sustainable level would require resolving fundamental issues 
concerning sea otter/fishery conflict as well as the potential 
adverse impact of human activities on the sea otters; whether 
the lack of detail in the draft Plan indicated that the 
Service did not concur with the Commission's view that the 
recovery plan should identify precisely what actions must be 
taken, by whom, when, and with what resources; and what 
steps the Service had taken or planned to take to compile 
and evaluate information on: (a) the distribution and 
density of sea otters in California and adjacent areas; (b) 
related fishery resources and fisheries; (c) biological 
productivity and other characteristics of current and potential 
sea otter habitats; (d) the possible direct and indirect 
effects of present and proposed human activities on sea 
otters and/or their habitats; and (e) such other data as may 
be relevant to decisions relating to the protection and 
conservation of the Southern sea otter population. In 
addition, the Commission asked to be advised of the procedure 
and schedule for finalizing the recovery plan, and the 
specific research and management actions that would be 
undertaken before the recovery plan is finalized, adopted, 
and implemented. 
On 24 and 25 July, representatives of the Service, the 
Commission, the California Department of Fish and Game, and 
the State's Scientific Advisory Committee on Sea Otters met 
in California to: discuss actions needed to complete the 
sea otter recovery plan, identify priority tasks to be 
undertaken immediately; and agree on agency responsibilities 
for carrying out identified tasks. At the meeting, it was 
noted that: the manager of the Service's Sacramento office 
had been designated the Service's sea otter spokesperson; 
the Service had determined that, because of deficiencies in 
the first draft, a second Technical Review Draft of the 
Southern Sea Otter Recovery Plan would be prepared; and a 
small group of sea otter experts was being organized by the 
Service to assist with preparations of the second Technical 
Review Draft. Participants agreed that every effort should 
be made to complete the second draft by the end of September 
1980, and that the Service would consult with the California 
Department of Fish and Game in assessing the suitability of 
potential sites for establishing one or more sea otter 
colonies outside the present range in California. 
In late September, the Commission learned that the 
Service, under contract to the Bureau of Land Management, 
was completing "An Ecological Characterization of the Central 
and Northern California Coastal Region", and that it had 
