NAGPRA GRANT COMMUNITY MEETING:

SECTION 6 SUMMARIES UPDATE

BY LEE RAINS CLAUSS

SHERWOOD VALLEY BAND OF POMOFEBRUARY 7 , 2015

T h i s m e e t i n g i s s u p p o r t e d b y a g r a n t f r o m t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f t h e I n t e r i o r ,

N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c e , N a t i o n a l N A G P R A P r o g r a m .

Mato NAGPRAConsultation &

Documentation Grant

WHAT IS NAGPRA?

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. 3001-3013) Regulations—43 CFR Part 10 Passed on November 16, 1990

Two main objectives: Resolve disposition of Native American cultural items and

human remains under the control of Federal agencies and American institutions that receive Federal funding

Resolve ownership and control of cultural items and human remains discovered on Federal or Tribal lands after November 16, 1990

NAGPRA: WHO IS INVOLVED?

Federal agencies (excluding the Smithsonian) who have control of NAGPRA cultural items

American institutions that receive federal funds Museum University or college State agency Local agency

Lineal descendants of the deceasedFederally-recognized Indian tribes (including

Alaska Native Corporations) and Native Hawaiian organizations

NAGPRA: WHAT DOES IT INCLUDE?

Human Remains: physical remains of a Native American These can be considered affiliated or unidentifiable

Funerary Objects: objects placed near individual human remains as part of a death rite or ceremony These can be considered associated or unassociated

Sacred Objects: objects needed for the modern-day practice of traditional Native American religions

Objects of Cultural Patrimony: group-owned objects having ongoing importance to the group

SVBP NAGPRA GRANT: Award & Goals

In August of 2013, the National NAGPRA office awarded SVBP with grant funding for August 2013-August 2015.

The grant is referred to as the Mato NAGPRA Consultation and Documentation Grant or Project

The purpose of the Grant is to increase SVBP’s capacity to consult with museums regarding NAGPRA objects in their collections that are culturally affiliated with the Tribe.

The ultimate, long-term goal will be to facilitate the successful repatriation of SVBP’s ancestors and their funerary objects, as well as sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony, to the Tribe.

SVBP NAGPRA GRANT: Objectives & Activities

Research and Data Collection Documenting, organizing, analyzing, and reporting

upon existing information from Mendocino Country Repatriation Project (MCIRP) files and online databases

Determining the number, nature, location, and legal status of NAGPRA objects potentially culturally affiliated with SVBP and other Northern Pomo, Coast Yuki and Huchnom peoples

Community Outreach and Education Fostering an understanding of NAGPRA within SVBP’s

leadership and Tribal membership Seeking the community’s direction regarding the

prioritization of and culturally-appropriate protocols for future repatriation requests and the possibility for inter-tribal partnerships

RESULTS OF GRANT-BASED RESEARCH

A thorough review of the Section 5 inventories (human remains and associated funerary objects) that were supplied to the MCIRP and/or SVBP, found in the Notices of Inventory Completion in the online Federal Register, and located in the online databases of the National NAGPRA office revealed:

Culturally Affiliated Remains from Mendocino, Lake, and Sonoma counties totaling 327 individuals (MNI=327) 3,010 associated funerary objects

Culturally Unidentifiable Remains from Mendocino, Lake and Sonoma counties totaling 188 individuals (MNI=188) 67 associated funerary objects

RESULTS OF GRANT-BASED RESEARCH

Agencies/Repositories in Possession of Majority of Section 5 Collections from Lake, Mendocino, and Sonoma Counties (80% of individuals; 97% of AFO)Agency /Repository MNI AFO

Sonoma State University 186 881

Phoebe Hearst Museum, UC-Berkeley 103 1265

CA Department of Transportation 58 178

San Francisco State University 18 49

CA Department of Parks and Recreation 15 74

Peabody Museum, Harvard University 14 118

UC-Davis 6 419

UC-Los Angeles 8 0

RESULTS OF GRANT-BASED RESEARCH

Section 6 Summaries Collections Includes potential unassociated funerary objects,

sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony Ultimately, it is the Tribe’s purview and responsibility to

delineate which items are UFOs, SOs, and/or OCPs There are no comprehensive national databases for

the Section 6 summaries and no Notices of Summary Completion in the Federal Register

The only record of these collections is in the museum-to-Tribe communications in the MCIRP files and the SVBP NAGPRA files These communications are incomplete—there are many

summaries from 1993-1996 and 2000-2002, but few from other years

RESULTS OF GRANT-BASED RESEARCH

To date, Section 6 NAGPRA summaries from 110 institutions in 36 states and Washington, D.C. have been reviewed

States with Largest Number of Repositories Reporting Section 6 Collections Potentially Affiliated with SVBPCalifornia (20) Texas (4)

Illinois (9) Washington (4)

Massachusetts (6) Washington, D.C. (3)

New York (6) Connecticut (3)

Indiana (5) Nebraska (3)

Michigan (4) Oklahoma (3)

Minnesota (4) Rhode Island (3)

Ohio (4)

RESULTS OF GRANT-BASED RESEARCH

The Section 6 Summaries review has revealed that: Collections are typically listed as potentially culturally affiliated

with “Northern Pomo”, “Pomo”, “Northern CA”, “Coastal CA”, “CA General” and “North America” Very few collections or items are attributed to a specific maker,

tribe, or county The few Pomo artists/makers specifically mentioned include:

RESULTS OF GRANT-BASED RESEARCH

The Section 6 Summaries review also revealed: The vast majority of the potential Section 6 items reported

are BASKETS Number of baskets noted to date: Approximately 1700 -2000 50+ reporting institutions only have baskets in their

possession Other materials listed are often in the categories of:

Hunting and fishing implements (bows, arrows, fish hooks, net sinkers, stone tools, metal tools)

Household tools (pestles, manos, metates, mush paddles) Recreational items (whistles, flutes, gaming objects) Clothing/items of personal adornment (jewelry, hair

ornaments) Regalia, ceremonial, and medicinal objects

RESULTS OF GRANT-BASED RESEARCH

Some institutions have collections of ethnographic objects that often include Pomo-affiliated regalia and ceremonial and/or medicinal objects. These institutions include:

Repository Collection Summary

Grace Hudson Museum, Ukiah, CA Top knots, feather capes, hair ornaments, dance wands, rattles, whistles, pipes, gambling objects, shell and magnesite jewelry, etc.

Phoebe Hearst Museum, University of CA-Berkeley

Headdresses, top knots, capes, dance wands, clappers, rattles, whistles, bracelets, bull roarers, hair and ear ornaments, shell money, necklaces, etc.

Oakland Museum, Oakland, CA 45 ceremonial and medicinal objects; 70 items of dance regalia, 8 gaming pieces, 17 musical instruments

The Heard Museum, Phoenix, AZ Headdresses, dance wands, necklaces, hair ornaments, headbands, gaming objects, pipes, etc.

RESULTS OF GRANT-BASED RESEARCH

Some institutions have collections of ethnographic objects that often include Pomo-affiliated regalia and ceremonial and/or medicinal objects. These institutions include:

Repository Collection Summary

Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL

Capes, headbands, necklaces, pipes, whistles, surgical/medicinal tools, hairpins, headdresses, dance dresses, drilled beads, burned magnesite, wristlets, gaming pieces, dance batons, mouth bows, deer hoof rattle, deer head masks, dance clappers, topknots, war bonnet, ear ornaments, etc.

Oregon State University, Corvallis Necklaces with clamshell, abalone, beads, and/or olivella beads; headbands

Montclair Art Museum, Montclair, NJ Dance regalia, pipes, head ornament

RESULTS OF GRANT-BASED RESEARCH

Some institutions have collections of potential Section 6-based archaeological materials that are considered affiliated with Pomo peoples. These institutions include:

Repository Collection Summary

CA Dept. of Forestry and Fire Protection, Sacramento

Artifacts from 90+ sites in Mendocino County, including the material from Three Chop Village and Buldam

CA Academy of Sciences, San Francisco

416 charmstones (or net sinkers) from Laguna de Tola in Sonoma County; necklace, mortar, pestle from Lake Co.

University of California-Davis Warm Springs Dam construction archaeological data recovery (over 50,000+ artifacts)

American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY

Approx. 8 objects from possible burial context found in Cape Mendocino, CA

RESULTS OF GRANT-BASED RESEARCH

Some institutions have large collections of potential Section 6-based objects that are considered affiliated with Pomo peoples, but for which there are no details. These institutions include: Repository Collection

SummaryTriton Museum of Art, Santa Clara, CA 2100 ethnographic objects

Southwest Museum, Los Angeles, CA 2000 ethnographic objects

CA Dept. of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento

1300 ethnographic objects consisting of tools, basketry, clothing, regalia, jewelry, etc.

Brooklyn Museum, Brooklyn, NY 750 objects

Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County

270 ethnographic objects

American Museum of Natural History, NY, NY

227 ethnographic objects

Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University, New Haven, CT

62 objects including basketry, tools, weapons, and wampum

Florida Museum of Natural History, Gainesville

58 objects

Clarke Memorial Museum, Eureka, CA 36 objects

MOVING FORWARD: QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMUNITY

1. What is SVBP’s aboriginal territory? Do you consider the Tribe to be culturally affiliated with remains and objects from all three counties? Just Mendocino County?

2. What are the types of NAGPRA collections about which you are most concerned? If you had to prioritize repatriation goals, which remains or objects would you like repatriated first? Are there any kinds of objects you would not wish to have

brought back in to the community or your aboriginal territory?

3. Do you have priorities or preferences with regard to which agencies or institutions should be approached first regarding SVBP repatriation requests?

QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMUNITY, CONT’D

4. There are many Pomo-made baskets in museums around the United States. Are their ways in which the Tribe can determine which baskets are NAGPRA objects and which ones are not?

5. Are there Section 6 objects that you know, based on a written description only, are either sacred objects, objects of cultural patrimony, or unassociated funerary objects?

6. Are there Section 6 objects that require the viewing of photographs or in-person assessment to know whether or not they are sacred objects, objects of cultural patrimony, or unassociated funerary objects?

QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMUNITY, CONT’D

7. What sorts of guidelines and infrastructure do the Tribe need to have in place before NAGPRA collections are repatriated? A. Would all human remains and funerary objects

always be buried? If so, where? B. How would the community wish to handle

sacred objects? Do they need to be buried or stored in some manner? If stored, where?

C. How would the community wish to handle objects of cultural patrimony? Do they need to be stored in a dance house? Someone’s home? A cultural center?

QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMUNITY, CONT’D

8. What is the community’s feeling about joint repatriations? (i.e., Working with other Pomo groups to bring home certain NAGPRA collections.)

9. Do you have any concerns or wish to contest any of the cultural affiliation determinations that have been made by agencies or repositories that I have noted in this presentation?

10. Any other questions or comments about the NAGPRA grant?

THE MATO NAGPRA GRANT-- The Next 5 Months

Continuing research and data entry of Section 6 communications stored in the MCIRP files Collections from approximately another 30-40 repositories need to be

reviewed and entered into the master spreadsheetResearching, organizing and re-housing of the MCIRP

records The Tribe has located two file cabinets full of MCIRP documents at the

Guidiville Rancheria. We are currently retrieving these files, drawer-by-drawer, copying them, and organizing them

Summarizing and conducting quality control for community interviews Each interviewee is being asked to review the typed notes of their

interview and approve of the notes prior to their finalization All interviews are then being summarized to provide insight into

NAGPRA-based questions related to objects of concern, community priorities and future treatment protocols