313 



keystone environmental principle is the lesson of universality — the 

 intricate relationship of all things to one another. From this, I am com- 

 mitted to the notion that we must not allow our zeal to regain lost 

 ground to overcome the need for comprehensive knowledge of the effect 

 our actions might have. 



The reasoning is particularly appropriate to the work of this com- 

 mittee relating to ocean mammals and its larger work relating to the 

 protection of the entire marine environment. While it is certain that im- 

 mediate protective action is essential in some areas and for some spe- 

 cies, I believe the theme of your final legislation in the 92d Congress 

 should be the gathering of adequate information for coming years. 



I believe it is particularly important to add a great deal to our 

 knowledge regarding ocean mammals. I would be less than honest if 

 I did not reflect my feeling that some of the information circulated 

 regarding some marine mammal species in Alaska has given way to 

 excessive inaccuracy and information. In the specific case of the Alaska 

 fur seal, it was finally necessary for the most serious of these in- 

 accuracies and exaggerations to be corrected by responsible public 

 and private groups. I will comment further on this issue at a later 

 point. 



Unquestionably, all those involved in this issue are motivated by 

 notions of sound public policy. As with so many of the newly emerg- 

 ing environmental issues, however, the desire to take prompt action 

 is running ahead of the facts. In my view, this is the shortcoming of 

 H.R. 6558, and is the reason that this bill cannot serve as the starting 

 point for a comprehensive and responsible legislative program in this 

 area. 



An examination of all bills introduced reveals that H.R. 10420, by 

 the gentleman from California (Mr. Anderson) has an admirable 

 commitment to the need for com])rehensive study and isolation of 

 areas of particular concern. Title II of H.R. 10420 offers a framework 

 which is responsible and practical. I indorse this proposal with a single 

 exception, and that is the need for additional participation by the 

 States. In undertaking: study and regulatory action regarding marine 

 mammals, the Federal Government is certain to steer perilously close 

 to the State police powers clearly established in the area of fish and 

 game regulation. In my view, the way to resolve this issue is to fully 

 involve the States, with a cooperative program of study and partici- 

 pation. 



In the specific case of Alaska, I believe a substantial additional 

 benefit exists in creating a cooperative State-Federal program. The 

 benefit is that the information contribution of Alaska is very likely 

 to exceed that of the Federal level as the study of ocean mammals 

 has been underway by State agencies for years, while it is a much 

 newer national issue. I suspect the same is true for other States as 

 well. 



Mr. Chairman, I would summarize these first points at this time. 

 I believe the early emphasis of comprehensive legislation should focus 

 on the gathering of information and the isolation of problems for 

 immediate attention. The formation of a long-term regulatory scheme 

 should await the conclusion of the information gathering process. 

 Second, I believe this process should emphasize the State-Federal 

 relationship to a much greater extent than proposed in any legislation 



