Stewart Edward W h ite=5portsman
Stewart Edward White .amateur
fisherman and expert writer has
attracted a great deal of pub
licity by his articles on Alaska
fisheries in the Saturday Even
ing post of last December.
The praise that he gives Hen
ly O’Malley was probably given
with his tongue in his cheek.
The evils of the system are am
ple to show that something is
wrong with the regulations of
Henry O’Malley. That is what
led Mr. White to say:
“Which brings me to an idea
of my own. It may be a poor
Liea; it may be that there are
leasons against it which my lack
of training does not permit me
to see. But I have not yet met
a fisherman who offered any
fundamental objections.
“It is based on the further
fact that the number of salmon
that run to any given stream is
greatly in excess of the number
necessary to fully plant that
stream. Further, where the fish
have not been unduly diminish
ed, it is more than can get into
the stream. The surplus simp
ly fails to fulfil its function.
Why not establish watchers who
are competent to report when
the streams have been fully
stocked? Until that report is
complete for any district, keep
the canneries closed. After the
report is made, say to them in
effect:
“ ‘Gentlemen, we the people
have all the fish we need for our
purpose which is the continu
ance of the supply. Go to it!
Take all the rest’ ” .
Nothing New Under the Sun
This idea might be new to Mr.
White, amateur fisherman. But
it is not new to anybody who
jhas studied fishery laws of oth
er countries.
The Convention of the ALAS
-X
KA NATIVE BROTHERHOOD in
1928 passed a resolution con
taining the following clause:
“We contend that the unit of
conserving salmon should bo the
stream, and whenever a suffi
cient number of salmon have
escaped into the stream that the
restricted area be .changed even
to abolishment, it being under
stood that the restricted area
may also be enlarged when con
oitions require such action;
That the system of stream
watchmen be maintained, but
that supervisors having good
judgment be given districts of
perhaps 100 miles.
The ALASKA NATIVE BRO
THERHOOD in their last con
vention held last November (be
fore the publication of Mr.
White’s article) again adopted
this resolution though in differ
ent language*
“No fishing should be allowed
until the salmon stream is ade
quately seeded; Thereupon fish
ing should be allowed to the high
tide mouth of the stream; but
whenever the amount of seed
fish in the stream decreases be
low the safety point the dead
line should be moved out until
the supply of seed fish is guar
anteed in the stream; thereafter
the deadline should be moved
cut nihil the supply of seed fish
is guaranteed in the stream;
thereafter the dead-line should
be placed at whatever point
might be necessary to keep the
stream sufficiently seeded with
out over-stocking it—in other
words, we rerommend a move-.
able dead-line to be determined
fcy the seed fish in the stream
tnd the amount in sight.”
But the Canadian Regulations
are even earlier than our Indian
suggestion.. The law for years
past in British Columbia is as
follows:
Fishing Regulations, Province of
British Columbia of 1925,
Section 30
..(a) The local .fishery .officer
may stop all salmon fishing by
purse seines or drag seines in
any portion of his district for
■Fiich time er from time ta time
in aidiicn to the weekly closed
lime as he deems necessary to
fnable sufficient salmon to pass
to assure adequate seeding of
the spawning grounds adjacent
thereto.
(b) If the local officer for any
area fmis that sufficient salmon
are not passing beyond the nets
in such area to sufficiently seed
the spawning grounds adjacent
thereto, he is hereby authorized
to require and enforce such long
er close tike any week or from
v. eek to week in such area as he
rray deem necessary for such
purpose.”
It will be noticed that only
seines are mentioned above and
net traps. The reason is this—
British Columbia does not allow
fish traps except a very few
south of the Fraser River to
compete with the American
traps. This has been announced
by a prominent packer, Mr. Gos
se, as being “a matter of public
policy.” One notable result of
this policy is this—it takes 9,
322 men to catch the salmon for
1.480,102 cases in British Colum
bia while only 2,793 men are em
ployed to catch the fish for the
2,373,948 cases packed in South
eastern Alaska.
On the same basis, it would
take 14,537 fishermen to catch
the fish in Southeastern Alaska.
IS IT WORTH WHILE.
Be rather bountiful than ex
pensive . .