Page Four
THE FISHERMAN
August 13, 1940
THE
FISHERMAN    the march Of labor
Published Every Other Tuesday by The Fisherman Publishing Society at 164 East Hastings Street, Vancouver, B.C.   Telephone MArine 1829. EDITOR    -    -    V. McCRAE Subscription Rates: One Year, $1.00; Six Menth's, 60c. Advertising Rates on Application.
Make All Payments to: THE FISHERMAN PUBLISHING SOCIETY
Fish In The Can; Fishermen In The Hole
Well, the 1940 Rivers and Smiths Inlet sockeye are now in the can, and the fishermen who caught them are in the hole, most of them. The big run which the canners told the fishermen and Mr. Michaud told Parliament was going to compensate for the small price, didn't arrive. Some said it Came and went through to the spawning grounds before the season Dpened, but in any case it didn't show up in the nickels and Jimes which are all that a fisherman ever gets out of a dollar's worth of fish. Is it going to be left at that and forgotten until next season, when the fishermen will probably be asked to repeat the show?
When the price situation was being discussed, the Hon. Minister of Fisheries, Mr. Michaud, suggested that the operators should make a clear statement on. the whole affair. The gillnetters don't need to make a statement. The cannery bookkeepers have already made them out—in the red.
Up to date we have heard no word from the canners on their side of the operation, but actions speak louder than words, and we must congratulate them on the extreme frankness of their action-statement on the Fraser. Allowing a normal differential from the northern price, they started at 50 cents. However, some of the buyers who needed more fish than they were getting, despite the fact that there was no market for sockeye, offered a slight increase. Well, the price didn't exactly increase like the proverbial snowball, but it did get up into the seventies, and after all 75c is a 50 percent increase over the 50c which they gave us to understand was a break for the fishermen.
We don't know which of the old-timers it was, Shakespeare, Omar Khayyam, Confucius or Bob Paine, who told us that "Money talks" and that "Actions speak louder than words," but we'll accept his word for it. Also we would suggest to the Hon. Minister that he too should accept this action as a fair statement of the fact that the operators can pay more for sock-?ye than they did in Rivers Inlet.
When the gillnetters commenced fishing at Rivers and Smiths they knew that they must lose. The canners admitted that things were tough and that if they could pay a cent more they would. Now is their opportunity. Had the British Empire not been at war there is no doubt that no fish would have been canned in that area. However, the fishermen made the sacrifice — a sacrifice which we now find was not to aid the war effort but just to swell the dividends of those who were allowed by our government to dictate the price.
Of course, someone will look at the Fishing Dept. Bulletin ind point out that this year has been the biggest pack of sock-ele for at least six years. Well, what of it; the run of dollars to ;he fisherman was very small. What would have happened if the run of sockeye had been small, too? Is it that the run of fishermen is too large? The canners don't seem to think so— they are still staking newcomers to nets and boats. The small price is, of course, a big factor, but no doubt there are other things. We would like to see our readers discuss them in our correspondence columns.__
Our Crude Exploiters
By L. H. C. PHILLIPS
The present crude oil situation in the Turner Valley field seems to be developing true to type, with the major oil companies ruthlessly attempting to "squeeze" the Consumers' Co-operative Refineries of Saskatoon—the world's finest cooperative refinery — out of existence.
Taking advantage of the national emergency and the federal government's desire to extend the home market for crude, the British - American Oil Company and the Imperial Oil Company, who, between them own or control approximately 95 per cent of the allowable output of the wells in that field, have increased their demands by over 5,000 barrels per. day, leaving only a meagre 1341 barrels for the rest of Canada, including the Consumers' Co-operative Refinery, whose allotment on July 29 was 750 barrels—just about half the capacity of their plant!
If the output of the field were apportioned on the basis of legitimate refinery requirements, the Consumers' Refinery would have been allotted approximately 1,300 barrels per day; but in spite of protests and appeals on behalf of the co-operators no attempt has apparently been made by G. R. Cottrelle, Federal Oil Controller, to apportion the available supplies of crude in an equitable manner.
The Co-op could, of course, get its crude from Montana, as their new cracking plant is designed to handle that product quite as efficiently as Turner Valley crude; but there is a premium of 11 per cent on American exchange, plus 7 per cent surcharge on freight to all of which must be added the
additional 10 per cent tax as set out in the recent federal budget, making the saving in processing Montana crude very limited. Not only that, but the Montana crude producers, sensing a golden opportunity to cash in on the situation, have increased the price of their product which, until recently, was more or less of a distress commodity since the withdrawal of Canadian demand somewhat over a year ago.
Questioned recently in the House of Commons, Hon. C. D. Howe, Minister of Munitions and Supply, blamed the shortage on the increase in the requirements of the Consumers' Refineries. He failed to point out, however, that this increase was caused by the opening of a completely new plant with triple the capacity of the former one, whereas there was no legitimate reason for a 23 per cent increase in the requirements of the major oil companies.
All of which goes to prove how easily the specious arguments of Big Business are assimilated by those in authority, while what should be the obvious needs of the people as a whole have to overcome a barrier of official suspicion before they can gain recognition.
Of course, the co-operators of Saskatchewan are not taking it lying down; they have demanded a public hearing in Toronto and sent their representative by air to present the case of the co-operative refineries and appeal for a more equitable apportionment of the available Turner Valley crude. At the time of writing this the result of their action is not yet known here; but we shall be surprised indeed if their organized
*»*st compute WAGE SCALE
to be ?r€s€nt£d in1he ^.s. was drawn UPWfyh org-Mij£V 'PftimtRS of Atew York
IN IQOO-
PROMPTEP BV the hazards of WE WORK and the ■PROHIBITIVE. m-
Sl»RAN cerates
c+JAR6ED BY -private insurance- companies, SOME railroad UNIONS BEGAN as mutual insurance ORGANIZATIONS.
Organized workers nominated their own candidates
in l£29.
Union members/
YOKfHC STRAICMT UNION TICKET ! BUY
only N/ffS~BE/WiN6
TUB UNION LABEL I
1850 - 1924
Organizer and Guiding-
GENlUS of THE AMERiCAk)
Federation op Labor . He was
ITS^IRStTRESiDENT/AND held OFFICE TRom i8&6 To 1924-EXCEPTftjROAlEYEAR . «IS Co/JCEPT OF *PlTRE ANDSwne.
Trade JaIio^Jism'left A TermakIent MARK Amerk»i5 Trade OMio/JT-HitostfPHY'.
©
Conservation Time Is NOW!
So much has been said and written on the question of conser vation that it would seem the subject has been completely exhausted and that there is nothing more can be added which has not already been expounded by a host af prominent and authoritative people interested in the protection of our fisheries resources.
With the failure of the expected Rivers Inlet run of sockeye, the whole matter of conservation again becomes a subject of deep concern to the people of British Columbia, and especially the fishermen. .
It is not the intention of the writer to belittle or condemn the tremendous amount of scientific
protest is not eventually successful.
It is interesting to note that this is not the only "squeeze play" enacted against a co-operative refinery by the major oil companies. Over in Phillipsburg, Kansas, last May, less than two weeks after its impressive dedication which 20,000 people attended, the world's s«cond and largest co-operative refinery was obliged to shut down temporarily on account of the action of the majors, who mercilessly cut off its supply of crude oil in an attempt to put it out of business. Today, the co-op re-fineryy—an $850,000 plant capable of processing over 88,000 gallons of petroleum daily—is operating at {ull capacity; but its officials admit that the situation was tense and tough for a while.
There were injunctions and counter-injunctions, protests to State officials, and threats of legal action against the Kansas Corporation Commission to force a showdown on the matter. But what finally turned the trick for the co-ops was a letter-writing campaign.
The 6,000 individual members of the local co-ops who own the refinery passed the word along to 56,000 members of other co-ops affiliated with them, t informing them that their refinery was in a bad spot, and that letters to the Governor of the State (who happens to be coming up for re-election next November) protesting against the inequalities of the pro-ration law might get action. A barrage of letters was immediately forthcoming; and pretty soon the injunctions were dropped and a satisfactoryy compromise effected.
Thus was the lesson once more made plain that only by intelligently organized effort can the common people hope to protect themselves from the rapacity of private interests founded on the theory of unlimited exploitation of the public.
knowledge that has been made available over a period of years pertaining to the history of Pacific Coast fisheries, habits of fish and the practical and artificial methods for their conservation, but rather to make a critical examination of the reasons why certain expected salmon runs failed to materialize and if the methods of applying the scientific inowledge gained has had anything to do with it.
There is no one in any-way connected with the fishing industry but realizes that there is ample room for improvement in the annual returns to fishermen, con-ners and allied industries, if common sense coupled with adequate finances were made available by the Federal Government for the regulation and conservation of the fisheries.
IMPROVEMENT RECOGNIZED.
In an article carried in the Vancouver Daily Province, on June 17, 1936, dealing with the Fraser River International Sockeye Treaty, the writer states in part, "Canada and its neighbor will start soon to regulate sockeye fishing on all waters tributary to the Fraser, to conserve the spawning salmon hordes in the autumn, and to build up over a period of years a food fish resource worth about $25,000,000 annually."
George Alexander, Assistant Commissioner of Fisheries, commenting on the above, had this to say: "As it stands, with its present depleted run, the Fraser is worth about $3,000,000 a year; if it can be brought back to its old position, it should be worth about $25,000,000, with a corresponding increase in the number of fishermen employed."
The late Mr. J. P. Babcock w?-another prominent authority who consistently advocated the building up of the various fisheries and did contribute as a member of the joint Halibut Commission, to the conservation of the halibut banks, which was done through trie application of a strict quota system. Many others could be quoted in a similar way, up and down the entire Pacific Coast and Alaska, and fishermen's unions have more than once passed resolutions on the question demanding action in a practical way to save our fisheries.
CAUSE AND EFFECT.
Now what are the most prominent causes spoken of by many officials of the Dept. of Fisheries and of the fishermen's associations as being responsible for depletion of the salmon runs? In the report of the Commissioner of Fisheries for the year 1934, there  is  an  article  by George
We used to think that animals had an instinct which told them when one was afraid of them. Now the scientists step in and tell us that it is only a sense of smell.
It seems there are glands in our bodies which exude some kind of fluid when we're afraid, and the dog or cat or horse smells it and knows we are afraid.
But there's an instinct which tells humans whether other humans are trustworthy or not, and it hasn't anything to do with smells.
When I was a wrole lot younger than I am now I had a hobby of remembering my first impressions of people and then watching them to see how my first impressions checked up with later observations. I found that those first impressions which had no visible basis were generally right, or at least they coincided with my mature observations.
As time went on and I got my elbows rawer and rawer from rubbing edge of life, I began to value friendship so much that I lost my interest in my hobby and induced myself to like anyone I met, whether I liked it or not.
But those first impressions still registered and I've often reminded myself that some gink I thought was a right guy for a long time had given me the impression on first contact of being haywire. By the same token I've met guys that registered in the negative and future events have proven that I was wrong the first time.
On the whole, though, I've been right the first time in a vast majority of cases.
Don't get the impression by the foregoing that I think a guy is necessarily no good because J think so; hell, no! I'm just as liable to be wrong as anyone, but that instinct I mentioned is still something for the science sharks to explain.
* »      * •
We are prone to think because some guy—generally a big shot in his particular sphere—is in a position to know, that he does know. But if we compare the predictions of some of the big shots who should know with events as they have transpired, it "gives us pause," to say 'the least!
In the last few years events have been moving so rapidly and have been influenced by so many factors that are new to us that it seems to be impossible to predict anything any more, except that the working people, being as they are, the authors of their own misfortune or good fortune, must either take their own destiny in hand a whole lot more than they ever have before, or else they will find themselves completely "behind the eight ball"—and that in the very near future, if indeed they aren't there already.
• •     * «
Well, the fish trap commission has reported and recommended that the traps be left where they are.
For the reason as stated in the report that the added availability of seining and gill-netting ground would not compensate for the loss Df employment to the community to Sooke.
What I have an idea the commissioner had in mind, was that there wouldn't be enough benefit derived by fishermen to compensate the trap owners for the loss of profit. But that wouldn't sound good in a commissioner's report.
Alexander dealing with the Rivers Inlet sockeye fishing. In that article he clearly outlines the effect on the fishermen's annual earnings, by increased amount of gear being fished, and makes the following summary:
(1) The sockeye packs in Rivers Inlet, as represented by five-year averages over the past twelve years, are less than they were in 1922 by over 13 percent. That this decline in pack is not due to curtailment on the part of industry itself is evidenced from the fact that fishing effort has continuously increased.
(2) Fishing effort as measured by the number of boats fishing has increased 60 percent during the period under review.
(3) As a result of smaller packs and increased effort, the individual fisherman's earnings for the sockeye season in Rivers Inlet have decreased nearly 38 percent.
.(4) Prices paid for fish in this district based on five-year averages have increased 12 percent, out due to smaller packs as under (1), the total amount distributed has increased very little.
(5) The efficiency of gillnets in Rivers Inlet as measured by the average amount of fish produced per net has fallen from an index of 100 for the five year period 1922-26 to 70.3 for the five-year period 1930-34. Nearly 78 percent of this total drop in efficiency is due to the increase in the number of boats fishing, while less than 23 percent is caused by fewer fish available for catching. TOO MUCH GEAR.
The above can be equally ap-)lied to other areas besides Rivers Inlet and to other types of gear, the seiners having long realized that there are too many boats fishing, for the amount of fish .vailable, and still allow for ade-;uate escapement to the spawn-ng grounds. Under these circumstances there is bound to be a langer (fishery reports notwith-itanding), that not sufficient fish do escape past all this gear to spawn, and certainly no provision is made for available spawners for the purpose of artificial propagation, if it were needed, as all hatcheries are closed since March, 1936. So much for the man-made obstructions to conservation, and the only solution possible is that applied  in  halibut and herring
fields to preserve the runs — a strict quota system which, when filled, closes the area to all fishing.
CONDITION OF SPAWNING GROUNDS.
In the report of Major Motherwell, Supervisor of Fisheries, contained in the 1935 report of the Commissioner of Fisheries, on condition of the spawning grounds he has this to say regarding seeding of the Skeena River watershed:
"Notwithstanding the poor sockeye pack in this area, the escapement was found to be fairly heavy. This applies to practically the whole watershed. In the Lakelse District there was an excellent supply found and, in addition to the hatchery being filled, a large natural seeding occurred. Unfortunately, however, freshets practically destroyed all the eggs naturally deposited, and had not hatchery operations at this point permitted of the seeding of the streams AFTER THE FRESHETS, the run, as far as the seeding is concerned, would have been an entire loss."
The following year Major Motherwell, reporting the condition of the spawning grounds at Rivers Inlet, has this to say: "This season, due to a strike amongst the gillnet fishermen, the bulk of the sockeye were enabled to pass unmolested to the spawning grounds and the resultant spawning, as might be expected, was heavy.
"A disquieting factor, however, has been a freshet, the severity of which has not been known for fears. Undoubtedly quite a per-:entage of the eggs deposited in the gravel have been destroyed, and this may nullify to some extent the excellent results which might be expected four and five years hence."
The nullifying effect is now well known from the results of this year's fishing at Rivers Inlet, but, had the hatchery been in operation, as in the previous year in the Skeena, some degree of salvage from the havoc of freshets •ould have been realized and not only the run saved but fishermen would have come out of Rivers Inlet this year with a few dollars, instead of in the hole to the oan-ners.
(Continued on Page 5)