Session 7: PERSPECTIVES ON PARTNERSHIPS I
Moderator: Lori Stanley, Assistant Professor of Anthropology and NAGPRA Project Director, Luther College, Iowa

Preparing Archeological Collections for the Future: Is Deaccessioning the Solution?
Lynn E. Christenson, Collections Management Program, San Diego State University

Deaccessioning may in some cases be the solution because there is a lack of available space and a lack of funding for managing collections.

How much can we afford to keep?

Reasons to deaccession:

1. collections would be more selective
2. the high cost of storage and conservation
3. growth through exchange
4. financially forced consolidation

Legal considerations:

1. Ownership- only federal government and Indian tribes have ownership; there is no legal ownership for all others.
2. Proper authority- this responsibility is given to various people (archeologists, lab technicians, etc.)
3. Proper Documentation
4. Method of Disposal

Not a simple solution; condition requirements vary.

1. Artifact or ecofact can be removed from the collection.
2. Artifacts can be left in the field.

Solutions

1. educate to recognize problems
2. locate space and establish minimum fees
3. determine method of disposal
4. formulate deaccession standards; hierarchial order of deaccessioning

Alternatives to Disposal

Educational collections

• give to research universities
• give back to tribes

Main point: We need a coordinated effort to establish standards for deaccessioning.

Conversion of the US Army Fort Rosecrans Morgue to a US Navy Collections Management
Ronald V. May, Director of Archeology, Fort Guijarros Museum Foundation

Purpose: To adaptively reuse surplus Department of Defense properties for storage.

Two regulations

1. Retention of public records
2. Improved looting laws

175 archival boxes of Fort Guijarros excavation

Legacy Grants Used To:

1. Repackage old collections
2. Adaptively reuse bunkers to comply with 36CFR79

$95,000 received from Legacy grants
85 boxes have been archived
This program can serve as a pilot program.
The underground bunkers have high security, fire protection, and temperature control.

Indigenous People's Sovereignty
Connie Hart Yellowman, J.D., Cheyenne Cultural Center, Clinton, Oklahoma

Presented the comparison of the bombing of the Murrah building in Oklahoma City, April 19, 1995, to the Sand Creek Massacre, November 29, 1864, within the context of NAGPRA. Both were emotional and tragic events, the impact of which will last for generations. Repatriation is a very emotional issue for tribal people yet it is not just a Native American concern. The likelihood of reduced NAGPRA funding is a challenge for Native Americans to develop new ways of seeking repatriation.

The NAGPRA-Compliance Workshop on Archeology-Bridge for Understanding
Mei Wan Campbell, Curator of Ethnology/Clothing and Textiles, museum of Texas Tech University

Held a NAGPRA workshop to dispel misconceptions of NAGPRA.
Group of seven tribal representatives and 30 presenters.

Of the presenters:

• 27% were Native American
• 25% were museum curators or worked with museum collections
• 33% were archeologists and physical anthropologists
• 7% were other Federal agencies

Joined presentations of tribal and museum partners with consultation of objects and human remains.

Over 90 participants:

• 25% from federal agencies
• 23% from museum community
• 20% from archeological and physical anthropology; target audience
• 28% Graduate students

11 States represented

Results of conference:

• Understood each others view points
• Facilitated open dialogue and cooperation
  
  

Recent Advances in Developing a Standardized Automated Curation Assessment
Frederick L. Briuer, Director, Center for Cultural Site Preservation Technology, USAE, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS

Briuer developed a standard procedure for accessioning Corps of Engineers collections for the research repositories.

Key point-you have to have standards.

1. Legacy project gave money to look at 30 repositories to provide a comparative analysis.
   Took the raw data and anticipated categories and values on questions.
2. Took objective format and sent to facilities
3. Finally- Tested database throughout district
   Test data acquisition procedure and enhance for entire region.

Advantage - the corps district had quantitative data to help decide on consolidation questions- had varying importance-some questions were weighted

Used dBase IV
Query it- lok at any one repository and compare to whole district
Transfer this information to users
Assessment procedures started with 100 subjective questions
Tested at 17 institutions
Considered American Association of Museums standards and National Park Service guidelines early on in developing assessment questions.