“The Indians Complain, and with Good Cause”: Allotting Standing Rock—U.S. Policy Meets a Tribe’s Assertion of Rights
Land allotment was embraced by the U.S. Government in the late 1800s and early 1900s as part of a solution to the “Indian problem”, the goal of which was assimilation into the Euro-American cultural and economic system. As a progressivist program, it was imposed with enthusiasm and confidence, divid...
Saved in:
Published in: | Geographies Vol. 4; no. 3; pp. 411 - 440 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
MDPI AG
01-09-2024
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Land allotment was embraced by the U.S. Government in the late 1800s and early 1900s as part of a solution to the “Indian problem”, the goal of which was assimilation into the Euro-American cultural and economic system. As a progressivist program, it was imposed with enthusiasm and confidence, dividing reservations into rectangular land parcels (allotments) in the belief that the allotment recipients would become yeoman farmers of the Jeffersonian mold. Tribes were unable to thwart the imposition of allotment, despite their best efforts, and its devastating long-term effects are now well known. Much less is understood, however, about the efforts of various tribes, sometimes successful and sometimes not, to obtain modifications to the terms of allotment imposed on them. We describe how the people of the Standing Rock Reservation in North and South Dakota successfully advocated for modifications which worked to their significant advantage. We draw heavily from the outgoing correspondence and allotment records of the Special Allotting Agent, Carl Gunderson, along with contemporaneous records of legislative proceedings and other documents. The successful efforts of the people of Standing Rock resulted not only in equitable access to scarce timber, but in allotments to numerous individuals who otherwise would have been ineligible. The net impact was the additional allotment of nearly 400,000 acres (160,000 ha) to over 1800 individuals who otherwise would have received nothing. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2673-7086 2673-7086 |
DOI: | 10.3390/geographies4030023 |