Publication Information The main body of the Publication Information page contains all the metadata that HRAF holds for that document.
Author: Author's name as listed in Library of Congress records
Livelihood and tribal government on the Klamath Indian
Published in: if part or section of a book or monograph
Human organization -- Vol. 20
Published By: Original publisher
Human organization -- Vol. 20
Washington, D.C.: The Society for Applied Anthropology.
1962. 172-180 p.
By line: Author's name as appearing in the actual publication
HRAF Publication Information: New Haven, Conn.:
Human Relations Area Files, 1998. Computer File
Culture: Culture name from the Outline of World Cultures (OWC) with the alphanumberic OWC identifier in parenthesis.
Subjects: Document-level OCM identifiers given by the anthropology subject indexers at HRAF
Real property (423);
Tribe and nation (619);
Deliberative councils (646);
Public welfare (657);
Political parties (665);
Abstract: Brief abstract written by HRAF anthropologists who have done the subject indexing for the document
This article is an examination of the vitality and
effectiveness of the Klamath Indian tribal government and its relationship to the tribal
economy. By privatizing reservation land, the Dawes Act (1895) was designed to break up the
tribal 'mass' and to 'individualize' the Indians. However, in the case of the Klamath, a
large tract of forest land (860,000 acres), unsuitable for farming, continued to be held in
common and administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs which later leased it to commercial
lumber interests. In 1950, the per capita income earned by reservation Indians from
commercial lumbering exceeded the median county family income. This dependency on an
assured income and contentment with the status quo undermined Klamath economic
diversification and development, weakened tribal solidarity, and engendered general
political apathy. The more politically active did form factions and vied for control over
various executive committees within the General Council, however, the factions did not have
wide support because they did not control the tribes most valuable resource: its
Document Number: HRAF's in-house numbering system derived from the processing order of documents
Document ID: HRAF's unique document identifier. The first part is the OWC identifier and the second part is the document number in three digits.
Document Type: May include journal articles, essays, collections of essays, monographs or chapters/parts of monographs.
Language: Language that the document is written in
Includes bibliographical references
Field Date: The date the researcher conducted the fieldwork or archival research that produced the document
Evaluation: In this alphanumeric code, the first part designates the type of person writing the document, e.g. Ethnographer, Missionary, Archaeologist, Folklorist, Linguist, Indigene, and so on. The second part is a ranking done by HRAF anthropologists based on the strength of the source material on a scale of 1 to 5, as follows: 1 - poor; 2 - fair; 3 - good, useful data, but not uniformly excellent; 4 - excellent secondary data; 5 - excellent primary data
Analyst: The HRAF anthropologist who subject indexed the document and prepared other materials for the eHRAF culture/tradition collection.
Ian Skoggard ; 1996
Coverage Date: The date or dates that the information in the document pertains to (often not the same as the field date).
Coverage Place: Location of the research culture or tradition (often a smaller unit such as a band, community, or archaeological site)
Klamath County, Oregon, United States
LCSH: Library of Congress Subject Headings