108 
BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES FISH COMMISSION. 
To show tlie chauges from 1882 to 1895, 1 submit some illustrations and two maps, 
wbicb need some words of explanation.' 
The drawing submitted (])1. 20) is taken from a photograph of a iiencil sketch made 
by me July 30, 1882. Mr. Grebuitski, in going to St. Petersburg in the autumn of 1882, 
was anxious to have it accompany his report, and upon his arrival at San Francisco 
had a photographic copy made, which he sent me, and which is here reproduced. Like 
most drawings, the vertical dimensions are exaggerated, but on the whole it gives a 
fairly accurate representation of the rookery. The inner edge of the breeding-grounds 
are obscured by an immense number of bachelors on the ^‘parade” or “sands,” but 
the sketch shows pretty conclusively that the salient features are yet maintained. 
The photograph by Voloshinof (pl. 27«), taken in 1885, unfortunately is not very clear, 
but there is enough in it to show that the breeding area, so far as it can be seen from 
the direction of the salt-house, has shrunk comparatively little. My photograi)hs 
(pl. 21) were taken from practically the same standpoint as the sketch and Volos- 
hinof’s photograph, and they afford as good a comparison as can be expected from 
photographs taken at such a distance. Those taken from a somewhat different stand- 
point, viz, from the driveway (pl. 22), give perhaps a better idea of the rookery, 
small as they are. 
The map rej)resenting the seal-grounds in 1883 (pl. 7) was sketched on August 
21, and shows the distribution of the seals on that date — hence the lack of definiteness 
to the areas of red and the extension of the bachelor seals into the grass-covered area. 
The map showing the location of the seals in 1895 (pl. 8), however, represents the seals 
as they were located J uly 17 and 19. 
At Kishotchnai/a I found the same state of affairs as on the Eeef, only that the 
patch had shrunk still more and the seals apparently covered the ground less densely 
than on the Eeef. This last observation, however, is not to be relied upon, as the 
breeding-ground can be looked down upon from a much greater elevation (70 feet), 
though at a greater distance. Bachelor seals in small numbers hauled out on the 
outer rocks and in among the females in the rear of the rookery, but the center of the 
“ parade ” ground was deserted all summer, and never a seal entered the posterior 
third of the latter, now covered witli a scanty growth of tufted grass. 
It was at once apparent that there was a low percentage of hulls on both rook- 
eries, though at the Eeef I afterwards found that the condition was not quite so bad 
as I first was led to believe. Upon my third visit to the rookery, when the wind was 
favorable for approaching it from the west side, I discovered that there were a good 
many more bulls proportionately to the females on that side than on the eastern half, 
which is the one first reached and most commonly seen. The formation of the ground 
made it utterly impossible to make a reliable estimate of the average number of females 
to each bull by counting a sulficient number of harems. At Kishotchnaya, however, 
the opportunities were more favorable, and on July IG I averaged at the south end of 
'Dr. Slnuin in his recent report (Promysl. Bog. Kam. Salcli. Komaiul. Ostr.) has been singularly 
nnl'ortnnate in inisnnflerstandiug an old map hy Mr. Grehiiitski with regard to the extent of the 
rookeries on Bering Island. In the legend on plate 7 the dotted areas are represented as being the 
“rookeries according to Grebuitski.” I have the original map, the so-called “ Sandinan-Grehnitski” 
map, before me, and can assert i)ositively that Grebuitski never meant to represent the rookeries by 
the dotted areas, which are nothing else but the reefs surrounding the island. Of course Grebuitski 
did not intend to convey the idea that more than 60 miles, or half the entire coast line of Bering Island, 
were occupied by the rookeries. 
