THE ALASKA FISHERMAN
Published the 15th of each month at Ketchikan, Alaska
WILLIAM L. PAUL, ATTORNEY FOR THE
Alaska Native Brotherhood
Entered as second-class matter at the Post Office at
KETCHIKAN, ALASKA
SUBSCRIPTION PRICE $2.00 FOR TWELVE ISSUES
OUR PLATFORM:
ABOLISHMENT OF ALL TRAPS.
ALASKA FOR ALASKANS.
FULL TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT.
ONE NATION, ONE LANGUAGE, ONE FLAG.
“Be ye not as the horse, or as the mule,
Which have no understanding;
Whose mouth must be held in with bit and bridle,
Else it will not come near unto thee.” Ps: 32d
Unanswered Charges
Secretary Herbert Hoover, Governor Bone,
Fish Commissioner O’Malley, Professor Gilbert
all declare that the fish reserves are mere tem
porary devices to conserve fish “until Congress
can pass adequate laws.”
On February 28, 1923, Dan Sutherland made
certain charges before Congress and told Con
gress just how and why these reserves were
made.
The attorney for Libby, McNeil & Libby first
came to Washington and tried to get the Secre
tary of Agriculture to create a “bird” reserve.
Can you beat it?
The secretary would not create such a bird re
serve for a cannery company for the secretary
knew that the attorney wanted a “fish” reserve,
the “bird” reserve being but a way to get what
was really wanted.
The fish trust was then forced to work on
Sec. Hoover and they worked directly from San
Francisco where they held a meeting. “The U.
S. Commissioner of Fisheries and his special ad
viser, Dr. Charles Henry Gilbert, were present,
but the process of cutting and dividing the melon
was conducted entirely by the head of the trust,
the Alaska Packers’ Association. The history
of the whole infamous performance is contained
in the certified record of the proceedings, and
for brazen audacity in dividing up the public
property of the people of the United States by
private selfish interests there is nothing re
corded in American history with which to make
comparison.” This was before the lid of the
Teapot Dome was lifted.
Then Dan Sutherland incorporated a letter of
the Alaska Packers which is almost verbatim
the words establishing the reserves. These rules
give the absolute control of Alaska to the fish
trust by placing the control of all gear in their
hands, and it is provided that no person may
fish there until “The Bureau v of Fisheries is
convinced that further restrictions are unneces
sary.” You will see later on what that means.
The fish trust dictated, and Secretary Hoov
er signed his name to the order while Governor
Bone, Fish Commissioner O’Malley applauded.
Here is a sample of their dictation:
“No purse seines, small-meshed gill nets, or
power gill net boats to be permitted to be oper
ated or used in salmon fishing in this reserva
tion.”
If you think that is all right, listen to this;
“No roving operating licenses or permits to
be issued to floating canneries or salteries.”
If you think the fish trust was satisfied with
this, you are mistaken, for the Bureau of Fish
eries and Mr. Hoover are running the reserve
on the theory that all the fish that come in from
the ocean belong to some cannery in the reserve.
Read the following and use your own head. A
little cannery at Castle Bay, about 30 miles from
the Chignik Lagoon, asked for a permit to op
erate, and the servants of the fish trust , O’Mal
ley & Co. wrote him as follows:
“The fish which would be caught by the traps
you desire to erect are believed to constitute a
part of the Chignik run, and the operation of
these traps would mean further inroads upon
the Chignik fishery.” O’Malley might have said
this in fewer words, towit: “No you can’t be
cause the fish trust at the Chignik Lagoon won’t
like it.”
And thus the salmon swimming 30 miles dis
tant from the fishing grounds of the trust must
not be disturbed by any mere citizen.
IS IT CONSERVATION?
At the time, Sutherland protested that if
these reserve orders were for conservation, the
limitations of pack were out of all reason, and
he stated the following:
“Of the 7 canneries on the Alaska peninsula,
the aggregate of their limit is exactly 25,233
cases more than they packed in 1922. This is
conservation with a vengeance.”
And yet the people of the United States be
lieve Mr. Hoover when he says he is conserving
the fish by “limiting the pack.”
Again: “Port Molier; the average pack per
year of the Pacific Fisheries Co. at that place
for the years 1916 to 1921, inclusive, was 62,639
cases of red salmon, but for the purposes of con
servation the Bureau fixes the pack limit at
80,000.”
Again: Libby, McNeil & Libby at Kenai had
an average pack of 28,432 cases for the years
1916 to 1919 inclusive, but the FISH CONSERV
ING HOOVER gave them a limit of 40,000 in
1922.
CHARGES ARE UNANSWERED
Commissioner O’Malley answered (?) these
charges by saying that “this terrifying gigantic
piece of corruption not only embraces the old
villianies of the salmon canners, embalmed fish
sellers, War Department frauds, the Chicago
meat packers, all of whom are busy levying
graft for their nefarious purposes, but the in
quiry falls upon Stanford University, which truly
needs the money, involving eminent professors
of zoology at Stanford, Washington and Illinois;
upon Chajnbers of Commerce and Pioneer Igloos