Commentary

The 1864 Klamath Treaty and its Aftermath: A Legacy of Promises, Conflict, and Endurance

Special Commentary

Today I drew Counting Coup – victory card…

To know that I have honored
My words with my deeds.
Sweet Victory is shared by all,
In filling other’s needs.
Humankind rejoice!
The prize of Counting Coup,
Harmony and balance,
A peaceful world anew.

Scalps were not honorable prizes of Counting Coup before the Boat People came to Turtle Island. When in fact trappers and traders sold scalps to European curiosity seekers by those who sought money from the wealthy in Europe. The Warrior Clans began to retaliate.

In the original meaning, Counting Coup has been the act of victory, forward movement and the acknowledgement of right action.

The meaning of victory and honor would be profoundly tested in the decades following a momentous gathering at Council Grove near Fort Klamath in October 1864. There, representatives of three sovereign Native nations – the Klamath, Modoc, and Yahooskin Band of Snake Indians – met with federal officials to negotiate what would become one of the most significant treaties in Pacific Northwest history.

The Path to Treaty

Before the ink would dry on the treaty paper, these tribes had lived for thousands of years in a vast territory stretching across what is now southern Oregon and northern California. The Klamath people were masters of the marsh, their lives intertwined with the rhythms of the great Klamath Lake and its vital wocus (yellow water lily) harvests. The Modoc thrived in the lands around Tule Lake, their knowledge of the lava beds and high desert environment passed down through generations. The Yahooskin Band of Snake Indians, skilled hunters and gatherers, moved with the seasons through the eastern territories.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is treaty-of-1864-1024x773.jpeg
Source – KlamathTribes.org

Before the 1864 Treaty: The McKee Negotiations of 1851
(see PDF at end)

The story of tribal-federal relations in the Klamath Basin begins well before the 1864 treaty. In 1851, federal Indian Agent Redick McKee undertook a significant but often overlooked diplomatic mission that would set important precedents for future negotiations.

McKee’s journey brought him to the ancestral territories of three distinct tribal groups: the Poh-lik (Lower Klamath), Peh-tsick (Upper Klamath), and Hoo-pah (Trinity River) tribes. These negotiations occurred during a pivotal moment in California’s history, as the Gold Rush was transforming the region’s demographic and political landscape.

The 1851 treaty negotiations reflected the complex dynamics of this transitional period. McKee, representing federal interests, sought to establish formal relationships with tribes who had their own sophisticated systems of governance and land management. The resulting agreement attempted to balance tribal sovereignty with increasing pressure from American settlement.

Several key elements of the 1851 treaty would later influence the 1864 negotiations. McKee’s agreement recognized distinct tribal territories and attempted to protect certain traditional rights – concepts that would reappear in the later treaty. However, the 1851 treaty also revealed the challenges of cross-cultural diplomacy, as American legal concepts often clashed with traditional tribal understandings of land use and sovereignty.

Importantly, the 1851 McKee Treaty established a pattern of federal-tribal relations in the region that would carry forward to 1864. It introduced formal diplomatic protocols between the U.S. government and the tribes of the Klamath Basin, while also highlighting the difficulties of enforcing treaty provisions in rapidly changing circumstances.

The thirteen years between McKee’s negotiations and the 1864 treaty saw dramatic changes in the region. White settlement increased, traditional tribal lands came under growing pressure, and federal Indian policy evolved. Understanding this earlier treaty helps explain why the 1864 agreement took the form it did, and why certain provisions – particularly those protecting traditional rights and resources – were so crucial to the tribes involved.

This historical context reminds us that the 1864 Klamath Treaty wasn’t created in isolation, but rather emerged from a longer process of negotiation, adaptation, and resistance as tribal nations sought to protect their sovereignty and way of life in an increasingly challenging environment.

178907837-klamath-1864-treaty

The 1864 treaty negotiations took place against a backdrop of increasing pressure from white settlement and the federal government’s broader policy of consolidating Native peoples onto reservations. The document that emerged from these talks would prove to be far more than a simple land transaction – it was a complex agreement that would reshape the future of three nations.

A Web of Promises When President Ulysses S. Grant finally ratified the treaty on February 17, 1870 – nearly six years after its signing – he formalized an intricate set of mutual obligations. The tribes would cede vast territories but retain crucial rights within a new reservation. These included exclusive fishing rights in reservation waters and the ability to gather traditional foods like wocus, berries, and roots – resources that had sustained their people for countless generations.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Screenshot-2025-01-10-at-10.01.36%E2%80%AFAM-1024x560.png

The federal government’s commitments were equally substantial. Rather than a simple payment for land, the treaty established a 15-year schedule of payments intended to support tribal development. The government promised to build and maintain sawmills, flour mills, and schools. They committed to providing specialized workers – blacksmiths, carpenters, teachers, and others – who would help bridge traditional ways of life with new economic realities.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Screenshot-2025-01-10-at-10.05.44%E2%80%AFAM-1024x582.png

Seeds of Conflict

However, the treaty’s implementation revealed deep flaws in federal Indian policy. The forced coexistence of different tribes on a single reservation created tensions. Delayed payments and inadequate resources strained tribal resources. For the Modoc people in particular, life on the Klamath Reservation proved untenable.

However, the treaty’s implementation would soon lead to one of the most significant conflicts in Western American history. The Modoc War of 1872-1873 erupted largely from tensions surrounding forced relocation and poor conditions on the Klamath Reservation. The conflict’s aftermath proved devastating for the Modoc people. Following their defeat, 153 Modoc were forcibly relocated to Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma) as prisoners of war, while those who hadn’t participated in the conflict remained on Oregon’s Klamath Reservation, effectively splitting the tribe.

Klamath Indian tribe in Southern Oregon: a tribe that today has gone from being one of the richest in America to one of the poorest, this happened in just a few short years how it happened took much longer.

In 1872, a group of Modoc led by Kintpuash (Captain Jack) left the reservation, returning to their ancestral lands around Tule Lake. What followed would become known as the Modoc War – a conflict that saw roughly 60 Modoc warriors and their families hold off U.S. Army forces for months in the natural fortress of the lava beds. The war’s tragic conclusion – the capture and execution of Modoc leaders and the forced relocation of 153 Modoc to Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma) – would split the tribe for generations.

A Living Document

Despite these painful chapters, the treaty’s legal framework established enduring principles that continue to influence tribal-federal relations. The Supreme Court has consistently held that such treaties must be interpreted as the tribes would have understood them at the time of signing – recognizing them as agreements between sovereign nations rather than mere property transactions.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Screenshot-2025-01-10-at-10.16.29%E2%80%AFAM-1024x238.png

Today, the 1864 treaty remains very much alive. Its provisions influence modern issues from water rights to resource management. The Klamath Tribes – having survived termination in 1954 and achieved restoration in 1986 – continue to assert their treaty-protected rights and maintain their cultural traditions.

The Legacy Continues

Understanding this complex history helps illuminate why these treaties cannot be reduced to simple property transactions. They represent living agreements between nations, their provisions and promises as relevant today as they were in 1864. As we reflect on this legacy, we must acknowledge both the historical injustices and the enduring strength of tribal nations who continue to fight for their rights and preserve their cultural heritage.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Screenshot-2025-01-10-at-10.17.00%E2%80%AFAM-1024x571.png

Image credits – Klamath Tribe Shared History Powerpoint

References & Research Deep Dives

Government and Legal Resources:

Historical Organizations:

Tribal Resources:

Academic Sources:

Educational Resources:

Additional Research Materials:

Important Note: As with many historical documents, some of these materials may require institutional access or be available only by request.

Bonus material: Treaty at Camp Klamath signed by Redick McKee, 1851

A treaty was made and concluded between Redick McKee and the chiefs, captains and headmen of the Poh-lik, or lower Klamath, Peh-tsick, or upper Klamath, and Hoo-pah, or Trinity river tribes of Indians in California.

p15952coll4_666

Arrest Avery Theatre bookings chinook CHSRA coho Copco Dam Removal Dunsmuir Dunsmuir Elementary Easter Egg Hunt Etna EtnaCa FERC Forest Service gardening Irongate Iron Gate Jail KCOC klamath Klamath National Forest klamath river Klamath River Dams KNF KRRC McCloud Montague Mount Shasta Mt Shasta obituary Rodeo Salmon Scott River Scott Valley Scott Valley Agriculture Water Alliance Siskiyou Siskiyou County Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors Siskiyou Golden Fair USDA KNF weedca YPD Yreka Yreka City Council

One Comment

  1. Madea Freeman

    good stuff Jay!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*