RERPES earacchs
AEE
SEEMING
rere
SI LTE ke
Raat
a His i
LAE
bee}
ep
idee
isos
t
MeN,
Oisire $4)
oy % i
=
oe <2
=
Cae
See
Poste eno
CEN
SoSee
.
ii
te
xe
Se gg TEN a iba
=
<
ys)
434
0)
‘
4
eas
pitt
Ve,
3 ct
BAN
ee + i
fs
errs
4
3
S
SSS
~
S
SS
Sele
evans
TARR £2 AR? ESSAI iy
a
<
a
~~
a
eaacre
~
Ss
Sar
Cenens
Se NE Et nA ET EEN OY Ome: pene tne
ae
af
vy
;
Merl
*
LE,
rit
hie
Aen
DANI S 4
EES yet
He oe
PER
Conese toner ne
—
=
ns
fern ee earn awe ees
+
se
Meads!
1
i
&
}
t
;
’
i
4
f
i
'
SNe
ys
ire
eH
3
So
— Se
net el SN
ee
sane
se oii rapa
SA,
OES
ht APC ERT
eres
x
fotos?
po Sent Sat Sat
ree
DLL TULL ent MH,
fae
; :
eed
G BG BH Patt
CREE
FUR SEAL ARBITRATION.
%e_ PROCEEDINGS
OF THE
TRIBUNAL OF ARBITRATION,
CONVENED AT PARIS
UNDER THE
TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND GREAT
BRITAIN CONCLUDED AT WASHINGTON FEBRUARY 20, 1892,
FOR THE
DETERMINATION OF QUESTIONS BETWEEN THE TWO GOV-
ERNMENTS CONCERNING THE JURISDICTIONAL
RIGHTS OF THE UNITED STATES
IN THE
WATERS OF BERING SEA,
VOLUME VI.
WASHINGTON:
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFIOB,
1895.
Mee, Pt
FeO a RES
eNom bo. os beats. -INior 2°:(1893).
BEHRING SEA ARBITRATION.
guelintes ©)oE yal
OF
THE BEHRING SEA COMMISSION,
AND
PHePORL OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS
Of UNE 2h. 1892.
WITH FIVE MAPS AND DIAGRAMS, AND APPENDICES.
PRESENTED TO BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT BY COMMAND
OF HER MAJESTY.
MeA i CE 189°.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Para-
graph.
MNS ELUCUONS tee eee see sace ieee teem osiais ioe oes awigenis te dee Seaton atee dec ceeneiee
REPORT
Vointine pores sere seco cece ee oe = Se toss sido sma da dcuce we cetinseee cee abeeseeeesaucess
ReporsOl Srivishy COMMISSIONCIS ese - so se el sce ose ee einen epee ne cae ccemee
25m UN CLOCUC LOR yee sae escent scin= cece sain cm ces cele eee Seen rca ete Aa seta care
PART I.—SUMMARY OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS.
\E: —THE FORMER, PRESENT, AND PROSPECTIVE CONDITION OF THE FUR-SEAL FISH-
ERY IN THE NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN.
ahesdeleAt) GeneraliCondibionsiOt seal Witet ses. co seane os oscsa soo. o cee nae ose scales ce
Bo—O9) || (se) sallino ion the breeding Tslandsys2 v2 one ss (sjsteibe slain sa icra sim = enn eel oreieis ote ale
HORTON (Cs) Salim Nyab Sears smcee estes cts Asal hola s srelareine aa emtara ise meine sereneneie ere Slave sth mislerecieleteres
71-84 | (D.) Additional points connected with Sealing at Sea or on Shore....-...--..---.... |
85-100 | (E.) Former and present condition of the Industry Sees corte canine see eae
101. | II1.—CONSIDERATIONS RELATING TO THE BASIS UPON WHICH PRECAUTIONS MAY BE
DEVISED FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THE FUR-SEAL ...--...--.----.------0---
ODA (AS) TORE St SeUEVO] Wed Necriete cies = stsiere ciclo setae aie Sie severe ere cleierele Crate aie epcisletscis ois aiatece.siereinlele
115-144 | (B.) Principles involved... ..--.2° SEE CSE ESSE etter oT ERE Sere eee were eames Shae
145 | (C.) Summary of general conditions bearing upon Regulations. a Seber BOSE DacHoneoe
IT].—MEASURES FOR THE PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION OF THE FUR-SEAL OF |
THE NORTH PACIFIC.
|
146 (A®) "General nature Measures required sae miee = ane aa em an miele min wee ae a nie wis |
147-150 ~(i.) Improvements in the Methods of taking Seals.--...-..--..------------- |
151-154 Gi.) Restriction in the Number of Seals taken. -----...-..-.----..---2--.---- |
155-161 | (B.) Specifie scheme of Repulations recommend eds se eet eee aeiateln nnie tee sister
162 (C.) Methods of giving effect to Re Pulations: — =. 22s -25- ether ne chesemaeeeeehios
163 (D>) pAliternative Methods ofpheriul ationmeasee =a ass 2 sec ee eee olin ese meres ele |
164 (i.) Entire Prohibition ‘of Killing on one of the Breeding Islands, with |
suitable concurrent Regul: Biron s ab Soak eee oO Be ee ee 4a
165 (ii.) Recurrent periods of TL Ra ae aS ine gen eae TERETE LCT
166-168 Gii.) Total Prohibition of Killing on the Breeding Islands, with concurrent |
strict Regulationyot Pelagic Sealinges = -- 2c cea — == oem soem cla |
HGS=l Onl a (Ls)eunternationalactioni te -ueere sas cess srine es a oceiece enicinl sinetrele siciaieiaini cielo eisaiccane |
PART II.—DETAILED OBSERVATIONS ON THE FACTS AND CONDITIONS
OF SEAL LIFE.
I.—NATURAL HIsTORY AND ENVIRONMENT OF THE FuR-SEAL OF THE Norti_ |
PACIFIC.
(A.) Migr ations and Range of the Fur-Seal of the North Pacitic—
171-196 (i.) Eastern side piston North ePaciiGes ahs ike iti se. cette seoe
197-208 (18) aWiestern side of thor Northubacifics. sss 22 seceeee sale a oe eaten tee eels
209-223 (GHA) RD IStribution ms Gasseeres sce: ons asee cla eine ate ose sesieee cise eee sees
OME OA SR (se), MOOG: Ofeth Ov MT: SEAL Sam aoc ncneemice = atin ae salsteinios = is ee aac incisenine oS calcite eeace
244-276 | (C.) Physical characteristics of the Pribyloff and Commander Islands, and nature
OtatheuBreadin oy Ground ameeee seer eae e eee eet eee ee abe orem aemtenue
277-283 | (D.) Annual progress of events in Seal Life on the Breeding Islands.--....-.....-.-.
284-291 | (E.) Ages at which Males reach V irility and the Females produce pYounge = 64: Corre
Ova Nda ahs) PROCMISLLE DT OP OLUONSIOls SOXOS! =a atest ayaia|+ saeilee eo eerie le mi= sian =a
2 (Gey (COMBO. Getebe aesr nono seb soptadsecucweD oc San Srcuentbsepees coc oapcecs SaeIOpsoDoE
298-302 | (H.) Age at which the young Swim.—Number of young at a Birth.................-
303-316 | (1.) Distances to which Seals go from the Breeding Islands in search of ood, and | |
himesvotellec dan peer amen se cose tee eee ee mrieia se mise reat eelee rasta a -inte
URS) | (aL) dakar ern pS eel bye Kae eo encoo Asean cepme bens Usouesobossbesseaereee
S2G—c4on Ke) Natonalcauses Of DesStruchlonilece aces sees os asl es tee reas ee ed nc ye x ota
Sides DOU (las) NOT tAliny OL MOUNo SOLS OO Meee aries latalee eis = seis seine lacie nia eleteleie sas eel
357-376 | (M. ; ds of enumerating Seals on the Pribyloff Islands and estimates of |
WE BAS cco good oboe sect mC dOnRcece OEOde bOnee dado Jceccp Uo0 eC OnTepmBpEedecoodce
Para-
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Table of Contents—Continued.
graph. Page.
377-395 | (N.) Various natural indications of former extent of ground occupied by Seals on
the Pribylothislandst.s-c-sese soe cone ee ne ee cee eee eee eae eee 67-71
396-446 | (O.) Changes in Habits of the Fur-Seal in recent years.-.-.....---.--.--...--.------ ala
447-450 | (P.) Fur-Seals Breeding on the Southern part of the North American coast. --.--.-.- 79
451-457 | (Q.) Connection or interchange of Seals between the Pribyloff and Commander
i AS) aNd Sie none oe aot Te Se oe see Bsig see nice cee eee Joc aneezacsosbnasce- 79-81
458-473 | (R.) Conditions affecting the Sea-Otter and Sea-Cow contrasted with those affecting
Phe whan Seal ores ae ce es eee = siete cale ata/e ale nla ler= e elele ele a eee tate ee are ee eS 81-83
474-525 | (S.) Breeding Places and Resorts of the Fur-Seal on the Western Side of the North
1OYOniOs Ssoer cose de ass a Reeecs -aneenod 4 toebenneSomopecSaerboc eas naga toa Asso | 84-91
526-570 | II.—NATIVES OF THE COASTS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA AND ALASKA DIRECTLY INTER-
ESTED IN INDEPENDENT SEALING. METHODS OF HUNTING, AND NUMBER :
HUN SON peciie oe SOD HO BO OU DO SCHOO CICOn Seen coed Sh ISeé “Sos cd enoo SnAsScroqbooSs de sogge 91-97
III.—PELAGIC SEALING.
70-600) (Av) OripinvandsDevelopmentt2 cna. eeoasetsete ese e race aera etnias ieee | 97-102
GOT=6125 (BS) eMlethod Bye. ec see eee eae nae eee me tte lore siete ee eee Pets PS 102-104
613=682)/k(C) Proportion of Seals losts-cs.e see eee =e eee mean nee ae sneer 104-109
635-653))|) (De Composiiioniot Gate hes -ce essential =e Be ee mise eae ee ei ele aia e eee 10-113
654=658))|/-(442)) Bute ofethe sings tr yi ser a= ete oe ere ala oan alte alee ieee 113, 114
IV.—ContrRoL AND METHODS OF SEALING ON THE PRIBYLOFF ISLANDS, THEIR |
NATURE AND RESULTS.
59 = 67.5) (-AGe) foe Boel ee Rg Ly CN me a ata ta ste 114-116
674-693 | (B.) Decrease in Number of Seals, its Origin and Progress. .-...--......--.---------- 116-119
694-703) S(Gs)) Standard awWieiohts Of js kins taken ssp aeee- aeeeee ee sca cemme re ease eee 119-121
TOE PAIN GBS) el Oy ak livia Gy PIS GEH ee sie See Sees OS Se ees Cee owe aqoca coun sap obraonseeedaeesacee! | 121-123
722 (E>); Protection off@Rookeriesitrom isturbante pets eet eerie a eee 124
2p 02om| LOE) Nabi Ovlaberes tsiOm ‘ih ews lar doers prem ats ele ete tere ice era ree bal tay eee cee) 124095
WPA ei Val iy (Cae Wal a0 (sa eae aes aos Seite stat Me AM ens Sree HOM ee Oca Som aoS ee aee oe 125-131
771-781 V.—NUMBER OF FUR-SEALS KILLED UPON THE PRIBYLOFF ISLANDS....-.-.----- | 131-184
782-833 VI.—HIstTorRIcAL NOTES ON THE CONDITION OF THE FUR-SEAL ROOKERIES OF THE
IPRIBYERORE. JSEANDSsING VARTOUS! GH AIRS soe Seh menor sss es eae eas 134-140
834-901 | VIi.—THE FUR-SEAL FISHERY IN THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE..-...-------.---.--- 140-149
9022903) | Vall — MOAR KE DING: DHE SRAL-SKINSt ence emaen seat ceceriee teenies seniaee ciceeetate 149
| PART III.
9042908" |KOONCEUDING VE MAHIK Se a5 c(t tereinintarn sine ere ey eretepa are ey atavere el aynveiste ae ol atrala tease ie tete fetter 150
~=<= —— —— — —<—— —
MAPS; AND DIAGRAMS.
J. Track Chart of Routes followed by the British Behring-Sea Commissioners, 15th
July to 8th October, 1891.
II. Sketch Map, illustrating Resorts and Migration Routes of Fur-Seals in the North
Pacific.
Ill. Sketch Map, showing approximately the Area frequented by Fur-Seals in the
period extending from 15th July to 16th August, 1891.
IV. Sketch Map, showing approximately the Area frequented by Fur-Seals in the
period extending from 15th August to 16th September, 1891.
V. Diagrams illustrating Number of Fur-Seals Killed.
APPENDICES.
ware,
Appendix (A). List of Persons and Authorities supplying evidence.......- 151-153
‘ (B). Circular to and replies from Colonial and Foreign Govern-
MON US Pawel see we se hese os se as Swe Rata see Baie ae 154-169
(C). Various letters and communications relating to the Fur-Seals
of the British Columbian and neighbouring coasts. ...-... 170-178
(D). Miscellaneous correspondence and Memoranda-..........---- 179-192
(HE). Seal Preservation Regulations and Ordinances..........---- 193-203
(F). Particulars of Pelagic Catch of British and United States
Sealimoavessel sie 3 fl— Oe se ee eee tae ce sac eece Reo 204-212
(Gee Miscellaneous Mablessee 22 4 2 oe ae ore he seco ocean ae 213-218
(H). Affidavits relating to Pelagic Sealing-..................... 219-241
5
Pa, alee
lt a Oh"
i Teas
can
v's
View?
of
v BEHRING SEA COMMISSION.
INSTRUCTIONS TO BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Nop:
The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir G. Baden-Powell and Dr, Dawson.
FOREIGN OFFICE, June 24, 1891.
GENTLEMEN: The Queen having been graciously pleased to appoint
you to be her Commissioners for the purpose of inquiring into the con-
ditions of seal life in Behring Sea and other parts of the North Pacific
Ocean, I transmit to you herewith Her Majesty’s Commission under the
Sign Manual to that effect.
The main object of your inquiry will be to ascertain, ‘¢ What interna-
tional arrangements, if any, are necessary between Great Britain and
the United States, and Russia or any other Power, for the purpose of
preserving the fur- ‘seal race in Behring Sea from extermination ?”
Her Majesty’s Government have proposed to the United States that
the investigation should be conducted by a Commission to consist of
four experts, of whom two shall be nominated by each Government,
and a Chairman, who shall be nominated by Arbitrators.
If the Government of the United States agree to this proposal,
you will be the Delegates who will represent Great Britain in the
Commission.
But, in the meanwhile, it is desirable that you should at once com-
mence your examination of the question, and that for that purpose you
should proceed as soon as you conveniently can to Vancouver, from
whence the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty have been requested
to provide for your conveyance to the various sealing grounds and
other places which it may be expedient for you to visit.
Application has been made to the United States Government for per-
mission for you to visit the seal islands under their jurisdiction, and a
similar request will be addressed to the Russian Government in the
event of your finding it necessary to visit the Commander Islands and
other Russian sealing grounds.
Your attention should be particularly devoted to ascertaining—
1. The actual facts as regards the alleged serious diminution of seal
life on the Pribyloff Islands, the date at which such diminution began, the
rate of its progress, and any previous instance of a similar occurrence.
2. The causes of such diminution; whether, and to what extent, it is
attributable—
(a.) ‘To a migration of the seals to other rookeries.
(b.) To the method of killing pursued on the islands themselves.
=
(
8 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
(c.) To the increase of sealing upon the high seas, and the manner in
which it is pursued.
I need scarcely remind you that your investigation should be carried
on with strict impartiality, that you should neglect no sources of infor-
mation which may be likely to assist you in arriving at a sound con-
clusion, and that great care should be taken to sift the evidence that is
brought before you.
It is equally to the interest of all the Governments concerned in the
sealing industry that it should be protected from all serious risk of
extinction in consequenceof the useof wasteful and injudicious methods.
You will be provided with all the documentary evidence in the pos-
session of this Department which is likely to be of assistance to you in
the prosecution of your inquiry.
Mr. A. Froude has been appointed to be your Secretary, and will accom.
pany you on your tour.
vi Separate despatches will be addressed to you with regard to
the expenses of your mission, and the form in which your cor-
respondence with this Office should be conducted.
Iam, We.
(Signed) SALISBURY.
[Inclosure in No. 1.]
Commission passed under the Royal Sign Manual and Signet, appointing Sir George Smyth
Baden-Powell, K. C. M. G., M. P., and George Mercer Dawson, LL. D., I’. R. S., to
undertake an inquiry into the Conditions of Seal Life and the precautions necessary for
preventing the extermination of the Fur-seal Species in Behring Sea and other parts of
the North Pacific Ocean.
Victoria, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Treland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, Empress of India, &c., to all and singular
to whom these presents shall come, greeting!
Whereas, we have deemed it expedient that Commissioners should be appointed
for the purpose of inquiry into the conditions of seal life and the precautions neces-
sary for preventing the extermination of the fur-seal species in Behring Sea and
other parts of the North Pacific Ocean:
Now, know ye, that we, reposing especial trust and confidence in the diligence,
skill, and integrity of our trusty and well-beloved Sir George Smyth Baden-Powell,
Knight Commander of Our Most Distinguished Order of St. Michael and St. George,
Member of Parliament; and of our trusty and well-beloved Professor George Mercer
Dawson, Assistant Director and Geologist of the Canadian Geological and Natural
History Survey, have nominated, constituted, and appointed, and do by these pres-
ents nominate, constitute, and appoint them our Commissioners to undertake the
inquiry aforesaid:
And we do hereby give to our said Commissioners full power and authority to do
and perform all acts, matters, and things which may be necessary and proper for
duly carrying into effect the object of this our Commission.
In witness whereof we have signed these presents with our Royal hand.
Given at our Court at Windsor Castle, the 22nd day of June, in the year of our
Lord 1891, and in the fifty-fifth year of our reign.
By Her Majesty’s command,
(Signed) SALISBURY.
No. 2.
The Marquis of Salisbury to the Behring Sea Commissioners.
FOREIGN OFFICE, January 15, 1892.
GENTLEMEN: I have to inform you that Her Majesty’s Minister at
Washington has sent home the text of seven Articles, signed by himself
and Mr. Blaine on the 18th ultimo, which are to be embodied in a formal
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 9
Agreement between Her Majesty’s Government and that of the United
States for referring to Arbitrators certain questions at issue between
the two Governments in regard to the jurisdiction claimed by the latter
over the waters of Behring Sea in connection with the fur-seal fisheries
therein.
Sir J. Pauncefote has also forwarded the text of an Agreement signed
on the same day for the appointment of two Commissioners by Her
Majesty’s Government and that of the United States respectively, to
investigate, conjointly with the Commissioners of the other Govern-
ment, all the facts relating to seal life in Behring Sea, and the necessary
measures for its proper protection and preservation.
A copy of Sir J. Pauncefote’s despatch, inclosing both these docu-
ments, is forwarded herewith for your information.
I now transmit the Queen’s Commission under the Sign Manual
appointing you to be Her Majesty’s Commissioners in accordance with
the provisions of the Joint Commission Agreement, and I request that
you will proceed to Washington as soon as you can conveniently do so,
in order to draw up the Report indicated in the second paragraph ot
the agreement.
vil The information which has been obtained by your American
colleagues and yourselves during your recent visit to Behring
Sea will supply you with material for the preparation of your Report.
There are, however, a few points to which Her Majesty’s Government
consider it desirable that your special attention should be directed.
You will observe that it is intended that the Report of the Joint
Commissioners shall embrace recommendations as to all measures that
should be adopted for the preservation of seal life. For this purpose,
it will be necessary to consider what regulations may seem advisable,
whether within the jurisdictional limits of the United States and Can-
ada, or outside those limits. The Regulations which the Commissioners
may recommend for adoption within the respective jurisdictions of the
two countries will, of course, be matter for the consideration of the
respective Governments, while the regulations affecting waters outside
the territorial limits will have to be considered under clause 6 of the
Arbitration Agreement in the event of a decision being given by the
Arbitrators against the claim of exclusive jurisdiction put forward on
behalf of the United States.
The Report is to be presented in the first instance to the two Govern-
ments for their consideration, and is subsequently to be laid by those
Governments before the Arbitrators to assist them in determining the
more restricted question as to what, if any, Regulations are essential
for the protection of the fur-bearing seals outside the territorial juris-
diction of the two countries.
In the event any points arising on which the Commissioners are
‘unable to arrive at an understanding, they should report jointly or
severally to each Government on such points.
In conclusion, I have to state that Her Majesty’s Government place
every reliance on your tact and discretion in the conduct of your inves-
tigations with your American colleagues, who will, no doubt, be equally
desirous with yourselves of arriving at a common agreement on the
questions to be discussed.
Iam, We.
(Signed) SALISBURY.
10 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
[Inclosure in No. 2.]
Commission passed under the Royal Sign Manual andSignet appointing Sir George Smyth
Baden-Powell, K. C. M. G., M. P., and Professor George Mercer Dawson, Assistant
Director and Geologist of the Canadian Geological and Natural History Survey, to be
Her Majesty’s Commissioners under the Behring Sea Joint Commission Agreement between
Great Britain and the United States of the 18th December, 1891.
Victoria, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land, Queen, Defender of the Faith, Empress of India, &c., &c., &c., to all and singu-
lar to whom these presents shall come, greeting!
Whereas we have deemed it expedient that Commissioners should be appointed
for the purpose of inquiring into the conditions 6f seal life in Behring Sea and the
measures necessary for its proper protection and preservation under the Agreement
between Great Britain and the United States of America of the 18th December, 1891.
Now know ye that we, reposing especial trust and confidence in the diligence,
skill, and integrity of our trusty and well-beloved Sir George Smyth Baden-Powell,
Knight Commander of our most distinguished Order of St. Michael and St. George,
Member of Parliament, and of our trusty and well-beloved Professor George Mercer
Dawson, Assistant Director and Geologist of the Canadian Geological and Natural
History Survey, have nominated, constituted, and appointed, and do by these presents
nominate, constitute, and appoint them our Commissioners to undertake the inquiry
aforesaid.
And we do hereby give to our said Commissioners Full Power and authority to do
and perform all acts, matters, and things which may be necessary and proper for duly
carrying into effect the object of this our Commission.
In witness whereof we have signed these presents with our Royal hand.
Given at our Court at Osborne the 1st day of January in the year of our Lord 1892,
and in the 55th year of our reign.
By Her Majesty’s command,
(Conntersigned) SALISBURY.
1 BEHRING SEA COMMISSION,
JOINT REPORT.
No. 3.
The Behring Sea Commissioners to the Marquis of Salisbury.—( Received
March 19.)
“WASHINGTON, March 4, 1892.
My Lorn: We have the honour to transmit herewith a Report signed
this day by the Commissioners of Great Britain and the United States
appointed to investigate the condition of seal life in the North Pacific
Ocean.
Under the instructions contained in your Lordship’s despatches of the
24th June, 1891, and of the 15th January last, and in accordance with
the terms of the Agreement arranged between the two Governments,
the requisite investigations have been carried out; the Joint Report, as
now submitted, has been agreed to; and we are at present engaged in
drawing up our “several” Reports dealing with those facts of seal life,
and measures necessary for its proper protection and preservation, on
which no agreement was come to in the Joint Report.
We have, &e.
(Signed) GEORGE BADEN-POWELL.
° GEORGE M. DAWSON.
[Ineclosure in No. 3.]
BEHRING SEA COMMISSION JOINT REPORT.
An Agreement having been entered into between the Governments of Great Britaiy
and the United States to the effect that—
‘“‘Kach Government shall appoint two Commissioners to investigate, conjointly
with the Commissioners of the other Government, all the facts having relation to
seal life in Behring Sea, and the measures necessary for its proper protection and
preservation ;
“The four Commissioners shall, so far as they may be able to agree, make a Joint
Report to each of the two Governments; and they shall also report, either jointly or
severally, to each Government on any points upon which they may be unable to
ALTeE ;
eeThese Reports shall not be made public until they shall be submitted to the Arbi-
trators, or it shall appear that the contingency of their being used by the Arbitrators
cannot arise ;”
And we, in accordance with the above Agreement, having been duly commissioned
by our respective Governments, and having communicated to each other our respective
powers, found in good and due form, have agreed to the following Report: a
12 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
1. The joint investigation has been carried out by us,and we have utilized all
Senge of information available.
. The several breeding-places on the Pribyloff Islands have been examined, and
the general management ‘and methods for taking the seals upon the islands have been
investigated.
3. Inregard to the distribution and habits of the fur-seal when seen at sea, informa-
tion based on the observations recorded by the cruizers of the United States
2 and Great Britain, engaged in carrying out the modus vivendi of 1891, has been
exchanged for the purpose of enabling” general conclusions to be arrived at on
these points.
4. Meetings of the Joint Commission were held in Washington, beginning on Mon-
day, the 8th ‘February, and continuing until Friday, the 4th March, 1892, As a result
Oe these meetings, we find ourselves in accord on the following propositions : :
. We are in thorough agreement that, for industrial, as well as for other obvious
Peaeonk, it is incumbent upon all nations, and particularly upon those having direct
commercial interests in fur- seals, to provide for their proper protection and | preser-
vation.
6. Our joint and several investigations have led us to certain conclusions, in the
first place, in regard to the facts of seal life, including both the existing conditions
and their causes; and, in the second place, in regard to such remedies as may be nec-
essary to secure the far- seal against depletion or commercial extermination.
7. We find that, since the Alaska purchase, a marked diminution in the number of
seals on, and habitually resorting to, the Pribyloft Islands has taken place; that it
has been cumulative in effect, and that it is the result of excessive killing by man.
8. Finding that considerable difference of opinion exists on certain fundamental
propositions, which renders it impossible in a satisfactory manner to express our
views in a Joint Report, we have agreed that we can most cony eniently state our
respective conclusions on these matters in the “several” Reports which it is provided
may be submitted to our respective Governments.
Signed in duplicate at the city of Washington this 4th day of March, 1892.
(Signed) GEORGE SMYTH BADEN-POWELL.
GEORGE MERCER DAWSON.
THOMAS CORWIN MENDENHALL.
CLINTON Harr MERRIAM.
14 a r NTT 7 Wro 5
(Signed ) ASHLEY ANTHONY FROUDE, LToint Scoretanien
JOSEPH STANLEY-BROWN, — §
3 REPORT OF THE BRITISH BEHRING SEA COMMIS-
SIONERS,
No. 4.
The Behring Sea Commissioners to the Marquis of Salisbury.—( Received
August 14.)
FOREIGN OFFICE, August 13, 1892.
My Lorp: With reference to our despatch of the 4th March, 1892,
inclosing the Joint Report of the Joint Commission, we now have
the honour to submit, as the “several” Report contemplated in that
despatch, the Report which we have had the honour to make to Her
Majesty the Queen under the Commission appointing us to investigate
seal life in Behring Sea.
' We have, &e.
(Signed) GEORGE BADEN-POWELL.
GEORGE M. DAWSON.
[Inclosure in No. 4.]
REPORT.
To the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty.
May IT PLEASE YOUR MAJESTY,
We, your Majesty’s Commissioners, appointed to undertake an inquiry into the
conditions of seal life and the precautions necessary for preventing the extermina-
tion of the fur-seal species in Behring Sea and other parts of the North Pacific Ocean,
beg to submit the following Report.
2. The main object of our inquiry was to ascertain what international arrange-
ments, if any, were necessary between Great Britain and the United States and
Russia, or any other Power, for the purpose of preserving the fur-seal race from
extermination.
3. We were further instructed that Her Majesty had proposed to the President of
the United States that the investigation should be conducted by a Joint Comiission
of the two nations, and that, on the conclusion of an Agreement providing for this,
we were to be the Delegates who would represent Great Britain on the Commission.
4, It was also understood that the investigations and conclusions of this Joint
Commission would be ultimately laid before the Arbitrators, who were to adjudicate
on the international rights involved, and on the establishment of Regulations for
the proper protection and preservation of the fur-seal in or habitually resorting to
the Behring Sea.
5. Wherefore, in carrying out the terms of our Commission, it has been our object
to acquire and record the most complete information available, in order to promote,
in the true interests of all concerned, an equitable, impartial, and mutually satis-
factory adjustment of the questions at issue.
6. The necessary means ot transport over the North Pacific Ocean was provided
for us by the Lord Commissioners of the Admiralty, and the requisite permission to
visit and examine the seal rookeries situated in American or Russian territory was
obtained at our request from the respective Governments,
13
14 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
7. We formed complete plans for visiting such places situated in, and such areas of
the North Pacific Ocean, and holding personal interviews with such persons as
4 should satisfy us that we had neglected no source of information which might
be likely to assist us in arriving at sound conclusions.
8. Care was taken before commencing our local investigations to complete our
personal knowledge of all documentary evidence to which we could procure access,
including the previous official correspondence, and a mass of public and private
publications, descriptions, records, and opinions.
9. Requests for information were also addressed to several countries outside the
probable scope of our personal inquiries, from which collateral information of
importance could be derived. With the aid of the Canadian and Imperial Govern-
ments, a series of questions were sent to the various Governments who now hold
the chief resorts of the fur-seal in the Southern Hemisphere, namely, the Argentine,
Uruguayan, Chilean, and Brazilian Republics, and the Colonies of the Falkland
Islands, the Cape of Good Hope, Tasmania, New South Wales, Victoria, and New
Zealand.
10. Inquiries were also made for information in regard to the North Pacific seal
fisheries to the Governments of Russia and Japan, to Her Britannic Majesty’s Con-
suls at Shanghae, Canton, Honolulu, and San Francisco, and to the Canadian Indian
Agents along the coast of British Columbia,
i. In regard to personal work, a brief account of our proceedings will explain
the plan of action adopted, and we append a Chart of our track. From the 6th to
the 9th July we consulted with the Canadian Ministers in Ottawa; we then crossed
the continent by train, and at Vancouver and Victoria held prearranged interviews
with those who were engaged in the practical work of sealing, and with the Com-
mander-in-chief of the Pacific Station and the port authorities. So soon as the
chartered steamer ‘‘Danube” could be got ready for sea, we left on a direct course
for the port of Iliuliuk, in Unalaska Island.
12. The “Danube” made the passage of about 1,400 miles in seven and a-half
days. After consulting at Unalaska with the Senior Naval Officer, Commander
Turner, of Her Majesty’s ship ‘‘Nymphe,” we made the best of our way to the
Pribylott Islands, where we spent several days carrying out our first inspection of
the seal rookeries in company with Professor Mendenhall and Dr. Merriam, the
Commissioners-designate of the United States, every hospitality and courtesy being
afforded by the officials both of the Government and of the lessees of the islands.
13. At this date the rookeries were still at their fullest, and the organization had
not yet broken up. After careful inquiry into the various questions connected with
the habits and treatment of the seals on these islands, we started on the 6th August
on a cruize of 1,450 miles to the eastward and northward in company with her Maj-
esty’s ship ‘‘ Pheasant,” to satisfy ourselves as to the limits of the range of the fur-
seal in those parts of Behri ing Sea. We visited the native and other Settlements on
Nunivak Island, Cape Vancouver, St. Matthew Island, St. Lawrence Island, and
Plover Bay in Eastern Siberia, near the entrance of Behring Straits, returning thence
for a second inspection of the Pribyloff rookeries and to note the difference in their
appearance after a fortnight’s interval.
14. Thence we proceeded to [liulink Harbour, Unalaska, to communicate by appoint-
ment with the Commanding Officers of the English and United States war-ships as
to future movements. Leaving that port on the 24th August for the westward we
cruized along the Aleutian chain, calling at the Islands of Atka and Attu, on which
are the only 1 remaining native Settlements in the western part of the Aleutian chain.
15. We then crossed to the Commander Islands, and there received from the Rus-
sian authorities every facility and courtesy in our task of learning all we could
concerning seal life on those islands. Thence we proceeded down the coast of Kam-
schatka to Petropaulouski, where again the Russian authorities gave us every infor-
mation. On this cruize Her Majesty’s ship “Porpoise,” sailing in company, proved
of the greatest assistance.
16. Leaving Petropaulouski on the 10th September our course was shaped for the
Pribyloft Islands, so as to strike them from a westerly direction, and continue across
that portion of Behring Sea our observations of seals seen at sea. A third and final
examination of the Pribyloff rookeries was then made after a further interval of
twenty-six days, and Unalaska was again reached on the 17th September.
17. Leaving Behring Sea on the 20th September, we visited Kadiak Island, Sitka,
and Shakan, making inquiries of both the native and White residents as to the fur-
seal fishery in this distant territory of the United States. Continuing our cruize of
investigation, we called at the following places on the coast of British Columbia,
viz., Port Simpson, Metla-katla, Port Essington, Masset (Queen Charlotte Islands),
Bella-Bella, Nawitti, Clayoquot Sound, and Barclay Sound, where, by per-
5 sonal inquiries, we were enabled to amplify the written statements which, in
compliance with our previous request, had been forwarded to us by the Indian
agents on the coast. The Indian Settlement at Neah Bay, on the United States shore
of the Straits of Fuca, was also visited, where we likewise obtained valuable infor-
mation.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 15
18. The facts thus obtained afforded a direct knowledge of the fur-sealing industry,
both past and present, as it affects the Indians of South-east Alaska and British
Columbia.
19. We completed our local investigations by obtaining from the sealers in Victoria,
Vancouver, and Seattle, further evidence as to their opinions and wishes, thus con-
cluding our task by obtaining authoritatively the views of all persons connected with
the fur-seal fishery on the facts of seal life and on the protective measures they would
faveur.
20. The cruize in the North Pacific occupied nearly three months, and the log
shows a distance covered of more than 9,000 miles.
21. We were thus enabled to examine for ourselves all the principal seal rookeries,
and especially to inspect the typical rookeries on the Pribyloff Islands at three
different seasons, at the widest intervals of time possible within the period at our
command: to learn, by personal inquiry, knowledge of the limits eastward, north-
ward, and westward of the present habitat of the fur-seal, and to satisfy ourselves as
to the peculiar features of the localities which the fur-seal did or did not select as
shore resorts.
22. Inregard to the important point of the facts and reasons of the presence of the
fur-seal in particular portions of the ocean at particular seasons of the year, a point
on which we could find little or no previous descriptions or recorded observations,
records were collated from schooners engaged in sealing, and for 1891 we formulated
a plan of seal logs and seal track-charts based on recorded observations of seals seen
at sea, which has been very efficiently carried out on the British men-of-war
“Nymphe,” ‘‘ Porpoise,” and ‘‘ Pheasant,” and on our own chartered steamer, the
“Danube,”—similar work having also been carried on by the United States men-of-
war and revenue-cutters employed in Behring Sea during the same season. For this
‘purpose also special inquiries were made as to the kinds of fish constituting the
‘favourite food of the fur-seal. Photographs were also taken by us of the seals, their
breeding places, and surroundings.
23. It may be observed further, that in obtaining evidence from persons of expe-
rience or knowledge of the subject, we adopted, in general, the informal plan of free
interviews and independent conversation. In this way we acquired very distinct
and trustworthy knowledge of their opinions and experiences.
24, The witnesses who thus gave evidence included officials of the Governments
and the Companies, and ex-officials now otherwise employed, owners, captains and
hunters engaged in pelagic sealing; natives, chiefly Aluet and Russian half-breeds,
engaged in killing and skinning seals on the Pribyloft Islands; natives, such as
Indians, Innuits, and Aluets, who habitually hunt and kill fur-seals, and merchants
and others connected with the trade in furs.
__ 25. In the following statement of the results of our investigations, we propose,
first of all, to present in summary, in Part I, a general view of the conclusions at
which we have arrived as to the condition of seal life in the North Pacific Ocean, and
las to the measures necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal industry.
__ We would then, in Part II, deal in a more systematic manner and in detail with
the various divisions of the subject, and subsequently give, as Appendices, such cor-
respondence and statistics as may be needed to complete our account of the subject
under investigation.
PART I.
SUMMARY OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS.
J.—THE FORMER, PRESENT, AND PROSPECTIVE CONDITION OF THE
FUR-SEAL FISHERY IN THE NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN.
Habits of the
fur-seal.
Migrations.
Winter and
summer habi-
tats.
16
(A.)—General Conditions of Seal Life.
26. The fur-seal of the North Pacific Ocean is an animal
in its nature essentially pelagic, which, during the greater
part of each year, has no occasion to seek the land, and
very rarely does so. For some portion of the year, however,
it naturally resorts to certain littoral breeding places, where
the young are brought forth and suckled on land. It is
gregarious in habit, and, though seldom found in defined
schools or compact bodies at sea, congregates in large num-
bers at the breeding places. Throughout the breeding sea-
son, the adults of both sexes—if not entirely, at least, for
very considerable periods—abstain from food, but during
the remainder of the year the seals are notably influenced
in their movements by those of the food-fishes upon which
they subsist.
27. Such movements are, however, subordinate to a more
general one of migration, in conformity with which the fur-
seals of the North Pacific travel northward to the breeding
islands in the spring and return to the southward in the
autumn, following two main lines, one of which approxi-
mates to the western coast of North America, while the
other skirts the Asiatic coast. Those animals which pursue
the first-mentioned migration-route, for the most part breed
upon the Pribyloff Islands in summer, and spend the win-
ter in that part of the ocean adjacent to, or lying off, the
coast of British Columbia. Those following the second
route breed, in the main, on the Commander Islands, and
winter off the coasts of Japan. The comparative proximity
of the breeding islands frequented by the seals pertaining
to these two migration-tracts during the summer insures a
certain interrelation and interchange of seals between the
two groups, to an extent not fully known, and which
doubtless varies much in different years.
28. The fur-seal of the North Pacific may thus be said, in
each case, to have two habitats or homes between which it
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
migrates, both equally necessary to its existence under pres-
ent circumstances, the one frequented in summer, the other
during the winter. If it were possible to confine the fur-
seal to the vicinity of the northern islands resorted to dur-
ing the breeding season, or even within the limits of Beh-
ring Sea, the species would become extinct in a single year;
but if, in any way, it were to be debarred from reaching
the islands now chiefly resorted to for breeding purposes,
it would, according to experience recorded elsewhere,
speedily seek out other places upon which to give birth to
its young.
29. The fur-seal of the Southern Hemisphere, while rec-
ognized as distinct in kind, resembles that of the North
Pacifie in its habitual resort to littoral breeding places and
in other respects, but is not known to migrate regularly
over such great tracts of sea, or to have definitely separable
summer and winter habitats.
30. With reference to the length of the period during
which the fur-seals resort to the shore:—The breeding
males begin to arrive on the Pribyloff Islands at varying
dates in May, and remain continuously ashore for about
three months, after which they are freed from all duties on
the breeding rookeries, and only occasionally return to the
shores. The breeding females arrive for the most part
nearly a month later, bearing their young immediately on
landing, and remaining ashore, jealousiy guarded by the
males, tor several weeks, after which they take every oppor-
tunity to play in the water close along the beaches, and
about a month later they also begin to leave the islands in
search of food, and migrate to their winter habitat. The
young males and the young females come ashore later than
the breeding seals, and at more irregular dates, and “haul
out” by themselves. Lastly, the pups of the year, born in
June and July, commence to “pod,” or herd together away
from their mothers, towards the middle or end of August,
and after that fr equent the beaches in great numbers, and
bathe and swim in the surf. They remain on the islands
until October, and even November, being among the last
to leave.
31. While resorting to or remaining on the land, the fur-
seal is practically defenceless, and it is, therefore, on unin-
habited islands or rocks that large numbers of seals are
known to congregate during the breeding season. Such
places alone have afforded the necessary security from
various predaceous animals and from man, and all the noted
seal ‘‘rookeries” of both hemispheres have been
7 found on unpeopled insular areas. The latitude and
corresponding climate of such breeding places has
doubtless been a circumstance of some importance in ren-
dering certain localities congenial to the fur-seal, but even
the single species inhabiting the North Pacific shows acon-
siderable range of adaptability in this respect, provided
that thenecessary security against disturbance and destrue-
tion be afforded for adults and young.
32. Until the discovery by the Russians of the Com-
mander Islands in 1741, and the Pribyloft Islands in 1756,
Base
17
Events on
breeding places.
Breeding
places.
18
Original condi-
tionson breeding
islands.
Natural fluctua-
tions innumbers.
Tnterference
with natural con-
ditions.
Effects of kill-
ing.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
these were doubtless, in the average of years, fully peopled
with seals up to the limits imposed by natural conditions,
such as food supply, areas available for breeding grounds,
and the counteracting effects of destructive agencies at
that time affecting se: al life. Among the latter, particwlar
mention may be made of predaceous marine animals such
as the killer whale and shark, and to hunting carried on in
the southern portion of the migration-range ‘of the seal by
various hative tribes. These agencies were almost contin-
uous in their operation, but, in addition, certain occasional
sauses of destruction of seals must not be lost sight of.
Among these are, inclement seasons in which the breeding
islands, orsomeof them,remained so long ice-bound that the
females were unable to land in time to give birth to their
young; autumn storms, fatal to young seals, and also the
recurrent inroads of mur rains or diseases of various kinds.
Of the two first of these last-mentioned causes, instances
which have resulted in great damage to seal life have been
recorded on the Priby loff Islands. In regard to the third,
though elsewhere observed, there isa r emarkable absence of
notice in the records of these islands.
30. The separate or concurrent effects of such causes,
even see fore the era of the seal hunter, must have produced
great fluctuations in the total v olume of seal lifein certain
years or terms of years. There are of course no data avail-
able in actual proof of this, but that such must have
occurred is sufficiently obvious from analogy with the
known facts relating to other animals, and particularly
those of a similar gregarious habit.
54, In all parts of the world the discovery of the breed-
ing islands of the fur-seal has usually been followed by
unrestricted slaughter upon these breeding places, and this
has invariably resultedin general depletion, often approach-
ing extermination, but in no known case within historical
times, has it ac tually resulted in complete extirpation,
(B.)—HKilling on the Breeding Islands.
35. The discovery of the breeding islands in the North
Pacific, and the slaughter of seals upon them by man,
introduced a more important factor in regard to their seal
life, the general effect of which, under what regulations
soever, tended inevitably towards a reduction in the aggre-
gate number of seals frequenting the islands. In other
words, the initiation of commerciai killing on the oeicre
islands interfered with the previously established balance
of nature. It formed a heavy new draft upon seal life,
while no compensating relief was afiorded against the
active depredations of other enemies or against other nat-
ural occurrences which had heretofore set limits to the
increase of the seals. Their former places of secure retreat
were invaded by man, while, during the greater part of
each year, they remained exposed on the open ocean as
before to innumerable accidents, and entirely beyond the
control or possible protection of those in charge of the
breeding islands. The inroads of the seal killers on the
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
islands might be modified in kind or in degree, but their
general tendency could not be reversed.
36. The Pribyloff and Commander Islands of the North
Pacific have, however, continued to be the resorts of large
numbers of fur-seals for more than 100 years subsequent to
their discovery and occupation by the Russians. Almost
from the first, regulations restricting the slaughter of seals
on land were instituted and carried out by the Russian
authorities, and similar measures have been continued in
the case of the Pribyloff Islands by the Government of the
United States. Though continuous, or nearly so, in their
general operation, such regulations have varied much in
their nature, and even more with regard to the degree of
efficiency with which they have been enforced, and in the
latter respects they have at no time been entirely satisfac-
tory for the purposes intended.
37. During the early years of the Russian control, the
conditions of seal life were very imperfectly understood,
and but little regard was paid to the subject. A rapid
diminution in the number of seals frequenting the islands,
however, eventually claimed attention, and improvements
of various kinds followed. Among the first of the more
stringent measures adopted was the restriction of killing
to males, which followed from the discovery that a much
lar ger number of males were born than were actually
8 required for service on the breeding ‘rookeries.”
The killing of females was practically forbidden on
the Pribyloff Islands about 1847, and on the Commander
Islands probably about ine same date.
38. The obvious fact was also recognized that the killing
for food alone of large eee of young seals or “pups, »
when their skins came to possess no commercial value, was
a useless waste of seal life. On the Commander Islands
this practice ceased after the year 1874. It was strongly
protested against as early as 1875 on the Pribyloff Islands,
but was not actuaily forbidden there until the year 1891.
59. The number of seals annually killed on the P riby lott
Islands during the earlier years of the Russian régime is
not accurately known, though fairly exact statistics are
extant from the year 1817. Sufficient is known, however,
to show that the number killed in various years before this
date differed widely, and was in some years excessive.
The whole numbers of seals killed in certain terms of years
has been recorded with approximate accuracy. <A study
of the figures thus available indicates that the average
annual killing during the twenty-one years, 1787 to 1806,
both inclusive, was about 50,000; during the nine years,
from 1807 to 1816, it was approximately, 47,500; and dur-
ing the years from 1817 to 1866 was 25,000.
Combining the whole period covered by the figures above
quoted, and adding the year in which the islands were
discovered, we find that the killing on the Pribyloff Islands
averaged for this term of eighty-one years about 34,000
annually.
The exact figures, in so far as these can be obtained, are
given ina tabular form (S771),
a9
Regulations on
breeding islands.
Improvements
in regulations.
Numbers kill-
ed on the Priby-
loff Islands.
20
Depletion
threatened in
Russian times.
Increase in lat-
er years of Rus-
sian régime.
United States
control.
Effects of ex-
cessive slaugh-
ter.
' REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
40, The excessive killing of seals in certain years of the
Russian period of control, together with the nearly pro-
miscuous Slaughter (for the first part of this period) of seals
of both sexes and all ages, doubtless had much to do with
the alarming decrease in seal life which occurred more than
once during this period. It is to be noted, however, in this
connection, that as both males and females continue to be
productive as breeders for a number of years, the effect of
excessive killing of any particular class of seals, such as
young males or young females, for two or three consecutive
years, could only produce its full effect on the breeding
‘‘rookeries” after the lapse of four or five years.
It is thus instructive to observe that even to maintain
the comparatively low average number killed during the
Russian period, it was found absolutely necessary on sev-
eral occasions to institute periods of rest or ‘ zapooska,”
in which all killing of seals was prohibited for some years.
41. It is also noteworthy, that for many years previous
to the close of the Russsian control (probably from about
1842) under a more enlightened system of management
than that of the earlier years, the number of seals resorting
to the islands was slowly increasing, and that the average
number taken annually was gradually raised during these
years from a very low figure to about 30,000, without
apparently reversing this steady improvement in the num-
bers resorting to the islands.
42. In 1867, the last year of the Russian tenure, a sudden
and great incr ease in the take of seal-skins was allowed to
occur, and the number arose abruptly in this year to about
75,000.
43. In the next year, being the first in which the Priby-
loff Islands passed into the control of the United States,
an almost promiscuous slaughter occurred, in which it is
estimated that over 242,000 seals were killed. In 1869
about 87,000 seals in all were killed, making an average
number for each of the three years, 1867 to 1869, of over
130,000, and including large numbers of females.
44, The effect of the irregular and excessive killing on
the breeding islands in these three years (long before pe-
lagic sealing had grown to be of any importance) became
apparent in two principal ways: (1) the number of seals
diminished on the breeding islands to an extent much
greater than could be accounted for by the actual number
slaughtered, and at about the same date the seals were seen
in unprecedented abundance off the British Columbian
coast to the southward (facts clearly shown in the diagrams
and by figures elsewhere given for the catch); (2) the num-
ber of young produced in the three following years was
much less than before, and this, in conjunction with the
extraordinarily high limit of 100, 000 allowed by law to be
taken each year, commencing in 1871, speedily brought
about a very marked decrease in males of killable age.
Thus, in 1875, notwithstanding the generally optimistic
tone maintained in official reports, we find a first significant
note of warning, and economy of seal life is ineuleated. In
the same year the number of skins obtained was consider-
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
ably reduced in face of a steady market, and before the
decline in prices of the two succeeding years, which decline,
no doubt, accounts in part for the still smaller number of
skins taken in these two years.
9 '45. It is particularly important to note the effects
of the excessive killing of the years 1867-68-69,
which, combined with those ensuing from the slaughter of
male seals of particular ages in various years to 1876, can
be closely followed, chiefly by means of Captain Bryant’s
intelligent notes on this period, which are elsewhere sum-
marized (§ 810 et seq.).
46. It is clearly apparent, and is borne out by the expe-
rience of later years, that any severe disturbance of the
natural conditions on the breeding islands is at once re-
flected in changes of habits of the seals and in the irregu-
larities and overlapping of dates in the annual cycle of seal
life. Such changes are not prevented by the restriction of
killing to males, for an excess in number of males is a part
of the natural conditions; and any change in the proportion
of males, even if not pushed so far as to become in itself a
cause of decrease in numbers born, constitutes a true cause
of change in habits, and has a very special effect on the
time and place of landing of the females (§ 396 et seq.). An
excess In number of males, with the consequent competition
for females, must, in all probability, further be regarded as
@ provision for maintaining the strength of the race as a
whole by means of natural selection, and in the case of the
fur-seal it is not possible to substitute for such provision
the artificial selection of breeding males, as is done with
animals under the control of man.
47. In 1870 the Pribylotf Islands were leased by the
United States to the Alaska Commercial Company, and the
number of seals to be killed for skins was fixed empirically
at 100,000 annually. This number was admitted at the
time by the best authorities to be experimental (§§ 810, 815),
and it was provided by Congress that the Secretary of the
Treasury might reduce the number allowed for killing if
found necessary, for the sake of preserving the seals and
with proportionate reduction of rent. Practically, how-
ever, and on grounds not publicly explained, it remained
unaltered, and became a fixed limit.
48. As early as 1875 and 1876 the number thus estab-
lished was officially reported as being too great, but it was
not reduced or changed during the entire twenty years’
term of the lease, except by an alteration made in the rela-
tive proportions to be killed on St. Paul and St. George
Islands in 1874, when also the time during which the kill-
ing for skins might progress was extended.
49, The limit thus fixed did not include seais killed for
food at seasons or of ages at which the skins were not mer-
chantable; and, as a result, the total recorded take of seals
on the islands in each full year of the lease but three,
actually exceeded 100,000. Of these three exceptional
years, one falls below 100, 000 by a very small amount only,
while two are considerably below it. Thus, excluding the
first year, the number kiuown to have been killed in each
Changes pro-
duced by dis-
turbance.
Killing fixed
at 100,000,
Reported too
high.
Actual killing
exceeded 100,000.
22
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
of the nineteen succeeding years of the lease averages
103,147. The official figures for the entire twenty years of
the lease further show that, during this term, 129,530 seals,
ineluding about 93,000 unweaned young, or “paps, ” were
killed for food or otherwise, of which the skins were not
marketable; this waste alone being more than 7 per cent.
of the whole number killed.
50. These totals, however, do not include seals lost or
destroyed in various ways incidental to the modes prac-
tised in driving and killing (§ 704 et seq.), nor those taken
or killed in raids (§ 727 et seq.), or other illegal ways con-
sequent on the imperfect protection of the islands. These
together would raise the figures representing the annual
killing by a very material though unknown amount. Lieu-
tenant Maynard, in his report written in 1874, estimates
the total number of seals killed each year about that date
at 112,000. According to Bryant (‘Monograph of North
American Pinnepeds, ” p. 410), the total number of seals
actually killed upon the islands during the first six years
of the United States control amounted to 110,000 annually.
51. The killing since 1867 of so large a number of seals
on the Pribyloft Islands thus constituted a draft on their
seal life of a character never before attempted, and more
than twice as- great as any similar demand of which com-
parable records have been preserved; the annual average,
as above stated, for the previous eighty years, having been
about 34,000.
52. The various reports on the condition of the seals
resorting to the Pribyloff Islands in different years, and
other published information bearing on the same subject,
are often contradictory, and sometimes so manifestly inac-
curate, particularly in respect to the cruc ial point of the
teports afford number of seals, that it is difficult from these alone to form
unsatisfactory
data.
Evidence of
other kinds.
any satisfac tory or coherent idea of the actual state of seal
life during much of this period. These discrepancies in
part arise from the frequent changes which occurred in the
personnel ot the Government Agents and Company’s offi-
cers, in consequence of which no single method of ascer-
taining the condition of the “rookeries,” or of estimating
the number of seals frequenting the isl: inds, was long main-
tained: in part from the appearance in several cases of the
same individual, now in the capacity of an employé
10 of the Company , and again as @ supervising officer
of the Government. There are also, unfortunately,
certain groups of years during which no serious attempt
appears to have been made to record the true condition of
the breeding islands. This is particularly the case in years
between 1880 and 1889.
53. The killing on the isiands was, however, by law con-
fined to male seals, and it is, rather from the collateral
evidence afforded by allusiens to the proportion of virile
inales to females, together with other incidental references,
the meaning of w hich becomes clear when coupled with
local knowledge, than from many of the direct statements
published, that a true idea of the actual condition of seal
life on the islands during these years can be formed.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
54. The proper proportion in number of virile males to
adult females is a matter of importance, and in estimates,
made while the rookeries of the Pribyloif Islands were still
in excellent condition, there is a satisfactory measure of
agreement on this point. Bryant placed this proportion at
one male to nine to twelve females, while Elliott states the
mean number of females in a harem in 1872-74 at from five
to twenty (“Monograph of North American Pinnepeds,” p.
390; United States Census Report, p. 36). M.Grebnitzky,
Superintendent of the Commander Islands, and a naturalist
of pre-eminent experience in the facts of seal life, informed
us that when the proportion of females exceeded ten to each
mature male, he considered that too many males were being
killed, and that each harem should in no case contain more
than twenty females. When, therefore, we find the harems
in the Pribyloff Islands growing yearly larger, till at the
present time they surpass the proportions above mentioned
from four to eight times, it is reasonable to conclude that
in this change the effect of an excessive slaughter of young
males is rendered apparent.
55. Our own and all other local observations on the rook-
eries during the last few years prove that itis no uncommon
event to find a single male seal with a harem numbering
from forty to fifty, and even as Many as sixty to eighty,
females.
56. Further evidence with the same meaning is afforded
by the increasing number of barren females; by the dis-
turbance and change in the habits of the seals; by the actual
dearth of “killable” seals in the vicinity of the nearer rook-
eries, and the extension of driving (as early as 1879 or 1830)
to places which had previously been held in reserve and
which had seldom or never been drain upon in earlier years ;
by the driving of “killables” from the very margins of the
breeding rookeries, which should have remained undis-
turbed; by the longer time during which the killing required
to be continued in later years in order to enable the full
quota to be obtained, and by the larger number of under-
sized and otherwise ineligible animals, including females,
ruthlessly driven up in recent year's and turned away from
the killing grounds in an exhausted and bewildered if not
actually injured state. The proportion thus turned away,
according to the report ef the Special Treasury Agent in
1890, actually rose to 90 per cent. of the whole number
driven.
57. A critical investigation of the published matter,
together with the evidence personally obtained from many
sources and an examination of the local details of the rook-
eries and hauling grounds on the Pribyloff Islands, leads
us to believe that there has been a nearly continuous deteri-
oration in the condition of the rookeries and decrease in the
number of seals frequenting the islands from the time at
which these passed under the control of the United States,
and that although this decrease may possibly have been
interrupted, or even reversed, in some specially favourable
years, it was nevertheless real, and in the main persistent.
23
Proportions of
males to females.
Further sources
ot information.
Indicate con-
tinued decrease.
24
Number fixed
for killing too
high.
Not adaptable.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
58. There can be no doubt that the number fixed by law
and maintained for commercial killing on the breeding
islands has been much too great, and that the resulting
slaughter of more than 103,000 male seals in each year has
been more than the total volume of seal life could fairly
stand. The sparing of females in a degree prevented, for
the time being, the actual depletion of seals on the islands, -
and this, with the fact that the killing of immature males
does not immediately produce its effect on the “ rookeries,”
caused the apparent decrease to be at first gradual. As,
however, this effect was of a cumulative character, it could
not very long escape observation, and it was observed by
the natives, as we personally ascertained from them, to be
distinct and serious at least as early as 1882 or 1883, while
Colonel Murray, the Government Agent, and Mr. Elliott,
the Special Treasury Agent, in their several reports to the
Treasury, trace the beginning of the notable diminution
back as far as 1879 or 1880. Other evidence of a cireum-
stantial rather than a direct character, elsewhere detailed,
enables the earlier effects of the general decrease to be fol-
lowed still further back (§ 674 et seq.).
59. It is particularly necessary to note that the adoption
of a high fixed number to be killed each year, practically
prevented such a system of adaptable control, based
cb on the observed facts of each year, as would have
enabled the best results to have been obtained and
due provision to have been made in time to counteract the
Pelagic sealing
afurtherdrafton
seal life.
effects of unfavourable seasons or of other extraneous con-
ditions affecting seal life. The system adopted was in fact
purely artificial, and one not suited to the natural require-
ments of the case.
(C.)—WSealing at Sea.
60. From the circumstances above noted, the maintenance
of seal life in the North Pacific was threatened and reduced
to a critical state in consequence of the methods adopted
on the breeding isiands, where the seals were drawn upon
annually to, and even beyond, the utmost limits possible
apart from depletion, and where, in consequence of the
enlarged season of commercial killing and the allowance
of “food killing” during the entire time in which any seals
resorted to the islands, these animals had practically no
undisturbed season of respite. At this time a new factor
also tending towards decrease appeared in the form of
““Helagic sealing,” a phrase applied specially to the hunt-
Its origin and
development.
ing of the fur-seals on the open sea, schooners or other small
vessels being employed as a base of operations.
61. This particular method of sealing originated as a
natural outgrowth from that practised from time imime-
morial by the natives of the coast of British Columbia, and
parts of South-eastern Alaska and the State of Washington.
In this industry these natives have from the first been
largely interested, though it has been taken up, fostered,
and directed by the Whites. It was thus in its mode of
origin a perfectly natural and iegitimate development of
the native modes of hunting (§ 571 et seq.).
REPORT OF BRI'TISH COMMISSIONERS.
62. Pelagic sealing, as thus by degrees expanded into an
finportant industry, was an essentially novel method of tak-
ing the fur-seal consequent on the peculiar habits and mari-
time genius of the native peoples of the west coast of North
America, and particularly of those in British Columbia, and
the vicinity of Cape Flattery in the adjacent State of Wash-
ington. It was from the first, and still is, an important
source of revenue to a native population, numbering many
thousands, as well as a help to their advancement in civili-
zation.
63. Under the circumstances above described as prevail-
ing on the breeding islands, the growth of this new industry,
however, meant a further acceleration of the rate of dimi-
nution of the fur-seal of the North Pacific as a whole.
64, The hunting of the fur-seal by the native peoples in
their own canoes, and using the shore as a base of opera-
tions, had been practised trom times which are prehistoric
for the West Coast; but the total number of seals thus
taken (save in certain exceptional years) was always small,
and it was not till about the year 1869 that the first practical
essays were made in taking the seals at sea with the assist-
ance of schooners provided with Indian hunting crews and
canoes. This method of hunting was initiated almost simul-
taneously, about the time mentioned, in British Columbia
and in the adjacent State of Washington.
65. It may here be particularly noted that the industry
thus developed in consequence of peculiar local conditions,
had never elsewhere appeared as a factor of commercial
importance, and that in so far as we have been able to dis-
cover by inquiries specially directed to this point, no ves-
sels carrying hunters for the purpose of taking seals at
large on the sea-surface had ever before frequented any seas
anywhere.
The vessels sailing from New England and from some
ritish ports, which Jjormerly, in considerable numbers,
made sealing voyages to the Southern Hemisphere (§ 834
et seq.), Slaug ohter ed the seals there only on shore and at the
breeding places, and this without any respect for the rights
of territorial dominion or property over the islands they
frequented. The ‘sealing fleet” employed in the Southern
Hemisphere has, therefore, at no time been of the same
character with that engaged in pelagic sealing in the North
Pacific.
66. For several years subsequent to its inception, pelagic
sealing remained in the hands of a few persons, and was
to so great an extent a trade secret that little information
can now be obtained respecting it. Thisis particularly the
case in regard to the sealing-vessels sailing from United
States por rts, some of which, although interested in pelagic
sealing proper, are known to have obtained many skins by
illegal raiding on the breeding islands from the earliest
ee of the control of these islands by the United States.
. From four schooners in 1878 and 1879 (about which
an the new development of sealing first began to attract
some attention), the sealing fleet owned in British Colum-
bia gradually increased, till in 1889 twenty-three, in 1590
25
TIndepen dent
native hunting.
Peculiar char-
acter of pelagic
sealing.
Its growth.
26
First pelagic
sealing in Beh-
ring’s Sea.
Decrease ob-
served on Priby-
off Tslands.
Measures prac-
tised to obtain
quota
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
12 twenty-nine, and in 1891 fifty vessels were employed
init. So far as known, the first of these vessels to
enter Behring Sea for purposes of sealing was the “ Mary
Ellen,” in 1884. In 1885 two of the British Columbian
vessels continued their voyage into Behring Sea, and in
the following year the entire fleet, then numbering eighteen
vessels (excepting two which were wrecked), did so.
The fifty vessels employed in 1891 were provided with
370 boats and canoes, and were manned by 1,083 Whites
and Indians.
68. Phe number of skins thus obtained grew in propor-
tions corresponding to the growth ef the fleet from 35,310
in 1889 to 43,315 in 1890, and to 49,615 in 1891. Only a
portion of these catches were, however, made within Beh-
ring Sea, and of this portion an increasing percentage was
obtained in the western region of that sea.
69. At least one vessel registered in the United States is
known to have entered Behring Sea for legitimate pelagic
sealing as early as 188i, and, in this particular extension
of the industry, the Br itish Columbian sealers cannot
therefore claim to be the pioneers.
70. The United States have for many years past strenu-
ously endeavoured to build up native maritime industry.
In this pelagic sealing they undoubtedly have on the
Pacific coast a useful nursery for seamen. The industry
of whaling las shown a serious falling-off in recent years,
but that of sealing has exhibited a marked and steady
increase. In 1885 there were not ten vessels so employed.
In 1891 the sealing fleet owned in the United States num-
bered more than forty vessels, and the value of the catch
is reported to have exceeded 30,0001.
(D.)—Additional points connected with Sealing at Sea or
on Shore.
71. The decrease in the number of seals resorting to the
Pribyloff Islands is reported to have been more rapid since
1886 or 1887, and this has been attributed to the growth of
pelagic sealing. At the same time, the chief complaint
has been that a great proportion of the seals taken at sea
are females, whereas the most noticeable decrease observed
on the islands is in males. While, therefore, it may be
admitted that pelagic sealing must be held accountable for
its share in the total effect, the above-mentioned incom-
patible complaints cannot be received without question.
When a decrease became apparent on the islands, pru-
dence should have dictated some curtailment of the annual
Slaughter there in correspondence with the effect of the
new factor tending towards diminution.
72. No such curtailment, however, occurred. The Com-
pany holding the lease of these islands on fixed terms were
not interfered with, but continued to take their full legal
quota of skins without regard to the risk to seal life as a
whole. Not only so, but instead of reducing the catch,
the standard of weight of skins taken on the islands was
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. PA
steadily lowered so as to inelude a yeunger class of seals
under the designation of “killables.” Instead of skins
weighing 7 or 8 Ibs., those of 5 lbs. and (as we have ascer-
tained on excellent authority) even of 4 Ibs. and of 54 Ibs.
have been taken and were accepted by the Company as
early as 1889.
This is in marked contrast with the conduct of affairs on
the Commander Islands, where no seals yielding skins
below 7 Ibs. in weight have been allowed to be killed for
some years, and where in 1891, in order to afford a factor
of safety, the limiting weight of skins was raised to 8 lbs.
73. The Company holding the lease of the Pribyloff
Islands had, of course, its own interests in view, and the
period of its lease was drawing to a close; but it must be
added that no explanation has been offered by the Govern-
ment Agents in charge of the islands of the principles
under which they were guided to allow this lowering of
standards, with the concomitant encroachment on the
limits of breeding rookeries, and the extension of the area
of driving to places hitherto held in reserve.
74, Summarizing the causes of waste of seal life involved |, Waste of seal
in the methods actually practised in killing seals on the’
Pribyloff Islands (§ 659 e¢ seq.), we find the following to be
the most serious:
(i.) The killing of unweaned “pups” and of “stagey’
seals for “food,” which together reached an average amount
equalling 7 per cent. of the total annual catch. The skins
of such seals are unmerchantable, and their slaughter is
now admitted to be unnecessary, but it has been allowed
to continue till the year 1891.
(ii.) Accidental killing of seals, due to over-driving, and
other violence inseparable from the mode of ‘“ driving”
and clubbing the seals. These evils had been fully dealt
with by the United States Special Agent in his report
for 1890,
13 (ili.) ‘“Stampedes” upon the breeding rookeries,
caused by efforts to secure “drives” too close to
their borders, or to carelessness of various kinds. -These
are especially destructive to ‘* pups,” which are trampled
to death by the older seals.
(iv.) Effects of disturbance on the breeding rookeries,
and of distress and fright resulting from “driving,” which,
it is believed, causes many motlfers with young, as well as
other classes of seals, to leave the breeding islands pre-
maturely.
(v.) Surreptitious killing of seals by unauthorized per-
sons on the islands. This may not have reached great
dimensions, but is known to have occurred, and no statis-
tics can be obtained respecting it.
(vi.) Raids upon the rookeries, rendered possible by the
laxity of control and supervision, which prove most de-
structive to all classes of seals engaged in breeding, and
especially-to nursing mothers and “pups.”
75. The official statistics show, besides the seals killed
of which the skins were accepted for shipment, only those
killed for “food,” and of which the skins were rejected.
Y)
28 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
All the incidental causes of loss above noted are unac-
counted for, and the actual percentage of wastage in secur-
ing the annual quota of skins since the Alaska purchase
thus remains indeterminate, but must have been great. It
is believed to have exceeded 10 per cent., and may well
have reached 20 per cent. on the whole number a skins
accepted.
Diffieultyot 76. Itis thus clear that the slaughter of seals upon the
resulating shore breeding islands is in itself an essentially critical and dan-
i¥ gerous method of killing, which, although established by
long custom, can scarcely be otherwise justified. No reg-
ulations which have heretofore been devised have even
theoretically removed such dangers. Till quite recently,
altogether insufficient care has been exercised in carrying
out existing regulations; and the facts above referred to
show clearly in what way, notwithstanding stated rules,
and, in the absence of thoroughly independent and trained
supervision, such rules may be so interpreted or strained’
as to permit the most serious damage to seal life as a whole.
Allegations %77. Against the methods of pelagic sealing two principal
against” pelagic lines of criticism and of attack have been developed, and
ee both have been so persistently urged in various ways, that
they appear to have achieved a degree of recognition by .
the uninformed altogether unwarranted by the facts, in so
far as we have been able to ascertain them, though in both
there is an underlying measure of truth. It is stated (1)
that almost the entire pelagic catch consists of females;
(2) that a very large proportion of the seals actually killed
at sea are lost.
_Killing of 78, It is undoubtedly true that a considerable proportion
females. a < 5 = :
of the seals taken at sea are females, as all seals of suit-
able size are killed without discrimination of sex. This is,
in part, however, a direct corollary of the extent and
methods of killing upon the breeding islands, where, practi-
cally, in late years, all males reaching the shore have been
legally killable, and where, as a matter of fact, nearly all
the young males which land have been persistently killed
for some years, with the nécessary result of leaving fewer
killable males in proportion to females to be taken at sea.
79. The precise bearings on the industry as a whole of
the character and composition of the pelagic catch made
along various parts of the coast and in Behring Sea are
discussed at greater length elsewhere (§ 633 et seq.), but it
may be here noted that the great surplus of females, result-
ing from the practice just alluded to, has certainly ren-
dered the killing of considerable numbers of these at sea
less harmful in its effect than it might otherwise have
been.
80. To assume that the killing of animals of the female
sex is in itself reprehensible or inhuman, is to make an
assumption affecting all cases where animals are preserved
or domesticated by man. Most civilized nations, in accord-
ance with the dictates of humanity as well as those of self-
interest, make legislative provision for the protection of
wild animals during the necessary periods of bringing
forth and of rearing their young; but the killing of females
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS,
is universally recognized as permissible if only to preserve
the normal proportion of the sexes. This is the case in
all instances of game preservation and stock raising, and
in the particular example of the fur-seal, it is numerically
demonstrable that, in maintaining a constant total of Seals,
a cervain proportion of females should be annually avail-
able for killing. The killing of gravid females must, how-
ever, be deprecated as specifically injurious, and in any
measures proposed for the regulation of seal hunting
should receive special attention.
81. Respecting the number of seals lost after being killed
at sea, a large mass of evidence has been accumulated, not
alone directly from the pelagic sealers proper, but also
from independent native hunters, both Indian and Aleut,
and from other sources of a disinterested character. The
result of this goes to show that the asserted wastefulness
of the methods employed is gravely exaggerated by
14 common report, and that there has been marked
improvement in this respect due to the increasing
experience of the hunters (§ 613 et seq.).
82. Against this expert testimony we find scarcely more
than supposititious statements quoted and requoted, which,
when traced back to their sources, are discovered to rest
either on very limited experience or on very doubtful au-
thority; in some of which the number of seals fired at is
hopelessly confused with the number killed, while in others
it is even assumed that the number of rounds of ammuni-
tion disposed of represents the number of seals killed. We
have thought it well to follow up all the statements upon
which these allegations and hypothetical calculations are
based, and practically all of these are summarised else-
where (§ 614), and call for no further comment here. It is
certain that inexperienced hunters miss many seals, and
lose a considerable proportion of those hit, but such purely
negative results cannot rightly be assumed to have any
bearing’on the number lost by skilled hunters, such as con-
stitute the crews of the successful sealers.
83. More recently a further accusation has been made
against the practice of pelagic sealing, to the effect that
large numbers of females, with young upon the breeding
islands, are killed at sea, and that in consequence many of
the young die. The consideration of this point involves so
many facts of seal life that it cannot be treated at length
here; but it may be mentioned that, when upon the Priby-
loff Islands in 1891, we ourselves were the first to note and
to draw attention to the occurrence of a considerable num-
ber of dead “‘ pups” in certain parts of the rookery grounds.
Various explanations of this fact were offered by the resi-
dents of the islands, both Whites and Aleuts, but in no
instance was the killing of the mothers at sea at first
voluntarily advanced by them as a principal cause. The
actual. circumstances, closely investigated by us, were,
indeed, such as to call for some other explanation, as else-
where detailed (§ 344 et seq.). It is, nevertheless, certain
that mothers are sometimes killed at sea, especially in
proximity to the shore fronts, and it is chiefly upon this
29
Percentage lost
of seals killed.
Mortality of
young seals.
30
Effect
prices.
of high
Seals becom-
ing more pelagic.
More than ever
found at sea.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
ground a radius of protection about the breeding islands,
extending beyond the ordinary limit of territorial juris-
diction, is advocated as a measure of material benefit.
84. In addition to the circumstances obtaining on the
breeding islands, and the inception and growth of pelagic
sealing, the high prices ruling for skins during the past
few years have to a considerable extent stimulated the
hunting of seals by natives all along the coast. They have
also tended to incite, on the part of the more lawless
sealers, raids upon the shores of the breeding islands
themselves, many of which have proved successful in con-
sequence of the wholly inadequate protection which has
heretofore been accorded to these shores; but, so far as we
have been able to ascertain, no schooners sailing from
British Columbia under the British flag have even been
detected as participants in such raids on the Pribyloff
Islands.
(i.)—ormer and present Condition of the Industry.
85, Perhaps the most notable result of the above-men-
tioned co-operating causes, embracing the disturbance of
conditions on the breeding islands consequent on close and
persistent driving and great paucity of males, on raids
made upon the shores of the islands, and on hunting at sea
during the northward migration of the seals, has been to
render that animal even more than before strictly pelagic
in habit.
86. Seals not actually engaged in breeding, including
young seals of both sexes and barren or unimpregnated,
though mature females, have either not landed upon the
isiands, or have remained there for but a short time; and
thus the aggregate number to be seen on shore at any one
time has of late years become notably reduced.
87. At the same time, the general consensus of the state-
ments obtained from persons occupied in pelagic sealing
goes to show that there has been no similar decrease in the
number of seals found at sea, but rather a possible increase
during the corresponding years. The evidence of a gen-
eral kind to this effect does not stand alone, but is fully
confirmed by an analysis of the annual catch of the British
Columbian sealing fleet for the past few years, as exhibited
in the subjoined table, in which the average number of
skins obtained to each canoe or boat, and to each man
employed in the pelagic sealing industry is given:
| Number of
| Seals per
| Number of
15 Year. x | Seals
| Bey | per Man.
| \9
TRE SeBC cra G OO OA aor R AOD ON bunDlb Hae somos OOM US shee ae KesDd Sad 164 | 56
DOBBS ae Spee cee Ne ere ae Oe nN ene ones rains ae aay Ar am aaa eeetee 143 | 55
TEESE EM SSSR 2 eee Scie RAPE I 58 Soy eens Seen ot eee ae 156 58
1 OE SCRE SORE Wears Sea a Tos A ommer SMSO e Opera a Snape | 160 59
SONS erates ee ese ec see eee cere ee siete Sears Scie ele eet ate olere 46
1354 |
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Weather and other obvious circumstances, including
those connected with the uncertain status of the sealers in
respect to seizure, have of course affected the figures for
the various years to a considerable extent; but speaking
generally, the results show a remarkable uniformity, and
taking into consideration the measures adopted in 1891
under the modus vivendi, the results of pelagic sealing in
this year are particularly noteworthy and to the point, see-
ing that of the fifty schooners employed, nearly all were
turned back before the expiry of the usual hunting season.
88. At sea, however, it is generally acknowledged that
the seals are becoming from year to year more and more
difficult of approach and capture, facts specially noted by
the native independent hunters, because specially affecting
their catch by reason of the greater distance from shore to
which it is now necessary to go in search of seals.
89. While, therefore, it is certain that, in recent years,
dl
More wary
than formerly.
Diminution
on Pribyloftf,
the number of seals to be found upon the Pribyloff Islands Tslanas.
has very considerably decreased, it is uncertain to what
extent this particular decrease has been compensated for,
or is counterbalanced by the greater dispersion of seals at
sea. Under all the circumstances, it must be considered
as a remarkable evidence of the resistance of seal life to
unfavourable treatment, that the apparent decrease upon
the islands has not been even greater.
90. Respecting the actual amount of this decrease upon
the Pribyloff Islands, it is difficult to arrive at anything
like precise conclusions, in consequence of the lack of trust-
worthy evidence of a comparable nature for the various
years. A study of the available published data, made in
connection with a personal examination of the various
breeding grounds themselves, has convinced us, however,
that some, if not all, the estimates of the total number of
seals made in the earlier years of the term of the Alaska
Commercial Company have been greatly exaggerated, while
reports made in 1890, however accurate in themselves, have,
because compared with these overdrawn estimates, exag-
gerated the amount of the decrease.
91. The alarming forecasts as to the condition of the
breeding islands based upon reports made in 1890, have,
fortunately, not been verified by the facts in 1891, as per-
sonally observed by us. If, indeed, the correctness of some
of these reports for 1890 be admitted, the rookeries must
have materially improved in condition in 1891, while all
the evidence collected indicates that they were, in 1891, in
at least as good condition as they were in the preceding
year.
92. On the Commander Islands, where the breeding rook-
eries have undoubtedly been more carefully and systemat-
ically supervised, the number of seals seen has gradually
increased for many years, and has in late years apparently
held its own up to the present year, in which a decrease
has been noted. There is reason to believe, however, that
the increase ceased in 1589 or 1890, and was replaced by a
deficit in 1891 in consequence of the number of skins taken
in the two foregoing years, which greatly exceeded the
Diminution on
Commander
Islands,
32 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
average, presumably because these years were the last of
the Alaska Commercial Company’s lease of these islands.
Reasonable proof is thus again afforded that the sum total
of seal life on the breeding islands is affected most directly
by excessive killing on shore.
peterien iat ees 93. In nearly all that has heretofore been written on the
plementary. fur-Seal of the North Pacific, attention has been too nar-
rowly confined to such observations as could be made upon
the breeding islands, and the fact that the greater part of
the life of the seals is spent, not upon these islands, but at
large on the ocean, has been to a great extent lost sight of.
This naturally happened from the circumstance that those
in any way interested in the seals, till the beginning of
pelagic sealing, remained upon the ‘breeding islands, and
knew merely what could be ascertained there. The data
now obtained at sea, for the first time enables the migra-
tion routes and the winter as well as the summer habitat
of the fur-seal to be clearly understood, and it becomes
evident that, in considering the condition of seal life as a
whoie, we must inciude, not only the observations made
on the islands, but also the complementary, and, in part,
countervailing, facts noted at sea.
eGongral-veons NG 94, A review in detail of all the available facts,
most of which have been alluded to or outlined in
the foregoing part of this summary, leads us to believe
that there has been, in the main, a gradual reduction in
the total volume of seal life in the North Pacific, dating
back to a period approximately coincident with the excess-
ive and irregular killing on the Pribyloff Islands in 1867 to
1869, but that this reduction in total volume has not in late
years been nearly so rapid as the observed decrease in num-
bers upon the Pribyloff breeding islands in the correspond-
ing years. Such a review sugvests that if suitable and
moder ate regulations be now adopted and carried out, the
decrease may be arrested, and no danger of the proximate
depletion of the fur-seal or destruction of the fur-seal fishery
need be anticipated.
Possibleresult. 95, If, however, the inflexible and heavy draft on seal
life in the past should be maintained on the breeding
islands, while pelagic sealing also continues to increase at
the present ratio, it is practically certain that the whole
number of seals must, in the course of a few years, become
further reduced to such a degree as to cause the industries
based upon their capture to lose all importance from a
commercial point of view. The continued undue disturb-
ance of the seals must likewise tend to cause them to
abandon their present haunts.
Industrial con. 96. Apart, therefore, from such merely ethical consider-
siderations. ations as have from time to time been advanced in favour
of the preservation of the fur-seal, but which appear to
have no special bearing upon this more than on any other
animal in a state of nature, the intrinsic value of the fur
of the seals together with the material interests involved
in the taking and the dressing of the skins, seem to call for
such regulations as may result in the maintenance of the
fishery.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
97. A point, however, of grave but unrecognized impor-
tance, is the direct influence on the sealing industry of the
market for seal-skins. It is necessary to remember that
the requirements of this market may from time to time
altogether alter the regulations necessary. In the Atlantic
hair-seal fishery, for instance, the international regulations
became subject to the new requirements of a process by
which the hair of newly-born seals became commercially
valuable. Again, the actual price of the skins at any par-
ticular period depends largely upon the uncertain require-
ments of fashion; and it is known that the Alaska Com-
mercial Company, recognizing this fact when lessees of the
Pribyloff Islands, by various more or less direct methods,
did much to popularize and increase the market value of
the seal-skins, of which in the earlier years of their lease
they held a practical monopoly.
98. To render this point perfectly clear, it is only neces-
sary to quote the following expressions from the report of
the Congressional Committee of 1876 on the Alaska Com-
mercial Company :—“ Every art and appliance and much
money have been expended in the cultivation of a taste for
seal-skin furs, which the Alaska Commercial Company had
almost the exclusive control over. . . . By placing on
sale a larger number of skins than was required the prices
obtained would be lessefied, and the popular estimate of
this luxury depreciated, so that its present value would be
endangered and a change of fashion probably effected,
diverting it to some other fur, which might ruin the trade
altogether.”
99, The high price obtainable for the skins in recent
years has, however, been in itself a principal cause of the
increased activity in killing and hunting which now ap-
pears to threaten the industry. If, for any reason, the
price of seal-skins should fall below, or even nearly to, the
amount of the Government tax (10 dol. 25 ¢.) payable on
skins under the new lease of the Pribyloff Islands, then, on
the one hand, the lessees would no longer find it remuner-
ative to continue taking seals on shore, and, on the other,
the profits of sealing at sea would become so much reduced
as to discourage further enterprise in this direction.
100. It would thus appear that, as matters stand, a most
influential factor in respect to the fate of the fur-seal fishery
is one altogether removed from natural facts of seal life,
and that either the demand for seal-skins as a whole, or
the special size or kind of skins called for by the market,
may at any time be changed in such a manner as to intro-
duce new determining factors in the industry. It is there-
fore evident that, in a matter of such considerable import-
ance, some additional and possibly counteracting system
of regulation of an intelligent kind is desirable; that this
should include a consideration of the industrial features of
the case as well as of those relating to the fur-seal as an
animal, and should be susceptible of constant adaptation to
the changing requirements of the problem,
Pipi Vk 3
fs)
Regulations
desirable.
34
The case to be
met.
Interests at
sea and ashore.
Capital em-
ployed.
On the Priby-
loff Islands.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
alg II.—CONSIDERATIONS RELATING TO THE BASIS
UPON WHICH PRECAUTIONS MAY BE DEVISED
FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THE FUR-SEAL.
101. The case to be met in the North Pacific is outlined
in the foregoing paragraphs, and is treated in greater de-
tail in Part II of this Report. Broadly stated, it is that
too many seals are or may be killed, that there are too few
males on the breeding islands; and that the seals, being
so continually harassed and disturbed, may take to other
breeding and feeding places, or largely diminish in num-
bers, and in either case endanger and damage the existing
sealing industries.
(A.)—Interests involved.
102. In regard to interests, the sealing industry is nat-
urally divided into what may, for the sake of brevity, be
termed the shore and ocean interests respectively. The
rights in either case are indisputable, and the possessors of
one class of these rights will not willingly allow them to
be curtailed or done away with for the mere purpose of
enhancing the value of the rights of their commercial rivals.
Thus the only basis of settlement which is likely to be sat-
isfactory or permanent is that of mutual concession, by
means of reciprocal and equivalent curtailments of right,
in so far as may be necessary for the preservation of the
fur-seal.
103. It may be added, that the line of division between
the shore and ocean interests is not an international one,
and that the question of compromise as between the two
industries cannot, in consequence, beregarded strictly from
an international point of view. If we may judge from the
respective number of vessels employed, the interest of citi-
zens of the United States in pelagic sealing is at the pres-
ent time approaching to an equality with that of Canada;
while Germany and Japan have been or are represented
in sealing at sea, and other flags may at any time appear.
The shore rights, again, are at present chiefly divided
between the United States and Russia, although Japan
owns some smaller resorts of the fur-seal.
104. Confining ourselves more strictly to the eastern part
of the North Pacific, to which the present discussion directly
relates, a comparison may be instituted between the amount
of capital employed in the prosecution of sealing on shore
and at sea, and of the other interests involved.
105, Atthe present time the actual value of the buildings,
plant, and equipment of the North American Commercial
Company, on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, is esti-
mated not to exceed 130,000 dollars (26,0001.). Adding to
this a further sum to cover other items of capital less directly
connected with the islands themselves, the entire invested
capital would probably be over-stated at 200,000 dollars
(40,0001.); and it is not to be forgotten that the Companies
leasing the seal islands habitually do a profitable retail trade
in supplies, &e., with the natives and others in addition to
acquiring the seal-skins,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
106. Theestimated aggregate value of the British Colum-
bian vessels employed in sealing, with their equipment, as
they sailed in 1891,-was 359,000 dollars (72,000/.). It has
been asserted that only a portion of this total, correspond-
ing with the length of the period in each year in which
these vessels are actually engaged in sealing, should be
taken as the capital invested. This statement is, however,
as a matter of fact, incorrect. The sealing vessels are sel-
dom used in or fitted tor other employment, and nearly all
of them remain laid up in harbour between the dates of the
closing and opening of the sealing season—that is, between
October and January, or February.
107. Adding to the above amount an estimate of the
value of the United States sealing fleet in the same year,
which, it has been ascertained, exceeds 250,000 dollars
(50, 000, ), and may probably amount to 300, ,060 dollars
(60,0001.), an aggregate amount of capital of about 650,000
dollars (130,0001.) is represented by the combined fleets.
In the foregoing estimates, no mention is made of the
revenue accruing to the Government of the United States
from the lease of the Pribyloff Islands to the sealing Com-
pany.
108. Itis difficult to present a numerically accurate state-
ment showing the magnitude of the several interests as
represented by the number of skins taken on the Pribyloft
Islands and at sea respectively. During the past few
years, the statistics of the Canadian pelagic catch have
been fully and carefully recorded; but of the catches made
by the numerous vessels sailing from ports in the United
States, no trustworthy or complete official or trade statis-
tics appear to exist. Certain approximate figures for the
total pelagic catch have, however, been obtained,
18 the difference between which and those representing
the Canadian pelagic cateh, compared with other
incomplete statistics, may be roughly assumed as showing
the catch by United States vessels. These totals include,
however, in some cases, skins taken on seizure from both
Canadian and United States vessels. The statement thus
presented may be considered as at least sufficiently accu-
rate to indicate the relative importance and growth of the
shore and sea industries respectively. The catehes made
by United States vessels are comparatively small in pro-
portion to the number of vessels employed, chiefiy because
of the lack of skilled hunters.
35
In the Cana-
dian vessels.
Total.
Comparative
number of skins
taken.
36 REPORT OF
BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
109, These statistics may be tabulated as follows:
|
| Skins
| taken on
Year. the Priby-
| loff Is-
|
Skins
taken at
sea by
Canadian
lands. | Vessels.
1886 85, 455
’
1887 | 90,770
1888 86, 995
1889 78, 623
1890 | 20, 945 |
1891 12, 070 |
24, 344
20, 266
24, 329
swan dl
27, 868 |
49, 615
Approximate
totals of Skins
taken at sea
(records of
catch by
United States
vessels being
fragmentary).
Remarks.
36, 000
37, 500
?
fos
42, 870
51, 560
68, 000 |
| First seizures by United States Govern-
ment. Three Canadian and one United
States vessel seized.
Six Canadian and ten United States vessels
seized.
No seizures made.
Four Canadian and two United States ves-
sels seized.
| No seizures made. Killing stopped on
Pribyloff Islands, at figures stated, by
United States Government Agent.
Vessels turned back from Behring Sea be-
fore completion of voyages. Killing on
Pribyloft Islands, limited to 7,500 under
modus vivendi, actually reached 12,071.
110. In explanation of the above table, it may be added:
(1) That the figures given for the Pribyloff Islands are those
of the skins actually accepted for shipment in each year by
the lessees, and are therefore neither identical with those
representing the shipments made yearly, nor with those
elsewhere given for the wholenumber of seals killed in each
year; (2) that the relatively small coast catch made by the
Indians in their own canoes and without the aid of sealing-
vessels is not included in the pelagic catch; (3) that the
pelagic catch as given includesskins taken both outside and
within Behring Sea, and both in the eastern and western
parts of that sea, as well as such skins as were obtained by
raids made on shore on the breeding islands.
Numberofmen 111. The number of men employed inthe British Colum-
employed: bian sealing fleet alone, in this year (1891), was 1,083, in the
United States fieet about 750, making a total of about 1,830
persons earning their livelihood by this means, of whom
about 1,450 are White and 400 Indians. In the shore seal-
ing upon the Pribyloff Islands the number of men employed
is about 10 Whites and 80 “natives.”
Native inter- 112, Upon the Pribyloff Islands the whole “native” pop-
ests.
fur-seal numbers under 300,
necessity of providing for the support of these particular
It isnot so generally recognized, however, that
in British Columbia probably 1,500 or 2,000 natives depend
upon the earnings of about 370 Indian hunters employed
“natives.”
in the sealing fleet.
ulation deriving its support from the industry of killing the
Much has been said as to the
The earnings of these hunters thus
represent much of the support of a considerable part of
the entire native population of the west coast of Vancouver
Island.
Native inde. 113, The direct interest in sealing of the Indian tribes of
pendent sealing. British Columbia, parts of Alaska, and the State of Wash-
ington is, moreover, not confined to their share in pelagic
sealing” proper.
The results of independent hunting, car-
ried on for the most part in canoes from the shore by men
x REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 37
who do not ship in sealing-vessels, is, from the point of view
of the Indians themselves, not inconsiderable. It amounts
for the British Columbian coast alone (§ 569) to an annual
money value of about 30,000 dollars (6,000/.), besides a con-
siderable food value represented by the seal flesh and fat.
This independent native hunting is undoubtedly a prim-
itive vested interest of the coast tribes, and its character
in this respect is Strengthened by the fact, now made clear,
that the winter home of the fur-seal lies along, and is adja-
cent to, the part of the coast which these seal-hunting tribes
inhabit.
1) 114. In regard, then, to the interests likely to be summary.
affected by any measures of preservation, it is evi-
dent that much the largest amount of invested capital is
that engaged in pelagic sealing, while the most important
native interest involved is that of the Indians who take
seals either along the coast or as engaged hunters in the
schooners. On the islands there is far less capital employed,
and the number of natives earning a livelihood is relatively
small.
(B.)\—Principles involved,
115. Passing from the interests to a more special consid- Protection both
eration of the principles involved in the protection of the Qu,SUere #"* *
fur-seal, it is in the first place clear, in view of the habits
and range of migration of this animal, that unlimited kill-
ing, whether practised on shore or at sea, must ultimately
result in destroying the prosperity of the sealing industry
as a whole, and, therefore, that any measure of protection,
to be effective, must include both areas.
116. It is, moreover, equally clear, from the known facts, Fasier onshore.
that efficient protection is much more easily afforded on the
breeding islands than at sea. The control of the number
of seals killed on shore might easily be made absolute, and,
as the area of the breeding islands is small, it should not
be difficult to completely safeguard these from raiding by
outsiders and from other illegal acts.
117. The danger to seal life on the breeding islands is, | Greater anger
on the other hand, and for reasons of a similar kinds Pate anes = ee
ticularly great. It is chiefly by the persistent killing of
all males between certain ages upon the Pribyloff Islands
that the sealing industry is immediately threatened. ‘To
killing carried out on shore at the breeding season the
depletion of the fur-seals of the Southern Hemisphere is
entirely due, and, as we have seen, as an effect of such
killing, long before the inception of pelagic sealing, the
rookeries of the Pribyloff Islands were more than once
brought to the verge of depletion.
It is certain that by excessive killing on the breeding
islands, to whatever class of seals dir ected, the sealing
industry as a whole might without difficulty be ruined.
118. In sealing at sea the conditions are categorically , bess danger at
different, for it is evident that by reason of the very method ~~
of hunting the profits must decrease, other things being
equal, in a ratio much greater than that of any decrease
in the number of seals, and that there is therefore inherent
38
Protection sea
alone quite inad-
equate.
Suggested pre-
hibition on shore.
New methods
of contro! neces-
sary.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. i
an automatic principle of regulation sufficient to prevent
the possible destruction of the industry if practised only
at sea. The growthof pelagic sealing proper, even though
so recent in its origin, already begins to contribute experi-
ence in support of this view. The seals when at sea occupy
a given area of surface, and there is thus a natural limit to
the number of boats or eanoes which can work that area
without interfering to a certain extent with each other’s
success. The increasing wariness of the seal has already
been alluded to, and it is also to be borne in mind that seal-
ing at sea can only be carried on in calm weather, seals
obtaining absolute “rest” while stormy weather prevails.
119. It is, therefore, abundantly evident, if we judge by
actual experience, that a contro! of seal life beginning and
eee with protection at sea, either partial or absolute,
xan do no more than palliate, and certainly cannot mate-
ley lessen, the danger to seal life as a whole, unless such
control be devised and adopted in close co- oper ation with
agreed-upon equivalent measures on the breeding islands.
”120. Whether from the point of view of expediency or
from that of justice, this must be the dominant principle of
any regulation, and while it is improbable that any scheme
of measures would be seriously ‘proposed which neglects
this principle, it cannot be too plainly stated that if the
attempt is made to regulate the killing of seals on shore or
at sea without the provision of concurrent restrictions upon
the other method, the result at best would be a curtailment
of slaughter in one direction, the door being left open to a
more than equivalent slaughter in the other, and no security
being obtained. It therefore follows that, as one class of
restrictions must be applied within jurisdictional limits, and
the other requires regulations applicable to all comers upon
the high seas, the subject of measures must be considered
as one of conventional agreement, concession, or bargain
as between the Powers interested. It will also be remem-
bered, that the primary plea for such an arrangement has
been that advanced in their own interest by the possessors
of the breeding islands; but it is believed, on the other
hand, that had no such plea been made, the interests of
the pelagic sealers would, in the natural course of events,
have led them to press for a better protection of the breed-
ing places of the seals ashore, in the interests of their own
branch of the industry.
20 121. It has been pointed out, and we believe it to
be probable, that if all killing of seals were prohibited
on the breeding islands, and these were strictly protected
and safe-guar ded against encroachment of any kind, sealing
at sea might be indefinitely continued without any "notable
diminution, in consequence of the self-regulative tendency
of this industry
122, The natural development of pelagic methods of seal-
ing has rendered it now no longer possible to preserve the
seals mer ely by restricting the catch on the breeding islands,
and the old methods of utilizing the seals on these islands,
and of affording them a measure of protection there during
the season at which they come to land for breeding purposes,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
have become in their nature ineffective and inappropriate,
especially in view of the sea sealing, which, at the time
these methods were adopted, was practically unknown.
The added knowledge of the fur-seal now gained renders
it further necessary to recognize it as an essentially pelagic
animal, which, at a certain season of each year, resorts to
the land. Thus, the older and cruder methods of regula-
tion have become unsound and in large measure useless,
and the new conditions which have arisen require to be
faced, if it is desired to obviate all danger of commercial
extermination.
123. Besides the general right of all to hunt and take the
fur-seal on the high seas, there are, however, some special
interests in such hunting, of a prescriptive kind, arising from
use and immemorial custom, such as those of the “natives”
of the Pribyloftf Islands, and of the inhabitants of the Aleu-
tian Islands, of South-eastern Alaska, of the coast of Brit-
ish Columbia, and of the State of Washington. There are
alse rights dependent on local position, such as those of the
Governments possessing the breeding islands and those
controlling the territorial waters in or adjacent to which
the seals spend the winter half of the year. Such rights
do not, however, depend on position only, but also on the
fact that the seals necessarily derive their sustenance from
the fish which frequent these waters, which, if not thus
consumed by the seals, would be available for capture by
the people of the adjacent coasts. The rights of this kind
which flow from the possession of the br eeding ¢ islands are
well known and generally acknowledged, but those of a
similar nature resulting from the situation of the winter
home of the seal along the coast of British Columbia have
not till lateiy been fully appreciated.
124, Referring more particularly to the Pribyloff Islands,
it must perhaps. be assumed that no arrangement would be
entertained which would throw the cost of the setting apart
of these islands as breeding grounds on the United States
Government, together with that of the support of some 300
natives.
It may be noted, however, that some such arrangement
would offer perhaps the best and simplest solution of the
present conflict of interests, for the citizens of the United
States would still possess equal rights with all others to
take seals at sea, and in consequence of the proximity of
their territory to the sealing grounds, they would probably
become the principal beneficiaries.
125. Anysuch disinterested protection of breeding islands
either by Russia or the United States would possess the
extreme simplicity of being entirely under the control of
a single Government, whereas in every other project it
becomes necessary to face the far more difficult problem of
international agreement to some code of regulations involy-
ing an accompanying curtailment of rights. In other
words, any such arrangement must be viewed either as a
concession of certain rights on the high seas, or a conces-
sion of peculiar rights devolving from territorial possession
of the breeding islands of the seal, made in each case for
39
Various rights
involved.
Prohibition on
) Pribylofts.
Needs no inter-
national regula-
tions.
40)
The ruling
principle of pro
tection.
Rights at sea
and on breeding
islands com-
pared.
Measures
adopted
where.
else
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
the purpose of inducing equivalent concessions on the other
side in the common interest.
126, For practical purposes, the main consideration is
that any scheme of measures of protection shall absolutely
control, so far aS may be necessary, any and every method
of taking seals; and from industrial considerations, and in
order properly to determine on reciprocal concessions, it is
necessary to assume some ruling principle in accordance
with which these shall be gover ned, and such may be found,
in arough way, in postulating a parity of interests as be-
tween pel: agic sealing and sealing on the breeding islands.
This would involve the idea that any regulation of the
fishery, as a whole, should be so framed as to afford as
nearly as possible an equal share in benefit or proceeds to
eee two interests.
127. Inasmuch as the United States and Russia, with in
a minor degree Japan, alone have direct interests in the
breeding islands, while all other nations share with them
the undoubted right of sealing on the high seas, it may at
first sight appear inequitable that any basis of arrangement
giving so large a share to the possessors of the breeding
islands and involving so general a curtailment of common
rights should be contemplated.
128, The exceptionally favourable position which
21 the United States and Russia would hold under such
a basis of arrangement is, however, to some extent
justified by the fact, that upon these Governments would
devolve the expense and responsibility of efficiently con-
trolling and guarding the breeding islands of the seals. It
may. be noted that the present time is one specially favour-
able to some such arrangement, because Great Britain and
the United States alone possess considerable sealing fleets,
and it 1s probable that any regulations agreed upon by
these two Governments (especially if also approved by
Russia) would meet with the ready concurrence of other
Powers at present but slightly interested, or with-merely a
potential concern in the matter.
129, In dealing with specific measures of preservation, it
may be well to bear in mind that more or less effective steps
have already been taken for this pupose in other parts of
the world besides the Pribyloff and Commander Islands.
It is wholly in accordance with long experience in game
protection in the United Kingdom that the tendency has
arisen in various parts of the British Empire to protect the
fur-seal. In Australasia, in South Africa, and in the Falk-
land Islands, regulations have been adopted from time to
time with this object. Further precedents of a specially
appropriate character are found in the regulations of the
Newfoundland Government for the control of the great hair-
seal fishery, and in the Jan-Mayen International A gree-
ment, whereby a certain area of the North Atlantic, defined
by lines of latitude and longitude, has been subjected to
specific rules as to sealing since 1875, these rules affecting
the control of vessels, their captains, and crews.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
130. The principal modes of protection of a practical char-
acter which have been suggested for the North Pacific by
various authorities may be classed under the following
heads:
(a.) Time. Limit in period of sealing.
(b.) Number. Limit in number of seals taken.
(c.) Area. Limit in regions over which sealing may be
carried on.
(d.) Methods Improvement in methods of conducting
sealing.
131. Limitations of time have been placed most promi-
nently in the list of remedies; and, indeed, ‘“‘ close seasons”
have been popularly regarded as the main if not the only
remedy of a general kind. It is clear, however, in the
light of facts, that, for the purpose of limiting the total
numbers taken, a time limit is specially applicable only to
the pelagic industry, in which the number of seals taken
bears a direct ratio, other things being equal, to the length
of the season of hunting, and where the only way in which
a reduced catch would not result from a shortened season
would be by an increased number of vessels employed,
which would soon reach unremunerative limits. On the
breeding islands, on the contrary, limiting the time of kill-
ing does not necessarily limit the numbers taken, and the
only effective limit is one of number, This has been fully
acknowledged in the measures adopted throughout with
regard to the regulation of the catch on both the Pribyloff
and Commander Islands, where it is obvious that if but
one or two summer months in all were allowed for killing
and no other restrictions were applied, the number of seals
killed would become merely a question of the number of
men employed, and need only be limited by the exhaustion
of animals to kill.
132. With further reference to the effect of proposed
time limits or close seasons on the shore- and sea-sealing
respectively, and in order to prove that such an apparently
simple method of regulation is not equally applicable to
both industries, it may be shown that generally this effect
would be not only inequitable, but often diametrically
opposite in the two cases.
In pelagicsealing, the weather is usually such as to induce
afew vessels to go out in January, but the catches made in
this month are as a rule small. In February, March, and
April the conditions are usually better, and larger catches
are made. In May and June the seals are found further
to the north, and these are good sealing months; while in
July, August, and part of September sealing is conducted
in Behring Sea, and good catches are often made till such
time as the weather becomes so uncertain and rough as to
practically close the season.
133. Upon the Pribyloff Islands, though it has been the
custom to kill a certain number of seals for food at all times
during the period of five or five and a-half months in which
any seals are found on shore, the young males or ‘ bache-
lors” (which, together with virgin females, are practically
the only class which can be taken ashore in large numbers
Al
Parlin en: pried
modes of protec.
tion suggested.
Time limits:
Close seasons.
Effects differ at
sea and on shore.
On the Priby-
off Istands.,
Close se Bsome
thus not equally
applicable.
Other means of
regulation.
Combined limi-
tation of time and
number.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
without actually breaking up and destroying the breeding
rookeries) do not arrive in notable proportions till June,
and, in common with other seals upon the islands, become
“ sts agey, ” and incapable of yielding good skins about the
middle of August. The profitable killing on the Pribyloft
Islands is thus naturally limited, as a maximum, to a period
of about two months, and as a rule and under normal cir-
cumstances, the annual quota has been eompleted
22 within thirty to fifty working days, during which
the slaughter is carried on ata numerical ratio many
times greater than that attainable during any period of the
pelagic killing.
134. With seals killed at sea, the skins are never found
to be in a “ stagey” condition, as has been ascertained by
inquiries specially made on this point, and there is, there-
fore, no naturally definite close to the time of profitable
killing, such as eccurs on the islands. The markedly
‘““stagey” character of the skins at a particular season
appears to be confined to those seals which have remained
for a considerable time on the land.
135, Without, therefore, entering at length into a com-
parison of the respective effects of close seasons at sea or
on shore, it may be stated that, with the exception of the
months of July and August, any close time whatever would
have practically no effect on the killing on the islands, while
several of the months which might be chosen would seri-
ously affect sealing at sea. If, again, June or July should
be chosen as a close month, it would shorten the time ctf
killing upon the islands, but without necessarily reducing
the number killed; while an endeavour to insert such a
month of inaction, in the middle of the season of pelagic
sealing, would not only be very difficult in proper enforce-
ment, but, if enforced, would practically break up the seal-
ing voya ves, as the ve essels engaged are then far from their
home ports.
136, Limitations of number of other kinds have, how-
ever, been proposed as applicable to the regulation of pe-
lagic sealing. Thus, it has been suggested that the number
of seals to ‘be taken by each vessel should be limited ae-
cording to tonnage; that the whole number of vessels
employed should be limited; that those engaged in sealing
be required to obtain a license; and that a limited number
of personal licenses should be supplied ip individual
hunters.
Some such provisions might be found to possess a par-
tial applicability, but while they might be useful portions
of a greater whole, they could not by themselves become
efficient systems of control.
137. An equitable basis of protection is therefore not to
be found in the adoption of any simple and corresponding
close season, including a part of each year applicable to
both shore and sea alike; but as pelagic sealing might
easily be regulated by the adoption of a close season, while
shore sealing might with equal facility be eoverned by a
limit of number, it seems probable that some compromise
of interest may be arrived at by a combination of these
methods. ~
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
138. If certain months should be discussed as a close
time for sealing at sea, it becomes important to inquire
which part of the season is most injurious to seal life in
‘proportion to the number of skins secured, and to this
inquiry there can be but the one reply, that the most de-
structive part of the pelagic catch is that of the spring,
during which time it includes a considerable proportion of
gravid females, then commencing to travel on their way
north to bring forth their young. It is on similar grounds
and at corresponding seasons that protection is usually
accorded to animals of any kind, and, apart from the fact
that these seals are killed upon the high seas, the same
arguments apply to this as to other cases.
139. This portion of the pelagic sealing is wholly carried
on in that part of the North Pacific which lies to the south
of the Aleutian Islands, and here also, as has already been
pointed out, a certain number of seals are killed at the
same season by the independent sealing of natives resident
along the coast of British Columbia and South-eastern
Alaska. Theaggregate number of seals killed in this par-
ticular way is, however, relatively so small that it may be
practically ignored in any general proposals looking to pro-
tection. It is scarcely possible, under present circum-
stanees, to interfere with the independent native sealing,
even if it should be considered just to attempt to do so.
This species of hunting is decreasing rather than increas-
ing in amount as other industries grow up, and it may be
further indirectly discouraged without great difficulty.
140. It may be remembered that, to a great degree, any
restrictions of time applied to sealing at sea are also
restrictions of area, for at different seasons the sealing is
necessarily carried on in different parts of the ocean.
141, Respecting protection by means of limiting the area
of sealing operations, it may be pointed out that the cir-
cumstances are such as to enable this to be done upon the
breeding islands without difficulty, for, both in the case of
the United States and Russia, two separate islands are
resorted to by the fur-seals, and one or other of these
islands in each case might be strictly set apart and main.
tained as a reserve of seal lite. Or, again, certain portions
of the several islands might without difficulty be perma-
nently exempted from driving or disturbance by the sealers.
142, Limitations affecting sealing operations on the high
seas, by international assent, might equally be established
and maintained with the aid of a sufficient patrol of cruiz-
ers, though such police regulations would be attended
23 with considerable expense. Some expenditure is,
however, involved under any system of control of
sealing at sea, whether defined by area or by time limits.
143. In any case, great good would be done by extending
around the breeding islands, to a distance to be agreed
upon in conformity with the circumstances, a zone of pro-
tected waters. Such an area of protection, if only of mod-
erate width, would not alone prevent the disturbance or
slaughter of practically all seals at the time actually resort-
ing to the breeding rookeries, but would possess the great
43
Time limits at
sea,
Limits of area
on shore.
Expense of
control at sea.
Protected zones
round seal is-
lands.
A4
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
additional advantage of rendering it possible to put down
the very destructive raids upon the rookeries, which have,
almost from the time of the Alaska purchase, been prac-
tised with comparative impunity by certain unscrupulous
sealers (§ 727 et seq.). It has always been easy, under cover
of darkness or fog, to slip in under the land across an
imaginary line drawn at only three miles from the shore;
but by extending such a limit to ten or twenty miles, it can
bemade an effective safeguard, so long as any cruizer is
retained about the islands on police duty. Theadvantages
of such a widened zone of protection will be quite obvious
to any sailor, and its practical effect would be to keep the
sealers, from ordinary prudential motives, very far from the
shores of the breeding islands. A 60-mile zone was reported
by Mr. Blaine (in December 1890) to be, in the opinion of
the President, an ‘effective mode of preserving the seal
fisheries for the use of the civilized world.”
144, To render such reserved area an efficient protection,
however, it would be necessary to provide that between
certain dates no vessels, whether under pretext of whaling
or fishing of any kind, should enter the protected area
except in making a passage, and that any vessel lowering
boats, or hovering within this area, would be subject to
penalties. It is already known that vessels ostensibly
engaged in whaling and other pursuits in Behring Sea, have
really occupied themselves or aided in sealing or raiding,
and any less strict measures of preservation could only
result in increasing this evil.
~(C.)\—Summary of General Conditions bearing upon Regu-
lation.
145. From the foregoing review of the various facts and
circumstances of seal-lifein the North Pacific, tne follow-
ing may be stated to be the governing conditions of proper
protection and preservation:
(a.) The facts show that some such protection is emi-
nently desirable, especially in view of further expansions
of the sealing industry.
(b.) The domestic protection heretofore given to the fur-
seal on the breeding islands has at no time been wholly
satisfactory, either in conception or in execution, and many
of its methods have now become obsolete.
(c.) Measures of protection to be effective must include
both the Summer and winter homes, and the whole migra-
tion-ranges of the fur-seal, and control every place and all
methods where or by which seals are taken or destroyed.
(d.) Although primarily devised for the protection and
perpetuation of the fur-seal itself and of the sealing in-
dustry as a whole, any measures must be such as to inter-
fere as little as possible with established industries, and
such as can be instituted under existing circumstances.
(e.) Equitable consideration must therefore be given to
the several industries based upon the taking of seals, and
especially to the number of persons dependent on these for
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. AD
a livelihood and to the amount of capital invested, so that
the measures adopted may be such as to recommend them-
selves on the ground of common interest.
(f.) The controlling Regulations should be so framed as
to admit of varying degrees of stringency in accordance
with the changing exigencies of the case.
III.— MEASURES FOR THE PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION OF THE
FUR-SEAL OF THE NORTH PACIFIC.
(A.)—General Nature of Measures required.
146. The actual measures necessary for the proper protection and
preservation of the fur-seal fall under two heads, namely:
(i.) Improvements in the methods of taking seals;
(ii.) Restriction in the number of seals taken.
24 Those of the latter class are the more important, but as the
‘improvements in methods” are more easily dealt with, and are
scarcely open to question, these may be first outlined.
(i.)—Improvements in the Methods of taking Seals.
147. On the Breeding Islands.—The “ drives” should be made as short
as possible, say, not to exceed half-a-mile as a maximum. They should
be carried out with due deliberation, avoiding excessive hurry, and
under the personal supervision of a responsible officer, and all seals not
intended to be killed should, as far as possible, be “‘cut out” at an early
stage in each “drive.” P
The actual clubbing of the seals should be performed with greater
care, avoiding injury or death to seals not intended to be taken.
148. Care should be exercised to avoid disturbing the actual breeding
rookeries in any way, and no seals not capable of yielding merchantable
skins should ever be killed.
The breeding islands should be fully secured against ‘‘raids,” a com-
petent guard, with authority to repel any attempts at landing, being
provided; while some armed vessel should remain about the islands
during the whole of each sealing season, say, from the Ist June to 30th
November.
149. At Sea.—Here most of the improvements in methods which may
be suggested, necessarily partake of the character of restrictions which
may tend directly to reduce the number of seals taken. Such improve.
ments therefore require to be considered in their connection with the
general regulations proposed for the restriction in number of seals
killed.
150. The most important improvements or restrictions which may be
treated from the side of ‘‘ methods” are as follows:
Prohibition of the use of rifles in shooting seals at sea, and of the
employment of nets as a means of capture.
The adoption of asystem of personal licences for White hunters, such
licences to be renewable annually, and revokable for proved breach of
any of the regulations provided.
Vessels propelled by machinery to pay an increased licence fee, or to
be wholly excluded from sealing.
46 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
(ii. )—Restriction in the Number of Seals taken.
151. We are of opinion that to be effective and suited to the exist-
ing conditions and to the interests at present involved, any system of
measures for regulating the number and kind of seals taken should
include provisions of the following kinds:
(a.) The strict limitation of the “number of seals killed on the breed.
ing islands to a safe maximum, the number and kind of seals to be
adjusted within the limit of this maximum, from year to year if found
necessary, inaccordance with the actually obser ved state of the breeding
rookeries in each year.
(b.) The institution of a zone of protected waters surrounding the
breeding islands.
(c.) The establishment of a close time, such as to limit the period of
hunting at sea, and so devised as in particular to safeguard the seals
during that portion of the spring (covering the earlier part of the seal-
ing voyages as now made) in which a certain proportion of gravid
females is taken. ;
152. One or other of these provisions for the limitation of sea sealing
should be subject to modification in area or time respectively, in such
manner as to check any tendency to excessive killing at sea, to allow
for exceptionally unfavourable breeding seasons, and, in general, to
correspond with any marked increase or decrease found te oceur in the
number of seals.
153. It is suggested that such compensatory changes in the degr ee of
stringency of regulative measures shall be made to depend upon the
number fixed for killing on the breeding islands in each year, so that if
it be found necessary or advisable to change this ruling number at any
time, the degree of stringency of the regulations applied at sea may
be proportionately increased or diminished.
154, A compensatory principle of this kind should absolutely remedy
(if not in each individual year, at least in the average of years) any
possible want of efficiency in the general scheme of measures, remov-
ing any doubt which may be supposed to attach to the proper control
of sealing at sea, which it is not possible to regulate on an exact
numerical basis.
25 (B.)—Specifie Scheme of Regulations recommended.
155. In view of the actual condition of seal life as it presents itself
to us at the present time, we believe that the requisite degree of pro-
tection would be afforded by the application of the following specific
limitations at shore and at sea:
(a.) The maximum number of seals to be taken on the Pribyloff
Islands to be fixed at 50,000.
(b.) A zone of protected waters to be established, extending to a dis-
tance of 20 nautical miles from the islands.
(c.) A close season to be provided, extending from the 15th Septem-
ber to the Ist May in each year, during which all killing of seals shall
be prohibited, with the additional provision that no sealing-vessel shall
enter Behring Sea before the 1st July in each year.
156. Respecting the compensatory feature of such specific regula-
tions, it is believed that a just scale of equivalency as between shore
and sea sealing would be found, and a complete check established
against any undue diminution of seals, by adopting the following as a
unit of compensatory regulation:
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. AT
For each decrease of 10,000 in the number fixed for killing on the
islands, an increase of 10 nautical miles to be given to the width of
protected waters about the islands. The minimum number to be fixed
tor killing on the islands to be 10,000, corresponding to a maximum
width of protected waters of 60 nautical miles.
157. The above regulations represent measures at sea and ashore
sufficiently equivalent for all practical purposes, and probably embody
or provide for regulations as applied to sealing on the high seas as
stringent as would be admitted by any Maritime Power, whether
directly or only potentially interested.
158. As an alternative method of effecting a compensatory adjust-
ment of the stringency of measures of protection, it is possible that
some advantages might be found in the adoption of a sliding scale of
length for the season of sealing at sea, with a fixed width of zone of
protection about the islands.
In this case it is believed that, in correspondence with a decrease of
10,000 seals killed upon the breeding islands, the length of the sealing
season at sea might be curtailed by seven days, such curtailment to be
applied either to. the opening or closing time of the sealing season.
159. It may be objected to the principle involved in any correlative
Eanes of shore and sea sealing, that it would be impossible in any
particular year to make known the number fixed for killing on the islands
in time to secure a corresponding regulation of pelagic sealing. Asa
matter of fact, however, if the condition of the breeding rookeries called
for any change, it should be possible to fix this number with sufficient
precision a year in advance; while, on the other hand, the general
effect would be almost equally advantageous if the number killed on
the islands in any one year were employed as the factor of regulation
for pelagic sealing in the following year.
160. While a zone of protection has been spoken of as the best method
of safeguarding the vicinity of the breeding islands, it is to be borne in
mind that such an area might be defined for practical purposes as a
rectangular area bounded by certain lines of latitude and longitude.
Even in dense fog, and, therefore, comparatively calm weather, an
arrested vessel could be anchored with a kedge and warp until the
weather cleared, according to frequent custom, The special advantages
of a concentric Zoue appear to be that it is more directly in conformity
with the object in view, and that in fine weather the visibility or other-
wise of the islands themselves might serve as a rough guide to sealers.
161. The restriction of the iumber of seals killed on the breeding
islands, appropriate safeguards being provided, admits of very consid.
erable precision, and requires no special explanation. That the restric-
tion of the number taken at sea may be accomplished practically and
with all necessary certainty, and that the means of control available in
the case of this branch of the sealing industry are sufficient, is clearly
shown by the successful application of measures such as these here
proposed, to the Jan-Mayen and Newfoundland hair-seal fisheries, as
well as of those based on like principles which are generally employed
in protecting fish and game.
26 (C.)—Methods of giving effect to Regulations.
162. The means suited to secure the practical efficiency of regulations
at sea are generally indicated by those adopted in the instances just
cited. It is unnecessary to formulate these here in full detail, but the
48 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
following suggestions are offered as pointing out those methods likely
to prove most useful in the particular case under consideration :
(i.) Statutory provisions should be made, declaring it unlawful to
hunt or take fur-seal during the close season by subjects or vessels of
the respective Powers.
(ii.) The time of commencement of the sealing season should be fur-
ther regulated by the date of issuance of special Customs clearances
and of licences for sealing, and preferably by the issuance of such
clearances or licences from certain specified ports only.
' (iii.) As elsewhere explained, the regulation of the time of opening
of the sealing season is the most important, and the closing of the
season is practically brought about by the onset of rough weathér in
the early autumn. If, however, it be considered desirable to fix a pre-
cise date for the close of sea-sealing in each year, this can be done, as
in the case of the date of sealing under the Jan-Mayen Convention.
(iv.) The liability for breach of the regulations, of whatever kind,
should be made to apply to the owner, to the master or person in charge
of any vessel, and to the hunters engaged on the vessel.
(v.) The penalty.imposed should be a fine (of which one-half should go
to the informant), with possibly, in aggravated cases or second. offences,
the forfeiture of the catch and of the vessel itself.
(vi.) To facilitate the supervision of the seal fishery and the execu-
tion of the regulations, all sealers might, in addition, be required to fly
a distinctive flag, which might well be identical with, or some colour
modification of, that already adopted for the same purpose by the
Japanese Government.
(D.)\—Alternative Methods of Regulation.
163. Although the general scheme of measures above described
appears to us, all things considered, to be the most appropriate to the
actual circumstances, measures of other kinds have suggested them-
selves. Some of these, though perhaps less perfectly adapted to secure
the fullest advantages, recommend themselves from their very sim-
plicity and the ease with which they might be applied. Of such alter-
native methods of regulation, three may be specidily referred to:
(4.)—Entire Prohibition of Killing on one of the Breeding Islands, with suitable Concurrent
Regulations at Sea,
164. The entire reservation and protection of one of the two larger
islands of the Pribyloff group, either St. Paul or St. George Island,
might be assured; such island to be maintained as an undisturbed
breeding place, upon which no seals shall be killed for any purpose.
On the remaining island, the number of seals killed for commercial pur-
poses would remain wholly under the control of the Government of the
United States.
Tn consideration of the guaranteed preservation of a breeding island
with the purpose of insuring the continuance of the seal stock in the
common interest, a zone of protected waters might be established about
the Pribyloff Islands, and pelagic sealing might be further controlled
and restricted by means of a close season, including the early spring
months, or by a protected area to the south of the Aleutian Islands,
defined by parallels of latitude. Such provisions at sea to have, as far
as possible, quantivalent relation to those established on the breeding
islands,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS, AQ
(ti.)—Recurrent Periods of Rest.
165. This implies the provision of a period of rest, or exemption of all
seals from killing, both at sea and on shore, to extend over a complete
year, at such recurrent intervals as may be deemed necessary.
27 Such a period of rest might be fixed in advance for every fifth,
or possibly as often as every fourth, year, and be made to form a
part of a general scheme imposing limitation of number of seals killed
on the islands in intervening years, together with restriction by time or
by area of pelagic sealing.
While proximately equal in effect on both shore and sea killing, a
period of rest of this kind would, in other respects, cause some incon-
venience by its interruption of the several industries, and this, though
minimized by the fact that the date of occurrence of the year of rest
would be known in advance, would not be wholly obviated by this
circumstance.
(tit. )—Total Prohibition of Killing on the Breeding Islands, with Concurrent strict Regu-
lation of Pelagic Sealing.
166. While the circumstance that long usage may in a measure be
considered as justifying the custom of killing fur-seals on the breeding
islands, many facts now known respecting the life history of the animal
itself, with valid inferences drawn from the results of the disturbance
of other animals upon their breeding places, as well as those made
obvious by the new conditions which have arisen in consequence of the
development of pelagic sealing, point to the conclusion that the breed-
ing islands should, if possible, remain undisturbed and inviolate.
167. If this view should be admitted, and particularly if the United
States and Russia, as the owners of the principal breeding islands of
the North Pacific, should agree to co-operate in entirely prohibiting all
killing of seals on these islands, and in guarding and protecting the
breeding places upon them, it should be possible to obtain, in considera-
tion of such care exercised in the common interest, an ‘inter national
assent to measures regulating sea sealing, of any required degree of
stringency, including certain special rights of supervision by the Powers
mentioned.
168. It might, for example, under such circumstances, be provided—
(1.) That all sealing-vessels should be registered, and should take out
special licences at one or other of certain specified ports, as, for instance,
Victoria, Port Townsend, Honolulu, Hakodate, and Vladivostock.
(2.) That such annual clearances or licences be not issued before a
given date, say, lst May, and that certain licence fees be exacted. Such
licence fees to be collected by the Customs authorities of the licensing
Government, and to be eventually transferred, in whole or in part, pro-
portionately, to the Governments protecting the breeding islands, to go
toward meeting the cost of this protection.
(3.) That no vessel should seal in Behring Sea before some fixed date
(say, Ist July) in each year, and that vessels intending to seal in Beh-
ring Sea should report either to the United States or to the Russian
authorities on or after that date at named ports, such as Unalaska or
Petropaulouski.
(4.) That all duly licensed sealing-vessels should be required to fly a
distinctive flag, and that any unlicensed vessel found engaged in seal-
ing should be subject to certain penalties.
(5.) That a zone of protected waters should be established about the
breeding islands, within which no sealing should under any circwn:
stances be permitted,
BS, PT VI——4.
5O REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
(E.)—International Action.
169. In the foregoing remarks on the measures available for the pro-
tection and preservation of the fur-seal of the North Pacific, reference
is made throughout especially to the eastern part of that ocean, inelud-
ing more particularly the area comprised in the range of those fur-seals
of which the summer haunts and breeding places are about or on the
Pribyloff Islands, and of which the winter home is found especially off
the coast of British Columbia. It is evident, however, that the same
remarks and recommendations apply equally to those fur-seals which
in summer centre about the Commander Islands, and in winter fre-
quent the seas off the coast of Japan.
170. It may be stated, further, thatno system of control can be con-
sidered as absolutely complete and effective which does not include
under common regulations all parts of the North Pacific, and that the
facility of execution of measures and their efficiency would, under any
system of regulations, be much increased by the concurrent
28 action of Great Britain, the United States, Russia, and Japan,
as indicated in the Message of the President of the United
States in 1889. Apart from the fact that vessels prevented from seal-
ing at given dates in certain areas might at these times frequent other
waters in increased numbers, the circumstance that there is a certain,
though not fully known, interrelation and interchange of seals between
the eastern and western breeding islands of Behring Sea, points very
clearly to the advisability of such co-operation in protection.
29 Part II,
DETAILED OBSERVATIONS ON THE FACTS AND CONDITIONS OF
; SEAL LIFE.
I.—NATURAL HISTORY AND ENVIRONMENT OF THE FUR-SEAL OF
THE NORTH PACIFIC.
(A.)—Migrations and Range of the Fur-seal of the North Pacific,
(i.)—LHastern Side of the North Pacific.
171. Respecting the migrations and range of the fur-seal in the North
Pacific, while numerous scattered references are to be found, these are
for the most part fragmentary and vague, and no connected account of
the migrations or migration routes, based upon facts, have heretofore
been given.- The additional information gained in the course of special
inquiries on this subject now, however, not only enables the migrations
of the fur-seal to be clearly followed, but appears definitively to set at
rest the question which has been consistently asked by sealers from the
earliest times of the Russian occupation as to the winter habitat of the
fur-seal.
172. Written inquiries on this and other points were addressed to the
district Indian agents along the coast of British Columbia, and the
traders, Aleuts, Indians, and others interested or engaged in seal-
hunting, or resident on the West Coast, have been conversed with and
questioned. (See Appendix C.)
173. The notes thus obtained are summarized below, and it may be
stated that, with few and unimportant exceptions, such as may be
explained by variations from year to year in time and direction of
migration, these are concordant and homogeneous in their meaning.
174, Those who have been upon the Pribyloff Islands in the autumn
and winter state that the seals leave these islands and their vicinity for
the south chiefly between the middle of October and the early part of
December, though a few may depart before the first date, while in
exceptionally mild seasons stragglers have been known to remain after
the latter month. The mature seals, especially the females, are the first
to leave, the pups (now on account of their change of coat ranking as
““orey pups”) going later, and almost all about the middle of November,
when they are driven off by the weather. The ‘holluschickie” (half-
grown males or bachelors”) and a few old bulls are the last to leave.
175. From October to December, but chiefly in November, the seals
are seen in varying abundance by the Aleuts of the eastern part of the
Aleutian Islands, and are hunted by these people.
51
52 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
The openings in the Aleutian chain, through which most of the seals
go southward, are those known as the Unalga, Akutan, Unimak, and
Issanakh Passes. The seals killed here are chiefly grey pups, which,
particularly when the wind blows strongly from northerly directions,
seem to miss the actual passes, and to become embayed for a time in the
harbours and inlets on the northern side of the islands.
When strong easterly winds prevail at this season, grey pups, which
have evidently made their departure from the Pribyloff Islands, are
occasionally and in small numbers drifted as far to the westward as
Atka Island, longitude 172° west, but none are ever seen at Attu
Island.
176. On getting clear of the Aleutian Islands, the seals continue their
migration in a southerly or south-easterly direction, and do not follow
the coast in its north-easterly sweep, round the border of that part of
the ocean which is sometimes called the Gulf of Alaska. They are not
seen about Kadiak at this season, and only rarely in the autumn and
winter off Sitka. Nearly two degrees of latitude south of Sitka, how-
ever, the Indians of Klawak, in the Bucarelli Gulf, take a number of
seals every winter, generally about Christmas, most of these being grey
pups or yearlings.
177. About the northern part of the Queen Charlotte Islands, some
young seals are seen every winter toward the end of January and in
February. These are chiefly grey pups or yearlings, though a few full-
grown males and seals of other ages are seen as well. Hunting is not
carried on at this season, but considerable numbers of such seals
30 have sometimes been taken close to the shore. Between the
latter part of February and the third week in April, it is stated
that no seals are seen here.
Abreast of, or somewhat further north than, the Queen Charlotte
Islands, a considerable body of seals is often met with at sea by the pe-
lagic sealers in May or June. These seals are then moving northward.
In the northern part of Hecate Strait and its adjacent waters a few
erey pups are said to be often found in November and December, but
persons giving information on this point mention the end of December
as the time of arrival. Seals are more plentiful in January, February,
and March, but particularly in February. The entrance to Wark Inlet
is specially noted as a locality at which grey pups are often obtained
at this season. A few adult seals are sometimes taken in winter off
Banks Island, but no regular hunting is attempted there before the 1st
March, when Bonilla Island is occupied for this purpose by Kit-katla
Indians, and the 1st April, at which time Tshimsians resort to Zayas
Island for the same purpose. The hunting, as at present practised,
extends over April and the greater part of May; off Bonilla Island it
is continued through the greater part of June, but this difference is
due rather to the option of the Indians than to any diversity in dates
in the arrival and departure of the seals in the two places.
Seals of both sexes and all ages are killed during the hunting season,
and «a few full-grown bulls are seen, but are seldom taken. There is,
in this region, no interval between the arrival of seals from the north
in the early winter and their departure for the north, which occurs in
the main about the end of May.
Mr. R. Cunningham states, that about twenty-three years ago, he
was personally cognizant of the fact that for several successive years
a small colony of adult seals stayed all the winter about Somerville
Island, in the entrance of Observatory Inlet, These seals appeared to
be following and feeding upon the ulachan or candle-fish.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 53
178. On that part of the coast about Milbank and Fitzhugh Sounds,
still further south, but unlike the last region in being fully open to the
Pacific, a few seals are seen about Christmas, or not long thereafter.
They are generally first observed outside Cape Calvert. Seals are
most abundant in March, but a few remain till the latter part of June.
The seals coming first are chiefly females, but after about the Ist June
they are nearly all young males. Fully matured large males are found
in small numbers; grey pups or yearlings venture further into the inner
channels, and come nearer to the shores.
179. About the north end of Vancouver's Island and the entrance to
Queen Charlotte Sound the seals are first seen early in December, but
not in any abundance until about Christmas, from which time, for a
month or six weeks, they are very numerous in all this vicinity; though
the stormy character of the weather prevents the Indian hunters from
going far to seain pursuit of them. They are stated to disappear about
‘April. The females are the first to arrive in the winter, but are fol-
lowed by the grey pups or yearlings a little later, and in most of the
time during which the seals remain, both sexes and all ages are repre-
sented, though the grey pups come nearest to the shore, particularly
when the weather is rough. In the winter of 1890-91, a number of
seals were killed by the Indians as far in as the entrance of See ae
Inlet, and on one occasion (according to Mr. Huson, about 1870,
March) a great number of grey pups ascended Knight’s and Tipeeonie
Inlets to their heads, following the wlachan, w hich seek these places
to spawn at this season.
180. At Nootka, on the west coast of Vancouver Island, it is stated
that no seals are seen before Christmas, but in the first or second week
after that date, according to the weather, hunting begins, and is con-
tinued for three months. Occasional large old bulls are also rarely
seen here.
181. At Clayoquot Sound, the seals arrive about Christmas, or between
that time and the end of December, and hunting begins early in Janu-
ary. The Indians report that some schooners hunt off that coast for
about a month from this date before going north. Seals of both sexes
appear here and remain together, but no large bulls have ever been
seen.
In 1885 seals were unusually abundant off Clayoquot as early as the
10th or 15th December, but were mostly grey pups “smalls,” or 2 and
o year-olds.
182. About Barclay Sound the seals are first reported in December,
and are often very abundant during January and February. The
greater number leave before the end of April, when they begin to travel
north, but a few are killed, further out at sea, sometimes as late as the
15th J une.
Most of the skins brought in by Indians are grey pups or “ smalls,”
but in 1891 there was an unusual number of adult skins.
183. With further reference to the occurrence of fur-seals on the
80 A coast of British Columbia generally, the following note by Mr. J.
W. Mackay, who has for many years been conversant with this
coast, may be quoted. In reply to inquiries made, he writes: ‘ These
animals were driven to the ocean from the narrow waters by the use of
fire-arms in hunting. During the spring, numbers of the young ani-
mals fish in the broken waters inside the half-tide rocks and reefs which
fringe the western shores of Vancouver Island and of the other islands
which lie west of the mainland from Queen Charlotte Sound to Dixon
Entrance. The older animals remain further at sea, but numbers of
54 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
them take refuge in the larger sounds during stormy weather; I have
seen them off Metla-katla in : the month of January. vy
184. Captain John Devereux, who has been for twenty-seven years on
the coast of British Columbia, and has had excellent opportunities for
observation, in command of the Canadian Government steamer “ Doug-
las,” informs us, in reply to questions addressed to him, that from the
latter part of November, or early in December, to the beginning of June,
the fur-seal is found off the coast of the entire length of Vancouver
Island, but Paes in the early winter the weather is altogether too rough
for hunting. He adds, “When they are found along the bank on the
west coast of ase Island they are feeding on their natural feed-
ing-grounds.” He further states that, though often far off the land, he
has frequently found them inshore, and even eighteen miles up Barclay
Sound; as well as in the Strait of Fuca, and, on rare occasions, in the
Gulf of Georgia.
85. Near Cape Flattery and about the entrance of the Straits of
Fuea, it is reported that the Indians have on exceptional occasions
seen seals as early as December, and schooners have been known to
take seals in that month off the Cape; but the seals usually arrive
about the Ist January, when hunting begins. Grey pups are the first
to appear, but in February all sorts of seals are found, except mature
males. No full-grown baile have ever been seen in this s vicinity. No
females with pup are found after the 5th or 6th July, and it is prob-
able that only a few stragglers of any kind remain, though, according
to Judge Swan, occasional seals are to be found here at all seasons.
The last seals seen in Summer are as arule males or barren females.
In exceptional instances a few seals, probably grey pups or yearlings,
have been noted in recent years as far up the Straits of Fuca as Vic-
toria and Port Townsend. Mr. J. W. Mackay, already quoted, states
that the older hunters of the Songis, Sooke, and Tlalum tribes, living
on or near the southern end of Vancouver Island, told him that in for-
mer years fur-seals were in the habit of landing in large numbers at
Race Rocks, within 11 miles of Victoria, Fur-seals also many years
ago frequented the Gulf of Georgia, and Mr. Mackay has himself
bought skins from the Seshal Indians, of Jarvis Inlet, which they had
taken at Sangster Island, near Texada Island.
186. From “the foregoing notes, embodying the result of careful
INqUITIES personally made ‘at the loc: uities referred to along a stretch
of 2,000 miles of the west coast of the Continent, it is evident that in
that part of the ocean adjacent to the entire length of the coast of
British Columbia, as well as within the main openings and inlets of
that coast, the fur-seal is a permanent winter resident, arriving soon
after it is known to have passed southward through the Aleutian chain,
and remaining till a general movement to the north begins in the early
spring, and, though the movement last referred to acquires greater
force and regularity towards its close, no time occurs between the
arrival of the seals from the north and the return migration, at which
ae are not found off this coast.
187. To the north of the Queen Charlotte Islands, however, the case
is different, for here, as already stated, the seals do not follow the
coast in the autumn migration, whereas they move in rather close
parallelism or contiguity to it when on their way north in the spring
and early summer. Thus, in the vicinity of Sitka some seals appear
near the coast as early as the middle of April, but they become abun-
dant during May, and some are still seen in the early part of June.
On the Fairweather ground, in the Gulf of Alaska, seals are most
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 55
hnmerous from the 1st to the 15th June. About the 25th June, in 1891,
tuey were found in abundance by the sealing-schooners on the Portlock
banks, to the east of Kadiak Island.
About Kadiak they are generally found from the 25th May to the end
of June, being most abundant in the average of years about the 10th
June. They are seldom seen in July, and very rarely even stragglers
are noticed after the middle of that month.
In the latter part of June, or about the 1st July, the female seals in
pup, which have entered Behring Sea, are found only making their
way rapidly and directly to the breeding islands, while the great body
of non-breeding seals either travel in a more leisurely way and with
frequent intervals of rest, in the same direction, or disperse themselves
in search of food over various parts of the sea.
30 B 188. According to Elliott, Bryant, and Maynard, the greater
number of the adult breeding males (known as “‘ beachmasters”
or “‘seacatchie”) arrive at the Pribyloff Islands and take up positions
there, from the Ist to about the middle of June. The females about
to give birth to their pups follow, at first in small and then in large
numbers, their time of arrival ending about the 10th to 25th July.
Yearlings (the grey pups of the previous season) come to the islands
in great numbers in the latter part of July.
189. Comparatively little attention bas been given to the movements
of the full-grown males by the pelagic sealers, because of the small
value of their skins, but it has been noticed that even as early as May
the females at sea are travelling more persistently than the other seals
to the north, while after the 1st June they are said to “bunch up” and
to travel so fast towards the passes in the Aleutian Islands, that it is
-impossible to kill many of them.
190. Respecting the extreme southern limit of the range of the fur-
seal of the North Pacific on the American coast, little can be added to
what has already been published. The earliest departures of vessels
for pelagic sealing from Victoria usually occur not long after the Ist
January; these vessels then generally cruize southwards, sometimes
nearly to the latitude of San Francisco, in pursuit of seals; butit would
appear that no large “ catches ” have been recorded to the south of the
Columbia River, and frequently much of what has been classed in the
Returns as “south-coast catch” has been obtained off the entrance of
the Strait of Fuca. It seems certain that in recent years, at least, no
considerable number of seals is found further south than about 46°
north latitude, though stragglers may find their way much further south.
Captain Seammon, in his work on marine mammalia, states that fur-
seals were formerly abundant on the Californian coast. They have been
noted, in small numbers, as lately as 1878 on the coast of Southern
California,* while Professor Jordan informs us that they were still taken
in considerable numbers on the Guadaloupe Islands there in 1879.t We
have also been informed by an experienced sealer that in former years,
he had seen fur-seals as far south as the Gulf of Tehuantapec.
191. On this subject Professor Allen writes: “The fur-seal is well
known to have been formerly abundant on the western coast of North
America, as far south as California, but the exact southern limit of this
range I have been unable to determine.” He then quotes Scammon as
to the occurrence of these animals on the San Benito Islands, the coast
of Lower California, Guadaloupe Island, and Cedros Island, in latitude
28°. He adds, writing in 1880: “Although at one time abundant on
* Elliott, Census Report, p. 66.
' “Fishery Industries of the United States,” vol. ii, p. 393.
56 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
the California coast, they are by no means numerous there now, having
been nearly exterminated by unrestricted slaughter by the sealers.”*
This local depletion of seals may incidentally be taken as a further evi-
dence of the local character of the seal herds above referred to, a point
of some importance, which is subsequently discussed. If included in
the annual migration-cycle of the Pribyloff Island seals, the Californian
coast should not at this date have shown any notable sign of diminu-
tion in number of seals.
It is, however, extremely improbable that these seals were concerned
in the annual migration to Behring Sea, and doubtful whether they
were regularly migratory at all in the proper sense of the term. Like
most of the fur-seals of the southern hemisphere, they may merely have
resorted to the neighbouring land at the breeding season.
Scammon states that the fur-seals formerly bred along the Californian
coast. The Farallone Islands, off that coast, are known to have been
the resort of a considerable body of seals, which may be assumed to
have been of the same species with those of the North Pacific, and
doubtless occupied these islands as breeding places. The Russians
established a station there, and, “from 1812 to 1818, about 8,400 fur-
seal skins were obtained there, and it is stated that before their oceu-
pation by the Russians as many as 10,000 were taken on these islands
in a single autumn.”t ‘The season at which this killing took place, if
correctly given, is alone sufficient to show that the seals found here
were not migrants from the far north.
192. Disregarding exceptional cases of small importance, with the
occurrence of stragglers preceding or lagging behind the main body of
seals, and including both sexes and all ages of seals without reference
to the different dates at which these are known to reach various points,
it would thus appear that the seals which resort to the eastern part of
Behring Sea, with the Pribyloft Islands as a centre, in the main
dl frequent that sea from the early part of June till about the
middle of November, a period of about five months and a-half.
Behring Sea may, in fact, be named their summer habitat.
During a period of four and a-half or five months, extending in the
main from about the 1st January to the middle or end of May, they
frequent the sea lying off that part of the West Coast included between
the 56th and 46th parallels of north latitude,—these limits including
the whole length of the British Columbian coast, and extending beyond
it slightly at both extremes. This is the winter habitat of the fur-seal
of the eastern side of the North Pacific.
During a great part of the time, in which the seals are off this coast,
the weather is so tempestuous as to prevent successful pelagic hunting,
whether from schooners, or directly by canoes using the shore as a base
of operations. The actual numbers of seals seen close in shore depend
largely upon the weather in each locality, and varies much from year to
year; and with a prevalence of strong westerly winds, the grey pups
or yearlings are driven into the immediate vicinity of the coast and into
its bays and channels, first and in the largest numbers. The neigh-
bourhood of Dixon Entrance, the northern end of Vancouver Island,
the eutrance to Queen Charlotte Sound, and the entrance to the Straits
of Fuca, are localities specially notable for the abundance of seals
during the winter and spring.
The actual resorts of the seals are not alone influenced by the weather,
but also greatly by the supply of suitable food, as more fully explained
* “Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 332.
t Bancroft’s Works, vol. xxxiii, p. 487.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 57
elsewhere; and it is probably in great measure because of the abun-
dance of food fishes near the larger openings in the land above men-
tioned, that these places are special resorts.
193. It is a noteworthy and interesting fact, ascertained in the course
of the present inquiry, that the full-grown males, known as “beach-
masters” or “‘seacatchie,” have seldom or never been reported to the
south of the 50th parallel, while all other classes of seals are found in
considerable numbers much further south. This statement, of course,
applies to the seals frequenting as their winter habitat that part of
the ocean lying off the coasts of British Columbia and the State of
Washington.
194, Touching the distance to which the seals extend off the coast:
during the winter months, the generally stormy weather at this season,
with the dependant absence of pelagic sealers, have prevented accur ate:
information from being obtained. Captain Devereux, already cited,,
has, however, possessed special opportunities for obtaining information:
on this subject. He writes: ‘‘The distance from the shore where they
(fur-seals) are to be found most ey say, off Cape Beale (where:
the bank extends furthest from the land), is from 30 to 150 miles; but
these figures must not be taken by any means as a fixed limit.” Judge
Swan has recorded the fact that, in 1880, large numbers of fur- seals
were seen at from 100 to 300 miles off shore by vessels bound into the
Straits of Fuca from China and the Sandwich Islands, but the exact
time of year is not given.* While the seals are moving northward in
the spring, it can only be stated that, when the weather becomes such
as to enable pelagic hunting to be carried on, the main body of seals is
found to extend for a width of 50 or 60 miles off the coast of Vancouver
Island, and for about 80 miles off the Queen Charlotte Islands.
195. Between the winter and summer resorts of the fur-seals lies a
minimum distance of about 1,200 miles, across which they pass only
during their migration. As already stated, in their spring migration
they appear to follow parallel to the general trend of the coast on their
way northward and westward, keeping in touch with the shore, or at
least with the soundings or submarine edge of the continental plateau.
196. In their southern or south-eastern migration the seals do not
follow the coast, but after passing through the Aleutian Islands, it is
possible that they may at first scatter rather widely and at random over
the ocean. It is certain, at least, that they do not pursue a direct course:
to the northern portion of their winter habitat, and thence travel regu-
larly southward along the coast. The comparatively small differences:
and occasional irregularities in their dates of arrival in the different:
parts of their winter resorts, with other circumstances, seem to indicate
that they come in-shore from the westward with an extended front.
This, it would appear, results naturally from the set of the currents in
this part of the ocean from west to east and directly toward the coast,
together with the prevalent westerly winds of November, December,
and January. The latter are well shown in detail on Maps 27, 47,
and 49 in the “Challenger” Reports, Physics and Chemistry, vol. il.
(For currents and directions of drift in the Pacific Ocean, see especially
Petermann’s “ Mitteilungen,” 36 Band, 1890.)
While, therefore, the course and manner of this southern and eastern
migration (embracing scarcely two months of the entire year)
32 must at present remain to some extent hypothetical, the whole
remaining migratory route of the fur-seal is now accurately known,
and the circumstances are such as to leave little doubt that this partis
* Fishery Industries of the United States,” vol. ii, p. 394.
58 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
correctly explained as above. It may be supposed, that to the winds
and currents chiefly is attributable the concentration of the fur-seals in
the vicinity of the coast preparatory to the inception of the spontaneous
northward movement early in the spring. :
(ii,)— Western Side of the North Pacific.
197. Respecting the migration-range of the fur-seals which resort to
the Commander Islands, to Robben Island, and in smaller numbers to
several places in the Kurile Islands, as more fully noted in subsequent
pages, comparatively little has been recorded; but the result of inquir-
ies made in various directions, when brought together, are sufficient to
enable its general character and the area which it covers to be outlined.
‘The deficiency in information for the Asiatic coast depends on the fact
that pelagic sealing, as understood on the coast of America, is there
practically unknown, while the people inhabiting the coast and its
adjacent islands do not, like the Indians and Aleuts of the opposite
side of the North Pacific, naturally venture far to sea for hunting
purposes.
195. The facts already cited in connection with the migration of the
seals on the east side of the Pacific, show that these animals enter and
leave Behring Sea almost entirely by the eastern passes through the
Aleutian chain, and that only under exceptional circumstances, and
under stress of weather, are some young seals, while on their way south,
driven as far to the west as Atka Island. Nolarge bodies of migrating
seals are known to pass near Attu Island, the westernmost of the Aleu-
tians, and no young seals have ever within memory been seen there.
These circumstances, with others which it is not necessary to detail
here, are sufficient to demonstrate that the main migration-routes of
the seals frequenting the Commander Islands do not touch the Aleu-
tian chain, and there is every reason to believe that although the seals
become more or less commingled in Behring Sea during the suminer,
the migration-routes of the two sides of the North Pacific are essentially
distinct.
199. During the late autumn, the winter, and in early spring, the
fur-seals of the western side of the North Pacific are in fact known to
frequent that part of the ocean to the eastward of the Island of Yezo,
the northernmost of the Japanese group, and are seen about that coast
chiefly between Inobasaki and the east part of Yezo. As the prevailing
winds are at these seasons off-shore, and as neither these nor any
oceanic current tend to establish a drift toward the land, the fur-seals
are probably much more widely scattered in proportion to theirnumbers,
and are spread out to a greater distance from the land here, than those
of the other side of the ocean are found to be during the corresponding
period of stay in their winter habitat. This belief corresponds with
such information as we have been able to obtain on the subject, and
probably in part at least explains the fact that it has not yet been found
to be a profitable enterprise to engage in pelagic sealing in this portion
of the Pacific. It must further, however, be mentioned here, that no
definite information has been obtained as to the northern limit of the
tract which may be described as the winter habitat of the fur-seal on the
western side of the North Pacific. It may therefore possibly include
some portion of the waters adjacent to the Kurile Islands.
200. According to information contained in a Memorandum supplied
by your Majesty’s Minister at T6kié (Appendix B), the seals are first
seen off the coast of Yezo early in November, while from other sources
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. ag
it has been ascertained, that in former years, when the Alaska Commer-
cial Company’s vessel followed the southern route in her spring voyage
from San Francisco to Petropaulouski, fur-seals were often seen at sea
in the month of May in about the same latitude.
201. When the seals first come south in the autumn, the grey pups
are often abundant not far from the shores of Yezo and about Nambu,*
and from 2,000 to 3,000 are annually taken there by the inhabitants, in
boats. In the Memorandum just referred to, it is stated that, “Large
numbers of seals from the Russian rookeries are scattered every winter
over the ocean lying off the east coast of Japan, but they are unmo-
lested by foreign or native sealing-vessels, and only the fringe of them
is touched by native fishermen in their open boats along the Nambu
and Yezo coast.”
202. When these seals move to the northward, in the spring or early
summer, they doubtless follow a route parallel to the line of the
33 Kurile Islands, though there is nothing known to show whether
they pass near to these islands, or at some considerable distance
to the eastward of them. According to Mr. Grebnitsky, Superintend-
ent of the Commander Islands, the seals travel with the northward
branch of the Japan current, and are first seen on the south-western
shore of Copper Island, where some of them land, while others continue
their journey to the north-westward, between Copper and Behring
Islands; and those which land on the northern rookery of Behring
Island come to it eventually from a north-eastern direction. The same
gentleman further states, as the result of his observations, that these
naturally pelagic animals land thus on the Commander Islands only
because it is necessary for the females to do so in order to give birth to
their young; while he believes the main reason of the landing, at later
dates, of the seals not actually engaged in breeding, is that during the
“shedding” or “stagey” season, their pelage becomes too thin to afford
a suitable protection from the water. The date of arrival of the seals
on the Commander Islands is somewhat later than on the Pribyloff
Islands, and the dates of leaving appear to be also later and rather
more irregular in correspondence with the longer summer season and
less precisely marked beginning of cold weather. In fact, in unusually
mild years, a few fur-seals may generally be found about the Com-
mander Islands all the winter.
203. According to Captain Brandt, of the Russian gun-boat “ Aleut,”
who has had long experience of these waters, the fur-seals frequenting
Robben Island, on the east coast of Saghalien in Okotsk Sea, pass
through the Kurile Archipelago into the Pacific in autumn and do not
go directly south into the Japan Sea; though he has seen a few fur-
seals at sea not far to the north of Vladivostok.
204, It will be observed that the migration-range of the fur-seals fre-
quenting the Commander Islands is somewhat less extended than that
of those resorting to the Pribyloft Islands, its entire length being little
more than 1,000 miles.
205. It is of interest here to refer to the account of the migrations of
the fur-seal or “sea cat,” drawn up by the Russian Kraschenimikoff,
which is supposed to be based partly on his own observations and
largely on those of his fellow-traveller Steller, both members of Behring
Expedition.t He writes: ‘The sea cats are caught in the spring and
in the month of September, about the River Sheepanova; at which
time they go from the Kurilskoy (Kurile) Islands to the American
* A seaport on the east coast of Nipon, near latitude 40°.
t Quoted by J. A. Allen in “‘Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 341;
from Grieves’ English translation, 1764.
60 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
coast (read Commander Islands); but the most are catched about the
Cape of Kronitzkoy, as between this and the Cape Shupinskoy (both
on the east coast of Kamtschatka); the sea is generally calm, and
affords them proper places to retire to. Almost all the females that
are caught in the spring are pregnant; and such as are near their time
of bringing forth their young are immediately opened, and the young
taken out and skinned. None of them are to be seen from the begin-
ning of June to the end of August, when they return from the south
(sic, read east) with their young.”
206. The remarks on the same subject made by Fleurieu in. March-
and’s voyage are probably in the main also based on those of Steller.
He writes, referring to the last decade of the eighteenth century:
Ces animaux quittent au mois de Juin les cétes de Ja presqu’ile de Kamtschatka,
et y reviennent, comine i] 4 été dit, ala fin d’Aott ou au commencement de Septembre,
pour y passer l’automne et V’hiver. Dans les temps du départ, les femelles sont
prétes a mettre bas, et il paroit que Vobjet du voyage de ces amphibies et de
s’éloigner le plus qwils peuvent de toute terre habitée, pour faire tranquillement
leur petits sur des bords solitaires, et s’y livrer ensuite sans trouble aux plaisirs de
VYamour; car c’est un mois apres qu’elles ont mis bas que les femelles entrent en
chaleur. Tous reviennent fort maigres 4 la fin d’Aofit; et il est & présumer que,
pendant leur absence, ils ne mangent que peu ou point du tout.*
207. The particular interest attaching to these quotations is, that
they appear to show that at the early dates to which they refer, the fur-
seal was much better known and more often seen by the natives of the
coast of Kamtschatka than it is at the present day, from which it is
reasonable to conclude that on the Asiatic coast as well as on that of
North America the fur-seal las considerably changed its habits, as the
result of persistent hunting, and has become more pelagic than it
originally was.
Particulars of the same kind referring to the North American coast
are elsewhere referred to in detail (§ 396 et seq.).
208. The mode of origination of the regular migratory habit, which
has become hereditary and instinctive in the case at least of by ‘far the
largest number of the fur-seals of the North Pacific, is an inter-
34 esting question of a general kind. It is evident that the habit
has grown up as a necessary result of resorting to far northern
breeding grounds, while at the same time it is not essentially a part of
the life history of the animal, as the breeding stations formerly occupied
on the Californian coast show. It is fur ther. instructive to mention, that
as the result of inquiries made on this point from those most familiar with
the subject in New Zealand, the Falkland Islands, and Cape Colony, it
is found that the closely related fur-seal of the Southern Hemisphere
does not regularly migrate over great tracts of the ocean, but, when
occupying stations where the conditions are favourable for its existence
throughout the year, it merely approaches the shores and lands upon
them at the breeding season. The continued presence of fur-seals about
the Commander Islands in mild winters, likewise shows that even in
the case of the fur-seal of the North Pacific, it requires the prompting
afforded by decided changes in the seasons to keep up the regularity
of its migratory habits. It has indeed been suggested, and with some
probability, that the seasonal changes in the temperature of the sea
itself may have much to do with impressing regularity on the annual
movement of migration, or, in other words, that when this temperature
falls below or rises above certain limits, the seals begin to move south-
ward or northward in search of less frigid or Jess heated waters. The
data at hand are, however, insufficient for a detailed study of this point.
* “Voyage autour du Monde, 1790-92,” tome V, p. 65.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 61
(iii. )—Distribution at Sea.
209. The distribution and mode of occurrence of the fur-seals at sea
when congregated in their winter habitats on the two sides of the
North Pacific, and while migrating, have already been noticed. While
the information on these points is not as complete as could be wished,
it is sufficient to show in a general way how the fur-seal is affected in
its movements by currents, drift, and winds. In speaking of its food
and feeding habits on a subsequent page, it further becomes apparent
in what manner the seals congregate and travel in following certain
food fishes. It appears to be rather in consequence of such circum-
stances, operating conjointly upon these pelagic animals, than to any
ruling gregarious tendencies while at sea that they become collected
into “schools” or groups of greater or Jess dimensions. ‘This at least
is the result of the examinations made during the summer of 1891 in
Behring Sea, where, though two or three seals were often seen actually
in company, and occasionally as many as six or eight, the general rule
seemed to be that each seal was pursuing its own course, travelling
sleeping, feeding, or sporting in the water, without reference to others
in the vicinity. This is clearly shown by the observation that even
when passing through an area at sea in which the seals would be noted
as abundant, they are as a matter of fact usually separated by distances
much too great to enable any single animal, or any group of two or
three individuals, to be in any way cognizant of tle presence of the
next adjacent individual or similar group. Apart from seals met with
near the shores of the breeding islands, the densest “‘ school” found by
uS Was on one occasion about five miles to the westward of the land of
St. Paul Island, where about forty seals were counted in a distance run
of two miles. In all other cases, if was exceptional to meet with seals
to the number of four to a mile run, while two to a mile run was much
above the average even when passing through areas of abundance. It
is thus evident that the seals had been brought together in such areas
of abundance by reason of common conditions rather than by their
own volition.
210. In order to arrive at as complete a knowledge as possible of the
actual distribution of the fur-seal in Behring Sea, a circular was pre-
pared, in which it was requested that regular seal logs should be kept
on the British eruizer s, and, through the kindness of the Commander-
in-chief on the Pacific Station, communicated to their Commanders.
The work was taken up with enthusiasm by the various officers, and
maintained throughout the season. Careful observations of the same
kind were also made on our own steamer, the “Danube,” and subse-
quently, through the courtesy of the United States’ Commissioners,
copies of the track-charts, and observations made of seals by the vari-
ous United States’ cruizers, were supplied. Information on the same
subject was also sought in various other ways, such as by inquiry from
the captains and hands of sealing-vessels met in Victoria and Van-
couver, and from the inhabitants of various places touched at during
the summer.
211. Little or nothing has previously been put on record with regard
to the distribution of the fur-seal in Behring Sea during the months of
their stay there, for though the pelagic sealers had formed their own
opinion as to the best regions for carrying on their avocation, they natu-
rally did not make these public, and it is believed that, in some cases at
least, they were rather inclined to keep such knowledge as they
35 had gained by experience entirely private. What has been actu-
ally published on this subject depends principally upon meagre
62 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
observations or ill-founded conjectures such as the resident agents on
the breeding islands have been able to make with their limited oppor-
tunities. The circumstances in 1891 were, however, exceptionally
favourable for acquiring information of a comparable kind on the ques-
tion of distribution.
212. The observations at command for 1891 practically cover pretty
thoroughly the period of about two months during which seals are ordi-
narily taken by pelagic hunters in Behring Sea, extending from the
middle of July to the middle of September, and they are much more
complete for the eastern than for the western part of the Behring Sea.
213. On consideration of the material to be dealt with, it was decided
that it might be most advantageously divided into two periods of about
a month each, the first including all dates from the 15th July to the 15th
August, and the second those between the 15th August and the 15th
September. All the lines cruized over in the first of these periods were
plotted on one set of maps, and those in the second period on another.
The parts of these tracks run over during the night, and in which seals
therefore could not well be observed, were indicated on the maps in a
different manner from the day tracks, as far as possible; and with the
assistance of the logs, the numbers of seals seen in certain intervals
were then entered along the various routes in a graphic manner. The
places in which pelagic sealers had reported seals to be abundant or
otherwise, aS well as those in which sealing-vessels were found at work
by the cruizers, and other facts obtained from various sources, were also
indicated on the maps.
214. Without attempting to enter into further details here as to the
methods employed, the general results arrived at may now be briefly
described:
It is evident, in the first place, that the seals are most abundant in
the water in the immediate vicinity of the shores of the breeding islands,
this abundance of seals extending often not more than half-a-mile from
the fronts of the breeding grounds, and seldom for 3 or 4 miles in such
a way as to be at all notable. In the case of the Pribyloff Islands, it
is also observed that seals were numerous in both the monthly periods
in the tract included in a general way between St. Paul and St. George
Islands, though they differed much in this respect even at nearly
approximate dates. It is further clearly shown that the Pribyloff and
Commander groups form the main centres of abundance of seals in
Behring Sea during the summer; but that while this is undoubtedly the
case, the seals are not found to decrease in numbers with any approx-
imation to regularity in zones concentric with the islands,—always
excluding the seals in the immediate neighbourhood of the shores.
215. It is therefore not possible to outline a series of zones in which
the number of seals present will bear an inverse ratio to the distance
from the islands. It is, however, possible to draw an approximate limit
for a region about the Pribyloff group, which will roughly define the
area of abundant seals at sea during each of the two monthly periods
chosen. In the case of the region about the Commander Islands, data,
though almost wanting for the first monthly period, and but scanty for
the second, are sufficient to indicate a general mode of distribution
similar to that demonstrable in the first case. Within the areas of
abundant seals, these animals are, however, by no means regularly
distributed, even at any particular fixed date, but are scattered in
irregular patches in the diffuse character already described, and are
very often thickest locally towards the outer limits of the area.
216. Beyond these areas, seals are found more or iess sparsely scat-
tered over a great part of Behring Sea, which in the first period extends,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 63
in the longitude of the Pribyloff Islands, from the Aleutian chain north-
ward to about the 59th degree of latitude, includes the whole vicinity
of the western Aleutian Islands, and spreads again to a greater width
with the Commander Islands as a centre.
217. In 1891 the area of abundant seals about the Pribyloff Islands
appeared to be not only changed in form, but considerably reduced in
size in the second monthly period; while that of scattered seals was
not only changed in form, but much enlarged in area. It appears, that
in most years, in the later summer this area of scattered seals extends
to the north-east of the Commander Islands, quite to, or even beyond,
the 60th parallel of north latitude. This particular extension is prob-
ably to be explained by the drift of that branch of the Japan current
which flows through the western part of Behring Sea, assisted by the
prevailing southerly winds in the same part of the sea in June and
July;* while the comparatively restricted spread in a northward direc-
tion in the eastern part of the sea may be similarly connected with the
general movement of the water from north to south in that region.
36 218. The northern outline of this wider region of scattered
seals in the second monthly period, may be practically assumed
as that of the normal range of the fur-seal to the north, and is adopted
as such on one of the accompanying maps. On other maps the outlines
of the areas of abundant and scattered seals in each monthly period are
Shown. The extreme northern range of the fur-seal, however, extends
far beyond the line just referred to, for Captain Healey and Lieutenant
Jarvis, of the United States Revenue Cruizer “Bear,” state that fur-
seals are occasionally seen by whalers as far as St. Lawrence Island, and
even on the northern shores of that island. They also found in 1891, at
Cape Tchaplin or Indian Point on the Siberian coast, the natives in
possession of a few skins of old bull seals, which they stated had been
taken near St. Lawrence Island. Our own inquiries on that island and
at Plover Bay on the Siberian coast were purely negative as regards
fur-seals, though hair seals, including the rare banded or ribbon seal
(Histriophoca fasciata), were being taken by the Tuskis in nets. It
was, however, further ascertained that one or two instances had occurred
of old male seals being taken near St. Michael, not far from the Yukon
mouth, and it is therefore probable that a line drawn from Cape Tchap-
lin to this place may be considered as defining the extreme maximum
northern range of the fur-seal of the North Pacific. This limit, how-
ever, appears to be but rarely attained, and then only by mature and old
males, which have probably become useless on the breeding rookeries,
and have been driven or have wandered away alone far from their kind.
219. With the idea that the general distribution of the fur seals in
Behring Sea, from the breeding islands as centres, might show some
direct relation to the prevailing winds, meteorological observations
made during the summer by ourselves and on several of the cruizers
were sent to the Meteorological Department of Canada, and were there,
under the direction of Mr. Carpmael, analyzed by Mr. Stupart, who
prepared wind-roses for each of the monthly periods for the vicinity of
the Pribyloff Islands. The observations taken near the Commander
Islands were, however, insufficient for such treatment. The wind-roses
thus obtained for the vicinity of the Pribyloff Islands were then com-
pared, both in a direct and in an inverse sense, with the outlines of the
area of abundant seals, but without bringing to light any manifest con-
nection of the kind conjectured, though there appeared to be a slight
balance of evidence in favour of the belief that the seals tended rather to
* See Maps 37 and 39, “ Challenger Expedition Report,” Physics and Chemisty, vol. ii.
64 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
travel against the wind than with it. So far, therefore, as this evidence
goes, it seems to show that the seals found at sea, even in the regions
in which they are not very far from the breeding islands, are not ani-
mals which have only temporarily left the islands, for in this case their
movements would almost certainly show some obvious relation to the
prevailing wind and weather. The fact that they do not do so, in itself
suggests that the seals met with at sea really form practically inde-
pendent pelagic schools of a diffuse kind.
220. An examination of the area surrounding the Pribyloff Islands in
which seals were abundant in 1891, together with such other facts bear-
ing on former years as could be obtained from pelagic sealers, indicates
that the maximum limit to which this area may reach from the islands
in the summer months in any direction is not more than about 180 miles,
and it is probable that similar conditions obtain with regard to the
Commander Islands.
221. Respecting the number of fur-seals to be found at sea within the
areas of abundance above referred to, and exclusive of those frequent-
ing the islands and their immediate shores, it is difficult to attain to
anything like certain results. The endeavour has been made, how-
ever, in a tentative way to reach some roughly approximate estimates,
by finding the number of seals actually seen in measured lengths of
runs in or across such areas, chosen as typical, and made at different
times in both monthly periods. The results obtained varied somewhat
widely, as might be expected, not alone in consequence of the actual
difference in density of the seals, but also from circumstances con-
nected with the weather and the state of the sea surface. The obser-
vations made were, however, combined in a general average, which,
when thus treated, showed about one seal noted to each mile run. On
the assumption (which cannot be very far from the fact) that on the
average a width of half-a-mile was efficiently scanned from the deck,
this would give a mean number of two fur-seals to each square mile of
sea surface within the area referred to.
222, As to the much larger area of scattered seals, it is still more
difficult in this case to arrive at any even approximately accurate
results, for though long runs were often made without meeting any
seals, limited patches of relatively abundant seals were sometimes met
with, and these seemed to be quite irregularly distributed. It appears
probable, however, that the density of seals within these areas does not
exceed, but may reach, about one to five square miles.
37 223. No connected body of observations is in existence as to
the actual abundance of seals at sea and their distribution in
various parts of their range in different years, but more attention has
naturally been paid to this since the development of pelagic sealing.
The following references on this subject have been found in documents
already published, or obtained in evidence. They are together suffi-
cient at least to show that the distribution of the seals at sea, particu-
larly as between different parts of their winter habitat, is subject to
considerable variation.
1866. Judge J. G. Swan says, that between 1857 and 1866 fur-seals
were very scarce about Cape Flattery, and that it is only since the last-
mentioned year that they have begun to resort to the vicinity of Fuca
Strait in such great numbers.*
[This statement is probably based on the number of skins actually
taken by the Indians, and may in part, at least, be explained by the
*<Wishery Industries of the United. States,” vol. ii, p. 394,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 65
fact that for a number of years the Indians scarcely hunted the fur-seal
§ 562).]
1868. 5,000 fur-seals are said to have been killed about the Strait of
Fuea in this year.*
1869. Bryant speaks of the abundance of fur-seals off the coasts of
Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia in this as compared with
former years.t
1872. Captain Lewis, then connected with the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany, stated that in 1872 “immense numbers of fur-seal pups and
yearlings” were observed in the ocean off Vancouver Island and the
entrance to Fuca Straits. That he bad never during thirty years of
previous service on the north-west coast seen or heard of such an abun-
dance of fur-seals. He thought that “8,000 or 9,000 skins, chiefly pups
and yearlings,” were taken.+
1873. Captain Lewis, previously cited, stated that in this year very
few fur-seals were seen off the British Columbian coast. His figures
showed only ‘600 or 700 skins; these were all older ones.”§
1866 to 1880. Writing in 1880, Judge J.G. Swan says: “ This unpree-
edented number of seals which made their appearance, a number which
seems to have increased every season since 1866, will give employment
to a larger fleet of vessels another year. ||
1880. Fur-seals were reported in great abundance 100 to 300 miles
off-shore, by vessels making for the Strait of Fuca.
According to Judge J. G. Swan,{] the canoe catch of Neah Bay
(Makah) Indians in this year was 1,558,
1881. Mr. Marsilliot, second engineer of United States Revenue Cut-
ter “Wolcott,” states that in this year fur-seals were very abundant in
Puget Sound, and were taken as far in as Hoods Canal.**
1888. Judge J. G. Swan, in a letter to Senator Dolph, says: “Seals
are reported as being unusually numerous this season, and are in
myriads. California steamers report running through one herd which
extended 100 miles, and the seals appeared to be as thick as they could
Swim.” {t
1889. Captain J. D. Warren, who has been actively engaged in seal-
ing for twenty years, states that during that time he has noticed no
diminution in the number of seals at sea, but, if any change at all, an
increase. tt
1889. Captain W. O’Leary, with four years’ experience, says: ‘I do
not think there is any decrease in the number of seals entering Behring
Sea. I never saw so many seals along the coast as there were this
year, and in Behring Sea they were more numerous than I ever saw
before.” § §
1890. Mr. A. R. Milne, Collector of Customs at Victoria, summariz-
ing the information obtained by him from sealers respecting that season,
says: “I can now safely repeat what I have already said and written,
that owners and masters do not entertain the slightest idea that the
seals are at all scarcer.” He adds, that statements made to a contrary
* Dall. ‘Alaska and its Resources,” p. 493.
t ‘‘Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 332.
t Quoted by Elliott, United States Census Report, p. 166.
§ United States Census Report, p. 166.
| ‘Fishery Industries of the United States,” vol. ii, p. 397.
q Ibid., p. 394.
** Quoted by Judge J. G. Swan in Ball. ‘‘United States Fishery Commission,” vol.
lii, p. 206.
tt Parliamentary Paper [C. 6181], p. 192.
tt Ibid., p. 356.
$§ Ibid., p. 357.
BS, PL VI——5
66 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
effect in the press are believed to have been inspired by interested
motives.*
1590 and 1891. Mr. R. H. Pideock, Indian, reports that the Indians
of northern port of Vancouver Island say the fur-seals have been less
plentiful than before during these two years.
Mr. Harry Guillod, Indian Agent for the west coast of Van-
38 couver Island, says that the Indians report an unusual abundance
of seals in these two years, while they were scarce for three years
previously.
1891. Mr. C. Todd, Indian agent at Metla-Katla, on the northern part
of the coast of British Columbia, states that the Indians believe the
number of fur-seals to have been about the same for the past twenty
years.
Respecting the number of seals met with at sea in this year, the
following statements occur in the sworn evidence of sealers:
C. J. Kelly: Seals are as plentiful this year from the coast (of British
Columbia) to the Shumagin Islands as last year.
Captain W. Petit: From Cape Flattery north, seals were more plenti-
ful than any year since 1886; in Behring Sea, as plentiful as in former
years.
Captain W.E. Baker: Along the coast to the Shumagin Islands seals
were as plentiful in some places as the year before; in others, more
plentiful. No material difference in my average catch for last four
years. No decrease in number of seals in late years.
Captain A. Bisseti: Seals were as plentiful last year as in previous
years along the coast.
Captain T. M. Magnesen: Seals were more plentiful last year than I
had ever seen them, both in Behring Sea and along the coast.
Richard Thompson: Seals were as plentiful last year as the year
before.
Andrew Laing: No decrease in seals last year.
Captain W. Cox: Seals were as plentiful last year as ever before.
Captain C. Hackett: Found the seals as plentiful on the coast last
year as in former years. Seals were more numerous in Behring Sea
than I ever saw them before.
Captain C. McDougal: Found the seals thicker in Behring Sea than
ever before.
A. Douglas: Had sealed seven years. Noticed no decrease in number
of seals last year. Thought they appeared a little shyer. Saw more
seals and larger bodies of seals in Behring Sea than ever before.
L. L. McLean: Seals were more plentiful last year. Never saw seals
so plentiful in Behring Sea before (in seven years’ experience).
1892 (January). Judge J. G. Swan, in a letter, states that Indians
report seals unusually abundant off Cape Flattery and about Barclay
Sound.
(B.)\—Food of the Fur-seal.
224, The broad and general facts of the annual migration habits of
the fur-seal do not appear to depend primarily upon the pursuit of
food, but rather seem to be governed by the instinctive resort to the
breeding islands in the spring, followed by the equally instinctive
departure for more southern latitudes on the approach of the cold and
snows of winter. The distribution and migrations of the animals upon
which the seals depend for food doubtless have, however, a consider-
* Parliamentary Paper [C. 6253], p. 78.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 67
able influence on the movements of the seal in a subordinate degree,
and particularly upon its abundance or otherwise at various times in
different parts of its summer and winter habitats. Some of the last
observations quoted have a direct bearing on this point.
225. Most of the information gained on this subject is the result of
special inquiries made among the native hunters of different parts of
the coast, and of questions addressed to the pelagic sealers. The
knowledge procured by these people is obtained in various ways. Seals
are often seen at sea actually pursuing fish of different kinds, or com-
ing to the surface with a fish held in the jaws. The stomachs of seals
killed at sea are frequently well filled with fish, and are, from motives
of curiosity sometimes examined. It is also often noticed that a seal,
when taken into a canoe, vomits the entire contents of the stomach.
Another, and, though less direct, scarcely less trustworthy source of
information, is the locally-observed coincidence in abundance of seals
with that of certain kinds of fish.
226. Without quoting at length the numerous statements obtained
on this point, it may be said that the general tenour of the evidence
shows, that while the fur-seal has been known to eat almost all kinds of
fish, including cod and even halibut, its favourite diet consists of small
fish, of which the herring, probably from its size and from its gregarious
habit, is altogether the most important. The appearance of seals
toward spring in the inner waters along the coast of British Columbia,
and the numbers seen there at any particular place or time, bear a very
close relation to the occurrence of shoals of herring, while some of the
most notable cases of the penetration of seals into the narrow channels
about the estuary of the Nass, Skeena, and Knight’s Inlet have
39 been directly traced to their pursuit of the ulachan, or candle-
fish, then resorting to these places to spawn.
227. Another animal, which may be classed as a special food of the
fur-seal, is the squid or cuttle-fish. LEvidetce of this has been obtained
at various points along the British Columbian coast and in the Com-
mander Islands, and of the seal stomachs opened by us on the Priby-
loft Islands, besides a very few fish-bones the beaks of squid were about
the only traces of food found. It is perhaps further worth noting in
this connection, that Captain Morrell many years ago stated, with
special reference to the fur-seal of the Falkland Islands, that they are
said to live on the squid.*
228. Itis particularly along the British Columbian coast, within the
winter habitat of the fur-seal, that the connection of its movements
with those of the herring has been traced. Unfortunately, little is
accurately known about the migratory habits of the herring in any part
of the world, and the information respecting the migrations of this fish
on the West Coast is exceedingly imperfect. It is probable that here,
as elsewhere, the migrations of the herring are somewhat capricious,
and that this fish regularly approaches the shores in large schools only
about the spawning season, while its movements at other times are
largely governed by the relative abundance on different parts of the
surface of the ocean of the minute crustaceans and other pelagic organ-
isms upon which it lives. This, again, depends on the winds and cur-
rents and temperature, and to the interaction of these several factors,
the sudden appearance or disappearance of bodies of fur-seals, in
various parts of their winter habitat particularly, may doubtless be
traced.
*Dall, “Alaska and its Resources,” p. 492,
68 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
229. In the summer habitat within Behring Sea, it has been noted by
some of the more intelligent pelagic sealers that fur-seals are found to
be numerous where ‘ whale-food”. abounds. The “whale-food” met
with in these seas consists of similar minute organisms to those com-
posing ‘herring-food,” and the seals are doubtless in search of the
smaller fishes which may be living upon this food. A further cireum-
stance having the same general bearing is the frequently-observed
association of seals at sea, particularly in Behring Sea, with abundance
of single fronds or tangled masses of drift kelp. This no doubt depends
partly on the fact that the kelp affords shelter and a measure of pro-
tection not only to the minute pelagic organisms, but also to the various
small fishes which prey upon these. It is, however, to be explained for
the most part by the circumstance, that the drift kelp accumulates in
areas of eddy or slack-water between the various marine currents, into
which these minute organisms with surface-fishes and the fur-seals
themselves naturally drift.
230. The most important point to be gathered from these observations
is, that the fur-seal is not usually a bottom feeder, and that it is not
necessary that its fishing-grounds should be found upon submarine
banks situated at such moderate depths as those to which the seal may
attain by diving or “sounding,” a hypothesis often advanced by theorists,
but which finds little basis in the known facts.
231. That the fur-seal is essentially a pelagic surface feeder, is further
shown by the fact that it is not known to resort habitually to the best
fishing banks in Behring Sea, such, for instance, as the Baird bank, and
that fish, such as the cod and halibut, inhabiting water of some depth
and feeding along the bottom, are often found in considerable numbers,
not only near the breeding islands of the seal, but even in the imme-
diate vicinity of the breeding rookeries of these islands. Such fish
are actually caught at various seasons by the natives of the Pribyloff
Islands within 1 or 2 miles of some of the largest rookeries on the south
side of St. Paul fsland, and not more than 24 or 3 miles off the rookeries
on the north shore of St. George Island. On one occasion, while at
ancbor for a short time within less than half-a-mile from the largest
rookery on Behring Island, at Cape Yushin, over twenty cod, with some
other fishes, were caught from our steamer with two or three hand lines,
in water not more than 6 or 7 fathoms in depth.
232. Some particulars are given on a later page respecting the absten-
tion from food of the fur-seals while remaining upon or about the breed-
ing islands. It appears to be certain that the mature males doing duty
on the breeding rookeries do not feed at all during the breeding season,
and that for some time, at least several weeks, after landing, the breeding
females do not leave the rookery grounds in search of food. There is
no apparent reason why the ‘“holluschickie,” or young males, should
not go to sea in quest of fish. Singularly enough, however, though
animals of this class have been killed by hundreds of thousands upon
the breeding islands under all conceivable conditions of weather, and
often within less than an hour of their deportation from their
40 hauling-grounds, the almost universal testimony is to the effect
that their stomachs are invariably found to be free from food.
233. With a view to obtain such direct information on this subject as
might be possible, the stomachs of seals killed in our presence were
examined; and though the results of these examinations, noted below,
do not entirely confirm the statement just referred to, they show a
remarkable absence of food. The number of seals which it was thus
possible to examine was of course small,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 69
On St. George Island, twenty seals were killed on the 1st August in
our presence. These were selected from a drive made from the nearest
part of the Great Northern Rookery, to the killing ground about half-
a-mile distant, and had been about three hours off the rookery before
they were killed. Of these twenty young males, the stomachs gave
the following results:
Seventeen: no food whatever, in most a little slimy matter, froth or
bile, and often a few lively worms.
One: a handful of small pebbles.
One: a clot of brownish blood.
One: an isopod crustacean, about an inch in length, and a few frag-
ments of fish bones.
234. On St. Paul Island, the 3rd August, the stomachs of ninety-
eight young males were examined. These were selected from a drive
made from Zoltoi sands to the killing ground, a distance of about 2,000:
feet, from which they had been driven early in the same morning, pos-
sibly two or three hours before being killed. The contents of these
stomachs, in addition to a few worms present in many Cases, were as.
follows:
Sixty-five, contained nothing, or, in some cases, a pinch of sand, or
a small quantity of slimy or fr othy, matter.
Seventeen, contained pebbles, sometimes several, in other cases but
a single pebble.
Six, showed a rather notable quantity of bright yellow bile.
Four, contained some blood, generally somewhat changed in colour
by the action of the gastric juices, and in one or two cases clotted.
Three, contained the horny armatures or beaks of squids only; one
of these a single beak, another two beaks, and the third three beaks.
One, held some pebbles, the ear-bone of a fish (cod?), and a few
pieces of broken dead shell.
One, held some pebbles and broken pieces of dead shell, with a single
beak of squid.
One, showed a very small piece of kelp only.
235. From the large North Rookery ou Behring Island, 5th Septem-
ber, an adult male or “seacatch,” two females, and an unweaned pup,
were driven directly from the rookery ground, about 200 yards distant,
and killed, by permission of the authorities, for presentation by us as
specimens to the British Museum. ‘The stomachs of all four were com-
pletely empty, with the exception of a few worms in those of the three
adults. Not only the pup, but the females, and even the old male, were.
fat and in good condition.
236. Respecting the pebbles frequently found in the stomachs of the:
fur-seal, it has been suggested by Mr. Elliott that these may be swal-
lowed for the purpose of destroying the worms often observed. It has
further been suggested that such stones have incidentaly found their
way into the seals’ stomachs attached to sea-weeds, or zoophytes eaten:
by the seals; but little can be said in favour of this theory. The habit
is one, however, not peculiar to the fur-seal, but common to most pin-
nipeds. feo bne largest of those pebbles actually collected from the
stomachs of the seals above noted as having been killed on St. Paul on
the 3rd August, is a flat stone, 14 inch in length and 1 inch in breadth,
but much larger ones have often been found. Itis probable that individ-
ual stones do not as a rule remain very long in the stomach; for about
one-half of those collected on this occasion were rough scoriaceous
* «Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 354,
70 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
fragments, showing little or no sign of attrition. The other moiety
was more or less perfectly rounded, and a certain number showed a
peculiar fine polish, probably to be attributed to wear in the stomach
of the animal. About one-seventh of the entire number represent
rocks not found on the Pribyloff Islands, or, if occurring at all, only
very exceptionally as erratics carried there attached to the roots of
drift trees or kelp, or brought upon floating ice. These have, in all
probability, been borne by the seals themselves from some distant
localities. The remaining and much the larger part of the collection
consists of ordinary voleanic pebbles, such as might be picked up any-
where on the beaches of the Pribyloff or the Aleutian Islands.
41 237. The Aleut foreman in charge of the rookeries on Behring
Island stated that the young seals began to swailow pebbles
when about four months old, after which they become thin. If correct,
this statement would appear to mean that it is about the time at which
the young are weaned that this habit is first developed. He also said
that, when seals of mature age were observed to swallow stones, they
were (or became) thin, and this may possibly be regarded rather as the
effect of the gastric worms than of the pebbles. The same man added,
and entirely as an idea original with himself, that when the seals first
arrived at the Commander Islands each year, they contained stones
unlike those to be found upon the islands, and which he conjectured
had been picked up upon the Kamtschatka coast. In the stomach of
the seal pup examined for us by Dr. Giinther at the British Museum,
it will be noted that a stone was found, although the pup was supposed
to be about seventeen days old only. (Appendix D.)
238. On several of the rookery- and hauling-grounds of the Pribyloff
Islands there is to be seen a notable abundance of small rounded peb-
bles, just such as those found in the stomachs of the seals. As these
lie upon the surface, often far above any possible action of the sea, and
as there is no evidence of beaches of such rolled stones due to former
periods of greater submergence upon the Pribyloff Islands, the con-
jecture appears to be legitimate that these have, in the course of years,
been brought and accumulated by the seals themselves. Whether
voided or disgorged from time to time upon the rookery grounds, or
whether accumulated by a slower process consequent on the occasional
death of seals upon these grounds, cannot be decided. The suggestion
here made, it should be stated, is due to Mr. J. Stanley-Brown.
239. The blood noticed in some of the stomachs may probably be
attributed to the laceration of the tongue by the teeth, or to congestion
and extravasation of the nasal membranes brought about by the severe
ordeal of dviving. Its presence in the alimentary tract is at least
seareely explicable as the result of internal lesions.
240. In the middle of September, when paying a last visit to the
Pribyloff Islands, several of the young seals of the same year, then
well grown, were observed upon water-washed rocks, either playing
with or eating fronds of kelp. Mr. J. C. Redpath stated that he
believed the seals actually ate the kelp as a part of their food, but from
personal observation no statement could be made to this effect, and it
is considered very doubtful.
241. Colonel J. Murray informed us that, in 1890, the young seals or
pups killed as food for natives on the Pribyloff Islands about the 4th
and 8th November, had not even at that date been weaned, but were
found full of milk. He further stated, that such pups had been driven
in the very early morning to the killing grounds, and sometimes not
killed till late in the evening, thus insuring a period of at least fifteen
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. vial
hours from the time at which they had had any possible connection with
their mothers. Others, again, had not been killed till the following
morning, enlarging the necessary time of abstinence from suckling to
twenty-four hours from the time of last suckling. These observations
appear to show that the young seals are capable of laying 1 in a very con-
siderable reserve in the way of mother’s milk, and have important bear-
ings on the general question of the time’during which the mothers may
absent themselves from the breeding rookeries at earlier dates in the
history of the young.
242, Perhaps the most notable feature in regard to this food question,
and one directly consequent on the prolonged abstinence of the seals
from food while on and about the islands, is the entire absence of all
excrement on the rookeries and hauling grounds. Captain Bryant
appears, however, to be the only author who has specially mentioned
this particular and striking fact. He writes:
The fact of their remaining without food seems so contrary to nature, that it seems
to me proper to state some of the evidences of it. Having been assured by the natives
that such was the fact, I deemed it of sufficient importance to test it by all the means
available. Accordingly, I took special pains to examine daily a large extent of the
rookery, and note carefully the results of my observations. The rocks on the rook-
ery are worn smooth and washed clean by the spring-tides, and any discharge of
excrement could not fail to be detected. I found, ina few instances where newly-
arrived seals had made asingle discharge of red-coloured excrement, but nothing was
seen afterwards to show that such discharges were continued, or any evidence that
the animals had partaken of food. ‘They never left the rocks except when compelled
by the heat of the sun to seek the water to cool themselves. They are then absent
from the land for but a short time. I also examined the stomachs of several hundred
young ones, killed by the natives for eating, and always withont finding any trace of
food in them. The same was true of the few nursing females killed for dissection.
On their arrival in the spring they are very fat and unwieldy, but when they leave,
after their four months’ fast, they are very thin, being reduced to one-half their
former weight.
42 In a note appended to the above by Professor Allen, that gen-
tleman writes: “Steller states that in the numerous specimens
he dissected he always found the stomachs empty, and remarks that
they take no food during the several weeks they remain on land; Mr.
Dall confirms the same statement in respect to the present species, and
Captains Cook, Weddel, and others, who have had opportunities of
observing the different southern species, affirm the same fact in respect
to the latter. Lord Shuldham long since stated that the walrus had
the same habit, though its actual fast seems somewhat shorter than
those of the eared seals. . . . This singular phenomenon of a pro
tracted annual fast during the period of parturition and the nursing of
the young—the season when most mammals require the most ample
sustenance—seems not wholly confined to the walruses and eared seals.
So far as known, however, it is limited to the pinnipedes; and, except-
ing in the case of a single member, the sea-elephant, to the two above-
named families. By some of the old writers the sea-elephant was said
to feed sparingly, at this time, on the grasses and sea-weeds that grew
in the vicinity of its breeding places, but the weight of the evidence in
respect to this point seems to indicate that this species fasts similarly
to the eared seals and walruses during the period it resorts to the land
to bring forth its young.” *
243. The fur-seals on Juan Fernandez are likewise reported, and
without qualification as to sex, to abstain from nourishment during the
breeding season: ‘Toward the end of the month of June these animals
*On the Eared Seals. ‘Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. ” vol. ii, No. 1, pp. 101, 102. See
also Senate, Ex. Doc. No. 32, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, p. b.
a2 _ REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
come on shore to bring forth their young, and remain to the end of
September without stirring from the spot, and without taking any kind
of nourishment.” *
Though not at the time aware of Bryant’s statement, above quoted,
the absence of excrementitious matter was one of the first points noted
and remarked on by us after landing upon the Pribyloff rookeries, and
it is to the absence of such matter alone that the continuous herding
together on one spot for several months of so many thousand animals is
on sanitary grounds rendered possible. It became obvious that so soon
as the seals commence again to feed, it must be absolutely necessary for
them to abandon their crowded quarters on shore. The evidence thus
afforded, that the females do not feed to any notable extent until the
young are practically weaned, or, at all events, until very late in the
suckling season, is perhaps more definite than that given in any other
way.
(C.)—Physical Characteristics of the Pribyloff and Commander Islands,
and Nature of the Breeding Grounds.
244, The principal breeding places of the fur-seal of the North Pacific
at the present time, are the Pribyloff and Commander Islands, and,
omitting certain exceptional periods dependent chiefly on the interrup-
tion of natural conditions brought about by the slaughter of seals, it
appears that the Pribyloff Islands have, within historic times, been fre-
quented by larger numbers of seals than the Commander Islands.
Recent changes, depending chiefly on the circumstances which have
occurred in the first-named islands, have, however, at the present time,
produced a nearer approach to equality in numbers as between the two
groups of islands than has been normal. Of other breeding places in
the North Pacific still known to be frequented by smaller numbers of
seals, Robben Island is the most important, but of these some notes are
given later.
245, While it has not been disproved that the fur-seal may bring forth
its young upon detached floating masses of the great kelp of the Pacific,
particularly in cases where the gravid female has been prevented from
reaching the breeding places on shore in due time, such instances, if
they occur, must be quite exceptional... As to the alleged birth of young
at sea, the result of careful inquiries of various kinds shows thatif this
Should occur without the presence of any resting place, the young prob-
ably perish, for, though undoubtedly capable at birth, and even if cut
from the mother before birth, of swimming fora shorter or longer time,
the young is not suited at once for a pelagic existence, and authentic
instances in which females with recently-born young have been seen at
sea are very rare. It may be mentioned here, however, that some of
the Indians of the northern part of the coast of British Columbia aver
that they have seen the female fur-seal swimming with its young on its
back in the manner said to be practised by the sea-otter, and actually
observed in the case of the hair-seal, but this statement has not been
fully authenticated.
246. The normal habits of the fur-seal are such as to require a
43 safe terrestrial retreat at the season during which the young is
born, where the young may remain undisturbed for a period of
three or possibly four months, or till such time as they may be able to
assume the pelagic habits of the adult. It is therefore primarily for
the purpose of giving birth to their young and suckling them that the
female fur-seals seek the breeding islands. At other seasons they do
“Quoted in United States Census Report, p. 122.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 73
not require to land anywhere, and, asa matter of fact, they very seldom
do so. It has frequently been stated that the mating of the male and
female must be accomplished on shore, but there is ample proof that
this is not true, and that the male and female come together with equal
facility in the water. Itis thus evident that the ruling motive for the
landing and sojourn ashore of the seals, is the birth of the young, and
that the habit of the males in frequenting the breeding rookeries and
seeking the females there after the young have been born has grown up
from this or in connection with it. With many animals the male has a
function to fulfil on the breeding places in protecting the young, but in
this instance the males are neither called upon, nor do they show any
natural disposition, to exert themselves in this particular direction.
247. The Commander and Pribyloff Islands when originally discov-
ered in 1741 and 1786 respectively, were entirely uninhabited by man;
nor has any evidence been found since on either group to show that man
had ever previously visited them, With the exception of St. Matthew
Island, which, by reason of the late date to which the ice often lingers
about its shores, is not suited to become a habitual breeding resort of
the fur-seal, these two groups of islands are the only ones in Behring
Sea, or, for that matter, in the whole northern part of the North Pacific,
which were not either peopled by natives or regularly visited by them
on their hunting and fishing expeditions. To this cause rather than to
any other is to be attributed the fact that these islands became the
permanent breeding resorts of the fur-seal. The cool and humid sum-
mer climate may doubtless in itself have been congenial to the seal, but
in this respect, and also in the temperature of the sea surrounding them,
well-marked differences occur as between the two groups, while almost
any of the very numerous islands of the Aleutian chain afford surround-
ings so similar in the matter of climate that they wouid undoubtedly
have afforded suitable breeding places if similarly uninhabited. The
islands of this chain were, however, then thickly inhabited by the Aleuts,
and as the fur-seal, when resorting to and remaining upon the shores dur-
ing the breeding season, is practically defenceless and incapable alike
of resistance or effective flight, while its flesh and fat are highly prized
by all native tribes as food, it is probable that no breeding stations could
long be maintained there or on any other lands similarly peopled.
Captain Scammon nevertheless states that fur-seals formerly occupied,
in addition to the Pribyloff and Commander Islands, “several of the
more isolated points in the Aleutian chain.”* He does not, however,
particularize further, or say whether he speaks from personal observa-
tion, or from what source his information was obtained.
248. The fact that fur-seals of the same species formerly had breeding-
places ou such islands as the Farallones of the Californian coast, under
climatic conditions perhaps as different as it is easy to imagine, is alone
sufficient to show that climate was not the ruling factor in the choice
of the Pribyloff and Commander Islands by the fur-seals of the North
Pacific. If further evidence be required it is furnished by the facts
relating to the species of fur-seal inhabiting the southern hemisphere,
which, though differing from that of the North Pacificin structural points,
is so similar in habit as to furnish a case in point. Here also it is found
that all the notable breeding places or rookeries were discovered upon
insular lands to which man had never come, and on which, during this
critical period of the annual cycle of its life, the fur-seal was also exempt
from the attacks of other terrestrial animals to which it would have been
*@Marine Mammalia,” p. 155.
74 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
an easy prey. This being granted, it is, perhaps, a legitimate subject
of speculation what the conditions in the North Pacific were before the
present races peopled its shores and nearer islands, and more particu-
larly before the islands of the Aleutian chain were peopled. Dall has
shown it to be probable that even these islands were inhabited from a
very remote period, that the population was throughout of an innuit
type, and that the occupation of the islands proceeded from east to
west.* It ean scarcely be doubted that in still earlier times the fur-
seals resorted to many or to all of these islands at the breeding season,
but that as the islands became occupied successively by the predecessors
of the modern Aleuts, this animal, from the nature of its habits, was
the first to find them no longer safe or congenial. When discovered by
the Russians it was estimated that the population of the chain amounted
to 50,000, and in this fact alone a sufficient reason for the absence of
breeding rookeries of the fur-seal is found.
44 249. The Pribyloff Islands are almost entirely, and the Com-
mander Islands are chiefly, composed of rocks of volcanic origin,
but in this respett they are by no means singular, and no physical
characteristics dependent on this circumstance are ruling ones in respect
to their fitness as breeding places.
250. The Pribyloff group consists of two rather large islands, St.
Paul and St. George, separated by a distance of about 39 miles, with
two small islets, Walrus Island and Otter Island adjacent to St. Paul.
Of these, Otter Island is about a mile in length, while Walrus Island
is a mere flat rock about a quarter of a mile in length. The seal rook-
eries are all situated either on St. Paul or St. George. and those on St.
Paul are considerably the more important. St. Paul Island is about 13
miles in length by 6 in breadth, while St. George island is about 14
miles in length, by 5 miles in greatest breadth, with a somewhat infe-
rior area.
251. As already stated, both are composed of volcanic rocks, prob-
ably referable to the latest stages of the Tertiary period, and consisting
largely of basalts or basalt-like rocks in the form of nearly horizontal
beds, often distinctly columnar where broken off in cliffs. There are,
however, certain beds of scoriaceous material which are included
between those representing originally molten matter. These islands
appear, in fact, to be the result of old submarine volcanic eruptions,
spreading their material in pretty regular layers on the sea-bed, and
eventually rising above the surface of the shallow eastern plateau of
Behring Sea, either because of the mere accumulation of material, or
perhaps more probably with the aid of a local elevatory movement of
somewhat later date. Since the original time of their appearance above
the sea, their margins have been worn into sea-cliffs, or beaten back to
form stretches of sandy beach, by the action of the waves; but in con-
sequence of the absence of older rocks, most of the material for these
beaches, as well as that of the sand dunes which characterize parts of
the coast (particularly on St. Paul Island) is not siliceous, but is com-
posed of the comminuted material of the local volcanic rocks.
252. The surface of St. Paul may be described as consisting of rounded
hills, of which the highest attains an elevation of about 600 feet, con-
nected by flat land, much of which is but little elevated above the sea.
Its shores are not often bold though forming cliffs of moderate height
in some places, particularly about its western end. St. George is, on
the whole, considerably higher, and contains very little low or flat land.
*“Contribimions to North American Ethnology,” vol. i,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 15
Tts surface consists of hills and upland moors, and its highest parts
exceed 900 feet. The shores of St. George are generally steep and bold,
and much of its border is formed by cliffs of considerable height, which
constitute the breeding places of innumerable birds.
253. No tree or shrub occurs on either island, of which the surface is
covered, when not too rocky to support any growth, with grass and
herbaceous vegetation, mingled with moss and lichen on the higher parts.
Neither island affords any harbour, and it is necessary to anchor under
a weather shore and to effect a landing either with an off-shore wind or
in calm weather. The situation of the village on St. Paul is, however,
such that a landing can generally be effected there either on one side or
other of the long south-westerly-extending peninsula terminating in
Reef Point.
254, The breeding rookeries and hauling grounds (or tracts which the
bachelors and other seals not actually engaged in breeding frequent)
are, of course, confined to the immediate vicinity of the coast-line on
bothislands. The seals seldom land and never remain on Walrus Island,
and though in former years many are said to have hauled out on Otter
Island, and some still do so, this is not known to have been occupied as
a breeding station. ,
255. All the existing breeding rookeries on St. Paul and St. George
Islands were visited and examined by us during our first visit to the
islands about the end of July, and some of them were subsequently
re-examined on our second and third visits in the months of August
and September respectively, for the purpose of noting the changes in
the distribution and habits of the seals at various seasons. So much
has, however, already been written in description of the topography of
the various rookery grounds, particularly by Mr. H. W. Elliott, that it
is not here necessary to enter into any minute description of them. It
will serve all practical purposes and will tend to leave the main question
involved unobscured, if the several rookeries are merely characterized
in a very general way, and if their differences and common characters
are subsequently treated of together.
256. There are on St. Paul Island at the present time seven recog-
nized breeding rookeries, of which the names and general characters
are as follows:
(i.) Zapadnie Rookery.—This consists of two parts, which may be
called West and East Zapadnie respectively, separated by a
45 sinall bay with sandy beach, upon which the seals do not remain.
The rookery ground of both parts faces to the south-east, and
consists of rather regular slopes rising from the edge of the sea, and
more or less thickly strewn with angular or sub-angular basaltic blocks.
(ii.) Tolstoi Rookery.—This rookery faces to the north-west, on the
other side of English Bay. The ground occupied by the breeding
seals is, for the most part, a steep and rugged slope, strewn with
angular blocks, and broken by jutting masses of solid rock. At its
north-east end the slopes become lighter, and it merges into the open
and smooth slopes of Middle Hill, which constitute an important
hauling-ground frequented by bachelor seals or holluschickie.
(iii.) Lagoon Rookery.—Facing to the south-west, and open to the
full sweep of the sea only in bearings between south-west and west.
In consequence of the protection aiforded by the long Reef Point, this
rookery ground is the most sheltered of any on either of the islands.
The ground actually occupied by the breeding seals is a narrow and
low reef of well rounded boulders, which separates the sea from a
shallow lagoon.
76 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
(iv.) Reef Rookeries.—Occupying both sides of the outer part of the
long promontory known as Reef Point, and facing to the north-west
aud south-east. The north-western slope, often called Garbotech, is
rather steep, and a part of the rookery-ground occupied on this side
consists of a narrow fringe of rocky shore overlooked by low basaltic
cliffs. A narrow ridge, which is worn bare and occupied as a hauling
ground by holluschickie in the early part of the season, and is fre-
quented by all classes of seals at a later pericd, separates the north-
western from the south-eastern side of Keeft Point. On the south-east
side there is a wide border of flat land but little elevated above the
tide, upon which the greater part of the seals of the rookeries is found.
Almost the whole of the rookery ground of the reef is plentifully strewn
with angular masses of rock, though occasional smooth spaces also
occur. The higher parts of the Reef Point consist very largely of a
bed of voleanic scoriz, lying compact and mach in its original state,
and forming a fine hard surface considerably different from that found
on most of the rookeries.
(v.) Lukannon and Ketavie Rookeries form practically one rookery;
they slope generally eastward, and in parts are much broken by the
irregular jutting out of the solid rock and the many angular masses
which have detached themselves from it.
(vi.) Polavina Reokery.—This faces to the south-eastward and stretches
irregularly along the shore for nearly 1§ miles. The rocky shore is
here bounded on the landward side by a range of low irregular cliffs,
perhaps averaging 40 feet in height, and the br eeding seals for the most
part occupy the upper part of the beach along the base of the cliffs,
together with such breaks and hollows as exist in the cliffs and a wide
rocky reef near the sea level at the southern end of the rookery ground.
A certain proportion of the breeding seals, however, take up stations
upon the upper edge of the cliffs, and later in the season they move
irregularly back upon the low plateau composed of bare volcanic tufa
which rises very gradually toward the distant base of Polavina Hill.
(vii.) North-East Point Rookery.—This is the most important breeding
place upon either of the islands, and might perhaps be more correctly
described as a series of rookeries than asa singleone. North-East Point
is a low peninsula of quadrangular form, connected at one of its angles
by a narrow neck, consisting of sandy flats and high dunes, with the
main island. Hutchinson Hill, probably about 150 feet in height and
near the northern side of peninsula, is its highest point. The rookery
ground runs along the eastern, nor ther ae and north-western shores
almost continuously, and particularly in the
immediate vicinity of Hatchinson Hulten is much wider than in others.
Nearly all this length of shore is strewn thickly with rocky fragments,
which as far as the highest tides reach are usually well rounded, but
farther back are still. angular or sub-angular. Between Hutchinson
Hill and the sea, there is a considerable width of rock-strewn flat land
resembling that of the south-east side of Reef Point, and coinciding
with the most important portion of the rookery.
257. On St. George’s Island there are now five recognized rookery
grounds, four on the northern coast and one in Zapadnie Bay on the
southern coast:
(i.) Zapadnie Rookery.—This breeding ground is more or less perfectly
divided into two parts, one lot of seals occupying a rough bouldery flat
immediately back of the beach, another the slope of a ‘hill a little sth
ther to the south.
¢
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 17
(ii.) Starry Arteel Rookery.—The ground here occupied by the breed-
ing seals is a particularly steep slope, which faces to the eastward and is
broken off at one side, to the north, by the shore cliff, which prevents
the seals when they land from reaching the breeding grounds directly.
(iii.) North Rookery.—This is the most important breeding
46 ground on St. George Island, and irregularly occupies nearly a
mile of the shore. It is supposed to contain about half the entire
number of seals resorting to this island. The shore is here character-
ized by low irregular clifis, with occasional breaks which afford access
to the low plateau above. Most of the breeding seals are, however,
strung along not far from the sea, and gather into larger groups wher-
ever the width of the lower rocky shore is greatest.
(iv.) Little Eastern Rookery is comparatively small, and occupies a
piece of shore not unlike that of many parts of North Rookery.
(v.) Great Eastern Rookery.—This rookery spreads at its western end
part-way up the slopes of a steep and somewhat rocky hill, while its
eastern end runs along the base of the rather high cliffs, on a very rough
and rocky beach forming there a narrow strip just above the wash of
the sea. ,
258. An examination of the various rookeries on the Pribyloff Islands
alone, is sufficient to show that the seals are by no means exacting in
regard to the precise character of the ground occupied. They do not
require a southern or a northern aspect, and the statement that they
land naturally upon the first part of the coast reached on their course
from south to north is contradicted by the position of most of the rook-
eries of St. George Island. Nor do they appear to seek specially either
sheltered or exposed situations, though most of the rookery sites are of
the latter character. Their breeding ground may be nearly flat, or very
steeply inclined, and on it they may be exposed to the driving spray
' from the waves or removed to some distance from the sea and at some
height above it. The feature most peculiar to the rookery grounds, and
common to most of them, is the profusion of detached angular masses
of rock, which depends upon the ease with which the basaltic rocks of
the Pribyloff Islands break up into such blocks under the local climatic
influences. But this cannot be assumed to be an essential requirement
ot the seals, for they are found to be equally at home on beds of well
water-worn boulders and on flats and slopes locally free from stones or
rocky projections.
259. Most of the rookeries on the Pribyloff Islands are characterized
by extensive off-lying beds of kelp, which indicates a gradually shelv-
ing rocky bottom, and implies that any very heavy sea will be broken
and reduced in force before it actually falls upon the land. This may
be a desideratum, but it is not a necessity, as some examples show, and
the kelp-beds are by no means confined to those parts of the shores
adjacent to the rookeries.
~ 260. It appears possible to mention only two conditions which have
been avoided by the seals in the choice of their rookery grounds: these
are mud and loose sand. On muddy ground the fur is doubtless apt to
become uncomfortably clotted, and the sand if driven by the wind or
splashed about by rain is probably also irritating to them. Shifting
sandy ground besides renders the always clumsy locomotion of the seal
when upon the land additionally difficult; but it may be noted that
sandy beaches appear to be well liked by the seals when they haul out
temporarily, and are not actually established for breeding purposes. On
most of the rookery grounds, away from the actual beach, the character
of the soil is such that it becomes beaten down between the projecting
78 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
rocks into a hard and nearly smooth floor, a circumstance which depends
in part on the incorporation with it from year to year of the felted hair
which is shed by the seals themselves during the stagey season.
261, Behring and Copper Islands, forming the Commander group,
differ very considerably in physical aspect from the Pribyloff Islands,
though like them they are entirely destitute of either arboreal or
shrubby growth, and are largely covered by grasses. These two islands
form parallel elevations running in north-west by south-east bearings,
and separated by a least distance of 26 miles. Copper Island, which is
furthest to the eastward, is separated by 190 miles of ocean from Attu
Island, the westernmost of the Aleutian chain. Behring Island is again
removed by a distance of 95 miles from the nearest part of Kam-
tschatka, and though the high voleanic inountains of the peninsula may
in clear weather be seen from the island, the latter is probably never
under any circumstances visible from the mainland. It is, nevertheless,
rather remarkable that the islands of this group had never been inhab-
ited by man until their discovery and occupation by the Russians in
1741, as the distance from the mainland is not so considerable as in
itself to afford a completely satisfactory explanation.
262. Behring Island is about 50 miles in extreme length, with a
width of nearly 20 miles at its northern and widest end. From this it
tapers gradually but irregularly to Cape Maniti, its south-eastern
extremity. The northern half of the island is low, with a rolling or
nearly flat surface, much of which is described as consisting of ‘ tun-
dra” land. It includes one large lake, which discharges on the north-
ern Shore. The southern half is higher, and appears, as seen
47 from the sea, to consist of a mass of rounded hills of heights
varying from several hundred to perhaps 1,000 feet. The shores
of the higher part of the island are very generally bordered by cliffs
or steep scarped rocks, with narrow V-shaped valleys breaking through
them to the sea. The greater part of the island is composed, so far as
examined, and also on the authority of M. Grebnitsky, of well stratified
Tertiary rocks, generally shales and sandstones, but basalts and vol-
canic breecias appear upon some parts of the coast, and generally from
the projecting reefs and rocks. There are no harbours, but a fair
anchorage with off-shore winds may be found at Nikolski, the only per-
manent settlement, situated on the west coast of the island, about 10
miles from its north end.
263. Copper or Medni Island is about 30 miles in*length, with a
greatest width of about 5 miles to the south of the middle of the island.
It is a partially submerged mountainous ridge, much higher and bolder
than Behring Island, and apparently almost wholly composed of voleanic
rocks, which are not, however, modern, like those of many parts of the
Aleutian Islands, but probably of Tertiary age. Its surface is exceed-
ingly irregular and comprises very little flat land of any kind, while
the shore is often bordered by bold and rugged sea cliffs, particularly
along the south-eastern side. The shore-line of this side is sinuous,
but that of the north-east side is broken, and comprises several consid-
erable bays, but no good harbours for lar ge vessels. There are three
small settlements on the coast: Glinka, Karebelny, and Preobajenski,
the last-named being the most northern, and the only one continuously
occupied at other seasons than the time of sealing. The highest parts
of Copper Island probably attain an elevation of 3,000 feet.
264. Along the shores of both of these islands there are extensive
fields of kelp, but these are not more notable than those to be found
in similar situations in the Aleutian, Pribyloff, and other islands of
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 79
the southern part of Behring Sea or along the Alaskan and British
Columbian coasts,—a fact which is perhaps worthy of note in connection
with statements which have been made as to the peculiar suitability of
these islands to the graminivorous and now extinct Rhytina, as well as
from its possible bearings on the habitats of the fur-seal.
265. Upon Behring Island the fur-seals are killed in the immediate
vicinity of the two rookeries, where salt-houses are established. On
Copper Island, the rookeries, situated on the south-west coast, are
classified under two groups, from one of which the seals are driven
across to Karebelny and from the other to Glinka for slaughter, this
being supposed to be necessary owing to the rough character of the
coast where they are actually situated. _
266. Further evidence of the adaptability of the seals to cireumstances
is found in comparing the physical character of the rookeries on the
Commander Islands with those of the Pribyloff Islands. On Behring
Island, the North Rookery, situated at Yushin Point, towards the western
part of the north coast of the island, is the largest. It occupies a flat
stretch of rocky reef, which runs seaward in a triangular form, with its
wide base against the land and a length of about a quarter of a mile.
The surface of the reef is irregular, and much of it stands above high-
water mark, though in heavy gales few parts of it can escape the more
or less direct wash of the surf. To the west of the reef proper, and
connected with it, is a wide dry beach or bar of sand, which is also
occupied by seals, but chiefly by holluschickie or bachelors. On the
landward side, the reef is overlooked by low rocky banks overgrown by
rank grasses and weeds, and between these and the reef proper are some
small irregular grassy flats and pools of salt water. Here the seals
never go, though there is no apparent reason why this upper plateau
might not be used as a hauling-ground or *“‘ parade,” which would resem-
ble several of those adjacent to rookeries on the Pribylotf Islands.
267. The South Rookery on Behring Island, situated at Poludenni
Point, on the south-west side of the island and about midway in its
length, was not visited by us. Itis, however, much smaller than the last,
and is described as presenting very similar characters. In both cases
there is ample room for expansion of the rookery ground without break-
ing its continuity.
268. On Copper Island, the circumstances are again quite different.
The rookeries and hauling-grounds are here scattered along about 15
miles of the south-east coast, extending from about the middle of the
island to its southern end. All the rookeries are small; and though
distinguished by various local names they are not well defined, but
are connected by irregular scattered colonies of breeding seals strung
along the narrower and less favourable parts of the shore. The whole
shore is bordered by high irregular cliffs, here and there broken by
ravines, or by more moderate though always steep and rough rocky
and grassy slopes. Flat rocky reefs run out irregularly from the shore
below, with abundance of rocks awash and large fields of kelp.
48 Opposite the breaks in the cliffs are bouldery or gravelly bays,
and both these and the larger areas of reef are irregularly occu-
pied by the seals. At Palata Point, near the southern extremity of
the island, the seals occupy a steep slope of earthy appearance, which
they have completely bared of vegetation to a distance estimated at 150
to 200 yards back from the shore, and a height of, say, 200 feet. This
rookery in its general character more closely resembles Starry Arteel
than any other of the Pribyloff Islands. It is distinctively a breeding
rookery, as no holluschickie, it is said, ever haul out near it.
80 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
269. On Copper Island, however, as on Behring Island, M. Tillman,
the Superintendent in charge for the Russian Government, states that
even when the seals were more abundant than in 1891, there has never
been any lack of room for expansion of the rookeries and hauling
grounds, and that there are many other localities in all respects equally
well suited for occupation by the seals, though these usually occupy the
same or nearly the same stations year after year. It is thus evident
on the Commander as on the Pribyloff Islands, that no very special or
peculiar physical features are required to render certain spots suitable
as the breeding resorts of the fur-seal. It is necessary to emphasize
this point, as the question has been obscured by a tendency to surround
it with a certain mystery, and to affirm that certain spots, and those
alone, are available as rookery grounds.
270. The fact: remains to be explained, however, that the breeding
seals actually do resort with great persistency to the various recognized
rookeries, congregating in these spots and leaving other neighbouring
parts of the shores of the breeding islands untenanted. There is
indeed some evidence to show that the same old bulls or ‘beach-
masters” from year to year occupy the same places, and it is quite
probable that the instinct which induces many animals to return to the
same place in succeeding seasons, may influence the fur-seal. There
is, however, another and very obvious practical cause for the reoceu-
pation of old rookery grounds. As arule, these extend some distance
beyond the reach of the sea, and are there by the continuous presence
and movement of the seals not only bared of vegetation, but beaten
down into smooth and hard flats and slopes, and therefore constitute
as long as they are occupied each year, and from this very cause, the
places most congenial to the seals. The fact that the first of the seals
to arrive in the spring, coast along the shores and land for a time in a
timid and tentative way only, shows that they are in search either of
their old breeding stations or of suitable new ones, and there can be no
doubt that they are largely guided in their choice by the very manifest
traces of former occupation by their species which the rookery sites
present.
271. Not the least evident of these signs is the peculiar and very
distinct odour of the rookery grounds. It is certain that the sense of
smell is more trusted in by the fur-seal as an indication of danger than
either that of sight or hearing (the eye and possibly the ear also being
probably adapted rather to use in the water than in the air) and it is
more than likely employed in relocating the old breeding grounds in
each succeeding year. This is the opinion of the natives, who have
had the best opportunities for observation, and is borne out by many
other facts, some of which are elsewhere alluded to in this report.
272. The reasonable consideration of this subject has been somewhat
obstructed by the assumption of an entirely unwarranted fixity in the
position and area of the ground occupied each year by the breeding
and non-breeding seals of each rookery site. For the very reason,
apparently, that such fixity is not found in nature, it appeals to the
imagination of writers of a certain class. While it may therefore be
admitted that the several rookeries have on the whole a notable degree
of permanency, this undoubtedly arises from their continued occupa-
tion each year, rather than from any peculiar physical conditions in
the places chosen; and while the animals are clearly averse to sudden
change, the boundaries of individual rookeries when not naturally
limited, evidently from year to year increase in one direction and
diminish in another, in consequence of circumstances which may at
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 81
first be accidental; but which are acquiesced in by the seals and ren-
dered for a time permanent. This is particularly the case with the
hauling-grounds or resorts of the holluschickie, which hang about the
borders of the breeding rookeries proper, and thus in the course of
years, a very considerable area of ground in any particular locality
may come to bear traces, in polished rock surfaces and otherwise, of
the presence of seals, in consequence of the natural oscillations of the
whole body of animals which have occurred in the course of many
generations of seal life.
273. It is unfortunate that no such precise or consecutive observa-
tions have been made, with the aid of plans, measurements, and fixed
marks, as to enable the changes in rookery- and hauling-grounds to be
followed out from year to year, either on the Pribyloff or Commander
Islands. It will be sufficient, however, to refer to a few known
49 facts which are independent of very close observation, but bear
on the point in discussion. One of these is the remarkable differ-
ences noted in various years between the relative proportion of seals
visiting the two islands, St. Paul and St. George. ‘These are referred
to in connection with the historical notes on those islands. Of the
same purport is the fact that two rookeries existed within historical
times at a place called Maroonitch, on the north coast of St. Paul,
which even maintained their position in a reduced form in the season
of great scarcity of seals in 1836, but which have since absolutely dis-
appeared, though there is no reason to suppose that they were at any
time heavily drawn upon, if at all disturbed by man. Elliott states
that in 1872-74, when at the prompting of the natives he examined
this shore, he was still able to trace the old limits of these rookeries
tolerably well by the polished edges of the rocks.* Another, though
never large, rookery, named Nah-speel, situated near the village on
St. Paul Island, has become extinct more recently; while as a fact, in
the opposite direction, the formation of the Lagoon Rookery within the
memory of natives still living may be cited.t
274. St. George Island again, the natives assert, was in early Russian
times, entirely peopled by sea-lions, and the fur-seal began to frequent
it only in later years. Though more doubtful than the other cited
instances, there appears to be some reason to believe that there is a
basis of fact in this statement also.t
275. An examination of the shores of the Pribyloff Islands, shows
that statements which have occasionally been made, to the effect that
all ground available for the purposes of seal life has been fully occu-
pied within historic times, are incorrect, and that the most extended
limits of even temporary occupation indicated by any marks still remain-
ing, do not prove that the area available and suitable for breeding
rookeries and hauling grounds has ever been occupied up to its full
capacity. From this it follows, that even if restricted for breeding
purposes to these particular islands, the fur-seal has never reached its
natural limit in numbers in consequence of a want of space for breed-
ing ground but only as the result of other causes.
276. Asa further result of the examination of the physical character-
istics of the rookery grounds, it may be stated that the necessary con-
*United States Census Report, pp. 49, 59.
t Ibid, p. 52.
tUnited States Census Report, p. 58. When Lutké visited the islands in 1827,
about 1,000 sea-lions were killed each year on St. George, and 300 or 400 on St. Paul;
pay fur-seals were also abundant on both, ‘Voyage Autour du Monde,” tome i,
p. 265.
BS, PI VI——6
82 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
ditions, and even the most favourable conditions, are by no means con-
fined to the Pribyloff and Commander Islands, wide rocky beaches
overlooked by sea-cliffs, and with all the characteristics of those of Cop-
per Island, are found on many of the islands of the Aleutian chain, and
though low plateaux bordering the shores, or gentle slopes rising from
the beaches are not so common, there are plenty of them to be found
in different parts of this great series of islands, some of which, as for
instance the Semitchi Islands, almost precisely resemble St. Paul in
physical characters. Again, on St. Matthew and Hall Islands, locali-
ties well suited for breeding places of the fur-seal occur, but as already
indicated, the inhabited character of the Aleutian chain, and the long
continuance of ice about the St. Matthew Islands probably explain the
absence of rookeries in these places.
(D.)\—Annual Progress of Events in Seal Life on the Breeding Islands.
277. In order to follow out the various questions connected with the
life history of the fur-seal, it is necessary to bear in mind the main
points involved in that important part of each year during which it
resorts to the breeding islands. A summary of the facts in this con-
nection will be given here. ;
So far as regards the Pribyloff Islands, the fullest details under this
head may be found in the works of several writers, particularly in those
of Bryant, Elliott, and Maynard. There is very little room for differ-
ence of opinion as to the main facts, and most of the points in which
divergence is found may be explained by the tendency to give too rigid
dates and too precise an aspect to the various events and changes; or to
the circumstance that with the growing depletion of males upon the
islands and its attendant results, the dates and habits formerly observed
by the seals have also, to some extent, changed from year to year. It
will be sufficient to give a general and very brief résumé of the princi-
pal events of the breeding season based chiefly on the combined obser-
vations of the writers above cited, and afterwards to refer in somewhat
greater detail to a few important points connected with these and with
the general organization of seal life on the islands.
278. The first seals to arrive at the islands in spring are the full-
50 grown males or *“‘bulls” of about six years old and upwards. A
few stragglers sometimes reach the islands as early as the mid-
dle of April, and from about the 1st May to the 10th or 15th June they
continue to arrive, but in much larger numbers towards the latter part
of this period. On arrival, these full-grown males, generally known as
‘‘beachmasters,” or ‘‘seecatchie,” take up stations on the old rookery
grounds to await the coming of the females.
With the main body of full-grown bulls a large proportion of the
“bachelors,” or younger males, also appear.
279. The time of arrival and landing of the gravid females appears
to depend directly on the approaching close of their period of gesta-
tion. A few usually land as early as the 1st June, but it is, under nor-
mal circumstances, between the middle of June and the middle of July
that the great body of females come ashore, and at or about the same
time most of the yearlings of both sexes, or such of them as resort to
the islands, also generally arrive, though it appears that in some years,
at least, the main body of seals of this class lands somewhat later.
On landing, the females, or “cows,” are taken possession of by the
old bulls, and very soon after landing the young are born. Within a
few days the females are again in heat : and under normal circumstances,
with an adequate supply of virile males, the female is at once served.
,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 83
The landing of gravid females does not usually cease till about the
20th or 25th July, and in certain years has been continued -much later
by females which have evidently been served unusually late in the pre-
vious season.
280. All this time the bulis jealously keep the females they have
secured within the boundaries of their particular harems, but about the
end of July, or early in August, the breeding rookeries begin to lose
their compact character. The beach-masters, or many of them, return
to the sea, or haul out here or there on the beaches, while younger males
crowd upon the rookeries, and the females continue going and coming
between the sea and their young on shore. Before the middle of
August a large proportion of the females are at all times to be found
swimming and disporting themselves in the water close to the rookery
ground, and the young collect in masses along the edges of the shore
and rocks, from which they make short excursions into the sea.
281. About the middle of August, most of the seals found upon the
Pribyloff Islands become what is known as “ stagey,” in consequence
of the shedding of the hair and under-fur. This condition appears to
continue, more or less definitely, for about six weeks. The fact, else-
where mentioned, that practically no “‘stagey ” skins are ever taken at
sea, appears not only to show that the change in pelage is rendered
definite and well marked by prolonged resort to the land, but also that
during this period the seals frequenting the islands do not go to any
great distance from their shores.
282. In October the seals begin generally to leave the islands, the
oldest and strongest being the first to go. Nearly all the bachelors, or
holluschickie, have left before the 10th November, and before the end of
that month all the pups of the year, which have now changed the first
black coat for a grey one, also go. A very few seals, however, gener-
ally linger on into December, and in exceptional years have been known
to stay on into January and even into February.
283. The seals resorting to the Commander Islands, which belong, at
least in the main, to a different migration-area, and reach the islands
from the south-westward, are thought by those acquianted with both
these and the Pribyloff Islands to be somewhat later in the date of their
arrival than those of thelatter islands. It is stated that here as on the
Pribyloff Islands the seals have been later than usual in coming in recent
years. In 1891, we found the “‘stagey” season was just beginning on
the Commander Islands on the 1st September. The first killing of
seals took place on Copper Island in the same year on the 22nd June.
Generally speaking, some seals can be found to kill on this island (in
which the dates are slightly in advance of those in Behring Island) as
early asthe 1st June.
(H.)—Ages at which Males reach Virility, and the Females produce Young.
284. The ages at which the male and female seals respectively reach
maturity and become able to take part in the procreation of their species,
as well as the number of years during which the male remains virile
and the female fertile, are questions of very practical importance from
two points of view. In the first place, they enable us to trace out the
effect of the killing of seals of special ages or sexes at certain times,
and, in the second, to estimate the time necessary for any improvement
in numbers to follow from the sparing of the younger seals on the
rookeries.
Hii 285. Veniaminoy arrived at the conclusion that the female gives
birth to its first young in its fifth year, and bases a somewhat
84 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
intricate and ingenious series of calculations partly on this supposition,*
but there is now a very general consensus of opinion among those who
have studied this question on the Pribyloff Islands to the effect that
the females are covered at or shortly after the expiry of the second
year from the time of their birth, and bear young in the third year from
that time or early in the fourth year of their age. The same opinion
was found to be held upon the Commander Islands, and there is every
reason to believe that it is essentially correct.
286. Both maies and females leave the islands at the close of the season
in which they are born as “‘ grey pups,” the sexes being undistinguish-
able to all outward appearance. In the following season they are
classed as yearlings, and it is probable that a large proportion of these
either do not land upon the islands at all or stay only for a short time
onshore. Such of the yearlings as are found upon the islands, however,
both males and females, consort with the holluschickie or bachelors.
287. It appears, further, to be certain that the males arrive at virility
in their fourth year, and between this time and that in which they attain
their full strength and size and are able to maintain their places on the
breeding rookery, when six or seven years old, they are often spoken of
as “half-bulls” or “reserves.” They actually serve in the latter capacity,
and cover many of the females which escape the attentions of the older
males upon the rookery grounds, and in such eases the act of coition is
usually accomplished at sea.
288. While the points just referred to may be supposed to have been
ascertained with moderate certainty, nothing 1s certainly known as to
the maximum ages attained by seals of the two sexes respectively, and
very little as to the total number of young which a female may bear
during the continuance of her fertility, or the number of years during
which the male retains his virility. Elliott conjectures that the females
may live to an age of 18 or 20 years. Bryant gives his reasons for sup-
posing that 12 years is about the average attained by the males.t
Veniaminov thought that the females in their prime bring forth every
year, and as they grow older, every second year. He states that, accord-
ing to persons familiar with them, each female may produce in the course
of her life ten or fifteen young or even more.t He admits, however,
that this is very uncertain, and the whole subject is, in fact, beset with
almost insuperable difficulties. All that is certain is that both males
and females continue to perform their functions as breeders for a con-
siderable number of years.
289. From what has been said as to the number of years required by
the respective sexes to reach maturity, it follows that any great loss
of young in the year of their birth can only begin to make itself appar-
ent on the rookeries, in the case of females, after the lapse of three
years, and in the case of males after five or six years. Thus in the
event of the killing of all or nearly all the young males of a certain
age, in any one year or series of years, a void of smaller or larger
dimensions is created in the supply of full-grown males for the rookery
grounds, which can only be partially bridged by the continuance on
the rookeries of the older and enfeebled males, which have passed their
natural term of retirement. If such killing is maintained from year to
year, the deterioration in the supply of virile males for the requirements
of the females, though slow and spread over several or many years,
must be continuous. Moreover, the lowering of the standard weight
* Quoted by Elliott in United States Census Report, p. 141 et seq.
t ‘‘Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 407.
¢ Quoted by Elliott in United States Census Report, p. 141.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 85
of skins which has actually occurred in late years on the Pribyloff
Islands, because of the scarcity of males of 3 or 4 years of age and
which permits the killing to embrace those of 2 years old and even year-
lings, is the most effectual method possible of cutting off the supply of
virile males at the fountain head, and of enlarging the void in male seal
life to alarming proportions.
290. Details of this kind, with their observed effects on seal life, are
cited in abstract in the historical notes elsewhere given (§ 310 et seq.),
but it is impossible to adequately represent in summarized form the
whole of the facts bearing on this point. Captain Bryant’s observa-
tions, as quoted by Allen, should be referred to.*
291. The diminution which has culminated in late years on the
Pribyloff Islands recalls the criticism made by Lutké, when he visited
these islands in 1827. Lutké writes:
La précaution de séparer les gros miles d’avec ceux qui doivent étre tués, est
nécessaire pour entretenir la multiplication; mais cette précaution est-elle suffisante
pour cela? Si tous les jeunes sont exterminés, d’ou sortiront a la fin les gros
52 males? Les chasseurs expérimentés ont observé que les ours marins vivent de
quinze & vingt ans; il en résulte qu’avec cette méthode dans vingt ans il ne
doit plus rester un seul.t
(F.)\—Requisite proportions of Sexes.
292. Though each full-grown male or “seacatch” holding his place on
the rookery ground endeavours to obtain and keep about him as many
females as possible, there is a limit to the number which may be advan-
tageously held by a single male, and when adult males are found in
abundance, it is not easy to pass this normal limit; but, on the other
hand, when, in consequence of a paucity of adult males in proportion
to females, the harems become too large, the females are irregularly
served, served too late in the season, or, in some cases, may altogether
escape efficient service, with resulting irregularities in times of birth of
young in the next year, or an addition to the number of barren females.
293. The proper proportion of adult males to females cannot be ascer-
tained by inspection of the Pribyloff rookeries as they are at present,
because of the obvious and generally acknowledged deficiency of virile
males; but in the earlier years of the control of these islands by the
United States, Bryant estimated the existing proportion as about one
male to fifteen females, or, as indicated by other statements by the same
writer, as one to nine or twelve.{ Elliott, a few years later, and subse-
quent to the date of certain changes in organization of the seals
described by Bryant, writes:—“I found it an exceedingly difficult
matter to satisfy myself as to a fair general average number of cows to
each bull on the rookery; but, after protracted study, I think it will be
nearly correct when I assign to each male a general ratio of from fifteen
to twenty females at the stations nearest the water, and from there
back in order from that line to the rear from five to twelve.Ӥ M. Greb-
nitsky, Superintendent of the Commander Islands, as the result of his
prolonged experience, states that the proportion of one adult male to
ten females should not, as a rule, be overpassed, and that one to twenty
may be considered as a maximum limit. Captain Blair, long familiar
with the fur-seals of the Asiatic coast, informed us, in speaking of
Robben Island, that the number of males now existing there, viz., one
* “Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 398 et seq.
t Lutké ‘Voyage autour du Monde,” tome i, p. 261.
¢t Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” pp. 385, 390,
§ United States Census Report, p. 36.
86 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
adult male to twenty-five females, was far too small. Lieutenant May-
nard, again, says: “The bulls are polygamous, having from five to
twenty cows each; so that the number of them upon the rookeries is
not more than one-tenth of that of the cows.*
294. It may thus be very safely assumed that the ratio of virile males
of full age, cannot be allowed to exceed the proportion of one to twenty,
without serious danger of harm to the breeding rookeries, and the
certainty of grave irregularities on them; and it is necessary to bear
this fact in mind in endeavouring to appreciate the meaning of the
present condition of the rookeries of the Pribyloff Islands, where, as
elsewhere pointed out, these conditions have, for a number of years,
not been realized.
(G.)—Coition.
295. An erroneous statement concerning the manner of life of the
fur-seal, which has important bearings in various ways, but which has
naturally arisen and has been as naturally maintained in consequence
of the too exclusive attention paid by most writers on this subject to
the breeding islands, is that the fecundation of the female is, and can
only be, accomplished on shore. Bryant has, however, distinctly stated
that copulation very often occurs in the water, and in the description’
of seal life prepared by him for Professor Allen, he adds: ‘* When there
was a full supply of breeding males copulation occurred mainly on the
breeding grounds, the half-bulls (or reserves) participating to only a
limited extent, and was rarely seen to occur in the water. Since 1874,
owing to the decrease in the number of breeding males, a much larger
proportion of the females receive the males in the water, so that on any
still day after the 20th July, by taking a canoe and going a little off
shore, considerable numbers may be seen pairing and readily approached
so near as to be fully observed.t In another place the same
53 gentleman is even more precise, writing: ‘‘Owing to the position
of the genital organs, however, coition on land seems not to be
the natural method, and only rarely—perhaps in three cases out of ten—
is the attempt to copulate under such circumstances effectual.” Mr.
W. H. Dall, again, in a manuscript note supplied to Professor Allen,
says: “They [the females] sleep in the water lying on their sides, with
the two flippers [of the upper side] out of the water, and receive the
male in the’ same position.” t
296. Special inquiries made by us on this particular subject have fully
confirmed Bryant’s original statements, the evidence obtained including
that of four or five gentlemen who have had long experience with the
Pribyloff and Commander Islands, and several intelligent and observ-
ant hunters who have been engaged in sealing at sea.
297. The particular importance attaching to this subject depends on
the circumstance that the possibility of connection being accomplished
at sea, and the greater frequency of this habit caused by the dearth of
adult males on the rookeries, enables us to explain in great measure
the irregularity, which has in ‘late years much increased, “of the date of
birth of the young. It shows, in fact, that the time of impregnation of
the female is not necessarily comprised within the period during which
she seeks the shore for the purpose of giving birth to the young.
*Maynard’s Report, Ex. Doc. No. 43, 44th Congress, Ist Session, p.3. This passage
is incorrectly quoted by Elliott in his Census Report, where May nard is made to
state that the seals have each from twenty to fifty cows.
t Senate, Ex. Doc. No. 32, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 5, ‘Monograph of North-
American Pinnipeds,” pp. 385, 405,
t “Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool.,” vol. i, PartI, p. 100.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 87
(H.)—Age at which the Young Swim.—Number of Young at a Birth.
298. It has already been noted, that evidence such as to show that
the young can swim for a time at or immediately after birth, has been
obtained from a number of sources, though it is, at the same time, im-
probable that under any circumstances the young is at first fitted to
maintain its existence for any length of time in the open sea. This is,
however, not a matter of any great importance, for it is evidently the
normal method for the young to remain for some weeks ashore before
venturing even to enter the sea.
299. It, nevertheless, appears to be quite possible that, under excep-
tional circumstances, the female might succeed in rearing her young
while only occasionally resorting to the land and while moving from
place to place. There is no reason to believe that the fur-seal is less
adaptable in this respect than the hair seals, and of one of the latter
(Ptoca vitulina) Professor Allen quotes Mr. John Cardeaux to the fol-
lowing effect: “‘The female has one young in the year; and, as these
banks [upon which they breed] are covered at flood, the cub, when born,
must make an early acquaintance with the water.”* One of the authors
of this Report has, moreover, seen the same species (17th of June, 1878)
in the southern part of the Queen Charlotte Islands, breeding upon tidal
rocks, from which, when alarmed, the mothers took to the sea, each car-
rying her young upon her back, the heads of the mother and young seal
coming to the surface simultaneously at each rise. Upon Indian
authority, the same habit has been, as elsewhere noted, observed in
the case of the fur-seal.
300. The date at which the young normally begin to swim has, how-
ever, like many others, been given an altogether undue fixity and pre-
cision. Thus Elliott states that by the 8th or 10th August the pups
born nearest to the water first begin to learn to swim; t and Bryant gives
the 20th August as the date at which they first take to the water; {t while
as early as the 28th July, in 1891, great numbers of pups were actually
observed by us to be swimming along the edges of the rookery grounds
and climbing in and out over the rocks, and this in spite of the fact
that it is acknowledged that the seals now arrive at the islands at dates
later than they did in former years. On the 14th September two pups
were even seen swimming and alone at distances of 40 and 70 miles
respectively to the westward of the Pribyloff Islands.
301. As arule, but a single pup is produced at a birth, and, though
this rule is not without exceptions, it may be used in any estimates of
the natural rate of increase of the seals. Maynard admits that occa-
sional cases of twins have been recognized on the Pribyloff Islands,
notwithstanding the difficulty of arriving at certainty as to such a mat-
ter under the circumstances which there obtain. The Haidas and the
Tshimsians state that they have frequently found two unborn pups in
a female seal when killed, though a single pup is much more common.
Chief Edensaw, many years ago, saw a female in the act of giving
birth on Rose Spit, Queen Charlotte Islands; one pup had been born,
and when he killed the mother he found another still unborn.
302. It is perhaps further worth noting, in this connection,
54 that those most familiar with the closely allied fur-seal of the
South African Coast state that, as a rule, two pups are produced
*“ Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 591.
t United States Census Report, pp. 40, 42.
t‘‘ Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 387,
88 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
at a birth; while on the Australian coast it is said that the female gen-
erally brings forth a single pup, sometimes two.*
(1.)—Distances to which Seals go from the Breeding Islands in search of
Food, and Times of Feeding.
303. The feeding habits of the seals, and the distances to which seals
engaged in breeding on the islands may be supposed to go for food, as
well as the period of the breeding season at which excursions in search
of food begin to be made, are important because of their direct bearing
on the limits of protection which might appropriately be accorded
about the islands at the breeding season.
304, 'The full-grown bulls, or beachmasters, holding stations on the
rookery-grounds, undoubtedly, in the majority of cases—if not inva-
riably—remain on duty throughout the breeding season and to the
close of the rutting period without seeking food. The young again,
born in any particular season, are not weaned, or not fully weaned, nor
do they, under normal circumstances, leave the immediate vicinity of
the shores till the time of their final departure.
305. It is thus only the classes of bachelor and female seals that can,
under any circumstances, be found leaving the islands in search of food
during the breeding season. Of the females, the yearlings associate
with the bachelors. Some of the two-year-olds may seek the vicinity
of the rookery-grounds for the purpose of meeting the males, but prob-
ably they do not long remain there, while it is believed that most of
them are covered at sea. Barren females, again, whether without
young from age, from an insufficiency of males, or inefficient service,
are not in any way permanently attached to the islands at this time.
306. The remaining—and, at the time in question, most important—
class is thatof the breeding females. These, some time after the birth
of the young and the subsequent copulation with the male, begin to
leave the rookery-ground and seek the water. This they are able to do
because of the lessened interest of the beachmasters in them, and more
particularly after many of the beachmasters themselves begin to leave
their stands. Thus, by about the middle of August, probably only
one-half of the females, or even less, are to be seen at any one time on
the rookeries. Snegiloff, the native foreman in charge of the rookeries
on Behring Island, expressed the opinion that the females first leave
their young and begin to frequent the water about a month after the
birth of the young. Bryant says about six weeks.t Other authorities
are less definite on this point, but, according to observations made by
ourselves, the mothers and young were present on the Pribyloff rook-
eries-in approximately equal numbers in the last days of July, while, on
the same rookeries, in the third week of August, the young largely out-
numbered the mothers present at any one time, and, in so far as could
be ascertained by observation, the females were disporting themselves
in the sea off the fronts of the rookeries.
307. It is very generally assumed that the female, on thus beginning
to leave the rookery-ground, at once resumes her habit of engaging in
the active quest for food, and though this would appear to be only
natural, particularly in view of the extra drain produced by the demands
of the young, it must be remembered that, with scarcely any exception,
the stomachs of even the bachelor seals killed upon the islands are found
a ‘‘Prodromus of the Zoology of Victoria,” by Sir F. McCoy, F. R. S., Decade
UG joe Be
t Senate, Ex. Doc. No. 32, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 5.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 89
void of food, and that all seals resorting to the islands seem, in a great
degree, to share in a common abstinence. While, therefore, it may be
considered certain that after a certain period, the females begin to seek
such food as can be obtained, the absence of excrementitious matter on
the rookery grounds, elsewhere referred to, shows that this cannot occur
till towards the close of the breeding season. It may, further, be stated,
that there is avery general belief among the natives, both on the Priby-
loft and Commander Islands, to the effect that the females do not leave
the land to feed while engaged in suckling their young, and that neither
of the two females killed in our presence for natural history purposes
on Behring Island, on the 5th September, had any trace of food in the
stomach, though killed within a few yards of the rookery from which
they had just been driven. Also bearing on the same point is the state-
ment made in a memorandum received from Her Majesty’s Minister at
T6kid, based on information obtained from a gentleman fully conver-
sant with the habits and haunts of the fur-seal of the western side of
the North Pacific, as follows: “It is sometimes stated that the
5d breeding cows are in the habit of leaving the rookeries to fish for
the support of their young, but the experienced authority on
whose remarks these notes are founded is not of this opinion. He has
never found food inside the female fur-seal taken on the breeding
grounds.” (See further under Food paragraph 224, et seq.)
308. It appears to us to be quite probable, however, that toward the
close of the season of suckling, the female seals may actually begin to
spend a considerable portion of their time at sea in search of food. It
is unlikely that this occurs to any notable extent till after the middle of
September, before which the season of pelagic sealing in Behring Sea
practically closes. It is not as if the mere presence of seals in any
particular part of Behring Sea during the period in question could be
taken as representing that of females from the breeding rookeries, for,
as already stated, other classes of seals remain thus at large during the
greater part, or even the whole, of the breeding season, and it is gener-
ally very difficult even for the most experienced eye under favourable
circumstances to distinguish at sea between such unattached seals and
breeding females. Several of the statements as to the feeding resorts
of breeding females from the islands have undoubtedly been founded
on the mere presence of seals of some kind at sea. In fact, most of the
previously published statements on this point have been based either
exclusively on information gained on the breeding islands, and, there-
fore, not to the point, or on such information, loosely combined with
notes on the position of seals casually observed at sea. It is unfortu-
nate that the prohibition of pelagic sealing in Behring Sea in 1891
rendered it impossible in this particular year to gather much actual
experience in this matter, such as might have been obtained by exam-
ining the condition and sex of seals killed at various known distances
from the islands.
The statements collected from other sources are often singularly diver-
gent; but, notwithstanding the evident lack of information on this par-
ticular point, a remarkable agreement is found among those interested
in decrying pelagic sealing, to the effect that the pelagic sealers do, and
must, kill a large number of female breeding seals. In order, however,
to show the present state of this question, and the actual basis of many
and serious complaints against sea sealing, a few quotations from various
authorities on seal life may first be given, and after that some notes on
the further evidence obtained by ourselves.
90 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
309. Bryant, after describing the relaxation in watchfulness of the
male after impregnation has been accomplished, says of the female:
‘Krom that time she lies either sleeping near her young, or spends her
time either floating or playing in the water near the shore, returning occa-
sionally to suckle her pup.” *
Elliott writes in a similar strain of the same period. The females,
he says, “lie idly out in the rollers, ever and anon turning over
and over, scratching their backs and sides with their hind flippers.” +
Klsewhere he states that the mother, he thinks, nurses her pup every
two or three days, but adds, “In this I am very likely mistaken.”
Again, he speaks of a mother coming up from the sea, ‘where she has
been to wash and perhaps to feed for the last day or two.Ӥ In another
reference, he says: ‘Soon after the birth of their young they leave it
on the ground and go to the sea for food, returning perhaps to-morrow,
perhaps later, even not for several days in fact, to again suckle and
nourish it, having in the meantime sped far off to distant feeding
banks,” &e.||
310. In the Report on the Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska (1889), {{ Mr.
W.B. Taylor states that the cows go out every day for food to a distance
of 10 or 15 miles, or even further.
Mr. T. F. Ryan states that the “‘main feeding grounds of the seal
during the summer stay upon the islands, and to which the cows are
continually going and coming, are to be found 40 to 70 miles south of
St. George Island.” |
Mr. G. R. Tingle, in the same Report, says that the seals probably go
20 miles out in some cases in search of food.
311. Such are the more definite references of a published kind which
we have been able to find on this important point in seal life, and they
are sufficient to show that very little has heretofore been known on the
subject, though much has been taken for granted.
312. The following is a summary of the evidence personally obtained
in 1891 from those supposed to be most capable of giving an opinion
on the subject:
Mr. G. R. Tingle stated that he believed seals from St. George went
to feed, for the most part, about 30 to 40 miles to the southward or
south-eastward of that island. From St. Paul he was not aware that
they went in any particular direction.
56 Mr. J.C. Redpath did not know of any special place or places
to which the seals go to food, but believed that the females go
from 10 to 15 miles from the islands for that purpose.
Mr. D. Webster thinks that seals go from St. George Island, when
feeding in the autumn, about 60 miles southward; he believes that there
is a favourite feeding ground in this vicinity, because he has seen
numerous seals there when on his way from the islands to Ounalaska.
Mr. Fowler stated that he believed there was a favourite feeding
ground of the seals about 30 miles off north-east point of St. Paul
Island. This was not from personal knowledge, but depended on state-
ments that seals had been seen in abundance there.
Natives of St. Paul informed us that the females from the rookeries
went only 3 or 4 miles to sea to feed, always returning to their young
*“ Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 386.
tIbid., p. 361.
t United States Census Report, p. 38.
§ Ibid., p. 39.
Ibid peo.
{| House of Representatives, Report No. 3883, 50th Congress, 2nd Session. The
italics in the above-cited passages are our own.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 91
on shore the same day. When questioned as to the classes of seals
seen further out, as, for instance, midway between St. Paul and St.
George Islands, they stated that all kinds of seals might be found
there, but added again that the females usually do not go far from the
rookeries.
Mr. N. Grebnitsky, Superintendent of the Commander Islands, stated,
as the result of his own personal observation and long experience, that
the females went out to sea while suckling the young, but not further
than half-a-mile or a mile from the shore. Most of the natives, be
added, thought that the females did not feed during this period, but in
this he believed them to be mistaken.
M. Tillman, the Agent of the Russian Government, in charge of Cop-
per Island, where he has been for two years, thinks that the females go
as much as 2 to 4 miles off shore to feed, but return to the rookeries
every night.
M. Kluge, who has been for twenty-one years in the service of the
Alaska Commercial Company on several different islands, agreed in
this point with M. Tillman, and added that he knows from close per-
sonal observation, which he was able to make on Robben Island, that
the females return every mght, as stated.
Snegiloff, the native foreman on Behring Island, thinks, on the con-
trary, that the females may leave their young for several days, and may
go as far as 10 miles from land to feed.
313. So far as the facts actually observed in 1891 go, it is apparent
that there is always a considerable number of seals Swimming, playing,
or sleeping at sea opposite each of the rookery grounds, and that these
in August consist largely of females, while in September great num-
bers of pups are to be found in addition. When extensive kelp beds
exist off the rookeries, the main body of seals is generally seen inside
the kelp, and at a distance of half-a-mile or so from shore compara-
tively few seals are seen; while at two or three miles seaward from the
rookery there is no notable abundance of seals, and if sailing round
the breeding islands in a fog, at a distance of four miles from the shore,
it would be difficult for the closest observer (apart from other indica-
tions) to decide when he had passed abreast of a rookery.
314. It is, however, certain, from statements obtained, that females
with milk are occasionally killed at sea by the pelagic sealers, and
though it is possible that these are mothers which have deserted the
islands in consequence of having been driven up to the killing grounds
with the holluschickie, or because of some other cause of disturbance,
such as the death of their young, it is highly probable that in the later
summer and autumn the distance to which the females go from the
breeding places becomes gradually increased. It is, nevertheless,
scarcely credible that, under any circumstances, the females engaged
in feeding their young can navigate to great distances from the islands
on erratic courses, and subsequently return punctually and without
fail to their rookeries; and any assumption made on this basis must be
regarded as requiring proof of a character very different to that so far
advanced by those holding such a belief.
315. It may be added here, as the result of personal observations as
well as of those already published, that the seals tend to leave the
rookeries and hauling grounds for the sea in large numbers when
incommoded on shore by too great heat or by heavy rain, and, further,
that after stormy weather, characterized by heavy wind and surf, there
is generally an increased and marked exodus from the shore.
92 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
316. Singularly enough, the greatest diversity of opinion was found
to prevail, even among those who ought to be best informed on this sub-
ject, as to ‘whether the seals leave the land for feeding or other purposes
most commonly by day or by night. This difference of opinion obtained
not only among the Whites, but also among the natives, and it is found
both in the Pribyloff and Commander Islands. Some maintain that
the female seal returns to shore every night, others that most of them
leave the shore at this time, and, taking all opinions into consideration,
the only conclusion that can be arrived at is that the seals go and come
atall times. Certainly, there isno particular period of rest upon
57 the rookeries themselves during the breeding season, for they are
as noisy during the nightas by day. Judging from observations
made while at anchor near the rookery grounds of St. Paul and St.
George, it would appear that the seals are more abundant in the water
during the night, when they often surrounded the vessel in great num-
bers. On these occasions they seldom seemed to be travelling in any
particular direction, but played about, coming up first on one side of
the vessel and then on the other, and appeared to be more wary and
easily frightened than during the day.
(J.)—Habits when Suckling.
317. When the female seals begin to absent themselves at frequent
intervals from the rookery grounds and from their young, as already
described, the young begin “to travel about in all directions from the
actual spot of their birth. Most of them collect in large groups, or
“pods,” sometimes near the edge of the sea and sometimes at a dis-
tance from it, while solitary pups are to be found roving or sleeping
everywhere. It has been stated, and the statement has been received
without question, that throughout the entire season, and even under
the circumstances above described, the female is invariably able to
single out, and will suckle only, her own young. Analogy with most
other animals appears to favour this view, and probably accounts for
the fact, that it has been accepted without proof, which, indeed, as
neither the individual mothers nor the individual young can be con-
tinuously recognized on the rookeries, would be very hard to obtain.
318. The analogy just referred to may or may not hold in the case of
the fur-seal, which is in many respects very peculiar in its habits. The
young of most other animals, if left at any time by the dam, remains
where left, and it is very seldom necessary for the mother to select her
own progeny from a vast crowd of others. Again, even assuming that
she be capable of thus singling out her own young one, if, as is com-
monly supposed, she remains for the greater part of the day, or, accord-
ing to some authorities, for several days, in the sea, she must very often
wholly fail to find her young, which may have in the meantime wandered
off to an entirely different part of the rookery. Under these cireum-
stances, the female would continue to be unquiet till she got rid of her
milk, and must indeed be possessed of great fortitude if she refuses to
part with it to any of the thousands of other young seals about her.
The difficulty of finding the young must, of course, be vastly increased
in cases in which the mother has given birth to two pups, one of which
may have wandered in one direction, another elsewhere.
319. The idea that the female will suckle the pup she has brought
forth only, appears to have been started by the natives, but, so far as
can be ascertained, is first advanced by Bryant, who writes: ‘‘On land-
ing, the mother calls out to her young with a plaintive bleat like that
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 93
of a sheep calling to her lamb. As she approaches the mass (of young)
several of the young ones answer and start to meet her, responding to
her call as a young lamb answers its parent. As she meets them she
looks at them and passes hurriedly on till she meets her own, which she
at once recognizes.”*
320. Elliott has adopted this theory, and amplifies it, writing :—‘“‘The
mother, without first entering into the crowd of thousands, recognizes
the voice of her offspring, and then advances, striking out right and
left, toward the position from which it replies.” Elsewhere in this con-
nection he speaks of the mother crying out for its young and recognizing
the individual reply, “though ten thousand around, all together, should
blaat [sic] atonce.” Ona later page, he again says: ‘I have witnessed
so many examples of the females turning pups away to suckle only
some particular other one, that I feel sure I am entirely right in saying
that the seal-mothers know their own young, and that they will not
permit any others to nurse save their own. I believe that this recog-
nition of them is due chiefly to the mother’s scent and hearing.” t
321. It is not intended to criticize these statements, which, in so far
as they relate to observed facts, can be certified to; but it is necessary
to point out that they constitute the entire body of proof in the matter
in question, and that the influence drawn from them must be charac-
terized as “not proven.” The young themselves certainly do not know
their own mothers, and the statement that the mother knows her indi-
vidual young seems to be placed in doubt, and is certainly not to be
assumed merely from analogy with other animals which show a degree
of affection for their young, because of the observation which may be
made any day on the rookeries, that the female fur-seal is entirely care-
less respecting her offspring.
58 322. As Mr. Elliott is chiefly responsible for the theory here
specially referred to, it is only fair, however, that he should be
heard also on the last-mentioned point. On this he says: “ The apathy
with which the young are treated by the old upon the breeding grounds,
especially by the mothers, was very strange to me, and I was con-
stantly surprised at it. I have never seen a seal-mother caress or fondle
her offspring; and should it stray to a short distance from the harem I
could step to and pick it up, and even kill it before the mother’s eye,
without causing her the slightest concern, so far as all outward signs
and manifestations would indicate.” t
323. The whole theory in fact, when examined, rests on the circum-
stance that when a female seal is seen to come ashore, she will not take
the first young one she meets, but perhaps by sound, perhaps by scent,
selects one which she allows to feed. It appears, therefore, to be at
least quite possible, that in thus making her selection she may merely
seek a young one which does not carry the smell of fresh milk about
it. The gregarious habits of the fur-seal, with the difficulties inherent
in the matter of the reunion of mother and young under the peculiar
circumstances obtaining on the rookeries, appear to show that it would
be advantageous to seal life as a whole if any mother would suckle any
hungry pup.
24, It may be added, that in a report received from Mr. C. H. Jack-
son, Government Agent in charge of the Seal and Guano Islands of
Cape Colony, he states, respecting the fur-seals inhabiting these islands
(after speaking of the killing of females), that ‘“‘ but for a happy pro-
*As quoted by Allen, ‘‘ Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 387.
t United States Census Report, pp. 39 and 162.
t United States Census Report, p. 38.
94 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
vision of nature, whereby a female seal will suckle any young one, the
destruction of the new-born seals would be complete;” and, again, says:
“The cow will suckle any of the young seals, whether her own or not,
and this period of nursing continues more or less for about six months.”
The same statement is made with respect to the fur-seal of the Aus-
tralian coast.*
325. The analogy of other animals has so frequently been cited in
this connection that it may be in point to quote from an interesting
memorandum furnished by Sir Samuel Wilson, M. P., the eminent Aus-
tralian sheep-breeder. He states that it is common and easy to make
ewes suckle other ewes’ lambs, either by putting the skin of the dead
lamb over the new lamb, or by folding together, in hurdles, the strange
lamb and the ewe. When the herd is valuable, all ewes are mothered
to lambs which have none of their own, and the same is done in the case
of twins. Ewes recognize their own lambs by smell. Sometimesa lamb,
not her own, may come up on the other side while she is suckling her
own lamb, and may, unnoticed by her, suck her for a time. There are,
moreover, lambs which go about in this way, and manage to live by
what they can steal. This Australian experience is fully borne out by
general experience.
(K.)—Natural Causes of Destruction.
326. In connection with the general aspects of seal life, and the effects
upon it of commercial killing, it is necessary to remember that it is
largely ruled by certain natural events, or phenomena, and that, as in
the case of nearly all animals in a state of nature, but a limited propor-
tion of the whole number of young produced ever attain either to a
‘* killable” age, or to one of maturity. Thus, in killing a large number
of seals annually, a draft is made upon a margin of seal life which has
escaped all the other necessarily environing dangers, and which very
often must be regarded as a natural reserve in process of being slowly
built up in the intervals between irregular and exceptional inroads
which may at any time occur, and over which man exercises no possible
control.
327. Thus, on the Pribyloff Islands, one particular instance has been
recorded, when, in consequence of the long persistence of field-ice about
the islands, the seals were very greatly depleted. This occurred in 1836,
when, according to native count, the number of adult seals on St. Paul
Island was reduced to about 4,000, and the greater part of the small
number of seals killed in that year consisted of pups. Other, though
less disastrous instances, of the same kind have occurred since, and a
study of available information respecting the amount and position of the
ice in Behring Sea in various years shows that such adverse conditions
may recur in any year, though probably seldom with the same intensity
as in 1836. é
328. Again, large numbers of pups are often killed before leaving
the islands by heavy storms occurring before they are able to swim
strongly, and in consequence of which they are dashed against the
rocks or upon the beach. Unfortunately, nothing like a complete
record has been kept of such occurrences, but Bryant, Maynard, and
Elliott, in their published Reports, all refer, at greater or less
59 length, to them. One notable case of this particular kind
occurred in October 1876, and Mr. D. Webster informed us that
*<Prodromus of the Zoology of Victoria,” by Sir F. McCoy, F. R. S., Decade
VIII, p. 10.
t ** Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 597.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 95
once “in the seventies” as early as July, he had seen the beaches at
North-East Point “strung with dead pups,” after a heavy storm.
More or fewer pups are, in fact, apparently killed in this way every
ear.
: 329. On Robben Island, very considerable numbers of young pups
are killed by burgomaster gulls (Larus glaucus), which pick out their
eyes. This is so well known that a reward of 5 copecks (14d.) is given
for each of these gulls killed. This gull is rather scarce on the Com-
mander Islands, but the natives there have noticed cases of pups being
killed in the same way. They are common about the Pribyloff Islands,
and are frequently seen on the rookeries, but no one there appears to
have observed them attacking young seals.
330. The most generally recognized danger to the pups, of a con-
stant kind, while they are still upon the islands, is that resulting from
the adult bulls or seacatchie on the rookeries, These, when fighting,
or otherwise excited or disturbed, pay not the slightest attention to
the young in their vicinity, and overrun them without compunction in
such a manner as frequently to cause their death. Elliott doubts
whether more than 1 per cent. of the whole number of young in each
year is destroyed in this way, but everyone who has paid the slightest
attention to the economy of the rookeries is familiar with the frequent
occurrence of such deaths.
331. In his Report upon the condition of affairs in Alaska (1875), the
same writer speaks of the presence on the rookeries of ‘decaying car-
casses of old seals and the many pups which have been killed accident-
ally by the old bulls while fighting with and charging back and forth
against one another.”* In the Census Report substantially the same
passage is, however, paraphrased by the writer, with the substitution
of “few pups” for “‘many pups.” t
Professor Allan may also be cited in this connection, though he spe-
cially refers to alarms of a kind which can scarcely be strictly classed
under natural causes of destruction. He writes: “Constant care is
also necessary lest thoughtless persons incautiously approach the breed-
ing grounds, as the stampede of the seals which would result therefrom
always destroys many of the young.” t
332. When a sudden alarm causes a panic among the seals on a
rookery, and they make in consequence a rush in closely-huddled masses
for the water, very considerable numbers of pups may at any time be
killed. Itis very easy in this way to “stampede” even the breeding
seals, and the necessity of preventing such stampedes is one of the main
reasons for preserving the vicinity of the rookeries from all intrusion
and disturbance. As already noted, the seals are alarmed particularly
by smell, and during the summer of 1891 a panic was caused on the
Reef Rookery of St. Paul Island by the drifting over it of the smoke
from a steamer which was entering the anchorage there.
333. Nordenskiéld refers particularly to this matter in his account
of the fur-seals of Behring Island, writing:
The young ones are often smothered by the old when the latter, frightened in some
way, rush out into the sea. After such an alarm hundreds of dead pups are found
on the shore. §
334. Killer whales (Orca rectipinna) are among the more activeenemies
of the fur-seal. Mr. D. Webster, who, because of his long experience on
*Page 149. See also ‘Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 370.
t United States Census Report, p. 42.
¢ ‘Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool.,” vol. ii., Part I, p. 97.
§ “ Voyage of the ‘ Vega,’” translation by Leslie, vol. ii, p. 290.
96 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
the Pribyloff Islands, has already been frequently quoted, states that
these whales usually come to the islands from the north early in Sep-
tember, and stay about them as long as the seals do.* They kill many
seals, particularly pups, and wantonly kill, apparently in sport, many
more than they actually devour. Captain Lavender, in his Report for
1890, mentions the occurrence of large schools of killer whales in pursuit
of young seals about the islands on the 30th October in that year,t
and Lieutenant Maynard mentions a case in which a single killer whale
was found to have fourteen young seals in its stomach.t The Aleuts
at Ounalaska further stated that they have often seen killer whales pur-
suing and catching fur-seals, not alone the young, but also the adults.
335. In the vicinity of the Commander Islands killer whales also
occur, but they do not appear to be so numerous as about the Pribyloff
Islands, and their ravages have not been complained of in the same
way.
60 336. As the killer whale frequents not only the summer haunts
of the fur-seal, but its whole migration-range and winter habitat,
it is practically certain that the seals are exposed to their attacks at all
times, except when actually ashore on the breeding islands. It is,
moreover, Supposed, and doubtless correctly so, that the larger sharks
to be found in the same waters prey upon the young seals to a consider-
able extent.
337. In consequence of these and perhaps other enemies, and of vari-
ous accidents, and irrespective of possible epidemic disease, the number
of the young seals born is greatly reduced before they return as year-
lings in the following year; and it is still further continuously reduced,
though in a diminishing proportion, in subsequent years. On this sub-
ject Bryant writes as follows:
During the time the young seals are absent from the islands, fully 60 per cent. of
their number are destroyed by their enemies before they arrive at the age of one
year, and during the second year. about 15 per cent. more are lost. Later they appear
to be better able to protect themselves, but before they arrive at maturity, at least
10 per cent. more are destroyed. So that if left entirely to themselves, only 10 or 15
per cent. of the annual product would mature or reach the age of seven years.§
On the same subject Elliott writes, speaking particularly of the males:
By these agencies, during their absence from the islands until their reappearance
in the following year and in July, they are so perceptibly diminished in number,
that I do not think, fairly considered, more than one-half of the legion which left
the ground of their birth last October came up the next July to these favourite
landing-places; that is, only 250,000 of them return out of the 500,000 born last year.
The same statement, in every respect, applies to the going and coming of the 500,000
female pups, which are identical in size, shape, and behaviour. ||
338. Neither of these statements claim any great precision, and it
would be impracticable to make them precise. Bryant’s may be taken,
however, aS showing a more careful consideration of the facts, and
according to his estimates, in the case of 100,000 pups, but 40,000 would
return in the second year and 34,000 in the third year, while about
30,000 would reach maturity.
339. It can scarcely be doubted that the fur-seal of the North Pacific
is also subject to diseases of various kinds, the prevalence or otherwise
of which have their effects on the numbers at each particular period.
Inquiries made on the subject have, however, not brought to light any
*See also Bryant in ‘‘ Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 407.
t Senate, Ex. Doc. No. 49, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. .
{ House of Representatives, Ex. Doc. No. 48, 44th Congress, Ist Session, p. 6.
§ “ Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 407; see also House of Represent-
atives, Ex. Doc. No. 83, 44th Congress, Ist Session, p. 65.
|| United States Census Report, p. 63.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. On
notable mortality which has been attributed to disease, nor do previously
published reports include any mention of such mortality. It may thus
at least be inferred, that no notably fatal disease has attacked these
animals while upon their breeding islands within historic times, but it
is not safe to affirm that disease has been wanting, or that epidemic
diseases may not, at any given time, appear, and require to be allowed
for in any regulations made respecting the killing of seals.
340. In the Report of Mr. C. H. Jackson on the fur-seal islands of
Cape Colony, already referred to, he writes: “‘Upon several islands,
especially in the Ishabar group, are to be found the remains of vast
numbers of ‘seal,’ probably the effects of an epidemic disease at some
distant period.”
341. On the same subject and referring to the same region, Mr. H. A.
Clark writes as follows, quoting ‘‘Morell’s Voyages”: “In 1828 Captain
Morell, in the schooner ‘ Antarctic,’ visited the west coast of Africa on
a fur-seal voyage. At Possession Island, in latitude 26° 51’ south, he
found evidence of a pestilence among the fur-seals. The whole island,
which is about 3 miles long, he states, was covered with the carcasses
of fur-seals, with their skins still on them. They appeared to have
been dead about five years, and it was evident that they had all met
their fate about the same period. I should judge, from the immense
multitude of bones and eareasses, that not less than half-a-million had
perished here at once, and that they had fallen victims to some myste-
rious disease or plague.” About 17 miles north of Possession Island
are two small islands not over a mile in length, where Captain Morell
found still further evidence of a plague among the fur-seals. ‘These
two islands,” he says, “have once been the resort of immense numbers
of fur-seals, which were doubtless destroyed by the same plague which
made such a devastation among them on Possession Island, as their
remains exhibited the same appearance in both cases.”*
342. Elliott, after stating that he has observed no disease among the
seals of the Pribyloff Islands, quotes a recorded instance of a plague
affecting the hair seals of the north of Scotland, Orkney and
61 Shetland Islands, and adds: “It is not reasonable to suppose
that the Pribyloff rookeries have never suffered from distempers
in the past, or are not to in the future, simply because no occasion seems
to have arisen during the comparatively brief period of their human
domination.” t
343. The fur-seals upon the Pribyloff Islands are, however, afflicted
by at least one known trouble, that of intestinal worms, and in the
stomachs of nearly every seal killed a certain number, and often a very
considerabie number, of such worms are found. ‘This cannot of course
be considered as constituting in itself a very serious affection, but if
under any particular train of circumstances it should be considerably
increased, it alone might become a danger to the continued well-being
of the seals.
(L.)—Mortality of young Seals in 1891,
344. In the season of 1891, considerable numbers of dead pups were
found in certain places upon the rookery grounds or in their vicinity,
and various hypotheses were advanced to account for this unusual mor-
tality. As some of these have special bearings on the general question
of seal preservation, it may be well to devote a few words to this par-
ticular subject.
* «¢ Wishery Industries of the United States,” vol. ii, p. 416.
t Uniteé States Census Report, p. 62.
BS bev HK
98 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
345. In order to exhibit the circumstances surrounding this fact and
to arrive at a probable explanation of its true meaning, it will be neces-
sary in the first instance to give in summarized form the observations
and notes bearing upon it made on the ground by ourselves.
346. When visiting Tolstoi Rookery, St. Paul Island, on the 29th
July, we observed and called attention to several hundred dead pups
which lay scattered about in a limited area, on a smooth slope near the
northern or inland end of the rookery eround, and at some Jittle distance
from the shore. The bodies were partly decomposed, and appeared
to have lain where found for a week or more, which would place the
actual date of the death of the pups, say, between the 15th and 20th
July. Neither the Government Agent who was with us, nor the natives
forming our boat’s crew at the time, would at. first believe that the
objects seen on the rookery were dead pups, affirming that they were
stones; but when it became clearly apparent that this was not the case,
they could suggest as causes of death only over-running by bulls or surf
along the shore, neither one of which appeared to us at the time to be
satisfactory. Mr. D. Webster, interrogated on the subject some days
later on St. George Island, offered merely the same suggestions, but a
few days still later, both Whites and natives on the islands were found
to have developed quite other opinions, and to be ready to attribute the
deaths to the operations of pelagic sealers killing mothers while off at
sea, and leading to the death of pups from starvation consequent on
such killing.
347. Believing the matter to be one of considerable importance, how-
ever it might be explained, particular attention was paid to it on sub-
sequent v isits to rookeries. On the 31st July and the 1st August the
rookeries of St. George were inspected, but no similar appearances were
found, nor was anything of the same kind again seen till the 4th August,
on Polavina rookery, St. Paul Island, where, near the southern extrem-
ity of the rookery, several hundred dead pups were agair found by us,
here also covering an area of limited size, which we were able to exam-
ine carefully without disturbing the breeding seals. It was estimated
that the pups here found had died between ten days and two weeks
before, which would place the actual date of death at about the same
time with that of those first referred to.
348. On the following day the extensive rookeries of North-East
Point were visited and ex xamined, but very few dead pups were any-
where seen. Mr. Fowler, in char ee of these rookeries for the Company,
was specially questioned on this point, and fully confirmed the nega-
tive observations made by ourselves at the time. It may here be men-
tioned that the vicinity of North-East Point had been the principal and
only notable locality from which, up to this date, sealing vessels had
been sighted in the offing, or had been reported as shooting seals within
he: aring of the shore.
349. On the 19th August, after a cruize to the northward of about
a fortnight’ s duration, we returned to St. Paul, and on the same day
revisited Tolstoi Rooker y. On this occasion the dead pups previously
noted were still to be seen, but the bodies were flattened out and more
or less covered with sand, by the continuous movement of the living
seals. There were, however, on and near the same place, and particu-
larly near the angle between Tolstoi Rookery and the sands of Enelish
Bay, many more dead pups, larger in size than those first noted,
62 and scarcely distinguishable in this respect from the living pups
which were then ‘ podded out” in great numbers in the immedi-
ate neighbourhood. Messrs. Fowler and Murray, who accompanied us
» oreow
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 99
on this occasion, admitted the mortality to be local, and the first-
named gentleman stated that in his long experience he had never seen
anything of the kind before, and suggested that the mothers from this
special locality might have gone to some particular “feeding bank,”
and have there been killed together by sea sealers. On the same day
we visited the Reef R ookery again, and a search was made there for
dead pups, which resulted in the discovery of some of approximately
the same size with those last mentioned, but probably not more than
an eighth, and certainly not more than one- fourth, in number as com-
pared with the inner end of the Tolstoi Rookery ground, and propor-
tionately in both cases to the number of living pups.
350. While making a third inspection of the St. Paul rookeries in
September, on the 15th of that month, the Reef and North-East Point
rookeries were again specially examined. The rookery ground of the
south-eastern side of the Reef Point was carefully inspected area by
area, with field. glasses, from the various rocky points which overlook it,
and from which the whole field is visible in detail save certain narrow
stony slopes close to the sea-edge, where dead pups might have been
hidden from view among the boulders. Subsequently, the north-eastern
sloping ground, named Gorboch on the plans, being at that date merely
occupied by scattered groups of seals, was walked over. The result
of the inspection was to show that there were on the south-east side ¢
few dozen dead pups at the most in sight, while on the opposite side
perhaps a hundred in all were found in the area gone over, being, prob-
ably, the same with those seen here the previous month, and in number
or contiguity not in any way comparable with those seen at the inner
end of Tolstoi.
351. On the same day a final visit was made to the North-East Point
rookeries, then in charge of three natives only. Two of these men
went over the ground with us, and were questioned on various subjects,
including that of dead pups, through our Aleut interpreter. They
would not admit that they had seen any great number of dead pups on
the North-East Part this season, and did not seem to be in any way
impressed with the idea that there had been any unusual mortality
there. The ground to the north of Hutchinson Hill was, however,
carefully examined by us from the slopes of the hill, and a few dead
pups were made out there. Again, at a place to the north of Sea-lion
Neck of the plans, and beyond the sand beach upon which holluschickie
generally haul out, a slow advance was made among a large herd of
females and pups, though part of these were necessarily driven off the
ground in so doing. An occupied area of rookery was thus walked
over, and the dead pups which appeared at this spot to be unusually
abundant were counted with approximate accuracy. A very few were
found scattered over the general surface, but on approaching the shore
edge, an area of about 20,000 square feet was noted, in which about
100 dead pups were assembled. Some of these lay within reach of the
surf at high tide. Most appeared to have been dead for at least ten
days, and several were broken up and mangled by the movement of
the living seals on and about them. This particular locality showed a
greater number of dead pups to area than any other seen at this time
either on the North-East or Reef rookeries, but in number in no respect
comparable to that previously noted at Tolstoi, or even to that on the
south part of Polavina.
302. We were informed on this our last visit to the Pribyloff Islands,
that subsequent to our discovery of and comments upon the dead pups
at the two last-mentioned places, the attention of Mr. J, Stanley-Brown
100 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS,
(who was engaged during the summer in making a special examination
of the rookeries for the United States Government) was called to the
circumstance, and that he undertook some further examination of it, of
which the result will, no doubt, eventually be rendered available. Dr.
Acland, who had just been installed as Medical Officer on St. Paul,
also told us that he had, within a few days, examined the bodies of six
of the dead pups from Tolstoi,and that though rather too much decom-
posed for correct autopsy, he had been unable to find any signs of
disease, but that all those examined were very thin sad without food
in the stomachs.
353. It may be noted here that the Garcasses thus examined must
have been those of pups which had died in the month of September,
or when no sealing schooners remained in Behring Sea.
354. The body of a pup found by us on the North Kast Rookery on
the 5th August, which was still undecomposed, was preserved in alcohol,
and has since been submitted to Dr. A.Giinther, F.R.S., of the British
Museum, who kindly offered to make an examination of it. This is
quoted at length in Appendix (D). The stomach was found to contain
no food. The body was well nourished, with a fair amount of fat in
the subcutaneous tissue, but no fat about the abdominal organs.
63 The lungs and windpipe were found in an inflammatory condi-
tion. Respecting-the actual cause of death, Dr. Giinther says:
“Both the absence of food as well as the condition of the respiratory
organs are sufficient to account for the death of the animal; but which
of the two was the primary cause, preceding the other it is impussible
to say.”
355. It would be inappropriate here to enter into any lengthened dis-
cussion of the bearings of the above facts on the methods of sealing at
sea; but as, after the tentative adoption of various hypotheses, the
mortality of the young seals was with a remarkable unanimity attrib-
uted to pelagic sealing by the gentlemen in any way connected with the
breeding islands, and as it has since been w idely and consistently
advertised in the press as a further and striking proof of the destruct-
iveness of pelagic sealing, it may be permis ssible to allude to a few
cogent reasons, because of which the subject seems at least to require
consideration of a much more careful and searching kind:
(1.) The death of so many young seals on the islands in 1591 was
wholly exceptional and unprecedented, and it occurred in the very season
during which, in accordance with the modus vivendi, every etfort was
being ‘made to drive all pelagic sealers from Behring Sea. Those famil-
iar with the islands were evidently puzzled and surprised when their
attention was first drawn to it, and were for some time in doubt as to
what cause it might be attributed.
(2.) The explanation at length very unanimously concurred in by
them, viz., that the young had died because their mothers had been
killed at sea, rests w holly upon the assumption that each female will
suckle only its own young one, an assumption which appears to be at
least very doubtful, and which has already been discussed.
(3.) The mortality was at first entirely local, and though later a cer-
tain number of dead pups were found on various rookeries examined,
nothing of a character comparable with that on Tolstoi rookery was
discovered.
(4.) The mortality first observed on Tolstoi and Polavina was at too
early a date to enable it to be reasonably explained by the killing of
mothers at sea. It occurred, as already explained, about the 15th or
20th July, at atime at which, according to the generally accepted dates,
as well as our own observations in 1891, the females had not begun to
,*
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. Ok
leave the rookeries in large numbers, or, when leaving them, to do ne
more than swim or play about close to the shore. It has already been
stated that Bryant gives the 25th July as the opening of the period in
which the females begin to leave the rookeries. Maynard states that
the bulls, cows, and pups remain within the rookery limits to the same
date, while Elliott places this change in the rookeries between the end
of July and the 5th and 8th August. It is, moreover, acknowledged by
the best authorities, that the dates in seal life upon the islands have
become later rather than earlier in recent years, as compared with these
in which the dates above cited were ascertained. In the case of the
death of pups after the middle of August, it might be an admissible
hypothesis that the mothers had been killed at sea, and that subse-
quently to such killing the young had had time to starve to death, but
not at dates earlier than this. In the present case, the inortality began
long before that date, and it seems probable that the deaths which
occurred later must be explained by the same cause, whatever it may
have been, extending from the original localities and becoming more
general.
356. The causes to which the mortality noted may be attributed with
greatest probability are the following, but the evidence at present at
disposal scarcely admits of a final attribution to one or other of them.
If, however, the examination made by Dr. Acland of several of the
carcasses be considered as indicative of the state of the whole, one of
the two first is likely to afford the correct explanation:
(a.) It is well known that in consequence of the decreased number of
“killables” found on the hauling- grounds in late years, it has been found
necessary to collect these close to and even on the edges of the breeding
rookeries, and that it has thus been impossible to avoid the collection
and driving to the killing grounds with the “killables” of all sorts of
seals not required, including seacatchie and females. It is also known
that the driving and killing in the early part of the season of 1891 was
pushed with unwonted energy, taking into consideration the reduced
number of seals, and it appears to be quite possible that the females
thus driven from their young, though afterwards turned away from the
killing grounds in an exhausted and thoroughly terrified state, never
afterware ds found their way back to their original breeding place 4s, but
either went off to sea or landed elsewhere. The places where the
greatest number of dead pups were first seen on Tolstoi and Polavina
were just those from the immediate vicinity of which drives were most
frequently made.
(b.) The appearances, indicating a local beginning and greatest inten-
sity of mortality, with its subsequent extension to ‘ere eater areas, might
reasonably be explained by the origination and transmission of some
disease of an epidemic character.
64 (c.) The circumstances where the mortality was observed to be
greatest appeared to be such as to be explicable by a panic and
stampede with consequent over-running of the young, but, if so, such
_stampedes must have occurred more than once, They might not
improbably have resulted from attempts to collect ‘‘drives” too near
the breeding rookeries.
(d.) It is entirely within the bounds of probability that raiders may
have landed on at least Tolstoi and Polavina rookeries without any one
upon the islands becoming cognisant of the fact. Females would in
such a case be killed in greatest numbers, for these occupy the stations
most easily got at from the sea-side, and the killing upon the rookery
ground would also unavoidably have resulted in “ stampeding” large
numbers of seals of all classes.
102 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
(M.)—Methods of enumerating Seals on the Pribyloff Islands and Esti-
mates of Numbers.
357. The number of seals frequenting the Pribyloff Islands at differ-
ent dates is of course a fact of fundamental importance, and every
attention has thus been given to the methods employed in making esti-
mates of number and to the results arrived at. Unfortunately for pur-
poses of comparison, these have been made for the past twenty years
at irregular intervals, on entirely different methods, and by quite dif-
ferent persons, excepting in the one case of Mr. Elliott, who made
elaborate observations on the spot both in 1872-74, and in 1890, the
latter being of special value for purposes of comparison with the con-
ditions in 1891.
398. The first actual estimate of the total numbers of seals resorting
to the Pribyloff Islands appears to have been that made by Bryant in
1869. Bryant states that he discovered that there were no open places
on the rookeries, that they began to fill at the water-line, and extended
no further back than the breeding seals could occupy in a compact
body. He then estimated the number to a square rod, and, presum-
ably, by finding the number of square rods contained in the rookery
grounds, found the total number of breeding seals to be 1,130,000. He
next proceeded to estimate the non-breeding seals and the young of
the year, and states his belief that there were on the island [sic] not
less than 3,230,000.* If intended for both islands, as by the context it
appears to be, this estimate is probably a reasonably fair one, made at
least to the best of the writer’s ability, though, as he does not state the
number assumed to the square rod, we are without any exact means of
checking it.
359, In his report, based on observations in 1872-74, Mr. Elliott claims
the credit for the “ discovery ” that the seals collected on the rookeries
in a uniform number to the square rod, and, with even greater candour
than the last writer, puts us in possession of his unit of computation.
This is very simple, for he merely allows two square teet to each breed-
ing seal on the rookery ground, divides the whole number of square
feet considered as rookery ground by two, and calls this the number of
breeding seals. His discussion of the subject is somewhat lengthy,
but he sums up his conclusions as follows: “Taking all these points
into consideration, . . . I quite safely calculate upon an average of
two square feet to every animal, big and little, on the breeding grounds,
as the initial point upon which to base an intelligent computation of
the entire number of seals before us.”+ Working upon this basis, he
makes the number of breeding seals on the islands, in 1872-74, 3,193,420,
and, adding an estimate for the non-breeding seals, raises the grand
total to 4,700,000.7
360. Lieutenant Maynard, in his Report written in 1874, states that
the seals frequenting the Pribyloff Islands *‘have been variously esti-
mated at from 1,000,000 to 15,000,000.” He thinks Mr. Elliott’s method
of estimation to be the most accurate, but, by adding a larger number
of non-breeding seals, raises the grand total, as relating to the year
1872, to about 6,000,000.§
361. Fourteen years after Mr. Elliott’s estimate, Mr. G. R. Tingle, in
1887, expresses the belief that the area of rookery grounds had increased,
and, employing Elliott’s method of computation, arrived at the figures
* « Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 389.
t United States Census Report, p. 50.
tIbid., pp. 61 and 62.
§ House of Representatives, Ex. Doc. No, 43, 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 5,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 103
6,357,750 for the total number of seals. He explains, however, that the
Space given to each seal by this hypothesis was too small, and, con-
sequently, reduces his estimate by one-fourth, making it 4,768,300.*
362. It will be observed that Elliott’s mode of computing the space
occupied by the breeding seals has been made the basis for sub-
65 sequent calculations, though both Maynard and Tingle took the
liberty of essentially changing the results as they would have
appeared if this method had been strictly followed. Neither wholly
believed in it, but neither saw his way to substituting a more accurate
basis, and both, therefore, merely modified its results by guessing at
additions or subtractions.
363. Elliott’s basis of computation must, however, be taken subject to
his own measurements of an adult female, which are as follows: Length,
50 inches; girth, 36 or 57 inches. Such an animal, in a recumbent
position, would be contained in a rectangle of as nearly as possible 4,
instead of 2, square feet, and as it is not the normal habit of seals to
lie overlapped one upon another, or to stand upright on their hind flip-
pers, it is surely clear that his unit of measurement is an erroneous one.
This appears to have occurred to the author himself, for, in stating the
totals of various rookery areas, he writes, cautiously, “making ground
for” so many seals, and it is not till he proceeds to make up his grand
totals that this statement is suddenly exchanged (though in the same
tables) for one representing actual number of seals.
364, This fact of measurement is not, however, the most palpable
source of error in these calculations, for the nature of the ground occu-
pied by the breeding seals in itself renders them wholly inapplicable.
A first inspection of the territory covered by any one of the Pribyloff
rookeries is sufficient to show this, and the fact becomes more and more
obvious as they are examined in detail. The notes already given (§ 256
et seq.) on the character of the rookery grounds may indicate the reason
of this criticism, but it would be difficult to convey an adequate idea of
the rocky and broken character of some of them by any description.
Photographs may serve to exhibit better their general nature, and it
appears to be reasonably within limits of error to conjecture that, in the
ageregate of the Pribyloff Rookery grounds, not more than one-half the
whole space included by their outer limits can, under any circumstances,
be assumed to be a surface so level as to be “ ground for the resting-
place of seals.”
365. It has been considered necessary to deal with this subject because
of its direct bearing upon the question of the fluctuation and general
diminution of the Seals upon the rookeries, and the evidence ‘that it
affords of the now scarcely-questioned fact, that the estimates made in
the earlier years of the control of the islands by the United States were
absurdly high. It may be added that no single individual of the many
questioned by us who had been familiar with the Pribyloff or Com-
mander Islands, or both, for longer or shorter periods, was found to be
ready to maintain even the approximate accuracy of the statements of
number of seals according to the above-discussed method of enumera-
tion.
366. By way of further substantiating the conclusions arrived at, how-
ever, it may be well to quote a few published opinions bearing on it,
which occur in the Congressional Inquiry into the Fur-seal Fisheries of
Alaska, made in 1888: t
*House of Representatives, Report No. 3883, 50th Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 163
and 177.
t House of Representatives, Report No. 3883, 50th Congress, 2nd Session.
104 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Mr. 8S. M. Biiynitzky, Government Agent on the islands during parts
of the years 1870-71-72, says: “I saw an approximate estimate made by
Mr. filliott . . . . I donot think any estimate would be within a
million or two. I think he puts them at five millions, but it may be
three or seven millions, as they are countless.”
Mr. G. Wardman, Government Agent on St. George Island from 1881
to 1885, asked as to the total number of seals on the islands, says: “I
never could make it so much as Professor Elliott has done. I made
many estimates. I have been to all the rookeries on the islands many
times, and compared them with the space occupied by the carcasses on
the killing grounds, and I feel pretty confident that the whole number
has been over-estimated.” He then proceeds to justify his opinion by
special references to rookeries on St. George and to measurements.
Mr. T. F. Morgan, who was on the Pribyloff Islands in 1868-69, and
again during every killing season from 1874 to 1888, as an employé of
the Alaska Commercial Company, Says, respecting thenumber of seals:
‘“‘T think that Professor Elliott has over-estimatedit . . . : helaid
down the carcasses of seals and measured around them, and then meas-
ured the rookeries. . . . But they do not lie all over the territory
which he marked out. . . . The seals did not cover the whole area
as thoroughly as he measured it.”
Dr. H. H. Meintyre, Superintendent of the Alaska Commercial Com-
pany, and on the islands every year, except three, from 1870 to 1888,
says: “I think the number has been very largely over-estimated in the
repor ts of naturalists who have observed the habits of the animals on
the seal islands. They have made their mistake in supposing that all
the ground which shows signs of having been occupied by seals is coy-
ered by them simultaneously, rahten the fact is, that the bachelor
66 seals may be found to-day upon a certain rookery, and another
time upon another place. The result is, the same animals in
many instances have been counted two or three times. I think the
estimates are fully one-third, or perhaps one-half, too high.”
367. No further estimate of the total number of seals upon the Priby-
loff Islands appears to have been made until that of Mr. Elliott in
1890, in which the grand total arrived at is 959,593 breeding seals, in-
cluding only 350, 000 br eeding females, besides a large number of bar-
ren females, while the number of male seals over one year old did not
exceed 100,000.
368. The citations above given are sufficient to show the character of
the estimates of numbers made, and to indicate why it is impossible to
follow the changes and fluctuations in numbers of seals resorting to the
Pribyloff Islands directly and by these means alone. in his original
report of 1874, Lieutenant Maynard very Sous, remarks that the most
trustworthy index of the condition of the rookeries is to be found in
the aggregate area occupied by them at particular dates in each season,
rather than in actual numbers of seals, which can never be anything
but mere approximations. His suggestion, that plans should be made
and marked with the rookery limits in each year, was unfortunately not
carried out, and we are thus thrown back upon indirect methods of
instituting comparisons between the past and present condition of seal
life upon the islands. We can only hope that for the future steps will
be taken accurately to peg out or mark the limits of the existing rook-
eries as a criterion of changes certain to occur from year to year.
369. The auxiliary methods which were adopted in making compari-
sons of the past and present condition of the rookeries, included care-
ful personal observation at three different periods in the season of
2 wah
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. . 105
1891, made in the light of evidence previously published, and with the
aid of formal and informal questioning and conversation with all those
actually engaged in the work on the islands, as well &s with many who
had previously worked on the islands, but were at the time in other
independent employments.
370. The differing ages at which the males and females respectively
2ach maturity and enter into the breeding class, together with the
Serine times at which the sexes are supposed to continue in this class,
with other circumstances already detailed as to the habits of the fur-
seals, together afford the data for very elaborate calculations as to the
rate of increase or decrease of numbers of seals under various condi-
tions, and subject to the killing of certain numbers of seals of specified
Sexes and ages. Such calculations, from a practical point of view, are,
however, more curious than useful: first, because of the uncertainty of
many of the data, due to a want of necessarily precise information;
and second, from the impossibility of including the consideration of the
varying natural causes of loss, which in some years may be so serious
as to entirely vitiate any arithmetical result which may be arrived at
by such a calculation. An attempt of a very general character has,
nevertheless, been made to illustrate the normal increase and possible
killing of seals, which may be presented for the purpose of putting the
matter in point. In this calculation roughly approximate data only are
employed, because it is believed that such data are, under the circum-
stances, likely to yield results as trustworthy as any assumptions of a
refined and definite character.
O71. The state of the breeding rookeries of the fur-seal, under normal
circumstances, and while the surplus of males is being’ annually killed
off, may, it is believed, be fairly represented by a unit value consisting
of—breeding males 10,000, breeding females 100,000. Bryant’s esti-
mate (which appears to be the best) of young surviving to reach matu-
rity, under normal circumstances, is 30 per cent. of the entire number
born; or with an annual birth-rate corresponding to the above * unit”
of 100,000, 30,000 would reach “maturity” each year.*
It may further be assumed that the average age of “maturity” in the
two sexes is 4 years, and that the whole number of seals upon the rook-
eries during four preceding years has remained constant.
372. Under these assumptions, 30,000 4-year-old seals would be added
each year; and it may be postulated, though it has not been actually
ascertained, that of these 15,000 are males and 15,000 females. Of
these it may be supposed that 10 per cent. is required in each case to
replace natural losses by death annually of the breeding classes, or, say,
10,000 females and 1,000 males.
373. Under these assumptions, it is evident that a surplus of the
yearly increment, consisting of 14,000 males and 5,000 females, may be
killed each year without dama ge to the existing state of the rook-
67 eries, Which should thus remain at a fixed number. The death-
rate allowed is probably sufficient to cover all but very excep-
tional natural causes of loss.
If, however, under-these circumstances, no females be killed, an addi-
tion of 5,000, or 5 per cent., on the whole number of females, will accrue
to the rookeries yearly; and such increase, to maintain the requisite
proportion of the sexes, will call for a similar i increase of 5 per cent. in
males, or 500 males; thus reducing the number of males which may be
killed, if killing is restricted to this sex, to 13,500 annually.
*Bryant estimates that during the first year 60 per cent. of the young are lost,
during the second year 15 per cent., but before they arrive at maturity at least 10
per cent. more are destroyed. “Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 407,
106 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
With such an annual increase of 5 per cent. to the entire herd, this
should double in number in about every fourteen years. :
Thus, about 770,000 breeding seals should produce annually £00, 000
killable males of an average age of 4 years, and still allow for a 5 5 per
cent. annual increase of the breeding seals.
374, Adding to the assumed unit of 110,000 breeding seals, male and
female, the number of non-breeding seals required by Bryant’s per-
centage estimates of loss by death of young, the following figures would
represent the whole number of such seals at any one time:
PUPS A USUIDOPM Ree. Sar cess sees ose cleae naan ae ee eee ener aeeee 100, 000
Weanling sec Aes cece let oe dole ss ecco ck slecetie Be seine eae a ee ee ee 40, 000
A VGHE Gan accse ned Ae oon BAC ee opeco ator ane tee asosesence aoe Gasersoseboe 35, 000
SEV/CH NEO) 0h: ae ea BE eeie Hae ROSSER Saas Sa eaee Bes Serhan sseinenocr sSeneanc 33, 000 .
Ettetewsealsiol Voth Sexes (sats cece meen ie see oe aaa ee ree ee eee eee 50, 000
Totaljof non-breedingsealsies-—- se cee soe = eee eee eee eee 258, 000
375. Adding to these the breeding seals, the whole number of seals
present, when 30,060 may be killed annually without decreasing the
aggregate number, would be 368,000, and proportionately, in order to
produce an increase of 100,000 annually, a total number of 2,576,000.
376. As a matter of opinion, based on such information as we have
been able to obtain, and notwithstanding the much larger number given
to the islands by several of the estimates previously quoted, we are
inclined to doubt whether the whole number of seals frequenting the
Pribyloff Islands has ever, since the exceptional slaughter of 1868,
actually exceeded 2,000,000. There can be no possible question that
the actual number has been very greatly exaggerated in most of the
computations made. If this opinion be approximately correct, it is evi-
dent that an annual slaughter of 100,000 males might lead to just such
a continuous and cumulative decrease in total numbers as is elsewhere
shown to have occurred before pelagic sealing had entered into the
question.
(N.)— Various Natural Indications of former EKatent of Ground occupied
by Seals on the Pribyloff Islands.
377. It will be understood, that on the Pribyloff Islands all parts of
the surface above the reach of the waves, and not too rocky or too
entirely composed of loose sand, is, in consequence of the humidity of
the climate, naturally covered with grass, but that on the areas running
back from the shore with a greater or less width, which are occupied
as rookeries or hauling-grounds by the seals, the constant movement
and passage of these animals entirely prevents any vegetable growth.
Thus, these resorts of seals, when seen even from a considerable dis-
tance, are quite distinctly marked as bare, earthy slopes. When more
closely examined, it is further found that the rocky projections and
scattered angular rocks, which are common to a greater or less extent
to nearly all the rookery § grounds, have had the angles more or less
polished and worn by the constant movement of the “seals over them.
The rocks being generally basaltic contain no very hard minerals, and
there being a certain proportion of silicious matter in the sand, this
supplies a very efficient polishing material, which is applied by the
flippers and bodies of the seals. The polish thus imparted to portions
of the rocks is different from that produced by wind-drifted sand in
being chiefly confined to points and angles, and is thus easily distin-
guished from it,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 107
378. It is found that such partly polished rocks are characteristic
particularly of the seaward side of the several rookery grounds, and
that further inland, and at greater distances from the central parts of
the several rookeries, the appearance become less and less well marked,
till it at length ceases to be obser vable.
379. It is. evident that the polishing and wearing down of rocky
angles in the manner above described can have occurred only during
long series of years; but it is also evident that the occupation
68 of the same spot by large numbers of seals, say once in every
third or even every fifth or tenth year, would be sufficient to
render the polishing process practically continuous. That, in fact, any
particular rocky spot, if not occupied for intervals of several or many
years, would not in such intervals lose the traces impressed upon it by
former occupation, and that, if reoccupied from time to time, these
traces would become cumulative. Experience gained in connection
with the examination of polishing due to the glacial period in other
regions, impressed on just such rocks as those of the Pribyloff Islands,
shows that such polishing is exceedingly enduring, and that the mere
action of the weather upon polished rock angles, like those found upon
some of the breeding grounds, cannot have perceptibly operated in the
direction of their obliteration since the earliest human knowledge of
the Pribyloff Islands. Otherwise stated, it may be safely asserted,
that while affording no valid evidence of recent occupation, such traces
give invaluable evidence as to the whole area at any time long occupied
by large numbers of seals during the past few hundred years.
380. In consequenee of the want of actual information as to the extent
of seal-occupied ground about the various breeding places on the Pri-
byloff Islands in various years, a very general tendency is apparent,
even among those who have been familiar with the islands for several
years, to magnify the conditions of the past at the expense of the pres-
ent, and free scope is often given to the imagination in describing the
former extent of various rookeries and hauling grounds. An excellent
corrective to generalizations of this kind was found, however, in noting
the bare or lichen-covered surfaces of the scattered rocks. The climate,
as well as the rock surfaces of the Pribyloff Islands, are well adapted
to the growth of lichens, but where seals have been in any considerable
numbers, no lichens are found on any surface over which they can climb,
or which has been within the reach of their flippers. A knowledge of
the very slow growth of lichens was sufficient to indicate that where
such accessible rocks were well lichen-covered, seal life must have been
but scantily, if at all, represented for a long term of years.
381. An observation of this particular fact, continued from rookery
to rookery over both islands, showed that the lichened rocks often
extended quite to the limits of the ground still annually kept bare of
grass by the seals. By this statement, it is not meant to affirm that
the lichened rocks and stones were always and everywhere contermi-
nous with the limit of the bared ground, but that in many cases easily
accessible points of ground touched these limits, both on St. Paul and
St. George, and thus proved that the seal- frequented area had not con-
tinuously overpassed the actual limits for a considerable number of
years, and that vague statements to a contrary effect were necessarily
erroneous. This was particularly noted on West Zapadnie Rookery, on
certain parts of the Reef rookeries, and those of North-East Point on
St. Paul, and on the Little Eastern Rookery on St. George; but as a
criterion, it was in a lesser degree distinctly observed on nearly all of
the breeding grounds,
108 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
382. To render the meaning of this fact clear to those who have not
particularly paid attention to this subject, the following quotation may
be given from the article on lichens in the “ Encyclopedia Britannica” :*
In this fitful and abnormal life of lichens, we have the explanation in a great
measure of their almost indefinite duration of existence. It is well known that they
are perennial plants in the widest sense of this term; and that, though in the earlier
stages of their existence, their growth is comparatively rapid, yet this becomes
extremely slow when they arrive ‘at a certain age. ‘The time required for the devel-
opment of even the most rapidly growing species may be calculated by the appear-
ances of such of these as are met with on gravestones, mortar of houses, stone walls,
wooden palings, and such like, the date of whose erection is known. Amongst other
instances that have come under the present writer’s own observation may be adduced
the case of Physcia parietina [the common grey lichen of the Pribyloff Islands is a
Physcia), growing in fair quantity on the stones of a granite wall, built in 1856, in
a maritime district where the plant is extremely abundant, and where the atmos-
pherical and other conditions are well suited for its growth. In a recent visit to the
spot, it was found that although the thallus is now well developed, no fructification
whatever is visible, though traces of spermogones are beginning to Syne so that,
in a space of forty -five years, this plant has not yet attained full maturity
383, Still another characteristic of the rookery grounds is, aa their
surfaces are generally composed, especially in hollows subjected to little
wear, of a felted coat of mud and hair. In the damp climate of the
Pribyloff Islands this characteristic does not endure very long, and
when any particular area is abandoned for a few years by the Sei als, it
soon becomes again covered with grass.
69 384. This last circumstance leads to the consideration of a fact,
upon which much stress has lately been laid, in connection with the
estimation of the present and former areas of the ‘vookeries and hauling
grounds. It is quite noticeable that when an area doubtless originally
covered with rough, tussocky grass of long growth, and of the character
normal to the islands (and generally or always confined to the single
species, Hlymus mollis), has been occupied by seals for such a time as
to eradicate this grass and smooth down the lumpy surface upon which
it grew, the temporary or permanent abandonment of the area is followed
by. the appe: wance on it of grasses of a shorter and closer growth, and
which in the later summer rand autumn sooner assume yellowish colours,
in consequence of which the outlines of the previously occupied area
become clearly defined. It is quite natural, that in the unfortunate
absence of any consecutive record of the extent of the rookery grounds,
or of correct or comparable estimates of the number of seals upon them
or upon the islands as a whole, these “grass limits,” as they may be
called for brevity, have been seized upon as something tangible.
385. The “grass limits” are often quite readily observable, particu-
larly froma little distance, and some special attention was given to them
in order to ascertain, as far as possible, to what extent they might be
employed asa criterion of change, and particularly of diminution in the
areas frequented by seals, or in the aggregate number of seals resorting
to the islands.
386. It may be mentioned, in the first place, that the grasses to be
found in these particular areas are not in themselves peculiar, but if is
merely the predominance of certain forms and their mode of growth
which seems to outline such areas, the most abundant grass being
apparently Deschampsia (Aira) caespitosa, with which the little crucifer-
ous plant Cochlearia officinalis is often mingled. Farther, that a very
similar growth and colouration is found in other parts of the islands,
which have never been known to be, and which in all probability never
have been, frequented by fur- Seals; as, for instance, on the easterly
*Ninth edition, vol. Xiv, p. 558.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. ° 109
slopes of the low hill upon which the flagstaff stands at St. Paul village.
Making due allowance, however, for these and other accidental circum-
stances, the fact remains that, surrounding all, or nearly all, the present
rookery grounds, there is a margin of varying width, and. not always
concentric with the still bare area, pretty cle: arly marked out by such
difference of sod.
387. Respecting the time which it might take for any portion of seal-
worn ground to revert to its original tussocky condition if undisturbed,
little can be said with certainty, further than that it must be many
years. The tussocky character of the general surface upon the islands
has arisen in the course of time and by the persistence of grass-clumps,
about which sand and soil carried by the wind have collected, and
vegetable matter produced by continued growth has accumulated.
Experience on the western plains of North America, where a buffalo-
path or cart-trail is sometimes found to have retained its identity, with
little apparent change for thirty or more years, would indieate that the
time of reversion here to the original state of the surface cannot be
placed at less than perhaps fifty years, while a century would, in all
probability, more nearly represent it.
383. Without, however, attaching any importance to particular limits
of time, it is perfectly clear that both in the extent of the seal-polished
rocks and in that of the distinctive vegetation, we see marked the
greatest expansion which the areas so characterized have at any time
attained during the last 100 years or so, and that these traces thus carry
us back so far as to,render them of little value in the elucidation of the
changes of late years. Still further, it is obvious that such limits need
not, and probably do not, quantitatively represent the actual expansion
of the seal herd centering about any given rookery ground, but, o1 the
contrary, indicate an outer boundary, within the limits of which the
seals have oscillated during a long term of years. The extraordinary
fixity which has been attributed to the rookery areas and hauling
grounds, arising naturally from a popular exaggeration of their sub-
permanent character, has alone rendered it mentally possible to advance
to the further stage of belief, which has induced some writers to
assume that the whole of the areas showing traces of seal occupation
have been at some definite time simultaneously and closely occupied.
There is no basis for any such belief in nature, or in the observed
habits of the seals, and any reference to it with this meaning involved,
merely tends to cloud the consideration of the true facts of the case.
389. Dr. McIntyre, in a passage already quoted, refers clearly to this
point, and the facts previously given in connection with changes in the
rookeries further illustrate it, though it is not at once grasped in
an inspection of the seal islands for the first time, or in one confined to
a single period of the year. It is, moreover, very easily understood that
any one with but a general remembrance of the former greater abun-
dance of seals on the islands, if asked to indicate the limits
70 occupied by them and groping for some tangible means of doing
so, Should seize upon the ‘‘ grass limit” as affording this means,
and maintain that that limitis co-extensive with the spre ad of the seals
in the “ sixties” or in the “seventies,” as the case may be.
390. The best locality actually found for observing the circumstances
connected with old seal-frequented areas was that of the important
rookeries of North-East Point. The “grass limit” was there particu-
larly well marked, especially in the month of September, and it was
noted that the rocks with polished edges scarcely, and then only in a very
slightly marked form, extended as far as the “grass limit,” giving reason
110 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
to believe that the ground had been at no time thickly or very continu-
ously frequented by seals to this limit. The nearly straight shore-line
running eastward from Hutchinson Hill is almost, or practically quite,
continuously occupied by breeding-seals, though these occupy a much
greater width in some places than in others. As early as the 5th
August, 1891, it was observable from Hutchinson Hill, in connection
with the general change in the rookeries at about this date, that con-
siderable bodies of seals had worked back in three places quite to the
margin of the “grass limit,” and in a fourth had almost reached this
limit. In thus working inland, the respective bodies of seals had formed
four “bays,” gradually narrowing toward the inner ends, where the
greater number of seals were at the time gathered, but of which the
limits were quite distinctly marked by the flattening down and partial
disappearance of the short grass, and the fact that mud and sand had
been drawn over it by the restless movement of the seals. This observa-
tion alone was sufficient to indicate that even the present number of
seals might naturally, in the course of a few years, work over every part
of the ter ritory on the seaward side of the general “ grass limit,” and
that this limit might thus be perennially maintained.
391. When the same part of the North-East Rookery was re-examined
in the middle of September, though there were still some large “pods”
of seals scattered out as far as the “ grass limit,” the arrangement above
described had partly broken up, and the “bays” were not so distinctly
outlined, as recent rains had washed and partly revived the seal-
trodden grass by which they had previously been marked out. The
seals occupying the ‘‘ bay” nearest to the base of the hill had, however,
moved still further back, and were actually in occupation to the num-
ber of 2,000, or thereabouts, of an area of the longer and tussocky grass
to the rear of the general orass limit.” At the same date, near the
western base of the long slope of Hutchinson Hill, a considerable area
of the shorter turf on the seaward side of the ‘grass limit” was found
to show obvious traces of having been occupied by a large number of
seals for some days at least, though they had subsequently abandoned
it for some other locality. Here, again, one corner of the area thus
marked out by recent occupation overpassed the “ grass limit,” and cov-
ered a superficies estimated at about 50,000 square feet of the long tus-
socky grass, which showed no sign of previous occupation by seals.
The shorter grass had naturally suffered more than the lon ger, being
flattened down, partially worn off, and pressed into the mud. The
longer grass in the course of a year will probably show no trace of its
occupation.
392. Passing now to several changes of the same general character
noted on the Reef Rookery: As early as the 18th August, not only was
a larger number of seals than before observed (mostly holluschickie)
seen hauled out on the outer part of Zoltoi sands, at the inner end of
Reef Point, but they were also scattered in considerable numbers far
back on the hill. There were in all probably about 3,000 seals here at
this time, and one-half of them were estimated to be “killable” seals.
On the 15th September large droves of seals were resting or travelling
about all parts of the bare ‘parade ground” between “the Reef and
Gorbotch rookeries, which had on previous visits, six weeks and nine
weeks before respectively, been but scantily occupied, and which, if
noted only in the earlier part of the season, would have been charac-
terized as an area practically abandoned by seals. The only notable
exception to this occupation was the grassy flat to the southwest of
“ Fox Hill,” which for some reason was not frequented, and shows little
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 11]
sion of having been much occupied either in this or former years.
While, therefore, it might easily have been assumed at earlier dates in
the season that the bare slopes of the “parade” indicated the former
existence of great masses of seals unlike any now to be found, the rea-
son of the absence of grass upon them, even under the present circum-
stances, became perfectiy obvious on a later inspection.
393. Before leaving this particular subject, it may be well further to
mention that there is on the North-East Point a considerable area of
what may be called “spurious grass limit,” to the west of the slopes of
Hutchinson Hill, and extending nearly to Cross Hill. Here there is a
flat, spreading back from the beach and bounded on the inland side by
a low rise or step, which might easily be mistaken for a very wide
expansion of a former rookery ground, but which is in reality not due
to any such cause, but is physically different. The higher flat,
(al running inland from the step or low bank just referred to, is
chiefly composed of loose, porous sand, a few feet only in thick-
ness at the edge, but extending in greater or less thickness over a con-
siderable portion of the interior of the whole North-East Point peninsula.
This is overgrown by rough, tussocky grass. Between the edge of the
step and the sea the superficial sandy covering has been removed, prob-
ably by the action of the wind and sea in exceptional storms, and has
exposed a stony and bouldery lower surface, on which volcanic soil rather
than sand is packed between the rocky fragments. Ali that part of the
lower area which is grassed, is covered with a shorter and yellower kind
of grass. No distinct ‘‘grass limit” can, therefore, be traced across it,
and it is impossible in this place to outline the maximum limit of seal
occupation at any period except by the polished character of therocks,
a feature which ceases to be observable long before the edge of the
upper flat is reached.
394. The general features here described are well shown in the sketch
forming Plate LX in Mr. Elliott’s Census Report, though in this sketch,
for artistic effect, the horizontal distances are considerably reduced in
proportion to the vertical dimensions. The sinuous line of the edge of
the higher flat may be clearly traced by the longer grass, and it is
obvious that the seals did not approach this line even at the time this
sketch was made, or in 1872-74. A photograph taken from the same
point of view in 1891 indicates the structural peculiarities of this stretch
of ground still more conclusively.
395. It may therefore be stated, in concluding the consideration of
this subject, that neither the extent of the seal-polished rocks nor that
of the “grass limits” in the vicinity of the breeding grounds, can be
trusted to for the purpose of giving infermation as to changes in area
or position of ground occupied by seals in recent years, as contrasted
with that at present occupied. Far less can it be taken to indicate in
any reliable manner the numerical decrease in the seals in these years,
or be accepted in place of the annual details on this subject which an
intelligent supervision of the rookeries would have exacted as a matter
of prime importance, but which are unfortunately wanting, and can
only be in part supplied by incidental allusions or coliateral observa-
tions which have been preserved. Whether considered from a general
point of view, or in the light of the special inquiries made in 1891, such
indications as those above referred to must be admitted to mark out
only the maximum average limit of oscillation and range of seal occu-
pation during a very long period of years. While, therefore, exact
recent surveys of the areas marked out by such “grass limits” or other-
wise, in the vicinity of rookeries, may possess a certain limited intrinsic
112 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
interest, they can have absolutely no fixed value in connection with the
pr actical matters under discussion. It is, in fact, largely to ideas
loosely based on the observable extent of ground which has at one time
or another, but never simultaneously, been occupied by seals, that
many of the exa ggerated estimates of the amount of the present redue-
tion in number of seals in the islands may be directly traced.
(O.)—Changes in Habits of the Fur-seal in recent Years.
396. The systematic and persistent hunting and slaughter of the fur-
seal of the North Pacific, both on shore and at sea, has naturally and
inevitably given rise to certain changes in the habits and mode of life
of that animal, which are of importance not only in themselves, but as
indicating the effects of such pursuit, and in showing in what particular
this is injurious to seal life as a whole. Such changes doubtless began
more than a century ago, and some of them may be traced in the histor-
ical précis, elsewhere given (§ 782 et seq.). It is unfortunately true,
however, that the disturbance to the normal course of seal life has
become even more serious in recent years, and that there is, therefore,
no lack of material from which to study its character and effect even at
the present time.
397. The changes in habits and mode of life of the seals naturally
divide themselves into two classes, which may be considered separately.
The first and most direct and palpable of these is that shown in the
increased shyness and wariness of the animal, which, though always
pelagic in its nature, has been forced by circumstances to shun the land
more than before, so that, but for the necessity imposed upon it of seek-
ing the shore at the season of birth of the young, it might probably ere
this have become entirely pelagic. Changes of the second class embrace
those which have resulted from a disproportion of the nee produced by
the continuous and excessive killing of males of certain ages, and from
new and more destructive methods adopted on the breeding islands
because of diminished numbers and other such circumstances. The
increasing irregularity and overlapping in the dates in the events of
seal life may be included in this latter class.
72 398. Changes of the first class have now apparently become,
ina measure, hereditary, while those of the second depend almost
from year to year upon the treatinent at the time accorded to the seals,
and might, in the course of a few years at most, with care, be caused
to revert to their former normal condition.
399. Pelagic sealers of experience are almost unanimous in stating
that the fur-seal is each year becoming more alert and difficult of
approach and capture, while the independent native hunters add their
testimony to the same effect, and there can be no question as to the
general fact. Such changes are more notable at seathan on the breed-
ing islands, for when at sea the seal is in its natural element, and free
to exercise its instincts of self-preservation; when on shore at the
breeding season it is, on the contrary, practically defenceless, and,
beyond the instinct to attempt to escape from immediate death about
to be inflicted by the club or otherwise, it is incapable of seeking
safety, and is at the mercy of the seal-killer. Its only refuge, under these
circumstances, is to seek, if such may be found, some new breeding-
place unknown or inaccessible to man. Captain Scammon, many years
ago, adverted to this fact in the following terms: “We may add, like-’
wise, from our own observation, and as the expressed opinion of several
exper ienced sealing-masters, that their natural migrations extend over
a great expanse of ocean; and if they are unduly disturbed in their
REPORT OF BRILISH COMMISSIONERS. 113
favourite haunts for several successive years, they are quite sure to
seek some distant and unknown place, where they can congregate
unmolested by man.” *
400. It is doubtless in consequence of this fact, as already pointed
out, that the Pribyloff and Commander Islands had long ago become
the special resorts of the fur-seal of the North Pacific, and to the same
cause must be attributed the abandonment of other breeding grounds
formerly frequented by this animal, as well as the attempts to take up
new rookeries which have been mentioned when describing the facts of
seal life along the western shores of the North Pacifie.
401. As above stated, nearly all the pelagic sealers concur in the
opinion that the fur-seal is annually becoming more shy and wary at
sea. They add that this is most apparent in that part of the east side
of the North Pacific to the south of the Aieutian Isiands, but that it
is becoming equally marked in the eastern part of Behring Sea; while
in the western part of the sea, where pelagic sealing has as yet been
scarcely practised, the seals do not show the same fear of boats, and
are more easily approached. It is thus evident that greater skill and
caution is annually required on the part of the pelagic hunters, and on
the assumption that the number of seals met with at sea has remained
the same in proportion to area of surface, the statistics quoted on a
later page respecting the catch made in relation to each boat employed,
would appear to show that the dexterity of the hunters has increased,
pare passu, with the wariness of the seals.
402, The facts observed by the pelagic sealers in regard to the abun-
dance or otherwise of seals at sea have important bearings on the gen-
eral question of the whole number of seals now or in recent years
inhabiting the North Pacific, and also when taken in conjunction with
the reduction in numbers on the breeding islands, in evidencing the
changes in habits here specially reterred to. The general tenor of the
whole of the evidence to be obtained on this particular subject, whether
directly by ourselves or from other sources, shows that though changes
in position are noticed from year to year, no decrease in numbers has
occurred at sea, while an actual increase is in many cases reported.
This circumstance of the continued abundance of seals at sea in the
whole tract of ocean frequented by the pelagic sealers is so notable,
and at the same time so entirely opposed to some loose general state-
ments as to diminution which have found currency, that some evidence
relating to it may properly be adduced.
403. In 1889, Captain J.O. Warren, whose experience is entirely
pelagic, as he has never been within sight of tie Pribyloff Islands,
says: ‘I have noticed no diminution in the number of seals during the
twenty years I have been in the business, but if any change at all an
increase.”{ Captain W. O’Leary says, in the same year: “TI do not,
think there is any decrease in the number of seals entering Behring
Sea. I never saw so many seal along the coast as there were this year,
and in Behring Sea they were more numerous than I ever saw them
before.”{ In the following year Mr. A. R. Milne, Collector of Customs
at Victoria, after detailing his inquiries made from pelagic sealers,
says: ‘I can now safely repeat what I have already said and written,
that owners and masters do not entertain the slightest idea that the
seals are at all scarce.’ §
* “Marine Mammalia,” p. 152.
+ Parliamentary Paper [C. 6131], p. 356. London, 1890,
t Ibid., p. 357.
§ Parliamentary Paper [C. 6253]. London, 1890,
Bs, er ys
114 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
73 404, Messrs. Carne and Munsie, in a letter, dated the 31st
October, 1890, addressed to Mr. Milne, state that while the seals
had in that year, both in Behring Sea and along the coast, to some
extent changed their grounds, they did not appear to be any scarcer
than when they first engaged in the sealing business in 1884. In 1890,
they found the seals most plentiful to the north and eastward of the
Islands of St. Paul and St. George, and distant from them from 35
to 60 miles, while in former years they were most abundant to the
westward of these islands. All their captains reported that the seals
were as plentiful as ever in Behring Sea, and attributed the compara-
tiveiy small catches made to the rough and foggy weather that pre-
vailed during the season. Captain J. 8. Cox, in a letter bearing the
same date as that from which the above statements are taken, and
addressed to the same gentleman, says that the masters of his schooners
report that the seals are not getting any scarcer. The limited catch
made was, in their opinion, due entirely to the bad weather which pre-
vailed in Behring Sea during the sealing season. ‘They found the seals
most plentiful to the east of St. Paul and St. George Islands. Messrs.
Hall, Geepel, and Co., in a letter, dated the Ist November, 1890, and
also addressed to Mr. Milne, state that the captains of their schooners
found the seals to be as plentiful as in any previous year, but that,
owing to the foggy and boisterous weather encountered in Behring
Sea, very large catches were not made.
405. During the month of January 1892, several captains of sealing-
vessels, and hunters on such vessels, were examined under oath by Mr.
Milne at Victoria, and from their evidence the following statements as
to the relative abundance of seals in 1891, as compared with former
years, are taken:
Mr. C. J. Kelly found the seals as abundant as formerly along the
coast to the Shumagin Islands.
Captain Wm. Petit followed the seals north from Cape Flattery, and
Says:
IT found them more plentiful last year than I have any year since 1886; that is,
from Cape Flattery north . . . . In Bebring Sea as plentiful as in former
years .. . . Wesaw more last year than for several years previously.
Captain W. EE. Baker reported the seals to be as plentiful along the
coast to Shumagin Islands as in former years, ‘in some places more
plentiful.” He says: ‘‘ No material difference in my average catch for
last four years.”
Captain A. Bisset followed the seals north from Cape Flattery and
found them as abundant as ever before.
Captain T. M. Magnesen says:
I think they [the seals] were more plentiful last season than I ever saw them
before . . . . The biggest catch I haye ever made was last year, on the coast as
well as in Behring Sea.
Henry Crocker thinks, from what he saw of the seals, that ‘‘ they were
just as many as before.”
Richard Thompson believed the seals were as plentiful as in the
previous year.
Andrew Laing had observed no decrease in the number of seals; ‘if
anything, they were a little more numerous than in 1890.”
Captain W. Cox took 1,000 seals in four days, 100 miles to the west-
ward of the Pribyloff Islands. He found the seals much more plentiful
in Behring Sea than he had ever seen them before.
406. Similar evidence of a general character, and confirmatory of the
Statistics just quoted, was obtained by us in the autumn of 1891 from
—
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. ant) Wis)
a number of sealing captains and hunters, to the effect that the general
experience was that seals were le. or more abundant at sea this
year than they had been in former ye
407. The actual success of individ heat seuiin g-vessels of course depends
so largely upon the good fortune or good judgment which may enable
them to fall in with and follow considerable bodies of seals, as well as
on the weather experienced, that the figures representing the catch,
compared to the boats or whole number of men employed, constitute a
more trustworthy criterion than any such general statements.
74 Comparison between the number of Boats and Men employed in the Fur-seal Pishery
and the number of Seals taken. (Only Vessels sailing from Victoria are included.)
Woah | Number of | Number of | A verage | Number of} Average
, Seals. | Men. per Man. Boats. | per Boat.
TNGY/ cade noa docee recep ce coebno gases doedbes 20, 266 361 56 123 164
lh) soe ba Se Sede cddanbeUneaEedeecsscseesobe 24, 329 442 55 170 143
1L})) deburGoecsos opi envods see ConconEdaSeS6 27, 868 481 58 179 156
NEE otinb dobe oe Sore seoenoenee cbbbopESscona 39, 047 665 59 246 160
PURSE epeteye eat eats fare te chat a ate fete iniatetntetaiateTa/ateectaret oY 49, 615 981 46 353 * 134
* In 1891, nearly all the schooners we re warne d out of Behring Sea some wecks before the expiry of
the ordinary hunting season.
408. In considering the general bearings of the above statements
obtained from pelagic sealers, and of the numerical facts derived from
an analysis of their catch, it must be remembered that the vessels
engaged in sealing are able to carry on their work wherever the seals
may be found, and that the tendency of the seal to keep further from
the shores does not materially affect their success. It is otherwise with
the independent native hunters, who employ the shore as their base of
operations, and it is therefore chietly from the observations made by
these men that an idea can be formed of the recent changes in habits
of the seals. It must be noted here, however, before quoting this par-
ticular evidence, that circumstances of wind and weather, as well as
the abundance or otherwise of suitable food for the seals, have a great
effect locally on the numbers of seals of which the natives are cogni-
zant, and that it is, therefore, rather on the general tenor of their
observations than on any isolated notes that broad conclusions may be
safely based.
409. In the Aleutian Islands, the natives questioned at Ounalaska
began by stating that the number varied much from year to year, but
the oldest among the hunters said that it had been about the same for
the past five or six years.
410. At Kadiak Island, Mr. Washburn, the local agent of the Alaska
Commercial Company, expressed the opinion that seals were four times
more numerous in the vicinity of the shores of that island five years
ago than at present, and that the number seen there had decreased
notably within the last two years. The seals did not now come in to
the shores as before, and did not enter Prince William Sound in large
numbers as they had previously done, but remained at sea in the
neighbourhood of the Portlock and other banks.
411. The same gentleman informed us of the interesting fact, related
by the natives of Kadiak, that one season, now many years ago, several
hundred fur-seals had formed a breeding rookery on one of the islands
in Shelikoff Strait, but that this attempt had not been continued. In
June or July 1891, one recently born seal pup had been seen with its
mother near the shore, about 20 miles to the west of St. Paul on
Kadiak Isiand. ‘This, however, was the only instance of the kind he
could vouch for.
116 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
At Sitka, both Whites and Indians, familiar with the sealing
ares stated that the hunters complained that the seals were now
wild and difficult to approach, and united in attributing the compara-
tively small native catch of 1891 to this cause. They think that the
number of schooners engaged in the fishery is the reason of this
increased wariness. Captain Morrisay stated that he did not think
the seals were less numerous at sea this year than before, but that, on
the contrary, all accounts show that they were more abundant than
usual, and that a good catch would have been obtained had they not
been so much disturbed by vessels. The Indians aver that long ago
the seals were very numerous about Sitka, and it is a tradition or
legend, that in early times they frequently landed on the islands in that
vicinity. Within the memory of the living hunters, single seals had
been seen ashore. in various places on the islands olf Sitka and near
Cape Edgecombe. Two years ago, a female had been seen on the beach
on the outer side of Cape Ommeny.
413. Among the Indians from Klawok, an old man explained that in
the time of his ereat-grandfather there were vast numbers both of
seals and sea- otters in that vicinity, and that the old people said that
in these times the seal gave birth to its young there. He had never
heard, however, that there were any special places to which the seals
resor ted for that purpose.
414, In the northern part of Queen Charlotte Islands, the Indians
state that the seals have now become so timid, that in a hunting
75 season of two months they sometimes kill about thirty seals only
to a canoe, whereas they formerly were often able to get the same
number in one day. When they first began to hunt seals systematie-
ally, they generaily got them 5 or 6 miles from the shore, whereas at
the present time they had to go 15 or 20 miles. ‘They attribute this
change to the schooners which they see engaged in hunting off their
coast. Hdensaw, the old Chief, said that m: uy years ago the seals were
often found lying together on the water almost touching each other, aud
30 or 50 in a bunch, but that now they are more w idely SC ittered.. He
further stated, that in former years he had sometimes seen full-grown
bulls coming ashore in various plaves on the west coast of the islands
in spring. Not many years ago, he had seen a female with a recently
born pup on the shore near Cape Kaigani; and once, long ago, he had
found a female seal in the act of giving birth to two pups on Rose Spit.
These facts are of particular interest, from their bearing upon the state-
ments quoted by Professor J. A. Allen, on the authority of Captain
Bryant, now more than ten years ago, for while they do not directly
confirm this statement, they tend to support it. Referring to Captain
Bryant, Protessor Allen writes: “In his MS. Report just received, he
states that a half-breed hunter told him that he found in summer, on
Queen Charlotte’s Island, groups of these animals, consisting of two or
more beach- mNSSLCnS, with a dozen or more females and pups, but no
half-grown males.
415. Speaking nf ‘the same vicinity, aud as the result of long experi-
ence, Mr. Alexander Mackenzie said that, judging from the number of
skins taken, seals were less abundant than formerly in Dixon Entrance,
but that the fact must also be taken into consideration, that there were
not now so many good hunters as before among the Indians. In 1881-82
and 1852-83 many skins were got, but in the years since 1885 the num-
ber of skins had been smaller than before.
* &Nonograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 338.
ee
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. a lea
416. The Indian hunters of the Tshimsian tribes say that before the
seals were so much hunted, some of them used to give birth to their
young on rocky islets in Hecate Strait. Living hunters had seen this.
417. At Bella-Bella, the Indian hunters stated that as long as they
themselves could remember, seals were very abundant in that vicinity.
They had gradually decreased in number till about four years ago,
since which they had been moderately abundant for three years, and
in 1891, had shown a marked increase in number. They sometimes, but
rarely, saw seals, both male and female, coming outon the rocks. Two
or three had at various times been killed on shore.
418. The Indians of Nawitti, who hunt about the north end of Van-
couver Island, had no complaint to make of scarcity of seals. They
said, on the contrary, that the hunting further at sea by schooners
had, they thought, driven the seals into the entrance of Queen Char-
Jotte Sound in greater numbers than before. They had occasionally
seen seals of different ages sleeping on the rocks.
419, At Clayoquot Sound, on the west coast of Vancouver Island,
seals were said to have been very numerous long ago, but to have been
seen in smaller numbers for some ten or fifteen years past. At Ahouset,
also in Clayoquot Sound, the Indians said they had never seen or heard
of seals coming ashore to breed, or for any other purpose.
420. At Neah Bay, near Cape Flattery, the Indians stated that the
Seals seen by them, in that vicinity, are now fewer and more wary than
before, and more difficult to kill. They have never seen even a single
seal on the rocks, but always at sea.
421. Referring to the same place, Judge J. G. Swan writes, in 1880,
that between 1857 and 1866 seals were very few, but that since that
time they had appeared in much larger numbers.*
422. Mr. R. Finlayson and Mr. T. Moffat, both long identified with
the Hudson’s Bay Company on the West Coast, believe that the fur-seals
became notably more numerous in the waters adjacent to the coast of
British Columbia about the time the Alaska Commercial Company
obtained possession of the Pribyloff Islands. This they attribute to
some difference in the mode of capture practised on these islands, in
consequence of which the seals changed their former habits. Captain
Bryant has-also particularly referred to the abundance of fur-seals
along the coast of Oregon, Washington, and. British Columbia in 1869.1
423. Some years in which exceptionally large numbers of seals have
been noted along various parts of the coast of British Columbi: a are
referred to in other parts of this report. (See particularly § 223.)
424, On another page, and in connection with the Sebiecs of the
76 migrations and habitat of the fur-seal, Mr. J. W. Mackay has been
cited with reference to the former abundance of seals upon the
southern part of Vancouver Island. His informants on this point were
old Indian hunters of the Son gis, Sooke, and Tlalum tribes, inhabiting
the adjacent coasts. The following additional statements by the same
gentleman, from their bearing on changes in habits of the seal, may
appropriately be included here: “The Indians above quoted stated that
the fur-seal bred on the Race Rocks, on Smith’s Island (Washington),
and on several islands of the Gulf of Georgia. They used to have their
young to within a recent period on the Hay stac k Islands, off Cape Scott,
Vancouver Island. It is probable that a few individu: ils still breed
* “Wishery Industries of the United States,” vol. ii, oe: 394.
t “Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 332.
118 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
there, these islands being very inaccessible to small craft on account of
the strong tides and cross currents which prevail in their neighbour-
hood.”
Mr. Mackay’s authority for the first part of the above statement are
the Indians previously referred to, and the matter must even, at the
early date at which Mr. Mackay first knew them, have become tra-
ditional.
425. Under the heading of Migrations and Range (§ 171 et seq.), suffi-
cient allusion to the former abundance of fur-seals on the Californian
coast, and to their breeding places there, now apparently abandoned,
has been made. Further particulars may be found in Scammon’s work
and elsewhere.
426. From the foregoing notes, it may be gathered that the increasing
timidity of the fur-seal has caused it almost completely to abandon its
original habit of occasionally landing elsewhere than on the main breed-
ing islands, and has led, besides, to the probably complete abandonment
of certain local breeding places where small numbers of seals resorted
in former years. Not only so, but the seals now shun more than ever
the entire vicinity of the coast, and are found at sea in undiminished
quantity only by the pelagic sealers, whose operations do not depend
on proximity to the land. The same instinct has its effect also on the
breeding islands, to the continuous harassing of the seals upon which
its gr owth is doubtless in large part due. On the islands, it shows itself
particularly in the late arrival, short stay upon, or continued avoidance
of, the shores by those seals not actually engaged in breeding; as well
as in erratic variations in proportional numbers of seals of different
classes at various seasons. These changes cannot be wholly attributed
to the operations of the sea-sealers, for though not so striking on the
Commander Islands as upon the Pribyloff Islands, they are still observ-
able there, though the contingent of seals visiting these islands belong
as a whole to a different migration-tract, which has scarcely as yet been
touched by pelagic sealers.
427. The fact that the breeding islands are now inhabited by man, is
in itself an anomaly, and particularly so when the protection of the
seals on these islands is combined with the requirements of a large
annual slaughter. Such circumstances need to be hedged about with
most rigorous precautions, in order that they may remain compatible
with the continuous prosperity of seal life. More care is taken in this
respect on the Commander than on the Pribyloff Islands, but even there
improvement seems possible. On the Commander Islands, great pre-
cautions are observed to prevent the smell of smoke reaching the rook-
ery grounds, particularly early in the season, when the seals. first land.
Coal-oil is used for cooking in the houses near the rookeries at this
season, and all fires are quenched when the smoke blows in the diree-
tion of the rookeries. Smoking is not permitted near the rookery
grounds, and no one is allowed in their vicinity (unless for purposes of
collecting a drive) but the superintendent of the island or the foreman
in charge of the rookeries.
428. There are, however, in addition to actual fear and the instinct
of self-preservation, other causes which now render the breeding islands,
and particularly the Pribyloff Islands, less continuously the resort of
seals than formerly. Chief among these is the paucity of virile males,
which makes the islands less attractive to the females, and, besides, has
resulted in the existence of a large and increasing class of barren
females, which do not find themselves under the necessity of seeking
the shore.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 119
429, On this point, speaking of an early date in the history of the
islands, Veniaminor writes: ‘This opinion is founded on the fact that
never (except in one year, 1852) have an excessive number of females
been seen without young; that cows not pregnant scarcely ever come
to the Pribyloff Islands; that such females cannot be seen every
year. *
430. To this may be added the probable circumstance, that the con-
stantly harassed and now much reduced number of young but already
virile males, meet the females more commonly than before at sea.
CAC, 431. The ‘occurrence of increased numbers of barren females
ine been more precisely noted on the Commander Islands than
upon the Pribyloff Islands, probably because, as the result of a better
system of protection there, these animals still come to the rookery
grounds instead of staying at sea. In 1891, a large number of females
were observed to be without young both on Behring and Copper
Islands.
432. In the eastern part of the North Pacific, the increased number
of barren females has principally been observed by pelagic sealers.
Their statements on this subject, whether those already published or
those obtained by ourselves in conversation, are of course of a general
kind, but they show that ‘while barren females are more common than
before to the south of Behring Sea, nearly all the adult females got in
Behring Sea itself are of this class. The Indian hunters of the Queen
Charlotte’s Islands, moreover, informed us, without being specially
questioned on the subject, that years ago the females killed by them
were always with young, but that this was now no longer the case.
Mr. A. Mackenzie, of the same place, stated that about two-thirds only
of the females killed were with young.
433. Upon the Pribyloff Islands in 1891, we did not ourselves note
any great abundance of barren females, but the facts in this matter
would be seareely apparent to those not intimately connected with the
rookeries for more than a single year. In his official report on the con-
dition of the islands in 1890, Mr. Elliott states that there were then -
250,000 females ‘not bearing, or not served last year and this,” but he
does not explain in what way this numerical estimate was arrived at.t
434, One direct result of a paucity of virile males, is to bring about
an irregularity and change of dates in the events of seal life, which is
especially notable upon the breeding islands in an unwonted absence of
the usual precision and simultaneousness in these events. Instances
of this are found in the recorded history of the Pribyloff Islands, else-
where cited, and facts of the same kind are again markedly appar ent at
the present time. Suchirregularities follow from the circumstance that
the period of gestation of the female is nearly twelve months in length;
and that therefore any want of promptitude in reimpregnation carries
the time of birth on to a date later than usual in the following year. It
is easy to see that such delay having once occurred, the female, under
the most favour able circumstances, can only revert gradually and after
several years to her original time; ‘and that by a recurrence of delays
in Gineonition the change of time will not only be carried on from year
to year, but must gradually depart more and more from the normal date.
One important effect of the resulting late birth of the young is to ren-
der these much more than otherwise open to danger of various kinds,
not’ only to that resulting from inclement and stor my autumn weather
* Quoted in United States @insus Report, p. 141,
tParliamentary Paper [C. 6368], p. 61.
120 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
occurring while they are yet too young to withstand it, but also from
the circumstance that they must delay longer upon the breeding islands,
and must perhaps in the end leave these islands before their strength
is sufficient for the long southern journey.
435. The best account of the nature of such changes in earlier years
is that given by Bryant, which is elsewhere quoted in abstract. The
changes now apparent on the rookery grounds of the Pribyloff Islands,
as compared with the previously described state of these grounds, and
as pointed out by those familiar with them, are chiefly of the following
kinds:
436. A general decrease in the number of seals, which is most
marked in the disproportionally small number of holluschickie or males
of an age of less than about 6 years. Alinsion has already been made
to this in connection with the marked increase in size of the “‘harems”
or cows held by a single adult bull, in late years. It is also strikingly
apparent when the present conditions are contrasted with the descrip-
tions of former years, in which the half-grown but already virile bulls
are represented as haunting the vicinity of the breeding rookeries in
great numbers, and constantly struggling to meet the females upon
them, or in the margin of the adjacent sea. It is further indicated,
and very definitely, by the practical impossibility of procuring more
than 21,000 male skins in 1890, though every exertion was made to do
so, and ‘the standards in weight of skins were greatly lowered, in order
to allow the inclusion of very young males. This effort was continc Ad
till it became patent to the Government officers in charge that it wa
useless and cruel to allow it to go further, because of the very iarge
and constantly increasing numbers of non-killable seals which were
driven and redriven to the killing grounds, in order to obtain a few
passable skins. On this subject it may be well, however, to allow
these officers who witnessed and superintended those killings to speak
for themselves.
437. Mr. C.J. Goff says: “Heretofore, it was seldom that more
78 than 15 per cent. of all the seals driven the latter part of June
and the first few days in July were too small to be killed; but
this season the case was reversed [notwithstanding the lowering of
standards], and in many instances 80 to 85 per cent. were turned away
. . . The season closed on the 20th July, and the drives in July
show a decided increase in the percentages of small seals turned away,
and a decrease in the killables over the drives in June, demonstrating
conclusively that there were but few killable seals arriving, and that
the larger part of those returning were the pups of last year.”*
438, Colonel J. Murray gives an account of a meeting of the natives
held for discussion in the same year and long continued, after which—
“They unanimously declared that it was their firm belief and honest
opinion that the seals have diminished, and would continue to diminish
from year to year, because all the male seals had been slaughtered
without allowing any to come to maturity for use upon the breeding
grounds;” he adds: “Iam now fully convinced by personal observa-
tion that it is only too true, and that the natives were correct in every
particular.” t
439, Captain ... W. Lavender says: “ The writer was surprised when
he first visited the rookeries to find no young bull seals upon them; this
looked strange to him, and he began to look up the cause, and it occurred
to him thatthe constant driving of young male seals, and the killing of
all the 2-3- 4- and 5-year olds, that there were no young bulls left to go on
* Senate, Ex. Doe. No. 49, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 4. tIbid., p.8.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. Lt
to the rookeries, and without young blood the fur-seal industry will be
something of the past in a very few years.”*
440. Mr. W.H. Elliott, in his official report for 1890, remarks to the
same effect on the exhaustion of the supply of young male seals, and
their reduction to a “seant tenth of their number in 1872-74.”t
441, It is further noticed on the islands that the rookeries are more
scattered and less definite in outline than in former years, and that the
remaining holluschickie tend to lie close to the rookery edges for pro-
tection, a circumstance which materially adds to the difficulty of col-
lecting drives without unduly disturbing the breeding seals.
442, It is also generally admitted that the dates of arrival of the seals
at the islands, and especially that of the arrival of the females, is becom-
ing on the average later each year. It is difficult to arrive at a precise
statement on this subject, for obvious reasons, but some authorities
place the average delay in arrival of females as compared with earlier
years at aS much as, or more than, two weeks.
443. On the Commander Islands, where the officers in charge were
found ready to afford all information on such points with the utmost
frankness, it has likewise been noted that the seals now arrive some-
what later than formerly. In 1891, seals capable of yielding 10 and 12
pound skins were about a week later than usual in reaching Behring
Island, and the killing, which on Copper Island generally begins about
the 1st June, did not begin in 1891 till the 22nd June.
444, Various other irregularities have also been noticed in late years
in or about the Commander Islands. Thus, in 1890, there were rather
few holluschickie, and females appeared in smaller numbers. Again, it
was remarked particularly on Copper Island, that though there had
been a large number of young boru in 1890, yearlings came ashore in
markedly small numbers in 1891. The natives professed themselves
unable to account for this, but it is almost certain that the yearlings,
in consequence of the unusually severe onslaught made on the seals in
1890, had simply remained at sea. This explanation is supported by
the observation, that an unusually large number of scattered seals
were reported at sea between Behring Island and the coasts of Kam-
schatka and Siberia, in 1891, by the vessels belonging to the Russian
Government and Company. In 1890, again, according to Mr. Tillman,
an unusual event occurred in the arrival of a number of holluschickie
and mature bulls quite fat, at Copper Island, in August. His conjec-
ture was that these might have come from the Pribyloff Islands, but it
is possible that these seals had merely remained fishing at sea until
this exceptionally late date.
445, The general effect of these changes in habits of the seals is to
minimize the number to be seen at any one time on the breeding islands,
while the average number to be found at sea is at least proportionately,
though, perhaps, in face of a general decrease in total number of seals,
not absolutely increased. The regularity of the routes of migration has
no doubt been also to some extent interfered with, and it seems proba-
ble that the seals may now be more widely scattered at sea both in
their winter and summer habitats than formerly.
446, As to the eventual results of such changes in habits, if perpetu-
ated and increased by the continued and further effect of the
io causes referred to, it is evident that they must ultimately be
injurious to all industries based on the capture of the fur-seal.
It is probable that the seals might altogether cease to frequent their
present breeding grounds in mass, and instead, as has been recorded
* Ibid., p. 9. + Parliamentary Paper [C. 6368], pp. 15, 16, 19, 21, 56, and 57.
122 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
in the Falkland and other islands in the Southern Hemisphere, scatter
out to form small irregular Colonies beneath cliffs or rocks which are
practically inaccessible to man. They would thus doubtless manage to
perpetuate their species, but the numbers might be very much reduced,
so that the skins would cease to be a factor of commercial importance.
‘The continued prosperity of seal life requires, from its peculiar features,
above all things, complete regularity and protection on the breeding
places, and, deprived of these advantages, it lies open to many acci-
dents and failures, which must affect it more prejudicially than can be
determined from the actual numerical amount of the slaughter for
skins. The extract from Scammon’s work, quoted in paragraph 399, is
to the point in this connection.
(P.)—Pur-seals Breeding on the Southern Part of the North American
Coast.
447. It is evident that many years ago a considerable number of fur-
seals bred in various places along the western coast of North America,
and probable that the seals so breeding did not take any part in the
migration of the larger body to Behring Sea. Statements previously
quoted respecting the fur-seals of the Californian coast show this, and
the traditions of the Indians of the coast of British Columbia, partic-
ularly those relating to Race Rocks and Smith’s Island, appear to have
the same meaning. Judge J. G. Swan has also collected much evidence
to the same effect, w ith particular reference to the vicinity of Cape
Flattery, which may be found detailed in the “Fishery Industries of
the United States” (vol. ii, p. 393), and in the “Bulletin of the United
States Fish Commission” (vol. ili, p. 201). Some of his observations
we have been unable to confirm, but the statements since obtained from
Mr. J. W. Mackay go far to prove that, in still earlier years than those
referred to by Judge Swan, a certain number of seals regularly occupied
certain breeding places in the vicinity of the Straits of Fuca.
448. Once established, whether on the Californian or British Colum-
bian coasts, such a race of southern-breeding seals must have become
sub-permanent; and, following the analogy of other rookery grounds,
it is probable that the same animals tended each year to reoccupy the
same, or nearly the same, breeding stations. It is probable that these
southern-breeding families may have been directly connected with the
larger northern-breeding race, and it is at least easy to see how they
may have originated and been recruited from it. Females delayed from
any cause, and giving birth to their young along the coast to the south-
ward, must often be served by young males, and irregular and too early
service may also occur in many instances in the case of young females,
or of those barren since the previous year. In all such cases of too
early service, it would be impossible for the female to reach the Priby-
loff Islands in time for the birth of the young, owing to climatic causes.
She would, no doubt, remain with the other seals till impelled by nature
to seek the shore, and if in any particular year a considerable number
of females collected together for breeding purposes, the males would
doubtless soon find and follow them, and, if undisturbed, the family
thus established might probably return to the same place again in the
next ensuing year.
449. This reasonable explanation, at all events, accords with the facts
ascertained, and, moreover, in itself appears to have so much force, ,
that even apart from these facts, it would be admissible to predicate the
occasional birth of young along the whole extent of coast frequented by
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 133
the fur-seal. It is further borne out by the actual existence of breed-
ing rookeries situated along or near to the migration route of the fur-
seal on the western side of the Pacific, on the Kurile Islands and on
Robben Island. These occupy the same position relatively to the prin-
cipal breeding places on the Commander Islands, which the former
similar colonies on the North American coast must have held relatively
to the Pribyloff Islands, and the survival of the southern colonies on
the Asiatic side is directly due to the less persistent and less efficient
hunting by the natives there.
450. This subject is in its nature closely related to the foregoing
remarks on observed changes in habits. It also, however, connects
itself with the general question of the origin of the regularly migratory
habits assumed by the larger number of the fur-seals of the North Pacific,
a question referred to under the head of migrations.
(Q.)—Connection or Interchange of Seals between the Pribyloff and Com-
mander Islands.
451. It is frequently assumed that the fur-seals inhabiting the whole
North Pacific may, from year to year, resort almost indifferently
80 to the Pribyloff or Commander Islands at the breeding season.
Statements to this effect have been made by various authorities, *
and, as already noted, the arrival, in 1890, of a number of fat hollus-
chickie and adult males on Copper Island was accounted for by the
Superintendent there on the hypothesis that they had migrated thither
from the Pribyloff Islands, though in reality his knowledge merely war-
rauted the statement that he did not know whence they came. It has
often been claimed by persons interested in justifying the methods
practised on the Pribyloff Islands, that the continued abundance of
seals on the Commander Islands is not due to greater care there exer-
cised, but that they have been reinforced by accessions from the Priby-
loff Islands, induced by the operations of pelagic sealers. One writer,
indeed, took occasion, as early as 1887, to forestall any adverse criticism
which might be directed against the methods and results on the Priby-
loff Islands and based on the diminution of seals ther e, by stating, in
anticipation, that such* decrease would have no meaning unless dis-
cussed in connection with an unknown but possible increase on the
Commander Islands.
452. When it is considered that for twenty years both groups of
islands have been controlled by a single Company, whose employés
were often transferred from island to island, it is remarkable that so
little has been placed on record in regard to this particular question,
especially in view of the importance evidently attached to it by the
gentlemen connected with the Company whose statements have just
been referred to. Though unable to speak from personal observations
on this point, it is clear that the result of Mr. Elliott’s investigation
of the Pribyloff Islands led him to believe that an interrelation existed
between the seals frequenting these islands and the Commander Islands,
and that a familiarity with one group of the breeding islands w as
insufficient to enable a complete view of the problem to be arrived at.t
*See Elliott, ‘‘ Condition of Affairs m ‘Alaska’ ” (1875), p- 2665 Miller, ‘House of Rep-
resentatives, Report No. 623, 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 45; suy nitsky, Ilouse of
Representativ es, Report No. 3883, 50th Co ongress, 2nd Session, p. 16; Williams, ibid.,
pp. 77 and 78; Elliott, United States Census Report, pp. 69 and 157.
t “ Fishery ‘Industries of the United States,” vol. ii, p. 361.
{See especially United States Census Report, p. 69.
124 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
453, The inquiries and observations now made, however, enable it to
be shown that the fur-seals of the two sides of the North Pacific beiong
in the main to practically distinct migration-tracts, both of which are
elsewhere traced out and described, and it is believed that while to a
certain extent transfers of individual seals or of small groups oecur,
probably every year, between the Pribyloff and Commander tribes, that
this is exceptional rather than normal. It is not believed that any
voluntary or systematic movement of fur-seals takes place from one
group of breeding islands to the other, but it is probable that a con-
tinued harassing of the seals upon one group might result in a course
of years in a corresponding gradual accession to the other group.
454, There is no evidence whatever to show that any considerable
branch of the seal tribe which has its winter home off the coast of
British Columbia resorts in summer to the Commander Islands, whether
voluntarily or led thither in pursuit of food-fishes, and inquiries along
the Aleutian chain show that no regular migration route follows its
direction, whether to the north or south of the islands. It is certain
that the young seals in going southward from the Pribyloff Islands
only rarely get drifted as far to the westward as the 172nd meridian of
west longitude, while Attu Island, on the 173rd meridian east, is never
visited by young seals, and ther efore lies between the regular autumn
migration-routes of the seals going from the Pribyloff and Commander
Islands respectively.
455. The price obtained for skins from the Commander Islands has
generally been somewhat lower than that for the Pribyloff skins, but
this is believed to result rather from the less careful handling and
preparation of the Commander Island skins than from any inherent
inferiority. Under this belief, the Alaska Commercial Company at one
time, in 1876, sent Mr. D. Webster, their most experienced foreman, to
the Commander Islands, to introduce better modes of treating the skins
there. M. Grebnitsky, however, states that there is some actual general
difference in the skins, such as to enable them to be distinguished by
an expert, and that he is informed that the Commander Island skins are
more difficult to “unhair” in dressing. Snegiloff, the Aleut foreman
in charge of the Behring Island rookeries, who had also been on the
Pribylotf Islands for some years, stated that he had observed that in
both sexes the seals on the Pribyloff Islands were somewhat shorter
and stouter than on the Commander Islands, and that the Pribyloff
seals have thicker fur and shorter hair on the beliy. This he
81 attributed to the circumstance that the seals stay longer ashore
on the Pribyloff Islands. He said further, that on the Com-
mander Islands the females are larger, and the mature males, or ‘‘sea-
eatchie,” often become nearly white about the manes with age. He
added that on Robben Island, in Okotsk Sea, the seals have still longer
and thicker hair than on the Commander Islands.
456. As there is a considerable range of individual diversity, particu-
larly in colouration, among the seals of any single locality, it would
require much longer and more detailed examination than we ourselves
were able to make, to verify these statements; but it appears to be
probable that there is actually a slight eeneral varietal difference as
between the tribes frequenting the two principal groups of breeding
islands, whether this is due to causes such as those above referred to
or other circumstances. The amount of interconnection between the
two groups is doubtless, however, sufficient to prevent any very strik-
ing or permanent peculiarities even of a varietal rank to grow up.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 125
457. Some evidence not without importance in this connection is
afforded by a comparison of the diagrams elsewhere given and repre-
senting the number of seals killed each year on the two groups of
islands. Though affected by other causes as well, this number may be
taken in a very general way as a record of the state of the rookeries as
« whole, and the correspondence of the lines in the two diagrams is
thus significant of connection or of co-operating causes.
(R.)— Conditions affecting the Sea-otter and Sea-cow, contrasted with those
affecting the Fur-seal.
458. It has often, but incorrectly, been stated that the fur-seal of the
North Pacific is in danger of “extermination” if measures be not taken
to preserve it. The question is, however, not one of extermination, if
by that term the extinction of the species is meant. The breeding Col-
onies of the analogous species in the Southern Hemisphere, once
exploited and harried in every conceivable way, and without law or
hindrance of any kind for over fifty years, chiefly by New England ves-
sels, have, in no known instance, been absolutely destroyed. Long
before the point of extermination is reached the killing of the seals, by
whatever method practised, ceases to pay. Extermination is finan-
cially impossible, and therefore need not be feared. ‘This is well enough
understood by those best informed on the subject, and it is no senti-
mental dread of the extinction of a species which appeals to the imagi-
nation of the persons immediately interested in the breeding islands,
but rather the practical destruction of their profitable monopoly of the
sealing business of the North Pacific. Depletion, or great reduction in
numbers, together with changes in habits of life, such as have been
already indicated, are sure to be the result of continuous indiscriminate
and unrestricted slaughter and hunting of the fur-seal, but not exter-
mination. To precisely what point the diminution in numbers of the
fur-seal might go before the increased average price of the skins ceased
to compens sate ‘for the reduced aggregate number taken, it is impossi-
ble to say, but that such a point would eventually be reach ed is proved
by all experience. This experiment, however, it is hoped, is one which
need not be tried, for, as already made apparent, the fur-seal, by the
nature of its life and habits, offers peculiar facilities for the exer cise of
a rational protection under which it may remain a source of profit to
the hunter, while at the same time affording a continuous yield of skins
intrinsically valuable.
459. From this point of view, the sea-otter (Hnhkydra marina) is an
interesting case in point. This animal has played a area part in
the discovery and history of the North Pacific. Its skin was highly
valued long before that of the fur-seal was considered of any worth,
and owing to its intrinsic value as an article of dress, its cost has con-
tinued to increase in a greater or less degree with its increasing scarcity,
so that at the present time s skins of the first quality are worth in London
700 to 1,000 dollars each. Surely, if it were possible to exterminate a
fur-bearing animal of this kind, the sea-otter should long ago have met
with that fate, yet it has been hunted for more than a hundred years,
and is still a chief object of pursuit of many hundreds of natives.
460. Originally, this animal frequented a large part of the west
coast of North America, together with the east coast of Asia, and all
parts of the Aleutian, Pribyloff, Commander, and other islands. Its
limits have now been much reduced, so that it is rare/y found on the
coast of British Columbia or anywhere to the south of Sitka, and has
126 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
altogether disappeared from the Pribyloff Islands, while on the Asiatic
coast it has stmilarly ceased to be a matter of commercial interest in the
Kurile Island chain. Although in the early part of the present century
it was taken by thousands in certain localities, a few hundreds
82 are now considered an excellent catch for a considerable district.
It is to be remembered that the diminution of the sea-otter has
been the result solely of operations conducted from the shore. In the
old days the otter was clubbed, speared, or shot on the beaches, and
afterwards from stages or from canoes close along the rocks and beaches.
461. The sea-otter possesses, however, one important advantage over
the fur-seal in the nature of its procre ation. The young are born at
all seasons of the year and not simultaneously, and it is not necessary
for this animal to resort in large numbers to particular breeding places,
or to remain on or about such places for any considerable time. Its
disadvantages as compared with the fur-seal are that it is not properly
a pelagic animal feeding upon migratory fishes, but, on the contrary,
subsists chiefly upon sea-urchins, molluses, and other such creatures,
which are only to be obtained in the immediate vicinity of the shores
and their adjoining rocky patches and Kelp beds.
462, As a result of its diminishing numbers, and the greater activity
of the hunters, it has within historic times not only greatly increased
in wariness, but has also very markedly changed its habits in directions
similar to those in which a change has already beceme observable in
the case of the fur-seal. In earlier years, it frequented the rocky shores,
and was frequently found on the land, forming in some instances ver-
itable colonies or ‘‘rookeries,” comparable in some respects with those
of the fur-seal. The young in those days were probably always born
on shore, and it seems further probable, though not proven, that many
of the so-called *“ kitchen middens” of the Aleutian Islands, composed
almost entirely of the shells of echinus, and attributed by Dall to the
pre-historic Aleuts, really owe their origin to such pre-historic sea-otter
colonies. At the present time, it has become an event of extreme rarity
to see a Sea-otter anywhere on those shores, and, so far as the natives
who spend their lives in hunting the animal can ascertain, the young
are now almost always brought forth on floating masses of kelp.
463. The sea-otter, in fact, appears, as the result of persistent hunting
and of the efforts and instinct to elude pursuit, to have reached a prae
tically irreducible minimum, at which it is likely to remain unchanged
unless new factors enter into the problem.
464. The non-pelagie character of the sea-otter, however, renders its
protection a matter of comparative facility as contrasted with the fur-
seal. A strict preservation, for instance, on the Sannakh Islands, which
still constitute one of its remaining favourite haunts, would, without
doubt, result within a few years in this group being restocked with an
abundance of sea-otters.
465. Probably, the only remaining notable colony (or rookery, as it is
called from analogy with the breeding places of the fur-seal) is that
which is now strictly preserved by the Russian Government on the
north-west point of Copper Island, of the Commander group. The sea-
otters are reported by the Superintendent of Copper Island as increasing
here from year to year, though a limited number is allowed to be taken
by the natives each year, and though the natives are permitted to shoot,
during the winter and in the absence of the fur- seals, any Sea- otters
found to the south of Maty eya Point on the east coast, and a designated
point somewhat further to the southward on the west coast. To the
northward of the line thus defined, no shooting is at any time allowed
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. baat
for any purpose whatever. This reserved area thus comprises about
five miles of the northern end of Copper Island, with Sulkovsky Point
and the Bobroti rocks and reefs lying off this point. Here the sea-
otters are taken at designated times and under Government supervision
in twine nets, except in certain years in which the natives get a permit
to make a drive of otters upon the rocks, and kill them there with clubs
like the fur-seals. This was allowed in 1890, and twenty sea-otters were
got in the drive, though more might have been secured but for some
mistakes which occurred during the operation. One hundred and eighty
sea-otter skins in all were obtained from Copper Island during the year
1890.
466. Vigilance is required in guarding this sea-otter colony from
raids, and it is said that in 1887 or 1888 Captain Snow, in the schooner
‘‘ Nemo,” from Yokohama, and flying the British flac, attempted to,
raid the place, but was fired at and driven off. Snow was reported
wounded, and two Japanese sailors killed. Since this time no raids
have been attempted here.
467. Near Cape Lopatka, the southern extreme of Kamschatka, a
sea-otter colony or rookery existed till recent years, but it was raided
and destroyed by vessels from San Francisco between 1880 and 1882.
There is also stated to have been a similar colony at Pirat, or Yellow
Cape, not far from the last; An effort was made to protect this by sta-
tioning a number of Aleuts at the place to guard it, but many of these
people died, and the remainder were withdrawn at their own request,
after which the sea-otter colony was raided and destroyed.
83 468. Some attempt has also been made by the United States
Government to protect the sea-otter. Section 1956 of the Revised
Statutes of the United States provides that no person shall, without
the consent of the Secretary of the Treasury, kill any otter, mink,
marten, sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal, within the limits
of Alaska territory, or in ‘the waters thereof. This is further explained
by a Treasury Department Notice, dated 21st April, 1879, which reads
as follows:
No fur-bearing animals will, therefore, be allowed to be killed by persons other
than the natives, within the limits of Alaska territory, or in the waters thereof,
except fur-seals taken by the Alaska Commercial Company in pursuance of their
lease. The use of fire-arms by the natives in killing other than during the months
of May, June, July, August, and September, is hereby prohibited. No vessel will
be allowed to anchor in the well-known otter-killing grounds except those which
may carry parties of natives to and from such killing grounds; and it will be the
duty of the officers of the United States who may be in that locality to take all
proper measures to enforce all the pains and penalties of the law against persons
found guilty of a violation thereof. White men lawfully married to natives, and
residing within the territory, are considered natives within the meaning of this
Order.
469. Inquiries at Ounalaska, however, show that no attempt had
been made to enforce the law against the killing of fur-seals by the
Aleuts in that vicinity till 1890, when instr uctions were received that
it must be enforced, although no means were provided for its enforce-
ment. The law against the killing of sea-otter and the ruling as to
the months in which fire-arms shall be prohibited in hunting this
animal is also, as a matter of fact, inoperative. The prohibited months
inelude all those in which it is practically possible to hunt the sea-
otter, and it is well understood that if the Aleuts of the Aleutian
Islands were interfered with in this, their only means of obtaining a
living. they must either suffer great hardships, or their support must
be undertaken by the Government,
128 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
470. The sole instance of the actual extermination of an animal of
the North Pacific within historic times, and one of the very short list
of such cases of extermination the world over, is that of the Rhytina
or Steller’s sea-cow (Ahytina Stelleri). It is instructive to allude to this
instance, because it becomes obvious that it was entirely owing to the
great differences in habits and the very restricted range of the ‘animal,
as compared with the fur-seal, that its extermination became possible.
471. This sea-cow or manat e was found in great numbers on Behring
Island, and to some extent also on Copper Island, at the time of the
discovery of these islands in 1741, but searcely, if at all, elsewhere;
though Nordenskivld conjectures that it may within historic times have
also occassionally visited the Kamschatkan coast.
472. It was a large, slow, clumsy, and incautious animal, which fed
chiefly along the shores upon marine alge; and being found easy of
‘apture and good for food was persistently attacked by the early Rus-
Sian navigators, who often visited Behring Island for the sole purpose
of laying ina stock of its flesIf. From the accounts of these voyages,
it seems first to have disappeared from Copper Island, and subse-
quently, about 1768, less than thirty years after the discovery of the
islands, it became extinct, also on Behring Island.*
473. It is stated that Brandt expresses the belief that the Rhytina
formerly, and in pre historie times, not only frequented the coast of
Kamschatka, but extended also as far as the coasts of China and the
northern islands of the Japanese group, and to the western islands of
the Aleutian chain. It thus appears to have already been naturally
verging towards extinetion before it was at all pursued by man. Ina
paper read before the Russian Imperial Geographical Society in Mareh
1884, Dr. Dibofsky expresses a similar opinion. Mr. F. W. True writes
as follows respecting the causes of its extinction: “The most generally
accepted notion is that the rate of capture much exceeded that of the
increase of the animal, and that extinction followed as a matter of
course. Nordenskidld, however, and in a certain way Brandt, also
avows his belief that the sea-cow had gotten out of harmony with its
environment many years before the Russi: ins discovered it, and that
its extermination would have occurred within a comparatively short
time without the intervention of man. The fact that in Steller’s time
the range of the animal was much circumscribed seems to give weight
to the latter view.” f
S4 (S.)\—Breeding Places and Resorts of the Fur-seal on the Western
Side of the North Pacijic.
474. The pursuit of the fur-seal on the western or Asiatic portion of
the North Pacific, affords much evidence very directly affecting the con-
ditions and prospects of the seal fishery in the eastern waters of that
ocean, altogether apart from the question as to how far the territorial
Powers of these Asiatic waters, viz., Russia, Japan, and China, may
desire to participate in any general regulations tending to the preser-
vation of so old- established, important, and useful an industr y:
* Baron Nordenskiéld found some reason to believe that a single individual of the
sea-cow Was seen as late as the year 1854, but Dr. L. Stejneger, first in the ‘ Pro-
ceedings of the United States National Museum, ” vol. vii, 1884, p. 181, and at later
dates in the “American Naturalist,” vol. xxi, p. 1047, and “ American Geographical
Society Bulletin,” No. 4, 1886, has advanced strong reasons to show that the animal
actually became extinet in 1768.
t “ Pishery Industries of the United States,” vol.i, p. 135. See also Nordenskiéld’s
“Voyage of the Vega,” vol. ii.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 129
475. We have been careful to collect and collate all the information
possible on the growth of the industry on the Asiatic coasts of the
Pacific, because it has for the most part been left untouched by those
who have written on the subject. Clark* simply dismisses the subject
with the brief remark: “The seals taken by the Japanese are those
migrating from the Commander group, the number taken averaging
4,000 annually, though some years as many as 11,000 are taken.”
Messrs. Lampson t mer rely report: “The supply fiom this soure e (Japan)
has varied very much of late years, amounting sometimes to 15,000
skins a-year, at others only 5,000. Last year (1887) stringent prohib-
itory laws were passed by the Japanese Government, and very few
skins have come forward.” Very little else has been published on the
subject by any one of authority. But in addition to the results of much
correspondence, official and private, and gathering together of scattered
references, we have had the advantage of making the acquaintance of
men experienced in seal-hunting and in seal localities in this portion of
the Pacific, and» have thus been enabled to put together a sufficient
body of information to convey sufficient accounts of “the rise and prog-
ress of the sealing industry in these waters.
476. Among the points of special interest to our present purpose
are:—the growth of the industry; the similarity of conditions prevail-
ing on this side of the Pacific; the dissimilar circumstance of the
absence of pelagic sealing; the very destructive effect of raids upon
breeding rookeries; and the attempts at regulation and control by both
the Japanese and Russian Governments.
477. After the middle of the eighteenth century, British vessels, espe-
cially under the auspices of the Kast India Company, extended their
voyages from Bombay and Calcutta or Macao to the coast of Kam-
schatka, and along the Aleutian Islands into Behring Sea, and as far
as the north-west coast of America, in search of furs. Such voyages
were made in 1780 and in 1786-87. These English traders at once
encountered the claims of the Russians and the Spaniards to the sole
right to navigate and trade in those seas, a claim then successfully con-
tested and tacitly or explicitly ignored about 100 years before the officials
of a territory belonging to the United States seized British vessels for
engaging in similar enterprises in these waters.
478. The furs thus obtained by the British were taken to the Chinese
market. The Russians were quick to notice this, and in due course
obtained from the Chinese authorities an interdict against the landing
in China of any furs from the islands and shores of the Eastern Pacific.
In the event this proved but a partial restriction so far as the English
were concerned, for they commenced at once to turn their attention to
bringing to the Canton market tie fur-seal of the southern seas, and
this highly profitable trade thus started flourished from about the year
1795 until 1835.
479. Meanwhile, however, in the Northern Pacific the Russians were
active. In 1799 acharter was granted by the Czar to the Russian-A mer-
ican Company, giving them control over all the coasts of America on
the Pacific north of latitude 55° north, and this Company, extending its
operations under Baranoff and other leaders, acquired a wide dominion.
In the course of a few years, English and American vessels established
almost a monopoly in the supply of goods of all sorts to the Russians and
their natives, the return tre ide being mostly in furs for the Canton
Tee Pajien [C. 6151], p. 178.
t House of Representatives, 50th Congress, 2nd Session, Report No. 3883, p. 114.
BS, PT Vi—_9
130 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
market. In 1811 the firm of Astor, of New York, made a special con-
tract to supply the Russian Company with provisions, payment being
taken in furs to be sold in Canton. This enterprise took the name of
the Pacifie Fur Company, and the two Companies undertook, besides
this mutual trade, to prevent the natives obtaining any liquor, to assist
each other against all interlopers and smugglers, and to respect each
other’s hunting areas. In the following year these rights and under-
takings were bought up by the North-West Fur Company, of which the
headquarters were in Montreal.
480. Thus, the English were in the North Pacific taking seal-skins
from the south seas to Canton, and also trading generally in
85 furs, right away to that portion of the North Pacific which sub-
sequently became known as Behring Sea, on a well-established
basis, by the beginning of the present century.
481. In connection with this part of the North Pacific, it may also
be borne in mind that about the year 1840 whaling began to be exten-
sively practised. In 1840 to 1842 the whaling fleet: frequented the
Kadiak ground, where many right whales were taken. In 1846, the
Japan Sea was found to be a ood whaling ground, from which that
part of the Pacific near Kamschatka was next re eached, and soon after
Okotsk Sea. In 1848, the first whaler entered the Arctic Ocean, and
thereafter not only Behring Sea, but also this further ocean, has been
regularly frequented by whalers, the bow-head whale chiefly being
taken in the extreme north. The industry has gradually declined, in
consequence of the lessened number of whales; but between 1849 and
1860, there were about 300 vessels under the United States flag, besides
British, French, Oldenburg, Danish, and other vessels. Many of the
British vessels came from Hobart Town and other places in Australasia.
82. But the fur-seal of the North Pacific remained in great measure
a monopoly of the Russians until towards the middle of the nineteenth
century, and then, by reason of its becoming a well-ascertained fact
that the supply of seal-skins from the Southern Ocean had practically
ceased, English and other nations also turned their attention to the
supply of seal-skins from the North Pacific.
483. It is necessary to bear in mind that the commercial importance
of the skins of the fur-seal of the North Pacific is thus of recent origin.
In the well-known “Penny Cyclopedia,” published so lately as 1842,
the seal is described as follows, and it is stated that no market value
is attached to the skins of the adult:
Arctocephalus ursinus.—Islands on the north-west point of America, Kamschatka,
and the Kurile Islands. This is the Otaria ursina of Dezmaest; Phoca ursina of Lin-
neus, &c. When these migratory seals appear off Kamschatka and the Kuriles early
in the spring they are in high condition, and the females are pregnant. They remain
on or about the shore for two months, during which the females bring forth. They
are polygamous, and live in families, every male being surrounded ‘by a crowd of
females (from fifty to eighty), w hom he guards with the greatest jealousy. These
families each, ineluding the young, amounting to 100 to 120, live separate, though
they crowd the shore, and that to such an extent on the islands off the north-west
point of America, that it is said they oblige the traveller to quit it, and scale the
neighbouring rocks. Both male and female are very affectionate to their young
and fierce in their defence; but the males are often tyranically cruel to the females,
which are very submissive. es a) ene: Skane. which is very thick, is covered with
lie eee . Thereisa very soft, prownish-red woolclose totheskins. . . . .
The skins of the young are highly prized for clothing.
484. Upon the Commander Islands, until the year 1868, nothing was
thought worthy of capture except the grey-pup seals, while on the Pri-
by lott Islands and along the coasts of North-West America the skins of
the fur-seal were considered as hardly worth the taking. For instance,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. Maylk
in 1825 skins were bartered by the Russian Government in the Sand-
wich Islands at an average rate of 1 dol. 75 ¢. (7s.); in China, at Kiatcha,
at from 1 dollar (4s.) to 1 dol. 40 ¢. (6s.); while the prices given by the
Hudson’s Bay Company at Port Simpson were, so lately as 1850, only
1 dol. 50 e. (6s.) per skin.
485. A few years later, however, more attention was given to the
northern fur-seal, and we find vessels from all quarters, including Hono-
lulu, cruizing round the North Pacific, endeavouring to trade for, or take,
seal-skins. Seal-hunters followed in their track, bringing with them the
traditions and experiences of the south seas summed up in the idea of
taking the fur-seal as and when it came ashore. Writing in 1870, Pro-
fessor Dall describes the Harbour of Chichagoff, in Attu, as a notorious
smuggling centre for furs.
Such was the general aspect of affairs by the middle of the present
century in the North Pacific.
486. In the more westerly portion of that ocean, from a variety of
sources, and especially from the special report supplied to us by Mr. de
Bunsen from the British Legation at Toki6, and a memorandum obtained
from his Government by Viscount Kawazé, Japanese Minister in Lon-
don, we have a tolerably complete account of the fur-seal fishery on the
coasts of Japan and the Kurile Islands.
487. The seal fishery is an old-established industry in Japan, and par-
ticulars are on record dating back to the middle of the last century.
The skins were obtained about 1750 and 1760 from Horomoshir, Maka-
ruru, Shimsir, and Urup by the natives of Itrup and Rashua, using
arrows, harpoons, and nets.
In 1800, we read of a regular sealing establishment being set up in
Itrup, and carried on for years with success.
86 The seal-skins were usually bartered at Nagasaki to the
Chinese. The Government in these years purchased the skins
from the natives, at the fixed rates of 90 and 45 sen for the best and
medium quality skins respectively.
During the succeeding years, Russian subjects gradually pushed
southward down the Kurile group, aud much competition and even
conflict resulted in rival endeavours to secure seal-skins. At this
period, the Russians began to send furs to the China market direct to
Peking through the great mart established at Kiatch, in Eastern Siberia.
488. About the year 1865, the Japanese Government found itself
forced to deal with the increasing numbers of foreign vessels—chiefly
Russian, British, American, and Dutch—which began to visit their
coasts, and frequent the bays and harbours in quest of marine products.
489. As early as 1869, the Japanese Colonial Department set up a
branch establishment in the Island of Itrup, with the special object of
carrying out the measures established to protect the Japanese coast
fishing against foreigners. The old seal-skin regulations were revived
and the Government price trebled. In 1873, Commissions were set up
specially to prevent seal poaching and sale of seal-skins by foreigners.
Much trouble was occasioned by the foreign vessels, which usually
claimed the right to remain in the bays and harbours, on the plea of
stress of weather or need for wood and water. This necessitated a man-
of-war being sent up, and, ultimately, a special cruizer was detailed
to the Kurile Islands for the sealing season, viz., May to October.
490. In May 1874, the Government issued regulations to control the
fishery around the Hokkaido (Yezo) Islands, claiming jurisdiction
within a limit of two and a-half miles from the shore, and stating “if
any foreigners be found fishing within the above-mentioned limits, they
13a REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
shall be arrested in as peaceful a manner as possible and sent to Hako-
date, accompanied by guards, and delivered to the Consul of the coun-
try of their nationality.” During these years, foreign vessels were
frequently encountered engaged in sealing. Besides many vessels from
the United States, a Danish vessel, the ‘“ Mattée,” and others, are
mentioned.
In 1875, on Itrup, the Russians actually commenced putting up huts,
as did the Americans at a place called Maroko, for the purpose of
killing seals. They were, however, arrested and sent to Hakodate.
491, The head-quarters of the Protection Establishment originally
set up on Itrup Island were afterwards transferred to Nemuro, with
branches on Oonebetsu, Nanneho, and Toshimori. In 1876, in conse-
quence of the agreements come to with Russia in 1874 concerning the
Kurile Islands, new regulations were issued, prohibiting fishing for
seals by foreign vessels within gunshot of the Hokkaido shores; new
branch offices established on Shikotan and elsewhere, and measures
were taken by proclamation and otherwise to notify foreign vessels that
sealing was prohibited. Endeayvours were also made to improve the
native methods of preparing the seal-skins. {n addition to this, special
reculations as to the methods of slaughter were issued, deprecating the
use of fire-arms and the killing of “pups,” limiting the number of seals
to be taken along the coast, and establishing a close season between
the months of May and November in the territorial waters. Special
inquiries were also to be instituted into the facts of seal life.
492, The Japanese were thus inclined to adopt wise Regulations, but
foreigners, and especially Americans, were far more reckless, and con-
tinued to maraud along the shores and to use fire-arms, eagerly seeking
the profits of to-day, but ignoring all risks of depletion on the morrow.
In 1877, 1878, and 1879, the Japanese made establishments successively
in Kunashir, Iviribush, and others of the less inhabited islands, to
secure for themselves the fur-seal industry. But foreigners followed
them closely, and by the year 1880 or 1881 serious apprehensions existed
that the seals were hopelessly diminished in numbers. The Japanese
Report states: “The foreigners do not in the least care about the
decrease of breeding or the extermination of the species; they freely
use their guns in hunting, and, as the result, they kill the greatest num-
ber. Thus, we are obliged to throw aside.the old instruments, such as
clubs, bows and arrows, and gaffs, snd to adopt the gun, as it would
be most foolish to keep to the old system, which left others to make the
ereatest gain. Thus, the use of guns is the main cause of the present
decrease.”
493. Over all these years, and up to the present, seals were known to
breed in numbers on at least three points on the Kurile Islands, viz.,
the Srednoi Rocks, off the Island of Ushishir, on Raikoko Island, and
on the Mushia Rocks. Indeed, in 1881, quite an impetus was given to
sealing by the unexpected discovery of a small rookery on the Srednoi
Rocks, holding 20,000 to 25,000 seals. 5,000 skins were taken there in
that one year.
87 494, Seals were known to frequent the adjoining ocean in large
numbers from November to May, especially off the coast of Japan
between Inabosaki and the east part of Yezo, and it was reported that
during the remainder of the year the seals travelled away northwards
into the Okotsk and Behring Seas to breed on Robben Island and the
Commander Islands. They were never molested out at sea.
495, The native fishermen, in open boats, along the Nambu and Yezo
coasts north of Inabosaki, habitually take the seals by spearing, by
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 133
shooting them with barbed arrows, and in nets. In some places, a fur
covering for the head and neck enabled the hunters to approach close
to the seals. The annual catch of from 2,000 to 3,000 skins is disposed
of to Chinese buyers in Hakodate. In ‘the auttumn, they sometimes
take 2,000 to 2,500 grey pupsin nets. But it has always been custom-
ary, whenever a rookery was discovered, especially along the Kurile
Islands, for larger vessels to proceed thither and take all seals that
could be killed on shore by clubbing.
496. The Japanese Agricultural Department states that the fur-seal
appears to be reared on the rocky coasts, and caught at a distance of
not more than one nautical mile from the shore, but that they are gen-
erally found on the beaches and clubbed there.
497. In recent years good records have been kept, especially of ves-
sels under foreign flags engaged in sealing from Japan, but it is not
so certain that all Japanese vessels so employ ed are always registered
498. The following are the figures, about one-half of the total being
under the British flag:
|
Number of Number of
Foreign Foreign
Year. Vessels en- Year. Vessels en-
gaged in gaged in
Sealing. Sealing.
TSRO Ge miele creas sas Sees cinarin cieseatb eco SPIS8G or co cetaie deo ce ee tokens ecient ee 7
ASS seen eek siccistce cis > delcisteissrewisietes at QUI USBTe oe alae ce a aernie oie oes eercisigesee see 6
BS 2 eters eras niye sae ene raa eis oa ia sage erslre ha = USS) |l alstotia ak cor ctedassctadasoecus seb soe sade 5
PRS Baia estes thie cise tix, asela Seite cieisiwieicrsesieres = MMT US BO es ters cretaretastelalaee sttetais aeere saps oe ele 5
Ite) OO eaapOe Dare Sean ne CeO ee eee ase OGRE UE See poy saad ssocsae cohen Ae see re 4
ASRS Seerssscice ae aise ete mise elalalemteiaiae a> = UM Wale ile ses Gon eae eSane ras AnBeaenmdor 3
499. The rapid increase in numbers of vessels employed from 1880
up to 1884 was due to the discovery of the rookeries cn the Kurile
Islands. But these were speedily exhausted by indiscriminate slaugh-
ter, and these sealing-vessels almost confined their operations to raids
in and around Robben Island and the Commander Islands, especially
during the temporary absence of the guard-ships. Several schooners
came from America every autumn for sealing purposes, but not one of
these vessels was ever employed in “ pelagic” sealing.
500. It is certain that these schooners could not have been worked at
a profit unless they had taken ten times as many skins as are reported
to have been landed at Hakodate and Yokohama. But it is almost
impossible to form a correct estimate of the total catch, because the
vessels sometimes bring to Japanese ports skins of seals raided from
the Russian shores, and sometimes ship seal-skins thus obtained to
Europe or China without bringing them into a Japanese port, even if
only for transhipment.
501. Of the extensive and wasteful slaughter on the breeding places
included in the territorial jurisdiction of Japan, many interesting
though incomplete records were obtained. Captain Miner, of Seattle,
a particularly well-informed sealer, had frequently been to these rook-
eries. The Alaska Commercial Company, he stated, had obtained seals
from Ushishir and Srednoi in 1882-83. In 1884, he heard from the
natives of a rookery at Kikaka, a small island near Mattoo. There he
secured 4,500 skins. but news of this having become public there were
next year six schooners at work there, and the few seals left were
killed off by the Japanese Marine Products Company which now leases
the island.
134 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
502. Captain Snow, the well-known sealer of Yokohama, took in one
year (1881) 7,000 seals from Srednoi Rock alone. Next year he found
none there. The natives of Urup Island always had seal-skins to sell,
and this led to the Alaska Commercial Company and the schooners
searching the neighbourhood, but the island being low and behind others
was very difficult to find. In the following year (1887), he secured
2,000 seals on Ushishir Island. Such are some of the examples of the
wholesale slaughter of seal on these smaller, but prolific, rookeries.
88 503. The Japanese Government was not slow to appreciate
the gravity of the case, and the Agricultural Department was
prompt to report that the promising annual catch had suddenly
decreased because of this indiscriminate slaughter on shore.
504. An Imperial Decree was issued on the 23rd May, 1884, forbid-
ding the hunting of the fur-seal in Japanese waters except by persons
with a special permit. This was supplemented on the 16th December,
1886, by Regulations issued by the Imperial authorities under the
immediate supervision of the Governor-General of Hakodate.
505. These Regulations, in brief, enacted:
(i.) No fur-seal may be taken except between the 15th April and the
dist October.
(ii.) No fur-seal may be taken outside a defined area.
(iii.) This area is divided into three portions, in only one of which is
seal-hunting permitted in any given year, the other two divisions bene-
fiting by two years of rest.
(iv.) All vessels engaged must be specially licensed, and conform to
special regulations, and fly a special flag.
(v.) All skins brought to market must be stamped at certain ports.
There is no specified limit to the numbers of licences, but the issuing
authorities would exercise discretion in the matter.
506. The Nipon Marine Products Company, of Hakodate, with a cap-
ital of 125,0001., was formed to carry on whaling and the capture of sea-
otter and fur-seals. The Company purchased three schooners of about
70 tons each, manned by crews of twenty five men, for the purpose of
killing seals on these hauling-grounds, these being the only vessels
which have as yet taken out the necessary licences. These three ves-
sels were reported to have taken sixty seals between them in 1891.
507. Last year three “foreign” vessels fitted out in Yokohama, but
their destination was to the north of the Japanese waters; and two,
the “Arctic” and the ‘‘Mystery,” were captured in the late autumn by
the Russian gun-boat “Aleut” raiding Robben Island, having killed
1,500 seals.
508. It would appear that the somewhat elaborate Regulations set up
by the Japanese Government in 1886 have been as yet practically inop-
erative. It is reported that the Government vessel, the ‘“ Kaimonkan,”
detailed to enforce these Regulations in 1891, as a matter of fact never
left her station at Nemuro. It seems probable, however, that, with the
exception of the local shore fishermen, no one else has been inclined
to seek for seals among these Japanese islands since the rookeries were
depleted in 1881-82.
509. Apart from the Commander Islands, the most important breed-
ing place of the fur-seal in the Western Pacific at the present time is
undoubtedly Robben Reef or Island, named Tucelen or Seal Island on
Russian charts, lying off Cape Patience, on the east coast of Saghalien
Island, in Okotsk Sea. This is a low, flat, rocky islet, destitute of
haven or convenient anchorage for vessels, about 1,800 feet only in
length and not more than 50 feet in greatest height, surrounded by
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 135
shingly and rocky beaches. What little is known of its history is per-
haps particularly interesting, in showing how persistently the fur-seal
may continue to resort to its favourite haunts in the face of slaughter
and disturbance provided these are not actually continuous.
When first discovered, it is reported that the seals frequented all
parts of the periphery of the little island, but especially the east and
north-east sides; at present, in reduced numbers, they congregate
chiefly on the south-easterly beach.
510. According to Mr. D. Webster, now employed on the Pribyloff
Islands by the North American Commercial Company, Robben Island
was cleared of fur-seals by raiding vessels in 1851-53, and was thereafter
not again visited by sealers till he himself went there in 1870. The
slaughter here referred to is no doubt the same with that mentioned in
greater detail by Scammon, who says, however, that it occurred in the
“midst of the Crimean War” (probably, therefore, in 1854 or 1855), and
was carried out by a clipper bark sent there by ‘an enterprising firm in
New London, Connecticut.” He gives some further particulars of this
raid upon Russian territory, and adds that a valuable cargo of skins
was obtained, which brought an unusually high price in the Kuropean
market because the regular Russian supply was cut off by the war.*
Webster thinks that after the above date the seals gradually increased
again in number, but nothing is known of the conditions till he himself
visited Robben Island in 1870. Webster did not name the vessel in
which he visited the reef, but it was probably either the “ Mauna Loa”
or “John Bright,” as these two vessels, nominally engaged in whaling,
are known, from information afterwards obtained from M. Kluge on
Copper Island, to have raided Robben Island in that year. Web-
89 ster, at this time, according to his own account, assisted in
taking 15,000 skins, though Kluge’s estimate of the number
taken was 10,000. Webster further informed us that he had hoisted
the United States flag on the island, and though warned that it was
Jtussian territory by a vessel of that nationality, he paid no heed. A
little later, however, a Russian Government vessel appeared, and the
officer in command ordered him to leave within twenty days. He had
already sent most of the skins to San Francisco, probably on one of
the vessels above mentioned, but continued killing until he had taken
about 2,000 more skins.
511. In 1871, this island, with the Commander Islands, was leased to
Messrs. Hutchinson, Kohl, Phillipeus, and Co., who transferred their
rights to the Alaska Commercial Company. Mr. Kluge went there in
the same year in the interests of the lessees, and found that, in conse-
quence of the raid in 1870, there were not over 2,000 seals to be found
on the entire island. The island was watched in that year, but no
seals were killed. A few may have been killed in 1872, though, if so,
the number is not known; but from 1873 to 1878 rather more than
2,000 skins were on the average taken annually by the Company from
this one small reef.
512. About the year 1879, schooners sailing from Japan began to
frequent the island, and were in the habit of raiding it in the autumn,
after the guardians had been withdrawn. In 1881, the Company’s
agent remained on the island as late as the 5th November, at which
date five or six Japanese schooners were still hovering about, looking
for a chance to land. The Dutch sealer “Otsego” was warned oft by
the Company’s trading steamer “Alexander.” In consequence of such
raids, the number of seals declined from year to year.
* Marine Mammalia,” pp. 149 to 151.
136 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
513. Probably discouraged by the cost and difficulty of protecting
the island, and in order to prevent competition in the sale of skins, the
Company in 1883 made a barbarous attempt to extirpate the seals on it.
A full account of this attempt is given in the deposition of C. A. Lund-
berg,* who arrived at Robben Island in the schooner “ North Star” from
Yokohama, and found the mate of the schooner ‘‘ Leon,” a vessel in the
employ of the Alaska Commercial Company, living on the island with
about fifteen Aleuts. Lundberg found a great mass of dead and decay-
ing seals upon the shore, which had been killed by these men, as they
said, in order to “keep any of those Yokohama -fellows from getting
anything this year.” The crews of the‘: North Star” and another
schooner, the “ Helene,” then set to work to remove the carcasses,
which included those of many females and young, and proved to num-
ber between 9,000 and 10,000. In the process, they managed to pick
out some 300 skins in good condition. ‘There were thousands of seals
in the water, but they would not pull out on the beach on account of
the stench and filth. We washed the beach as clean as we could, and
turned the gravel over as far as we were able. Shortly a heavy gale
came on, which washed the beach quite clean again, and the seals then
began tio pull out.”
514. We were also informed that Captain Hansen, afterwards master
of the German schooner “ Adele,” was present on this occasion. Cap-
tain Miner, an experienced sealing-master of Seattle, also visited the
island in the same year, and described to us the great heap of carcasses
which he found on the island, and the manner in which the skins had
been slashed in order to render them useless.
515. In 1884, according to Mr. Kluge, the Russian Government sta-
tioned a steam launch at the island for its protection, and in the same
year four schooners, including the German schooner ‘“ Helene,” were
captured there by the Russian man-of-war ‘ Rasbonik.”
516. In 1885, the launch was replaced by a force of twenty Cossacks,
but these were withdrawn in September, after which raiding schooners
again appeared. In that year, there were not more than 7,000 or 8,000
Seals in all upon the island. From 1885 to 1890, no skins were taken
by the Company from the island, but in the last-mentioned year 1,452
Skins were taken. The guard was, however, removed from the island
between the 12th and the 15th October, and after that date the island
was raided by schooners, one of these, reported as hailing from Japan,
and said to fly the United States flag, being the chief offender. These
schooners must have obtained at least 4,700 skins, for when the island
was revisited early in 1891, that number of carcasses was found upon
it, and these were buried in order to avoid the effect which their pres-
ence might have in preventing seals from again landing.
O17. In consequence of this heavy slaughter, but 520 skins were
obtained by the Company from the island in 1891, and Captain Brandt,
of the Russian gun-boat “ Aleut,” estimates the whole number of seals
present on the island at this date at about 16,000. In October 1891,
Captain Brandt returned to the island in "the “ Aleut” when not
90 expected there, and captured two raiding vessels from Yoko-
hama, sailing under the British flag, and at the time in posses-
sion of 1 500 fur- seal skins.
Captain Blair, of the Company’s schooner “ Leon,” further informed
us that there were at present about twenty-five females to each adult
male on the islands, a proportion of males which he, from long experi-
ence of the sealing industry, considers to be far too small.
* Parliamentary Paper [C.—61351], p. 363.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 3K
One of the difficulties found in guarding this island is due to its small
size, in consequence of which the mere presence of guardians on shore
tends continually to disturb the seals.
518. Passing to the coast of Kamschatka, from various good author-
ities on the Commander Islands and at Petropaulovski, it was learnt
that there is some reason to believe that a new breeding place of the
fur-seal has been established near Cape Stolboi or Cape Kamschatka.
Females with young pups have been seen off this part of the coast, and
an attempt was made in 1890 to examine it in boats, but was frustrated
by stormy weather.
519. At Cape Tshipunski, also on the Kamschatka coast, M. Greb-
nitsky, the Superintendent of the Commander Islands, stated that he
saw breeding fur-seals in 1879 or 1880, though it had been ascertained
in 1877 that there were no seals there. Subsequent to the time of M.
Grebnitsky’s visit, the incipient rookery was destroyed by hunters or by
raiding schooners.
520. From the vicinity of Cape Kamschatka north-eastward to Bar-
oness Korf Gulf, a stretch of coast exists which has been entirely unin-
habited for many years, and about which very little is known. The
former inhabitants were killed off by small-pox, according to informa-
tion received in 1786.*
Karaginski Island lies off this] part of the coast, and here it is reported
that numbers of seals were seen in former years.
521. It seems certain that the killing and harassing of the seals which
has been so actively carried on for the past ten years or more from the
Japanese coast, along the Kurile Islands, has had the effect of causing
these animals to wander further afield than before, and more or less
instinctively to seek for new and secluded breeding places.
522. Thus, the Lieutenant Governor of Petropaulovski, who is well
acquainted with the northern coasts of the Okotsk Sea, informed us
that up in the north, off the Ola River and in Tausk Bay, the natives
have noticed the fur-seal since 1886, though not before, and that fishing-
vessels in these waters occasionally secure one or two. It is also known
that fur-seal occasionally haul out at various points, although at none
are they known to breed. Captain Brandt, of the Russian gun-boat
“Aleut,” again has himself recorded as a new feature seeing several
fur-seals off Point Povorotny, near Vladivostock, and states that seals
are sometimes seen at Cape Seritoko.
523. The facts relating to the Asiatic coast of the North Pacific, out-
lined above, showing as they do that several outlying rocks and islands
in various latitudes, and affected by somewhat diverse climatic condi-
tions, have been or are resorted to by the fur-seal as breeding places, and
that new places of resort may be chosen by that animal, go far to prove
that itis to the continuously inhabited character of the Aleutian Islands,
and other islands along the American coast, that the absence of such
breeding places there at the present day must be generally attributed.
This is fully borne out by the notes already given with respect to
former breeding places on the Californian and British Columbian and
Alaskan coasts, and may be adduced in favour of a belief that with
proper protection new rookeries might not improbably be established
in suitable places, provided there be no disturbance or slaughter by
man.
524, This is particularly worthy of consideration in the case of the
Aleutian Islands, where, in consequence of the now v ery small and
* Bancroft, however, gives this year as 1768, “ History,” vol. xxxiii, ‘/p. 164.
138 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
still decreasing number of natives, it would not be difficult to set apart
reserves for this purpose, as well as for the propagation of the sea-otter.
The greatest difficulty in the case of the fur-seal would doubtless be
found in the matter of inducing the first colonization of such new
rookery grounds, but as it has been shown that the smell of the form-
erly occupied rookeries is one of the chief—if not the ehief—attrac-
tion to the first-arriving seals, and as this smell is inherent chiefly in
the soil of these rookeries, it is perhaps not unworthy of consideration
whether the transfer of portions of this seal-impregnated soil, and its
scattering over suitable places—particularly such as lie near the migra-
tion-route of the seal—might not lead to their occupation. In any case,
such reservations would soon be colonized by the more widely wander-
ing sea-lions and hair-seals, and the security and increase of these
would probably after a time have the effect of producing a
OL sense of safety which might induce the fur-seal to take up its
abode there at the breeding season. The principal objection to
experiments of this kind would be the cost of affording the necessary
protection, but if such islands were also stocked with and preserved
for the blue-fox, the sale of the skins of this animal might alone, in the
course of a few years, be sufficient to cover a large part of this cost.
525, Similar measures would, of course, be also worthy of considera-
tion in the case of various places on the shores of British Columbia, or
on the Asiatic coasts of the Pacific.
IJT.— NATIVES OF THE COASTS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA AND ALASKA
DIRECTLY INTERESTED IN INDEPENDENT SEALING. METHODS OF
HUNTING, AND NUMBER TAKEN.
526. The native peoples of the west coast of America directly inter-
ested in the capture of the fur-seal are the following:
1. Aleut.
2. Eskimo, or Innuit, including Kaniagmut, of Kadiak Island and
vicinity, and Chaga-Chigmut, of Prince William Sound, with probably
some other tribes of lesser importance.
3. The Tlinkit, or Koloshan tribes of South-eastern Alaska.
4, The Haida, of the Queen Charlotte Islands; with the Kaigani, of
the southern extremity of the Alaskan coast-strip.
5. The Tshimsian, of the inner coast of Hecate Strait.
6. The Hailtzuk tribes, to the south of the last.
7. The Kwakiool tribes of the northern part of Vancouver Island.
8. The Aht, or Nootkan tribes, of the west coast of the same island,
and including the linguistically-identical Makah, of Neah Bay and Cape
Flattery.
527. All these people have known and hunted the fur-seal from time
immemorial, and in all eases either within the limits of what has been
referred to as the winter habitat of the seal, or along the course of its
northward migration-route. So long as the breeding islands remained
uninhabited by man, the seal was practically exempt from his attacks
in its summer habitat.
528. The amount of the interest of these native peoples in this pursuit
has naturally varied in accordance with changing circumstances, and
has, in most cases, been notably stimulated by the higher prices which
have ruled for skins within the last twenty years. Their aboriginal
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 139
modes of hunting the fur-seal are somewhat varied, including the spear,
bow and arrow, net, and club; but in most cases the gun is now the
weapon employed.
529. Aleuts.—The hunting of fur-seals by the Aleuts inhabiting the
eastern part of the Aleutian chain has already been referred to in con-
nection with the migrations of the seal. The Aleuts of Iliuluik Settle-
ment at Unalaska, stated that they generally got twenty or thirty seals
in the early part of the summer and when on their way north. They
are engaged in hunting the sea-otter at this season, and take a stray
seal if they find it. Such seals are generally got along the southern
side of the islands, but the seal-hunting season proper is in the autumn.
In hunting seals, these natives employ the same methods as in sea-otter
hunting. They use a “bidarka,” or light skin-boat, in which they some-
times go as far as 25 or 30 miles from land. The spear, launched by
means of a throwing-stick, was formerly most employed, but is now
being superseded by the gun loaded with buck-shot. They generally
shoot from a distance of 40 or 50 yards, and have plenty of time to
paddle up in the bidarka and get the seal before it sinks. The dead
seal is taken either with the hand or by means of a gaff carried for the
purpose. Grey pups always float when killed, being very fat. An old
male, or a-female over two years of age, generally sinks when shot,
particularly in the autumn, when seals of these kinds are thin. A
female with young may sink, but more slowly. These natives, however,
affirm that they never lose a seal if killed. Mr. Dirks, now agent for
the Alaska Commercial Company at Atka Island, states that when
previously stationed at Sannakh Islands, he has seen the Aleuts there
pursue and overtake fur-seals in their light bidarkas, a feat which would
be impossible with any boat. :
530. Nets were formerly employed by the Aleuts of Unalaska and
neighbouring islands for the capture of sea-otter, fur-seal, and hair-seal.
These are described as having been from 20 to 30 fathoms in length.
Such nets were set about the rocks, generally a mile or so from shore.
They are still used on the Sannakh Islands, but have elsewhere been
practically abandoned in consequence of the increasing wariness of the
sea-otter.
531. The fur-seals killed by the Aleuts afford practically the
92 the only flesh meat which they are, under ordinary circumstances,
able to obtain, and, as food, are highly prized by them. In 1890,
for the first time, the United States Government prohibited the killing
of fur-seals by the Aleuts of the Aleutian Islands, but this rule has so
far been practically inoperative, in consequence of the want of means
for its enforcement.
532. The Aleutian Islands were originally thickly inhabited, and
settlements existed on nearly all those of considerable size. Soon after
the Russian discovery, measures were taken to concentrate the Aleuts
in a few islands, where they might be more easily controlled. The
decrease in number of inhabitants has since then been continuous, and
the number of inhabited villages is now small. In the eastern part of
the chain the following places are still inkabited, and to all of them
the remarks above made, with special reference to Unalaska, are equally
applicable. On Unalaska Island, Hiuluik, Makushin, Kashega, Tsher-
nofsky; on Spiskin Island, Burka; on Akutan Island, Akutan; on Akun
Island, Akun; and on Umnak Island, Nikolsky.
533. The most westerly of these villages is that on Umnak Island.
The next permanently inhabited place is Nazan Bay, Atka Island, 210
miles further west, and beyond this there now exists but one permanent
140 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
settlement, that on Chichagoff Harbour, Attu Island, at a further dis-
tance of no less than 480 miles. The Aleuts resident at these places,
however, during the summer months, hunt from island to island along
almost the entire chain, with all parts of which they are consequently
more or less familiar.
534, At Atka Island, fur-seals are occasionally seen. In former years,
they sometimes were observed to pass on their way north, between Atka
and Amlia Islands, but never of late. Grey pups are not infrequently
taken about Atka in November. The Aleuts here do not make a busi-
ness of hunting the fur-seal at any time, but when seen kill them with
sea-otter spears. The flesh is prized for food. At Attu grey pups are
never seen, but larger seals are occasionally got. They are generally
speared, as at Atka Island. The spear employed in both cases has a
small detachable ivory or copper head, and is impelled by means of a
throwing-stick. The bidarka is used in hunting by these as by the
other Aleut tribes.
535. Innuit—The Kaniagmut Innuit people, inhabiting Kadiak
Island, kill a few fur-seals in the earlier part of the summer, when they
are engaged in hunting the sea-otter. They employ the skin bidarka
or kayak, and use an ivory-tipped arrow with detachable head, shot
from a bow. The same style of weapon is used along the AHaska penin-
sula, and is probably co-extensive with the limits of the Innuit peoples
of this region. In Prince William Sound, the Chaga-Chigmut tribe
formerly made a special business of the pursuit of the fur-seal, often
getting, within recent years, as many as 200 skins in a season. In 1891,
the number obtained was about fifty only.
536. Tlinkit.—To the eastward and southward of the Aleut and
Innuit peoplés, the skin boat is replaced by the wooden dug-out canoe,
which, though comparatively rude, as made among the Tlinkit peoples,
is nevertheless a serviceable craft, and with the Haida and other north-
ern tribes of the coast of British Columbia, becomes perfected in con-
struction, and assumes lines of almost ideal form.
537. In the neighbourhood of Sitka, the Indians systematically hunt
the fur-seal in the spring and early summer. They form camps at suit-
able spots on the outer coast for this purpose, the favourite places being
between Cross and Salisbury Sounds, particularly about Cape Edwards.
In some years as many as 700 skins are got, but in 1891 about 300 only
were obtained. Three or four Indians man a canoe, and when the
weather is favourable start about two o’clock in the morning for the
hunt. They continue paddling or sailing until near noon, and believe
that they often get thus as far as sixty miles from the shore. They
then hunt for six or seven hours before setting out on their return, and
reach the land early the following morning. Such atrip is made about
once a-week when the weather is fine, and the hunters consider them-
selves fortunate if they can make ten trips in all during the season.
538. The Indians here first saw schooners hunting off the coast about
ten years ago, but heard of them before this. Some of these people
are employed in sealing-schooners sailing from Sitka.
539. The seals were formerly killed with spears: rifles were after-
wards employed to some extent, but in late years the gun, with buck-
shot, has been adopted by almost all. The Indians state that the seals
sometimes sink when shot, the proportion thus lost being sometimes
one, sometimes two, out of ten. One man informed us that he had in
1891 got nineteen skins and had lost four in addition, all of which he
felt sure he killed.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 141
540. The Tlinkit (Hanega tribe) of Klawak on Bucarelli Sound, Prince
of Wales Island, are now mingled with some Indians of Kaigani
(Haida) extraction. They have not in recent years hunted the fur-seal
in spring or summer, being more remuneratively and less arduously
employed at that season in salmon canneries, or at other work.
93 During the winter, however, most of the men hunt the fur-seal
toa oreater or less extent; a single hunter sometimes getting as
many as twenty skins in a season. Here, five men often go together
in a canoe, the canoes used being larger than those at Sitka. In the
spring and early summer the seals are far off shore, but in the winter
months they come close in, particularly the gray pups and yearlings.
About two years ago, seals appeared in great numbers. Ina good season,
200 or 300 skins are secured at Klawak, for which 2 dollars to 9 dollars
is paid by the traders on the spot. The flesh is sometimes eaten, but
not now so much as formerly, though the fat is still prized as food.
541. Haida.—In the northern part of the Queen Charlotte Islands
(lying off the northern extreme of the coast-line of British Columbia),
Masset is now the principal Indian Settlement. Here the Haida people
who formerly inhabited permanent villages at Virago Sound, North
Island, and elsewhere, now centre, though still resorting for purposes
of hunting and fishing to their ojd homes. Inquiries made at Masset
among the Indians (including Chief Edensaw, an old but very intel-
ligent man), with other information obtained, enable the following
statements to be made respecting fur-seal hunting by the Haida people.
542. About the beginning of the present century the sea-otter was
very abundant, and was systematically hunted. Iur-seals were often
seen, and, when required for food, were shot with arrows tipped with
the bone of the whale, or speared, though the skins at that time were
of little value. About the year 1846 (the year in which Fort Victoria
was established) the Haida first began to make a business of hunting
the fur-seal for skins. Guns were employed from the first in this hunt.
ing, loaded either with buck-shot or with “ trade bullets,” three to a
charge. At first comparatively few skins were got, but for the past
fifteen years a considerable number has been obtained—in two of these
years 1,000 skins or more. In 1873, a post of the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany was established at Masset, chiefly for the purpose of buying fur-
seal skins from the Indians, and the increased activity of the local
hunters coincides with this date. The Indians first saw schooners
engaged in hunting off this part of the coast about thirteen years ago.
543. The hunting season is the spring and early summer, and most
of the hunting is done in Dixon Entrance, where the hunters have a
good chance of making the land safely, either to the south or north, if
bad weather comes on. They know that seals are often abundant in
the open ocean to the westward, but seldom go far out in that direction
because of the danger of being blown off and lost. North Island is a
favourite starting-point for the hunters.
544. In hunting there are usually four paddlers in a canoe, and one
man to shoot. When shot through the head, and at once killed, the
seals frequently sink, and long ago hunters often lost seals in this way;
now they spear the seals as soon as they are shot, and seldom lose any.
The males are the most apt to sink, while females with young always
float. Mr. R. H. Hall, formerly in charge of the northern coast posts
of the Hudson’s Bay C ompany, who has himself been at sea with the
Haida when hunting, as the result of his own experience, states that if
a seal is lightly wounded with shot it generally escapes, as it is then
a acai to overtake it with a single canoe. If severely wounded or
142 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
killed outright, the seal is seldom lost. After a short time the body
generally begins to sink; but “an Indian killing or badly wounding a
seal is pretty safe to get it.” He has seen three seals shot, and two
of them left floating till the third one fired at was picked up.
545, The Indians spoken to were unable to give a percentage ratio of
seals lost when shot, but in order to reach some conclusion on this point,
with regard to these particular Indian hunters, those who had lately
killed considerable numbers of seals were specifically questioned with
the following result:
Hunter No. 1.—In the hunting season of 1891 got 21 seals; lost none.
Hunter No. 1.—In the season of 1890 got 38 seals; lost 3 in addition.
Hunter No. 2.—In the season of 1890 got 37 seals; lost none.
Hunter No. 3.—In 1889 got 126 seals; lost none.
Hunter No. 4.—In 1889 got 90 seals; lost 3 in addition.
The Haida seldom ship as hunters in sealing schooners, but the two
last-mentioned catches were made in connection with a schooner on
which these hunters were engaged, and most of the seals got were taken
in Behring Sea, ‘too far from shore to see the land.” They are noted
here as indicating the skill of the Haida hunters.
546. Chief Edensaw explained that long ago, when ships first began
to come to buy sea-otter skins (in the latter years of the last century
and earlier years of the present century), his people were well off, get-
ting plenty of good clothes, &e., in exchange for these skins. When
the sea-otter became very scarce the trading vessels ceased to
94 come, and for many years the Haida were very poor, and had to
returi to the use of skin clothing. Their condition has, however, ~
improved again in later years, partly because of the money they are able
to obtain for the fur-seal skins, partly on account of the growth of other
industries along the coast in which they can engage. The Haida gen-
erally, complain that the continued hunting of the fur-seal has caused
it to keep far off shore, and has rendered it so shy, that itis now becom-
ing difficult to earn money near their homes by hunting the seal as
before. They are, in consequence, obliged to leave their homes in search
of other work.
547. The above notes refer particularly to the northern part of the
Queen Charlotte Islands. Special inquiries were not made among the
southern Haida tribes. Many years ago there were numerous village
communities scattered along the outer west coast of the islands, but
these have gradually abandoned this coast, and coalesced with the large
communities of the eastern coast. It is, therefore, now difficult to
obtain facts respecting the outer coast, where, however, in connection
with the sea-otter hunting, many fur-seals were doubtless formerly
killed. The Haida eat the flesh of the fur-seal, and esteem it highly.
548. Tshimsian.—The principal fur-seal hunting station of the Tshim-
sian tribes proper is upon Zayas Island. They hunt in the spring, from
this place as a centre, in the eastern part of Dixon Entrance and north-
ern part of Hecate Strait. Till about thirty years ago these people
never systematically engaged in hunting the fur-seal, though they knew
that their neighbours, the Haida, long before this took fur- “seals, Each
hunting canoe is here usually manned by four persons, and guns appear
to have been employed from the beginning of the systematic hunting
by the Tshimsians. Buck-shot, or trade bullets of twenty-eight to the
pound, three to six in a char ve, are used. Three canoes hunting from
Zayas Island in 1890 obtained catches of seventy, fifty, and twenty-
eight skins, respectively, during the season. The trade prices paid for
‘hese skins on the spot in 1891 ranged from 3 dollars to 3 dol. 50 ¢, for
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 143
“ grey pups” to 17 dollars for best skins. The number of skins got in
various years depends of course on the abundance of seals and the
character of the weather; but there is also a great difference from year
to year in the number of hunters, governed by the prices of skins, and
the wages offered for other work. Probably, about 200 skins are taken
each year at present by these Indians, but as these are bought by vari-
ous traders, it is difficult to get exact figures. ¢
549. A spear or hook about twenty feet in length is often used to
recover the seal when shot, and the Indian hunters questioned stated
that they had never lost a seal when killed.
550. The Kitkatla tribe of the Tshimsians, whose permanent village
is situated on Goschen Island, are noted as fur-seal hunters, though,
because of the facility in obtaining employment with regular wages, in
late years they have not paid so much attention to this hunting as
before. They resort to Bonilla Island in the seal-hunting season, and
in 1891 there were there seventy hunters with their families. The num-
ber of skins obtained this year was, however, small, as most of the
hunters suffered from the influenza epidemic. Generally speaking,
about 300 skins are taken in spring and early summer.
551. These people hunt in Hecate Strait, and their mode of hunting
is the same as tha’ practised by the Tshimsians proper. A few of the
Kitkatlas have been employed on sealing-schooners for the past four
or five years, but no large numbers from any of the Tshimsian group
of tribes engage in this species of hunting. Mr. R. Cunningham, who
has been for twenty-five years familiar with the Indians of this tribe,
states that the seals do not usually sink at once unless the breath
escapes from the body.
552, Hailzwk.—The Hailzuk tribes, of the vicinity of Milbank Sound,
resort chiefly to the outlying group, named the Goose Islands, at the
seal-hunting season in spring. A number of these Indians, includ-
ing several well-known seal-hunters, were interviewed at Bella-Bella.
They stated that in ancient times the fur-seal was killed by their fore-
fathers only for food. Sea-otters were abundant, and the skin of the
seal was not of much value. When a fur-seal was killed, it was kept
only if fat. The flesh is sometimes eaten still, but not so much as
formerly, though the fat is always kept for food. The best part of the
seal for food is the flipper. Before guns were in common use, the spear
was employed exclusively in the pursuit of the sea-otter and fur-seal,
but now one hunter only still continues to use the spear. They began
hunting fur-seals as a business about twenty years ago—not so long
ago as twenty-five years, which they remembered because of the small-
pox. Guns are now employed, loaded with buck-shot, or with three
trade bullets. They hunt only in their own canoes, with two to four
men in each canoe; and in these they sometimes go so far from land
that only the mountains about Cape Calvert remain in sight. Occa-
sionally they spend a night at sea.
552*,. The seal is sometimes shot from a distance of not more
95 than 20 feet, when sleeping, but often at much greater distances.
It is taken into the canoe with the hand, or, if beginning to
sink, a spear or gaff is used. Males sink more frequently than females.
553. These people were unable to state any definite proportion as
between the seals recovered and those lost by them, but they are not
accounted very skilful hunters. The largest number taken by a single
canoe in one day in 1891 was eight, and in this case two that were
killed were lost in addition. About 3800 fur-seal skins in all were
obtained by the Bella-Bella people alone in 1891, which was a good
144 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
year; and nearly all these were brought in by their own co-operative
store, and sold afterwards in Victoria. The highest price they got at
Victoria was 16 dollars. The Indians here voluntarily expressed their
willingness to conform to any laws made as to the killing of fur-seals,
but requested that they might be informed in time.
554. Kwakiool.—Nawitti, on Hope Island, at the northern end of Van-
couver Island, is the ptace most noted as a centre of fur-seal hunting
among the Kwakiool tribes. The people here hunt principally in the
winter, and do not resort to special hunting stations. They start on
hunting trips very often from Nawitti village itself, and bring large
quantities of seal meat, which they relish as food, back to this place,
They hunt in their own canoes, and few of them have ever been
employ ed on schooners. Nearly all the men engage more or less in
hunting at the proper season. Spears were formerly used in hunting,
but guns are now always employed, though the spear is still made use
of to recover the seal after it has been shot. The seals shot sometimes
sink before they can pick them up, but this happens chiefly when they
are shot in the head and killed at once. Mr. A. W. Huson, who is
familiar with this part of the coast, states that in some years he has
himself obtained in trade as many as 100 skins from the Indians of the
Nawitti village alone.
555, Fur-seals are also hunted by the Quatsino, Klaskaino, and other
tribes of the Kwakiool family, but the numbers obtained by them are
not known to be considerable, and time did not admit of special visits
to their villages.
556. Aht.—The Aht or Nootkan tribes, inhabiting the whole of that
part of the west coast of Vancouver Island to the south of Cape Cook,
are the most noted of the British Columbian Indians as expert fur-seal
hunters. The Makah, of Cape Flattery, in the State of Washington
are a detached tribe of the same stock. These Aht people furnish by
far the larger part of the Indian hunters employed on sealing schooners,
and have to a great extent abandoned their original method of seal-
ing in canoes from the shore in consequence. The number of skins
still abiained. by them as independent hunters is, however, not incon-
siderable.
557. They are chosen as hunters for the sealing schooners in prefer-
ence to the Indians of the northern part of the coast, partly because of
their experience and dexterity in the use of the spear, but also because
they are accustomed to hunt in comparatively small canoes, requiring
fewer men, and taking up less room on the schooner’s deck. The north-
ern Indians require larger canoes, and usually no greater number of
skins is taken by a large canoe than by a smallone. It is true that the
spear has, even among these people, now been largely replaced by the
gun, but, meanwhile, they have become familiar with the method of
hunting from se hooners. Still another cause is found in the fact, that
the Ahts are by no means so favourably disposed as other coast tribes
toward devoting themselves to regular occupation, such as cannery
work or logging.
558. The Ahts are divided into a large number of tribes and village
communities, from many of which det ails as to seal-hunting have not
been obtained, but the following notes on some of them may be taken
as examples of the whole:
Hunting in canoes from the shore is still practised at Nootka Sound,
where the hunting season embraces about three months of the later
winter and early spring. The hunters go out a long way from shore,
and, when the weather is fine, sometimes stay two days at sea. The
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 145
skins obtained are disposed of to various traders, but, in all probability,
about 200 are got at this place annually. One of the hunters said that
about twenty years ago he had himself secured 260 seals, but as the
prices were then very low, he obtained just 1 dollar each for the skins.
559. At Clayoquot Sound, the Indians stated that in the times of
the grand-parents of the present generation, fur-seals were valued aie
hunted only for food. They were then always killed with spea
Independent hunting with canoes from the shore has fallen into anne
for the last seven or ten years at Ahouset village and Clayoquot proper,
respectively. The Indians from this vicinity now hunt only from
schooners, and many are so employed every summer. Long ago many
of them were drowned when hunting independently, and this
96 mode of hunting has come to be considered very dangerous. At
the present time, both the gun and spear are employed in taking
seals, according to circumstances or the habits of the individual hunter,
560. At Barclay Sound, the Indians of several villages still engage
to a considerable extent in hunting in their own canoes from the shore,
but they are also in many cases employed on sealing-schooners. The
number of seals taken by them in independent hunting varies between
wide limits from year to year. In the spring of 1891, about 1,300 skins
at least were taken to Victoria from this vicinity, all obtained in this
way. The spear is usually employed still in preference to the gun by
these hunters.
561. The Makah Indians of the neighbourhood of Cape Flattery are
great seal-hunters. They themselves now own three small schooners,
which are registered at Port Townsend. Some of them go every year
in schooners owned by Whites, but the old method of independent
hunting from the shore is also still practised. Two or three men gen-
erally go in each canoe, and occasionally stay out a night at sea, where
they are frequently as far as thirty miles from land. They usually still
spear the seals, whether hunting independently or from schooners,
though the shot-gun is employed by some of the hunters. The older
men think that shooting is bad, but the younger men have taken to it.
The spear used has two prongs, with detachable barbed heads. It is
about fifteen feet long, and is thrown from the hand, without a throw-
ing-stick, the butt end being flat and widened, with grooves cut in it for
the fingers. The same type of spear is employed by all the Aht people.
562. “The old men say that before they were born (say, about sixty
years ago), the fur-seal was hunted for food and clothing, and was
abundant; but on several occasions a number of Indians lost their lives
at sea while hunting, and, consequently, for about twenty years the
hunting was practic ally given up. About the time the small-pox came
among ‘them (probably in 1852, as ascertained from other sources) hunt-
ing began again, and has been continued ever since. They think that
it was about twenty-five years ago (§ 586) when they first knew of
Whites going to sea to hunt the fur-seal. Nearly 1,000 fur-seal skins
are annually got by the Makah Indians, but a considerable proportion
of the whole number is obtained by them in their schooners along the
coast to the northward or in Behring Sea, so that the precise number
taken in the vicinity of their own territory is difficult to ascertain.
Nearly the whole of the skins taken by these Indians are sold in
Victoria.
563. When the seals are speared, practically none are lost, but when
shot some are lost by sinking, though a spear isemployed to gaff them.
These Indians stated that in taking fifty seals, sometimes one, some-
times two, might be lost, but oce asionally none would be lost,
Bs, PL V1 10
146 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
564. Further particulars of interest respecting the Indian fur-seal
hunters of Cape Flattery may be found in Judge J. G. Swan’s report
on that subject contained in the “ Report of the Fisheries and Fishery
Industries of the United States,” vol. ii, p. 393. Also in the “ Bulletin
of the United States Fish Commission,” vol. ili, p. 201. From the first
of these publications, it appears that the independent catch of the Cape
Flattery Indians amounted to 1,558 skins in 1880, with an average
value of 9 dollars per skin at that time. In a letter of recent date, the
same gentleman states that no official record of the number of skins
taken by these Indians has since been kept.
565. While it is to be regretted that it is impossible to give an accurate
statistical record of the number of fur-seal skins taken by the natives
of the coasts of Alaska, British Columbia, and Washington, by their
independent hunting in their own canoes from the shores, the results
of inquiries made at a number of detached places along the coasts, and
given in abstract above, are at least sufficient to show that important
vested interests are there involved.
566. Itis undeniable that all the natives represented along this great
line of coast have been accustomed from the earliest times to hunt the
fur-seal. So long as the sea-otter was abundant, little use was made
of the inferior skin of the fur-seal, and that animal was prized chiefly
as an article of food. At a later date, when the hunting of the sea-
otter had become scarcely remunerative because of its increasing
searcity on this part of the coast, the price offered for the skins of the
fur-seal was still insufficient to tempt the natives to engage systematic-
ally in the somewhat hazardous business of its capture; but as the
skins became higher in price, and notably within the last twenty years,
the hunting of the fur-seal has possessed a greater importance for the
natives. Within quite recent years, however, the independent hunting
of natives has somewhat decreased from two principal causes—the
employment of large numbers of the more expert natives on sealing
vessels, and the growth of various other industries capable of affording
remunerative employment.
567. The low prices given in former years to the Indians of the
97 British Columbian coast for their skins were in part due to the
fact that, in accordance with native custom, the skins were
stretched and dried, and were thus not so suitable for the trade as salted
skins; but of late years the Indians have become accustomed to salt
nearly all the skins they take.
568. Respecting the dates between which the Indians of various tribes
engage in seal-hunting, and in connection particularly with the notes
elsewhere given on the migration of the fur-seal, it must be observed
that these dates do not necessarily coincide with those defining the
occurrence of fur-seals along the coast. ‘The actual time of beginning
the hunt depends chiefly upon the date at which such fine weather as
is described as ‘‘ sealing weather” sets in. The close of sealing is, on
the other hand, largely governed by the arrival of the particular sea-
son at which immemorial custom requires that fishing of some other
kind—generally halibut fishing—shall begin.
569. The best estimates obtained of the number of skins taken annu-
ally by the Indians of the British Columbia coast alone, for the last four
or five years, show that about 1,500 in all are taken to the north of the
northern end of Vancouver Island, and at least a similar number to the
south of that point, or say, at least 3,000 skins each year for the entire
coast. Estimating these at 10 dollars a skin (an average price suffi-
ciently low to cover the relatively small value of the skins of grey pups
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 147
or yearlings which sometimes form a considerable portion of the catch),
the gross value of the catch amounts to 30,000 dollars annually. This
amount constitutes a very important part of the whole revenue of these
natives, with whom also the fur-seai forms a staple article of food at
certain seasons.
570. The less direct, but financially more important, interest of the
same native peoples in the pelagic sealing proper, in which they are
now largely engaged, is of course not included in the above estimate.
III.—PELAGIC SEALING.
(A.)—Origin and Development.
571. The interest of the natives of the west coast of America in the
capture of the fur-seal is an immemorial one, but in the earlier years of
trade upon the coast the skin of the fur-seal occupied a subordinate
position to that of the sea-otter, and in still earlier and pre-historic times
the fur-seal seems scarcely to have been pursued except for food. The
Sea-otter yielded an ample supply of superior skins for clothing, while
sea-lions, hair-seals, and other animals afforded skins better suited to
the manufacture of skin boats by the northern tribes, and for the south-
ern, that of other articles requiring strength of hide rather than thick-
ness of fur.
572. The principal areas in which the fur-seal was more or less hunted
in such early times, were doubtless those extending on the west coast
from the vicinity of Cape Flattery to about the latitude of Sitka. To
the south of Cape Flattery the natives were not seafaring in their habits,
and the same may be said of most of the native peoples of the Asiatic
coast, along the Kurile Islands to Kamtschatka.
573. So long as the skins of the sea-otter could be obtained in abun-
dance for Chinese markets (where at the time they were most valued),
the White traders then beginning to frequent the coast made little
inquiry for the comparatively inferior skin of the fur-seal, but these, with
other skins of minor value, were purchased from time to time by the
traders, and have occasionally been thought worthy of mention in the
narratives of their voyages. The observations on this particular sub-
ject which it is now possible to glean from these narratives are naturally
rather meagre, but even an imperfect examination of some of them, is
sufficient toshow that from the first the skins of the fur-seal were counted
among articles of trade with the natives along various parts of the coast
to which these animals did not habitually resort for the purpose of
breeding, and where, consequently, they must have been taken by the
natives at sea.
574, It was primarily the search for, and trade in, the skins of the sea-
otter which, in the last century, impelled the Russian adventurers to
extend their operations from the coasts of Asia along the Aleutian
Islands and to the American coast. When the Commander and Pribyloft
Islands were successively discovered, the skins of the fur-seal began to
be added in large numbers to the lists of articles of commerce, but even
from the first, ‘and before these principal breeding places had been
found, fur-seal skins also were procured from the Aleut natives.
98 From ‘incidental references made in the summaries of early Rus-
Sian voyages, such as those given in Bancroft’s History of Alaska,
148 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
enough facts to show this may be gathered, though a complete exami-
nation of the original works might doubtless afford additional facts of
the same kind.
575. Thus, in 1766, the “‘ Vladimir” included in her return cargo 2,000
fur-seal skins which are said to have been brought from the Near Islands
of the Aleutian chain. The number here given is, however, so consid-
erable, that it may be regarded as not improbably showing that at this
early date some place resorted to by the fur-seal for breeding, still
existed on Agatu, Attu, or other neighbouring islands of the group; in
which case all of these skins may not have been taken at sea. The
“ Arkangel Sv. Mikhail,” returning from a voyage which had extended
from 1772 to 1777, during which Kadiak was reached, but in which no
mention is made of any call at the Commander Islands (the Pribyloft
Islands had not then been discovered), brought back 143 fur-seal skins.
In 1790, again, Sauer, of the Russian Scientific Expedition, under Bil-
lings, is recorded to have been told at Shelikoft’s establishment at
Kadiak, that 600 double bidarkas had been sent out to hunt sea-otters,
fur-seals, and sea-lions. In 1812, in Chugatach Bay, Prince William
Sound, where seals had formerly been plentiful, the yield is stated to
have fallen off to fifty skins.*
576. Similar incidental allusions may be found as well in the records
of other voyages. Thus, among the skins sold in China by Portlock and
Dixon, in 1788, were 110 fur-seal skins, though these navigators did not
approach the known breeding islands in any part of their route.t
In 1791, again, Captain Marchand obtained thirty-seven seal-skins
from the natives of Norfolk Sound, these skins forming a considerable
proportion of the whole amount of furs got there.f
577. There is often some difficulty in identifying the particular kind
of skins which were obtained by such traders along the coast, because
of the indefinite and varied terms made use of by them, but it seems
probable that much of that classed as “‘ beaver” was in reality fur-seal.§
This must certainly have been the case in the Queen Charlotte Islands,
for though Portlock and Dixon state that considerable numbers of
‘“‘beaver skins” were purchased there, the beaver is not, and never has
been, a native of these islands.||
578. The opinion just referred to is that of Mr. Alexander Mackenzie,
who has long been familiar with the Queen Charlotte Islands in partic-
ular, and who bases his statements upon the direct testimony of the
natives themselves, to the effect that they frequently in former times
traded fur-seal skins to the vessels then frequenting the islands in search
of sea-otter skins.
579. Such facts, taken in conjunction with those already given as the
result of our own inquiries on the West Coast, are, at least, sufficient to
show that the natives were, from the earliest recorded dates, accustomed
to hunt the fur-seal, as well as the more valuable sea-otter, at sea. So
long as the skin of the fur-seal possessed but aninsignificant commercial
value, little attention was paid by traders and others upon the coast to
the hunting of this animal by the Indians. The skins scarcely appeared
in the lists of furs procured, and very little has been placed on record
on the subject. A few skins were purchased by the Hudson’s Bay Com-
pany from time to time, chiefly those offered by the Cape Flattery Indiaus.
* Bancroft’s History, vol. xxxiii, pp. 155, 171, 286, and 528.
t‘* Voyage to the North-west Coast of America,” p. 300.
t“ Voyage Antour du Monde,” tome ii, p. 11.
§ The term ‘‘Sea-beaver” was also, however, sometimes applied to the sea-otter.
| ‘ Voyage to the North-west Coast of America,” pp. 169, 201, and 300.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 149
The first really commercial appearance of fur-seal skins at Victoria,
according to Mr. Rh. Finlayson, was in or about 1546, between which
date and 1856 considerable numbers of skins from the Pribyloft or Com-
mander Islands, collected at Sitka by the Russian Fur Company, were
forwarded from’ Victoria to London by the Hudson’s Bay Company.
These were shipped in casks, and were presumably salted skins, doubt-
less all taken on the breeding islands. In part overlapping the period
just mentioned is the record of purchase of fur-seal skins by the same
Company from Indian hunters, which runs from 1852 to the present
year. (See Appendix G.)
580. When, however, better prices began to be paid for these skins,
those persons interested in Indian trade along the coast became familiar
with the native mode of hunting, and recognized the difficulty and dan-
ger to which the native hunters were often exposed in consequence of
the distances to which they were obliged to venture from the shore in
pursuit of the seal. The endeavour was then made to encourage the
Indians in sealing, because of the profits obtained from the sale of the
skins, and it naturally occurred both to the Indians and the traders
(some of whom employed small vessels for the purposes of traffic), that
a combination might be formed which would be advantageous to
99 both parties. It became evident that the danger and hardship
inherent in the independent native mode of hunting might be
much reduced by employing small vessels to carry the Indians and their
canoes to sea in search of seals, thus to serve as a base of operations
from which they might more successfully practise this industry.
- 581, At this time, the Indians of the coasts of South-eastern Alaska
and British Columbia knew nothing whatever about the summer resorts
of the fur-seal in Behring Sea, and very little was known by any oneas
to the extent or course of their migrations. Thus, Dall, in his elaborate
work on Alaska, published in 1870, though conversant with all facts
then available, is able merely to make the following statement on this
subject: “The Alaskan fur-seal formerly extended ‘from the ice line of
Behring Sea to the coast of Lower California. At present, a few strag-
glers reach the Strait of Fuca .. . , but the great majority are con-
fined to the Pribyloff Islands . . . . They leave on the approach of
winte They are supposed to spend
the winter in the open sea south of the Aleutian Islands. ’*
liven so late as 1880, Professor Allen, after a very careful investiga-
tion of the whole subject, was able to write in the following very gen-
eral way only with regard to the migrations of the fur-seal:
Except during the season of reproduction, these animals appear to lead a wander-
ing life, but the extent and direction of their migrations are not yet well known.
Steller spoke of their migrations being as regular as those of the various kinds of
sea-fowl, and they are recorded as arriving with great regularity at the Priby loff
Islands, ‘put where they pass the season of winter is still a matter of conjecture.t
582. It was the habit of the Indians, when sealing in their own
canoes, to bring back the entire carcasses of the seals killed, and to util-
ize the flesh and fat as food. When schooners were first employed as
an auxiliary, the same practice was very often followed. The carcasses
belonged to the individuals killing the seals, and were prized by them,
and whenever possible carried back to the villages to which the sealing
Indians belonged. The vessels were seldom very long away from port.
The sealing voyages thus at first made were restricted in their scope,
and it was only by degrees that it came to be discovered that the seals
* “ Alaska and its Resources,” p. 493.
t‘ Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 335.
150 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
might be profitably followed in their general northward movement along
the coast, after the cessation of the rough wintry weather. It was also
found that some seals might be obtained in the winter and early spring
as far south as the coast of California, and before “sealing weather”
set in on the coast of British Columbia; and as no other profitable
employment offered for the sealing schooners, it became customary for
them to make a cruize to the southward betor e engaging in the fishery
to the north of the Strait of Fuca. Ata later date still, the pelagic
hunters ascertained, as the result of their own experience, that the fur-
seals might be followed with advantage through the eastern passes of
the Aleutian chain, and taken during the months of July and August,
and oecasionally during the early part of September, or till such ‘time
as stormy weather rendered further hunting impossible.
583. Thus, beginning as a purely local industry, in which the Indians
of the west coast of Vancouver Island, with those of the vicinity of
Cape Flattery in the State of Washington, were chiefly interested, the
sea-sealing naturally developed and extended with the increasing
knowledge gained of the habits and haunts of the fur-seal, till its oper-
ations covered almost the entire migration-range of the animal, and the
number of skins obtained became SO considerable, that the sealing
interests of the Alaska Commercial Company (at that time the lessees
of the Pribyloff and Commander Islands), and their heretofore e profit-
able monopoly of the fur-seal of the North Pacific, was notably affected.
Not until this occurred was any serious protest, or, in fact, any com-
pore whatever raised against the practice and methods of pelagic
sealing. On the contrary, in so far as it became a matter of public
aaa aie: pelagic sealing was spoken of as a commendable new indus-
try, developing maritime enterprise, in which both citizens of the United
States and of Canada were engaged, and which aftorded remunerative
employment to them, as well as to a large number of the Indian popu-
lation of both countries.
Irom the commercial point of view, which is necessarily that of the
lessees of the islands, it is not only and perhaps not so much the fact
that at sea a considerable number of seals are killed, but the cirewm-
stance that this industry interferes with their monopoly or practical
monopoly of the market, which has frequently been admitted to be the
most valuable part of their franchise, and in the endeavour to maintain
which they have even purchased the greater part of the catch made at
sea, particularly in the year 1890.
584. With the altered conditions and extended range assumed
100. ~—— by pelagic hunting in the course of the few following years, certain
changes also occurred in the manner in which it was conducted.
The Indian hunters became accustomed to go far from their native
villages, and to engage for the hunting of an entire season. The spear
employed from pre-historic times by the people of the Aht Stock was
at first the only weapon used in pelagic hunting. The captains of
schooners engaging in the business discouraged the employment of fire-
arms, under the belief that the result of their use would be to alarm
the seals and reduce the chances of a good catch. This belief was
doubtless in some measure justified, but as White hunters also began
to engage in the business, it became impossible to prevent the use of
such weapons; the rifle was introduced, though soon superseded by
the shot-gun, which has now become the ‘usual hunting weapon. Most
of the Indians readily adopted this new and more effective mode of
hunting, and each year the number of these people employed, together
with that of the vessels engaged in the industry, increased. The num-
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 151
ber of Whites employed as hunters varied, but, as a rule, competent
Indian hunters have always been preferred when they could be obtained.
585. The Indians themselves benefited largely from a pecuniary point
of view, and, in consequence of the encouragement offered by the pur-
suit of the fur-seal, began themselves to own and navigate sealing-
schooners. Perhaps in no other way is the influence of the sealing
industry toward the civilization of the Indians rendered more apparent
than by the facts, that three sealing-schooners are now actually owned
by the Makah Indians of Cape Flattery, while five are similarly owned
by Indians of the coast of Vancouver Island, while in addition it is esti-
mated that the payment to the Indians employed in the British Colum-
bian sealing fleet in 1890, calculated on the number of skins obtained,
was probably between 35,000 dollars and 50,000 dollars.
586. Reverting to the question of the date of the first known practical
attempts at what is now classed as pelagic sealing proper, it appears,
from information kindly supplied by Mr. J. W. Mackay, that this method
of sealing was first attempted by Captain Hugh Mackay, of the sloop
“Ino,” in the spring of 1866. Captain Mackay, however, soon found
that this sloop was too small to conveniently carry two or three Indian
canoes, and he accordingly built, for the purpose of sealing, the schooner
‘‘ Favourite,” 75 tons, which was registered in Victoria on the 18th June,
1868. Little is known as to these first sealing voyages, but, doubtless,
as a consequence of their success or good promise, other vessels were
fitted out. Thus, Judge J. G. Swan, of Port Townsend, in a letter on
this subject, quotes Captain McAlmond, of New Dungeness, Washing-
ton, as follows on the matter: “The first schooner to take Indians
that I know of was the ‘ Lottie, in 1869, from Neah Bay, believing that
we were the pioneers. I afterwards understood that a vessel from Vic-
toria was also taking an Indian crew.” The vessel from Victoria here
mentioned was evidently the “Surprise,” of which Mr. Charles Spring
writes: “The first attempt at sealing, in a practical way, with schooners
and Indian hunters, was made in or about 1869 by Jas. Christienson in
the schooner ‘Surprise,’ owned by the late Captain William Spring, of
Victoria, British Columbia.” From other sources it was ascertained
that the Indian hunters employed on this and other pioneer sealing-
schooners were obtained at Pachena, on the south-west coast of Van-
couver Island, near the entrance to the Strait of Fuca.
587. The history of the progress and continued expansion of the
pelagic sealing industry may be here briefly set out. In regard to that
carried on from the British Columbian coast, it has been particularly
inquired into and recorded by Mr. A. R. Milne, Collector of Customs
at Victoria, upon whose investigations, checked and amplified in so far
as has been possible, the subjoined summary is based.* It has already
been stated, however, in another part of this report, that, for the earlier
years of the development of the business of sealing at sea, the data are
very incomplete, as in these years it had scarcely begun to receive any
particular attention, and records were not systematically kept of it by
the Customs authorities, as has been required of them in later years.
588. From 1871 to 1878, it is known that three schooners were
engaged more or less continuously in the sealing business on the west
coast of Vancouver Island, where, however, they were also employed
as traders. In 1879 to 1881 four or five schooners were employed in
sealing along the same coast. In 1882, auxiliary steam-power was
added to two of the schooners, and eight vessels in all were employed
*Parliamentary Paper [C.—6363], August 1891.
152 ’ REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
in the industry. In 1883 nine, and in 1884 eleven, schooners were
employed, and all are said to have been fairly successful. One of
these vessels, the ‘‘ Mary Illen,” belonging to Victoria, outfitted at
San Francisco, and eventually continued her voyage into Behring Sea,
which she entered about the 15th June, and left about the end
101 of August. This, so far as ascertained, was the first of the
British Columbian schooners to extend sealing operations to the
waters of Behring Sea. It has not, however, been definitely ascer-
tained that the “Mary Ellen” was the only vessel to enter Behring
Sea in this year.
589. The result of the venture of the “Mary Ellen” having been
satisfactory, she, and at least one other vessel, entered Behring Sea in
1885. Thirteen British Columbian schooners in all are known to have
been engaged in sealing in this year.
590. In 1886, eighteen schooners engaged in the sealing industry.
One of these had Deen brought round the Horn from the eastern coast
of Canada for the purpose. Two were wrecked, but the remaining
sixteen vessels entered Behring Sea; and in this year, for the first
time, exception was taken to sealing in this part of the ocean by the
Government of the United States, and three of the sealers, the ‘‘ Caro-
lena,” ‘“‘ Onward,” and ‘“* Thornton,” were seized.
591. In 1887, seventeen British Columbian schooners were engaged
in sealing; fifteen of these are believed to have continued their opera-
tions into Behring Sea, six being seized there by the United States
cutters ‘* Rush” and “ Bear.”
592. In 1888, twenty-one vessels from British Columbia composed the
sealing fleet, and though the fishery was carried on in Behring Sea in
the latter part of the season, no seizures were made by the United
States. One schooner, however, the ‘‘ Araunah,” was this year seized
and confiscated by the Russian Government, having been detected in
sealing within the territorial waters of Copper Island.*
593. In 1889, the sealing fleet consisted of twenty-two vessels, all of
which are believed to have entered Behring Sea. In this year four of
these vessels were seized, and one was ordered out of the sea.
594, In 1890, twenty-nine British Columbian vessels were engaged in
sealing, twenty-three of which entered Behring Sea.
595. In 1891, the sealing fleet of British Columbia had increased to
fifty vessels, and most, if not all, of these cleared with the intention of
entering Behring Sea. The adoption of the modus vivendi between
Great Britain and the United States, however, had the effect of turning
back many of these vessels, while the patrolling of the sea and warning
of others, with other circumstances connected with the operations in
this year, need not be repeated here.
596. As already noted, the first extension of the cruizes of the sealing-
schooners of British Columbia was that along the coast to the south-
ward, and this began to be practised as early as 1878 or 1879. Sealing
operations were first extended into Behring Sea by sealers from British
Columbia in 1884, though one or more United States schooners had
already at that date been for several years accustomed to frequent
Behring Sea for this purpose, and cargoes obtained by them were sold
in Victoria in 1881 and 1883. The practice grew up of making in the
winter and early spring a voyage from Victoria to the southward, after
which the vessels returned to Victoria and outfitted there for the north-
ern voyage. This was found, however, to be inconvenient, from the loss
of time involved, as well as from the fact that crews often had to be
* Parliamentary Paper [C.—6041], 1890. a
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 153
re-engaged for the second trip. Therefore, in 1890, arrangements were
made by the sealers to rendezvous with a steamer at some northern
point in June, to tranship their skins for conveyance to Victoria, com-
pleting their outfit for hunting in Behring Sea at the same time. In
1890, Sand Point, in the Shumigin Islands, was the place selected for
the purpose, and in 1891 Alitak ‘Bay, Kadiak Island, was chosen.
597. The foregoing details respecting the growth of the pelagic seal-
ing industry of British Columbia have been obtained by special research
and inquiry, but it has been found to be practically impossible to pro-
cure, whether officially or otherwise, comparable particulars of the
pelagic sealing business conducted by United States vessels. It is
known that vessels sailing from the New England States have been
engaged in the capture of the fur-seal since the latter part of the last
century, their operations being carried on principally in the southern
hemisphere, and the mode of killing the seals being that of a promiscu-
ous slaughter whenever these animals could be found on shore, carried
out by means of clubs or otherwise. This method of killing seals has,
however, no analogy with that of pelagic sealing as now understood. It
is further known, that in more recent years, and after the Governments
of Russia, Japan, and the United States had provided regulations for
the protection of the respective breeding islands under their jurisdic-
tion, vessels were dispatched by unscrupulous persons for the purpose
of raiding the rookeries upon these islands. The records preserved of
the raids themselves, which are treated in detail elsewhere, show that
such illegal sealing has been carried on, but, naturally enough, it
102 isdiffieult to obtain full particulars of its character or magnitude.
This again, however, is quite distinct from the question of pelagic
Sealing proper, the origin’ of which little if at all antedates the year
1869. Moreover, while this raiding of the various breeding islands
‘appears to have been practised from year to year in the case of United
States vessels, it has latterly been more and more replaced by the legit-
imate pursuit of the fur-seal at sea. There was thus almost an organic
connection between the two methods of sealing in the case of vessels
sailing from the United States, that did not exist in the case of the seal-
ing industry of British Columbia, which grew up directly from the inde-
pendent Indian sea-sealing, and had not previously existed in any other
form.
598. A certain number of vessels have for many years taken clear-
ances from the Pacific ports of the United States for “hunting and
fishing voyages;” but while most of those which have been engaged
in any form of sealing have doubtless been included under this general
designation, it comprises as well vessels which may have been engaged
in various forms of fishirg proper, and in the hunting of the sea-otter.
liven in the last census of the United States (1890) the vessels engaged
in sealing are not specially indicated, but are included under the gen-
eral designation of the “fur-seal and sea-otter fleet.”* If such clear-
ances were confined to a single port, local inquiries might without great
difficulty result, in the case at least of the later years, in eliminating
vessels which were not engaged in pelagic sealing, and in affording a
reasonably exact statement of the operations of those of the latter class,
but the number of ports of clearance has unfortunately baffled inquiries
made in this direction.
599. It is certain, however, that the pelagic sealing industry has con-
tinued to grow in the United States in a ratio corresponding to that of
the same industry in British Columbia. In 1889, the best estimate
—
*See United States Census Bulletin. No. 123.
154 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
which Mr. Milne could quote of the number of vessels engaged in it
placed this at thirty-two.* The United States Census Bulletin relating
to the saine year gives the fur-sealing and sea-otter hunting vessels at
twenty. It is probable that though two or three of these vessels were
chiefly engaged in sea-otter hunting, even these occupied part of their
time in sealing, while it is known that most of the fleet was primarily
engaged in sealing. In 1890, more than fourteen vessels sailed from
United States ports for sealing, but the exact number has not yet been
ascertained. In 1891, the number had increased to about forty-two.
600. The estimated value of the British Columbian sealing fleet with
its equipment, as it left port in 1891, was 373,000 dollars. That of the
United States fleet in the same year exceeded 250,000 dollars. Accord-
ing to the United States Census Bulletin already cited, the value of the
vessels engaged in the fur-seal and sea-otter industry in 1889 was
152,757 dollars. Dividing this amount by the tonnage, an average ton-
nage value for this fleet is obtained of 160 dol. 54¢., while a similar
calculation based on the figures for the British Columbia fleet of 1891
gives a corresponding tonnage value of about 114 dollars.
(B.)\—Methods.
601. In what has already been given, the methods of pelagic or sea-
sealing have been indicated ina general way. These methods are essen-
tially of a very simple character, but the actual procedure followed in
killing the seals may now be briefly alluded to. The vessels employed
range in size from 130 to 40 tons. Taking the sealing fleet of British
Columbia in 1891, the average number of canoes or boats carried on
each of the small vessels (which are all or nearly all schooner-rigged)
is about seven. The average size of the vessels in 1891 was sixty-five
tons, and the average number of men (White and Indians) employed on
each was in the same year about twenty-two.
602. The effective hunting strength of each vessel depends on the
number of canoes or boats carried, for no advantage is gained by carry-
ing large boats, a single hunter being sufficient foreach. Various plans
are therefore adopted, to enable as large a number of canoes or boats
as possible to be stowed on the deck of the schooner.
603. It is necessary for success, not only that a sufficient number of
seals should be fallen in with, or, in other words, that an area of sea-
surface rather plentifully sprinkled with seals should be found, but also
that the weather should be favourable. In stormy or thick weather
sealing is impossible, and the most the sealing master can attempt to
do is to stay with the seals. The circumstances being favourable, the
boats or canoes are launched and manned, and set out in different direc-
tions from the schooner in such a way as to cover as great an area as
possible. The schooner has only to keep to leeward of the boats, so
that these may the more easily rejoin her at the close of the day.
103 604, Seals thus met with upon the sea-surface are roughly
classed by the hunters as “sleepers” and “ travellers,” and the
former are of course the most easily approached. Whether in canoes
or boats, paddles are employed in preference to oars,as they enable
a more noiseless approach to the seals. When a Seal is seen, the boat
or canoe is quietly but swiftly impelled toward it, till the hunter
believes that he has arrived within sure range, when he fires. If killed,
as happens in the majority of cases, especially now that the shot-gun
has superseded the rifle, the seal may either remain floating upon the
* Parliamentary Paper [C.—6368], London, August 1890, p. 362.0
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 155
surface or begin to sink slowly. In either case, the boat or canoe is
at once urged forward, and if the carcass, which ’ does not differ much
in specific gravity from the water, is already partly submerged, it is at
once secured with a 15-foot waft, and hauled on board. Tt the seal
should happen to be merely badly wounded, it either struggles upon the
surface until gaffed, or, if retaining strength to do so, dives. If quite
lightly wounded, as of course happens in some cases, it may eventually
escape; but if severely wounded, it is probably killed at the next rise
after a ‘short submersion.
605. We are informed that it has been learned by experience that
seals may easily be lost if shot in the neck, as in this case the muscular
contraction of the body often forces most of the air from the lungs, and
the carcass then may sink much more rapidly than usual.
606, This brief description refers to the killing of seals by shooting,
which is now the method most commonly practised.
607. The spear is still often employed by the Indians, and when used
it involves a closer approach to the seal, before it can effectively be
thrown. If either of the two detachable barbes enters the body the
seal is never lost, and if neither strikes it, it escapes unhurt; in short,
if the seal is speared, it is secured.
608. The dead seals are drawn into the boat or canoe, and brought
back at the close of the hunt to the schooner, on board of which they
are subsequently skinned, and the skins laid down in dry salt for cur-
ing. It is said that in recent years considerable improvement has been
made in, and extra care given to, the preserving of the skins on the
schooners. This will no doubt have a favourable influence on the prices
obtained for the ‘‘ pelagic skins.”
609. The prosecution of this industry at sea requires all the courage
and skill which can be brought to bear on it. The canoes often find
themselves far from the supporting schoonor, and should bad weather
or one of the frequent fogs of the northern part of the west coast set
in, it may be difficult or impossible for them to regain her with ease.
Several instances are known.where Indian hunters out off the west
coast of Vancouver Island have entirely lost the supporting schooner
in fogs, and have only regained the distant shore after suffering great
hardships.
610. The accusation of butchery laid against those who take the seals
on shore cannot be brought against this pelagic method of killing the
seal, which is really hunting as distinguished from slaughter, and in
which the animal has what may be described as a fair sporting chance
for its life. The little vessels employed in such work must be staunch
and well found, for they have not only to make long voyages, but must
be able to keep the sea in any weather, and it often happens that they
have to lie-to for days together in storms, with all hands crowded in
by no means comfortable. or commodious quarters below.
611. Thus, whatever arguments may be advanced against some of
the methods and consequences of pelagic sealing, it is not possible to
speak of these in terms such as those employed by Lutké, who visited
the Pribyloff Islands as long ago as 1827, and who records his impres-
sions as follows:
I] y a quelque chose de révoltant dans ce carnage de sang-froid de quelque milliers
@animaux sans defense. Les chasseurs, tout endurcis qu ‘ils sont a ce genre de
meurtres, avouent que souvent leur main a peine ase lever pour frapper une créa-
ture innocente qui, les pattes en l’air et poussant des cris plaintifs, quel quefois tout
a fait semblables & ceux d’un enfant qui pleure, semble implorer miséricorde. *
* “Voyage autour du Monde, PAW Estey yy We PL OH US
,
156 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
612. Free use has been made of the appellation “ poachers ” as applied
to pelagic sealers in general, and to the Canadian sealers in particular,
in the course of discussions arising in the Behring Sea controversy, with
the obvious purpose of prejudicing public opinion. The use of this term
may be justified in the case of raiders upon the breeding islands, but in
such cases only, and, as has already been stated, no instance is actually
known in which Canadian sealing-vessels have been found raiding the
Pribyloff Islands. It more nearly describes, however, the operations of
the sealing fleet in the southern hemisphere, which for many years
104. has consisted almost solely of vessels sailing from the United
SESS aud witich as lately as 1880 numbered ten vessels, aggre-
gating 1,277 tons, and manned by 272 men.* The decreased importance
of this fleet i in still later years has resulted only from the reduction in
number of seals brought about by its operations. Sealing by these
adventurers has been conducted entirely on land, on islands or coasts
either nominally or actually in the possession of various Powers, but in
no instance controlled by the United States, and in some cases in direct
infraction of all local laws. The killing of the seals has always and
everywhere been carried out in the indiscriminate, ruthless, and waste-
ful manner described in detail in several of the works elsewhere cited in
this Report, and in most cases a greater part of the catch has consisted
of females.t
(C.)—Proportion of Seals lost.
615. As to the proportion by number of seals which are lost after
being killed or mortally wounded, to those actually taken, a great vari-
ety of very wild statements have been made, and it must be admitted
that in so far as concerns mere assertion and reiteration of such asser-
tion by means of the press and in every other conceivable manner, the
critics of pelagic sealing have established an unchallenged supremacy
over its defenders. If popular opinion could be educated into the belief
that the operations of the pelagic sealer are wholly barbarous and sean-
dalously destructive, by the means of unsupported assertion, this should
have been fully accomplished by this time. It is necessary, however,
in order to arrive at aS nearly as possible a true result, to weigh and
criticize the evidence offered, and to take into account the sources from
which it comes. It is further most important to remark that actual
numerical statements are far more trustworthy and more susceptible of
critical analysis than general assertions, which, however, have hereto-
fore been those most commonly employed as the basis of argument in
this question.
614. Disregarding mere rhetorical statements made by irresponsible
individuals, or given forth without signature in the press, the following
citations may be made as repr esenting the published evidence adduced
in official reports in regard to the loss. of seals by the sea-sealers. Itis
wholly upon the evidence here cited or referred to that all the state-
meuts as to great losses of seals in pelagic sealing have, up to this time,
been founded.
Captain C. A. Abbey, from June 1886 to the latter part of August in
the same year in command of the United States Revenue Cutter “ Rich-
ard Rush,” in Behring Sea, says of the pelagic sealers: “I should judge
they killed about three for every one they got.Ӣ
““Wishery Industries of the United States,” vol. ii, p. 439.
tIibid., p. 431.
{“ Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska,” House of Representatives, 50th Congress, 2nd
Session, Report No. 3883, p. 246.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 157
Captain Shephard, in command of the same vessel in 1887 and 1888,
says, on the same subject: “I have no very accurate information on
which to base an opinion, but I should judge that they lost from 40 to
6U per cent. of them. Isaw a good many shot from the boats as I was
approaching, and I think they lost two or three out of five or six that
I saw them shoot at.”*
Mr. W. B. Taylor, Agent of the United States Treasury Department
on the Pribyloft Islands in 1881, says, in answer to a question as to the
proportion of seals recovered by pelagic sealers, “that he does not
believe that more than one-fourth of the seals shot at are got, the rest
sinking.”t This was before the year 1881, when but few vessels had as
yet engaged in the industry, and one only is actually known to have
been in Behring Sea in this year.
Dr. H. H. McIntyre, Superintendent of the Pribyloff Islands for the
lessees for a number of seasons, says: “I think not more than one-fifth
of those shot are recovered. Many are badly wounded, and escape.” t
Mr. G. R. Tingle, at the time Government Agent in charge of the
Pribyloft Islands, gave the following testimony: ‘The logs of maraud-
ing schooners have fallen into my hands, and they have convinced me
that they do not secure more than one seal out of every ten that they
mortally wound and kill.” He then proceeds to make some caleulations
on the basis of this statement. Ata later stage, and when more closely
pressed for details, he explained the allusion above made more clearly
as follows: ‘I remember reading the log-book of the ‘Angel Dolly,’
which I captured. There was an entry in that log-book which
105 _— read as follows: ‘Issued to-day to my boats 300 rounds of ammu-
nition, all expended, and one seal-skin;’ . . . . another
entry: ‘Seven seals shot from the deck, but only secured one.’” §
Mr. Tingle gives some further citations of a similar kind from the
sane log, which may, however, be found at length in the “ Fur-seal
Fisheries of Alaska.” In it the captain refers to the character and
want of skill of his crew in language rather too forcible for citation in
this report.|| ‘
Mr. C. A. Williams, a member of the Alaska Commercial Company,
in another part the report of the investigation on the Iur-seal Fish-
eries, from which the above quotations are made, refers again to the
same log-book as the “best testimony we have” on the subject of the
proportion of seals lost by hunters at sea, and adds that the captain,
in the log, estimates that he got but one seal in seven shot at. ]
Mr. H. D. Wolfe, who described himself as “in the newspaper busi-
ness,” and stated he had some familiarity with certain parts of Alaska,
though claiming no experience in sealing, gives testimony to the fol-
lowing effect: “I think the hunting of seals in the open water is very
injudicious, because the hunters will shoot, and out of every 100 seals
they shoot you will not get more than thirty. . . . . If youdon’t
hit a fur-seal or a hair-seal right in the head, you are not going to catch
him; he will sink. **
*Ibid., p. 230.
tIbid., p. 118.
tIbid., pp. 164 and 170.
§ ‘‘Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska,” House of Representatives, 50th Congress, 2nd
Session, Report No. 3883, pp. 164 and 170. j
|| See “Further Correspondence relating to Fur-seal Fisheries in Behring’s Sea,”
Washington, 1890, pp. 37, 38, and 332.
q| ‘‘ Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska,” pp. 108 and 109.
Bo Report of United States Senate Committee on Relations with Canada, 1890,”
Pp. e
158 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
615. Nothing more precise than the statements just quoted, every one
of them made by those presumably interested in, or engaged in, pro-
tecting the breeding islands, but without personal experience in this
matter, has been found as authority for the theory which has been so
diligently propagated, that excessive waste of seal life results from the
practice of pelagic sealing.
616. The following statements, called forth by the publicity given to
the above-mentioned theory, though for the most part made by persons
directly interested in pelagic sealing, are given over their signatures,
and as the result of experience, extending in some cases over many
years, must be considered as of a much higher order of accuracy than
those above cited:
Captain J. D. Warren, one of the pioneers of pelagic sealing, and for
over twenty years personally engaged in the business, says: “Indians
rarely lose a seal they strike, andif one escapes, it is always but slightly
wounded. . . . . My experience with White hunters is not so
extensive as with Indians, but from what I have seen while engaged in
sealing, I can say that not over 6 in 100 seals killed by White hunters
are lost or escape. . . . . Experienced hunters seldom lose a
seal.” *
617. Mr. W. Fewings, with three years’ experience of seal-hunting
on the Pacific coast and Behring Sea, says: “The average number
lost does not exceed 6 in 100, and by Indians not 6 in 1,000.”*
618. Captain H. F. Sieward, who has been two years master of a
sealer, employing in one year Indian hunters and in another White
hunters, says: ‘The Indians lose very few seals, for if the spear strikes
the seal is got, and if the spear misses, the seal of course escapes
unhurt. . . . . Theseals lost by White hunters, after being shot
or wounded, do not, on the lower coast, exceed 6 in 100, and on the
Alaskan coast and in Behring Sea, not over 4 in 100. On sailing I gen-
erally take 10 per cent. additional ammunition for waste shot—that is,
if calculating on a catch of 3,000 seals, I would take ammunition for
3,300 shots. That was double the excess the hunters would consider
necessary, and I never knew the percentage of waste shot to be used.” t
619. Captain William O’Leary, with four years’ experience of sealing,
in which he sealed into Behring’s Sea one year with an Indian crew,
and three with White crews, says: ‘‘ My experience with Indian hunters
is that they lose none—at most, a few—of the seals they spear.
The number of seals lost by White hunters does not exceed 6 in 100,
and many hunters lose much less than that number.” ¢
Mr. W. Munsie, an owner of sealing-schooners, in 1886, and there-
fore long before the question of losses by pelagic sealers had achieved
the notoriety which it subsequently has, writes thus to the Honourable
G. E. Foster, Minister of Marine and Fisheries: ‘*Allow me to contra-
dict a statement made by Special Agent Tingle, of the United States
Treasury Department, in which he says that three-fourths of the seals
shot in the water sink and are lust. From the experience of our
106 ~— old hunters, I maintain but a small percentage is lost in this
way, probably not over 1in 50. I doubt if the loss is as great
as that caused by the rejection of skins after being clubbed by the
Alaska Commercial Company on the islands, to which reference is made
in the tables of Elliott’s s report. §
* Parliament ary Paper [c. 615i, L ondon, August, 1890, p. 3DD
tibid., p. 356.
t Ibid., p. 337.
§ Parliamentary Paper [C.—6131], London, August 1890, p. 36,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 159
620. Mr. A. R. Milne, Collector of Customs at Victoria, who has had
occasion to make, for official purposes, a special study of the pelagic
sealing industry, and to take much sworn evidence from hunters and
others engaged in sealing, in Summing up his conclusions on the point
here in question, writes: ‘Many erroneous opinions have been given
in the American press, and by the paid officials of the Alaska Fur Com-
pany, as to the loss of seals by wanton slaughter (as they term it) by
our sealers. I have made due and diligent inquiry as to the percentage
of seals liable to be lost after being shot, and from what I have gath-
ered it amounts, at most, to only 6 per cent.”*
621. Further evidence on this subject, derived from sworn statements
obtained by Mr. Milne, with special reference to the last two or three
years, is printed in Appendix (H). The following is an abstract of the
general statements made:
C. J. Kelly, with two years’ experience of sealing, stated his belief
that the average number lost is less than 3 per cent.
Captain W. Petit, says that Whites do not lose more than 5 per cent.,
Indians 1 per cent.
Captain W. E. Baker, states that the proportion of seals lost was not
more than 3 per cent.
C. N. Cox, states that the Indians lose 1 per cent., the White hunters
4 or 5 per cent.
Captain T. M. Magnesen believes 34 per cent. would bea fair average
figure for seals lost.
H. Crocker states the loss at 3 to 4 per cent.
George Roberts, with four years’ experience, gives 3 to 5 per cent. as
representing the proportion lost.
Rt. Thompson, with two years’ experience, also places the loss at 3 to
5 per cent.
A. Laing, witb ten years’ experience with Indian hunters, states that
they do not lose more than 1 in 10.
Captain W. Cox, with four years’ experience with Indian crews, states
that there is no loss of seals when Indians employ the spear.
622. From information obtained by ourselves on the West Coast, the
following brief notes may be given:
Martin Lundberg, with three other practical sealers, possessing no
vested interest in sealing, and at the time employed as seamen, and
no longer connected with the sealing business, concurred in stating, as
to the proportion of seals lost, that if a man should lose two out of
thirty killed he would be considered a poor hunter.
623. Judge J. G. Swan, of Port Townsend, Washington, whose famil-
larity with the sealing industry of the West Coast, and particularly
with the Indian interest in sealing, is well known, went so far as to
characterize many of the statements made as to great numbers of seals
being lost as “ scandalous falsehoods.” The same gentleman, in a com-
munication subsequently received on this point, writes as follows:
I have seen several Makah Indians who have been here, and they tell me that
Indians lose very few seals, whether they spear or shoot them, as they are always so
near the seal at such times that they can recover them before they sink. Captain
Lavender, formerly of the schooner ‘‘Oscar and Hattie,” who is a very fine shot, told
me that he secured ninety-five seals out of every hundred that he shot. He said that
poor hunters, of which he had several on his vessel, would fire away a deal of ammu-
nition and not hit anything, but would be sure to report on their return to the vessel
that they had killed a seal each time they fired, but that all the seals sank except
the few they brought on board. Captain Lavender was of opinion that not over 7
per cent. of seals killed were lost.
* Ibid., p. 360,
160 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
624. On a consultation with the members of the Sealers’ Association
of Victoria, comprising owners of Sealing-vessels and sealing captains,
they called special attention and invited inquiry into the matter of the
number lost. They explained that when the seals sink after being
killed, as they often do, they sink slowly “on a slant,” so that it is
usually quite easy to gaff them. They further affirmed that the result
of the sealing in 1891 was, like that in former years, to show that the
loss from this cause averaged below 6 per cent.
625, The captain of the “ Bliza Edwards,” interviewed at Vancouver,
stated, as the result of his experience, that sealing must be learnt like
any other business. That “ green hands” might lose as much as 25 per
cent. of the seals shot, but that with experienced hunters the loss is
very small. It might possibly amount to 5 per cent.
107 626. The information on this point, gathered from native
sources, has already been referred to in connection with the
description of the native modes of hunting, but may here be recapitu-
lated.
Aleut hunters, questioned at Unalaska, say that they never lose a
seal if killed, whether shot or speared. Indians of Sitka, when hunt-
ing fur-seals, state that they lose sometimes one, sometimes two, out of
ten shot. Haida Indians, of Queen Charlotte Islands, state that they
very seldom lose seals shot at.
Mr. A. Mackenzie, long familiar with the Haida Indians, says that a
very small proportion of the seals fired at by them ‘very sel-
dom,” ‘‘very few indeed.” ‘Some canoes do not lose a single seal the
whole season.”
Mr. R. H. Hall, of the Hudson’s Bay Company, and equally familiar
with the Haida and other Indians of the coast, said that ‘an Indian
killing or severely wounding a seal is pretty safe to get it.”
Mr. R. Cunningham, of Port Essington, believes that the Tshimsians
may lose aS many,.as one in five seals shot. The Makah Indiais, of
Cape Flattery, informed us that when they speared the seals they prac-
tically lost none, but that when shot, a few were lost. In taking fifty
seals they might lose one or two, but sometimes would lose none.
627. The statements given above are of course all of a general charae-
ter, and open to the objections which may be urged against such state-
ments. Those referring to the native loss in hunting, whether derived
from the natives themselves or quoted from Messrs. Mackenzie, Hall,
and Cunningham, are entirely removed from any suspicion of. self-
interest. It has been endeavoured, however, still further to elucidate
the question here considered by tabulating all the well-authenticated
statements referring to the actual numbers of fur-seals shot, and the
proportion lost. ‘These, it will be observed, record the actual numerical
loss of seals shot and not secured, by over twenty different hunters in
various years, the whole number of seals thus accounted for numbering
nearly 10,000. Some of these statements have already been published,
while others are those obtained in the course of our own inquiries. The
tables given below show the results of this method of treatment, and are
believed to afford evidence of a very high class, directly referring to the
question under discussion.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 161
White Hunters.
N Vi 1 Skins Seals Lost ee Yi Remark
ame. essel. otaned: ‘als Lost. Ee ear. marks.
1. J. Wilson.......-- eH bere) Meee esc 23 1 4.3 | 1889 | First year of hunting.
2s SO um tere acc < # .---| (over) 60 iL 1.6 | 1889
3. W.Fewing....---- ‘*Favourite”’...| (about)400 25 6.2 | 1887 | Some only ‘‘shot at.”
; First year of hunt-
ing.
4. Oh Goaasede CO AE ls cr acidic (over) 500 | (about) 30 6.0 | 1888
5. ee aT Merce Serban elehee Bess 146 1 0.7 | 1889
6. Oscar Searr.....-- CM Visi tees Senince (over) 600 | (about) 20 3.5 | 1888
7. Walter House..... “Walter L. 185 5 2.8 | 1889 | First yearof hunting;
Rich.Y other hunters on
schooners lost about
same proportion.
Soe OL Meaty ina “Pathfinder” .. 44 1 2.3 | 1889
9. Fred. Gilbert...... s we 518 14 2.7 | 1887 | First year of hunting.
OS, SS EO) eSaoti oe 30 244 5 2.0 | 1888
iil ee “2 aeooss Ye se 454 16 3.5 | 1889
12. George Howe..---- tMheresa’’ 2s sce 159 | (about) 7 4.4 | 1886 Ditto.
Bee oe Re pete ‘¢ Pathfinder ”’ .. 442 | (about) 20 4.5 | 1886
a =<! BY ee ‘“Penelope””..-. 618 31 5.0 | 1887
Ley ene OO ongets [OVEN ae! Sh see 734 |. 37 5.0 | 1889
16. Thomas Howe..... “Theresa” and 397 | (about) 20 5.4 | 1886
‘* Pathfinder.”
17. ue sega tenet “‘Penelope”’.... 510 | (about) 30 6.0 | 1887
18. S Ue PSB ae OO ACRE coapoe 316 Ny 3.7 | 1888
19. S MO e008 COMME ee eae 587 27 4.4 | 1889
20. Albert Bertram...| ‘Annie C. 320 21 6.8 | 1889 Ditto.
Moore.”
21. Captain Jacoby... ae 117 2 1.7 | 1888
DP ernggneOdass5 JSeeRO ‘* Allie Alger’’.. 613 21 3.4 | 1883
23. Martin Lundberg. x oe 33 1 3.0 | 188 | Quoted as an example
ofa good day’s work.
24. Captain Spring..-..| ‘‘ Favourite” --.| (about)180 1 0.5 | 1888
25. Captain McLean .. te aes 90 | (about) 5 5.5 | 1888
26. Cdk Kelley---.--- Sc i) 2 1.6 | 1891
27. Captain W. Baker.|.-. 55 1 1.8 | 1891
Dee Han ter? es=221-2 498 17 3.4 | 1891
Abel Douglas......... ‘‘May Helle”... PASH GA pS boroonsallsossaes\pscose
ty SO eh ocisa semis os aioe 205 rl 3.4 | 1891
Movaliessss2 9, 337 381 4.0
Nos. 1 to 20, from signed statements given in Parliamentary Paper [C. 6131], 1890. Nos. 21 and 22,
from ‘‘ Relations with Canada,”’ United States Senate, 51st Congress, Ist Session, Report 1530. Nos.
23 to 25 from evidence personally obtained. Nos. 26 to 28 from sworn statements obtained in 1892.
108 Indian Hunters.
Skins Loss
Native Hunters. Tribe or Place. Obt Aracal Seals Lost.| Per |Year. Remarks.
: cent.
NOs Wi cctieesseeeteses Sitkajs2:42.23-.c2 19 45 20,0stesee
We sataya(ee wie alaicon sis \2 ais Hiaidaas.-seeeaee 21 One asee 2 1890
SOD, comes ooenicas cies ay Steere 38 3 8.0 | 1891
Se MOjsemcee vee wc ceeasie COVE peat SE dee 52 37 Giiliss ati 1890
Chiat Bien, eras caaeteaa's ‘* (on Adele). 126 On |te esac 1889
SO aa SOUS OEE a 90 3 3.3 | 1889
Se Deere cece asec Hailtzak.-....... 8 2| 25.0 | 1891
WO « Tf cactsogeaeeoOUeUEe Ma Kah c css << SON 2 nOLMONG! | feces esee
Nos. 1 to 7, all from evidence personally obtained.
628. A certain proportion of the seals shot of course escape, and in
killing on the islands each year, some are found with encysted shot in
the skin or blubber. A few ounces of shot thus obtained was shown
to us on the Pribyloff Islands as that collected from seals killed in 1890.
This aggregated much less than $ lb., but placing the amount at 8 ozs.,
this would give, at 150 pellets to the lb., seventy-five shot gathered
from 21,000 seals killed, or at the rate of one pellet to 280 seals. Asin
most cases several pellets might be found ina single seal, while in other
cases shot might be present but not found in skinning and cutting up
BS, PT vI—l1l
162 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
the seal, the proportion thus stated probably more than represents the
ratio of seals so slightly wounded as to reach and live on the islands
in apparent health.
629. It appears to have been very generally taken for granted, on @
priort grounds, by most of the apologists for the methods of land kill-
ing, that the fur-seal does and must sink immediately when shot at sea.
Actual experience contradicts this assumption in the manner and to
the degree explained above, and it is, therefore, useless to enter at
length into the question of the analogy of the fur-seal with other ani-
mals in this respect, which has been advanced to show that the fur-seal
should not float. Arguments of this kind have been derived particu-
larly from the circumstance that the various species of hair-seal often
sink when shot before they can be recovered. It must not be forgotten,
however, that the hair-seal belongs to an entirely different group of the
Pinnipedia, and. is characterized not only by a much heavier osseous
framework, but also by a smaller lung capacity in proportion to its
weight. Yet even the hair-seal is often shot and secured at sea, where
its pursuit is made an industry, and it is only when exceptionally lean
that it sinks rapidly.
630. The following notes bearing on this particular subject may be
quoted trom Mr. J. A. Allen’s ‘* Monograph of North American Pinni-
peds,” which has already been frequently referred to:
“Like other species of the seal family, the harbour seal is very tenacious of life,
and must be struck in a vital part by either ball or heavy shot, in order to kill it on
the spot.” Says Mr. Reeks: ‘‘T have been often amused at published accounts of
seals shot in the Thames or elsewhere, but which ‘‘sank immediately.” What seal
or other amphibious animal would not do so if “tickled” with the greater part of,
perhaps, an ounce of No.5 shot? He adds that it is only in the spring of the year
that this seal will ‘‘float” when killed in the water, but says that he has never seen
a seal ‘‘so poor, which, if killed dead on the spot, would not have floated from five to
ten seconds,” or long enough to give ‘‘ample time for towing alongside,” supposing
the animal to have been killed by shot, and the boat to contain ‘two hands.”
Again, referring to the bearded seal, Mr. Allen quotes Kumlien, as
follows:
In July, during the moulting time, their stomachs contained nothing but stones,
some of them nearly of a quar ter- pound weight. They seem to eat nothing during
the entire time of shedding—probably six weeks. Certain it is they lose all their
blubber, and by the middle of July have nothing but ‘ white-horse”—a tough, white,
somewhat cartilaginous substance, in place of blubber. At this season they sink
when shot.
631. No loss occurs at sea from the taking of seals with ‘“‘stagey” or
unmerchantable skins. All those familiar with pelagic sealing who were
questioned upon this point agreed as to the fact that ‘‘stagey” skins
are practically never got at sea, not even in Behring Sea at the season
at which the seals upon the islands are distinctly ‘‘stagey.” The skins
taken in the earliest part of the sealing season, in December and Jan-
uary, are sometimes rather inferior, but they do not fall into the general
category of ‘‘stagey” skins.
632. It would thus appear that the distinctly “‘stagey” or *‘shedding”
condition of the fur-seal supervenes after a sojourn of some
109 length on shore, and that such sojourn results in a general change
of pelage ew hich does not occur in the same marked way when
the animals remain at sea. The same circumstance has further some
bearing on the question of the possible excursions of the seals from the
breeding islands, and on the interchangeability of the seals remaining
on or about the islands with those of the general sea-surface, which
thus seems to be exceptional, during at least the later summer and
early autumn, which is the ‘‘stagey” season ashore
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 163
(D.)—Composition of Catch.
633. By the pelagic sealers and by the Indian hunters along the coast,
fur-seals of both sexes are-killed, and, indeed, it would be unreasonable,
under the circumstances, to expect that a distinction should be made
in this respect, any more than that the angler should discriminate
between the sexes of the fish he may hook. Even upon the breeding
islands, it is difficult for the most experienced natives to distinguish
virgin females from young males of corresponding size in the drives,*
and in the autumn of 1891, we are informed by an eyewitness, that in
endeavouring to secure a female yearling seal alive for the zoological
collection at San Francisco, no less than seven male seals were succes-
sively captured by the natives, who, judging from the general appear-
ance of the animals, believed them to be females, before one of the
requisite sex was obtained! At sea, save in exceptional cases, females
can only be certainly detected by an examination of the body when it
is brought on board. The fur of the female is equally good with that
of the male, and under the conditions under which the hunting is car-
ried on, there is room for no sentimental considerations in favour of either
sex. But it is unfortunately the case, that at certain seasons consid-
erable numbers of gravid females are thus killed, and this killing is
Pieced by the better classes of the pelagic sealers themselves, “not
alone on grounds of humanity, but because they see clearly that’ it 1s
unduly destructive to the industry in which their fortunes are embarked.
From communications held with pelagic sealers, there can be no doubt
that any equitable arrangement having for its object the minimizing of
this particular cause of loss would be favourably received by them.
With the natives along the coast it is somewhat different; their tradi-
tional code of ethics admits of no period of immunity for any wild
animal, and the contingency of future decrease appears to them to be
too remote to be taken into their consideration. They are constitution-
ally observant, and in no degree reticent about the killing of females
with young, and the statements on this subject obtained from them may
be implicitly trusted.
634. On the question of the general composition of the pelagic catch
in respect to sex and age of seals killed, and the special abundance of
various kinds of seals in certain parts of the hunting area or at par-
ticular dates, evidence varying much as to numerical proportion and
often diametrically opposite in bearing may easily be obtained. It is
only natural, and is entirely in accord with what might be expected,
that the proportions of seals by sexes and ages should be found to differ
very considerably in different instances, even in a single year, in con-
formity with the dates or places in which the greater proportion of any
particular catch was secured, and the kind of seals in each case fallen
in with. Some landsmen are found to be emphatically certain that
nearly the whole of the pelagic catch consists of females, but this does
not accord with the testimony of those who are or have been actually
engaged in sea-sealing; and while itis not maintained that the evidence
of such practical sealers is entirely untinctured by motives of personal
interest, it must be evident that these men know more on the subject
than any others. Subjoined are quotations or abstracts relating to the
composition of the pelagic catch, obtained from what are believed to be
trustworthy sources, and in a number of cases derived from statements
made over the signatures of the individuals as taken under oath. The
* See “Bull, Mus. Comp. Zool., ” vol. li, Part i p. 105,
164 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
very fact that these statements, though taken at different times, and
while varying considerably from the point of view of numerical propor-
tions, tally very well in the main, one with another, is an inherent proof
of their credibility.
635. It must not be forgotten, however, in examining these statements,
that the complementary information derived from the breeding islands
shows that the persistent killing of young males has led of late years
to the existence of a very large surplus of females, and that, therefore,
the proportion of females to the whole number of seals, whether at sea
or ashore, is, at the present time, according to the information obtained
by us, quite abnormal.
The term “coast catch,” often used in the following statements, must
be understood to mean the seals taken to the south of the Aleutian
Islands, and, as a rule, to those taken south of any part of the coast
of Alaska.
110 The evidence first quoted below, is that obtained from Indian
hunters.
The Indians of Neah Bay, accustomed to hunt about Cape Fiattery,
in the State of Washington, informed us that in the early part of the
summer they often found living young in females killed, of which at that
season there was a considerable proportion; but later in the summer no
gravid females are found, most of the catch consisting of young males or
young females. Of the total catch, they thought that about one-twen-
tieth consisted of grey pups. In 1890 seals of this class were abundant,
but in 1891 very few. :
636. At Nawitti, near the north end of Vancouver Island, the Indians
find young in the females killed in the early summer. These are quite
strong, and if thrown into the water swim well. One man kept such a
young seal alive for six days.
637. At Bella-Bella, the Indians think that the larger proportion of
the seals they kill in the early part of the season are females, and these
are often with young. Young taken from females often live for three
weeks or a month. ‘They drink water, but will not eat, and so probably
die of starvation. Some time in May the females disappear, and the
greater part of the catch then consists of young males, by which they
mean males somewhat smaller than the full-grown female.
638. About the Queen Charlotte Islands, many of the seals killed are
females, and a large proportion of these, in the latter part of April and
early part of May, are with young. The Indians state that the young
taken from the mother might live a couple of hours, but they are inva-
riably killed, as it is believed that if allowed to live the hunters will be
unlucky. A White hunter, who had been with the Indians here, stated
that he had tried to keep such young, which could, in some cases, Swim
quite strongly, but that the Indians had begged of him to kill them.
Mr. A. Mackenzie, when buying skins for the Hudson’s Bay Company
at Masset, refused to purchase the skins of unborn pups on any terms;
but after a time the Indians found they could sell them to the Chinese,
working at salmon canneries on the Skeena River.
639. About Bonilla Island, in the northern part of Hecate Strait, the
seals obtained in spring are chiefly females, but after the Ist June these
leave, and the catch is then composed of non breeding seals, supposed
to be about three years old. The young are often fully matured in the
female, and Indians say that they will swim if thrown into the water.
The people here have not the same superstition as those on the Queen
Charlotte Islands, and have sometimes kept the young seals alive for
three weeks or a month. Mr. Lockerby, connected with the Hudson’s
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 165
Bay Company at Port Simpson, states that the skins purchased there
are classed by size, not according to sex, but, so far as he can judge, a
large part consists of young males, with a considerable proportion of
grey pups.
640. Indians hunting from Sitka,in South-eastern Alaska, often find
living young in females killed. These are skinned, and the skins possess
some little value.
641. in the eastern part of the Aleutian Islands, so inconsiderable a
number of seals are killed in spring or summer, that very few gravid
females can be included.
642. The following evidence on this particular subject is that con-
tained in written statements as to the various places of sealing, made
by some of the most experienced and intelligent pelagic sealers:
643. William Fewings says: “It is very seldom a female is killed in
Behring Sea, carrying her young with her, and out of 1,000 killed on
the coast earlier in the season, less than one-third are females carrying
their young.”
644. Captain J. D. Warren says: “Of the seals taken along the coast,
about one-half are females, and of the females, not more than one half
are with young. In Behring Sea, not more.than 1 in 100 of these
taken by the hunters are females with young, because as soon as the
females carrying their young get into the sea they go to the breeding
islands or rookeries, and in a few days their young are born. ‘The cows
remain with their young till they are quite able ‘to take care of them-
selves. 1 do not think that of the seals taken by Indian and White
hunters more than 30 per cent. are females actually breeding, or capa-
ble of breeding. ‘Old bulls,’ ‘bachelors,’ ‘two-year-old pups,’ and ‘ bar-
ren cows’ make up the great majority. Cows actually breeding are very
watchful, and while on their voyage northward are ever on the alert,
so they are difficult to take. On the other hand, the other classes above
named make up the great class of ‘sleepers,’ from which fully 90 per
cent. of the whole catch of hunters is derived. I never saw or heard
of a ‘cow’ having her young beside her in the water, either on the coast
or in Behring Sea.”
645. Captain William O’Leary says: ‘‘About half the seals taken
along the coast are cows, and perhaps two-thirds of the cows are with
young. Putting a vessel’s catch at 400, from 150 to 175 might be cows
with young. In Behring Sea the average of cows with young killed
will not average 1 in 100, for the reason that as soon as the cows reach the
sea they go to the breeding islands, where their young are born.”
111 George Howe says: “ About one-third of the seals taken on the
coast are cows with pup, or capable of being with pup. In Beh-
ring Sea I got four cows with pups in them.” (This was in a season’s
catch.)
Albert J. Bertram says: “I got during the season 320 seals... .
On the coast I got about twenty-five to thirty females with young in
them, and in Behring Sea I got six or seven. I never saw a cow with
her pup alongside of her in the water.”
646. In the sworn statements obtained by Mr. Milne, and already
referred to, frequent reference is made to the composition of the catch,
both along the coast and in Behring Sea. From these statements the
following abstracts have been made:
C. J. Kelly, two years’ experience in sealing, found the percentage of
females to be always less than that of males.
Captain W. Petit, who seems to have paid particular attention to
this matter, savs that in 1891 of 765 seals killed, 18 were females carry-
166 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
ing young—not quite 24 per cent. “ About 10 per cent. every season
are barren cows, and 124 per cent. grey pups (always males). My
catch was more than 75 per cent. males; more males were taken in
Behring Sea than in any former year.” He further states that in 1886
he took off Barclay Sound, in one day, 104 seals, of which 3 only were
females. In 1887, on Portlock Bank, 29 seals were taken in one day;
of these 2 were females. ‘More barren cows are killed than those
bearing young.”
Captain W. E. Baker’s proportion last year was 3 males to 1 female.
The percentage of barren females was considerable.
Captain C. N. Cox states that females are more abundant in Feb-
ruary, March, and April than at any othertime. Very few females with
pup are taken in May. Bearing cows are not got in Behring Sea after
their young have been born. Of 848 seals taken along the coast by
him in 1891, 75 per cent. were males, 15 per cent. were breeding females,
and 10 per cent. barren females. In 1889, 90 per cent. of his catch con-
sisted of males.
Captain A. Bissit believes that more males than females are killed,
and that more females in proportion are taken in March and April than
in other months. His catch in 1891 showed 75 to 80 per cent. of males.
Captain T. M. Magnesen states that females are most plentiful in
February, March, and April; they about equal the males then. Near
Behring Sea the proportion is about 80 males to 1 female. About half
his catch last year was females, 12 or 14 per cent. bearing females, the
others barren.
H. Crocker, four years’ experience, thinks females are most plentiful
from February to May; 80 per cent. of the seals killed are males.
R. Thompson, two years’ experience, says that 70 to 80 per cent. of
the seals taken are males.
Andrew Laing, ten years’ experience, found in his coast catch that 3
in every 5 seals were males; in Behring Sea 4 in every 5 were males.
The females include barren cows.
Captain W. Cox, four years’ experience, states that females are most
abundant in February, March, and April; in February and March
there are as many females with young as males. About 65 or 70 per
cent. of the seals.taken are males, 15 per cent. are barren females, and
about 15 per cent, bearing females. Of 2,434 seals taken by him in
Behring Sea, about 5 per cent. were females in milk.
Captain Charles Hackett, five years’ experience, has observed no dif-
ference in the proportion of females in different months. In 1890 about
one-quarter of his catch consisted of females; in 1891, about one-half.
In a catch of 1,555 seals in Behring Sea, he took only ten females with
pup between the 15th July and the last of that month. Got quite a
number of barren cows.
Captain C. McDougall, three years’ experience, took 1,100 seals in
Behring Sea, of which 800 were males. The proportion of barren cows
is about one to ten bearing cows in Behring Sea.
Captain A. Douglas, seven years’ experience, has not obtained more
seals in one month than in another. One or two females in pup are
taken during the season in Behring Sea.
Captain 8. S. McLean, seven years’ experience, got more males than
females along the coast; about half and haif in Behring Sea. About
5 per cent. of the females taken in Behring Sea are barren. My catch
last year (1891) was made up of two parts males and one females.
647. In conferences held with sealers, some additional particulars as
to the proportion of females taken were obtained, as follows:
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 167
Captain Dod stated that he had taken over 600 seals in Behring Sea,
of which less than Eyeniy carried young, and that the schooner
W2 “Viva” in 1890 took 2,000 seals in Behring Sea, of which only
two were females with young. Captain Baker said that in 1891
on Portlock banks he found males most abundant, consisting of young,
medium, and a few full-grown animals.
648. A consultation held with a number of representative pelagic
sealers on this particular point elicited the following general state-
ment, which, it is believed, is in entire accordance with the facts in so
far as these are known from practical experience, as no degree of reti-
cence was shown in, answering direct questions on all points involved:
It is generally admitted that a considerable proportion of gravid
females are found among the seals taken in the early part of each seal-
ing season. Such animals are generally fallen in with in more or less
diffuse groups, one area of sea-surface being characterized by them,
another by young males or by yearlings, a circumstance which may
explain the rather varied proportions by sex and age of seals comprised
in the catches of different vessels. After about the 20th May, or, at
latest, the 1st June, very few females with young are ever taken. The
pregnant females then begin to “bunch up,” and to travel fast toward
Behring Sea, so that in favourable sealing weather (or, in other words,
calms and light winds) the schooners ‘annot keep up with them. After
this time, the catch consists chiefly of young males or of barren females.
649. Behring ‘Sea is now usually entered by the pelagic sealers
between the 20th June and the Ist July, and in Behring Sea the same
conditions hold. The gravid females are well ahead of the sealers, who
have been working up the West Coast, and go straight to the breeding
islands. By the time the sealers reach the sea, it is practically only the
young males and barren, or young and non- br eeding, females which
remain dispersed over the sea to be taken. At a later date in the sum-
mer, a few females in milk, and, therefore, pr esumably from the breed-
ing places on the islands, are oc “casionally killed, but no large number.
This last fact is the only one which has a direct bearing, or establishes
a direct connection, between the economy of the breeding rookeries
and the hunting of legitimate pelagic sealers, as distinguished from
raiders on the islands, in Behring Sea. The killing of unweaned pups
upon the islands, together with other matters bearing on the possible
excursions of br eeding females to sea, are fully noticed in another part
of this report, which should be referred to in this connection.
650. Statements of the most contradictory kind can be quoted on the
subject of the composition of the catch made by the pelagic sealers.
Doubtless, this varies very much in different cases and in different
seasons, but a number of the statements met with are so extreme from
one point of view or the other, that they must be supposed to have
been largely coloured by interest. The single fact, already referred to,
that a certain number of the young males ‘killed upon the islands are
found to contain pellets of shot, is sufficient to show that the catch of
the pelagic sealers and Indians is not practically altogether composed
of females, as some persons would have us believe. The foregoing
paragraphs give a general statement of the case, without taking such
extreme views on either side into account. It may be added, however,
that the excessive killing of young males on the breeding islands may
probably, by changing the proportion normally existing between the
sexes, have had the result of directly increasing the number of females
found and killed at sea in late years, This point is elsewhere treated
at greater length.
168 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
651. The general conclusion to be derived from an examination of the
statements above noted is, that in proportion to the number of skins
obtained, that part of the pelagic catch made in the early part of the
Season, and to the south of the Aleutian Islands, is the most damaging
to seal life as a whole, while the skins taken after this date, whether
without or within Behring Sea, are obtained at much less proportionate
cost to seal life.
652. With reference to the composition of the catch of the pelagic
sealers, a note may be added respecting the relative amounts of those
portions of the catch made to the south and to the north of the Aleu-
tian chain, known as the “coast catch” and ‘Behring Sea catch”
respectively. ‘These may be represented in tabular form as follows:
Behring Sea
aN \ Catch
Year. Coast Catch. (Eastern and
Western).
20, 389 800
11, 921 12, 423
8, 502 11, 764
7, 676 16, 653
12, 371 15, 497
URGO SSE ee BREE: TERA AEDS RILESIEE AT Gis ely ea Oikae ie kd eb One ne eS. ON 21, 390 18, 165
BGOIS fo Fees oO fede Trot Wael Bese Meg eee) a Sel Oe 20,727 28, 888
115 653. Kvidence has been put forward as to the composition of
the catches on shore and at sea, based upon the reports of skins
as sorted in the factories in London where the skins are prepared for
the market. It is, however, to be borne in mind, that the skins arrive
at these factories classed as they were for sale, and the titles used do
not necessarily imply the actual source of origin, but rather the kind
and quality of the skin.
It is, however, asserted by the experts, that the different localities
produce somewhat different skins, which is probable. Thus it is said
that while the skins known as “ Alaska” (assumed to come from the
Pribyloff Islands) and “Copper” (assumed to come from the Com-
mander Islands) are distinguishable, in that the former have as a rule
a longer and finer fur, that yet the skins from the two sourees are often-
times identical in quality. Indeed, it would appear that in many eases
skins are classed as “ Alaska” because they have longer and finer fur,
and not because of any known place of origin. As arule, the “ Alaska”
skins have come for fifteen years past in much better order than any
others. They have been originally better skinned and better cared for
all through.
It appears that at the factory, as a matter of fact, they can chiefly
tell which are “north-west catch” skins by the obvious marks of shot
or spear, which often reduce the market value of a skin by 25 or 30 per
cent. But there is nothing to show that such skins were not taken close
to or even upon the Pribyloff Islands.
It is also easy, especially after the skins are ready prepared, to rec-
ognize the four teats of the female. But, more especially in the*Smaller
skins, the marks of sex are extremely difficult to trace. For instance,
in one parcel examined in London, which was marked “ faulty,” all the
Skins with the exception of three, were female, and most of them badly
shot-marked. But the great majority were young females, giving but
little or no evidence of having suckled any young. There was no
evidence to show whether these seals were obtained at sea or on the
rookeries by raids.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 169
The female skins were also to be distinguished by the superior fine-
ness of the fur, and by its being thinner on the “ flanks” or under part
than on the back.
(E.)—Future of the Industry.
654. Asto the probable future of pelagic sealing, which as at present
practised has not been in existence for much more than twenty years ;—
like any other industry depending on the continued existence in suita-
ble numbers of the animal upon which it is based, this may easily be
overdone. The regulations under which the slaughter of fur-seals on
the Pribyloff Islands has been carried on for the past twenty years or
more have on the average been such as to require killing there to be
pushed to and beyond the maximum figure which the seal life fr equenting
these islands could afford, without showi ing evidences of rapid decrease.
The arrangements have been, in fact, so framed as to make the lessees
of the Pribyioff Islands as far as possible the sole beneficiaries of the
entire eastern side of the North Pacific, under the belief, that by the
possession of the breeding islands it was possible to monopolize the
industry. The methods upon the islands had themselves resulted in
decrease when the growth of the independent industry of pelagic sealing
began still farther to affect seal life, and, as elsewhere shown, co-operated
in producing a decrease at a more rapid rate in late years.
655. The hypothetical question may here be put: Lf all killing should
be stopped upon the breeding islands, and the pelagic industry be left
untrammelled by regulations on the high seas, what would be the ulti-
mate effect on seal life?) Experience directly obtained with reference
to the fur-seal is here entirely wanting. The history of all the depleted
breeding places of other parts of the world clearly points to a single
cause of damage, viz., unrestricted and barbarous killing on shore upon
the breeding evounds. Analogy with the history of other maritime
industries, such as those conducted for ordinary food fishes, becomes,
however, in the case supposed, directly apposite. Employing such
analogies, it may be affirmed that so long as the industry continues to
be profitable, a greater number of vessels will each year be employed
in it; but that before long a point will be reached at which, in conse-
quence of the greater competition, the ever-increasing wariness of the
seal, and a reduction in total numbers,—the profits will diminish, unre-
munerative voyages will frequently be made, and a reaction will occur
such as to allow a renewed increase of the animal. Such an automatic
principle of regulation appears to be necessarily inherent in the seal
fishery as in other fisheries, but just what the average annual catch
might number when this particular fishery reached its level of stability,
it is of course impossible to say. It is not likely, however, that it
would show a continued decline so serious as that which has affected
the whale fishery, for this is due to special causes which are well known;
and, under the conditions which have been assumed for the fur-seal fish
ery, "the breeding places of the animal would be continuously exempted
from attack.
114 656. One of themost obvious and generally applicable methods
of controlling pelagic sealing would be the general adoption of
rules against the employment of specially destructive methods, and such
rules might be arranged by international consent as applicable to cer-
tain defined tracts of the high seas, in the manner which has been
advocated in connection with the subject of the “purse” seine in the
mackerel fishery of the Atlantic coast.* Thus, the use of vessels with
a See ‘Report of Department of Fisheries, ” Canada, 1890, p. 90, and Appendix
,p. 1.
170 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
steam power might be prevented, as well as that of rifles in shooting
the seals. Nets have scarcely been used along the eastern part of the
North Pacific in the fur-seal fishery, and it is improbable that they ean
be advantageously employed anywhere beyond the three-mile limit.
The only known case in which nets have actually as yet been employed
occurred in 1888, when it is on record that the Alaska Commercial Com-
pany fitted out two schooners, privately owned, to net seals in the
passes leading from Behring Sea through the Aleutian Islands. One
of these schooners is stated to have obtained 700 grey pups which were
sold to the Company at the rate of 2 dol. 50 ¢. per skin.* Netting, how-
ever, forms no part of legitimate pelagic sealing, and might well be
altogether prohibited.
657. The use of the shot-gun for the purpose of killing seals at sea
has now become so nearly universal, that it is doubtful whether it can
be changed without an undue interference with the now established
industry. The loss of seals thus shot is, as already shown, small, and
there is therefore no cogent reason why this practice should be discon-
tinued. All the evidence shows that the loss when seals are speared
by the Indian hunters is practically nil, but to restrict killing to spear-
ing would necessarily be to preclude all but skilled Indians from engag-
ing in it.
658. Any such regulations applied to the use of specially destructive
engines, would have the effect, under the assumed conditions, of increas-
ing the aggregate number of seals which would exist when what has
been referred to the level of stability is reached.
IV.—CoNTROL AND METHODS OF SEALING ON THE PRIBYLOFF
ISLANDS, THEIR NATURE AND RESULTS.
(A.)—WMethods employed.
659. The system adopted for the regulation and working of the Priby-
loff Islands by the United States Government, when its control had
been established, and after the irregular and excessive killing which at
first followed on the withdrawal of the Russian authorities, was sub-
stantially that which had gradually been introduced by the Russians,
as the result of their prolonged experience, but with one very important
exception. This exception related to the number of seals allowed to be
killed annually. The number was at this time suddenly and very
largely increased, being in fact more than doubled, as is elsewhere
pointed out in detail; and while the experience of many former years
showed that the Russian system, with a limited annual killing, might
be maintained with a reasonable certainty of the continued well-being
of the breeding grounds, it had in fact, according to the best available
information, resulted in a gradual and nearly steady increase in number
of seals. The much larger number permitted to be killed under the
new regulations at once removed the new control into the region of
experiment.
660. Theoretically, and apart from this question of number and other
matters incidental to the actual working of the methods employed,
these were exceedingly proper and well conceived to insure a large
continual annual output of skins from the breeding islands, always
* Parliamentary Paper [C.—6131], London, August 1890, p. 356.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. en
under the supposition that the lessees of these islands could have no
competitors in the North Pacific. It was assumed that equal or proxi-
mately equal numbers of males and females were born, that these were
subject to equal losses by death or accident, and that, in consequence
of the polygamous habits of the fur-seals, a large number of males of
any given merchantable age might be slaughtered each year without
seriously, or at all, interfering with the advantageous proportion of
males remaining for breeding purposes.
661. The existence of the breeding rookeries as distinct from the
hauling-grounds of the young males, or holluschickie, was supposed to
admit, and did in former years to a great extent admit, of these young
males being killed without disturbing the breeding animals. The young
seals thus “hauling” apart from the actual breeding grounds were sur-
rounded by natives and driven off to some convenient place,
115 where males of suitable size were clubbed to death, and from
which the rejected animals were allowed to return to the sea.
The carcasses were skinned on the killing ground, the skins salted, and
at a later date bundled in pairs and shipped, with such duplication or
checking of count as might be supposed to afford guarantees to the
agents of the Government and to the lessees that the interests of both
were fairly treated.
662. There can be no doubt that if the number permitted to be killed
had been fixed at an amount so low as to allow for exceptional and
unavoidable natural causes of interference with seal life, and if it had
been rearranged each year in conformity with the ascertained condi-
tions, killing might have been continued without general damage to the
seal life of the Pribyloff Islands, and very probably even with a con-
tinued gradual increase in numbers of seals resorting to the islands up
to some unknown maximum point. Such results might have followed,
notwithstanding the practical imperfection which clearly attached in
execution to these theoretically appropriate methods, and in spite of
the important change from natural conditions which any disturbance
in proportion of sexes involved, if the demands made in the matter of
annual take had been moderate; but when the number fixed for killing
resulted, as has been shown, in an average slaughter of over 103,000
seals, it bore so large a proportion to the entire number of animals
resorting to the islands as to lead necessarily in the long run to serious
diminution. This decrease continued, on the whole, in an increasing
ratio, being due not only to the actual number of seals slaughtered, but
also to the numbers lost in various ways incidental to the methods of
control and modus operandi on the islands, which loss, though formerly
a matter of minor importance (because counted against a large annual
surplus), in the face of the greatly decreased numbers, became a very
serious addition to the total of diminution. In short, from a transcen-
dental point of view, the methods proposed were appropriate and even
perfect, but in practical execution, and as judged by the results of a
series of years, they proved to be faulty and injurious.
663. Summing up the records as to the number of seals killed on the
Pribyloft Islands, Professor J. A. Allen writes as follows:
In this year (1822), it was ordered that young seals should be spared each year for
the purpose of keeping up thé stock. This order was so honestly enforced, that in
four years the number of seals on St. Paul’s Island increased tenfold. The number
annually taken these years was only 8,000 or 10,000, instead of 40,000 to 50,000, the
number formerly killed yearly. Subsequently, the killing was allowed to greatly
increase, which prevented any augmentation in the number of seals. In 1834, the
number allowed to be killed on St. Paul’s Island was reduced from 12,000 to 6,000.
After this date the conditions of increase were more carefully studied and more care-
1%2 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
fully regarded, so that there was a gradual numerical increase from 1835 to 1857,
when the rookeries are said to have become very nearly as large as now, the natives
believing, however, that there has been since the last- mentioned date avery gradual
but steady inc rease.*
664. From the experiences thus recorded, it appears to be very clearly
shown that in the average of years the killing of 40,000 to 50,000 seals
on St. Paul was more than this, the principal seal- bearing island, could
stand, while that practised during the later years of the Russian con-
trol scarcely fall short of the figure at which all continued increase in
number of seals would cease. Since the operations of the Alaska
Commercial Company began, the number fixed for killing on St. Paul
Island has been very much higher than any of the foregoing figures.
It was originally fixed at 75,000 for St. Paul and 25,000 for St. Geor ge
Island, but the law was changed in 1874, so that even a larger propor-
tion of the whole number might be taken on St. Paul’s.
665. Captain Bryant elsewhere writes
During the administration of this able Governor (Shisenekoff), these nurseries of
the seals had been developed from almost nothing to the condition in which they
were at the transfer of the islands to the United States. For many years they were
able to kill only a small number, but the seals gradually increased, so that they
killed as many as 40,000 in one y ear. t
666. When, therefore, following the extraordinary slaughter of 1868,
it became lawful to kill 100,000 seals each year, changes of a very
marked kind might have been expected, and, as ’ elsewhere detailed,
They soon began to be observed.
The incidental waste entailed in taking the annual quota of skins
on id Pribylotf Islands for the twenty years sof the Alaska Commercial
Company’s lease is acknowledged by the official figures to have been
slightly greater than 7 per cent. of the whole number of skins secured.
This includes skins cut in skinning, “stagey” skins of seals killed for food
when not merchantable, and a number of young unweaned pups
116 killed (itis now admitted unnecessarily) for native food. Besides
- these thus accounted for, however, there is reason to believe that
a large proportion of the seals which had been subjected to the very
severe ordeal of driving never afterwards recovered.t Again, the dis-
turbance produced by various causes incidental to the habitation of
the islands, together with that, never wholly obviated, which arose
directly from the process of driving from the vicinity of the breeding
grounds, led to various changes inimical to the favourable continuation
of seal life.
668. Such causes began to operate with much increased force when
the general reduction became so considerable, that an ever-growing
difficulty arose in collecting the fixed annual quota of skins. In addi-
tion, the inefficient guarding of the breeding islands from raids made
upon their shores by marauders, due to the absence of methods of pro-
tection and laxity of control of the natives, became serious evils.
669. Some of the more notable ill-effects which followed from the
practical working of the system of administration adopted, have already
been referred to at sufficient length, particularly in the paragraphs
(§396 et seq.) treating of changes in habits of the fur- seal, and those
outhning the general decrease in numbers resorting to the Pribyloff
Islands. A few words may now be added, in greater detail, in relation
to the evidence showing the date of the commencement of the decrease
* Monograph of North American Pinnipeds, p. 379.
tIbid., p. 389.
t See especially in this connection Elliott’s Official Report for 1890.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. ie
and its progress, and then on the defective methods, viewed as such,
which have been largely responsible for this result.
670. Statements have been made to the effect that during the lease of
the Alaska Commercial Company, frauds were perpetrated in regard to
the number of skins taken on the islands and counted for taxation. No
direct evidence of this seems to have been produced, but as the official
counting of the skins both on the islands and in San Francisco was done
in bundles, each of which was supposed to consist of two skins, it is
obvious that but for observed diiference of size or weight, three or even
four skins might have been bundled and corded together and counted
as two. Speaking of the mode of enumerating the skins, Elliott says:
“The list of the Treasury Agent on the islands, when the skins are first
shipped [the shipment being made, as elsewhere stated, in bundles}, is
the official indorsement of the Company’s catch for the year; but when
the slip reaches San Francisco, these skins are all counted over anew
[but again in bundles] by another staff of Government Agents.”*
671. Referring to the weight of the skins and bundles, he elsewhere
writes: “The average weight of a two-year-old skin is 54 lbs.; of a
three-year-old skin, 7 lbs.; and of a four-year-old skin, 12 lbs.; so that
as the major portion of the catch is two- or three-year-olds, these bundles
of two skins each have an average weight of from 12 to 15 lbs. In this
shape they go into the hold of the Company’s steamer at St. Paul, and
are counted out from it at San Francisco.”t
672. An independent observer, Lieutenant Maynard, in his report
written about the same time, says: “Finally, they are prepared for
shipment by rolling them into compact bundles, two skins each, which
are secured with stout lashings. The largest of these bundles weigh
64 Ibs., but the average weight is but 22 lbs. The smallest skins, those
taken from seals two years old, weigh about 7 Ibs. each, and the largest,
from seals six years old, about 30 Ibs.”
673. The weights given by Lieutenant Maynard for the skins of seals
of various ages are in error, but it would appear that in thus writing,
these weights had been deduced from that of the bundles which he had
seen, the weight of which certainly appears to require some explanation.
(B.)\—Decrease in Number of Seals, its Origin and Progress.
674. With regard to the first of these questions, that relating to the
decrease of seal life on the Pribyloff Islands, what has already been
stated respecting the available estimates of number of seals at differ-
ent dates will have shown that it is hopeless to obtain any satisfactory
and connected idea of the state of the breeding islands from these
alone. It is, in fact, largely from collateral evidence, from facts inci-
dentally placed on record, of which the meaning now becomes plain,
from statements obtained by ourselves in response to personal inquiry
and other such sources, that a general history of the condition of the
Pribyloff Islands may be built up.
675. A gentleman long associated with the Company whose lease of
the Pribyloff Islands has lately terminated, explained the matter
117 ~—s to us in brief terms, by saying that this Company—“ Had a good
thing” in the lease: ‘‘They got the cream of the fur-seal business,
and kept the decrease dark.” Without in any way indorsing this
statement, or attributing any such settled policy to the Company, it is
* United States’ Census Report, p. 169.
Tibide psi.
${ House of Representatives, 44th Congress, Ist Session, Ex. Doc. No. 48, p. 9.
174 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
certain that the published reports did not by any means convey a full
and correct statement of the condition of affairs and progress of events
on the breeding islands.
676. It is agreed on all hands that the Pribyloff Islands were in excel-
lent condition when finally ceded by Russia. The fact that the exces-
sive slaughter of 1868 did not lead to an immediate collapse in seal life
upon them is alone sufficient to show this. Ina talk had with six of the
oldest and most experienced natives on St. Paul Island, all affirmed that
the islands had never since been so well stocked with seals. Entering
into details, they explained that the North-east Point was then com-
pletely occupied by seals both to the north and south of Hutchinson Hill.
Tolstoi was in like manner entirely covered, while the Reef Peninsula
was wholly occupied by cows and seacatchie as a breeding rookery, and
the killable seals found room to haul out only at its inner end, on the
sands. At this time, 3,000 to 4,000 holluschickie might easily be col-
lected in a single drive from Middle Hill, South-west Bay, or the haul-
ing grounds nearest to the Reef Point.
677. Mr. Daniel Webster, who has been almost continuously on the
Pribyloff Islands since 1868, most of the time upon St. Paul Island, and
whose statements bore evidence of entire honesty, gave evidence fully
corroborative of that above quoted. He expressed himself as confident
that the seals were in greater abundance in 1868 than they had ever
been since. In that year of unrestricted slaughter, some 75,000 young
males were killed on North-east Point by the single Company with
which he was connected, and without exhausting the supply. In 1874
and 1875, from 35,000 to 36,000 skins were taken each year from the
same rookery without undue difficulty. According to Mr. Fowler, who
has been familiar with St. Paul Island since 1879, from 29,000 to 18,000
skins were taken from North-east Point in that and some subsequent
years. By the official figures, it is shown that 15,076 skins were obtained
here in 1889, and 5,007 in 1890.* Mr. Fowler expressed the belief that
in 1891, if killing had not been restricted, at least double that number
might have been secured at North-east Point.
678. Returning, however, to the earlier years of the Alaska Commer-
cial Company’s lease, it is found that in 1874 Lieutenant Maynard, as
the result of his inquiries in that year, expressed the belief, though not
without reservation, that the number of seals resorting to the islands
had not decreased between 1872 and that time.* Captain Bryant notes
a slight improvement in this year as contrasted with the unfavourable
conditions observed in 1873.+ It was not till 1875, however, that the
annual slaughter required to produce 100,000 marketable skins was
first officially reported as being too great for the well-being of seal life.
In this year Captain Bryant, as the result of seven years’ experience
of the islands, wrote on this matter in some detail; but, without quot-
ing his observations at length, it may be sufficient to cite the following,
which expresses his main conclusions :
When the lease was put in practical operation in 1871, there was a very large
excess of breeding males on hand; since then this surplus has been diminished by the
dying out of old seals faster than there has been younger seals allowed to escape and
grow up to fill their places, until the present stock is insufficient to meet the neces-
sities of the increasing number of breeding females.
679. Of the following year, Bryant says that ‘the decrease in num-
ber of breeding males may be considered to have reached its minimum
*House of Representatives, Ex. Doc. No. 43, 44th Congress, 1st Session.
t‘*Monograph of North American Pinnipeds.”
¢“*Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska,’ House of Representatives, Ex. Doc. No. 83, 44th
Con gress, 2nd Session, pp. 176 and 177.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. Was
[sic] in 1876. In 1877, the last season I spent on the islands, there was
an evident increase in "the numbers of this class.”* In the same yea
before a Committee of Congress on the Alaska Commercial Compank,
he repeats his statement as to the too heavy rate of killing, saying: “I
think that the number of 100,000 was a little more than ought to have
been begun with. I think if we had begun at 85,000, there would have
been no necessity for diminishing. On the other hand, { think that
within two years from now it might be increased.” t
680. In 1876, a lengthened inquiry was made by a Committee of Con-
gress in regard to the operations of, and certain charges made against,
the Alaska Commercial Company. This Committee does not seem to
have had clearly before it the fact, that the actual number of seals
killed under the lease considerably exceeded 100,000, but the view
arrived at as to the killing of 100,000 seals annually, included in
118 the official report of the investigation is plainly expressed as fol-
lows: “It is certain that to kill more than this number (100,000)
would tend to a rapid decrease of the annual supply, and end in the
extinction of the animals on these islands long before the expiration of
the twenty years that the lease had to run.”
681. From 1877 to 1887, such allusions as can, be found to the general
condition of the seals upon the Pribyloff Isiands in contemporary reports
are almost uniformly of an optimistic character; and a perusal of these
reports might well lead to the belief that a continued and satisfactory
increase in number was in progress, which, if truly representing the
facts, should have brought the rookeries in this period of eleven years
into a state of unexampled prosperity, though the facts were in reality
far different.
682. The only reference to any decline met with in these Reports—
and that is an incidental one—is due to Assistant Treasury Agent
Wardman, who shows that there was a decrease in the number of “kill-
able” seals on St. George Island in 1882, as compared with 1881. His
statement serves to prove, at least, that the practical limit of killables
on St. George had been reached in 1882, at a number of 21,000 or 22,000,
and that the balance of a quota of 25,000 aecorded to that island had
to be made up on St. Paul.§
683. Though not to be found in the contemporary Reports, the true
history of these years can.now be very clearly understood, in a general
way, as the result of more recent investigations and of our own inquiries.
684. Mr. Elliotts ‘‘ Monograph” of the Pribyloff Islands is based on
examinations carried out in 1872-74, and his statements of fact clearly
show that nearly half the breeding rookeries and hauwing grounds were
at this period, and had been for at least ten years previously, entirely
exempt from “driving,” and therefore constituted reserves of seal life,
and especially of young male seals. He writes:
As the matters stand to-day, 100,000 seals alone on St. Paul can be taken and
skinned in less than forty working days, within a radius of 14 miles from the village,
and from the salt-house on North-east Point; Il hence the driving, with the exception of
two experimental drives which I w itnessed in 1872, has never ‘been made from longer
distances than Tolstoi to the eastward [westward}, Lukannon to the northw ard,
and Zoltoi to the southward@f the killing grounds at St. Paul village. q
* Quoted by Allen, “Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,” p. 399,
tHouse of Representatives, 44th Congress, 1st Session, Report No. 623, p. 99.
t House of Representatives, 44th Congress, 1st Session, Report No. 623, 05 able
§ “‘Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska,” House of Re presentatives, 50th Congress, 22nd
Session, Report No. 3883, p. 39.
||The italics are not employed in the original,
q United States Census Report, p. 72.
176 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Whatever may have been the detailed history of the seal interests on
St. Paul in the intervening years, the fact that in 1879 it became neces-
sary for the first time to extend the area of driving so as to include
Zapadnie and Polavina rookeries, or the hauling grounds adjacent to
them, shows conclusively that a great change for the worse had already
occurred at that date. This cannot be explained by any theory of the
mere reduction in number of redundant young males, for even if it be
admitted that seals of this class were to be found in excessive numbers
after the slaughter of 1868 (which is not probable), the normal ratio of
such males resulting from any logically permissible killing should have
been reached long before this time.
685. Many years ago, under the Russian régime, a small native set-
tlement was situated near the rookery ground of Polavina, and seals
were regularly killed there. Traces of this old settlement may still
be seen, but it has probably been abandoned since the time of the
“ Zapooska,” or intermission of killing which took effect in 1835, at
which time most of the ‘‘natives” were removed from the Pribyloff
Islands. From information gained on the islands, it appears that in or
about the year 1879 the salt-house now employed at Polavina was first
built, and that driving has been annually practised both from Polavina
and Gapadnie ever since, but with much increasing persistency in later
years,
686. The time at which the decrease in killable seals began to make
itself actually apparent in the acknowledged difficulty in obtaining the
annual quota of skins is thus pretty definitely fixed by circumstances,
but other corroborative information with a similar meaning is now not
wanting. Colonel J. Murray, Assistant Treasury Agent, in his Report
for 1890, writes: ‘The whole truth must, nevertheless, be told, and that
is, that the seals have been steadily decreasing since 1880. ”* The older
and more experienced natives, conversed with on St. Paul Island, after
describing the great abundance of seals at the time the United States
first took possession of the islands, stated that the decrease became
very marked in 1882 or 1883; arriving at these dates by counting back
from the actual year.
119 687. One accessory cause of the decrease so plainly shown at
this particular time, is perhaps to be traced in the great mor-
tality of young, due to unfavourable weather in 1876, which would
naturally be making itself apparent on the hauling grounds in 1879 or
1880. (§ 817.)
688. It is thus made evident that the decrease of young males, con-
stituting the killable class, had reached such proportions as to ham-
per the lessees in taking their permitted number of skins, and to dis-
quiet the natives, before the pelagic sealing industry had attained any
considerable development, and some years before it could, under any
valid hypothesis, be supposed to be accountable for any such result.
Although three or four schooners were tentatively engaged in pelagic
sealing off the coast of British Columbia in the years 1879-83, till the
year 1883 the fleet did not include nine schooners in all, and the first
of these schooners did not enter Behring Sea yntil 1884.
689. The United States sealing fleet, in the corresponding years, was
of similar small dimensions, and, though one-vessel is known to have
sealed in Behring Sea as early as 1881, the aggregate pelagic catch was,
comparatively speaking, so small in these years, that it may safely be
left out of consideration.
* Senate, Ex. Doc. No. 49, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, p. Ty
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 177
690. Of these persons questioned by us, almost all who possessed a
familiarity with the Pribyloff Islands, including several who had _ pre-
viously been connected with the Alaska Commercial Company, were,
in 1891, found ready to admit that in 1885 and 1886 the decrease in the
number of seals to be found on the islands, and particularly that of
killable seals, had become very striking. It was not, however, till
1888, that the existing state of affairs found some recognition in the
official reports, when Dr. H. H. McIntyre, then agent for the lessees on
the islands, admitted to the Congressional Committee on the Iur-seal
Fisheries of Alaska that the seals had decreased since 1882, and that
it had become difficult to obtain the full quota of marketable skins,
adding: ‘‘ There are at present, in my opinion, too few bull seals to
keep the rookeries up to their best condition.” *
691. In the years 1886, 1887, and 1888, the annual pelagic catch in Beh-
ring Sea probably did not exceed 17,000, being thus less than one-fifth of
the slaughter upon the islands; and even if it be admitted, for the sake
of argument, that the killing of this number at sea was more injurious
than that of a like number on shore, such alleged injurious effect could
searcely have begun to make itself apparent on the rookeries for three
or four years after it took place.
692. The conditions 6btaining on the Pribyloft Islands in the last
three years have been so fully referred to in the present report, and in
various reports made by the officers in charge, that they scarcely
require detailed recapitulation in this particular connection. In 1889,
Mr. C. J. Goff reported an alarming shrinkage in the rookeries and
hauling grounds; and though the full quota was obtained, this was
only done by lengthening the killing season to the end of July, and
greatly lowering the standard size of seals killed. In 1890, being the
first year of the North American Commercial Company’s lease of the
islands, the number to be killed, in view doubtless of Mr. Goft’s previous
report, which has not been published, was reduced to 60,000. But
killing was stopped by Mr. Goff, in charge of the islands, at the usual
date of the 20th July, at a time when, in consequence of the scarcity
of killable seals, only about one-third of that number had been secured.
In the same year Mr. Elliott re-examined the islands, and though his
report has likewise remained unpublished, a summary of his conelu-
sions has appeared, from which citations have already been made. He
states clearly that the injury to the rookeries, he now believes, ‘set in
from the beginning, twenty years ago, under the present system.”t
693. In 1891, the result of our own examinations, as well as the evi-
dence collected by us from all available sources, lead us to believe that
some at least of the breeding rookeries are in a better condition than in
the previous year, while in none of them is any further deterioration
noticeable—a circumstance which fully justifies the action taken in
restricting the catch in 1890, and clearly indicates that the rookeries,
however reduced in numbers, possess an abundance of recuperative
energy.
(C).—Standard Weights of Skins taken.
694, Closely connected with the foregoing notes, and of interest in
showing that the required number of young male seals has not been
killed of late years upon these islands without great detriment to
120 their seal life, is the fact that the standard of weight of skins has
* House of Representatives, 50th Congress, 2nd Session, Report No. 3883, pp. 116
to 119.
t Parliamentary Paper [C.—6368], London, 1891, p. 57.
BS, PT VI 12
178 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
been from time to time lowered so as to enable younger animals to be
taken, and that even many yearlings were included in 1889,
695. In 1890, the Government tax was suddenly raised from 2 dol. 25
c. to 10 dol. 25 ¢. the skin under a new lease, and it became at once no
longer profitable to take very smalls kins. It was in part in consequence
of this, and in part as a direct resalt of the complete sweep of the
killable seals made in 1889, the last year of the expired lease, that the
extremely unfavourable showing in 1890 was due. Continuous killing
had left very few young seals to come forward to properly killable ages
in 1890; and thus Mr. Goff notes that, of the seals returning to the
islands in that year (besides those actually on the breeding rookeries),
nearly all were the young of the preceding year.
696. This lowering of the standard weight of skins appears to have
commenced as early as 1883; for, in 1888, Dr. H. H. McIntyre says: “In
1883 the sizes decreased, and have cousti intly decreased ever since.
Last year they sent an urgent appeal to take larger skins, as the sizes
were running down; but we were unable to respond, and during the
present year the eatch averages still smaller in size.”*
697. From information obtained from trustworthy sources on the
Pribyloft Islands, it appears that the reduction, in the standard weight
of accepted skins was well known and recognized there in 1886 and
1887; and that from 1858, inclusive, many 5-lb. skins were taken, and
all 2-, , d-, 4-, and 5-year-old seals w ere accounted marke table; while in
1889 about 40,000 very small skins were taken to complete the quota,
averaging pr obably about 4 lbs., and in some cases running down even
to 34 Ibs.
698. Thus, arriving at this conclusion from the known weight of skins
of seals of various ages, it appears that, in 1889, even yearling seals
were killed in large numbers. One noteworthy result of such killing
requires special mention, ¢@. e., that in consequence of the recognized
great difficulty (amounting in most cases to absolute impossibility) of
distinguishing virgin females from young males of corresponding size,
it is quite cer ‘tain that large numbers of females as well as males must
have fallen under the club in these years of reduced standards, and
that the protection supposed to be afforded to females by the methods
employed on the islands was, in consequence, necessarily rendered
largely fictitious.
699. Reterring specially to the catch of 1890, Mr. Goff writes: ‘There
have been no 2-year-olds of an average size turned aw: uy this Season ;
they were all immediately clubbed to “swell the season’s catch.” f
700. Thus, even excluding the extreme case afforded by the year 1889,
it is apparent that all male. seals except yearlings and full-grown sea.
catchie, together with many virgin females, hav e, On the breeding
islands, been considered fair game by the sealers for several years past,
and, with this circumstance in mind, the cause of the dearth of males
upon the rookeries is not far to seek, Not content with taking the
young males at the year, or within the period of two years in which the
skins are most valuable, the killing was carried back into the more
numerous ranks of the very young animals upon which the supply of
suitable skins for future years depended, while, at the same time, other
males, which had escaped previous slaughter, and become too old to
attord first-class skins, were not allowed to take their places upon the
breeding grounds, but were also killed to inerease the catch.
*<«Wur-seal Fisheries of ‘Alaska,’ House of Representatives, 5 Both ¢ Congress, 2nd
Session, Report No. 38838, p. 118.
tSenate, dix. Doc. No, 49, 51st Congress, 2nd Session. v. 5.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. ais)
701. The facts above cited afford a connected train of evidence, show-
ing the gradual reduction and deterioration in condition of seal- life upon
the Pribyloff Islands, ese apart from the estimates of the total
number of seals made at various times, and as we believe of a more
trustworthy character a these.
702. As to the comparative conditions in the years 1890 or 1891 with
that of the early years of the United States’ control of the i islands, no
accurate information can be given. The result of our investigations and
study of the subject in all its bearings leads us, however, to believe that
the aggregate numbers given for these earlier years have been greatly
in excess of the facts, and that while the latest estimates published may
not be too small, the total amount of shrinkage has beef very greatly
exaggerated by means of comparisons instituted be ‘tween these and the
excessive estimates of earlier times. Because of this want of trust-
worthiness in the first estimates, therefore, any present estimates ot a
general character, however carefully made, and though interesting in
themselves, cannot be accepted as criteria of value in relation to the
question of the actual amount of decrease.
703. The ease with which fictitious reports may be built up on imper-
fect or ill-considered ex parte evidence is illustrated by a remark made
by Elliott, who writes: “I noticed in this connection a very queer
121 similarity between the sealers on St. Paul and our farmers at
home; they, just as the season opens, invariably prophesy a bad
year for se: als and a scant supply; then, when the season closes, they
will gravely tell you that there never w ere so many seals on the island
before. I was greeted in this manner by the agents of the Company
and the Government in 1872, again in 1875, and again in 1874, I did
not get up to the grounds in 1876 soon enough to hear the usual spring
cr ooking of disaster; ; but arrived, however, in time to hear the regular
cry of, ‘Never was so many seals ‘here before !?” *
(D.)—Driving of Seals.
704, One of the most important points connected with the method of
taking fur-seals on the Pribyloff Islands, is that of the driving from the
Tar ious hauling grounds to the killing erounds. However safeguarded
or regulated, the. method of driving fur. seals overland for considerable
distances must beboth a cruel and destructive one. Active and graceful
as a fish in the water, the fur-seal is at best clumsy and awkw ard in its
movements on land, and though it is surprising to note at how good a
pace it can, when forced to do so, travel among the rocks or over the
sand, it is also quite evident that this is done at the expense only of
eres ul effort and much vital activity, as well as at serious risk of physical
injury. A short shuffling run is suceeeded by a period of rest, and when
undisturbed, all movements on shore are carried out with the utmost
deliberation and frequent stoppages. But when a herd of seals half
crazed with fright, is driven for a distance of a mile or more from the
hauling ground to some killing place, already pestilential with the
decaying carcasses of seals previously killed, it unavoidably, and how-
ever frequently the animals may beallowed to rest, entails much suffering.
When the weather is at all warm, or when the seals are pressed in
driving, individuals frequently drop out and die of exhaustion, others
again are smothered by the crowding together of the frighte ned herd,
and it is not infrequent to find some severely wounded by bites ruth.
lessly inflicted by their companions when ina high state of nervous
—
* United States Consus Report, p. 165.
180 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
tension. It appears also, from information obtained on this subject,
that in warm weather seals, during a drive, occasionally pass into a
state of violent spasmodic activity, which is aimlessly maintained till
death ensues. Under such circumstances, drives have not infrequently
had to be abandoned.
705. On St. Paul Island, the longest drives now practised are those
from Polavina to the vicinity of the salt-house near Rocky Point, and
from Tolstoi to the village killing grounds. These are about equal in
length, and each not much less than two miles. On St. George, the
longest drives are from the Great Eastern Rookery and from Starry
Arteel Rookery to the village killing grounds, each being about three
miles in length, the time oceupied in driving being from four to six
hours, according to the weather. Under the Russian régime much
longer drives were made, and in the curtailment of these a very con-
siderable improvement has been effected, but the essentially injurious
features of the drive remain the same.
706. On Behring Island, of the Commander group, the drives are
short, the longest being about one and a half miles, from the South
Rookery. On Copper Island, on the contrary, the drives generally
extend across the island, and are from three to four miles long, very
rough, and crossing one or more intervening steep ridges. These
drives must be much more trying to the seals than any now made
upon the Pribyloff Islands, and are, in fact, only rendered possible by
extreme caution on the part of the drivers, and by the expenditure of
much time.
707. If it were possible to drive only those seals which it is intended
to kill, little exception could be taken to the method of driving in the
absence of any better method, but the mingling of seals of varied ages
upon the hauling grounds from which the drives are taken, even under
the original and more favourable conditions of former years, renders it
necessary to drive to the killing place many seals either too young or
too old to be killed. It is sometimes possible to “cut out” from the
drives many of these unnecessary individuals en route, and great care
is exercised in this respect on the Commander Islands, thongh little
appears to have been practised on the Pribyloff Islands.
708. It admits of no dispute that a very considerable impairment of
the vital energy of seals thus driven, and eventually turned away from
the killing grounds, occurs, altogether apart from the certainty that a
proportion of such seals receive actual physical injuries of one kind or
another, but this appeared to have been recognized on the Pribylofft
Islands only within the past two or three years. The circumstance
which has called particular attention to this source of injury to
122 seal life is the greatly increased proportion of ineligible seals
which have now to be driven up in company with the diminish-
ing quota of “killables.” It is unnecessary to quote authorities at
length on this subject, but a single citation from Mr. Goft’s Report of
1890 will be sufficient to show its general character. Mr. Goff writes:
We opened the season by a drive from Reef rookery, and turned away over 83} per
cent. when we should have turned away about 15 per cent. of the seals driven, and
we closed the season by turning away 86 per cent., a fact which proves to every
impartial mind that we were redrivi ing the yearlings, and considering the number
of skins obtained, that it was impossible to secure the number allowed. by the lease,
that we were merely torturing the young seals, injuring the future life and vitality
of the breeding rookeries, to the detriment of the lessees, natives and Government.”
709. In other words, many of the seals turned from the killing ground
on one occasion, return eventually to the hauling- grounds, and may
* Senate, Ex. Doe. No. 49, 5 5ist Congress, ond ‘Session, p. 4.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 181
thus be driven and redriven throughout the entire killing season, if
they do not meanwhile succumb under the strain.
710. Owing to the restriction imposed on the killing of seals in 1891,
we were ourselves able to witness the effect of two small drives only,
one on St. George, the other on St. Paul. Both these drives were made
from the grounds nearest to the village killing places, and were there-
fore short. The weather was favourably cool, and the actual driving
from the rookeries to the vicinity of the killing ground was accomplished
with all requisite care and deliberation. Notwithstanding this, the seals
were in both cases evidently very much exhausted and completely wit-
less from fear. The animals let go from the killing grounds at St. George
set out, when released, in small groups towards the shore, not far off,
but from weakness were unable to go more than a few yards at a time;
while some of them, notwithstanding their terror, were unable to keep
up with the rest, and simply lay helpless upon the ground. On draw-
ing the attention of one of the gentlemen superintending ¢ the killing to
this, he remarked that it was nothing unusual, that, in fact, the “hot
infrequently remained thus in the immediate Vicinity of the killing
ground for several days before recovering.
711. Much the same observations were made in the case of a drive
on St. Paul Isiand, but it was noticed here that 100 or 200 of those set
free, after slowly making their way for 500 or 600 feet, remained in an
exhausted condition upon the grassy bank overlooking the northern
end of Zoltoi sands, and, on the evening of the following day, many of
them were still lying together at the same place without having made
any effort to reach the sea, which was not over 200 feet distant.
712. Incidental proof of the disastrous effects of driving may be seen
along any of the routes ordinarily taken in the significant frequency of
skeletons and bones around each rough and rocky place that has to be
passed over in the course of the drive. It is of course difficult, if not
impossible, to say with certainty in individual cases, to what extent this
ordeal of driving may prove permanently detrimental to the animals
driven. It may, however, be worth noting that Veniaminoy, as long
ago as 1842, quoted the natives as authority for the statement that the
seals thus spared ‘‘are truly of little use for breeding, lving about as if
outeasts or disfranchised.” *
713. Elliott, in his published summary of his investigation on the
islands in 1890, gives various reasons for arriving at a similar belief, and
sums these up as follows:
Therefore, it now appears plain to me that these young fur-seals which may happen
to survive this terrible strain of seven years of driving overland arerendered by this
act of driving wholly worthless for br eeding purposes; they never go to the breed-
ing grounds and take up stations there, being wholly demoralized in spirit and in
body. With this knowledge, then, the full effect of the drivi ing becomes apparent,
and that result of slowly but surely robbing the rookeries of a full and sustained
supply of fresh young male blood demanded ‘by nature imperatively for their support
up to the standard of full expansion. t
Captain Lavender, Assistant Treasury Agent, in his Report for the
same year, and speaking particularly of St. George Island, adopts a sim-
ilar view on the matter, saying:
All the male seals driven should be killed, as it is my opinion that not over one-
half ever go back upon the rookeries again. {
714. Mr. Elliott, in the publication which has just been quoted, further
* Translation by Elliott in United States Census Report, p. 141.
+ Parliamentary Paper [C.—6368], June 1891, p. 57.
t Ibid., p 21.
182 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
summarizes his ideas as to the causes of the present reduced condition
of Pribyloff Island rookeries in the two following paragraphs:
1. From over-driving without heeding its warning first begun in 1879, dropped
then until 1882, then suddenly renewed again with increased energy from year to
year, until the end is abruptly reached this season of 1890.
123 2. From the shooting of fur-seals (chiefly females) in the open waters of the
North Pacifie Ocean and Behring Sea begun as a business in 1886, and con-
tinued to date.*
715. It will be observed, however, that, even according to this state=
ment, the overdriving began, in consequence of marked diminution,
some seven years before it is alleged that pelagic sealing “began as a
business.”
716. As already indicated, all the evils incident to ‘driving’ in any
form became greatly intensified when, with a diminished number of kill-
able seals, the attempt is still continued to obtain a large yearly num-
ber of skins. This occurs not only because of the driving and redriving
above referred to, but also in consequence of the fact, that under such
circumstances the remaining killables lie very close to the breeding
rookeries, so that it is no longer possible to make drives without dis-
turbing the rookeries themselves. Thus, it has occurred that, in late
years, considerable and increasing numbers of breeding females have
been driven to the killing grounds with the killables, though when
recognized there in the process of selecting for killing, they have been
released. The probable special effect of such treatment of females, as
well as the fact that in the disturbances caused upon the breeding rook-
eries, a certain number of the young are almost certain to be killed,
have been already noted.
717. Speaking of the years 1872-74, and in connection with the driv-
ing of seals, even at that time, Elliott makes the following remarks:
‘It is quite impossible, however, to get them all of one age without an
extraordinary amount of stir and bustle, which the Aleuts do not like
to precipitate; hence the drive will be found to consist usually of a bare
majority of three- and four-year-olds, the rest being two-year-olds prin-
cipally, and a very few, at wide intervals, five-year-olds, the yearling
seldom ever getting mixed up.” t
718. Referring particularly to his experience in 1869, Captain Bryant
writes: “At the close of this period the great body of yearling seals
arrive. These, mixing with the younger class of males, spread over
the uplands and greatly increase the proportion of prime skins, but
also greatly increase the difficulty of killing properly. Up to this time,
there having been no females with the seals driven up for killing, it was
only necessary to distinguish ages; this the difference in size enables
them to do very easily. Now, however, nearly one-half are females, and
the slight difference between these and the younger males renders it
necessary for the head man to see every seal killed, and only a strong
interest in the preservation of the stock can insure the proper care.” {
719. The meaning of these remarks and their bearing on the possi-
bility of restricting the killing on the islands to males, becomes clear
when it is remembered that the external genital organs of the male do
not become distinctly obvious till about the third year of its age,§ and
particularly so when it is remembered that even as long.ago as 1872-74
*Parliamentary Paper [C.—6368], June 1891, p. 56.
tUnited States Census Report, p. 72.
+“ Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool.,” vol. ii, Part I, p. 105.
§ ‘‘Fishery Industries of the United States,” vol. i, p. 108.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 183
the “major portion of the catch” consisted of two-and three-year-old
seals,* while at other times even yearlings have been killed.
720. In addition to the injury caused by the physical strain of driv-
ing, its probable effect on the mental organization of a naturally timid
and somewhat intelligent animal like the fur-seal must be great. The
killing grounds themselves are always strewn with the carcasses of for-
mer victims in various stages of decomposition, and even in the small
drive witnessed by us on St. George Island, the various “pods” of seals,
including both those turned away and those killed, were actually driven
over and among numbers of putrid bodies, by which the whole atmos-
phere in the vicinity was infected. It is believed, in fact, that this
special feature of the driving is responsible to a large extent for the
increasing disinclination of the seals to remain upon the breeding
islands, a new but not unnatural tendency specially noticed and reported
on in regard to the Commander Islands, and evidently still further oper-
ative on the Pribyloff Islands.
721. Reviewing, then, the subject of driving as a whole, and without
laying stress on the more extreme statements which have been made as
to its deleterious effects, it is quite evident that even if a small meas-
ure of the injury referred to this cause actually happens, the proportion
of loss of seals to the whole number of skins obtained on the Pribyloft
Islands, due to this one cause, must very considerably add to the waste
of about 7 per cent., which is admitted by the official figures. The
aggregate loss incur red is thus the result of various causes, which
together involve the killing of many seals which ought not to be killed,
and it is evident that the methods of driving and killing on the Pr iby.
loff Islands, as now practised, are susceptible of very ereat improve-
ment.
124 (li.)—Protection of Rookeries from Disturbance.
722, Reverting to the general question of the management of the
seal industry of “the Priby loft Islands, it is conceded by every one that
the most important single matter is the safeguarding of the breeding
rookeries from disturbance of all kinds. Generally speaking, the sys-
tem adopted on the islands has this end in view, but in addition to the
specific disturbance caused in the ways already mentioned, other and
uncalled for effects of the same kind have been and are produced in
consequence of a certain want of discipline and vigilance. Chief among
these is the raiding upon the shores of the islands, which might and
Should be stopped by efficient protection. This is referred to at greater
length below. Some of the means adopted in the government and
preservation of the Commander Islands have already been alluded to,
and nothing is more obvious to any one comparing the conditions on
the Pribyloft and Commander Islands than the greater efficiency of the
general control of the latter. This is particularly notable in the supe-
rior discipline maintained among the natives, who, as a direct corollary
of their favoured position as participants in the proceeds of the islands,
are understood to be entirely at the service and under the orders of the
Superintendent on the islands. The appearance of vessels in the offing
is reported to head-quarters with the utmost promptitude, as noted in
the case of our own arrival both on Copper and Behring Islands. The
Seals are more carefully assorted before being driven to the killing
grounds than on the Pribyloff Islands, and the killing of young seals
*United States Census Report, j06 Tle
184 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
for native food has been prohibited now for seventeen years. A fine
of 100 roubles is exacted in the case of each female accidentally killed,
with other such similar precautions. The methods taken to prevent
the disturbance of seals upon the rookeries by smoke have already
been alluded to.
(F'.)— Native Interests on the Islands.
723. The condition of the Aleuts of the Pribyloff Islands has undoubt-
edly been much improved by their connection with the sealing industry,
but it is difficult to see on what grounds the special advantages of a
material kind afforded to these particular people as distinguished from
others of the same race, and partly at the expense of interference with
the rights of hunting of those inhabiting the Aleutian Islands, can be
advanced as a valid argument in favour of the perpetuation of a com-
mercial monopoly of fur-sealing. The Aleuts on the Pribyloff Islands
are not natives of these islands in any true sense, but were brought
thither by the Russians for their own convenience, and to afford the
labour necessary for sealing. The actual circumstances of their exist-
ence on the islands are unfavourable to their vitality, as evidenced by
the fact that the death rate is higher than the birth rate, so that if
additions had not been made from time to time from the Aleutian
Islands, in conformity with the requirements of the lessees, the number
now remaining would be insignificant. These people are, moreover,
now in the majority of cases half-breeds, with often a notable pre-
ponderance of “white blood.” As it is, the entire population of the
Pribyloff Islands, according to the Census of 1890, amounts to but 303
persons, and therefore the question of their disposition and maintenance
cannot be regarded as a very embarrassing one, or one which should be
allowed to enter seriously into discussions as to the means appropriate
for the preservation of the fur-seal, or into the important questions
connected therewith.
724. It is also clear that the so-called natives of the islands, though
under ordinary circumstances provided for in certain respects by the
lessees according to legal arrangement, have in past times not always
been among the first objects of their solicitude. Many allegations as
to the ill-treatment of the natives are to be found in the Congressional
Reports on the Alaska Commercial Company and on the Fur-seal Fish-
eries of Alaska, while a general indictment of the treatment of the
natives by the Company by A. P. Swineford, Governor of Alaska, is
made so lately as in his Report for the year 1887.*
725. A single instance, to which it happened that our attention was
drawn, may be cited for the purpose of showing that the natives, even
in recent years, received no more than strictly “commercial” treat-
ment. This refers to the allowance of coal made to them. The fuel
to be obtained on the islands is confined to small quantities of drift-
wood, supplemented by seal blubber, or oil from seals or sea-lions, and
naturally proves insuflicient for the requirements of a long and inclem-
ent winter. It was therefore stipulated in the original lease that
sixty cords of fire-wood should be furnished annually for the natives
on the two islands. For this, 60 tons of coal was afterwards substi-
tuted, and the annual allowance for St. Paul Island was fixed at
125 40tons. The supply thus furnished, being at the rate of about
1 ton per family each year, was naturally, and even with such
* Page 31, et seq.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 185
small local additions as could be made, insufficient, and when exhausted
the people often found it necessary to purchase more coal from the
Company, of which the price was fixed at 30 dollars (61.) per ton!
726. This particular abuse has fortunately been remedied under the
present lease, for in 1890 the amount of coal for St. Paul was increased
to 50 tons, and in 1891 the Government stipulated that 100 tons should
be provided for the same island, where there are now only thirty-eight
families. The more liberal provision thus made, however, tends to show
very clearly how insufficient that previously accorded actually was.
(G.)— Raids.
727. In forming an adequate estimate of the number of seals killed
from time to time in the North Pacific Ovean, and especially on the
Pribyloft Islands, it isnecessary to take into consideration the numbers
taken by “raids,” an absolutely illegal form of seal killing, which has
for years past been in active operation.
728. This form of sealing has distinct historical connection with the
original seal hunting of the South Seas in the latter years of the last
and the earlier years of the present centuries. There seal hunting is
and was conducted entirely by the crews of vessels landed on various
islands or reefs where seals were to be found, the seals being shot or
clubbed on shore, and the skins shipped away in the vessels.
729. Such a form of sealing was obviously the most destructive that
could be devised. The seals are easily herded together on shore by
very few men, and can be driven slowly inland, and there guarded until,
if need be, every single one of those thus herded is killed. But in the
process of herding them together on the beaches thousands upon thou-
sands of seals around are and must be stampeded, and in their wild
rush to the sea not only do they do themselves much physical injury,
but they overrun the smaller seals, and especially the pups, that chance
to lie in their path. We have ourselves seen the evil after-effects of
such rushes in the corpses of pups lying thick along such tracks. More-
over, in this form of killing itis usually the plan to pay no regard what-
ever to sex, age, or condition, and certainly females are not spared.
730. In addition to this, the raiding schooners make an abundant
catch along the rookery fronts, where thousands of seals, and especially
of females in milk, habitually disport themselves, and even play around
any passing boat. The consequent shooting by the raiders greatly dis-
turbs, scares, and scatters the females and males on the breeding,
rookeries close by. There thus seems to be no limit to the numbers of
females and other seals that may be easily taken or destroyed by schoon-
ers cruizing close in shore.
731. Raiding is a purely piratical and illegal form of sealing when
carried on along shores over which Governments have extended their
sovereignty, and particularly where regulations have been established
for the preservation of the fur-seal.
732. At the present time, this illegal and destructive practice is car-
ried on in various parts of the South Seas—for instance, in a paper by
Mr. T. R. Chapman on “The Outlying Islands south of New Zealand,”
contained in the transactions of the New Zealand Institute for 1890,
though it is stated that the fur-seal is now very scarce on these islands;
the operations of seal poachers are referred to in connection with the
Auckland Islands, Campbell Island, Antipodes Island, and the Bounty
Islands. The name “poacher” is here applied to sealers killing on the
islands, in contravention of the laws of New Zealand. Some of the
186 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
men thus referred to come from New Zealand itself, but the only vessel
specifically alluded to in 1889 is the “Sarah A. Hunt,” a seal-poacher
from America (p. 512),
733. Again, in the Straits of Magellan, the British Vice-Consul at
Sandy Point reports in April 1889, that the United States schooners
pay no attention to the interdiction on sealing enacted by the Chilean
Government. Indeed, the frequent presence of sealing-vessels, most of
them hailing from ports in the New England States of North America,
is a matter of much concern to the different Governments now endeav-
ouring to preserve the seals in these waters.
734. There has been wholesale and most destructive raiding on Rob-
ben Island, and other islands in the Okotsk and Japanese Seas; and
there have been persistent and more or less successful raids made on
the rookeries both of the Commander and Pribyloff groups.
735. In recent times, in the North Pacific Ocean, the greatest instance
of the revival of this form of seal hunting occurred during the inter-
val of the transference of the Pribyloff Islands from Russian to
126 American control. Some vessels equipped for the purpose at
once visited these celebrated islands and landed sealing parties.
Various Companies of United States sealers occupied the islands in
1868, chief among them bands of Connecticut sealers, all of whom
entered into armed combination to drive off the sealers under Pfliigel,
who had come up from the Sandwich Islands to raid. The general
result was that at least 75,000 skins were secured in 1867, 242,000 in
1868, and 87,000 in 1869, or a total of more than 400,000 skins in these
three years.
736. Itis necessary for our present purpose to review the details only
of raids made or attempted on the Pribyloff Islands since the United
States Government leased these islands to the Alaska Commercial
Company, and this Company took formal possession under established
Regulations in 1870. .
737. The existing records are irregular, often insufficient, and fre-
quently consist of mere allusions ov indirect testimony. It is, there-
fore, probable that but a small proportion of the whole number of raids
have actually been recorded, but the notices, such as they are, amply
indicate what has been doing. In September 1870, the Secretary of the
Treasury gave written authority to the Company to use fire-arms in
protecting the rookeries against marauders.
738. Between 1871 and 18380 ay eral actual raids were reported, one
of the earliest being one by the ‘‘ Cygnet,” of San Francisco, caught
on the 30th August, 1874; shooting seals close to Otter Island, and which
raided the rookeries at Zapadnie, “St. George Island, on the 1st Septem-
ber; 1874, and again in 1875. In July 1875, the “San Diego” was
seized off St. Paul Island with 1,660 skins taken on Otter Island. On
the 21st June, 1876, the ““Cygnet” and the “Ocean Spray” raided the
same rookery.
739. In 1877, the “Industry” was reported as hovering around St.
Paul Island, and a raid was made on Otter Island.
739.* In the same year, the revenue-eruizer ‘ Corwin” was instructed
specially to look after the seal fisheries. In the Report of her Captain
for 1879 occur the following remarks:
In 1877, our first year in these waters, there was a vessel (the schooner ‘‘ Industry’’)
about the islands late in September, which, without doubt, intended to take seals.
She touched at St. George under the plea that she was short of water, but hearing
that the ‘‘ Rush” was still about the islands, left very abruptly without waiting to
watership. I would respectfully state that, in my opinion, it is only necessary that a
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 187
revenue-vessel should be known to be in these waters during the season for the pro-
tection of the islands, that it is not necessary to locate an officer and men from the
vessel on Otter Island, and that now—there being two special agents during the sea-
son on each island—an occasional visit by them in their boat from St. Paul to Otter
Island would be sufficient.
740. In 1879, the revenue-cruizer “ Rush” received her orders “ to
eruize in the waters of Alaska and among the islands of the Aleutian
Archipelago . . . , with a view to protecting the seal-fisheries and
sea-otter hunting grounds.”
The Captain reported “that in June 1879 he landed 3 tons of coal on
Otter Island, and left Lieutenant Wyckoff and two men on St. Paul
with instructions to proceed to Otter Island as soon as the Company
could furnish him with two men and a whale-boat, this same arrange-
ment having been made every year.”
He added that in the end of September (4879), “Lieutenant Wyckoff
reports that quite a number of seal would haul ashore at Otter Island
during the summer. They were not inclined to stop there, but probably
would if there was no one living on the island. He had seen four or
five pups which were born there, but later in the season quite a number
of young cows came there with the male seals.”
741. In 1880, the Captain of the revenue-cruizer “Corwin” reports
that he visited St. Paul on the 18th September:
Special Agent H.G. Otis informed me that he had visited Otter Island several
times during the summer, and that no vessels nor unauthorized parties had been
seen any where in the vicinity of the seal islands.
742. In 1880, Mr. Webster, according to his own statement to us,
found clubs, hauling-hooks, and dead seals on the Great Eastern
Rookery, St. George Island, all left there by raiders.
743. In 1880, the Captain of the revenue cruizer “Corwin” reported
to the Secretary of the Treasury his seizure of the schooner ‘ Leo” in
the Arctic for whiskey selling to the Eskimo, adding, ‘There were also
found on board the ‘Leo’ several DORSONS ute cats five were natives
of Kodiak, employed, probably, for the purpose of taking seals around
the seal islands in the fall.”
744, In 1881, the Captain of the revenue-cruizer “ Corwin” reported
that on the 23rd May, at St. Paul Island, ‘Colonel H.G. Otis, the Special
Treasury Agent in charge, ‘ame on board, and, after a consul-
12 tation with ‘him, it was decided unnecessary to detail an officer
for duty on Otter Island, as it was believed that the force on
St. Paul Island would be ample to protect both islands.”
745. In the same report the Captain states that, on the 19th June,
1881, he overhauled the schooner “ Flying Mist” at St. Michael’s, and
found 25 gallons of whiskey on board, ‘ also complete outfit for taking
Seals,s).. 1. .;; Seal. clubs for killing them, and salt for preserving
their skins, and was apparently on a predatory cruize around the seal
islands later in the season.”
746. The Captain of the “Corwin” also reports that the Special Treas-
ury Agent on St. Paul wrote to him that, ‘on the night of the 8th June
(1881) a schooner, supposed from her suspicious movements to be on a
predatory mission in these waters, was sighted off the east side of the
island bearing in a northerly direction, and next mor ning at 2 o’clock
she was discov ered by the look-out at East Point standing close in
shore. Later in the morning, after the men on shore commenced mov-
ing about, she stood out to sea.” On this the Captain remarks: “As
parties on board the ‘ Flying Mist’ acknowledged to having been in the
vicinity of the seal islands, she was undoubtedly the vessel referred to
188 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
by Colonel Otis, and our suspicions as to her intentions were confirmed.
She had probably been frightened off by seeing men on shore, and
would return later in the season when the nights were longer, and
endeavour to take seals during the night, and stand off shore before
daylight.”. Mr. Wardman reports that he noted raids on St. George
Island in 1881, the first being on the 2nd September: “A gap was
created in the rookery which was not filled that year.” Mr. C. A. Wil-
liams reported that vessels hunted often around Otter Island, where,
in 1881, sixty carcasses were found at one time.
747. Special Agent D. B. Taylor states that vessels have been poach-
ing around the islands for years, landing under cover of fog, and that
no protection is afforded against their poaching right on the rookeries.
He adds that, in 1881, the Company was powerless to protect the seals
against marauders; but that, if a harbour were built and a steam-
launch stationed at each island, the protection would be ample. He
states that vessels visit the islands, and kill in all 10,000 to 15,000 seals
each year.* ‘Treasury Agent Gliddon, there from 1882-85, reports that
the trouble consists in the marauding which takes place every moon-
light night.
748. In 1884, the “Alexander” was captured by the Treasury Agent
George Wardman off Starry Arteel rookery, St. George Island, but he
reported “he had to release her because he eould not hold her, being
unable to navigate, and there being no harbour at St. George, permitted
of no other course under the circumstances.”
In the same year the “Adele” was captured and sent to San Fran-
cisco.
749. The Captain of the “Corwin” sending in, for 1885, his “ general
report of operations of vessel for the protection of the seal fisheries
and sea-otter grounds,” states:
Mr. Tingle, the Government Special Agent, with a representative of the Alaska
Commercial Company, came on board (11th September, 1885), and both stated that
during the absence of the ‘*Corwin” in the Arctic, vessels had been cruizing in
sight of the islands for the purpose of killing seals; but anticipating the ‘‘ Cor-
win’s” return and the heavy weather incident to the lateness of the season, none
had been seen within three weeks of that time. These gentlemen estimated that
about 15,000 seals had been killed by the marauding vessels.
750. The Captain proceeds:
In previous Reports I have called the attention of the Department to the impor-
tance of greater protection to seal life in Alaskan waters, and especially in the vicinity
of the Pribyloff Islands. Last year (1884) the schooner ‘‘Adele” was seized by an
officer connected with this vessel for unlawfully killing seals, and delivered by him
to the United States authorities at San Francisco. Instead of being prosecuted,
as provided by section 1956 of the Revised Statutes, she was subsequently released
on technical informalities.
The same vessel has pursued her illegal occupation during the past summer, and
her release from justice has very generally led to the belief that the seizure of the
“Adele” was an act unwarranted by law.
Other vessels had previously been seized for the same offence, but in no instance
has punishment been inflicted. The Department can readily see what the result
will be if this state of affairs be allowed to continue.
During the year, quite a number of vessels have raided Alaskan waters for seal
and other fur-bearing animals.
* * * * * * *
128 Rumours are current here that the American Consul at Victoria has informed
people that they are not prohibited by law from sealing in Alaska or other
waters, provided they keep more than three leagues from the shore . . . . ; all
in direct violation of the Regulations, &c.
The Report for 1885 concludes with the urgent recommendation “that
a revenue-cutter be sent to cruize in the vicinity of the Pribyloff Islands
—
* Tlouse of Representatives Report, No. 3883, 50th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 58.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. — / 189
and Aleutian group during the sealing season. One vessel cannot
protect the islands and visit the Arctic Ocean besides . . . . While
the cutter is absent in the Arctic, much damage can be done by maraud-
ing vessels to the seal islands.”
751. In 1885, Mr. Webster, the Company’s agent, with the aid of
Lieutenant Lutze and his two men left as guard on Otter Island, cap-
tured three schooners, one the “ Adele.” Inthe same year, Mr. Webster
found that the schooners left boats ashore, and the men actually camped
in Pirate’s Cove, St. George Island, for the purpose of taking seals along
the shore. Many vessels were seen frequently hovering around the
islands.
752. In 1886, Starry Arteel rookery was raided, and many hundred
seals taken. Mr. Morgan found the carcasses of 800 female seals on
the shore, as well as the cargo-hooks used for hauling them. The raiders
actually camped on the beach and were seen there by the natives, but
it was not discovered to what vessel they belonged.
Mr. Tingle, before the House of Representatives Committee, stated
that the “San Diego” captured by the “Corwin” in 1886 had on board
175 skins of seals that had been clubbed, and some skins of pups, show-
ing that a raid had been made on St. George/Island. We also have
sworn testimony that in 1886 and 1887 the ‘ Lookout” raided on the
islands. The “‘C. 8. Fowler” is also mentioned as a known raider.
753. In 1887, Mr. Webster saw as many as from four to eight schooners
in sight, and hovering around from 35 to 6 miles off. ‘Many a night
has he walked round with his rifle, and seen their boats out shooting
seal. One night in 1887, in a thick fog, boats were shooting away so
close to shore as to scare all the seals on the beach.”
At St. Paul Island on the 18th, 21st, and 25th July, a schooner was
seen shooting seals close along the shore off the North-east rookery.
On the 28th a uly a schooner appeared close to Otter Island, the crew
ashore killing seals. She proved to be the “ Angel Dolly,” afterwar ds
captured, because her Captain and one of the crew were accidentally
wounded. On the 4th August a steam schooner was reported off North-
east Point, and was fired at by the watchmen. She was captured by
the revenue-cutter ‘‘ Rush,” and proved to be the “* Kate Anna.”
In August the Starry Arteel rookery was raided, but nothing was
known of the occurrence until some time afterwards. Mr. Webster
found all the unmistakable signs of what had been done, either at night
or in a fog, but unknown to the authorities.
Mr. Tingle, Treasury Agent on St. Paul Island in 1887, reported a
schooner lying off, the Reef Rookery killing seals, and she was repre-
sented to have taken altogether 4,300 seals. In his report for 1887, he
strongly urged that a 20-ton steam-yacht, armed with one gun, should
be provided to chase and board the schooners sealing along the islands.
He writes: “While the ‘Rush’ was busy taking care of marauders
round St. George, those schooners were killing seals near St. Paul,”
being frequently in sight, but beyond the reach of the Treasury Agent.
754. In 1888, many vessels were seen hovering around the islands.
One schooner anchored in broad daylight in 8. W. Bay, St. Paul Island,
and boldly sent several boats ashore.
755. In 1889 there are several records, especially around St. George
Island, of schooners coming along shore, and of strange men being
seen on the beaches in September and October. On the 21st Nov ember,
a schooner, supposed to be the “‘ Angel Dolly,” anchored half.a-mile
from the shore, aud sent four men ashore who killed seals. On the 22nd
November at Zapadnie, St. George, the authorities discovered that
190 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
three separate landings had been made, and found two clubs, seven
dead female seals and one bull wounded with buckshot. In the autumn
the “‘ Allie Algar” raided on St. George, and procured more than 800
skins. A report in the ‘* New York Herald” states that certain mem-
bers of a schooner’s crew boasted that in this year fifteen men had in
five hours of one night killed 1,000 seals on St. George. Practical
sealers, giving evidence under oath, testified that to their certain knowl-
edge in the year 1889 and 1890 raids were made on the islands by the
“George RK. White,” the “ Daniel Webster,” the ‘‘ Mollie Adams,” and
the “ Adele.”
756. In 1890, off the North-east rookery, St. Paul Island, on the 15th
and 16th June, there were two schooners hovering, with boats out.
From the 1st tothe 4th July the whaling barque “Lydia” was cruizing
along close in shore. Mr. Tingle, the Company’s agent, saw a
129 _ boat in a fog sealing within 200 yards of the beach; he fired at it
with his rifle; an unseen vessel at once began to blow her fog-
horn, the understood signal of recall to all boats out.
On the 28th August a schooner anchored close to North-east Point.
Next day the revenue-cruizer “Rush” boarded her. She proved to be
the “ Kate Anna,” but had noskins on board. Tor the next eight days
a schooner was reported off the same rookery, anchoring close in, lower-
ing her boats, and continually shooting seals within half-a-mile of the
shore. Nothing appears to have been done to stop her, although
Colonel Murray afterwards reported that there were any number of dead
pups found at a later date along the beach. In August the schooner
“Adele” was boarded and captured, all her crew being ashore raiding.
She was brought into the bay.
The schooner “C. D. Rand” was taken by the cruizer “ Rush,” in
North-east Bay. Her Scotch captain, declaring himself to be a mem-
ber of the Salvation Army, protested he was not and could not be seal-
ing, because it was Sunday. The only evidence given by the watch-
men on shore was that they “had seen a boat.” The schooner was
released.
In September 1890 a large white schooner sailed into North-east
rookery to land a party. The Aleut watchmen fired four shots from
Martini-Henry’s across her bow. She returned about 100 shots and
sailed away.
757. In the same year, on St. George Island, numerous raids or at-
tempts were reported. Four distinct attempts were made at Zapadnie
rookery. The “Helen Blum” and “Unga” failed to secure any seals.
The “ Flying Dutchman” [“Adele”] secured many skins, and it is actu-
ally reported that she would have made a great haul but that her crew
at the critical moment obtained.access to liquor. One schooner was
surprised in the act, and departed leaving 190 females killed on the
beach, the skins of which were taken and salted by Mr. Webster, of
behalf of the Company, as we were informed by Captain Lavender.
On the 17th September no less than three schooners were in the offing,
and one attempted a landing, but retired when fired at by the watch-
men. In the same year, it was also reported that one of the district
salt-houses had been broken open by the crew of a vessel, and all the
salted skins carried off.
758. Colonel Murray, the cautious Treasury Agent on St. George,
informed us that he had examined the traces remaining of many raids
that had taken place, unknown to the authorities. On one occasion he
had seen the fresh blood-stained tracks down which the carcasses had
been hauled to the boats; on another, he and his companion, on a
‘
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. ror
fairly dark night, had come across thirteen dead seals, clubbed the
night before. They had fired twenty-five shots to warn off the raiders,
and had noticed, incidentally, that these shots did not in the least dis-
turb the seals around.
759. In 1891, we found all the resident officials and natives persistent
in their complaints of raids, and their reports of schooners hovering
around the shores with intent to raid, and of that being reported espe-
cially on foggy days. When we first arrived at St. Paul Island, on the
morning of Monday, the 27th July, the Treasury Agent, Colonel Murray,
came off at once in a boat, and besought us to proceed without delay to
the North-east rookery, as shots had been heard there repeatedly on the
previous day, and at night close along the shore. Major Williams, the
Chief Treasury Agent, and Mr. Redpath, the manager for the Com-
pany, had driven over 12 miles to the North-east rookery to see whit
could be done. When we went to the Company’s house, Mr. Tingle,
the general superintendent of the Company, was perpetually working
the telephone to North-east rookery and reporting that schooners were
there. The vivid impression produced on us at the time was that what-
ever the actual amount of raiding in progress, both Government and
Company were absolutely without proper means to stop it. On the
29th July we saw a brigantine sail boldly right past the settlement, but
there were no means at hand either to detain or even to identify her.
In the late autumn the revenue-cruizer “ Bear” remained near the
islands for thirty-six days, and then proceeded to coal at Ounalaska;
the day after she left the islands a steam sloop raided the Great Hastern
rookery on St. George Island.
760. Corroborative evidence has been afforded in 1891 by the news-
paper correspondents who visited Behring Sea. According to their
accounts, Captain Alexander Carlson, of San Irancisco, had been a
per sistent raider since 1884. Captaim Hansen, in the “Flying Dutch-
man” [ “Adele,” ] perpetrated many raids, until his vessel was wrecked
last year. In 1891 he wished to obtain a coasting clearance for the
‘¢ Borealis,” but his openly-avowed intention to raid Ted the Collector of
Customs at Victoria to refuse him a clearance to Behring Sea, and he
went off to Okotsk Sea. Captain Downs, of the “ Hattie Gage,” made
a sworn affidavit that his mate Adams, who superseded him when he
was forcibly put ashore on the Shumagin Islands, was proceeding to make
raids on the Pribyloff Islands, and that in 1890 the Captain of
130 ~=—s the “Hattie Gage” had been relieved of the command because
he refused to make raids ashore. Captain Reilly, of the “Otto,”
said that if he had his owner’s permission he would willingly make
raids.
761. It will thus be seen that raiding on the Pribyloff Islands has
been carried on persistently at least since 1868, and that from that date
the authorities have known of the raids, and from the earliest time
Hens demanded precautions in prevention.
62. The evils of raiding are very great. Itis by far the most de-
baknve form of sealing, combining all the disadvantages and none of
the advantages of the other forms. The killing is chietly of breeding
females, as the raiders cannot penetrate far enough inland to obtain the
young bachelors or immature female seals. Thus, the skins they obtain
are those of females which are either still with pup or are suckling their
young. Moreover, the process implies disturbance of the breeding
rookeries; the sc aring of the seals during their breeding time, male,
female, and young; and the stampeding of whole rookeries, whereby,
without doubt, there ensues that great killing of helpless pups which
e have already reported we observed in certain rookeries,
192 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
763. We ourselves noticed the great ease with which, under present
arrangements, raids might be successfully carried out, and nothing what-
ever be known to the residents at the moment, while after discovery
depended merely on accident. Even on the rookeries immediately under
the settlements no look-out is kept. For instance, we steamed into the
anchorage of the settlement at St. Paul, close past the Zapadnie and
Tolstoi rookeries, one bright moonlight night (14th September), and
moved early the next morning by daylight round the Gorbotch and Reef
rookeries to the other landing, without our presence becoming known
in any way at the settlement. On the outlying rookeries no watch what-
ever is present, except at North-east Point on St. Paul Island and Zapad-
nie on St. George Island. All the other rookeries on both islands are,
as a rule, absolutely without any watch or guard. On North-east and
Zapadnie rookeries the guard consists of two or three native Aleuts
who have rifles, but are instructed not to fire at men. Moreover, we are
by no means assured that bribery by money or drink has not been actu-
ally practised over some of these distant guards.
Evidence was afforded of numerous instances of the signs of recent
raids being discovered, although as to the actual occurrence nothing
whatever was known to those in authority at the time, and we are not
at all surprised to see that in recent years the reports that schooners
are hovering off the island, anchoring close in, and sending boats ashore,
are rapidly growing in frequency. As the prospects of a heavy catch
ashore or along the rookery fronts are great, so is the temptation great,
especially as chances of detection are few and innocuous, and chances
of capture most remote under the present system.
In short, under present regulations and arrangements, there is no
difficulty or danger whatever to vessels raiding along shore any night,
or in any of the frequent fogs at several of the best rookeries, except
when a revenue-cruizer chances to be close by, an occasional occurrence
well known to every marauding schooner. Moreover, the United States
cruizers never interfere with ‘“‘ whalers,” some of which undoubtedly, at
all events, report the movements of the cruizers, forming as it were both
watch-houses and store-houses for the raiders, even when they do not
themselves engage in actual raiding.
764. It is, perhaps, needless to reassert that this form of taking seals
is entirely illegitimate, and although it is a very severe and disastrous
drain on seal life, it is, nevertheless, one for which the national govern-
ment and the administration are entirely and solely responsible. Thus,
the British men-of-war which in 1891 entered Behring Sea for the pur-
pose of assisting in stopping sealing at sea were expressly and properly
precluded from taking any step within the ordinary jurisdictional limits
around coasts and islands.
765. It may be pointed out that in no case yet has it been shown or
proved that any British vessel ever engaged in raiding on the Priby-
loff Islands.
766. There is no valid reason whatever why the local authorities
should not be provided with ample means for stopping raids. It should
be remembered also that the San Francisco sealers have asserted that
the possibility of raiding, a most profitable operation, encourages seal-
ers of a certain class to fit out sealing-schooners and enter Behring Sea,
and if the local authorities made raiding the great risk that it should
be, they wouid take one practical step towards reducing the number
of vessels which engage in this illegitimate and most destructive
methods of sealing.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 193
767. While we were visiting the Commander Islands in 1891, we paid
special attention to the means adopted for preventing raids. The Rus-
sian authorities acknowledged that the danger was great. At one
time, sixteen Cossack soldiers were stationed on each island authorized
to fire on all raiders, and at the present time this force consists of
thirty-six armed native watchmen under four Cossacks. The
131 Company’s trading steamer was specially authorized to seize
schooners when she had the proper Government officials on
board, and now a gun-boat is detailed to cruize round the islands during
the sealing season. We found the system of watching and reporting
by the Aleuts to be in admirable order. When we first arrived, we
found even the mastheads of the “ Porpoise” and the “ Danube” had
been reported as having been seen above the fog on the other side of
the island, and on Copper Island our presence in a bay at one end of
the island had been at once reported by special messenger to the set-
tlement seventeen miles distant.
768. Among measures to this end most frequently advocated is that
of having a revenue-cruizer permanently stationed at the Pribyloff
Islands throughout the months of June, July, August, and September.
But we found, in 1891, that the revenue-cruizers were often far distant
from the seal islands, perhaps in Ilinliuk Harbour, waiting for mails or
coals, or away cruizing around Nunivak or St. M atthew Island, or on
duty at St. Michael’s or other distant points. We also noticed that, in
the frequent fogs and the dark loom of the land, schooners can very
easily elude even the sharpest look-out from seaward. In our opinion,
the most effectual, as well as the most economical, method of guarding
against raids would be to have an armed police force with details per-
manently on guard near each rookery, and with specific orders to fire
on all persons landing or taking seals. The rookeries are limited in
number, and moderately well defined in area, and could easily be thus
defended with effect.
769. We would also point out that, in so far as disturbance of seals
is concerned, it would be well if greater restriction was placed on the
number of persons allowed to visit the rookeries and outlying islands.
We found that Walrus Island was regarded practically as a shooting
resort for all Government officials and all officers of Government ships.
Again, when on the 4th August we went in a steam-launch from St.
Paul anchorage quietly to note whether there were any seals on Otter
Island a revenue-cruizer happened to come in, and while we were pro-
ceeding dead-slow along the shore carefully looking for seals she landed
a boat’s crew, and the officers at once began with shot-guns and revol-
vers shooting at the foxes and sea-fowl on shore. This appears to be a
common practice in all years, and is quite sufficient of itself to scare all
seals from these particular islands. We might here also mention that
the day before we paid our first visit to the North-east R ookery (on the
5th August), American officers had been driving up and shooting sea-
lions there for scientific purposes.
770. In regard to the practical effect of these raids on the total catch
of seals, it would appear that, from the annual recorded totals of the
American catch landed from schooners, very material deductions must
be made and transferred to the annual total catch on the Pribyloft
Islands as being the result of operations on and around the rookeries
on the Pribyloff Islands, and forming, therefore, properly speaking, no
part of the pelagic catch. It is not possible, owing to the scantiness
of records kept on the islands, to estimate precisely the total numbers
of seals thus killed. It is certain, however, that raids constitute avery
material drain on the seal life of the Pribyloff Islands, probably
BS, PT VI——13
194 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS,
amounting in some years to many thousand seals; that the practice
involves the barbarous slaughter of very large numbers of females and
pups of immature growth; and that it is an evil for which the remedy
is extremely simple and easy of application, consisting merely of the
most rudimentary police arrangements for insuring the execution of
the local laws.
V.—NUMBER OF FUR-SEALS KILLED UPON THE PRIBYLOFF
ISLANDS.
771. While the foregoing account of the methods of control and the
manner in which seal killing has been and is conducted on the Priby-
loff Islands shows that the official returns cannot absolutely represent
the whole annual slaughter, these returns are of great interest for the
purpose of instituting general comparisons as between the amount of
the killing in various years, and particularly in their bearing on the
fact of the unprecedented character of the draft which has been continu-
ously made on the seal life of the islands since they passed under the
control of the United States, which has already been referred to at
length. Much care has been given to the compilation of the subjoined
table, which, it will be remarked, does not represent either the number
of accepted skins actually got in each year or the shipments of such
skins actually made, but is intended to show, as far as the returns
admit, the whole number of seals killed according to the official count.
The unrecorded causes of loss and waste would, of course, add con-
siderably to the figures actually given:
132 Table showing the Number of Fur-seals killed on the Pribyloff Islands in each year,
from 1817 to 1891.
Number of | Number of Number of | Number of
Year. Seals killed. | Pups killed. SED Seals killed. | Pups killed.
ASI Teoseteccsctectceee 60, 188 8, 585
TSIGE en seen ess cece 59, 856 23, 550
[STO Met note e seas 52, 225 21, 082
SOON SSeeet Sore eeeee 50, 220 31, 810
EPA e aS gm acon cons soc 44, 995 32, 000
1Q90) ene eee 36, 469 21, 590
SS ese leistete a alone ait ates ales ees 29, 873 29, 699
Ge) Wee Ey ee a ees 25, 400 34, 294
TSP ee eee eee 30, 100 25, 0002
TSDGE Pc eeeeee corer eee 23.250 11 7 cindes || 1804--------2ee ooo 26, 000%
ASD. Sve ae. eee eee 19, 700 UUCON) Tyiss sada socenosoos 40, 000?
PSOB! cee ae eee ecence 23, 228 DUPE: ISG ieme etases Saeeee 42, 000?
QD OMA Se ARE 20, 811 TSG Mees cee Sie eee 75, 000
ASSES Ae Sans Pee 18, 034 ARGS eh eee ae A 242, 000*
USsieee asses eects 16, 034 ISGOY Stee ese ieee 87, 000
TEBE BEA Tae ee ee ee 16, 446 TSTOL ences ee een eee 23,773
TSE EEE Sogn ase es 16, 412 SGM Dae N os ctiae 97, 002
Tic By ie dpe Lane BO 15, 751 137 Oe ee Ee 101, 698
TORS Ce eee a wise cee ose 6, 580 Weioeerens ct c eee ete 101, 555
LSSGccacce lence see 6, 590 VO ease en aisieie sees 107, 932
USB Tee eee eeceeee 6, 802 aie aa mney ee aS 101, 249
USS RG Ee Ieee me a 6, 000* DT Oise metre Tes sae 89, 478
[SOR Me a Aseueee see 6, 000* ASTI see cee cee 77,956 || Average
TTR ie RE 8, 000* ass CURE eee tans 101, 394 annual
Gye Spee sescscescnse 8, 000* WO aseccoacesspoo5> 106, 908 | killing of
SADE aes 10, 370 TS80 eee ees 100, 634 abou t
pt Sy iSacucasoeacddecs 11, 240 Ist ees SoocceNooooboCd 101, 734 4,600 pups
CVE SUP REE TNE EGE SBE 11, 924 ASOT eh aces eee 101, 736 not in-
(SUG ees ace ass eeee 13, 637 1QSe2. Vase 77, 063 cluded.
Te GiS 2 eee eres = rea 15, 070 ISSA to ONS mare 101, 013
LSA Aenean are oe 17, 703 SESE eee eres 101, 509
QA Que ee. 2k 14, 650 [SSO eh tee 100, 772
[S40 - SERRE Pees 21, 450 [SST Se ee! 100, 795
6, 770 1SSRs Taree as SRLS 100, 450
6, 564 1SG0e ee ese h ee 100, 135
6, 725 S908 SMe ee re sea 20,995 | Not ineclud-
18, 035 ing pups.
1654 4 t SCO a Re ae 26, 146 TSO eae BES: 12, 071
* Approximate, probably 270,000 if St. George Island be included.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 195
Total Shipments of Skins (by periods) made by the Russian American Company and the
succeeding Alaska Commercial Company.
Includes some skins from the Commander Islands and elsewhere— Skins.
Russian-American Company (and Antecedent United American Com-
pany), 1799 to 1821 (both inclusive), 23 years...--.......-<--.-.... 1, 232, 374
(Elliott, Census Report, p. 70.)
Russian-American Company (second period), 1822 to 1841 (both inclu-
BEVO) POOR CATS saa nent aisete = a atnee os seine eisimiseisn cccince GS owas ees 458, 502
(Bancroft, p. 563, from Techminoff; Elliott, Census Report, p. 70.)
Russian-American Company (third period), 1842 to 1861 (both inclu-
BLVE) HA0KVCATS 15 si-.a0 Sy eeloein 2 oS tAS sate staiclo ee Soot WSs uele selesttie sites, 5 338, 600
(Bancroft, p. 582, from Techminoft.)
Pribyloff Islands alone—
Interregnum (1862 to 1867), being years between last term of Russian-
American Company and period of United States control] (about)... 242, 294
(See Table of annual killing.)
Inviscsitherepwere!takentabowba-s- 1-2 -\s-cccisecee sess sae sce ee 240, 000
(Elliott, Census Report, p. 70.)
nie SS uheremwerewaKken avOUbesessesccmaciassses eeminentes alee siaane 87, 000
(Elliott, Census Report, p. 70.)
Alaska Commercial Co ke 1870 to 1889 (both inclusive), 20 years. 1, 840, 364
(Parliamentary Paper [C. 6368], p. 45.)
otalesl(Iostod soon (Glsvearsy)reriesacassetcsie mae ciscisete a'elcicere arte 439, 134
Average annual Shipment ol slime se cee sete ce ee wo toate 48, 782
133 Sources of Information Utilized in the above Tables.
772. 1786. Shelikoff (quoted by Bancroft, vol. xxxiii, p. 192) states
that 40,000 skins were secured in the first year of hunting.
773. 1787 to 1806. Taking Resanoff’s estimate of total killing of seals
on Pribyloff Islands to 1806 at 1 000,000, the annual killing during & this
period seems to have averaged ‘about 50, 000, though known to “have
been irregular from year to year.
774, 1807 to 1816. In 1817 Veniaminov’s account of number of seals
killed on Pribyloff Islands begins. No exact data have been found for
the years between 1806 and that date, but from the figures quoted in
Bancroft’s History (vol. xxxili, p. 418) from Materialui Istor Russ, a
rough approximation may be arrived at of annual killings in Behring
Sea from 1745 to 1822, a period extending from the beginning of sealing
for seventy-six years. The total number of skins obtained in this
period was, according to the above figures, 2,324,364. Deducting from
this Veniaminov’s fieures for seals killed on the Pribyloft Islands from
1817 to 1822 (both inclusive), the number remaining for the years 1745
to 1816 (both inclusive) is 2,056,880, or an average of 28,970 per annum.
This of course includes skins taken on the Commander Islands, with
some obtained from natives in trade elsewhere. It also includes the
years 1745 to 1785 antecedent to the discovery of the Pribyloff Islands,
during which it is known that more than 93,000 fur-seal skins were
obtained, chiefly from the Commander Islands (Bancroft, pp. 111-191).
It, however, does not include seals killed for food on the Pribyloff
Islands, and of which the skins were not kept. It thus appears proba-
ble that, allowing the differences in opposite senses to offset each other,
the total average annual killing on the Pribyloff Islands from 1807 to
1816 (both inclusive) was not far from 30,000.
Another approximate value for the killings in these years may be
obtained from Techminoff’s figures, which are official, and are quoted
by Elliott.
Techminoff gives the total shipments for the years 1798 to 1821 (both
)QAy Oo
inclusive) as 1,232,574.* Elliott states that about 5,000 of this amount
* Bancroft, however, gives the figures for 1799 to 1821 (both inclusiy e) as 1,767,340
(p. 418), and no explanation has been found of this discrepancy.
196 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
each year came from the Commander Islands. Deducting these and
also the skins accounted for by Veniaminov for 1817 to 1821 (both inclu-
sive), the average annual product in skins from the #’ribyloff Islands is
found to be 44,468. The period thus accounted for includes only nine
years antecedent to the period beginning with 1807, which it is wished
to bridge. It is probably nearer the fact for these years than the fore-
going estimate, with which it, however, agrees fairly well. Italso tallies
well with the earlier years of Veniaminovy’s table. Techminoft’s figures
do not include seals killed for food or otherwise of which the skins were
not kept, but it is scarcely probable, even including these, that the aver-
age annual killing on the Pribyloff Islands for the years in question
reached 50,000. It may reasonably be assumed to have been between
45,000 and 50,000, or, say, 47,500. As in the years before 1807, the
number killed from year to year is, however, known to have been
irregular.
775. 1817 to 1837. The figures for these years are Veniaminov’s, as
ascertained by Mr. Elliott from an inspection of Shisenekoff’s journal,
and includes pups in the numbers given for 1835-36. It may, therefore,
probably be assumed that pups are included throughout.
776. 1838 to 1860. The figures for these years are taken from the
Correspondence relating to Fur-seal Fisheries, printed in Washington
in 1890.
777. 1861. Bancroft’s total for years 1842-61 (both inclusive) is 338,600.
The total for years 1842-60 (both inclusive) is 308,901. This being
deducted from total for 1842-61 gives the number of seals taken in 1861.
778. 1862. Elliott (p.165) gives the total catch for 1842-62 (both inelu-
sive) as 372,894. Baneroft’s total for 1842-61, 338,600, being deducted
from this sum gives the number of seals taken in 1862.
779. 1862 to 1867. Both inclusive, being years of interregnum be-
tween last term of Russian American Company and United States
control of Pribyloff Islands, have been filled hypothetically by Elliott,
who explains that, guided by information obtained from the natives, he
has proportioned the number of skins in the salt-houses on the islands
in 1867 (40,000 to 48,000) back to the latest figures given by Techminoff
(1861). The figures for these years are therefore far from satisfactory.
A more complete examination of the subject has enabled moderately
exact figures to be obtained from 1861 and 1862, as explained above,
while Bryant gives the number for 1867 as 75,000 (Allen, ‘“‘ Monograph
of North America Pinnepedia,” p. 389); but for the years 1863 to 1866
Elliott’s approximate estimates must still be taken. It is to be
134 presumed that these figures represent only marketable skins, not
including pup skins and other rejected skins. As confirmatory
of the approximate correctness of these estimates, Dall may be quoted.
Writing in 1868 (Alaska and its Resources, p. 496), he says that of late
years the Russians had not been allowed to take more than 50,000
annually. Bryant, quoted by Allen, referring to this same period, says
that for many previous years the Russians took but few seals, but the
number has increased, so that in one year 40,000 were taken. (Mono-
graph of North America Pinnepedia, p. 389.)
7380. 1868 and 1869, The figures for these years are those given in
Elliott’s Census Report, p. 70, and are doubtless the most trustworthy
that can be procured.
781. 1870. The figure for this year includes pups, 4,000, and a large
number of rejected skins. (Ex. Doc. No. 83, 44th Congress, 1st Session,
p. 63.)
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 197
1871 to 1889. The figures for these years were taken from Corre-
spondence relating to Behring’s Sea-seal Fisheries, Parliamentary
Paper [C. 6368], pp. 44-47, and include all seals, other than pups, killed
for any purpose. From 1870 to 1889 (both inclusive), 92,864 pups were
killed for food, an average annuai killing of 4,643,
VI.—HISTORICAL NOTES ON THE CONDITION OF THE FUR-SEAL
ROOKERIES OF THE PRIBYLOFF ISLANDS IN VARIOUS YEARS.*
782. 1786. Pribyloff discovered the islands now known by his name
in June of this year. He returned to the Asiatic coast with 31,100 fur-
seal skins. It is elsewhere recorded that about 40,000 fur-seal skins in
all were taken on the islands in this year. (Bancroft’s works, vol. xxxiil,
DDR e199.)
in the first years (after the discovery of the islands), the seals in St.
George Island were only five or six times less than those on St. Paul,
i. €., equal to one-sixth or one-seventh of those on St. Paul. (Venia-
minoyv, quoted by Elliott in Census Report, p. 147.)
From 1786 to 1797 or 1799, several Companies were engaged in taking
seals, without count or list. Veniaminov estimates that 50,000 to 60,000
skins were obtained annually on St. Paul and 40,000 to 50,000 on St.
George. He characterizes this as ‘horrible killing.” (Quoted by
Elliott. Census Report, pp. 70, 140, and 147.)
783. 1799. The islands came under the control of the United Ameri-
can Company, which was organized at Irkutsk in August 1798.
784. 1800. First year of control of Russian American Company, an
out-growth of the last, organized in 1799.
785. 1803. Baranoff ordered Banner to go to the Pribyloff Islands,
which “had not been visited for many years” (by traders), and where
a vast number of skins must have been accumulated by the natives.
(Bancroft, p. 417.)
786. 1804. Between 1801 and 1804, the Russian American Company
are said to have accumulated about 800,000 skins, many of which rotted
for want of care. (Bancroft, p. 477.)
787, 1805. Veniaminov states that no care as to the preservation of
seal life on the islands was exercised till this year. (Census Report,
p. 141.)
1806. Resanoff visited St. Paul Island in July. He found that avery
wasteful killing of seals had been in progress, that 30,000 had been
killed for their flesh alone, while over 1,000,000 in all had been killed up
to date. He was informed that the seals had decreased 90 per cent. in
number since the earlier years, and concluded that if the slaughter was
not reduced a few years would witness extirpation. He ordered the
killing to be stopped; but from the season of his visit it is certain that
some seals had been killed in 1806 before his arrival. (Bancroft, pp.
445, 446.)
788. 1806-1807. Following Resanoff’s order, no seals were killed on
the Pribyloff Islands during these years (with the probable exception
above noted). Nearly all the natives were removed to Unalaska.
(Census Report, p. 140.)
* Notes given below which have not been derived from published reports and docu-
ments, but have been obtained as a result of our own inquiries, are inclosed in
brackets, thus[ ].
198 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
789. 1808. Killing was recommended on St. George and in 1810 also
on St. Paul, but not till 1812 did it amount to half the number killed in
former years. Jemales as well as males were taken. Killing without
proper supervision continued from this time till 1822. (Veniaminov,
quoted by Elliott. Census Report, p. 140.)
790. 1817. The fur-seals on St. George were estimated to amount to a
quarter of those on St. Paul; seals on the latter island having decreased
more in proportion. (Veniaminov, quoted by Elliott. Census Report,
p. 147.
135 91. 1817 to 1837. A gradual diminution of seal life on the
islands stated to have been in progress in these years, visible in
each year, but not always equal, according to Veniaminov. ‘This is also
indicated by Veniaminov’s quoted figures of annual catch. (Census
Report, pp. 143, 147.)
792. 1820. Veniaminov characterizes the annual killing of 50,000
seals, which occurred at about this date, as excessive and leading to
dimunition. (Census Report, p. 147.)
793. 1822. First year of second term of Russian American Company.
Moorayvett ordered the killing to be limited, so that instead of 40,000
or 50,000 not more than 8,000 or 10,000 were taken. (This appears to
refer to St. Paul Island only.) (Census Report, p. 140.)
794. 1822 to 1824. Period of rest or restricted killing on St. Paul.
(Veniaminoy, quoted by Elliott. Census Report, p. 142.)
795, 1824. Stated that between 1522-1824 the seals on the islands
were estimated to have doubled in number. (Report upon the Condi-
tion of Affairs in Alaska, p. 107.)
796. 1826-1827. Both years inclusive. Period of rest or restricted
killing on St. George Island. (Veniaminov, quoted by Elliott. Census
Nteport, p. 141.)
797. 1826. Veniaminov states that the seals on St. George equalled
about one sixth those on St. Paul, those on St. George having increased
more in proportion since 1817. Also, that Chestyokhoff, estimating
that the seals had doubled in number as a result of restrictive meas-
ures, ordered 40,000 to be killed annually. But with all possible effort
this number could not be obtained. Greater caution in killing females,
&e., was ordered, but the number of seals on the islands nevertheless
remained stationary, or continued to decrease. (Veniaminoy, quoted
by Elliott. Census Report, pp. 140, 147.)
798. 1832. Veniaminov incidentally states that in this year an exces-
sive number of females were observed on the islands without young.
(Quoted by Elliott. Census Report, p. 141.)
799. 1834, The number of seals to be taken at St. Paul was largely
reduced, the killing being limited to about 4,000 instead of about 12,000.
(Veniaminov, quoted by Elliott. Census Report, p. 142.) From Venia-
minov’s table the reduction ordered in 1834 took effect only in 1835.
This rest or “‘zapooska” continued on St. Paul Island during 1835, 1836,
and 1837.
800. 1835. [R. Astomonoff, a native on St. Paul Island, informed us
that he remembered being at North-east Point in this year, when the
Russians allowed only seven seals a-day to be killed there for food.]
1836. Elliott, from information received from natives on the Pribyloff
Islands, states that the winter of 1835-36 was exceedingly severe.
Great quantities of ice surrounded the islands, and remained heaped
on the shores tiil August 1836. A great mortality of seals resulted, so
that, according to native count, only 4,100 seals of all classes, exclusive
of pups, remained on the rookeries of St. Paul. (Census Report, p. 49.)
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 198
Mr. Elliott has informed us that, according to a journal by the Rey. K.
Shisenekoff, only 100 holluschickie were obtained in 1836, the remainder
of the catch for this year being pups. Bryant, also according to native
evidence, gives the date of this destruction of seals as 1842. (Allen,
Monograph of North American Pinnipeds, p. 388.)
801. 1842. First year of third term of Russian American Company.
Bancroft states that a system of “alternation” in hunting grounds was
adopted, which, in the case of the Pribyloft Islands, led to great increase
of numbers of seals. (Bancroft’s Works, vol. xxxiii, p. 582.)
802. 1842 to 1861 (inclusive). The Russian American Company’s ship-
ments showed a heavy decrease in fur-seal (and other) skins, as com-
pared with the preceding period of twenty years. This is mainly
attributed to the encroachment of foreign traders—particularly Amer-
ican whalers. (Banecroft’s Works, vol. xxxiil, p. 582.)
803. 1845. The great importance of never disturbing the breeding
seals was first recognized in this year. (Census Report, p. 143.)
804. 1847. Up to this date males and females had been killed indis-
criminately for skins; thereafter only males were killed. (Census
Report, p. 49.)
805, 1862 to 1867 (both inclusive). Interregnuyn on Pribylofft Islands
following the close of the Russian American Company’s third term.
806. 1862. Techmainoff says, referring to this year: ‘In earlier times
more (seal-skins) were taken than in the later; at present there are
taken from the Island of St. Paul 10,000 annually, without diminishing
the number for future killing; on St. George, 6,000.” (Quoted by
Elhott. Census Report, p. 163.)
807. 1867. Bryant speaks of the judicious administration and
136 gradual increase of seal life on the islands under the Russian
rule for many years previous to this date. In the spring of 1867,
however, the Russians, knowing that the islands were about to be
surrendered to the United States, took a much increased number of
seals, amounting to 75,000. (Monograph of North American Pinnipeds,
p. 389.)
808. 1868. Following the cession of Alaska to the United States in
1867 a period of lawlessness ensued on the Pribyloff Islands, and in
1868 a very great number of seals was killed. The number so killed in
this year is estimated at 242,000 by Elliott; at 250,000 by Bryant.
Rival Companies were at work, and the killing appears to have gone on
without count, Jist, or supervision. Inthe autumn of this year, however,
Congress passed a special Resolution, prohibiting the killing of seals
until further action of Congress. (Census Report, p. 25.) Bryant
states that, previous to 1868, the selection of seals killed had, under the
Russian régime, been left to the natives, and that most of those killed
were under 3 years of age, including many yearlings. The killing
being from this more numerous class plenty of males were left to reach
maturity, and the rookeries were well supplied with active males. The
males of all ages not engaged in actual breeding were about equal in
number to the combined totals of beachmasters and females so engaged.
Of these excluded males about 30 per cent. were virile, and there was
thus one efficient male to every three or four females, or about three
times aS many as actually required. As a consequence, all females
were served before the 10th August. (Monograph of North American
Pinnipeds, pp. 390, 398, &e.)
[Messrs. D. Webster and T. F. Morgan were on the island in this
year. They informed us that the seals were clubbed then as now, fire-
arins being used only in self-defence among the rival sealers. The kill-
200 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
ing was directed to young males, but about 40,000 females were killed
inadvertently. he limit to the number killed was reached only when
salt was exhausted. Seals were more abundant at this time than ever
since. It also appears that the numbers above quoted as representing
seals killed in this year do not include St. George Island, where some
30,000 skins are supposed to have been taken. |
809. 1869. Practically indiscriwninate killng appears to have con-
tinued in this year, though it is stated that seals were taken only for
the subsistence of the natives, and under direction of the Treasury
Department. (Census Report, p. 25.) The gentlemen in charge do not
seem to have known the number of seals actually killed. Agent
Wicker stated that 150,000 skins had been taken on the two islands.
Bryant states that this was impossible, as when he left the islands in
August only 16,000 skins had been obtained. McIntyre says that,
under the orders given by him, 42,317 seals were to be killed for food
on the two islands. Major-General Thomas afterwards ordered that as
many seals as should be required for native food be killed. (United
States Senate, Ex. Doc. No. 32, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, pp. 24, 37.)
In consequence of this slaughter .in 1868-69, seals are reported to
have “ disappeared rapidly from the Pribyloff Islands, but two or three
years later began to return in vast numbers” (Bancroft’s works, vol.
xxxiii, p. 638). Coincidently with this, Bryant states that fur-seals were
very abundant along the coasts of Oregon, Washington Territory, and
British Columbia as compared with former years (Monograph of North
American Pinnipeds, p. 332). Bryant estimated the total number of
seals on the islands at this date at 3,230,000. (Monograph of North
American Pinnipeds, pp. 390, 392.)
McIntyre, Government Agent, after stating that for some years suc-
ceeding the discovery of the Pribyloff Islands 100,000 skins were
annually taken by the Russians, adds, “‘ But this it seems was too large
a number, for the decrease in the yearly return was constant until 1842,
when they had become nearly extinct. In 1858, 31,800 were taken,
which was the largest catch in any one year until 1867, when, as I am
informed, 80,000 or 100,000 were secured. From the most careful com-
putation I have been able to make, I am of the opinion that no more
than 100,000 can be taken annually without incurring the risk of again
diminishing the yearly production.” (United States Senate, Ex. Doc.
No. 32, 41st Congress, 2nd Session.)
The Alaska Commercial Company was incorporated in this year.
810. 1870. The general conditions of seal life on the islands remained
as described above (under 1868), according to Bryant.
An Act was passed by Congress providing that seals should be
killed on the Pribyloff Islands only during the months of June, July,
September, and October, that killing should be confined to males, and
that the number killed for skins in each year should not exceed 75,000)
on St. Paul and 25,000 on St.George. Respecting the number thus
fixed, Dall says: “It is probable that 100,000 might be safely killed,”
but suggests that the number should .be increased or diminished as
experience proved to be necessary. (Alaska and its Resources, pp.
496, 497.)
137 This was the Alaska Commercial Company’s first year of lease
of the islands, but no full control was achieved till 1871. Bryant
states thatin this year the natives, to purchase supplies and for their
own food, killed 85,000, mostly 1- and 2-year-old seals. (Monograph of
North American Pinnipeds, p. 398.)
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 201
The killing as per official Return made up in 1871, however, shows a
total of 23,773, from which 9,988 skins in all were saved, the remainder
being pups and other seals killed for food. (House of Representatives,
Ex. Doe. No. 83, 44th Congress, 1st Session.)
811. 1871. It was discovered that the skins of 3-, 4-, and 5-year-old
seals were most in demand, and the killing was changed to suit this
demand; but no material change was observed in the habits of the
seals. (Monograph of North American Pinnipeds, p. 392.) Bryant else-
where says that a careful comparison of this year with 1869 and 1870
shows a decrease of 10 per cent. in females. (Ex. Doe. No. 83, 44th
Congress, 1st Session, p. 69.)
812. 1872. The killing was directed as far as possible to seals from 4
to 6 years old, and some of 7 years old were killed. This, taken in con-
junction with the killing of 1871, diminished the number of ‘reserves ”
or virile males not actually on the breeding grounds, but doing duty
along the shores. The number of females was increasing 5 per cent.
annually. (Bryant in Monograph of North American Pinnipeds.)
Lieutenant Maynard, accepting the method of estimating the seals
advocated by Elliott, makes the whole number in this year nearly
6,000,000. (House of Representatives, Ex. Doc. No. 43, 44th Congress,
1st Session, p.5.) Elliott estimated that the seals on St. George Island
were only one-eighteenth of the whole number, or, as compared with
those on St. Paul, as 1 to 17. (Census Report, p. 157.)
Mr. Dirks stated to us that in this year it seemed as if the killing
of 100,000 seals annually could not injuriously affect the rookeries. |
In this year Captain Lewis, of the Hudson’s Bay Company, reported
very great and entirely unprecedented number of seals off Vancouver
Island and the entrance to Fuca Strait, chiefly grey pups and year-
lings. (Elliott. Census Report, p. 166.) This appears to have been in
connection with the change in habits observed on the rookeries in the
following summer.
813. 1873. It was now found that the 3-year-old seals afforded the
best marketable skins, and the killing was directed to those. The
‘creserves” becaine reduced to half their former number, and each beach-
master had on the average fifteen females. When the rookeries broke
up at the close of the breeding season, the females lingered instead
of leaving them as before. In September and October a few young
were born, showing that some females had not been served at the proper
time in 1872. The females were still increasing 5 per cent. annually in
number. (Bryant in Monograph of North American Pinnipeds.)
814, 1874. The condition of seal life remained about the same as in
1873. The “reserves” were in about the same numbers, but contained
more young as compared with fully mature males. The females appeared
in similar number, and, on the whole, there was an evident improve-
ment in the condition of the rookeries. (Bryant in Monograph of North
American Pinnipeds.)
An Act of Congress, approved March 1874, authorized the Secretary
of the Treasury to rearrange the proportion of catch to be taken from
St. Paul and St. George respectively, and to designate the months of
killing. Under this provision, the time of killing was extended to
include the first half of the month of August. (Bancroft’s Works, vol.
XXXxill, p. 638.)
815. In 1874, Lieutenant W. Maynard, U.S.N., investigated the con-
ditions of seal life on the Pribyloff Islands as Special Government
Agent. He recommended that enlarged copies of maps of the breeding
grounds should be furnished to the ageuts in charge of the islands,
202 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
who should be required to compare these each year with the respective
breeding rookeries. ‘‘This, if carefully done, will afford data, after a
time, by which the fisheries can be regulated with comparative cer-
tainty.” Respecting the number of seals killed, he says: “Since 1870
there have been killed on both islands, in round numbers, 112,000 young
male seals each year. Whether this slanghter has prevented the seals
from increasing in number or not, and, if so, to what extent, can only be
deduced from their past history, which, unfortunately, is imperfectly
known.” He isinclined to think that no decrease had occurred between
1872 and 1874, but states that the period was too short to decide whether
the killing was excessive. He adds: “The number now killed annually
is entirely experimental, and we have nothing to start from as a basis.”
Maynard further states that the number of bulls in this year was not
more than one-tenth that of the females. (House of Representatives,
Ex. Doc. No. 43, 44th Congress, Ist Session, pp. 5, 6.)
138 [Mr. D. Webster states that the skins taken in 1874 and 1875
ranged in weight from 6 lbs. to 11 Ibs.]
Elliott believes that the number of seals did not materially alter in
the twelve or fifteen years previous to 1874. He estimated the number
of breeding seals on the islands at 3,193,420, the whole number of seals
on the islands at 4,700,000. (Census Report, pp. 57-67.)
816. 1875. The killing was this year confined to seals less than 5
years old, and more 2-year-olds were taken than in any year since 1870.
This left a large number of males to mature. Many young were, how-
ever, born as late as August. (Bryant in Monograph of North Ameri-
can Pinnipeds.) In his official Report for this year, Bryant protests
against the killing of pups for food, characterizing it as “‘a great waste,”
and adding, ‘“‘ I can find no precedent for this previous to the transfer
of the island to the United States, only that the former Russian Fur
Company allowed, as an extra indulgence to the natives, after the close
of the season’s sealing, to take 500 of these young seals for feasting.”
(House of Representatives, Ex. Doc. No. 83, 44th Congress, 2nd Session,
p. 174.)
Bryant also states in the same Report (p. 175) that a residence of
seven successive seasons on the islands had convinced him that the
killing of 100,000 annually did not leave a sufficient number of males
to mature for the wants of the increase in the number of females. He
explains his reasons for this in some detail.
517. 1876. No marked change in the conditions this year, but many
females landed to bring forth their young after the 20th July. A heavy
gale with snow occurred on the 30th October, driving seals into the
water, from which only a small number returned, many pups being lost.
Bryant anticipates that the result of this loss will appear in 1880, when
the pups should reach maturity. The decrease in breeding males, con-
Sequent on excessive slaughter of 1868 and 1869, was in this year
greatest. (Bryant in Monograph of North American Pinnipeds, p. 399.)
Bryant again states that he believes the number 100,000 fixed for
killing to have been too high, and that in his report he had recom-
mended that it be reduced by 15,000. (House of Representatives, Ex.
Doc. No. 625, 44th Congress, Ist Session, Report on Alaska Commer-
cial Company, p. 99.)
John F. Miller, President of Board of Directors of Alaska Commer-
cial Company, says: “Our agents report a very considerable increase
in the number of females since 1871. We cannot tell that there is
much increase in the number of males.” (Report on the Alaska Com-
mercial Company, p. 41.)
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 203
818. 1877. Bryant states that this year there was an evident increase
in the number of breeding males. He estimates that there were about
1,800,000 breeding seals on the islands, as against 1,150,000 in 1869,
(Monograph of North American Pinnipeds, p. "410. )
819. 1878. [Mr. D. Webster informed us that he did not observe
much decrease in the number of seals till this year.]
820. 1879. [From evidence obtained by us, it appears that in this
year it became necessary to extend the area of driving for tlie first
time, so as to include Polovina and Tolstoi rookeries, and that the salt-
house near Polovina was built at or about this time.]
821. 1880. The number of seals on the Pribyloff Islands is said to
have been greater than ever before, the increase being particularly
observable in young seals. (Cruise of the ‘‘Corwin” in 1880, p. 55.)
Colonel J. Murray dates the beginning of a steady decrease of seals
from this year. (Senate, Ex. Doc. No. 49, 51st Congress, 2nd Session.)
822. 1881. Llliott, in his report printed in this year, strongly pro-
tests against the unnecessary slaughter of pups for food purposes.
He states in the same report that- the breeding rookeries have been
gradually increasing since 1857. (Census Report, pp. 119, 170.)
W. B. Taylor, Assistant Agent of Treasury Department on St. Paul
in 1881, says that according to information received from those who
had been a number of years on the Island of St. George, there were as
many seals there as ever. (Hx. Doc. No. 5883; 50th Congress, 2nd
Session, [’ur-seal Fisheries of Alaska, p. 44.)
823. 1882. Dr. H. H. McIntyre, after June 1870 Superintendent of
the Seal Fisheries of Alaska for the lessees, states that since 1870 the
number of seals on the Pribyloff Islands has increased every year.
(Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska, p. 116.) Speaking in 1888 (see under,
1888), he, however, places the beginning of decrease in this year. The
same gentleman reports that at this time the desired number of large
skins could no longer be obtained. (Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska, p.
118.
Mr. G. Wardmaw’s statement, however, respecting the number
139 of “killables” on St. George Island indicates a decrease in the
number of tiis class as between 1881 and 1882. (Fur-seal Fish-
eries of Alaska, p. 39.)
[Natives on St. Paul Island informed us that they noticed seals to be
markedly reduced in number in this year. |
24, 1883. Jacob H. Moulton, Special Agent of the Treasury Depart-
ment on the Pribyloff Islands from 1877 to 1885, says that between
1877 and this year there was, he thinks, an increase in the number of
seals on the Pribyloff Islands. (Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska, p. 255.)
825, 1884. [Mr. T. F’. Morgan informed us that from 1874 to 1884 he
thought the seals increased. He noticed a decrease in 1884, accompa-
nied ‘with an irregularity in habits.
826. 1885. Jacob H. Moulton states that between 1883 and this year
there was no increase of seals on the islands. (Fur-seal Fisheries of
Alaska, p. 255.)
H. A. Gliddon, Agent of the Treasury Department on the Pribyloff
Islands from 1882 to 1885, says that from 1882 to 1885 no change in the
number of seals on St. Paul was noticed, but they vary in different
years, especially on St. George. (Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska, p. 27.)
827. 1886. George R. Tingle, Treasury Agent onthe Pribyloff Islands,
states that a frequent inspec tion of the rookeries on the islands showed
a decided increase in the number of cows, with an ample supply of bulls.
(‘ Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska,” p. 174.)
204 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
828. 1886-87. George R. Tingle, using Elliott’s method of estimating
the seals, makes the number on the Pribyloff Islands 6,557,750. He
states, however, that he considers this result too great by about one-
fourth, which reduces his estimate to about 4,768,300. (Fur-seal Fish-
eries of Alaska, p. 177.)
[From information obtained on the islands, it appears that the redue-
tion in average weight of skins taken was well recognized in these two
years.
309. 1887. [Mr. T. F. Morgan told us that he noticed a marked
decrease in this year. In this or the preceding year, according to Mr.
J.C. Redpath, the standard weight of skins was lowered to enable the
Company to complete its quota. |
830. 1888. Dr. H. H. McIntyre, Superintendent for Alaska Commer-
cial Company at the time on the islands, states that the number of seals
has decreased since 1882; that the rookeries do not produce enough to
bear the killing of ‘¢100,000 by marauders in addition to the 100,000
killed lawfully.” He recommends that the permission accorded to
natives of killing seal pups for food should be rescinded, and, speak-
ing particularly of 1888, says: “There are at present, in my opinion, too
few bull seals to keep the rookeries up to their best condition.”
He adds, further, that the size of skins ruled still smaller than in
1883. (Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska, pp. 116, 117, 127, 132.)
In the same year T. F. Morgan, in the employment of the Alaska
Commercial Company, says that there had been a large increase in the
number of seals on the islands since 1865, and also since 1874. The
breeding rookeries occupied more territory.
S. M. Biiynitsky, Special Treasury Agent on Pribyloff Islands in 1870,
states that there may be 3,000,000 or 7,000,000 seals on the islands; no
estimate can be made within 1,000,000 or so of the actual number.
George Wardman, Treasury Agent on Pribyloff Islands from 1881 to
1885, estimates that the seals on St. George numbered 165,000 at most.
He thinks that the number of seals has been over-estimated. (Fur-seal
Fisheries of Alaska, pp. 12, 39, 69.)
[In this year, according to Mr. D. Webster, the standard weight of
skins was lowered from 6 lbs. to 5 lbs. and to 44 Ibs., because of sear-
city of 6-lb. skins. Thus, all males from 2 to 5 years old became, and
thereafter continued to be, accounted killable.]
831. 1889. Last year of lease of Alaska Commercial Company.
[To complete the catch in this year, we ascertain that some 40,000
very small skins were taken, including even yearlings. |
832. 1890. First year of control of North American Commercial Com-
pany, under new lease.
Colonel J. Murray, First Assistant Government Agent, reports that
the seals on the Pribyloff Islands have been steadily decreasing since
1880, and attributes this to the excessive slaughter of males 2 to 5
years old.
Mr. Goff states that no 2-year-old seals brought to the killing grounds
were turned away in this year. (Senate, Ex. Doc. 49, 51st Congress,
2nd Session.)
Elliott estimates the number of seals on the islands in this year at
959,393. He attributes the decrease in number of seals to:
1, Over-driving on the islands, begun in 1879, dropped till 1882, and
then suddenly renewed and continued to date.
140 2. To pelagic sealing, which, according to him, was begun as
a business in 1886, and carried on to date. (Parliamentary Paper
London, June 1891, p. 53.)
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 205
The bearing females on the rookeries are estimated at 350,000, but it
is stated that there are also 250,000 not bearing, and not served in
1889 or 1890, owing to dearth of virile males. He states that the con-
dition of seal life on the islands is like that which occurred in 1834
under the Russian régime.
George R. Tingle, now in charge of the islands foe the North Ameri-
can Commercial Company, states that late in this season there was a
marked increase in the arrival of seals on the islands. (Hx. Doc. No.
49, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, Exhibit P.)
A. W. Lavender, Assistant Treasury Agent, notes that large schools
of killer whales were about the islands in October, destroying great
numbers of pups. (Ex. Doc. No. 49, 51st Congress, 2nd Session.)
833. 1891. [The result of our investigations and evidence obtained
elsewhere detailed shows that the rookeries were this season in better
condition than in 1890.]
VII.—THE FUR-SEAL FISHERY IN THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE.
834. In dealing with the question of the preservation of the valuable
fur seal in the North Pacific Ocean, it is desirable to utilize all the
experience that may be obtained in regard to the treatment of the fur-
seal in other parts of the world, and the records of these seal fisheries
are peculiarly abundant.
835. There are several varieties of seal which have been taken in
large numbers south of the Equator which yield that particular close
fur so valued in commerce. The three chief varieties are respectively
known as the Otaria Australis (=Otaria Falklandica, Arctocephalus
Australis, Arctocephalus Falklandicus), of the South American coasts;
the Otaria Pusilla (=Arctocephalus Antarcticus) of the South African
coasts; and the Otaria Fosteri (= Arctocephalus cinereus, Euotaria cin-
erea) of the Australasian coasts. But there is much variety in nomen-
clature, ever since the fur-seal on Amsterdam Island were described as
the Phoca Ursinus in 1770. Professor Flower, the Director of the
Natural History Department of the British Museum, has kindly sent
us a Memorandum (Appendix D), descriptive of these differentiations.
The southern fur-seals differ specifically, and according to some natural-
ists generically, from those in the Northern Hemisphere. The fur-seal
north of the Equator differs in structural character, and especially in
the form of the fore part of the skull, from all seals found south of the
Equator.
836. But their habits and manner of life are practically identical, and
thereare certain conditions common to the presence of all these varieties,
For breeding purposes they need rocks in close proximity to the sea,
where fogs are frequent. For feeding purposes they require a wide
range of ocean, yielding small fish, and squid. For temperature, they
prefer temperate and even sub-tropical latitudes, and rarely if ever
approach the zone of ice. Ever since the first navigators from Kurope
entered those seas the fur-seal was found all over the great Southern
Ocean in very great abundance from the Galapagos Islands, under the
Equator, in the Pacific, the Islands of St. Paul and Amsterdam in the
Indian Ocean, and along the shores of Africa and America to the south-
ward of the parallel of 20° south latitude in the Atlantic away south to
the groups of islands in 60° and 63° south latitude. But their con-
tinued existence in such habitats depends on their not being destroyed
or disturbed by man, murrains, or predacious animals,
206 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
837. In the North Atlantic at the present day there exists no known
species of the fur-seal, although fossil remains indicate their existence
in the tertiary period.
838. [Extensive sealing operations were conducted in the South Seas
about the close of the last century and the first part of the present
century. for all this period anes are extant many of the actual logs
and journals of those engaged in the pursuit.
These * sealers” of the South Seas hailed for the most part from British
ports or from those on the east coast of North America, and very consid-
erable profits accrued, although the work was of a particularly arduous
and venturesome character.
839. Itisnoteworthy, however, that South Sea sealing, as a greatindus-
try, undoubtedly had its origin in the closing of the fur trade of the North
Pacific to English traders and sealers when the Russians prevailed on
China, at that time the one chief market for such furs, to close her
141s ports absolutely against all furs brought across the Pacifie from
the islands and coasts of North America, the monopoly of the
whole trade being accorded to the Russians at their great mart of Kiat-
cha, on the Amoor. Englishmen had become convinced of the great
value of the China fur trade, and this policy of restriction on the part
of the Russians at once turned maritime enterprise to the South Seas
for the necessary supply of furs, and in a very few years made secure
the footing of the English and Americans in the China and other markets.
S40. At: a very early period, the English were already endeavouring to
collect fur-seal skins for the China market in the seas known to their
regular Kast India traders. Thus in February 1773, when the vessels
couveying Lord Macartney to China called at the Isk wnds of Amsterdam
and St. Paul, in the Southern Indian Ocean, in latitude 39° south, they
found a sealing party there engaged in carrying out a contract to sup-
ply 25,000 skins of the Phoca Ursina for the Canton market. The
description sent home was as follows:
The seals are found here in greater numbers in the summer than in the winter
ret In the summer months they come ashore, sometimes in droves of 800 to
4,000 at a time, out of which about 100 are destroyed, that number being about as
many as five men can peg down to dry in the course of the day. . . . . In gen-
eral they are not shy. . . . . Most of those that come ashore are females, in the
proportion of thirty to one male. Whether in these animals nature has fixed on such
apparent disproportion between the sexes, or whether, while the females have occa-
sion to seek the shore, the males continue in the deep, has not hitherto been observed
by observations here. *
In 1789 the Island of Amsterdam was visited by Captain Cox, of the
“Mercury,” who reported as follows: “On our first landing we found
the shore covered with such a multitude of seals that we were obliged
to disperse them before we could get out of the boat. . . . . We
procured here 1,000 skins of very superior quality.” t
S41. Theseal- skin for long found its chief market in Chinaand Russia,
where it became a coveted and fashionable fur, but its gradual intro-
duction into Europe and America dates from the time when South
Sea sealing was first taken in hand as a regular industry. It has been
calculated that from first to last not less than 17,000,000 skins were thus
placed in the market, and without doubt it was the threatened failure
of this enormous supply from the south which about the year 1840 led
the Russians, British, and Americans to pay special attention to the
supply of fur- seals known to exist in the North Pacific Ocean.
*@. W. Clark on Eared Seals.— “Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London,
1875,” p. 652.
tlbid., p. 651.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 207
842. The conditions in the South Seas differed categorically from
those now prevailing in the North Pacific. The various islands resorted
to as breeding places by the fur-seal were not only absolutely uninhab-
ited by man, but were also at the time in the political ¢ ategory of ‘ no-
maw’s-land.” As a consequence there was no possibility of instituting
any regulation of methods of slaughter, restrictionsof numbers or kinds
taken, or any limitation of place or season.
843. There were practically no natives (as on the west coast of North
America) to lead the way in pelagic sealing. The method of slaughter
universally adopted was precisely that of the White raiders of the
North Pacific. No labour or effort was wasted in any endeavours to cap-
ture or kill the seal at sea. The simple method was invariably adopted
of establishing parties of men on all likely beaches, camped in wooden
huts or under canvas, and engaged in slaughtering and skinning all the
seals that Janded, without distinction of age, size, or sex. Captain
Weddel pithily writes of the killing in the South Shetlands in 1821-22:
‘‘ Whenever a seal reaches the beach, of whatever denomination, he
was immediately killed and his skin taken; and by this means, at the
end of the second year, the animals became nearly extinct. A vessel
of from 200 to 400 tons brought out from the home port the men and
camping equipment. She would land parties on various beaches, and
then would be herself safely moored in some handy harbour. Boats,
and even tenders of 30 and 40 tons, would travel between this vessel and
the various islands until the season’s fishery was over. Occasionally the
work of destruction was more expeditiously performed when the barge
or brig carrying such landing parties came upon a large rookery already
well filled out with seals, for then the whole work of the cruize would
be accomplished in a few days.” Such sealing parties were found at
work by several exploring expeditions, as, for instance, by Her Majes-
ty’s ships “‘ Erebus” and “ Terror.”
844, The more detailed records of these South Sea adventurers yield
many points of interest, and it may be well to quote from the earlier
descriptions of the fur-seal as indicating how rapidly so valuable a fur
secured the notice of the early adventurers, and how speedily their suc-
cessors brought about the commercial extermination of the seal.
142 845. In the sixteenth century, Sir Francis Drake, the first
Englishman who penetrated to the South Seas, frequently reports
the presence and comments on the peculiarities of seals. These formed
indeed a chief source for the supply of fresh meat. On his great vcyage
of circumnavigation in 1577-78, seals were taken in the Rio de la Plata,
and again in latitude 47° 30’, at an anchorage eventually named Seal
‘ Bay; about the middle of the month of May seals were found so plen-
tiful that 200 were slaughtered in one hour.* In the same neighbour-
hood some years later, in December 1586, Cavendish reports in detail
on the seals found in a bay he named Port Desire.t
846. In the observations of Sir Richard Hawkins on his ‘ Voyage
into the South Sea” in 1593, we read, in his notes made in the Straits
of Magellan: ‘Of Seals or Sea-W olves—One day, having ended our
hunting of penguins, one of our mariners, walking about the island,
discovered a great company of seales or sea-wolves (so called for that
they are in the sea as the wolves on the Jand), advising us that he left
them sleeping with their bellies tosting against the sunne. Wee pro-
vided ourselves with staves and other weapons and sought to steal
upon them at unawares to surprise some of them, and coming down the
* “Hakluyt,” vol. iii, p. 733. tIbid., p. 804-5.
208 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
side of a hill we were not discovered till we were close upon them;
notwithstanding their sentinell, before we could approach, with a great
howle waked them, wee got between the sea and some of them, but
they shunned us not, for they came directly upon us, and though we
dealt here and there a blow, yet not a man that withstood them escaped
the overthrow. They reckon not of a musket shot, a sword pierceth
not their skinne, and to give a blow with a staffe is as to smite upon a
stone; only in giving a blow upon his snowt presently he falleth down
dead.
‘« After they had recovered the water they did as it were scorne us,
defie us, and danced before us untill we had shot some musket shott
through them, and so they appeared no more.
“This fish is like unto a calfe, with four legs, but not above a spanne
long; his skinne is heyre like a calfe, but these were different to all
that I have ever seene, yet I have seene of them in many parts, for
these were greater and in their former parts like unto lyons, with
shaggy heyre and mostaches.
‘‘ They live in the sea, and come to sleepe on the land, and they ever
have one that watcheth, who adviseth them of any accident.
‘‘They are beneficiall to man in their skinnes for many purposes; In
their mostaches for pick-tooths, and in their fatt to make traine-oyle.
This may suftice for the seale, for that he is well known.”
847. In the seventeenth century these notices still continue frequent.
Thus Henry Brewer landing at Valentine Bay on the 9th March, 1642,
writes: “Saw among the rocks several sea lions and sea dogs, about the
bigness of a good European calf; some of a greyish, some of a brownish
colour, making a noise not unlike our sheep.”
S48. Dampier, in 1683, gives the following very full general descrip-
tion of seals :*
The seals are sort of creatures pretty well known, yet it may not be amiss to
describe them. They are as big as calves; the head of them like a dog, therefore
called by the Dutch, the ‘‘sea hounds ” Under eachshoulder grows a long thick fin;
these serve them to swim with when in the sea, and are instead of legs to them when
on the land, for raising their bodies up on end by the help of their fins or stumps,
and so having their tail parts drawn close under them, they rebound as it were, and
throw their bodies forward, drawing their hinder parts after them, and then again
rising up and springing forward with their fore parts alternately, they lie tumbling
thus up and down all the while they are moving on land. From ‘their shoulders to
their tails they grow tapering like fish, and have two small fins on eachside the rump,
which is commonly covered with their fins. These fins serve instead of a tail in the
sea, and on land they sit on them when they give suck totheir young. Their hairis
of divers colours, as black, grey, dun, spotted, looking very sleek and pleasant when
they come first out of the sea. For these at John Fernando have fine short fur, the
like I have not taken notice of anywhere but in these seas. Here are always
thousands, I might say possibly millions, of them, either sitting on the bays, or going
and coming in the sea round the island, which is covered with them (as they lie at
the top of the water playing and sunning themselves) for a mile or two from the
shore. When they come out of the sea they bleat like sheep for their young, and
though they pass through hundreds of other’s young ones hefore they come to their
own, yet they will not suffer any of them to suck. The young ones are like puppies,
and lie much ashore, but when beaten by any of us, they, as well as the old
143 ones, will make toward the sea, and swim very swift and nimble, though on
shore they lie very sluggishly, and will not go out of our ways unless we beat
them, but snap at us. A blow on the nose soon kills them. Large ships might here
load "themsely es with seal-skins and trane oyle, for they are extraordinarily fat.
Seals are found as well in cold as in hot climates.
849. In the British Museum are kept the admirably written MSS. oi
certain other voyagers, and in that relating the experiences of Captian
Strong in the * Welfare,” in 1689, the writer, named Simson, states that
*“ Dampier’s Voyages,” vol. i, p. 89.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 209
on the 12th September, at the Island of Juan Fernandez, ‘“We went on
shore, but could hardly sett a foot down, the seals lay so thick on the
place. Besides we saw a great number of sea-lyons, not unlike other
lyons in countenance, colour, and fierceness. They had no ffeet but
ffins. :
‘As for the seals they were of a dark colour and grissled, but under
the long pile there was couched a fur of an incomparable fineness, that
if it could be felt it would answer all ye ends of beaver furr, wherefore
a great many of their skins were brought to England.”
This is probably one of the earliest accounts of the commercial value
of the fur-seal skins.
- 850. In the eighteenth century navigators continue to report the
abundance of seals. Thus Captain Wood Rogers, taking Alexander
Selkirk off the Island of Juan Fernandez in 1709, records a lengthy
description of the fur-seal seen there at that date.*
851. The amount of information at this period extant on the fur-seal
is well emphasized by Chaplain Richard Walter, of Lord Anson’s flag-
ship which refitted at Juan Fernandez from June to September 1740.
This chaplain gives a very full and elaborate account of all the natural
features of the islands and of their Fauna and Flora, but he dismisses
seals in the single sentence: ‘The seal, numbers of which haunt this
island, hath been so often mentioned by former writers that it is unnec-
essary to say anything particular about them in this place.”
852. Captain Carteret, writing of Masafuera in 1767, says: “The
seals were so numerous that I verily think if many thousands were
killed in a night they would not be missed in the morning; we were
obliged to kill a noted number of them as, when we walked the shore
they were continually running against us, making at the same time <
most terrible noise. These animals yield excellent train oil, and their
hearts and plucks were very good eating, being in taste something like
those of a hog, and their skins were covered with the finest fur I ever
saw of the kind.”
853. Captain Cook, in his official Report of the voyage of the ‘ Reso-
lution” in 1771, calling attention tothe great number of fur-seal on New
Georgia, is generally credited with being first to direct the attention of
the English adventurers to the commercial advantages of South Sea
sealing. But before this period, and probably following on the sug-
gestions made as early as 1690, Englishmen were already at work on
this new harvest of the sea. Thus, when Bucareli, the Spanish Gov-
ernor at Buenos Ayres, sought to recover the Falkland Islands for
Spain in 1770, his first task was to forcibly eject from their established
port and station the “ English sealers” at port Egmont, an act for which
Spain afterwards made full restitution.
854. Before the end of the eighteenth century sealing in the South
Seas had assumed very extensive dimensions. Not only were the furs
regarded as of great value, but the oil, technically known at the time
as “ train-oil,” assumed an important commercial position. Attention
seems to have been first directed to the islands and coasts of South
America. We hear of no less a number than 1,000,000 skins being
taken to Canton, from the neighbourhood of Masafuera in one year, in
1798, while before the seals were exterminated on that one island in
1807, no less than 3,500,000 skins had been taken.
855. All along the coast of Chile and Peru, even as far north as the
Islands of St. Felix and on the Galapagos group, seals were hunted.
ad * Kerr’s ‘ Voyages,” vol, xi.
B 8S, PT vi—14
210 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
By the end of the century there were not less than thirty New England
vessels so employed on that coast. Meanwhile, in 1783, Dame Haley,
of Boston, had sent a 1,000 tons ship, the “States,” down to the Falk-
land Islands, where she procured a cargo of 13,000 skins of fur-seal
which were sold in Boston at 50 cents a-piece, shipped to Calcutta,
where under the name of “sea-otter” they were sold for 2 dollars, and
eventually reaching Canton, where they fetched 5 dollars per skin.
856. The methods of slaughter involved rapid extirpation in any
given breeding place, and sealers came to be perpetually discovering
and exhausting in succession every place to which seal resorted.
144 The islands around South America, Tristan d’Acunha, the South
Orkneys, South Georgia, and Sandwich Land, were all in turn
discovered, and hundreds of thousands of skins taken from each for a
long series of years. Thirty vessels—eighteen being under the Ameri-
can, ten under the English, and two under the Russian flag, in the
three years 1819-22, took more than 600,000 seals from the South
Shetiand group, completely exhausting the seal race there for the time.
857. Sealing-vessels had as early as 1790 crossed the Atlantic and
worked up the coast of Western Africa as far as 20° north latitude,
obtaining many seals. Others worked steadily along the open sea to
the south, successively landing upon the various groups of islands—
Bouvet and Lindsay, Marian, and Prince Edward, the Crozets, Ker-
guelen, and MacDonald.
Yet further to the eastward, seals were obtained on the following
islands: Royal Company, Emerald, Antipodes, Campbell, Macquarie,
Auckland, and Bounty, while one vessel reported in Sydney a catch of
40,000 from the Fiji Islands, probably a locality named to shroud the
real killing place.
858. At this period, and especially from 1810-20, there sprung up
a very large transhipment trade in fur-seal skins in the new port of
Sydney, reaching hundreds of thousands in five years.
Enterprising men chiefly on the Reports of Vancouver and Cook had
already found their way to the coasts of “New Holland,” and away
round the islands of New Zealand. Bass had reported the reefs off
Cape Barren Island, off the north coast of Tasmania, ‘covered with
fur-seal of great beauty.” Cook had found seals in great numbers on
the rocks in Dusky Bay in New Zealand in 1773.
859. But the severe process universally adopted speedily exhausted
the different rookeries, and by the year 1830 we meet with strenuous
complaints that all the known killing grounds were depleted, and that
new grounds must be discovered. Fanning and others pointed out,
however, the significant fact that vast numbers of seals were still to
be seen cruizing about at sea, a remark of special and new significance
to the owners of the North Pacific rookeries in 1892.
860. It is a matter of some difficulty to estimate the total number of
seals taken in the South Seas during the period of the excessive energy
of the great sealing industry. But there are actual records which,
added together, bring the acknowledged total to more than 16,000,000.
These seals were taken from about thirty different island groups or
coast districts on the mainland, and they were all taken by the one
method of indiscriminate slaughter on shore.
It is probable that this wholesale slaughter did not extend over more
than seventy years, but it is certain that at the end of the period the
fur-seals were so terribly reduced in numbers that even the sixty years
of subsequent rest and total cessation of killing have not sufficed to
bring about any effectual restoration of the numbers of years gone by.
REPORT OF - BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 211
861. Equally valuable to the treatment of the seals in the North
Pacific is the more recent history of sealing in the South Seas. The
excessive slaughter of seals by man on the breeding islands alone had
brought about the commercial extermination of the once abundant fur-
seal before the year 1830.
From that period for thirty or forty years sealing was carried on bat
fitfully and seldom. Sir John Ross, writing of ‘Kerguelen Land in
1840, says: “Of marine animals the sea- elephant and several species
of seals were formerly in great abundance, and annually drew a num-
ber of vessels to these shores in pursuit of them. They have now, after
so many years of persecution, quite deserted the place or have been
completely annihilated.” All other writers and travellers give similar
descriptions of the methods and results of this excessive slaughter.
The officers of Her Majesty’s ship ‘“ Beagle,” surveying the intricate
passages of Magellan’s Straits and Tierra del Fuego in 1830, speak in
similar strain, and it is noticeable that Charles Darwin, when visiting
these old-time resorts of the fur-seal in 1832-34, and contributing so
much of permanent value to natural history, does not make even a
ner allusion to the fur-seal.
. It is instructive to notice, however, that in later years, as civil-
eal aanien began to assert sovereignty over these wild shores, so did
they claim the right to the seals and to control the breeding ‘places.
Augustus Earle, who has published an interesting account of Tristan
d@’Acunha in the year 1834, thus recounts the experience of one of the
islanders named Richard: ‘* By one of those sudden acts of treachery
and cruelty which have been so common on the coast of South Americe
the vessel to which he belonged while quietly engaged in picking up
seal on the shore was seized by an armed Republican cruizer on pre-
tence of her occupation being unlawful, and her crew (for whom Rich-
ard had the honour of cooking) were lodged in durance vile, and
145 ‘the only chance they had of escaping from perpetual imprison-
ment was by entering the Republican army.”
863. All accounts speak of change in the habits of the fur-seal. In
Tristan d’Acunha they are described as having deserted the open
beaches and taken to haunting caves and ledges “inaccessible to man.
On the Auckland group they now resort to the beaches and ledges below
the steep cliffs on the western shores, where the perpetual heavy surf
renders it impracticable for man to land. But on some islands, as on
Adam/’s Island, the sealers have made roadways for themselves over
the rocks and ice of the interior down on to these beaches. This is,
however, not always practicable, and it is said that under the protec-
tion of intractable precipices the fur-seal are unmolested and very
plentiful on MacDonald’s Island, one of the Kerguelen group.
864. A traveller, Mr. Chapman, visiting Adam’s Island i in 1889, writes:
“We landed at the cave where the seal huts are. . . . These seal-
ers make an easy road across the island, and when they arrive at the
cliffs at the other side, lower some of their number to the ledges and
caves where they slaughter seals. The slayers and the skins are then
drawn up. It is wholly illegal, but it goes on, so that the fur-seal are
nearly exterminated.”
3865. The naturalists on the “Challenger” frequently observed fnr-
seal in 1873-74. Of Nightingale Island it is reported: ‘‘The caves,
with the sloping ledges leading up to them, are frequented by fur- seals.
Four years before the visit of the expedition 1,400 seals had been killed
on the island by one ship’s crew. Seals were very much scarcer in 1873,
but the island was visited regularly once a-year by the Tristan people.
ae, REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
The Germans killed only seven seals at Inaccessible Island during their
stay, but the Tristan people killed forty in December 1872.”*
866. Of the Crozet Island the report was: “The islands are fre
quented by elephant- and fur-seals, although they are not so plentiful
as formerly. . . . . The flesh of the seals and birds, the eggs of
the latter, together with the Kerguelen cabbage, form a nourishing
diet on which the sealers residing at times on one or other of the islands
have usually lived.”
867. Of Kerguelen Island it is said: “Two of the whaling schooners
killed over seventy fur-seals on one day, and upwards of twenty on
another. . . . . It is a pity that some discretion is not used in
killing the animals.” 2
868. Another entry tells us of the Messier Channel: “The steam-
pinnace left Gray Harbour at 4 A. M. with several naturalists and offi-
cers, and joined the ship in the evening at Port Grappler” (in January
1876). ‘On the way landing was effected at several spots, and a num-
ber of birds were procured; a very large number of fur-seals (A rctoce-
phalus) were seen, and six were shot, the skins and skeletons of which
were preserved.”
869. In regard to Australia, Sir F. McCoy, kindly supplying us with
information from the National Museum, Melbourne, states of the Huo-
taria cinerea: ‘The decline or destruction of the fishery is certainly
attributable to the indiscriminate slaughter of the seals on the few
islands off the south coast, especially in Western Port, where the old
males and gravid females resorted in the summer to bring forth and
tend the young. . . . . The fur-seal fishery was conducted simply
by manning a boat suitable for landing on the islands, the landing
usually taking place at night, and then the seals were killed indis-
criminately by clubbing them on the nose with large sticks.
The Australian fur-seals were never fished for in the open ocean.”
870. Thus, over all these forty years, vessels, most of them under the
United States flag, have continued to haunt the breeding places of the
fur-seal in the South Seas for the purpose of killing all that could be
killed, regardless of sex or condition.
The records show that the number of vessels fitting out in New Eng-
land ports for this fishery averaged since 1840 from six to ten or twelve
each year.
871. At the time of the revival of sealing in the NNeeih Pacifie in 1867
and following years, several more vessels were dispatched to the South
Seas and very considerable catches were made, although not in num-
bers at all comparable to those of the old days. Never ‘theless, vessels
returned with cargoes of 1,000, 1,600, and even 2,700 choice skins.
872. A summary and authoritative account of what occurred was
given in 1889 by the Honourable C. A. Williams, of Connecticut, before
the House of Representatives: ‘People who had been previously
engaged in the sealing business revisited these southern localities after
a lapse of nearly fifty years, and no seals were found on the Island of
Desolation. . . . . The Island of South Shetland, and the Island
of South Georgia, and the Island of Sandw ich Land, and the
146 Diegos off Cape Horn, and one or two minor points, were found
to yield more or less seal. In this period of fifty years in these
localities seal life had recuperated to such an extent that there was
taken from them in the six years from 1870 to 1877 perhaps 40,000
skins. . . . . To-day they are again exhausted. 21th eee siealo
* “Challenger Expedition Report,’ ” vol. i, p. 264 et seq.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 213
not think that 100 seals could be procured from all the localities men-
tioned by a close research.”
873. According to authentic records, the sealers from New London
obtained from the South Shetlands and the neighbourhood of Cape
Horn and Tierra del Fuego 92,756 fur-seal skins between the years 1870
and 1880, but sealers are still at work, by their wasteful and indiserim-
inate slaughter, preventing the fur-seal of the South Seas from reeup-
erating and being restored in numbers.
874. Thus, the actual experiences of South Sea sealing unmistakably
emphasize the serious dangers of indiscriminate and wholesale slaughter
on shore, and prove conclusively that, in the entire absence of pelagic
sealing, it is perfectly possible practically to exterminate the seal race.
875. This serious result, actually achieved, is brought into still greater
prominence when we bear in mind the measures adopted by several
Governments of territories in the Southern Hemisphere, by special reg-
ulations or otherwise, to restore and preserve the fur-seal rookeries.
The Governments which have set up such regulations are those of the
Uruguay, Argentine, and Chilean R epublies, and of the British Colo-
nies of the Falkland Islands, the Cape of Good Hope, Victoria, New
Zealand, and Tasmania.
876, In the Uruguay Republic, for many years the Government have
protected the seals resorting for breeding purposes to the Lobos, the
Hspinillo, and the Coronilla Islands.
According to a special report, furnished to us by Your Majesty’s
Minister, Mr. Satow, these fisheries have been very carefully looked
after. They are now leased to a private company for a term of years,
but without limitation of the numbers to be taken. The company have
the sole right of taking seals, and there is no Government tax levied
on the skins. The killing of seals is only permitted between the Ist
June and the 15th October in each year. All the seals are killed on
shore, chiefly by means of clubs, and there is no pelagic fishing. It is
the general opinion that no diminution is observable in the number of
seals frequenting the rookeries. Mr. Lafone, M. P., has kindly supplied
us with much very valuable information. The chief rookeries have
been, to his knowledge, in good condition for more than forty years
past. In Appendix (G) we give the figures of the numbers actually
taken in recent years, from which it will be seen that the aver age
annual take, with no apparent injury to the numbers of seals frequent-
ing the rookeries, is nearly 15,000 seals; but that of these more than
one-third are “ small pups.” Tn 1888 str ong representations were made
against killing pups. It may be added that in the medium sizes many
females are included without injuriously affecting the total number of
the seals.
877. In 1889 the Government of the Argentine Republic absolutely
forbad the taking of seals along its coasts, and also commenced negoti-
ations with Chile for co-operation in the same direction, especially with
the view to stopping United States vessels which habitually poached
on the rookeries, notably the “Sarah W. Hunt” and the “ Martha
Gale.”
878. The Chilean Government has from time to time considered the
question of protecting the fur-seals. In 1883 they abstained from enfore-
ing regulations. Up to 1889 the seal fishery was free to any Chilean
subject or foreigner residing in the country, but not open to vessels and
their crews coming from foreign countries. It has, however, been found
hitherto impracticable to euard the fishing distr icts during the breed-
ing season, and the British Vice-Consul at Punta Ar enas, in the Straits
214 REPORT OF SKRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
of Magellan, reports in 1889 that the American schooners take no notice
of the interdiction, although only one of them, the “ Sarah W. Hunt,”
bas as yet been specifically prohibited from such illegitimate sealing.
He also reports that the Chilean Government are contemplating more
stringent measures of protection for the few remaining seals.
879. The Chilean Government has always recognized the value of the
seal-fishery, although since the earlier years of the century it has been
felt that the seals were nearly extirpated. We have frequent allusions
to Government control. Thus, in 1866, Her Majesty’s ship ‘‘Topaze,”
visiting the Island of Juan Fernandez, reports ten inhabitants engaged
in sealing under licence from the Chilean Government. In 1875 Her
Majesty’s ship “Challenger” reports finding a Chilean leasing the right
from this Government for 2001. a-year, and employing fifty or sixty men
on Juan Fernandez and Mas-a-Fuera for the purpose of collecting seal-
skins.
880. In all these places, and especially in the districts around the
Horn, the enforcement of strict regulations, especially instituted
147 =~‘ for avoiding the taking of gravid females and disturbance of
males, females, and young during the early portion of the period
they spend ashore, is certain to permit of a great increase in the supply
of fur-seal.
881. In some of the several British Colonies where the fur-seal is found,
specific regulations have been in force for some time past.
882. In the Falkland Islands there is legislative provision embodied
in the Ordinance No. 4 of 1881 for the protection of the fur-seal, which
is already having an excellent effect, so far as it can be enforced. Its
main provisions (see Appendix E) are a close time from the 1st October
to the Ist April, and penalties and forfeiture against individual owners
of vessels and others killing or permitting to be killed any fur-seals dur-
ing those months.
883. Recent inquiries made of those experienced in sealing in those
islands elicited the invariable opinion that the main causes of the pres-
ent depletion has been the reckless and indiscriminate slaughter of the
seals whenever they land, and especially during the breeding season.
In some cases the stocking of farms and people taking up their abode
in the neighbourhood of the seal rookeries has certainly driven the seals
to other resorts. But the killing of seals has never been attempted at
sea, and is entirely confined to parties of sealers landed from boats and
schooners, who club, shoot, and spear the seals on shore. The most
serious complaints are that foreign schooners cruize along the coast and
land sealing parties regardless of the statutory close season.
884. Experienced men in the Falkland Islands assert that the fur-
seal are known not infrequently to desert favourite landing places when
they find they are molested for others where they rest and breed in
eace.
F 885. The Government of the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope has
for very many years paid attention to the fur-seals frequenting the
coast and islands under its authority. Thus, on the 12th April, 1844, a
Proclamation was issued:
His Excellency the Governor, having been pleased to decide that the Seal Islands
in Mossel Bay shall not be granted on lease for the present, hereby prohibits all per-
sons from disturbing the seals on the said island, and warns them from trespassing
there after this notice on pain of prosecution.
886. A special Report from Mr, C. H. Jackson, the Government Agent
in charge of the Seal and Guano Islands (Appendix B), speaks of indis-
criminate slaughter on shore as the chief cause of the present deple-
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 215
tion; and points out that, for lack of a close time during the breeding
season between November and January, a great number of females
have been destroyed “either about to give birth or suckling their
young.” Pelagic sealing is unknown, the system of killing adopted
being that of landing men in boats, "armed with clubs. He speaks
specially of the ease with which seals are scared from their resorts by
steamers and other vessels coming close in. He also mentions that
“by a happy provision of nature a female seal will suckle any young
one, whether her own or not.”
887. There are no special protective laws, but the islands are Gov-
ernment property and are leased upon short leases, so that the Govern-
ment has power, if it will, to control this profitable fishery.
888. In the Australian waters fur-seals were found on the coasts and
islands of Victoria, Tasmania, and New Zealand in very great abun-
dance, and they are still seen and obtained.
889. In regard to Victoria, Sir F. McCoy reports as follows:
(1.) The seal fishery of Australia was never so extensive as that of the North
Pacific, and for more than thirty years the trade in Australian fur-seal skins has
entirely ceased, although of some extent in Sydney a little before that time.
(2.) In Victoria, the only fur-seal is the eared seal,(Huotaria cinerea), the size,
shape, and habits of which very nearly recall those of the North Pacific. The
decline or destruction of the fishery is certainly attributable to the indiscriminate
slaughter of the seals on the few islands off the south coast, especially in Western
Port, where the old males and gravid females resorted in the summer to bring forth
and tend the young. At present a few islands only are frequented by those seals,
now in the breeding season, and the number of individuals is too small to furnish
any trade.
(3.) The fur-seal fishery was conducted simply by manning a boat suitable for
landing on the islands, the landing usually taking place at nicht, and then the seals
were killed indiscriminately by elubbing them on the nose with large sticks. The
skins were chiefly exported from Sy dney.
(4.) No measures effective for the protection of the fur-seal fisheries have been
undertaken on any large scale by any of the Australian Colonies, but some years ago
Irecommended the Victorian Government to prohibit the killing of seals on the
148 = small islands which they frequent near Phillip Island, and although the num-
ber has somewhat increased in consequence, it is far too small to furnish a
trade.
(5.) The Australian fur-seals were never fished for in the open ocean.
(6.) Generally the life history of the Victorian fur-seal exactly resembles that of
the North Pacific, following shoals of fish in the open ocean, but coming on the islands
to breed in the latter part of the summer.
890. Sealing was a leading industry in New South Wales, especially
in the years 1810-20. Several firms fitted out large schooners, and
great numbers of skins were secured, especially from places like Mac-
quarie and the Antipodes Islands. Some years ago the Government
issued an order prohibiting the killing of seals on the mainland and
islands of the Colony, and they are reported as increasing in numbers,
as, for instance, around Port Stephens.
891. From Tasmania sealing has been conducted on many neighbour-
ing islands, the seals all being shot or clubbed on the shore. No meas-
ures of preservation have been taken until 1891, when a Government
Proclamation was issued: ‘The taking of seals, known by the name of
seals or any other local name,in Tasmania and its dependencies, is
hereby prohibited for a period of three years from the 26th July, 1891.”
The chief difficulty found is with schooners from other parts maraud-
ing on the rookeries.
892. In New Zealand at the beginning of this century seals were
numerous in several places along the coast around Port Chalmers, along
the west coast, near Westport, round Stewart’s Island, and in other
places. All the neighbouring islands, such as the Chatham, Macquarie,
Bounty, Campbell, and Antipodes groups, were well-known haunts.
216 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. ©
Mr. Yate, a missionary, writing in 1835, tells of several establishments
for the seal fishery on the coast of New Zealand. But fifteen or twenty
years of persistent and indiscriminate slaughter on shore had practi-
cally exterminated the seal in 1840.
893. As to the causes of the depletion, Mr. F. Chapman, writing from
Dunedin, says: ‘As to the cause of this there is but one answer: reck-
less killing and disturbance in the rookeries. Mr. Dawson need not
trouble himself about pelagic sealing; there is not and never was such
a thing in these waters.”
894. In the early years of this century the port of Sydney did a
large trade in seal-skins, and it is undoubted that with rise in market
prices of more than ten-fold over that period, the industry may well be
revived by judicious Government regulations duly enforced.
The main difficulty in these seas, as elsewhere, is the raiding ashore,
especially in the breeding season, by unauthorized persons. It is to be
hoped that the outcome of the Behring Sea negotiations may be inter-
national agreement as to the illegality of all such proceedings, and thus
all territorial Powers will be empowered to execute regulations against
all comers, so necessary to the preservation of soimportan? an industry
as that of sealing. '
895. It will be well if the Governments of New Zealand, Tasmania,
Victoria, the Cape of Good Hope, and the I’alkland Island, as well as
those of the Uruguayan Republic and Chile, take steps to secure for
themselves any international advantages for the proper protection of
the fur-seal in the South Seas which may be determined to be applicable
under international sanction in the North Pacific. As acommencement,
each of these Governments should forthwith make statutory provision
for close seasons, restriction of numbers taken, and other matters affect-
ing seal life within their territorial dominions and the waters thereof.
896. A further point in connection with South Sea sealing remains to
be dealt with.
Some of the older sealers who gave us evidence mentioned their opin-
ion that the fur-seal of the Pribyloff Islands were the overflow of the
fur-seal of the South Sea when disturbed and harassed by the indiserim-
inate slaughter above detailed.
We observe also that the United States authority, Mr. Elliott, in his
“‘ Monograph on the Fur-seal” (p. 6), writes: ‘“‘It appears as if the fur-
seals had originally passed to Behring Sea from the parent stock of the
Patagonian region, up along the coast of South America, a few tarry-
ing at the dry and heated Galapagos Islands, the rest speeding on to
the northward, disturbed by the clear skies and sandy beaches of the
Mexican coast, on and up to the great fish-spawning shores of the Aleu-
tian Islands and Behring Sea. There on the Pribyloff group and the
bluffy Commander Islands they found that union of cool water, well-
adapted landing, and moist foggy air which they had missed since they
left the storm-beaten coasts far below.”
897. We have, however, received from the Director of the Natural
History Department of the British Museum a very valuable Mem-
orandum (Appendix D), pointing out the structural and other differ-
ences which distinguish the various species of fur-seal, and
149 ~=which clearly indicate that the seals frequenting the North
Pacific do not migrate south of the Equator. Nor can we hold
out any hope that, as was expressed by a New Zealand authority, the
persecution of the fur-seal in the North Pacific may drive them south
to replenish New Zealand rookeries.
898. Tlie relative importance of the South Sea fishery is insignificant
at the present day in comparison with that of the North Pacific. In
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. Dia
the latter the last full years gave a total catch of about 190,010, whereas
the total catch south of the Equator only reaches 25,000. But the
South Seas, during the first seventy years of the fisheries, produced at
least 16,000,000 seals, whereas from the North Pacific it seems probable
that not more than 5,000,000 have been, in all, secured in 110 years.
To reinstate in some degree the South Sea fisheries would thus be to
revive, if only partially, a great and most profitable industry.
899. At the same time, in the immediate matter of the preservation
of the fur-seal in the Northern Pacific, it is well to bear in mind that
actual experience in the South Seas proves incontestably the following
among other facts:
(i.) Excessive slaughter on shore, in the entire absence of any pelagic
sealing, results in commercial extermination.
(ii.) Excessive slaughter and disturbance causes absolute depletion
and desertion in given breeding places, leading the surviving seals to
seek other resorts.
(iii.) As Fanning has recorded, while old rookeries are being depleted
and new ones being taken up, more seals are seen at sea than ever.
900. This is a timely object lesson for the North Pacific, where from
two known breeding resorts, for the past twenty-five years, so great a
number of skins have been taken (§ 43 et seq.) by excessive slaughter
on shore, and complaints are now made officially that untess strong
measures of rest and recuperation are promptly adopted the seals fre-
quenting these resorts will disappear. Undoubtedly, they will seek
other breeding places.
901. Mr. Blaine has done good service in drawing attention, in his
despatch of the 17th December, 1890, to the disastrous results in the
South Seas following on indiscriminate and unrestricted slaughter of
the fur-seal. There has never been recorded any more self-evident and
striking example of the consequences of excessive slaughter by man.
It is therefore useful to bear in mind the precise character and circum-
stances of the seal fishery of the Southern Hemisphere.
VITI—MARKETING THE SEAL-SKINS.
902. The process of preparing the seal-skins for the market, costing,
on the whole, 18s. to 20s. per skin, is the work of a prosperous industry
in London.
The skins are landed in the docks, and sorted for size, quality, and
kind, ready for the sale-room. Eventually they arrive, thus graded, at
the factory, and are dealt with in batches. The process commences
with the removal of the fat and flesh left on the skins by careless skin-
ning; the next step is thoroughly to cleanse the skin by hot-water
washing and stretching, after which the skins are deftly shaved down
to the requisite thinness. They are then treated in a hot chamber, and
the outer hair taken off. The completing stages are those of dyeing to
a uniform colour, and finally shaving the skin down to the necessary
thinness. At every stage much technical skill and judgment are
required.
903. It is a noteworthy fact, that nearly all fur-seal skins are taken
to London to be dressed and sold. The fur-seal industry thus gives
employment to much shipping on the Pacific, to railways across the
American continent, and to shipping on the Atlantic; while in the
business of insurance, and in the sale of the raw and finished skins,
both wholesale and retail, as well as in the processes above described,
very considerable profits are realized.
150 Part III.
CONCLUDING REMARKS.
904, In commencing our Report, we explained the steps taken to carry
out the duties assigned to us. In Part I we have given the conclusions
to which our investigations have led us in regard to the facts and con-
ditions of seal life in the North Pacific Ocean, and to the measures
necessary for the proper protection and preservation of the fur-seal.
In Part II and in the Appendices there are presented, in fuller detail, the
results of our investigations, together with such collateral information
or evidence as appears to be necessary to enable just conclusions to be
arrived at.
905. In conclusion, we would wish to record our hich appreciation of
the ready response afforded to our inquiries by the numerous persons
to whom we addressed them, whether in correspondence or by word of
mouth.
906. To the officials of the United States Government, to the Com-
manding Officers of the men-of-war and revenue-cruizers, as well as to
the representatives of the Alaska Commercial and North American
Commercial Companies, we are greatly indebted for the hospitality an '
courtesy they uniformly extended to us, as well as for the zealous and
ready assistance they rendered us in our endeavours to obtain the infor-
mation of which we were in search.
907. From the Admiral in command of the Pacific Station and the
Commanders, officers, and men of Her Majesty’s ships ‘‘Nymphe,”
“ Porpoise,” and “Pheasant,” we received every assistance and aid, and
they secured for us much valuable information.
908. We would venture specially to commend the industry, zeal, and
ability with which, throughout our investigations and negotiations, Mr.
Ashley Froude has conducted the arduous duties of Secretary to the
Commission and Joint Secretary to the Joint Commission. We would
also beg that the Government of Canada may be informed of the pains-
taking, capable, and thorough manner in which we have been assisted
throughout by Mr. James Macoun.
All of which we humbly submit, for the gracious consideration of your
Majesty.
(Signed) GEORGE BADEN-POWELL.
GEORGE M. DAWSON.
(Signed) ASHLEY FROUDE, Secretary.
JUNE 21, 1892.
218
Maps, Nos 1 to 5 to lace p. 150
| |. CHARLOTT ex.
os °
1% \ a
-
)
Diacon Entrance Ri
iy )
atte S%
kt
VANCOUV
2 tas
Juan de Fucdoy~ iin
JULY-8 OCTOBER, 1891.
(2000. 3/93.1194.) Fo sos
a 8 See
a
a
OKHOTSK SEA
b “t
an
|
|
s GHALIEN |.
\_\ J
yh we
oRobbenl. . ?
| No. 1. TRACK CHART OF ROUTES FOLLOWED BY THE BRITISH BEHRING SEA COMMISSIONERS, 15 JULY-8 OCTOBER, 1804
Sackatt@Wilhelms Litho Co NY
(2000. 3/93.1193.) FO 505.
: <3 t .
: = ; 5 7
7 lees : x co
= {
a * So 7% ‘ : H ’ = >
i : a - a : - : :
i 7 ‘ $ t
7 : » : 7 :
ot ’ - a “>
i 7 Lal i hy
2 1
5 - 7
i
a , ‘ j
= 7 a a ¢ Poi
‘ J poy f
_ :
: 7 4
I oe : 7
* ae - it
- 4 ; 7
’ i 7
; 7 ; -
- 7 7 " a = f :
if = o 7 Mi » - - o -
- - 7 << - ol o
= “aoe rah i 7 7 4
‘ a -
y - 4 ,
ws j 7
- F
j 7 ®
= _ —, ~
- F. :
- : - 7
o ; .
mn
7 ‘
“4
oes , %
THE NORTH PACIFIC.
INITY OF ROBBEN ISLAND AND THE KURILE ISLANDS
NED.)
{ 2060. $/93.1197,) Fo. 305,
i» a —
OKHOTSK SEA
——— —
No. 2. SKETCH MAP ILLUSTRATING RESORTS AND MIGRATION ROUTES OF FUR SEALS IN THE NORTH PACIFIC.
i eeeeeneenaaeeiaaaiemmmmmamnmannammmmmmmmmammmmmmmmmmmmmnmmmmmmmmmmmsssssssmeeseeeeeeeeseseeeeeeeeeeeeeee eee
.- SUMMER HABITATS.
WINTER HABITATS. (NOTE.—THE SUMMER HABITATS OF SEALS IN THE VICINITY OF ROBBEN ISLAND AND THE KURILE ISLANDS
ARE MERELY INDICATED AS THEY CANNOT BE DEFINED.)
~~~"... . NORTHERLY MIGRATION ROUTES IN EARLY SUMMER
-. SOUTHERLY MIGRATION ROUTES IN AUTUMN.
{ 2000. $/93.1197,) Fo. 505,
‘Sacre 8 Vininadon Lathe Co MY
:
| Q. CHARLOTT
hod
vs
A" tako
1 . )
Juan de Fuca}
} IN THE PERIOD
TY OF THE COMMANDER ISLANDS, IN THIS PERIOD,
1 RESPECTING IT iS INSUFFICIENT. SMALLER AREAS
N ISLAND AND SOME OF THE KURILE ISLANDS ARE
| Tat.
* by
Se ec (2000. 3/93.1197.) FO 305.
aie
60
Spates Ny
|
| OKHOTSK SEA
|
SAGHALIEN |.
BEHRING
Diagram showing relative number of observations.in which the wind blew from VANCOUVE RN
warious directions, each observation being indicated by ao inch. . a\.
Number of calms in 144 observations = 13.
The figure indicates average force of wind for various directions :-—
Sig age force of wind f
July 15 to Aug. 16, inclusive, he il
1891.
Observations made use
of in forming diagram
nearly all taken north
of 55° N., and east of
175° MW, mostly in neigh-
bourkood of Pribyloff
Islands.
.| Directions Sorce for
III.
Q. CHARLOTT. ye: We
it :
Juan de ag?
Average
different
L 3
16 NW |
13 Calm. |
= | ae
No. 3. SKETCH MAP SHOWING APPROXIMATELY THE AREA FREQUENTED BY FUR SEALS IN THE PERIOD
ier) AREA CHARACTERIZED BY ABUNDANT, SEALS.
AREA CHARACTERIZED BY SCATTERED SEALS.
Sackett @ Wiidelos Lite Co NY
EXTENDING FROM JULY 15TH TO AUGUST 16TH, 1891,
(NOTE.—THE AREA OF ABUNDANT SEALS IN THE VICINITY OF THE COMMANDER ISLANDS, IN THIS PERIOD,
IS NOT INDICATED, AS THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION RESPECTING IT (S INSUFFICIENT. SMALLER AREAS
OF SEAL OCCURRENCE IN THE VICINITY OF ROBBEN ISLAND AND SOME OF THE KURILE ISLANDS ARE
NOT SHOWN FOR THE SAME REASON.)
(2000. 3/93.1199.) FO 305.
we)
Q. CHARLOTT ‘a
Wy
=
0. Charlotte S?°%
IN THE PERIOD
Y OF THE COMMANDER ISLANDS, IN THIS PERIOD,
ATIONS. SMALLER AREAS OF SEAL OCCURRENCE
F THE KURILE ISLANDS ARE NOT SHOWN AS NO
Sackett @ Withelms Lithc.| (2000. 3/93.1194.) FO 305.
OKHOTSK SEA
*
@. CHARLOTT ye: LS 3
Ve
0. Charlotte S%:%
Diagram showing relative number of observations in which the wind blew from VANECUNE
various directions, cach observation being indicated by ~, inch.
Number of calms in 96 observations = 11. Juan de
The figure indicates average force of wind for various directions :-—
Aug. 16 to Ss 15, inclusive,
1891.
Observations mostly
east of 170° W., and
between parallels of 54°
and 60°,
No. 4. SKETCH MAP SHOWING APPROXIMATELY THE AREA FREQUENTED BY FUR SEALS IN THE PERIOD
EXTENDING FROM AUGUST 16TH TO SEPTEMBER 15TH, 1891.
=: HE VICIN F THE COMMANDER ISLANDS, IN P :
Ea ys ae AREA CHARACTERIZED BY ABUNDANT SEALS (NOTE.—THE AREA OF ABUNDANT SEALS IN THE VICINITY O S, IN THIS PERIOD
DEPENDS UPON A VERY LIMITED NUMEER OF OBSERVATIONS, SMALLER AREAS OF SEAL OCCURRENCE
es td AREA CHARACTERIZED BY SCATTERED SEALS.
IN THE VICINITY OF ROBBEN ISLAND AND SOME OF THE KURILE ISLANDS ARE NOT SHOWN AS NO
INFORMATION 1S AVAILABLE RESPECTING THEM)
Sechelt Wilbelms Lithe Co NY
(2000. 3/93.1191.) FO 305.
1880 1890 300,000
ra weight of SINS
lowered, 7883.
SE
COAST, FROM 1862 TO 1891,
TO 1891.
1890
Sackett 8 V/itheims Litho CoNY
DIAGRAM REPRESENTING THE NUMBER OF FUR SEALS KILLED ANNUALLY ON THE PRIBYLOFF ISLANDS,
FROM 1817 TO 1891.
DIAGRAM REPRESENTING THE NUMBER OF FUR SEAL SKINS PURCHASED BY THE HUDSON’S BAY COMPANY AT POSTS ON THE COAST, FROM 1852 TO 1891,
BEING A PORTION OF THE INDEPENDENT INDIAN COAST CATCH FOR THESE YEARS.
No record of Indian Coast Catch tn earlier years.
DIAGRAM REPRESENTING THE NUMBER OF FUR SEAL SKINS OBTAINED ANNUALLY BY CANADIAN SEALING VESSELS, FROM 1871 TO 1891.
(THE NUMBER OF SKINS TAKEN BY UNITED STATES SEALING VESSELS IS NOT INCLUDED, THERE BEING NO TRUSTWORTHY STATISTICS FOR IT.)
a
=]
uw
Price in Shillings.
ws
2 os
w nw
Oo
meee | | ih |
1820 1630 1840 1850 1860 1870
(2000. 33.1197) F.0.305.
‘Oa
151
APPENDICES.
APPENDIX (A).
LIST OF PERSONS AND AUTHORITIES SUPPLYING EVIDENCE.
Tist of those who gave Personal Evidence and Information to the Behring Sea Commission.
4)
°
CONATR NH |
Name.
Whe-JivO@asaoeoscoccansc
Colonel Barnes
Mr. Bentzon
Captain Blairs.-----.---
Captain Brandt.......--
Mr. Boscowitz ....-......
Mr. Stanley Brown.....
GAs Andee saeooosess
Captain Baker..........
Mire Clinrttond a4 50008
Captain Coulson........
Captain Cox...........-
Captain W. Cox ........
Mr. R. Cunningham.....
Mr. G. Cunningham ....
Mr. Campbell...........
Minis: COPCbermscieniee Osc
Captain Dodds..... oon
Mass Dirks) = 2 =< s-mcsteeae
Mr. Ji. Marle, M.P.......
Captain Edwards.......
Mr. Emmons
Lieutenant Emmons....
Edensaw
Mr. R. Finlayson .......
MirmeHowlelimancacseeme
Woks Jee Ban acacouonoes
Woe, IMOsesaaGaSecdacond
Mr. Fergusson....... Soe
Mr. Flummerfelt .......
M. Grebnitzky...
Mir? Grevies- 1
Mr. J. Henderson.......
Captain Healey.........
Rev. — Hopkins ........
Mr. Hammersley .......
AG SOWNSON= = = 2-1.
Cap talm2 da@keasencece
Lieutenant Jarvis .-.....
Rev. — Jennings.-......
Jesuit Missionaries.....
M. Kamyakoff ......cc.-
Place and Profession.
Medical Officer, St. Paul Island.
Trader, Masset, Queen Charlotte Islands.
Signal Officer, Neah Bay.
A. D. C.to Commandant, Petropaulouski.
Bookkeeper, St. Paul Island.
Assistant Treasury Agent, St. Paul Island.
Formerly employé, Hudson Bay Company, Port Simpson.
Schooner ‘*Leon,’’ Petropaulouski.
Russian gun-boat ‘* Aleut.”
Victoria, British Columbia.
Special Agent of United Si:
Hunter, St. Matthew Island.
Sealing-schooner ‘‘ Viva,” Victoria, British Columbia.
Manager, Hudson Bay Company, Port Simpson.
United States Revenue-eruvizer ‘* Rush.”
Agent for E, B. Marvin and Co., Victoria, British Colimbia.
Sealing-schooner ‘“‘Sapphire,” Victoria, British Columbia.
Fur-trader and owner of Canneries, Port Essington, British Columbia.
Ditto.
Vancouver, British Columbia.
Ditto.
Sealing-schooner ‘‘ Maggie Mac,” Victoria, British Co umbia.
Agent of Alaska Commercial Company, Atka Island.
Victoria, British Columbia.
Vancouver, British Columbia.
Collector of Customs, Unalaska.
United States ship *‘ Pinta,” Sitka.
Heida Chief, Masset.
Victoria, British Columbia, formerly employé of Hudson Bay Company.
Agent of North American Commercial Company, St. Paul Island.
Vancouver, British Columbia.
Ditto.
Ditto.
Victoria, British Columbia.
Administrator of Commander Islands.
Alaska Commercial Company, Unalaska.
Victoria, British Columbia.
President of Board of Trade, Victoria, British Columbia
Secretary of ditto.
Vancouver, British Columbia.
United States revenue-cruizer ‘‘ Bear.”
Bella Bella.
Vancouver, British Columbia.
Indian hunter, Shakaan.
Native, St. Lawrence Island.
United States revenue-cruizer ‘‘ Bear,”
Missionary, Port Essington.
Hazen Bay, Cape Vancouver.
Victoria, British Columbia.
Commandant, Petropaulouski.
3 Government, Pribyloff Islands.
Governor Knapp........| Sitka.
219
220 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
List of those who gave Personal Evidence and Information, etc.—Continued.
No. Name. Place and Profession.
D2 eMeGlare eee ce = —c= ----| Agent of Russian Seal-skin Company, Copper Island.
53 | Captain Lavender -.....-| Treasury Agent, St. George Island.
54 | Mr. J. Linguist-.........| Agent for Hutchinson, Kohl, and Co., Petropaulouski.
55 | Mr. Lockarby .........- Hudson Bay Company, Port Simpson.
Gi ACHoOShee. seciemenceelisce Kitkatla Indian, Port Essington.
57 | Captain Laing.-...-....- Victoria, British Columbia.
58 | Martin Lunberg..---.--- Quartermaster, steam-ship ‘‘ Danube.”
BOW Mars Minnie heme pees eacee Collector of Customs, Victoria, British Columbia.
60 | Captain Miner.-.-.-...... Sealing-schooner ‘‘ Henry Dennis,” Seattle.
61 | Captain Meyer.....-.--. Steain-ship ‘‘ Danube.”
62 | Colonel Murray......--- Assistant Treasury Agent, St. Paul Island.
63!) Mir Morgan ------.es-e= Agent of Russian Seal-skin Company, Behring Island.
64 | Mr. Malanwanski.-.-.---- Late Agent, Alaska Commercial Company, Behring Island.
65 | Mr. McManus.......... Newspaper reporter, sealing-schooner ‘‘ Otto.”
66 | Captain Maynard....--- United States ship ‘‘ Pinta.”’
67 | Mr. McKenzie.-.-........ Fur-trader, Masset, Queen Charlotte Islands.
68 | Captain McKenzie.-..-.- Sealing-steamer ‘‘ Eliza Edwards.”
69 | Mr. Macgowan....-..... Vancouver, British Columbia.
70s) DreeMiacalipinicec ects Ditto.
M0 | Miro Miun Sie 2s: =<, Owner of sealing-schooners, Victoria, British Columbia.
72 | Captain L. Maclean..... Sealing-schooner ‘‘ Favorite,”’ Victoria, British Columbia.
730) Sib Manvaiesss.. se Owner of sealing-schooner, Victoria, British Columbia.
74,| Mruk. Neumann... --..- Agent of Alaska Commercial Company, Unalaska.
759| MasNéwman=----2--- <1 Fur-trader, Aleutian Islands.
1G) Maze C...NTXON: oo sees Owner of sealing-schooners, Seattle.
77 | Mr. Oppenheimer......- Mayor of Vancouver, British Columbia.
78 || Mr: Redpath. --c-c.s-cs- Manager of North American Commercial Company, St. Paul Island.
79 | Captain Reiter..........] United States ship ‘‘ Thetis.”
80 | Mr. Rousefell..........- Vancouver, British Columbia.
81 | Mr. R. Robertson.-.-...-- Ditto.
82 | Mr. Justice Swan......-.| Port Townsend.
83 | Captain Spring ..-....... Ditto.
84 | Rev. — Stevens......... Port Essington.
85 | Mr Rasmibh=. 22... Ship-owner, Yokohama.
86 | Mr. Stevenson.......... Vancouver, British Columbia.
87| Mz G. RR. Dingle: <2-5- Sap cnbend eae North American Commercial Company, Pribyloff
slands.
88 | M. Willmann-2-.22c- so Russian Government Agent on Copper Island.
89 | Mr. Tatlow...--........ Vancouver, British Columbia.
90 | Captain Warren .......- Victoria, British Columbia.
O10 eVirsWialsbheecssacceeeese Navigator of sealing-schooner ‘‘ Wanderer.”’
92) (Mrs Wiashburn=s.-5--..l Agent of Alaska Commercial Company, Kodiak Island.
93 | Mr. D. Webster.-..-.... Benidont Agent of North American Commercial Company, St. George
Island.
94 | Major Williams......... United States Treasury Agent, St. Paul Island.
About 100 natives, Aleuts and Indians, as follows:
Aleut natives.........-- Village, St. Paul Island.
00 Oe npr cre caterer werent North-east Point, St. Paul Island.
os 00 Sppa6sasbe55 Unalaska.
WL Oe a eeasogoosS Atka Island.
ss DO go5seng0n6- Attu Island.
a SOO Sa baticeratetsle Copper Island.
Os Wo poossocesos Village, Behring Island.
ce Cs Go Se eens North Rookery, Behring Island.
Indians (Tlinkit)......-. Sitka.
Oe (Klawok) ...... Shakaan (Hanega tribe, from Klawok).
Oe (Tshimsian) ...| Port Simpson.
ae (Hailtzuk)..... Bella-Bella.
oe (Athit) oes seene Clayoquot Sound.
se (Haida) eeeesee- Masset, Queen Charlotte Islands.
OP (Kwakiool) ....| Nawitti, Hope Island.
es (Abt) Heccceecee Neah Bay (Makah tribe).
se ber niciae Suse Indian Office, Victoria, British Columbia (various tribes).
153 The following are the sources from which written informatiom has been
obtained by, or at the request of, the Behring Sea Commission:
1. Colonial Governments.
Cape of Good Hope. New Zealand.
Falkland Islands. Tasmania.
Newfoundland. Victoria.
New South Wales.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 221
2. Foreign Governments.
Argentine Republic. Monte Video.
Brazil. Russia.
Chile. Uruguay.
Japan.
3. Her Majesty’s Consuls abroad.
Canton. . San Francisco.
Honolulu. Shanghae.
4. Officers of Her Majesty’s Ships and Canadian Government Officials.
Admiral Hotham, C. B., Senior Naval Officer, Esquimalt.
Commander Turner, R. N., Her Majesty’s ship ‘‘ Nymphe.”
Commander Burr, R. N., Her Majesty’s ship ‘‘ Porpoise.”
Lieutenant-Commander Hadley, R. N., Her Majesty’s ship ‘‘ Pheasant.”
Mr. A. R. Milne, Collector of Customs, Victoria, British Columbia.
Indian Agents on coast of British Columbia, through Mr. A. W. Vowell.
5. Miscellaneous.
Mr. de Bunsen, British Legation, T6kié.
Earl Brownlow.
Captain Devereux, Graving Dock, Esquimalt.
Professor Flower, C. B., Natural History Museum, London.
Captain David Gray.
Dr. Giinther, Natural History Museum, London,
Hudson Bay Company.
Mr. A. W. Huson.
Sir George Curtis Lampson, Bart.
Mr. A. Lafone, M. P.
Mr. J. W. Mackay.
Professor Sir F. McCoy, Melbourne.
Sir R. Morier, G. C. B.
Mr. Murray, ‘“‘Challenger” Office, Edinburgh.
Baron Nordenskiold. -
Mr. Sclater, Zoological Society, London.
Mr. Justice Swan.
Mr. E. Maunde-Thompson, British Museum.
Mr. W. C. Van Horne.
154 APPENDIX (B).
CIRCULAR TO, AND REPLIES FROM, COLONIAL AND FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS.
The following Circular of Inquiry was prepared by the Behring Sea Commission-
ers, and forwarded at their request to the Governments of—
The Cape of Good Hope. Chile.
The Falkland islands. Argentine Republic.
New South Wales. Brazil.
Victoria. Uruguay.
Tasmania. Japan.
New Zealand.
Such replies as have been received are given below.
In addition to this Circular, direct correspondence was entered into with the
authorities on the same subjects.
Circular of Inquiry.
The Department of Fisheries of the Dominion of Canada, in connection with
questions relating to the fur-seal fisheries of the North Pacific, is desirous of obtain-
ing all possible information relating to the fur-seal fisheries of the Sonthern Hemis-
phere. The southern fur-seal, or ‘‘sea-bear’’ (of tlie family of eared seals, or Otarida),
is known to have formed the object of an important industry in the early part of
222 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
the present century, but the islands on which it once abounded are now reported,
and believed to be, almost entirely depleted of seals. As the habits and life-history
of the fur-seal of the North Pacific appear to be closely similar to those of the allied
seals of the Southern Hemisphere, it is thought probable that the history of the
decline of the southern fisheries may afford some facts having a direct bearing on
the fur-seal fisheries of the North Pacific, and may serve to indicate a proper mode
of protection to be accorded to these fisheries, if such should be found necessary.
In this connection, it would be of particular interest to know for each of the seal
islands our sealing-grounds of the Southern Hemisphere:
1. Whether the decline or destruction of the fishery is attributable to the slaughter
of the seals while on shore at their breeding-places, or to their pursuit at large on
the circumjacent ocean.
2. In what manner the fur-seal fishery has been or is conducted in each particular
locality.
3. Whether any, and, if any, what measures have been taken by various Govern-
ments towards the protection of the fur-seal fisheries in their territories or in places
within their jurisdiction; and, further, if any such measures are known to have
proved successful in preserving or rehabilitating the fisheries.
4. Generally, any particulars as to the life-history of the animal, its migration,
season of bringing forth its young, and the habits of the seals while engaged in
suckling and rearing the young.
It is also particularly requested that copies of any printed documents or Reports
referring to the fur-seal fisheries, or embodying Regulations provided for these fish-
eries, may be furnished.
Reply to Circular received from the Government of the Cape of Good Hope.
MINUTE.
In acknowledging the receipt of his Excellency the Governor’s Minute of the 25th
August last, inclosing a despatch from the Right Honourable the Secretary of State
for the Colonies, requesting to be supplied with certain particulars respecting the
fur-seal fishery of this Colony for the information of the Canadian Government,
Ministers have the honour to submit herewith a Report which has been received
from the Government Agent in charge of the seal and guano islands, affording the
desired particulars.
(Signed) J. W. SAUER.
CapPz Town, October $0, 1891.
Report upon the present Condition of the Seal Fishery on the Coasts of the Cape of Good
Hope.
The decline of the seal fishery in these waters is attributed by practical experts
entirely to the destruction of the females in the breeding season, and but for the
fact that there are many places almost inaccessible, and others where landing is diffi-
cult, the seal in these waters would probably have been exterminated, as no protec-
tion or legislation of any kind has ever been considered necessary.
155 During the “springs,” as they are technically called, at certain seasons of
the year, the seals are destroyed with clubs by men landing upon the islands
from boats.
The winter or shedding season commences in June and ends in August, during
which period numbers of male seals are killed, but very few females, who do not
appear to come out of the water at this season of the year.
The summer or breeding season, which extends from November to January, is,
however, by far the most important as regards the number of seals destroyed, and
of these the larger portion are females, either about to give birth or suckling their
young. Of course, in the former case, all these seals are lost; in the latter, the
greater number perish;.and but for a happy provision of nature, whereby a female
seal will suckle any young one, the destruction of the new-born seal would be com-
plete.
As the Colonial Government up to the present have always contented themselves
with letting out the islands upon short leases, with no restriction upon the lessees
as to the killing of seal, &c., no official information or statistics of any kind can be
furnished.
The life of a seal in the southern waters, if unmolested, is supposed to extend over
a considerable period, and it arrives at maturity in about three years. The old male
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 223
seals, called ‘‘bulls” or ‘‘whigs,” attain an enormous size, and fight desperately
among themselves. The females generally produce two pups at a birth, and imme-
diately afterwards take the male. The ‘‘cow” will suckle any of the young seals,
whether her own or not, and this period of nursing continues more or less for about
six months.
As regards their migrations, it is difficult to give an opinion, as seals are always
to be found in these waters, although they do not take up upon the islands in any
numbers except at the seasons I have mentioned; but I think it may be naturally
assumed that their migrations, whatever they may be, are regulated solely by the
food supply.
Unfortunately, as I have stated before, there are no printed documents or Reports
of any kind referring to the subject, but I have availed myself of information kindly
furnished by the best practical experts in the Colony, with whom I have been asso-
ciated, who are unanimous in their opinion—first, that the seals are decreasing in
these waters; and, secondly, that the sole cause of this decrease at the present time
is to be found in the destruction of the females during the breeding season.
We have practically no pursuit of the animals in the water on these coasts.
At one period, most of the islands were inhabited by seals, but there are compara-
tively few at the present time upon those islands in the immediate vicinity of Cape
Town, and this may be accounted for by many reasons, besides the most important
which I have already mentioned. Seals are very timid, and the noise of a steamer
will scare them away; in fact, passing to windward in a sailing vessel, within 2 or 3
miles of an island which they frequent, will generally disturb them. It requires
considerable experience to approach them, and old sealers never attempt to do so on
these coasts when an easterly wind is blowing. .
Upon several islands, especially in the Ichaboe group, are to be found the remains
of vast numbers of ‘‘seal,” probably the effects of an epidemic disease at some dis-
tant period. In many places, the hair, which is practically indestructible, has been
found mixed with earth to the depth of several feet, and this when sifted gives a fair
percentage of ammonia and phosphate, probably the residue of the bodies and bones
of the dead animals.
The average value of seal-skins in the rough state in the London market, taken in
these latitudes, is about 25s., but many fetch a much higher price. No attempt has
been made in the Colony to dress the skins, and there has been no sale for them locally
except for export.
The system of killing the seals is the same throughout all the colonial islands,
namely, with ‘‘clubs,” by men landing in boats.
The skins are salted upon the spot, folded up, tied, and sent to Cape Town by
coasting craft, from whence they are shipped to Europe.
(Signed) C. H. JACKSON,
Government Agent in charge of the Seal and Guano Islands,
CapPE Town, October 9, 1891.
Reply to Circular received from the Government of the Falkland Islands.
GOVERNOR SIR R. GOLDSWORTHY TO LORD KNUTSFORD.
GOVERNMENT Houses, Stanley, October 26, 1891.
My Lorp: I have the honour, in reply to your despatch of the 31st July, inclosing
a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada asking for information regarding
the seal fisheries in these seas, to forward a précis of the replies to the questions
asked, which I have been able to obtain here.
I regret that the information is not as full as might be desired, but, unfortunately,
Captain Hansen, an old and experienced sealer, from whom I had hoped to obtain
full particulars, was accidentally drowned before my letter, requesting his views
on a matter on which he was looked upon as an authority, reached him.
I have been given to understand by those conversant with these matters—indeed,
it is referred to in the accompanying précis—that foreign vessels destroy the seals
in the close season, which exists here from the 1st October to the Ist April.
The foreign vessels alluded to are American sealers, and formed the sub-
156 ject of correspondence between Governor Kerr and Captain Musgrave, Senior
Naval Officer on the South-East American Station.
I shall probably, when better informed on the whole question, be able to submit
my views on the subject. At present I refrain from doimg so.
Ihave, &c.
(Signed) RoGEeR Tockrp. GOLDSWORTHY,
224 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Précis of Replies to Circular of Inquiry emanating from the Department of Fisheries of the
Dominion of Canada relating to the Fur-Seal Vishery of the Southern Hemisphere which
have been received from Residents in the Falkland Islands.
Question 1. Whether the decline or destruction of the fishery is attributable to the
slaughter of the seals while on shore at their breeding places, or to their pursuit at
large on the circumjacent ocean.
Honourable J. J. Felton.—The main cause is due to the reckless and indiscriminate
slaughter of the seals during their breeding season; the death of the mothers, leay-
ing the young to perish, and the numbers who are driven from their resorts bring
forth their young in the water, which naturally perish. It has not been the practice
to shoot the seals in the water. If so shot, they sink.
J.J. Goodhart sends cutting from the ‘‘ Field,” which he thinks fully answers the
first three questions.
E. Nilsson.—The decline is to be attributed to the stocking of theland and people
taking up their abode in the neighbourhood of the rookeries.
H. H. Waldron.—The decline in the Southern Hemisphere, including the Falklands,
is to be attributed to the indiscriminate slaughter of the females during the breeding
season, whereby the young perish. Pursuit in the high seas is not carried on to any
extent.
Question 2. In what manner the fur-seal fishery has been, or is, conducted in each
particular locality.
J. J. Felton.—Formerly, by means of whale-boats; later on, by cutters and schoon-
ers. They would be fitted out for the “‘ pupping” and the “‘shedding” seasons; as
many men would be taken as possible, armed with clubs, spears, and guns, and,
landing at the breeding places, they would line the beach and endeavour to turn the
seals from taking to the water. If successful in this, the seals fell an easy prey.
Has repeatedly heard it said that so many were killed that numbers had become use-
less before they could be skinned. Now that the seals have taken to outlying rocks
and cliffs, the work is less profitable and more dangerous.
J. J. Goodhart.—See answer to Question 1.
E. Nilsson.—They have been usually captured by shooting or clubbing.
Henry Waldron.—By men landed from schooners, who remain on the rookeries
until calm weather permits them to be taken off.
Question 3. Whether any, and, if any, what measures have been taken by various
Governments towards the protection of the fur-seal fisheries in their territories, or
in places within their jurisdiction; and, further, if any such measures are known to
have proved successful in preserving or rehabilitating the fisheries.
J. J. Felton.—In the Falklands, since the close season was enacted, there has been
an increase of seals; but foreign schooners occasionally break the law.
J. J. Goodhart.—See answer to Question 1.
E. Nilsson.—Does not see any improvement since the Law enacting a close season
was passed.
H. Waldron.—To the same effect as J. J. Felton.
Question 4. Generally, any particulars as to the life-history of the animal, its
migration, season of bringing forth its young, and habits of the seals while engaged
in suckling and rearing the young.
J. J. Felton.—Does not think the seal migratory. The breeding season is about
midsummer, when both male and female make for a suitable place.
The “shedding” season is in the fail of the year, when they frequent rocks, and
the young, which before were valueless, become marketable.
J. J. Goodhart.—Has not studied the subject sufficiently to be able to give particu-
lars.
E. Nilsson.—The seal generally is a timid animal, and recedes from advancing civ-
ilization, and migrates to any place where it can remain undisturbed,
H. Waldron.—Owing to keen pursuit, the seals prefer caves and ledges of rocks
under high cliffs to form breeding rookeries. The fur-seal hauls up to breed in Jan-
uary, the young leaving in May for other rookeries with both ‘‘whigs” and “ clap-
matches.” * There is no regular migration, but it is probable that, when hard
pressed, they leave the South Shetlands and mainland for the Falklands. ‘They
are peculiar in liking some places for several years, and then at once going away
and not hauling up there again, apparently without cause, in some instances where
but few were killed and in others quite unmolested.”
157 When sealers leave carcases on the rocks, seals desert the place.
Seals will not increase in the Southern Hemisphere until the Chilean and
Argentine Governments have a close time and see it enforced.
(Initialled) Vie S28:
OCTOBER 28, 1891.
* Note.—‘ Whigs,” male seals; ‘clapimatches,” female seals,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 225
Reply to Circular received from the Government of New South Wales.
GOVERNOR LORD JERSEY TO LORD KNUTSFORD.
GOVERNMENT Housg, Sydney, October 30, 1891.
My Lorp: I have the honour, in reply to your despatch of the 30th July last, to
state that I can obtain no information concerning the fur-sea] fishery, as the fur-seal
is not found on the coast of New South Wales.
Ihave, &c. (Signed) JERSEY.
Reply to Circular received from the Government of Victoria.
GOVERNOR LORD HOPETOUN TO LORD KNUTSFORD.
GOVERNMENT Housk, Melbourne, October 27, 1891,
My Lorp: I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Lordship’s
despatch of the 30th July ultimo, requesting information on certain points con-
nected with the fur-seal fishery in this Colony, and to transmit a copy of a letter,
dated the 20th instant, from Sir Frederick McCoy, Director of the National Museum,
which embraces all the available information on the subject.
I have, &c. (Signed) HOPETOUN.
SIR F. M’COY TO MR. MUNRO.
NATIONAL MusiuM, Melbourne, October 20, 1891.
Sir: In reply to your letter of this date, I have the honour to report as follows:
1. The seal fishery of Australia was never so extensive as that of the North Pacific,
and for more than thirty years the trade in Australian fur-seal skins has entirely
ceased, although of some extent in Sydney a little before that time.
2. In Victoria the only fur-seal is the eared seal (Huotaria cinerea), the size, shape,
and habits of which very nearly recall those of the North Pacific. The decline or
destruction of the fishery is certainly attributable to the indiscriminate slaughter of
the seals on the few islands off the south coast, especially in Western Port, where
the old males and gravid females resorted in the summer to bring forth and tend the
young. At present a few islands only are frequented by these seals, now in the
breeding season, and the number of individuals is too small to furnish any trade.
3. The fur-seal fishery was conducted simply by manning a boat suitable for land-
ing on the islands, the landing usually taking place at night, and then the seals were
killed indiscriminately by clubbing them on the nose with large sticks. The skins
were chiefly exported from Sydney.
4. No measures effective for the protection of the fur-seal fisheries have been under-
taken on any large scale by any of the Australian Colonies, but some years ago I
recommended the Victorian Government to prohibit the killing of seals on the small
islands which they frequent near Phillip Island, and although the number has some-
what increased in consequence, it is far too small to furnish a trade.
5. The Australian fur-seals were never fished for in the open ocean.
6. Generally, the life-history of the Victorian fur-seal exactly resembles that of
the North Pacific, following shoals of fish in the open ocean, but coming on the
islands to breed in the latter part of the summer.
Ihave, &c.
(Signed) FREDERICK McCoy,
Director of Museum.
158 Reply to Circular received from the Government of Tasmania.
MR. SEAL TO THE CHIEF SECRETARY, HOBART.
HoBart, November 30, 1891.
Sir: I have the honour to report, for the information of the Canadian Govern-
ment, the following, in reply to the queries laid down in their Circular letter of the
9th July, 1891:
Query 1. Sealing in Tasmania and her dependencies (almost solely confined to the
islands in Bass Straits and the Macquarie Islands, situated to the south of New Zea-
land) has been carried on by the seals being killed on shore at their breeding places,
and not by ‘‘pursuit at large on the circumjacent ocean.”
BS.) by Vial 15
226 REPORT OF BRITISHL COMMISSIONERS.
Query 2. The seal fishery has been conducted by means of boats of 4 or 5 tons reg-
ister fitted up amongst the islands in Bass Straits, the erew being equipped with clubs
and rifles, the seals being shot upon the rocks when practicable, or followed upon
the shore and clubbed. Occasionally, large vessels come to Bass Straits from other
Colonies, but the same mode of killing is adopted. In the Macquarie Islands the
same principles are adopted with larger vessels.
Query 3. No measures were taken by the Tasmanian Government towards the pro-
tection of the seal fisheries in their territories until the early part of the present
year, when, at the request of the New Zealand Government, seal fishing was pro-
- hibited on the Macquarie Islands, and in October of the present year the Commis-
sioners of Fisheries, fearing the total extinction of the seals in Tasmania, consequent
upon their unrestricted slaughter, submitted a Regulation (copy attached, marked
A) totally prohibiting the taking of seals in Tasmania and its dependencies for a
period of three years.
Query 4. IL inclose a newspaper copy (marked B) of a paper prepared and read by
Mr. Alexander Morton, F. L. 8., one of the Tasmanian Commissioners of Fisheries, at
a late meeting of the Commission, which will, I think, fully answer the query, as
well as give interesting particulars of the history of the seal fisheries, and habits of
the seals, as far as Tasmania is concerned.
I have, &c.
(Signed) MATTHEW SEAL,
Chairman of the Commissioners of Fisheries.
GOVERNMENT NOTICE.
(AS)
The Governor in Council has been pleased, in accordance with the provisions of
section 12 of ‘‘The Fisheries Act, 1889” (53 Vict., No. 11), to amend and approve of
the following Regulation, the same having been made by the Commissioners of Fish-
eries, and published in accordance with section 13 of the said Act.
By his Excellency’s command,
(For Chief Secretary, absent),
(Signed) ALFRED T, PILLINGER.
CHImF SECRETARY’S OFFICE, October 26, 1891.
REGULATION.
1. The taking of seals, whether known by the name of seals or any other local
name, in Tasmania and its dependencies, is hereby prohibited for a period of three
years from the 20th day of July, 1891; and any person committing any breach of this
Regulation shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding 51.
NEWSPAPER EXTRACT.
(B.)
Mr. Morton then said that Mr. A. W. Scott, M. A., of New South Wales, was for many
years prior to his death a trustee of the Australian Museum, and. acting under instruc-
tions from the New South Wales Government, published a most comprehensive work
on the classification and habits of the seals found frequenting the Australasian shores,
including the Macquarie Island. ‘Three species of seals are found in these waters:
the grey Australian fur-seal (Arctocephalus cinereus), the sea-leopard (Stenorrhycnhus
leptonyx), and the sea-elephant (Morunga elephantina). The latter is only found on
Macquarie Island, although it is supposed at one time to have been met with in the
islands in Bass Straits.. Mr. Scott, in his work, divides the genus Arctocephalus into
two main divisions—the northern fur-seal of commerce, and the southern fur-seal of
commerce—(Aretocephalus ursinus and Arctocephalus Falklandicus). If, as has been
stated by Mr. Scott, that the fur-seal found on our coast is similar, if not identical,
with the fur-seal of Alaska, the proposed Regulations recommended by this Board
are absolutely necessary for their preservation.
159 At the Fisheries Exhibition, held at London in the year 1883, considerable
interest was taken in the collection of seals seut by the trustees of the Austra-
lian Museum. The skull of one of the seals sent to London was compared with the
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 22
one at the Paris Museum, and found to be identical. It was the first time that the
southern fur-seal (Arctocephalus cinereus) had been seen in England. Representations
were made to the New South Wales Government some few years back that this seal
was rapidly becoming extinct. The Government issuedLan order protecting them on
the islands and the mainland of New South Wales, the result being that they are
now on the increase, and a number may be seen inhabiting the Seal Rocks a little to
the north of Port Stephens.
In New South Wales the sealing trade was in full swing from 1810 to 1820, the
firms engaged being Sydney firms, viz., Messrs. Cable, Lord, Underwood; Riley,
Jones, and Birnie; Hook and Campbell. These firms had crafts manned by crews
of from twenty to twenty-eight men to each vessel, and were usually fitted out for
a twelve months’ cruize.
Owing to the want of proper restrictions, the indiscriminate slaughter was terri-
ble. It is recorded that in the years 1814-15, 400,000 skins from one island, the
Antipodes Island, or, as it is sometimes called, Pennatipod, were taken. These
skins being obtained in such a hasty manner were but imperfectly cured, and a
writer states that the ship ‘“‘ Pegasus” took home 100,000 of these in bulk, and on
her arrival in London the skins, having heated during the voyage, had to be dug
out of the hold, and were sold for manure.
As early as 1301-2 Péron says he found British seamen in Bass Straits killing all
that came in their way. In the years 1803 and 1804 upwards of 36,000 skins were
sent from the islands in Bass Straits, the slaughter being made without regard to sex.
At the present time in Macquarie Island are oniy to be found the sea-elephant
(Morunga elephantina), yet when Macquarie Island was discovered by a sealer in
1811, the sealing master who discovered it procured a cargo of 80,000 skins, and
another sealing party 100,000 skins, in one year.
With such a reckless killing, it is no wonder that the seals have become scarce
round our shores, and unless steps are immediately taken, it will only be a question
of time when their extermination will be completed.
Along the shores of New Zealand, as well as the southern shores of Australia,
large numbers of seals were found. In New Zealand a vessel from Boston, called
the ‘‘General Gates,” landed a party of six men near the south-west cape of the
Middle Island on the 10th August, 1821. In six weeks the party got 3,563 skins.
For about twenty years enormous numbers were captured without any respect to
age or sex, and in the year 1839 only a straggling seal was occasionally seen along
the shores of New Zealand.
The American fur-seal had a narrow escape of sharing the fate of its southern
kindred. In apaper dealing with this subject, a writer gives the following account :
“arly in this century the seals were almost exterminated in many of the islands
in the North Pacific, and were there as ruthlessly slaughtered as they were in the
Bass Straits and the New Zealand coast. The extermination was, as it were, com-
menced, had not Russia first and the United States afterwards leased the exclusive
right of killing seals on the Pribyloft Islands—a famous sealing place—to a single
Company, by which means the seals were saved, as the Company had an interest in
keeping up the supply of furs.”
This single experiment, the writer states, has proved conclusively that fur-seals
can be tarmed as easily as sheep, and that sealing should not be thrown open with-
out restrictions. Seals are a property the State should jealously guard. On the two
Pribyloff Islands it is computed that 500,000 seals resort annually. These islands,
from the value of the fur-seal, were discovered i in the year 1786, when the slaughter
commenced, and was prosectited without [ ? ] until the year 1839, when the num-
ber had been so reduced that the business threatened to be entirely destroy ed within
a few years. The destruction was then stopped until 1845, when it was gradually
resumed, though, instead of the indiscriminate slaughter which had before been per-
mitted, only the young males (2 years old) were allowed to be killed. The rookeries
continued to increase in size until 1857.
The Company who leased the right of sealing in these islands were restricted about
the year 1860 to 50,000 seal-skins annually. From 1821 to 1839, 758,502 fur-seals were
killed, and 372,894 from 1845 to 1862. From another authority, Mr. Hittell, I find
that when the United States Government took possession of the islands in 1867 sev-
eral American firms took possession, and the wholesale slaughter of seals began
afresh. In 1868 not less than 200,000 seals were killed, and for 1869 it is said the
number was not far below 300,000. The United States Government, fearing their
total extinction, leased the sole right cf seal-fishing on these islands to one firm,
restricting the allowed number to 100,000. From what he had been able to lay before
the Fisheries Board, no time should be lost in at once taking steps to protect the
seal fisheries in Bass Straits. Wherever proper restriction has been introduced a
most valuable industry has been started in connection with the seal industry, and,
instead of the three years, as has been proposed by this Board, he strongly recom-
mended five years for the close season, and if at that time the seals have increased
Das REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
the Government might be recommended to lease the islands, allowing only a certain
number to be taken annually, and on no account to allow the females to be killed.
In New Zealand, from the year 1855, the statistics of the export of seal-skins show:
In 1855, from Wellington, 580 skins were exported; in 1857, 376. From then until
1868 there isnorecord. Then, in 1868, 675; 1869, 14; 1870, 269; 1871, 755; 1872, 2,012;
1873, 1,602; 1874, 1,061; 1875, 2,767; 1876, 3,417; 1877, 1,503; 1878, 820; 1879, 2,484;
1880, 2,648; 1881, 1,259; 1882, 353; 1883, nil; 1884, 374.
Professor J. H. Middleton states that the annual value of the fur-seal fisheries of
the world is about 185,000/. The male seal does not attain his full size till he is
about 6 years old, and the female when she is about 4. There is, says Mr. J. Clarke,
in a paper printed in the ‘‘Contemporary Review,” a remarkable disparity of size
and build between them. In a species where the male would be 7 feet or 8 feet in
length, and weigh 500 lbs. or 700 lbs., the female would not be more than 4 feet
160 long, and. weigh from 80 Ibs. to 100 lbs. The males, when aged, are whitish
erey, and between 7 feet to 8 feet in length; when adult, brown-grey to black-
grey, and about 6 feet in length: young, grey, upper portions soon assume darker
colours; pups, black. ‘The females when adult are ash-grey to silver-grey, at times
golden-buff, frequently spotted: from 3 ft. 6 in. to 4 ft. 6 in. in length, even more
when aged; pups, black. The under-fur of both sexes is rich reddish, diversified
by deeper or lighter shades, and variable in length and abundance, the whole being
influenced by health, sex, and condition.
He thought the Government should step in now, as the sealing industry might
prove a valuable source of revenue to the Colony in the future.
Viscount Kawasé to the Marquis of Salisbury.—( Received December 15.)
LEGATION OF JAPAN, London, December 14, 1891.
M. Le Marquis: I have the hononr to inform your Excellency that, at the request
of Sir George Baden-Powell, one of Her Majesty’s Commissioners on the seal fisheries,
I obtained from my Government a rapidly prepared Memorandum as to such fisheries
in Japan. Ihave the pleasure to hand your Exceliency herewith a translation of
this Memorandum, which may be of interest to the above-named Commissioner,
I may possibly receive a further more detailed Report on the same subject, in which
case I will forward a translation of it to your Excellency.
I have, dc.
(Signed) KAWASE,
MEMORANDUM ON TIIE SEAL FISIIERIES IN JAPAN,
[‘l'ranslation.]
N. B. —In this Memorandum ‘‘seal”’ does notalways mean ‘' seals proper,” but includes sometimes all
: : d CWE 19% ’ mney .
kinds of sea animals. Word ‘‘county” is not always applied to subdivision of Prefecture
(‘‘ken’’), but sometimes it is meant for the division (‘‘kuni”’) of the old system. |
Seals are considered among the most important products of Hokkaido.
They are found in every part of the Kurile group, from Shimshu in the north to
Shikotan and Kunashir in the south; Urup and Itrup being their favourite haunts.
Although the history of the origin of seal-hunting cannot be accurately traced,
it appears that about 170 years ago a few natives of Akishi, in Kushiro, emigrated
to Shibetoro, in Itrup, and occupied themselves in hunting seals, eagles, bears,
&e., which they brought back to Akishi every year when the sea was free from ice
(after April and May), in order to barter them for rice and other necessaries of life;
while the natives of Akishi visited this new Colony for the exchange of these com-
modities.
In the course of time the emigrants increased by degrees, settling down in such
places as Toshiruri, Rianshi, in that island, and became hunters of seals and other
sea animals in the neighbourhood.
In 1765 (about 120 years ago) seal fishery became very prosperous, and the natives
of Rashua, as well as the old islanders of Itrup, carried on their hunting business in
the Isles of Horomoshir, Makaruru, Shimsir, Urup, &c.
In the same year the Russians first made their appearance in the Islands of Rashua
and Musir. In the following year they came to Itrup, and having obtained informa-
tion about the localities from the natives, they went to the Island of Urup, where
they stayed for three years. During their sojourn there they treated the natives in
a very cruel manner, and provoked their great anger. But the natives being power-
less to resist their oppressors, their Chief at last fled from the island.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 229
In the summer of 1770, while the natives of Itrup, with their Chief, were hunting
in the Island of Urup, the Russians came there and ordered them to ship all their
catch to Russia, and, on their refusal, their two Chiefs were killed by the Russians.
In the same year, while the Chief of Rashua, together with a host of natives, were
hunting in Urup, the Russians again made their appearance, and seized all their
catch at the point of their guns. At last the anger of the natives was aroused
to such a pitch by the Russian outrages that they resolved to avenge themselves,
and in 1771 they gathered in great numbers, each carrying some weapon, and
attacked the Russians in Urup, killing eight of them; and thence from the western
coast they passed over the mountains to Wanino, where they attacked some Rus-
sians who were living in caves. Only seven of the Russians escaped slaughter.
From that place the natives sailed to Makarusi, where they also slaughtered seven-
teen Russians.
At that time the chief instruments used by the natives for killing seals were the
bow and harpoon, while the Russians used guns.
After this defeat the Russians did not come for a long time.
During the years of the Anyei period (1772-80) the natives of Urup were con-
stantly cruizing and hunting round Urup and its neighbouring islands, and this pre-
vented the Russians from catching seals so freely, although now and then they made
their appearance. But towards the end of the Anyei period they came in a great
number, and made a good catch.
In the years of Tenmei (1781-88), as the natives ceased to hunt for seals, all the
islands of the Kuriles except Itrup were monopolized by the Russians.
161 In 1795 Government caused some thirty men and women to emigrate to Itrup,
and there were good catches made. Nets were then first used.
In 1800 Takataya Kahé, a native of Awaji, emigrated to Itrup, and there employ-
ing the natives started a settlement for seal-hunting and other fisheries.
In the years of Kiowa (1801-3), Suwara Koyemon and Daté Rinyemon, of Fuku-
yuma, Matsumayé having taken over the fishing establishment and plants from
‘Takataya Kahé, and building new fishing depdts in several places, carried on the
fishing of sea animals.
At that time the seal-skins were bartered with the natives as follows, viz.:
The best — 20 sacks of rice (each sack containing 8 sho*) per skin; the mid-
dling = about 10 sacks, and the common skins were severally valued according to
their qualities; and the natives were paid according to the skins they produced at
the time of counting their catch. ‘The skins thus bought were called ‘karimono,”
and were annually sent to the Prince of Matsumayé, whose Government paid for
them at the fixed rate of 0.56 sen for Lsho of rice, which was the standard of barter;
and there were strict penal regulations against smugglers.
In the years of Keio (1865- 67) the Russi: in Government sent Alaskan natives to
Urup, and the Russian fishing settlement became more and more prosperous.
Seal-skins were a special product of Japan, and from olden times they were trans-
ported to Nagasaki, where they were sold to the Chinese.
In modern times seals and other sea animals, once famous products of Japan, being
mostly caught by the Russian hands, are now looked on as Russian products, and
are imported into Peking direct from Russia.
In 1869, at the time when ‘ Kaitakushi” (Colonization Department) was newly
established, its branch office was set up in the Island of Itrup, and some officials
were sent in order to check foreign poachers, and superintend the fishing industry.
As to the mode of buying skins, the old regulations were adopted, but on account of
the old rate of exchange at 1 sho of rice at 0.56 sen being out of date, the fisheries
incurred much loss. In April 1873 the official rate was raised to 1.68 sen per 1 sho.
In June of the same year for the first time a special office was established in Itrup,
whose duty it was to suppress sea!-poaching, and Commissioners were sent there.
In August instructions were given to these Commissioners to keep strict vigilance
as to poaching- vessels of foreign countries and the unlawful sale of seals in the
vicinity of the island.
As seals mostly congregated in the seas neighbouring to Itrup, the ingress of for-
eign vessels to those waters, not only Russian, but also British, American, Dutch,
and other countries, increased year after year, and oftentimes these vessels used to
anchor in the neighbouring harbours.
In such cases the Commissioners informed them of the national prohibition, and
requested them to leave, but under such pretexts as ship’s repairs, or want of water
and fuel, they did not obey the remonstrances, and when there was a shipwreck,
which oceurred very often, it gave a great deal of trouble and annoyance to the Com-
missioners, who had to look after the wrecked crews, and to have them escorted to
the port of Hakodateé.
*1 sho is equal to 0.1985 peck.
230 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
For instance, when the ‘‘Isalie” [?], an American vessel, stranded on a reef near
Itrup, the natives rendered as much assistance as they possibly could to the unfortu-
nate vessel, but all efforts having proved fruitless, this vessel was wrecked at last,
and dam: uses were claimed on the ground that it was lost on account of sufficient
assistance not haying been rendered. Such unlawful and unreasonable action on
the part of foreign vessels was of frequent occurrence.
All these foreign poaching-vessels being of a much more improved type than the
ordinary Japanese fishing-boats, it was very difficult to watch their movements in
the high seas, and, as about seven-tenths of the island was uninhabited, fishing estab-
lishments in the whole island being very few, it was no wonder that watch could
not be effectively kept by a few Commissioners with only two or three fishing-boats
to cruize with.
Under these circumstances, in consultation with the Navy Department, two ships
of war were commissioned, and one of these two was stationed at the port of Nemuro,
one replacing the other in alternate years, and they were ordered to cruize round
the Kurile group in order to watch the poachers.
Besides, the ‘‘ Kioriomaru,” of Kaitakushi, was sent to Itrup every year from May
to October (season for seal-hunting) to cruize and watch in the vicinity of the
island.
In March 1874 Mr. Alcott Brookes, His Imperial Majesty’s Consul in San Francisco,
reported to the loreign Office that six boats were being prepared in Canada to start
for seal-hunting in the islands of Hokkaido, and soon afterwards he also reported that
some sealing-vessels had left the port of San Francisco.
In May of the same year, upon consultation with the Foreign Office, Regulations,
consisting of three clauses, controlling the fisheries in the waters near the islands of
Hokkaido, were issued, viz.
“1, Along the coast- lines ihe limit of the territorial right of Japan is fixed at 3 ri
(1 ri=2.4403 miles) from the shore; in case of bays, the line of limit shall be meas-
ured from a straight line drawn between the two capes at the extreme ends of the
bay; but this applies only to cases where the space between the capes does not
exceed 3 Yi.
“Tf any foreigners be found fishing within the above-mentioned limit they shall
be arrested in as peaceful a manner as possible, and sent to Hakodaté, accompanied
by guards, and delivered to the Consul of the country of their nationality to be
dealt with in a proper manner.
“9. Tf foreigners do not submit themselves to the authorities, or any violent resist-
ance be offered by them at the time of such arrest, necessary foree may be employed
to carry out the foregoing Regulations.
“3. Tnasmuch as there may be some foreign vessels arriving in harbour in
162 consequence of stress of weather or want of “water or fuel, a careful scrutiny
shall be made as to the true circumstances, and, upon ascertaining their good
faith, they shall be treated in accordance with the ‘Regulations for Assistance to
Foreign Vessels in Distress.’ And if His Imperial Majesty's subjects be found poach-
ing, their fishing apparatus and catches shall be confiscated according to the exist-
ing Regulations, and they shall be delivered to the branch office at Nemuro, there to
be- properly dealt with,” &e.
The ‘Kioriomaru” and “Genbumaru,” belonging to Kaitakushi, having on board
interpreters and Seal Fishery Superintending g Commissioners, were ordered to eruize
in the vicinity of Itrup to watch any foreign poaching- vessels.
In the same month there was a pourpar ler with M. Benlin [?], master of a Danish
poaching-vessel the ‘‘Mattée” [?].
In June, when the “ Kioriomarn” was eruizing back, she met with six American
vessels, and there were various interviews respecting them.
In July His Imperial Majesty’s ships ‘‘Hoshio” and ‘‘Osaka” were sent over, and
the ‘‘ Kioriomaru” again sailed to the islands.
In August an American ship ‘‘Snowdrop” was found at Tankam Bay, and some
investiga ition was made. Five foreign vessels at Ounebetsu Bay were also subjected
to investigation. But these are only a few vessels out of many which were not
brought under notice.
To illustrate the cunning of foreign poachers, they, all of them, would enter and
anchor in harbours, pretending that they had come under stress of weather or for
want of water or fuel, going out of one port in the morning and entering another in
the evening, their movements being so alert that it was a matter of no wonder that
a single watch- -ship was unable to keep them under observation. But, on the whole,
the Island of {trup was found unfavourable for the purpose of promoting our fisheries
and of watching for foreign poachers. The climate is very inclement; during sum-
mer mouths there is dense fog, and when the autumn approaches the fog begins to
lift, but only to be succeeded by a violent northwesterly gale, causing a “he: wy sea.
And there is no good harbour. Thus the navigation in these waters is very difficult.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. Zon
Consequently, in the same month, the stationing of the ‘ Kioriomaru” at that
island was discontinued, and she was ordered to cruize between Nemuro and Hako-
daté twice every month; the seal-hunting affairs were left to the control of the
branch office at Nemuro; and three branches of the supcrintending office were estab-
lished in the islands at Ounebetsu, Nanneho, Toshimori, where Comunissioners were
sent respectively with three boats, four boatmen for each boat.
As to the mode. of hunting, the natives used to shoot seals with bows and arrows
while resting upon reefsorrocks. In winter, when the seais frozen over, they simply
chased them over the ice and killed them with clubs, or they used to go in a boat
made of skins of sea-horse and whale-bones, wearing a kind of waterproof made of
the bladders of sea elephants or sea-horse, and with a head covering made of fox or
wolf-skins, thus deceiving seals when approaching them. In this clever manner they
used to catch a great many. The boat itself was very simple, but so easy of motion
that its progress was very fast, even in a heavy sea-way, and it was quite safe from
capsizing.
The weapons which the natives had in these boats were along harpoon, a club, and
_agaff. When they approached a victim they threw the harpoon, and having made
a good hit, the top, or barbed end, which is tied to a long string, separated itself
trom the pole and remained in the flesh; thus, even if the animal was not killed at
one coup, its whereabouts could always be known, as the pole to which the other end
of the string is tied acted as a float, and the seal was dragged out and clubbed to
death, and then gatled into the boat.
This mode was considered to be the best way of catching seals, but in modern
times it is superseded by the use of guns.
But seals are very averse to the sound of firing, and the use of the gun is sure to
drive them away from the vicinity to some far distant places, and the flocks are
thinned year by year. Thenatives, knowing this by long experience, abstained from
using guns, but at the present time, as all foreigners poach with guns, our mode of
hunting was also obliged to be similarly changed.
In April 1875, at Beretarubetsu, near Shibetoro, Itrup, a Russian boat was found
anchored, and its master, with three Russians and three Japanese, were seen con-
structing a hut on the coast. They were consequently warned off by the Commis-
sioners. 7
Again, an information was given to the Commissioners that at Moroco, in the same
county, the Americans Ramion Jean (?) and three others built houses, and were
carrying on poaching business since October of the preceding year. They were
consequeutly arrested and sent to Hokadaté, and delivered to the hands of the United
States Consul.
In June of the same year His Imperial Majesty’s ship ‘‘ Asama” entered into the
port of Nemuro as a guard-ship, and cruized about the Kurile group and along the
coast of Kitami.
In September the ‘‘ Asama” returned, and the ‘ Kioriomaru” and ‘ Genbumaru”
set out for a cruize around Itrup.
In December «a schooner, built at Muroran for seal-hunting, was completed and
sent to the port of Nemuro. This schooner was named the “ Chishimamaru.’
The Regulations for controlling seal fisheries which were issued some years ago,
after consultation with the F oreign Office, had to be amended, owing to the territo-
rial boundaries being definitely marked out, consequent upon the exchange of the
Kuriles (with Russia) having been effected in September, 1874. Consequently, in
April 1876, new regulations for controlling the fisheries in Hokkaido, consisting of
three clauses, were issued.
The first clause prohibited any foreign vessels from fishing with any line, net,
guns, &c., any fish or sea animal within the range of a gun-shot from the coast of
Hokkaido or of other islands belonging to the Empire of Japan.
The second clause decreed that the officials appointed under the Regulations for
controlling fisheries in the territorial waters of Japan shall order to clear out
‘163 of the boundary any foreign vessel which is suspected of infringing upon the
prohibition mentioned in the first clause, or if such vessel is thought to have
already infringed the prohibition, that they shall board the vessel and inspect her
cargo.
The third clause decreed that when there is any foreign vessel which has actually
infringed the prohibition in the first clause, or refused to clear out of the boundary or
to submit to the inspection of cargo mentioned in the second clause, the officials under
the Regulations for controlling fisheries in the territorial waters of Japan shall take
such vessel to the nearest open port, shall deliver it to the Consul of the country to
which is belongs, and upon its being clearly proved to be guilty of the offence after
due inquiries, shall demand from the Consul the infliction of due punishment.
In the same mouth, in the Bay of Tsumtan, in the Island of Shikotan, in the
county of Hanasaki, an office building and a store-house were built.
Bas REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS
The island of Shikotan is 18 ri in circumference, and has a good natural harbour.
In old times many natives used to immigrate, and the people’ of the mainland also
used to come for fishing purposes; but, owing to the ditficulty of communication,
almost all of them crossed over to the neighbourhood of Nemuro; and at the present
time it is rare to find any inhabitants in the island. Thus the island became a good
shelter for foreign poachers, and many vessels made the harbour their resting-place
whence to sail, and when the time and wind were favourable for their unlawful acts.
Accordingly, some Superintending Commissioners were scnt over to guard the
neighbourhood,
In June an office-house and a store-house were built in the Bay of Tankamu, in the
county of Furubetsu, Itrup.
In July His Imperial Majesty’s ship ‘‘Moshun” ernized abont the Island of Itrup
in search of poachers.
In August, in consideration of the diligence and hardships of the superintending
officials of Itrup in discharge of their duty, day and night through all seasons, a
sub-regulation was made rewarding them by special grants of money, classified
according to the merit of each individual.
In May 1875, in consequence of much inconvenience having been experienced by
the officials in discharge of their duty on account of the differences of language on
such occasions as when interviewing foreign vessels or making inquiry as to foreign
poachers, the following instructions were given to the superintending: officials in
Shikotan, and were posted in conspicuous places, written in foreign languages, viz:
“1, This island is the Island of Shikotan, county of Hanasaki, Nemuro, Hok-
kaido, belonging to the Empire of Japan.
«2. You are requested to report in detail, in writing, the nationality of vessel,
its name and that of the captain, the number of crew, and the reason of coming.
If for temporary anchorage, in want of water or fuel, or in consequence of wind or
tide, you are requested to leave as soon as your wi: mts are satisfied or the weather
becomes favourable.
“ Hunting of sea animals is prohibited in the neighbouring seas.’
The skins of the seals prepared according to the mode of the jocaliey were very
thin, and the process of tanning was imperfect. In June of the same year a skilled
tanner of TOkié was consulted, and it was advised that the skins shall be left as
thick as possible, and to prevent the change of fur-colour, that they should be
painted with coal-water in such a manner as to allow the colour of the leather to be
seen, aud when dry to be painted again twice in the same way. In summer, there
being fear of moth, they were to be painted with camphor-water after being painted
with coal-water.
Heretofore, as there was no restriction as to the mode of seal-hunting, and fears
were entertained of the extermination of the species by wanton hunting, Hunting
Regulations were issued in October with a view to promote the increase of seals, as
well as to check poaching; and four superintending officials and thirty-six hunters
were added.
The Regulations run as follows:
“Article 1. In view of protecting seal-hunting and checking foreign poachers, a
vessel of foreign type shall be commissoned to cruize in the neighbourhood of Itrup.
‘Chishimamaru’ shall be commissoned for this purpose for the time being.
“Art. 2. The mode of killing shall mainly be by clubbing, and the use of guns
shall be avoided as much as possible.
“Art. 3. Young seals shall be spared as much as possible.
“Art. 4. The number of seals to be caught within 1 ri of coast-line shall not
exceed forty-five per annum.
“Art. 5. Between the months of May and November the killing of seals within 1
ri of coast-line is prohibited.
“Art. 6. Any person who catches wounded or crippled seals washed ashore, even
within the prohibition limit, shall be paid in money or in kind according to the
quality of the skin.
“Art. 7. To prevent the decrease of seals by careless chasing and wanton killing,
special care shall always be taken, and the preventive method shall be established.
“Art. 8. The number of seals taken will be inspected, and their skins shall fix the
proof of apeln ages.
“Art. 9. The covering and breeding seasons, &c¢., shall be carefully ascertained
by eatae al observations.
“Art. 10. Practical observations and investigations shall be made as to the truth
of the seals losing or changing the colour of their fur according to different seasons.
“Art. 11. An actual investigation shall be made as to Low many seals can be
caught annually if the use of guns be discontinued, and clubs and bows and arrows
be adopted instead.
“Art. 12. While out hunting, if anything oceurs likely to form an object for future
inv estigation, a minute record shall be kept.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 233
“Art. 13. While the present Regulations shall be strictly obeyed by all those
164 who are responsible for seal-hunting, they can address themselves to the
authorities to effect required amendments in case practical inconveniences
shall have been experienced.”
Year by year the use of guns for killing seals having gradually increased, the
frightened seals escaped into distant places, and began to flock about the coast-lines
and near seas of the Island of Kunashir, where human beings were most seldom
found. Consequently, hunting quarters were established in the island, hunting
apparatuses newly supplied, superintending officers were sent and hunters engaged,
and the hunting business was startedafresh. But here, again, people came and fixed
their hunting quarters, and the arrival and departure of boats became frequent,
The decrease of seals naturally followed, and foreign poachers also disappeared.
In June 1879 a hunting depot was built at Iriribush, in the county of Furubetsu,
Itrap.
In May 1880 His Imperial Majesty’s Consul at San Francisco reported that a schooner
had left that port for the purpose of seal-hunting in the neighbouring seas of Itrup.
On observing the general aspect at this time, and comparing it with former years,
the number of seals caught was found to be on the decrease, and it is evident as a
matter of course that the more they are killed the fewer will be bred; while, year
after year, increased influx of foreign poachers competed in the fishing, there being no
means of checking them outside the line of territorial limit fixed by international law.
Lesides, as the foreigners did not in the least care about the decrease of breeding or
the extermination of the species, they freely used their guns in hunting, and, as the
result, they kilied the greatest number. Thus we were also obliged to throw aside the
old instruments, such as clubs, bows and arrows, and gaffs, and to adopt the gun,
aus it would be most foolish to keep to the old system while letting others make the
greatest gain. Thus the use of guns is the main cause of the present decrease.
In February 1882, after Kaitakushi was abolished, seal fishery affairs were trans-
ferred to the Agricultural and Commercial Department, together with the superin-
tending officers, fishing implemeuts, and everything connected with the fisheries.
T'rom this time the fishing was carried on by the authority of the above-mentioned
Department until 1887. And, in 1889, the ‘‘ Dainippon Suisan Kaisha” (the Marine
Produce Company of the Empire of Japan) was given the exclusive perinission of
hu: ting seals and sea-otters; and the several Regulations in force at the present
time are as follows:
“DECREE NO. 16.
“May 23, 17TH YEAR OF MEIJI (1884).
“Tn future, the hunting and catching of seals and sea-otters in Hokkaido is pro-
hibited; the offenders will be punished by 373rd clause of the Penal Code, and their
catches will be confiscated; but those who are in possession of the special permission
of the Minister of Agriculture and Commerce shall be exempted.”
“IMPERIAL DECREE NO. 80.
“DECEMBER 16, 19TH YEAR OF MEIJI (1886).
“REGULATIONS CONIROLLING THE HUNTING, THE IMPORTATION, AND THE SALE OF
SEALS AND SEA-OTTERS AND THEIR KAW HIDES.
“Article 1. Any person who is in possession of the special permission of the Minister
of Agriculture and Commerce, pursuant to the Decree No. 16 of the 17th year of
Meiji (1884), shall be allowed to hunt and catch seals and sea-otters within such
area and season as may be fixed by Hokkaido Cho, provided that the person shall
always carry the special permit when he is engaged in hunting, and that wherever
he may be, on land or on water, he shall at once produce and show the same to the
superintending officials or police officers when they ask him to do so.
‘Art. 2. When any person engaged in seal and sea-otter hunting arrives in Hok-
kaido, he shall report the name of his boat, its tonnage, and the names of crew, to
the branch office named by the Hokkaido Cho, and shall always keep fixed to the
mast, or other conspicuous part of the boat, a certain sign specially provided for
such hunting-boats.
“Art. 3. Any person wishing to sell raw hides of seals or sea-otters shall first pre-
sent and have them stamped (branding stamps can be used) by the proper officers at
the branch office mentioned in Article 2. No hides without this official stamp shall
be allowed to be sold.
“Art. 4. If any person who has imported into any port of the Empire, or anchored
in any port having on board raw hides of seals or sea-otters, or had sold or is going
to sell these hides in a market, be found out, the Customs authorities or the police
234 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
officers shall seize the articles, and shall at once prosecute the offender: provided
that the raw hides of seals or sea-ottcrs caught within the territories of Russia or
the United States of America, with due permission of the respective Governments,
can be imported into the Impire upon the owner or the captain of the ship prodnec-
ine the certificate given them by the proper authority of their Government or the
guaranteeing certificate of the Russian or the United States Consuls residing in the
Kmpire.”
165‘ Report regarding the Revision of the Details of Procedure to carry out the Regu-
lations controlling the Seal and Sea-otler Hunting.
“To his Excellency ENomorro TAKEAKI,
“ Minister of Agriculture and Commerce, §c.
“HOKKAIDO, CHO, July 10, 21st year of Meiji (1888).
“Sir: Ihave the honour to inform your Excellency that the details of procedure
to carry out the Regulations controlling seal and sea-otter hunting per notification
No. Ko. 15 of Hokkaido Cho (December) 19th of Meiji (1886) have been revised, as
shown in the inclosed copy of Chorei No. 35, dated 10th May of the current year.
“Thave, &c.
' (Signed) “NAGAYAMA TAKESHIRO,
“ Director of Hokkaido Cho.”
({‘‘ Inclosure.]
“DETAILS OF PROCEDURE TO CARRY OUT THE REGULATIONS CONTROLLING THE
SEAL AND SKA-OTTER IFUNTING.
‘Article 1. The open season for seal and sea-otter hunting shall be from the 15th
April to the 31st October in each year.
“Art. 2. The area of hunting shall be all the islands situated eastward of Itrup,
and southward of Shimshu, of the Kuriles, and it will be divided into three sections,
and every year only one of these sections shall be opened for hunting.
“The first section includes seven islands, i. ¢., Itrup, Chirihoi, Butettchelboa [ ?],
Broughton, Raikoké, Mushir, and Chirinkotan.
““The second section includes six islands, i. e., Shimshir, Shiritoi, Ushishir, Sleto-
nepa [2], Rashua, and Matsua.
“The third section includes twelve islands, i.e., Shannekotan, Yekkerma [?],
Karreukotan, Ounekotan, Anos, Makarushi, Shurenwa [?], Paramushir, Holt, Cocks-
ear, Araito, and Shimshnu.
“Art. 3. When a boat is going out for hunting, her name, tonnage, and the names
of the crew shall be reported for inspection to the branch office of seal and sea-otter
hunting superintending authorities, either at Nemuro, in the county of Nemuro, or
at Shikotan, in the county of Chishima.
“Art. 4. When the branch office of seal and sea-otter hunting superintending
authorities find the report mentioned in Article 3 in due form on inspection, it will
give to the boat a flag hereinafter shown.
“Art. 5. Any person who wishes to export and sell the raw hides of his catch shall
produce them to the Shikotan branch of the seal and sea-otter hunting superintending
authorities, and shall have them stamped.”
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 235
THE FLAG.
[3 shaku.]
[ White ground. ]
[4 shaku. ]
166 Number of Seals and Sea-otters caught.
ae | Number of | Number of Number of | Number of
Year Sea-otters. | Seals. Year. Sea-otters. Seals.
NG TSE BOSAL eoaeeee BBG AIE LAS GSS re Sead tes Ee os SSE Sule eA ee
GT RES Sao ocka sae SUE DES the), Nae sae PB onone Ee onan eee pbosodaareacc 05) ESE eer ace
USO sce Godot sseodscee aace AD OMe a a eta eats tere Ie ie we be ecdtenesabonouen Ge eee aeere
MOOS eeptnsysrereeats atest atayeveyae Pity shescascooue eas SbacosheeekeaTdosaor OOM hearse oa
WO coecescacboe sondern eons Ot ST ic radeoodeEoe ide soneaar | CCaBESeanatdSaanndaceeo -ssopeuse soe
Wiles staseeasaceesopocacs Pa ae SoBe Hee Ibis peaches scsenooaeoes lsqosoenspeec|Sasncasessee
OTADS aotne tens oe OBS ae ot QI Hae. are seis NSS ONE eet t= httetsare | 53 33
iGiWsscecssaduenscanteocor Ubi ke sbeanoec se NEO ce eaneeeeope socecocrc 47 381
Ig Pils See eaesoose coraussos UU dlSsSeeaaaeaos ie) (SS acekosbecebauapooce Baars ets 4 Seacnceseane
eR Sec sp onesoedenoeonaee CP lscassteqaces |
| |
Memorandum respecting Japanese Seal Fisheries.
1.—WHETHER THE DECLINE OR DESTRUCTION OF THE FISHERY IS ATTRIBUTABLE
TO THE SLAUGHTER OF THE SEALS WHILE ON SHORE AT THEIR BREEDING-PLACES,
OR TO THEIR PURSUIT AT LARGE ON THE CIRCUMJACENT OCEAN.
1. The only known rookeries or hauling grounds of the fur-seal within Japanese
dominions are the following:
Srednoi Rocks (off Ushishia).
Raikoké Island.
Mushia Rocks.
The first of these hauling grounds, all of which are situated in the Kuriles, is only
some 100 yards long by 60 yards wide, and the others are not much larger; but at
the time of their discovery in 1881 they must have harboured annually some 20,000 or
25,000 fur-seals ; 5,000 were actually taken there by one vessel in the year mentioned.
Since then they have gradually declined in productiveness, and it may be said that
at the present time they yield catches of only a few scores in the place of thousands.
There can be no doubt that this result is exclusively due to the indiscriminate
slaughter of the seals at their breeding place. No ‘“‘rookery” could withstand for
many years such wholesale destruction as these were exposed to in consequence of
the successful venture of 1881. Nor is there any other way of accounting for their
depletion, for it is known that the two or three foreign sealers which now find it
worth their while to equip at Yokohama do not engage in pelagic sealing, but pro-
ceed to the more extensive haunts of their quarry beyond Japanese waters, such as
Robben, Behring, and Copper Islands, where they hope to elude the vigilance of the
Russian guard vessels,
236 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Large numbers of seal from the Russian ‘‘rookeries” are scattered every winter
over the ocean lying off the north-east coast of Japan, but they are unmolested by
foreign or native sealing-vessels, and only the fringe of them is touched by native
fishermen in their open ‘Doats along the Nambu and Yezo coast, where some 2,000 or
3,000 are taken annually.
2.—IN WIIAT MANNER THE FUR-SEAL FISHERY HAS BEEN OR IS CONDUCTED IN EACH
PARTICULAR LOCALITY.
2. The coast fishery by the Japanese in the immediate neighbourhood of Yezo and
off the mainland north of Inabosaki has just been alluded to. It is carried on in
native open boats by means of spearing or nets. The catch (2,000 or 3,000 skins
a-year) is disposed of to Chinese merchants at Hakodateé.
Other pelagic sealing there is none in the ocean lying off Japan.
The few scattered seals still to be found about the exhausted breeding grounds of
the Kuriles are occasionally taken by the schooners of the Japanese “Marine Prod-
ucts Company,” but only two fitted out this year, and their catch was sixty seals
between them
Of British and other foreign sealers only three were equipped at Yokohama this
year, but the sphere of their operations lies to the northward beyond Japanese
jurisdiction. According to figures furnished by the British Consulate at Yokohama,
between eleven and eighte en of these vessels left Yokohama annually for the seal
fisheries in the years “following the discovery of the Kurile breeding grounds,
namely, between 1882 and 1885 inclusive. After 1885 their numbers gradually dwin-
dled, owing to the depletion of the Japanese fishery and the greater risk and uncer-
tainty attending a er aie to more northerly waters.
167 It is stated by the Japanese Agricultural Department that ‘the fur-seal
appears to be reared on the rocky coasts, and, in consequence, they are gener-
ally caught while swimming at a distance not more than 1 nautical mile from the
coast.”
It may be that a few are so taken about the Kuriles, but the fishery—now almost
extinct—of those islands was carried on, in the years of its prosperity, entirely by
clubbing the animals on the beach.
3.—WHETHER ANY, AND, IF ANY, WHAT MEASURES HAVE BEEN TAKEN TOWARDS THE
PROTECTION OF ‘THE FUR-SEAL FISHERIES, AND, FURTHER, IF ANY SUCH MEASURES
ARE KNOWN TO HAVE PROVED SUCOESSFUL IN PRESERVING OR REHABILITATING
THE FISHERIES.
3. The measures tardily taken by the Japanese Government in 1884 to protect the
Kurile rookeries have remained entirely inoperative. Elaborate Regulations were
framed in that Hear and in 1886, establishing a close season between the 1st Novem-
ber and the 15th April, and dividing the Kuriles into three groups, in only one of
which was fishing to be allowed in any one year, and then only on the issue of a
licence by the authority constituted for the purpose.
There is no means of enforcing these Regulations, which, indeed, were not devised
until after the ruin of the hauling grounds had been effected. A Japanese guard-
ship was told off this year to watch over their observance, but she never left her
station at Nemuro, and, except the Japanese ‘‘ Marine Products Company,” now
rapidly approaching bankruptcy, no one dreams of applying for the regulation
licence, or of limiting his operations to the group in which the fishery is legally per-
inissible. But, as stated above, the Kuriles no longer attract the seal fishermen to
any extent worth mentioning.
The Japanese Regulations in question have no bearing on pelagic sealing, which,
as already stated, is not engaged in by Japanese or foreign sealing-vessels.
4.—GENERALLY, ANY PARTICULARS AS TO THE LIFE-HISTORY OF THE ANIMAL, ITS
MIGRATION, SEASON OF BRINGING FORTH ITS YOUNG, AND HABITS OF THE SEALS
WHILE ENGAGED IN SUCKLING AND REARING THE YOUNG.
4. The vast bulk of the seals now found in Japanese waters, and more especially
in that portion of the ocean extending eastwards from the coast between Inabosaki
and the eastern point of Yezo are from the Russian breeding grounds in the Behring
Sea and in the Sea of Okhotsk.
They follow the fish southwards about the beginning of November, and remain
scattered over a large expanse of ocean, where they are quite unmolested, through-
out the winter and spring months. It is a matter of some surprise that no attempt
is made to take them in the open sea, as is done on such a large scale in the case of
the seals resorting to the breeding erounds of the eastern portion of Behring Sea.
Possibly they scatter more in the Western Pacitic, and are less easy to find,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 2a
After their sojourn in the south, the first to repair to the northern rookeries are
the old bulls, arriving about the middle of June. They await the cows, which fol-
low them towards the end of the same month. Yearlings and other non-breeding
seals arrive at any time later. The young are brought forth in the beginning of
July.
It is sometimes stated that the females are in the habit of leaving the rookeries
to catch fish within 10 or 20 miles of the shore for the support of their young, but
the experienced authority on whose remarks these notes are founded is not of this
opinion. He has never found food inside the female fur-seal taken on the hauling
grounds.
(Signed) M. pE BUNSEN,
Her Majesty’s Secretary of Legation.
TOK10, November 19, 1891.
Mr. Wyndham to the Marquis of Salisbury.—( Received November 21.)
(No. 107. Commercial.) Rio DE JANEIRO, October 27, 1891.
My Lorp: With reference to your Lordship’s Circular despatch No. 30 of the 10th
August last, and to my despatch No. 114 of the 25th September, on the subject of the
fur-seal fisheries of the Southern Hemisphere, I have the honour to transmit here-
with to your Lordship copy of adespatch which I have received from Her Majesty’s
Consul at Rio Grande do Sul, in which he states that, having made inquires in both
States of his Consular district, he finds that no expeditions are sent thence to the
fisheries, and that nothing is known about the conditions under which the fisheries
are carried out, or the habits of the seal itself.
Ihave, &ce.
(Signed) HuGu WyYNpIIAM.
CONSUL HEARNE TO MR. WYNDITAM.
R10 GRANDE DO SuL, October 14, 1891,
Sir: With reference to your despatch of the 9th September last respecting certain
information with regard to the fur-seal fisheries of the Southern Hemisphere,
168 Ihave the honour to inform you that I have made inquiries in both States in
this Consular district, and find that no expeditions are sent hence to the fish-
eries, nor is anything known about the conditions under which fisheries are carried
out, or the habits of the seal itself.
I have, &c.
(Signed) W. R. HEARNE.
Mr. Wyndham to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 22.
(No. 114.) j RIO DE JANEIRO, Seplember 25, 1891.
My Lorp: With reference to your Lordship’s despatch No. 30 of the 10th ultimo,
desiring certain information respecting fur-seal life in the Southern Hemisphere, for
the use of the Government of Canada, and to my despatch No. 109 of the 9th instant
on the same subject, I have the honour to report to your Lordship that I have
received a note from the Minister of Foreign Affairs, in reply to my request for the
information desired, in which he states, on the authority of the Minister of Marine,
that seal-fishing is unknown in Brazilian territorial waters, that no laws respecting
the same exist in Brazil, and that hitherto no vessel engaged in this trade has
touched at any Brazilian port.
I have, &c.
(Signed) HuGH WYNDHAM.
Mr. Pakenham to the Marquis of Salisbury.—-( Received January 18, 1892.)
(No. 51.) BurENnos AYRES, December 22, 1891.
My Lorp: With reference to your Lordship’s despatch No, 24 of the 10th August
on the subject of seals and seal fishery on the Argentine coast, I now have the
honour to inclose translation of the reply of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to my
inquiry on the subject, whereof copy is likewise inclosed.
238 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Apparentty the taking of seals is at present prohibited by law, as also the work-
ing for profit of any natural product of the south coasts, though it is implied that
before very long certain fishery privileges may be conferred in various quarters not
as yet named.
I helieve there is an extensive industry in the seal fishery off Maldonado, near
Monte Video, and, in fact, I well remember, twenty-five years or so ago, that those
concerned in the fishery gravely petitioned the Government that the lighthouse at
Maldonado should be closed, as the light appeared to alarm the seals.
I have, &c.
(Signed) FB. PAKENHAM.
MR. PAKENHAM TO SENOR COSTA.
BUENOS Ayres, September 12, 1891.
M. Le MinistRE: IT have the honour to place in your Excellency’s hands a copy of
a Circular issued by the Department of Fisheries of the Dominion of Canada, and
which Lord Salisbury has directed me to lay before the Argentine Government, with
the request that, if it is possible, they will kindly furnish the information therein
asked, which is to the effect that fears being now seriously entertained as to the
total destruction of the fur-seal, or sea-bear, a series of queries has been issued on
this interesting subject with a view to their protection.
‘I have therefore the honour to request that your Excellency will kindly cause
steps to be taken to obtain the desired information as to the pursuit, capture, or
preservation of these valuable animals in Argentine waters for transmission to the
Governor-General of the Dominion.
I avail, &c.
(Signed) F, PAKENHAM.
SENOR ZEBALLOS TO MR. PAKENHAM.
{Translation.]
Burnos Ayres, December 14, 1891.
SrNor Ministro: Inreply to your note addressed to my distinguished predecessor
on the 12th September last, I have the honour to inform your ixcellency that the tak-
ing of seals, as also the working for profit (‘‘exploitacion ”) of any natural product
of the south coasts, is prohibited by law, and for a long time this has been the case
with this branch of national industry.
Further, from what I can judge of the case, I am able to tell your Excellency that
the Executive Power has asked Congress for authority to concede some fishing con-
eessions to certain persons, who will be obliged to supply the necessary information
for the publication of the projects presented to the Legislative Body.
IT avail, &c.
(Signed) ESTANISLAO ZEBALLOS.
169 Memorandum on the Seal Fishery in Uruguay, by Mr. Ernest Satow.
The seal fishery in the Republic of Uruguay is carried on at three points on the
Atlantie coast, namely, Lobos Island, at the entrance to the Rio de la Plata, at the
Castillos Islands further north, and at Coronilla group, near the Brazilian frontier.
Two kinds of seals are known there, namely, the fur-seal, and the common single-
hair seal. The male of the latter species is large, and of a dark brown colour, while
the female is much smaller, and of a yellow colour.
At Lobos Island there is an establishment for steaming down the oil and salting the
skins, besides huts for the accommodation of the sealers who live there during the
killing season.
At the highest point of the island is 2 large “ corral,” or inclosure, capable of hold-
ing several thousand seals. When not engaged in killing, the sealers remain in the
vicinity of their huts, but when the superintendent sees a favourable opportunity,
which happens usually during cold winds from the southeast, in consequence of the
seals coming high up out of the water, he sends the men down to intercept them, and
by making loud noises to drive them into the corral. Then, as convenience suits, a
certain number of seals are let out by a door on the opposite side to that by which
they entered, and driven to the killing ground, where they are quickly dispatched
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 239
by a blow with aeclnb. The establishment for the Castillos Islands is at Polonia, on
the mainland, whence the sealers proceed in boats when they judge that there is a
favourable opportunity.
The general opinion seems to be that there has been no diminution in the number
of the seals, at any rate of recent years. In 1876 a Decree was issued establishing a
close season from the 16th October to the 31st May, and this Law is strictly enforced.
A copy in translation is annexed.
As has been seen above, there is no pelagic seal-fishing off the coast of Uruguay.
The figures of the export of seal-skins and nutria skins (the latter is a large fresh-
water rat, Myopotamus Coypus, inhabiting the rivers) for the last six years preceding
1891 are as follows:
SCC eh Ma SS a aT Oe A 25, 885
Theo SRR cee ts des Oe i A 24, 191
Thr riglamibe ae eay Se So a 1 IN a MRR NT A ae ee 42, 348
1 RRO 3 cae Ga St a a a 22, 542
TFS SO eer SOS eo Rha le! Sei Mitte! GS 2 le Be ca 30, 211
TiS} RRS Sime sr aR AA aS Le A LE LER a lg 38, 462
Although there is thus considerable variation in the yield of the fisheries, there
does not appear to be any ground for supposing a constant diminution.
The female fur-seal produces one at a birth, the male pups being the more numer-
ous, The pupping season begins in November. ‘The mothers are very careful of
their young. When the latter are about a fortnight old the mothers take them down
to the water and teach them to swim. They suckle their young for nearly a year,
The seals never entirely abandon the islands, but go to and fro their fishing banks,
which are not far off.
The mating season is in December and January. During this time the males often
fight savagely for possession of the females, and numbers may be seen lying on the
islands or shore of the mainland helpless from their wounds.
The fisheries in Urnguay are leased to a private Company, of which Don Guillermo
JLatoue is Managing Director.
DECREE ESTABLISHING A CLOSE SEASON,
{Translaticn. }
The Government being unable to remain indifferent to the denunciations of the
periodical press with reference to the abuses committed in ‘“‘exploiting” the amphib-
ious animals that populate the Islands of Lobos, Espinillo, and Polonia, and the regu-
lation of this industry, implying not only an advantage for the Company which
pursues it, as well as a duty appertaining to the public Administration charged
with the preservation and development of those factors of the national wealth, the
Provisional Governor in Council decrees:
Article 1. The slaughter of seals on the above-mentioned islands shall commence
on the Ist day of June, and terminate on the 15th day of October in each year.
Art. 2. The Civil Administrator of the Department of Maldonado is charged with
the execution of the present Decree, and he will take the necessary measures for its
due execution.
Art. 3. Let this be communicated, published, and deposited in the public archives.
(Signed) LATORRE,
(Countersigned) JUAN A. VASQUEZ.
MOonrE VIDEO, May 13, 1874,
170 APPENDIX (C),.
VARIOUS LETTERS AND COMMUNICATIONS RELATING TO THE FUR-SEALS OF THE
BRITISH COLUMBIAN AND NEIGHBOURING COASTS.
Questions addressed to District Indian Agents on the Coast of british Columbia.
[These questions, prepared by Dr. Dawson, were kindly forwarded by Mr. A.W. Vowell, Superintend-
ent of Indian Affairs in British Columbia, to the three Coast Agencies, in the summer of 1891.)
1. Are fur-seals found or hunted by Indians in any part of your district? If so, at
what seasons are they found in greatest numbers, and about what dates are they
first and last seen each year?
2. Are fur-seals known to give birth to their young on or about any part of the
coast in your district, and, if so, at what places and in what seasons?
240 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
If young pups are observed, please state whether the Indians know their mode of
birth, i. e., whether born on shore or at sea.
3. Do any of the Indians in your district know of breeding places formerly resorted
to by the fur-seal, or do they remember to have heard that such breeding places form-
erly existed ?
4. Have the fur-seals been more or less abundant on the coast within the past few
years?
Information received in reply to the foregoing Questions.
West Coast INDIAN AGENCY, Nanaimo, July 30, 1891.
Sir: In answer to Circular of the 20th July, received from India Office, I have the
honour to state that fur-seals are hunted by the Indians on the west coast, and are
found in great numbers in February. Are first seen in December and last in April—
that is close in shore. After that they begin to travel along the coast of Vancouver
Island and Queen Charlotte Islands towards Behring Sea. Fur-seals are not known
to give birth to their young on any part of the coast in my Agency. All Indian
sealers inform me that seals are born on shore (from their experience in Behring Sea,
where many females are killed), and that the mothers leave the young on shore in
daytime, going some miles out to sea in search of food, returning at night. Indians
in my district do not know of any breeding places formerly resorted to by the fur-
seal, nor do they remember to have heard of such places.
With regard to the last query, I should say that the fur seal have been less abun-
dant on the coast the last few years, as the schooner coast catch has been less than
formerly. From the Barclay Sound Indians report the seals have been unusually
abundant this and last season, but were scarce for three seasons before. The reason
given to me by one of the best Indian sealers in Barclay Sound for the number of
seals in the mouth of the Sound this year was that the hunters on the schooners
who seal farther irom shore than the Indians shoot at the seals so much that it
frightens them in shore, of which the Indians, who use only spears, take advantage,
and get the skins they want without frightening them away; also the seals follow
the herrings for food. Some 1,300 skins were taken to Victoria this spring at one
time speared by Indians in or near the mouth of Barclay Sound.
I have, &c.
(Signed) HARRY GUILLOD, Agent.
Dr. Dawson,
(Care of C. Todd, Esq., Metlakahtla. )
Kwaw KEWLTH INDIAN AGENCY, Alert Bay, August 13, 1891,
Sir: I have the honour to forward, as requested, the information which I have
obtained from the Indians at the north end of Vancouver's Island, viz., the Nuwitti
Indians on the east, and the Kwatseéno Indians on the west side, as these are the
only two tribes in my Agency who hunt the fur-seal.
The fur-seal is fonnd in greatest numbers about the last week in December, and
continue to be seen for about a month or six weeks, when they decrease in numbers,
and are only occasionally seen after that time.
‘The Indians have never known them to have young during the time they are in
the neighbourhood, and none have been killed younger than about six months old.
They have never heard of any breeding grounds in the vicinity.
They say that during the last two years the fur-seals have not been nearly so
plentiful as in former years, and this year few have gone out to hunt them on that
account.
The Indian name here for the fur-seal is ‘‘ ka-wha.”
Ihave, &c.
(Signed) R. J. Prpcock, Indian Agent.
Dr. Dawson, Metlakahila.
e
171 NorvTu-wEst Coast AGENCY,
Metlakahtla, B.C., September 4, 1891.
Str: In reply to a Ciretilar letter from the Superintendent of Indian Affairs at Vie-
toria, dated the 20th July, 1891, requesting my answers to certain questions concern-
ing the habits and haunts of the fur-seal in British Columbia waters, after full and
exhaustive inquiries, I have the honour to subjoin the following:
1. Yes; they are hunted and killed by Indians all along the north-west coast and
Queen Charlotte’s Islands, their route whilst travelling sonth being near the coast-
line east of Queen Charlotte’s Islands, and returning to the northward mostly on the
west side of said islands.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. ZA
They first appear going south about the middle of December, and disappear going
north about the end “of M: ay in each year.
The fur-seals are most numerous during the months of January, February, and
March.
2. No; occasionally a last year’s pup is found, and during April and May many
female seals have been killed with young so near birth that they have been taken
trom the old seals and have lived, can swim about, and have been raised by Indians.
The Indians all state that the mother seals go far north to give birth to their
young; that seals are born on shore far away.
3. No such places known to the Indians of this district.
4. Indian tradition makes tur-seal very numerous long ago, but the present genera-
tion of Indian hunters think that they have been the same as now for at least twenty
years.
During last spring (the Indians think) the seals were as numerous as ever, but few
were ¢ caught owing to continued rough water.
I inclose a letter from West Huson, Esq., a man well acquainted with the Bella
Bella Indians and their hunting wor k, which disproves the statements originating at
Bella Bella that the fur-seal bring forth their young amongst the kelp beds in Queen
Charlotte’s Sound.
Ihave, &c. (Signed) C. Topp,
Indian Agent, North-west Coast Agency,
Dr. Dawson.
Letter from Mr. A. W. Huson, inclosed by Mr. C. Todd.
BELLA BELLA, B.C., August 17, 1891.
Dear Sir: As per request I have made several inquiries at China Hat and at this
place regarding breeding places of the fur-seal, but find that none of the natives
know of | any breeding rookeries of the fur-seal in this part of British Columbia.
Some say the seals have their young off shore in kelp patches, then others say they
bring forth their pups on the outlying rocks along these shores, but none of the
natives ever saw their pupping places; most of them say the mother seal goes a long
way off to pup.
Mr. Clayton says he is positive that the fur-seal do not bring forth their pups on
this part of the coast.
Respectfully » ours,
(Signed) A. W. Huson.
J. Topp, Esq.
Extract from Letter from Mr. A. W. Huson, dated Victoria, B. C., October 16, 1891, and
addressed to Dr. G. M. Dawson.
The fur-seal come into Queen Charlotte Sound early in December, and are mostly
all females in pup. A little later on the grey pups make their appearance close in
shore if the weather is bad, so that the natives kill many of them in sight of their
villages, and on one occasion, some twenty years ago, a great swarm of grey pups
ascended to the very head of Knight’s Inlet so thick that I knew of one native kill-
ing sixty in one day., However, this was an exception, it was in the month of March,
and the young seal seemed to be falling in and feeding on the wlachan that always
ascend Knight’s and Kingcome Inlets.
Nearly every winter fur-seals, both old and young, are to be seen in about the
waters of Queen Charlotte Sound, coming in in December and leaving again about
April.
The number usually killed by the natives depends on the weather.
I have traded in as high as 600 skins from the natives of Nawitti in one year.
There are no rookeries about the north end of Vancouver Is!and that I know of.
The natives say the females go off into the kelp patches to bring forth their young.
Extracts from Letters to Dr. G. M. Dawson from Mr, J. W. Mackay.
Under date of the 13th November, 1891, Mr. Mackay writes as follows:
“The old Indian hunters of the Songees, Sooke, and Clalan bands often informed
me that in their younger days fur-seals and sea-otter were in the habit of landing in
great numbers at the Race Rocks, 11 miles from Victoria; they also frequented the
Gulf of Georgia. I have bought fur-seal skins from the Seshahls who inhabit the
BS, PL VI 16
242 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Jarvis Inlet, taken from animals killed at Sangster’s Island, near Texada. These
animals w ere driven to the ocean from the narrow waters by being hunted with the
use of fire-arms; during the spring numbers of the young animals fish in the broken
waters inside of the outlying half-tide rocks and reefs which fringe the western
shores of Vancouver Island and of the other islands which lie west of the main-
land from Queen Charlotte Sound to Dixon’s Entrance. The older animals
172 remain further at sea, but numbers of them take shelter in the larger sounds
during stormy weather. I have seen them off Metlakahtla in the month of
January. They were first systematically hunted by the Whites about 1856. The
Indians took to hunting them some two or three years later; before that period they
inerely killed them when they happened incidentally to come in their way, as they
did with most other wild animals; up to that period the beaver, marten, mink, land-
otter and sea-otter were the only animals which the Indians systematically hunted
for their skins.
“Phe Indians above quoted stated that the fur-seal bred on the Race Rocks, on
Smith’s Island (Wash.), and on several islands in the Gulf of Georgia. They used
to have their young to within a recent period on the Haystack Island, off Cape Scott,
Vaneouver Island. It is probable that a few individuals still breed there, these
islands being very inaccessible to small craft, on account of the strong tides and
cross currents which prevail in that neighbourhood.”
A further inquiry addressed to Mr. J. W. Mackay on the subject of the former
breeding of fur-seals on Haystack Island, elicited (under date the 7th January, 1892)
the subjoined additional particulars on this and other points previously referred to.
‘‘Respectihg your query of the Ist instant, I got my information from the late Cap-
tain Hugh Mackay, of the schooner ‘Favourite.’ Mackay was the first person to
practise the taking of the fur-seal in the open ocean, and using a seaworthy vessel
as the starting point and for shelter. The idea was suggested to him by the Indian
hunters, who represented to him the difficulties and dangers of following the seals
far from land in open canoes, and asked him to take them out in his schooner. He
acceded to their demands, and success followed the operation. Mackay died about
twelve years ago. He was an intelligent Scotchman from Sutherlandshire, a cooper
by trade; he collected much trustworthy information during the twenty years in
which he was oceupied trading on the west coast of Vancouver Island. I believe his
statement respecting the fur-seal on Haystack Island, as it agrees with the accounts
which I got in early days respecting individual fur-seals having their young in the
unfrequented parts of the coasts of Vancouver Island. Mr. Huson is probably cor-
rect as regards the landing of sea-lions on the Scott Islands. In former times these
animals extended their peregrinations all round Vancouver Island. I was one night
kept awake for hours by the roaring of the male animals on Smith Island, off the
south entrance to Rosario Strait. ‘The sea-lions would not inter fere with the move-
ments of the fur-seals, and both varieties might herd together.’
From a further correspondence respecting the date at which Captain Hugh Mackay
first attempted sealing at sea the following are extracts:
January 20, 1892.— “The date of Hugh Mackay’ s beginning to take the fur-seal at
sea may be arrived at approximately by an examination of the Customs Records at
the port of Victoria, British Columbia. Mackay owned thesloop ‘Ino;’ with her he
traded oil and furs from the Indians of the west coast of Vancouver Island. He made
his first experiment on the fur-seal at sea with the ‘ Ino;’ finding this vessel too small
to carry two or three canoes on deck, he built the schooner ‘ Favourite,’ of 75 tons
burthen. The ‘ Favourite’ was registered at the port of Victoria. The date of her
register will be about eighteen months subsequent to the ‘Ino’s’ first fur-sealing
eruize. I shall write to Mr. Milne, the Customs Collector at the port of Victoria, to
give ine the date of the ‘ Favourite’s’ first register, and shall communicate results
to you.”
January 31, 1892.—‘* T am informed that the schooner ‘ Favourite’ was launched at
Sooke, British Columbia, on the 28th April, 1868. She was registered in Victoria on
the 18th June, 1868. Hugh Mackay was registered owner and master r; on this data
we may conclude that the first attempt at taking the fur-seal at sea was made by
Hugh Mac kay in the spring of 1866, say, February 1866. The above information is
from the Collector of Customs at the port of Victoria, British Columbia.”
Extracts from Letters from Judge James G. Swan, of Port Townsend, State of Washington,
addressed to Dr. G. M. Dawson.
Under date of the 4th November, 1891, Judge Swan writes:
“Your letter of the 28th Oc tober was received this mor ning. I promised you, when
we met in Victoria, to send you certain information relative to the seal catch at Cape
Flattery, and particularly regarding the date when schooners first took out Indians
with their canoes on the sealing grounds. But there has been no official record, and
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 243
I have had to rely upon the recollection of individuals, which has proved very unsat-
isfactory. ‘To-day 1 received a note from Captain E. H. McAlmond, of New Dun-
geness, Washington, in reply to a letter from me. Captain McAlmond writes, Ist
November, 1891: ‘The first schooner to take Indians that I know of was the schooner
‘Lottie’ in 1869 from Neah Bay; believing that we were the pioneers, I afterwards
understood that a vessel from Victoria was also taking an Indian crew.’
“(On the 28th October last I received from Mr. Charles Spring, of Victoria, a letter,
dated the 27th, in which he writes: ‘ The first attempt at sealing, in a practical way,
with schooners and Indian hunters was made in or about 1869 by James Christienson
in the schooner ‘‘ Surprise,” owned by the late Captain William Spring, of Victoria,
British Columbia.’ This is evidently the vessel referred to by Captain MeAlmond,
No record of catch has been kept by any one that I have ascertained, and the recol-
lection of individuals is very uncertain. For instance, Captain James Dalearduno,
for many years a Puget Sound pilot stationed at Neah Bay, was quite certain that
schooner ‘ Potter,’ of Port Townsend, took Indians with canoes to the sealing grounds
in 1861. But Captain McAlmond, who was at Neah Bay the same time, writes in the
letter received from him to-day: ‘Captain Norwood, in the ‘‘ Potter,” took Indians
to pilot him to the halibut bank.’
173 “The only official account of the seal catch at Cape Flattery that has ever
been kept is the one I had charge of for the tenth census of the United States
under instructions from Professor Spencer F. Baird, to make a full Report on the
fisheries of Cape Flattery, including fur-seals. This Report, in full, may be found
in ‘The Fisheries and Fishing Industries of the United States,’ section 5, vol. ii
This is the most complete and reliable Report ever published of the Neah Bay fisher-
ies, and was compiled by me during the entire year of 1880 while I was in the official
capacity of Inspector of United States Customs, stationed at Neah Bay. Since that
time no account has been kept of an official nature, and any attempt to make up a
statement would be mere guesswork, and utterly unreliable. Ithink Captain Charles
Spring, who was with us during our interview in Victoria, is a thoroughly reliable
man, and his statement of seal statistics the most correct that [have known. Ihave
endeavoured to obtain statistics from parties at Neah Bay, but without success.
“The whole of the seal catch by the Indians of Cape Flattery has been sold in Vic-
toria, and I think, classed with other skins procured from the west coast Indians.
I would have supposed that the Indian Department at Washington, ever mindful of
the good effect on members of Congress it is to make a good showing of Indian
industries, would have instructed the Indian Agents to have kept a record similar
to mine, so that they could show to Congress that the Makah Indians of Cape Flat-
tery are a self-supporting people. Had such a record been kept, its value at this
time would have been appreciated, but it seems to have been the policy of the anthor-
ities at Washington to ignore all knowledge of seal industries except those of the
Pribylott Islands; » hence the impossibility at the present time of reaching any reliable
results.”
Under date of the 10th January, 1892, Judge Swan writes:
“Your kind letter of the 22nd December was received on the 31st. Since then I
have been endeavouring to obtain past statistics of the seal business at Cape Flat-
tery, but without success. I have, however, arranged with an intelligent half-breed
Makah Indian, who has the agency store and trading post at Neah Bay, to keep an
accurate account of the catch during the present season.
“Yesterday a number of Makah Indians came to my office, and I had a long inter-
view with them. They told me that they had come to fit out their se hooners ‘ Lot-
tie’ and ‘James G. Swan’ for sealing. These schooners are in winter quarters in
Scow Bay, opposite the city. Those Indians say that seals are unusually plentiful
at Cape Flattery and Barclay Sound, and if the weather is good they hope to make
a large catch.”
Under date of the 6th February, 1892, Judge Swan writes:
‘“T have seen several Makah Indians who have been here, and they tell me that
Indians lose very few seals, whether they spear or shoot them, as they are always so
near the seal at such times that they can recover them before they sink.
“Captain Lavender, formerly of schooner ‘Oscar and Hattie,’ who is a fine shot,
told me that he secured ninety-five seals out of every hundred that he shot. He said
that poor hunters, of which he had several on his vessel, would fire away a deal of
ammunition and not hit anything, but would be sure to report on their return to the
vessel that they killed a seal each time they fired, but that all the seals sank except
the few which they brought on board. Captain Lavender was of opinion that not
over 7 per cent. of seals killed were lost.”
244 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Judge Swan to Dr. G. M, Dawson.
STATE OF WASHINGTON, December 13, 1891.
Drar Srr: I have just received from Neah Bay the following names of vessels
engaged in sealing trom Neah Bay in 1890 and 1891, with the number of seal-skins
taken by each vessel.
1890, .
Schooner— Skins.
SW) stared crete elated wisteregd Sete erates oe ae espe totreh sia (Cre oiclalo rs aia eieotee erate 136
Ottle:s2 683 ..24- 24) Be oc Rice. 2 ates eee ees Se ares oe eee eee 120
OAS OD coer tee srk S212 thee eee CE eee te Bana aoe 250
OPC aR erlsins 32 2s cies bed oi te EE REE Se ORE Se eee eee eee 30
5386
1891
Sls er ee ee ree Seta or Sree ae eI AOS 160
TiO bbe eee ie ee eh ee oe eee ead Sa ee Se eee eee 480
@iGhiPerkins¢ asses: seen sch. ste eee 2 ee ec ae eee cee 190
MGASCT 20 ks cents Be See tin d eet be oe ee Ee eee Seer ome tere 195
1, 025
The schooner ‘ Teaser” is owned in Seattle, the ‘‘Swan,” ‘ Lottie,” and “C, C.
Perkins” are owned by Indiaus at Neah Bay.
Yours truly,
(Signed) JAMES G. SWAN.
174 Under date of the 28th November, 1891, Judge Swan writes:
‘‘Thesame letter informs me that schooner ‘ Lottie,’ Captain Peter Thompson,
was the first vessel which took Indians and canoes from Neah Bay to hunt seals.
This was in 1869; the ‘Lottie’ was a pilot-boat at that time. She is now owned by
Captain James Claplanhoo, a full-blood Makah Indian, and Head Chief of the tribe.
Last spring the ‘ Lottie’ went to Behring Sea and did very well. Captain Claplan-
hoo, after paying all costs of the voyage, had 7,000 or 8,000 dollars left. He deposited
5,000 dollars gold in the Merchant Bank in this city. He will buy another schooner
and try his luck again next season.
“‘T am amused with reading the remarks of correspondents of the eastern press
about seals. They only know what they have seen and been told on the rookeries,
but of the migratory habits of seals they know nothing and careless. I have always
contended, and still hold my opinion, that the seals are not in one great band, but in
countless herds, like flocks of wild geese or the bands of buffalo. Geese do not all fly
to the Arctic, as was once supposed, nor did the buffalo of Texas go north to the
Saskatchewan in the summer, or the herds of Winnipeg visit Texas in the winter.
‘All the bands of fur-seals in the North Pacific do not go to the Pribyloff Islands,
and there are thousands which do not visit Behring Sea at all. But these writers,
who assume to know all the facts, never discuss this question, Where do the seals go
when they leave Behring Sea? ‘
“Tf the killing of fur-seals is prohibited on the Pribyloff Islands during the breed-
ing season there will be no fear of extermination. That butchery is driving off the
seals more than the so-called poaching.
“T inclose an article from the ‘Seattle Post Intelligencer’ of the 5th on fur-seals,
written by myself. It was published in the Sunday issue, but the demand was so
great that every copy was sold, and another edition published in their weekly the
following Thursday. The editor told me that it has been extensively copied in the
leading journals of the east.”
Extract from the “Seattle Post Intelligencer” of November 5, 1591,
[Special Correspondence. }
Port TOWNSEND, Oclober 31, 1891.
The investigations of the United States and British Commissions in Behring Sea
during the present season of 1891 have been the most thoroughly scientific ever
made by either Government. Hitherto all the special agents sent by the United
States Government from Washington City have confined their investigations and
reports to the seals of the Pribyloff Islands, derived partly by their own observa-
tions, but mostly from the interested statements of persons residing at the rookeries
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 245
on those islands, the officers and employés of the Alaska Commercial Company, and
the present lessees of these islands. These reports are the only ones that have
obtained credit in Washington City. All adverse reports of sealers or parties
engaged in the fur trade outside of the powerful sane ae have been either
ignored or set aside with contempt. ‘The controversy so far has been between
os ganized capital seeking to secure a monopoly and private traders and fishermen,
inost of whom are men of small means seeking by their own exertions to secure a
protit. These latter have never combined or formed associations for their own pro-
tection, so as to have their side of the question fairly considered and discussed in
Washington City. Both parties have been stimulated by greed, and not by a desire
for scientific investigation.
When the Reports of the United States and Royal Commissioners are published
enough new facts will be produced to make a material difference between what has
been dogmatically and persistently asserted by interested writers in the employ of
the Alaska Commercial Company, and the real state of the case, enough to call for
a modification of the present stringent Sealing Laws.
It is persistently asserted by the lessees of the Pribyloff Islands that the seals are
disappearing, and that they are being exterminated by the sealing schooners, whom
careless writers term poachers. Poaching cannot be done where there is no preserve,
and the only preserve is on those islands leased by the United States Government
to the Sealing Companies. The open sea is not. and cannot be, in any sense a pre-
serve. Hence to call sealing-schooners poachers is an evident error which should
be corrected. These vessels ure not poachers on the Pacific Ocean any more than
they were poachers on the Atlantic Ocean before they came around Cape Horn. ~
The full sealing fleet list to the 20th June, 1891, amounted to 79 vessels, 47 of which
are under the British flag; 30 are under the United States flag. All are of North
American build. The British vessels mostly came from Nova Scotia; a few were
built in British Columbia, and the rest were purchased from citizens of the United
States. The American vessels were mostly from Massachusetts, some from San Fran-
cisco, and a few were built on Puget Sound. Other vessels have been added to the
fleet, but their names and tonnage I have not been able to ascertain. It is charged
by the lessees of the islands that these 79 vessels have destroyed so many seals, and
have driven so many off the islands, that they are in danger of being exterminated,
and the wailing of these unfortunate capitalists has induced the Governments of the
United States and Great-Britain to send their armed cruizers to Behring Sea to put
a stop to the killing of seals by private enterprise, so that the lessees of the islands
may be protected and the poor seals kept from being utterly exterminated. These
specious assertions, urged with eloquent sophistry, have deluded eastern people, and
especially those at Washington City, into a belief that our hard-working fishermen
and hunters upon the high seas are Working a great wrong to the monopolists and
the nation at large, and must be suppressed by force
Now let us see who is really working an injury to the monopolizing capitalists,
and the real causes why the intelligent fur-seal is leaving the leased rookeries on the
Pribyloff Islands.
A writer in the London ‘Weekly Times,” of the 12th September, 1891, who
175 was in Behring Sea as a reporter on the steamer ‘‘Danube” during the past
summer, says of the decrease of the seals on the Pribyloff group:
“The cause of this is, no doubt, the indiscriminate slaughter of these animals on
the islands by the Alaska Commercial Company and the present Company’s servants,
which has driven the seals to other parts of the sea for breeding, and already, the
Beene season, considerable numbers have made their appearance on St. Matthew’s
Island, where formerly they did not resort, the two islands St. Paul and St. George
being the great rookeries.””
The seals begin to make their appearance in the region about Cape Flattery in the
latter part of December or the first of January, varying with different seasons.
When easterly winds prevail with much snow they keep well off shore, and do not
nake their appearance in great numbers before the middle of February or the first
of March. Last winter was very mild, with but little snow, but the prevailing
winds, which were south and south- west, were exceedingly violent, preventing
sealing- schooners from doing much hunting. The mildness of temperature, how-
ever, with the direction of the prevailing winds, drove the seals toward the coast
in incredible numbers. They gradually work up the coast toward Queen Charlotte
Island, when the larger portion of the herds move along the Alaskan coast toward
Unimak Pass and other western openings into Behring Sea. A portion of these
seals, however, pass into Dixon’s Entrance, north of Queen Charlotte Island, and
into Cross Sound and Cook’s Inlet, and do not go to Behring Sea, but have their
young on the innumerable islands, fiords, and bays in Southern Alaska and Britisk
Columbia. These seals are seen in these waters all summe r, at the same time of the
breeding on the rookeries of the Pribyloff Islands, and are killed by Indians and
the skins sold to dealers. The great body of the seals, however, do enter Behring
246 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Sea, where they are followed by the sealing-vessels. They usually take to the islands
about the first of June, the breeding cows and bulls being earlier than the rest of
the herd. The breeding goes on about four months.
The writer in the London ‘‘ Times” before alluded to says of the method adopted
on the islands for taking the seals, that:
“It is cruel and unsportsmanlike. ‘The animals have no chance for their lives,
but are slaughtered like sheep in the shambles. A portion of the herd is separated
from the main body by a party of men armed with clubs. These men—they can
hardly be called hunters—by shouts and blows drive the part of the herd they have
surrounded away into the interior of the islands, a mile or so from the beach.
Here, ona clear space, the unfortunate seals are atonce clubbed to death and skinned,
the carcases being left as they lie. ‘These slaughters are carried on until the number
of skins required are secured. Latterly the seals seem to have an instinet that
there is something wrong, as the squads driven into the sand-hills never return,
only the stench from the slaughter coming down to the beach when the land breeze
blows. In consequence of this the rookeries have been less frequented than in
former years. This has given rise to the assertion of the monopolizing Company
that the taking of seal by the private vessels is causing a depletion of the seals on
the breeding islands.
‘‘When the methods adopted by the hunters of the sealing- vessels are compared
with those of the licensed killers, those barbarous butchers, it does not require much
consideration to give an intelligent judgment in the case, and determine which
method is the most humane and which method is the real cause of the seals leaving
the rookeries.
‘‘When the sealing-schooner is at sea she has a number of small boats of a canoe
form, built expressly for sealing. When a seal is sighted a boat is launched over-
board, a hunter, with one or two men to pull the boat, quietly take their places.
The hunter is armed with shot-gunsand rifle. The boat is pulled quietly toward the
seal. In nine cases out f ten the animal takes alarm and dives out of sight before
the boat is near enough for the hunter to shoot, and in no case does a hunter shoot
until he is near enough to be certain of the game. As soon as a seal is shot it begins
to sink slowly, and the boat is pulled rapidly up to it, the carcase is gatfed and hauled
aboard. This is repeated as long as a seal can be seen. Jn many instances only one
or two will be killed during a whole day’s hunting, but at other times as many as
twenty or thirty will be taken. After aday’s hunt the boats return to the schooner,
the seals are skinned, and the pelts laid in salt in the hold. This goes on from day
today during the season. A small boat is not a very safe craft in the boisterous water
of the Northern Ocean, and the thick fogs often spring up and hide the schooners
from the hunters’ sight, when days may elapse before the boats are picked up, and
sometimes they are never found Thusthese hardy sealers pursue the objects of their
chase in the open sea. The seal has a chance of escaping, and the percentage killed
is very small. When it is considered that an extent of ocean of nearly 12,000 square
miles is hunted over, the chance is slight of the seals being exterminated by the fleet
of sixty or seventy vessels engaged in the seal-hunting business.
“Tt has been asserted that only a few seals out of every hundred shot are captured
by the hunters, and the balance sink or escape wounded to die lateron. This is not
so. The ample evidence collected by the Commissioners this season proves that a
seal hardly ever escapes when shot. Of course, a few do, but not over five or six out
of the hundred.
“The sealing monopolists of the rookeries have had reports made by so-called
‘experts’ on the condition of the sealing business and on the probable effect on seal
life if the present rate of killingis tobe kept up. All, or nearly all, of these ‘experts’
have reported that but few seal are left; that the piratical poaching schooners had
killed them off, and yet the whole of the persons interviewed by the Commissioners,
masters of sealing-schooners, Indians along the coast, and traders admitted that the
seals are in no ways diminishing in numbers, but that the present season of 1891 the
fur-seals in the North Pacific have been more numerous than for the past twenty
years. There is, however, much greater difficulty experienced in capturing them.
The wary animals have learned what a sealing-boat is, and at the sound of a gun the
animal is on its guard, and it is harder for the hunter to get in range of his quarry.
The Indians kill the seal by paddling the canoe silently close to the sleeping animal,
and then with unerring aim hurling a barbed spear with a line attached, with which
the seal is hauled in and taken aboard the canoe. Seldom or never does a seal escape.
The white hunters use the gun as described.”
176 Although seals have appeared in incredible numbers this present season of 1891,
yet the weather all through the spring and early summer months was unusually
boisterous, and days and even weeks elapsed during which time it was impossible to
launch a sealing-boat or an Indian canoe, consequently the catch has not been as
large as was generally expected, and recent accounts from London show that the
prices brought for fur-seal skins at the great trade sales did not average over 13 dol-
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS, 247
lars. As prices from 17 to 22 dollars were paid in Victoria for these skins, somebody
has been a great loser, and the prospect now is that fewer vessels will engage in the
business next season, and that prices will rule still lower.
Of the migratory habits of fur-seals but little has hitherto been made known, for
those who have had the information to give have had an interest directly opposed to
imparting the truth. Hence the fallacious assertion has been made and stoutly
maintained by the monopolists and their mendacious hirelings that all the fur-seals
of the North Pacific Ocean congregated on the rookeries of the islands of the Priby-
loff group, and if they are allowed to be killed by the poachers and pirates, whom
the general public know as honest, industrious, energetic fishermen and hunters—
the fur-seal will become extinct, and Miss Flora McFlimsey will have nothing to
wear, poor girl! But the scientific vestigations of the United States and Royal
Commissions, and particularly the latter, w ho have made the migrations of the seals
a special study, will show that the habits of all migratory animals, both birds and
beasts, are governed by natural laws. ‘The seals, like the great herds of buffalo,
formerly so abundant, and the myriads of wild fowl from the north, are not (each
kind) one single great body. The buffalo were found in great droves from Texas to
the Assiniboine and the Red River of the north, but they were not all in one band.
The herds from Lower Texas never went north to the upper limits, nor did the herds
of the extreme north ever seek their feeding ground in Southern Texas. Every band
had its own range. So of the Canada geese and other wild fowl, which were popu-
larly declared to visit the regions of the North Pole every spring to propagate their
young. No one thought or dared to assert to the contrary, but when Colonel Goss,
the celebrated ornithologist, found the nests and eggs and young of the Canada
goose in Kansas, and other observers have discovered these so-called Arctic breeders
rearing their young at the head-waters of the Missouri and Mississippi, it was found
that popular belief regarding natural history is not always scientific fact, and so as
to the habits of the fur-seal. They do not move in one immense herd to Behring
Sea, but in droves and bands or schools like fish, all over the great expanse of the
North Pacific Ocean. Dr. Dawson, of the Royal Commission, said, as reported in
the Victoria ‘‘ Colonist” of the 13th October:
“Very little has been published about the migrations of the seals on the North
Pacific coast before they enter the Behring Sea, and this point is one from which we
got a lot of interesting matter. We have taken a good deal of evidence about the
presence of seals at Cape Flattery, and have been told that they were more numer-
ous last spring than they have ever been before. . . . . . I find a peculiar idea
existing among those who claim to be authorities in regard to seals found in the
waters “ot South America, especially about Tierra del ‘Fuego and the Straits of
Magellan. The notion that they are the same species of seal as those found in Beh-
ring Sea and the North Pacific is quite erroneous. They are of a different genus
altogether. ai
So also will these scientific investigations show that a portion of the so-called
California seal, which comes north every season, does not enter Behring Sea at all,
and that its habits in many respects differ essentially from those which visit the
rookeries on the Pribyloff Islands. These California seals do have pups somewhere
on the coast, either at the Farallones or further south, or on the great kelp patches,
as is clearly shown by the young pups which annually make their appearance with
the herd, and are taken and brought into Neah Bay by the Indians every season,
and it is further proved that these pups will swim at birth, and even when taken
from their mother before birth, thus showing a difference of habits between the
Pribyloff Islands seal and those taken at Cape Flattery. These facts about the
habits of the fur-seals of Cape Flattery, which I have known for more than thirty
years, have this year been proved to be correct by the Royal scientists, and will
seem to show there are alw: iys two sides to every question. While I join with all
the sealers with whom I have conversed that there should be a close season on the
Pribyloff Islands, when no seals should be killed on those islands or in Behring Sea,
I equally join with some of the more intelligent and observing of these sealers that
the hunting of seals along the coast of Washington, British Columbia, and South-
eastern Alaska does not in any way affect the seal catch on the Priby loft Islands, as
there is every reason to assume that these coast seals never enter Behring Sea.
When we consider how the development of the fisheries of the North Pacific have
been paralyzed by this seal controversy, and our fishermen have been driven by the
mistaken policy of our Government to seek protection under the British flag, we
may well exclaim, ‘‘ This is a sorry sight.” The fishermen of Gloucester and other
eastern ports, who were protected by our Government in their fisheries on the
Atlantic, almost to the verge of hostilities with Great Britain, find that when they
come around Cape Horn to engage in the same peaceful and honourable vocation in
the North Pacific, Behring Sea, and the Arctic Ocean, they are denounced by the
same Government as poachers and pirates. They take notlng but the products of
the ocean. They rob no man. Yet because a powerful Syndicate of capitalists
demands the right to monopolize the taking of seals to furnish articles of luxury
248 REPORT OF BRI'TISH COMMISSIONERS
for the rich, our fishermen and hunters are harried and worried by revenue-cutters
and other armed vessels, not for the publie good, not for the benefit of the poor,
but simply to gratify the avarice of the wealthy few who have secured from our
Government a monopoly of seal-catching on Pribyloff Islands, which they arrogantly
assume gives them the monopoly of the whole ocean, as well as Alaska.
When “the Hudson Bay Company. which for more than 100 years had lorded it with
despotic sway across the whole continent, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, sought to
renew its Charter, those far-seeing statesmen, Gladstone, Labouchere, Lord Bury,
and others opposed granting a renewal, and Parliament refused. ‘The course of those
wise statesmen against that gigantic monopoly opened to the Dominion of Canada
all that great region which had been represented by the Company as a land of
177 ice and snow, of fogs and cold, fit only as an abode for wild beasts and the
still wilder Indian. But it has been found an agricultural region of immense
value, which has been opened and demonstrated by the Canadian Pacific Railroad
to be a fit abode for thousands of industrious white persons, who have found within
its borders happy homes, and have thus added to the wealth of the Dominion.
So, too, when we can have statesmen in Congress who can rise above the sordid
motives of filthy luere, and look into this seal question and the development of
Alaska, and of our great fisheries, they will see that the sum paid by the Company
for the lease of the Pribyloff Islands is not a feather’s w eight in thescales of justice,
when we compare this amount, great as it is, with the vastly greater amount of good
the nation will derive by giving every encouragement to our fishermen to bring in the
rich products of the ocean, the whales, the seals, the fish, and to our miners and
others to open up and develop the rich treasures of Alaska. All this development is
retarded and paralyzed by the action of the monopolizing Companies, just as the
Hudson Bay Company retarded the development of British Columbia and all that
great region, clear through to Hudson’s Bay and the Atlantic. Instead of emulating
the ex: ample of the British Parliament and abr ogating a powe!ful monopoly, we seem
to have gone back to feudal times and granted rights and privileges to the moneyed
Barons which are denied to the people. Better that every fur-seal be exterminated
than the United States should enter into this unholy alliance with a monopoly to
paralyze our industries and rob the people of their inheritance.
On the North Atlantic Ocean the hair-seals have been hunted for more than two
centuries, and every year more vessels and larger ones are engaged in this business.
Yet the bair-seal is not exterminated. The habits of the fur-seal and hair-seal are
analogous—both live on fish, both are amphibious; but the commercial value of the
fur-seal is the greatest, and while our fishermen can kill all the hair-seals they wish
the fur seal must be reserved for those who have longer purses and can cajole Con-
egress by their sophistries.
The fur-seals never will be exterminated. They may and have been driven from
their rookeries, but they have found others, and if they are being driven from the
Pribyloff Islands, as is asserted, I predict that when the wholesale butcheries are
stopped and the stench of the rotting carcasses no longer pollutes the atmosphere of
St. Paul’s and St. George’s rookeries, the seals will return to their old haunts, as
they are now returning to their former rookeries at C ape Horn and other places in
the South Pacific. In all the preceding years of the history of the sealing on the
Pribyloff Islands, the Captains of the revenue-cutters have not been required to
make specific Reports on their observations of fur-seals off the rookeries, and any
voluntary statements they may have made were either pigeon-holed or not con-
sidered good form, hence we have no knowledge of any such Reports. This season,
however, the Captains have been required to make Reports on their observations of
fur-seals and their habits off of the rookeries, and their testimony, added to the
Reports of the Commissioners, will furnish much interesting information which has
hitherto been suppressed.
If the Government will prohibit the killing of fur-seals on the Pribyloff Islands
and in Behring Sea during the breeding season, and will encourage our fishermen
as they are encouraged on the Atlantic, the seals will not be driven off nor the mar-
ket overstocked, and, better than all, encouragement will be given to the develop-
ment of our fisheries by furnishing a motive * for a fishing fleet to congregate on
Puget Sound, and by the products of their labours to enrich our State. If such a
course is pursued one will hear no more of American vessels being driven under the
British flag for protection from the United States Government, which should protect
them. Our Government is very jealous of injuries and insults put upon our citizens
by foreign nations, but not a word is said of the injuries and losses our citizens
have incurred by our Government in sustaining and protecting a monopoly on the
seal islands. It is a disgraceful partnership between the United States and these
monopolists, which should be dissolved. It is an old adage that ‘‘ when thieves fall
out honest men get their dues,” and I hope that the present feud between the two
rival Companies may bring Congress to a clear understanding of this matter, and
our fishermen allowed the same privileges and encouragement that they have in the
North Atlantic.
(Signed) JAMES G. Swan!
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 249
Letter from Captain John Devereux, addressed to Ashley Froude, Esq., Secretary, Behring
: Sea Commission.
GRAVING Dock, Esquimalt, November 10, 1891.
Sir: In reply to your letter of the 28th ultimo, respecting the habits of the fur-
seal along the coasts of British Columbia and Alaska, I bee to report as follows:
1. From the early part of December to the beginning of June they are found near
the edge of the bank of soundings along the coast from south of the Strait of De
Fuca to Cape Scott Islands on the west coast of Vancouver Island, and that about
the middle of June they disappear altogether, and are seldom seen again until late
in November or early part of December, when the weather is then too rough for all
practical purposes to catch them.
2. The distance from the shore where they are to be found most plentiful—say off
Cape Beale, where the bank extends furthest from the land—is from 30 to 100 miles,
and in some cases to 150 miles; but these figures must not be taken by any means as
a fixed limit, because they are frequently found inshore and up the sounds some 8
or 10 miles inside the headlands, and, in fact, I have seen them in the Strait of
Fuca, and on rare occasions in the Gulf of Georgia even.
3. When they are found along the bank on the west coast of Vancouver Island
they are feeding on their natural feeding grounds, where they feed upon all kinds
of fish in season—of which we have a variety on this coast of some thirty odd
species—however, the herring is their principal food, and then comes the salmon
and other varieties, and so long as the fish are plentiful the seal never leaves
178 =the feeding ground, but when the herring, salmon, smelts, and others proceed
northward and into the inlets, harbours, rivers, &c., to spawn, the seals follow
them, but so soon as they find shoal water they go to sea again. Now some of our
julets on the west coast are from 50 to 100 fathoms deep, and the seal is quite at
home in them.
4, As far as my observations have extended regarding the increase or decrease in
their numbers, and I have been on this coast twenty-seven years, all I can say on the
subject is that when they return to their feeding grounds after their periodic
migrations they appear to be in numbers very similar to the salmon, herring, smelt,
oolachan, &c. Some years they are found in inexhaustible numbers, then for a year
or two they will be scarcer, only to return in the following year in as great abun-
dance as ever, and it 1s my firm belief that if the fish never left the banks fringing
the west coast of British Columbia and Southern Alaska the seals would never leave
their feeding grounds, for the only food they can get in Behring Sea is codfish,
which is by no means so plentiful as the herring, smelt, and oolachans further south.
As to the distance they preserve from the shore-line, I do not believe there is any
difference, for instance, in the months of November, December, and January the
salmon and herrings, &c., are far off shore, and as spring advances they approach
tie land in shoals and the seals follow them. The herrings come in first, the salmon
follows, and feeds upon them, and the seal feeds upon all, although the herring is
its favourite food.
Any other information as to the history of seal-fishing in this province, &c., I can
supply if necessary.
Iam, &c.
(Signed) JOHN DEVEREUX, Dock-master.
179 APPENDIX (D).
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE AND MEMORANDA.
1. Behring Sea Commissioners to Her Britannic Majesty’s Consuls-General at Shang-
liae, Canton, and Honolulu.
2. Her Britannic Majesty’s Consul at San Francisco to Behring Sea Commissioners.
3. Her Britannic Majesty’s Consul-General at Shanghae to Behring Sea Commis-
- _sioners.
4. Her Britannic Majesty’s Consul-General at Canton to Behring Sea Commissioners.
5. Behring Sea Commissioners to Senior Naval Officer, Esquimalt,
6. Extracts from “Challenger” Reports.
7. Letter from Mr. F. Chapman.
8. Extract of letter from Baron Nordenskiold.
9. Letter from Mr. John Murray.
10. Report of examination of dead Seal Pup by Dr. Giinther.
11. Memorandum by Sir Samuel] Wilson, M. P. (Sheep-breeding).
250 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
12. Memorandum by Earl Brownlow (Deer-breeding). —*
13. Memorandum by Professor Flower, C. B.
14. Letter from Captain David Gray, Peterhead.
15. Mr. W. Palmer, on the Killing of Seals upon the Pribyloff Islands.
16. Extract from the Melbourne ‘‘Argus,” December 17 1887, (referred to by Mr,
Chapman).
17. Extracts from Pamphlet by Mr. A. W. Scott on the Fur-seals of the Southern
Hemisphere, 1873.
1.—Letter from the Behring Sea Commissioners to Her Britannic Majesty’s Consul-General
at Shanghae.*
GOVERNMENT HOUSE, Ottawa, November 16, 1891.
Sir: Having been appointed British Commissioners to investigate the facts and
conditions of fur-seal life and the sealing industry in the North Pacific Ocean, we
find that our inquiry would be much assisted if you could furnish us with informa-
tion on the following points:
1. As to the names and number of vessels sailing from Chinese ports in any given
years, which have taken fur-seal at sea or on the rookeries, together with the num-
ber of skins taken and other particulars, such as the nationality of the vessels, and
the numbers of their crews.
2. Any information as to the number of fur-seal skins landed at Shanghae, and the
market prices of the same in any given years.
{t3. Any information on, or names of authorities for, the very considerable trade
in fur-seal skins, both from the North Pacific and the South Seas, which appears to
have been carried on at Canton during the earlier years of the present century. ]
We should be much obliged if the above information could be forwarded to us as
soon as possible, addressed to the Behring Sea Commission, care of his Excellency
the Governor-General, Ottawa, Canada.
We have, &e.
(Signed) GroRGE BADEN-POWELL.
GEORGE M. Dawson.
2.—Lelter from Her Britannie Majesty’s Consul at San Francisco to the Behring Sea
Commissioners.
SAN FRANCISCO, January 5, 1892.
Str: Iam in receipt of your despateb, dated Foreign Office, the 10th clone! wish-
ing me to obtain for the Behring Sea Commissioners the forms of clearance issued at
the Custom-house at San Francisco for vessels proceeding on whaling, fishing, and
sealing voyages to the North Pacific, including Behring Sea.
The precise phrases used in clearing vessels at this port upon these voyages is
shown on the inclosed forms of clearance obtained from the Custom-house. ‘Those
that go hunting and fishing procure a clearance, which states that they are ‘ bound
for hunting and fishing voyage, having on board stores,” and those that go whaling
are cleared “ for whaling voyage, having on board stores.” I am informed by the
Deputy Collector of Customs, who clears all vessels here, that these are the only
two forms of clearance given, and that no sealing or trading clause is inserted in such
forms. He says no vessels are cleared for Behring Sea. ‘The steamers of the Alaska
Commercial Company clear for Unalaska, and receive permission from the Collector
of Customs there to proceed to the Islands of St. George and St. Paul.
As regards a statement of the number of vessels clearing from this port for fishing
and hunting, I inclose a Memorandum which I have procured from the Custom-house
at this port.
Tam, &e. (Signed) DENIS DONOHOE.
180 3.—Letter from Her Britannic Majesty’s Consul- General, Shanghae, to the Behring
Sea Commissioners.
SHANGHAE, January 8, 1892.
GENTLEMEN: In reply to your letter of the 16th November last, just received, ask-
ing for certain information with regard to vessels clearing from Chinese ports which
have —— fur-seal, I have the honour to inform you that, as far as I can learn, no
vessels have cleared for that purpose from this country, though vessels registered
here may possibly have left for Yokohama with the ultimate intention of engaging
* Sent also to Her Majesty’s Consuls-General at Honolulu and Canton.
t' To Canton only.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. PADI |
in the seal fishery. Most, if not all, of the vessels engaged in the seal fisheries reg-
istered here are built and fitted out in Yokohama, and are only registered in Shan
hae because it is the nearest port where English registry can be obtained.
The Imperial Maritime Customs have kindly furnished me with the following
figures showing the import of seal-skins:
we-
oD
Year. Pieces. Value.
| Haikwan
taels.
lies KS6dc SEB SB OCHS BEARD Oda Ser Cot ao anb aces Con DOOR eeSbRCoGeE COSCO EE CHO ccne cd aren 972 1,941
IBC 324 deo s SoCs GRE Tega sae oo Cech tL CHA BON CRR BCE OE EOORE price eee et ite ae mites 2, 381 5, 097
VSS OEE ee csae =~ ok oe sk aetna eins Naas bats ate wieteinie Senet aceee sed EL ee IEL4 8, 450 8,114
SOO Seer eee 2 13s 4 si. Slee ey efter eit aac ec icietins eetiaeiiose mete ose tse seas ot 502 1,012
AS eet pele faa aints icine = avn tae heres eee ieee alois\c eis ie is Cineiometete tee cok ao adiesipie Sameer 860 1,775
The Haikwan tael is, roughly speaking, equivalent to 5s.
These skins have all been imported from Japan, and I am unable to say whether
they had their origin in that country, or had been previously imported to it.
Tam sending copy of your despatch to Her Britannic Majesty’s Consul at Yokohama,
who will doubtless furnish you with all the information obtainable.
I have, &c.
(Signed) NICHOLAS J. HANNEN. ~
4.—Letler from Her Britannic Majesty's Consul-General, Canton, to the Behring Sea
Commissioners.
CANTON, December 28, 1891.
GENTLEMEN: I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the
16th ultimo, in which you ask for information about the fur-seal trade of this port.
In reply to your first query, [ have to state that, so far as can be ascertained, no
vessel sailing from a Chinese port has ever gone on sealing expeditions.
As to the second point on which you ask for information, I cannot trace any record
of fur-seal skins having ever been landed at this port.
On the third point also I have been unable to obtain any information. None of
the records accessible here have even a mention of a ‘‘very considerable trade in
fur-seal skins, both from the North Pacifie and the South Seas.”
In a Consular Report on the trade of this port in 1843, Mr. Thom writes: ‘‘ Twenty
years ago the fur trade (which was alinost entirely in the hands of the Americans)
earried on with China amounted to upwards of 1,000,000 dollars annnally. But,
owing to the indiscriminate slaughter of the animals of the chase, it has dwindled
away so much as to be no longer worth pursuing, and, indeed, during these last two
or three years no skins or furs whatever have been imported into China.” Mr. Thom
gives the names of the furs imported into China, and fur-seals is not among them.
Further, in a Return of United States imports into Canton in 1846, other furs are
enumerated, but not fur-seals. In a previous Return (1831) of tke United States
trade in furs, I find in like manner the names of the furs exported to China, and fur-
seals is not among these. But in another account I find it stated that the furs
usually imported into China by United States traders in the early part of this century
were rabbit, seal, sea-otter, land-otter, beaver, and fox.
The archives of this Consulate-General do not go back to the period at which the
United States trade in furs with China flourished. Consequently, there are no
archives to shed light on the subject. The books which I have referred to also fail
to give precise information, and it is doubtful whether anything certain and definite
about it can be learned here.
Lhave, &c. ; (Signed) T. WATTERS.
5.—Behring Sea Commissioners to Senior Naval Officer. Esquimalt.
OTTAWA, July 8, 1897.
Srr: As Her Majesty’s Commissioners appointed to investigate the conditions of
seal life in Behring Sea, it appears to us that information on the following points
would be of great value to the Commission if gathered by any of Her Majesty’s
ships visiting Behring Sea in 1891.
We therefore venture to append, for your consideration, heads of information op
matters which we have to investigate.
We have, &e. (Signed) GEORGE BADEN-POWELL,
GrkORGE M. Dawson.
252 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
181 eecords of Observations on Fur-Seal Life in the North Pacific Ocean, for the Beh-
ring Sea Commission, to be entered in a Separate Seal Log.
Place of each recorded observation (possibly, marked off on separate chart by
reference numbers).
Points to be noted in regard to seals:
¢i.) Whether playing, resting, or travelling (if travelling: (a) direction, (f) pace,
(vy) whether single or in schools).
(ii.) (a) Sex, age, and size; (/) whether accompanied by pups or not.
(iii.) State of w eather and sea at times of observation.
3. Obtain corresponding information from any sealing-schooners visited for any
immediately preceding dates, and generally record any information applying to seal
life.
This Memorandum was communicated to the commanding officers of Her Majesty’s
ships ‘‘Nymphe,” ‘‘ Porpoise” and ‘‘ Pheasant,” who kindly caused accurate observa-
tions to be made on the points indicated.
The results of these observations are, so far as were considered essential, embodied
in our Report.
6.—Extracts from Reportof the Scientific Resultsof the Exploring Voyage of Her Majesty’s
Ship ‘ Challenger,” 1873-76.
“The caves (on Nightingale Island), with the sloping ledges leading up to them,
are frequented, as was said, by fur- seals. Four vears before the visit of the expedi-
tion, 1,400 seals had been Killed on the island by one ship’s crew. Seals were very
much searcer in 1873, but the island was visited regularly once a-year by the Tristan
people, as was also Inaccessible Island. The Germans killed only seven seals at
Inaccessible Island during their stay, but the Tristan people killed forty there in
December 1872.” (Narrative, vol. i, part i, p. 264.)
“rom all sides of the precipitous black cliffs cataracts fall over into the sea, and
water is found in numerous ponds all over the group. The islands* are frequented
by elephant- and fur-seals, although these are not so plentiful as formerly, and as there
is no lack of water, there is no d: anger of shipwrecked mariners dying of starvation.
The blubber of the elephant-seal and the skins of penguins, with the adherent fat,
furnish the material for fire, and the flesh of the seals and birds, the eggs of the
latter, together with the Kerguelen cabbage, form a nourishing diet, on which the
sealers residing at times on one or other of the islands have usually lived, and with
which they appear to have been contented.” (Narrative, vol. i, part i, p. 321.)
“Two of the whaling-schooners met with at the islandt killed over seventy fur-
seals on one day, and upwards of twenty on another, at some small islands off Howe
Island to the north. It is a pity that some discretion is not exercised in killing
the animals, as is done in St. Paul Island in Behring Sea in the case of the northern
fur-seal. By killing the young males, and selecting certain animals only for killing,
the number of seals” may even be increased ;{ the sealers in Kerguelen Island kill all
they can find.” (Narrative, vol. i, part i, p. 355.)
“Tn 1866, when Her Majesty’s ship ‘Topaze’ called at the island,§ there were only
ten inhabitants, and the ‘Challenger’|| fonnd forty or fifty nnder the control of a
Chilean, who paid 2001. a-year rent to the Chilean Government, and who had a few
men also at Mas-a-Fuera island; he was engaged principally with the hunting of the
fur-seals.” (Narrative, vol. i, part ii, p. 827.)
“The steam-pinnace left Gray Harbour J at 4 A. M. with several naturalists and
officers, and joined the ship in the evening at Port Grappler. On the way, landing
was effected at several spots, and a number of birds were procured; a very large
number of fur-seals (Arctocephalus) were seen, and six were shot, the skins and skele-
tons of which were preserved.” (Narrative, vol.i, part ii, p. 865.)
“Tn the narrative of the voyage it is stated that fur-seals frequented Nightingale
Island, one of the Tristan da Cunha group; the Crozet Islands, Kerguelen Island,
Juan lernandez, the Messier Channel, and Elizabeth Island, in the Strait of Magel-
lan. Specimens. of eared seals, which did not possess the elongated concave palate
*Crozet Islands, Penguin or Inaceessible Island, visited 1873-74.
+t Kerguelen Island.
tJ. A. Allen.—The eared seals. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., vol. ii, pp..1-88, 1870-71.
§ Juan Fernandez.
|| Visited by ‘‘ Challenger,” 1875.
q Visited by ‘‘ Challenger,” January 1876.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 253
so characteristic of the genus Otaria in the sense defined on p. 29, were procured from
the Kerguelen group of islands, in the Messier Channel on the west coast of South
America, and from Juan Fernandez. They consisted of the following specimens
from Kerguelen: two carcases of young fur-seals without the skin, procured from
the ‘Emma Jane’ at Fuller’s Harbour, January 1874; two skeletons of fur-seals, also
at Fuller's Harbour, which were distinguished from each other as No.1 and No.2
(No. 2 having been killed on Swaine Island), From the Messier Channel were
obtained the skin and skeleton of amale and the skin and skeleton of a female; also
two skeletons of males shot on rocks in January 1876. The specimen from Juan
Fernandez was a skin containing the skeleton of a very young animal.” (Zoology,
vol. xxvi, part lxvii, p. 37.)
182 7.—Seals and Sealing in New Zealand.
Through the kindness of Professor T. J. Parker, F. R.S., of the University of Otago,
Dunedin, New Zealand, the subjoined interesting account of the seal fishery in New
Zealand, written at his request, has been furnished by Mr. Frederick Chapman,
The communication is in the form of a letter addressed to Professor Parker, and is
dated from Dunedin, 24th September, 1891:
“‘T have endeavoured to get some definite information and original opinions to
enable you to answer Mr. G. Dawson’s letter of the 23rd June, with reference to the
extirpation of our seals, but the only person I could think of as uld enough to give
me first-hand information, yet not too old, has not yet answered my letter. I think,
however, that from a general knowledge of the traditions and literature of old New
Zealand, and from books at my command, I can give you something to begin with,
and I will try and obtain more.
“Doubtless Mr. Dawson has access to a paper on the fur-seal of New Zealand, by
J. W. Clarke, in the Proceedings of the Zoological Society for 1875 (p. 650), which
is in your Museum library. This paper gives some interesting facts, the verification
of which I had previously sought for years. As I know nothing of the seals in Aus-
tralian waters beyond the fact that they were once numerous in the islands of Bass
Strait, I will come to New Zealand. Seals were formerly numerous on our mainiand,
To get at the numbers taken here early in the century, one would have to make
inquiries of old mercantile houses in Sydney, London, and America—the Campbells,
Enderbys, &c., if any of them exist. The old Maori traditions constantly refer to
seals, Which were very numerous in the neighbourhood of this port two centuries
ago, and may have been plentiful when the century began. ‘The rocky west coast of
this island was, however, the home of numerous seals, and a few are still killed
there in quiet places. There was a beautiful colony at the Steeples, close to the
Westport lighthouse, but when the Government o;ened a season for sealing, a few
months since, a party went out in a boat from Westport and butchered them. That
was already regarded as a past place for sealing when Brunner explored that coast
by land in 1846, though Brunner saw a few seals there. It had evidently revived in
our time. The coasts of Foveaux Strait and the west coast swarmed with sealers
early in this century, and there were some on the west coast about Dusky Sound
even earlier. They were shore parties, who bagged the seals in great numbevs. Dr.
Shortland, who visited Mr. Jones’ whaling station at Waikonarti, -0 miles from here,
in 1842, frequently 1efers to the sealing, but ratherasa past matter. Our whales were
pretty well exterminated by 1850, and had even then long been scarce, and a writer
ten years before that repeats the protests of the French whalers, who were numer-
ous here, against the disastrous practice of the Sydney people, who maintained shore
stations, and so utterly destroyed the whales. It is difficult to realize that in 1843
there were fourteen whale ships lying in this port, with all their boats out daily,
and four shore stations in active operation, in face of the fact that during the nine-
teen years I have lived here only one whale has been killed. I have digressed from
the seals, but the fact of the whale explains, and more than explains, that of the
seal.
“Captain Turnbull, whose book I have never seen, writes in 1810 of 46,000 seals
taken at the Fiji Islands. We don’t hear of seals there now. It is quite possible
that that locality was mentioned to lead others off the scent. At Macquarie Island
the discoverers killed in one season 80,000 fur-seals! Our friend Professor Scott
visited it ten years ago. and was told the fur-seal never came there. Ever since then
it has been occupied by sea-elephant hunters, but no fur-seal ever visits them, ‘This
suggests that the fur-seals do not come up from the Antaretie ice, as the sea elephant
do. Campbell Island was repeatedly occupied by sealing parties, some of whose
graves are seen there Antipodes Island was occupied in 1824, and [do not know
how much earlier or later. Captain Vairchild, of the New Zealand Government
steamer, in four or five visits has never seen a seal there. The Auckland Islands, the
/
254 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS,
largest group, have been visited repeatedly during the last eighty years, and numer-
ous shore parties have lived there. On the Snares, sealers’ huts still stand. The
coasts of Stewart’s Island have yielded large numbers of seals.
“The Rev. Wm. Yate, a missionary, in "1828-35, after describing the enormous
number of whales destroyed (black or inshore whales) writes: ‘There are also sev-
eral establishments for the seal fishery on the coast of New Zealand or on the small
islands in the vicinity of the coast. A number of sailors are landed and left to kill
and skin the seals, many thousands of which are destroyed in the course of a few
months.’ Earlier than this, in 1815, the Rev. 8. Marsden, the first missionary in New
Zealand, writes narrating the adventures of the Maori Chief Diraterra and ten Tahi-
tians and ten Europeans who were placed as a sealing party on the Bounty Islands.
They suffered great privations, but in a few months, on sixteen rocks with a total
area of about 100 acres without vegetation or water, killed and skinned 8,000 seals.
This is enough to show you that once these places were densely peopled with seals.
The Chatham Islands were another sealing ground, but of them I know very little.
All this relates to matters which happened so long ago that sealers are a dead race,
while, as you know, whalers who came later or lasted longer are only represented
by a very few old men. As for middle- aged natives like myself, we heard in our
youth of whales, but not of seals.
‘Sealing has been closed for a good many years, before which the Maoris of Riv-
erton used to visit the west coast and get a few, and thou gh poaching never wholly
stopped, it did not pay very well. This year a sapient Government has opened a
season, and two vessels have been sent to the islands. One reports getting 150 from
the Chathams and Bountys, and the other 450 from the Auckland, but there is some
underhand work over it, and more may have been got, as the crew are accused of
stealing 300 skins. ‘This is by far the largest take for many years, and has, I think,
about finished the fur-seal in New Zealand waters.
“T visited five groups of islands last year in the summer, and saw one fur-seal, and
from this and other facts concluded that they were very scarce now.
“Now, as to the cause of this, there is but one answer. Reckless killing and dis-
turbance in the rookeries. Mr. Dawson necd not trouble himself about pelagic seal-
ing. There is not and never was such a thing in these waters. You could not
183 have it in our wide and angry sea, Calm days s are almost unknown where you
get south of New Zealand, and I never heard of seals being seen in the open
ocean. Certain it is that ocean sealing is and always has been an unknown thing
here.
“In December 1887 some very interesting articles appeared in the ‘Melbourne
Argus’ on ‘The Sealers at Work,’ by a man who was shipwrecked in the ‘ Derry
Castle’ at the Auckland Islands, and rescued by seal poachers. I have tried to get
these papers, but they are out of print. He describes the modus operandi. They
carry a long rope and lower one of the party over the cliffs hundreds of feet high.
He gets off at the mouth of the cave where the seals lie, and cuts off their retreat.
He then proceeds to club them, and send up their skins by the rope. This is done
because it is so dangerous to put in a boat on the open coast with a fearful sea run-
ning. The whales, so enormously plentiful prior to 1840, are, as I have said, almost
extinct. This is due to slaughtering them in the breeding bays, and to the ovcupa-
tion of these bays as shipping ports. ‘Ihe off-shore whale (sperm whale) is still lively,
though greatly reduced in numbers, Disturbance, as you know, is as great a
destroyer as actual killing. I believe it will pay our Government some “day to
restore the seal fisheries. Tt would be interesting to experiment with northern seals,
as they might migrate, and so people the islands and coasts, while the facts I have
mentioned, and the direct testimony of Captain Fairchild, who assures me that tlris
is the case, seem to show that ours keep very much to the native spot. If I can see
Captain Fairchild I will get some further facts from him. J think Filhol could give
Mr. Dawson some information, as he told mea great deal about seals when he was
here, which I have forgotten.
“This is about all I can tell you at present. Of this I am certain, that unless the
American seal fisheries are subjected to some kind of management, they will follow
the fate of ours, though it will take longer to effect it in their case.”
8.—Extract from Letter from Baron Nordenskiold to Dr. Dawson, dated Stockholm,
September 2, 1891.
My personal experience about the higher animal life in the Behring Sea is very
limited, and all the information I could collect you will find in Chapters. XIV and XV
of the second volume of the ‘‘ Vega Voyage,” which work, perhaps, can be useful to
you by my references to the older literature, to which I had a fuller access than any
of the previous authors on the subject. The collections of invertebrates brought
from the Behring Sea and the adjacent part of the Polar Sea by the scientific staff
of the ‘‘ Vega” were very large.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. ZOD
9.—Observations on Sealing in the Southern Hemisphere in the years 1873-76,
In addition to the notes contained in the published volumes relating to the ‘‘Chal-
lenger” expedition, Mr. John Murray has been so kind as to furnish the following
information :
‘CHALLENGER’? EXPEDITION OFFICE, 45, FREDERICK STREET,
“ Edinburgh, September 2, 1891.
“‘Drar Str: I have been from home for some time, otherwise your letter of the
2nd July would have been answered long before this.
“T fear I have very little information to convey with reference to the seal fisheries
of the south. All the fur-seals that we procured were killed on land, and it was the
habit of the seal-fishers we met thus to capture all their animals. We saw very few
seals far from their breeding places. We saw only three or four on the southern ice.
All the seal-fishers we encountered in the south were from New London, U.S.A. In
our time there were no Australians engaged in the trade. There were immense
numbers of sea-elephants killed every year on Long Beach at Herd Island. Men
wintered there for the purpose of killing them when they came on shore in the early
spring. We saw the sealers kill twenty-four fur-seals one day by landing on Swain’s
Islands where they were breeding.
‘“‘We found that some fur-sealing was done at the Falkland Islands. You could
get information as to the present state of the trade by addressing a letter to Mr.
Jeans, Stanley Harbour, Falklands, or you might address a letter direct to the
Governor of the islands.
“Trusting that you will have had a pleasant trip to the west, yours, &c.
: (Signed) ‘¢ JOHN MURRAY.”
~
10.—Report of Examination of Seal Pup, by Dr. Giinther, F. R.S., British Museum,
The pup fur-seal submitted to my examination was labelled ‘‘ Found dead on north-
east rookery, St. Paul’s Island, 5th August, 1891.”
1. Its length from end of nose to root of tail 23 inches: umbilical cord closed at its
distal end; milk-dentition perfectly grown, Apparent age of animal about 17 days.
2. Fur in perfect order; no signs of external or internal mechanical injury. Body
well nourished, with a fair amount of fat in the subcutaneous tissue; no fat about
the abdominal organs.
3. Organs of digestion and other abdominal organs healthy. Stomach entirely
empty, with the exception of asmooth black pyramidal pebble, size of a small bean,
and of two or three very small corroded pebbles; intestine empty, with some slight
accumulations of mucus in various parts. ‘The animal could not have taken any sus-
tenance for at least two or three days before its death.
4. The chest had not been opened, consequently partial decomposition had
184 set in befure the preservative fluid could act upon the organs. It is therefore
difficult to distinguish between pathological signs and post-mortem appear-
ances. But so much is certain, that the lungs were in an inflammatory condition,
especially at the base of the right lung. The inflammation extended also some way
up the wind-pipe, the mucous membrane of which was covered with a granular
deposit in the portion affected.
5. Both the absence of food as well as the condition of the respiratory organs are
sufficient to account for the death of the animal; but which of the two was the pri-
mary cause preceding the other is impossible to say.
6. A small and thin nematoid worm, from 1 to 14 inches long, was found in con-
siderable numbers in the lower half of the smaller intestines; one specimen to, per-
haps, every 2 inches of intestine. They could not have caused any inconvenience
to the animal, and, in fact, there was not the slightest sign of irritation in the
mucous membrane.
(Signed) A. GUNTHER, MW. D.
British MusEuUM, Janwary 26, 1892.
11.— Questions in regard to Sheep in the Breeding Season, kindly answered by Sir Samuel
Wilson, M. P.
1. Is it common and easy to make ewes suckle other ewes’ lambs?—Yes. It can
be effected by putting the skin of the ewe’s dead lamb on the lamb she is desired to
adopt, or by holding her and getting the lamb to suck her for a few days, when she
will take to it as if her own progeny.
2. Is it absolutely certain that lambs always know their own mothers, and never
get milk from any other mother unless forced to do so by man?—Ewes always know
256 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
their own lambs by smelling them. <A ewe will not allow a strange lamb to suck
her if she notices it, but sometimes a lamb not her own may come up on the other
side while she is suckling her own lamb, and may unnoticed by her suck her for a
time.
There are motherless lambs which go about in this way, and manage to live by
what they can steal, and the green grass, which they can soon digest, even when a
few days old.
Lambs at a very early age do not, I think, know their own mothers, but will run
up to any ewe bleating for the lamb, and try to suck her, when the ewe at once
knows if it be her own lamb, and if not drives it away. Older lambs know their
dams by the voice.
3. Is it usnal to lead ewes accidentally deprived of lambs to suckle other lambs,
whether one or twins, or having lost their mother i
all lambs are ‘“‘mothered” to ewes that have lost their own, and ggmetimes one of
twins is put to a ewe that has lost her lamb.
Ewes lambing at large in paddocks, however, are left to do as instinct directs,
and fewer lambs in proportion are reared than when well cared for.
4. If so, what are the measures adopted?—Putting motherless lambs or one of
twins to a ewe which has lost her lainb.
5. How many ewes will one ram serve effectively in the season, and how long
does the season last?—Ordinarily oe ram is put to fifty ewes running at large in
paddocks, but a ram that is well fed, and only allowed to serve a ewe once, may get
200 lambs in a season.
Rams are usually kept with the ewes six or seven weeks.
6. Do the rams eat as much, and the usual food, during the rutting season ?—The
rams eat as usual when serving the ewes, but fall off in condition owing to running
about after the ewes. If fed artificially besides the natural pasture they would, vi
think, consume more food while serving the ewes than at other times, but this I
have not tested.
7. What is the proportion of male to female lambs born?—The proportions are
about equal as a rule. In some cases there is a very considerable difference, the
causes being imperfectly understood. Old rams put to young ewes are said to pro-
duce amuch larger proportion of ewe lambs, but I have not endeavoured to alter the
proportions of the sexes of the progeny, and cannot speak from experience in this
matter.
(Signed) SAMUEL WILSON.
leh Ts sidered a good average increase in merino ewes.
A flock of ewes with caretta management may double their numbers every two
and a-half years for a considerable time under favourable conditions.
sis
12.—Letter from Earl Brownlow on the subject of Deer in the Breeding Season.
8, CARLTON House TERRACE, London, May 8S, 1892.
DEAR Sirk GEORGE: Iam very glad to give you any information in my power about
the habits of deer in the British Isles both in a wild and tame state. This informa-
tion I have gained in a great degree from personal observation, but the details of
management of tame deer in a park [ have partly obtained from my park-keeper,
who is a man of very great experience, and has a thorough knowledge of the subject.
The habits of deer differ very little in a taine or wild state,
A stag is in his prime at about 12 years old, and a hind at about 9 years old.
Supposing that the stock in a park consists of 100 deer.
There should be forty stags to sixty hinds. Three stags should be killed each
year at 12 years old, leaving a margin of four for loss and accident, and six hinds at
9 years old, leaving a margin of six for loss or accident. From sixty hinds you
would probably get from twenty-five to thirty calves each year.
185 The breeding season begins about the 20th September, and lasts till late in
October.
During this time the stags eat very little. In a wild state they begin to eat white
lichen off the rocks early in October. If you kill astag then you will tind the grass
in his stomach mixed with lichen, and later there will be no grass, and only a hand-
ful of lichen. In a park where they cannot get lichen they will rush into the water,
and suck the green vegetation from the surface. They soon get thin and poor, and
when the skin is removed the flesh is red, without fat, with an offensive smell.
They are then quite unfit for food. They t take no rest, and spend all their time in
hunting and keeping together their hinds.
A stag will have with him any number of hinds trom two or three to thirty,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 257
At other times of the year the stags and hinds keep separate in small herds, the
very young stags keeping with the hinds.
A hind has one calf as a rule, which is born about May.
The stags cast their horns every year, and will eat the old horns if they can get
them to supply lime for the growth of the new horn.
Although a great deal might be written on this subject, no other information
strikes me which would be likely to be of any assistance to you in your inquiry.
Iremain, &c.
(Signed) BROWNLOW.
13.—Memorandum on the Place of the Fur-Seal in the Classification of Mammalia, by
Professor Flower, C.L., F. R.S., Director of the Natural History Departments, British
Museum,
All the animals commonly spoken of as seals are divided into two very distinct
roups:
; (a.) The true seals (Phocide), distinguished mainly by having no external ears,
and by not using their hind limbs when walking on land.
(b.) The eared seals (Otaviide), often called sea-lions or sea-bears, which have
small external ears, and which, when on land, support themselves and walk on the
soles of their hind as well as their fore limbs.
None of the first-named group have the fine under-fur which makes the skin of
some of the species of the second group such a valuable article of commerce; it is
therefore not necessary to speak further of them in the present Report.
Up to the year 1816 both groups of seals were included under the generic name of
Phoca (Linneus), but in that year the eared seals were separated by Péron* from
the others, under the name of Olaria, a name which zoologists, whose tendencies in
questions of nomenclature are conservative, still retain for the whole group.t Others
have divided it up into nearly as many genera as there are species, founded on trifling
modifications of the teeth and skull and the length of the ears, and thus such names
as Arciocephalus, Callorhinus, Huotaria, Zalophus, Ewmetopias, Phocarctos, Halarctus,
Neophoca, Arctophoca, and Gypsophoca occur as generic appellations of various mem-
bers of the family in zoological treatises on the subject.
As the various authors who have made a special study of this group of animals do
not agree as to the relative importance of the characters upon which these distine-
tions are founded, there is much difference of opinion as to the extent and limits of
these so-called generic divisions, and consequently as to the name tu be applied to
many of the species, hence the confusion of nomenclature which is obvious ‘9 any
one who compares the different monographs and treatises on the natural history of
the seals.
Besides the difficulties as to the most appropriate names, there are others which
arise from our ignorance of the animals themselves, especially the distinctive charac-
ters and geographical distribution of the various species. The number of species is
not even accurately determined, as variations due to sex, age, or season have often
been mistaken for those due to specific distinctions. Indeed, until more complete
materials are collected in our museums, including skins, skeletons, and skulls of
animals of both sexes and various ages, and from different and well-recorded locali-
ties, a complete zoological monograph of the family will be impossible.
The common practical distinction between “hair-seals” and ‘‘fur-seals,” or those
which, in addition to the stiff, close, hairy covering common to all the group, possess
an exceedingly fine dense woolly under-fur, does not coincide with divisions based
on other and more important structural characters. Though all true seals (Phocide)
are ‘‘hair-seals,” some of the Otariid@ are ‘‘hair-seals,” and others ‘ fur-seals.” It
is the skins of the latter, when dressed and deprived of the longer, harsh, outer
hairs, which constitute the ‘‘seal-skins” of commerce so much valued for wearing
apparel.
In habits all the Otariidew, whether hair-seals or fur-seals, appear to be much alike.
As might be inferred from their power of walking on all fours, they are better capable
of locomotion on shore, and range inland to greater distances than the true seals at
the breeding season, though even then they are always obliged to return to the water
to seek their food, and the rest of the year is mainly spent in the open sea far away
from land. They are gregarious and polygamous,and the adult males are usually
much larger than the females. They are widely distributed, especially in the tem-
* Voyage aux Terres Australes,” vol. ii, p. 37.
+ Flower and Lydekker: ‘Introduction to the History of Mammals, Living ané
Extinct, 1891,” p.593.
B 8, PT vI—l17
258 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS,
perate regions of both hemispheres, though their entire absence from the North
Atlantic is a noteworthy fact. No Otaria has ever been found either on the European,
African, or American shores of that ocean north of the Equator.
So far as is yet known, each species has a definite and limited area of geographical
distribution bevond which it never wanders. In this respect they follow an almost
universal law of Nature, applicable to both animals and plants, although the causes
of this limitation are, in most cases, extremely obscure.
186 The chances of accurate observations upon the movements of marine ani-
mals are so small that we are still and probably shall long remain in consider-
able ignorance as to the exact pelagic range of many of the species, but as they always
spend some months on shore every year during the breeding season, and as the num-
ber of localities suitable for this purpose is limited, the coast range of each species
should be ascertained with a tolerable amount of precision when a sufficient number
of reliable data are obtainable. his cannot be said to be the case at present, owing
to the difficulty of discriminating the species from the casual external observations
of uninstructed seamen upon whose information we have mainly to rely.
These remarks apply chiefly to the species inhabiting the Southern Hemisphere.
With regard to those of the North Pacific, our knowledge is in a more satisfactory
state.
It is now ascertained with tolerable certainty that there are in this region three,
and only three, very distinct species, and there is no evidence that either of these
species is, or has ever been, found elsewhere.
These are—
1. STELLER’s SEA-LION (Otaria stelleri=Eumetopias stelleri of some authors), the
largest of the whole group; found on the Pacific coast of North America from Cali-
fornia to Alaska; Pacific coast of Asia from Japan northwards into the Behring Sea,
2. THE CALIFORNIAN StA-LIon (Otariacaliforniana= Zalophus californiana= Otaria
gillespii) inhabiting the coasts of California and Japan, but not entering the Behring
Sea.
These two are hair-seals; the next is a fur-seal. -
3. Turk NoRTHERN FurR-SEAL OR SEA-BEAR (Otaria ursina=Callorhinus ursinus)
inhabits the North Pacific from California and Japan northwards into the Behring
Sea.
The main character by which this animal is distinguished from all other Otariide,
and which has been considered by Gray and most later writers to entitle it to gene-
ric distinction, is the form of the fore part of the skull, which is short, broad, and
high, being as it were truncated in front, instead of low and narrow as in all other
species. Gy this general aspect the skull can be distinguished at once from that of
any other. The molar teeth are six above and five below on each side. In the two
other North Pacific species they are five above and five below. The external char-
acters need not be entered into here, as they have been abundantly and minutely
described elsewhere. *
The distinctive characters and geographical distribution of the species of Otaria
inhabiting the seas and coasts south of the Equator, and met with either now or
formerly in all suitable localities round the whole circumference of the globe, are,
as stated above, less accurately determined, nor is this the place to attempt to
unravel this purely zoological problem, but the following may be mentioned as best
established.
4. THe SOUTHERN SEA-LION (Otaria jubata), formerly abundant on the Falkland
Islands and the coasts of Patagonia and Chile, extending as far north as the Gala-
pagos Islands; an animal nearly as Jarge as the Northern or Steller’s Sea-lion, but
easily distinguished from it by the form of the skull, especially of the bones of the
palate. This is not a fur-seal.
5. Tue Sourn AMERICAN FuR-SEAL (Otaria australis = Otaria falklandica= Arcto-
cephalus australis and falklandicus), South American coasts, from Lobos Islands near
the mouth of-the Rio de la Plata on the east, to the Galapagos on the west.
6. THE SouTH AFRICAN Fur-SEaAu (Otaria pusilla Arctocephalus antarcticus),
from the Cape of Good Hope.
7. Tue AUSTRALIAN Fur-SEAL (Otaria forsteri—= Arctocephalus cinereus) of Aus-
tralia, New Zealand, Auckland Islands, &c.
8. THE AUSTRALIAN SEA-BEAR (Otaria lobata = Zalophus lobatus). A hair-seal from
the Australian coasts. . :
9. HooKER’s SEA-LION (Otaria hookeri—= Arctocephalus hookeri). Auckland Isiands.
Also a hair-seal.
, Wi Ei. as
May 1892.
SS
*See especially the excellent “Monograph on North American Pinnipeds,” by
J. A. Allen, Washington, 1880,
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS, 259
14.—Letter from Captain David Gray, Peterhead.
PETERHEAD, June 3, 1892.
Str: I had the honour yesterday to receive your communication, asking for infor-
* mation regarding the hair-seal fishing in the North Atlantic.
The Jan-Mayen Convention provides that no seals are to be killed within the limits
detailed in the Act, namely, trom latitude 68 N. to latitude 75 N., and from the
meridian of Greenwich west tothe Greenland shore. The penalty for killing a seal
before the 3rd April is 5001., payable to the informant.
There are no police required to entorce the close time; each ship’s crew looks after
their neighbours, so that the close time in the Greenland seas has been very strictly
kept.
The effect of the close time on the seals is to protect them during the time they are
bringing forth their young, and gives them a few days’ quietness to nurse them, and
is beneficial in so far that it prevents the old seals being killed before the young are
born, and also allows a proportion of mother seals to escape to continue the species;
beyond this the close time does not go. The young broods were very often clean
swept up, so that not one escaped.
The Newfoundland seal fishery is conducted in a different way; the St. John’s
people, having the control of the fishing themselves, do not allow the ships to leave
before a date. This year the 15th March was the day fixed for the steamers
187 leaving. Sailing-sbips are allowed to sail eight days sooner. The Newfound-
landers are becoming more strict every year; the sailing day was five days
later this season than last, and they have to stop fishing on the 20th April. e
To sum up, the position is this: at Greenland the close time will prevent the seals
being exterminated, but it will nof allow them to increase.
At Newfoundland their present mode of fishing means, in a few years, extermination.
Ihave, &c.
: (Signed) Davip GRay.
Sir Grorer BADEN-POWELL, M. P.,
Foreign Office, London, S. W.
15.—Mr. W. Palmer on the killing of Seals upon the Pribyloff Islands.
The following are extracts from a paper read by Mr. William Palmer, Taxidermist
to the Smithsonian Institution, before the Biological Society of Washington, in
October 1891. Mr. Palmer visited the Pribyloff Islands in an official capacty in 1890.
The first part of the paper from which these extracts are made gives some general
account of the habits of the seal, together with remarks on pelagic sealing, with
which subject, however, Mr. Palmer was not personally familiar. The portion of
the paper quoted below is that giving the result of Mr. Palmer’s own observations
made on the breeding islands, and is, therefore, of value as a record of the conclu-
sions thus arrived at by him:
Natural History.
FATE OF THE FUR-SEAL IN AMERICA,
[Read before the Biological Society of Washington, District of Columbia, October 17, and illustrated
by Lantern Slides. ]
The present condition of the Alaskan fur-seal islands is but another illustration of
the fact that the ignorance, avarice, and stupidity of man have succeeded in reducing
an overwhelming abundance of animal life, that by careful and considerate treatment
would for ever have been a source of immense wealth, to such a condition that it
becomes a question of great moment to devise means to prevent its extermination,
and adopt measures to restore its former abundance.
* * * * * * *
But pelagic seal fishing is not the only cause of the decrease of seal life on the
Priby lofts.
Probably, an equal cause is the unnatural method of driving seals that has been
followed on the islands since the first seal was captured.
The mere killing of seals as conducted on the islands is as near perfection as it is
possible to get it. They are quickly dispatched, and without pain. One soon rec-
ognizes, as in the killing of sheep, that in the quickness and neatness of the method
lies its success, all things considered.
But the driving is a totally different matter. I doubt if any one can look upon
the painful exertions of this dense crowding mass, and not think that somewhere
and somehow there is great room for improvement. It is conducted now asit always
has been: no thought or attention is given to it, and, with but one exception, no
other method has been suggested, or even thought necessary.
260 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Each day during the season, which lasts from the 20th June to the Ist August,
there are three killings: one on St. George, one at the village of St. Paul, and another
at North-east Point, St. Paul.
I have marked on outline Maps of the islands the extent of some of these drives,
which are as follows:
Monday, from the Reef; Tuesday, from Lukannon; Wednesday, Tolstoi; Thursday,
at Half-way Point (the drive being brought from Polavina); Friday, at Zapadnie
(when the water is smooth the killers go by boat to Zapadnie, but in rough weather
the seals are driven to the village); Saturday and Sunday drives are made up from
some of the places driven from earlier in the week, or a number of small drives from
several places are united. At North-east Point drives are made, commencing at one
end on Monday and continuing round wherever enough seals can be found. On St.
George drives are made from each rookery in succession, the killing ground being just
below the village. Some of these driving trails are from a quarter to a mile long,
but the longest, from Zapadnie, is 5 miles.
The fur-seal is utterly unfitted by nature for an extended and rapid safe journey
on land. It will progress rapidly for a short distance, but soon stops from sheer
exhaustion. Its flippers are used as feet, the belly is raised clear of the ground, and
the motion is a jerky but comparatively rapid lope. When exhausted, the animal
flops over on its side as soon as it stops moving, being unable to stand up.
The drives are conducted in this manner: as soon as it is light, which is between
land 2 in the morning, several natives make their way between the seals hauled
out near a rookery and the water, and cut out as large a drive as possible. As it
is the habit of the seals when alarmed to get as far as possible from any strange
object, it follows that they are easily driven in any direction by simply walking
behind them waving the arms and making a noise. The character of the ground
over which the seals are driven is in many places utterly unfit for the purpose: up
and down the steep slopes of sand dunes, over cinder hills studded with sharp rocks,
some places being so bad that they are avoided by the people themselves; but the
seals have been driven over the same ground for many years, and on some of the
hills deep paths have been worn by the passing of tens of thousands of seals.
188 No attempts have been made to remove the rocks or to lessen the difficulties
of the passage, and the seals are still driven pell-mell over huge rocks and
down steep inclines, where many are crushed and injured by the hurrying mass of
those behind. When the drive reaches the killing ground it is rounded up and left
in charge of a man or boy to await the killing, which begins at 7 a.M. A pod of
perhaps sixty seals are then cut out of the drive and driven to the killers, who
with long wooden clubs stun those seals that are of proper size and condition by a
blow or two on top of the head. The seals that are not killed are then driven away
by tin pans and a great noise, and while in an excited and over-heated condition
rush, as fast as it is possible for a seal to go, into the icy-cold waters of Behring Sea.
It will thus be seen that these seals are subjected on an average from 2 o’clock in
the morning until 10 to a long drive over very rough ground, then to a dense herd-
ing, where they are continually in motion and crowding each other, thence to an
intense excitement on the killing ground, and finally in a condition little better than
madness rushing into icy cold water. Uncivilized and partly civilized man has po
pity for dumb brutes, and as these drives are conducted entirely by the natives, who
prefer indolence in the village to the discomforts of a drive in the fog and rain, it
follows that the seals are often driven much faster than they should be, and abso-
lutely without thought or care. But this is not all. The seals that are spared soon
haul out again near a rookery, and perhaps the very next day are obliged to repeat
the process, and again and again throughout the season, unless in the meantime they
have crawled out on a bench to die, or haye sunk exhausted to the bottom. The
deaths of these seals are directly caused as I shall explain, and, as far as lam aware,
it is mentioned now for the first time.
A seal body may be said to consist of three parts, an inner, which is the flesh,
bones, &c., a ring of fat surrounding this of from 1 to 4 or 5 inches thick, and then
the skin which carries the fur. I think it will be readily seen that a forced drive
for a long distance over rough ground, up and down hills, and over and among huge
boulders and fine sand, with a subsequent herding, and then after a most violent
exercise a sudden bath in icy cold water, must of necessity disturb that equilibrium
of vital forces which is essential to the good health of any animal. It is known
that the stomachs of the fur-seals on the islands contain no food, and that in all
probability many of them have fasted for several weeks. When driven into the
water the seals are weak from two causes, the drive and lack of food; before they
can secure food they must rest, and rest is only obtainable at the expense of that
most vital necessity of these animals, their fat. I remember looking with great
curiosity for the cause of death of the first dead seal that I found stranded on the
beach. Externally there was nothing to indicate it, but the first stroke of the knife
revealed instantly what I am confident has been the cause of death of countless
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 261
thousands of fur-seals. It had been chilled to death; not a trace remained of the
fat that had once clothed its body and protected the vital organs within. Since the
day that it had escaped from the drive, it had consumed all its fat in the effort to
keep warm, and nothing remained but to lie down and die. I opened many after
this, and always discovered the same, but sometimes an additional cause, a fractured
skull perhaps. I have even noted those left behind in a drive, and watched them
daily, with the same result in many cases. At first they would revel in the ponds or
wander among the sand dunes, but in a few days their motions became distinctly
slower, the curvature of the spine became lessened; eventually the poor brutes
would drag their hind flippers as they moved, and in a few days more become food
for the foxes. In every case the fat had disappeared.
It will be seen also that by this driving process the 2- or 3-year-olds, which are
the only ones killed for their skins, are culled out almost completely from the seals
which visit these islands, and therefore that very few male seals ever reach a greater
age; consequently, there are not enough young bulls growing up to supply even the
yearly loss on the rookeries, much less to provide for any increase.
It should also be thoroughly understood that until a cow seal is 3 years old she is
but a cypher so far as natural increase of the rookeries is concerned, and that a male
seal must be at least 7 or 8 years old before he can possibly secure a footing on the
rookeries. During these 3 and 8 years they have torun the gauntlet of the poachers.
If they escape the driving—and this seems impossible—they have their natural ene-
mies to encounter, sharks and killer whales, so that taken altogether, nearly every-
thing is against this increase.
During the eight years’ minority of the few male seals that have escaped their
enemies it is safe, I think, to assume that at least four summers were spent in getting
an experience of the drives. Does any one think that they were then capable of
filling their proper functions on the rookeries?
But some one is not satisfied with the accidental landing of the seals on the
beaches, from whence they can be easily driven. Along the sea edge of the rook-
eries are many small outlying rocks, on which the young male seals congregate in
large numbers and survey the rookeries from which they are disbarred by their
inferior size and strength. An old bull seal will suffer himself to be slaughtered
rather than yield an inch of his chosen location. ‘The cows are so timid that only
the greatest exertions of the bulls prevent their being stampeded, while as to the
“‘holluschickie” the sight, even the scent, of a man or strange object will drive them
pell-mell instantly into the water.
The natives have been provided with whistles, and when a boat finds itself near a
rookery (and a pretence for its presence is easily found) good use is made of them
with a consequent confusion among the seals, and a probable increase in the next
morning’s drive. And yet astranger on the islands is bamboozled with the informa-
tion that his presence a few yards from the village is fraught with great danger to
the Company’s interests.
The breeding seals on the rookeries represent the principal of the sealing industry,
while the quota of 100,000 skins taken annually for the past twenty years is the
interest on the principal. Owing to poaching and the effects of driying and culling
the principal has become seriously impaired, so that it is no longer possible to pay this
large rate of interest. The work on theislands has been directed entirely to collect-
ing this interest at any cost. The principal was left to take care of itself.
The decrease in seal life began about ten years ago; before then it was an easy
matter to secure 100,000 skins a-year from St. George’s Island, the rookeries
189 near the village of St. Paul, and at North-east Point. The rookeries at Pola-
vina and Zapadnie were then never driven from. But ten years ago it became
absolutely necessary, in order to secure the full quota of skins, to make drives from
these places, and the custom has been continued since, to the great injury of the seal
business.
But these drives from Polavina and Zapadnie, and the decrease in seal life, seem to
have been carefully concealed from the Government and others interested in the wel-
fare of the seals; in fact, it has been strongly put forth in the Reports of the Treasury
Agents in charge and elsewhere that the seals have actually greatly increased in
numbers; but acomparison of the sketches alone in Mr. Elliott’s ‘‘Monograph of the
Seal Islands,” made in 1873-74 and 1876, with the actual condition of affairs at present
on the islands, will convince any one that the opinions and Reports of political
appointees are almost worthless when dealing with the fate of the fur-seal.
How can it be otherwise? Their tenure of office exists only with that of the Sec-
retary of the Treasury; ‘with every change of that office new men who know nothing
of seals are sent up, and these men are entirely dependent on the seal Company ever
for their passage and board while there. All visitors to the islands are regarded as
interlopers and meddlers.
It may be interesting for a moment to compare the management of the Russian side
of Behring Sea withourown. Dr. Stejneger, of the National Museum, who has spent
262 : REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
several seasons on the Commander Islands, assures me that, instead of decreasing, the
fur-seals there are actually increasing innumbers. A comparison of the Russian ideas
of seal management with our own willreadily show thereason. Thenecessity for great
care in the driving and management of the drive seems to be a fixed fact in the minds
of the Russian officials and natives of the Commander Islands, while on the Pribyloff
Islands not the slightest interest is taken in the matter. On the Russian side the
natives are firm in the belief that their interests lie in the proper care of the seals;
consequently, when a drive is made, it is composed of many small drives carefully
selected and slowly driven, so that the large and small seals unfit for killing are
gradually weeded out, and when the drive reaches the killing grounds it is composed
almost entirely of killable seals.
On the American side, on the contrary, the seals are driven as fast as possible, the
only ones weeded out being those too weak to go further, while of those rounded up
on the killing ground by far the greater number are allowed to escape. Out of a
drive of 1,103 counted by me only 120 were killed; the rest were released. On the
Russian side, it is a settled fact that the islands and seals belong to the Russian
Government, and that the Company taking the skins has only certain restricted
rights for that purpose; but on the American side it seems to be a settled fact, at
least in the minds of the Company’s people, that they own the seals and the islands,
while the duty of the Government is to collect the tax and appoint Agents to sub-
serve the interests of the Company only. The natives are utterly dependent on the
seal Company for their support, and while having a very vague idea that somehow
the Government is a big thing, they naturally look to the Company for everything
affecting their interests. :
Sealers have no doubt about the fate that would be their lot if caught poaching
on the Commander Islands, or within 3 miles of their shores, and accordingly have
given them a wide berth; but they have heretofore done as they pleased about the
Pribyloff Islands, and even on the rookeries. In the absence of the revenue-cutters
the islands are utterly defenceless, and liable at any time to be raided.
I have only touched lightly upon several questions of the sealing industry, and
have by no means exhausted the subject; but enough has been said, I think, to show
that if an industry, which eighteen month ago was expected to pay the Government
a net profit of over 2,000 per cent., and is, besides, a great natural exhibit, the only
one of the kind America can produce, is to be saved, reform is necessary. For twenty
years the fur-seal has been the spoil of politics and the victim of the poacher. Inex-
perience on the one hand, and avarice on the other, have well nigh ruined the indus-
try in American waters.
There are then two chief causes of the decrease of seal life on the Pribyloff
Islands—poaching in Behring Sea, and the driving and culling of the seals on the
islands. The remedy is simple:
1. No seals should be killed by any one at any time in the waters of Behring Sea.
2. Allseals driven on the islands should be killed; none should be driven and again
allowed to enter the sea.
These remedies are not new. Nearly twenty years ago Captain Daniel Webster,
whose knowledge and experience of sealing are second to none, said, pointing to the
drive, ‘‘ Every one of them should be killed, none should be allowed to return to the
water,” and gave reasons which, while unsupported by evidence then, and which,
in view of the immense abundance of seal life, seemed absurd at the time, are now
beginning to be accepted as true.
There should also be a close time for at least five years to allow the rookeries to be
replenished, and then by careful management by a bureau and employés of the Gov-
ernment, trained in the knowledge and care of animal life, a rich and profitable
industry will be saved.
(Signed) WILLIAM PALMER.
UNITED STATES’ NATIONAL MusEeuM, Washington, D. C.
190 16.—ELxtract from the Melbourne “Argus,” December 17, 1887, referred to by Mr.
FE, Chapman.
SEALERS AT WORK.
[By James M’Ghie, survivor from the wreck of the ‘ Derry Castle.’’]
When I wrote the account of “Life on the Auckland Islands,” which has just
appeared in “The Argus,” I purposely said nothing about the Awarua poaching
seals when she visited Port Ross, and picked us up while we were cast away there.
It did not become me to tell tales against my benefactor, but inasmuch as the cap-
tain’s admission of the poaching has been published in all the newspapers, I may as
well describe how seal hunting is done. The work is the most dangerous and
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 263
arduous that men can do. It is besides so ill-paid, that few but Maoris will undergo
the risk and the hardship on the terms which custom has assigned to the enterprise.
The owner of the sealing-vessel gets nearly all the benefit if many seals are taken,
and if the trip is unsuccesstul—which is very seldom the case, owing to the sur-
prising boldness and endurance of the Maoris—he loses comparatively little. The
Maoris agree to ration themselves, to work the vessel, and to catch the seals at so
much per skin, less the cost of the provisions put on board the vessel upon the
requisition of the crew at the time of commencing the cruize. If only enough skins
are secured to pay for the stores the Maoris get nothing for their work, while the
owner has the profit of the skins at the price they are worth in the London market
to recoup him for the use of the vessel and for paying the captain’s wages. The
rule, I believe, is that the sealers have far worse than a sailor’s life at less than a
sailor’s pay, but year after year crews are found ready to engage in the chase. The
men are engaged by a Headman, to whom alone they are subject, and who directs
the sealing operations. The crew (through their Chief) determine what places shall
be visited, and when they shall return home. The captain has simply to navigate
the vessel from one haunt of the seals—called a ‘‘rookery’’—to another, in order
that the men who are on shares may have the best opportunity of doing well as far
as they are inclined out of the trip.
* * * * * * w
We agreed to go with the sealers, and forthwith all hands set about preparing for
the expedition, repairing the whale-boat, cutting seal-clubs, making bullets, and
packing up. Then a start was made for a “‘ whig rookery” at Enderby Island. A
“rookery” is a home of seals in the interstices of rocks near the water’s edge.
What sealers know as a ‘‘ whig rookery” is one which is only occasionally the haunt
of adult seals, and is not a breeding place. The ‘‘take” depends upon whether the
seals happen to be ‘‘at home” or not. They were not ‘“‘at home” on this occasion.
* * * * * * *
The next ‘‘rookery” chosen for a visit was at North-west Cape, 7 miles from Port
Ross, and across mountains over 1,000 feet high. We found the track blocked up
with snow, so while we were waiting for the snow to melt on the hills hunting
excursions were made, and three wild pigs were killed.
The sealer is armed with a club, which is a stick with a hook at oneend. The club
is used to stun the seals by striking them on the nose at close quarters, and the hook
serves to bring to a halt seals which are escaping from their holes, or rookeries, into
the sea when they are attacked by the hunters. ‘To reach the rookeries, which are on
the face of steep cliffs, invariably on the weather side of the islands, the sealers have
to travel over the mountains from the sheltered side, where their vessel lies at anchor.
These journeys, which are made in winter while the snow is falling heavily, and over
almost impassable country, are toilsome and exhausting in the extreme. The men
can carry little food or blankets in addition to the equipment for circumventing the
seals, and half starved, and without any shelter beyond what the rocks afford, they
for several days pursue the seals until all the prey is either killed or driven away.
But it is in descending the cliffs to reach the rookeries that the most dangerous part
of the work is done. Sometimes there is a sheer descent of 1,000 feet to the sea, on
the edge of which the seals make their home. The men are let down one after
another by their companions, some of whom remain above to haul up their comrades
and the skins when the hunt is over. When the scene of action is reached the boots
are replaced with a sort of plaited slipper, made by the Maoris, and which gives a
better foothold on the slippery rocks when leaping about after the escaping seals.
The rookeries are formed by masses of rock falling from the cliffs. In time they get
covered over with earth, so as to form a sort of roof. It is only in these places that
the fur-seal, which is the valuable article of commerce, is found. The hair-seal is
of no value, as the hide is too oily to tan into ordinary leather. The seals go into
the rookeries to breed and to sleep after a spell at sea, and the hunters have to creep
into the holes and crevices between the rocks to get them. The seal will fight hard
when put to it. The old seals are mostly spared, as their fur is often torn from
fighting, or worn off by rubbing against the rocks, and they are left to multiply the
species. When an old seal is met with the hunter lies perfectly flat, and allows the
animal to creep over him. Sometimes the seals get so far back in the rocks that a
man cannot follow them, in which case they are pulled out to a more open space by
means of the hook and clubbed. While the hunters are raiding the interior of the
rookeries, some of the party stay outside to intercept any that may try to escape,
like fox terriers watching the holes of a warren till the rabbits bolt. After knock-
ing all the seals on the nose and sticking them in the first onslaught, the hunters
proceed to skin the animals. The carcasses are thrown into the water. If they
were left on the rocks the seals would avoid the place for a considerable time.
The North-west Rookery, which, as I have said, was one of the first visited by the
party, can only be reached by crossing a ‘‘ razor-back,” or conical-shaped causeway,
which comes to a sharp point with the sea, 700 feet below, on both sides. Some
264 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
191 of the men walked it, but others of less iron nerve crossed astraddle. The
danger is increased owing to the friable nature of the soil, which slips from
under the feet. ‘The 7 miles walk to the rookery and back to Port Ross is one of the
most severe on the island. A fog came on, and the party lost their way among the
hills. They divided into pairs, and some did not get back for hours after the others.
* * * * * * *
A rough trip was made in the whale-boat to the Government depét at Carnley
Harbour, in the hope that some boots would be obtained for our party, who much
needed them, but there were no boots there; but we got some clothes.
A start was made across the island next morning to the Red Rock Rookery on the
western side. Our longest rope (1,000 feet) required three men to carry it, each
haying a coil on his shoulder, with a slack piece between the bearers. The total
descent to the rookery was 800 feet, and it was undertaken in two lengths, the first
landing-place being at a drop of about 500 feet. The first man who (tied by the
waist) is let down runs great risk from dislodging loose stones, which may fall upon
his head. As he goes down, a look-out man, on a projecting point, gives the signal
to ‘‘stop” or to “lower away” from time to time. When five men got on to the first
ledge, they helped each other to get to the bottom, while communication was main-
tained with those overhead by means of notes stuck in the strand of the rope, which
was hauled up on a signal being given. If firewood is to be got it is thrown down
on to the rocks, but at the rookery I am speaking of the shore was lined with plenty
of fuel from the wreck of the ‘‘ Derry Castle.”
After the sealing party had descended, their comrades made another trip back to
the boat for more requisites for camping as comfortably as possible, as this place is
the head-quarters for attacking all the rookeries in the locality, all of which are
within a radius of 15 miles.
On the fourth day the hunters reappeared, and signified to those who had kept a
constant watch on their movements to see if they wanted anything sent down, that
the hunting was over. They sent up forty-two skins, which was more than they
expected, and when the whole of the party mustered again on the top of the moun-
tain, they were in very good spirits accordingly.
The next rookery chosen for a raid was ealaat “The Point,” because the lowering
is down from the end of a promontory. The landing-place is a narrow piece of sward
sloping towards the sea, which is about 100 yards lower down.
The ‘‘Cave” Rookery, so designated because the seals are found in a natural cave,
and the Nineteen Rookery, whose title indicates the number of skins taken when it
was first visited. These were assailed in turn, and while waiting for snow, which
put a stop to further active operations, to melt, the skins were duly salted and rolled
up in the peculiar manner which prevents the ‘inside of the pelt touching and injur-
ing the fur.
The next and last rookery visited was of a different nature to all the others. It is
“The Swinger,” because the sealers have to swing 80 yards across a chasm, through
which the sea surges with great fury, to get to where the seals are. The cliff is close
on 1,000 feet high, and overhangs the sea. Theartof getting safely across the chasm
is to place the loop for the foothold in the rope at exactly the proper length for the
leap, so that you will strike the landing-place, instead of being dashed by the
momentum of the swing against the rocks if the loop is too long, or swing frnitlessly
back if it is too short. ~ Only a few skins were got, and the party were ereatly disap-
pointed after all their risk and labour. The total take of skins was 178.
A start was made to return to the vessel. Again heavy snow fell, and it was not
possible to leave Norman Inlet for two days, but finally the schooner was reached.
* * * * # * *
On arriving at the boat from Norman Inlet the question was debated whether we
should proceed to the Campbell Islands and prolong the trip at least two months, or
close it at once and get back home. Captain Drew was in favour of coming away,
chiefly because the young seal-skins, which were the greater portion of the take,
were not properly ‘‘primed” by age and salt water to be of the full value.
17.— Extracts from Pamphlet by Mr. A. W. Scott on the Fur-seals of the Southern Hemi-
sphere, 1878.
In “Mammalia, Recent and Extinct,” published in Sydney by the Government of
New South Wales, Mr. A. W. Scott writes as follows:
‘“‘Thave endeavoured . . . , by devoting as much space-as my limits would
permit, to the consideration of the animals whose products are of such commercial
value to man, and whose extinction would so seriously affect his interests, to point
out the pressing necessity that exists for devising the means of protection for the
fur-seals and the sperm and right whales of the Southern Ocean.
* * * * * * *
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 265
“The islands of the Southern Seas, now lying barren and waste, are not only
numerous, but admirably suited for the production and management of these valu-
able animals, and need only the simple Regulations enforced by the American Legis-
lature to resuscitate the present state of decay of a once remunerative trade, and to
bring into full vigour another important export to the many we already possess.
“A detailed account of the habits of the fur-seal of the Auckland Islands has
recently been given by Mr. Musgrave” (narrative of the wreck of the ‘‘Grafton,”
Melbourne, 1865) ‘‘ which he acquired during a compulsory residence in their midst
of nearly twenty months. Of the females, he relates that ‘their nose resembles that
of a dog, but is somewhat broader; their scent appears to be very acute. The eyes
are large, of a green colour, watery, and lustreless. When on shore they appear to be
constantly weeping.
“<In the latter part of December, and during the whole of January, they
192 are on shore a great deal, and go wandering separately through the bush, and
into the long grass on the sides of the mountains above the bush, constantly
bellowing out in the most dismal manner. ‘They are undoubtedly looking out for a
place suitable for calving in. I have known them go toa distance ‘of more than a mile
from the water for this purpose.
“¢Wemales begin to breed when 2 years old, and carry their calves eleven months,
and suckle them for about three months.
“<< Before they have their calves the cows lie sometimes in smal] mobs (from twelve
to twenty), as well as while giving suck, and there are generally one or two bulls in
each mob. The cows are evidently by far the most mumerous.’
“Of the habits of the very young, he says:
“Tt might be supposed that these animals, even when young, would readily ¢
into the water—that being one of their natural instincts—but, strange to say, sich
is not the case; it is only with the greatest difficulty, and a ‘wonderful display of
patience, that the mother succeeds in getting her young in for the first time. I have
known a cow to be three days getting her calf down half-a-mile, and into the water ;
and, what is most surprising of all, it cannot swim when it is in the water. This is
a most amusing fact. The mother gets it on her back, and swims along very gently
on the top of the water, but the poor little thing is bleating all the while, and con-
tinually falling from its slippery position, w hen it will splutter about in the water
precisely like a little boy who gets beyond his depth and cannot swim. Then the
mother gets beneath it, and it again gets on her back. ‘Thus they go on, the mother
frequently giving an angry bellow, the young one constantly bleating and crying,
frequently falling off, spluttering and getting on again, very often getting a slap
from the flipper of the mother, and sometimes she gives it a very cruel bite. The
poor little animals are very often seen with their skins pierced and lacerated in the
most frightful manner. In this manner they go on until they have made their pas-
sage to whatever place she wishes to take her young one to.’
“The males are described thus:
““¢One of a medium size will measure about 6 feet from nose to tail, and about 6
or 7 feet in circumference, and weigh about 5 cwt. They by far exceed these dimen-
sions. The fur and skin are superior to those of the female, being much thicker. On
the neck and shoulders he has a thicker, longer, and much coarser coat of fur, which
may be almost termed bristles; it is from 3 to 4 inches long, and can be ruffled up
and made to stand erect at will, which is always done when they attack each other
on shore or are surprised, sitting as a dog would do, with their head erect, and look-
ing towards the object of their surprise, and in this attitude they have all the appear-
ance of a lion. They begin to come into the bays in the month of October and
remain until the latter end of February, each one selecting and taking up his own
particular beat in a great measure; but sometimes there are several about the same
place, in which case they fight most furiously, never coming in contact with each
other (either in or out of the water) without engaging in the most desperate combat,
tearing large pieces of skin and flesh from each other; their skins are always full of
wounds and scars, which, however, appear to heal very quickly.
“““ At this place we saw hundreds of seals; both the shores and the water were lit-
erally swarming with them, both the tiger and black seal, but in general the tiger
seals keep one side of the harbour, and the black seals, which are much the largest,
the other side, but in one instance we saw a black and a tiger seal fighting.’
SoMir: Morris, of Sydney, for many years a sealer by profession, in addition to the
information already quoted in p. 15, has kindly furnished me with the following
interesting particulars of the history of the southern fur-seal fishery and the habits
of the animal, which have the advantage of being derived from his own personal
experience.
“From him I learned the following particulars:
“<< The females in September come on shore to pup, and remain until about March.
The pups are born black, but soon change to grey or silvery grey. The herd then go
to sea for the remaining portion of the year, returning again in September with
regularity.
266 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
“<Turing this absence in the sea the male pups have changed from the grey to a
light brown colour, while the females remain unaltered.
““<Tn New South Wales the sealing trade was at its height from 1810 to 1820, the
first systematic promoters of which were the Sydney firms of Cable, Lord, and
Underwood; Rilie and Jones; Birnie; and Hook and Campbell. The vessels employed
by them were manned by crews of from twenty-five to twenty-eight men each, and
were fitted out for a cruize of twelve months.
“<The mode of capture adopted was: The men selected for the shore party would
number from six to eighteen, this being regulated by the more or less numerous gath-
ering of seals seen in the rookery. These men always land well to leeward, as the
scent of the animal is very keen, and cautiously keep along the edge of the water
in order to cut off the possibility of retreat; then when abreast of the mob they
approach the seals and drive them up the beach to some convenient spot, as a small
nook or naturally formed inclosure; this accomplished, one or two men go in to the
attack, while the others remain engaged in preventing outbreaks. Assoon asa suffi-
cient number have been slain to erect a wall of the dead, then all hands rush in to
the general massacre.’”
193 APPENDIX (EK).
SEAL PRESERVATION REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES.
Falkland Islands. Japan.
Cape of Good Hope. Newfoundland.
Greenland Seas.
FALKLAND ISLANDS.
[By his Excellency Thomas Kerr, Governor.]
No. 4, 1881.
An Ordinance to provide for the establishment of a Close Time in the Seal Tishery of the
Falkland Islands and their Dependencies and the Seas adjacent thereto.
Whereas the seal fishery of these islands, which was at one time a
source of profit and advantage to the colonists, has been exhausted
by indiscriminate and wasteful fishing, und if is desirable to revive
and protect this industry by the establishment of a close time during
which it shall be unlawful to kill or capture seals within the limits ot
this Colony and its dependencies.
Be it therefore enacted by the Governor of the Falkland Islands and
their dependencies, with the advice ae consent of the Legislative
Council thereof, as follows:
Close time for 1. No person shall kill or capture, or attempt to kill or capture, any
seal fishery, and seal within the limits of this Colony and its dependencies, between
im adbih es for the days hereinafter mentioned (which interval is hereinafter referred
to as the close season), that is to say, between the Ist day of October
and the Ist day of April following, bothinclusive, and any person act-
ing in contravention of this section shall forfeit any seals killed or
captured by him, and shall, in addition thereto, incur a penalty not
exceeding 100/., and a further penalty of 51. in respect of every seal so
killed or “captured.
Liability of 2. Any owner or master, or other person in charge of any ship or
owner and mas- vessel, who shall permit such ship or vessel to be employed in killing
terof ship. | or capturing seals, or who shall permit any person belonging to such
ship or vessel to be employed in killing or capturing as aforesaid
during ‘the close season, shali forfeit any seals so killed or captured,
and, in addition thereto, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding
300/. for each offence.
Pros:cution of & Every offence under this Ordinance may be prosecuted, and every
offences. penalty under this Ordinance may be recovered, before the Police
Magistrate or any two Justices of the Peace in a summary manner, or
by action tn the Supreme Court of this Colony, together with full
costs of suit: Provided that the penalty imposed by the Police Magis-
trate or two Justices shall not exceed 100/., exclusive of costs.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 267
One-half of every penalty recovered under this Ordinance shall be
paid to the person who prosecuted the offence or sued for such penalty.
All fines, forfeitures, and penalties recovered under this Ordinance
where not otherwise hereinbefore provided, shall be to Her Majesty,
her heirs and successors, and shall be paid to the Treasurer for the use
of the Government of this Colony.
For all purposes of and incidental to the trial and punishment of
any person accused of any offence under this Ordinance, and the pro-
ceedings and matters preliminary and incidental to and consequential
on his trial and punishment, and for all purposes of and incidental to
the jurisdiction of any Court, or of any constable or officer with
reference to such offence, the offence shall be deemed to have been
cominitted either in the place in which it was actually committed, or
in any place in which the offender may for the time being be found.
4. Where the owner or master of a ship or vessel is adjudged to pay Liabili
z 5 é 2 = ears : siability of
a penalty for an offence under this Ordinance, the Court may, in addi- .nip to penalty.
tion to any other power they may have for the purpose of compelling ;
payment of such penalty, direct the same to be levied by distress or
arrestinent, and sale of the said ship or vessel and her tackle.
5. In this Ordinance the expression “seal” means the ‘‘fur-seal,” the yy.gnition of
“sea-otter,” the ‘‘hair-seal,” the ‘‘sea-elephant,” the ‘‘sea-leopard,” «se4),”
and the ‘‘sea-dog,” and includes any animal of the seal kind which
may be found within the limits of this Colony and its dependencies.
6. This Ordinance may be cited as ‘‘The Seal Fishery Ordinance, short title.
MS SMe +
[SEAL. ] (Signed) T. Kerr, Governor.
Passed the Legislative Council this 27th day of December, 1881.
(Signed) JOHN WRIGHT COLLINS,
Clerk to the Council.
194 Carr or Goop Horr.
Cape Government Notice.
SEAL ISLAND.
His Excellency the Governor, having been pleased to decide that the seal island in
Mossel Bay shall not be granted on lease for the present, hereby prohibits all persons
from disturbing the seals on the said island, and warns them from trespassing there
after this notice on pain of prosecution.
By Command of his Excellency the Governor,
(Signed) JOHN MONTAGUE,
Secretary to Government.
COLONIAL OFFICE,
Cape of Good Hope, April 12, 1844.
[Tasmania. Sce p. 158.]
JAPAN.
Regulations for the Protection of the Fur-Seal Iishery issued by the Japanese Government
in October 1878,
Article 1. In view of protecting seal-hunting and checking foreign poachers, a
vessel of foreign type shall be commissioned to cruize in the neighbourhood of Itrup.
“Chishimamaru” shall be commissioned for this purpose for the time being.
Art. 2, The mode of killing shall mainly be by clubbing, and the use of guns shall
be avoided as much as possible.
Art. 3. Young seals shall be spared as much as possible.
Art, 4, The number of seals to be caught within 1 ri of coast-line shall not exceed
forty-five per annum.
Art. 5. Between the months of May and November the killing of seals within 1 ri
of coast-line is prohibited.
268 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Art. 6. Any person who catches wounded or crippled seals washed ashore, even
within the prohibition limit, shall be paid in money or in kind according to the
quality of the skin.
Art. 7. To prevent the decrease of seals by careless chasing and wanton killing,
special care shall always be taken, and the preventive method shall be established.
Art. 8. The number of seals taken will be inspected, and their skins shall fix the
proof of their ages.
Art. 9. The covering and breeding seasons, &¢c., shall be carefully ascertained by
practical observations.
Art. 10. Practical observations and investigations shall be made as to the truth of
the seals losing or changing the colour of their fur according to different seasons.
Art. 11. An actual investigation shall be made as to how many seals can be caught
annually if the use of guns be discontinued, and clubs and bows and arrows be
adopted instead.
Art. 12. While out hunting, if anything occurs likely to form an object for future
investigation, a minute record shall be kept.
Art. 13. While the present Regulations shall be strictly obeyed by all those who
are responsible for seal-hunting, they can address themselves to the authorities to
effect required amendments in case practical inconveniences shall have been expe-
rienced,
Seal and Otter Catching.
We hereby give our sanction to the Regulations for catching seals and sea-otters,
and for the sale and importation of their raw skins, and order the same to be pro-
mulgated.
{His Imperial Majesty’s Sign-Manual.]
[Privy Seal.]
The 16th day of the 12th month, 19th year of Meiji (1886).
Countersigned by Count Iro Hrropumy,
Minister President of the Cabinet.
Count YAMAGATA ARITOMO,
Minister of State for Home Affairs.
Count MaTsukATA MASAYOSHI,
Minister of State for Finance.
Count YAMAGATA ARITOMO,
Minister of State for Agriculture and Commerce.
193 Imperial Ordinanee No. 80.
REGULATIONS FOR CATCHING SEALS AND SEA-OTTERS, AND FOR THE SALE AND
IMPORTATION OF THEIR RAW SKINS.
Article 1. Persons who have obtained the special permission of the Minister of
State for Agriculture and Commerce, in accordance with the second paragraph of
Decree No. 16 of the 17th year of Meiji, may engage in catching seals and sea-otters
during the term, and within the limits of the places, specified for the purpose by the
Hokkaido Local Government.
Every person catching seals and sea-otters shall at all times carry a certificate of
such permission, and whenever, whether at sea or on shore, any officer supervising
seal and sea-otter catching, or any police officer, demands to inspect the certificate,
the same shall be immediately produced.
Art. 2. Any person engaging in catching seals and sea-otters shall, on arrival in
Hokkaido, report the name and tonnage of the vessel and the names of her crew to
an officer designated by the Hokkaido Local Government Office for that purpose,
and shall at all times exhibit, on the mast or in some other conspicuous position in
the vessel, a signal specially adopted by the Hokkaido Local Government Office for
vessels engaged in catching seals and sea-otters.
Art. 3. Any person desiring to sell the raw skins of seals and sea-otters shall pro-
duce the same to the officer mentioned in Article 2 hereof, and shall have the seal (a
brand may be used instead of a seal) of the said officer stamped thereon. No person
shall be permitted to sell skins not bearing such stamp.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 269
Art. 4. Whenever it is found that any person is importing the skins of seals and
sea-otters not stamped by the officer, as provided in the preceding Article, into any
port of the Empire, or is staying in any port of the Empire with such skins laden
on board a vessel, or is selling, or attempting to sell, such skins in the market, the
Customs or police officers shall seize the same, and shall immediately make com-
plaint to the competent authorities.
But the raw skins of seals and sea-otters caught within the territory of Russia or
of the United States of America, with the permission of the Governments of those
countries respectively, may be imported into the Empire, provided the owner or
master of the vessel first produces a certificate issued by a competent authority of
Russia or the United States, or by a Russian or United States Consul residing in
Japan,
Details of Procedure to carry out the Regulations controlling the Seal and Sea-Otter
Hunting, May 10, 1888.
Article 1. The open season for seal and sea-otter hunting shall be from the 15th
April to the 31st October in each year.
Art. 2. The area of hunting shall be all the islands situated eastward of Itrup, and
southward of Shimshu, of the Kuriles, and it will be divided into three sections, and
every year only one of these sections shall be opened for hunting.
The first section includes seven islands, i. ¢., Itrup, Chirihoi, Butettchelboa [7],
Broughton, Raikoké, Mushir, and Chirinkotan.
The second section includes six islands, i. e., Shimshir, Shiritoi, Ushishir, Sleto-
nepa [?], Rashua, and Matsua.
The third section includes twelve islands, i. e., Shannekotan, Yekkerma [?], Kar-
reukotan, Ounekotan, Anos, Makarushi, Shurenwa [?], Paramushir, Holt, Cockscar,
Araito, and Shimshu.
Art. 3. When a boat is going out for hunting, her name, tonnage, and the names
of the crew shall be reported for inspection to the branch office of seal and sea-
otter hunting superintending authorities, either at Nemuro, in the county of Nemuro,
or at Shikotan, in the county of Chishima.
Art. 4. When the branch office of seal and sea-otter hunting superintending
authorities find the report mentioned in Article 5 in due form on inspection, it will
give to the boat a flag hereinafter shown.
Art. 5. Any person who wishes to export and sell the raw hides of his catch shall
produce them to the Shikotan branch of the seal and sea-otter hunting superintend-
ing authorities, and shall have them stamped.
NEWFOUNDLAND,
In reply to an inquiry as to the Regulations for the protection of the hair-seal
fishery in Newfoundland, information to the following effect was kindly furnished
by Sir Terence O’Brien, K. C. M. G., the Governor of that Colony.
The accompanying Acts will furnish the whole legislation on the matter.
The Regulations extend to all vessels under the British flag, there being no foreign
vessels engaged in the fishery.
The Regulations are acknowledged to be effectual, and were much needed for the
preservation of the seals.
The means taken to enforce the Regnlations will be found in the Acts above men-
tioned, which, it may be added, have no force in extra-territorial waters as such.
270 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
196 NEWFOUNDLAND
Acts respecting the Prosecution of the Seal Fishery.
ANNO QUADRAGESIMO SECUNDO VICTORIA REGINA.
Car. 1.—An Act respecting the Prosecution of the Seal Fishery.
[PASSED FEBRUARY 22, 1879.]
Section.
. 36 Vict., cap. 9, repealed.
. Steamers not to sail before 10th March; Penalty.
Sailing-vesseis not to sail before 1st Mz irch; Eeuatty.
. Seals not to be killed before 12th March; Penalty ; Proviso; Notice.
. Cats not to be killed; Penalty; Definition; Proviso.
. Limitation.
. Times of Clearance; Proviso; Sundays.
. Recovery of Penalties; Appropriation.
9. Appeal; Proviso; Recognizance.
WAM TBC
Enacting Beit enacted by the Governor, Legislative Council, and Assembly,
clause. in Legislative Session convened, as follows:
36 Vict.,cap.9, I. The Act passed in the thirty-sixth year of the reign of Her pres-
repealed. ent Majesty, entitled ‘“‘An Act to regulate the Prosecution of the Seal
Fishery,” is hereby repealed.
Steamersnotto JJ, No steamer shall leave port for the seal fishery before the 10th
ihe dia Bi Dk day of March in any year, under the penalty of 2,000 dollars, to be
Penalty. recovered from the owner or other person on whose account the steamer
shall have been sent to the seal fishery.
Sailing-vessels ]]I, No sailing-vessel shall leave port for the seal fishery before the
nee oral betore 43 day of March in any year under the penalty of 400 dollars, to be
Penalty. recovered from the owner or other person on whose account such ves-
sel shall have been sent to such fishery.
See noU te be IV. No seals shall be killed by the crew of any steamer or sailing-
March. Vessel before the 12th day of March in any year, under a penalty of 4
Penalty ; dollars for every seal so killed, to be recovered from the owner or other
person as aforesaid, or from the master or crew of the said vessel, or
from the parties receiving the same respectively: Provided, that in
case of the owner or other person as aforesaid, that such owner or other
person received such seals with notice or knowledge that the same
had been killed before the 12th day of March in any year,
Cats not tobe V, No immature seals, known as cats, shall be killed by the crew
Steeles. of any steamer or sailing-vessel at any time, under a penalty of 4 dol-
: lars for every such seal so killed, to be recovered from the receiver of
such seals, or from the master or crew of any such steamer or vessel.
And it is hereby declared, a young seal pelt of less weight than 28 Ibs.
Proviso. shall be considered an immature, or cat seal: Provided, that no party
or parties referred to in this section shall be liable to the penalties or
fines herein stated, unless it be proven that over 5 per cent. in number
of seals taken on board or landed from such vessel are of less weight,
each, than 28 lbs. aforesaid The fines and penalties mentioned in this
section to apply to the excess over such 5 per cent.
Limitation. VI. No action shall be brought by any person to recover any pen-
alty provided by this Act after twelve months {rom the time such pen-
alty shall have been incurred.
Times of clear: VII. No officer of Her Majesty’s Customs i this Colony shall clear
Proviso;
Notice.
Definition;
ance; any steamer for a sealing voyage before the 9th day of March, or any
sailing-vessel for a sealing voyage before the last day of February :
Proviso; Provided, that in the ev ent of either of these days falling on Sunday,
Sundays. such vessel may be cleared on the preceding Saturday.
Recovery of VIII. All penalties incurred under the provisions of this Act shail
penalties ; be sued for and recovered in a summary manner before a Stipendiary
Appropriation; Magistrate, by any person who may sue for the same; one-half of such
penalty shall go to the party who shall sue for and prosecute the
same, and the remainder to the Receiver-General for the use of public
hospitals.
Appeal; IX. If any person shall feel himself aggrieved by any Judgment of
a Stipendiary Magistrate, under this Act, he shall have liberty to
appeal therefrom to the then next sitting’ of Her Majesty’s Supreme
Proviso; Court at St. John’s: Provided, that notice of the same be given to the
Magistrate within twenty- four hours after such Judgment shall have
Recognizance. been delivered, and within five days thereafter recognizances, or other
security, with or without sureties, at the option of such Magistrate,
shall be entered into to prosecute the same without delay, and pay
such amount as may be awarded, with costs.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 2tt
197 ANNO QUADRAGESIMO SEXTO VICTORIA REGINZ.
Cap. I.—An Act to amend an Act passed in the 42nd year of the Reign of Her present
Majesty, entitled ‘An Act respecting the Prosecution of the Seal Fishery.”
[PASSED MARCH 3, 1883.]
Section.
1. 42 Vict., cap. 1, sections 2 and 3, repealed.
2. Steamers not to sail before 6 A. M., 10th March; .Penalty; Proviso.
3 Sailing-vessels not to sail before 6 A. M., Ist March; Penalty; Proviso.
Be it enacted by the Administrator to the Government, Legislative Enacting
Council, and Assembly, in Legislative Session convened, as follows: <lause.
I. The second and third sections of the Act passed in the forty- 42nd Vict., cap.
second year of the reign of Her present Majesty, entitled ‘An Act 1, secs. 2 and 3,
respecting the prosecution of the Seal Fishery,” are hereby repealed. tepealed.
II. No steamer shall leave port for the seal fishery before the hour Steamers not
of 6 o’clock in the forenoon on the 10th day of March in any year, to sail before 6
under the penalty of 2,000 dollars, to be recovered from the owner or ttre LAGI,
other person on whose account such steamer shall have been sent to Beni
such fishery. Provided that, in the event of the said 10th day of
March falling on Sunday, any steamer may leave port for such fishery
at any time after 6 o’clock in the forenoon of the previous day.
III. No sailing-vessel shall leave port for the seal fishery before the _ Sailing-vessels
hour of 6 o’clock in the forenoon on the Ist day of March in any year, not to sail before
under the penalty of 400 dollars, to be recovered from the owner or ®4.M., 1st March;
other person on whose account such vessel shall have been sent to Pe™lty:
such fishery. Provided that, in the event of the said Istday of March Proviso.
falling on Sunday, any sailing-vessel may leave port for such fishery
at any time alter 6 o’clock in the forenoon of the previous day.
ANNO QUINQUAGESIMO VICTORIA REGINA,
Cap. XXIII.—An Act to regulate the taking of, and Right of Property in, Seals.
{PASSED May 18, 1887.]
Section.
1. Right of property in seals.
2. When seals not to be killed; Penalty.
3. Second trip of steamers; Proviso.
4. Penalty; Proviso.
5. Masters’ penalty.
6. Term ‘‘second trip.”
7. Complaints must be made within three months.
Be it enacted by the Administrator of the Government, the Legis- Enacting clause.
lative Council, and House of Assembly, in Legislative Session convened,
as follows:
I. In any action or proceeding for the recovery of, or in relation to, Right of prop-
the property in seals, or seal-pelts, killed by persons engaged in or °tY in seals.
prosecuting the seal fishery in steam-vessels going from, or coming to,
the ports of this Colony, it shall be held that no property, or right of
property, shall have accrued except in seals killed, sculped, panned,
or bulked by and in the actual and personal charge of the claimants,
or some person or persons for them watching or engaged in carrying
away such seals or seal-pelts.
II. No seals shall be killed by any crew of any steamer, or by any Whenseals not
member thereof, before the 12th day of March, or after the 20th day of to be killed;
April, nor shall seals, so killed, be brought into any port in this Colony
or its dependencies as aforesaid, in any year, under a penalty of 4 dol- Penalty.
lars for every seal so killed, to be recovered from the master and crew
by, and paid to, any informer who shall sue for the same, in a sum-
mary manner before a Stipendiary Magistrate.
Ill. No steamer shall be permitted to go upon a second orsubsequent Second trip of
trip to the seal fishery after the Ist day of April in any year: Provided sperurte
that, if it be shown to the satisfaction of the Collector, Sub-Collector, ~"?’’*
or other Customs officer of the port from which the said steamer sails,
that a steamer has been forced, by any accident, to return to port
during the first trip, she shall not be deemed to have gone upon a
second trip if she again leaves port before the 10th day of April.
Qe REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Penalty ; IV. The master, owner, and crew of any steamer, which shall go on
a second or subsequent trip contrary to the third section of this Act,
shall be liable to forfeit double the value of their respective interests
in the seals which shall be brought in on such second or subsequent
trips, to be recovered and paid to any informer who shall sue for the
Proviso. same, in a Summary way, before a Stipendiary Magistrate: Provided
that, in case the owner or purchaser of such seals, having had notice
that such seals were killed on such second or subsequent trip, shall
be liable and responsible for the payment of such penalty, to the
extent of the interest of the owner, master, and crew of such steamer:
Provided that, in cases in which a larger sum than 100 dollars
-198 shall be adjudged, against any defendant, he may appeal to the
Supreme Court, upon (if required) giving good and sufficient
security within ten days after conviction, to prosecute the appeal and
abide final Judgments.
Masters’ pen- V. Sealing-masters violating the third section of this Act shall be
alty. incompetent, for two years after conviction for any offence thereunder,
to be employed to command vessels of the seal fishery, or to be cleared
at the custom-house, as masters of such vessels.
Term ‘‘second VI. For the purposes of this Act, vessels shall be deemed to be on
trip. a second or subsequent trip if they shall engage in killing seals on
the coast of this island and its dependencies, after clearing and sail-
ing for Davis Straits or Greenland fishery, and the master and owners
shall be liable to the same penalties as provided in fourth and fifth
sections of this Act. Any complaints, on information under this sec-
tion, may be made within three months next after the return of the
said vessel to a port of this island.
Complaints WIT. Any complaint or information, under the foregoing provisions
aeast De. made of this Act, must be made within three months of the time of the
mouths. alleged breach thereof.
ANNO QUINQUAGESIMO SECUNDO VICTORIZ REGINA.
Car. I.—An Act to amend the Law relating to the taking of Seals and Right of
Property therein.
[PASSED MARCH 7, 1889.]
Enacting. Beit enacted by the Governor, Legislative Council, and Assembly,
clause. in Legislative Session convened as follows:
Repealing I. The first section of the Act passed in the fiftieth year of the
clause. reign of Her present Majesty, cap. 23, entitled ‘‘An Act to regulate
the taking and right of property in Seals,” is hereby repealed.
Memorandum respecting the Seal Fishery of the Greenland Sea, prepared at the Board of
Trade at the request of the Behring’s Sea Commissioners.
Roughly speaking, this so-called fishery used to be carried on between Spitzbergen
and Iceland, its chief centre being the neighbourhood of the Island of Jan Mayen.
As early as the month of February 1873 the late Mr. Frank Buckland, by a letter
to the ‘‘ Times,” entitled ‘‘A Plea for the Seals,” and otherwise, called public atten-
tion to the abuses connected with the pursuit of this fishery. The circumstances
would appear to have been as follows:
About the time of the Spring Equinox, the seals congregate in immense numbers, ~
and the females give birth to their young upon the ice. The young at birth are
very helpless, and weigh about 4 lbs., but they grow with astonishing rapidity, and
it is said that in about a fortnight the weight of each young seal is some 70 lbs.
Owing to competition in the fishery, it had become the practice to take (i. e.; kill)
seals immediately upen the birth of the young. In this way the mothers were slain
or often scared away from the young before the latter were of age to take care of
themselves. The young were of small value for commercial purposes at this stage
of their existence, and though some of them were killed and shipped, enormous
numbers were left to die of starvation.
Conducted in this manner the fishery was a scene of revolting cruelty, the cries of
the thousands of young dying seals being said to resemble the cries of hundreds of
thousands of human infants, and the destruction of the fishery by the scattering or
extermination of the seals seemed not far distant. The seals in question are not
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS, 273
those from which the fashionable fur is obtained, but their skin is much used for
making boots, especially patent leather boots, and the oil obtained from them is
applied to various purposes. X :
As regards the United Kingdom, the fishery was prosecuted from the ports of
Dundee and Peterhead. Norway was the foreign country mostly interested. In
1874 the Swedish Government suggested to our Foreign Office that some international
arrangement might properly be attempted with a view of imposing restrictive Reg-
ulations to remedy the evils above referred to.
The earlier action of the Board of Trade upon this proposal is set forth in Par-
liamentary Paper No. 73 of 1875 (copy herewith). The result so far was to obtain
concurrence on the part of those interested, both in Great Britain and in Norway,
as to the necessity for a close season about the time of the birth of the young seals.
But there was considerable divergence of opinion both as to the date for ending and
the duration of such close season.
Subsequently, the Board of Trade, in consultation with the Foreign Office, framed
a Bill, which they introduced into Parliament, and which became law as ‘‘The Seal
Fishery Act, 1875” (38 Vict. cap. 18). This Act empowered Her Majesty, by Order
in Council, to fix a day before which it would be illegal for British subjects in any
year to kill or capture, or attempt to kill or capture, seals within an area specified
in the Schedule to the Act, and the Act provided heavy penalties for those contra-
vening its provisions. ‘The area in question was that included between 67° and 75°
north latitude, and 5° east and 17° west of Greenwich, in adopting which the Board
of Trade were chiefly guided by Captain David Gray, of Peterhead, one of the most
experienced of the ship-masters engaged in the fishery, and by whose graphic repre-
sentations Mr. Buckland had been put in motion. ~
In the meanwhile, the Foreign Office were making representations to other coun-
tries who might be interested in the matter, with a view of insuring recip-
199 rocal legislation on their part. As already indicated, the fishery was chiefly
conducted by subjects of Great Britain or Norway, but Germany, Holland
and Sweden were also, though to only a small extent, concerned.
In the course of the year 1875 all the Governments of these foreign countries
expressed a willingness to initiate legislation of the character desired. It was also
thought well to provide for the contingency of the subjects of Russia, France, Den-
mark, or the United States joining in the fishery. The Governments of these latter
countries were accordingly informed of what was being done, and a hope was
expressed that, in the event of their respective subjects coming, as they might any
day do, to fish within the area in question, similar legislation would be adopted by
the Governments, and that, in the meantime, they would not allow their flags to be
carried by the subjects of countries which had legislated in the matter for the pur-
pose of evading such legislation.
The replies of the tirst three of these Governments were generally favourable, but
that of the United States was indefinite. Neither French nor Danish subjects were,
however, engaged in the fishery.
By the commencement of the year 1876 the steps towards legislation in Norway
and Sweden were represented as approaching completion, and satisfactory assur-
ances as regards legislation in Germany and Holland had been received. An Order
in Council was thereupon obtained in this country which brought the Seal Fishery
Act into operation, and fixed the 3rd April in every year as the day before which
British subjects should not commence the taking of seals within any part of the area
defined in the Schedule to the Act. This date was named as a compromise between
the views of British and Norwegian subjects.
The former wished for a rather later, and the latter for a rather earlier, date.
This Order had hardly been promulgated when a telegraphic intimation was
received from Her Majesty’s Minister at Stockholm to the eftect that the Norwegian
Government would be unable to obtain legislative authority for fixing a close season
as regarded the fishery of the current year. In consequence of this, the British
Order in Council had to be revoked.
In the course of the same year the necessary legislation was obtained as regards
Norway. There had, however, been in that country a reaction of opinion as to the
need of a close season.
This was probably due to a consideration of which the Board of Trade were later
on made aware by Captain Gray, 7. e., that the new-born seals, which had formerly
been of little commercial value, had now become far more valuable owing to a proc-
ess invented for utilizing their hair in the manufacture of sham seal-skin. They
would, in consequence, be taken in as large numbers as possible, instead of being
left to die of starvation after the slaughter of the mothers. This, if a fact, would
make it perhaps unnecessary to interfere with the conduct of the fishery on the
ground of preventing cruelty, but would make a close season more needful as regards
preventing the extermination of the seals. The Norwegian Government, however,
thought themselves bound in honour to proceed with the measure. Strangely
BS, PT VI 18
274 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
enough, during the progress of the Bill, there was some idea of making it apply to a
larger area than that contemplated by the English Act, it being held in Norway that
such an area was apn unduly restricted one, and the Bill was passed on the under-
standing that a modification on this point should hereafter be made, if necessary.
In November 1876 a fresh Order in Council was obtained in England again fixing
the 3rd April as the day for opening the fishery, and steps were taken for circulating
copies of it and of the Act amongst those concerned in the United Kingdom, and for
informing the foreign Governments interested.
By about the end of March 1877 the Governments of Norway, Sweden, Germany,
and Holland had all taken legislative steps similar to those adopted in Great Britain,
and the close season until the 3rd April thus established has been duly observed by
parties of these nationalities and by British subjects, who were all that were engaged
in the fishery, except possibly some Russians. It has not been necessary to organize
any police for the enforcement of the Act. No date was fixed for the commencement
of the close season, though Germany raised the point, the advisableness of fixing a
date for that purpose being then doubted by the Board of Trade.
In 1879 Russia intimated that she had imposed similar restrictions on her own
subjects.
In 1885 Captain Gray and others of the Peterhead interest represented that the
close season which had been imposed had had most beneficial results, but that further
restrictions were to be desired.
They intimated that a new branch of the fishery, i. e., that for ‘‘ hooded seals,” had
been created between Iceland and Greenland, extending as far south as the latitude
of Cape Farewell; and that, with a view to more effectually protect the breeding
seals and immature young, the close season should be extended.
They accordingly proposed that the area for restrictions should in future be that
comprised between 60° and 76° north latitude, excluding Iceland and its territorial
waters, and between the Greenland coast on the west and the ice margin on the east,
that the close time should end on the 10th April, and that a definite date (10th July)
should be fixed for commencement of the close season.
They added that there was reason to believe that the Norwegians, as the only
foreigners then engaged in the fishery, would be ready to concur.
These proposals were supported by the Fishery Board for Scotland, the only part
of the United Kingdom from which ships were known to proceed to the fishery. At
the instance of the Board of Trade the proposals were submitted by the Foreign
Office to the Governments of the five foreign countries who participated in the exist-
ing restrictions. ;
By November 1886 replies were received from all those countries, with the excep-
tion of Russia. These replies were to the following effect:
GERMANY AND HOLLAND.
The Governments expressed themselves as disposed to favourably regard the
Scottish proposals but as awaiting information as to the course contemplated by
other Powers.
200 SWEDEN.
Those interested received the Scottish proposals rather favourably, but wished, in
consideration of young seals moulting in April, that opening of fishery should be not
later than the 7th of that month, and, further, that closing day should be the 7th July.
NORWAY.
Those interested thought the 10th April and 10th July inadmissible as dates for
opening and closing, and did not wish Iceland and its waters excluded from the
protected area. They also had proposals of their own widely divergent from those
of Scotland. These were:
(a.) That to prevent destruction of females, it should be forbidden to kill old seals
before the 15th April (6 A.M.) at the places where the young are taken.
(b.) That in consideration of hooded seals having no young to need protection
towards end of close season, the fishery for these seals between Cape Farewell and
Spitzbergen should be free until the 15th July (6 P.M.), after which date it was,
according to them, pursued only by one or two ships under conditions ruinous to
the fishery, as the seals having by that date become very wild, immense numbers
were then destroyed by shooting at long range without many being actually taken.
(c.) That to obviate dangers incident to opening the fishery immediately after
midnight, the opening should be at 6 A.M. on the 3rd April, or, if that day is a
Sunday, at 6 A.M. on the 4th.
(d.) That the limits of protected area should be 60° and 78° north latitude, the
east coast of Greenland, and 10° east longitude (Greenwich).
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 275
These views were conveyed to the Scottish Office by the Board of Trade, with an
intimation that they were unable to see that future steps towards establishment of
new restrictions could be taken unless some course could be suggested for reconciling
the respective views of the Scottish, Norwegian, and Swedish interests.
Early in 1887 the reply of the Scottish interests was received. They thought the
point raised by Sweden in connection with young seals moulting not material, as the
short hair skins had now become more valuable than the fur-skins. They were will-
ing to accept the area as defined by Norway, and that, on the day of opening, the
fishery should commence at 6 A.M. They agree as to need for protecting female
seals, but thought opening on the 10th April would insure this, as later the females
would get too wild to allow of their being shot, and they agree as to need for pro-
tecting hooded seals late in the season.
They were, however, firm as to the need for making the opening and closing dates
for the fishery as near the 10th April and 10th July as possible, and did not see how
hooded seal fishery could be made free during general close time without endanger-
ing the observance of close time for other kinds of seals.
These views were communicated to the Foreign Office by the Board of Trade in
the hope of an understanding being arrived at between Norway and Scotland, soas
to form a basis for negotiation with the other Powers. At the same time, it was
pointed out that the including of Iceland and its waters in the protected area would
involve inviting Denmark to join in the arrangements.
In March 1888 a further communication was received from Norway. It now
appeared that, owing to a change observed in the last two or three years in the con-
dition of the ice off Greenland, the Norwegian interests no longer wish the hooded
seal fisheries to close on the 15th July.
They declined to make any concession as regards the day for opening the seal
fishery generally, and it was doubtful whether they would adopt any date for clos-
ing. On other points they now acquiesced with Scotland, to which country these
views were conveyed.
Later in the year Russia intimated that she concurred with Norway on all points.
Subsequent correspondence afforded no prospect of reconciling the divergent
views of Scotland and Norway, whilst Denmark took exception to the territorial
waters of either Iceland or Greenland being included in the area of protection.
In these circumstances, the negotiations came to a standstill, and the arrangements
made in 1875-79 have been maintained.
Copy of the English Act, with the Order in Council, in handbill form, as circulated
in the past amongst those interested and now in force, is annexed.
(Initialled) J. M. N.
FEBRUARY 11, 1892.
SEAL FISHERY (GREENLAND).—38 VICT., CaP. 18.
Order in Council made the 28th day of November, 1876, for applying ‘‘The Seal Fishery
Act, 1875.”
At the Court at Windsor, the 28th day of November, 1876.
Present: THE QUEEN’S Most EXCELLENT MAJESTY IN COUNCIL.
Whereas by “‘The Seal Fishery Act, 1875,” it is enacted that when it appears to
Her Majesty in Council that the foreign States whose ships or subjects are engaged
in the seal fishery in the area mentioned in the Schedule to that Act, or any
201 part of such area, have made or will make, with respect to their own ships
and subjects, the like provisions to those contained in that Act, it shall be law-
ful for Her Majesty, by Order in Council, to direct that that Act shall, after the date
mentioned in the Order, apply to the seal fishery within the said area, or such part
thereof as may be specified in the Order:
And whereas it has been made to appear to Her Majesty in Council that the foreign
States whose ships or subjects are at present engaged inthe seal fishery in the area
mentioned in the Schedule to the said recited Act have made or will make, with
respect to their own ships and subjects, the like provisions to those contained in the
said recited Act:
Now, therefore, Her Majesty, in exercise of the power vested in her by the said
recited Act, by and with the advice of her Privy Council, is pleased to direct that
“The Seal Fishery Act, 1875,” shall, after the date of this present Order, apply to
the seal fishery within the area mentioned in the Schedule to the said Act.
And Her Majesty, in exercise of the same power, by and with the like advice, is
further pleased to fix the 3rd day of April in every year as the day before which the
276 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
master and person in charge of, and every person belonging to, any British ship, and
every British subject, shall not kill or capture, or attempt to kill or capture, any seal
within the area mentioned in the Schedule to the said Act.
“The Seal Fishery Act, 1875,” is as follows:
88 VicT., CAp. 18.—An Act to provide for the establishment of a Olose Time in the Seal
Fishery in the Seas adjacent to the Eastern Ooasts of Greenland.
[JUNE 14, 1875.]
Be it enacted by the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty, by and with
the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Com-
mons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of
the same, as follows:
Application of 1. When it appears to Her Majesty in Council that the foreign States
Act by Order in whose ships or subjects are engaged in the seal fishery in the area men-
rouney wn th tioned in the Schedule to this Act, or any part of such area, have
toreion States, made or will make, with respect to their own ships and subjects, the
i like provisions to those contained in this Act, it shall be lawful for
Her Majesty, by order in Council, to direct that this Act shall, after
the date mentioned in the Order, apply to the seal fishery within the
said area, or such part thereof as may be specified in the Order.
Her Majesty may, by the same or any subsequent Order, limit the
operation of the Order, and render the operation thereof subject to
such conditions, exceptions, and qualifications as may be deemed
‘expedient.
So long as an Order under this section remains in force this Act shall,
subject to any such limitation, condition, exemption, or qualification
as aforesaid, apply to the seal fishery within the said area, or such
part as may be specified in the Order.
Her Majesty may from time to time, by Order in Council, rescind,
alter, or add to any Order made in pursuance of this section, and
make a new Order in lieu thereof.
Every Order in Council made in pursuance of this section shall be
laid before both Houses of Parliament within six weeks after it is
made, or if Parliament be not then sitting, within six weeks after the
then next meeting of Parliament, and shall also be published in the
“London Gazette.”
Close time for . 2: When an Order in Council has been made for applying this Act,
seal fishery. then, so long as such Order remains in force, the master or person in
charge of or any person belonging to any British ship, or any British
subject, shall not kill or capture, or attempt to kill or capture, any
seal within the area mentioned in the Schedule to this Act, or the part
of the area specified in the Order, before such day in any year as may
be fixed by the Order, and the master or person in charge of a British
ship shall not permit such ship to be employed in such killing or cap-
turing, or permit any person belonging to such ship to act in breach
of this section.
Any person who is guilty of any breach (by any act or default) of
this section shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding 5001. for each
offence.
Prosecution of 3. Every offence under this Act may be prosecuted, and every pen-
offences. alty under this Act may be recovered—
(1.) In England, before two Justices of the Peace in a summary
manner, or by action in any of Her Majesty’s Superior Courts at West-
minster, together with full costs of suit; and
(2.) In Scotland, by action as for a debt in the ordinary Sheriff
Court or in the Court of Session; and
(3.) In Ireland, before two Justices of the Peace in a summary
manner, or by personal action in any of Her Majesty’s Superior
Courts at Dublin.
Provided that the penalty imposed in a summary manner by two
Justices shall not exceed 1001., exclusive of costs.
One-half of every penalty recovered under this Act shall be paid
to the person who prosecuted the offence or sued for such penalty.
For all purposes of and incidental to the trial and punishment of
any person accused of an offence under this Act, and the proceedings
and matters preliminary and incidental to and consequential on his
trial and punishment, and for all purposes of and incidental to the
jurisdiction of any Court or of any constable or officer with reference
to such offence, the offence shall be deemed to have been committed
either in the place in which it was actually committed or in any place
in which the offender may for the time being be found.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 200
4, Where an offence under this Act is committed, then—
(a.) If the same is committed by the fault or with the connivance Roba ea
of the master of any ship, that master, and— f Ltaality of
202 (b.) If the same is committed by the fault or with the con- ter of ship in cer-
nivance of the owner of any ship, that owner— tain cases.
shall be liable to the like penalty to which the person committing
such offence is liable under this Act.
5. Where the owner or master of a ship is adjudged to pay a pen- Liability of
alty for an offence under this Act, the Court may, in addition to any Ship to penalty.
other power they may have for the purpose of compelling payment of
such penalty, direct the same to be levied by distress or arrestment
and sale of the said ship and her tackle.
6. In this Act the expression ‘‘ seal” means the harp or saddleback a 4
seal, the bladdernosed or hooded seal, the ground or bearded seal, and ,, Despition of
the floe seal or floe rat, and includes any animal of the seal kind which *""
may be specified in that behalf by an Order in Council under this Act.
7. This Act may be cited as ‘The Seal Fishery Act, 1875.” Short title.
SCHEDULE.
Area to which Act applies.
The area included between the parallels of 67° and 75° of north latitude, amd
between the meridians of 5° east and 17° west longitude, reckoned from the meridian
of Greenwich.
Norwegian Law for the establishment of a Close Time for Seal Fishery in the Arctic Seas.—
Stockholm, May 18, 1876.
(Translation. ]
We, Oscar, by the grace of God King of Norway and Sweden, the Wends and
Goths, hereby notify that a Resolution passed by the Ordinary Storthing now in
session, on the 25th April of this year, of the following tenour, has been submitted
to us:
1. When it shall appear that the foreign States whose ships or subjects are engaged
in the seal fishery in the area included between the parallels of 67° and 75° of north
latitude, and between the meridians of 5° east and 17° west longitude, reckoned
from the meridian of Greenwich, have made or may hereafter make the like provi-
sion, it shall be lawful for the King to fix a time of year during which it is forbidden
either for the crew of a Norwegian vessel or for a Norwegian subject within the area
aforesaid to kill or capture seals, including Cystophora cristata.
2. Any one guilty of a breach of the prohibition enacted by section 1, or who shall
in any way aid or abet such breach, shall be liable to a fine of from 200 to 10,000
kronor. But none of the crew shall be held liable except the master in case the said
breach took place either by his order or with his knowledge, and without his having
done everything in his power to prevent the same.
The provision in the Criminal Law of the 3rd June, 1874, 2nd chapter, section 40,
last sentence, is not applicable.
3. In the event of a breach of the present Law taking place, it will be dealt with
by the Police Court. The vessel will be liable for any fine that may be incurred by
either the master or owner. One-half of the fines shall go to the intormer.
We have, therefore, accepted and sanctioned, as we hereby accept and sanction,
this Resolution as law.
Given at our Palace at Stockholm, the 18th May, 1876, under our hand and seal of
the realm. -
(signed) [Lass OSCAR.
Ordinance of the King of Sweden and Norway to establish a Close Time for the Seal
Fishery by Swedish Vessels in the Arctic Seas.—Stockholm, November 30, 1876.
{Translation.]
We, Oscar, by the grace of God King of Sweden and Norway, of the Goths and
the Wends, make known that, considering that the seal fisheries in the Arctic Seas,
especially in the neighbourhood of Jan Mayen’s Island, are conducted in such a man-
ner as to threaten the extermination of the seal in those waters, and the total destruc-
278 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
tion of the fisheries, negotiations have been initiated by our Kingdom of Norway
with the Governments of those foreign countries whose inhabitants take part in the
said fisheries, and those Governments having now promulgated, or declared their
willingness to promulgate, suitable Ordinances to the above effect, and seeing that
a certain small number of Swedish ships also take part in the fisheries, and that, in
so far as these Ordinances are calculated to work the desired effect, it is essential
that, as has already been ordained elsewhere, the liability for their violation should
be of such a character as to outweigh the benefit to be derived from a breach of the
law, we have now thought it right, in so far as Sweden is concerned, to participate
in the said Agreement, and we have therefore graciously ordained as follows:
§ 1. In the Arctic Seas, between 67° and 75° north latitude and 5° east and 17°
west longitude from Greenwich, all Swedish ships and all Swedish subjects are for-
bidden until further notice to kill or catch seal (including the Phoca cristata) earlier
in the year than the 3rd April. '
203 § 2. All persons infringing the Regulations contained in the foregoing par-
agraph, or being in any manner parties to such infringement, will be liable to
a fine of from 200 to 10,000 kronor, with the proviso that, should the said infringe-
ment have taken place either in obedience to the orders of the captain of the ship
or with his knowledge, or without his having done everything in his power to guard
against it, he alone of all the crew shall be liable to the penalty incurred. Of the
fines imposed, half goes to the informer and half to the Crown. Failing means to
meet the fine, the corresponding legal penalty shall be enforced.
§ 3. In cases of violation of the prescriptions of this Ordinance, jurisdiction lies
with the ordinary Courts.
Let this be obediently observed by all whom it may concern. For further cer-
tainty we have hereunto affixed our hand and seal.
(Signed) (L. 8.) Oscar.
STOCKHOLM PALAck, November 30, 1876.
204 APPENDIX (IF).
PARTICULARS OF PELAGIC CATCH OF BRITISH AND UNITED STATES SEALING-
VESSELS, 1871-91.
Memorandum on the Number of Fur-Seal Skins taken at Sea in 1891.
From the Returns (Table A) compiled by Mr. Milne, the Collector of Customs at
Victoria, British Columbia, and from information furnished by Mr. D. Oppenheimer,
the Mayor of Vancouver, it appears that the number of British vessels engaged in
sealing in 1891 was fifty, and that their total catch for the year was 49,615. These
Returns have been compiled with the greatest care.
With regard to the catch of the United States sealing-vessels for the same year,
there is much difficulty in arriving at an estimate of the number of skins taken,
owing to the fact that practically no records were kept by the United States Cus-
toms authorities of the number of skins landed. The only official Returns supplied
to us are those derived from a telegram from the Custom-house at San Francisco to
the Treasury Department at Washington (Table B), which gives certain particulars
as to the catch of sixteen vessels, and statements from the Collectors of Customs at
San Francisco, Port Townsend, Astoria, and San Diego, giving the number of sealing-
vessels that cleared from those ports in 1891 (Table C).
From the latter Table it appears that the number of United States vessels engaged
in sealing in 1891 was forty-two, but no details as to their catch are given.
It has been ascertained that 62,500 seal-skins were sold in London in 1891, under
the classification of ‘‘North-West,” this being the termed used for skins supposed
to be taken at sea.
If we assume that these represent the whole pelagic catch for the season of 1891
in all parts of the North Pacific Ocean, and deduct from this number those known to
have been taken by British vessels, i. ¢., 49,615, there remains a balance of 12,885
skins to be accounted for. A certain number of these may have been taken by the
Indians in canoes on the coasts of Washington, British Columbia, and South-East
Alaska, but their number would probably not amount to more than 3,000. This
would leave about 10,000 as the catch of the United States sealing-vessels.
It must, however, be borne in mind that the above figure of 62,500 does not repre-
sent the total number of skins taken, as a portion of those sent to London are
re-exported after having been dressed, and thus would not appear in the sales list,
and that, besides, many skins are not sent to London at all to be dressed, but are
prepared in America.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
16,000 and 20,000.
205 TABLE (A).—British Columbian Sealing Fleet, 1891.
3 Crew. Catch.
g : a pale of
45 o ; eturn to
Name of Vessel. a r= S ce British
8 : arning.| Golum-
weer eae eed veg, Peete A: ef eg um
Serer = sy to st es irs
A hE eo. | 2 | a A
AMNIEN ©. VOOTO. ai. 42 2 seieeie ni 113!) 71) 23 46 442 | 1,588 | 2,076 | Aug. 6] Aug. 30
PAUIMONA Se oe econ ace aeineee eee ZB alr || Gy | ales 53 340 47 440 | July 7 CRS TL
PAMIIO Kameene cane ree eee ece CD) |) UI )) |) 28) eccese 4063|b == 5-=%- 406 | June 30} July 27
INH GO) DAR B BEE eR ORE BOC EE aOe PaO oe WG eee see boceece 1,082 | 1,082 | Aug. 16 | Sept. 7
Annie KE. Paint. .---.2..----- SP) |G eal seed] jsceecel Boceces 154 154 | June 29 | July 28
IBeati COnseeeeaaaeeeseaeerece 66) 12) 5] 22 59 136 | 876 | 1,071 | July 23 | Sept. 27
Beatrice (Vancouver) .---.-- 48 ID epee] so55cr 136 206 342 =. 8) }) Aug; 29
Borealisg@ceeccsccte sae acer 37 | 13] 5] 25 |....-- Cire || ie bind) G2 Cok) |ocescoeee By
C. D. Rand (Vancouver)...-. 19) 1 CRBs Boece Hanseen Paseeed (shel one yee hil Serco sete
Carlotta G. Cox.........---- U9) || AAD eed boosée 517 | 1,519 | 2,036 | Aug. 10 | Aug. 30
Carmelite ..-...--.-..--..--- 99} 7} 23 }...-)-. 2... 751 | 1,639 | 2,390 * 8] Sept. 2
CoH Ruppersess-2s0s-6 sono) CED Ml | 228 leeSdissosce 235 374 609) | dimly 1) |e een nee
Eliza Edwards, steam-ship
@Wancouver)=2-s<2 222 Sih |baod) 24) eGoolesaciee a 49 50 SOT widtilwcmetseisle ee
eos) ManVvinleer ss sccs-lece sl MT Ti) 285) S21) 276 462)| sce aces 738 Sle hualys 27
(Seized
July 6)
80 | 12] 6] 20 35 337 | 2,381 | 2,753 | Aug. 12 | Sept. 18
OZ0 Ga) Zon |e 3 224 267 494 | July 16 | Aug. 30
Se ONS On hGH seen 191 | 1,224 | 1,415 «18 | Sept. 24
Gl Oy) || GO Books TTD |) TH, 18P |paoccaasoe “98
JOG MINE acaasacoceseseeencar ee 28 e Oaleer|p La WN ee teen ble oe ciate 4. sslesiescie es | siete ss stele
Waa brad Oleeecteleale aie -te==/-Ial-1 == ras) || 4) |) Ab Be od bees 374 216 590 | July 18 | Aug. 28
WUAUTS mae eaciaieeelseiiemiaeceae TR) th ay |) US| ee oa eeeenee 61 61 a ty tie 24
MUNNIG sce seis so selacosietsi= 46/12] 6] 20] 308 373 22 703 Seo 15 +S 3
Maggie Mac........-....---- Met ne ee 22 197 (0548 3] 638] ‘ 1] July 14
Marva Ray lore o-\-s2oser 43 | 5/18 ]....| 54 445 264 KB |leecsbocods Aug. 29
IMiasCO tt ssa =o = 15 is mise slaieis CMY |) PA) 9 Nese Tieecceas 79 £5 |Econcéscoc Noy. 16
Mountain Chief............. 5 a © Pte eel acne DIG eea\aecine se Aug. 29
Maryebllen toes .\c1-s\cscleciccise 69 | 16 | 12 | 24 21 609 65 695 | July 2] July 29
Mand Seeee aes -eaeeneeeae Ol 2 eS6qbecocs 394 | 1,030 | 1,424 «23 | Sept. 26
May Belle scso2< ct! so-lascne 58 i POM TOs oes | sees ae 701 24% 942 | ‘“* 22] Aug. 21
Otto. eee. 252 Fs scnetetiases Sou Oe Till (6llesssesleeecces 48 48 | Seized | Sept. 27
Ocean Beller. 3: 22 5-sacs5er SB) Uf IPE eoed| ab) 568 | 1,170 | 1,908 | June 30 er)
Oscar and Hattie-............ 81} 5] 29 |... 54 409) O62 M5525) |S soccer co 22,
PenelOpSrnec fesse nee TOM Te ZO eit] 229) 410 691 | 1,330 | July 7] Oct. 3
IBM! -cooooccHadabecsEcooe 668] 6 20 ee.) 162 TN ASSs PON B08! |ewincemicinn = Sept. 17
Rosie Olsen ...-..--.----.--- 38 | 9] 3] 16 40 176 52 268 | July 24 | Aug. 29
SiGe sopSnogecncseEToeadsoos 35 | 6]. 127 |) 886"|o sc scleiscece S886) eco ccscso|ciecovicc sme
NAPpPUWITOlececcieesenaaeescine 124 | 8§) 20 |713 30 974 | 2,435 | 3,439 | Aug. S|} Sept. 2
NGAP ION eseseceaa eee ese 50] 6/19 |....| 354 584 82 | 1,020 | July 14 |] Aug. 1
Mon ekapetessess ss vsce eee G8) |] 7 OB io sd begone 307 | 985]1,292] ‘ 17] Sept. 27
Amp heseesee ee eee eee OSM eTlest eaee TG GGGN| | Tl TOls |) 6 17) Antone 5
Thistle, steam-ship.-.-.-.-...-.-- VEYA 1) P18 )booe 9 294 82 385 Yo alps aan,
LOA BAINES gop acoescpescadoase BES 202-83) eee leecood 405 504 909 “23 | Sept. 9
RMENUUTO sa caciee naire aes cea== CEG aS | CT PAN Beco besesse 659 WY) |bsaohoosas NG
Vancouver Belle(Vancouver)| 73 |....| 27 |.--.].-.---|------- 28 Pay Gh WH |baeacassoe
WAVER oncseinc nn ce en ccsiemerjas 92's ere 2am terate [eraciere 1, 261 731 | 1,992 | June 380 | Sept. 17
Wilh) Savward...:-.--2..20. BOD 137/16") 25 |p 187i |e mea [ee S01) | 1,722 eee eee Aug. 22
WWANNTired Sesssons cones ssicen Sel e2) eer |) 8 1 Bose 98 105 | July 15 Oe
Walter A. Harle..........-.-. 68 | 6 | 20]....) 198 848 | 1,021 | 2,067 |] Aug. 12] Sept. 2
Wanderer 2 -.ceccsece--- = a- 25] 6] 44 12 7 200 330 537 ese LS: See ky
Walter L. Rich........... ase) YO) WW ePeacalessscc 519 21 540 | June 29 | July 27
Fifty vessels .......... 3,401 |369 |715 |368 |3, 565 |17, 162 |28, 888 |49, 615
Skins purchased from In-
dians at Victoria in 1891. ..]...cccleces|eccclecce|------ cosesa soos seo-| 1, 953
279
It appears, therefore, that in the absence of sufficient official records it is impossi-
ble to form anything more than a very approximate estimate of the number of seal-
skins taken by the United States sealing-vessels.
Taking the average catch of the British Columbian vessels as 1,000, and allowing
a similar catch to the United States vessels, their total catch would amount to
about 40,000, but from information derived from unofficial sources this estimate
appears to be too great, and after careful consideration it may be estimated that the
catch of the forty-two United States vessels engaged in sealing in 1891 was between
HR OAH HHOHOHH | Where warned.”
Feb Sa et OSS
OAR On
t Total crew.
*I.—Inside Behring Sea. O.=Outside Behrin
$399 caught off Kurile Islands.
§ Qy-
Sea.
oats apart from canoes.
280 REPORT OF
206
BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
TABLE (B).—Particulars of United States Sealing Fleet, 1891,
N. B.—These particulars are derived from information given to the Behring Sea Commissioners by
Mr. J. Stanley-Brown at Washington in March 1892, and which he stated was all that he was able
to collect from official sources.
24 sealing-vessels cleared from San Francisco in 1891, as per telegrams from Collector
E. B. Jerome, February 25 and 26, 1892:
Albert Walker. Mattie T. Dyer.
Hattie Gage. C. H. White.
Helen Blum. City of San Diego.
Lily L. J. H. Lewis.
C. G. White. E. E. Webster.
Hermann. Lizzie Derby.
La Nimfa. John Hancock.
Louis Olsen (s. 8.). Mary Gilbert.
Sophie Sutherland.
San Diego.
Annie Harley.
Emma and Louise.
Rosie Sparks.
Pearl.
Alexander.
Thistle (s.s.).
9 sealing-vessels cleared from Port Townsend, as per telegrams from Collector A.
Wasson, February 25 and 26, 1892:
Allie Alger. George R. White.
Emmet Felix. Mist.
Challenge. Maytlower.
bo
February 25 and 26, 1892:
Bessie Rutter.
Henry Dennis.
J. G. Swan (Neah Bay).
Lottie (Neah Bay).
sealing-vessels cleared from Astoria, as per telegrams from Collector E. A. Taylor,
Kate and Ann (Yakina Bay).
2 sealing-vessels cleared from San Diego, as per telegram from Collector John R.
Berry, February 26, 1892:
Laura.
Ethel.
5 sealing-vessels cleared from miscellaneous United States ports:
Sitka (2).
Leo.
Sitka.
Kadiak Island (3).
Nellie Martin.
Undaunted.
F. F. Feeney.
total number of vessels.
TABLE (C).—Jnformation tabulated from Telegrams from the Custom-house at San Fran-
cisco to the Treasury Department, Washington, dated February 16, 1892.
[Taken from Manifests; and Mr. Stanley-Brown states is all that the Custom-house is able to furnish. ]
Name of Vessel.
Skins
Date of Arrival. reported.
Siw SIU OWAN fomis® cavst siehae Oe cere ee ey nle ae niceties SRN A oi btiete eteents Woe ao ae March 7, 1891 Fi
TROSI@IS DALI By dee ee pis hace igaeee he Rem te Ae oR eee eee ee ote oe | August ie 148
SO NEST WHA sae ken as daemae Ade onasedewabs Sob uoonosod semaudoad ace ut Gieae 17
SH Ste DEC Be arSO SSeS Acts Cae See el atl mae Sem Se org ce of We mks 465
CAEL. WADIGO SE o> Sante ae bape eye ee ee ee eee nk a ate ees erceene oe ee ay Eee 438
0. G. Wilson cu Diente 23
Mattie Dyer | og Pals 15
CSG. iWihite. 2242 o-s2 see -h September 1, ‘ 1, 686
MAMNEXAN GENS =~ - 32 ose aie eee eee lee tee oe ee ects ee 8; "ist 9
DUG HO oS se laeats se wom SRO Oe fe so ae ee ae eee bis ele ices ye ae December 28, ‘ 10
ily, T= Sates ate c Sose 2 OLE A EAR hte oo se wees oat 4 SOR ae Le re September 16, ‘ 61
LOTMA M he aoe ob einintacciscie oe ence eae eer eek Bio eeeie re rae aicenina oe ue aig us’ 31
NE rng! hsieae AIS Reese eee ss Scie eae he eel ee Oe yl a Be ue 24, “* 3
TAP WiG DBtOr tase ee os oe oe eee eo ee ee ee ee Se oe ene eer oe ae October Bh kee |Rosccnsose
Pearl i j34 alee Ae ga: see OS eee ae ee ee SOE ce ee ae aE pen | J Bee 2
Emma‘and-Womiseescaentick.c2csiwe io eee etine eee ace eee eee epee a Gee 894
a Nimfa.-s 2225 sceeeeccminete sack- beac Sedeee cad asec seep saece ms sete ws | November 9, ‘ 9
|
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 281
_ The following skins were taken to ports in Alaska, and arrived at San Francisco
in coasting-vessels:
: Name of Vessel. Date. Cargo.
SSA BENE neSoecauebaRnbedsaosdncrooccosuodencUbEsoces July 31, 1891 | 17 cases of skins.
NA tN oc cee ae eae ewe os ceice ote August As 16 barrels.
Ie MRM RYGie te Gao ameeaacuacoscos oon cueouSecuodaouer oa ee 4, os 150 packages.
IBA pp ASRG ERAN S Ones KOcmatn SAAC AS AOAC EOSAOOASOE ie 27, ‘* | 46 sacks and 12 bundles.
SOONG meeieee eee ie nena eR LAR Shoat October Suc’ 21 skins.
JNU) Sacchi SE Bose asad see ctin 6c cobouapE coo DO EnUOE November 9, ‘ 42 bundles and 1 box.
207 Summary Statement of the Approximate Number of Fur-Seal Skins taken by Pelagic
Sealers from 1871 to 1891,
A pproxi-
Number of malts Approxi
ata British : Number | Approximate ee i
Year. Gatamalsan Catch. of United Daten Catch of Foreign Vessels. mate
Vessels. States Total.
Vessels.
1871 ?
tOu> ca.) About.3 22, 000 DM ease sentence ceaicisitenisisicmeaic a ce aodess eax 2, 000
1878
IP occose 40s FAR SOON EER eet ae| eres Pet al ata eee cahcuasineabe scence 4, 800
1880...--.. 4 $4 S00H Sra eaatrs| Seen ceineecise sa ate lt mac sewce cic doceccle cacececic 4, 800
TSSIG Sse: Sal PeeOMOOUR| Maaeeen AS renens se Fee aS Pa be es hee deetscuseice 6, 000
188222452 S41 Fab24 0004 Pesca: |b ostas sees |e ced sesertossesewretimcer sees 12, 000
1883..-... 9 | %?18, 500 1 2,500 | 1 German (catch unknown). 16, 000
(in Behring Sea)
1884...-- 11 | ?16,500 Sli Sascesiecesiseacks= oo oo ab ~ 16, 500
1885... 4: 133 | Di 180): |S pee aa ete eer oe “ 1, 756 25, 935
1886_ --- 3. 16 24, 344 13 11, 000 ae 605 36, 000
ete Serer 17 20, 266 32 16, 000 a 1, 350 37, 500
T888=- =. =- 21 24, 329 8 Unknown i) 1, 214 25, 000
1889-2. - 5. 22 27, 868 33 13, 3800 Gs 1, 701 42, 870
SOO s- eaves 29 39, 547 12 11, 000 s6 1, 031 51, 560
ASOT a... 50 49, 615 42 AERA) leSeasaccooodreshueicocodscaceHo 68, 000
Since 1885 correct data of the British Columbian sealing-vessels have been pre-
served; previous to that year the figures given are approximate.
All figures given for the United States sealing-fleet are approximate, no reliable
records having been kept.
The catch ot the German vessel (“‘Adéle”) are correct, she having landed her cargo
at Victoria.
Annual Reports of Number and Catch of British Columbian Sealing Fleet from 1871
to 1890.
SEALING REPORT FROM YEARS 1871 TO 1878.
|
Vessels. Tons. | Crew.
FR AV OUTIL OR PRS = eS ae = nee eae an nS a oe ee ee eee Sat Sade ep Wecineasedasen 80 14
BRO UMN Mer aa oat sae e eee eta sons wa claein an ano nas als sein oaaecaoalebewaseegeccsiee 29 8
PANTO OCHS 2 seats =, 205 ae eae aaa einen Stina) aa icinaraicleia waeicars sclyeeiaac'essicilaimeresenies 36 9
The above vessels at this time were not regularly engaged in seal-hunting, but
were visiting the trading stations of their owners, where many of the skins were
obtained by barter from the Indians along the west coast of Vancouver Island,
Queen Charlotte Islands, Bella Bella, Bella Coula, and other points on the British
Columbian coast.
The owners being very reticent, no reliable information could be obtained; con-
sequently, the number of skins and the extent of the industry were not known at
that time.
The probable catch of the Indians and above vessels would be about from 3,000
to 5,000 skins yearly, and the price at this time was low, about from 3 to 4 dollars
per skin.
282 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
It was reported in the years 1874 and 1875 that the American schooner ‘‘ Cygnet,”
Captain Kimberly, went to Behring Sea and obtained good catches. This is probably
incorrect, as the chief object of her voyage was sea-otter hunting, she once bringing
them to Victoria.
SEALING REPORT FOR YEARS 1878 TO 1880.
Vessels. Tons. | Crew.
80 14
29 8
36 9
35 9
These vessels were engaged in the coast sealing only, with an average catch each
of about 1,200; price of skins then in Victoria from 4 to 5 dollars each, the Indian
catch being about 2,000 to 2,500 skins yearly.
208 SEALING REPORT, 1881.
Vessels. Tons. | Crew.
Favourite...... p00) Goods Seameseeteronnes canes celesia samnismeiincenoecisins semen esieats meres 80 14
Thornton 29 8
Anna Beck .. 36 9
Onward 35 9
Mary Ellen..... Decne bab COGS HCO DBococcacd cactod sab ane pS oDoSSoLeGusnScrassdsononcabede 63 12
These vessels were only engaged in sealing on the west coast of Vancouver Island,
about 1,200 skins being the average catch. Value at Victoria about 5 dollars per
skin.
No official Report made by above vessels, and no memoranda at Custom-house.
About this time the Indians would kill and bring to Victoria for sale about 2,500
skins yearly.
SEALING REPORT, 1882.
Vessels. Tons. | Crew.
HavOUritOse cc ces os cisinissinsisisinislnsicivisise ciclo ecieisicicisicieisiaicieis cicisioisin sinisielesissic(elsle/siciciais pooecescac 80 14
Mhorntonmieeccce cesar serseeena cee saa seceaaec nek ciistciisscisisesscieeinisisinccininsicisnioaciassias 29 9
INTE BET) ea Sa OOO DOO COCO CORT EC OOD S SB OCORO BO SUED OCO URAC COD BUCO OCOD BOOCHOGOBEOD COD. 36 9
Onwardeee sa ccteeclesicseisicceee cect eect ece ee reaeeccelee cee sels icles ocichleloetessietes/ol-emecicete 35 9
GEACO cnc ccu cewisatetciaie eleleee Sate elaele tet Rae earoteiniale lores ib wlele clan elele Glnic eteiviels elelclelolcleleieletelcielele 77 12
Alfred Adams ..... Breet Bein’ 69 14
W.P. Sayward.... 59 12
Mary Ellen ........ 63 12
These vessels were only engaged in sealing on the west coast of Vancouver Island,
and did not go to Behring Sea. The average catch would be about 1,500 skins for
each vessel, and the prices low, about from 5 dollars to 5 dol. 50 c. per skin.
Vessels at this time considered in the coasting trade, and no official Report kept.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 283
SEALING REPORT, 1883.
Vessels. Tons. | Crew.
WiniAy TOWER b soqbocsojodscoqne bho ocantode nase s6 COSOSNCUOS Snob DOSS oBEEbOpaososeesseosec 63 12
Graeme eee cece co ce aie ae eerste ei eeeleen aint eis cise sisinien\aalewlolsiwisicis wes wicie eainisin\Sacce sicieiawejeeie 17 14
VWio LBs SEN AERIS opp cosocnocnscpnSqnsesdesde00e Jon HEPES AOS Ee HOB DOB EOSOEEAOO, SAAC BOSE 59 12
PANT AS BOCKE season eee tee ae naaee nak en cin.ceaisidic en sclnica sie </c/s\ejnicjslcinfera naive ee e'reisiarele 36 10
PRHOVNGOM ss seece 5 sins te ae ele eeloeticisincs riciss owe Crate cloiaisinie'< Wisin iayein alas mlcjejmcicisjsis/ajaisiel csisisjaac 29 9
Dolpiinwsseosossee see e eee eee nasa meri saat ister sate ielae claisjs/sseice Jac sjsiniaisejeicia'e -1siale 60 12
AGB Sos odoin oeecs as « See cma ome claeaisisise sincinis wisinic Sepelscis ccna Solas euieajaa'ecacaineaicecisiwcicins 58 12
PAN TrEGVATG AMS ls cjasc aise einer eietee ee ee Secrets ce cee icainis sia S)aloe sic werleiceanicise cama cereals oe 69 14
A AVOULILO te siaicen o o0c temic oe oe ee atone eae ac ineen cuintiss wislnic ese ciciscccicerice csescccdeces 80 16
None of these vessels cleared for or entered Behring Sea, but confined their opera-
tions to hunting on the west coast of Vancouver Island. Number of seals taken by
each schooner not recorded. The average catch for each vessel would be about 1,500
skins; value at Victoria about 6 dollars each.
In this year the American schooner ‘‘ City of San Diego,” Daniel McLean, master,
and his brother Alexander, mate, and a crew of thirteen men, entered Behring Sea
to hunt seals, and had a successful catch of 2,500 skins. This vessel fitted out in
San Francisco and proceeded direct to Behring Sea.
In this year the German schooner ‘‘Adéle,” which came from Japan, was caught
trespassing near seal islands in Behring Sea, and was seized, but was afterwards
released. The seizing vessel confiscating the skins, reported the skins taken at
about 300.
209 SEALING REPORT, 1884.
Vessels. Tons. | Crew.
PSH OLN TOME eo hisis smiscic.ceisisiciaisloe se oe emis cicsina + cieme ace ne we ciasiaisisiqasione cece sees fade cb eoees 29 9
WOlp hin yes secmieseo Ses eee bee a iciciee Saale ciceiecisrance cee c oes ccimmeione fetes 60 16
Onward eect casa sac sa coeteatclenslsinie este cianaieie o BEI s clsisiwiosinsiv ce cee oeceeneeteceedeeese 35 9
JICTIO eG HBOS BOSE OD ODS SaaS ee CC OES BES OO MSE Ieee eee eatery 58 12
BASIN TID BIS OC Reset aster te erste ee nee ee cia ce cicie aioe State Sinss le wisle Seiate misiersig eres durane nc a teiere are 36 9
TRO RR SESS Coa arOD HOH EE OS GO STOO Oe BSCE ERD Cal ae en NEE ata eaey alee ah ce ea ee T7 18
BWV sed Exh BY WVAD Cocca ctoe a eens atse tet efasaoinie oh erie te siete sta rete nea ela ike eclectic esiarnt Scicinidiaele sails 59 12
PANTPOGPAGAMS2S oe weiee ete ae ae ee ise Seren nena beac naiseee sale emdccecoteceteteceeces 69 16
BlSekg Diam ONG eae eee eee cee ed Aen amine Beer en Soames eee anata cece a eaaiae 81 19
Maryet lonicccn cece ascent coer tee semaiccets selec er sieicieiaaacsesececadecaicensesa 63 17
MAVOUITIGO! ce ss (= alos soca a = cisioc cis Seeisisiweicin clolnis nisie eee ection ces bwitcedteelcecesdcsectencee 80 19
All the above reported as having entered Behring Sea, but no returns reported.
Average in 1884 about 1,500 skins per vessel. Have carefully examined the records,
and can find no particulars of catch.
The following foreign vessels also cleared from Victoria, British{Columbia, but did
not return:
Vessels. Tons. | Crew.
WityiOLs Sane Die Cras sececeeeseeeieee nce sae cieseseeiseeacseisciciss see cee 46)
PAIOX AN OF) <is.s52o0.ccSSecceinenssciss tees pascceses acaciaseslsaccdeccecec ewes 45M jac ceca American.
ODbOR Ee toc ciccla o sive cision teins Meisin aiciula Gace 'e inte iis ee Sia/nic'a ate eeeaetiemeacenaaoe 38
VAN Glatemeaettas cc cdecac cee ne cecisie Ses eainiseicce cca seniesisiwccieee ee se siaias cicici 50 10 | German.
284 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
, CATCH OF BRITISH COLUMBIAN SEALING-VESSELS, 1885.
Catch.
Vessels. Tons. Men. :
Coast. Dee Total.
TiS ae Asenee sooner cen coscosHococoseseasecces sae 28 5 BAS eeteretete te 1, 450
TR DLC oo ate elela ae lw statatolotetatnt stat tle) late ttt twterotet == ol etate te f= al === 58 14 HAG Skeasosaen 1, 675
SVAN OULU a aw alm ttre lett tt ete tte team 18 BA PAD rammecarns 1, 726
Omar! ee an = oa tatetatrwteteloletatereto Peat ota fat atatatatafatata lalate lalate 9 GOSS eee aoe 1, 694
JOY) MO SS ecseoteno cece pecooeeonEns sp acacaccagsor 15 Uh eRB loeccesasec 1, 833
Black Diamond) ora aro iaretatater eter ee oe ole 15 1; 4360 tee 1, 426
JEU NG ES oe ee pee e eee Seago spe ORES Ose a5SONIg 55 18 1, 512 300 1, 812
(GRO acececlonno sooo Ce mosaamas obadsooobantoSeadods 16 158000 ee aeeasoae 1, 800
PORN LON seem crete oer alee eee isis le ee ate talon tal 9 AZM eee eee 1, 425
W. P. Sayward ..-.- 16 1900) |aeeeeceeee 1, 900
Mountain Chief -..-.- 6 A225" Paces a. a 1, 225
INTITEY LEO) a5 Soar = poeneos cons decgssee 5 vi 15234) 5: 544255 1, 234
WMiarry sles ee a= oles eile Fe eee 18 1, 489 500 1, 989
(Thirteen vessels.) 701 166 20, 389 800 21, 189
OTHER SKINS LANDED AT VICTORIA.
Aidle\ (German) |< << 4-6 oc fees eininie= meine emer wenn | 50 | 15 | 1, 356 400 | 1, 756
210 CATCH OF BRITISH COLUMBIAN SEALING-VESSELS, 1886.
Beata 3 Catch.
Vessels. Tons. and rew. .
Canoes. Coast. S ehring Total.
63 6 24 1, 200 2, 353 3, 553
66 6 22 750 950 1, 700
60 5 18 1, 040 960 2, 000
70 6 20 600 650 1, 250
Th 6 21 600 1, 100 1, 700
Anna becksse es strc tecte ccacemcc cco seiacs 36 9 18 541 601 1, 142
Niels Shiaehiel ss So ge copceednopeeeacsss 59 5 24 750 850 1, 600
PAN nedeAl@ aM Siner eee a seecer se ceeasee ee 69 10 22 650 750 1, 400
Favourite. ----- a Patel ojos fete csists is reterate aisete ine 80 12 28 650 2, 231 2, 881
BlacksDiamond*s- ea. seeece oe teeae see eos 81 12 24 350 378 14 128
PR GneS dent caeee eecten mismiccasticni= aiteaaistel= 63 5 18 800 1, 400 2, 200
VAT ChIC Aas amaclaw ons misceeisee cnn siee onesies 42 4 16 1 S008 |Saos-eeeae 1, 300
1 OHIG I Set ae, cea caderoonernangncooncapas 58 4 15 O90) 2a neaaee 1, 090
EhormtOntesscschoccocestecs een as 29 3 14 HOON Sees emis 500
Onward ance eeesiecs oases aces eais= 35 4 15 400) sata serene 400
Carolina*sss2so- cesses eee woes. 32 4 15 (OO Seececcace 700
(Sixteen vessels.) 920 101 ; 314 11, 921 12, 423 24, 344
Aldéle (German) 2 22-8 Se ee eceeeee 50 4 16 433 132 605
* These vessels were seized and confiscated by the United States Government.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
CATCH OF BRITISH COLUMBIAN SEALING-VESSELS, 1887.
285
Catch.
Vessels. Tons. Boats. Crew. 2
Coast. Bene Total.
Sea.
Vifod En SEMA EIRIb ee eee seeped orbccubeeoeE 59 12 24 AST Tl eesecae ae 477
Amin a) BOCK *s 22/0. wb sate sais eeaeine< cine 36 4 12 210 126 336
(CNPC eb Soma ateobeiee Sonu se: Gche DESOUS 77 6 18 410 359 769
Wolphin een se. so bape ce manera aes 60 5 18 330 288 618
JUHP TT LONG ERIN Bae epee socoder bsccroese 69 12 29 525 854 1, 379
PNG Tal* wet ceiensg os 21 astecite cen Parse once oc 64 6 24 512 1, 364 1, 876
Wottenairield: s-<- sucess masaeeence a 125 6 24 400 2, 600 3, 000
Wilenay ayy eee esedes coeecubelclasesode 43 5 18 450 550 1, 000
Rathiinder: sc. 2-2 ya epee nesses es 66 6 21 1, 000 1, 300 2, 300
IRON lO NOs emes = == ase es meee eee eee orera alle 69 6 23 800 700 1, 500
Ltipliben oll Saeeqodsensanecarsoadosnesacedo 98 6 Pe BREE Sonene 480 480
SIA VOUTILO £12 \ et Se eats wccineetlec's 80 14 28 630 1, 257 1, 887
Black#Diamond! 2-2-0. sce sees Ree ccsee 81 5 21 250 245 495
Mountain Chief -esccsee sees s eee n= ce 26 7 5 100) ||-wondee cers 700
PRETES SP ee ese ac ciao cuec eee eee eee 63 7 23 550 696 1, 246
ESO eters seas aye = = ara eee oles arate erent 58 8 20 GAD" )|raatguiisiciss 743
Marya Men es. 5a! oo% snimteeeiaes cee siseieiae 69 8 24 515 945 1, 460
(Seventeen vessels.) 1, 143 123 361 8, 502 11, 764 20, 266
dele (German) aoa sees cee siclee seelniai= 50 5 20 720 630 1, 350
* Seized by United States Government in Behring Sea.
211 CATCH OF BRITISH COLUMBIAN SEALING-VESSELS, 1888.
Catch.
Vessels. Tons. Boats. Crew. oe
Coast. Bebe Total.
pea.
Marve lllonieeersnas <a cies a selaeons sea 69 12 30 805 910 TOY ANG)
1220) tee contiossseseeneopece es seusseds. 69 5 20 1, 410 1, 937 3, 347
OWEN OIE poacorsonosaaoccccoe CaOnCeneeaaese 40 13 28 177 1, 017 1, 194
iMoumnbaine Chieti ~ 1 eecjece ccd asic. se-< = 26 6 10 400 825 1, 225
SAM OSG ea acarclere elon cye te oie a Acie eeinicinchicine 52 4 16 Ome <a see ee ees 107
Sapphinesesscece ee aan snes ncniee oat 124 9 22 Pe Z00F Ree oe cee 1, 206
ahi bec SeScuibe poser aearas Saaremaa artis 92 6 21 806 2, 069 2,875
Blacks Diamond! =! sas.2 seetaa- scam ae cee 81 9 20 231 863 1, 094
IW iGieye SRAM seas Sede secuSseanocas seed 43 9 24 BEA posesocasSe 392
DPPTa Tp heen. eee eee Ue 98 12 99) |ssansceee 2,470 2, 470
PASTING CU sNLOOLG "2b ci cepe = cisisieelne Series cit sien 113 6 2S aeemoee mee 715 715
IWF NEG eo oop Se6e a soeeceeeeoseos soos 71 5 20 125 1, 299 1, 424
INAV OUEILO = sac cite meee a alelaei senate alain stele 79 13 30 300 1, 834 2,134
PAIN Os sere ote eis see isintate eee Sees elnc eco 25 5 11 156 1, 0389 1,195
Rosie Olsen 39 4 13 100 500 600
Pathfinder 66 9 22 600 650 1, 250
TOMY 228 se jcccs cat some soem ope ccwoct aes 68 12 22 OSs Eze sence 93
0.8. Fowler. - 34 3 12 OB il aeeesaoeee 230
Minnie 46 12 26 209 525 734
Aurora 41 vat 23 BCH eeeseese 335
Araunah t 71 5 PAD SSE Ameer sarc eure merit
(Twenty-one vessels.) 1, 347 170 442 7, 676 16, 653 24, 329
Ad éley (German) -2sss-oc ote ese atec ceca 50 8 20 392 822 1, 214
* The Behring Sea catch for this and previous years includes a certain number of skins taken on
the coast of British Columbia to the north of Vancouver Island, the schooners having no opportunity
of landing the skins before entering Behring Sea.
t‘‘Araunah”’ seized by Russians near Copper Island (Parliamentary Paper C. 6253, p. 80).
286 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
CATCH OF BRITISH COLUMBIAN SEALING-VESSELS, 1889.
Catch.
Vessels. Tons. Boats. Crew. .
Spring. | Coast. Behe Total.
Pathfindere cess s son 66 6 24 384 558 48 990
dLeRCEf esooncecnoaegosaosadac 63 7 23 284 198 828 1, 310
Annie C. Moore.....---..-.--- 113 7 23 313 489 1, 318 2,120
Wi Wsticeinic mctee nse oc oeiceelasice 92 6 22 589 872 2,182 3, 643
Penclope eaceeeea cea eee eee 70 6 21 BB4 ie ciemiae meet 1, 796 2, 180
Sapphire saeestee- nas eeea cee 123 18 39 754 610 1, 626 2, 990
PAMIFOLS == sammie ee oes ce te 41 11 22 330 486) |Ssoseeeeine 816
WUANILA Aroee se Soto oan 40 13 29 103 32 29 164
Mary Ua ylOnet cael a-l eo ae i-a= 42 6 18 383 SOA I ealeesoeere 747
IMINTIG ssa ser tiee ace ecceces 46 10 21 PANY) \\saoosadsse 500 700
RWiandOrer cee eees= osesnaccese 15 6 15 a(S Beaeoaceer Secoboor ac 178
PATI Ol sa ccceaetsicmicccee ces cuien 90 6 DoH asiseaiereias 841 844 1, 685
MOA plete iam eee einictelciaeeinnicistaas 68 11 25 2808. oscee eee 74 354
Black Diamond =-e- pees esse 81 12 29 347 282 55 684
Ii BSA SpeHaascenoosdecasaciad 58 10 24 6245/2. -s cee 800 1, 424
NavOuritoe creosote ce 79 10 ZO) lsaeeeeeee 340 1, 764 2, 104
Mountain Chief ....--------.- 26 5 13 210"|-s2-5 552 eh|Seeecccee 210
Slerraeceeececesase Accesasacss 10 2 5 ot EB See ciaicnol aoooscesae 80
Wib Sayward ss ccsse eset ces 59 12 PO) emoceaaAS 557 1, 643 2, 200
Nighi ba See SSeucssasae 10 2 5 D2 cero h hl Sais See 22
IBeatriCOtnacescccemm ccc emacicn 67 7 22 BOON peers eer 700 1, 200
Maggie Mac.........-..------ 70 6 25 164 613 1, 290 2, 067
(Twenty-two vessels.) 1, 329 179 481 6, 129 6, 242 15, 497 27, 868
Adélei( German) mer cece eens sess be ie caerieinal ceceeeciae 240 ye a ee eee 1,701
212 CATCH OF BRITISH COLUMBIAN SEALING-VESSELS, 1890.
Crew. Catch.
Vessels. Tons. | Boats.
White.} Indian. | Spring.} Coast. Benning Total.
9
Gil) eee2ON [cece Nees eset
10
Ta 6 amon scr
Fall) wir HLS Allecwecsoeree
JNPala) | Asano socbaassonosocsans 91 12 4 24 220 349 1,137 1,706
Whine) AAgSeosooos=sc5beno0gd 46 9 5 16 300 764 1, 467 2, 531
RGR Ns demaonesscqoousiaone 50 5 US Al oteelereratecterers 254 817 774 1, 845
SW alte ruls WC Neate aoe imier 79 6 20beseccecee 122 562 633 od,
Ocean Bellescoseceso--ecaeeere 83 7 Oo ulkemase ence aeiseceaas 946 480 1, 426
Wiand re tierce cassette ae 25 9 4 15 CPA ESE eebadel|Saase0s aeGd 82
WONTUNO -sae alone salt serine 48 4 5 dlecemelecee. OV by lex OGecciod||aecoaseons 94
IMiiry GON asente ee aera 70 7 23 | aae eee a 115 (ET lel esacsanaoe 1, 066
Mountain Chief.........-...- 3 Ay Seeeceen 10 (10h BaRocomce boaocsoses 60
etitiag eens ase ee eee eae 28 Di eetateersaes 12 HAY) Rep oseer-| HK soncaonas 70
(Thirty vessels.) 1, 994 246 372 293 4, 658 16, 732 18, 165 39, 547
Adéle (German) .-.-...--...-.. a Backeet lene cent cl aisles 7 220i eecesesee - 811 1, 031
a T eer
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 287
Approximate Number and Catch of United States Sealing Fleet, 1886-91.
1886— :
City of San Diego...........- oe
Sylvia Hatdy..-.-...2.-..-.. landed atWictoria,..c2.- - cos. -osiseecee 2, 648
Wander bilt se secccescee: =
About ten others, with total catch of, say....-.------22 2-2-2. 2222s eee 8, 500
Total for 1886 (thirteen vessels) ........0..02220 2-00 eeeeee ce eeeeee eee 11, 000
1887— *
Vandorbilt.c-eosscocccca, f Landed at Vietoria. eee eeceee 2,481
About thirty others, with total catch of, say -...---..----.------...---. 13, 500
otal for 1887 (thirty-two) vessels))/--2- c+ sc-sc-- 2-26 Jssei2es- sn ceee ee 16, 000
1888—
About eight vessels, catch unknown.
"Walter L. Rich........-.--..-+
San’ Diego: .: 6 Vsck wesc ose
Wenture: = =<. 52-so-s-2ec55 sce
JANIE) INURE ees csebee cponéocee .
Henry Dennis) -!2... 2252.22 WandedlawVictoriteccs. cesses taceoe cee 5, 741
W@ttie << ac cstsaecigcect ce esias
Molly Adiams\<ces sos. 20s ser-
Bessievhiuttersecers-teres = =e
Serle MO WAS ses clenico cease asi
About twenty-four other vessels, with total catch of, say .--.---....---. 7, 600
Total for 1889 (thirty-three vessels) ....-...-----------eeeeeee eee cee 13, 300
1890—
Mattie Dyer...-....--:- sapace
San DievOse ot ccj-csa ere occ e =
GeorvAn WRG a6 <taies ses cece handed. at Victoria: ..-.-.-.---.-..----- 3, 116
Henry, Dennis) .s--- 2-2. «-5---
GI) Soc cook one ceanneoneeoe
About seven others, with total catch of, say.-.-..-.-.---------.-------- 8, 000
‘otal for 1890) (iwelve vessels) ssa5.2.c8s 2 occ cosines nice scmnlsndsaeesiess ccs 11, 000
213 APPENDIX (G).
MISCELLANEOUS TABLES,
1, Average Prices realized for Alaska Salted Fur-Seal Skins at Public Auction in
London.
2. Statement of Fur-Seal Skins obtained in trade from Indians by the Hudson Bay
Company on the coast of British Columbia between Port Simpson and the north-
ern end of Vancouver Island, 1852 to 1890.
. Skins taken for Shipment from Commander Islands, 1862 to 1891.
. Shipment of Fur-Seal Skins from Lobos Islands, communicated by Mr. Alfred
Lafone, M. P.
. Particulars of Fur-Seal Skins in London Market, from Messrs. C. M. Lampson
and Co,
mo
or
288
1.—Average Prices realized for Alaska Salted Fur-Seal Skins at Public Auction in Lon
Surnished by the Hudson Bay Company.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS,
don,
|
Year. Skins. Price. | Year. Skins. Price.
8. vd: | Ae as
Lf ee | SoS eA CORO CSOD eS cat 104, 899 42 G2-||| PBB soe eccccemc- ns aoe ee eee 100,100 | 53 7
ise ee A eat ety Ea YEO mer > ae GI [Sas cera ae Bee Pe Fe 75, 914 82 9
TSTSNEE ene ae ened LOST OL, N59 Ms Raden ee eee) ene eee 99, 994 51 9
NRG eae oat ce eee asec ste 99, 150 D2 g6 li W8bsoees sec eee asc eles 99, 874 Pie ty /
Steyn se Ne aS fon eR 9916345! 750) 29 |eeGhe ces cose aeee See 99, 947 69 3
TCS See AEs eee raecrera4 90, 276 Gy er al et oy en See See eesti tr 99, 949 56 OO
WS77 2s. toe. tron es Fe Soe-% 5 75, 410 3 OF LOB SSeS oo =. man ae eescomee 100, 037 Fi fee bl |
SSP Ae ere meen ae San ac iapare 99, 911 69 2 1889eS 2: see aeaee. toe ee 100, 031 | 66 11
WTO eee aS Sate ise tee 100, 036 SEM Gh ELBOOE.. eee SET. see eee 20, 994 146 «6
WBSOses See asec ste eee saems 100, 161 Ol (y'bo || MS0Ie ese kos scpsemee ccc eseene 13,494; 125 4
PASI POMS eo season cee cuntienicsemere 99, 921 79 #9
Note.—Previous to 1871 fur-seal skins were sold privately, and it is impossible to obtain correct
average prices.
2.—Statement of Fur-Seal Skins obtained in Trade from Indians by the Hudson Bay Com-
pany on the Coast of British Columbia bet
Vancouver Island, 1852-90.
veen Port Simpson and the Northern End of
Number of | Number of
Year. Skins Year. Skins
obtained. obtained.
AG eae ccd ee oe eset oe Bee eee 5) | ASTAs to cee sack esa sn LET
SDS stan. SATE nee es dat ete mete 1ST) LS RS ere Bae RE oc SEIS 1, 033
LG5 Aes Soe use as at ovat hies seme me 9.|| M876. -o-ccs-> cecteemoss tee ee eeeeeee 1, 515
R55 GaN a osc S sO Oe eereee ee ace 39) || MISITe.2 goa oneaahsodet So. eee eee 1, 210
TS O meerasyee te tete ea ere lena es nlateie @laveleiete siolemiatae GSU MUSTB 2 a ale.coisiersajsicre Ulva ono eet eee 1, 544
DOD Tore ek ee eet eae ence RE SEE Pel [halls sees Oe neRE Ga e aes ene tes Sc 1, 257
i RRR Esa CEA EE ng 99) 1RR0 2 Ra eee oe ee 1, 418
SHO aE sec ace oceans cise ee etitinn ote UST || WSL Shes. 3 setae ot acitce Se ote 1, 882
NS GO ee eee eee ioe ieee meister 625882220 Jou. s\snseeecncccese= ee -eeeceee 3, 551
Tele aH Sancseeosco home Sopdcdececorine ne CALS MAC bos Se eae ae eae Sessa sos 557
iA oe Se rinersenS CoCe SouRE sone Janae OIG LOSE de ess ace ate as tosis tee eee 471
USGS Ses cee ewes ese beceee cee eee S69) W885. eo eee ee eee 95
SG 4S Boe oo ac Simeone wisreio oes Se en craeereat BPA WARS OSE SeopnaemarconncsdonD oosemasssis = 1, 545
SOS ime tears seeeeerre note cine atelela(atel= 7A SA Ute oma ae Spam os Som ae een a pacacrosreae 102
NSO Ghee elem is om eneie oe =a lnfoteis eet ilciemt== BSL all U888s accuse ass cst ane cs eee Scemeaeee 646
LS Gi ae = rene & mite oie ictaiee aim = nein tatoo iste 068')||: 1889). S222 5-.ceteh). sa scmee e+ seeee 289
L868ck HK es eee cere Seek ceed rcew rere 367, |}!1890). 22. 286556 PLC eRe) Aa “ead be 228
SOO Een eee ete ean ne atomic > Smlistereric 430 —.
TEGO S Sere aa ea es SORTS Se SS. es 4, 686 Total number obtained in 39
Ubyfll. Soo soc cSooensSscScusSsaecososcacmaS 8, 911 WGENWS) = Sane eSoeasooceesecosnsc 39, 624
IEP. a sos sac aossosa a soqeed sceaocDosaes 1, 336 Average number obtained each
TYR 55 a SOS SAAS aso asees 9SSSeoS45sne 1, 229 Wear seen. eee eee an eee 1,117
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 289
214 3.—Skins taken for Shipment from Commander Islands, 1862-91,
}
Notes. Year. Number. Notes.
4, 000
4,500
: 5, 000
Only grey pups killed.............- 4,000
4, 000
4, 000
12, 000
21, 000
Alaska Commercial Company’s first a
term began. IOs see Acadsee 27, 500
Elliott makes catch 3,614, but this | 1871........ aan 3, 412
doubtless a mistake.
CY PASpaaacosecs 29, 318
18730 Eses: 30, 396 | | Including Robben Island.
NSA weaicicinclelata 31, 272
Stopped killing pups for food ........ ——
Ne enSeocoeneS 36, 274
TS Gm anette = ales 26, 960
TSTie Meee eee 21, 532
Ie Ytesaaceoopeos 31, 340
NST Oememecrtacrets 42,752
UG scnoeenohoe 48, 504
Ne ecsenccoas 43, 522
sgoerecees en-.| 44, 620 ~
LE Soon oa seaicteiae 28, 696
1 eye eoScodac 52, 652
W885 4s Soo cgcc er 41, 737
Approximate estimate .....ee-e.-06--| 1886........--- 44, 500
TSB ieee se 46,754 || Without Robben Island, from
Approximate estimate ........... ocd | REE CoHosencar 45, 000 which no skins were taken.
Ieee eogencocoad 55, 493
18903 23225 oc 55, 727 | Including 1,453 taken on Robben
End of Alaska Commercial Com- —————-———_-—————| _ Island.
pany’s lease. 1 Ee eee 27, 467 Tnelnding 500 taken on Robben Is-
—————— and.
Total ...| +872, 408
*1865 to 1891 from official figures obtained by us on Commander Isiands.
_ +The skins obtained by raiders upon Robben Island and on the Commander Islands are not included
in the figures above given, which merely represent the annual catch as officially recorded.
Notes on the Killing of Fur-Seals on the Commander Islands.
The facts available for the earlier years after the discovery of these islands are
very incomplete, but the following notes may be cited:
In 1751-53, Jugot, among skins brought from Behring Island, had 2,212 fur-seal
skins, and in 1752 and 1753 the crew of a vessel belonging to Trapeznikoff, an
Irkutsk merchant, took 2,500 fur-seal skins on the same island. (‘‘Neue Nachrich-
ten von denen Neuentdecken Insuln,” quoted by Nordenskiéld, in ‘‘ Voyage of the
Vega,” vol. ii, p. 270.)
Returns of cargoes of skins from the Commander Islands, quoted by Bancroft
(Bancroft’s Works, vol. xxxiii, pp. 111-191), show that between 1752 and 1786 (the
last year not included) at least 93,708 skins were shipped. Most of these were
obtained from the Commander Islands, upon which alone the actual killing doubtless
exceeded this figure, probably very considerably. It was not till 1886 that the first
skins were taken on the Pribyloff Islands.
Elliott states that he believes there was an interregnum between 1760 and 1786,
during which the fur-seals were driven from the Commander Islands, and no skins
were taken (Census Report, p. 109). This is, however, manifestly an error, in view
of the statements of individual cargoes upon which the above total amount is based,
and from which it would appear that the Commander Islands never ceased to pro-
duce a certain number of skins. Elliott further states that he does not know when
the seals returned, but is ‘‘inclined to believe” that they did not reappear in any
considerable number till 1837 or 1838. In 1867 the Russians did not think that more
than 20,000 skins could be secured on the Commander Islands annually. Since 1867
(to 1880) the capacity of the Commander Islands gradually increased from about 15,000
to 50,000 skins per annum, doubtless because of the careful management of the
industry on these islands. (Census Report, p. 109.)
B Ss, PT vVI—19
290
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
215 4.—Shipment of Fur-Seal Skins from Lobos Islands, communicated by Mr. Alfred
Lafone, M. P.
ie a |8. 5
= 2 .
2 Bln = Ba me a |oe
ol = mM
Year. ; £ iz pA oe Ay a5; ae ag | 28) | Dotal
Be | aie |e bea |S | 22 cacikea
E a a 4 A a | a ee
NESTemnasnae onae 256 | 163 154 558 | 1,195] 5,660 | 6,488 |....-- 344 21 14, 849
Ie ismcrioesonsod 301 } 255 654))" 1489) 660)" 77088 11 5, 915 en 333 23 17,718
UG ac aacboscase 155 | 134 266 741 | 1,651} 5,955 | 3,618 93 4883 | 106 13, 205
UG ees eso5c4 175} 175 403 968 | 1,084] 5,901 | 4,898 |.-.... 502 95 14, 244
EM aocebos0na4 224 115 867 694 | 1,093 | 6,333] 3,400 |...... 10 40 12,77
Totals - 1,101 | 842 | 2,344] 4,450] 6,683 | 30,937 | 24,319 93 | 1,677] 285 72, 789
Total Catch of Salted Lobos Island Seal Skins, 1876-91, communicated by Mr. Alfred
Lafone, M. P.
Year. Skins.
TROES SF ened Pee. Seth eo a eee 14, 580
S80 emis ceetet eisia se micisisisin sinie See ieieete sence 10, 862
UCL ee oe Se SCR SAE CRS Seton: Coes 14, 986
TBS 722 ee a ee ea eco ee ore ee ee 14, 849
WSS8= 2. systiscssiseniele de ae ee sec eeseee ae 17, 718
WB89" | sete ode wciscemeissicjciow ee wcmiactee emer 13, 205
1890: 2. suuisiigas cdcacsinecnews ccnscee eee Se 14, 241
W891 ons o masiceismctln'= Se ceniacneedae cetaee a2, 776
5.—Particulars of Fur-Seal Skins in London Market, from Messrs. C. M. Lampson and Co.
here.
We are, &c.
64, QUEEN STREET, London, May 23, 1892.
DEAR Sir: We have the pleasure to inclose herewith particulars of fur-seal skins
sold in London, for which you asked us when we had the pleasure of seeing you
(Signed)
C. M. LAMPSON AND Co.
Sir GEORGE BADEN-POWELL, K.C.M.G., M.P., &c.,
8, St. George's Place.
(A.)—Salted Lobos Island Fur-Seal Skins sold in London.
Year.
Year. Skins
ASS4: «oo ciscae no smaece ta eaeaes comalscmteste 16, 258
PORE Leb Ale Aeos Lys A hd ee RE 10, 953
NSS6S23. FSS. eee ae ee eee 13, 667
WSS Temia®. Gt olseclatl. nels ceca ice eee 11, 068
NBRBe usa ttince cee st mele dcae ace aoueeenes 20, 747
OBOE ecco ainicicja slow a oleleisieine eeleermeatocie stants 8, 755
TSSORS £826 SA ee A ee 18, 541
TOOL Sh SE. tk eto eta seein eeasianee 15, 834
18920 (tGordaiie),ass2sj--lnocl-- eee oe Safuncme => 4, 800
Total =~ << Sie pieeteaisie saiceien Seeccoas|), soe trent
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. Zot
216 (B.)—Sales of Cape Horn Salted Fur-Seal Skins.
Year. Skins. Year. Skins.
ISTO xeeowcs vee sosesse cue soceotedes sues 2 GUSCGS (el SSO sree ccc csee eects scene Sseee 909
ART ee ee one. Sens oe As CGS {TTT aoa hep ae eA i ea 2, 762
lisllislsoeoporiteddddddecddddddsédoadsdsddsdad S22 [Nl Wt OS SESSA RS SSR ASSESS Sa 5 SOAS 8 4, 403
BGOM: clo o2azssuaklecsssueeneceeeeeee- TQFIBO! | |PTBSOE ME eee ecu cee teen e eee oee 3, 021
Tht casera: CoSE eM EREEE EE eaten ooaRULeneeE ATSB TSBs cat pee tee cette cee eee ne 2, 450
ASBIO.. 22 oJikssseeasstekiserseseeeasene oo TSVUG45||/ TROBE She ene ce chk eee nee eewoeecee 3, 114
Tlic! SS oc SebonUEODDoUpaB et SeHoDSecoces TS LL) L892) (tod abe) ei. =~ 22 2a caer alm 3, 966
TE i oeec conga SSeeoeBOSBOE RDS Bin odcotee 4, 655 —_—
NG Baan mace sins since scerececcwnecensee ens 6, 743 TLotalyacccccie SaccGecsec Gunadoasue 112, 208
PSE oer e een oct San ceembeeneeeee secmmes 3, 404
(C 1.)—Salted North-west Coast Fur-Seal Skins sold in London prior to Pelagic Sealing
in Behring Sea.
Year Skins Year. Skins
MSiioeee ce Ae DROSS HSOB SEO RE mosCecanuoUccorS MNOZSR i esOescosssstenece eee teeta eiecc cee ne cet 8, 939
Li ing SRE Ce OS OPO OOr GOT ORe Se SSPEroUcoocd Accneee Bec USM occedosceeoooceanod cdbnoocooOcCOOns 9, 997
URC. pee nb Soa dae Hees aad socsebedasosadsed Ce TE eA cen UACCB EO BOS Goa OC ee OOOOCESARHOS ToT
DS Oeeasan as cave cee soa cssces Seen esse WIGSESISISS3 oo ance csmccccs as cameesaeccecccecsac 2,319
TTR eae dss 3 ee AS, BC Woah INADA SANS BPMN LG BI aw Ee 2 9, 242
TOY 36 COLOR EOD EOD OR SUOORO OIC OU CCOOE COC rCoCeepsee
Was csceree oalaraic ce isetaie mieie ate ateiciarsie sists terete 264 Potal scccccacsoccscsace canes nocd 64, 366
IRGC 0 beetreopterset holetsqa totals eieieiciete mis wie ote cisjera 12, 212
(C 2.)—Salted North-west Coast Fur-Seal Skins dressed and dyed in London (but not sold
* there) taken prior to Pelagic Sealing in Behring Sea.
Year. Skins. Year. Skins.
699 4, 562
40 5, 890
122 11, 159
578 6, 385
1, 062 10, 115
772
2, 434 46, 215
2, 397
(C 3.)—Dry North-west Coast Fur-Seal Skins sold in London prior to Pelagic Sealing in
Behring Sea.
Year. Skins. Year. Skins
Saison e wate ss aaa ceiile cates Py Well) belies oo cooesscoocoEiedbcossacucsHHdsed 912
Beet lalla sietaiaciataintclciseis cere mieraleine = staicleiais i Copal |) Ake aoredederiGonnesessoocr cecdoscpeor 918
Sea eaten ate es enter at tecle ote at reat esta astm tet GEFEN SSO ete dicen ale ctalale clstacieicislccicimiolae miainialciais|| siuisevsminsites
we eee ae neraeee Re IN) Tee oe oo onEpSeo SUED EOL OD ROSeCOOnOODaOE
aU eiey cemee ne ose IVE YU || TIDE Sap oe ee
LIAR ERLE 12 5 Rone etsgseeeeeee
nn PAOD OOOOUCBEDOODODELOEbooUBSEcEocHS Daan Plooteaacasceanecses a cnicinemoe cence sect
2 SSAC OCIAD DS OOOUMODO DCE AEE Cem OOROCLeE 1, 351
MaVats ala|nia sfascie\sijeieelciawieneiaciemascteie ects c 993
oe SASS EAE oe op tee Sloe 1,173
Of the skins sold in 1871 and 1872, a very large proportion were the accumulation of the Russian-
American Company, and sold by them after the “purchase of Alaska by the United States.
RECAPITULATION.
Salted fur-seal skins’sold: in: London, 1872-84. ....-.-..-2.-.c-ceeescee-se--- 64, 366
us dressed and dyed i inion don PS (2-84 eeeace ccc <is nce os 46, 215
mee fur-seal skins sold in London, 1868-84........-.-. Seon ce cicec es S6eode) 225 UY
Grand total...... Naeereslaeecain Gacsad se see sone bee ot ccs eeee os sceces ses 105348
292 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
217 (C4.)—Dry North-west Coast Fur-Seal Skins sold in London after commencement
of Pelagic Sealing in Behring Sea.
Salted North-west Coast Fur-Seal Skins dressed and dyed in London (but not sold there)
taken after commencement of Pelagic Sealing in Behring Sea.
Year. Skins. Year. Skins.
TS85 soe sc corse aSopoecésbacgpSodoRso06 16; G67)||\| I888c~. ssc cee~ ~~ cc eacsecessanee ceclceence 1, 980
Be) ee ra, es ee are ae a Ub SO ey fel belt oe ee SES SSSR BSBOSSOSeSOS5 5050050066 2,017
NSSi ie oowecseecneceais opooqnonesadsc asanace 3, 589 ————
LOtal 32 cjos-<ccesels occ se cee encase 39, 290
In addition to the above it is estimated that from 25,000 to 30,000 skins have been dressed and dyed
in the United States.
(C 5.)—Salted North-west Coast Fur-Seal Skins sold in London after commencement of
Pelagic Sealing in Behring Sea.
Year. Skins. Year Skins
U7 ae Rie AEE RS B; O78 || 18005 wlon 22. caacicacetaesAeeaee tomer 38, 315
TIBET. ao aco edo cn cdo ON SSA HOD NOD SDOOUOSRE GRE) Weel e aes Goose os onanoossessansioocens 54, 180
LC SaaS ee Ea eRe Deep Pra 36,907 || 1892 (to date) of catch of 1891.......... 28, 298
ASRS AAS eabie) 1k a. soot Sec seesk ane cutee 36, 818
TSS See see Smee Cosas sistisinecicie's aes 39, 563 Lotalccotcectesee ss cence es ereeee 254, 068
RECAPITULATION.
Dryskins| sold melon don a S85 —Ole eee eee ee = ae aie neta area eet 8, 604
Salted skins dressed and dyed i in London, but not sold there, 1885-89. ...... 39, 290
United States, estimated, 1885-89-.-...---- 30, 000
Salted ein sold in mere TS85=92 Se Sos See SEs es aac Sacer 254, 068
Grand totale eens cscsrsseser JA GAAT QUO BOSS CODOSHSUES Gone BOSC eccee- dol, 962
(D.)—Sales of Alaska Salted Fur-Seal Skins.
Year. Skins. Year. Skins.
RSW cre wie iets aie = se wicre nie aistw wera wielate Onie ein iatan TORS | ee a ea SRS see ccSesauaecs ssnsosonosq08 75,914
96, 283 || 99, 994
103, 724 99, 874
99, 150 99, 947
99, 634 99, 949
90, 276 100, 037
75, 410 100, 031
99, 911 20, 994
100, 036 17, 652
100, 161 —
99, 921 1, 883, 897
100, 100
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 293
218 (E.)—Sales of Copper Island Salted Fur-Seal Skins.
Year Skins. Year Skins
UST KPa aeeteEpeodockhoudocadeo sopaccedeoed Pare JASE |) Tee ae See ceegonooooconoose ncoooaoSEnHe 26, 675
STA Seen lcestiase see scosere cer ecisenas ace SRB YE) | Se a ooeipooonooCetbSoocaqnesseaAnrSoaas 48, 929
SO eeatalat sleteimeteielee' aie staiaireels slotereinitetet=s[alleiale GEE CNG) II dete sca saonmnooocacedcooncs HosoosocsaScs 41, 750
USO caepacnonoosseEeS DODU LOS CHCaCOmnnOUr Bo MLOSE | SB emistemeiciociasiae cocistenmicemion=c clasrtereicr 54, 584
TS Wititeseee se soSceecooSTaeoSSeSceorchndes 2A BOG USE sec eopocadacsoScode see EboEerakeoseSe 46, 296
TST Soee eee CUE Ne oct ae eee Set DESC || GUST SLM Sar Pani eae sR ne Ges Rare 47, 411
TUS aa ee ee ees are Soe a DBNOTON||W1 BOOM man seeeek cace omen se ses toon caress 52, 765
fst) is eco DOS QC OR GODS DOs BOCONCOSCRIOCORO BOWOOO MESO Ieee wtetatomctana einialniniates olarsia ome ereieiec seal 59, 724
GS leer emia cise ste ee nie semienisesaiseteinicte EON A0GU | SO asemnine ne cemeiaceniaaice =siscicinate <sleosisials 30, 680
IEPs oe ApeipeSdeidbasuscacacuscossanHagdoe 39, 311 —
Lee a Son OOS EO SHON ESOS ore ae AOSSOSCOdbaS 36, 480 MOtalenicsicseecerinnie sce ssatsccieaa 761, 219
219 APPENDIX (H).
AFFIDAVITS RELATING TO PELAGIC SEALING.
Mr. Milne to Mr. Tupper.
CusToMS, CANADA, Victoria, B. C., January 22, 1892.
Sir: I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of the
7th instant relative to a joint letter from Sir George Baden-Powell and Dr. George M.
Dawson, Behring Sea Commissioners.
_ I beg to state that I have endeavoured to supply the information, and herewith
transmit the first lot of affidavits of some of the most reliable of our sealing men,
and | am continuing to take all I can obtain, which will be forwarded from day to day.
I trust the information is what is wanted, as I have endeavoured to frame the ques-
tions so that the answers would show reasons for theiz intelligent answers on the
three questions:
1. The proportion of seals lost as compared with hit.
2. The proportion of females tomales killed in the different months.
3. The abstention of Canadians from all raiding, &c.
Ihave, &c.
(Signed) A. R. MILne, Collector.
Depositions taken before A. R. Milne, Collector of Customs, Port of Victoria, B. C.
Cereno Jones Kelley, master of the Canadian schooner “‘C. H. Tupper,” of Shel-
bourne, Nova Scotia, having been duly sworn—
1. Mr. Milne. How many years have you been engaged in sealing, Captain Kel-
ley ?—A. I have been sealing for two years as master of the “C. H. Tupper.”
2. Q. Have your voyages been reasonably fortunate, in comparison with those of
other vessels?—A. About an average.
3. Q. Have you gone south of Cape Flattery in hunt for seals?—A. Yes, Sir; and
have followed the seals all along the coasts of British Columbia to Behring Sea.
4. Q. During last year, to your observation, were the seals as plentiful from the
coast of Shumagin Islands as they were the previous year?—A. I think there was
no material difference.
5. Q. Did the seals last year appear to be frightened or more timorous than in pre-
vious years on account of the number of vessels?—A. I observed no material differ-
ence.
6. Q. In shooting seals, what is your experience?—A. My experience is that unless
a seal is mortally wounded—hit in a vital spot—it is practically uninjured, and
appears to be as full of vitality as before it was shot. The shot-wounds will rapidly
close up, if not made in a vital part, and the seal will swim away as though nothing
had happened. The flow of blood stops very quickly, and the seal moves off at a very
rapid rate I picked shot from the bodies of seals, previously wounded in other than
a vital part, and the animal in every other way appeared to be in a healthy condition.
7. Q. So you believe that a seal when shot, if not mortally wounded, does not
sink or seek a place—a rookery, or some place to die?—A. A wounded seal will not
alter its course in the slightest. It will go along the same as before, its wounds heal-
ing rapidly, very rapidly, too. It isastonishing how quickly such wounds will heal.
I once shot a seal which had been speared by Indians, and the spear had made an
294 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
apparently mortal wound. There was a cut about 2} by 3 inches a little above the
side behind the flipper. This wound appeared to have been made about three days
previously, and in that time it had healed half-an-inch all round.
8. Q. Are there more seals shot sleeping than in motion?—A. I should say that the
larger proportion of seals are shot whilst sleeping, that is, as far as my own expe-
rience goes.
9. Q. What do you consider the vital part of a seal? Where do the hunters aim
for generally—the head or the heart?—A. It depends largely upon the position of the
seal. The vital parts are in the head, in the vicinity of the heart, and, if a seal is
shot so as to bleed internally, the hunters are sure of securing it. The head is the
usual mark.
10. Q. What is usually a safe shooting distance?—A. It depends largely upon the
circumstances of the case. Somewhere between 10 and 30 yards would be about the
distance. Ishould say that it is the average with sleeping or travelling seals. The
sleeping seal is often approached to within even less than 10 yards, but the average
is from 10 to 20 yards for sleeping seal, and from 10 to 30 yards for travellers.
11. Q. The seal is very sensitive, is it not?—A. Yes; we have to approach them
from the leeward always. ‘Their sense of smell is very acute.
12. Q. Do the seals generally travel far when wounded?—A. That will depend
upon where it is wounded. If it is vitally wounded in the head, it will hardly move
from its position, for it is likely to die right there, but it will not sink. ‘This is
from my own observation. There is only one way that a seal will sink after being
shot, that is, when it is shot in such a manner as to-be thrown backwards, sinking
tail first, thus allowing the air to escape out of its mouth. I might say, further, that
I have never seen a seal sink which was shot while sleeping.
13. Q. Will you state the proportion of seals lost as compared with those hit in
sealing ?—A. My own personal experience during the past two years is that
220 my loss by seals sinking would not average 3 per cent. During the last year
(1891) I actually lost only two seals out of seventy-seven—that is, I shot sev-
enty-nine, and secured seventy-seven.
14. Q. In hunting seals, what is the direction in which they usually travel?—A.
In the spring months they are leisurely travelling towards the north, when they
change their position.
15. Q. In hunting seals, have you ever met with pups in the water?—A. Not gen-
erally; but during the season of 1890, while off Middleton Island, the hunters reported
seeing two seal pups, probably a week old, but they appeared to be only just born.
16. Q. What is your opinion of the proportion of males to females killed during
the hunting season? Are there any months in the year when there are more
females than males killed?—A. It depends upon circumstances. My experience is
that groups of bachelor bulls will travel together, and sometimes groups of females,
including barren cows, willtravel together, and again groups of yearling pups appar-
ently travel together. That is my experience, and the experience of a number of
others. The catch of any schooner coming into contact with groups of bulls, or of
females, would be no criterion of the catch of other schooners as regards the number
of females. In the year 1890, while in Behring Sea, one day we took seventy-five
seals, and the next day we took eighty, and in the whole of that number I observed
only one female, and the hunters particularly informed me that they did not see any
female seals at all; that they were all vigorous young bulls.
17. Q. Would anything lead you to think, Captain Kelley, that there is a likelihood
of more females than males being killed between here and Shumagin Islands? That
is, from January to June?—A. I can safely say that my personal experience has been
on the side of the males, largely—both on the coast and in the Behring Sea the num-
ber of seals caught is made up largely of males.
18. Q. Are there any months of the year during which there are more females
caught than males?—A. I should say that, as far as my own observation has gone,
there is no difference; but in every month, during my voyages, I have had more males
than females.
19. Q. Do you know of any Canadian vessels who have raided the seal islands
during any year in which you have been engaged in the sealing industry ?—A. [have
every reason to believe that none of the Canadian fleet have ever raided, or attempted
to raid, or made any preparations to raid, any seal islands in the Behring Sea. If
any such a thing had. happened, I should most certainly have heard of it, and I
believe it to be true that the American schooners ‘‘George R. White” and “ Daniel
Webster” did raid these islands, as also the ‘‘ Mollie Adams.” That they did raid
the seal islands is a fact well known to all Canadian sealers. I also heard that the
German schooner ‘‘ Adéle” raided the Pribyloff Islands, which action met with the
strong disapprobation of every Canadian sealer. :
; (Signed) C. J. KELLEY.
Sworn to at Victoria, British Columbia, this 22nd day of January, 1892.
. (Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 295
Before A. R. Milne, Collector of Customs, Victoria, B. C., January 23, 1892.
Captain William Petit, present master and part owner of the steamer ‘‘ Mischief,”
having been sworn:
1. Q. (Mr. Milne.) —Captain Petit, how many years have you been engaged in seal-
ing?—A. Six years, Sir.
2. Q. Continuously.—A. Yes, Sir.
3. Q@. What vessels did you command ?—A. In 1886 I commanded the ““W. P. Say-
ward,” in 1887 the steamer ‘‘ Grace,” in 1888 the schooner ‘‘Sapphire,” and in 1889,
1890, and 1891 the ‘‘Mary Taylor.”
4. Q. Have your catches during these six years been reasonably successful in com-
parison with other vessels?—A. About an average.
5. Q. You have sealed south of Cape Flattery, have you not, and followed the seals
along the coast of British Columbia and into Behring Sea?—A. Yes.
5*. Q. During last year, to your observation, were the seals apparently as plenti-
ful from the coast to Shumagin Islands as they were in previous years?—A. I found
them more plentiful last year than I have any year since 1886, that is, Cape Flattery
north.
6. Q. How did you find them in Behring Sea?—A. I found them there in Behring
Sea as plentiful as in former years.
7. Q. Are the seals now more frightened or more timorous than they have been on
account of more vessels, or from any other cause?—A. I have seen no material dif-
ference.
8. Q. In shooting seals, what is your experience?—A. My experience is that unless
a seal is mortally wounded—hit in the head or in the region of the heart—the shot
does not appear to injure it. !
9. Q. Do you believe that a seal, when shot, and not mortally wounded, does not
sink, or seeks some place to die—a rookery, or some such place?—A. No, Sir; a
wounded seal will not alter its course in the slightest. It will move along as before,
its wound healing rapidly.
10. Q. What do you consider the vital part of a seal? Where do the hunters gen-
erally aim for?—A. For the head or the heart; it depends upon the position of the
seal, but usually the head.
11. Q. What is the distance at which you shoot seals?—A. It depends upon cir-
cumstances.
12. Q. Are more seals shot while sleeping than in motion?—A. There are more shot
sleeping, Sir. Itis my opinion that the larger proportion of seals are shot while
sleeping. The seals taken by the Indians are nearly all killed while sleeping.
13. Q. What is the shooting distance?—A. It depends upon circumstances; 10 to 20
yards for sleepers, and a little more, 10 to 30 yards, for travellers.
221 14. Q. You have seen the hunters and Indians approach even nearer than 10
yards, have you?—A. Yes, I have seen them approach to within less than 10
feet.
15. Q. When seals are vitally wounded, say in the head, will they move far from
the position in which they are shot.—A. No, Sir.
16. Q. They are likely to die right there, are they?—A. Yes, Sir.
17. Q. And they will not sink?—A. With few exceptions, such as when a seal is
shot and thrown backwards, thus allowing the air to escape out of its mouth.
18. Q. Will you state your opinion, Captain Petit, of the proportion of seal lost
by sinking after being shot?—A. My personal experience during last season with
white hunters would not exceed 5 per cent., and with Indians in former years I
doubt if it amounts to even 1 per cent. The reason of this percentage in favour of
Indians is because they were caught with a spear, and consequently could not get
away.
19. Q. Have you ever seen a seal shot while sleeping sink.—A. I have never known
one to sink.
20. Q. Then you are clearly of the opinion that seals will not sink for some time
unless thrown backwards?—A. Iam. When they do sink, even to 10 or 15 feet, they
can be reached with the gaff.
21. Q. When the hunters return to the vessel at night, do they usually discuss
their day’s proceedings, and particularly mention the loss of seals, when such loss
occurs?—A. Yes.
22. Q. Then, Captain Petit, you conscientiously adhere to the statement that the
loss by sinking of seals hit will not exceed 5 per cent.?—A. I certainly do; but there
are seals hit and not mortally wounded, and these escape, but they are not “lost,” as
they are quite as vigorous as before, because their wounds heal very rapidly. I have
often found shot in the skin.
23. Q. What is your opinion of the proportion of females to males killed during
the last hunting season?—A. Last year, out of my catch of 765, I had only 18 females
carrying young—not quite 2} per cent. Of course, as in other seasons’ catches,
296 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
we had anumber of barren cows—about the usual run, 10 per cent., and 124 per
cent. of grey pups. These grey pups are always bulls, and one year old.
24. Q. Your catch, then, would be about 75 per cent. of males last season?—A. Yes,
Sir; including the yearlings it was more than 75 per cent.
25. Q. Yousay grey pups are always males; will you explain this?—A. The Indians
called my attention to this fact years ago, but the reason is not quite known, still it
is a fact. I have observed very closely, and have never yet seen a female grey pup
one year old. I try to account tor this by the supposition that the yearling grey
male pups are driven early out of Behring Sea by the old bulls.
26. Q. Last year, did you hear any remarks about the number or proportion of the
males to females caught from any one or any source?—A. Yes, Sir; 1 heard that a
much larger percentage of males were caught last year than in any former year.
27. Q. I would ask you, Captain Petit, if in any former years there was a similar
preponderance of males—do you remember of any such fact?—A. Yes,I do. In 1886,
when off Barclay Sound, in one day we had taken 104 seals, of which 3 only were
females. In the following year, 1887, when off Portlock Bank, we took 79 in one day,
and only 2 females were found in that number.
28. Q. How do seal cows travel? Singly or in pairs?—A. They travel singly or in
pairs.
29. Q. How do bulls travel?—A. They travel in bands, as do also the bull pups.
They travel singly too.
30. Q. Are female seals carrying young very timid?—-A. Yes, Sir; they are. They
sink their bodies so that nothing but their noses and eyes are out of water, and are
therefore smaller marks for the hunters.
31. Q. Barren cows travel with bulls, do they?—A. Yes, Sir; barren cows usualiy
travel with the bulls.
32. Q. Are there any months in the year during which there are more females than
males killed? Any particular time that you have observed?—A. No, Sir.
33. Q. Is it your candid opinion that there are more barren cows killed than seal-
bearing cows?—A. Yes, Sir; I think there are more.
34. Q. Do these barren cows, from the knowledge you have of seals—do you think
that they ever become bearing ?—A. I think they do.
35. Q. That they will have periods of bearing?—A. I don’t think that a seal will
bear before she is 4 years old.
36. Q. How long does a seal carry her young?—A. It is understood to be eleven
months.
37. Q. Were there any circumstances occurred to you upon your last voyage which
would indicate a marked decrease in the number of seals?—A. None whatever, Sir.
On the contrary, Ishould say there were more. There seemed to be more last year,
at least we saw more that year than for several years previously.
38. Q. In your observation as to the habits of the seals, they appear to be like the
salmon—that they return from no known cause in larger numbers?—A. Well, I don’t
know, Sir; I think that they have their annual migrations; but there is question
whether they follow the same track every year. You will find them on some grounds
one year, and in other years on other grounds.
39. Q. Do you think that the number of female seals killed in the hunt is mate-
rially injuring the reproduction of seals?—A. No, Sir.
40. Q. Can you give a reason for that?—A. From the small percentage of females
killed, I don’t think it would injure reproduction in any way.
41. Q. Were youin Behring Sea last year, and were you ordered out?—A. And was
ordered out by the United States ship ‘‘Corwin.”
222 42, Q. Before being ordered out, what was your usual fishing distance from
land?—A. 60 to 100 miles.
43. Q. You found seals all along that distance from land?—A. Yes, in large
numbers.
44, Q. You had the prospect of a fair catch?—A. Yes, Sir; I had the prospects of
a very fair catch up to the time I was warned.
45. Q. You consider it a very material loss, being warned at the time out of Behring
Sea?—A. I do, Sir; I consider it a very heavy loss.
46. Q. You still adhere to the statement that the seals between 60 and 100 miles
from land were as plentiful as in any previous years in your experience?—A. As plen-
tiful as they were in any year since 1886.
47. Q. Did you observe in your catch in Behring Sea any preponderance of females
over males, or vice versa?—A. Yes, Sir; the males were in excess.
48. Q. Can you state from recollection an average day’s hunt in Behring Sea?—A.
Forty-eight was about the largest I made while in Behring Sea.
49. Q. Do you remember hearing any of the hunters speak of losing any seals by
sinking ?—A. No, Sir; I don’t remember any instances of such loss.
50. Q. Did you cross from the American side of the Behring Sea into the Russian
side?—A. No, I didn’t; I came straight home to Victoria through Ounimak Pass.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 297
51. Q. During the year, did you hear from any source that any Canadian vessels
had raided the seal islands or any of them?—A. No, Sir; I never heard of any British
or Canadian vessels, not during the past year, or any year I have been engaged in
sealing.
52. Q. Captain Petit, do you believe any of the stories that are told about the
“Geo. R. White,” the ‘‘Daniel Webster,” and the ‘‘ Mollie Adams” raiding these
islands?—A. Yes, Sir; I believe those reports.
53. Q. These were all American vessels, were they not?—A. Yes, Sir.
54. Q. During the last two years, it is reported that the American schooners “J.
Hamilton Lewis,” formerly the British schooner ‘‘ Aida,” and the “City of San
Diego,” raided the Copper Islands?—A. Yes, Sir.
55. @. Do you believe that is true?—A. I do, Sir; and also in 1886 or 1887, the
American schooner ‘‘ Look-out ” raided the Pribyloff Islands, so that the history of
raiding the seal islands is peculiarly American, and solely by American schooners
56. Q. Was not the British schooner “ Aida” seized by the American Government
and sold?—A. Yes, Sir. In 1887, and renamed the ‘‘ J. Hamilton Lewis.”
57. Q. Is not this same vessel, the ‘‘ J. Hamilton Lewis,” the same vessel as was
seized by the Russians this year, in the vicinity of Copper Island?—A. Yes, Sir; and
served her right too.
58. Q. If any of the Canadian vessels had raided either the American or Russian
seal islands, your long experience in the sealing fleet here would have insured your
being aware of it?—A. Yes, Sir; [should certainly have heard of it—learned it from
hunters, masters, or seamen. It would have been sure to have leaked out.
59. Q. Is it your opinion that ship-masters or ship-owners have been most care-
ful in instructing their masters or captains to avoid any interference whatever with
the seal islands?—A. I have served with different owners, and I have been instructed
to carefully avoid approaching the islands within the international limit. In fact,
all the sealing I have conducted has been done outside at least of the 20 miles from
land.
Mr. Milne.—That will do, Captain Petit. Thank you very much.
(Signed) WILLIAM PETIT, Master.
Sworn to before me, at Victoria, British Columbia, this 23rd day of January, 1892.
(Signed) A. R. Mitnez, Collector of Customs.
Before A. R. Milne, Collector of Customs, Victoria, B. C., January 22, 1892.
Captain Wentworth Evelyn Baker, present master of the Canadian schooner “C,
H. Tupper,” and formerly master of the schooner ‘‘ Viva,” of Victoria, being duly
SWOrn:
1. Mr. Milne.—How many years have you been engaged in sealing, Captain Baker ?—
A. Four years.
2. Q. What Canadian schooners have you commanded during those four years ?—
A. The schooner ‘‘ Viva.”
3. Q. During the four years have you been more than reasonably successful as a
seal-hunter?—A. Yes, Sir.
re Q. How many white men would your vessel usually carry?—A. Twenty-three,
all told.
5. Q. You have hunted all along the coast, and also every year in Behring Sea?—
A. Every year except 1891. During last year I was always outside of the line of
demarcation between Russian and American waters.
6. Q. During last year, to your observation, were seals as plentiful along the coasts
to Shumagin Islands as they were the year before?—A. In some places I found
them as plentiful; in others I found them more plentiful. In some places where I
never found any before I found them last year, and I found none where I had pre-
viously found some.
7. Q. Then, Captain Baker, you think there is no material difference, on the aver-
age, during the four years? That is to your observation?—A. I should say, to my
observation, there was no material difference.
223 8. Q. Your coast catch last year was equal to that of former years, was it?—
A. It was equal to the first two years, and better than the third year by almost
as many more skins, having 698 skins in 1890, and in 1891 I had 1,260 skins.
9. Q@. Owing to the number of vessels, do the seals appear to be more timorous?—
A. Well, I did not find them so, except in some places. It is a great deal owing to
the position in which vou find them. I found that the nearer the coast the wilder
they are, and the further at,sea you go they don’t seem to be any wilder than pre-
viously. I think that what makes them wilder along the coast is the increase of
trafiic, steamers and so on being very numerous,
298 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
10. Q. It is said that seal travel in groups of females and groups of bachelor bulls
and young bulls—not mixed. Is that so?—A. I have always found it so.
11. Q. So you think that the number of male or female seals caught would depend
entirely upon the schooner falling in with groups of males or females?—A. Entirely.
12. Q. Howis that?—A. It is much harder to keep the run of females than of the
males or barren cows. Females with young appear to be much more timid, and when
you get among them and commence shooting, they disappear very quickly, and show
only the nose and eyes above water when travelling, and do not expose their bodies
as much above the water as the bulls and barren cows do, as if the maternal instinct
to preserve their young was apparent. This fact is well known to all seal-hunters.
I have often been in a group of cows with pups during the afternoon, and at night
they would all disappear, and, apparently from maternal instinct, they will travel
away as quickly as vossible.
13. Q. Do you consider it more difficult to shoot females, so little exposed as they
are, than males?—A. It is decidedly more difficult, particularly on the coast.
14. Q. You have observed a number of barren females?—A. Yes; quite a[ ? ].
15. Q. How do they travel?—A. Usually by themselves, or mixed with bulls; I
have never found a cow with pups among the bulls.
16. Q. Have you any idea what the percentage would be of the number of barren
cows to the number of seals caught?—A. I could not say exactly, but the percentage
is considerable.
17. Q. What is the accepted theory among the sealers as to the barrenness of
cows?—A. I don’t know as I have heard of any theory—unless they are like other
animals.
18. Q. When you speak of barren cows, you mean those who have been more than
one season barren?—A. Yes; because before that they are called pups. The barren
cows are those who are old enough to have pups, but didn’t.
19. Q. You are quite of a clear opinion, then, Captain Baker, that there is a con-
siderable percentage of barren cows?—A. Yes, Sir.
20. Q. Are there more seals shot whilst sleeping than in motion?— A. Yes, Sir; my
experience has been that there are more seals shot whilst sleeping, and that is the
experience of most of my hunters, by their report.
21. Q. What do you consider the vital part of a seal?—A. The head or the heart,
or in the neck.
22. @. Do your hunters prefer to shoot the seal in the head?—A. Yes, Sir; on
account of preserving the skin, and also that, the moment the seal is shot in the head,
the head sinks and the wind cannot escape. Then, if the seal is not killed, the shot
will stun it, and its head will drop below water, so that it cannot sink.
23. Q. What is usually a safe shooting distance?—A. For sleeping seals the dis-
tance would be about 10 yards, and for travelling seals the distance would be about
10 to 30 yards.
24. Q. Considering that the seals are shot in the head, and the greater portion
whilst sleeping, will you state the proportion of seals lost, as compared with those
hit, in sealing ?—A. The proportion is very small, because, as the usual distance for
shooting is about 10 yards for a sleeping seal, we most always kill them instantly,
and being so near the seal—even if they are inclined to sink—they are gaffed before
they have time to sink. If they even did sink 15 feet, say, we could catch them, as
when sinking they go very slowly. ‘The only time I know of when a seal is likely
to sink is after it has been chased around in the boats and winded, then shot again,
so as to be thrown backwards, allowing the wind to escape from its mouth, when it
sinks tail first. Every boat is supplied with a long pole, about 15 feet, and a spear
and gaff on the end, so that we can reach that distance. It is very seldom that a
seal will get away. I would say, therefore, from personal experience that the per-
centage of loss, as compared with those hit in sealing, would not exceed 3 per cent.
Last year I killed, myself, on the coast, fifty-five seals, and out of that number I
lost only one by sinking.
25. @. As a general thing, is the percentage of loss more now than it was four
years ago, or is it smaller?—A. Irom personal experience, I think about the same,
and from the reports of the hunters I should judge it was the same, as they all report
their experiences on their return to the vessel each night, and when a seal is lost it
is always spoken about. From a record kept by hunters during two voyages the
aggregate loss by each hunter is shown, and the percentage is not greater, on an
average, than 3 per cent.
26. Q. How many hunters do you usually carry?—A. Six; and I hunted myself.
The ship’s company consists of twenty-three persons.
27. Q. What size shot do you use in shooting seal?—A. No. 2 buck-shot or “8”
Canadian shot; and the guns are of the very best material and very expensive, cost-
ing from 70 to 100 dollars,
28. Q. What do you think is the proportién of females to males in the number
killed in the different months of the fishing season?—A. I don’t know, I am sure.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 299
It depends upon circumstances. My experience last year was very largely on the
bull side on the coast; that is, the proportion taken were largely male seals. I can
conscientiously say that it must have been three bulls to one female, and I had a
larger number of seals than any other vessel on the spring catch.
29, @. In the Behring Sea, to your observation, were the males or females in the
preponderance?—A. My experience is that they are very much as they are on the
coast. Sometimes I would meet with groups of all bulls, and again with groups of
all cows.
224 30. Q. While in Behring Sea last year what would be your usual sealing
distance from the land?—A. I was not in Behring Sea last year, but in pre-
vious years it would be from about 30 to 90 miles from land. The usual distance is
about 60 miles. Sometimes we are inside of that, sometimes outside of it.
31. Q. Last year, I understand you to say, Captain Baker, you were not in the
Behring Sea on the American side?
32. Q. Do I understand you to say that on the Russian side the same observations
will apply to the habits and shooting of seal as on the coast?—A. Precisely the same
as to their grouping and habits.
33. Q. During the four years that you have been sealing, Captain Baker, I would
like you to state explicitly if you saw or heard of any Ca nadian vessels raiding the
American seal islands?—A. No, Sir. To my knowledge I have never heard of “any,
and I have every reason to believe that there has never been any Canadian schooner
raiding any of them.
34. Q. If anything like this had happened, you would have heard of it?—A. Most
certainly I would have.
35. Q. You have never heard any information of any of our sealers conniving to
raid the seal islands?—A. I never did.
36. Q. Two years ago it was reported that some American schooners had raided
seal islands. Did you 1 hear such a report?—A. Yes, Sir; I heard a report that cer-
tain American schooners had raided these islands. The ‘‘ Geo. R. White,” ‘Daniel
Webster,” ‘ Mollie Adams,” and for two years the ‘‘J. Hamilton Lewis,” have been
raiding the Copper Islands on the Russian side, and it is reported that the American
schooner ‘City of San Diego” also raided the Copper Islands last year.
37. Q. You have heard of the German schooner ‘‘Adéle” raiding these islands ?—A.
Yes; in 1889, with poor success. These illegal acts meet with the strong disappro-
bation of every Canadian sealer.
38. Q@. And if Canadian sealers had done acts of that kind, you think it would
most certainly have leaked out?—A. It most certainly would have.
39. Q. You are quite satisfied, then, that not a single Canadian schooner at any
time has raided the seal islands?—A. Not to my knowledge. I don’t know of one
single case.
40. Q. What was your entire catch last season?—A. 1,991 for the whole season.
41. Q. Giving your opinion in confidence, what is your opinion of the seals on the
coast and in Behring Sea? Are they decreasing or increasing ?—A. From my expe-
rience, I have not seen any decrease, but I have noticed also that they change their
grounds from time to time, and where you find them this year you may not tind
them the next. This was very remarkable during the year 1890, for the seals were
all found to be eastward of Pribyloff Islands, while in former years they were found
to the westward.
42. Q. When did you find them to the eastward of St. Paul’s Island? Iunderstand
you to say that you found them very numerous?—A. More so than I ever did before.
43. @. Have you any opinion to offer as to the return of the seals to the coast last
year?—A. I have no direct opinion, but certainly the seals were more plentiful on
the northern coast last year than the previous years.
(Signed) W. E. Baker, Master.
Sworn to before me, at Victoria, British Columbia, this 22nd day of January, 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
January 19, 1892.
Clarence Nelson Cox, master of the schooner ‘‘E. B. Marvin,” of Victoria,
examined by Collector Milne:
* 1. Q. What vessels have you commanded on this coast and in Behring Sea, Captain
Cox?—A. I have been two years master of the ‘‘ Triumph,” and one year mate of the
“Sapphire” with my brother.
2. Q. This makes your fifth or sixth year?—A. This makes my fourth year. I was
in Behring Sea so late last year; that is probably why it may seem I have been out
oftener than others.
300 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
3. Q. The inquiry, Captain Cox, is to elicit, first, the number of seals lost by being
hit. It is alleged that you lose a large proportion of those that are shot, and we
wish to get at the facts. Also to establish the number of females caught during the
last and previous years, and also to investigate if there were any Canadian sealers
raiding the seal islands. In the spring of the year, when you leave port, you go
down to meet the seals along the coast?—A. Yes.
4. Q. I have been given to understand that the seals travel in bands?—A, Yes; all
the cows together, and all the bulls together, and the grey pups together.
5. Q. I suppose they are quite distinctly separated?—A. Yes; we get the grey
pups closer to shore, always inside of the large seals.
6. Q. Asa matter of fact you do not find many female seals bearing young travel-
ling with the bull seals?—A. I have never seen them in company together. I have
found the barren cows and bulls in company.
7. Q. This separation is from natural selection, or instinct?—A. Yes; while carry-
ing their young they are never found with the bulls. The barren cows occasionally
do travel with the bulls.
8. Q. During what months have you found more females carrying young as com-
pared with other months of the sealing season?—A. In the winter, when we first go
out—February, March, and April.
225 9. Q. That is, both bearing cows and barren cows, too?—A. No; bearing
cows. There are also grey pups about at that time.
10. Q. What do you mean by “‘ grey pups” ?—A. The yearling seal. After that it
is called a “‘ brown pup,” then a ‘* two-year-old.”
11. Q. Along the coast, from the time you strike them in the spring, do you shoot
the larger proportion of the seals sleeping, or are there more shot while travel-
ling?—A. Yes; the larger portion of the seals killed during the season are shot while
sleeping.
12. Q. You say you find the bearing cows travelling continually?—A. If the
weather is rough, they are travelling, but if fine, they are usually seen sleeping or
resting. ;
13. @. Is it a fact that the females with young swim low down in the water?—
A. Yes; the bulls and barren cows keep their heads well up, looking around.
14. Q. When you come upon a group of seals, your catch, then, will depend upon
whether the group is composed of males or females?—A. Yes; very much.
15. Q. Asa matter of experience, Captain Cox, have you come upon more groups
of males than of females during the last year, say?—A. I have caught more bulls
the last season—a great deal more. I had 848 seals coming up the coast before enter-
ing Behring Sea, and of these about 75 per cent. would be males.
16. Q. Have you any private opinion as to the reason of this preponderance of the
males last year as compared with previous years?—A. I cannot account for it. In
fact, I could hardly advance any idea of the cause. I get the most of them from
Queen Charlotte Island coast northwards.
17. Q. You think, though, with some of the other sealers, that at about May the
cows are well inadvance, going to Behring Sea, to the breeding grounds, consequently
the males would be left behind?—A. That is the only reason I can see for it, because
we get very few females ‘‘ with pup” in May.
18. Q. What do you consider a sufficient shooting distance, that is, sufficiently
close range for sleeping seals?—A. A great many are shot inside of 15 yards. I think
about 15 yards.
19. Q. Asa professional sealer, what is your honest and candid opinion about the
percentage of Seals lost, that is, the number lost after being hit—those that sink ?—
A. With the Indian hunters it would not amount to one in a hundred. They kill
with the spear, and I know it would not amount to 1 per cent. I was only one sea-
son with Indian hunters. Last year I had Whites. I do not think the loss would
be more than 4 or 5 per cent. with shooting by the white hunters.
20. Q. The spear of the Indian sealer is barbed, is it not, and fastens in the ani-
mal?—A. Yes, it has two barbs and a line attached, so that they are sure of their
seal unless their line breaks, or the spear is not stuck in far enough to hold, neither
of which happens often,
21. Q. You can quite confidently state that the loss of seals killed by white hunters
would not exceed 4 or 5 per cent.?—A. I can.
22. Q. This you base upon your own personal knowledge?—A. Yes.
23. Q. How many of a crew do you carry on your vessel?—A. Six boats, that is,
six hunting boats and a stern boat; seven in all.
24. Q. Your ship’s company would be how many ?—A. Twenty-three men.
25. Q. And the number of hunters?—A. Six hunters, or, counting the stern boat,
seven hunters.
26. Q. Your catch last year was how many skins?—A. On the coast 848 skins.
27. Q. Of that number how many would be breeding seals?—A. I do not think
there would be more than 15 per cent.—about 126 female skins.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS, 301
28. Q. What percentage of them would be barren female skins?—A. About 10 per
cent.
29. Q. Is the percentage of bearing cows greater than that of barren cows?—A.
Yes; every year in my experience there have been more bearing cows than barren.
30. Q. About 15 per cent., then, would be bearing cows. and 10 per cent. barren
ones?—A. Yes,
31. Q. You stated that it would entirely Gepend mon the groups you struck along
the coast whether you got males or females?—A.
32. Q. And you base your figures upon four oa Noaewertatigs ?—A. Yes,
33. Q. Then you know the percentage of bearing cows would be 15 per cent., and
the barren cows 10 per cent?—A. Yes. The first year I was with my brother I
believe we had not more than 10 per cent of cow seals; one of our seasons we had
at least 90 per cent. bulls.
34. @. That statement applies to Behring Sea?—A. Yes.
35. Q@. What year was that?—A. 1889, when I was with my brother as mate of the
“Sapphire.” The catch on the coast up to Behring Sea was about 90 per cent. bulls.
36. Q. In the Behring Sea, what percentage of females had you, as compared with
males—I am told there are less bulls?—A. I think the percentage of bulls in Behring
Sea is less than on the coast.
37. Q. Bachelor bulls?—A. Yes. The greater percentage would be cows—bearing
cows; after they have dropped their young we don’t vet them in Behring Sea.
38. co Do you not find a lot of bachelor bulls hov ering about the outskirts of the
Soups of seals?—A. Yes, we get some, but there are more females in Behring Sea.
39. Q. Did you find it so last year?—A. Of course, I was not in Behring Sea long
enough to know.
40. Q. Your remarks, then, would not apply to last season?—A. No.
41. Q. You think there would be about an equal number of cows and bulls in
Behring Sea?—A. Yes; I think that the bulls and cows are about equally divided.
42. Q. It is well known among sealers that the old bulls keep their herds, and
drive the “bachelor” bulls off?—A. Yes.
226 43. Q. Do you find many groups of bachelor bulls in Behring Sea ?—A. We
do not find them so much in groups as on the coast.
44. Q. Taking your whole catch for the past year, skin for skin, what percentage
of females had you?—A. We had not more than 25 per cent. barren and bearing
cows. That would leave us about 75 per cent. bulls.
45. Q. 25 per cent. females, including barren cows?—A. Yes.
46. Q. In the years before last would that percentage hold good?—A. I think the
previous years would not differ very much.
47. Q. In the months of February, March, and April, you think that the females
killed are more numerous than in Behring Sea?—A. Ithinkso. We get a good many
more grey pups in the winter.
48. Q. Among all the hunters it is pretty well known that the average of loss by
being hit would not exceed 3 to 5 per cent.?—A. Yes; that is well known.
49. Q. Wounding a seal so that it escapes, you don’t consider that lost?—A. No;
they carry a lot of shot, and the hunters don’t just shoot at it and leave it if it does
not die on the spot, but give chase, and if wounded badly it has not much chance of
getting away.
50. Q. Considering the hazardous occupation of sealing, the men get very expert
in it?—A. Yes; I have a man aboard who does not lose five seals during the whole
season.
51. Q. Is it your opinion that the female seals with young are somewhat timid,
and more on the alert than the old bulls?—A. Yes; they are.
52. Q. That is one reason why the percentage of females is so small, I suppose ?—
A. Yes.
53. Q. In Behring Sea you say the percentage of loss would be more than on the
coast?—A. I think the percentage of loss in Behring Sea is less than on the coast,
because the sealers get more seals asleep in the sea. They seem to be right at home
there, and not travelling about so much.
.54. Q. Have you at any time known any of our vessels (that is, Canadian vessels),
registered Canadian vessels, landing on the seal islands for the purpose of raiding
and killing seals? A. [ can conscientiously say that I have never known of any of
our vessels landing there.
55. Q. And have never heard our masters or sailors encourage that sort of prac-
tice?—A. No.
56. Q. Have you heard of any vessel having done so?—A. Yes; I have.
57. Q. What vessels?—A. The ‘ Mollie Adams, » “George R. White,” and the
0.8. Fowler,” of San Francisco, I heard, raided the Pribyloff Islands.
58. Q. That fact is well known to the whole fleet?—A. Yes, Sir.
59. Q. You were not in Behring Sea last season?—A. I was in, but didn’t stay long;
I was ordered out of it.
302 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
. Q. You left as soon as ordered to leave?—A. I did; came direct home.
61. Q. Who warned you?—A. The British steamer ‘‘ Pheasant.”
Q. You_didn’t try to seal after that?—A. No.
Q. Or lowered your boats?—A. I didn’t lower any boats after receiving the
64. Q. You have heard of some American schooners raiding Copper Island?—A. I
65. Q. Do you know the McLean brothers?—A. Yes; and the ‘‘City of San Diego”
here, and the ‘‘ Webster” and “J. Hamilton Lewis,” three American vessels who
raided Copper Island.
66. Q. You have no idea of why the seals were more plentiful along the coast last
year than other seasons?—A. I have no idea.
67. Q. There has been no practical theory advanced as to why last year the seals
were more plentiful close in shore than in other years?—A. I have none, except that
it is on account of their food fish. The seal follows the food. The earlier those fish
strike along the coast, and the closer in shore, the earlier and closer to the coast we
get the seals.
(Signed) C. N. Cox.
Sworn before me, this 18th day of January, a.p. 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
Captain Alfred Bissett, master of the Canadian schooner “‘ Annie E. Paint,” of
Victoria, British Columbia, being duly sworn, says:
20. Mr. Milne-—How many years have you been engagéd in sealing?—A. Two
years; this is my third year—have been master, mate, and hunter.
21. Q. You have had about average luck?—A. Yes; about the average.
22. Q. You have followed the seals from south of Cape Flattery north, haven’t
you?—A. Yes, Sir.
23. Q. During the last year, to your observation, were the seals as plentiful along
the coasts as they were the previous years?—A. They were.
24. Q. Did the seals appear more frightened than usual?—A. I think not; I
noticed no difference.
25. Q. Did you notice last year, or any year, in hunting seals, that the cows travel
together by themselves, and the bulls by themselves, in herds?—A. I did notice that
the bulls, in a general way, travel together, and the cows together, and small seals—
as a rule, pups—travel together.
26. Q. When hunting, of course, if you struck a band of bulls the catch that day
would be principally bulls?—A. Yes; principally bulls.
27. Q. Do you think more seals are shot while sleeping than when in motion ?—A.
Oh, yes; far more; about 80 per cent., 1 think.
28. Q. What do you consider a safe shooting distance for a sleeping seal?—A. For
a sleeping seal about 20 to 30 feet is a sure distance.
227 29. Q. And when they are on the move, what is the distance?—A. Well,
from 25 to 30 yards.
30. Q. What is your opinion of the proportion of seals that are lost after being
hit?—A. I think from 3 to 5 per cent. would cover everything.
31. Q. Where do you aim for in shooting a seal?—A. I aim for the head.
32. Q. So when a seal drops his head down, the air is stopped from escaping ?—
A. Yes; that is the reason we shoot in the head.
33. Q. During last year did you notice the proportion of females to males killed ?—
A. From counting the skins, and noticing the seals coming on board the ship, I
I should form 75 to 80 per cent. were bulls, and the remainder females.
34. Q. Do you know the reason of that?—A. I don’t know, unless the cows travel
a little faster than the bulls, who follow the coast. I have always noticed that there
are more bulls killed on the coast than there are females. ;
35. Q. Have you ever noticed when the number of females predominate?—A. I
hardly know, but I have noticed that during the months of March and April that
there were more cows than males than in the months of May, June, and July.
36. Q. Can you form any idea, from what you have heard, whether there are more
females killed than males?—A. I should say that there are decidedly more males.
That is from what I have heard and seen myself. There is no doubt that the low
price obtained in London this year is due to the large number of small bull skins
taken, the skins of the females being larger and better.
38. Q. During the two years that you have been engaged in sealing have you ever
known any Canadian vessel to raid any of the seal islands?—A. No, Sir.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 303
39. Q. If there had been any such thing going on, it would have leaked out ?—
A. It would certainly have leaked out, and I would have heard of it. It is almost
impossible to keep it quiet.
(The above having been carefully read over to Captain Bissett, he corroborates and
substantiates the same.)
(Signed) ALFRED BISSETT.
Sworn before me at Victoria, British Columbia, this 18th day of November [sic], 1892.
(Signed) ‘A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
January 19, 1892.
Captain Theodore M. Magnesen, in command of the schooner ‘‘ Walter A. Earle,”
of Victoria, examined by Collector Milne:
1.,.Q. How many years have you been sealing in Behring Sea, Captain Magnesen ?—
A. Three years; this will be my fourth.
2. Q. You have had very good success last year?—A. Yes; very fair success.
3. Q. Did you notice last year any perceptible decrease in the number of seals
compared with previous years?—A. I think they were more plentiful last season than
I ever saw them before.
4. Q. Do you mean in Behring Sea?—A. Yes; both along the coast and in nee Sea,
The biggest catch I ever made was last year, on the coast as well as in the Behring Sea.
5. @. You have noticed the habits of the seals—how they travel?—A. They travel
in batches, the bull seals by themselves, and the cow seals by themselves, and the
yearling pups by themselves.
6. Q. As a matter of fact, are there more seals shot while sleeping than while they
are travelling?—A. That is hard to say; but I think there are just as many shot
while moving as there are sleeping seals.
7. Q. When you shoot seals by sleeping, what is the safe shooting distance?—A.
About 25 yards.
8. Q. And when travelling ?—A. About 45 to 50 yards.
9. Q. The usual mark you shoot at is the head of the seal?—A, Yes.
10. Q. When hit in the head, the seal does not sink?—A. No; sometimes he does,
though, if he is shot when short of wind at the moment, and he will sink if you are
too far away to pull it out.
te Q. You have noticed them sinking ?—A. Yes; they generally sink tail first.
2. Q. If the seal is shot in the head, he drops his head, and that confines the
ae and it floats?—A. Yes; that is the way I have accounted for them floating.
13. Q. How many seals, in your experience, do you think a hunter loses out of say,
100 shot at?—A. I know my head hunter killed 498 seals last year, and 17 of them
sunk.
14. Q. That would be about 34 per cent?—A. Yes.
15. Q. Do you consider that a fair average on the number of seals lost?—A. As an
experienced hunter, I think it is a fair average.
16. Q. Would you say that a man who loses, say, 5 per cent of the seal he shoots
would not be an experienced hunter?—A. He could not lose more than that.
17. Q. Will that percentage of loss apply to the travelling seals as well as to the
sleeping seals?—A. Yes, the most of the seals lost are the ones shot by the ones
moving or travelling.
18. Q. Your boats carry pole, spear, and gaff?—A. Yes; and if the seal sinks down
10 or 15 feet they are easily recovered.
19. Q. If you were on your oath, now, and heard any one say that for every seal
that was killed, male or female, one was lost, you would say it was a misstatement ?—
A. Yes; that is not so.
20. Q. If any one came here and said that for every seal you hit you killed another
seal—— ?—A. That is nonsense.
21. Q. The highest percentage of loss, you say, would be 5 per cent. for
228 sinking seals?—A. Yes; and I may say that I have taken seals with shot
in them, dropped out when skinning, and they seemed as strong and healthy
as ever.
22. Q. That is to say, that unless you shoot a seal in a vital part, the wound heals
quickly ?—A. Yes; and unless you hit it hard the seal gets away.
23. Q. You have seen females with young?—A. No; I never saw them carrying
their young in the water.
24. Q. Down the coast the seals are pretty well divided, are they not?—A. Yes.
25. @. The cows travel by themselves, and the bulls by themselves?—A. Yes.
26. Q. Did you say that you have caught more bull seals than cow seals during the
season?—A. Yes, along the coast; but when I got up and up I got more bulls than
cows.
304 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
27. Q. What months have you seen more cows in proportion than other months !—
A. In February, March, and April. :
28. Q. But even when you see more cows the average of the seals killed is in
favour of the bulls, is it not?—A. No; it is about equal.
29. You say the cows travel quicker towards the Behring Seaf—A. Yes; when we
get further up the cow seals seem to leave the bulls behind.
30. Q. Has it always been sof—A. Yes; I have got 181 seals in a day, and not a
cow amongst them, but you sometimes get one. I think the average is about 1 in 90.
31. Q. You always get more bulls than cows?—A. Yes, up there. i
32. Q. How many out of every hundred seals you had on board your vessel last
year would be females*—A. I think fully a half of them would be cows.
33. Q. How many of them would be bearing cows, and how many of them would
be barren cows?—A. Of bearing cows, I think about 18 or 20 per cent. would be
bearing cows. I do not think there would be so many as that. I had 2,000, and I
think there would be only about 12 or 14 per cent. with pups; the others would be
what are called barren cows, and a lot of them would be dry cows.
34. Q. With the barren cows and the ones bearing young you say would make up
about half your catch?—A. Yes; about half and half.
35. Q. The proportion of males and females, though, depends upon the crowds or
groups you get into?—A. Yes; it depends upon the band you strike.
36. Q. You never, at any time, had more females than males in any of your
catches?—A. No; never.
37. Q. While in Behring Sea during the last four years had you ever heard of any
Canadian schooners ‘‘raiding” the Pribyloff Islands?—A. No. I never heard of any
of my crew being engaged in such. Several of my crews told me of the American
sealers raiding them, but I never heard of a Canadian vessel doing so.
38. Q. If you were bound to make a statement on your oath, you would say you
believed no Canadian vessels ever raided the Pribyloff Islands for seals?—A. Not as
far as I know.
39. Q. You believe, as a matter of fact, that the owners of Canadian sealers and
their masters have never countenanced this raiding ?—A. I believe that is the feeling
that prevails among them all.
40. Q. You have heard mentioned the names of the American vessels that raided
those Islands?—A. Yes; I heard of the ‘‘ Mollie Adams” and “‘ George R. White,” but
not any others.
41. Q. You have not heard of any others?—A. No; I have not heard of any others.
42. Q. You have heard of vessels raiding the Copper Islands?—-A. Yes; I have
heard of the “Hamilton Lewis” and ‘‘ Webster” raiding Copper Island.
43. Q. Those vessels you name are all American vessels ?—A. Yes.
44, Q. Manned by American crews?—A. Yes.
45. Q. Have you any recollection of seeing any of those vessels in this (Victoria)
Harbour?—A. No.
(Signed) THEO. M. MAGNESEN.
Sworn before me, this 23rd day of January, A. D. 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
Henry Crocker, hunter on board the schooner ‘Annie E. Paint,” having been
Sworn:
65. Q. How long have you been engaged in sealing ?—A. I have been hunting now
for three years; this is my fourth.
66. Q. From your observation, do you think that the seals were as plentiful last
year as they were during the previous seasons?—A. Yes; from what I saw of them
I am sure they were just as many as before.
67. Q. In what months do the female seals seem to be the most plentiful in the
sealing grounds?—A. I believe that from February to May the females seem to pre-
dominate in numbers; that is, when the cows are getting heavier with young, they
make for the Islands sooner than the bulls.
68. Q. Is it more difficult to shoot a female seal than it is a bull?—A. The males
are more easily killed than the females, owing to the inquisitiveness of the males,
and the females being more shy, and also as they move along the water with only
their nose visible.
69. Q. As an experienced hunter, what percentage of loss have you had by seals
sinking ?—A. It is very rarely that a seal will sink. I have been a whole season and
have not had more than half a dozen sink during the whole season.
70. Q. Can you form any estimate of what your loss has been?—A. I would say not
more than 3 or 4 per cent.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 305
229 71. Q. Was the loss last year more than in previous years?—A. [ could see
no difference.
72. Q. As a reason for the small percentage of loss, you get very near the seals
before shooting?—A. Yes, Sir; the usual distance is within about 20 feet to the
sleeping seal.
73. Q. If a man has a higher percentage of loss than that, he must be careless, you
think?—A. Yes, I should say so, and not a first-class hunter, for there is no necessity
for losing a seal.
74. Q. Does your percentage of loss agree with other hunters with whom you have
conversed?—A. Yes. ;
75. Q. So that on the coast and in Behring Sea the same percentage would apply ?—
A. Well, on the coast one does not very often sink a seal; but in Behring Sea, if a
cow, having delivered her pups, is shot, she will be more apt to sink, as the blubber
is very much thinner. But, on the whole, I think the percentage will not be more
than 3 or 4 per cent. of loss.
76. Q. Have you taken notice in hunting whether there are more females than
males, or the reverse, taken?—A. There is fully 80 per cent. of bull seals killed off
the coast, as well as in Behring Sea. I think the reason for this is that the younger
bulls are driven off by the older ones, who guard their particular herds.
77. Q. In the three years you have been in Behring Sea has it always been your
experience that there were more males caught than females? And in what propor-
tion?—A. I say about the same as this year; I don’t see any difference.
78. Q. Does your percentage of females taken agree with that of other hunters
with whom you have conversed?—A. Yes.
79. Q. As an experienced hunter, then, you adhere to the statement that for the
whole season’s catches for the years you have been hunting, that the percentage of
seals caught will be about three males to one female?—A. Yes; about that.
80. Q. Do you include in that statement barren cows?—A. Yes.
81. Q@. Have you any idea or reason of your own why the males come to predomi-
nate somuch?—A. I think it is because the females make for the islands earlier than
the young bulls and barren cows.
82. Q. Have you ever heard of any Canadian vessels raiding the seal islands?—A.
No, Sir.
83. Q. You have never heard of any Canadian master or owner offering any induce-
ment to hunters to raid the islands?—A. No, Sir.
84. Q. There has never been any bonus offered you to raid the islands?—A. No,
Sir; while in Behring Sea we are always too anxious to get away from the islands.
85. Q. If any Canadian vessels had raided the islands you would have likely heard
of it?—A. Yes. I think it is impossible to keep it as quiet as that.
86. Q. You have heard of American vessels raiding the Copper and Pribyloff
Islands?—A. I have heard it. I have known of the American vessels going into
Sand Point just after they had raided the islands, and I was in Sand Point when one
vessel was fitted out for the purpose of making a raid.
87. Q. The masters with whom you have sealed all seem to have avoided the
islands?—A. Oh, yes; they keep away from the islands between 50 and 100 miles.
(The foregoing having been read over to the said Henry Crocker, he corroborates
and substantiates the whole of the said statements.)
(Signed) HENRY CROCKER, Hunter.
Sworn to before me, at Victoria, British Columbia, this 18th day of -Tanuary, 1892,
(Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
George Roberts, hunter on board the schooner “Annie E. Paint,” being duly
SWOrn, Says:
55. Q. How long have you been engaged as a sealer?—A. I have been at seal-
hunting for three years, one season as a hunter.
56. Q. Were the seals more plentiful last year than in previous years?—A. They
were just about the same as regards number.
57. Q. How do the seals generally travel—in mixed numbers, inales and females
together?—A. The seals travel in bands of bulls and bands of cows, both by them-
selves.
58. Q. What is the proportion of seals lost by sinking after being shot?—A. Well,
I should say that 3 to 5 per cent. would cover the whole loss. It is not more.
59. Q. What is the distance you are off a seal when you shoot, generally?—A.
Well, from 20 to 30 feet for a sleeper, and for a traveller from 25 to 30 feet.
60. Q. What part ofythe seal do you aim at?—A. I aim at the head, us the best
place, being the surest.
20
BS, PT VI
306 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
61. Q. Do you think there were any more female seals shot than males last year ?—
A. No; I think there were more males shot; in fact, I think that since I have been
engaged in the business there have been more males killed than females.
62. Q. What months have you noticed more females than males?—A. In the months
of March and April there are more females than at any other time. There are more
females killed during those months than there are any other time.
63. Q. Have you ever heard of any of the Canadian vessels poaching on the seal
islands?—A. I never did; I would have heard of it if there had been any. I have
heard of the American raiders; but I do not know of a single Canadian vessel
raiding a seal rookery.
230 64. Q. If a seal is sinking, does it go quickly or slowly ?—A. If it is not too
far away it can always be secured, as it does not go too quickly to get it. ~
(The above having been read to the said George Roberts, he corroborates and sub-
stantiates all of the foregoing statements. )
(Signed) GEORGE ROBERTS, Hunter.
Sworn to before me at Victoria, British Columbia, this 18th day of January, 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
Richard Thomson, hunter on board the schooner ‘‘ Annie E. Painter,” being duly
SWOTrN, Says:
40. Q. How long have you been engaged in sealing?—A. I have been engaged as
a hunter for two years.
41. Q. Were the seals as plentiful last year as they were the previous year, to your
observation?—A. Yes; I believe they were.
42. Q. Were the seals apparently harder to approach than they were in previous
years?—A. No; I can’t say that I saw any difference.
43. Q. How do the seals generally travel?—A. Asarule the bulls travel separately,
and quite a distance apart generally.
44, Q. What is your experience in hunting as to the number of seals lost after
being hit?—A. I should think from 3 to 5 per cent. would cover all.
45. Q. What is the usual manner in which seals are lost?—A. Well, if the seal is in
a certain position and shot so as to allow the air to escape, the seal will be lost. As
long as the head sinks below the water first, the seal will not sink. They very
rarely sink in any case.
46. Q. You carry a spear on a gaff, don’t you?—A. Yes; it is carried to spear the
seals when they are going down.
47. Q. From your experience in sealing, you consider that from 3 to 5 per cent.
would cover the total loss of seals, after being shot, through sinking?—A. Yes.
48. Q. When you shoot a seal at a distance, and do not shoot them in a vital part,
they make off, do they ?—A. Yes.
49. Q. You don’t consider that lost, then?—A. No; we don’t consider the seal lost
unless it sinks.
50. Q. Have you handled more males than females during the past two years ?—
A. I should say more males.
51. Q@. Have you any idea of the proportion of males—would there be two males
to one female?—A. I should say from 70 to 80 per cent., or about three males to one
female.
52. Q. In what months do you consider that there are most females killed?—A.
During the months of April and May. There are apparently more females, but not
as many as males.
53. @. You have never known of any Canadian schooners raiding the seal islands,
have you?—A. J have never heard of a Canadian, but I have of the American.
54. Q. During the time that you have been to Behring Sea, you would have heard
of it?—A. I would certainly have heard of it.
55. Q. You have always sailed out of this port?—A. Yes, Sir.
(The above having been read over to Richard Thomson, he corroborates and sub-
stantiates the same.)
(Signed) R. THomson, Hunter.
Sworn to at Victoria, British Columbia, before me, this 18th day of January, 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 307
Victoria, B. C., January 22, 1892.
Andrew Laing, called and examined by Collector A. R. Milne:
1. Q. You are one of the oldest seal-hunters in the province, Mr. Laing?—A. I
have been ten years at it.
2. Q. Your knowledge of sealing really goes beyond the present knowledge of the
average sealer?—A. I have had as much experience as any of them. I think I know
as much as any of them.
3. Q. Your observations on the west coast extend beyond the advent of the seal-
ing business in Behring Sea?—A. Yes. I went on the coast in 1871, and have been
sealing with natives for the last twenty-one years.
4. Q. You had ample opportunity of observing the life and habits of the seals ?—
A. Yes.
5. Q. From those.observations last year did you notice any perceptible or material
decrease in the number of seals?—A. None whatever.
6. Q. It was generally reported last year they were more numerous than the year
beforef—A. Yes, I think, if anything, they were a little more numerous than 1890.
7. Q. Does that remark apply to full-grown?—A. To full-grown and mid-sized.
8. Q. What direction do the seals on the coast usually come from?—A. They come
from the south, following the herring, which spawn on the west coast and different
places, and the seal follow those fish into the shore or far out, as the case may be.
The natives get a great number of these seals among a school of herring.
9. Q. What is the usual distance which the natives hunt away from shore?—
231 <A. In the spring they will hunt 10 or 15 miles off, later in the season 20 or 25
miles. I have seen them 40 miles from the land.
10. Q. How long does the hunting of the seal on the west coast usually last tA.
Commences in February, or latter end of January, and lasts till the Ist June, when
you get more or less seals; you can get a few stragglers in July.
11. Q. And the tendency of the seals is from the south?—A. Yes, following their
food fish.
12. Q. You have been down the coast to where you meet the seals in their migra-
tion?—A. I have gone down as far as Shoal Water Bay, Columbia River.
13. Q. How do you meet the seals—in large bands or batches?—A. Yes, in schools,
from two to twenty in a school.
14. Q. Do they seem to travel in pairs,?—A. No, Sir.
15. Q. Do you find in these schools, or bunches, they are all males or females?—A,
They aremixed. [remember an instance—I think in i886—when we got on the coast
off Cape Flattery either 104 or 109, am not positive, and out of that there were over
100 bull seals, and the next day we got about 86, and out of that number over 70
were bulls. That was in the year 1886.
16. Q. Would your observation lead you to suppose that your catch would depend
entirely upon the group of bulls or females as to which your catch would be com-
posed of principally ?—A. As we get amongst them; yes.
17. Q. But taking one year with another—from 1886 to the present time—have you
seen any more females killed than of bulls?—A. No, Sir. I think we have got about
three males in five, and when we get up about the Bank, about Middleton Island, I
think they will average more males than females.
18. Q. When you strike the seals on the coast abont 40 or 50 miles from shore, do
you find a large proportion of them sleeping?—A. They are generally sleeping. The
Indians get none but sleeping seals. I have never been wor rking with Whites.
19. Q. The natives approach the seals very close?—A. Yes; ‘and he comes to the
leeward of them, and if there is any sea on they get into the trough of the sea and
make no noise. ‘Tf he went to windward the seal ° would scent him, and get away.
20. Q. When he gets close enough he throws his spear, and seldom misses e—A.
Yes; he don’t miss one in ten.
21. Q. And when once his spear is fastened, the seal never gets away?—A. No.
22. Q. If an Indian loses more than what you say, he would not be a good hunter ?—
A. No good at all. It would not pay to ‘‘ pack” him.
23. Q. Do the Indians ever shoot?—A. Sometimes. They never shoot if the seal is
sleeping.
24. Q. Does that percentage of loss apply to the sleeping seals only?—A. Yes.
25. @. You mean by ‘‘loss”—what?—A. By sinking.
26. Q. If the seal is wounded so it gets away, you don’t consider it lost?—A. No.
27. Q. If speared and wounded, and scurried off, you don’t consider it lost?—A.
Oh, no; not lost.
28. Q. The Indian hunter is very close to the quarry, and rarely misses his aim ?—
A. Well, he will get within 25 or 30 yards of it.
29. Q. Have you noticed any marked difference in the manner in which the females
carrying young travel as compared with the males?—A. The only difference I could
see is that they will travel very fast for a little distance, and then turn up and rest
308 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
30. Q. I mean, do they sink their bodies more?—A. No; they do not.
31. Q. Do you think that the female is more shy than the male, that is, those “with
young” ?—A. No; I think they are not any more shy. The femaleis always inclined
to be sleepy. The male is always on the watch, and will rise till his head and shoul-
ders are out of the water. ;
32. Q. One hunter nas said that the female lies deep in the water, exposing only a
portion of her head?—A. I have never noticed that. When lying asleep one-half of
the head is under water.
33. Q. Then you will say that the percentage of loss of the Indian hunters is not
more than how many in the hundred ?—A. Not more than one in ten; not more than
10 per cent.
34. Q. You say you never hunted with white men until this year?—A. No.
35. Q. If any person made a statement that there is a greater amount of loss than
what you say, you would not regard it as correct?—A. I would say it was not cor-
rect, with Indian hunters.
36. Q. Your statement is based upon actual experience?—A. Yes.
37. Q. In going down the coast in the spring, in February, March, and April, have
you noticed that females are more plentiful than in the following months?—A. I do
not think they are.
38. Q. But as they come from the south, you think they are not?—A. Between
January and June, and between the south and the Shumagin Islands, have you
noticed any time or place where there were any more females killed than others ?—
A. I think in May, I have noticed one thing: you will not find, take one in ninety,
you will never find a female pup. Where the female young go to is something that
the Commissioners ought to have found out before they came down from the sea.
39. Q. It has been stated that the Indians say there is no such thing as a female
grey pup?—A. I have never seen one yet, and cannot account for it, unless the
females go one way and the males another.
40, Q. Among all yearling grey pups, there has never been any one known to have
found a female?—A. Yes, it is a fact. I have heard a great deal of talk of females
having young on the kelp, too, but I don’t think that is so. Some hunters report of
seeing pups off Middleton’s Island, but I think that is impossible.
41. @. Have you ever seen them cut a pup out of the female seal?—A. Yes; and I
have seen the pup so cat out walk or move about the deck of the vessel, and I have
tried to raise it. I have also thrown it into the water, and have seen it swim about
like a young dog; I have seen it keep afloat for fifteen minutes, as long as the
232 + vessel was within sight. On the islands, the mother seal will take the young
and force them into the water to teach them toswim. They will never take
the water freely themselves for from six weeks to two months.
42. Q. You think they will swim 50 yards probably, or 100 yards?—A. Yes; but
don’t think they could live continually in the water if they were born in it.
43. Q@. When you strike the seals on the west coast, what would you say was the
usual distance per day that the seals travel?—A. That is impossible to say; it
depends upon their food.
44, Q. That is, they linger longer over good food than otherwise?—A. Yes; I
remember in, I think, 1888, where an Indian threw his spear at a seal, and his line
broke; it was near the Shumagin Islands, and he took the same seal the next day—
we lay-to all night—and he recovered his own iron spearhead. That might show the
distance they move in, say, a night, because it did not travel far.
eae When you lower your boats two Indians go to a canoef—A. Yes, and both
paddle.
46. Q. The Indian in the bow keeps his spear right before?—A. Yes.
47. Q. And he throws it at the animal, and strikes it where?—A. It makes no dif-
ference where they are hit. They try when shooting to hit in the head.
48. Q. When a seal is struck, or wounded, what time does it require to heal?—A.
It heals very rapidly.
49. Q. What time does it require to get the seal aboard after it is speared?—A.
Not more than two minutes when they spear, and not as long as that when they
shoot it.
50. Q. What is the usual length of the sealing-boat?—A. About 20 feet.
51. Q. And the canoe?—A. About 22 feet.
52. Q. Isit not a fact that sealing in these small boats in the stormy spring months
is a very hazardous undertaking ?—A. Yes.
53. Q. It is commonly reported that our seal-hunters, both Whites and Indians,
are more expert than any others on the coast?—A. That isso. They are the most
expert.
54. Q. It is said also that unless the weather is very tempestuous nothing will
retard them?—A. Yes; they go out every chance they can get.
55. Q. The loss of a full-sized skin meant the last two years how much to the
hunterf—A. About 3 dollars per skin.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 309
56. Q. What is the largest number which you ever saw an Indian canoe bring
aboard in one day?—A. Forty-eight in one canoe, in Behring Sea.
57. Q. On the coast, how many?—A. Thirty-four; that is over the average.
58. Q. In leaving the schooner, how far do the hunters, both Indians and Whites,
go?—A. They go as far as 10 or 12 miles, sometimes 15 miles, from the vessel, till
they can just see the tops of her sail.
59. Q. And this in pretty rough weather?—A. Yes; pretty rough. It might be
smooth when they go out, but it often comes on rough before they can get back.
60. Q. In following the seals up the coast in February, March, and April, and May
and June, where do you begin to get them in larger numbers?—A. Off Queen Char-
lotte Islands.
61. Q. At this time, are the females in advance of the males, seemingly hastening
to the sea?f—A. They get through as soon as they can, the males in advance of the
females—they haul out first.
62. Q. Some sealers think the cows go ahead?—A. The males haul out, and each
one gets his batch of females, and as the cows come in they make up their herd of
females.
63. Q. Have you ever, when with sealers, heard the percentage of loss talked of ?—
A. No; I have never heard it mentioned with sealers.
64. Q. You speak from your experience with Indians? Your percentage of loss of
1 in 10 won! be based on actual experience with Indian hunters?—A. Yes; 1 in 10.
65. Q. You have stated that in the month of May you think there would be more
females than in the other months of the season? At that time what part of the
ocean would you be?—A. Up off Queen Charlotte Island. A
66. Q. You have also stated that the more plentiful the food, the slower the seals
travel.—A. Yes; they stay longer where the food is.
67. Q. At the end of any of your seasons, haye you actually counted the number
of females you had in your cargo?—A. I have never done so.
68. Q. Have you any idea of your last year’s catch, what proportion of females
you had in the coast catch?—A. I think there would be about 3 males in 5—3 males
to 2 females.
69. Q. That applies to the coast catch only?—A. Yes; up to Kodiak.
70. Q. In the Behring Sea, what proportion would it bear?—A. I think about 4
males in 5—4 males to 1 female.
71. Q. Were youin Behring Sea last year?—A. The vessel was. The way Iaccount
for getting so many males was, during the beginning of July and August, when the
females would be ashore nursing their young the greater part of the time.
72. Q. At any time in Behring Sea, what has been your nearest point of hunting
to the seal islands?—A. I have never been closer in hunting than 30 miles—usually
30 to 90 miles off. We got blown in there once, the only time I saw the island; we
were within 10 miles of them then.
73. Q@. You never saw or heard of any schooners, or spoke any schooner, who made
a boast of raiding the islands?—A. None belonging tous. I heard of the ‘‘Webster,”
“Mollie Adams,” the ‘‘ Hamilton Lewis,” and the German schooner ‘‘ Adéle” raiding
the islands.
74, Q. All these were American schooners?—A. Yes; except the ‘“‘Adéle.”
75. Q. There is no doubt, then, among sealers, that these vessels did actually raid
the islands.—A. It has been commonly reported, and I have no reason to disbelieve it.
76. Q. Did any of those vessels at that time belong to Victoria?—A. No; they did
not.
77. Q. Can you advance any idea as to when the seals leave Behring Seaf—A. To
the best of my knowledge, about the middle of October.
233 78. Q. Is it the accepted idea that those seals which leave Behring Sea in
the fall are the same that return in the spring?—A. That is my opinion.
79. Q. You have never heard at any time any inducement ever offered by a captain
or sailor from Victoria to ship men or to perform any work with the intention of
raiding those islands?—A. Not from a Canadian vessel.
80. Q. It is a fact that every ship-owner and master of Canadian vessels has depre-
cated the raiding of the islands, that is, have never agreed with it?—A. They do not
agree with it at all. very one I have spoken to are very well satisfied to go into
the sea and get their catch legitimately.
81. Q. You think there is ample field for hunting seals without raiding the
islands?—A. Yes, I do.
82. Q. Is it your opinion, Captain Laing, that, with the increased number of
schooners here and in San Francisco, there will be any material injury to the sealing
industry ?—A. I do not think so.
83. Q. From observations made last year, you are quite of the opinion that the
seals were more plentiful than you had ever seen them before?—A. They were more
plentiful last year, 1891, than the year before, 1890.
310 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
84. Q. Is there any way you can account for that?—A. None whatever, unless it
is the same as with any species of fish; some years you get more than others. There
is no accounting for it.
85. Q. Referring to the number of females caught in the spring, there are quite a
number of the female seals barren, or have never borne youug? You have noticed
it?—A. Yes; someare barren that have had young, and others that have not borne.
86. Q. When you speak of the proportion of females killed, you mean the barren
cows as wellas those that are bearing young?—A. Yes.
87. Q. Have you formed any idea of the general average or percentage of females
carrying young killed in April and May ?—A. I could not form any idea.
88. Q. Nor of barren cows?—A. No, Sir.
89. Q. Would you hazard a statement that all the females, both bearing and barren
cows, were certainly less than the male seals taken?—A. Yes; certainly less in
number.
90. Q. If any one were to make the bold statement that for every male seal killed
there is a female killed, would it be correct?—A. That would not be correct.
91. Q. You have not heard any estimate of the percentage of barren females as
compared with the bearing cows killed?—A. There are less of the barren cows killed
in the spring than there are in the fall. I don’t think that they go as far south as
the cows that bear young.
92. Q. You say that in Behring Sea the males preponderate?—A. Yes.
93. Q. You cannot account for this, you say, except it be that the females are all
ashore bearing young?—A. The males we get in the sea are all 3- or 4-year-olds,
which the old wigs would not let ashore at all.
94. Q. Are there any “‘ rookeries” along the coast of any extent?—A. I have never
heard of one this side of the Shumagin Islands.
95. Q. Year after year, hunting, then, do you find them travelling along the same
course?—A. Yes, where their food is, from 15 to 35 miles out.
96. Q@. Your opinion is that the percentage of loss as compared with those hit
would not exceed 10 per cent. with Indian hunters?—A. How do you mean lost?
97. Q. You say a seal hit and not killed is not lost if it escapes?—A. Yes.
98. Q. Then the proportion of loss in proportion to those killed is about how
much—10 per cent.?—A. It does not exceed that.
99. Q. In the number killed during the different months of the season, what is
the proportion of males to females?—A. Three males to two females.
100. Q. As to the abstention of Canadian sealers from raiding the seal islands, yeu
are quite positive that from your knowledge of sealing-vessel owners and masters,
you give it as your direct opinion that no Canadian sealers ever raided those islands.
You would say so upon oath in Court?—A. They never did to my knowledge.
101. Q. If such a thing had been attempted, it would, as a matter of fact, have
leaked out?—A. Yes; it stands to reason the crews would have been unable to keep
it to themselves.
102. Q. They would tell it either to their associates on board or after getting
ashore?—A. They could not keep it.
103. Q. After the hunters get aboard at night, they usually recount whether they
lost any seals, and in speaking of their loss it would mean those seals that would
sink, not those that escape?—A. If they lost any, they would not tell it at all, but
if they sunk any, they would speak of it.
104. Q. You are at present a ship-owner, Captain Laing?—A. Yes.
105. Q. You have had great opportunities of hearing from all sources matter rela-
tive to the seal fishing?—A. Yes.
106. Q. Has it been noticed that the skins taken last year in the Behring Sea were
smaller than usual?—A. About the same general size.
107. Q. Is it generally known that the seals caught on the Copper Island are better
than the average?—A. I have never seen them, but it is reported they are better.
108. Q. Itis reported also that seals caught in January, March, and April are better
than any in Behring Sea; they say the fur is better?—A. They say so, but I don’t
know that you can see any difference.
109. Q. It has been said that the fur of the seals caught during the winter and
spring monthsislight? The fur of all animals in cold climates is thicker in winter ?—
A. I have never noticed that with seals.
234 110. Q. A few years ago it was said that the Behring Sea skins were the
best ?—A. It has been so reported, but I don’t think there is any difference. |
111. Q. The “grey pup” of this year will be a ‘‘ brown pup” next year?—A. Yes;
a “42-year-old” or ‘‘ brown pup.”
112. Q. Do the hunters usually follow the grey pups with the same zeal as they do
he other seals?—A. They can’t tell the difference till they are actually ‘‘on top of
em.
113. Q. And they are apt to shoot little as well as big?—A. Yes; everything they
Come across.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. Dilek
114. Q. Were the Indian hunters more successful last year than Whites?—A. No,
they were not, It was a ‘stand off” between them. ‘The only difference is that the
Whites will risk more than the Indians.
115. Q. The expensive wages, cost of outfitting schooners, considered, don’t you
think that 4 dollars per skin a high figure for hunters?—A. It is.
116. Q. How many boats does the average schooner carry?—A. About six and the
stern boat.
117. Q. And each boat takes three white men?—A. Yes, a hunter, a boat-puller,
and a boat-steerer.
118. Q. The ship furnishes the boat, guns, and outfit?—A. Yes, the whole outfit of
guns, ammunition, provisions, wages for the two men, and pays the hunter so much
per skin.
119. Q. At the present time, how much per skin?—A. 3 to 4 dollars.
120. Q. With Indian crews?—A. They furnish their own canoe, spears, and outfit;
one Indian steers; but the vessel finds them in provisions only. The last two or three
seasons some vessels have supplied guns and ammunition.
121. Q. Does the Indian get 4 dollars per skin; does he out of that pay his own
boat-helper?—A. Yes, he pays out of his rate per skin. ‘The ship pays the steerer
nothing.
122. Q. Therefore, if the Indian crews were as profitable, they are the cheapest;
if they get as many skins?—A. Yes, if you can get them.
123. Q. Is the Indian a good hunter, in your experience?—A. Yes, Sir.
124. @. Bold and intrepid?—A. Yes, when he is in his canoe nothing will scare
him. I have seen an old bull seal capsize a canoe, and the Indians would get into it
again, bail the water out, and go on hunting as though nothing had happened.
125. Q. Is the Indian lazy, or does he seem anxious to proceed in the hunt from
day to day?—A. In fine weather, yes, but when the sea is ‘‘choppy” he would
usually rather stay aboard.
126. Q. His canoe is not quite so strong as the sealing-boat?—A. No, not quite.
127. Q. Have there been many accidents among the Indians—loss of life?—A. Not
since, | think, 1887, when a schooner foundered with all aboard.
128. Q. Do you think that as the years pass along the Indians, as well as the Whites,
get more expert in seal-hunting?—A. Yes, they do.
129. Q. Notwithstanding all the ships in the fleet on the ocean, you would adhere
to your statement that you don’t think there is any noticeable decrease in the number
of seals?—A. Yes; I donot think so. If the vessels had been let alone in Behring
Sea last year, we would have had a bigger catch than any previous year.
130. Q. Do you think, Captain Laing, if they would cease killing seals on the
Pribyloff Islands it would increase the number of seals on the coast?—A. I think it
would.
131. Q. If the rookeries were undisturbed by anything, you think the seals would
be more plentiful?—A. I do.
132. Q. Have you any opinion to offer as to killing seals on the islands doing more
harm than anything else?—A. I think the American people are doing more harm by
killing seals and interfering with them on their rookeries or seal islands than we
hunters do on the coast.
133. Q. You have never heard of any rookery along the coast?—A. I never heard
of one. There is a rookery of sea-lion off Queen Charlotte Island, but I never heard
of any of seals.
(Signed) A. D. LaInG.
Sworn before me, this 25th day of January, A. D. 1892.
(Signed) _ A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
January 25, 1892.
William Cox, present master of the schooner “‘Sapphire,” of Victoria, called and
examined by Collector Milne:
1. Q. You are engaged in the sealing business, Captain Cox?—A. Yes, I have been
master of the sealing-schooner ‘‘ Sapphire” for the last four years.
2. Q. How many boats do you carry in your outfit?—A. I carry canoes and an
Indian crew.
3. Q. With the exception of how many white men to navigate?—A. Seven white
people I carry for navigating the vessel.
4, Q. The number of Indians?—A. The last two years I have had twenty-eight
north to Behring Sea.
5. Q. And how many canoes?—A. Fourteen canoes.
6. Q. Had you more canoes on the coast?—A. Yes, I have had twenty-four canoes
while on the coast,
312 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
7. Q. When you finally leave for Behring Sea, you drop a number of the Indians,
and only take about fourteen canoes with you?—A. Yes.
8. Q. Do you prefer Indian crews to white men?—A. Yes, I do.
235 9. Q. What are your reasons for the preference?—A. Well, I get along bet-
ter with them for one thing; there is more honour among them than among
the average white crew in this business. They don’t make an agreement to-day, and
break it to-morrow if they see a chance to make a little more.
10. Q. And they don’t quarrel among themselves?—A. No; and you can generally
trust them more.
11. Q. They are more profitable, too, are they not?—A. Yes, a little more.
12. Q. They furnish their own canoes?—A. Yes, and’ spears and boatmen; and it
is not such a heavy outfit, but their canoes are light and easily broken by the heavy
seas.
13. Q. They are better than aboard a large vessel?—A. Yes, but you have to be
very careful—the canoes are ‘‘dug-outs” and easily shattered.
14. Q. Apart from getting along easier with the Indians, the experience is just
about the same as with the white crew?—A. Yes, the skins cost about the same in
the end.
15. Q. Do the Indian crews venture out during the stormy weather as much as the
white men?—A. Yes, almost as freely. I have had the same crew so long now that
they will do anything I wish them to do.
16. Q. Do you take them down the coast?—A. Yes, and up the coast and on into
Behring Sea.
17. Q. They spear all their seals?—A. The greater number of them, yes, but some-
times shoot; they spear all the ‘‘ sleepers.”
18. Q. What proportion do you think they shoot?—A. They shoot probably twenty
out of the hundred; but I think now the fleet is getting so large there are more
wake seals, that consequently they did more shooting with me last year than ever
before. They never shoot a sleeping seal.
19. Q. Do you think the seals are getting more shy on account of the larger fleet of
vessels?—A. Yes, they are much more shy.
20. @. Do the Indians approach the seals from leeward ?—A. No; the Indian always
goes ‘‘across on the wind;” he pulls up almost in range of it, and goes across the
wind. They have a sort of idea that the seal sleeps with one eye open, hence the
way they approach.
21. Q. When they heave the spear, tlie barb holds fast?—A. Yes; if they strike
the seal at all, they cannot lose it.
22. Q. Therefore the percentage of seals killed by Indians and lost would be very
small?—A. I would really countit nothing. If they did lose one by the spear pulling
out of the blubber it would not kill the seal, as it heals so quickly again.
23. Q. The barb holds them, and they have no chance to sink?—A. Yes.
24. Q. Therefore the percentage of loss is nothing?—A. I would not reckon it
anything.
25. Q. The loss they make is only when firing at a travelling seal?—A. Yes.
26. Q. And that loss would be by the animal escaping ?—A. Yes.
27. Q. You would not consider it lost, then?—A. No; if not hit in a vital part it
is not lost, for the Indian fires at a close range, and there are two in a boat, and
almost sure of it before the shot is fired, because they can’t sink far before they are
right on to it.
28. Q. So the percentage of the seals lost by Indian hunters, ‘‘sleeping” and not
“travelling,” would be how much?—A. With sleeping seals there is no loss. In
travelling seals there are none lost, only in escaping. Last year I saw a great num-
ber of seals brought in that had been shot before.
29. Q. From personal knowledge and observation, you are satisfied that a flesh-
wound made in the seal would healrapidly and not injure the seal?—A. Yes; the shot
seems to strike in the fatty parts or blubber, and does not seem to hurt the animal,
as it closes over and soon heals.
30. Q. In the months of February, March, and April, have you seen a marked
number of female seals bearing young killed?—A. Yes; in winter there are a number.
31. Q. Does that mean “barren” cows?—A. No; on the coast we get them “with
young.” [have not seen many “ barren cows” out here in winter.
32. Q. During the months of February, March, and April, what would you say
was the proportion of males to females?—A. I have only done one winter’s sealing,
and that winter they would be fully one-half females during February and March.
33. Q. That is, there would be as many females as bulls and grey pups?—A. Yes;
I have never seen a female grey pup on the coast. That is a yearling grey female
Beals that is corroborated by the Indians. All the yearlings seen by me have been
males.
rite Q. That is well known, you say, by the Indians?—A. Oh, yes. They remark
8.
© ® * * « ®
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 313
38. Q. But there is a larger number of males killed than females in April, May, and
June?—A. Yes; in those three months we get a larger number of males; bulls from
3 to4 years old; all about the same size. F
39. Q. Your opinion is that the females, after the month of May, hasten on to the
Behring Sea?—A. Yes.
40. Q. Now, from the beginning of the sealing season, when you start out this
time of year (January), till the time you enter Behring Sea, what is your opinion as
to the percentage of female seals, including both bearing and barren cows, killed?
What would be the proportion of female seals, including both bearing and barren
cows, killed? What would be the proportion of females as compared with the
bulls?—A. Right up to the Shumagin Islands?
41. Q. Yes. Would it be 60 per cent., or 70 per cent., or what?—A. Yes, I think
it would be about 65 or 70 per cent. of males, and the remainder mixed cows—bear-
ing and barren cows.
42. Q. About what percentage of barren cows?—A. I think about equally divided;
about 15 per cent. of barren and 15 per cent. of bearing cows, and 70 per cent. of
bulls, would pretty near represent the catch on the upper and lower coast.
43. Q. There is an opinion expressed that a seal pup will not swim; some people say
so?—A. I have seen three with their dams in the water on the Alaskan coast.
236 i 44. Q. How far from shore?—A. 40 or 50 miles from shore, in the month of
une.
45. Q. Is it your opinion that they would be born in the water?—A. Yes, or on the
kelp. Seals mate in the water, sleep in the water, and I have seen pups taken from
the dead mother on the vessel, and thrown overboard and swim about awhile in the
water. I have watched such pups swim about for half-an-hour or more. They
seemed to have no difficulty in swimming.
46. Q. You have never seen or heard of a Canadian sealing-schooner attempting to
raid the Pribyloff Islands?—A. I have never heard of one.
47. Q. If such a thing had been done or attempted it would be sure to be known
among sealers?—A. Yes; it would be impossible to keep it a secret.
48. Q. Is it your opinion that our ship-owners and masters have done everything
they could possibly do to discourage anything of that kind?—A. Yes; everything.
49. Q. What has been the general distance you have sealed—the distance from the
seal islands?—A. From 100 to 140 miles. I was within 80 miles of them last year;
that was the nearest I was to them.
50. Q. Of course your men on board would, if they had ever been engaged in such
raiding of the islands, certainly have told their fellows?—A. Yes, it would soon have
become known.
51. Q. It is well known to all sealers that certain schooners have raided those
islands?—A. Yes, during 1889 and 1890.
51*. Q. Do you remember what their names are?—A. Yes; the American schooner
“Mollie Adams,” ‘‘ George R. White,” and others.
52. Q. Do you remember any other schooner raiding the islands?—A. Yes; the
German schooner ‘‘Adéle.”
53. Q. It was well known that it was a German vessel?—A. Oh, yes.
54. @. Those American vessels that raided the Pribyloff Islands recruited their
crews—where?—A. I think the ‘‘ Mollie Adams” recruited her crew at Gloucester.
55. Q. Inthe United States?—A. Yes; she fitted up in Port Townsend, Washington.
56. Q. Did you ever hear of any American vessels fitting out at Sand Point to raid
the islands?—A. I do not remember it.
57. Q. Were you ordered out of Behring Sea last year?—A. Yes.
58. Q. By whom?—A. The British steamer ‘‘ Porpoise.”
59. Q. On being ordered out of the Sea, you immediately complied?—A. Yes; I
came right away.
60. Q. Did you lower your boats afterwards?—A. I did not. I came right out of
the Sea.
61. Q. What month was that?—A. 9th August.
62. Q. Had you not been ordered out, were you in good hunting ground?—A. Oh,
yes.
63. Q. Were the seals plentiful at the time you were warned; that is, as plentiful
as you had previously seen them?—A. Yes; just as thick as ever.
64. Q. What was your catch up to the time you were warned out?—A. 2,434 in
Behring Sea.
65. Q@. What was your coast catch?—A. 1,008 on the coast, and 2,434 in the Sea.
66. Q. Had you been unmolested for another thirty days your chances were good
for a large catch?—A. Yes; our chances were good for quite doubling our catch.
67. Q. Your principal ground for sealing you found—wheref—A. About 100 miles
westward of the Islands of St. George and St. Paul. I took 1,000 in four days there.
68. Q. During that time, when you were getting seals so quickly, was your per-
centage of loss greater there than on the coast?—A. No; they were very quiet.
314 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
69. Q. You have stated that, from your personal observation, you think the seals
were as plentiful last year as you have ever seen them in Behring Sea?—A. Yes;
much more so than I ever saw them before.
70. Q. More so at a distance of 100 to 130 miles from the nearest seal island ?—A.
Bc
. Q. What course would that lie from the Pribyloff Islands?—A. About west.
2, Q. At the time you were sealing there were there any other Canadian schooners
in your company ?—A. Yes; the*‘Annie C. Moore,” the ‘‘ Carmelite,” and the ‘‘Ariel.”
They had all an average catch.
73. Q. Have you ever heard of the McLeans raiding Eppnes Islands?—A. Yes.
74. Q@. Do you believe they did actually raid them?—A.
75. Q. Did ‘you hear the story of their going, with three Toe of the ‘‘ Webster”
and ‘‘ City of San Diego” in a crowd, landing at a passage between the rocks and
the mainland of the island, and standing there, where the water was swift, and
shooting the seals as they passedthrough?—A. Yes; but they lostagreatmany. The
captain of the ‘‘San Diego” said that they didn’t get one-tenth of what they shot.
76. Q. It is the prevailing opinion among the sealers that the ‘J. Hamilton Lewis”
was seized for landing on the islands?—A. Yes; the Russians had been watching
Mee She was seized for actually raiding the islands.
. Q. You didn’t go to the Copper Island side at all?—A. I did not.
ig. Q. In leaving Behring Sea, where did youcome out through?—A. Through the
Four Mountain Pass.
79. Q. After you had been warned out, did you speak any other cutter?—A. I did
80. Q. Did you see any seals from the time you were warned out till the time you
came through the pass?—A. They were just as thick as ever within 40 miles of the
Four Monntain Pass. We were two days sailing through them. It grieved us very
much, I can tell you, to sail through seals and couldn’t touch them.
81. Q. The Four Mountain Pass is about what longitude?—A. ‘172 Pass” we
call it.
82. Q. But you say there were plenty of seals from the time you were warned up
to within 40 miles of this pass?—A. Yes; just as thick as where we had left.
237 83. Q. Will you state in direct evidence, as though in Court, that, as far as
your knowledge goes no Canadian sealer, directly or indirectly, ever raided or
attempted to raid the seal islands?—A. I have had ample opportunity of learning if
such had been the case, and I know of none.
Captain Cox, continuing, said: I didn’t take one ‘‘bearing” female seal last season
in Behring Sea. I have taken a few which were evidently ‘‘ with milk.”
84. Q. What percentage do you say ?—A. There might be5 per cent. of what I took
which had had young; there was evidence of having had young; whether they had
last year or not I do not know.
(Signed) WILLIAM Cox.
Sworn before me this 25th day of January, 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
Victoria, B. C., February 15, 1892.
SEAL-HUNTING IN NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN AND BEHRING SEA.
Captain Charles Hackett, master and managing owner of the schooner ‘‘Annie C.
Moore,” of St. John’s, New Brunswick, being duly sworn:
Q. How many years have you been sealing?—A. This is my fifth year.
. You have had reasonable success in seal-hunting?—A. Yes.
You have followed sealing from San Francisco to Behring Sea?—A. I have.
What has been the number of your crews?—A. Twenty-three men all told.
The number of boats your vessel carried ?—A. Seven altogether.
. You have had eyery opportunity of seeing seal life?—A. I have.
On the coast did the seals appear to be as plentiful last year as former years ?—
A. I have found them so.
Q. Please state how the seals travel?—A. As a rule we find the bearing females by
themselves.
Q. Did the seals appear more timorous last year than former years?—A. I don’t
think so.
Q. Are there more seals shot whilst sleeping than travelling?—A. As far as my
experience has been that about seven-eighths, that is seven are “shot while sleeping
to one travelling.
POLLO LO
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. | 315
Q. Please state about the average distance that seals are Bhot while sleeping ?—
A. From 10 to 15 yards.
Q. What do you consider the proportion of seals lost as compared to the whole
that are hit in pelagic sealing?—A. One of my hunters, named Folger, killed over 400
seals during the season, and only lost five seals; the exact number is hard for a
master to say, but I believe that 5 per cent. would be the outside.
Q. Captain Hackett, would you consider that a hunter that lost more than five in
the hundred would not be a good hunter?—A. I certainly do.
@. Do you mean by being lost, that is by sinking?—A. When I say lost I mean by
sinking.
Q. When a seal is shot in the head you generally get him, and mostly all the seal
are shot in the head?—A. They are; and when we shoot them trom the deck of the
schooner, to lower the boat and bring the vessel to generally is from ten to fifteen
minutes; but we always get the seal floating.
Q. From actual observation, then, you would say that the actual loss during the
seasons you have been sealing will not exceed 5 per cent.?—A. I certainly say so.
Q. Are there more lost on the coast than in Behring Sea?—A. In the Behring Sea
the percentage of loss would not be 5 per cent.
Q. Have you observed in any month a greater number of females than in other
months; that is, on the coast have you observed a greater number of females taken
during the months of April and May?—A. I have not observed any difference.
Q. What proportion of females were in your catch last year (1890), and also in
1891?—A. In 1890 about one-quarter were females, and in 1891 about half and half,
Q. Would this percentage apply to your catch in Behring Sea as well as on the
coast?—A. Yes; the percentage of females in 1890 would be about one-quarter, and
in 1891 about half and half.
Q. What was yourcatch in 1890?—A. About 1,500.
Q. What was your catch in 1891?—A. 2,070 seals.
Q. What proportion of females with pup did you observe taken on the coast dur-
ing the past two years?—A. About half and half.
Q. What proportion of females with pup did you observe in Behring Sea?—A. In
a catch of 1,555 seals in Behring Sea last year I had only ten females with pup; those
with pup were taken between the 15th and last of July, and that those females
killed with pup appeared to come from the westward ana got mixed with groups of
other female seals which had their young and were entirely dried up.
Q. Do you find many yearling pups in Behring Sea?—A. No; I have found no
yearling pups in Behring Sea; we get what we call the white-belly pups; they are
from two- to three-year-old pups, and we get quite a number of barren cows.
Q. What do you mean regarding barren cows?—A. I mean those who have not
borne young during that year.
Q. Did you notice if the seals were smaller in size last year?—A. I did not; they
were as large as any year.
238 Q. Whilst in Behring Sea last year were the seals as numerous as you have
seen them before?—A. They were more numerous than I have ever seen them
before.
Q. What age is a seal-skin at its best?—A. I consider at 3 years old.
Q. What has been the distance from the Pribyloff Islands that you were while
sealing any year in Behring Sea?—A. Frem 50 to 100 miles, and was never nearer
than 50 miles.
Q. You were warned out of the Sea last year?—A. [ was.
Q. Were the seals plentiful at the time?—A. They were quite numerous.
Q. How far were you from land when warned?—A. About 100 miles to the west-
ward of Pribylotf Islands.
Q. Had you not been ordered out of the Sea your catch would have been good ?—
A. My catch would have been at least 3,000 seals.
Q. Have you ever heard of any Canadian vessels during the years that you have
been employed in the sealing industry raiding the Pribyloff seal island in Behring
Sea?—A. I have not.
Q. Yould would have certainly heard of it had it occurred?—A. Had that been
done, I would have heard it; I am acquainted with all the principal sealing men.
(Signed) CHAS. HACKETT.
Sworn before me this 15th day of February, 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
316 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Victoria, B. C., February 8, 1892.
Caleb McDougall, master of the schooner “Pioneer,” of Victoria, British Colum-
bia, personally appeared, and being duly sworn, doth depose and say:
That this is the third year that he has been engaged in hunting seals in the North-
ern Pacific Ocean and Behring Sea.
That he has had every opportunity of watching every peculiarity of seal-hunting,
That it is his opinion, from actual observation, that the number of seals lost, as
compared with those hit in pelagic sealing, is about one in fifty, that is, one seal is
lost to fifty caught.
That the loss of seals is by sinking.
That the greater number of seals are killed while sleeping.
That seals travel in groups, that is, groups of males and groups of females, also
of grey or yearling pups.
That in Behring Sea during the year 1890 in one place the hunters would bring
110, and 120, and 130 each day, all males and no females, that is, in that one place,
and the greater number of his catch (1890) were male seals, that is, his vessel had
1,100 in Behring Sea, of which 800 were males and the rest females.
That there is no doubt but that the old bull seals drive the younger males away
from the islands, and that is the reason why he considers that more males are caught
than females in Behring Sea.
That the proportion of barren cows is about one in ten to the bearing cows, that
is, there is one barren and ten bearing in Behring Sea.
That since he has been engaged in sealing he thinks the seals are increasing, and
that he found the seals in Behring Sea thicker last year than he ever found them.
That it depends entirely upon what portion of the Sea that the vessel is in and
striking a band of males or females, but with all vessels in Behring Sea the catch is
always more males than females.
That he does not know of any single instance of a British sealing-vessel raiding
the seal islands in Behring Sea, and he is quite sure that no British vessel in any case
attempted to raid the seal islands. If they had, he would have heard of it.
(Signed) C. McDouGALL.
Sworn before me, this 8th day of February, 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
Victoria, B. C., February 1, 1892.
1. Q. Captain William O’Leary, how many years have you been sealing?—A. This
is my sixth year.
2. Q. You have been generally successful?—-A. Yes. 1
3. Q. You have had all opportunities of watching every peculiarity of seal-hunt-
ing?—A. Yes.
4. Q. What is your opinion of the proportion of seals lost as compared with those
hit in pelagic sealing ?—A. My opinion is that only 3 to 5 per cent. are lost.
5. Q. Do you mean those who are lost by sinking?—A. Yes.
6. Q. Are there any lost in any other way?—A. Yes; by escaping.
7. Q. What is your opinion of the proportion of females to males taken during the
season on the coast?—A. My experience on the coast has been that the females and
males are about equal, and of the females there are an equal number of barren cows
and bearing cows.
239 8. Q. Whatis your opinion about the proportion of bearing cows?—A. About
half and half, that is, half barren and half bearing cows.
9. Q. In Behring Sea is your catch chiefly male seals?—A. Yes; about three to
one; that is, three males to one female.
10. Q. Captain O’Leary, what is your opinion about the increase or decrease of
seals?-—A. I think the seals were as plentiful last season as I have ever seen them.
11. Q. Captain O’Leary, being one of the oldest sealing captains, do you know of
any single instance of’a British sealing-vessel raiding the seal islands?—A. I have
never heard of one, nor do I believe that any British vessel raided or attempted to
raid the seal islands; I would have heard it if such had been attempted.
(Signed ) WILLIAM O’LEARY.
Sworn before me, this lst February, 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs.
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 317
Victoria, B. C., February 16, 1892.
RE SEALING IN PACIFIC OCEAN AND BEHRING SEA.
Abel Douglas, present master and managing owner of Canadian schooner ‘May
Belle,” of Victoria, British Columbia, being duly sworn, in answer to the following
questions, says:
Q. How many years have you been sealing?—A. I have been seven years.
Q. You have been reasonably successful in the sealing industry ?—A. Yes, I have.
Q. You have followed the seals along the west coast and in Behring Sea?—Yes,
Sir; I have.
Q. How many men composed your crew last year?—A. Twenty-one men, all told.
Q. The number of your boats carried?—A. Six boats.
Q. You have had every opportunity of being acquainted with the habits and life
of the seals?—A. I have.
Q. On the coast, did the seals appear as plentiful last year as former years?—A. I
have seen no decrease; in fact, [saw more seals last year, but they appeared a little
shyer.
Q. In Behring Sea, did the seals appear as plentiful last year as formerly?—A. I
saw more seals and larger bodies of seals in Behring Sea last year than in any year
before.
Q. Did the seals appear more timorous in Behring Sea than formerly ?—A. No, they
did not, but seemed quite quiet, and not frightened.
Q. On the coast do the females travel by themselves?—A. The females generally_
travel by themselves; think the males don’t travel so far south. We find the males
appear more plentiful towards Alaska.
Q. Are there more seals shot sleeping than travelling ?—A. Yes, Sir.
Q. What is the usual distance that seals are shot while sleeping ?—A. About 40 to
45 feet.
Q. What would be the distance shooting at a travelling seal?—A. About 30 to 40
ards.
? Q. Where are the seals usually struck when shot?—A. In the head and neck.
Q. From your long experience, what do you consider the proportion of seals lost
as compared to the whole that are hit in pelagic sealing?—A. I am quite sure that
not more than from three to five in the hundred, in one year in Behring Sea; out of
216 seals taken by myself, I never lost a single one; and last year I lost seven out of
205 killed by myself; the loss was by sinking.
Q. Having personal experience hunting every year, how quickly do you reach the
animal shot sleeping?—A. About five to ten minutes if the seal has been shot
sleeping.
Q. Slee eping seals don’t sink quickly, do they ?—A. Sleeping seals very seldom
sink. The loss by sinking is altogether the travelling seals.
Q. Then you would say ; that the percentage of loss, that is, three to five in the
hundred, has been your experience for several years?—A. Yes; it has been about the
same.
Q. Is the loss greater on the coast than in Behring Sea?—A. No, Sir; very few are
lost on the coast.
Q. On the coast, have you taken a greater number of females in some months than
in other months; say, have you observed a greater number of females taken in April
and May ?—A. No psiibe
Q. Where do you find the yearling grey pups?—A. Always on the coast.
Q. Do you find many pups in Behring Sea?—A. No; I have only found two grey
pups in Behring Sea.
Q. Doyou find any brown pups, about 2 yearsold, in Behring Sea?—A. Very few.
Q. Have you observed in Behring Sea that the females have delivered their
young?—A. Yes, Sir.
Q. Do you take any females with pup in Behring Seaf—A. Very few; say one or
two in the season. They have all delivered their young before the vessels enter
Behring Sea.
Q. Did you observe any difference in the size of seal-skins last year?—A. None;
they are the same as former years.
Q. What has been the distance from the seal islands that you usually hunted
in Behring Seain the past years?—A. From 60 to 100 miles generally to the west-
ward.
240 Q. You were warned out last year, and by whom?—A. Yes, Sir; and by the
United States ship ‘‘ Mohican.”
Q. At the time you were warned, what distance were you from the seal islands?—A.
At the time I was warned I was 115 miles to the north-west of the seal islands.
Q. At the time you were warned were the seals plentiful?—A. I have never seen
the seals so plentiful in Behring Sea.
318 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Q. Do you say that had you not been forced out of Behring Sea that you would
have had an excellent catch?—A. I certainly would have had a good catch.
Q. Then you consider that having been ordered out of Behring’s Sea last year that
it has been a serious financial loss to you?—A. It has been a great loss to me and a
very great hardship.
Q. Have you ever heard of a British vessel, during the years that you have been
engaged in the sealing industry, raiding, or attempting to raid or take seals in any
way on the Pribyloff or seal islands in bebring Sea?—A. I have not at any time heard
of any British vessel taking any seals from the seal islands.
Q. If any vessel had attempted to do so you would have certainly heard of it?—A.
I certainly would; for I am acquainted with all the principal sealing men sailing
from this port.
(Signed) ABEL DOUGLAS.
Sworn before me, this 16th day of February, 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MILne, Collector of Customs.
Victoria, B. C., February 20, 1892.
RE SEALING IN PACIFIC OCEAN AND BEHRING SEA.
Laughlin L. McLean, present master of the Canadian schooner “ Favourite,” of
Victoria, British Columbia, and master of the same vessel for the past seven years,
personally appeared, and being duly sworn, in reply to the following questions doth
depose and say:
q. Captain McLean, you have been master of the ‘ Favourite” during the past
seven years?—A. Yes; for seven years.
Q. You have been reasonably successful in the sealing industry?—A. Yes; I have.
Q. You have had every opportunity of observing the seals and seal life?—A. I
have had every opportunity.
Q. What number of men compose your crew usually?—A. From thirty to thirty-
two men, all told.
Q. How many Whites and how many Indians?—A. Seven Whites and about twenty-
five Indians compose my crew.
Q. Have had Indian hunters every year?—A. Every year but one, that was 1887.
Q. Do you prefer Indians to Whites for hunters?—A. I do.
Q. Were the seals to your observation as plentiful last year as former years?—A.
They were more plentiful. ~
(). Were they as plentiful on coast?—A. Yes.
Q. Were the seals as plentiful in Behring Sea as in former years?—A. In my expe-
rience I have never seen the seals as plentiful in Behring Sea.
Q. Did the seals in Behring Sea appear te be more timorous?—A. No; they did
not; but appeared quite tame.
Q. From your long experience, what do you consider the proportion of seals lost
as compared to the whole number that are hit in pelagic sealing?—A. I would say
with Indians about one in ten, and with good white hunters about 5 per cent.
Q. Have you observed in any months more females than males?—A. No; but I
think there are more males in the month of April on the coast.
Q. Did you have more males than females in the coast catch?—A. Yes; I had
more males than females on the coast.
Q. What percentage of males to females did you have in Behring Sea last year
and any year?—A. About half and half, and every year about the same.
Q. Did you notice that the females taken in Behring Sea had delivered their
young?—A. Yes; they had all their young some time before that. They give up
their young about the end of July. We never get them with pup after July.
Q. What proportion of females taken in Behring Sea are barren?—A. About 5
per cent.
Q. Do you ever find yearling or grey pups in Behring Sea?—A. No; we never find
them.
Q. Do you find brown pups (2 or 3 years old) in Behring Sea?—A. We find a few;
not many; occasionally one or two.
Q. From your long observation, do you think that the females taken in Behring Sea
have remained long enough with their pups so that they care for themselves on the
Jand?—A. Yes, I do.
Q. You mean by barren cows those that have not borne that year?—A. Yes, I do.
Q. In Behring Sea do they all travel together, that is, males and females?—A.
They are pretty well mixed up. .
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 319
241 Q. Then you say that, including barren cows, that the percentage of all
females taken in Behring Sea is about equal to ‘the males?—A. About that,
and no more.
Q. Do I understand you clearly to say that the catch on the coast was mostly
males?—A. Yes, I do.
Q. Captain McLean, would you please say in what proportion the males were to
the females in your catch on the coast?—A. About two-thirds males, that is, two
males to one female.
Q. Did you observe any change in the habits of the seals last year from former
years?—A. On the coast [ do not observe any difference, but in Behring Sea I find
the seals further from land; a few years ago I found them 25 or 30 miles from land,
that was our favourite fishing ground; but ‘the last two or three years my best catches
have been from 140 to 150 miles from land.
Q. Have you ever known or heard of any British vessel engaged in the sealing
industry raiding or attempting to raid or to take seals in any way from the Pribyloft
or seal isiands in Behring Sea?—A. I have not heard that any British vessel in any
year attempted any such thing g, as I know all the principal men engaged in sealing,
and I would certainly have heard it if such had occurred.
Q. You have heard of some American vessel raiding the seal islands?—A. Yes,
two years ago.
Q. You were ordered out of Behring Sea last year?—A. Yes, by Her Majesty’s ship
* Porpoise.”
Q. Were you in good hunting ground when warned?—A. Yes, the seals were very
thick.
Q. Had you been let alone your catch would have been very good?—A. Yes, my.
catch would have been an extraordinary good one, for I had 2 ,183 when ordered out,
and I had a full month to go, and my catch if let alone would have been at least
3,500 seals.
Q. On your way out did you observe that the seal were plentiful in Behring Sea ?—
A. They were thick all the way out to the pass coming out of the sea, and it was
very annoying to see so many and not be able to touch them.
Q. Where did Her Majesty’s ship ‘‘ Porpoise” speak you and order you out?—A. In
173° west longitude, about 135 miles from nearest land.
Then you consider that being ordered out last year has been great financial
loss and hardship to you?—A. I do, most certainly; my vessel was equipped. for a
voyage two months longer.
(Signed) LAUGHLIN L. McLEan,
Master, Schooner ‘‘ Favourite.”
Sworn before me this 20th day of February, 1892.
(Signed) A. R. MiILne, Collector of Customs.
ig GUkd Aas nee hd 15 AA CE
rng Ea ls rors ok te
rae Da
art eee sar:
ea ny Sa! Eres att:
on aati f
Mh see © Bay Cae AT gs ae
S F tit av
; ? . ey : i> rt y 3} f by, wal ST a
PADS MICE AY Gebt ES fh er ee Taha oe as 1, ATED bop aW SEOs
~ Bi seeay Pit Vig ae Ce Spe PS jaAl VAL Fis +, a 1a 45 Poniee, ny ou
ay. . oR ick aia Bi
r ’ ~A Tr
7] Py Sie f ‘a: | sg Cosretéat ae Oe asia Paha =
- e Taft igi iL att : % rite eos Ey Sey a > 3 3 ae dy & Teg s see
on nit ee Tiras thigh wei ad 1b AG : a fer tow be oes, * oe +h ys tie RO
_ Maignw oF ietegie wade fe Rit a nated i} Bs SIS, vith og
7 ie x , Zeer ATSib Umit tebe © RDO e ee Pie ai p te? Beer. hl
Bit) Ao P Aiitonee (ale ORY | cues Pe ots ate tne By rear i? ie
| | aaa
~ u
_ _ : } : ;
Me v ' ' ‘ 4
t
a = >,
i ;
7 a 1 7 5
a a is re
: on
' 5 i :
ce : 7 Lui t j .
7 kot t & t ;
.
4 i 7 =
- 7 , " ‘ eh j
oe 7 :! ‘ L4é i
y
he ‘ ;
py : H
—
oa ee
. ug ; =
' + ’
a ~
- P =
_ ? F
A .
4" ss
7 a
*
7 -
oa € 7
7 ies m
A ‘ ay
" at ~. '
“a ¢ <
= se
- ;
; . 7 7 ~
=- “a:
i ra se ‘
a all wy he
=p) a ted Wee 4
INDEX TO REPORT OF BEHRING SEA COMMISSION, AND REPORT
OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Paragraph.
A.
Acland (Akerly), Dr., autopsy of dead pups, 1891
PNET CaaS sare emis oo ro cienieonic ise ices eeoose eee seesactcicsseesoseetie
Baker, Captain W. E
Bisset, Captain A
TDNTEYELIC SRI sa ape PEE NS ar
Hackett, Captain C
ARCOM G yO UO estn tenet ioe Sees Sheena sanegeanementayesescese | ae ee ee emia
Laing, A. D
McDougall, C
McLean, L. L
Magnesen, Captain T. M
O'Leary, Captain W
Petit, Captain W
Roberts, G
Thomson, R
Alaska Catch—
Sales in London
Alaska Commercial Company—
Advantages derived from islands by
Seals on Robben Island destroyed by
Treatment of natives by
Allen, Professor—
Females receive males in water
Killing under Russian management
Aleutian Islands—
Early history of
Hormerly resorted to by fur-seals.......-----------.---------
Passes through which seals travel
PopulavionioLpinieachy, bimesessseeseeeessees seceiem chasse ener
Aleuts—
Interests in seal industry
Method of hunting fur-seal
Amsterdam Island—
Fur-seals on
Appendices
Area Limit (see Limitation of Sealing)—
Hasily meanaoeable onl shoresese ss -ecacee ee sce-ssecc se seecee
Possible arrangement at sea
Area of rookeries (see also Rookeries)—
Accurate definition impossible
Lichen as indication of
Polished rocks as indications of
Grey pups seen at
Attu Island—
Seals seen at
Australasia—
Protective regulations in
Bachelor Seals (see Killable Seals and Males).
Barclay Sound—
Seals seen near in December, January, and February
Barren Females—
Large number obs
oe
erved
iT
Behminc ried en Ye nh en PEE ESREE ESTE,
Description of
Rookeries on
B §, PT VI-——21
Sh he ey
675
513
724, 725
295
663, 664
248 |
248
141
142, 143
395
380
377-879
182
431-433
646
262
265-267
Page.
322
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS,
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, ete.—Continued.
Paragraph.
Bonilla Island—
Seals obtained near, in spring, mostly cows
Brazil—
Reply to inquiries.
Breeding-grounds—
Nature of
Breeding-places—
Effect of stopping killing on
In Gulf of Georgia
IGT IS ILENE A 8 open gnooso see deUdeL oo taco Soo oRSaOsenrs
In Southern Hemisphere
Killing on (see Killing).
On Haystack Island
On Race Rocks, near Victoria
On Smith's Island
Original condition of
Possible establishment of, on coasts of British Columbia or
on Aleutian wis amd sisassmie= sales eraser erate etter tele yeetalatorertaecle
Reasons for selection of by seals
Time of arrival at, and departure from
Breeding Rookeries—
Tope ATO 0) Bo eameopS conbonp ca soopoaDpEdgnonobSsconeEeeTee
British Columbia—
Boats and men employed in fur-seal fishery of (1887-91)
Fur-seals permanent winter residents on coast of
Pelagic catch, and vessels (1871-91)
Replies to inquiries from Indian agents and other residents in-
Sealing: fleet, vale tof: mi VSO Ve = ea patents ol aiinleiatetaielel=in lois eo
Skins taken on coasts of, by Indians.......------.--...--.---
British Commissioners —
Commissions
Conduct of inquiry
Instructions to
TIER O Ss) AEMNE es sen ae oagnaEsoaScaceSooSsanonS coe
Plan of Report
Several Report of.
Brownlow, Earl—
Information as to breeding of deer
Bryant, Captain—
Copulation often occurs in water
Death of seals from natural causes..-....-..-.-s2.---s------
Rollin ocmndersRissiansee senses se aa ees aateea een
Bulls (see Males).
Burgomaster Gulls—
Seals killed by, on Robben Island
Sealing unknown in
Canton—
Reply to inquiries from
Cape Horn—
Skins sold in London
Cape of Good Hope—
Protective Regulations at..-.-..--..----------++-2+2+ +2222
Heply to inquiries from
Seal life at
Catch—
Composition of (see Pelagic Sealing).
Diagram illustrating
Seals and sea-otters in Japan
“Challenger ’—
Obveryations on seals during voyage of
Report by Mr. John Murray
Charts (see Maps and Diagrams).
Chile—
Early seal fisheries on coast of
Close Season (see Limitations).
Best combined with number limit
Defined
Different effects on sea and shore
On:HalklandTslandss.s 5.22 ae Seen steams eemmernceneeeees
Only applicable to pelagic sealing
In Uruguay
Clubbing—
At Cape of Good Hope
Greater care recommended
In Falkland Islands
207-212
170,171
Vi, vii
3-5
V, vi
4,5
5
3
184, 185
216
194
154, 155
154, 155
Facing 22
166
181
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, etc.—Continued.
—_—_—_—_—_—————————————————————— oO — — — ——eeseseseeeeeSeSSSSSSSSSSMSSSSsMsMMMMMMMMssseseseseses
Paragraph.
Coal sold to natives—
Spr CClObasese oe Coc edeseocsce sce cect ces ee eec aeons 725
CoastiVatchy cerca eee eee cece core ccs cmees cote cece ee ree eee 635
Cod—
Numerous mean behrinowlslands--.ssesse ee sen eeneric ss cece 231
Coiwmlon tery etme rceeece scion se meee rece eee eee ne eanaee cree 295-297
HOssiblevat sea wout usuallonlandienesnecesscce cece nen cell nee 295
Commander Islands—
Mateo fis covenye- wanes alesse etna tics sac Sse este ciceee se 247
Difterentromsbribylot lslands=--eeerss sees cncesecoe nee een. 261
ILS RM Ge Ghahkeky O Nooo sponse HoEsanccericeEoubodossusosposoee 706 |
Migrations littlemecorded|ses-cseseee see cena ee ses e eee cn ee 197 |
phy sicalcharacteristiCsOlje =<. se- scene ee cece ce ecenoeeses 244-276 |
PLOLECLION ag aAINS tad SOs cee sesso] oes oe ecee-cencene ce 167
SalesioresicinsmlsondoMeceemaceccr se sees cee tee noes oe ce ae eee eee ee nee
Seal-killingpnrearlypy earns ONuscseccnss ee seescs cases Soe eicnla seek ee men meee
Seals arrive later than on Pribyloff Islands.......-.----.--. 283
‘* seen all the winter in mild seasons ..........-.-.--.---- 202
Skins takenttor shipment sec -was cerns = os oshoece cence Meee Sell \aceeeae een ack eee
Communication between seals on Pribyloff and Commander
tslands(seeiausoylnterminelint)-sss-— -e-cee sone eee so ee estan oe 451-457
Composition of Catch (see Pelagic Sealing)—
Hvadenceotsealingicaptainsen-2= 2 --ses-ee scenic sess cscs 645-647
iPercentagelof bearingifemales----------ssescec-eceneesscs eae 644
Copper Island—
WES CrIPVIONGO lane see eee serene ences cae eeace eee e noeeae nee 263
ROOKeM es ONmerseee ase arena aceee crest ase oaeeeeeen corer 268
Wearlinesiscarceonyin TBO) sac cece cece set eeks Olesen 444
Cows (see also Cows suckling)—
PALS OR WINO MELA Hi) DIU DRS: DOLMa term etal ieee sieeleeet iaee clinical 285
PATTY AGO MRS ANG Soot eforateo sieleetee lejos s sie nice Meceisecte aeaeoe 6 & 279
JOP USO TPS PROPER hoe nO aes ote = Sema aaSnScesnsosedecerooe 306
Mistances, theyigorto feeds .s-5- 0. ss niessssececeec ce oeeo tee 309-312
Travel rapidly in Behring Sea when in pup...-....--......-- 187
Cows suckling—
JGMIGG! GIbRGR Gs deodsqaccoodecaobccacenndoHToEcosoSECEgueseLoe 314
INauIVeS Saye one yiGOMObeAb. seccons a a-leeies eee coceee cee eseee 207
Remain asa rule close to Shore. - =.= 2--<ss--60- meesccesce ce 309
Remarks: as COMMCOR yaaa ints see Soca cect ice tceos face ceelnce. 317-324
Their own young. Analogy of other animals...............- 317-325
WilewsiotErotessorE lio tts. sos ceme ee nes cee scence er eemeces 320
Currents:in:- North: Racific Ocean.- = 2. --cccccenseccceces secs ces 196
D.
Dall, Mr.—
Harly history of Aleutian Islands.......-------.-.-..-.ss---- 248
Dates of arrivaliof seals on islands..---.:...-..---.-.-5.e.cc---- 278
Dead pups—
Autopsy byeDreAcland! (Aikerly;)- 22-0. cesaasaceeeewcinee ease 352
a Dyer a Gunther eee a eeean see csie sone e ee nee eerie 354
ACK CONE ON Mle Te SO) meet eeinte se a seiniseiclecer ase eelericmemenness 355
None on St. George’s Island 348
INotiduetopelapicsealin gg: -sesssesssescss sc ceeee emcees 3 Sei 355
@npNonth-east-Pomtirookenryasscccsccc see scea seco ee oe enue nee 346
Onwlolstoinookenysa-essreese eens ecce etree eee eee enone 348
OpinioniofeMinyHhowloteusecemes seh ene cerereercs cece eer nee 348
Opinions of natives as to causes of.....---.-.-.....-.--..-.. 346
ropa ble callses(Otemaneeemcrisceacciece smientace cs eree cece Goolek 356
Decrease—
PAST © Cleat alate =a ate tee eeiee oes eee see ences sees 57, 94
Chiefly of-malesyoncislants senerscsneseer nee osc cosecceeoee. fil
Mayaberarested by Neg ulabionsss--secnce cece scree eceeasnce 94
Not entirely due to pelagic:sealing..........-----..----....0- 71
Noto bsernved \biSOa va sa dcee ose emis sie oe a eiste sine ocamicee nae 87
OnsCommandermlslandssnaccscetoccee coca o-csceeceeeeeecrne 92
Onvlandwobserved unl S80easceacascecace oastec soneeseceoeecee 686
Onvbribylofi islands’ s:asesenecccacciscioee cree cece e oe noecnee 89-91
OrroiniandsprogressiOf= na. cecsacte anes se snce ee erences soccer 674-693
Deer-breeding—
Analogous to seal-breeding. Information from Karl Brown-
LON fo sobboddeoudd semesac0Bce SOOL SoSH USS sOU Beno SansoRcscokod) seeecoseeeous cesta
Departure of seals from islands.............2..--.--.eeeecns-neee 282
Depletion (see also Extermination)—
Greatendangerofonishoresqcjcce css ceacinsa seis ceenas= a5 oem 7
MGCSN dan Cenor, AGCA (2 << /Jois\ain c/scin/=emiainiasesalsiaeioce ne cieeeioe © 118
Depositions (see Affidavits).
Destruction—
IN sibumalK CASS iO fmm ans csieni ome ecieajes ne os ses acesectmateneenes 326-343
Devereux, Captain G.—
HSealsionicoastiOnmVaNCONVCL. « -..-e oee ane accncecuccceececies 184
Diagrams (see also Maps)—
Comparison of pelagic and island catch in one season.....-..|.....-------------
a
of numbers killed on land and sea from early
LINTO8) LOPLOSeNGS « - = .<5.<ci3-sscnsmnecceeeeees|sanaeee ene cenecens
weet tere ce ewenenes
177
Facing 22
156
324
KEPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, ete.—Continued.
Diseases of fur-seal (see also Epidemics)
Distances cows go to feed. Various statements as to.---......--
IDFA oy RMN ELC G REE Is oe monoeneabaanOSeobonoouDsouoRneeec
Affected byawinds) and) (Curments ase eee eee em <leininine wieeelata a
Charts pl banderas nee ee ee ee eee een ete aeesee eeeinoe
Means taken to) ASCORtAIN: cates cam ae coeeise alata linlo aiotelesiiniat=
WeanlouSwODSCLVabLONS OM seer cee see aa ele eee alee er
Drives—
Causeviriphtrandidistresseestcnse =e sce mleeisteecsicsiciae==enicleinioct=
Cruelty of
Large number of seals rejected from, as unkillable...---..-.
Length of, on Commander Islands.........-..-...-----------
CeO OnE Tb vy lots] ACS eeietsteve mre slatelsininte ase etree
WOR ECs Osim Olan sosooseacaooabosesoobosboeSreosEsase
Mr. Palmer’s opinion on
Mortality caused by excessive....--..--.--------------------
Professor mlliott/siopinion Ons -e-- os sasee-saseeneee eee eee eee
Recommendations as to regulation of.......-----.-----------
Vital energy of seals impaired by.---.--..--.-----.---------
Waste of seal life in
Weakness of seals after
Early Explorations in Behring Sea—
References to fur-seals in accounts of.........---------------
Elliott, Professor—
Observations on death of seals from natural causes. -.-..------
a on driving
on interrelation between Pribyloff and Com-
mander seals
on proportion of males to females.-..---..-...--
On em tbe peo nget eno neenosanasnEadkearooockee
Epidemics (see also Diseases)—
Ah CapeloiG oodeHo neem creme iam miaaicie cies miele si\elelselaialei= ==)
Evidence—
Circular of inquiry to Governments..-.-.-.-.-----.-----------
List of persons and Governments supplying.--.--.---.-.---
Repliesvor Governments =o mte siete ne ra lelalniarelate cee einieieseiesie
Excrement—
PAD BENCO OL AN OUEC eet cas ctae tole cjemiaeiciem vicina alone wicictetale jee /oie-Poere
None on rookeries
Extent of ground occupied by seals
Extermination (see also Depletion) of Fur-seals—
Mimnanciallysampossiblosseeecsacee ssa) s-ee ses eee alee (aelel=aalar=
Fairweather Ground—
Seals most numerous on from 1st to 15th June..-.-..........-
Falkland Islands—
Protective Regulations on
AVE D hiypbOin QT OS aie aaeielee isle nies aialmialaiate le ele stale aiale elaine ieee stra
Farallones Islands—
SealsptormerlysbrediOneeres--acsn= sees eces esis alee saat
Females (see also Cows)—
MeseructlonlOlw all CApOs eee nc seem aaela(eelstelselninteraimisterasisiela (=
Excess of, owing to killing of males on shore......-..--.----
Large number killed on islands in 1868
Proportion of, in pelagic catch... -...2. 22.020 cecceseenccnene-
Fish—
"AlMMkindsiof, eateniby seals. cess se ses cnes elccesmnctenieein ele nizise
Large number of, near rookeries
weet ecw wwe ec eee e enter een ne
aA
istinctive, for pelagic sealers in Japan
“ recommended
Flattery, Cape—
Catchyofusealsinearsesr=- accesses sonsscececeacoeacekceicse sere
Flower, Sir W. H.—
Memorandum on classification of fur-seal.............------
Fogs—
VAISHIS tance sbOsTAIMOnsy-cMoerecincis > alesis se eisisseeeerinene cs
Food—
Absence of, in cows killed on Commander Islands..-......-.--
Distance to which seals go for, from islands--...-...---...-..-
Fur-seal on Juan Fernandez reported to abstain from......-.
LY surface not bottom feeders
Information gained on, from natives....---.......-.---------
Migration habits depend on (see Migration)........---------
Of far-Seali seco bse aches ace cine aacicn tesa tesceeoscenaceneer
Only bachelors and cows leave islands for-.-..-......-------
Principaliksind siotsaseess sere ae clase see acistele staeinaistee
Rarely found in seals killed on islands
Stones found in stomachs of seals
Worms in stomachs of seals ......... Blelsescisesinoceeciecaceine
Paragraph.
339
309-312
209-223
209
205/206: ee ards sae
BB Tubsoieeesoaeee ae eee
Td le cc eects eee
AD Nei. ewe ey dyeeeee
Like. teste ee
OTT. \Wicige cee
LAS eh uate Ee 155
Wes 8 AS bel oS 154
ces 8 pag 151-153
456'\:-\2ci- eee
187 :\2i 28 eeeoeeeeee
129-193
155, 156
248 || savwcateu ue see
eae g aoe 154
16951 | moe tee oarctateanene
808i) cea cba odeeeneees
97,718 teontocece ee
O96 lta 22's Sea eee
981'|.. cence ae
U Aacee oon oe 165
162 |. o28icaseer eee
185 172, 173
sol Mista aucatare 185
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
325
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, etc.—Continued.
Paragraph. Page
HowloreMir—— (ARR 8 ee RM rr se aceec noo eee eee
Opiniontas toydeadspupsiiny1S9llo =. -saceecserissecestecee: esses. 348
Harsealk(seevalso! Seals) mean) 0 ale MNOMNLT (RIM eNte Whew PM ET ot Je. te ah Net eve ds Sra pees gp crete
Abundance of, affected by weather ........-.........--.-.--- 408
oe INVSCAMCAT! TOOKETIOS Sa ames en = sciesemeleca= i= o- BUS |S -at Set foc cease
Becoming-more pelagi cece sscose seeetee eee ene ae see cer eee oe ChyC RE) ena ophecgeawercens
Bred formerly on rocks in Hecate Strait ......--.-...----...- AGT | Lee ce seme araeae
Breeding grounds on southern part of North America-...-.- SAT Hd 5 Ok ees Sh. ache eae
Breeding-placesvOt-s-sepin eases ieee sees cece oc cecci ccc: BES Yd ce cone eee eon Sas c
Breed on outlying rocks on Asiatic coast.-..-.-...---.....-- O23) aee eae eceacees coer
Change of habits\in recent years -----. 2... -5-2-----ccenee-~ SIG GA Gol oe omnia cle ce nee
w “ Wonteach sidelof hacitichascssssccnee esos = PAUSES oeeee ter inet
He ‘ea PLOGUced by disturbance! esssesccseecens-e AG) || ates ek ee
Contents of stomachs examined -....-.......-.----------.--. 234 lla socizcaeele soc came
Continued abundancelat sea) 2-2: se. soe soe oe. - sence SOQ=A OMA Re ae etartaisa¥ai ta ste ereiete
Date of arrival at Pribylotf Islands.-.----.-.....2.20222....: W887 > oe ake Soe Societe
ne leavangseribyloilislands2aecaeestan se eneee see aen ee TAS Seen ace ea renee
Distribution at sea (see Distribution).
Does not migrate in Southern Hemisphere..-.....---..--..--- DON Earn ams Jae eee ee
Harly takesjof, on Pribylotf Islands 2-..-..-.--=--------<---- UPd eemeonae -cconcaee
Evidence of return to same hauling-grounds .......--..-...- 74ND Wares pacino no naisoe.
iHxcession breeding males)in 187) sc: 22. cece oo ssce se see cee ce (7/30 SR OR RecN yA senisocee
EXCOSSIVe kallin' pot sin T868Es sass nonce ae cetcinise ae ete Meee ae CU7AS0SN os sees
Food of (see Food). Ti
Habitats in winter and summer (see Migration).-.........-.. 28a) ni tecltelais cee erie
abitsiofi(seeseliabibs)hascse se cee cco ocaas cess seacesce eee! AGI |. 9s 22 SSR oe ais
Hunted byeAlewbssseee ater seems asae esses cee soe eecenee ee ATO l aaa eeheereine sens
ne Indians from time immemorial-..-................ Gy ( eietreettia ast eee
ImMCrOASed swialiNOSM\Ole eco osc eee wes eces dees hekccecuesecee ce BL renee: PG te ae ee oe iomcecs reece
MaximMumiac@i0 fic. sec) seciewos so soscemrst oonicess ce cees 288) oc cce.n ers easietoecine
Migration range of (see Migration) .........-...--..--..--.--- 2 actor secarcian seestere revere
Mostabundantinear rookeniesies--s-sse-eee cers see oe nen ceeeee Dia seit topes eee
Motives tor landing cs. sass saeco to ccicsecc cesses cas ciccneies ZAG ES eeien asec
iNortherntlimit! of f2 ccc se ce seissssecemes seeclsne Ses ceme se aoe Urs osha tie crersia crate sien
Number killedvonubribyloth islandss--+----s-ce-2-es2s 2-2-5 -- TL 78 0) Renee Seer cece
‘* seen atsea not proportionate to distance from islands. PAGS ees Bree Ses IS cyC
Of eastern side of North Pacific; extreme southern range of- LOO Serle cinta eaeee ene
Of North Pacitic identical in habits with those of South Seas. CET Ba SenSeememocesoacs
Old breeding-grounds of, on—
Giulio Genoa min scissor actisjso Sataceistens se eee cine aces ctoucete eens. Seer 172
avs tac wil slan disecaaenec asec ee ne ease eee nele cistern salah ta aacsamenasitonate 172
RacepRocks) (NEATVACbLOria)pmere sere setae ce oon s ee ee fe ool sence arte he rme oe 171, 172
Smiths sland (Washington Mernitory)=]---ces-ses-see- hee nereseesteseeee 172
Piaceniclassificationlofmammialiay ss seeseesss lose. eeeceal|-ossesenee came ne ne 185, 186
Possibility of deserting breeding-grounds if too much
RAT ASSCCtee sere eee ee Soc eee ne ae eee oon see eiewecis AAG) | Brenishiac ate <foercleromeres
Scarcity of, on Pribyloff Islands, in 1835-36 ...............--. SOON oe es eee oe ee
Table of number killed on Pribyloff Islands, 1817-91 .....-... iM Se ya ers ememietany eects
Wsedlasifoodibyslmdisns te -ene sem ce wien nace oese ee cis cone oe BS2N eee e cosas see
Varieties of, in Southern Hemisphere .................-.-.-- 885ristececesucteedeces
Furriers—
TiAl GINO ChE ooo coadmaccacosaoncndococcadecsosneHesorecnnges UB) llbamocscasccossdsacs
G.
Gaff—
Used toisecure’ wounded seals) --.----- 2-5... --c--csenee cence Oe ercicdencstosnecacs
Gott, Mr.—
Opinionlomdrivies:o-c4m.0 sa s<2 54 ~ -ee atin sise tee e eeeeinwe tates (AUT eer epepeese acsearle
ROpOrvion decrease: Cseniscceacisens acacia aes Adee sean ee 692i Eee ec sa neces
Germany—
Interests of, insealingyindUstl yn sc... ecisesece scene cece UNE}. locecosecooosebscoaS
Grass—
ASunG@ication Ofmookery areaea-s5----- 2-4 sane eeecseeiie Chey ORY! organo seanagecocear
Gravid Females—
Rallediot QueentCharlotte Tslands=----.---.-.+--2---s-2e--=- G88 Was iossetmsoaaes sees
Killing of, deprecated by pelagic sealers .......--..---.-.--- (HEM poanbaprebeoaetotec
oe st sshouldtbeavoided! -c os. .ccccceescecsaceecce-ssece SON a-cthepseemsoe ss
Number in pelagic spring catch OS see rcmcttas sterertaiaietats
Seldom killed in Behring Sea ...-..-.- VG De Bean te Cacocerre
‘Eravelrapidhy in) Behrin Pe Sea eis-\<- 2.4 ese eee setae een S78 | eceeetetee sees ae
Gray, Captain—
Metter omhair-seals* 2 cis0 saeco h at sccscics mses eeasaeeeese ssl siceccceccise ott 186, 187
Grebnitzky, M.—
Wiewaslasito miptabion! OfSealssce.-osc= since aeceo ose mecca 202) | soe, acts aemmstecmcies
ss ‘* proportion of females to males .............-.--- Be Ee 5d icra Sars Sa seyeetssie sie
e PES UNE OV ens KN See cents atatsaleclsistele sialeleisoe eee ae sae BOD ators ncjsicists tee ieeie -ee
Greenland—
BLUSHMLe GIS] vel OMKaAtL EGU cree satan win syeiels alsiainie eisielaieisictieetelise|| stasemicieinimiele ciate <iciee 200-202
Hairssealibisheryeherulavions. = s2.-2.006cs----5-ciee oct ees c|semecedacnewece! oc 198-203
Norwegian Law and Ordinance. .......-.c.cccesscesee senna liste sistas depreiaweeiciat 202, 203
326
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, ete.—Continued.
Paragraph.
Grey pups—
Large numbers seen in 1870in Knight's and Kingcombe Inlets -
Seen at Atka Island
«jn Queen Charlotte Sound
at Unalaska
Ginther. Dr.—
Autopsy of dead pup
oe
tn.
Habitats—
British Columbian coast in winter in Eastern Pacific
In summer and winter
Japanese coast in winter in Western Pacific
No separate summer and winter, in Southern Hemisphere -.-
Summer and winter distinct in North Pacific
Habits of fur-seal (see Fur-seal)—
Cause of change in
Change of, in recent years
Hair-sea]—
Diseases of
Letter from Captain Gray as to
Protective measures (see Greenland and Newfoundland).
Harems—
Breakrup,Ot .-52 see cos tec sc Secs paste so sea aecee eee se aecee
Danger if too large
IN CREASEA'SI26 Ofte toi de gto wino wa sae esas tees esicce oe cee
Proportion of males to females
Hunting rights of —
Aleuts
Natives of British Columbia
ae of islands
i.
Ice—
Mortality of seals caused by
Tnerease of seals on Pribyloff Islands in later Russian times. .-.
Indians —
Employment of, in sealing-schooners ..-..-------------------
Interest of, in seal fishery
Method of hunitin a fur seale soe. assess cereals fase see aa
Number of seals lost by
Prices paid to, for skins, in 1891
Indian Agents—
Replies of, to Circular of inquiry
Interests involved
Aleuts
As represented by skins taken
British Columbian
German
Indian
Japanese
Land and sea, compared
Natives on islands
Russia
Intermingling of Commander and Pribylott seals-.....-..-.-..--
Mr. Elliott’s views on
Tateneclation of Commander and Pribyloff seals (see Intermin-
gling).
J.
Jackson, Mr.—
Seal rookeries at Cape of Good Hope
Jan Mayen—
Regulations for hair-seal fisheries
J apan—
Distinctive flag for sealers in
iWur-seal-fisherlesiof- =------<cec ecm scene csscsesdetcs eats es
Regulations for seal fisheries
te ae ee not enforced
Reply to inquiries. --..-- Gas SAMBA BE BOR GOUO OOD SSANGesosaesaued
Sealing-vesscls sailing from
Winter habitat of seals on west side of Pacific
Joint Commissiou—
RROPOL Oly sea aisectelale we ial ete ae iaiatatets acre feta oratelalletlaidicte siesta rare a ee
Fa.
Kelp—
Birth of pups on, improbable
Eaten by pups in September
Killable seals (see Killing of Seals on Pribyloft Islands)—
Number fixed too high
Small number of, in 1890
27, 186
192
327
41, 42
111-118, 557, 566
569, 570
536 et seq.
545
548
108
129
162
475, 486-508
503-505
58, 59
17, 18, 19
162-164
167
160-167
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, etc.—Continued.
Paragraph. Page
Killer-whales—
Destruction of youngiscalsiby==2s-ssec.+2-eeee-sn-aee eens $34-836 |2ccssc'sctescetcteas
Kallineyofitenial essa tiseaseemcr vercesaces teresa sa eeaee eeten esas oes Ulhe UN | Seapepocen nace accuse:
Permissible, to preserve normal proportion of sexes..--..--- SON (Satta sal. 2 eae ase
Surplus of females renders practice less harmful .-.-...-.--. 19) |S arette See ascedeces
Killing of Seals on Pribyloff Islands—
Average annual slaughter under United States management
LOO STOAGS =. Seem Creel eaemcem cere tee aaeeoisnc a aancincis occ mee 47-51, 662
Control Oe Oye Wrwhien UO SyeMiGticconeocceccueTcHoeRerCEceepEeoere (1b) Bene aoedeseesecsoor
ID IROL eC CLS KO Laer eee oes ne tt aici oleae Sane eoele 3044-40 0690 Sues Saracens eae ane
Excessive in early Russian period -.-....-..-....-.5--.--+--- 0) eee eee eee
Immediate cause of danger to seal life......-.-...-.----.----- UTA Sees a\saitecrs Sse wre <i
Methods employed in, cr ruelty Obi (S62pO TIVES) eemam sees al he eeepc bese dacceoee
se theoretically PMO ce secoeeeseersen besser G60H Ease Aras Shs See
os if Was be OVOlV edi se= sect a=2 sees eee TANTO Seach. ase eeee eee ne
Mrsbalmenonipadvettect Ota-=nssseeeeenee tena mene e eee Weapenciciec ste eecemes 187-189
Numberikaled (iSl7—Olle- 2 spe. ato setae se ene cee ce oe occie oonic BON TUG ee sees case eae ee
Regulations for, at different periods. -....-...---..-.-----.--- BOS sees. Seas See
LG dificulityolis -seserecs sao or oneecee se keccoe eek MG aetere oi sois,b a ee moneie
Sudden incfease of, under United States management.-.-.... 699) oe cisaes sass aegeceoe
Suggested improvements i Wis S52 sasnosssodosscseesessqcasdn sce WaT, VAS HO soc isrs neice steeiae
prohibition of, (on one msland:22----s--ceccessccne. WG es eee meicisnnmcee sees
“ total prohibition Oisoondseddoaddoalicdosceseewsosded LOA GO—16 8" | asas a eee ces =
Killing on Breeding Islands—
Cause of depletion in Southern Hemisphere-...-............- Tes ee occemeee cet
Only method ever employed in Southern Hemisphere ------- 154160 )0||2 see acne cease ees
Klawak—
Sealsitakeniby Indians Ofesccssiocasecsoss-cisseasscosee ee +e aU Me ee ee eee
Kurile Islands—
Se Nie TH WI sec occoonoSndnaodsooabodonooSdstesaddacenoaouded bagdoonedacodadeHe 160-167
i.
Haroon Rookery on st. haul slim s2 ss -c- nce se = nis nis ie 2 2OG 2d, |e etemiaea cs eiaea aes
Lampson, C. M., and Co.—
Salevore slain ssimelyond Ong ae a= sestcinn- coos ease ee ses aa=ee ae ee ellen esa aees cas home 215-217
Licences—
Proposed issue of, to) white humters.....---2--2--..---<-<--- UY) || paeebongsdesesaasda
Lichen—
Mestion arenolyroOkeries! ses. cece selene elias cee ee ee 380-383) ce cempeniaacicccennets
Limitation of Sealing by—
@lOSCRSCAS ONS eis sean stas ee atclninctat-ierersiters wie eral naire niece IDEN BS lbBacapesacaadceaass
Number of seals taken (see Number Limit)...............--. TSO MUS TAS iss apiece cere ae
IREStLICleUmaneae seem ete eee ane ane ine aeee sees LSON TAS aan eee ae atse apace ce ae
Lobos Islands—
Mar-sealoisherysOusensek scioscacate cose ses see sais cajemians S504 |'asiaciseismeisiele Seana 169
Shingishipped trom(T8s(—HOl) sasanccacecine scce as cceece os ceet oclecaeee cee aceesmes 215
BeEsOlduine ls Omcdontdove-92) saseeeacce sess aoe e ne essa oe White a a/aloreisto's steremterts 2 215
Motalcatchiotesealsone(lS16-Ol)Mecncce nese este chess ose soe er alnesosne foe ec tones 215
Little Eastern Rookery, St. George Island...-........-.-..-.----- PSY In cebadaoeape acHoeoe
Loss of seals at sea (see Pelagic Sealine) Be em aeie cise eri eee mies UT; SISA csoctacaeceeietescae
Lukannon and Ketavie Rookeries, Soy Panlislan dees eeccess 206) lan cis ccieisinsaiteaeccee
Lutké—
Observations on killing of male seals...-.......--.......-... PADI ooo sconeoonOnGEaToS
MM.
Mackay, Mr. J. W. —
Seals on coast of British Columbia........................-. 183-185) | osc s-cssscensceoee
Male Seals (see Killing of Seals on Pribyloff Islands).
Males—
AROOE WH esodncboot cnobc0T0 36 Se Sets Bee ASSOaRESOS oes SRE AS |lpoosoconeoa6 sbmca66
Danger to seal life if too many killed.........-...--.----.-.. ash) GcogousaeTeuedQqoae
Decrease OfVomislandsh- sera soe tececs on cuscsacsemec cee tsinae Tse sisters nse see siee
Proportion of, COPE MBles sc sae sci cle cleioeleie seis ete sates ace O45 | seek See ce aaeeinciss
Scarcity of, on islands, makes habits of seals irregular...... BOS eam .s\2:aje\s Se sis see es
Manatee (see Sea-Cow).
Management onp—
Commander, compared with that on Pribyloff Islands. -.-..--.. (PAE VAG lGeagao ocsbaceecoere
Pribylofft Islands; insuflicient care taken till recently... --.- UD NseSbenosonasessaac-
Maps (see also Diagrams).
ierrack Chart. showing route of British Commissioners... .|......---.--....-- Facing 150
2: Resorts and migration routes of seals... 2.22.2. 22. -22.26.| cece a eteocet ose sce $s 150
3. Area of seals, July and PA eusbi oss. sa. ssn ase sae se Seas sae menioced oe See esis ss 150
4. ie August andi September? 2seacseascaccst oe one test aemseccaciee se 150
5. Diagram showing number of seals killed, and price of
SKINS see a Sep eee a eincbesc cc adece ances cae coaster cco cesmeaiacal asmee cee cucncaion oo 1b
Maynard, Lieutenant—
Obseryatiousion seallifese: .-tacs-ajcces cscs cscs sesehe om esee PGT Nee eco soeobecoc
Repornioneeribyloteuslan Gsm. 4). = cs a1 siciseer-\eninae tna ciliate Silty lps sceuceeeecieocac 50
Meteorological observations taken in 1891...........-+.-----.---- PAW) coe enososasc gaoooe
9
ov REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, ete.—Continued.
Paragraph.
Methods of taking Seals—
Improv ements suggested Ennis sas nogasassnocacaucdcoace oe 149, 150
onsshore! scenes se eeeecilscicisct= 147, 148
Migration—
At Cape of Good Hope.-....-..--.---------+-22- 2-22 eee ene] e eee e eee eee teense
Conrselot seallsviml Spring eee sere ee easter alee eteletetaletataraelale 195
IENIN GCN Eola oodemseasoouseal aoe EaSs una ooOdeenoaneocads 171-196
Inquiries as to, made in British Columbia...-...----------- 172
None abeHallklandelelandsi.o- ec se cea cin seminaries cicieferele pieeieabeaciaciest eee
Range of, on west side of Pacific........-.-------.----.-.-.-- 197-208
REASON SOE Ca ee eae Bee cet carat ce a Eee Be oeeonoe: 208
Seals travel north in spring and south in autumn........--- 27
Southern course in North Pacific hypothetical...........--. 196
MM WOMINOS\Olmese same cocecce ~ ae Seca eae eee cee cee eeiace ae 27
Modusavivendinotl Soles = sono e se ener eee ee eae eeleeiaeaiatatats 595
Mortality of young seals in 1891 (see Dead Pups).--.-..------.-- 344-356
N.
INalbivennteres us OMe Slama Seem teeiaieise lap ree a ates aimtainleeleetoetel eletel= 723-726
Natives on Islands—
JB eA CNN iEEhMNe MAO oOHoGd a eoseeboonos obo odboceocdasasas 724
Insutticient coal supply to. .-..--..-.-----.------------+----- 725
Native races interested! im sealing. 22-2 J25-).------------------ 526-570
Neah Bay (see Cape Flattery)—
- Evidence of Indians as to gravid females taken near.....-.. 635
ets—
Employment of should be forbidden.............-.--------- 150
Greyapups obtained ibyres eens eae ee cinema = senna seme ee 656
Newloundiand protective LecwlatlONSe eee scion secs cline ts selmi ell seein ee eielateletee aa
New South Wales—
Sealinoindustmysin, ceased to lextsbe mm seeccasmeee sete oeie| hee erecs sees aee
New Zealand—
SealitfisheryiOfsancms cess: sense Seat oes ene Sen eee meee eee
Nordenskiold, Baron—
MietbersrOny ssa ce sce sence staea seein se coe eases nae onamcemen lace n ete scsioe mona
North A tlantic—
ur sealeum kmnOwabine eeenciescecre eee cee aie oe lost cise aaintele stares 837
North-East Point, St. Paul Island—
Toa, Ctlina bon Se ona ae aw ano se coadaser isu oGasUeUantdEaaGoanS 256, 390, 391
NioribeRookenyais ta G corceplsl am discs priate trate = ajetelalatrieletate a=
North-west catch—
Salles imi on Gone ann estes cislcine cices ice cswelere crnasicwios sates cicnl eee oe heros
North-west Coast—
indian sealtfisheny Onin acess sees assess saws seeetaciniclsiee| sees aneecteee cess
Number killed on Islands (see also Killing of Seals on Priby lott
Islands)—
Notiproperlyicurtailedii22tcscacccsacescce- eciscbe~ sci oceeocee 72, 73, 131
NUS PestedanamMuUMee ne seeeeh en s<saece ene eee seeese esses 155
ae MINIMUM a escee ewes et ees eee eee Cn eee 156
Number Limit—
iBesticombined -withitime limita-ceese-=- ees esee = seeceecce 137
Possibleappucationior ab Sets ese sssees eae soe soca seeeeceee 186, 161
Safe maximum should be fixed on land.-.............--.. ee i51
Especially effectivernJand'.---- 22-22 -255--cenee-cecece ceases 131
Number of Seals on Islands—
Affected most by excessive killing on shore....--........--- 92
Area occupied DeStaMdexvORsseas sess soem ae eee emcees 368
Bryant's method of enumerating S Sa\cies aise woos sais Slate oes 358
Elliott's CEE Toe ee Wl my Sees chet eee RN SP nee Soe Seas eer te 359
Mstimates of, exarverated: ap ceeesceecsesae teres ee nce cceenn 90, 365
Opinions of various authorities as to.........---......-..... 366
Oo.
Okhotsk Sea—
Hares alimise saree ancsee see ee rome ries sceise decile eee 522
Onisinjofidecreaserolseal se sm asec came eeee ane eee eee eee 674-693
Otter Island—
RAISON ere eror ees ests nise oa oi eeisielans Sica a nro ne crete serena eee 746
Seal sonscecdec somes See eee ea oA Sos eee cle oer meee 254, 740
Sad Le
Pacific—
Migrations of fur-seal in (see Migration).
Palmer, Mr. W.—
Observations on preedin g islands 232s 2 ss ccmscceccceiccemsaeee taainciemsenineeeemee
Pelagic catch (see also Pelagic Sealing).
Approximate Statistics"of United States::222-. 522222222. 222|\--202-.0--5 <2 2
Behring Sea, about 5 per cent. cows in milk.................- 646
British’ Columbian sRepontstot-cas2-cs-5 piecnscs scarcer ae beencetcesineeeeeee
ts SChOon ers ees Tse see ears aces 652
Character'andicomposibioniOfeea-- scene see ao eee eee eeere 633-653
Diagrams illustratin pencecoee oe mse sce oso is es aeseoe ee nice ceo ae cet selec eee
195-198
157
182, 183
183
216, 217
170-172
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
329
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, ete.—Continued.
Paragraph. Page.
Pelagic catch (see also Pelagic Sealing)—Continued.
Harly catches ingBehnrin GiS6aosc 025-6 socieece cae ee ea =
Incompleteness of United States statistics..............----
Number per boat and man
Proportion of females
Skineitakensinbyells Qe ae sie s- -o.cico nec ecls ea swinicisicisine vis wccise civic
Summary from 1871 to 1891
Pelagic Sealers—
Not poachers
Opinions as to abundance of seals at sea
Pelagic Sealing—
Advantages of Indian method of spearing
Aftidavits respecting (seer ATidaviltis) eo eet Ae aacusee eos
Amount paid to Indians engaged in 1840
A new factorof decrease in seal life...........-.-..---------
At first not objected to
Benefits COUN diansts- oc cteicesaccmssascecs cee celoce sees sess
Capitaliemployedehace --coseeaeccs cheer sccsan-resnccose sees
Conflicting evidence as to sexes taken......--......--.------
Continuation depends on abundance of seals
Could not have caused first decrease on land
Criticisms on
Cruelty of, as compared with land killing
Danger to men employed
Date of commencement
iniBehring Sen peas 2eaee 0010 enone
Harly historyOte. cectssiee sn aece seer aresewccecietes= seis e ce
HITS tyn OWN) ALLEN PU scecs ae henie n= saeaineenee tee seiaecinne ee
Ty
“ee
Growth of, in United States..............-..
Improvements suggested.........-.........-
Indians seldom lose seals when speared
Loss exaggerated
v3
by white hunters
Metnodsemployedeeerser esac saree arenes eee reeeee rere ee
INoneati CapeotaGoodsHope -aaseesreseaessceseeenereeeoects
Spinel al klar des lands taee isi scalseie emesis cicincaete cisco cine
INoticauserof deadipupsiin 189) eee eee ee cceee eens
Nuwber of gravid females caught in spring
Orizinjandidevelopment Of e-em se seasee eee ceeene nese eeeoe
Originated with natives on coast...-.--......-..-..ce-<-----
Parity of interests with land sealing
RecwlMarewOuNOnbneeaciniGoaasq-eeeeecenesnsteoceenecens cece.
Broportioniotisealsilostess-ccn=csccccacecenesccaucesnooecucce.
Regulations suggested
Neli-recmlativetacso-semacicctec ssc omcisina se once e Soba uooucces
Nexes mot a@ustinowishedieasarecee coceesceeeer secon ene ce enero:
Umitedestatesinteresteimeese sae reece nese: so acecneciee
Value of United States and British Columbian fleets, 1891...
Periods of Rest—
Found necessary in Russian period
Suggested as protective measure ...........-......------.---
Physical characteristics of Pribyloff and Commander Islands. --
Places visited by British Commissioners
Polavina Rookery, St. Paul Island
First driven in 1879
Poachers—
Term cannot be applied to pelagic sealers
Precautions on Islands—
Better on Commanders than Pribyloffs
Pribylotf Islands—
Mate OledisCO VERY. canis seieeise acs e -e eeeece eee ees
Decrease of seals noticed in 1879
MESCription Olt cca esis sac eee ee Meee ee ot ORES a ae
Historical notes on rookeries
Killing of seals excessive
mMethodsemployedecesseccaceriaat ce ce ecmes eee aae eee Rees
Mr. Palmer’s visit to
Native ;populabionvofenssccimsaecceereoseecscenesareroe conor
hysicalicharacterishics! Of-.- <-siec<--ce ccc see sees anes oeeee ne
Statistics of skins taken on
Proportion of Seals lost at Sea—
(See Pelagic Sealing.)
Protection (see Protective Measures and Regulations)—
PATINT EDL ASI AME aise cicciociencccsccenatcctases secccnesessemeescs
ConditiOnsfol Suni ani Z ede. sein ceeaise a see eeeaetercerers
Desirable
612
590)
355
654
659-673
330
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, ete.—Continued.
Reet Rookery, St. Paul Island
Regulations (see also Protective Measures)—
Paragraph.
Protection (see Protective Measures and Regulations)—Cont’d.
iHasier Oni] and jthanis@ae a=-25- scenes ees sess ae eee eee Eee
Halkiandlslandgreccmacemee ne -eaeaniniecnenm ee wan ccoaceeeae
Inadequacy of, on breeding-islands........---.-----.--------+
Industrial interests must be considered
Jan Mayen
Must include whole migration range
Newfoundland
PTOCECOMUS LOT He stare ie wes sia wns ee Nou see eei ea emeemae coe
Should control all methods of sealing
South Africa
Protective Measures (see also Protection and Regulations)—
Capevof Good Hope. 5 a2a-a.2- danas msec atees nee nee saan
Mal lana@blsland see aqr 2c scene ces asistencia eee
Greenland’. io- Gute 2is = 22 assets clei ano JS eee one oo etee mercieiee
Improved methods of taking, necessary
International co-operation necessary
Japan
Prohibition of killing on one island suggested
Restriction in numbers killed necessary
Specific recommendations for
ASM AN Vasey eeetiae cee claves acre Se ayaa de Ceca eee etree
Total prohibition of killing on islands
What are required
Prices of Skins (see also Skins) —
Average in London, 1871-81
From Cape of Good Hope
Pups—
Agel ai which theygs Wal. .-2 ceo oss soe sen asee once eee sca ten
Autopsyaby DreiGunhher ceo a0 sccm seer ee see eee saeco mooee
Birth of, on Queen Charlotte Islands
Do not know their own mothers
Full of milk in November
Killed by—
Bulls fighting
Indians
Live when taken from dead cows
Mortality sin st39 lps gees a ote oe a mene neo sane
Number at a birth
Periodiofieneldlimos mes ase dese seniaee ase oeowoe see eee
ETO bablyerowgneltab orm wb Seale soee sae onee ees eee aaa nan
Unweaned skins unmerchantable
Queen Charlotte Islands— ~
UPS DOENIONY- Sie at acne Meee eran Be is aee een cee asses
Sealsiseen on uawinbere ase. oe cae See eee eee ee
Queen Charlotte Sound—
Grey PUPS staseec se so ease clothes oasis coc oo oce esac eeseee
R.
Raids ces i asee Sarecee cee eeeae ee eeeiee eta eae ene eae
Complaints of Mins lees setae mesa ae on eee eee eec eae
Destruction caused by, to all classes of seals ...............-
ff i United States vessels in South Seas. .
Destruction of seals on Robben Island by..-.--....-.-..-----
Drainvonisealvitercanseduby assess coca eee aeons
Ease with which they can be made
Illegality of
Insuflicient protection against, on Pribyloff Islands ........
istolonveribyotielslands esse se ae ee ee eee ae
Means taken to check, on Commander Islands ...........---
No recorded instanee of, by Canadian vessels on Priby loft
iS ENG CRBS SARE ee ches Ome erate een pee aa gente Ee A pe
Rendered possible by laxity of control ..................---:
Should be more strictly guarded against...................-
Similarity of methods to those causing destruction of South
Sea breeding resorts
Raiding-vessels—
Seals killed by, in waters near rookeries
Range of fur-seal (see Migration).
Redpath, Mr. J. C.—
Thinks seals eat kelp
ZN fernahivemmechouar tenance eee He eee nee ee eee
Compensatoryeadjustmentiofecceses cece ons bee nen cece oeeenen
General conditions summarized
ee ee ee ee er
129
115, 119, 120
145
129
129 |
126, 145 |
129
147-150
169, 170
727-770
759
730
240
256
163-168
193
194, 195
195-198
156-158
145
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
331
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, etc.—Continued.
Regulations (see also Protective Measures,—Continued.
Internationai co-operation necessary
IMiaWeATLE GS UG COLES Ole steieicisiscic's ols <)atsraradiajale a aa als siefeiaiela <eisiciateele
Method srol carrying Ollbieeaes «ss ccneccicese=o-seesee sec se
Mutual concessions necessary
Should be based on industrial as well as physical require-
TNGLNIG) ~ oSoosacoo ons eoesoG ODES OE ORONOOS STO DODD EP Or Een CoeCoS
Specific scheme of, recommended
WATICUSISU CC eSTONS HOP ma. se -fe ocecimin aetna sass saecee ssc
Rifles, use of, in pelagic sealing, should be prohibited
Robben Island—
Destruction of seals on, by Alaska Commercial Company -.- -
Means taken by Russian Government for protection of.-..-.
Migration routes of seals frequenting. .......-.-.---.---.---
Raids on..--.---- BF oe town oeeite ais news cecledsaanstns sescosces
Rookeries—
Area of (see Area of Rookeries).
TROAERES OP Gagaec ScoqseoaosenoonDonE pose DacRCOSTe oScECODSBOeS
AOL OUxe LOMbO hgem rele [aate aistorersleleisicte el =leleis nisiatere evctelelsteieisiateislelelere
Necessary conditions for, exist elsewhere-...-....-----------
INot mecessanily limited/in area -----.- <=... --2- s55-s-0-----
On Behring Island, North and South .................-------
Oni Copperslisland@eeesseereeee seeeerr sere ee saet aise sse cree eae
On St. George Island (Great Eastern, Little Eastern, North,
Stamey Amrteel and: /apadnieisoee a cen aes se oeiesiie cn
On St. Paul Island (Lagoon, Lukannon and Ketavie, North-
East Point, Polavina, Reet, Tolstoi, and Zapadnie) .--.-.---
Protection of, better on Commander than Pribyloff Islands.
Reports as to condition of, unsatisfactory -...-...----.------
Should Obie isturp Cd a see e sae acieaiajanensis ass fnimala\a
SING GO fees sree eee eat ee onlnie ae tolerate aleinjnleinisie Seleieeisicieisins iscisisais
Russia—
Increase of seals on Pribyloff Islands under rule of .....----
Interests of;,1n sealing IN@ustLy =. = <s-oes-ee eine = silos =e
Management of Commander Islands by-.....-.---------------
IBrecautlonsiacainst) raids! Dys sac=- =| =e aan e-em = ate
Ropbenelslandspropected Dyiecererisseneenmaasieacce= =e esse.
Ss.
San Francisco—
Ep lyAGOsL CITIES Mae Ol Bb sere o]ol< elera!a (ala! ol=lalai =reiale/=isie eleleierein(e)siele
OSI TEE Sono ot apes sete gon coe sesoce spo councoschonoedese
Scarcity of seals (see Killing on Islands)—
INuEibo Over-Kiline sof males ees. sc-aa\x ee alereisneima cece la
Sea-cow—
DET QTV A DY OTN O fees stele lorelaia mim siale slate nisms eieleiieniaiermielinine ats staler=ie l=
Hormoera bun dance feessaamee cet aemelae Seen enamel inter
Seal Fisheries—
ASHEGTI TING ITN OO Soonececonocoacdoosneccecnsogosoonosesene
ACIS trai gees e-em ieee ne eis esisieeeieicee eae sin iso sisies ane
CaneloinG ooduhlope meee nrc cenisaseercieie saeco = sateen aaa
Chileanteee eee ae cee esis aie aaa aie eerste sei
Walldlandslantd soos sieeiatnisiers ec eeee eee ite ctor amos a arte
JOC OOS METAS. Socossces eso soon pocccoere epee escent copeasSsaoe
NeweZealland 2). Saac wt isice ote coins vei eisierais « seers otels store steisisie os
Stomidn Shyaibiyil. sSéoes-seachouccapoosncuues doe sereacdemacase
Sealing at Sea (see Pelagic Sealing).
Sealing Fleet—
British Columbian
United States
Sealing Industry (see also Interests involved)—
Capital employed in
Mormieriand present condition Ofer oes eile
German, Japanese, Russian, and United States interest in -- -
Interests on sea and shore
Number of men employed in
Seal Islands—
Flourishing condition of when ceded by Russia......-.------
Sealing on Islands—
Parity of interests with sealing at sea..-....-..-.-.---------
Suggested improvements in methods
Seal life—
Becontiny more pela viG)- eee male a elnian ion ee ele
Conditions of, on breeding-islands
Disturbance of, greater in recent years
Evidence as to conditions of
TUT TE ATS Te Nere Sea oot eecpooUseseeoonea sos oescnese—
Generalicongitions Qfemt i445 55) inv wo sine eieeewie see eisteeleini=
Gradualidiminimntiomos on islands. 2. <2 <i... aomieieecelaie cinici=i=
Natural conditions interfered with
Should be studied atsea as well as on land
eee eee eee
Paragraph.
266, 267
268, 269
438-440
470
471 |
877
869, 889
835, 887
878, 879
882, 884
876
892-894
872, 873
600
600
104-107
102, 103
111, 112
676
126
147, 148
332
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, etc.
Seal Logs—
Kept by Her Majesty’s and United States cruizers in 1891-.
Seals feeding (see also Food)—
Doubtful whether by night or day............---...------.--
Seals (see also Fur-seal)—
Methods)oliennimeratin os. aster cteere mieyatera terete ates taieieat-orat=tatotels
Sinking when shot. ..... 22-1226 jeetees een eee oes eee see anee
“S108 Ot (DY, COXA MOTE! aero cle ojalaratalainl-ta alate tote slavsi=ia
Views of Professor Allen as to
Sea-otter, Observations.on. --......-ssss2-cccece sees
Breed allthe vearround.s 5-5 ssc mann cmareisssce tan sees sotto
ee
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS.
Continued.
Paragraph.
210
316
357-376
613-630
Catchiofin' Japan! sti. 25 - secce eels aise eceasie cose Scbeaeces cls ociace ememepeenar
Could be protected more easily than the fur-seal.....-....-.--
Hormerrookery of, atiCape Lopabkances.cesecneeeee ese scree
Inadequate protection of, by United States Government. -..-
angemumiberofantearly Gays jer eck laleleree ere eleetsiareeere einer
Not properly pelagic
Only remaining rookery is on Copper Island........----....-
Value of skins of
Seecatchie (see Bulls).
Seizures of Sealing-vessels by United States Government—
WALL YS tSSIZULO! ao sae assets ce eee re eeeaciate eisiera etetelaaroletans
SUMMA yiOl Pjscew sel soacsawle ceisios cise ealeeietctelw ate loloyaremteetetestarlere ete
Sexes—
Requisite proporsioniolascesecceeesacece ere seeseacisecesceeee
Shanghae—
Reply to ang uIries MOM = =m ane/)> = eeeee cee eee ene eae ence eee
Sheep—
Analogous to seals in breeding habits.............-.-..-.-.-
Habits when sucklin
Skins—
AtverageypricennWondony 187l—9le ence ceeceseeslceee > ciesecsine
Bought from Indians mostly ‘‘grey pups”’ or smalls.......-.
Classed in London more by quality than origin
Copperiisland ts ales Ob i emcce- seieetoe eee ce curios sees
Differences between ‘‘Alaska” and ‘‘Copper”’..-..--..---..-
Hromi@apesHorn asco: sac ce bsp wsaccion sem emceracuecensect
creCaneot |GoodsHOpes cs. .cncij- ccc sos s-eecccce- nee seeesinee
Commander Islands (1862-91)
MoposPislandsy\.- cise. eteciscehcciceoacisissenmackecnere
Marketincioftnce: .2scnrse eascctit.ccs emcee a socseone ce aaeoeee
North-west coast catch, distinguished by shotand spear marks
Ag SaleiOts Sas as sss oes clsecleenicce esseeee
Obtainedifromelndians! (1852-90) seas seeseee setter eee eeeeeee
Of ‘‘ stagey”’ and pup seals unmerchantable............ onc
Shipment of, Nolewidence of) frauds... 5 sce se ccees oan
Weight of
Weight of, on islands
ue
“ee
oe
Southern Hemisphere—
Account of fur-seals in early times...........-.-----.-...---
Mur-séalifisheries omen. eee ce aneee a aoaeeer eres Oeerne aaa
oo S Falkland Islands destroyed by Ameri-
CANSVESSEIS mate iie sat eee ine tsieiet ore see eee ceee
South Sea Sealing—
Noianalogy with pelagic sealing..--.--.-.------se--cccecenes
Spears used by Indians for killing seals.-.....................--
sO SLAP CVn REASON) sae wists sino eee se bee saci eice sisaie cine seceenericcers
PETIOd OL. ok atoms sacra tee ee mene etna eben sa ccctesiose cua cGe
“Stagey”’ skins—
NGVier tAKen ASO As ce <feceiern.clesinicicle cizie aici omjeisisie csi eran eeeene
Wnmerchantableteek leases See e cite secie se csciae se siciens ce seine
Stam pedes—
Death of pups caused by
Starry Arteel Rookery, St. George Island
Stones found in stomachs (see Food).
Suckling (see also Cows)—
Cows will suckle young of other cows at Cape of Good Hope.
Habits\duringitimeofssss5- 1s saeeassos = ncn aces cose sccene
Swan, Judge—
MMOlters inom Fate oee soe cies lest sae eee epee ol erera eee
Thinks seals are found near Cape Flattery all the year round.
T.
Table showing normal increase of seals....-.-......---------+---
Tasmanuia—
ProtectivesRerulationsin- =. sss. c-caeceeeceeeenoceeaeerae
Replystowngquiniesprom sense seeees seca co aeeee cece ne cinee
Tax on skins paid to United States Government, increase of....
Time) dimits(seex@losei Season) seecece cc -nee se laneee nena ene eeee
Tolatoi Rookery, (St. Baulelslands..52-sscseescecsceeeeceeeececre
653
844-854
834-901
257
371-375
iy
213
83, 190-192
155, 156
wee eet ces e ee ene wane
158
158, 159
REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 333
Index to report of Behring Sea Commission, etc.—Continued.
United States—
Sealing HeGt wis lem scence 2 arc secs: sea cneecass seleceicee
‘incomplete Returns of catch of..........-......
Uruguay—
Op lyatonin quinn Gseemerccccicncccecs ssaisesinina ses ccseecsesso< sc
Veniaminov, Bishop—
Onidinivesbeeseseeeee me eee cae cricsisieseineiece na eieionieiecisicciaeeieiae
Virgin females difficult to distinguish from young males. ......
Virility, age of ...---.-.------- +--+ 222222 seen eee eee eee eee ee eee
Volcanic origin of breeding- TE ETOT SsonccnonocncosnoosAnoosacsoeac
Ww.
Wariness of seals causes them to shun the coast.............-.-
Wark Inlet—
(Ghehy OOS) UWA Til, 3 oa ooonaoeoopKoOsonSsoodossoceoooRDaoC
Waste of seal life on islands ....-.-......--2+-22-0-+----- 2202 eee
es largely reduced in 1889.-......
ae ss i lowered in 1883...........00-
Western side of North Pacific—
Breeding-places of fur-seal on..........---.--..-------5-20--
History ‘ot Beg lin oe Gus tvs OM ate eeteele salem raisin aelaleeieiaieiaiae
Whale Food—
Seals most numerous where it is found....-......--.---.----
Wilson, Sir Samuel, M. P.—
Eevormauion as) to sheep-breeding. =~ s.--cccsecnnsossse5-- =
Worm
Seals troubled by............- sana Jooncoos ssesscsessISoSacEDs
Yezo—
CORE TISIIGIAy S665 noacsoneopocognagonaspasccescaoguasconnocaas
Seals seen near, in autumn and late winter...............--.
Z.
Zapadnie Rookery, ScmGeorsestaland eemeseeaccteeeetees see eerace
St--Banliisland--eeecen. adcoodbbadgonosaccebac
Zapooska (see Periods of Rest).
Zone of Protected Waters—
ST) OLIN CG era oe em wie Sea cae wie clalsiciora'eje cinjelsaa'e Suit @aBlae sisinseine sto wes
Paragraph. Page.
177
74, 75, 667
694-703
697
696
424-525 || 2 << cimee aecemiecicciee
ATTA 850 |W senses cise sreicinieiels
PPA lo aoosmodsopaocceace
V55=160) | fe cecieisciseieieieisice ses
TOT TGON | eames as cteee ieee
a ose = Pas Te,
eeririoe dah Bo
24 0G 5 grat ke thee ay
yy
%
if EG Se re Se nlad
ae
— ; ays Ne
car
a
Sone eae ee dg ft i tie Sa | nea HT Widely et mod baleen 8
Sa a
.
2
n
,
pea
£
=
t
*
.
,
a
’
;
‘
cs
+
=
saat?
<A! me erGas « Ea
=8SG abn se
z
Laie:
1
-?
sre
oe ay elie { rivaled ty Rages au) Am te
- ae ote [payee PER Ce 1 Foo iT Pik gil . ite,
= ae ys ‘| b pestieess enw? AT ON Oe rel on 2 iS hat
P ' ; tl bihar th af Be Ms 0
; Ep ict . ‘ ek Reet osm heel ue
MPa 3 slngd bar
WAIN
088 00814
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11