Yes, Smalma, historically the size of Chinook shrank due to fishing removals. But, in the past few years researchers are seeing smaller salmon at an age; a two year old fish now is smaller than a 2-year old fish (say) a decade ago.

I agree that the fishery removed the faster growing fish, too, but this appears different. Also, I was told that the actual quality of food is declining. The salmon have full stomachs but the nutritional quality is lower; fewer calories per gram. This made sense to me as herring have a lot more calories than some other forage fish. Anyway, the large adult salmon leave the feeding grounds for home, hit warmer water, and are unable to maintain life as they can't collect enough calories to stay alive. I was conversing with the researchers on this before retirement; they have since retired too.

Note, too, the strong correlations between the number of pinks released from AK facilities and declines in most salmon species, SRKWs, seabirds, and zooplankton.

I think one of the major factors influencing smaller salmon is plainly selectivity. Years ago when I was getting my basic salmon understanding when volunteering at the hatcheries on my days off, I found out that the largest of the returning adults were used for hatchery stock. This made sense to me, because in the various fisheries, especially the gillnet fisheries, selected larger fish with appropriate mesh size. Over the years, the largest of salmon are taken by various fisheries. I'm now unaware of hatchery practices - if they select for large size or not. Years ago I learned that hatchery selectivity was across the board for size. What's the practice now? I don't know.

It seems to me that we're breeding, both naturally and artificially, a bunch of jockeys instead of defensive lineman. The smaller fish also diminish in fecundity, but good 'ol WDFW doesn't adjust the numbers to relate to that diminishment in viable eggs.

Remember that the hatcheries select spawners from what makes it back. I know there used to be some size selectivity but I don't think so now. And, with the intensity of fisheries and the demand to not waste a single fish they often end up with few to sort out.

But, yes, if we kill the big fish we spawn the little ones. Right again that fecundity goes down with fish size, but we keep those sacred escapement goals. Unless we want to lower them.

The past several posts raise some interesting questions.

Fish managers know how to increase the numbers of salmon but are they prepared to increase the size of the adult salmon? We have known for quite some time that the average size at maturity is going down, and that this is not good for anyone. Lots of problems arise, as several folks have pointed out (Smalma, Carcassman, Tug).

What needs to be changed to reverse this trend? What actions can be taken to increase the quality (i.e., size) of the returning salmon rather than just the quantity?

Perhaps hatchery practices can be modified to focus on spawning larger adults. The genetic problems associated with doing that need to be balanced against the need to achieve larger adults. And we ought to be re-thinking how we are managing the forage base primarily herring, anchovy, sand lance, and perhaps smelt. Seriously reducing harvest of forage fish that salmon feed on might be a step in the right direction.

I don't pretend to have all the answers but actively managing the North Pacific fishery to increase the size and age at maturity of Chinook salmon might be the next step in helping to conserve these stocks. And in helping the SRKW's.

They should know better than to Name the pets...

Gets people to donate...Governmnet won't fund recovery, at least not willingly.

Spawning only the biggest fish regardless of how many might be a good start. Bigger fish from start to finish would be much better able to survive than smaller fish and lay more eggs if allowed to spawn. Smaller fish can’t get away from predators and probably are less smart at doing so.

Salman. Yes and no. Way back, in an effort to increase the size of Skamania summer steelhead they spawned the big fish only. The larger fish spent and additional year in saltwater so they got bigger. Worked super except for one thing. Marine survival was too low to replace the brood. The additional year of mortality reduced returns below egg-take needs.

There is a reason why there are multiple age classes and it is not so that anglers can catch big fish. We need all the pieces. Plus, since age at maturity tends to be inherited if you focus on one age at maturity you run the risk of run failures. Remember that there is no safety net with pinks. A huge flood and you get damn little back.

As to the other questions about increasing adult size and fecundity the managers (or at least knew when I was involved) what needs to be done. In simple terms, increase the food base so they have food to eat. Stop killing any and all immature fish, which means having NO marine mixed stock fisheries. Limit fisheries to maturing adults in the bays/rivers. It ain't rocket science, it had been known for decades, but the political opposition is too great.

Then, you throw a warming ocean that is also getting more acidic, a human population that keeps expanding, and you have a recipe for failure.

I very much agree that the root cause of low or nonexistent salmon runs in Oregon and Washington over the last 30 years was due to over harvest by SEA commercial fishers intercepting our fish.
But be very careful of what you wish for with this court battle and remember that WFC’s ultimate goal is Wild fish only, they want hatcheries GONE!!!
Just my two cents.

Perhaps a little nuance to WFC's position. I have found that they will accept hatchery runs where the habitat is in such poor shape that it can't produce wild fish. There is no reason why here in PS, for example, there are any hatchery fish in (at the minimum) the Queets, Quilleute, Elwha, Skagit, Stilly, Snohomish, and Nooksack watersheds. They have the habitat, or could have with proper management.

The problem with hatchery production is we try to catch them in the ocean, where the wild stocks get hammered.

A problem with what you allege, or agree about, is that the evidence does not support it. Except for Columbia River Up River Bright Chinook being caught in large numbers in AK. Most of the interceptions of WA Chinook and coho salmon occur in BC, Canada, not AK. Good thing you only invested two cents in your (Misguided) opinion.

Have to respectfully disagree SG. The projected 2022 Chinook escapement for the Chehalis was 14,957. Below you can see that AK & BC were projected to take more Chehalis Chinook than made it into Grays Harbor Bay. For coastal Chinook it is AK & BC that is driving stocks down.
wild hatchery total
SEAK 7,588 4,028 11,617
CANADIAN 3,046 1,588 4,633
SUS NON-TREATY 126 65 191
SUS TREATY 66 35 101

Sure would be handy if this site allowed posting of screen shots. It would much easier to show data tables for the misguided, misinformed or those that know more than the generals.

12/31/2022




I sure agree with this, also be able to "cut and paste" and it'd be ohhhhhh so nice to be able to post pictures.

Happy New Year.....2023 hopefully better sport fisheries for the whole State, but especially Region 6......

Double agree! But! Steel are in! Time to fish instead of bitch! If I could post pics I would. Happy New Year!

Rivrguy & Misguided,

Sorry. My bad. Sometimes I think I remember fishery catch statistics better than I actually do. I need to more often look them up instead of trying to remember them.

oh I would not worry, at all ! I think the memory thing is over rated to say the least at least from the old guys seat in the bleachers.

Memory may be faulty on the details but, dayum, the old guys used to actually manage the fishery. With much more primitive technology. Sometimes, Rivrguy needed to take his shoes off when we counted over 10....

Math sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regular math is fine with me. Calculus sucks big time.

But, hey, the folks now have difficulty with simple addition and subtraction.

Ain't the cheap seats grand???