55 



would assist at ports of entry. The Department anticipates no unusual adminis- 

 trative or enforcement responsibilities which cannot be fulfilled in cooperation 

 with the other interested Departments. 



Similar bills (H.R. 6554: H.R. 6558; H.R. 7463; H.R. 8183; S. 1315), would 

 identify a joint responsibility of the Secretary of the Treasury, among others, 

 with resi^ect to enforcement measures. Since Treasury (Customs) officers have 

 considerable search, seizure and arrest powers under existing tariff and related 

 laws, we suggest that the Committee consider a reference to the joint respon- 

 sibility of the several Departments likely to be involved, and include the language 

 "in addition to any other authority" when referring to persons authorized to en- 

 force the bill's provisions. 



It is sugge.sted that section 111 of Title I of the bill be extended so as to author- 

 ize regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury in fulfillment of 

 the Department's enforcement resi>on.sil)ility. 



The Department anticipates that the seizure and forfeiture provisions of the 

 bill, involving Customs dispositions of violating vessels, cargos and related prop- 

 erty, foreseeably will add to the existing Customs enforcement workload. 



The Department has l)een advised by the Office of Management and Budget 



that there is no objection from the standpoint of the Administration's program 



to the submission of this report to your Committee. 



Sincerely yours, 



Roy T. Englert, 



Acting General Counsel. 



Mr. DiNGELL. I would like to insert a memorandum on the general 

 subject of marine mammals, prepared by Frank Potter, counsel to the 

 subcormnittee. As an accommodation to the membei-s of the com- 

 mittee, the memorandum will be inserted at this point in the record. 



(The information follows :) 



U.S. House of Representatives, 

 Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, 



Washington, B.C., September 7, 19^1. 



To : Members. Subcommittee on Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation. 

 From : Frank M. Potter, Jr., counsel. 

 Subject : Marine mammal protection. 



There are many bills presently pending before the Committee which deal with 

 protection of some or all si>ecies of marine mammals. Some provide research 

 authority only (H.R. 6804 by Mr. Whitehurst). some deal with only certain 

 types of marine mammals (H.R. 7463, by Mr. Anderson of California.), some 

 are directed at the humane or inhumane methods of taking (H. Con. Res. 77, by 

 Mr. Ryan and others; H.R. 4370. by Mr. Helstoski). Mr. Pryor has intro<luced, 

 with some 100 cosponsors, a bill which would impose an absolute ban upon 

 the taking of all such mammals (H.R. 6558 and others), and Mr. Anderson and 

 several others have introduced an alternative which would impose such a ban, 

 but would permit the Secretary of the Interior to issue permits for the taking 

 of marine mammals, after full public review (H.R. 10420) . 



The Harris-Pryor bill (H.R. 6558) and the Anderson-Pel ly bill (H.R. 10420) 

 appear to involve the most comprehensive treatment of this complex problem. 

 Copies of both bills were sent to a wide selection of experts and interested per- 

 sons for comment by :Mr. Dingell on August 12, and many of these will doubtless 

 be communicating with the Committee. 



In preparing for these hearings, I have read a vast amount of material on 

 ocean mammals, and have interviewed a number of people who seemed to be 

 knowledgeable on the subject: conservationists, government officials, scientists 

 and others. While this material is. of course, available to anyone who wishes 

 to see it, its bulk precludes general distribution. I thought that it might of help- 

 ful to the Committee if I were to identify some of the critical issues that may 

 emerge during the course of hearings on this subject, and to supply back- 

 ground information that may put these issues into somewhat clearer perspective. 



Attached as appendices to this memorandum are summaries of the Harris- 

 Pryor Bill (The Ocean Mammal Protection Act of 1971) and of the Anderson- 

 Peily bill (The Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1971), and a list of the ques- 

 tions put to the experts and interested persons in Mr. Dingell's letter of August 

 12. 



67-765 0—71 5 



