Year: 1985
Type: dissertation
Abstract: In 1895 the Blackfeet Indians sold the western portion of their reservation to the United States Government for 1.5 million dol lars.In addition to the monetary settlement the Blackfeet were to retain the rights to hunt, fish, and cut timber for domestic and agency purposes on the land for as long as it remained pub lic land of the United States.In 1910 Glacier National Park was created using as its eastern half the land ceded under the Agree ment of 1895.As part of a national park the land was no longer legally considered to be public land.Thus, the rights granted to the Blackfeet by the Agreement were no longer valid.Since the creation of the park the Blackfeet have made numerous claims con cerning the status of the rights from their viewpoint, and at num erous times these claims have resulted in lawsuits and court cases.These claims, lawsuits, and court cases have resulted in several conflicts with the Government, especially the National Park Service and the management of Glacier National Park.These conflicts with the National Park Service have occjafed because several of the rights claimed are contrary to management practices in Glacier Nat ional Park.The purpose of this thesis is threefold: (1) Tb present in chron ological order the sequence of events involving the Agreement of 1895 and Glacier National Park from 1895 to 1977.(2) Tb show from this sequence that all of the elements necessary to reach the con clusions in U.S. v. Kipp, 369 F. Supp.774 (1974) and U.S. v. Momberg, 378 F. Supp.1152 (1974) were present several years prior to 1974, and (3) Tb show how ignorance of this fact created many un necessary problems for the Blackfeet and the National Park Servp-rce.In addition it is the conclusion of this thesis that none of^fie events ^involving the Agreement of 1895 and Glacier National Park occurred due to any unscrupulous or conspiratorial acts by the participants on either side.^ As a case history the chronological sequence speaks for itself.The information in the case history was gathered primarily from public documents, although several other sources were used.Sources used included monographs, periodicals, newspapers, letters, memos, legal briefs, petitions, hearings, court records, proceedings, re ports , government documents, and interviews.how ignorance of this fact created many unnecessary problems for the Black feet and the National Park Service.The sources used for the information necessary to this thesis are pri marily public in nature, although this is not true of all of the sources.These sources include books, periodicals, newspapers, letters, memos, legal briefs, petitions to Government officials, court records, Congressional hearings, proceedings and reports, as well as several interviews.There are several potential sources not utilized which should be noted.These include the records of the Blackfeet Tribal Government, Browning, Montana and the records of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Browning, Mon tana.Permission was not given to me to have access to these sources.Also not utililzed were the records of Glacier National Park stored in the Na tional Archives, Washington, D.C. and the records of the Solicitor, Depart ment of the Interior, Washington, D.C.These two agencies were not used due to: (1) the prohibitive expense of travelling to Washington, D.C. and (2) the prohibitive expense of having the agency do the research under the Freedom of Information Act and mailing the results to me.This was espe cially true in regard to the acquisition of any information from the Of fice of the Solicitor.There is no question that any of these four sources could have yielded valuable information for this thesis.However, there is nothing to indicate that the information from these sources would have altered the chronological sequence of events as presented.This is because the easily obtained public records, such as Congressional hearings and the transcripts of the Agreement negotiations, are quite ex plicit and complete.Sources such as these are probably the most impor tant to the sequence of events, and they are all included in the paper.This thesis is not the final word on this subject, and the questions that it leaves unanswered, such as why did the Blackfeet lawyers in 1925 choose to press for damages for a taking of the rights instead of attempting to claim the rights by virtue of Jones v. Meehan, merit further investi gation.Chapter Ttoo: The Blackfeet Prior to 1895 The modern Blackfeet are the descendants of a people who were at one time the most powerful and numerous Indians of the northern Great Plains.Although commonly referred to as the Blackfeet Nation or Confederation, the Blackfeet were in reality three separate and distinct political groups united by a common language and common customs, but each having its own chief.These political units did, however, go to war together against common enemies when necessary. 1 The Siksika, or Northern Blackfeet, lived in Canada along the area drained by the Northern Saskatchewan River; the Kainah, or Bloods, lived to the south of the Northern Blackfeet in the vicinity of the Milk River drainage; and the Pikuni, or Piegan Blackfeet, occupied a territory from below that of the Bloods south to the area around present-day Yellowstone National Park.It should be noted that while each tribal unit had its own territory, all three territories overlapped and each tribe freely entered the other's for hunting and social purposes.When the Blackfeet were at the height of their power in the early to mid-nineteenth century their total population was approximately 15,000 and their area of domination extended from just east of the Rocky Mountains north to the North Saskat chewan River and south to the Yellowstone Country.This was an area twice the size of New England.2The land occupied by the Blackfeet was bounded on the west by the Rocky Mountains, and much of this mountainous area later became a part of Glacier National Park.Although many other Indian tribes that were located both east and west of the Rockies lived at one time or another in the 4 U.S. Department of the Interior.Federal Indian Law.Washington, D.C. : Government Printing Office, 1958.
Source: The Mathematics Enthusiast
Author: Christopher S. Ashby
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W598071670