Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> Bob Axtell wrote:
>
>   
>> It was a failure because there is almost NO available western lands to 
>> buy; US Indian tribes own all the land.
>>     
>
> Are you sure? Last I checked there were huge amounts of land owned by the
> federal (and possibly state) governments, plus a lot of private property
> owned by individuals, not US Indian tribes. (I'm not sure, but I think
> James is one of those non-tribal owners :)
>
>   
Its not that there is NO land, its just that there is little AFFORDABLE 
land.

> I tried to find a number of how much is actually owned by Indian tribes,
> but couldn't find one. Does someone know? My forays into the south-western
> USA didn't leave me with the impression that most of it was tribal owned,
> much less all of it.
>   
The state of Arizona (where I live) is a good example. 3/4 of the land 
is owned by Indian Tribes or
Federal facilities. For example, soldiers come to Arizona to become 
acclimatized before shipping out
to Iraq. A huge facility near Yuma is kept  to train US military pilots 
how to make aerial attacks, etc.

Since 3/4 of the land cannot be taxed by AZ, the remaining land is 
heavily taxed, so even arid desert
becomes expensive..

New Mexico does have some cheaper land, as the amount of Indian land is 
much less by percentage.
Many people are self-sufficient in NM, some accomplishing it by pooling 
their meager resources for
wind energy and well facilities, etc.

--Bob

> Gerhard
>
>   

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist