More handpicked essays just for you.
Us government and native american relations
Native american government and united states relations
Governemnt policies towards native americans
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Bureau of Indian Affairs
This is a great day for you and for us. A day of peace and friendship between you and the whites for all time to come. You are about to be paid for your lands, and the GREAT FATHER has sent me today to treaty with you concerning the payment...And the GREAT FATHER wishes you to have homes, pastures for your horses and fishing places. he wishes you to learn to farm and your children to go to a good school; and he now wants me to make a bargain with you, in which you will sell your lands and in return be provided all these things. – Isaac I. Stevens, 1854
The US government’s official role in Indian affairs began as far back as the Continental Congress (1786) when the Indian tribes were still considered independent nations with whom the settlers had to make treaties (Jackson 1). The purposes for these interactions were to buy land and to keep peace between encroaching settlers and natives.
Unfortunately, these first transactions reflected the cultural misunderstandings between the two parties that would continue to plague communication until this century (Taylor 5). The Europeans assumed the Indians viewed land in the same way—individuals owning plots of land for agricultural purposes. Most of the eastern tribes were nomadic and moved to meet seasonal needs for hunting. When the Europeans offered to buy land, the natives did not understand that they would thence be barred from the use of that land for migrating and for hunting. Even at these early stages of negotiations, conflicts arose between the two levels of government as to who had jurisdiction. The federal government alone had authority to make treaties with foreign nations, but the states had to deal with the individual tribes. This led to more local intervention by "agents" of the federal government to actually negotiate between states and tribes (Jackson 15). Another role of these agents was, as Henry Knox stated, "to familiarize Indians with the American way of living" (Jackson 20).
As the bureaucracy began to develop to meet the needs of the westward expansion, the department’s oversight was given to the Secretary of War. This did not seem to be an intentional statement of purpose but rather a decision of convenience because the Department of the Interior did not exist yet. However, Francis Prucha felt that this may have been because the Indians had been viewed as siding with the British during the Revolutionary War and thus were adversaries(319).
In order to better understand the historical context of nuclear development it seems to me as though Iversen dove into a fair amount of investigative journalism. The book focuses primarily on the events of Rocky Flats and her life through a narrative nonfiction interpretation. By providing a journalist approach, Iversen makes it easy for the reader to build a relationship with the characters presented throughout the book. At times I found myself visualizing the intensity of the fires, the whirlwind of emotions from locals, and the lasting environmental impacts that would not only plague Colorado, but taint the reputation of what it means to be human.
Under the Jackson Administration, the changes made shaped national Indian policy. Morally, Andrew Jackson dismissed prior ideas that natives would gradually assimilate into white culture, and believed that removing Indians from their homes was the best answer for both the natives and Americans. Politically, before Jackson treaties were in place that protected natives until he changed those policies, and broke those treaties, violating the United States Constitution. Under Jackson’s changes, the United States effectively gained an enormous amount of land. The removal of the Indians west of the Mississippi River in the 1830’s changed the national policy in place when Jackson became President as evidenced by the moral, political, constitutional, and practical concerns of the National Indian Policy.
The generalization that, “The decision of the Jackson administration to remove the Cherokee Indians to lands west of the Mississippi River in the 1830s was more a reformulation of the national policy that had been in effect since the 1790s than a change in that policy,” is valid. Ever since the American people arrived at the New World they have continually driven the Native Americans out of their native lands. Many people wanted to contribute to this removal of the Cherokees and their society. Knox proposed a “civilization” of the Indians. President Monroe continued Knox’s plan by developing ways to rid of the Indians, claiming it would be beneficial to all. Andrew Jackson ultimately fulfilled the plan. First of all, the map [Document A] indicates the relationship between time, land, and policies, which affected the Indians. The Indian Tribes have been forced to give up their land as early as the 1720s. Between the years of 1721 and 1785, the Colonial and Confederation treaties forced the Indians to give up huge portions of their land. During Washington's, Monroe's, and Jefferson's administration, more and more Indian land was being commandeered by the colonists. The Washington administration signed the Treaty of Holston and other supplements between the time periods of 1791 until 1798 that made the Native Americans give up more of their homeland land. The administrations during the 1790's to the 1830's had gradually acquired more and more land from the Cherokee Indians. Jackson followed that precedent by the acquisition of more Cherokee lands. In later years, those speaking on behalf of the United States government believed that teaching the Indians how to live a more civilized life would only benefit them. Rather than only thinking of benefiting the Indians, we were also trying to benefit ourselves. We were looking to acquire the Indians’ land. In a letter to George Washington, Knox says we should first is to destroy the Indians with an army, and the second is to make peace with them. The Indian Trade and Intercourse Act of 1793 began to put Knox’s plan into effect. The federal government’s promise of supplying the Indians with animals, agricultural tool...
As the frontier moved west, white settlers wanted to expand into territory, which was the ancestral land of many Indian tribes. Although this had been going on since the administration of George Washington, during the administration of Andrew Jackson the government supported the policy of resettlement, and persuaded many tribes to give up their claim to their land and move into areas set aside by Congress as Indian Territory. In 1830, Congress passed the Indian Resettlement Act, which provided for the removal of Indians to territory west of the Mississippi River. While Jackson was President, the government negotiated 94 treaties to end Indian titles to land in the existing states.
The Indians thought of land very differently to the white man. The land was sacred, there was no ownership, and it was created by the great spirit. They could not sell their land to others, whereas the white people could fence off the land which belonged to them, and sell it freely to whoever they wanted. The Europeans didn't think that the Indians were using the land properly, so in their eyes, they were doing a good favour to the earth. To the Indians, the land was more valuable than the money that the white man had brought with him, even though it didn't belong to them.
Once the white men decided that they wanted lands belonging to the Native Americans (Indians), the United States Government did everything in its power to help the white men acquire Indian land. The US Government did everything from turning a blind eye to passing legislature requiring the Indians to give up their land (see Indian Removal Bill of 1828). Aided by his bias against the Indians, General Jackson set the Indian removal into effect in the war of 1812 when he battled the great Tecumseh and conquered him.
Have you ever seen an animal sitting in a cage all alone with nothing to do. Well, zoos are trying to change that fact. They will allow the animals to live in an environment that is like their home. Many people don't realize this, but zoo are keeping and breeding these animals because they would not survive in the wild alone. In the three passages, ¨The Stripes Will Survive,¨ ¨The Zood Go Wild from No More Dodos,¨ ¨Our Beautiful Macaws and Why They Need Enrichment.¨ All of these articles present one claim, that is that the role of zoos is no longer to keep animal, but to protect them.
Deloria defines the relationship between the US Government and the Indians as paternalistic. The US Government treated and governed the Indians as a father would by providing basic needs but without given them rights. There has been some improvement with the Indian Reorganization Act in 1934. This act allowed the return to local self-government on a tribal level and restored the self management of their assets. By allowing the Indians to self govern it encouraged an economic foundation for the inhabitants of Indian reservations. Unfortunately only a few tribes have fully taken advantage of this Act, while others struggle for survival.
Beginning in the 1860s and lasting until the late 1780s, government policy towards Native Americans was aggressive and expressed zero tolerance for their presence in the West. In the last 1850s, tribal leaders and Americans were briefly able to compromise on living situations and land arrangements. Noncompliance by Americans, however, resumed conflict. The beginning of what would be called the "Indian Wars" started in Minnesota in 1862. Sioux, angered by the loss of much of their land, killed 5 white Americans. What resulted was over 1,000 deaths, of white and Native Americans. From that point on, American policy was to force Indians off of their land. American troops would force Indian tribe leaders to accept treaties taking their land from them. Protests or resistance by the Indians would result in fighting. On occasion, military troops would even lash out against peaceful Indians. Their aggression became out of control.
One of the several ways, and probably most effective ways to prove that zoos are helping our society is that they teach children about animals. Opponents against zoos, state, “There is no compelling evidence that zoos…promote attitude changes, education, or interest in conservation in their visitors.” (Do zoos and aquariums really educate public?). Most zoos require zookeepers to have a bachelor’s degree in biology, zoology or animal science, which is how zookeepers...
Professor Livia Dobutsu from the University of Newcastle says: “Although we all know that zoos are very beneficial to the wild and saving endangered species, the fact
Starting thousands of years ago, zoos attracted large crowds around the world (Fravel). Because of that, everyone today has seen, been to, or heard of a zoo at least once in their lifetime. However, people are missing valuable information that they need to know about zoos today. Do the zoos really do what most people think?
Zoos, there are more than 10,000 in the world and more than 700 million people visit them annually each year (AZA). Some people go for entertainment, some go for work, and some go for studies. These facilities are normally owned by government, cities, or privately owned. Zoos are able to exist because of taxpayers, grants, funds, and annual visitors that come to zoos. One question has been lingering around about zoos though do they really benefit animals or are they human entertainment? This report will examine the effects of zoos on animals, on employment, and on the economy.
Many humans have desire and fascination with wild animals. Every year, millions of people gather together to go on cruises safari trips, or simply take a drive down the street to the local zoo to fulfill their day with animal gazing. Peoples interest in animals is nothing new. Zoos have been around and attracting people with many exotic animals since 1250 B.C. In the 13th- century England for a small free Henry III moved the family’s menagerie for viewing along with lions, camels, and lynxes. However brought a dog or cat to feed to these animals were allowed to view for free. The first modern zoo comes about in the Imperial Menagerie in Vienna Austria. Established in 1752 this zoo continues to bring in visitors from all over the world. Germany on the other hand holds the world largest animal collection at the Zoo Berlin formerly known as The Berlin Zoological Gardens which hold more than 15,000 different animals coming from almost 1,700 species. Many people visit zoos all around the world proving that we never grow tired of observing animals. Depending on your view on the topic zoos can be seen as a classroom for learning about animals or a death trap for animals. It’s hard to differentiate between what’s good if it’s a good thing or not. Maybe we should start out with the good things.
Without the education and awareness offered by zoos, most people would forget about endangered animals and how their everyday action affect the environment surrounding those creatures. Some people say zoos do not draw a crowd of people because of the lack of interest. People who utilize this argument do not know that “American zoos draw more than 110 million visitors a year- more than the combined annual attendance at baseball, football, and basketball games (Claggett 3).” The United States only contains around 320 million people which means that one third of the population visits some type of zoo annually. Zoos provide for a safer and more interactive family environment than traveling to a movie theater or watching tv at home. Generally, the public believes zoos benefit education. Out of a study of 5,500 visitors, “a large majority of visitors (76%) indicated that they believed that zoos and aquariums are invested in conservation and education ( Falk et al. 7).” This statistics shows that the public believes zoos contain the best interest for the community’s education. Zoos support education by running summer camps, tour guides, and information stations. Without the valuable resources provided to communities by zoos, people would not know about different species of animals and how they interact with the world around