UNDBR CONTROL OF

THE HON. THE M ISTER OF FISHERIES

BULLETI No. XXXI

PACIFIC N MIGRATION

THE TAGGING OF PINK SALMON AND THE

Pacific Dlq!lOglc:aJ Station THE BIOLOGICAL BOARD OF CANADA

UNDER THE CONTROL OF

THE HON. THE MINISTER OF FISHERIES

BULLETIN No. XXXI

PACIFIC SALMON MIGRATION

THE TAGGING OF THE PINK SALMON AND THE CHUM SALMON IN BRITISH COLUMBIA IN 1929 AND 1930

BY

ANDREW L. PRITCHARD

Pacific Biological Station

OTTAWA

1932 FIGURE I- A purse-seine drawn up to seine boat in preparation for "brailing".

FIGURE 2-Salmon being emptied into the hold of the seine boat. PINK SALMON (ONCORHYNCHUS GORBUSCHA (WALBAUM»

INTRODUCTION.

In order that the motives for the tagging of Pink salmon in 1929 may become apparent, it is necessary to note some of the conditions existing in the fishery for this species in British Columbia. These are illustrated by the statistics in table I, which includes the yearly packs in each district of the province during 1925-1930.

TABLE I.-Packs in cases of Pink salmon in the various districts during 1925-1930

Queen Year Fraser Skeena Rivers Smiths Nass Charlotte Vancouver Outlying river river inlet inlet river islands island districts

--

1925 99,800 130,079 *8,625 35 ,530 2,640 51,384 118,107 1926 32,256 210,081 12,815 689 50,815 200,512 86,113 179,731 1927 102,356 38,768 671 732 16,609 275 52,561 35,474 1928 2,881 209,579 16,546 167 83,183 167,217 41,885 270,914 1929 161,759 93,479 1,895 827 9,982 880 95 ,174 112,143 1930 30,754 275 ,642 18,023 16,615 79,976 224,902 89,941 376,084

*Total for Rivers and Smiths inlets

A study of the table above makes it evident immediately that in any given area the packs of Pinks are alternately large and small. Since the quantity of fishing g�ar has in most cases remained constant or decreased, we may safely assume tpat the total runs are alternately large and small as well. From direct observation, also, it has been well established that Pinks spawn in large numbers in each l�cality biennially. Hence a so-called "on" year or season of abundance is followed by an "off" year or season of scarcity. A circumstance still more peculiar is that the large runs occur in northern British Columbia in the even­ numbered years and in southern British Columbia in the odd-numbered ones. Thus the packs in and the Skeena river are large in 1926, 1928 and 1930, anp. in the Fraser river in 1925, 1927 and 1929. · This season of "famine" may in some cases become extreme. For instance in Massett inlet and Naden harbour on the Queen Charlotte islands in 1928 approxi­ mately seventy thousand cases were canned, and in 1930 over two hundred thousand, representing the capture in the former year of at least one million four hundred thousand Pinks, and in the latter of four million. Furthermore since in both seasons the streams were fairly well "seeded," we are safe in assuming that at least as wany more escaped. This implies at a conservative estimate a run of approxiqiately two and one half million, and eight million respectively. Contrast this conElition with that in 1929 and 1931, the "off" years in these areas, when although the streams were carefully patrolled by officers of the Dominion Fisheries Department, not one Pink salmon was seen. No acceptable explanation of this phenomepon has been advanced. 3 With these facts in mind, extensive programmes were initiated in 1929, the "on" year for the Fraser river, in the waters contiguous to Johnstone and Brough­ ton straits and' at Sooke'in the strait of Juan de Fuca, in order that data on the migration might be available to supplement those which were obtained for the "off" year, 1928. (PRITCHARD, ANDREW L. Pacific salmon migration: the tagging of the Pink salmon and the Chum salmon in British Columbia in 1928. Biol. Bd. Can. Bull. 14, 1930).

METHOD. The method of tagging was similar to that described in a previous paper (Pritchard 1930). The actual fishing was carried out by purse-seine boats illus­ trated in figures1 and 2. We are deeply indebted to Mr. J. L. McHugh for allowing us to reproduce these pictures. Figure 1 shows a net which has been set around a school of salmon being "pursed" and drawn up to the side of the boat. Figure 2 demonstrates the act of brailing the catch into the hold. In preference to this, the taggers emptied a brailer of fish into a rowboat half filled with water, from which they could at leisure lift the individuals, place them on a canvas cradle on the tagging boat, and tag and release them as in other experiments.

JOHNSTONE STRAITS 1929.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.

To the following, credit is due for arranging the smaller details of the pro­ gramme and carrying out the actual work, - Messrs. L. L. Bolton, W. R. Whit­ taker, D. Beal and Dr. W. W. Simpson. We also extend thanks to the seine boat captains and their crews for greatly facilitating matters by their co-operation with the taggers.

PROGRAMME. During July, August and September 468 Pink salmon secured from purse­ seines were tagged as follows: near Beaver cove, August 28, 103; near Robsons bight, August 9, 29 and September 5, 128; near Adams river, August 4-16, 142, and in , July 29-August 9, 95. The returns,have been respectively 16 (15.6 per cent.) , 9 (7.0 per cent.), 12 (8.5 per cent.), and none, giving a total of 37 (7.9 per cent.).

AGE OF PINK SALMON TAGGED.

At the time of tagging, scales were removed from each fish. Later these were cleaned, mounted in glycerine jelly on a glass slide and examined. All appeared to be of the typical "two-year ocean" type, i.e., there was visible only one definite area where the rings on the scale (circuli) were close together. This represents therefore only one winter. Because of these observations, we conclude that the fish left the rivers as fry in the spring of their first year and were returning to spawn in the autumn of their second. 4 In some cases, faint areas close to the centre of the scales, where the rings were close, were evident. These probably indicate some slackening of growth due to adverse conditions in the brackish waters of the estuaries during the sea­ ward migration in the fry stage. Since all these fish are presumed to spawn at the end of their second year and since they were all in their second year when tagged, it is not surprising that all returns should be received the same year in which tagging took place.

WEIGHT OF PINK SALMON TAGGED. In table II are given the daily averages of the weight of the tagged Pinks estimated for each fish by the tagger at the time of tagging. While these values may not be exact, it has been found that by careful judging and comparing in some cases with the actual weight, a fairly reliable average for each day can be obtained. These averages will at least give an idea of proportionate increase and decrease.

TABLE n.-Numbers of Pink salmon tagged daily in 1929 and the average estimated weights

Date Number A verage weight in pounds

Aug. 12 49 7 0 " 14 27 7 9 " 15 75 8 3 " 16 42 7 9 " 28 lO4 8.3 " 29 47 7.5 Sept. 5 31 6.6 I

It is interesting to note that there is little indication from table II of a rapid growth in weight as the season progresses as is the case for the Coho salmon (CLEMENS, WILBERT A. Pacific salmon migration: the tagging of the Coho salmon on the east coast of Vancouver island in 1927 and 1928. Biol. Bd. Can. Bull. 15, 1930). There is, however, a suggestion of a slight increase until August 15, followed by a decrease to a weight of 6.6 pounds on September 5. This may be due either to the appearance of a late run of small fish or more probably to the loss in weight of the individuals in the normal run due to abstinence from food during the spawning migration. Another noteworthy fact is that with one exception the fish which were weighed when recaptured were lighter than at the time of tagging. The average for these is 5.9 pounds, an amount considerably lower than any in table II. This is undoubtedly due to lack of food while migrating.

RETURNS. Of the 468 tagged Pink salmon, 37 or 7.9 per cent. were recaptured later. The details of these returns are given in table III below and illustrated graphically in figure 3. As in the previous paper, (Pritchard 1930), the line on the map is not intended to designate the exact route followed by the salmon but merely to indicate the probable general direction. 5 TABLIt IlL-Returns of Pink salmon tagged in Johnstone straits, British Columbia, in 1929

Weight Weight Tag Date Date of Time at at Locality Locali�y of no. tagged recapture free tagging recapt. of tagging recapture (days ) (lb.) (lb.)

---

15587 Aug. 28 ...... 9 . . . Beaver cove ... " " " *15603 28 ...... 6 ... (Cannery floor, Alert bay,) " " " 15598 28 Sept. 3 6 10 ... Kingcomb¢. In. " " " 15547 28 Aug. 29 1 8 5 � Johnstone St. " " " " 15525 28 30 2 9 6� Johnstone St. " " " 15528 28 Sept. 2 (app.) 5 (app.) 10 . . . Johnstone, St. be- tween Adams R. and Beavh cove " " " 15559 28 Sept.15 (app.) 18 (app.) 8 6 Fraser R. " " " 15513 28 Sept. 25 28 9 . . . Near Rowl1ng drift, Fraser R. " " " 15492 28 Oct. 10 43 8 6 Main Ch.,Fraser R • " " " 15567 28 Sept. 25 28 9 ... Fraser R., near Steveston. " " " 15496 28 Oct. 3 36 8 ... Fraser R., near - Deas 1. " " " 15560 28 Sept. 21 24 7 6 Fraser R., near Sunbury. " " " " 15584 28 18 21 8 . . . Fraser R., near Ewen's cannery. " " " " 15578 28 26 29 8 · .. Fraser R., opp. New Westminster " " " " 15512 28 25 28 10 .. . Fraser R., near Ladner. " " " " 15537 28 12 15 9 6 West side Whidbey 1., U.S.A. " " 15278 12 19-49 9 . . . East side Rob- Puntledge it, near sons bight ... Courtenay.; " 15249 8 Aug. 21 13 . . 4 1 mi. above Lockboro In. Robsons bight " " 15310 12 27 15 6 · .. East side Rob- Orford bay, Bute sons bight ... In. " 15316 12 Nov. 3/30 448 10 · .. Robsons bight. (Picked up on fish dock at Deserted bay saltery.) " 15270 9 Aug. 26/29 17 6 · .. � mi. below Indian R., Burrard Robsons bight In.

15658 Sept. 5 Sept. 25 20 7 · .. 1 mi. below Fraser R., near Robsons bight Steveston. " 15630 Aug. 29 27 29 8 . . . 1 mi. below Fraser R., near Robsons bight New Westminster " " 15313 12 12 31 8 . .. East side Rob- Fraser R., near sons bight ... New Westminster " 15660 Sept. 5 23 18 5 4 Below Robsons Fraser R., near bight...... New Westminster

*Returned as a Coho 6 TABLE IlL-Continued.

Weight Weight Tag Date Date of Time at at Locality Locality of no. tagged recapture free tagging recapt. of tagging recapture (days) (lb.) (lb.)

------

15458 Aug. 16 Aug. 20 (app.) 4 (app.) 9 ... 9 mi. above South of Alert bay Adams R, Vancouver 1.. " " 15369 15 15 .... . 11 . . . 9 mi. above Near Bear R., Adams R., Johnstone St. Vancouver 1.. " 15143 5 Aug. 21 (app.) 16 (app.) .. · .. 8 mi. above Deep Water bay. Adams R., Vancouver 1.. " . tI5346 14 Oct. 12 (app.) 60 (app.) 7 · .. 9 mi. above Sliammon R., near Adams R., Powell R. Vancouver 1.. " 15451 16 Aug. 1-15 . . · .. 9 mi. above Deserted bay , Jer- Adams R., vis In. Vancouver 1.. " 15161 5 Sept. 9 35 6 . .. 8 mi. above Fraser R. Adams R., Vancouver 1.. " 15367 15 Oct. 10/30 421 9 · .. 9 mi. above Fraser R. Adams R, Vancouver 1.. " 15404 15 Sept. 20 36 10 · .. 9 mi. above Fraser R. Adams R, Vancouver 1.. " " 15420 15 4 20 7 · .. 9 mi. above Mouth of Fraser R. Adams R., Vancouver 1.. " " 15443 16 24 39 8 . .. 9 mi. above Main Ch.,Fraser R Adams R., Vancouver 1.. " " 15155 5 17 43 7 · .. 8 mi. above Fraser R., Cotton- Adams R., wood drift. Vancouver 1.. " " 15467 16 12 27 8 .. . 9 mi. above Fraser R., below Adams R., New Westminster Vancouver 1..

t Returned as a Chum

DISCUSSION OF RETURNS.

The returns in 1929 demonstrate that the Pinks which appeared in the John­ stone strait area migrated to spawn in an easterly and southerly direction as did those in 1928. In 1929, however, the distances traversed were much longer, the greatest being from Beaver cove to Whidbey island, approximately two hun­ dred and fifty miles at a minimum average rate of 16.6 miles per day. 7 Of the 37 tags which were returned, 20 or 54.1 per cent came from the Fraser river. One only was captured near the southern end of Vancouver island and one only in United States waters. None was retaken in an area farther north than where it was tagged.

FIGURE 3-Distribution of recaptured Pink salmon tagged in Johnstone strait and at Sooke, strait of Juan de Fuca in 1929.

SOOKE, STRAIT OF JUAN DE FUCA, 1929.

In order that some data might be obtained regarding the migration of the Pinks which appeared around the southern end of Vancouver island in the "on" year for the Fraser river, a programme was conducted in that area in 1929. We are greatly indebted to Messrs. ]. H. Todd and Sons who tagged 185 Pink salmon from their traps at Sooke during August and September.

S Of these fish, 14 or 7.6 per cent have been returned from the areas indicated in table IV below and illustrated graphically in figure 3.

TABLE IV.-Returns from Pink salmon tagged at Sooke in 1929

Weight Weight Tag Date Date of Time at at Locality of Locality of no. tagged recapt. free tagging recapt. tagging recapture (days ) (lb. ) (lb. )

------

17127 Sept. 10 Sept. 17 7 ...... Otter point .. .. Otter point. " " 17119 8 23 15 ... . '" . Beechey head.. Fraser R., Rowlings drift. " " " " 17052 4 18 14 ...... Fraser R. , Sunbury drift. " " " " 17077 5 25 20 ...... Fraser R. , near Steveston. " " 17125 10 28 18 ...... Otter point .. .. Fraser R., near Steveston. " 17100 8 Oct. 3 25 ...... Beechey head .. Fraser R., near Deas I. " *17147 12 SepL17 5 .... 5 Otter point .... Fraser R., near Hammond. " " 17097 8 30 22 ...... Beechey head.. Fraser R., Albion drift. " " " " t17083 5 4 ...... Spiller of trap 4, east of Pt. Roberts, U.S.A. " " " t17023 Aug. 28 1 4 .... 18 (app. ) Pt. Roberts, U.S.A. " tl7170 Sept. 17 28 11 ...... Otter point .... Pt. Roberts, U.S.A.

17015 Aug. 21 Oct. 12 52 ...... Beechey head.. Pilchuck creek, trib. Stilla- guamish R., Snohomish Co., Wash., U.S.A.

17173 Sept. 18 Sept. 23 5 ...... Otter point .... Trap 106, west shore, Lummi 1., U.S.A.

*17025 Aug. 28 1930 ...... Beechey head.. Off Salmon banks, Puget Sd.

*Returned as a Sockeye tReturned as a Spring probably tReturned as a Spring

These returns show that 7 or 50 per cent were taken in the Fraser river, 6 or 42.9 per cent reached United States waters and one only was recaptured locally.

SUMMARY. For the year 1928, the conclusion was reache& that "the principal migration of Pinks in the Johnstone and Broughton strait region takes place in an easterly and southerly direction" but "no tagged Pink salmon were taken south of Dis­ covery passage" (Pritchard 1930). The returns for 1929, the year of the large Pink run in southern British Columbia differ in that they show the majority of the individuals, tagged in the same district, to be migrating to the Fraser river, and not to local spawning areas. Many of the Pinks which appeared this year at Sooke on the southern coast of Vancouver island were evidently passing through the strait of Juan de Fuca to the Fraser river and areas in Puget sound. Hence the Pink, at least in the "on" year for the southern part of the province, may reach the Fraser river, as do the Sockeye and Spring salmon from both the northern and southern ends of Vancouver island. 9 PINK SALMON TAGGING IN 1930.

In 1930, although tagging programmes were carried on as usual, few Pinks were tagged. The two returns which are at hand are interesting because they are for fish from northern areas. The first was tagged at Fred�rick island on the west coast of the Queen Charlotte islands on June 25, and returned from Principe channel, off Gale point, Banks island, British Columbia on July 15. The second was tagged on July 31 off Pillar bay on the north shore of the Queen Charlotte islands and returned from Fitzhugh sound or Burke channel on September 28 or 30.

CHUM SALMON (ONCORHYNCHUS KETA (WALBAUM»

PROGRAMME OF 1929.

In 1929, it was deemed inadvisable to continue the tagging work into the late autumn when the Chum salmon spawning migration was at its height. For this reason only thirty-eight individuals w.ere tagged coincident with the Pink salmon; thirty-three at Deep Water bay on the west coast of Quadra island and five in Johnstone strait off Robsons bight. Only two returns, both from the Fraser river, have been forthcoming.

AGE CONSTITUTION OF THE RUN.

Although the numbers were small, it was thought that age determinations, made by interpreting the winter checks on the scales, might give some indication of the age constitution of the run. These are summarized in table V (below),

TABLE V.-Numbers, percentages and average weight of fish in each year class for Chum salmon tagged in 1929

2 years old 3 years old 4 years old (In third year) (In fourth year) (In fifth year)

No. Av. wt. Per cent No. Av. wt. Per cent No. Av. wt. Per cent (lb.) (lb.) (lb.)

------

Johnstone strait. .. ' ...... 2 10.0 67 I 12.0 33

Deep Water bay... .. 6 10.3 22 18 12.3 67 3 16.3 11

Here, as in the case of the Pinks discussed above, the weights recorded are averages of the estimates set down at the time of tagging by the tagger and the fishermen. Since over ninety-five per cent of the returns from the tagging of the com­ mercial catches of Chums are received in the year of tagging from spawning rivers and contiguous areas, we may safely conclude that any age analysis of this run in salt water is a fairly accurate cross section of the actual spawning population. This case indicates, therefore, that Chums mature in their third, fourth and fifth years, i.e., at two, three and four years of age respectively, and that over sixty-five per cent of these are in their fourth year, i.e., three years old. 10 PROGRAMME OF 1930.

In 1930, due to the facts that there was apparently a larger run of Chum salmon and that it appeared at an earlier date, it was possible to tag extensively in the vicinity of Robsons bight in Johnstone strait and Granite bay on the west coast of Quadra island.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.

The actual fishing was carried out by Mr. S. Vollmers in the boat "Whiff" which was under charter to the Biological Board of Canada. The tagger in charge was Mr. T. C. Wheeler. In September and October, 882 Chums secured from purse-seiners were tagged as follows: Robsons bight, September 9, 10, 12, 15 and 19, 351; Granite bay, September 30 and October 1, 2 and 8, 531. The returns have been respec­ tively 23 (6.5 per cent), and 54 (10.2 per cent), or a total of 77 (8.7 per cent).

AGE CONSTITUTION OF THE RUN.

As in 1929, scales were removed from the fish at the time of tagging. The age of each individual has since been determined. A summary of the findings is given in table VI.

TABLE Vr.-Numbers, percentage and average weight of fish in each year class for Chum salmon tagged in 1930

2 years old 3 years old 4 years old (In third year) (In fourth year) (In fifth year)� No. Av. wt. Per cent No. Av. wt. Per cent No. Av. wt. er cent (lb.) (lb.) (lb.)

------I ------Robsons bight.. 81 7.7 23 2 264 9.7 75 .6 4 9.75 1 .2 I Granite bay. 186 7.8 36 3 319 9.9 62 .3 7 11.9 1 .4 I

As noted before, the table above presents a fairly accurate idea of the age constitution of both the sea run and the spawning migration. It is probable also that this is more nearly the true average than that of 1929, since more fish were considered. Once again it is striking that the run consists of three year-classes only, viz., third, fourth and fifth; and that the fourth constitutes over sixty per cent of this total. In this case, however, there is a greater number of two year old fish, i.e., in their third year. Even though the weights recorded are averages of the estimates made by the taggers throughout the year, it is noteworthy that there is such close agreement between the two areas. This fact, together with data presented later, suggests the conclusion that the fish at Robsons bight belong to the same run as those at Granite and Deep Water bays. 11 WEIGHT OF CHUM SALMON TAGGED. As in the case of the Pink salmon, the weight of each fish was estimated at the time of tagging. These weights have been summarized and appear in table VII.

TABLE VII.-Numbers of Chum salmon tagged daily in 1930 and the average estimated weights

Date Number A verage weight in pounds

Sept. 9 52 9.8 " 10 110 9.6 " 12 39 9.5 " 15 III 8.6 " 19 39 8.9 " 30 116 9.7 Oct. 1 117 9.0 " 2 114 9.5 " 8 183 8.9

In the above table there is no indication of a regular increase or decrease in the weight of the salmon as the season progresses.

WASHINGTON

FIGURE 4-Distribution of recaptured Chum salmon tagged in Robsons bight, Johnstone strait, in 1930. 12 ROBSONS BIGHT, JOHNSTONE STRAIT. Of the 351 Chum salmon tagged at Robsons bight in 1930, 23 or 6.6 per cent have been returned. The details of these recaptures are given in table VIII, and illustrated graphically in figure 4.

TABLE VIIL-Returns from Chum salmon tagged in Robsons bight, Johnstone strait in 1930

Time Tag Date Date of free Locality of Locality of no. tagged recapture (days ) tagging recapture

-- ---

21276 Sept. 15 Sept. 29 (app.) 14 (app.) Robsons bight, Johnstone St. Vicinity of Alert bay. " " " " " " " " " " " " 21316 19 29 10 " " " " " " " " " " " " 21332 19 29 10 " " " " " " 21030 10 7-14 Blinkinsop bay. " " " " " " 21116 10 24 (app.) 14 (app.) Johnstone strait. " " " " " 21188 15 Sept. or Oct. ... Vicinity Deep Water bay. " " " " " " " " " 21194 15 Sept. or Oct. .. , . " " " " " " " " " " " " 21200 15 ... " " " " " " " " " 21042 10 Sept. 15 5 " " " " " " " " " " 21089 10 15 5 " " " " " " " " " " 21098 10 15 5 " " " " " " " " " " 19979 9 15 6 " " " " " " " " " " 21003 9 15 6 " " " " " 19984 9 Oct. 24-31 45-52 Vicinity Granite bay. " " " " " 21094 10 Oct. 4 24 103 Rd. creek, Ladysmith. " " " " " " 21147 12 13 31 Vicinity of Chemainus. " " " " " " 21237 15 20 (?) 35 (?) Chemainus. " " " " " 21230 15 Nov. 1 47 Orford bay, . " " " " " 21132 12 Oct. ( ?) Bute inlet. " " " " " 21002 9 Sept. 23 14 Vancouver bay, " " " " " 21275 15 Oct. 16 31 Jervis inlet or Johnstone St. " " " " " " 21120 10 7 27 Squamish, . " " " " " 21009 10 . . . . . Cottonwood drift, Fraser river.

DISCUSSION OF RETURNS. It is immediately evident that these returns are similar to those received from tagging in Deep Water bay and vicinity in 1928. The principal migration is southerly, dividing to reach the lower mainland and Vancouver island, the larger number 6 or 26. 1 per cent going to the former district and the smaller number 3 or 13. ° per cent to the latter. A peculiarly noteworthy feature is the return of 9 or 39.1 per cent from the Deep Water bay and Granite bay area. This lends support to our assumption made above, when discussing the age constitution of the catch, that fish from Deep Water bay and Granite bay are probably the same run as those at Robsons bight, on their way southward. 13 L

7--z- [.(�:!?�0 0 C- L "" )0

WASHINGTON

FIGURE 5-Distribution of recaptured Chum salmon tagged in Granite bay, west coast of Quadra island in 1930. GRANITE BAY, WEST COAST OF QUADRA ISLAND.

The details for the return of 54 individuals, 10.2 per cent, from a total number of 531 tagged Chums, is given in table IX below and illustrated graphically in figure 5.

TABLE IX.-Returns from Chum salmon tagged in Granite bay on the west coast of Quadra island in 1930

-- Time Tag Date Date of free Locality of Locality of no. tagged recapture (days) tagging recapture

21363 Sept. 30 Oct. 22 22 Granite bay Ramsay arm. " " 21456 Oct. 1 Sept. 1 (?) - . Deep Water bay. " " 21400 Sept. 30 Sept. 30 or Oct. 30 .. Vicinity Deep Water bay. " " " " " " 21728 Oct. 8 Sept. or Oct. - . " 21656 2 Sept. 14-19/31 347-352 " " " " " " " " " 21642 2 Oct. 16/30 14 Comox. " " " " 21610 2 23 21 Comox spit. " " " 21474 1 Nov. 28 58 Puntledge river. " " " " 21723 8 18 41 Mouth Cooks creek, Deep bay, Vancouver I. " " " 21543 1 Oct. 14 13 Yellow rock lighthouse, south end of Denman I. " " " 21423 Sept. 30 14 14 Yellow rock lighthouse, south end of Denman 1. " " " 21558 Oct. 1 15 14 Yellow rock lighthouse, south end of Denman I. " " " " 21708 8 21 13 Vicinity of Qualicum R. " " " 21354 Sept. 30 17 17 Qualicum river. " " *21649 Oct. 2 Nov. 20/31 (app.) 414 (app.) Vicinity Five Finger I. " " " 21459 1 Oct. 22/30 21 <.:hemainus. " " " 21748 8 Nov. 1 (app.) 23 (app.) Chemainus river. " " " 21824 8 Nov. 3 26 Head of . 21857 " 8 " 3 26 " " " " " " " " " " 21759 8 17 9 Sliammon river. 21655 " 2 " 27 25 " " " " " " " " 21574 2 17 15 Jervis inlet. '21648 " 2 " 21 19 " " " " " " " " 21749 8 16 8 Vancouver bay, Jervis inlet. " 2140 1 Sept. 30 22 22 " " " " " " " " " " 21399 30 24 24 Deserted bay, Jervis inlet. " " 2i519 Oct. 1 Nov. 5 35 Deserted bay saltery. " " " " 21535 1 7 37 Narrows arm, Jervis inlet. " " " 21465 1 Oct. 10 9 Head of Jervis inlet. " 21442 Sept. 30 15 15 " " " " " " 21606 Oct. 2 Nov. 7 36 " " " " " " " " " " 21473 1 9 8 McNab creek, Howe-sound. " " " 21499 1 Oct. 7 6 Squamish, Howe sound. " " " " 21600 2 21 19 Howe sound. " " " 2t803 8 ...... Slough of Cheakamus R., Howe sound.

*Returned as a Coho 15 TABLE IX.-Continued.

Time Tag Date Date of free Locality of Locality of no. tagged recapture (days) tagging recapture ------

21609 Oct. 2 Oct. 23 21 Granite bay Mouth of Fraser river. " " " " 21585 2 22 20 Fraser river. " " " " 21808 8 23 15 Near Ewen's cannery, Fraser river. " " " 21409 Sept. 30 23 23 Near Ewen's cannery, Fraser river. " " " 21462 Oct. 1 28 27 Opp. New Westminster, Fraser river. " " " " 21572 2 24 22 Port Hammond, Fraser river. " " " 21353 Sept. 30 22 22 Near Albion, Fraser river. " " 21863 Oct. 8 Dec. 19 63 Mouth of Liumchin creek, Chilliwack river. " " " 21691 8 Nov. 26 49 Cheam view, Fraser river. " " " 21837 8 Sept. .. Deception pass, U.S.A. " " " " " " 21662 2 Sept. . . " " " 21522 1 Mar. 20/31 170 Eagle harbour, Wash., U.S. A. " " " 21788 7 Oct. 27/30 20 Nooksack river, Wash., U.S.A. " " " " " " " 21356 Sept. 30 27 27 " " " 21761 Oct. S 17 9 Pender harbour (?) " " " " 21760 8 6 or 7 (Cold storage, Prince Rupert.) " " " " " " " 21779 8 6 or 7 " " " " " " " 21811 8 6 or 7 " " " " " " " I 21839 8 6 or 7 " " "

As in 1928, the distribution of returns from Granite bay was chiefly to the southern mainland rivers and inlets. Nine or 16.6 per cent appeared in the Fraser river and 5 or 9. 3 per cent reached American waters. Once again Van­ couver island returns were less numerous, being 12 or 22.2 per cent as opposed to 18 or 33.3 per cent for the mainland.

GENERAL DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

Our results this year are interesting in that they give rise to conclusions similar to those of 1928. The main easterly and southerly migration divides to give a small run to Vancouver island and a larger one to the mainland. The recapture of tagged Chums from Robsons bight and Granite bay at Chemainus proves that some of the fish found in this area migrate from the open sea by way of the northern end of Vancouver island. This is at variance with the suggestion made by Fraser, as a result of the study of the scales of this species, that "the Chemainus fish come in much earlier than the others and probably come from the open sea by way of the south end of Vancouver island while those from Qualicum and Nanaimo evidently come from the north," (FRASER, C. M. Further studies of the growth rate of Pacific salmon. Contr. Canad. Biol. 1918c 1920 (7) 27, 1921). 16