141 



the ecological considerations, recreational and esthetic values must 

 be g-iven weig:ht along with the traditional direct economic values. 



Therefore, we have come to a much broader concept of the objectives 

 for management of our living resources. As a result, in some oases, 

 revision in our approach to this management is required. This prin- 

 ciple is particularly evident in the case of some marine mammals, 

 such as whales. 



When the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling 

 was developed following World War II, a paramount consideration 

 was the health and welfare of the whaling industry which had been 

 seriously affected by the war. Associated with this was the concern that 

 maximum economic yields of the products of whales be obtained. The 

 net result of whale management under this convention has been the 

 drastic reduction of whale populations to the point where this Grovern- 

 ment has placed all commercial species on the endangered species list. 

 This action will have the effect of withdrawing the United States from 

 all whaling activities or commerce in whale products at the end of this 

 year. Although the situation may have bettered somewhat in recent 

 years, it is clear that effective management of the whales has not been 

 obtained under the convention. A significant revision in the convention 

 may be required to provide the base for effective management of 

 whales as a continuing and productive part of the marine en\'iron- 

 ment. Section 202(a) (1) of H.R. 10420 addresses this need for review 

 of the whaling convention. 



While we recognize an urgent need to improve some of our manage- 

 ment of marine mammals, and to increase the knowledge base upon 

 which some management depends, we also recognize that some effective 

 research and management has been accomplished at both a State and 

 Federal level. For example, from the information available to us, 

 it appears that the operation of the fur seal convention has been one 

 of the few successful examples of intemational management of a liv- 

 ing marine resource, which has resulted in an increase of a formerly 

 depleted population and in continued economic and biological 

 productivity. 



Some marine mammals are truly international, spending much of 

 their lives outside of the territorial waters of the United States. Ef- 

 fective management of these species requires that the Government 

 have adequate authority to regulate the taking of- these animals on 

 the high seas beyond the waters under American jurisdiction. Such 

 authoritv at present exists for the management of fur seals and sea 

 otters under the Fur Seal Act of 1966 (80 Stat. 1096 ; 16 U.S.C. 1171) . 

 However, it does not extend to some of the other marine mammals 

 such as polar bears and walrus. Although section 101(1) of H.R. 

 10420 refers to taking marine mammals on the high seas, section 102 

 (a) limits the authority granted under the act to protection of marine 

 mammals within the waters under the jurisdiction of the United States. 

 We would recommend that the act be amended to extend authority, 

 as appropriate, to the taking of marine mammals by persons under 

 U.S. jurisdiction on the seas beyond the territorial waters of the United 

 States. 



Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970 (84 Stat. 2090) transferred to 

 the Department of Commerce those authorities formerly exercised by 

 the Department of the Interior through the Bureau of Commercial 



