FUR SEALS CONVENTION, © fo 7) & TP Tw ve =D 28 Report from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 1912, Gases OTs dk) 2 Book 806) ‘Iz ‘NYP "Ave ‘AN > ISNOVHAS SuaNYW ——— SS ae 62D CONGRESS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. REPORT 2d Session. . No. 295. THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. Frspruary 3, 1912.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed. ; Ui, Mr. Suxzer, from the Committee on Foreign Affairs, submitted the following REPORT. z [To accompany H. R. 16571.] The Committee on Foreign Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 16571) to give effect to the convention between the Govern- ments of the United States, Great Britain, Japan, and Russia for the preservation and protection of the fur seals and sea otter which fre- quent the waters of the north Pacific Ocean, concluded at Washington, July 7, 1911, having had the same under consideration, recommends the adoption of the followmg amendments, to wit: On page 3, line 20, after the word “seals,” insert the words ‘or sea otters.” . On page 5, line 12, after the word ‘‘skins,” insert the words, ‘‘or sea otter skins,’’ and after the words ‘‘seals,” on line 12, same page, insert the words, ‘‘or sea otters.” On page 5, line 13, after the word ‘‘seals,”’ insert the words ‘‘and sea otters,’ so that section 7 of said bill shall read as follows: Sec. 7. That if any vessel shall be found within the waters to which this act applies, having on board fur-seal skins, or sea otter skins, or bodies of seals or sea otters, or apparatus or implements for killing or taking seals or sea otters, it shall be presumed that such vessel was used or employed in the killing of said seals and sea otters, or sibel said apparatus or implements were used in violation of this act until the con- rary is proved to the satisfaction of the court, in so far as such vessel, apparatus, and implements are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. On page 8, line 11, strike out all after the word ‘‘authority,’ down to and including the word ‘‘same,’’ on line 16, same page, that is to say, the following words: to determine the number of fur seals to be taken annually on the Pribilof Islands, or any other islands or shores of the waters mentioned in the first article of said con- vention and subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to which any seal herds hereafter resort; to direct the taking of the same. n etn . : 2 THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. (\ x So that section 11 of the bill shall read as follows: \0\ See, 11. That the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, or his authorized agents, shall have authority to receive on behali of the United States any fur-seal skins taken as provided in the thirteenth and fourteenth articles of said convention and tender for delivery by the Governments of se and Great Britain in accordance with the terms of said articles; and all skins which are or shall become the property of the United States from any source whatsoever shall be sold by the Secretary of Commerce and Labor in such market, at such times, and in such manner as he may deem most advantageous; and the proceeds of such sale or sales shall be paid into the Treasury of the United States. And the Secretary of Commerce and Labor shall likewise have authority to deliver to the authorized agents of the Canadian Government and the Japanese Government the skins to which they are entitled under the provisions of the tenth article of said convention; to pay to Great Britain and Japan such sums as they are entitled to receive, respectively, under the provisions of the eleventh article of said convention; to retain such skins as the United States may be entitled to retain under the provisions of the eleventh article of said convention; and to do or perform, or cause to be done or performed, any and every act which the United States is authorized or obliged to do or perform by the provisions of the tenth, eleventh, thirteenth, and fourteenth articles of said convention; and to enable the Secretary of Commerce and Labor to carry out the provisions of the said eleventh article there is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of four hundred thousand dollars. And as amended the committee recommends that the bill be passed. The object of this bill is to give effect to the convention between the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, Japan, and Russia for the preservation and protection of the fur seals and sea otter which frequent the waters of the north Pacific Ocean, concluded at Washington July 7, 1911. The negotiation and conclusion of this convention, for the preser- vation and protection of the fur seals and sea otters which frequent the waters of the north Pacific Ocean, was a signal triumph of Ameri- can diplomacy, and when the convention is carried into efect by the high contracting parties, pelagic sealing, which is and has been the scourge of the fur-seal herd, will be a thing of the past, and those best able to judge confidently declare the fur seals will rapidly increase and the herd grow rapidly. The attention of Congress is especially called to the necessity for legislation on the part of the United States for the purpose of ful- filling the obligations assumed under this convention, to which the Senate gave its advice and consent on the 24th day of July last. The fur-seal controversy, which for nearly 25 years has been the source of serious friction batween the United States and the powers — bordering upon the north Pacific Ocean, whose subjects have been _ permitted to engage in pelagic sealing against the fur-seal herds hay- ing their breeding grounds within the jurisdiction of the United States, has at last been satisfactorily adjusted by the conclusion of the north Pacific sealing convention entered into between the United States, Great Britain, Japan, and Russia on the 7th of July last. This con- vention Is a conservation measure of very great importance, and if it 1s carried out in the spirit of reciprocal concession and advantage upon as it is based, there is every reason to believe that not only will it result in preserving the fur-seal herds of the north Pacifie Ocean and aap them to their former value for the purposes of commerce, but also that : will afford a permanently satisfactory settlement of a efforts exclusively to the hunting of the valuable sea otter and paid little attention to the collection of other furs. By 1775, however. the supply of sea otters had become so depleted that efforts were directed toward securing those less valuable furs which theretofore had not attracted the cupidity of the hunters. Among these were the skins of the fur seal. The existence of the fur seal was known to the early Russians only through the capture of an occasional animal in the water. The land habitat of the animal was not known. Inquiries by the Russians of the native Aleuts disclosed the fact that a profuse migration of these fur seals occurred each spring north- ward through those passes between the islands forming the Aleutian Archipelago, and that an equally profuse migration southward occurred each fall. From this it was concluded that these fur seals each spring returned to breed at a place to the northward of the Aleutian Islands and that they left this breeding ground each fall to spend their winters in the less rigorous climate of the Pacific Ocean. As the location of this breeding ground was unknown to the abo- rigines, the Russians bent their energies to discovering the place to which the fur seal migrated and where they believed it could be found in countless numbers. Vessels to search for this unknown breeding ground were fitted out and various attempts made toward its location. In 1786 the St. George, a small sailing vessel, sailed from Unalaska, in command of Gerrasim Pribilof, a navigator in the employ of the Lebedof Co., set out into Bering Sea to search for the haunts of the fur seal. It cruised for three weeks in the supposed vicinity of the seal islands without discovering them, but, withal, finding unmistakable evi- dences of the close proximity of land. At last, in the first days of June, 1786, the mantle of fog that surrounds this locality was lifted, and before Pribilof loomed the high coast of the eastern end of the most southern island of the group. The discovery was named St. George, after Pribilof’s vessel. Finding no safe anchorage there the explorer ordered all his hunters ashore with a supply of provisions, while he stood away again for the Aleutian Islands to spread such reports as to keep others from following. The news, however, of Pribilof’s discovery of the breeding place of the fur seal was spread amongst the various companies operating in Alaska, and in 1787, when Pribilof returned to the islands, his ship was followed by others, and the location of the islands became a matter of general information. Various rival companies made settle- ments at several places on both the islands of St. Paul and St. George, and as these islands were found to be not inhabited by man they imported native Aleut hunters to perform the work of taking skins. n 1799, by imperial grant, the Russian American Co. was given the exclusive right to exploit the resources of Alaska in consideration ‘of its bearing all the expenses of administration and of protection of the territory. This company at once expelled all the small traders from. the seal islands and retained control of them until the cession of Alaska in 1867. 4 THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. HISTORY OF THE SEAL HERD. When Pribilof discovered the islands which bear his name, am- phibian life was found thereon in limitless quantity. lhe shores of St. George literally swarmed with sea otters which, undisturbed so far by man, could be killed as easily as sheep. Large number; of walrus inhabited the low beaches. ‘The first hunters to land could not secure a foothold on the beaches because, of the teeming animal life and were forced to scale the cliffs in order to reach the high eround beyond. As the summer progressed the fur seals made their appearance by millions. In the first year of discovery, by the few hunters left by Pribilof, over 2,000 sea otters were taken as well as 40,000 sealskins and nearly 15,000 pounds of walrus ivory. , With the return of Pribilof to the islands in 1787 and the arrival of the other vessels which followed in his wake, the killing of seals on land became the chief industry. From 1787 to 1799 as many as six rival companies established stations upon these two small islands, imported native workmen from Unalaska and elsewhere, and vied with each other in securing all the skins they could encourage the natives to deliver to them. In the killing no attention was paid to age or sex, but everything in the way of animal life having a market- able skin was killed. These islands were not then a Government reservation, and no restriction or regulation whatever was placed upon the killing of any animal found thereon. What number of skins was taken by these rival companies prior to 1800 will never be known, but it is supposed to be in the neighborhood of several mil- lions. When in 1799 they were either expelled or consolidated into the Russian American Co., killing of seals continued in the same ruth- less manner. Between 1801 and 1804 the company had accumulated in warehouses about 800,000 sealskins, over 700,000 of which spoiled from lack of care in curing and had to be destroyed. In 1805 such unmistakable evidences of scarcity of seal life were found by a visit- ing court official that he took it upon himself to stop the slaughter - entirely and to send nearly all the native hunters away from the islands. Killing of seals began again in 1808 in a more moderate degree. Attempts were made to secure an increase in this life by the pro- vision of seasons in which no killing was done and by a limitation upon the catch. These measures, however, were ineffective, and in 1835 the Pribilof herd reached the condition of numbering not more than 250,000. The situation in that year became so alarming that all killing was prohibited except 6,480 nursing pups for natives’ food and 100 bachelors, or young males. Also the vital principle that females should be exempt from slaughter and never disturbed on land was recognized in 1835 for the first time and thereafter en- forced, at first partially and finally rigorously. With these restric- tive measures in operation the herd gradually increased, contem- poraneously with a gradually increasing killing of surplus young — males for skins, until in 1867, the year of the cession, the Russians took 75,000 skins and the seal herd again numbered millions. THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. 5 AMERICAN OCCUPATION. Upon the cession of Alaska to the United States, the Congress in 1869 declared the Pribilof Islands to be a special Government reserva- tion. In 1870 an act was passed declaring that no unauthorized erson should kill seals on these islands, but that the privilege of illing such animals be leased in 20-year periods to the highest bidder. Under this act, in 1870, a 20-year lease was granted to the Alaska Commercial Co. In 1890, upon the expiration of the first, - another lease was granted to the North American Commercial Co. At the expiration of the lease of the latter company, in 1910, Congress passed a further act abolishing the leasing system and authorizing the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, in his discretion, to kill seals of certain classes and to market the skins of such seals. Under this act, in 1910 and 1911, the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, through his agents and officers, took such skins on the Pribilof Islands as the herd would afford and sold the same in London at auction. During the period of American occupation the taking of seals pro- gressed under careful Government supervision, and not more than 100,000 skins were allowed by law to be taken in any one year. Fur- thermore, females were exempted from slaughter at all times; neither could any seal be killed for its skin that was less than 1 year of age. These provisions were enforced by agents of the Government, under whose supervision the skins were taken. . From 1870 to 1889, both inclusive, the annual take of skins on these islands was 100,000, except that for two years of this period the catch was arbitrarily restricted by the lessee to a smaller number because of an oversupply of these skins on the market. Notwithstanding this careful regulation of killing, however, the annual catch declined, from 1890, when 20,995 skins were taken, until 1911, when the catch comprised only 12,006 skins. PELAGIC SEALING. During the American occupation, however, a practice grew up which previously had been unknown. ‘This practice was called pelagic sealing, or the killing of seals in the water, as opposed to the land killing on the islands. This began as a business in 1881 or 1882, with an annual catch of about 10,000 skins, and reached its apex in 1894, when over 61,000 skins were taken from the Alaskan herd. Thereafter the annual pelagic catch declined because of scarcity of seals. In 1911 it was about 12,700. The seals killed by the pelagic sealers are taken by means of spears or shotguns. In the water no differentiation can be made with respect to age or sex, whereas the land killing, which can be carefully con- trolled, is composed only of immature and surplus males, of which, owing to the polygamous habits of the seal, at least twenty-nine thirtieths are not required as breeders. The skins taken in the sea have been demonstrated to be composed of from 50 to 85 per cent of females. The death of the female entails the loss not only of herself but of her unborn fetus and of her nursing pup on the rookeries, which dies of starvation. The death of every pregnant female, therefore, entails the loss of three lives. 6 THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. MEASURES TO ABOLISH PELAGIC SEALING. The early pelagic sealers were exclusively Americans and Canadians. Soon becoming aware of the destructiveness of the practice to seal life, this Government took active measures to protect that seal life which, breeding on American territory, was asserted to be the prop- erty of this Government wherever found. Assuming that Russia had a right of property by discovery in all the eastern portion of Bering Sea and that those rights were transferred to this Government by the treaty of cession, the war vessels of the United States seized all schooners in Bering Sea engaged in pelagic sealing they could spe hend, whether American or Canadian, and confiscated them with their cargo, apparel, and furniture. This seizing of Canadian schooners led to the convention of the tribunal of arbitration in Paris, in 1891. The award of this tribunal, rendered in 1893, disallowed all claim of this Government to exclusive jurisdiction in Bering Sea, and held that the seizure of vessels under this claim of jurisdiction was unwar- ranted. The tribunal, however, promulgated regulations, which, without forbidding the practice of pelagic sealing, were designed to afford protection to the fur seals during the breeding season. They required that all sealing in Pacific waters north of 35° of north lati- tude and east of the one hundred and eightieth meridian of east longi- tude should cease on April 30 of each year; that when it was again resumed on August 1 it should be carried on in Bering Sea only with spears and outside of a zone of 60 miles radius about the Pribilof Islands. After the promulgation of this award pelagic sealmg was begun again by both Americans and Canadians. It required but a few months to demonstrate that the Paris award regulations were ineffec- tive in providing that protection to the seal herd necessary to preserve it from gradual extinction. The employment of pee spearsmen in the Bering Sea made the spear even a more deadly weapon than the shotgun, while the 60-mile zone about the islands afforded little or no protection, as the seals while feeding traveled usually three times that distance from the islands. This Government at once strove to reopen the question with Great Britain with a view to obtaining greater protection for the seals, and as an earnest of her good faith, in 1897, passed an act forbidding pelagic sealing on the part of her own citizens. These efforts, how- ever, were without results until the ratification of the present treaty. Strangely enough, while the pelagic fleet of Canada became smaller, that of Japan increased. These latter vessels, not being bound by the Paris award, could take seals whenever and wherever they pleased outside of territorial waters. In 1911, no Canadian schooners were known to have operated, while the Japanese fleet numbered at least 30, and took approximately 12,700 skins, as opposed to a land catch on the Pribilof Islands of 12,006. THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. 7 A comparative statement of the land and pelagic catches from the Pribilof herd from 1870 to the present year follows: {Land catches extracted from official reports in the Department of Commerce and Labor; pelagic catches from report of Paris Tribunal of Arbitration and also from reports of sales of sealskins in London.} 1] | ; iets Pelagic | lpn so Pelagic eae ree catch from eee catch from Year. Pribilof Year. ; Pribilof lof Islands "nen lof Islands Z Ves Gretrats slands jj hed Islands x herd. | ee end Ei al > be Passe j= On ) 2 Baws 6, 017 Be Goel! SOB. Seo aha) od 7,549 46, 642 95, 211 he td LAM Ea 2 ee es Se ne ee 7,425 30, 812 99, 941 NERS S RTE otc RS ae aa ed ee 16.031 61, 838 99, 485 Hasan IR Me co), cesa set i ee a8 | 15,000 56, 291 99, 424 Tree Nig a a ane? ee ae ee oe a 30, 000 43,917 99, 687 Bs Gay || Reed ee tae ates ee be bh Ne 20, 766 24, 321 90, 000 | DIPLOeI Meese. sys ssl fences 18, 032 28, 552 75,199 | POPALUTE WALA Oe a eae ae Sa 16, 812 | 34, 168 100.000 | DST. 22 (0s! | ARN Pee RS See eee aes 22,470 35,191 100,000 | BO Ge LDN a Re os ee Sn 22,672 24,050 100, 000 | GLa WO samen ewe. 2 SNR TS | 22, 386 22,812 99,905 | 10 P3820 O08 2.8 3 oc tSS. he ee: 19, 292 | 27,000 100.000 | TIFFS tly | gE 19 le a ee a Rea 13, 128 29, 006 75, 000 | POT EVR iota 2 te See ee See ee ie 14, 368 | 25,320 100, 000- LG atin He cceem =. owen e228. oo 8 14, 476 21, 236 99,995 | oO WAGON coc. otee eee TA ee 14, 964 16, 036 100, 000 Reena mec Sigs Un et sae See 15, 001 18, 151 100, 060 SO GAR Ms HOOD ws 2 See 5 Say pice oe 14,995 | 114,142 100, 000 DO Hh SOTO meee es SA EE Bee he 13.584 1 12.000 100, 000 PE oa aN eS oe ee ae 12, 006 112,700 20,995 40.814 | 13, 482 59. 568 inptalcee . 2 2 2,205, 298 | 962,849 | 1 Estimated. CAUSE OF DECREASE OF SEAL LIFE. It will be noted that a decrease in seal life occurred during the Russian as well as the American occupation. It will be mstructive to examine briefly the causes which led thereto. It has already beem mentioned that the Russians, in their land killing from 1786 to 1835, killed both sexes indiscriminately, male and female, young and old alike. During these years it is not pos- sible to ascertain the whole number of seals killed, but it is stated that between the years 1801-1805 over a million were taken. The killing previous to that probably was as rigorous. The meager Rus- sian records show that several millions of sealskins were taken on these islands prior to 1805, and that they were taken from males and females indiscriminately. The practice of killing females for skins on land without restriction obtained until 1835, and was never com- pletely abolished, it is believed, until 1847. During the American occupation it also is proven that while the land kuling carefully exempts females from slaughter, the sea or pelagic killing was and is composed in great part of the skins of females, all of which were pregnant and many of which had a nursing pup on shore that died of starvation upon its mother’s death. Furthermore, not by any means all the seals killed at sea are recoy- ered, as many upon being shot sink and are lost before the hunters can reach them. ‘The statistics obtained by this Government from an expert examination of thousands of skins taken in the sea demon- strate that of those taken in the North Pacific Ocean from 50 to 60 per cent are pregnant females, while of those killed in Bering Sea ~ = 8 THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. from 75 to 85 per cent are pregnant females, cach o! which also was nursing a pup. It is a recognized fact that any given class of polygamous 1 will decrease rapidly if a system of slaughter is maintained fe operates directly upon the females of the eae Such killing ee at once to decrease the births of new animals from which the numbers of the herd must be maintained. Whenever the number of animals killed becomes greater than the natural increment through births, the species must decrease. The fact that large numbers of female seals were killed annually by the Russians through a series of many years, points inevitably to the cause of the seal herd’s decrease during that period. The killing of large numbers of female seals annually through pelagic sealing during the American occupation indicates the same cause of the deck in numbers of seal life in recent years. It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that the decrease in both the Russian and American occupations was due to x like cause, namely, the excessive killing of female seals. animals REHABILITATION OF SEAL HERDS. It is now confidently asserted that, with a complete cessation of seal killing in the open ocean, and the consequent immunizing of the breeding females from slaughter, the Pribilof seal herd will rapidly increase in numbers. It can be cited, in confirmation of this belief, that following the year 1835, when the Russians first recognized the principle of noninterference with the females, the Pribilof herd gradu- ally increased during a period of 35 years to several millions in 1867. It is significant to note that this increase cccurred contemporane- ously with an annual land killing of surplus males of from 6,580 in 1835 to 75,000 in 1867. Also the fur seals on Robben Island in the Okhotsk Sea, after having been virtually wiped out by raiders in 1855, had by 1869 reestablished themselves in their original numbers. The committee submits this legislation to carry into effect the con- vention, especially so far as pelagic sealing is concerned, between the high contracting parties. The real object of the convention is to stop pelagic sealing. That is an international question, and the bill pro- posed legislates on the subject matter without regard to the question of the killing of the surplus male seals on the Pribilof Islands, which is purely a national or a domestic question, and about which there is much honest difference of opinion and legitimate controversy. In so far as the matter of the Government killing annually some of the surplus male seals on the Pribilof Islands is concerned, your com- mittee deems it advisable to legislate in that regard in a separate bill, so as not to complicate the international aspect of the case regarding pees sealing with the local or national aspect of the case-regarding and killing on the islands of the surplus male seals. If Congress shall determine to legislate for a closed season, or to place restrictions and regulations on the number of surplus male seals" to be killed each season, or any season, on our own islands while this treaty is in force, it is exceedingly desirable for many reasons, which must be apparent, that such restrictions and regulations should not be made in the act adopted for the sole purpose of giving effect to the treaty regarding pelagic sealing and to carry out in good faith our international obligations thereunder. ae al THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. 9 We must recognize the fact that this country can not deal with the herd at sea as its own property, and that the cooperation of Great Britain, Russia, and Japan in the manner provided for in the fur-seal treaty is essential for the protection of the herd against pelagic sealing. . The pelagic-sealing countries have been induced, after difficult and protracted negotiations, to agree to abandon pelagic sealing on condition that they shall receive a compensating interest in the skins taken by us on land. If, however, the interest which they derive in this way does not prove to be of more value to them than the profits to be gained by pelagic sealing, it is not likely that they will be willing to continue the treaty beyond the 15-year period, It is certainly true that if durmg the 15-year period they receive less than they regard as their fair share of the increase of the herd, they will be inclined to make up the difference by resuming pelagic sealing, which presumably at the end of 15 years will be immensely profitable on account of the increase in the size of our herd. One of the chief arguments which this Government relied upon throughout the past 15 years covered by the fur-seal controversy to induce Great Britain, and more recently Japan, to abandon elagic sealing, has been that pelagic sealing was chiefly responsible or the destruction of the fur-seal herd. It will be particularly unfortunate if we lose the opportunity, which is now presented for the first time by virtue of this treaty, to demonstrate by actual experience the soundness of our argument. It is a serious ques- tion, however, if this can fairly be tested if Jand killing and pelagic sealing are both prohibited at the same time. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABor, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, January 20, 1912. Dear Mr. Suuzer: | have } een informed that during the consideration by your committee of H. R. 16571, a bill to give effect to the convention between the Govern- ments of the United States, Great Britain, Japan, and Russia for the preservation and protection of the fur seals and sea otter which frequent the waters of the North Pacific ‘Ocean, concluded at Washington, July 7, 1911, it has been suggested that the bill be amended providing for a suspension of the killing of fur seals on the Pribilof Islands substantially as outlined in House resolution 277, introduced at the last session of Congress. The question of killing fur seals on these islands, including the regulations of this department and the manner of conducting the killing under the supervision of the agents of the Government, has been the subject of inquiry and investigation during the year 1911 by the Committee on Expenditures in the Department of Commerce and Labor. That committee has taken considerable evidence and at its last meeting, on August 17, 1911, voted to invite the members of the Fur Seal Advisory Board, upon whose advice this department has acted, to te heard before a final report is made. While I shall not now attempt to place before you and your committee all oi the data in the possession of the department upon which it has acted in this matter, I take the liberty of inclosing herewith for your information copies of statements made to me in August, 1911, by Mr. Charles H. Townsend, director of the New York Aqua- rium under the management of the New York Zoological Society, and Mr. F. A. Lucas, of the American Museum of Natural History. These statements strongly oppose a closed season. Within the past few weeks I have talked with Dr. David Starr Jordan, president of Leland Stanford University and chairman of the Fur Seal Advisory Board, and I have also discussed the matter with Dr. Leonard Stejneger, of the National Museum. I also have various statements and reports of these gentlemen and of Dr. C. Hart Mer- riam, of the National Museum, Mr. J. Stanley Brown, of New York, and Mr. E. W. 10 THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. Sims, who have devoted much time to this subject. They agree substantially with the two gentlemen, copies of whose statements | am sending you. All seven of them have made a careful study of the fur seal and have visited the islands—some of them several times. Respectfully, CHARLES NAGEL, Secretary. Hon. Wimu1AM SuLzeEr, Chairman Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives. STATEMENT OF MR. CHARLES H. TOWNSEND, DIRECTOR OF THE NEW YORK AQUARIUM. I can not commend the resolution (H. Res. 277, 62d Cong., 1st sess.), that the Seere- tary of Commerce and Labor be directed to suspend all killing of fur seals on the seal islands of Alaska for 15 years. The provision of the resolution is an unwise one. It would result in the undue accumulation of large fighting males on the breeding grounds, and thereby cause seri- ous losses of females and nursing pups during each breeding season. ‘ The provision of the resolution is not only unwise, but unnecessary. The fur seal is the most highly polygamous of all mammals. A single male controls enywhere from 20 to 80 females, according to his age and fighting weight. The careful investigations of the past 20 years show that he will do this whether there be present a large surplus of mature males or not. It is a matter of individual prowess, and this is common to all the older and heavier males. The provision is not only unwise and unnecessary, but it is unbusinesslike. The important revenue derived from the surplu: males of each season would not only be cut off, but the fur trade would be injured without reason. Since the beginning of the fur-seal controversy the fur seal hes been studied more critically than any other wild mammal. The facts of its life history as accepted to-day are all based on prolonged inquiry, under the keen criticism of the representatives of the two great nations interested in the fur-seal industry. The British and American representatives who spent the seasons of 1896-97 on the seal islands, published a ‘‘joint statement” respecting points upon which they were in agreement. They state in part: That the trampling of fighting bulls was a source of great loss among pups, and that the polygamous habit of the animal permitted a large surplus of males to be removed with impunity. The criticism of the present administration of the seal islands which doubtless called forth the above resolution of August 12, 1911, was ntade by men who have not been on the islands for 20 years, and also by men who have not been there at all, and whose opinions upon the subject are of little value. j Even if it could be admitted that it might possibly do no harm to stop land killing for a couple of seasons, the provisions of the resolution would be harmful, because thes period of cessation proposed is a very long one. The injury to the herd could not be promptly remedied when the evil (which is sure to result) becomes evident beyond question from any source. Nature had already fixed a limit to the size of the great seal herd when the islands were discovered by Pribilof, and that the limit is founded chiefly upon the fact that an oversupply of fighting males tends to the reduction of the females and young. With the cessation of pelagic sealing the killing of females will cease. Ii modern zoology may now be permitted to apply its expensively acquired knowl- edge of the Pribilof seal herd, and to remove the altogether destructive male surplus, we firmly believe that the breeding stock on the Pribilofs may. in the near future, be increased to numbers far greater than those found there when the islands were first dis- covered, Let the Congress “investigate’’ the fur-seal matter to its entire satisfaction, but do not let us have a hastily made law at the critical moment when the killing of females has stopped, and we are ready to demonstrate what we have learned. ; I sincerely hope that. you will do all in your power to procure the withdrawal of this resolution. I value my 10 years’ labor on the islands, where I was associated with many competent and faithful naturalists, too highly to let this resolution pass without criticism. C. H. Townsenn. THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. 11 AmERICAN Museum or Natura History, New York, August 17, 1911. Dear Sir: I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of August 14, with its accompanying documents, in which you ask for my opinion regarding the merits of House resolution 277, suspending the killing of fur seals on the seal islands of Alaska for 15 years. In response to this, I wish to say that I regard such suspension of killing as abso- lutely unnecessary as well as impractical and unscientific. I have never seen the slightest reason to modify my view that up to the present time the killing on land has had no effect in diminishing the numbers of the fur-seal herd; and there is no reason why a carefully regulated killing should do so in the future. The suspension of land killing is impractical, because it would result in the abso- lute waste of many thousands of seal skins and many hundreds of thousands of dollars; this, too, at a time when, by treaty, Japan and Canada are to have a share in the proceeds of seals killed by the United States. Incidentally, I would say that in a period of 15 years every seal now living would die from old age or from other natural causes. Furthermore, it would seem that such suspension would be a direct attempt to evade our treaty obligations to Japan and Canada. The cessation of killing is unscientific for the following reasons: We have for the first time an opportunity to test the conditions of the seal herd when unaffected by the attack of pelagic sealers, and it is of the utmost importance, for the making of future treaties and regulations, that we should know the exact facts in the case. The arbitrary suspension of killing for a period of 15 years would be extremely unwise, as we know, from observations of seals made on Robben Island and of sea elephants on Kerguelen Island, that a seal herd that has been reduced almost to extinction will so recover in from 5 to 10 years as to yield a large number of killable males. Finally, as has so often been stated, there is not the slightest danger of extermi- nating animals like the fur seals where their breeding grounds are guarded. How much less is the danger when the actual killing can be regulated year by year accord- ing to the numbers present! The sole suggestion I would make would be that in the event that pelagic sealing is actually ended, a smaller number of males be killed for two or three years to come. But this is a matter for the fur-seal and advisory boards to consider. I remain, very respectfully, yours, ; BA Hbucas: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR, BUREAU OF FISHERIES, Washington, January 12, 1912. Hon. WM. SuLzEr, Chairman Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives. Srr: I have the honor to inclose a set of tables designed to show the effect on the Pribilof seal herd of the passage of the bill (H. R. 16571) which prohibits pelagic sealing during a period of 15 years in the waters frequented by these seals. These tables are as follows: Table 1. Number of females estimated to be in the herd each year to 1926. Table 2. Number of cows to be served by bulls each year to 1926. Table 3. Number of bulls required to serve these cows at the normal ratio of | bull to 30 cows. Table 4. Total number of bulls that would be produced in the herd if land killing were discontinued as well as sea killing; this is taken from Table 7. Table 5. Number of bulls that will be produced if a rational land killing of surplus young males be allowed; this is taken from Table 8. Table 6. Number of sealskins that could be taken during this period while pro- ducing the‘number of bulls shown in Table 5; this is taken from Table 8. Table 7. Total number of male seals estimated to be in the herd each year to 1926, without land or sea killing; Table 4 is based upon this. Table 8. Total number of male seals estimated to be in the herd if a rational land killing were allowed. Tables 5 and 6 are based upon this. The icresoing tables are constructed upon the following hypotheses, namely: 3} That all females above the age of 2 years bear one young annually. (b) That these young are equally divided as regards sex. (c) That a mortality of 40 per cent occurs among these pups or newborn seals between the time of birth and their return from their migration as yearlings. ‘ 12 THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. (d) That a mortality of 10 per cent per annum occurs among all other seals than ups. Table 1 deals with the expected increase in femals during the 15-year period covered by the treaty. As the females measure the producing capacity of the herd, and there- fore are the most important factor in the replenishment of the rookeries, their increase must be considered first. The table shows that 84,719 females of all classes, in the herd in 1911, will be increased in 1926 to 357,673, of which 179,243 will be adult females. Table 2 shows that in 1926 219,195 cows, adults, and 2-year-olds will be present to be served by the males. Table 3 shows that at the estimated normal ratio of 30 cows to 1 bull, 7,307 bulls will be required to serve these cows. Table 4 shows that, if all land killing be suspended during this 15-year period, 71,589 adult bulls will be present on land in 1926, of which only 7,307 will be needed. The remainder, 64,282 will be useless and will represent simply economic waste. Table 5 shows the number of bulls that can be provided each year, while at the same time killing, when their pelts will be valuable commercially, those young males which, as adults, will be superfluous and not required as breeders. The table demonstrates that, in 1926, 18,800 bulls will be present, of which only 7,300 will be necessary to impregnate the females, while a take in that year of 35,000 2 and 3 year old male pelts could be secured. Table 6 shows the number of seal pelts that can be taken during this period while yet providing over twice as many males as will be required for breeding. The table shows that an aggregate of 262,000 sealskins could be taken, which, at $35 each, would bring into the Treasury $9,170,000. Tables 7 and 8 are the full computations upon which the foregoing tables are based (except Tables 1, 2, and 3), and demonstrate the number of each class of male life present during any given year of this period. These computations at the rate of increase stated show that in 1926, with no pelagic sealing, and with such land killing as has been assumed in Table 6, there will be the following numbers of seals in the herd in 1926: Adialt ude SEP 2 RE EERE et SSR in) 18, 810 6-year-old males tog nL eae RRP ER RO es SER ee 2,996 Se year-oldsmaless +. cca 3st See ee Le = cee PE I hee BEN 2,407 4-year old amales®242. ec les ik fused Bs Ue ES eee 2, 686 SaViear-G) Gsm aes oe eo ce Oh ata reer ee he Se 3, 270 2=year-old males /seic 22 se eee Dee Re ee ee ee ee ee 10, 952 l=vear-old-males Mego. s2 2 ad = ae RS oe eae eC |. Cae Ae 48, 857 PUpS tial Scr ese: See aac Saas ire re oo a=) ee Ce 89, 621 Adult females ( Plo-1waA~Z 000°9 000‘9 {000° | 000‘9 | 000% | 000° | 000‘ | 000‘ | 000° | o0g‘z | 00S‘c | 000% | 000° | 000° | ~-"°-* \" plo-ae0A-f | | | ISUIYS JO ONV I, 1c9'68 | 62h 18 | S86.€2 | Zc 19 | 2LO'19 | POF SS | Fer OS | LO8"Sh | SID‘Tr | IS8‘2e | Soe FE | S40 TE | LBP 82 | Eke OT | P9E'Ze |.00L'6 | sayeut ‘sd LOS "Sh | IGE FH | EEE OF | 9PO'DE | GEZ'E | FSG'OS | FBF'LG | OLE'FZ | OTL‘°ZS | 619'0G | $F9'ST ue GGL CLINSTRET SV OCRelte: [s0Ge GT [27> * 2 a3 SO[BUL P[O-1BOA-] is, O1) | (Oog‘ot)} (286°6) | (296°6) | (62% TT)! (oez*6) | (ELF ‘6) | (6eh'8) | (8eg'8) | (x22) | (ege's) | (Ozz"9) | (220°S) | (Beg‘F) | (BBL‘G) [Tt “ "(Sul [P] toys cutureurey ) MEGS | OE "DE | ZBO'ZE | 96°62 | BEC'LZ | OEL‘FS | EL‘ZC | OEY 'OZ | 8CS'ST | GLL‘YT | E8E°ST | Oca"hI | 220'SI | 8e9"OT | SBL‘eT | O00'e | ““SoTBUL PlO-IBIA-G (O2z"e) | (h86°c) | (126°Z) | (Lot'+) | (gon‘e) | Gzg'r) | ee“) | (goz‘r) | (ZoO*F) | (GFI‘F) | (S60's) | Cozg‘z) | (Get‘e) | (oTZ‘*e) |-*° 777 *° ee ~--(SUTIPY 1eqye Sururewmey 0186 7868 | 146°8 | 201‘OT | e4'8 | 929°8 | 96G'2 | BOLL .| OO'Z | Sr9'9 || BB9's | OLS" | GAI% | Ole’e | 00L° [OT |------**7 77 SoTVUL P[O-IBIA-F 989% VL9'% «|| LOWS | L8G) | PLOY | LET bh | €ez'b «| ZOo‘e «=| Ten‘s =| OSS. | STS‘ | BG6‘T | OBB’ | OES «| O80"T | 000'E «= f777 =“ So[BUI Pjo-Ived-p LOPS 866 | Boe | L99‘E | F2L'e | OT8‘S | sa‘s | scets | ITs‘c | 80's | BOLT | 09'S | 28L'% | 226 | 006 (0) a Naik epee SoTBUL pjO-IwoA-¢ 966 °% PLP's 10S | oce'e | 6h's | 86's | Ez0'e | 092‘ p18 ‘1 186 ‘T TPES | 6961 18 ors | 089 008 Pe “So[VUl plO-IwaA-g OIS’St | 9h'LT | T90°9T | S6r‘FI | PL9‘ZT | POT‘IT | I88°6 | G9T'8 | 96T2 | SOP‘ Ls a a Se Se a “STE | ! | | SH TVW DNOOK SOITdUNS AO DNITTIN ANVT snororanr HLIM LOG ONITVAS OIOVTIAd AO AVddOLS TVLOL HALIM ‘9261 NI GUAH NI 49 OL GULVYWILSA STVAS AIVW HO UAAWON—S GIAVL Leg ‘Sh | 168 "P| £88 ‘OF | opg‘oe | 96z'ee | Fez‘0e | PSh Lz OL6:F2- | OIL ‘Ze |i619"0 | SPO4ST. |e60'2T ~| Go ST. | STR“e1 {| OZe = -"gaTBUL P[O-IvaA-\) esc‘Iz | zte‘e9 | woD‘cs | cog‘sr | Toc‘Th | gol‘ce | T86‘se | 698‘Ze | FSP ZT | Prr'ST | SlL‘y | Bee‘ | Fex's | SEES | L96'T | $80'T eer SUNG ' ‘ONITTIM VES UO OIOVIGd AO ee ADVddOLS GHL HLIM GNV ‘YAADOSLVHM DNITIIM GNVI ON HLIM ‘9661 NI CUA AHL NI Fd OL CELVWILSE SIVAS AIVW AO UMAWAN—2Z A1UV I, 16 THE FUR SEALS CONVENTION. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR, BuREAU OF FISHERIES, Washington, January 6, 1912. Hon. WILLIAM SULZER, Chairman Committee on Foreign Relations, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. Sir: As requested by you during the hearings on H. R. 16571, to give effect to the recent treaty on the fur-seal question, I have the honor to inclose herewith a statement of the receipts from the sale of sealskins, and of the expenditures incident to taking the same, and the maintenance of the establishments on the seal islands during the season of 1910. A similar statement for 1911 is not furnished for the reason that the full data upon which to make such statement have not all been received. Respectfully, Gro. M. Bowers, Commissioner. Receipts and expenditures, Alaska firr-seal service, 1910. Recetved tromsale of fur-seal skins= {2 54 ste St ee eee $403, 946. 94 Cost of operations and support of native inhabitants of Pribilof Islands: Charter of supply vessel and expenses thereof............-.-----.- 15, 757. 50 | Da es | Miata st ape thee ga cy REA, Ea i ony Je aia eg os . ieee ¢ . 3 4g: 5 ¥ \ ea ‘oe ae ‘dl igs a se 2: ersa3s 7