Just wondering what some of your thoughts are regarding Puget Sound Blackmouth - hatchery vs. wild. I do know that blackmouth are simply just imature chinook that never venture into the ocean and just stay in Puget Sound. I have caught a lot of marked blackmouth and unmarked blackmouth - approx. 70 unmarked/50 marked. Most of the guys I fish with keep either, since its legal. However, a few guys I know release some of the none clipped fish. What are your experiences?

If you visit the Friday creek hatchery on the samish river there is an extra pen. They keep smolt in there for 9 months. when they release the 6 to 9 inch fish they go to the sound but dont migrate out of the sound. They lose there desire to go to sea by living in the creek/pond for the extra time. Not one of these fish are fin cliped and they go all over the sound. I bet at least one fish that your friends released was from the samish, so what do you think about that...DJ

DJ - I have heard of that before. Thanks for the input. I believe that some fish that aren't realeased late just hang around the sound also.

Excuse my ignorance, but I have not ran into any "marked" blackmouth.

This could partially be due to the fact that:
I winter fished this year for the first time in several years, and/or my winter fishing experience is limited to a couple areas - Saratoga Passage and Oak Bay.

By "marked" do you mean adipose clipped? What part of the sound are you catching the "marked" chinook?

Other questins I have always wondered are:
Do "Blackmouth" head out to sea the following year? If there is a blackmouth season now, like there appears to be in some parts of the sound, are the fish bigger than the ones I catch in January/February? Why are blackmouth always around 6 - 9 lbs?

Ate the last one from the freezer Monday night.

Thanks

Ya, it may have something to do with where the fish are released from. I fish mainly in areas 9 and 10 on the Kitsap Peninsula side. This is where I catch most all of them. By marked I mean adipose clipped, just like steelhead.

I am not a biologist, but I will give you what I do know about blackmouth. Basically they are imature Chinook that never migrate all the way out to the ocean. Therefore, they don't have the abundance of food and don't grow as big. Also, with the 22 inch minimum a lot of fish are released just below that size and then caught the next year in the 6-9 lb. class and between 22-30 inches. I believe this is why you see so many in that range. We are always catching fish that are just at 22 inches or below, so we release them to catch next year/season.

Downriggin- maybe you can give us some insight on this Blackmouth topic.

Thanks

Chad G

A blackmouth, by definition, is an immature Chinook. The blackmouth is not necessarily a fish that does not migrate to the ocean. The local blackmouth that WDFW raises are "fooled" into staying within the boundaries of Puget Sound by a late release time from the rearing ponds. This program has been in effect for several years and the new $10 punch card fee will ensure that money is available for this program to continue.

A native blackmouth is simply not ready to spawn in this years cycle. That is why there can be 4 year old blackmouth that weigh 30-+#. So being 22" is not a definitive trait of a blackmouth. Most of the blackmouth migrate with the food source which also moves out of the sound in spring time. A fair number of our chinook migrate to Alaska where many of them are caught. Fin clipping is not done to all hatchery fish yet and thanks to the tribes it may never happen. So having an adipose fin does not automatically mean the fish is wild.

Grandpa has hit it on the head...

It is interesting to note that s good number of the sound fish will be caught in the straight in the winter months. As Grandpa noted, the majority of the bait will head north- so do the fish. This is why you'll often hear of "great" catches up north during these months. Also, a lot of folks will assume these mighty salmon are Springers. Is there a way to tell? A Blackmouth will have small scales compared to a mature fish with larger scales. Experience on the water will show you a Springer of 15# will have larger scales than a 15# Blackmouth)

On a side note, there are two main reasons why the bait moves north: (1) spawning and (2) the abundance of krill (or euphasids) to feed on. Not all herring migrate north. It depends on the species and the amount feed in the water. Many will linger in the mid/south sound...

As far as wild or not, you and I will never know being out on a boat. (I imagine there some subtle way of telling though.)

I would not want to speculate, but I would say the numbers of actual wild blackmouth in existence is pretty darn low. I do know that most go through the chute unmarked- probably because of time constraints.

thanks for the detailed report DR...By the way I wore the USS Carl Vinson cap over the memorial day weekend on a cruise to Port Orchard Yacht Club right across from Bremerton. ship yard .I was thinking of you being stuck over there and here we sit on our boat in the sunshine...no fishing though so you're not missing much there. Sure was sunny some of the time though...

Grandpa and Downriggin are correct in that blackmouth are immature chinook. While we think of blackmouth being a Puget Sound fishery they are found where ever one finds feeding chinook - off the coast from California to Alaska as well as the inner waters. In some of the northern waters where some chinook still live to an age of 8 or more years it is possible to catch immature chinook (blackmouth) of more than 50#.

Historically Puget Sound supported an excellent blackmouth fishery on wild chinook. It was noted that most of those fish were from smolts that have spend a year (yearling or river type chinook) in freshwater before migrating to sea. Several decades ago it was found that if the young chinook were held in the hatchery longer than normal (6 or more months) they were more likely to stay in the Sound and support the blackmouth recreational fishery.

The important thing here is that the hatchery chinook are minicing the wild chinook stocks that produced yearling smolts such as the various spring (Nooksack, Skagit/Sauk, White )and summer (Skagit, NF Stilly, and Skykomish) stocks. Thus while the % of wild stock in the blackmouth sport fishery is relatively small those fish are from the more important stocks in terms of salmon recovery. For example the single largest catcher of Skykomish summer chinook is the PUget Sound recreational fishery - higher than Canadian sport or commerical fisheries, the various troll, or net fisheries.

One other note - few of the Puget Sound chinook are caught in Alaska. They tend to feed off the coast of Vancouver Island, Northern Washington coast, the Straits, and Puget Sound. In contrast stocks such as the various Columbia river stocks and the Strait of Juan de Fuca stocks migrate further North and significant portion of their catch occurs in Alaskan waters. In Southeast Alaska the majority of the chinook caught in marine waters are not Alaskan fish but rather Canadian and/or Southern US fish.

Tight lines
Smalma

Saw my first 30# blackmouth last summer in area 8-2 and another that hit 20lbs last march from the same area. Boy those were dandy fish. odor. As far as the enhancement program goes I think it has been a bust the first year they would have been of legal size. Didnt notice any more fish per say. Also heard that the indian nets got a lot of them during their chum and steelhead seasons. Would be interesting to see the bycatch numbers for the last couple of years.

I have noticed blackmouth do indeed stink, literally.

I keep hearing that blackmouth stink. Does anyone have a theory on this?

My theory is this....for those blackmouth caught in the Puget Sound I think for one reason or another take on the smell of their environment (i.e., the Puget Sound). I don't know if this is correct, but I've noticed shrimp from the Puget Sound taste more briney than those from the Hood Canal with a similar smell as blackmouth. Just a theory, but I wondered if anyone else had any thoughts.

They're feeding on herring and candlefish. Can't really say I've ever caught a blackmouth that had shrimp or squid in their stomachs. They smell like what they eat!

I have heard many reports over the years that I cannot substantiate which point to a real bycatch disaster during the commercial Chum netting. I kind of surmise that the smallish size of blackmouth in mid to South Sound has something to do with those being the ones that escape the gill nets in the fall. Being basically residents of Puget Sound, this makes some sense.

Smalma..thanks for the clarification on the SE Alaska Chinook catch...the troll fishery up there has a long early spring season for Chinook of Washington /Oregon fish in a large degree. I know some commercial fishermen who have reported on this years catch...I think their season is around 45,000 fish..Is that what you hear? I have been up in Homer and several locals refer to the fish as YOUR fish..meaning from Washington.

All fish stink! Especially on the BBQ...

I have heard the "metal" smell on Blackmouth theory too. Then again, I have smelled mature fish with the same smell. I don't know why. I would imagine the feed. Scale size and time of year will give you the best chance of determining a mature or immature salmon.

As far as the smallish size, I would like to believe their environment for the first 15 months has more to do with being "stunted" (Pen held- similiar to a goldfish in a two gallon tank verses the same goldfish in a 50 gallon tank and the non-availabilty of baitfish). These little guys are voracious once released.

Squid... I have heard a lot of hoopla about BM not feeding on squid. I'll say bull! Although I would say the majority of their diet consists of 90% herring and candlefish, I know certain times of the year (December/January in particular) BM will key in squid. I have caught numerous BM with their stomachs stuff full of squid. I was once told the reason we don't find many squid in stomach samples is because of the salmon's digestive track dissolves the squid very quickly. Makes sense to me...

Shrimp... the smaller guys probably key in them for the first year or so but, the bigger guys are strictly meat and taters...

Grandpa, glad you're enjoying the hat! Finally got out on the Marlin trip... No Marlin, but some nice Yellow Fin Tuna! ...and a nice sun burn to boot!

Grandpa -
Don't have the Alaskan troll quota handy - too many numbers floating around the limited space of my brain.

In my experience all chinook have a distinctive odor. Virtually all fish have an odor of their own - largemouth bass smell different than smallmouth and both are different than trout.

The reason blackmouth tend to be small is two fold. Generally the feeding conditions in the Sound is less than that in the ocean thus at a given age the resident fish will be smaller than the ocean fish.

The second reason is the more important - we catch then as immature fish - less than fully grown. For some reason harvesting the fish at 22" or 24" or 26" reduces the likelyhood of the fish reaching 30 inches.

Tight lines
Smalma

Hey I think you're on to something...The blackmouth that do grow a little bigger than average do get stuck in the Chum nets, however. Just how big that impact is will probably never be known outside the gill netters fraternity. Fortunately the average blackmouth is probably churning up the sand with his head looking for sand lances so he is safe from thegill nets...but not from the darts and mooched herring.

Smalma,

I am curious to know if you believe being pen-held has anything to do with size? Also, during this 15 months cycle, do they feed on strictly pellets? I am sure the nutritional value would be equivlent to natural feed, but I would think the constraints of being "held-over" and supplemental fed might be a factor too. Chinook start feeding bait fish as soon as they hit the salt water.. Thoughts?

I agree wholeheartedly on the feeding opportunities and size... However, per area ratio (ocean:sound- including the staright), wouldn't feeding opportunities roughly be the same? Yes the opportunities are greater for feed- more concentrated over a broader area. But what intrigues me the most, is the number of sizeable bait concentrations ("fish finder blackouts for minutes at a time") I run in to being out on the water and yet our fish tend to be smaller..

I am no professional when it comes to marine biology, nor do I have numbers to support my claim but I do not see the depleted stocks of herring. I think our local fish have just a good as chance at feeding as do the right turning fish. I do see a strong increase of marine mammals in the south sound that might have an additional slight impact.

If I remember correctly, didn't the State impose a 24" minimum in the 80s for a few years? I thought this was a great decision. It actually increased fishing opportunities after the minimum was lifted (IMO). Instead of keeping the 22 inchers (2- 2 1/2 years old) we were catching 3 year old fish averaging 7 to 8 pounds just as regular.

I am not too concerned with the size of fish I catch. I just enjoy my time being on the water with family and friends honing the skills or experimenting with new tactics. However, I enjoy it more if I happen across a nice size Blackmouth.

Downriggin -
I understand where you are coming from. I don't think anyone has all the answers; know that I certainly don't.

For much of the 1980s and 1990s the Puget Sound herring stocks were down howevert they seem to be rebounding (especially the mid/south stocks) Regarding the pen released hatchery fish - two thoughts. If your scenario were correct then the wild fish (unmarked) would be larger - all the enhancement fish (those paid for by the sure charge and held longer) are marked prior to release. Don't believe that is the case. Also if food was as abundant in the Sound then the ocean coho would not be larger than the Sound fish.

A thought I have had regarding the apparent higher productive of the ocean may be due to more upwellings on the coast than in the Sound. Those upwellings tend to bring nutrients to the surface thus stimulating the food chain. I'm not an oceanographer so others may be able to correct my thinking.

Tight lines
Smalma