Even if we deny whales the right to live, and disregard the scientific importance of this marvelously specialized group of mammals, it is apparent that, reduced to a sordid standard, our problem demands immediate attention. It is of the utmost importance that while there is yet time the governments of the world should realize that if proper legislation is enacted to regulate the killing of whales, a great and lucrative industry can not only be conducted profitably in the present, but preserved for the future.
The history of modern whaling in Newfoundland, where American shore stations were first established, is an excellent example of what will happen sooner or later in every other part of the world if commercial greed remains unchecked. In 1908, Dr. Frederic A. Lucas, who from personal investigation is one of the best informed students of the subject, published a carefully prepared account of the Newfoundland fishery and I cannot do better than quote here a portion of his remarks. Dr. Lucas says:
Before 1903 we have no data as to the number of whales taken along the coast of Newfoundland and can only say that the value of whale products rose successively from $1,581, in 1898, to $36,428, in 1900, and $125,287 in 1902. Making a rough estimate, based on the value of the whale fishery, one may say that this represents not less than 350 whales, more probably about 500, since prior to 1902 the waste was very great. The first whaling station in which modern methods were adopted was established in 1897 and its success was so great that in 1903 four others had been erected and three more planned, although but three steamers were then employed. R. T. McGrath in the Report of the Newfoundland Department of Fisheries for 1903 gave it as his opinion that no more applications for factories should be granted for some years to come, saying, “Two factories are about to be erected, one at Trinity and one at Bonavista—during the coming year. This will make eight factories in all, viz., Balena, Aquaforte, Snook’s Arm, Chalem Bay, Cape Broyle, Bonavista and Trinity. In my opinion no further applications should be granted for some years. If licenses are given without restriction, it will result in complete depletion of this industry within a short time; whilst if judiciously dealt with, it will be a profitable source of revenue, and a great assistance to the laboring people of the colony for many years to come.” This advice, however, was not heeded, the only restriction placed on whaling being that stations should not be nearer one another than twenty miles and that but one steamer should be employed. These restrictions were practically of no avail, as one steamer was all that could then be employed to advantage and a run of twenty miles is nothing to a 12-knot vessel. So whaling stations rapidly multiplied until by 1905 eighteen were in operation, occupying all the more favorable locations about Newfoundland, Labrador and the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and fifteen steamers were employed. The effects of this over-multiplication were felt at once, and while in 1903 three steamers took 858 whales, or an average of 286 each, in 1905 fifteen steamers took but 892 whales, or an average of only 59 a vessel.
| In | 1903 | 3 | vessels took | 858 | whales |
| „ | 1904 | 10 | „ „ | 1,257 | „ |
| „ | 1905 | 15 | „ „ | 892 | „ |
| „ | 1906 | 14 | „ „ | 429 | „ |
| „ | 1907 | 14 | „ „ | 481 | „ |
| 3,935 | whales | ||||
| Taken between 1898–1902, estimated | 350 | „ | |||
| 4,285 | whales | ||||
Thus in ten years more than 4,000 whales have been captured in the immediate vicinity of Newfoundland. The effect was disastrous and caused the ruin of the smaller companies, the chief sufferers being the smaller shareholders who had invested their entire capital.
Since then the number of stations in operation has been reduced and some of the steamers sold, not more than ten stations being operated in any one year and only six or eight of these at one time. Still the catch has steadily decreased and in 1913 only two hundred and twenty-two whales were taken.
One of the arguments in favor of indiscriminate whaling has been the theory that whales had the whole world to draw upon and that the depletion in any one locality would soon be supplied by overflow from another. To a slight extent this may be true, for there seems some reason to believe that whales do now and then pass from the Pacific to the Atlantic,[[20]] but on the whole whales are restricted in their range as other animals[[21]] and extermination in one place means extermination in that locality for all time. Another fallacy was the belief that the supply of whales was practically limitless and that one might “slay and slay and slay” continuously. There is not a more mischievous term than “inexhaustible supply,” and certainly none more untrue. So we see our inexhaustible forests on the verge of disappearing, our inexhaustible supplies of coal and oil daily growing less, and the end of the inexhaustible supply of whales in sight. Man is recklessly spending the capital Nature has been centuries in accumulating and the time will come when his drafts will no longer be honored. It matters not whether the vessel is a bucket or an ocean, one can only take out as much water as it contains and where all is outgo and no income, it is merely a question of time when one or the other will be emptied.[[22]]
[20]. “Capt. Bull states that a sulphur-bottom whale shot on the coast of Norway contained a harpoon fired into it on the coast of Kamchatka and that a humpback killed off Aquaforte was found to have in the flesh an unexploded bomb lance fired from a San Francisco whaler in the Pacific.”
[21]. “For example, the sulphur-bottom is not found or occurs as a straggler on the east coast of Newfoundland; although once common on the south coast.”
[22]. “The Passing of the Whale.” Zoölogical Society Bulletin, July, 1908, No. 30, supp., pp. 446–447.