Here's a great way to undermine political support in Alaska for traditional subsistence hunting: Kill a bunch of caribou, leave many carcasses to waste on the tundra, then claim that the whole thing is just the way subsistence hunting works.
That's essentially the case that an attorney is making for one of the defendants accused in the mass caribou killing near Point Hope. As reported Friday, the attorney decried the state's prosecution as "an attempt to criminalize subsistence hunting."
It's a breathtaking claim, one that may well backfire on legitimate subsistence hunters.
There's little dispute that a group of hunters operating near Point Hope killed many more caribou than they salvaged. At least three dozen caribou were left to rot, according to troopers. In their investigation, troopers say the Point Hope defendants claimed they left behind the animals because the meat was bad.
Maybe that's true. But wouldn't real subsistence hunters, with real respect for true subsistence traditions, show better discretion before pulling the trigger? Is it not disrespectful to Native traditions or Western hunting ethics to kill an animal and then make no use whatsoever of its meat or hide?
We don't know if the particular defendants in this case are guilty as charged. We do know that invoking this dubious defense threatens to erode the political support that Natives and rural residents need to protect legitimate subsistence hunting opportunities.
BOTTOM LINE: If this mass caribou killing was "subsistence," then subsistence is getting a black eye.
Town hall
Mark Frazure held two flags at Town Square during the demonstration against accepting federal energy stimulus money on Monday. One read, "Don't Tread on Me." The other, blue with a white crescent moon, read, "Liberty." The crescent is an old symbol, explained Mark Fish, another demonstrator. A hunter's moon -- enough light to see by, not enough to give yourself away.
Fish, Frazure and their compatriots had two targets -- the stimulus money vote and health care reform. They didn't need a hunter's moon. They had a sunny noon.
Frazure asked why Sen. Mark Begich won't have a town hall meeting about health. Opponents of health care reform bills in Congress chanted, "Town hall, town hall," before Begich's speech at the Dena'ina Center. They want a session with Begich.
Just to disrupt it?
"We should let him speak and it should be a peaceful meeting," Frazure said.
Town halls across the country have descended into raucous shout-downs, part of an orchestrated movement to defeat health care reform. I reckon most of the disruptive voices are genuine. The people doing the shouting believe what they shout.
But that hasn't given us anything close to informed debate. Just noise and, in some cases, violence.
So let's have that town hall with Sen. Begich and both supporters and critics. Signs, too. Chants, if you like. But when the meeting starts, let's prove that we truly don't give a damn how they do it Outside.
Hear Sen. Begich out. Then, when it's time for questions and answers, listen to the questions and the answers. Be passionate, be critical. But show that Alaskans respect representative democracy enough -- and respect one another enough -- to have tough, lively debate within the bounds of decency and civility.
Remember the image that "town hall meeting" evokes -- neighbors getting together to hash out an issue, speaking their minds without reservation, but still able to break bread together when the debate is done.
"What we need is dialogue," Mark Fish said. Yup. That means both talking and listening.
-- Frank Gerjevic