Given the wreckage that could result from collision between a powerful law and an Indian tribe that takes its sovereignty seriously, it was encouraging last week to see leaders of the two Passamaquoddy reservations and federal officials peacefully discussing the harbor porpoise hunt.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, part of the Department of Commerce, is charged with carrying out the 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act which made it illegal to kill porpoises, seals, sea lions, whales, polar bears and other such creatures.

But not totally illegal. Tribes in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest are exempt from some prohibitions and are allowed a limited hunt of traditional prey. Harbor porpoise is a traditional quarry of Passamaquoddy hunters; today its consumption is almost entirely ceremonial and the take is small, only 50 or so animals a year. The Maine tribes deserve the same consideration given to those in the West.

The Marine Mammal Protection Act is a deadly serious piece of legislation, those convicted of violations face ruinous fines and long prison sentences. It is to NOAA’s credit that it is putting negotiation ahead of enforcement. And it is to the tribe’s credit that it acknowledges there is a need to negotiating reasonable limits.

There are ample reasons for NOAA to proceed with caution. Harbor porpoises are far from endangered — there may be as many as 50,000 in Northeastern waters. The small number killed by the tribe pales in comparison to the 2,000 that die in fishing nets each year. Experts at the New England Aquarium predict that the fishing industry bycatch will virtually vanish within a few years as the use spreads of highly effective sonic devices that repel porpoises from nets. In short, the harbor porpoise population is healthy and is soon to get healthier. It certainly can withstand a few ceremonial feasts.

Opponents of the hunt, such as the American Humane Society, say there is insufficient evidence that the Passamaquoddy porpoise hunt is rooted firmly enough in antiquity to be a heritage issue, that documentation of the hunt goes back only to 1840. Since the Passamaquoddy Tribe does not have an extensive written history, the 157 years that are on the books sound like a good piece of antiquity; the criticism sounds like a bad piece of selective research and a rather presumptuous value judgment. Other critics say tribal leaders should forget about the past and deal with the present by concentrating instead upon education, housing, economic development. Respecting one’s past and dealing with the concerns of today are not mutually exclusive.

The leaders of Pleasant Point and Indian Township make a good point: In agreeing to the 1980 Maine Indian Land Claims Settlement, the tribe gave up its claim on the land, but it did not give up its claim on its heritage. NOAA also makes a good point: It cannot ignore a violation of the law and it cannot recommend an exemption without good reason. With the positive, constructive approach taken by both parties in last week’s opening meeting, that good reason should easy to find.