Comparing the Effectiveness of Federal Policies Towards the Plains Indians
Comparing the effectiveness of federal policies towards the Plains Indians means weighing how far measures such as the Fort Laramie Treaties, the Indian Appropriations Acts and the 1887 Dawes Act protected or eroded Plains Indian land and ways of life.
Before you start
Make sure you're comfortable with these topics first:
Method
- Before comparing, list what each policy was actually trying to achieve: the 1851 Fort Laramie Treaty aimed to keep peace and secure migrant safe passage; the Indian Appropriations Acts aimed to relocate tribes onto reservations; the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty aimed to end Red Cloud's War and guarantee the Black Hills to the Lakota; the Dawes Act, 1887, aimed to assimilate Plains Indians through individual land ownership.
- For each policy, find one piece of evidence it worked (even briefly) and one piece of evidence it failed or was broken, so your comparison is balanced rather than one-sided.
- Compare policies against EACH OTHER using a consistent measure, e.g. 'which policy held longest before being broken', or 'which policy achieved its stated aim, even if that aim harmed Plains Indians'.
- Use the breaking of the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868, after gold was discovered in the Black Hills in the 1870s, as a clear example that even a treaty that appeared to succeed at first could still fail in the longer term.
- For a judgement/assess question, structure your answer around two or three named policies, giving a supported point for each, before writing a conclusion that directly ranks or weighs them against each other rather than simply summarising.
- Keep the comparison grounded in what each policy did to Plains Indian land, resources or independence, since this is what 'effectiveness' means in this unit, rather than judging policies only by whether fighting stopped.
Worked example
'The Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 was more effective than the Dawes Act of 1887 in protecting Plains Indian land.' Assess the extent to which you agree with this statement.
- Plan a supported point in favour: the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 initially achieved its aim, ending Red Cloud's War and formally recognising the Black Hills as part of a Great Sioux Reservation, protecting a large area of land at least on paper.
- Plan a supported counterpoint: however, the treaty's protection did not last, since the US government broke its own recognition of the Black Hills once gold was discovered there in the 1870s, showing the treaty's protection was only temporary.
- Plan a supported point on the Dawes Act: the Dawes Act, 1887, was arguably even less protective, since rather than being broken by outside pressure it was deliberately designed to reduce Plains Indian landholding, allotting individual plots and selling 'surplus' reservation land to settlers.
- Write a conclusion that weighs the two: because the 1868 treaty at least recognised a large area of land, even temporarily, while the Dawes Act intentionally reduced Plains Indian landholding as government policy, the treaty could be judged more protective in its stated aim, even though neither policy secured Plains Indian land in the long term.
Practice questions
Try each question, then tap to reveal the answer.
Q1What did the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851 aim to achieve?Show answer
Answer: To set out defined tribal territories and secure safe passage for migrants, in return for annual payments to the tribes.
Q2What did the Indian Appropriations Act of 1851 begin?Show answer
Answer: The policy of using federal funding to relocate Plains Indian tribes onto reservations.
Q3What did the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868 achieve, and how was it later broken?Show answer
Answer: It ended Red Cloud's War and recognised the Black Hills as part of a Great Sioux Reservation, but the US government broke this recognition after gold was discovered in the Black Hills in the 1870s.
Q4What was the stated aim of the Dawes Act of 1887?Show answer
Answer: To assimilate Plains Indians into white American culture by allotting individually owned plots of reservation land to families.
Q5Give one piece of evidence that US government policy towards Plains Indians was often broken or poorly enforced.Show answer
Answer: For example, the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1851 was increasingly ignored as migrant numbers grew, or the 1868 recognition of the Black Hills was broken once gold was found there.
Q6Why is it more accurate to compare each policy against its own stated aim, rather than a single standard?Show answer
Answer: Because the policies had different goals (e.g. peace and safe passage, relocation, assimilation), so effectiveness should be judged against what each policy was actually trying to do.
Exam-style questions
Written in the style of a GCSE History exam paper, with a full mark scheme.
'Government policies towards the Plains Indians in the period c1851-1890 were mostly ineffective.' Assess the extent to which you agree with this statement.
Show mark scheme
Tick each line you got. Your score builds from the marks on the scheme.
Nothing ticked yet - 8 available
Explain two consequences of the discovery of gold in the Black Hills for the Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868.
Show mark scheme
Tick each line you got. Your score builds from the marks on the scheme.
Nothing ticked yet - 8 available
See real GCSE History past-paper questions, with official mark schemes →
Free printable worksheet
Want more practice on paper? Download the comparing the effectiveness of federal policies towards the plains indians worksheet pack - 7 pages of exam-style questions with a full mark scheme. One email opens every download in this browser for 14 days - no account, no card. Print it for personal and classroom use.
Next topics
Not quite what you needed?
Tell us what is missing on comparing the effectiveness of federal policies towards the plains indians, or which topic to write up next. Every request is read, and we reply to every one.
Build a full practice pack.
This topic is one of hundreds in the library - pick the ones a student needs and generate a printable PDF in minutes.