48 



We have applied what is called the precautionary principle with 

 respect to climate change, ozone depletion, other kinds of questions, 

 ana to a certain degree we may not have perfect science. We may 

 have trend lines and evidence that we draw as rational human 

 beings from which we are going to have to draw some conclusions. 

 And life is sometimes like that. It does not always present you with 

 clear-cut choices. 



But I think the precautionary principle as well as the basic evi- 

 dence indicates that we have some responsibility to future genera- 

 tions and to ourselves to protect this extraordinarily fragile re- 

 source called the oceans. 



By no means is fishing the only problem, folks. We have 60,000 

 acres of clam beds closed off here because of habitat destruction, 

 flow of oil and fuel and residue and pesticides right off into our es- 

 tuaries and bays, all kinds of problems, development, waste, dump- 

 ing at sea, you name it. But we have to really be careful about 

 what we are doing, and that is what this is all about. 



And I hope we can do it in a cooperative, sensible, calm, rational, 

 nonvitriolic way. It is a tough process. But we have to remain coop- 

 erative and open to each other and work together to try to find the 

 best solutions. 



I want to thank you for laying a lot on the table. We have not 

 discussed everything, I understand that, but believe me, there is a 

 lot of work that I have here. I have 10 pages of notes of what I 

 want to sit down with the Commerce Department and my staff and 

 think out as we go through this. This hearing has been very help- 

 ful, I think, in getting us to think some more about some of the 

 ways to approach the Magnuson reauthorization. 



On that note, I thank you, and we stand adjourned. 



[Whereupon, the committee adjourned at 11:45 a.m.] 



