228 



FUR-SEAL HEED OF ALASKA. 



Lembkey swears that every 

 step is taken to guard the female 

 seals from killing. 



Mr. Lembkey. Females on land are 

 protected by every effort of human inge- 

 nuity that can be devised compatible 

 with the taking of the skins of the surplus 

 young males, and the committee can be 

 assured first that the number killed in 

 the past is negligible and that none ever 

 have been or will be killed deliberately. 



In treating of the subject of the killing 

 of females, 1 have suppressed no fact tliat 

 would aid the committee in forming its 

 conclusions regarding the number of these 

 animals killed. After hearing this evi- 

 dence I am sure that the committee will 

 conclude that, in regard to the accidental 

 killirig of an occasional female, in spite 

 of the greatest care exercised, no charge 

 of malfeasance will lie. Wlien we con- 

 sider the fact, also, that thousands of these 

 females were killed annually by pelagic 

 sealers in the sea, it can be seen that the 

 accidental and unavoidable killing on 

 land of a half dozen females annually 

 could have, to say the least, no bearing 

 upon the future of the herd. (Hearing 

 No. 9, p. 381, Mar. 1, 1912, H. Com. Ex. 

 Dept. Com. and L.) 



Lembkey compelled to admit 

 that he does not know whether 

 female skins are taken, or not; no 

 penalty for killing them inflicted. 



Mr. McLean. After the skins are re- 

 raov-ed, can you distinguish between a 

 male and female 2-year-old? 



Mr. Lembkey. Yes, sir; at once. Oh, 

 1 beg pardon — 2-year-olds? 



Q. After the skin is removed from the 

 animal? — A. If you would look at the 

 carcass of a 2-year old you could not dis- 

 tinguish it readily, but the man skinning 

 the seal recognizes it the moment he takes 

 it into his liand to skin it. Of course he 

 examines the organs and matters of that 

 kind. 



Q. But the animal is then dead? — A. 

 Tiie animal is then dead. 



Q. What I asked you was this — after 

 the skin is removed from the animal, by 

 the inspection of the skin itself could you 

 distinguish between a male or a female 

 2-year old. — A. You could by looking at 

 the teats of the animal. 



Q. And are they developed on a 2-year- 

 old female? — A. I don't know that they 

 are. You could find them there possibly. 

 I don't know whether they are developed 

 or not ; I never examined a skin to find out. 



The Chairman. How positive can you 

 be, then, Mr. Lembkey, that no females 

 are killed? 



Mr. Lembkey. The reason upon which 

 I base that positive statement that no 

 females are killed is this: Stringent orders 

 are giA^en to all the skinners to report at 

 once any female knocked down in the 

 drives. They are ordered to re]>ort it to 

 the agent in charge of the killing and in 

 charge of the men. 



Mr. McLean. Is there a penalty then 

 inflicted upon the killer for killing the 

 female and when he reports it? 



Mr. Lembkey. No; because the killing 

 gang consists of six persons, we will say, 

 and it is impossible to tell which one of 

 those six knocked down the seal; but if a 

 female should be knocked down by acci- 

 dent an admonition is given to the club- 

 bers. 



Q. So that it is quite possible? — A. 

 They are jacked up. 



Q." It is quite possible if a female was 

 killed through inadvertence that the 

 native might not report it? — A. No; be- 

 cause the man who reports the presence 

 of the female would not in the least be 

 culpable, because he is a skinner, having 

 nothing to do with the killing. 



Q. He is probably a relative? — A. I 

 should not say that. There is no great 

 penalty attached to the killing of a female, 

 such as to lead the men to suppress the 

 fact of its presence. (Dixon Hearing, 

 U. S. Senate Com. Cons. Nat. Resources, 

 pp. 15, 16, Feb. 4, 1911.) 



