it with a view to securing all
ether sites upon which can
neries might be constructed,
caused a survey of every such
site to be made, applied to the
United States to purchase every
such possible site, paid for them
with soldiers’ additional home
stead scrip (which did not re
quire the purchaser to make any
settlement or improvements \
procured United States patents
for such lands, and now hold the
title to every possible cannery
site on that bay, and have held
them unimproved for many
years, thereby preventing the
construction of any other shore
cannery on that bay. In that way
they have had and held a com
plete monoply of the fisheries of
Bristol Bay for nearly a quarter
of a century and demand the
right to do so forever. Only a
floating cannery can now get
into Bristol Bay, for the shore
canneries now there control all
the shore sites, and if the bill
H R. 6483 shall pass Congress,
it will effectually drive them
out, and thus practically guaran
tee the entire monoply of this
great natural food supply, be
longing to the people of the
United States, in the shore can
neries now situated on this bay.
The hearings on this bill dis
closed, without denial or ques
tion, another harmful type of
monopoly in the Bristol Bay fish
eries, national in its character,
in this way: That Libby, McNeill
& Libby, operated 6 of these
snore-site canneries, and in 1931
packed 20.5 per cent of the total
Bristol Bay pack; that that com
pany is a subsidiary of Swift &
Co., the Chicago meat trust; that
the Alaska Packers Association
of San Francisco, said to be the
author of this bill, operated 7
shore-site canneries, and in 1931
packed 37.5 per cent of the
pack; that that company is a
subsidiary of the California
Packing Corporation, the fruit
and food canning trust; that the
Nakat Packing Corporation op
erated 1 cannery in Bristol Bay,
and in 1931 packed 4.4 per cent
of the total pack in that bay;
that the Nakat Co. is a subsidi
ary of the Great Atlantic &
Pacific Tea Co. of America, with
its 15,000 chain stores, which
also has 5 more canneries in
southeastern Alaska. These 3
great food-trust companies own
14 out of a possible 27 shore-site
canneries in Bristol Bay and in
1931 packed 62.4 per cent of the
entire Bristol Bay pack of reds,
the most valuable fish on the
Alaska coast. No testimony was
elicited in the hearings to con
nect the other Bristol Bay can
neries with the food trusts
except the testimony whici*
clearly shows they are all in the
combine to monoplize all the
shore-cannery sites in that bay,
whereby all independent can
neries and fishermen, especially
Alaska resident fishermen are
excluded from its valuable fish
eries, either as operators or
laborers. It appears to be a
water-tight monopoly, based on
weak acts of Congress, of the
most valuable fisheries in A
merican waters, which belong to
the people of the United States,
who pay through the nose.
(Continued next month.)
Do Not Let Selfishness Destroy Our Fisheries
-A
Unable, after many years’ ef
forts, to effect a treaty with the
United States for moving joint
ly in the regulation of sockeye
salmon fishing, Canada now
threatens to move the fish.
The sockeye, one of the most
valuable species of salmon, runs
up the Fraser River to use the
lakes of its watershed as spawn
ing grounds. The river and
lakes are wholly within the
Dominion, but to approach them
from the sea, where salmon
spend the major portion of their
life span, the fish must pass
through territorial waters of the
United States. This fact makes
joint action by the two nations
necessary before any protective
or regulatory measures can be
come effective.
After much study and effort
by representatives of Canada
and the United States a propos
ed treaty was formulated, but
thus far has not received ap
proval of the United States
senate.
Most of the fishing interests
on this side of the line favor a
treaty which will conserve the
sockeye salmon, the taking of
which returns as much as $4,
000,000 a year to fishermen and
canners of Puget Sound.
However, the treaty draft met
opposition sufficiently formid
able to prevent its ratification.
This resistance centered ag
round objections raised by Gov
ernor Hartley of Washington.
Canada grows impatient, and
her attitude is understandable.
However, previous efforts to in
duce the sockeye to migrate to
rivers farlher north in the
Dominion have failed. Anadro
mous fish are stubborn, clinging
tenaciously to habit
uanaaa s only workable re
prisal seems to be contained in
her threat to exterminate the
sockeye from the Fraser River
by systematically removing eggs
fiom the spawning beds.
This will scarcely be done. It
is not the habit of intelligent
Canadians to destroy a resource,
no matter how sorely their pa
tience may be tried.
If the sockeye industry ever is
destroyed, it will come about be -
cause too much stubbornness
and selfishness and bad judge
ment, chiefly south of the in
ternational boundary.
Efforts should be 'continued
until a satisfactory treaty is
negotiated.