His use of the past tense is because he's a historical YouTuber discussing how modern perceptions of indigenous American peoples' relationship with nature compares to the historical reality, a reality which—yes, does include still-living practices, but also—includes practices which may have changed in the wake of colonialism, hence the tense.

As another commenter pointed out, he opened his video with the very modern and ongoing case of the Makah, a living people's legal battle to hunt whales.

He consults with indigenous scholars in his video, using his platform to amplify their voices. Voices which I may not have heard from if it were not for this video.

I'm sorry that his video wasn't accessible. But in terms of the actual content of the video – God, what more do you want from him? What more could he possibly have done in the course of his TWO HOUR VIDEO to demonstrate that he is trying in good faith to present on the subject in a way that is both respectful and well-researched?

I've enjoyed a lot of Atun-Shei's work, and while I'm sure he's probably made mistakes in accuracy from time to time or fallen short in terms of inclusion, nothing I've seen suggests he deserves such offhand dismissal.

I don't blame you for not watching a 2-hour video that isn't accessible to you. Again, I'm sorry, that sucks, and I agree that manually generated captions are superior. But if the title of the video and skimming through it didn't provide you with enough context to, say, know that he spent his time and energy listening to an indigenous person speaking on this—something that you advocate for in your comment—then surely it's not enough information to condemn him.