Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-75

4.6 Cultural Resources 

Introduction 

Section 4.1 provides a definition of what constitutes a significant effect. Generally, a 

significant effect is determined with regards to context and intensity. Section 4.1 and 

Section 2.0 provide a definition and explanation of the possible taxation and jurisdictional 

scenarios that could apply to lands not conveyed into trust by the BIA. With respect to 

cultural resources, these scenarios have a potential effect to not only the resources but the 

Nation as well. Effects in this case can be direct, indirect, or cumulative. The Oneida are 

tied both culturally and spiritually to the 17,370 acres of land proposed for trust transfer. 

Potential effects therefore can not only occur to cultural resources, but to the rights of the 

Nation as well with respect to the possession, control or disposition of objects that are of 

human, funerary, sacred or patrimonial importance. One aspect of the purpose and need 

for the Proposed Action is the protection of Oneida historical and cultural sites. The 

geographic boundary for the consideration of effects includes Oneida and Madison 

Counties inclusive of the area considered to be within the Oneidas’ 300,000-acre 

reservation recognized in the 1794 Treaty of Canandaigua. For cultural resources, this 

geographic boundary is also considered the area of potential effect (APE). The timeframe 

for consideration of the cumulative effects analysis extends to 2011. This is the five-year 

planning horizon considered to be reasonable for evaluating the potential effects of the 

Proposed Action and the alternatives. Section 4.6.1 provides an assessment of effects to 

cultural, historic and religious properties. Section 4.6.2 provides an assessment of effects 

to archaeological resources. Many Oneida sites as recorded by the Nation’s Historian 

have (prior to purchase by the Nation) been disturbed by amateur archaeologists and 

artifact seekers. The pattern of disturbance goes back decades and physical evidence can 

still be seen on some parcels. 

As part of the data gathering process for this Draft EIS, the BIA consulted with the 

OPRHP for information concerning cultural resources. These letters dated August 17 and 

August 18, 2005 (one each for Oneida County and Madison County) and March 14, 2006 

are included in Appendix J. The OPRHP responded to the letters in 2005 by directing the 

information request to their website at http://nysparks.state.ny.us. To date, a response to 

the March 14 letter has not been received. Further consultation with the OPRHP 

pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800 concerning the National Register status of sites and the 

potential effects to them is ongoing. The BIA-SHPO consultation letter, dated August 16, 

2006, is included in Appendix J. Additionally, the BIA initiated formal consultation with 

the Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPO) of the Oneida Tribe of Indians of 

Wisconsin, the Stockbridge-Munsee Community of Wisconsin, and the Tuscarora Nation. 

The purpose of the consultation was to ascertain whether these Tribes held any religious 

or cultural significance to the lands proposed for trust transfer. These letters dated 

January 20, 2006 are included in Appendix J. To date, responses have not been received. 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-76

Using the information obtained from OPRHP, NYSM, and the Office of the Oneida 

Nation’s Historian, and described in Section 3.6.3 and Table 3.6.5-1, it can be seen that 

the number and types of cultural resources present on or within 1,000 feet of Nation lands 

differ among the Proposed Action (Alternative A) and the trust alternatives (Alternatives B 

through F). Within the six alternatives, the number and types of resources present differ 

among Groups 1 – 3 parcels. The resource types consist of: 

• Properties listed on the New York State or National Registers of Historic Places; 

• Buildings and structures fifty years of age or older; 

• Previously identified archaeological sites; and 

• Archaeologically sensitive areas previously defined by OPRHP. 

In order to place the analysis of potential effects into the proper context, a summary of 

this information follows here: 

Alternatives A and B. These alternatives are discussed together since the same parcels 

are affected. A total of 447 resources are on or in proximity to Nation lands that are 

included in Alternatives A and B. These consist of 13 properties listed on the National 

Register of Historic Places, 85 other structures fifty years of age or older, 157 previously 

identified archaeological sites, and 192 Nation parcels that are considered by OPRHP to 

be archaeologically sensitive. 

Within these two alternatives, 51 resources are associated with Group 1 lands consisting 

of 12 structures fifty years of age or older, six previously identified archaeological sites, 

and 33 archaeologically sensitive properties. Properties listed on the State and National 

Registers of Historic Places are not associated with Group 1 lands. Two hundred and 

seventy-six (276) resources are associated with Group 2 lands. These consist of 11 

properties listed on the State and National Registers of Historic Places, 55 structures fifty 

years of age or older, 94 previously identified archaeological sites, and 116 

archaeologically sensitive properties. One hundred and twenty (120) resources are 

associated with Group 3 lands within these alternatives. These consist of two properties 

listed on the State and National Registers of Historic Places, 18 structures fifty years of 

age or older, 57 previously identified archaeological sites, and 43 archaeologically sensitive 

properties. 

Alternative C. A total of 327 resources are on or in proximity to Nation lands that are 

included in Alternative C. These consist of 11 National Register of Historic Places 

properties, 67 other structures fifty years of age or older, 100 previously identified 

archaeological sites, and 149 Nation parcels that are considered by OPRHP to be 

archaeologically sensitive. 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-77

Within Alternative C there are 51 resources associated with Group 1 lands consisting of 

12 structures fifty years of age or older, six previously identified archaeological sites, and 

33 archaeologically sensitive properties. Properties listed on the State and National 

Registers of Historic Places are not associated with Group 1 lands. Two hundred and 

seventy-six (276) resources are associated with Group 2 lands. These consist of 11 

properties listed on the State and National Registers of Historic Places, 55 structures fifty 

years of age or older, 94 previously identified archaeological sites, and 116 

archaeologically sensitive properties. Group 3 lands are not included with Alternative C. 

Alternative D. Alternative D includes only Group 1 lands. A total of 51 cultural 

resources are on or in proximity to these lands. These consist of 12 structures fifty years 

of age or older, six previously identified archaeological sites, and 33 Nation parcels that 

are considered by OPRHP to be archaeologically sensitive. Properties listed on the State 

and National Registers of Historic Places are not associated with Alternative D lands. 

Alternative E. Only two archaeologically sensitive sites are within the vicinity of 

Alternative E lands. 

Alternative F. A total of 343 resources are on or in proximity to Nation lands included 

in Alternative F. These consist of one property on the National Register of Historic 

Places, 71 other structures fifty years of age or older, 111 previously identified 

archaeological sites, and 160 Nation parcels that are considered by OPRHP to be 

archaeologically sensitive. 

Within Alternative F there are 51 resources associated with Group 1 lands consisting of 12 

structures fifty years of age or older, six previously identified archaeological sites, and 33 

archaeologically sensitive properties. Properties listed on the State and National Registers 

of Historic Places are not associated with Group 1 lands. Two hundred and forty-eight 

(248) resources are associated with Group 2 lands. These consist of one property listed on 

the State and National Registers of Historic Places, 49 structures fifty years of age or 

older, 87 previously identified archaeological sites, and 111 archaeologically sensitive 

parcels. Forty-four (44) resources are associated with Group 3 lands within Alternative F. 

These consist of 10 structures fifty years of age or older, 18 previously identified 

archaeological sites, and 16 archaeologically sensitive properties. A summary of the 

cultural resources on or within 1,000 feet of Nation lands is provided in 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-78

Table 4.6-1 

Summary of Cultural Resources within 1,000 Feet of Nation Lands

Alternatives A + B 

 Resource Type Group 1 

Lands 

Group 2 

Lands 

Group 3 

Lands 

Total 

Sites 

 NYS or National Register of Historic Places 0 11 2 13 

 Buildings and Structures (50 years plus) 12 55 18 85 

 Archaeologically Sensitive Properties 33 116 43 192 

 Archaeological Sites 6 94 57 157 

 Total Resource Count 51 276 120 447 

Alternative C 

 Resource Type Group 1 

Lands 

Group 2 

Lands 

Group 3 

Lands 

Total 

Sites 

 NYS or National Register of Historic Places 0 11 0 11 

 Buildings and Structures (50 years plus) 12 55 0 67 

 Archaeologically Sensitive Properties 33 116 0 149 

 Archaeological Sites 6 94 0 100 

 Total Resource Count 51 276 0 327 

Alternative D

 Resource Type Group 1 

Lands 

Group 2 

Lands 

Group 3 

Lands 

Total 

Sites 

 NYS or National Register of Historic Places 0 0 0 0 

 Buildings and Structures (50 years plus) 12 0 0 12 

 Archaeologically Sensitive Properties 33 0 0 33 

 Archaeological Sites 6 0 0 6 

 Total Resource Count 51 0 0 51 

Alternative E

 Resource Type Group 1 

Lands 

Group 2 

Lands 

Group 3 

Lands 

Total 

Sites 

 NYS or National Register of Historic Places 0 0 0 0 

 Buildings and Structures (50 years plus) 0 0 0 0 

 Archaeologically Sensitive Properties 2 0 0 2 

 Archaeological Sites 0 0 0 0 

 Total Resource Count 2 0 0 2 

Alternative F

 Resource Type Group 1 

Lands 

Group 2 

Lands 

Group 3 

Lands 

Total 

Sites 

 NYS or National Register of Historic Places 0 1 0 1 

 Buildings and Structures (50 years plus) 12 49 10 71 

 Archaeologically Sensitive Properties 33 111 16 160 

 Archaeological Sites 6 87 18 111 

 Total Resource Count 51 248 44 343 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-79

4.6.1 Cultural, Historic and Religious Properties 

Significance Criteria 

For the purposes of defining whether the Proposed Action or the alternatives, including 

No Action (collectively referred to as the action), have a potentially significant adverse 

effect to cultural, historic or religious properties, the following are considered: 

Whether the action is likely to directly, indirectly or cumulatively: 

• Cause an adverse change in the significance of a historical resource (including a 

historic building, district, site, structure or object) as defined by Section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 & 36 CFR Part 800) and/or the 

NYS Historic Preservation Act (SHPA, Article 14 ECL). This includes resources 

listed or eligible for listing on either state or federal registers; 

• Affect a resource that is significant in American history, architecture, engineering, 

or culture; 

• Affect a National Historic Landmark; 

• Affect a resource that has yielded or may likely yield, information important to the 

prehistory or history of the Counties, New York State, the Nation or the United 

States; 

• Potentially alienate control of cultural, historic or religious properties that are 

important to the cultural and historical record of the Nation and afforded 

protection under the Federal Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 

(ARPA, 16 U.S.C. 470 & 25 CFR Part 262, 43 CFR Parts 6 & 7) and the Native 

American Graves Protection & Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 

3001 and 43 CFR Part 10).

Overview of ARPA and NAGPRA 

Section 2 of the ARPA states that: 

(a) The Congress finds that 

(1) Archaeological resources on public lands and Indian lands are an accessible and 

irreplaceable part of the Nation's heritage; 

(2) These resources are increasingly endangered because of their commercial 

attractiveness; 

(3) Existing Federal laws do not provide adequate protection to prevent the loss 

and destruction of these archaeological resources and sites resulting from 

uncontrolled excavations and pillage; and 

(4) There is a wealth of archaeological information which has been legally 

obtained by private individuals for noncommercial purposes and which could 

voluntarily be made available to professional archaeologists and institutions. 

(b) The purpose of this Act is to secure, for the present and future benefit of the 

American people, the protection of archaeological resources and sites which are on 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-80

public lands and Indian lands, and to foster increased cooperation and exchange of 

information between governmental authorities, the professional archaeological 

community, and private individuals having collections of archaeological resources and 

data which were obtained before the date of the enactment of this Act.

Section 10.1 of the NAGPRA regulations state: 

(a) Purpose: These regulations carry out provisions of the Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (Pub.L. 101-601; 25 U.S.C. 3001-3013; 104 

Stat. 3048-3058). These regulations develop a systematic process for determining the 

rights of lineal descendants and Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations to 

certain Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of 

cultural patrimony with which they are affiliated. 

(b) Applicability: (1) these regulations pertain to the identification and appropriate 

disposition of human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural 

patrimony that are: 

(i) In Federal possession or control; or 

(ii) In the possession or control of any institution or state or local government 

receiving federal funds; or 

(iii) Excavated intentionally or discovered inadvertently on federal 

or tribal lands. 

(2) These regulations apply to human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects 

of cultural patrimony which are indigenous to Alaska, Hawaii, and the continental United 

States, but not to territories of the United States. 

ARPA and NAGPRA provide unique protection to historic artifacts and human remains 

on only federal or Indian lands. ARPA and NAGPRA afford an elevated level of historic 

and archaeological protection on lands conveyed into trust by the U.S. government. 

Overview of Cultural, Historic and Religious Properties 

Section 3.6.3 of the Affected Environment section describes the historic, cultural and 

religious properties potentially affected by the Proposed Action and alternatives. Table 

3.6-1 provides a summary of cultural resources distributed among Group 1, 2 and 3 lands. 

Figures 3.6-1, 3.6-2 and 3.6-3 indicate Nation properties within 1,000 feet of sites listed 

on the New York State and National Register of Historic Places. Figures 3.6-4 through 

3.6-13 indicate Nation properties with buildings 50 years or older that have been 

evaluated for potential National Register eligibility. 

There are no National Historic Landmarks on any of the Nation’s lands proposed for 

conveyance into trust. There are no State or National Register sites, structures or 

buildings contained on any of the Nation’s lands proposed for conveyance into trust but 

several are within 1,000 feet of Nation properties (Appendix D). There are eleven such 

resources in Group 2 within 1,000 feet of Nation lands and two within 1,000 feet of 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-81

Group 3 lands. One Nation parcel (Nation Police Station, Parcel 33 in Group 2) lies 

within the bounds of a Historic District and a Multiple Resource Area in Canastota (South 

Peterboro St. Residential District). This parcel is also within 1,000 feet of a second 

Historic District, the South Peterboro St. Commercial Historic District. Six National 

Register sites are located within 1,000 feet of Parcel 33. Two other National Register sites 

(on North Peterboro Street) are within 1,000 feet of Nation Parcels 75, 76, 79, 80, 87 and 

111 (all in Group 2) in Canastota. Although not assigned any State or National Register 

status, two Nation parcels (Parcel 75 and 76) at this locale make up an important Nation 

cultural-festival site. Two other Register properties are located within 1,000 feet of 

Nation lands: Parcel 166 (Group 3, used for corn production) in Oneida is located 

adjacent to the Mt. Hope Reservoir; Parcel 112 (Group 2, Standing Stone Gaming) in 

Vernon is located within 1,000 feet of the Vernon Methodist Church. 

The Nation contracted an architectural historian to conduct a detailed survey and review 

of all structures 50 years or older on lands proposed for conveyance into trust in the fall of 

2005 to determine their architectural significance and potential eligibility for National 

Register listing (Appendix D). A total of ninety structures were recorded and evaluated by 

the historian. Three of the structures are considered eligible for inclusion on the New 

York State and National Registers of Historic Places with seven other structures 

considered potentially eligible for listing. The remaining 80 properties are considered to 

be architecturally insignificant. The 10 structures considered to be eligible or potentially 

eligible are located on Parcels 16, 139, 159, 208, 209, 109, 237, and 251 in Group 2 and 

on Parcels 171 and 228 in Group 3. If these 10 structures were to be listed on the 

National Register, Federal protection under Section 106 would apply once the properties 

are in trust. No structures were found to be potentially eligible in Group 1. 

Eighty-one Native American and Historic period archaeological sites have been previously 

recorded within the site files of OPRHP, NYSM, and Office of the Oneida Nation 

Historian that are now located within or in proximity to the APE. More precise 

information concerning the locations of the sites is not provided in order to protect them 

from looters and aid in their preservation. In addition, available data on the sites is 

insufficient to provide definitive information as to their boundaries. National Register 

significance evaluations for the sites have not been conducted by OPRHP. Accordingly, 

none of the sites are listed on the New York State or National Registers of Historic Places 

or have been determined eligible for listing. 

A preliminary evaluation of the eligibility of the sites was conducted for the EIS, based 

upon the information available in the collections and files of the agencies identified above, 

as well as the archaeological literature, has determined that 36 of the sites are potentially 

eligible for listing on the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places and 12 

of the sites are not eligible for listing (Appendix D). Not enough information is available 

for a determination to be made for the remaining 33 archaeological sites. Regardless of 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-82

their status, however, none of the identified archaeological sites will be affected by the 

trust action because the undertaking is not ground disturbing and there will not be a 

change in property use. None of these sites are located on parcels with deteriorated 

structures slated for demolition by the Nation. Consultation with OPRHP currently is 

ongoing concerning these National Register status determinations and the potential effects, 

or lack thereof, the Proposed Action will have on the archaeological properties. 

In addition to sites, structures, building and districts listed on the State and or National 

Registers, there are cultural and religious properties which are important to the Nation 

contained on the lands proposed for conveyance into trust. These properties have special 

cultural and ancestral importance to Oneida heritage, tradition and world view identity. 

They include, for example, the Shako: wi Cultural Center (Parcel 3, Group 2) which also 

includes burial grounds), the Ray Elm Children & Elders Center (Parcel 4, Group 2), the 

Festival Site (Parcels 75 and 76, Group 2), the Living History Reenactment Site (Parcel 

259, Group 2) the traditional Three Sisters cropland and white corn sites (Parcels 211 and 

33 in Group 3) and others. The ancestrally significant Nation properties typically support 

a combination of salient historic, cultural and religious events and activities. There are a 

number of ancient Oneida burial sites and culturally important sites that have been 

acquired by the Nation specifically for this reason and are mostly contained in Group 3. 

These are more fully described in Appendix D. A number of the properties discussed in the 

section are also associated with components considered archaeological resources as well. 

4.6.1.1 Direct Effects 

Direct effects are applied in various ways throughout this section: 

• Those that could have a direct physical effect to a cultural resource; 

• Those that could affect the regulation of that resource; and, 

• Those that could affect the Nation’s ability and right to preserve and protect their 

culture on lands considered their aboriginal homeland. 

While there are no direct physical effects to cultural resources, there are direct effects to 

both the regulation of those resources and the ability to preserve and protect the Nation’s 

culture under the various alternatives and taxation-jurisdiction scenarios. 

There are no direct adverse effects to cultural, historic and religious properties resulting 

from the Proposed Action (Alternative A) or any of the trust alternatives (Alternatives B 

through F) including No Action (Alternative G). This pertains to cultural resources both 

on and off Nation lands. Direct effects in this sense are defined as physical or contextual 

effects (e.g., viewshed or character) to the resource as might occur if a site were developed 

or changed in some way. The Proposed Action or alternatives do not involve the physical 

disturbance or modification to such cultural, historic or religious properties. None of the 

alternatives involve the construction of new buildings or facilities on Nation lands that 

could affect the integrity, setting, feeling or association of adjacent cultural, historic and 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-83

religious properties. Nation parcels within Historic Districts or within 1,000 feet of 

Historic Districts or resources listed on the State and/or National Registers would simply 

transfer from Nation title to Federal title held in trust for the Nation. State and Federal 

protection afforded by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 

470 & 36 CFR Part 800) of these districts and structures would still apply with the lands 

in trust or not in trust. The seven potentially eligible State and National Register 

structures on Nation lands would still be afforded protection under Section 106. 

The State of New York has asserted that trust status affects their jurisdiction of cultural 

and historic properties under SEQRA and SHPA on and adjacent to Nation lands 

conveyed into trust. This concern of New York State would presumably apply to all 

alternatives where lands are conveyed into trust as they would not regulate the resources 

contained there. Further, New York State has asserted that any inability to protect 

potentially significant cultural, historical, archaeological, and architectural resources, 

including protection against potential viewshed impacts, from future activities on Nation 

lands conveyed into trust would constitute a significant adverse effect. The Nation’s 

ongoing and reasonably foreseeable plans do not involve activities that would physically 

affect such resources or their viewsheds, and therefore significant adverse effects are 

unlikely. The Nation has coordinated with the OPRHP in the past and has shared 

information contained in each others databases. It is reasonable to assume that this 

coordination would continue under Alternatives A through F for lands conveyed into 

trust. 

Alternative A. All 17,370 acres of land in Groups 1, 2 and 3 would be conveyed into 

trust and afforded protection under ARPA and NAGPRA. This would result in additional 

protection to cultural, historic and religious properties on their lands and would have a 

beneficial direct effect to the Nation. While the State would not have jurisdictional 

authority over these cultural resources, they would still be afforded protection under 

Section 106 of the NHPA and ARPA-NAGPRA. 

Alternative B. An additional 17,630 acres of land could be conveyed into trust over time 

resulting in a reservation area of 35,000 acres. Alternative B would involve the same 

cultural, historic and religious properties and resources as Alternative A in addition to 

other cultural resources potentially located on those additional lands. Alternative B from 

the standpoint of the Nation could be viewed as the most preferable alternative since both 

identified and yet to be identified Oneida sites not yet owned by the Nation containing 

cultural assets (e.g., villages, burial grounds, camp sites or religious sites), including some 

which might contain internments, would be purchased by the Nation over time. Many of 

the Nation parcels especially in Groups 2 and 3 were identified and purchased specifically 

because they contained cultural assets important to the Nation. It is reasonable to assume 

that additional cultural, historic and religious properties and assets important to the 

Nation could be located on future properties comprising this alternative. These properties, 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-84

all within the Oneidas’ reservation and aboriginal homeland, would be conveyed into trust 

at some point. Once in trust, these cultural assets would be afforded the additional 

protection of ARPA and NAGPRA which represents a direct beneficial effect to the 

Nation. 

Alternative C. Cultural, historic and religious properties and assets important to the 

Nation located in Group 3 would not be conveyed into trust and therefore not afforded 

the additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA. Several of the Nation’s significant 

cultural, historic and religious properties (Parcels 136, 282, 310, and 315) are located in 

Group 3 within the Town of Stockbridge. Absent of trust status over the lands, the 

protection afforded by ARPA and NAGPRA would not apply. The ARPA and NAGPRA 

laws only apply to federal public properties and Indian lands. Part of the need for 

conveying lands into trust is the preservation and protection of an Indian Tribe’s culture. 

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Section 106 requires consultation with 

Tribes to protect cultural assets. Historical artifacts and human remains however are 

afforded an additional level of protection when occurring on federal public lands or Indian 

lands. The State would assert its jurisdiction over cultural properties contained in Group 

3 not in trust. Protection afforded by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 

Act would also apply to the lands not conveyed into trust. 

Alternative D. Cultural, historic and religious properties and assets important to the 

Nation located in Groups 2 and 3 would not be conveyed into trust and therefore not 

afforded the additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA. Absent of trust status over the 

lands, the protection afforded by ARPA and NAGPRA would not apply. The same adverse 

effects to the Nation described under Alternative C would apply. New York State would 

assert its jurisdiction over cultural properties contained in Groups 2 and 3 not in trust but 

not those sites or sensitive properties in Group 1. Protection afforded by Section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act would also apply to the lands not conveyed into 

trust. 

Alternative E. Only the single Turning Stone Casino tax lot totaling approximately 225 

acres in size would be conveyed into trust. Cultural, historic and religious properties and 

assets important to the Nation located in Groups 2 and 3 would not be conveyed into 

trust, in addition to other New York State identified sites and sensitive properties in 

Group 1, and therefore not afforded the additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA. 

The same potential effects to the Nation described under Alternative C would apply. The 

direct effects asserted by the State on their jurisdiction over cultural resources for lands 

conveyed into trust would not apply as none are located on this tax lot. New York State 

would assert its jurisdiction over cultural properties contained in Groups 1, 2 and 3. 

Protection afforded by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act would also 

apply to the lands not conveyed into trust. 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-85

Alternative F. Lands comprising all of Group 1 and the majority of Group 2 would be 

conveyed into trust along with some Group 3 lands. The Group 2 lands comprising this 

alternative would include some of the most significant and important Nation cultural 

properties such as burial grounds in Madison County, festival sites, the Shako: wi Cultural 

Center and the Ray Elm Children & Elders Center. However, a significant cultural 

property in the Town of Cazenovia, Madison County containing multiple resource 

components (Parcel 57) would not be included. In addition, Alternative F includes two 

parcels (Parcel 255; Parcel 314) containing cultural resources. These sites are two of the 

most significant cultural, historic and religious properties for the Nation. These sites also 

have significant importance to the State of New York. These sites are more fully described 

in Section 3.6.3 Historic, Cultural, and Religious Properties and in Appendix D. These 

properties are within the Oneidas’ reservation and aboriginal homeland. Once in trust, 

these cultural assets would be afforded the additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA. 

Some of the cultural, historic and religious properties and assets important to the Nation 

located in Groups 2 and 3 would not be conveyed into trust under this alternative and 

therefore not afforded the additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA. Several of the 

Nation’s significant cultural, historic and religious properties (Parcels 136, 282, 310, and 

315) are located in Group 3 within the Town of Stockbridge and subject to a competing 

tribal claim. The same direct adverse effects to the Nation described under Alternative C 

would apply if these lands are not conveyed into trust. The State would assert its 

jurisdiction over cultural properties contained in Groups 2 and 3 not conveyed into trust. 

Protection afforded by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act would also 

apply to the lands not conveyed into trust. 

Alternative G. None of the Nation’s lands containing cultural, historic and religious 

properties are conveyed into trust. There are no direct physical effects to such properties 

or cultural resources under No Action. If the lands are not in trust, the Nation’s cultural 

assets would not be afforded protection under ARPA and NAGPRA. The ARPA and 

NAGPRA laws only apply to Federal public properties and Indian lands. 

Applicable State laws and regulations would apply to lands not in trust (SHPA, Article 14 

ECL, Sections 3.09 and 14.09 of NYS Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law, 9 

NYCRR Part 428). No Action would allow the State to assert jurisdiction over cultural, 

historic and religious resources including the viewsheds of such resources. Section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 & 36 CFR Part 800) would still 

apply under No Action as with any of the other trust alternatives. 

There are three taxation-jurisdiction scenarios which apply to alternatives where some 

lands (Alternatives C through F) or no lands (Alternative G) are conveyed into trust. The 

No Action (Alternative G) also has the additional scenario of the Casino Closes and All 

Enterprises Close. These scenarios only apply to those alternatives that exclude lands from 

conveyance into trust (Alternatives C – G) 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-86

Property Taxes Paid (PTP): The Nation would retain title to the lands not in trust but 

would submit to regulation of cultural, historic and religious properties under applicable 

State laws. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 & 36 

CFR Part 800) would apply. The Nation would not assert sovereign control over its 

cultural resources. Cultural resources would not be afforded additional protection under 

ARPA and NAGPRA. 

Property Taxes Not Paid - Foreclosure (PTNP-F): This would have the same adverse 

regulatory and cultural effects to the Nation as PTP but with the added adverse effect that 

properties containing cultural, historic and religious resources would be foreclosed or 

alienated away from the Nation. Loss of these properties and the cultural assets would 

also have a direct significant adverse effect to the Nation. 

Property Taxes Not Paid - Dispute Continues (PTNP-DC): The Nation would retain title 

to the lands and apply control of cultural, historic and religious properties but absent the 

additional protection afforded under ARPA and NAGPRA. The Nation would continue 

to apply its cultural resources ordinances and manage the properties as it has in the past. 

State regulation of cultural resources would remain in dispute. 

Under the No Action - Casino Closes and All Enterprises Close scenario, the Turning 

Stone Resort & Casino would close and lands containing cultural resources could be 

foreclosed as the Nation would lose it most significant source of revenue. This revenue 

enables the Nation to maintain cultural assets and programs. The Casino Closes and All 

Enterprises Close scenario would have a significant adverse effect to the Nation’s selfgovernance and protection of important cultural resources. 

Summary of Direct Effects 

There are no direct physical effects to Nation-owned or non-Nation cultural, historic and 

religious properties resulting from the Proposed Action (Alternative A), any of the trust 

alternatives (Alternatives B through F) or No Action (Alternative G). The various trust 

action alternatives (A through F) involve different Groupings and Nation parcels. As a 

result, different Nation and non-Nation resources would be involved in each. Different 

alternatives would involve different Nation lands with structures 50 years or older with 

some eligible or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. 

Regardless of the alternative, federal laws and regulations still apply to all lands not 

conveyed into trust with the exception of ARPA and NAGPRA. Federal law applies to 

lands in trust with the additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA. No currently listed 

New York State or National Register sites, structures or districts would be conveyed into 

trust under any alternative. National Historic Landmarks would not be affected under the 

Proposed Action or alternatives. Under some alternatives, the federal government would 

convey into trust some structures on Nation lands eligible for listing on the federal and 

New York State registries. 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-87

Alternatives affording greater trust protection and sovereign control over Oneida cultural, 

historic and religious properties would have a greater beneficial direct effect to the Nation 

than those affording less protection and less control. These alternatives could be viewed 

as best fulfilling the Nation’s purpose and need for placing lands into trust with the BIA. 

In this regard, Alternative A would be superior to Alternative F and both alternatives 

would be superior to Alternative C. Alternatives D and E would be the least desirable as 

Groups 2 and 3 contain the cultural resources important to the Nation. Alternative B 

could potentially accommodate the most cultural, historic and religious properties since 

both identified and yet to be identified Oneida sites (not yet owned by the Nation) 

containing cultural assets (e.g., villages, religious sites) including some which might 

contain internments, would be purchased by the Nation over time. Alternative G results 

in none of the Nation’s cultural resources and properties conveyed into trust. Alternative 

G fails to support the purpose and need expressed by the Nation. 

4.6.1.2 Indirect Effects 

As defined in Section 4.1, indirect effects can be caused by an action but occur later in 

time or farther removed in distance from the action, and are still reasonably foreseeable. 

Potential adverse indirect effects to Nation-owned cultural, historic and religious 

properties may occur under alternatives where lands are not afforded trust protection. In 

addition, there is also a potential indirect effect to the Nation’s culture if cultural 

properties and assets are not afforded trust protection. There are no identified indirect 

effects to the New York State regulation of cultural properties. 

Alternatives acquiring fewer Nation cultural resources that are not afforded protection 

under ARPA and NAGRPRA potentially have a greater indirect effect to cultural resources 

contained there. Absent of trust status over the lands, the protection afforded by ARPA 

and NAGPRA would not apply. Lands and the historical artifacts and human remains 

contained there would not be afforded this more comprehensive protection. Several 

Nation lands contain identified cultural, historic and religious resources critical to the 

history of the Oneida as a distinct Indian tribe. The Nation acquired (through purchase) 

these previously alienated lands within their aboriginal homeland specifically to preserve 

their artifacts, culture and heritage. Part of the need for conveying lands into trust is the 

preservation and protection of cultural materials and tribal heritage. The National 

Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Section 106 requires consultation with tribes to protect 

cultural assets. Historic artifacts and human remains, however, are afforded an additional 

level of protection when occurring on federal public lands or Indian lands. 

Under Alternatives A and Alternative B all the Groupings of Nation lands are conveyed 

into trust. All cultural, historic and religious assets of the Nation contained on these 

properties would be afforded additional federal protection including the restriction from 

future alienation. Thus, implementation of Alternatives A and B would not result in 

indirect adverse effects to cultural resources or to the Nation’s culture. 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-88

Alternative C would exclude important cultural, historic and religious assets located in 

Group 3, the most important of which are in the Towns of Stockbridge, Fenner, Lincoln 

and Smithfield in Madison County. Alternative D and Alternative E convey none of the 

Nation’s important cultural, historic and religious` properties into trust. Alternative F 

includes some of the Nation’s important cultural sites but excludes some sites in Group 2 

and Group 3. 

Under Alternatives C through G, lands not conveyed into trust and cultural materials 

contained there would not be afforded protection under ARPA and NAGPRA. Lack of 

these protections could have an indirect adverse effect to both the physical resources and 

the Nation’s culture if these lands are foreclosed and the properties or cultural assets are 

disturbed by others. Under Alternative G none of the Nation’s cultural assets would 

receive protection under ARPA and NAGPRA. The potential adverse indirect effects to 

the Nation’s cultural properties, assets and culture are far more significant under 

Alternative G than the other alternatives. 

There are three taxation-jurisdiction scenarios which apply to alternatives where some 

lands (C through F) or no lands (G) are conveyed into trust. The No Action 

(Alternative G) also has the additional scenario of the Casino Closes and All Enterprises 

Close. These scenarios only apply to those alternatives that exclude lands from conveyance 

into trust (Alternatives C through G). 

Property Taxes Paid (PTP): The Nation would retain title to the lands not in trust but 

would submit to regulation of cultural, historic and religious properties under applicable 

state laws. The New York SHPA (SHPA, Article 14 ECL, Sections3.09 and 14.09 of New 

York State Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law, 9 NYCRR Part 428) and 

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 & 36 CFR Part 800) 

would apply. The Nation would not assert sovereign control over its cultural resources. 

Cultural resources would not be afforded additional protection under ARPA and 

NAGPRA. 

Property Taxes Not Paid - Foreclosure (PTNP-F): This would have the same adverse 

cultural effects to the Nation as PTP but with the added adverse effect that properties 

containing cultural, historic and religious resources could be foreclosed or alienated away 

from the Nation. Loss of theses properties could result in an indirect effect to cultural 

assets if the properties are affected by future development activities on these lands by 

others. 

Property Taxes Not Paid - Dispute Continues (PTNP-DC): The Nation would retain title 

to the lands and apply control of cultural, historic and religious properties but absent the 

additional protection afforded under ARPA and NAGPRA. The Nation would continue 

to apply its cultural resources ordinances and manage the properties as it has in the past. 

State regulation of cultural resources would remain in dispute. 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-89

Under the No Action - Casino Closes and All Enterprises Close scenario, the casino would 

close and lands containing cultural resources could be foreclosed as the Nation would lose 

it most significant source of revenue. This revenue enables the Nation to maintain cultural 

assets and programs. The Casino Closes and All Enterprises Close scenario would have a 

significant adverse indirect effect to the Nation’s assets and culture. 

There are no indirect adverse effects to non-Nation cultural, historic and religious 

properties from any of the alternatives. None of the alternatives involve the physical 

disturbance, contextual or viewshed modification to non-Nation properties which might 

indirectly affect a resource. None of the alternatives involve the construction of new 

buildings or facilities on Nation lands that could indirectly affect the integrity, setting, 

perception or association of adjacent non-Nation cultural, historic and religious 

properties. 

4.6.1.3 Cumulative Effects 

Cumulative effects include effects beyond those solely attributable to the implementation 

of the Proposed Action or alternatives which result from the incremental effect of the 

action when added together with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future 

actions. 

There are several points worth considering when assessing whether cumulative effects to 

cultural, historic and religious properties could potentially occur. First, whether the 

resources may be especially vulnerable to incremental effects under any of the alternatives 

and second, whether these effects have been historically significant for this resource. The 

same points can be stated for cumulative effects to the Nation and Oneida culture. 

Essentially therefore, there are two broad categories of potential cumulative effects to 

cultural, historic and religious properties: 

• Cumulative effects resulting from lands held in trust by the federal government. 

• Cumulative effects resulting from lands not held in trust by the federal 

government. 

The former category results in more comprehensive federal protection, tribal sovereignty 

and restriction from foreclosure or alienation of cultural resources while the latter 

category does not. 

Past historical actions adversely affecting the Oneida and their cultural, historical and 

religious sites and materials include the alienation of their reservation and aboriginal 

homeland and the loss and destruction of cultural assets contained there. Many Oneida 

sites as recorded by the Nation’s Historian have (prior to purchase by the Nation) been 

disturbed by amateur archaeologists and artifact seekers. The pattern of disturbance goes 

back decades and physical evidence can still be seen on some parcels (e.g., pits, trenches, 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-90

stakes, and mesh screens for sieving artifacts). Some of these disturbances have involved 

grave sites and internments. New York State and federal laws were previously unable to 

adequately protect these sites. Since taking possession of some of their cultural assets, the 

Nation has implemented a program to preserve and protect the sites on those parcels as 

well as to archive important artifacts and data recorded from those sites. These sites are 

now part of important Nation programs regarding cultural, historic and religious 

education to both Nation members and non-Nation members alike. 

Those alternatives acquiring fewer Nation cultural resources that are not afforded 

protection under ARPA and NAGRPRA potentially have a greater indirect effect to 

cultural resources contained there and on the Nation’s culture. Elimination of the 

protection afforded by ARPA and NAGPRA potentially subjects these resources to future 

impacts by others. Foreclosure or alienation of these lands again could make these 

resources vulnerable to additional future effects and exacerbate historical damages to 

Oneida cultural assets which include village sites, camp sites, and burial grounds. 

Potential future damages to cultural properties not held in trust could affect a resource 

that has yielded or may likely yield, information and artifacts important to the prehistory 

or history of the Nation, New York State, its Counties, or the U.S. 

4.6.2 Archaeological Resources 

Significance Criteria 

For the purposes of defining whether the Proposed Action or the alternatives including No 

Action (collectively referred to as the action) have a potentially significant adverse effect to 

archaeological resources or on the Nation, the following are considered: 

Whether the action is likely to directly, indirectly or cumulatively: 

• Cause an adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource; 

• Directly or indirectly destroy a unique archaeological or historical resources or 

records that are sacred or ritually important; 

• Affect a resource that has yielded or may likely yield, information important to the 

archaeological record of Madison and Oneida Counties, New York State, the 

Nation or the U.S.; 

• Potentially alienate control of archaeological resources including human remains 

and burial grounds that are important to the cultural and historical record of the 

Nation and afforded protection under the Federal Archaeological Resources 

Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA, 16 U.S.C. 470 & 25 CFR Part 262, 43 CFR Parts 

6 & 7) and the Native American Graves Protection & Repatriation Act of 1990 

(NAGPRA, 25 U.S.C. 3001 and 40 CFR Part 10. Refer to the overview of ARPA 

and NAGPRA in Section 4.6.1. 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-91

Overview of Archaeological Resources 

Section 3.6.4 of the Affected Environment section describes the archaeological resources 

potentially affected by the Proposed Action and alternatives. Table 3.6-1 provides a 

summary of archaeological sensitive properties (192 in number) and identified sites (157 in 

number) distributed in and among Group 1, 2 and 3 lands. Figures 3.6.-14 through 3.6.-

24 indicates the general locations of previously identified archaeological sites by USGS 

Quadrangle that are associated with Nation lands. These data are derived from OPRHP, 

NYSM, and Oneida Nation Historian files. Figures 3.6.-25 through 3.6.-33 indicates 

Nation parcels by USGS Quadrangle within OPRHP areas of prehistoric archaeological 

sensitivity. 

Eighty-one Native American and historic period archaeological sites have been previously 

recorded within the sites files of OPRHP, NYSM, or Office of the Oneida Nation 

Historian that are now located within or in proximity to the APE for the Proposed Action. 

All of these sites are within the Oneida’s reservation and aboriginal homeland. National 

Register significance evaluations for the sites have not been conducted by OPRHP nor has 

such evaluations been requested. However, a preliminary evaluation of the eligibility of 

the sites conducted for the trust transfer, based upon the information available in the 

collections and files of OPRHP, NYSM, and the Office of the Oneida Nation Historian, as 

well as the archaeological literature, has determined that 36 of the sites are potentially 

eligible for listing on the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places and 12 

of the sites are not eligible for listing. Not enough information is available for a 

determination to be made for the remaining 33 archaeological sites. 

None of the sites are listed on the New York State or National Registers of Historic Places 

or have been determined eligible for listing. Appendix D provides detailed information on 

these sites. Precise location information for them is not provided since it is considered 

confidential in order to aid in their preservation. 

Numerous sites are specific to the Oneida and illustrate a pattern of historic occupation on 

these lands spanning almost 500 years beginning around 1350 (Nichols Pond, c. 1350-

1400) through 1820 (Oneida Castle, c. 1762-1820). These sites include camp sites (10), 

village/habitation sites (32) of which nine contained burials, other mortuary sites (11) and 

sites of “stray finds” (2). Twenty-seven of the village sites comprise the accepted Oneida 

village development sequence (refer to Section 3.6.4.1 for a listing of the sites). Of the 27 

sites, nine of them are located on Nation lands. Some of the nine sites contain burials. Of 

these nine sites, three are in Group 2 and six are in Group 3 lands. No previously 

recorded sites are in Group 1. Six of the 27 sites are within the immediate vicinity (1,000 

feet) of Nation lands. Some of the more notable archaeological sites within Group 2 or its 

APE include those referred to as Nichols Pond, Sterling, Oneida Castle, and McNab. 

Within Group 3 or its APE, sites identified include those referred to as Vaillancourt, 

Dungey, Simpson, Wilson, Marsh, Stone Quarry and Onneyuttehage. Twelve other sites, 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-92

concentrated primarily in the Stockbridge and Smithfield areas, are not located on or 

within 1,000 feet, of Nation lands. All are village site types and at least five are associated 

with burials. These sites lie in an around the very center of the Oneida aboriginal 

homeland. 

One site in Stockbridge not on Nation lands, known as Primes Hill, also has spiritual 

significance to the Oneida culture. Oneida legend says that as they moved throughout their 

territory, they were followed by a large granite stone which finally rested upon one of the 

highest hills in their lands. Thus they came by the name by which they refer to themselves, 

the People of the Standing Stone. The Oneida looked upon this stone as an entity that 

possessed life and intelligence, hence the word Oneita, in the original Native dialect, from 

Onei meaning stone and ta signifying life or living stone. The stone was a symbol of their 

culture and identity, their very essence accordingly. The Oneida were known by the 

placement of a stone marking the boundary of their villages. It is thought that one of their 

earliest settlements, where the stone rested, was on Primes Hill. The hill was a place 

where the Oneida held councils and built beacon fires to communicate with other 

settlements. The Oneida settled and built their villages in valleys and along terraces in the 

surrounding area. 

The OPRHP has also identified zones considered to be archaeologically sensitive for the 

presence of Native American sites. The zones contain environmental settings that are 

similar to those of previously identified sites accordingly, it is expected by OPRHP that 

archaeological sites may be found anywhere within a sensitive zone. One hundred and 

ninety-two Nation parcels proposed for conveyance into trust are situated within OPRHP 

zones of archaeological sensitivity. Of the 349 identified archaeological sites and sensitive 

properties, the majority occur on or within 1,000 feet of Group 2 (210 in number) and 

Group 3 (100 in number) lands. Thirty-nine sites/sensitive properties occur on or within 

1,000 feet of Group 1 lands. 

The wealth of information on these resources and the association of the Oneida Nation 

with the lands which comprise the Proposed Action and alternatives are evidence of: 

• The long history and association of the Oneida with these specific lands; 

• An even longer term occupation of the area by prior Native American cultures; 

and, 

• The importance of these lands to Oneida heritage, tradition, culture, identity and 

world view, both spiritually and to developed lifeways and adaptations. 

The lands that the Nation purchased beginning around 1987 are lands previously 

guaranteed to them through Federal treaties, the most significant of which is the 1794 

Treaty of Canandaigua. This Treaty acknowledges an area of some 300,000 acres within 

the larger 6 million-acre Oneida aboriginal homeland in Central New York State. These 

significant archaeological sites are all within this area and are the reason that the Nation 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-93

purchased these specific, previously alienated lands instead of lands elsewhere in New 

York State. 

4.6.2.1 Direct Effects 

Direct effects are applied in various ways throughout this section; those that could have a 

direct physical effect to an archaeological resource; those that could affect the regulation 

of that resource; and those that could affect the Nation’s ability and right to preserve and 

protect their culture on lands considered their aboriginal homeland. While there are no 

direct physical effects to archaeological resources, there are direct effects to both the 

regulation of those resources and the ability to preserve and protect the Nation’s culture 

under the various alternatives and taxation-jurisdiction scenarios. 

There are no direct adverse effects to archaeological resources resulting from the 

implementation of the Proposed Action (Alternative A) or trust alternatives (Alternatives B 

through F) including No Action (Alternative G). This pertains to archaeological resources 

both on and off Nation lands. Direct effects in this sense are defined as physical effects to 

the resource as might occur if a site were developed or changed in some way. The 

Proposed Action or alternatives do not involve the physical disturbance or modification to 

such archaeological resources. None of the alternatives involve the physical disturbance or 

modification to properties containing archaeological resources. None of the alternatives 

involve the construction of new buildings or facilities on Nation lands that could affect the 

integrity, setting, feeling or association of adjacent cultural, historic and religious 

properties. 

The State of New York has asserted that the inability to regulate archaeological resources 

on or adjacent to lands conveyed into trust and covered under the SEQRA and SHPA 

would constitute a significant adverse effect to the people of the State of New York. This 

concern of New York State would presumably apply to all alternatives where lands are 

conveyed into trust and they do not regulate the resources contained there. Further, New 

York State has asserted that any inability to protect archaeologically significant resources 

would constitute a significant adverse effect. The Nation’s ongoing and reasonably 

foreseeable plans do not involve activities that would directly affect such archaeological 

resources, therefore adverse effects are unlikely. 

The Nation has enacted its own Oneida Indian Nation Cultural, Historical or 

Archeological Resources Ordinance (Ordinance Number 00-01) which establishes 

procedures for identifying, evaluating, and protecting cultural, historical and 

archaeological resources of the Nation. They have a Historic Preservation Committee 

empowered to recommend purchasing of sites with cultural resources as well as 

implementing study on existing lands for information recovery, education or avoidance of 

effects. This committee consists of cultural resource experts and an Oneida Council 

member. The Nation has appointed a representative historian (Oneida Nation Historian) 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-94

to oversee the collection, study and archiving of its cultural materials. The Nation has 

coordinated with the OPRHP in the past and has shared information contained in each 

others’ databases. The Nation and the SHPO signed a cooperative agreement on March 

18, 2004 agreeing to share archaeological site file information (see Appendix D). It is 

reasonable to assume that this coordination would continue in the future under 

Alternatives A through F for lands conveyed into trust and serve to help mitigate the type 

of concerns expressed by New York State. 

Alternative A. All 17,370 acres of land in Groups 1, 2 and 3 would be conveyed into 

trust and afforded protection under ARPA and NAGPRA. This would result in additional 

protection to archaeological resources on their lands and would have a beneficial direct 

effect to the Nation. The effects asserted by the State on their jurisdiction over 

archaeological resources would appear less than significant given that a cooperative 

agreement is in place with the SHPO and that the Nation regulates archaeological 

resources on its lands through a dedicated Historian and application of the Oneida Indian 

Nation Cultural, Historical or Archeological Resources Ordinance. 

Alternative B. An additional 17,630 acres of land could be conveyed into trust over time 

resulting in a total trust land area of 35,000 acres. Alternative B would involve all of the 

archaeological resources within Alternative A in addition to other resources potentially 

located on those lands. Alternative B from the standpoint of the Nation could be viewed 

as the most preferable alternative since both identified and yet to be identified Oneida 

archaeological sites not yet owned by the Nation containing cultural assets (e.g., villages, 

burial grounds, artifacts), including some which might contain internments, would be 

purchased by the Nation over time. Many of the Nation parcels especially in Groups 2 

and 3 were identified and purchased specifically because they contained archaeological 

resources important to the Nation. It is reasonable to assume that additional 

archaeological resources important to the Nation could be located on future properties 

comprising this alternative. These properties, all within the Oneida reservation and 

aboriginal homeland, would be conveyed into trust at some point. Once in trust, the 

cultural assets would be afforded the additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA which 

represents a beneficial direct effect to the Nation. The effects asserted by New York State 

on their jurisdiction over archaeological resources would appear less than significant given 

that a cooperative agreement is in place with the SHPO and that the Nation regulates 

archaeological resources on its lands through a dedicated Historian and application of the 

Oneida Indian Nation Cultural, Historical or Archeological Resources Ordinance. State 

laws have proven inadequate to protect Nation archaeological sites from amateur 

archaeologists and artifact seekers. 

Alternative C. Archaeological resources important to the Nation located in Group 3 

would not be conveyed into trust and therefore not afforded the additional protection of 

ARPA and NAGPRA. Several of the Nation’s significant archaeological resource (Parcels 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-95

136, 171, 255, 282, 310, and 314) are located in Group 3 within the Towns of 

Stockbridge, Lincoln, Fenner and Smithfield. Four of these sites are located in Stockbridge 

(Parcels 136, 171, 282, and 310). Absent of trust status over the lands, archaeological 

resources are not afforded the protection by ARPA and NAGPRA. ARPA and NAGPRA 

only apply to federal public properties and Indian lands. Part of the need for conveying 

lands into trust is the preservation and protection of an Indian Tribe’s culture. The 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Section 106 requires consultation with Tribes 

to protect cultural assets. Historical artifacts and human remains however are afforded an 

additional level of protection when occurring on federal public lands or Indian lands. 

New York State would assert its jurisdiction over archaeological resources contained in 

Groups 3 not in trust. Protection afforded by Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act would also apply to the lands not conveyed into trust. The effects 

asserted by New York State on their jurisdiction over archaeological resources in Groups 1 

and 2 would appear less than significant given that a cooperative agreement is in place 

with the SHPO and that the Nation regulates archaeological resources on its lands through 

a dedicated Historian and application of the Oneida Indian Nation Cultural, Historical or 

Archeological Resources Ordinance. 

Alternative D. Archaeological resources important to the Nation located in Groups 2 and 

3 would not be conveyed into trust and therefore not afforded the additional protection of 

ARPA and NAGPRA. These would include Group 3 resources mentioned under 

Alternative C with the addition of Group 2 lands containing significant archaeological 

resources (Parcel 57 in Cazenovia; Parcels 138, 139, 140, 142 and 150 in Verona/Sylvan 

Beach; Parcel 297 in Vernon or the site known as Oneida Castle). Absent of trust status 

over the lands, the protection afforded by ARPA and NAGPRA would not apply. The 

same potential effects to the Nation described under Alternative C would apply. This 

alternative would not include any of the Nation’s identified archaeological sites but would 

include six previously identified sites by the State. The effects asserted by the State on 

their jurisdiction over archaeological resources in Group 1 would appear less than 

significant given that a cooperative agreement is in place with the SHPO and that the 

Nation regulates archaeological resources on its lands through a dedicated historian and 

application of the Oneida Indian Nation Cultural, Historical or Archeological Resources 

Ordinance. New York State would assert its jurisdiction over cultural properties 

contained in Groups 2 and 3. Protection afforded by Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act would also apply to the lands not conveyed into trust. State laws have 

proven inadequate to protect Nation archaeological sites from amateur archaeologists and 

artifact seekers. 

Alternative E. Only the casino gaming floor tax lot totaling approximately 225 acres in 

size would be conveyed into trust. Archaeological resources important to the Nation 

located in Groups 2 and 3 would not be conveyed into trust, in addition to other State 

identified sites and sensitive properties in Group 1, and therefore not afforded the 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-96

additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA. The same direct effects to the Nation 

described under Alternative C would apply. The direct effects asserted by the State on their 

jurisdiction over cultural resources for lands conveyed into trust would not apply as none 

are located on the casino grounds. The State would assert its jurisdiction over cultural 

properties contained in Groups 1, 2 and 3. Protection afforded by Section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act would also apply to the lands not conveyed into trust. 

State laws have proven inadequate to protect Nation archaeological sites from amateur 

archaeologists and artifact seekers. 

Alternative F. Lands comprising all of Group 1, and the majority of Group 2 would be 

conveyed into trust along with some Group 3 lands. The Group 2 lands comprising this 

alternative would include two significant Oneida archaeological resources (Parcels 138, 

139, 140, 142 and 150 in Verona/Sylvan Beach; Parcel 297 in Vernon or the site known as 

Oneida Castle). However, a significant archaeological resource property (Parcel 57) in the 

Town of Cazenovia, Madison County, containing multiple resource components (e.g., 

Late Woodland, burial, Protohistoric Oneida village) would not be included. In addition, 

Alternative F includes two parcels in Group 3 (Parcel 255; Parcel 314) containing Oneida 

archaeological resources. These sites are two of the most significant archaeological 

properties for the Nation and these also have significant importance to the State of New 

York. These sites are more fully described in Section 3.6.3 and in Appendix D. Once in 

trust, these cultural assets would be afforded the additional protection of ARPA and 

NAGPRA. Some of the archaeological resources important to the Nation located in 

Group 3 would not be conveyed into trust under this alternative and therefore not 

afforded the additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA. Four of the Nation’s most 

significant archaeological resource properties (Parcels 136, 171, 282 and 310) are located 

in Group 3 within the Town of Stockbridge. The same direct effects to the Nation 

described under Alternative C would apply to these sites. The direct effects asserted by 

New York State on their jurisdiction over cultural resources for lands conveyed into trust 

would not seem to apply given the cooperative agreement in place and the Oneida Indian 

Nation Cultural, Historical or Archeological Resources Ordinance. The State would 

assert its jurisdiction over cultural properties contained in Groups 1, 2 and 3 not conveyed 

into trust. Protection afforded by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 

would also apply to the lands not conveyed into trust. 

Alternative G. None of the lands containing archaeological resources are conveyed into 

trust. There are no direct (physical) adverse effects to such resources under No Action. 

However the Nation since would not attain control over lands containing archaeological 

resources (including burial grounds, possible internments, village sites, camp sites, and 

associated artifacts), which would not provide protection under ARPA and NAGPRA. 

The ARPA and NAGPRA laws only apply to federal public properties and Indian lands. 

State laws have proven inadequate to protect Nation archaeological sites from amateur 

archaeologists and artifact seekers. 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-97

Applicable New York State laws and regulations would apply to lands not in trust (SHPA, 

Article 14 ECL, Sections 3.09 and 14.09 of New York State Parks, Recreation and 

Historic Preservation Law, 9 NYCRR Part 428) under most taxation and jurisdiction 

scenarios. No Action would potentially allow the State to assert jurisdiction over 

archaeological resources. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 

470 & 36 CFR Part 800) would still apply under No Action as with any of the other trust 

alternatives. 

There are three taxation-jurisdiction scenarios which apply to alternatives where some 

lands (C through F) or no lands (G) are conveyed into trust. The No Action (Alternative 

G) also has the additional scenario of the Casino Closes. These scenarios only apply to 

those alternatives that exclude lands from conveyance into trust (Alternatives C through 

G). 

Property Taxes Paid (PTP): The Nation would retain title to the lands not in trust but 

would submit to regulation of archaeological resources under applicable State laws. 

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 & 36 CFR Part 800) 

would apply. The Nation would not assert sovereign control over archaeological 

resources. Archaeological resources would not be afforded additional protection under 

ARPA and NAGPRA. 

Property Taxes Not Paid - Foreclosure (PTNP-F): This would have the same adverse 

effects to the Nation as PTP but with the added adverse effect that properties containing 

archaeological resources would be foreclosed or alienated away from the Nation. 

Property Taxes Not Paid - Dispute Continues (PTNP-DC): The Nation would retain title 

to the lands and apply control of archaeological resources but absent the additional 

protection afforded under ARPA and NAGPRA. The Nation would continue to apply the 

Oneida Indian Nation Cultural, Historical or Archeological Resources Ordinance and 

manage the properties as it has in the past. New York State regulation of archaeological 

resources would remain in dispute. 

Under the No Action - Casino Closes and All Enterprises Close scenario, the Turning 

Stone Resort & Casino would close and lands containing archaeological resources could 

be foreclosed as the Nation would lose it most significant source of revenue. This revenue 

enables the Nation to maintain cultural assets and programs. The Casino Closes and All 

Enterprises Close scenario would have a significant adverse effect to the Nation and their 

rights to govern and protect resources important to their culture. 

Summary of Direct Effects 

There are no direct (physical) adverse effects to archaeological resources resulting from the 

Proposed Action (Alternative A) any of trust alternatives (Alternatives B through F) or No 

Action (Alternative G). The various trust action alternatives (A through F), however, do
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-98

involve different Groupings and Nation parcels. As a result, different Nation and nonNation archaeological resources would be involved in each. Different alternatives would 

involve different Nation properties with archaeological resources, within 1,000 feet of 

other sites with archaeological resources, or within areas determined by the OPRHP to be 

generally sensitive for archaeological resources (refer to Figures 3.6.4-1 through 3.6.4-20). 

Regardless of the alternative, federal laws and regulations still apply to all lands not 

conveyed into trust with the exception of ARPA and NAGPRA. Federal Law applies to 

lands in trust with the additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA. 

Alternatives affording greater trust protection and sovereign control over Nation 

archaeological resources would have a greater beneficial direct effect to the Nation than 

those affording less protection and less control. These alternatives could be viewed as best 

fulfilling the Nation’s purpose and need for placing lands into trust with the BIA. In this 

regard, Alternative A would be superior to Alternative F and both (A and F) would be 

superior to C. Alternatives D and E would be the least desirable as Groups 2 and 3 contain 

the archaeological resources most important to the Nation. Alternative B could potentially 

accommodate the most Oneida archaeological resources since both identified and yet to be 

identified Oneida sites (not yet owned by the Nation) containing cultural assets (e.g., 

villages, burial grounds, camp sites) including some which might contain internments, 

would be purchased by the Nation over time. These sites, all within their reservation and 

aboriginal homeland, would be conveyed into trust at some point. Once in trust, these 

cultural assets would be afforded the additional protection of ARPA and NAGPRA. 

Alternative G results in none of their cultural resources and properties conveyed into trust. 

Alternative G fails to support the purpose and need expressed by the Nation. 

4.6.2.2 Indirect Effects 

As defined in Section 4.1, indirect effects can be caused by an action but occur later in 

time or farther removed in distance from the action, and are still reasonably foreseeable. 

Potential adverse indirect effects to archaeological resources on Nation lands may occur 

under alternatives where lands are not afforded trust protection. In addition, there is also 

a potential indirect effect to the Nation’s culture if archaeological resources are not 

afforded trust protection. There are no identified indirect effects to the State regulation of 

archaeological resources. 

Alternatives acquiring fewer Nation cultural resources that are not afforded protection 

under ARPA and NAGRPRA potentially have a greater indirect effect to archaeological 

resources contained there. Absent of trust status over the lands, the protection afforded by 

ARPA and NAGPRA would not apply. Lands and the historical artifacts and human 

remains contained there would not be afforded this more comprehensive protection. 

Several Nation lands contain identified archaeological resources critical to the history of 

the Oneida as a distinct Indian tribe. The Nation acquired (through purchase) these 

previously alienated lands within their aboriginal homeland specifically to preserve their 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-99

artifacts, culture and heritage. Part of the need for conveying lands into trust is the 

preservation and protection of cultural materials and tribal heritage. The National 

Historic Preservation Act of 1966, Section 106 requires consultation with Tribes to protect 

cultural assets. Historic artifacts and human remains, however, are afforded an additional 

level of protection when occurring on Federal public lands or Indian lands. 

Under Alternatives A and Alternative B all the Groupings of Nation lands are conveyed 

into trust. All archaeological resources contained on these properties would be afforded 

additional federal protection including the restriction from future alienation. Thus, 

implementation of Alternatives A and B would not result in indirect adverse effects to 

archaeological resources or to the Nation’s culture. 

Alternative C would exclude important archaeological resources located in Group 3, the 

most important of which are in the Towns of Stockbridge, Fenner, Lincoln and Smithfield 

in Madison County. Alternative D and Alternative E convey none of the Nation’s 

important cultural, historic and religious` properties into trust. Alternative F includes 

some of the Nation’s important archaeological resources but excludes sites located in 

Group 2 and Group 3. 

Under Alternatives C through G, lands not conveyed into trust and archaeological 

resources contained there would not be afforded protection under ARPA and NAGPRA. 

Absent these protections, there could be an indirect adverse effect to both the physical 

resources and the Nation’s culture if these lands are foreclosed and the properties or 

cultural assets are affected by others. Under Alternative G none of the Nation’s cultural 

assets would receive protection under ARPA and NAGPRA. The potential adverse 

indirect effects to the Nation’s cultural properties, assets and culture are far more 

significant under Alternative G than the other alternatives. 

There are three taxation-jurisdiction scenarios which apply to alternatives where some 

lands (C through F) or no lands (G) are conveyed into trust. The No Action Alternative 

(Alternative G) also has the additional scenario of the Casino Closes and All Enterprises 

Close. These scenarios only apply to those alternatives that exclude lands from conveyance 

into trust (Alternatives C through G) 

Property Taxes Paid (PTP): The Nation would retain title to the lands not in trust but 

would submit to regulation of archaeological resources under applicable state laws. The 

New York SHPA (SHPA, Article 14 ECL, Sections3.09 and 14.09 of New York State 

Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law, 9 NYCRR Part 428) and Section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 & 36 CFR Part 800) would apply. 

The Nation would not assert sovereign control over its archaeological resources. 

Archaeological resources would not be afforded additional protection under ARPA and 

NAGPRA. 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-100

Property Taxes Not Paid - Foreclosure (PTNP-F): This would have the same adverse 

cultural effects to the Nation as PTP but with the added adverse effect that properties 

containing cultural, historic and religious resources could be foreclosed or alienated away 

from the Nation. Loss of theses properties could result in an indirect effect to cultural 

assets if the properties are affected by future development activities on these lands by 

others. 

Property Taxes Not Paid - Dispute Continues (PTNP-DC): The Nation would retain title 

to the lands and control archaeological resources on the lands but absent the additional 

protection afforded under ARPA and NAGPRA. The Nation would continue to apply the 

Oneida Indian Nation Cultural, Historical or Archeological Resources Ordinance and 

manage the properties as it has in the past. State regulation of cultural resources would 

remain in dispute. 

Under the No Action - Casino Closes and All Enterprises Close scenarios, the casino 

would close and lands containing archaeological resources could be foreclosed as the 

Nation would loose its most significant source of revenue. This revenue enables the 

Nation to maintain cultural assets and programs. The Casino Closes and All Enterprises 

Close scenario would have a significant adverse indirect effect to the Nation’s 

archaeological resources and culture. 

There are no indirect adverse effects to non-Nation archaeological resources from any of 

the alternatives. None of the alternatives involve the physical disturbance to 

archaeological resources. None of the alternatives involve the construction of new 

buildings or facilities on Nation lands that could indirectly affect the integrity, setting, 

perception or association of archaeological resources on adjacent non-Nation lands. 

4.6.2.3 Cumulative Effects 

Cumulative effects include effects beyond those solely attributable to the implementation 

of the Proposed Action or alternatives which result from the incremental effect of the 

action when added together with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future 

actions. 

There are several points worth considering when assessing whether cumulative effects to 

archaeological resources could potentially occur. First, whether the resources may be 

especially vulnerable to incremental effects under any of the alternatives and second, 

whether these effects have been historically significant for this resource. The same points 

can be stated for cumulative effects to the Nation and Oneida culture. 

Essentially therefore, there are two broad categories of potential cumulative effects to 

archaeological resources: 

• Cumulative effects resulting from lands held in trust by the Federal government. 
Section 4 

Environmental Consequences

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Draft EIS 

Oneida Nation of New York Conveyance of Lands Into Trust

4-101

• Cumulative effects resulting from lands not held in trust by the Federal 

government. 

The former category results in more comprehensive Federal protection, tribal sovereignty 

and restriction from foreclosure or alienation of archaeological resources while the latter 

category does not. 

Past historical actions adversely affecting the Oneida and archaeological sites and 

materials include the alienation of their reservation and aboriginal homeland and the loss 

and destruction of cultural materials contained there. Many Oneida sites as recorded by 

the Nation’s Historian have (prior to purchase by the Nation) been disturbed by amateur 

archaeologists and artifact seekers. The pattern of disturbance goes back decades and 

physical evidence can still be seen on some parcels (e.g., pits, trenches, stakes, and mesh 

screens for sieving artifacts). Some of these disturbances have involved grave sites and 

internments. State and federal laws were previously unable to adequately protect these 

sites. Since taking possession of some of their cultural assets, the Nation has implemented 

a program to preserve and protect the sites on those parcels as well as to archive important 

artifacts and data recorded from those sites. These sites are now part of important Nation 

programs regarding cultural, historic and religious education to both Nation members and 

non-Nation members alike. 

Those alternatives acquiring fewer Oneida archaeological sites that are not afforded 

protection under ARPA and NAGRPRA potentially have a greater indirect effect to 

materials contained there and on the Nation’s culture. Absent trust status over these 

lands, archaeological resources would not have the protection afforded by ARPA and 

NAGPRA. This potentially subjects these resources to future effects by others. Foreclosure 

or alienation of these lands again could make these resources vulnerable to additional 

future actions and exacerbate historical damage to Oneida cultural assets which include 

village sites, camp sites, and burial grounds. Potential future damages to archaeological 

sites not held in trust could affect a resource that has yielded or may likely yield 

information and artifacts important to the prehistory or history of the Nation, New York 

State, Madison and Oneida Counties or the U.S.