146 ALASKA FISHERIES AND EUR INDUSTRIES IN 1919. 



toward depletion, even though thc}^ may exhibit an occasional flare- 

 up into a season of greater activity. 



These are all clear-cut cases of overfishing with the resultant par- 

 tial destruction of the runs of fish. And the end is not yet. So long 

 as the liigh price of canned salmon continues, be assured that aggres- 

 sive capital will seek an opening. Wherever a run of any size remains 

 and may be further exploited, or wherever apparently an opportunity 

 presents itself to force witli profit an entrance into a field already 

 overdeveloped, this will be done, and invariably the result will be a 

 sharper rivalry for fish and a further decline in the run. 



It is customary in these discussions to lay the responsibility for 

 depletion nt the doors of the canners, and to criticize them sharply 

 for their rapacity. Something can be urged, doubtless, for this 

 point of view; especially in the earlier days was this ti-ue w^hen com- 

 petition was in its infancy and fish wei-e to be had for the taking, yet 

 nevertheless streams were barricaded to prevent the ascent of the 

 salmon, and other practices were indulged which constituted a cut- 

 throat policy, foolishly and needlessly adopted. 



But despite all this, the responsil)iUty has rested from the begin- 

 ning and now rests fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the Con- 

 gress and the general public. The present administration of the 

 fisheries appears based on the expectation that men will hold back 

 their hands wliere a further profit can be made. It is witless to 

 expect tliem to do so. The administration of public affairs can not 

 be made to depend for success on men's voluntarily foregoing a profit. 

 There are those, doubtless, who would relinquish private gain in the 

 public interest, but it need not be contended that they are in the 

 majority. And whereas it might appear that in the salmon business 

 private interests would counsel moderation in the hope of securing 

 the perpetuation and the permanency of the industry, such in fact is 

 not the case. It would boot them nothing to permit most liberal 

 numbers of salmon to escape their nets. So long as the public throws 

 this field open to unrestricted competition, and so long as there re- 

 sults keen rivalry for every fish that swims, no individual canner can 

 accomplish anything toward the protection of the streams. Whatever 

 he spares for spawning purposes, Iiis competitors will thankfully 

 accept and place in cans. He is powerless to conserve either the 

 public interest, or even — should he be sufficiently enlightened to see 

 it — his own private interests, by listening to any counsels of modera- 

 tion. If fishing grounds or fishing rights could bo leased or assigned, 

 and property rights acquired which would become valueless should 

 the fishing greatly decline, cooperation with the authorities to pve- 

 serve the fisheries could confidently be counted on. But so long as 

 the present policy is maintained, and the canners have only what 

 they can seize and can hold with every mun's hand against tliem, 

 there can be but one final outcome. Total exhaustion of tlio fisheries 

 will occur; if not to-morrow, then the day after. 



It can not be too often nor too strenuously insisted on that the 

 dangers which confront the Alaska salmon industry are inherent in 

 the very plan which the Congress has adopted for its administration. 

 The onlj'^ effective remedy lies in altering the groundwork of this 

 plan, in treating the fishery resources in practice as well as in theory 

 as the property of the public, and in administering them in the inter- 



