Railroad rates for canned tuna are favorable for a considerable part 

 of the long-haul business when compared with rates of other types of 

 transport. The favorable railroad rates for the general category of 

 canned fish, under which canned tuna is shipped, may also be attri- 

 buted in part to the nature of the product. Canned fish can be load- 

 ed in freight cars to a relatively heavy weight compared to many 

 other foods. The use of heavy loadings also increases the economic 

 utilization of transportation equipment. The sturdy nature of -.uell- 

 packed canned fish has also resulted in a low rate of loss and damage 

 claims. In addition, favorable schedules and the fact that most 

 plant locations have railroad siding facilities and access to rail- 

 roads aids the movene nt of canned tuna by this form of transport. It 

 should be noted that many of the foregoing factors apply in somewhat 

 similar fashion to canned tuna when shipped by other forms of trans- 

 port, especially boat. 



Table 82 gives a comparison of railroad rates for various food 

 products with canned fish shipped fran Los Angeles, California, 

 (Terminal Island, California) to Chicago, Illir.Dis, and Pittsburgh, 

 Pennsylvania. It illustrates more effectively the economical manner 

 in which the transport of canned tuna by railroad can be conducted. 

 The mininium weight commonly used for canned fish is considerably 

 higher than the minimum for other foods shown in table 82, which 

 supports the contention that canned fishery products can be moved 

 from location of processing to consumption areas, as efficiently 

 as other foods, if not, in many cases, more efficiently. The indi- 

 cated railroad rates for carjied fish are definitely more reasonable 

 than for the other food products in table 82 reflecting this effi- 

 ciency- For most commodities, in the table where a 15 percent in- 

 crease of rates in 1952 as compared to 1950 is shown, an increase 

 to that extent was authorized by the Interstate Coi^merce Commission 

 and was made effective May 2,1952. Whereas, the rates for most of the com- 

 modities v;ere increased 15 percent, those for canned fish were in- 

 creased less because the Interstate Commerce Commission ordered that 

 increases in the railroad rates for most canned foods be limited to 

 an amount less than the general increase in freight rates which was 

 authorized. In both cases shown thie percentage increase in rates 

 for canned fish amounted to 8 percent. Although railroad charges 

 for shipments of canned tuna have been rising in recent years they 

 have not been rising at as great a rate as the railroad charges for 

 many other commodities, principally because of "hold-downs" ordered 

 by the Interstate Commerce Commission. 



374 



