82 THE ASIATIC FUK-SEAL ISLANDS. 



There is a rock not sliowu ou the older charts ^ 9J miles S., 21° 30' E., true from 

 St. lona, with au approximate position on Brit. Adm. Chart No. 2388, lat. 56° 14' N., 

 long. 143° 23' B. (Euss. Hydr. Circ. 265; Not. Mar. 7, 1896). 



From a memoraudum kindly given me by Gapt. H. J. Snow it appears that tlic 

 seal rookery on St. loua was first exploited in 1889, when the Rose took 495 skins the; i-. 

 Hermann's statement (Fur Seal Arb., viii, p. 709) that the seals were first discovered 

 there by Captain Pine, of the Arctic, in 1889, therefore does not seem to be correct. 

 According to Snow, who was there himself in the Nautilus, no less than four schooners 

 visited the rock in L890, taking 879 seals together, viz, the Nautilus, 80; Benton, 280; 

 Arctic, 280; Diana, 239. In 1891 the Arctic got 400 ^ and the Mystery 67 seals on St. 

 lona, but both vessels were seized that year by a Russian man-of-war (see p. 77). 

 During the following year the Norma took 103 seals and the Diana 100 at St, Zona. 

 The Anaconda got about 200 in 1895 and, finally, the Josephine succeeded only in 

 taking in 1896. We know, consequently, of about 2,250 fur seals having been ^ 

 taken on St. lona between 1889 and 1896. 



I have mentioned above that the KotiWs boat, on August 12, 1896, could see no 

 seals at the former rookery, and it is therefore pretty certain that St. lona belongs to 

 the same category as the Kuril Islands, the rookeries of which are also nearly extinct. 



I may finally quote the statement by William Hermann, a seal hunter of San 

 Francisco, that eight years ago Captain Peterson, of the schooner Diana, of Yoko- 

 hama, was there, and there were no seals there (Fur Seal Arb., viii, p. 709). 



This does not necessarily mean that we have to do with newly formed rookeries 

 on St. lona. In the first place, it is not stated at what date the island was visited; in 

 the second, the seals may have been easily overlooked. I will mention an instance to 

 show this: In 1881 Capt. J. Sandman, in the AleTcsander II, in passing the Kuril 

 chain was looking for the possible existence of fur-seal rookeries on the uninhabited 

 islands. His attention was particularly drawn to'Srednoi Island, quite a small and 

 insignificant affair. He happened to approach it from the Pacific side, and seeing 

 nothing but sea lions went away. Imagine his chagrin when he heard that Mr. Snow 

 landed on the island that same season, taking several thousand seals. They were 

 located on the Okhotsk Sea side; at least that was Sandman's explanation, but 

 Captain Snow says Sandman was there too early. 



OTHER ISLANDS. 



Omitting all references to breeding rookeries on the mainland of Kamchatka as 

 based upon hearsay, and in all probability resting on misidentiflcation of young 

 sea lions ^ I may briefly mention that it has been stated that fur seal breed on various 

 other islands in the Okhotsk Sea. Philip B. Powers has thus been quoted as an 

 authority for the statement that fur seals occur at the Shantar Islands, a numerous 



' Curiously enough it seems to have been known before and forgotten, for it is clearly down on a 

 map published in 1803 in St. Petersburg by the quartermaster- general's department. 



i' William Hermann (Fur Seal Arb., viii, p. 709) says 551 seals. 



3 In corroboration of this assertion I quote the following from a letter written by Captain 

 Grffiuberg, then commanding the Bohrik, December 22, 1896: "I also coasted the east shore of 

 Kamchatka from Cape Shipunski to north of Cape Stolbovoi twice during the past summer in order 

 to locate seal rookeries, but did not find any, and what is more, did not come across a single seal in 

 the water." I, myself, had a similar experience in the EotiJc during 1897, between the mouth of the 

 Kamchatka River and Stolbovoi. 



