The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1893-03-27
Contentious of the United States and
England in the Bering Sea
Controversy.
The Claims Of This Government as
They Are Made to the
Arbitrators.
Connicting Views ns to the Canses for the
steady Decrenss In tho Number
Of tho Seals.

PARIS, March G.-The Berinp sea nrti.
traitors have decided that their aittino will
not be hold behind closed doors, This mar
mits making public the exact points of oon-
tention. Briefly stated the case of tho
United States is that the Alaskan fur seal
is beRottsn, born and reared only upon
fribylov islands. to which they return each
spring to spend several months consortinQ
together; that while at these islands ths
seals arc easily controlled; that discrimina-
ton can be and has been exercised; that
while absent from the islands during
migration. which reaches AZ far south al
the coast Of California. they land on no
other shore and mingls with no other herd
OF fur seals; that because OF these habits
the Alaskan herd and each individual of 1,
Ia the property of the United States.
The methods employed by the open
sea sealers il attacked by the American
government as destructive, wasteful and
discriminating. 1t is claimed that a large
percentage of the seals killed by tho open
sea hunters are fomalss. a majority Of
which are about to become or are mothers.
Inc destruction Of the pregnant female
causes the death OF her unborn young, The
death of a mother seal, killed while in tho
search OF food in the waters of BerinQ sea.
destroys the offspring on the Pribylov
rookeries. II is further claimed that mauv
seals shot in the open sea by the hunters,
escape mortally wounded. or sink before
the hunter reaches them. Open sea seal
Ing 1t is argued. will result in the destfuc-
ton Of the herd in the near future. On
the island only limited number OF seals
are killed. AS the seal 10 polygamous, .
large number of males can be killed with
out affecting the birth rate of tho herd. On
these facts the American Roysrnme ont claims
that from the nature of the industry estab-
lished on Pribylov island the United States
seals wherever they may be found, AZ the
animals can only be killed on United Statea
territory without danger of determination.
II is also claimed that owing to the long
period OF CESSATION petagic sealing cannoS
AZ any VINE De otherwise than destructive.
dangerous and wasteful, and should be pro-
hibited.
Tho case Of Great Britain on tho other
hand, ia that the Alaskan seals have not tho
characteristics OF snimals that can be m ade
subject to property; that it is not certain
they land only on Pribylov island or that
they do not interminQle with the Russian
sea herd; or that they are petaeio in ma
ture; and therefore they should be treated
as fish rather than land animals. Il il
claimed that many of the propositions es-
sential to the position taken by the United
States nre unproven or contrary TO
the facts. As to petagic SEAL
ing, it IL claimed that
the destructiveness and wastefulness have
been areatly exaggerated; and that il is the
legitimate and proper method of taking
scala, and can be prosecuted without dan
ger of exterminatin9 the herd. Much inn
portsnce ia also given by the British gov
eminent to the jurisdiction it claims over
BerinR sea. but this appears to be treated
by the United States as secondary ques-
tion.
Both nations concede that the seals have
decreased; the United States charging such
decrease to the destruction of the producing
sex by open sea sealing, and Great Britain
claiming the present condition has been
caused by the excessive number Of males
killed on the islands and tho injurious
effect of tho methods there employed.