The federal government has designated more than 3,000 square miles of Cook Inlet as critical habitat for beluga whales, carving out exemptions for the Port of Anchorage and military installations.
The listing has been in the works since 2009, after environmental groups threatened to sue to prod the government into taking action to protect the whale from looming development in the Anchorage region. The whale has been listed as endangered since 2008 but the federal government never followed up with designating critical habitat and crafting a recovery plan.
The National Marine Fisheries Service has estimated that the Cook Inlet population of belugas has dropped from about 1,300 to about 300. The newly designated habitat areas include upper Cook Inlet, the coastal areas of western Cook Inlet and most of Kachemak Bay.
Rebecca Noblin, the Alaska director for the Center for Biological Diversity, hailed the habitat designation as an important victory for the belugas.
"The designation of critical habitat for the Cook Inlet beluga whale gives this highly imperiled whale a real chance of recovery," Noblin said in a press release. "The Fisheries Service has thrown Cook Inlet belugas a much-needed lifeline."
The designation means that federal agencies are prohibited from taking actions that might change the habitat in a way that harms the endangered population. Federal agencies are required to consult on permit applications, for instance, to make sure the critical habitat designation is being upheld.
The designation comes a few days after the state Department of Natural Resources announced it would hold a lease sale in Cook Inlet in June, offering acreage that would support oil and gas development operations.
Brendan Cummings, senior counsel for the Center for Biological Diversity, said the critical habitat designation and the rules it creates only apply to federal agencies. So it wouldn't have any effect on the lease sale. But, he said, it could come into play if federal permits are required for any drilling operations in Cook Inlet, such as seismic work which generally requires a federal permit or siting of a drill rig that usually need a Corps of Engineers approval.
"Future development on those leases could be affected," Cummings said.
Noblin noted that other developments in the Inlet near Anchorage also could have an impact on the whales, including the proposed, billion-dollar Knik Arm Bridge will directly affect some of the whale's most important habitat, she said.
Port expansion and a proposed giant coal mine and coal-export dock would also destroy key beluga habitat, Noblin contends.
"While today's designation is an important step toward saving the Cook Inlet beluga, protections for the species remain far from complete," said Noblin. "The Fisheries Service must quickly finalize a recovery plan and must stop approving permits that allow for the destruction of important beluga habitat in Cook Inlet."
The designation drew some concerns from the Alaska congressional delegation, who had been critical of it from the beginning. They were pleased exemptions had been made for the port and military facilities.
But Alaska Sen. Mark Begich, a former Anchorage mayor, said in a press release he is still concerned that the designation could be "crippling to Alaska development."
"The decision is unjustified by science or economics," Begich said. "The designation could stall or shut down projects from the Mat-Su to Anchorage to the Kenai Peninsula. NOAA is still trying to tell Alaskans this designation will only have a small ripple effect on the Southcentral economy. Unfortunately, it could be a bore tide."
Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she thinks NOAA did not take the actual costs of the designation into account.
"I understand the Beluga habitat needs protection, but I have serious concerns with NOAA's figures to justify it," Murkowski said in a prepared statement. "The costs involved are 100 times higher than they're estimating. Beyond their bad math, I remain extremely concerned the critical habitat designation will lead to something all too common to Alaska: more delays in permitting, construction and protracted litigation."
NOAA's impact cost estimates average out to $364,000 over the next decade, she said. But an independent economic analysis prepared for the Resource Development Council put the cost of varying economic scenarios between $39 million and $400 million per year, she pointed out.
U.S. Rep. Don Young said in a statement Friday that he was "pleased" that federal officials "recognized the importance of the Port of Anchorage and the Eagle River Flats Range," but that "these designations have become purely political."
The fisheries service has been criticized for listing the whales as endangered and its consideration of the critical habitat designation by state officials, Anchorage Mayor Dan Sullivan, the state's congressional delegation and business groups. They were concerned about the effect on shipping operations at the port but the new designation accommodates that area as well as adjacent military operations.
The state filed suit to challenge the listing and that case is still pending in federal court.
"In its ongoing attack on wildlife, the state of Alaska has repeatedly shown a willingness to choose politics over science," said Noblin. "All evidence shows that Cook Inlet belugas are in serious trouble and desperately need the protections of the Endangered Species Act to survive and recover."
The governor's office issued a press release late Friday blasting the decision. Parnell said the state would continue to fight the designation and the listing ofthe species as endangered.
"The likely result will be less resource development, less economic development, and fewer jobs at a time when the president recently called for increased domestic energy production," Parnell said in the prepared statement. "Presidential statements are one thing, but again the agencies continue to lock up land and hurt our families and Alaska communities."
Some state lawmakers also reacted angrily to what they see as a federal effort to choke Alaska's ability to bolster its economy.
Rep. Charisse Millett said in a prepared statement she was relieved the port and Eagle River Flats Range were excluded. "The remaining areas are of grave concern to me because of the unknown impacts it will have on management and development of resources in the Cook Inlet area and especially the Point McKenzie area."
Millett sponsored a resolution last year opposing the critical habitat designation and said she will ask the federal agency to reconsider its decision.
House Speaker Mike Chenault, who represents the Kenai Peninsula area, said, also in a prepared statement: "I am, and will continue to be, indignant on this issue."
He called the designation "another prime example of the federal government locking up our land and ignoring the calls for caution from the State of Alaska and the Legislature."
Chenault is worried that the middle and lower Cook Inlet will be prohibited from "construction, drilling or dredging" as soon as next month when the designation takes effect.
"This rule sends a terribly mixed message," Chenault said. "The President of the United States says he wants to lessen reliance on foreign oil – he's re-opened the permitting process for offshore oil and gas – but with this habitat designation, the feds are blocking just that sort of development.
"The State of Alaska approved helping to pay for a jack-up rig to hit the Inlet this summer. This federal overreach could jeopardize that work. It is especially troubling for the Kenai, following on the heels of the LNG plant's closure earlier this year. We were hoping to see the benefit of the state participation in drilling this summer. Now? It's out the window."
Contact Patti Epler at patti(at)alaskadispatch.com.