116 FISH AXD GAME COMMISSION 



that the' future tuna supply for the canneries of this state will he 

 hroufflit mostly from distances hcyond oni' thonsfind mil(>s. See articles 

 hy W. L. Scofield and rioraldino ( "oinicr in h'i^li I'lillrtin No. 20. 



SALMON 



The problem of savinj; tlie last remnant of the Sacramento salmon 

 run is still with us. In our last report we prave in detail the efforts 

 the division had made over a period of ton or twelve years to fret ade- 

 quate lenrislation to prevent the commercial extinction of this once most 

 valuable of the state fishery resources and how they had failed. Practi- 

 cally all commercial salmon fishermen and commercial fishery interests 

 aprree that the salmon which enter the Sacramento-San Joaquin rivers 

 for the purpose of spawninjr are near to commercial extinction, and 

 they aprree that somethinfr radical needs to be done. They do not aprree, 

 however, on what the radical measure should be. The commercial 

 fishermen who troll for salmon in the sea think that the river fishing: 

 should be stopped. The river fishermen think that sea trollinpr should 

 be stopped and. while these conflicting interests have battled each other, 

 sportsmen have succeeded in pretting our streams opened up again 

 to salmon spearing. At the 1927 session of the legislature, the division 

 attempted to have a bill passed which would have eliminated sea trolling. 

 This measure was defeated, mainly by the argument that the states of 

 Oregon and "Washington permit sea trolling and fishermen of those 

 states would continue to catch our salmon, which go into their 

 waters, and would even fish off our coast beyond the three-mile limit, 

 while our fishermen would not be able to fish, or if they should fish 

 beyond the three-mile limit, they would have to deliver their catch in 

 Oregon. While this was not a very good argument, it was sufficient to 

 defeat the measure. A lack of support on the part of river fishermen 

 and the general public was a large factor. 



At the 1929 session of the legislature the division sponsored a bill 

 which would have closed the Sacramento River to fishing except during 

 the winter and spring. It would have eliminated the river fishing for 

 the main fall run. The bill also provided a closed season for sea trolling 

 which was uniform for the entire coast of the state. This last measure 

 was to do away with certain legal difficulties connected with the 

 enforcement of the closed trolling seasons. This proposed change 

 would give added protection to the salmon against trollers from Men- 

 docino County to Monterey Bay. The measure establishing the uniform 

 trolling season was adopted, but the proposal to close the river during 

 the time of the fall run was defeated, mainly by the argument that it 

 was the sea trolling which should be stopped rather than river fishing, 

 and that its adoption would be to the advantage of the San Francisco 

 wholesale fish dealers. This last argument was unfair, for the San 

 Francisco dealers, who supported the bill, were moved by a genuine 

 desire to save the salmon of the Sacramento. They knew that it did 

 not pay them to maintain salmon receiving stations on both the river 

 and the coast for the dwindling number of fish which are caught. 

 They also realized the difficulties of entirely eliminating sea trolling in 

 this state while trolling is permitted in Oregon. They stated they 

 would be in favor of stopping the trolling if all trolling could be 

 stopped. 



