A Whole Bunch of Dead Indians! Wow!

[AZ Ranger]

It was the loss of habitat that reduced the bison in the end. If the total popualtion was 60 million and 3 million a year was harvested then the 30 million over 10 years is not as significant as one might think.

If the popuation consisted of 20 million cows they could produce 10 to 15 million calves per year. So for those 10 years 100 to 150 million could be recruited to the population.

[markland]

Jun 23, 2009 7:00:45 GMT -6 crzhrs said:

Buffalo Jumps:

The remains found there were the remains of buffalo over THOUSANDS OF YEARS rather than a one-time event.

Granted, many buffalo may have fallen to their death at one time.

Overall . . . the Plains Indians (which covers the plains from Southern Canada to Southern US) were never able to kill large numbers of buffalo until they acquired horses and guns . . . and even then it certainly didn't compare to the 30 MILLION killed between 1870-1880 by White Market Hunters.

Let's not muddy the waters . . . it was White Market Hunters who were responsible for the near-extinction of the buffalo . . . not Indians.

Muddying the water by countering your emotionalism with facts? Please!

For the less idealistic, a good resource may be browsed at

tinyurl.com/lcleyl

Billy

[crzhrs]

<Muddying the water by countering your emotionalism with facts? Please!>

Who? Me?

Please read my counter below WITHOUT emotionalism!

In a working paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research, University of Calgary environmental economist M. Scott Taylor argues that the story of the buffalo slaughter on the Great Plains is not, at bottom, an American one. Instead, Taylor argues that the slaughter of some 30 million bison over the course of a decade was initiatied by a tanning innovation created in Europe, and maintained by a robust European demand for buffalo hides for use as industrial leather.

Taylor used international trade records and first-person accounts of the hunt to show that that the widespread slaughter of bison between 1870 and 1880 was the result of a market for industrial leather that was virtually unregulated by the U.S. government as the country emerged from the Civil War.

PS: What the heck is wrong with being an idealist?

[crzhrs]

<It was the loss of habitat that reduced the bison in the end>

That may be true for wildlife now and in the near past . . . but in the latter part of the 19th century the Plains area was still mostly undeveloped with few non-Whites.

[conz]

Jun 23, 2009 7:00:45 GMT -6 crzhrs said:

Let's not muddy the waters . . . it was White Market Hunters who were responsible for the near-extinction of the buffalo . . . not Indians.

That may not really be true. I think most historians will agree that the Indians played a large part in the decimation and extinction of the buffalo herds. They eventually may have made them extinct even without American help...it just would have taken much longer.

But it should be clear that the Indians killed FAR more buffalo each year than they could ever possibly use, in order to sell/trade their skins to the Europeans and Americans. Their own greed went far to decimate the very herds their survival depended upon.

Clair

[conz]

Jun 23, 2009 9:03:30 GMT -6 crzhrs said:

Taylor used international trade records and first-person accounts of the hunt to show that that the widespread slaughter of bison between 1870 and 1880 was the result of a market for industrial leather that was virtually unregulated by the U.S. government as the country emerged from the Civil War.

That is true, but weren't the Indians themselves killing many, if not most, of these bison? Not the white hunters, which killed a lot, but probably not nearly as many as Indian hunters did.

So the white DEMAND for hides I think we can say drove the huge killings, but who was doing all that killing? Perhaps mostly the Indians themselves...

PS: What the heck is wrong with being an idealist?

Nothing at all...it is very refreshing. Much more pleasant than us cynics. <g>

Clair

[conz]

Jun 23, 2009 9:06:42 GMT -6 crzhrs said:

<It was the loss of habitat that reduced the bison in the end>

That may be true for wildlife now and in the near past . . . but in the latter part of the 19th century the Plains area was still mostly undeveloped with few non-Whites.

Could be a chicken and egg thing...the buffalo had to be eliminated in order to create habitat for American farmers and cattlemen. And as this habitat was made for them, it permanently restricted its use by buffalo.

Americans had little use for buffalo other than limited hide requirements. Cattle were the preferred meat, and farming the preferred societal occupation.

The buffalo HAD to go to civilize the continent, no two ways about it. That the Indians helped us to do this, that was fine by the Americans. The Indians all had to take up farming, anyway, so they may as well help get rid of all those pesky bison herds.

Clair

PS, btw, I have a small bison herd living on a farm near my own farm in KY. Wonderful beasts, if you keep them within their fence. <g>

[crzhrs]

According to Colonel Homer W. Wheeler, an officer who fought with the United States' Fifth and Eleventh Cavalry for 35 years and who lived to write about his expeditions out West, "Millions of Buffalo were slaughtered for the hides and meat, principally for the hide. Some of the expert hunters made considerable money at that occupation. (Buffalo Days)

In 1873 over 750,000 hides were shipped on the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad alone, and it is estimated that over 7.5 million buffalo were killed from 1872 to 1874. (General Pope and U.S. Indian Policy)

The Indians could never kill in the numbers that White Market Hunters could . . . nor could they travel with the hides like the Hide Hunters could with their big wagons.

<Americans had little use for buffalo other than limited hide requirements. Cattle were the preferred meat, and farming the preferred societal occupation>

Only because cattle industry was lobbying for it. The buffalo was FREE meat rather than having to raise it, which most Americans in cities couldn't do.

Sorta like solar power which is free once you have a system . . . the oil industry is petrified of people producing their own power so they are continually pushing for more drilling rather than alternative energy (which is a whole other topic)

Big business was just as big and influential back in the 1800s as it is now.

[conz]

Jun 23, 2009 10:50:32 GMT -6 crzhrs said:

Big business was just as big and influential back in the 1800s as it is now.

No doubt about that!

Clair

[ignimbrite]

Just out of curiosity I googled "buffalo jump" prefaced by individual states and provinces. It came up with 4 in Montana (including the one on the Rosebud battlefield), 2 in Alberta and one each in Utah, South Dakota and Wyoming. The conditions needed for a good buffalo jump are difficult to find. As an article on the Head Smashed In Buffalo Jump says, "Buffalo jumps are surprisingly scarce." It not only needs a cliff but a grassy gathering basin beyond the cliff and an area below the jump for a camp and processing area.

A buffalo seminar I was at in Yellowstone several years ago mentioned the fact that historically bison hides were in high demand for making leather drive belts for industrial machinery. The buffalo hide made a longer lasting and tougher belt than cow leather and so was preferred. I always wondered about how many people wanted a buffalo hide coat or rug. That kind of demand never seemed large enough to account for the number of hides shipped.

It was also discussed that the buffalo robe trade of the mid-1800's was particularly hard on the herds. The best robes were made from the young female bison just before rut. Those animals were sought out and killed which had a major impact on the reproductive rate. Since an average female bison lives 10 to 12 years and has the potential to have a calf every year after age 2, that's 8 to 10 buffalo that didn't even get born.

Ruth

[AZ Ranger]

Jun 23, 2009 9:06:42 GMT -6 crzhrs said:

<It was the loss of habitat that reduced the bison in the end>

That may be true for wildlife now and in the near past . . . but in the latter part of the 19th century the Plains area was still mostly undeveloped with few non-Whites.

You still haven't addressed that reproduction was greater than the kill of 3 million per year. Habitat includes factors such as hiding places. The horse reduced the beneficial cover factor of the habitat along with the train. At one time all they had to do is run and avoid cliffs in good habitat.

[crzhrs]

<You still haven't addressed that reproduction was greater than the kill of 3 million per year>

Obviously if you kill more animals than they can reproduce it will greatly affect viability. That's why some US states have "bucks only" hunting season when numbers are low.

I don't think horses affected the number of buffalo. In addition at one time there were millions of antelope and elk that were on the plains, plus millions of prairie dogs, sage grouse, prairie grizzlies & wolves and countless other wildlife.

Apparently there was enough room for all those animals AND Indians without them being hunted to extinction PRIOR to Whites arriving who not only wiped out animals but destroyed and altered the Great Plains until there is only a small fraction of original priarie left.

[conz]

Jun 24, 2009 7:35:35 GMT -6 crzhrs said:

Apparently there was enough room for all those animals AND Indians without them being hunted to extinction PRIOR to Whites arriving who not only wiped out animals but destroyed and altered the Great Plains until there is only a small fraction of original priarie left.

This may not be a valid assumption. The Indians very well could have made the bison extinct all by themselves, without any white help. This is rather a rule for human interaction with the environment when factors change, such as moving a new population west into the bison's main foraging areas (Sioux migration) and adding horses to these people, vastly increasing their killing capability.

It may have taken longer, but there is no reason to presume that eventually the Sioux would have exterminated the bison, just because they could. This is rather the rule, rather than the exception, in human experience, I think.

Clair

PS, may add to this thread, "A whole bunch of dead buffalo!"

[crzhrs]

<but there is no reason to presume that eventually the Sioux would have exterminated the bison, just because they could.

Could is one thing, but would they?

Anything is possible with humanity involved, but to think the Plains Indians would exterminate their most sacred animal is hard to believe.

[AZ Ranger]

I would suggest that the horse played a major role in all aspects of Indian life by those that were hunters and caused a greater expansion to the western plains habitat of the buffalo.

Habitat is not just food and water. That exists still today. Cover includes hiding places and is a necessary component. The horse helped to reduce available hiding cover. It allowed a for more efficient methods used used by predator,man, to follow the herds.

The stress of being chased all of the time takes it toll on the condition of the animals and can have an effect on reproductive rates.

I see no particular conservation efforts by Indians. For example did they decide not to kill a cow with a red calf. What I see is efficiency of use of materials available brought about by the nomadic life style and the simple tools available at the time. Survival causes one to use every bit of animal and natural materials there were no other alternatives.

It seems funny to me that I ride in country that has lots of broken pottery and I think that is that is great and then further down the highway on roads on the reservation there are piles of broken wine bottles and beer bottles and I consider it littering.