The value of chum roe should ensure continued respect for chum salmon by the commercial fishing industry. Chum salmon popularity in sport fishing seems to have coincided with reduced sport fishing opportunity for chinook and coho.

The PC ESU is large geographically but not so much in numbers in contemporary times. The LCR chum have been ESA listed for 10 years or so now. I've read that the OR chum have been protected from fishing for at least a decade, but that they are showing no sign of rebounding. From what I hear, ODFW doesn't know what is presently limiting their chum populations. My thought is that OR chum are the natural southern limit of the species' range, and therefore they would be most vulnerable to any factors correlated with natural range, like climate change, ocean temperature changes, ocean feed supply changes, etc.

We've thought that LCR chum were limited by seasonal and peaking operations of Bonneville Dam, dike and levy projects on LCR tributaries, and the general degradation of the Columbia River estuary.

WA coastal chum fall into two catagories, the Willapa and GH populations that occur in estuary systems, and the north coast group that occur in rivers that lack significant estuary systems. While climate and ocean conditions may play a role in the condition of Willapa and GH chum, I'd first look at the effect of the coho gillnet season on chum. If the incidental catch is greater than 10% of the chum run, as indicated by catch records posted in this thread, when the runsize is below the escapement goal, then the co-managers are failing to manage for chum conservation, perhaps in a zeal to achieve coho harvest.

The north coast rivers are not chum salmon systems, and are unlikely to host major chum populations due to lack of significant estuaries.

Considering the status of the OR coast chum, the LCR chum, and the southern WA coast chum, a petition for listing under the ESA may be in order. While it wouldn't eliminate over fishing during coho fisheries, it would reduce it.

Sg