Mr. Steele offered a valuable insight into the world of government when he said that bureaucrats in the real world work in a "quagmire of conflicting pressures." This certainly can be true for people like me who work in the regulatory arena and who would welcome making the quagmire as habitable as possible. But bureaucrats can't do it alone and, in fact, it can be done only with individuals like you and groups like yours whose interests are affected and who possess the essential background for changing the habitat.

If we are really interested in making our particular quagmire less hostile we must recognize some facts concerning and factors contributing to it. First among these is the fact that both the bureaucracy and its regulatory regimes are creatures of legislation passed by Congress in response to some perceived public need. Once in place, it is generally very difficult to have such legislation rolled back or significantly modified. In the case of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, most observers of the Congressional scene would agree that there is little likelihood that the Act might be changed in any significant way in areas of interest to IAAAM members. I suspect the same may be true of the Animal Welfare Act.

If we accept the first fact that there is little possibility of going back to the days prior to extensive legislation affecting marine mammals, then we should have little difficulty recognizing the second one. Regulations governing your activities and our relations are and will continue to be a way of life. Further, because they do exist, these regulations tend to proliferate and to help in promoting other regulations of which those recently issued by the Department of Agriculture covering care and maintenance of captive marine mammals under the Animal Welfare Act are an example.

If we accept both facts -- that legislation, and regulations in potentially increasing number are a way of life we will have to share together -- it seems to me that our next step should be to determine how this way of life can be influenced so that the quagmire effect is minimized. That this can be done is, at least to me, also a matter of fact. Examples demonstrating this come immediately to mind.

The first example is the change in my agency's interpretation of veterinary certification in applications for permits to maintain captive marine mammals. Here, an individuals "pressure" resolved "conflicting" views in favor of that individual's approach. As a result, certification is now done by the veterinarian responsible for the animals, as reasons would require, rather than by an outsider, as had been the case dictated by concern over the validity of insider certification. What made the change possible was a factual presentation of relevant information that enabled us to set valid, but emotionally based, opinions aside. The first point for successfully influencing regulations should be apparent in this example. It is -- Communicate -- and, where possible, make it fact rather than opinion.

A second example of influences on regulations is the impact that implementation of the Animal Welfare Act marine mammal standards will have on Marine Mammal Protection Act permits for captive wild animals. As a benefit of this implementation, I expect that about 75% of the information we now must ask for will no longer be required. Thus a positive improvement has come from additional regulations. From this, point two for influencing the regulatory world can be derived. It is -- recognize that regulations are (or should be) non-emotional, not necessarily either good or bad, but simply requirements over which some measure of control can be exercised. As is apparent, substantive communications and in-depth involvement can produce positive results as they did in this case where a lot of careful thought and effort on your part and that of the agencies has improved operations in our joint area.

An area that is not directly related to the facts we've discussed thus far but is relevant leads to my final point on how to influence your regulatory world. It is --"Watch the store." Regulations and/or legislation in areas other than those you believe will affect you can do just that. For example, I'm sure that most of us did not suspect that non-endangered, non-threatened, small marine mammals were likely candidates for listing under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Nonetheless, that is exactly what happened at the last meeting of the parties to the Convention and so an additional permit will be required for some of your activities. I'm not suggesting that such a requirement is not needed but only that changes in the regulatory world can be sudden, rapid and virtually permanent. "Watching the store" is obviously the only way to influence such changes at the most important time -- inception, and this thought is basic to my summary as to how to make regulations work in all of our best interests. Simply, we need to recognize that regulations do and will continue to exist; that they are not necessarily bad; and that to insure that they have a positive effect, you need to provide factual guidance and help to the regulatory agency as early and completely as possible.

Although I hadn't expected to be one of the speakers during this session, I am happy to have had these few minutes to update you on the Marine Mammal Protection Act regulatory world and to provide some thoughts on influencing it. As usual it is a pleasure to attend your meeting because it gives me a chance to improve my own lot in the quagmire as well as to express my own and my agency's thanks for the many valuable contributions of the IAAAM and its individual members.