The Daily Alaska empire., 1948-10-11
ALL-IMPORTANT REFERENDUM


 privilege of speaking their minds the question of Alaska. It will be purely advisory vote and will necessarily that the Federal government will eliminate the traps if the vote carries against this of fishing. And should the vote carry in favor of retention of traps-that would not mean that the Federal authorities will necessarily continue the use of traps indefinitely.
 However the expression of the people of Alaska on this question should have important bearing the future of Alaska fisheries
 With the poor packs of recent years, the question assumes even importance at this time.
 Most persons tomorrow will be casting their votes with the future conservation of fisheries in mind been told by those against the traps that the poor have been the result of trap fishing And those in favor of traps might contend that the poor runs are result of illegal fishing by seners and too many seine boats.
 On this subject, Editor Sid Charles of the Ket- chikan Daily News has this to say:
 "Conservation angle is merely a 'smoke-scr without substance of fact. Only way to conserve salmon is through proper escapment and seeding. One kind of gear will catch just much salmon as another kind of gear"
 Under present regulations, the Federal govern ment recognizes that fish traps necessary to the
  allows their use under strict regulation
 The government may close any all traps if it feels that any trap is threat to the proper escape ment of salmon. Over the past 2l years the number of traps have been reduced from 800 to 415.
 The number of fishing boats however, has in- creased considerably. Today there about 3,20O seine and gill net boats operating in Alaskan waters It might be said here that the government cannot limit the number of boats, while they limit the number of traps.
 During recent years, the Fish and Widlife Serv- ice been hampered in its work by lack of funds to enforce the regulations. The traps which remain in the place all season and are less in number, are much easier to police This is why the violations by traps less than violations by boat operators And the only possible violation by trap would be fishing during closed periods. But the boats can around and if the agent isn't watching what's prevent the seiner from seining at the mouth of stream?
 It all adds up to this:
 Violations by any form of gear endanger con- servation It is easier for the boat operators to get away with violations than the trap operators.
 Other aspects may be covered briefly
 At present the canneries get about 50 per cent of their pack from traps. Naturally, if traps are eliminated the pack will suffer and many canneres which depend primarily upon trap-caught fish may close down.
 It should also be pointed out that those canneres which do have traps have been the most successful the years.
 The seiners might well ask themseves-if the elimination of traps will close down 25 canneres, where will they sell their fish, and what will be the price? Seiners today getting more for their fish than before, and the canneres will take all of the fish they can catch.
 The Alaskan economy demands that large share of the taxes for Territorial government from the basic fishing industry. There is question but what the elimination of traps would seriously curtail tax revenue
 It is opinion that the people of Alaska will do best to vote for the retention of traps.