Giske appeals from a decision of the United States District Court of the First District of Alaska, affirming an award of the Alaska Industrial Board, hereafter the Board, for his temporary disablement while employed by D. K. MacDonald & Co., hereafter the Employer. The award of the Board was based on Giske’s daily earning capacity of $3.88.

The Chairman of the Board determined the appellant’s average daily earning capacity during the period of his disability was $7.05.

He made the following findings of fact:

Obviously the Chairman did not feel that appellant’s “actual earnings” reasonably represented his earning capacity. § 43-3-1 A.C.L.A.1949. Thus he fixed “such daily wage earning capacity as shall be reasonable.” § 43-3-1. Unlike the case of Brown v. Alaska Industrial Board, 9 Cir., 224 F.2d 680 , the findings made by the Chairman show he did make his findings on those matters which the statute directs him to consider.

On review by the full board the following order was entered:

I. The Findings Of The Board Are Adequate.

Appellant contends that the Board must be reversed because it failed to make findings of fact in accordance with § 43-3-16 A.C.L.A.1949. This- point is for the first time raised in the brief on appeal. A reasonable construction of the Board’s order together with the Chairman’s findings is that the Board adopted his findings but not his conclusion. Hence the requisite findings are present.

II. There Is Substantial Evidence To Support The Board’s Determination.

Although appellant earned an average daily wage of $17.63 while engaged in the occupation which resulted in his injury, the Board found that appellant failed to maintain his burden of proof on the question of whether his employment would have continued but for his injury. His average daily wage during the off-season was $2.12 based on the last three years. The Board allowed him compensation based on a $3.88 average daily wage. Appellant is in no position to complain that this figure is greater than his average daily wage during the off-season for the past three years. There is substantial evidence to support the Board’s award.

The judgment is affirmed.