ANCHORAGE — For hundreds, perhaps thousands, of years, Natives of Southeast Alaska have paid artisans to create tools, clothing and ceremonial regalia adorned with feathers.
So contemporary Tlingit carver Archie Cavanaugh was startled last month when U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service personnel told him that items he had advertised for sale violated federal laws. Specifically: a carved hat featuring the wings and tail of a raven, and a headdress, or “shakee.át,” topped with the feathers of a flicker, a robin-size relative of the woodpecker.
“They told me that under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act they can charge me up to $10,000 and throw me in jail for a couple of years,” Cavanaugh said. “And they told me that under the Lacey Act they can charge me up to $100,000 and put me in jail for 10 years. It was very scary. I went into complete depression.”
In shock, he removed the ads from the Internet sites where they’d been posted and took the feathers off the items. But that only seemed to make the problem worse.
“They told me that I was tampering with evidence and that would be another charge,” he recounted. “I told them, ‘I was just trying to comply with you guys’ request.’”
Cavanaugh hired an attorney and sought advice from Rosita Worl, president of Sealaska Heritage Institute.
“He wasn’t just upset about the money and possibility of jail,” Worl said. “He told me, ‘If I’m a felon, I can’t vote. They’ll take away my father’s rifle. Every seal my family ever ate was shot with that rifle.’”
On Oct. 5 he settled for a fine of $2,005 and the equivalent of a ticket. The Fish & Wildlife Service returned the hat and headdress to him, but they kept the feathers.
“I’m thankful I survived with only a $2,000 fine,” Cavanaugh said. “But I’m still getting hit with something like post-traumatic stress syndrome.
“I had no idea this law existed. Nobody knew. I asked Fish (and) Wildlife, ‘Why did you not advertise this law?’”
Worl feels much the same way. Neither her group, the non-profit cultural arm of the Sealaska Corp., nor Southeast artists were aware of how the law applied to traditional Native art.
“We didn’t even know it was an issue,” she said. “We’ve just been doing things that we’ve been doing forever. We sent out word to our tribal members quickly that it is against the law to sell any arts and crafts with flicker feathers.”
“We certainly want to make sure we’re abiding by the law,” Worl said. “But I would have been much happier if Fish (and) Wildlife had come to us first.”
Bruce Woods, Fish and Wildlife spokesman for the Alaska Region, said the Lacey Act involves interstate commerce and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act is intended to prevent the commercialization of migratory birds.
“It makes it illegal to sell the feathers of any migratory bird,” he said. “That’s regardless of whether the sale is from Native to Native or non-Native or whatever.”
There are exceptions, he said. “If it’s a bird that is legally hunted, like waterfowl, it’s legal to possess the feathers or give them to someone. But it’s still illegal to sell them.”
Introduced game birds, like pheasant, are not covered by the law.
Cavanaugh, 61, won first place in the traditional category at the juried art show sponsored by Sealaska at this year’s Celebration in Juneau with an Eagle/Man mask. He’s also a musician whose latest CD, “Alaska Jazz,” came out this year. (See archiecavanaugh.com.) He stressed that he did not pay for the feathers and had never heard of anyone buying or selling feathers in his life — not in his hometown of Wrangell, not in Kake, where he grew up, not in Juneau where he now lives.
“The flicker feathers were given to me by a farmer in the midwest who found them on the ground, the way we find eagle feathers on the beach,” he said. “The raven came from an animal control officer who’s a friend of mine.”
The raven was found dead, he said. “I never killed anything.”
Cavanaugh says he’d like to see the Migratory Bird Treaty Act changed to create exemptions for Native-made arts and crafts such as in the Marine Mammal Protection Act, which allows Alaska Natives to sell work made from parts of protected animals. Worl said she hopes to open a discussion about that during the Alaska Federation of Natives Convention this week in Anchorage.
“But it’s going to be a long, tedious process,” she said.
Worl referred to the grueling effort leading to a recent Justice Department ruling clarifying the use of eagle feathers by Native Americans.
“We were happy about that,” said Worl. “It’s been a continuing issue for as long as I can remember. But it took a long time to resolve it.”
But now Cavanaugh’s case raises other concerns about traditional practices, she said, such as whether authorities will prohibit the sale of regalia with feathers within a tribal group.
“We view (such regalia) as ceremonial, with spiritual dimensions,” she said. “But I have no idea what Fish (and) Wildlife is going to do.”
Neither flickers nor ravens are considered endangered, Worl said. “But there may be (international) treaty issues.”
Cavanaugh warned that sellers and wearers alike could be charged as he was.
“Masks, headdresses, hats, the clothing people use in traditional gatherings, that’s all illegal if you bought it,” he said. “Our people are in danger if they have eagle feathers or down or raven or flicker feathers on regalia. If they purchased it, Fish (and) Wildlife can go after them.”
Comments (24)
Add commentThe law should apply to
The law should apply to everyone.
post-traumatic stress?
Really? Could we play the victim card any harder?
I agree with noroad on this one.
An excellent example of the
An excellent example of the law run amuck, with no hint of the original intent of the laws and treaties. An appalling use of the law to harass and humiliate a traditional artist.
Congress should spend a session purging
This is a prime example why Congress should spend a session on purging laws and regulations from the books. Imagine the wages and other expenses incurred by the taxpayers to "enforce" the law...... Imagine how much more productive the American economy could operate, because we all know the Lacey Act and Migratory Bird laws are not the only archaic laws on the books.
REALLY!!!
Are you kidding me! What a waste of time, money and manpower! Some F&G employee should be fired! Yes, the law should apply to everyone. At the same time, there is such a thing as due diligence! If there was an old law on the books stating that everyone on any federally funded highway could only go 20 mph and they started pulling everyone on Egan over today and ticketing them, that would be rediculous. You would expect some basic notification, even though "we should know the law". It sounds to me like a little notification of native corporations and contacting a few artists directly would have been the proper, intelligent and humane course of action.
I guess some F&G employee didn't want to take the time to follow common sense and instead, read a law and sought to make a name for himself!
DUE DILIGENCE!
Neither flickers nor ravens are considered endangered, Worl said. “But there may be (international) treaty issues.”
International treaty issues? Did we set up a treaty with Japan or Mexico to protect woodpeckers?
All the predictable responses
Instead of Brad standing up for an exemption for his heritage, he follows his predictable Libertarian dogma of getting rid of laws.
And of course, we have the predictable racists who complain about "playing the victim card", by which they mean that First Americans are again complaining about assaults on their traditional rights.
It's time for Congress to pass a law that provides exemptions to indigenous people to use natural materials, including fur and feathers, in their arts and crafts unless they are endangered species.
If the artwork is not for
If the artwork is not for native religous practices the law should be the same for all. There's good reasons restricting sales of animal parts.
Yikes
Curmudgeon you have got to be kidding me? I am working at getting Native people treated equally under the law, not seeking exemptions from them.
US Fish and Wildlife is not
US Fish and Wildlife is not F&G
Halvis...
You are correct. I misread this. Probably due to a meeting that recently took place between F&G and some local Native Americans regarding a simular issue.
Native Americans are only mentioned once in the Constitution. It is in the Commerce Clause:
Article I, Section 8:
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
This is open to some interpretation but to me, it sets "Indian Tribes" aside from both "foreign Nations" and "States". Basically, making them their own entity altogether. To me, this means they are not to be regulated by either/or. But sale and trade to non-native people should be able to be regulated by the federal government, "with Indian Tribes". If there is a law in place, it should be able to be enforced. However, there needs to be common sense and due diligence.
But, Constitutionally, I do not believe the Federal Government has the right to regulate commerce between Indian Tribes. Until there is an amendment to the Constitution, Indian Tribes should be able to buy, sell, barter and gift among one another. No where in the Constitution does it say the Federal Government be allowed to regulate commerce "between" Indian Tribes.
I guess this only applies if you believe in the Constitution as I do...
I commend the plaintiffs in this case.
The artist and Ms. Worl seem to have kept their cool; they simply didn't know. But for those not aware of it, there are several international treatys and conventions that apply to a multitude of species. Without these regulations and agreements in place the worlds wildlilfe would be disappearing at a more rapid rate than it is now. Are you aware of the HUNDREDS of elephants slaughtered every MONTH. Do a little research on the hundreds of thousands of small birds and animals killed or caged up every month and shipped to all parts of the world. I could not read all the way through my recent Nat. Geo. mag because of the hearbreaking photos of dead elephants of ALL ages.
While the use of feathers and skins may be a bit outdated and unnecessary I guess it's okay with me-but the trouble is the oversight and control of it. I know its for "cultural" and "religious" purposes but on the other hand my great great great ancestors used to burn witches for religious purposes. I suspect I'd get more than a small fine if I did that tomorrow on Front Street.
Birchwood...
I agree with you that there needs to be protection of different species. However, treaties with foreign nations do not trump our Constitution. That's like saying the UN trumps our Federal Government. Not the case. Nothing inside or outside our nation trumps our constitutional rights.
The Constitution does not apply only when we agree with it.
I remember being told on an
I remember being told on an outing when I attended elementary school that you can't take eagle feathers. I didn't understand why but I accepted it was wrong. I find it extremely unlikely that sealaska or anyone associated with them didn't know about this if a 4th grader was informed almost 20 years ago. I'm not saying they were intentionally breaking the law but more they should have figured the law out a very long time ago since they pretty much help and deal with most if not all southeast Alaska native artists.
A simple warning and follow up should have been more then sufficiant. Should someone lose their job over it? No, no matter how you spin it, this man was breaking a law. So the enforcer was in the right. Should it be changed? I think so. But just because you find something wrong doesn't make the opposite right. I will end with, if they didn't tell him he couldn't take the feathers off at first contact, then threatening the tampering charge is over the top. Man seemed to just be trying to do the right thing after being scared for his lively hood. Glad he lawyer'd up, does seem shady that he ended up settling though.
lets see.........
Its okay to shoot other migratory birds such as Mallards and Canadian Geese for pleasure but you can't gather feathers (chicken is cheaper than shotgun shells)? Really?
You can't gather seagull eggs in Glacier Bay either because they are under "protection"? What a bunch of bulls%!t!!
This law is clearly intended to empower stupidity.
So, John Corzine and MF
So, John Corzine and MF Global executives can steal $1.6 billion in customer funds, and walk around free as can be. An average American makes a mistake with what he tries to do with some of his art materials, and is threatened with up to 12 years in jail and over $100,000 in fines. Then he tries to do the right thing and is threatened with additional charges.
I'd say that would be enough to cause some stress. He's not playing the victim card, at all, and "settling" for a $2005 fine and a ticket doesn't indicate anything other than a smart decision considering the circumstances he faced.
This is our federal government, and it is disgusting. I think I'll go buy several of Mr. Cavanaugh's CD's.
Back off!!!!
Archie's one of the good guys; I've seen his picture in this paper when he and his wife were cleaning up the roadside out where they live. If he'd known putting feathers on his art work was against the law he never would have done it; he removed them when he found out. A warning would have been sufficient!
Swimmergirl-- As for stress we have no idea how Archie was treated. He's an upstanding member of the Juneau community who wouldn't be use to having a U.S Marshall knocking at his door. I know it would certainly trouble me!
i am disappointed in the
i am disappointed in the grounds that this official has represented this law. i as a child growing up knew that natives reserve special rights to our culture and the land. but with that respect it is not wise to sell to just anybody outside of our culture. or per se "sell". i am sure we are protected but with certain guidelines, which is why he was only slapped with a fine. which shows that the officer was outside of his jurisdiction. but i do not feel bad for the artist. if you are going to sell our art, sell it with material that just anyone can have in their possession. this will defeat that problem of "endangering" a species. I am double headed raven but am appalled that some people deem it ok to sell it for profit. in fact idiotic and in need of repercussion and clarity, but thankful for not being overly punished, as i feel the law violates, in many ways. i think this was a learning example for both parties involved. i am confused in why we are able to freely buy some animal pieces like cowhide, snakeskin, fur, ect. i have painted a emblem of a raven onto a online purchased cowhide i would sell to anyone. but the sacred crests in which our culture prides in regalia and other cultural uses should stay strictly for that purpose with good reason and respect to our land.
A teaching moment,
It would seem, if one wishes to illustrate a problem, that this would be an opportune time to teach about bullying, and one need look no further than government, at all levels, for examples. This being a prime one. Complying out of fear of government retribution. What happens to a dead feather? Is it not better to put it to good, artistic uses rather than rotting on the ground? This is a prime example of “Unintended consequences” Not an example of regulatory “intent” I doubt that this was ever the intent of the regulation, rather employee enthusiasm at being able to write a ticket. A feather in his hat, if you will!
We are here to help
Increase the powers of government, or make big government bigger, and standby for more ridiculous situations like this. If selling animal parts, is against some Big Brother law, artist or not shouldn't matter. Get out a here with special rights that don't apply to my kids.
I'm OK with...
...using protected species parts for cultural purposes, within reason. And paying an artist for crafting that cultural piece is reasonable.
But once the artist starts selling those pieces on the open market, he's simply taking advantage of a loophole in the law that gives Native artists an unfair monopoly.
Save the birds
If Big Brother wants to save the birds? Arrest and jail people with bird feeders. Protected species is nothing more than a green light for more heavy handed management. It is also how government creates (justifies) jobs. Its a game, like the US mexico border game. If we stopped the flood of dope into this country, imagine how many government employees would be laid off. Industries have been built on drug testing drug counseling, jailing users, and huge court costs. We need violators. Remember now citizens, golfers don't make mistakes on a score card, the pencil does.
Another Obama accomplishment.
We should not expect a community organizer from Chicago to have any sympathy for Alaskans no matter their race or ethnic background. Alaskans will vote for change, and we can only hope a majority of Americans are just as smart.
Ever by fly fishing flies?
I wonder how many are illegal under this act.
I used to tie my own, but I know the shops have plenty of them for sale.
Ravens
This was native american land. Native americans survived this land. My grandparents respected native americans. I respect native americans.
Treated equally under the law? Their tribal art rights need to be respected and there needs to be allowances for their tribal art rights.
Fact: A raven feather dropped from the sky at me one day, an honor. I have yet to find a Raven Chief to return it to, because it does not belong to me. Is this the right thing to do? I'll probably just mail it to Sealaska and see what USPS does to me.