If it was easy to get to and thousands came, this place would be destroyed. The walrus would leave and the flowers would be trampled. Some places are best left unspoiled and protected so that other generations, years from now, may come and sit in solitude and observe the things we were blessed to see.
In 1960 the wise people in the newly formed state of Alaska created the Walrus Islands State Game Sanctuary, about 65 miles southwest of Dillingham. At that time we, as a people, promised to keep those seven islands with their miniscule coastlines a safe haven for a small portion of our walrus population.
Now a less wise group of Alaskans has decided that this gem is no longer worthy of our protection, and have chosen to remove those who stand on the green hills and say, "not on my watch." There is mention that perhaps another way can be found to do this. This comes after months of no plan at all. I believe a plan should have already been in place to protect these animals. I believe it was shortsighted to completely remove the biology techs and take away all funding without having another plan in place first.
Alaska has a responsibility to the walrus of our state. They are a federally managed species and are proposed to be listed on the endangered species list. It seems to me that we should be doing more, not less, when it comes to walrus.
Last summer I visited Nome, and while I was there a headless walrus carcass was found to have washed ashore. There are many places a thing like this can happen in the state of Alaska and go completely unnoticed. This should not occur in a state sanctuary that claims to protect walrus. To be clear, this has happened on Round Island, the best known of the walrus sanctuary islands, even with the biologists there. Thankfully, because they were on the island, those who broke the law were caught and punished. With the biologists off the island how many more walrus will be killed for their skulls and tusks?
This can't possibly be monitored from offices in Anchorage. Cameras can be useful, but they are costly. The other concern is that by the time the pictures are reviewed, the walrus have already been disturbed or killed. Walrus are very sensitive to disturbances and have been known to completely abandon haul outs if they are subject to frequent disturbances.
Cameras also need to be set up, checked on and taken down. A large expense to the program at Round Island is travel and fuel costs; who will pay for all of this?
Camp hosts have also been suggested. Volunteers are great, but they will also need training and support. They can't be expected to set up camp or tear down camp. Would they be required to pay for their travel to and from Round Island? Volunteers are not trained formally about the laws of Fish and Game and only have basic knowledge of the walrus and other animals on the island. The biologists often speak with boat captains and a great deal of positive interactions and education occurs through these conversations, as well as education to permitted visitors.
One potential is to start some sort of intern program. Spending a summer on this island and studying walrus seems to me to be a great use of the sanctuary. What better partnership than to match trained and experienced biologists with university students that have an interest in marine biology. This would also mean that Fish and Game would need to take an active role, and part of that role would no doubt be financial.
It has been suggested that the many counts and research that have been conducted on Round Island are "not useful to walrus management." It may not have the short-term impact that some may be looking for; however, I've no doubt that these counts over decades are valid. I believe that it's shortsighted to discount the data and the importance in overall walrus research.
The data collected over the years is also not all just related to the walrus. The biologists on Round Island collect data for multiple entities on various species on the island, including the many migratory birds and the sea lions that pass through.
One major concern regarding walrus haul outs across the state is the curiosity factor. As more walrus come ashore en masse we may find more disturbances abound as humans take the opportunity to get closer to the animals. These visits will no doubt cause further stampede activity and deaths to walrus.
Round Island is already set up to receive and educate visitors. Photographers and tourists may come and camp there and enjoy observing the walrus from a safe distance without disturbing the animals. I suspect it may be the only place on earth where people may have extended visits with walrus in the wild with minimal disturbance to the animals. Staying in a tent near these great animals, one is gifted with a concert of chiming through the night. The music of these large animals is gentle and haunting.
Like McNeil River, Round Island allows an intimate experience of humans with animals. The permitting process was set up to keep the experience intimate and to protect the animals from stress, not as a means of bringing in a great deal of revenue.
We have an opportunity to utilize this amazing place to teach future generations a kindness and appreciation for our wild places. The biologists or biologist/interns may be our best way to do this. We need to do more to support the communities in the area around the sanctuary so that travel to/from the island is more reliable. We also need to continue to have a program there that allows for visitors in a controlled environment with oversight. Our goal must be to protect the animals at the sanctuary first (as stated on the Fish and Game website) and then to educate society by allowing for tourism and photography.
Yes, budgets are tight and cuts will always be an issue. However I believe taking the biologists and the funding away from Round Island and the Walrus Islands Sanctuary may have lasting and devastating effects. I would hope that those who make these decisions about our wild places and animals would reconsider this decision to completely remove all funding and work harder to find an option such as combining interns and biologists for the good of the island, animals and future generations. It may mean moving funds around to cover some costs and working with other entities to come up with other options for portions of the funding. We must remain steadfast in our state to protect the land and animals. We must follow the lead of other generations who were wise and set these great places aside with a promise to protect, promote and preserve.
Alaska has over 47,000 miles of coastline if you include islands, coves and bays. Surely we can find a way to protect these few miles.
Betsy Palfreyman is the founder and president of the nonprofit group Walrus Advocates of Round Island Sanctuary.
The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)alaskadispatch.com