****sorry every one, I couldn't figure out how to fix the formating***
In Oklahoma, the Cherokee nation has been having issues with the polluted Illinois River.
Eleven poultry companies from Arkansas have been accused of polluting the water with chicken
feces and parts. The state of Oklahoma is suing the poultry companies for $600 million for
damages to the water. The state was told that they could not sue for the large amount of money
they were asking for because the river runs through Native American land, and the state failed
to add the Cherokee nation as a primary plaintiff. The Cherokee nation was denied by the court
to join the lawsuit because they were tardy in filing their name. The Cherokee Nation has now
has signed an agreement with the state of Oklahoma allowing the state to claim for the Cherokee
nation. The Cherokee nation is now questioning: who really owns the stretch of the Illinois River
that cuts through the Cherokee nation. The Cherokee nation is now fighting for rights to the Illinois
River, a right that they thought they always had.
Link to article: http://www.nativetimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=9&Itemid=4
Probing Question: Why are the rules so unclear on who has the right to bodies of water that are shared with multiple states and Native American land?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that the rules are unclear about water claims because a river flows. By that, I mean that a river is just a long ditch in the ground with water running through it. They can claim parts of the ditch because those parts don't move. However, since the water is really what matters, it becomes difficult to say one controls a section of the water. Because water flows, you cannot lay claim to a portion of water that may be in the next state by the end of the day. I believe that the Cherokee Nation would be justified to claim rights only to the section of the Illinois River which flows through their reservation. And likewise, I think that the state should only claim the part that runs through their state. The tribe needs their own source of water so this should be a good settlement. So ultimately, my opinion is that it can be difficult to claim something that moves.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Christian.. the ownership of water can be very unclear. The water is constantly moving, so how is someone supposed to claim ownership of water that’s changing by the minute? The tribe obviously needs a water source therefore they should have ownership of the river that runs through their reservation and anything outside the reservation could be the state’s.
ReplyDelete