In Alaska, a judge recently made a crucial decision to set aside a federal agency’s designation of land equivalent in size to Texas as critical habitat for two species of Arctic Alaska seals. The ruling was made by U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason, who found that the National Marine Fisheries Service had failed to adequately justify why the extensive 174-million-acre area was deemed “indispensable” for the recovery of the ringed and bearded seal populations. Gleason stated that the agency had “abused its discretion” by not taking into account any protected regions to exclude or the conservation efforts of other nations in safeguarding these seal populations.
The critical habitat designation that was vacated by Judge Gleason covered waters stretching from St. Matthew Island in the Bering Sea to the boundaries of Canadian waters in the Arctic. The judge has since instructed that the matter be revisited by the agency for further examination and clarification.
The legal action challenging the 2022 designation was initiated by the state of Alaska, which argued that the designation was overly expansive and could potentially impede oil and gas development in the Arctic, as well as disrupt shipping to North Slope communities. Julie Fair, a representative for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, mentioned that the agency is currently scrutinizing the court’s decision.
Alaska’s Attorney General Treg Taylor criticized the protected areas designated, stating that they lacked a sound scientific basis. Taylor accused the federal government of frequently employing tactics to impede Alaskans from utilizing their land and resources, alleging that restrictions are often imposed under the guise of conservation or preservation initiatives.
Bearded and ringed seals, both of which give birth and nurture their offspring on ice, were listed as threatened species in 2012 due to concerns regarding projected declines in sea ice over the coming decades. Efforts to challenge the threatened species designation by the state, North Slope Borough, and oil industry groups were unsuccessful, as the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the case. Judge Gleason emphasized that the Endangered Species Act prohibits actions that could potentially jeopardize threatened species, hence the temporary dismissal of the critical habitat designation was deemed necessary and not overly disruptive.
