FUR-SEAL HERD OF ALASKA. 



207 



M. Smith, of the United States Fisheries 

 Bureau, one of the finest at and most 

 unprejudiced and unbiased men of 

 science in the country, in the last number 

 of the National Geographical Magazine 

 exactly expresses the truth on this 

 subject. 



With your permission, I should like to 

 jmblish this letter, but will not do so 

 without your permission. 



"With best wishes for the prosecution of 



the many grave and important questions 



which are before your committee, and 



with continued personal regard, I am. 



Sincerely, yours. 



Henry Fairfield Osborn, 



President . 



Hon. William Sulzek, 



Chairman House Conimittce on For- 

 eign Affairs, House of Repre- 

 sentatives, Washington, D. C. 



Dr. Lucas. I do not agree with that, 

 which shows very plainly I did not in- 

 spire the letter. 



Townsend, naturalist, does not 

 believe the natural law which 

 governs wild life is the best; he 

 knows better. 



Mr. McGuiRE. Do you approve the 

 present policy, then, that the Govern- 

 ment continue the killing? 



Dr. TowNSEND. I approve that. 



Mr. McGuire. And, in your judgment, 

 will the seals increase under the present 

 regulations and the present method of 

 killing by the Government, in case 

 pelagic sealing is stopped? 



Dr. TowNSEND. Oh, yes; they are 

 bound to increase. The stock of breeders 

 will increase, and when the pelagic sealers 

 stop killing the females at sea there will 

 be more pups born . The animals are 

 polygamous, and the males fight so much 

 among themselves that they destroy a 

 part of the crop of infant seals by their 

 fighting. 



Mr. McGuiRE. Then, in your judgment, 

 there is nothing to be gained by the cessa- 

 tion of the killing of the seals, proidding 

 the regulations are proper? 



Dr. TowNSEND. There is nothing to be 

 gained. The male seals are on shore; 

 they do not go away to sea as the females 

 do when they are nursing their young, and 

 they can be managed ; they can be farmed, 

 and the surplus stock of males disposed of 

 just the same as you dispose of the surplus 

 stock of any domestic animals, your sur- 

 plus male stock. It is a clear-cut propo- 

 sition, and very well understood by those 

 who have been up there. (Hearing No. 

 13, p. 812, June 8, 1912.) 



Liebes, seal contractor, has 

 carefully studied the question and 

 has the same improvement over 

 natural law in mind. 



The Chairman. Do you think it would 

 be better to kill males not less than 3 years 

 old than to kill males less than 2 years 

 old? 



Mr. LiEBES. Well, naturally, they are 

 more valuable; but if there is no pelagic 

 sealing at all, then, naturally, it makes no 

 difference what you kill, except the 

 natural enemies they have in the water. 



The Chairman. But I have always had 

 the impression, without knowing any- 

 thing about the subject, except what I 

 have heard at these hearings, that it was 

 killing too closely that would injure the 

 herd — I mean, killing them too young. 



Mr. LiEBES. Oh, no. As I say, there 

 are too many "P's, " too many professors, 

 too much politics, and too much pelagic 

 sealing; that is what is killing the herd 

 more than anything else. 



The Chairman. Is there any politics in 

 the killing up there? 



Mr. LiEBES. No; not up there, but in 

 Washington. You can not run a stock 

 farm from Washington and tell them what 

 is going to happen next year. You should 

 have men there in whom you have con- 

 fidence, and let them run the thing. A 

 business man, running a stock farm, 

 would not sit down in Washington and 

 write a letter up north telling them to let 

 the stock run wild for 5 or 10 years. My 

 Lord, it would be ruinous; that would kill 

 off the herd; they would destroy them- 

 selves. (Hearing No. 13, p. 878, June 20, 

 1912.) 



