Gray Whale Harpooned Illegally by Makah Tribesmen

[Frodo]

A question to the liberals and leftists on this forum -what should claim precedence when it comes to whale and seal hunting in general: indigenous rights, or animal rights?
--------------------------------

Whale dies after shooting, harpooning by Makah

By BRAD WONG, MIKE BARBER AND PAUL SHUKOVSKY
P-I REPORTERS

A gray whale died Saturday night, several hours after Makah tribal members harpooned and shot the animal that was tangled in a fishing net. The men shot the whale without federal permission.

Coast Guard Petty Officer Kelly Parker confirmed the harpooning conducted by five tribal members. The whale was one mile east of Neah Bay, in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, about a half-mile off shore

The Coast Guard detained the five tribal members and questioned them, said Mark Oswell, a National Marine Fisheries Service spokesman. They later were released to the tribe, who placed them into custody at the tribal jail, according to the mother of one of the five.

"They are all in jail," said the mother.

In an interview before the whale died, she said "I don't know why they don't let them put the whale out of its misery. That's cruel."

In view of a Coast Guard boat, the wounded whale swam for hours still trapped in the net with a harpoon in its back, before dying.

Attempts to reach several Makah leaders Saturday night were not successful, they were conducting a tribal meeting at the community hall.

[Alcon]

I met the guy who was jailed -- briefly, a few years back.  Don't remember him much, though, beyond the name and the face.

This isn't really so much about indigenous rights.  This was illegal.  The tribe didn't even support it.  There are complex issues here, but this was an individual act of civil disobedience by Wayne Johnson and a few others, not the tribe.  It shouldn't be considered more than that.  It is an opportunity to revisit the law, though.

[Gabu]

A question to the liberals and leftists on this forum -what should claim precedence when it comes to whale and seal hunting in general: indigenous rights, or animal rights?

Animal rights for me, but that isn't even the issue here.  Gray whales are on the verge of being endangered in the Eastern Pacific and are critically endangered in the Western Pacific.  It's in the interest of preserving this species of animals that killing them is illegal.

[Frodo]

This isn't really so much about indigenous rights.  This was illegal.  The tribe didn't even support it.

That's why I said 'in general', as in outside and beyond this particular case. 

[CultureKing]

This case was sickening to me. Not only did Wayne Johnson violate state law, but he also went in defiance of his tribe, in my view he definately deserves jail time for this. Though I will say those who support Johnson seem to be just as bad to me as him, they need to realise that if there is going to be any more whale hunting at all they must restrain themselves for a time to let the whale numbers get back up.

Oh and on a side note your news source didnt mention the fact that the whale was shot using a machine gun (I just thought this was a little interesting and overall inhumane). When the tribe does legally go whale hunting they have to use a canoe (this was a motor boat) and all of the other practices that go with their heritage.

[??????????]

Nuke the Whales!

[7,052,770]

Screw the primitive tribal traditions.  Seriously.  Protecting the environment requires sacrifice on everyone's part, and butchering whales should be at the top of the list.

[minionofmidas]

I met the guy who was jailed -- briefly, a few years back.  Don't remember him much, though, beyond the name and the face.

This isn't really so much about indigenous rights.  This was illegal.  The tribe didn't even support it.  There are complex issues here, but this was an individual act of civil disobedience by Wayne Johnson and a few others, not the tribe.  It shouldn't be considered more than that.  It is an opportunity to revisit the law, though.

Okay. You're probably able to give me the facts unbiased, while everybody else is just shooting their silly mouths off. (White Northwesterners are not usually ready to resort to logical thought when it comes to Native fishing rights, except as a last resort. )

Which laws were violated*, and why were they violated?**

*Wrong time of year, excess of quota, wrong species of whale? Or just wrong method of hunting?
**Were they killing an accidentally trapped whale, as the article can be read to imply? Or is that incorrect? Is there some sentiment among the Makah that the current restrictions on Makah whaling still go to far? (I get it that this was not an officially tribally supported action - that's not the question.)

[Alcon]

Haha, sorry, I didn't mean to speak with any authority (I am, btw, quite white, if there's any confusion).  Here's why:

1. I'm not anywhere near an expert in this case, or the Makah whaling rights.  I've read the articles, and can't do much beyond parrot them.  The issue was before my time.

2. I'm biased.  A different way than you'd think, though.  I'm rather good friends with Billy Frank, a fellow involved very closely in the Indian fishing rights movement here.  Beaten up and jailed myriad times for civil disobedience decades ago.  He's my only source of deep information, and he's obviously about as biased as you can get (although a graet guy).  Even that considered, I don't know much.  And fishing is a rather different issue than whaling, from what I draw.

I'm not entirely sure what law was violated (but you certainly need some sort of official position to go out and down a grey whale), but those responsible are saying it's an act of civil disobedience, the tribe is saying it was illegal, etc.  No one is arguing legality at all.  The guy who did it is arguing it's his moral right under tradition.  The Makahs, whether they believe in the law or not, seem to be arguing legality, maybe mostly to save face.

His argument seems to boil down to "it's traditional, we've been doing it this way for many years, and I don't regret it."  No one significant seems to be defending him (yet that I've seen).

The rest of your questions, I simply can't answer.  I used to know some Makah, but it's been years.

[CultureKing]

I met the guy who was jailed -- briefly, a few years back.  Don't remember him much, though, beyond the name and the face.

This isn't really so much about indigenous rights.  This was illegal.  The tribe didn't even support it.  There are complex issues here, but this was an individual act of civil disobedience by Wayne Johnson and a few others, not the tribe.  It shouldn't be considered more than that.  It is an opportunity to revisit the law, though.

Okay. You're probably able to give me the facts unbiased, while everybody else is just shooting their silly mouths off. (White Northwesterners are not usually ready to resort to logical thought when it comes to Native fishing rights, except as a last resort. )

Which laws were violated*, and why were they violated?**

*Wrong time of year, excess of quota, wrong species of whale? Or just wrong method of hunting?
**Were they killing an accidentally trapped whale, as the article can be read to imply? Or is that incorrect? Is there some sentiment among the Makah that the current restrictions on Makah whaling still go to far? (I get it that this was not an officially tribally supported action - that's not the question.)

In Washington whaling is illegal for everyone with the exception of native peoples who are allowed to acquire a permit to hunt 1 (emphasis on the one) whale per permit, usually it takes a good number of years to get a permit and they are very rarely issued.
The gray whale that was shot was actually in open waters in the strait of Juan de Fuca. The Gray whales in the eastern Pacific are endangered, so there is a lot of controversy over the killing of even one whale.
This whole episode has been all the talk around here (especially with the people I know with the state government who are supposed to be in charge of this)
Oh and whaling and fishing rights are completely different.

[bgwah]

From what I understand, the tribal council is also supposed to authorize a whale hunt. The tribe did not do so; the men merely decided to go on a hunt.

Anyway, I find it kind of amusing that they're using guns to get in touch with their whaling traditions.

As for my own opinion, I'm inclined to think this was a despicable act and I hope he's thrown in jail.

[opebo]

I read this as 'gay whale harpooned illegally by Makaka Tribesman'. 

Anyway I wouldn't throw in in jail outright as jail is too dangerous for a minor offense, but I would recommend an extended  house arrest with one of those exploding ankle bracelets.

[Alcon]

I read this as 'gay whale harpooned illegally by Makaka Tribesman'.

hilarious

Anyway I wouldn't throw in in jail outright as jail is too dangerous for a minor offense, but I would recommend an extended  house arrest with one of those exploding ankle bracelets.

They were released immediately after being booked.  Somehow I doubt whale harpooners are going to be shanked in the Clallam County Jail, anyway.

[minionofmidas]

Well they do seem partly answered (and I suppose I can google much of this, anyways)...

Which laws were violated*, and why were they violated?**

*Wrong time of year, excess of quota, wrong species of whale? Or just wrong method of hunting?

So the answers include wrong method of hunting and not having a license (which basically includes excess of quota as well). Apparently not wrong species of whale Id surmise.

**Were they killing an accidentally trapped whale, as the article can be read to imply? Or is that incorrect?

That would seem to be incorrect.

Is there some sentiment among the Makah that the current restrictions on Makah whaling still go to far? (I get it that this was not an officially tribally supported action - that's not the question.)

Apparently. Of course, how widespread that is (the real question here) is an entirely different question, but I doubt anybody in the world knows an answer to that.

This isn't really so much about indigenous rights.  This was illegal.  The tribe didn't even support it. 

Whether that means anything depends on the tribe in question. In the Makah case, it clearly does. In the case of those big amalgamated "nations" defined merely by a shared reservation, it wouldnt.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Really?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wiki is also interesting: The Gray Whale isnt even on the endangered species list.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not really. What applies to salmon under the other treaties applies to whales under Neah Bay - that the Makah have never ceded the right to hunt whales off the NW tip of Olympic Peninsula to the US, but that the state government nonetheless has a right to regulate Makah whaling as long as it does so fairly.

There is a massive difference as well, of course: Just think of Boldt Phase IIs "fair and equitable, and that means 50%" . Which is meaningless here given that by the time the decision came around, whites had wholly abandoned the practice of whaling.

[Alcon]

If I were to guess based on my knowledge of the Makah, I'd say there's a good number of traditionalists who believe they should do whatever the hell they want.  Life in Neah Bay is isolated.  It's pretty much the corner of the known world.  Look it at it in a map, and you'll see what I mean.  But I think the mainstream view there is, we have to keep good relationships with the government.  The fishing and whaling is just not sustaining the economy.

The Makah are a pretty centralized tribe, I think.  The coastal tribes have VERY similar issues.  The Hoh on the coast may have moved to Neah Bay in part, since it's a very sparsely-populated area, but the issues are so similar for them that there isn't much friction.  Again, Neah Bay is remote.

Whaling and fishing rights may be heavily intertwined, but I've found that different Indians I know can have starkly different positions on them.  I don't remember hearing anything during the Makah whaling incident last time about fishing.  I think the tribes do the best to separate them.

[CultureKing]

Well they do seem partly answered (and I suppose I can google much of this, anyways)...

Which laws were violated*, and why were they violated?**

*Wrong time of year, excess of quota, wrong species of whale? Or just wrong method of hunting?

So the answers include wrong method of hunting and not having a license (which basically includes excess of quota as well). Apparently not wrong species of whale Id surmise.

**Were they killing an accidentally trapped whale, as the article can be read to imply? Or is that incorrect?

That would seem to be incorrect.

Is there some sentiment among the Makah that the current restrictions on Makah whaling still go to far? (I get it that this was not an officially tribally supported action - that's not the question.)

Apparently. Of course, how widespread that is (the real question here) is an entirely different question, but I doubt anybody in the world knows an answer to that.

This isn't really so much about indigenous rights.  This was illegal.  The tribe didn't even support it. 

Whether that means anything depends on the tribe in question. In the Makah case, it clearly does. In the case of those big amalgamated "nations" defined merely by a shared reservation, it wouldnt.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Really?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wiki is also interesting: The Gray Whale isnt even on the endangered species list.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not really. What applies to salmon under the other treaties applies to whales under Neah Bay - that the Makah have never ceded the right to hunt whales off the NW tip of Olympic Peninsula to the US, but that the state government nonetheless has a right to regulate Makah whaling as long as it does so fairly.

There is a massive difference as well, of course: Just think of Boldt Phase IIs "fair and equitable, and that means 50%" . Which is meaningless here given that by the time the decision came around, whites had wholly abandoned the practice of whaling.

My bad on the endangered species list, they were pulled off the list in 1994.

[angus]

A question to the liberals and leftists on this forum -what should claim precedence when it comes to whale and seal hunting in general: indigenous rights, or animal rights?

"...as she was headed east on US 78 toward Tupelo from Birmingham, she came upon a beat-up, older, slow-moving semi sputtering up a hill.  As she was late for hear meeting already, she decided to pass him.  But on her way past, she couldn't help but glance over, only to notice his toothy grin as he winked.  All she could think about as she overtook him doing 75 in her convertible Le Baron was how this Low Ball trucker wrestling his big dinosaur through the long dark tunnel of the Bible Belt..."

that's a line I read in a dollar paperback today.  That's what I do when I'm at the Dollar Tree.  My son plays with the toys.  I read the pulp fiction.  Both of us too cheap to spend the dollar.  It's like an amusement park, except that it's free.  And you don't have to put up with hucksters with cameras asking you if you want your picture made for a buck. 

Anyway, your post reminded me of the triple entendre.  "...wrestling his big dinosaur through the long dark tunnel of the bible belt..."  Or something like that.  Yeah, Makah tribesmen are members of the kingdom Animalia as well.  Puts them in a bit of a twist, doesn't it?

[Alcon]

Lewis,

Some Makah tribal leaders say they are sympathetic to frustrations of rogue whalers

I hope that answers your questions better than I could(n't).

[Inverted Things]

This is a red herring question: it seems as though the tribe in question is using modern western technology (guns, harpoons), and therefore has sacrificed "indigenous rights."