Skip to main content

Full text of "The Salmon of Swiftsure Bank and the Fraser River sockeye run of 1912"

See other formats


BRITISH  COLUMBIA  FISHERIES  DEPARTMENT,  1912. 


THE  SALMON  OF  SWIFTSURE  BANK 

AND 

THE  ERASER  RIVER  SOCKEYE  RUN  OF  1912. 


BY 

CHARLES  H.  GILBERT, 
Professor  of  Zoology,  Stanford  University. 


The  EDITH  and  LORNE  PIERCE 
COLLECTION  of  CANADI ANA 


ilueens  University  at  Kingston 


(V3^; 


THE  SALMON  OF  SWIFTSURE  BANK 

AND 

THE  ERASER  RIVER  SOCKEYE  RUN  OF  1912. 


fRcpi'iiitod   without  cliaiijie  of   pasiug   fi'oui   the   Ili'i)oit  of  the  B.O.  ("oininissioin'r  of  Fisheries,  1".)]2.] 


\ 


APPENDIX. 


TUB  SALMON  OF  SWIFTSUKE  BANK. 


Hon.    W.  J.  Bowser,  K.C., 

Cominissioner  of  Fisheries,    Victoria,  B.C. 

Sir, — Salmon-fishing  on  Swiftsure  Bank  and  in  the  Cape  Flatter}'  region  generally  did 
not  begin  on  a  large  scale  until  the  season  of  1911,  when  the  extensive  use  of  power-boats 
enabled  the  troUer  and  purse-seiner  to  operate  with  comparative  safety  on  the  off-shore  banks. 
For  a  number  of  jeais  prior  to  1911  a  small  supply  of  salmon  had  been  obtained  from  the 
Cape  region,  and  either  marketed  fresh  or  canned  at  Port  Angeles  or  Port  Townsend. 
Originally,  these  were  taken  by  Indians  who  obtained  them  trolling,  for  the  most  part  near 
shore.  In  1908  white  trollers  appeared  and  have  since  steadily  increased  in  numbers.  The 
maximum  output  during  this  early  period  has  been  estimated  at  approximately  15.000  cases, 
in  addition  to  a  small  amount  marketed  fresh. 

In  the  season  of  1911,  for  the  first  time,  purse-seiners  operated  in  the  Cape  region  and 
were  accompanied  by  an  unprecedented  number  of  trollers.  There  are  said  to  have  been  in 
commission  about  twenty-two  seine-boats  and  perhaps  2.50  trollers.  No  close  estimate  can  be 
made  of  the  total  output  of  the  district  during  1911.  The  best  figures  available  indicate 
8.50,000  cohoes  or  silver  salmon,  and  an  equal  number  of  pinks  or  humpbacks.  No  record  is 
obtainable  of  the  spring  salmon,  but  it  is  safe  to  assume  that  they  were  taken  in  about  the 
small  proportion  as  existed  in  1912.  Sockeyes  and  chums  or  dog-salmon  were  taken  in  very 
small  numbers. 

Finally,  in  1912,  over  100  purse-seine  boats  were  operating  out  of  Neah  Bay  at  one  time, 
with  a  total  for  the  season  of  probably  over  125.  There  were  probably  400  or  450  trollers  at 
work  some  time  during  the  season.  But  the  total  yield  of  the  Bank  was  less  than  for  1911, 
in  spite  of  the  great  increase  in  amount  of  gear.  This  was  due  in  part  to  the  fact  that  1912 
was  an  off"-year  for  humpbacks,  partly  perhaps  to  unfavourable  weather,  but  in  part,  without 
question,  to  the  diminished  run  of  cohoes  or  silver  salmon.  Over  100  purse-seiners  in  1912 
failed  to  increase,  if  indeed  they  equalled,  the  catch  of  cohoes  made  by  twenty-two  purse- 
seiners  in  1911. 

Figures  obtained  from  all  the  canneries  known  to  have  handled  fish  from  Swiftsure  Bank 
and  the  Cape  in  1912  give  the  following  totals  : — 

Spring  salmon 47,434 

Sockeyes 12,711 

Cohoes 822,798 

Humpbacks 3,324 

Figures  were  not  available  for  spring  salmon  marketed  in  a  fresh  condition,  and  such  are 
not  included  above.  Making  a  reasonable  allowance  for  these  and  for  tliose  of  other  species 
that  failed  to  be  enumerated  or  that  perished  in  transit,  we  have : — 

Spring  salmon 90,000 

Sockeyes 15,000 

Cohoes 840,000 

Humpbacks 5,000 

Total 950,000 

This  total  agrees  with  that  independently  obtained  by  Mr.  W.  I.  Crawford,  secretary  of 
the  Puget  Sound  Oanners'  Association,  who  has  kindly  furnished  us  with  much  valuable 
information,  and  to  whom  our  thanks  are  due. 


3  Geo.  5  Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries.  I  15 


Various  theories  are  held  by  fishermen  and  dealers  as  to  the  source  and  the  destination 
of  the  salmon  which  school  on  Swiftsure  Bank.  Some  claim  they  come  in  from  the  south  and 
are  mi<i;ratory  species  bound  north  for  Alaskan  waters.  As  regards  the  direction  whence  they 
approach  the  Bank,  we  have  nothing  to  offer ;  but  it  can  be  asserted  with  a  very  high  degree 
of  probability  that  all  of  them  are  bound  up  the  Straits  of  Fuca  to  spawn  in  the  Fraser  River 
or  in  the  streams  tributary  to  Puget  Sound.  This  can  now  be  considered  demonstrated  as 
regards  the  sockeyes  and  humpbacks,  for  the  periodicity  in  their  runs  which  these  species 
exhibit  in  the  Puget  Sound  I^istrict,  and  not  elsewhere,  is  perfectly  marked  on  Swiftsure 
Bank.  Thus  we  have  seen,  there  was  an  enormous  run  of  humpbacks  on  the  Bank  in  1911, 
when  this  species  ran  heavily  on  the  Sound,  whereas  it  was  almost  wholly  lacking  on  the  Bank 
in  1912,  the  off-year  for  the  Sound.  It  is  safe  to  predict  that  it  will  run  heavily  again  on  the 
Bank  in  1913  and  be  almost  lacking  in  1914.  No  observations  have  yet  been  made  of  the 
abundance  of  sockeyes  on  Swiftsure  Bank  during  a  season  of  heavy  run.  An  opportunity  for 
such  an  observation  will  offer  for  the  first  time  during  the  summer  of  1913,  when  we  may 
confidently  anticipate  a  much  larger  catch  than  was  made  in  1911  or  in  1912.  But  the  Fraser 
River  run  can  be  detected  just  as  certainly  in  any  part  of  its  course  during  the  year  before  the 
big  run.  For  it  is  then  marked  by  enormous  numbers  of  small  precocious  males,  known  as 
"grilse,''  whereas  in  all  other  streams  and  in  the  other  three  years  of  the  Fraser  River  cycle 
the  grilse  are  present  in  such  small  numbers  as  not  to  attract  attention.  A  heavy  run  of 
grilse  was  due,  therefore,  in  1912,  and  wherever  the  Fraser  River  sockeyes  were  captured, 
whether  in  the  Gulf  of  Georgia,  on  the  Salmon  Banks,  or  along  the  southern  coast  of  Van- 
couver Island,  the  grilse  were,  in  fact,  found  to  constitute  numerically  a  surprising  proportion 
of  the  total  catch.  On  Swiftsure  Bank  the  same  was  true,  the  grilse  constituting  numerically 
from  15  to  20  per  cent,  of  the  total  catch.  This  fact  alone  was  sufficient  to  identify  the  Bank 
fish  completely  as  a  part  of  the  Fraser  River  run. 

The  spring  salmon  taken  on  Swiftsure  Bank  can  also  be  identified  by  those  familiar  with 
the  Puget  Sound  run.  The  Fraser  River  race,  with  its  short,  bluntly  rounded  head,  tender 
red  flesh,  and  soft  bones  and  cartilages,  familiar  to  the  trapmen  of  the  Gulf  of  Georgia,  the 
Salmon  Banks,  and  the  west  coast  of  San  Juan  Island,  can  be  easily  distinguished  on  Swift- 
sure, and  runs  there  in  varying  proportions  in  difi"erent  parts  of  the  season.  The  other  springs 
taken  on  the  Bank  agree  in  appearance  with  those  bound  for  the  streams  of  Puget  Sound, 
with  long  sharp  noses,  paler  firmer  fiesh,  and  harder  bones  and  cartilages.  Here,  again,  we 
can  entertain  no  doubt  that  the  spring  salmon  also  are  schooling  on  the  Bank  temporarily,  and 
are  headed  up  Sound  to  the  streams  in  which  they  will  spawn  and  die. 

As  regards  the  destination  of  the  cohoes,  which  constitute  so  large  a  proportion  of  the 
yield  of  the  Bank,  conclusive  evidence  is  lacking,  due,  no  doubt,  to  the  fact  that  these  fishes 
have  been  less  investigated  than  the  sockeye  and  the  spring  salmon,  so  we  are  not  yet  in  a 
position  to  recognize  their  local  races  and  the  streams  for  which  they  are  bound.  In  the 
early  part  of  the  season  the  cohoes  taken  on  the  Bank  differ  so  strikingly  from  those  taken 
later  in  Puget  Sound  that  the  majority  of  the  canners  consider  them  a  distinct  fish.  They 
average  much  smaller  in  size,  have  redder  meat,  and  are  so  soft  that  it  is  difficult  to  bring 
them  from  the  fishing-grounds  in  fit  condition  for  canning.  But  as  regards  both  size  and  con- 
sistency, there  is  a  gradual  change  in  the  Bank  cohoes,  the  fish  becoming  both  larger  and  firmer 
as  the  season  advances.  The  increase  in  size  is  made  evident  by  all  cannery  records,  which  give 
the  number  of  fish  per  case  at  intervals  through  the  season.  The  one  given  below  would  be 
still  more  striking  did  it  contain  the  first  of  the  run  : 


July  23rd 13.35  cohoes  to  the  case. 

August    4th 11.55  II  II 

„       12th 10.08 

„       23rd 9.65 

M      30th 8.06 

September  2nd 7.56  n  n 

Another  record  is  as  follows  : — 

July  6th 14.16  coho«s  to  the  case. 

August  9th 11.14  II  II 

.,     19th 10.00 


I  16  Keport  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries.  1913 


The  small  size  and  different  consistency  of  the  Bank  echoes  are  evidently  phenomena 
associated  with  their  growth  and  manner  of  feeding,  and  do  not  mark  them  off  from  the  fish 
of  Puget  Sound. 

All  the  cohoes  taken  on  the  Bank  are  in  (heir  third  year  and  will  mature  and  die  during 
that  season.  Those  captured  during  the  summer  of  1912  had  V)een  spawned  in  the  winter  of 
1909-10,  and  had  lived  in  their  native  stream  until  the  spring  of  1911,  when  they  descended 
to  salt-water,  at  a  length  of  3  or  4  inches.  During  that  summer  they  grew  rapidly,  and  by 
September  had  attained  a  length  of  6  to  14  inches.  Their  further  growth  during  the  winter 
of  1911-12  has  not  been  fully  traced,  but  it  is  these  same  fish  which  appeared  on  Swiftsure 
Bank  the  following  spring  and  attained  full  size  and  maturity  during  that  season.  Much  the 
greater  part  of  their  growth  is  attained,  therefore,  in  their  third  and  last  year,  so  it  is  not 
surprising  that  those  first  seen  in  the  early  summer  are  small  and  immature  in  comparison 
with  the  same  fish  two  or  three  months  later. 

Food  of   Swiftsure  Bank  Salmon. 

All  species  of  salmon  are  feeding  voraciously  on  Swiftsure  Bank,  even  including  the 
sockeye,  the  feeding  habits  of  which  have  been  hitherto  unknown.  Although  thousands  of 
sockeyes  had  been  examined  from  the  mouth  of  the  Fraser,  the  Gulf  of  Georgia,  the  Salmon 
Banks,  and  even  from  the  westernmost  traps  on  Vancouver  Island,  no  trace  of  food  had  been 
found  in  the  stomachs.  This  had  led  to  the  theory  that  the  Fraser  River  sockeye  come 
annually  from  some  distant  feeding-ground  and  begin  fasting  as  soon  as  they  start  on  tlieir 
shoreward  migration.  But  during  the  past  summer  it  was  observed  by  Mr.  J.  P.  Babcock  and 
the  writer  that  the  sockeye  on  the  BanK  were  feeding  extensively  on  a  small  shrimp-like 
crustacean  {Thysanoi'-ssa  spini/era,  Holmes*),  which  floats  in  incredible  numbers  on  the  tides 
and  forms  a  favourite  food  for  the  other  species  of  salmon  as  well  as  the  sockeye.  These 
floating  organisms  often  form  brownish  masses  at  or  near  the  surface  and  are  considered  to 
give  certain  indication  of  the  presence  of  salmon.  Every  specimen  of  sockeye  examined  at 
the  Bank  had  been  feeding  freely  on  these  crustaceans,  but  whereas  the  spring  salmon  and  the 
cohoes  frequently  contained  herring  and  other  small  fish,  no  trace  of  these  were  found  in  the 
sockeye.  This  distinction  in  diet  is  not  improbably  a  permanent  one,  though  further 
observations  are  necessary  to  establish  it.  The  springs  and  cohoes  have  large  teeth,  and  the 
appendages  or  strainers  on  the  gill  arches  are  short,  few  in  number,  and  coarse.  These  are 
characteristic  of  predaceous  fish,  and  doubtless  indicate  a  preference  for  the  larger  and  more 
active  prey.  But  the  sockeye,  as  is  well  known,  has  but  few  minute  teeth,  so  that  it  frequently 
passes  for  toothless,  and  is  further  characterized  by  the  numerous,  long,  slender,  and  close-set 
strainers  of  the  gill-arches.  It  should  occasion  no  surprise,  therefore,  to  discover  that  it  feeds 
principally,  or  even  exclusively,  on  the  smaller  pelagic  organisms. 

This  discovery  of  Fraser  River  sockeyes  feeding  normally  at  the  entrance  of  the  Straits 
of  Fuca  is  an  important  one,  with  a  bearing  on  the  probable  life  of  this  species  in  the  sea.  It 
is  no  longer  necessary  to  postulate  for  them  a  distant  mysterious  residence  where  they  feed  on 
some  equally  mysterious  diet.  AVe  are  at  liberty  to  believe  that  the  young,  on  passing  out 
from  the  Straits,  may  distribute  themselves  in  the  adjacent  sea,  and  during  the  years  of  tlieir 
growth  may  wander  far  or  near  in  search  of  food,  reassembling  off  the  Straits  when  approaching 
maturity  leads  them  back  toward  their  natal  stream.  Neither  in  the  case  of  the  sockeye  nor 
in  that  of  any  other  Species  is  there  any  basis  for  assuming  a  definite  migration  in  the  sea, 
either  north  or  south,  and  a  longitudinal  movement  along  the  coasts.  More  probably  there  is 
something  in  the  nature  of  a  fan-like  dispersal  of  young  from  the  mouths  of  their  native 
streams,  and  a  reverse  movement  as  spawning-time  approaches. 

The  favourite  fish-food  of  the  spring  salmon  and  the  cohoe  is  the  sand-lance  (Ainviodytes 
personatus,  Girard),  known  locally  as  "candle-fish."  Another  species  of  Animot/ytes  is  the 
preferred  food  of  the  Atlantic  salmon.  Where  the  sand-lance  abounds  in  the  Straits  of  Fuca, 
it  is  chosen  by  young  and  old  to  the  almost  total  exclusion  of  other  diet.  None  were  seen  on 
Swiftsure  Bank,  where  the  numerous  species  taken  from  the  stomachs  seemed  to  indicate  that 
choice  was  largely  determitied  by  available  size  and  by  ease  of  capture.  Herring  and  suielt 
were  most  frequently  seen,  but  the  larger  spiing salmon  may  even  devour  the  hake  and  species 
of    similar    size.     The    principal    food    of    all,    however,    is   the  small  crustacean    previously 

*  For  the  identification  of  these  specimens  and  for  other  facts  in  tliat  connection,  we  have  to  thank  the 
kindness  of  Miss  M.  J.  Rathhun,  of  the  United  States  National  Museum. 


3  Geo.  5  Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries.  I  17 


mentioned.  There  is  no  reason  apparent  why  these  sliould  occur  in  special  abundance  in  tlie 
vicinity  of  a  submarine  bank.  They  are  pelagic  or  free-swimming  throughout  life,  the  eggs 
float  freely  in  the  water  and  hatch  out  in  free-swimming  larvae,  which  at  no  stage  in  their 
development  have  any  necessary  relation  with  the  bottom.  The  depth  which  this  species  may 
inhabit  is  unknown.  The  closely  related  Atlantic  form  (IViysano'-ssa  inemiis,  Kroyer)  is 
found  in  the  upper  water  layers,  from  the  surface  down  to  100  fatlioms,  but  whether  deeper 
than  100  fathoms  has  not  been  ascertained. 

Economic  Aspects  of  the  Fishery. 

Before  the  recent  phenomenal  development  of  the  purse-seine  fishing  fleet,  Puget  Sound 
and  adjacent  waters  were  already  too  closely  fished,  with  serious  inroads  already  made  on  the 
three  most  valuable  species — the  sockeye,  the  spring  salmon,  and  the  cohoe.  In  their  long 
journey  through  Straits  and  Gulf,  they  had  to  run  an  ever-lengthening  gauntlet,  with  the  result 
that  the  breeding  stock  became  yearly  so  depleted  tliat  it  was  inadequate  to  keep  up  the  supply. 
The  recent  discovery  that  the  salmon  school  in  large  numbers  on  Swiftsure  Bank  adds  one 
more  point  of  attack  and  threatens  annually  to  diminish  the  advancing  schools  by  another 
million  fish.  This  in  itself  is  regrettable,  but  might  not  furnish  adequate  grounds  for 
prohibiting  the  fishing,  even  were  it  ascertained  that  effective  supervision  of  the  Bank  could 
be  exercised.  For  it  might  be  justly  urged  that,  even  though  an  additional  million  fish 
threatened  the  industry,  there  was  no  reason  why  Swiftsure  Bank  should  not  be  permitted  to 
furnish  its  quota  of  whatever  total  number  could  rightly  be  spared. 

There  are  at  least  two  other  reasons,  however,  why  the  capture  of  salmon  on  Swiftsure 
Bank  is  ill-advised  and  involves  a  serious  economic  waste  not  encountered  elsewhere.  In  the 
first  place,  the  salmon  there  captured,  especially  in  the  first  part  of  the  season,  are  far  from 
having  attained  their  full  growth,  although  maturity  is  but  a  few  months  distant.  The  most 
valuable  product  of  the  Bank  is  the  cohoe,  which  would  gain  about  100  per  cent,  of  its  net 
weight  if  it  could  Ije  permitted  to  grow  throughout  the  season,  and  could  be  taken  on  fishing- 
grounds  up  the  Sound,  when  mature  in  the  fall. 

A  further  objection  lies  in  the  well-known  fact  that  the  condition  of  the  salmon  taken  on 
the  Bank  from  the  beginning  of  the  season  to  near  its  close  is  such  that  the  majority  of  the 
canners  would  perfer  not  to  handle  them.  This  is  pre-eminently  the  case  with  the  cohoe,  but 
is  unmistakably  true  also  with  the  spring  salmon.  The  flesh  is  peculiarly  soft  and  pulpy,  so 
that  it  rapidly  deteriorates,  and  the  abdomen  is  commonly  distended  with  crustacean  food, 
which  quickly  breaks  down  and  infects  the  adjacent  tissue.  As  a  result,  even  when  handled 
with  the  customary  care,  salmon  from  the  Bank  may  become  in  less  than  twenty-four  hours 
from  their  capture  the  very  reverse  of  attractive.  The  abdomens  may  be  broken  open,  the 
ribs  protruding  freely,  and  the  flesh  may  hav?  begun  to  deteriorate.  Even  the  canneries  most 
favourably  located  to  handle  this  product  were  forced  to  adopt  extraordinary  precautions. 
Those  at  a  great  distance,  while  forwarding  the  fish  with  all  possible  expedition,  sometimes 
received  them  in  very  poor  condition.  Now  and  again,  a  part  of  the  consignment  would  have 
to  be  rejected.  Occasionally,  it  is  to  be  feared,  it  found  it  way  into  tins  to  which  a  pure-food 
law  might  well  have  taken  exception. 

Not  only,  then,  is  there  an  economic  waste  in  catching  the  smaller  fish  on  Swiftsure  Bank 
so  early  in  the  season,  but  there  is  an  economic  crime  in  handling  them  at  such  time  and  place 
that  there  must  result  a  product  very  inferior,  if  not  actually  dangerous  to  health.  We  cannot 
resist  the  conclusion  that  it  would  be  far  better  for  the  industry  if  fishing  on  the  Bank  could 
be  entirely  discontinued. 

The  above  statements  concerning  the  small  size  and  unfavourable  condition  of  the  Bank 
salmon  refer,  as  has  been  said,  pre-eminently  to  the  cohoe,  which  in  most  years  form  the 
most  valuable  component  of  the  catch.  This  species  spawns  very  late  in  the  fall  and  winter, 
and  continues  to  feed  voraciously  and  to  grow  up  to  the  time  of  entering  the  sti'eams.  Of  the 
valuable  species  which  frequent  the  Bank,  it  is  therefore  the  smallest  and  most  immature  in 
the  early  part  of  the  season. 

The  .sockeye,  on  the  other  hand,  has  practically  attained  its  full  growth  on  reaching  the 
Bank,  and  the  flesh  is  not  conspicuously  softer  then  when  captured  el.sewhere.  No  young 
sockeyes,  save  the  precociously  mature  male  grilse,  were  seen.  The  species  occurs  on  the  Bank 
in  off-years  in  such  relatively  small  numbers  as  to  have  during  those  years  no  effect  on  the 
sockeye  run. 


1  18 


Keport  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries. 


1913 


The  spring  salmon  is  taken  in  large  numbers  and  furnishes  a  somewhat  inferior  product, 
with  soft  flesh,  little  oil,  and  poor  colour.  Several  thousand  young  of  this  species  are  captured 
during  the  season,  two-year-olds,  about  a  foot  long,  with  white  soft  flesh — a  total  waste.  The 
numbers  of  these  are  relatively  small,  as  the  great  majority  of  the  salmon  on  the  Bank  are  in 
their  last  season,  but  the  loss  is  nevertheless  serious  and  deplorable. 


Victoria,  B.C.,  Septemler  1st,  191i 


I  have,  etc., 

Charles  H.  Gilbert, 

Professor  of  Zoology, 

Stanford  University. 


3  Geo.  5  Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries.  I  19 


THE  FRASER  RIVER  SOCKEYE  RUN  OF  1912. 


Hon.    W.  J.  Bowser,   K.C., 

Commissioner  of  Fisheries,    Victoria,  B.C. 

Sir, — Prior  to  1910,  when  the  writer  first  developed  the  method  of  determining  the  age  of 
Pacific  salmon  by  the  seasonal  grouping  of  the  delicate  rings  marking  the  surface  of  the  scales 
{see  page  I  57),  it  had  been  generally  accepted  that  Fraser  River  sockeye  mature  invariably 
in  their  fourth  year.  This  theory  was  based  on  the  well-known  fact  that  very  heavy  runs 
enter  the  Fraser  every  fourth  year,  with  much  lighter  runs  in  the  intervening  years,  a 
condition  which  has  existed  as  far  back  as  we  have  any  definite  records.  The  theory  of  a 
four-year  cycle  for  the  sockeye  seemed,  therefore,  well  founded,  and  it  became  a  matter  of 
extraordinary  interest  to  test  the  theory  by  independently  determining  the  age  of  a  number 
of  individuals  belonging  to  the  spawning  run. 

On  doing  this,  it  became  at  once  apparent  that  the  majority  were  four  years  old  and 
hence  in  accord  with  the  theory.  But  the  smallest  members  of  the  run  (almost  invariably 
males)  were  but  three  years  old,  while  a  considerable  number  of  the  larger  fish  were 
unmistakably  in  theii'  fifth  year.  In  view  of  these  facts,  it  became  important  to  inquire  how 
the  predominance  of  every  fourth  year  had  been  so  long  maintained.  For  if  the  progeny  of  a 
big  year  should  mature  and  return  to  the  river  partly  in  three,  partly  in  four,  and  partly  in 
five  years,  it  would  seem  there  should  be  a  tendency  to  increase  the  runs  in  the  third  and 
fifth  years  of  the  cycle,  as  well  as  to  maintain  that  of  the  fourth  year ;  and  as  this  tendency 
would  be  constantly  operative  and  cumulative,  it  should  eventually  distribute  the  benefits  of 
the  "big  years"  equally  among  the  others. 

On  consideration,  however,  it  becomes  obvious  that  the  three-year  fish,  or  grilse,  can  be 
eliminated  from  the  problem.  For  inasmuch  as  practically  none  of  these  are  females,  and  as 
the  males  can  be  considered  purely  supplementary,  being  of  small  size  and  not  needed  on  the 
spawning-beds,  it  is  evident  they  add  nothing  to  the  progeny  of  any  year  in  which  they  are 
more  than  usually  numerous. 

But  the  case  would  appear  otherwise  with  the  five-year  fish.  Among  these,  both  males 
and  females  are  present  in  not  very  unequal  numbers,  and  with  these  the  females  average 
larger  than  the  four-year  females  and  produce  a  greater  number  of  eggs.  If,  therefore,  any 
constant  percentage  of  the  progeny  of  a  big  year  matures  in  its  fifth  rather  than  its  fourth 
year,  this  should  have  its  evident  ertect  on  the  fifth  year  of  the  cycle.  Such  an  effect  thus  far 
has  not  been  determined.  It  wouM  be  impossible  to  separate  the  two  ages  by  their 
appearance,  for,  although  the  five-year  fish  average  larger,  the  two  ages  widely  overlap  in  this 
regard.  An  analysis  of  the  run  by  the  aid  of  the  scales  is  necessary  to  decide  this  point,  and 
must  extend  over  a  numV;er  of  years,  until  we  shall  have  ascertained  whether  the  proportion 
of  the  progeny  which  delay  maturing  until  their  fifth  year  is  a  relatively  constant  one,  or 
whether  it  fluctuates  so  widely  for  unknown  reasons  that  we  are  unable  to  predict  the  outcome 
in  any  given  case.  If  the  proportion  is  relatively  constant,  then  we  can  predict  the  run  with 
some  assurance  in  any  year,  if  we  know  the  success  of  natural  and  artificial  propagation  in 
the  fourth  and  the  fifth  5'ears  preceding.  But  if  the  proportion  varies  widely  in  different 
years,  this  would  introduce  a  disturbing  factor. which  might  bring  prophesy  to  naught, 
especially  in  the  years  of  small  run. 

Thu.s,  if  1914,  191.5,  and  1916  should  have  approximately  equal  runs  and  should  present 
equally  favourable  conditions  on  the  spawning-beds  and  in  the  hatcheries,  nevertheless  the 
corresponding  years  of  the  next  cycle  might  fi-om  this  cause  exhibit  very  unecjual  runs.  If, 
for  example,  5  per  cent,  of  the  progeny  of  1914,  4-5  per  cent,  of  191.5,  and  20  per  cent,  of  1916 
should  mature  in  their  fifth  year,  then  the  run  of  1919  would  be  made  up  of  the  5  per  cent, 
five-year-olds  from   1914  and  55  per  cent,  four-year-olds  from  1915  ;  while  the  run  of  1920 


I  20 


Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries. 


1913 


would  contain  45  per  cent,  five-year-olds  from  1915  and  80  per  cent,  four-year-olds  from  1916. 
The  latter  would  be  more  than  twice  as  large,  therefore,  as  the  former.  It  is  thus  highly 
important  to  establish  the  constancy  or  the  variability  of  the  age  factor,  for  to  establish  this 
will  bring  us  one  step  nearer  the  possibility  of  predicting  future  runs. 

As  a  contribution  to  this  end,  it  was  attempted  to  analyse  the  run  of  1912  into  its  age 
components,  and  to  compare  the  results  with  those  secured  by  the  writer  in  1911,  when  this 
method  was  used  for  the  first  time. 

The  Grilse. 

In  1911  the  number  of  three-year-olds  or  grilse  were  so  small  as  to  be  almost  negligible. 
No  attempt  was  made  to  determine  the  very  limited  proportion  in  which  they  occurred,  as  it 
was  difficult  to  secure  enough  specimens  for  examination.  It  should  be  recalled  that  the 
grilse  of  1911  were  developed  in  their  due  proportion  from  the  comparatively  few  eggs 
deposited  in  the  "oflF-year,"  1908. 

In  1912  the  case  was  far  different.  The  grilse  of  that  year  were  derived  from  eggs  laid 
down  in  the  big  year  1909,  and  from  the  first  of  the  season  to  its  conclusion,  wherever  the 
Fraser  River  run  was  intercepted,  the  large  number  of  small  three-year  fish  was  at  once 
apparent.  Several  attempts  to  estimate  the  proportion  of  grilse  to  full-grown  fish  were  made 
August  4th  to  August  7th,  by  enumerating  them  as  they  passed  along  the  conveyor  at  the 
cannery  of  the  Pacific  American  Fisheries  at  Bellingham,  Washington.  The  results  of  the 
different  trials  were  as  follows  : — 

Proportion  of  Sockeye  Grilse  in  Fraser  River  linn  of  1912. 


Total  Number. 

Number  of  (Jrilse. 

Proportion  of  Grilse. 

August  4th 

1,445 

270 

18.6  per  cent. 

//      4th 

8,200 

1,900 

23.4 

„      4th 

771 

200 

25.9 

«     4th 

10,426 

2,370 

22.7 

„     6th 

5,318 

1,166 

21.9 

//     7th 

7,189 

1,182 

16.4 

t,     7th 

6,115 

1,400 

22  9 

Totals 

39,464 

8,488 

21.5  per  cent. 

Other  less  extensive  tests  were  made  at  different  localities  and  at  various  times  during 
the  season,  and  were  all  in  close  agreement  with  the  above,  It  seems  safe  to  conclude,  there- 
fore, that  in  the  Fraser  River  sockeye  run  of  1912  about  one  fish  out  of  every  five  was  a  small 
three-year-old  precocious  male.     The  grilse  were  thus  about  half  as  numerous  as  the  males  of 


the  full-grown  fish. 


In  length,  the  grilse  varied  from  16|  to  21^  inches  long,  as  shown  in  the  following  table, 
in  which  are  included  500  individuals  taken  at  random  : — 


Length  in  Inches  of  500  Grilse  Sockeyes. 


Length  in  inches 

Number  of  specimens. . . . 


16.i 

17 

174 

18 

18i 

19 

m 

20 

20J 

21 

1 

15 

25 

95 

112 

96 

44 

22 

11 

21i 
2 


The  average  length  is  19  (18.9)  inches.  The  weight  varies  from  If  to  4  It).,  tiie  average 
being  2|  lb.  The  flesh  is  lighter  in  colour  and  liberates  less  free  oil  than  the  full-grown 
individuals,  and  is  commercially  less  valuable.  In  addition,  there  is  greater  waste  in  cleaning. 
To  test  tins,  ten  grilse  averaging  2i  lb.,  ten  medium-size  sockeyes  averaging  51  R).,  and  ten 
of  larger  size  averaging  7*-  It).,  were  cleaned  by  the  usual  process,  including  the  use  of  the 
"  Iron  Chink."  When  ready  for  the  tins,  the  grilse  had  lost  27.1  per  cent.,  the  fish  of  medium 
size,  24.6  per  cent.,  and  the  larger  size  22.7  per  cent,  of  their  weight.     The  grilse  are  therefore 


3  Geo.  5 


Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries. 


I  21 


not  a  very  valuable  component  of  the  pack.  In  former  seasons,  when  fish  were  abundant 
and  clieap,  they  were  very  generally  rejected,  or  were  put  up  separately  as  a  cheaper  grade. 
But  in  1912  they  were  generally,  though  not  universally,  included  with  the  rest  of  the 
sockeye  pack. 

The  scales  of  several  hundred  grilse  were  examined  in  an  attempt  to  discover  some  event 
in  their  past  history  which  could  aid  in  explaining  their  precocious  development,  but  without 
success.  The  vast  majority  of  them  had  remained  in  the  lake  in  which  they  were  hatched 
until  their  second  spring,  as  is  the  case  also  with  the  fish  which  mature  in  their  fourth  and 
fifth  years.  They  had  grown  at  the  same  rate  as  the  latter  in  the  first  and  the  subsequent 
years.  The  factor  which  determines  the  age  at  which  maturity  is  attained  is  unknown,  and 
has  not  as  yet  been  correlated  with  any  peculiar  habit  or  set  of  external  conditions.  This  is 
in  accord  with  our  observations  on  salmon  reared  in  aquaria.  A  thousand  young  spring  or 
chinook  salmon,  hatched  and  reared  in  a  single  aquarium,  in  which  conditions  are  as  nearly 
uniform  as  they  can  be  made,  will  include  at  the  close  of  their  first  summer  a  number  of 
precociousl}'  developed  males,  capaVjle  of  furnishing  functional  milt.  While  such  males  are 
perhaps  more  frequently  found  5  or  6  inches  long,  among  the  larger  individuals  of  the  colony 
this  is  by  no  means  invariably  the  case.  A  number  have  been  observed  not  exceeding  31 
inches  long.     It  is  evidently,  then,  not  a  matter  of  simple  nutrition. 

Full-grown  Sockeyes. 

For  comparison  with  the  adult  sockeyes  constituting  the  main  element  of  the  1912  run, 
we  have  only  a  similar  examination  made  by  the  writer  in  1911.  The  results  in  the  two 
years  are  widely  dissimilar.  In  1911,  out  of  a  total  of  500  individuals  examined,  271,  or 
54.2  per  cent.,  were  maturing  in  their  fourth  year,  and  229,  or  45.8  per  cent.,  in  their  fifth 
year.  Almost  half  of  the  pack  of  1911,  therefore,  was  composed  of  individuals  five  years  old, 
derived  from  eggs  deposited  in  1906.  It  is  apparent  how  impossible  it  would  ha\e  been  to 
predict  accurately  the  run  of  1911,  as  has  been  heretofore  attempted,  solely  from  the 
condition  of  the  spawning-grounds  and  hatcheries  four  years  previously — that  is,  in  1907. 

But  in  1912,  the  number  of  five-year  fish  was  so  small  as  to  be  almost  negligible.  Five 
hundred  individuals,  examined  July  29th,  at  the  cannery  of  J.  H.  Todd  &  Sons  at  Esquimalt, 
B.C.,  were  distributed  as  shown  in  the  following  table : — 

Fii^e  Hundred  Adult  Sockeyes  of  the  1912  Run,  fjrouiied  by  Aye,  Sex,  and  Size. 


Number  of 

[ndividuals. 

Len(;th  in  Inches. 

Four  Years  Old. 

Five  Years  Old. 

Males. 

Females. 

Males. 

Females. 

2H 

1 

1 

1 

11 

22 

36 

62 

51 

19 

9 

1 

22 

2 

3 

4 

10 

41 

37 

55 

27 

35 

22 

5 

224 

23- ::::::.;::::::.::. 

23J 

24  

24i 

2 

25  

25J 

1 

3 
6 

26  

26.i 

5 
1 
6 
2 
2 
2 
1 

6 
4 

27 

4 

274 

28   

1 

28i 

29  

Total 

240 

214 

20 

26 

As  will  be  noted,  454,  or  90.8  per  cent.,  were  four-year  fish,  and  only  46,  or  9.2  per 
cent,  were  in  their  fifth  year. 


I  22 


Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries. 


1913 


On  August  5th  a  second  lot  of  500  were  investigated  at   the   cannery  of   the   Pacific 
American  Fisheries  at  Bellingham,  Wash.,  with  results  as  follows : — 

500  Adult  Sockeyes  of  the  1912  Eun,  grouped  by  Age,  Sex,  and  Size. 


Number  of 

Indiviihals. 

Lenctii  in  Inches. 

Four  Years  Old. 

Five  Years  Old. 

Males. 

Females. 

Males. 

Females. 

oo 

1 

1 

1 

14 

15 

49 

52 

33 

21 

II 

1 

1 

224  

2 

1 

9 

15 

33 

43 

47 

41 

23 

21 

6 

3 

I 

2.S   

23i          

. 

24  

24i   

25" 

2 

25i   

2 
3 

5 
I 
3 
4 
6 
3 
1 

3 

26   

5 

26^^           

8 

27               

8 

27i 

28  

I 

28i   

29  

29i     

Total   

445 

200 

28 

27 

In  this  case,  445,  or  89  per  cent.,  were  in  their  fourth  year,  and   55,  or  11   per  cent.,  in 
their  fifth  year. 

A  third  trial  was  made  August  6th  at  Bellingham,  as  shown  in  the  following  table : — 

Five  Hundred  Adult  Sockeyes  of  the  1012  Run,  grouped  by  Age,  Sex,  and  Size. 


Ndmbek  of 

Individuals. 

Length  in  Inches. 

Four  Years  Old. 

Five  Years  Old. 

Males. 

Females. 

Males. 

Females. 

21       

I 

21i 

22            ....               ... 

2 
2 
11 
13 
36 
53 
50 
31 
13 
4 

22^ 

23   

2 

6 

7 

25 

40 

45 

54 

31 

15 

9 

3 

I 

23i 

....... 

2 

24   

24A 

0 

25   

2 

1 
I 
1 
6 
7 

6 

25.^ 

5 

26   

3 

26i   

5 

27 

27A     

I 

28                 . 

28i 

1 

29   

29J   

2 

216 

Total 

238 

22 

24 

The  result  was  here  identical  with  that  obtained  at  Esquimalt,  454  (90.8  per  cent.)  being 
four-year-olds,  and  46  (9.2  per  cent.)  five-year-olds.  The  Bellingham  fish  were  taken  in  traps 
and  with  purse-seines  on  the  salmon  banks  and  in  the  Gulf  of  Georgia,  and  the  Esquimalt  fish 


3  Geo.  5 


Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries. 


I  23 


in  traps  located  on  the  southern  shore  of  Vancouver  Island,  west  of  Victoria.  The  close 
correspondence  of  these  three  tests  is  sufficiently  remarkable,  and  indicates  beyond  question 
that  at  the  time  the  examination  was  made  the  run  consisted  everywhere  of  a  homogenous 
mixture  of  four-  and  five-year  fish  in  definite  proportions,  nine  of  the  former  to  one  of  the 
latter.  The  1,500  examined  gave  altogether  90.2  per  cent,  four-year-olds  and  9.8  per  cent, 
five-year-olds. 

The  causes  of  the  great  disparity  shown  in  1911  and  1912  in  relative  numbers  of  four- 
and  five-year  fish  cannot  yet  be  assigned  with  certainty,  but  are  to  be  looked  for  in  conditions 
which  existed  in  1906,  1907,  and  1908,  the  small  years  of  the  preceding  cycle.  The  following 
may  be  suggested  as  possibilities : — 

(1.)  It  is  possible  that  an  abnormally  large  proportion  of  the  1906  generation  may  have 
delayed  maturing  until  their  fifth  year.  Had  this  occurred,  it  should  have  diminished  the  size 
of  the  run  four  years  subsequently  in  1910,  and  should  have  materially  increased  the  run  of 
1911.  It  is  a  valid  objection  to  the  theory  that  1910  gave  an  average  yield,  in  the  present 
condition  of  the  industry,  while  1911  was  the  poorest  for  many  years. 

(2.)  An  alternative  theory  is  to  the  effect  that  the  season  of  1907  may  have  brought  to 
the  Fraser  River  spawning-beds  so  small  a  number  of  sockeyes  that  their  progeny,  which 
matured  part  as  four-year  fish  in  1911  and  part  as  five-year  fish  in  1912,  would  both  be 
present  in  very  limited  numbers.  This  would  explain  the  heavy  percentage  of  five-year  fish  in 
1911,  as  well  as  the  light  run  of  that  year,  and  would  explain  the  abnormally  light  run  of  five- 
year  fish  in  1912.  Its  influence  on  the  total  size  of  the  run  of  1912  would  be  far  le.ss  than  in 
1911,  if,  as  we  suppose,  the  total  number  of  five-year  fish  produced  from  any  given  batch  of 
eggs  is  much  below  the  number  that  mature  in  four  years.  This  theory  would  then  of  itself 
explain  all  the  facts,  without  having  recourse  to  the  first  suggested  above,  or  to  any  further 
hypothesis. 

It  becomes,  then,  of  unusual  interest  to  recur  to  the  condition  of  the  spawning-beds  on 
the  Fraser  River  in  1907,  as  given  in  the  Report  of  the  Commissioner  of  Fisheries  in  that  year. 
While  the  hatch,  both  natural  and  artificial,  had  been  larger  in  1906  than  during  any  off-year 
of  the  preceding  cycle,  we  learn  that  the  reverse  was  true  in  1907.  In  the  report  of  that 
year,  Mr.  J.  P.  Babcock  writes  (p.  9):  "From  an  inspection  of  the  spawning-grounds  of  the 
Fraser  and  its  tributaries,  I  find  that  a  smaller  number  of  sockeye  reached  them  this  year 
than  in  any  one  of  the  past  seven  seasons.  .  .  .  While  the  number  of  eggs  secured  this 
year  exceeds  by  six  millions  those  gathered  last  year,  the  number  which  sjMwned  naturally  was 
insignificant.  A  competent  observer  who  lives  on  the  Birkenhead  River,  the  principal  stream 
of  the  Harrison-Lillooet  Lake  Section,  states  that  there  was  not  one  sockeye  there  this  year 
for  every  ten  last  year.  In  the  Shuswap-Adams  Lake  Section  the  run  of  sockeye  this  season 
was  small.  ...  To  the  Quesnel  Lake  Section,  the  run  of  sockeye  consisted  of  only  a  few 
hundred  fish,  and  none  were  observed  in  the  Horsefly.  The  run  to  Stuart  and  Chilco  Lakes 
was  the  smallest  ever  reported."     (Italics  mine.) 

It  seems  highly  probable,  therefore,  that  the  percentage  of  five-year  fish  observed  in  the 
run  of  1911  (45.8  per  cent.)  was  abnormally  high,  due  to  the  unusually  small  number  of  four- 
year  fish  which  resulted  from  the  lean  year  1907;  and,  further,  that  the  proportion  of  five- 
year  fish  observed  in  the  run  of  1912  (9.8  per  cent.)  was  abnormally  low,  owing  again  to  the 
small  yield  of  1907.  If  there  prove  to  be  a  relatively  constant  ratio  between  the  four-  and  the 
five-year  fish  which  develop  from  any  given  batch  of  eggs,  such  ratio  will  probably  be  found 
between  the  extremes  given  by  these  two  years.  But  the  year  1913  cannot  be  expected  to 
throw  any  light  on  this  question,  as  the  enormous  numbers  of  a  big  year  must  consist  in  over- 
whelming proportion  of  four-year  olds. 

The  avgrage  weight  of  the  1912  run  agrees  closely  with  that  obtained  in  1911,  though 
the  latter  was  from  less  abundant  data.  As  is  shown  by  the  following  table,  the  average  for 
four-year  fish  was  5.98  ft.  (6.27  in  1911);  for  five-year  fish,  7.38  K).  (7.46  in  1911)  :— 

Five  Hundred  Fraser  River  Sockeye  Run  of  1912,  grouped  by   Weight  and  Age. 


Weight  in 

Pounds. 

4 

^ 

5 

5h_ 

6 

6i 

86 
4 

7 

7i 

8 

7 

7 

84 

6 
4 

9 

2 
3 

9i 

Four-yearoMs 

1 

19 

52 
1 

107 
3 

120 
3 

38 
10 

13 
12 

Five-year-olds 

2 

I  24  Repout  of  'jhe  Commissioner  of  Fisheries.  1913 


It  will  be  noted  that  neither  in  length  nor  in  weight  is  there  any  considerable  overlapping 
between  grilse  and  the  older  fish.  Of  500  grilse  examined,  only  two  reached  a  length  of  21^ 
inches  and  a  weight  of  4  B).  Of  1,500  adults,  only  two  were  as  snaall  as  21  and  21^  inches 
long,  respectively,  and  only  one  weighed  as  little  as  4  ft.  This  does  not  include  two  highly 
emaciated  and  obviously  abnormal  females,  20i  and  21  inches  long,  of  the  same  size  as  male 
grilse,  but  four  years  old.  They  were  evidently  dwarfed  by  malnutrition,  but  they  had 
successfully  matured  their  eggs.     No  female  grilse  were  seen  in  1912. 

No  attempt  will  be  made  here  to  discuss  in  detail  the  early  history  of  individuals 
comprising  the  1912  run  of  sockeyes,  as  we  infer  it  from  the  structure  of  their  .scales.  But 
certain  differences  were  obvious  when  comparison  was  made  with  the  run  of  the  previous  year. 
In  1911  there  was  a  number  of  interesting  individuals  having  scales  distinguished  by  large 
centres  with  widely  spaced  rings.  These  were  interpreted  as  having  migrated  oceanwards 
immediately  on  reaching  the  free-swimming  stage.  In  the  run  of  1912  there  was  an  almost 
total  absence  of  this  form.  Practically  the  entire  run  had  developed  from  fingerlings  which 
spent  their  first  year  in  fresh  water.  The  centres  of  the  great  majority  of  scales  exhibited  a 
structure  identical  with  that  found  in  migrating  yearlings,  taken  in  the  early  spring  in  the 
Fraser.  The  number  of  rings  varied  from  seven  to  twenty ;  the  outermost  rings  intimately 
crowded,  tenuous,  and  usually  more  or  less  broken  and  interrupted.  Immediately  beyond 
them,  begin  abruptly  the  wide  rings  which  signal  the  rapid  growth  of  the  second  spring, 
begun  either  while  still  in  the  lower  reaches  of  the  river — in  which  case  an  intermediate  zone 
is  formed — or  later  after  they  have  reached  the  sea.  A  very  small  percentage,  however,  do 
not  entirely  agree  with  the  above,  and  have  not  been  satisfactorily  accounted  for.  Their 
scales  have  the  centres  with  closely  crowded  rings  as  in  those  noted,  but  the  nuclear  area  is 
larger  than  the  scales  of  any  yearlings  yet  captured  on  their  downward  migration.  The  rings 
may  be  as  numerous  as  thirty  to  thirty-five  in  number,  but  give  no  indication  of  more  than 
one  year  having  been  spent  in  the  lake.  Two  alternative  theories  suggest  themselves.  Either 
these  remained  in  their  native  lake  for  one  year,  like  the  others  with  similar  but  smaller  scale 
centres,  and  represent  exceptionally  large  individuals  which  have  thus  far  eluded  capture  on 
their  seaward  migration ;  or  they  ran  to  sea  immediately  on  reaching  the  free-swimming 
stage,  but  found  the  conditions  in  the  ocean  less  favourable  than  in  other  years,  and  hence 
failed  to  reach  the  usual  size  for  yearlings  in  the  sea.  The  first  of  these  seems  the  more 
probable  hypothesis. 

I  have,  etc., 

Charles  H.  Gilbert, 

Professor  of  Zoology, 

Stanford  University.