259 



10) Marine mammals must be managed for the benefit of their 

 species and not for the benefit of commercial exploitation. 16 

 U.S.C. §1362(6). The primary purpose of the Marine Mammal Pro- 

 tection Act is to protect marine mammals; the legislation was not 

 intended as a "balancing act" between the interests of the fishing 

 industry and the animals. The legislative intent and judicial 

 interpretation of the Act is clear and explicit in this regard. 

 Committee for Humane Legislation, Inc. v. Richardson , 414 F.Supp. 

 297 at 306 and 540 F.2d 1141 at 1148. Nevertheless, a close 

 examination of the language of the new regulations indicates a 

 pervasive preference in behalf of maximum yield for commercial 

 interests rather than protection and conservation of the affected 

 mammals. In light of the mortality quota established by the 

 regulations (59,050 for a 38 week period; over 80,000 when 

 converted to an annual basis), a passage from page 12019 of the 

 Federal Register becomes terribly revealing: "The economic 

 analysis which is part of the record indicates that the imposition 

 of a quota below 80,000 will adversely affect the profitability 

 of purse seiners, at least in the short run." When all is said 

 and done, this appears to have been the controlling factor in 

 the issuance of the regulations. 



In summary, the regulations are fatally defective because 

 they fail to meet the statutory requirements of the MMPA in the 

 following respects: 



1) No present porpoise stocks are at OSP, i.e., pre- 

 exploitation level. 



2) OSP has never been quantified as required by the Act. 



3) No provision is made for permits to cover the three 

 million-plus, non-fatal "takings" anticipated in 1977. 



4) A quota of 59,050 (or an annual rate of approximately 

 80,000) comes nowhere near meeting the immediate statutory goal 



of an insignificant level approaching zero... plus the fact that the 

 quota is open-ended. 



