Pacific Stock Assessment PSARC Working Paper S97- 5 Review Committee

A 1996 Update of Assessment Information for Strait of Georgia Coho Salmon Stocks (Including the Fraser River)

by

1 1 3 3 K. Simpson , R. Diewert2, R. Kadowaki , C. Cross and S. Le hmann

July 1997

1 Fisheries and Oceans Canada Stock Assessment Division, Science Branch Pacifi c Biological Station Nanaimo, B.C. V9R 5K6

2 Fisheri es and Oceans Canada Stock Assessment Division , Science Branch 61 O Derwent Way, Annacis Island New Westminster, B.C. V3 M 5P8

3 Fisheries and Oceans Canada Program Coordination and Assessment Division Habitat and Enhancement Branch 555 W. Hastings St. Vancouver, B.C. V6B 5G3

Not Citable

PSARC Working Papers document the scientific basis for fisheries management and advice in the Pacific Region. As such, they provide one component of the assessment process and are not intended as comprehensive treatments of stock management. 1. INTRODUCTION

This is the fifth PSARC Working Paper presenting an assessment of the coho populations in the Georgia Basin and provides 1996 data to update the last report (S96-11, Kadowaki et al. 1996). The Salmon PSARC Sub-committee endorsed that report's conclusion that the status of these stocks has not improved and they remain at risk. They recommended that managers develop explicit management objectives with an expectation of continued low survival and another year of 'outside' distribution. They also recommended that the risk simulation model presented in the report be further developed to enable its use in evaluating the risk of alternative harvest scenarios.

This paper presents 1996 catches, catch distributions, escapements, survival rates, exploitation rates and fry densities and relates this data to past years. Unlike past reports, it does not include forecasts of distribution and survival, nor is there a risk analysis of alternative management criteria such as minimum escapement bounds or particular exploitation rates. Forecasts are dealt with in an accompanying paper (S97-6, Kadowaki 1997) while further development of the risk analysis model will be reported in a fall, 1997 working paper.

2. METHODS

Assessment of coho from the Georgia Basin ('GS' coho) relies on using some stocks to represent other stocks in the same area(e.g. Symons and Waldichuk 1984). These indicator stocks include all wild and most hatchery stocks that have reliable smelt release, catch and escapement data. The catch distributions of coded wire tagged (CWT'd) coho from 1990 to 1993 were analyzed by cluster analysis in Kadowaki et al. (1995) to define stock aggregates that may be associated with indicator stocks. Melding the cluster analysis results with criteria of geographic proximity and natural geographic regions, seven geographic regions were defined: SE Vancouver Island, Nanaimo area, Baynes Sd., Campbell River area, Powell River area, Sunshine Coast/Squamish, and lower Fraser. 10 these may be added the Thompson system as an eighth region. Based on the between-stream covariations that can be seen in the data summarized in this report and from earlier work (e.g. Labelle 1990b), marine mortality factors appear to be sufficiently similar between stocks in a region to permit the indicator stock strategy to be a valid practical solution to the high cost of obtaining survival and exploitation rate data.

2 2.1 WILD STOCK INDICATORS

Black Creek and Salmon River (Langley) are the only wild GS populations where we have the smelt, catch and escapement data needed to estimate survival and exploitation rates. The Mesachie Creek indicator operation ceased in 1996.

2.1.1 Black Creek

This creek flows into the Strait of Georgia mid-way between Courtenay and Campbell River and is a mid-sized, low gradient stream, 31 km long (Brown et al. 1996). There was an adult counting fence near tidewater for six years between 1968 and 1980 and every year since 1985 (Kadowaki et al. 1995). Of the pre-1980 counts, 1975 and 1978 are considered the most accurate and are the only escapements used from this period in this report. The 1975 escapement may be an underestimate however (the escapement includes an estimate of 450 uncounted coho during a two day breach and the fence was also terminated early). Escapements from 1985 to 1995 were estimated using recaptures of coho tagged at the fence. However, a large proportion of the spawners were counted at the fence in most years: the mark recapture estimate was less than 10% greater than the fence count in 1986, 1987, 1992, 1993, and 1995. Only the 1985 fence count was less than half the MR estimate. We consider the 1996 adult escapement to have been completely counted at the fence.

We have fence counts of smelts in 1978 and 1979 and for every year since 1985. The fences caught virtually all smelts during their operation in most years. The median expansion multiplier of the fence count to obtain the estimated smelt numbers used in this report was 1.03. There was a large discrepancy between the tagged proportion of smelts in 1985 and subsequent adults, indicating that perhaps half the smelts were not counted (Labelle 1990a).

Black Creek smelt and adult assessments up to the spring of 1995 are published: Clark and Irvine (1989), Fielden et al. (1989), Labelle (1990a), Bocking et al. (1991, 1992), Nass et al. (1993a,b), Nelson et al. (1994a,b; 1995, 1996), and Nelson and Simpson (1996). Having the longest time series and the most complete enumeration of juveniles and adults, Black Creek is our best wild indicator.

2.1.2 Mesachie Creek

The Mesachie system consists of a small lake, an inlet stream and a short outlet stream which flows into Cowichan Lake (Mesachie Creek). We operated a fence on Mesachie Creek from the fall of 1986 to the summer of 1996. Fry, smelts and adults were counted and tagged. Results and methods are presented by Holtby (1993) and Kadowaki et al. (1995). Adult fence counts were incomplete several times in later years due to flooding. However, regular creek walks were made every year and fairly accurate estimates were made of spawners in Mesachie Creek (where 50-60% of the spawning occurs). Spawner estimates are calibrated to fence counts, regular observer efficiency estimates have been made and survey lives were estimated by tagging so we consider the AUC estimates in Mesachie Creek to accurately depict actual numbers and certainly to depict annual trends. Smelt counts are accurate in all years but their interpretation is complicated by extensive upstream and downstream movements of fry.

3 ~ 2.1.3 Salmon River (Langley)

The Salmon River is a lowland tributary that flows northeast for 33 km before entering the Fraser River near Fort Langley, B.C. The system consists of the Salmon River mainstem and its principal tributary, Coghlan Creek, which joins the mainstem 14 km upstream from the Fraser River. The Salmon River supports the largest coho population of any of the wild stock indicators.

Escapement estimates provided by fishery officers are available from 1951 to 1987 {Farwell et al. 1987; unpublished files). We have little confidence in these estimates because turbid water often made enumeration difficult, and the estimation procedures were not documented. These data, therefore, will not be presented here.

During 1977-1981, escapement was monitored using systematic foot surveys {Schubert 1982b; Schubert and Fleming 1989); however, estimation of accuracy and precision were poor. In 1982 and 1986, traps were installed in culverts where the river passes under the dike at the river mouth {Schubert and Fleming 1989). This technique proved unsuitable because the traps could not fish during high flows. Furthermore, tagging data showed that fish from nearby stocks would enter the trap and subsequently leave the Salmon River when the traps were removed during freshets. Since 1987, escapement has been estimated using the single census Petersen mark-recapture technique. Coho adults are captured using an electroshocker and marked with disk tags and opercular punches. Escapement is estimated by recovery of carcasses following spawning {e.g. Schubert et al. 1994a).

Smalt traps were operated in the Salmon River and in Coghlan Creek during the springs of 1978-1980 {Schubert 1982a) and 1986-1996 {Schubert and Kalnin 1990; Farwell et al. 1991; 1992a,b; Kalnin and Schubert 1991; Schubert et al. 1994a,b; R. Diewert, unpubl. data). The traps were located in Williams Park, 14 km upstream from the Fraser River, and were designed solely to capture coho smelts for tagging. They did not provide estimates of total smolt production because the trapping period did not encompass the entire emigration period and the traps could not operate during high flows. Also, smolt production from the river downstream of the traps was not assessed.

To index smolt trends, we calculated a smolt production index {SPI). The index represents Petersen estimates, scaled by a factor of 1ff , using fin clipped smelts as the mark application sample and adult recoveries as the census sample. The estimates are expressed as an index because capture and tagging probably reduced smolt to adult survival, introducing an unquantifiable positive bias in the population estimates. However, the bias is presumably similar among years.

2.1.4 Upper Pitt River

The upper Pitt River originates in Garibaldi Provincial Park near Isosceles Peak {171 O m) and flows 52 km in a southerly direction to the north end of Pitt Lake. The lower Pitt River drains Pitt Lake and enters the north side of the Fraser River near Coquitlam. The upper Pitt River flows for most of its length in a braided, shifting channel through a 1 km wide U-shaped valley. The river has a relatively high rate of bedload transport and an overall gradient of 3.2% {Elson

4 1985). Tributaries enter the upper Pitt River mainstem from steep valleys and have short, flat, delta areas in the river's floodplain.

The hydrograph of the upper Pitt River reflects a dominant summer glacial melt with low flows from December to March. Daily river discharges vary widely in the fall due to frequent heavy rainfalls and freezing and thawing temperatures. Extreme autumn discharges often result in scouring and shifts in the main river channel (Elson 1985).

Coho salmon enter the upper Pitt River system .as early as September and begin to spawn in mid-November. There are no obstructions to adult migration for the lower 40 km of the river but adults usually concentrate in an area half that length (Elson 1985). The main run of adults usually remains in the upper Pitt mainstem through December with peak spawning occurring later that month. A second group of coho may arrive in the river in late January and spawn in early February (Schubert 1982b). Coho spawning is generally confined to mainstem side channels and the lower 2 km of tributaries.

Escapement estimates provided by fishery officers are available from 1951 to 1996 (Schubert and Fedorenko 1985; unpublished files). We have little confidence in these estimates because river conditions often made enumeration difficult, and the estimation procedures were not documented. These data, therefore, will not be presented here.

Systematic spawning ground surveys were carried out from 1977 to 1981 and in 1983 (Schubert 1982b, Schubert and Fleming 1989). Escapement estimates were derived subjectively based on live and dead counts in conjunction with sighting conditions, physical stream characteristics and carcass flushing rates.

In 1982, and from 1994 to 1996, escapement has been estimated using the Petersen mark recapture technique (Schubert and Fleming 1989; R. Diewert, unpubl. data). Coho adults were captured by beach seine in the lower reaches of the mainstem upper Pitt River and marked with uniquely numbered disk tags and opercular punches. Tributary spawning grounds were surveyed throughout the spawning period and the incidence of disk tagged carcasses was used to estimate the total spawning escapement.

2.2 HATCHERY AND ENHANCED STOCK INDICATORS

Hatchery indicator stocks are used to provide more catch distribution, survival and exploitation data, supplementing the wild indicator data within a year and providing data from before the mid-1980's when annual wild monitoring began. Hatchery coho generally do not survive as well as adjacent wild stocks. It is clear, however, that hatchery survivals correlate well with wild stock survivals, as data presented in this report will show.

Hatchery smolt releases and escapements were obtained from the HEB and MAP databases. The following describes the hatchery indicators that we used. Data from some hatcheries were not used for the following reasons. The most common reason was absent or incomplete escapement data, for example Nanaimo, Cowichan and Goldstream (GSVI); and Chapman Cr. and Sliammon (GSMN). As described below, the Chehalis (LWFR) and Puntledge (GSVI)

5 operations do not provide escapement data but, because they are near hatcheries that do have useful escapement data (Inch and Big Qualicum, respectively), exploitation rate estimates from the neighbor hatchery were used with the subject hatchery's survival to the fishery data to estimate its escapement and total smelt to adult survivals. Capilano hatchery data were not used because this is a summer run hatchery stock and is not regarded as representative of many other stocks in the region. It also has a large local sport and aboriginal fishery that is not adequately assessed.

A more rigorous selection of hatchery indicators has not been made to date because we have found a regional cohesiveness in the catch distributions, marine survivals and exploitation rates of hatchery stocks. For example, excluding Chehalis and Puntledge data from the report would not alter our conclusions. Clearly, there are regional gaps however. The mainland coast of the Strait of Georgia north of the Fraser River (GSMN) is not represented by a hatchery (or wild) indicator. Tenderfoot Hatchery (Squamish R. system) may be used in future assessments. Its data must be reviewed and an assessment made of the significance of unassessed sport catches in the system. There is also potential for Sliammon Hatchery (near Powell River) to be used. The Thompson/UPFR region is also under-represented. Eagle River Hatchery, which used to release smelts, is now closed.

2.2.1 East Coast Vancouver Island Stocks

Big Qualicum. The Big Qualicum River is 11 km long and runs from Horne Lake into the Strait of Georgia, 60 km north of Nanaimo. The Big Qualicum Project was the first of the modern enhancement projects to be undertaken in British Columbia. The project consists of a counting fence, chum rearing channels, incubation and rearing facilities for chinook, coho, steelhead and cutthroat, and a flow control facility.

Big Qualicum provides the longest time series of data for Strait of Georgia coho marine survival and exploitation rate trends. This stock is used as an indicator of survival trends and distribution for mid-Vancouver Island and Sunshine Coast coho stocks. Smalt releases have been consistently marked since the 1969 brood with coded-wire tags. Returning adults and jacks are enumerated and sampled for marks at the counting fence, located approximately 1 km from the estuary. Some fish are placed above the fence after sampling and allowed to spawn naturally. Four hundred to two thousand coho are estimated to spawn below the fence, out of a total return of fifteen to forty five thousand. These fish are not sampled for marks.

Quinsam. The Quinsam River is a tributary of the Campbell River, which enters Johnstone Strait just north of the town of Campbell River. The hatchery is located 3 km above the confluence of the Quinsam and Campbell Rivers, which is 3.5 km from the Campbell estuary. The project consists of a diversion fence and incubation and rearing facilities for coho, chinook, pink and steelhead. ·

Quinsam stock is used as an indicator of survival trends, exploitation rate and distribution for north Vancouver Island and Mainland Inlet coho stocks. Smalt releases have been consistently marked with coded-wire tags since 1974 brood. Returning adults and jacks are enumerated and sampled for marks at the diversion fence. Some fish are placed above the fence and allowed to spawn naturally. Wild migrants were marked for 1972 to 1976 and 1984 to 1985 broods. Six hundred to three thousand coho are estimated to spawn naturally below

6 the fence, out of a total return of ten to thirty five thousand adults. These fish are not sampled for marks.

Puntledge. The Puntledge River runs from Comox Lake to the Strait of Georgia through the town of Courtenay. The project occupies two sites. The upper site consists of a fishway for entry of summer run chinook and rearing channels for coho, steelhead and summer run chinook. A collapsible fence is erected in the fall, after the summer chinook have moved upriver, to divert spawners into the lower site. The lower site includes a fishway, the incubation building, early rearing containers for chum, pink, coho, chinook and steelhead, and chum and fall chinook rearing ponds.

Coho are able to pass through the diversion fence during periods of high water and the fence is removed before the run is completed. River swims are conducted to estimate the number of spawners in the river but accurate estimates are not possible. In addition, a resident population of seals at the river mouth consume an unknown, but potentially significant, number of juvenile migrants and returning adults. Puntledge is, therefore, not used as an exploitation rate indicator. Marine survival rate trends and the distribution of catch are, however, useful to confirm trends noted at other indicator sites.

2.2.2 Lower Fraser River Stocks

Chilliwack. Chilliwack River flows northwest into Sumas River near the confluence with the Fraser River, at the town of Chilliwack. The hatchery is situated at Slesse Creek, approximately 35 km upstream from the mouth. It consists of a fishway and incubation and rearing facilities for coho, chum, chinook and steelhead. Enhancement began in 1980.

Coho have been released mainly as yearling smelts and have been tagged consistently from 1980 to the present. Hatchery returns are counted at the fishway and escapement estimates are made for several tributaries each year. A possibly substantial portion of the run is unaccounted for, due to a large freshwater sport fishery that has not been assessed since 1988. Approximately, 2,000, 15,000 and 15,000 coho were estimated to have been harvested in 1985, 1986 and 1988 respectively (Hickey et al. 1987, Whyte et al. 1987, Whyte and Schubert 1990), most of which were from Chilliwack Hatchery. Although recreational catches are underestimated generally, the unassessed catches of Chilliwack Hatchery coho result in larger than average under-estimates of survival and exploitation rates for this indicator stock. Chilliwack is not, therefore, an exploitation rate indicator, but is used as an indicator of survival trends and distribution.

Inch. Inch Creek is a small groundwater-fed tributary of Nicomen Slough, near Dewdney. The hatchery is situated at the head of this creek and consists of incubation and rearing facilities for chum, coho, chinook, cutthroat and steelhead. Chum enhancement began in 1970 and coho were added in 1979.

Inch Creek coho have been released mainly as yearling smelts and have been tagged consistently since 1982. Most of the coho return to the hatchery to spawn. Returns to the hatchery are enumerated and sampled for marks and a deadpitch is conducted to enumerate and sample natural spawners. Typically, few marked fish are observed spawning in the river. Inch Creek is the best indicator for exploitation rates of lower Fraser stocks, since almost the

7 entire return can be enumerated and sampled.

Chehalis. The Chehalis River flows southerly into the Harrison River, 8 km upstream from its confluence with the Fraser River. The hatchery is adjacent to the lower Chehalis, 3 km upstream from its confluence with the Harrison River, and consists of incubation and rearing facilities for chum, coho, chinook, cutthroat and steelhead. The coho are released as smolts, and have been consistently marked with coded-wire tags since 1982 brood.

Since 1989, because of changes in river conditions and operating procedures, returning coho adults have not entered the facility once brood stock requirements have been met. As well, there is no enumeration or sampling of fish that remain in the river. Chehalis stock cannot be used as an exploitation rate indicator. However, marine survival rate trends and the distribution of catch are useful to confirm trends noted at other Lower Fraser River indicator sites.

2.2.3 Thompson River Coho

Three hatcheries in the North and South Thompson drainages have fence counts of adults: Eagle River, Dunn Lake and Deadman Creek. Lemieux and Louis creeks and Salmon River (Salmon Arm) receive fry or smolt plants and are used as escapement indicators for lack of any completely wild indicators in the area. An enhancement summary is given in Appendix Table 2.1. The fence counts from Salmon River (Salmon Arm) are the best on-going counts we have to a partially wild system in the Thompson system. Mark recapture estimates have been made since 1993 for Lemieux and Louis creek coho to provide another escapement measure for the region.

2 Dunn Lake Hatcherv. Dunn Lake (3. 7 km ) is drained by Dunn Creek, a tributary of Joseph Creek which enters the North Thompson River from the east, just upstream from Little Fort. 2 The watershed area is 105 km • The Dunn Lake facility was constructed in 1982 under the Community Economic Development Program, to provide employment and training for the North Thompson Indian Band and to enhance North Thompson coho. Dunn Creek, Lemieux Creek and Fennell Creek were the original three stocks enhanced. In 1988 Fennell Creek was replaced with Louis Creek stock, which had been enhanced for several years by a Public Involvement group.

The project consists of a small hatchery building containing bulk upwelling incubators and a rearing trough. Fry were moved in the fall to net pens in Dunn Lake to rear over-winter but poor survivals necessitated hatchery rearing, first at Clearwater Hatchery and now at Spius Creek Hatchery. .The present release targets are: Dunn Creek - 1OK fry and 20K smolts; Lemieux Creek - 15K fry and 20K smolts; and Louis Creek - 1SK fry and 20K smolts. In 1996, only about 1OK eggs were taken from Lemieux and Louis combined and none from Dunn. Coded-wire tagging on all stocks has been fairly consistent since 1982 but the 1996 brood will not be tagged, due to low numbers. An adult enumeration fence is maintained on Dunn Cr. and escapement counts are made in most years.

Lemieux Creek. Lemieux Creek flows 33 km in a southerly direction before entering the west side of the North Thompson River at Little Fort. A drainage area of 282 km 2 includes Taweel Lake and three tributaries. Lemieux Creek is characterized by abundant side channel habitat, a gravel and cobble substrate, numerous beaver dams and plentiful woody debris. Impassable

8 falls are located at km 12.5 making the upper reaches inaccessible to anadromous fish. A substantial groundwater influence moderates winter temperatures allowing major spawning areas to remain ice free. Lemieux has had coho fry plants (mostly before 1991) and smelt releases since 1990 (mean 17,900). Dunn Lake Hatchery is the rearing facility. Wild smelts have not been enumerated or tagged.

Escapement estimates provided by fishery officers are available from 1951 to 1985 (Harding et al. 1994). In 1986 an enumeration fence was installed near the Highway 24 bridge crossing, approximately 1.5 km upstream of the confluence with the North Thompson River. The accuracy of the fence counts varies annually based on the duration of fence operation and environmental conditions that affect fence integrity. Since 1993, escapement has been estimated using the Petersen mark recapture methodology. Coho adults were captured at the fence and marked with numbered disk tags and opercular punches. Escapement was estimated by recovery of carcasses following spawning (R. Diewert, unpubl. data).

Determining the trend in coho escapement over an extended time period is not possible for this system due to the changes in enumeration techniques. As a result, we will only present the mark recapture estimates for 1993 to 1996.

Louis Creek. Louis Creek flows 66 km in an easterly direction before entering the east side of the North Thompson .River at the town of Louis Creek. A drainage area of 512 km 2 includes Eileen Lake and six high gradient tributaries that offer little useable salmon habitat. Louis Creek is characterized by a meandering, single channel bordered by agricultural land. Extensive agricultural and recreational use has resulted in silting and stream bank erosion in ~ some areas (Harding et al. 1994).

Like Lemieux, Louis Creek is one of the few interior streams where intensive escapement estimates are made so it has been used as an indicator despite on-going enhancement by fry and smelt releases from Dunn Lake Hatchery. Annual smelt releases of approximately 8, 8, 6, 20, 28, 13 and 31 thousand were made from 1990 to 1996, respectively. Fry plants have decreased in size to an annual average of 13, 100 since 1990 and none in 1996. Wild smelts have not been enumerated.

Escapement estimates provided by fishery officers are available from 1951 to 1984 (Harding et al. 1994). In 1985 an enumeration fence was installed approximately 1O km upstream of the confluence with the North Thompson River. The accuracy of the fence counts varies annually based on the duration of fence operation and fence integrity. Since 1993, spawning escapement has been estimated using the Petersen mark recapture methodology as in Lemieux Creek (R. Diewert, unpubl. data).

Determining the trend in coho escapement over an extended time period is not possible for this system due to the changes in enumeration techniques. As a result, we will only present the mark recapture estimates for 1993 to 1996.

Eagle River Hatcherv. The Eagle River flows 81 km south-west into Shuswap Lake near Sicamous with no barriers to fish passage except during low flow years. The Eagle River Hatchery was located approximately 32 km east of Sicamous, 40 km up the Eagle River from Shuswap Lake. It consisted of incubation and rearing facilities for coho, chinook and rainbow trout and an adult enumeration fence. Eagle coho were enhanced from 1983 until the

9 hatchery was closed during budget cuts in 1993. This facility was also the hatchery for Salmon A. (Salmon Arm) satellite fry planting.

Various release strategies were studied: spring fry, fall fry and smelt releases. All release groups were consistently tagged. Adult fence counts were made throughout the migration period from 1986 to 1996, although fence breaches did occur. Data were adjusted based on average timing.

Salmon River (Salmon Arm). The Salmon River flows 149 km north-east, entering Shuswap Lake at Salmon Arm. There are no barriers to fish passage and low flows occur only above the spawning grounds. Fry were out-planted in the spring from Eagle River Hatchery from 1984 to 1991 and in 1993. About 10,000 and 21,000 smolts were released in 1993 and 1994. Beginning with the 1994 brood, Salmon River coho have been enhanced from the Spius Creek facility. Overall, the average annual fry release is 215,000. The peak was 1990 when 531,000 were released.

There are complete adult fence counts since 1986. Wild smolts have not been enumerated or tagged.

Deadman Hatcherv. Deadman River flows south into the Thompson River, 4 km west of 2 Kamloops Lake and has a watershed of 1,495 km • Deadman Hatchery is run by the Skeetchestn Indian Band. It was built in 1983 to provide employment and training for the band and to enhance coho and depressed chinook stocks.

The hatchery consists of moist incubators, cassettes, earthen rearing channels and a large rearing pond. Target releases are set at 50K 1+ chinook and 30K 1+ coho. There have been various problems resulting in poor in-hatchery survival, especially during the initial rearing phase for coho. Until these problems are rectified, Spius Creek Hatchery has taken over production of Deadman coho in 1996 and most chinook in 1997.

The 1990 to 1994 brood coho were tagged. The 1995 brood were not tagged due to disease problems but the 1996 brood which is rearing at Spius Hatchery will be tagged.

A fence on the lower Deadman River makes it possible to obtain total escapement counts for both chinook and coho. However, poor data recording and a lack of coded-wire tag recoveries have made it impossible to develop it as an exploitation rate indicator for other Thompson River streams. Despite these problems, the Deadman fence data was judged sufficiently accurate to present as an indicator of escapement trends.

2.3 CATCHES AND CODED-WIRE TAG (CWT) RECOVERIES

10 Recreational and commercial catch estimates were taken from the SSA (Catch Module) database in the PBS VAX computer system. The Canadian catch data is not yet finalized for 1996 although future changes will probably be minor.

Recreational catch estimates in the Strait of Georgia up to 1976 were based on subjective assessments and local creel surveys. The statistics from 1972 to 1976 were revised by Argue et al. (1977) using CWT recoveries. The Strait of Georgia creel survey began in 1980 and continues. However, budget reductions have necessitated cuts to the period sampled, from 12 months/year up to 1992 to 10 months in 1993 and 1994, 8 months in 1995 and 6 months {April to September) in 1996. The coho sport fishery in the Strait of Georgia was not surveyed in October, 1995 and 1996. There has also been an erosion in the number of fisher interviews during the survey period. Recreational catches are not estimated elsewhere except in the creel surveys in Barkley and Nootka sounds (incomplete temporal coverage) and in the lower Fraser mainstem. The lower Fraser survey was done in 1995 and 1996 but it was not designed for coho catch monitoring and terminated in September each year, before most returning coho were available in the river. Nor did this survey cover the intense local sport fishery directed at Chilliwack Hatchery coho in the Chilliwack/Vedder River. Clearly, south coast recreational catches of GS coho are under-estimated.

The incidental catch of coho in commercial net fisheries are also likely under-estimated due to 'take home' of coho and mis-reporting of coho on sales slips as other species. Using observers, Bison (1992) estimated that the reported coho catch in the Nitinat chum fishery was one third of the actual catch.

Aboriginal catches of coho are not well recorded. Although possibly significant for local stocks, overall the aboriginal catch is a minor component of total recreational and commercial catch.

Coded wire tag recoveries were obtained from the MRP database in the PBS VAX computer. Estimated recoveries (observed recoveries multiplied by the catch:sample ratio) were used for wild stock analyses and expanded recoveries (estimated recoveries divided by the tagged proportion of the total hatchery release) were used for hatchery stocks. Recoveries by catch region were not filtered to exclude cells with few recoveries where the sampling rate was low (causing a large number of recoveries to be estimated from a few recoveries with correspondingly large confidence limits on the estimate).

US recoveries of CWTs are not yet available for 1996. Survival and exploitation rate estimates for the 1996 return year are therefore preliminary and will increase slightly when US recoveries are included. For example, including US catches increased the 1995 survivals for Quinsam, Big Qualicum and Inch hatcheries and Salmon (Langley) and Black wild stocks an average of 0.26%. Exploitation rates for Quinsam, Big Qualicum, Salmon and Black increased 2.1 % on average with inclusion of US catches.

2.4 ESCAPEMENTS OF WILD AND SEMI-WILD STOCKS

Approximately weekly foot surveys have been made on several tributaries in the Cowichan River system since 1989 (Holtby 1993). Coho in these streams are not enhanced.· The

11 procedure is as follows. Two workers walk in the creek prodding into cover for hiding fish, obtaining an observed and estimated count of jacks and adults, live and dead. Dead and moribund fish are sampled for size, mark status and age structures. Coho in one tributary, Shaw Creek, are estimated by swimming. Most or all the length of stream utilized by spawners is covered and the same reach is surveyed each year. Weekly differences in observation efficiency are subjectively compensated for by asking the crew to record their estimate of the actual number of spawners present in the reach on each visit as well as the observed number. Area under the curve abundance estimates {e.g. Irvine et al. 1993) are calculated using the estimated numbers and survey lives which, except for Shaw Creek, are based on measurements in Mesachie Creek (8.8 d). A survey life of 12.9 d is used for Shaw Creek AUC estimates, based on measurements there. Survey lives do not appear to vary greatly from year to year in our experience and, although they do vary between streams, using standard survey lives achieves the purpose of this data which is to index annual trends.

Multiple visit visual and mark-recapture estimates of wild escapements began in 1995 on Vancouver Island {Willow Creek, near Campbell River) and on the Sunshine Coast {Myers and Wilson creeks) and will be presented in a subsequent working paper once there is a longer time series and we have reviewed the methods {these surveys are being conducted by volunteers and fisher groups). Their results will only be presented in general terms here. Thorough escapement estimates are also available for the last two years from Chaster and Guillet creeks near Gibson's Landing and since 1988 from Chase River in Nanaimo {see Irvine et al. 1994 for results up to 1993). However, these are enhanced systems. Chase has not been reported for that reason but should be evaluated for possible inclusion in the next PSARC Working Paper.

Fence counts and mark recapture estimates in the Thompson system were briefly discussed in Section 2.2.3 for each site. Visual estimates of coho spawning escapements have been made annually for a large number of tributaries to the North and South Thompson systems. These estimates are based on multiple stream walks by DFO staff from the Clearwater and Salmon Arm subdistrict offices. While these estimates are of unknown precision and accuracy and many stocks have had some form of enhancement, when aggregated by geographic area they provide valuable information on trends in spawner abundance. The data available were filtered to remove streams that were not visited consistently from 1988 to 1996. This process resulted in the inclusion of nine streams from the Clearwater subdistrict and eight streams from the Salmon Arm subdistrict.

12 2.5 FRY SURVEYS

The rationale and methods of the fry survey were presented by Kadowaki et al. (1995).

Streams throughout the south coast and in the Thompson system were sampled in the early fall, one site per stream in about two thirds of the streams and usually two sites elsewhere. Streams were favored that were small enough to allow reaches to be isolated with nets, that had road access, and that had no enhancement. However, some enhancement activities had been directed at a few populations, particularly in the Thompson basin. We tried to sample the same sites each year although there have bee~ some deletions and additions to the survey.

Site selection was not random: accessible reaches were selected that were judged to be coho habitat (we favored lower gradient areas with. pool and cover habitat). Although the fry survey methodology is under review and some form of stratified random design may be deemed necessary for new analysis requirements, random selection has not been considered necessary for the first purpose of the data which is to aggregate densities to provide an index of inter-annual variations in abundance.

This use of the data to detect annual trends and perhaps regional differences requires several years of data. The fry survey in the Thompson system is still in a formative, site selection stage which began in 1995. Interpretations of the 1995 and 1996 data from this region should be constrained. For example, we recently realized after this report was reviewed by the PSARC Salmon Sub-committee that quantitative density estimates were not attempted at 33 sites in 1995 and nine sites in 1996. Estimates were made at five sites in 1995 (one site each in Tumtum, Mann and Shannon creeks and two sites in Lemieux Cr., all N. Thompson tributaries). The same sites were sampled in 1996 plus one site each on Lion Cr. (N. Thompson), Wap Cr.(S. Thompson) and Trinity Cr. (S. Thompson). The reason most estimates were not initiated was that after an average of 370 seconds of reconnaissance electrofishing no or few fry were caught. This finding obviously affects how one interprets the reported densities.

Most sampled reaches were 20 to 35 m long. T.he reach was isolated with barrier nets and the abundance of coho fry estimated using a removal technique, usually three pass with equal shocking and netting effort in each pass. The area and length of the reach was measured to calculate fry densities with the area of water greater than 1O cm deep being recorded as well as total wetted area. Areas of riffles, glides and pools were also distinguished. The only other habitat measures taken were water temperature and since 1995, water conductivity. Calculated densities include age 1. fry which were usually less than 5% of the total population.

Although the results are not reported here, fry lengths were recorded and scales taken from fish that could possibly be age 1 . Where the catch in the measured section was less than 100 fry, we extended sampling immediately upstream and/or downstream from the density reach to obtain a larger sample. We did not do this if catches were so poor that obtaining an adequate sample was not practical. The catches in the extended reach areas were not used to calculate density and the sample data were recorded separately from the sample data in the density reach. Kent Simpson and Ron Diewert have the fry density and size data from non-Fraser and ~ Fraser streams, respectively. ·

13 3. STOCK STATUS UPDATE

3.1 CATCH DISTRIBUTION

The GS stocks are mostly caught in the Strait of Georgia/Fraser River ('inside') sport and aboriginal fisheries, in the "outside" troll, sport and net fisheries off the west coast of Vancouver Island and in Juan de Fuca and Johnstone straits. The Strait of Georgia troll fishery has had a coho non-retention restriction since 1995. Also in 1995, the recreational daily bag limit was reduced in Johnstone and Georgia straits from 4 to 2 coho and the size limit was increased from 30 cm to 41 cm. Bearing these influences in mind, we think it is acceptable to use, as Kadowaki et al. (1996) did, the proportion of recoveries of tagged GS coho in the Strait of Georgia as an indicator of inside/outside distribution. The phenomenon is sufficiently marked that it overwhelms data problems like the above (and others such as a portion of the inside sport catch consisting of inward bound coho in the fall, which could be easily excluded, and exacerbation of high and low inside recoveries due to increases and declines in effort in response to high and low abundance).

Recoveries indicate that an unusually high proportion of coho ranged out of the Strait of Georgia to the west coast of Vancouver Island in 1991, 1994 and 1995. This outside distribution occurred again in 1996 (Fig. 3.1 ). Only 11, 27, 3 and 10 percent of the recoveries of tagged GS coho were in the Strait of Georgia in 1991 , 1994, 1995 and 1996, respectively. Such low proportions had not been seen since tagging began 20 years ago. By comparison, the inside proportion was 80% in 1993. The troll catch in the strait in 1991 was the lowest since records began in the early 1950' s, suggesting that never in that 40 year period had there been fewer coho inside (Kadowaki et al. 1996). We think that it is an actual distribution shift and is not due to very po~r inside survivals because marine survivals of indicator stocks (Section 3.5) have not declined in outside years to an extent that the requisite near total inside mortality would require.

Detailed catch distribution (tag recovery) data are given for Black and Salmon (Langley) wild stocks and Quinsam, Big Qualicum, Inch and Chilliwack hatchery stocks in Appendix Tables 3.1 to 3.6.

3.2 CATCH

The estimated April to September coho catch in Strait of Georgia fisheries was 39,885 in 1996, most of which occurred in the northern strait sport fishery (25,595). More were caught than in 1995 (15,353) but both years were very poor compared to a more normal year of inside distribution such as 1992 when the estimated catch was 462,270, not including the GS troll catch. The inside catch by all gears for the 12 months of 1992 was 745,481.

14 0.8 0• CJ 0... A Chilliwack

!e0 A Salmon a. 0.6 ti) (LWFR) ti) C BQR CJ .E o o Quinsam c 0 0 0.4 ...... ~ • Black 0 a. • ...0 --Mean a. 0 0 • • 0.2 ...... ······ ...... ······ ······ ...... ······ ......

0 O> O> O> O> ...... O> ...... O> ...... O> ...... O> ...... O> ...... O> ...... O> ...... O> ...... O> ...... O> ...... Catch Year

Figure 3.1 Proportion of CWT'd coho caught in Strait of Georgia troll and sport fisheries for three hatchery indicator stocks and Black Cr. and Salmon R. (Langley) wild stocks.

Poor catches were not confined to the inside, however. The catch in all south coast fisheries declined markedly to 957,000 {Appendix Table 3.7, Fig. 3.2). The WCVI troll catch was 784,000 compared to the 1990 to 1995 average of 1.49 million. The troll fleet failed to reach the reduced catch ceiling of one million coho despite a one week fishing extension. The fleet was much reduced from previous years but CPUE was still poor.

This decline in catch cannot be explained by a more recent and relatively small decrease in smelt releases by Washington State hatcheries {Fig. 3.3). There may be declining smelt abundances in wild stocks, perhaps in response to declining escapements {Section 3.4). Wild smelt data is only available from Salmon {Langley) and Black and the picture is different in each: smelts have been declining in Salmon River {Langley) ~ince estimates began but there is little trend at Black Creek (Fig. 3.4). However, given the observed loss of coho habitat from urban, agricultural and industrial encroachment, water losses and water quality degradation, it would not be surprising if wild coho production has decreased.

Marine survivals alone, which are in the order of one third or less the survivals seen in the 1980's {Section 3.5), can account for the decreased catch. Other contributing factors in 1996 were the unavailability of coho for the inside sport fishery and much reduced fishing effort in the Johnstone and Juan de Fuca straits interception fisheries due to low abundances of other salmon species.

15 4,500,000

4 ,000,000

3,500,000

3 ,000,000

2,500,000

2,000,000

1,500,000

1,000,000

500,000

0 ,.._0 Ol

Figure 3.2 Coho catch in the sport, net and troll fisheries of south coast BC, 1970 to 1996.

80

70

Ci) c 60 -0 g 50 !/) Q) !/) ro Q) 40 Qi a: ...>- Q) 30 .c u ro ::r:- 20

10

0 I.[) r-- Ol C') I.[) r-- Ol ..- C') lO r-- Ol C') (!) (!) (!) r-- r-- r-- r-- r-- co co ro ro ro Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol

Figure 3.3 Smelt Releases by southern BC and Washington hatcheries, 1965 to 1994 brood years. 16 3.00 ::r------

~Salmon A.

B 2.00 ------~Blacker. c ca "Cc ::::s .ll <( 0- E en 1.00

0.00 .....,___-1...,__---i----+---+-----+----+----+----1...... -_.., 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 Smolt Year

Figure 3.4 Smolt abundances in Salmon R. (Langley) and Black Creek. Black Creek 5 abundances are fence counts x 10· • Salmon River abundances are indices (SPI): Petersen mark recapture estimates using the number of marked smolts and the 5 proportion of marked adults returning, also scaled by 10· _

3.3 ESCAPEMENT

Escapements continued a general decline in 1996, down to extremely low levels (Fig. 3.5 and Appendix Tables 3.8 and 3.9). On Vancouver Island, the fence count from Black Creek was only 141 adults (65 females). This is the smallest escapement by far in 14 years of monitoring and is less than 5% of the MSY goal of 3, 150 (Kadowaki et al. 1995). Extremely low spawner abundances were also found in the Cowichan R. tributaries that have been monitored for at least eight years (Appendix Table 3.8 and Appendix Figures 3.1 to 3.5). For example, in Oliver Cr., a tributary near the outlet of Cowichan Lake, over 800 were estimated in 1990 but the abundance declined sharply to near zero in 1992, rebounded moderately in 1993 and 1994 and dropped again to near zero in 1996. Five coho were estimated to have spawned in Oliver Cr. last winter. This was a subjective allowance by the field crew for observer error: for the first time none were actually seen in weekly searches. Approximately 250 to 900 were counted through a fence on Oliver in the early 1940's. Except for a few enhanced stocks (e.g. Oyster River), extremely low to below recent average escapements were reported by community groups and HEB Community Advisors in the Gulf Islands, along the entire Vancouver Island ~ side of the Strait of Georgia and on the Sunshine Coast.

17 18,000

~ 16,000 -+-M esachie x 5 -If-Black 14,000 ~salmon ...,._Upper Pitt 12,000

10,000

8,000 •

6,000

4,000

2,000

0 CD CX> 0 C\I v CD CX> 0 C\I v CD ,..... ,..... CX> CX> CX> CX> CX> O> O> O> O> O> O> O> O> O> O> O> O> O> O> O> ..-- ..-- ..-- ..-- ..-- ..-- ..-- ..-- ..-- ..-- ..--

Figure 3.5 Adult escapement to Mesachie Cr., Black Cr. , Salmon R. (Langley) and Upper Pitt River. Note: the 1996 Mesachie escapement estimate of 26 is obscured by the Black Cr. count of 141.

The mark recapture estimate of adult spawners·in Salmon R. (Langley) was 2,639 in 1996, a poor run relative to the 1980's when mark recapture estimates began but about average for the 1990's. Escapements to Salmon and upper Pitt rivers and observations of other spawning populations in the lower Fraser area indicate that escapements here were generally poor but not as bad as elsewhere in 1996 (e.g. Fig. 3.5). The continuing decline in estimated smelt production from Salmon River (Fig. 3.4) may be due in some measure to insufficient escapements, although habitat loss must be considered also.

We do not have wild stock indicators in the Thompson River system. Despite enhancement, coho escapements to the Thompson system continued to decline in 1996. Fence counts from 1988 to 1996 in four tributaries throughout the Thompson system indicate that this is not a localized trend (Appendix Table 3.9, Fig. 3.6). Note Salmon River which only received 170 adults compared to an average of 3,000 before 1990. Escapements to Salmon have been poor since 1990 despite an average of 165,000 fry planted each year (Appendix Table 2.1 ). The 1996 return was not appreciably enhanced (46K fry planted) but the brood that returned in 1995 had been supplemented with 137K fry and 21 K smelts and only 900 adults were counted.

Combined fishery officer estimates of escapement aggregated by geographic area further support the observation that coho escapements are depressed relative to recent historical levels for both the North and South Thompson «;frainages {Fig 3.7). Finally, escapements to Louis and Lemieux creeks have been estimated by mark-recapture methods since 1993 {Appendix Fig. 3.6). We believe these estimates to be more accurate than previous estimates in these streams which relied on incomplete fence counts. Spawners decreased in both

18 6~

~ ·~g~ oi 966 ~ pue v66 ~ LI! puesno4i e inoqe WOJJ paseaJoap xna1wa1 LI! sJaqwnN "966 ~ LI! S)faaJo 14,000 -r------~

12,000 ml Deadman, Eagle and Dunn 10,000

• Salmon R. (Salmon Arm) 8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

Fig. 3.6 Escapements of the enhanced coho populations in Eagle, Deadman and Dunn creeks (combined) and in Salmon R. (Sa!mon Arm), 1988 to 1996. Estimates are based on fence counts (Appendix Table 3.9).

3,000 .,...... ------.

tm North Thompson

•South Thompson 2,000

1,000

0 1988 1989 1990 1991 . 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

Fig. 3.7 Stream walk estimates of coho escapements: totals to nine N. Thompson streams and eight S. Thompson streams, 1988 to 1996 (Appendix Table 3.10).

20 It should be noted in considering the effect of these very poor escapements that virtually all coho in southern B.C. smolt at age 1. and all females spawn the following year so there is only limited potential for female cross-over between the three brood lines. Growth compensation at low fry densities can be expected to reduce the incidence of age 2. smolts even further. Many on-going habitat impacts may also help to isolate brood lines when riparian canopies are diminished and streams are exposed to more sunlight. Fry growth may increase in these streams in response to temporary increases in trophic production and age diversity is again reduced (Holtby 1988; Simpson et al. 1996).

Very low spawning escapement in 1996 to many Strait of Georgia and Thompson River streams raises a very serious conservation concern for adult returns in 1999. Fry surveys in 1997 and smolt enumerations in 1998 will help to clarify the level of concern prior to fishery management planning for the 1999 fishing season.

3.4 MARINE SURVIVAL

Based on coded wire tag recoveries in catches and escapements, the 1996 survival of smolts to the adult catch and escapement ranged from 0.9% to 4.3% in six hatchery indicator stocks (Table 3.1 ). Of these, we are not able to directly obtain survivals from Puntledge, Chehalis and Chilliwack hatcheries. Escapements to Puntledge and Chehalis are not known and the large unassessed Vedder/Chilliwack sport fishery limits the usefulness of Chilliwack escapements, as explained in Section 2.2.2. Instead, we estimated their survival by dividing their survival to the fishery ( catch/smolts) by the exploitation rate of a neighboring hatchery, Big Qualicum for Puntledge and Inch for Chehalis and Chilliwack. Total survivals estimated this way are insensitive to errors in exploitation rates. For example, if for each year of Inch Hatchery data, survival to the fishery is divided by the maximum exploitation rate seen at Inch (91 % in 1982 BY) and these total survivals are compared to total survivals calculated using the minimum exploitation rate (67% in 1986 BY), the average difference using these extreme exploitations is only 2.7%. The range of actual survivals of Inch coho is 16.8% (7.3% if the one very high survival of 20.6% is excluded).

The survivals of Black and Salmon wild stocks were 2.4% and 7.4%, respectively. Wild coho survivals are correlated with hatchery survivals but are usually greater and this was true again last year (Figs. 3.8 and 3.9). This correlation lends support for the policy of using hatchery stocks as indicators of trends in wild populations.

Survivals continued to decline for Vancouver Island indicator stocks but stabilized or rose slightly in the lower Fraser. Note that the survivals of lower Fraser indicator stocks are usually greater than ECVI indicator stocks (cf. Figs. 3.8 and 3.9). Since the 1984 brood year the mean survival of Inch and Salmon (Langley) coho has always exceeded the mean survival of Quinsam and Black, although not a significant difference (mean of means: LWFR = 10.1 %, GSVI = 7.0%; t= 1.74, P=.10; assuming unequal variances). The difference has been most marked in the last three years. In 1996 the Black/Quinsam mean was only 1. 7% compared to

21 - the Inch/Salmon mean of 5.5%. Big Qualicum was not used in this analysis because this population had a period centered in the mid-1980's (Fig. 3.9) when survivals were much lower than elsewhere for reasons thought to be caused by unidentified fish culture problems.

Table 3.1 Percent smolt to adult survival rates for six hatchery and three wild coho indicator stocks.

1973 28.7 1974 5.8 15.1 1975 9.5 14.6 1976 6.4 32.5 19.2 21.4 1977 8.8 12.6 27.0 23.9 1978 6.3 11.4 11.7 1979 4.6 8.0 10.3 1980 5.7 8.2 11.2 (12.0) 1981 5.1 6.4 7.9 {14.3) 1982 7.9 14.3 5.0 6.8 14.5 1983 6.8 9.6 1.0 6.1 11.9 10.0 12.5 ~ 1984 8.4 4.2 0.7 8.6 13.4 15.7 11.4 15.4 1985 8.0 4.1 1.7 20.6. 12.3 17.3 12.7 21.9 6.9 1986 10.2 3.3 1.3 11.1 12.5 14.5 11.3 13.5 4.9 1987 7.7 2.4 4.7 8.1 10.5 9.7 12.4 13.4 7.0 1988 4.2 3.9 6.3 6.8 7.9 8.0 7.6 7.8 3.2 1989 5.8 2.1 5.5 9.8 10.0 5.3 12.1 9.6 2.5 1990 3.5 3.2 6.7 8.3 8.5 6.1 6.3 8.4 2.0 1991 2.3 0.6 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.9 5.4 9.5 2. 1992 2.5 2.0 3.0 5.5 3.6 3.0 4.5 6.9 19933 0.9 1.8 1.5 3.8 4.3 2.8 2.4 7.4

1 Survival to fishery divided by BQR Hatchery exploitation rate to give estimated total survival rate. 2 Survival to fishery divided by Inch Hatchery exploitation rate to give estimated total survival rate. 1980 and 1981 BY survivals of Chilliwack coho were not corrected this way and are probably under-estimates due to significant unknown catches in-river. 3 1993 brood year survival rates are preliminary because US catches are not available yet. ·

Four indicators have data extending back to the 1970's: Quinsam, Black, Puntledge and Big Qualicum. The latter three had very good survivals up to the 1977 brood year, usually more than 15% and up to 32% (Table 3.1 ), indicating that declines in ocean survival have broadly occurred over 16 years in some stocks. Their survivals are now about 10% or less of the 1970's survivals.

22 25

20 'ii > -~ ---salmon R. ::s 15 en -s-1nch ~ 10

5

lt) ..... O> ..... M lt) ..... O> ..... M ...... co co co co co O> O> .....O> .....O> O>..... O>..... O>...... O> O>..... O>...... O> O>..... Brood Vear

Figure 3.8 Smolt to adult survival of Inch Hatchery and Salmon River coho .

.. 25 \----7~------e--aulnsam Hatchery

: . ~ _._Black Cr. 20 ~---~-~------~. ..~ ~. -- -6 - • B lg Quallcum Hatchery . . ' . JI. • • ~~----~------

10

5 . ' . . ' • ,.6 - "41 6--A" 0 CW) U) ..... en T"" CW) U) ..... en T"" CW) ...... co co co co co en en en en en en en en en en en en en T"" T"" T"" T"" T"" T"" T"" T"" T"" T"" T"" Brood Vear

Figure 3.9 Smolt to adult survival of coho from Quinsam and Big Qualicum hatcheries and Black Creek.

23 3.5 EXPLOITATION

Expecting another year of outside distribution and poor survival based on Kadowaki et al. (1996), and with concerns regarding other stocks off the west coast of Vancouver Island, managers reduced the WCVI troll quota to 1 million in 1996. The outside distribution had the same effect as a closure in the Strait of Georgia. Furthermore, the troll fleet was less than one third its previous size and relatively few coho were caught incidentally in net fisheries because openings in Juan de Fuca and Johnstone straits were reduced in response to low returns of sockeye and chum. As discussed in Section 3.2, catches were indeed less in 1996. However, despite this, reduced stock abundances caused exploitation rates to remain about the same or increase over 1995 (Table 3.2). All were in the 55% to 60% range except there was a substantial increase in the Black exploitation to 79% and Inch Hatchery coho, at 82%, remained at about its average. The other wild indicator also increased (Salmon, up by 8.8% to 57. 7%). These 1996 estimates will probably increase by about 2% when US recovery data are included.

Table 3.2 Adult exploitation rates (%) for three hatchery and three wild coho indicator stocks.

1976 91.6 1977 71.7 79.1 1978 73.2 81.2 1979 72.1 69.6 1980 78.2 87.0 1981 74.0 80.1 1982 79.3 75.4 1983 80.4 83.4 1984 68.1 69.5 1985 84.0 76.8 91.4 1986 74.5 73.2 78.5 72.6 1987 73.2 76.9 83.2 85.3 69.3 1988 80.1 77.4 87.3 71.6 74.9 74.9 1989 62.9 70.5 66.6 70.5 72.8 61.7 1990 70.2 83.1 84.5 73.8 77.8 64.2 1991 69.3 66.7 82.7 70.9 76.5 68.6 1992 79.5 78.8 76.0 78.1 14.3 69.3 1993 74.1 75.8 78.6 79.8 54.4 74.6 1994 71.0 73.5 81.9 81.4 66.7 83.2 1995 55.9 59.9 77.2 56.4 48.9 19962 58.2 56.9 81.5 79.2 57.7

1 1996 exploitation rates are preliminary because US catches are not yet available.

24 The Black Creek exploitation rate in 1996 was much above the 1995 rate but comparable to the rates seen in the previous three years, 1992 to 1994. The estimated 1996 catch of Black Cr. coho was based on catch/sample ratios of less than 1O in every catch region except Juan de Fuca Sport which had a ratio of 13. Only 39 coho were estimated caught in that fishery. Nor are errors in the estimate of the marked escapement likely to have caused a significant error in exploitation rate: if the entire escapement of 141 coho had been marked instead of the estimated 93, the rate would still have been 71.5%. We do not know why the exploitation of Black coho did not remain at 1995 levels, making it similar to Quinsam. Twenty-one percent of the Black catch was taken inside, all in GSPTN. Only 5%, 3.5% and 11 o/o of Big Qualicum, Chilliwack and Salmon (Langley) coho were caught in the strait. This would explain why Black exploitations were greater if they were subject to about the same outside exploitation. But it does not explain why the exploitation of Inch coho was higher than Black when relatively fewer were caught in the Strait of Georgia (14%) nor why the Quinsam exploitation was much lower when 16% of its catch was in the strait.

3.6 FRY DENSITIES

We measured coho fry densities in 1996 at 58 sites in 42 streams around the Strait of Georgia and in the Thompson system. This was the sixth year of surveying coho fry (Kadowaki et al. 1995). Fish sizes were also measured but there was insufficient time to analyze the size data. The distribution of densities is shown in Fig. 3.10. Densities are number of fry of all ages per m2 of water deeper than 1O cm. The 1991 data was excluded because that was the initial reconnaissance year and the stream sample was biased toward 'good' coho streams.

In aggregate, densities were better than the 1992 to 1995 average. Reading Fig. 3.10, 50% of the 1992-95 populations were denser than about 1. 7/m 2 compared to the median density in 2 1996 which was 2.2/m • This was largely due to dense populations on Vancouver Island from Nanaimo to Campbell River. Densities averaged 42% better than the 1992-95 average in this area. Elsewhere on the coast densities were about equal to the four year average. They may have been below average on the Sunshine Coast but it was the first year of a change in personnel and there is uncertainty about data comparability in that area.

Densities in the Thompson system are shown separately in Figure 3.1 O because Thompson fry have been distinctly sparser than coastal populations and because the surveys only began in 1995 and, as explained in the Methods section, sampling sites are not finalized. Nineteen sites were checked in coho streams in the N. Thompson system in 1995: after exploratory shocking (much less fishing effort than in a removal estimate) removal estimates were completed in five. No coho were caught in two and up to 52 were caught in the remaining 12 (median catch in the twelve = 5). Nineteen were also checked in the S. Thompson in 1995: none were estimated by 3 pass removal, no coho were found in 12 and up to 27 were caught in the other seven (median catch in the seven = 9). Not as many sites were checked in 1996: seven in the N. Thompson, six of which had removal estimates done and one (Louis Cr.) did not (no fry were caught in the preliminary shocking). Eleven S. Thompson sites were checked: two were estimated, four had zero preliminary catches and five had up to 35 (median catch= 12).

25 1000/o .I .. . I 90% .I ..I 80% .;, I t I I ~ I I c 70% I I ::sCD .I .I ts" f u.. 60% .:o . c I I CD - I I f 50% . CD Q. CD > 40% as :;= • • • • ·Thompson, 1995 E -- 0 - -Thompson, 1996 ::s 30% 0 • 1992-95 ~1996 20%

10%

0%+--+--i--+--t--+--+--+--+--+---+--+--+--t---t---t---+--+--t----1 ~ - ~ N ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ Fry Density (NoJsq.m)

Figure 3.10 Cumulative percent frequency of fry densities for Georgia Basin locations, including the Thompson system. The mean frequency for 1992- 95 is shown with bars indicating the range of frequencies·in the period.

For comparative purposes in Fig. 3.10, the 1996 Thompson densities are only from the five sites that were done in 1995. Three new sites were done in 1996, two in the S. Thompson. Densities were better in 1996 but fry densities in small Thompson streams are clearly extremely low - especially considering that the reconnaissance crew often failed to find coho in the sites they visited. One question that remains is do these densities accurately reflect the seriousness of the depressed status of interior coho or are interior coho rearing in larger, unsampled habitats such as lakes and rivers?

Another question regarding our fry surveys relates to the sensitivity of the method to detect shrinking coho habitat. As discussed in the Methods section, sites are not randomly selected and most streams are sampled at one site. Fry data must be analyzed in a more sophisticated way than we have had time to do here (e.g. B. Holtby's analysis in Simpson et al. 1996). The simple presentation of fry density trends carries the risk of not detecting shrinking habitat capacity or shifts in habitat use by fry. Habitat research is critical to the proper assessment of coho populations and, clearly, habitat preservation and restoration is critical for the mid to long term viability of coho populations.

The very poor 1996 escapements will provide an unsought but very valuable opportunity to further define coho population dynamics by fry and smolt sampling. The severe 1996/97 winter

26 floods on the coast are an additional concern with regard to egg and fry survivals. A decline in fry densities will signal that the very strong compensatory mechanisms that coho exhibit were insufficient up to the early fall sampling period to compensate for low fry recruitment. Total freshwater survival will be monitored by smelt enumerations in 1998. Thus 1997 fry and 1998 smolt monitoring, at Salmon (Langley) and Black Creek and in the Thompson and Cowichan systems will provide particularly valuable information needed to define risks associated with escapement goals (Holtby and Kadowaki 1996).

4. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1 . Virtually all coho originating in the Strait of Georgia and Fraser River region once again completed their ocean rearing to the west and north of Vancouver Island. Marine survivals have been declining for at least seven and perhaps 16 years. Survivals continued to decline for the 1993 brood year, probably more so on the east coast of Vancouver Island than in the lower Fraser area. Catches began to decline in 1990 but dropped substantially in 1996. Despite reduced catches, exploitation rates on hatchery indicator stocks were similar to 1995 levels, mostly in the 55% to 60% range, but exploitations of the two wild stocks increased. Since catches were much less (it is noteworthy that the WCVI troll ceiling was not achieved), recruitment to the fishery must have been very poor. Escapements to indicator stocks have been trending down for at least the last 12 years and were extremely low in 1996, especially on the east coast of Vancouver Island and in the Thompson system. We conclude that crisis-level escapements and declining catches are being primarily driven by poor ocean survival and perhaps reduced wild smolt production.

2. It is especially important with poor survivals and low escapements to estimate fry, smelt and spawner abundances in as many streams as possible. Although the indicator stream strategy appears to be a good one, indeed the only adequate one, there are important differences from stream to stream. The very high exploitation rate at Black Creek in 1996 compared to nearby hatcheries was a case in point.

Recommendations:

1. More mid to high quality escapement data should be obtained to supplement existing wild indicator stocks, for example by utilizing community volunteers. This escapement data network should be coupled with fry surveys and some stocks should be developed into full indicators by conducting smolt enumerations and coded wire tagging. First priority should be given to wild stock indicators on southeast Vancouver Island, the mainland coast and in the Thompson system.

2. A PSARC Working Paper should be prepared which evaluates the assessment framework for coho salmon.

27 5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank Brenda Adkins, Roberta Cook, Steve Baillie, Clyde Murray and Colin Wallace for their generous assistance.

6. REFERENCES

Argue, A.W., J. Coursley, and G.D. Harris. 1977. Preliminary revision of Georgia Strait and Juan de Fuca Strait tidal salmon sport catch statistics, 1972 to 1976, based on Georgia Strait Head Recovery Program data. Fish. Mar. Serv. Tech. Rep. PAC/T-77-16: 68p.

Bison, R. 1992. The interception of steelhead, chinook, and coho salmon during three commercial gill net openings at Nitinat, 1991. Report to file, British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, Fisheries Branch, Kamloops, BC.

Bocking, R.C., J.R. Irvine and R.E. Bailey. 1991. Enumeration and coded-wire tagging of coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch) smelts leaving Black Creek, French Creek, and the Trent River on Vancouver Island during 1989. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2115: 103 p.

Bocking, R.C., J.R. Irvine and R.E. Bailey. 1992. Coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch) escapement studies in Black Creek, French Creek, and Trent River, Vancouver Island, 1989. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2160: 77p.

Brown, T.G., L. Barton, and G. Langford. 1996. The use of a Geographic Information System to evaluate Terrain Resource Information Management (TRIM) maps and to measure land use patterns for Black Creek, Vancouver Island. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2395: 34p.

Clarke, D.G., and J.R. Irvine. 1989. Enumeration and coded-wire tagging of coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch) smolts leaving Black Creek, Vancouver Island, during 1978 and 1979, their subsequent distribution in sport and commercial fisheries and escapement to the creek in 1978-1980. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2017: 45p.

Callicutt, L.D., and T.F. Shardlow. 1992. Strait of Georgia sport fishery creel survey: statistics ·tor salmon and groundfish, 1990. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2109: vii + 75· p.

28 Elson, M.S. 1985. A review of the Pitt Lake watershed. Prepared for New Projects Unit, Salmonid Enhancement Program, Can. Dept. Fish. Oceans, Vancouver, B.C. 128 p.

Farwell, M.K., N.D. Schubert, K.H. Wilson, and C.R. Harrison. 1987. Salmon escapements to streams entering statistical areas 28 and 29, 1951 to 1985. Can. Data Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 601 : 166p.

Farwell, M.K., N.D. Schubert, and L.W. Kalnin. 1991. A coded wire tag assessment of Salmon River (Langley) coho salmon: 1988 tag application and 1989-90 spawner enumeration. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2079: 32p.

Farwell, M.K., N.D. Schubert, and L.W. Kalnin. 1992a. A coded wire tag assessment of Salmon River (Langley) coho salmon: 1989 tag application and 1990-91 spawner enumeration. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2114: 32p.

Farwell, M.K., N.D. Schubert, and L.W. Kalnin. 1992b. A coded wire tag assessment of Salmon River (Langley) coho salmon: 1990 tag application and 1991-92 spawner enumeration. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2153: 42p.

Fielden, R.J., G.J. Birch, and J.R. Irvine. 1989. Enumeration and coded-wire tagging of coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch) smolts leaving Black Creek, French Creek and Trent River, Vancouver Island, during 1988. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2018: 85p.

Harding, T., L. Jaremovic and G. Kosakoski. 1994. Strategic Review of Fisheries Resources, North Thompson Habitat Management Area. Fraser River Action Plan, Dept. Fish. Oceans, Vancouver, 8.C. 164 p.

Hickey, D.G., l.W. Whyte, and N.D. Schubert. 1987. An assessment of the fall Vedder­ Chilliwack River sport fishery, 1985. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1908: 25p.

Holtby, L.B. 1988. Effects of logging on stream temperatures in Carnation Creek, British Columbia, and associated impacts on the coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch). Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 45:502-515.

Holtby, L.B. 1993. Escapement trends in Mesachie Lake coho salmon with comments on Cowichan Lake coho salmon. PSARC Working Paper S93-3.

Holtby, B., and R. Kadowaki. 1996. Forecast of 1997 return of coho to west Vancouver Island with comments on the implications of the po.or brood year (1994) escapement. PSARC Working Paper S96-22.

Irvine, J.R., J.F.T. Morris, and L.M. Cobb. 1993. Area-under-the-curve salmon escapement estimation manual. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1932: 84p.

Irvine, J.R., R.E. Bailey, D. Imhof, F.C. Dalziel, W. Pennell, and C. Chesnut. 1994. Coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch) spawning enumeration and related studies at Chase River and Beck Creek, Vancouver Island. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2264: 31 p.

29 Kadowaki, R., J. Irvine, B. Holtby, N. Schubert, K. Simpson, R. Bailey, and C. Cross. 1995. Assessment of Strait of Georgia coho salmon stocks (including the Fraser River}. PSARC Working Paper S94-9.

Kadowaki, R., B. Holtby, K. Simpson, and D. Blackbourn. 1996. An update of assessment information for Strait of Georgia coho salmon stocks with 1996 forecasts and advice on setting an exploitation rate target. PSARC Working Paper S96-11.

Kadowaki, R. 1997. 1997 forecasts of marine survival and catch distribution for Strait of Georgia coho salmon. PSARC Working Paper S97-6.

Kalnin, L.W., and N.D. Schubert. 1991. A coded wire tag assessment of Salmon River (Langley} coho salmon: 1987 tag application and 1988-89 spawner enumeration. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2068: 37p.

Labelle, M. 1990a. A comparative study of coho stocks of SE Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Juvenile outmigration, coded wire tagging and recovery, escapement enumeration and stock composition at Black Creek, Trent River and French Creek, 1984- 1988. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1722: 148p.

Labelle, M. 1990b. A comparative study of the demographic traits and exploitation patterns of coho salmon stocks from SE Vancouver Island, B.C. Ph.D. thesis, The University of British Columbia. 264p.

Nass, B.L., J. Carolsfeld, J.R. Irvine, and R.E. Bailey. 1993a. Enumeration and coded-wire tagging of coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch} smelts leaving Black Creek, French Creek, and the Trent River on Vancouver Island during 1990. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2206: 82p.

Nass, B.L., R.C. Bocking, R.E. Bailey, and J.R. Irvine. 1993b. Coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch) escapement studies in Black Creek, French Creek, and Trent River, Vancouver Island, 1990. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2205: 69p.

Nelson, T.C., B.L. Nass, R.E. Bailey, and J.R. Irvine. 1994a. 1991 juvenile and adult coho salmon enumeration studies at Black Creek, Vancouver Island. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2239: 71 p.

Nelson, T.C., J.R. Irvine, and R.E. Bailey. 1994b. 1992 juvenile and adult coho salmon enumeration studies at Black Creek, Vancouver Island. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2290: x+70p.

Nelson, T.C., R.E. Bailey, and J.R. Irvine. 1995. 1993 juvenile and adult coho salmon enumeration studies at Black Creek, Vancouver Island. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2291: x+74p.

Nelson, T.C., J.R. Irvine, and R.E. Bailey. 1996. 1994 juvenile and adult coho salmon enumeration studies at Black Creek, Vancouver Island. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2356: x+67p.

30 Nelson, T.C., and K.S. Simpson. 1996. 1995 juvenile coho salmon enumeration studies at Black Creek, Vancouver Island. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2361: ix +40p.

Schubert, N.D. 1982a. Trapping and coded wire tagging of wild coho salmon smelts from the Salmon River {Langley), 1978 to 1980. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1972: 68p.

Schubert, N.D. 1982b. A bio-physical inventory of thirty lower Fraser Valley streams. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1644: 130p.

Schubert, N.D., and A.Y. Fedorenko. 1985. Trapping and coded wire tagging of wild coho salmon juveniles in the upper Pitt River system, 1979 and 1980. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1815: 78p.

Schubert, N.D., M.K. Farwell, and L.W. Kalnin. 1994a. A coded wire tag assessment of Salmon River {Langley) coho salmon: 1991 tag application and 1992-1993 spawner enumeration. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2208: 39p.

Schubert, N.D., M.K. Farwell, and L.W:Kalnin ..1994b. A coded wire tag assessment of Salmon River {Langley) coho salmon: 1992 tag application and 1993-1994 spawner enumeration. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2241 : 33p.

Schubert, N.D. and 0. Fleming. 1989. An evaluation of the escapement and survival of selected lower Fraser River area wild coho salmon stocks. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2006: 121p.

Schubert, N.D. and L.W. Kalnin. 1990. A coded wire tag assessment of Salmon River {Langley) coho salmon: 1986 tag application and 1987 spawner enumeration. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2053: 43p.

Simpson, K., 8. Holtby, R. Kadowaki and W. Luedke. 1996. Assessment of coho stocks on the west coast of Vancouver Island. PSARC Working Paper S96-10.

Symons, P.E.K. and M. Waldichuk [eds.]. 1984. Proceedings of the workshop on stream indexing tor salmon escapement estimation. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1326: 273 p.

Whyte, l.W., N.D. Schubert and D.G. Hickey. 1987. An assessment of the fall Vedder­ Chilliwack River sport fishery, 1986. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1928: 22p.

Whyte, l.W., and N.D. Schubert. 1990. An assessment of the fall Vedder-Chilliwack River sport fishery, 1988. Can. MS Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2050: 33p.

31 S318VJ. XION3ddV r r (''

Appendix Table 2.1 Fry and smolt releases in four Thompson streams used as escapement indicators.

Stream l\,ta1 am.el l\,tal 1g:(Js fttbst ~yrs Nall arrual N&l11g:[Js ~yrs of Sl11Jlt rel's fryrela& fryrela& ,.,...... of fry rel's sm>lt release sm>lt release ITDlfh*

llm 49,792 24,377 Fal 12 17,'2S2. 18,119 9 (sirm 1988)

L.aTieux 16,ffiB 995 ~rYJ 9 1,9'25 3,BEl> 3 ('92, '94 m95)

l..ruis 24,411 13,002 ~rYJ 15 6,7E6 16,479 7(sirm1900)

Salnm 215,045 1€6,314 ~rYJ 15 1,915 4,378 2 ('93 a"d '94)

*rvtrly exaiPes of sµi~, fall a"d sare SLl11TB' pants exC'SJX in sanm (Wiere al bJt aie releca3 V\E5 in spirv;J).

33 Apriix Table 3.1. Estimated CWT data by catch region for a~· pho from Black Creek. ('·:

Return Year 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 No. Fish Released: 24134 31648 35640 74997 29203 118382 52351 49860 54996 75970 18152 FISHERY NTR 16 94 36 88 42 66 69 52 22 73 25 NCTR 23 25 40 15 26 21 79 4 13 12 0 SCTR 656 363 379 451 348 143 896 133 50 18 0 NWTR 308 375 519 993 334 1831 1023 182 294 420 88 SWTR 161 131 141 561 138 1049 209 37 647 633 71 GSTR 128 467 346 209 303 75 345 319 189 0 0 JFTR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NN 0 9 0 32 0 4 0 9 8 10 0 CN 15 17 28 53 28 25 107 34 30 27 0 NWVN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SWVN 0 0 0 9 5 5 4 0 5 1 0 JSN 317 266 318 1135 333 759 413 289 166 148 9 GSN 6 18 6 32 44 28 23 12 0 0 0 FGN 0 0 0 6 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 JFN 29 23 3 223 61 473 31 0 107 32 0 FSN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NSPT 0 0 ·O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CSPT 39 13 59 65 36 231 311 108 55 60 45 ACS PT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WSPT 8 10 0 42 6 129 95 0 29 68 0 GSPTN 418 1163 1248 1646 877 1032 1117 1192 752 92. 76 GSPTS 19 38 75 202 36 14 100 33 38 0 0 JFSPT 9 6 0 25 22 44 21 2 81 48 39 FWSP 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 10 0 WASHINGTON 28 46 23 191 25 412 29 18 5 66 NIA ALASKA 3 4 10 21 12 39 60 97 59 204 NIA TOTAL BC TROLL 1291 1455 1460 2316 1190 3186 2622 725 1214 1156 184 TOTAL BC NET 368 332 356 1489 471 1303 578 343 316 219 9 TOTAL BC SPORT 498 1234 1382 1980 977 1449 1643 1341 954 277 159 ESCAPEMENT 824 531 1279 2502 944 2616 1388 638 583 1494 93 SURVIVAL 12.5% 11.4% 12.7% 11.3% 12.4% 7.6% 12.1% 6.3% 5.7% 4.5% 2.5% EXPLOITATION 72.6% 85.3% 71.6% 70.6% 73.9% 70.9% 78.0% 79.8% 81.4% 56.3% 79.2% PROP'N INSIDE' 26.3% 55.6% 52.1% 35.7% 46.7% 18.9% 32.0% 62.0% 38.5% 5.0% 21.5%

1 Recoveries in the inside troll and sport fisheries as a proportion of total marine recoveries, excluding recoveries from Washington State. <:pendix Table 3.2. Estimated CWT data by catch region 1!:dult coho from Salmon River (Langley).

RETURN YEAR 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 No. Fish Released: 7891 20022 24634 26911 20390 29435 28141 15611 35256 32616 FISHERY NTR 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 NCTR 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCTR 7 31 0 34 1 72 19 0 5 0 NWTR 22 94 97 138 96 319 69 48 141 300 SWTR 111 267 563 580 713 318 79 550 739 751 GSTR 206 681 101 594 15 399 516 57 0 0 JFTR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CN 0 2 0 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 NWVN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SWVN 0 5 36 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 JSN 2 61 32 40 0 10 4 6 3 7 GSN 3 5 8 3 0 3 0 2 0 0 FGN 1 108 6 98 24 52 3 18 0 0 JFN 56 33 263 45 130 39 8 62 52 2 FSN 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NSPT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CSPT 12 37 0 7 0 30 10 0 0 0 ACS PT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WSPT 14 0 23 0 24 48 0 25 20 17 GSPTN 260 1236 530 830 10 458 403 167 0 61 GSPTS 44 512 301 158 0 218 149 26 54 86 JFSPT 26 0 95 38 12 60 8 32 49 117 FWSP 7 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 WASHINGTON 71 203 366 234 186 74 18 0 125 NIA ALASKA 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 NIA TOTAL BC TROLL 346 1072 761 1358 825 1108 684 655 885 1051 TOTAL BC NET 62 218 344 188 154 109 14 87 55 9 TOTAL BC SPORT 363 1793 949 1032 45 813 570 250 128 280 ESCAPEMENT 373 1102 903 801 371 730 1079 495 1248 982 SURVIVAL 15.4% 21.9% 13.5% 13.4% 7.8% 9.6% 8.4% 9.5% 6.9% (7.1%) EXPLOITATION 69.3% 74.9% 72.8% 77.8% 76.5% 74.3% 54.4% 66.7% 48.9% (57.7%) PROP'N INSIDE1 67.1% 82.1% 45.7% 63.9% 2.5% 54.3% 84.4% 25.7% 5.1% 10.9% l Recoveries In the Inside troll and sport fisheries as a proportion of total marine recoveries, excluding recoveries from Washington State. Appendix Table.f"". Expanded CWT data by catch region for adult coho fro< 1illiwack R. Hatchery. Survivals and exploitations are und£ 3timated · due to sign1t _..tnt unknown catches in freshwater sport fisheries.

RETURN YEAR 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 No. Fish Released: 59358 31516 393925 2119869 1788359 1799232 1706288 1728963 1828481 1908265 1942508 2003183 1939584 1795181 FISHERY NTR 40 0 63 0 1243 165 222 253 219 0 0 0 0 0 NCTR 36 15 19 237 107 158 73 122 0 0 0 0 0 0 SCTR 547 100 300 4498 5229 2819 318 2286 671 1895 247 101 319 0 NWTR 365 265 2091 8019 16526 9694 10406 14006 20098 13624 6595 11947 5766 9556 SWTR 882 921 6308 36011 41518 20494 40253 26948 57429 12413 11142 53239 29000 20105 GSTR 397 348 11822 31361 40098 53645 8083 22944 235 11127 22425 3182 0 0 JFTR 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NN 5 0 0 132 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CN 13 0 11 73 50 0 0 0 0 496 0 0 0 0 NWVN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SWVN 0 0 18 0 168 490 2192 0 0 140 56 0 0 0 JSN 610 78 941 1498 2228 4796 2649 2547 1288 1374 1201 299 0 327 GSN 53 6 537 792 876 168 0 190 0 151 390 0 0 0 FGN 80 18 1056 3935 1774 7418 1355 2201 825 451 605 537 457 0 JFN 15 32. 1042 3040 8017 1086 14513 6377 8983 2407 210 3146 1865 0 FSN 0 0 0 541 0 211 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NSPT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CSPT 19 0 42 277 239 2100 217 0 337 0 465 253 164 0 ACS PT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WSPT 0 4 0 247 715 0 1206 741 869 978 0 887 641 806 GSPTN 1257 471 16908 39078 68712 116550 35878 40905 1526 20182 34261 12209 88 1085 GSPTS 373 226 4600 8924 15871 28480 14264 6378 1767 6452 6285 2159 0 315 JFSPT 28 13 129 1292 2800 1963 1903 1293 1878 831 190 2835 321 4336 FWSP 416 128 1680 9830 9700 7823 11708 6413 4498 2070 5420 5113 1909 3830 WASHINGTON 312 101 4651 15852 17676 12884 19583 7405 19610 2381 4166 830 4684 NIA ALASKA 15 4 11 0 56 0 69 0 111 0 0 153 0 NIA TOTAL BC TROLL 2267 1650 20603 80125 104721 86974 59355 66559 78652 39060 40409 68469 35085 29660 TOTAL BC NET 776 134 3605 10011 13113 14169 20709 11315 11096 5018 2462 3982 2322 327 TOTAL BC SPORT 2093 842 23359 59647 98037 156916 65176 55730 10875 30512 46621 23456 3123 10371 ESCAPEMENT 1656 1776 19825 45478 69268 55878 47009 43136 45154 31115 20165 30798 27223 27407 SURVIVAL 12.0% 14.3% 18.3% 10.0% 16.9% 18.2% 12.4% 10.7% 9.1% 5.7% 5.9% 6.4% 3.7% (3.8%) EXPLOITATION 76.7% 60.6% 72.5% 78.5% 77.1% 82.9% 77.8% 76.6% 72.7% 71.2% 82.3% 75.9% 62.4% (59.6%) PROP'N INSIDE1 44.0% 42.2% 75.2% 58.9% 61.2% 81.9% 44.0% 56.3% 3.7% 52.5% 75.8% 19.4% 0.2% 3.8%

1 Recoveries in the inside troll and sport fisheries as a proportion of total marine recoveries, excluding recoveries from Washington. f Appenf'. able 3.4. Expanded CWT data by catch region for adult cf.:o from Inch Cr. Hatchery.

Return Year 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 No. Fish Released: 70595 80268 99414 53863 59721 82129 184526 153120 183104 229647 242949 257049 FISHERY NTR 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NCTR 5 0 0 0 8 0 0 91 0 0 0 0 SCTR 0 162 149 41 29 32 18 194 18 0 0 0 NWTR 105 141 269 193 51 259 1092 1493 311 529 666 1305 SWTR 759 557 1007 786 999 1289 5262 2083 574 5533 6859 4604 GSTR 964 1026 1565 2308 277 775 180 1901 3387 1130 0 0 JFTR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 0 NWVN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SWVN 0 3 31 23 69 0 21 26 0 61 0 0 JSN 28 54 108 126 40 71 0 109 127 10 152 0 GSN 47 18 46 18 0 11 0 13 14 0 0 0 FGN 14 63 0 106 0 102 359 193 0 26 0 0 JFN 170 104 240 33 434 250 811 209 0 1018 282 28 FSN 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NSPT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CSPT 0 12 46 22 0 46 25 47 63 0 0 0 ACS PT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WSPT 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 143 0 GSPTN 1406 974 2224 3982 1241 1559 173 2647 5148 2113 109 302 GSPTS 554 364 793 1498 466 494 581 1542 1926 438 1163 784 JFSPT 19 15 89 103 69 127 225 268 98 335 256 575 FWSP 28 15 28 85 59 11 69 21 76 104 120 278 WASHINGTON 286 299 428 361 669 613 1598 522 251 19 430 NIA ALASKA 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 N/A TOTAL BC TROLL 1833 1885 3032 3328 1365 2356 6551 5762 4290 7193 7524 5908 TOTAL BC NET 259 251 426 306 544 434 1191 550 141 1115 495 28 TOTAL BC 2007 1380 3185 5690 1835 2237 1073 4525 7311 3005 1791 1939 SPORT ESCAPEMENT 413 1046 1431 1415 2212 1035 2174 3592 3257 2496 3025 1790 SURVIVAL 6.8% 6.1% 8.6% 20.6% 11.1% 8.1% 6.8% 9.8% 8.3% 6.0% 5.5% (3.8%) EXPLOITATION 91.4% 78.5% 83.2% 87.3% 66.6% 84.5% 82.7% 76.0% 78.6% 81.9% 77.'l!>lo (81.5%) PROP'N INSIDE1 72.9% 69.3% 69.8% 85.4% 53.9% 57.7% 11.1% 57.4% 89.8% 32.9% 13.1% 14.3%

1 Recoveries in the inside troll and sport fisheries as a proportion of total marine recoveries, excluding recoveries from Washington.

I) "7 \r· Appendix Table ~.5. Expanded CWT data by catch region for adult coho from Big Qualicum River Hatchery.

RETURN YEAR 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 \lo. Fish Released: 377765 672372 983081 1009430 690872 987395 1197409 1182746 1169263 1254712 3522034 2658239 1472413 1111678 822542 1057206 1062989 1142312 1168887 1158714 1391025 =1SHERY \ITR 290 112 420 344 425 0 79 0 293 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 181 0 0 450 \ICTR 1492 493 1919 560 653 1010 497 381 334 0 0 0 80 0 18 0 198 0 0 0 0 SCTR 11205 2826 9946 5879 6920 11157 5719 20743 7552 1101 2323 8 1630 6 1132 601 1479 824 62 178 0 \IWTR 4694 2233 7774 4323 7010 5893 4426 9579 10032 2164 1214 1611 1269 423 2230 8248 6878 2349 4822 4413 4351 SWTR 7609 5422 8087 6934 10390 10731 14073 6887 9048 4218 4678 1301 32 1446 1189 17899 3393 834 19082 11104 5121 3STR 6448 6690 16446 19996 15925 6338 11981 970 3609 5111 3744 1801 1525 379 3485 338 5869 11502 2598 0 0 JFTR 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \IN 94 93 0 160 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :)N 1986 1544 1549 937 670 435 348 688 0 200 0 0 5 7 60 0 559 0 0 0 0 \IWVN 91 126 0 0 0 0 163 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SWVN 23 0 146 12 26 22 0 0 73 0 0 0 0 8 0 214 114 37 149 43 0 JSN 11718 14665 20043 10496 15306 15052 18251 19029 7011 4751 1278 754 2168 651 1696 1160 3240 3048 851 384 316 3SN 5164 787 399 298 479 1418 2204 6850 3833 6296 1045 735 848 320 989 3031 826 626 324 0 0 =GN 297 0 364 208 4 0 93 24 0 0 0 0 0 147 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 JFN 2173 1622 662 1041 1435 1871 1083 44 516 1589 558 435 198 794 891 2833 591 0 3445 116 0 =sN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \ISPT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~SPT 26 71 40 373 270 195 675 502 668 187 0 333 599 16 256 908 1418 1091 301 88 0 ~CSPT 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NSPT 0 0 41 6 0 4 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 1097 440 0 0 972 1201 637 3SPTN 35933 30251 29412 77589 67739 25427 27521 35186 16440 23205 9152 6470 10348 4899 11113 4350 19097 32343 15708 353 574 3SPTS 2661 3036 4492 8578 7764 2553 3144 2637 1630 1772 188 327 575 131 782 0 2073 2790 1239 62 0 JFSPT 289 292 240 294 133 363 1041 715 662 114 198 376 0 48 636 1005 508 123 1995 422 0 =wsP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 276 490 0 310 0 0 254 239 148 334 2253 306 552 NASHINGTON 7448 2487 3027 1470 10776 3175 5825 2028 601 1525 2166 118 171 126 1078 4901 400 126 0 315 NIA ~LASKA 0 0 0 0 0 0 253 0 200 0 0 0 136 0 3 65 0 110 0 163 NIA TOTAL BC TROLL 31737 17805 44591 38035 41322 35130 36775 38561 30869 12593 11959 4721 4535 2253 8054 27086 17817 15690 26564 15695 9922 fOTALBC NET 21546 18837 23162 13152 17920 18797 22143 26635 11433 12836 2880 1924 3219 1927 3636 7237 5329 3742 4769 543 316 TOTAL BC SPORT 38910 33650 34225 86846 75905 28542 32468 39112 19676 25768 9538 7816 11521 5129 14138 6942 23245 36680 22469 2431 1762 :SCAPEMENT 9157 28692 38393 54027 40728 30048 25503 25984 29305 10076 9102 5330 4803 5554 11517 20386 12046 19750 22059 15115 8608 SURVIVAL 28.7% 15.1% 14.6% 19.2% 27.0% 11.7% 10.3% 11.2% 7.9% 5.0% 1.0% 0.7% 1.7% 1.3% 4.7% 6.3% 5.5% 6.7% 6.5% 3.0% (1.5%) :XPLOITATION 91.6% 71.7% 73.2% 72.1% 78.2% 74.0% 79.3% 80.4% 68.2% 84.0% 74.5% 73.2<'k 80.3% 62.9% 70.0% 69.4% 79.5% 74.0% 70.9% 55.9% (58.2%) =>ROP'N INSIDE1 51.9% 57.5% 49.7% 77.2% 67.9% 42.3% 47.7% 39.8% 37.3% 67.7% 56.1% 64.1% 67.1% 61.2<'/o 62.5% 12.3% 59.5% 84.4% 38.2% 2.2<'/o 5.0%

1 Recoveries in the Inside troll and sport fisheries as a proportion of total marine recoveries, excluding recoveries from Washington.

l)O Appendix Table(''. Expanded CWT data by catch region for adult coho trof:uinsam River Hatchery.

RETURN YEAR 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 '.Jo. Fish Released: 1439951 661667 537382 1331237 1382865 985767 1275830 948180 1174047 1853852 1201640 1287066 1347697 1057725 1172118 1176616 1220201 1224754 1128936 1193987 =!SHERY 'HA 178 751 99 980 353 149 161 114 57 379 382 540 867 143 139 0 0 0 0 0 \JCTR 1163 1018 222 2332 761 341 1122 191 114 331 642 581 92 0 56 212 0 0 0 0 SCTR 3690 5735 1887 13158 12978 3911 14297 5333 4510 24835 5760 6946 4218 3846 558 4695 646 351 0 0 \JWTR 2333 3186 1675 8084 5366 3178 7482 3885 2745 4775 4080 8805 8081 3546 5834 6330 1151 1734 3245 948 SWTR 2516 1699 860 5311 2684 2300 1563 2571 2421 3115 2534 1444 3839 1473 11045 1156 182 6024 7320 1698 3STR 2924 6009 1325 7436 2026 2046 2897 1388 3886 5587 13307 6480 13372 10244 540 6191 4891 1482 0 0 JFTR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \JN 25 0 227 198 28 31 0 0 24 0 95 0 4 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 :N 4374 939 672 1631 195 458 385 88 355 166 301 805 768 652 0 1238 0 101 0 0 \JWVN 1531 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SWVN 0 0 0 110 37 8 0 0 31 0 0 0 575 0 0 0 0 54 21 0 JSN 18714 9859 4223 22788 25211 11445 17925 7175 16597 16915 5754 11780 15666 10193 4174 3270 3387 944 798 465 3SN 78 35 0 57 165 73 125 111 218 461 169 176 112 122 155 0 0 0 0 0 =GN 0 65 21 19 139 53 69 48 12 145 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 JFN 758 31 23 757 1209 318 26 71 852 773 744 263 2073 836 2628 224 0 571 814 0 =sN . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 \JSPT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :SPT 164 216 205 786 723 433 677 593 864 2326 849 2393 1843 1432 1206 3522 852 131 0 583 ~CSPT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NSPT 0 0 0 70 0 9 109 34 7 15 469 0 28 0 569 0 0 279 970 967 3SPTN 26069 20160 11641 35326 15558 8063 12727 10442 35894 29275 39065 37246 39383 32784 3004 23875 20474 7300 1624 1039 3SPTS 530 746 561 1088 572 402 554 745 1005 1825 1522 863 3055 1746 0 2602 446 698 0 0 JFSPT 88 189 29 0 10 57 96 159 180 353 643 1112 637 440 408 330 0 509 993 664 =wsP 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 95 355 110 179 232 33 275 0 0 0 0 0 0 NASHINGTON 935 326 189 1591 1548 555 426 206 1115 1044 1050 84 1523 141 2309 326 0 67 838 NIA ~LASKA 0 0 0 748 72 123 68 32 19 193 0 0 316 178 0 0 0 68 0 NIA fOTAL BC TROLL 12804 18398 6067 37299 24168 11925 27522 13482 13732 39022 26705 24795 30467 19252 18173 18584 6870 9591 10565 2646 rDTAL BC NET 25479 10930 5165 25560 26984 12390 18530 7496 18090 18485 7062 13025 19211 11868 6958 4733 3387 1669 1633 465 fOTAL BC SPORT 26851 21311 12435 37270 16862 8964 14199 12068 38310 33930 42728 41845 44979 36676 5186 30329 21771 8917 3586 3253 ::SCAPE ME NT 17442 11764 10409 15346 17270 11080 12096 14613 21542 33948 23235 23159 40476 13781 16209 14436 10261 7329 11133 4820 SURVIVAL 5.8% 9.5% 6.4% 8.8% 6.3% 4.6% 5.7% 5.1% 7.9% 6.8% 8.4% 8.0% 10.2% 7.7% 4.2% 5.8% 3.5% 2.3% 2.5% (0.9%) ::XPLOIT ATION 79.1% 81.2% 69.6% 87.0% 80.1% 75.4% 83.4% 69.5% 76.8% 73.2% 76.9% 77.5% 70.4% 83.2% 66.8% 78.9% 75.7% 73.5% 59.9% (56.9%) :>ROP'N INSIDE' 45.4% 53.3% 57.2% 43.5% 26.8% 31.6% 26.9% 38.3% 58.6% 40.4% 70.8% 56.3% 58.9% 66.3% 11.7% 60.9% 80.6% 46.8% 10.3% 16.3%

1 Recoveries in the inside troll and sport fisheries as a proportion of total marine recoveries, excluding recoveries from Washington. Appendix T~3.7. Coho catch in commercial and sport fisheries of so< :>ast BC, 1970 to 1996. Sport catch estimates before 198("'J from Collicu'l _.• d Shardlow (1992).

··:ti'i' ...:.: ..... ·=-. m- ms111~ r-:Wmt«l~ • YY.'::•.°• ••• •;.;.~. ~ ~·-.. :' .: §: ;.•.': ..~ .f.' ~.; ~ :::;:;: • • N ~.~ .-::: •" 1w.,,.,··.· 14~M§:;"'""'""'"•': ·: ·~ .. . .:$·{-.:*Wffi~' . , ~ ~--,--8 ~ ~ . . ~; .,.II -=~= :{:!:!~ :~ l';:Tll -.. r:~;;;:-fm : . .. ~ .· .. ~·w1.f ·= ~~ =· = ....·~· .. i:'··;:: . :·.. ~ ~kiimlM~r · · · . · ~ ·' : : ~ ·~;,iif~ ~?::·:: ~ ~ •. ~ ;i:.:::.-~·,., "I!=- • . :::s:::~::::~.:::::::::$:w: . :;:::~~m.W~w.: ·: ' . • W.« ' , . fl.'...... :... .-:-:-: ...... ::: .:-»... :::; ::: . : ...... ,:oc .. II ::;-:;~::-~:lli~=- =·~=~f:m~ .• r n 1970 262330 162103 16789 526594 252839 •99076 188825 •20157 463978 6018 22013 •500000 800067 1220655 500000 2520722 1971 134687 238985 7130 1509385 666334 70781 224643 26663 597689 10317 30967 800000 961060 2556521 800000 4317581 1972 194910 62881 7434 601387 387038 80922 72238 11841 158261 9917 23723 335000 356902 1253650 335000 1945552 1973 171408 92497 1508 1127748 278553 53521 142376 17357 474034 13437 23608 373000 724333 1671714 373000 2769047 1974 179855 148074 5664 1230483 413520 26164 103108 16026 437892 2572 63890 772000 649652 1977596 772000 3399248 1975 115696 112609 4094 524507 256741 43238 112072 21401 408213 4041 72406 454000 661371 1013647 454000 2129018 1976 372286 80635 3365 1136783 503476 14009 202992 12174 248510 11047 28736 415000 517468 2096545 415000 3029013 1977 159925 143194 7314 1244496 323383 42119 221422 11510 505842 9636 41160 682000 831689 1878312 682000 3392001 1978 205822 326372 1831 955328 404946 51002 195196 6846 104174 26219 3114 1103000 386551 1894299 1103000 3383850 1979 186351 224239 1496 1365077 547801 7661 132878 1142 255340 23057 2321 708734 422399 2324964 708734 3456097 1980 212457 150819 2202 1325602 412868 34587 163864 6911 158611 12019 3151 642000 379143 2103948 642000 3125091 1981 196917 63867 5270 1026915 358408 5181 199163 12353 278186 6319 1073 391200 502275 1651377 391200 2544852 1982 145783 115693 1593 1315815 461621 19365 189376 9021 127641 3949 9451 436090 358803 2040505 436090 2835398 1983 351635 57938 0 1689250 478188 11323 239310 16279 16907 9053 155 404026 293027 2577011 404026 3274064 1984 226130 80416 3642 1668409 503757 9194 118071 13563 74851 7787 2772 443590 2995 226238 2482354 446585 3155177 1985 89266 191207 310 1012020 377035 18229 145694 31764 224735 4859 2656 728197 2190 427937 1669838 730387 2828162 1986 430083 181419 2892 1546331 610502 34394 123059 16237 202501 6709 3872 571980 2579 386772 2771227 574559 3732558 1987 141049 217538 190 1295914 525108 6528 57916 14045 216400 6741 501 641572 26834 302131 2179799 668406 3150336 1988 145363 256480 187 1039887 555914 29893 82660 3478 56719 10968 0 1084790 5626 183718 1997831 1090416 3271965 1989 94888 73306 69 1373216 578793 9954 108888 5051 342055 39660 0 497223 45268 505608 2120272 542491 3168371 1990 165128 163202 92 1134092 729516 12748 95931 8014 154133 2740 0 630033 20177 273566 2192030 650210 3115806 1991 47384 11583 0 1225300 664646 10091 63778 7168 180362 5234 0 157111 50086 266633 1948913 207197 2422743 1992 164425 137289 0 736329 935493 6963 57272 5675 105963 9167 572 595554 . 37654 185612 1973536 633208 2792356 1993 56726 275953 0 531812 421999 3000 55332 7216 6211 3406 71 838731 14322 75236 1286490 853053 2214779 1994 36074 50754 0 1044142 207675 5465 32827 716 124245 4650 91 294767 16397 167994 1338645 311164 1817803 1995 6217 14 0 1068480 276853 833 17119 18 36726 1373 73 85609 41571 56142 1351564 127180 1534886 1996 1943 21 720 549660 234740 732 5301 0 4153 1013 0 132512 25712 11199 787084 158224 956507

A I'\ Appendix Table 3.8 Escapements to Vancouver Island streams: Black Creek and Cowichan R. tributaries, 1941 to 1996. Cowichan data up to 1992 are from Holtby (1993).

Return Black Mesachie Richards Rotary Oliver Robertson Patricia Shaw Year Chann I ide Chan.

1941 1,291 890 1942 999 307 1943 1,826 394 1944 3,292 258

1975 7,989 1976 1977 1,697 719 1,575 816 1978 7,587 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1,153 ~ 1985 5,992 1986 4,818 291 366 1987 785 431 393 1988 3,122 170 285 1989 3,273 156 242 528 475 1,106 1990 1,237 574 1,201 553 811 621 1,320 1,626 1991 3,574 77 393 155 97 199 550 1,161 1992 1,722 13 124 69 5 30 274 591 1993 959 41 246 111 313 217 320 573 1994 900 133 446 69 306 57 715 1,588 1995 1,760 374 372 10 95 83 366 701 1996 147 26 97 31 5 22 78 365

41 ~ Appendix Table 3.9 Escapements to Fraser system streams, 1977 to 1996. See Section 2 of the text for data sources.

1 Return Salmon Upper Pitt Ea~le 1 Dunn1 Deadman Salmon Louis1 Lemieux1 Vear flower Fraser\ lSalmon Arm\1

1977 7,500 1978 17,500 1979 5,000 1980 2,500 1981 4,512 1982 7,297 1983 3,545 1984 1,550 1985 3,800 1986 2,700 1987 11,947 2,479 1988 9,152 10,300 700 1,722 4,405 1989 8,427 5,750 375 231 3,100 1990 4,942 3,862 1,400 273 1,070 1991 4,321 1,935 1,574 1,561 308 1992 2,604 3,322 1,990 1,225 2,250 1993 5,913 1,000 587 3,438 500 556 537 1994 1,941 6,976 1,000 609 476 376 290 935 1995 4,214 5,304 800 280 485 900 731 1,115 1996 2,639 4,845 235 150 353 127 284 212

1 Enhanced population.

42 Appendix Table 3.1 O Stream walk estimates of coho escapements to streams in the North and South Thompson drainages, 1988 to 1996.

Stream 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996

North Thompson (Clearwater Sub-district)

Avola Creek 0 0 10 20 120 100 126 40 20 Blue River 250 450 50 20 30 1 0 0 0 Cook Creek 25 70 100 10 20 4 0 0 0 Lion Creek 1,500 650 600 230 530 100 150 1,000 500 N. Thompson River 600 680 774 667 740 350 358 150 92 Reg Christie Creek 15 22 200 24 70 0 0 20 Shannon Creek 15 2 0 4 20 0 7 5 Tumtum Creek 0 25 26 0 45 12 2 2 0 Wirecache Creek 60 130 150 0 400 15 0 70 10 TOTAL 2,450 2,042 1,912 971 1,959 603 636 1,269 647

South Thompson (Salmon Arm Sub-district)

Adams River 500 350 100 100 250 20 70 75 16 Blurton Creek 70 35 50 0 50 30 8 0 0 Canoe Creek 75 100 50 30 20 25 6 10 0 Johnson Creek 90 50 50 30 50 24 6 25 8 Kingfisher Creek 150 50 0 0 45 60 32 25 0 Scotch Creek 100 50 50 40 50 10 10 20 16 Shuswap River(lower) 400 250 200 200 250 20 100 25 0 ~ Shuswap River(mid) 1,200 500 200 300 800 20 300 50 120 TOTAL 2,585 1,385 700 700 1,515 209 532 230 160

43 S31:1nE>l.:I XION3ddV ~ 3,500 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~------

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

O I ,•,•,•,•, 1 a 1 1 1 a a 1 a a a 1 a a 1 1 a 1 1 1 1 1 a a a 1 1 1 a a a ,•, 1 1 1 a 1 ,•, ,•,•,•,•,•,•,-,•,•,•,·1 0 ('I) U) 0) (\J lt> Q) ,.... 0 ('I) U) O> (\J lt> Q) v v v v lt> lt> lt> u; (2) ,.... ,.... co Q) Q) a; 0) .....O> .....0) .....~ .....0) .....0) .....0) .....O> .....0) 0)...... ~ ·~..... 0)...... O> .....~ .....O> .....0) .....0) .....O> .....0)

Appendix Figure 3.1 Escapement estimates of coho to Mesachie Creek, tributary to Cowichan Lake, 1941 to 1996. Data up to 1992 are from Holtby (1993). ~

900

800 --

700 --

600 -r-

500 --

400 ---

300 --

200 - 100 -- I_ I_ 0 ' . . . ' ' (\J Q) 0 ('I) U) 0) (\J lt> Q) 0 ('I) lt> lt> lt> u; (2) ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... Q) Q) Q) c;; ~ v v v lO 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) .....0) 0)...... O> ~...... 0) .....0) .....0) .....0) 0)...... O> .....O> O>...... O> O>...... ~ Appendix Figure 3.2 Escapement estimates of coho to Oliver Creek, tributary to upper Cowichan River, 1941 to 1996. Data up to 1992 are from Holtby (1993).

45 ~ 1,400

1,200 Bl Richards Cr.

1,000 • Rotary Side Chan.

800

600

400

200

0 ,...._ ,...._ ,...._ co ,...._O> 0 .,.... C\I C") ..q- LO 0 .,.... C\I C") ..q- LO O> O> O> O> O> O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> .,....O> ~.

Appendix Figure 3.3 Escapement estimates of coho to Richards Cr. and Rotary Channel, tributary to the lower Cowichan River, 1977 to 1996. Data up to 1992 from Holtby (1993).

-~

46 •

1400

1200 •Robertson side chan.

1000 13 Patricia Cr.

800

::: ~ ~ 600 <· ;. ·.,~ :~ 400 ~ ;i fil ~: ":; :-: ~ <· f: ?- ~ ~ ~ 200 x ,,~ @ ~ .,~1 i .,x ~ x ~ § x~ <· f1 f:: -*:~ ~ I *:-: I ~ JI ~ 00 Ol 0 N C") "

Appendix Figure 3.4 Escapement estimates of coho to Robertson side channel and Patricia Cr., tributaries to Cowichan Lake, 1977 to 1996. Data up to 1992 from Holtby (1993).

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Appendix Figure 3.5 Escapement estimates of coho to Shaw Cr., tributary to Cowichan Lake, 1990 to 1996.

47 D Louis Cr. 1,000

Im Lemieux Cr. 800

600

400

200 ......

1993 1994 1995 1996

Appendix Figure 3.6 Mark recapture escapement estimates of coho to Louis and Lemieux creeks, tributaries of the North Thompson River, 1993 to 1996.

48