Indian tribes buy back thousands of acres of land

[demoleft]

Source: ap

OMAHA, Neb. – Native American tribes tired of waiting for the U.S. government to honor centuries-old treaties are buying back land where their ancestors lived and putting it in federal trust.

Native Americans say the purchases will help protect their culture and way of life by preserving burial grounds and areas where sacred rituals are held. They also provide land for farming, timber and other efforts to make the tribes self-sustaining.
...
Those buying back land include the Winnebago, who have put more than 700 acres in eastern Nebraska in federal trust in the past five years, and the Pawnee, who have 1,600 acres of trust land in Oklahoma. Land held in federal trust is exempt from local and state laws and taxes, but subject to most federal laws.

Three tribes have bought land around Bear Butte in South Dakota's Black Hills to keep it from developers eager to cater to the bikers who roar into Sturgis every year for a raucous road rally. About 17 tribes from the Dakotas, Nebraska, Wyoming, Montana and Oklahoma still use the mountain for religious ceremonies.


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091227/ap_on_re_us/us_buying_back_america

---

"...perhaps you think the creator has sent you here to dispose of us
as you see fit
if i thought you were sent by the creator
i might be induced to think you had a right to dispose of me
do not misunderstand me
but understand me fully
with reverence to my affection for the land
i never said the land was mine to do with as i choose
the one who has a right to dispose of it is the one who has created it
i claim a right to live on my land and accord you the privilege to
return to yours

brother we have listened to your talk
coming from our father the great white chief at washington
and my people have called upon me to reply to you

and in the winds which pass through these aged pines
we hear the moanings of their departed ghosts
and if the voice of our people could have been heard
that act would never have been done
but alas though they stood around they could neither be seen
nor heard
their tears feel like drops of rain

i hear my voice in the depths of the forest
but no answering voice comes back to me
all is silent around me
my words therefore must be few
i can now say nomore

he is silent
for he has nothing to answer
when the sun goes down"

(robbie robertson, words of fire, deeds of blood)

[Dinger]

1. Good

That land was theirs in the first place.

[Greybnk48]

2. I'm especially happy about the Black Hills purchase.

It's so beautiful there, except when the bikers come in.

[demoleft]

3. yes. part of my so cherished long long readings about lakota people...

...of some years ago.

dear pages and feelings.
i am happy as well.

[54anickel]

6. Same here and I'm a biker (for Bear Butte). Haven't done the Sturgis run in ages, but

have plenty of friends who do and most have signed up to help protect Bear Butte, honor the buffer zone and agree to avoid route 79

http://www.protectbearbutte.com/

http://www.protectbearbutte.com/Bikers%20for%20Bear%20Butte.htm

[WriteDown]

4. Tribes with money...

I've noticed that the Eastern tribes hardly get mentioned in any reporting. And why the heck was this moved from LBN?!?!?!?

[demoleft]

8. hehe, technically it is not LBN. ;) but it's good news. kpete has posted the same there anyway. n/t

[virgdem]

43. Money may not be the issue..

for the Eastern tribes. It may be because the Eastern part of the U.S. is very densly populated and there is not much land left to buy due to overdevelopment.

[WriteDown]

45. Kind of my point....

There money isn't worth much where they are at.

[BolivarianHero]

5. Unrecommend...

It's sickening that they have to buy back their birthright.

[54anickel]

7. It is sickening, but very newsworthy, so I'll undo that unrecommend.

[madokie]

35. I'll give that a bump

[Wednesdays]

60. Agree..."rec'd" simply means you think it's important

Not that you like what's happening.

[tkmorris]

9. Yes it is

So why would you want to lower the profile of the story by unrecommending it?

[Kaleva]

10. Anyone here planning on donating their property back to the Indians?

[demoleft]

11. infact they're not begging. self-respect is among their virtues. n/t

[Maru Kitteh]

19. Indeed, some people do.

http://narfnews.blogspot.com/2007/05/narf-assists-pawnee-nation-in-return-of.html

[demoleft]

23. great link. thanks for sharing. n/t

[begin_within]

25. All public lands should be deeded to them, and

any private landowner should be required to pay an annual tax to whatever tribe is the rightful owner. I don't own any land anywhere, but if I did I would certainly pay the tax. The entire continent is their land and was systematically stolen from them over a period of several centuries. The only way to right that wrong is to give it back to them and/or pay "rent" in the form of a tax.

[1monster]

34. The local and state Native Americans where my home is located were decimated by the Spanish long

before it became a state. Other Native Americans moved in, but went much further south than my part of the state...

So to which Indian Nation do you think I should donate my home?

on edit: Bravo to the Indian Tribes for being proactive and not waiting for the government to do the correct thing. One should never hold one's breath when waiting for that.

[WriteDown]

46. Good point!

Very few actually walk the walk.

[AwakeAtLast]

16. I am looking at it a little differently

While I also feel they should not have to buy it back, they are at least empowering their people by doing this. It is good to see and makes me hopeful for their survival.

[Maru Kitteh]

17. That's dumb. Really dumb. You're not unreccing the US government, you're unreccing the efforts of

the tribes to retake their lands by whatever means they deem necessary and the OP for bringing it to our attention. Dumb, dumb dumb.

[dana_b]

29. I understand your sentiment but will rec

this so more people will see it

[DKRC]

51. Agreed

But this is one case where I can wholeheartedly support the ends justifying the means. Having the land back in the hands of the tribes, where it will be protected & managed for the benefit of the original inhabitants, is the best outcome.

[jwirr]

12. Minnesota tribes are also buying back land where they can.

[Guilded Lilly]

13. Bravo

just a simple and heartfelt BRAVO

[demoleft]

14. welcome to DU. :) n/t

[Guilded Lilly]

30. thank-you :)

I am enjoying it here!

[Number23]

15. Fantastic. Happy to rec

[Bobbieo]

21. Am happy to read the sacred land around Bear Butte was bought back by the Natives.

I suggested that solution several years ago in my Native Unity blog as the ony sure way to keep the land from bar owner - Jay Allen? - from Arizona who was trying to expand the area with his Bike Rally bars and entertainment areas

[Number23]

24. Your blog is wonderful

I'm always talking about the plight of Native Americans in this country and how disgusting and immorally they've been treated by our government. I think the $3 billion from the Obama admin is a start (and only a start) in the right direction towards righting what have been some really ugly wrongs done in this country.

[jtroy]

18. Good news

Im very happy for all the tribes involved

[Hekate]

20. This is wonderful. It would be more wonderful if the US gubmint would honor its treaties...

... but in the absence of that, I am glad the tribes are being proactive. :fistbump:

Hekate

[The Backlash Cometh]

22. I recommended this post,

but I noticed that there was no option for unrecommend. Is this new?

[G_j]

26. some good news for a change

smart move

[hankthecrank]

27. Good News

Now if they could fix that sale that SD did for back taxes on Indian land. That would be even better news.

[winyanstaz]

52. exactly..that was a blatant theft of Native lands by the CIA...

It would also help if this government would let Leonard Peltier go home to die. The man is sick and has spent far far too long as a political prisoner. Let him go home.

[sagetea]

28. K&R

Ho
sage

[Liberty Belle]

31. Here's a great story about a displaced tribe buying back its land...

which now contains the Warner Springs Resort in San Diego County. :-)

Pala Indian band to buy Warner Springs Ranch
Resort is on land that was once tribe’s home

By Onell R. Soto, UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

Wednesday, December 2, 2009 at 12:01 a.m.

More than 100 years after government agents marched the tribe out of its ancestral village, North County’s Pala Indian band is getting it back, using $20 million in profits from its casino to buy what is now known as Warner Springs Ranch.

The tribe, San Diego County’s largest, said it plans for the ranch to continue operating as a resort.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2009/dec/02/pala-indian-band-buy-warner-springs-ranch/

[proteus_lives]

32. Good for them!

:thumbsup:

[nofurylike]

33. k&r. thank you for posting this important information, demoleft!

great thread discussion, too! enlightening!!


peace and solidarity

[demoleft]

38. it was and is a pleasure. :) n/t

[sybylla]

36. Curious that the Ho-Chunk (Winnebago) are buying reservation lands in Nebraska

instead of ancestral lands in Wisconsin. I'm surprised, since they claim to be decendents of the mound builders that they don't deem all the unprotected mounds and old village sites as more important to their culture. Not that the reservations aren't part of their history, too. Just something I wouldn't think would be quite so important heritage-wise.

[semillama]

53. It's probably not the Wisconsin Ho-Chunk but the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska

It tends to get confusing since there were Ho-Chunk who ended up in NE and adopted the name Winnebago, while other Ho-Chunk stayed in WI and fought off attempts to refer to them as Winnebago.

Here's the NE Winnebago website: http://www.winnebagotribe.com/

And here's the WI Ho-Chunk site: http://www.ho-chunknation.com/

The Ho-Chunk site has a good summary of the two tribes/names:
" Winnebago was a name given by the Sauk and Fox, who called the people Ouinepegi, or People of the Stinky Waters. The Ho Chunk traveled and lived extensively along the Fox, Mississippi, and Wisconsin Rivers where fishing and edible vegetation was bountiful, the shores fertile for gardens, and the waterways convenient for travel. This name was heard as Winnebago by the government agents, and was the name the United States government took for the Ho Chunk people. This remained the official name of the Nation until the Constitution Reform in 1993, when the Ho Chunk reclaimed their original name.

In 1836, the Ho Chunk were removed from the choice land of southern Wisconsin to make room for the miners that were fast taking over the land. The area was also in demand for the lush farmland of the various river valleys. This land was taken from the Ho Chunk for a pittance, and the people were forcibly removed to northeastern Iowa. Within ten years they were moved to the northern Minnesota territory. Here they served the United States government by being a buffer between the warring Lakota/Dakota and Ojibwe. Unfortunately, the Ho Chunk had to endure attacks from both tribes. By this time they were imploring the United States government to move them to better land near the Mississippi. Due to white resistance, the Ho Chunk were moved further west. By 1859, their reservation was reduced from 18 square miles to 9 square miles. In 1863, the Ho Chunk were again moved, this time to a desolate reservation in South Dakota, a land so different from the lush forests and hunting grounds they were familiar with in Wisconsin.

Through various treaties, eventually all of the Wisconsin homeland was ceded, as the Ho Chunk were removed to various scattered parcels of land. Throughout eleven removals, the Ho Chunk continued to return to Wisconsin. Finally, the United States government allowed the Ho Chunk to exchange their South Dakota reservation for lands near the more friendly Omahas of Nebraska, who willingly released part of their reservation so that the Ho Chunks could become their neighbors. The Nation split, with part of the tribe returning to Wisconsin, and part moving to the reservation in Nebraska. Those tribal members who stayed in Nebraska on the reservation are today known as the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska. "

[MissDeeds]

37. Great news

Sad that they have to buy back what was theirs in the first place...

K&R

[katkat]

39. Great. More casinos in environmentally fragile areas, just what we need. n/t

[WriteDown]

44. Yes, we must stop these ignorant savages!

Who knows what they'll do?!

:sarcasm:

[TheCML]

48. Wow.

Glad to see racism alive and well on a progressive forum. Because we know the non natives have done a bang up job when it comes to protecting the environment.

[Kajsa]

40. Good!

I'm glad to see they are proactive.

Too many promises have been broken
by the US government.

K&R

[AllyCat]

41. That worked out pretty slick for the US Gov't

Steal something that belongs to the people you conquer by war and disease. Then hold onto it for a very long time after signing an agreement that you'll return it. Then take in the money when they don't want to wait anymore.

Sounds like DC.

[yellerpup]

42. Howa!

:kick:

[RedCloud]

47. Somehow I feel they should NOT buy back what was taken by force or hook and crook.

Recall Sand Creek and Washita River
That's where the creeks ran red with blood,
Women, children lying all around
Babies dying like dogs in the mud...

But it's one, little two, little three, little four
five little Indians will never dance no more
Six, little seven, little eight, little nine
ten little Indians will never breathe again

[Desertrose]

49. How sad they have to BUY it "back"...but I am glad they are able to!

YES!!!

[kjones]

50. I'd like to point out, in addition to this...

the Eastern Band Cherokee in North Carolina purchased all their land with their own funds. It's inaccurate to call it a "reservation."

[phasma ex machina]

55. IMHO reservations actually enjoy the world's highest status

as localities off limits to the American Army.

[kjones]

65. And I would have to disagree...as well as gawk as someone that would make that audacious statement.

Individuals that are part of a reservation are subject
to the same federal laws that we all are.

Native Americans, both on and off reservations have
been active throughout the American military.
Perhaps you've never heard of the code talkers?

[Overseas]

54. K&R. Inspiring. //nt

[zoff]

56. I'm always happy to hear good news about Native (Original) Americans.

Thanks for posting.

[Meldread]

57. Curious to see some people's perspective on this...

I don't think anyone would disagree that what was done to the Native American's was wrong. However, some of the responses in this thread seem... interesting... to say the least.

Let us say that the government (state, local, or federal) decided to return various parts of the land to the Native American's. How would you react if you were forced from your home, a home that you purchased and lived in for years, a home that you raised your children in... all to give it to a Native American tribe that makes up less than 1% of the population of your state?

Further more this line of thinking doesn't seem to square very well with the general prevailing attitude here against rich kids. Basically, the attitude is that a rich kid shouldn't really inherit his / her parents fortune / business because the kid didn't "work for it." Why should a Native American automatically inherit the right to all of the land that once belonged to their tribe? It was taken from them by force and other sadistic methods, but how is it any different than the government coming in (with force if necessary) to snatch up a rich kids trust fund? The reason I bring it up is because the two views seem odds.

Of course, the two issues are slightly separated by events done to the ancestors of Native American's... but that doesn't change the fact that they were ancestors.

I am not opposed to a tribe buying back their ancestral lands, and I think it's great that they've been able to do that. I'm also not opposed to allowing them to have a great deal of autonomy on those lands, and to govern them how they see fit (with national oversight).

What I am opposed to is the government coming in and taking land to give to Native American's. You cannot undo past crimes. Native American's are compensated through various tax exemptions and are given a great deal of autonomy on their lands. But turning over huge swaths (or even the ENTIRE country) to them... as one poster above suggested... that's a bit too much. They've gotten more reparations than African American's got for slavery.

[Chulanowa]

61. Ever heard of stolen property?

What happens if you purchase a stolen car? do the cops say "oh well, he paid cash for it, might as well let him keep it?" Nope!

Also bear in mind that we're talking about nations, not individuals. Nations with treaty rights stretching back three centuries in several cases.

You might want to stick to topics you know something about, Meldread.

[Pithlet]

63. Well said n/t

[Meldread]

64. So would you support...

...going back through world history, to examine every war and conflict ever fought to return property to their proper owners?

In my mind it's not about doing what is "fair" it's about accepting the reality that exists, and that reality is that Native American's make up a tiny minority of the nation, and literally tossing people who currently live on the land OFF the land (by force if necessary) will not negate the wrong done to Native American's.

I'm not opposed to Native American's buying back the land, and having a great deal of autonomy on the land. I'm not opposed to various types of reparations made. What I *AM* opposed to is tossing people currently living on (by force if necessary) the land to return it to Native American's.

There is no amount of land that can be given to undo the wrongs done to Native American's. Yet, the reality is that it happened to the ancestors of modern Native American's. I'd feel differently if it was only one or two generations removed.

However, I cannot support the notion that entire swaths (or even the entire nation) should be returned to Native American's. The fact of the matter is, I'm one of the few people being honest here. I can guarantee that there would be virtually no one in this thread who wouldn't be screaming bloody murder (and even threatening violent revolution) if the government tossed them off their property. People nod, smile, say nice things - white man's guilt - but when it comes to making good on promises, they point to their neighbor's land instead of their own.

[Kaleva]

66. Not all land was stolen. Much of northern Wi. and all of Upper Michigan was...

ceded to the U.S. by the Ojibwe. Michigan ignored many provisions of the treaty, such as hunting and fishing rights, until forced to by federal courts.

[Major Hogwash]

58. Hahaha, a little real estate transaction here and there, and we'll be standing on a rock island

again asking them if we come ashore.

I love it!!!!

Woo-hoooo!!!!!

[Chulanowa]

59. 840,000 acres down...

2,299,160,000 left to go!

[DireStrike]

62. Doesn't this usually end with the government saying, "aw, in't that cute!" and taking everything?

Good to see them keep trying though.