456 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTEY OF ALASKA. 



Mr. Clark. Yes, sir, I was. 



The Chairman. And you were authorized by Congress to make 

 this? 



Mr. Clark. Yes, sir; the commission was authorized. 



The Chairman. That is what I mean. The commission was 

 authorized. On page 124 of the same volume appears the following: 



It is not the intention here to justify the methods of killing employed in the closiDg 

 years of the lease of the Alaska Commercial Company. Such killing ought never to 

 have been allowed. It would not have occurred had not the termination of the lease 

 been approaching, as it would have been wholly against the interest of the lessees. 

 But it is not conceivable that such killing could ever affect the life of the herd, as it 

 would necessarily bring to ruin the business of taking sealskins on land long before it 

 could produce any effect on the breeding herds. 



That is part of the report of that commission ? 



Mr. Clark. Yes, sir. 



The Chairman. Of which you were secretary ? 



Mr. Clark. May I 



The Chairman (interposing). I just want to connect this up with 

 something else and then you can answer and explain. Turn to page 

 202, footnote: 



The contrast here visible between 1889 and 1890 is by no means a measure of cor- 

 responding decrease in the breeding herd. The fact is that the fictitious quota of 1889 

 was made up largely of yearlings which belonged properly to the quota of 1891. In 

 like manner the quota of 1889 and the preceding year had largely absorbed the legiti- 

 mate quota of 1890. It is probable that had the quota been reduced in proportion to 

 the decreasing birth rate, and been confined to the regular ages of animals, the normal 

 quota of 1889 and 1890 would have been between 50,000 and 60,000. 



\Yliat I want to ask }'ou is this: How did you arrive at the con- 

 clusion that the quota of 1889 was largely made up by yearlings'? 



Mr. Clark. The point is that in 1896 and 1S97, the commission, 

 both commissions, quite generally assumed that the yearlings came 

 in large numbers in the close of the killing season on the hauling 

 grounds. Thai is the way it appeared to us in 1896 and 1897. Now 

 when the Alaska Commercial Co. was killing in the closing years of 

 its teaSe, first it came against a dearth of 4-year-old seals, than it came 

 against a dearth of 3-year-old seals, and then against a dearth of 

 2-year-olds, and then it the yearlings were there, it made up on the 

 small seals, the yearlings. It took probably all the animals on the 

 hauling grounds just as was done in 1909. 



The Chairman. You had the information that they took yearling 

 seals, did you not, or else it would not be in your report to the Gov- 

 ernment ^ 



. Mr. Clark. To our knowled_ bhat time. You remember tins 



report was published in 1896 and 1897. 



The Chairman. Xow how did you find out that this company had 

 taken these yearling seals? That is the question I want you to 

 answer? 



Mr. Clark. The assumption was that they must have killed those 

 animals because they were not there to take the next year. 20,000 

 was all that could be taken in 1890. 



The Chairman. How did you know they were there in 1889? 



Mr. Clark. Because they had a quota of 100,000 skins. 



The Chairman. There might have been 125,000 skins the year 

 before or in 1S89. Where did you get your information that they 

 took 25,000 yearling seals 3 



