PROGRESS IN BIOLOGICAL INQUIRIES, 1926 649 
Fingerlings from this race were introduced into a creek that empties into the 
Columbia only a short distance from the ocean. When the resulting adult fish 
returned to the Columbia they lingered for a short time at the mouth of the 
creek but finally continued on up the main Columbia, with no definite destina- 
tion before them. Whether or not they succeeded in spawning, we do not know. 
As a converse experiment the progeny of chinooks, which normally leave the 
ocean late in the season and make only a short migration, were reared and 
liberated at a distance of several hundred miles from the ocean. The fish in 
these experiments have not yet reached maturity. 
The opportunity offered by these experiments to Secure seales of salmon of 
known age and life history has not been overlooked. It is hardly necessary 
now to present evidence of the validity of salmon-scale reading in general. It 
is pleasing, however, to find that without exception our interpretation of the 
scales has agreed with the known age of the fish. 
The study of the chinook scales has clarified our understanding of many per- 
plexing variations that are found in the scale history of the first year’s growth. 
Doctor Ricu. The rather striking difference between the results 
obtained from the marking of the sockeye salmon in the Columbia 
River and the marking of the chinook salmon is worthy of an 
explanation. There are a number of reasons why we could not 
expect as great returns from the marking of the chinook salmon as 
were received from the marking of the sockeye. In the first place, 
they have different feeding habits in the ocean. The sockeyes are 
plankton feeders, and the chinooks feed on smaller fishes. The dis- 
tinct difference in feeding habits is a factor presumably of some 
importance. In the majority of cases the chinook salmon have spent 
a greater actual mortality to take place with the chinook. 
to the difficulties of ocean life for a longer time. ‘The result is that 
while the mortality might not be at the same rate, one would expect 
a greater actual mortality to take place with the chinook. 
Probably the most important fact that makes the difference in 
returns is that the sockeyes in the Columbia River are so different 
from the other fish that are running at the same time that they are 
separated and counted separately, so that much less difficulty is 
experienced in getting the returns from the sockeye. When there 
may be 30 or 40 tons of chinook salmon on the floor they will have 
a few hundred pounds of the sockeyes, and it is much easier for the 
men in the canneries to pick out these and get their dollar reward 
than it is to pick out the comparatively few marked chinook salmon 
that may be mingled with this great mass of other unmarked fish. 
Mr. Bower. It has occurred to me that the Columbia River is one 
of the outstanding examples of the effects of fish-cultural work. 
Something that Mr. Holmes said leads me to suspect that he thinks 
the Columbia River is on trial in that respect. May I ask whether he 
thinks the work is a success on that stream ? 
Mr. Hormes. That is rather difficult. Practices differ so, and our 
experiments have covered such a small part of the work that the 
results may be so different that I would hesitate to give any opinion. 
I may say that from what I know of salmon culture, I really think 
the Columbia River hatcheries are at the top. The particular experi- 
ment with sockeyes in the Columbia shows that since we put our fig- 
ures on the basis of the percentage of returns from the number of fish 
liberated, our reported returns were 1.4 per cent, the next were 2.5 
per cent, and the third were 4.8 percent. As Doctor Rich has pointed 
out, the conditions that determined the number, or rather the per- 
centage, of return have not been particularly favorable. They have 
