57 



of fishing industry stakeholders might be further narrowed by geographic region or 

 gear type. 



For instance, Alaska harbor seals range throu^out coastal Alaska. The Secretary 

 of Commerce mi^t consider appointing one member to represent Alaska Native 

 subsistence interests, and one or two members from the Alaskan salmon industry 

 (depending on the geographic spread of the harbor seal throughout the coastal 

 range). The subsistence and fishing industry representatives may also be used to 

 represent Alaskan coastal community interests. An environmental representative 

 could also be appointed to the subgroup. This would put the subgroup at 3-4 mem- 

 bers. Other subgroups ffught even oe smaller. Beluga whales in Cook Inlet involve 

 only subsistence users. The subgroup for this animal might involve two people, a 

 subsistence representative and an environmental representative. The Secretary 

 might consider appointing the same environmental representative to each subgroup. 



Funding would oe directed to the expedited formation of these teams, developing 

 initial recommendations to fill in gaps in data, and drafting a conservation plan. It 

 is intended that these informal groups be established on a short-term basis to jump 

 start the conservation process. A series of work group sessions would be required 

 at the outset. The Gulf Coalition acknowledges that these work groups would 

 consume a significant share of the initial MMPA Program administrative funding. 

 Once a plan is approved by the Secretary, the relevant subgroup could be disbanded 

 or put in a dormant status unless it is determined that the plan as set forth is not 

 accomplishing the two statutory benchmarks. Additionally, the subgroup could be 

 asked to evaluate and comment on the ongoing investigation of indirect causes of 

 mortality, such as changes in ecosystems or predator-prey relationships which may 

 have been prompted by Conservation Team recommendations, (explained below) At 

 such time that the Secretary concludes that conservation plans for the mammal 

 stocks in the region are in place and functioning as intended, the core Conservation 

 Team could then be disbanded indefinitely. 



Finally, the Gulf Coalition recommends that conservation team members rep- 

 resenting stakeholders not be entitled, as a matter of law, to per diem expenses. The 

 better approach is to provide discretionary funding for the Secretary to pay for per 

 diem expenses when, in the Secretary's sole discretion, a specific individual is 

 deemed to be a critical member of a conservation team and cannot participate with- 

 out such per diem funds. For instance, the Secretary may want to assign an aca- 

 demic expert to the team. Since the academic expert is not a "stakeholder" in the 

 classic economic or public interest sense, per diem may be a necessary element in 

 inducing the expert to participate. There may also be situations where stakeholders 

 in remote areas do not have the financial capacity to participate, yet they are in 

 the middle of the hot spot interaction being discussed. 



Paying for stakeholder travel should, however, be the exception to the rule. Stake- 

 holders with established associations or who routinely hire advocates at the Federal 

 and State level should be deemed to have sufficient financial capacity to fund the 

 per diem of the team participant. 



A second concern is that the makeup of the conservation teams could create bias 

 if the commercial, subsistence, and environmental interests do not have the same 

 number of representatives on each conservation team. The Gulf Coalition submits 

 that the intent of this proposal is not to set up a "majority-rules" forum where one 

 group of stakeholders can out vote or shout down another group. The conservation 

 teams are instead forums for coming up with a long-term and balanced approach 

 to meeting the two statutory benchmarks. It is an attempt to reach a facilitated so- 

 lution between the regulators, the regulated, and other interested parties which will 

 bear the weight of public scrutiny, increase cooperation within the regulated com- 

 munity, and achieve the conservation goals. 



To the extent that the political or personal dynamics of the discussions destroy 

 the effectiveness of the forum, it should be pointed out that the Secretary of Com- 

 merce has final responsibility for the plan. The role of the conservation teams are 

 purely advisory. The teams have six months to come up with a plan acceptable to 

 the Secretary. If the Secretary determines that a stakeholder is using the forum to 

 obstruct achievement of the statutory benchmarks, the Secretary must assume the 

 direct responsibility of completing the plan. It is intended, however, that Secretary's 

 representatives on the conservation teams will consult with the NOAA leadership 

 to assure that the teams are headed in the right direction. 



A third concern is the fear that a conservation team forum could be used by stake- 

 holders to achieve economic advantage over their competitors. The Gulf Coalition be- 

 lieves that this concern is unfounded. The system is not, however, designed to per- 

 mit the use of marine mammals as a weapon against others. All conservation team 

 deliberations would be open to the interested public. Interested parties would have 

 an opportunity to stay informed of the data being used in the aeliberative process 



