96 



In any responsible compilation of population of ocean mammals, the 

 numbers of seals of breeding age is vital. The inclusion of pups to pad 

 a herd total is a deceptive practice since, again to quote Government 

 data, the survival of pups is often as low as 15 percent. 



Therefore, to achieve a realistic estimate of herd size, we took Gov- 

 ernment data on the headcount of adult males in 1968 and published 

 it in the New York Times as follows : 7,924 harem bulls ; 4,383 idle 

 males, 316,960 females of breeding age — an average of 40 per harem 

 bull — total 329,960. This prompted Senator Kennedy to make an in- 

 quiry of the Department of Commerce which responded that our ad- 

 vertisement "contains many misstatements and distortions regarding 

 the condition of the Pribilof Islands seal herd" but simultaneously 

 admitted that the breeding population is about one-quarter of their 

 estimated 1.3 million herd total. One-quarter of 1.3 million is 325,000 

 seals of breeding age. 



Our published figure, then, was deceptive only in being high by 

 about 5,000 seals. However, that was 1968 data and obviously the 

 number of mature seals has decreased significantly during that 3-year 

 period, following the trend which I quote here from the 1968 year 

 report : 



The total number of adult males counted on the Pribilof Islands in July, 1968, 

 has decreased annually since 1961. [exhibit G] 



. . . the number of harem and idle males counted in 1968 represents 63 percent 

 and 37 percent, respectively, of the number counted in 1962. [exhibit G.]. 



Another ploy by which these bureaucrats attempt to support their 

 positions as "scientific managers" is "managed pup production." 



Since it is done by slaughtering breeding females, it is also termed 

 a "manipulation of the population". Its expressed purpose, and I quote 

 from Commerce's letter to Senator Kennedy, is to "achieve the level 

 of abundance that will provide the maximum sustainable yield" — ^the 

 yield being skins. 



Gentlemen, I repeat that this is a gross prevarication of the most 

 despicable sort. The bureaucrats have been aware for a long time that 

 the herd is in trouble. Their slaughter of breeding females was solely 

 to obtain more skins. For a time their reports gave this new embar- 

 rassing information : 



iBy the time the United States purchased Alaska, the Pribilof herd had re- 

 covered to the point it sustained an annual harvest of 100,000 males for many 

 years, [exhibit H.] 



That this statistic of 100,000 skins is embarrassing to them is found 

 in a report to the Honorable John D. Dingell (exhibit EE) , where the 

 figure is expressed only as several thousand. It is many, many years 

 since their "managed pup production" produced a "maximum sustain- 

 able yield" of 100,000 male sealskins. In 1971 their proven abiliti^ 

 produced 31,847 skins, some of which were certainly females. 



May I also point out that in our Government's seal massacre, wliich 

 the Conunerce Department describes as a model of conservation, it is 

 not the old and the diseased seals that are killed, as nature provides 

 for in its law of survival of the fittest. Rather, the healthiest seals are 

 killed, those whose pelts will make the most attractive, unblemished 

 sealskin coats. 



Commerce also defends the seal kill on the basis of employment 

 for the Aleuts. But the Harris-Pryor bill would give them an oppor- 

 tunity to develop the Pribilofs as a tourist attraction. 



