155 



8 



a symbol of the fight to stop the continuing destruction of man's own ecosystem." 24 We 

 submit that the time has come for Congress to give the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

 the authority it needs to protect polar bear habitat and to make good on an important, 

 but long overlooked, wildlife treaty obligation. 



Congress Should Not Deregulate Oil Company Activities Affecting Polar Bears 



In addition to amending the MMPA to improve the regime for polar bear habitat 

 protection, the Committee should make sure that it does not reduce the existing 

 statutory regime used to regulate oil and gas activities in polar bear habitats. 

 Specifically, Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA provides the FWS with authority to 

 review and regulate some of the potential impacts of oil company activities on polar 

 bears and, to a certain extent, polar bear habitat. Although Congress should supplement 

 this provision by providing the FWS with clear and affirmative authority to protect polar 

 bear habitat directly, Section 101(a)(5)(A) serves as an important means of regulating oil 

 and gas activities. The provision also provides a primary statutory basis FWS is using to 

 develop a Polar Bear Habitat Conservation Strategy. For these reasons, we strongly 

 oppose deregulatory proposals to create a separate process for oil company activities 

 that harass polar bears. Since lethal takes resulting from oil and gas activities are 

 prohibited under the Polar Bear Agreement, all petitions for the incidental taking of 

 polar bear submitted by oil companies will be for so-called "harassment trkes." Since, 

 with respect to the impact of oil company activities on polar bear denning behavior, the 

 distinction between harassment and lethal taking is a very fine one (i.e. harassment takes 

 are likely to be fatal to polar bear cubs), it is wholly inappropriate to change the existing 

 regulatory regime. Moreover, as noted above, such a change might call into question 

 FWS' statutory basis for developing a Polar Bear Habitat Conservation Strategy. 



Congress Should Not Allow the Importation of Polar Bear Trophies 



Finally, we oppose proposed amendments to Section 104 which would allow the 

 importation of polar bears trophies from Canada. We believe that such an amendment 

 is unnecessary in view of the existing waiver provision contained under Section 

 101(a)(3)(A) of the MMPA. This waiver provision assures that any import would be 

 conducted in a biologically sound manner. Moreover, such an amendment runs counter 

 to the wildlife protection intent of the Marine Mamma] Protection Act. There is simply 

 no compelling reason to set a precedent that undermines the protective nature of one of 

 this nation's most important wildlife statutes. 



We appreciate the Committee's interest in this matter and urge the committee to 

 address this concern during the reauthorization of the Marine Mammal Protection Act 

 by adopting appropriate amendments to clarify the FWS' authority in this area. 



