405 



must be solved. "We urge that the burden of proof be placed upon the 

 industry for solution of this problem. 



Second, there is the urgent problem of marine mammals in cap- 

 tivity, and generally, we support the testimony of Robert Horstman 

 on this matter. We urge that national policy be established to bring 

 private ownership of marine mammals under permit. The same should 

 be true of zoos and oceanaria and their suppliers. There are not ade- 

 quate guidelines for the capture and husbandry of these delicate crea- 

 tures. We assume that one task for the Commission's Scientific Ad- 

 \isory Committee would be to aid in develo2Dment of such guidelines. 



Third, "native" rights must be protected, but this aspect is not 

 clear in the bill. In Alaska, "native" rights are not along ethnic or 

 racial lines, but have been established for subsistence hunters, re- 

 gardless of race. Skin and ivory hunters and the Eskimo ivory-carv- 

 ing industry, for instance, must be considered and this is currently 

 done by the State of Alaska. Neverthless, it is by no means clear that 

 the level of hunt is below, or will remain below, the annual increment 

 of some populations. Walrus, bowhead whales, and polar bears, among 

 others, are hunted under "native" rights. The level of this hunt bears 

 careful watching. Should it become excessive, restrictive regulations 

 will prove necessary. Since these mammals are inhabitants of the open 

 ocean and are international in nature, Federal policy is needed. We 

 reemphasize, however, that such policy must be made in close coopera- 

 tion with tliat State and that management on a local level be 

 strengthened. 



Fourth, the fur seal is a special case. We are not concerned with 

 the question of why these animals are killed. That is a social and 

 moral decision. In scientific terms, the method of kill by clubbing and 

 exsanguination is quick and humane. Also, the level of kill leads to 

 a healthy, productive population. In terms of international law, we 

 see this fishery as the best example of conservation of a large mamnial 

 anywhere. In'"humanitarian" terms, it is not an easy matter to decide 

 whether a direct kill to regulate a population below carrying capacity 

 is more or less "humane" than a population let go to maximum abun- 

 dance with the resultant high mortality of pups on the rookery. 



Fifth, the idea of sanctuaries bears urgent consideration. Testi- 

 mony by Mr. Vandevere on the California sea otter and Mr. Hart- 

 mann on the Florida manatee mentioned the threats of environmental 

 pollution and collision with boats. Perhaps sanctuaries of a more 

 complete or restrictive nature than exist today might assist in 

 management. 



Last, we would like to enter into the record of these hearings the 

 reports of the AYorking Groups of the International Conference on 

 the Biology of ^Miales, held in June of this year. These documents 

 represent the thinking of biologists from many nations who have 

 dealt with whales and whaling and who have made great efforts in 

 conservation against, at times, nearly overwhelming odds. At last, their 

 rational viewpoint appears to be having appreciable effect and we may 

 yet see the substantial rebuilding of populations. It is clear that a 

 moratorium which protects them and then forgets them will not pro- 

 tect and may actually endanger the whales. 



In conclusion, we are in a real sense hoist on the petard of our own 

 humanness in the "exploiter" versus the "conserver" confrontation. 



