178 REPORT OF BRITISH COMMISSIONERS. 



been from time to time lowered so as to enable younger animals to bo 

 taken, and that even many yearlings were iiichided in 1S89. 



095. In 1890, the Government tax was suddenly raised from 2 dol. 25 

 c. to 10 do]. 25 e. the skin under a new lease, and it became at once no 

 longer profitable to take very smalls kins. It was in part in consequence 

 of this, and in part as a direiit result of the comi)]ete sweep of the 

 killable seals made in 1889, the Inst year of the expired lease, that the 

 extremely unfavourable showing in 1890 was due. Continuous killing 

 had left very few young seals to come forward to properly kilhxble ages 

 in 1890 5 and thus Mr. Goff notes that, of the seals returning to the 

 islands in tliat year (besides those actually on the breeding rookeries), 

 nearly all were the young of the i)receding year. 



09G. This lowering of the standard weight of skins appears to have 

 commenced as early as 1883; for, in 1888, ijr. H. H. Mclntyre says: "In 

 1883 the sizes decreased, and have constantly decreased ever since. 

 Last year they sent an urgent appeal to take larger skins, as the sizes 

 were running- down; but we were unable to respond, and during the 

 present year the catch averages still smaller in size."* 



097. From infornuition obtained fiom trustworthy sources on the 

 Pribylotf Islands, it appears that the reduction in the standard weight 

 of accepted skins was mcU known and recognized there in 1880 and 

 1887; and that from 1888, inclusive, many 5-lb. skins were taken, and 

 all 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year-old seals were accounted marketable; while in 

 1889 about 40,000 very small skins were taken to complete the quota, 

 averaging probably about 4 lbs., and in some cases running down even 

 to 3i lbs. 



C98. Thus, arriving at this (;onclusion from the known Aveight of skins 

 of seals of various ages, it appears that, in 1889, even yearling seals 

 were killed in large numbers. One noteworthy result of such killing- 

 requires si)ecial mention, ?'. t'., that in consequence of the recognized 

 great difliculty (amounting in most cases to absolute inqiossibility) of 

 distinguishing virgin females from young males of corresponding size, 

 it is quite certain that large numbers of females as well as males must 

 have fallen under the club in these years of reduced standards, and 

 that the protection supposed to be attbrded to fenuiles by the methods 

 emi)loyed on the islands was, in consequence, necessarily rendered 

 largely fictitious. 



G99. Keferring specially to the catch of 1890, Mr. Goff writes: "There 

 have been no 2-year-olds of an average size turned UAvay this season; 

 they were all immediately clubbed to swell the season's catch." t 



700. Thus, even excluding- the extreme case afforded by the year 1889, 

 it is apparent that all male seals except yearlings and full-grown sea- 

 catchie, together with many virgin fenmles, have, on the breeding- 

 islands, been considered fair game by the sealers for several years past, 

 and, with this circumstance in mind, the cause of the dearth of males 

 upon the rookeries is not far to seek. Not content with taking the 

 youn.g males at the year, or within the period of two years in which the 

 skins are most valuable, the killing was carried back into the more 

 numerous ranks of the very young animals upon which the supply of 

 suitable skins for future years depended, while, at the same time, other 

 males, which had escaped previous slaughter, and become too old to 

 afford first-class skins', were not allowed to take their places upon the 

 breeding- grounds, but were also killed to increase the catch. 



* "Fur-seal Fisheries of Alaska," House of Represeutatives. 50th Congress, 2nd 

 Session, Report No. 3883, p. 118. 

 i Senate, Ex. Doc. No. 49, 51st Congress, 2nd Session, u. 5. 



