Alaska v. Endangered Species Act

Concerned with recent activity regarding application of the Endangered Species Act, Gov. Sean Parnell and the state's lawyers are gearing up to invest more money than ever engaging in the legal warfare between government and conservation groups.

A major initiative would carve a role for the state in the legal battles that drive the ESA, while also funneling money to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game for enhanced studies and the state's own conservation efforts, Attorney General Dan Sullivan said.

"We think it's possible, and indeed from a state government official's perspective constitutionally required, to both develop our resources, economic opportunity, and protect our wildlife and environment," Sullivan said. "We can do both. That's the balance we're trying to achieve."

The state's focus isn't just about the polar bear or the beluga whale or the ringed seal.The state says it supports protections for animals that face threats.

The real worry is the theory underscoring the protections afforded the polar bear, and the legal precedent that has set -- one that could turn Alaska into the world's largest zoo, the state warns.

"This is unprecedented, the (polar bear) listing by (U.S.) Fish and Wildlife," Sullivan said. "You have a listing that's not based on a demonstrated decline, but on a potential future decline based on the theories of climate change continuing. What animal in Alaska would not be listed under that theory?"

But groups devoted to saving species discount the state's desire to protect animals, and admonish the government for bringing politics into play.

"It's a waste of the state's resources," said Rebecca Noblin, an Anchorage-based staff attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, a national environmental group leading the charge. "Climate change is the biggest threat to biodiversity we've seen. A lot of the species really are in trouble, and we need the protections of the ESA to give them a fighting chance."

A poster child

Alaska's government isn't disputing that the climate is changing and sea ice is diminishing. But, Sullivan said, the environmental groups are misusing the Endangered Species Act to intentionally shut down the state's oil industry on the grounds that it contributes to climate change, which may affect animals in the future.

The polar bear is a poster child, but not simply one that captures the world's attention as an iconic Arctic species. It's also an example of how Alaska has managed to develop resources while protecting an animal, Sullivan said.

"The last four decades we've significantly developed the North Slope -- significantly, our oil resource up there, and at the same time, the population numbers of the polar bear dramatically increased," he said.

But he's talking about worldwide numbers, which are thought to range between 20,000 and 25,000, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature. The two populations that inhabit parts of Alaska -- the Chukchi Sea group, which shares turf with Russia, and the south Beaufort bears, which ignore the Alaska-Canada boundary -- could be in decline.

"What they're saying is misleading," Noblin said. "In the past few years, populations have begun to decline again because of loss of sea ice. In particular, the two Alaska species are now considered to be both in decline by the International Polar Bear Working Group."

The working group is part of the IUCN, which puts Alaska bears in decline or calls numbers "uncertain." Polar bear counts are not reliable, and there is often little past data with which to compare current estimates. Just the same, the group says declines in both populations are expected to continue. Most at fault? The impacts of climate change, human activity associated with industrial development, increased contaminants transported to the area by the atmosphere and ocean, and possible overharvest.

Endangered economy

Under the Endangered Species Act, critical habitat areas are drawn up for animals listed as threatened or endangered. The goal is to protect the areas the critters live in, including their food supplies, to allow populations a chance at bouncing back.