270 



costs in Alaska would be substantially higher. These factors would greatly in- 

 crease the cost of processing the skins, and other governments whose skins are 

 now processed by Fouke would probably not want their skins processed in 

 Alaska at such increased costs. As a result, a plant in Alaska would process less 

 ihan h,alf the skins now being handled by Fouke at its Greenville plant. Never- 

 theless, the same number of supervisors would be required for the Alaska plant 

 and, because of the necessity of close supervision of the process, management 

 personnel would have to move to Alaska. As a result, the operating costs per 

 skin would be substantially higher than the present costs. Loss of such volume 

 from the Greenville plant would, of course, greatly increase the per skin cost 

 of processing there and would probably render operation of that plant un- 

 economical. 



4. South African Skins. The Fouke Company does not now nor has it ever 

 processed skins of baby seals. Neither does the Company process harp seals or 

 any other hair seal. In addition to North Pacific fur sealskins, South African 

 and Uruguayan fur sealskins are processed although Uruguayan skins are less 

 significant in number. The Secretary of the Department of Industries, Republic 

 of South Africa, through the local Embassy, advises that fur seals within the 

 jurisdiction of that country have been protected by law since 1891 and that 

 sealing operations are smbject to strict government supervision. The Secretary 

 advises further that baby seals are not knowingly killed in the annvial harvest 

 nor are unweaned pups and females harvested. The number harvested annually 

 amounts to less than one-third of the annual recruitment plus five-thousand 

 surplus bachelors. According to the Secretary, the present South African seal 

 population is estimated at one milMon and this population has been increasing. 



"We hope the foregoing information will be useful to the Subcommittee. 

 Sincerely, 



Paul A. Lenzini, 

 Attorneys for The Fouke Company. 



Mr. DiNGELL. Let us switcih to another point. 



Mr. Pollock. They have a partioular patent. 



Mr. DiNGELL. How many natives are employed in the taking of the 

 fur seal and how many mainland Alaskans are employed in the taking 

 of the fur seal and how many from the contiguous 48 are employed 

 in the taking of the fur seal ? 



Mr. Pollock. Just a moment, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. DiNGELL. I am informed that sources of recruitment for seal- 

 skin operations, this is according to information submitted to Mr. 

 Potter of the committee and I note here in 1967 there were a total of 

 78 people involved. 



Of this total involved, 37 came from the Pribilofs, six from the 

 Aleutians, 27 from the mainland of Alaska and 18 from the Unit^ed 

 States. 



Since that time there has been some adjusting of the figures. 



In 1968 there were 24 people from the Pribilofs who got employed 

 in this taking, four from the Aleutians and so it was a drop in each 

 instancn. 32 from the mainland of Alaska and 12 from the contiffu- 

 ous 48. 



In 1969, it went to 26 from the Pribilofs, three from the Aleutians, 

 28 from the mainland of Alaska, and 12 from the contiguous 48. 



In 1970, it was 22 from the Pribilofs,^six from the Aleutians, 13 

 from the mainland of Alaska, and 24 from the contiguous 48 out of 

 a total of 63. 



How are you benefiting the people from the Pribilofs which I sup- 

 pose this bill is supposed to benefit because you cited the second section 

 relating to the help to the Pribilof Natives, but of the 65 employed in 

 1970, onlv 22 were from the Pribilofs : one-third. 



In 1969 people employed were only 26 from the Pribilofs. 



