Feds look at protecting Pacific walrus

The agency said that protecting the Pacific walrus as a threatened or endangered species may be warranted, in part due to projected changes in sea ice due to the warming Arctic. The Fish and Wildlife Service will now launch a 60-day public comment period, after which it will have until Sept. 10, 2010, to decide whether protecting the walrus is necessary.

The review is taking place because the Center for Biological Diversity, an Arizona-based conversation group, sued the agency for failing to move forward with a decision on whether the walrus should be added to the federal list of threatened and endangered species. The group first petitioned Fish and Wildlife to protect the Pacific walrus under the Endangered Species Act in February 2008.

The lawsuit was settled in May 2009 with an agreement that Fish and Wildlife would reach a decision on whether to conduct the review by this Thursday. The Center for Biological Diversity is the same group that successfully led the charge to list Alaska polar bears as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.

Pacific walrus use sea ice as a sort of life raft, resting on it between dives for clams and other seabed organisms. When there's less ice, or when the ice drifts beyond the shallow waters where walrus feed, the large mammal is forced to rest on the beach, where it's more vulnerable to predators.

"Walrus use sea ice to haul out between feeding bouts and to feed their young, so their distribution is determined by the presence of sea ice," said Joel Garlich-Miller, a walrus biologist for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The last population estimate of Pacific walrus counted 200,000, but that study was done back in 1990. Analysis of a 2006 aerial survey will be completed soon, and will assist the Fish and Wildlife Service in their decision.

If the walrus is listed as threatened or endangered, the federal government should look at how offshore oil development in the Bering and Chukchi seas might affect the walrus population, said Rebecca Noblin, staff attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity.

"If an area is designated as critical habitat, it doesn't mean that it can't be developed for oil," Noblin said. "It just means that the government will have to take a look at how walrus would be affected."

Contact Josh Saul at jsaul@alaskadispatch.com