Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (70171)	1/2/2000 5:52:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

A recent article on the subject: Historians Revisit Slaughter on the Plains By JIM ROBBINS NYT 11/16/99 MISSOULA, Mont. -- The wanton slaughter of millions of bison in the 19th century by white hide hunters, abetted by a military intent on subjugating Indians, is probably the most famous conservation horror story in United States history. The problem with this tale, a growing number of scholars and historians say, is that it is not true. As portrayed in a number of new books, the real story of the decline of the buffalo involves a significant change in climate, competition for forage and cattle-borne disease. Another major factor, the authors say, were Indian tribes, empowered by the horse and gun and driven to hunt buffaloes for the profits that came from hides and meat. "What most people don't consider in their 'Dances With Wolves' version of history is that Indians were involved in the market," said Dr. Dan Flores, the A.B. Hammond professor of Western history at the University of Montana. "They were cashing in on buffalo in the 1840s as their principal entree into the market economy, and very few species are able to survive when they become a commodity." White hunters who killed buffaloes by the millions in the 1870s and 1880s played a major role in the demise, said Flores, but only as the coup de grace. "The hide hunters are not off the hook," he said. "They share the burden of the final mop-up. But without their involvement, the buffalo would probably have only lasted another 30 years." That is because their numbers had been so greatly reduced by the other factors. That's about 1/4 of the article, it being the NYT and all. A subject of some controversy, apparently. Cheers, Dan.