Cook Inlet beluga whale, NOAA Fisheries
Our comment on the preparation of a potential June 2021 Cook Inlet Lease Sale 258
October 13, 2020
Amee Howard, Project Manager
BOEM Office of Environment, Alaska Region
3801 Centerpoint Drive, Suite 500
Anchorage, AK 99503
RE: Comments on BOEM’s NOI to Prepare an EIS for the 2021 Cook Inlet OCS Oil and Gas Lease Sale 258
To Whom It May Concern,
On behalf of the Alaska Wildlife Alliance and its supporters, I am providing the following comments as part of the scoping process regarding the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM’s) notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to analyze the environmental effects of the potential June 2021 Cook Inlet Lease Sale 258, and specifically the potential effects of leasing, exploration, development and production of oil and natural gas in the proposed lease sale area.
The Alaska Wildlife Alliance is a non-profit organization based in Anchorage, founded more than 35 years ago, and speaks for more than 1,500 supporters of Alaska’s wildlife. We advocate for healthy ecosystems, ethically and scientifically managed to protect our wildlife for present and future generations. While there are numerous species of marine wildlife in Cook Inlet which may be impacted by future oil and gas activities, our greatest concern and focus of our comments is for the Cook Inlet beluga whale. We were unable to find on your site https://www.boem.gov/ak258 where the map and description of the “Beluga Whale Mitigation Alternative” referenced on regulations.gov was located, so we were not able to provide comments directly regarding that alternative. Instead, we provide our general concerns for the Cook Inlet beluga population, and request they be considered during the development of an EIS.
The Cook Inlet beluga whale is a revered whale population that resides off the coast of Alaska’s largest city and along Alaska’s popular Kenai Peninsula. Its population has plummeted in recent decades from nearly 1,300 individuals in 1979 to only 279 in 2018, and despite its status as an endangered species (listed in 2008), the population shows no signs of recovery and continues to decline at a rate of 2.3% per year 1. While the reasons for the decline are not precisely known, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) identified ten threats to the species’ recovery in their Recovery Plan for the Cook Inlet Beluga Whale (Delphinapterus leucas) 2. They ranked each threat as high, medium, or low concern. Only three threats were ranked as high concern to beluga recovery: anthropogenic noise, catastrophic events, and cumulative effects. All of these are likely outcomes from additional oil and gas development in Cook Inlet and deserve extra scrutiny during the EIS development, with particular attention to how noise or catastrophic events would increase the cumulative effects of multiple stressors.
In regards to cumulative effects, NMFS recognizes in the Recovery Plan the significant role cumulative effects have on beluga recovery, and the need for improved assessment.
“Cumulative effects of multiple stressors are considered to be a high concern for the recovery of CI belugas. In the absence of a single threat clearly limiting recovery, the cumulative effects (including any synergistic effects) from multiple stressors limiting recovery is a most plausible explanation for why the CI beluga population has not recovered. The compounded effect of multiple stressors in constraining CI beluga recovery can be greater than the effect of any single stressor or sum of stressors.” (pg. VI-27)
“Although individual activities might be deemed insignificant when considered independently, creeping normality3 (e.g., death by a thousand cuts) can cause substantial adverse effects to nearly any entity, including Cook Inlet belugas, at both individual and population levels. Applications for Incidental Harassment Authorizations (IHAs) historically have been reviewed on the basis of an individual activity in isolation. But the high level of human activity in Cook Inlet has increased such that cumulative effects of multiple activities must be appropriately accounted for. Although assessing cumulative impacts from multiple activities is challenging, results of such an assessment might be particularly relevant for understanding the lack of recovery for CI belugas.” (pg. VI-30)
Unfortunately, despite this sage insight and expression of concern for the species, NMFS continues to authorize industry to incidentally take imperiled Cook Inlet beluga whales under both the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act. This means NMFS anticipates that the industrial activity will take beluga whales by harassing them, but issues the authorization anyway since the harassment isn’t the point of the activity (i.e., the harassment is incidental to the permitted activity). Issuance of such an authorization protects industry when their activities harass belugas by making such harassment legal. This policy flies in the face of conservation efforts to address the species’ decline and contributes to the lack of recovery of this endangered species.
Although NEPA regulations were revised in a final rule published July 16, 20204, the definition of cumulative impacts was removed in its entirety. The new definition of “effects” does not truly capture the meaning of cumulative effects, nor does it address the detrimental effects that small additive insults can have on a population’s ability to recovery, as is the case for Cook Inlet beluga whales. In the development of the Lease Sale 258 EIS, we strongly urge BOEM to conduct a thorough assessment of cumulative effects using the prior definition of “cumulative impacts” developed by the Council on Environmental Quality, which had previously defined cumulative impact as:
“the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions (40 CFR ~ 1508.7).”5
We also urge the agency to not rely on the limited cumulative effects assessment NMFS will conduct under future ESA section 7 consultations. The ESA definition of cumulative effects is extremely restrictive and only looks at future federal activities within a specific project’s action area, thereby all but guaranteeing the agency will find that the project will not adversely affect the species. For mobile species with a fairly small range and which are regularly exposed to multiple stressors on a daily basis, like Cook Inlet beluga whales, an adequate assessment of cumulative effects must be undertaken range-wide, not just within the specific lease sale area. Such an assessment also needs to consider the take already or likely to be authorized to understand not only the current state of stressors to the whales, but also to consider the impacts of adding stressors from new oil and gas activities to a declining population. We strongly urge BOEM to ensure a thorough and comprehensive review of potential cumulative effects to Cook Inlet beluga whales is completed, to include analysis of future exploration and development activities within the lease areas. This involves consideration of seismic exploration (i.e., threat of anthropogenic noise), and pipeline leaks or oil spills (i.e., threat of catastrophic events).
A spill or leaking pipeline can be catastrophic, and the environmental conditions in Cook Inlet (e.g., ice; strong tidal currents) means it might be months before a leak is detected or able to be repaired. We know this to be true because from December 2016 to April 2017, Hilcorp Alaska’s natural gas pipeline running across Cook Inlet was leaking for an estimated two months before it was detected, and it was another two months before they could conduct temporary repairs6,7. While no causation has been made, in part due to inconclusive cause of death determinations, an unusually high number of beluga whales were reported dead in the months of September and October later that year. BOEM must factor in the potential for a future spill or leak occurring as a result of authorizing the lease sale for oil and gas activities, and must not dismiss any effects as inconsequential due solely to a false notion that a spill or leak is extremely unlikely to occur. With a mere 279 belugas remaining, one spill could be the final straw that breaks the beluga’s back.
On behalf of Alaska Wildlife Alliance and its supporters, I thank you for your time and consideration in regards to this matter.
Sincerely,
Nicole Schmitt
Executive Director
1) Shelden, K. E. W. and P. R. Wade (editors). 2019. Aerial surveys, distribution, abundance, and trend of belugas (Delphinapterus leucas) in Cook Inlet, Alaska, June 2018. AFSC Processed Rep. 2019-09, 93 p. Alaska Fish. Sci. Cent., NOAA, Natl. Mar. Fish. Serv., 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle WA 98115. Available online at: https://apps-afsc.fisheries.noaa.gov/documents/PR2019-09.pdf
2) National Marine Fisheries Service. 2016. Recovery Plan for the Cook Inlet Beluga Whale (Delphinapterus leucas). National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska Region, Protected Resources Division, Juneau, AK. Available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/document/recovery-plan-cook-inlet-beluga-whale-delphinapterus-leucas
3) Footnote from NMFS Recovery Plan pg. VI-30 says: “Creeping Normality: the way a major negative change, which happens slowly in many unnoticed increments, is not perceived as objectionable. For more information about the concept of creeping normality, see the book ‘Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed’ by Jarod Diamond.”
4) Final Rule Revising NEPA Regulations: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-07-16/pdf/2020-15179.pdf
5) Pre-July 2020 NEPA Regulations: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2019-title40-vol37/pdf/CFR-2019-title40-vol37.pdf#page=474
6) Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Spill Prevention and Response, Prevention Preparedness and Response website – “Hilcorp Natural Gas Leak from 8” Pipeline”. https://dec.alaska.gov/spar/ppr/spill-information/response/2017/04-hilcorp/
7) Alaska Public Radio news story about Hilcorp’s Natural Gas Leak in Cook Inlet: https://www.alaskapublic.org/2017/04/14/hilcorp-completes-repairs-on-cook-inlet-gas-line-leak/
