Post two questions/comments in response to the reading
Posted by Capper Nichols on February 6, 2006 09:10 AM|Permalink
Comments
In response to the first section of readings in "Final Frontiersman"...
My initial reaction to the first section was that I didn't realize that there was much debate in regards to adding Alaska as a state. I thought it was really interesting that there were people who didn't want it, particularly because they didn't think it could afford the necessary government agencies.
I also wonder why Canada didn't buy it first. Were they not in the place to do so at the time or what stopped Canada from buying Alaska?
Also very interesting was how the government acts mentioned in the book caused an immediate change in the way natives in Alaska lived. They wanted to keep their land and keep trapping and living a subsistence lifestyle until they were given shares in the pipeline/oil work. This basically linked their lifestyle and money to the oil.
As Carla did, I found it interesting that the native Alaskans were determined to keep their land which was so important to their culture. However, when money (in the form of oil) was presented as a means of agreement, the natives got to keep their cultural land, but lost many of the aspects which made their culture special.
I think the Trans-Alaska Pipeline is a very interesting topic. Its construction, purpose, and impact on nature and the people of Alaska are fascinating.
For the second set of readings in "The Final Frontiersman" I found one contradiction interesting enough to comment on. On page 153 the author writes how the need to escape routine is one of the main appeals for chosing a life of solitude in the wilderness, however on page 160 this idea is contradicted by the statement that many would-be-settlers leave because they are "bored by repitition."
"The Final Frontiersman" reading for today was interesting. Though it has been said, I too was surprised about the debate regarding the addition of Alaska as a state. I've always looked at it from my point of view and not the natives point of view.
I was surprised to learn that some people consider living in Alaska's wilderness "the simple life," because if anything, I would consider it the hard life. I don't know how they do it!
In the section were he goes to visit Johnny Oldman in the hospital, I find some truth in it that today's people rely more on medicines and are a lot weaker for immune systems then people ever were before. People never try to build up a resitance to any sicknesses or the weather. We all retreat behind medicines, heated homes, and air conditioning units.
The Koyukon people found out about conservation of animal life and food sources and they found out the hard way. They hunted and fished so much that they chased all of there food away. They had to constantly move to find enough food to make it through the winter.
The Koyukon people believe largely in not affending the animal that are used for food and they treat them with great respect. It is different and kind of unique on their religious belief in the animals and their spirits after being killed. The people go through a great deal to not let the animals know that they are being hunted.
In the reading from Huntington, I found that their respect and compassion for animals was amazing. Even though they were killing the animals, they showed their deep appreciation by ceremonies. Today,I don't think that enough people really appreciate wild animals whether they're being hunted or just enjoyed. For example, how much respect do you think a poacher has for a wild animal?
Also, when Johnny Oldman was in the hospital talking about how the indians were stronger than that of todays people I found it interesting. Even by the time that he had died, didn't modern techniques increase life expectancy? I am sure that he wasn't getting at age but maybe just how they lived their lives?
It is interesting in the Huntington article it states that while Johnny was in the hospital the nurse bent needles trying to give him shots because his thin was so thick! Is this really possible that living outdoors in the cold a person will actually grow a thicker skin?
The 3 lives that was mentioned in the article really shows the drastic differences between advances in lifestyles. And it all happened within 90 years! It just puts a different perspective on change.
I thought it was interesting while I was reading "The Old Koyukon Ways" that they would not talk about the animals because they thought that they would offend them.
I thought it was extremely interesting how regulations and policies made Alaska what it is today. Each regulation identified a piece of land and it created certain stipulations on who can live there and what the land can be used for. In reference to this, I believe Heimo was very fortunate that he moved and established residency in Alaska when he had the chance. I'm not sure when that was, but it definitely before 1978.
How much contact does Heimo have with other people? Do his children go to school? Do him and his wife have an ordinary job? I am intrigued by the way he lives and I want to find out more about his and his family's way of life.
What is the policy with Heimo and his daughters regarding school? Are they just being trained as trappers? Are they being home schooled? Isn't there a policy that requires all children to have some form of schooling?
Who got the better deal when it came to oil in Alaska: the Natives or the American government? Was it worth giving up land rights?
I find it intruiging how the Koyukuk managed to survive in such extreme circumstances. It was metioned that Johnny told Sidney not to cover the little girl because it made her tough. I wonder if there was a large mortality rate in this area?
Do the Koyukuk still retain any of their native lands?
If oil hadn't been found in Alaska, would the state been able to sustain itself, or would it have gone bankrupt? What would happen if a state went bankrupt?
How far was it for the Koyukon people to travel from the Yukon River to the Koyukuk river?
I was wondering what the difference is, rights-wise, in regards to the difference to being just owned by the U.S. and being a territory of the U.S., as Alaska was at varying points in the past 150 years?
I was just wondering how big of an area is considered to have vast amounts of oil in Alaska?
Alaska seems to have not gone under near as much change as the lower 48 states. The lower 48 have changed so much from colonial times to now. Alaska still seems to have that old fashion way of living that is not really seen around here today.
In Huntington's excerpt he tells how the grandmother convinced her son not to try to save her life, but to worry about the lives of his wife and son. Then she had him help her hang herself. What a moral dilemma! Having to chose the life of one over the life of another... assisting in a suicide... Even though things like that do happen today, I wonder how many people would sacrifice their own life so that someone else might have the "chance" to survive, not even a guarantee.
Going back with what Angie said, i thought it was crazy that the nurse actually bent needles when she was trying to give him a shot.
I was also just wondering if there are any plans for development of Alaska, or is it going to be kept as a more wildlife refuge and natural landscape like it is now?
The plight of the Koyukok in the harsh Alaskan climate is a decent example of what happens when resources become scarce. The lives of the Koyukok are much like the lives of the Northern New England indians we looked at earlier. They make their homes wherever the food is. If there is no food, they must move.
Of course, all of that changed with the arrival of Europeans and the technology they brought. Snow machines, gunpowder and electricity allowed the natives to become more sedentary and less dependent on the hunt.
I have a hard time relating to how Heimo Korth could just up and leave his family to go live in Alaska. I don't think I could move more than an hour away. My family is just too important to me. I know that many people today still leave their "homelands" for career and lifestyle choices, but I just don't understand it.
It was interesting to note that even for those who lived in the wilderness, most chose not to spend their entire life there. Most ended up returning to a town of some sorts later in their life. Was it just that living in the wilderness was a phase in their life that the needed to do or was it that living in the wilderness became too hard for them?
The views and opinions expressed in this page are strictly those of the page author. The contents of this page have not been reviewed or approved by the University of Minnesota.
Comments
In response to the first section of readings in "Final Frontiersman"...
My initial reaction to the first section was that I didn't realize that there was much debate in regards to adding Alaska as a state. I thought it was really interesting that there were people who didn't want it, particularly because they didn't think it could afford the necessary government agencies.
I also wonder why Canada didn't buy it first. Were they not in the place to do so at the time or what stopped Canada from buying Alaska?
Also very interesting was how the government acts mentioned in the book caused an immediate change in the way natives in Alaska lived. They wanted to keep their land and keep trapping and living a subsistence lifestyle until they were given shares in the pipeline/oil work. This basically linked their lifestyle and money to the oil.
Posted by: Carla Inderrieden | February 6, 2006 09:59 AM
As Carla did, I found it interesting that the native Alaskans were determined to keep their land which was so important to their culture. However, when money (in the form of oil) was presented as a means of agreement, the natives got to keep their cultural land, but lost many of the aspects which made their culture special.
I think the Trans-Alaska Pipeline is a very interesting topic. Its construction, purpose, and impact on nature and the people of Alaska are fascinating.
Posted by: Vanessa Magnus | February 6, 2006 11:12 AM
For the second set of readings in "The Final Frontiersman" I found one contradiction interesting enough to comment on. On page 153 the author writes how the need to escape routine is one of the main appeals for chosing a life of solitude in the wilderness, however on page 160 this idea is contradicted by the statement that many would-be-settlers leave because they are "bored by repitition."
Posted by: Katie Hausladen | February 6, 2006 04:33 PM
"The Final Frontiersman" reading for today was interesting. Though it has been said, I too was surprised about the debate regarding the addition of Alaska as a state. I've always looked at it from my point of view and not the natives point of view.
I was surprised to learn that some people consider living in Alaska's wilderness "the simple life," because if anything, I would consider it the hard life. I don't know how they do it!
Posted by: Rachel Maust | February 7, 2006 07:09 PM
In the section were he goes to visit Johnny Oldman in the hospital, I find some truth in it that today's people rely more on medicines and are a lot weaker for immune systems then people ever were before. People never try to build up a resitance to any sicknesses or the weather. We all retreat behind medicines, heated homes, and air conditioning units.
The Koyukon people found out about conservation of animal life and food sources and they found out the hard way. They hunted and fished so much that they chased all of there food away. They had to constantly move to find enough food to make it through the winter.
The Koyukon people believe largely in not affending the animal that are used for food and they treat them with great respect. It is different and kind of unique on their religious belief in the animals and their spirits after being killed. The people go through a great deal to not let the animals know that they are being hunted.
Posted by: Jessica Bryan | February 7, 2006 07:31 PM
In the reading from Huntington, I found that their respect and compassion for animals was amazing. Even though they were killing the animals, they showed their deep appreciation by ceremonies. Today,I don't think that enough people really appreciate wild animals whether they're being hunted or just enjoyed. For example, how much respect do you think a poacher has for a wild animal?
Also, when Johnny Oldman was in the hospital talking about how the indians were stronger than that of todays people I found it interesting. Even by the time that he had died, didn't modern techniques increase life expectancy? I am sure that he wasn't getting at age but maybe just how they lived their lives?
Posted by: Amanda Melhorn | February 7, 2006 08:23 PM
It is interesting in the Huntington article it states that while Johnny was in the hospital the nurse bent needles trying to give him shots because his thin was so thick! Is this really possible that living outdoors in the cold a person will actually grow a thicker skin?
The 3 lives that was mentioned in the article really shows the drastic differences between advances in lifestyles. And it all happened within 90 years! It just puts a different perspective on change.
Posted by: Angie Walbridge | February 7, 2006 08:51 PM
I thought it was interesting while I was reading "The Old Koyukon Ways" that they would not talk about the animals because they thought that they would offend them.
Posted by: Alicia Lund | February 7, 2006 09:02 PM
I thought it was extremely interesting how regulations and policies made Alaska what it is today. Each regulation identified a piece of land and it created certain stipulations on who can live there and what the land can be used for. In reference to this, I believe Heimo was very fortunate that he moved and established residency in Alaska when he had the chance. I'm not sure when that was, but it definitely before 1978.
How much contact does Heimo have with other people? Do his children go to school? Do him and his wife have an ordinary job? I am intrigued by the way he lives and I want to find out more about his and his family's way of life.
Posted by: Jamie Seitzer | February 7, 2006 09:17 PM
What is the policy with Heimo and his daughters regarding school? Are they just being trained as trappers? Are they being home schooled? Isn't there a policy that requires all children to have some form of schooling?
Who got the better deal when it came to oil in Alaska: the Natives or the American government? Was it worth giving up land rights?
Posted by: Emily Schroeder | February 7, 2006 09:21 PM
I find it intruiging how the Koyukuk managed to survive in such extreme circumstances. It was metioned that Johnny told Sidney not to cover the little girl because it made her tough. I wonder if there was a large mortality rate in this area?
Do the Koyukuk still retain any of their native lands?
Posted by: Nick Miller | February 7, 2006 09:33 PM
If oil hadn't been found in Alaska, would the state been able to sustain itself, or would it have gone bankrupt? What would happen if a state went bankrupt?
How far was it for the Koyukon people to travel from the Yukon River to the Koyukuk river?
Posted by: Becca Haack | February 7, 2006 09:39 PM
I was wondering what the difference is, rights-wise, in regards to the difference to being just owned by the U.S. and being a territory of the U.S., as Alaska was at varying points in the past 150 years?
Posted by: Mike Bush | February 7, 2006 10:30 PM
I was just wondering how big of an area is considered to have vast amounts of oil in Alaska?
Alaska seems to have not gone under near as much change as the lower 48 states. The lower 48 have changed so much from colonial times to now. Alaska still seems to have that old fashion way of living that is not really seen around here today.
Posted by: Adam Dicke | February 8, 2006 12:29 AM
In Huntington's excerpt he tells how the grandmother convinced her son not to try to save her life, but to worry about the lives of his wife and son. Then she had him help her hang herself. What a moral dilemma! Having to chose the life of one over the life of another... assisting in a suicide... Even though things like that do happen today, I wonder how many people would sacrifice their own life so that someone else might have the "chance" to survive, not even a guarantee.
Posted by: Katie Hausladen | February 8, 2006 07:59 AM
Going back with what Angie said, i thought it was crazy that the nurse actually bent needles when she was trying to give him a shot.
I was also just wondering if there are any plans for development of Alaska, or is it going to be kept as a more wildlife refuge and natural landscape like it is now?
Posted by: Marc Huneke | February 8, 2006 08:13 AM
The plight of the Koyukok in the harsh Alaskan climate is a decent example of what happens when resources become scarce. The lives of the Koyukok are much like the lives of the Northern New England indians we looked at earlier. They make their homes wherever the food is. If there is no food, they must move.
Of course, all of that changed with the arrival of Europeans and the technology they brought. Snow machines, gunpowder and electricity allowed the natives to become more sedentary and less dependent on the hunt.
Posted by: T. Beaster | February 8, 2006 09:08 AM
I have a hard time relating to how Heimo Korth could just up and leave his family to go live in Alaska. I don't think I could move more than an hour away. My family is just too important to me. I know that many people today still leave their "homelands" for career and lifestyle choices, but I just don't understand it.
It was interesting to note that even for those who lived in the wilderness, most chose not to spend their entire life there. Most ended up returning to a town of some sorts later in their life. Was it just that living in the wilderness was a phase in their life that the needed to do or was it that living in the wilderness became too hard for them?
Posted by: Katie Hausladen | February 10, 2006 08:08 AM
Here is your life...
http://buygenericviagr.forumlivre.com/
http://buygenericviagr.forumlivre.com/ >buy generic biagra [url=http://buygenericviagr.forumlivre.com/]buy generic biagra[/url]
Posted by: biagra | July 25, 2007 07:05 AM
Here is your life...
http://buygenericviagr.forumlivre.com/
http://buygenericviagr.forumlivre.com/ >buy generic biagra [url=http://buygenericviagr.forumlivre.com/]buy generic biagra[/url]
Posted by: biagra | July 25, 2007 07:05 AM
You`ll be glad to watch this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra >buy biagra [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra]buy biagra[/url]
Posted by: biagra | July 31, 2007 04:51 AM
You`ll be glad to watch this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra >buy biagra [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra]buy biagra[/url]
Posted by: biagra | July 31, 2007 04:51 AM
Here is my links,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra >buy generic biagra [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/search/google?keywords=site%3Aforumlivre.com%20biagra]buy generic biagra[/url]
Posted by: biagra | August 6, 2007 09:29 PM