776 
BULLETIN OF THE BUREAU OF FISHERIES 
seeded than in 1905, when most of the very heavy late run went to that lake system. 
The runs to Lillooet and Harrison Lakes, below Hell’s Gate, were practically a failure. 
The fact that tremendous numbers of sockeyes escaped to the spawning grounds 
on the big years, despite the huge catches, may have occurred because of the presence 
in all of the big-year cycles from 1901-13 of very abundant late runs, appearing after 
most of the fishing had ceased. The extent of this late run on the big years is indi- 
cated in the following quotation from the British Columbia Commissioner of Fisheries 
Report for 1909: 
On September 16, 1905, there appeared in the channels at the mouth of the Fraser a run of 
sockeye so numerous as to lead many competent observers to state that it equalled that which ap- 
peared during the first two weeks in August. This late run continued until the first week in October. 
None of these fish were observed in Juan de Fuca Strait, or in the American channels leading to the 
Gulf of Georgia and the Fraser River. During the first week of this movement several of our canners 
packed the fish, and a considerable number of them were purchased for and shipped to American 
canneries . . . Nothwithstanding the fact that there had been a similar run in the Fraser in Septem- 
ber and October of 1901, the claim was made that the late run of 1905 was most unusual. The same 
claim was again advanced as to the late run this year (1909). It appears evident, however, from the 
numbers of sockeye which ran in the lower Fraser in September and October of 1901 and 1905, and 
again this year, that a late run is characteristic of the big years. 
Whether the huge catch of 1913 had enough effect on the spawning escapement 
to have affected the abundance of the 1917 run will never be definitely known, as a 
portion of the sockeye ascending the Fraser River in 1913 were prevented from reach- 
ing the spawning grounds on accoimt of rock slides, incidental to the construction of a 
railway at Hell’s Gate in the canyon near Yale. The spawning-ground estimates of 
1913 show 552,000 entering Quesnel Lake, contrasted to 4,000,000 in 1909, the pre- 
vious year of the cycle. Chilco Lake was likewise estimated to have had about one- 
eighth as many as in 1909. Anderson and Seton Lakes had an estimated escapement 
of 30,000 against 1,000,000 in 1909. Lillooet and Harrison Lakes, below Hell’s Gate, 
had poor runs. However, large numbers were seen in Adams River; and in Little 
River, connecting the outlet of Shuswap Lake with Little Shuswap Lake, the spawn- 
ing sockeyes appeared as thick as in 1905 or 1909. The run at Stuart Lake was re- 
ported to be one-twentieth as large as on most big years, and that at Fraser Lake 
about 50 percent as large. 
From the foregoing it is evident that, whether due chiefly to the obstruction at 
Hell’s Gate, or to the tremendous catch, the spawning escapement of 1913 was con- 
siderably curtailed. In spite of this curtailment, the run of 1917 was of such size 
that, had the fishing effort been sufficiently reduced to allow an escapement even 
comparable to that of 1913, the big-year cycle might have continued to dominate. 
However, the total fishing effort was probably as great as in any of the preceding big 
years, a relatively large portion of the run being taken before it even reached the river, 
as is shown by the small gill-net catches. 
Spawning-ground surveys in 1917 showed 26,000 spawners arriving at Quesnel 
Lake as against 552,000 in 1913. The Chilcotin Indians caught but 15,000 in the 
Chilcotin River compared with 25,000 in 1913. Seton Lake had not to exceed 200 
fish caught by actual weir count. Shuswap and Adams Lakes had much less than in 
1913. Harrison and Lillooet Lakes had the poorest spawning escapement that they 
bad known. 
