128 FUR-SEAL FISHERIES OF ALASKA. 



Q. Has the Government to construct, equip, and maintain any more 

 revenue-cutters for the protection of the seal fisheries than it would do 

 under nuy circumstances? — A. I think not. Ther.e are but four reve- 

 nue-cutters now upon the Pacific coast. Two of those are kept upon 

 the coast of California and Oregon, one cruises in Bering's Sea in sum- 

 mer, and one goes to the Arctic. 



Q. After your years of observation there, what do you consider the 

 real value of those rookeries held as a property and reduced to a capital 

 basis, if protection were secured to that property by the Government ? — 

 A. That is a very difficult question to answer, because the hazards of 

 the business are unusually great. If the full protection of the Govern- 

 ment was assured, the amount that would be offered by different per- 

 sons would depend very largely upon the character and temperament 

 of the individual, whether he would choose to take extraordinary risks 

 or engage in a conservative business. I know of no other business that 

 is so very hazardous in its nature. It is exposed to the chances of bad 

 weather during the killing season, the risk of losing animals from nat- 

 ural causes over which we have no control, to risk in shipping beyond 

 a point where any insurance can be obtained, risk in market fluctua- 

 tions that do not pertain to other goods arising from caprice of fashion, 

 and unusual hazards in almost every direction ; hazards that are taken 

 in hardly any other business. 



Q. Of course there would not be such a degree of security under pri- 

 vate ownership. Would you consider it desirable property for a com- 

 pany or person to purchase under existing conditions? — A. Not under 

 the present existing conditions, but if assured of full protection by the 

 Government I think it would be ; but the assurance should be abso- 

 lute against all interference. 

 By Mr. Jeffries : 



Q. Would it enhance the value if it was known that the Government 

 was behind it and had a share in the risk ? Would that not give it a 

 standing abroad ? — A. Undoubtedly ; because abroad it would be un- 

 derstood as a Government enterprise. 



By the Chairman : 



Q. Would it be practicable for the Government to administer that res- 

 ervation by dividing the lease, giving one island to one person and the 

 other to another? — A. No, sir; I do not think itj would. There would 

 be constant conflicts between them, followed by a fur-seal trust. 



Q. What would be the result of such conflicts to the herd?— A. That 

 is a contingency that was never brought to my mind before ; but the 

 seals are found indiscriminately on the two islands ; that is, seals born 

 on St. George are found at St. Paul, and vice versa. What the actual 

 status would be between the lessees is, of course, a matter of conjec- 

 ture. 



Q. Would divided ownership affect the natives ?— A. I think it would 

 affect them unfavorably. They are carried from one island to another 

 for a season's work, as we may need them. They belong to the same 

 families, intermarry and intermix. I do not believe the business would 

 be profitable under a divided ownership and the competition that would 

 ensue. 



Q. What would be the effect of withdrawing Government protec- 

 tion ?— A. The seals would be completely and absolutely exterminated 

 within three years. 



Q. There would be no seal ? — A. No, sir 



