Land bridge and French failures

In class we discussed that the land bridge theory is no longer a widely accepted theory for how people migrated to North and South America. I disagree that the land bridge theory was not a plausable passage for people to travel from Asia to North America. While the earliest immigrants may have traveled a different passage, a large number of people most likley traveled across the land bridge accounting for a significant percentage of the population. Empirical evidence in the form of human remains and artifacts shows that there was human activity along the eastern corridor. Becasue of this evidence I think that the land bridge theory holds some level of importance when discussing possible routes of migration into the Americas.

We also discussed how Louisiana was not favorable to the French because of the tribes that occupied the land. I would like to add another theory as to why utilizing the Mississippi river as a means of transporting goods in an attempt to turn Louisiana into an agricultural and shipping center was not a managable strategy. First depending how far North a trader is (northern Minnesota or lake superior) the river is not navigable due to a thick layer of ice. In early spring currents are extremely strong and the course is unpredictable due to flooding. Also the river was not dredged at this point limiting the size of the boat that could travel through the channel. (With modern dredging technology the channel is now guaranteed to be 9 ft., but it may have been shallower without manipulation.) Finally the return of the transporting ship to the north would be made difficult due to the afore mentioned strong current. Although they did have the capabilities to sail upstream and into the wind it was still a tedious process. These factors may have greatly hindered French's efforts to utilize the river and the port as a means of conducting business.