VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, [9], 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Thu, 12/12/02 10:24pm
Author: john mohdom
Subject: Re: Unrecognized tribes
In reply to: earthw7 's message, "Unrecognized tribes" on Thu, 12/12/02 8:43pm


>I also meet a woman who "claims" eastern Shawnee. She
>is also unrecognized She know her family and culture.
>She claims 1/32 Shawnee.

do you mean she's an unenrolled member of the Federally Recognized Tribe or she's a member of a group looking for Federal Recognition out east?

>The difference is the Chinock
>guy looks native and the Shawnee woman looks white.
>Now the question? Which would you choose to be
>recoginized?

I would never base recognition on what members look like. I don't know about the Chinock tribe but the Shawnee signed something like 16 treaties with the government I would say it's not exactly a questionable tribe. ...now if you are talking about one of those 'remnant' groups out east I have a very opposite response.

>Both were invited to the meeting because
>of their knowledge of their nation.
>I am just wondering if we need to define our belief as
>to who is native.

>personally I could include both in my definitions.
>I was also told that federal recoginzation is up to
>the Navajos because they make up the committee on this
>recognization.

I find that hard to believe. (not that I'd put it past the BIA)...but two of the three paths for Federal Recognition are somewhat separated from the Navajo (Congress and the President). Is this person saying only Navajo sit on the BIA portion of this recognition process? Or is it something else?

The Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma went through this using the Congressional path not too long ago so some of this is somewhat fresh with me. ...but this whole recognition thing is very slippery. A friend of mine recently estimated that about a third as many as are currently recognized (563?) could probably meet the seven criteria if politics weren't involved. He's only estimating from what he knows. I don't have data to support or to doubt him. Unfortunately those seven criteria for recognition are not bullet proof...they have holes in them.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.