That would depend on whether the proper paperwork has been done. Usually overseen by the Registrar, they are very complicated (and long) documents that require documentation of everything from the number, positions, and credentials of the staff to a detailed history record of the climate control and security systems, acquisition procedures, the extent, accuracy, and detail of the catalogue and registration system, 'Item History' files and data base, conservation protocol, records of any loan agreements, published records and papers, and on and on. And of course a detailed 'Mission Statement' and evidence to adherence to such. Usually takes months to put together and has many parts, and has to be redone periodically. Not as easy to be an legitimate accredited museum as people think. But the perks are worth it. Without all this, a collection would be merely what the 19th century folks called 'A Cabinet of Curiosities'.
Well the rules imposed by the feds on possessing a number of items, such as eagle feathers, can be mind boggling. Basicly they only allow native Americans to own eagle feathers and even then it requires paper work being approved by bueracrats. Anything that may have come from federal owned land an also be touchy even though a good piece of the battle field is today owned by a very nice family from the Crow tribe. If you visit the battle field they give a very interesting horse back tour of the battle field. But I was very disappointed in the NPS museum at the battle field and think it could be much better. Possibly Some of the seized artifacts will appear in the government museum. However I do not think the goverment should seize property not made illegal by congress but by administrative direction
Not true. There is a cut off date and most artifacts at Garryowen existed before that date.
Stop in and talk with Kortlander and he will get you caught up to speed.
As far as your statement: "However I do not think the goverment should seize property not made illegal by congress but by administrative direction" you need only to read the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act which was enacted in 1940 to see that Congress did make illegal.
Post by benteeneast on Apr 27, 2017 6:42:10 GMT -5
There seems to be a great tolerance in some Federal actions and then something changes and the actions seem out of bounds for the particular incident. I have no clue on what was used to get the warrants but it is a judge that approves it.
In this new environment of Cities refusing to obey Federal laws there is little chance of doing away with Federal officers in the near future in my opinion.
It seems funny to me that the Bundy's were allowed to accumulate millions of dollars in back grazing fees before the government took action to resolve the issue. It clearly pointed out the tolerance to allow the government's perceived notion that they were not paying the grazing fees and then the action we see on TV.
I have Bundy friends and some not so much of a friend which is normal in my line of business.