38 SALMON FISHERIES OF PACIFIC COAST. 



such as the waste through catching and killing in wheels and traps 

 of enormous quantities of salmon which can not be handled in the 

 limited time available, or of species which the packers have no use 

 for, and which they find it easier or less expensive to kill by much 

 handling than to release and in so doing lose a few salmon. 



One thing should never be lost sight of, however. Fishery appa- 

 ratus is set for the purpose of catching fish, and its value is depend- 

 ent upon the degree of effectiveness with which it accomplishes the 

 object sought with the least expenditure of money and time for con- 

 struction and operation. 



It is a question whether, under present conditions, if the use of 

 traps were abolished, the other forms of apparatus would be able to 

 keep pace with the demand for fish. But the question of whether 

 traps should be allowed or not in any one section should be settled 

 by reference solely to the conditions prevailing in that section, and 

 not to theoretical or general objections to traps as traps or to objec- 

 tions based upon trap fishing in some other and, possibly, vastly 

 different section. There are some regions on the Pacific coast where 

 if traps were permitted they would soon destroy the run of salmon, 

 while there are many other sections where they would not injure the 

 fisheries at all, unless possibly by use in too great numbers. The 

 latter is especially true in many parts of Alaska, where the chief 

 objection is that in a few places too many of them are grouped 

 together. 



A considerable part of the objection to the use of traps is doubtless 

 due to the generally shameless disregard of the laws in the past, and 

 in some sections also to-day. In Alaska up to 1908 the trap owners 

 paid practically no attention to the laws, and the same is true to a 

 large extent to-day on Puget Sound, and to a lesser extent, possibly, 

 in the Columbia River. Since the enactment and rigid enforcement 

 of the excellent trap law of 1906 in Alaska, the objections to trap 

 nets have decreased very noticeably, though the traps have probably 

 caught more fish than they did under the old conditions, the only 

 difference being that the catch has been distributed more equally, 

 and not, as in former times, caught chiefly in those traps situated 

 nearest to the ocean, while those in the upper reaches took but few. 



The Washington law prescribes minutely the method to be fol- 

 loAved in closing traps during the weekly closed season and appears 

 on its face to be an excellent plan. In practice it is quite otherwise, 

 however, for one person can close or open the trap in one or two 

 minutes' time, and all the watchman has to do in the weekly closed 

 season is to let the apron down whenever he sees a boat approaching, 

 raising it again as soon as he is sure the visitor is not a fish warden. 

 Thus it is practically impossible to detect any but the boldest or most 

 careless violations of the law. 



