Home > Redwood National Park, Yurok > Yurok Tribe wants National Park, Forest acreage

Yurok Tribe wants National Park, Forest acreage

San Francisco Chronicle: California’s largest tribe is seeking thousands of acres of the state’s national parks to build eco-lodges, gift shops and water taxis that travel into the backcountry along the Klamath River.

The Los Angeles Times reports that Yurok tribe officials want Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, to propose legislation that would give them 1,200 acres of Redwood National Park, 1,200 acres of redwood stands in the Six Rivers National Forest and Redding Rock.

Thompson hasn’t signed off on the bill yet.

Full Story.

[Image source.]

  1. DavidIsley
    December 26, 2010 at 2:39 pm

    This story “broke” in October.
    Why the interest now?
    Returning this land to the First Nation’s Members is a good start but a mere token.
    I’m sure the U.S. Forestry Department wil be pitching a fit topreserve it’s turf and power,and recieve support from “sportsman”, 5th wheelers,some “environmentalists”,developers, and ever predictable knee-jerk conservatives and millenialists..
    May provide interesting entertainment.

  2. 69er
    December 26, 2010 at 3:17 pm

    I say NO, NO, No, they want it not preserve their native way of life but to commercialise and exploit it in a way that is against the very thing they are supposed to be for. Their fishing is an example of their claims to indigent rights. If they want to fish as their ancestors fished why not do it as their ancestors did. Not with the detested white mans inventions, aluminum and fibergalss boats, gas and electric motors and nets made of synthetic materials. This is the white mans way not the Native Americans way. They want the best of both worlds, enough is enough!!!

  3. tra
    December 26, 2010 at 3:40 pm

    From what I’ve read so far, this seems like a just and appropriate deal. In addition to the benefits that this deal will bring to the Yurok tribe, the public at large will benefit in that the Yurok tribe can manage those National Forest lands more conservatively and with more of a long-term vision than has been typical under the management of the US Forest Service.

  4. Living In Eureka
    December 26, 2010 at 3:56 pm

    Give them their land back! We can not undo what has been done, but we have the power to make the future right! They can fish any way they want to, it should be their right! Just as the “White Man” has changed from the horse & buggy to the auto so have the Native Americans! 69er, maybe you should try out a cave or two!

  5. owltotem
    December 26, 2010 at 4:09 pm

    I whole-heartedly support the Yurok managing their land. The sense of community, respect for their elders and guidance for the next generation has been a refreshing experience for me.

    69er whoa, how bitter and prejudice is the us and them polarization in that post. It is 2010 almost 11 the world has changed, we all adapt. A respectful steward of the land is just that and the Yurok people should be revered as such.

  6. owltotem
    December 26, 2010 at 4:16 pm

    ~From the Preamble to the Yurok Constitution

    “Our people have always lived on this sacred and wondrous land along the Pacific Coast and inland on the Klamath River, since the Spirit People made
    things ready for us and the Creator placed us here. From the beginning, we have followed all the laws of the Creator, which became the whole fabric of our tribal sovereignty. In times past and now Yurok people bless the deep river, the tall redwood trees, the rocks, the mounds, and the trails. We pray for the health of all the animals and prudently harvest the great salmon runs and herds of deer and elk. We never waste and use every bit of the salmon, deer, elk, sturgeon, eels, seaweed, mussels, candlefish, otters, sea lions, seals, whales and other ocean and river animals. We also have practiced our stewardship of the land in the prairies and forests through controlled burns that improve wildlife habitat and enhance the health and growth of the
    tan oak acorns, hazelnuts, pepperwood nuts, berries, grasses and bushes, all of which are used and provide materials for baskets, fabrics, and utensils.”

    ~From the Preamble to the Yurok Constitution

  7. Eric Kirk
    December 26, 2010 at 4:17 pm

    I’m a bit cynical on these proposals as I’ve been involved in areas where “white man’s” corporations use tribes as fronts to elude local regs. Yes, the tribes make a lot of money. But sometimes someone else is making a killing as well.

  8. SNaFU
    December 26, 2010 at 4:58 pm

    Black Jack, slot machines, keno & cocktails on
    flotilla along the Klamath River has got my vote! This could be a
    major tourist attraction? (I mean trap)

  9. tra
    December 26, 2010 at 5:03 pm

    Well, it’s always prudent to be at least somewhat skeptical of any big land deals, but I don’t think it’s appropriate to view this particular proposal through a lens of outright cynicism.

    I think the Yuroks are sincere in their belief that this proposal will benefit not only the tribe and the larger community, but also the wildlife and the ecosystem at large, and I’m inclined to trust their judgement on that unless I see some evidence to the contrary.

    So I guess my attitude toward this proposal, at this point, could be decribed as cautiously optimistic .

  10. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    December 26, 2010 at 8:05 pm

    The problem with more people creating over-populated levels is that to preserve something means it becomes much harder to deny people the right to use something that needs to be preserved.

    Too many government paperwork scams due to processes where the paperwork says something is preserved or it is mitigated or conditoned, yet on the ground reality says development full circle has occured or is to occur.

    Rather, I would focus on getting the land back to the rightful owners first – ya all know, from that theft by white men years ago serving in a capacity as a government agent, official, represenatative, etc…. There will most likely be many instances in the future that will occur that shall end-up rendering reparations back to native indigenous peoples for the crimes and land grabs that were committed against their cultures years ago. Now, let them do what they want too since white man has for years done what it wants and really has not shown any above and beyond cabilities for solving problems which native indigenous people could not make cohesive, concise and appropriate efforts to resolve.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  11. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    December 26, 2010 at 8:09 pm

    “capabilities”

    oops.

    JL

  12. anon1
    December 26, 2010 at 8:41 pm

    After booze it was Ooh Casinos…People are being fed and housing is happening..Give it back..Maybe someone will care for the land..

  13. SYLVIA DE ROOY
    December 26, 2010 at 10:03 pm

    I completely support the return of this land to the Yurok people. I feel far more confident about their handling of that land than I do of the US government which seems wholly owned by huge corporate powers and serves those powers, not we the people.

  14. DavidIsley
    December 26, 2010 at 10:27 pm

    From “69er”:

    “…They want the best of both worlds….”

    It’s called “appropriate application of technology.”

  15. December 26, 2010 at 11:14 pm

    Yeah,native Americans today really walk the trail of tears daily don’t they? “Whitey” forces them on their rez drunk,smoking/shooting up crystal meth. It’s time to stop being enablers and quit feeling guilty for past wrongs committed by some of our ancestors.

  16. Eric Kirk
    December 26, 2010 at 11:18 pm

    Well, the tribal gill netting across rivers in Washington state is not an “appropriate application of technology.” Unfortunately, there is sometimes in play a white liberal romanticization of native peoples which does nobody any favors, and in fact can generate stereotypes as destructive as any based on bigotry.

    But in principle I have no problem with eco-lodges, gift shops, and water taxis. I am concerned about a precedent of transferring park land for profit enterprise. I would want many more details before I could support it.

  17. Little Tree
    December 26, 2010 at 11:39 pm

    Buy it.

  18. Anonymous
    December 26, 2010 at 11:56 pm

    Prejudice is alive and well and hiding behind monikers on the Herald, are you guys for real? 69er, snafu, smokemonster? Can you sleep with yourselves? Let me guess with deadbolts locked, and guns within your reach, wow, scary.

  19. Anonymous
    December 27, 2010 at 12:41 am

    Eric, those gill nets would not be a big deal if the runs of salmon were not destroyed by dams and logging. The allocations for those resources are based on contracts signed by the US government in exchange for land. The expectation by the tribes is that the US government will keep their end of the deal and manage the lands and rivers in a way that the resource is abundant. It is not up to tribes to take less but for the US to fix what it has broken so the system can produce more.

  20. TexiCali
    December 27, 2010 at 6:10 am

    I wonder which corporation is behind this proposal? A little journalism please.

  21. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    December 27, 2010 at 8:21 am

    SmokeMonster says:
    December 26, 2010 at 11:14 pm
    Yeah,native Americans today really walk the trail of tears daily don’t they? “Whitey” forces them on their rez drunk,smoking/shooting up crystal meth. It’s time to stop being enablers and quit feeling guilty for past wrongs committed by some of our ancestors.

    Response: What about the current day wrongs and abuses and denials that coincide and are attached legally to the former years’ contracts that were peace-mealed and broken back long ago. This is the problem the U.S. elitist elected officials and their stool pigeons and minions created – they stole, grafted and took from another for whom were classified as animals, beasts, savages, etc…. So, in America, just as it is with corporate fascisms, it is still apparent that trying to get something for free at the natural resource level in order to be able to “mark-up” a profit as much as possible, both economically and politically, in order to win something from another person’s wallet. With a Democracy and Capitalism, there always has to be a economic loser for there to be a winner because when so many corporate types don’t want to actually WORK to make a profit, but rather steal resources and create battles/war in order to brainwash the consumer minions and political stool pigeons into thinking that what is occuring is right and not wrong…..It is a whole damn culture thing that needs a re-visit in so far as attitude adjustments.

    JL

  22. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    December 27, 2010 at 8:28 am

    Forgot to lament,

    One thing that is HARD TO UNDERSTAND is “why do native indigenous peoples practice religion?”

    Once, white man’s religion was an unknown. Then, the beasts and savages converted over little by little to “white-man’s religion”. Now, for me, the two cultures do not go hand in hand; and, it is digusting for any native american to practice a “white-man’s religion” to become a social convert, thus diminishing any credibility with respect to any native culture’s ancestorial ways.

    Oh, I am white too; and, don’t buy into the religious scams either.

    JL

  23. Frank Drinkard
    December 27, 2010 at 9:04 am

    Redwood National and State Parks already provide complete protection to those lands. Transferring the property may open the lands to further development and resource extraction. The Yuroks just signed a deal with Green Diamond to acquire 47,000 acres and now they desire already protected lands? What historically happened to the Yuroks was tragic, but I prefer my Redwood National and State Parks as is! I’d encourage the tribes to pursue more industrial timberland and leave protected land alone!

  24. Eric Kirk
    December 27, 2010 at 9:52 am

    Eric, those gill nets would not be a big deal if the runs of salmon were not destroyed by dams and logging.

    Sorry, but that’s just not true. At least in the late 1980s when I was living there and very much aware of the practice, they extended across the river so salmon could not make it to their spawning sites. Congress had not at that point imposed the regs on the tribes. I don’t know if anything has happened since, but apparently it’s now an issue on the Klamath and Trinity Rivers.

    I do believe we owe a huge debt to Native Americans. But our debt does not affect the basic laws of physics and biology. If the fish cannot reach their spawning grounds, the species cannot perpetuate.

  25. Eric Kirk
    December 27, 2010 at 9:55 am
  26. beel
    December 27, 2010 at 10:45 am

    Eric-
    just to keep the dialog factual, the article suggests that the gill nets are only up during daylight,
    only occupy one third of the river and once an annual allotment is filled, the gill nets come down. even the gill netters are highly regulated.

    i think the real conflict over Tribal fishing rights and practices is that the rules are divided along racial grounds.

  27. tra
    December 27, 2010 at 10:47 am

    I’m not sure how the approval or rejection of this land aquisition proposal would have any effect on the gill-netting issue on the Klamath and Trinity Rivers. The Yuroks reservation already stretches along both sides of the Klamath all the way from the mouth of the Klamath to boundaries of the Hoopa Reservation.

    In the article that you linked to, Eric, it notes that the tribes were NOT exceeding their quota, and that those gill-nets are never allowed to stretch more across more than 1/3 of the river. Those complaining about the tribal fisheries were upstream non-native sport fishermen. According to the article, the sport fishermen are given a collective quota equal to that shared by the two tribes, and are upset that they weren’t able to catch their quota because those pesky tribal fishermen get the first crack at the salmon as they come up the rivers.

    From the point of view of the tribes, the major reasons for the long-term decline of the salmon are dams, industrial logging operations, and withdrawl of water for irrigation — problems not caused by or controlled by the tribes — nevertheless, tribes are being scolded for using a method of fishing that they had practiced sustainably for hundreds of years, and even though they are staying within the quota that they are allowed, all because sport fishermen upstream aren’t able to catch their full quota.

    And let’s be clear: the sport fishermen aren’t saying that fewer fish should be caught overall, they’re just saying that they, the sport fishermen, should get to catch more of them. From my point of view, if the fish really are getting somewhat more scarce upstream, that should provide even more incentive to hurry up with the dam removal, ease up on the industrial logging, and stop withdrawing so much water for agriculture. And in the meantime, if need be, I’d rather reduce or even eliminate the sport-fishing allotment before I’d ask the Native Americans to accept further impoverishment in order to satisfy those who are fishing for “sport.”

  28. Eric Kirk
    December 27, 2010 at 11:50 am

    just to keep the dialog factual, the article suggests that the gill nets are only up during daylight,
    only occupy one third of the river and once an annual allotment is filled, the gill nets come down. even the gill netters are highly regulated.

    That’s the case with the Hoopa Tribe which has voluntarily agreed to those limitations. That was not true in Washington State during the 1980s when the nets spanned entire rivers.

    Although the effectiveness of Hoopa’s internal regs is under question, I’m certainly not qualified to participate in that debate. I do know that by 1990 salmon fishing in Washington state was all but dead, and between the Boldt decision and the gill netting, it was hard to place the blame on overfishing by corporate interests or even logging. The tribes up there were discussing some type of inter-tribal solutions (they were competing with each other at times) before Congress did something, but I moved back to California right about then and I haven’t followed up on what happened since.

  29. A-Nony-Mouse
    December 27, 2010 at 5:00 pm

    I agree with Eric Kirk. I’m not sold on this idea. It’s one of those issues that if you question it at all, you get branded as anti-native or something worse. I am not anti-native. I think they should pursue the type of land acquisition they did with Green Diamond. I’m leary of proposals to use what are now PUBLIC Lands (National Park and National Forest) for private money-making activities, whether they’re tribal or not. Many questions remain to be answered on this one.

  30. tra
    December 27, 2010 at 5:15 pm

    I don’t think it’s “anti-native” to question this proposal, and I agree that there are plenty of questions that remain to be answered. But some of the comments in the thread above clearly do display ignorant anti-native biases and stereotypes.

  31. anonymous#1
    December 27, 2010 at 6:05 pm

    I don’t think the demise of a salmon fishery is either native or a white man issue. All Salmon fishing on these rivers ought to be shut down until there is a return of the historical runs. Nobody has to give up their tribal rights. Put them on hold until there is a run that supports this gill netting method. Yeah it is the traditional method but the current fishery/river condition are not what they once were. All peoples need to pull together on this one and help restore this planet back to the abundant ecosystem that it once was.

  32. tra
    December 27, 2010 at 6:27 pm

    I think the idea is that if we remove the dams and cut back on upstream water diversions we won’t need to put tribal rights “on hold.” Cutting back on the tribes’ fishing quota should be the last resort, and would only be a reasonable choice after we have already done all that we can do to deal with the other major factors, including the dams, water diversions for agriculture, overlogging, and ocean fishing.

  33. tra
    December 27, 2010 at 6:32 pm

    To put it another way, if we had already removed the dams, cut back on the amount of water diverted for agriculture, and so on, and STILL the salmon population wasn’t recovering, well then we’d be in a more credible position to ask for a reduction in tribal fishing quotas.

  34. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    December 27, 2010 at 7:21 pm

    A “Right” put on hold?

    Now, who thought of that?

    JL

  35. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    December 27, 2010 at 7:31 pm

    Remember those invasive fish species which have done in the other river systems too.

    I am curious to know some tidbits though: What percentage of the Salmon population has been lost to non-native consumptions (impacts) versus native consumptions (impacts); and, has the population of native indigenous peoples risen steadily on their lands while Salmon runs have fallen in their river systems? Just wondering about the effect of over-population and whether or not the river systems up here can actually produce more fish for more mouths and bellies. It seems a river system can only produce so much, and it varies at that; thus, farm produced fish.

    JL

  36. Bolithio
    December 27, 2010 at 8:37 pm

    …the public at large will benefit in that the Yurok tribe can manage those National Forest lands more conservatively and with more of a long-term vision than has been typical under the management of the US Forest Service.

    tra, the USFS is arguably one of the most conservative land managers there is. They where certainly more aggressive 20 or more years ago, but since the 1990s, the USFS has cut virtually nothing. They have proposed plenty of projects, fodder for EPIC, but their overall management technique has been “no management”.

    Im not sure about this deal either, I think State Park Lands would be a much better fit. However, from a land management perspective, the Tribe could be a superior steward of the land, which would certainly benefit from much more aggressive vegetation management strategies.

    (also the USFS has a real and serious long term vision. Its hard to understand these considering we have to be thinking in terms of hundreds of years…but that’s another topic…)

  37. E. A. Goldman
    December 27, 2010 at 10:10 pm

    The more I think about this the more I am convinced that Green Diamond is using the Yutok to get hold of old growth redwoods for lumber. Notice the Yurok Tribe is asking for land in a national forest not a state forest. If this was state forest land it would get shot down immediately but national forest means that this deal has to go to congress where there are many politicians who have been purchased by the timber companies. On the surface this looks like we are helping out the Yurok but when you look past that you see the hand of Green Diamond.

    I am interested in organizing a letter writing campaign to stop this. Anyone who is interested in helping please contact me at eagoldman@fogtown.org

  38. Walt
    December 28, 2010 at 6:16 am

    Would the Mafia do the the forestry like they do the casino management now?

  39. Steak n Eggs
    December 28, 2010 at 7:33 am

    E. A. Goldman says…

    Yes, definitely a conspiracy brewing in the works. LOL. Green Diamond is not in the milling/selling biz; that would be California Redwood Company. Also note that California operates eight Demonstration State Forests totaling 71,000 acres. The State Forests grow approximately 75 million board feet yearly and harvest an average of 30 million board feet of timber each year. Lastly, If the Yuroks decide to “manage” the aquisition, it will likely be supported by many.

  40. Eric Kirk
    December 28, 2010 at 12:49 pm

    Speaking of conspiracies, I’m wondering if the thread story is related to Obama’s secret intention to give the US back to Native Americans!

    http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/latest_right-wing_freak-out_obama_wants_to_give_ma.php?ref=fpa

  41. Eric Kirk
    December 28, 2010 at 12:50 pm

    Sorry. I just started to read the article. He only wants to give back NY City. Wasn’t it bought for 24 dollars?

  42. Eric Kirk
    December 28, 2010 at 12:52 pm

    No, actually my source was right!

    Last week, the “Director of Issues Analysis” for the Christian conservative American Family Association, Brian Fischer, wrote a blog post claiming that “President Obama wants to give the entire land mass of the United States of America back to the Indians. He wants Indian tribes to be our new overlords.”

    The Yurok almost pulled one over on us!

  43. Mitch Litella
    December 28, 2010 at 2:53 pm

    Eric,

    I hear they’re going to make Navy SEALS shower with tribal members. This is outrageous.

  44. Anonymous
    December 28, 2010 at 3:00 pm

    Indian Overlords, Death Panels, Gay in Military Showers… Oh My!

  45. December 29, 2010 at 6:32 am

    Bunch of white guys arguing about land stolen by their fathers.

  46. Anonymous
    December 29, 2010 at 2:21 pm

    Neither Europeans nor Indigenous people can be blamed for all the evil that has taken place upon this continent.

    AmerIndians engaged in warfare of tribe against tribe for thousands of years. The spoils of war included slaves and land. This was typical of tribal behavior on the American continent long before Europeans arrived.

    Europeans, of course, engaged in their own tribal behaviors in Europe long before they arrived in the Americas. When they arrived on this continent, they were already well-prepared for war by their own long history of war, slaving, and land theft.

    Thus, we are bound together by our common humanity – or inhumanity – depending how you look at it.

  47. Anonymous
    December 29, 2010 at 2:27 pm

    The statement I made at 2:21 is a generalization about the history of Europeans and of Indigenous peoples in American history. It is not meant as a statement about the specifics of our local history.

  48. Anonymous
    December 29, 2010 at 2:32 pm

    And (need I add?) No disrespect intended.

  49. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    December 29, 2010 at 8:40 pm

    Had the Native indigenous peoples been advanced to the point of musket and bible, I really believe that the North American Continent would be nothing like it is today. Simple fact is – Humankind kills and teaches how to kill rather than teaching how not to kill, but how to live life in peace. It is a power, control and money thing through indentured servancy (slavery). Today, slavery is less color of skin and more pocket of change.

    JL

  50. Anonymous
    December 29, 2010 at 10:09 pm

    Those were all of our ancestors, and many of us are both European as well as Natives to this country. There is no “making it all equal” so let’s start from here! None of us remember or knew the bad folks. We all have different sufferings. Quit the attempts to make it all better.

  51. DavidIsley
    December 29, 2010 at 11:37 pm

    “moviedad says:
    December 29, 2010 at 6:32 am
    Bunch of white guys arguing about land stolen by their fathers.”

    Dude, YOU ABSOLUTELY ROCK!
    Great observation!
    Succinct and poignant.
    THANK YOU, once again.

  52. setnaffa
    December 30, 2010 at 9:06 am

    Yeah. Let’s give them stuff they never owned so we can ease our guilt about things we never did…

    All this talk about the “poor Yuroks”.

    When they want to be successful, they can be.

    But they want to claim lands stolen from locals by Jimmy Carter and the “traditional” gill nets made from synthetic materials so they can run casinos and buy drugs and over-fish the rivers and sell the stuff they don’t want.

    Humboldt County’s economy was destroyed by the Feds and now they want it to be a permanent cesspool of gamblers, drug addicts, and those who prey upon them.

    California used to be a nice place and Humboldt County was a gem; but now it’s just a place to be from.

  53. setnaffa
    December 30, 2010 at 9:13 am

    Look around the USA and see where Indian or other casinos have gone up. See the sickness they bring. It’s not something you want for your own back yard. The costs are a lot higher than the benefits.

    Not all the gill nets on the Klamath come down at night. Some of you know who I mean. And they sell a lot of fish they are not supposed to sell.

    How about we just try to start where we are and try to get along instead of everyone trying to get something that belongs to someone else?

  54. December 30, 2010 at 10:39 am

    try to get along

    You have a funny way of “trying.”

  55. Anonymous
    December 30, 2010 at 2:22 pm

    Heraldo, ignoring the truth (about illegal fish sales by tribal members) will not make it go away.

  56. Not A Native
    December 30, 2010 at 2:55 pm

    So lets say anon loans some items to a friend and the friend dies after selling the items to another person. And anon dies leaving his property to heirs. The heirs go to that other person and says they want the items back, its time to return them. But the person shows a bill of sale and says he bought the items and they are his.

    Now, receiving borrowed property isn’t always a crime according to the laws now on the books. But borrowed property is always returned to its ‘rightful’ owner. Taking and possessing property that wasn’t owned by the person you got it from doesn’t make it yours, even if you bought it on the open market.

  57. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    December 30, 2010 at 5:54 pm

    AH NAN – good topic regarding heirs,

    how about this….. – but no one told the heirs that the reverse mortgage sucked out all the equity in the home for the future deceased to enjoy now and make sure that heirs get squat.

    See how reverse mortgages give the inheritances to the financial sector cronies and not family members, especially despised family members for whom the future dead person figures it best to spend it all now and leave nothing for any heirnesses to heir….

    Those reverse mortgage deals are atm machines meant to get at a person’s wealth before any surviving family members – for anyone who still thinks the financial system is necessary in its present form…..

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  58. snoopy
    December 30, 2010 at 8:15 pm

    I hope it happens over and over and over again in this country. Give all their land back. They know how to live on the land softly. We only destroy it.

  59. Anonymous
    December 30, 2010 at 9:25 pm

    Oh, c’mon.. We are they. We are all mixed up now. Who knows who is Indian and who is European and who is Latin, etc… ? Start from scratch and forget the past ’cause none of us were involved in any way.

  60. Not A Native
    December 30, 2010 at 10:51 pm

    Pure BS anon. Lots of folks hereabouts proudly directly trace their ancestry to gold miners and pioneers who were given land grants. FWIW theres a very active DAR chapter in Eureka. They KNOW, vlaue and cherish their backgrounds. And others here KNOW histories of their forebearers who were here before 1800, and they’re dedicated and proud about remembering and honoring the traditions of their lineage.

    Yep, there are also rootless people here who know little about where they came from(or have sordid histories they try to run away from), and often know and care even less about where they and their progeny are going. Except perhaps to be succeptible to marketed materialism and trendy psychic fads in an effort to fill their identity voids. Thats hardly a behavior or attitude thats worthy of encouragment or celebration.

  61. I agree with Snoopy
    December 31, 2010 at 9:14 am

    Yes Snoopy, the saintly & wonderful indians know what to do with the land, living in harmony with nature and all the crap.

    So lets give them back their land as you suggest and lets start with your house. You have been watching far too many Disney movies.

  62. Anonymous
    December 31, 2010 at 11:22 am

    Saintly and wonderful indians never pollute land with casinos or sell sacred salmon to buy new 4x4s that people who work honest jobs can’t afford.

  63. Anonymous
    December 31, 2010 at 11:22 am

    4x4s and houses.

  64. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    December 31, 2010 at 12:19 pm

    Or be like an imigrant/dependent social services/taxes family @ 1 -2 bedrooms per dwelling filled with enough people to live in a 10+ bedroom facility; yet, they sure save for those corporate toys and such by being able to sleep in such tight, confined quarters without privacy issues. It depends on priorities in a person’s life – sadly, corporate fascist America has twisted many a minds.

    JL

  65. JoshN
    August 31, 2011 at 2:20 pm

    Wow, here are some facts people:
    The general allotment act of 1887 divided the Yurok reservation into individual family allotments. The Burke act of 1906 forced families to declare proprietorship and how the land will be used to generate income. One had to be either half white or have an eighth grade education to declare proprietorship. No one on my great grandmother’s allotment declared proprietorship or a purpose for the land. The land was seized the goverment and put into trust. During the 1950’s the National Parks added what used to be my family’s allotment and four others to the Redwood National Park now known as Flint Rigde. The Yurok Tribe now has the resources and tribal members have the education to challenge past enactments of “law”.

    All, please reserve your ill informed assumptions for your own dinner table. This is a serious issue for some readers.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s