Disclaimer: I do not represent those involved in NoDAPL protests. These views are my own.
This post serves as an introduction to the historical context of the treaties relevant to the Standing Rock Reservation and property on which the Dakota Access Pipeline was built. It also explores some of the government intervention in the construction of the pipeline, role of corporate interests, and intimidation tactics used.
“We have great respect for the concerns of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and plan to continue to work with their leaders to address those concerns. Recently, their interests have been overtaken by politically-motivated, anti-fossil fuel protesters who are using this issue as a cover for their often violent and extremist efforts to cause disruption. Their actions deny private property rights and freedoms to the landowners who are near and adjacent to the Standing Rock Reservation and deny American citizens and businesses the energy they need to produce jobs and build a vital and healthy economy. The behavior by some of these extremist organizations is not only criminal but dangerous to themselves and others, and we join with law enforcement and others in asking them to obey the rule of law.” — from “Dakota Access Pipeline Facts” website by Energy Transfer Partners.
Some background information on building of Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) in North Dakota and South Dakota:
As the white population becomes more dense, and as the value of the lands increases, the desire to intrude upon the reservations for purposes of settlement and trade also increases. I assured the chiefs that their apprehensions of having their homes taken from them were groundless, and that so long as they conducted themselves in a peaceable and proper manner, the government would protect them in their homes, which had been guaranteed to them by solemn treaty stipulations. — Excerpt from Condition of the Indian tribes: Report of the joint special committee, March 3, 1865. United States Congress.
“We don’t want a confrontation today. Not today,” the officer exclaimed through his megaphone. It was Thanksgiving day. The officer was pleading with the protesters, but his tone carried an air of provocation — we dare you to try. The authorities were there to protect the pipeline and the workers employed to build it.
There would be no clash that day. The protests by the Sioux nation elders and their organizers were peaceful, and they did not advocate for violent interventions. The water protectors (protesters) did not come to Turtle Island to seek confrontation, but to pray at the hill — which they did and then turned back.
By November 24, 2016, the Oceti Sakowin Camp had become the front line of the NoDAPL resistance. Public road access leading to the DAPL construction site had been barricaded and was being patrolled by military personnel, Morton County Police, and private security.
The pipeline was going to be built, and the government and security personnel were there to make sure of it. The militarized opposition to the organized protest suggested that they would stop at nothing to prevent the protest from reaching or interfering with the pipeline construction.
Even as Obama announced a request for a “voluntary pause” on all construction within 20 miles of Lake Oahe, it seemed that construction would continue, despite being denied the easements necessary to proceed with construction. By this point, it was obvious that there was no political will power to stop the pipeline.
The ultimate goal of the protesters was to stop DAPL or Dakota Access Pipeline. This could only be attained by getting as close to the construction site as possible. Beyond Turtle Island, the construction site was over a mile away on Cannonball Ranch property just north of the Oceti Sakowin Camp.
The map below illustrates DAPL construction in relation to the Oceti Sakowin Camp, Army Corps-owned land, and Cannonball Ranch. Timelines of events in the NoDAPL protest can be found here, here, and here.
Historical Background
The Standing Rock Syllabus provides a good timeline of US policies and historical events relevant to Indigenous sovereignty and colonization. Also, see Lakotah’s 158 Year Struggle for Justice and United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371 (1980).
This post will focus on the time period between the Treaties of Fort Laramie of 1851 and 1868 and the Wounded Knee Massacre in 1890, as it relates to the Sioux Reservation boundary and DAPL construction at Cannonball Ranch.
Treaty of Fort Laramie 1851
The Treaty of Fort Laramie in 1851 established territories of various Native American tribes, including the Sioux or Dahcotah (Dakota), Cheyenne, Arapahoe, Crow, Assinaboines, Gros- Ventre Mandans, and Arrickaras.
Most of the treaty land at the time was considered “unorganized” territory, and while the territory belonged to the indigenous nations, it was commonly referred to as “Missouri Territory”…
…and later “Nebraska Territory.”
One of the reasons for the 1851 treaty, according to Article 1, was to establish peaceful relations among the aforementioned tribes. By signing the treaty, the tribes “agreed to abstain in future from all hostilities whatever against each other, to maintain good faith and friendship in all their mutual intercourse, and to make an effective and lasting peace.”
This was easier said than done, as the white settlers did not fully understand indigenous culture, traditions, spirituality, or governance.
The Native Americans were nomadic people, and their hunting grounds heavily relied on the grazing patterns of bison, which would naturally fluctuate. This would make it difficult to draw territories on a map or evenly distribute hunting grounds, let alone enforce these boundaries.
Additionally, some tribes like the Crow and Sioux were mortal enemies and would encroach on each other’s territories to hunt game. It was also common to acquire and claim territory through warfare. Attempting to make peace between these tribes by drawing boundaries on a map would prove to be futile, especially when a growing shortage of bison in the plains would make it necessary to move hunting grounds into territory where bison were still plentiful, which would consequently create conflict between the tribes.
The various Native American leaders and their respective tribes were also divided over whether to cooperate with the US government and essentially assimilate to the white peoples’ culture (i.e., adopting farming, formal education, Western religion and clothing, property ownership, etc.) or resist entirely the colonization or occupation of their lands. Some refused to sign the treaty, or any treaties. This led to a division between non-treaty tribes and those who signed in exchange for annuities and food rations.
Sioux territory per the 1851 Treaty:
“The territory of the Sioux or Dahcotah Nation, commencing the mouth of the White Earth River, on the Missouri River;
(current maps for point of reference)
thence in a southwesterly direction to the forks of the Platte River;
thence up the north fork of the Platte River to a point known as the Red But(t)e, or where the road leaves the river;
thence along the range of mountains known as the Black Hills, to the head-waters of Heart River;
thence down Heart River to its mouth; and thence down the Missouri River to the place of beginning.”
The Sioux Territory would have looked something like this:
(without state boundaries, which would be established at a later date)
Notice that the Northern boundary is very much north of the mouth of the Cannonball River, close to present-day city of Bismarck. It’s also worth noting that an R.M. Johnson, one of the first white settlers along the Cannonball River, according to the North Dakota Cowboy Hall of Fame, started the Cannonball Ranch in the 1860’s. I could not find more information on R.M. Johnson at the time of this post. What we do know is that the ranch was established on land that belonged to the Sioux per the 1851 treaty. So, unless he settled there after 1868, R.M. Johnson must have received permission from the Sioux and/or bought the land for coin or traded for it; otherwise, he settled there illegally.
Article 2 of the 1851 Fort Laramie Treaty clearly explains what the US government intended to build within the Native American territories:
“The aforesaid nations do hereby recognize the right of the United States Government to establish roads, military and other posts, within their respective territories.”
The ceded land — the land received in exchange for annuities and rations — would serve the same purposes, except it would be open for white settlers.
The underlying objectives of the 1851 treaty negotiations (for the US Army and Congress) can be summarized in four points:
- Open the land for railroad construction
- Open the land for white settlers and westward migration
- Open the land for gold prospecting
- Open the land for construction of military forts (to protect all of the above)
Also in 1851, the Treaty of Traverse des Sioux resulted in the Wahpetunwan and Sisitunwan Dakota tribes ceding or transferring ownership of all of the territory in the State of Iowa and much of Minnesota to the U.S. The third article of the treaty, which set apart and guaranteed land for the Dakota people, was stricken out prior to being being ratified by the US government. As you can see, the conniving nature of US government meddling in Indigenous sovereignty is neither new, nor shocking.
At this point, much of the land east of the Missouri River was now open to white occupation.
Northern Pacific Railroad- 1851 and Onward
One of the main objectives of the 1851 Treaty, for the US Army, Congress, businessmen, settlers, and prospectors was to allow for the (un-harassed) surveying of land and route exploration for the Pacific Railroad.
In 1853, hundreds of soldiers, scientists, surveyors and artists fanned out across unknown and uncharted western territories to find a railroad route to the Pacific. — webpage dedicated to The Pacific Railroad Surveys 1853–1854.
The plan to build a network of transcontinental railways had long involved Northern, Central, and Southern routes; a route would inevitably run through Native American territory, therefore treaties were critical to successful construction. Protecting the construction was expensive for Congress and conflict naturally resulted in casualties. Treaties were a way to alleviate this burden but also guaranteed less resistance for the time being.
Railroad routes out west, as part of a transcontinental railroad, were conceived as early as 1830. The route was refined over the years.
President Abraham Lincoln signed the Pacific Railway Act in 1862, and the Northern Pacific Railroad Company was officially formed in 1864.
“I concur with General Sherman in his view that this is a National enterprise (referring to Pacific Railroad), and should receive the support of the Government. It will also prove to be an economical measure, and will tend to the solution of the Indian problem in the Northwestern territory.” — William M. Belknap, Secretary of War. Brainerd Tribune, February 22, 1873.
(Belknap was criminally disregarded of his duty as Secretary of War for “prostituting his high office to his lust for private gain.”)
“By its construction an almost limitless country of unequaled fertility will be thrown open to settlement, and the Indian problem will be effectually solved, saving the Government a mint of money in a fruitless contention with the Sioux west of the Missouri.” — Brainerd Tribune, February 22, 1873
Gold Rush and Settlers Moving West- 1852 and Onward
The era of the gold rush brought white American soldiers, scientists, prospectors, speculators, and settlers out west. According to the 1851 treaty, passing through Native American land without permission was illegal. However, white American settlers would often enter Native American territory and try to make claims to the land or illegally pass through it to hunt buffalo or search for gold.
It was therefore the responsibility of the US government to enforce treaties, which would require the use of US Army resources and soldiers. With significant numbers of settlers traveling West, it became increasingly difficult and expensive for the government to enforce treaty borders and prevent violations.
Also, while the Native Americans had merit to retaliate against incursion on their land, their actions were viewed as hostile by settlers and prospectors, who would also call upon and demand the US government and Army to protect them. Consequently, conflict would ensue between the parties, ultimately leading to years of skirmishes and battles known as the Sioux Wars (1854–1891).
1855 marked the beginning of American military and scientific exploration of the Black Hills, part of the Sioux territory per the 1851 treaty. The Black Hills were considered sacred by the Sioux and said to be the most beloved of all the Sioux possessions. They were also rumored to contain large gold deposits, hence piquing the curiosity of prospectors for many years to come. (More on the Black Hills later.)
Conditions Post 1851 Treaty
The 1851 treaty was doomed from the outset. Almost every provision was flawed, starting with the selection of chiefs to speak for entire tribes. Although it seemed perfectly logical to the white concept of politics and authority, it had little meaning to Indians subscribing to a complex system of leadership generally segregated by tribal domestic and war needs. Men influenced the affairs of the band by earning stature through accomplishments in war, sound judgment, and generosity rather than by any notion of arbitrary rank. Just how the commissioners selected the head chiefs remains a mystery. — Fort Laramie and the U. S. Army On the High Plains, National Park Service Historic Resources Study.
The US government hoped to see Native Americans assimilate to the white, non-native American culture, or otherwise stay out of the way of Western progress and expansion, i.e., manifest destiny. The US government hoped to achieve the following:
- Reduce conflict between Native Americans and white settlers by pushing Native Americans onto reservations.
- Reduce subsidies (food and clothing rations and annuities) provisioned by the United States and reduce the Native Americans’ reliance on food rations, by forcing the Native Americans to abandon hunting as their way of life and adopt farming instead.
- Acquire land for as little money and resources as possible, without causing conflict; therefore, reaching an agreement through treaty negotiations where military strategy was not successful was critical for the United States.
In accordance with the treaty, the US government began to provision food rations to members of tribes whose leaders signed the treaty. Native Americans would collect their food rations and annuities at various posts or government agencies, including Fort Laramie.
Article 7 of the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851 guaranteed these rations and annuities for the ceded territories:
In consideration of the treaty stipulations, and for the Annuities. damages which have or may occur by reason thereof to the Indian nations, parties hereto,’and for their maintenance and the improvement of their moral and social customs, the United States bind themselves to deliver to the said Indian nations the sum of fifty thousand dollars per annum for the term of ten years, with the right to continue the same at the discretion of the President of the United States for a period not exceeding five years thereafter, in provisions, merchandise, domestic animals, and agricultural implements, in such proportions as may be deemed best adapted to their condition by the President of the United States, to be distributed in proportion to the population of the aforesaid Indian nations.
However, Article 8 made the annuities described in Article 7 conditional, meaning the annuities could be suspended by any violation of the treaty, e.g., warfare between tribes:
It is understood and agreed that should any of the Indian nations, parties to this treaty, violate any of the provisions thereof, the United States may withhold the whole or a portion of the annuities mentioned in the preceding article from the nation so offending, until, in the opinion of the President of the United States, proper satisfaction shall have been made.
Although not explicitly mentioned, the US government also had the power to withhold food rations, for strategic, political or military purposes.
It was apparent to the US Army and government that the Native Americans, even with some receiving rations, would not consider abandoning their ways so long as game, mainly buffalo, could still be found in the Plains. Essentially, if it was impossible for Native Americans to resort to hunting as an alternative to receiving food rations, they would be more likely to cooperate. Various military commanders encouraged the slaughter of buffalo to destroy the Plains economy and main source of food for Native Americans.
On May 10 1868, Lieutenant General William Sherman, tasked by General of the Army Ulysses S. Grant to protect various trails and railroad construction through Native American territories, writes to his friend and comrade-in-arms, General Philip Sheridan:
“as long as Buffalo are up on the Republican the Indians will go there. I think it would be wise to invite all the sportsmen of England and America there this fall for a Grand Buffalo hunt, and make one grand sweep of them all. Until the Buffalo and consequent[ly] Indians are out [from between] the Roads we will have collisions and trouble.” — The Frontier Army and the Destruction of the Buffalo.
In the mid-19th century, it was estimated that 30 to 60 million buffalo roamed the Great Plains. By the mid-1880’s, most of the buffalo that had roamed the plains were killed, reducing the total population to about 300.
“Has the white man become a child, that he should recklessly kill and not eat? When the red men slay game, they do so that they may live and not starve.” — Kiowa chief Satanta at the Medicine Lodge Treaty Council of 1867.
While allowing and perpetuating the killing of the major Native American food source and resource (e.g., hides for clothing and shelter and bones for weapons and tools), the US government could simultaneously withhold food rations to quell uprisings and enforce compliance.
“They are brought in contact with the white population in all of the villages and lumber camps along the western portion of the sound, and rapidly falling victims to venereal diseases and noxious whiskey which they can but too readily obtain.”
“It is true that some of them work for the farmers in the neighboring, settlements, and make good hands; some of them also cultivate small farms upon the reservation; but these are exceptions; the majority of the tribe have been spoiled by ill-advised charity, until they are now the most persistent and importunate of beggars. They will, however, within a few years cease to be a burden upon the government, as the universal prostitution of their women has entailed diseases upon them, which must soon cause their extermination.”
“The few of them who reside upon the reservation, with a white farmer to assist them, have only about ten acres of ground in cultivation. The annuities and other appropriations are too limited to enable the superintendent to collect and subsist such a de-moralized and drunken herd of savages while the experiment of their reformation is being attempted It is not certain that any amount of mans would enable the department to improve the condition of these people. Possibly a few of them may be reclaimed and induced to cultivate the soil. I look, however, upon the great majority of them as doomed to a speedy extinction as the result of indolence, loathsome diseases, and bad whiskey.”
— Excerpts from Condition of the Indian tribes: Report of the joint special committee, March 3, 1865. United States Congress.
Bozeman Trail War — 1866
In the early 1860s, John Bozeman popularized the “Bozeman Trail”, a shortcut to the Montana gold fields. Between 1864 and 1865 approximately 2,000 people made the trip across the Bozeman Trail. There was only one problem — this trail cut through Lakota and Cheyenne territory. This was illegal per the treaty. To add insult to injury, military forts were built to guard and protect travelers along the trail. The trail would become the focal point of several, significant battles.
In resistance to the incursion, Cheyenne, Lakota, and Arapaho tribes, led by Lakota war chief Red Cloud, attacked the forts and defeated the US Army. This became known as Red Cloud’s War. Most notably, the tribes defeated Lieutenant Colonel William Fetterman and his column of eighty men near Fort Kearny, Wyoming, in December of 1866.
Unable to defeat the Native Americans, the US Army ultimately pulled back, which then initiated negotiations of the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868.
Treaty of Fort Laramie 1868
See full text here.
Three agencies were established on the west side of the Missouri River, including the Great Sioux Reservation.
The 6th Article of the treaty specifically to infrastructure being built through native land:
6th. They withdraw all pretense of opposition to the construction of the railroad now being built along the Platte River and westward to the Pacific Ocean, and they will not in future object to the construction of railroads, wagon-roads, mail-stations, or other works of utility or necessity, which may be ordered or permitted by the laws of the United States. But should such roads or other works be constructed on the lands of their reservation, the Government will pay the tribe whatever amount of damage may be assessed by three disinterested commissioners to be appointed by the President for that purpose, one of said commissioners to be a chief or head-man of the tribe.
“They made us many promises, more than I can remember. But they kept but one — They promised to take our land…and they took it.” — Chief Red Cloud in 1890, expressing regret over signing the treaty.
“The Indians are now subjects of our bounty and charity, and we can impose upon them conditions for their improvement as we will. They are sure to be resisted at first, but will be assented to gladly in time, as it is impossible for them to resort to hunting as an alternative, so that dependence upon the Government or self-support by labor or starvation are the alternatives.” — Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 1875
Executive Order, March 16, 1875
An Executive Order in 1875 by President Ulysses S. Grant apparently made an amendment to the 1868 treaty to include the south bank of the Cannonball River in Sioux Reservation territory. This is important because the DAPL pipeline was built to the north of Cannonball River.
“It is hereby ordered that the tract of country in the Territory of Dakota lying within the following-described boundaries, viz, commencing at a point where the one hundred and second degree of west longitude intersects the forty-sixth parallel of north latitude; thence north on said one hundred and second degree of longitude to the south bank of the Cannon Ball River; thence down and with the south bank of said river to a point on the east side of the Missouri River, opposite the mouth of said Cannon Ball River; thence down
and with the east bank of the Missouri River to the mouth of Beaver River; thence up and with the south bank of Beaver River to the one hundredth degree of west longitude ; thence south with said one hundredth degree of longitude to the forty-sixth parallel of latitude; thence west with said parallel of latitude to the place of beginning, be, and the same hereby is, withdrawn from sale and set apart for the use of the several tribes of Sioux Indians as an addition to their present reservation in said Territory.
— U. S. Grant.”
The Black Hills
The 1868 treaty recognized the Black Hills — perhaps the most important of all territories — as part of the Great Sioux reservation. The Black Hills are sacred to the Sioux Indians to this day. In fact, the Sioux have yet to claim more than $1 billion USD in exchange for the Black Hills (which were stolen).
In direct violation of the 1868 treaty, the infamous General Custer entered the Black Hills in the summer of 1874 to look for gold; it was the largest and most controversial expedition to explore the Black Hills.
On June 25, 1876, Custer and his men (over 200) were killed in the Battle of Little Bighorn, also known as “Custer’s Last Stand.” After the defeat at Little Bighorn, Congress retaliated by passing the Indian Appropriations Act of 1876, which cut off all rations for the Sioux until they agreed to cede the Black Hills to the United States. Large numbers of gold prospectors continued to enter the Black Hills even after the battle.
Proceedings between the US Indian Peace Commission and the Sioux council at the Red Cloud agency, held on the 19th of September, 1876, sheds light on tribe sentiment and the relationship between the Commissioners and tribal leaders (the speeches and remarks are quite lengthy but eloquent — I recommend reading them in full):
RED CLOUD: “The commissioners have both brains and hearts. The Great Father has sent you here to visit me and my people, and I want that you should help us. We see a great many soldiers here in our country. We know that the duty of these soldiers is to follow the people that are bad throughout the western country. We do not like to see them here. I want you to have pity upon us, and have them all taken away, and leave us alone here with the agent of the Interior Department.”
YOUNG-MAN-AFRAID-OF-HIS-HORSES: “My good friends you have come here, and I am now prepared to answer you. My father shook hands with the Dakotas peacefully on the Platte River. He told me that this country belonged to the Dakota people. I have been brought up here from a boy until I got to be a chief. The soldiers have no business in this country at all, and since I have been here I have always tried to do right…”
BLACK COAL (Arapahoe): “…You have come here to speak to us about the Black Hills, and, without disguising anything that we say, and without changing anything that we say, we wish you to tell the Great Father when you get back that this is the country in which we were brought up, and it has also been given to us by treaty by the Great Father, and I am here to take care of the country, and, therefore, not only the Dakota Indians, but my people have an interest in the Black Hills that we have come to speak about today…”
RUNNING ANTELOPE: “…The Great Father has spoken of the Black Hills. In return for this country I expect to have issued to me rations, that I and my children and my children’s children may live and shall be taken care of and provided for by the Government. I want the Indians to obtain wealth equal to the wealth that the whites realize from the Black Hills. The children of the Great Father will obtain wealth from the Black Hills that will make them rich as long as the country lasts, and I wish the Indians to be cared for as long as that wealth lasts the whites…
…In respect to the white men that are living in our country and are married to our women, I consider them as my own. Their wishes are our wishes, and what we get I hope they will get, because we have need of these men. This is all I have to say in regard to the Black Hills….”
TWO BEARS: “…I am of the fifth generation of Sioux Indians, and the sixth generation is growing up around me. I want the Government to provide for the same number of generations in the future. I am making this trade with the Great Father, and I am not a white man and am not able to live like a white man. I do not know how to eat yet like white men…”
The tribes had little alternatives at this point, yet many refused to sign the new agreement. Regardless, the “Agreement of 1877”, a Congressional Act, was passed to ratify the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, effectively ceding the Black Hills to the United States. Refer to United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371 (1980). White settler encroachment into Native American territory continued over the years and tensions continued to grow…
Wounded Knee Massacre and Beyond
Red Cloud delivers the following speech after the Wounded Knee Massacre in 1890:
“I will tell you the reason for the trouble. When we first made treaties with the Government, our old life and our old customs were about to end; the game on which we lived was disappearing; the whites were closing around us, and nothing remained for us but to adopt their way — the Government promised all the means necessary to make our living out of the land, and to instruct us how to do it, and with abundant food to support us until we could take care of ourselves. We looked forward with hope to the time we could be as independent as whites, and have a voice in the Government.
The army officers could have helped better than anyone else but we were not left to them. An Indian Department was made with a large number of agents and other officials drawing large salaries — then came the beginning of trouble; these men took care of themselves but not of us. It was very hard to deal with the government through them — they could make more for themselves by keeping us back than by helping us forward….”
Read more about the American Indian Movement and Leonard Peltier.
Present Day (2016–2018)
“In recent days, we have seen thousands of demonstrators come together peacefully, with support from scores of sovereign tribal governments, to exercise their First Amendment rights and to voice heartfelt concerns about the environment and historic, sacred sites. It is now incumbent on all of us to develop a path forward that serves the broadest public interest.” — Department of Justice
The looming question is: Was the level of effort by Energy Transfer Partners and DAPL sufficient to show “reasonable and good faith effort” of engaging Indian tribes per the section 106 process of the National Historic Preservation Act, adhering to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) guidelines and regulations?
“The agency official shall make a reasonable and good faith effort to carry out appropriate identification efforts, which may include background research, consultation, oral history interviews, sample field investigation, and field survey…” ACHP Protection of Historic Properties
“It is the responsibility of the agency official to make a reasonable and good faith effort to identify Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations that shall be consulted in the section 106 process. Consultation should commence early in the planning process, in order to identify and discuss relevant preservation issues and resolve concerns about the confidentiality of information on historic properties.”
Here’s what the Army Corps of Engineers claimed:
“Throughout the permitting review and approval process, USACE has worked diligently to meet its obligations under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires consultation with Native American Tribes. Specifically, USACE has completed cultural resource surveys for USACE jurisdictional areas; facilitated individual Tribal site surveys; consulted more than 250 times with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), respective State Historic Preservation Offices and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices or other designated Tribal representatives.” — Army Corps of Engineers
Response from ACHP:
“We appreciated receiving this information, however, it does not change the conclusions outlined in our letters regarding shortcomings in the Section 106 review carried out by the Corps and FWS. We continue to disagree with the Corps’ findings regarding effects on historic properties and believe a comprehensive Programmatic Agreement (PA), as we recommended to Lieutenant General Bostick, be developed.” — ACHP
