3 o RRPORT OF ALASKA INVESTIGATIONS. 



hours. I opened a number of cans of salmon ready for the market and found brown, discolored meat, 

 the direct result of a stab from a fish pew. Unless the cannery people feel the necessity for stopping this 

 practice, it would seem wise to pass a law prohibiting the use of fish pews on any part of the salmon except 

 the head. At some canneries this is now being done, but in many instances the matter receives only 

 indifferent consideration. 



There is another matter regarding sanitary conditions that should receive more consideration from the 

 owners and managers of some of the canneries, and that is the condition of the outbuildings and surround- 

 ings. The quarters in which the employees sleep and eat are in some places quite filthy and even worse 

 than many city tenement houses. These employees who handle in various ways the food that is being 

 prepared for general consumption should have comfortable and healthful quarters and surroundings pro- 

 vided for them. Matters of this character should come under the supervision of the Government officials 

 just as much as the inspection of the interior of the canneries. 



While some canneries unfortunately do not lay great stress on the need for perfect cleanliness and 

 sanitation, there are many that are regarding this with the seriousness it deserves; therefore, to encourage 

 and protect those who give proper attention to such matters, the Government should be willing to cooperate 

 with them by approving the goods they manufacture. 



GOVERNMENT INSPECTION OF CANNERY PRODUCT. 



The question of Government inspection of the product of every cannery in Alaska is a splendid scheme 

 in theory and is strongly indorsed by most of the cannery men and the people at large ; but looked at from 

 a practical standpoint the plan does not seem feasible. There are 80 canneries in Alaska which are in oper- 

 ation from two to five months each year, and no competent man, experienced in cannery work, would give 

 his time or engage himself in such inspection work unless afforded employment throughout the year. 

 Unskilled, impractical men would only create disorder and misunderstanding. The suggestion that these 

 men be paid by the canneries is out of the question, for the Government should furnish such services to 

 make them of any value. Therefore, while it seems highly desirable that closer inspection be made of the 

 canneries and their product by Government officials, it appears impracticable on account of the shoit 

 season and lack of funds to supply such inspectors. With a proper patrol service and a more adequate force 

 of men to undertake this work, the inspection of all canneries could, to a large extent, be accomplished. 

 The suggested patrol service will be further taken up under another head. 



The question of handling partly spoiled fish is an important one. The law to-day forbids the canning 

 of salmon which have been dead for more than 48 hours. This is wrong from two standpoints. It is an 

 undeniable fact that many salmon which have been dead not over 24 hours, because of the method in whiclr" 

 they are caught, the way handled, and the weather conditions, are not fit to go into cans. On the other 

 hand, I saw fish that were to my knowledge 60 hours old which were perfectly good and could properly 

 have been canned so far as their condition was concerned. Still, under the existing law, it was necessary 

 that these fish be thrown away. 



I observed in canneries no less than a dozen instances where from 500 to 5 ,000 salmon were absolutely 

 unfit for canning; yet, when I remonstrated with the superintendents, they proved that some of these fish 

 were not over 48 hours old. Therefore they were technically complying with the fisheries law. Some of 

 these fish had, of course, deteriorated more than others. Still, superintendents, knowing these conditions, 

 have allowed such fish to be put up for food. It goes without saying that all such salmon, canned or 

 uncanned, were thrown overboard without delay. 



The question may be asked, How do you account for this variation in the condition of fish at the same 

 time of the year and in the same locality? My explanation is this: As previously indicated, the haul and 

 purse seines and gill nets do not usually deliver their fish in as good condition as the traps, and owing to 

 the fact that the fish are roughly handled in many instances they often reach the cannery bruised, torn, 

 and in a deteriorated condition. On the other hand, the trap fish are taken out of the trap alive, in a 

 comparatively easy manner, are dropped into the scows, and lie there in the moisture, which is almost 

 equal to hermetical sealing; and these fish keep for hours in this state without the slightest deterioration. 

 Furthermore, trap fish are almost always delivered at the canneries more promptly than fish taken by 

 other forms of gear. I would therefore recommend that in place of the 48-hour provision there be one 



