California Appellate Court Decides ICWA Expert Witness Case

Here is the opinion in In re M.B.

An excerpt:

Subsequently, the court conducted a hearing to select and implement a permanent plan of adoption. (Welf. & Inst.Code, § 366.26.) At the hearing, the juvenile court applied the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), which requires the expert opinion of an Indian expert that continued custody of the child by the parent or Indian custodian would result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child. Both appeal the judgment. Father argues the judgment must be reversed because the Indian expert did not conduct an adequate investigation. Mother joins this challenge. We affirm.

Michigan Daily on U-M’s Response to New NAGPRA Regs

Excerpt from the Michigan Daily:

* * *

LSA sophomore Alys Alley, the co-chair of the Native American Student Association at the University, wrote in an e-mail interview that she and other members of the group believe that the new rule will mean that the culturally unidentifiable remains in the University’s possession will be returned to their respective tribes.

“Many of those remains that are held by the University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology are the ancestors of the Native American students on campus, including myself, and I can say confidently that we are looking forward to the return of our ancestor’s remains to our communities,” she wrote.

She added that the status of the “culturally unidentifiable” remains in the University’s possession has caused a lot of tension between the University and Native American groups in Michigan.

“This whole situation with the 1,390 Native American human remains in the U of M Museum of Anthropology has caused a lot of pain for the Native American community; we have struggled to see our ancestors return home for many years,” she wrote.

Continue reading

State Court Challenge to Kennecott Eagle Mine in U.P.

Petitions are here:

Kennecott632Petition

KennecottGroundwaterPetition

Detroit News on U-M Decision to Repatriate Culturally Unidentifiable Remains

From the Detroit News:

The University of Michigan will work with tribes on the disposition of unidentified Native American human remains held by the university to comply with newly released federal rules.

The National Park Service on Monday announced the rule to establish a process to repatriate remains in museums or on exhibit which have not been culturally affiliated with a tribe.

The rules, which go into effect May 14, require universities and federal agencies with unidentified remains in their collections to work with tribes that lived in the areas where the remains were exhumed.

There are more than 124,000 unidentified Native American human remains in the United States, including some held by U-M’s Museum of Anthropology.

Continue reading

New NAGPRA Regs Forcing U-M to Re-examine Its Museum Holdings

From Ann Arbor.com (formerly the Ann Arbor News):

The University of Michigan will have to re-examine its holdings of Native American human remains under a change to federal guidelines announced today.

The U-M Museum of Anthropology has about 1,400 human remains in a storage facility that are 800 to 3,000 years old.

The 1990 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, known as NAGPRA, requires museums, federal agencies and institutions to inventory holdings of human remains and identify their cultural affiliations with tribes. Native groups can then claim the return of remains deemed to be culturally affiliated with them.

031510_native_american_remains.jpg

Frank Bartley III, an Odawa Indian and a U-M student, beats the drum and sings with other Native Americans in front of Fleming Hall in Ann Arbor before a U-M regents meeting in this 2008 file photo. The gathering was part of a request to the regents to return Native-American remains.

Ann Arbor News file photo

Continue reading

New Final Regs on Culturally Unidentifiable Remains under NAGPRA

Here.

Congrats to Sherry Hutt!!!!!

Ron Whitener on Tribal Control of Research

Ron Whitener has posted his paper, “Research In Native American Communities in the Genetics Age: Can the Federal Data Sharing Statute of General Applicability and Tribal Control of Research be Reconciled?” on ExpressO. Here is the abstract:

Since colonization, the populations indigenous to the United States of America have been an enticing subject for researchers of all types. Geographic continuity with traditional homelands and traceable blood quantum requirements for tribal membership provide a unique connection to the past for researchers studying a broad array of topics from epidemiology to religion. In recent years, the explosion of discoveries in the field of genomic research has led to even greater interest in the United States’ Native communities by both commercial and scientific interests. Firms have sprung up offering genetic tests claiming the ability to detect Native American Ancestry. National Institutes of Health has identified minority health disparities research as a high priority and the National Human Genome Research Institute has identified genetic research addressing health disparities in minority communities as a significant focus. Native Americans currently suffer some of the most marked health disparities among all U.S. races. Through genomic research, knowledge of the genetic contribution to many diseases is rapidly expanding and offers the potential for many promising advances in health care. Without research participation from Native American individuals, this population may be excluded from some of the health benefits of genetic research. Researcher access to Native American participants is problematic. Unethical and undesirable research practices have led to distrust and conflict between Native populations and outside researchers, especially when considered alongside the extensive history of wars, plagues, and broken treaties inflicted on Native Americans and tribal governments. The ethical concerns relating to the treatment of human research subjects and the data derived from them have largely been concerned with protecting the health, safety and privacy of the individual research subjects and protecting the ability of researchers to freely study samples provided to them by research participants. Where Native American subjects are involved, however, an additional variable must be factored into the ethical calculus: the sovereign authority of federally-recognized tribal governments over Native American research participants and researchers themselves. This article will examine several case studies highlighting the history of research conflicts to provide a context for Native American concerns with free researcher access to tribal members and their data. It will look at the federal law related to sharing of data collected with federal funding and NIH’s implementation of that law, including specific data sharing policies related to genetic research. It will examine whether these data sharing laws should be preempted from applying to data collected from tribal communities. Finally it will provide an example of a tribal research code which maximizes the ability to preempt the data sharing laws but also provides a framework for research conducted under tribal regulatory authority and for sharing of tribal data, whether they be stories or tissue samples.

2010 Ann Arbor Powwow Press Release

Here: 2010 A2 Powwow press release

A snippet:

Aanii!

Ann Arbor’s Dance for Mother Earth Powwow Committee is writing to share the details of this year’s event, held April 10-11. We’re also reaching out to our tribal communities to make a special request for your support this year.
For the second year in a row, the Native American Students Association at U of M has turned down major funding from the university and taken the Dance for Mother Earth Powwow off campus. We are saddened to say 1,390 ancestors are still stuck in the Museum of Anthropology, and our concerns about Native student issues on campus are still unresolved.

Eric Hemenway Column on Cultural Preservation

From the Petoskey News-Review:

My name is Eric Hemenway and I am an Anishnaabe/Odawa from Cross Village. I work in the Archive/Records and Cultural Preservation Department for the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians here in Emmet County. I am very fortunate to have such a diverse job that involves cultural preservation for my tribe — but cultural preservation is a very broad term that covers many different areas. One aspect of the Odawa culture that I focus on in my work is the caretaking for our dead. Respecting and honoring our ancestors who have passed on is a fundamental element of our identity as Odawa and has been with our tribe for countless generations. I have the opportunity to carry on this tradition in a unique way by working in my department.

The federal law NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act) enables tribes to reclaim human remains and sacred items associated to their respective tribal communities. These remains and items are housed in museums and universities throughout the country. What I do is locate where the remains are, submit claims and if all goes well, retrieve the remains and rebury them. We also submit claims for sacred items affiliated to our tribe. Repatriating remains is a difficult task, but a necessary one, because it ties in with our belief the dead need to be taken care of. This is a new dilemma tribes across the country have to deal with, having their ancestors taken from their final resting places and placed in boxes on shelves, to be examined and documented in manners the tribes deem as inappropriate and disrespectful. But we have the opportunity to get these old ones back and we at LTBB Odawa have made it a priority to do so. It’s sad yet rewarding work. Sad to know the history of how museums acquired these remains and the fact our dead were not given the proper respect as groups, yet rewarding to finally lay them to rest, again, and finally see our beliefs being recognized.

Along with work in NAGPRA, I also take care of several Odawa cemeteries within our reservation boundary. Many of these cemeteries are in very rustic, rural areas. The grass needs to be mowed, dead trees taken out, crossed fixed and replaced. When I first started my job in 2006, I never would have thought I would be working so much with the dead, but that’s my job now. Other people work in the Odawa language, with the youth, elders, education, housing, education, etc. I just happen to work with the ones who have passed on. Hopefully someday all our ancestors will be returned and all the tribes across the country can have that piece of their tribe back. And when that days comes, I am sure my job will change into something else, but in the meantime, there are thousands of Anishnaabe that need to come back home.

Here is Eric’s outstanding blog!

NAGPRA News: Regs on Culturally Unidentifiable Remains to be Published on March 15

From the National NAGPRA site:

CUI RULE TO PUBLISH MARCH 15

The reserved section of the NAGPRA regulations, 10.11, the disposition of culturally unidentifiable Native American human remains, is set to publish on Monday, March 15, as a final rule. The rule will be effective on May 14, 2010. During the 60 days, the public may submit additional comments on the rule to Regulations.gov. The comments will thereafter be considered as to whether amendment to the rule is appropriate.

The National NAGPRA Program will offer a webinar prior to the comment deadline, which will include a training on the rule. The webinar date will be announced shortly anticipating a 200 capacity access line.