BTW, as long as we are talking about parallels to the Cowboy Hall -- and they are relevant because the two projects are similar in many ways -- it should be noted that OKC won the right to host the hall in 1955 but construction didn't even start until 1959.

Then, after several starts and stops including a complete stoppage for 2.5 years, it didn't open until the middle of 1965. And of course, that was a much, much less ambitious project.

People also forget that the Myriad Gardens took forever to get done the first time.


I'm sure the ACCIM will get done and I hope in the near future we'll look back on this as more or less part and parcel of these types of projects.

Some random thoughts (i looked a lot of this up for over in the Oklahoman thread but don't have it handy now so am doing it from memory)

• Originally proposed/authored by the same Native American State Senator that was quoted in the article as now being against more tribal contributions.

• The State HAS lived up to its original monetary commitment and gone well above and beyond

• Original plan was for the cost to be split evenly among 3 main entities:
1) State
2) Feds (Congress committed something like $30 million to it but didn't follow thru, eventually $16 million or so came but think it was thru something else)
3) Private donations (i.e. Tribes)

• As costs have escalated only the State has come up with more money. The other entities have fallen well short of their original financial commitments much less the increased amounts.

Also, the new director seems to have it backwards a bit (if I am reading it right). According to the state issued bonds, the States amount was to be matched by private donations (not the other way around)...back to the even split.

If there is a lack of enthusiastic support among tribal leadership perhaps it is because there is a lack of trust. Would it be farfetched to suspect that it is just a matter of time before any contributions made will be lost? What happens to the contributions already made by the tribes if the center is not finished? Teacher pay was already last in the country when the agreement to build the AICCM was made. Our roads and bridges were already in bad shape too. When the land was donate for this center it was a toxic waste site. No one wanted anything to do with it. Now that it has been cleaned up people can see all kinds of uses for it. Hopefully the AICCM was not used just as a scam to get the site cleaned up so it could be put to a "better use." This project needs to be completed. It can be a great education resource for our underpaid teachers.

If there was a lack of trust from the outset, why was it originally proposed by (if I recall correctly) a Native American state senator, and why did they contribute so much as a penny if they had so much distrust up front?

It matters not at all the status of teacher pay when the project was proposed, it matters now that the project is clearly underfunded and the state is now being asked to foot the bill. Not one penny of public funds should go to this project so long as our teachers are underpaid and our roads are crumbling. It's all about priorities.

When I see "graduates" struggling to read, write, balance their checkbook, or handle fundamenal math, I hardly see the educational value of this center as something that should be deemed an "educational" priority. Through whatever political boondoggery we arrived at this point, there is no better time than to say "No more state funding, period."

For those that think the State should keep throwing good money after bad money, let me know if you ever want to play poker. Bring your checkbook.

It'll get done one way or another and, in my opinion, it should. It will be a great asset for the city.

It'll get done one way or another and, in my opinion, it should. It will be a great asset for the city.

I agree Doug, even if it takes State, City and Private funding, it needs to be finished ASAP. The potential for this museum is something like we've never experienced before.

I agree Doug, even if it takes State, City and Private funding, it needs to be finished ASAP. The potential for this museum is something like we've never experienced before.

Every time we travel West, we make it a point to stop at 4 corners and Oak Creek Canyon at Sedona, just to buy jewelry and goods from the Native American vendors. That could happen here.

While I agree with what you said, Bellaboo, the Center of the American Indian is about much much more that people stopping en route from point A to point B to purchase Native American trinkets/memorabilia. It is about our state and city paying homage to his history prior to the time that this territory was opened to white and other non-Native American settlement, as well as embracing that history as part of who it is that "we" (inclusive of Native Americans) are. THAT is the best part of what can happen here, with this development.

It is about our state and city paying homage to his history prior to the time that this territory was opened to white and other non-Native American settlement, as well as embracing that history as part of who it is that "we" (inclusive of Native Americans) are. THAT is the best part of what can happen here, with this development.

I think the price of homage is way south of $170 million. Do people really not understand how much $170 million is?

JTF, there is no point served in arguing with you. We do not agree, and we will not. Do you not understand THAT?

I think the price of homage is way south of $170 million. ...

And you think the country folds in the year 2020, and a few other things that others don't exactly sit around a campfire with you singing kum bah ya and snacking on s'mores. We get it. I promise you've made your position clear. you think it's a dumb and wasteful project. And that's fine that you feel that way. No one is going to beat you up over it or try to shame you into seeing it differently. It's likewise fine that not everyone agrees with your position on this museum project.

FWIW, I think it'll get finished as well, and I think it'll cost more than it ought to, and I'm ok with that.

JTF, there is no point served in arguing with you. We do not agree, and we will not. Do you not understand THAT?

I wouldn't call it arguing. It is more of a spirited debate about how $170 million should be spent. Some want it closer to the original $33 million dollar price and some don't think there should be any limit at all. 300% over budget already and all they have is a mound of dirt and some building frames. The amount needed to "finish" is more than the entire original state's portion.

And true, we might never agree but we aren't the only people that read the comments. You are attorney and in a trial the lawyers rarely agree on any case - but they have the trial anyhow. In fact, the disagreement is the reason for the trial.

I read the comments occasionally. And my comment is that there are very few things that make Oklahoma City worth visiting for someone who doesn't have a relative here. Done right, the Native American Cultural Center, especially when combined with our nice, but not worth a stop, features like our Zoo and the National Cowboy Museum, make this a more worthy place for a visit. I still don't think we'll do anything more than attract a few more convention attenders, in terms of longer term stays, but adding the Cultural Center might make us worth an overnight stop. That is a good thing.

Also, I like the idea of celebrating the one thing that makes us fairly unique among states. I'd like to know how much the state wastes on studies and surveys and commissions and special programs that don't work. It would be nice to funnel that money into something we taxpayers can enjoy.

I posted this earlier, but I recently visited the Chickasaw Cultural Center in Sulphur. It's worth the drive, and plan to spend a good 3 hours, it's outstanding. I feel this could be exponentially more considering the number of tribes and stories to be told.

Even if streamlined a bit, this needs to be completed. The Cowboy Hall took 40 years to transform into something great and this project could very easily be it's equal.

We could all start by everyone on this board throwing a few bucks it's way.

I wouldn't call it arguing. It is more of a spirited debate about how $170 million should be spent. Some want it closer to the original $33 million dollar price and some don't think there should be any limit at all. 300% over budget already and all they have is a mound of dirt and some building frames. The amount needed to "finish" is more than the entire original state's portion.

And true, we might never agree but we aren't the only people that read the comments. You are attorney and in a trial the lawyers rarely agree on any case - but they have the trial anyhow. In fact, the disagreement is the reason for the trial.

No, the reason for the trial is to ascertain the TRUTH. Disagreement clouds the truth because of perspectives and agendas. Objective consideration of all evidence points to the truth. Truth isn't a matter of opinion.

No, the reason for the trial is to ascertain the TRUTH. Disagreement clouds the truth because of perspectives and agendas. Objective consideration of all evidence points to the truth. Truth isn't a matter of opinion.
That's true ... unless, of course, truth itself is an opinion ... :dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
J/K

...my comment is that there are very few things that make Oklahoma City worth visiting for someone who doesn't have a relative here...
betts, this is not to pick a fight with you, as your take is fairly typical of most who live here and is a common opinion most people have about their own hometown.

A story: a few years ago I was on a business trip to Little Rock, and having been there several consecutive years, on a whim I decided to drive past L.R. and overnight in Memphis, a city I had not visited to that point. Like many who visit Memphis, I went to Graceland, and I stayed in the Peabody. I went to a Grizzlies/Bulls pre-season game at the then-new FedEx Forum. That evening I visited a bar on Beale Street. I was chatting with the bartender and another business traveler, who himself had checked out Sun Records that day. The bartender made small talk and asked about our trips. When we told him, he rolled his eyes, and made it clear that he thought it was just this side of dumb that we had wasted our time on such nonsense.

I refrained from pointing out to him that the reason we were both sitting in front of him, keeping him in a job and (perhaps) tip money, was because we were drawn to the very things he found tiresome about Memphis.

My point is that even in a well-developed tourism market, locals rarely see the true value in their own attractions. You might be surprised to know that OKC already IS a well-developed tourism market, itself.

I work in the tourism industry. I talk daily to tourists, conventioneers and other people who fall into the "visitors" category. I have traveled to all of our contiguous states to promote the OKC metro to potential visitors. I can say without question that just about 0% of the ones who make it here feel the way about OKC that you do. Typically, they are stunned by all that central Oklahoma has to offer. For families, many will tell you it is the best tourism destination in the entire region, including the Dallas metroplex, where many of them now come from.

You say that not much here warrants a single overnight stay, yet I am routinely told by people that they didn't allocate enough of their trip and are already planning return visits. I've been told these things not just by people from Kansas, Texas and Arkansas, but by people from L.A., San Diego, Maryland, Florida, Scotland, and Japan.

OKC residents (even the more educated) have no idea whatsoever how many tourists (and tourist dollars) come through and STAY in our city. Tourism is the third largest industry in our state, and the center of tourism is in the twelve central counties. If you'd like to try being a tourist in your own metro and wrap your arms around how many quality visitor opportunities we have, a good place to start is Frontier Country's website (http://www.oktourism.com/), which covers the twelve central counties. Another great place is the OKC CVB's site (http://www.visitokc.com/), which focuses specifically on the metro.

Sorry to digress, but I often see comments on here that demonstrate a lack of understanding regarding how much the tourism and convention business ALREADY brings to OKC. It's the best kind of economic development; people from other cities come here and drop off their money in our economy, while demanding very little in the way of infrastructure or public services. Growing that segment of the economy is a sure way to grow the entire OKC economy.

There are many things to do here once you are here. However, maybe Betts was saying there aren't a lot of DESTINATION type attractions, of which this has a chance to be one. We have some great things here of which I and all of us are proud. Not all are extremely visible and most appeal to certain niches. This center could be a bigger family attraction and is also very noticeable when traveling through OKC.

I can tell you that for years, bringing in my international reps and their customers to OKC, the most popular things for them were the native culture things...the western culture, the American Indian culture, rodeo, etc. We need to embrace the things that are unique and interesting and that others have an interest in knowing about and shout them out, not ignore they exist. I believe this has a chance to be very popular and CAN create a significant amount of hotel nights, dinners sold, and attention for our other attractions.

There is also a strong correlation of conference center success and these types of tourist attractions in the near proximity. All the things can create a synergy, and this could be an important piece.

IMHO

I am still troubled by the whole "unique to Oklahoma" thing.

http://500nations.com/tribes/Tribes_State-by-State.asp

I am still troubled by the whole "unique to Oklahoma" thing.

http://500nations.com/tribes/Tribes_State-by-State.asp
Yes, that's quite troubling. Why would anyone say such a thing, under the circumstances that 37 or so tribes of Native Americans were forcibly removed here from their homelands to the then obscure place known as "Indian Territory." Because of that, Oklahoma is home to nearly forty American Indian tribes, and it includes the largest Native American population of any state. Nothing really unique about that, is there? (Yes, that's a rhetorical question.)

Nothing remarkable, either, after having been forcibly removed here, about the history of how these tribes or individual members were duped out of their lands or mineral interests after the opening of Indian Territory to settlement by non-Native Americans. Nothing remarkable, either, that Native Americans were forced to forego their native languages and tribal histories in favor of an amalgamation process to make them more "white" like. Nothing remarkable, either, that their children were forced to go to schools which were intended to strip them of their heritage and become acculturated into the white society, which white society did with a gusto, to the point that a Native American child who deigned to speak in his/her native tongue would be harshly punished by his/her white educators. Nothing remarkable that, for the decades which spanned from the 1890s into to the 1960s or so, that white society Oklahomans viewed Native Americans as something second class, and that, sadly and forced into submission, many Native Americans came to accept that role, as well.

Gratefully, that time is past.

What's done is done and cannot be undone. But, at the least, history can be made right and tell the truth. A very good friend of mine but especially of my wife Mary Jo Watson, Blue Clark, Ph.D., had this to say about that:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxY3wcHcK2o

The above video was made in my wife's office at the University of Oklahoma. She is Mary Jo Watson, Ph.D., director or the School of Art at O.U., and I just stumbled across the above video while researching to respond to your message, JTF. To be sure, Dr. Clark was talking about his book ... but he could just as well have been talking about the American Indian Cultural Center & Museum, at the same time.

I told you earlier, JTF, that we disagree and that neither of us would likely change the mind of the other, and I avoided discussion with you for that reason, such discussion being pointless. But, in so many words, you said that the matter should receive an airing here. Perhaps, in the above, you may get a better handle on my own perspectives and my own position, and better understand that I have no chance of being persuaded by your arguments to not complete the American Indian Cultural Center & Museum in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, to become a monument to the role of Native Americans as a central, original, and integral part of Oklahoma's history and heritage, and, more, to become a beacon to all who will find a no better and more comprehensive place to learn, and relish in, the heritage of Oklahoma's Native American tribes and population, than right here in the capitol city of the State of Oklahoma.

In rejoinder, perhaps you will urge that the costs of completion of the center are too great. To that I will say that the costs are not nearly enough, but, more, have already been paid ... paid in terms of history, above stated, but not paid in terms of dollars to get the complex completed. I'm not thinking tourist dollars. I'm not thinking of economic dollars producing a return on investment. I'm just talking about doing the right thing to honor the Native American part of this state's history and heritage, and to not chisel them yet again.

The State of Oklahoma took upon itself on the mantle of getting this project done, and it should damn well finish it.

At least, that's my opinion, and why.

I am still troubled by the whole "unique to Oklahoma" thing.

http://500nations.com/tribes/Tribes_State-by-State.asp

Here is why people say that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_removal

And that was just the start. Tribes from all over the U.S. would be forced to OK. Relocation to "Indian Territory," not original homelands, is what makes our history so full of Native history.

How can you not acknowledge Oklahoma has played a much larger role in Native American history than other states? Historians recognize it, but not Just the Facts. Go figure.

There are so many good reasons to finish this project, it is pretty hard to come up with a compelling reason not to. Fix any project management issues, tighten the financial accountability, and let's get it done. It is right for our culture. It is right for our history. It is right for Oklahoma. And it certainly is right for OKC.

Any time we fly people into here they always ask about tornadoes and Indians, and occasionally the Memorial. Unique or not that's what we are known for.

On a related issue... We have actually stopped recommending that our folks go to Bricktown unless it's a game night. Too many of our folks keep complaining that restarsunts are not open, even during posted times (these are business travelers during the week). Also the words "vacant" and "depressing" come up a lot. Our folks stay at downtown hotels, at least right now anyway. We've been having meetings or just generally recommending they head over to Midtown instead, and they've been much happier. It's kind of sad, but it is what it is. Perhaps if we had more "attractions" in the Bricktown area such as the Indian museum the area wouldn't be so dead during the week.

Any time we fly people into here they always ask about tornadoes and Indians, and occasionally the Memorial. Unique or not that's what we are known for.

On a related issue... We have actually stopped recommending that our folks go to Bricktown unless it's a game night. Too many of our folks keep complaining that restarsunts are not open, even during posted times (these are business travelers during the week). Also the words "vacant" and "depressing" come up a lot. Our folks stay at downtown hotels, at least right now anyway. We've been having meetings or just generally recommending they head over to Midtown instead, and they've been much happier. It's kind of sad, but it is what it is. Perhaps if we had more "attractions" in the Bricktown area such as the Indian museum the area wouldn't be so dead during the week.

Questor, the museum might help draw people to Bricktown but I would hardly call that the Bricktown area. Midtown is as close to Bricktown as the Cultural Center and it's much easier to get between them.

That's true ... unless, of course, truth itself is an opinion ... :dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:
J/K

Dear Mr. D. Loudenback

I am surprised that you would even offer [The Pontius Pilate Conjecture (regarding Truth act "truth")] as an alternative/defense . . . =)

Yet, that is beside the point of [another memorial to native-americans] and the entire "guilt trip" regarding what "we"
could have done better.

Sincerely,
RM (not a real estate speculator)

Questor, the museum might help draw people to Bricktown but I would hardly call that the Bricktown area. Midtown is as close to Bricktown as the Cultural Center and it's much easier to get between them.

But . . .
Where's The Braum's?

But . . .
Where's The Braum's?

It's coming, Radical. Be patient. LOL

What were some of the tribes that were truly native to Oklahoma (not moved here), especially in Central Oklahoma?

What were some of the tribes that were truly native to Oklahoma (not moved here), especially in Central Oklahoma?

This will give you a good idea about which tribes were native to Oklahoma and which were relocated.

http://www.native-languages.org/oklahoma.htm

Well . . . I can fer shure tell yew dat dey vasent de same tribe/al [persons] that you have to avoid running over in the road up there in Minnesota, around that lake, with all of the mosquitoes and so fort' . . . . on account of the gambling around the casino yust outside o' town lookin' fer a gud steak . . . fer gootness sake. ..=)

[Rent/View "Sweet Land" . . . Tew hours well invested.]

This will give you a good idea about which tribes were native to Oklahoma and which were relocated.

http://www.native-languages.org/oklahoma.htm

Thanks!

Many of the relocated tribes have their very own cultural centers in their native lands. Some of you seem to think that the relocation of tribes to Oklahoma was the lone significant event for eastern tribes. The history of the Cherokees did not start and end in the 1830s. You are talking about a single event over thousands of years of existance. If you want to make a Trail of Tears Museum then call it that because that seems to be the subject.

Many of the relocated tribes have their very own cultural centers in their native lands. Some of you seem to think that the relocation of tribes to Oklahoma was the lone significant event for eastern tribes. The history of the Cherokees did not start and end in the 1830s. You are talking about a single event over thousands of years of existance. If you want to make a Trail of Tears Museum then call it that because that seems to be the subject.

This musuem is to explore and share the history of the American Indian tribes IN OKLAHOMA, not make claim to be the only museum possible for any Native American tribe in the country. Their mission statement is this:


AICCM Mission Statement
To serve as a living center for cultural expression promoting awareness and understanding for people regarding Oklahoma American Indian cultures and heritage.


AICCM Vision
•Living Center for Contemporary American Indian Culture
•Communicate the story of American Indians in Oklahoma
•Center for the Study of American Indian Culture and History

Source: http://www.aiccm.org/mission-vision--foundation-statements


The larger tribes will have (and often do have) their own cultural/history centers that will celebrate their unique history and perspective. Unless the AICCM only focuses on the largest tribes, it will be the only voice for many of the smaller tribes. Do you think the Miami Nation has enough money or tourist interest to support their own center? The Modoc tribe? The Kaw Nation?

There is no reason that this can't act as a gateway to other tribes and their specific venues. Oklahoma City is obviously going to be more of a tourist draw than Ada, but maybe visiting this museum will lead some to the Chickasaw Cultural Center where they wouldn't have gone before.

This museum has the opportunity to be more than the stereotypes and generalizations with which you label it. It has the opportunity to open the world of Native American culture and history to many who have no experience with it, both locally and from around the country/world. We are unique in our history because of why things happened. No one is claiming to speak for all Native American tribes, no one is saying only Oklahoma has a right to any Native history. That does not detract from the amazing stories that this center can tell, both positive and horribly negative. This will give one more voice to the Native population to tell their stories (whether it is run by the tribes or the state).

Many of the relocated tribes have their very own cultural centers in their native lands. Some of you seem to think that the relocation of tribes to Oklahoma was the lone significant event for eastern tribes. The history of the Cherokees did not start and end in the 1830s. You are talking about a single event over thousands of years of existance. If you want to make a Trail of Tears Museum then call it that because that seems to be the subject.


The Chickasaw tribe relocated from northen Mississippi and Alabama, western Kentucky and Tennesse. This happened around 1840 and took about 7 years to get to Oklahoma.

Where did they build their cultural center ?

Down by Lake of the Arbuckles just south of Sulphur, not back in their home state of Mississippi or the afor mentioned.

All those that don't want this built argue the micro view but this is about the mosaic that is Native American Oklahoma. It is a singular place to have the story told. It is a book, not a chapter.

The Chickasaw tribe relocated from northen Mississippi and Alabama, western Kentucky and Tennesse. This happened around 1840 and took about 7 years to get to Oklahoma.

Where did they build their cultural center ?

Down by Lake of the Arbuckles just south of Sulphur, not back in their home state of Mississippi or the afor mentioned.

But they built their own right? They chose the location, the content, and how much they wanted to spend. But for the guilty "white man" this isn't enough. We have to build our own center for them and pick the location ourselves - a location by the way that maximizes profit to the "white man" via tourist dollar and sales taxes. That is what makes this quote from the Oklahoman so self-contradictory.


Why should tribes be asked to contribute more than they already have?” Haney said. “This is a state agency. How often do see state agencies asking for private money to finish projects of this size?”

The former Seminole Nation chief, who describes himself as a semiretired artist, said he is looking forward to the museum opening, but maintains that tribes have done enough for the project.

“The reason for the museum is to let Native people tell their own stories,” Haney said.

“They have never been able to do that up until now — everyone's done it for them.”

Read more: http://newsok.com/american-indian-cu...#ixzz1h272UzuW

But they built their own right? They chose the location, the content, and how much they wanted to spend.

Yes, they chose NOT to locate it in Mississippi - that was the earlier discussion about some of the Eastern tribes. To expand on this, their Cultural Center has equal space given to pre- and post-Oklahoma.

I haven't seen any evidence the Native Americans in Oklahoma are objecting or fighting this project. They just don't want to be obligated to pay for it. One more time....this is a story of OKLAHOMA's roots, not of any ONE TRIBE. Why is that so hard for some people to understand?

there are so many good reasons to finish this project, it is pretty hard to come up with a compelling reason not to. Fix any project management issues, tighten the financial accountability, and let's get it done. It is right for our culture. It is right for our history. It is right for oklahoma. And it certainly is right for okc.

agree!

Well clearly I am in the minority here.

Well clearly I am in the minority here.

Finally something we can all agree on, Kerry. LOL

I can see this becoming a museum for Native Americans what the Holocost museum is for Jewish people. It can be a powerful way to tell the story of the removal from their homelands by showing how their culture survived despite horrendous circumstances. Has there been any thought to linking AICC with the various tribes "home" museum such as the Cherokee museum in Cherokee, NC?

I hope it gets completed sooner rather than later but have no idea how to best fund it. Obviously it needs to be a cooperative effort but cooperation seems to be lacking unfortunately. But that is probably simply due to current economic conditions for the potential funding sources.

If it was a Trail of Tears Museum you would have a good point, but using your simile; this is more akin to a History of the Jewish People Museum built at Auschwitz funded by the German people and marketed as a tourist attraction to improve the local economy – hence all the economic impact studies to support the initial funding and all the comments on this thread about how it will bring in tourist.

It's not just the Trail of Tears. Many other tribes from across the United States were relocated to "Indian Territory" also. What you don't realize is that many of the tribes still are here. They had to re-adapt their lives after the tragedy of forced removal. Tragedy begot a new life and Oklahoma should finish this museum to recognize the tragedy AND the heritage.

A better analogy would be to have an African-American museum about slavery in the south... which is something I would go to if I was in the area so I could learn more about the institution of slavery.

A better analogy would be to have an African-American museum about slavery in the south... which is something I would go to if I was in the area so I could learn more about the institution of slavery.

Those are all over the South.

Those are all over the South.

Great! I hope people attend them and learn about the South's past and present... Just like people should be able to do for Native Americans in OKC.

Great! I hope people attend them and learn about the South's past and present... Just like people should be able to do for Native Americans in OKC.

They are pretty well attended, but I don't know of any that cost $170 million. It seems the US National Slavery Museum in Virgina bit the dust because they couldn't even raise enough money to pay the property tax on the donated land. I wonder if they thought to ask Oprah. If they did then she turned them down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Slavery_Museum

They are pretty well attended, but I don't know of any that cost $170 million. It seems the US National Slavery Museum in Virgina bit the dust because they couldn't even raise enough money to pay the property tax on the donated land. I wonder if they thought to ask Oprah. If they did then she turned them down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Slavery_Museum
Got to give you credit, JTF, for tenacity, even after you earlier acknowledged that your view about completion of the Native American Center was a minority position, at least in this thread.

You do persist however, but, in my opinion, you have become a bit of a boor who continues to plow the same ground over and over ad naseum. That's fine and that's your privilege (not a right, but a privilege) for as long as the owner of this forum will allow it. But it is also my privilege not to have to keep seeing it when I come to OkcTalk. So, please do continue to talk about the cost of this project all you want until you are exhausted (should such a comforting time come) ... and I add parenthetically that I for one am on the edge of my seat wondering what Oprah would have to say about slavery museums in Virginia or elsewhere ... particularly as it may relate to the topic of this thread.

But, instead of waiting to hear what you might have to say about that, I'll tell you what, JTF ... I'm instead going to change my personal settings at OkcTalk to ignore your posts here at OkcTalk, and I won't be at all offended if you do the same to mine, as well.

Here's how you can do that:


Once you are logged in, in the menu at the top (between My Settings and Log Out), notice the "Settings" item. Click it.
A dialog will open. In the left pane, an item named "My Settings" is present, and a sub-item, "My Account," is present.
In that sub-item, an item called "Edit Ignore List" is present. Click it.

In the dialog which opens, add or subtract any OkcTalk names which you want to affect.

That should do it. I may have gotten some of the above slightly incorrect, but it shouldn't be hard to figure out from what I've said. Thereafter, any post that I've made (old or new) will simply appear, "This message is hidden because Doug Loudenback is on your ignore list."

I won't see your reply to this, JTF, should you make one. C'est la vie.

More power to you Doug. For myself, I am perfectly capable of skipping over topics, individuals, and even individual posts that don't interest me without resorting to the electronic ignore feature.

I'll tell you what though, just for experimental purposes I won't post again in this thread for 30 days and we will see how far down the active topic list this thread falls. A small group of people all agreeing with each other should make for stimulating reading.

Shutting up now - see you in 30 days.

It's okay if the thread falls. The same dead horse has been pulverized...beaten into dust. I doubt if any readers don't know who believes what. When there is some movement, then the thread will deserve to be renewed.

It's okay if the thread falls. The same dead horse has been pulverized...beaten into dust. I doubt if any readers don't know who believes what. When there is some movement, then the thread will deserve to be renewed.

Exactly, Rover. Unless something new happens, rehashing the same arguments over and over serves no purpose.

I found this pretty interesting!

http://www.ok.gov/oiac/documents/2011.FINAL.WEB.pdf
http://www.ok.gov/oiac/documents/FY2010.POCKET.PIC.pdf

It shows that tribes in Oklahoma have an annual economic impact of over $16 billion, of which the Chickasaw Nation accounts for most of this with of this with $13.9 billion, Choctaw Nation is second with almost $900 million, third is the Citizen Potawatomi Nation with $422 million, fourth is the Osage Nation with $222 million, then the Kaw Nation with $200 million, then the Eastern Shawnee Tribe with with $164 million, and so on.... The Cherokee Nation had a huge difference in its impact between 2010 and 2011, with $441 million in 2010 then way down to $109 million in 2011.

Population wise, here are the largest nations (from the 2010 census):
Creek Nation - 759,000
Cherokee Nation - 505,000
Chickasaw Nation - 303,000
Choctaw Nation - 233,000
Kiowa-Comanche-Apache - 198,000
Cheyenne-Arapaho - 174,000
Citizen Potawatomi-Absentee Shawnee - 118,000
Sac and Fox Nation - 57,000
...and then they get much smaller.

I could only find land area information for the Five Civilized Tribes and Osage Nation, of which the Choctaw Nation is the largest.
Choctaw Nation - 10,864 sq. mi.
Chickasaw Nation - 7,356 sq. mi.
Cherokee Nation - 6,791 sq. mi.
Creek Nation - 4,811 sq. mi.
Osage Nation - 2,304 sq. mi.
Seminole Nation - 572 sq. mi.
However, looking at maps, the Cheyenne-Arapaho Nation and the Kiowa-Comanche-Apache are both very large and definitely rank within the top 6 largest.
http://www.ok.nrcs.usda.gov/contact/misc/tribal_jurisdiction_map.jpg

My point is is that I didn't realize how much of an economic impact all of the tribes in Oklahoma have in the state, and it's interesting to see how they compare in size, population, and total number of enrollment. To me, the AICCM is perfectly placed in Oklahoma to represent not only Oklahoma's tribes but all tribes of the US. Also, because it is being built in our home state, it's like a monument that represents the successes of our state's tribes and how they've thrived here since being relocated from their homelands.

Also, as a proud Choctaw, Navajo, and Cherokee guy, I can't wait until the AICCM is complete and go for a day long visit!

I found this pretty interesting!

http://www.ok.gov/oiac/documents/2011.FINAL.WEB.pdf
http://www.ok.gov/oiac/documents/FY2010.POCKET.PIC.pdf

It shows that tribes in Oklahoma have an annual economic impact of over $16 billion, of which the Chickasaw Nation accounts for most of this with of this with $13.9 billion, Choctaw Nation is second with almost $900 million, third is the Citizen Potawatomi Nation with $422 million, fourth is the Osage Nation with $222 million, then the Kaw Nation with $200 million, then the Eastern Shawnee Tribe with with $164 million, and so on.... The Cherokee Nation had a huge difference in its impact between 2010 and 2011, with $441 million in 2010 then way down to $109 million in 2011.

Population wise, here are the largest nations (from the 2010 census):
Creek Nation - 759,000
Cherokee Nation - 505,000
Chickasaw Nation - 303,000
Choctaw Nation - 233,000
Kiowa-Comanche-Apache - 198,000
Cheyenne-Arapaho - 174,000
Citizen Potawatomi-Absentee Shawnee - 118,000
Sac and Fox Nation - 57,000
...and then they get much smaller.

I could only find land area information for the Five Civilized Tribes and Osage Nation, of which the Choctaw Nation is the largest.
Choctaw Nation - 10,864 sq. mi.
Chickasaw Nation - 7,356 sq. mi.
Cherokee Nation - 6,791 sq. mi.
Creek Nation - 4,811 sq. mi.
Osage Nation - 2,304 sq. mi.
Seminole Nation - 572 sq. mi.
However, looking at maps, the Cheyenne-Arapaho Nation and the Kiowa-Comanche-Apache are both very large and definitely rank within the top 6 largest.
http://www.ok.nrcs.usda.gov/contact/misc/tribal_jurisdiction_map.jpg

My point is is that I didn't realize how much of an economic impact all of the tribes in Oklahoma have in the state, and it's interesting to see how they compare in size, population, and total number of enrollment. To me, the AICCM is perfectly placed in Oklahoma to represent not only Oklahoma's tribes but all tribes of the US. Also, because it is being built in our home state, it's like a monument that represents the successes of our state's tribes and how they've thrived here since being relocated from their homelands.

Also, as a proud Choctaw, Navajo, and Cherokee guy, I can't wait until the AICCM is complete and go for a day long visit!

....................The importance of the tribes to the character and history of both Oklahoma and Oklahomans can't be understated. Having said this, these population figures can not be correct unless they represent the number of all peoples living in these historic national (tribal) boundaries. The Cherokee tribe is the second largest tribe in the US behind the Navajo - and these figures show it being 2nd in Oklahoma?

Yes, the population figures represent the total number of people living within the boundaries, not by enrollment. Sorry, I should've added that little note in there.

Somewhat recent photo below. Shows that most the external construction is complete and are awaiting additional funds before finishing the interior and exhibits.


http://ih.constantcontact.com/fs078/1102220562926/img/484.jpg?a=1108668378882

^^ So that is what $100 Million dollars looks like?

Reading back through their promotional materials, the Visitor Center is designed as a satellite for the 39 tribes based in Oklahoma.

I suppose the idea is to lure anyone interested in Native American culture to this center, they promote the outlying tribes and their various tourist attractions.

So in theory $180 million to tell visitors to go elsewhere?

It looks like they had champagne and caviar dreams on a shasta rootbeer and corn nuts budget.

So in theory $180 million to tell visitors to go elsewhere?

Or to encourage them to see more of the state after already visiting this attraction.