ulate the fisheries. At that time the explanation was
that the waters were overfished and the packers were
taking too many fish. With the enactment of the
1924 law (White Bill) which gave the Bureau enlarg
ed powers the scientists regulated the salmon fishing
in such a manner that more fish were taken than ever
before and they then pointed to the increased pack,
taken from waters that they claimed were depleted,
as evidence of the efficiency of their regulations. All
practical men knew what the result of this continued
overfishing would be and now that the fishery in
Southeastern Alaska is a complete failure the Bureau
does not know “the whys of it” except that a “catacly
smic upheaval” may be responsible for it.
To give human beings credit for plenteous harvests
and to make nature responsible for famines seems a
pretty small business for scientists to be engaged in
but this is just what the Bureau has been doing.
A large run of salmon is taken advantage of to^e^c-^
alt the Bureau while a depleted run is used to
the Almighty.
• MINDS CONTROLLED BY ‘HOO-DOO’ ”
So begins an editorial from the Juneau Empire,
published by Johnny Walker Troy, an acknowledged
authority on everything.
To go on;
“A pretended authority on Alaska fisheries which
insists that only salmon caught in traps deplete the
fish supply says that the contention that the salmon
run this year was two weeks or so late iss all wrong
It declares that the fish are coming in now because
the trap's have been closed and are no longer catch
ing all the salmon that enter the estuaries before
they reach the spawning streams.
“The funny part of this is that the traps did no!
catch any fish to speak of, except in Icy Strait and
tributary waters where they were late in beginning.
All the traps combined in the areas that are reached
through estuaries south of Chatham | Strait did not
take enough 'salmon during the fishing season to nil
300,000 cases—not more than enough to make fair
packs for three four-line canneries. If any one can
figure how traps that are not catching fish can pre
vent the escapement of salmon, he must be relying on
some sort of “hoo-doo” or “witchery.**
Even if we were to agree that only enough fish were
caught by traps to fill 300,000 cases, that would
amount to over five million salmon.
Suppose we should figure this in terms of fish
hatcheries a system in which the Empire believes so
strongly.
The release of 12 million salmon fry represents the
spawn of only 4,000 salmon, and yet the Empire did
not think Itself relying on “some sort of hoo-doo or
witchery” when it asked the continuance of our hatch
ery system at a cost of over $100,000 with a prospec
tive release of not more than 20 million fry—the
spawn of about 7,000 salmon.
The day will come when we will get a legislature
filled with men who are not afraid of the special in
terests represented by the Juneau Empire, and fish
traps will be abolished.
Why not? The fish traps are outlawed in every
country except Alaska and the state of Washington.
Even the State of California, the home of Congress
man A. M. Free, makes it unlawful to even build a
trap.
THE “BETTER UNDERSTANDING” ARTICLE
BY EDWARD W. ALLEN
The best advocate we have against the present can
■s nery and trap system is Edward W. Allen and men
like him. It is well to read his article and also to
know something about him.
Mr. Allen is the attorney for the Nakat Packing
Company, a subsidiary of the Great Atlantic and Paci
fic Tea Company, owner of 16,000 chain stores in the
United States.
Mr. Allen knows nothing about the fishing business
except what his clients tell him. When I told him
about the great population in Southeastern Alaska who
did not live in Juneau and Ketchikan, he was astonish
ed. He did not know anything about towns like Sitka,
Hoonah, Killisnoo, Angoon, Kake and other places which
depend entirely on seining for their existence.
Mr. Allen was a lobbyist.
And yet in his report of the last session, he purpose
ly misrepresents not only the facts but also the re
sults. We give a few examples.
“Had the measures which were introduced been en
acted into law, the cost of conducting the territorial
government * * * would have been multiplied.”
Mr.Allen did not appear before the legislature or a
committee thereof a single time and makes this state
ment. Measures like the workmen’s compensation law
would simply divert the premium from the insurance
company to the Territory and is not to be considered
an increase in the cost of government.
“Restrictions would have been imposed with which
it would be physically impossible to comply;"
Mr. Allen is referring to the cannery inspection bill.
This bill was written by Hon. John Rustgard, attorney
general of the Territory and was approved by the
canneries themselves. August Buschmann testified that
his cannery would have no difficulty in complying with
the law as they were already doing so. Mr. Allen did
not attend the hearings nor did he object to the law
on behalf of his company.
‘"Hordes of inspectors would be haunting every