Mayor John J. Williams' Testimony - July 27, 2007, Soldotna, AK
Note: This is a copy of his testimony, as provided
Good evening. For the record, my name is John Williams, I currently reside in Kenai, Alaska, and represent the Kenai Peninsula Borough as Mayor. Thank you for this opportunity to testify.
As you know, the Kenai Peninsula Borough has been involved in past and present regulatory and court actions related to the depleted stocks of the Cook Inlet beluga whale. We have commented on proposed rulemakings and the draft conservation plan, devoted funds and worked diligently to try to secure resources for NMFS to conduct further scientific research, and intervened on behalf of NMFS in a federal suit almost seven years ago to defend the depleted status decision. Given the dearth of scientific research, that decision is one the Kenai Peninsula Borough continues to support as it is based on solid information, not speculation, and it applies the appropriate legislation, the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), to protect the Cook Inlet beluga whale. The Kenai Peninsula Borough will continue to advocate for additional funding for further research of this marine mammal as well as defending the current depleted status until additional scientific research, not speculation, supports changing this decision.
I wish to clearly state that I do appreciate the concerns mentioned by all participants in this process, and the efforts of the NFMS to conduct research on the issue, albeit without enough funding. My main concern is that we proceed based upon good science, which requires more funding and more time. Fortunately, the most recent studies reveal a small increase in the Cook Inlet Beluga Whale population, which I believe allows us time to conduct more research to ensure we proceed in a productive direction.
The National Marine Fisheries Service has proposed that listing Cook Inlet Beluga Whale as endangered is warranted. Let’s put this in proper perspective. The issue before you is not whether to protect the Cook Inlet beluga whales, but whether the only way to protect them is by listing them under the Endangered Species Act. The Kenai Peninsula Borough administration does not believe that available scientific evidence shows that an “endangered” listing is needed to protect the beluga. Instead, we believe that the Marine Mammal Protection Act provides the necessary level of protection for the beluga whale to continue to recover in Cook Inlet. The depleted status under the MMPA provides the authority to protect the Cook Inlet beluga whales from actual harvest and also provides the National Marine Fisheries Service options to protect the whales from specific activities that may impinge on important habitat.
“Endangered,” as defined in the Endangered Species Act, means "any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” Right now, no one knows how far the Cook Inlet beluga whale’s range extends. Until the National Marine Fisheries Service receives adequate funding for additional studies, and performs those studies, it lacks the necessary data to draw a supportable conclusion regarding the Cook Inlet beluga whale’s current range. Beluga whales have been sighted in the Gulf of Alaska, Sitka, Kodiak, and the Prince William Sound, yet these sightings are discounted from the Cook Inlet beluga whales under the proposed rulemaking released on April 20, 2007, the same ruling that NMFS proposed to list the Cook Inlet beluga whale as endangered. We need more information on this key point. NMFS states, “We have insufficient information at this time to determine if these whales are part of the Cook Inlet DPS.” This is a clear indicator that more research is needed and leaves the question open as to the distinct population segment issue.
NMFS states the Cook Inlet Beluga whale has been classified as a “distinct population segment.” It then confuses this conclusion with its comments on a population segment of 12 Yakutat beluga whales that used to be included as part of the Cook Inlet group and also excluding the other sightings in the Gulf of Alaska and other areas due to insufficient information. It excludes the Yakutat whales from the Cook Inlet belugas as “no records exist that show any association between these whales.” However, I have found no good description of whether any research was performed on whether any such association occurs and no indication of any serious effort to locate other belugas in the Gulf of Alaska. I request further clarification on the status of the 12 Yakutat beluga whales that were previously considered part of the Cook Inlet beluga whales and on efforts made to determine whether other belugas live in other areas of the Gulf of Alaska.
Also, under the rulemaking described above, the NMFS removed the Yakutat whales from the Cook Inlet group based largely on unpublished biopsy data. Basing decisions like this on unpublished data is troubling. It is not clear to me how their removal affects the current and previous abundance estimates.
According to the proposed rulemaking on April 20th, speculated reasons for the population level, such as habitat, prey, predation, disease, pollution, and noise, have not changed since the depleted status was made, and are not stated as a current or ongoing cause of decline. It does not appear that any studies indicate that resource development and commerce have contributed to the decline as well. The Status Review and the proposed rulemaking language states that hunting appears to be the sole reason attributable to the decline. Hunting has virtually been eliminated under the MMPA through regulation and co-management agreements. This has provided a major conservation effort. While the proposed listing states future development projects such as the Knik Arm Bridge and the Port of Anchorage Projects MAY have an impact on habitat, these can be managed under the depleted status ruling and are also regulated by the State of Alaska and Federal Governments.
The National Marine Fisheries Service states that the population of the Cook Inlet beluga whale has dwindled to an estimated number of 302 animals with a 26% chance of going extinct in 100 years. National Marine Fisheries Service goes on to state that the population has declined 4.1 percent annually since 1999. The estimated abundance of animals was 278 at the time petitioners filed with National Marine Fisheries Service to have the beluga listed and the corresponding Status Review was completed. However, the estimated abundance count at the time of the proposed listing was 302. This is a nine-percent increase over the previous years’ estimate. This increase is buttressed by recent information currently being verified and peer reviewed that was submitted for the record in Homer. That draft document finds over 330 distinct and different whales in its 2005 study that utilized water borne craft with verifiable photo identification on both the left and right side. The draft study states that this photo identification method represents a “minimum” size population.
The latest NMFS draft Stock Assessment Report for 2006 on the Cook Inlet beluga whale states “Once the subsistence harvest ceased, the decline in stock ceased.” The report goes on to say that “However, there has been a lack of recovery, and most recent analysis suggests that the population is declining slowly.” I disagree. There was an increase in the 2006 SAR of 24 whales in the abundance estimate, a 9% increase over 2005. The MMPA depleted status is working. Many believe an endangered listing is a panacea and the only way to adequately protect the whale. Again, I disagree. The only other known mortality issues cited in the 2006 draft SAR by NMFS are Killer Whale predation and strandings. Killer whales, if present in the Cook Inlet will continue to prey on belugas despite an endangered listing. Strandings will continue as well. According to NMFS, most strandings have occurred in the Turnagain Arm and they go on to state it is highly unlikely they were caused from human interactions. Again, and endangered listing will not change this. The decline problems have been identified and those that were human caused have been identified and addressed. As Mayor I pledge to you the continued support of the Borough to continue efforts to study and reduce identifiable impacts on the Cook Inlet beluga whale. I will submit additional written comments which detail the borough’s concerns as well as additional concerns related to the proposed listing.
Thank you for your time.
