<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>

<!-- <!DOCTYPE TEI PUBLIC "-//UNL Libraries::Etext Center//DTD TEI.dtd (Nebraska Press)//EN" "include\TEI.dtd" [
]> -->

<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="egp.na.096">
<teiHeader>
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title level="m" type="main">Reservations</title>
<title level="m" type="sub"></title>
<author>David J. Wishart</author>
<editor>David J. Wishart</editor>
<respStmt>
<resp>Project Team</resp>
<name>Katherine Walter</name>
<name>Laura Weakly</name>
<name>Nicholas Swiercek</name>
</respStmt>
</titleStmt>
<editionStmt>
<edition>
<date>2011</date>
</edition>
</editionStmt>
<publicationStmt>
<idno>egp.na.096</idno>
<authority>Encyclopedia of the Great Plains</authority>
<publisher>University of Nebraska&#8211;Lincoln</publisher>
<distributor>
<name>Center for Digital Research in the Humanities</name>
<address>
<addrLine>319 Love Library</addrLine>
<addrLine>University of Nebraska&#8211;Lincoln</addrLine>
<addrLine>Lincoln, NE 68588-4100</addrLine>
<addrLine>cdrh@unlnotes.unl.edu</addrLine>
</address>
</distributor>
<date>2011</date>
<availability>
<p>Copyright &#169; 2011 by University of Nebraska&#8211;Lincoln, all rights reserved. Redistribution or republication in any medium, except as allowed under the Fair Use provisions of U.S. copyright law, requires express written consent from the editors and advance notification of the publisher, the University of Nebraska&#8211;Lincoln.</p>
</availability>
</publicationStmt>
<notesStmt>
<note type="project">

</note>
</notesStmt>

<sourceDesc>
<bibl><author n="Wishart, David J.">David J. Wishart</author>. <title level="a">"Reservations."</title> In <editor n="Wishart, David J.">David J. Wishart</editor>, ed. <title level="m">Encyclopedia of the Great Plains</title>. <pubPlace>Lincoln</pubPlace>: <publisher>University of Nebraska Press</publisher>, <date value="2004">2004</date>. <biblScope type="pages">597-598</biblScope>.</bibl>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>

<revisionDesc>
<change>
<date>2008-04-20</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Nicholas Swiercek</name>
</respStmt>
<item>Model Encoding</item>
</change>
</revisionDesc>
</teiHeader>
<text>
<body>


<div1>
<head type="main">RESERVATIONS</head>

<p>Reservations in the Great Plains are territorial
units retained by Native American tribes, either
as remnants of their ancestral lands, or as
designated areas assigned after removal&#8212;from
both within and outside the region&#8212;following
the cession of homelands to the United States.
They are places where tribal and federal jurisdictions
prevail, to the general exclusion of
state jurisdiction, though the legal boundaries
here are constantly shifting with new decisions
in the courts. Great Plains reservations are
generally poor places, mineral resources and
revenues from gaming notwithstanding. But
they are also treasured homelands where ancestors
are buried, sacred sites revered, and
cultures preserved; for their Native American
residents, they are the surviving geographic
connection between past and present.</p>

<p>The first reservations in the Plains, other
than the relatively large areas set aside for relocated
Indians such as the Delawares in the
1820s and 1830s, were created after the Kansas-
Nebraska Act of 1854 opened up the area to
European American settlement. Because of
this incursion, the idea of a separate, extraterritorial
"Indian Country" in the Plains, which
had prevailed since 1830, became impractical.
Instead, Plains Indians would be restricted to
small areas recognized in treaties, laws, or executive
orders as belonging to them. The remaining
homelands would then be available
for resettlement by European Americans. On
the reservations, Native Americans would be
placed under great pressure to assimilate&#8212;to
take out individual farms, or allotments, to
learn English, and to convert to Christianity.
When this occurred, theoretically, the Native
Americans would simply merge into the larger
society, and any additional reservation lands
over and above their allotments would also
pass to European Americans. In this sense,
then, and despite the recognition in treaties
of Indian rights to the lands, reservations
were seen by the United States in the mid–
nineteenth century as only a temporary expedient
until Native Americans assimilated.
But Native Americans in the Plains, and elsewhere
in the United States, did not disappear
through assimilation, or through war and disease.
Thus, reservations have remained a significant
component of the region's identity.</p>

<p>By 1860 the Indians of eastern Nebraska
(e.g., the Pawnees) and eastern Kansas (e.g.,
the Kaws) had sold their remaining homelands
to the United States, retaining only small reservations.
In the following decades reservations
were created successively west, north, and
south (in Indian Territory) from the initial
area of European American advance, as tribes,
under varying degrees of coercion, were forced
to cede their lands. In 1868, for example, at the
Treaty of Fort Laramie, the Crows surrendered
38 million acres of their hunting grounds
in what is now Montana and Wyoming and
agreed to a reservation in south-central Montana.
In 1874 and 1888 the Blackfeet relinquished
about 27 million acres of land in Montana
and took out a reservation where the
Plains meets the Rocky Mountains at the fortyninth
parallel. By the latter date, all Plains
tribes had been restricted to reservations.</p>

<p>Despite the "recognized" or "reserved" title
under which the Plains tribes hold their reservations,
their size and the Indians' sovereignty
on them have been eroded almost from the
beginning. Those early reservations in Kansas
and Nebraska were quickly surrounded and
coveted by settlers. By 1881 the Kaws, Pawnees,
Poncas, and Otoe-Missourias had all been removed
to Indian Territory and their reservations
thrown open to resettlement. Even when
original reservations were retained, as in the
cases of the Crows and Blackfeet, the Indians
were forced by settlers' demands, and by their
own poverty, to sell portions to the United
States in return for subsistence. The Crow Indian
Reservation, for example, was significantly
reduced by cessions in 1882 and 1892,
and the size of the Blackfeet Reservation was
almost halved in 1895.</p>

<p>Even greater losses from Plains reservations
occurred after passage of the General Allotment
(Dawes) Act of 1887. At various times
thereafter, Indians were allocated individual
allotments (generally 160 acres), and the portions
of reservations remaining after that allocation
were declared "surplus lands" that
were opened to European American settlement.
In 1904, on the Devils Lake Sioux Reservation
in North Dakota, for example, 135,824
acres were allotted to 1,193 Indians, leaving
92,144 acres of surplus lands to be sold to settlers
at $1.25 an acre. Subsequently, following a
government trust period, many of the allotments
were also sold to settlers. As a consequence,
non-Indians now own 75 percent of
the Devils Lake Sioux Reservation. This is a
characteristic pattern on many Plains reservations,
which are a "checkerboard" of Indian
and non-Indian lands, greatly complicating
jurisdiction and compromising tribal
sovereignty.</p>

<p>On a map of Indian reservations in the
United States, the Northern Great Plains
stands out. There are still many Native Americans
in Oklahoma, of course, as the successor
to Indian Territory, but with the exception of
the Osage Reservation, all the reservations
were dissolved in the years leading up to statehood.
(Many Indian groups in Oklahoma own
tribal lands, and some refer to their lands as
reservations, but for census purposes they are
designated as Tribal Jurisdiction Statistical
Areas.) There are no reservations in the Texas
Plains, where, after statehood in 1846, the state
controlled land disbursement and made no
room for the Indigenous inhabitants. There
are relatively few (seven) remaining reservations
in Kansas and Nebraska, the result of
Indian removals in the nineteenth century. But
north of the Nebraska–South Dakota border,
reservations abound (there are seventeen of
them), and most are large. The 1,771,082-acre
Pine Ridge Reservation, for example, with its
tribally enrolled population of 17,775 in 1995, is
one of the largest reservations in the country. It
is also one of the poorest places in the country,
with 60 percent of families living below the
poverty level in 1990. Even on the 2,235,095-
acre Crow Indian Reservation in Montana,
with its rich resources of coal, oil, and gas, per
capita income in 1995 was only $4,243 and unemployment
stood at 44 percent.</p>

<p>Despite the promises of the United States,
spelled out in treaties and agreements, the status
of Plains reservations remains insecure, especially
because of state intervention. In an
important case in 1981, <hi rend="italic">Montana v. United
States</hi>, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the
Crow tribe does not have the right to regulate
nonmember hunting and fishing on reservation lands that are not owned by, or held in
trust for, the tribe. The only exceptions are if
the activity threatens tribal integrity or if
consensual agreements have been made. Similarly,
in federal district court in North Dakota
in 1993, the Devils Lake Sioux were held to
have the right to contract for electrical services
only on lands owned by, or held in trust
for, the tribe, which meant only about one-quarter
of the area of the reservation. These
decisions indicate that the geographic extent
of Indian sovereignty is being moved from the
exterior boundaries of the reservation to those
areas within the reservation held in trust by
the tribe or by members of the tribe.</p>

<p>Yet, in other ways, the Indian presence on
Plains reservations is resurgent. In a region
where rural populations are rapidly thinning,
Indian reservations stand out as areas of significant
population growth. Birthrates are
higher than average, and death rates, though
still high, have fallen. Moreover, Indians are
returning to reservations to fill jobs created by
gaming and other economic development.
New revenues mean that reservation lands
once alienated can be reclaimed. Far from disappearing,
Native Americans and their reservation
homelands are reasserting themselves
on the landscape of the Great Plains.</p>

<p><hi rend="italic">See also</hi> <hi rend="smallcaps">CITIES AND TOWNS</hi>: <ref n="egp.ct.042">Reservation Towns</ref>
/ <hi rend="smallcaps">LAW</hi>: <ref n="egp.law.033"><hi rend="italic">Montana v. United States</hi></ref>.</p>

<closer>
<signed>David J. Wishart</signed>
University of Nebraska-Lincoln</closer>
</div1>

<div1>
<bibl>Marino, Cesare. "Reservations." In <title level="m">Native America in the
Twentieth Century: An Encyclopedia</title>, edited by Mary B.
Davis. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1996.</bibl> <bibl>Royce,
Charles C. <title level="m">Indian Land Cessions in the United States</title>. 18th
Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology,
1896-97. Washington <hi rend="smallcaps">DC</hi>: Government Printing Office,
1899.</bibl> <bibl>Velarde Tiller, Veronica E. <title level="m">American Indian Reservations
and Trust Areas</title>. Albuquerque: Tiller Research Inc.,
1996.</bibl>
</div1>


</body>
</text>
</TEI>