488 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 



the branded reserve was eliminated, rose to 90. Having in mind the 

 conditions of 1896 and 1897, when the } 7 ounger animals were turned 

 back by the thousands in the later drives, and when the total killed 

 was 18,000 and the total number of small seals rejected was 23,000, 

 the close killing of 1909 alarmed me. Eighteen thousand was the total 

 of animals killed under our observation in 1897, and we turned back 

 by actual count 23,000 young seals or small seal. Having in mind, 

 as. I said, those conditions, the killing in 1909 alarmed me. We had 

 supposed in 1896 and 1897 that the bulk of the animals turned back 

 as small seals were yearlings, or small 2-year-olds. If this had been 

 the case, then the killing of 1909 must have included yearlings. It 

 seemed to me in 1909 that either yearlings were killed or else that 

 they did not come to the hauling grounds. The fact is that as a class 

 they were not present in 1909, nor were they present in 1896 and 1897 

 as a class. It was the 2-year-old animals that were so conspicuously 

 turned back in 1896-97, and it was the 2-year-old animals that made 

 up the bulk of the catch in 1909. The yearlings were at sea or on the 

 rookerv fronts, and did not come in until later in the fall. As no 

 considerable body of yearlings have ever been present on the hauling 

 grounds, and the few actually there being males, the injury alleged 

 to have been done by the killing of female yearlings has not occurred. 



Now, fifteenth, I wash to discuss the effect of pelagic sealing: The 

 killing of yearlings of which so much has been said included not more 

 than 128,000 of these animals. At most only one-half of these could 

 have been yearling females, or 64,000. Against this 64,000 I wish 

 to cite the results of pelagic sealing as stated by Mr. Alfred Fraser 

 in hearing No. 1 of this committee, page 32. On that page Mr. Fraser 

 shows that the pelagic catch from the Pribilof herd for the period 

 1872-1910 numbered 1,095,000 skins. In the Sims report for 1906, 

 page 35, a total of 877,000 skins is given for the period from 1868 to 

 1906. In the report of the Foreign Relations Committee, No. 295, 

 page 7, another summary gives 962,000 for the period from 1870 to 

 1911. I do not pretend to say which of these estimates is right, but 

 they are in practical agreement that practically 1,000,000 seals 

 were lost to the Pribilof Island herd during the period of pelagic 

 sealing. 



The Chairman. I think there is a table in hearing No. 1 showing 

 the number of seals lost by pelagic sealing. 



Mr. Clark. I want to call attention to the fact that these other 

 authorities give a number slightly less than Mr. Fraser. It may be 

 that Mr. Fraser included the Commander Island seals, but he is in 

 substantial agreement with the others that the loss to the Pribilof 

 herd was about 1,000,000 seals. 



Mr. Stephens. What do you attribute that to? 



Mr. Clark. I think I can develop that right now, if you will per- 

 mit me. I want to call attention to the fact that that was the mini- 

 mum loss because many animals were shot by the pelagic sealers 

 that were not recovered. Pelagic sealing was indiscriminate. Mr. 

 A. B. Alexander found a percentage of 63 females in the pelagic 

 catch hi 1895, and Mr. A. Halkett, a Canadian, found a percentage 

 of 84 in the catch of 1S96. 



Mr. McGttere. That was one year loiter? 



Mr. Clark. Yes, sir, and those figures were agreed to by the joint 

 conference in 1897. 



