Matter, of December 29, 1972. This concern reflects the modification proposed by the United States to add a new article to prohibit the disposal of fishing debris at sea, with enforcement mechanisms. Although no new material was added to the treaty text, this agreement encourages more active implementation of existing laws and international arrangements on marine pollution.

(3) in accordance with Article X of the Convention, it may be necessary during the interim period of the Convention to take into account unforeseen circumstances as noted by the States of Fur seal origin in considering measures to be taken for conservation and management of the fur seal population. This concern is similar to the modification proposed by the United States to amend Article V to allow in special circumstances, a reduction or suspension of the harvest by individual harvesting nations. Although the Convention presently contains a provision which allows the NPFSC as a whole to recommend to the Governments "measures regarding a reduction or suspension of the harvest...," the United States or the Soviet Union may alter the number of seals to be taken in their respective harvests as a result of unforeseen circumstances and following consultations with the other Parties. A modification of the harvest strategy may include, for example, a change in timing for the harvest, with possible reinstitution at a later date. This agreement may be invoked if necessary for the recovery of the fur seal herd, and possibly in response to extreme environmental changes, such as a major oil or other toxic spill in the Bering Sea.

(4) taking into account Article XIII, paragraphs 4 and 5, as well as Article V, paragraph 2(e), within two years after the entry into force of the 1984 Protocol Amending the Interim Convention on Conservation of North Pacific Fur Seals and considering current factors, the Governments will review the operation of the Convention to determine what further agreements would be desirable in order to achieve the objectives of the Convention. In the draft EIS our proposed negotiating position included the extension of a modified Convention for six years. However, based on a review of the current status of the species, the economics of the sealskin market and the progress made on development of the Pribilof Islands, as well as the comments received on the draft EIS, we amended this position to a four year extension. Since the United States was unable to persuade the other Party Governments to modify the Convention, agreement was reached to review the operation of the Convention within a fixed period of time in order to determine whether other agreements would be desirable.

The United States remains committed to the premise that because of the range of migration of the northern fur seal, single-nation management of this species would be ineffective. Moreover, because of the interaction of marine mammals with fishing operations in the Bering Sea and North Pacific Ocean, opportunistic and/or directed pelagic take of fur seals could occur without the international safeguards provided by this treaty. The present text of the Convention can be improved, and improvements can take place within the next few years (see section 4 of the Statement) when the operation of the Convention is reviewed by the Party Governments. Although the United States was unable to persuade the other Party Governments to modify the Convention at this time, the resulting Statement clearly expresses the concerns in an officially agreed upon document.

In 1983, the United States, in its role as depository government, asked the other Convention members for their views on treaty modifications, since the Convention was due to expire in October 1984. The Party Governments clearly indicated to the United States that any attempt to interject major changes or to restructure the Convention

significantly would result in the loss of this valuable conservation agreement. Both renegotiation and expiration of the Convention could have major adverse impacts on the fur seal stocks and on the lives of the people who live on the Pribilof Islands. An end to the commercial harvest on St. Paul Island would result in the loss of jobs and income on the Islands. This could intensify the social and cultural impacts occurring on the Pribilof Islands during the transition to a self-sustaining economy based, for example, on fisheries and offshore energy operations. Although it is unlikely that pelagic sealing would be resumed except on an opportunistic basis, the Pribilof Islands fur seal population would be placed at great risk from a resumption of any pelagic taking that might occur following a termination of this treaty (Section III.B.4). The loss of any portion of the breeding stock of this declining species could be devastating to any recovery of the population to levels approaching OSP.

In our view, this Convention will help to advance the northern fur seal toward population levels consistent with the purposes and principles of the MMPA (Section I.B.3.). International cooperation on population research, gear technology, and enforcement is the best way to begin to reverse the serious population decline, and bring this species back to levels supporting an optimum population size. Continued international prohibitions on pelagic harvests will prevent further losses while progress is made on the issue of fur seal entanglement in fishing debris. If the population decline is principally due to entanglement, however, the decline may continue through 1988, whether or not this treaty is extended. The existing debris is expected to remain at sea for many years.

B. Extend the Convention

We could have proposed an extension of the Convention without any attached Statement. The management and harvest regime that is currently articulated in the treaty would continue for four more years. A simple extension was favored by other Parties to the Convention.

We continue to believe that international management of fur seals under the NPFSC is the most effective means of conservation of this species. The essential cooperation of Party Governments on scientific research and on broader issues such as the entanglement of seals in marine debris would be less likely outside the treaty mechanisms. Extension of the Convention would allow Party Governments to continue to study the migration routes of fur seals, and the interaction between seals and commercial fishing operations in the North Pacific Ocean.

The harvest of fur seals would probably continue under the extension alternative. The NPFSC scientists believe that the current harvest probably is not a contributing factor in the population decline (Section III.B.9.), and thus termination of the harvest is not justified on scientific grounds. Should this action become necessary, however, the Convention has provisions which allow the Commission to reduce or suspend the harvest of seals. We are proposing, on the other hand, to recommend a Protocol extending the Convention which includes a Statement that expresses the shared concern of the Party Governments over the decline of the fur seal population, current economic conditions, and other problems of fur seal conservation and utilization. The proposed action would give the United States greater flexibility in determining our own harvest levels.

In our view, even a simple extension of the 1980 agreement for four years would have been preferable to renegotiation or termination of the Convention. The latter two alternatives could place this species at great risk from a resumption of pelagic sealing. Renegotiation is opposed by other Party Governments and is not considered an achievable

option at this time. The species population decline may continue, whether or not the Convention is extended through 1988.

C. Renegotiate the Convention

We could have proposed that the Convention be renegotiated to institute a different management regime along the lines of the MMPA (Section I.B.3.). This would have meant a formal restructuring of the agreement to consider substantial changes, such as introduction of OSP as the guiding management principle. If renegotiated to comply strictly with the MMPA, harvesting would have been permitted only if the population of seals were determined to be above OSP.

The renegotiation option may be favored by individuals who support international management and research on migratory species, but who are opposed to the harvest of a species whose population is below levels consistent with MMPA standards. Because the fur seal population is currently below OSP, this alternative would probably result in the suspension of commercial harvesting on the Pribilof Islands until the population recovered. Renegotiation of the Convention and the resulting termination of the harvest would seriously impact Island residents who are already experiencing the stress of significant social and cultural changes (Sections III.C.2.-4.). The jobs and income provided by the commercial harvest are necessary to the continued evolution of an independent economy on the Pribilof Islands. An end to the harvest at this time would multiply the pressures of social change on the Island residents, as they move from Federal employment to new private enterprises, including the operation of the seal harvest.

Successful renegotiation was unlikely at this time. The other Party Governments indicated their preference for the current Convention and their opposition to any new management scheme. They continue to oppose the introduction of OSP and believe that management under maximum sustainable productivity is preferable to the U.S. concepts embodied in the MMPA. It is highly unlikely that an agreement could be reached to restructure the Convention along the lines of the MMPA.

In addition to problems associated with seeking agreement from other Parties on a moratorium on commercial taking and the concept of OSP, a formal renegotiation holds other risks. Party Governments could propose, under this alternative, major changes to the Convention, including introduction of pelagic sealing, changes in the division of seal skins, and harvesting of other than bachelor males. Although such proposals may be inconsistent with what the United States believes to be effective wildlife management principles, other governments might well attempt to pursue these options to discourage U.S. efforts to restructure the Convention. However, in the Statement attached to the 1984 Protocol extending the Convention the Parties agree to review the Convention, and determine if modifications are desirable.

D. Allow Expiration of the Convention (No Action)

This alternative was based on the assumption that the Pribilof Islands northern fur seal population could be protected by domestic legislation alone, or in conjunction with a new multilateral agreement or separate bilateral agreements. If the Convention expires, the Pribilof portion of the population would immediately come under MMPA regulation. Because of the current decline in the herd, no commercial harvest of seals would be allowed. A subsistence harvest by native Alaskans for food and native handicrafts would be permitted. Our information indicates that up to 12,000 fur seals might be claimed by Aleut residents for subsistence purposes. The current subsistence take of 350 to 500 seals on St. George is only a small portion of the seals actually used for subsistence on

the Pribilofs. Under Section 109 of the MMPA, the State of Alaska may request jurisdiction and management authority for fur seals (Section I.B.3.). Following any transfer of management authority, and the recovery of the population to levels above OSP, a commercial harvest could resume under State wildlife regulations.

Expiration of the Convention without new bilateral or multilateral agreements does not appear to be an effective management scheme for fur seals. The United States could not expect the same high degree of cooperative research that has characterized the present fur seal treaty. International efforts to seek ways to reverse the present population decline would be adversely impacted. Moreover, Canada, Japan, and the Soviet Union have all indicated preference for an extension of this treaty, rather than a new bilateral or multilateral agreement. These countries believe that the present international regime is the best way to manage and conserve fur seals worldwide.

Without bilateral or multilateral agreements, expiration of the Convention would result in a conservation and management regime extending only to the 200 nautical mile limit of the U.S. EEZ (Section I.B.5.). The migration routes of fur seals place these animals outside the jurisdiction of either the United States or Canada during certain times of the year. The female portion of the population is at special risk from any resumption of pelagic sealing (Section III.B.4.). Continuing the Interim Convention eliminates the threat of any directed commercial pelagic take of this species.

Allowing the Convention to expire would also seriously affect the Aleut residents of the Pribilofs during a time when private enterprise is replacing the Federal Government as the major employer on the Islands (Sections III.C.2 and III.Č.3.). The Aleut residents have expressed a need to continue the seal harvest, especially during this transition period. As the Village Corporations expand their economic base and develop their fishery operations, it is likely that they will depend less and less on the fur seal harvest. However, until that point, termination of the harvest could impair the economic viability of the Island communities.

Expiration of the Convention and the harvest is favored by some wildlife protection groups. Many people believe that the U. S. Government should not participate in any treaty which involves the killing of marine mammals. A perception also exists that ending the harvest would cause the population to increase toward OSP and MSP. Preliminary analysis of data relating to sex ratios suggests, however, that termination of the male-only harvest could impede any recovery of the species (Section III.B.8.). The current harvest is probably not responsible for the observed decline in numbers (Section III.B.9.); however, studies are continuing on the effects of the harvest and its role, if any, in the current population decline.

III. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

A. Oceanographic Factors

A review of oceanographic conditions in the subarctic North Pacific Ocean is found in Dodimead et al. (1963) and specific information on the oceanography of the eastern Bering Sea is available in Hood and Calder (1981). A brief summary of bathymetry, current systems and weather affecting living resources of this area (from Kajimura, 1980, 1982) follows:

1. Bathymetry

Figure 1 details general bathymetry of the Bering Sea where northern fur seals are known to occur at various times of the year. The continental shelf (denoted by the 1,000 meter contour line) is widest in the eastern and northern Bering Sea. The Pribilof Islands are situated in the eastern Bering Sea within a shallow plateau of about 55 to 73 meters, part of the vast continental shelf which extends over 740 km offshore. By contrast the Commander (Kamandorski) Islands are surrounded by very deep water. Continental shelf areas are associated with higher plant and animal productivity, although unique hydrodynamic conditions are known to increase productivity of deep waters. The shelf along the eastern Aleutian Islands, most of the Gulf of Alaska, and the western coast of the United States is relatively narrow. The shelf is widest off Kodiak Island where Portlock and Albatross Bank are major feeding grounds of fur seals in the Gulf of Alaska.

2. Ocean Currents

The role of ocean currents and other oceanic factors in the migration and distribution of fur seals in the eastern North Pacific Ocean is still generally unknown. Some factors that probably affect fur seals are seasonal and annual variations in temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen and water movement patterns. Kenyon and Wilke (1953) reported that fur seals were most abundant in surface water temperatures of between 8° and 14° C. They also indicated that the preference for water of a given temperature may be only a response to the availability of food in the area. During the U.S./Canadian pelagic research cruises of 1958-74, the largest numbers of fur seals were collected at temperatures of 10-14° C off California, 7-12° C off Washington, 5-9°C in the Gulf of Alaska, and 8-10°C in the Bering Sea.

Upwelling of water from the depths is an important oceanic and coastal process which occurs when the surface layer is transported offshore (due to the stress of wind parallel to the coast on the sea surface) and is then replaced by nutrient-rich water from below. The western coast of North America is among the world's major upwelling regions. Here, upwelling probably influences productivity and concentrations of primary producers and zooplankton. This in turn influences the distribution and recruitments of fishery resources which become available to the fur seal, and ultimately the distibution of seals because they winter and feed off the western coast of North America.

3. Weather

Little is known concerning the effects of weather on fur seals at sea with the exception of pup/yearling seals. Scheffer (1950) concluded that storms in January and February 1950 were the principal cause of death to large numbers of pups/yearlings, many of which were washed ashore on the beaches of British Columbia, Washington and Oregon. Based on data from pelagic catches during December and January 1958-74 off Washington, the pup/yearling loses nearly one-half of its body weight after leaving the