38 NORTH AMERICAN FAUNA 61, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 



and natives stated that it had been present in considerable num- 

 bers, at one time (Murie 1936). Bent (1922) reports that he 

 did not observe this bird during a cruise along the Aleutian chain 

 in June 1911. Laing (1925) observed two whitish albatrosses at 

 a distance in the Kuriles in 1924, but he saw no others during two 

 crossings of the North Pacific. In the course of many voyages 

 across the Gulf of Alaska after 1920, I never saw a short- 

 tailed albatross. In 1936 and 1937, we cruised about the Barren 

 Islands several times and saw none, although this had been 

 considered to be a favorite area for them by T. H. Bean. 



It appears, then, that at one time the short-tailed albatross was 

 plentiful in the Aleutian district and Bering Sea region in general, 

 but that the population had suffered a drastic reduction in 

 numbers, probably about 1900 or a little later. 



Austin (1949) has indicated that Japanese fishermen and plume 

 hunters were responsible for the destruction of this species on its 

 nesting grounds. But it seems that the decline began long ago. 

 Did the plume trade affect this species, as it affected the Laysan 

 albatross? Whatever the facts might be, the concentrated nesting 

 of a species on one or on a few small islands constitutes a serious 

 hazard to its perpetuation. 



There is a puzzling problem in distribution revealed by Fried- 

 mann's work on bones found in ancient village sites. All bones 

 found on the Aleutian Islands proved to be those of D. albatrus, 

 and not those of D. nigripes. This indicates that in earlier times 

 D. albatrus was the common bird of the region and that D. 

 nigripes was scarce or absent, at least close to the coast. Even 

 at Kodiak Island, though there were some bones of D. nigripes, 

 Friedmann found numerous bones of D. albatrus, thus confirming 

 early reports of this bird's abundance in those more easterly 

 waters. 



Friedmann's findings from midden material, therefore, lend 

 some support to Bean's designation of 51° N. latitude as the 

 northern limit of range of D. nigripes, even though Turner states 

 that he saw this bird as far north as Bristol Bay. Otherwise, 

 at least a few bones of this bird would have appeared in middens. 



In his study of the distribution of these two forms off the 

 California coast, Loye Miller (1940) did not find nigripes in 

 channel waters near the coast, but found them farther out; how- 

 ever, there is evidence that albatrus did occupy the channel waters 

 chiefly. He quotes Willett to that effect, and remarks: "The 

 two birds seem to have divided the territory between them, as 

 it were." He states, "I have taken from the channel Indian 



