The longtime Northwest controversy (discussed by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer) over the Makah tribe’s whaling is rooted, like so many contemporary Indian issues in the Northwest, in the treaties of 1855, now 150 years old.

I side with the Makah. The five or fewer gray whales they intend to hunt each year are from a now healthy population numbering in the tens of thousands. Aside from sentimentalism about marine mammals, I can’t see a single compelling reason to effectively abrogate the Makah’s treaty rights by denying their application to resume the hunt.

Grist thanks its sponsors. Become one.

The notion that recognizing the Makah’s right to hunt whales will create a precedent for a widespread return to commercial whaling seems preposterous. The Makah are the only group in North American with an explicit right to whale in their treaty. And they have a 1,500 year history of whaling responsibly.

It seems to me that the Makah whaling issue is controversial primarily because it is a wedge: It separates advocates for sustainability from animal rights activists.

What do you think about Makah whaling? I’m curious where Gristmill readers stand.

Reader support helps sustain our work. Donate today to keep our climate news free.