518 



Mr. Pankowski. I shall certainly do so. 



It would still permit commercial harvesting — the wisdom of which 

 at this time seems extremely doubtful — except in circumstances, like 

 the Pribilof seals. It still leaves some of the States in effective con- 

 trol of important game species like the polar bear — a resource of 

 international significance — and is subject to the interpretation that 

 the Secretary may set what seem to be bag limits on these creatures. 

 Moreover, we would like to suggest that it may be possible to manage 

 a species on a sustained-yield basis without endangering its survival 

 as a species by concentrating a representative sample within a very 

 small area — an outdoor zoo-type situation undesirable. 



We would like to suggest the following : 



1. That in lieu of the language of section 2 (1) and (5) of H.R. 

 10420 and its emphasis on "use," the leglislation specifically state that 

 its purpose is to protect and enhance the status of marine mammals as 

 resources vital to the ecological integrity of the seas and man's 

 environment. 



2. That permits be issued by the Secretary only in those situations 

 where the taking of marine mammals is necessary to enhance the well- 

 being of those species or, in extenuating circumstances, where hard- 

 ships to men are involved. This would give the benefit of the doubt 

 where it seems to belong at this time without doing violence to man 

 who is, in our view, the real beneficiary of this legislation. 



3. That there be a requirement that the Secretary shall first con- 

 sider alternative management techniques to killing in order to protect 

 against overcrowding — transplanting and the provision of additional 

 habitats, for example. The Chair knows well the differences between 

 the elk of Yellowstone and the situation at Tule Range. 



4. Direction to the Secretary and to the Marine Mammals Commis- 

 sion that efforts should be made to encourage an abundance of mam- 

 mals throughout their possible range and habitat toward the view that 

 they may in the future be used to provide legitimate esthetic, recre- 

 ation and economic benefits to man. 



We believe these recommendations are consistent with the findings 

 contained in the Anderson bill and with public concern over the 

 future of these creatures. We should not be comfortable or satisfied 

 in a world containing only remnants of a once vast mammal heritage. 

 Xor sliould be cloak our fears for the survival of man and our rever- 

 ence for life in measures based on a contorted idea of animal mysticism. 



We opt with Aldo Leopold : 



These wild things. I admit, had little human value until mechanization 

 assured us a good breakfast and until science disclosed the drama of where 

 they come from and how they live. The whole conflict thus boils down to a 

 question of degree. (Sand County Almanac) 



Thank you. 



Mr. DiNGELL. Mr. Pankowski. we are particularly grateful for your 

 suggestions with regard to amendments and we will certainly consider 

 them most carefully in the consideration of the bill. 



Our last witness is Mr. Tom Gari-ett. 



Mr. Garrett, you have been extremely patient in waiting. Patience, 

 you have demonstrated. You would have been a witness at the time 

 earlier but we had to save vou for last. 



