316 



States, Russia, Japan, and Canada, and is cited by historians as one 

 of the most successful conservation efforts ever undertaken. 



In 1911 the North Pacific fur seal herd numbered less than 200,000 

 due to indiscriminate slaughter in the open seas. Under the protec- 

 tion accorded by the North Pacific Fur Seal Convention their num- 

 bers now exceed 1^3 million. . 



The Ocean Mammal Protection Act would terminate this historic 

 treaty and call instead for the United States to seek an international 

 agreement to stop all killing of North Pacific fur seals on land or sea. 



I submit that such a measure is totally unfeasible and would result 

 in resumed random hunting of the animals. 



Fifteen of the world's most respected conservationist groups, in- 

 cluding the American Committee for International Wild Life Pro- 

 tection, the National Audubon Society, North American Wildlife 

 Society, and the World Wildlife Fund are united in their opposition 

 to this bill. 



As responsible legislators, we cannot allow the emotional aspects of 

 this issue to override the scientific facts. 



We cannot accept blanket legislation of this sort. The field of ocean 

 mammal protection is a vast one — each species deserves individual 

 consideration. 



For example, under the bill, the preservationist policies for the 

 polar bear, which although relatively rare is not on the endangered 

 species list, would be the same as for the blue whale which is in dan- 

 ger of extinction. How can the guidelines established for these two 

 species be adapted to the thriving fur seal population ? 



We must distinguish carefuly between the bills introduced for ocean 

 mammal protection. 



H.R. 6558 is the wrong choice. Its negative aspects far outweigh 

 any good its sponsors hope to accomplish. It would not put an end to 

 the slaughter of baby seals on the St. Lawrence — it would terminate 

 the international treaty which brought about the restoration of the 

 North Pacific fur seal herd and create obstacles to any future interna- 

 tional agreement for protection of ocean mammals. In addition, it 

 would seriously undermine the scientific gains made in the field of 

 animal conservation and ]3rotection. 



The Marine Mammal Protection Act, H.R. 10420, is the more rea- 

 sonable alternative. 



I particularly endorse the creation of a Marine Mammal Conser- 

 vation Commission which would comprehensively review U.S. par- 

 ticipation in international treaties relating to marine mammals and 

 conduct a continuing review of the condition of these mammals, of 

 methods for their management, and of humane methods of commer- 

 cially taking the animals. 



It would make recommendations for additional measures for pro- 

 tection of ocean mammals if deemed necessary and recommend revi- 

 sions in the endangered species list when called for. 



An authority of this nature is precisely what is needed to bring 

 about a balanced program for protection and preservation of the ocean 

 mammals. 



Again, let me stress that we must not neglect our responsibility— 

 we must work together, not divided on mistaken emotional grounds 

 but rather united in our attempt to find the best possible solution to 

 the problem of ocean mammal preservation. 



