Nations Before Borders
Long before Saskatchewan, North Dakota, or South Dakota existed, the northern plains were home to Indigenous peoples whose territories, trade routes, and relationships paid no attention to lines that wouldn't be drawn for centuries.
Major Nations of the Region:
- Lakota, Dakota, Nakota (Sioux): The Great Sioux Nation once controlled much of the northern plains. The 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty recognized their sovereignty over a vast territory including the Black Hills.
- Cree: Plains Cree territory extended across what is now Saskatchewan and into Montana.
- Saulteaux (Ojibwe): Present throughout the region, particularly in the eastern portions.
- Assiniboine: Closely related to the Sioux, territory spanning the current border region.
- Métis: A distinct people arising from Indigenous-European contact, with strong presence in both Saskatchewan and North Dakota (historically).
How the Border Divided
The 49th parallel, established by the 1818 Convention and subsequent treaties, cut across Indigenous territories with no Indigenous consultation:
- Families were separated
- Seasonal movements were disrupted
- Trade networks were severed
- Different colonial powers (Britain/Canada vs. United States) imposed different policies on the same peoples
The consequences persist. Indigenous peoples crossing the border face the same immigration controls as anyone else, despite treaty provisions that were meant to guarantee free passage. The Jay Treaty (1794) promised Indigenous peoples the right to cross freely; this right has been inconsistently honoured.
Different Systems, Same Struggles
Indigenous peoples on both sides of the border face similar challenges but within different legal and political systems:
| Canada (Saskatchewan) | United States (Dakotas) | |
|---|---|---|
| Legal Framework | Indian Act, Treaties, Self-Government Agreements | Federal Trust Responsibility, Tribal Sovereignty, Reservations |
| Land Base | Reserves (typically smaller, scattered) | Reservations (often larger, consolidated) |
| Self-Governance | Increasing, through modern treaties | Tribal governments with significant sovereignty |
| Healthcare | Non-Insured Health Benefits + provincial coverage | Indian Health Service (chronically underfunded) |
| Education | Mix of federal, provincial, and band-controlled | Bureau of Indian Education + tribal + public |
Neither system works perfectly. Both have histories of colonization, forced assimilation, and broken promises.
What Integration Could Mean
Opportunities:
- Reunification of divided nations and families
- Potential extension of Canadian treaty rights frameworks to Dakota communities
- Access to Canadian reconciliation processes (Truth and Reconciliation Commission implementation)
- Healthcare improvements (Canadian universal coverage vs. underfunded IHS)
- Possible resolution of land claims through Canadian frameworks
Concerns:
- US tribal sovereignty is in some ways stronger than Canadian self-government—would this be lost?
- ANCSA-style claims (Alaska Native) vs. Canadian treaty processes—which would apply?
- Some Indigenous peoples might not want to change legal frameworks they've adapted to
- Reconciliation in Canada has been slow and incomplete—would this be an improvement?
The Black Hills Question
The Black Hills (Pahá Sápa) remain the most significant outstanding Indigenous land claim in the region. The Supreme Court ruled the taking unconstitutional in 1980. Integration would not automatically resolve this, but it might open new approaches:
- Canadian courts might apply different precedents
- Canada's UNDRIP implementation (incomplete but advancing) offers different frameworks
- The political dynamics would shift entirely
What Do Indigenous Peoples Want?
This is not a question we can answer in a forum post. It must be answered by Indigenous peoples themselves, through their own governance processes. Any integration that affects Indigenous territories and rights must be developed with Indigenous leadership, not imposed upon them.
What we can say is that the status quo—an arbitrary border dividing Indigenous nations—was never their choice. Whatever comes next should be.
Questions for Discussion
- Should Indigenous nations have a formal role in any integration decision affecting their territories?
- How could cross-border Indigenous governance work in practice?
- What could Canada and the US each learn from the other's approach to Indigenous rights?
- Is integration an opportunity for reconciliation, or does it risk imposing another colonial framework?
This forum explores Indigenous perspectives on prairie integration—the histories that preceded the border and the futures that might transcend it.