174 



FUR-SEAL HEED OF ALASKA. 



The self-confessed sham of 

 ^'accurate count," or ''census," 

 of the fur-seal herd. 



Mr; Elliott. I call your attention to 

 the census tables that you have just been 

 talking about, and on page 606 this 

 appears : 



"Official reports of Department of 

 Commerce and Labor to Congress from 

 1904, annually, made to close of season 

 of 1909, declare that in 1904, 243,103 seals 

 of all classes alive August 1, 1904; 1905, 

 223,000 seals of all classes alive August 

 1, 1905; 1906, 185,000 seals of all classes 

 alive August 1, 1906." 



And so on. You bring this down to 

 August I, 1910, and iI^ 1911 you an- 

 nounced to the House Committee on 

 Foreign Affairs that there were about 

 133,000 seals of all classes alive. Now, 

 in 1904, according to this statement, 

 there were 243,103 seals of all classes alive 

 August 1, 1904. Now, Mr. Chairman, I 

 would like to have Dr. Evermann explain 

 to yoiu- committee why in these long 

 series of census tables — from 1904 to 

 1911 — he has made no subtraction for 

 loss by pelagic sealing, the most ' ' terrible 

 destruction" which he claims was at 

 work on that herd ; and why in making up 

 these census tables and emitting these 

 official alarm calls to Congress about this 

 ''terrible destruction" he neglects to 

 subtract that loss from these tables. 



The Chairman. What do you mean 

 by "loss"? 



Mr. Elliott. The loss entailed by 

 pelagic sealing. There is not a seal 

 subtracted from these tables for that; 

 not a single seal that the pelagic hunter 

 has destroyed since 1904. 



The Chairman. What is the object of 

 your statement in this connection? 



Mr. Elliott. To show that these 

 census tables are of no value; they mean 

 nothing; they do not show the number of 

 seals that are there. He admits it here 

 tonight; that these seals are out at sea 

 and wandering about in the nebulous 

 North Pacific, and they have them all 



" Exhibit No. 7. Being the official letter 

 of 'George M. Bowers, commissioner,' to 

 Secretary Commerce and lyabor, dated 

 February S, 1910, inclosing copies of three 

 letters, all urging renewal of the seal lease 

 and giving the reasons of the ^VTiters for 

 such renewal, to wit, H. H. Taylor, presi- 

 dent N. A. C. Co. (lessees), dated January 

 27, 1910; C. H. Townsend, for 'fur-seal 

 advisory board, ' dated January 31. 1910, 

 Alfred Fraser. London agent for the N. A. 

 C. Co. dessees), January 28, 1910, as fol- 

 lows." (Hearing No. 3, p. 157,? June 9, 

 191U 



Evermann swears that the 

 "ghost dance" seals at sea always 

 supply the loss on land: — Stej- 

 neger, ' ' authority. ' ' 



The Chairman. If that is the case, 

 let Dr. Evermann explain it. 



Dr. Evermann. The pelagic sealers 

 do the deducting — ■ — 



Mr. Elliott (interposing). You do not; 

 you keep right on. 



Dr. Evermann (continuing). And we 

 count only what are left. 



The Chairman. It seems to me from 

 what he read and the way Mr. Elliott 

 puts the question to the witness, that he 

 is under the impression that if you take 

 the census, say, of 1909, in August, and 

 there are found 100,000 seals, that next 

 year when those seals return you should 

 deduct the number that were killed by 

 pelagic sealers in calculating the next 

 census. Is that correct? 



Mr. Elliott <i That is it; and they have 

 got to do it; if not done, then the census 

 is erroneous. 



Dr. Evermann. Of course, that is 

 perfectly easily imderstood. You will 

 recall that in Dr. Stejneger's testimony 

 he made the statement that his observa- 

 tion and study of the question lead him 

 to believe that a relatively small per- 

 centage of the yearling seals are ever 

 present on the islands at any one time, 

 and that a large percentage of the 2-year- 

 olds are not on the islands, and that even 

 a percentage of the older seals- — the 3, 

 4, and 5 year old seals — are not upon the 

 islands all the time. Now, those numbers, 

 it seems to me, that are not upon the 

 islands at any time will enter into the 

 catch by the pelagic sealers. But 

 whether they do or not, that would not 

 justify you in reporting a fewer number 

 of seals upon the islands than is actually 

 there. Suppose the census of 1910 

 showed on the islands 100,000 seals at the 

 end of the killing season and the statistics 

 of the pelagic catch showed a killing 

 of exactly 100,000 seals between the 

 time of taking that census and the time 

 that you would take the next census in 



