Common use of Biological Consequences Clause in Contracts

Biological Consequences. Alternative 1 has few direct biological effects. A harvest would not occur and whales would not be removed from this population by hunting in 2000. Several indirect biological effects have been identified as a possible result of selecting Alternative 1. The lack of CI beluga whales taken in subsistence harvest by Alaskan Natives might place additional hunting pressure on other marine mammal stocks in Cook Inlet. Of these other marine mammals, only the harbor seal occurs regularly in upper Cook Inlet and increased harvest for subsistence uses would be expected. Similarly, there may be increased pressure on the harvest of beluga whales from other stocks throughout Alaska. The stock considered most likely as an alternative source of beluga whale muktuk for those living in the Cook Inlet region would be from Bristol Bay because of its proximity and ease of shipping to Anchorage. The muktuk from one beluga whale harvested in Bristol Bay was delivered to the Anchorage Native community in 1999. That whale had been incidentally caught in a fishing net and was sent to a local hunter who then distributed it to Alaskan Natives in both Tyonek and Anchorage. In another instance, muktuk from a beluga whale taken in October 1999 on the Naknek River was subsequently sold in Anchorage. Some level of importation of beluga whale products into the Cook Inlet region may be expected. The four other Alaskan beluga stocks are currently healthy and could support an additional small level of harvest. However, the subsistence use of these stocks is managed through an agreement between NMFS and the Alaska Beluga Whale Committee, who would address any management or village concerns associated with this trade. Without a beluga whale harvest additional subsistence take of waterfowl and fish in the region may occur. However, it is difficult to predict whether or not there would be an increased harvest of other subsistence species. Traditional Native foods consist of a variety of things that are not necessarily equivalent on a pound-for-pound basis (i.e, beluga muktuk would not be replaced by a pound of fish or seal). Therefore, there may be little interest among hunters in harvesting more of these other resources than they currently do. Also, the amount of these resources harvested is determined in part by their availability, which is not expected to change. Despite the loss of the opportunity to harvest beluga whales, Alaskan Natives would be expected to continue to utilize Cook Inlet for purposes of subsistence hunting, fishing, and gathering. These activities may include large game hunting (moose and bear), hunting of fur bearing animals, waterfowl hunting, marine mammal hunting (mainly harbor seal), fishing for salmon and eulachon (smelt), and plant and xxxxx picking. The harvest and use of these foods are activities with significant social and cultural meaning as well as having economic importance.

Biological Consequences. Alternative 1 has few direct biological effects. A harvest would not occur and whales would not be removed from this population by hunting in 20002002. Several indirect biological effects have been identified as a possible result of selecting Alternative 1. The lack of CI beluga whales taken in subsistence harvest by Alaskan Alaska Natives might place additional hunting pressure on other marine mammal stocks in Cook InletCI. Of these other marine mammals, only the harbor seal occurs seals occur regularly in upper Cook Inlet CI and an increased harvest of this species for subsistence uses would be expected. Similarly, there may be increased pressure on the harvest of beluga whales from other stocks throughout Alaska. The stock considered most likely as an alternative source of beluga whale muktuk for those living in the Cook Inlet CI region would be from Bristol Bay because of its proximity and ease of shipping to Anchorage. The muktuk from one beluga whale harvested in Bristol Bay was delivered to the Anchorage Native community in 1999. That This whale had been was incidentally caught in a fishing net and was sent to a local hunter an Anchorage hunter, who then distributed it to Alaskan Alaska Natives in both Tyonek and Anchorage. In another instance, muktuk from a beluga whale taken in October 1999 on the Naknek River was subsequently sold in Anchorage. Some level of importation of beluga whale products into the Cook Inlet CI region may be expected. The four other Alaskan Alaska beluga stocks are currently healthy and could support an additional small level of harvest. However, the subsistence use of these stocks is managed through an agreement between NMFS and the Alaska Beluga Whale Committee, ABWC who would continue to address and manage any management or village concerns associated with this trade. Without a beluga whale harvest additional An increased subsistence take of waterfowl and fish in the region may occuroccur without a CI beluga whale harvest. However, it is difficult to predict whether or not there would be an increased harvest of other subsistence species. Traditional Native foods consist of a variety of things that are not necessarily equivalent on a pound-for-pound basis (i.e, beluga whale muktuk would not be replaced by a pound of fish or seal). Therefore, there may be little interest among hunters in harvesting more of these other resources than they currently do. Also, the amount of these resources harvested is determined in part by their availability, which is not expected to change. Despite the loss of the opportunity to harvest beluga whales, Alaskan Alaska Natives would be expected to continue to utilize Cook Inlet CI for purposes of subsistence hunting, fishing, and gathering. These activities may include large game hunting (moose and bear), hunting of fur bearing animals, waterfowl hunting, marine mammal hunting (mainly harbor seal), fishing for salmon and eulachon (smelt), and plant and xxxxx picking. The harvest and use of these foods are activities with significant social and cultural meaning as well as having economic importance.

Biological Consequences. Alternative 1 has few direct biological effects. A harvest would not occur and whales would not be removed from this population by hunting in 20002001. Several indirect biological effects have been identified as a possible result of selecting Alternative 1. The lack of CI beluga whales taken in subsistence harvest by Alaskan Alaska Natives might place additional hunting pressure on other marine mammal stocks in Cook InletCI. Of these other marine mammals, only the harbor seal occurs regularly in upper Cook Inlet CI and increased harvest for subsistence uses would be expected. Similarly, there may be increased pressure on the harvest of beluga whales from other stocks throughout Alaska. The stock considered most likely as an alternative source of beluga whale muktuk for those living in the Cook Inlet CI region would be from Bristol Bay because of its proximity and ease of shipping to Anchorage. The muktuk from one beluga whale harvested in Bristol Bay was delivered to the Anchorage Native community in 1999. That This whale had been was incidentally caught in a fishing net and was sent to a local hunter an Anchorage hunter, who then distributed it to Alaskan Alaska Natives in both Tyonek and Anchorage. In another instance, muktuk from a beluga whale taken in October 1999 on the Naknek River was subsequently sold in Anchorage. Some level of importation of beluga whale products into the Cook Inlet CI region may be expected. The four other Alaskan Alaska beluga stocks are currently healthy and could support an additional small level of harvest. However, the subsistence use of these stocks is managed through an agreement between NMFS and the Alaska Beluga Whale Committee, who would address any management or village concerns associated with this trade. Without a beluga whale harvest additional subsistence take of waterfowl and fish in the region may occur. However, it is difficult to predict whether or not there would be an increased harvest of other subsistence species. Traditional Native foods consist of a variety of things that are not necessarily equivalent on a pound-for-pound basis (i.e, beluga muktuk would not be replaced by a pound of fish or seal). Therefore, there may be little interest among hunters in harvesting more of these other resources than they currently do. Also, the amount of these resources harvested is determined in part by their availability, which is not expected to change. Despite the loss of the opportunity to harvest beluga whales, Alaskan Natives would be expected to continue to utilize Cook Inlet for purposes of subsistence hunting, fishing, and gathering. These activities may include large game hunting (moose and bear), hunting of fur bearing animals, waterfowl hunting, marine mammal hunting (mainly harbor seal), fishing for salmon and eulachon (smelt), and plant and xxxxx picking. The harvest and use of these foods are activities with significant social and cultural meaning as well as having economic importance.