Background and Context
The Indian Relocation Act of 1956 was a federal program designed to move Native Americans off reservations and into cities, with the stated goal of improving their economic prospects. In practice, it was a core piece of the broader termination era, a period when the U.S. government actively tried to dissolve the special legal relationship between tribes and the federal government. The act reshaped Native American demographics in ways that are still felt today.
Post-World War II Era
The years after World War II brought rapid urbanization and industrialization across the country. For Native Americans, this period carried specific significance. Roughly 25,000 Native Americans had served in the military during the war, and many returned having experienced life far beyond their reservations. At the same time, the federal government was looking to cut spending, and officials increasingly viewed financial obligations to tribes as a burden they wanted to shed.
Termination Policy Origins
The relocation program didn't appear out of nowhere. It grew from a broader assimilationist agenda that gained momentum in the 1940s and 1950s. The idea was to end federal recognition and support for tribes entirely.
- House Concurrent Resolution 108 (1953) formally declared the government's intent to terminate the special status of tribes "as rapidly as possible"
- Public Law 280 (1953) transferred criminal jurisdiction over tribal lands to certain state governments
- Supporters framed termination as "freeing" Native Americans from federal control, but the effect was to strip tribes of sovereignty and resources
Urban Migration Trends
Even before the formal relocation program, Native Americans had been moving to cities on their own. Wartime defense industry jobs in places like Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area drew many off reservations. The lack of economic opportunity on reservations pushed others toward cities independently. This voluntary migration gave federal officials a foundation to build a more structured relocation effort.
Indian Relocation Act Overview
Officially known as Public Law 959 (also called the Adult Vocational Training Program), the act was signed into law in 1956. It created a voluntary program offering Native Americans financial assistance and job training if they agreed to move to designated urban areas.
Key Provisions
- Financial assistance for moving expenses and initial housing costs
- Job training and placement services in urban areas
- Orientation sessions about urban life before departure
- The program was technically voluntary, though many participants later described feeling pressured to enroll
Target Populations
The program focused on young, working-age Native Americans, particularly those from tribes facing severe economic hardship or already slated for termination. Whole families were encouraged to relocate together. Elderly individuals, people with disabilities, and those the BIA considered unlikely to "succeed" in cities were generally excluded.
Implementation Timeline
- Early 1950s: Pilot relocation programs launched in select cities before the act was formally passed
- 1956: The Indian Relocation Act became law, expanding and formalizing the program
- Late 1950s–1960s: The program grew to include multiple urban centers across the country
- 1970s: Policy shifted toward self-determination, and formal relocation efforts wound down
Goals and Objectives
The program's stated goal was to improve economic conditions for Native Americans. Its unstated goals were to reduce federal spending on tribes and to accelerate assimilation into mainstream American society.
Assimilation Efforts
Federal policymakers saw relocation as a way to break down tribal identity. The program encouraged English language use, participation in the urban workforce, and adoption of mainstream cultural norms. The underlying assumption was that tribal affiliations and collective identities were obstacles to individual economic success.
Economic Integration
On paper, the economic logic was straightforward: reservations had few jobs, cities had many. The program offered vocational training in trades with high labor demand and aimed to move participants toward financial independence. Homeownership and participation in urban consumer culture were held up as markers of success.
Cultural Dissolution Concerns
Many Native communities recognized from the start that the program's economic promises came with a steep cultural cost. Policymakers openly viewed traditional Native cultures as barriers to "progress." Weakening ties to tribal lands, communal economies, and collective governance was not an unintended side effect; it was part of the design.
Bureau of Indian Affairs Role
The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) was the federal agency responsible for running the relocation program. It coordinated between reservation offices and urban field offices, handling everything from transportation logistics to job placement.
Relocation Programs
BIA field offices in destination cities were supposed to help relocatees get settled. In practice, the support was often thin:
- Orientation sessions covered basic expectations of urban life
- The BIA arranged transportation from reservations to cities
- Financial assistance typically covered moving costs and the first month's rent, but little beyond that
- Follow-up support after the initial move was frequently inadequate
Job Placement Services
The BIA conducted skills assessments and offered vocational training in various trades. Staff developed relationships with urban employers and helped with job searches and interview preparation. The quality of these services varied widely depending on the local office.
Housing Assistance
Finding housing was one of the biggest challenges. The BIA helped relocatees locate affordable rentals and provided information on lease agreements. But racial discrimination in urban housing markets severely limited options, and many families ended up in substandard housing in low-income neighborhoods.
Urban Destinations
The program directed Native Americans to major metropolitan areas chosen for their job markets and existing infrastructure.
Major Relocation Cities
- Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Oakland received large numbers of relocatees, making California home to some of the largest urban Indian populations in the country
- Chicago became a major hub, particularly for tribes from the Upper Midwest
- Denver drew many people from Plains tribes
- Other destinations included Seattle, Salt Lake City, Dallas, and Minneapolis-St. Paul
Employment Opportunities
Urban jobs generally paid better than anything available on reservations. Many relocatees found work in manufacturing, construction, and the service sector. Some pursued careers in healthcare, education, and skilled trades. Factory and defense-related work was especially common in the early years of the program.
Cultural Challenges
The adjustment was often jarring. Relocatees faced:
- Culture shock from the pace and anonymity of urban life
- Language barriers for those whose first language was not English
- Discrimination in housing, employment, and everyday social interactions
- Deep isolation from traditional cultural practices, ceremonies, and the land itself
Impact on Tribal Communities
The relocation program didn't just affect the people who left. It fundamentally changed the communities they left behind.
Population Shifts
As working-age adults moved to cities, reservation populations skewed older and younger. Some tribes lost a significant portion of their members. Meanwhile, new urban Indian communities took shape in cities across the country, creating a geographic split in Native American life that persists today.
Reservation Depopulation
The loss of skilled workers and potential leaders weakened many reservations. Reduced populations also meant reduced federal funding, since allocations were often tied to population counts. Smaller tribes already targeted for termination became even more vulnerable. Maintaining tribal governance and community institutions grew harder with fewer people.
Traditional Lifestyle Disruption
When young adults and families left, they took potential with them. The intergenerational transmission of cultural knowledge, language, and traditional practices was disrupted. Extended family networks were broken apart. Traditional economic activities like farming, ranching, and crafts suffered from the loss of labor.
Urban Indian Experiences
Life in the city was a mixed experience. Some relocatees found genuine economic opportunity. Many others encountered hardship that the program's promises had not prepared them for.
Adjustment Difficulties
The cost of living in cities was often higher than expected. Without extended family or tribal support networks, many relocatees experienced isolation and mental health struggles. Navigating unfamiliar systems like public transportation, urban healthcare, and city schools added daily stress. Unemployment and underemployment were common, especially for those who faced discrimination or whose vocational training didn't match available jobs.
Community Formation
Despite the challenges, urban Indians built new communities. Urban Indian centers sprang up in major cities, offering cultural activities, social services, and a gathering place for people from many different tribes. These centers helped foster pan-Indian identities, where shared experiences of urban life and common struggles bridged tribal differences. Urban settings also became incubators for new forms of Native American political activism.
Cultural Identity Preservation
Many urban Indians worked hard to maintain their tribal heritage. They organized powwows and cultural events in cities, established urban Indian health clinics and education programs, and traveled back to reservations for ceremonies and family gatherings when they could. Cultural preservation in the city required deliberate effort in a way it hadn't on the reservation.
Criticism and Opposition
Opposition to the relocation program came from tribal leaders, Native advocates, and eventually from many relocatees themselves.
Tribal Resistance
- Some tribal councils passed formal resolutions opposing the program
- Leaders argued relocation threatened both tribal sovereignty and cultural survival
- Several tribes developed their own local job training and economic development programs as alternatives
- Community leaders encouraged members to stay and build up reservation economies instead
Cultural Preservation Arguments
Critics emphasized that relocation severed people from ancestral lands, sacred sites, and the ecosystems they had stewarded for generations. They pointed out that Native languages, spiritual practices, and traditional ecological knowledge all depended on community continuity and connection to place. Extended family networks and communal ways of life couldn't be replicated in a city apartment.
Broken Promises Allegations
Many relocatees felt they had been misled. The jobs were not always as good as promised. The BIA's support often evaporated after the first few weeks. Some participants described the program as coercive, with BIA agents pressuring them to sign up. Critics also pointed to a fundamental contradiction: the government was spending money to move people off reservations while neglecting its treaty obligations to develop reservation economies in the first place.
Long-term Consequences
The relocation program reshaped Native American life in ways that outlasted the program itself.
Urban Indian Demographics
By 1980, more than half of all Native Americans in the United States lived in urban areas rather than on reservations. This was a dramatic reversal from just a few decades earlier. Large, diverse urban Indian communities became permanent features of cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, and Minneapolis. Intermarriage rates between Native Americans and other ethnic groups also increased in urban settings.
Reservation Economic Effects
Reservations that lost large portions of their working-age population faced long-term economic consequences. The "brain drain" effect meant that educated and skilled tribal members often stayed in cities even after the formal program ended. Some tribes responded by pursuing new economic strategies, including casino gaming and tourism, to create jobs that might draw people back or keep them from leaving.
Cultural Revitalization Movements
Paradoxically, the relocation experience helped spark movements to reclaim and strengthen Native identity. Urban Indians who had experienced cultural loss firsthand often became the most passionate advocates for revitalization. These movements led to the establishment of Native American studies programs at universities, new artistic and literary traditions exploring themes of identity and displacement, and organized efforts to revive endangered languages.
Legacy and Modern Implications
The effects of the Indian Relocation Act continue to shape Native American communities and federal policy.
Policy Reversal Efforts
The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 marked the formal end of the termination era. Federal policy shifted toward supporting tribal sovereignty and self-governance. Some tribes have since created programs encouraging members to return to reservations, and there has been increased investment in reservation-based economic development and capacity building.
Urban Indian Organizations
Urban Indian communities have built lasting institutions:
- The National Urban Indian Family Coalition advocates for the needs of Native Americans living in cities
- Urban Indian health organizations provide culturally appropriate healthcare
- Youth programs work to connect young urban Native Americans with their tribal heritage
- Urban powwows and cultural events remain vital for community cohesion
Contemporary Relocation Issues
Many Native Americans today move back and forth between reservations and cities for education or employment. Providing adequate services to geographically dispersed urban Indian populations remains a challenge. Federal responsibility toward urban Indians versus reservation-based tribal members is still debated. And for many urban Native Americans, questions of cultural identity and belonging remain deeply personal and unresolved.