272 THE ASIATIC FUE-SEAL ISLANDS. 



THE CONTENTION OF THE PELAGIC SEALERS. 



The conclusions we arrive at from the inspection of these diagrams may therefore 

 be summed up as follows: 



The seals are rapidly decreasing. The people, however, who are directly inter- 

 ested in the fitting and sending out of the pelagic sealers, and the latter themselves, 

 are not yet willing to admit that. They do admi<>-for the figures are indisputable— 

 that the catches have been decreasing, but they insist that there are just as many 

 seals in the water as ever; that the sealers have seen as many In 1896 as in 1893 or 

 1894, and they refuse, consequently, to believe that the pelagic sealing is threatening 

 the very existence of the seal herds. They refuse to accept the statements of the 

 experts who have been examining the rookeries and who report an alarming 

 diminution of the breeding seals, professing to believe them either bribed or misled by 

 the companies who have leased the islands. They explain the undeniable decrease 

 in the catches by alleging that the weather has been so bad in late years as to interfere 

 with the sealing, and, on the Asiatic side, that the seals are now so wary and wild 

 that the hunters can not get within range of them. 



As to the first assertion, that the weather has interfered with the sealing, let us 

 examine the tables. From the table given above (p. 270), the average number of days 

 on which hunting was done by each schooner oft' the coast of Japan was as follows; 



In 1893, average hunting days per schooner 45. 6 



In 1894, aFerage hunting days per schooner 44. 7 



In 1895, average hunting days per schooner 43.5 



In 1896, average hunting days per schooner 49. 5 



These figures alone disprove the allegation completely, as they show that in 1896, 

 the year when the absolute and relative catches were smallest, the hunting days were 

 much more numerous, or, in other words, the weather was greatly more favorable than 

 in any previous year. 



With regard to the other reason given for the decreasing catches, viz, the 

 increasing wildness of the seals, it is sufficient to remark that the greatest drop in 

 the average catch was in 1894, which fact in itself shows that the explanation given 

 does not explain, for it is certain that if the decrease was due to the seals becoming 

 shyer from the shooting the decrease would become greater for each succeeding year, 

 and that consequently the greatest drop ought to be in 1896. It is quite likely that 

 the seals have become more difficult of approach as a result of the shooting, but I 

 maintain that the increased experience of the pelagic sealers in handling both vessel 

 and gun has kept pace with and offset the effect of the noise of the shooting. 



As for the contention of the sealers that they have of late years seen quite as 

 many seals at one time as formerly, it may be remarked that it is probably true. It 

 is quite reasonable to suppose that the bands of traveling seals are of approximately 

 the same size, or rather that the seals in traveling keep about as close together as 

 formerly, and that the sealer consequently sees as many as then tchen he falls in with 

 them. But the places for seeinf/ the decrease are the rookeries, and now that the 

 representatives of the pelagic sealing interests themselves have become convinced of 

 this fact, there is no excuse any more for the insinuations of a few of the more bigoted 

 sealing captains. 



