Treaty making between the United States and the Native American tribes were very common from the time the first settlers came to the land, for tribes all over the United States. But these treaties all have different outcomes, ways of negotiation and effects in the long term. The Lakota and Ojibwe tribes had very different outcomes of these treaties including hunting rights and forced assimilation. These outcomes were different partly because of the negation processes of the two treaties.
Hunting is one very important aspect of the Native American culture found in most tribes throughout the United States. The treaties were different the permitting of hunting. The Lakota in the Fort Laramie Treaties were allowed to hunt only on the allotted …show more content…
The Lakota “reserve the right to hunt on any lands north of North Platte, and on the Republican Fork of the Smoky Hill river, so long as the buffalo may range thereon in such numbers as the justify the case” (Fort Laramie1868). The Ojibwe had a different outcome of treaties, because the continued to have the right to hunt fish and rice on ceded territory. As stated in the “Treaty with the Chippewa, 1837” the Ojibwe people had “The privilege of hunting, fishing, and gathering the wild rice, upon the lands, the rivers, and lakes included in the territory ceded” (Satz, 156). During negotiation of the Treaty of 1837, La Trappe said to Henry Dodge, “We wish to hold on to a tree where we get our living, and to reserve the streams where we drink the waters that give us life” (Satz, 18). It was interpreted as a desire for hunting, fishing and ricing rights, so these were given to them. In the 1970’s issues with this portion of the treaty arose. There were two brothers that went spear fishing off the reservation, and were unlawfully arrested …show more content…
The treaties with the Lakota had “little to no negotiation” (Bell 59). The United States was very clear on what they wanted from this treaty (Bell 59). There was one major thing that was not negotiated but changed the lives of the Indians significantly in the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851. The Lakota, with the other tribes on the plains, had to designate one leader to negotiate all future treaties. This also affected future treaties, because they no longer could collaborate on the little negotiation they did receive in the forthcoming treaties. In the treaties the United States wanted to use some of the land on the reservation to make sure the Lakota would not be in the way of expansion. Due to this, in the treaty it was written that the Lakota would allow to have roads and trail built on the Great Sioux Reservation, “as the Lakota could and would not impede the growth of the California gold rush and not stand in the way of American progress” (Bell 59). The Oregon Trail was built through the reservation as a result of this part of both the Fort Laramie Treaties in 1852 and 1868. In exchange the Lakota wanted the right to the Black Hills, because it was sacred to them. “The Lakota had been guaranteed possession of the Black Hills in both the 1851 and 1868 Treaties of Fort Laramie” (Bell 61). Then these lands were taken away from the Lakota unlawfully, breaking the
Hunting is one very important aspect of the Native American culture found in most tribes throughout the United States. The treaties were different the permitting of hunting. The Lakota in the Fort Laramie Treaties were allowed to hunt only on the allotted …show more content…
The Lakota “reserve the right to hunt on any lands north of North Platte, and on the Republican Fork of the Smoky Hill river, so long as the buffalo may range thereon in such numbers as the justify the case” (Fort Laramie1868). The Ojibwe had a different outcome of treaties, because the continued to have the right to hunt fish and rice on ceded territory. As stated in the “Treaty with the Chippewa, 1837” the Ojibwe people had “The privilege of hunting, fishing, and gathering the wild rice, upon the lands, the rivers, and lakes included in the territory ceded” (Satz, 156). During negotiation of the Treaty of 1837, La Trappe said to Henry Dodge, “We wish to hold on to a tree where we get our living, and to reserve the streams where we drink the waters that give us life” (Satz, 18). It was interpreted as a desire for hunting, fishing and ricing rights, so these were given to them. In the 1970’s issues with this portion of the treaty arose. There were two brothers that went spear fishing off the reservation, and were unlawfully arrested …show more content…
The treaties with the Lakota had “little to no negotiation” (Bell 59). The United States was very clear on what they wanted from this treaty (Bell 59). There was one major thing that was not negotiated but changed the lives of the Indians significantly in the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851. The Lakota, with the other tribes on the plains, had to designate one leader to negotiate all future treaties. This also affected future treaties, because they no longer could collaborate on the little negotiation they did receive in the forthcoming treaties. In the treaties the United States wanted to use some of the land on the reservation to make sure the Lakota would not be in the way of expansion. Due to this, in the treaty it was written that the Lakota would allow to have roads and trail built on the Great Sioux Reservation, “as the Lakota could and would not impede the growth of the California gold rush and not stand in the way of American progress” (Bell 59). The Oregon Trail was built through the reservation as a result of this part of both the Fort Laramie Treaties in 1852 and 1868. In exchange the Lakota wanted the right to the Black Hills, because it was sacred to them. “The Lakota had been guaranteed possession of the Black Hills in both the 1851 and 1868 Treaties of Fort Laramie” (Bell 61). Then these lands were taken away from the Lakota unlawfully, breaking the