82 



n 



given for any type of interactive display that a facility would 

 like to establish. Rather, the Secretary should be given the 

 necessary latitude to authorize such interactions based upon a 

 careful analysis of the potential risks and benefits of the 

 proposed interactive display. In this regard, there may be a 

 need to clarify that, in authorizing interactive displays, the 

 Secretary should weigh not only the potential risks to the health 

 and welfare of the animals involved, but to public safety as 

 well. 



The American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums 

 proposed an amendment to allow marine mammals from depleted 

 populations to be imported for purposes of public display if the 

 animals were held in captivity prior to the depletion designation 

 or if the animals are captive born. 



At present, the only permits that may be issued to authorize 

 the taking or importation of depleted marine mammals are those 

 for scientific research or enhancement. An exception from the 

 general prohibition on importing depleted marine mammals for 

 other purposes, e.g. public display, is made by section 102(d)(1) 

 for marine mammals that were imported into the United States 

 prior to publication of a proposed depletion finding. The 

 proposed amendment would expand the exception to allow 

 importation of a depleted marine mammal if the animal were 

 removed from the wild prior to issuance of a depletion finding or 

 is the progeny of a marine mammal removed from the wild prior to 

 issuance of a depletion finding. 



There are several potential problems with this proposed 

 amendment. First, the rationale for the amendment seems to be 

 that the original taking did not significantly contribute to 

 causing depletion of the population and, therefore, that those 

 who hold such marine mammals should not be penalized by 

 foreclosing the opportunity to use or sell the mammal for 

 purposes of public display. This is not necessarily the case. 

 In some instances, the removal of animals for captive maintenance 

 may have contributed to depleting the population. 



Second, such an amendment should only be considered if there 

 were an acceptable international system for identifying and 

 tracking individual marine mammals. Without such a system, 

 animals could be removed from the wild, "laundered" through 

 foreign facilities or passed off as the progeny of pre-depletion 

 animals, and imported to the United States for public display. 



Third, whether or not animals were held in captivity prior 

 to issuance of a depletion finding, it may be appropriate to 

 limit uses of such animals to those designed to help rebuild the 

 depleted stock. In this regard, it should be noted that 

 importation of marine mammals from depleted stocks is permissible 

 for enhancement purposes and that public display of such animals 



