Tribal Representatives Meet with UC Berkeley Chancellor Regarding NAGPRA

For Immediate Release: 4/8/08

Contact: Reno Franklin, Kashia Pomo Tribal Council Member, 707-591-0580, ext.105; James Hayward, Redding Rancheria, 530-410-2875; Radley Davis, Pit River Nation, 530-917-6064; Mark LeBeau, Pit River Nation, 916-801-4422



Tribal Representatives Meet with UC Berkeley Chancellor to Discuss Problems Associated with the University’s Compliance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and to Initiate Dispute Resolution Strategies



Berkeley, Calif.—The first meeting between Tribal representatives and Robert Birgeneau, UC Berkeley (UCB) Chancellor, to discuss the problems associated with how UCB staff have attempted to comply with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) and other issues was attended by twenty-one people. The event was held at UCB on April 4th. All of the Tribal reps. spoke eloquently and passionately about the needs and legal rights to repatriate Tribal human remains and their belongings from UCB. A number of these reps. also discussed a report written by UCB staff and other evidence indicating that other UCB staff were not conducting their work in compliance with the mandates of NAGPRA. A passage from one such UCB report states:



“...virtually all human remains yet to be inventoried were determined to be culturally unidentifiable, with no evidence supplied as to why this was the case. Even more serious, however, and contrary to statutory language, the inventory was not associated with evidence that consultation with Indian Tribes had taken place, nor were associated funerary objects listed. In addition, this inventory did not accurately reflect the museum’s documents, and the descriptions of the geographic and cultural affiliation of the human remains listed were insufficient.”



Tribal people asked for this and follow-up meetings because they have for many decades witnessed bad museum practices at the Phoebe Hearst and feel that this constitutes flagrant violations of NAGPRA. Tribal people and cultural preservation officers work with museums and institutions across the U.S. At the Hearst, the problems are pervasive and start from curation to display to consultation to the untimely response to repatriation claims. During the meeting, the Tribal reps. recommended and received an outline and timeline for implementing further substantive meetings with those empowered through UCB to cause change. The areas the Tribal reps. are most concerned about are the policies that direct staff on their day-to-day interaction with Native cultural and burial material, how consultation is defined at the Hearst and conducted by the museum from curation to display to analysis to NAGPRA. These reps are also concerned with how NAGPRA is implemented from start to finish, who is involved with NAGPRA and who makes decisions from beginning to end. They also want to know what the policy is for destructive analysis on Native human remains, where the human remains are kept and how they are accounted for on a day-to-day basis and how this policy could include tribal consultation. This list is not exhaustive, but demonstrates how far reaching Tribal concerns are. The Tribal reps. recommended a leading expert in NAGPRA to conduct an independent and full review of the historical and contemporary activities of the NAGPRA Program at UCB and make recommendations to fix the related problems at the University.



The Tribal representatives also presented the Chancellor with the following list of concerns documented by Tribal Historic Preservation Officers and other Tribal officials to be remedied: 1) re-establish/establish a tribal advisory board, 2) review past tribal leader correspondence and formally respond, 3) future tribal leader correspondence to be handled respectfully, 4) provide staff with training on respectful manner for object care, 5) visit tribal museums to gain insight on proper care of items, 6) draft protocol for handling of objects (a general protocol that is refined to be tribal specific), 7) add Natives to NAGPRA Review Board, 8) use geographic location as a primary indicator to determine cultural identifications, 9) return items to Tribes and allow them to loan back if they want, 10) set a time line, 11) prepare an apology to Tribes, 12) report back to the Tribes on progress, 13) review Tribal "Loan" Policy, 14) move the NAGPRA unit away from the Vice Chancellor of Research Control, and 15) consult with the Tribes before making changes.



A letter containing the information discussed above was submitted to the Chancellor by the Tribal NAGPRA Alliance indicating that the group looks forward to receiving a written response from him. They would like him to respond to the letter’s contents and demonstrate UCB’s commitment to remedying these issues and to moving forward with further Tribal participation in shared interests. Additional meetings will take place to determine what UCB accomplished during each time period.



UCB’s Hearst Museum warehouses the remains of approximately 10,000 Native individuals; one of the largest collections in the U.S. UCB’s scientists refuse to allow many of these ancestors to be reburied by their living Tribal descendents. Such refusal violates Native spiritual and cultural practices and puts UCB into non-compliance with NAGPRA.