Closed by a line 500 yards from
t »ie head of the bay.
Long Distance Government
“I know the evils of long-dis
tance government” you say. “But
here is a department of the Gov
ernment which I claim is effi
cient, which I claim is protect
ing the property of Alaska as
well as the property of the peo
ple of the United States.”
Mr. McKeown, Bureaus are
all the same, and long distance
government is exactly the
same. You should be ashamed
to defend such a Bureau since
you claim personal knowledge
of what bureaucratic govern
ment means.
H. R. 2394, Hearing Jan. 17, 1922
You should read this hearing
in which the witnesses were
Bishop Rowe the Episcopal
Bishop of Alaska, William L.
Paul, and Charles Ferguson, for
you need the kind of informa
tion that is contained therein.
You referred to the Yakutat
situation as being satisfactory.
That is true to a large degree.
Whatever abuse that exists there
is due largely to Libby, McNeil
& Libby who use this unFa{r
practice—it puts its hired men
on the ground while the rivers
are still frozen and these men
hold the best places for their
set-nets by putting their nets in
place on the ice. In this wav,
the natives are forced to take
inferior places simply because
they cannot afford to sit and
watch their places in competi
tion with the hired men of this
great Chicago corporation.
\ What we are trying to do is to
get Henry O’Malley to give the
rest of us the same favorable
consideration which NATURE
l as forced him t© give the Yaku
tat fishermen. These men earn
ed according to the figures giv
en you by the Bureau of Fisher
ies almost $1,000 each. We could
get along on that, but certainly
nut on the meager earnings now
possible under Mr. O’Malley’s
rules. I know the natives side
of that story too, Mr. McKeown,
and there is no credit due Mr.
O’Malley for he has and is mak
ing it just as hard for the na
tives there as he can. For ex
ample, he has closed Dry Bay
to commercial fishing this year
tc May 15th and prevents our
fishermen from catching the
king salmon till they get into
the river. Of course this would
meet with your approval. But
after that date, the district is
< pen and the Chicago company
has special hydroplane boats
that go up the river and catch
the very same fish before they
get into the lake so that the ef
fect of Mr. O’Malley’s regulation
“in the interest of conservation”
Is that the Natives and others
me prohibited from catching
salmon which are later caught
\.y the great corporation of Chi
cago.
Who Wrote the Letter
On page 2498 of the Congres- j
sional Record you quote a letter
which in turn quotes from the
report of the Hon. S. L Howe;
Pjovincial Secretary of British
Columbia. I merely ask who
wrote for this reason—he as
sumes that the fishermen would
object if the B. C. regulations as
applied to seines were also the
law of Alaska. I would say this
—the Natives of Alaska for
whom I am spokesman, and the
other local fishermen whose con
fidence I have, would not ob
ject if the entire policy of the
fishery officials of British Co
lumbia were adopted and applied
as they are in British Columbia.
We do not advocate fishing of
any sort without regulation.
We know what the ultimate
regulation will be, but until that
time comes, we ask that the bur
dens of regulation be fairly dis
tributed. Our condition is now
like the Children of Israel for
Henry O’Malley is forcing us to
“make bricks without straw.”
The very figures of the Bureau
of Fisheries prove this for they
show that in 1924 (the birth of
the White Fish Bill) the catch by
gear was as follows: seines, 38
per cent; traps, 57 per cent;
then in 1928 after four years of
plenary power by Henry O'Mal
ley, the god of Alaska fisheries,
the catch was as follows: seines,
25 per cent; traps, 71 per cent.
The Hook-off Change
You remarked that the rule
against the hook-off was omit
ted this year; but why? When
Mr. O’Malley was here on July
3rd last he told our secretary
that “if you (meaning the mass
meeting of the local fishermen
who were meeting within three
hours) want me to change the
hook-off rule, it is no use be
cause I don’t intend to change
it.” What happened then to
to make him omit it? If it was
right then, it is right now. He
changed it because of my ap
peals for help to the Vice Presi
dent of the United States who
quickly saw the injustice of the
rule, and who promptly laid the
matter before the Hon. Robert
P. Lamont, Secretary of Com
merce, in whose name Henry
O’Malley runs our fisheries.
Other Matters
There are other matters con
cerning which Mr. O’Malley is
totally wrong. I am now talking
to you as an expert for there
is no man in or out of Alaska
who knows more about the
‘ trouble with Alaska fisheries”
than I do. In all my talks with
rannerymen, none have dis
agreed with me after a full dis
cussion. The opposition comes
from those who do not know
either me or my plans or the
facts.
In 1923, before the Alaska
legislature when the ‘‘Seasonal
Closed Scheme for Conserving
Salmon” was first made, I warn
ed the legislature that the plan
was wrong and would result in
the destruction of all our eafly
varieties of salmon, and that “if
you breed late fish, you will get
late fish.” Later on, the great
authority of fisheries,Dr. Charles
Gilbert made the same observa
tion in an interview for the Pa
cific Fisherman. Today there is
no divergence of opinion among
fhe fishermen and cannerymen
Where in former time, NO
humpies were in our bays in
October, last year thousands of
bright humpback salmon were
In the bays on the West Coast oi
Prince of Wales Island. Where in
former times, we caught salmon
for commercial use in large
quantities in June (sometimes
100,000 in one haul) today every
group of fishermen recognizes
the fact that the season in the
southern district of southeastern
Alaska should be closed to com -
mercial fishing till August 1st.
What does Henry O’Malley say?
He really won’t find out till too
late. That has been the re
cord.
Do not think for one moment
that I speak only at the behest
of Indians and other fishermen
Numbers of cannerymen, includ
ing some rather large corpora
tions, continually encourage me
When I have solicited their open
upport, they decline because of
their fear of reprisals.
In closing let me remind you
that nobody has a better right
to protest than the natives of
Alaska. This was our own coun
try before the Russians came
here, they exercised no author
ity as a ruling power; their forts
(two in number in s. e. Alaska)
were for their own protection
and nothing else. Whatever they
did was done only with the per
mission of the Natives. When
Russia sold Alaska, Russia sold
only what it had—nothing as
far as my people were concern
ed. Certainly the resources were
in our hands. In respect to the
fisheries, we owned our fishing
streams and the right to fish
WHAT SHALL WE EAT ? '
Every Housewife Is Confronted With This Problem Three Times A Day. No Solution For This Problem Is Any Easier Or Pleasanter
Than To Walk Through UPIGGLY WIGGLY'S PANTRY”, Shelf After Shelf Of Attractivly Arrainged And Appetizing Foods Are Sure
To Suggest To You THE VERY THING.
No One Offers You A Wider Variety, And Remember, You Buy Just What You Want, Just The Amount That You Want, And Pay
For Only What You Have Selected For Yourself.
EGGS
FRESH
STANDARDS
BUTTER “Sunset Gold”
Two pounds for 89c
POTATOES Yakima Netted Gems
Per 100 pounds $4.50
TIAMFY “White Clover”
xlvfll J_/ X 100 per cent pure
5 pound pails 83c
PRUNES sweet Italian
5 pound package 79c
per dozen 40c
KLIM Powdered Milk
2 -1|2 pound tins $1.95
FLOUR “Fishers Blend”
49 pound bags $2.65
FIRDA FISH BALLS
2 pound tins each 45c ♦
TOMATO SAUCE Del Monte
8 oz. tins 3 tins for 24c
Advertising Deal!
While They Last ,
One Box of Palmolive Face j
Powder With 5 Bars of Palm \
Olive Soap
All For 49c
“U. S. HALT SYRUP”
i j - pound tins 50c
“SILVER BAR” TOMATOES
3 No. 2&1\2 tins 50c
2 No. 2 tins 25c
“DEL MONTE” TOMATOES
SOLID PACKED
LARGE SIZE TINS 23c
Mail Orders Promptly Filled. Phone 26 Petersburg, Aaa.