Single Page
The New York Times inaccurately depicts Alaska Native whalingI was disappointed by last Sunday’s New York Times article on the fall subsistence whale hunt near Barrow. I’ve noticed that when Outside reporters visit our region and write news stories about cultural activities, the problem is not so much that they get the facts wrong -- although they often do that. The larger issue is that they see activities happening in the context of our local culture, but they don’t try to understand them except in the context of the mainstream culture. If reporters are going to get the story right, they really have to get out of their comfort zone and work to understand our traditional culture as a living experience. Reporter Bill Yardley and the New York Times failed the test last Sunday. Even their headline was sarcastic and small-minded, suggesting that if the hunt involves motor boats, it’s no longer sacred. The Times seems to believe that, unless we remain frozen in time as noble savages, then our traditional subsistence whale hunt is somehow invalidated. That’s easy for Bill to say from the urban comfort of his Seattle home. Yardley’s article starts with a tone of sarcasm (“the traditional forklift”). Is that appropriate for a guy who’s never even been here before? Maybe it works for the Times, but it betrays a shallowness that I’ve always thought is beneath the standards of “America’s newspaper of record.” Yardley’s only nod to the core of our whaling activity -- the spring hunt -- is to say, “Many hunters use more traditional methods in the spring.” Now there’s an understatement. The spring hunt is launched from the edge of shorefast ice in skin boats without motors, and the whales are pulled onto the ice by hand. Yardley would have to come back for spring whaling to realize how foolish it sounds to summarize that part of the hunt in a single sentence. He says that “some blubber ends up in the trash” because we no longer burn it for fuel. I’d like to know how much discarded blubber he saw. I guarantee it was less than one percent of what was harvested. We may not burn it anymore, but we still prize the blubber as a food source to be shared with the community, and very little if any gets thrown away. Whale blubber is believed to be one of the foods that allows the Iñupiat to survive in the extreme cold of the Arctic. I’m surprised that this article was so culturally shoddy, because the New York Times has sent other reporters in the past who have done thorough and credible jobs of telling about the unique way of life here. This time they missed the mark by a long shot. It’s a sad day for us, but that won’t help unless it’s also a sad day at the Times. Edward S. Itta was elected mayor of Alaska's North Slope Borough in 2005. He is a past president of the Barrow Whaling Captains Association and a past commissioner and vice-chairman of the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission. He was vice-chairman of the federal government's subsistence advisory council for northern Alaska, and represented Alaska as a member of the executive council of the Inuit Circumpolar Council. The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch. Alaska Dispatch welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, e-mail commentary(at)alaskadispatch.com. I would like to thank Mr. Itta and Mr. Ahmoagak for clarifying what culture means to the Inupiat to the nation. I am for one a young native man who subsists for survival. I do depend on feeding my young family off the land that has been provided to me. I have a wife and an infant. Alot of you may think just because i can use a computer i should be able to find a job and pay for food at a store. We do have produce and meat products at a local store that are fresh. But it is at a very high cost. my wife and I do have jobs that pay fairly. At the store, one gallon of milk is 8 dollars, one loaf of bread is 4 dollars. Can you imagine what everything costs based on that. I have to survive off of my land here on the north slope. I take pride in harvesting what i can when i do. That invovles whaling, now it may seem barbaric, but it sustains my life as well as my families. i can name many others who have to work but still cant afford enough to buy a weeks worth food from the store. when i catch a caribou, eating it straight twice a day and not eating pretty much anything else, it can feed me and my family for almost two weeks. and i pay 80 dollars for gas and maybe 30 dollars for a box of rifle bullets when i go out to hunt caribou. for two weeks worth of food eaten twice a day at the local store would cost me over 500.00 dollars. Can you imagine what a whale provides for a person like me. Now when you want to rib my culture and tell me that my culture is diluted just because we want to evolve like any other human being, even if it were from a person that lives her as well, it does feel like a knife is being stuck into my stomach. I take great pride in my culture because there are many customs that you dont see in newspapers or videoshots. I for one when i do harvest animals it is custom for me not to keep all of my catch. I hand out well over half of what i harvest to the ones who cannot work or hunt for themselves. I consider myself pretty well, I am not starving. I was taught well by my father and grandfather as well as my uncles on how to survive off the land. One of the many things they taught me was to always take care of my family and it pretty much includes the whole slope whether we may be related or not. thats just one of many customs within my culture. Now, some of you want to do away with whaling just because we use motorboats and forklifts, you would be taking my life and the ones that depend on me to fill there freezers and cellars for the very harsh 7 months of the year. how can that ever be more humane than what i do to survive this wonderful place i call my home. Whaling is the backbone of the inupiat people, take that away then you will take the lives that live off it. Unfortunately, this is an issue that cannot be broached without emotional outbursts of some type from either those who participate in whaling or oppose whaling for various reasons. At the heart of the matter is the concept of subsistence hunting. There is a context greater than the historical use of these animals by Mr. Itta and other Alaskan natives. For example, at a recent International Whaling Commission meeting Greenland successfully secured a subsistence quota for hunting humpback whales in limited numbers but not for any lack of meat. In fact, the 'tonnage' of whale meat will be lower, but the native people there will now have a more palatable whale to sell as a product in Greenland markets. Greenland's Danish representatives claim that this commercial use by native people also qualifies as subsistence. Representatives of Japan, and other nations that contributed significantly to the global decimation of whales through commercial exploitation, have also made claims to 'traditional' rights to hunt. Of course, their end-game is a bit more obvious than Greenland in the mass production of whale meat, long history of industrial whaling, and open defiance of international whaling regulations. Japan, in particular, has argued that cultural imperialism is at work against the interests of its supposedly traditional whalers despite using Norwegian whaling techniques and technology for industrial-scale commercial production since the start of the 20th century. Despite being adamantly against whaling in all of its forms, I will reluctantly admit that those who actually use whale meat for survival -- as opposed to producing canned whale as a luxury to curious consumers -- have the best argument for whaling. However, with an international moratorium on whaling and several nations openly defying the whaling ban, it becomes problematic to justify the destruction of whales (perhaps some from endangered populations) for nutritional 'subsistence' without skepticism. A disillusioned view of native hunting is magnified by the hunters use of industrial machinery, sport utility vehicles, and modern firearms among other non-traditional equipment of western industrialized nations. While the outsiders' view may fail to comprehend any truly spiritual or traditional native Alaskan reliance on whale meat, forklifts are generally regarded as anti-traditional. At some point humanity, regardless of culture, must weigh the consequences of environmental exploitation against various economic, strategic, and cultural interests. Some are opposed to whaling on grounds of animal cruelty. More are concerned with the big picture of endangered species and ecological damage as a result of commercial whaling. Still others see whaling as an irrational attachment to unnecessary ancient practices. At what point does the concept of tradition cease to outweigh all other concerns? With Alaskan subsistence quotas coming up for review at the next IWC meeting, the USA will surely be tested by those commercial whaling nations pushing for repeal of the moratorium and new expansion of their whaling industries. It wouldn't be the first time Alaskan native subsistence whalers were used as bargaining chips to undermine international conservation efforts. Sorry, but the NY times was quoting the sarcastic attitude of one of your so-called traditional hunters. You are just like all the great white hunters that go to Alaska today. You noble folks like to kill things for fun. Here is the quote of the noble hunter from the piece. “Ah, the traditional loader,” one man mumbled irreverently. “Ah, the traditional forklift.” This is a very cruel way of killing or you would let it be filmed. It appears that you noble natives have some amount of shame regarding killing these beautiful whales. This so called cultural tradition should be stopped just like you people stopped putting your old folks on the ice to die when they cannot contribute to the community anymore. me thinks that you are missing the roots of the sense of humor that led to that quote. Of course, it seems to me that Itta is also missing that humor, which is, perhaps, evidence that it is actually myself who is misinterpreting the humor. *sigh*. Life is easy when we are quick to laugh at a joke. Perhaps I am too quick. The NYT article was rather well written and fair, I thought, and the rebuttal was very good too, though I did not find the tone of either so demeaning. I agree that the writer's choice of a lead for his article was unfortunate, unless that was the choice of his editor at the Times. The headlines at most larger newspapers are not written by the reporters, and sometimes don't reflect the content of the stories. Some of his comments also were poorly put. As Eddie points out, very little of the whale is wasted. In times past, whale and seal oil lamps were used to light and heat semi-subterranean homes which were amazingly energy efficient, though the smoke contributed to lung problems. Those homes haven't been used for many, many decades, though. In the Midwest, where I live, "soddies," were the first homes for a good deal of pioneer farm families. The construction principles were much the same. The writer also gave due deference to the culture as more traditionally preserved in spring whaling, right down to the late 19th Century brass harpoon guns used for the kills and the flensing tools that would not have been out of place in the hands of Boston whalers. The knives used for carving the carcass are brush hooks, an old firefighting and ground clearing tool. I too felt the New York Times article to be somewhat backhanded. Obviously relishing in one person's admittedly irreverent comments about the "traditional forklift", overall it lacked a balanced perspective. Are the Inupiaq and other Subsistence cultures expected to not adapt to a changing world? Every year the ice becomes more dangerous and uncertain; however, there was little mention of the enormous challenges a whaling crew faces, as they put their lives on the line for the village. As I wrote below, had the authors spent more effort on learning about the rippling impact a good or bad hunt can have on a community, on the history and traditions of Subsistence whaling-instead of bare-bones, verbal-snapshots with little context; and less effort on thinly-veiled condescension regarding the issue of modern equipment, then perhaps this could have been a well-balanced, informative article. But it clearly was not. It stopped just short of saying that Native Alaskans are not entitled to the same technology to improve quality of life and adapt culturally as anyone else. Thank you, Mr. Itta, for speaking out on this critical Alaskan issue with firm dignity, and attempting to show the US what life in the Arctic truly means to those who have lived here for thousands of years. I just don't understand all the heartache here. The left has always worked tirelessly to make native subsistence a thing of the past and yet in their tireless quest for federal dollars the native voters have always ignored this and aligned themselves with the left. Why the sudden concern? All the new york times did was slant the story to meet the expectations of it's Left leaning audience. Your delusions are showing, "Old.' Have you considered seeing a shrink or geriatric neurologist? Medication could help with your "seeing" commies under your bed. Greenpeace, the foremost conservation organization, has supported Native subsistence hunting rights, unlike white urban hunters typically represented by the Alaska Outdoor Council. Greenpeace and Inupiat whalers even joined ranks to fight offshore drilling in bowhead migrating waters. In "...it's (sic), Left (sic) leaning (sic)" coverage, the Times is the paper that published an unending stream of White House propaganda, authored by Judy Miller and Michael Gordon, that bore no relation to reality. It made Bush's unjustified and illegal invasion and occupation much more acceptable to the American public. Finally, you also consider adult education. The three consecutive misspelled quoted words lead me to believe it might help you. You might also be thereby exposed to some sources of information not delivered directly to you by Rush Limbaugh or Fox "News." It seems that my method of communication was sufficient to get under your skin and that is good enough for me. Anyone who would say "Greenpeace, the foremost conservation organization" is not to be taken seriously at any point after having uttered such complete crap. Not long ago a Greenpeace ship named the Sunrise arrived in Alaska without a oil spill response plan on the ship. This plan is something that is required by a regulation that Greenpeace fought long and hard to have enacted. it seems that they feel that laws are for "other people". The Sunrise a(GREENPEACE)owned ship arrived in Alaskan waters July 13 without the required documents. The next day, the DEC faxed the crew a notice of violation and ordered the ship to stay at anchor in Ketchikan until the paperwork was completed. However, one hour after the vessel agent signed an affidavit saying he had read the letter and would comply with the order, the ship left Ketchikan, according to Craig Wilson, section manager for financial responsibility and prevention initiatives at the DEC. "They said they were moving to avoid cruise ships [which was allowed under the order], but they steamed west 18 hours," Wilson said, calling the action the high-seas equivalent of a motorist speeding away from a police officer after being stopped for a moving violation. Left, right, blah blah blah. Why does this have to be political? You might as well mention Palin. Yea, the NYT's guy must have confused the whale saving movie coming out and 'spected to see natives cutting blowholes in the ice for a hundred miles to save them. I thought the New York Times article was excellent. Mr Itta, you have really thin skin if you are offended by the New York Times. You sound like a little kid whining. With respect sir, you are as entitled to your perspective and opinion as much as Mr. Itta. As are the rest of us, even the New York Times. Had the authors spent a little more effort on the history and traditions of Subsistence whaling, and less effort on thinly-veiled condescension about the use of modern equipment, then perhaps this could have been a well-balanced, informative article. But it clearly was not. It stopped just short of saying that Native Alaskans are not entitled to the same technology to improve their quality of life and adapt culturally as anyone else. Furthermore, politics aside, Mr. Itta is an Inupiaq Elder. At the least he should please be treated with the honor an Elder has earned; even if you disagree with him: which again is absolutely your right, one that I would never seek to take away, please do not do that to Mr. Itta by attempting to shame him into silence. If you are not already, then one day you too will be an Elder, and I would hope the same respect would be shown to you. Thank you Edward I will share this on my Facebook page. |
Comments