CNT OF @) <?.. -. %< . , +, 

Unitedstates Department of the Interior 

(')FFI(;E (,)F THE SOL.I(:ITOK 

%Qcz -,ibq \\.;I~I~I~QI~ )ti. I).(;. 202.~) 

MAR 1 6 iSS8 

Memorandum 

To: Acting Director, Indian Gaming Management Staff 

Through: Deputy Commissionprfiqr Indian Affairs . L 

From: Derril B. Jord 

Subject: Gaming on Proposed Trust Acquisition in Manistee County, 

Michigan, for the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians 

This is in response to your memorandum dated January 6, 1998, requesting a legal opinion on 

whether gaming by the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians (hereafter "Little River Band" or 

"Tribe") on a parcel of land totaling approximately 152.8 acres and known as the "Manistee 

Orchard-A" property, is exempt from the prohibition against gaming on trust lands acquired 

after October 17, 1988 in Section 20 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), 25 U.S.C. $ 

271 9, and the requirements of 25 CFR Part 15 1. 

The Tribe has submitted an application for a fee to trust acquisition to the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs which includes the Manistee Orchard-A parcel . The property is not currently owned in 

fee by the Tribe, but the Tribe has entered into an Optioflurchase Agreement with the current 

owner, Manistee Orchards, Inc., to purchase the property for $325,000.00. We understand that 

this land acquisition is made pursuant to a Congressional directive and is intended to establish a 

land base for the Tribe. 

Congress reaffirmed Federal recognition of the Little River Band at the same time (September 

2 I, 1994) and in the same statute that reaffirmed the recognition of the Little Traverse Bay Bands 

of Odawa Indians. See Pub. L. No. 103-324,108 Stat. 21 56,25 U.S.C. tj 1300k-1 to 1300k-7. 

The restoration legislation (known as the "Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians and the 

Little River Band of Ottawa Indians Act," hereafter "Little River Band Act") demonstrates that 

the two tribes share a nearly identical history in terms of participation in early treaties and their 

subsequent treatment by the Federal Government. Therefore, for the reasons s6t forth in our 

November 12, 1997, memorandum regarding gaming on land to be acquired in trust in Emmet - 

County, Michigan, for the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, we conclude that the 

Little River Band is a restored tribe with lands restored to the Tribe within the meaning of 

Section 20 of IGRA. See 25 U.S.C. tj 2719(b)(l)(B)(iii). Section 20 of IGRA prohibits gaming 

on lands acquired by the secretary of the Interior in trust for the benefit of an Indian tribe after 

October 17, 1988. However, Section 20 exempts fiom the prohibition lands restored for an 
Indian tribe that is restored to federal recognition. 

We must determine whether the Manistee Orchard-A property qualifies as "restored" land for 

purposes of 25 U.S.C. $ 2719(b)(l)(B)(iii). In the Little River Band Act, Congress found that 

members of the Little River Band "continue to reside close to their ancestral homeland as 

recognized in the Manistee Reservation in the 1836 Treaty of Washington and reservation in the 

1855 Treaty of Detroit, which area is now known as Manistee and Mason Counties, Michigan." 

25 U.S.C. 3 1300k(4). Congress directed the Secretary to acquire real property in Manistee and 

Mason Counties for the benefit of the Little River Band, and provided that the Secretary ''shall 

also accept any real property located in those counties for the benefit of the Little River Band if 

conveyed or otherwise transferred to the Secretary, if at the time of such acceptance, there are no 

adverse legal claims on such property including outstanding liens, mortgages or taxes owed." 25 

U.S.C. tj 1300k-4(b). Finally, the Little River Band Act provides that land acquired by or 

transferred to the Secretary under 25 U.S.C. tj 1300-k-4 shall be taken in the name of the United 

States in trust for the Little River Band and shall be a part of the tribe's reservation. See 25 

U.S.C. 9 1300k-4(d). 

The Manistee orchard-A property is located near the City of Manistee, in Manistee County, 

Michigan. The property qualifies as "restored" land for purposes of 25 U.S.C. tj 

271 9(b)(l)(B)(iii) because it is located within one of the two counties where Congress required 

the Secretary to acquire land for the Little River Band. 

For the reasons set forth in our November 12,1997, memorandum with respect to the 

applicability of 25 CFR Part 15 1 to the proposed trust acquisition of land in Ernmet County, 

Michigan, for the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, we conclude that the proposed 

trust acquisition of the Manistee Orchard-A property for the Little River Band is exempt fiom the 

provisions of 25 CFR 15 1.3 and 15 1.10. However, under the Little River Band Act, the 

acquisition of the Manistee Orchard-A property can only occur if there are no adverse legal 

claims existing on the property, which we believe includes potential environmental claims. 

Therefore, the Bureau of Indian Affairs must comply with the requirements of 602 DM 2, Land 

Acquisitions: Hazardous Substance Determinations, to determine whether any such potential 

environmental claims may exist. It is our understanding fiom the documentation submitted by 

your office that the Area Director has complied with the requirements of 602 DM 2, and that 

there also has been compliance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA), even though the Field Solicitor, Twin Cities, has stated that compliance with NEPA 

was not necessary in this instance. For the reasons stated in our November 12, 1997, 

memorandum, we concur with the Field Solicitor's determination that NEPA compliance is not 

necessary in this instance. 

Conclusion 

For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the Little River Band is a restored tribe pursuant to 

25 U.S.C. $ 2719(b)(l)(B)(iii) of IGRA, and that the Manistee Orchard-A property proposed to 

be taken into trust by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to the Little River Band Act will 

qualify as "restored" land under this provision of IGRA when taken into trust. Therefore, the 
1 

Little River Band may legally conduct Class I1 gaming on such land, but may not engage in 

Class I11 gaming absent compliance with the compacting provisions of IGRA. The BIA is not 

required to comply with the requirements of 25 CFR $5 15 1.3 and 15 1.10, including NEPA 

compliance, except for compliance with 602 DM 2 to ascertain potential environmental liability. 

If you have any further questions, please contact George T. Skibine of my office at (202) 208- 

4388. 
CC: Twin Cities Field Solicitor 

Minneapolis Area Director, BIA 

SOL DIA RF 

Gskibine RlF 

Twoodward RF 

File:H:\MAIL\LILRIVER.TMW 

This version printed: March 12, 1998