Impact on Tribal Lands
For a better understanding of the breadth of the indigenous tribes visit the California Tribes page to explore the original California tribes.
Content
Generational Trauma on Tribes by Colonizing Powers
1769 to Present
+
Major U.S. Federal actions, policies and events against Indigenous
1850 to the Present - A Summary
+
“That a war of extermination will continue to be waged”
Governor Peter Burnett 1851
+
Massacres in California 1850s
+
Homestead Act of 1862
+
Early Episcopal Legislators and Acts Impacting Tribes
​
​
Generational Trauma on Tribes by Colonizing Powers
[See Separate Pages for These Eras]
Spanish Era 1769-1821
Mexican Era 1821-1846
​​
California Legislative Actions since Statehood to the Present
California's legislative actions against Native American tribes have evolved significantly since 1850, reflecting broader changes in U.S. federal policy and public attitudes toward Indigenous peoples. Here's an overview:
​
1850s: Early Legislation and Dispossession
Act for the Government and Protection of Indians (1850): This state law facilitated the exploitation and disenfranchisement of Native Americans. It allowed for the legal enslavement of Native Americans, particularly children, through forced "apprenticeships." The law also permitted the displacement of Native Americans from their lands and restricted their rights to testify in court.
​​
Land Dispossession:
Many Native American lands were taken through treaties that were either unratified or violated. The federal government initially negotiated 18 treaties with California tribes, promising them land, but the U.S. Senate refused to ratify these treaties, leaving the tribes without legal land rights.
https://calindianhistory.org/california-unratified-treaties-map/
​​
Late 19th to Early 20th Century: Continuing Marginalization
Reservations and Forced Assimilation: During this period, California tribes faced ongoing pressures to assimilate into white society. Native children were often sent to boarding schools designed to strip them of their cultural identity. Reservations were established, but often on less desirable land, and the tribes had little control over these lands.
https://airc.ucsc.edu/resources/schools-little.pdf
​
Allotment and Detribalization:
Following the Dawes Act of 1887, California tribes were subjected to the allotment policy, which divided communal lands into individual plots. This policy led to further loss of tribal lands and undermined communal tribal structures.
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/dawes-act
​
Mid-20th Century: Termination Era
Termination Policies (1950s-1960s): The federal government, with the support of state authorities, pursued a policy of "termination," aimed at ending the special relationship between the federal government and Native American tribes. Several California tribes were "terminated," meaning their recognition as sovereign entities was revoked, and their lands were sold off. The California Rancheria Termination Acts of the 1950s and 1960s are examples, which led to the loss of lands and federal benefits for many tribes.
https://library.law.howard.edu/civilrightshistory/indigenous/termination
https://www.dpublication.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/37-1058-W.pdf
​
Late 20th Century: Reversal and Recognition
Restoration and Recognition (1970s-Present): Starting in the 1970s, many California tribes began to have their federal recognition restored, and there was a growing movement to acknowledge past injustices. This included the restoration of lands and the federal acknowledgment of tribes that had been previously terminated. Tribes also began to assert their sovereignty more vigorously, particularly in the areas of cultural preservation, education, and gaming.
​
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (1988):
This federal law allowed tribes to operate casinos on their lands, leading to significant economic developments for many tribes. However, it also led to tensions with the state over the extent of tribal sovereignty and control over gaming revenues.
https://www.nigc.gov/general-counsel/laws-and-regulations
​
21st Century: Ongoing Challenges and Progress
Environmental and Cultural Protection: In recent years, California has passed legislation aimed at protecting Native American cultural sites and environmental resources. This includes laws requiring consultation with tribes on land-use decisions that could affect sacred sites.
https://nahc.ca.gov/environmental-and-cultural-department/
​
Education and Apologies: The state has also taken steps to acknowledge past wrongs, including formal apologies for historical injustices against Native Americans and efforts to include Native American history and culture more prominently in school curricula.
​
Overall, California's legislative history regarding Native American tribes reflects a long trajectory from dispossession and marginalization to gradual recognition and restoration of rights. However, challenges remain, particularly in the areas of land rights, cultural preservation, and economic development.
​
Major Federal actions, policies and events against Indigenous Tribes
1850 to the Present - A Summary
​
1. Indian Removal and Relocation (1850s)
- Treaty Violations: Numerous treaties with tribes were violated by the U.S. government, leading to the forced relocation of tribes from their ancestral lands.
- Reservation System: Tribes were confined to reservations, often on land far less valuable and far from their original homes.
​
2. Indian Wars (1850s-1890)
- Conflict and Resistance: Various tribes resisted U.S. expansion, leading to a series of conflicts known as the Indian Wars.
- Sand Creek Massacre (1864): A surprise attack by Colorado militia on a peaceful Cheyenne and Arapaho village, resulting in the death of around 150 Native Americans.
- Wounded Knee Massacre (1890): The killing of about 300 Lakota by U.S. troops, marking the end of armed Native American resistance.
​
3. Assimilation Policies (Late 19th - Early 20th Century)
- Dawes Act (1887): Allotted tribal lands to individual Native Americans in an attempt to dissolve communal living and promote assimilation. It resulted in significant land loss for tribes.
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/dawes-act
- Indian Boarding Schools: Native American children were forcibly removed from their families to attend boarding schools, where they were stripped of their culture and language.
-Listening Sessions on Boarding Schools - Diocese of Arizona - August 2024
​
4. Indian Reorganization Act (1934)
- Aimed to reverse the Dawes Act by restoring some tribal land and encouraging self-government, though it did not fully undo previous damages.
​
5. **Termination Policy (1940s-1960s)
- The U.S. government sought to terminate the recognition of tribes as sovereign nations, leading to the loss of land, federal recognition, and services.
- Urban Relocation Program: Encouraged Native Americans to leave reservations for urban areas, which often resulted in loss of cultural identity and increased poverty.
6. American Indian Movement (1960s-1970s)
- Occupation of Alcatraz (1969-1971): Activists occupied Alcatraz Island to protest federal policies.
- Wounded Knee Occupation (1973): AIM activists occupied Wounded Knee to protest against the U.S. government's failure to honor treaties.
​
7. Legislation and Court Decisions (1980s-Present)
- Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (1975): Allowed tribes greater control over their own affairs.
- Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (1990): Protected Native American graves and allowed for the repatriation of human remains and sacred objects.
- Violence Against Women Act (2013): Recognized tribal authority to prosecute non-Native individuals for crimes of domestic violence on tribal lands.
- Dakota Access Pipeline Protests (2016-2017): Tribes, particularly the Standing Rock Sioux, protested against the pipeline due to concerns over water rights and sacred sites.
8. Contemporary Issues
- Ongoing Land Disputes: Many tribes continue to fight for the return of ancestral lands or compensation for land taken in the past.
- Legal Battles for Sovereignty: Tribes continue to assert their sovereignty in courts, often facing opposition from state and federal governments.
These events reflect a history of systemic actions against Native American tribes, often involving land dispossession, cultural erasure, and legal challenges. However, there has also been significant resistance, activism, and gradual legal progress toward recognizing tribal sovereignty and rights.
​​
“That a war of extermination will continue to be waged”
Governor Peter Burnett, Inaugural Address,
January 6, 1851, Pueblo of San Jose’ – California State Capitol
In his inaugural address on January 6, 1851, California Governor Peter Burnett made a notorious statement regarding the treatment of Native Americans during what he referred to as the "war of extermination." The quote is as follows:
That a war of extermination will continue to be waged between the races until the Indian race becomes extinct must be expected. While we cannot anticipate this result but with painful regret, the inevitable destiny of the race is beyond the power or wisdom of man to avert.
This statement reflects the brutal and openly genocidal policies and attitudes toward Native Americans in California during that period, where violence against Native communities was both widespread and officially sanctioned.
The 1800s were a devastating period for California Native American tribes, marked by numerous massacres that significantly impacted their populations and cultures. These massacres were often carried out by settlers, militias, and sometimes state and federal authorities, motivated by desires for land, resources, and the suppression of Native resistance. While all of the tribes in the land now designated the Diocese of El Camino Real had nearly been destroyed during the Mission and Mexican Eras, the survivors chose for the most part be absorbed into the Californio, or “Mexican” population. They adopted Spanish surnames and tried to become invisible in the face of the official policies ushered in by Governor Burnett and supported by the Federal Government. [Also see on this page Major Federal Actions Against all Tribes in the Western U.S.] Census)
1. Bloody Island Massacre (1850)
- Location: Clear Lake, Northern California
- Tribes Affected: Pomo Tribe
- Event: After two white men, known for abusing Native Americans, were killed by the Pomo people in self-defense, a U.S. Army detachment retaliated. They killed over 100 Pomo people, including women, children, and the elderly, on an island in Clear Lake.
- Significance: This massacre demonstrated the severe and often indiscriminate violence that Native Americans faced in California. It also highlighted the extreme consequences for Native communities defending themselves against abuse.
2. Klamath River Massacres (1851-1855)
- Location: Klamath River, Northern California
- Tribes Affected: Yurok, Karuk, and other tribes in the region
- Event: A series of violent attacks were carried out by settlers and miners against Native communities along the Klamath River. These attacks were often provoked by the presence of gold miners who viewed Native people as obstacles to their mining efforts.
- Significance: These massacres contributed to the significant population decline among the tribes of Northern California and furthered the displacement and dispossession of Native lands.
3. Yontoket Massacre (1853)
- Location: Yontocket, near Smith River, Northern California
- Tribes Affected: Tolowa Tribe
- Event: A group of white settlers attacked a Tolowa village, killing around 450 people, many of whom were attending a ceremonial gathering. The massacre decimated the Tolowa population and disrupted their cultural practices.
- Significance: The Yontoket Massacre was one of several attacks on the Tolowa people, contributing to the near-extermination of their community. It also served as a brutal example of the genocidal practices faced by Native tribes in California.
4. Wiyot Massacre (1853)
- Location: Tuluwat Island, Humboldt Bay, Northern California
- Tribe Affected: Wiyot Tribe
- Event: During a Wiyot ceremonial event, a group of white settlers attacked the village at night, killing over 100 people, primarily women, children, and elders. The men of the tribe were away gathering supplies for the ceremony, leaving the village vulnerable.
- Significance: This massacre is particularly significant as it occurred during a sacred ceremony, highlighting the settlers’ disregard for Native cultural practices. The event nearly wiped out the Wiyot population and left a lasting scar on the community.
5. Bridge Gulch Massacre (1852)
- Location: Bridge Gulch, Northern California
- Tribe Affected: Wintu Tribe
- Event: After the killing of a white settler, a militia organized an attack on a Wintu village, killing over 150 people, mostly women and children. The militia members were never held accountable for the massacre.
- Significance: The Bridge Gulch Massacre was part of a broader pattern of violent retribution against Native communities, often justified by the killing of a single settler. Such events were used to justify further encroachments on Native lands and resources.
6. Round Valley Settler Massacres (1856-1860)
- Location: Round Valley, Northern California
- Tribes Affected: Yuki and other tribes in the area
- Event: During this period, settlers and militias carried out a series of attacks on the Yuki people and other tribes, leading to widespread killing, enslavement, and forced removal to reservations. Thousands of Native people were killed or displaced.
- Significance: These massacres were part of a larger effort to clear Native populations from the fertile lands of Round Valley, allowing settlers to establish farms and ranches. The near extermination of the Yuki people exemplifies the broader pattern of genocide in California during this time.
Significance of the Massacres
The massacres of California tribes in the 1800s were part of a broader campaign of genocide against Native Americans in the state, fueled by the Gold Rush and the influx of settlers. These events had devastating effects on the indigenous populations, leading to significant population declines, loss of land, culture, and autonomy. The systematic violence was often supported or ignored by the state and federal governments, and the trauma of these massacres continues to affect Native communities in California today.
These events are crucial in understanding the history of California and the United States, as they illustrate the extreme measures taken to displace and destroy Native populations in the pursuit of land and resources. The legacy of these massacres is still felt in the struggles of Native American tribes for recognition, land rights, and justice.
​
Homestead Act of 1862
The Homestead Act of 1862 and the regulations that came before it freed up lands for new settlers while allocating Native American tribes to reservations. But where did all this land come from? Most of the United States was already home to vast tribes of native peoples, each with its own culture and traditions.
“They made us many promises, more than I can remember, but they never kept but one; they promised to take our land, and they took it.” – Red Cloud, Lakota Leader.
When we think of the Westward Expansion of the U.S., we might think of landraces and pioneers looking for new land to claim and farm. Pioneers used the California Trail to move West from about 1845 to 1869 to find gold, escape persecution, and make a fresh start on land of their own away from the crowded cities.
​
What Was The Homestead Act Of 1862?
​
According to The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, the Homestead Act gave any adult citizen who had never born arms against the United States government the right to claim 160 acres of land. About 10% of the area of the U.S., roughly 270 million acres, was claimed and settled under this act.
Go to: https://www.californiatrailcenter.org/the-homestead-act-of-1862/
​
Early Episcopal Legislators and Enacted Laws Impacting Tribes
At the Political Beginning: Two Episcopalian Legislators
Had Roles Making the State’s First Laws Against Indigenous Californians
​
Elisha Oscar Crosby (1818-1895) and Dr. Benjamin F. Cory (1822-1896) were early American migrants to California with strong family ties to prominent members of Trinity (now Cathedral) Church in San Jose. Undoubtedly, these were distinguished men of impressive achievement. But, being humans, they were morally ambiguous. They were capable of doing both good and bad, of exhibiting moral clarity sometimes and, at other times, cultural blindness. On the positive side, in over a hundred cases in the 1850s Crosby’s law practice defended Spanish-speaking Californios whose land grant titles were being challenged. In all these cases, including one before the U.S. Supreme Court, he argued that the title challenges were unjust and in blatant violation of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1850) which guaranteed the state’s former Mexican citizens equal rights in California. Also, when Minister to Guatemala during the 1860s, Crosby married an Indigenous woman.
However, for purposes of this Truth-Telling Task Force, we note that Crosby and Cory served in the first session of the California State Legislature of 1850-52 that enacted laws and policies highly detrimental to the state’s Indigenous people. [For fuller explanation of early state measures damaging to Native Californians, see Kimberly Johnston-Dodds, Early California Laws and Policies Related to California Indians at https://library.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/crb-reports/02-014.pdf ].
Denial of Indians’ Voting Rights and Legal Protection in Courts
In the initial legislative session, Cory served in the Assembly house while Crosby was a Senator. Of the two men, Crosby’s role was greater in setting the state’s formative policies towards Indigenous peoples, as he was also a delegate to the 1849-50 California Constitutional Convention that decided against granting voting rights to Native Californians. This was the first of several acts by California’s government leading to Indigenous people having virtually no rights and protection by government or law, leaving them vulnerable to mistreatment by whites. [The only individual whose vote on Indian suffrage is recorded was Kimball Dimmick, the convention’s chairman, who broke a tie by voting against Article V on Suffrage to include Indians. Report of the Debates of the Convention of California, on the Formation of the State Constitution, In September and October,1849, by J. Ross Browne (Washington, D.C.: John T. Tower, 1850, p. 73. Generally, early California legislative proceedings records stated only if a measure passed and gave no record of individuals’ votes].
Elisha O. Crosby served in the Senate of the first California Legislature from 1850 to 1852. He chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, so was likely influential in passing the 1850 statutes banning Indians from testifying in California courts.
Punitive Indian Expeditions
The state’s first Constitution empowered the Governor to call out the Militia to enforce the law, suppress insurrection, or repel invasion. Twice in 1850, Governor William Barnett called on the Militia to mount Indian “Expeditions” to punish Indians for reputed attacks or crimes against Whites. The first legislature responded to both of Governor Burnett’s requests by authorizing and financing the punitive expeditions. Indian Expeditions, it must be noted, were not conventional military campaigns or battles. Rather, they were hunts that usually culminated in unrestrained massacres, with any survivors sold into servitude. This was the start, during the 1850s and 1860s at the state, federal and local vigilante levels, of what the leading historian of genocide in California has labeled the state sponsored “Killing Machine.” [See Benjamin Madley, An American Genocide: The United States and the Californian Indian Catastrophe, 1846-1873 (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 2016), especially Chapter 6, “Rise of the Killing Machine.”]
The most frequent reason cited for forming punitive expeditions was alleged theft by Indigenous persons of Whites’ horses, cattle or other livestock. Relatedly, from Spanish colonization to the American period, the greatest cause of the decimation of Indigenous Californian populations was the rapid destruction, upon introduction of European livestock and crop field crops, of local ecosystems and Native peoples’ traditional food sources such as seed plants and wild game. Ironically, once European and Euro-Americans’ livestock had destroyed Native Californians’ ability to feed themselves, facing starvation, they often turned to that livestock for food—which then often led to genocidal anti-Indian expeditions being launched against them.
Moreover, any Indians charged by Whites with theft or other crimes were presumed guilty--and if the specific Indians accused proved elusive, then any Indigenous people at hand would do on whom to unleash lethal punishment. Almost all contemporary White voices (political leaders, military authorities, newspaper editorials, etc.) agreed on the “pedagogical” value of Indian killing-- that it would teach surviving Indigenous peoples not to tamper with whites' animals, property, or lives. [On White Californians’ notion of “pedagogic killing” see Madley, American Genocide, pages, 48, 95, 128, 137, 180, 181 and 216.]
Act for the Protection and Governance of Indians (1850)
This law was another enormously harmful act of the first legislature in that it created the legal foundation allowing for the continuation and expansion of coerced Indigenous labor in California.
That bill was assigned in the Senate Judiciary Committee chaired by Crosby. According to a recent state government report, the “1850 Act for the Protection and Governance of Indians facilitated removing California Indians from their traditional lands, separating at least a generation of children and adults from their families, languages, and cultures. . . This California law provided for ‘apprenticing’ or indenturing Indian children and adults to Whites, and punished ‘vagrant’ Indians by ‘hiring’ them out to the highest bidder at a public auction. . .” [FN 5: Johnston-Dodds, Early California Laws, p. 1.] From passage of this Indian Act in 1850 until 1863, between ten-to-twenty thousand Indigenous Californians were kidnapped, indentured, and forced into bondage. By 1852, “one-third of the Native boys in California were indentured and 65 percent of Native females were bound over before they were fifteen years old.” [Jean Pfaelzer, California, A Slave State (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 2023) p. 175.]
If legislators such as Crosby and Cory created this law, it was enforced and implemented by judges at the county and township levels. For examples, County Courts of Sessions and township Justices of the Peace determined which Indigenous adults were indentured or children “apprenticed” to White persons. (Bearing in mind that Californian Indians could not testify), any white person could bring an Indian or Indians before a Justice of the Peace and -- on such grounds as that the Indian lived on the White’s land, owed him money, could not provide for themself, were orphaned, or followed an immoral lifestyle—the Justice could legally bind the Indigenous person(s) to the applicant.
Given that numerous Episcopalians were judges, it is likely that some early local Episcopalians played parts in imposing this Act’s unjust measures on Native Californians.
​