452 
BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES 
the distance from bank to bank was less than 500 feet was made unlawful. Red- 
salmon streams were also protected against fixed appliances to a distance of 500 yards 
outside the mouths. The interesting point in this connection is that only red-salmon 
streams were protected at their mouths. In other words, there was no legal prohibi- 
tion against operating a trap or any other fixed fishing appliance directly in the mouth 
of any stream not classed as a red-salmon stream. The same law prohibited the 
placing of movable fishing gear in any stream, estuary, or lagoon across more than 
one third of its width, or within 100 yards outside the mouth of any red-salmon 
stream less than 500 feet in width. The lateral and endwise distance between traps 
was also prescribed by law. Under these provisions, protection was given very 
largely to red salmon in so far as restriction of fishing in or at the streams was involved. 
A weekly closed period of 36 hours in all localities in southeastern Alaska and a daily 
Figure 9.— Catch of cohos and pinks in the Yakutat district. 
closed period of 12 hours for all streams less than 100 yards in width were provided 
in the hope that this would increase the opportunities for salmon to ascend to the 
spawning grounds. Undoubtedly these provisions had a direct effect upon the 
catches of all species. 
On December 21, 19 18, 8 all commercial fishing for salmon in streams less than 500 
feet in width and within 200 yards of the mouths of all salmon streams was prohibited; 
traps and other fixed appliances were not permitted within 500 yards of the mouths of 
such streams. Thus, for the first time, general regulations affecting indiscriminately 
all species of salmon were promulgated. 
In 1920 the regulations were broadened by extending protection to all salmon 
streams regardless of width and to a distance of 200 yards outside the mouths of such 
streams. They also prohibited the operation of fixed fishing appliances within 500 
• This order was published in Department of Commerce Circular No. 251, fifth edition, Jan. 14, 1919, but was inadvertently 
omitted from part I of this review. 
