OCR Text |
Show vities. 53 The proposed reservation contained almost three million acres of land that could be used for this activity, while the present reservation had only 1.3 million acres and was surrounded by white settlers who became very angry when the cattle and sheep of the Indians wandered off the reservation. It was suggested that the Indians would be happier where this constant conflict with the whites were less apt to develop. Many people justified removal by claiming that the continual conflict between the groups was actually slowing the civilization process of the Indians. It made it impossible for them to turn their attention to those activities which would allow them to enter the mainstream of Colorado's economic life. The whites rationalized that it would be better for the Utes if they were moved where they could turn more of their attention towards farming and ranching. Those fighting for the removal of the Utes noted that the amount of game available for hunting was nearly depleted on the reservation, but that it was quite plentiful on the proposed reservation in Utah. 54 The relocation would allow them more and better hunting areas. Finally, the Colorado residents argued that the Indians wanted to move to the proposed reservation and had indicated this intent by signing the negotiated agreement of 1888. They argued that had the Indians not wanted to move they would not have agreed to the proposal presented to them by the commissioners. 55 There were groups who argued against removal. One of the most eloquent and aggressive of these groups was the Indian Rights Association. Organized on December 15, 1882, the Association attempted to advance the civilization of the Indian race by bringing to the attention of the American public what was happening to the Indian, and offering a means of altering those Government policies and programs that were considered detrimental to the Indian's well- being. An agency was established in Washington, D. C, for the purpose of lobbying in the halls of Congress. The main office was located in Philadelpha. Within a few years after its organization the Association's influence on Indian affairs in Congress and in the Executive Branch of Government was considerable. In fact, money, capable administration and a strong lobbying effort enabled them to change the course of Ute removal policy in 1889. The arguments of the Association against the Colorado delegation were persuasive. They held that if the Indians were given allotments in their present location the land now held as a reservation would become part of Colorado's land and lose its special status. By ending this status, travel between northern New Mexico and southwestern Colorado could then proceed normaly. This contact with the white community surrounding the reservation would help to increase and speed the civilization process, while removal to a more isolated location would hinder its development. The Association also noted that the hunting grounds in the proposed reservation were located off the reservation and that this would once again lead to the same conflict with whites now being felt by the Utes. The move would not help the Indians obtain better hunting grounds. The Association doubted that the Indians could contain their herds of sheep and cattle any better in Utah than in Colorado, or prevent the herds of cattle from the local cattle companies from straying onto the proposed reservation. Finally, the Association disputed the claim that the Utes were failures as farmers. The Association noted that during the last several years more Indians had been turning towards agricultural pursuits and every indication was that 53. Richard McCloud, B. W. Ritter, and Adair Wilson, The Southern Utes of Colorado, ( Durango, Colorado: Democrat Print, 1893), the Ute Collection, Durango Public Library, Durango. Colorado, p. 18. Hereafter cited as McCloud, Ritter, Wilson, . . . 54. Painter, Removal of the Southern Utes, op. cit., p. 5. 55. McCloud, Ritter. Wilson, op. cit, pp. 9- 11. - 44- |