MESSAGE OF TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ON FUR SEALS, Communicated te Congress, January &, 1915. 62D CONGRESS | SENATE § DocuMENT 3d Session \ No. 997 MESSAGE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ON FUR SEALS COMMUNICATED TO THE TWO HOUSES OF CONGRESS WEDNESDAY ,JANUARY 8, 1913 ) P JANUARY 9, 1913.—Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and ordered to be printed * WASHINGTON 1913 MESSAGE. To the Senate and House of Representatives: At the last session of Congress an act was adopted to give effect to the fur-seal treaty of July 7, 1911, between Great Britain, Japan, Russia, and the United States, in which act was incorporated a pro- vision establishing a five-year period during which the killing of seals upon. the Pribilof Islands is prohibited. Prior to the passage of this act, I pointed out in my message to Congress, on August 14 last, the inadvisability of adopting legislation the effect. of which was to require this Government to suspend the killing of surplus male seals on land before it was actually proved by the ‘test of experience and scientific investigation that such suspension of killing was necessary for the protection and preservation of the seal herd. I also pointed out in that message that the other Governments interested might justly complain if “this Government by prohibiting all land killing should deprive them of their expected share of the skins taken on land, unless we can show by satisfactory evidence that this course was adopted as the result of changed conditions justifying a change in our previous attitude on the subject. As was then anticipated, the other parties interested have now objected to the suspension thus imposed on the ground that it is contrary to the spirit, if not the letter of the treaty, inasmuch as under existing conditions a substantial number of male seals not required for breeding purposes can be killed annually without detriment to the reproductive capacity of the herd. The same objection was raised by the other Govern- ments interested under this convention while the bill was awaiting my signature, after its passage by Congress, but I refrained from vetoing it because at that time several thousand sealskins had already been taken on the islands and were ready for distribution in accordance with the requirements of the treaty, so that the sus- pension of land killing would not actually become effective until the following year, and I was satisfied that the information resulting from a study ‘of the condition of the herd during the past summer would put this Government in possession of f: acts which would either lead to the amendment of the act at this session of Congress, or enable this Government to justify a temporary suspension ‘of land killing; and apart from this particular provision, the act was needed to give effect to our treaty obligations. It now appears that under the operation of the fur-seal convention during the past year the condition and size of the herd has improved to an extent which seems to indicate that there is now no necessity, and therefore no justification, for the suspension of all land killing of male seals, as required by the act under consideration. Last season’s reports from the officials in charge on the Pribilof Islands show that the herd which the year before contained at the 3 4 FUR SEALS. highest estimate not more than 140,000 seals, now numbers upward of 215,000 by actual count, showing in one season an increase of at least 75,000 seals. This increase is largely due to the protection afforded by the treaty to the breeding female seals, which last sum- mer numbered nearly 82,000, many thousands of which, except for the treaty, would have been slaughtered by the pelagic sealers, and as every breeding female adds one pup to the herd each year, over 81,000 new pups were added last season. Moreover, instead of losing 10,000 or 15,000 of these pups through starvation as heretofore on account of the slaughter of the nursing mothers by pelagic sealers, this summer by actual count the number of dead pups found on the rookeries was only 1,060. It is evident from these reports that there has been a very remark- able increase in the size of the herd in one season under the operation of this convention and that a large part of this increase consists of female seals, upon which the future increase of the herd depends. The present condition of the herd shows that there will be about 100,000 breeding female seals in the herd next summer, each one of which will produce one pup, and in the following year the female pups born ee summer, amounting in accordance with the laws of nature to one-half of the total number of the year’s pups, will pass into the breeding class, subject to losses from natural mortality, thus adding a possible 40,000 more, which would bring the total up in the neighborhood of 140,000 breeding female seals; and so on from year to year the reproductive strength of the herd will increase in almost geometrical progression, so that we can confidently count on having the present size of the herd doubled and trebled within a very short period. All that is required to fulfill these expectations is to protect abso- lutely the female seals and set aside an adequate number of male seals for breeding purposes. The protection and preservation of the herd does not require the protection and preservation of the surplus male seals not needed for breeding purposes. Owing to the polyga- mous habits of the seals, the increase in the number of these surplus bachelor seals can in no conceivable way increase the birth rate or the reproductive capacity of the herd. Seals of this class contribute nothing to the welfare of the herd, and in some ways they are a dis- tinct detriment as a disturbing element on the rookeries and as con- sumers of food, which is bound to become scarcer as the size of the herd increases. These nonbreeding males, therefore, ere of no value as members of the herd, except to furnish skins for the market in place of those heretofore taken by pelagic sealers, and in this connec- tion it should be noted that the value of their skins for commercial purposes diminishes after they are 4 years old and ceases altogether after the age of 5 or 6. It is right and necessary that the killing of all seals in the herd other than the nonbreeding males should be absolutely prohibited not only for five years but forever. Land killing has been and always must be strictly limited by law to male seals, so that female seals would never be included in land killing in any event. Pelagie sealing, on the other hand, always has been chiefly directed against female seals, thus diminishing the size of the herd not merely by the number actually killed each year but also by an equal number of nursing pups killed by starvation and by the loss of the countless FUR SEALS. 5 number of unborn pups which would have been added to the herd the following year and in succeeding years. Pelagic sealing has now been stopped, but it must be remembered that the United States alone was powerless to stop it. An international agreement was necessary for that purpose, and has at last been secured after diffi- cult and protracted negotiations resulting in the present convention with Great Britain, Japan, and Russia, who have now joined with us in prohibiting pelagic sealing, and whose cooperation is necessary to make that prohibition effective. To secure such an agreement has been the aim of the United States throughout the entire period covered by the fur-seal controversy, and from the point of view of the United States this prohibition against pelagic sealing is the most important feature of the present convention. In order, however, to secure its adoption by Great Britain and Japan it was necessary for the United States to agree to give each of them a share of the proceeds of the annual increase of the American herd with the assurance, as an inducement, that a large annual increase available for commercial purposes would result from the abandonment of pelagic sealing. As stated in my former message to Congress on this subject: _ Ever since the question of land killing of seals was subjected to scientific investi- gation, soon after the fur-seal controversy arose, nearly 25 years ago, this Governnent has invariably insisted throughout the protracted and almost continuous diplomatic negotiations which have ensued for the settlement of this controversy that the pro- gressive diminution of the herd was due to the killing of seals at sea, and that if pelagic sealing was discontinued the polygamous habits of the seals would make it possible to kill annually on land a large number of surplus males without detriment to the reproductive capacity of the herd and without interfering with the normal growth of the size of the herd. The position thus taken by the United States has always been put forward and relied on by the United States in urging that an international agree- ment should be entered into prohibiting pelagic sealing; and it is obvious that one of the considerations which induced Great Britain and Japan to enter into this con- vention prohibiting their subjects from pelagic sealing was the expectation that the position thus taken by the United States was well founded and that the skins falling to the share of those Governments from the land killing of seals, as provided for in this convention, would compensate them for abandoning the taking of sealskins at sea. It was well understood by all the parties in entering into this con- vention that the result aimed at was to increase the annual repro- ductive capacity of the herd, so that a larger number of sealskins might be taken each year for commercial purposes without injury to the welfare of the herd. It is evident from these considerations that the United States is in honor bound under this convention to permit the killing annually for commercial purposes of male seals not required as a reserve for breeding before they have passed beyond the age when their skins cease to have a commercial value. The question of how many male seals should be reserved each year for breeding purposes can readily be determined. In the act under consideration, as 1t passed the House and before it was amended in the Senate, there was a provision that hereafter only 3 year-old males shall be killed, and that there shall be reserved from among the finest and most perfect seals of that age not fewer than 2,000 in 1913, 2,500 in 1914, 3,000 in 1915, 3,500 in 1916, and 4,000 each year from 1917 to 1921, inclusive, and 5,000 each year thereafter during the continu- ance of the convention. These figures were arrived at after full and careful investigation by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, 6 FUR SEALS. and it appears from the committee reports accompanying this act that these figui ‘s were intended to be and were regarded as large enough to be on the safe side. It would be more appropriate and convenient to leave the decision of this question to the Secretary of Commerce and Labor, subject to the limitation, which might properly be imposed, that each year before any commercial killing is done there should be marked and set aside or reserved from among the finest and best of the males of 3 years of age such number as is neces- any in his judgment, to provide an ample breeding reserve of males. n any event it is evident that the determination “of the number of male seals to be reserved each year for this purpose will present no difficulty; and in this connection it should be noted, as stated in my former message on this subject, that— since the fur-seal business has been taken over by the Government and no private interests are now concerned in making a profit out of it, there is no urgent necessity for imposing by legislation stringent limitations upon land killing. The only provision in the convention authorizing the United States to limit or suspend land killing is the reservation in Article X that nothing therein contained shall ‘restrict the right of the United States at any time and from time to time to suspend altogether the taking of sealskins on its islands and to impose such restrictions and regulations upon the total number of skins to be taken 1 in any season, and the manner and times and places of taking them, ‘‘as may seem necessary to protect and preserve the seal herd or to increase its number.” It is clear from the terms of the convention that the right thus reserved to the United States to regulate or suspend land killing is not an arbitrary right, but can be exercised only when necessary ‘to protect or preserve or increase the herd. It is also clear that this provision must be read in connection with the main purpose of the convention, and that the right reserved should be exercised in aid of that purpose. It has alr eady | been shown that the result aimed at by this convention was to increase the annual yO ductive capacity of the herd, so that a larger number of sealskins might be taken each year for dessa pr irposes without injury to the welfare of the herd. It follows, there! ‘ore, that when a limitation or suspension of land killing would inter/ere with, rather than pro- mote, this purpose of the convention there would then be not only no necessity but no justification for suc) limitation or suspension. The argument has been advanced that in addition to the nght thus raserved the convention recogniz d an absolute right in the United States arbitrarily to suspe snd all land killing, because, accord- ing to this argument, another clause of the convention fixes a measure of. damages to be ene each year to th» other parties whenever the United States prohibits all land killing. The clause referred to 1s found in Article XI, which provid>s that in case the United States shall absolutely prohibit all land killing of seals, then it shall bey to Great Britain and Japan each the sum ‘of $10,000 annually in lieu of their share of skins durine the years when no killing is allowed It is evident, however, from an examination of the other provisions of the sam? clause of the convention that these $10,000 payments can not be, and were not intended to be, regarded as a measure of damages, because Great Britain and Japan are required to repay them to ‘the United States with interest at 4 per cent out of the proceeds of their FUR SEALS. 7 share of the skins taken whenever land killing is resumed.