Tag: NAGPRA

  • I Found Bones In My Backyard, What Do I do?

    You are on Native Land.

    Alameda is hallowed ground.

    The site of no less than four “Ancient Indian Burial Mounds.” (We call them Shellmounds now.) The resting place of Ohlone ancestors.

    It sounds so distant when people use the word “ancestors”. Because it’s so safe; and sterilized by a false sense of temporal distance.

    Even though those shellmounds contained the Great-Great-Grandparents of Muwekma (the word for “Ohlone People“, in their language, Chochenyo) who are alive and well today.

    But the bodies didn’t stay buried.

    Bones from shellmounds were used to fertilize the fields, gardens, and flower beds which became iconic as soon as Mark Twain called Alameda the “Garden of California”.

    The remains of hundreds of Native Americans were used to pave Bay Farm Road. Twice.

    The bodies of thousands of Ohlone people were crushed, and pulverized, to make concrete for sidewalks, and foundations for houses. Their graves pushed over to fill marshland, and level out the numerous railways running through the island we now call “Alameda”.

    So it’s no wonder you found someone in your backyard.

    Native American Graves are being Still Being Uncovered in Alameda Today

    The story goes: a contractor working on a new deck, or a foundation crew digging around the cribs will find some bones. Human bones.

    You’re supposed to stop work, supposed to call the Police Department and report the discover of a burial. Because it could a crime scene. Or it could be a Native American Grave.

    If the bones look old enough, some contractors will turn a blind eye, and toss them back into the ground for some other guy to dig up.

    But that’s not how you should do it.


    Here are the 5 Steps to Honoring Native American Graves on the Stolen Land You Now Occupy

    Step 1:

    Don’t call the Museum!

    If you find bones in Alameda while digging, do not call the Alameda Museum.

    The Alameda Museum has no one on staff, or on call, who is qualified to identify or store Native American artifacts.

    Since 1948 the Alameda Museum had mis-identified Ohlone people as “Miwok”, instead of “Costanoan” which is what Ohlone people in the Bay Area were known as until about the 1970’s. This mis-identification ended abruptly when the Alameda Native History Project interceded in the miss-identification of the First Alamedans (Muwekma) and mis-attribution of their stolen property.

    So don’t call them. They don’t know what they’re doing.

    Step 2:

    Let the ancestors rest!

    Stop work.

    Don’t touch a damn thing.

    🤬 around and catch a curse. Or a case.

    [CA HSC §7050.5(a) : Every person who knowingly mutilates or disinters, wantonly disturbs, or willfully removes any human remains in or from any location other than a dedicated cemetery without authority of law is guilty of a misdemeanor….]

    I know it sucks: but pay the crew for the rest of the day and send them home.

    You’re done for the day.

    Step 3:

    Report the discovery to the police!

    Who honestly knows if this is an ancient burial? Your contractor isn’t an expert either. It doesn’t matter what they say.

    Stop work and call the police immediately.

    The sooner you call, the sooner this gets settled.

    [Also, this is not a real skeleton. All of these images were made with AI because using real skeletons would be disrespectful.]

    Step 4:

    Wait for the Coroner

    While you’re waiting, check out California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5

    The Coroner is the only person who has the authority to identify whether or not the remains are Native American.

    “[I]f the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American” he or she will contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours.

    NAHC will send for a Tribal Consultant from the Tribal Groups affiliated with the area where the discovery was made, and whomever NAHC also determines is the Most Likely Descendant.

    Step 5:

    Step back. Tribal Consultants will handle the rest.

    Consultation is private. Anyone who isn’t directly involved, won’t be.

    At the end of consultation, you will generally be presented with two options:

    1. Re-Inter (or Re-Bury) the ancestor(s) in a place on the property where they will not be disturbed again.
    2. Tribal Consultants will remove their ancestor(s) and repatriate them at their Tribal Cemetery.

    That’s it!

    You just helped protect Native American Graves, and reunited someone’s ancestor with their family!

    Encourage your neighbors to do the same.

    Encourage the Alameda Museum to do the right thing, and give their collection of stolen artifacts back to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area.

  • 99% of Alameda Museum’s Ohlone Artifacts Were Stolen from Native American Graves

    We’ve found a pattern of reckless and careless treatment of 100% of those stolen artifacts.


    The Alameda Museum has roughly 186 Native American Artifacts. All of those artifacts were found in connection with Native American Graves, except for 2.

    So, we can’t say ALL of the artifacts are grave goods. But we can say:

    99.93% of Alameda Museum’s Indigenous Artifacts are Stolen Burial Goods from Native American Graves all over the place we now call “Alameda.”


    Shellmounds are cemeteries, ancient structures, sacred sites, historical resources, and ancient structures built by the first inhabitants of this area, Ohlone people.

    Shellmounds are made rows of burials stacked vertically and alternately; covered with the shell-laden soil found along the San Francisco Bay Region’s shorelines.

    There were several excavations of the shellmounds of Alameda.

    Artifacts saved from excavations attended by professional and amateur anthropologists/archeologists were donated to both the Alameda Library, and the U.C. Berkeley Museum. [Some artifacts were notably kept by a City Engineer by the name of I.N. Chapman.]

    Alameda Free Library existed long before the historical Alameda Historical Society, or the Alameda Museum were ever founded.

    The Two Alameda Historical Societies

    To be clear about the two Alameda Historical Societies: one of these societies existed in the early 1900’s, and is mentioned in newspaper articles, as being interested in the early Alameda Free Library’s “Museum” in the Carnegie Library.

    The second iteration of the Alameda Historical Society started in the 1940’s, and was instrumental in moving the Museum from the basement of the Alameda Free Library, into the old Alameda High School Auto Shop in the 1980’s. And then, into the storefront of the Masonic Building, on Alameda Avenue–where it remains [“lies in state”?] today.

    Transfer of Artifacts & Records from Alameda Free Library to Alameda Museum

    All of these artifacts taken from the mounds were transferred from the Alameda Library to the Alameda Museum when the Museum moved into the old Alameda High School Auto Shop.

    Those artifacts weren’t the only things transferred to the Alameda Museum.

    At it’s inception, the Alameda Museum was designated as the Official City Repository for City Records, and the Records of the City of Alameda’s Departments, including (but not limited to,) Alameda’s Fire and Police Departments.

    I know this isn’t incredibly relevant, but it’s important to know this background information, especially when the Alameda Museum claims they don’t have stolen artifacts, or that the artifacts the museum displays aren’t Native American Grave Goods. You’ll know that 99.93% of artifacts in the Alameda Museum’s possession are Grave Goods because they were taken from the Alameda “mounds”, which are Native American Graves.

    Out of the approximately 186 Ohlone Artifacts in the possession of Alameda Museum, only two of them are unrelated to Native American Graves.

    The other 184 artifacts are directly attributed to the shellmounds of Alameda.

    What’s more: the Alameda Museum’s pattern of wanton “inattention”, and reckless disregard for these burial goods are clearly stated in the museum’s own records:

    History:

    Stone mortar and pestle found in one of Alameda’s mounds. The information on the pestle can be connected to a donation documented in the museum records: Subject: One Indian Mortar and Pestle. Date received: April 1954. Unfortunately, as a result of earlier inattention there is no further description, and as a result of later inattention during moves and minor catastrophes, it is not certain the mortar and pestles are together anymore, and the connection has been lost. Part of a collection of objects found in the largest Shellmound, also known as Sather’s Mound in Alameda, or smaller mounds. The excavations at Sather’s Mound were carried out in 1908 by Captain Clark, an amateur anthropologist. The items were donated to the Alameda Free Library, and passed on to the museum when the museum moved to a separate location. Date: April 1954 Mortar Acquired from: unknown Date: before 1991

    Condition:

    Notes: 6/30/2020 MvL: The label has suffered water damage when a pipe in the museum burst. Any accession numbering of the mortars and pestles was lost and has been redone.

    The above excerpt of an artifact’s description establishes the Alameda Museum’s pattern of careless disregard, and reckless neglect of Native American artifacts.


    Grave goods belong in graves; not museums.


    Mismanagement of Ohlone Artifacts by Alameda Museum:

    • Misidentified the tribe associated with these stolen Ohlone artifacts;
    • Mixed up mortars and pestles, (among other things) so they no longer match;
    • Lost records and identifying information about the stolen burial goods;
    • Carelessly and recklessly stored, handled, and moved Ohlone grave goods.

    This mismanagement, and noncompliance with their Service Provider Agreement with the City of Alameda; with the standards and practice of commensurate professionals and institutions engaged in the conservation and preservation of historical records and artifacts; and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA); has resulted in damage to these priceless, irreplacable artifacts, which the Alameda Museum possesses without permission, or right of ownership.

    This evidence of unreported and unclaimed, loss/damage to Ohlone grave goods; and the established pattern of careless and reckless neglect of Ohlone artifacts…

    Should be reason enough for the Alameda Museum to concede it cannot adequately care for any of the 186 Ohlone artifacts it possesses; and return them to the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area in the most expeditious way possible.

  • What is Tribal Recognition, Who is a Descendant, How does the NAGPRA Notification List Work?

    This article will be a very brief primer, touching on three important topics:

    • “State-Recognized” Tribes don’t exist in California; but they do in 11 other states.
    • Tribal Notification occurs after the discovery of Native American Remains; Tribal Consultation Occurs during the CEQA Workflow.
    • Recognized Descendants of a Tribe, and Enrolled Tribal Members have established their “American Indian ancestry”.

    What is Tribal Recognition?

    Federal Recognition

    When the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of Federal Acknowledgment, formally recognizes a group (“tribal entity”) as being a separate sovereign government from the United States.

    This recognition “establishes” a government-to-government relationship with the U.S., and imbues this “Federally Recognized Tribe” with certain rights–like the ability to make and enforce their own laws, decide who they want to lead them, but also receive federal benefits (like HUD services), and must follow certain B.I.A. Federal laws, rules and regulations.

    At last check, California has 109 Federally Recognized Tribes, with nearly 100 separate reservations or Rancherias. [California Courts, California Tribal Communities FAQ’s]

    State Recognition

    Provides the same acknowledgment of sovereignty; however, it does not necessarily come with the kind of funding (reparations), or even “Trust Responsibility” that the Supreme Court ruled the Federal Government has to Tribes.

    States with a Tribal Recognition Process:

    • Alabama
    • Connecticut
    • Georgia
    • Louisiana
    • Maryland
    • Massachusetts
    • New York
    • North Carolina
    • South Carolina
    • Vermont
    • Virginia

    Still, each of the (currently) 11 states with a tribal recognition process imbue Recognized Tribes with their own mix of duties, rights, and responsibilities.

    California State Recognized Tribes

    The State of California does not have a recognition authority or process for Tribes, therefore, there are no State-recognized Tribes.

    In California, there are Federally recognized Tribal governments, non-Federally recognized tribal governments, and Tribal communities.

    California Community Assistance for Climate Equity Program, Tribal Appendix to the 2020 Technical Assistance Guidelines for State Agencies [Deliberative Draft]

    California Native American Heritage Commission and NAGPRA

    What California does have, is the California Native American Heritage Commission (Cal NAHC, or NAHC), and a robust, and codified set of laws protecting Tribal Cultural Resources (like Rivers, Forests, Plants, and Animals); and Places (like Shellmounds, Caves with Petroglyphs, Sacred Places like Ceremony and Village Sites); and Things (like mortar & pestles, funerary objects, jewelry,); and more.

    Acts of legislation like both the Federal and California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), AB 52-CEQA Tribal Consultation, empower the California Native American Heritage Commission to carry out both the administration and enforcement of NAGPRA, AB-52, and other related laws.

    How Does the NAGPRA Notification List Work?

    NAGPRA Notification Lists are made up of NAHC Contact Lists.

    Part of NAHC’s solemn duty as the NAGPRA Administrator for the Great State of California is to develop and maintain a contact list of federally recognized California Native American tribes, non-federally recognized tribes, and coalitions of tribes.

    This contact list informs the Most Likely Descendant List (CalNAGPRA List).

    The Most Likely Descendants list is a registry of tribes, coalitions, and Individual Native Americans who trace their ancestry to a particular village site or traditional tribal territory. Tribes and Coalitions appoint their own MLD Representative; Individuals appear for themselves.

    If discovered human remains are determined to be Native American by the County Coroner, the Coroner is required to send notification of that discovery to NAHC. (The Native American Heritage Commission.)

    NAHC immediately notifies the appropriate Most Likely Descendant(s) via phone. This is the process commonly referred to as “Tribal Notification

    This Tribal Notification only occurs when the Native American Heritage Commission “receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a county coroner” pursuant to the Health and Safety Code.

    Public Agencies are required to perform Environment Impact Assessments and Reviews. The California Environmental Quality Act mandates Tribal Consultation for public projects [with some very important exemptions; I digress.]

    Tribal Consultation is the process of working collaboratively with a Tribal Consultant(s), and/or Most Likely Descendant(s) before development begins to mitigate the harm to Tribal Cultural Resources, and/or Native American Remains.

    What is a descendant?

    Anyone can claim descendancy, sure. Some people bet the farm on a family rumor of “Chief Apache” blood. But claiming descendancy is different than being an actual descendant of a tribe. It’s not something you can claim from a generalized mouth-swab, or even a fully sequenced finger prick; unless you can tie your DNA to a specific place, or band/tribe, that ancestry test means nothing. [For a number of reasons].

    Being a descendant means knowing your family history. Being able to state who you are related to, and where you come from. True tribal descendants will be Recognized By Their Tribe (“Recognized Descendant“), or be Enrolled As a Tribal Member. When someone claims Native American/Indigenous/American Indian Ancestry, we expect them to be able to back that up by telling us who they are.

    One who Is descended from another; a person who proceeds from the body of another, such as a child, grandchild, etc., to the remotest degree. 

    Black’s Law Dictionary, 2nd Ed

    Establishing Indian Ancestry is an essential part of any person’s claim of descendancy.

    The two easiest ways to tell if someone is lying about their Native American ancestry, are: (1) they claim to belong to a California “State-Recognized Tribe“, or (2) when they are not a Recognized Descendant of the tribe they claim to be a descendant of.

  • Open Letter to City Hall: Reach out to other affected tribes before granting exclusive rights to their land

    We sent out numerous letters to City of Oakland Officials, today. [Here’s the contact list we used.] This is what the letter said:

    Alameda Native History Project
    2201 Shoreline Drive #6334
    Alameda, California 94501
    (510) 747-8423
    info@alamedanativehistoryproject.com

    October 31, 2022

    Oakland City Council
    Oakland City Hall
    1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza
    Oakland, CA 94612

    -VIA EMAIL-

    Re: Proposed Cultural Conservation Easement at Joaquin Miller Park (Agenda Item #10 22-0849)

    Dear City Council Members, and Staff,

    I am writing to ask you to include all Ohlone people in the planning and consultation for the proposed cultural easement at Sequoia Point, in Joaquin Miller Park. Currently, there are only plans recognizing one Ohlone tribal group, the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.

    However, if Sequoia Point is to be treated as a Tribal Cultural Resource, then Tribal Consultation should take place with all of the Ohlone tribal groups. I know that you are familiar with Tribal Notification Requirements; so it’s especially dismaying that Tribal Consultation was not solicited from any or all of the groups in the Native American Heritage Commission’s Tribal Consultation Lists.

    These groups include, but are not limited to:

    1. Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista
    2. Confederated Villages of the Lisjan
    3. Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe
    4. Indian Canyon Mustun Band of Costanoan
    5. Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area
    6. Northern Valley Yokuts Tribe
    7. The Ohlone Indian Tribe

    Granting exclusive rights to use, and access, a Tribal Cultural Resource, as an easement in perpetuity, without consulting with other real parties in interest ( i.e., these other tribal groups) is a serious mistake that does not have to be made.

    Please reach out to other affected tribes before granting exclusive rights to their land.

    Sincerely,

    Gabriel Duncan

    Alameda Native History Project
    2201 Shoreline Drive #6334
    Alameda, California 94501
    (510) 747-8423
    info@alamedanativehistoryproject.com


  • Oakland City Council: Vote No on Ohlone Cultural Easement at Sequoia Point

    It’s not the fact that Sogorea Te Land Trust may be receiving a Cultural Conservation Easement grant of 5-acres of land, called Seqouia Point, in Oakland’s Joaquin Miller Park that bothers me.

    Or that this is the product of Libby Schaaf’s (Mayor of Oakland) unilateral dealings with Corrina Gould (Spokesperson for Sogorea Te Land Trust, alleged Tribal Chair Person of Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.)

    It’s the fact that other local Ohlone tribal groups weren’t consulted during the process of creating the easement we see proposed today.

    Also: this still isn’t LandBack. It’s just an easement.

    Land is not being conveyed from the City of Oakland, to any entity, as Sogorea Te Land Trust claims. An easement just gives them the right to use Sequoia Point as they chose, within the parameters of the Memorandum of Agreement entered into by the City of Oakland and Sogorea Te Land Trust. The City of Oakland retains ownership of the 5-acre area in Joaquin Miller Park–part of Oakland’s Recreation and Parks Department.

    There are some important limitations listed in the propose ordinance you can find in the City of Oakland – Calendar. This includes a clause regarding public access, as well as permit free operations within the scope of the agreement and zoning requirements.

    But this is a small part of a large document, that also excludes the Sequoia Point land grant, and (possibly) any future projects at the Point, from certain CEQA, NAGPRA, and AB52 Rules, which have requirements that projects on or near Tribal Cultural Resources must follow a consultation and scoping process with representatives of all the tribal groups of the area.

    Bypassing these requirements would completely preclude any other tribe’s rightful claim to be a part of, or hold a share of interest in, this easement. Other tribes would not get a say in what happens at Sequoia Point, a place which other Ohlone groups claim as a part of their tribal homeland. Where each of the Ohlone Tribal Groups should share an equal interest, and have an equal voice.

    The most curious part of the Agenda Report, regarding the “Cultural Conservation Easement to Sogorea Te’ Land Trust in Joaquin Miller Park” is the section marked “Public Outreach / Interest”. This section, in its entirety, states:

    City staff and the Land Trust have conducted substantial outreach. The Land Trust, both with and without City staff, met with the Friends of Joaquin Miller Park several times to receive input and feedback about the project, and the organization enthusiastically supports the project. District 4 Councilmember Sheng Thao hosted an online Town Hall about the project on September 13, 2022. More than one hundred people registered for the meeting and participants expressed strong support for the project and no opposition. The Land Trust and City staff have also presented the project multiple times to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. The Commission recommended formal and enthusiastic approval at its meeting on September 14. Since the project was publicly announced on September 8, 2022, there has been a broad expression of support and enthusiasm from the public at large.

    City of Oakland Agenda Report for Item # 10 22-0849, on for City Council Meeting Nov-1-2022
    The passage above contains no mention of City Staff attempting to contact other tribal groups in the area.

    Proponents of the easement appear to have had one very popular online Town Hall, and contacted the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, and the Friends of Joaquin Miller Park, for their opinions.

    But there is no mention of either City Staff, nor Sogorea Te Land Trust, reaching out to any other Ohlone Tribal Group in this area other than the Confederated Villages of the Lisjan Nation, INC.–who is conveniently fronted by the same person as the Sogorea Te Land Trust, Corrina Gould.

    Most projects or proposals on this scale would require some form of Tribal Consultation, or Scoping; this proposal especially, because–for all intents and purposes–Sequoia Point is being considered, or treated, as a Tribal Cultural Resource.

    When a city is creating an Environmental Impact Report or Assessment for any proposed public project (or project on public lands) they must exercise due diligence in requesting from the Native American Heritage Commission a list of tribes to consult regarding possible Tribal Cultural Resources possibly affected by the project, and develop ways to avoid or mitigate damage to those resources.

    This is an example of a 2019 Tribal Consultation List for Richmond, California.

    2019 Tribal Consultation List for Richmond, California – This list is public record and was included as part of an EIR filed in the City of Richmond, California.
    As you can see, there is more than one Tribal Organization to consult with. There are seven organizations on this Tribal Consultation List, next to the associated tribes composing those organizations.

    FYI: No, this list is not radically different in Oakland, California. I couldn’t find one quickly enough to use as an example. But please believe me, it looks the same, and still has more than one Tribal Organization. [… It’s also really difficult to track down one of these lists outside of an Environment Impact Report/Assessment.]

    My point is: cities are required to send letters to every single one of these organizations requesting consultation. Those letters, and replies by tribal representatives, must be filed in the Environmental Impact Report/Assessment; along with a report regarding the request for consultation and any subsequent consultation and scoping activities.

    The law requiring requests for consultations, and the consultation lists, were created and required in order to ensure that Native American land rights are respected; Native American Graves, and Cultural Resources are preserved, and protected from desecration.

    This is done by codifying the Tribal Consultation process in the California Environmental Quality Act; thereby ensuring that Native American Tribes have a voice, and a say, in what happens on their traditional homelands, to their sacred places, and tribal resources.

    The preamble of AB52, and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, both specifically state this is the legislative intent of these laws.

    The well-defined and accepted procedure of the Tribal Consultation Process was not followed to create the proposed Sequoya Point Cultural Easement.

    To grant this land to one Ohlone group, without even talking to the others, is wrong; and in opposition to the Equity of all Ohlone People of the San Francisco Bay Area.

    Choosing to award one single tribal group with land grants, while simultaneously excluding all others, sows division among indigenous people. And it interferes with tribal sovereignty in a way that disenfranchises thousands of indigenous people from having ownership of a place and project that is supposed to be for them.

    The City of Oakland is meddling in tribal politics in the same way the US does in the Middle East. Or Haiti. Or any other place where people have turned around and said, “maybe that wasn’t such a good idea.” Where the actual people living in those countries have done things like burn flags, and tell us to get out. [Judgments reserved.]

    The same way that some tribes were denied recognition by the US Government for petty, arbitrary reasons from the start–just as other Tribes were arbitrarily, and capriciously unrecognized [“removed from the Tribal Rolls”] during the Termination Era for the same.

    This meddling is unwelcome, and sets a dangerous precedent across the rest of the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as California. The precedent that Tribal Consultation doesn’t matter.

    Tribal Consultation matters.

    All Ohlone Tribal Groups should be consulted, and have an equal share–and an equal voice–in the Ohlone Cultural Easement at Sequoia Point.

    Excluding the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, as well as other tribal groups, from what’s happening at Sequoia Point, is not equitable. And the easement should not go forward without proper consultation with all affected tribes of the this area. Especially since this is a land grant made in perpetuity,


    https://opr.ca.gov/ceqa/tribal/ – Governor’s Office of Planning and Research “Tribal Resources”

    PDF – Native American Heritage Commission, Tribal Consultation Under AB52: Requirements and Best Practices

    http://www.muwekma.org – Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area website


  • Alameda’s Racist History: If You Won’t Share Ours, Give Back Our Artifacts

    “Alameda Museum: / If you won’t share our history, give our artifacts back / Celebrate the First Alamedans just / as much as your Colonizer Heroes. / Alameda’s Racist History” Title art for @AlamedaNativeHistoryProject on Instagram.com.

    Alameda is a model colonial city. Their Victorian houses, and expansive gardens have been written about for hundreds of years. Regular Alameda Garden Tours, and Alameda Legacy Home Tours extoll the virtues of Alameda’s First Colonizers.

    These historical celebrations routinely leave out facts, such as,

    “This garden was fertilized by using human remains found in one of Alameda’s three shellmounds.”

    Or,

    “This sidewalk was constructed using one of the over 350 Native American bodies found in the ‘Sather’s Mound’.”

    The Alameda Museum is exclusively devoted to commemorating and memorializing Alameda’s White History, while simultaneously ignoring and minimizing the existence and contributions of people of color; and the atrocities committed by those who are purported to be such heroic goliaths of Alameda History, today.

    This is all done in the shadows of people like Rasheed Shabazz, someone who had to trace his own Alameda Legacy to bring us Black Alameda History, which was never touched upon, or even considered by an all-white museum staff, and curation team. [

    Sure, the Alameda Museum invites us to search their archives. But the word “search” belies the onerous nature of digging through files and card catalogs which aren’t actually indexed or organized in any useful way.

    People always offer us the chance to do their work for them, like it’s a favor to us.

    But let’s be clear: an archive that isn’t indexed or organized is trash.

    The real issue here, is that the Alameda Museum has existed for so long without ever: (a) indexing their holdings; (b) focusing on anything other than Alameda’s White History; or (c) ever asking for permission to possess the Native American Funerary Objects, and Grave Goods in their possession….

    The issue of Alameda Museum’s possession of Native American Grave Goods and Funerary Objects is especially salient considering their absolute lack of respectful handling of the Historical Events Surrounding the Sather’s Mound, and the Destruction and Morbid Uses for Alameda’s Shellmounds.

    Simply put;

    Alameda Museum, if you’re not going to engage the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, ask for permission to possess their artifacts, and present respectful, and responsible, information regarding the First Alamedans: then you don’t deserve to possess their artifacts.


    Stay tuned for more.

  • In Defense of Native America: The People versus David Van Horn

    “In Defense of Native America: The People Versus David Van Horn” cover art for @AlamedaNativeHistoryProject on Instagram.com

    An archaeologist is sued by the California Attorney General, and the Native American Heritage Commission for the return of stolen Native American Artifacts.

    Santa Cruz Sentinel; Nov. 09, 1990

    People v. Van Horn (1990)

    The only “published” case in California where any entity is being sued by “The People”.

    In this case: the State of California is suing David Van Horn, and Archaeological Associates, Ltd. (a company owned by him and his wife, Ruth) for the return of Native American artifacts and remains in his, and his wife’s, possession without Native American consent.

    David Van Horn, an archaeologist hired by a City to examine land The City intended to use as an industrial park, found two burials, and related funerary items and goods. Also present, and a party to this action, is Horn’s assistant, Robert White. Tribes weren’t aware of the discovery until the Oceanside Blade-Tribune reported it, and hinted that Van Horn, and his archaeological consulting company were trying to conceal the existence of the discovery.

    Once tribes found out, they grouped together, engaged Kern County, City governments, and demanded that the remains and everything be returned to the tribes.

    This lead to a meeting, where David Van Horn agreed to return the remains to tribes. But, in a later meeting, he refused to return metates that were buried somehow on top of the remains; arguing that objects placed on top of buried remains were not “funerary objects”, or grave-related goods; he asserts his “expert opinion” that the metates were simply put there to “weigh” the body down.

    Van Horn publicly showed contempt for NAGPRA, and claimed he was being unfairly persecuted for doing legitimate, scientific, work. He even went as far as to throw doubt that the representatives of several Native American tribes demanding return of these objects were even related to the bodies discovered.

    This was the ultimate in sleazy denials. I bet the demurrer was fantabulous. Because, Van Horn threw out everything he could in his defense. Archaeological Associates, Ltd., claimed ignorance, and pointed to David Van Horn as the party ultimately responsible for breaking the law.

    A year into the dispute, the California Attorney General, and Native American Heritage Commission filed suit to compel the return of the objects.

    The statutes were clear that it is against the law to posses Native American Artifacts without Native American consent. Summary judgment was granted against David Van Horn. Van Horn, and Archaeological Associates, Ltd. were ordered to return the Native American artifacts, and repatriate Native American remains, to their Tribal Nation.

    In the end, it didn’t matter how much David Van Horn tried to fight culpability for his actions, and continued possession of Native American artifacts, without Native American Consent. It didn’t matter because he never argued whether or not it was against the law to possess those objects.

    And so…

    the issue of fact becomes one of law and loses its triable character if the undisputed facts leave no room for a reasonable difference of opinion.

    (Reid v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 557.)
    The California Attorney General published an opinion on this case:
    2007 Cal. AG LEXIS 23, 90 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 89
    Santa Cruz Sentinel; Nov. 23, 1990

    There were also criminal charges filed against David Van Horn, and his assistant, for knowingly desecrating Native American graves. The case was ultimately dismissed.

    However, the criminal case against Van Horn is notably “the first use of a 1988 state law that makes Native American grave robbery a felony.”


    Stay tuned for more.

  • The Side Effects of Institutional Gatekeeping of Tribal Knowledge & Native American Sacred Sites and Cultural Assets

    From the beginning of my life, I never had the opportunity to learn about my culture, or where I was from. For the first 12 years of my life, I never even saw another Paiute person.

    This was because I was adopted at birth. I knew that I was Native American. That I should be on a reservation somewhere in Central California. But, instead, I found myself in Alameda; trying to navigate the expectations and life plans set by my new, white, parents.

    This kind of estrangement is common.

    It comes in many different forms, for many different reasons. Boarding schools are pointed to, most often. But cultural estrangement started in California with the Mission System. It continued on through Mexican Occupation, when the missions were secularized, and “Spanish” land was granted to Mexican citizens, and select Indigenous People, who were associated with the Missions as ranchers and herders, or were deeded land in some other way. This was actually the first Native American “buy-in” that occurred in California.

    When the American government came in, their imperative was to destroy or pacify people who they viewed as “savage”, and sub-human. Giving land to these people who Americans found so hard to wipe off the face of the planet was unheard of. All land, property, and wealth held by the First Californians were immediately seized, destroyed, or transferred to white interlopers.

    Some Native Americans went into hiding. Claimed to be Spanish. (They already spoke Spanish.) …Leaned into their baptismal names.

    This was the second estrangement.

    American Occupation came with a number of different attempts to destroy, pacify, and ultimately assimilate and “breed out the savage”. Each of these attempts divided (and sub-divided) tribal groups; moved us farther and farther away from our homelands, each other, and purposely tried to destroy everything linking us to the old ways. This was a sophisticated attempt at genocide, and population control; and people need to stop minimizing effects of this recent history on Indigenous People in America, today.

    Native American People have been forced to live as Prisoners of War since the 17th Century. For more than three centuries, Indian Children and Infants were taken from their families, and placed into Missions, Orphanages, Boarding Schools, and worse. For most of the 19th and 20th centuries, it was legal for White Women to take Indian Children away from their families, and keep them as “wards”. [Like in the series “Them”.]

    So it’s not uncommon for a Native American Person to be so estranged from their family and culture. To have such a conflicted self-image of what it means to be Native American, and what Native American really is. For Spanglish to be spoken on the rez out here, in California. For former “Mission Indians” to be so heavily involved in the Catholic Church, and the veneration of the Missions.

    But what if a Native American Descendant from California doesn’t want to go to the Catholic or Mormon church to find out about their own people?

    What if they’re tired of listening to a narrative from white people’s perspective? From the Eastern U.S. perspective of tribes like Dine, Lakota, Sioux? From the perspective of people who view Native America as a homogeneous group?

    Where does someone go to find the stories of their specific tribe? The songs of the place they come from? Pictures of their ancestors? The history of their reservation? Where their ancestors lived before that?

    Where do you go when your only sources are generic, pan-Indian narratives, and single-page, one-sentence mentions of your tribe?

    I decided to search historic newspapers, museums, government, and institutional records.

    Historic Newspapers are hard to locate. And even harder to read for free. Many of these newspapers were taken out of circulation, and stored on microfilm. Even more are locked behind Ancestry.com (and affiliate) pay gates, specifically. It is interesting to note that “Ancestry” is based in Salt Lake City, Utah, though.

    Museums store items by the Date Received; not by Keyword, or Subject–which shows that Museums have historically been about accounting and fundraising more than they were about collecting items which they intend to reference, much less curate. This makes the situation even more problematic, because researchers are expected to do the work of tracking something down, and often times creating a new library information system in the process. [Basically, re-cataloging every single object to find the two or three that were actually being sought after.]

    The amount of free labor some museums get on the backs of unpaid researchers is very disproportionate to the amount of useful information researchers actually find when laboring for said museums.

    Government Records only had to be stored for a certain period of time. Certainly, anything more than 100 years old was more likely to be destroyed, than it was preserved. Much of the City of Alameda records were converted to microfilm; combined with transcriptions of the Official Alameda Newspaper of Record, then simply labeled “Historic Rolls”.

    Much of these rolls contained little to no useful information, and was simply a transcribed duplicate of several newspaper reels, which were also available. Still, missing records stymied my search. It almost seemed as if things were intentionally removed from the City of Alameda Historical Record between 1910, and 1960.

    Other cities which were consulted, like Pleasanton, San Leandro, and Hayward, do not have historic newspapers from before the early 1900’s. These inquiries were usually passed on to local museums. Then on to local genealogical and historic societies–where the inquiry usually died. This is to say that there are no contrasting reports available from other historical newspapers (yet.)

    Governmental Chain of Custody

    Furthermore, because of the changeover from Spanish, to Mexican, to American hands: the chain of custody of important documents was broken each time the land changed hands. The U.S. Government was not interested in keeping prior records[; which also explains the fundamental lack of understanding of tribal cultures American anthropologists still experience to this day.]

    This is why the “California Land Grants” case happened, in 1851. Because rich Mexicans (and Spanish ex-pats) were getting jilted out of their land they had old titles to, by white people, who claimed their American land deed superseded any other. (I mean, this is consistent with the U.S. policy of west-ward expansion during the late 1800’s, to test Mexico’s control over ‘The West’, and eventually gain control of California–among other territories.)

    Mission/Spanish/Mexican records are still somewhat of a mystery and records were basically abandoned “as the vine withered”.

    This is because many of the missions and forts Spain installed in California were actually remote forward operating bases.

    Paperwork flowed back through California, to Mexico, and over the Atlantic Ocean, to Spain–when everything was working as planned. This organization was already broken down by “Corporate Office”, “Regional Managers”, “District Managers”, “Store Managers”, “Shift Managers”, and Baristas.

    So, when the Spanish were sent back to Spain, those documents stayed here, were hastily mailed out, or were destroyed.

    When the Missions were secularized, those documents were abandoned, taken by cardinals (or whoever), or destroyed.

    Anything that wasn’t specifically removed and preserved was probably destroyed in the [totally righteous] fires that destroyed many of the the San Francisco Bay Area Catholic Missions the first time.

    So, when it comes time to track down the records of these organizations; it’s necessary to chase them all the way back to the original departments and agencies which created them. This search almost always leads to institutions like the University of California, at Berkeley.

    Why? Because, it turns out, the University of Berkeley Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology, and the U.C. Berkeley Library has the largest collection of relevant materials within 50 miles.

    Institutional Records and Academic Studies

    Academic Institutions, like The Smithsonian, and the University of California, made their names on robbing the graves of Native American and Indigenous People all around the world.

    Thousands upon thousands of bones, and cultural artifacts are in the custody of these institutions, waiting to be returned to their descendants, and laid to rest in the manner of each of their hundreds of individual tribes. More than half of the remains are “tribally unaffiliated”; and stay in limbo, because they have no living descendant to receive them, and no ancestral land to be laid to rest in.

    The “researchers” who did this physically separated people from their final resting places, mixed and miss-matched parts of other people’s bodies together, failed to properly label our ancestors, and now have what amounts to a “spare parts bin” of archaeological malfeasance.

    As much as Archaeologists and Anthropologists would like you to believe the opposite, these bones were found by systematically cutting open cemeteries, and removing rows of bodies under the guise of “legitimate scientific research”.

    They did this all the while wondering, “Where did these people disappear to?”

    Knowing full well that Indian Wars were raging nearby.

    Conflicts such as:

    Sioux Wars – 1854-1891 in the Great Plains
    Ute Wars – 1850-1923 in Utah
    Apache Wars – 1854-1924 in the South-West

    They wondered…

    Even with the knowledge that an Indian Reservation or Indian Town existed within 100 miles of any place mentioned in any anthropological or archaeological study/survey from 1860-1920.

    These “ethnologists”, anthropologists and archaeologists were living through the California Land Grant Cases.

    Anybody in the business of “antiquity” should well know the whereabouts and disposition of any of the Indigenous People whose graves, bones, and property they were “studying”, or auctioning off to private collectors.

    Especially when the battles were making front page news daily.

    There is no answer for this willful ignorance, and unethical exclusion of important facts and datum. The narrative of Native American History, as told by colonizers, is full of these types of falsities, and lies by omission. And things like this really call to question the accuracy, and reliability of any of these works.

    If you can even get access to them.

    Institutional Gatekeeping of Tribally Affiliated Knowledge/Artifacts

    Because Universities, Museums, and other Grave Robbers (“hunters of antiquities”, “tomb raiders”, etc.)–as well as Ethnologists, Linguists, and Archaeologists–stole bodies; sacred, ceremonial, and cultural artifacts; caused the damage and loss of cultural land and sites; and attributed Native American intellectual property to themselves, instead of to the Native American creators of said property;

    And,

    Because of the sustained and forceful objections to the theft and kidnapping of Native American Bodies and Culture by Native Americans, and The Public; as well as demands for the return of Native American Remains and Items & Artifacts:

    The Native American Graves Repatriation Act was enacted Federally, and by the State of California to protect the Graves, Remains, Cultural Sites, Artifacts, and Other Native American Objects within the State; as well as to create a framework for the repatriation of Native American remains in the possession of Universities and Institutions.

    The Native American Heritage Commission was created in California to directly administer these efforts. In 1982, the Commission was authorized to make a determination of “Most Likely Descendant” when Native American remains are found. Most Likely Descendants are people or tribal groups who have documented ties to the land where Native American Graves were disturbed, and Native American bodies have been found. The Native American Heritage Commission is charged with assisting Tribal Notification, and the process of Tribal Consultation by the Most Likely Descendants.

    The tribal consultation process only offers two ways to “mitigate” the damage to Native American Graves, Remains, Landmarks, Objects, and/or other Funerary Things:

    1. Re-bury the remains in a place where they will not be disturbed;
    2. Remove the remains, and return them to the Most Likely Descendant for proper burial.

    The process of notification goes something like this:

    1. Human remains found, notification to Coroner.
    2. Coroner determines remains are Native American, and therefore under the jurisdiction of the California Native American Heritage Commission (CalNAHC).
    3. CalNAHC provides a notification list to property owner. This list contains the contact information for Tribal Groups who are Most Likely Descendant(s) of the Native American body found.
    4. Tribal Group is notified and only has a certain amount of time to make a response as to how the Native American remains should be treated, or how a project can avoid disturbing cultural resources.

    If the Tribe does not respond within 30 days of notice, the developer or property owner will be able to continue work, unencumbered by the Native American Graves Protection Repatriation Act. And, in the case of housing development, the building process will be allowed to be streamlined, via AB 831, an act relating to housing, and declaring the urgency thereof.

    But, if the Most Likely Descendant and Property Owner are not able to reach a compromise….

    Say the MLD wants absolutely no more development of the land; and the property owner (CalTrans, Ruegg & Ellsworth, San Rafael Rock Quarry, etc.) is unable to reach a compromise, the desecration will be allowed to continue if the developer simply alleges they tried their best. The construction just won’t be “streamlined”, and will have to go through the normal Environmental Assessment procedure; and will likely still result in the destruction or desecration of Tribal Cultural Resources.

    The aforementioned refers to situations where Native American Graves and/or Remains (funerary objects, etc.) have been found.

    CalNAHC also plays a role when Public Entities, like Caltrans, Amtrak, Los Angeles Public Works, East Bay Municipal Utility District, East Bay Recreation and Parks Department, the City of Menlo Park, etc., want to develop anything on what’s considered “public land” or subsidized by public funds.

    We’re talking: Public Works Projects, Improvement Projects…. Things which translate into freeway on or off-ramps, giant rain water caches underneath Glen Cove Park (in Vallejo, California), water pumps in Alameda, Treasure Island, San Francisco… BART stations, Water Treatment Plants… And more.

    All of these places around us started as project proposals.

    And each proposal needs to comply with local, state, and federal law. Each facility, site, or subject property–after being built–needs to operate in compliance with local state, and federal law.

    Namely: CEQA. The California Environmental Quality Act.

    CEQA was one of the first set of laws that recognized Native American Graves, Objects, etc., as being valuable, and worth saving.

    Because of CEQA, when these proposed public works projects, projects on public land, or projects using public money, are submitted, they are also required to perform an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).

    You’ve probably seen the Public Notice of Hearing(s) that are posted on the front of buildings, or on the fences outside of where buildings once stood.

    These are Required Notices to The Public. You. These hearings decide the very fate of the sacred places which have, up to this point, become Shopping Malls, and Subdivisions with Waterside Parks.

    These Notices tell you when a Water Treatment Plant, Waste Management Facility, Shooting Range, or Quarrying Operation has an upcoming Permit Hearing.

    In fact, multi-year operations, like the San Rafael Rock Quarry, are required to resubmit an Environmental Impact Report periodically, and submit to a public hearing (to the County Board of Supervisors, in this case), to keep their permits, and continue operating.

    These EIA’s are often very long (more than 40 pages,) and contain a multitude of very technical information regarding the current state of the land intended to be “used”, and the speculative impact of the operations intended upon said land (e.g. pollution, destruction of natural habitat, etc.) The specifics change with every project. However, the demands of the Environmental Impact Assessment remain constant.

    Recently, the passage of Assembly Bill 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes 2014) codified the inclusion of a single question regarding “Tribal Cultural Resources”:

    Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:

    a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or

    b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.”

    Because of this, the California Native American Heritage Commission is charged with yet another duty: maintaining a Tribal Contact List for CEQA Purposes, per AB 52 (CA PRC §21080.3.1…); and when Cities and Municipalities create their General Plan [among other things], per SB 18 (CA GOV §65352.3).

    The California Native American Graves Protection Repatriation Act, and the authoritative statutes empowering the California Native American Heritage Commission, specifically state the importance of the “confidentiality of information regarding specific identity, location, character, and use of those [Native American] places, features, and objects.”

    In the courts, this has often played out as the misreading of statute from “confidential” to “secret”. However, statutes surrounding the confidentiality of Native American (Tribal) Cultural Resources simply state that NAHC is “not required” to disclose certain records, or information specifically enumerated in the California Government, and Health & Safety Codes.

    The statutory scheme, as it stands:

    requires Tribal Cultural Assets to be listed (in a confidential appendix) in Environmental Impact Assessments. The specific information regarding the Tribal Cultural Resource is hidden. But general, non-confidential information regarding the Existence Of A Tribal Cultural Resource that could be significantly effected by a proposed project should be published and made available to the general public. [PRC §21082.3(f)]

    These public sections of the Proposed Environment Impact Report, or Proposed Negative Impact (“Declaration”), which mentions “Tribal Cultural Resources”, will be small. Maybe the heading won’t even catch your eye. And the “general information” presented on the document will minimize the existence of Tribal Cultural Resources, even though the report is supposed to clarify how significantly the Tribal Cultural Resource will be affected.

    In fact, the EIR, or Negative Impact Declaration, is supposed to tell you how damage to Tribal Cultural Resources could have been mitigated, or the circumstances behind why the destruction of Tribal Cultural Resources was “unavoidable”. It should say whether or not Tribal Consultation (or “Scoping Activities”) were conducted or concluded, or if an agreement was reached with the direct Lineal, or Most Likely Descendants of the Tribal Cultural Resource.

    The EIR, or Negative Impact Declaration should make it clear whether or not the tribe even responded to invitations for consultation. That information should be in bold. But it’s not. And, who actually knows how to read an Environmental Impact Report?

    At some point, we have to realize that our ignorance is being taken advantage of every day.

    The fact that we are distracted every single waking second is an advantage that is being leveraged against us in the long wars of attrition against corporations and governments who want nothing more than to exploit our land, and tear the bodies of our ancestors out of the ground to build condos that cost $1.5-2M, each.

    This is why property owners refuse to register Native American Historical Sites. Because this land is worth more money than many of the people who live on it will see in our entire lives. This land is worth more than us. And erasing us, or creating a statutory scheme that makes it easy to disregard Native American objections to the desecration and theft of our land, also makes money for themselves while they do it.

    This is a Billion dollar industry that Native American “Consultants” are sucking the dew off of in only the most parasitic, “bottom-feeder” kind of way. The disrespect to the bodies of our elders. Our great grandparents…. It’s all just for the zero’s.

    No matter how the statute is written. No matter how much commitment legislators and politicians can claim to have, the easy-out that Developers and Governmental Agencies has hinges upon the responsibility of a Tribal Organization to respond to these “invitations” for tribal “scoping” and “consultation”.

    The statute presupposes that Government Agencies and Developers are law-abiding. But, when it comes to the required “consultation” with Native American Tribes, Lineal, or Most Likely Descendants… all of the exceptions hinge upon the “nonparticipation” of Native Americans.

    (d) In addition to other provisions of this division, the lead agency may certify an environmental impact report or adopt a mitigated negative declaration for a project with a significant impact on an identified tribal cultural resource only if one of the following occurs:

    (1) The consultation process between the California Native American tribe and the lead agency has occurred as provided in Sections 21080.3.1 and 21080.3.2 and concluded [in an agreement with Tribal Consultants.]

    (2) The California Native American tribe has requested consultation pursuant to Section 21080.3.1 and has failed to provide comments to the lead agency, or otherwise failed to engage, in the consultation process.

    (3) The lead agency has complied with subdivision (d) of Section 21080.3.1 and the California Native American tribe has failed to request consultation within 30 days.

    Assembly Bill 52

    According to Assembly Bill 831, housing projects meeting the above criteria would still be “streamlined”, removing most of the public response and permit hurdles necessary for quick development.

    The problem is that Native American Graves, Cemeteries, Cultural Sites, and Sacred Lands are still being given the green-light for demolition.

    They are being rubber-stamped for desecration by a function of law that simply added Notification, and “Due Process” instead of actual Justice, and Accountability.

    There must be a way to advocate for Native American Tribal Cultural Resources, like Graves, Cemeteries, and Sacred Places, when Lead Agencies and Private Developers receive no response through the Tribal Contact List.

    Either the Native American Heritage Commission must step up for all of these places, or they need to devise an apparatus that will allow true conservation work (the very basis of NAHC’s Mission) to take place without them.


    Stay tuned for more.

  • Stealing the San Pedro Shellmounds

    Building an Empire with Stolen Bones

    Stealing the San Pedro Shellmounds

    Sign the petition,
    “End the Practice of Using Native American Graves for Landfill & Construction”
    https://www.change.org/SaveSanPedroPoint

    (more…)

    Pages: 1 2 3 4