 trigger from the FAIC. Go ahead, Susan. And Susan, sorry, you're muted. You need... Am I on now? Okay. I'll start again. Hello everyone. And the very best way to keep informed about connecting to collections care is to join the list, the announce list. And this is only two or three announcements a month. And then... And that's it. And it's not for discussions. It's only for announcements. So if you want to join or you're not on, you can join here. If you were getting these and you're not getting them anymore, you may have changed your address or you may have been dropped off. So if that's the case, just go and sign up again. You can go up with us on Facebook and Twitter. These are our Facebook address and our Twitter handle. If you have questions that you need answered about caring for collections, there's a whole army of people who answer questions. So you can post them in the discussion form. You have to register to do that. But that's... It just takes a few minutes and it doesn't cost anything. And when you register, you can go to email options and then you can set your email options of when you want to have mail and then remember to save. And you can contact me anytime. This is my email address. I'm happy to hear from you. Solve problems. Or even if you just want to say hello. And next month we're going to have something on storage environments. So sign up for that and we'll see then. And now we're going to start today's webinar. So I'm going to hand you off to Chris Thompson. Here she is. Good afternoon. I'm going to go ahead and advance to the next slide here and introduce myself. My name is Christine Thompson and I'm an archaeologist at the Applied Anthropology Laboratories in the Department of Anthropology at Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana. I want to thank everyone for attending this webinar and thanks to Susan and Mike for all of their help and assistance in making this possible. As part of my job at Ball State, I do archaeology and preservation research projects in both Indiana and Ohio. I've been a project manager for three NAGPRA Consultation and Documentation grants and one NAGPRA Repatriation grant in the last five years. We have over 40 NAGPRA collections in our possession and control at Ball State. Our NAGPRA team has had multiple onsite consultations with American Indian tribes with the ultimate goal of repatriating all of these collections based on tribal wishes. We also have in our forming additional research partnerships with many of these same American Indian tribes. As part of our NAGPRA education and process, we also work closely with other NAGPRA museums and academic institutions in Ohio and Indiana, including the Ohio History Connection, Indiana University, Indiana State Museum and others. In my non-work hours, I volunteer for and am a member of a local historical society, which has given me valuable experience on how local historical societies view and relate to NAGPRA. With all this, oops, I'm going to go back one. Sorry about that. So with all of this being said, I don't feel like a NAGPRA expert at all. I often wonder if anyone feels like a NAGPRA expert. I feel like someone who has had quite a bit of experience with NAGPRA, but who's always learning more. I love to share the experiences that I have had because in turn I learned even more from preparing for presentations like these and from the attendees. NAGPRA is a very complex and emotional topic, and yet it is probably one of the most rewarding projects that I have ever worked on. It's important for anyone involved in museums and historical societies to have a basic understanding of NAGPRA, and I'm very glad that all of you joined us today. So today we are going to cover five main topics in the next 45 minutes, 10 hours or so, and then we'll have time afterwards for questions and discussion. By the end of this session, you will have a basic understanding of what NAGPRA is, why it's important, and how the NAGPRA process works. You will have a better understanding of how NAGPRA might affect you and your museum or historical society by listening to the multiple case studies of various NAGPRA scenarios. I can't possibly cover a subject as complex and nuanced as NAGPRA completely in 90 minutes, so I will give you practical tips on how you can learn more about NAGPRA. You will have a chance to ask questions, hopefully I can answer some of them, and if we run out of time for questions I will send written answers to any trailing questions. My goal today is not that you all become NAGPRA experts, but that you will have a better understanding of NAGPRA basics, and you will have tools to further your NAGPRA education and training. So let's get started. What exactly is NAGPRA? The entire NAGPRA process is administered by National NAGPRA, which is a division of the National Park Service, which is in the U.S. Department of the Interior. The NAGPRA website is shown here, just as a reference. NAGPRA is an acronym for the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, which is federal law that was passed in 1990. NAGPRA provides a consultation and repatriation process for returning certain Native American cultural items, including human remains, to tribes. NAGPRA law includes provisions for both cultural items and human remains that can be affiliated or associated with a specific tribe, and for cultural items and human remains that are culturally unidentifiable, meaning they cannot be associated with a specific tribe. There are penalties for institutions who do not comply with NAGPRA law, and there are also penalties for illegal trafficking of NAGPRA-related items. A very important aspect of NAGPRA law is that it authorizes federal grants for both tribes and museums to assist in the execution of NAGPRA compliance. These are the grants that I spoke of earlier that we have received at Ball State University to document our NAGPRA collections and consult with tribes. What does all this really mean? At its core, NAGPRA is human rights and civil rights legislation. It's federal law that acknowledges that Native American human remains are deceased people who should be treated respectfully and are not scientific specimens. It recognizes that Native American cultural items have spiritual significance and meaning to the specific tribes that they represent. Complying with NAGPRA entails building relationships with tribal members to build trust and respect. The ultimate goal of NAGPRA is to return Native American ancestors to a proper and respectful burial place all in consultation with tribes. There is a very specific vocabulary used when talking about NAGPRA. National NAGPRA even has a glossary on their website. I have already used some of these NAGPRA specific terms and you may have some questions about exactly what these words mean. We will review these in additional glossary terms now and then we will review a few more glossary terms later in the presentation. I've color-coded glossary terms in blue to highlight them. When NAGPRA refers to cultural items, they are specifically talking about human remains associated and unassociated funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony. A funerary object is an object that was specifically placed with the deceased at the time of death or after as part of a cultural death right or ceremony. It is considered an associated funerary object, sometimes shortened to AFO, when the human remains it is associated with or also in the possession or control of a NAGPRA-defined museum. Unassociated funerary objects, sometimes referred to as UFOs, are those where the human remains they were buried with are not in the possession or control of a NAGPRA-defined museum. Sacred objects are ceremonial items that would be important to traditional Native American religions and spiritual activities today. Objects of cultural patrimony aren't necessarily related to human remains but are items that have ongoing historical or cultural importance to Native American tribes. If all of these terms are a bit fuzzy right now, don't worry, as we will be talking about them during the rest of the presentation and we will go through multiple case studies that will illustrate all of these terms and concepts. Here are some more basic NAGPRA terms that we need to understand. We already have mentioned the term museum a lot. Museum has a very specific meaning in a NAGPRA context. A museum is defined by NAGPRA is an entity or state or local government including public educational institutions receiving federal funds for any purpose to have possession of or control of Native American cultural items. We have already learned that cultural items include human remains associated and unassociated funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony. Ball State University where I work is a public educational institution that receives federal funds and has possession and control over Native American cultural items. Hence we are considered a NAGPRA museum and must comply with NAGPRA federal law. So what exactly is possession and control and how are they different? Having permanent physical custody not alone of any of the previously mentioned cultural items means in NAGPRA terms that you have possession of those items or that collection. However just because an institution has possession of NAGPRA collections doesn't mean they control them. For example at Ball State we have possession of NAGPRA collections that legally belong to the state of Indiana so they control those collections while they are in our possession. It's very important to note who exactly has possession and control of each specific NAGPRA collection when proceeding in the NAGPRA process. If you have Native American cultural items remember these include human remains in your possession one of the first things you should do is determine who has legal control of those items. This is normally done by referring to a session record, loaner donation forms, or other records that document how these collections came into your possession. Why is NAGPRA important? Why is NAGPRA even needed and why was NAGPRA federal law enacted in 1990? I believe it's important to understand how NAGPRA came to be and imperative to be mindful of the reasons why NAGPRA was and still is necessary. For me personally NAGPRA is one of those federal laws that I wish wasn't needed but I'm certainly glad that it exists. Learning a bit of the history of NAGPRA helps us all understand a little more while why this legislation is so important to Native American tribes today. To understand the full importance and significance in NAGPRA we have to understand why NAGPRA was needed and how it came to be federal law. The Newberry has a nice Indians of the Midwest section of their website that does an excellent job of explaining the history of NAGPRA. They trace the origins of many NAGPRA collections to early collecting which they defined as a form of nation building. Early European explorers and settlers regularly desecrated and looted American Indian graves. In the 19th century it was not unusual for Native American leaders to be disinterred and displayed as trophies or oddities. One of the more disturbing actions is that the U.S. Surgeon General in the 1860s actually advocated and encouraged the collecting of American Indian human remains for study at the Army Medical Museum in Washington D.C. Oftentimes only the brain was needed so a deceased American Indian would be decapitated so his or her head could be sent to D.C. for research. This was all part of a very misguided attempt to study evolution and race. The Smithsonian became the repository of thousands of those remains. These practices continued into the late 19th and early 20th century treating Native Americans as exhibits, exotics and part of the past. One article I read talked about how Native American remains were displayed with dinosaurs as if extinction had occurred. This was all done at a time in the late 19th and early 20th century where Native American tribal cultural practices and languages were being eliminated or severely curtailed by forced assimilation and boarding schools. These things are not easy to acknowledge and talk about but these are the types of things that make NAGPRA such an emotional issue for everyone involved. So how did NAGPRA finally come to be in 1990? There are a multitude of reasons of course but again I think it's important to have familiarity with some of the most important ones. Besides the general Native rights awareness and movement in the 1970s one of the main catalysts of NAGPRA legislation was the story of Maria Pearson. Pearson was a Yankton Dakota activist leader whose husband was an engineer with the Iowa Department of Transportation in the early 1970s. Mr. Pearson was part of a road construction project in Iowa where both Euro-American and Native American remains were discovered. The 26 Caucasian pioneer burials were quickly and respectfully reburied into a nearby cemetery. In contrast the remains of a Native American mother and child and associated artifacts were sent to the state archaeologist office for study and kept in boxes on shelves. Maria Pearson did not understand this and could not accept this difference in handling of human remains. She met with the governor of Iowa, state archaeologists, various other tribal members, anthropologists and archaeologists, and lawmakers. This eventually led to a change to the Iowa burial law in the 1970s and was a major force behind the NAGPRA legislation in 1990. Another controversial case was the Slack Farm in 1987 in Kentucky. Slack Farm is a mound and village site dating to 1400 to 1650 AD. The site had seven cemeteries dating to that time period. After a change of landowners in 1987 a group of 10 men paid the tenants of the farm $10,000 to to illegally loot the property. Over 650 Native American grays were destroyed over two years with human remains casually discarded and broken throughout the field as the looters wanted to more quickly recover artifacts and grave goods buried with the deceased. Like the case in Iowa this led to more stringent burial laws in Kentucky and even though in private land still cleared the path for NAGPRA legislation. Something I didn't know when I was researching this presentation was that for many years Native American groups met in the area of Slack Farm to commemorate the site and mourn the damage done to their ancestors and their burial places. Again these are not pleasant things to discuss but it's important to understand why NAGPRA is so significant and so emotional for Native American tribes. In 1990 the year NAGPRA was enacted over 14,500 Native American human remains were at federal agencies alone not counting all other public and private institutions or in the hands of individuals. The large number of human remains and funerary objects sitting on shelves and the events I described all echoed some of the Native Americans' main concerns. One of the most distressing was the lack of state laws protecting unmarked graves or that violations were only punishable as a misdemeanor as was as was Kentucky's policy before the Slack Farm incident. This is an ongoing issue in many states as Ohio still does not have a stringent burial law. As evidenced by the story of Maria Pearson in the transportation project in Iowa Native Americans were very concerned about equal protection of burials. Why were accidental discoveries of Native American graves treated so much differently and less respectfully than non-native graves and human remains? Native Americans were also concerned and increasingly frustrated with the United States common laws lack of mention and respect of Native American death and burial practices and religious beliefs. Beliefs. For all these reasons and many more NAGPRA was enacted as federal law in 1990. Why is NAGPRA still important today? As of the fiscal year 2016 NAGPRA report the remains of over 182,000 Native American individuals were housed at federal institutions and NAGPRA defined museums. All of these individuals were at that time awaiting eventual repatriation. Sometimes an individual is represented by a single tooth and sometimes the remains are a complete skeleton. As we will see with one of our case studies there is an increasing awareness of objects of cultural patrimony that are held by NAGPRA museums and not in the control and possession of the tribes whose cultural whose culture they represent. Excuse me and as the director of the cultural and historic preservation office for the Nato Wasephi Huron Band of the Potawatomi States the importance lies in finally placing these ancestors back into Mother Earth where they belong. What is the NAGPRA process? It can be complicated, lengthy and messy. It can be very emotional. It can involve a single tribe or over 50 tribes. It can involve single NAGPRA collections or multiple NAGPRA collections. I can't possibly cover every aspect of the NAGPRA process today but I can give you a good overview. We have two NAGPRA glossary terms that we need to review. A summary is the process of documenting unassociated funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony. It is shown in steps one through three in pink on the left side. An inventory is the process of documenting human remains and associated funerary objects. It is shown in steps one through three in blue on the right side. Steps four and five apply both to summaries and inventories. We will go through each set of steps starting with inventories first. I have blown up the text on each step so it is easier for you to read. The first step in the inventory process is to consult with tribes or native Hawaiian organizations on the human remains and associated funerary objects to determine if they can be culturally affiliated. Step one has introduced several new glossary terms so let's review those. Consultation takes place between tribes and the NAGPRA museum to determine where a NAGPRA whether a NAGPRA collection can be culturally affiliated. Normally but not always, consultation is on site at the NAGPRA museum. Different tribes will have very different approaches to consultation. Some tribes will want to review all the human remains and associated funerary objects. Some tribes will want to review objects only and some tribes will only want to review documentation and or photos. Some tribes may want to perform a smudging ceremony. Some tribal customs dictate who can handle human remains. For example we've had requests to color code our human remain boxes by male female as only males will handle male remains and vice versa. Some tribes will not have women of childbearing age handle human remains at all. When planning a consultation you will want to ask about any specific request that the tribe have. All documentation regarding the NAGPRA collection, accession records, site forms, catalog records, reports, etc should be forwarded to the tribes before consultation for their review. The primary goal consultation is to determine if the human remains and objects can be culturally affiliated with any specific tribe. This could be determined by the types of artifacts found with the deceased in some cases the way the person was buried. In some cases it could be determined by the age and the location of the burial if it corresponds to a single tribe or its ancestors occupying that location at that time. Tribes determine cultural affiliation based on their remains artifacts documentation and data that is given to them. If cultural affiliation cannot be specifically determined the human remains and associated funeral objects are considered culturally unidentifiable also known as CUI. Our final glossary term is repatriation. Repatriation is the transfer of the physical transfer and the transfer of legal interest from a NAGPRA defined museum to a tribe usually but not always with the intent that the tribe will rebury the human remains and associated funeral objects. What tribe should you consult with? This is where the complexity could begin. You need to consult with any tribe that could have a cultural claim to the specific NAGPRA collection that you are dealing with. A place to start is the National NAGPRA Native American Consultation Database which lists tribes interested in consulting by state and county. However we have found that this database often contains incomplete information or in some cases is completely missing tribes would like to consult a particular state and county. Another good starting place is the federally recognized tribes in your state. The handout lists a resource for you to get a list of these tribes. Ohio and Indiana where I work are very interesting states for consultation. The Native American Consultation Database is not accurate for Indiana counties and it leaves out many tribes that are interested in consulting. We have no federally recognized tribes with headquarters in Ohio and Indiana. Why is that? Tribes in Ohio and Indiana sign many treaties before, during, and after the Northwest Indian wars with the end result of the tribes losing their land to Euro-American settlement. Tribes were forcibly removed by the United States government starting in the 1830s mostly to Kansas initially and then to Oklahoma. Many of these original tribes have now branched out into multiple modern tribes. Treaty claims combined with forced removal combined with the branching out of tribes means that in Indiana we have to consult with approximately 55 tribes on each of our NAGPRA collections. To make matters more complicated none of these tribes are close in proximity to Indiana. They are in Kansas, Oklahoma, Michigan, Wisconsin, and other states. Other places to ask for guidance on which tribes to consult to contact for consultation include any repatriation alliances that may be present in your state. Also discuss with your state historic preservation office, your state department of transportation, or public universities and other institution institutions with NAGPRA collections. All of these entities most likely have a consultation and contact list that they could share with you. If you remember one slide from this presentation this should be the one. NAGPRA is about people and building relationships and will be easier to build those relationships relationships if you educate yourself so you know a little bit about each tribe that you are working with. Take an interest in your consulting tribes and get in the habit of showing up where you can learn more about them and their current concerns. Review tribal websites. Almost every tribal website will have a cultural a culture or history section. Read up on their history especially their history in your state. Make a little cheat sheet of some important points to remember for consultation. Participate in any training sessions that deal with or are being presented by a tribal member that you are consulting with. Learn about their culture. Take an interest in what they are doing now. Show that you are interested in building a true relationship with them through the NAGPRA process. Tribes have lots of reasons not to trust us. Give them every reason to see that you are interested in regaining their trust and to respectfully and professionally move forward in the NAGPRA process. Learn as much as you can about tribal sovereignty and what that might mean between your organization and the tribes. Learn about tribal etiquette from others who have been through the NAGPRA process. We quickly learned through our first mistake that small gift giving was very important in our relationship with tribes. It is always good to learn from others mistakes if you can. Once you finish consulting with the appropriate tribes and based on their findings you will need to create a culturally affiliated inventory or culturally unidentifiable inventory. This is simply a list. The time between step one and step two could be years if you are consulting with numerous tribes or it could be just a matter of weeks if you only have to consult with one or two tribes and they are local. Once you compile the inventory then it needs to be sent to the consulting tribes and a federal notice of inventory completion needs to be submitted to the federal register via National NAGPRA. Once National NAGPRA receives your federal notice they also list your inventory on their website on their databases. The Notice of Inventory Completion Database is the searchable library for the published federal register notices. The Culturally Unidentifiable Native American Inventory Database is a searchable list by museum and state of the culturally unidentifiable human remains and associated funerary objects that are listed on federal notices and not yet repatriated. The Culturally Affiliated Native American Inventory Database is a searchable list by museum, state, and tribe of the culturally affiliated human remains and associated funerary objects. Steps four and five are then the same for both inventories and summaries. Let's now discuss the summaries process steps one through three. Remember summaries are for unassociated funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony. The first step is creating a summary description of any item that might fit into one of these categories. Summary step two is identical to inventory step two, consultation. Again you need to consult with any tribes that may be able to lay claims to the unassociated funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony in this specific NAGPRA summary. Step three is a bit different for summaries. After the consultation process a tribe can submit a written request to the NAGPRA Museum asking to repatriate the unassociated funerary objects, sacred objects, and or objects of cultural patrimony. The tribe will lay out their justification for this repatriation in their written request. The NAGPRA Museum then publishes a notice of intent to repatriate in the federal register via national NAGPRA. Once national NAGPRA receives your federal notice they also list your inventory on their website on their databases. The summaries database lists the name of each tribe that received a copy of your summaries. The notices of intent to repatriate database is a library that contains all federal register notices that pertain to unassociated funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony. Steps four and five are the same for summaries and inventories and are the two final steps towards the ultimate goal of repatriation. After the publication of a federal notice of the inventory completion for inventories or federal notice of the intent to repatriate for summaries, the NAGPRA Museum must wait at least 30 days. This 30-day waiting period gives any other tribe that sees the federal notice a chance to request consultation or file completing a competing claim. If there are no competing claims or when competing claims are resolved, the NAGPRA Museum must transfer the specific cultural items to the tribe who's making the claim. The NAGPRA Museum has 90 days to transfer possession and control the NAGPRA collection to the tribe making the claim. Like the consultation process, this process may go quickly or if there are competing claims it may become lengthy and complicated. The NAGPRA process that I just described is greatly simplified. As I mentioned previously, the consultation process can be quite complex and lengthy. This does not necessarily mean anything is wrong, it just means that lots of trust and relationships need to be built and this all takes time. This is the area where we learn the most at Ball State University. We had no idea how long these processes may take or how many tribes would eventually be involved. I think the best way to better understand the NAGPRA process is to present some selected case studies that each represent a little different view of NAGPRA. Our first case study takes place in 1982 and involves a small local museum and historical society on a site of a Northwest Indian War battlefield in Ohio. This is the museum and historical society that I volunteer for. In this case study actually happened the summer that I worked at the museum as an 18-year-old docent. There was an identified Native American skull on display in the main exhibit area. An American Indian visitor politely brought this to my attention and I informed the museum the museum director. This was all prior to 1990 and prior to NAGPRA laws. The historical society worked with local Native American cultural groups to rebury the skull and held a large public commemorative event. Every attempt was made to be respectful and to do the right thing, but the process today would be much different than it was in 1982. Today, federally recognized tribes would be consulted to see if any type of cultural affiliation could be established. If not, depending on the age of the skull, descendant tribes from the Northwest Indian War battle or from tribes with any treaty claims to the area would be consulted for proper disposition and eventual repatriation. Based on tribal wishes, the skull would most likely have been repatriated privately without a large public commemorative event. However, again, for the time this was regarded as a proper way to handle the human remains and the skull was no longer on display in the museum. Case study number two illustrates how different this process became post NAGPRA. There were additional human remains to femur bones found in the closet of the same historical society museum in 2014. These human remains had been donated years before and based on a preliminary inspection by two local nurses were hundreds of years old and presumed to be American Indian. In order to be as respectful as possible to federally recognized tribes, these human remains were donated to the Ohio Historical Society transferring both control and possession. The Ohio Historical Society already had an established method of consultation with all federally recognized tribes who had treaty claims in Ohio. The Ohio Historical Society was glad to facilitate the transfer of these remains so they could be handled properly and respectfully. The conversation with the local historical society and museum was interesting. Initially they wanted to handle these remains the same way as in 1982 when no involvement from federally recognized tribes and with a large public event. After confirming with the Ohio Historical Society, I explained to the members of the local historical society the proper way to respectfully handle the remains and how things had changed since 1982. The cooperation from the Ohio Historical Society made it very easy for the local historical society to agree to do the proper and respectful thing. Another local historical society case study that I'm familiar with is a county historical society in Indiana who has their NAGPREC collections listed on the National NAGPREC Culturally Unidentifiable Native American Inventory Database. They apparently receive or have received federal funding since 1990 as they are considered a NAGPRE Museum and have listed their NAGPRE inventory through the federal notice process. They have five NAGPREC collections listed three donations and two that have little pervenience information. A representative of this historical society contacted Ball State University in 2013 asking for NAGPRE advice. Since we no longer accepted donations of NAGPREC collections, we gave them advice on how to proceed to comply with NAGPRE federal law. We directed them to Indiana State Historic Preservation Office, whichever state has. We also gave them contact information for the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma Tribal Historic Preservation Officer because we knew they would be interested in eventual repatriation and would help guide the local historical society through the process. We encouraged them to call or email National NAGPRE with their questions and concerns. I have personally found National NAGPRE staff to be very helpful when I've had specific questions or was confused about a particular process or step that I needed to take. We also offered to assist this Indiana Historical Society with a NAGPRE consultation and documentation grant as they felt like they needed financial assistance to execute any of those suggestions. I don't know the current status of this NAGPRE collection at this historical society, but they should have been able to find guidance from any of these suggestions that we gave them. This case study is interesting as it shows an example of where it appears that NAGPRE is not applicable. A small museum in local historical society in Ohio has a collection of Sandal Soul Shell Gorgettes. I became familiar with this collection as these Shell Gorgettes were the topic of my anthropology master's thesis. A Sandal Soul Shell Gorgette is made from a conch shell and is the approximate size and shape of a sandal soul, which is how the object got its name. The ones I studied had three holes in them and the holes had use wear indicating that they were most likely strung from the neck with a cord. There are just over a hundred of these known. All of these objects were found in what are known as glacial cane burials. The glacial cane culture were archaic people that lived in what is now southern Ontario, Michigan, Ohio, in Indiana from 8000 to 1000 BC. They buried their dead in natural hills of gravel called glacial cams and had very distinct burial goods including these Sandal Soul Shell Gorgettes. They are impressive artifacts that are sometimes etched or engraved and these Gorgettes obviously had some kind of cultural or spiritual meaning giving their placement with a deceased. These artifacts cannot be culturally affiliated with federally recognized tribes today but were found in the same areas as today's federally recognized tribes ancestors occupied in the past. A collection of 11 Sandal Soul Shell Gorgettes is owned by this local historical society which does not receive federal funding. However, the collection is currently displayed in the museum building owned by the state of Ohio which does receive federal funding. The local historical society does have research relationships on other topics with federally recognized tribes. Because of the lack of federal funding by the local historical society this collection is not considered a NAGPRA collection is not listed on the national NAGPRA database. However, the local historical society is very much aware of NAGPRA and keeps up to date on similar artifacts that are part of NAGPRA collections of other institutions. Case study number five is a little bit unique and in my opinion the most interesting because it involves an object of cultural patrimony specifically journals containing tribal council records. Since the late 1960s the Gilcrease Museum in Tulsa, Oklahoma had in their possession the handwritten journals of the Miami Nation with council records dated dating from 1862 to 1910. With no accession documentation available it was unclear exactly how these two volumes came to be at the Gilcrease Museum but it appears it may have been through a series of multi-institutional undocumented loans and or a possible sale between 1910 and 1962. The consultation process took three years culminating in the Gilcrease Museum transferring control of the governmental record journals back to the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma in winter 2017. Through research the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma determined that the council books were legally objects of cultural patrimony and initiated the formal repatriation process. Since the Gilcrease Museum in the city of Tulsa did not agree with this assessment this matter was scheduled to be reviewed by the National NACPR review committee. The review committee did not hear the case however as the journals were returned by the Gilcrease to the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma several weeks before the National NACPR review committee was to meet. One of the most interesting aspects of this case is that these journals did not only contain typical council and governmental records but the journals documented tribal stories of the past that contain new information for current tribal members. This quote which is part of a Miami Tribe of Oklahoma newspaper article details the emotional connection that these council books represented between the Miami past and current tribal members. This article made the very reasonable and undeniable argument that records and journals like this are just as valuable and just as important to repatriate as more readily identifiable Indian artifacts. This case study is also a good example when repatriation doesn't does not automatically equate with reburial. The council books are now kept in the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma's archives. Case study number six is from Indiana University. In the 1930s a missionary nurse from Indiana who worked in Point Barrow Alaska donated Eskimo Human Remains to Indiana University. In 2014 Indiana University anthropologist consulted with members of the native village of Barrow via email and telephone. The village of Barrow was very interested in repatriation and the required federal notices were submitted to National NACPRA and published. The Indiana University anthropologist traveled to Barrow which is 350 miles north of the Arctic Circle in 2015 with a collection and it was reburied in a village ceremony. This is a good example of a clearly culturally affiliated collection with a single tribe involved. The last case study is the one that I'm most familiar with. As I mentioned before we have over 40 NACPRA collections in the Department of Anthropology at Ball State University. As a public university we receive federal funds so we are considered a NACPRA museum. Our NACPRA collections are all from the state of Indiana except for two collections from the same site in Kentucky. These collections, these 40 collections were acquired from field schools and excavations in the 60s and 70s. We have since discontinued this practice. Donations, accidental discoveries, and holdings from the state of Indiana. All of our NACPRA collections are culturally unidentifiable human remains and associated funerary objects. There are no federally recognized tribes with headquarters in Indiana. A list of tribes that we consult with was compiled from the NACPRA Native American Consultation Database, treaty claims, advice from tribes, and comparing consultation lists with the Indiana State Museum and the Indiana Department of Transportation. At present our consultation list includes 55 tribes and these tribes have headquarters mainly in Oklahoma, Kansas, Michigan, and Wisconsin and other states. However we have more robust relationships with about 15 of these tribes and some of the 40 other tribes have already said they would defer to the 15 core tribes recommendation when it comes to eventual repatriation. We have had on-site consultation with at least six tribes so far and are actively trying to schedule additional consultations. Before we could even consider hosting productive consultations we did a complete inventory and documentation of all of our collections, a process that started in 2009 and led to NACPRA consultation documentation grants in 2012, 2013, and 2015. We have had one repatriation mended by a NACPRA repatriation grant in 2014. In the relatively near future we hope to repatriate all of our NACPRA collections per tribal wishes. Besides the huge effort in re-inventoring and properly documenting our NACPRA collections, our biggest time spent has been in building relationships with the various Native American tribes who have not only become our NACPRA partners but who are becoming collaborators in other research areas. So how can you learn more about NACPRA? How do you proceed if you think you might have collections in your in your historical society or museum's collections that fall under NACPRA federal law? I'm going to wait until that phone stops ringing I'm sorry. Okay thank you. The first place to educate yourself is the national NACPRA website. The most applicable areas if you are new to NACPRA are the frequently asked questions, the glossary, the training area, the online databases, and resources for museums. Also, and I should have included this on my slide, don't be afraid to email or call National NACPRA if you have specific questions. I have found them to be very helpful. This is the National NACPRA website. Outlined in red are some of the topics that I just mentioned. They're very useful to to NACPRA newbies and all these links are also included in your handout. Here's the resource for museums page on the NACPRA website. It would be worth your while to take some time to explore these resources. Particularly if you have NACPRA collections in your possession or control. A great way to learn about more about NACPRA is watching their videos and webinars. All of their videos and webinars are available on the YouTube National NACPRA program channel. I've listed the ones that are most applicable if you are new to NACPRA. I've also listed them by category in your handout. You definitely want to take the time to review the general NACPRA videos before you get into specific topics such as consultation, federal notices, etc. These videos and webinars have been very helpful to me and I still consult them on a regular basis on specific topics. If you find that you do have NACPRA collections and you will be needing to consult with tribes, I would highly recommend the training class. The National Preservation Institute offers several different types of NACPRA training classes throughout the year in different locations. I took one of these classes in 2011 and I cannot overstate how helpful the class was in helping me understand the very basics of NACPRA. There are often scholarships available that cover the cost of training and travel grants are also available. I attended training in Minnesota and had to pay very little because of the scholarship and travel grant. I also had a graduate student that attended training in 2015 in Indianapolis and because it was close, her entire training fees and travel costs were covered. I highly recommend this training. It was invaluable to us. Do you remember this slide? I hope so. Again, if there is only one thing that you remember from today, this should be it. NACPRA is about people. Take an interest in your consulting tribes, attend their presentations, learn about their current concerns, learn about their past. I guarantee you the more you learn, the more you will begin to understand how all of these things influence the NACPRA process and you will feel more confident when consulting. Plus honestly, this is the professional and proper thing to do. We should be respectful of our consulting tribes and show our respect through our interest and participation. As I mentioned before in various parts of this presentation, there are people in your state who should be able to help you and guide you. Every state has a historic preservation office and there should be people in that in that office who are knowledgeable knowledgeable about NACPRA. Archeologists at your state museum most likely have a high level in NACPRA knowledge. Same with public universities with NACPRA collections in your state's department of transportation. More than likely these entities have a list of consulting tribes in your state with contact information. You should be able to fairly easily find someone that can help answer your basic questions and provide you with information. As I mentioned previously, some states like Michigan have Native American or repatriation alliances. These groups can also be very helpful and always learn and share with others. We have shared our NACPRA processes and grant applications with multiple entities in Indiana and Ohio. They in turn have shared with us their consultation contact lists, invited us to their meetings, and shared with us their practices and procedures. We collaborate with other institutions on future grants and try to schedule events so as to maximize both our time and tribal visitors time. By learning and sharing, we are assisting in making all Ohio and Indiana NACPRA museums more effective and efficient in working with Native American tribes. The handout that Susan has made available has all the links from today. If I have forgotten any links or if there's information you cannot find, please email me. I have added a few additional resources to the handout that I didn't mention in this presentation. To recap, today we learned the basic definition of NACPRA and some key terms that NACPRA uses to describe its processes. None of us are experts yet, but we should all have a basic understanding of what NACPRA is, why it was needed, and why is it still important today. We reviewed the general NACPRA process for summaries, unassociated funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony in the process for inventories, which are human remains and associated funerary objects. We understand in general the consultation and federal notice process for both summaries and inventories. We understand how and when repatriation occurs. We understand that sometimes this can all be a lengthy and complicated process. We reviewed selected NACPRA case studies that gave us examples of glossary terms, NACPRA compliance, how small and large NACPRA museums are different, and the different assistance available. Finally, we reviewed numerous resources that can be used to learn more about NACPRA and to dive into the details of NACPRA that may be applicable to your historical society or museum. I thank you again for your attendance and your time today. I think now we are probably ready to take any questions that you may have. Okay, so I'm going to read the questions. Before we start, I'm going to put the evaluation link up here. Please fill it out. These are very important to us and we use them extensively to do our planning. Rachel Loveless-Portal asked, will the slides be available? Yes, the slides and the recording and the handout will be available in the next few days. As soon as you don't see the ad for this webinar disappears from our homepage, then you'll know to look in the archive and the webinar recording and everything will be there. So let's start with the questions. Melvin Saracina says, what items are removed when items are removed from tribal lands illegally, who has ownership? Some of these questions are going to be really hard for me to answer. That is a question that I would call national NAGPRA about. If we have that case here at Ball State, I wouldn't even attempt to answer it. I would call them and have a discussion. Yeah, Melvin's from Akama and they have this big international dispute going on with the an auction house in France. Although Melvin, you can correct me if I'm wrong. I thought that has been settled. But then I saw something recently about it again. Julie Blood says, how do you repatriate objects to tribes that no longer exist? So that I would need some more specific information, but do they have descendant tribes? So are these tribes that branched out into other descendant tribes? And are these objects that weren't only culturally affiliated to that particular tribe? Those would be the questions that I would ask. I don't know if Julie could answer those now. Yeah, and I think, isn't that, oh Julie's typing something now, so we'll come back to that. Esther Burns says, sounds like a possible grant funded project to have the database up to date. Or to have, I'm not sure, Esther, let us know what database you're referring to. Your own database or the national database, because I think that's kept up to date, isn't it? I can kind of answer that question two ways. So in Ohio and Indiana, there were kind of two approaches to institutions applying for NAGPRA grants. So the one approach is that, and this is the approach Ball State took, is we didn't have our internal documentation up to date and we didn't have a good feel for if our inventories were correct in-house, if our catalog sheets were correct. And so we said we are going to apply for an NAGPRA grant and we're going to explain our current situation. We're going to ask for money to document and re-inventory and recatalog our collections. And so that's how we received our 2012 and 2013 consultation documentation grants. So that really, really helped us. I'm not sure, we certainly wouldn't have gotten that body of work done as quickly without those grants. On the other hand, some other institutions that are here in Ohio and Indiana, they said, oh, we feel like we're not ready for NAGPRA grants because we don't have things cataloged properly and we don't know exactly what we have. And so they waited a few years and they used some internal money to kind of get things organized before they applied for NAGPRA grants. You can kind of do it both ways. You have to make a case of, you know, that you have the capacity to do what you say you're going to do in the grant application. Okay. Julie says, my understanding is that these tribes or this tribe was wiped out by the early 1900s by disease. We're not aware of any descendants in our area. I believe we have both UFOs and AFOs. You know, something that specific, I would probably call National NAGPRA and have a discussion and ask them. That's something I feel I can't answer. Okay. Celeste Oda says, what if an individual, not a tribe, seeks repatriation? Is there a process or does the request need to be from a recognized tribe? So I didn't cover this in much detail, but if an object can be tied to a lineal descendant, then it can be repatriated to the lineal descendant. I don't know if that's the question she's asking, but they would have to, yeah. So that's correct. I just, there were certain things in the, you know, the essence of time that I couldn't go into much detail, and that was kind of one of them. Yeah. So Celeste, let us know if we didn't interpret that correctly. Samantha Schafer says, does the process differ when dealing with IHOs versus mainland tribes? And I assume that means Native Hawaiian organizations? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I do not have experience with Native Hawaiian organizations, but, so I don't really want to answer that. But they are included in the NAGPRA law, so I would assume that it's the same. I would also assume that, but, you know, I would not want to rely on my experiences, as I don't have any experience with that. Melvin Sarasino again says, some Native items have been treated with arsenic for preservation purposes. How has repatriation dealt within this instance? You know what, there is, I'm almost sure, there is a frequently asked question. There is documentation on the National NAGPRA website that deals specifically with contaminated collections. And that's an area that I didn't dive into as a presentation, but I know there are resources available, because I just saw them going, preparing. Yeah. And I know that Nancy Odegard and her group in Arizona have done a lot of conservation on repatriated items before they're given back to the tribes or the groups. So Melvin, you might contact Nancy. It looks like somebody just put in a book. From Nancy Odegard. Old Poisons and New Problems. That's one of the things that we checked on early in our, I think that was one of the first questions in our very first NAGPRA consultation. And none of us, all of us here are fairly new. So we had to talk to some people that were here before us to kind of figure out. As far as we know, we don't have that situation here. And I'll add this book of Nancy's to the handout before I post it. Thank you. And that's on my list of things I learn when I do these things. Yeah. Kelsey Perego says, in situations similar to case number four, no known funerary objects, is a consultation and inventory still required? And I first have to ask, Kelsey, are you the Kelsey that I know? If so, she is a graduate of our program here. So that's kind of interesting. Yes. Hello, Kelsey. Okay. So I'm looking at case study number four. Well, in that situation, that was unassociated funerary objects that were owned by an entity that has not received federal funds, so they are not considered a NAGPRA museum. So I'm not sure if I answered your question at all. If they would be unassociated funerary objects in a NAGPRA museum, so if they did receive federal funds, then, yes, they would still have to do consultation and inventory. Okay. Yes. And Rebecca, this webinar will be archived. And as soon as the add no longer appears on the homepage, it'll be in the archives with the handouts updated and all that stuff. Okay. Leo Joy Clark says, does NAGPRA have consideration for copyright regarding photographs, research based upon or audio duplicates of the original artifact? I'm basically asking about U.S. copyright law. And I have no idea. I'm in no way qualified to answer that. But that's interesting. Yeah. I've never seen anything about that. That would be worthwhile asking the NAGPRA people. So that would be if you want to do duplicates of the photographs or if you want to do de-scanning and duplication of the artifacts. Is that what? Well, imagine, Leo, you can correct us. It might also include having photographs. I know that there are problems in New Mexico that have asked for photographs to be withdrawn from photographs of ceremonies to be withdrawn from archives. And Leo says, we're struggling with that in Canada. If we repatriate and add an item who has control over the figures of the artifact that our staff took. That's a really good question. Yeah, I can answer that a couple ways. So one of the first things we did when we started consulting with tribes, we asked them about photographs. So at least one tribe, and I think it was two, wanted no more photographs taken. So we complied with that. But we also have all the photographs that were taken in the 60s and 70s. And what we do is we let tribes know. So for each collection, we have a listing that says if they have photographs and if the photographs are of human remains or just of objects, and then we let the tribe that is making the claim decide what they want to do with those. So if the tribe wants to take those, when they repatriate the rest of the collection, then they can have those. And what they do with them is kind of, so that's the approach we're taking. But I understand that might not be everybody's. And Leo says, thanks. I think that makes sense. So we just ask. We just say, this is what we have. How do you think we should handle it? Yeah. Michael Nagy says, rather than each museum doing this itself, are there any clearinghouse organizations that take these materials via deed or deposit with the purpose of clearing these repatriations? So is that kind of like case study number two, where we had the small historical society that found the two femur bones in their closet, and then they transferred control to the state historical society and the state is doing the proper consultation in eventual repatriation. I think that's kind of what you're getting at. I wish there was, because it would make the process so much easier for local historical societies and museums to do the proper thing. Yeah. Michael's tripping something right now, but we'll wait for him and we'll go on to Jane Babinski says, what's the difference between objects, i.e. tools found in fields versus objects found in burial mounds? Okay. So I can kind of answer that based on our experience. So on our first repatriation we did, it was human remains, it was found in a field setting, so it wasn't a burial setting, so there were some human remains on the surface and there were flakes and tools that were also on the surface. So there wasn't really anything found in a burial context per se. In the tribe we repatriated with, they said we will gladly take these objects, so these non burial goods, and we would take those and repatriate those as well if you'd like. And we said yes, because we felt like the whole collection should be together. We also have larger sites and larger collections where you have a burial context with the human remains and clearly associated funerary objects, and then you might have flakes and tools that were found, maybe several meters away on the surface. We let the tribes decide how they want to handle those. So we simply document as much as we can the context where everything was found in the catalog sheet and in the report the tribes get our detailed catalog sheets with as much pervenience in context as we know. They get our detailed reports and we let them make the decision of what materials they wish to repatriate when the time comes. So we don't make that determination. So I don't know if that helps answer that question at all. I think it did. Michael Nagy said yes, except that some of the big ones don't take these anymore, just wondering if anybody did. You might ask the NAGPRA people to see if they know of anyone that does. And Liz Friman Bragg says, you mentioned that if you receive federal funding and have NAGPRA collections, you are considered a NAGPRA museum. How is this determined? Annual funding, grants, etc. Can you, let's see, maybe I can scroll down. I don't see the rest of that question. Oh, here it is. Okay. It's over in the parking lot. Yeah, I see it now. So let me rephrase that a little bit and if I said it wrong, I apologize. So if you receive federal funding and you have Native American cultural items, then you are considered a NAGPRA museum. And so you're asking how is federal funding determined? If you've received federal funding since 1990. And there's more examples of that in the frequently asked questions. They talk about that. And they also, if you look in the glossary, they define that some more. So, and they also talk about how, you know, if it flows through the state, so if it's federal funds that flow through the state and then you receive them, then, you know, you might be considered a NAGPRA museum. So I would look at those resources first. And then sometimes those questions, you know, you have to call a national NAGPRA. And we had to do that once because we weren't sure of the situation. Yeah, I know of a small museum that actually they were threatened that the whole town would be shut down if they didn't become NAGPRA compliant. And so they were going to dig in their heels and not do it. I had to go and persuade them to do it. And it was easy. They already had an inventory. It was, it was fine. And but it also, because they weren't going to do what it was going to bar them for applying for an ADA grant and Americans for Disabilities Grant, which they did get. So yeah, that's something to check on to make sure. But I don't know that a whole town could be shut down if they were a local museum wasn't NAGPRA compliant. Okay, are there any more questions? So I just want to say something quick. Specific NAGPRA questions are very hard to answer because, I mean, as hopefully you can tell, you know, it's so nuanced and it's so specific. So certainly when you're trying to answer some of these questions, you know, use all the resources that are available. But I would not be afraid to email or call National NAGPRA and just present what we've done that several times. And I'm just, I'm very happy with how they've responded and how they've clarified some of the questions that we've had. So I'm just never afraid to ask questions. I do my homework first, because I want to ask the question intelligently. But don't be afraid to ask them. Yeah, so thank you so much. And please, everyone, please fill out the evaluation. And let's see, are there any more questions? I'm not sure. We'll wait a few seconds. And please join us next month for the webinar on storage environments. Okay, so thank you very much. And we'll see you next month.