THE ALASKA FISHERMAN
Published the 15th of each month at Ketchikan,
Alaska, by A. N. B. Publishing Co.
-x
Louis F. Paul - Editor
William L. Paul - - Associate Editor
C. O. Parks - Business Manager
Entered as second-class matter at the Post Office
at Ketchikan, Alaska
SUBSCRIPTION PRICE $2.00 FOR ONE YEAR
OUR PLATFORM
ALASKA FOR ALASKANS.
FULL TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT.
COMPETENT CHRISTIAN CITIZENSHIP.
ABOLISHMENT OF ALL TRAPS.
UNWISE LEGISLATION—WHEN?
-x
Delegate Sutherland recently introduced in
the House of Representatives a bill which would
convey to the Ketchikan Camp of the Alaska Na
tive Brotherhood for its own use and the use of
ether natives, an area of 200 X200 in the proposed
Thomas Basin project. This area—the entire
Thomas Basin project—has been recognized as
tidal rights to Indian owned uplands. A part of
this same area was the cause of dispute between
J. R. Heckman and another fisherman in the
early days—said dispute arising out of alleged
transfer of Indian rights to that area. Gradually,
little by little, the Ketchikan Indians have been
pushed out of their lands and in place of peaceful
Indian habitations there grew up the “Great
White Way” or “Wallstroet of Ketchikan” with a
more or less dubious reputation.
a iew years ago, the Ketchikan Post ot the
American Legion asked for and secured a portion
of that area which the government has “held in
trust” for the Ketchikan Indians and the Govern
ment has refused to permit any person, outside of
the Legion and the Salvation Army to put im
provements upon those tide lands.
If it is right and proper that permission shall
be granted to the American Legion and the Sal
vation Army to tidal lands in the same Thomas
Basin without any whining by the unspeakable
editors of the Empire, it is right and proper that
this bill should pass granting title to the Indians
of Ketchikan to lands which the government is
compelled by law to protect to them. “They shall
not be disturbed in their peaceful possession of
their inherent rights” would also mean that
these Indians should not be required to go to
Congress to secure a law recognizing their rights
to tidal lands which they have never released nor
relinquished to anyone.
Dan’s Political Debts.
Delegate Sutherland has not been and is un
der no obligation to the Alaska Native Brother
hood. Littie, crooked minds and contemptible vio
lators of the law liKe the editors of the Juneau
Empire cannot understand how any man can re
ceive political support from the Brotherhood and
not be beholden to the organization. That is
because their own crooked, whiskey-buying of
legislators, and political methods demands their
elected candidates to “produce” the goods or lose
their (Messrs. Troy and Pegues) support.
Tnc brotherhood has supported Delegate
Sutherland because he has been honest in his
convictions and in his elTorts to fulfill his
political promises, which were matters of princi
ple and benefit to all Alaska. Which is more than
can be said of those who criticize him in his
actions. D m Sutherland introduced this bill in
Congress because it was right, and honest and a
fair bill and we here challenge the “short-weight”
combination of Juneau to show wherein the bill
is not right, nor honest nor fair.
x
CHECK OR CHECKMATE
The Bureau cf Fisheries has been sponsoring
the International Sockeye Treaty which is now
before the Senate. Until recently it had the sup
port of virtually the entire industry. Within the
past few weeks considerable opposition has been
raised against the terms of the treaty and suffi
cient pressure put upon Senators Jones and Dill
of Washington, by the Governor of Washington,
the canning associations and the fishermen them
selves, that it is being predicted that the bill will
meet with plenty of opposition in Congress. So
much so that it is already declared that the
treaty cannot be ratified.
The sockeye fisheries of Washington, Canada
and Alaska are in a very sad state of depletion.
Washington and Canada at one time produced the
bulk of canned sockeye but to day their packs are
limited in size curtailing income therefrom to a
very large extent. Canada has long since recogniz
ed the early death of its fisheries unless regula
tory mear ures were enacted to protect the indus
try. They have passed at various times treaties
which they had presented to Congress but which
all met with opposition from the American can
ners through their powerful lobby in Washington.
Early in 1929 this same treaty was sent to
Washington and presented to the Senate for rati
fication but later Senator Jones had the treaty
recalled for revision. The revisions were made but