California State University, Bakersfield, hosted a panel discussion on Thursday addressing the impact of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) and its California counterpart, CalNAGPRA, focusing on the legal, ethical, and cultural responsibilities institutions hold when caring for Indigenous ancestral remains and sacred items.
NAGPRA is a federal law passed in 1990 that requires museums and universities to return Native American human remains and sacred items to tribes and families.
CalNAGPRA is California’s version of the law, passed in 2001, which adds stronger rules in the state and includes tribes that are not federally recognized.
Panelists included Dr. Maria Gutiérrez de Jesús, CSUB assistant professor of Indigenous and Native American Studies; Curtis Alcantar, natural resource manager for the Tejon Indian Tribe; Dr. Kent Spears, a NAGPRA coordinator from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo; and Jake Malsbury, a CalNAGPRA repatriation coordinator from CSU Stanislaus. The discussion was moderated by David Silva, CSUB’s NAGPRA and CalNAGPRA repatriation coordinator.
Alcantar said meaningful consultation between tribes and institutions must begin with honesty and consistency.
“From the tribal perspective, all I really want is honesty,” he said. “Even if what we’re finding is difficult to hear, just be upfront from the start. That’s how trust is built.”
Malsbury and Spears agreed that meaningful consultation involves more than checking boxes.
“It’s not just meetings; it’s about leading to real repatriations and building lasting relationships with tribes,” Malsbury said.
Spears added that CSU campuses are working to reduce barriers for tribal members who may face travel or scheduling challenges when engaging in consultations.
The Tejon Indian Tribe has worked with CSUB for about a year and a half, during which the university has focused on improving its curation and repatriation practices.
“We’ve moved some materials into a new curation facility that’s much larger than before,” Alcantar said. “It’s not perfect yet, but it’s way better, and we’re getting there.”
When asked why universities can’t immediately return all collections, Alcantar explained that repatriation involves multiple steps and coordination between universities, government agencies, and tribes.
“There’s a process to it,” he said. “Cataloging, verification, consultations, and federal notifications can take months. Even a single box of items can take six months or more.”
Silva said the process is designed to ensure accuracy and respect.
“If we rush, we risk returning remains or items to the wrong tribe,” he said. “That would be deeply disrespectful and contrary to the spirit of NAGPRA.”
CSUB is reviewing its holdings in consultation with tribes to ensure that artifacts and ancestral remains are identified and properly returned. The university is prohibited from sharing specific numbers, as the process is ongoing.
“The process involves looking through boxes with tribal consent, identifying what’s there, and consulting with the correct Native American tribes, lineal descendants, or Native Hawaiian organizations,” Silva said. “Once that’s done, the information is uploaded to the federal NAGPRA database, allowing other tribes to submit claims if they have cultural ties to those items.”
California has about 109 federally recognized tribes and around 55 non-federally recognized tribes, according to the California Native American Heritage Commission.
CalNAGPRA requires consultation with non-federally recognized tribes, while NAGPRA only permits federally recognized tribes to make legal claims.
In some areas, such as Los Angeles County, no federally recognized tribes exist, which can complicate the repatriation process.
“Federally recognized tribes can make claims under NAGPRA and then work with non-federally recognized tribes to ensure proper transfer,” Silva said.
Gutiérrez de Jesús said part of NAGPRA’s future success depends on how institutions educate students about its history and purpose.
“These laws did not come just because the government granted them,” she said. “They were earned through a long history of colonialism and resistance. It’s important for students and faculty to understand that.”
Gutiérrez de Jesús said incorporating Indigenous knowledge and perspectives into the curriculum helps future professionals approach repatriation ethically.
“We must acknowledge that not all Native tribes are the same and respect their unique cultural protocols,” she said.
Panelists agreed that while NAGPRA and CalNAGPRA have made progress, there is room for improvement.
Alcantar said a “new wave” of archaeologists and anthropologists is helping change outdated practices.
“Having the right people in the right positions with open minds changes everything,” he said. “The new generation is more focused on respect and collaboration than control.”
Gutiérrez de Jesús said the laws also remind institutions that repatriation is about restoring dignity.
“This is more than a legal obligation,” she said. “It’s a moral one to bring our relatives home and honor their spirits.”
