Legislative Alert

Update on the Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony Act (STOP Act) and the Terrorism Art Antiquity Revenue Prevention Act

Update on the Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony Act (STOP Act) and the Terrorism Art Antiquity Revenue Prevention Act

There are two bills currently before the Senate that are serous cause for concern for collectors, museums, and dealers in Native American and international ethnographic art. 

ATADA has already alerted its membership to the potential consequences of the STOP Act, S.3127/H.5854 which is currently before both House and Senate. 

The STOP Act amends NAGPRA to specifically prohibit the export of Native American and Hawaiian objects deemed tribal patrimony. The definition of tribal cultural patrimony under NAGPRA is an object has present religious and ceremonial significance to a tribe today.  

The STOP Act also makes it unlawful for any person to knowingly export from the United States any Native American “cultural items” obtained in violation of four existing U.S. statutes: NAGPRA, 18 USC § 1170, ARPA, and18 USC § 1866(b). A “cultural item” as defined in the ARPA is virtually any material remains of past human life or activities over 100 years old. To oversimplify a bit, the difference between an item that is lawful to collect and trade under ARPA and one that is illegal to trade is whether it was found or collected on private land, in which case it is generally deemed lawfully acquired, or found or collected on federal or Indian land in violation of law, including the 1906 Antiquities Act, when it not lawful to collect or trade.

The STOP Act also raises the penalty for a violation of any of the above existing laws from 5 years to 10 years. And finally, the bill adds a provision granting immunity from prosecution to anyone who “repatriates” an unlawfully obtained cultural object to the “appropriate” Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization within two years of the STOP Act’s implementation.

The STOP Act has no system for clearing artifacts that can be sold. The STOP Act does not identify the objects each tribe considers sacred or community owned. There are over 500 federally-recognized tribes. It is impossible for citizens to know what is deemed a cultural object by each tribe.

Proponents of the STOP Act have suggested that citizens can “ask the tribe” to determine if an item should be returned or can be sold. However, the law provides no permitting system, no staff or funding, no criteria, no standards of evidence, and no means of mediation or appeal.

The STOP Act’s 2-year “amnesty” window for the return of “unlawful” tribal cultural property by private collectors without prosecution implies that possession of all cultural objects is unlawful. The STOP Act is likely to cause unwarranted returns of thousands of lawfully owned and traded objects to tribes which do not want them. Collectors may be pressured to give up objects simply out of an abundance of caution. Alternatively, lack of clear criteria or means of compliance may result in virtually no returns at all.

ATADA has submitted testimony to both the House and Senate subcommittees on the STOP Act and is engaging directly with tribal governments to find better solutions to tribal concerns. Additional information on the STOP Act and contact information for legislators is linked below.

S. 3449, the Terrorism Art Antiquity Revenue Prevention Act of 2016

A second bill before the Senate, the Terrorism Art Antiquity Revenue Prevention Act of 2016, S.3449, poses a serious threat to US art collectors, museums and dealers in foreign ethnographic, antique, and ancient art. S. 3449 could overturn 40 years of US case law and make possession as well as trade in art from virtually any foreign country illegal under US law. 

Despite its name, the proposed law does nothing whatsoever to block terrorist funding. First, import of Syrian and Iraqi artifacts was already completely blocked by the Protect and Preserve International Cultural Property Act, signed into law by President Obama on May 9, 2016, as Public Law No:114-151. Second, there has been no evidence of any sales of Syrian or Iraqi art in the US that has supported ISIS or other terrorist activities.

The new proposed law, S. 3449, is a stealth attempt to end the international ethnographic and ancient art trade. It’s not the first and won’t be the last! The sponsor of the bill, Senator Kirk of Illinois, failed in his reelection bid, and no similar bill has been introduced in the House. It is therefore unlikely that there will be an attempt to pass the bill during the 2016 lame duck session. Nonetheless, ATADA is following the bill closely, and we anticipate that similar legislation will be introduced in the coming Congress in 2017.

What S. 3449 does:

  1. Section 2 amends the National Stolen Property Act (NSPA) to create special provisions for “cultural property.” “Cultural property” is broadly defined to include virtually all art and antiques, using the definition of cultural property in the 1970 UNESCO Convention. This includes antiquities more than one hundred years old. such as inscriptions, coins and engraved seals; objects of ethnological interest; pictures, paintings and drawings produced entirely by hand on any support and in any material (excluding industrial designs and manufactured articles decorated by hand); original works of sculpture in any material; original engravings, prints and lithographs; original assemblages and montages; rare manuscripts, old books, documents and publications of special interest (historical, artistic, scientific, literary, etc.); postage, revenue and similar stamps, singly or in collections; articles of furniture more than one hundred years old and old musical instruments.
  2. The threshold value to trigger criminal liability NSPA is reduced from $5,000 to $50. 
  3. Cultural property that has been removed or excavated in violation of local law will be considered to be stolen. Stolen property would include any object removed or excavated from a foreign country in violation of a foreign local law.
  4. Section 3(a) requires any person who seeks to import, sell or gift any Syrian or Iraqi cultural property in the US to provide to the Secretary of Homeland Security
  5. information, with supporting documentation, on the provenance of the property that includes, at a minimum, when and where the property was obtained, and such other information as the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Homeland Security consider appropriate.
  6. Section 3(b) sets up a working group to develop regulations to require dealers of cultural property to document and report information on transactions in cultural property of Iraq or Syria, and where objects were acquired; to work with participants in international art and cultural property markets to develop a Federal Government database with information on cultural property and warnings about buyers, sellers, appraisers and others with a history of conducting illegal trade in cultural property, and consider providing participants in international art and cultural property markets with access to the database.

ATADA President John Molloy, has written to the heads of the Senate Finance Committee, where the proposed bill is under consideration, urging the committee to take additional testimony before moving forward with this hastily introduced and extremely damaging bill. Other museum, collecting, and trade organizations have done likewise. ATADA and other organizations must work together to be sure this ill-considered bill and others like it do not continue to be introduced into the Senate and House.

Legislative Alert - ATADA's Position Regarding the STOP Act

ATADA’s position regarding the
“Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony Act (STOP Act)”


ATADA asks its members and supporters to write letters and/or send emails or faxes about the proposed bills, S. 3127, and H. 5854, the Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony Act (STOP Act) to their own senators and representatives and to members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs.

ATADA is committed to working with all tribes regarding patrimonial objects. We are currently discussing the law and working to build bridges between tribal communities, tribal artists, art dealers and collectors. However, ATADA has identified many serious issues with S. 3127.

  • The STOP Act is unnecessary because export for sale of unlawfully acquired artifacts is already illegal under ARPA and NAGPRA.
  • The STOP Act does not identify the objects each tribe considers sacred or community owned. 
  • The STOP Act creates no administrative body or standards for determination of what is claimed.
  • The STOP Act will damage businesses, cost jobs, and reduce tax revenue.
  • While voluntary donation of important sacred objects should be encouraged, tribal legal claims for restitution of unlawfully possessed objects belong in the courts, not in wholesale restitutions.
  • The STOP Act will result in consumer confusion and harm Native artisans and legitimate businesses because of the assumption that all Indian artifacts are tainted by illegality.
  • The STOP Act needs additional consultation with tribes and with other impacted US stakeholders, including collectors, dealers, academics, and museums.

A complete summary of these issues can be found in our Summary of Issues - STOP Act.

Use the buttons below to download complete copies of Senate Bill 3127 and House Bill 5854, which is identical to the Senate bill. 

Contact Your Legislators

Use this list to find your local Representative: http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

Use this list to find your Senators: http://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/

We have compiled a list of Senators and Representatives on the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, the House Subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairsand the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.

Tips for writing a great letter to a legislator:

  • State that your letter is about Senate Bill 3127 / House Bill 5854, the Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony (STOP Act).
  • Say who you are. Anonymous letters go nowhere. Include your correct name, address, phone number and email address. Otherwise, you will not get attention or a response.
  • State any professional credentials or personal experience you may have, and how long you have been involved in the Native American art field.
  • Keep your letter short — one page is best.
  • Use specific examples to support your position.
  • State what it is you want done – don’t pass the STOP Act, or fix the STOP Act so it does not damage important American values and harm US collectors, art dealers, Native artists, and museums. Express your own feelings about the STOP Act.
  • Thank the member for taking the time to read your letter. NEVER be rude or aggressive.

Please note: This linked list of Senators and Representatives on the Senate and House Indian Affairs Committees has the webpages for sending emails as well. These email links almost always require you to be a resident of the state or district of the senator or representative. However, you can send a letter via mail to any senator or representative. It shows that you (and probably many others who do not bother to write) really care!

Sample Letter

Here is a sample letter to a US Senator. Please make your letter your own by personalizing it and including the issues that are most important to you. You can add from the issues mentioned above or outlined in the above referenced Summary of Issues - Stop Act.
An editable copy of the letter (MS Word format) is available for download by clicking the button.

••• Sample Text •••

The Honorable _______________ 

(Room #) (Name) Senate Office Building
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator:

My name is ________. I live in _________. I am interested in Native American art because _________.

I am deeply concerned that Senate Bill 3127 / House Bill 5854, the Safeguard Tribal Objects of Patrimony (STOP Act) will harm ________ (For example, collectors, art dealers, Native artists, museums, or educational institutions) and the public interest.

I believe that the STOP Act is not necessary; US laws already prohibit illegal trafficking in Native American artifacts. The STOP Act does not identify the objects each tribe considers sacred or community owned. There are hundreds of thousands of items of Native art that have circulated in the market for decades. It is impossible for owners of objects collected over many years to know what is deemed a cultural object by each tribe, or to know which tribe might claim an object. The law does not create any system for determining if an artifact is safe to sell. Yet the penalties for selling an object claimed as cultural property are very high!

The STOP Act will require a huge bureaucracy to identify this volume of material, almost all of which came from ordinary trade. The STOP Act will damage businesses, cost jobs, and reduce tax revenue, especially in the Southwest, where art and tourism are important to municipalities and to Native artisans. The STOP Act is unworkable, impractical and ill-considered.

Thank you for your attention to my letter.


(Your Name, Address, and Telephone)

Sponsoring Senators

Below is a list of sponsoring Senators (four of these also serve on the Senate Indian Affairs Committee).

Senator Martin Heinrich, New Mexico
303 Hart Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510
(202) 224-5521

Senator Tom Udall, New Mexico
531 Hart Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510
(202) 224-6621

Senator Jeff Flake, Arizona
413 Russell Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510
(202) 224-4521

Senator John McCain, Arizona
218 Russell Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510
(202) 224-2235

Senator Jon Tester, Montana
311 Hart Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510
(202) 224-2644

Senator Lisa Murkowski, Alaska
709 Hart Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510
(202) 224-6665

Senator Steve Daines, Montana
320 Hart Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510
(202) 224-2651

Legislative Alert - The Ivory Ban - ATADA's Position

The Ivory Ban: ATADA’s Position

ATADA is dedicated to the highest standards of dealing and collecting antique tribal art and, as our members are composed of collectors, dealers, and museum staff, ATADA is well positioned, in terms of knowledge and experience, to address the issues surrounding the new Federal ban on Ivory.

In ATADA’s initial estimation, the ivory ban fails on many counts and it will NOT work for the intended purpose. The ivory ban does too little, too late, in order to have any significant impact on African and Asian elephants killed by poachers today. The ivory ban is a piece of “looks good” legislation that does not address the core issue. More importantly for ATADA, it adversely impacts our law-abiding antique dealers, collectors, and museums, no to mentions others, like musicians, who possess legal antique objects made of, or containing, ivory.

ATADA asserts that judging someone who buys or sells a piece of antique ivory art as “guilty until proven innocent” is the wrong methodology to use and it certainly will not prevent the contemporary killing of elephants.  At present, the emphasis of the ivory ban is to divert media attention and resources from the real problem, thereby providing the false impression that it will stop illegal poaching and save the elephant. Unfortunately, it won’t and the reality exists that extinction of the elephant could occur within the next 10 years if we do nothing to stop this issue at the source. The ivory ban, as it exists in the law now, will not extend the lifetime of the elephant by a single day and, concurrently, it penalizes countless of Americans who have done nothing wrong.

At the core, ATADA agrees with the Cato Institute: Americans should work together to save elephants with policies that actually address the problem and which respect people’s basic constitutional rights and liberties. Reports from Africa indicate that one elephant is being killed every 15 minutes. Only direct and immediate action at the source can prevent the elephant from becoming extinct. What is needed is enforcement of existing anti-poaching laws in the country of origin and preservation of habitat. The United States needs to direct funds and efforts at the problem abroad.

ATADA supports approaching the antique ivory trade with clear reason and guidelines. To quote ATADA attorney/collector Roger Fry, “It is ATADA’s position that the illegal killing of elephants for their ivory needs to be stopped at the source. The current proposal imposing prohibitions on the purchasing and selling of old, legally collected ivory in the USA may give the appearance of doing something to stop the illegal killing of elephants but, realistically, it is doubtful that it will save a single animal. The concept of shifting the burden of proof to the seller is inconsistent with our time tested rule that the state has the burden of proof.”

According to the guidelines, in order for an object made of, or containing, ivory to qualify as antique, the current owner must show that the item meets all of the following criteria:

  • It is 100 years or older;
  • It is composed in whole or in part of an ESA-listed species;
  • It has not been repaired or modified with any such species after December 27, 1973; and
  • It is being or was imported through an endangered species “antique port.”

Of particular note for many Native American art collectors is that this ban will NOT affect ivory derived from other species such as walrus, warthog, hippopotamus, mammoth and mastodon. Of course, it is possible to identify elephant ivory from other types of ivory however, as we often emphasize, buyer beware and proceed with caution if you intend to sell or purchase a product made of, or containing, ivory.  When purchasing, be sure to always ask for documentation that shows the species of AND the age of the ivory item you are purchasing. This documentation could include CITES permits or certificates, certified appraisals, documents that detail date and place of manufacture, etc.

To clarify some points about this new Federal Ivory Ban, ATADA defers to the official resource about the regulation as put forth by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.  There are basic vocabulary terms, necessary documentation, and understanding of the history of the bundle of the laws that surround this regulation that we recommend everyone with an interest (either commercial or personal) should familiarize themselves with before proceeding with sales/purchases/transfers of ivory antiques.  We strongly recommend consulting the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service website found athttp://www.fws.gov/international/travel-and-trade/ivory-ban-questions-and-answers.html#2

Here are some more helpful links that add to this conversation:



A short video clip of Representative Fleming discussing the subject of the Federal Ban on Ivory with a Fish and Wildlife Service representative (Representative Fleming makes his key point at about the 5 minute mark):


Legislative Alert - Ivory Ban Bills Introduced - 7/22/2014

ATADA Legislative Alert 4,  22 July, 2014: Ivory Ban Bills Introduced

ATADA believes that the proposed FWS regulations (ban) on antique ivory will penalize law-abiding US citizens while doing nothing to protect elephants. For a detailed discussion of the issues, see the ATADA Position on the Ivory Ban.

Last week Representative Steve Daines (R-MT) and Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) introduced bills (H.R. 5052 and S. 2587 ) that would remove the proposed changes to the FWS proposed regulations on elephant ivory and allow time to craft a more effective legislative response.

We ask that you contact your senators and congressman immediately to register your support of these bills.


Writing an e-letter to a Congressman is a lot more difficult than I initially thought.

Here is what I recommend:

1) Create a draft letter in a text editor (not Microsoft Word or your email client), be sure to request that they support the bills (H.R. 5052 and S. 2587 ),

2) Save a copy of your .txt letter file to your hard disk because you will need to come back and get it later,

3) go to the web page of each member of your congressional delegation and do what each requires to send a letter.

Here are some of the issues that you must consider:

-the text of the letter should not contain any .html or markup that is specific to any particular word processor or email client – some Congressional web pages will block any entry of .html and may block data from some particular word processors (Congressmen want to minimize the time that must be spent reading your letter and indexing it in their databases. They also want to make it difficult to submit a form letter to each of many Congressmen).

-you will need to have the text of your letter available in a separate window at the same time that your browser window is open at the Congressman’s site so that you will be able to copy and paste the letter into the data entry box. (you may need to browse to find the correct page allowing data entry into the data entry box).

– Once at a congressional delegation website, you will need to browse to find the page with a web form that allows you send a letter to your Senator or Representative. All web sites seem to be somewhat differently organized, so you will need to browse to find the correct page.

Please request that your friends and contacts do the same as the ATADA membership alone is not large enough to make a big difference in the statistics of public opinion.

Legislative Alert - Ivory Ban - 7/3/2014

ATADA Legislative Alert 3, Ivory Ban, 3 July, 2014

As a response to Presidential Directive, the Fish and Wildlife Service is revising its regulations and is considering putting place a nearly complete ban on elephant ivory. We ask that the membership write their Congressional Delegations a letter asking that they not approve the ivory ban. The text below (written by Roger Fry and Arch Thiessen) is suggested for this letter.  Follow one of the links below to the .html page of each member of your delegation, one at a time, and copy and paste this letter into the form provided on their web page. As a title for your letter (requested in one of the information boxes on the form), use “Ivory Ban Won’t Work”. You may personalize the letter before or after pasting the letter into the form as the space on their form is a text editor box.

All Members of Congress provide essentially the same form for receiving a letter, but you may have to do a bit of digging into their web site to find it.


*******start of suggested letter text********

Honorable Senator (Representative ) ________________

…personalize the introduction here…

The recently proposed Ivory Ban will not work. Reports from Africa indicate that one elephant is being killed every 15 minutes. An Ivory Ban will do too little, too late to have any significant impact on elephants killed by poachers. Only direct and immediate action at the source can prevent the elephant from becoming extinct.

The proposed Ban is a piece of “looks good” legislation that does not address the issue. It does, however, adversely impact law-abiding antique dealers, collectors, museums, musicians and others who possess legal older objects containing ivory.

What is needed is enforcement of existing anti-poaching laws in the country of origin and preservation of habitat. The United States needs to direct funds and effort at the problem in Africa.

The present U.S. emphasis on an Ivory Ban is diverting media attention and resources from the real problem and is providing the false impression that it will help save the elephant. It won’t. Extinction of the elephant could occur within the next 10 years if we do nothing. The ivory ban will not extend the lifetime of the elephant by a single day, while it penalizes countless thousands of Americans who have done nothing wrong.

Please do not support the ivory ban

*******end of suggested letter text********

Legislative Alert - Kennewick Man - 4/4/2005

ATADA Legislative Alert #2, Kennewick Man
4 April, 2005

Dear ATADA Member,

You are receiving this e-mail because of your membership in ATADA. The ATADA Board of Directors has asked me to send the following message to the membership.

ALERT: Senate to expand the definition of Native American

S.536 full text is at http://www.atada.org/S-536.pdf, see p. 15.

As early as this week (April 4-8, 2005) the US Senate will vote on S.536. In Section 108 of this bill, the Senate Indian Affairs Committee quietly and unanimously voted to amend NAGPRA’s definition of Native American. No public hearings were held on this sweeping change.

This expansive definition of Native American sets the stage to overturn the Kennewick Man decisions rendered by the Federal District Court of Oregon and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

More than the Kennewick Man case is at stake. In any future similar discovery, human remains might be reburied without scientific examination. This would, in effect, block the application of the scientific method to inquiry about our Nation’s pre-history.

FAX or E-mail your concerns to your state’s Senators and Senate Majority Leader Frist. Ask them to delete Section 108 from S.536. (US Mail will not reach these offices in time). Every FAX or e-mail counts.

To obtain contact information for your state’s Senators, go to the following URL:


Voice your concerns – NOW


Suggested language: (Personalize your own message but use this subject alert)

Subject: S.536 – DELETE Section 108

Suggestedletter – provided by W. Roger Fry (WRF@rendigs.com)

Dear Senator ____________:

I am writing to you regarding Senate Bill S.536 titled ” Native American Omnibus Act of 2005″ , introduced by Senator John McCain on March 7, 2005.

Senator __________, this Bill contains a drastic change at Section 108. No hearings were held on this and it has been treated as non controversial. Section 108 is a seemingly insignificant change to NAGPRA, however this is not the case. It represents a major change and one that should be thoroughly studied, with public comment, before a decision is made regarding it.

Adding ” or was” after the word ” is” in the definition of ” Native American” in NAGPRA, results in the nonscientific assumption that all human remains found in the United States, that date prior to 1492, are human remains of ancestors of present day Native Americans. Under those circumstances the Native Americans would be able to prohibit scientific study of the human remains and cause same to be reburied without any study whatsoever. Had this change been in the law earlier, there would have been no study of Kennewick Man. Those remains would have been reburied at the direction of the American Indians without our learning that they are over 8,000 years old and non Indian.

The scientists who opposed the immediate reburying of Kennewick Man presented an extraordinarily compelling case, under the current law, and prevailed. Accordingly, Kennewick Man, which has been determined to be a non Indian, has been studied and will be studied further and may represent a new chapter in ” the peopling of America” . The change in Section 108, by adding the words ” or was” would have given the American Indians the exclusive decision making power to immediately rebury Kennewick Man. That same power would exist as to future discoveries if the change in Section 108 is made. This would impede appropriate scientific study of the prehistory of America.

Please ask that Section 108 be removed from Senate Bill S.536 until the ramifications of it are thoroughly understood. A public comment period would provide you with the benefit of the Native American position on this and that of the scientific community. It would enable all members of the Senate to cast an informed vote on this crucial issue.

Thank you, Senator ______________, for your consideration of this most important matter.

Sincerely yours,



Please pass this e-mail along to any friends and/or customers that you think may be interested.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Arch Thiessen, ATADA Webmaster

Legislative Alert - ARPA Modification - 11/9/2004

ATADA Legislative Alert 1, ARPA Modification,
9 November, 2004

Dear (ATADA Member),

You are receiving this e-mail because of your membership in ATADA.

We understand that the Senate will vote by voice (no roll call, no accountability) on an amendment to NAGPRA after it reconvenes Nov. 16. Thus time is of the essence and we ask your prompt attention to the following matter:

(This is a quote from The Friends of America’s Past web site http://www.friendsofpast.org/)

” Without mentioning NAGPRA by name, Colorado Senator Campbell introduced an amendment that significantly changes the intent and scope of NAGPRA. By referring to Public Law 101-601 rather than calling attention to the more familiar NAGPRA, the clear intent was to slip this amendment by unnoticed. No time was allowed for discussion of this amendment. Although the original framers of NAGPRA recognized that the scientific community and the general public have a significant interest in understanding our nation’s factual prehistory, these interests have been quietly set aside with two words: ‘or was’. A press report (www.Indianz.com 10/1/04) quoted a Senate staffer who said the amendment was ” non-controversial” .

” The statute’s definition of Native American was a central issue in the Kennewick Man case. In fact, the government argued before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that if the bones of ” Adam and Eve” were found within our borders, they would be considered Native American under NAGPRA. As a result they would have been given to claiming tribes, reburied, and the public would have no legal right to object. This new amendment effectively allows any federally recognized tribes to claim any and all ancient remains even though they can produce, as the Ninth Circuit Court stated, ” no cognizable link” to the remains. This new definition puts all ancient remains such as Spirit Cave, Wizards Beach, Gordon Creek, Horn Shelter, and Arlington Springs under NAGPRA.

” If this new wording had been part of NAGPRA in 1996 when the Kennewick remains were discovered, the skeleton would have been deemed Native American, given to the claiming tribe (Umatilla), and reburied without study. Although NAGPRA requires that a tribe produce evidence of a relationship to an identifiable prior group, the Secretary of the Interior has the authority to set aside this requirement. Former Secretary Babbitt did so at least twenty times, allowing repatriation to claiming tribes without requiring any evidence beyond their beliefs. The government and tribes have argued that under NAGPRA, Native American remains cannot be studied for research purposes. NAGPRA does include such a statement.

” Expanding NAGPRA in this way imposes a simplistic view of the past: that the only inhabitants of the continent were the ancestors of modern American Indians. Time and time again, scientists have refuted this idea. Two words ‘or was’ denies factual understanding of the complexities that surely existed in the peopling of the Americas by giving American Indians exclusive control over our nation’s prehistory. In the Kennewick Man case, the government and tribes argued unsuccessfully all the information obtained during government studies is proprietary to the tribes should not be accessible to the public. With NAGPRA’s amended language, the public would be denied access to any information discovered about the earliest people to inhabit the continent. All information about our prehistory would belong exclusively to the tribes.”

” Contact your Senators and Representatives in Washington DC and voice your concern that this reportedly ‘non-consequential’ amendment to S.2843 has passed committee review without the benefit of public review or any consideration of the far-reaching consequences.”

The ATADA Board of Directors has asked me to create a “Legislative Alert” web page. More information on this alert will shortly be posted to the new web page.

There are numerous issues of importance to collectors and dealers alike. I am looking for help to collect information to be posted on our new web page. I am inviting all of you to send me subjects for posting and I am especially looking for help in keeping up to date on these rapidly developing topics.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Arch Thiessen, ATADA Webmaster