THE BERING SEA DISPUTE: A SETTLEMENT. 



By Sir GEORGE BADEN-POVv^^ELL, K. C. M. G., M. P.' 



It is generally forgotten, however, that this question of seizure is, 

 however great from an international point of view, a mere minor ques- 

 tion to that of the industry itself. It is merely as t o the lesser or 

 greater extension of one State's authority over certain seas, but it does 

 not afitect and can not affect the whole of those seas. If the American 

 case were conceded to morrow in its entirety it would merely mean that 

 " pelagic" sealers would not be permitted to fish north of the Aleutian 

 Islands. This means that they would miss one-third of their present 

 catch. But they would remain absolutely free to prosecute by every 

 means in their power the capture of seals at sea over all the ocean to 

 the south of these islands, where already they obtain two-thirds of their 

 catch. 



The owners of the islands complain that the " pelagic " sealers neces- 

 sarily lose nine out of every ten seals they kill, and that *J0 i^er cent of 

 those they kill are females, mostly in pup. My careful local inquiries 

 show both these complaints to be enormous exaggerations. But what 

 I would here point out is that, in so far as they are true, in so ftir the 

 owners of the rookeries, by pressing the one claim of jurisdiction within 

 Bering Sea, and making all to hinge thereon, will absolutely free and 

 incite these " pelagic" sealers to adopt even more vigorous methods of 

 sealing than those in use at present. A cordon of sealing vessels in 

 echelon, at the right moment, across the Unimack and other channels 

 in the Aleutian Islands, could capture or scare most of the seals journey- 

 ing to the Pribilof Islands, and this without so much as entering Ber- 

 ing Sea. 



As I have said, this question of jurisdiction in Bering Sea is alto- 

 gether a minor question, and even if won by or conceded to the owners 

 of the rookeries wouUl mean that free hand elsewhere to the "pelagic" 

 sealers which migiit and would do far more injury to the whole indus- 

 try than even the worst possibilities of the present indeterminate regime. 



What I have insisted on is that, in the interests of all concerned, the 

 question to be decided is industrial rather than political; the material 

 issue is not what rights have each of the parties in international or 

 conventional law, but rather what means are necessary to insure the 

 continued prosperity of the industry. The pelagic sealers have undis- 

 puted and indisputable right ov<'r tliousands of miles of ocean. The 

 shore sealers have undisputed and indisj»utable right over the land and 

 the waters adjacent thereto. The nunc definition of a line of deniar 

 cation between the two, however interesting, does not settle the qucs 



* Extract from "The New Review," Vol. iv., No. 21, February, 1891, pp. 147-149. 



588 



