The Complicated Mountain
Mount Rushmore is many things simultaneously:
- An iconic American monument visited by 2+ million people annually
- A significant tourism economic driver for South Dakota
- A site carved into the Black Hills—land sacred to the Lakota people
- A monument to four presidents on land taken in violation of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty
- A technical marvel of sculpture and engineering
- A symbol that means very different things to different people
If South Dakota were to join Saskatchewan, what happens to this complicated mountain?
The Legal and Historical Context
The Black Hills (Pahá Sápa in Lakota) were guaranteed to the Great Sioux Nation "in perpetuity" by the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty. The discovery of gold led to the U.S. government seizing the land in 1877—a taking that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional in 1980.
The Court awarded $102 million in compensation. The Sioux nations refused the money, which has grown to over $2 billion in trust. Their position: the land was never for sale, and accepting payment would extinguish their claim.
Mount Rushmore was carved between 1927 and 1941—a monument to American expansion built on contested Indigenous land. The sculptor, Gutzon Borglum, had ties to the Ku Klux Klan, adding another layer of complexity.
Options Under Canadian Jurisdiction
If the Dakotas joined Saskatchewan, several approaches to Mount Rushmore could be considered:
Option 1: National Historic Site (American Heritage)
- Designate as a heritage site recognizing its historical significance
- Maintain for tourism and education
- Add interpretive content about Indigenous perspectives and treaty history
- Continue operations under Parks Canada or provincial authority
Option 2: Transfer to Indigenous Governance
- Return the Black Hills to Lakota stewardship as part of reconciliation
- Let Indigenous peoples decide the monument's future
- This could range from maintaining it as-is to gradual naturalization
- Aligns with UNDRIP and Canadian reconciliation commitments
Option 3: Shared Governance Model
- Joint management between provincial authorities and Lakota nations
- Revenue sharing from tourism
- Dual interpretation—both American history and Indigenous perspectives
- Potential addition of Indigenous memorial nearby
Option 4: Natural Reclamation
- Allow the monument to gradually weather and erode
- No active preservation, but no active destruction
- Document the process as a statement about impermanence
- Return the mountain to natural state over centuries
Crazy Horse Memorial
Seventeen miles from Rushmore, the Crazy Horse Memorial has been under construction since 1948. When complete, it will be the world's largest sculpture—a monument to the Lakota leader who resisted American expansion.
The memorial is privately funded and run by the Crazy Horse Memorial Foundation, not by tribal governments. Some Indigenous people support it; others consider it another desecration of sacred land. Its future would also need to be addressed.
Tourism Economics
Mount Rushmore generates significant economic activity:
- 2.5+ million annual visitors
- $200+ million in regional economic impact
- Supports hotels, restaurants, and services in the Rapid City area
Any decision about the monument's future would need to consider these economic realities and plan for transition if tourism patterns change.
Questions for Discussion
- Can Mount Rushmore be separated from its contested history, or is the history inseparable from the monument?
- Who should have the authority to decide the monument's future?
- Is there a way to honour both the artistic achievement and the Indigenous claims to the land?
- What role should economic considerations play in decisions about cultural heritage sites?
- How do other countries handle monuments with complicated legacies?
This forum explores one of the most complex questions in any integration scenario: what to do with a monument that means completely different things to different people.