Knowing that we do have discreet populations does permit us to concentrate our conservation efforts in an effective way. That, is it should be possible now to develop a sustained yield harvest level for each polar bear stock. Through live capture and marking of polar bears, which now number some 900 live animals moving around the Arctic basin with tags on their ears, we have found out a good deal about not only local movements but about the areas where the polar bears den to produce their cub, something about longevity, and something about the intensity of exploitation. Some progress has been made but there are still large areas where we lack important information of much concern to the various interested countries. That is, there are large regions in the Arctic seas containing polar bears of unknown origin. We suspect in Alaska we are harvesting bears produced in Russia, in Canada, and on the high seas. Apparently, female bears will den on old multiyear pack ice and never have recourse to land. This is what the work to date suggests but this is not backed up by facts. We need more research before we can confidently talk to the Russians and say yes we agree, we are harvesting bears produced in Russia.

Senator HOLLINGS. How large is the population adjacent to the United States?

Mr. BROOKS. I have estimated, based on the harvest data that has accumulated for the past 20-some years and careful analysis of the age composition of the recent harvest, that there are approximately 5,000 bears in the Beaufort Sea adjacent to Alaska. This is, I believe, a conservative estimate. But one must realize that while 5,000 bears sounds like a large number, the fertility rate, the reproductive force is very small, very low in the polar bear. They are at least 5 years old before they become productive. The female breeds only every third year thereafter. Thus each female bear must live to an age of at least 8 years in order to produce a single litter and raise it to an independent age where the cubs can fend for themselves. So a fairly large stock of breeding animals is essential to taking even a moderate harvest. The 5,000 that I estimate to be present in this region at this time apparently cannot support the level of harvest now being taken from the female segment, and there are very obvious signs that we are cutting into the male segment of this population quite extremely. The average age of the male bears entering the harvest has declined from something near 10 years down to a little over 6 years during the past 5 or 6 years. So, it is evident that the population is being affected by the present level of exploitation.

Senator HOLLING. You are saying it went from 10 to 6. What about the females?

Mr. BROOKS. We have detected as yet no change in the average age of the female bears being harvested."

Senator HOLLINGS. We have a roll call. We thank you both, Mr. Secretary, and you, Mr. Brooks. The committee will reconvene at 1:30. Thank you, very much.

(Whereupon, at 12:06 p.m., the hearing was recessed, to reconvene at 1:30 p.m., this same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

Senator HOLLINGS. All right, ladies and gentlemen, the committee will come to order.

We have this afternoon as our first witness Mr. Ben Hilliker, Alaska Commissioner for Sport Fish and Game, and I believe you have Mr. Hickok with you. You can have him at the table with you and that will conserve time. We will be glad to hear from you both at this time.

STATEMENT OF BEN HILLIKER, ALASKA DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR SPORTFISH AND GAME; ACCOMPANIED BY DAVID M. HICKOK, DIRECTOR, SEA GRANT PROGRAM, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA; AND JACK LENTFER

Mr. HILLIKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Ben Hilliker of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. I have in the room Jack Lentfer who just returned from overseas.

Senator HOLLINGS. Invite him to the table with you, also. I understand Mr. Gabriel Stepetin, is here?

Mr. STEPETIN. Yes.

Senator HOLLINGS. Come on right on up, I didn't realize you were here.

Mr. HILLIKER. We have not had the opportunity to analyze and look at Senator Stevens' bill. We would like to have the opportunity to, the State of Alaska would submit at the later time our written analysis of the bill for Senator Stevens.

Senator HOLLINGS. The committee would appreciate it. And any written comments you have after analyzing S. 3161, and mine, S. 3112, we would appreciate your comments on that, too.

Mr. HILLIKER. During 1971, legislation was introduced in the U.S. Senate, dealing with the protection of and management of marine mammals. Similar legislation was also introduced and debated in the U.S. House of Representatives. These bills include S. 1315, S. 2579, and H.R. 7556, cited as the Ocean Mammal Protection Act of 1917, and S. 2639, S. 2871, cited as the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1971, which are similar in concept to H.R. 10420 which was debated and discussed thoroughly by the House last fall.

Most of this legislation has received considerable attention from organizations and agencies concerned with scientific marine mammal management programs. An impressive number of national conservation organizations have expressed oposition to S. 1315 and S. 2579, as did the Honorable Ted Stevens, Senator from Alaska and the Alaska State Legislature.

It is generally thought that S. 2639 and S. 2871 are more flexible than other proposed legislation in their policy and approach. However, they still contain several provisions which are of concern to the State of Alaska.

PROTECTING SUBSISTENCE USE BY ALASKAN NATIVE PEOPLES

The provisions in these various bills for protecting native subsistence use are inadequate. Subsistence use and commercial use do not necessarily occur independently. As an example, walrus are killed, their meat and hides taken for subsistence use, and the ivory carved into native handicrafts to provide additional subsistence income. Hides of seals, baleen from whales and bones of marine mammals are

all utilized by native craftsmen to provide additional revenues. These are indirect purposes for taking marine mammals, and the right to do so should not be jeopardized.

STATE, FEDERAL COOPERATION

Marine mammals as defined in these bills include several important species which the State of Alaska acknowledges as presently in need of total protection on an international basis. Conversely, several of the marine mammal species are neither presently, nor in the foreseeable future, in any danger of becoming extinct.

Additionally, all the proposed

Senator HOLLINGS. If I may interrupt, your statement will be included for the record. I notice you are summing up.

Mr. HILLIKER. I am trying to, Mr. Chairman.

Senator HOLLINGS. That is desirable in view of the time. You may sum up as you wish then.

Mr. HILLIKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The basis for this distinction was clearly recognized in both the Alaska Statehood Act and the Submerged Lands Act.

This legislation directs the Secretary to develop cooperative marine mammal conservation and protection programs with the respective States. As written, the jurisdiction and responsibilities for management of both those resident and migrant marine mammal resources need clarification.

However, State-Federal cooperative efforts are necessary in those instances where marine mammal resources may spend a portion of their lives in both State and international waters.

We fully recognize the present public interest in marine mammal conservation and applaud the response of Congress in proposing legislation to protect these animal species. However, if the marine mammal resources of Alaska and the world are to be perpetuated, sound resource management principles should not be rejected in favor of indiscriminate ban.

PORPOISES, DOLPHINS, AND WHALES (OTHER THAN BELUGAS)

The State of Alaska is basically in agreement with S. 2639 and S. 2871 as it pertains to porpoises, dolphins, and whales other than belugas. Porpoises and dolphins are species which are not utilized or managed at present, and for which there is no apparent potential use in the United States.

Some of the large whales are in fact endangered and most are wide. ranging. The State of Alaska does not have a whale research or management program. Whales are admittedly a proper object of Federal protection, and the Departments of Commerce and Interior have already banned commercial whaling by U.S. nationals.

Alaskan Eskimos annually harvest 15-25 bowhead whales for human consumption. Although acculturation is changing many aspects of Eskimo life, bowhead whales have traditionally been hunted and utilized by these peoples; we fully support a provision providing for the present relatively low Eskimo harvest, and suggest the establishment of a research program to determine if such harvest levels can be continued indefinitely. If present harvest levels are excessively

high, it is recommended that limited quotas be established for villages, and more efficient harvest methods be developed to assure 100 percent recovery of all whales "struck."

Beluga whales, which are widespread in many of Alaska's territorial waters, including some rivers, are essentially a resident species. Some belugas are harvested by Eskimos each year for food. Because belugas are basically a resident species, are also an Eskimo subsistence item, and prey on salmon, it is recommended that they continue to be regulated by the State of Alaska.

SEA OTTERS, SEA LIONS, AND LAND-BREEDING HARBOR SEALS

Certain other marine mammal species are essentially resident in Alaska and its territorial waters. These include the sea otter, Stellar's sea lion and land-breeding harbor seals. This species breed and pup on land or close in-shore. They are not migratory and spend the majority of their time either on land or within State territorial waters.

None of these resident species are endangered, and all are under intensive study and management by the State of Alaska. Sea otters, once severely reduced in numbers have continued to increase under State jurisdiction and recent extensive transplants have reintroduced sea otters into much of their previous range. Certain populations of sea otter, primarily in the western Aleutian Islands, may have exceeded the optimum carrying capacity of their habitat. These populations are capable of sustaining a limited annual harvest, for transplants, scientific use, or sale of products, and such a reduction in their numbers is frequently desirable.

The present Alaskan otter population exceeds 50,000 animals.

Land-breeding harbor seals and sea lions, both the subject of former predator control programs, are now protected by seasons and limits. Both species are abundant and regional harvest levels are below the rate of natural recruitment to the populations.

NORTHERN FUR SEALS

Fur seals are managed by the Federal Government under "The Fur Seal Act." While the State of Alaska is not directly involved in the management of this species, it has a definite interest in the continuation of this wise and successful management program.

We believe the present program is an excellent example of successful and intensive species management, based upon the application of sound biological information. Through this program the Pribilof seal herd has increased from approximately 200,000 animals during the early 1900's to its present optimum level of 1.3 million. It now sustains an average annual harvest of 50,000 seals.

The bills under discussion which provide for termination of "The Fur Seal Act" could cause the United States to lose management control of this valuable resource. A cessation of harvesting would result in increased natural mortality caused by overcrowding on the rookeries and increased demands on the fishery resources which support the seals, and are also utilized by man. The result would be no real improvement of the herd, but only an increase of mortality by starvation, disease, parasites, and other natural causes. It is possible that the fur seal population might be seriously jeopardized due to a

drastic population decline caused by the factors previously described, unless present population controls are continued. Finally if harvesting were curtailed, the 600 Pribilof Aleuts would lose the ability to support themselves in their ancestral home.

Another critical side effect resulting from termination of "The Fur Seal Treaty" might be the resumption of pelagic seal hunting by other nations. Japan has expressed the desire to harvest fur seals in this manner. If the United States fails to manage this resource, other countries may have a justifiable reason for resuming pelagic hunting. The proposed compensation provisions in all likelihood will not be adequate to prevent this possibility. There would be little if any reason for a foreign nation to accept this compensation when the potential and biological justification for harvesting a larger number of fur seals on the high seas exists. Such high seas hunting is nonselective with respect to sex and age of animals taken and there is a substantial loss due to wounding and sinking.

The present fur seal harvest program is subject to constant and critical review by groups both inside and outside the Federal Government. Concerns about the humaneness of the harvest have brought to the Pribilofs observers from national animal protective societies. These observers, in cooperation with the Federal Government, are seeking improvements in present killing methods. The consensus is, however, that the present methods, under the conditions existing on the Pribilofs, and the extent of present knowledge, are the best available.

Any rational analysis of the entire Pribilof fur seal management program will reveal that it is not detrimental to the species. This is abundantly clear when weighed against what is almost certain to occur should a prohibition of the fur seal harvest be instituted.

OCEANIC HAIR SEALS

The term oceanic hair seals is used to differentiate between landbreeding harbor seals and those populations and species present mainly, or entirely beyond the 3-mile limit of State territorial waters. The oceanic species include ice-breeding harbor seals, ringed seals, ribbon seals, and bearded seals. All of these species are presently taken by resident Alaskans, primarily Eskimos. These seals are not the object of commercial exploitation by American nationals. These species presently appear to have stable populations. Estimates of numbers are: bearded seals-300,000; ringed seals, 250,000; icebreeding harbor seals, 200,000; and ribbon seals, 150,000.

The estimated annual harvest of all hair seas in Alaska is about 25,000 to 30,000 animals. Approximately half of these are taken by Eskimos and used for food, clothing and the home manufacture of articles for sale.

WALRUS

The Pacific walrus constitutes a population of marine mammals which is presently the subject of continuing investigation and management by the Alaskan Department of Fish and Game. The commercial value of walruses for ivory was responsible for their initial decline during the period 1860 through 1920, and prompted the close