to transplant them to other areas from the Mc- 

 Cloud River. 



In preparation for this paper, about 20 salmon 

 agencies and students (located widely through- 

 out the known range of chinook salmon) were 

 queried by mail toascertain whether the winter 

 run discussed here is known elsewhere than in 

 the Sacramento River. All 18 responses were 

 negative, but nearly all evidenced sincere in- 

 terest in this race. The information and en- 

 couragement received from these responses 

 has been most helpful and is greatly appre- 

 ciated. Sincere thanks are extended to John 

 Pelnar and Harry D. Baer of Coleman Na- 

 tional Fish Hatchery for data provided from 

 the hatchery records. I also thank Richard J. 

 Hallock for original data supplied from his 

 observations and files. Donald H. Fry, Eldon 

 P. Hughes, and Richard J. Hallock, of the 

 California Department of Fish and Game, re- 

 viewed the manuscript, and their suggestions 

 have sparked material improvements in the 

 presentation. 



OBSERVATIONS BEFORE CON- 

 STRUCTION OF SHASTA DAM 



Livingston Stone may have observed winter- 

 run salmon on the McCloud River during his 

 early investigations of the 1870's. The Mc- 

 Cloud River now enters Shasta Lake and is no 

 longer accessible from the sea as it was then 

 (see frontispiece). Certainly, fish of this run 

 were known at least as early as 1902, for a 

 pair of salmon were observed spawning on 

 April 24 of that year in the McCloud River 

 opposite Baird Hatchery, now covered by 

 Shasta Lake. This observation was credited by 

 Rutter (1904, p. 73) in the annual report of the 

 Commissioner of Fisheries for 1902 to Super- 

 intendent Lambson of Baird Hatchery. No 

 evidence has been turned up that this observa- 

 tion was considered more than interesting. If 

 later students were intrigued by it, they were 

 silent in print. 



Hanson, Smith, and Needham (1940, pp. 42- 

 43) reported that 25 salmon were seen on May 

 26, 1939, over nests in the upper McCloud 

 River, at Big Springs and upstream to the 

 Lower Falls, A spawned-out female was found 

 June 12, 1939; eggs were taken from three 



nests on June 23 and 27; eyed eggs and alevins 

 were obtained from two nests on August 5; and 

 fingerlings were seined from the river at Big 

 Springs on September 29, 1939. (These obser- 

 vations were made during thepre-Shasta-Dam 

 surveys; salmon were blocked from these 

 areas beginning in May 1942.) These authors 

 suggested "a separate winter run." Needham, 

 Smith, and Hanson (1941, p. 66) were more 

 definite and cautioned that allowance must be 

 made for winter-run salmon in any salvage 

 plan (for Shasta Dam). Unfortunately, knowledge 

 of the critical temperature requirements of 

 salmon egg stages was inadequate to make any 

 effective allowance. 



OBSERVATIONS DURING SALVAGE 

 OPERATIONS RELATED TO 

 SHASTA DAM (1943-46) 



It remained for Needham, Hanson, and 

 Parker (1943, p. 23) to unequivocally commit 

 the name "winter run" to these fish. (The 

 unique spawning time of the run was, as noted 

 above, established first by Lambson's ob- 

 servation in 1902.) These authors gave an 

 account of the trapping and hauling work dur- 

 ing 1943 on Chinook salmon blocked by Keswick 

 Dam. This was the first season that salmon 

 were blocked. In June 1943, ripe, winter-run 

 females with flowing eggs were found in the 

 hauling trucks; later that month, spawned-out 

 fish were found in Deer Creek where the 

 trapped fish were released. Of 5,245 salmon 

 transferred from Keswick Dam to Deer Creek 

 during June 1943, 59 were reported by these 

 authors to have been winter run; the rest were 

 spring-run chinooks. Only seven (four females 

 and three males) of the winter run survived to 

 spawn. Presumably none of the eggs sur- 

 vived, for the water temperatures in Deer 

 Creek downstream from the mouth of the 

 canyon, where the fish were forced to spawn, 

 were and are too high for incubating eggs in 

 July and August. Yet these fish would have 

 fared no better in the main river, 



Moffett (1949) noted: "During the years 1943 

 and 1944, when Shasta and Keswick dams were 

 blocks to upstream migration but stored little 

 or no water, river temperatures in summer 

 were so high that the spring-run salmon would 

 have been eliminated or seriously impaired 



