179 



which supposedly are to be sent out to Congress at a later date, would 

 either complement or be contrasted with any of the legislative pro- 

 posals which this committee is considering now. 

 Do you have any time frame as to when tlus draft legislation will 



be sent up? ■ ^ ^ 



Dr. LixDUSKA. It is in final process of review right at the moment. 



It is on my desk right now. 



Mr. RouNTREE. Are you able at this point in time to give us a gen- 

 eral idea of what it is intended to do ? 



Dr. LixDUSKA. Yes; the main provision would be to relieve us of 

 the locked-in situation that we now face wherein we can deal only with 

 species at a point of endangerment. 



We would like to see that liberalized to the extent that we could 

 begin to give consideration to all forms of wildlife when they are not 

 only endangered but in a rare capacity. 



As Dr. Talbot mentioned in his testimony, it is highly desirable that 

 we do this. 



If we wait until a point of actual endangerment we are working 

 against tremendous odds whereas if we can recognize that an animal 

 is in a bad plight sometime in advance of that final day, we stand a 

 far better chance of doing whatever needs to be done to preserve it. 



That would be the main consideration. 



Mr. RouNTREE. I am a little bit concerned that in your agency 

 reports commenting on each of these specific bills before the committee, 

 the Department of Interior has supported the concept of a study 

 whereas the Department of Commerce has supported enactment of 

 H.R. 10420 with appropriate amendments. 



Is there any inherent conflict between the two positions of Interior 

 and Commerce and. if so, how will they be resolved in any type of 

 legislation this committee reports out ? 



Ostensiblv, vou would continue to have dual authority and dual 

 responsibilities with Department of Interior under the Endangered 

 Species Act in regard to all ocean mammal species, I assume, in addi- 

 tion to your existing authority with the polar bear and walrus and, I 

 believe,' the sea otter, whereas the Department of Commerce would 

 have a responsibility for fur seals and other ocean mammals. 



How is this conflict to be resolved ? 



Is it a proi^er approach to take or should there be some comprehensive 

 overall lead agency concept as opposed to a dual agency responsibility 

 within two departments as envisioned in a number of these bills ? 



Do you have any comment on this ? 



Dr.' LixDUSKA.' First separating out marine mammals, i^er se, and 

 then endangered species as a secondary consideration, I think there 

 is no question that the responsibility in terms of management, investi- 

 gation, and everything that goes with bringing proper recognition to 

 management should be in one pocket. 



Presently, this is provided for as far as marine mammals are con- 

 cerned, in the legislation which you mentioned. 



I do not see any opportunity for bumping heads too frequently 

 with the endangered species being a separate consideration, but at 

 t;he same time, this, of course, will all be resolved if the Department 

 of Xatural Resources should come into being. 



