Here's a question for Salmo and the other bios. I remember discussing the possibility that, before hatcheries and development, that PS Chinook were primarily Summers and not Falls. Late summer natural flows in most PS streams get pretty low. And probably warm. Maybe a bad situation for a lower mainstem spawner.

As the Green River fish got spread around, and dams on mainstems at least gave cooler water (and now we regulate the flows for more fall water) we created the PS Fall. They have adapted, survived, and spread.\

A similar thing happened in the Sacramento when stream temps downstream of Shasta and Keswick lowered, making that reach more suitable for salmon spawning.

Carcassman,

I included sea-run cutts with the Deschutes because of Percival Creek, a small tributary downstream of Tumwater Falls. Residents that found themselves downstream of the falls likely became anadromous, resulting in escapements to Percival well above what originated there naturally. Or they also likely strayed to other south sound tributaries.

I wasn't there, so I don't know. I think that historical populations of PS Chinook included springs, summers, and falls, varying according to each river system's hydrograph. Rivers with low and warm summer flows probably didn't have significant runs of summer Chinook, and instead had later returns of true fall Chinook, running a month and a half later than most contemporary GR and descendant summer-falls. I don't understand the reason for PS spring Chinook, except in the SF Nooksack because none of the other places they for sure or likely occurred don't have seasonal migration barriers. Oops - I take that back - the barrier falls that used to separate the upper and lower Cascade River in the Skagit basin, until it was blasted by WDF in the mid-1950s.

The Samish, Lake Washington, and the Green River look like basins that have always had low and warm flows when hatchery GR Chinook return - that return timing being the product of selective hatchery breeding where the first returns were always taken as brood and spawned. Contemporary GR temperatures in Aug. and Sept. and probably not that much warmer than historically, considering watershed elevation, hydrograph, shade, and gradient. Cooler and more water in Aug. and Sept. occurs only in the Skagit upstream of the Cascade, the Baker, Sultan, and Nisqually.

The PS fall Chinook is characterized by the GR hatchery critter, whose timing is totally out of sync with hydrographs due to selective breeding of the earliest returns to the GR hatchery and most of the hatcheries they were shipped off to. So I think the situation is different than that of the Sacramento River.

Sg

Salmo

I agree that we probably had the whole gamut of Chinook and we have really changed things. I was also of the opinion, unfortunately records are incomplete, that the Green River Falls are actually, primarily, Kalama River Falls. They were brought to Soos and succeeded. Some interbreeding with the actual natives. Never looked too deeply into it but I do remember seeing that Soos imported a bunch of Kalama Fish.

I don't have any information about Kalama River falls being the GR donor stock. A lot of fish have been moved around the region. Generally speaking, hatchery successes have been best with local or nearby stocks.

This is a bit out of order, but I just read thru the whole thread and wanted to inject my completely unwarranted 2 cents...

IIRC, WDFW went into NOF proposing a mark-selective fishery for coho in the salt, correct? Which ended up being one of the big sticking points. it was the tribes that demanded no coho fishing.

Remember this?
http://nwtreatytribes.org/treaty-tribes-propose-restricted-fisheries-face-historically-low-coho-year

So if that's true, WDFW actually DID go to bat for the saltwater coho angler.

On the question of in-season management. Let's say there were tools already in place for sampling, the LOAF coming out of NOF did not allow for any saltwater coho fishing (other than in limited areas). So those tools would have been useless. Right?

I dunno if you can really blame WDFW for this mess. Sure, there was some bureaucratic lethargy involved in getting the rivers opened. But once it again it was our co-managers that really put the kabosh on our opportunity.

Furthermore, as sportfishers, do we WANT in-season management, or NOT WANT it? The sportfishing industry hates it because it creates uncertainty in the seasons which directly affects business. Sportfishers have been calling for in-season management to be done away with in the blackmouth fishery for years. Me being one of the biggest whiners in that regard.

I guess, like human beings, we want what suits us at the time. Even if it's the exact opposite of what we wanted just a few months ago.

They opened up MA 13 to coho fishing last month, so it can in fact be done regardless of the NOF agreement.
It wasn't open for coho fishing prior to that.

Having the entire season closed down effects business just a bit......
SF

CM-
The information that I have stumbled across over the years indicate that say a 100 years ago the early time Chinook (spring/summers) dominated the runs. That said on most Puget Sound streams the not sure the divisions between spring/summer/fall Chinook stocks are as clear cut as one would like; at least in terms of river enter timing.

While it is probable that hatchery programs have influenced the return timing across the region I don't think that was the only selective factor in play. A century ago the early timed Chinook were not only more abundant they tended to be larger as well. Given the early availability and high table quality Just like on the Columbia the early commercial fisheries likely target those high value fish and rapidly fished the populations. Just one example records from the early 1900s indicate that early season (May) gill net seasons (non-treaty) took palace on the North Fork Skagit with records of catches in excess of 15,000 just for that month. An indicator of the potential size of those early Skagit fish was the gear of choice was gill nets with a 9 1/2 inch mess. The fishery selectivity continue later in the century moved further into the salt with higher exploitation on both older and early returning fish.

Another factor that have (and continuing to) that has dictated the life strategy that works best for various PS Chinook is habitat changes. Traditionally early Chinook tended to spawn earlier and further upstream in Puget Sound basins. Dam construction has always higher affects on upper basin populations that those spawning further downstream. I have come to believe a major factor determining spawn timing (and indirectly run timing) is stream temperature profiles. While in larger systems traditional spring Chinook were those that had either long migration journeys or had season migration barriers that selected for that early migration. On PS rivers it is rare for Chinook to penetrate PS basins more than a 100 miles or so and SG indicated those Chinook barriers were rare. However that Chinook that did penetrate the upper basins for spawning were typically in time race to have their eggs development to race a high survival stage before stream temperatures drop to lethal levels for the developing eggs. Chinook eggs have to develop at least to the "eye stage" before stream temperatures drop below 4 degree C. At least in the basins of North PS (the ones I'm most familiar with) than means spawning needed to be completed prior to say early September and substantially earlier than those Chinook spawning further down basin.

With climate change that spawn timing of the early stocks appears to be changed. The spring Chinook of the upper Sauk (a wild stock with relatively low hatchery influence) 35 years ago typically spawned from late July to early/mid September. Today the spawn timing has moved later; from mid-August through October. That timing is more typical to once was considered the "norm" for summer populations.

I do remember reading that one or twice fall Kalama Chinook were transferred to more northern basins in the 1950s or laters.

Curt

Yeah, I would really love to know the decisionmaking behind that.

Which further begs the question...why, after most if not all of the regularly-scheduled river fisheries were opened in October, was not all of PS saltwater opened?

My guess would be that WDFW went to the tribes asking for the latter and the tribes said, "No way! But we'll throw you a bone...you can have MA13." Just a guess.



No argument there! Business is also affected when blackmouth closes 1/3 of the way thru *because* we have in-season management. That's my point.

Thanks Curt. Your whole narrative fits what we were talking about.

WDF tried in season management of the recreational salmon fishery in the late 70s, in response to Boldt. It was a complete failure for a number of reasons. Some of the reasons were:

Change on weekly basis (when updates were done) would mean that all anglers would need to be notified and there would be no "hard copy" available. How do you ensure notification for all? Commercials are easy as there were relatively few of them.

The updates would have to calculate allocations each time. A crash for a week or two in Green River Chinook could close the Straits and Ocean.

Sampling would need to extensive (all marine areas, all fw areas) and have a very short turn-around. Again, sampling the nets is a lot easier as there are fewer and you know the buyers.

If you want a marine mixed stock fishery of any modest or larger size you will need to accept fishing on forecasts.