Living Law,
Living LandSupport land rights

Violation

Ute: the 1868 Colorado reservation, Brunot (1873), the 1880 Act, 1881 removal, and Hagen v. Utah (1994)

Not yet reviewed by this nation. What follows comes from public records and research. It does not speak for the nation.

An 1868 treaty gave the Ute most of western Colorado and barred outsiders; cessions in 1873 and 1880 and removal in 1881 followed.

Treaty
Treaty with the Ute (1868), 15 Stat. 619; Brunot Agreement (1873-74); Act of June 15, 1880, 21 Stat. 199
Nations
Ute (Northern Ute/Uintah and Ouray, Ute Mountain Ute, Southern Ute)
When
1873-1905
Land affected
Nearly all of the western Colorado reservation; Uintah Valley reservation diminished.
Acreage
San Juan cession about 3.7 million acresnot yet checked against a source

What happened

The 1868 treaty with the Ute (15 Stat. 619; proclaimed November 6, 1868) set apart a large district of western Colorado "for the absolute and undisturbed use and occupation" of the named bands. In it the United States "solemnly" agreed that no persons except those authorized "shall ever be permitted to pass over, settle upon, or reside in the Territory described."

In the Brunot Agreement of September 13, 1873, the confederated Ute bands relinquished a portion of that reservation. Congress ratified it on April 29, 1874 (18 Stat. 36). The United States permitted hunting on the ceded land "so long as the game lasts and the Indians are at peace with the white people," and set up a trust fund paying $25,000 a year.

Aspen Journalism says that the government brought Ute representatives to Washington "to ink a capitulation — not a treaty — on March 6, 1880." Under it, the Uncompahgre and White River Utes were directed to move to the Uintah and Ouray reservations in Utah. In September 1881 troops under Gen. Ranald Mackenzie and Gen. Wesley Merritt moved against them. The same article says the Ute Commission oversaw $75,000 in payments for their surrendered lands.

Land opened in Utah later shrank too. In Hagen v. Utah (1994) the Supreme Court held, 7 to 2, that Congress diminished the Uintah Reservation, so the town of Myton is not Indian country.

Summarized with AI assistance from 4 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error

What the sources say, and how this was checked

Supported by the sources below; some details rest on one source.

  1. set apart for the absolute and undisturbed use and occupation of the Indians herein namedTreaty with the Ute, 1868, 15 Stat. 619, Tribal Treaties Database
  2. The United States shall permit the Ute Indians to hunt upon said lands so long as the game lastsBrunot Agreement, 1873, 18 Stat. 36, Tribal Treaties Database
  3. to ink a capitulation — not a treaty — on March 6, 1880Ute removal policy comes to a head in the 1887 Colorow War (Aspen Journalism)
  4. We conclude that the Uintah Indian Reservation has been diminished by Congress.Hagen v. Utah, 510 U.S. 399 (1994), Cornell LII

Research notes. Acreage of the 1873 cession (reported as about 3.7 million acres in Colorado Newsline's paywalled text) is not stated in the treaty page and is omitted. The 1880 Act (21 Stat. 199) text was not readable; the Brunot page notes it reaffirmed Article III, and Aspen Journalism describes the 1880 document as a capitulation. The $75,000 figure is Aspen Journalism's, citing the Ute Commission report. Hagen vote and justices are from the syllabus. No source opened here records a court finding that the 1868 exclusion promise was breached. Ute tribal sources were not consulted.

Treaty or agreementAct of CongressShapes from the 1899 federal record: approximate, not legal boundaries.

Who is doing the work

This history belongs to living nations. Start with them:

Working with these nations

Land return and Native-led work nearby

Native legal and land defense, nationally

Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.

Connections

These links were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.

Nations named 3

Located in 2

Taken to court in 1

Carried out through 1

Policy era 1

Land returns that respond to this 1

Concerns the instrument 1

Sources

  1. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-15/pdf/STATUTE-15-Pg619.pdfprimary record
  2. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-21/pdf/STATUTE-21-Pg199.pdfprimary record
  3. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunot_Agreementpointer
  4. narf.org/nill/bulletins/news/2026/land.htmlself-description
  5. supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/510/399/legal text copy
The record’s fields
What happened
Ute: the 1868 Colorado reservation, Brunot (1873), the 1880 Act, 1881 removal, and Hagen v. Utah (1994) -- The treaty of Mar. 2, 1868 (proclaimed Nov. 6, 1868) set aside the western portion of Colorado for the Ute's 'absolute and undisturbed use and occupation.' After silver was found in the San Juan Mountains (1872), the Brunot Agreement (ratified 1873) gave the United States the mineral-rich land. After the 1879 White River (Meeker) conflict, the Act of June 15, 1880 (ch. 223) accepted an agreement with the confederated Ute bands to sell their Colorado reservation and settle members in severalty, withheld the White River Utes' share until the 'guilty parties' were surrendered, and required consent of three-fourths of adult males. In 1881 the Uncompahgre and White River Ute were forced west to reservations in Utah. In Hagen v. Utah (Feb. 23, 1994) the Court held Congress diminished the Uintah Valley Reservation when it opened unallotted lands, so Myton is not Indian country.
Legal aftermath
Hagen (1994) treated the opened Uintah lands as no longer reservation for jurisdiction. Subsequent Ute/Utah jurisdiction litigation not verified this session. In 2026 press reports describe Utah legislative moves complicating Ute land-return hopes (headline only).
Kind
Violation
Confidence
Medium
Nation review
Not yet reviewed by this nation
Notes
  • Some details not yet checked against a source

Correct this record