Ever since the market economy was introduced, our land and water are no longer managed by the local communities, rather they are regulated by the government. Some may believe that this transition is the ultimate problem to the decline and mistreatment of our water resources and land. Whether it is the main problem or not, one thing is for sure, our current ways of distributing our water and water rights are not as equitable as they should be. Often times the way the government distributes water it not the most efficient way possible. This issue greatly affects the people residing in the Southwest, including tribes from Arizona like the Hopi and the Navajo. One of the Senate Bills that involved the water rights of the two native tribes was …show more content…
In response to this discussion, Senators Kyl and McCain wrote the article, “An Endless Tribal Water Fight,” in hopes of defending the intentions of their bill. On the other hand, Navajo representative, Ed Bencenti wrote the article, “Senate Bill 2109 Seeks to Extinguish Navajo and Hopi Water Rights,” in which he exposes the real intentions of the Senate Bill. Both Kyl and McCain do a good job of presenting their claims to support their interests. However, the intentions of the Senate Bill are not ethical and efficient; instead of attempting to alleviate the issue of the scarcity of water, it is contributing to this problem by taking away the water that belonged to the tribes’ and giving it to coal …show more content…
The top priority of the Senators is clearly not the lives of the Navajo and the Hopi, but rather the “powerful mining and energy corporations” (Bencenti 1). What is more disturbing is that the corporations that Senators Kyl and McCain show interest to are one of the reasons why the water that the Navajo and Hopi tribes used to have access to is no longer readily available. According to Brian H. Hurd’s powerpoint “Who Owns Water? Water in the Southwest States,” a water right is the right to divert and use water beneficially. While it is hard to determine whether or not water is being used beneficially amongst the Southwest states, I would argue that the way the Senators claim to use the water that belongs to the Hopi and Navajo tribes is not beneficial. Giving coal corporations access to the water that belongs to the Hopi and the Navajo will only aid the rapid rates of the scarcity of water. The coal business will use the water to generate electricity; this process pollutes and effects the quality of the waters and wells that used to be readily available to people like the Navajo and the Hopi. The coal corporation is also violating one of the cornerstones suggested in Hurd’s powerpoint which states “new appropriations…must not harm, impair, damage, or diminish the rights of other appropriators.” The fact that the Bill plans on taking away the water of the Hopi and Navajo tribes and
In “Wrong assumptions,” Art Cullen, an editor of The Storm Lake Times, disputed Gov. Terry Branstad’s strategy to resolve the problems of polluted landscapes and contaminated water in Des Moines, Iowa. As a citizen of Iowa, Cullen is concern about the effects the controversy might influence not only his daily life but also the residents and community. Despite Cullen commending Branstad’s efforts to solving this conflict, Cullen points out that there were flaws in Branstad’s plan by stating in the article that “We have a few problems with the assumptions (Cullen, para 2).” In addition, Cullen suggested that the foremost solution would be using the Clean Water Act as the main point to how they will resolve their complications in the most fashionable
“Now the Sioux Must Battle Big Oil”, authored by Alan Gilbert, is an argument with many forms of evidences. Gilbert uses a variety of statistics, quotations, as well as personal experience to support his argument and his opinion. Most of these evidences are reliable, but some can be improved by adding more authority to the evidences. In the beginning of his essay, Gilbert uses a quote from a Standing Rock Tribal chairman. This is a trustworthy source, since it is from a firsthand witness of the situation.
The problem of North Dakota Access Pipeline is that the digging of the pipeline under Lake Oahe would affect people who drink from the water. In addition, the North Dakota Access Pipeline was built on scared land. This is a violation of Native Americans culture. There is no respect for Native Americans as oppressors just want to profit from their land. Many
Yuma, Arizona a state that was officially established in 1912 came to be one of the most and main important areas in irrigation and agricultural history as it grew and progressed and was founded by many. All Southern Arizona contributed to the significance of this history along with Yuma as well. With the Colorado River as the main supply and running through these areas supplying water creating other dams and canals such as the Yuma Siphon, Yuma Main Canal, Laguna Dam, All American Canal etc. Question Number one, Describe in detail how irrigation changed Yuma/ South Arizona.
In Senator Jay Rockefeller’s statement on Inhofe Resolution, Rockefeller argues that the resolution of disapproval is unsafe and a threat to many jobs of West Virginians. This sixteen minute speech was given on June 20, 2012 in front of the state senate. The Inhofe Resolution of disapproval is a resolution wanting to block the Environmental Protection Agency’s MACS or MACT rule. The rule limits mercury, acid gases, and other toxic pollution from power plants. The resolution of disapproval was proposed by Senator James Inhofe, who wanted to block the rule to “end Obama’s war on coal.”
Some complain that the deal will put massive amounts of Colorado River water in the hands of “Indian water czars. " Some people question
The confusing part is, is that the government spends $1,000,000 flying in bottled water. Instead of giving these First Nations only $250,000 to fix their treatment plant give them some of the $1,000,000 that 's spent
In the book Coming of Age in Mississippi, author Anne Moody tells her life story growing up in the American South and how her experiences lead to her becoming a civil rights activist during the Civil Rights Movement. She grew up on a plantation, in a community of sharecroppers. Her parents worked as sharecroppers, and after her father left the family with another woman, Anne, her mother, and her siblings move to various houses in six years. While her mom got a waitress and maid job, their family still suffered in poverty. They usually ate food such as bread and beans, which Toosweet brought home from the restaurant.
The Dakota Access Pipeline is a underground oil pipeline. Part of the pipeline is on Native American territory. To get access to the pipeline, burial grounds of the Natives Americans would have to be annihilated, going against the tradition of Native American culture. In the article,”
The government is backing out of its agreement. You left us on land that is too small a size and most of it cannot be farmed. The government should give more land back, not kick us off the leftovers” (Erdrich 197). The Indian tribe members are irritated with the Termination bill and attempt to communicate their thoughts with the Government. Additional members speak up with their concerns about the bill and they take a vote.
Attorney General, I am writing on the behalf of the Sioux Nation's stand against the pipeline that threatens their land, water, health, and future. Although their stand is a way to advocate for their rights laid out int the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man (1948) and should be supported, the primary reason I write are as follows: 1)Pipeline action violate the 1868 treaty that the U.S. has made with the Sioux Nation 2) Militarized tactics (rubber bullets, etc.) used against the nation's people for standing for looking after their health and the ecology of the land is attrocious. 3) There is a comonent of the above said actions that seem to violate the Sioux peoples' Freedom of Religion. I am extremely concerned
The government’s mishaps don’t stop with casinos. The Sioux do not deserve for their water to be contaminated. Originally the government intended for the pipeline to pass through Bismarck, yet the risk of contamination in states capitol lead to relocation through reservations (Sidder). Unlike the BP oil spill that affected many animals, an oil spill of the North Dakota Access Pipeline would affect humans. We are to question are federal laws protecting indigenous land doing their justice?
This act was an attempt by the US government to “Americanize” Native Americans. Based on these two pieces of legislation, the official viewpoint of the government during this time period was to encourage settlement of the West by encouraging the American tradition of private ownership of land, but this was just a front to hide the true discrimination and destruction that Native Americans were forced to endure. The official viewpoint is not accurately reflected in the song “Don’t Drink the Water”, however, this song does reflect the realities of what was happening in the West during this time period as a result of these two land policies. The main perspective of the song is that the incoming settlers were attempting to force the Native Americans off their land, which is shown through phrases like “you have been banished, your land is gone” and “...you must move on or I will bury you”. Phrases like these are littered throughout the sone and demonstrate how the settlers didn’t care that they were imposing on Native American’s
With the construction of this pipeline going right over the Ogallala aquifer, this puts Nebraska landowners at risk of not only contaminating their drinking water, but their irrigation water for their crops, too. The Ogallala aquifer is “one of the world’s largest known aquifers and the primary source of groundwater for approximately 20 percent of U.S. agricultural production” (Keystone 295). This puts Nebraska land owners at risk of not only contaminating their drinking water, but also “jeopardizing its use for farming” (Keystone
Congress passed the treaty in order to relocate the Indian tribes living east of the Mississippi River to lands in the west. Although, the act did not order the removal of the Indians, it did allow the president to negotiate land by exchanging treaties with tribes living within the boundaries of the states ” (2008-2015). This shows that the government did not have the right to do what they