505 



It should be fully understood that any marine mammal legislation 

 that may be enacted for the United States will not end misuse of these 

 animals by other nations. Canadian baby seal killings, the use of set 

 guns for polar bears in the Svalbard, procrastination in the Interna- 

 tional Whaling Commission, and all the other activities will go on. 

 There is a limit to what we can do by ourselves. 



Of the legislation before the committee, H.R. 10420 comes the closed 

 to meeting the requirements of a basic marine mammal program. We 

 believe it can be greatly improved, however, and we offer the follow- 

 ing comments with the thought of helping the committee to develop 

 the best possible bill. 



Section 2(2), the meaning of the word "optimum" is unclear. The 

 goal should not be solely to restore species or stocks so that they may 

 be managed on a susitained yield basis. Rather, action should be taken 

 to restore species or stocks found to be in a depleted status in terms of 

 the capability of their habitat to support them and of society to accept 

 their presence. Once restoration is achieved, then management deci- 

 sions may be made whether to permit a harve^. If a harvest is per- 

 mitted, then jrood management automaticallv decrees that it be con- 

 sistent with the long-term population plan for the species. 



Section 2(4), line 12, as explained earlier, the word "management" 

 is preferable to the present use of the word "conservation." 



Section 3(3), under present Government organization, responsi- 

 bility for marine mammals is split between the Secretaries of Com- 

 merce and the Interior. Is it the intent of the committee to vest the 

 entire responsibility in the Secretary of the Interior ? Care should be 

 taken to eliminate all obstacles, administrative and otherwise, to a 

 strengthened Federal effort. 



Section 3(4), information recently available suggests that large 

 numbers of some species of marine mammals may be killed and wasted 

 as a result of some kinds of commercial fishing operations. The waste 

 is reported to be of such a magnitude as to be unacceptable; and some- 

 where, either in this legislation or the program that it contemplates, 

 research should begin immediately to determine kinds of gear, fishing 

 teclmiques, and other steps, including development of markets for the 

 presently wasted resource, to turn these animals to man's benefit. Per- 

 haps impetus could be given for this by writing a requirement into 

 section 102(c), directing the Secretary to issue periodic statements on 

 existing and known impacts on marine mamals from man's activities 

 such as commercial fishing, and steps being taken to overcome them. 

 Further, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the exclusion 

 of commercial fishing in section 3(4) may not be justified. 



In sections 102, 103, and perhaps elsewhere the word "limitations" 

 is used several times. This has essentially a negative connotation, not 

 particularly compatible with the positive thrust of the proposal. We 

 suggest that the words "rules and regulations" would be much more 

 appropriate. 



Section 101, "Prohibitions," begins with a clause providing excep- 

 tions for sections 102, 107, and 109. Section 101 deals with taking, pos- 

 session, transport, and importation of marine mammals or their parts. 

 The other three referenced sections deal only with the taking of marine 

 mammals. No provision apparently is made for exceptions to the blan- 

 ket ban on possession, transport, or entering a harbor or port. As pres- 



