Carcassman – I think you’re probably correct on the productivity of Chinook, but I’m confused as to why. If chum habitat is productive in WB tribs, why can’t fall Chinook be also?

The life history between the two species is not much different. They spawn in the fall, over-winter in the gravel, emerge in the late winter and spring, and outmigrate either immediately, on the spring freshet, or when water temperatures get too warm as summer approaches. And given that chum normally require groundwater upwelling’s to spawn, I would think that chum habitat would be even more limited than Chinook. I’m not arguing, but I am a bit confused as to why only one of these two species are, or can be, productive when their life histories are so similar.

Also, minor point - I didn’t say WDFW’s mission statement favored commercial fishing. Only that commercial fishing is in their mission statement, so they are obligated to support it.

Riverguy - Chum are likely the most valuable species to a watershed, but only for those watersheds where chum exist. Chinook are more likely to be present in many more tribs, so your original answer (Chinook) is more correct than you might think. For example, chum salmon do not exist on the Columbia upstream of Bonneville Dam, and were never upstream of Celilo Falls (pre-dam). But Chinook went all the way to the headwaters of the Columbia in British Columbia. So which species is more important on the Columbia River? Chinook salmon. And it’s not even close……