by soldiers who were operating under the direction of the Army surgeon general, who requested that skulls be sent to him so that he could conduct studies on the cranial capacity of Native Americans to determine their intelligence.

Well, the soldiers got very enthusiastic about it, and they began collecting and digging up graves all over the countryside, and the only thing we know is that they came from the corridor area, or they came from the Oklahoma area. We have no association with specific tribes or specific areas, just a large area.

Now, having cited that, and then the case that has just concluded in Hawaii, I presume you would favor an amendment that would authorize a guardianship capacity for appropriate entities so that we could provide protection for these remains.

Mr. MONROE. The Review Committee has taken a number of approaches, and we did not have any information on the Hawaii case. I think that it is fair to state and Tessie, you could add-that there is great concern about the issue of unidentified remains. It is very important to try to figure out some mechanisms-not over the next 5 years, but in a reasonable time-by which remains can be returned.

And I think it's also fair to state that the issue of ancient remains is a contentious one.

We would like to see and I think I can speak for the museum community, as well-returns of Native American remains that ought to be returned, returned expeditiously. We're working to achieve that. The general principles you're talking about Senator are not in disagreement with the museum community. It's just that it's a difficult issue.

We don't, for example, wish to see remains returned to the wrong parties. There are groups like those in South and North Dakota with the Sioux, from whom you'll hear with later, that have joined together to help facilitate return of a number of remains where it may not be possible to determine whether they were precisely Oglala Sioux or Brule, but rather clearly there are Sioux and they should be returned.

I'm confident that we'll address these issues working on them. Senator INOUYE. I asked a question about the exemption from public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Do you think that information about Native American human remains should be kept secret?

Mr. MONROE. Well, there are a number of concerns that the committee has discussed with respect to this. Again, we're taken aback, I think, by the rulings in Hawaii a number of ways.

There are concerns in making information public about Native American human remains because, if you do then you're just basically publicly advertising where it may be possible for pot hunters and grave diggers to disturb more remains. That's clearly a major

concern.

Second, there is obviously-and as there should be a great deal of sensitivity about additional scientific study and about certain kinds of information being broadly disseminated.

The committee can't respond to the Hawaii case because we didn't know about it, but I think it's fair to say that it's a concern to us that information about the location of gravesites would be

available to anyone who wants it. It certainly goes against some of the basic tenets of this law.

Senator INOUYE. As to your other concern of including all Indian tribes, whether they are recognized by BIA or not, I can assure you we concur with that, because we know that most of the tribes that have not received Federal recognition are found in California at this time, and these tribes were recognized at one time. They entered into treaties with the United States, but we decided to disregard these treaties and therefore made them unrecognized, so we would try to correct history, if we can.

Mr. MONROE. Thank you very much. We'd appreciate it. I know the Review Committee would appreciate that, and certainly those unrecognized tribes with whom we've dealt would deeply appreciate

it.

Senator INOUYE. Because I think that we have the authority, Congress does have the authority, and that we should clearly enact a statute to provide authority for repatriation of all human remains.

Once again, I would like to say that, as Senator Dorgan and Senator Campbell have indicated, they have had 200 years to study and make scientific inquiry about these skeletal remains. Maybe the time has come. I do not think they need 200 more years to do that.

Mr. Monroe, you also somehow expressed that you were not too happy with the publication of the final regulations in the "Federal Register." Are you supportive or critical? I could not quite get it. Mr. MONROE. I'll be clear. The Review Committee has been concerned at the extended time it has taken to publish regulations.

We know that by not having regulations published in 5 years, almost to the day, after this act was passed, it has caused confusion, unnecessary expense, and it has made it more difficult, on the part of both tribes, museums, and universities and Federal agencies.

We would have been happier to have seen regulation passed expeditiously. We think, just to wrap it up, that there ought to be ample opportunity, and we've done that within the resources available to the committee and to the particular department under Frank McManamon, to make it possible for as many people as we can, representing everyone affected, to participate in and provide input to regulations, on the one hand.

On the other hand, we think that it is important and reasonable that to get this work done in a more timely manner. That was my point.

Senator INOUYE. Before I call upon Senator Campbell for questions, I would like to thank all of you on the committee for the many hours and many days of time you have spent, and for the contributions you have made toward implementation of this act.

I can imagine the frustration that you have experienced, but I hope that among the frustrations is not the feeling that you have no support here. I can assure you that you have a lot of support here. We are just waiting for our marching orders. That is all. And when we get them we will proceed.

Once again, I would like to request from you your views on this recent Federal district court of Hawaii decision, because it will impact upon your work, and if you believe that some of these provi

sions should be clarified or cured by legislation, if you would tell us so we'd be very happy to act upon it.

Senator Campbell.

Senator CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Monroe, are you a veteran, by any chance?
Mr. MONROE. No.

Senator CAMPBELL. Well, Senator Inouye, as you know, is a veteran, as I am. Senator Inouye is a very highly-decorated World War II veteran, and I was in the one after that in Korea.

Let me just put this in a context maybe that any veteran in this room could understand.

If you combine all of the people who are not accounted for, Americans of World War II, of Korea, and Vietnam, there are about 50,000. There are about 40,000 from World War II, roughly 8,000 from Korean, and about 2,000 from Vietnam.

Although the World War II veterans and the Korean veterans haven't been quite as vocal, I know that if you follow the newspapers you know that the Vietnam veterans have been very vocal and the families have been very vocal across this Nation about returning the remains of those 2,000 missing. So we have a total of about 50,000.

According to CBO, the number of skeletal remains that haven't been returned to Indians may number 200,000, maybe four times the amount of all American missing in all the wars since World War II.

I want to just put that in a sort of balance so you may be able to understand the magnitude of what it means to American Indians. Certainly those remains are just as important to them as any American's missing remains are of their loved ones in any of those

wars.

You talked about the Native American experience. It is a very proud, dignified, courageous experience in the history of this country. But I often think sometimes if we could have more department heads go out and live that Native American experience, on-reservation experience, they'd understand, I think, better what Indian people feel they are up against, because it is also an experience of poverty, of sometimes as much as 70 or 80 percent unemployment, of sickness, of lack of sanitation or good housing, of living on commodities, of all kinds of social problems.

If you magnify by five every problem that America has, magnify it by five and you have part of the Native American experience on a daily basis.

One of the few things they really hang on to is traditions, culture, and the knowledge and belief that the spirit of the old ones, the spirit of their ancestors are still with them to help guide them through troubled times.

I don't know of any culture that puts more emphasis on that, more belief that they're being guided and helped by the ancient ones than American Indians.

It seems to be a cultural experience for most Americans, when your parents die or your grandparents die, you go out there once a year and you put flowers on a grave and you remember them once a week or once a month or something in your prayers, and little by little they sort of fade out of your memory, but that's not the

Native American experience. They think about it all the time. They just absolutely think about it all the time.

People that we would call "traditionals," they include it in their prayers daily. Daily in the morning, before they do anything else, they include it in their prayers.

But I wanted to just point that out that sometimes when we talk about other experiences in America we're on different wavelengths. We try to apply the logic of living in a certain kind of a lifestyle to what the Native American experience might be, based on a couple of friends we've seen or something we read or a movie we saw or something of that nature.

But it is really a driving force, this concern about elders and ancient ones and the people that they believe the remains should go back to the earth or be returned.

But I wanted to point that out to you, just to sort of put it in kind of a context about all of the rhetoric, all the debate, all the dialogue, all the anger we're getting on the missing servicemen and how it pales by virtual numbers with what Indians go through.

Mr. MONROE. Senator, I appreciate that point, and if you will note in my written testimony, I made precisely the point you just made with respect to Vietnam veterans.

I'd just add one other thing, I also pointed out in my written testimony: This country has a moral responsibility to address this issue and that this small amount of money, while it has been very deeply appreciated, that has been invested so far on the part of the Federal Government needs to be increased for the very reasons that you just pointed out.

Senator CAMPBELL. And I appreciate the fact. I know there has been some progress made, probably more in the last 8 or 10 years, or at least since the Smithsonian bill passed, and probably the last three or four decades before that, so I don't mean to imply that nothing's being done.

Mr. MONROE. I understand.

Senator CAMPBELL. I just get frustrated that we're not moving as fast as we ought to, but thank you.

Mr. MONROE. I understand your point.

Senator CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much.

I would like to thank the panel: Ms. Stevenson, Ms. Naranjo, Mr. Monroe, thank you very much.

Mr. MONROE. Thank you.

Senator INOUYE. Before calling upon the last panel, I would like to advise all of you that this committee has requested information from the Department of Justice on the status of implementation of section 4 of the act, which provides for criminal penalties for violations of the act and for illegal trafficking of sacred objects. That has been a major problem in this area, and I can assure you that the written response we will receive from the department will be made part of the record so that all of us will be able to study that.

Now may I call upon the next panel: The Lieutenant Governor of the Gila River Indian Community, Cecil Antone; the chairwoman. of the Pawnee Tribe of Oklahoma, Elizabeth Blackowl, accompanied by the chief attorney of the Native American Rights Fund, Walter Echohawk; the chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe

of North Dakota, Jesse Taken Alive, who is accompanied by the NAGPRA representative of Standing Rock, Tim Mentz; and the chairman of the American Association of Museums and president and chief executive officer of the Milwaukee Public Museum, William Moynihan.

May I now call upon Governor Antone.

STATEMENT OF CECIL F. ANTONE, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, GILA RIVER INDIAN COMMUNITY, SACATON, AZ

Mr. ANTONE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It's good to be here again. We testified before on legislation that was approved in 1990.

At the outset, I would like to say basically that, in our situation with NAGPRA and the implementation, we have not done a lot in this particular legislation because, as you stated before, there are a lot of problems as far as the regulations, and the previous speakers have spoken to that, and the amount of resources.

What I want to at least say today is that, regarding my testimony, is our experience in Arizona, as far as our four tribes and the efforts we've done with Arizona law, because I think it has a lot to say because Arizona law was approved the same time NAGPRA was approved, in December 1990.

I know that Senator McCain had a lot of inquiries about the law in Arizona, because at the time the committee was looking at the passage of NAGPRA.

Basically, the inquiries that we've received over the last 4 years has been in excess of 150 letters, and we have responded to those letters indicating our interest in trying to at least make visitations to these locations.

I know in my testimony I did not make mention, but we did receive part of the NAGPRA grants, and that was between Gila River and Salt River, and so part of those resources are going to be toward visiting these institutions not all of them, but maybe one or two that has the highest concentration of our people.

The other thing is that we, as often people in our location with the other four tribes have had a lot to do as far as putting the State law into place, because we felt at that time that there had to be at least some cohesiveness among tribes, particularly if they are all related.

When I testified back in 1990, I believe, before NAGPRA was approved, we had put together a repatriation policy and it's still in place, and we have done a lot as far as implementing that policy, both to Federal agencies and to State law.

I guess our experience, at least with NAGPRA, has been very limited, as I stated, and it has only been with programmatic agreements we've done recently with the Air Force, and soon to do with some private entities, as well, because of the location of the mining facility close to our reservation.

In essence, we have, as far as the State laws, we've repatriated over 3,000 human remains of our people and funerary objects.

The biggest difficulty, as my testimony states, is the lack of resources, and so what we're doing is developing partnerships with the Federal agency to develop a repository there at Gila River to house all the big irrigation project in Arizona called "the central