380 



for some time. I have not had the opportunity to contact them but, 

 wiith the permission of the chairman, I would like to submit a supple- 

 mental statement with any facts that they have accumulated, includ- 

 ing instances of shooting these mammals from power craft. 



Mr. DiNGELL. I think that would be very helpful, but the Chair 

 suggests that you do so in as expeditious a fashion as possible because 

 it is our intention to move this bill forward rapidly. Without objection, 

 it is so ordered within the bounds of that statement. 



I would remind jou and our earlier witnesses that there is a bill 

 outlawing the shootmg of animals from aircraft. 



Mr. HoYT. This was other power craft, not strictly aircraft. 



A great deal of discussion has been held concerning polar bears and 

 the hunting of these creatures from aircraft. Although the hunting 

 of polar bears has been forbidden by Russia, the State of Alaska con- 

 tinues to grant licenses for this purpose. Mr, McMahon questioned 

 several pilots in 1968 and left Alaska with the very firm impression 

 that the killmg of these creatures is not confined to international 

 Avaters. One pilot made the comment that there are not enough game- 

 keepers to patrol the entire area and, if a perfect specimen were 

 sighted, "Who is to know if it is within 2i/^ miles off the coast or over 

 3 miles off the coast?" Mr. McHahon also found growing discontent 

 among the citizens of Alaska concerning the hunting of polar bears 

 from aircraft and the numbers of these animals being killed. 



I regret very much that I cannot present you with more detailed 

 figures on the populations of sea mammals and their depletion, but it 

 is obvious that even the Grovemment has made no serious attempt to 

 gather these statistics. 



For these reasons, the Humane Society of the United States strongly 

 supports section 102 of this bill which not only provides "for the pro- 

 tection of all ocean mammals from harassment or slaughter," but 

 "declares it to be the further public policy of the United States that 

 negotiations should be undertaken with foreign governments aiid 

 through interested international organizations with a view to obtain- 

 ing a worldwide ban on the further slaughter of ocean mammals." 

 We are not finally opposed to a program of proper and human man- 

 agement of these mammals, but until such time as it can be more ade- 

 quately demonstrated that their survival is not threatened, we support 

 this ban. 



There is in this amended version of Mr. Pryor's bill only one section 

 with which I take exception, and that by waj^ of a suggested addition. 

 I refer to section 204(a) . If "there be no prohibition against municipal 

 and/or other nonprofit zoos from obtaining w^ritten consent from the 

 Secretary to humanely capture a representative number of ocean niam- 

 mals herein defined for replacement for deceased or otherwise ailing 

 members of these species in these zoos," let it also be required that these 

 zoos guarantee, to the satisfaction of the Secretary, that they can 

 house such mammals humanely. Perhaps tliis concern will be rectified 

 by the Animal Welfare Act of 1970, but it makes little sense to require 

 that they be taken humanely only to be housed inhumanely. I feel, 

 Mr. Chairman, that this additional provision would significantly 

 strengthen the intent of this section. 



In conclusion, I would remind you that such an authority as Mr. 

 Lee M. Talbot of the Smithsonian Institution has said that — 



