96 



human competition for food, the chronic effects of water pollution, incidental take 

 in fisheries, and the potential for oil spills caused by oil transport or development. 

 It is clear that the Southern sea otter is a central player in issues of both a regional 

 and global nature, and it is a litmus species for how well we are governing human 

 interactions with the marine environment. 



Since its enactment in 1972, the MMPA has been one or the sea otter's most im- 

 portant protections. The requirements of the MMPA played a major role in the state 

 of California's effort to protect the otter from staggering losses in the near shore 

 set gill and trammel net fishery. As the California Department of Fish and Game 

 has stated, these losses "could he the most significant mortality reactor contributing 

 to the apparent lack of sea otter population growth in California waters during the 

 past decade." 



The MMPA also has been an important force in reintroducing the southern sea 

 otter to San Nicolas Island, promoting an observer program for incidental take, and 

 conducting valuable scientific research. To continue this progress, we need a strong- 

 ly reauthorized MMPA. 



Our testimony today is limited to the issue of incidental take of sea otters in com- 

 mercial fishing operations in California and Alaska. We wiU submit testimony on 

 other MMPA issues in the future. 



Any incidental take of Southern sea otters could ieopardize species recovery. Even 

 low levels of take could lead into a period of population stasis or decline similar to 

 that of the mid-1970's to the mid-1980's. 



Before the current net bans were enacted by the California legislature, sea otters 

 were drowning in large numbers (with take exceeding annual growth of the popu- 

 lation through reproduction) in large mesh entangling fishing nets set primarily for 

 halibut. Whfle the gill net restrictions have reduced the nuniber of otter drownings, 

 they have not stopped them. In addition, there is one 20 mile area along the central 

 California boast with no gill net restrictions, where commercial net fishing occurs 

 and a small colony of sea otters is now present on a year-round basis. The potential 

 for incidental taJke remains a threat in this area, as does take in illegal nets in 

 closed areas. 



Protecting Southern sea otters from incidental take also is a key aspect of the 

 ESA and MNPA recovery efforts. For example, in establishing the legal basis for 

 translocating sea otters to San Nicolas island. Public Law No. 99-625 also estab- 

 lished an area around the translocation site and throughout the parent population 

 range (including room for natural expansion) where sea otters would be fully pro- 

 tected and incidental take prohibited. The concept of an absolute prohibition of inci- 

 dental take in these areas was an essential underpinning of Public Law No. 99-625. 

 (Public Law No. 99-625 also designated areas where otters would not be allowed to 

 colonize, where incidental take during legal fishing operations would not be prohib- 

 ited, and where specified protections of the ESA woula not apply.) 



The State of California coined in the effort by prohibiting fishing nets and the dis- 

 charge of firearms around the San Nicolas Island translocation site. As a result, sea 

 otters are fully protected north of Point Conception and around their reoccupied 

 habitat at San Nicolas Island. 



By honoring in the 1988 interim exemption from the MMPA incidental take prohi- 

 bition the understanding that there would be no incidental take of Southern sea ot- 

 ters in its entire range except the designated area south of Point Conception, Con- 

 gress expressly reafnrmed the importance of prohibiting the incidental take of 

 Southern sea otters. That protection remains as necessary today as it was in 1988. 

 In addition, the incidental take of sea otters in Alaska is becoming an issue of major 

 concern which has been overlooked by the federal government, much takes have 

 never been authorized under the MMPA, although they are occurring in large num- 

 bers. 



In accordance with the requirements of section 114 of the MMPA and the terms 

 of the 1988 interim incidental take authorization, the National Marine Fisheries 

 Service ("NMFS") has submitted a proposed regime to govern the incidental take of 

 marine mammals in commercial fishing operations. FSO participated in this review, 

 including the Marine Mammal Commission's ("MMC") preliminary effort of provid- 

 ing guidelines to NMFS. Throughout the public review of the proposed regime. FSO 

 has argued strenuously for complete protection of southern sea otters from inciden- 

 tal take in accordance with the congressional mandate in Public Law No. 99-625. 

 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (TWS") has agreed that no new incidental take 

 authorizations should be established for this species, see Exhibits 1 and 2, and has 

 provided these views to NMFS. Of course, NMFS must defer to FWS on its rec- 

 ommendations for this species. This understanding between the NMFS and the 

 FWS has been clearly documented. See Exhibit 3. The NMFS will defer to the FWS 



