DOCSLIB.ORG

The Status of Protection Programs for Endangered, Threatened, and Depleted Marine Mammals in U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Status of Protection Programs for Endangered, Threatened, and Depleted Marine Mammals in U.S The Status of Protection Programs for Endangered, Threatened, and Depleted Marine Mammals in U.S. Waters Michael L. Weber David W. Laist 2007 One of a series of reports prepared in response to a directive from Congress to the Marine Mammal Commission to examine the biological viability and cost–effectiveness of protection programs for the most endangered marine mammals in U.S. waters CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE OF STUDY.........................................1 II. MAJOR FEDERAL STATUTORY PROTECTION MEASURES ...........3 The Marine Mammal Protection Act...............................................................................3 The Endangered Species Act.............................................................................................4 Other Authorities...............................................................................................................6 III. SPECIES-SPECIFIC PROTECTION PROGRAMS ..................................7 Sirenians..............................................................................................................................7 Florida Manatee ........................................................................................................... 7 Antillean Manatee, Puerto Rico Population............................................................... 19 Sea Otters..........................................................................................................................20 Southern Sea Otter...................................................................................................... 20 Northern Sea Otter, Southwest Alaska Population..................................................... 27 Pinnepeds..........................................................................................................................30 Caribbean Monk Seal ................................................................................................. 30 Hawaiian Monk Seal................................................................................................... 31 Guadalupe Fur Seal.................................................................................................... 39 Northern Fur Seal, Eastern Pacific (Pribilof Islands) Population............................. 40 Steller Sea Lion, Eastern Population.......................................................................... 44 Steller Sea Lion, Western Population ......................................................................... 46 Cetaceans ..........................................................................................................................53 Blue Whale.................................................................................................................. 53 Bowhead Whale, Western Arctic Population.............................................................. 56 Fin Whale.................................................................................................................... 59 Humpback Whale........................................................................................................ 64 North Atlantic Right Whale......................................................................................... 69 North Pacific Right Whale.......................................................................................... 74 Sei Whale .................................................................................................................... 76 Sperm Whale ............................................................................................................... 78 Beluga Whale, Cook Inlet Population ........................................................................ 83 Bottlenose Dolphin, Mid-Atlantic Coastal Population............................................... 87 Killer Whale, Southern Resident Population.............................................................. 90 Killer Whale, AT1 Group............................................................................................ 93 IV. OVERVIEW AND TRENDS........................................................................96 Statutory Protection Provisions......................................................................................96 Population Status .............................................................................................................97 Species Protection Programs ..........................................................................................97 Threats to Marine Mammal Species and Populations..................................................98 Management Framework................................................................................................99 Critical Habitat ..............................................................................................................100 Recovery Plans and Teams ...........................................................................................100 Management Actions .....................................................................................................102 Staffing and Funding .....................................................................................................105 iii V. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.......................................................................... 112 VI. REFERENCES ........................................................................................... 112 VII. APPENDICES ............................................................................................ 121 Appendix A. Major Federal Statutory Protection Measures.................................... 121 Appendix B. Year 2004 Category I, II, and III Fisheries Affecting Species Listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Depleted .................................................................. 141 Appendix C. Federal and State Expenditures for Listed Species of Marine Mammals ................................................................................................................. 147 Appendix D. Federal and State Expenditures (in $ thousands) for Listed Species of Marine Mammals by Year: 1998 – 2004............................................................... 154 Appendix E. National Marine Fisheries Service Line Items Related to Endangered Marine Mammal Species: 2001–2005 (in $ thousands) ....................................... 158 Appendix F. Federal Funding of Research on Listed Marine Mammal Species by Research Issue: FY1991–FY2000 .......................................................................... 160 Appendix G. Summary of the Status and Protection Programs for Listed Marine Mammals ................................................................................................................. 165 List of Tables Table 1. Status of four major subpopulations of Florida manatees relative to recovery criteria in the 2001 recovery plan..................................................................................................................8 Table 2. Major habitat protection concerns for the four subpopulations of Florida manatees ............10 Table 3. Criteria for downlisting and delisting Florida manatees under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 ......................................................................................................................................12 Table 4. Department of the Interior funding allocations (in $ thousands) for West Indian manatee research and management activities under the MMPA and ESA as cited in administrative reports required by the MMPA: 1980–2000 ........................................................................17 Table 5. Federal and state expenditures (in $ thousands) for recovery of the West Indian manatee, 1998–2004 ............................................................................................................................18 Table 6. Projected funding needs (in $ thousands) to implement recovery activities for Florida manatees during the first five years after adoption of the 2001 Revised Florida Manatee Recovery Plan.......................................................................................................................18 Table 7. Department of the Interior funding allocations (in $ thousands) for southern sea otter research and management activities under the MMPA and ESA as cited in administrative reports required by the MMPA: 1980–2000.........................................................................26 Table 8. Federal and state expenditures (in $ thousands) for the recovery of southern sea otters, 1998–2004 ............................................................................................................................27 Table 9. Federal and state expenditures (in $ thousands) for the recovery of Hawaiian monk seals, 1998–2004 ............................................................................................................................38 Table 10. Projected funding needs (in $ thousands) to implement recovery activities for Hawaiian monk seals during the first five years after adoption of the 2005 draft revised recovery plan........................................................................................................................................38 Table 11. Federal and state expenditures (in $ thousands) for the recovery of the eastern population of Steller sea lions, 1998–2004 .................................................................................................46
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Captive Orcas
    Captive Orcas ‘Dying to Entertain You’ The Full Story A report for Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS) Chippenham, UK Produced by Vanessa Williams Contents Introduction Section 1 The showbiz orca Section 2 Life in the wild FINgerprinting techniques. Community living. Social behaviour. Intelligence. Communication. Orca studies in other parts of the world. Fact file. Latest news on northern/southern residents. Section 3 The world orca trade Capture sites and methods. Legislation. Holding areas [USA/Canada /Iceland/Japan]. Effects of capture upon remaining animals. Potential future capture sites. Transport from the wild. Transport from tank to tank. “Orca laundering”. Breeding loan. Special deals. Section 4 Life in the tank Standards and regulations for captive display [USA/Canada/UK/Japan]. Conditions in captivity: Pool size. Pool design and water quality. Feeding. Acoustics and ambient noise. Social composition and companionship. Solitary confinement. Health of captive orcas: Survival rates and longevity. Causes of death. Stress. Aggressive behaviour towards other orcas. Aggression towards trainers. Section 5 Marine park myths Education. Conservation. Captive breeding. Research. Section 6 The display industry makes a killing Marketing the image. Lobbying. Dubious bedfellows. Drive fisheries. Over-capturing. Section 7 The times they are a-changing The future of marine parks. Changing climate of public opinion. Ethics. Alternatives to display. Whale watching. Cetacean-free facilities. Future of current captives. Release programmes. Section 8 Conclusions and recommendations Appendix: Location of current captives, and details of wild-caught orcas References The information contained in this report is believed to be correct at the time of last publication: 30th April 2001. Some information is inevitably date-sensitive: please notify the author with any comments or updated information.
    [Show full text]
  • Monk Seals in Post-Classical History
    Monk Seals in Post-Classical History The role of the Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) in European history and culture, from the fall of Rome to the 20th century William M. Johnson Mededelingen No. 39 2004 NEDERLANDSCHE COMMISSIE VOOR INTERNATIONALE NATUURBESCHERMING Mededelingen No. 39 i NEDERLANDSCHE COMMISSIE VOOR INTERNATIONALE NATUURBESCHERMING Netherlands Commission for International Nature Protection Secretariaat: Dr. H.P. Nooteboom National Herbarium of the Netherlands Rijksuniversiteit Leiden Einsteinweg 2 Postbus 9514, 2300 RA Leiden Mededelingen No. 39, 2004 Editor: Dr. H.P. Nooteboom PDF edition 2008: Matthias Schnellmann Copyright © 2004 by William M. Johnson ii MONK SEALS IN POST-CLASSICAL HISTORY The role of the Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) in European history and culture, from the fall of Rome to the 20th century by William M. Johnson Editor, The Monachus Guardian www.monachus-guardian.org email: [email protected] iii iv TABLE OF CONTENTS MONK SEALS IN POST-CLASSICAL HISTORY ......................................................III ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................... VII ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................ VII MONK SEALS IN POST-CLASSICAL HISTORY ..............................................................................1 AN INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIES ......................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • 56. Otariidae and Phocidae
    FAUNA of AUSTRALIA 56. OTARIIDAE AND PHOCIDAE JUDITH E. KING 1 Australian Sea-lion–Neophoca cinerea [G. Ross] Southern Elephant Seal–Mirounga leonina [G. Ross] Ross Seal, with pup–Ommatophoca rossii [J. Libke] Australian Sea-lion–Neophoca cinerea [G. Ross] Weddell Seal–Leptonychotes weddellii [P. Shaughnessy] New Zealand Fur-seal–Arctocephalus forsteri [G. Ross] Crab-eater Seal–Lobodon carcinophagus [P. Shaughnessy] 56. OTARIIDAE AND PHOCIDAE DEFINITION AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION Pinnipeds are aquatic carnivores. They differ from other mammals in their streamlined shape, reduction of pinnae and adaptation of both fore and hind feet to form flippers. In the skull, the orbits are enlarged, the lacrimal bones are absent or indistinct and there are never more than three upper and two lower incisors. The cheek teeth are nearly homodont and some conditions of the ear that are very distinctive (Repenning 1972). Both superfamilies of pinnipeds, Phocoidea and Otarioidea, are represented in Australian waters by a number of species (Table 56.1). The various superfamilies and families may be distinguished by important and/or easily observed characters (Table 56.2). King (1983b) provided more detailed lists and references. These and other differences between the above two groups are not regarded as being of great significance, especially as an undoubted fur seal (Australian Fur-seal Arctocephalus pusillus) is as big as some of the sea lions and has some characters of the skull, teeth and behaviour which are rather more like sea lions (Repenning, Peterson & Hubbs 1971; Warneke & Shaughnessy 1985). The Phocoidea includes the single Family Phocidae – the ‘true seals’, distinguished from the Otariidae by the absence of a pinna and by the position of the hind flippers (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1297 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 917B
    Page 1297 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 917b 1923, as amended’’ on authority of Pub. L. 89–554, § 7(b), classified principally to chapter 38 (§ 1801 et seq.) of this Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 631 (the first section of which en- title. For complete classification of this Act to the acted Title 5, Government Organization and Employ- Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1801 of ees), and of section 1106(a) of act Oct. 28, 1949, ch. 782, this title and Tables. title XI, 63 Stat. 972, which provided that references in MENDMENTS other laws to the Classification Act of 1923 shall be con- A sidered to mean the Classification Act of 1949. 1996—Par. (3). Pub. L. 104–208 substituted ‘‘Magnuson- In cl. (b), ‘‘subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5 and Stevens Fishery’’ for ‘‘Magnuson Fishery’’. section 5731(a) of title 5’’ substituted for ‘‘the Travel 1980—Par. (3). Pub. L. 96–561 substituted ‘‘Magnuson Expense Act of 1949 and section 10 of the Act of March Fishery Conservation and Management Act’’ for ‘‘Fish- 3, 1933 (U.S.C., title 5, sec. 73b)’’ on authority of Pub. L. ery Conservation and Management Act of 1976’’. 89–554, § 7(b), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 631, the first section of which enacted Title 5. EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1996 AMENDMENT In cl. (e), ‘‘section 501 of title 44’’ substituted for Section 101(a) [title II, § 211(b)] of div. A of Pub. L. ‘‘section 11 of the Act of March 1, 1919 (U.S.C., title 44, 104–208 provided that the amendment made by that sec- sec.
    [Show full text]
  • Whale Conservation in Coastal Ecuador : Environmentalism of the Poor Or Neoliberal Conservation ?*
    Revista Iberoamericana 25.2 (2014 ): 1-33. Whale Conservation in Coastal Ecuador : Environmentalism of the Poor or Neoliberal Conservation ?* Bradley Tatar Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology [UNIST] Tatar, Bradley (2014), Whale Conservation in Coastal Ecuador: Environmentali sm of the Poor or Neoliberal Conservation? In this p aper, I examine the interaction between transnational activist Abstract networks, conservation scientists, government authorities, and artisanal fish ing communities in coastal Ecuador. Focusing on the problem of cetacean bycatch, I employ the concept of the “discourse of nature” to identify contrasting languages of valuation used by the stakeholders for marine coastal environments. NGOs utilize a scientific evaluation to portray artisanal fishing as a hazard to the survival of hum pback whales, but this coincides with the attempt by government and development agencies to portray artisanal fisheries as inefficient and ecologically harmful. In contrast, a survey I carried out in a coastal fishing community shows that local residents contest this portrayal of fishing as ecologically harmful, drawing upon their discourses of livelihood, indigenous identity, territorial claims, and social marginality. Focusing on the social conflict surrounding the marine protected area [MPA] of Machalilla National Park, I argue that additional restrictions on fishing to mitigate the incidence of cetacean bycatch will not have adequate social acceptance by local artisan fishing communities. Hence, the language of whale conservation which appears to be a pro-poor environmentalism at the macro (international) level, appears to local actors as a threat to their livelihoods. To offset this micro/macro discrepancy, whale conservation NGOs should support local aspirations to continue fishing as a livelihood, thereby * This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2012S1A5A8024090).
    [Show full text]
  • Underwater Hearing and Communication in the Endangered Hawaiian Monk Seal Neomonachus Schauinslandi
    Vol. 44: 61–78, 2021 ENDANGERED SPECIES RESEARCH Published January 28 https://doi.org/10.3354/esr01092 Endang Species Res OPEN ACCESS Underwater hearing and communication in the endangered Hawaiian monk seal Neomonachus schauinslandi Jillian M. Sills1,*, Kirby Parnell2,3, Brandi Ruscher2, Chloe Lew1, Traci L. Kendall4, Colleen Reichmuth1 1Institute of Marine Sciences, Long Marine Laboratory, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA 95060, USA 2Department of Ocean Sciences, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA 3Marine Mammal Research Program, Hawai‘i Institute of Marine Biology, University of Hawai‘i, Kaneohe, HI 96744, USA 4Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA ABSTRACT: Hawaiian monk seals are among the most endangered marine mammals and the most basal of the phocid seals. The auditory biology of monk seals is compelling from behavioral, evolutionary, and conservation perspectives, but we presently lack substantive bioacoustic infor- mation for this species, with no formal descriptions of underwater vocalizations and limited data concerning hearing. These seals have been isolated for more than 10 million yr and have auditory structures differing from those of related species. Additionally, unlike other aquatically mating phocids, monk seals breed asynchronously and are not known to produce social calls in water. To address existing knowledge gaps, we trained a mature male Hawaiian monk seal to perform a psychophysical task while submerged. Detection thresholds were measured for narrowband sounds across the frequency range of hearing. We also conducted a year-round characterization of the seal’s spontaneous underwater vocalizations. This individual demonstrated best hearing between 0.2 and 33 kHz, with a lower high-frequency roll-off than that of related species.
    [Show full text]
  • The Regulatory Framework for Whales, Dolphins and Porpoises in European Waters
    The Regulatory Framework for Whales, Dolphins and Porpoises in European Waters Andrea Ripol, Seas At Risk, Brussels, Belgium and Mirta Zupan, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences and Ghent University, Belgium No EU citizen wants to eat fish that has been caught at the expense of iconic species like dolphins or whales. The legal framework to prevent the killing of marine mammals exists, now it is just a matter of political will to implement it. Andrea Ripol © Tilen Genov, Morigenos © Tilen Genov, 28 Overview of Cetacean Species in European Waters (including Red List Status) Introduction Interest in whale conservation began in earnest in the late 1940s largely as a response to the unsustainable pressure placed on whale populations by intensified commercial whaling. At first, the aim was to conserve populations in order to continue harvesting them. In the 1970s, as environmental activism heightened, several international agreements for nature protection were signed, including the Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS). Today, in addition, cetaceans in European Union (EU) waters are strictly protected by the EU‘s Habitats Directive, as well as the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, which intends to prevent human-induced decline of biodiversity, targets various pressures and threats and tries to achieve a good environmental status in EU waters. Legal framework in Europe Habitats Directive and the Natura 2000 network The protection of cetaceans in the EU is primarily driven by the Habitats Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC), a cornerstone of EU legislation for nature protection, adopted in 1992 (Council of the European Communities, 1992).
    [Show full text]
  • SOLUTION: Gathering and Sonic Blasts for Oil Exploration Because These Practices Can Harm and Kill Whales
    ENDANGEREDWHALES © Nolan/Greenpeace WE HAVE A PROBLEM: WHAT YOU CAN DO: • Many whale species still face extinction. • Tell the Bush administration to strongly support whale protection so whaling countries get the • Blue whales, the largest animals ever, may now number as message. few as 400.1 • Ask elected officials to press Iceland, Japan • Rogue nations Japan, Norway and Iceland flout the and Norway to respect the commercial whaling international ban on commercial whaling. moratorium. • Other threats facing whales include global warming, toxic • Demand that the U.S. curb global warming pollution dumping, noise pollution and lethal “bycatch” from fishing. and sign the Stockholm Convention, which bans the most harmful chemicals on the planet. • Tell Congress that you oppose sonar intelligence SOLUTION: gathering and sonic blasts for oil exploration because these practices can harm and kill whales. • Japan, Norway and Iceland must join the rest of the world and respect the moratorium on commercial whaling. • The loophole Japan exploits to carry out whaling for “Tomostpeople,whalingisallnineteenth- “scientific” research should be closed. centurystuff.Theyhavenoideaabout • Fishing operations causing large numbers of whale hugefloatingslaughterhouses,steel-hulled bycatch deaths must be cleaned up or stopped. chaserboatswithsonartostalkwhales, • Concerted international action must be taken to stop andharpoonsfiredfromcannons.” other threats to whales including global warming, noise Bob Hunter, pollution, ship strikes and toxic contamination.
    [Show full text]
  • MASS TOURISM and the MEDITERRANEAN MONK SEAL
    MASS TOURISM and the MEDITERRANEAN MONK SEAL The role of mass tourism in the decline and possible future extinction of Europe’s most endangered marine mammal, Monachus monachus William M. Johnson & David M. Lavigne International Marine Mammal Association 1474 Gordon Street, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1L 1C8 ABSTRACT Mass tourism has been implicated in the decline of the Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) since the 1970s, when scientists first began reviewing the global status of the species. Since then, the scientific literature, recognising the inexorable process of disturbance and loss of habitat that this economic and social activity has produced along extensive stretches of Mediterranean coastline, has consistently identified tourism as among the most significant causes of decline affecting this critically-endangered species. Despite apparent consensus on this point, no serious attempt has been made to assess the tourist industry’s role, or to acknowledge and discuss its moral and financial responsibility, in the continuing decline and possible future extinction of M. monachus. In view of this, The Monachus Guardian 2 (2) November 1999 1 we undertook a review of existing literature to identify specific areas in which tourism has impacted the Mediterranean monk seal. Our results provide compelling evidence that mass tourism has indeed played a major role in the extirpation of the monk seal in several European countries, that it continues to act as a significant force of extinction in the last Mediterranean strongholds of the species, and that the industry exerts a generally negative influence on the design and operation of protected areas in coastal marine habitats. There are compelling reasons to conclude that unless the tourist industry can be persuaded to become an active and constructive partner in monk seal conservation initiatives, it will eventually ensure the extinction of the remaining monk seals in the Mediterranean.
    [Show full text]
  • 1995-2006 Activities Report
    WILDLIFE WITHOUT BORDERS WILDLIFE WITHOUT BORDERS WITHOUT WILDLIFE M E X I C O The most wonderful mystery of life may well be EDITORIAL DIRECTION Office of International Affairs U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service the means by which it created so much diversity www.fws.gov PRODUCTION from so little physical matter. The biosphere, all Agrupación Sierra Madre, S.C. www.sierramadre.com.mx EDITORIAL REVISION organisms combined, makes up only about one Carole Bullard PHOTOGRAPHS All by Patricio Robles Gil part in ten billion [email protected] Excepting: Fabricio Feduchi, p. 13 of the earth’s mass. [email protected] Patricia Rojo, pp. 22-23 [email protected] Fulvio Eccardi, p. 39 It is sparsely distributed through MEXICO [email protected] Jaime Rojo, pp. 44-45 [email protected] a kilometre-thick layer of soil, Antonio Ramírez, Cover (Bat) On p. 1, Tamul waterfall. San Luis Potosí On p. 2, Lacandon rainforest water, and air stretched over On p. 128, Fisherman. Centla wetlands, Tabasco All rights reserved © 2007, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service a half billion square kilometres of surface. The rights of the photographs belongs to each photographer PRINTED IN Impresora Transcontinental de México EDWARD O. WILSON 1992 Photo: NASA U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE DIVISION OF INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION WILDLIFE WITHOUT BORDERS MEXICO ACTIVITIES REPORT 1995-2006 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE At their roots, all things hold hands. & When a tree falls down in the forest, SECRETARÍA DE MEDIO AMBIENTE Y RECURSOS NATURALES MEXICO a star falls down from the sky. CHAN K’IN LACANDON ELDER LACANDON RAINFOREST CHIAPAS, MEXICO FOREWORD onservation of biological diversity has truly arrived significant contributions in time, dedication, and C as a global priority.
    [Show full text]
  • N044p061.Pdf
    Vol. 44: 61–78, 2021 ENDANGERED SPECIES RESEARCH Published January 28 https://doi.org/10.3354/esr01092 Endang Species Res OPEN ACCESS Underwater hearing and communication in the endangered Hawaiian monk seal Neomonachus schauinslandi Jillian M. Sills1,*, Kirby Parnell2,3, Brandi Ruscher2, Chloe Lew1, Traci L. Kendall4, Colleen Reichmuth1 1Institute of Marine Sciences, Long Marine Laboratory, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA 95060, USA 2Department of Ocean Sciences, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA 3Marine Mammal Research Program, Hawai‘i Institute of Marine Biology, University of Hawai‘i, Kaneohe, HI 96744, USA 4Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, USA ABSTRACT: Hawaiian monk seals are among the most endangered marine mammals and the most basal of the phocid seals. The auditory biology of monk seals is compelling from behavioral, evolutionary, and conservation perspectives, but we presently lack substantive bioacoustic infor- mation for this species, with no formal descriptions of underwater vocalizations and limited data concerning hearing. These seals have been isolated for more than 10 million yr and have auditory structures differing from those of related species. Additionally, unlike other aquatically mating phocids, monk seals breed asynchronously and are not known to produce social calls in water. To address existing knowledge gaps, we trained a mature male Hawaiian monk seal to perform a psychophysical task while submerged. Detection thresholds were measured for narrowband sounds across the frequency range of hearing. We also conducted a year-round characterization of the seal’s spontaneous underwater vocalizations. This individual demonstrated best hearing between 0.2 and 33 kHz, with a lower high-frequency roll-off than that of related species.
    [Show full text]
  • The Northern Fur Seal ~/
    Wflal~erv:-c;rrc. The Northern Fur Seal ~/ / U IS, S, R, / / Breeding grounds of the northern fur seals: Robben Island (Kaihyoto or Tyuleniy Island) off Sakhalin; the Commandel Islands (Bering Island and Medny or Copper Island) at the Soviet end of the Aleutian chain; and the Pribilof Islands - St. Paul Island, St. George Island, Otter Island, Walrus Island, and Sea Lion Rock. Cover - The Pribilof Islands in Bering Sea are the homeland of the largest fur eal herd in the world. Here the fur seals come ashore to bear their young on the rocks and sands above tidewater. The story behind the restoration and de­ velopment of the Ala ka fur cal herd is one of adventure and international diplomac}. It i a heartening account of cooperation among nations - an out- tanding example of wildlife conservation. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Walter J. Hickel, Secretary Leslie L. Glasgow, Assistant Secretary f01' Fish and Wildlife, PaTks, and Marine Resources Charles H , Meacham, Commissioner, U,S, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Philip M, Roedel, Di1'ecto1', BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES The Northern Fur Seal By RALPH C. BAKER, FORD WILKE, and C. HOWARD BALTZ02 Circular 336 Washington, D.C. April 1970 As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has basic responsibilities for water, fish, wildlife, mineral, land, park, and recreational resources. Indian and Territorial affairs are other major concerns of America's " Department of Natural Resources." The Department works to assure the wisest choice in managing all our resources so each will make its full contribution to a better United States - now and in the future.
    [Show full text]