SALMON TAGGING IN ALASKA, 1924-1925 
143 ' 
As would be expected, the returns were concentrated about the localities where 
the tagging was done. The pink salmon taken in Alaskan waters were distributed 
almost exclusively through the southern part of Clarence Strait, Revillagigedo 
Channel, Behm Canal, and Dixon Entrance, close to the mainland. One individual 
only was reported from the western shore of Prince of Wales Island, and only eight 
were recorded from north of Tolstoi Point in Clarence Strait, which marks the 
southern boundary (in Clarence Strait) of the Prince of Wales district. We may 
safely conclude, therefore, that the pinks found in the region of Duke Island, Foggy 
Bay, and Cape Fox late in July and early in August are practically all of local origin, 
spawning in the streams within a radius of 50 miles or less of Cape Fox on both sides 
of the international boundary. 
CHUMS 
In 1924 chums were tagged as follows: Thirty-two on August 8 at Tree Point, 
2 on August 8 at Duke Point, and 2 on August 9 at Point White. In 1925, at Foggy 
Point, 28 were tagged on July 30 and 3 on July 31. Four fish of the first experiment 
were recaptured, 1 each from the second and third, 5 from the fourth, and 1 from the 
last. Again, most of the returns were from the shores of Revillagigedo Channel and 
Dixon Entrance bewteen Kanagunut Island and Revillagigedo Island, 8 of the 12 
recovered tags coming from this region. One each was taken at Kincolith Bay, 
near the mouth of the Nass River, and at Halibut Creek near the entrance to Chol- 
mondeley Sound, and 2 were taken from Behm Canal. As usual, the chums appeared 
to be mainly of local origin. 
VARIATIONS IN RETURNS OF TAGGED FISH 
The percentages of tagged fish recaptured later vary greatly with the species 
and also with the locality where the tagging was done. The data are shown in 
Table 21. 
Table 21. — Percentage of tagged fish recaptured 
Locality where tagged 
Red 
Coho 
Pink 
Chum 
Icy Strait 
23.4 
12.3 
14. 5 
14.4 
24.2 
Chatham Strait _ 
19.8 
15.8 
20.7 
50. 4 
Ruins Point 
30. 1 
18. 1 
37.3 
21.9 
Cape Muzon _ 
21.8 
Cape Chacon 
30.6 
IS. 7 
42.0 
22. 5 
36.6 
It is not possible, from the information at present available, to determine the 
causes for these wide fluctuations, or even to know whether the data represent un- 
usual or normal conditions. For instance, why were there approximately two and 
one-half times as many chums returned from the experiments at Kingsmill Point, 
in Chatham Strait, as were returned from any other experiment; and why were so 
many more chums than salmon of other species returned from these experiments? 
These are questions that can be answered only when more data are available, but it is 
quite apparent now that the fishing for some species and in some localities, at least, 
is so intensive as to require careful attention. It was pointed out in earlier tagging 
experiments 5 that these percentages of returns are always a minimum, and that 
‘See footnote 2, p. 109. 
