MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Andy Finch <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 11 Oct 1994 18:02:00 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines)
I should state at the outset that I'm speaking for myself, not for the
American Association of Museums, which happens to be my employer.
 
Also, while on the subject of my employer, AAM is not a Federally
sponsored organization, as someone stated.
 
While it is right to say that people running NAGPRA seminars cannot speak with
certainty about all the definitions under the law, they probably can talk
knowledgeably about the current state of National Park Service thinking on
such definitions.  And since the National Park Service has the
responsibility of writing the regulations that will contain the
definitions, the state of its thinking is of vital importance to anybody
interested in NAGPRA.  The regulations are already delayed -- they could
come out at any time, and they may have a retroactive effective date.
 
As long as instructors are clear about what is fact and what is
well-informed speculation, seminars should provide a useful tool for
understanding the new law.
 
Andy Finch
AAM
[log in to unmask]
(202) 289-9125

ATOM RSS1 RSS2