-46- 



a regime for collection and transmittal of data at present, 

 but postponing commitment to a conservation mechanism until 

 later, (4) negotiation of a complete conservation regime 

 providing for both data collection and an organization to 

 establish conservation measures and regulate harvesting, 

 (5) negotiation of a complete conservation regime, plus the 

 establishment of quotas for harvesting of all resources or 

 establishment of a moratorium on harvesting, and (6) prohi- 

 bition of all harvesting in the Antarctic region. 



The feasibility of negotiating each alternative, the 

 ability to develop and enforce conservation measures , and 

 level of harvesting activities anticipated under each 

 alternative are presented in Table 2. The probabilities 

 of overexploiting the various resource populations under 

 each alternative are indicated in Table 3. Indirect im- 

 pacts on stocks are compared in Table 4. Anticipated im- 

 pacts on local marine environments and on the health of 

 the ecosystem are indicated in Table 5. The effects of 

 the alternative approaches on science are compared in 

 Table 6. 



1. Ban on Harvesting 



The sixth alternative, prohibition of all harvesting, 

 would imply no harvesting activities south of the Antarctic 

 Convergence, if such a regime could be negotiated and en- 

 forced. This alternative would provide for the least impact 

 on the Antarctic marine environment. It is the most favor- 

 able alternative for recovery of whale stocks. Small ad- 

 justments in other population sizes would be expected as 

 whale populations increased. 



A ban on harvesting would preclude the possibility of 

 overexploitation of any stocks and would eliminate direct 

 and indirect impacts of harvesting. Since seals and whales 

 could be harvested under the International Whaling Convention 

 and the Convention for Conservation of Antarctic Seals, small 

 adjustments to other populations in response to sealing and 

 whaling could be expected. 



With the ban on harvesting, no commercial data would be 

 available, thus eliminating a significant source of infor- 

 mation on the stocks of some populations. 



Even though this alternative represents the least envi- 

 ronmental impact for the Antarctic marine ecosystem, achieve- 

 ment of a total ban on all harvesting is an unrealistic 

 expectation. Such an agreement would not have the support 

 of nations presently involved in exploratory krill harvesting, 



