Wolf Song of Alaska News
>>Wolves in General
>>Wolves of Denali
>>Wolves in the Lower 48
>>Wolves in Canada
>>The Mexican Wolf
>>The Red Wolf
>>Wolf Tracking
>>Coyote
>>Fox
>>Dingo
>>Animals Sharing Wolf Habitat
>>Wolfdogs in Alaska
>>Canis lupus familiaris
>>Wolf Poems
>>Wolf Distribution
>>Wolves in Afghanistan
>>Wolves in Africa
>>Wolves in Europe
>>Wolves in China
>>Wolves in Iran
>>Wolves in Japan
>>Wolves in Mongolia
>>Wolves in Tasmania
>>Wolves in South Asia
>>Wolves in Scandinavia
>>Wolves in Russia
>>Wolves in South America
>>Wolves Where???
>>Feral Children
>>Miscellaneous Topics
>>Wolf Academy
>>Wolves & Humans
>>Predator & Prey
>>Wolves & Native Americans
>>Wolves for Kids
>>Wolves & Folklore
>>Wolves in Business
>>Wolves in Religion
>>Wolves in War
>>Wolves in Games
>>Wolves in the Arts
>>The Wolf in Fiction
>>Wolves in Medicine

spacer

 

Help the McNeil Bear Sanctuary off linmits to hunting

 

Endangered Species Act a 'Weapon of Choice'

Mike Nizich / My Turn / Juneau Empire / February 2, 2009

Congress passed the Endangered Species Act in 1973 to be used as a safeguard to protect species from extinction. No one questions that reasonable and prudent measures should be taken to avoid extinction, especially when the threat is posed by human activity.

In recent years, however, the act has become the weapon of choice for environmental groups to thwart resource and economic development activities they oppose. Projects within the habitat range of a listed species must undergo extensive consultation and analysis before approval. In Alaska alone there are 19 ESA-listed species, with another nine species being considered for listing. They run the gamut from eiders to herring to walrus and their habitats blanket Alaska's entire coastline and some interior land.

The State of Alaska is alarmed at the recent proliferation of listings and petitions to list and we are concerned about some of the policies and methods used to make such decisions. We are troubled by an increased reliance on computer population modeling based upon overly conservative assumptions. We object to listing decisions that are made despite extremely small likelihood of extinction over extended timelines of 50, 100, or even hundreds of years. And we caution against setting recovery goals that may be unachievable and much more stringent than needed to alleviate the risk of extinction.

Increasingly, computer models are used to assess a species' risk of going extinct. When employing such models, an agency must determine how far into the future it can reasonably predict a species' viability. Should this be 10 years, 50 years, 100 years or beyond? In the case of beluga whales in Cook Inlet, population models were used to predict risk out to 300 years. This is too far into the future to model with any certainty.

Defining the risk of extinction is also important. Current National Marine Fisheries Service policy states that a species with greater than a 1 percent risk of extinction over 100 years qualifies for ESA listing. A species could have a 98.9 percent chance of not going extinct, but would still be listed. This is simply too conservative a threshold.

Goals for species recovery are being adopted that are increasingly unachievable. To be de-listed, a species must be shown as fully recovered with all threats to its continued survival eliminated. For beluga whales in Cook Inlet, federal agencies say they are likely to require that the whale population be stabilized at more than 800 - more than have ever been counted with current survey methods - and there must be no risk of falling below that number in the future. These goals make it nearly impossible to ever de-list these whales. The eastern stock of Steller sea lions remains threatened under ESA, despite achieving recovery goals and reaching high population levels, due to similar overly stringent requirements.

A listing should only be made if it will benefit the species. Both the polar bear and the Cook Inlet beluga whale are currently protected by the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The recent ESA listings provide little additional protection. Instead, they add a lengthy bureaucratic process and invite legal challenges that stand between Alaskans and responsible, safe resource development.

To avoid listing decisions that do not benefit a species but significantly impact our economy, it is imperative that reasonable standards apply. The State of Alaska will continue to watch for decisions that are based on speculative predictions or which are unreasonable. Pressing for credible science and reasonable listing decisions is in the best interests of the species and the public.

In the case of the recent Cook Inlet beluga whale listing, the State of Alaska is preparing a legal challenge to this decision. In the meantime, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game will continue to work with the fisheries service to mitigate the impact of the listing decision on the residents of Southcental Alaska and assist local governments and other stakeholders with navigating the consultation processes this decision imposes.

* Mike Nizich is Gov. Sarah Palin's chief of staff.

Back to the Current Events menu

 

© Wolf Song of Alaska

wolfsong@alaska.com
IRS Classification 501(c)(3)
Federal ID #92-0127397

The Wolf Song of Alaska logo, web site text and photos are copyrighted, registered, and protected, and cannot be used without permission.  Photos by Monty Sloan, Tom and Maria Talasz.

Web design and artwork donated by Maria Talasz, She-Wolf Works

Visitor Number... Site Meter Paw

 

 

Editorials / Opinions
Editorials/Opinions