WAHLE and VREELAND: BIOECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION OF FALL CHINOOK SALMON 



eight other special mark hatcheries (OxBow, 

 Elokomin, Grays River, Cascade, Klickitat, Big 

 Creek, Bonneville, and Little White Salmon) 

 ranged from 2,000 fish (Elokomin, 1961 brood) to 

 42,500 (Klickitat, 1963 brood). The range of catch 

 per 1,000 fish released was from 1.1 (Cascade, 

 1962 brood) to 14.7 (Klickitat, 1963 brood). The 

 potential contribution for all study facilities com- 

 bined ranged from 165,200 ( 1962 brood) to 602,200 

 (1963 brood). The average contribution was 

 358,500 fall chinook salmon per brood. The aver- 

 age catch per 1,000 smolts released was 6.7 fish. 

 Catch to escapement ratios ranged from 2.4 to 1 

 (Big Creek, 1963 brood) to 43.0 to 1 (Grays River. 



1962 brood). Total survivals ranged from 0.1% 

 (Elokomin, 1961 brood; Cascade, 1962 brood; Lit- 

 tle White Salmon, 1964 brood) to 2.6% (Spring 

 Creek, 1964 brood). Spring Creek Hatchery's av- 

 erage catch to escapement ratio was 9.3 to 1 and 

 the average survival was 1.3% . The average catch 

 to escapement and survival values for the Kalama 

 River hatcheries were 12.0 to 1 and 1.0%. For all 

 facilities and the four broods combined, the aver- 

 age survival was 0.7% and the average catch to 

 escapement was 8.6 to 1. 



Spring Creek Hatchery and Big White Pond 

 values were combined because Spring Creek per- 

 sonnel operated the Big White facility making 

 costs inseparable. The average cost of rearing each 

 brood at the two facilities was approximately 

 $100,000. The average value of the potential con- 

 tribution was $1,119,600. The average benefit to 

 cost ratio was 11.2 to 1. The average cost of rearing 

 the 1961-64 broods of chinook salmon at the two 

 Kalama hatcheries was $103,400. The average 

 benefit from their production was $414,100, yield- 

 ing a benefit to cost ratio of 4.0 to 1. For the other 

 eight special mark hatcheries, costs ranged from 

 $32,800 (Klickitat, 1963 brood) to $99,400 (Little 

 White, 1964 brood), benefits from $16,900 (Elo- 

 komin, 1961 brood) to $373,200 (Klickitat, 1963 

 brood), and benefit to cost ratios from 0.3 to 1 

 (Elokomin, 1961 brood) to 11.4 to 1 (Klickitat, 



1963 brood). The average cost of rearing the four 

 broods, all study facilities combined, was 

 $714,900. The average benefit was $3,006,800, for 

 an average benefit to cost ratio of 4.2 to 1. 



Fall chinook salmon releases from seven 

 nonstudy Columbia River hatcheries totaled 26 

 million fish for the 1961-64 broods. If we assume 

 these fish had a catch distribution and contribu- 

 tion like the 13 study facilities, then the estimated 

 total catch of fall chinook salmon from all Colum- 



bia River hatcheries is 1,467,600 fish. The 1961- to 

 1964-brood fall chinook salmon caught in marine 

 fisheries sampled from Alaska to California and 

 Columbia River fisheries was 14.8% of the total 

 chinook salmon catch. The portions of the total 

 chinook salmon catch by region originating from 

 fall chinook salmon raised at Columbia River 

 hatcheries were: Alaska, 0.3%; British Columbia, 

 12.3%; Washington, 38.2%; Oregon, 16.9%; 

 California, 0.2%; and Columbia River, 41.7%. 



The 1961-64-brood Columbia River hatchery 

 (study and nonstudy) contributions were valued at 

 $2,921,700, $1,485,200, $5,794,300, and 

 $3,284,600 by brood respectively. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



This study was planned and implemented with 

 the assistance of several agencies and many indi- 

 viduals. The Canadian Government financed and 

 conducted a mark sampling program in the 

 British Columbia fisheries. Alaska, Washington, 

 Oregon, and California State fishery agencies pro- 

 vided research and management personnel and 

 necessary catch data. We especially thank the fol- 

 lowing individuals: Donald D. Worlund, National 

 Marine Fisheries Service, for developing the de- 

 sign of this study and serving as the primary 

 mathematical consultant; Jack A. Richards, Na- 

 tional Marine Fisheries Service, for developing 

 the justification for the sport and commercial 

 economic evaluation; Robert C. Lewis, Bonneville 

 Power Administration, for improving the method 

 of amortizing hatchery construction costs; and 

 Harold Godfrey, Canadian Fisheries and Marine 

 Service; Gary Finger, Alaska Department of Fish 

 and Game; Richard E. Noble, Emanual A. LeMier, 

 Samuel G. Wright, and Harry Senn, Washington 

 Department of Fisheries; Fred E. Locke, formerly 

 Oregon Game Commission; Ernest A. Jeffries, 

 Earl F. Pulford, Thomas B. McKee, and Roy E. 

 Sams, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; 

 Paul T. Jensen, L. B. Boydstun, and William H. 

 Sholes, California Department of Fish and Game; 

 and Harlan E. Johnson and Warner G. Taylor, 

 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, for their help in the 

 design, supervision, and data collection portions of 

 this study. We also thank Arthur H. Arp, Dean A. 

 Eggert, Steven K. Olhausen, William D. Parente, 

 Joe H. Rose, and Paul D. Zimmer for data organi- 

 zation and previous reports which have led to this 

 report. Helpful editorial comments were contri- 

 buted by Roger Pearson, Frederick C. Cleaver, 



207 



