- 44 - 



The total estimated mortality level was relatively 

 low due in part to a shift in fishing effort by most of 

 the U.S. fishing fleet from the eastern tropical Pacific 

 to the western Pacific where tuna can be caught without 

 setting on porpoise. While this change in fishing area 

 results in reduced pressure on eastern tropical Pacific 

 porpoise populations by U.S. vessels (only 29 trips by 

 U.S. vessels in 1983 compared to 54 each in 1981 and 

 1982), it is not an entirely salutary development. The 

 number of foreign flag purse seiners fishing in the 

 eastern tropical Pacific and the associated pressure on 

 porpoise populations has increased dramatically in 

 recent years and it is estimated that the rate and level 

 of kill by such foreign vessels exceeds that by U.S. 

 vessels. These developments warrant increased attention 

 and efforts during 1984 to better determine and reduce 

 the level of foreign kill. 



Litigation 



Two major lawsuits relating to the tuna-porpoise 

 regulations were pending during 1983. 



On 12 December 1980, representatives of the U.S. tuna 

 fishing fleet filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court 

 for the Southern District of California ( American Tunaboat 

 Association v. Baldrige ) . The plaintiffs in the case 

 alleged that the decision of the Administrator of the 

 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 

 October 1980 establishing annual quotas and the tuna- 

 porpoise regulations were illegal because, among other 

 things, the recommendations of the administrative law 

 judge concerning mean school size, density, and range of 

 the porpoise stocks were not adopted and the determination 

 that the coastal spotted dolphin stock is depleted was 

 improper. The plaintiffs alleged that because the 

 regulations and quotas were not based upon the best 

 scientific evidence available, they were unlawful. 



On 10 March 1982, the District Court ruled that the 

 Administrator should have accepted the administrative 

 law judge's determinations and that the Administrator's 

 rejection of those determinations was unsupported by 

 substantial evidence and unlawful. The District Court 

 granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and 

 directed the Government to submit recalculations concerning 

 the density and range of porpoise schools and the current 

 status of the affected porpoise stocks based upon the 

 recalculated density, range, and mean school size values. 

 On 21 May 1982, the District Court denied the Government's 



