31 



Ms. Beattie. I don't know, Congressman. But what we are say- 

 ing is that in order to be considered a handicraft, it should be 

 worked. We are not proposing to ban the sale of oosicks. 



Mr. Young. Well, if we put a knob on the end of it, is that con- 

 sidered work? 



Ms. Beattie. I don't know technically, sir. 



Mr. Young. See, that is the problem. Now this is a government 

 agency, getting involved in something they have no business being 

 involved in. This is not being misused. 



Ms. Beattie. Congressman 



Mr. Young. This is the thing I don't get. That is exactly right. 

 The only thing you suggest 



Ms. Beattie. May I address your question? 



Mr. Young. You suggest the courts rule — wait a minute — the 

 courts have ruled on an issue that can be considered what are na- 

 tive handicrafts. The courts have already ruled on this. And why 

 are you and the agency — you know, I am hostile, not necessarily to 

 you, but the agency. This is an example of the agency stepping out 

 of bounds. Why are you trying to overturn the court rulings of what 

 are native handicrafts? 



Ms. Beattie. Our interpretation of the court ruling, Congress- 

 man, was that the standards in the Marine Mammal Protection Act 

 are not clear and are in need of clarification. And that is our in- 

 tent. 



Mr. Young. But you lost the case. Did you not? 



Ms. Beattie. Yes, on the basis 



Mr. Young. So you want to change — after the court case you 

 want to change it to fit your shoe? 



Ms. Beattie. Congressman, we are saying that we would like to 

 clarify something that we believe the court found to be unclear. 



Mr. Young. You want to clarify it in your favor and against the 

 natives. And yet you say you want to work with the natives. Be- 

 cause that is my problem. You lost the case. You are proposing 

 change in the regulations so it fits your situation, not the natives. 

 The natives won that case. Is that correct? 



Ms. Beattie. We are just simply preparing to clarify the defini- 

 tion of native handicraft, Congressman. 



Mr. Young. And that has already been decided by the courts. 

 Mr. Chairman, I suggest respectfully that in this case the courts 

 are correct. And last, in your statement, Mollie, you state that the 

 polar bear has been taken by aircraft. Now, you have evidence of 

 that? 



Ms. Beattie. We have some small evidence. It is not a major 

 problem, but we believe that this proposal, which is to restrict the 

 hunting of polar bears with aircraft and large motorized vessels, is 

 in keeping with the International Polar Bear Agreement. 



Mr. Young. But you don't have any evidence? If you have, you 

 should be prosecuting, is that correct? You are talking about sub- 

 sistence taking. Now, we are not talking about abandonment or 

 poaching, we are talking about subsistence taking? 



Ms. Beattie. That is true. We would, of course, exempt skin 

 boats, but we are simply talking about aircraft and large motorized 

 vessels. 



Mr. Young. What is a motorized vessel? 



