The project that I'm working on currently is embedded within the larger question of repatriation. The National Magpra Native American Braves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 is decades old. We continue to fight around the world for the return of cultural heritage and ancestors. But when those returns come home to the community, indigenous communities often discover, especially in the 1800s, those ancestors and those cultural items were treated with toxic chemicals, harmful chemicals, like arsenic and mercury, and then in the 1930s, even things like DDT. And so imagine community members fighting so hard to bring their ancestors and their cultural heritage home only to discover that they are harmful and potentially hazardous to the living community. And so the work that I'm doing now with indigenous communities is working to identify those toxic chemical treatments prior to repatriation, prior to the return to communities. And in the case where items and ancestors have already been returned to identify what they were treated with and how we might make the community and those returns safer. And it's on a case by case basis. Each is different depending on the kind of chemical treatment and the amount. So it's trying to identify where can indigenous communities go for testing to identify what kind of hazard. The testing is complex. It's different for every hazard, known chemical treatment, and it's very costly, very expensive to the community. It's working to bring together indigenous communities, leaders, tribal historic preservation officers, but also allies in the field, allies in museum studies, allies in anthropology, and other forms of academia, but also to take across disciplinary approach to this research, to this problem. And work with, for example, the American Industrial Hygiene Association to recruit toxicologists, object conservators, to come together to build a multidisciplinary team to tackle this ongoing problem. People should very much care about their health and their well being. And this is something that I think a lot of folks don't necessarily think about when they're interacting with older objects. Nowadays, we have a lot of rules and regulations, both federally and at state and local levels to try to protect our health. But in the past, that was not necessarily the case. And so something that may be as simple as a family hat could potentially have the possibility of contaminants depending on how old it is and if it was ever treated and preserved. So often if it's something that looks fragile, but is well preserved today, that's your first hint that there may be some sort of, you know, certainly some preservative involved, but was that an older toxic or contaminated preservative? A lot of times arsenic salts or mercury salts were used to preserve a number of different items. And again, just like Asbestos started out as something that was great, we now know that that is a significant health hazard and causes a lot of health problems. And particularly for folks who are antiquing. I'm not sure that that's something that they think about on a regular basis either, depending on the types of objects that they're interested in. The benefits this project is bringing is what we receive is what we're going to re put into our ceremonies. We have 12 different villages, so we have to look at what we get back, determine which village the object is from contact their religious leaders if they want the items back. It's hard job, but, you know, I like what I'm doing.