Keepers of the Treasures

Alaska

3400 Spenard Road Suite 4 Anchorage, Alaska 99503

Ph. 907-258-2844

Fx. 907-258-4373

STATEMENT TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

REGARDING THE STATUS OF IMPLEMENTING THE

NATIVE AMERICAN GRAVES PROTECTION AND REPATRIATION ACT

December 18, 1995

Prepared by Ellen Bielawski, Ph.D.

Executive Director and NAGPRA Project Director

and Directors of KTA

Note: The author is not a native person, but has written as "we", having been directed to prepare this summary of the board's comments and her archaeological and museum experience.

Keepers of the Treasures Alaska (KTA) is an Alaskan native non-profit organization supporting the efforts of Alaskan native people to reclaim, revitalize and perpetuate their diverse cultures and languages. KTA's Board of Directors is comprised of one representative of each of the 12 regions established under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, one at-large member, and one ex officio liaison member of the national Keepers of the Treasures. KTA members represent all of Alaska's native and non-native people and live all over the state.

Currently KTA holds a grant from the Administration for Native Americans to assist four (4) Alaskan village councils undertaking repatriation.

We submit these comments in support of some of the testimony presented on December 6, 1995, with the addition of specifically Alaskan perspectives on NAGPRA.

KTA urges Congress to appropriate at least $10 million in FY1996 for implementing NAGPRA. In Alaska, NAGPRA and the required summaries and inventories went to organizations unprepared to act on the opportunity NAGPRA represents for returning ancestral

remains and healing the wounds caused by their removal. In many cases, there are no human nor financial resources to write the grant proposals required for accessing NAGPRA funds available to federally-recognized tribes and organizations. KTA undertook to assist villages in implementing NAGPRA precisely because so many villages in Alaska lack even the resources to access the funds that would allow them to learn about and implement NAGPRA.

It should also be recognized that while costs are high everywhere, there are generally much higher in Alaska than in the Lower 48 states. Under NAGPRA, native people must visit some museums to work with museum staff on repatriation. Most of the villages, and the burial grounds from which ancestral remains were taken, are not accessible by road. Distances between museums and villages, even within the state, are long. This means that any travel associated with NAGPRA, as well ав the shipment of repatriated remains and objects, will be more costly than

2

elsewhere.

Similarly,

costs of

communication

are higher than elsewhere, by phone, fax, e-mail and so on. Because many Yupik and Inupiat Elders speak only their native language, interpretation costs are substantial, especially when addressing words, concepts and issues that do not translate comfortably across the cultural boundaries between museum staff and native people.

KTA also strongly suggests that Congress address the question of native peoples and organizations not formally recognized by the federal government. In the words of an Alaska Keeper: "it didn't matter...when the human remains of non-federally recognized Indian tribes were taken.. ..it irks me that living human beings are technically not in existence merely because the U.S. Government does not recognize them." We feel that carrying out repatriation only through federally-recognized entities goes against the spirit of NAGPRA, and the empowerment and healing it is to foster among native americans.

In Alaska, the Corporations created under ANCSA are federallyrecognized. Both regional and village corporations have received abundant museum summaries and inventories. Yet for many, the initiative required to implement NAGPRA is far outside the scope and interests of corporate, profit-making activities. The parallel non-profit native organizations are chronically overburdened and always struggling to stay in touch with their members across large areas. NAGPRA needs to be addressed both regionally and locally. In some cases, local cemeteries were excavated and large numbers of individual remains taken. In others, the summaries and inventories

indicate very dispersed remains with affiliation by region at best. At present, however, there is little NAGPRA activity dedicated to integrating regional and local cases. The emphasis on federallyrecognized tribes works against the notion of everyone in a region working together to repatriate large, discrete collections of human remains and remains from across and region, often more ore widely dispersed throughout museums. At present NAGPRA and implementation funding emphasize federally-recognized entity consultation with museums; a truer treatment of our ancestors would recognize that we are all their descendants and that we should work together on bringing our people home. This need is especially great concerning the repatriation of culturally unafilliated remains (see Alaska Federation of Natives Resolution 95 59).

We are very concerned that some museums and institutions (including the Smithsonian Institution which, while not subject to NAGPRA, should be) continue to engage in studies of human remains. Our experience suggests that museums and institutions may attempt to carry out work with our ancestors' remains that they call documentation and we know is at best against our expressed wishes and at worst profane (See Alaska Federation of Natives Resolution 95-61, attached).

Parallel to the power the federal government holds to recognize the tribes and organizations with repatriation rights through NAGPRA is the power museums and institutions hold under NAGPRA to determine what is sacred. This can only be twermined by Native American spiritual leaders. While NAGPRA is not directly

concerned with sacred places, only sacred and religious objects, it does apply to tribal and federal lands. Greater protection of Native American graves and otherwise sacred places, is required outside of tribal and federal lands. For example, one multijurisdictional dispute currently allows marked native graves to serve as lawn ornaments ostentatiously visible to tourist and local traffic along a heavily travelled highway just north of Anchorage.

Museums and other institutions are allowed to access to tribal confidential information, but no controls are in place to keep such information confidential. This is common sense violation of a fundamental intellectual property right. The information belongs to the tribes, and anyone desiring or requiring use of it must do so only in accordance with the wishes, agreement and informed consent of the people whose knowledge it is.

We thank you for the opportunity to address these concerns in testimony before the Committee. We trust that you will address these and the concerns of others brought to your attention. In the attempt to balance the budget, Congress seems to look primarily at dollars, cash flow, interest payments, and debt. The United States, and the museum, ethnology, anthropology, medical and other scientific and arts communities Owe a huge debt to American Indians, Native Hawaiians and Alaskan Natives. This cannot be paid simply in dollars. If NAGPRA is adequately supported and carried out with goodwill and the continued spiritual guidance that brought us this far, the healing can begin in earnest. Only in working together towards healing the relationship between native people and the United States will the debt be forgiven.