OPPORTUNISTICWHALE HUNTING ON THE SOUTHERN NORTHWEST COAST: ANCIENT DNA, ARTIFACT, AND ETHNOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE Robert J. Losey and Dongya Y. Yang Two modes of whale use have been documented on the Northwest Coast of North America, namely systematic whale hunt ing and whale scavenging. Ethnographic ally, systematic hunting was practiced only by Native groups of southwestern Van couver Island and the northern Olympic Peninsula of Washington State. This hunting was undertaken with technology specifically designed for the task. Other groups on the Northwest Coast reportedly did not hunt whales but did utilize beached animals. Here we present archaeological evidence of whaling from the northern Oregon coast site of Par-Tee in the form of a bone point lodged in a whale phalange. This hunting likely occurred 1,300 to 1,600 years ago. Ancient DNA extracted from the phalange proves it to be a humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliaej. DNA recovered from the bone point indi cates that it is made from elk (Cervus elaphus) bone, and the point's DNA sequence is identical to that from unmodified elk bone from Par-Tee, suggesting the whale was locally hunted. We present ethnohistoric data from the southern Northwest Coast describing opportunistic whale hunting with a variety of technologies. We argue that many groups along the west coast of North America likely occasionally hunted whales in the past and that this hunting occurred using nonspecialized technologies. Dos maneras de utilizacion de las ballenas se han documentado en la costa Noroeste de Norteamerica. Estas son, la caceria sistemdtica y la utilizacion de ballenas encontradas muertas en la playa. Etnogrdficamente, la caza sistemdticafue practicada unicamente por grupos Indigenas del sur-oeste de la Isla de Vancouver y la Peninsula Olimpica del estado de Washington. Esta caceria se realizaba con tecnologia especialmente disehada para dicha actividad. Se sabe que otros grupos etnicos de la costa noreste de Norte America no cazaban, sino que utilizaban los restos de ballenas encontradas sin vida en la playa. Una punta de hueso alojada en parte de la estructura osea digital de una ballena, encontrada en Par-Tee, en la costa norte de Oregon, representa la evidencia arqueologica de la caceria de ballenas en este lugar. Esta caceria posiblemente ocurrio hace 1,300 a 1,600 anos. Muestras de ADN antiguo extraido de la estructura osea digital de la ballena sugiere que se trata de una ballena jorobada (Megaptera novaeangliae). El ADN proveniente de la punta de hueso encontrada revela que estafue hecha de hueso de ciervo (Cervus elaphus). En este trabajo de investigacion, presentamos informacion etnohistorica de la costa noroeste de Norteamerica describiendo la caceria de ballenas "oportunista ", la cual incluye diversas tecnologias. Segun nue stro estudio, muchos grupos de la costa Noroeste de Norteamerica seguramente de vez en cuando cazaban ballenas en el pasado, y dicha caceria se realizo mediante la utilizacion de tecnologia no-especializada. Two modes of whale use have been docu 1983; Curtis 1916; Drucker 1951; Gunther 1942; mented on the Northwest Coast of North Jonaitis 1999; Kool 1982; Koppert 1930; Reagan America (following Kroeber 1939), namely 1925; Sapir et al. 2004; Swan 1870) (Figure 1). systematic whaling and whale scavenging. The first These groups systematically hunted whales off use was on a canoes mode of whale limited in its distribution shore seasonal basis using seaworthy during the ethnographic period to a few groups of and hunting technology exclusively designed for the central Northwest Coast, namely theNuu-chah the task. Neighbors of these groups, including the nulth and Ditidaht peoples of western Vancouver Clallam of the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Island, British Columbia and the Makah of the Quileute and Quinault of the western Washington Olympic Peninsula inWashington State (Arima coast also hunted whales (Hajda 1990:507; Pow Robert Losey 13-8 Tory Building, Department of Anthropology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6R 3H8, Canada. ([email protected]) Dongya Yang Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada. ([email protected]) American Antiquity, 72(4), 2007, pp. 657-676 Copyright ?2007 by the Society for American Archaeology 657 658AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 72, No. 4,2007] QueenWL m^^^^^H|n|H|ift' Charlotte^m ySBSBBt^B^BS^^^A Islands^ wRf^^^^^BBBBBBBmlm Whaling j))^H[j^^^^^H Groups?^a?^K9|^^^H Sound Barkley \^^K^^H Ozette\i^U^^H PacificOcean _ _ Par-Tee j^^^^^H^ fl^^^^H Alsea/YaquinaJ^^^^H| a Siuslaw^^^^HH /, Coos/Coquille^^^^hRI =^==0 125 250km Tolowa^^^^^1 ^^^^^H| Figure 1. Northwest Coast culture area with the distribution of ethnographically documented systematic whaling groups encircled. Other ethnographic groups and locations mentioned in the text also indicated. REPORTS659 ell 1990:431; Suttles 1974:166-168; Suttles, ed. of wealth that could be stored, traded, and given 1990:458). Whaling was adopted by the Quileute away (Drucker 1951), and were one of the means from the Makah in the 1800s (Frachtenburg through which individuals could self-aggrandize. 1921:322), and the Quinault reportedly practiced Whaling was often high risk but came with sub whaling to a lesser extent than the Quileute (Olson stantial rewards, particularly in the form of pres 1967:44). The second mode of whale use has char tige. To counterbalance risk and to help ensure acterized all other culture groups on theNorthwest success, ethnographic whaling on the Northwest Coast, who reportedly utilized beached or drifting Coast was often associated with complex ritual whales but never hunted them (but seeAcheson and preparation (Curtis 1916; Drucker 1951; Gunther Wigen 2002; Blackman 1981). Whale hunting 1942; Jonaitis 1999;Waterman 1967). Beyond this, groups also regularly scavenged drifting and whaling involved a set of cultural practices associ stranded whales (Drucker 1951:39, 255-256). ated with the act of hunting whales, the behavior Archaeological evidence for use of whale prod of whalers' families while crews were at sea, the ucts on the Northwest Coast, consisting of whale butchery of whales, and the distribution of their bones in cultural contexts, extends back at least products. Whaling was clearly a group activity, 4,000 years (Monks et al. 2001). Definite evidence often involving several households or entire settle for whale hunting, including the presence of ethno ments, and not just individuals in canoes pursuing graphically documented whaling tools (reviewed whales. Whales found dead or dying on the shore below) and strike marks on whale remains in sites, (drift whales) potentially involved many of the appears as early as 3000 B.P. and has been entirely same cultural behaviors, but certainly lacked the limited to the Nuu-chah-nulth and Makah area risks associated with active whaling. Possession of (Monks et al. 2001). Arguments also have been drift whales was often highly contested. At least made for precontact whale hunting on the Queen among some groups, obtaining drift whales was not Charlotte Islands based on ethnohistoric data and a passive process, but depended on an individual's the relative abundance of whale bone in sites (Ache spiritual power to draw dead or dying animals on son andWigen 2002). However, most researchers shore (Drucker 1951:171-173; Jacobs 2003: working beyond the region where whaling is ethno 182-183; Kroeber and Barrett 1960:122-126; graphically documented have been reluctant to use Sapiretal. 2004:147-163,189-203). Whales were as such information evidence for precontact whale also important mythological figures for virtually hunting. This is likely because no whale hunting every ethnographic Northwest Coast group (Sut technology similar to that described ethnographi tles 1990). cally has been found outside the Nuu-chah-nulth Whales and whaling were clearly important and Makah area of the Northwest Coast, and even among some groups on the Northwest Coast dur rare there it is (McMillan 1999:134; Monks et al. ing the ethnographic period, and it is reasonable to 2001:66). Also, it is often impossible to determine inquire if other groups in the region hunted whales if or scav whale bone in sites represents hunted at some point in the past and how such hunting was enged animals. Difficulties involving the archaeo accomplished. Presented here is evidence for the are use a logical identification of whale hunting common of previously undocumented form of whal even elsewhere, where whaling remains a strong ing harpoon or lance on the southern Northwest living tradition (Black 1987; Freeman 1979; Krup Coast. This evidence consists of the tip of a bone nik 1993; McCartney 1980, 1995; Mulville 2002, point lodged in a large whale phalange recovered 2005; Savelle and McCartney 1991; Whitridge from the Par-Tee site (35CLT20) on the northern 1999). Oregon coast, dating from 800 to 2300 cal. B.P. extent Documenting the and diversity of pre Mitochondrial DNA extracted from the point iden contact on whaling practices the Northwest Coast tified it as being made of elk (Cervus elaphus) bone, is reasons. important for several Large whales can a species found along much of the North Ameri an provide abundance of food and tool-making can Pacific coastline from roughly Vancouver materials and as such could have been important Island southward to near Point Conception, Cali subsistence and technological resources (Huels fornia (Bryant and Maser 1982:24). The DNA beck Whale were sources 1988). products potential sequence of the point suggests its ultimate origin 660AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 72, No. 4,2007] is not Vancouver Island, where roughly contem The whaling harpoon is consistently described poraneous evidence of whaling previously has been as a large thrusting implement several meters in identified, but somewhere further south along the length tipped with a three piece toggling head (Fig Pacific coast. Its DNA sequence was found to be ure 2). Attached to the head was a line several identical to that obtained from unmodified elk meters long leading to a seal skin float that produced remains recovered from Par-Tee.