Take it from Indian, Sell it to the Highest Bidder
The question of being a people in common expectedly means a lot to the
American people. ''This land is my land, this land is your land,''
intoned Woody Guthrie. The country had a great commons even in those
days of
the American
Depression; and for more than 60 years after the populist bard's song
was firstsung, the people protected their right to public lands held in
trust largely
by the federal and state governments - not for the few with the capital
to
buy it all, but by the many, even the all, whenever possible.
Native peoples have experienced the good and the bad of that equation.
Holding lands in common, even while respecting the production of
individual
homesteads, worked well for untold generations. The brunt of the bad
came in
waves of dispossession that now go back centuries. The denial that lands
held
in common had proper title, particularly when the commonality fell
within
an
American Indian nation, is the shared experience. Outright greed and the
willingness to enforce theft by gunfire left little justice for
Indians. Private allotments outside of tribal jurisdictions left much
undivided land for the
taking, given to land rushes by lawless claim makers, who shot and
maimed
each
other for years after the opening of Indian territories.
Well, some things never seem to change.
A potential land grab, the likes of which haven't been seen since the
Oklahoma land rush of 1889, is upon us. A huge acreage of what remains
traditionally Indian land, and yet in many places has seemingly been
passed to the public domain as federal trust lands, is slated to be put
up
for claim and/or sale,
if a provision pushed by U.S. Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., chair of
the
House Resources Committee, passes Congress. Pombo's provision,
slipped inside a House budget bill, would overturn a congressional ban
that
has kept both
mineral companies and individuals from taking patents on public lands,
prohibiting purchases in national forests and parks, for supposed
mining purposes.
The new bill would make it legal for anyone to stake out a mining claim
on
public land and then be allowed to buy it. Pombo is ostensibly revising
the
1872 General Mining Law that encouraged easy claims to stimulate
westward
migration. The loophole would now be expanded by lowering the levels of
commercially viable ore that must be present. Ultimately, an
estimated 350 million acres of ''public lands,'' much of which is still
legitimately Indian land, could
pass into private hands, at giveaway prices, under the new provisions.
That
estimate is more than three times the amount of land lost by Native
nations as a result of the allotment acts.
In at least one case, the so-called settling of title with the Western
Shoshone via legislative manipulation imposed by Sen. Harry Reid,
D-Nev.,
and
signed by President Bush allows the possibility of large
privatization in that state, where nearly 60 million acres could
ultimately
be sold to
developers. Six of the top 10 present claim-holders are foreign
entities,
mostly Canadian
and Australian mining companies.
They stand to carve out good chunks of Arizona, California, Colorado,
Idaho,
Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington
state
and Wyoming. The Pombo bill represents a severe approach to the selling
of
America to the
highest bidder, particularly when much of this land rightfully belongs
to
American Indians. It goes beyond the pale and should not be allowed
to pass. If it does, high-end developers will be allowed to purchase any
public land with
minerals on it and turn it into their own private property. More than
two
million acres inside or near national parks, wildlife refuges and
wilderness-designated areas will immediately be open for sale. An
additional four million acres encompass various sacred and culturally
important sites, and another
20 million acres are clearly threatened.
The ''wild'' country of America will be severely reduced through large
waves
of untrammeled development by this legislation; many bio-productive
watersheds, and many of the wonderful places Americans of all
persuasions can now access, will be closed off. The natural beauty and
natural wealth of places
currently held in the public domain will be sold to the few.
Where the American patriot, now that he is needed? Where the feeling for
natural spaces that Americans learned to have, based on their learning
from
Native peoples?
The centuries-old American campaign to privatize the natural world has
been
unrelenting. Nevertheless, traditional checks and balances, largely
based in
a
widespread (if not always deep) appreciation for the grand beauty of
valleys
and forests, promoted the establishment of protected areas where more
intricate understandings could emerge into ecological awareness.
In recent years, under the guise of an all-purpose ''free-market''
argument
espoused by rapacious and imbalanced ideologues, the drive to open up
the
protected areas has greatly intensified. All manner of environmental
protection
has been slapped down, and a dismissive - even hateful - attitude toward
natural world systems has been projected onto the public. As evidenced
by
the
Pombo bill, the drive now is to open up huge areas where mining and
other
development will trump nature-oriented sensitivities.
Greed, once considered a sin, becomes the driving force.
In one hopeful turn of events, some people among those that have
supported
the often-misnamed conservative movement have begun to reawaken from
their
unquestioning support of free-rein right-wing initiatives.
Most significantly, these include an emerging current among even
evangelical
Christians to the cause of environmental conservation. This welcome new
trend is advocated vigorously by Richard Cizik, vice president
of governmentalaffairs for the National Association of Evangelicals.
Cizik
speaks of an
attitude of ''creation care'' and is calling for the development of a
public
theology among the country's 30 million evangelicals ''to live
in conformity with sustainable principles, and [for] our government to
reduce pollution and
resource consumption.''
According to Cizik, quoted in Grist Magazine, ''creation care'' has
biblical
roots: ''We are commissioned by God the Almighty to be stewards of the
earth.'' The Bible articulates the ultimate result of failure to care
for
the
planet in Revelation 11:18: ''The time has come [...] for destroying
those who destroy the earth.''
While Cizik's concern group has not (to our knowledge) weighed in on the
California congressman's effort to privatize huge tracks of public lands
throughout the West, it is urging the government to ''encourage
sustainable use of natural resources and provide for the proper care of
wildlife and their
natural habitats,'' said Cizik.
We welcome this new trend among evangelicals, while also wondering where
the
consensus voice of tribal leadership is to be found on an issue of such
cultural and economic substance. It certainly won't be found in any
of the now countless gaming meetings. We abhor the consistent American
impetus to steal
Indian lands (such as Western Shoshone lands within Nevada) and the
current
intent to reduce our treasured commons, which is one of the few gifts we
have
left to bestow upon our coming generations.
Link to Report
Special thanks to Carrie Dann for sending this on.
November Reports
Contents
Last updated on November 23, 2005