Wednesday, Jun. 10, 1998

Testimony of James C. Chatters Ph.D. on HR 2893

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I want to thank your for the opportunity to speak to you on behalf of an ammendment to the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.

I am a professional archaeologist and forensic anthropologist with more than 30 years experience in western US, where I have often worked closely with the region's Indian tribes on archaeological studies and the analysis and repatriation of human remains. Most recently, I have been involved with the case of Kennewick Man, an approximately 9000 year-old skeleton found in Washington State that has drawn worldwide attention to issues addressed by this bill. As a husband and father of women of Native American descent who can benefit from scientific studies of ancient remains, I also have a very personal stake in what happens to this legislation.

- The overzealous prevention of scientific study by federal agencies

- The importance of scientific study to humanity at large

- NAGPRA's impact on non-Indians and Native Americans without tribal affiliation

- The impact of NAGPRA's geographic clause

- The need for a time limit to the statute

Federal Agencies Overinterpret NAGPRA to Prohibit Scientific Study

NAGPRA is seen by some agencies as superceding other statutes-even the constitution. At one point in the discussions over Kennewick Man, a tribal representative demanded that there be no further pubicity on the find and a Corps of Engineers spokesman agreed to exclude the press. When I reminded him of the first amendment right to free speech, I was informed that "the first amendment does not apply to NAGPRA cases."

Federal agencies are so paralyzed by NAGPRA regulations that many do not even investigate whether a newly discovered skeleton is Native American before turning it over to the tribes. This practice interferes with law enforcement, and alienates African, Asian and European Americans from any ancestor unfortunate enough to have fallen on federal land.

Enactment of HR2893, with its clear but respectful approval of limited scientific study will help to eliminate at least some of this overenforcement.

Scientific Study is of Value to Humanity at Large

NAGPRA Ignores the Interests of Nontribal Native Americans

Millions of our fellow citizens count Native Americans among their ancestors, yet relatively few belong to federally recognized tribes and most participate in mainstream American society. As currently drafted and implemented by federal agencies, NAGPRA alienates these people from the remains and cultural objects of their ancestors unless they can trace a direct lineal relationship. Living outside tribal society, these Americans can know their Native heritage only through anthropological writings and scientific research. Yet they have no standing to be heard in NAGPRA cases, even though the study of prehistoric remains may be important to their sense of identity and has potential health benefits for them and their children.

NAGPRA's Geographic Clause Limits Our Knowledge of History

The problem is particularly acute when truly ancient remains are at issue. Recent research in linguistics, dental anthropology, skeletal analysis, and even genetics is just beginning to indicate that the early peopling of the Americas was a complex process. After hundreds of generations at least some of our continent's original inhabitants have disappeared, apparently leaving no descendants. Such early peoples are of interest to, and should be considered the heritage of humanity at large, which explains the worldwide interest the Kennewick Man case has attracted.

NAGPRA Needs a Time Limit.

As I have spoken to thousands of people over the past two years, one question invariably is raised. " Why is there no time limit to this law?" People are incredulous that Congress would intend to place the entire human history of their homeland in the hands of only a few of its citizens. Other nations have laws pertaining to studying human remains and cutoff dates are commonplace.

HR 2893 Does not Go as Far as Scientists Might Prefer

HR2893 fails to address the issue of a time limit but most anthropologists are willing to live with this exclusion if congress sends a strong message that scientific study is to be allowed. We are concerned, though, with the provision that allows study to be denied "...based on existing museum policies and cultural concerns." Vague terms such as these make us uneasy, as they can be construed to totally frustrate the purposes of this bill. If these phrases are left in, we recommend that there be a very strong committee report describing how this phrase is to be interpreted (similar to the one that the original Senate report did for the term "sacred object").

HR2893 Restores the Balance

Despite its limitations, HR2893 alleviates the unequal treatment of tribal and nontribal Native Americans, allows for the historical recognition of extinct peoples, clarifies the position of science, and considers the interests of society at large. In the process it retains the primary intent of NAGPRA to return human remains and sacred objects to culturally affiliated tribes. It brings NAGPRA closer to creating the promised balance between the interests of the secular and the sacred, and in so doing is more in keeping with the principles on which our country was founded.

I urge you to pass this amendment. Thank you.