Dear Editor:
The news media has everyone doing the “Chum Run Hoochie Choocie Salmon Dance” with reports of huge chum runs on the coast. But when you take a closer look at how the Chum returns stack up in the Howe Sound area something starts to look a bit…well…fishy. Now predicting Chum returns is a bit like calling the U.S. election, but here is my take on things.
The Squamish System has been hurting for many years and not surprisingly our Eagle Count numbers have been dismal as well. I didn’t immediately jump for joy when I heard talk of this HUGE Chum run. I was sceptical that the Squamish River Chum run could instantly rebound, even if ocean conditions were the best. I watched the Squamish Streamkeeper counts for the Squamish System and read e-mails related to the field work and data. There was nothing big and definitely not “Hoochie Choocie” stuff. Then I headed out to do my own counts.
I’m one of the few who actually count returns around Howe Sound, away from the Squamish River. I typically count Britannia, Furry, Potlatch, and Mcnab Creeks. This year, I added a small creek on Gambier Island. The results were interesting, to say the least. I received one email reporting huge returns at Bowen, close to a 1000 or more Chum. I surveyed a small creek on Gambier and counted 930 Chum in the first part of the creek. The count would easily have gone above 2000 if I had surveyed the entire creek. You could walk across that creek on the backs of Chum, without getting your feet wet.
As I went further north, up Howe Sound, the numbers started drop. A nice 75 Chum at the Mcnab groundwater side channel, but nothing to start building a smoke house over. 53 for Potlatch Creek, 7 for Middle Creek (side channel of Furry Creek).
So why the difference in numbers? Gambier is the key to this puzzle. On Gambier and Bowen, the two big islands to the south, the run came in early, at the start of October. On Gambier, there was also evidence of a later, smaller run and I saw both runs using the same creek. This isn’t a big, single entity, but two distinct groups.
I will leave you with one last thought. The low Chum returns at Squamish can’t be related to poor ocean conditions, because the big runs at Bowen and Gambier clearly came out of the same body of water. The difference must be due to local river and creek conditions. What is it in the Squamish watershed that continues to suppress the Chum runs here?
John Buchanan
Squamish B.C.
