Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress, With the Annual Message of the President, December 1, 1890

Sir Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine.

Washington, April —, 1890. (Received April 30.)

Dear Mr. Blaine: At the last sitting of the conference on the Behring Sea fisheries question you expressed doubts, after reading the memorandum of the Canadian minister of marine and fisheries, which by your courtesy has since been printed, whether any arrangement could be arrived at that would be satisfactory to Canada.

You observed that the proposal of the United States had now been two years before Her Majesty’s Government, that there was nothing further to urge in support of it; and you invited me to make a counter proposal on their behalf. To that task I have most earnestly applied myself, and while fully sensible of its great difficulty, owing to the conflict of opinion and of testimony which has manifested itself in the course of our discussions, I do not despair of arriving at a solution which will be satisfactory to all the governments concerned. It has been admitted from the commencement that the sole object of the negotiation is the preservation of the fur-seal species for the benefit of mankind, and that no considerations of advantage to any particular nation, or of benefit to any private interest, should enter into the question.

Such being the basis of negotiation, it would be strange indeed if we should fail to devise the means of solving the difficulties which have unfortunately arisen. I will proceed to explain by what method this result can, in my judgment, be attained. The great divergence of views which exists as to whether any restrictions on pelagic sealing are necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species, and if so, as to the character and extent of such restrictions, renders it impossible, in my opinion, to arrive at any solution which would satisfy public opinion either in Canada or Great Britian, or in any country which may be invited to accede to the proposed arrangement, without a full inquiry by a mixed commission of experts, the result of whose labors and investigations in the region of the seal fishery would probably dispose of all the points in dispute.

As regards the immediate necessities of the case, I am prepared to recommend to my Government, for their approval and acceptance, certain measures of precaution which might be adopted provisionally and without prejudice to the ultimate decision on the points to by investigated by the commission. Those measures, which I will explain later on, would effectually remove all responsible apprehension of any depletion of the fur-seal species, at all events, pending the report of the commission.

It is important, in this relation, to note that while it has been contended on the part of the United States Government; that the depletion of the fur-seal species has already commenced, and that even the extermination of the species is threatened within a measurable space of time, the latest reports of the United States agent, Mr. Tingle, are such as to dissipate all such alarms.

Mr. Tingle in 1887 reported that the vast number of seals was on the increase and that the condition of all the rookeries could not be better.

In his later report, dated July 31, 1888, he wrote as follows:

I am happy to be able to report that, although late landing, the breeding rookeries are filled out to the lines of measurement heretofore made and some of them much beyond those lines, showing conclusively that seal life is not being depleted, but is fully up to the estimate given in my report of 1887.

Mr. Elliott, who is frequently appealed to as a great authority on the subject, affirms that, such is the natural increase of the fur-seal species that these animals, were they not preyed upon by killer-whales (Orca gladiator), sharks, and other submarine foes, would multiply to such an extent that “Behring Sea itself could not contain them.”

The Honorable Mr. Tupper has shown in his memorandum that the destruction of seals caused by pelagic sealing is insignificant in comparison with that caused by their natural enemies, and he gives figures exhibiting the marvelous increase of seals in spite of the depredations complained of.

Again, the destructive nature of the modes of killing seals by spears and fire-arms has apparently been greatly exaggerated, as may be seen from the affidavits of practical seal hunters which I annex to this letter, together with a confirmatory extract from a paper upon the “Fur-Seal Fisheries of the Pacific Coast and Alaska,” prepared and published in San Francisco and designed for the information of eastern United States Senators and Congressmen.

The Canadian Government estimate the percentage of seals so wounded or killed and not recovered at 6 per cent.

In view of the facts above stated, it is improbable that, pending the result of the inquiry which I have suggested, any appreciable diminution of the fur-seal species should take place, even if the existing conditions of pelagic sealing were to remain unchanged.

But in order to quiet all apprehension on that score, I would propose the following provisional regulations:

I. That pelagic sealing should be prohibited in the Behring Sea, the Sea of Ochotsk, and the adjoining waters, during the months of May and June, and during the months of October, November, and December, which may be termed the “migration periods” of the fur-seal.

II. That all sealing vessels should be prohibited from approaching the breeding islands within a radius of 10 miles.

These regulations would put a stop to the two practices complained of as tending to exterminate the species; firstly, the slaughter of female seals with young during the migration periods, especially in the narrow passes of the Aleutian Islands; secondly, the destruction of female seals by marauders surreptitiously landing on the breeding islands under cover of the dense fogs which almost continuously prevail in that locality during the summer.

Mr. Taylor, another agent of the United States Government, asserts that the female seals (called cows) go out from the breeding islands every day for food. The following is an extract from his evidence:

The cows go 10 and 15 miles and even further —I do not know the average of it—and they are going and coming all the morning and evening. The sea is black with them round about the islands. If there is a little fog and they get out half a mile from shore we can not see a vessel 100 yards even. The vessels themselves lay around the islands there where they pick up a good many seal, and there is where the killing of cows occurs when they go ashore.

Whether the female seals go any distance from the islands in quest of food, and if so, to what distance, are questions in dispute, but pending their solution the regulation which I propose against the approach of sealing vessels within 10 miles of the islands for the prevention of surreptitious landing practically meets Mr. Taylor’s complaint, be it well founded or not, to the fullest extent; for, owing to the prevalence of fogs, the risk of capture within a radius of 10 miles will keep vessels off at a much greater distance.

This regulation, if accepted by Her Majesty’s Government, would certainly manifest a friendly desire on their part to co-operate with your Government and that of Russia in the protection of their rookeries and in the prevention of any violation of the laws applicable thereto. I have the honor to inclose the draught of a preliminary convention which I have prepared, providing for the appointment of a mixed commission, who are to report on certain specified questions within two years.

The draught embodies the temporary regulations above described, together with other clauses which appear to me necessary to give proper effect to them.

Although I believe that it would be sufficient during the “migration periods” to prevent all sealing within a specified distance from the passes of the Aleutian Islands, I have, out of deference to your views and to the wishes of the Russian minister, adopted the fishery line described in Article V, and which was suggested by you at the outset of our negotiation. The draught, of course, contemplates the conclusion of a further convention after full examination of the report of the mixed commission. It also make provision for the ultimate settlement by arbitration of any differences which the report of the commission may still fail to adjust, whereby the important element of finality is secured, and, in order to give to the proposed arrangement the widest international basis, the draught provides that the other powers shall be invited to accede to it.

The above proposals are, of course, submitted” ad referendum, and it only now remains for me to commend them to your favorable consideration and to that of the Russian minister. They have been framed by me in a spirit of justice and conciliation, and with the most earnest desire to terminate the controversy in a manner honorable to all parties and worthy of the three great nations concerned.

I have, etc.,

Julian Pauncefote.

[Inclosure 1.]

The North American Seal Fishery Convention.

title.

Convention between Great Britain, Russia, and the United States of America in relation to the fur-seal fishery in the Behring Sea, the Sea of Ochotsk, and the adjoining waters.

preamble.

The Governments of Russia and of the United States having represented to the Government of Great Britain the urgency of regulating, by means of an international agreement, the fur-seal fishery in Behring Sea, the Sea of Ochctsk, and the adjoining waters, for the preservation of the fur-seal species in the North Pacific Ocean; and differences of opinion having arisen as to the necessity for the proposed agreement, in consequence whereof the three Governments have resolved to institute a full inquiry into the subject, and, pending the result of such inquiry, to adopt temporary measures for the restriction of the killing of seals during the breeding season, without prejudice to the ultimate decision of the questions in difference in relation to the said fishery.

The said three Governments have appointed as their respective plenipotentiaries, to wit:

Who, after having exchanged their full powers, which were found to be in good and due form, have agreed upon the following articles:

Article I.

mixed commission of experts to be appointed.

The high contracting parties agree to appoint a mixed commission of experts, who shall inquire fully into the subject and report to the high contracting parties within 2 years from the date of this convention the result of their investigations, together with their opinions and recommendations on the following questions:

(1) Whether regulations properly enforced upon the breeding islands (Robin Island, in the Sea of Ochotsk, and the Commander Islands and the Pribylov Islands, in the Behring Sea) and in the territorial waters surrounding those islands are sufficient for the preservation of the fur-seal species?

(2) If not, how far from the islands is it necessary that such regulations should be enforced in order to preserve the species?

(3) In either of the above cases, what should such regulations provide?

(4) If a close season is required on the breeding islands and territorial waters, what months should it embrace?

(5) If a close season is necessary outside of the breeding islands as well, what extent of waters and what period or periods should it embrace?

Article II.

on receipt of report of commission question of international regulations to be forthwith determined.

On receipt of the report of the commission and of any separate reports which may be made by individual commissioners, the high contracting parties will proceed forthwith to determine what international regulations, if any, are necessary for the purpose aforesaid, and any regulations so agreed upon shall be embodied in a further convention to which the accession of the other powers shall be invited.

Article III.

arbitration.

In case the high contracting parties should be unable to agree upon the regulations to be adopted, the questions in difference shall be referred to the arbitration of an impartial government, who shall duly consider the reports hereinbefore mentioned, and whose award shall be final and shall determine the conditions of the further convention.

Article IV.

provisional regulations.

Pending the report of the commission, and for 6 months after the date of such report, the high contracting parties agree to adopt and put in force as a temporary measure, and without prejudice to the ultimate decision of any of the questions in difference in relation to the said fishery, the regulations contained in the next following articles, Nos. 5 to 10 inclusive.

Article V.

seal fishery line.

A line of demarcation, to be called the “seal fishery line,” shall be drawn as follows:

From Point Anival, at the southern extremity of the island of Saghalien, in the Sea of Ochotsk, to the point of intersection of the fiftieth parallel of north latitude with the one hundred and sixtieth meridian of longitude east from Greenwich, thence eastward along the said fiftieth parallel to its point of intersection with the one hundred and sixtieth meridian of longitude west from Greenwich.

Article VI.

close time.

The subjects and citizens of the high contracting parties shall be prohibited from engaging in the fur-seal fishery and the taking of seals by land or sea north of the seal fishery line from the 1st of May to the 30th of June, and also from the 1st of October to the 30th of December.

Article VII.

prevention of marauders.

During the intervening period, in order more effectively to prevent the surreptitious landing of marauders on the said breeding islands, vessels engaged in the fur-seal fishery and belonging to the subjects and citizens of the high contracting parties shall be prohibited from approaching the said islands within a radius of 10 miles.

Article VIII.

further provisional regulations.

The high contracting parties may, pending the report of the commission, and on its recommendation or otherwise, make such farther temporary regulations as may be deemed by them expedient for better carrying out the provisions of this convention and the purposes thereof.

Article IX.

penalty for violation of provisional regulations.

Every vessel which shall be found engaged in the fur-seal fishery contrary to the prohibitions provided for in articles 6 and 7, or in violation of any regulation made under article 8, shall, together with her apparel, equipment, and contents, be liable to forfeiture and confiscation, and the master and crew of such vessel, and every person belonging thereto, shall be liable to fine and imprisonment.

Article X.

seizure for breach of provisional regulations. trial of offenses.

Every such offending vessel or person may be seized and detained by the naval or other duly commissioned officers of any of the high contracting parties, but they shall be handed over as soon as practicable to the authorities of the nation to which they respectively belong, who shall alone have jurisdiction to try the offense and impose the penalties for the same. The witnesses and proof necessary to establish the offense shall also be sent with them, and the court adjudicating upon the case may order such portion of the fines imposed or of the proceeds of the condemned vessel to be applied in payment of the expenses occasioned thereby.

Article XI.

ratification. commencement and duration of convention.

This convention shall be ratified and the ratifications shall be exchanged at —— in six months from the date thereof, or sooner if possible. It shall take effect on such day as shall be agreed upon by the high contracting parties and shall remain in force until the expiration of six months after the date of the report of the commission of experts to be appointed under article i; but its duration may be extended by consent.

Article XII.

accession of other powers.

The high contracting parties agree to invite the accession of the other powers to the present convention.

[Inclosure 2.]

Extract from pamphlet entitled “Fur Seal Fisheries of the Pacific Coast and Alaska,” published by C. D. Ladd, 529 Kearny street, San Francisco, Cal.

It is claimed that many seals are shot that sink and are lost.

Undoubtedly there are some lost in this way, but the percentage is light—probably one in thirty or forty, not more than this. It is also claimed that ten are shot and wounded that die to one that is secured. This is also an error. Many seals are shot at that are not hit at all, but when a seal is wounded so that in the end it will die, it is most always secured by the hunter, who may have to shoot at it several times in order to get it, as the seal in the water exposes only its head, and when frightened exposes only a small portion of that, so that together with the constant diving of the seal, the motion of the boat, etc., makes it very hard to hit. This is where it is claimed that ten are shot and wounded to one that is secured; but it is nearer the truth that one is lost to ten that are secured, for the reason that when a seal is wounded it can not remain under water any length of time and therefore the hunter can easily follow it up and secure it.

[Inclosure 3.]

Affidavits of practical seal hunters.

thomas howe.

In 1886, on boart the Theresa and Pathfinder, I got for the season 397 seals and lost about 20. In 1887, on the schooner Penelope, I got 510 and lost about 30. In 1888, on the Lily Lad, I got 316 and lost 12. In 1889, on board the Viva, I got 587 and lost 27.

Thomas Howe.

frederick gilbert.

I am a seal hunter. I have been 4 years on board sealing vessels; 1 year I was a boat rower and 3 years a hunter. I have always been with white hunters, and have used a shotgun and rifle for shooting seals.

In 1887 I got 518 seals and lost 14; in 1888 I got 244 and lost 5; in 1889 I got 454 and lost 16; or in the 3 years I got 1,216 and lost 35 or 2⅘ per cent. I never shot or saw pups with the cows in the water, nor have I ever heard of such a case. Some hunters lose a few more than I do, but the most unlucky hunters I have met with did not lose twice as many.

Fred. Gilbert.

Victoria, British Columbia, September 12, 1889.

capt. william o’leary.

I am a master mariner, and have been seal hunting on the Pacific coast four years, three of which I was in Behring’s Sea as well. One year I had Indian hunters only, and the three years I had white hunters only—all on the schooner Pathfinder. My experience with Indian hunters is that they lose none—at most a few—of the seals they spear. The spears are “bearded,” some with one, some with two beards, and once the seal is struck, capture is certain.

White hunters use shot-guns and rifles, according to distance and state of water. On smooth water and at long ranges the rifle is generally used, but the majority of hunters use the shot-gun, and the great majority of seals are shot with guns.

The number of seals lost by white hunters does not exceed six in one hundred, and many hunters lose much less than that number. About half of the seals taken along the coast are cows, and perhaps two-thirds of the cows are with young. Putting, a vessel’s coast catch at four hundred, and from one hundred and fifty to one hundred and seventy-five might be cows with young. In Behring’s Sea the average of cows with young killed will not average one in one hundred, for the reason that as soon as the cows reach the sea they go to the breeding islands, where their young are born.

I never saw cows in the water with their young with them. I do not think there is any decrease in the number of seal entering Behring’s Sea. I never saw so many seal along the coast as there were this year; and in Behring’s Sea they were more numerous than I ever saw before. This year I shot forty-four seals and lost one.

Wm. O’Leary.

Victoria, British Columbia, September 12, 1889.

captain sieward.

I have been a master sealer for two years. In 1888 I commanded the Araunah and in 1889 the Walter L. Rich, and during both years sealed along the coast from off Point Northward to Behring’s Sea. In 1888 I had Indian hunters and this year white hunters. The Indians lose very few seals, for if the spear strike the seal is got, and if the spear misses the seal of course escapes unhurt. The white hunters use rifles and shot-guns, the latter much more than the former. Rifles are used only by good shots, and then at only long range. The seals lost by white hunters after being shot or wounded do not, on the lower coast, exceed six in one hundred, and on the Alaska coast and in the Behring’s Sea not over four in one hundred.

On sailing I generally take 10 per cent, additional ammunition for waste shot; that is, if calculating on a catch of 3,000 seals I would take ammunition for 3,300 shots. That was double the excess the hunters would consider necessary and I never knew that percentage of waste shot to be used. I never saw a female seal with her young beside her in the water. Out of a catch of 1,423 seals this year I had only 55 seals under two years old, i. e., between one and two years old.

When at Ounalaska this year I learned that the Alaska Commercial Company last year fitted out two small schooners, belonging to private parties, with large deep nets several hundred fathoms long, which were set across the passes from Behring’s Sea for the purpose of catching young seals. One of these schooners got 700 of these young seals about four months old, and sold them to the Alaska Commercial Company for $2.50 apiece.

A schooner, the Spencer F. Baird, 10 or 12 tons, was then at Ounalaska fitting up to go to Akoutan Pass for the same purpose this fall. The law forbids the killing of all fur-bearing animals in Alaskan waters by any hunters except the natives, is done every year at Kodiak, Sanaka, and the Aleutian Islands by white hunters, fitted out by the Alaska Commercial Company, under the agreement that the furs must be sold to the company.

H. F. Sieward,
Master American Schooner Walter L. Rich.

Victoria, British Columbia, August 10, 1889.

george howe.

My first year’s sealing, 1886, was on board the Theresa, from San Francisco to Victoria. We left San Francisco on the 20th January, and arrived at Victoria on the 7th April. I got 159 seals, of which I lost about 7. I used a shot-gun principally, the rifle only for long range shooting, say from 30 to 60 yards. At Victoria I left the Theresa and joined the Pathfinder. The Pathfinder left Victoria on the 4th of May for Behring’s Sea, and that trip I got 442 seals and lost about 20. In 1887 I joined the Penelope and left Victoria on the 3d February. I got 618 seals during the season and lost 31. In 1888 I did not go sealing, but in 1889 I was engaged on the schooner Viva. We left Victoria on the 19th January, and I got 734 seals during the season and lost 37. I never saw a young pup alongside its cow in the water.

About one-third of the seals taken on the coast are cows with pup or capable of being with pup. In Behring’s Sea I got four cows with pups in them.

George Howe.

william fewings.

I have been three years hunting seals on the Pacific coast and in Behring’s Sea. In 1887 I was on board the sealing schooner Favourite, in 1888 on the Viva, and in 1889 on board the Triumph. In each year the vessel I was on entered the Behring’s Sea early in July and left the sea the latter part of August or early in September, except this year, when the Triumph left the sea on the 11th July under threat of seizure, after searched by the United States cutter Rush. In 1887 the hunters I was with were partly Indians and partly whites. In the two last years the hunters were all whites, using shotguns and rifles. The rifles were used by the more experienced hunters and better shots for long range shooting, up to 100 yards, but few hunters attempted that range. The general range for rifles is not over 50 yards and most shots are made at a less range.

A few hunters used the rifle for all distances. I used either rifle or shotgun, according to the distance and position of the seal and the condition of the water.

My first year I got about four hundred seals. In getting this number I failed to capture about twenty-five shot at, or killed or wounded, but which escaped. In my second year I got over five hundred, and lost about thirty. This year I got one hundred and forty, and lost only one. I have frequently shot from two to five seal in a bunch, and got them all. One day in 1887 I got two bunches of five each, and another of four, and got the whole fourteen.

Indian hunters use spears, and either get every seal they throw at or it escapes unhurt, or but slightly wounded. Indians, it can be safely said, get every seal they kill.

Oscar Scarr, a hunter on the Viva, in 1888 got over six hundred seals, and lost only about twenty. The average number lost by white hunters does not exceed six in one hundred, and by the Indian not six in one thousand. I have never shot, nor have I ever seen, a female seal with a young one beside or with her. It is very seldom a female is killed in Behring’s Sea carrying her young with her, and out of one thousand killed on the coast earlier in the season less than one-third are females carrying their young.

Wm. Fewings.

Victoria, British Columbia, August 9, 1889.

walter house.

I was a hunter on the schooner Walter L. Rich on her sealing voyage this year. It was my first year on the Pacific coast, but I had seven years’ experience on the Newfoundland coast catching hair-seals. This year on the Rich I got one hundred and eighty-five seals and lost five, which sank before I reached them. I used a shotgun. The hunters on the Rich lost about the same proportion, some it few more, some less. I never saw a cow seal in the water with her young beside her or near her, nor have I ever heard of such a case.

Walter House

Victoria, British Columbia, August 10, 1889.

james wilson.

I was carpenter on board the sealing schooner Triumph on her voyage this year. One of the hunters was drowned just before entering Behrings’ Sea, and I took his place. I was out hunting seals about a week, but the weather was bad and I got only twenty-three seals. I had had no experience. I used a breech-loading shotgun, and shot seals at a range of from 10 to 15 yards. I lost one seal through the carelessness of the boat hands running the boat over the seal, which sank directly under the boat.

Most of seals lost by hunters are shot at long ranges with the rifles. One hunter on the Triumph this year got over sixty seals and only lost one. I never saw a cow seal with her young beside her. Out of the twenty-three I got, five or six were cows carrying their young.

James Wilson.

Victoria, British Columbia, August 9, 1889.

capt. j. d. warren.

I am a master mariner, and have been actively engaged in the deep-sea sealing business for twenty years. I have owned and commanded sealing vessels on voyages along the Pacific coast from 47° to 48° north latitude to 56° or 57° north latitude within Behring Sea. I have generally employed Indians, except in 1886 and 1887, the last years I was out, when I had white hunters as well. White hunters use rifles and shotguns entirely, Indian hunters use spears. Bullets weighing from 300 to 400 grains are used with rifles, and ordinary buckshot with guns. Both rifles and shotguns are breech-loading and of the best make. Seals are approached by the hunters in boats to 10 or 15 yards, lying generally asleep on the water. Frequently seals are taken alive when asleep, especially by the Indians, who, in their canoes, get within from a spear’s length (14 or 15 feet) to 30 feet before they throw. Indians rarely lose a seal they strike, and if one escapes it is always but slightly wounded. Of seals killed by white hunters, probably not over 10 per cent, are killed with rifle, which is generally used for only a long range.

Sealers divide the seals for hunting purposes into two classes, “sleepers” and “feeders “or “travelers.” “Sleepers” are almost always shot at from 10 to 15 yards range, and are seldom lost. “Feeders” are shot at just as their heads emerge from the water. From this fact the range is always from a few feet to 100 yards, though few are fired at at that distance. Hunters use a “gaff,” a pole about 10 or 12 feet long, with one to three hooks upon it, with which they catch the seal and bring it into the boat. If the seal sinks, the “gaff” is run down, and the seal hooked up. The British sealing vessels employ more Indian than white hunters. My experience with white hunters is not so extensive as with Indians, but from what I have seen while engaged in sealing I can say that not over six in every one hundred seals killed by white hunters are lost or escape.

Experienced hunters seldom lose a seal; the losses are chiefly made by inexperienced hunters, only a few of whom are employed, for the reason that as hunters are paid so much a skin, inferior men can not make good wages. I have noticed no diminution in the number of seals during the twenty years I have been in the business, but if any change at all, an increase. Of the seals taken along the coast about one-half are females, and of the females not more than one-half are with young. In Behring Sea not one in one hundred of those taken by the hunters are females with young, because as soon as the females carrying their young get into the sea they go to the breeding islands or rookeries, and in a few days their young are born. The cows remain with their young until they are quite able to take care of themselves. I do not think that out of the seals taken by Indian and white hunters more than 30 per cent, are females actually breeding or capable of breeding.

“Old bulls,” “bachelors” “two-year-old pups,” and “barren cows” make up the great majority. Cows actually breeding are very watchful, and while on the voyage northward are ever on the alert, so they are difficult to take. On the other hand, the other classes above named make up the great class of “sleepers,” from which fully 90 per cent, of the whole catch of hunters is derived. I never saw or heard of a “cow” having her young beside her in the water, either on the coast or in Behring Sea.

J. D. Warren.

Victoria, British Columbia, August 10, 1889.