Lecturer, Renewable Natural Resources Division, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada.
THE AMERICAN INDIAN AND MISSOURI RIVER WATER DEVELOPMENTS†
Article first published online: 8 JUN 2007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1974.tb00598.x
Issue
1752-1688/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=6d8ba4f05904371bea7c7a5b8a47404bf9279832)
JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association
Volume 10, Issue 3, pages 573–579, June 1974
Additional Information
How to Cite
Shanks, B. D. (1974), THE AMERICAN INDIAN AND MISSOURI RIVER WATER DEVELOPMENTS. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 10: 573–579. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1974.tb00598.x
- †
Paper No. 73144 of the Water Resources Bulletin. Discussions are open until December 1, 1974.
Publication History
- Issue published online: 8 JUN 2007
- Article first published online: 8 JUN 2007
- Abstract
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- Missouri River;
- American Indians;
- social costs;
- reservoirs
ABSTRACT: The construction of three Missouri River main stem dams, Garrison, Oahe and Fort Randall, and the related reservoir taking caused social and economic changes on five Indian reservations, Fort Berthold, Cheyenne River, Standing Rock, Crow Creek and Lower Brute. The inundation of Missouri River riparian lands caused the loss of important cultural, social and economic environments. Ninety percent of the reservations timber, seventy-five percent of its wildlife and most of the fertile cropland were in the reservoir taking area. Urban and more fertile environments downstream and to the east received most of the projects benefits. The Indian minority on the five reservations received few economic and social benefits after bearing a disporportionate share of the social and economic costs of the developments. Relocation was forced upon those who had the longest historic and cultural claim to the land. The social costs to the American Indian occasioned by the Missouri River water developments illustrates two broad areas seldom considered during the decision process. First, the unique historic, cultural or religious values of minorities affected by developments. Second, the disproportionate spacial allocation of both benefits and costs. The second item includes social, economic and cultural considerations in not just a geographic framework but a cultural framework as well.

1752-1688/asset/bannerforeground.gif?v=1&s=bf00ff8247a6868653da8aff91ea33d86466427e)