Lewis and Clark’s White Salmon Trout: Coho Salmon or Steelhead? 200 Years of Getting it Wrong

Part I: Lemhi River to Canoe Camp on Clearwater River

Bill McMillan, December 15, 2016

William Clark. “A Map of Lewis and Clarks Track” from History of the Expedition under the Command of Captains Lewis and Clark, to the Sources of the Missouri, thence Across the Rocky Mountains and Down the River Columbia to the Pacific Ocean, 1814. Samuel Lewis, copyist; Samuel Harrison, engraver. Engraved map. Geography and Map Division, Library of Congress (67) http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/lewisandclark/lewis-landc.html#67 (Locations added by author)

Note on the Research: The research related to the Lewis and Clark Expedition was often reliant on The Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition Online as edited by history professor Gary Moulton through the University of Nebraska Libraries Etext Center website (now the Center for Digital Research in the Humanities): http://lewisandclarkjournals.unl.edu/ This digital collection began in 2002 with 200 pages from the Nebraska Press edition of The Journals edited by Moulton (2002). It includes the journals of Capt. Meriwether Lewis, 2nd Lt. William Clark (considered by all on the expedition to be Capt. Clark and so used), Sgt. John Ordway, Sgt. Patrick Gass, and Pvt. Joseph Whitehouse. Since 2002, the Journals Online has been greatly broadened to include much beyond the original book to increase the available information for scholars and research. The website also includes notes below each day of the combined journal entries by the expedition members that provide names of animal and plant species and expedition locations with their references; access to drawings and maps made on the expedition as well as relevant ones of more recent origin; and other features of considerable interest related to the expedition. The Journals Online is worded in the original spellings and grammar used by each journalist that can be difficult to initially read in some instances. In the quotes used I minimally corrected each to more closely represent our modern spellings and grammar for easier reading. On August 12, 1805 Capt. Meriwether Lewis quietly exulted as he drank from a headwater spring of the Missouri River following a Shoshone trail to near the eastside crest of Lemhi Pass. One part of the expedition’s purpose was complete, exploration to the western extent of the Louisiana Purchase. Within ¾ mile of his westside descent from the Continental Divide he

drank from a headwater spring whose waters flowed to the Pacific Ocean, the destination of the second part of his mission. The third, and primary, part of the mission assigned to him by President Thomas Jefferson would never be fulfilled in finding a water route to the Pacific. The mythical “Northwest Passage,” a navigable waterway between the Atlantic and Pacific, did not exist. But as he lingered at the crest, there remained some small hope that a navigable stream would soon be revealed in the valley below. If so, it would be but a 1-2 day traverse across the narrow divide between two of the continent’s greatest river basins without water travel. This hope would be short lived.

Photo from: USFS/BLM Public Lands Center, Salmon, Idaho

On August 13, 1805 Lewis was received with remarkable friendliness by the Lemhi Shoshone people at a fishing encampment along the Lemhi River at the eastern edge of Idaho. After being informed that the Lemhi Valley was isolated from the Pacific Ocean by mountains and a river that were both impassible, Lewis wrote with some disbelief: This was unwelcome information but I still hoped that this account had been exaggerated with a view to detain us among them. He was further hopeful after a tribal member shared a piece of freshly roasted salmon: This was the first salmon I had seen and perfectly convinced me that we were on the waters of the Pacific Ocean.

Seemingly so near, how could salmon presence not suggest an ocean within relatively short travel? If a salmon made it up by water, why not a canoe going down? Although not stated, such considerations would have some logic based on the river gradients and Atlantic salmon distribution of his familiarity in Eastern North America. What was this first salmon? It could only be one of two species of anadromous fish known to be present at the Lemhi River, Chinook salmon (Ocorhynchus tshawytscha) or steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) as classified today. Over the coming several days, weeks, and months, the expedition members would attempt to describe the differences in the salmonids of the Pacific. Their recorded descriptions would be puzzled over to the present day by historians and scientists. The subsequent conclusions drawn from the journals can be even more puzzling. This is particularly so regarding the salmon trout described in different ways and places by members of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, and the interpretations of the species they represented that would occur over the coming 200-plus years. On August 18th Clark set out with 11 of the expedition members to attempt to find a river route to the Pacific, or a land route of relatively easy passage. The Shoshones had not misled them. The ocean was not only distant, but getting out of the Lemhi Valley would be the most difficult feat of their entire journey, on the verge of starvation in their wandering through the Bitterroot Mountains. There would be no easy traverse of the continent, primarily by water or otherwise.

Photo from: USFS/BLM Public Lands Center, Salmon, Idaho

On August 21st Clark encountered a weir across the Lemhi used by the Shoshone to catch salmon. He continued downstream to the Lemhi entry to the Salmon River where the Native

people were “gigging” salmon using a wooden spear with a bone point that would detach once the salmon was impaled and then held to the shaft by a line. It was here the expedition members came to learn gigging, but they continued to occasionally shoot salmon using the more familiar tool of the muzzle-loading rifle despite being less effective.

Photo from: USFS/BLM Public Lands Center, Salmon, Idaho

Lewis and the other men had returned back over Lemhi Pass with some Shoshones to the former camp on the Beaverhead River of Montana near where Trail Creek joined it to cache much of their equipment prior to committing to the rest of the journey to the Pacific. On August 22nd Lewis described a type of Beaverhead “trout”: Late in the evening I made the men form a bush drag, and with it in about 2 hours they caught 528 very good fish, most of them large trout. Among them I now for the first time saw ten or a dozen of a white species of trout. They are of a silvery color except on the back and head, where they are of a bluish cast. The scales are much larger than the speckled trout, but in their form position of their fins teeth mouth &c they are precisely like them. They are not generally quite as large but equally well flavored. This “white species of trout,” with large scales and potentially with few or no spots as compared to the spotted trout (likely westslope cutthroat, Oncorhyncus clarki lewisi today) remains a curiosity for which there is no sure explanation. Sgt. Ordway provides a further description: ... 2 kinds of Trout & a kind resembling Suckers. Being on the east side of the Continental Divide these should not be part of the Pacific salmonid story except that some sources consider these white (meaning silvery) trout to be “steelhead”

(indicated in the Expedition Online notes for August 22, 1805). Given Ordway’s “resembling suckers,” the mountain whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni) is a possibility, but geographically steelhead they could not be. The probable error lies in the transition back and forth over Lemhi Pass in which the two Expedition leaders and their parties of explorers switched geographic locations. It could be misinterpreted that Lewis was still on the Lemhi on August 22nd. On August 26th Lewis returned to the Lemhi with his party and on the 27th both parties reunited there. At that time Sgt. Ordway indicated in his journal: Our hunters all returned towards evening had killed 4 deer and gigged 8 or 10 fine fish which we call salmon. They would weigh 7 or 8 pound each. But differ from the Salmon caught in the salt water, but the reason may be their living so far from the ocean in fresh water. Pvt. Whitehouse clarified that there may be a mix of salmon-like fish: The natives had also sent out some of their men to fish, & they were very successful. They caught a number of fish, which some call Salmon trout, & others Salmon, they weighed in general about 8 pounds, & their flesh were not so red, as the flesh of those caught in the New England States ... Our hunters all returned towards evening. They had killed 4 Deer, & 10 fine Trout or Salmon; they had killed those fish with a Wooden Gig, which is the method that the Natives use in fishing. Both men indicated that the Expedition members were fast learners with effective use of the gig method of fishing. The size of these “salmon,” or “salmon trout,” at 7-8 pounds each, suggest that they are steelhead. If these fish in late August of 1805 were indeed steelhead, it would be as close to the Continental Divide as Columbia/Snake basin steelhead are known to have natively occurred. Being about 900 miles by water from the Pacific, it would explain their having somewhat paler flesh than that of a fresh Atlantic salmon the expedition members were familiar with. However, Chinook salmon, the other possibility, would have even paler flesh with spawning likely occurring by late August, and some already dead, but not mentioned. The Lemhi River was once noted for spring Chinook and steelhead as indicated by Bjornn (1979), but by then the indigenous steelhead had been eliminated. Only the resident form of O. mykiss remained as rainbow trout. There may once have been summer Chinook as well, but like steelhead were eliminated. Hatchery steelhead reintroductions began in 1962, but returns to the counting weir through 1970 only numbered 14-73 annually. While spring Chinook salmon continued to return to spawn in mainstem areas in short windows of flow opportunities to do so, steelhead (and summer Chinook) largely disappeared due to diversion dams that dewatered access to spawning and rearing areas. Holubetz (1968) indicated that spawning escapements of spring Chinook in 1965 and 1966 were 765 and 1,473 fish respectively. A weir was operated to count fish moving upstream to the upper Lemhi River. By early May of 1966 Chinook were already attempting to make entry but the lower river was dewatered by irrigation. Actual entry did not begin until rainfall increased the flow in June. A second peak of upstream movement was timed with spawning and occurred the third week of August, the time of the presence of Lewis and Clark in 1805.

The size of the spring Chinook in 1966 ranged from a few less than 24 inches in length to as much as 44 inches with an average of 31 inches. It is difficult to clearly estimate weight-to-length for Chinook salmon after they have migrated some 900 miles, but 31 inches may well represent the average weight of 13-14 pounds for spring Chinook of earliest run-timing caught in the Lower Columbia commercial fisheries as determined by Rich (1940). By the time the Lemhi River is reached the 31 inch length may represent a Chinook of 11-12 pounds, an average larger than the 7-8 pounds per Lemhi salmon, or salmon-trout, indicated by Ordway in 1805. By contrast, early-return steelhead (prior to August 25th) to the Columbia River Basin at Bonneville Dam are considered A-run type steelhead that are less than 31 inches in length as indicated by Campbell et al. (2012), and more likely to be in the 7-8 pound range. August steelhead at the Lemhi would have migrated through the Lower Columbia at least one to several months earlier. The A-run steelhead size would concur with Pvt. Whitehouse’s indication that the Lemhi fish caught included “salmon trout,” or steelhead today. Although it is now known that A-, and B-run steelhead stock classifications, based on run-time and size, do not well represent the more complex genetic diversity in the Snake River Basin (Nielsen et al. 2009), nevertheless, run-time is an important adaptation. As shown in the two graphs below, today’s Columbia Basin steelhead have a different run-time than those of 1892, shortly after the first steelhead commercial catch data occurred. The Lemhi River steelhead that may have been present in August of 1805 could not similarly be there today at that time because of the shift to later steelhead run-time that has occurred through the Lower Columbia. This is compounded by the time needed to get past the eight dams between the mouth of the Columbia and the Lemhi River and also due to the commonly high summer water temperatures that stop their migrations with the need to find colder water refugia until the temperatures drop. There is yet a third problem for Snake River Basin steelhead. Many of the outmigrating juvenile steelhead are collected at Lower Granite Dam on the Snake River and transported by barge downstream to below Bonneville Dam in order to theoretically increase survival past the dams.

Historic Columbia River Wild Steelhead Run-Timing: Commercial Catch Data Lower Columbia 1892 Excludes 21 Days in August (from McDonald 1894)

10,503

32,795

141,194

199,333

52,991

11,29322,620

Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

Current Columbia River Wild Steelhead Run-Timing at Bonneville Dam: 10-year average 2006-2015 from the Fish Passage Center

452 344

3,249

41,795

45,361

18,367

2,956

Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

This shift to later run-time likely represents hatchery steelhead interactions with wild steelhead, harvest impacts, and that of the cumulative dams in the Columbia Basin. This is resulting in steelhead less well adapted to a changing climate and elevating water temperatures in the Columbia and Snake rivers in July and August. Warmer summer water temperatures are increasingly delaying salmon and steelhead upstream migrations, and/or result in outright mortality. The warmer flows also elevate disease occurrence in July and August, during the very peak of present upstream migration of wild steelhead. Historical wild steelhead had significant migration in June, and even May was greater than that of September. If this were still the significant case, it would provide a life history basis for adaptation to climate change that could

largely avoid highest water temperatures during upstream migrations. As a result it would allow them to reach uppermost tributary destinations at higher elevations with cooler water temperatures. In late August of 1805 it remains that spring Chinook would have been present and may have been included in the two Lemhi River catches described by Ordway and Whitehouse. However, it would be anticipated that the catch would have included at least a few fish larger than 7-8 pounds if Chinook predominated, or were exclusively that species. In 1966, Holubetz indicated there were 136 sport caught Chinook in the Lemhi between early June to mid July, but there was no known success by the tribal fishermen who were using their traditional spears (or gigs) as checked in 1965 and 1966. It is apparent that salmon (and steelhead) numbers at the time of Lewis and Clark had to have been many times greater in order to sustain the large catches then required by the Lemhi Shoshone. On August 13th, Capt. Lewis indicated that on arrival at the upper Lemhi Valley he was met by about 60 warriors from one encampment alone with others further down the Valley. This would have represented a population of at least several hundred men, women, and children. Steward (1938) indicates the Lemhi Shoshone “established comparatively large villages” and the total population in the Lemhi Valley in 1800 was at least 600 persons. However, it was also included there were other visiting tribes that included the Bannock, Nez Perce, Flatheads, and Southern Shoshone. The fishing would occur for the extent of the fish runs according to Rossilon (1982) with Chinook available from May to September and steelhead on fall entry (presumably at least through October) and spawning entry to tributaries in spring (presumably March into June). This would be a total of 8 months of the year with considerable dependence on Chinook and steelhead. At a minimum, 600 persons were dependent on salmon and steelhead for most of a year at the Lemhi River at the time of Lewis and Clark. Estimates of pounds of salmon eaten per person by indigenous Columbia Basin people prior to Euro-American contact have commonly been considered to be 365 pounds per person annually as determined by Craig and Hacker (1940) and Hewes (1947). There have been numerous other estimates since those in the 1940s that have considered other factors, among these being that salmon were used not only for personal consumption but also for trade, for fire fuel, and to feed dogs, as listed in Polissar et al. (2016). Further considerations they listed were that caloric needs per individual increase in colder climates, there is a certain amount of salmon weight that is not consumed or used (bones and entrails), and that the further salmon migrate upstream the more they lose in caloric content, which requires more salmon consumed to meet a person’s caloric requirements. These are all important considerations. Tendoy, Idaho, near where the Lewis and Clark Expedition camped on the Lemhi River, has an elevation of 4,842 feet above sea level from the U.S. Geological Survey Geographic Names Information System with resulting colder temperatures than most of the Columbia Basin and salmon and steelhead migrating nearly 900 miles to reach that point with weight and caloric content loss. Hewes (1947) considered that the indigenous people only required 2,000 calories per day, that 50% of their diet was salmon, and that salmon provided 1,000 calories per pound. However,

Marriott (1995), writing for the Committee on Military Nutrition Research, Institute of Medicine, has indicated that when in military training activity men require 3,200-4,650 calories per day and women 2,314-2,592 calories per day. This better reflects the lives of indigenous people who spent their entire lives exposed to the natural elements with minimal clothing and shelter and actively hunting, fishing, digging plants, and canoeing, riding horses, or walking 15-30 miles per day as can be required to live off the land. The caloric intake in cold climate increased to an average of 4,500 to 3,500 calories per day for military men and women respectively, or a median of 4,000 calories per day and twice that estimated by Hewes (1947), and who did not consider the other required uses of salmon catch for trade, dog food, and heating fuel. This would minimally suggest the need for 730 pounds of salmon annually consumed per person if salmon provided 50% of their sustenance. This still does not factor in other required uses for the salmon, and the amount of unused salmon, nor does it include the likelihood that the Lemhi salmon had lost a considerable amount of their caloric content. Polisser et al. (2016) has indicated that in 1993, Deward Walker calculated that the Shoshone-Bannock people would have to catch an average of 635 pounds of salmon per person per year, and the Lemhi Shoshone likely even more. Given the previous considerations, it is reasonable that the Lemhi Shoshone at the time of Lewis and Clark would have required 800-1,000 pounds of salmon per person annually, about 2-3 pounds of salmon per day. This would result in 480,000-600,000 pounds of combined salmon and steelhead needed annually to nourish and otherwise fulfill the survival needs of 600 Lemhi Shoshone. If the average combined spring Chinook and steelhead were 10 pounds it would mean that 48,000-60,000 spring Chinook and steelhead together were harvested annually from the Lemhi River. Presumably at least an equal number was required for sustainable spawning escapement with combined runs of at least 96,000-120,000 spring Chinook and steelhead to the Lemhi River, prior to harvest, in 1805. This would be the sort of abundance required to make gigging, in particular, an effective enough fishing method to significantly contribute to feeding the Lemhi Shoshone. The Lemhi River has a drainage area of 1,216 sq. miles as indicated by Brennan et al. (2005), with a resulting 80-100 combined salmon and steelhead per sq. mile in August of 1805 prior to harvest. Even these estimates may be conservative, given the evidence of the copious amounts of salmon used at Hudsons’s Bay Posts to feed their employed trapping brigades during their extensive Columbia Basin travels by canoe, horse, and by foot. Gibson (1985) drew from the records of John Work at Fort Colville in 1830 indicating that two dried salmon and one quart of roots or berries was one man's daily ration. When available, fresh salmon averaged 16 pounds each, enough to feed one man for 2 days (8 pounds salmon per day). Women, children, and elders would have eaten less, but it is apparent that people exposed to the elements with nomadic travels in search of subsistence (or trapping) required large amounts of food. The presence of fewer than 2,000 spring Chinook in 1965 and 1966, as indicated by Holubetz in 1968, was insufficient to allow even one salmon to be harvested by tribal fishers using gigs those two years at the Lemhi River. Steelhead were less than one hundred. This represents what the level of depletion for spring Chinook and steelhead at the Lemhi River may have been from 1805 to 1972, from 80-100 salmon and steelhead per sq. mile down to 1.7 per sq. mile – from abundance to the proverbial needle in a haystack, 2% or less of historical numbers.

After the Lemhi, the Expedition had a wandering route through the Bitterroot Mountains that resulted in a period of near starvation for the Corps of Discovery. In the mountain absence of both game and salmon they had to eat three colts that were among their horses, and killed a fourth horse that likely wandered from the Nez Perce. Their plight is recorded in the names of “Colt Killed Creek” and “Hungery Creek” on Clearwater National Forest maps today. Their return journey in 1806, through much of the same route, would prove nearly as challenging until a couple of Nez Perce guided them through. Throughout their journey on the west side of the Continental Divide they often came to depend on salmon for their nourishment. This was despite objections to it – both in verbal and gastronomical reactions. Their favored diet was deer, elk, bear, or even dogs purchased for that purpose from differing tribes encountered. While salmon were commonly described in the 1805 Expedition journals after they eventually emerged from the Bitterroots to the Clearwater River, and down the Snake to the Columbia, it was not until at the Great Falls of the Columbia (Celilo Falls) that there was further mention of salmon trout. However, on September 26, 1805, they arrived at “Canoe Camp” on the Clearwater River opposite the entry of the North Fork Clearwater River (near present day Orofino). Sgt. Gass describes a raft filled with fish coming down the North Fork Clearwater: A number of the natives came down in small canoes, and encamped close to us, for the purpose of fishing; and while we were encamping we saw a small raft coming down the north fork loaded with fish ... At the time, both Lewis and Clark were unwell along with some of the other men. Clark only provides three sentences about the day, Lewis none. Beyond their sickness Clark indicates fresh salmon were purchased from the tribal fishermen. What was this raft load of salmon? Or were they steelhead?

45.5 inch B-run steelhead of Dworshak Hatchery origin in 1973 during the early years when the hatchery still brought back

30 pound steelhead that the North Fork Clearwater River self-sustained prior to Dworshak Dam (photo by Steve Pettit) The North Fork Clearwater River is particularly noted for its historically large returns of B-run steelhead that were eliminated by Dworshak Dam (Nielsen et al. 2009). 43,196 steelhead were counted past the former Lewiston Dam of the Lower Clearwater River in 1962-63 of which 50-60% of the Clearwater steelhead went up the North Fork to eventually spawn (Miller 1987). It was further estimated that an average of 30,000 steelhead produced by the North Fork Clearwater were caught in combined commercial and sport fisheries in the Columbia drainage. This means that the 1962-63 return would have been 22,000-26,000 steelhead past Lewiston Dam were destined for the North Fork Clearwater. The total return that was destined there prior to harvest would have been 50,000-55,000 steelhead. This was despite the long history of logging the North Fork’s vast stand of white pine, considered the largest such forest that remained in the United States in 1918 (Timberman 1918). Log drives down the river continued until 1971 (McCollister and McCollister 2000). The cumulative effects of the Weyerhaeuser, Clearwater Timber, and Potlatch Timber companies’ logging practices were described by Sobata (2001): These timber companies were extremely harsh on their lands, completely clear cutting forests and selling the harvest areas as quickly as possible. These policies devastated the basin’s landscape as well as local communities. Harvested timber was drifted down the Clearwater for processing in Lewiston ...

Dynamiting wedged logs NF Clearwater log drive (R. Hall, July 1951, National Geographic Magazine)

At the time of Lewis and Clark, when habitat was as yet unaffected by Euro-American activities, the Clearwater steelhead would have been even more abundant than in 1962-63. The steelhead returned to the North Fork Clearwater in both the fall and the spring (Whitt 1954) and could have been among the “salmon” that were rafted down the North Fork in 1805. At Canoe Camp the Expedition remained until October 7, 1805 building five canoes. Water would be their route to the Pacific from there on. On September 27th Sgt. Gass wrote in his journal: The river below the fork is about 200 yards wide; the water is clear as crystal, from 2 to 5 feet deep, and abounding with salmon of an excellent quality. Being “of an excellent quality” would mean that they were not yet spawning with subsequent body deterioration. These could be what are called today “upriver bright” fall Chinook, of which the Clearwater River population went extinct after Lewiston Dam was built in 1927 and not blown out until 1973 (Schuck 2013a; 2013b). Then again, the abundance of excellent quality “salmon” described by Gass may have included steelhead building up to overwinter off the mouth of the North Fork Clearwater in wait for spawning entry in spring. There is now no way to know, but steelhead would have been present along with upriver bright fall Chinook.

28 pound B-run steelhead in late October of 1977 caught by late legendary recluse of the Clearwater River, Bob Weddell; such

fish sustained the Nez Perce and other tribal fishers of the Columbia at the time of Lewis and Clark (photo by Steve Pettit) From their Canoe Camp departure onward the Expedition would encounter continual evidence of the vast numbers of salmon (and steelhead) that then returned to the Columbia Basin sustaining a large Native American population estimated by them to be 61,840-62,710 people. Their route had tribal fishing encampments and storehouses for salmon bordering all along the Snake and Columbia as depicted on their maps and in their journals. Their descriptions are haunting to read today for the great loss in just 200 years ...

To Be Continued in Part II

Acknowledgments: The information this article is based on began with research of historical salmon and steelhead of the Columbia Basin as funded by NOAA Fisheries in 2007/08, and by a grant from the Patagonia World Trout Environmental Grants Program provided through the Wild Steelhead Coalition in 2010. (Since then the ongoing research has been volunteer.) Also, great appreciation to Steve Pettit for use of historical photographs he provided. Sources drawn from: Bjornn, T.C. 1978. Survival, production, and yield of trout and Chinook salmon in the Lemhi River, Idaho. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise.

Brennan, T.S., A.K. Lehmann, and I. O'Dell. 2005. Water Resources Data, Idaho.Volume 1. Surface Water Records, Water-Data Report ID-05-1. U.S. Georlogical Survey. Campbell, M.R., C.C. Kozfkay, T. Copeland, W.C. Schrader, M.W. Ackerman, and S.R. Narum. 2012. Estimating abundance and life history characteristics of threatened wild Snake River steelhead stocks by using genetic stock identification. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 141:5, 1310-1327 Gass, P. 1811. Journal of the Voyages and Travels of a Corps of Discovery under the Command of Capt. Lewis and Capt. Clarke of the Army of the United States, from the Mouth of the River Missouri through the Interior Parts of North America to the Pacific Ocean, during the Years 1804, 1805, and 1806. Printed for Mathew Carey, No. 122 Market St., Philidelphia. Gibson, James R. 1985. Farming the Frontier: The Agricultural Opening of the Oregon Country 1786-1846. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver. Hall, R. 1951. Idaho Loggers Battle a River. National Geographic Magazine, July 1951. Vol. C. No. 1: 117-130. Hewes, G.W. 1947. Aboriginal Use of Fishery Resources in Northwestern North America. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. February. Holubetz, T. 1968. Federal aid to fish restorations, annual progress reports: salmon and steelhead investigations. F 49-R-4 (Job 4) and F 49-R-5 (Job 4). Salmon and Steelhead production, escapement, and harvest studies, Lemhi River. Idaho Dept. of Fish and Game, Boise. McCollister, C.R., and S. McCollister. 2000. The Clearwater Log Drives, A Photo Essay. Forest History Today, Fall 2000. The Forest History Society, Durham, NC. pp 20-26. Miller, W.H. 1987. A review of Dworshak National Fish Hatchery mitigation record. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Dworshak Fisheries Assistance Office, Ahsahka, ID Marriott, B.M. (Editor). 1995. Not Eating Enough: Overcoming Underconsumption of Military Operational Rations. Committee on Military Nutrition Research, Institute of Medicine. The National Acadamies Press, Washington, D.C. Moulton, Gary E., editor. 2002. The Journals of the Lewis and Clark Expedition, 13-volume set (v. 1-13). Annotated Edition. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. 5,302 p. Also online: http://lewisandclarkjournals.unl.edu/ Nielsen, J.L., A. Byrne, S.L. Graziano, and C.C. Kozfkay. 2009. Steelhead Genetic Diversity at Multiple Spatial Scales in a Managed Basin: Snake River, Idaho. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 29:680–701

Polissar, N.L., A. Salisbury, C. Ridolfi, K. Callahan, M. Neradilek, D.S. Hippe, and W.H Beckley. 2016. A Fish Consumption Survey of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Final Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Rich, W.H. 1940. Seasonal variations in weight of Columbia River Chinook salmon. Contribution 5. Department of Research, Fish Commission of the State of Oregon, Salem. Rossilon, M.P. 1982. Cultural resource overview for the Salmon National Forest. Scholz, A. and K. O’Laughlin, D. Geist, D. Peone, J. Uehara, L. Fields, T. Kleist, I. Zozaya, T. Peone, and K. Teesatuskie. 1985. Compilation of information on salmon and steelhead total run size, catch and hydropower related losses in the Upper Columbia River Basin, above Grand Coulee Dam. Fisheries Technical Report No. 2. Upper Columbia United Tribes Fisheries Center, Eastern Washington University, Cheney. 165 pages. Schuck, M. 2013a. Snake River Fall Chinook, A Primer: 1900-1975. 2013 Snake River Fall Chinook Program Review Symposium, August 6-7, Clarkston, WA. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. https://www.fws.gov/lsnakecomplan/Meetings/2013%20Fall%20Chinook%20Symposium/Aug%206%20Reports/schuck%20Snake%20River%20Fall%20Chinook%20Overview.pdf Schuck, M. 2013b. Historical Perspective Including a Brief Current Status Assessment Relative to Historical. 2013 Snake River Fall Chinook Program Review Symposium, August 6-7, Clarkston, WA. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. https://www.fws.gov/lsnakecomplan/Meetings/2013%20Fall%20Chinook%20Symposium/Aug%206%20Presentations/2-Schuck%20SRFC%20Historical%20Review.pdf Sobata, D.J. 2001. The Clearwater River Basin, Idaho, USA. Oregon State University. Steward, J.H. 1938. Plateau-basin aboriginal sociopolitical groups. Bulletin 120. Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology. Washington, D.C. Timberman. 1918. America’s Last Great Stand of White Pine. The Timberman, an International Lumber Journal. Portland, Oregon. Vol XIX, No. 8: 44-45 USFS/BLM. The Lewis and Clark Back Country Byway and Adventure Road, Tendoy, Idaho. Public Lands Center, Salmon, Idaho. https://www.blm.gov/style/medialib/blm/id/special_areas/byways___trails/lewis_and_clark_backcounty.Par.84759.File.dat/LCBackCountryByway_web.pdf Whitt, C.R. 1954. The age, growth, and migration of steelhead trout in the Clearwater River, Idaho. Thesis for Master of Science. University of Idaho.