[Senate Hearing 115-75]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-75
CULTURAL SOVEREIGNTY SERIES: MODERNIZING THE INDIAN ARTS AND CRAFTS ACT
TO HONOR NATIVE IDENTITY AND EXPRESSION
=======================================================================
FIELD HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 7, 2017
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
26-821 PDF WASHINGTON : 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota, Chairman
TOM UDALL, New Mexico, Vice Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona JON TESTER, Montana,
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska AL FRANKEN, Minnesota
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
STEVE DAINES, Montana HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
MIKE CRAPO, Idaho CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
JERRY MORAN, Kansas
T. Michael Andrews, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Jennifer Romero, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Field hearing held on July 7, 2017............................... 1
Statement of Senator Heinrich.................................... 9
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 1
Witnesses
Begay-Foss, Joyce, Director, Living Traditions Education Center,
Museum of Indian Arts and Culture.............................. 40
Prepared statement........................................... 42
Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator (Retired) from
Colorado....................................................... 2
Martinez, Damon, Former U.S. Attorney, District of New Mexico,
U.S. Department of Justice..................................... 33
Prepared statement........................................... 33
Maybee, Dallin, Chief Operating Officer, Southwestern Association
for Indian Arts (SWAIA)........................................ 37
Prepared statement........................................... 38
Pratt, Harvey, Cheyenne-Arapaho Master Artist.................... 34
Prepared statement........................................... 35
Shappert, Gretchen C.F., Assistant Director, Indian, Violent and
Cyber Crime, Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys, U.S.
Department of Justice.......................................... 19
Prepared statement........................................... 21
Stanton, Meredith, Director, Indian Arts and Crafts Board, U.S.
Department of the Interior..................................... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 12
Woody, William, Chief, Office of Law Enforcement, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.............. 14
Prepared statement........................................... 16
Appendix
Baker, Hon. Bill John, Principal Chief, Cherokee Nation, prepared
statement...................................................... 74
Honanie, Hon. Herman G., Chairman, Hopi Tribe, prepared statement 70
Josey, Eloise, Executive Director, Alabama Indian Affairs
Commission, prepared statement................................. 69
M'Closkey, Ph.D., Kathy Adjunct Associate Professor/Freelance
Curator, Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Criminology,
University of Windsor, prepared statement...................... 59
Molloy, John, President, ATADA, prepared statement............... 57
Montgomery, David S., Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma Tribal Member,
prepared statement............................................. 73
Montibon, Roy, CEO, Montibon Provenance International, Inc.,
prepared statement............................................. 65
Ouellet, Kathi, President, Indian Arts and Crafts Association,
prepared statement............................................. 72
Riley, Kurt, Governor, Pueblo of Acoma, prepared statement....... 60
ShortCloud, Aiden, Tribal Artist, United Cherokee Aniyunwiya
Nation (UCAN), prepared statement.............................. 67
Wright, Hon. James, Chief, Ma-Chis Lower Creek Indian Tribe and
Nancy Carnley, Vice Chief, joint prepared statement............ 66
Additional letters and statements submitted for the record
CULTURAL SOVEREIGNTY SERIES:
MODERNIZING THE INDIAN ARTS AND CRAFTS ACT TO HONOR NATIVE IDENTITY AND
EXPRESSION
----------
FRIDAY, JULY 7, 2017
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Santa Fe, NM.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:17 A.M. in the
Santa Fe Indian School gymnasium, Hon. Tom Udall, Vice
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. Well, first of all, welcome to everybody
today. It's wonderful to have you here, and it's wonderful to
be at this location. I'll talk about that a little bit further
on, but I want to have welcoming remarks by Roy Herrera,
superintendent of the Santa Fe Indian School, who is our great
and generous host today. Thank you very much, Roy, for being
here and being our host.
Mr. Herrera. Thank you, Senators and guests, for being here
at the Santa Fe Indian School. My name is Roy Herrera. I'm the
superintendent of the Santa Fe Indian School. On behalf of our
board of directors, board of trustees, our students, our staff,
I would like to welcome you to this campus, beautiful campus
here in Santa Fe.
Also, I want to thank you for being here today, and
anything that we can do here at Santa Fe Indian School to
increase your stay--better stay, we'd appreciate it.
Thank you, Senators.
Senator Heinrich. You're welcome.
Senator Udall. Roy, thank you. Thank you so much for that
welcome. And I would next like to recognize Marvin Trujillo.
Marvin is a Marine Corps officer and Native veteran, and
Marvin's going to recognize us in a prayer. Is that correct?
Are you doing the Pledge of Allegiance?
Marvin's doing the Pledge of Allegiance. We'll all rise and
take our hats off.
[Pledge of Allegiance recited.]
Thank you, Marvin. Marvin, thank you for that, and thank
you for your service to our country. We really appreciate that.
And now we're going to stand again and recognize Santa Fe
Indian School student Jude Chavarria from the Santa Clara
Pueblo to offer the opening prayer.
[Opening prayer recited.]
Senator Udall. Thank you, Jude, so much, for that prayer.
We really appreciate you giving that this morning.
And good morning. I call this hearing to order. Let me
first, before we start with our panelists and our opening
statements, I'd like to acknowledge the former chairman of the
Committee, this Committee, this Senate Indian Affairs
Committee, Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell. He just happens to
be in town, Senator Campbell. He was here, traveled down, and
he saw it in the paper that we were holding this hearing. He
has a lot of experience on this issue, extensive knowledge as
an author of the Act. But he's also a Native American jeweler
himself. Look at that wonderful bolo tie he's wearing. I'm sure
he's the one that created that.
So Senator Campbell, I would ask you to come to the podium
here. I wanted to have you give brief remarks before we did the
opening and just talk to us about your experience and what you
learned.
So thank you for being here. As he's making it over to the
podium, I just want to say, when I started serving in the
House, Senator Campbell was a Republican; I was a Democrat. But
we always had lunch once a month, and we tried to do everything
we could to work through these issues, Western issues, which he
cared very much about.
So Senator Campbell, please. The microphone is yours.
STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL,
U.S. SENATOR (RETIRED) FROM COLORADO
Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And by the way,
thank you for complimenting me on my bolo. I didn't make it.
It is from a good friend who unfortunately passed away from
a motorcycle accident by the name of Singer, Tommy Singer. He
was a Navajo, a well-known Navajo silversmith. He made this
some years ago, and I cherish it because he was a good friend.
But thank you for the compliment. And as you mention, I'm kinda
here by accident, so I don't have any prepared statement.
But, by the way, I'm Northern Cheyenne on my dad's side.
Since the 1970s, my wife and I have lived on the Southern Ute
reservation in Southwest Colorado right near Mesa Verde in some
other historic and mystical places that you should come and
visit.
But I've been involved in jewelry ever since I was a boy,
starting in 1945, if you can imagine that. That will tell you
how old I am. In those days, we made everything from coins.
We'd go down and put them on a railroad track. We were always
on the wrong side of the track when we were kids and poor.
We never made any money from them. We used to trade them
for food. In those days, everybody was poor. Everybody. So it's
not like I was the only one that kinda came up the hard way.
But I was pretty active in helping revise the 1990 Act, and
I'd like to maybe venture a little bit about the things I think
were good about it and maybe things that still need to be
addressed.
Bill Richardson and I who was the last-elected Governor of
New Mexico, as you know, but we were on the Committee of
Interior and Insular Affairs when Senator Udall, Mo Udall, was
the chairman. His dad, by the way, about that time was
Secretary of Interior. So our families kinda go way back.
Bill and I recognized some of the things that were
happening with the plagiarism of American Indian art,
particularly in jewelry. So the first bill that we tried to get
introduced was a bill that would require all, quote/unquote,
Indian jewelry made in China and Japan, and all over the place,
it was made here to be stamped in the metal, point of origin
stamped in the metal.
As it is now, I think Federal regulations require a little
paper stamp or something. Of course, that goes away the minute
it gets off the boat. We couldn't get the muscle to pass that
bill. And one of the reasons was, everybody was cheating. The
big chains, the department store chains, the jewelry store
chains, Natural Jewelers Association all came out against us on
that bill, and we just couldn't get any traction on it. So we
let it die. But it reinforced in my mind the need to do
something.
Well, in 1990 when the bill was reintroduced, that was the
first reintroduction, I think, since it was passed in the
1930s. It was clear that it needed to be addressed, because a
lot of Indian people were being basically ripped off, by the
things were being made in foreign countries.
And so we did introduce that bill. I might mention a couple
of complications we had in testimony, which you may get to. No.
1 is defining who is Indian and who is not. It's easy to say,
Well, if you're on a federally recognized roll, you must be
Indian. But there are many Native Americans who are not.
I remember there was two Hopi cousins who testified in our
hearing, which was here in Santa Fe in those years, John Kyle
and I did it, Senator Kyle and I, and they were blood cousins.
One was on the roll and one was not. Because the Hopi, like the
Seneca and several other tribes, the blood line has
to come through the mother's side, not the father's side.
And that creates a lot of ambiguity about who is--you know, how
many are Indian or not.
And the other way for people to get enrolled is through
lineal descendancy. And so the Cherokee and several other
tribes--it doesn't make any difference how thin the blood gets.
If you're one one-thousandth Native blood and the other 999
something else, under this Act, you qualify as Indian to make
jewelry, if you're on that roll.
But that still left a lot of people off altogether. There
are over 50 tribes right now trying to be reintroduced that
were terminated in the 1950s. Some tribes, who are very big,
like the Lumbee of the Carolinas, I think there's over 50,000
members. They are not a federally recognized tribe, but they
are a State-recognized tribe. Creates another nuance about who
is and who cannot make it.
But the most outlandish story I heard was of a Japanese
citizen who arrived--I won't mention the tribe--but arrived at
a Northern Plains Tribe with an interpreter about a year and a
half ago, and he went to the Tribal headquarters. And through
the interpreter, he told the people in the tribal office, ``I'm
a member of this tribe.''
And of course, they said, ``What?''
They didn't know what he was talking about. Well, he was.
His father was in the military, stationed in Japan. He married
a Japanese lady. They had a son. He put the son on the roll,
and then they got a divorce. He came back to this country; she
stayed in Japan.
And so the youngster was born and raised in Japan, only
speaks Japanese, went to Japanese schools. Had to have an
interpreter when he visited the American reservation. But under
existing law, he could be sitting in downtown Tokyo making
authentic Indian-made rings.
So kind of makes you scratch your head when somebody who is
50 percent can't get on a roll, but somebody who has never been
in this country can be making authentic Indian jewelry.
There are many other cases like that. I just mention those
as a couple of really extreme ones that we had to deal with.
But one of the other weaknesses, and I might mention the
strengths of the bill that we passed in 1990, before that bill
was passed, there was no legal, civil way you could go after
somebody that was cheating and trying to say he was a Navajo if
he wasn't. We put a section in that bill, as I remember, it
authorized the tribe to sue up to something like $200,000 for
misinterpreting your identity as being one of their tribal
members when you are not.
And I think that section has been used a couple times, not
against individuals, but against some of these big chains that
are importing tons of so-called Indian jewelry. I think that's
been enforced a couple times, and that's good. But the weakness
of that section is--I'll give you an example.
If you drive from Flagstaff up to the Grand Canyon, you'll
see many little booths on the side of the road. Little elderly
ladies trying to sell a little necklace or something to get a
loaf of bread for Sunday. Around Four Corners monument, it's
the same. What if you go there, and you find out that lady--
maybe she's very honest, ``Oh, I got this from a trader.''
So she doesn't know where it came from, except a trader.
But if you have a good eye, you know by looking at it if it's
authentic, if it's plastic beads, if it's machine-stamped, so
on like that. What are you going to do about it? What if she is
cheating? What if she even knows she's cheating? Think of the
expense, the prosecutorial investigative expense of the Federal
agencies to enforce that section of the law.
Nobody in their right mind is going to do that--at least
not to my knowledge. They are not going to spend hundreds of
thousands of dollars and all the stuff it takes to put some
little old lady in jail, or fine her, because she's trying to
make five bucks for a couple of loaves of bread. It just
doesn't make sense. There's got to be some kind of an
intermediate action that can be done that you can deal with
that kind of a problem.
Yet one of the other weaknesses I saw of that bill that we
passed was, some things that are made, more than one person
works on them. So if a person--say you have five people, and
they worked on a bracelet. And one guy designs it, the next guy
frames it up, the next guy solders it, the next guy puts some
stones in it. What if one of the five is Indian and the other
four are not? How do you define that piece of jewelry? Is it
Indian-made or is it not? I don't know, but it's something that
I saw as a weakness.
I still judge. In fact, here in Santa Fe a couple years
ago, my daughter and I, we judged contemporary jewelry. There's
some very, very nice jewelry being turned out by some of our
young people now. I'm an old timer; I learned how to do it all
by hand. That's not the way things are done anymore. I mean,
youngsters are very creative.
And so there was a very fine belt that we judged first
place. I didn't know how it was made, but it was a very, very
nice-looking belt. Well, I found out that belt was done, as
many young artists do now, it was designed on a CAD/CAM.
So, okay, a Native person designed it on a CAD/CAM. The
CAD/CAM was then--I don't remember if the word is ``slated,''
``networked,'' or ``integrated''--worked with a milling
machine. And the milling machine cut out the pieces of jewelry.
So you have to ask, ``Well, okay, a Native person pushed a
button. Does that make it Indian-made?''
Another person might say, ``Well, yeah, wait a minute. He
really didn't touch the thing. It was all made kind of
automated.'' And I don't know the answer to that. Maybe you can
figure that one out and deal with it in new legislation.
But these things keep arising. When I judged Santa Fe a
couple years ago, I hadn't judged for a number of years before
that. Now they have divisions for film, for clothing, design,
all kinds of stuff that wasn't even in our realm of thinking in
the old way of doing, Indian, quote/unquote, art. And I support
that. It's given new avenues of expression for many of our
Native youngsters, and I think that's great.
But it also makes it more important for a committee like
this to ask, ``How do you define who is what?''
And so with that, let me just check a couple of my own
notes of anything that I did forget. Probably not. Those are
the main things I kinda wanted to bring to the Committee to
testify.
And with that, if you have any questions of me of what we
did in the old days, I'd be glad to answer.
Senator Udall. Senator Campbell, could you just say a word
about prosecution? I know you picked the example of a lady
trying to sell a bracelet. But if you have a big, like, some of
these cases we've seen, international operations, you know,
manufacturing, huge amounts of this stuff, representing it to
be authentic Native American, bringing it over here from
Philippines or China, wherever.
Senator Campbell. And I have to say, Mr. Chairman, some of
it's being sold right on the square here in Santa Fe. You know,
being around it my whole life, I've got a pretty good eye about
what is authentic and what is not. The Native people, when they
make it themselves handmade, there's a weight and a heft and a
design to it that you can almost qualify, once you've been
around it most of your life as I have.
But once the money started coming in for Indian art, which
is basically to say Indian jewelry in the late 1970s, we did
see people from Japan, from China, from some of the Gulf
countries, moving in literally, a number of them went out to
the reservations themselves, to the pueblos, to Zuni and other
tribes, and tried to tie up contracts with the craftsmen where
they couldn't sell to anybody except them.
And that was not enough to have it done there. So then they
actually started having it made overseas and importing it over
into this country under the guise of being Indian-made. That is
still going on. And the Mayor Becerra, I believe his name is,
in Santa Fe, he's really taken the lead in trying to bring that
to the forefront in the market here in Santa Fe.
But I think maybe one of the key things in this whole scene
is, if you are an unsuspecting buyer, the best thing you can do
is make sure you're dealing with somebody who can authenticate,
and they can tell you exactly who made it and give you the
address, if you want to go talk to them themself.
And if they can't do that, then you gotta say, ``Well, I
don't know where the heck that came from.'' Most of the people
that I think that belong to, say, the Indian Arts and Crafts
Board, Indian Arts and Crafts Association, they subscribe to a
ethics--code of ethics, and I think they're pretty darn good in
trying to represent exactly what it is.
But as I said, when you're going through four or five hands
and four or five people working on it, I don't know. I still
get pieces back, or I'll get parts of things, and somebody will
come to me and say, ``Ben, I've got this stone. I know it's
really valuable because my grandmother owned it.''
And I've just been around turquoise my whole darn life. And
I look at it, and it looks like it's a piece of Coca-Cola
bottle. And I don't want to hurt her feelings, so I don't even
work on it. But I don't even want to tell her how bad the thing
is, because I don't want to hurt her feelings, because a lot of
people are just that unaware about what authentic is, just what
is real Indian turquoise.
By the way, for the uninitiated, one of easiest ways you
can do it is with a hat pin or a needle. If you're unsure of
the stone, and you heat that needle, like, red-hot and touch
the stone, if nothing happens, that's real. But if a little bit
of smoke comes up or a little smell like plastic, it ain't
real. That's the layman's test how you can test to see if the
turquoise is the real thing.
And if there's anything I can answer, Mr. Chairman, I will.
But I commend you and Senator Heinrich on doing this hearing.
It's well needed.
Senator Udall. Well, thank you so much. We know you're busy
on your trip down here and for taking a few minutes and sharing
your thoughts and ideas with us. We hope you will think a
little bit more about this and maybe submit written statements,
as I'm going to tell everybody in the audience they have the
ability to do, too.
So let's thank Senator Campbell.
Okay. We're going to start with our opening statements
here, and then we'll go to the witnesses.
First of all, let me just welcome everybody to Indian
Country and to thank everyone who made it out to Santa Fe. Some
people, I think, traveled all the way from Washington, and so
we really appreciate your being here. I very much look forward
to today's discussion, exploring how to modernize the Indian
Arts and Crafts Act. It's long overdue, and I'm looking forward
to a very productive day here.
Today's hearing is an official Senate committee hearing,
the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, and this is a field
hearing what we're doing. The format today is the same as the
format we use for hearings in Washington, D.C. The Committee
will hear testimony from two panels of witnesses and Committee
members will ask the witnesses questions.
I want to thank all the witnesses who have traveled here
today to help us understand these issues, these very, very
important issues to Indian Country, and figure out how we can
do better to protect the cultural integrity of Native American
arts and crafts. So today's Congressional hearing is not a town
hall. I want to emphasize that. It's not a town hall, for
example, where folks speak out from the audience and ask
questions. We're here to take testimony, official testimony,
with a court reporter, from our witnesses.
However, we want to hear from everyone on this critical
issue before us. So you're invited and are most welcome to
submit your comments and ideas. And to do that, you can e-mail
them to [email protected].
That's [email protected], and my staff members
are here with badges on, and so you can get that from them as
you leave, too.
And Senator Heinrich's staff members are also here. We will
leave the official record open for two weeks until July 21st,
and I really encourage everyone to submit comments based on
what you've heard here. And also, please feel free to talk to
my staff, Senator Heinrich's staff, after this hearing with any
questions. They're seated behind me. Many of these folks behind
me are official Senate Indian Affairs staffers that have come
out from Washington, and they're wearing staff ID badges. So
you'll be able to identify them.
And then let me--first of all, I already thanked Roy
Herrera, but I want to thank the Santa Fe Indian School again
for hosting us, and Superintendent, for your very thoughtful
opening remarks. Santa Fe Indian School is in good hands with
Superintendent Herrera.
And I want to thank Jude for that beautiful opening prayer.
You're one of the future leaders of Indian Country, and I'm
glad you're here to witness the legislative process in action.
We sometimes call that in the Senate, and Senator Campbell
calls it sausage-making.
But the Santa Fe Indian School was established in 1890 to
educate Native American youth from tribes throughout the
Southwest. It was established during the boarding-school era, a
shameful period when the Federal government removed Native
children from their communities and attempted to assimilate
them into Anglo society; among other things, prohibiting
children from speaking their Native languages and practicing
their beliefs.
Sitting here today on the grounds of this tribally
controlled school located on pueblo land, it's clear to see--
and I'm proud to say--that our nation has made great strides
from its disastrous policies of the past. Santa Fe Indian
School and other Native American--other Native schools exercise
educational sovereignty by promoting Native languages and
affirming cultural identity by supporting Native students'
cultural and traditional beliefs.
But we still need to do much more to protect cultural
sovereignty and do that for now and for the future. That's why
I chose Santa Fe Indian School as the location for this
hearing, to highlight the gains we've made and the work that
still needs to be done.
As the Vice Chair of the Senate Committee on Indian
Affairs, I intend to hold a series of hearings right here in
New Mexico that focus on supporting cultural identity to make
sure future generations of Native Americans have what elders
have; pride in Native American culture and a way to practice
time-honored traditions of craftsmanship while maintaining a
livelihood.
We've got a serious problem on our hands as we heard from
Senator Campbell. Imitation Indian arts and crafts flooding the
market in places like Gallup and Albuquerque, Phoenix, and
right here in Santa Fe.
A network of swindlers are making millions of dollars off
the backs of Native Americans. This situation is wholly
unacceptable. The mass production of imitation Native American
jewelry and other crafts destabilizes the Indian art market,
forcing Native American artisans to drop prices to keep up with
wholesale prices of so-called Native American jewelry that is
actually fake. Artificially low prices then force Native
Americans to quit their crafts, crafts that often have been
passed down over many generations.
Arts and crafts are a major economic driver for Indian
Country. Fake art drives down prices, forces Native Americans
to quit their crafts and devalues Native American art. We want
this to stop. We want to see Native Americans reap the well-
earned benefits of their art.
Santa Fe is at the epicenter of the problem. Our city is
driven by tourism, and many tourists come here to experience
Native American culture and to buy Native American arts and
crafts. But many unknowingly buy imitation products, fueling
the black market, yet we have hardly talked about this problem.
So this hearing is important for a number of reasons. Most
importantly, to ensure that the cultural integrity of authentic
Indian arts and crafts, and by looking for ways to improve
enforcement of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act. We need to do
more to address this problem.
I'm encouraged by the recent efforts of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and the U.S. Attorneys' Office. For example,
in the last couple of years, the U.S. Attorneys' Office charged
three New Mexicans with violating the Indian Arts and Crafts
Act by importing and fraudulently selling foreign-made jewelry
as Native American-made. That was an international scheme that
you've heard a little bit about already.
And in February of this year, the U.S. Attorneys' Office
indicted several more people, including one person from the
earlier case, with violating the Act for the same types of
crimes.
Appropriation of Native American art is not a new issue.
This has been happening for decades. As Attorney General in
1996, I sued these scammers for violating the State's Unfair
Businesses Practice Act.
So during today's hearing, we will explore how to improve
enforcement efforts. Another goal of this hearing is to build
consumer awareness of the problem so the consumers can make
informed decisions in buying Native American arts and crafts.
The fact is, consumers want to purchase goods that are
authentic.
So again, thank you to all the witnesses for being here
today, and now I'd like to turn to my good friend and
colleague, Senator Heinrich, for his opening remarks. Senator
Heinrich has been a very strong advocate for Native Americans.
He has several pieces of legislation that he's already passed
in his Congressional career, and I look forward to continuing
to work with him on the very important issues that will be
outlined today.
Senator Heinrich.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. And I want
to start as well by thanking as well the Santa Fe Indian School
for hosting us today. And I really want to thank Senator Udall
for shining a light on this issue. We are very lucky to have
him as the vice chair of this Committee. And this new look at
what we can do to update this law is incredibly important.
I want to welcome and thank Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell
who worked on this bill back in the day. It's really important
that we hear from people who have your level of expertise. So I
very much appreciate you being here today. And I want to thank
the Senate Indian Affairs Committee staff for all of their hard
work in putting this together.
Welcome to our panelists. We have an incredible panel of
folks to offer testimony here today. And I want to take just a
moment and thank the Santa Fe Police Department and the BIA law
enforcement officers who are with us here today.
In New Mexico, we all recognize the incredible beauty and
worth of American Indian art. From the art left long ago on
canyon walls in places like Chaco Canyon, and the Gila cliff
dwellings, to traditional and modern art masterpieces created
by Native American artists to this day.
Here in Santa Fe, some of our nation's leading Native
artists are trained in the Santa Fe Indian School and at the
Institute of American Arts. And more than a thousand Native
artists gather here every August to display and sell their art
at the annual Santa Fe Indian Market. The sale of Native
American art and craftwork is a tremendous economic driver for
tribal communities in our state and throughout Indian Country
and the West.
New Mexicans understand the value of supporting true tribal
artists and recognize the dangers posed by counterfeit items or
items claiming to be Native-produced. For centuries, the United
States used cultural appropriation as a tool of colonization.
Today when non-Indians sell jewelry or pottery as Indian art,
they are denying the right of tribal communities to define and
control what tribal art is. This cultural appropriation removes
Native art in traditions from their rightful context and denies
the right of tribal communities to maintain sovereignty over
their history and their culture.
When tribal communities are denied ownership of their own
cultures, they lose the ability to maintain their language,
their beliefs; literally, their way of life. The Indian Arts
and Crafts Act of 1990 is essentially a truth-in-advertising
law that prohibits misrepresentation or falsely displaying arts
or crafts as Indian-produced.
We're here today to learn more about whether the law is
working and what steps we need to take to make sure that all
products marketed are marketed truthfully so that Native
artists can thrive in an ethical marketplace.
I would also like to quickly touch on another important
issue in New Mexico, which I've been proud to work with Senator
Udall and the tribes across New Mexico with. Many tribes in New
Mexico have experienced people literally stealing and
trafficking objects that are not art but are essential
religious and cultural patrimony. When someone steals and sells
a tribe's cultural patrimony, they are stealing that tribe's
traditions and identity.
Last month I was proud to reintroduce the bipartisan
Safeguard Tribal Objects and Patrimony or STOP Act, a bill to
prohibit export of sacred Native American items. And that
increases penalties for stealing and illegally trafficking
tribal cultural patrimony.
I announced the bill's reintroduction during a meeting with
the students from the Santa Fe Indian School Leadership
Institute Summer Policy Academy in my office in Washington. And
I was incredibly moved by the unique perspectives and personal
stories that those students offered. They talked a lot about
the responsibility that they felt to preserve their cultural
heritage and fulfill their sacred trust as generations before
them have.
That's what's at the heart of today's hearing for me. And
with that, I want to thank all of you again, and I look forward
to hearing from our two panels.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Heinrich so much, and
thank you for your good, hard work on the STOP Act, which is
for the protection of cultural patrimony.
We will now hear from our first panel. Mr. William Woody,
Chief of Law Enforcement at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
a bureau of the Department of Interior. Miss Meredith Stanton,
Director of the Indian Arts and Crafts Board, an agency of the
U.S. Department of Interior, and Miss Gretchen Shappert,
Assistant Director, Executive Office of the U.S. Attorneys at
the U.S. Department of Justice.
I want to remind the witnesses that your full written
testimony will be made a part of the official hearing record.
Please keep your statements to five minutes so that we may have
time for questions. And I look forward to hearing your
testimony, beginning with Miss Stanton.
Thank you very much and please proceed.
STATEMENT OF MEREDITH STANTON, DIRECTOR, INDIAN ARTS AND CRAFTS
BOARD, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR
Ms. Stanton. Thank you. Good morning, Vice Chairman Udall
and Senator Heinrich. I would like to also start the testimony
here today by thanking Chairman Hoeven for holding this
hearing.
I am Meredith Stanton, Director of the Indian Arts and
Crafts Board. I've worked for the Board for almost 40 years and
have been an enrolled member of the Delaware Nation of
Oklahoma. I appreciate this opportunity to testify before you
today about the Board. I work to promote and protect authentic
Indian art, artists, and the Indian Arts and Crafts Act.
The Board was established by Congress in 1935 and operates
with an annual budget of approximately 1.4 million, a staff of
nine employees, and one detailee stationed here in New Mexico.
The Board is the only Federal agency that is exclusively
concerned with the economic benefits of Indian cultural
development. Sales of Indian art exceed a billion dollars each
year.
With the very broad economic development and cultural
preservation mission, we operate three museums; one in South
Dakota, one in Montana, and one in Oklahoma to promote emerging
Indian artists. Marketing seminars and publications are
important components of our services.
For example, our new brochure promotes authentic Navajo
weaving to help offset the weavers' stiff competition from
counterfeit Navajo rugs. The arts are at the very heart of our
ancestral and contemporary Indian society and culture. The New
Mexico, and throughout the Southwest, Indian art production and
sales are critically important to the economic stability and
viability of Indian artists, communities, and tribes.
In response to the growing sales of counterfeit Indian
products, Congress passed the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of
1990. A top priority of the Board, the Act is a truth-in-
marketing law to combat the sale of counterfeit Indian art and
to protect the Indian artists' economic livelihood. The Act
prohibits the marketing of art as Indian-made if it is not made
by an Indian as defined by the Act.
Each day Indian economic livelihoods are eroded by the
fierce competition of lower-priced, imported counterfeit Indian
products. High-priced knockoffs of one-of-a-kind master Indian
jewelry also contribute to the erosion of consumer confidence
in the Indian art market nationwide.
To help remedy the problem, the Board promotes authentic
Indian art and art protections through participation in events,
including the Santa Fe Indian Market, and consumer education,
such as our collaborations with the New Mexico Attorney
General's Office in a brochure promoting authentic New Mexico
Indian art. The Board distributes this brochure at the Sunport,
visitors' centers, and Indian art businesses and markets
throughout the state.
The Act designated the FBI to investigate Act cases.
However, the Indian Arts and Crafts Enforcement Act of 2010,
which then Senator Heinrich was a cosponsor, allows now all
Federal law enforcement officers to conduct Act investigations.
This led to the 2012 agreement between the Board and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
Since then, the scope and depth of Act investigations have
increased exponentially. While complaints and violations have
often occurred primarily in the Southwest and particularly here
in New Mexico, the scope of the problem is nationwide.
Since 1996, the Board has received over 1700 complaints of
alleged Act violations, of which 1300 have been addressed to
date. We have been--we've had 22 Federal prosecutions in New
Mexico, Alaska, Utah, Michigan, South Dakota, and Missouri.
The Board has also worked with the Office of the State
Attorney General here in New Mexico on six cases involving the
misrepresentation of Indian art. Our sweeping Service Act
investigation to date involves a large-scale conspiracy to
import and fraudulently sell Filipino-made jewelry as Indian-
made.
Chief Woody will discuss that further in his testimony.
The Act has its challenges, and a tremendous amount of work
remains to dismantle these counterfeit Indian art networks,
certainly in New Mexico and nationwide. These counterfeits
hinder the passing down from one generation to the next of
important Indian traditions, skills, and heritage--true
American treasures.
The Department is committed to protecting Indian artists
from counterfeits and looks forward to working with our
Congressional colleagues to ensure the goals of the Act are
met.
Thank you, Senators Udall and Heinrich, for your interest
in supporting and protecting these true American treasures.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Stanton follows:]
Prepared Statement of Meredith Stanton, Director, Indian Arts and
Crafts Board, U.S. Department of the Interior
Introduction
Good Morning Vice Chairman Udall and Senator Heinrich. I am
Meridith Stanton, Director of the Indian Arts and Crafts Board, within
the Department of the Interior, which I have served for almost 40
years. I am also an enrolled member of the Delaware Nation of Oklahoma.
I appreciate this opportunity to testify before you today about the
Indian Arts and Crafts Board, our work to promote and protect authentic
American and Indian artists, artisans, and their creative work, and the
Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-644), as amended.
The Indian Arts and Crafts Board (Board) was created by Congress in
1935 to promote American Indian and Alaska Native economic development
through the expansion of the Indian arts and crafts market. The Board
is the only Federal agency that is consistently and exclusively
concerned with economic benefits of Native American cultural
development. We have a current staff of nine full-time employees and
one detailee who is stationed in New Mexico. The Board's policies are
determined by the Board of Commissioners, who are appointed by the
Secretary of the Interior and serve without compensation. The Board has
a very broad economic development and cultural preservation mission,
and operates three Indian museums in South Dakota, Montana, and
Oklahoma. The museum programs include special exhibitions to promote
emerging Indian artists, Indian Youth Art Competitions and art classes
to encourage the development of future Indian master artists, and
cultural programming to educate consumers about the inherent value of
authentic Indian art.
Business development, marketing, and Intellectual Property Rights
Protection workshops, seminars, and publications for Indian artists,
businesses, and consumers are also important components of the Board's
services. For example, the Board and New Mexico State Attorney
General's office collaborated on a brochure to promote New Mexico
Indian art. This brochure is distributed at the Board's consumer
education booth at each annual Santa Fe Indian Market, at the
Albuquerque airport visitor kiosk, New Mexico visitor centers, and
Indian art businesses and markets throughout the State. The Board also
recently prepared a brochure it will distribute nationwide to promote
authentic Navajo weaving and to help offset the challenges weavers are
facing due to competition from Navajo style and counterfeit Navajo
weavings.
The Indian Arts and Crafts Act
In response to growing sales of counterfeit Indian products in the
billion-dollar Indian art market, Congress passed the Indian Arts and
Crafts Act of 1990. The Act is a truth-in-advertising law that
authorized the Board to refer complaints of counterfeit Indian Goods to
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). It provides criminal and
civil penalties for marketing products as ``Indian made'' when such
products are not made by Indians, as defined by the Act. Under the Act,
work marketed as authentic Indian art and craftwork must be produced by
an artist or artisan who is an enrolled member of a federally or
officially State recognized Indian tribe, or an Indian Artisan
certified by the tribe of their direct descent.
Implementing and enforcing the Act is a top priority for the Board.
Enforcement of the Act protects Native American artists and
craftspeople, businesses, and Tribes, as well as consumers. It also
protects the integrity of Native American cultural heritage and the
economic self-reliance of Tribes and their members. The Act provides
critical economic benefits for Native American cultural development by
recognizing that forgery and fraudulent Indian arts and crafts diminish
the livelihood of Native American artists and craftspeople by lowering
both market prices and standards.
Scope of the Problem
In 2011, a Government Accountability Act report \1\ found that
``The sale of goods falsely represented as authentic Indian-produced
arts and crafts has been a persistent and potentially growing problem
in the United States.'' It continued that ``Misrepresentation by sale
of unauthentic products created by non-Indians, including imports from
foreign countries, is a matter of great concern to Indian artists, who
have to reduce their prices or lose sales because of competition from
lower priced imitation products.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ INDIAN ARTS AND CRAFTS: Size of Market and Extent of
Misrepresentation Are Unknown GAO-11-432: Published: Apr 28, 2011.
Publicly Released: Apr 28, 2011. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-432
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While complaints and violations have often occurred primarily in
the Southwest, particularly in New Mexico, due to the Indian art
industry's concentration in this region, the scope of the problem is
nationwide. Since 1996, the Board has received over 1,700 complaints of
alleged Act violations, of which 1,295 have been closed and 413 remain
open investigations. Many of these were handled administratively,
through letters informing businesses and individuals about the Act and
Act compliance. Others were referred for investigation to federal, and
at times State, law enforcement authorities, depending on the nature of
the complaint and jurisdiction. To date, there have been 22 federal
prosecutions in New Mexico, Alaska, Utah, South Dakota, and Missouri.
The Board has also worked with the Office of the New Mexico Attorney
General on five cases involving the misrepresentation of Indian art.
Working with Our Partners
The Indian Arts and Crafts Enforcement Act of 2010 authorized all
federal law enforcement officers, not just the FBI, to conduct
investigations and revised the Act's criminal penalties. Following
passage of this legislation, in 2012 the Board entered into a
memorandum of agreement and reimbursable support agreement with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for law enforcement agents to
work Act cases.
In the years leading up to the agreement with the Service, the
Board collected evidence of fraudulent activity in the Southwest. That
advance work was followed by an extensive investigation led by the
Service, Operation Al Zuni, the most sweeping and successful
investigation and enforcement of the Act to date.
The Board works with many tribes, state and local agencies and
federal partners to enforce the Act. These collaborations significantly
strengthen the Board's ability to successfully address counterfeit
Indian art and craftwork. The Board has successfully worked cases and
taken other actions to remedy violations of the law, such as those
involving the fraudulent marketing of rugs as Navajo, jewelry as Hopi,
jewelry as Apache, and art as Cherokee, as well as a settlement with
Pendleton Woolen Mills regarding their use of Indian names to market
non-Indian products.
Conclusion
For the highly talented, dedicated, and hard-working Indian artists
and artisans, Indian art is more than an income producing activity.
Traditional Indian art and craftwork, and evolving and cutting edge
Indian art, respectively, are at the very heart of Indian ancestral and
contemporary society and culture.
There are challenges to achieving the goals of the Act and there
remains a tremendous amount of work to dismantle these counterfeit
Indian art networks certainly in New Mexico, and nationwide. The Board
will continue to pursue robust Act enforcement in partnership with the
Service. We are committed to protecting Indian artists from competition
with counterfeit Indian art, which hinders the passing down from one
generation to the next of important Indian traditions, heritage, and
skills--true American treasures. The Department looks forward to
working with our Congressional colleagues to ensure the goals of the
Act are met and to preserve the cultures, heritages and self-
determination of tribes and Alaska Native communities.
Thank you, Senators Udall and Heinrich, for your interest in
supporting and protecting Indian artists and Indian economies through
the creative arts. I am pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Senator Udall. Miss Stanton, thank you so much for your
testimony.
And Chief Woody, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM WOODY, CHIEF, OFFICE OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT, U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Woody. Good afternoon, Vice Chairman Udall and Senator
Heinrich. I want to start by thanking you and Chairman Hoeven
for holding this hearing in support.
I am William Woody. I'm Chief of Law Enforcement for the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the Department of Interior.
And I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today
regarding our collaborative work with the Indian Arts and
Crafts Board to enforce the Indian Arts and Crafts Act.
The protection of tribal nations is of the utmost
importance to the Department of Interior in safeguarding tribal
arts and crafts integral to that mission and vital to the
economic livelihoods and culture of tribal nations. The sale of
Native American arts and crafts by individual producers,
businesses, tribal-run operations, and other members of overall
Native Americans, as Meredith states, is over a billion dollars
a year.
Criminal investigations, both nationally and
internationally and to individuals and businesses making
fraudulent Native American arts and crafts, and the sale or
offer for sale of those counterfeit items in the United States
are complex, requiring technical expertise, significant long-
term investigative capability, and an international presence.
Since 2012, the services maintained the memorandum of
agreement with the Board to serve as the enforcement arm of the
department to lead criminal investigations and allegations of
violations of the Act. Given cases our agents have been working
on and additional information we have received from the last
several years, it is fair to say the scope of the problem is
far larger than expected. Investigative activity thus far has
been extensive and far-reaching, taking place not only here in
New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas, California and Colorado,
Alaska, Nevada, Hawaii.
I have a few slides I'd like to show you to illustrate the
extent and complexity of the issue. But I think you need to
understand one thing. Being able to prove many of these cases
is very complex, and getting a conviction beyond a reasonable
doubt is--it isn't based on just hunches or assumptions, too.
So Operation Al Zuni involves fraudulent Native American
jewelry sales under the Act. During the course of this
operation, we uncovered two organized networks who had been a
Native American jewelry business for years and who perpetuated
an international scheme to illegally sell Filipino-made jewelry
as authentic Native American-made in the U.S.
Agents were able to access these manufacturing facilities
in the Philippines, document and track shipments of counterfeit
jewelry as they made their way to the U.S., and then traced
them to retail locations where they were being sold as
authentic Native American-made.
First slide.
This surveillance photo shows a shipment of fraudulent
jewelry from the Philippines. Prior to this photo being taken,
there was a significant amount of work done to ID the source
and track the shipment to where this UPS driver is delivering
it.
Slide two, please.
This shipment was tracked by our agents to a UPS hub,
detained, opened, and inspected, and allowed to continue to its
destination.
Third slide, please. This shows some of the jewelry from
just one of those boxes. So it is counterfeit jewelry from one
of the boxes. There are--if you look at these bags there's 50
to 100 items, whether they be rings, necklaces, pendants,
bracelets, mass produced.
Slide four, please.
This is a more detailed photo of the items in the shipment.
The photo on the left shows an original Native American-made
pendant that was sent to the Philippines to be reproduced. The
image on the right is one of the replicas that was found in the
intercepted shipment. They look nearly identical. If you'll
note the one on the right, look at the price tag up in the
corner of that particular items. You've got a $90 price tag on
that.
I think that particular item is being made pennies on the
dollar, if you will. So that's really--I mean, if you picture--
I guess the best term I would give it is, these factories that
we see, it's pretty much like a sweat shop. Which you look at
is, there's 40 to 50 people in the shop--and I'll just use this
as an example.
They have this sitting in front of them, and they're making
this particular same item, just mass-produced. So if you opened
one of those bags previously, what you end up seeing is all the
same item. And the only way to get this, as I stated, these are
very complex investigations. Following that all the way from
the beginning, in this case, the Philippines, all the way to
the sale, is complex and takes a long time.
Slide five, please.
This counterfeit ring was intercepted and marked prior to
the delivery of the shipment to a retail location.
Slide six. This is really the last step in the process. Our
agents purchased this ring and other counterfeit jewelry being
sold by a retailer, labeled as authentic Native American-made
by a particular artist.
Slide seven.
Slide seven--while she's working on that, we ultimately
executed 16 search warrants and seized over 200,000 pieces of
jewelry, much of it as shown in the photo, which is not coming
up.
Counterfeit jewelry that was imported in this case by the
business has an approximate declared value of $11 million. That
was their declared direct value of the importers bringing it
in.
However, the prices that they would receive for these items
when they were sold as authentic Native American, either
wholesale or retail, is substantially higher. To date, six of
the subjects in this case have been indicted and are awaiting
trial. In addition to charges of violating the Act, Federal
prosecutors have also charged the defendants with violations,
Federal fraudulent importation, money laundering, wire fraud,
and mail fraud.
The service is committed to continuing this important work
in partnership with all Federal, state, tribal, and county
offices, and the Board, and looks forward to working with you
to raise awareness on this issue and improve implementation of
the Indian Arts and Crafts Board.
If you look at in this slide that just comes up, think
about this, all of those boxes, everything you see in there, is
just from one case. As I stated, just talking with the agents--
and I had a chance to talk to them yesterday on some of the
projects they're working on--this is one. There's many more.
It is, as Mr. Ben Nighthorse Campbell talked about, the
folks on the roadside, what you've got is, you've got some
significant stuff still coming into this country that needs to
be dealt with.
And again, we are committed to this important work, and we
look forward to working with all the agencies and senators. I
want to thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I
look forward to taking your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Woody follows:]
Prepared Statement of William Woody, Chief, Office of Law Enforcement,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior
Introduction
Good afternoon Vice Chairman Udall and Senator Heinrich. I am
William Woody, Chief of the Office of Law Enforcement for the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (Service), in the Department of the Interior. I
appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today on our work to
enforce the Indian Arts and Crafts Act (Act) and address fraudulent
Native American art and crafts in the United States.
The Office of Law Enforcement's primary responsibility is to focus
on significant threats to wildlife resources--illegal trade, unlawful
commercial exploitation, habitat destruction, and environmental
hazards. The Office of Law Enforcement investigates wildlife crimes;
regulates wildlife trade; helps Americans understand and comply with
wildlife protection laws; and works in partnership with international,
Federal, State, and tribal counterparts to conserve wildlife resources.
The Service's Office of Law Enforcement has a workforce comprised
of special agents, conservation law enforcement officers, and wildlife
inspectors stationed at ports of entry, regional locations, and field
offices across the country, as well as attaches stationed at various
embassies around the world. When fully staffed, we have 140 wildlife
inspectors and 261 special agents. Our wildlife inspectors work at
major ports of entry across the nation to facilitate legal trade in
wildlife and wildlife products and check inbound and outbound shipments
for illegal wildlife and wildlife products. Service inspectors also
utilize seven canine detector dogs to facilitate cargo searches for
illegal wildlife and wildlife products. Our special agents conduct
complex investigations to detect and document international illegal
wildlife trafficking, unlawful destruction and harm of endangered
species and other trust species such as migratory birds, and crimes
involving the unlawful exploitation of native and foreign species in
interstate commerce. Our International Attache program places special
agents in U.S. embassies to investigate international wildlife
trafficking, share and coordinate intelligence, expand training
programs, provide technical assistance, and work collaboratively with
partners in the regions they are stationed. Attache locations include:
Bangkok, Thailand; Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; Gaborone, Botswana; Lima,
Peru; Beijing, China; and Libreville, Gabon.
With this technical expertise, investigative capability, and
international presence, the Service is uniquely suited within the
Department of Interior to enforce the Act. The protection of tribal
nations is of the utmost importance to the Department, and safeguarding
tribal art and crafts is integral to that mission and vital to the
livelihoods and culture of tribal nations. The Service is committed to
fulfilling this role on behalf of the Department and in partnership
with the Indian Arts and Crafts Board (Board).
Since 2012, the Service has maintained a Memoranda of Agreement
with the Board to serve as the enforcement arm of the Department and
lead criminal investigations into alleged violations of the Act. The
Board provides funding to the Service to cover the salaries of assigned
agents, their travel, supplies, equipment, and other needs. These
agents are specifically assigned to work cases related to the Act and
have led our investigations to date.
Operation Al Zuni
Operation Al Zuni is a multi-year investigation that centered
around two organized networks who have been in the Native American
jewelry business for years, and who perpetrated an international scheme
to illegally sell Filipino-made jewelry as authentic Native-American-
made. Through our investigations, we learned that members of both
networks established and operated manufacturing facilities in the
Philippines for the purpose of replicating and producing Native
American-style jewelry and crafts. The items were then exported to
business associates in the United States and sold in stores in
Albuquerque, Gallup, Santa Fe, and Zuni, NM, and Calistoga, CA as
genuine Native American items. The businesses imported Native American-
style jewelry with an approximate declared value of $11 million.
However, the networks were able to turn a large profit at the retail
level on these items, as the value of this jewelry sold as authentic
Native American-made items is substantially higher.
Operation Al Zuni is the largest investigation to date into
fraudulent Native American jewelry sales under the Act. Over a period
of four years, special agents based in the Southwest built the case by
collaborating with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Homeland
Security Investigations (HSI), and our own attache in Bangkok to visit
the manufacturing facilities in the Philippines. Wildlife inspectors
and special agents would document and mark the fraudulent jewelry,
track the shipment to the final destination in the U.S., and follow it
to its distribution and ultimate display in retail locations in New
Mexico and California. Our agents were also able to purchase marked
fraudulent items through undercover purchases. The Service partnered
with numerous state, federal, and foreign agencies throughout the
investigation, including on the day of the execution of the search
warrants and arrest warrants, when we worked closely with the FBI, HSI,
U.S. Marshals Service, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, New Mexico Department of Game and Fish,
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, tribal law enforcement
authorities, and the Philippine National Bureau of Investigations.
The investigative activity has been extensive and far-reaching,
taking place in New Mexico, Arizona, Texas, California, Colorado,
Alaska, Nevada and the Philippines. Our work led to the execution of
sixteen search warrants and three arrest warrants with the seizure of
approximately $320,000 in funds, over 200,000 pieces of jewelry, and
one vehicle. To date, six of the subjects have been indicted, pending
trial. In addition to charges of violating the Act, federal prosecutors
have also charged the defendants with violations of federal fraudulent
importation, money laundering, wire fraud and mail fraud laws. Through
the course of this investigation, other businesses and individuals have
been identified but not yet charged.
Those charged to date include Imad Aysheh, formerly of Gallup, NM,
and Iyad Aysheh, of Lodi, CA. Imad is the owner and operator of Imad's
Jewelry, a jewelry manufacturing business in the Philippines. Iyad is
CEO and agent for IJ Wholesale, Inc., a California corporation that
imports jewelry into the United States. The Aysheh family built the
international scheme, established the production facilities, sent
authentic Native American items to the Philippines to be mass
reproduced, and then imported the fraudulent pieces into the U.S. for
illegal sale.
Also charged were Nael Ali and Mohammad Abed Manasra, both of
Albuquerque, NM; Nedal Aysheh, formerly of Gallup, NM; and Raed Aysheh,
of American Canyon, CA. Ali is the owner of two jewelry stores, Gallery
8 and Galleria Azul, in Albuquerque's Old Town that purport to
specialize in the sale of Native American jewelry. Manasra is a
wholesaler of Native American jewelry, and Raed and Nedal are partners
managing Golden Bear & Legacy, LLC, a retail store in Calistoga, CA
that specializes in Native American-style jewelry. These individuals
distributed and sold the jewelry that was made in the Philippines and
transported to the U.S. by the Aysheh family.
As a result of the actions taken in this investigation, numerous
business and networks identified throughout this case have either
discontinued the production and importation of fraudulent Native
American jewelry, or changed their business practices to include
properly labeling items with the country of origin.
Scope of the Problem
Despite the successful results of Operation Al Zuni, we believe we
have just scratched the surface of the illegal activity occurring in
the southwestern United States, and across the country. As evidenced by
the 2011 Indian Arts and Crafts GAO report, there is much more that can
be done to enforce the Act. In addition, our investigative work has
shown that there is a significant presence of fraudulent Native
American jewelry for sale in retail stores in the four-corners region
of the Southwest. This influx of fraudulent jewelry drives legitimate
Native American artists out of a flooded market and in some cases
forces them to cooperate with the distributors in order to maintain a
livelihood. Further, our investigation has only examined markets for
fraudulent jewelry. We have not begun to take a comprehensive look into
the markets for other Native American items in the Southwest, including
pottery, paintings, blankets, etc., where there is likely similar
fraudulent activity that is occurring.
Furthermore, we believe this is not just a problem for the markets
in the Southwest. Other locations across the country that have high
volume sales for tourists and visitors are prime targets for illegal
activity to sell fraudulent Native American art and crafts. We have
seen evidence to that effect. The Service has built cases in Alaska and
Hawaii, with very similar circumstances involving areas with high
tourist sales, but involving different types of art. They help
exemplify and illustrate the potential scope and geographic reach of
this illegal activity.
In southeast Alaska, the Service began an investigation in May 2014
based on complaints from tourists regarding the illegal
misrepresentation of bone art carvings as genuine Alaska Native
products. Our investigation found that the products were actually made
by local non-native carvers and were being fraudulently labeled as
genuine Alaska Native products. Charges were filed against four
business owners and one employee for violations of the Act. These
resulted in four convictions, thousands of dollars in fines and
restitution, and twelve years of combined probation.
In Hawaii, our investigations took a slightly different turn in
that we found fraudulent Native American art and crafts being made with
illegal wildlife products. As part of a joint undercover investigation
with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration from 2013 to
2015, the Service uncovered a smuggling ring in Honolulu run through
Hawaiian Accessories, Inc. The company was found to be selling
illegally acquired ivory, bone, and coral carvings and jewelry made
from whale, walrus, black coral and other wildlife. The illegal
wildlife products were sent to the Philippines to be carved and then
smuggled back to Hawaii to be sold and fraudulently labeled as genuine
Hawaiian-made products. As a result of our investigation, the president
of Hawaiian Accessories, Inc. and several employees were sentenced for
felony charges of conspiracy, smuggling wildlife into and out of the
U.S., and violations of the Lacey Act.
Another area of concern uncovered by our investigations is
individual, high profile artists utilizing false tribal affiliations.
These artists promote a fraudulent cultural standing within the Native
art community and take lucrative art show slots away from legitimate
Native artists. For example, in response to a complaint to the Board,
the Service investigated an individual for utilizing a fraudulent
tribal identification card to sell his Indian artwork at fairs and on-
line. Our investigation, which included an undercover buy, confirmed
that Terry Lee Whetstone, of Odessa, MO was using a fraudulent Cherokee
Nation of Oklahoma enrollment card in conjunction with the sale of his
products. The Cherokee Nation verified that Terry Lee Whetstone is not
a citizen of the Cherokee Nation. Whetstone pled guilty and was
sentenced to three years of probation in 2015.
Conclusion
Investigations conducted by Service special agents, specifically
Operation Al Zuni, have been very successful in enforcing the Indian
Arts and Crafts Act and finally bringing criminals who have illegally
sold fraudulent Native American art for years to justice. However, the
scope of the problem is far larger than expected. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service has established a strong partnership with the Indian
Arts and Crafts Board to enforce the Act, educate consumers about the
issue of fraudulent art, and deter further illegal activity. The
protection of tribal nations is of the utmost importance to the
Department of the Interior, and safeguarding tribal art and crafts is
integral to that mission and vital to the livelihoods and culture of
tribal nations. The Service is committed to continuing this important
work and looks forward to working with you to raise awareness of the
issue and improve implementation of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Chief Woody.
Please, Miss Shappert, please go forward.
STATEMENT OF GRETCHEN C.F. SHAPPERT, ASSISTANT
DIRECTOR, INDIAN, VIOLENT AND CYBER CRIME,
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF U.S. ATTORNEYS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Ms. Shappert. Thank you. My name is Gretchen Shappert. I'm
the Assistant Director for the Indian, Violent and Cyber Crime
Staff for the Department of Justice. I want to thank the Vice
Chairman and Senator Heinrich for this opportunity and for
documenting this very important field hearing. I also want to
thank the Santa Fe Indian School for this opportunity.
The Indian Arts and Crafts Act was enacted to protect
Native American artists and artisans who rely on the creation
and sale of traditional and contemporary art and craftwork to
support their economic livelihood, preserve their unique
heritage, and transfer their extraordinary culture and values
to succeeding generations. Under the Act, it is illegal to sell
art or craft products in a manner that falsely suggests those
products were produced by American Indians and Alaska Natives.
A 2011 Government Accountability Office Report concluded
that the size of the Indian arts and crafts markets and the
extent of misrepresentation are unknown, in part because no
national database specifically tracks Indian arts and craft
sales or misrepresentations. Furthermore, the GOA Report noted
that U.S. Federal and state laws protecting intellectual
property rights do not explicitly include Native American and
Alaska Native traditional knowledge and cultural expressions--
such as the processes for weaving baskets--and therefore
provide little protection for them.
Native American artisans have voiced concerns that the
traditional knowledge of how to create Native arts and crafts--
often passed down from generation to generation within the
tribes--will not be carried forward by younger generations if
they cannot make a living producing these goods. Hence,
enforcement and education about the current Act is vital to
ensuring the integrity of Native arts and crafts.
Here in the District of New Mexico, my colleagues in the
U.S. Attorneys' Office have used the criminal provisions of the
Act, together with other Federal statutes, to prosecute
criminal misrepresentations of inauthentic items as genuine
Indian arts and crafts. Two criminal prosecutions will
demonstrate the significance of these cases.
Andrew Gene Alvarez of Woffard Heights, California, was a
prominent jeweler who alternately represented himself as
Mescalero Apache, Colville, and Mayo Indian. He also used an
alias, ``Andrew Red Horse Alvarez.'' He came to the attention
of Federal law enforcement because he was misrepresenting
jewelry that he was selling in an art show at the Santa Fe
Convention Center and said it was made by an Indian. Mr.
Alvarez was prosecuted under the Act here in New Mexico,
entered a guilty plea and was sentenced to 30 months of
probation to be followed by a year of supervised release.
As part of his sentence, he was prohibited from
representing that any of the jewelry he produced was of Indian
origin. According to Federal law enforcement officials in New
Mexico, this prosecution was widely noted in the Native arts
and crafts market, thereby serving as a potential deterrent to
other potential fraudsters who might be tempted to engage in
similar conduct.
The second example of criminal prosecution here in New
Mexico was a case of Rose Morris--she was on one of the slides
we saw earlier--who was sentenced to a probationary sentence of
five years--and excuse me--of a prosecution payment of $38,000,
having claimed the rugs she was selling were made by Native
Americans. In fact, she randomly purchased the rugs from
miscellaneous sources with no connection to Native craftsmen.
In other cases, Federal prosecutors have used a wide
variety of Federal statutes--wire fraud and mail fraud in
particular--to apprehend criminal offenders engaged in similar
fraudulent conduct involving misrepresentation of supposedly
Indian arts and crafts.
Criminal prosecutions are not the only way that Federal
prosecutors support enforcement of the Indian Arts and Crafts
Act. Representatives of the New Mexico U.S. Attorneys' Office
have engaged in frequent outreach initiatives to tribal leaders
and community members to inform them about the purpose and
provisions of the Act. As part of their training and outreach,
U.S. Attorney representatives encourage tribal leaders and
citizens to report violations of the Act to Federal law
enforcement for possible Federal prosecution. U.S. Attorneys'
Office leadership has routinely discussed the Act and its
consequences at District-wide Tribal Consultations and during
the more than 50 training seminars and programs conducted
throughout the District by the U.S. Attorneys' Office through
the past two years.
The scope of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act changed
dramatically over the years. The Act has been amended several
times since its initial enactment in 1935. Amendments in 1990,
2000, and 2010 increased penalties, expanded enforcement from
exclusive FBI jurisdiction to include all Federal law
enforcement agencies and strengthened enforcement provisions.
Application of the Act is not limited to retail sales of
misrepresented goods. The Act can be used to address large-
scale importations as we saw on the slides earlier.
The 1990 Act also amended civil remedies and authorized
civil suits by Indian tribes on behalf of themselves,
individuals, as well as by Indian arts and crafts
organizations. The 2010 amendments expanded civil enforcement
by authorizing Indian arts and crafts organizations, as well as
individual Indians, to file civil suits on their own. It also
provided for civil lawsuits against manufacturers, wholesalers,
and others involved in the distribution of the misrepresented
product. Enabling Native Americans to pursue civil remedies
independent from Federal law enforcement enhances the scope and
deterrence of the Act.
United States Custom and Border Protection also has a role
in maintaining the authenticity of Indian-style arts and
crafts. Since 1990, CBP regulations require that imported
Native American-style arts and crafts must generally be
indelibly marked with a country of origin by cutting, die-
sinking, engraving, stamping or some other comparable permanent
identification. Investigations in these cases referred may
require international assistance from foreign governments and
the commitment of significant law enforcement resources.
Another means of protecting the integrity of Native-made
arts and crafts is through trademarks used in commerce, which
can be registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or
a state by Indian artists, tribes, or arts and crafts
organizations to identify authentic Indian products.
Finally, at least a dozen states, including New Mexico,
have enacted laws prohibiting the sale of falsely labeled
Indian arts and crafts. Under the state law of New Mexico, as
you know very well, Vice Chairman, cases are being prosecuted
both as misdemeanors and felonies, depending on the value of
the item, or they may be the basis for permanent injunctive
relief and court-ordered restitution.
Of course, one of the reasons for today's hearing is to
discuss possible ways to modernize and improve the
effectiveness of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act. The Department
of Justice is always receptive to more effective legislative
tools to help us protect the rights and public safety of
Americans. We look forward to working with Congress to improve
the Act.
Violations of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act currently
cannot be prosecuted, for example, through the Federal money-
laundering statutes, because these violations do not meet the
definition of specified unlawful activities under the money-
laundering statutes. The Federal money-laundering statutes are
powerful tools to address the proceeds derived from criminal
activity.
Finally, for felony prosecutions under the Act, the sale or
price of the misrepresented goods or products must be, quote,
``a total price of $1,000 or more.'' Because of the nature of
the Indian arts and crafts business, many fraudulent dealers
sell large quantities of misidentified products where each
individual item sells for significantly less than $1,000,
although gross sales of the misidentified items exceed the
$1,000 threshold. Allowing for an aggregation of individual
transactions would enable Federal prosecutors to more
effectively prosecute large-scale distributors who violate the
Act.
An example of this approach is Title 18, U.S. Section 641,
the Theft of Public Money statute, which allows an aggregation
of the value of property, money or things of value to reach the
$1,000 threshold for felony prosecution.
On behalf of the Department of Justice, I wanted to thank
the Committee for the opportunity to appear here today, and I'm
happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Assistant Director,
Indian, Violent and Cyber Crime, Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys,
U.S. Department of Justice
My name is Gretchen Shappert, and I am the Assistant Director of
the Indian, Violent and Cyber Crime Staff in the Executive Office for
U.S. Attorneys. On behalf of the Department of Justice and on behalf of
my colleagues in the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) here in the
District of New Mexico, I want to thank the Committee, Chairman Hoeven,
and Vice-Chairman Udall for convening this important oversight field
hearing. I also wish to thank the Santa Fe Indian School for hosting us
today.
The Indian Arts and Crafts Act was enacted to protect Native
American artists and artisans who rely on the creation and sale of
traditional and contemporary art and craftwork to support their
economic livelihood, preserve their unique heritage, and transfer their
extraordinary culture and values to succeeding generations. Under the
Act, it is illegal to sell art or craft products in a manner that
falsely suggests that those products were produced by American Indians
and Alaska Natives.
A 2011 Government Accountably Office Report concluded that the size
of the Indian arts and crafts markets and the extent of
misrepresentation are unknown, in part because no national database
specifically tracks Indian arts and crafts sales or misrepresentations.
Furthermore, the GAO Report noted that U.S. federal and state laws
protecting intellectual property do not explicitly include Native
American and Alaska Native traditional knowledge and cultural
expressions--such as processes for weaving baskets--and therefore
provide little legal protection for them. Native American artisans have
voiced concerns that the traditional knowledge of how to create Native
arts and crafts--often passed down from generation to generation within
the tribes--will not be carried forward by younger generations if they
cannot make a living producing these goods. Hence, enforcement and
education about the current Act is vital to ensuring the integrity of
Native arts and crafts.
Here in the District of New Mexico, my colleagues in the USAO have
used the criminal provisions of the Act, together with other federal
criminal statutes, to prosecute misrepresentations of inauthentic items
as genuine Indian arts and crafts. Two criminal prosecutions will
demonstrate the significance of these cases. Andrew Gene Alvarez of
Wofford Heights, California, was a prominent jeweler who alternatively
represented himself as Mescalero Apache, Colville, and Mayo Indian. He
also used an alias, ``Andrew `Red Horse' Alvarez.'' He came to the
attention of federal law enforcement, because he was misrepresenting
that the jewelry he was selling at an art show in the Santa Fe
Convention Center was made by an Indian. Mr. Alvarez was prosecuted
under the Act, entered a guilty plea and was sentenced to 30 months of
probation to be followed by a year of supervised release. As part of
his sentence, he was prohibited from representing that any of the
jewelry he produced was of Indian origin. According to federal law
enforcement officials in New Mexico, this prosecution was widely noted
in the Native arts and crafts market, thereby serving as a potential
deterrent to other potential fraudsters, who might be tempted to engage
in similar conduct.
A second example of a criminal prosecution here in the District of
New Mexico was the case of Rose Morris, who was sentenced to a
probationary sentence of five years, following her guilty plea to two
counts of misrepresentation of Indian produced goods and products. Ms.
Morris falsely claimed that the rugs she was selling were made by
Native Americans, when in fact she randomly purchased the rugs from
miscellaneous sources with no connection to Native craftsmen. In other
cases, federal prosecutors have used a variety of federal statutes,
such as wire fraud and mail fraud, to apprehend criminal offenders
engaged in similar fraudulent conduct involving the misrepresentation
of supposedly Indian arts and crafts.
Criminal prosecutions are not the only way that federal prosecutors
support enforcement of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act. Representatives
of the New Mexico USAO have engaged in frequent outreach initiatives to
tribal leaders and community members to inform them about the purpose
and provisions of the Act. As part of their training and outreach, U.S.
Attorney representatives encourage tribal leaders and citizens to
report violations of the Act to federal law enforcement for possible
prosecution. USAO leadership has routinely discussed the Act and its
consequences at District-wide Tribal Consultations and during the more
than 50 training seminars and programs conducted throughout the
District by the USAO during the past two years.
The scope of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act has changed
dramatically over the years. The Act has been amended several times
since its initial enactment in 1935. Amendments in 1990, 2000, and 2010
increased penalties, expanded enforcement from exclusive FBI
jurisdiction to include any federal law enforcement agency, and
strengthened enforcement provisions. Application of the Act is not
limited to retail sales of misrepresented goods. The Act can be used to
address large-scale importations by corporate distributors. The 1990
amendment also added civil remedies and authorized civil suits by an
Indian tribe on behalf of itself, an individual Indian who is a member
of the tribe, or an Indian arts and crafts organization. The 2010
amendments expanded civil enforcement by authorizing Indian arts and
crafts organizations, as well as individual Indians, to file civil
suits on their own. It also provided for civil law suits against
manufacturers, wholesalers, and others involved in the distribution of
the misrepresented product. Enabling Native Americans to pursue civil
remedies independent from federal law enforcement enhances the scope
and deterrence effects of the Act.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also has a role in
maintaining the authenticity of Indian-style arts and crafts. Since
1990, CBP regulations require that imported Native American-style arts
and crafts must generally be indelibly marked with the country of
origin by cutting, die-sinking, engraving, stamping or some other
comparable permanent identification. Investigations in these cases may
require international assistance from foreign governments and the
commitment of significant law enforcement resources.
Another means of protecting the integrity of Native-made arts and
crafts is through trademarks used in commerce, which can be registered
with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or a state by Indian artists,
tribes, or arts and crafts organizations to identify authentic Indian
products.
Finally, at least a dozen states--including New Mexico--have
enacted laws prohibiting the sale of items falsely labelled as Indian
arts and crafts. Under the state law of New Mexico, the sale or
attempted sale of products falsely described as Indian labor or
workmanship may be prosecuted as a misdemeanor or felony, depending
upon the value of the items, or may be the basis for permanent
injunctive relief and court-ordered restitution.
Of course, one of the reasons for today's hearing is to discuss
possible ways to modernize and improve the effectiveness of the Indian
Arts and Crafts Act. The Department of Justice is always receptive to
more effective legislative tools to help us protect the rights and
public safety of Americans. We look forward to working with Congress to
improve the Act.
Second, violations of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act cannot
currently be prosecuted through the federal money-laundering statutes,
because these violations do not meet the statutory definition of
specified unlawful activities under the money-laundering statutes. The
federal money-laundering statutes are powerful tools to address the
proceeds derived from criminal activity.
Finally, for felony prosecutions under the Act, the sale or price
of the misrepresented good or product must be ``a total price of $
1,000 or more''. Because of the nature of the Indian arts and crafts
business, many fraudulent dealers sell large quantities of
misidentified products where each individual items sells for
significantly less than $ 1,000, although gross sales of the
misidentified arts and crafts far exceed the $ 1,000 threshold.
Allowing for an aggregation of individual transactions would enable
federal prosecutors to more effectively prosecute large-scale
distributors who violate the Act. An example of this approach is Title
18 USC 641, the Theft of Public Money statute, which allows
for an aggregation of the value of property, money or things of value
to reach the $ 1,000 threshold for felony prosecutions.
On behalf of the Department of Justice, I wanted to thank the
Committee for the opportunity to appear before you this morning.
Senator Udall. Thank you so much, Miss Shappert, and thank
all the witnesses for traveling out and for being here and for
your excellent testimony.
And we want to emphasize, from what you hear today, you can
submit additions or addendums to your testimony as we move
along. As several of you mentioned, as New Mexico's Attorney
General, I prosecuted cases under state law that related to
illegal sale of counterfeit Native American jewelry.
And at the time in the 1990s, it was estimated about 30 or
40 percent of the jewelry on the market was counterfeit. So it
was a big problem then. But now I understand that as much as 80
percent of those goods are likely counterfeit and therefore
being sold in violation of Federal law.
This doubling in a matter of decades is very alarming to
me. So Chief Woody, can you provide an estimate on a percentage
or even a range of the amount of counterfeit jewelry being sold
in the local markets in New Mexico or in any other markets
you're familiar with.
Mr. Woody. I can tell you that Slide 1 showed you, that's
all fraudulent. That is a hard--you know, it's very hard to get
that figure. I don't know how you would go about doing it,
because you have the legal market, you have the illegal market
that gets mixed in, used as a cover, if you will, for all the
illegal and really when we're working one of these enterprises
at a time, it's focused on that, I don't know how you would
extrapolate that out.
You know, I figure you throw out around 40, 50 percent back
then, you know, I would speak to these cases. Yes, it's much
higher. I can't tell you how much higher, because the retail
market and retail stores are doing it. They could be as high as
80 percent, but that's a hard statement for me to make, sir.
Senator Udall. And Miss Stanton, the primary purpose of the
IACA is to protect Indian artists and businesses, tribal
economics and culture. In fact, it was enacted in response to
the growing influx of counterfeit Indian art and craftwork that
was seriously eroding the market for authentic Indian products.
How successful has the IACA been in fulfilling this purpose?
Ms. Stanton. Well, again, as I mentioned in the earlier
testimony, we have had Federal prosecutions. So I think that is
positive. And certainly, now working with the Fish and Wildlife
Service, that number will dramatically rise. But a lot of what
we do is try to educate the public and to try to send messages
to the industry as well to prevent the sale.
That's really what we're focusing on in addition to law
enforcement. So by better educating the consumer and sending
messages to the overall industry, we think that we have made
inroads with that. You saw on some of the slides that we have,
we do consumer protection brochures. We instituted doing that
in the New Mexico AG's office. We did that with the other state
attorney general's offices. Also, we do a lot of work with the
Federal Trade Commission, and we work with a lot of Indian
organizations; whether it's the American Indian, Alaska Native
Tourism Association, Indian Arts and Crafts Association.
So a lot of it is really focused on education and outreach.
And, you know, we would love to do more. But we certainly feel
that now that we're partnering with Fish and Wildlife Service,
we're in a far better place.
Senator Udall. Could you please elaborate a little bit,
Miss Stanton, on the impacts of counterfeit Indian art on
tribal communities, on their economy, on their social activity,
and on their culture?
Ms. Stanton. Of course each community is different. Each
tribe is different. But I think overall, especially in the
Southwest, it's had really devastating effects economically, as
I said, passing down the traditions. And certainly, Senator
Campbell was very articulate in talking about how many people
depend on this for a living; that it's so difficult to compete
with the materials coming in from overseas. That is, it's what
he says, depending on the dollar.
So it's frustrating. It's economically destabilizing, and a
great deal needs to continue to be done and expanded on this
effort.
Senator Udall. Thank you for that.
Chief Woody, you've dedicated your career with the service
to enforcement of Federal laws that protect endangered and
threatened species, migratory birds, marine mammals, and global
wildlife and plant resources. How did this service come to the
investigative authority, have the investigative authority over
the alleged violations of the IACA?
Mr. Woody. Amendments to the Act. It allowed for any
Federal law enforcement officer to investigate violations of
the Act. And being a good friend of Miss Stanton's, her walking
in the door with a cup of coffee helped an awful lot.
Senator Udall. We appreciate that.
Under the MOIA how many law enforcement officers are
currently assigned to investigate IACA violations? Is that
enough to meet the overall demand?
Mr. Woody. Officers that are working on it do the best they
can with what they have. There is a dedicated--there are
several dedicated officers who work on Indian arts and crafts
issues. Also, we have--when we're doing the projects at certain
points, we get help from HSI, FBI, every Federal agency that's
tied into export-import into the country; State Department,
strong support from DOJ, states, counties, county officials,
local Native American tribes.
We get a lot of support on this work.
Senator Udall. Could you talk a little bit more about the
2012 memorandum of agreement between the Fish and Wildlife
Service and the IACB?
Mr. Woody. Sure. Really what that is, the IABC essentially
pays for the agents and the work they do. The agents work for
Fish and Wildlife Service, they work for me, and we do the
work. It's really, essentially--it's cost recovery for us, is
what that MOA is.
Senator Udall. Miss Stanton, it sounds like the MOA has
helped address outstanding enforcement of the IACA somewhat,
but are there more boots on the ground needed to adequately
address the problem of trading on the Indian-made goods covered
by the law?
Ms. Stanton. I would say that if additional agents were
made available, they would have plenty to do.
Senator Udall. And it looks like, Chief Woody, you agree
with that.
Mr. Woody. Yes, I do.
Senator Udall. Miss Shappert, do you also?
Ms. Shappert. I will defer to my law enforcement colleagues
as to the resources they needed.
Senator Udall. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you for
your testimony.
Senator Heinrich, the floor is yours for questions.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Vice Chairman Udall.
Chief, when you find a case like this when large amounts of
jewelry are coming into the country fraudulently labeled, are
you able to seize those shipments under the current statute?
Mr. Woody. They are seized for evidence, yes.
Senator Udall. Can you seize them on forfeiture?
Mr. Woody. On forfeiture, no.
Senator Heinrich. Would it be helpful to have an amendment
to the statute that addressed that particularly?
Mr. Woody. We would be more than happy to sit down with you
and look at that very closely. You know, one thing we don't
want--when you're dealing with--look at it this way. You don't
want a criminal enterprise to look at penalties in the Act,
just consider it a cost of doing business.
Senator Heinrich. Absolutely.
Mr. Woody. In other words, you know, they look at the fine,
and they say--you know, we're talking $11 million in this
particular case. $250,000 is really a pittance on them. You
know, is that a cost of doing business for the criminal
enterprise? Yeah, I'd say. You want to look at enhancements to
the Act, and you want that Act to act as a deterrent, if you
will, just knowing what's in it.
Senator Heinrich. Miss Shappert mentioned potential changes
to the Federal money-laundering definition to allow to meet the
definition. The aggregation of value to meet the thousand-
dollar threshold. Are there similar changes that you can think
of, Chief, that would, that you bumped up against in the--in
trying to prosecute these cases or investigate these cases?
Mr. Woody. As Gretchen stated, that is one of the ones
we've talked about a bit amongst the officers, the agents, and
us. But having policy discussions, we need--again, I'm more
than happy--or someone is more than happy to sit down with you
on technical issues.
Senator Heinrich. You concur that those two changes would
be helpful?
Mr. Woody. Yes.
Senator Heinrich. Great.
In the Al Zuni case, did we have cooperation from
Philippine law enforcement?
Mr. Woody. Yes, we did. We had good cooperation from the
Philippine government.
Senator Heinrich. Is that possible, apart, because of Fish
and Wildlife's role in also working with foreign countries, in
Southeast Asia and other places in wildlife trafficking issues?
Mr. Woody. Yeah. In the last several years, we've been able
to put agents out throughout the world. We have fellow agents
that are attaches stationed in a number of countries; the Asian
countries, Africa, working on a number of issues. They're
working strongly--a lot of work we do in the Philippines, we've
built long-term, good relationships there.
And yes, that helped immensely.
Senator Heinrich. Miss Stanton, you went through some of
the educational efforts that you are currently pursuing to give
people the knowledge to know the difference. Are you pursuing a
similar strategy online as what you've done with print, kiosks,
and other places in the state of New Mexico?
Ms. Stanton. Well, in particular, we worked closely with
the legal departments of a number of online marketing
platforms. That would be Amazon, Etsy, eBay, and Artfire, in
particular. And we had a lot of complaints about online
marketing, I will tell you that, and we really value the
complaints we get from the public, and we try to do our own
monitoring as well. But it is extensive, the problems with
Internet marketing.
What we typically do is, once we see potential violations,
we will reach out to the vendor, and that's the first real
collaboration with that platform, and they will provide the
contact information, and then we will do our due diligence in
trying to determine the extent of the violation and
communicating with that vendor on how to comply.
If they don't comply, we have them dropped. So that's one
of the really good vehicles that we have to monitor online
marketing.
Senator Heinrich. How often--what has the relationship been
like with some of those large online vendor platforms?
Ms. Stanton. EBay in particular was really our first
agreement. And they've been excellent. And there are some
challenges every step of the way, but Etsy now has come around,
and we've been working with them, and Amazon, who's massive,
and Artfire. So whenever we have the opportunity, we reach out
and try to get collaborations with their legal departments.
Senator Heinrich. For any of you, really, do you have a
sense for how oftentimes a retail store or a vendor knows that
what they're marketing is actually fraudulently labeled?
Ms. Stanton. Well, I certainly think in the operation of
the Al Zuni case, everybody was understanding what was going
on. It's--you know, greed does a lot of things to people.
Senator Heinrich. Miss Shappert, I wanted to ask you, the
2011 GAO report cites that there isn't a national database to
track these kinds of Indian arts and crafts sales. Is that
true, and should there be a database to track this kind of
thing?
Ms. Shappert. To be honest, Senator, I think it points to a
problem. I don't know if there could be a database, because of
the individuality of the art. So I think it underscores the
challenges associated with these kind of investigations, and
that's one of the reasons, because the art is so individualized
between different tribes.
Senator Heinrich. Okay. I want to thank you all for your
testimony.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Senator Heinrich.
Miss Stanton, the expansion of retail sales online has
changed the face of commerce and allowed consumers incredible
access to products around the world and around the globe. But I
imagine this access presents the challenges with respect to
online sales of Native arts and crafts and IACA enforcement.
Does the Board's mission to promote Indian economic
development through expansion of Native art and craft market
include e-commerce? A simple Google search reveals online
retailers, such as Etsy and eBay, selling goods as vintage or
authentic Native American jewelry. Does the IACA provide the
tools necessary to enforce violations with e-commerce?
Ms. Stanton. Well, a violation is a violation. And so
whether it's occurring on eBay or Etsy or Downtown Santa Fe
or--you know, we treat it all equally. And as I mentioned, we
work with the legal departments of these online platforms. And
we feel well served. But there's still so much to do. It just
really is a tremendous problem.
Senator Udall. Does the IACB certify reputable online
retailers?
Ms. Stanton. We have a source directory of American Indian
and Alaska Native-owned and operated arts and crafts
businesses. To be listed in that directory, you have to be a
member of a federally recognized tribe and provide your tribal
documentation. And that's a free opportunity for Indian artists
to promote their work, and we publish that online.
Senator Udall. Do you think the IACB should certify
reputable online retailers?
Ms. Stanton. We could certainly look into that. We have not
done so thus far, but we'd be happy to do that.
Senator Udall. Do you believe that these fraudulent online
sales, are they a significant problem?
Ms. Stanton. Yes.
Senator Udall. Yes. What is the extent of that problem, as
far as your knowledge of it?
Ms. Stanton. I couldn't give you a percentage. But I can
tell you from the complaints we receive every day, that
authentic Indian artists and authentic Indian art businesses
are not happy at all, because of the competition.
Senator Udall. For the record, would you be able to give us
some numbers on the numbers of complaints that you have gotten?
Ms. Stanton. Oh, absolutely.
Senator Udall. That would be very helpful.
Chief, do you have any comment in this area?
Mr. Woody. We do a lot of work on the Internet, whether
wildlife work or some of this other. As Meredith stated, it is
immense. I think there are some pretty good tools out there
that you may be aware of. We're working online, and we've got
some backup. Customs and Border Patrol and DHS has been
absolutely a good partner working with us on these cases.
They have a location called Commercial Targeting Analysis
Center. We'll have agents work online, and you can move it over
to the Commercial Targeting Analysis Center. And you can focus
on some really specific things off of that. There's a lot of
good things going on behind the scenes.
I welcome you out, when you're back in D.C. at any time,
we'd be more than happy to show you some of those locations and
the great work that goes on behind the scenes there.
Senator Udall. We should probably have a visit and take a
look at that. That would be very helpful.
Mr. Woody. I look forward to it, sir.
Senator Udall. Do tribal governments play a role or could
they play a role in certifying authentic Native American arts
and crafts for sale online?
Ms. Stanton. They certainly could. They sometimes do have
their own version of a certification program. I know the
Cherokee in Oklahoma, and in a different forum that we talked
about in Oklahoma, have similar issues as well as--I think that
perhaps the Cherokee in North Carolina.
Senator Udall. Chief, have--and also to Miss Shappert--have
any charges been brought against retailers for violating the
IACA for online sales or any pending?
Mr. Woody. Not that I am aware of, off the top of my head.
Ms. Shappert. Not that I'm aware of.
Mr. Woody. Not that we're working on.
Senator Udall. Do you have agents that are looking for
illegal activity online?
Mr. Woody. Depends on what the agents are working on.
Assigned to the cases they're working on right now, yes. But
talking specifically, that--I can't answer that question.
Senator Udall. Do you think it would be helpful to dedicate
resources to improving fraudulent--to looking at the fraudulent
online sales?
Mr. Woody. With the right information coming in,
absolutely, yes.
Senator Udall. Miss Shappert?
Ms. Shappert. We would be delighted, in the Department of
Justice, to review anything that our colleagues in Fish and
Wildlife bring to us from their online searches for possible
Federal prosecution.
Senator Udall. Okay, great.
I'd like to turn to the recent Fish and Wildlife Service
investigation known as Operation Al Zuni that's been reported
as the largest investigation ever into fraudulent Native
American jewelry sales under the Indian Arts and Crafts Act.
As reported in the press, this case involves individuals
who established and operated manufacturing facilities in the
Philippines in order to market and sell Native American-style
jewelry and handicrafts as authentic Indian-made. Counterfeit
Indian-made jewelry, in particular, was sold in stores located
in Albuquerque and Santa Fe with heavy tourist foot traffic.
So from Miss Shappert and Chief Woody, I know this is an
ongoing investigation, but to the extent you can answer, does
Operation Al Zuni--does that investigation go deeper than the
individuals who were indicted earlier this year?
In other words, are more indictments coming in this case?
Ms. Shappert. With all due respect, we cannot comment on
ongoing investigations.
Senator Udall. Chief, you're in the same position on that
one?
Mr. Woody. Yes, sir.
Senator Udall. And I would just advise everybody to look at
the reporting that's out there, because there's some very good
reporting that I think elucidates some of these issues, and
we'll look forward to be following what's going on.
Is DOJ and Fish and Wildlife Service prioritizing this
investigation, and would you characterize this case to be part
of a broader network of counterfeiters?
Mr. Woody. The case is prioritized. We have had--New Mexico
Attorneys' Office has been absolutely top-notch with this. It
is a priority. There are a number of cases out there being
worked.
Senator Udall. Okay. Good. I wanted to have that for the
record.
You testified that the declared value of sales in
fraudulent Native American-style jewelry related to this
investigation is 11 million. But is that the retail value or is
it substantially higher?
Mr. Woody. That's the declared value coming into the U.S. I
would say maybe Meredith can answer this better. You know,
whether it's a wholesale after that or retail after that, it's
substantially much higher. So that is the declared value when
it comes into the U.S.
Senator Udall. Is there a way to--please go ahead.
Ms. Stanton. I don't think it would be farfetched to say
that the 11 million easily turns into double that.
Senator Udall. So that's your best guess at this point.
Ms. Stanton. Yes, sir.
Senator Udall. Chief, would you argue with that?
Mr. Woody. No, I would not argue with Meredith.
Senator Udall. And obviously, this is an enormous amount of
money that should be going back to Indian Country. Native
jewelers and artisans rely on their works to earn a living,
provide for their families and sustain their cultural
expression and identities from generation to generation, not to
mention its impact on consumer confidence in the Indian art
market.
In other words, this is not a victimless crime. Miss
Shappert and Chief Woody, what are your agencies doing to
combat the spread of violations of the IACA?
Ms. Shappert. Well, I reference to you--first of all, Chief
Woody has talked about some of the things that his agency is
doing in collaboration with the Department of Justice. And I
know from my colleagues in the U.S. Attorneys' Office in New
Mexico, they are extremely grateful for their close partnership
with Fish and Wildlife, which goes into many different areas of
prosecution.
We talked about the importance of deterrence, and part of
that is, Meredith referred to us getting the message out. The
U.S. Attorneys' Office in New Mexico and other U.S. Attorneys'
Offices are engaged in that. They make a point of emphasizing
the Indian Arts and Crafts Act in their trainings, their tribal
consultations, and their meetings with other law enforcement
partners so that we could discourage this type of activity.
And as we saw in the Alvarez prosecution, when these cases
are prosecuted, it does send a chill through the minds of those
who might be tempted to commit these kind of crimes.
Senator Udall. Anything to add?
Ms. Stanton. I totally agree. The deterrent value of these
investigations and prosecutions, they're just--it's priceless.
Senator Udall. In your testimony, you state that, ``The
scope of the counterfeiting problem is far larger than
expected.''
Are there other IACA investigations ongoing, and could you
please describe them, and are they limited to the United
States, or is there an international component? Or is that one
that we shouldn't be getting into?
Mr. Woody. There are other cases, and there's an
international.
Senator Udall. Good, good.
Well, we really appreciate your effort on this front and
look forward to sharing and visiting with you, as you talked
about, in terms of making this a top priority and also making
sure that the people targeted are the ones that are doing the
most damage.
Senator Heinrich?
Senator Heinrich. Miss Shappert, I wanted to ask you, you
mentioned a couple of cases, including the case of Mr. Alvarez,
that resulted in probation being handed out. Do you think that
the punishments typically imposed under the Indian Arts and
Crafts Act typically provide an adequate deterrent?
Ms. Shappert. Well, I can tell you the punishments provided
are what the Act currently provides. And with the current
sentencing guideline configuration, the inclination would
probably be, in most cases, if someone doesn't have a record,
I'm speculating that they would not get active prison time. But
that's another reason why the financial component of the
punishment must be significant.
Because, as important as prison is for many kinds of
crimes, hitting people in the pocketbook is a real chilling
deterrent for many fraudsters.
Senator Heinrich. And do you find that that portion of the
penalties handed out typically does have that kind of impact?
Ms. Shappert. Well, as I indicated in my testimony, we're
very interested in the possibility of having conversations with
the Committee, including on things like aggregation of the
penalties so that you could go after individuals more
effectively who were engaged in large-scale amounts of money.
And Chief Woody referred to forfeiture as something to be
considered. Asset forfeiture is a powerful tool for dealing
with fraud and other types of crime when you can go after the
instrumentalities and the profits and the large monetary base
of these operations.
We are happy to have any conversations with the Committee
that they would like to have about these issues.
Senator Heinrich. I suspect the Committee looks forward to
that.
Chief, does your collaboration extend to BIA law
enforcement, given their tribal relationships?
Mr. Woody. To date, we have not worked--we've worked with
them on some of the operations when they're coming to
conclusion, working--the investigators working. We do not have
anybody working with us at BIA at this point.
That's not to say--we're open for those conversations with
BIA in the future.
Senator Heinrich. It sounds like a lot of this is really
coordination working across multiple agencies; U.S. Attorneys,
Attorneys General, Fish and Wildlife Service, you mentioned
Customs and Border Protection.
Mr. Woody. It is excellent cooperation.
Senator Heinrich. That's great.
Much of the conversation today has focused on jewelry. To
what extent does this same sort of enforcement extend to things
like textiles, pottery, ceramics, and other tribal Native
American arts and crafts?
Ms. Stanton. Well, certainly we have complaints about all
media; very contemporary work; very traditional works,
weavings, masks, carvings. In fact, these are from one of the
five indictments in Alaska. And so it's all across the board.
Senator Heinrich. Can you tell us a little bit about what
those are?
Mr. Woody. Yes. So in this particular case--and again, to
get to the crux of these cases--you're putting people
undercover and working these. I'm looking at the back of these,
and on this particular one on my right, to your left, you've
got a price tag of $1,700. And then you've another tag that
says, ``Authentic Native handicraft from Alaska,'' and a third
sticker that says, ``Made in Alaska.''
Just looking at that, you're not going to know it. But
again, working behind the scenes and getting to the fraud that
went into making this, putting those stickers on, that's what
we focus our investigations on doing. There were a number of
items similar to this that were seized in the case, and
actually, the complaint came in from some tourists on what was
going on behind the scenes, and that we worked on this case.
Senator Heinrich. Well, I want to thank you all again for
your testimony today. I'm going to have to leave right now, but
I'm going to leave you in the Vice Chairman's very capable
hands.
Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Heinrich. I really
appreciate you spending so much time with us here this morning.
And let me once again just thank the witnesses. And you're
certainly invited to stay and listen to the second panel. I
know you may be busy and heading off to other things, but
really, really appreciate your travels and testimony here
today.
We're going to take just a five-minute break to rearrange
name tags and to sort out things up here. And so we excuse this
panel, and we have a short recess and call up the next panel,
which is Damon Martinez, Joyce Begay-Foss, Mr. Dallin, and
Harvey Pratt. Thank you very much.
[Recess from 11:41 a.m. to 11:59 a.m.]
Senator Udall. Okay. Let's have everybody sit down. Any
conversations that are going on, we hope that you will move
those off the floor a little bit. We understand people had a
little bit hard time, especially the court reporter. So we
really urge you to stay very close to your microphone. And I
may remind you a little bit every now and then or the people
behind me may say, ``Speak up,'' or ``Move in'' like that to
the microphone.
I just very briefly, before I introduce our second panel
and proceed with them, I would like to recognize--there have
been many tribal officials that have visited here today, in and
out. And I want to recognize the very, very good leadership
they have given on this issue in Indian Country.
And we have a number of them that have been here this
morning. Governor Mark Mitchell, with Tesuque; Governor Peter
Garcia, Ohkay Owingeh; First Lieutenant Governor Mac Zuni with
Isleta; Second Lieutenant Governor Marvin Trujillo, Laguna;
Councilman Gil Vigil, with Tesuque; Ben Chavarria, Tribal
Historic Preservation office, Santa Clara; Second Lieutenant
Governor Matt Martinez, Ohkay Owingeh.
We've got Councilman Pascal Anjade, Mescalero Apache;
Lieutenant Governor Jerome Lucero, Zia Pueblo. And also from
the Navajo Nation, Barbara Mago. She's the Native arts and
crafts director there.
Let me just say once again to our second panel, thank you
for coming, and thank you for traveling here. We really
appreciate having you here today. We have Mr. Damon Martinez,
the former U.S. Attorney for the District of New Mexico; Miss
Joyce Begay-Foss, director, Living Traditions Education Center
at the Museum of Indian Arts & Culture right here located in
Santa Fe; Mr. Dallin Maybee, chief operating officer Southwest
Association for Indian Arts; and Mr. Harvey Pratt, a Native
American artist and retired forensic artist from Oklahoma.
Thank you for coming. I look forward to hearing your
testimony, beginning with Mr. Martinez.
Please proceed.
STATEMENT OF DAMON MARTINEZ, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY, DISTRICT OF
NEW MEXICO, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Mr. Martinez. Good afternoon, Chairman Udall. It is a great
honor to testify before this Committee regarding the Indian
Arts and Crafts Act. I also want to thank the Santa Fe School
for hosting this field hearing.
In New Mexico, we are very privileged to have Native
American art and craftwork that reflects generations of unique
culture and a rich heritage. In the 1990s, as an assistant
Attorney General for the State of New Mexico, I gained an
appreciation for the difference that government can make when I
watched you as Attorney General protect Native American artists
and artisans from dishonest practices.
Now, after having served as a U.S. Attorney for New Mexico,
I submit it is important for law enforcement--including the
U.S. Attorneys' Office--to prioritize its limited resources on
prosecuting those who knowingly counterfeit Native American art
and craftwork.
To accomplish this effectively, Federal law needs to
provide the necessary tools to investigate and prosecute those
who exploit and undermine the cultural heritage of Native
Americans. In modernizing the Indian Arts and Crafts Act, I
have proposed--I have respectfully proposed to this Committee
seven recommendations for your consideration.
Mr. Vice Chairman, also at this point, I would like to take
the opportunity, having served in the U.S. Attorneys' Office,
there's two people that I want to recognize from the U.S.
Attorneys' Office. These are the ones who are incredible public
servants, and the job that they do on behalf of the community,
on behalf of the nation, they never receive credit for it.
Those two people right now are Christopher Houghton and
Jonathan Gersen who are in the audience today. They are true
public servants, and they deserve credit for the work that they
do.
And at this point, I would just answer any questions you
have on the second set of recommendations that I'll make, or
any other questions that you would wish to propose.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Martinez follows:]
Prepared Statement of Damon Martinez, Former U.S. Attorney, District of
New Mexico, U.S. Department of Justice
Good morning. Chairman Hoeven, Vice Chairman Udall, Senator
Heinrich, and members of the Committee on Indian Affairs, it is a great
honor to testify before the Committee regarding the Indian Arts and
Crafts Act.
In New Mexico, we are very privileged to have Native American art
and craftwork that reflects generations of unique culture and a rich
heritage. In the 1990s, as an Assistant Attorney General for the State
of New Mexico, I gained an appreciation for the difference that
government can make when I watched then Attorney General Tom Udall
protect Native American artists and artisans from dishonest practices.
Now, after having served as the U.S. Attorney for New Mexico, I
submit it is important for law enforcement, including the U.S.
Attorney's Office, to prioritize its' limited resources on prosecuting
those who knowingly counterfeit Native American art and craftwork. To
accomplish this effectively, federal law needs to provide the necessary
tools to investigate and prosecute those who exploit and undermine the
cultural heritage of Native Americans.
In modernizing the Indian Arts and Crafts Act (the ``Act''), I
respectfully propose the following recommendations for your
consideration to make the law a more comprehensive and effective tool.
First, the Act should consider the importation of Native American-
style merchandise into the commerce of the United States separate from
the sale of Native American-style merchandise in the United States.
Second, the Act should require clearly and simply that Native
American-style merchandise imported into the commerce of the United
States must have an indelible country-of-origin marking. Currently, a
prosecutor must look to 19 C.F.R. 134.43(c)(``Method and Location of
Marking Imported Articles''), and 18 U.S.C. 542 (``Entry of goods
by means of false statements'') and 545 (``Smuggling goods into the
United States'') to establish this requirement.
Third, the Act should require that the seller of Native American-
style merchandise in the United States have a basis for representing
that such merchandise is actually Native American produced.
Fourth, the Act should have a specific forfeiture section.
Currently, a prosecutor must look to 18 U.S.C. 1341 (Fraud and
Swindles), and 1342 (Fraud by wire, radio, or television) to seek
forfeiture.
Fifth, 18 U.S.C. 1956 (Laundering of monetary instruments) should
be amended to include a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1159
(Misrepresentation of Indian produced goods and products) as a
specified unlawful activity.
Sixth, 18 U.S.C. 2516(1)(c) (Authorization for interception of
wire, oral, or electronic communications) should be amended to include
18 U.S.C. 1159 (Misrepresentation of Indian produced goods and
products) as an offense for investigation.
And finally, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security should be
encouraged to flag or seize during custom inspections Native American-
style merchandise imported into the commerce of the United States that
does not have an indelible country-of-origin marking on each item of
merchandise.
Thank you for your consideration of my recommendations and I stand
ready to answer any questions the Committee members may have.
Senator Udall. Thank you. Thank you very much.
And Mr. Pratt, please proceed.
And we'll get to questions after we go through the entire
panel and their testimony.
STATEMENT OF HARVEY PRATT, CHEYENNE-ARAPAHO MASTER ARTIST
Mr. Pratt. Good afternoon, Vice Chairman Udall. My name is
Harvey Pratt, and I'm pleased to testify before you today. I'm
a Cheyenne-Arapaho master artist from Oklahoma, on the Board of
the Red Earth Festival, which represents a large annual Indian
art market in Oklahoma City. I recently retired with over 50
years in law enforcement from the Oklahoma State Bureau of
Investigation.
While I was also--while I am also the Indian Arts and
Crafts Board chairman, I am testifying today solely on my
capacity as a private citizen and as a Cheyenne chief. My
recommendations are my own and do not in any way reflect the
official position of the Board or the Department of the
Interior.
Indian art is not just a commodity. Indian art reflects who
we are, where we came from, where we're going. It's a
reflection of our beliefs, religion, legends, and lifestyle.
You can see these connections in the kachina carvings,
paintings of Green Corn Dances, Native American Church fans and
rattles, and Spider Woman's role in weavings, to name a few.
Art is also about healing. For example, following an
alarming number of Indian youths committing suicide in record
number, all that, at the invitation of the Board's Southern
Plains Indian Museum, I provided a workshop at the museum to
encourage the Indian youth and their families to constructively
cope with these tragedies.
Indian art is also about being able to provide important
income for our families to carry on traditions of our ancestors
in contemporary and a challenging world. I know from firsthand
experience about the importance of promoting and protecting
Indian artists and their creativity and about the importance of
Indian Arts and Crafts Act enforcement.
When Indian artists are undercut by the sale of fake Indian
art, the integrity of authentic Indian art and artists suffer.
We're also being robbed economically, culturally, and
spiritually. These unscrupulous businesses are also ripping off
consumers and the viability of the Indian art. An example would
be my brother Charles Pratt, an internationally known Cheyenne-
Arapaho sculptor, residing in New Mexico, made a bronze chess
set featuring cowboys and Indians. It was later purchased and
knocked off by a non-Indian, who then duplicated it and sold it
as Indian art.
Though many Indian artists do not have the resources to
fight these injustices, fortunately, Charles did and was
compensated by his loss by taking this individual to court. And
after the hearing of this, I too support the modernization of
the Act to better protect the artists and the Indian art
industry. When Charles was confronted by this man, he told him
that he had been doing this over 30 years and had never been
confronted before.
Although the State of Oklahoma does not provide State
tribal recognition status, state recognized tribes have been a
significant issue in Oklahoma. This is due to the fact that,
unlike the Federal tribal recognition procedures, there is no
such standard for official state tribal recognition. State
tribal recognition requirements dramatically vary among those
states that provide such recognition.
Inconsistency in recognizing criteria also affects New
Mexico Indian artists as well as Indian artists nationwide.
Artists from federally recognized tribes are often selling
their art next to artists from tribes that may or may not be
officially recognized by a state. These artists may also
consider their tribe officially recognized by a state, even if
the state does not. A clear, easily verifiable standard within
the statute would benefit all Indian artists.
As an Indian artist, I also firmly support any effort to
expand the Act investigative program conducted by the Board
through their agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
on behalf of Indian artists, businesses, and tribes, as well as
consumers.
In addition, I support education and educating all
appropriate Federal law enforcement about the Act and the need
to protect Indian artists and collectors from fraudulent
activity. When state tourism and the economy are so dependent
on Indian artists and culture, here where such a high
percentage of Indian artists are distributed to businesses and
consumers nationwide, I believe that strengthening the Act
would not only benefit your constituents but consumers
nationwide.
Senator Udall. thank you for the opportunity to share my
thoughts with you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pratt follows:]
Prepared Statement of Harvey Pratt, Cheyenne-Arapaho Master Artist
Good Morning Vice Chairman Udall and Senator Heinrich. My name is
Harvey Pratt and I am pleased to testify before you today.
I am a Cheyenne-Arapaho master artist, a traditional Peace Chief of
the Southern Cheyenne Chief's Lodge, and on the Board of the Red Earth
Inc., which runs a large annual Indian art market in Oklahoma City. I
recently retired following over 50 years in law enforcement with the
Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation.
I come from a long line of Indian artists. My brother is
internationally known Cheyenne-Arapaho sculptor and New Mexico
resident, Charlie Pratt, and my mother, Cheyenne storyteller and
educator Ann Pratt Shadlow, received the honor of Native American Woman
of the Year in 1987.
While I am also the Indian Arts and Crafts Board Chairman, I am
testifying today solely in my capacity as a private citizen, and my
comments are my own and do not in any way reflect the official position
of the Board or the Department of the Interior.
Indian art is not just a commodity. Indian art reflects who we are,
where we came from, and where we are going. It reflects our beliefs,
religions, legends, and life ways. You can see these connections in our
kachina carvings, paintings of Green Corn Dances, Native American
Church fans and rattles, and in Spider Woman's role in weavings, to
name a few.
Indian art is also about healing. For example, I had the great
pleasure of participating in a three-day event sponsored by the Board's
Southern Plains Indian Museum in Anadarko, Oklahoma. This event,
supported by the surrounding Indian tribes, was held to help address an
alarming number of Indian youth suicides affecting every member of the
community. I spoke to the children and their families about the
importance of the arts in the healing process, and provided a painting
workshop to engage the children and encourage them to constructively
cope with the tragedies of losing family members and friends.
Indian art is also about being able to provide important income for
our families and to carry on traditions of our ancestors in a
contemporary and challenging world.
I know from first-hand experience about the importance of promoting
and protecting Indian artists and their creative work, and about the
importance of Indian Arts and Crafts Act enforcement.
When Indian artists are undercut by the sale of fake Indian art,
the integrity of authentic Indian art and artists suffer. We are being
robbed economically, culturally, and spiritually. These unscrupulous
businesses are also ripping off consumers and the viability of the
Indian market.
Time and time again, I hear from my fellow Indian artists about
their art and craftwork being knocked off by nonIndians and sold as
Indian made. In fact, my brother Charles Pratt made and sold a bronze
chess set featuring cowboy and Indian chess pieces. Later, Charles
discovered that the purchaser had reproduced that chess set in silver
without his approval, and was selling the reproductions to galleries as
Charles' work. Many Indian artists do not have the resources to pursue
these cases. Fortunately, Charles was able to take the man to court,
stop the reproduction, and was compensated for the sales. The purchaser
later told Charles that he had been knocking off others work for over
30 years, and no one had previously challenged him.
As the title of this hearing conveys, I too believe that
``modernizing'', in other words strengthening, the Act would greatly
benefit Indian artists and the Indian art industry.
I support removing any obstacles or unintended loopholes that have
hindered Act investigations and enforcement. For example, as an Indian
artist I believe the statute's current definition of State recognized
tribe should be reexamined and revised.
Although the State of Oklahoma does not provide State tribal
recognition status, State recognized tribes have been a significant
issue in Oklahoma. This is due to the fact that, unlike the federal
tribal recognition process, there is no such standard for official
State tribal recognition, and State tribal recognition requirements
dramatically vary among those states that provide such recognition.
Inconsistency in recognition criteria also affects New Mexico
Indian artists, as well as Indian artists nationwide. Artists from
federally recognized tribes often are selling their art next to artists
from tribes that may, or may not, be officially recognized by a State.
Those artists may also consider their tribe officially recognized by a
State, even if the State does not. A clear, easily verifiable standard
within the statute would benefit all Indian artists.
As an Indian artist, I also firmly support any efforts to expand
the Act investigative program conducted by the Board through their
agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Office of Law
Enforcement on behalf of Indian artists, businesses, and tribes, as
well as consumers.
In addition, I support educating all appropriate federal law
enforcement about the Act and the need to protect Indian artists and
the collectors from fraudulent activity.
Here in New Mexico, where the State's tourism and economy are so
dependent on Indian art, artists, and culture, and here where such a
high percentage of Indian art is distributed to businesses and
consumers nationwide, I believe that strengthening the Act would not
only benefit your constituents, but consumers nationwide.
Senators Udall and Heinrich, thank you for the opportunity to share
my thoughts and concerns with you today.
Senator Udall. Thank you so much, Mr. Pratt.
And let's proceed. Mr. Maybee, please.
STATEMENT OF DALLIN MAYBEE, CHIEF OPERATING
OFFICER, SOUTHWESTERN ASSOCIATION FOR INDIAN ARTS (SWAIA)
Mr. Maybee. Thank you, Vice Chair. I appreciate the
opportunity to come and speak a little bit about my experiences
and insights and perceptions of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act
and its implications on the contemporary Native American art
world.
My name is Dallin Maybee. I am Northern Arapaho and Seneca.
I grew up on the Cattaraugus reservation in Western New York,
but I'm actually enrolled in the Wind River Agency up in
central Wyoming. I am the chief operating officer for the
Southwestern Association for Indian Arts, the nonprofit that
produces the 96 year-old Santa Fe Indian Market. I have a
background in Native American performing arts and visual arts
and, of course, in Federal Indian law.
The Indian Arts and Crafts Act was a welcome addition to
the world of Indian art. It was meant to be a buffer and a
safeguard to the economic opportunities of our communities.
Artists have been able to see firsthand the significance of the
Act as they produce art forms and narratives that often present
aspects of their cultural identity that they choose to share
with the world.
As a participating artist at the Santa Fe Indian Market, my
eyes were opened to the economic opportunity that the Native
art market offered, as people appreciated my creativity and
continuation of art forms that we have often been practicing
for generations. Often utilitarian in usage, some everyday art
forms have evolved into fine art forms in which our artists are
able to receive suitable compensation for. But like most
perceived opportunities were gained, many of these forms have
been copied and reproduced, robbed of the Native soul and
creativity that often accompanies authenticity.
The nonprofit that produces the Santa Fe Indian Market, we
hold a venerated and prestigious place amongst all the now-
interested in Native American fine art markets. We are the
oldest and had humble beginnings in 1922. And for almost 96
years, artists from predominately the Southwest and now tribes
from throughout North America and Canada descend upon the Santa
Fe community, the traditional homelands of Tesuque, and other
pueblos here in New Mexico, to not only enjoy the beautiful
scenery and the fine food, but also to experience Native
America at its finest.
And it's presented through the many fine art forms we see.
We also, as part of our programming, produce everything from
couture and traditional fashion to food to performing arts. We
cooperate with and partner with the National Museum of the
American Indian to present a film festival. All of these things
cooperates to create an experience unlike any other, with an
economic impact of almost $80 million upon the state of New
Mexico itself and the city of Santa Fe.
When we engage with our visitors, they indicate that they
come to Santa Fe simply to experience what Native America has
to offer.
As thought leaders for a constantly evolving dynamic of how
people define Native art, our foundation is the artists
themselves. We currently accept artists from across the United
States and Canada, and we do require that participating artists
provide proof of enrollment or, as per the Act, evidence of
tribal certification from the tribe that they claim
descendancy. This definition of how we define who is Indian, as
Senator Campbell indicated, is still a challenge almost 30
years later. We routinely hear of artists who have legitimate
descendancy, either from their mother or their father's side.
But my own example, for instance, if I was not enrolled on
my mother's side--even though I was half Seneca--my father is a
full-blooded Seneca--it's a matriarchal enrollment process. I
would not find a place at Santa Fe Indian Market or elsewhere
to be able to say, ``As a Native American, I am producing art,
and you can, therefore, buy it.''
I would be precluded from the Act.
Some of the challenges that we see at Indian Market for our
artists is the appropriation that occurs, not only from the
theft of design, but also from the wholesale theft of often
cultural identity. On occasion we find artists who submit for
consideration their application claiming descendancy in order
to come to Indian Market and take advantage of the economic
benefit that our market has, but they simply on any level are
not Native, either through descendancy or enrollment.
So the first challenge that we see would be in the
definitions of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act. How do you
define who is an Indian? And we create models and mechanisms
for tribes often to participate or adapt or evolve in order to
help them create a certification process for themselves. We
want to exercise our sovereignty, but oftentimes we lack the
resources or the knowledge to create the models ourselves.
So if we see successful models from Cherokee or the Choctaw
in Oklahoma, we would hope that we'd be able to create forms or
engage with them in order to create models for other tribes
that need assistance on that form.
The testimony today is also reflected heavily on
enforcement. While we have seen a lot of success on both sides
of that issue of either dealers engaging in fraudulent
representation of Indian art or artists themselves engaging in
fraudulent identity, there just simply needs to be more
enforcement. I won't spend too much time on that because I
think it's been stressed quite a bit.
But again, I am grateful for the opportunity to present my
experiences with the Indian Arts and Crafts Act. The challenges
are definitely many, but through further definition and
clarification, I think we can continue to step forward and
protect the interests of our Native artists and their art
forms. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Maybee follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dallin Maybee, Chief Operating Officer,
Southwestern Association for Indian Arts (SWAIA)
Good morning, my name is Dallin Maybee, I am Northern Arapaho and
Seneca from the Spoonhunter and Maybee family's. I am the Chief
Operating Officer of the Southwestern Association for Indian Arts
(SWAIA), the non-profit that produces the world-renowned Santa Fe
Indian Market, which is currently in its 96th year. I have an extensive
background in Native American performing arts, in the visual arts, and
in Federal Indian law.
I would like to thank the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs for
the opportunity to speak to you today about my experience and insights
on the Indian Arts and Crafts Act.
The Indian Arts and Crafts Act was a welcome addition to the world
of Indian Art. Meant to be a buffer and safeguard to the economic
opportunities of our communities, artists have been able to see
firsthand the significance of the act as they produce artforms and
narratives that often present aspects of their cultural identity that
they choose to share with the world. As an artist for most of my life,
I would create the elaborate outfits I wear in social and ceremonial
settings, often spending hundreds of hours just on the beadwork and
feather-work alone. As a participating artist at the Santa Fe Indian
Market, my eyes were opened to the economic opportunity that the Native
art market offered, as people appreciated my creativity and
continuation of art forms that we have often been practicing for
generations. Often utilitarian in usage, some everyday forms have
evolved into fine art forms in which our artists are able to receive
suitable compensation for. Like most perceived opportunities for gain,
many of these forms were copied and reproduced, robbed of the native
soul and creativity that often accompanies authenticity. I have
recently heard first hand from a Navajo Jeweler whose acquired skills
began at the age of 12, under the lessons of his silversmith father. He
related how he was providing for himself at 14 through his jewelry
skills, but given the competition during the 1980's, at the age of 17
he was producing examples for a non-native dealer and working side by
side with 40 non-native jewelers to reproduce these items which were
then sold as ``Native'' made. Thankfully, the ``truth in advertising''
component of the Act protects our artists to some extent.
SWAIA, the non-profit that produces the Santa Fe Indian Market
(Indian Market), holds a prestigious and venerated place amongst all
Native fine art markets. With humble beginnings in 1922, our market has
bolstered and supported generations of Native artists, elevating
traditional art forms and in many cases, evolving them. Artists who are
able to jury into the competitive market find a venue unlike any other,
a place where almost 100,000 people descend upon Santa Fe to experience
one of the most beautiful and expressive forms of our cultural
identity. In addition to fine art, we partner with the Smithsonian
Institution's National Museum of the American Indian to present film
and our additional programming includes a Gala auction, art previews,
traditional and Couture fashion events, performing arts, and of course,
food. Many markets look to our high-level standards requirements as a
model for authenticity, and even foreign countries have sent
representatives to meet with us in an effort to learn our model for
elevating ``traditional art and craft forms'' to high level fine art.
As thought leaders for a constantly evolving dynamic of how people
define ``Native'' art, our foundation is the artists themselves. We
currently accept artists from across all tribes in the United States,
and have recently began accepting First Nations artists from Canada. We
do require that the participating artists provide proof of enrollment
or as Tribal Certified Artisans as per the Act. Year after Year,
artists bring their most exciting pieces to Indian Market in the hopes
of garnering one of our coveted prize ribbons and accompanying award.
These represent achievement of the highest level, not only in the realm
of the creative, but in technical mastery and expertise in the form as
well. Exquisite jewelry forms, traditional dolls, carved masks, and
textiles routinely garner Best in Show next to more recognizable forms
of paintings or sculptures. It is amongst these exciting opportunities
that the Act has helped to protect, that we have also seen the biggest
issues and violations.
Appropriation sees many forms in the Native art community. While
there has been a healthy exchange of ideas, songs, dances, and ceremony
amongst tribes for generations, there was a protocol and respect
associated with an exchange of ideas. Western ideas of property teach
differently however. Especially in art. We have most recently seen the
appropriation of family designs, often associated with the sacred,
taken by fashion designers who claim to want to ``honor'' or pay homage
to native culture. Others simply recognize the popularity of Native
design and simply hope to gain. Perhaps the most extreme of these, are
those who without enrollment or even descendancy, will appropriate an
entire tribal identity in order to gain economically, spiritually, or
for some other self-serving reason or status. Our certification process
during jurying does eliminate some of these fraudulent artists, but we
cannot simply verify with every tribe the validity of their artists. We
often rely on our relationship with the Indian Arts and Craft Board to
assist us in identifying potential violators. This is a critical
component of our market because attendees are assured that what they
are seeing and experiencing here is genuine and authentic.
Artists are grateful for the enforcement efforts that have been
made to date, but I am sure that the testimony heard today will reflect
a desire for increased resources for continued and ongoing enforcement
efforts. Just as there is trademark and patent protection for
``intellectual property'' concepts, so too should there be for artists
whose commodity and creation isn't simply art, they are cultural
identity concepts. This also places a measure of accountability on
tribes themselves. They must have the mechanisms in place to identify
their cultural patrimony and verify the validity of their claim. The
development of a model mechanism will assist tribes in the creation,
tailoring, and evolution necessary to fulfill this accountability.
Another mechanism that could be facilitated and presented to tribes for
potential adoption would be something to address the Tribal Artisan
Certification process for legitimate descendants who simply don't
fulfill enrollment requirements for their particular tribe.
Again, I am grateful for the opportunity to present my experiences
with the Indian Arts and Crafts Act. While the challenges are many, I
do suspect though that moments like this, further definition and
clarification, will increase the effectiveness of the Act and its
continued protection of Native art forms.
Senator Udall. Thank you so much, Mr. Maybee. And you've
got a real--like all of the witnesses here--they all have real
expertise and something to offer here. We hope all of you, as
you hear this testimony and then walk away from it, will keep
sharing with us your ideas and help us improve on what we have
going on right now, which is some good stuff, I think.
Ms. Begay-Foss, love to hear from you. Please proceed.
STATEMENT OF JOYCE BEGAY-FOSS, DIRECTOR, LIVING
TRADITIONS EDUCATION CENTER, MUSEUM OF INDIAN
ARTS AND CULTURE
Ms. Begay-Foss. Welcome to tribal leadership and officials,
Federal and state officials, and other guests.
Thank you, again, Senator Udall and Senator Heinrich and
the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs for scheduling this
very important field hearing on the topic of the Indian Arts
and Crafts Act.
I am an accomplished weaver for over 40 years, and I have
won numerous awards at the Santa Fe Indian Market. And I've
also showed at the Eight Northern Pueblo show and San Felipe.
So I draw on this expertise as a writer, instructor, and
lecturer on traditional Navajo textiles and dyeing techniques.
I curated several exhibitions at the Museum of Indian Arts and
Culture on Navajo textiles. I've also been involved in
addressing issues and concerns about the intellectual and
cultural property rights of the Southwest tribes, especially
with Dine (Navajo) weavers.
And for many years I've been in contact with local Navajo
weaving association groups, such as Ramah Navajo Weavers
Association, and Sheep is Life, in Navajo, which is Dibebelin .
My clan is the Nakaidine (Mexican clan) born for Tachi'ni,
(Red Running into the Water People). And I was born in
Shiprock, New Mexico. And on my mother's side, that's where I
learned weaving from, was from my great aunts who were weavers.
So they were like--my mother is in her 80s now, and they were
like in their hundreds. I was very fortunate to have that kind
of traditional cultural knowledge from them.
And so my aunts lived around Lukachukai, Arizona. And about
30 miles from Lukachukai in Canyon de Chelly, there's an 800-
foot tall rock called Spider Rock. So as a child, I was told
stories of Spider Woman (Naashjei Asdz ) and said she lived on
top of this rock and that she gave our people this gift of
weaving.
So for the Navajo people, weaving is not just an art form,
the direct connection to our environment and lifeways. Weaving
teaches you stamina and perseverance.
And I didn't put some of this earlier stuff in my written
testimony, but some of the earliest textiles that we have came
from around 1850s and 1880s. This was during the time of Long
Walk. So even during that time, our people persevered and
carried on that traditional knowledge of weaving.
And today, I feel we're losing that cultural knowledge as
well as our language. And it disturbs me that people throughout
the world are misappropriating our traditional designs and
profiting from it.
Our earliest designs came from our baskets, and then they
went into, transitioned into our women dresses, chief blankets,
shoulder and child's blankets. These textiles were finally
woven from handspun warp and weft woolen yarns. Back then
people had their own sheep and goats, and they had to spin it,
so they did not have the resource of buying commercial because
it was in the 1800s or even earlier.
So colors were limited to natural brown, white, black, and
indigo-dyed yarns. In these textiles, patterns were
specifically woven a certain color and placement for a reason.
However, today the import market has taken some of these very
traditional designs and have displaced or rearranged them in
knockoffs that I find offensive. We also have regional styles
throughout the reservation that have been misappropriated as
well. And these styles are Storm Pattern, Ganado, Crystal, Two
Grey Hills, Teec Nos Pos, Yei, and Yeibechai, to name a few.
The Two Grey Hills, Ganado, Crystal are actually chapter
areas. We have 110 chapter houses on the reservation. And so
within these areas, among as weavers, we know, like I come from
Shiprock, and Shiprock area, but I know I'm not going to weave
a Two Grey Hills rug, out of respect.
So that's why we don't really, like, copyright our designs.
It is traditional--Howard brought up it's how we were raised to
weave these patterns. So we know what they mean and how the
placement is and the colors.
So besides the misappropriation of designs in the import
market, Navajo weavers face competition in the lower cost of an
import item. Unfortunately, some consumers prefer to buy a
cheaper knock-off of a Native American design product.
Currently, Navajo knockoffs are being woven in over 15
countries, probably more, including Mexico, Guatemala, Peru,
Thailand, Nepal, India, Ukraine, Moldova--which is near Ukraine
and Romania--Japan, Egypt and Turkey.
Weavers on the reservation have limited--we have limited
venues to sell their rugs. There are few trading posts which
will purchase or trade for rugs or blankets. But again, weavers
are getting a lower price for their weavings. They can also get
their work juried at different art shows in the country. They
can gain recognition for their work, and also collectors or
buyers can have that consumer confidence in their purchases
because the art shows juried work and, you know, they have a
screening process.
There are so many issues. So I'm trying to keep it within
the five minutes, but there are some other issues to be
considered. More education, working with weavers, to have
better labeling on their weavings, like saying cultural
affiliation. Like we could say it's Navajo or Dine, a
description of your weaving patterns, the materials that you
use, because we not only have traditional and contemporary,
we--I could weave a Navajo rug made out of acrylic yarns.
The Federal law will not protect you as a buyer. It just
says it has to be Indian made. It doesn't say it has to be
wool. So some buyers might buy a wool rug that might be--have
different fibers, and then they get upset, because it's not
what they thought they had purchased.
Museums and juried art markets should have how to buy
Indian art on their websites. And I'm going to talk to my
museum director in my art department to see what we can do to
do that.
And then also Indian Arts and Crafts Board, I think they
need to hold more workshops nationally on different issues
regarding Native American art, not only just for artists but
for the general public. I am currently working with the Board
on the Navajo weaving brochure, and the museum is providing
images of some of our textiles.
So it's very important that we need to educate consumers,
and we also need to address, you know, the issue of the
importing. Even in the country, though, it's not just imported;
it's other designers and other people that are using Native
American designs, not just in weaving, but in basketry, in
jewelry, pottery, everything.
And there's only 12 states; Alaska, Arizona, California,
Colorado, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, South Dakota and Texas that have enacted laws
prohibiting the misrepresentation of Indian arts and crafts. I
think other states need to enact laws as well. Because we have
those other issues of the cultural objects and how we're going
to prevent people from taking them.
And we need stricter U.S. Custom laws regarding imported
non-Native American products coming into the country. And under
the former statements earlier, there are obvious--many
manufacturers that can be identified.
So thank you again, Senators, and the Committee for
allowing me to submit testimony regarding the issues about
Navajo weaving.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Begay-Foss follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joyce Begay-Foss, Director, Living Traditions
Education Center, Museum of Indian Arts and Culture
Thank you to Senator John Hoeven, and the U.S. Senate Committee on
Indian Affairs for scheduling a field hearing on the topic of the
Indian Arts and Crafts Act.
I am an accomplished weaver for over 40 years and have won numerous
awards at the Santa Fe Indian Market, the Eight Northern Pueblos Arts
and Crafts Show and the San Felipe Arts and Crafts Show. I draw on this
expertise as a writer, instructor and lecturer on traditional Navajo
textiles and dyeing techniques. I have curated several exhibitions at
the Museum of Indian Arts and Culture on Navajo textiles. I have been
involved in addressing issues and concerns of intellectual and cultural
property rights of the SW tribes especially with Dine (Navajo) weavers.
I am in contact with local Navajo weaving groups such as Ramah Navajo
Weavers Association and Sheep is Life (Dibe be Iina). http://
navajolifeway.org
My clan is Nakaiidine (Mexican Clan) born for Tachii'ni (Red
Running into the Water People). I was born in Shiprock, New Mexico and
on my mother's side my great aunts were weavers and lived in
Lukachukai, Arizona. About 30 miles from Lukachukai in Canyon de Chelly
there is an 800 foot tall rock spire (Spider Rock). As a child, I was
told stories of Spider Woman (Naashjeii Asdzaa ) and that she lives on
top of that rock and that she gave the Navajo people the gift of
weaving. For the Navajo people weaving is not just an artform but a
direct connection to our environment and lifeways. Today I feel we are
losing the cultural knowledge as well as our language. It also disturbs
me that people throughout the world are misappropriating our
traditional designs and profiting from it.
Cultural Misappropriation of design by import market
Our earliest designs came from our baskets and then transitioned
into our women's dresses, chief blankets, shoulder and child's
blankets. These textiles were finely woven from handspun warp and weft
woolen yarns.
Colors were limited to natural brown, white, black and indigo dyed
yarns. In these textiles patterns were specifically woven a certain
color and placement for a reason. However, today the import market has
taken some of these very traditional designs and have displaced or
rearranged them in knock-offs that I find offensive. We also have
regional styles throughout the reservation that have been
misappropriated as well. These styles are: Storm Pattern, Ganado,
Crystal, Two Grey Hills, Teec Nos Pos, Yei and Yeibechai to name a few.
Navajo Rug Economy
Besides the misappropriation of designs of the import market Navajo
weavers face competition in the lower cost of the imported item.
Unfortunately some consumers prefer to buy a cheaper knock-off of a
Native American designed product. Currently Navajo knock-offs are being
woven in over 15 countries, including Mexico, Guatemala, Peru,
Thailand, Nepal, India, the Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, Japan, Egypt and
Turkey.
Weavers on the reservation have limited venues to sell their rugs.
There are a few trading posts which will purchase or trade for rugs/
blankets but again weavers are probably getting a lower price for their
weavings. Weavers that can get their work juried at different arts
shows in the country can gain recognition for their work and also
collectors can have consumer confidence in their purchases.
Other issues to be considered:
Weavers need to have better labels on their weavings showing:
Cultural affiliation (i.e. Navajo/Dine), Description of weaving
and materials used.
Museums and art markets should have: How To Buy Authentic
Native American Art on their websites.
Indian Arts and Crafts Board should be holding workshops
nationally on different issues regarding Native American Indian
Art for Native Artists as well as the general public. Currently
working with Indian Arts And Crafts Board on a Navajo weaving
brochure. This brochure in very important to educate consumers
and also to address import/knock-off Navajo weavings.
Only 12 states--Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado,
Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma,
South Dakota, and Texas--have enacted laws prohibiting the
misrepresentation of Indian arts and crafts. Other states need
to enact laws as well.
Have stricter US custom laws regarding imported non-Native
American Indian Art products coming into the country. There are
obvious manufacturers that can be identified.
Thank you, Senators and the Committee for allowing me to submit my
testimony regarding the issues about Navajo weaving.
Senator Udall. Thank you so much, Miss Begay-Foss.
And I once again thank all the witnesses. And because you
presented such insightful testimony, I have a number of
questions here that kind of probe down on what some of you have
testified to today.
Mr. Martinez, in your--you've done a lot of law enforcement
work. You've worked in various capacities here in New Mexico.
You testified that one of the challenges you face in enforcing
the IACA is its failure to address importers of Native
American-style merchandise.
How would a clear country of origin label help to prosecute
violators of the IACA?
Mr. Martinez. Vice Chairman Udall, that is crucial in your
consideration from my perspective, because one of the things
that you need to show when you're prosecuting these cases is
knowledge. And so if you have a clear label of a country of
origin on the product itself, that would help the future
prosecutors going forward as far as, did the person who's
importing the product have knowledge or is the person who's
buying the product and then selling it retail have knowledge.
Senator Udall. And so it sounds like that could be the
difference.
Mr. Martinez. Very much so, sir.
Senator Udall. One of the goals that I have in mind
strengthening the IACA so that we dismantle counterfeit
operations in their entirety, how could amending the law to
include a forfeiture clause help to do that?
Mr. Martinez. Well, through a forfeiture clause, Vice
Chairman Udall, it would allow that future prosecutor to seize
the money from the operation, seize the proceeds from the
operation, and seize any merchandise that was bought from those
proceeds.
Senator Udall. And in a forfeiture, you don't necessarily
need a criminal conviction in order to do a forfeiture, is that
correct, or would you be recommending the two be combined
together?
Mr. Martinez. Well, you have both civil and criminal
forfeiture. In this Act, I would, from my personal perspective,
I would recommend that you look at a criminal forfeiture,
Section 4, amending this Act.
Senator Udall. Okay, great. Thank you.
Now, you in your testimony talked about, Mr. Martinez,
seven recommendations. How would you order those in terms of
the most important and the most urgent?
Mr. Martinez. Well, the first recommendation that I would
have is--and this goes back to part of your original question--
was that there's two places to target; the merchandise being
brought into the country and then the point of sale of the
merchandise in the country itself.
So I respectfully recommend that you look at adjusting the
statute to look at those two points separately. Also, again,
just stating what you already mentioned in the question, it's
crucial that this statute have--it makes clear that there
should be an indelible country of origin marking. Because right
now, what the prosecutors need to do is, they need to go a
civil--to the Civil Rule, 19 C.F.R. 134.43. But if you can
incorporate that requirement in the statute itself, that's
going to make a difference.
Also, you mention a forfeiture. That's crucial. 18 U.S.C.
1956, it's important that you incorporate Section 1159 as a
specified unlawful activity. Also, something that is absolutely
crucial here is, the U.S. Attorneys' Office, they go after
organizations, and one of the sections is 2516, 18 2516.
That's the authorization for a wiretap statute. And if you can
make Section 1159 as an offense for investigation, that would
be very important for the fact that again, in going to
knowledge, one of the best ways that you prove knowledge is
communication.
So if there comes a time in the future that a U.S.
Attorneys' Office needs to investigate an investigation, and
they're able to prove to the Court that a wiretap is necessary,
that would help prove knowledge, that communication.
Senator Udall. Thank you. And I'm going--I may come back to
you in a minute or so.
Mr. Pratt, in your testimony, you gave the real-world
example of your brother. A person purchased his work, then
replicated it and sold the replicas as authentic. Did your
brother file a complaint with the Indian Arts and Crafts Board
or did he take legal action on his own?
Mr. Pratt. He took legal action on his own, once he
discovered that his work was being duplicated. That rarely
happens in the Indian world. They don't have the funds to do
those things. And my brother had the funds to do that and
stopped this guy from doing that and made him pay royalties and
seek what he had left.
Senator Udall. So he was successful in his legal action,
but obviously in a legal action, you have to hire a lawyer, you
have to pay the lawyer on an hourly basis, and then you hope to
win, but you never know, because there's always two sides of a
story in legal cases.
Mr. Pratt. And we see that a lot among Indian artists; that
they don't have the assets to do that.
Senator Udall. Yes.
Mr. Pratt. And if they complain to somebody, they don't
have the knowledge to pursue it.
Senator Udall. What was the role of Federal law
enforcement, if any, in your brother's case?
Mr. Pratt. None.
Senator Udall. None.
Was it reported through various law enforcement channels
and outlets?
Mr. Pratt. I think he discovered himself when he saw his
work had been duplicated. He originally did it in bronze and
the man was duplicating it in silver. When he realized that was
his work in silver, he didn't do it, he found out who was
selling it under his name as a limited edition. And he filed a
charge against him.
Senator Udall. Now, Mr. Martinez, like any agency, we are
oftentimes forced to juggle priorities when we have limited
resources. As U.S. Attorney, what was your particular interest
in pursuing these counterfeit cases, and would you like to see
the current U.S. Attorneys' Office keep on the same path?
Mr. Martinez. Vice Chairman Udall, here in New Mexico, the
U.S. Attorneys' Office have great responsibility. We have two
national labs. We have military bases. There's immigration
issues. There's crime issues. There's a drug epidemic and then
what we're talking about today. So with the limited resources,
it was important to try to figure out how to prioritize and try
to get the limited resources to all these issues that we're
talking about.
As stated on your first panel, one of the things that was
absolutely crucial was good partnership with the law
enforcement agencies and, to the extent possible, with the
community when you're doing investigation.
And so what was important in prioritizing is the amount of
damage that's occurring in each investigation. The topic that
we're talking about today is extremely damaging to the Native
American community and with the U.S. Attorneys' Office has a
trust responsibility to the Native American community.
And as some of the panelists have already told you, this is
damaging to the heritage, it's damaging to the culture, and
then as part of that consideration, too, is a large part of the
economy in New Mexico is tourism. And it's also damaging there
if people can't trust what they're buying.
And just lastly answering your question, it is my hope, and
I have to believe that the next U.S. attorney will also keep
this as a priority.
Senator Udall. And I think it's important as a priority,
and I will be conveying that to whoever becomes the next U.S.
attorney.
And I hope that the acting U.S. attorney, which sometimes,
you know, the acting U.S. attorneys, if they're listening and
understand how important this is, sometimes they serve a--for a
matter of months in these kinds of situations. And so they're
the top person at the office.
Please go ahead.
Mr. Martinez. Vice Chairman, the current acting U.S.
attorney is Jim Tierney. He was first assistant in the office.
He has over 33 years of experience in the office. And after
having him as my supervisor and having worked with him, I have
no doubt that this is a priority for him and for this office.
Senator Udall. Great. Thank you so much.
Mr. Martinez, when I was attorney general of New Mexico,
you may recall that many of the complaints that came into my
office were from individuals that felt they were getting a bad
deal. So we took action under State law that had been on the
books for quite a while. But it seemed to me there should be
much more coordination between state, local, and tribal
authorities.
As U.S. attorney, did you work with nonFederal authorities
on any of these particular cases?
Mr. Martinez. Yes, Vice Chairman Udall. What we tried to do
is take the comprehensive approach. The basic is prosecution.
But also what we did is, we had a tribal liaison, and we tried
to make sure that we were touching base with the tribes as
often as possible. We also had listening sessions where we
tried to bring all of the tribes together so that they could
bring us input on how the U.S. Attorneys' Office was doing--
good or bad.
And then also from a regional perspective, we also--and
during my last year, we hosted the Four Corners Conference
where we brought together the U.S. Attorneys' Office from Utah,
Colorado, and Arizona, and the various players in these areas
to try to talk as a collective of what we were doing right and
what we were doing wrong to be better in the future.
Senator Udall. And my understanding, when you were the U.S.
attorney, you initiated efforts with the leaders of the Indian
Nations here in New Mexico and asked their input and how to do
better in the job which you were doing, which I'm sure you
heard about these issues in that context.
Mr. Martinez. Yes. Vice Chairman Udall, with the limited
resources we had, we were trying to get out and talk to the
community as much as possible.
Senator Udall. Do you think it would be possible to have a
joint Federal-state-tribal task force to implement a
coordinated enforcement response?
Mr. Martinez. Yes, Vice Chairman Udall, to the extent
possible. Sometimes you can't do it when you're doing an
investigation. But to bring folks together in a collective and
try to talk through the issues, one of the most important
things is getting people to the table. And that would show that
it's a priority.
Senator Udall. Mr. Maybee, an issue that concerns me is the
impact of fake, mass-produced goods that are marketed as
authentic Indian arts and crafts on the local economy. As an
executive at SWAIA, do you have any experience with Native
vendors at Indian Market or elsewhere being impacted by
counterfeiters of their work?
Mr. Maybee. Absolutely. Obviously, it's disconcerting to
hear about an artist going into a local shop and see their
hallmark piece of work that they didn't touch. As I talked to
other artists. And as an artist myself, you know all the pieces
that you've produced in your career, you're very familiar with
them and the techniques. And so there is a direct economic
impact on the artists when they see counterfeits.
And even then, it's the dynamic between what we do as an
organization in terms of educating our visitors and our
collectors. We give two licensing agreements to magazines to
produce, and give Market publications that are very heavy on
educating our collectors and casual visitors, even, as to
what's the difference between a thousand dollar squash blossom
necklace and maybe a $40 squash blossom necklace that they can
find in a shop 20 feet away, often, from artists at Indian
Market itself.
And so it's not just the fraudulence. It's the level of
standards that are often being seen. In my written testimony, I
related an experience of just recently talking to an artist who
started his career at the age of 12, and at the age of 14 was
using his jewelry skills to provide for himself. But at 17, the
competition was so strict, he actually went to work for a
dealer who employed 40 additional non-Native artists to produce
works that he would produce.
He produced a piece, and the dealer would ask him what he
would ask for that and take it to his non-Native jewelers and
said, ``What can you produce this for?'' And often pennies on
the dollar in comparison. He only did that for a short time,
but it was mainly a matter of survival.
Even today, you can go into the shops in Gallup and see
artists who, as a matter of survival, have to undercut each
other, because there's 30 other people who will sell--30 other
Natives, often--who will sell because of--at a lower price
point, these pieces of work, because the dealer will sell them
and very unscrupulous and unethical in how they deal with the
compensation for these artists.
Senator Udall. Do you know if Native vendors have been
forced to lower prices to compete with the wholesale
counterfeits flooding the market elsewhere?
Mr. Maybee. Not so much at our market. We've--we have the
luxury of having presented authenticity, high-level standards
for decades. Generations of artists have been able to utilize
the strength of our market and the prestige in order to gain
what is fair prices for their work.
But for the rest of the 363 days out of the year,
absolutely. If they are struggling to find representation in
galleries or find commission work, they have to undersell
themselves often, because the dealers know, If I don't get
something from this artist, I can go get something similar. And
for some, it will be straight counterfeits.
Senator Udall. Mr. Pratt, I understand you wear multiple
hats and have a wealth of experience not only as a master
artist but as a former law enforcement officer and the Chairman
of the Indian Arts and Crafts Board.
Can you provide some perspective on whether the IACA is
serving its intended purpose, and if it's not, ways that we can
improve the law.
Mr. Pratt. Well, I think that since 2014, that Indian Arts
and Crafts Board and the Indian Arts and Crafts Act has had
some success. Prior to that, I think it was very limited
because of no enforcement. We had a hard time getting
enforcement to enforce laws, because local-state-tribal
authorities didn't have the expertise in these specific crimes.
And they were limited to just serve jurisdictions.
So they couldn't--many times couldn't cross into other
jurisdictions. So I think it was very limited as what we were
doing. What we did in 2015, and prior to that, with Fish and
Wildlife, that had great impact. I think it opened a lot of
people's eyes that things have changed.
And I think I saw that in the past when my brother did
that. It made this man change his whole technique about what he
was doing. He said, ``I've been doing that for 30 years. No one
ever stopped me.''
He said, ``It's a new age.''
And I think we see that. Task forces, I think, would be--if
we could get people trained, if we could train people at
Artesia, train people in Georgia, in the Federal services, to
cooperate and realize that this is a tremendous impact on the
Indian people and on our economy; that we could train people to
pursue these cases.
And the Arts and Crafts Act is instrumental in that, in not
only protecting artisans but protecting collectors. And I think
that's really important.
Senator Udall. Thank you. And I think it's important. Like
you say, it is a new age. And if people are violating the law,
we're going to be coming after them, and they will be brought
to justice.
As a Native artist, Mr. Pratt, how are knockoffs impacting
your livelihood? Do you believe under-enforcement of the IACA
is part of the problem?
Mr. Pratt. I do. I think under-enforcement is part of the
problem. People have been doing things for years, you know. You
can sell a piece of art, an original painting to someone. And
over the years I've seen that thing end up as a print, as a
limited edition print, and the artists have nothing to do with
it. Artists have never received any kind of royalties at all
over those prints and that's just in that.
You see that same thing in sculptures, in duplicating those
things. And Indians don't pursue it.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Joyce, you're working with the IABC to educate consumers on
how to buy authentic Navajo rugs. Why is consumer education so
important to preserving the cultural integrity of traditional
Navajo weaving?
Ms. Begay-Foss. That's a good question. Well, I think we
still have a lot of consumers are not very educated about
Navajo weavings, because they're still buying the imported or
even knockoffs, as they call them, products. And then even
there are other designers--I won't mention their names--but
there are companies that produce other products. The designs
are taken from Navajo weavings as well.
But the thing that I've been working with Meredith's
office, even when I was chair, like, three or four years ago, I
brought that issue up to her again. And then I also helped her
on a case involving a Navajo weaver trying to sell an imported
rug.
But the thing is that consumers look at something and say,
``Oh, that's nice.'' That's a weaving, and they just assume
that it was made by a Native person, and it has that Southwest
Native design. And then they get home, and they realize, ``Oh,
my God, this is not even an authentic product.''
Even at the museum, we have people come in and bring in--
they want to know, ``Is this a weaving?'' And they ask me. I
have visitors that come to the museum. And as a curator and a
weaver, I say, ``No, this is a Mexican rug or an imported rug.
It is not authentic.''
And they really get upset. They go, ``Oh, my gosh.''
And so with the brochure, what we want to do is, like I
said in my testimony, we need to get the weavers to say, ``Yes,
this is my rug. I'm Navajo. This is the style that I weave,
whether it's Two Grey Hills, or it's my own personal style.
It's made out of wool. It's hand dyed. The warp and weft are
wool,'' or whatever it's made out of.
Because Federal law does not protect the consumer on the
materials. And this goes true with all the other art
categories, like pottery and jewelry. You know, we have this
huge issue with block turquoise. It's not even real turquoise
or coral. I don't know, I could go on and on about the jewelry.
But with the weaves, yeah, I think it's very important,
because it is affecting the Navajo weavers. So, like, they can
barely get 2- or $300 for a small rug today. And that's, like,
a couple of hundred hours. And it's, like, barely a dollar an
hour. So if you go and you look at, like, some of these
imported rugs they sell along the streets, even at, you know,
different markets or, you know--what do you call them, flea
market type shows, places--you get them for, like, 15, $20,
$30. Nothing. To me, I can tell. I'm like, you know, you're
getting what you pay for. But, you know, they think they're
getting, like, this Native product.
So that's why I think it's important throughout the
brochure and to educate the consumer and our Native artists
that there is a Federal law, and they have to comply with it.
But that's at the Federal level. I think we also need to
address state laws, and then I think the tribes--especially
Navajo tribe, too--we need to come to the table. And we need to
set some, I don't know, laws, or whatever.
But I think we need to have some educational things on how
to buy products from our communities, whether we have laws or
whatever information. Or even if they could have, like, a
consumer complaint place, you know, within the different tribal
communities and bring up these issues, because we have to start
somewhere.
We don't--you know, through all our state and Federal
agencies, you know, there's no--there's limited funding. But I
think at the grass-roots level in tribal communities, I think
we need to watch out for each other, and we need to help. Our
people can do that, and that's is how I do it. I talk to the
weavers, like Sheep is Life and Ramah Navajo Weavers, and they
tell me, you know, ``We're having a hard time. We can't make a
living.''
And, you know, Navajo Nation is remote. There are weavers
that live 30, 40 miles from a store. And for them to take their
rug and try to sell it to get groceries, you know, it's
devastating when you don't have that $50 or $100 to last you a
few more days.
So it's economically, and it's culturally, and it's a
very--I don't know--distressing topic that we're talking about
today.
Senator Udall. Now, Joyce, what other action can the IACB
or Congress take to ensure and build consumer confidence in
Indian arts and crafts?
Ms. Begay-Foss. Well, it just comes down to educating
people, I think. What are you buying? I mean, you can go buy a
diamond ring; you go to a jeweler, ``Is that gold, 14 carat
gold?''
I think there are not enough questions asked by the
consumers when they buy Indian art. They have to look at
Federal. Okay. So this person--so the Federal law says it has
to be Indian. What does ``Indian'' mean? I think that
definition needs to be elaborated on saying that you need to
ask Native American artists--even the word ``Indian,'' people
don't like the word ``Indian.'' ``Native American,'' ``American
Indian.'' But they need to go by cultural affiliation.
So I can say, ``Yeah, made in China,'' well, where in China
is that made? I can't find that as a consumer. But let's say,
you know, going back to Indian. If it just said, ``Indian
made.'' What the heck does that tell you?
So my responsibility as an artist and as a weaver, I can
say, ``No, you're buying a Navajo rug from me. It's 30-by-30
inches. It's a saddle blanket. It's made out of churro wool. I
have indigo dyes.'' I sign that, and I give it to my buyer.
That's a done deal.
But if the same buyer goes to another weaver and buys it,
let's say, not just a Native buyer but a non-Native buyer,
because they think it looks Native, and they buy it. ``Oh, I
thought I bought a Native American product.''
I say, ``Well, where's your receipt? Where's your proof?''
Has to go to provenance or some kind of a guarantee of
authenticity. We have to go to that level, I think, some kind
of authenticity certification, receipt from the artist. I think
that's going to be our thing that will hold up.
Senator Udall. Joyce, you testified that for Navajo people,
weaving isn't just an art form but a direct connection to your
environment and to lifeways. Weaving is also a big part of what
you describe as the Navajo rug economy. Can you elaborate on
the impact of Navajo rug knockoffs from abroad, on cultural
knowledge and the future of traditional Navajo weaving.
Ms. Begay-Foss. Well, first of all, I can say in my
testimony, it's very disturbing. And I really get upset about
it, because they're misusing our designs. And, in fact, behind
you, there are some baskets that are imported on the wall. And
those are Navajo baskets, and I really do not like how they
misuse even the design of our Navajo culture, because that
represents our mountains. That's your life.
All these designs and symbols--especially the traditional
designs, not just from our people but throughout our country--
our Native people, these early designs mean something to our
people. It's beyond--it's sacrilegious, in a way, how they just
totally distort and misappropriate the use of the design. And
we were taught, growing up, what these designs and patterns
meant. So each of the weavers would know what I was--we'd be
talking about. It's our connection to the sheep and the horses
and the lifeways and, you know, being on the reservation.
Those of us that do--I do natural dyes, so I use rabbit
brush. I use sumac and the Native tea. I use indigo, cochineal,
and that's connection to those lifeways I'm talking about.
You talk about storm pattern. There's things about
cosmology with what the lightning, and the placing even of our
four sacred mountains.
I could go on and on. I mean--so to me, these imported
designers or people that are taking our designs, and they're
abusing--I don't know how to explain it. It's misappropriating,
it's abusing our--it goes into the Native American Religious
Freedom Act. It's a violation of using our symbol--it's not
just a symbol. These things mean something to our people.
I think it's not just the Navajo. It's all of our people
throughout the country. And so I think that comes into cultural
and intellectual property rights.
Senator Udall. Joyce, thank you. The fake baskets on
display, the point we're making today is, there needs to be
better awareness. I mean, there's no doubt about that. I think
all of our witnesses are very much in agreement there. And one
of the things that we need is an informed public to know what
they're buying.
Does the New Mexico Museum of Indian Arts and Culture,
which is a very popular tourist destination, does that museum
play a role in educating the public on buying authentic Indian
arts and crafts? In your opinion, is there any reason to
increase public awareness of fake Indian arts and crafts, would
be in the best interests of Native artists or the market?
Ms. Begay-Foss. Yes, we do off and on, especially during
Indian Market. We will have invited the Indian Arts and Crafts
Board. They've done presentations at the museum. We also had
intellectual cultural property rights, a person coming in,
Deborah Peacock from Albuquerque, she's a lawyer, and she did
some presentations.
We try to work with artists, too, and educate them. But
like I mentioned in my testimony, I think we need to maybe look
at putting that online. And I think all of these things, you
have the Hurd Museum--especially museums that have, like,
Native art shows. We have Native treasures, too. It's an art
show, several hundred artists show it in May. And it's a good
venue for artists, too.
So yes, we are trying. Once a month we do have a program
called, ``Let's Take a Look.'' But that's when people just
bring in things just for us to identify. We don't do
appraisals, because you know, we can't do that. We can't do
appraisals. But we can tell them if it's authentic or not.
But there is a tremendous need for that. And there are a
lot of people that are wanting those type of services or want
to learn or read about it. So the public is interested in that.
Senator Udall. Great. Now, the last couple of questions
here for the artists on the panel. Where do you see the future
of the Indian arts and crafts business if we don't update the
law to include better enforcement? And do you see a role for
tribal governments in the future enforcement of the IACA?
Mr. Pratt, why don't you go ahead, and we'll work down the
line.
Mr. Pratt. I know Oklahoma has 39 federally recognized
tribes; 22 of those tribes have their own law enforcement, and
many of their law enforcements are very large. And the other 17
are law enforced by the BIA. And I think that some tribes are
making steps to do something to protect their artists. Not all
the tribes are doing it.
I think that there should be some kind of training programs
to the tribes to make them more aware of the laws and how to
protect their own artisans. And I think at that point, an
education of the public and collectors is going to be extremely
important to know who you buy from. Buy from reputable
galleries.
Senator Udall. Mr. Maybee?
Mr. Maybee. Yes. I believe that without increased fine-
tuning of the Act itself to strengthen it, not only in terms of
enforcement, but also the education on the part of people
interested and wanting to engage in Native art. You know, the
fraudsters and the dealers of counterfeits, they get savvy. And
they are savvy, and they'll increasingly move towards better
techniques to defraud consumers.
And we'll hopefully never see the market slide back to what
it was back in the '60s and '70s and '80s. So it's going to
take some increased efforts on the part of the Act. That
doesn't absolve tribes of their own accountability for creating
mechanisms to certify unenrolled artisans who have legitimate
descendancy.
It is within the tribe's purview to define the membership,
but they can go a step further and engage artists who are
simply in the business of protecting their art forms and
narratives.
A large component of what we do at Indian Market is, we
allow for the evolution of art forms. We don't dictate to the
artisans what they should or shouldn't create; whether it
should be X amount of traditional forms or contemporary forms.
That stuff evolves organically. We simply encourage them to
keep producing art.
Because more often than not, those art forms are direct
translations of who they are as people. They engage their
lifeways, their traditional and ceremonial narratives. They do
a pretty good job of policing themselves and not delve too much
into the cultural patrimony. We want to encourage that. We want
them to be as expressive as possible and simply be artists and
not just Native artists.
The Internet is a very real threat. It is very
disheartening to see that not too many prosecutions have
occurred over the Internet when all trends indicate that the
Internet is going to simply continue to explode exponentially
in terms of the amount of commerce that engages in what is
often a very anonymous arena.
Dealers can create an eBay website and have it disappear a
week later after they have sold significant counterfeits. It
makes it very difficult to prosecute some instances where there
still is a little bit of anonymity, especially for an unsavvy
collector, a person who wants to delve into the area of Indian
art.
Senator Udall. Joyce?
Ms. Begay-Foss. Well, with the Act itself, I would like to
see them change the term ``Indian'' and look more at cultural
affiliation for artists. And then also addressing the issue of
tribal--what do you call it, like, ``blood quantum''?
If there's a way that they can work with tribal leadership,
because I know there are families that have--that intermarry or
they marry outside. And then--like for me, for example, my
grandkids. They're Navajo, but they're not enough Navajo.
So anyway, they come from a strong lineage of ancestral
Navajo people, because my great-grandma is Dine, Navajo.
Anyway, forget the tribe, forget the government. They're still
Dine, no matter what. We are a matriarchal society, so even
among our own people and own clans, we do that.
But I think there needs to be something at the tribal level
to help some of our other artists, because I think we're going
to lose more of those type of artisans in that definition. And
we also need to educate the people, artists, and the general
public. I mean, it's just ongoing. You have to keep educating
people.
I think at the tribal level they need to work more closely
at the Federal level and how the Indian Arts and Crafts Board
carry out their mission for this big giant import, you know,
counterfeit cloud here. We're way over here, and there's this
big storm over here. I see this big storm. I don't know how to
clear it, to get rid of it, but it's always going to be there,
I think.
But we need to work--I think it's a matter of working
together as agencies and as people to work on this ongoing
issue, because it's not going to go away. I think we really
need to just work together.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much.
Just as a final question to the whole panel or giving you
an opportunity to just sum up here, is there anything that
you've heard that you want to agree or disagree with, or is
there something that we haven't given you the opportunity in
terms of asking questions to comment on?
Joyce, why don't you start with you and work to the left.
Ms. Begay-Foss. I think we overall--everyone has some very
empowering comments at many different levels. I would like to
see more--if we have another hearing on this issue at the
tribal level with our leadership and just hear what they have
to say and how they can work together with your office at the
Federal and then at the state level. And then, you know, look
even at revisiting even our state law, and really looking and
identifying the, like, the Indian art markets, with Dallin, you
know, the Hurd Museum. And, you know, there's other art markets
throughout the country, looking at some of the standards, how
we can help our consumers.
Because they're the ones that are buying the work. I mean,
so you've got to look at, Who are we targeting? And who do we
want to listen to us? Who can help us?
So it is just figuring out all the players. I think it is
very important to me that myself as a Navajo and member of the
Navajo Tribe, that I would like to hear from my leadership on
this very issue.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Dallin?
Ms. Shappert. So I'm highly encouraged by the efforts that
have come from the Federal, state, and even the local level.
The City of Santa Fe recently enacted an ordinance that created
an Indian Act Zone that mimics the Act in a lot of ways on a
state and Federal level with a little bit of an enforcement
issue.
They do say that for those vendors who are unscrupulous in
their business practice, they can have the potential of having
their business license revoked or taken away. It would be nice
to see cooperation on the state level if those prosecutions do
come through. They can recommend to the City of Santa Fe.
It's elusive, I know. Oftentimes ownership will shift hands
from one relative to the next in a span of a day or two. But
that does send a message. In terms of the Act itself, one point
I wanted to make was, you know, we live in a world where the
laws often have to define every aspect. We see it in trademark,
in patent law, areas of the law I was not a fan of in law
school.
But it was necessary. There's often resistance to defining
things to a point, but I think with enough conversation, yes,
we can recognize it. It's not enough to simply say, ``Oh, this
is inspired by'' or ``I'm paying homage to.''
That is very much a loophole to the Indian Arts and Crafts
Act. So if we can continue to work towards those definitions of
who is an Indian, what does it mean to be a Native artisan or
to create Native art, I think we still need to move forward.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
Harvey?
Mr. Pratt. I think that we need to move towards training
and education. Training of law enforcement, workshops with
galleries, with the tribes, make them more knowledgeable of
what their rights are and what they can expect if they discover
something wrong, who they can go to, to effect a result;
whether it be on a Federal level or state level, tribal level.
A lot of states have reservations. Oklahoma does not have a
reservation. We have trust lands, allotted lands, and tribal
lands. And allotted land could be in the house next door to
you. It would be tribal land and have no jurisdiction there.
So I think that we need to educate collectors and the
public and artisans and tribes about what they can expect.
Senator Udall. Thanks.
Damon?
Mr. Martinez. Senator, I would ask that in addition to
revising the statute, that you would also consider respectively
contacting the U.S. Department of Homeland Security,
specifically the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol, CBP, because
when they're doing the inspections at the port, they need to
know about the C.F.R. that's currently in place. And if they
come across anything that isn't marked, that they either flag
it or seize it.
And so that's going to be the first line of defense right
there. And thank you for this opportunity to speak to you
today.
Senator Udall. Great. Thank you so much. And I just really
want to thank this panel--the previous panel--but in particular
this panel that I think brought really insightful testimony to
what the harm is, what we're talking about here. And I think
all of us, my staff here, we've learned a lot, and so we really
appreciate you sharing with us and giving these examples and
taking your time to do that.
Since there are no more questions for today, I would like
to remind folks that senators that are on this Committee, they
also submit follow-up written questions to you for the record.
You may get questions from the Chairman. Senator Hoeven really
appreciates that the Chairman sent his top person out here, and
I know that he may visit us in the future, and I may visit him
in North Dakota.
He's been a great chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs
Committee. He's been very interested in the issues that we've
talked about today. And I really hope--he's got many tribes in
North Dakota. I hope I'll have an opportunity to visit Senator
Hoeven there. And so I thank him very much.
The hearing record will be open for two weeks. I thank the
witnesses again for their time and testimony. I just want to
say a word about staff. And thank you, Senator, for being here,
former Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell. He's been here the
whole time listening and hearing all of this.
You know, one of the things that I've learned being a
senator is, to be a good senator, you've got to have a great
staff. And we've had a great staff effort in this entire
operation here. We have the Senate Indian Affairs Committee
staff here. Jennifer Romero and Anthony Sedillo, both of them
are native New Mexicans.
We also have Mike Andrews and Holmes Whalen from Senator
Hoeven's staff. Also, the personal staff of my office that's
helped with all of the organization here; Josh Sanchez, Greg
Bloom, my State director, Alex Jordan, Ned Adrian, Zoey Wilson-
Meyer, and Cal Curlen.
So we appreciate all of the things that they've done, and
I'm going to tap the gavel, but I want you to just recognize
we're also going to recognize--is Jude still here for the
closing prayer?
Okay, terrific.
Senator Campbell, did you--you're going to--you want a
closing comment, a quick one?
Senator Campbell. Yes.
Senator Udall. Please come on up. I call him Senator
Campbell, you don't know I say former senator.
The tradition with senators is, Once a senator, always a
senator. So Senator Campbell, give us your closing.
Senator Campbell. The only advantage of being an ex is, you
don't get as much hate mail.
I really haven't been to a hearing for a long time. I was
really interested in the testimony. I would mention even when I
was the chairman, there is always budget constraints.
Under the present, current budget of President Trump,
there's going to be a 30 percent cut in the Interior's funds.
Part of that money comes out of the Indian Arts and Crafts
Board. Even when I was active in the Senate, they were always
ramming against the edge trying to do more with less. They're
going to need a champion this year, and I know you're going to
be that champion, Mr. Chairman.
This was really interesting to me because about three weeks
from now, as Chairman Maybee will tell you, there will be over
100,000 people in this town, and the vast majority are
wonderful, caring, loving people that are going to spend a lot
of money, visit with Native people, support Native people, and
so on.
But in that 100,000 crowd, just like any crowd of 100,000,
there's going to be a couple of rats. And it's always been that
way with any major group. But in this case, they will be around
photographing or copying right through your glass cases of the
artist. And a month later, you'll see those in a magazine made
in China.
That actually happened to me with a necklace I made one
time years ago. In fact, I think it made it into Indian Market
that year. And within a year later, I saw it in a magazine
which comes from China. Well, where does that leave an
individual craftsman? It leaves you out in the cold. You don't
have the resources to sue them in an international court.
So you just kinda wave, oh, you've been ripped off, and you
can't do anything about it. So as you dream up the new
revisions of the bill, Mr. Chairman, if you can also look at
how we--maybe not protect, maybe that's not a good word--but
educate Native people and how they can record their work,
document their work, and protect themselves, either through
going through a patent office registering the name as a
copyrighted name or at least on their designs, or something of
that nature. Because clearly, there's a big deficit between how
they make something and how they protect it from being
plagiarized.
Thank you so much for this hearing, and thank you for
inviting the old man back.
Senator Udall. Thank you for the closing comments. Really
appreciate that. I'm going to adjourn. But as soon as we
adjourn, we're also going to have Jude up here and recognize
him. He's from the Santa Clara Pueblo to offer the closing
prayer. So the hearing is adjourned.
And Jude, why don't you come up and give us a closing
prayer.
[Closing prayer recited.]
[Whereupon, at 1:13 p.m, the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Prepared Statement of John Molloy, President, ATADA \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ATADA is a professional organization established in 1988 in
order to set ethical and professional standards for the art trade and
to provide education for the public. ATADA membership has grown to
include hundreds of antique and contemporary Native American and
ethnographic art dealers and collectors, art appraisers, and a strong
representation of museums and public charities across the U.S.,
dedicated to the promotion, study and exhibition of Native American
history and culture. www.atada.org. email [email protected], PO Box
45628, Rio Rancho, NM 87174.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATADA is an international organization honoring the artistic vision
of indigenous people. ATADA represents professional dealers of historic
and contemporary tribal art from around the world. We support the
lawful circulation, trade, collection, preservation, appreciation, and
study of art and artifacts from diverse cultures.
Our objectives are to promote ethical and professional conduct
among art dealers, to encourage the responsible collecting, research,
and study of tribal arts and culture, and to educate the public in the
contribution of tribal cultures to the wealth of human experience.
As a condition of membership, ATADA members guarantee the
authenticity of all objects that they offer for sale.
ATADA is deeply concerned by the misrepresentation and mislabeling
of Native American, Native Alaskan, and Native Hawaiian works of art
and craft. Misrepresentation deceives individual consumers and the
public. When misrepresentation occurs, it also damages the reputation
of the art trade as a whole. Bad business practices by a few bad apples
can negatively impact many honest traders, Native artisans, art
dealers, and other important commercial interests. There is a trickle-
down effect to all legislation affecting Indian arts and crafts which
impacts much larger constituencies and business interests, whether they
are those of workers in the cultural tourism industry, or the diverse
businesses that depend upon tourism, especially in the Southwestern
region.
It is early in the legislative process and no specific amendments
to the Indian Arts and Crafts Act have yet been proposed. Without
having actual proposed amendments to respond to, ATADA states that it
supports in principle the amending of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act to
provide greater protections for consumers and the public, Native
artists, and the legitimate art trade. However, ATADA notes that
currently, prosecutors and tribal plaintiffs have excellent tools to
combat fraud and misrepresentation in domestic matters, and to require
proper, indelible labeling in foreign imports. The problem is not that
stronger laws are needed; resolution requires more and stronger
enforcement of existing laws, and funding to ensure that tribes are
equipped to fight using the legal tools already to hand.
Testimony at the hearing by Damon Martinez, former U.S. Attorney
for New Mexico, pointed out the need to distinguish between (1) steps
to improve the U.S. Customs marking requirements for imports to ensure
that the items are not later misrepresented, and (2) steps to halt and
penalize misrepresentation and other unfair business practices in the
U.S.
Proper Marking On Imported Goods
Proper marking is a key issue, as has been made clear by the
descriptions at the hearing of arrests and prosecutions of large scale
wholesalers alleged to have imported copies of Native American jewelry
from the Philippines. Continuing investigations and prosecutions of
individuals and corporate entities found to be engaged in wrongful
wholesale imports appears to be working very well and will put a
significant dent in any fraudulent activity, if it does not end it
altogether.
ATADA recognizes the inherent difficulties in indelibly marking
very small objects (such as certain jewelry items) with the country of
origin. Tagging protocols should not interfere with the lawful
importation and sale of properly identified items. However, packaging
and other options may provide a more flexible mechanism to make clear
the origin of a very small object. Larger items could reasonably be
indelibly marked through a variety of means.
If millions of dollars' worth of fraudulently imported jewelry has
been seized, as stated at the hearing, the federal government ought to
do its best to fill this gap in inventory and at the same time,
encourage economic development that would benefit tribal artists. One
wonders whether the National Park Service could work with the Indian
Arts and Crafts Board or with tribal communities to bring more
authentic Native American arts and crafts into the federal parks'
concessions, especially in Indian Country, and make authenticity a
primary selling point.
Native artists receive recognition for the authenticity of their
work when it is sold in the U.S. or elsewhere is another important
task, in which enforcement of consumer protection laws is key. Marking
options that would distinguish authentic contemporary Native American
artworks and crafts could facilitate enforcement.
Antique items cannot easily be marked without damaging the
integrity of the object. No rules requiring marking should be employed
for antique items. In this situation, consumers should be able to rely
of a written receipt and guarantee that items are as represented;
guaranteeing authenticity is mandatory for ATADA members already.
Authenticity and Consumer Rights Under State Law
ATADA strongly supports strengthened scrutiny of items offered for
sale to the public as Native American and rigorous enforcement of
consumer protections. We note that in New Mexico (and in several other
states) state consumer protection laws can be a significant deterrent
to bad businesses. Government should provide flexibility under the
Indian Arts and Crafts Act for the Indian Arts and Crafts Board to
provide advice and support to plaintiffs regarding state laws as well.
This could enable cases to be brought on behalf of artisans and
consumers at a lower cost, and to reap greater damages from violators.
For example, New Mexico's Indian Arts and Crafts Sales Act, NMSA
1978 30-33-7 makes it unlawful to barter, trade, sell, or offer for
sale or trade any article represented as produced by an Indian unless
the article is produced, designed, or created by the labor or
workmanship of an Indian. NMSA 30-33-10 grants a private right of
action to all consumers, and NMSA 1978 30- 33-6 establishes a duty on
the part of the seller to enquire whether an item is authentically
Indian and a duty to correctly label the item at the point of sale.
Misrepresenting an item as Native American when it is not is a
deceptive trade practice under NMSA 1978 57-12-2.D(4), which
prohibits using deceptive representations or designations of geographic
origin in connection with goods and services. Willful violation of the
standards creates liability for sellers of non-Indian goods under New
Mexico laws of triple actual damages or $300.00, whichever is greater,
under New Mexico's Unfair Practices Act, NMSA 1978 57-12-10.B.
Attorney fees for plaintiffs are more easily available under both
New Mexico's Unfair Practices Act (NMSA 1978 57-12-10.B) and the
Indian Arts and Crafts Sales Act , NMSA 1978 30- 33-1, both of which
provide that on showing of a violation, the court must award attorney
fees and costs.
Copyright and Trademark
Copyright and trademark were also briefly discussed at the hearing.
Much of the discussion surrounding misrepresentation of Indian art at
the hearing was in regard to wholesale importation of jewelry and
textiles in imitation of Native American artistic styles. A ``style''
cannot be copyrighted, and even specific designs that are considered
``traditional'' were never copyrighted and are not eligible to be
copyrighted now under the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-
553, October 19, 1976).
Nonetheless, the specific creations of contemporary jewelers and
weavers may be copyrighted, if they are deemed ``original'' under the
law and meet other copyright requirements. While acknowledging that
federal trademarks can be expensive to acquire, ATADA suggests that
tribal organizations might consider establishing tribal trademarks that
would serve as both an identifying mark and a marketing vehicle. ATADA
supports federal funding to facilitate economic development programs
within the tribes to provide education and assistance in trademark and
copyright for tribal artists and artisans through the Indian Arts and
Crafts Board, tribal heritage offices or tribal governments.
Conclusion
ATADA urges the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs to consult with
tribal government and economic development offices in order to
determine the most direct and effective means of establishing
authenticity for artworks in the market. The most successful measures
will be those that boost consumer confidence and encourage the artists
of the Native American community to continue to produce the outstanding
works of art that represent Native American creativity and skill and
that have come to symbolize the wonderfully diverse and unique
Southwestern culture.
ATADA looks forward to further discussions with the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs on this and all other legislation affecting
the interests of the trade in contemporary and antique Indian art.
______
Prepared Statement of Kathy M'Closkey, Ph.D., Adjunct Associate
Professor/Freelance Curator, Department of Sociology, Anthropology and
Criminology, University of Windsor
I am writing as a U. S. citizen and anthropologist who has
researched how the escalation of knockoffs of Navajo weaving designs is
increasingly impoverishing reservation weavers. I authored Swept Under
the Rug: A Hidden History of Navajo Weaving, UNM Press 2002/2008, and
served as research director of the PBS documentary ``Weaving Worlds,''
directed by Navajo Bennie Klain 2008. Both the book and the film
provide evidence of the destructive effects that knockoffs have had on
diminishing demand for authentic creations.
In her eloquent testimony Joyce Begay-Foss noted that ``we can't
make a living,'' and she mentioned how appropriation of Navajo designs
is in violation of the Native American Religious Freedom Act. It is
also in violation of Articles 11, 20, and 31, of UNDRIP, the UN
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The articles stress
the right of Indigenous Peoples ``to maintain, control, protect and
develop their heritage, traditional knowledge and expressions. . .
[including] designs, and the intellectual property over traditional
cultural expressions.'' Part II of Article 11 stipulates that states
shall ``provide redress, including restitution with respect to their
cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property taken without
their free, prior and informed consent.''
It is very troubling that the magnitude of the problem has
continued to increase, even though the Act was significantly
strengthened within the past two decades. There is no question that
Internet sales have grown exponentially, and pose a major threat due to
the impersonal nature of transactions that can occur globally within a
fraction of a second. Even if Al-Zuni is shut down in the U. S., it
could continue to market knock-offs in any other country in the world.
I doubt there is anything that the government can do about such sales.
Although the recent hearing contained compelling testimony from
eight presenters, the root of the problem concerns the lack of
protection for Native American communal property rights, because the
government placed designs in the public domain over a century ago.
Regardless of how much `truth in advertising' exists, the exponential
increase in knock-off sales, allowable under free enterprise,
increasingly impoverishes Native American households. For example, the
Pendleton Company website advertises classic Navajo rug designs woven
by Zapotec weavers living in Mexico. El Paso Saddle Blanket Company of
Texas, continues to wholesale thousands of ``trading post rugs'' woven
in Eastern Europe. Both companies comply with the IACB Act.
In her testimony Meredith Stanton noted that the Board has
prosecuted 22 cases successfully over the past two decades. Although
each successful prosecution is a victory, Native American artisans
continue to endure appropriation of their designs from unscrupulous
entrepreneurs. In 2006 two friends were browsing shops in Santa Fe
located on the Plaza. They were admiring a beautiful Navajo rug that
had the weaver's photo attached. When one of the staff noted their
interest, he said that if they couldn't afford a genuine rug, Packards
would have it copied for a much cheaper price! These are just three
examples of legitimate companies that practice ``truth in
advertising.'' I also know several weavers who have experienced theft
of their designs.
The recent hearing seeks to modernize and improve the IACA. It is
evident from the testimony that an increase in the budget will be
necessary if government agencies can root out and escalate prosecution
of guilty parties. Perhaps the IACB could also review how Australia,
New Zealand, and Canada to some extent offer design protection for
their Indigenous Peoples. I have attached three publications which
address this serious issue.
Please don't hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance. *
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The article Diasporas of and by Design, Historicizing the Growing
Impoverishment of Native American Artisans by Kathy M'Closkey
[Anthropology News November 2013] has been retained in the Committee
files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of Kurt Riley, Governor, Pueblo of Acoma
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
Prepared Statement of Roy Montibon, CEO, Montibon Provenance
International, Inc.
Dear Senator Udall, Senator Heinrich and the Senate Committee on
Indian Affairs,
I attended the Oversight Field Hearing on Modernizing the Indian
Arts and Crafts Act in Santa Fe on July 7th, 2017. I was impressed with
the quality of the testimony given and the sincerity of the Senators
present. Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell's comments were particularly
interesting.
It is concerning that the problem of fraud in the world of Native
American arts is now international in scope. Native Americans have been
exploited and harmed enough. As an American citizen, I am outraged that
nameless, faceless con-artists in other countries are exploiting Native
American artists. As a nation we must do as much as we can to end the
fraud that is rampant here in New Mexico, across the U.S. and around
the globe.
I understand that U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the FBI and other
participating Federal agencies have their hands full with these complex
undercover investigations. The Indian Arts and Crafts Act definitely
needs to be updated to give it more teeth--more legal tools for law
enforcement and prosecutors to leverage when going after fraudsters
(including asset forfeiture, etc.)
However, I'd like to bring to the attention of the Senate Committee
that there are also new technical tools and processes that can also be
brought to bear on this problem.
Our New Mexico tech startup, Montibon Provenance International
(MPI) protects art, antiquities and cultural artifacts against forgery,
fraud, theft, and counterfeit documentation (chain-ofcustody) by
utilizing proprietary object identification technologies and chain-of-
custody processes.
MPI has been involved in R&D with nanotechnology scientists at a
private lab in Albuquerque and physicists at Los Alamos National Labs
to effectively solve each of these problems, (including cyber-security
and long-term data archiving innovations). In lab testing to date, MPI
solutions have proven to be effective. MPI has been awarded two NMSBA
LANL research grants; have received three small NSF-related grants
through the NMFAST program coordinated through the Arrowhead Center at
NMSU; and are currently applying for the NSF I-Corps pre-SBIR program.
As you are aware, standard methods of identifying and
authenticating art objects to protect and track them over time present
problems for artists, collectors, museums and law enforcement.
MPI is particularly focused on working to solve the problem of
fraud in the Native American art market as Native artists are
particularly vulnerable to such fraud. Unlike artists and collectors in
the general contemporary art market, many Native artists do not have
the personal financial wherewithal to seek justice through civil
actions. In addition, the frauds against Native artists go beyond
purely financial crimes and are actually crimes against American Indian
culture, traditions and sovereignty, and thus, are particularly
egregious.
We would love to present our technological innovations to the
Senate Committee as we feel that our New Mexico-developed solutions can
make significant contributions as useful tools for law enforcement and
prosecutors in criminal cases to: reduce the complexity and ambiguity
of legal cases; increase the recoverability of stolen tribal artifacts;
reduce the amount of counterfeit objects in circulation; and add weight
to IP-related cases.
______
Joint Prepared Statement of Hon. James Wright, Chief, Ma-Chis Lower
Creek Indian Tribe and Nancy Carnley, Vice Chief
We appreciate the opportunity to testify regarding the Modernizing
of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act.
The Ma-Chis Lower Creek Indian Tribe of Alabama is a State
Recognized Tribe by the State of Alabama.
The Ma-Chis Lower Creek Indian Tribe of Alabama supports the
modernizing of the Indian Arts and Crafts Law and supports
strengthening the ability to enforce this Act as it should be. The Ma-
Chis Lower Creek Indian Tribe of Alabama works to make sure that this
Law is adhered. This Tribe has requested and continues to request the
publication regarding the Indian Arts and Craft Law (from the
Department of Interior) to disseminate to every tribal citizen, pow wow
committee member, vendor, demonstrator, that participates at the Ma-
Chis Lower Creek Indian Tribe of Alabama. The Pow Wow Chairman verifies
that each vendor is a citizen of a state or federal tribe if a vendor
is not their booth has a sign placed in front Non-Native Made.
I do not believe that the definition of who an Indian artisan is
should be changed. It says quite clearly that ``Indian is defined as a
member of a federally or officially State recognized Tribe, or a
certified Indian artisan''; and the definition of Indian Tribe as ``Any
federally recognized Indian Tribe, Band, Nation, Alaska. . .'' and
``Any Indian group that has been formally recognized as an Indian Tribe
by a State Legislature, a State Commission, or another similar
organization. . .''.
There will always be people who will try to circumvent the law.
These people could be impersonating a federally-recognized Indian, a
state-recognized Indian, or a certified Indian artisan. To ignore
state-recognized tribes simply to make things easier is not the answer.
Again, the Ma-Chis Lower Creek Indian Tribe of Alabama will continue in
our endeavors to enforce the Indian Arts and Crafts Act.
Thank you for this opportunity to share the concerns of the Ma-Chis
Lower Creek Indian Tribe of Alabama Tribal people.
______
Prepared Statement of Aiden ShortCloud, Tribal Artist, United Cherokee
Aniyunwiya Nation (UCAN)
To the Vice Chairman Udall and Senator Heinric and all others who
attended the field hearing last Friday. I am a recognized tribal artist
of the United Cherokee Aniyunwiya Nation (UCAN) My relatives can be
found on the Cherokee Miller Rolls and the Henderson Rolls. Both are
federal rolls that are dismissed by the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma as
well as the Eastern Band Cherokee of North Carolina. I am therefore a
State Recognized artist. My tribe requires documentation to a direct
relative on any of the Cherokee Federal Rolls. There are 15 Cherokee
rolls. The Federally recognized tribes only take 3 of these. Meaning
for me my family is on the Miller roll which after 1923 was retaken as
the final Baker Roll of Eastern Band Cherokee, all others before it no
longer qualifies. My tribe's standards are the same as Cherokee Nation,
except they take all 15 rolls, not just one.
To be clear I am writing on behalf of myself and not representing
my nation or any other organization to whom I coordinate with. I have
been an artist since I was 8 years old. I make drums, I dance, I tell
stories. I have a few art pieces here and there that have made it into
museums. I make quality art that has been used by the History Channel,
National Geographic and many other organizations.
As Native people we rely on the sale of our art as a valuable
source of income and of course a way to keep our traditions strong.
Authentic art and authentic materials are becoming harder and harder to
find. For example: The quahog shell that we use to make wampum beads
from is no longer getting to a dark purple. The oceans are becoming
more and more polluted. The Beautiful pink shell beads the Shoshone
Bannock people in Idaho use for their loop necklaces are now endangered
and can not be found. With the threats of deforestation and more and
more regulations towards what can and can not be sold are causing
artists to have to use plastics and fake materials. This severely
lowers the quality of art. The amount of people still producing Brain
tan leather at an affordable price are disappearing. On my trip to New
Mexico this spring I was disappointed to find that the tribal silver
artists are no longer making the beautiful turquoise items that used to
be everywhere in my youth. The silverwork is plain, common looking. . .
No Sterling feathers swirling around stones. . . Plain. . . The truth
of the matter is we are also fighting larger pictures of destruction
from overharvesting that is zapping our materials to make art. The laws
in states allowing us to harvest the items needed to make this art are
becoming more and more strict.
There is no exemption for these products made unless you are a
member of an Alaskan tribe. For example. I live in Idaho, here we are
allowed the harvest of black bear. Two bears a year per person. We hunt
in the fall for the fat, we use it to make an arthritis paste, we use
it for soap, we use it for waterproofing, the list goes on. We hunt in
the spring because the meat is also leaner at this time. We don't hunt
for the fur, so we have always sold it along with the claws. The money
from this is distributed to my business, then to my tribe, then to
local organizations, then to prison facility native programs and then
to national organizations to help everyone to continue our strong
culture. I sell claws and hides to other natives to make their art as
well. Let's face it, it is hard to make a sterling silver bear claw
pendant, without a bear claw. . . .
However, now many states don't allow you to sell these products.
This has lead to large websites such as www.Etsy.com to allow only
Alaskan natives to sell their bear products (due to the exemptions in
the Endangered Species act stated earlier for native made art) Yet
there are no exemptions for other tribal artists who hunt and fish just
as traditionally. This has lead to us throwing away bear hides, if I
can't sell them I can' afford to make my art. It costs me $400 to tan a
bear hide so that I can paint it and turn it into a robe that I might
be able to sell for $600. So now, the art is dying. There are people
who want these items to purchase to support me and my tribe, but due to
laws they can not purchase and I can not sell. It creates a terrible
waste for something that can be used and made into authentic art.
I propose that the exemptions for Alaskan and Inuit artists also
extend to any person enrolled in a state of federally recognized tribe.
Because this art is preserving our art and culture it's being purchased
for spiritual use and it is being hunted for meat as discussed in our
sovereign treaty rights. I am not suggesting being able to sell
migratory bird items in any way, but to allow tribal artists to use
materials such as bear claws that are considered endangered in one
state but are being harvested legally and made into authentic art by a
native person.
Another point I would like to bring up is websites such as
www.etsy.com just spend five minutes on there and you will see no
enforcement of the arts and crafts act. Vintage Chinese made imports
line the top posts where as actual artists have little to no
representation. www.ebay.com enforces this by requiring us to put out
name and tribal affiliation. But still people list these fake items and
confuse buyers. It is discouraging to have to look for 30 minutes to
find maybe one or two pieces of native art that is genuine. I have
written Etsy and all e-mails have been ignored, I have flagged listings
and they remain up. I have reported Etsy to the IACA as well as the BIA
and nothing has come of it. The fake fashion headdress remains. What if
the site required verification or a tribal ID on file with the artist
of a state or federal tribe? Disclosing my name and tribal status
before the purchase of an item allows people to steal my name online. I
always send a certificate of authenticity with the piece but it is very
scary having that information out there for someone to take.
Lastly in November 2016 Oklahoma passed a law banning my art from
being considered Native American made because I am a member of a state
recognized tribe. Oklahoma state also expanded the law to cover
storytelling and any visual demonstration. This is in direct violation
under the federal arts and craft act. As we saw with marriage equality
state laws can not trump federal law. My family lives in Ardmore
Oklahoma. We have lived between Ardmore and Rusk county for the past 6
generations. . . This severely effects me when I go home to visit my
dad. I refuse to sell in that state, and it causes resentment towards
the federal tribes. I am fortunate enough to live in Idaho where my art
is still protected. However, this is very sad. Not only has it silenced
my art, I can not competitively dance in that state. If I am paid for
any activity where I state that I am a tribal member/Native American I
am in violation of state law but well within rights granted by Federal
law. . . This means if I enter a competition pow wow dance and say I'm
Cherokee I get a fine. Because I am not a member of a federal tribe
there. It is a hidden agenda to make sure that only Federal tribal
people can participate in cultural events and receive compensation. To
me that just means they want a monopoly on the Arts and Crafts. Let's
not forget some tribes have lost their federal recognition and are now
State recognized. Are they any less native? Oklahoma has increasingly
become more and more exclusive. The state recognized tribes have been
in existence since before 1990. The Powhatan tribes (many are state
recognized) have always existed and are still state recognized. The
Lumbee tribe is a great example of a state recognized tribe. They have
treaties going back to pre 1900 and are STILL fighting for federal
recognition. I would like to remind everyone that this law was created
to protect Authentic handmade Native American Art from corporations and
cheap fake imports. . . It wasn't designed to tear each other apart. To
put tribal people against one another. And to create a ``who is and who
is not'' Native Barrier. Art brings people together, it holds history,
stories. It holds culture.
I will mention that I teach my art classes to federally recognized
and state recognized people. I wonder sometimes how the federal artist
would feel if I stopped teaching these classes and tried to exclude
them from traditions the way they continue to try to exclude everyone
else. But I continue to tell myself that that isn't the traditional way
to act, and I refuse to stoop to that level.
I read a testimony that was upset about Federal artists selling
next to someone who is state recognized. What it comes down to in that
case is art quality. A federal tribal artist has nothing to fear from a
state artist, unless their quality is less and vice versa. This is
because, they're both Indian in the eyes of the law. The hierarchy
needs to stop. What about the Hispanic people who are now selling
beadwork at pow wows and are assumed to be Native American. They are
copying our northern art and selling it when they should be selling
their beautiful traditional Aztec arts. To me this is more of a threat
than another recognized artist selling.
As a tribal artist my first responsibility is to ensure the art is
passed on and the tradition is not lost. Secondly it is currently my
only source of income. Thirdly I am a state recognized native and
currently the thought of discrediting state recognized tribes would
truly be a loss to so many arts and crafts. I am one of maybe 5 wampum
weavers left. I currently only know of one wampum weaver in Cherokee
Nation, although I have taught many Cherokee Nation Citizens, none have
taken up the art to the extent that I have yet several members of my
tribe are now excelling in making these historic belts and straps.
I get bullied because I am a state recognized artist, I get
harassed. I am immediately discredited and my work must be three times
as accurate as the federal tribal artists. This is what I deal with
when I go to sell my art on a daily basis. The only protection I have
is the Arts and Craft act of 1990 for my quality art that is getting
harder and harder to find.
State recognized people have few rights, the right to our identity
is one of them. The right to say our art is Native made is accurate and
granted by Federal law.
I appreciate your time to hear my testimony. You are welcome to e-
mail me at any time or contact me through www.cherokeespirits.com if
you require further input or wish to look at my art which the federal
tribes wish to revoke protections for.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of Eloise Josey, Executive Director, Alabama Indian
Affairs Commission
I appreciate the opportunity to testify regarding the Modernizing
of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act.
The State of Alabama recognizes nine (9) tribal governments. Eight
of these tribes are state-recognized and one (the Poarch Band of Creek
Indians) is federally recognized. In 1984, the Alabama Legislature
created the Alabama Indian Affairs Commission recognizing seven (7)
tribal governments granting authority to the Commission Board to set up
criteria for recognizing any further groups. Two additional groups were
recognized by the Board in 2001 following that criteria, which is in
the Administrative Code for the State of Alabama.
The Commission consists of representatives from each of the tribal
governments, one Senator appointed by the Lt. Governor, one State
Representative appointed by the Speaker of the House, one Federally-
Recognized Indian person living in Alabama (not Poarch Creek) and one
representative appointed by the Board.
The Alabama Indian Affairs Commission supports the modernizing of
the Indian Arts and Crafts Law and supports strengthening the ability
to enforce this Act as it should be. The Commission office, as well as,
State government works to make sure that this Law is adhered to. This
office has requested and continues to request the publication regarding
the Indian Arts and Craft Law (from the Department of Interior) in
order to disseminate to every Mayor in Alabama, and every Indian tribe
holding Pow Wows or Festivals where Indian art might be sold. In a
further attempt to support the Indian Arts and Craft Act, the
Commission will be introducing legislation to further strengthen the
ability to make sure that any events held in Alabama adhere to the
Indian Arts and Craft Act.
I do not believe that the definition of who an Indian artisan is
should be changed. It states quite clearly that ``Indian is defined as
a member of a federally or officially State recognized Tribe, or a
certified Indian artisan''; and the definition of Indian Tribe as ``Any
federally recognized Indian Tribe, Band, Nation, Alaska. . .'' and
``Any Indian group that has been formally recognized as an Indian Tribe
by a State Legislature, a State Commission, or another similar
organization. . .''.
There will always be people who will try to circumvent the law.
These people could be impersonating a federally-recognized Indian, a
state-recognized Indian, or a certified Indian artisan. To ignore
state-recognized tribes simply to make things easier is not the answer.
Again, the State of Alabama and the Alabama Indian Affairs Commission
will continue in our endeavors to enforce the Indian Arts and Crafts
Act.
Thank you for this opportunity to share the concerns of Alabama's
Indian people.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Herman G. Honanie, Chairman, Hopi Tribe
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
Prepared Statement of Kathi Ouellet, President, Indian Arts and Crafts
Association
Dear Senator Udall,
As the President of the Indian Arts and Crafts Association, I'd
like to respond to your July 7, 2017 hearing on updating the Indian
Arts and Crafts Act.
The Indian Arts and Crafts Association is a non-profit organization
based in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Our mission is to promote, preserve
and protect authentic Native American arts and crafts. We also support
and promote Native American artists, and support all aspects of the
Indian Arts and Crafts industry from the material suppliers through the
end consumers. The Indian Arts and Crafts Association has been in
existence for over 40 years, and while most of our members are here in
the US, we do have members in Japan, Germany, France and Australia.
The Indian Arts and Crafts Act is the foundation of our
organization and our educational efforts to promote authentic Native
American arts and crafts. Educating the general public, Native American
artists, and retail and wholesale businesses is critical to maintaining
and increasing economic opportunity for Native artists. The fraudulent
art market affects every aspect of the Native American art industry,
but has a particularly harsh economic effect on artists.
We fully support and encourage the modernization of the Indian Arts
and Crafts Act. We hope that you will add specific language that
addresses all aspects of the fraudulent art market including, Internet
auction sites, web sites and social media. We also encourage you to
increase civil and criminal penalties as deterrents. Specifically, we
hope that language will be added that aggregates the total of non-
authentic properties seized, so that it is not the dollar value, but
rather the simple violation of the Act that triggers civil or criminal
prosecution at the Federal level. We also hope that a forfeiture clause
be added. Given the dollar value of the fraudulent goods being brought
into the US, we believe that the current fines are treated as a ``cost
of doing business'' rather than a true deterrent.
In addition, while we would like to see a requirement to indelibly
mark all imports with the country of origin. We understand that this
issue is complicated and expensive, and although we believe that this
could significantly reduce fraudulent goods being brought into the
U.S., at this point we recommend study in Trademarks, Copyrights and
indelible import marks, so as not to hold up the implementation of
other critical parts of the modernization.
The Indian Arts and Crafts Association works very closely with the
Indian Arts and Crafts Board, and supports its efforts to increase the
economic opportunity of Native American artists. The services that the
Board provides are invaluable to our members and therefore the
preservation of Native American heritage and culture. The Board
publishes and distributes brochures, conducts workshops to help
artists, and provides information about current laws. The Indian Arts
and Crafts Association appreciates our relationship with the Board, and
we are fully committed to support and approve legislation going forward
to modernize the Act.
______
Prepared Statement of David S. Montgomery, Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma
Tribal Member
Dear Senators Hoeven and Udall,
My name is David Montgomery. I am of Cherokee and Choctaw descent,
and I am a registered tribal member of Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, one
of the three federally-recognized Cherokee tribes. I have many friends
and family who are artists and registered tribal members of various
federally-recognized tribes in Oklahoma, New Mexico, California and
throughout Indian Country.
I was very pleased your committee visited Santa Fe for a Field
Hearing on Modernizing the Indian Arts and Crafts Act (IACA) on July
7th 2017, and I was happy to be in attendance at this important
hearing.
I believe it is long overdue to modernize the 1990 IACA, and help
protect Indian artists of federally-recognized tribes, as well as
maintain the sovereignty of federally-recognized tribes to determine
who is and who is not a member of their tribal nations.
I know I speak for many Indian artists who would like the IACA to
be updated to remove state-recognized tribes from the language of the
law. As has been acknowledged by all federally-recognized tribes and
several states facing the question of ``state-recognition'' of supposed
tribes within their borders, it has long been determined that tribal
recognition and issues concerning Indian tribes is the exclusive domain
of the Federal government since the earliest days of the republic, and
covered under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
What many federally-recognized tribes have now observed since 1990
is an explosion of groups of individuals claiming to be ``tribes'' in
various states (most notably Southern states such as Alabama, Georgia,
Louisiana, South Carolina, etc), seeking and obtaining ``state-
recognition''. The process for vetting ``tribes'' at the state-level
for recognition is non-uniform and non-rigorous compared to the federal
recognition process, and varies widely from state to state. It can be
simply a ``governor proclamation'' (hardly the intent of the rigor
expected for the IACA), or some state-level office on Indian affairs
that lacks the stringency for tribal recognition that is used at the
Federal level. Regardless, state-level recognition of Indian tribes as
sovereigns and their members as ``Indians'' oversteps the bounds for
recognition of sovereign entities that resides solely at the Federal
level.
As an example of the potential for corruption and circumvention of
the existing IACA law, some state-recognized ``tribes'' simply ask for
an annual fee (anywhere from $15-$50 dollars) and one can ``join'' the
tribe, with no rigor in their registration process such as genealogical
trees for descent from an Indian ancestor, state-certified birth, death
and adoption certificates, etc. This also neglects the fact that most
state-recognized tribes lack any historic record of connection to the
tribe of Indians they are claiming to be, and state-tribes that have
applied for federal-recognition with the BIA have been rejected because
there was simply no burden of proof to support their claims as Indian
tribes.
To remedy this, I propose the following:
1) removal of ``state-recognized tribes'' from the language of
the IACA
2) certification of an individual by a federally-recognized
tribe as being an ``Indian artist''. This path would allow
authentic tribal descendants, who may not be able to register
as a tribal member but are deemed by the tribe to be authentic
descendants of that tribe, to become certified as ``Indian
artists'' and thus protected under the revised IACA. This path
preserves the Federal government's sole authority to recognize
Indian tribes, preserves the sovereignty of federally-
recognized tribes to determine who is and who is not a member
of their tribe, and preserves sovereignty for tribes to
acknowledge their non-member descendants as certified Indian
artists in order for those non-enrolled individuals to be
protected under the IACA.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bill John Baker, Principal Chief, Cherokee
Nation
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
Additional Letters and Statements Submitted for the Record
To whom it may concern:
As a citizen of the Echota Cherokee Tribe Of AL, I appreciate your
work on the Arts and Craft Law and join with the Alabama Indian Affairs
Commission in support of its strengthening. I implore you to maintain
the definition of 'Indian' set forth in the present law, and to
continue the inclusion of the state recognized tribes.
Thank you in advance for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Deborah Davis
______
I was in Santa Fe last week and saw reproduction Native American
jewelry all around the Plaza. One way to identify a business
selling Asian made jewelry is to notice how bright the lights are
inside the store. Lots of glass cases and too much light wattage is a
dead giveaway. Why don't you clean up that area and shut those people
down?
Glenn White, Scottsdale, Arizona
______
I support Senator Udall's proposal to modernize and enforce the
livelihood of fellow Native Artist and their communities from Fraud
Thank you
Jesse Salcedo
______
This is my statement and no way am I speaking for anyone but
myself, but hope my concerns fall on open ears.
First of all; we need all our artist where they be Federal or
State-without all of them our culture, like our people die out-Their
erpertise in the making and use of all natural materials and animals,
not excluding anything from turtles/fish/trees and plants are needed.
I am a local NA artist from Alabama where most of my cherokee
ancestors lived, until the removal act was put in force.I try to use
any and or all natural things the creator gave us to better my life and
support myself and family. My bloodline comes down from Moytoy 1st
through Robert Cherokee Thomas and his daughter Ann Martha Tiny bird
Cherokee-
My Ancestors were proud and resourceful people. They shared all
they knew for future generations to survive and make use of if they
chose.. They took from the earth what was needed and shared or traded
items and their knowledge, to support them and family, letting others
do the same. A lot of my living is making and selling items from beads
to furs and hide, learning from
those who teach it to me, and sharing this to others especially the
younger generation (Our Future)in hopes our culture and Heritage does
not die, as it almost has many times before-It is the Local State
Artist in rural areas, that has opened the door for young people to see
what in truth, our past was like, NOT what was taught in school- and to
teach them about keeping it true, for the future-Many of my Ancestors
have long gone and with just enough to pass down what they knew with me
to survive and pass on with this generation.I am one of few who has
kept this interest and hope to open the ears of others- If the State
Recognized Tribes are cast aside and not allowed to Be/make, sell or
trade same items as large companies and or Federal tribes-How are we to
teach our arts/crafts and culture to others and survive?Not everyone
has Internet or TV-But the ones who do mostly see the fake items passed
off as Hand Made NA crafts, on Ebay or sites like Etsy, which in
reality comes from China and other foreign countries.Many letters have
been sent to try and stop this but falls on deft ears. How do we show
how all parts of deer or shells of turtles and plants were used to make
clothes and rattles to use in our spiritual ceremonies and gatherings
or everyday use? and or give joy to those both seeing, wearing and
using these items that they made?WE TEACH HOW-People like to see in
person arts and crafts that are hand made-Why it is so important that
local artist and teachers survive. Showing our children may keep
interest in our culture; If these rights are not taken away, and not
taught because for lack of interest?. Every State has its own rules now
of what you can gather or use unless you carry a card from a recognized
tribe, and then it is closely watched.Federal tribes and large
companies, have tried to do away with State Artist and tribes for a
long time and I have seen more and more items from China made from
artificial materials, passed off as NA art coming from commercial
companies at a lot of pow wows or gatherings, A lot of our people meet
to share ideas and sell or trade their hand made crafts at these
gatherings-The State Artist I know work hard to teach and promote the
use of all items given of mother nature for our use, and spiritual
being ,giving back to their people and tribe.We need our State as well
as Federal tribes to promote the growth and culture of our people.
Since most are far apart. But we are limited to what and how much we
can use, depending on State you are from and items you use to make your
art, like bear claws and hides that come more from our Northern States,
or Quahog shells that comes from the coast that was part of our culture
for so long. and becoming more hard to find the good color that was
once all along the clear waters, and with our waters poisoned with
pollutants and forrest cut down, that helped us have fresh and healthy
air and animals, now most is all gone.Fish and skin drumheads to use in
our drums to make our hearts sore with Eagles as we dance and wear
their feathers. Are becoming much harder to find what was once
plentiful.Forrest is taken away to make large cities, animals have no
where to go or live. So materials from there are harder to come by.The
ones that are, is usually just thrown on side of road or in a ditch
from trophy hunters, just using the head, instead of offering rest to
artist or families for food .If we are excluded from making and selling
our wares at gatherings or stores; then our culture may be doomed, jobs
to support our family gone, and more poverty taking control-I ask for
the sake of my forefathers to not exclude State Tribes in this or other
hearings, in being able to do and have the same right as Federal
Tribes, or big companies. Most of us carry the same blood and need our
rights to survive. Thank you for listening.
Bob Upton
______
Ladies & Gentlemen,
I fully support Tom Udall's efforts to strengthen the Indian Arts &
Crafts Act of 1990 to further protect our Native American Art.
In a time when too many of the items available for purchase are
``Made in China'' it becomes imperative to protect the quality of all
American products. Strengthening this Act is one step out of many which
I hope will be taken.
Protected Native American Art gives ``Made in America'' something
we can be proud of.
Thank you for your effort on behalf of our National Treasures.
Sincerely,
Patricia J. Witt,
Marathon, FL.
______
Over the years, I have heard Native artists complain about their
work being copied. Their works are inspired by their culture and the
lives they have lived. Natives are expressing their innermost thoughts
through their art. It's a personal expression not felt by those who
copy. Those who are copying the Native artists are stealing- a culture
and potential income.
I have also known people who have purchased and treasured art works
they assumed were created by Native artists, but were not. The Indian
Arts & Crafts Association's logo ensures the art work is created by a
Native artist. The IACA requires documentation from the tribe and
examples of the artist's work before including the artist in their
registry. One of the problems has been the lack of funding for
promoting the work the IACA has done and making potential buyers aware
of what to look for when purchasing Native art.
The bigger problem has been punishing those who knowingly copy
Native art for profit. Even if the fakes have been found and reported,
the laws protecting Native art are not always enforced. I believe this
is due, in part, to limited Federal funding dedicated to this area.
I have been an arts administrator for over 20 years and an artist
for many more years, and I have felt the sorry artists feel when there
work has been copied, particularly when they are not acknowledged or
have not benefitted from financial compensation. I have also been
honored to be an artist member of the IACA.
Christine Klimmek, BS Art Education
Oneida Nation Arts Program Coordinator
______
Dear Sir:
I recommend the following:
Only tribal members who are officially enrolled in a federally
recognized tribe or state recognized be authorized to sale items as an
authentic Indigenous/American Indian craft or art product.
Proof must be provided by the craftsman/craftswoman as an
officially enrolled member of either a federal or state recognized
tribe.
All Indigenous/American Indian craft or art work must be created
and verified to have been done only within the USA.
I am enrolled with the Echota Cherokee Tribe of Alabama.
I was appointed to the Board of Directors for the Florida
Governor's Council on Indian Affairs for the state of Florida.
I am a past member of The Board of Directors for the Vietnam Era
Veterans Inter-Tribal Association, Inc.
I am a member of the Presidential Advisory Board for President
Trump.
I will be advising President Trump on all issues related to
Indigenous/American Indians and tribal government issues.
What is your relationship with Secretary Ryan Zinke? Have you
included the BIA in this review of the Craft and Arts issue?
I recommend that you send a formal notice to the following:
All federal tribes
All state recognized tribes
All commissions of Indian affairs
Provide a federal list for all federal tribes and state recognized
tribes that are authorized to make and sale craft and or Art as
Indigenous/American Indian made solely inside the USA
Sincerely,
Joel K. Harris, Sr., Ph.D.
Ocala, FL.
______
Good morning members of the Committee,
My name is Steve K. Boone, I am a member of the Zuni Pueblo Indian
Tribe.
I would like to submit a comment concerning the Indian Arts and
Crafts Act, which is vital for all gifted Native American artisans.
More is needed to disceminate a large variety of the authenticity and
quality of hand crafted designs that symbolize importance and meanings
to each tribal nation across the Americas. By developing better
educational efforts with the artisan and tribal leadership for all
visitors who enter each region of where they could find and purchase
the unique products for their appreciation, along with knowing they
were handcrafted by an individual of an American Indian.
Best regards.
______
As a collector of genuine Native American art, I hope you not only
continue the current level of enforcement and preferably provide an
increased level of surveillance to ensure that authenic goods are being
sold.
I have been several galleries in Santa Fe when they have been
trying to sell goods of dubious origin to visitors.
It seemed to me at that time that this was short term thinking
since if folks think they have been cheated, they are less likely to
return to New Mexico, however for some making a buck is the immediate
goal.
Patrick Blackwell
______
Dear Senator Udall,
I am in favor of legislation that will support the livelihoods of
Native artists, while also protecting Native artists and all Native
Americans and their communities from fraudulent practices.
Thank you.
Charles T. Saunders, Ph.D, ACG, ALB,
Franklin University--Columbus, OH
______
Thank you for conducting the recent hearing in Santa Fe on proposed
legislation to strengthen enforcement of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act
of 1990. I support your work to protect the livelihoods of Native
artists and defend Native communities from fraudulent practices.
Karie Luidens
______
Respectfully, Native makers of Native art should be the decision-
makers on their wares.
Sen. Udall's proposal to update the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of
1990 comes at a time when theft and fraud seems to be more
sophisticated than ever.
In New Mexico, we've learned there's a need to protect our chiles
and laws are now in place.
It's time the U.S. improve protections on all Native products.
Sincerely,
Susan Bortz-Johnson,
Cedar Crest, NM.
______
My name is James S. de Champlon, for the past 10 years I have
worked with the Cultural Services Department of the City of Albuquerque
as the Historic Old Town Portal Market Manager. The Portal Market is a
multicultural arts and crafts market that is open year round, and
though not limited to Native American artisans, a majority of the
participants in the program are Native Americans.
Over time it has become apparent to me that the Indian Arts and
Crafts Act in its efforts to promote Native American artisans could use
some kind of reinforcement in order to become more effective in
achieving this goal and so I was excited to hear about the Senate
Indian Affairs Committee efforts towards Modernizing the Indian Arts
and Crafts Act.
In my position as Portal Market manager I work with both Native
American artisans along with artisans of other varied cultural
backgrounds and it has been by experience that similar issues of,
authenticity in production, and materials are shared by all of the
artisans that participate in the Portal Market program and perhaps in
the arts and crafts industry as a whole.
I have developed some ideas about how the IACA might be reinforced,
specifically thru the provision that relates to the establishment of
trade marks and the possibility of broadening the scope of such a
system so that it might include other arts and crafts categories
related to various aspects of regional and ethnic heritage from both
domestic and foreign artisans along with a differentiation between
categories such as traditional, contemporary, and manufactured items.
I would be happy to share my thoughts in more detail if the
Committee might find it useful.
Thank you for your efforts.
______
Hello,
I'm French, and looking for authentic Native American Indian Arts
and Crafts to sell to Museums shops in France and in Europe.
My last visit to the USA was in April 2016 and I saw in Santa Fe,
Taos, Gallup. . . (even in Albuquerque airport) many items sold as
Navajo pottery, Pueblo pottery, Zuni fetishes, Hopi kachinas. . .etc. .
.which were obviously not authentic and not locally produced (looking
like they were coming from the Far East and Middle East).
Some of these items end up in European shops, and sometimes even in
Museum shops.
Just thinking that a testimony from across the ocean would be
beneficial in strenghtening the Act enforcement and maintain the
quality and authenticity of Native works of art.
Staying at your disposal.
Sincerely,
Olivier Lucotte.
______
Our retail store Ownership and Management at Lantern Dancer, in
Pagosa Springs, CO, supports Senator Udall's modernization proposal of
the Indian Arts and Crafts Act. Specifically, we want to increase the
capability to enforce compliance to the act and education and outreach
to artists, organizations, businesses, and the general public. We also
know it is critically important to address the selling of authentic
Native American arts and crafts via the Internet and Social Media. We
work direct with Calvin Begay and have been impacted by the influx of
fraudulent and fake works.
Thank you for helping us help protect our artists and our retail
business.
Sincerely,
Leanne Goebel,
Manager/Board member IACA
______
I fully support efforts to enhance and enforce legislation
providing harsher penalties for those who would cheat our indigenous
artists by appropriating their culture. As a retail member of the
Indian Arts and Crafts Association, I know fakes hurt all of us. They
take unfair advantage of the artists, the dealers and the unsuspecting
consumers who unknowingly help perpetuate this fraud by their
purchases. Penalties for producing fake Native American art or dealing
in it must be stronger and must be rigidly enforced.
Thank you for your consideration.
Suzie McKay,
Indigenous Arts, LLC.
______
Hello,
I'm emailing in support of Senator Tom Udall's proposal to submit a
new bill to modernize the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990. I am in
favor of his proposed legislation to strengthen the Act's enforcement,
to support the livelihoods of Native artists and protecting Native
communities from fraudulent practices.
Hope this helps.
______
I support the modernization of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act,
especially the aggregation and forfeiture issues. Also, we need an
increase in the capability in enforcement and education and outreach to
Native artists, organizations, businesses and the general public
interested in buying and selling authentic Native art.
Sincerely,
Dawn Dunkelberger,
Aka Dawn Dark Mountain
______
Dear Senator Udall:
I follow Indian Arts and Crafts for my own love of the art of
Native Americans. One of the websites that I frequently utilize is
Shumakolowa Native Arts in Albuquerque, New Mexico. This modernization
is vitally important to protect the artifacts of native peoples for so
many native artists; archeologists, and to provide clear and
authoritative directions on how Indian Arts and Crafts should be
handled.
I did my homework before I selected two reliable, authentic &
reputable artists' distributors who feature work in specific areas:
jewelry. pottery, art, instruments; media, pendletons and other woven
items; carvings, baskets, rugs. There are here in the Bay Area many
buyers who go into a store that sells turquoise jewelry which is not
authenticated. Who kniws what they are really getting when they buy an
Indian necklace. Shumakolawa authenticates every art piece they
distribute to a buyer. And the case of stolen artifacts has become
quite serious. Dishonest collectors are stealing valuable artifacts and
selling them on the black market. This is a case of stealing the
heritage of Native Americans.
This law needs to be strengthened to reflect the changing
circumstances that Native Americans are facing to support their culture
and share their priceless artifacts with others through museums;
reputable distributors and private collectors.
I can attest that Native American jewelry is filled with so much
life and so many activities that the jewelry symbolizes.
Sincerely yours,
Rebecca Hazlewood,
El Cerrito, CA.
______
I whole heartedly support your proposal to update and modernize the
Indian Arts and Crafts Act, and support better protections for Native
American artists and crafts-people.
Thank you,
John Landry
______
Thank you for supporting the new updated legislation proposed by
Udall to protect the Native American Art and Crafts.
Carolyn Rodriguez,
Albuquerque, NM.
______
Senator Udall please help us keep the Arts law as it currently is
and keep the interests of State recognized tribes in good standing. I
am not an artisan but I am friends and a tribal brother to several who
are and they are every bit Native Craftsmen. Thank you for your
involvement
Mike Richards,
Echota Cherokee.
______
Dear Honorable,
The present efforts are to be commended, and continued, thank you.
The present focus is on Items being made out of the USA and being
brought into the USA and being sold as handmade/handcrafted American
Indian Art. This practice needs continued enforcement.
There are over 1,000 jewelry factories in Albuquerque, NM, that are
also creating American Indian style jewelry. Mostly Navajo style
jewelry. The Jewelry is sold retail and wholesale to shops/galleries
around the country and world markets. These businesses have been very
active since before the 1950's. many of them have been and are members
of the Indian Arts and Crafts Association. These Businesses have
created this association the IACA. These businesses have wholesale/
retail shows several times a year. Shops that buy from these Factories
have a IACA label/sticker placed appropriately in their shops/stores,
in America and Internationally. The IACA claims that all items sold by
their businesses are American Indian Handmade/handcrafted. The
authentication of each business member and their items for sale as
American Indian Handmade/handcrafted items is based solely upon their
application and acceptance into the IACA organization. No evaluation
process to authenticate the items to see if American Indians are making
the Items is done. The IACA sticker is placed in the shops and the
customers feel confident that all items in these shops are handcrafted/
Handmade by American Indians. These factory business also contract with
award winning Indian Artists and use their designs to create jewelry.
These manufactured jewelry pieces have been sold on TV home shopping
markets in the past. The artist is brought on the show explaining how
they handcraft/Handmake each piece. The pieces are massed produced by
these factories and are sold on these tv shows. Mass production is
their method of meeting the demand of their world market American
Indian styled jewelry and products. So not all American Indian Style
Jewelry is made overseas. The IACA is a great place to check for
enforcing the present law.
Creating the next generations of laws has to include the complete
transparency of these companies in Albuquerque and Gallup, New Mexico
and other places in the region. These companies pay no taxes for
selling wholesale. The people who buy their products and sell at shows
pay no taxes. The loss of tax monies over the years since the beginning
including the beginning of IACA, is in the billions.
Loloma,
Bennard Dallasvuyaoma,
Nephew of Charles Loloma.
______
Good morning. I am writing in regards to the revision of the Indian
Arts and Crafts Act. After watching the testimonies given, there are
some concerns that the definition of what is ``Indian'' will remove
state recognized tribes. I have concerns as I am a tribal citizen of
the Echota Cherokee Tribe of Alabama. Because the 3 federal tribes only
use two (of many) rolls listing Cherokees, my family cannot enroll in a
federal tribe. However, my DNA shows North, South and Central American
Indian markers. My genealogy also shows Cherokee, Shawnee and Catawba
ancestors. Yet, I cannot enroll in any of the federal tribes. There are
thousands of people just like myself who are truly Native American,
Their only option is to join a state recognized tribe or not be
enrolled at all. This does not make us any less Native American.
I would like to see the board pull from all three definitions of
``Indian'' and have all three participate in these discussion. It is
unfair that only federal tribal members were included in the
testimonies. Under the Act, ``an Indian is defined as a member of any
Federally or officially State recognized Indian Tribe, or an individual
certified as an Indian artisan by an Indian Tribe.''
Please consider a full representation of all Native Americans when
addressing these issues by having federal, state and certified artisans
in the decisionmaking process.
Best regards.
Weeya Michelle Smith.
______
The American Indian Alaska Native Tourism Association (AIANTA)
promotes economic development and cultural perpetuation in Indian
Country through its mission: to define, introduce, grow and sustain
American Indian, Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian tourism that honors
traditions and values. Cultural tourism creates jobs and supports the
teaching of each tribal nation's distinct food, language, art, music,
dance and cultural practices across generations.
The Indian Arts and Crafts Board (IACB) has partnered with AIANTA
to present consumer information, marketing information and protections
available to tribal artists and to educate various publics about
authentic tribal arts and crafts.
Art and crafts are integral to tribal cultures and heritage and
represent important sources of revenue for tribal members and their
families. AIANTA supports strengthening enforcement of the Indian Arts
and Crafts Act through changing laws to allow for an aggregation of
individual transactions that would enable federal prosecutors to more
effectively prosecute largescale distributors who violate the Act. We
also support more education and training of local, state and federal
enforcement officers and increased funding for investigations,
especially in the areas of Internet sales and making sure imports of
Native American-style arts and crafts are indelibly marked with the
country of origin.
Tourist and other consumers' confidence in the purchase of
authentic American Indian arts are essential to authentic tribal
tourism. Consumer education materials by the Indian Arts and Crafts
Board educates visitors to Indian Country and gives them confidence in
their purchases.
We commend Senator Tom Udall and the Senate Committee on Indian
Affairs for taking up this important strengthening of the Arts and
Crafts Act
Camille Ferguson,
Executive Director, American Indian Alaska Native Tourism
Association
______
Dear Senator Udall,
I am president of the Santa Fe Downtown Merchants association,
board Secretary and ex board chair of SWAIA, and a business owner in
Santa Fe.
I have cooperated with the IACB for over 17 years trying to stop
the shameless miscreants in our own community as they cheat, lie,
defraud, and commit cultural genocide with relative impunity since you
left the Attorney General's office. In fairness,other Attorneys'
General have tried, the Fish and Wildlife and other Interior people
have tried as well, but the local corruption on every level and the
greed of dealers, and even Native artists who also sometime lie about
their materials and methods just gets worse and worse.
Clearly, underfunding is the biggest issue, but following close on
its heels is legitimate fear of these threatening and violent people,
their very public bragging about paying off elected and appointed
public officials, and their equally public display of stocks of
automatic firearms, unsavory connections, and willingness to hurt
others.
Hopefully, bigger fines, increased enforcement, and more visible
educational possibilities might help. Santa Fe's new ``authenticity
zone'' is an interesting idea, but carries with it no enforcement
capability or intent. I simply hope that making some one sign a pledge
will make it easier for the AG Balderas to prove that such a person was
aware of the rules when he broke them.
I wish that you had had more time to meet with those of us who
actually live and work amidst this retail situation, and would
recommend that you or your staff visit with me, with John Dressman,
Mark Bahti, and some others as we are in a situation to see this entire
dynamic play out ``where the rubber meets the road''.
When a subset of local merchants is determined, in Santa Fe, in
Scottsdale, in Gallup, or in Las Vegas to defraud consumers, cheat
natives, and destroy a way of life, seemingly without retribution, it
is alarming.
We have tried to help in the past, and would like to do more.
Enforcement, secret shoppers, and increased attention to money
laundering, bribery, and other nefarious activities all require money,
I suspect that is the eternal crux of the matter. Perhaps this could be
sold as a form of enhanced border security.
The IACB and other Interior personnel are dedicated, smart,
determined, and overtasked. Again, I guess that's money.
Thank you.
Elizabeth McNally Pettus,
Things Finer, Santa Fe, New Mexico
______
I am writing in support of Senator Tom Udall's proposal to submit a
new bill to modernize the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990. My wife
and I have a small collection of authentic Indian arts and crafts and
greatly treasure them. I am pleased to hear that the proposed
legislation will strengthen the Act's enforcement, supporting the
livelihoods of Native artists and protecting Native communities from
fraudulent practices.
I have seen several locations selling items that were being passed
as authentic. We have studied this art enough to note some inauthentic
pieces being passed as authentic, and believe that if there is one
piece on the shelf is fraudulent, they all are suspect. However, we
have watched as other people bought these pieces believing them to be
authentic, including jewelry, textiles (blankets) and pottery.
This law needs stronger teeth and greater enforcement. Please
stiffen the penalties and increase the enforcement so severely against
fake Indian art that this fraudulent practice is not worth what these
``con artists'' will lose.
Joe and Stephanie Cavanaugh
______
I urge you to take measures to strengthen the Indian Arts and
Crafts Act of 1990. I have been a longtime purchaser and collector of
Native American art and jewelry. Our native artists have faced an
onslaught of cheap foreign producers flooding the market with knockoffs
and imitations.
Unfortunately, many people associate Indian jewelry with cheaply
produced items, many of which are mass-produced overseas with fake
turquoise and other materials. This cheats both consumers and
producers. Additionally, labels used to identify native art are
confusing.
These practices undercut local markets, local jobs, and local
economies as well as deceive consumers. High quality native artwork
commands top dollar because of the skill and artistry involved as well
as the uniqueness of the product. Many of us are more than willing to
purchase American Indian art, handicrafts, and jewelry at fair market
value, ensuring that the products are both authentic and priced to
reflect fair market wages.
Please develop ways to better protect American jobs and local
economies through labeling, enforcement, and other measures to ensure
the authenticity of Native American arts and crafts.
Thank you.
Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele
Durham, NC.
[all]