Significant Letters From the Bureau of Fisheries
We print the following correspond
ence because it reveals the “mind”
of E. M. Ball, field agent of the Bu
reau of .Fisheries and since Henry
O’Malley sustains him, the mind of
the entire Bureau.
The fact concerning the illegal
trap at Staney’s Creek is that this
trap was inside the “dead line” from
the very beginning; that this fact
was known to the watchman placed
there by Jack White, head warden of
the Bureau; that many fishermen
protested the illegal trap; that the
watchman drove off fishermen who
attempted to fish near the trap; and
that during the last season this trap,
unlawful at all times, caught over
175,000 'salmon, we are informed,
most of them being sockeyes. The
value of the fish at the minimum
price paid for humpbacks, about
$9,000. If but 50,000 sockeyes were
caught here, the value would increase
to $19,000. The Bureau allowed this
trap to remain here and fish during
the entire season of this creek.
After a plea of “guilty” was en
tered, this company was fined $400.
We will say for the presiding
Judge that the Bureau of Fisheries
offered no information to show the
contempt for the law, with which the
Booth Fisheries had built their trap,
the connivance of the Bureau them
selves, the rich catch of the illegal
trap, and the fact that the Cannery
was guilty of about 40 counts since
every day of illegal fishing is a
separate crime under the law.
As for the District Attorney’s
force, one of two things is true;
either they allowed their well-known
sympathies for the rich and powerful
to close their mouths when they
could have assisted the court as was
their sworn duty, or they were so
tickled to thinpc that at last they
could add a victory to their long list
of defeats, that they grabbed at the
chance.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
BUREAU OF FISHERIES
Juneau, Alaska, Sept. 3, 1923.
Alaska Native Brotherhood,
W. L. Paul, Secretary,
Ketchikan, Alaska.
Dear Sir:
Replying to your letter of August
13 with reference to the location of
a trap near Staney Creek, you are
advised that about two weeks before
receipt of your letter complaint was
filed in the office of the United
States Attorney at Juneau against
the Booth Fishery Company charg
ing it with locating and operating a
fish trap within five hundred yards
of the mouth of Staney Creek. The
company is bound over to the Grand
Jury meeting in Juneau, November
13, 1923.
I do not know the exact distance
from the mean low tide mark to the
trap but information is available at
this office showing that the trap is
approximately four hundred yards
from the point regarded by us as the
mouth of the stream. From the
sketch submitted by you it appears
that the trap itself stands outside
the protected area but that some
thing l|ke one half the length of the
lead is inside the line.
Yours very truly,
(Signed) E. M. BALL,
Assistant Agent.
GRAND CAMP
ALASKA NATIVE BROTHERHOOD
Sept. 14, 1923.
E. M. Ball, Assistant Agent,
Juneau, Alaska.
Dear Sir:
Referring to the activities of your
department in Alaska with special
reference to unlawful traps like
Staney Creek, almost every instance
like this emphasizes the fact that to
your department there seems to be
one law for the seiner and another
for the big trapowner.
The trap at Staney Creek was
there in violation of law from the
beginning of the season, about July
1st. Your watchman knew it, your
warden should have determined it
when he made his first inspection,
and yet it is not till August some
time that you take the first step to
stop this unlawful contrivance.
When your watchman was asked
why he drove seiners off from the
very district in which the trap fished,
he is reported to have shrugged his
shoulders and said “Oh, the trapman
has a pull and you haven’t.” We are
beginning to believe that.
The dead line is a mere matter of
opinion when it concerns the trap
and moves in and out to suit the
convenience of the big fellow whose
influence you fear, but where the
seiner is concerned, the law becomes
a rigid thing to be enforced by
“fearless” officials bound by their
oaths to “uphold the law.”
I am sending copies of my cor
respondence to Washington, for I am
convinced that you are a mere „o)l
of the big interests, and regardless
of whether we can have you removed,
- it -is the duty of every good citizen
who is independent, to fight you.
Yours very truly,
WM. L. PAUL,
Grand Secretary.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
BUREAU OF FISHERIES
Juneau, Alaska, Sept. 3, 1923.
Alaska Native Brotherhood,
W. L. Paul, Secretary,
Ketchikan, Alaska.
Dear Sir:
Receipt is acknowledged of your
communication of August 13 protest
ing against the action of Warden
John T. White in defining the closed
area at the salmon stream of Salmon
Bay. Mr. White was acting in the
interests of the preservation or pro
tection of run of salmon at Salmon
Bay without thought of discrimina
tion against any fishermen. His
action is approved and will be sus
tained by this office.
It was my good fortune to take
Commissioner O’Malley, Senator
Jones and Representative Hadley into
Salmon Bay recently at about low
water and to point out to them the
location of the notices indicating the
boundary of the closed area. They
were unanimously of the opinion that
the notices were yet too near the
stream and that they should be
moved something like one hundred
yards further out as only in that
way would reasonable protection be
afforded the salmon. They also
stated voluntarily that we were en
tirely too liberal in the marking of
such streams. In view of these state
ments it is probable that the pro
tected area off the mouth of the
stream in Salmon Bay will be ex
tended in 1924.
Yours very truly,
(Signed) E. M. BALL,
Assistant Agent.
GRAND CAMP
ALASKA NATIVE BROTHERHOOD
September 14, 1923.
E. M. Ball, Assistant Agent,
Juneau, Alaska.
Dear Sir:
You have as usual missed the
point of my letter.
What I am kicking about is that