I just read a story say the Kennewick man may not be a 10,000 year old indian at all.. Could this be the start of changes for the fishing community? I just wonder how this is going to affect us ??????????????????????????????? I think history is about to change..............

Any thoughts?????????

http://www.alternet.org/story/11129/

COHO

Study of the skeletal remains of kennewick man (found on US ARMy corps of engineers land) has shown that he was probably caucasian. Kind of calls into question the whole first people thing that most tribes believe. They want to bury him saying he is one of their ancestors, evidence suggests otherwise.

The tribes have sued to keep scientists from thoroughly studying kennewick man, for some reason the corps of engineers sided with the tribes and we've had a decade long legal pissing match in federal court as a result.

I think the case stands that the Burke museum has him, but the army corps of enigneers is stalling any study despite court rulings permitting scientific study. Seems stupid to me. They need to figure out if he's caucasian and if not apologize to the tribes and bury him.

I can totally understand the tribes not wanting him studied his very existence flies in the face of their traditional religion (being the first people and all).
For christians, its analgous to somebody finding proof that Christ wasn't the son of God. There'd be lots of folks fighting to suppress that tidbit of info if it were true.

BTW there are other archeological finds of old human remains that are non-indian. I belive somebody recently found ~13,000 year old polynesian skeletons in California these predate any indian remains by thousands of years.

I think the tribes are going to have to adjust their relgion to fit reality. Maybe someday all relgions will do that, I think it would make the world a better place.

Just my $0.02

The courts have recently ruled against the tribes. The studies can go on. The Corps Of Engineers did, however, cover over the site where the skeletal remains were found under the premise that it was an ancient indian burial ground.

So Gramp,
What are the Native American laws and the modern day Federal and State laws concerning Native American sacred burial grounds?

Any body want to shed some knowledge?

That would be interesting to know
I personally think that if the kenn man is caucasian, then it really wouldnt effect the indian culture/tradition/religion beliefs.

I don't think the "burial site" is on the reservation so it would be a common courtesy to respect the burial site. Unfortunately the tribes are afraid of what has all but been proven and that is that the skeletal remains are those of a caucasian...that would shoot down alot of their claims and they can't have that. I think it is common for projects to come to a screaching halt if there is one claim of ancient indian anything in the ground. I don't think it matters where it is but I could be wrong. I think the new Narrows bridge was stopped because the excavating uncovered something that could be construed as tribal. The tribes tell us when it is ok to resume our work I think. Kind of like our fisheries. We decide after they decide to allow us to decide.

Does it really matter? I mean, if he's white, he's white. If hes not, hes not.

I think the issue we SHOULD be debating is the age of the body. What says hes 10000 years old??? carbon?? Yeah, carbon testing has all but been shattered in reputation. Remember that Mt. St. Helens rock?

Curtis

I think the History Channel did a show on carbon dating and pretty much said it was a hit & miss tactic. I wouldnt be surprised if that ten thousand year old body was actually a thousand years old.

federal law applies on all federal and tribal lands....native american graves and protection and rpatriation act...washington law applies on all other lands....kennewick man was found on federal land...read the statutes to find out why the corps did what they did...

the hood canal bridge project was stopped when a large(possibly the largest in the NW) village site was unearthed...

carbon dating is used mainly to determine age of things that were once living...not rocks and such...the carbon they look at doesn't accumulate until an animal/plant dies...and it is pretty darned accurate when used on appropriate material....

protections for all historical sites and graves are important....native and non native....
do you really want disney to build a theme park at gettysburg??

Geoduck- I'm curious if you could provide a link to more info on your reference to Polynesian skeletal remains in California. Thanks

Sorry Capt.Dan,

I heard a blurb on this about a month ago on NPR while driving to work. They said something about the oldest north american human remains being found and that they were polynesian. The find was supposedly in california somewhere, but I can't recall where.

I looked and couldn't find it in the archaeology literature online. Probably hasn't found its way into the published literature yet.

I took the report with agrain of salt. NPR is better than most, but the popular press has a way of mis-reporting and over-hyping science findings.

The real study when it gets published is the place to go for solid facts.

Unfortunately, I don't think the origin of Kennewick Man can or will have any bearing whatsoever on current indian treaties or their current legal interpretations.

I believe Kennewick Man is the only way to change the present laws because the court cannot deny the logic that, if a Caucasian was here before the Asian-based Indians, then the "right of first occupancy" presently granted to the Indians goes out the window.

The treaties that grant current tribal fishing rights have nothing to do with science or who was "here first." They are binding political documents, negotiated and signed by particular parties. It's as simple as that. The controversies surrounding Kennewick Man, however thay are ultimately resolved, will have absolutely no bearing on fishing rights or any other aspect of treaty interpretation. Whether or not caucasians or the ancestors of Indians where here 10,000 years ago doesn't change the fact that modern Native Americans certainly were here 500 years ago when Europeans first arrived, and 150 years ago when Americans began settling the NW, occupying and utilizing the land that white settlers, speculators, and governments thought they'd like for themselves. Those are the people the US signed treaties with, not some speculative white-man's ancestor in North America.

I agree with Slabquest & Ramon, regardless of kennewick man or subsequent findings, the legal treaty interpretations will not change.

I may be fuzzy on the treaty language, but I believe they are not predicated on who was here first.

Wow what a great disscustion..... these views are great..................

Thanks to all !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

COHO

COHO,

I completely concur.

Thank you for posting/launching this thread!

Glory be!! I agree with BOTH Ramon and Slab in one day....whew

He may have been white, and then again he may have been an indian... but chances are no matter what he was probably pretty hairy all over... I'll mull that over while fishing today.

Even if the outcome is to overturn any treaties, the decision will come long after the wild fish in this state have vanished. Lets keep our fingers crossed!

It will be used to challnge the treaties. Wheather it is successful or not is the question. That is why the tribes fought so hard to gain possesion. A caucasiod predating the "native Americans" throws the whole "original" people intent of the treaties into question legally.

how IS the wheather up there anyway?

It's good H20 really good.

This is an old story and there are several law firms already working on the case. Only the naive believe that the law is about right and wrong. You will see the ground work for the evidence publically and a lawsuit with in 5 to 10 years. Why? there is a lot of money at stake. Where there is money you will find attys. Whether it will be successful or not again is the question.

If they do overturn any treaties (I doubt it), it will remind most people of all the thousands of other treaties that were signed and deliberatley shat upon by the U.S. gov many years ago.

Whatever, I'd just like to see everyone starting to live in the 21st century and the problems we're faced with today, not the 19th and issues that no longer exist.

King

King

Must be hot in Graceland again today

TC,
The issues from the 19th will remain until probably the 22nd century. I just dont think politicians will want that kind of "pigeon holed" rep.

Lt,

I did not give my personal opinion. I just stated some facts that I am aware of. There are many other industries besides fishing that would like to see the treaty rights revised if not reversed. It's all about money.

i think he's still trying to figure out 'wheather' or not you're serious is all.

H20


"i" edited the spelling did you fix your error?

dude, you missed the joke three times in a row and you're going to cast grammatical aspersions now?

H20,

Your life must really be slow ,Dude!

Back to our regularly scheduled program.

seattle times had an article a couple years ago on the possible polynesian skull found in california ...but also remember that the voyage of the kon tiki showed it was possible that there was also migration from south america into the pacific islands as well as from the west..and that people also could have sailed from africa to south america....

also...when they say kennewick man was 'caucasian' they don't mean in the 'viking' sense but more like the Ainu of northern japan...

oh yeah...'buhl woman' woman found in idaho was more 'polynesian' than indian as well....dated around 10000 years ago as well...

The K-man was a white guy. Never be able to prove it though. I had a professor at UW last year that actually got to look him over. The indians really did a number on the scientists.... they filled his "coffin" up with cedar branches and other voodo. It really messed things up for testing. The worst part of the whole deal is the Army Core burried the site so that they couldnt find any artifacts to assosiate him to europe. He obviously died form a spear point, but it was from indians with the forsight to protect their fishing/treaty rights.

So lets get this straight... the same morons that could not support WSR are now on board to support Kennewick man as a means to stop tribal netting ???

Wow... You guys are a cartoon of how to screw things up....

Yep, my guess is that he was a white guy too. This earth is a very old place and many different groups of folks have come and gone...us included some day.

I do find it interesting, however, that Lewis and Clark in their journals of 1805-6 while traveling west repeatedly mentioned the Indians keen interest in seeing "white men"...most had never seen a white man before...or a colored man for that matter, also part of the LC Party. This certainly suggests that if there was a time when white dudes shared inhabitance with indians (as the KM remains suggest) that it had been "a long time" (beyond the memory of the indians LC were meeting) since any indian had seen them.

RM

Never forget that when Lewis and Clark encountered the Indians on the Columbia river they offered them discount smokes... fireworks.. and an open invatation to gamble at their casinos... in their usuall and accustomed way...

Never forget that when Lewis and Clark encountered the Indians on the Columbia river they offered them discount smokes... fireworks.. and an open invatation to gamble at their casinos... in their usuall and accustomed way...


yep
they be cutting a fat hog in this day of mamby/pampy citizens
1 percent of the population
50% of the take
and?
taxpayer subsidies????

hmmm

i don't think life has ever been so good for "tribal" members while most "native" americans try to survive amongst the other 99% of they're brethen 21st century citizens

white, black, yellow and red all seem to say
why?
why 1% get to rape with impunity?
wtf?


i need to stop rantin (or drinking)
or i'll be labelled a "racist"
question will be though?
right or wrong
is any one citizen better or more deserving than another?
or?
can i call a spade a spade and say this is wholesale bull****?
call it how you see it
but i call bs

maybe even vote
yea vote
maybe vote the mamby/pamby touchy/feely girly kind of senators out so a mean/anti-netting /anti-mono-rail kind of person might actually get elected instead of the capitol hill/coke spoon in the nose/who gives a flyinf f$$$k about a fish instead of a river boat turned casino

ahh
neveermind

the ainu aint white but are considered caucasian as well....not like some olaf lookin guy...better look and see what an ainu looks like folks...