REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 123 



the fur seal. It is further borne oiit by the actual existence of breed- 

 ing' rookeries situated ak>ni;' or near to the. migration route of the fur- 

 seal on the western side of the Pacific, on the Kurile Islands and on 

 Kobben Island. These occui)y the same jiosition relatively to the ijriu- 

 cipal breeding' places on the Commander Islands, which the former 

 similar colonies on tlie North American coast must have held relatively 

 to the Pribyloff Islands, and the survival of the southern colonies on 

 the Asiatic side is directly due to the less persistent and less efficient 

 hunting by the natives there. 



450. This subject is in its nature closely related to the foregoing 

 remarks on observed changes in habits. It also, however, connects 

 itself with the general question of the origin of the regularly migratory 

 habits assumed by the larger number of the fur-seals of the North Pacific, 

 a question referred to under the head of migrations. 



(Q.) — Connection or Intcrehange of Seals between the Prihyloff and Com- 

 mander Islands. 



451. It is frequently assumed that the fur-seals inhabiting the whole 

 North Pacific may, from year to year, resort almost indifferently 



80 to the Pribyloff' or Commander Islands at the breeding season. 

 Statements to tliis effect have been made by various authorities,* 

 and, as already noted, the arrival, in ISOiJ, of a number of fat hollus- 

 chickie and adult nuiles on Coi)per Island was accounted for by the 

 Superintendent thereon the hy])othesis that they had migrated thither 

 from the Pribylolf Islands, though in reality his knowledge merely war- 

 ranted the statement that he did not knoAV whence they came. It has 

 often been claimed by ])ersons interested in justifying the methods 

 X)ractised on the Pribyloff' Islands, that the continued abundance of 

 seals on the Commander Islands is not due to greater care there exer- 

 cised, but that they have been reinforced by accessions from the Priby- 

 loff' Islands, induced by the operations of pelagic sealers. One writer, 

 indeed, took occasion, as early as 1887, to forestall any adverse criticism 

 which might be directed against the methods and results on the Priby- 

 loff" Islands and based on tlie dimiiuition of seals there, by stating, in 

 anticipation, that such* decrease would have no meaning unless dis- 

 cussed in connection with an unknown but possible increase on the 

 Commander Islands.t 



45-J. When it is considered that for twenty years both groups of 

 islands have been controlled by a single Company, whose employes 

 were often transferred from island to island, it is remarkable that so 

 little has been ])lace(l on record in regard to this particular question, 

 especially in view of the importance evidently attached to it by tlie 

 gentlemen connected with the Company whose statements have Just 

 been referred to. Though unable to speak from personal observations 

 on this point, it is clear that the result of Mr. Elliott's investigation 

 of the Pribyloff" Islands led him to believe that an interrelation existed 

 between the seals frequenting these islands and the Conunander Islands, 

 and that a familiarity with one group of the breeding islands was 

 insufficient to enable a complete view of the problem to be arrived at.| 



* See Elliott, " Condition of Affairs m Alaska " (1875), p. 266 ; Miller, House of Rep- 

 resentatives, Report No. 623, 44tb Conji^ress, 1st Session, p. 45; Bnycitsky, Ilonse of 

 Representatives, Report No. 3883, 50tli Congress, 2nd Session, p. 16; Williams, ibid., 

 pp. 77 and 78; Elliott, United States Census Report, pp. 69 and 157. 



t "Fishery Industries of the United States," vol. ii, p. 361. 



I See especially United States Census Report, p. 69. 



