37 



Senator Kerry. But hold on a second. You are telling us you 

 want universal registration. You do not have that today. So, you 

 clearly do not have an adequate data base, even according to your 

 own judgment? 



Dr. Foster. We have registration of our old categories I and II 

 fisheries, so we have the system in place. 



Senator Kerry. But you want universal registration? 



Dr. Foster. Yes. 



Senator Kerry. That is opposed by the working group, who sug- 

 gest that you can accomplish your goal by taking the data base of 

 the existing State and tribal and Federal permit system. You could 

 tap into existing permit systems, and then you would not have to 

 develop a whole new bureaucracy or process of registration. But 

 you are saying, no, that is not adequate. If you are saying you need 

 this larger system, why will what they are proposing not do the 

 job? 



Dr. Foster. I do not think it is that we need a larger system, 

 sir. We have the system in place. We have at least two-thirds — let 

 us say two-thirds of the universe is already registered. So, what we 

 are doing is just talking about getting more names into the data 

 base from that other one-third out there. 



Senator Kerry. Completing the one-third that are not there? 



Dr. Foster. Right. 



Senator Kerry. Do you know what one-third, more or less? Is it 

 a particular sector — is it tribal? What population would be affected 

 by this extra third that is being added? 



Dr. Foster. It was not tribal. It was our category III fisheries, 

 which were fisheries that did not have — ^they had some interaction 

 with marine mammals, but not what we were calling significant 

 interactions. 



Senator Kerry. Dr. Hofman, what about quotas as a manage- 

 ment tool? You recommend, or NMFS recommends quotas. The 

 working group has an alternative to quotas. Where do you come 

 out on the quota issue as a tool? 



Dr. Hofman. This is a case, Mr. Chairman, where I think that 

 there may be some confusion between the two proposals. I am not 

 entirely sure that I fully understand the proposal fi-om the industry 

 and the environmental community in several areas. This is one. 



Under the National Marine Fishery Service proposal, there 

 would be a calculation of what they refer to as the potential biologi- 

 cal removal level. If their estimate of the total take from all 

 sources, including, but not limited to fisheries, were above that 

 level, they would establish, at least initially, the estimated PBR as 

 a cap, or, I think the term you are using is "quota." And then they 

 would look to allocating that cap or that quota among the various 

 users. 



I am not sure I fully understand what the industry and environ- 

 mental community are proposing. You may want to ask the rep- 

 resentatives of industry and the environmental community this 

 same question. I think what they are saying is they would go 

 through a similar kind of calculation, and want to make sure that 

 the total take is not above the biologically acceptable level, but 

 there they stop. 



