117 



Harbor seal numbers are so dense in southern Puget Sound that their feces have 

 contaminated shellfish growing beds. The Washington Department of Health has 

 been forced to close sites in Dosewallips State Park to shellfish harvesting for the 

 protection of public health. 



California nearshore gillnet fisheries for halibut and sea bass suffer up to 80 percent 

 loss of catch in some areas during certain seasons, as harbor seals strip fish from 

 nets. 



In California, and increasingly in Washington, sea otters are eliminating harvestable 

 shellfish resources upon which people also rely (clams, crabs, abalone and sea 

 urchins). Without long-term zonal management (zones for otters and zones for 

 people) the West Coast will find itself without shellfish fisheries (The sea urchin 

 fishery in California alone is an $80 million export to Japan!). 



At the mouth of the Elwha River in the Strait of Juan de Fuca, tribal gillnet and set 

 net fishermen have lost 30-50 percent of their fall chinook catch to harbor seals. 

 Also, non-Indian sport fishermen report big populations of harbor seals taking large 

 Chinook from their lines. 



Finally, it would be remiss to not mention the infamous "Herschel" at the Ballard 

 Locks in Seattle, where California sea lions have nearly succeeded (and likely will) 

 in annihilating a native run of wild steelhead. 



The Cause of These Problems 



These problems result because society has so feverishly embraced "protectionism" as the goal 

 of the Act, implementation of the statute has turned away from reality. Have we not learned 

 from federal "protection" of elk in Yellowstone National Park, with its resultant impact on the 

 habitat? (Professional hunters are now hired to relieve the strain of overpopulation.) Have not 

 we learned from the federal protection of wild horses, with its corresponding impact on range 

 lands? (Adoption programs are required to help thin the herds. Imagine, if you can, an 

 adoption program for sea lions!) Two decades of marine mammal protection have successfully 

 rebuilt marine mammal stocks along the West Coast, but symptoms of this unilateral protection 

 now show that the "roof is beginning to leak". 



Implementation of the Act is deliberately and unrealistically lopsided toward pure protectionism. 

 For example, why have so few populations been listed at OSP? (Only 6 of 64 stocks listed in 

 the NMFS proposed regime are declared to be at OSP.) Any reasonable wildlife manager would 

 intuitively (if not statistically) conclude that both gray whales and California sea lions are 

 obviously within their OSP, yet the government has failed to declare them so. (Recall that 

 NMFS has stated that the gray whale population has recovered to near its estimated original 

 population size, and recent NMFS studies indicate that the present abundance of California sea 

 lions may be higher than any historical level.). Could special interests fear that if marine 

 mammal populations are at OSP, the exemption on takes will be waived and therefore create 

 an opportunity to manage these animals? 



