By Sangita Chari, Jaime M. N. Lavallee
NAGPRA calls for museums and federal organisations to come back asked local American cultural goods to lineal descendants, culturally affiliated Indian tribes, and local Hawai’ian organizations. because the 1990 passage of the act, museums and federal corporations have made multiple million cultural items—and the continues to be of approximately 40 thousand local Americans—available for repatriation.
Drawing on case experiences, own reflections, ancient files, and statistics, the quantity examines NAGPRA and its grassroots, useful program during the United States.? Accomplishing NAGPRA will attract execs and lecturers with an curiosity in cultural source administration, Indian and human rights legislation, Indigenous reports, social justice activities, and public policy.
Read or Download Accomplishing NAGPRA: Perspectives on the Intent, Impact, and Future of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act PDF
Similar native american studies books
Throughout the 19th century, american citizens appeared to the eventual civilization and assimilation of local americans via a means of elimination, reservation, and directed tradition switch. regulations for directed subsistence switch and incorporation had far-reaching social and environmental outcomes for local peoples and local lands.
Within the spring of 1832, while the Indian warrior Black Hawk and one thousand fans marched into Illinois to reoccupy lands past ceded to American settlers, the U. S. military became to rival tribes for army help. parts of the Menominee, Dakota, Potawatomi, and Ho bite tribes willingly allied themselves with the USA govt opposed to their fellow local american citizens in an unusual protection in their assorted pursuits.
This day Kahnaw? :ke (“at the rapids”) is a group of roughly seventy-two hundred Mohawks, situated at the south shore of the Saint Lawrence River close to Montreal. one of many biggest Mohawk groups, it really is identified within the sleek period for its activism—a traditionalist, vigorous impulse with an extended heritage.
This article offers the reaction of the Gitksan and Gitanyow to using the treaty method through the Nisga'a to extend into Gitksan and Gitanyow territory at the Nass River. It makes a contribution to the query of the way First international locations in primary British Columbia determine their rights to territory.
- Plateau Indian Ways with Words: The Rhetorical Tradition of the Tribes of the Inland Pacific Northwest
- Archaeology, History, and Custer’s Last Battle: The Little Big Horn Re-examined
- American Woodland Indians
- Archaeological Studies of Gender in the Southeastern United States
Extra info for Accomplishing NAGPRA: Perspectives on the Intent, Impact, and Future of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
11(c)(2). 77 60 Fed. Reg. 62139 (December 4, 1995). 78 McKeown and Hutt, “In the Smaller Scope of Conscience,” 185–186. 79 Jason C. Roberts, “Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Census: Examining the Status and Trends of Culturally Affiliating Native American Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects Between 1990 and 1999,” Topics in Cultural Resource Law (2000): 79, 84–85 . C. 3001(11). C. 80q-9. C. 3001(8). R. 2(a)(3)(iii). R. 2(d)(1). R. 2(d)(1). 86 McKeown and Hutt, “In the Smaller Scope of Conscience,” 164–165.
C. 80q-9(c). Rec. , Nov. 13, 1989) (Statement of Rep. Nick J. Rahall, II, during the debate preceding passage of the bill by the House of Representatives); 135 Cong. Rec. , Oct. 3, 1989) (Statement of Senator John McCain). 52 135 Cong. Rec. S12397 (daily ed. Oct. 3, 1989) (Statement of Senator John McCain). 53 136 Cong. Rec. , Oct. 22, 1990) (Statements of Representative Ben Nighthorse Campbell and Representative John J. Rhodes III); 136 Cong. Rec. , Oct. 26, 1990) (statements of Senators Daniel K.
C. 3003(d)(1), (2). C. 3003(d)(2). C. 3003(b)(2). C. 3006(a) Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act: After Almost 20 Years, Key Federal Agencies Still Have Not Fully Complied with the Act. (Washington DC: GAO-10-768, July 28, 2010), 26. C. 3004(a), (b)(1)(A). C. 3004(b)(1)(B), (C). C. 3004(b)(2). C. 3005(a)(1) and (4). C. 3001(2). House Report 101-877. Ibid. C. R. 14(d). R. 14(d) and (f). Senate Report 101-473. R. Reg. 62156 (1995). C. 3005(a)(4). R. 14(c). C. C. 3005(a). C. 3005(b).