THE RUSSIAN FUR-SEAL ISLANDS. 
137 
One year’s total proliibition on land is thought sufficient to furnish enough males 
to start with for tlie increasing number of females. It is also supposed that there will 
be enough males left every year from those not hauling out until August 1. The 
reason why I do not advocate a longer prohibition of killing on land than one year is 
that I regard a large surplus of mature males on the rookeries beyond the actually 
indispensable number for the impregnation of every female as a check to the increase 
of the herd. The herds on the Oommander Islands, as well as on the Pribylof Islands, 
must have been practically at erpiilibrium at the time of their discovery by man, and I 
attribute this solely to the fact tliat there must have been a superabundance of males 
sufficient to prevent an increase. The killing off of the superfluous number of males 
must inevitably result in a rapid increase of the herd. Similar conditions exist among 
other polygamous animals, which have been known to increase rapidly by the killing 
off of a great number of the males. 
The natives would have to be supported for one year, but that undertaking ought 
not to be so expensive on the Oommander Islands as it might appear at lirst glance. 
The first thing to be done would be to exterminate the sledge-dogs on Bering Island. 
They eat more seal meat and fish than the natives, and are a general nuisance. A 
few Kamchatka horses would do much better service than all the dogs, and, supple- 
mented with a few more good boats on the island, would suffice for transportation and 
travel. The Bering Islanders, having nothing else to do during the whole year of the 
prohibition, could easily put up an extra quantity of dried salmon at Saranna, which, 
with the quantity saved from the dogs, Avould go a long ways toward the feeding of 
the Copper Islanders. The latter, having still the sea-otters, could well afford to ])ay 
the Bering Islanders something for the fish. Besides, it might be so arranged as 
to have fox hunts on both islands during the year of the ‘‘zapuska,” or prohibition. 
There seems to be no good reason why the fTovernments in question should not 
be able to agree upon some such scheme of protection, which appears to be both equi- 
table and effective. However, should both reason and self-interest ]>rove unavailing, 
and it should be found impossible to effect a satisfactory protection, the question 
naturally arises, What is to be done with the remaining seals ? 
There would certainly be no reason for limiting the number of male seals to be 
taken on land. Tlie restriction placed upon the killing on the islands lender the 
present conditions results in nothing but a one-sided attempt at preservation of the 
rookeries for the benefit of the pelagic sealers. 
As for a total extermination of the herd, simply to prevent the pelagic sealers 
from getting any more seals, it may well be remarked that the measure seems well-idgh 
superfluous, as thei’e will soon be no seals for the pelagic sealers to kill. A j)erusal 
of the chapter on Eobben Island might raise the question whether it would be effective. 
However, the issue is not an actual one in the present case; for, so far as I 
know, the Eussian authoi’ities are not iiublicly discussing the possibilities of such a 
step. At the safiie time it should not be forgotten that Eussia’s position is more 
advantageous than that of the United States in this respect, as it is bound by no 
such moral obligations, much less legal ones, as would have confronted her had she 
ever submitted the main points in the case to international arbitration. 
