Service prepared and, on 17 March 1987, submitted a Coastal 

 Zone Consistency Determination on the proposed translocation 

 to the California Coastal Commission for its review and 

 concurrence. The Service also sought authorization of the 

 proposed translocation by the California Fish and Game Commis- 

 sion, which is responsible for approving state permits for 

 taking of wildlife from state lands and waters. The Service 

 issued its Final Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed 

 translocation in May 1987. 



By separate letters of 15 May 1987, the Marine Mammal 

 Commission wrote to the California Coastal Commission and the 

 California Fish and Game Commission providing the rationale 

 for its support of the translocation as proposed by the Fish 

 and Wildlife Service. In its letters, the Commission expressed 

 its belief that the proposed translocation of sea otters to San 

 Nicolas Island in conjunction with the establishment of a 

 "no-otter zone" south of Point Concepcion was in the best 

 interest of both the sea otter and the long-term management 

 of California's other valuable coastal resources. The Commis- 

 sion pointed out that, if the plan were approved and imple- 

 mented and the translocation were successful, the following 

 positive results would be realized: 



the significance of the possible impacts of an oil 

 spill on the California sea otter population would be 

 reduced ; 



much of the information necessary to make judgments 

 concerning the optimum sustainable level of the 

 California sea otter population, as required by the 

 Marine Mammal Protection Act, would be obtained; 

 progress would be made toward recovering and delist- 

 ing the population under the Endangered Species Act and 

 reaching the optimum sustainable population level under 

 the Marine Mammal Protection Act; 



zonal management would be implemented so as to limit 

 sea otter distribution in southern California to the 

 immediate vicinity of San Nicolas Island, thereby provid- 

 ing much better protection to both sea otters and fisheries 

 within their respective zones; and 



the effectiveness of possible non-lethal methods for 

 controlling sea otter distribution would be evaluated. 



The California Fish and Game Commission considered the 

 translocation proposal at a special public meeting held in 

 Sacramento, California, on 24 June 1987. During the meeting, 

 it was questioned whether the Fish and Game Commission had 

 complied with a California Environmental Quality Act regulation 

 requiring at least 45 days advance notice of the Commission's 

 intent to base its decision on the Federal Environmental 

 Impact Statement. The Commission therefore scheduled another 

 hearing on the proposal for 7 August 1987 and, on 18 August 



44 



