wanton waste and destruction of any salmon or
other food fish” by manufacture into fertilizer or
fish oil, except that offal may be so manufactured.
The Juneau Chamber of Commerce is stating
its objections to the Committee on Merchant
Marine and Fisheries. The miners are telling the
fishermen that they must continue to have the
herring fisheries destroyed; that the bait fisher
men must operate at a loss; that the halibut
fishermen must go on short bait trips; that the
trollers must go without bait; that the salmon
must be chased from Alaska waters for its food
supply. That in order to protect a few greedy
operators, the halibut fleet, the trolling fleet, the
herring fisheries must be destroyed.
Be it remembered that the Petersburg Cham
ber of Commerce adopted a long resolution op
posing the wasteful destruction of the herring
fisheries by these fertilizer plants. That the Wran
gell and Ketchikan Chambers of Commerce sup
ported this resolution. That the Alaska Native
Brotherhood in convention at Yakutat endorsed
the resolution and thereby reaffirmed their posi
tion on this question. That George Rounsfell, Jr.,
special investigator for the U. S. Bureau of Fish
eries has found by his investigations, scientific
and practical, that the arguments set forth in the
resolution were correct and that depletion of the.
herring fisheries is already an accomplished fact.
The Chambers of Commerce interested in
their fisheries should not lose any time nor
energy in getting back of Delegate Wickersham
in support of his bill which was presented at the
instance of these same organizations and at the
instance of the halibut and herring fishermen
and others.
It would be foolish to allow this bili to be de
feated by the Juneau Chamber of Commerce—a
town interested in mines and mining and with
no knowledge of fishery conditions—and by the
so-called Alaska Fishermen’s Union, a group of
Californians who are never long enough in Alas
ka to establish a voting residence.
-x
THE WELCH BILL
-X
The Welch Bill, an amendment to the White
Pish Law of 1924 provides that no floating can
nery may operate unless permission has been
granted by the Bureau of Fisheries prior to De
cember 30, each current year and said cannery
may not operate in more than one place in each
year; it further extends the power of the Com
missioner of Fisheries over and beyond the 3-mile
limit whereby he may prevent landing of com
mercial salmon in American ports during any
cloised season.
In the hearings published last month it will
be noted that the measure is for the purposes of
“conservation.” To prevent the floaters from going
from one district to another and thereby deplete
the various Ashing areas. There are only two or
three small floaters operating in Alaska—and a
couple of those are operating in the Bristol Bay
section—which is reserved by the United States
Bureau of Fisheries for the Pacific American
Fisheries, the Alaska Packers’ Association and
perhaps one or two other large corporations. The
floaters must not move from one district to an
other—a conservation measure. Listen:
Stationary canneries in Southeastern Alaska,
have packed salmon from Icy Straits to Ketchi
kan; from Lynn Canal to Ketchikan; from north
and South Frederick Sound to Ketchikan; from
north and south Chatham Straits to Ketchikan.
from those same districts to Craig, Rose Inlet on
the West Coast of Prince of Wales; from the West
Coast and Ketchikan Districts to Petersburg and
north. In fact, the stationary canners with their
large and high powered tenders and scows pack
Ush for distances up to three hundred miles
from one district to another. Last summer daily
there were close on to 100,000 salmon passing the
port of Petersburg enroute to Ketchikan and at
other times lesser numbers being taken north.
Now, to conserve salmon, it is proposed by
the Bureau of Fisheries—Mr. Henry O’Malley, if
you please, that the small floating cannery must
not operate in more than one district in a season.
It will destroy the fisheries supply. It is more
dangerous than transporting in large scows and
tenders. The few thousand salmon a small float
ing cannery uses, represents the seed supply and
to conserve that supply, the floater must remain
in one district—regardless of whether that dis
trict has any salmon or not. To conserve the
supply! Get that! To conserve the supply! And
while the Bureau of Fisheries is protecting a few
salmon from the small operator, it makes no pro
vision whereby the large operator must not trans
port from one district to another the very salmon
it says a small floating operator must not touch.
Conservation — Conservation of what?
Peter E. Olson, California fishermen, puts in
his oar in defense of this bill. You can well ima
gine that his endorsements were written by Henry
O’ Malley—it is as prominent as your proboscis.
--x
IN SIMPLE JUSTICE
-X
Any person arrested for transportation of
liquor in violation of the prohibition laws, must
first be found guilty of transporting liquor before
his vehicle may be seized, confiscated and sold.