Navigation Menu



Cultural resources are non-renewable parts of our environment. Once a site is destroyed, it is lost forever. The importance of cultural resources to preserving our national heritage has been recognized by all levels of government in the United States and around the world. The unprecedented destruction of these significant resources during periods of rapid development after World War II prompted national initiatives to preserve important prehistoric and historic sites and structures. Even archaeologists recognize that the act of excavation destroys a site. That is why specialized training in ways to conserve and protect artifacts, sites, and structures is an important part of the ethical training of all archaeologists. Adherence to standards and acceptance of ethics are ways archaeologists “police” themselves and

The unprecedented destruction of these significant resources during periods of rapid development after World War II prompted national initiatives to preserve important prehistoric and historic sites and structures. Even archaeologists recognize that the act of excavation destroys a site. That is why specialized training in ways to conserve and protect artifacts, sites, and structures is an important part of the ethical training of all archaeologists. Adherence to standards and acceptance of ethics are ways archaeologists “police” themselves and ensure that fragile cultural resources are not wastefully excavated or irresponsibly destroyed.1

Indigenous Perspective

Shinnecock Tribal Historic Preservation Officer David Bunn Martine wrote an open letter2 to Dr. John Strong regarding the preservation of sites;

In a recent issue or The Press, Dr. John · Strong expressed his concerns that the Bayberry Hills site in Shinnecock Hills and the James/Klugh site on Mecox Bay would be destroyed if proper care weren’t taken in the proper study or each site.

The protection or the sites and other as of yet undiscovered sites of Native Americans is indeed of critical and of great importance. This can and should be seen in the context that this year is the 350th anniversary or the founding or Southampton.

It is always easy for Native American issues and concerns to be overlooked or disregarded. That is why I wholeheartedly support Dr. Strong’s efforts at preserving and understanding the history or my people, the Native American; and I respect his courage at speaking up for his convictions. Shinnecock culture and history is worthy of our respect and study.

It is equally important that we as Shinnecock and Montauk people should realize that our interests do extend beyond the borders of our current reserve. We must not fool ourselves into thinking that since we no longer occupy all of our ancient territories, that we abdicate all connection with that territory. Whether we as Shinnecock people realize it or not, we do speak today not only for ourselves and our ancestors but spiritually we represent all those countless people who lived on this Island long before the first white man set foot off his boat.

Again, thank you Dr. Strong for your intelligence, perse·rverence and courage in your important wort.

Archaeological Method

Archaeology is one of the major disciplines associated with CRM investigations; history, architecture, geology, and Native American studies are some other common fields used in CRM. Archaeology is a social science and one of the four subdisciplines in anthropology. Archaeologists study artifacts and other evidence in (and on) the ground to identify sites and interpret human behavior covering hundreds and thousands of years. Archaeology uses a variety of methods to locate sites and to analyze cultural material. The results of these scientific studies yield clues about the past that cannot be gleaned from other sources, such as written histories. Archaeological sites are sometimes the only remaining traces of the earliest inhabitants of New York State.

The sites found in the Northeastern U.S. are not like those depicted in the movies. They do not involve massive temples and stone structures. Rather, most archaeological traces are invisible to the passerby, buried in fields, or hidden under asphalt. We know that the prehistoric and early historic peoples in New York State lived in structures that were relatively small; these dwellings were usually constructed of wood and bark, the types of materials that do not last long in our wet, acidic soils. For most of the prehistoric past, people lived in camps and they moved these camps as the seasons changed, leaving behind varying amounts of debris, broken tools, and features. With the start of farming in this region, around A.D. 800, people began to live year-round in the same general area. It was not until European settlers arrived that people began erecting stone and wood frame structures, many with outbuildings, such as barns. Construction of roads, canals, railroads, and clusters of houses offer more visible signs of past occupations. Archaeologists must be well trained in their field and use the best methods available to locate these traces of the past that are no longer standing.3


The following criteria are used to evaluate properties for listing on the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places.4

The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and:

Historic-Preservation-Guide-830x1024 Preservation Jeremy Dennis On This Site

Flowchart describing the steps taken to preserve an archaeological site.


  • that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
  • that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or
  • that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
  • that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Cultural resources are the collective evidence of the past activities and accomplishments of people. They include buildings, objects, features, locations, and structures with scientific, historic, and cultural value.” (NYAC, Appendix D). Cultural resource management refers to the processes and procedures for the identification, evaluation, mitigation, and conservation of significant sites and structures. CRM is grounded in federal and state laws governing historic preservation. A corresponding set of federal and state regulations spell out the general process and procedures for managing cultural resources. 3

 Preservation Attempts

5I5A6568-Edit-300x212 Preservation Jeremy Dennis On This Site

Ayeuonganit Wampum Ayimꝏup

Ayeuonganit Wampum Ayimꝏup, formally Parrish Pond, is the site of a former Shinnecock wampum-manufacturing site. Through protest, the Shinnecock tribe and Southampton town allocated $900,000 from the Community Preservation Fund to preserve the cultural site.



Corey Dolgon describes[1.Corey Dolgon, The End of The Hamptons, 2005, pp. 191-193] the Parrish Pond protest in The End of The Hamptons;

On a cold Thursday morning in February 2000, state troopers arrested the Shinnecock activist Becky Genia for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. Along with a few dozen other tribal members and supporters, Genia was protesting the development of a sixty-two-acre piece of land adjacent to the Shinnecock reservation in Southampton. The developers, Parrish Pond Associates, had hoped to begin work clearing the wooded parcel and building their thirty-eight-lot 'McMansion' subdivision. But local Native Americans argued that the land contained a sacred burial ground, and environmental groups claimed that a large residential development would result in hazardous groundwater runoff, eventually contaminating the reservation’s drinking water. Chanting “not one more acre,” demonstrators met bulldozers on Tuckahoe Road, and a standoff ensued.

Genia explained that she and others had made sure they weren’t trespassing and that they planned a “peaceful protest” that included possible civil disobedience. Before any formal activities had begun, state police moved in and, according to witnesses, “severely manhandled” some of the demonstrators. Three Shinnecocks were arrested that morning, and a fourth was arrested the next day when, once again, protesters gathered at the site. This time, however, the tribe had won an injunction against the subdivision and called in Bob Zellner, co-chair of the Southampton Anti-Bias Task Force, to help mediate the situation. Zellner had barely introduced himself to the supervising officer when he was “knocked to the ground and brutalized” by police. He, too, was arrested.[1. New York Times, 25 February 2000; Southampton Independent, 1 March 2000; Southampton Press, 2 March 2000. Bob Zellner and Rebecca Genia, in interviews with the author, used the terms “manhandled” and “brutalized.” While upcoming court cases will determine the legal outcome of these claims, the photographs and videos of the incident seem to support the use of the terms.]

Eventually, all four of the Shinnecock protesters and Zellner were either acquitted or had their cases dropped or dismissed. They are all currently suing state police for brutality and false arrest. The Shinnecock did, however, lose their court battle to stop the development, not on the case’s merit but on a technicality stemming from a missed deadline.

Today, Parrish Pond Associates advertise 4,000+-square-foot luxury homes on one-and-one-half-acre lots “in a unique community of meadows, tall pines, and a magnificent pond.” Realtors boast about the subdivision’s location, “[o]nly minutes from some of the most spectacular beaches in all the world, the famous Shinnecock Hills Golf Club, mere footsteps from fashionable shopping and the finest dining experiences imaginable, and completely surrounded by the history, culture, ambiance, and world-renowned style of Southampton.” Starting at about $1 million apiece, the Parrish Pond Estates homes now stand as the most recent symbol of the Shinnecock Nation’s long history of struggling land battles.


The following 27east article from 2014  describes the preservation of Parrish Pond;

The Southampton Town Board agreed this week to purchase a 1.5-acre lot in the Parrish Pond subdivision in Shinnecock Hills, a former wampum-making site cherished by the Shinnecock Indian Nation.

The site had been the focal point of days of protests and an aborted legal challenge by members of the tribe in 2000 over the approval of the 62-acre subdivision surrounding it.

“Years ago, the Iroquois chiefs would come to us to collect a fathom of wampum—that was enough to make a million wampum beads that they used in their wampum belts—because the Shinnecock were the best wampum makers,” tribe member Rebecca Genia said on Tuesday. Tribal elder Elizabeth Thunderbird Haile sat next to her in the hallway of Town Hall following Tuesday’s meeting, holding an earring made from the finely polished clam shells, or quahog, that served as a form of currency among Native American tribes centuries ago.

“Parrish Pond, as they call it, was one of the last two wampum-making sites on Long Island,” Ms. Genia said.

Ms. Haile said that the site had the perfect combination of a running stream and a particular type of heather grass that was used to smooth and polish the shells.

The town, on Tuesday afternoon, agreed to pay $900,000 from the Community Preservation Fund to purchase the 1.5-acre lot, known as lot 24 in the 38-lot Parrish Pond development. Tribe members implored the board to work to preserve a neighboring lot as well, an effort board members said they would pursue, and asked that they be allowed to hold an annual ceremony at the site.

The neighboring lot, number 23, is owned by another resident of the subdivision but has not been scheduled for development. The tribe says it, too, is part of the sacred site of the former wampum factory.

“We can do some homework there and see if the owners of the adjoining parcel are amenable to purchase as well,” Supervisor Anna Throne-Holst told the tribe members. “We don’t know their intention at this point.”

Ms. Throne-Holst noted that the town would have to look at the legal details of allowing the tribe to hold ceremonies on the property once it is owned by the town, as both the bylaws of the CPF and legal covenants and restrictions in the subdivision approval may pose hurdles. But, she said, the town would also do an investigation of the possibilities and make accommodations for the tribe during the purchase if possible.

After the Parrish Pond subdivision was approved by the Town Planning Board in early 2000, following a three-year review, the tribe sued to try to stop it, but the case was dismissed by a judge on a technicality. When the clearing of the property, which sits just across Montauk Highway opposite the tribe’s 800-acre Shinnecock Neck reservation, was set to begin, dozens of tribe members and supporters protested. Protesters stopped traffic on Montauk Highway, and five, including Ms. Genia, were arrested. Two later had the charges against them dropped, and two others were acquitted more than two years later in a town court of disorderly conduct charges.

One of those arrested, activist Bob Zellner, filed a $60 million lawsuit against New York State Police troopers, after he was injured during the confrontation.

The tribe contends that there were ancient remains of tribe members on the land that were unearthed and removed from the property by workers during the construction of the property.

“We could never prove that there were our ancestors remains on that land ... because the people who worked for the developers removed them and talked about it all over Southampton,” Ms. Genia recalled. “We know there were burials there.”[1.]

S7A1022-Pano-Edit-300x90 Preservation Jeremy Dennis On This Site

Sugar Loaf Hill

Sugar Loaf Hill is an Orient Period burial site facing south eastern, the only Orient burial site known outside of the North Fork of Long Island. During the 20th century, despite being known and marked on maps as early as 1797, the burial grounds were desecrated and developed for contemporary residence.



On April 10th, 2013, members of the Shinnecock Nation protested a housing development in the Sugar Loaf Hill area, down the road from the burial hill site. Below is an article from 27 east.

Shinnecocks Protest New Development At Sugar Loaf by Michael Wright

_DSC0251 Preservation Jeremy Dennis On This Site

2013 Development. Photo by Dana Shaw


Members of the Shinnecock Indian Nation mounted a small protest Tuesday morning, objecting to new development in the area of Shinnecock Hills known as Sugar Loaf, which they have long claimed as sacred ancestral territory containing numerous ancient native grave sites.

img_5752524023a75 Preservation Jeremy Dennis On This Site

Elizabeth Thunderbrid Haile at the protest on Montauk Highway on Tuesday. Photo by Dana Shaw

A cluster of tribe members gathered at the site of a new residential construction project on Tuesday. No work was going on at the site on Tuesday, but a new driveway had been cut into the property and excavation had begun where the house’s foundation will go.

“This land is part of our ancestral history and remains hallowed and sacred to the Shinnecock Indian Nation,” said a statement released by the tribe on Tuesday morning. “Tribal members are protesting more development in this area where many ancient Shinnecock cultural and funereal artifacts have been uncovered.”

A few hours later, before the Town Board, some of the same tribe members who had held signs on Montauk Highway that morning sat solemnly listening to the Town Board members debate legal particulars of state legislation to codify strong protections of Native American grave sites. The board was considering a memorializing resolution—simply an official voicing of support by the board, carrying no legal weight—but one that has been a topic of divergence on the board for months.

The new house that drew the protest on Tuesday is going up in the same area where the development of three lots on land that the Shinnecocks say were their ancestors’ burial grounds centuries before European settlers arrived in what is now Southampton and Hampton Bays drew outrage and protests from the tribe in the late 1990s. That property was near but not within a recognized and protected Native American burial ground known as the Sugar Loaf Hill Shinnecock Indian Burial Grounds.

The tribe has been petitioning the town for formal protection of ancient burial sites, both known and yet to be discovered, since 2005, following a years-long battle over remains found during the clearing of the former Hotel St. James property in Water Mill.

State Assemblymen Fred W. Thiele Jr. and Steve Englebright introduced a bill providing strict protections for remains to the State Legislature that year. It has yet to be brought up for a vote.

In the boardroom on Tuesday, members of the tribe implored the board to take action on their behalf.

“This hole has been dug in the hills for another residence,” tribe member Becky Genia said, proposing that the hole dug for the foundation should instead be used to return the 16 sets of remains of Shinnecock ancestors, which have been uncovered by development over the years, to the hills that bear their name. “You may not desecrate our hills anymore.”

img_5752e26243059 Preservation Jeremy Dennis On This Site

Members of the Shinnecock Indian Nation protested the continued development of the area of Shinnecock Hills known as Sugar Loaf, which they claim as sacred ancestral territory. DANA SHAW

Councilwoman Bridget Fleming again proposed the memorializing resolution she has been pressing for months, throwing the town’s support behind the state legislation. With the tribe members looking on, Ms. Fleming said she planned to insist that the resolution be voted on by the board, even while acknowledging that she did not think it would garner enough votes from other board members to pass.

Other board members raised doubts about the state legislation, noting that since the bills have not yet been brought up for debate, they could still be modified, and the town might not necessarily agree with the final proposal. But the main hang-up, as it has been for seven years, continued to be that a provision in the legislation says any human remains discovered must, in “practicable” cases, be left in the ground where they lay—a wrinkle that attorneys and business interests have said is too vague and could disrupt business, unfairly restrict property owners and violate constitutional rights.

“The very crux of the state law is that the remains have to stay in place, on the site, which is what we haven’t been able to come to consensus on,” Councilwoman Christine Scalera said. “I still think we need a town policy, but I realize we’re at an impasse about the removal from the site.”

Councilman Jim Malone said that the legal hang-ups are unfortunate, because he thinks there is strong support for an official policy regarding native remains. Ms. Fleming was nonplussed and took Mr. Malone and Ms. Scalera to task about their steadfast opposition to the mostly symbolic resolution. “It depends on what you mean by support—whether you favor the protection of remains over property rights,” Ms. Fleming said. “That’s where the rubber meets the road. It’s not real support if you can’t even vote for this.”

The resolution failed, with only Ms. Fleming and Ms. Throne-Holst voting in favor. Ms. Scalera voted no, and Councilman Chris Nuzzi and Mr. Malone both abstained, with Mr. Malone explaining that he could not vote for a resolution expressing support for the state bills when he does not know what they will contain if they are ever adopted.

It’s frustrating to me that we are unable to come to consensus about protecting Native American burial grounds. We’re talking about the inhabitants of our land. We’re talking about human remains. -  Bridget Fleming

Ms. Fleming nodded to the respect and reverence given to history just moments earlier by the Town Board, which granted landmark status to two North Sea Road homes, originally built in the 1700s. Yet, she noted, the board could not find a way, after years of appeals from the tribe, to formulate a policy on protecting the remains of the area’s first residents.

“I think there’s a certain cruel irony in today’s meeting. We’re landmarking two structures from the 18th century, a hundred years after the Europeans settled here and thousands of years after Native Americans arrived,” Ms. Fleming said. “It’s frustrating to me that we are unable to come to consensus about protecting Native American burial grounds. We’re talking about the inhabitants of our land. We’re talking about human remains.” [1.]



  1. The New York State Archaeological Council, Cultural Resource Standards Handbook, 2000 pp. 5
  2. David Bunn Martine, The Southampton PRess, January 25, 1990
  3. The New York State Archaeological Council, Cultural Resource Standards Handbook, 2000 pp. 8
  5. The New York State Archaeological Council, Cultural Resource Standards Handbook, 2000 pp. 8


About the Knowledgebase

The Knowledge Base is always a work in progress! Please feel free to contribute suggestions, edits and ask for more information at my contact menu.

Latest Articles

Popular Tags

Latest From Instagram
 A confused appreciation; In 1933, artist Elliott Brooks carved several relief sculptures, two in memory of the Montaukett and Poquatuck people of Long Islands east end. Later he describes desecrating a prehistoric burial, ".. while I dig around for Indian relics, it proved to be a ceremonial burial mound, and I like to imagine that the Indian spirits led me to the cache in appreciation of my carving the memorial."  Looking back at when @nativblood and I tried to find the contact period Montaukett Fort at the highest point in Napeague Harbor.  Four prehistoric human remains were found at Reeve Farm Site in 1961, sparking public and archaeological attention. For decades following, local residents flocked to the farm in an attempt to uncover more remains and artifacts. The skeletal remains were purchased by the Bridgehampton Historical Society and displayed there for several years. Their fate is now unknown.