95 



trophic for elimination of the Marine Mammal Commission or reduc- 

 tion of its functions. 



I would like to comment on a comment that was made at the out- 

 pot today that the tuna/porpoise issue is a classic confrontation be- 

 tween environmentalists and business enterprise. The statement was 

 made that the conservationist group demand that the tuna fishermen 

 immediately stop killing dolphins, even if it means drastic curtail- 

 ment or cessation of fishing. 



We would like to refresh the Committee's memory or the position 

 that has been historically taken with complete consistency by the 

 monitor groups on this issue. In every tuna/porpoise forum in the 

 last few years, we have gone on record that significant progress 

 must be made each year to move toward the goal of a mortality 

 approaching zero. We have insisted on. one, an annual quota which 

 must be significantly reduced each succeeding year. 



Two, we have insisted on an observer on every boat. 



Three, an annual multi-million-dollar program of research and 

 development be with emphasis on acoustics and behavior, existing 

 gear and techniques and new improvements that will permit econom- 

 ically successful catching of yellowfin tuna without putting nets 

 around the porpoise at all. 



At no time, Mr. Chairman, and distinguished members of the 

 committee, have we recommended that there be a total cessation of 

 setting on porpoise nor have we had any desire to drive the tuna 

 industry to the economic wall or bankruptcy under the foreign flag. 

 We have recognized from the outset that it was absolutely essential 

 that American fishermen continue to fish so that working with the 

 Government, it would be possible to develop the technological break- 

 through that is the ultimate resolution of this problem. 



I must confess to a degree of shock today, in terms of what I feel 

 to be a feeling of some members of the committee that the point has 

 been established that industry, to remain viable, there must be sig- 

 nificant amendments of the act. We have only begun to get progress 

 toward resolution of this problem after the 2-year period of grace 

 was over. 



During the 2-year period of grace, there was no significant move- 

 ment toward solution of this problem. Both the Government and the 

 industry paid lipservice to the need to solve the problem, did not put 

 significant resources into this. 



The record is replete with the fact that there was a very inadequate 

 application of resources, money and manpower into this problem dur- 

 ing the 2-year period. If we go back to a grace period, we will have 

 stopped forward movement toward solution of this problem. 



At the same time, it was not until we took the Federal Govern- 

 ment into court that a quota was established and it was not until a 

 quota was established that significant resources began to be applied 

 to solving this problem. We would be very much concerned with the 

 kind of amendment that we discussed today, that we would be back 

 in square 1 with this problem. 



So I think that completes my remarks, Mr. Chairman, and I 

 would be happy to try to respond to any questions. 



We thank you very much for inviting the monitor groups to ap- 

 pear before the committee today. 



