HOME | DD
enc86 β Lake Memphremagog
Published: 2013-08-18 05:07:39 +0000 UTC; Views: 823; Favourites: 22; Downloads: 7
Redirect to original
Description
Located in northern Vermont USA, is lake Memphremagog. a really incredible lake with warm clean water. this lake is shared by my northern neighbors the Canadians.this shot in alot of ways is how i think of my home state. rolling hills and small mountains,deep woods and clean lakes and rivers.and of course a little bit of modern amenities creeping in.
Related content
Comments: 63
thanks man, that means alot. happy i can get photos like this now.
π: 0 β©: 0
If that boat were edited out, it would look like either a scene from Jurassic Park 3, or a screenshot from the PC game Carnivores 2.
π: 0 β©: 1
ohhh your right, que the music www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8zlUUβ¦
π: 0 β©: 0
its easy to get photos like this in a place as beautiful as that lake.
π: 0 β©: 0
every time i see a lake like this, American monster movie remind me of prehistoric piranha, megacroc or sharktopus :}}
but that aside, very nice place mate
π: 0 β©: 1
lol there is a small part of my mind that thinks that too. guess its from too many B movies.
π: 0 β©: 0
its pretty freaking nice,tho it looks like you guys in the Ukraine has some really wonderfully lands as well!
π: 0 β©: 1
Well, they have one common flaw - i've seen most of them %)
π: 0 β©: 1
I live in VT and I never knew about this lake
π: 0 β©: 1
its up north and really nice, i prefer it over lake willoughby even.
π: 0 β©: 0
thanks man! i have been having fun with photography . guess that one more hobby to add to my list.
π: 0 β©: 0
Gorgeous lake 
π: 0 β©: 1
thanks!
i would have to get out a map but i think everything in this photo is Vermont. Canada is just a little bit to the right(out of frame)
π: 0 β©: 1
Memphremagog? What a cool name! Is it some Indian language? What's its meaning?
π: 0 β©: 1
its is a pretty cool name, and is indeed native American(alot of our lakes and rivers are native American named)
belive that Memphremagog roughtly tralates to "where there is a big expanse of water"(according to wiki)
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks for the explanation!
π: 0 β©: 0
XD
yea i have feel asleep here many times, almost too peacefully not to. rally gotta bring some tanks and pt boat up here from some photos.
π: 0 β©: 0
That's a great looking boat too - would be terrific to take her out for a spin!
π: 0 β©: 1
this lake is awesome fun with a boat. my in-laws own a boat that we take out sometimes. i forget what kinda it is but it has a full cabin to sleep and eat in. this lake doesn't get to much traffic so it always a great to take the boat out for an afternoon.
π: 0 β©: 1
Wow - that makes for a great afternoon!
π: 0 β©: 1
it really does! its one of those fine things about living in the country.
π: 0 β©: 0
XD
yea we got some great names for stuff up here.
π: 0 β©: 0
Lake Memph...Memphregdsdsdfd...Memphisgog...screw it.Β
Lol looks nice though!
π: 0 β©: 1
lol yea its a great name, we have alot of these native American named lakes and rivers. growing up here, i really dont have a problem saying any of them XD
π: 0 β©: 1
Ah I guess I know what you mean-we have a summer camp near a lake in the Sierra Nevada mountains called Camp Chawanakee, named after a Mono Indian Chief. Never had trouble with that one. But west coast native tribe names seem a lot easier to pronounce-like Mono, Miwak, Mojave, Paiute, Quinnault, etc.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
yea over here in the east we get the fun names:
willoughby,passumpsic, but my fav ompompanoosuc!
π: 0 β©: 1
Wowzers. It's interesting though how Native American tribe names are so prevalent in names all over the US-like the state of Massachusetts named after the tribe for example. The Dakotas are probably named after the Lakota Indians (but the name was probably changed a bit for some reason), and of course the Chinook, Kiowa, Shawnee, Sioux, and perhaps the Black Hawk helicopters were all named after Indian tribes. Oh and the Comanche prototype too. Winnebago camper/RV named after the tribe. I've heard that paratroopers yelled "Geronimo!" while jumping out over Normandy--and some got Mohawks. I heard that there was a computer software company awhile back called Inktomi, which is named after the Lakota "trickster" figure in their lore/religion.
π: 0 β©: 1
well its a good thing and really alot more areas really should of been named what they called it. i mean to offense to anyone but the first settlers of our country really stole the land from them.Β plus in the military sense they represent alot of great things and traits. sports teams as well. its kinda like a watered down respect thing.
π: 0 β©: 1
I've honestly thought about it though-in a sense, "us" (as in "the white man") invading and taking their land was similar to any other military conquest (albeit, there were atrocities on both sides...though war has that usually...). As in, sovereignty against sovereignty-I say this because the Native Americans had their own "nations" established, and eventually formed coalitions and confederations.Β
I mean I don't want to come across as "insensitive," "racist," or anything like that, but if you think about it, isn't it almost demeaning to Native Americans to assume that they were just helpless, less organized, and such before the white man (as some might unknowingly imply by thinking of the Native Americans as pure victims)? There were numerous organized efforts by them, defending against "us" white men.Β
Again, not to come off as insensitive, racist, or anything, but in the end, one nation took over the other nations in what's now the Continental US-the USA (if counting after we got independence, but the Brits before that, I guess the Dutch before that) took over those of the Native Americans. Just the way it was.
Now I DON'T support any ACTUAL genocidal acts or other atrocities (scalping, which I heard both sides did, massacres of non-combatants, etc) that happened. There were killings of "civilians" and "non-combatants" to put it into more modern terminology on both sides, and I'm sure there was some true genocide going on against the Native Americans-I'm just not sure the extent.Β
And I distinguish "actual," because I've seen some very high numbers of native deaths, Β (many many millions) but that don't distinguish cause. Disease probably wiped out the majority (and the minority of that number would still be pretty high), and I'd be willing to bet that almost all native deaths by European disease were unintentional. There was at least 1 case where this was done-the British were putting down Pontiac's Rebellion with smallpox infused blankets. But other than that I don't know of any other instances like that, that are true anyway.Β
Those unintentional disease deaths, I would not count as a part of any genocide number-intentional ones, yes. SO, my point in bringing up the fact that Natives did have organized, effectively sovereign nations, is that THEN, native warriors killed by the white man were killed in action. As in, they'd technically be legitimate, military targets. Soldiers killed in wars aren't *supposed to anyways, I think* counted in genocide numbers.Β
Once again, I hope I don't come off the wrong way-that can happen over the internet pretty easily, especially with more touchy/debatable topics. Now, I'm not necessarily saying that the US had an obligation to campaign against the Indians-that's like saying the Romans or Alexander the Great had an absolute obligation to expand their borders. However, in the end, I can't help but ponder what our nation might be like today, had we not. Dunno if it would've been better, or worse, ya know?Β
π: 0 β©: 1
lol WALL'O TEX, I don't usually do political conversations just cause its easy too come across like you said as a black hearten SOB, but for you ill share my view. Here is a general disclaimer: i do not want to come across as argumentative, small minded or racist ect . i know things can be taken outta context(especially political and on the internet) so hopefully no one reads this and thinks i am a wow what an As*&%#$! i allso don't want to come across as a bleeding heart liberal and such. even tho i might make some assumptions or sweeping generalizations in my analogies, i am only gonna use them to make a point and by no means take things as 100%. to get it outta the way, i am very very white, just about as pasty as they come and of mixed western European decent. i allso live in one of the whites states in the union but Β i have friends of every decent and my cousins are 50% native American am pretty unsure i am not gonna be able to make a great augment with tex, i am much better with this sorta thing IRL. with all that being said:
you have a somewhat solid augment, lot more thought out and in dept than most. i think some of it really holds true. and instead of doing a counter augment for every pint ill put up my side of the overall augment:
Lots and Lots of bad stuff happened. i pretty much think that most expansions throughout time have had similar effects and consequences but that does not make them right. the NA did try to hold their ground but alot of different factors were involved. disease, genocide, fighting amongst themselves ect but at the end of the day our nation was formed was on THEIR land. weither they were prepared, had a shot, is irrelevant Β cause in the end here is the thing: we did take this land from them, we did make them sick,we did start wars with them. alot of the time we didn't give peace a chance, we were greedy, and DID commit acts of genocide, we rounded them up,put them in ghettos, and perpetuated the "savage" image. no matter how prepared they were, or how hard they fought , them "loosing" does no make what happened justified. and i mean alot of bad sH*% happened and still happens to their people. they might of had soveran nations but many spoke different languages , did not like each other, were isolationist ect and spanned a country.. its the whole divide and conquer kind Β a thing.its pretty easy to take over alot of smaller country than one giant force. there is just no way for me to come up for a justification for most of it, its just what happened. plus alot is lost to time the victor writes history........
lol years and years latter we name sports teams "redskins" "Indians" as a sign of what? it kinda seems like a slap in the face when soo many live in tiny reservations and endured hundreds of years of subjugation, bigotry and racism. we came to their country, took it over and made them second class citizens.
it would be like the axis winning WW2. "well you know the world had its shot and lost". it was alright for them to take over the world cause they won,right! both sides did some pretty bad stuff but all's fair in war. the allies were many sovereign nations, they fought Β hard but in the end they won soooo
every nation has done some bad stuff and has history paved with blood. our country's first settlers ,through its expansion to even now has done some really really horrible things. i try to look back and learn for our mistakes and realize they were mistakes and lean from that. from our treatment of NA, the cotton industry to the secrete bombings of Cambodia. to me everything that has been done to the NA was unjust and in some case remains unjust.
anywho i respect your opinion and while i am sure we will never agree, thats one of the great things about the USA. out of all the bad things that has happened in our bloody history, this is our end result. back to the point, even tho we disagree, i want to make sure there are no hard feelings and such(lol the internet, and things coming across different than intended) i really do respect Β you having a different view than me and Β u can understand my Β point of view. Hopefully i have shed some light into the way i feel about it.
π: 0 β©: 1
I understand your view here-no hard feelings at all!
Indeed, every country has bad stuff somewhere along their timeline, really. And that's where the study of history comes in "today," I think. To learn from mistakes so we hopefully don't do the same things again. Or so we CAN do the GOOD things, again.Β
Agreed that conquest/expansion isn't MANDATORY-Hitler and Mussolini for example as you were mentioning. Or the Romans, Greeks, etc. I mean Hitler had claimed that there was a need for "lebensraum"--"living space," but I'm pretty sure that was just a lie/excuse to want to take over more land and all that. We didn't HAVE to war against, kill, and evict Native Americans. However, I bet that even if the US didn't really officially expand its borders and such, adventurous people still would have kept moving west just because they were curious, wanted to find new opportunities, etc (and maybe some just wanted to just hunt Natives for I all know), and undoubtedly they'd still come in violent contact with Indians sometimes, as did happen. Though if the Army (such as Custer's 7th Cavalry) hadn't gone riding through the midwest and up in to the Dakotas and such, and westward and such, things would have likely been less bloody.
And I mean even if there was a certain "do not cross" line for going west, set by the government at the time, I don't think it would've stopped people, just based on historical precedents like colonists going past the Appalachians even though the British said not to. Again, not saying they SHOULD still go in that scenario, but based on similar, actual occurrences like that in history, it probably would've happened.Β
Speaking of Anglo/Native American relations in the modern day, you might want to check out the new crime-solving series on Netflix/TV called "Longmire." It's about a Wyoming Sheriff named Sheriff Longmire, who of course solves crime in the area, but it also involves the mentioned Anglo/Native relations as he sometimes has to work with the law enforcement of the nearby Indian Reservation. He has a good deputy friend who's a Native American too, and they're pretty good together. Thought you might be interested.Β
Also, just a somewhat recent phenomenon-on my trip into Washington state some weeks ago, we went up to Olympic National Park, and at the edge of the park is Lake Quinault named after the Quinault tribe/tribal nation (honestly I think that they refer to themselves as the Quinault Nation unless I'm mistaken). We stayed at the lodge nearby which was cool. But anyways, in June, they closed the lake to swimmers and boaters of all kind who weren't part of the Quinault. They eventually let swimmers in but no boaters-not even canoes or kayaks. Which I must say is ironic, given that there is a replica dug-out CANOE on display right by the lodge with a sign talking about how the tribe used such canoes on the lake and rivers nearby...
Some think it may be a (as a few on blogs said,) a "power play" by them; others think it's retaliation for some football thing at a local high school. And I wonder also if it could be either one of those, with a hopes of running out "white" kayak/canoe rental people that thrive in aquatic tourist places like the lake, and then creating a monopoly on it. I don't know for sure, and I don't know much about whatever that football thing was, so I dunno. But it was a bit disappointing anyways.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
good to hear that their is no hard feelings, can be hard on the net.
i agree even if the US had not expanded it borders people wuld of still headed off. but its hard to tell who would of ened up having power of that land in the future. its really hard to say. its hard to say but i think we migt of ended up with several sovereign nations but in the end we will never know.
ahhh dont think i have watched that yet. i have seen a few documentary's on netflix about our relations(i love netflix!) there is almost always a documentary(or trek) playing in the background while i build.
huh weird circumstance......
π: 0 β©: 1
Undoubtedly European powers, and then Mexico would have control of whatever parts of the US we didn't officially go into. Russia controlled Alaska, down through northern California (there's a pretty cool fort museum on the California north coast called Fort Ross that was built by the Russians by the way) but eventually sold it to the US, however I bet that instead they would sell that land to Britain most likely, given Canada/British Columbia being nearby = British. From California through the midwest would probably be Mexican like it was historically.Β
Longmire is definitely a good one. Oh and if you ever watched the show Magnum PI, starring Tom Selleck, you'd love "Quigley: Down Under" which is a movie set in Australia during the mid 1800s. Selleck plays Mr. Quigley, a skilled American sharpshooter hired by an Aussie outback land baron, who reveals his intention for Quigley to snipe elusive Aborigines. Quigley decides instead to help the Aborigines, and turn the tables on the baron. Quite good movie IMO.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
"this shot in a lot of ways is howΒ I think of my home state. rolling hills and small mountains, deep woods and clean lakes and rivers, and of course a little bit of modern amenities creeping in."
...And then the Maple Tree Monster attacks and eats the obnoxious tourists....
Β
(He does however dab his maw with a napkin afterwards... he is a modern tree monster, after all.)
π: 0 β©: 1
i WISH we had maple tree monster. when all the leaves start changing color we get ALOT of flatlanders XD
π: 0 β©: 2
Would this be the time to mention I know how to make a ghilleyΒ suit?
Β
π: 0 β©: 1
lol ohhhh even better!
but i fear that if we had a maple monster, it would just attract more tourists.
π: 0 β©: 1
Not when the Maple Monster begins feeding on tourists---I feel a SYFY Channel movie coming soon.
π: 0 β©: 1
now that would be a site to see! would love that movie, i get a big kick outta their movies as is!
π: 0 β©: 0
Β
"Why, 'yes' Dear, ...I need 40 pounds of plaster to build a giant tree monster for the front yard.... that's all.
π: 0 β©: 1
XD
lol pretty much! some day i will make something epic like that!
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>