{"@context":{"@language":"en","AIPUUID":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/terms#identifierAIP","AggregatedSourceRepository":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/dataProvider","AlternateTitle":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/alternative","CatalogueRecord":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/isReferencedBy","Collection":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/isPartOf","Creator":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/creator","DateAvailable":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/issued","DateIssued":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/issued","DigitalResourceOriginalRecord":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/aggregatedCHO","FileFormat":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/elements\/1.1\/format","FullText":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2009\/08\/skos-reference\/skos.html#note","Genre":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/hasType","Identifier":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/identifier","IsShownAt":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/isShownAt","Language":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/language","Provider":"http:\/\/www.europeana.eu\/schemas\/edm\/provider","Publisher":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/publisher","Rights":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/rights","SortDate":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/date","Source":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/source","Title":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/title","Type":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/type","Translation":"http:\/\/purl.org\/dc\/terms\/description"},"AIPUUID":[{"@value":"1ccdb339-7e36-46e1-adad-f7c3cc58ad22","@language":"en"}],"AggregatedSourceRepository":[{"@value":"CONTENTdm","@language":"en"}],"AlternateTitle":[{"@value":"REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. -- p. 32","@language":"en"}],"CatalogueRecord":[{"@value":"http:\/\/resolve.library.ubc.ca\/cgi-bin\/catsearch?bid=1198198","@language":"en"}],"Collection":[{"@value":"Sessional Papers of the Province of British Columbia","@language":"en"}],"Creator":[{"@value":"British Columbia. Legislative Assembly","@language":"en"}],"DateAvailable":[{"@value":"2016","@language":"en"}],"DateIssued":[{"@value":"[1946]","@language":"en"}],"DigitalResourceOriginalRecord":[{"@value":"https:\/\/open.library.ubc.ca\/collections\/bcsessional\/items\/1.0320801\/source.json","@language":"en"}],"FileFormat":[{"@value":"application\/pdf","@language":"en"}],"FullText":[{"@value":" PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA\nFIFTH ANNUAL REPORT\nOF THE\nPUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION\nPURSUANT TO SECTION 36 OF THE\nMOTOR CARRIER ACT\nFOR THE\nLICENCE-YEAR 194445\nVICTORIA, B.C. :\nPrinted by Charles F. Banfield, Printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty.\n1945.  Victoria, B.C., June 30th, 1945.\nTo His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor in Council\nof the Province of B7-itish Columbia.\nMay it please Your Honour :\nSir,\u2014We have the honour to transmit herewith, in accordance with section 36 of\nthe \" Motor Carrier Act,\" the Fifth Annual Report of the Public Utilities Commission\nunder that Act for the year ended February 28th, 1945.\nPUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION.\nW. A. Carrothers, Chairman.\nL. W. Patmore, Commissioner.\nJ. C. MacDonald, Commissioner.  ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION,\nPURSUANT TO SECTION 36 OF THE \" MOTOR CARRIER\nACT,\" FOR THE LICENCE-YEAR ENDED\nFEBRUARY 28th, 1945.\nGENERAL.\nAs will be seen from the statement contained in Appendix A of this report,\nthe total number of carriers' licences issued during the licence-year 1944-45 was\n15,259. This constituted an increase of &y2 per cent, over the number issued during\nthe previous year, and exceeds the number issued in any previous year since the\nlicensing of motor carriers was commenced in this Province. Similarly, the revenue\nhas grown from $124,000 in the year 1939-40 to over $183,000 for the year 1944-45.\nThe number of licences (new and renewed) issued during the licence-year now under\nreview shows an increase in all categories except limited freight-vehicle licences.\nThese figures are a clear indication of the steady increase in the volume of motor-\nvehicle transportation in British Columbia.\nIn its last report the Commission mentioned the large number of applications for\ntransfer of licences received in that year\u2014namely, 166 in 1943-44 as compared with\n63 during 1942-43. During the licence-year now under review the number of transfers\nwas practically double the number for the previous year\u2014namely, 323 licences transferred, including 70 taxi licences, 93 public freight-vehicle licences, and 26 limited\nfreight-vehicle licences. It would seem that, in so far as transfer of public and limited\nlicences is concerned, the value of the businesses which the licences represent has been\nenhanced, due, no doubt in part, to the increased volume of business arising out of war\nindustry and increase in population, but due also in large part to the stabilization of\nthe motor transportation industry, resulting from the introduction and enforcement\nof the provisions of the \" Motor Carrier Act.\" In this connection it may be of interest\nto quote section 38 (1) of the Act, which reads as follows:\u2014    -\n\" It  shall be the duty  of the  Commission to  regulate  motor\ncarriers with the objects of promoting adequate and efficient service\nand reasonable and just charges therefor, and of promoting safety\non the public highways, and of fostering sound economic conditions\nin the transportation business in the Province, and the Commission\nmay make such investigations and inquiries and such regulations\nand orders as it deems to be necessary for the carrying-out of such\nobjects.\"\nThe Commission, in administering the Act, has two duties:   One\u2014to the public,\nto see that the service given by motor carriers is adequate, efficient, and safe, and that\nthe charges made for same are just and reasonable.    Two\u2014to the transport industry,\nto see that sound economic conditions are fostered.    The main objective here is to see\nthat the old chaotic and cut-throat conditions that prevailed in the industry and which\nresulted in poor service are removed and that the industry is established on a sound\nbasis so as to enable continuous, reliable, and efficient service to be given to the public.\nIn order to accomplish this it has been necessary to place some restriction on\nthe number of licences granted and on the services which might be rendered by each\noperator, as provided in the Act.    This means that every application for a new licence\nor for an alteration of licence must be considered individually by the Commission,\n5 N 6 \"MOTOR CARRIER ACT.\"\nparticularly in relation to the necessity for additional service and the ability of the\napplicant to give that service. In this connection the Commission during the year\nconsidered a total of 811 licence reports submitted by the Superintendent of Motor\nCarriers dealing with various applications for licences, alteration of licences, transfers, etc. (This does not include applications for private freight-vehicle licences\nwhich are dealt with by the Superintendent.)\nIn order to carry out the requirements of the Act it is necessary that applications\nfor licences or alterations of licences be, from time to time, refused. This has led to\nsome criticism of the Act, particularly from those who are denied licences. However,\nif the Act is to be of any value to the people of this Province and to the industry,\nit would appear that power to restrict licences must be retained as, if licences are\ngranted indiscriminately, regulations would be ineffective and it would be impossible\nto carry out the purpose of the Act.\nRehabilitation of Service Men.\nWith respect to granting of additional licences, the matter of rehabilitation of\nmen discharged from the armed forces has already become a problem which, no doubt,\nwill reach greater proportions on the general release of men from the services.\nSeveral cases were considered during the year. It is understood that, in so far\nas the release of trucks or granting of other privileges is concerned, it is the Dominion\nGovernment's policy to give any ex-service man who was established in the transportation business when he joined the services an opportunity to re-engage in such\noccupation, irrespective of whether or not he transferred or sold his taxi or truck or his\ntransportation business on enlistment. In so far as the \" Motor Carrier Act\" is\nconcerned, the Commission has not laid down any fixed policy; each case will be\nconsidered on its merits; but naturally sympathetic consideration will be given to\nany application of this nature.\nReplacement Vehicles.\nJudging from the increased number of vehicle replacements, it would appear that\nthe situation respecting release of new trucks by the Dominion Government has eased\nsomewhat. Whereas in 1943 it was unusual to receive an application for a licence\nrespecting a new truck, such applications were received with increasing frequency\nduring 1944.\nAmendment to \" Motor Carrier Act.\"\nDuring the 1944 session of the Legislature an amendment to the \" Motor Carrier\nAct \" was passed which gave any person who considers himself aggrieved by any\nregulation or order made by the Commission; or by the granting of a licence or refusal\nto grant a licence; or by the attachment of terms or conditions to any licence; or by\nthe amendment, suspension, or cancellation of any licence; or by the fixing of any rate\nor schedule of rates the right to appeal to the Lieutenant-Governor in Council within\nthirty days. As a result of this amendment the Commission deemed it advisable to\npublish all decisions made by it regarding applications for public or limited licences or\nalterations thereof, except minor changes, and such decisions have been issued weekly\nby the Superintendent of Motor Carriers, commencing with decisions for the week\nended April 15th, 1944. These decisions are posted on the notice-board in the Vancouver office and are also sent to the secretaries of the two motor carriers' associations.\nAmendments to Regulations.\nDuring the year five amendments were made to the regulations as follows:\u2014\n(a.)  The standards for passenger-vehicle construction, having been revised,\nwere incorporated in the regulations  (Paragraphs 6.40 to 6.426, inclu- REPORT OP THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 7\nsive). They apply only to passenger-vehicles designed to carry more\nthan twelve persons. The regulations provide that no such vehicle\nwhich does not comply with these standards shall be licensed without\nwritten consent of the Commission. It may be mentioned here that,\ndue to war-time restrictions, a certain amount of elasticity of treatment\nis necessary with respect to fixtures and other equipment in buses.\n(b.) By order approved May 25th, all of the islands lying between Vancouver\nIsland and the Mainland, with the exception of Saltspring Island,\nGabriola Island, Denman Island, and Bowen Island, were exempted from\nthe provisions of the \" Motor Carrier Act.\" This was found desirable\nowing to the difficulty in administering the Act on the isolated islands\u2014\nsome of which have only a few miles of road,\n(c.) By order approved July 13th, 1944, the Terrace and Prince Rupert areas,\nwhich had previously been exempt from provisions of the \" Motor\nCarrier Act,\" were brought under the provisions of the Act. This action\nwas a direct result of the completion of construction of the road connecting Prince Rupert and Terrace with the main highways of the Province.\n(d.) A minor amendment was made with respect to the exemption of a vehicle\nwhen operated as an ambulance.\n(e.)  By order da^ed February 10th, effective March 1st, 1945, Part 10 of the\nRegulations with respect to Class I., Class II., and Class III. permits was\namended and simplified.\nWith respect to item   (c) :   The various operators in the previously exempted\nTerrace-Prince Rupert area were contacted and applications for licences of the various\nclasses obtained and licences were issued, including three public passenger-vehicle\nlicences, seven public freight-vehicle licences, twenty-nine limited passenger-vehicle\nlicences, and four limited freight-vehicle licences.\nAuthority of Superintendent of Motor Carriers.\nIn March, 1944, the authority of the Superintendent of Motor Carriers was\nrestricted by withdrawing authority covering the granting or refusal of any licence,\napproval of transfer of any licence, and amendment or cancellation of any licence on\napplication of the licensee, leaving in effect authority to grant only private freight-\nvehicle licences, to renew any licence, and the power to make minor amendments to\nany licences, etc.\nThis change was made as a direct result of the amendment to the \" Motor Carrier\nAct\" respecting appeals, as the Commission felt that responsibility for granting or\nrefusing or altering public or limited licences must now rest with the Commission itself.\nWar-time Restrictions.\nDuring the year the Truck Division of the Wartime Prices and Trade Board\nwas absorbed by Transit Control, Department of Munitions and Supply. As in previous\nyears the Commission,and the Superintendent of Motor Carriers maintained close\nco-operation with officials of Transit Control in order to avoid any misunderstandings\nor conflict with respect to matters concerning both departments. However, it was\nnecessary for the Commission to keep in mind that judgment on any application under\nthe \" Motor Carrier Act\" must be given finally on the basis of that Act and the regulations made thereunder, in accordance with the general policy of the Commission.\nThere were, therefore, some cases wherein the Commission considered public\nnecessity required the granting of the licence, judged on the basis of the \" Motor\nCarrier Act\" and in accordance with the general policy of the Commission, whereas\nthe policy or regulations of Transit Control would not permit of part of or possibly all N 8 \" MOTOR CARRIER ACT.\"\nof the service. In such cases, after consultation with and with the full knowledge of\nTransit Control, the Commission's favourable decision was conveyed to the applicant\nwith, however, a condition that the applicant must first obtain the concurrence of\nTransit Control before operation could be commenced or undertaken to the full extent\napplied for.\nThere was further relaxation by Transit Control of the restrictions imposed in\n1942 on bus travel, as follows:\u2014\nB.C. Coach Lines, Ltd.\u2014Service on Kamloops-Salmon Arm route increased from\nthree days per week to six days per week.\nB.C. Greyhound Lines, Ltd.\u2014Service between Vancouver and Kamloops, which had\nbeen suspended, restored on the basis of one trip daily.\nB.C. Motor Transportation, Ltd.\u2014 (a.) Vancouver-Chilliwack. Service increased\nfrom two trips daily to four trips daily, and restriction on through passengers between\nVancouver and Chilliwack removed.\n(b.) Vancouver-New Westminster. Service on week-day evenings and on Sundays\nand holidays, which had been suspended, was permitted to be restored on the basis\nof a regular service only.\nHuffman and Smith.\u2014Service between Prince George and Vanderhoof, which had\nbeen suspended, was permitted to be restored on the basis of one trip per week.\nVancouver Island Coach Lines, Ltd.\u2014Restrictions on through passengers on the\nVictoria-Nanaimo route were relaxed.\nWestern Canadian Greyhound Lines.\u2014Service between Nelson and Fernie, which\nhad been restricted to one trip daily with no overload buses permitted, was changed\nto permit overloads, but number of trips still restricted to one round trip daily.\nPeace River District.\nDuring the latter part of August the Chairman, Public Utilities Commission, and\nthe Superintendent of Motor Carriers made a trip into the Peace River District with\na view to determining whether it would be advisable to bring this area under the provisions of the \" Motor Carrier Act.\" At this time there was no connection by road\nbetween British Columbia except through the Province of Alberta. The construction\nof the Alaska Highway had resulted in abnormal trucking conditions in the area.\nThe highway was now completed, resulting in a great reduction of trucking, but there\nwas still a considerable amount thereof in connection with maintenance of the Alaska\nHighway and transportation of military supplies. The highway at that time was\na military highway maintained by the United States Government. After consideration\nof these circumstances it was not considered advisable at that time to bring the Peace\nRiver area in British Columbia under the \" Motor Carrier Act.\"\nIt may, however, be noted that at the time of writing this report tenders are being\ninvited for the construction of sections of the \" Peace River Highway \" over a distance\nof 151 miles from Summit Lake, B.C. When this highway is constructed the situation\nwill doubtless have to be reviewed.\nThe Chairman and Superintendent also made a trip over the new Prince Rupert\nHighway which, although open to traffic, is still under control of the Federal authorities. REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION.\nN 9\nCOMPARATIVE STATISTICS RE LICENCES ISSUED AND REVENUE, ETC.\nThe following is an analysis of the various classes of licences issued during the\nlast five years, comprising new licences and licences renewed, but not including replacements and transfers:\u2014\nKind of Licence.\nNumber of Licences  (New\nand Renewed).\n1940-41.\n1941-42.\n1942-43.\n1943-44.\n1944-45.\n336\n403\n1,606\n620\n5,085\n3,853\n344\n508\n1,678\n717\n5,657\n4,252\n351\n521\n1,580\n799\n5,998\n4,469\n334\n463\n1,538\n793\n6,210\n4,549\n355\n513\n1,613\n770\n6,563\n4,857\nRevenue.\nThe following  is a comparative statement of  revenue for the past  six years,\nshowing the various sources of revenue:\u2014\nKind of Licence.\n1939-40.\n1940-41.\n1941-42.\n1942-43.\n1943-44.\n1944-45.\nPassenger (buses) \t\n$16,295.91\n2,273.34\n79,498.27\n25,540.00\n535.76\n22!00\n$18,369.50\n4,040.77\n89,093.03\n33,032.81\n2,426.14\n85.70\n$20,061.60\n5,281.72\n100,696.10\n37,723.89\n3,853.26\n56.70\n$18,999.30\n5,402.38\n104,139.81\n39,939.39\n6,360.88\n25.30\n$17,986.14\n4,926.49\n103,888.20\n41,438.20\n5,249.95\n41.55\n$18,977.90\n5,527.77\nPublic and limited freight....\n109,171.53\n44,545.29\n5,413.49\nMiscellaneous\u2014- _ \u2014\n55.28\nTotals \t\n$124,165.28\n$147,047.95\n$167,673.27\n$174,867.06\n$173,530.53\n$183,691.26\nNumber of Licences in Effect.\nThe figures in Appendix A show total number of licences issued during the year.\nThe following tabulation shows approximately the number of licences actually in effect\nat the beginning of each month, taking into account licences surrendered or expired,'\netc.:\u2014\nApproximate Number of Licences in Effect.*\nLicence-year\nMonth. 1943-44.\nMarch      6,887\nApril \t\nMay \t\nJune \t\nJuly \t\nAugust\t\nSeptember\nOctober   ...\nNovember\nDecember _.\nJanuary \u2014\nFebruary _.\nEnd of licence-year\n10,223\n10,914\n11,471\n11,900\n12,189\n12,407\n12,568\n12,680\n12,795\n12,827\n12,833\n12,829\nLicence-year\n1944-45.\n7,813\n11,077\n11,789\n12,299\n12,580\n12,800\n13,072\n13,220\n13,365\n13,474\n13,513\n13,547\n13,542\n* Namely, the number of licences issued, less number of licences surrendered or expired. N 10 \" MOTOR CARRIER ACT.\"\nApplications for Licences.\nThe following tabulation shows the number of applications for new or additional\nlicences actually recorded, year by year, since the inception of the \" Motor Carrier\nAct \" r\u2014\u25a0 No. of\nApplications\nLicence-year. recorded.\n1940-41  3,686\n1941-42  3,910\n1942-43  3,484\n1943-44  3,148\n1944-45  3,277\nNumber, of Licences issued Annually.\nThe following is the total number of licences issued under Part V. of the \" Highway Act \" and under the \" Motor Carrier Act \" respectively for the years stated:\u2014\nLicence-year. Licences issued.*\nPart V., \" Highway Act \"  1935-36 1,672\n1936-37 7,832\n1937-38 11,148\n1938-39 11,970\n1939-40 12,427\n\" Motor Carrier Act \"  1940-41 13,025\n1941-42 14,635\n1942-43 14,425\n1943-44 14,485\n                                                                                     1944-45 15,582\n* Including licences transferred and renewed.\nTEMPORARY PERMITS.\nThe following is a summary of the number and classification of temporary permits\nissued. Administration of the \" Motor Carrier Act\" would not be practical without\ndue provision for issuing permits of this nature to take care of various emergency\nand seasonal operations as and when they arise.\nSummary of Temporary Permits issued during the Year 1944-45.\nClass I. Permits (temporary operation, usually for a few days\nonly)    1,361\nClass II. Permits for seasonal operation (for thirty, sixty, or\nninety days)       613\nClass III. Permits for operation of licensed vehicle temporarily in a manner other than is authorized by the licence__     940\nClass IV. Permits for substitute vehicle when licensed vehicle\nis disabled      330\nHEARINGS ON APPLICATIONS.\nOn fifty-seven different occasions throughout the year public hearings were held\nby the Superintendent of Motor Carriers at Vancouver, at which a total of 245\napplications were considered.\nDETAILS OF DECISIONS RESPECTING CERTAIN APPLICATIONS.\nApplication for Additional Limited Passenger-vehicle (Taxi) Licences at New\nWestminster.\u2014In April, 1944, four of the taxi operators at New Westminster made REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 11\napplication for additional licences. Investigation disclosed that, in so far as public\nconvenience was concerned, several more taxis could be profitably used at New Westminster. Public necessity, however, is merely a relative term in so far as taxis are\nconcerned, having regard to war-time conditions that confront taximen everywhere.\nThe Transit Controller was only prepared to grant one additional licence, which was\ngranted to the prior applicant.\nRevision of Public Freight-vehicle Licences at Nanaimo.\u2014The Class III. public\nfreight-vehicle licences of thirteen operators at Nanaimo and four other operators in\nthe district were revised generally by the substitution of \" general freight \" in place of\nnaming commodities which may be hauled within a distance of 20 road-miles from\nNanaimo Post-office. The limiting of these operators to hauling certain defined commodities only within this restricted area had not been found necessary.\nApplication for Bus Service at White Rock.\u2014Tentative application was made by\nW. E. Taylor & Son, of White Rock, for a licence to operate local public passenger\nservice at White Rock via two circular routes starting and finishing at White Rock.\nThe Regional Director, Transit Control, decided that the introduction of a new service\nof this nature could not be permitted at this time. Therefore the applicant was\nadvised his application had been filed for future consideration.\nFerndale Auto Freight of Ferndale, Washington.\u2014Ferndale Auto Freight of\nFerndale, Washington, made tentative application for limited freight-vehicle licence\nto transport rubber stock and general freight for Firestone Tire & Rubber Company\nbetween Ferndale, Wash., and Port Coquitlam, B.C. The Firestone Tire & Rubber\nCompany had brought into use the old Gregory Tire plant at Port Coquitlam and was\ntransporting rubber for processing from Ferndale to the plant at Port Coquitlam and\nvice versa. In view of the fact that two companies are already operating public\nfreight service on this route between Vancouver and Seattle, and are capable of undertaking this transportation, the application of Ferndale Auto Freight was refused, and\nthe licences of the two licensed companies were revised to permit them to extend their\nservice to Port Coquitlam.\nPublic Freight Service between Vancouver and Nelson.\u2014R. J. Barber, d\/b\/a\nSnappy Truck Line, made application for two Class II. public freight-vehicle licences\nfor scheduled public freight service between Vancouver and Nelson via Spences Bridge\nand Princeton, or via Hope-Princeton Road when the latter is open. Barber previously\nheld three licences for this operation which he relinquished on voluntary withdrawal\nof service in November, 1942. Under Dominion Government Wartime Truck Regulation Orders, the service having been relinquished, the applicant would require to obtain\napproval of the Dominion Government before he could recommence same. The applicant was, therefore, put in touch with the Federal Truck Control Officer, as a result of\nwhich the applicant agreed to having his application placed on file, no further action\nbeing taken regarding same for the time being.\nTraders' Transport Service, Limited.\u2014Traders' Transport Service, Limited, of\nVancouver, made application for ten Class III. public freight-vehicle licences (including\nreclassification of four limited freight licences then held), chiefly for the transportation\nof fish of all kinds, including canned, fresh, frozen, and salted, but also to undertake\ndelivery and pick-up of general freight for Traders' Freight Traffic, Limited. The latter\nis an associate company formed for the purpose of shipping and forwarding freight\u2014\nprimarily but not entirely as a pool-car operation; and general freight to be processed\nor warehoused by Traders' Service, Limited. Traders' Service, Limited, is the parent\ncompany and operates warehouses and undertakes the business of labelling, reconditioning, repacking, and strapping of canned fish and other food products and commodities.\nIn view of the fact that the applicant owns and operates seventeen trucks in Vancouver,\nand considering the nature of its business, the applications were approved. N 12 \"MOTOR CARRIER ACT.\"\nPublic Passenger Service, Prince Rupert.\u2014On application of Leonard C. Griffiths,\nd\/b\/a Arrow Bus Lines, of Prince Rupert, three public passenger-vehicle licences\nrespecting three buses were issued for public transportation between the shopping\ndistrict in Prince Rupert and Seal Cove, a suburb. This was not a new operation, but\nthe licensing of the vehicles was necessitated by the amendment to the regulations\nwhereby Prince Rupert is not now exempted from the provisions of the \" Motor Carrier\nAct.\"\nChilliwack Cartage Company, Limited.\u2014On application of Chilliwack Cartage\nCompany, Limited, the Commission agreed to grant it a limited freight-vehicle licence\nrespecting a truck and semi-trailer, carrying capacity 12 tons, as an additional vehicle\nfor transportation of milk from Chilliwack to Vancouver, subject to the applicant's\nshowing that it had received the necessary permission from Truck Division, Transit\nControl, Department of Munitions and Supply. As such evidence was not forthcoming,\nthe licence was not issued.\nContract Rates for Transportation of Coal at Telkwa.\u2014MacDonald's Cartage Company, of Smithers, made application for permission to transport coal under contract\nfor the Telkoal Company, Limited, from Telkoal mine to railway siding at Telkwa at\nrates lower than the rates in effect under contract previously entered into between the\ncompany and the Telkwa Transfer (B. M. Hoops). Telkoal Company, Limited, had\ncancelled its contract with the Telkwa Transfer, being dissatisfied with the service\nreceived, and had negotiated a new contract with MacDonald's Cartage Company at\nlower rates. This contract was approved. The Telkwa Transfer and Smithers-\nTelkwa Haulers' Association protested against the granting of licence to MacDonald's\nCartage Company and acceptance of its contract. Notice of appeal under section 55\nof the \" Motor Carrier Act\" was given.    This appeal was later withdrawn.\nPublic Freight Service between Vancouver and Kelowna via Princeton.\u2014Country\nFreight Lines (J. C. Fleming & Sons), successors to Johnston Bros. & Byrnell, who\noperate public freight service between Vancouver and Chilliwack, made application for\nreinstatement of two public freight-vehicle licences previously held by Johnston Bros.\n& Byrnell for operation of public freight service between Vancouver and Kelowna via\nSpences Bridge, Merritt, Princeton, and Penticton. This service was voluntarily discontinued by Johnston Bros. & Byrnell as at August 21st, 1943, at which time the\nlicensees were advised that the voluntary withdrawal of service would involve the surrender of the licences and would extinguish any privileges which they may have had\nunder the \" Motor Carrier Act\" with respect to this service. The applicants were\nadvised that the concurrence of the Truck Division, Transit Control (Dominion Government) , would be necessai-y before the service could be reinstated, and that it is not\nthe policy of Truck Control to give concurrence to additional licences unless war necessity can be proven. They asked that the application be held in abeyance for consideration at a later date, and the matter so stands.\nTENTATIVE APPLICATIONS.\nThe policy of the Truck Division, Transit Control (Dominion Government), of first\nascertaining whether a Provincial motor carrier's licence will be issued, where such\nlicence is required, before release of a new truck, resulted in a number of tentative\napplications for motor carrier's licences being received and dealt with.\nAs a result of the opening-up of the Prince Rupert Highway, a number of tentative\napplications were received for licences to operate public passenger-vehicle or public\nfreight-vehicle service over this route or portions thereof, including the following:\u2014\nKind of Service. Route.\nPublic freight Smithers-Prince Rupert.\nPublic passenger and freight.\u2014Prince Rupert-Vanderhoof. REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 13\nKind of Service. Route.\nPublic freight Prince Rupert-Terrace.\nPublic freight Smithers-Prince Rupert.\nPublic freight Hazelton and District-Prince Rupert.\nPublic freight Vancouver-Prince Rupert.\nPublic passenger Vanderhoof-New Hazelton.\nPublic passenger -. Prince Rupert-Terrace.\nPublic passenger and freight\u2014From Prince Rupert to the farthest\npoint in British Columbia that\nmay possibly be granted.\nThese are applications received during the year 1944. Other applications were\nreceived in previous years. Tentative applications were also received for public\npassenger and freight licences between Prince George and Dawson Creek. In all cases\napplicants were advised that their applications had been received and filed but that\nsuch action does not confer on the applicant any prior rights or privileges under the\n\" Motor Carrier Act.\"\nRATES AND TIME SCHEDULES.\nTaxicab Rates, Victoria and Vicinity.\u2014Charter and Sightseeing Tariff No. 2 was\nprescribed by the Public Utilities Commission, effective March 1st, 1940, and named\nrules and regulations on charter trips and sightseeing tours for Victoria and vicinity\noriginating within a radius of 20 miles from the Victoria City Hall, with certain\nexemptions for limited passenger vehicles making trips entirely in an exempted area\nwithin a radius of 5 miles from the City Hall. Due to increased costs of operation\nand limited supplies of gasoline, an application was made by the Taxi Operators'\nAssociation of Victoria for a revision in rates. A hearing was held at Victoria by\nthe Commission on January 20th, 1944, which was followed by an investigation into\nthe books of the operators. Working in conjunction with the Wartime Prices and\nTrade Board the Commission drafted a revised tariff. Taxicab rates were set by\nthe Wartime Prices and Trade Board for the area within a radius of 15 miles from\nthe Victoria City Hall, and Charter and Sightseeing Tariff No. 2 of the Public Utilities\nCommission was amended so that the whole area of Victoria and vicinity now has\nuniform limited passenger-vehicle rates.\nGeneral.\u2014Attached (Appendix B) is the report of the Rates Examiner, which\nshows further and encouraging progress in filing of tariffs by licensed operators.\nIt will be noted that 255 tariffs of all kinds were dealt with during the year as well\nas 27 supplements, 38 revisions, and 114 contracts. It will also be noted that 129 time\nschedules were received and dealt with and that the total number of filings of all kinds\nfor the year amounted to 563. In many cases a considerable amount of preliminary\nwork was necessary with respect to these filings, involving considerable correspondence\nand investigation. All changes in time schedules are duly advertised for two weeks,\nwith allowance of a further period of seven days in which to deal with any objections.\nAll such changes in time schedules are referred to the Commission before they are\napproved or otherwise.\nIn so far as tariffs are concerned, only special cases are reported to the Commission\nin which changes in rates or any major revisions are involved. The Commission\nreceived thirty-five tariff reports from the Superintendent of Motor Carriers during\nthe year covering cases of this nature. In some cases it was necessary to refer these\napplications to the Wartime Prices and Trade Board at Toronto, under the arrangement previously made whereby the Commission takes up direct with the Board at\nToronto any matter involving an increase in rates, where the Commission is of\nthe opinion that the increase is justified. N 14 \"MOTOR CARRIER ACT.\"\nIn previous reports reference has been made to the increased cost of operating\nmotor-vehicles, for a number of reasons as outlined therein. It is, therefore, worthy\nof note that existing transportation services in this Province have in general been\ncontinued throughout the war without any general increase in cost to the shipper or\nto the public.\nFrom the Rates Examiner's report it will be noted that progress was made in\nobtaining uniform tariffs for local operations at Nanaimo, Alberni, Courtenay, Revelstoke, in the Howe Sound-Pender Harbour area, and at Kimberley. Naturally the\nwork of preparing tariffs of this nature is greatly influenced by the necessity of avoiding any increases in rates contrary to the Maximum Price Regulations.\nPUBLIC PASSENGER SERVICE.\nInspection of Vehicles.\u2014Early in the year a complaint was received from the\nAmalgamated Association of Street, Electric Railway, and Motor Coach Employees of\nAmerica respecting alleged unsafe condition of buses operated by B.C. Coach Lines,\nLimited, at Kamloops, with which company the said union held an agreement, and it\nwas stated that the members of the union had petitioned to the Secretary of the Association to make application for inspection of the buses.\nIn co-operation with the Commissioner of B.C. Police the' vehicles were duly\ninspected and defects rectified, and the Commission received a letter from the Association expressing gratification for the results of the action taken.\nThe Commissioner of B.C. Police reports there were approximately 478 motor-\nvehicle inspections made of vehicles licensed under the \" Motor Carrier Act.\"\nConsolidation of Through Passenger Services between Alberta and Vancouver.\u2014\nIn June, 1944, the Western Canadian Greyhound Lines, Limited, took over the operation\nof the B.C. Greyhound Lines, Limited, and Cariboo Greyhound Lines, Limited, through\nthe purchase of shares in the last two companies. This transaction, which resulted in\nthe placing of through bus passenger business from Alberta to Vancouver under one\nmanagement, was approved by an order of the Public Utilities Commission, dated the\n10th day of June, 1944.\nTime Schedule, Western Canadian Greyhound Lines, from Nelson Easterly.\u2014\nDuring June, 1944, representations were made by the Cranbrook and Fernie Boards of\nTrade with respect to the Western Canadian Greyhound Lines bus schedule from westerly points to Cranbrook, leaving Nelson at 2 p.m. and leaving Cranbrook at 9.20 p.m.\nThis schedule required a stop-over of five hours at Yahk for passengers proceeding from\nthe United States to easterly points. The suggestion was made that the bus line return\nto the original schedule, leaving Nelson at 11 a.m., leaving Yahk at 5 p.m., and leaving\nCranbrook at 6.30 p.m., using the earlier ferry on Kootenay Lake, cutting down the\ntime of stop-over at Kingsgate, and giving passengers better hotel accommodation in\nCranbrook and Fernie. This was not approved, as such change of schedule would seriously inconvenience and cause extra expense to the public living along Kootenay Lake\nbetween Gray Creek and Kuskanook, for whom the bus line is the only form of public\ntransportation.\nService between Slocan City and Nelson.\u2014Representations were made regarding\nthe Western Canadian Greyhound bus schedule in the Slocan Valley. Several years ago\nit was arranged that there would be a morning schedule out of Slocan City to Nelson\nand return in the evening, but, with the shortage of rubber and gas, this service was\ndiscontinued. While at first no complaint was made by the residents, they pointed\nout that there were two buses running on the morning schedule from Nelson, and the\npurpose of the representations was to endeavour to have one schedule in the morning\nand one in the afternoon, instead of two buses in the morning. After considerable\ncorrespondence and investigation, a new time schedule was filed during the month of REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 15\nJuly, providing for two services daily, in the morning and afternoon respectively,\nbetween Nelson and New Denver, except on Wednesday when only one service is\nprovided.\nBus Service to Say ward (V.I.).\u2014On application from the company, the schedule of\npublic passenger-vehicle routes of the Vancouver Island Transportation Company,\nLimited, was amended with respect to Route 3 by extending to Sayward (Kelsey Bay)\nthe northerly terminus of this route, which previously had terminated at Menzies Bay.\nWithdrawal of Public Passenger Service at Smithers.\u2014Mr. Fred Mounkley,\nlicensed to operate public passenger service between Smithers and Smithers airport,\nwithdrew his service in June, 1944, there being insufficient air force personnel stationed\nat this point to warrant continuation of the service.\nReduction in Bus Fares at Victoria and Nanaimo.\u2014In April, 1944, the Veterans'\nSightseeing and Transportation Company, Limited, made application for reduction in\nbus fares in Oak Bay Municipality and the Haultain district of Victoria, and on bus\nroutes in the City of Nanaimo and district.\nThe general reduction in cash fare at Victoria was 1 cent\u2014namely, from 6 cents\nto 5 cents, or from 7 cents to 6 cents. At Nanaimo the general reduction was 2 cents\non a 10-cent fare and 1 cent on a 6-cent fare.    The reduced tariff was accepted.\nSuspension of Licence.\u2014Notice having been received under date of September\n11th, 1944, from the British Columbia Police that a Yellow Coach licensed under the\n\" Motor Carrier Act\" under carrier's licence A-110 issued to E. H. Neville had been\nprohibited from operating as a public passenger vehicle until certain repairs had been\nmade, the said licence was suspended.\nPUBLIC FREIGHT SERVICE.\nRe Complaints against the Milk Hauling Service of Irvin S. Parberry and Lester\nMcGarva.\u2014Complaints were received against the services of Irvin S. Parberry, of\nHuntingdon, and Lester McGarva, of Abbotsford, as to alleged unsatisfactory service\nwith respect to the transportation by them of milk from the Sumas area to Vancouver;\nin particular, with regard to alleged irregular service, delays, spillages, and loss of or\ndamage to containers. A hearing was held on May 18th, 1944. Subsequently, by order\nof the Commission dated May 31st, 1944, these licensees were placed on six months'\nprobation to show that they were able to give satisfactory service, the matter to be\nreviewed at the end of the six months' probationary period. The probationary period\nwas later extended for further two months.\nApplication of Griffiths Bros.\u2014A tentative application of Griffiths Bros., of Abbotsford, for five Class III. public freight-vehicle licences to transport milk from Sumas\nMunicipality to Vancouver, New Westminster, or Mission, which licences, if granted,\nwould duplicate the service rendered by the above-named Parberry and McGarva, was\nleft in abeyance, as these applications could not be considered further in view of the\ndecision regarding the present licensees.\nPublic Freight Service between Nelson and Creston.\u2014On page 11 of the Fourth\nAnnual Report of the Commission it was reported that an application was received from\nWilliams Transfer, of Nelson, for transfer of public freight licence for the above\nservice from Gordon F. Shaw;  the application being under consideration at that time.\nIn connection with their application, Williams Transfer filed a new tariff which\ninvolved some increases in rates over rates filed by Shaw. This tariff was mimeographed and distributed to the shippers and residents of the area served and resulted\nin a large number of objections being received. Subsequently, the Commission\ninstructed its Field Auditor to proceed to Nelson and examine the books of Williams\nTransfer, as a result of which, under date of the 15th day of July, 1944, the Commission\nmade an order requiring Williams Transfer to revise their methods of accounting and of keeping records of operations, for the purpose of supplying such information with\nrespect to the public freight service between Nelson and Creston as distinct from their\nother operations. This was necessary to enable the Commission to determine whether\nor not any increase in rates was justified.\nSubsequently, Williams Transfer revised their tariff with a view to removing as\nmany objections as possible, and this tariff was circulated to the previous objectors\nunder date of March 9th, 1945. The matter was not, therefore, concluded during the\nlicence-year under review and is still under consideration.\nTransportation of Household Goods, Greater Vancouver.\u2014In April, 1944, the\nCommission, after consideration of representations from the Superintendent of Motor\nCarriers, approved of the latter's suggestion that some additional licences be granted\nfor transportation of household goods in the Greater Vancouver area, subject to full\ninvestigation in every case, particularly with regard to proper rates, equipment, and\nexperience in connection with each application. This decision was made having due\nregard to the large increase in population in the area and the difficulty of the local\ntransfer companies in confining their operations entirely to the City of Vancouver;\nalso having regard to the additional amount of movement of household goods due to\nshortage of houses and job changing caused largely by war-work.\nMISCELLANEOUS.\nEnforcement.\u2014The Commissioner of B.C. Police reports 224 prosecutions under\nthe \" Motor Carrier Act\" during the licence-year March 1st, 1944, to February 28th,\n1945, inclusive, with 221 convictions and 3 dismissals.\nMeeting of Motor Carrier Officials of the Four Western Provinces.\u2014A meeting of\nmotor carrier officials of the four Western Provinces was held in Victoria on Wednesday, October 11th, 1944, attended by members of the Public Utilities Commission of\nBritish Columbia and the Highway Traffic Boards of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and\nManitoba. Mr. George S. Gray, Transit Controller, and his British Columbia representative, Mr. S. Sigmundson, were also present for the purpose of discussing war-time\nFederal Control over highway transportation.\nThe whole question of Federal control and possible withdrawal of the restrictions\nwas discussed. It was the feeling of the meeting that control should revert to the Provincial authorities as soon as the present emergency had ended, but it was agreed that\nthe withdrawal would have to be gradual.\nOther matters of general interest to the administrators of the Motor Carrier Acts\nwere discussed.\nConference of Inspectors at Vancouver.\u2014During the period January 8th-llth,\n1945, inclusive, the Inspectors of Motor Carriers met the Superintendent of Motor\nCarriers and other officials of the Branch at Vancouver for a conference, working to\nfairly extensive agenda. A considerable portion of the time was spent in discussing\nthe preparation and filing of tariffs.\nThe Commission as a whole met the Superintendent and Inspectors on the concluding day and various questions which had arisen were fully discussed and necessary\nrulings were made by the Commission.\nStaff.\u2014Mr. J. A. Carmichael, previously employed as an Inspector of Motor Carriers, rejoined the staff of the Motor Carrier Branch in December, 1944, on discharge\nfrom the R.C.A.F., it being the intention to reopen the motor carrier office at Kamloops,\nwhich had been closed since August, 1941, when the Inspector at that point resigned\nhis position.    (See page 21 of Second Annual Report.)\nINSPECTORS' REPORTS.\nThese are contained in Appendix C. REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 17\nLIST OF PUBLIC PASSENGER AND PUBLIC FREIGHT ROUTES.\nIn Appendix D attached will be found lists showing names of operators of scheduled public passenger-vehicle services and of scheduled public freight-vehicle services\nrespectively as at March 1st, 1945, with a statement of the routes over which these\noperations are carried out. N 18\nMOTOR CARRIER ACT.\"\nC\/3\nw\no\nI\u2014I\nQ\n55\nW\nPL,\nXI\nhH\nP\nH\nfit\nft\n<\nta \u00a7\nW S\ncs a\nH\nO\n\u00ab.\nPh\nw\n\u00ab\n<!\no\n\u00ab\no\nH\nO\nS\nrs\n<;\n<\nw\na\no\no\npj\no\nH\nw\n\u00ab!\na\nu\nH\na \u00a3\nQ\nz\n\u25a0<\na\nia\nB\nK\nEl\n(x.\n03\ni\nEh\nO\n|\n5\n6.\nO\nH\nO\nfa\no\nH\ns\nH\nS\nH\nEh\n\u25a0M\nNumber o\nLicences\nClassifica\ntion\nchanged.\nCM       !   H   IO   [\u25a0\n1                   OJ\nCN\nCN   0C\nCM\n^r\n1    CO\nTj<\ntr-\nO M  3j\nL_l   \u00b0   ri\nm  \u00ab S\n_o fi_S\nS.S 5\nCM       i   O   CO   tC\n\u00ab\n00    C\nie\n1   CrO\nCO\n:  t-        c\\\nt-\n|   CN\nCM\nCO\ntO    rt    o    t-    Ifl\na\n<N   IO\n00\nTf    rt\nOl\n'rt\nOl   CO   O   rH   CM\noc\nCl    IM\ne.\nrt    M\n\u00bbo\nO\nrt             tO    rt    CC\ni-t   Tj\nC7>    t>\nCM\n^T co\nB\"\n0)\nIO\n+j\n7\n3 co\n1\nTf\ntfl   rt\n;   : -h t-\n<N   IN\n00   o\nrt   -fi\n00\nOJ\n\u25a03S\no\nW\np\nto\nco\n4   _!\nr.   cfl\nCfl\nw\no\nfc\n.sfl\nCC   CM   E-   00   OC\nie\ntr-  0C\nt>\nOi   00\nt-\n00         \u25a0**\ni-H    Tf\nCM\nCO    rt\no\nP. CJ\ncj a\n1-1\nIO\nG\n3\nh\ni\u00bb\no\nIn.      CJ\nry,     OJ\nto  ta   rt  tr- ta\ncr-\n<N    \u00abC\ncn\noo oq\nCi\ni\non         oo         cr\nrt    CQ\nCM    Tf\n-fi\nrt    IO\ned\nta\n13\nM\nCC   -fi   Ol   rt    tO\nCC\nrt    CT\nOl   l-H\nCM\ntO    IO    CQ    CO    tr-\nto\ntD    CM\no\nIN   <N\nCM\nrt             -f    rt    IC\nr-l   r-\nt-   O\nIO\nco\" io\"\nrH*\nOJ\nti\nO   IO   t-   IO   If\nlO   CT\no\nO  Ci\nOl\nevenue\nfrom\nlicence\nFees.\nO   tO   tr-   CM   \u2022-\nTl\nio   cr\nc\nO    CM\no v t- \u00ab oc\ncr\nto   to\n00    t-\nCM\nH    M    N    00    r-\nCO   to\nTl\nrt    CM\nCM\nO)    H    IO   OO   K\na\nCi   w\nIO\n<N\no        in\" t- oc\nt>\nri   CC\n' t-\nCO*\nti    i-J\nrt                                    Cv\nrt   ie\nTf\nt-\n\u00abW\ns*\ncfl\nri\n1)\ns\nft\nCfl\nci\n*\nJ\n\u2022m\na\na\nt-\ntt    at\nao  o\nOJ  fi\nfc\nfi\ng 2\n1 9 J\na\nC\nC\na\no\nrt\nojt\nE\n0\n5\no\ncfl\nn\nc\nr-\nhH    ^^\nt-H\nh-1   J\u2014(\nCO     CO\no\n5\not-  j\n-   - fee\n\u00ab         01         H\nc\nc\ntfl   tr\nD\nCO     CO\n<^   rt\nfc\n\u00a3 \u00a3\n^0\n3 o\nM\ncr\nq\n'e\nfi\na\nQJ\nS\nCJ   cj \u00a3 .:\nH     i    V     \u00a3\ntu   qj    Cj   >\nco   bo \u00a3  J.\n0   fi   c jg\nCJ    Cj   ,~    fcj\nc\n0\nc\n1\nc\na\nCC\no c\neo   a\n\u25a0S   _h=\noj   a.\n\u25a0^ -\u2022-\nC\nV\nJ\nIE\na\nr\n_S\nco\"    CO*\nOJ    01\nQJ     <U\n>     >\n-rl    +J\nfi  fi     a-\nbO     bfl      r-\n\u25a0 ri    .w         S\n<U    CD     +-\nh    li      c\nfc  fc    Eh\nS   cfl   M j\u2014t   a\n\u00bb nffl  a\" -a  rfc\nc\na\na;   a\nfH        t.\na\nC -a >n cj x\nj\nfa     fa\nfc\n0   |   Jj    u   .\u00a3\nT\nt\nrt   rt\na 1 1 1 1\n^3   X\n2\n_>   >\n1\n3     P\ns\n*S 'E\na, Ij 3 fa ri\nfa   fa\nfc\nfc fc\np. b\np   OJ\n2%\n< B o q h\nfc\nC3 K\nHj\nM   H^\nri oj\no^\no\nCM\nCO\n00\nCO\n&&\u25a0\n.s\nfl\no\ns\n13\na\n3\nta\n<u\nfH\nCS\n0)\nS3\n0)\n!>\n0)\n3\nta\n\u00ab3\na)\nH\n(N   i-H   (N   rH   T-l\n00  IC\nDh\nSi\n5-\n8\nS\nto\nS ,3\nMh   a>\nw\nS\na\nO   C3\nft\naj   o\no\nH\nfc\nr-l  H   <C|  O  \u00a7  H REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 19\nAPPENDIX B.\nREPORT OP RATES EXAMINER.\ni\nIn spite of an increase in investigational work, the Rates Division has handled a considerably greater number of time schedules and tariffs in the year ended February 28th, 1945,\nthan in any other year previous. The extent of the work is reflected in the total number of\nfilings for the year (shown at the end of this report) which, when compared with that of the\nprevious year, reveals that approximately 130 per cent, more time schedules and 70 per cent,\nmore tariffs were filed than in the year 1943-44.\nThe changing requirements in all districts, especially in those areas where there have\nbeen large concentrations of military personnel, have been responsible for the increased\nfrequency in time schedule changes.\nIn relation to the total number of carriers holding licences to carry for compensation,\nthe number of active tariffs does not seem great and it would appear as if the work of\ncollecting tariffs had slackened to some extent. This is accounted for partially by the fact\nthat revisions of tariffs, of which there have been many during the past year, have tended to\ncause the number to remain somewhat stationary and partially on account of the tremendous\nturnover of transportation businesses transferred from one party to another necessitating\nthe refiling of tariffs.\nA number of projects were undertaken in connection with the preparation of uniform\nfreight and passenger tariffs and these are dealt with in further detail elsewhere in this\nreport.\nThe staff in the Rates Division was increased during the year by the addition of one\nstenographer in August, 1944, and this additional assistance accounts in part for the acceleration of work passing through the Rates Office. The present staff now consists of a Rates\nExaminer and two stenographers and, while such a small staff has managed to keep abreast\nof the unprecedented volume of business, it has not been possible to attempt any major\nadjustments or improvements in the methods either of tariff making or office procedure.\nInvestigations.\nThe field-work carried out by the Rates Examiner to assist carriers in the preparation\nof uniform tariffs, consisted of five special meetings as follows:\u2014\nAt Nanaimo.\u2014Investigation of the rates charged by Class III. (non-scheduled) public\nfreight carriers in the Nanaimo district. As a result of this investigation a uniform freight\ntariff was successfully compiled and presented to the Public Utilities Commission. This tariff\nwas accepted for filing and has since been in effect in the Nanaimo area and is reported to be\nsatisfactory in all respects, both to the shipper and the carrier.\nAt Alberni.\u2014Investigation of the rates charged by Class III. (non-scheduled) public\nfreight carriers in the Alberni-Port Alberni district and that area west of the Beaufort Range.\nAs reported in the Fourth Annual Report, a previous investigation had already been made\ninto a tariff drawn up for these carriers by the Motor Carriers' Association but, as there was\nconsiderable disagreement among the carriers over the charges set forth therein, a second\ninvestigation became necessary and as a result a new tariff was compiled. This tariff has\nbeen forwarded to the carriers for their further examination and will be presented to the\nPublic Utilities Commission for consideration immediately upon receipt of approval from the\ncarriers concerned.\nAt Alberni.\u2014Investigation of the charter passenger (taxi) rates charged by the limited\npassenger operators in the Port Alberni-Alberni district. A full meeting was held and\nsufficient information obtained to enable the Rates Examiner to prepare a suitable tariff for\nthe carriers' consideration. This charter passenger tariff is now in the hands of the carriers\nfor their final examination before presentation to the Public Utilities Commission.\nAt Courtenay.\u2014Investigation of the rates charged by the Class III. (non-scheduled) public freight carriers in the Courtenay-Comox-Cumberland area. A tariff has been prepared,\nbut, as there is some disagreement among the carriers over certain items, the tariff is awaiting\nadditional information before being submitted to them for their final approval.\nAt Revelstoke.\u2014Investigation of the rates charged by the Class III. (non-scheduled)\npublic freight carriers in the Revelstoke district.    A tariff was prepared and submitted to the carriers for their final approval.    This tariff is now ready for presentation to the Public\nUtilities Commission.\nIn addition to the above investigational work, investigations were also made into new\ntariffs, among which were:\u2014\nWilliams Transfer, Nelson.\u2014Proposed Class II. (scheduled) public freight tariff of the\nWilliams Transfer, successor to Gordon F. Shaw, of Nelson, naming class and commodity\nrates and rules applicable to the route between Nelson-Crawford Bay-Creston. A very\ncomprehensive study was made of this tariff, which was the subject of considerable complaint\nfrom the general public because of certain increases in rates applied for. A new tariff was\ncompiled and distributed to all parties concerned and no serious objections were received.\nHowever, certain increases are still involved and the matter is still under investigation by the\nPublic Utilities Commission.\nBowness Transfer Company, Limited, Cranbrook.\u2014Class II. (scheduled) public freight\ntariff of the Bowness Transfer Company, Limited, and subsequently Revie's Freight Lines, of\nCranbrook, naming class and commodity rates and rules applicable to the following routes:\nCranbrook-Creston, Cranbrook-Kimberley, and Cranbrook-Fernie.\nAn extensive investigation was made into the charges made by the Bowness Transfer\nCompany, Limited, of Cranbrook, and after many months of deliberation a tariff was prepared. The tariff, which was accepted for filing, conforms, in all respects, with the requirements of the \" Motor Carrier Act \" and regulations, and so far appears to have met with\ngeneral public approval.\nHowe Sound-Pender Harbour Area.\u2014A survey was made of the rates charged and rules\napplied in connection with Class III. (non-scheduled) public freight operations in the Howe\nSound-Pender Harbour area. A complete revision and compilation of a new uniform freight\ntariff was undertaken to which tariff all Class III. public freight carriers in this district\nsubscribed. The tariff was subsequently presented to the Public Utilities Commission and\naccepted for filing on August 29th, 1944.\nKimberley.\u2014Investigation was made into the rates charged for Class III. (non-scheduled)\npublic freight service in the Kimberley area, resulting in the compilation of a uniform freight\ntariff. On receipt of approval from the carriers subscribing to this tariff, it was presented\nto the Public Utilities Commission and accepted for filing on February 22nd, 1945.\nBesides the foregoing, many complaints in connection with overcharges have been given\nattention. In such cases, both shipper and carrier were called upon to produce such evidence\nas bills, etc., to support their contentions, and where the carrier had misapplied or violated\nhis tariff in any way he was obliged to make amends. In the majority of cases thus handled\nthe matter has been tactfully brought to a successful conclusion.   Two cases are still outstanding.\nIn all of these investigations, the Field Inspectors worked very closely with the Rates\nExaminer and their valuable assistance contributed immeasurably to the successful completion of these tariffs, etc.\nThe Rates Examiner took part in the Conference of Inspectors of Motor Carriers at\nVancouver in January, 1945, when many of the problems arising out of rate matters were\ndiscussed and a greater understanding of the needs in this particular field was reached.\nTariff Reports.\nThere were many applications during the year for changes in tariffs. Wherever the\nchange in rate or rule consisted of an increase or the substitution of a new rate, the application was reported in detail to the Public Utilities Commission, together with recommendations\nas to whether or not the new rates should be accepted. There were thirty-five such tariff\nreports; thirty of these applications were passed by the Commission and the new rates were\naccepted for filing. The five applications which were either rejected or are still under\nconsideration are as follows:\u2014\nApplication of Central Transfer Company, Limited, of Vancouver, to file a new tariff\nnaming a general increase in freight rates applicable to their Class III. (non-scheduled)\npublic freight operations in Licence Districts 14, 14a, and 15. After a thorough investigation\nby the Public Utilities Commission the new tariff was not accepted on the grounds that the\nincreases applied for were excessive, and the Central Transfer Company, Limited, were\nnotified to the effect that if they wished to modify the increases applied for their application REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 21\nwould be reconsidered. The Central Transfer Company, Limited, furnished further data to\nsubstantiate their case, but the additional information submitted was not sufficient to prove\nthat they were entitled to the large increases asked for and they were so advised. No further\naction has since been taken.\nApplication of Gerald G. McGannon, Fruitvale, to file a new tariff naming certain\nincreases in rates in connection with his Class III. (non-scheduled) public freight operations\nin the Fruitvale district. This application was submitted to the Public Utilities Commission\nbut was rejected on December 5th, 1944, Mr. McGannon not having submitted sufficient\nevidence to substantiate his claims to the increase applied for.\nApplication of Class III. (non-scheduled) public freight carriers operating in the Quesnel\ndistrict to file a new tariff, naming certain increases in rates. Insufficient information was\nsubmitted by these carriers to justify favourable recommendation by the Public Utilities\nCommission to the Wartime Prices and Trade Board, and the Commission, therefore, rejected\nthe application on March 20th, 1945.\nApplication of the limited passenger (taxi) carriers operating in the Kamloops area to\nfile a uniform charter passenger tariff, naming a general increase in rates. In view of the\nfact that all of the carriers had already subscribed to and filed, since the basic period, copies\nof a tariff known as \" Uniform Toll Schedule No. 2,\" the proposed new tariff could not be\nfavourably recommended to the Public Utilities Commission as the increases applied for\nwere higher than the generally filed rates for limited passenger service in other districts in\nthe Province. The application was, therefore, rejected by the Commission on February\n25th, 1945.\nContracts.\nFrom the figures at the end of this report it will be noted that an appreciable number of\ncontracts were accepted for filing. These contracts were investigated just as thoroughly as\nif they had been tariffs, to ensure against any unwarranted increases or decreases in rates.\nAlthough care was taken not to interfere with arrangements between the contracting parties,\nit was felt that it was in the best interests of the public to guard against any unfair practices\nwhich might possibly occur under the guise of contracts. Carriers were required to submit\ndetails of the services rendered in connection with their transportation facilities to justify\nthe establishment of their rates.\nIn instances where more than one carrier was participating in the same haul for the\nsame party, rates were made uniform.\nOne of the outstanding cases where a uniformity of contract was brought about was in\nthe case of the transportation of cull and Grade C apples for the B.C. Tree Fruits, Limited,\ntransported from Okanagan points to rail-head at Keremeos, B.C., and Oroville, Washington.\nB.C. Tree Fruits, Limited, received orders for cull or Grade C apples for shipment to points in\nthe United States. This resulted in a truck movement to rail at Keremeos, B.C., and at\nOroville, Washington, these two points being the closest shipping-points on the Great Northern\nRailway.\nThe necessary permits were issued and satisfactory rates agreed upon between the B.C.\nTree Fruits, Limited, as shipper, and the various carriers in each locality. Permission was\ngranted by the Public Utilities Commission to the employment of special rates to be effective\nonly for the duration of the particular haul in question. This transportation was carried\nout to the satisfaction of all parties concerned.\nGeneral.\nIt has been pointed out in previous reports that few carriers are able to compile tariffs\nwhich conform with the provisions of the \" Motor Carrier Act\" and regulations. For this\nreason the Rates Office has made vigorous efforts to assist in the preparation of their documents. While the carriers themselves do co-operate to a certain extent, and in many instances\nappear quite anxious to comply with requirements, they are very prone to neglect carrying\nout their responsibilities in this regard unless continually prodded into doing so. This neglect\nis not altogether due to a lack of interest but is more than likely the result of the heavy\npressure of business generally experienced under present-day conditions. It is this neglect,\nhowever, which makes the task of assembling and preparing a tariff very laborious for the\nRates Office, to say nothing of the time involved thereby. Added to this is the fact that the majority of carriers do not keep adequate book-keeping\nrecords from which proper information can be obtained to prepare a suitable tariff, and\ncarriers, for the most part, have been charging whatever the customer can pay, no consideration being given to costs of operation, etc.\nNotwithstanding the existence of these handicaps, an effort has been made to improve\nthe scope and character of tariffs as well as to encourage, wherever possible, participation in\nuniform tariffs. To a considerable degree this effort has been successful as several uniform\ntariffs are already in effect and there are many others under consideration. This is a definite\nstep forward in the promotion of more dependable and more economical service and is proof\nthat, through proper supervision of rates, the industry itself is becoming more and more\nstabilized.\nThe proposed uniform tariff covering the Vancouver-Hope route has been in the hands\nof the Automotive Transportation Association and has been already received, but presentation\nof this tariff to the Public Utilities Commission is being held in abeyance pending receipt of\nrevised tariffs and concurrences from the connecting carriers operating between Hope-Chilli-\nwack and Chilliwack-Vancouver who have also signified their willingness to participate in\nthe proposed new tariff for through freight between Hope and Vancouver.\nWorthy of special comment is the recent filing by the Williams' Transfer, of Nelson, of\na special household goods tariff. This tariff is a departure from the usual style of tariff in\nthat it is particularly restricted to the carriage of one commodity, namely, household goods,\nand the rates are based on a \" per 100 lb. per mile \" basis with appropriate minima. Such\na tariff enables the carrier to handle multiple shipments, thereby increasing his earning\npower and at the same time provides more desirable rates to the shipper. Pooling shipments\nreduces truck mileage, which, in turn, reduces costs of operation, and is another important\nadvantage to the carrier operating under this tariff.\nThe present standard method of charging by household goods movers generally is on the\ncharter basis and does not permit of delivery other than in \" single \" shipments. This is a\ndisadvantage to the shipper as he must hire the entire capacity of the vehicle regardless of\nthe size of equipment.\nThe tariff also provides adequate protection to both shipper and carrier in the movement\nof this commodity and will tend to develop a more highly specialized service. The adoption\nof such a tariff, therefore, is in the public interest and should be encouraged.\nBecause of these qualities this new type of tariff will attract the majority of household\ngoods carriers in British Columbia and it is expected that, before long, applications will be\nreceived in large numbers to file this style of document.\nMuch of the foundation has now been laid to enable the Government to exercise a reasonable control over rates for transportation in the various Licence Districts, and it is hoped\nthat by the end of next year all carriers who, either from lack of initiative or from deliberate\nevasion, have not, as yet, filed their rates, will be caught up with and an initial tariff, at least,\nfiled in accordance with requirements.\nRespectfully submitted.\n0. Cashato,\nRates Examiner. REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 23\nStatement of Tariffs and Time Schedules filed during Licence-year 19U4-45.\nPassenger Time Schedules     87\nFreight Time Schedules    40\nExpress Time Schedules       2\n129\nPublic Passenger Tariffs l     11\nCharter Passenger Tariffs     86\nLocal Express Tariffs 1       5\nPublic Freight Class I. Tariffs       3\nPublic Freight Class II. Tariffs     14\nPublic Freight Class III. Tariffs  119\nLimited Freight Tariffs       5\nSpecial Commodity Tariffs     12\n  255\nSupplements to Freight Tariffs     12\nSupplements to Passenger Tariffs     15\n     27\nRevisions to Tariffs     38\nContracts   114\nTotal number of filings  563\nStatement of Total Number of Active Time Schedules and Tariffs filed as at\nMay 1st, 19U5.\nPassenger Time Schedules  129\nFreight Time Schedules  122\nExpress Time Schedules      4\n255\nPublic Passenger Tariffs     47\nCharter Passenger Tariffs  233\nLocal Express Tariffs     24\nPublic Passenger and Express Tariffs     21\nC.O.D. Tariffs        1\nClass I. Tariffs     18\nClass II. Tariffs     69\nClass III. Tariffs ,  353\nLimited Freight Tariffs and Contracts  166\n932\nTotal number of filings  1,187\nAPPENDIX C.\nREPORTS OF INSPECTORS.\nInspector F. Black.\n(Licence Districts 9a, 14, 14a, and 15; Licence District 8 (Hope to Lytton) and portion of\nLicence District 9 (between Lytton and Lillooet, but not including Lillooet).)\nThe following is a summary of conditions generally in respect to the above territory for\nthe licence-year 1944-45.\nThere has been a slight increase in the number of public and limited freight-vehicle\nlicences over the previous year.    The rural area in the Lower Fraser Valley has had a con- siderable increase in population. This is due to people coming from the East, as well as\nlocal citizens residing in the cities of Vancouver and New Westminster buying and moving\non small ranches in the rural areas.\nDuring the year the licensed operators handled the greatest volume of freight in the\nhistory of the Lower Fraser Valley. Owing to the increase in population in the rural areas\nbus operators were at times hard pressed to provide sufficient service, and from time to time\nwere forced to run specials to relieve the congestion. Taxi operators throughout the valley\nhave refused a considerable amount of business in order to conserve on gas and tires for more\nessential work.\nThe usual complaints from commercial carriers with regard to Class I. and Class III.\nprivate freight operations resulted in numerous and continuous investigations.\nAs a result of information handed to the municipal police, eight convictions were obtained,\nas well as two convictions by the British Columbia Police.\nContinued contacts were made with operators who failed to comply with the filing of\nproper freight tariffs. This situation has improved considerably. However, for the regular\nfreight operators a more uniform tariff is desired, particularly between Vancouver and\nChilliwack.    This is now gradually taking shape and will be completed in the near future.\nApproximately 1,200 investigations were made. These included investigations for new\napplications, transfer of licences, alteration of licences, permits, and complaints within and\nwithout the office.\nThere were approximately 1,150 commercial licences in effect during the year.\nIn carrying out the above duties 23,753 miles were travelled.\nFred Black,\nInspector of Motor Carriers.\nInspector W. A. Jaffray.\n(Vancouver Island and Adjacent Islands.)\nDuring the licence-year 1944-45 there has been a decided levelling off in both passenger\ntravel and freight movements on Vancouver Island. Larger companies who, in the past three\nyears, have had all their facilities taxed to capacity and were generally unable to cope with\nthe volume are now able to supply a complete service.\nThe demand for public passenger service for the armed forces over certain routes has\ndiminished, while the general movement over the other lines has not decreased. Time schedules\nrequired amendment from time to time in order that the facilities available could be used to\nthe greatest advantage on each line.\nTransportation of industrial workers is still causing some concern, especially in connection with the logging industry. There is a decided improvement in the type and mechanical\ncondition of equipment being used. Operators have satisfied themselves that it is more\neconomical and better policy to use good equipment as industrial workers' conveyances.\nStandards for passenger-vehicle construction as now incorporated into the \" Motor Carrier\nAct \" regulations have been instrumental in bringing about the improved condition related\nabove.\nLimited passenger carriers (taxis) have had a constant flow of business in all areas.\nThere has been no increase in the number of licences; however, many of the smaller old-time\noperators have sold out to established carriers or to newcomers in the business. Very few\ncomplaints were received and a general improvement in service was noted.\nPublic freight carriers (line haulers) are supplying a good service and complaints re\nlack or failure of fulfilling obligations, when received, were investigated immediately. In\nmost instances it was found that the cause for complaint lay solely in the carrier being\nforced to hire unskilled help or due to shortage of labour.\nPublic freight (Class III.) operators seemed to enjoy a very stable operation with only\na few new applications for licences being dealt with. Limited freight operators were greatly\nreduced in number during the year. This decrease was attributable mainly to completion of\nthe airport-construction programme. However, the opening of small tie and sawmills has\ntended to take care of a percentage of this type of operator. REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 25\nPassenger and freight tariffs received considerable attention during the year. Many\ntariffs were accepted which were prepared after meetings and interviews with the carriers.\nSome tariffs were filed by the individual carrier, but the trend seemed to be toward the subscribing to a uniform schedule prepared from information supplied by all operators in the\nparticular area.\nMechanical condition of passenger vehicles inspected during the year was good, but the\nfreight-trucks, due to continuous operation under capacity loadings, with few replacements\navailable, were fast deteriorating. After inspections the general condition of such vehicles\nwas greatly improved and found satisfactory.\nStatistics compiled from inspection, investigational, and general reports are as follows:\u2014\n(a.)  Mechanical inspections carried out on passenger carriers and long\nline freight-trucks        280\nDefective brakes   99\nDefective steering _-_        116\nFailed to comply completely with regulations       243\nVehicles condemned   3\n(6.)  Investigations made         721\n(c.)  Complaints received         71\n(d.)   Prosecutions\u2014\n\" Motor Carrier Act \"     9\n\" Motor-vehicle Act \"      1\nFederal Orders in Council     1\n\u2014 11\n(e.)  Mileage travelled while performing duties  13,024\nConditions in this district are most satisfactory with very few infractions noted. Generally speaking, the \" Motor Carrier Act\"' is being obeyed and very little enforcement was\nfound necessary. Flexible transportation is now being treated as an industry, and those so\nengaged show great interest and are definitely eager to advance with the times. Assistance\nreceived from our department was appreciated and decisions rendered have received wholehearted support.\nW. A. Jaffray,\nInspector of Motor Carriers.\nInspector G. L. Greenwood.\n(Cariboo, Prince George, Omineca, and Skeena Districts.)\nDuring the licence-year 1944-45 there has been a constantly increasing efficiency throughout this district, both in administration and operation of motor-vehicle transportation under\nthe \" Motor Carrier Act.\"\nDue to technical assistance given from this office, all rates tariffs have been properly\nprepared and presented for filing by the public, and limited, freight, and passenger licensees.\nAssistance has also been given in the proper preparation of time schedules. Constant checking and revising of rates tariffs and time schedules has kept them up to date.\nThe general attitude of the motor-vehicle operators and shippers shows a definite respect\nfor the \" Motor Carrier Act \" and regulations.\nBy order of the Public Utilities Commission, dated July 8th, 1944, approved by Order in\nCouncil, dated July 11th, 1944, exemption from the \" Motor Carrier Act \" was removed from\nthe area between Hazelton and Prince Rupert. Under instructions issued by the Superintendent of Motor Carriers, the period of August 11th, 1944, to August 28th, 1944, was used by\nthe undersigned to organize the new area under the \" Motor Carrier Act.\" A total of 106\nnew carriers' licences were issued in the formerly exempted area. Rates tariffs, time\nschedules, etc., were properly filed at time of application. No difficulties of any consequence\nwere encountered during the period of organization.\nNational Defence construction projects are terminated but a number of new sawmill and\nlogging operations in the Quesnel, Prince George, Burns Lake, and Hazelton Districts have\noffset the expected slump in freight transportation. N 26 \"MOTOR CARRIER ACT.\"\nThe writer attended a successful conference of Inspectors held in Vancouver during\nJanuary, 1945, at which time many matters were discussed and decisions made that were\nnecessary for the consideration and knowledge of the separate Inspectors.\nGeneral statistics for the licence-year 1944-45, showing routine duties performed, mileage\ntravelled, etc., are as follows:\u2014\nOperators given technical assistance to revise or prepare rates tariffs\nand time schedules         112\nVehicles checked on highway  (approximately)        820\nInvestigations and interviews     1,036\nTemporary permits issued (all classes)       305\nMiles travelled during course of duties  22,378\nG. L. Greenwood,\nInspector of Motor Carriers.\nInspector H. K. Hume.\n(Okanagan Valley, Princeton, Merritt, Kamloops, Ashcroft, Salmon Arm,\nand Revelstoke Districts.)\nI submit herewith a report respecting the administration and enforcement of the \" Motor\nCarrier Act \" within the above districts during the licence-year 1944-45.\nThe issuing of additional public and limited licences for both passenger and freight\ntransportation has been held to a minimum in order to conserve man-power and equipment,\nbut it has been necessary to issue some additional licences to take care of the increase in\nbusiness.\nIn addition to issuing approximately 40 new licences, 410 special permits and thirty-seven\nshort-term licences were issued to take care of all emergencies, said emergencies caused by\nthe shortage of privately owned trucking equipment, coupled with an abnormally large\nfruit-crop.\nIn the fruit-raising district, known as the main line Okanagan and Kootenay districts,\nthe 1943 crop consisted of 5,052,957 boxes of packed fruit and 15,329,117 lb. of fruit for\nprocessing. The 1944 crop in the same district was 10,762,587 boxes of packed fruit and\n21,885,131 lb. of fruit for processing, thus making an increase during the 1944 season over\n1943 of 5,709,630 boxes of packed fruit and 6,556,014 lb. of processing fruit.\nA distance of 17,000 miles was travelled while carrying out the duties of an Inspector\nand making approximately 600 investigations in connection with new applications, rates\ntariffs, etc.\nThe filing of rates tariffs and special commodity tariffs is still progressing favourably\nand it is the opinion of the writer that the rate situation throughout the whole district is\nsatisfactory.\nEnforcement of the \" Motor Carrier Act \" in the above-mentioned districts is favourable,\nbut it is hoped that a larger staff of enforcement officers will be available after the war, as\nefficient enforcement of this Act and intelligent administration are very closely related.\nIt is felt by the writer that both the licensee and the public are very well satisfied with\nthe increased efficiency and economy that has been brought about by the administration and\nenforcement of the \" Motor Carrier Act\" and regulations.\nH. K. Hume,\nInspector of Motor Carriers.\nInspector H. J. Maddaford.\n(Grand Forks-Greenwood District;  East and West Kootenays, including Rossland, Trail,\nNelson, Kaslo, Slocan, Cranbrook, Fernie, Windermere, and Golden.)\nHerewith is submitted the annual report for the licence-year 1944-45 respecting the\nadministration, operation, and enforcement of the \" Motor Carrier Act\" within the above-\nmentioned district. REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 27\nThe number of motor carrier licences issued remained approximately the same as the\nprevious year. There were no new public passenger licences issued and only two limited\npassenger (taxi) licences issued. Two new Class II. public freight licences were granted;\nthese were not for new services but were given to existing licensees as additional licences, due\nto the increase in volume of freight handled on their lines. The number of Class III. public\nfreight licences issued was approximately the same as the previous year. The number of\napplications for such licences increased slightly during the past twelve months, but in the\nmajority of these cases it was felt that there was sufficient service already available to the\npublic and that it was unwise at this time to grant additional licences unless absolutely essential. Limited freight licences showed a steady increase over last year, most of these being\nissued for the transportation of forest products, particularly in the East Kootenay district,\nwhere logging and lumbering operations have been increasing.\nThere have been a large number of licences transferred, many of the older operators\nretiring from the trucking business and selling out. Two of the largest transfers of this kind\nwere the Bowness Transfer Company, Limited, to D. Revie, and the City Transfer Company\n(W. E. Warden), of Cranbrook, to Miller & Brown's Transfer. R. D. McDonald Freight\nLines, operating between Calgary and Kingsgate, were sold to Dench of Canada, Limited, and\nseveral smaller businesses changed hands.\nTemporary permits issued exceeded 1943-44, the chief reason for this being the large\nnumber of permits issued to truckers hauling wood at Canal Flats for the contractor supplying wood for the Fuel Administrator.\nSeveral complaints dealing with the quality of service given by public licensees were\ninvestigated, also the usual numerous complaints re private freight-truckers handling public\nfreight. In the majority of cases, the latter complaints were adjusted by contacting these\nprivate truckers directly and explaining to them the \" Motor Carrier Act \" and regulations\nand warning them that future infractions would be prosecuted.\nA check-up of tariffs filed by the older licensees showed that in many cases these tariffs\nwere incomplete and inadequate, and steps were taken to bring these tariffs up to date. In\nsome of the larger centres the public licensees wished to file a uniform tariff, and assistance\nwas given the operators at Kimberley and Creston in filing a uniform tariff covering their\nrespective communities. Assistance also was given to numerous truckers in smaller towns\nwho wished to bring their tariffs up to date, and to new licensees filing a tariff with their\napplications.\nThe attitude of truckers and shippers to the \" Motor Carrier Act\" has been very satisfactory, and there appears to be a gradual improvement in the understanding of the Act and\nregulations, and the advantages to both trucker and shipper are now being recognized.\nStatistics.\nNumber of licences issued 1944-45 (all classes)  2,015\nTemporary permits issued  (all classes)  465\nNumber of new public licences issued\u2014\n(1.)  Limited passenger   (taxi)  2\n(2.)   Class II. public freight  2\n(3.)  Class III. public freight  7\n(4.)   Limited freight   30\nNumber of reclassification of licences  3\nNumber of alterations of licences  15\nNumber of licences transferred  27\nNumber of prosecutions (cases only where information was supplied\nby the undersigned)  8\nNumber of investigations and interviews  986\nMiles travelled by the undersigned in course of duties  21,419\nH. J. Maddaford,\nInspector of Motor Carriers. APPENDIX D.\nLIST OF PUBLIC PASSENGER-VEHICLE OPERATORS AND ROUTES\n(SCHEDULED SERVICE).\nAs at March 1st, 1945.\nName and Address of Operator. Route.\nGeorge R. Abbey, Nelson      Nelson-Kaslo.\nAtkins Stage Lines, Ltd., Cultus Lake      Harrison Hot Springs-Cultus Lake\nvia Chilliwack and Agassiz.\nB.C. Auto Interurban, Ltd., Nelson      Trail-International Boundary at\nPatterson\u2014in connection with\nservice to Spokane.\nB.C. Coach Lines, Ltd., Kamloops      Kamloops-Vernon.\nKamloops-Merritt.\nKamloops-Salmon Arm.\nKamloops-Revelstoke.\nKamloops-Tranquille.\nSpences Bridge-Princeton.\nVernon-Revelstoke.\nVernon-Nakusp.\nB.C. Greyhound Lines, Ltd., Vancouver      Trail-Penticton via Osoyoos.\nPenticton-Vernon.\nPenticton-Princeton.\nPrinceton-Copper Mountain.\nVancouver-Revelstoke.\nB.C. Motor Transportation, Ltd., Vancouver     Vancouver-Harrison Hot Springs.\nVancouver-Chilliwack.\nVancouver-White Rock.\nVancouver-Whytecliff Park.\nVancouver-Ladner.\nVancouver-loco.\nCoquitlam-Ioco.\nVancouver-New Westminster.\nVancouver-International Boundary (for Seattle).\nJames Cancelliere, Revelstoke _'      Revelstoke-Arrowhead.\nCariboo Greyhound Lines, Ltd., Vancouver__     Ashcroft-Prince George.\nErnest J. Christien, Lumby      Lumby-Vernon.\nGus Erickson (City Bus Service), Trail      Local service at Trail and to\nWarfield.\nW. G. Clarke, Squamish      Squamish-Cheekye.\nCorporation of District of West Vancouver     West Vancouver-Vancouver.\nDeep Cove Stages, Ltd., Deepwater      Vancouver-Deep Cove.\nM. C. Donaldson, Ltd., Salmo      Salmo-Reno Mill.\nNeal Evans Transportation Co., Ltd., Sha-     Shalalth-Pioneer.\nlalth Pioneer-Vancouver.\nJ. W. Farquhar and Sutro Bancroft, Harri-     Harrison Hot Springs-Agassiz.\nson Hot Springs\nGallagher Transportation, Ltd., Hope      Hope-Chilliwack.\nGleeson & Company, Abbotsford      Abbotsford-R.C.A.F. Airport,\nnear Abbotsford.\nAlbert Goglin, Prince George      Prince   George - Government\nAirport and Army Camp\n(local).\nFrank Grimes, Victoria      Local Service\u2014City of Victoria. Name and Address of Operator. Route.\nLeonard   C.   Griffiths    (Arrow   Bus   Line),     Prince Rupert-Seal Cove.\nPrince Rupert\nMrs. Jessie B. Hall, Okanagan Mission      Okanagan Mission-Kelowna.\nHole  &   Clarke   Transportation   Co.,   Ltd.,     Coal Harbour-Hardy Bay.\nCoal Harbour\nVernon-Salmon   Arm   Coach   Lines,   Ltd.,     Vernon-Salmon Arm.\nVernon\nJ. A. Huffman and H. W. Smith, Fort St.     Fort St. James-Vanderhoof.\nJames Pinchi Creek-Vanderhoof.\nFort St. James-Germansen\nLanding.\n\u00ab Fort St. James-Prince George.\nAlice Ingham, Port Alberni      Alberni-Port Alberni.\nInterior Stages, Ltd., Trail      Trail-Rossland.\nTrail-Nelson.\nNelson-Nelway.\nTrail-Fruitvale.\nHenry Kershaw, Fort Steele      Cranbrook-Fort Steele.\nFred W. Knott, Tofino      Tofino-Ucluelet.\nC. G. Lawrence, Gibsons Landing      Gibsons Landing-Garden Bay.\nLillooet Cartage Co., Ltd., Lillooet      Lillooet-Lytton.\nGeorge Mcintosh, Sooke       Sooke-Victoria.\nMary C. Magro, Cranbrook      Cranbrook-Golden.\nE. F. Moorhouse, d\/b\/a Moorhouse Stages,     New Westminster-Langley.\nNew Westminster New Westminster-Ladner.\nNew Westminster-Coldicutt\nVillas via Crescent.\nNew Westminster-Sunbury.\nNew Westminster-Port Mann.\nRichmond   Transportation   Co.,   Ltd.,  Van-     Vancouver-Sea Island,\ncouver\nE. H. Neville, Vancouver      Between   Boundary  Road  at\nHastings Street and Bain-\nbridge Avenue at Central\nArterial Highway, in Burnaby Municipality.\nNorth   Coast   Transportation   Co.,   Seattle,      Vancouver-Seattle.\nWash.\nNorth River Coach Lines, Ltd., Kamloops __     Kamloops-Birch Island.\nPowell River Stages, Ltd., Powell River      Powell River (local service).\nEdward Procter, Vernon      Vernon-Lumby.\nVernon-Vernon Army Camp.\nW. A. Sproule, d\/b\/a Columbia Stage Lines,     New Westminster-Port Moody\nNew Westminster (and local service).\nFred Gnucci and Walter Miller, d\/b\/a Star      Cranbrook-Kimberley.\nStages, Cranbrook\nVeterans' Sightseeing & Transportation Co.,     Victoria-Oak Bay.\nLtd., Victoria Victoria-Haultain.\nNanaimo (City bus service and\nto Departure Bay).\nH. B. Tuffley, Quesnel      Quesnel-Barkerville.\nArthur F. Wale, Langford      Victoria-Langford Lake.\nVictoria-Metchosin.\nThe Wildwood Bus, Ltd., Powell River      Wildwood-Powell River.\nS. W. Wilson, Milner      Langley Municipality  (local service).\nJames Vanderspek, Hope      Haig-Tashme Camp via Hope.\nWilliam M. Munro, Naramata      Naramata-Penticton. N 30\n\" MOTOR CARRIER ACT.\"\nName and Address of Operator.\nWestern  Canadian Greyhound Lines,  Calgary, Alberta\nRoute.\nCrowsnest-Trail.\nYahk-Kingsgate.\nNelson-Kaslo.\nNelson-Nakusp.\nCranbrook-Kootenay Park.\nWest Gate Yoho National\nPark-Revelstoke.\nThis company is licensed to\ngive through public passenger service on all important main routes on\nVancouver Island, with\nnumerous local services.\nLIST OF PUBLIC FREIGHT-VEHICLE OPERATORS AND ROUTES\n(SCHEDULED  SERVICE).\nAs at March 1st, 1945.\nVancouver Island Transportation Co., Ltd.,\nVictoria\nAtkins Stage Lines, Ltd., Chilliwack\t\nB.C. Coach Lines, Ltd., Kamloops\t\nB.C. Motor Transportation, Ltd., Vancouver\nBritish Columbia-Seattle Transport, Seattle,\nWashington\nRobert A. Baxter, Prince George\t\nBlack's Motor Freight, Vancouver\t\nBlue Line Freight (Helen I. Vant), Nelson\nCharles E. Boothby, Mission City\t\nBroadway Messenger Service, Vancouver.....\nBruce Motor Cartage, Vancouver\t\nH. Brown & W. S. D. Brown, Salmon Arm.\nReuben Buerge, Nakusp\t\nC. R. Carfrae, Kamloops\nCarson's Truck Line, Ltd., Vancouver\t\nArchie   Carswell,   d\/b\/a   Rocky   Mountain\nFreight, Vernon\nD. Chapman & Co., Ltd., Kelowna\t\nChilliwack Cartage Co., Ltd., Chilliwack\t\nJames C. Clarke, Cloverdale\t\nGeorge G. Clyde, Robson\t\nE. M. Cottrell, Hope\t\nCountry  Freight  Lines   (J.   C.   Fleming  &\nSons), Chilliwack\nCowichan Freight Service, Victoria\t\nConstance E. Cummins, Nelson\t\nHarrison Hot Springs-Cultus Lake\n(express service only).\nKamloops-Salmon Arm.\nKamloops-Vernon.\nVancouver-New Westminster.\nVancouver-Mission and Dewdney.\nVancouver-Chilliwack and Rosedale.\nVancouver-Seattle.\nPrince George-Quesnel.\nVancouver-loco.\nloco-New Westminster.\nHarrison Hot Springs and Agassiz-\nVancouver.\nNelson-Rossland.\nTrail-Salmo.\nMission-Vancouver and New\nWestminster.\nVancouver-New Westminster and\nFraser Mills District.\nVancouver-New Westminster.\nSalmon Arm-Haywards Corner.\nNakusp-Nelson.\nNakusp-Edgewood.\nKamloops-Merritt.\nKamloops-Williams Lake.\nVancouver-Prince George.\nVernon-Revelstoke.\nKelowna-Penticton.\nChilliwack-Vancouver.\nSurrey Municipality-Vancouver.\nRobson-Castlegar.\nHope-Vancouver.\nChilliwack-Vancouver.\nVictoria-Shawnigan Lake and\nDuncan.\nNelson-Procter. REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION. N 31\nName and Address of Operator. Route.\nDelta Freight Lines, Ladner      Ladner-Vancouver.\nDench of Canada, Ltd., Calgary, Alberta..\u2014.     Crowsnest-Creston      \"IInterprovincial\nCranbrook-Kimberley   or\nCranbrook-Kingsgate [International\nCreston-Rykerts I service.\nThomas Dent, Milner      Willoughby-Vancouver.\nF. S. Duggan, Kelowna      Winfield-Kelowna.\nNeal Evans Transportation Co., Ltd., Sha-     Shalalth-Pioneer.\nlalth\nFerguson's Motor Transport Co., Vancouver     Vancouver-Horseshoe Bay,\nWest Vancouver.\nVancouver-Deep Cove, North\nVancouver.\nJohn Fraser (Fraser Transport), Vancouver     Vancouver-New Westminster.\nGallagher Transportation, Ltd., Hope      Chilliwack-Choate.\nArthur W. Green, Agassiz      Harrison Hot Springs-Vancouver\nvia Agassiz.\nC. R. Greenaway, Cloverdale      Surrey Municipality-Vancouver.\nG. 0. Griffith, Kelowna      Vernon-Oyama.\nHaney Hammond Motor Freight, Ltd., Port     Haney-Vancouver.\nHaney\nThomas D. Hodgson, Williams Lake      Williams Lake-Kleena Kleene\n(non-scheduled service to\nAnahim Lake and other\noff-route points).\nR. H. Holt (Cordova Bay Freight), Victoria     Victoria-Cordova Bay.\nHoulden Transfer, North Vancouver      Vancouver-Deep Cove, North\nVancouver.\nVancouver-Horseshoe Bay, West\nVancouver.\nFrank M. Hufty, Slocan City      Slocan City-Nelson.\nD. J. Innis, Keremeos      Keremeos-Penticton.\nInterior Truck Lines, Nelson      Nelson-Salmo.\nInvermere Contracting Co., Ltd., Invermere     Cranbrook-Golden.\nIsland Freight Service, Ltd., Victoria  All public freight routes described in 'schedule filed\nwith Public Utilities Commission.\nJohnson Transfer, Vanderhoof -      Vanderhoof-Prince George.\nVanderhoof-Fort Fraser.\nPrince George-Hansard.\nJones Bros. Transfer, Deroche      Deroche-Vancouver.\nLouis Katelnikoff, Blewett      Nelson-Bonnington.\nKaslo Motor Transport, Kaslo      Kaslo-Nelson.\nRobert F. Kerr, Langley Prairie  Langley Municipality-Vancouver.\nKing's Motor Cartage, Vancouver      Vancouver-New Westminster and\nFraser Mills and way points.\nVancouver-Port Moody and loco.\nLadner Transfer, Ltd., Ladner      Ladner-Vancouver.\nLadner-New Westminster and\nVancouver.\nRussell W. Large, Enderby      Mable Lake-Enderby.\nP. Lawrence, Ewing Landing      Fintry-Vernon.\nLee's Transport, Vanderhoof      Pinchi Lake-Vancouver.\nPeter A. Lind, Sandon      New Denver-Sandon.\nJ. A. Loney, New Westminster      Port Kells-Vancouver.\nJoseph Logus, Poplar Creek      Lardo-Gerrard.\nJohn C. McCaig and J. Goodkey, d\/b\/a Cas-     Penticton-Nelson.\ncade Motor Freight, Grand Forks N 32 \" MOTOR CARRIER ACT.\"\nName and Address of Operator. Route.\nMrs. L. M. McKinnon, Barkerville  Barkerville-Quesnel.\nGeorge S. McMyn, Pitt Meadows  Maple Ridge Municipality-\nVancouver.\nLee C. McFarland, Cranbrook  Pentieton-Naramata.\nMountain's Transfer, Langley Prairie  Langley Municipality-Vancouver.\nJ. C. Muir, Nelson _____   Nelson-Rossland.\nNorth Thompson Freight Lines, Kamloops.. Kamloops-Birch Island.\nNorthern Freighters, Fort St. James  Vanderhoof-Fort St. James-\nGermansen Landing.\nO.K. Valley Freight Lines, Ltd., Penticton.. Osoyoos-Salmon Arm.\nPenticton-Princeton.\nOverland Freight, Ltd., Chilliwack  Chilliwack-Vancouver.\nH. R. L. and A. M. Potter, Oliver  Oliver (rural mail route).\nW. and V. Porteous, Agassiz  Harrison Lake and Agassiz-\nChilliwack and Sardis.\nA. G. Perry, Notch Hill  Notch Hill-Sorrento.\nDonald Revie, d\/b\/a Revie's Freight Lines, Cranbrook-Kimberley.\nCranbrook Cranbrook-Fernie.\nLeonard Roberts, Courtenay  Courtenay-Menzies Bay.\nJames Rollo, Gabriola  Gabriola Island-Nanaimo.\nG. E. Rutledge, King George VI. Highway, Surrey Municipality-Vancouver.\nNew Westminster\nSaanich Freight Service, Sidney  Deep Cove (Saanich)-Victoria.\nScott & Peden, Ltd., Victoria  Victoria-Hillbank.\nSeattle-Vancouver, B.C. Motor Freight Ser- Vancouver-Seattle,\nvice, Vancouver\nLloyd W. Shannon, Summerland  West Summerland-Penticton.\nSidney Freight Service, Sidney  Sidney-Victoria.\nSeth Smith, Quesnel  Quesnel-Marguerite.\nA. L. P. Stevens, Crescent  Surrey Municipality-Vancouver.\nStoltze Motor Freight, Vancouver  Vancouver-Stave Falls.\nA. L. Stuart, Redstone  Redstone-Williams Lake.\nTerminal Cartage, Vancouver  Vancouver\u2014New Westminster.\nEdward Thouret, Buffalo Creek  Exeter-Canim Lake.\nA. S. Towle, Milner  Langley Municipality-Vancouver.\nTrail Livery Co., Trail  Nelson-Rossland.\nJ. A. Wade, Quesnel  Quesnel-Barkerville.\nQuesnel-Kamloops.\nRobert I. Walters, Williams Lake  Williams Lake-Keithley Creek.\nA. E. Warner, Armstrong  Armstrong-Vernon.\nWest   Coast   Freight   Service,   Ltd.,   Port Port Alberni-Nanaimo.\nAlberni\nWhite Rock  Transfer   (J.  A.  Roddick  and Surrey Municipality-Vancouver.\nF. A. Best), White Rock\nWhite Transport Co., Ltd., Vancouver  Vancouver-Kelowna.\nWilliams Transfer, Nelson  Nelson-Creston.\nD. M. Winton, Vancouver  Vancouver-Abbotsford.\nGeorge D. Witte, Big Creek  Witte Ranch (5 miles westerly from Big Creek)-\nHanceville P.O.\nWood & Fraser Transport, Vancouver  Vancouver-Prince George.\nJ.    C.    Vanderspek,    d\/b\/a    Vanderspek's Vancouver-Hope.\nTransportation, Hope\nJohn Wyatt, Kelowna  Kelowna-Winfield.\nS. Ylisto,  Solsqua  Malakwa-Salmon Arm.\nVICTORIA, B.C. :\nPrinted by Charles F. Banfield, Printer to the King's Most Excellent Majesty.\n1945.\n555-1045-8827","@language":"en"}],"Genre":[{"@value":"Legislative proceedings","@language":"en"}],"Identifier":[{"@value":"J110.L5 S7","@language":"en"},{"@value":"1946_V01_15_N1_N32","@language":"en"}],"IsShownAt":[{"@value":"10.14288\/1.0320801","@language":"en"}],"Language":[{"@value":"English","@language":"en"}],"Provider":[{"@value":"Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library","@language":"en"}],"Publisher":[{"@value":"Victoria, BC : Government Printer","@language":"en"}],"Rights":[{"@value":"Images provided for research and reference use only. For permission to publish, copy or otherwise distribute these images please contact the Legislative Library of British Columbia","@language":"en"}],"SortDate":[{"@value":"1946-12-31 AD","@language":"en"},{"@value":"1946-12-31 AD","@language":"en"}],"Source":[{"@value":"Original Format: Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. Library. Sessional Papers of the Province of British Columbia","@language":"en"}],"Title":[{"@value":"PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 36 OF THE MOTOR CARRIER ACT FOR THE LICENSE-YEAR 1944-45","@language":"en"}],"Type":[{"@value":"Text","@language":"en"}],"Translation":[{"@value":"","@language":"en"}],"@id":"doi:10.14288\/1.0320801"}