114 



committing resources to insignificant ones. 



The purpose of permits for scientific research under the MMPA 

 was to allow scientific activities that would otherwise be 

 prohibited. The current permit process for scientific research 

 is not inappropriate for the rare requests for lethal or 

 injurious research. However, I do not support requiring permits 

 for research activities that have negligible impact or that are 

 not regulated for other groups. The MKPA should be amended to 

 allow a general authorization for these specific research 

 activities. There is no reason this should not include 

 notification requirements, but requirements for extensive 

 advance warning would restrict access to the unpredictable 

 research opportunities that are such an important part of marine 

 mammal science. 



It is less clear how to regulate research activities with an 

 unknown potential to harm or harass animals. The National 

 Marine Fisheries Service has devoted more effort to this gray 

 area than to many nonresearch activities posing much greater 

 risks to marine mammal populations, but their newly proposed 

 definitions for harassment remain deeply flawed. The failure of 

 the National Marine Fisheries Serva.ce to regulate harassment 

 contrasts with the relative success of Institutional Animal Care 

 and Use Committees to regulate the complex issues of potential 

 harassment or pain to individual animals under the Animal 

 Welfare Act. The Animal Welfare Act is specifically designed to 

 protect individual animals, just as the MMPA is designed to 

 protect populations. I would suggest that issues of potential 

 harassment or pain to individual marine mammals in the course of 

 research be regulated by such committees, and that regulation 

 under the MMPA concentrate on risk to populations. This must 

 involve regular notification to the appropriate Federal agency 

 of all research potentially harassing or harming individual 

 marine mammals, and Federal notification to all Care and Use 

 Committees of special requirements for depleted populations or 

 critical habitats. 



As a scientist, I must point out that research methods involving 

 physical contact with an animal may involve less risk than other 

 methods. For example, if one needed to determine the home range 

 of an animal for a whole season, attaching a small tag in one 

 approach might be preferable to repeated close approaches for 

 photography. This issue is of particular importance because 

 biopsy sampling is well documented to pose negligible risks to 

 large whales and provides tissue critically needed for 

 conservation issues such as stock identification and contaminant 

 analysis. The wording of the MMPA should emphasize magnitude of 

 risk and to determine lists of which research activities belong 

 in which risk category based upon the best scientific evidence. 

 This might include specific approved protocols. Some method to 

 expedite the transfer of tissue whose collection involved 

 minimal risk is also needed. Difficulties in shipping tiny 

 samoles across international borders create a manor obstacle to 



