By Sharon Young
Imagine if researchers, in the name of helping a species, proposed to capture 3,000 dogs and hot brand them, pull some of their teeth and whiskers, take samples of their fat and blood, and attach electrodes to assess their stored fat—but would administer anesthetic for painful procedures only to some of them. What if some of the dogs were pups as young as 6 days old? And what if you were told that some of them would die as a result of the research?
| Just the Facts |
| • Steller sea lion population in Alaska has declined by nearly 80% in less than three decades to 22,000. |
| • Eight research groups are proposing to capture more than 3,000 Steller sea lions and use highly invasive procedures on the animals to study their decline. |
| • The HSUS has sued the government to seek a moratorium on Steller sea lion research until its possible adverse effects can be studied. |
Performing such procedures on dogs would be unthinkable to most people. Yet, eight research organizations have been granted permits by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to inflict exactly these procedures on Steller sea lions, an imperiled species protected not only under the Marine Mammal Protection Act but also under the federal Endangered Species Act. Some estimate that in a period of less than three decades, the Steller sea lion population has dropped by nearly 80% in the species' home range in Alaska.
Research is currently underway in the Gulf of Alaska, in which researchers propose to capture more than 3,000 Steller sea lion adults, juveniles, and pups, and perform a number of highly invasive tests to determine the nature and extent of the sea lions' decline in the region. How exactly the tests will accomplish their stated goals is anyone's guess—including that of the National Marine Fisheries Services, which has admitted it is allowing the research even though the agency has no idea if all of it is necessary. The agency also doesn't know what will happen to individual sea lions or their populations once the research is finished because NMFS made no plans to monitor the animals after the tests and did not conduct an Environmental Impact Statement before issuing research permits, as required by law.
For these reasons, and more, The HSUS has filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Washington D.C. to challenge the research permits issued by NMFS. The lawsuit, filed only after The HSUS had repeatedly attempted to steer NMFS away from allowing such ill-advised research, seeks a moratorium on further testing pending completion of an in-depth review of the potential adverse effects of the research.
"Having exhausted all efforts at negotiation, we are left with no choice but to take legal action to ensure that federally protected wildlife is not captured, branded, mutilated, and otherwise tormented for no valid scientific reasons," said Jonathan Lovvorn, HSUS vice president of Animal Protection Litigation.
The "Research" in Question
The decline of Steller sea lion populations is a serious issue, and the methods that NMFS-permitted researchers plan to use to study this decline are deadly serious, too. Researchers plan not only to hot brand captured sea lions, but also to perform the following procedures (among others): take samples of muscle and fat; attach electrodes to determine body fat percentage; pull teeth and whiskers; and keep some of the sea lions in temporary captivity, where the animals will subjected to more tests, including the surgical implantation of tracking devices and stomach temperature probes. Some of the tests will be performed without the benefit of anesthesia.
The problems with these procedures—or lack thereof—are varied and complicated: The techniques that the researchers propose for collecting information, not to mention the number of animals that they propose to sample, are not justified. What's more, the lack of any coordination between the eight research groups, as well as a lack of follow-up monitoring, make the impact of their research on the animals uncertain at best—and in fact could undermine their ability to know if they are even addressing the right questions with regard to the decline.
"Such an irresponsible approach to wildlife research is completely unacceptable," says Dr. John Grandy, The HSUS's senior vice president for Wildlife and Habitat Protection. "The obligation of scientists and the government to do no harm while conducting research is greatest when dealing with endangered species whose very future can be jeopardized by invasive or harmful protocols."
The research permitted by NMFS is more than irresponsible, too. The HSUS believes that NMFS's decision to issue these research permits on Steller sea lions violates the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Endangered Species Act. The heart of the matter is this: NMFS has approved activities that could cause Steller sea lion deaths in numbers that could exceed the threshold established by Congress in determining whether an action will have a significant, irreversible impact on the ability of a protected species to survive.
Just as important, NMFS's decision to issue the permits was made without preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), as required under the National Environmental Policy Act. An EIS would have helped to ensure that researchers were not harming the very species they are trying to protect. NMFS not only failed to prepare the necessary EIS, the agency also failed to properly consult with the Marine Mammal Commission, an independent agency created to provide impartial oversight of marine mammal conservation policies and programs implemented by federal agencies.
The Decline in Steller Sea Lions
In the 1970s, the rocky Alaskan coastline was carpeted with Steller sea lions, and the air was alive with their raucous barking and calling. In 1976, the National Marine Mammal Laboratory counted more than 90,000 adults in the area from Kenai to Kiska. This number has declined by almost 80%—approximately 22,000 were found there in 2003. As a result, the Western stock of Steller sea lions in Alaska is listed as endangered under the ESA; the animal is listed as threatened everywhere else in its range.
There are two theories for the decline. Both hypothesize that the cause is nutritional stress, due either to a reduced quantity of food or to a reduced quality of diet. Observers have noted that Steller sea lions in Alaska are smaller than normal for the species, particularly juveniles of 1 to 3 years. Fewer pups are being born, and young Steller sea lions are dying at a higher rate.
Some studies indicate that the very food that Steller sea lions eat in the areas of decline has changed: Studies of the Western stock before the decline suggest that Steller sea lions' diet consisted primarily of high-energy producing, small forage fish (such as herring, sand lance, and smelt) and smaller amounts of pollock, cod, and salmon. In the areas of the decline, however, their diet now appears to consist primarily of pollock and cod—but very few forage fish. Restrictions on fishing in Alaska (primarily focused on the pollock, mackerel, and cod fisheries) are intended to reduce any competitive pressure from fisheries, but some scientists argue that this may not help.
The alarming decline in Steller sea lions has indirectly contributed to the very research that could further stress their populations. Owing to the public's concern over the declines, and to the suspicion that they were caused by the Alaskan fishing industry, Congress in 2001 and 2002 appropriated approximately $80 million for Steller sea lion research—the largest research appropriation put toward a single species in the history of the United States. Not surprisingly, this flood in funding brought on a reciprocal flood of applications from government agencies, universities, and private research institutions hoping to receive research permits or permit amendments.
A July 2005 article in Nature notes that the government's generosity toward Steller sea lions may not have been altogether altruistic. Rex Dalton, the magazine's U.S. West Coast correspondent, reports that environmentalists "contend that the (appropriations) legislation was worded in such a way that money would be steered away from some of the most germane research—in particular, any projects that might implicate the fishing industry in the Stellers’ decline. The legislation specified, for example, that the initiative should include projects looking at the roles of predators and climate change." Dalton also reports that research money had to be spent within particular budget years, which limited long-term studies.
In other words, the money was available mainly to give the impression that researchers could get to the bottom of the Steller sea lion decline—while, at the same time, stifling research into one of the probable causes of the decline. Still, the money had to be administered and NMFS dutifully fulfilled its job, issuing so many permits but never taking into account the cumulative effects that so much research might have on the fragile species.
What The HSUS Is Requesting
There is no question that until the decline is reversed and populations return to a level that Steller sea lions can be removed from the Endangered Species list, any research on the species must be conducted with extraordinary care. NMFS is legally tasked with ensuring that the Steller sea lion is protected from any activity that would reduce its vulnerable populations. NMFS is simply not living up to its legal obligation.
The HSUS has brought suit because it is the only way to ensure that NMFS performs its Congressionally mandated duties to protect and conserve imperiled Steller sea lions. Specifically, The HSUS is asking NMFS to perform an Environmental Impact Statement before casually giving researchers access to these highly vulnerable populations. We are also asking that NMFS not issue any new permits or modify any existing permits until the EIS and expert review have concluded
In addition to our legal claims, The HSUS is also asking that NMFS follow recommendations made in the late 1990s by independent scientists reviewing the recovery plan for Steller sea lions. These recommendations include convening an independent, expert review panel to assess which types of research methods would best answer important questions about why the population is declining and about how many sea lions must be studied, as well as how to monitor the effects of the research in order to be certain that it is not adding to the problems facing the species.
"We all want to know what is causing steller sea lion numbers to dwindle," says Lovvorn, "but such questions must be answered without jeopardizing the remaining population."
Sharon Young is The HSUS's Marine Issues Field Director.
