Seward seaport record., 1954-03-12

along the outside of wharf pill ing. He did admit that frequent dredging of the area would be a possible expense. What he did not admit (probably did not know) is that Army records dur ing World War II show that motor vessels were compelled to lie off, .A7lchor Point, Homer and Seldovia for days to clean out tubes clogged after two days in Anchorage harbor. However, sitting conditions are negligi- ble quantity when a mere $5- or $8 million are to be spent in An chorage.
 That the silting problem is not a growing situation is re- futed by the memory of many Seward and Anchorage resi- dents of the lime when the old schooner Dora and another made two regular trips each year up 10 old Knik. Now a rowboat cannot get up this course ex- cept al very high tide. This is fact. not ficiion. The silt de- posit is growing rapidly and within a few years. they will be planting potatoes in Knik Arm. Look for yourselves!
 BUSINESS ACTIVITY
 Without question:" the re- port states, Anchorage is the business and financial capitol of Alaska" He insists that even Ketchikan and Southeastern ci- ties should be proud of and give full support to the development of Anchorage GA DB reporD. Bank deposits as of June 30, 1853 amounted to S61, ,696,193. Assessed valuation of the city proper Q952) was S66, ,165,9 $40. The Anchorage labor force was larger than the total for Fair banks, Juneau, Ketchikan and Petersburg. Consequently, with all that money and all those people, why should they hesitate to squash a smaller community to give an advantage to so many?
 The report keeps harping on transportation costs, implying that all these excessive charges are railroad charges on the IA mile haul from Seward. His fig ures are based on published re- ports of the ARR, and fail to show that most increases have been due, not to railroad charg- es, but to increased rates grant ed by the Maritime Board to steamship lines. Recent revision of ARR tariffs have REDUCED rail freight costs in~a number of categories. It is not our intention to produce figures in support of this claim, the Railroad is well able to present it's own case with figures to prove it. If the people of Anchorage are misled by Browne's figures into believ- ing that the mere fact of freight being delivered to their own docks by ship is going to reduce their costs by any appreciable amount, it behooves them to look into the matter more close ly, and not take the word of any pressure group literally.
 o'CONNER REPORT
 Late in 1852. the Department of Interior sent 10 Alaska Don aid J. O'Connor. Washington. DC. economist. 10 make spe- cial transportation study of the railbelt area. He confined his Studies" of transportation to Anchorage. If he came 10 Sew ard al all. it could only have been for a few hours between trains. He DID NOT talk to any transportation officials in town. DID NOT inquire into the situa- lion as known here. but reported inc Anchorage angle as being the only problem. and discour- aged rebuilding of Whittier. writing Seward off completely. This is the kind of "investiga- lions" and Studies" inc situa- lion has undergone for many years.
 B. H. Parkinson, executive vice-president of Coastwise Line in 1853 gave damaging testi- mony against the Seward docks. Since that time, Parkinson was replaced by D. J. Seid, and is no longer associated with Coast wise. Other statements by un- qualified men stud Browne's re- port and when he states that unanimous agreement proves the feasibility of the Anchorage port he is in error.
 Browne's report states that 77,500 tons is conservative estimate of the amount of ship ping to be expected in the mi tial period. And, if the Seward Portage rail line is closed so