There's an interesting line of thought that wonders if the U.S. National Parks should be returned to Native Americans. - David Treuer, a writer who is also Native, [wrote](https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/05/return-the-national-parks-to-the-tribes/618395/) about this idea recently. - Treuer also lays out some of his vision in an [interview](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/should-native-americans-control-national-parks-examining-an-argument-for-reparations): "As parks were being created, over 87 million acres of parkland were being set aside for Americans, Native Americans were being deprived of and we lost control of over 90 million acres. So, I think it's high time that the United States did the right thing and returned land to Native tribes. And we would manage it on behalf of all Americans. This wouldn't be a place that sort of non-Native people would be excluded from. These parks would be open to everyone as before, but they would be managed, controlled and protected by us. And I think it's safe to say that we are much better, we are much better at encouraging and making room for our neighbors than the federal government and the majority of Americans have been, at least vis-a-vis Native people, for the past few hundred years. So, if this were to happen, if the parks were run by a consortium of all of the tribes of the United States and managed on behalf of all Americans, this would be good for Native people, of course, but it would also be good for American people and good for parks." - He continues on to respond to questions of logistics, which can also be read about [here](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/should-native-americans-control-national-parks-examining-an-argument-for-reparations). - It's quite possible that doing something like this would lead to a fundamental change in how we view the commodification of lands, although perhaps a bit farther down the line (e.g., an unanticipated consequence of engaging in this way of thinking.)