| | While in general this bill has been long overdue, and is a building block of better relations with Indian people and the US Government, it has some de-facto problems. | | While in general this bill has been long overdue, and is a building block of better relations with Indian people and the US Government, it has some de-facto problems. |
| − | #At what point are ancient bones of "anthropological" interest in general, and at what point are they truly bones of a given tribe? 500 year old bones? 1000 year old bones?<ref>See Kennewick Man controversy and the small role NAGPRA played in the situation</ref> 10,000 year old bones? If a bone were found in the US, to be 1,500,000 years old, and show evidence of Alien presence, is that still a "Native American" bone? <ref> Though this example is extreme, the fact is that the law itself makes no clear distinction between bones that would clearly be the legacy of a particular tribe, and those old enough to simply be something more generally "human interest".</ref> | + | #At what point are ancient bones of "anthropological" interest in general, and at what point are they truly bones of a given tribe? 500 year old bones? 1000 year old bones?<ref>See Kennewick Man controversy and the small role NAGPRA played in the situation</ref> 10,000 year old bones? If a bone were found in the US, to be 1,500,000 years old, and show evidence of Alien presence, is that still a "Native American" bone? <ref>Though this example is extreme, the fact is that the law itself makes no clear distinction between bones that would clearly be the legacy of a particular tribe, and those old enough to simply be something more generally "human interest".</ref> |
| | #Which tribe gets to say if a location can be disturbed, or of the location under construction is a religious site? | | #Which tribe gets to say if a location can be disturbed, or of the location under construction is a religious site? |