123 



I think this is an undignified as well as perhaps an unwise way 

 for Congress to proceed on very difficult and complicated legisla- 

 tion. 



Mr. Leggett. We did that last week in order to allow the 200-mile 

 limit law to be effective by March 1. 



Mr. Butler. I know you did that. 



Mr. Leggett. There is a policy in that, and we acted in 3 days. 



Mr. Butler. I remember the blackbird incident of last year, which 

 I would use as a counter example, where it seems to me, in retrospect, 

 perhaps a little greater time might have resulted in somewhat more 

 discrete action, and perhaps even no action. 



Mr. Leggett. Your views are appreciated. 



Mr. Anderson, do you want to examine? 



Mr. Anderson. No questions. 



Mr. Leggett. Counsel? 



Mr. Mannina. No. 



Mr. Spensley. No questions. 



Mr. Leggett. OK, Mr. Eisenbud. 



Mr. Eisenbud. I wonder if you would indulge me, and allow me to 

 offer a clarification of one point, Mr. Chairman. 



You made mention of the Commission's role in the period between 

 1972 and 1974. I would just like to note that the Commission was 

 not funded as operational during most of that period. The Commis- 

 sion was not able to establish offices until February of 1974, toward 

 the conclusion of the interim period. As you know, we participated 

 in the first hearing in May 1974 and we offered detailed recom- 

 mendations in July of 1974. I respectfully submit that if those were 

 adopted they would have proven formidable and helpful to effort to 

 solve the problem. 



If you would like, I can submit those for the record. 



Mr. Leggett. Good. You can submit those for the record, and 

 your explanation will be used in mitigation 



[The following was received for the record.] 



Marine Mammal Commission, 

 Washington, D.C., July 30, 197%. 

 Robert W. Schoning, 



Director, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Department of Commerce, 

 Washington, D.C. 



Dear Mr. Schoning : The Marine Mammal Commission and the Committee 

 of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals have been pleased to cooperate with 

 you and members of your staff in developing regulations and information 

 relating to the incidental taking of marine mammals in the course of com- 

 mercial fishing operations, pursuant to Sections 101 (a) 2, 103, 104, 111 and 202 

 of the Marine Mammal Protection Act. As you know, these cooperative efforts 

 have included consultation concerning the proposed rules governing the inci- 

 dental taking of marine mammals in the course of commercial fishing opera- 

 tions prior to their publication in the Federal Register on April 30, 1.974 (39 

 F.R. 15042), participation by counsel at the public hearing on those regula- 

 tions in Seattle, Washington on May 15 and 16, 1974, and submission of a 

 brief to the Administrative Law Judge containing recommended changes, as 

 well as meetings in San Diego and at the Southwest Fisheries Center, La 

 Jolla, and correspondence and conversations relating to porpoise population 

 and estimated kill data. 



In further consultation and pursuant to the Act, I am pleased to transmit, 

 on behalf of Dr. Victor B. Scheffer, Chairman of the Commission, the fol- 

 lowing additional comments and recommendations relating to the incidental 

 taking of marine mammals in the course of commercial fishing operations : 



94-S86— 77 9 



