48 



tion From this, it mav l>e inferred that most species of ocean mammals are 

 not threateneii or in danger of becoming so. though the Department must 

 obviously disclaim auv si^ecial scientitic competence in the matter. 



Since "there appears to be no sound, scientitic Ivisis for a total ban on the 

 killing of all marine mammals, we believe it quite unlikely that ^>ther Govern- 

 ments would be preivire<l to enter into negotiations to this eml. The Depart- 

 ment stands readv to seek iutermitioual agreements for the conservation for 

 rational use of si^nes lieuelicial to man or for the protection of endangered 

 species when a reasonable scientitic case can be made that such measures are 

 needed We have foimd that other Governments are generally receptive to 

 prowsals of negotiations kx>king to agreements to cover such circumstances. 

 On the other hand, whatever may be the ethical merits of the c-oncept that a 

 blanket prohibition on the killing of iKesin mammals is a desirable end in itself, 

 we believe that few. if any. other nations woiUd at the present time be prewired 

 to accept this wncept as a kisis for negotiations. 



In ivissing. we might note that the taking of five of the eight si>ecies of whales 

 on the endangered fist publisheil by the Secretary of the Interior has lieen pro- 

 hibited for some vears under regulations of the International Whaling Commis- 

 sion, of which the United States and the major whaling tx>untries are members. 

 The United States is continuing to seek more effective measures by the Com- 

 mission for the conservation of the remaining three s^^^ies. Further, the killing 

 of northern fur seals is controlled through the North Pacific Fur Seal Com- 

 mission. Conservation of the harp and hood seals of the northwestern Atlantic 

 Ocean is among the responsibilities of the International Commission for the 

 Northwest Atlantic Fisheries- • t^ ^ , 



The 1957 Interim Convention on Conservation of North Pacific inir fc>eals, 

 the parties to which are the United States. Canada. Japan and the Soviet 

 Union is the successor to the 1911 treaty on this subject l>etween the four 

 coimtries In the vears prior to 1911 the fur seal herds had been decimated by 

 indiscrimniate t>elagic sealing— the killing of seals at seii. Since it was not 

 possible to determine beforehand the sex or age of the animals, many females 

 and immature seals were killed. Many animals were lost through wounding or 

 sinking Bv the time of conclusion of the 1911 treaty the herds on the Pribilof 

 islands had been reduced to perhaps 200,000 animals ; the herds under Russian 

 jurisdiction faced extinction. 



The 1911 treaty forbade pelagic sealing to the nationals and vessels of the four 

 parties. In exchange, the taking of fur sealskins was shared in such a way that 

 the countries controlling the rookeries retained 70 per cent of the skins and dis- 

 tributed 30 per cent among the others. The treaty was highly successful in restor- 

 ing the seal populations, so much so in fact that the Japanese Government as early 

 as 1926 suggested a conference for modification of the convention on grounds that 

 the seals had become too numerous. No conference was held, however, and the 

 treatv continued until 1941 when it was terminated by notice given by Japan, 

 in connection with which it was alleged by that Government that both direct and 

 indirect damage had been inflicted on the Japanese fisheries by the increase of 

 the fur seal populations. 



The present Convention retains the prohibition on pelagic sealing and the basic 

 features of the sharing formula. It also provides for research and for coordina- 

 tion of research and management plans through the North Pacific Fur Seal Com- 

 mission, composed of one member from each inirty. The killing of the ftir seals 

 on the Pribilofs and the taking of the skins is conducted by the National Marine 

 Fisheries Service. Department of Commerce, according to the management plan, 

 which is addressed to the objective of bringing the herds to the level of maximum 

 stistainable productivity and maintaining them at that level. We understand that 

 the Pribilof population now numl>ers about a million and a half, with perhaps 

 another half million from the Soviet rookeries. 



Termination of the 1957 treaty would expose the fur seals to the possibility 

 of resumption of the wastefiU practice of pelagic sealing and consequent over- 

 exploitation. It is not certain, of course, that other countries would permit the 

 resumption of the hunting of these animals at sea. It appears very doubtful, how- 

 ever, that other Governments, for example, that of Japan, would be prepared 

 without any tangible quid pin quo to restrain their nationals from taking the 

 seals for their valuable furs, particularly when these animals have been accused 

 of causing damage to the fisheries. Moreover, we believe that the existence of an 

 international conservation agreement, generally regarded as highly successful, 

 constitutes a significant deterrent to additional countries which are in a position 

 to engage in pelagic sealing. Termination of the treaty would remove this deter- 



