The Montlake Laboratory and itsBiological ResearchClinton E. Atkinson

Open House" was held just before theactual occupancy of the building.Those present included Henry O Malleyof the Bureau of Fisheries and theInternational Fisheries CommissionMiller Freeman , editor of the PacificFisherman , and U. S. Senator WesleyJones , author of the Jones Act. doubt others prominent in fisheries inthe Pacific Northwest and Alaska werepr esent also , along wi th the local

In the Beginning

On 22 May 1931 , the new laboratory

the U. S. Bureau of Fisheries opened onMontlake Boulevard in Seattle. An

1/ Former Director, Seattle BiologicalLaboratory, bureau of ComwercialFisheries, U. S. Fisn and WildlifeService; present address: 4CJ5.) 21stAve. ~~. , Seattle , wA 98199.

Construction of the new additionduring the summer of 1963.

The completed addition on January 1

1965.

staff uembers of both the Bureau andthe International Fisheries Commissioncoillffionly known as the HalibutCommission.

The ,report of the U. S. Commissioner Fisheries for 1930 notes, "Thecompletion of the new laboratory atSeattle provides the much neededfacilities for the Pacific coastbiological staff of the Bureau as wellas for certain of its other personneland the stat f of the InternationalHalibut Commission. In the report for1931 , there is the succinct statement,On Hay 22 , 1931 , the personnel andequipment of the Stanford field stationwere transferred to the new FisheriesBio logical Lab orato ry a t Seat tieincluding all of the Bureau s Pacificbiological investigations dealing withPacific coast fishery problems , exceptshellfish and the cooperative work onCalifo rnia trout.

The actual move did not occur all atonce; the period between Hay and Junewas the beginning of the summer s workon salmon in Alaska and on the ColumbiaRiver , so most of the staff had left orwere in the process of leaving for thefield. Ed Power , the newly appointedstatistical agent for the PacificNorthwest and Alaska , was among thefirs t to move into the building.George Rounsefell and Edwin Dahlgren the Alaska Herring Investigations wereearly occupants. Joseph Craig, the newdirector of the Pacific coastlaboratory, was there also, working outproblems of space and operatingexpenses, as well as initiating the onenew i nves tiga tion fo r Montlake--thestudy of salmon fisheries on PugetSound.

The halibut Commission moved into theMontlake facili ty in July 1931. At thetime , all of the junior staff memberswere in the field and two of the senior

staff were at the University ofWashington s Biological Station atFriday Harbor for the summer , leavingHeward Bell in charge of the Seattleoffice. While the others were away,Bell was given the task of moving thefiles and belongings of the staff intotheir new quarters at Montlake. took months , so the story goes , beforethe absentees could loca te andreorganize their records and personalef fects.

The Firs t Decade: the Depression Years

Even these firs t years , the Montlakelaboratory was the training ground fora number of future leaders in fisheriesresearch and management. Dr. RichardVanCleve , who eventually became Dean the University of Washington s Collegeof Fisheries , and Dr. John Kask, whohas served as head of several fisheryagencies in the United States andCanada , both attained their advanceddegrees at the University of Washingtonwhile working for the InternationalPacific Halibut Commission at Montlake.Dr. Lauren Donaldson , known throughoutthe world for his work in the selectivereeding of trout and salmon, worked

part time at Montlake reading salmonscales--he really did not find the jobtoo interes ting, but it provided ameans of support during his firs t yearsa t the College of Fisheries in thedepth of the depression.

With one exception, the biologicalresearch program at Montlake remainedthe same as when the work was conductedfrom Stanford University. The one newprogram, initiated in 1931 , concerned astudy of the biology of Puge t Soundruns of sockeye salmon under the directsupervision of the laboratory directorJoseph Craig. A small, short-term

operation , tagging Rogue Rivers teelhead trout, was started in thewinter of 1930-31 and completed thesame year.

Continuing programs at the newlaboratory consisted of six programs onAlaskan fish: four dealing wi sockeye salmon, one with pink salmonand one with herring. Specifically,these programs were: 1) Karluk sockeyesalmon under Thomas Barnaby, 2) Chigniksockeye salmon under Harlan Holmesassisted by George Kelez, 3) CopperRiver sockeye salmon under SetonThompson assisted by Morris Rafn,4) Bristol Bay sockeye salmon under L. Schulte; 5) Alaska pink salmon underDr. Frederick Davidson assisted by J. Hutchinson; and 6) Alaska herringunder George Rounsef ell assisted byEdwin Dahlgren.

Work also continued on a program toobtain information for the Bureau ofFisheries to help the U. S. Army Corpsof Engineers design a new dam on theColumbia River that would offer minimalinterference wi th salmon runs. Thisprogram dealt largely with fish-ladderand f ish-sc reen de sign fo r variouslocalities. It was under direction U. B. Gilroy, a civil engineer, withguidance from Shirley Baker , a SanFrancisco consulting engineer, who hadoriginally headed this program.

In 1933 Dr. Davidson was appointedlaboratory director. He wasparticularly aware of the importance statistical analysis in theinterpretation of the results offishery research. During his firstmonths as director , he hired ElizabethVaughn as the laboratory s statisticalanalyst. About the same time, Dr.Thompson and the staff of the HalibutCommission began to apply Baranof' stheory of fishing to the regula to ryproblems of the halibut fishery. These

were firs ts in fishery research.During this same period , Dr. Davidsonand Eugene Shostrom also undertook astudy of the physical and chemicalchanges that occur in salmon duringmigration upstream and spawning.

The pink salmon program soon evolvedtowards studies of freshwa ter survivalof the eggs and young. In 1934, SamuelHutchinson, the firs t permanentbiologist to be employed at Hontlakeand la ter the Regional Director , was

placed in charge of es tab lishing a newfield station for pink salmon survivalstudies on Sashin Creek near the Li t tiePort Walter field station insoutheastern Alaska. The U. S. ForestService set aside 2 000 acres , coveringthe entire drainage of Sashin Creek , asa reserve. Building materials, Bureausupplies , and equipment were brought inon the Heron wi th the help of EdwardDahlgren and LeRoy Christey. Thelittle green shack" that was built onSashin Creek in 1934 was used bybiologists stationed there until largerand roo re pe rmanent facili ties wereconstructed in the fall of 1940, alsoin 1934, Christey began his studies the fluctua tions in the ca tch of pinksalmon in southeastern Alaska and inthe movement of these fish wi thin thecommercial fisheries.

Much credit is due to Dr. Davidson andHutchinson fo r their wisdom and laborin establishing the experimentalstation on Sashin Creek. Soon thisstation will also reach its 50-yearmark. Over the years it has providedinnumerable studies and experiments onsalmon and other fish and hascontributed much to our unders tanding.

Although the details are not wellknown , permanent quarters were alsobuilt on Kodiak Island at Karluk nearthe outlet of the lake. There weresimilar problems in getting materials

and supplies to the building site. this case, t he means was a barge up theKarluk River which in itself is qui an accomplishment!

It wap also during this period (1932)that a very extensive tagging programwas begun on the herring insoutheastern Alaska , usir~ the newmetal "belly" tag which can berecovered by a magnetic detectionsys tew on the conveyer belts atpr ocessing plants. The tagging ofherring wi th internal illagnetic tags wasfirst undertaken during the summer 1932 in Chatham Strait, southeasternAlaska , near Port Alexander. Using theDotor vessel Heron and a floatingherring pot as the tagging f acili ty,Dr. George Rounsefell , Edwin Dahlgrenand Samuel Hutchinson tagged andreleased some 5 , 000 herring. flliny ofthese tagged herring were caught in thecommercial fishery and the tagsrecovered by electric magnets at theherring reduction plants. It was EdDahlgren ' s iI~enui ty and extraordinaryinventive instincts that led to thedevelopment of the internal metal bellytag for tagging herring. He alsodevised and developed the elect ronicand magnetic systems for recovering thetagged herring or the tags as theypassed through the reduct ion plant.This was an outstanding researchdevelopment fo r de termining theIllagnitude and distribution of thevarious herring popula tions in Alaska.

However , the most significant expansionof the fisheries programs in the earlyyears of the Montlake laborato ryoccurred on the Columbia River , relatedto the development of the system dams proposed for that River. Since1928 , the Bureau of Fisheries had beenstudying problems and methods of fishpassage at various wa ter divers ionprojects along the Pacific coast , but

the ef fo rt was not adequate to sa tisfy

the needs of the proposed dams on theColumbia River; Rock Island Dam hadalready been built , Bonneville wasunder construction, and Grand Couleewas planned for construction beginningin 1934.

Because of some previous experience infish coun ting and f ish passage problemsa t Rock Island and Lewis River dams,Harlan Holmes became the Bureau s fishpassage expert. He , along withrepresentatives from Oregon andWashington and the Army Corps ofEngineers , solved numerous problemsarising from the construction of theBonneville Dam. It is difficult describe the character of HarlanHolmes. He was completely dedicated tohis work, had a very inquisitive mindand was continually setting uphypothetical situations which he , ormembers of his staff, would then try solve. Milo Bell \mo worked with theWashington Department of Fisheries andla ter became one of the top fisheryengineers in the world , tells of thetime that Holmes swam up the RockIsland fishways (and almost made it)just to prove that if a man can swim upa fishway, then a salmon should have nopr ob lem!

Holmes was transferred to Portland in1933 or 1934, ostensibly to be close his work and the offices of the ArmyCorps of Engineers , although the realreason was simply to get paid. those days , it was impossible transfer funds from the Corps to theBureau; to solve the problem , Harlansimply tr ans fe rred to the Corp s. remained in Portland until BonnevilleDam had been comple ted .

In 1939 he returned to the Montlakelaboratory as Biologist-in-Charge ofthe new Hydraulic Engineering Sectionworking on the Bureau s growing fish-passage problems in the Columbia River

" '\

system. The section was to review allfederal power permit applications andto develop, design, and restore fish-passage structures and devicesincluding fish-screens throughout theColumbia River where needed, such as atdams and divers ions.

, )

Ole Lindgren was Holmes ' designengineer for a short time , and he wassucceeded by Scott Bair. CliffordBurner , a University of Washingtongradua te student hired by Craig andSuomela in early 1938 to do salmonspawning surveys, joined the staff asan engineering draftsman andtroubleshooter. Holmes was delighted!When tes ts were needed, it was nowBurner who swam t hr ough flumes,ladders, weirs--even the new Burkeyelect ric fish sc reen--wh ile Ho lmes to notes from the bank and signaleddirections wi th eloquent whistles andarm-waving. Many of the Columbia Riverf ish-sc reens were massive, rotary-drumtypes requiring a field maintenancecrew. This crew was headed by RobertHolcomb working out of shops in Yakima,Washington. Russell Lambert , an

engineer , was added to the HydraulicEngineering Section at Montlake, andwhen Burner was called by the U.Navy, Ronald and Esther Barker joinedthe proj ect as draf tsmen.

Holmes and Bair , along wi th Milo Bellof the Washington Department Fisheries, became recognized nationallyand internationally as an expert teamof consultants in the field of " fishhydro" problems. Bair la ter becamedesign engineer for the Chelan PublicUtili ty Department on Rocky Reach Damnear Wenatchee, Washington.

In 1941 Harlan Holmes succeeded Dr.Davidson as Laboratory Director, buttypical of his interest and tirelessenergy, he retained direction of theHydr aulic Engineering Sect ion.

Principally for his research in thisfield , Holmes received the Departmentof Interior s Distinguished ServiceAward , its highest honor, wi th a goldmedal , when he retired in 1958.

The first major increase in funds forthe Bureau s work at Montlake came in1934 with the initiation of the veryextensive Columbia RiverInvestigations , which were closelyassociated wi th the wa ter-usedevelopment program for the ColumbiaRiver basin. Joe Craig was placed incharge of the new program and hisposition as Director of the Montlakelaborato ry was turned over to Dr. FredDavidson.

The Columbia River Program was sparkedby the well known " 308 Report " of theArmy Corps of Engineers (1933) whichoutlined the basic plan for thedevelopment of a series of mult purpose dams on the Columbia and SnakeRivers and their tributaries.Information was needed almostimmediately to provide the basis for acomplete program of maintenance andrehabili tation of the fisheries on theColumbia River. In addition to JoeCraig, who was in charge of theprogram, Willis Rich served asconsultant in the various studies andRobert Hacker compiled the backgroundhistory and other information on thedevelopment of the Columbia Riverfisheries.

A major part of the Columbia RiverProgram during the first years was thecomprehensive survey of all accessiblesalmon streams in the river system.This survey de termined the pr esentcondi tion of the various tributariesand their availabili ty and usefulnessfor the migration , spawning, andrearing of migratory fishes (i.salmon and steelhead). Arnie Suomela,who at his own request had returned to

Montlake earlier in 1934, was namedhead of the Columbia River survey andwas actively assisted in the work byMitchell Hanavan and Zell Parkhurst.There were at least 15 other Bureauempl~yees Who over the next severalyears were associated with thisprogram. 27

This sudden increase inactivity and staff brought with it aneed for additional space at thelaboratory and thoughts qui te naturallyturned to the " 15 room units" occupiedby the International FisheriesCommission (later to be named theInternational Pacific HalibutCommission) .

There were many factors associated withthe termination of the joint occupancyof Montlake by the Bureau and theInternational Fisheries Commission. 18 March 1936, William Thompson wrotethe following letter . to the U.Commissioner of Fisheries , Frank T.

Be 11 :The removal of the

International Fisheries Commissionfrom the Bureau s laboratory at2725 Montlake Boulevard is nowvirtually completed. May Iexpress to yourself and Mr.Higgins our appreciation of thecourtesy and friendliness withwhich we have been treated whileguests of the Bureau. I am surethat there has been the utmostgood feeling on both sidessomething which we hope willpersist in the years to come.

Thus ended the period of jointoccupancy in the history of theMontlake laboratory.

Although Bonneville Dam was of majorconcern to the fishery agencies becauseit was the first dam to be encounteredby anadromous fish in their ascent the Columbia River , the real problemfor the salmon fisheries of the

Coluffibia occurred at Grand Coulee Damlocated in the middle section of theColumbia River. The dam, claimed to bethe largest man-made structure in theworld, was some 320 ft high (forebay totailrace) precluding any hope of eitherpassing the ad ul t salmon over the damor the young migrants downstream. Thusmore than 1, 000 miles of spawning andrearing grounds for salmon above thedam were eliminated.

In 1939 a study was carried out by theWashington Department of Fisheries determine the possible means ofpreserving the salmon runs that wouldbe blocked by the dam. In due time aplan was developed, reviewed by a boardof consultants , and finally approved bythe various agencies. Since the u.government had jurisdiction overnavigable waters, " the Bureau ofFisheries was given the responsibilityfor the salmon rehabilitation program--somewhat to the dismay of those who haddeveloped the plan.

However, many of the state and federalfishery biologists had gone to schooltogether, had worked together on anumber of other proj ects, and helpedorganize the informal meetings of thePacific Fishery Biologists at whichthey met at' least once a year. Thus,throughout the proj ec t there was much

2/ The fo llowi ng we re named by Willi s Rich(1948) as having participated in the streamsurveys at one time or another: Charles Bal tzoFloyd Bryant, Roger Burrows, LeRoy Christey,David Frey, Frank Jobes, Lawrence Kolloen , Ray

Langton , Milton Lobell , William (Mark) MortonRobert Peterson , Richard Shuman, Kingsley WeberRichard Whiteleather , James Wilding, and PaulZimmer. Later , Clifford Burner , Willard

Brewington , Leonard Fulton , and Harold Gangmark

also became a part of this program. Suddenincrease in activity and staff brought with it analmost immediate need for additional space at theHontlake laboratory, and thoughts quite naturallyturned to the " is-room units " occupied by the

International Fisheries Commission (Halibut).

personal cooperation between the staffsof the two agencies.

As an amusing example , one nightWilbert Chapman, always an energeticand capable biologist, was apprehendedfor murder in Leavenworth , Washingtonthe center of the Grand Coulee proj ect.There had been a murder in the area andthe alert local constabulary notedblood trickling from the trunk of Wib'car. The blood , of course, was salmonblood but Wib had little identificationwith him and the local police simplycould not believe that anyone would beinterested in collecting dead salmon.Arnie Suomela, who was in charge of theGrand Coulee proj ect for the Bureau andwho just happened to be in Leavenworthat the time, had to convince the localauthorities that Wib was really a stateemployee and the salmon were anecessary part of his work!

The Grand Coulee fish maintenanceproj ect continued for nine years (1939to 1948) and was the first attempt atmassive transplants of salmon runs fromtheir native streams to new, qui distant spawning and rearing areas.There were numerous problemsespecially in the early years. Thesalmon were trapped at Rock Island Damand hauled by truck to the new "homestreams which appeared to be bestsui ted to the particular species:Nason Creek (Wenatchee River) forspr ing-run steelhead and chinooksalmon, Wenatchee and Entiat rivers forsummer-run chinook salmon and fall-runsteelhead, and Lakes Wenatchee andOsoyoos for sockeye salmon. Biologistsoften accompanied trucks and ranchemical analyses for pH , oxygencarbon dioxide, and methyl orangealkalinity on the water in trucksrivers, and lakes. As reflected in thecounts at Rock Island Dam, salmon thathave returned to the area of transplanthave generally not only maintained

their original levels of abundance buthave increased two- to three-fold.

Although not really part of thebiological program, the Division ofHa tcheries of the Bureau of Fisheriesshared in the management of the GrandCoulee fish maintenance program. TheDivision was responsible for all fishculture operations at the hatcheriesand for the physical trapping andtransportation of adult fish at RockIsland Dam. Accordingly, in 1937 theWestern Regional Office of the Divisionof Hatcheries was established atMontlake. Fred Foster served as theRegional Director , Clarence Lucas asthe Assistant Regional Director , Al

Kemmerich as Superintendent-at- largefor hatcheries , Hanford Thayer asengineer , and Dr. Fred Fish as the fishpa thologist . Dr. Lauren Donaldson ofthe University of Washington s Collegeof Fisheries was once again at Montlakeas a troubleshooter for the hatcheryprogram, and Dr. Robert Rucker, wholater became head of the Western FishDisease Laboratory, began his career atMontlake under a fellowship program.

The center of the fish cultureactivities relating to the Grand Couleeprojects was at Leavenworth Washingtonwhere there was a very large hatcherycomplex which included some 288troughs , about 70 rearing ponds , and an

elaborate system for the collection offish. Dr. Fish was in charge of thelaboratory at the Leavenworth stationto do research on holding adult salmon,artificial spawning, rearing eggs andfish , nutrition, and the control ofdiseases. In addition to Leavenworthtwo substation hatcheries were locatedon the Entiat and Methow Rivers, wheresimilar research was carried out by Dr.Fish' s staff.

Other salmon fishery concerns began surface during this period. For almost

a half century, there had beenrecurring conflicts between theCanadian and U. S. fishermen in PugetSound and the Gulf of Georgia, wherethey competed for sockeye salmon boundfor the Fraser River in BritishColumbia , Canada. Finally, in May 1930the Sockeye Salmon Fisheries Conventionwas signed, but questions about therole of the Commission in regulation ofthe fishery, the division of catchbetween the fishermen of the twocountries , and the agency or agenciesresponsible for the i~vestigationsremained unresolved. In order provide background information neededby the U. S. government beforeratification, a new study was begun onthe sockeye salmon fisheries of PugetSound; as noted previously, Joe Craigwas in charge of this proj ectsimul taneously wi th his appo in tmen t head of the Montlake laboratory. Afterhis transfer to the Columbia Riverprogram , George Rounsefell , who hadbeen in charge of the Alaska herringstudies fo r some 6 years, took over thePuget Sound sockeye salmon study.Shortly thereafter , on 16 June 1936the convention was ratified by the U.Senate; documents of ratification wereexchanged on 23 July 1937. TheCommission was formally established inOctober 1937, wi th Dr. W. F. Thompsonas Director of Investigations and anindependent staff , similar to theorganization of the Halibut Commission.

Results of the Puget Sound sockeyesalmon study were eventually publishedby Rounsefell with George Kelez asco-author , but unfortunately theybecame available 2 or 3 years after theCommission s own research program hadbeen established.

A related program was also started in1934-35 on the coho salmon fisheries ofPuget Sound under the direction ofGeorge Kelez. This was one of the

early studies made by the Bureau on therelation between the release time ofyoung from the hatcheries and theultimate number of returns of adultcoho salmon.

The first major expansion of theAlaskan fishery research program at theMontlake laboratory occurred in 1938when funds were made available for thebeginning of a large, comprehensiveprogram of study on the salmon runs inthe Bristol Bay area of the Bering Sea.The program which developed was dividedinto two major parts. One part of thestudy was on the freshwater lifehistory of the Bristol Bay sockeyesalmon and the environmental factorsthat would affect their survival. field station and experimental area wasestablished on Brooks River , near theoutlet of the lake. This was abeautiful site for study in the BristolBay area; it was accessible by floatplane from King Salmon , and the lakeand river were large enough to providenormal access and spawning and rearingconditions, yet the site was smallenough to allow studies ofenvironmental conditions in somelimnological detail. During the firstyear of study, an adult counting weirwas installed in Brooks River , near theoutlet of the lake, and the collectionof samples of downstream young migrantswas started , not only for Brooks Lakebut in four other river systems ofBristol Bay as well. George Kelez wastransferred from Chignik to take chargeof this phase of the Bristol Baystudies.

The other part of the Bristol Bayprogram was in many ways more excitingbecause it was the first real study inthe United States of the ocean lifehistory of salmon. Tom Barnaby, aveteran of the Karluk studies , wasplaced in charge of the marine phase ofthe program. The oceanographic part of

the work , an essential part of thestudy, was done in close cooperationwi th the U. S. Coast Guard and involvedthe use of the cut ter Redwing In thesecond and subsequent years, U. S. purseseiners were chartered to explore theavailability of salmon on the ocean.These vessels fished with ocean-typesalmon gill nets , similar to those usedin the Japanese high-seas fisheries.This work was funded primarily by theU. S. Department of State which soughtadditional information on the extent Japanese operations in the easternBering Sea and the Aleutian Islands.

It is somewhat ironic that thesestudies had to be terminated in 1941with the outbreak of World War II andthe invasion of the Aleutian Islands bythe Japanese. The general study planwas to begin work in Bristol Bay andeach year to fish farther and fartheroffshore. At the time the work wascancelled , the distribution of salmonover the continental shelf of theeastern Bering Sea as well as aroundsome of the Aleutian Islands had beenestablished , but the more distantwaters of the central Bering Sea andthe North Pacific Ocean had not yetbeen explored. Had the work continuedfor another year or two , the UnitedStates would likely have had theinformation it needed for post-warnegotiations at the International NorthPacific Fisheries Convention with Japanand Canada in 1952.

The Second Decade: 1941-51--World WarII and the Post-War Readjustment

The first 10 years of Montlakehistory was marked by the very rapidexpansion of the biological and relatedresearch programs and a comparablegrowth of a competent staff of young

biologists , led by a group of the topfishery scientists of the time. Theprograms were new and there was theexcitement of discovery and themomentum that would carry the variousprograms through periods ofdifficulties. The Montake laboratory,in a very short period of time , hadbecome well established among thefishery biological laboratories alongthe Pacific coast, and the staff hadgained the respect of their colleaguesin other agencies.

The next 10 years, however, saw thegradual disintegration of the researchprogram and the dispersion of thestaff. This change began even beforethe U. S. declared war in December 1941.In 1939, in accordance with thePresident s Reorganization Plan No. II,the Bureau of Fisheries was transferredfrom the Department of Commerce to theDepartment of the Interior , and in 1940it was merged in to the newly fo rmed

S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Atthat time, the Western Regional Officeof the Hatchery Division , wi th FredFoster , AI Kemmerich , and others , wasmoved to Portland and became part ofthe Regional Office of the Fish andWildlife Service. Then in 1941, Dr.Fred Davidson resigned as Director ofthe Montlake laboratory and from theBureau. Harlan Holmes was appointed succeed Davidson , but he soon developeda distaste for the job and asked to bereplaced. Dr. Willis Rich then servedas director (1943-44).

In 1943, Fred Foster , who had beentransferred from Montlake to theRegional Office in Portland 2 or 3years earlier , was appointed theDirector of Fisheries for the State Washington by the newly electedGovernor , Arthur Langlie. He almostimmedia tely persuaded two of his oldfriends and hunting companions atMontlake to join his staff , Joe Craig

as Director of Research, and ArnieSuomela as Managing Biologist. Fosterserved as director until early 1945.La ter tha t year he received anappointment as Director of Fisheriesfor ~he Fish Commission of Oregon. returned to Washing ton , D. C. , in 1954as Assistant and later AssociateDirecto r of the U. S. Fish and WildlifeService.

These were war years--1941 to 1945.Following the attack on Pearl Harbor on7 December 1941, George Kelez, who wasin the Navy s Reserve Officer TrainingCorps (ROTC) Reserve, was called upimmediately and Clifford Burner andothers on the staff soon followed.Ralph Ferrandini , Victor Samson , SamHutchinson, and other members of thestaff were assigned to the Office ofthe Coordination of Fisheries orsimilar wartime agencies. Funds werekept to a minimum , the use of vehicleswas curtailed, and supplies andequipment became increasingly difficultto obtain.

Although many of the research programswere maintained at basically a

standby" level, there were exceptions.In 1942 , Tom Barnaby, in George Kelezabsence , took over the Bristol Bayprogram to finish construction of thefield station at Brooks Lake andcontinue the series of counts at theweir of Brooks River and the samplingthroughout Brooks Lake. The GrandCoulee fish maintenance programcontinued to transplant salmon into new

home" streams through 1943, with 4years of evalua tion afterwards.However , the work in general waslimited and there was not theexcitement of the first decade.

In 1944 Tom Barnaby was named the newDirector of the Montlake laboratory. Inthe following year , Dr. Lionel Walfordreplaced Elmer Higgins as Director of

Research for the Bureau of CommercialFisheries in Washington , D.C. ElmerHiggins had been head of biologicalresearch programs for the Bureau inWashington since 1927 and played a keyrole in the selection of the site andconstruction of the Montlake laboratoryand in the development of the researchprogram at Stanford and at Montlake.He was especially interested in theproblems of the salmon fisheries of thePacific Northwest and Alaska. frequently visited these areas anddeveloped a research program aimeddirectly at problems of management.Higgin s professional career was almostentirely in the administration offishery research and he was a very goodadministrator.

Dr. Walford' s background and experiencewere completely different fromHiggin ' s; he was a gradua te of StanfordUniversi ty and had received hisdoctorate from Harvard. He wasscientist in every sense of theand his pr imary interest was inmarine sciences and the marinefisheries. Dr. Walford was not happywith most of the research programs ofthe Bureau of Commercial Fisheries atthe time he was appointed Director ofResearch; he deplored the lack ofpublications and set about reorganize the entire research program.He was almost obsessed with the policyof creating "new and exciting" researchprograms and of bringing into thescientific staff new blood with newideas. He encouraged transfers ofscientific staff between laboratoriesand programs or into other Divisions ofthe Bureau.

wordthe

Sam Hutchinson transferred to thePortland Office in 1945 to become theAssistant Regional Director forFisheries. As a result of Hutchinsontransfer, Mitchell Hanavan was placedin charge of all pink salmon research

at Little Port Walter and southeasternAlaska. Eugene Maltzeff and PaulZimmer also transferred to Portland in1945, Bill Peck and Mark Morton in1949, and finally Tom Barnaby, HarlanHolmes , and Zell Parkhurst in the early1950s. Ed Dahlgren transferred Washington, D. , in 1950 to becomeChief of the Marine Fisheries sectionin the Division of Research under Dr.Walford.

, ,

In the latter part of this period newfaces began to appear at the Montlakelaboratory. Ralph Silliman transferredin 1945 from the California SardineInvestigations at Stanford Universityto be in charge of a study funded bythe U. S. Army Corps of Engineers on thepopulation dynamics of salmon spawningin the tributaries of the ColumbiaRiver with John Hodges Harlan Johnsonand Mark Morton. The proj ect ended in1949 and Silliman moved back toWashing ton, D. , to become Chief ofthe Anadromous Fisheries section in theDivision of Research.

Ken Mosher , who had a long experiencewith the determination of the age offishes on the Pacific coasttransferred to Seattle in 1949 to readand analyze the large collection ofsalmon scales accumulated from previousAlaskan and Columbia River studies.

Dr. Gerald Collins was employed atMontlake in 1950 to begin his programon the passage of salmon at dams on theColumbia River.

In 1951, when Tom Barnaby transferredto the Regional Office of the Fish andWildlife Service in Portland, CliffBurner became the Director of theColumbia River program and ActingDirector of Montlake, and MitchelHanavan became Director of AlaskanInvestigations.

Some changes occurred in the researchprogram at Montlake in 1950-51.Phillip Nelson began a study of thefertilization of Bare Lake, a smalllake on Kodiak Island, in cooperationwi th Dr. Edmundson of the Universi ty ofWashing ton , and new studies werestarted at Sashin Creek, in thevicinity of Little Port Walter , on theintertidal spawning of pink salmon.There was no change in the research inBristol Bay or in the herring studies.The research program on the ColumbiaRiver was almost entirely orientedtowards problems of fish passage atdams , especially in the diversion ofdownstream migrants away from theturbine intakes and in other sources ofmortality.

During the latter half of this decade,the Alaskan research activities werefurther affected by the development ofa highly competitive researchrganiza tion on the University of

Washington campus--the FisheriesResearch Institute (FRI) of the Collegeof Fisheries. In 1943 Dr. W. Thompson had resigned as Director ofInvestigations of the InternationalPacific Salmon Fisheries Commission.He was retained , however , by theCommission to complete his reports onthe obstruction to salmon migration atHell' s Gate on the Fraser RiverBritish Columbia , and to serve as aconsultant to the Commission. TheAlaska Salmon Industry Inc. , an

association of Alaskan salmon packersapproached Dr. Thompson in 1944-45 toundertake a series of extensiveinvestigations of the salmon fisheriesof Alaska, that was well- financed by aself- imposed levy on their annual pack.The research was done by a group ofwell-chosen graduate students from theUniversi ty of Washing ton. Finally, in1947, the FRI was accepted as aresearch unit of the University ofWashington and formally established

wi thin the College of Fisheries.

There is no question that results fromthe research program of the FisheriesResearch Institute were of highscientific quality and were wellreceived among their colleagues in theBureau of Fisheries and other agencies.Unpublished info rmation from FRI' field studies , however, began to beinjected by the Alaska ' salmon industryinto the regulations proposed each yearby the Alaska Management Division ofthe Fish and Wildlife Service andgradually became a source ofembarrassment to the Bureau and attimes a source of almost violentanimosity towards the policies (but notthe staff) of the FRI - perhaps afi tting end to the chaotic seconddecade of biological research atMontlake.

The Third Decade: 1951-60--PacificSalmon Investigations and the NorthPacific

In 1952, Dr. Walford of the BureauDivision of Research began reorganize the biological program atMontlake, and in February of that yearhe selected Clinton Atkinson asDirector of the laboratory. Atkinsonwas a gradua te of the College ofFisheries at the University ofWashington , had worked for a short timefor Dr. W. F. Thompson at theInternational Pacific HalibutCommission, and then was employed byThompson as a member of the scientificstaff of the International PacificSalmon Fisheries Commission in 1938.He left the Commission 10 years laterto join the Bureau of CommercialFisheries as Chief of Middle and SouthAtlantic Investigations. He wasinvolved at the time with a new

research program on the shad fisheriesalong the Atlantic coast and inrehabilitating the Bureau s biologicallaboratory at Beaufort , North Carolinaand had little thought of everreturning to the west coast or tosalmon.

The instructions given to Atkinson byDr. Walford were simple: revitalizethe research program at Montlake,create an environment for productiveresearch by the staff , and enhance theprestige of the laboratory throughcooperation with other fishery agenciesand the industry.

In heading up the new salmon program atthe laboratory, Atkinson was asked develop a research program that wouldprovide a better understanding of thebiology and the env ironmen t of salmon.However, it was not to include anymanagemen t biology, " which was theresponsibility of the Bureau s FisheryManagement Office in Juneau, nor was itto conflict with or duplicate work thatwas already being done by other fisheryagencies along the Pacific coast.After considerable discussion , it wasdecided that the salmon researchprogram of the Bureau should becombined into a single unit for bettercoordination of staff and funds. Thenew organization was to be calledPacific Salmon Investigations, andClifford Burner was appointed AssistantDirector for this program.

The major changes that occurred underthe Pacific Salmon Investigations were1) the establishment of an experimentalchinook salmon study area on Mill Creekon the Sacramento River;2) modification of the Columbia Riverprogram into a more comprehensive studyof the relation of temperature andwater quality to the migration andsurvival of salmon in the ColumbiaRiver, and the initiation of study of

predation by squawfish on young salmonin the Columbia River--especially belowdams; and 3) survey of the Cook Inletarea prior to establishment of a morepermanent study area. The researchprogram developed by Dr. Gerald Collinsin 1951 for the study of fish passageat Columbia River dams remainedunchanged, as did the existing researchunderway a t Bare Lake, Karluk LakeBrooks Lake, Sashin Creek, a?d thestudies on Alaskan herring.

In 1951 the Army Corps of Engineersprepared a preliminary prospectusentitled "Columbia River FisheriesEngineering Investigations and Researchprograms --a broad program designed toprovide design criteria for moreeconomical and more efficient fishpassage facil~ties at the Corpsproj ects on the Columbia River.Subsequently, a technical committee wasformed consisting of the heads of thevarious research units wi thin theseveral state fishery agencies andrepresentatives from the FisheriesResearch Institute of the University ofWashington and the Pacific Salmon

3/ The staf f working on the various freshwaterstudies of the Pacific Salmon Investigations(1952-1960) were: Harold Gangmark (Mill Creek,California) with R. broad, H. Meyer, and later Bakkala; Kingsley Weber (Columbia RiverEnvironment) with C. Abegglen , D. Craddock, J.Gauley, B. Pullias , and later R. Najor and R.French; R. Thompson and Galen Maxfield (PredatorStudies and Control) wi th Dr. T. Duncan , B.

Patten, K. Liscom and G. Osterberg; HitchellHanavan (Pink Salmon Spawning, Southeast Alaska)with Bernard Skud , Willara Brewington and JeroldOlson; Philip Nelson (Fert iliza tion Studies , BareLake , Kodiak Island) with W. Edmondson, CarlAbegglen , Charles hunter and Clark Thompson;George Eicher (Brooks Lake, Bristol Bay) with C.Weaver; Carl Elling (Cook Inlet Studies) with Weaver and l~. Liscom; and others. In addition the environmental study program , Larry Kolloenwas in charge of the Alaska Herring Studies withCarl Elling and Bernard Skud; Elizabeth Vaughanw~s the statistical analyst during the first yearof investigations.

Investigations at Montlake. There weremany meetings of this committee overthe next 3 years. The relativeimportance of the criteria wasdiscussed at length in an attempt determine the best experimen talapproach to obtain the needed results.There was considerable controversy attimes wi thin the committee since eachagency and investigator had their petproj ects and each was competing for ashare of the funds available from theCo rps .

Dr. Collins was convinced that most ofthe problems troubling the Corps on theupstream migration of salmon over thedams could only be solved by building alarge experimental flume where full-scale fishways could be constructed.As envisioned, salmon , in their normalmigration up a fishway, could bediverted into test fishways of variousdesigns , and researchers could comparetheir speed and ease of passage.Finally, in 1955, Dr. Collins ' proposalwas approved by the committee and theCorps. A test facility was built forhis research program adjacent to thenorth shore fishway of Bonneville Dam.

The results from this laboratory weretruly amazing, contributing more to theunderstanding of the movement of salmonand steelhead in fishways and over damsthan any previous research. Theresults were immediately applicable the design of fish passage facilitiesin the mid-Columbia and lower SnakeRivers at a conside

7able savings inconstruction cost.

Less successful were the attempts todevelop means of guiding the young,downstream migrants away from the

4/ Assisting Dr. Collins in these studies were:Carl Elling, J. Gauley, C. Weaver , R. Holcomb , J.

Johnson , C. Long, H. Raymond , and others.

turbine intake and other areas of highloss. The use of sound over a widerange of frequencies had little effecton the movement of the young fish , nordid the jse of a moving series oflight s.

The most promising method for guidingthe downstream migrating salmon , andone with proven application , was theuse of a pulsating electrical currentto divert fish , into areas of safepassage. The costs however, were highand generally impractical for use inlarge areas of wa jr wi th anyappreciable flow.

Another valuable development at theMontlake laboratory was the sonic tag--a small capsule with abattery-operated, sound-emitting devicewhich is attached to a fish forcontinuous tracking in a stream or inthe ocean. 7 / Also significant was thedevelopment of the electronic fishcounter which was found to be qui teaccurate in counting the numbers ofsalmon ascending the fishways at theHiram M. Chittenden Locks in Seattle.

There were a number of " fringebenefits" that came out of theelectrical guiding/ electronicslaboratory at Montlake during this

5/ Sound studies were conducted by Cliffordburner and Harvey Moore; moving light studieswere by conducted Leonard Fulton.

6/ Laboratory studies on electrical guidingwere conducted under Gerald Collins with Newman , A. Groves, G. Monan , C. Long, and Dole; field studies were carried out under JamesNason with H. Garrett , C. Hunter , G. ~~xfield, K.Liscorn , G. Esterberg, G. Honan , J. Hughes , J.

Smith , and others.

7/ Fish tracking was under the direction ofParker Trefethen , J. Johnson , G. l'ionan, and K.Liscom with J. Hughes, C. Volz , G. Esterberg, D.Thorne , and C. Bartlett.

period. It is now remembered as amildly unconventional unit , alwayscoming up wi th some new device or idea.Many still recall Ghuck Volzdemonstration of a headless fishswimming across the tank on a pulsatingelectrical current. But there was alsothe experimental application ofelectronic sensors for monitoring waterquality at remote locations , in freshwater or at sea , and the little devicethat would indicate the freshness offish. None of these developmentsreached the stage of practicalapplication--they were regarded as 20years too early--but they did open theeyes of the fishery biologists to theapplication of electronics to theirwork, and this was a valuablecontr ibut ion. 9/

The other new phase of research at theMontlake laboratory was on the highseas of the North Pacific and was underreview by the U. S. section of theInternational North Pacific FisheriesCommission. This treaty was negotiatedin 1952 and ratified in 1953, but theCommission was not formally organizedun til February 19544 In January ofthat year the biological laboratory atMontlake received a call fromWashington , D. , requesting that itdevise, almost overnight , a researchprogram for the U. S. portion of thework, that is , a program to determinethe areas and degree of intermixing ofAsian and North American salmon in theNorth Pacific. The program which itproposed on such short notice was theobvious one , focusing on distributionmovement or migration , and

identification of stocks of salmon andthe oceanographic factors that affectall of these.

8/ Fish counting was under the direction of Dr.Julius Rockwell wi th R. Bergs trom and G. Lucich.

9/ C. Volz, H. Dale, R. VanHagen , D. Thorne , K.

Compton , C. Gillespie , and others.

After considerable discussion at thefirst meetings of the U. S. section ofthe Commission, it was. finally agreedthat the research tasks would bedivided between the biological researchgroup at Montlake and the University ofWashington as follows: studies ofmovement and migration of salmon by theFisheries Research Institute , studiesof. oceanography by the Department ofOceanography, both of the University ofWashington, and studies of distributionand identification of salmon by thestaff at Montlake. This decisionunited the work and the staffs of theBureau and the Fisheries ResearchInstitute and closed the gap that hadgradually developed between the twogroups over the preceding years.

Preliminary explorations for salmon inthe offshore waters of the AleutianIslands were made in 1953 by the John

Cobb mainly to develop thetechniques of fishing for salmon withgill nets on the high seas. The firstsurvey to determine the distribution ofsalmon in the eastern North PacificOcean was made in the spring of 1955again by the John N Cobb , and wasfollowed later that year by similarcruises of two chartered halibutschooners, the Mitkof and the ParagonWherever these vessels fished in thenorthern part of the Gulf of Alaska oralong the Aleutians (north of aboutlatitude 4S N and out to longitude175oE), salmon were taken. Studies ofthe distribution of salmon continuedwi th the use of the John N. Cobb andvarious chartered halibut schooners,and by 1961 the general distribution ofsalmon in the North Pacific Ocean andthe Bering S

ia /had been firmly

established. 0

10/ The Ocean Salmon Studies were under thedi~ction of Mitchell Hanavan with Richard Hajny,George Tanonaka, Douglas Weber , Richard JohnsonEugene Hill, Dr. Robert Ting, and others.

The probability that the biologists atMontlake could identify and separatestocks of North American and Asiansalmon was less certain. It was truethat in previous studies , differenceshad been found between certain stocksof fish , but in general, thesedifferences were lost when all thestocks in the fishery were mixedtogether. Fortunately, the maj concern of the United States wasprotecting the sockeye salmon ofBristol Bay, and this species , becauseof its characteristic history ofremaining in different freshwaterenvironments for a year or more beforegoing to sea have the greatestprobability of detectable differences.Therefore , the first studies atMontlake were on this species.

Although the 1955 results werepreliminary, there were indicationstha t the Japanese high seas mothershipfleet was taking significant numbers ofBristol Bay sockeye salmon. This wasbased on an analysis of growth patternsin scales examined by Kenneth Mosheran expert in scale analysis Whotransferred from the Bureau s sardinestudies at Stanford University in 1949.Although both the Japanese fishermenand the scientists had apparently beenaware of the dominance of a differentsockeye salmon in the mid-Aleutians,which was "probably North American inorigin and probably from Bristol Bay,the findings by Mosher and the rapidprogress being made in the otherstudies of the North Pacific came as ashock to the members of the Japanesesection of the International NorthPacific Fisheries Commission. Japanincreased active participation in the

commission search program almostimmed ia t el y .

Scales alone however, were notadequa te to separate North American andAsian stocks of sockeye salmon with anyacceptable degree of accuracy.Accordingly, ,the research program forthe identification of salmon stocks wasbuil t around a very comprehensive studyof differences in the anatomicalstructur es of salmon, e.g. , number fin rays, vertebrae , scales along thelateral line. A large number of thesecharacteristics were examined andfinally 7 were chosen that wouldprovide the greatest degree ofseparation between Nort? American andAs ian so ckeye salmon .

Because of the amount of data requiredand the complexity of the analysisitself , the only possible way to obtainthe results was by use of a computer.Computer systems were not too common inthose days and it required muchdiscussion, correspondence , andjustification before Montlake got itscomputer, probably the first fisheriesbiological laboratory to begin theregular use of automatic dataprocessing equi

int for storing andanalyzing data. 3

11/ Kenneth Mosher was Project Leader with RayAnas, Mabel Casterlin , and the part-timeassistance of Dr. Ted Koo and Richard Hajny.James Nason joined this unit later.

12/ The Sampling Unit for Racial Studies wasunder the direction of Alvin E. Peterson with Duncan , L. Nakatsu, W. Meyer , C. Fiscus , andot hers.

The Analytical Unit for Racial Studies was underDr. Francis Fukuhara , with Sueto Murai , JackLaLanne , George Slusser , Roger Pearson , GeorgeBeam, and others.

Two other methods were used at theMontlake laboratory to support andconfirm the identification andseparation of the salmon stocks on thehigh seas. First , the development anduse of serological techniques allowingresearchers to identify stocks throughthe presence or absence of certainan tib odies in the blood of the fish.Second, the then-new method ofelectrophoretic analyses allowingresearchers to examine the proteincomposi tion of blood and tissue; amethod now commonly used in the geneticstudies of fish land in implants ofgenetic tags.

As noted earlier, a very important partof the North Pacific salmon studies wasthe tagging program carried out by theFisheries Research Institute of theUniversity of Washi?gton (under aBureau contract) . 15 The initialproblem was how to capture salmon onthe high seas leaving them uninj uredand suitable for tagging. A method ofpurse seining for salmon on the highseas was developed which proved to beespecially effective in this particularstudy. In 5 years , 1956 to 1960, theInsti tute tagged more than 60, 000salmon north and south of the AleutianIslands and lesser numbers in thenorthern part of the Gulf of Alaska.The returns from both Asia and NorthAmerica defined the patterns ofintermixing for the various species of

13/ The original Biometric Unit was under thedirect ion of R. Fredin , wi th Robert LanderDonald Worlund , and others (later , Sueto Muraiand Murray Amos were transferred into thisgroup) .

14/ Dr. George Ridgway was proj ect leader withG. Klontz , L. Holmes , and others.

15/ The tagging program was under the direct ionof Allan Hartt and Benjamin Jones with AlbertPalmer and others.

salmon across the ,North Pacific and inthe Bering Sea.

In the following years the results fromthe work carried out at Montlake andthe FRI revealed the extent of thecatch of Bristol Bay sockeye salmon bythe Japanese high-seas salmon fisheriesin the mid-Aleut ian area.Understandably, the Japanese section the Commission was qui te reluctant accept the findings of U.S. scientistsbecause of the impact on their fishery;in general , the Japanese maintainedthat definition of " areas of mixingapplied to all species combined.Finally in 1960, based on the resultsobtained by U. S. scientists and theircounterparts in Canada and even Japan,the Commission agreed to consider theareas of mixing on a species by speciesbasis , opening the way for recognitionof the preponderance of Bristol Baysockeye salmon subj ect to capture bythe Japanese high-seas fisheries.

In 1956 the U. s. section of theCommission began to question thecontribution being made towards the

S. portion of the Commissionresearch on the North Pacific problemsand decided to terminate theUniversity s contract. The Montlakelaboratory s scientists were left insomewhat of a dilemma. First, theyrecognized that there was arelationship between ocean conditionsand the distribution of salmon on thehigh seas: a temperature barrier salmon both to the north and to thesouth had already been detected andneeded further study. Second, Japan

16/ Dr. W. Royce , a former , long-time employeeof the Bureau (Woods Hole , Honolulu , and Juneau),was appointed Director of the Institute upon theretirement of Dr. W. Thompson in 1958.Subsequently, Dr. Thompson served as Consultantt9 the Montlake laboratory s biological programuntil 1965.

Canada , and the Commission were givingconsiderable attention to oceanographyin their research programs, and it wasessential that the United Statesparticipa te in these studies. Thus , in

a few months and with other funds, anoceanographer , Dr. Felix Favorite , wasadded to the staff and an oceanogra~hyprogram was underway at Montlake. 17/

Two other research proj ects wereassigned to the Montlake biologicalstaff by the U. S. section of theCommission. The first was to developproof that the U. S. stocks of salmon,halibut, and herring were being managedproperly and were fully utilized inorder to qualify for abstention fromfishing by Japan and Canada. Theresults of these studies were subj ectto endless arguments with the Japanesescientists over the adequacy andinterpretation of the data. Finally,however , the staff was able to showthat while salmon and halibut didindeed fulfill all of the treatyrequirements for abstention , herring,due to economic and other problems hadnot been fished commercially to anyextent since World War II or before,and did not qualify . 18'

The second research proj ect dealt withking crab stocks in the eastern BeringSea. This work was not an originalpart of the tripartite treaty betweenJapan , Canada , and the United Statesbut was requested by the United Statesat the organizational meeting of theCommission in February 1954 and waslimited to study only. The request forthe study was the result of efforts byLowell Wakefield, a member of a

17/ In the next several years , as theoceanographic program developed , J. Hebard , Dr.

Timothy Joyner , Patsy McLaughlin , Betty Morris,and W. Ingraham were added to the staff.18/ The cases for abstention were prepared by Fredin and others in the Biometrics Unit.

pioneering and well-known fishingfamily in Alaska who had acquired andout fi tted a high-seas crab processingvessel, the Deep Sea , and was intent ondeveloping a U. S. king crab fishery inthe ,eastern Bering Sea. The Japanesehad operated a king crab fishery inthis area during the late 1930s andre-entered the fishery in 1952 afterthe signing of the peace treaty.Wakefield was anxious ' to develop amechanism for exchange of informationbetween the two countries and also tokeep this fishery under the "umbrellaof the Commission , should problemsarise.

Almost nothing was known of the biologyand populations of king crab in theeastern Bering Sea or elsewhere inAlaska. But wi thin an 8-year period(1956-64), the complete story (lifehistory, rate of growth , migrationssurvival, and numbers of crab in thearea) was developed by the group atMontlake.

On one occasion during the researchthe group was stymied in their effortsto determine the age and growth of theking crab. They had many samples ofthe very young and there was no problemin obtaining samples of the large crabstaken by the commercial fisheries.However, missing was a size group inbetween that eluded all conventionalmethods of sampling. Finally, earlyone spring, two scuba divers from thestaff went to the area in the easternBering Sea where these crab were mostlikely to be found and were able collect the necessary samples , like

but terf lies , of the missing group.This was one of the very earlyapplicatioqs of scuba in biologicalstudies . 19/

As support for the staff of theexpanded biological program at thelaboratory (and especially for those

working on international problems)grew, a literature research unit wasestablished to assist the scientists inthe search for and retrieval ofliterature needed in their studies.More importantly, the unit developedthe capability for translatingJapanese, Russian , and Chineseliterature--a valuable aid in all the studies ~n the North Pacificfisheries.

In 1956 Congress enacted lawsreorganizing the Fish and WildlifeService into two divisions: 1) theBureau of Commercial Fisheries and2) the Bureau of Sportfish andWildlife. The plan also added aCommissioner of Fisheries and anAssistant Secretary for Fish andWildlife. In 1957 Arnie Suomela, whohad joined the Montlake laboratorystaff in 1934 and was a part of theearly history of the laboratory, wasnominated and confirmed as the firstCommissioner of Fish and Wildlife andheld this position until the change administration in 1961 and hissubsequent appointment as fisheryattache in the American Embassy inTokyo.

Under the new organization, the Alaskanoperations were placed under theAdministrator for Alaska CommercialFisheries , Donald McKernan. As part the reorganization plan, all biologicalresearch associated with the Alaskan

19/ The king crab research was under thedirect ion of Dr. Fred Cleaver and Tak Miyaharawith Henry Sakuda and others.

In many respects, the use of the vessel DeeR Seaprovided without cost, was an integral part of

these studies along with other help and theassistance of Lowell Wakefield.

20/ Paul Macy was in charge of literatureresearch with Elizabeth Keyser , Sherry Pearson,

Art Priddy, and others.

fisheries (with the exception of theresearch being performed for theInternational North Pacific FisheriesCommission) was transferred to Juneau.Some of the staff also transferred Juneau at that time, but projectleaders and most of the staff requestedreassignment elsewhere. Subsequently,the Alaskan biological laboratory wasestablished at Auke Bay, near Juneau(the establishment and subsequentdevelopmen t of the Alaskan researchprogram is given in another section ofthis review).

So ended the third decade--one of themost exciting decades in the 50-yearhistory of the Montlake laboratory.The period was marked by very rapidexpansion of research programs , by therapid accumula~ion and development ofthe staff , by new ideas and theapplication of those ideas , by acontinuing critical review byscientists in other agencies both inthe Pacific Northwest and Alaska and inCanada and Japan. The accomplishmentsby the staff are still classics infisheries research today.

The Fourth Decade:the Environment

1961-70 Return to

By 1961 many of the major goals of the~orth Pacific and fish-passage researchat the laboratory had been met , oftenunder great pressure and urgency. Thesixties became a time to evaluate theapplication and the value of completedresearch and to plan for the future.The research climate at Montlake becamenoticeably more relaxed and a number ofnew research facilities wereconstructed.

In 1962-63 the George B. Kelez , a

converted U. S. Navy surplus vessel , was

acquired which allowed , for the firsttime, our oceanographic and high seassalmon studies to be extended into thewinter season. Previously, schoonersand seiners had been chartered forspring and summer work, but they weretoo small for safe winter operationsfar offshore and they lacked adequatespace for laboratory studies and forgear storage and repair.

In 1964 work began on the new additionto Montlake--a fully modern laboratory,library, and conference room/auditoriumof some 65, 000 ft2 In 1967 a new215-ft ocean research vessel , theMiller Freeman , was launched: it wascarefully designed to providelaboratory space and equipment for theNorth Pacific studies. In addition,several field stations were establishedon the Columbia River and Puget Sound.

This was also a period of furtheranalysis and the publication of summaryreports of research results from thepast 10 years of work. For examplethe International North PacificFisheries Commission directed thescientists of the three countries tojointly prepare comprehensive reportson the accomplishments andinterpretation of the results of theCommission s research programs sinceits first meeting in 1954. It wasduring the early part of this periodthat the Montlake laboratory initiatedthe massive compilation of allsignificant salmon research literatureinto a salmon compendium--probably thefirst attempt of its kind for a moreefficient system of fis?ery literaturesearch and retrieval.

In 1964 Ralph Silliman , who served asChief of the Section of Anadromous

21/ The system was suggested by Dr. w. Thompsonand compiled by Galen Maxfield.

Fisheries in Washington, D. , from1949 to 1961, was selected as one ofsix senior scientists by the Bureau ofCommercial Fisheries , and in the nextyear he moved to the Montlakelaboratory to continue his work on thepopulation dynamics of fish--a seriesof basic studies on the relationbetween population size and theultimate production or , yield from astock of fish. Silliman remained atMontlake until his retirement from theBureau of Commercial Fisheries/NationalMarine Fisheries Service in 1973.

By the early 1960s the criticalinformation required by the U. S. ArmyCorps of Engineers for the passage adult salmon at dams had been obtainedat the North Bonneville laboratory, andthe attention of this unit shiftedtowards the more difficult problem ofthe downs tream passage of the young,migrant salmon over the dams on theColumbia and Snake Rivers. Themortali ty of the young salmon passingthrough the turbines was evalua ted,studies were started on the movement the young fish in and through the largeimpoundments behind the dams , and thewhole problem of diverting and/orcollecting the young salmon at dams wasreviewed. Perhaps most significant wasthe discovery of mass mortality causedby the supersaturation of gases mainlynitrogen , in the tail waters below someof the dams. The unit also beganexploring the feasibility oftransporting the young fish by barge ortruck around s

7veral of the dams in theSnake River .

At the same time, the research beingdone for the International North

22/ Although incomplete , the staff associatedwi th the fish-passage studies in 1963 includedDr. Gerald Collins, Carl Elling, Joseph Gauley,Leonard Fulton , Parker Trefethen, John HughesDaniel Bates, Clifford Long, and Alan Groves.

Pacific Fisheries Commission also beganto change from the primary concern forthe sockeye salmon taken each year bythe Japanese high-seas fisheries to thedistribution and fate of the chinookand chum salmon from the Yukon Riverand other streams flowing in to theeastern Bering Sea. Around 1964 theCommission s scientists began examine the ground fish fisheries of~~:e

~~~ ~~::~;~2~~erating in the Bering

In 1964-65 Atkinson served as AssistantDirector for Research with the Bureauof Commercial Fisheries in Washington

, and in 1966 he resigned asDirector of the Montlake BiologicalLaboratory to become the fisheryttache with the American Embassy in

Tokyo, Japan. During this period,Clifford Burner was the ActingLaboratory Director at Montlake.

Shortly thereafter , Dr. Gerald Collinswas appointed Director of theLaboratory and Dr. Francis Fukuharawho had previously led the difficultresearch of identifying and separatingNorth American and Asian sockeyesalmon , was chosen to be the newAssistant Director. There wasconsiderable reorganization within theprogram and staff to allow for agreater emphasis on research relatingto the effect of the environment , bothfreshwater and marine , on the movementsand survival of salmon and other fish.

Wi th the new Miller Freeman and theGeorge B Kelez as a core , there was amarked expansion in the oceanographicprograms at the laboratory.

23/ Although incomple te , the staf f associatedwith the North Pacific research in 1963 includedDr. Francis Fukuhara , Robert French , H. LarkinsCharles Hunter , Jack LaLanne, Roger PearsonThomas Dark , Dr. George Ridgway, Fred Ut terBetty Landrum, Kenneth Mosher , and Raymond Anas.

A salmon aquaculture program wasestablished at the Montlake laboratoryin 1967 with a laboratory and fieldstation at Manchester Washington. Theprogram of aquaculture researchincluded all phases of rearing salmonin saltwater pens, e.g. , nutritionstock selection, and temperaturecontrol. Within a short time, thislaboratory was able to demonstrate therapid growth of coho salmon insal twater rearing pens from 0. 3 oz. tomarketable size (0. 5 lbs. ) in about sixmonths. Simil~r work has been done onother species.

Two new research units were establishedin 1968: studies on the physiology andbiochemistry qf fish , and the effect ofthermal and petroleum products (andother environmental contaminants) onfish. In addition to the Montlakelaboratory, a total of six fieldstations operated during this periodfor research on fish-passage andenvironmental problems: the AdultFish-Passage Laboratory at NorthBonneville, Washington; the JuvenileMigrant Biological Field Station Pasco, Washington; the EnvironmentalField Laboratories at Prescott andHammond, Oregon; and the EnvironmentalPollutant Laboratory at MukilteoWashington.

Although the fourth decade did not havethe rapid development of new researchprograms experienced in the previous years and perhaps lacked much of theassociated excitement of discovery, thebiological research program wasanything but dull. The completion ofthe large new addition to Montlake withgreatly improved laboratory facilitiesand the availability of a modern

research vessel for ocean studies alonemust have been an inspiration for thestaff. The total staff at the end ofthis decade was almost 200 , nearlydouble the number employed in 1961. 25/However , of greater significance wasthe broadening and reorienting of thebiological research programs atMontlake towards multi-species studiesof the fisheries of the North Pacificand the development of environmentalcriteria for fish found in both freshwater and in the ocean. The results ofthis work provided perhaps a 10-yearadvantage to the fishery regulatoryagencies of the Pacific Northwest andAlaska in enforcing several acts thatwould become effective in the nextdecade.

24/ The Aquaculture Station was under thedirect ion of Conrad Mahnken , Anthony Novotny, Dr.Timothy Joyner , C. Hunter , and others.

25/ The Marine Research Program was under thedirection of Dr. Francis Fukuhara wi th HerbertLarkins (Groundfish), Richard Major(Identification of Fish Stocks), Dr. RichardThompson (Marine Behavior), Robert French (OceanDistribution/Abundance of Salmon), Dr. FelixFavorite (Oceanography), and Dr. Harold Hodgins(Physiology and Biochemistry).

The Freshwater and Estuarine Research Program wasunder the direction of Carl Elling with AlanGroves (Behavior Laboratory), Daniel Bates(Fingerling Collect ion), Howard Raymond(Migration Rates and Timing), Clifford Long(Turbine Studies), Dr. George Snyder (Predictionof Environment), Leonard Fulton (Production inInaccessible Area), James Johnson (Sonic FishTracking), Wesley Ebel (Transportation Migratory Fish), and others.

The Service Units included Reynold Fredin(Biometr ics Ins titute), Wins ton Farr (Engineeringand Gear Development), Roger Pearson (PublicationUnit), Gerald Monan (Staff Services), RalphSandvigen (Vessel Operations), and BerylMortensen (Administration). Roy Robeck and HarryJacobsen were Masters of the George Kelez and theMiller Freeman , respectively.

The Fifth Decade:Change

1971-81 A Period of

The fifth decade is marked by maj orchang~s both in the organization of theu. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and theBureau of Commercial Fisheries , and inthe direction and demands of thebiological research program at theMontlake laboratory by -important newleg isla tion.

On 3 October 1970, all functions of theBureau of Commercial Fisheries(excluding certain freshwater programssuch as the Great Lakes , work involvingthe Alaska pipelines , and similarinvestigations) were transferred fromthe Department of the Interior to theDepartmen t of Commerce and placed undera newly created agency, the NationalOceanic a

id Atmospheric Administration(NOAA) . 26 The Bureau was recreated asthe National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS). One of the problems that aroseduring the early stages ofreorganization concerned thestructuring of the various researchactivities and laboratories within theNMFS. This was not a new problem.Although the biological and researchlaboratories had reported to RegionalOffices since the reorganization in1956, many of the programs carried outby these units were broad in scopeextending beyond regional jurisdictionand were even responsible , in someinstances , to internationalorganizations.

Shortly after the creation of theNational Marine Fisheries Service , Dr.

Robert White , the Administrator ofNOAA, addressed the issue of organizingresearch. He appointed an internal

26/ Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970 (84 Stat2094) .

committee to study the problem andrecommend action , and he employed anindependent consulting firm to make asimilar study and recommendations. Dr.Dayton (Lee) Alverson from the Montlakelaboratory was a member of the internalcommittee.

The recommendations of the two studyteams were basically the same. Twogroups were established to conductresearch. One group conductingprimarily oceanic research would reportto the appropriate Associate Directorof the Na tional Marine FisheriesServic e in Washing ton , D. C. , whileanother group conducting shoreresearch , local in nature would reportto the Regional Director. Four fisheryresearch centers concerned with marinestudies were established, of which theMontlake laboratory was one; fourinshore and estuarine laboratories wereestablished, of which Auke BayLaboratory near Juneau was one.

The Pollution Laboratory at Mukilteothe Environmental Laboratoriesassociated with the Columbia Riverprograms, and Fisheries Eng-ineering(Fish-Passage) program, the AquacultureStation at Manchester , and a fieldstation at Kodiak, Alaska, all remainedwi th the newly established NorthwestFisheries Center (NWFC) at Montlake . 27/

As a result of the studies , all vesselsunder the NOAA programs were placedinto a vessel pool, available to allbut beyond the control of any singleunit.

In 1976 the National Marine FisheriesService realigned its organization andfunctions in order to administer the

27/ Originally named the No rth Pacific ResearchCenter but changed shortly afterwards to theNorthwest Fisheries Center.

new and expanded responsibilities itassumed as a result of the 200-milefisheries conservation zone legislatedby the Magnuson Fishery Conservationand Management Act. The four regionalfisheries centers were given fullresponsibility for both thebiological/ environmental and fisheriesutilization research. The Auke BayLaboratory had been a part of the NWFCsince 1974 and continued under theadministration of the newly namedNorthwe~t land Alaska FisheriesCenter. 8

At the time of the establishment of theNorthwest Fisheries Center at Montlakein 1971, Dr. Alverson , who had beenwith the Exploratory Fishing and GearDevelopment Unit at Montlake since1958, was appo~nted Center Director.Dr. Brian Rothschild served as theDeputy Center Director for the firstyear and was then replaced by A. T.Pruter , a former associate of Dr.Alverson s in the Exploratory FishingUnit who was working at the time NMFS headquarters in Washington , D.Dr. Alverson remained Director of theCenter and the Montlake laboratoryuntil his retirement in October 1979.Dr. Francis Fukuhara then served asActing Director un til his retirement inFebruary 1980, followed by Dr. MurrayHayes. The new Center Director, Dr.William Aron , was appointed in July1980. 29/

The biological research program duringthis last decade was stronglyinfluenced by the passage of severallaws: the National EnvironmentalPolicy Act of 1969, the Federal WaterPollution Control Act of 1972, theMarine Mammal Protection Act of 1973,the Endangered Species Act of 1973, andthe Magnuson Fishery Conservation andManagement Act of 1976. In additionthe laboratories at Montlake , andlater , Auke Bay also participated in a

number of cooperative programs,including the Outer Continental ShelfEnvironmental Assessment Program(OCSEAP) of NOAA and the Bureau of LandManagemen t; the Processes and Resourcesof the Bering Sea Shelf (PROBES)Program of the National ScienceFoundation; and the Marine ResourcesMonitoring, Assessment , and Prediction(MARMAP) Program of the National MarineFisheries Service.

As a result of the reorganization , thebiological programs of the j oint staffsof the former Montlake laboratory andthe Exploratory Fishing and GearDevelopment Unit related to resourcemanagement were placed into three majordivisions: Resource Assessment andConservation Engineering (RACE)Division , (formerly Fish , Shellfish andOceanography Studies), Resource Ecologyand Fisheries Mangagement (REFM)Division , and Coastal Zone andEstuarine Studies (CZES) Division. TheEnvironmental Conservation (EC)Division (in part) and the FisheriesData and Management Systems (FDMS)

28/ The history of the Auke Bay Laboratory isfound in another section of this review.

29/ At the present time , the CenterAdministrative Unit consists of Center DirectorDr. William Aron (vice D. Alverson), DeputyDirector Hiro Heyamoto (vice A. Pruter), andSenior Scientist and Scientific ConsultantMaurice Stansby, with G. Tanonaka , Dr. L. Low , C.Gill , A. Wilson , M. Barrett, E. Zweifel , andassistants.

Division are described elsewhere inthis review.

The first 2 or 3 years as part of thenew NOAA organization were difficultfor the biological programs of theNorthwest Fisheries Center at Montlakeand the other Centers. Funding waslimited and staffs had to be markedlyreduced. Because of the costs ofvessel operation , the oceanographicstudies , begun near the end of theprevious decade, were among the hardesthit. The Miller Freeman could not beoperated for the oceanographic studiesin 1971, and the George B. Kelez wasdecommissioned and taken out of thefleet in 1974. The Center was unableto participate in the nationalmulti-agency MARMAP Program involvingthe basic collection of oceanographicdata on ocean currents , water

30/ When the Center was firs t es tab lished , therewas no change in project leaders from theprevious organization of the laboratory: Dr.Francis Fukuhara (Marine Fish , Shellfish andOceanography), Dr. Gerald Collins (Coastal Zoneand Estuarine), and Reynold Fredin (FisheriesDa ta and ~illnagement).

Resource Assessment and Conservation Engineering(RACE) Division is under the direction of Dr.Murray Hayes with R. Wolotira (ShellfishAssessment and Ecology, Kodiak, (MARMAP II)),Miles Alton (Multispecies Assessment (~lARMAPI I) Jincluding R. Mintel (Survey Strategy) and W. High(Foreign Cooperative Research), B. F. Jones(Conservation Engineering) and M. Nelson(Hydroacous tic Assessment (MARMAP II)), andassistants.

Resource Ecology and Fisheries ManagementDivision (REFM) is under the direction of Marasco and includes Dr. L. Low (Division DataManagement), J. Ingraham (Desc riptiveOceanograp hy), Dr. T. Laevastu (Ecosys tem ModelDevelopment), Dr. A. Kendall (Ich thyoplanktonInves tiga tions), R. French (Foreign ObserverProgram), Dr. R. Marasco (Socio-economic Models),G. Hirschhorn and J. LaLanne (Age and GrowthStudies), Dr. J. Balsiger , R. Francis, Dr. K.henry, J. Reeves , R. Major and others mentionedabove (Status of Stock Models and Evalua tion),and assistants.

properties , and food patterns in theNorth Pacific. Most research waslimited to addressing the originalresearch requirements of theInternational North Pacific FisheriesCommission program and to finishingexisting field studies.

The marine biological program atMontlake began to recover about 1975-76with the new responsibilities andfunding made available from OCSEAP andthe enactment of the Magnuson FisheryConservation and Management Act of1976.

The Resource Ecology and FisheriesManagement Division was given anespecially important role in thedevelopment of the management plans andpolicies for the u. s. and foreignfisheries operating in the northeasternPacific Ocean and the Bering Sea. Theimmediate demands were great: thescientists at the Seattle and Auke Baylaboratories had to assemble theavailable information on the lifehistories and fisheries of the variousspecies of fish and to define theoptimum harvesting schemes for eachspecies for use by the Pacific andNorth Pacific Fishery ManagementCouncils. Especially difficult werethe Fishery Management Plans for thegroundfish fisheries involving mixedcatches of the various species. Thepreliminary plans were developed withina very short period , reviewed , and

became a part of the Councilsmanagement program in 1977.

In the years that followed , the

direction of the program shifted towardthe problems and information necessaryfor the prediction of the abundance offish and the optimum level of harvestin the near future as a base for themanagement plans that must be preparedfor each coming year.

The age and growth studies became anessential part of the forecast sinceresults indicated the relativeabundance of young fish entering thefishery in each successive year. began as a modest program and a carry-over from the early days at Montlake,but in 1980, ages were determined forsome 92, 000 walleye (Alaska) pollock,Pacific whiting, Pacific cod, rockfishsablefish , and yellowf in sole.

Of similar importance and use is thestudy of the abundance of eggs andlarval fish collected by fine-mesh netsfrom the spawning-nursery areas in theNorth Pacific and the Bering Sea. Theinformation gained from these studiesprovides a direct link to the effect the ocean environment on the survivalof commercially important fish at thevery young and critical stage of life.During 1975-76, the oceanographicstudies took on new meaning andpurpose, and over the next severalyears, an eight-component ecosystemmodel (DYNUMES) and a prognostic (orpredictive) bulk biomass model (PROBUB)were developed. These models haveproven most useful in evaluating thecomplex interactions between the marinebiological and oceanographicconditions. For example , by the use ofthese computer models, it is nowpossible to predict with some accuracythe size and fluctuations in abundanceand distribution of the various speciesof fish , and the effect of varyingintensities of fishing on the differentstocks of fish as well as theenvironment. These analyses provide amost valuable tool for fisherymanagement and rank as one of theoutstanding accomplishments of thefifth decade at Montlake.

This unit is also responsible forplacing observers aboard foreignfishing vessels to collect information

on the size and composi tion of thecatches and other information on theoperation of the fisheries wi thin the

S. 200-mile fisheries conservationzone. This is a large program,involving about 90 observers in 1980,with volumes of narrative and datareports which are valuable not only forthe management of the foreign fisheriesbut also for the u. s. fishermen intheir efforts to develop fisheries inthis offshore area.

The Resource Assessment andConservation Engineering Divisionfocuses on the other obj ective of theMagnuson Fishery Management andConservation Act , that is , assisting inthe development of u. s. fisheries bothwi thin the coastal area , and moreimportan t , in the 200-mile zone. developing a fishery, the fishermanusually asks three questions: How manyfish are there where are the greatestconcentrations of fish , and what is themost efficient gear for catching them?This very succinctly defines the workof this division. At the present time,most of the effort is devoted surveys of the important fishing areasto determine the relative abundance ofthe fish in the different areas. Thestudies continually involve newtechniques that can be used to moreaccurately census the abundance of thefish in the ocean. For example , a

great deal of attention is being givento the use of very modern sonic oracoustical equipment that will detectand continuously identify majorconcentrations of fish as the vesselmoves from one area to another. Theunit is also developing new shrimp andherring " samplers.

In connection with ocean surveys , thisunit conducts most of the basicbiological studies on the populationsof various fish. They have undertakeninnumerable tagging studies on the

North Pacific stocks of fish (rockfishPacific cod, sablefish) and many ofthese have been undertakencooperatively with state and universityresearch groups of several states andwith the scientists and agencies ofCanada, Japan, Republic of South Koreaand the Soviet Union.

The Division of Coastal Zone andEnvironmental Studies operates thefish-passage program developed by Dr.Gerald Collins in the early 1950s.Expanded considerably in scope duringthe 1960s, it has been under thedirection of Dr. Wesley Ebel since theestablishment of the Center in 1970.The Division has three major sections:aquaculture, ecological effects of dams, and habitat investigations.

Since the beginning of the fish passageprogram , the results have providedimportant criteria for the design andpreparation of the dams on the ColumbiaRiver. A substantial part of itspresent funding still comes from otheragencies. The deleterious effect ofdams on the runs of salmon andsteelhead ascending the Columbia Riverhas become even more pronounced in thepast 2 or 3 years. Many of the runs ofchinook and coho salmon ascending therivers are now declining markedly,causing much concern to the fisheryagencies of Washington , Oregon , andIdaho. One of the principal causes ofthis decline is the loss of migrants asthey pass over or through the dams onthe Columbia River or the lower SnakeRiver.

31/ Dr. Snyder and the personnel from the Oregonfield stations were transferred in 1978 back the Coastal Zone and Estuarine Studies (CZES)Division , where they had been until 1972 , becausetheir work on salmon in the Columbia River thenwas more closely associated with the program CZES Division than with EC Division.

In 1970 CZES estimated that the effectof the two dams on the lower SnakeRiver at that time reduced the survivalof migrants by 50%. The major causesof this loss are the passage downstream migrants through theturbine , the heavy predation on theweakened fish just below the dams , andthe association of the fish with thesupersaturation of nitrogen or othergases in the water below the dams.Methods have been devised to collectand transport young salmon andsteelhead around these dams and avoidthese sources of high mortality. CZESalso conduc ts work on the survival ofhatchery and wild fish in the estuarineareas , and studies the behavior ofadult salmon near the dams by use of aradio tracking system, to determine theeffect of dam operation on themigrating salmonids.

Studies have also been made of othercauses of mortal i ty in the lowerColumbia River estuary. Three areas ofwork have now been completed: theeffect of dredging in the lowerColumbia River , the toxicity of thedischarge from the cooling towers ofthe Troj an nuclear power plant, and theeffect of chemical fire retardants onsalmonids. The results of thesestudies have had immediate impact ondecisions made by a number of federaland state agencies.

Fisheries enhancement studies conductedat Manchester , Puget Sound , Washington,demonstrated in the first years thatrapid growth can be obtained by rearingcoho salmon in sal t water. Subsequentwork has focused on ways in which thepresen t methods used can be made moreeconomical. A vibrio disease has beenidentified and a method of mass vaccinedeveloped. A number of studies havebeen made that will increase the

returns from aquaculture , including thedevelopment of rearing strategies ofsalmon from freshwater throughsaltwater stages broodstocks of salmonkept for their entire life in sal twaterpens , and perhaps most interesting,methods of rearing spot prawnsuccessfully in pens wi th salmon at amore rapid growth than those found innatural conditions. For instanceharvestable shrimp (40/lb) can be grownin 12 months and "prawn-size" shrimp(16/lb) in 24 months.

In summary, the biological researchprogram at Montlake over the fifth andlast decade can best be characterizedby two words--change and success.There has been the vast reorganizationof commercial fisheries wi thin NOAA inthe Department of Commerce followed bya period of austerity, reduced staffsand the elimination of a number of theprograms and activities. There hasbeen the centralization of all researchactivities into four major Centers andthe introduction of multi-disciplinaryapproach to our fishery problems.There has been the effect oflegislation which placed new andprimary responsibilities upon Montlakeand its research staff for criterianeeded in the maintenance andmanagement of the fisheries in theNorth Pacific and Bering Seas. Theresearch programs that were aimedduring the third and fourth decadestoward the more basic research are nowmore applied and are considered by manyto be "management biology. And, atlast, use is being made of the vastamount of data that the Montlakelaboratory has accumulated over theyears.

It is perhaps a fitting conclusion thatthe end of this decade and the first 50years of the Montlake laboratory, wasm~rked by the retirement of Dr.Alverson and the appointment in 1980 of

Dr. William Aron as the new Director.Dr. Aron is no stranger to Seattle norto the Pacific Northwest. Althoughborn on the east coast , he did hisgraduate work at the University ofWashing ton, receiving his MasterDegree in 1956 and his Doctorate in1960. He took part , indirectly, in theactivities at Montlake at that time andoften relates that it was the moneyreceived through a contract between thelaboratory and the Department ofOceanography a t the Universi ty ofWashington that helped him surviveduring those lean student years. Thework that he did under that contractprovided Dr. Aron with material for hisfirst publication.

We end the fifth decade and begin thenext 50 years at Montlake with no greatchange in program nor organization buta heritage of accomplishment anddedication of the many scientists Whoworked at the laboratory over theyears , setting standards for others tofollow.

In addition , there are other assetscharacterizing the Montlake laboratorythat Dr. Aron recognizes and is intenton following. There has been thespirit of growing cooperation betweenthe Northwest and Alaska FisheriesCenter , the universities and otheragencies , the industry, and thecommunity as a whole; these ties willbe strengthened even further to solvethe fishery problems that each year arebecoming more and more complex. Dr.Aron is also very much aware of andplans to retain as far as possible thedepth of scientific expertise that hasbeen characteristic of the Montlakelaboratory over these . 50 years, and theability of the scientists to be able respond to new challenges that willcertainly arise in the futuredevelopment and management of thefisheries and the maintainence of the

resource. These are the thoughts thathave been so well expressed in thetheme of this 50th anniversary - "FiftyYears of Cooperation and Commitment

" -

and this remains Dr. Aron s goal forthe future.

Acknowledgemen ts

This history of the biological programsand research would not have beenpossible without the help of a numberof "old timers " who, individually andcollectively, have recounted anddocumented the events that occurred atthe Montlake laboratory during thefirst ten years or so. We areespecially grateful for the assistancegiven us by the following: Thomas J.Barnaby, Heward Bell , Clifford J.Burner , Dr. Laur en Donaldson , Samuel J.Hutchinson, Edward A. Power, Dr. RobertR. Rucker, and Arnie Suomela. We alsowish to give special recognition William Markham Morton, who un til hisrecent death , had undertaken acompilation of the biographies of anumber of his colleagues at theMOntlake laboratory. The material,which he presented in the first twovolumes , has provided innumerablereferences to dates and events reportedin this text.