Jenkins and Romanzo 98—have a private law practice in Washington D.C., specializing in international and environmental law, and trade and the environment (*Leestefly AND **Cara, “Makah Whaling: Aboriginal Subsistence or a Stepping Stone to Undermining the Commercial Whaling Moratorium?,” Colorado Journal of Int'l Envt'l Law and Policy Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, LexisNexis, Winter 1998, http://www.lexisnexis.com.turing.library.northwestern.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=152950&sr=AUTHOR(Jenkins)%2BAND%2BTITLE(Makah+whaling%3A+aboriginal+subsistence+or+a+stepping+stone+to+undermining+the+commercial+whaling+moratorium%3F)%2BAND%2BDATE%2BIS%2B1998)//FJ
The absolute necessity of the bowhead whale to the continuing cultural integrity of the Alaskan Eskimos serves as the defining case study for understanding the cultural need prong of the ASW test. The lengthy debate in the IWC surrounding the Alaskan bowhead quota reveals that the "cultural" requirement means more than simply cultural heritage -- rather, it connotes that whaling must be an absolute cultural necessity. In the case of the paradigmatic Alaskan bowhead quota, which now serves as a prototype for all subsequent ASW quota considerations, a panel of experts [*80] was convened to help determine whether a quota for bowhead whales should be given to the Alaskan Eskimos. This panel of experts found that "the complex of whaling and associated activities is perhaps the most important single element in the culture and society of north Alaskan whale hunting communities. It provides a focus for the ordering of social integration, political leadership, ceremonial activity, traditional education, personality values, and Eskimo identity." n23 This shows that the aborigine exception was narrowly interpreted as a means of avoiding undue hardship for Alaskan natives. Preserving a broadly defined cultural tradition -- the assertion at base of the Makah claim for an ASW quota -- simply does not fall within the parameters of this exception when measured by the Alaskan bowhead case. The Alaskan natives possess an absolute necessity for the bowhead whale to remain within their culture: the whales are not just a part, but the central focus, of their community and culture. To remove the bowhead from the Eskimos would thus be tantamount to removing the stock market from Wall Street -- one does not function in the absence of the other. In short, the Alaskan bowhead case reveals that mere cultural heritage alone is insufficient to constitute an absolute cultural necessity to whale. The Makah are unable to satisfy the cultural need prong of the ASW quota requirement for the following reasons: (1) their cultural need arguments are simply too broad to satisfy the narrow IWC criterion for an ASW quota; (2) they cannot illustrate an ongoing traditional dependence on whalingthat is connected to strong community, familial, and cultural ties surrounding active whaling traditions; and (3) their proposed whaling plan cannot revive Makah traditions, since it relies primarily on modern whaling methods and only retains superficial elements of traditional whaling techniques.
Makah tribe is evolved without whaling -- engaged in other types of fishing and hunting.