APPENDIX. 497 



These people are unable to generalize in any effective degree and 

 their opinions on such subjects are wholly valueless. The most intelli- 

 gent native on St. George assured us that the seal herds were all 

 right, because the old bulls came back regularly as ever. Mr. Otis was 

 doubtless right in thinking that this notion of the natives was without 

 foundation. It may have been an echo of the view of Captain Bryant 

 in the years preceding. 



Harrison G. Otis, 1880: Page 130. 



We find here the first distinct reference to the injury of the herd from 

 pelagic hunting and of the international questions which might arise in 

 connection with it. Mr. Otis notes in the same connection that the catch 

 of 1880 "is but slightly below last year's figures at this date," but in 

 1881 no contraction was apparent, while he finds a considerable surplus 

 of idle bulls, " capable bulls who have been elbowed out of the family 

 circle '' 



The table published by Mr. Otis (page 143) shows that from 1871 to 

 1881, the number of killable seals was slowly increasing. 



George Wardman, 1882 : Page 163. 



Mr. Nicholas Grebnitzky as quoted by Mr. Wardman is quite right 

 in rejecting the suggestion ''by a scientific writer on seal life that it is 

 quite possible our fur seals may some day migrate to breeding grounds 

 on the Eussian side." 



Henry A. Giidden, 1884 : Page 168. 



Mr. Giidden visited St. George, where he ascertained "that the taking 

 of 15,000 seals" there reduced the killable seals to such an extent as, 

 in his opinion, "to endanger the seal life." 



Doubtless this number involved an over-killing, in the sense of an 

 anticipation of the next year's quota. But there is no probabihty that 

 the killing of 2-year-old bachelors to make up the quota of 3-year olds, 

 had then or at any later time reduced the number of males to a point 

 of danger to the herd. In 1883 Mr. Tingle notes a surplus of old idle 

 bulls and recommends that 1,500 on St. Paul and 500 on St. George 

 should be killed, which was doubtless a wise suggestion. These 

 recommendations are interesting in view of the statements made by 

 Captain Bryant in 1875-76 about the effect of killing for the quota on 

 the herd. 



George R. Tingle, 1886: Page 197. 



This attempt at an enumeration of the seals through measurements 

 of the acreage of the rookeries has very little value. It is not likely the 

 increase here noted since 1872 (on Garbotch, for example, from 366,000 to 

 750,250 square feet) actually took place. Mr. Elliott in 1872 estimated 

 2 square feet for each seal, or 3,030,950 on St. Paul. Mr. Tingle found 

 a number of square feet which on this basis would give 5,148,500 seals, 

 or an increase in fourteen years of 2,137,550 animals. Mr. Tingle thinks 

 "the space assigned to each seal by Mr. Elliott is not large enough, 

 and a reduction of one-fourth from the figures above would give more 

 nearly correctly the actual number of seals on the rookeries named." 

 But a reduction of one-half would be still nearer. The fact is that both 

 estimates represent little more than playing with figures— the sum of a 

 series of estimates multiplied by an assumption. It must be borne in 

 H. Doc. 92 32 



