148 



INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE COAUTION 



The following represents the response of the International Wildlife Coalition to questions posed 

 by Representative Dan Hamburg subsequent to the August 4, 1993 hearing before the House 

 Subcommittee on Natural Resources and the Environment. 



Questions Pertaining to Sea Otters and H.R. 2760 



1 . Resource competition. 



H.R 2760 does not specifically address resource competition. Because the Marine Mammal 

 Protection Act (MMPA) is designed to protect and recover depleted marine mammal 

 populations, fishery issues are secondary to concerns about recovery. As regards management 

 of sea otters and fishery conflicts, the bill defaults to P.L. 99-625. 



A corollary of this question is how conflicts can be addressed. The proposals of the Marine 

 Mammal Protection Coalition contain a provision to fund a program of gear and technology 

 research to find means of reducing marine mammal interactions with fisheries. If HR 2760 is 

 amended to require such a program, we would support extending its function to seeking 

 reasonable solutions to conflicts between commercial interests and sea otter recovery. 



2. The relationship of H.R. 2760, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and P.L. 99-625 in the 

 event of sea otter de-listing. 



It is our understanding that P.L. 99-625 may become moot before sea otters ever recover to 

 such an extent that de-listing them becomes an issue. The October meeting of the sea otter 

 recovery - team will discuss recommendations. We believe that if the otter is de-listed while P.L. 

 99-625 exists, then 99-625 would have precedence, but only within the management zone. 



We would also like to point out that when otters are eventually de-listed under the ESA, 

 provisions of the MMPA still apply. Even if sea otters are no longer considered threatened, 

 they may still be considered depleted under the MMPA. As such, they would be managed to 

 assure recovery to Optimum Sustainable Populations (OSP). This would demand a very small 

 Potential Biological Removal (PBR), and would seriously curtail any possibility c • .idental 

 takings. Currently the MMPA relies on historic carrying capacity to determine numbers for 

 OSP. Provisions of H.R. 2760 would change this to a reliance on current carrying capacity to 

 make OSP decisions. It is not clear what effect this change would have on determining OSP for 

 otters. 



3. Implications of the abandonment of translocation and the "no sea otter" management zone. 

 It is generally accepted that commercial levels of shellfish takes cannot be supported within 

 areas that also have significant sea otter populations. Both otters and humans are exceptionally 

 competent foragers, and resources are limited. If zonal management is terminated, and large 

 stable numbers of sea otters occupy shellfish grounds used by commercial harvesters, the 

 fishery is likely to be significantly damaged or even collapsed. Both the ESA and the MMPA 

 mandate that recovery receive priority over commercial interests. In order to reach OSP under 

 the MMPA, sea otters will require greater range either to the north or south of their current 



634 North Falmouth Highway. P.O. Box 388 

 North Falmouth. Massachusetts 02556 



