318 



scieiitific management of marine mammals are being threatened by 

 well-publicized and misguided efforts which, if successful, would de- 

 stroy the operation of biologically sound activities conducted by State 

 and Federal conservation agencies. The letters made clear that the 

 "hands off" policy proposed in H.R. 6558 and S. 1315, an identical 

 Senate bill, would severely jeopardize the efforts of responsible fish 

 and wildlife agencies to manage their marine mammals programs in 

 a scientific manner. Thus, the ability of these mammals to survive and 

 prosper would be adversely affected. I respectfully request that the 

 letters which I have just mentioned be inserted in the hearing record. 

 Mr. DiNGELL. If there is no objection, it is so ordered. 



(The letters follow:) 



KODiAK, Alaska, June 5, 1911. 



President Richakd M. Nixon, 

 The White House, 

 Washington, B.C. 



Dear Mr. President : We are writing in regard to the upcoming meeting of the 

 International Whaling Commission, to urge that the United States propose a 

 ten-year international moratorium on the killing of all whales. 



The slaughter of these animals by foreign fleets— so common in the waters off 

 Alaska— will surely lead to their extinction unless drastic measures are enacted 

 and enforced. 



We are encouraged by the steps your adminstration has already taken to 

 protect several species of whales. However, we believe that an international 

 moratorium on whaling for at least ten years is vital if whales of all existing 

 species are to survive. 



We respectfully request your support of such a proposal. 

 Very truly yours, 



Mr. and Mrs. Douglas K. McLeod. 



U.S. Senate, June 7, 1971. 



Dear : Through a well-financed advertising campaign, a good 



deal of misinformation has recently been disseminated relative to the Alaska 

 fur seal program administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service. These 

 ads have represented that the Alaska fur seal is in danger, that baby seals are 

 slaughtered on the Pribilof Islands, and that the annual Pribilof harvest is 

 inhumane. These representations are not true. 



Based on this misinformation, S. 1315, the Ocean Mammal Protection Act, has 

 been introduced to require that the four-nation North Pacific Fur Seal Conven- 

 tion be terminated. If enacted, this measure would seriously endanger the con- 

 tinuing existence of the Alaska fur seal and would destroy the livelihood of 

 Alaska Natives living on the Pribilof Islands. Withdrawal of the protection 

 presently provided under the Fur Seal Convention would make a retrogression to 

 the pre-convention .situation where seals were slaughtered indiscriminately on 

 the high seas. Under the Convention, the herd has progressed from near extinc- 

 tion to what is now a healthy, thriving population. To insure the continuing 

 vitality of the herd, the selective harvesting of bachelor seals that have not 

 found a mate is necessary. (Baby seals are not killed in Alaska.) Extensive 

 experimentation has demonstrated that the swiftest, most painless harvesting 

 method is clubbing in the expert manner practiced by the residents of the 

 Pribilof Islands. 



Seeking expert opinion, I asked Tom Kimball, Director of the National Wildlife 

 Federation, and Dan Poole, President of the Wildlife Management Institute, for 

 their views on S. 1315. Both of these men told us that this legislation is unsound 

 in that it prohibits prudent management on the Pribilofs and requires the 

 termination of the Fur Seal Convention. Representatives of other conservation 

 groups are expected to express similar views in the near future. 



Not only is S. 1315 unsound from a conservation point of view, it is also 

 unsound economically. The Aleut residents of the Pribilof Islands would be 

 deprived of their primary source of livelihood. At the same time, if the Con- 



