500 Sioux

36 Chains, peed in my breeches.

This would be about one mile south and four to five miles west of present day Benkelman, Nebraska. One mile to the west of the Sioux encampment is a grain elevator at Doane. Amtrak runs smack through the middle of the Sioux encampment. The links below show what happened one day short of exactly 139 years after the government survey at the Doane elevator. On August 26, 2011 the Amtrak California Zephyr struck a crane that was present to raze the old elevator resulting in the derailment of the train and 20 people being injured. In the first link, between about 1:00 and 2:00, you can see what the area looks like today.

[MEDIA=youtube]prbd8-RoEj4[/MEDIA]

[MEDIA=youtube]hYty8bTO7Gk[/MEDIA]

This is very familiar turf to Mrs. Cow as she grew up on a farm not far from there. In fact, their north farm would be about nine miles from the Sioux encampment site and one half mile into Kansas. Geezers may recall the very popular TV western, Wagon Train. The original wagon master was played by Ward Bond. Benkelman proudly claims him as a native.

Thanks for sharing, I find this kind of stuff of great interest, because it is something we don't hear about all that often. Because I work in an area that was mainly Comanche, that's how I think of the Indians interactions with surveyors. The thoughts of just waltzing into a Comanche camp would result in a sudden stop of chaining!

Monte, post: 398639, member: 11913 wrote: ...The thoughts of just waltzing into a Comanche camp would result in a sudden stop of chaining!

I'm inclined to challenge George Fairfield's crews ability to properly identify the inhabitants of the camp, or even the actual number. At that time there were Northern Cheyennes, Arapahoes and Oglala Sioux occupying the area. The Oglala Sioux were not necessarily known for their tolerance of the white man, as were most of the other tribes I mentioned. Only two winters previous a Northern Cheyenne warrior "Hook Nose" that was called Roman Nose by the white man was killed in a battle not far from the site in question.

Reports indicate a volunteer force of frontiersman under the command of Lt. Geo. Forsyth engaged hostile tribal forces that had been slaughtering white settlers in what came to be known as the battle of Beecher's Island. Lt. Beecher being Forsyth's second in command. It apparently was the first time northern plains tribes had encountered hostile fire in the form of a repeating carbine. The resulting native body count rivaled anything to date. It was written Lt. G.A. Custer called it the "greatest battle ever on the plains". Down here we would probably call it a "turkey shoot".

This encampment noted in the survey was only a short day's ride from that battle site only two winters later. I question whether the crews actually "chained through" the settlement or just pencil whipped it.

Whichever tribe (it was probably several) was settled along the crest overlooking the Arikaree Fork it apparently was a large encampment. Plains Indians gathered together for strength in numbers. Small groups of Indians hunted, stole and tormented settlers with opportunity, large groups were formed for offensive tactics, gathering usually in winter near buffalo herds. I truly cannot imagine a survey crew waltzing into a camp of 500 at that time without being immediately relieved of their boots, food, whisky, firearms, scalps and heartbeats.

Sorry to question fellow surveyors duly deputized by the U.S. Surveyor General, but I'm not buying their story completely.

They wouldn't have stumbled upon the settlement. They could have seen it for several miles looking down the river valley. Trees are few and far between still today.

The nearby town of Benkelman did not appear until 1880. From Benkelman (Pop. 1000 +/-) to the nearest bigger town is 40 miles west passing very close to the Sioux encampment. That would be Wray, Colorado (Pop. 2350 +/-). Midway along that route is the only other named place, Haigler, Nebraska (Pop. 120 +/-). The nearest city in Kansas is Bird City (Pop. 450 +/-). Wray was founded in 1882 and Bird City in 1887.

It is evident the population of settlers in the area of the Sioux encampment was extremely low for many years. The current population of all of Dundy County, Nebraska, excluding the 1000 in Benkleman and 120 in Haigler, is about 900 spread over about 920 square miles.

Holy Cow, post: 398600, member: 50 wrote: This is very familiar turf to Mrs. Cow as she grew up on a farm not far from there. In fact, their north farm would be about nine miles from the Sioux encampment site and one half mile into Kansas. Geezers may recall the very popular TV western, Wagon Train. The original wagon master was played by Ward Bond. Benkelman proudly claims him as a native.

I remember seeing some of those derailed train cars. Seems like they left them there for weeks or months. The clarinet adds a lot to that second video.

Mrs. Cow must be familiar with horse thief cave. I took the kids there earlier this fall. We enjoyed the scenery of the Arickaree Breaks, Devil's Gap, Three Corners, and Beecher Island.

paden cash, post: 398650, member: 20 wrote: I'm inclined to challenge George Fairfield's crews ability to properly identify the inhabitants of the camp, or even the actual number. At that time there were Northern Cheyennes, Arapahoes and Oglala Sioux occupying the area. The Oglala Sioux were not necessarily known for their tolerance of the white man, as were most of the other tribes I mentioned. Only two winters previous a Northern Cheyenne warrior "Hook Nose" that was called Roman Nose by the white man was killed in a battle not far from the site in question.

Reports indicate a volunteer force of frontiersman under the command of Lt. Geo. Forsyth engaged hostile tribal forces that had been slaughtering white settlers in what came to be known as the battle of Beecher's Island. Lt. Beecher being Forsyth's second in command. It apparently was the first time northern plains tribes had encountered hostile fire in the form of a repeating carbine. The resulting native body count rivaled anything to date. It was written Lt. G.A. Custer called it the "greatest battle ever on the plains". Down here we would probably call it a "turkey shoot".

This encampment noted in the survey was only a short day's ride from that battle site only two winters later. I question whether the crews actually "chained through" the settlement or just pencil whipped it.

Whichever tribe (it was probably several) was settled along the crest overlooking the Arikaree Fork it apparently was a large encampment. Plains Indians gathered together for strength in numbers. Small groups of Indians hunted, stole and tormented settlers with opportunity, large groups were formed for offensive tactics, gathering usually in winter near buffalo herds. I truly cannot imagine a survey crew waltzing into a camp of 500 at that time without being immediately relieved of their boots, food, whisky, firearms, scalps and heartbeats.

Sorry to question fellow surveyors duly deputized by the U.S. Surveyor General, but I'm not buying their story completely.

I'm inclined to agree with your assessment. That pretty well sums up the history as I understand it. The Sioux were generally north of here, but it would not be out of the question for them to be in the area. I cant imagine that there would have been 500 Cheyennes together after Beecher Island and Summit Springs, so if there were 500, maybe they were Sioux. I would think that 5 chains would have been close enough to the camp.

This survey was about 60 miles upstream from the Nelson Buck massacre, which was 3 years earlier.

I was just at Beecher Island this morning. We attend church there.

Holy Cow, post: 398656, member: 50 wrote: They wouldn't have stumbled upon the settlement. They could have seen it for several miles looking down the river valley. Trees are few and far between still today.

That's what I was thinking. Both parties would have seen each other for miles. They could probably tell for some time that their next random and true line was going to go right through the Indian camp.

I was wondering how the field notes could be so clean and the writing so neat and clear while chaining through an Indian camp.

lmbrls, post: 399008, member: 6823 wrote: I was wondering how the field notes could be so clean and the writing so neat and clear while chaining through an Indian camp.

Reminds me of a funny story.

I had a party chief that would always embellish about how much he had gotten done in a day. One sunny afternoon he came back into the office proclaiming he had 'finished' all of the cross-sections in a particular area, even the ones that were a little difficult to get at...but he also said he needed to go back out there the next day to remark and reference some BMs. I figured he hadn't really finished, but I played his silly game and let him go back out there the next day...trouble was it was a drizzly mess that morning. He was adamant and went anyway.

When he brought his field book in that afternoon I could tell the last half-dozen pages had been written in the drizzle (us old guys KNOW these things)...but he was smart enough to either place the book up by the windshield defroster or he dropped by his girlfriend's place to use her blow dryer. The smeared pages were dry, but had a different stiffness that the other pages.

I never let on...I just let him keep fibbing to himself. 😉

lmbrls, post: 399008, member: 6823 wrote: I was wondering how the field notes could be so clean and the writing so neat and clear while chaining through an Indian camp.

Those "field notes", like all such "field notes", aren't the actual notes that were taken on the spot in the field. They are a transcription (at best). Some field notes are even typed.

I don't think the GLO "field notes" were written in the field. The true field notes were copied into books in the office and then thrown away. A crime in my mind, but SOP at the time.

I might wonder if they chained it twice,,,,,,,pretty sure that didn't happen in these parts, despite what it says in the notes.;)

Having a "scratch field book" was a firing offense most places I have worked. Of course, I never will never forget the look the boss gave me when I turned in a field book that had fallen off the top of the truck and hit by a semi. Another time, a party chief had a field book fall out of his pocket and land open page on the subject of his out in the woods squat. As field books could not be altered, he sent it in to the Corp office. His adherence to the policy was noted but not well received.

lmbrls, post: 399023, member: 6823 wrote: Having a "scratch field book" was a firing offense most places I have worked. Of course, I never will never forget the look the boss gave me when I turned in a field book that had fallen off the top of the truck and hit by a semi. Another time, a party chief had a field book fall out of his pocket and land open page on the subject of his out in the woods squat. As field books could not be altered, he sent it in to the Corp office. His adherence to the policy was noted but not well received.

Yeah...something tells me that wasn't so much an accident as it was a mess-age. 🙂

paden cash, post: 398650, member: 20 wrote: The Oglala Sioux were not necessarily known for their tolerance of the white man,

Especially when Crazy Horse became their "leader".

FL/GA PLS., post: 399088, member: 379 wrote: Especially when Crazy Horse became their "leader".

From what I've gleaned from written history (which can be misleading) the Sioux weren't necessarily a vicious people. And I say that knowing a lot of innocent people died at their hands. But the American military was allowed to hunt them down and attempt to extinguish them mercilessly. I really think they were probably only guilty of not wanting to be "screwed" with by the US military and rejecting the US government's desire to contain them inside a reservation. Eventually enough was enough and they saw all settlers as a hostile presence. The Battle of Little Bighorn is a good example of what can happen when you mess with a heavily populated native encampment.

paden cash, post: 399010, member: 20 wrote: Reminds me of a funny story.

I had a party chief that would always embellish about how much he had gotten done in a day. One sunny afternoon he came back into the office proclaiming he had 'finished' all of the cross-sections in a particular area, even the ones that were a little difficult to get at...but he also said he needed to go back out there the next day to remark and reference some BMs. I figured he hadn't really finished, but I played his silly game and let him go back out there the next day...trouble was it was a drizzly mess that morning. He was adamant and went anyway.

When he brought his field book in that afternoon I could tell the last half-dozen pages had been written in the drizzle (us old guys KNOW these things)...but he was smart enough to either place the book up by the windshield defroster or he dropped by his girlfriend's place to use her blow dryer. The smeared pages were dry, but had a different stiffness that the other pages.

I never let on...I just let him keep fibbing to himself. 😉

My experience with chronic liars is that they won't be wrong and they won't stop. You can blatantly catch them in a lie and they will still insist. It is just plain too frustrating to get into an argument with them and show them the absolute obvious truth. You just need to accept their deficiency and move on. Only when their lies are harming you or someone else is it wise to do something.