The Cordova daily times., 1922-12-02
SATURDAY, DECEMBER ?, 1922
THE FISHERIES RESERVE

Persons appearing before the Bureau of Fisheries representatives m Seattle nave asked that a reserve be established in South eastern Alaska and some have gone so far as to urge that with that done the bureau issue regulations, forbidding the establish ment of other cannerics, and that they limit the pack that each cannery may put up.
 The start appears to be well within reason. A fisheries reserve appears at this time to be not inadvisable It appears also that there IS a rather strong demand for one. In principle it is not the thing to be- desired, for it would be placing more power in the hands of bu- reau than it has ever had before ana at lime when there is much talk of too much bureaucracy But the situation IS that the fisheries are being depleted, that they Will De depleted unless some prompt acton IS taken' and there is no hope of securing any leglsla- tive action that will save the resources. me fisheries have been the football of the poll ticians until it has come to appear that any assistance that may come must come through presidential proclamation rather than through immediate legislation.
 And this may be understood without over looking the danger that turks in giving tre- mendous power to any bureau. While true That America has a Secretary of Commerce now who is probably the strongest and most able man ever to fill that office, death or res ignation are always possible And while It IS +rua that the commissioner of fisheries IS most able. thoroughly familiar with the Alaskan situation. and friend of Alaska, there IS aiso the possibility of resignation or death. III which event there is no knowing what sort or man or men might step in, in this admlnstra- tion or the next It is probable that success sors would be appointed who would have the nroner irrespective of the situation, but there is always the danger.
 However, that danger IS not as great as tho .nresent one, with nothing being done
 Now, as to the talk of limiting the pack tha' each cannery might put nn. That IS tommy rot. Limit the time within which fish may he taken. Gut short the season Make tne period for taking fish from the water sucn as will give the salmon plenty of tune 10 ge' to the spawning grounds. Even forbid tlshhe in certain areas, if it is desirable. But let no ono cav that any man shall have the power +o say who shall take thousand fish, ana who shall take a hundred thousand, and who sba11 take million, or ten million. Llm't the period and then let them compete. oucf a proposed limitation of packs would .be a1 injustice to the packers and also to the fls''- ermen for there would not be the competitor for the fish.
 As for the talk of limiting the number o1 canneries, it reminds one of the movement IT England, at the time of the invention or the locomotive, to forbid such "ungodly' means of transportation Why should the Bureau o1 Fisheries step up from the sea to the land te say that there should be only one cannery here and one there not three here or three there Why should they say what number o1 canneries there should be any more than they should say how many peanut stands there should be in given area.
 Give us the fisheries reserve and regulator to save the fish, but do not attempt to regu late industry on land to the extent of throt ting it. If the time for catching fish, anc therefore the catch, is limited the number o1 canneries will regulate themselves. Cannerie' will not run when they cannot be run at profit -Ketchikan Chronicle.