No!

I keep hearing about sacred lands and Indian burial grounds and seeing this used to stop development.

Something I am starting to develop is recognizing the style of stone tools thanks to trying to learn what sets stone-age Neanderthal apart from stone-age American Indian.

The stone tools in these "Indian" burial grounds are a lot more primitive than the tools used by the plains Indians.

Because they're stone, they might have been sitting there for thousands of years.  Maybe even tens of thousands.

The tribes claiming these "Indian" burial grounds are very reluctant to allow any scientific testing of the stone tools or checking the genetics of any bodies uncovered.

The burial grounds are often, literal burials and not in alignment with the practices of the tribes claiming the ground to block development.

In other words, it's bullshit to try and control land they don't own.

Land that they could have purchased, but didn't when they could have afforded it; before the potential development made it valuable.

I'll say the quiet part out loud:  You lost the war, and thus, all claims to the lands being contested in that war.  I don't care who started it; I know who won.

It's a measure of Victorian era restraint and charity that win didn't proceed to the normal genocide that clashes between civilizations happened before.