Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1914-06-26
THE INITIATIVE
MEASURE NO. II
Fishing Industry is Already
Taxed Heavier than Any
Other Enterprise.
WOULD KILL BUSINESS
Proposed Royalty on Each
Fish Caught Would Prove
Ruinous to Industry.

The purpose of initiative measure
No. II to increase the public revenues
by imposing heavy special tax on
the fishing industry of the state is
likely to fail because it will work ir-
reparable injury to or destroy the in
dustry itself. The fishingt industry
under the present system of taxation
bears it full share of the cost of state
government. In addition to the tax
paid on the fishing business, such as
canneries, boats, trap locations and
paraphernalia, the industry pays II.
censes and royalties which more than
recompense the state for the money
paid out for the maintenance of hatch
cries. Just why the fishing industry
should be singled out for the destruc-
tive tax proposed in initiative meas.
ure No. II is not apparent to the
average citizen.
After paying the property tax the
fishing industry, under the present
license system, the salmon fisheries
paid to the state $94,553 from April l.,
1913, to March 81, 1914.
During that same period the total
amount paid out by the state for the
maintenance of hatcheries was $751;
4O6, leaving balance in the treasury
of $16,147.
The present law provides for the
payment of the following licenses for
those engaged in the fishing busi-
ness:
Drag seines (according to lengthy, !,
$3.50 to SIS; gill net and set net,
$3.50 to IS; purse seines, $25 to $50:
fish wheels, SO to $25; pound net
columbia river, $50 to $50; pound
net (Ruget sound), $50 to 800.
In addition there is tax Of 81 per
thousand on all fish caught by traps
and 80 cents a ton for all salmon
bought and sold and not used for can
ming purposes. Canneries pay licenses
from $3.50 to $1,000.
Initiative measure No. II proposes
to collect a royalty of cents on
each sockeye or blue salmon taken
from the waters of this state, 9 cents
on each steelhead, 20 cents on each
spring, Chinook or tyee salmon, and
" cent on each humpback. There is
poses on each cannery packing less
than 10000 cases a royalty of 500,
and on canneries packing more than
10000 cases 500 royalty at the time
Of taking out the license and 1 cent
per case for each case packed over
10000. A tax of 81 a ton on whole
sale fish dealers and a like tax or
each person, firm or corporation re-
preserving or dealing in fish in some
manner than otherwise specifically
mentioned in the bill.
In order to carry out the provisions
of the proposed law the fish COM
missioner would have to count all the
fish taken from the waters of Wash
ington, count every case of fish can
ned and packed and weigh every ton
handled by the wholesale dealers
Considering that $4,000, 600. worth OF
fish are taken from Washington wat.
ers every year the task looks like a
large undertaking. 1t is certain to
open the way to graft and to dis.
ronesty.
Thousands of men engaged in fish.
ing may be forced out of business
should this measure be enacted into
law. With prohibitive tax on the
fisheries the fishermen of Washington
will be unable to compete with the
Oregon fishermen or the British Co
lumbia fishermen, who are not SO
burdened. The Columbia river fish
ermen can cross the river to Oregon
and escape the tax, and it is likely
that hundreds of thousands of dollars
paid for labor and material in the
Puget Sound district will be trans
ferred to and will be expended in Brit
ish Columbia.
The salmon taken in the Puget
Sound fisheries are captured while or
their way to their spawning grounds
If they are not taken they are gone
never to return. If they are not tax
en- here they my be taken in British
Columbia and the benefit to our peo
pie will be LOST. w. Gilbert, in the
Seattle P.-I.
Send the twice-a-week Herald I,