150 U. S. BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 
Not all the screening out of the larger sizes and the net marking 
was due to the operations of the cannery. Natives in the lower river 
also fish for king salmon with nets, but the extent of their operations 
is so very small compared with that of the cannery in 1919 that the 
effect was negligible. Fishermen interviewed stated that they had 
in previous years seen a few net-marked fish prior to the opening 
of the cannery, but never anything to compare with the condition 
observed in 1919. The prevalence of small-sized king salmon in 
1919, taken in connection with the extent of the net marking, may 
justly be considered a measure of the closeness with which these 
salmon were fished in 1919. 
What was true of the king salmon was true also, it is believed, of 
the run of chums. Fishing for these was prosecuted during the 
months of June, July, and August. Conditions at the mouth of the 
river were comparatively favorable for a maximum catch through- 
out the season. As the salmon move back and forth with the tides, 
passing up and down the banks where nets are staked, and loitering 
in the eddies where other nets are anchored, the cannery gear has 
repeated chances to ensnare them. One of the principal deficiencies 
in the 1919 run in the upper river was the almost total failure of 
the “silvers.” These, it will be recalled, are the bright chums of high 
quality which run after the king salmon have passed. It was to 
these that the cannery devoted its attention after the king salmon 
nets had been retired. In 1919 the king salmon run had materially 
declined by July 5, and it was after this date that 272,717 out of the 
total 357,081 small salmon (principally chums) were taken. It is 
considered certain that the operations of the cannery in 1919 ve 
materially added to the scarcity of fish on the river. Had the fish 
captured by the cannery been free to enter the river, the run would 
still have been below the normal size, but the distress and incon- 
venience occasioned to the interior of Alaska by the salmon short- 
age would have been largely mitigated. 
EFFECT OF CANNERY IN 1920. 
The run of 1920 has been universally approved by fishermen as 
the most favorable since 1916. Salmon were abundant, of good © 
average size, and of excellent quality. Some fishermen acclaimed 
it the largest run they had ever seen on the river, but the majority 
called it a fair average run of the better class of years. Certain it 
was there was no necessary lack of dried salmon anywhere on the 
main river as far upstream as Dawson. Some complaint was heard 
of insufficient fish supply on the Yukon Flats in the vicinity of 
Fort Yukon, and it was noted in certain native villages between 
Circle and Forty-Mile that scant provision seemed to have been made 
for the winter. But it was not evident that there was any lack of 
salmon. Al] white fishermen and some natives in these districts made 
good catches and reported the fish abundant. At Dawson, where 
serious complaints were heard the previous year, sufficient supples 
were secured in 1920. Such slackness as apparently existed in 
certain native camps may find its explanation perhaps partly in the 
effects of the “ flu,’ which ravaged some of these communities in 
the spring of the year, partly in superabundance of money, owing 
to high prices received for muskrat pelts, and partly, in some com- 
