Larry Caldwell wrote in message t...
In article ,
writes:
Larry Caldwell wrote in message t...
In article ,
writes:

There does appear to be an agenda. I don't see the Klamath tribe
involved in it, since their tribe legally doesn't exist at this time
to my knowledge.

You are very mistaken. Plus, it is the Klamath TribeS. There are Modoc,
Paiute and Klamath tribes involved in the Klamath Basin. They have all
had official tribal status restored, but they didn't get their
reservations back.

I'd still like to see something more than just your informed opinion,
Larry. If I am mistaken, a citation would certainly prove that
allegation.

Why not check with the tribes themselves?

http://www.klamathtribes.org/history.html

"In 1986, we were successful in regaining Restoration of Federal
Recognition for our Tribes. Although our land base was not returned to
us, we were directed to compose a plan to regain economic self-
sufficiency. Our Economic Self-sufficiency Plan reflects the Klamath
Tribes' continued commitment to playing a pivotal role in the local
economy."

I live in a rural area outside the Willamette Valley. While the Indian
population of Oregon is not huge, you don't have to go very far before
you rub elbows with one. I used to work for a Modoc, who employed
several Indians from various tribes. There was never a hint of
discrimination. They always treated me like a regular person.

I'm no expert, but when you work with Indians you hear a lot of
conversations from the Indian viewpoint, and get a picture of their
politics. The Klamath Tribes were once pretty prosperous, before the
feds took the reservation away.

I think most Klamath Basin Indians want to return to a land based
economy, rather than cashing in on the gambling craze. I have always
supported the return of tribal lands. There is no doubt that the
termination movement was nothing but a land grab clothed in high sounding
phrases. The environmentalists don't like the idea, because turning a
whole national forest back to the Indians would erode their power base.

The Whites in the Klamath Basin are of mixed opinion about the
restoration. On one hand, the Indians historically did a great job of
managing the land and were a big part of the local economy. Farm stores,
restaurants, shopping malls and similar businesses stand to benefit in a
big way if the Indians get their land back. OTOH, whites would lose
their hunting and fishing privileges on millions of acres of land, which
would be a big hit to the local recreation industry. A lot of people
show up to hunt mulies and waterfowl each year, and leave big wads of
green at local vendors. Some ranches would lose profitable grazing
leases.

So you see, besides fishery concerns, the Klamath Tribes are using the
water issues to leverage their cause.

Oh and the recent subsidy farmers to the area are Not???????

Sometimes they may use the
environmentalists to make a point, but they have no illusions that the
environmentalists would support the tribes.


Hard to say! Incase after case, value habitat for endangered species
are found and welcomed on many reservations!

They may dispute with the
farmers, but know that the farming community contains some of their most
solid supporters.


In what century? = not the 17th, 18th 19th, 20th or 21th as far as I
can see!

Farmers and Indians are united in their loathing of
Washington DC.

Fine = tell them they can no onger have any reservations as the
property rights fanatics see it = then see how they view it!


If the feds destroy the local economy, it will hurt the
Indians bad, because they depend on the white community for jobs.

Potato farming is highly mechanized = proove that the number of Native
Americans hired by those farms is significant!

If you
destroy the farming economy of the basin, you push another 20% of the
Indian population below the poverty line.

So, the aRMS ARE EMPLOYING 20% OF THE RESERVATION POPULATION????

http://www.indiancountry.com/?390

excerpt:

What Walker does not mention is that several local businesses have
taken measures widely perceived to be anti-Indian. One local Klamath
Falls eatery is selling a cod-based sandwich that they advertise as a
"Sucker Fish Sandwich." The proceeds from sales of the sandwich are
going to fight the Endangered Species Act.

Tribal members said some restaurants refused to serve them and that
local area whites often harass them when they go into town.

The tribe has fared a little better in the water woes. Located on the
north side of Klamath Lake, the tribe and individual American Indian
ranchers have greater access to water since they are in the direct
path of mountain water run off. Water remains fairly scarce even in
this area and it is nearly impossible to transport water from the area
to the drought-stricken area on the south side of the lake.

One of the tribal sources at Klamath said there is no easy solution to
the problem, and as the area braces for the drier summer season the
situation is not likely to get better.

"The only thing that can solve this situation is rain, and a lot of
it. Other than that it looks like we're in for a bumpy ride."

http://www.r5.fs.fed.us/modoc/manage.../Chapter_3.htm

excerpt:

Native American Groups

(Traditionalists and Non‑traditionalists)



The members of this group primarily include Upper Pit River, Paiute,
and Modoc/Klamath Indians. Most of the Upper Pat River Indians are
located in the Alturas area, while the Paiute are generally found in
the Ft. Bidwell area. Modoc/Klamath Indians are primarily
nonresidents. The group experiences high unemployment (approximately
75%), and those who are employed work seasonally in ranching and
construction off the reservation.



Native Americans have traditional and non‑traditional (economic)
ties to the land. That is, religious/heritage sites are located on the
Forest; and many individuals are employed by the timber products
industry (logging, thinning, planting, mill work, etc.). Traditional
Native Americans hold nature in high regard and believe that all land,
plants, animals, and water are sacred.



The major influence of Forest management on this group is the
disturbance of Native American cultural and religious resources.
Traditionalists believe in retaining a natural landscape and using
resources necessary to sustain their lifestyle. They consider major
land alterations (clearcuts, road building, etc.) disrespectful to
nature. Thus, protection and preservation of hunting, gathering and
spiritual places is only part of their concerns in the way the Forest
is managed. Major prehistoric sites, such as villages, seasonal base
camps, cemeteries, rock art, and prayer seats, are also of concern and
should similarly be preserved out of respect for ancestors and to
preserve examples of past lifestyles.



The certainty and uncertainty of maintaining the group's way of life
and their traditional uses of the land is directly related to the
amount of environmental disturbance caused by Forest activities: the
greater the disturbance, the more likely an area of religious or
cultural significance will be changed. Consequently, traditional
Native Americans prefer alternatives which stress maintaining tine
Forest in a natural setting.



Traditionalists may include tribal elders who are not involved in the
current job market. They may also include younger individuals
interested in reviving some aspects of past lifestyles, beliefs, and
traditions. These revivalists may be involved in the current local job
market.



Non‑traditional Native Americans are generally younger to
middle‑aged individuals involved in the current job market.
While they may lean toward the traditionalist point of view, they are
also concerned with the economic necessity of employment. Because of
their need to work, non‑traditionalists accept more intensive
management of the Forest, including disturbance of some cultural
heritage sites. Generally, increased opportunities for local
employment, especially in the timber products industry, is a benefit
to this group.

-------------------------

The general public just gets sound bites, and has no clue about the
historic basis for local politics.


AKA = Stip the Natives of the Land!

At this point, everybody is praying
for rain. Twenty years ago, they had to raise the road bed of US97
because Klamath Lake was flooding the highway. This was right after the
severe droughts of the late 1970s. A couple years of double snow packs
and this entire issue would sink into the water and drown.

We shall see!

Larry Caldwell wrote in message t...
In article ,
writes:

So you see, besides fishery concerns, the Klamath Tribes are using the
water issues to leverage their cause.

Oh and the recent subsidy farmers to the area are Not???????

What would you do if you didn't have farmers to demonize? Don't you get
tired of being a hate monger?

Just responding to what you wrote!



How about those subsidized environmentalists? What makes them think they
can use federal lands like they want?


Or not use land as you want = a big difference!

Or how about subsidized commuters
in cities? What right do they have to expect government roads?

None = Why don't you end them?


Sometimes they may use the
environmentalists to make a point, but they have no illusions that the
environmentalists would support the tribes.

Hard to say! Incase after case, value habitat for endangered species
are found and welcomed on many reservations!

Endangered species are also found and welcomed on many farms. Are you
trying to play the old Noble Savage theme again?

Why all the squak about Prairie dogs and Preble's Meadow jumping mice
then???



They may dispute with the
farmers, but know that the farming community contains some of their most
solid supporters.

In what century? = not the 17th, 18th 19th, 20th or 21th as far as I
can see!

You are notoriously myopic. Of course you can't see it. You can't see
anything that would conflict with your hatred and prejudice.

Well the only articles I see from farmers are against the Klamath!

Farmers and Indians are united in their loathing of
Washington DC.

Fine = tell them they can no onger have any reservations as the
property rights fanatics see it = then see how they view it!

If you want to pick on lunatic extremists, the Indians have them too.

I was referring the the Termination:

http://www.pps.k12.or.us/depts/india...ml#Termination

Termination
In 1954, Congress passed legislation called the "Termination law."
This termination bill affected many Oregon Indians, as a terminated
tribe could not get education, health care, management of resources
and legal help from the federal government. Upon termination, the
reservations were closed and services were withdrawn.

At that time, there were 2,133 Klamath Indians and 2,081 Grand Ronde
and Siletz Indians. Approximately 864,820 acres of Indian trust land
was sold. The Termination Act names a total of 61 different groups in
Oregon, some of which had never been federally recognized, but were
included in the termination list to avoid any future claims. Not all
Oregon tribes, however, were terminated. Some Indian tribes like the
Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs had organized according to the
Indian Reorganization Act. They created self-governments and continued
to be recognized by the federal government. They were allowed to keep
most of their land and continued to receive assistance from the Bureau
of Indian Affairs. Restoration

In the 1970's, Indian tribes all over the United States felt a new
sense of identity and growing prides. Groups like the AIM (American
Indian Movement) were created. During that period, Congress gave back
tribal status to some terminated tribes. This continues today and is
called restoration.

Tribes can be restored and members can group back into the tribe.
Throughout Oregon, a new sense of Indian awareness began to grow. The
Siletz, Grand Ronde and the Klamath tribes have been restored and,
therefore have regained federal recognition. The Cow Creek Band of the
Upper Umpqua, the Coos, Lower Umpqua-Siuslaw, and the Coquille tribes
have been recognized by the United States government but have not
received reservation lands.

Other terminated tribes in Oregon have maintained their tribal
cultures and governments and are working to become restored.

The restoration policy does not include restoring reservation lands.
The tribes may be federally recognized, with federal services and
benefits, but without a land base. Grand Ronde and Siletz, however,
are two tribes which have been restored and were able to secure and
reestablish small reservations.



If the feds destroy the local economy, it will hurt the
Indians bad, because they depend on the white community for jobs.

Potato farming is highly mechanized = proove that the number of Native
Americans hired by those farms is significant!

The whole economy of the Upper Klamath depends on farming. There used to
be a forestry base, but extremists like you destroyed that. Now you are
out to destroy farming too. Where do you think the money will come from
if the area doesn't produce anything?

Seems if the Klamath had retianed the Land = It would be productive!

If you
destroy the farming economy of the basin, you push another 20% of the
Indian population below the poverty line.

So, the aRMS ARE EMPLOYING 20% OF THE RESERVATION POPULATION????

What is an aRMS?

Farms!

And there is no reservation, did you forget? The
Indians live in the community right along side the whites.

And why is that = see 1954 termination above!



http://www.indiancountry.com/?390

excerpt:

What Walker does not mention is that several local businesses have
taken measures widely perceived to be anti-Indian. One local Klamath
Falls eatery is selling a cod-based sandwich that they advertise as a
"Sucker Fish Sandwich." The proceeds from sales of the sandwich are
going to fight the Endangered Species Act.

You love to feed the hatred between people, don't you?

Oh the search was full of such!

It's bread and
butter to hate mongers like you.


Bread and butter = comsumptive extraction = what do you mean!

There's a big difference between a
sucker fish and an Indian, and a bigger difference between the ESA and
Indian politics.

Name one environmentalist group that has come out in favor of tribal
lands restoration. Can you name even one? I bet you can't.

Me!