NAGPRA: Responses to 'Bones of Contention' in LA Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bones13jan13,1,1281929.story
From Jon D. Daehnke to LA Times:
"First, thank you for your article and for bringing this issue to the attention of people in Southern California. I think that the article is overall an excellent report of the primary issues. There is, however, an error in the article relating to the status of non-recognized tribes. The article seems to insinuate that ancestral remains cannot be repatriated to non-recognized tribes. This is incorrect. There is absolutely nothing in NAGPRA that precludes the repatriation of human remains or cultural objects to non-recognized tribes and in fact repatriation to non-recognized tribes has occurred across the nation (and has been applauded by the National NAGPRA Review Committee)
Read letter:
http://censored-news.blogspot.com/2008/01/nagpra-and-bones-of-contention.html
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bones13jan13,1,1281929.story
From Jon D. Daehnke to LA Times:
"First, thank you for your article and for bringing this issue to the attention of people in Southern California. I think that the article is overall an excellent report of the primary issues. There is, however, an error in the article relating to the status of non-recognized tribes. The article seems to insinuate that ancestral remains cannot be repatriated to non-recognized tribes. This is incorrect. There is absolutely nothing in NAGPRA that precludes the repatriation of human remains or cultural objects to non-recognized tribes and in fact repatriation to non-recognized tribes has occurred across the nation (and has been applauded by the National NAGPRA Review Committee)
Read letter:
http://censored-news.blogspot.com/2008/01/nagpra-and-bones-of-contention.html
PHOTO: A protest was held last fall at the University of California, Berkeley, over the school's storage of tribal remains. (Robert Durell/Los Angeles Times/file)
No comments:
Post a Comment