Violation

Canandaigua 1794 and the Kinzua Dam (1958-1965)

Not yet reviewed by this nation. What follows comes from public records and research. It does not speak for the nation.

Congress flooded part of the Seneca's Allegany lands for Kinzua Dam, though a court called the treaty infringement undisputed; $15 million followed.

Treaty
Treaty with the Six Nations (Canandaigua), 7 Stat. 44
Nations
Seneca Nation of Indians (Allegany Reservation); Haudenosaunee
When
1958-1965
Land affected
About 10,000 acres of the Allegany Reservation, nine communities.
Acreage
about 10,000 acres; about 600 people (some sources say more than 600 families)

What happened

In the Treaty of Canandaigua (1794), the United States acknowledged the Seneca's land within set boundaries as theirs. Article III says the United States "will never claim the same, nor disturb the Seneka nation" in its free use and enjoyment of that land.

In October 1956 the Army Corps of Engineers began surveying Seneca land for the Kinzua Dam over the Nation's objections, Environmental Health News reports. The dam was meant to protect Pittsburgh from flooding. The Seneca hired the engineer Arthur E. Morgan in 1957 to propose another plan, and they argued their case in court on the 1794 treaty.

The federal court of appeals ruled against them on November 25, 1958. It wrote that it was "undisputed" that the flooding "will infringe Indian rights acquired by treaty in 1794," and also undisputed that Congress can authorize a taking despite a treaty. The question was whether Congress had shown that intent clearly. The court said Congress knew the Seneca lands would flood and that the Nation would not give them up, and held that Congress had authorized the taking.

Environmental Health News says the Seneca lost nine communities and 10,000 acres of the Allegany Territory, and around 600 people lost their homes. A Bureau of Indian Affairs release says legislation in August 1964 awarded the Senecas $15 million for relocation and rehabilitation after one-third of their Allegany Reservation was taken for the reservoir.

Good to know. The court called the treaty infringement undisputed but held that Congress had power to authorize it anyway. Figures for land and people lost vary by source.

Summarized with AI assistance from 4 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error

What the sources say, and how this was checked

Well supported by the sources below.

  1. the United States will never claim the same, nor disturb the Seneka nation, nor any of the Six NationsTreaty with the Six Nations, 1794 (Treaty of Canandaigua), OSU Tribal Treaties Database
  2. It is undisputed (1) that the proposed flooding will infringe Indian rights acquired by treaty in 1794Seneca Nation of Indians v. Brucker, 262 F.2d 27 (D.C. Cir. 1958)
  3. They lost nine communities and 10,000 acres of their Allegany Territory to the dam.The complicated history of the Kinzua Dam and how it changed life for the Seneca people (Environmental Health News)
  4. awarded the Senecas $15 million for relocation and rehabilitation after one-third of their Allegany Reservation had been taken for the Kinzua Dam ReservoirBill submitted to end federal ties with Seneca Indians (Bureau of Indian Affairs)

Research notes. Treaty breach is stated by the court as undisputed, but Congress's power to override was upheld (no remedy). EHN says the district court ruled in early 1957 in United States v. 21,250 Acres of Land; the appeals opinion cites the January 1957 survey order. 10,000 acres and 600 people come from EHN journalism and the figures differ by source. The Rivers of Steel PDF could not be read and was dropped. The 2026 Army Corps MOU and whether the Senate ratified the 1794 treaty were not verified.

Treaty or agreementShapes from the 1899 federal record: approximate, not legal boundaries.

Who is doing the work

Working with these nations

Land return and Native-led work nearby

Native legal and land defense, nationally

Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.

Connections

These links were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.

Nations named 2

Located in 2

Taken to court in 1

Policy era 1

Concerns the instrument 1

Sources

  1. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinzua_Dampointer
  2. ehn.org/seneca-nation-kinzua-dam-2644943791.htmlunclassified
  3. law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/F2/262/262.F2d.27.14488.htmllegal text copy
  4. sninews.org/2026/03/13/beyond-the-betrayal/unclassified
  5. treaties.okstate.edu/treaties/treaty-with-the-six-nations-1794-0034reference work
The record’s fields
What happened
Canandaigua 1794 and the Kinzua Dam (1958-1965) -- Article 3 of the treaty (concluded Nov. 11, 1794; proclaimed Jan. 21, 1795) acknowledged Seneca land and says the United States 'will never claim the same,' for the Seneca's 'free use and enjoyment.' Congress authorized the Allegheny Reservoir/Kinzua Dam under Flood Control Acts of 1936 and 1938 and appropriated for it in 1957. The Seneca challenged it as a violation of the 1794 treaty; the D.C. Circuit (Nov. 25, 1958) held Congress may authorize a taking of treaty-protected land by eminent domain if it clearly shows that intent, and found it had. The Corps broke ground Oct. 22, 1960; the dam was completed in 1965, filling to 1967. About 10,000 acres (nearly a third of the Allegany Reservation) were flooded and about 600 Seneca were relocated; hundreds of graves were exhumed. An alternative design by engineer Arthur E. Morgan was rejected by the Corps. A 1964 act provided relocation and rehabilitation funds.
Legal aftermath
No injunction. Compensation by a 1964 act (amount not confirmed this session; commonly reported as $15 million). In March 2026 the Seneca Nation and the Army Corps signed a consultation MOU as the Corps studies dam safety modifications.not yet checked against a source
Kind
Violation
Confidence
High
Nation review
Not yet reviewed by this nation
Notes
  • Some details are disputed
  • Some details not yet checked against a source

Correct this record