Step aside Don Young and Dan Sullivan and make room for Darin Markwardt, whose most recent diatribe as a conservative Alaskan Voice moves him to the frontlines of the alarmist doomsayers who predict that efforts to protect Cook Inlet’s beluga whales threaten to destroy Alaska’s future. I do not exaggerate (though Darin clearly does.) To quote from his Jan. 6 posting, “Folks, our future is at stake. A Critical Habitat Designation [limited to Cook Inlet, mind you] has the potential to devastate Alaska.” YIKES. Not only the Southcentral region will be devastated by the critical habitat designation, but our entire state! Darin, say it ain’t so, tell us you really haven’t been driven off the deep end by this effort to protect Cook Inlet’s much beloved population of beluga whales.

Like many of Alaska’s pro-development bunch, Markwardt is driven to hysteria whenever the two bogeymen of the north – environmentalists and “the feds” – do anything to protect the interests of beings that aren’t human or values that aren’t measured with $. To his credit, though, Darin uses the word “environmentalists” without attaching “extreme.” Kudos for that, though it seems his main purpose in this recent posting is to paint the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration as extreme, not to mention reckless, untrustworthy, generally incompetent, and, let’s face it, anti-Alaskan. In fact many people who favor special protections for Cook Inlet’s beluga whales – yes, count me among them – believe that if “the feds” erred, it was in being overly cautious before declaring these belugas endangered and, at long last, designating some parts of Cook Inlet as critical habitat.

What’s curious is that Darin begins his tirade against NOAA with the statements “A leader has a dangerous obsession with a white whale . . . Facts are irrelevant. Costs to human life are ignored.” And then he goes on to make his own unsubstantiated and exaggerated statements of “fact” while failing to show what the actual “costs to human life” might be – except, of course, the complete and utter devastation of Alaska’s economy.

Those darn feds. They always have it in for us Alaskans, don’t they? Except when they’re pouring billions of dollars into our economy, which they happen to do on a regular basis.

Darin states that it is “widely accepted that hunting killed most of the whales.” Well, in truth we don’t know that for certain. Yes, subsistence hunters killed substantial numbers of Cook Inlet’s belugas and they very likely were the primary cause of the decline. But when the feds stopped the hunt, everyone expected the population to begin a slow recovery – not “quick results, replete with booming beluga numbers.” (Yet another of Darin’s exaggerations.)

The lack of a slow but steady population rebound is what led many people – from the feds to greenies and even some independent researchers – to suspect that more than hunting factored into the beluga decline.

And while Darin makes it appear the feds acted precipitously and recklessly in protecting Cook Inlet belugas, in fact many years passed from the first hints of a problem to the eventual designation of those whales as endangered and warranting special protections.

While Darin and some other naysayers continue to argue that beluga numbers worldwide are healthy, the science clearly shows that Cook Inlet’s belugas are a distinct and unique group of whales. I suppose you could argue that they don’t deserve protections anyway, but in fact the Endangered Species Act does apply to such threatened or endangered sub-populations. And I wonder: how many local residents who love to watch belugas swimming up and down Turnagain Arm or through other parts of Cook Inlet really wouldn’t mind if these whales disappeared. I think a lot of people, even some pro-development types, would be saddened by that loss.

On one point Darin, I and the feds agree: there’s a lot that we don’t know about Cook Inlet belugas. That’s one reason we need to be cautious, it’s why NOAA, at long last, finally designated 3,000 square miles of Cook Inlet as critical habitat. Darin seems to think that our ignorance demands we take no action. I suppose that’s reasonable if you don’t care what happens to the whales.

Maybe, as Darin insists, the feds can in fact “slow or completely stop any development in Cook Inlet,” if that development is shown to irreparably harm the inlet’s whales. But if something we humans are doing directly harms the whales, don’t you think we should reconsider and even change our behaviors?

Truth be told, it’s highly unlikely that the beluga’ endangered listing and designated critical habitat will have any significant impact on Alaska’s business-as-usual.

As U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Director Geoffrey Haskett recently noted in a Compass piece about polar bears and their listing as a threatened species (ADN Compass, Dec. 26, 2009), “Many people fear that Endangered Species Act listings will curtail development in Alaska, but there is no evidence that this ever has been or will be the case. Keep in mind that there have been federally listed species (and some with designated critical habitat) in Alaska for years – from bowhead whales to spectacled and Steller’s eiders – and yet oil and gas exploration and other developmental activities have continued and expanded.”

I for one am all for curtailing some development if it proves harmful to other species, but like Haskett I don’t see it happening in this deeply red, pro-development state where way too much emphasis is put on economic gain.

Sure, you can disagree with the feds on their choice of critical habitat. But to suggest NOAA’s decision threatens to devastate Alaska’s economy? That it poses some danger to human life? That it’s based on junk science and insubstantial data? That’s a bunch of hooey. And I think Darin knows it, as does any sharp pro-business Alaskan.

So rant and rave all you want Darin & Co., but don’t make specious and disingenuous arguments to support your own extreme views about what’s right for Alaska. And consider that maybe, just maybe, doing what we can to protect Cook Inlet’s belugas is the right thing to do in the long run, even if there’s some economic cost.