210 
Fishery Bulletin 1 14(2) 
Figure 3 
Average ocean growth (mm) of age-0.3 male chum salmon ( Oncorhynchus keta) from Fish Creek (FC) 
Alaska and Quilcene River (QR), Washington. Time series data include (A) early juvenile growth 
SWla (FC: 1971-2004 and QR: 1972-2004), (B) middle juvenile growth SWlb (FC: 1974-2004; QR: 
1974-2003), (C) late juvenile growth SWlc (FC: 1971-2004, (D) 1 st immature year growth SW2 
(FC: 1972-2004 and QR: 1972-2004), (E) 2 nd immature year growth SW3 (FC: 1972-2004 and QR: 
1972-2004), and (F) maturing growth SW4 (FC: 1972-2004 and QR: 1973-2004). Solid lines repre- 
sent FC and dashed lines represent QR. 
SE Alaska to the AP management-region harvests and 
was positively related to length at the start of the 
growing season (La) (Table 2). Seventy percent of the 
variation in SWlb was explained by La and pink salm- 
on abundance (r 2 =0.70; PcO.001). 
SWlc was negatively correlated with the velocity 
of fall winds, but not correlated with pink and chum 
salmon abundance. Fall winds explained 39% of the 
variation in SWlc. 
SW2 was inversely related to the combined abun- 
dances of immature age-0.1 chum salmon and matur- 
ing pink salmon on the basis of abundance data from 
BC to the south of the AP (Table 2). The SIC was fur- 
ther reduced by including lagged values of SST, PDO, 
and growth in the error correction model. SW2 was 
positively correlated with summer SST 2 years ear- 
lier and negatively correlated with the winter PDO 
4 years earlier. The variables in the GLS/VAR model 
explained an additional 27% of the variation in SW2 
in comparison with the GLS model. Performance mea- 
sures indicated no change in the coefficients of varia- 
tion when the error correction term was included in 
the SW2 model. 
SW3 was negatively correlated with the abundance 
of immature age-0.2 chum salmon from BC to SE Alas- 
ka and maturing pink salmon from BC to SE Alaska 
(Table 2). Abundance explained 35% of the variation in 
SW3. Growth was also significantly and negatively cor- 
