Chinook Salmon - National Wildlife Federation Chinook Salmon Genus: Oncorhynchus Species: tshawytscha The Chinook salmon is an important keystone species of the Pacific Northwest. It is a vital food source for a diversity of wildlife, including orca whales, bears, seals and large birds of prey. Chinook salmon is also prized by people who harvest salmon both commercially and for sport. The health of Chinook salmon depends entirely on your location – Alaskan stocks are very healthy, while those in the Columbia River are in danger. Protection of Chinook salmon is crucial to maintain healthy Pacific Northwest ecosystems and to provide a delicious food source for years to come. Description: Chinook salmon are blue-green on the head and back. The sides are silvery. The tail, back and upper fin have irregular, black spots. There are also black markings around the gums. During the mating season the salmon develop a reddish tint around the back fins and tail. It is possible to tell the difference between males and females. Male Chinook salmon have a distinctive hooked nose at the top of the mouth. Less noticeable is the male's ridged back. Females do not have a ridge. Size: Chinook salmon are big fish!

They are the largest Pacific salmon species. On average, Chinook salmon are 3 feet long and approximately 30 pounds. But some Chinook salmon can grow to over 5 feet long and 110 pounds! Diet: Young Chinook salmon will eat small invertebrates, including crustaceans, and amphipods. Adult salmon dine on smaller fish. Typical Lifespan: Chinook salmon live about 3-7 years. For the first year or so the juvenile salmon stays in freshwater habitat. Soon it will move to the estuaries and then the open ocean. Estuaries provide a lot of food and nutrients to the developing salmon. The fish will spend approximately 2-4 years feeding in the ocean before returning to the spawning grounds to breed and die. Habitat: Chinook salmon utilize many different habitats during their lives. Adults lay salmon eggs in fast moving, freshwater streams and rivers. Juvenile salmon spend some time in the freshwater streams before moving to mixed salt and freshwater estuaries. As the salmon reach adulthood, they move out into the open ocean. Range: Chinook salmon live in the colder, upper reaches of the Pacific Ocean.

They live around the coasts of Alaska, western Canada, Oregon, Idaho, Washington and northern California. Chinook salmon can also be found in Russian and Japanese waters. Chinook salmon breed in the freshwater rivers and streams of the Pacific Northwest. Chinook salmon have been introduced into numerous water bodies including the Great Lakes, where it is not native. Life History and Reproduction: Chinook salmon are diadromous, which means that they spend part of their life in the salt-water of the ocean and the other part of their life in freshwater rivers and streams. Chinook salmon are born in freshwater streams and they travel to the open ocean to grow into adulthood. At reproductive maturity, they will swim back to their birth stream and produce young. When an adult Chinook salmon reaches maturity at about 3-7 years of age, it makes the long migratory journey back to the site of its birth. After so many years, some salmon can be hundreds of miles away from their birth stream. The time of the breeding depends on the river and population of salmon. Typically, they breed in the summer and autumn. At their birth stream, male and female salmon pair up to breed. The female digs a nesting hole (also called a redd).

She deposits thousands of eggs in the redd before the male releases his sperm. After mating, the male and females stand guard over the eggs to protect them from predators. Chinook salmon burn a lot of energy migrating to the nesting grounds, breeding and protecting the eggs. Both parents will die before the eggs even hatch. Threats to Chinook Salmon: Indian fishing Indian fishing John Harrison Indians of the Columbia River Basin were salmon fishers. Salmon spawned as far inland as the headwaters of the Columbia River, 1,200 miles from the ocean and were an important food to the people who lived along the river, and also to those who traveled far to trade for fish at established fisheries like those at Kettle Falls and Celilo Falls . By about 1,500 years ago, Northwest Indians were arranged in tribes and identified themselves with specific areas or watersheds. Salmon was an important resource for many of the tribes, particularly those in the lower reaches of the Columbia River west of the Cascades, where salmon and steelhead were more plentiful than in rivers east of the mountains.

The annual return of salmon and steelhead from the ocean had spiritual and cultural significance for tribes, and the fish had economic importance as a trade and food item. Tribes developed elaborate rituals to celebrate the return of the first fish. These first-salmon ceremonies were intended to ensure that abundant runs and good harvests would follow. There is archaeological evidence of fishing at Kettle Falls on the Columbia in northeastern Washington as long as 9,000 years ago, but it is not clear that fish was being dried for winter consumption at that time. At the time of the first contacts with Europeans, in the late 1700s and early 1800s, Columbia River Indians had well-established fisheries using nets and traps. Particularly in the lower river, from Celilo Falls to the ocean, the abundant salmon runs supplied a reliable and abundant source of protein in the Indians’ diet. Farther inland, where salmon were less numerous, other forms of animal protein, from deer, elk, and waterfowl, were as important or more so than salmon.

Indians were able to fish the salmon runs heavily and still enjoy multitudes of salmon year after year because they practiced a form of management in the form of rules and rituals that limited the catch at the same time it supplied their needs. Historian Joseph Taylor writes: “In the Oregon Country, historical, ethnological and archaeological evidence suggests that aboriginal spiritual beliefs, ritual expressions, social sanctions and territorial claims effectively moderated salmon harvests. Myths, ceremonies and taboos restrained individual and social consumption, while settlement patterns and usufruct rights restricted access to salmon.” According to Taylor, Indians developed a respect for salmon because it sustained their lives, and this respect shaped actions that moderated harvest and consumption. The salmon runs appeared at predictable times and places throughout the year, every year. Fishing, therefore, was a more efficient way to secure protein than through hunting land animals. “It is no wonder that salmon was a staple of aboriginal diets,” Taylor says. West of the Cascades, where the Columbia and its tributaries ran thick with salmon in the spring, summer and fall, Indians lived in well-established and semi-permanent groups; east of the Cascades, Indians lived in smaller groups and migrated more frequently in search of food.

Fishing sites on salmon-bearing rivers were traditional seasonal gathering places and permanent communities existed at important fishing locales such as Celilo Falls and Kettle Falls. Generally, Indians that lived east of the Columbia Plateau relied less on salmon than did Indians living to the west. But the plateau is not an absolute demarcation of the salmon culture. Some plateau tributaries of the Columbia, like the Spokane, and others to the east, like the Salmon and the Clearwater, supported large annual salmon runs that provided an important food source for tribes. Some of the largest salmon ever caught in the Columbia River Basin were fall Chinooks from the Spokane River, a plateau tributary. These were among the giants that non-Indian fishers in the lower Columbia River nicknamed “ June hogs ” because of the timing of their appearance in the river and their sheer size. Some weighed more than 100 pounds and were close to five feet long. Interior Columbia Basin salmon fishing There were a number of important fishing sites in the upper Columbia River Basin, and large numbers of Indian fishers.

Eyewitness accounts described 1,000-2,000 fishers at Kettle Falls, 1,000-1,400 at Little Falls on the Spokane River, 1,000 at a site on the Little Spokane River, more than 1,000 at Spokane Falls and 250 on the Sanpoil River, a Columbia River tributary downstream from the Spokane. In fact, these accounts suggest that the highest concentrations of Indian fishers in the Columbia River Basin were at these interior sites, not in the lower Columbia area. The Spokane Indians, for example, were salmon people. The tribe was arranged into three distinct bands along the lower, middle and upper reaches of the river according to the location of historic salmon fishing sites. While relations with their neighboring tribes, particularly the Coeur d’Alenes, at times were strained, salmon fishing and salmon trading brought the Spokanes into contact with many other tribes, sometimes from far away. Historians Robert Ruby and John Brown write that when the Spokanes encountered a tribe whose language was not familiar, they would identify themselves with hand movements that suggested the side-to-side movement of a fish tail, as with a spawning salmon.

They also put their hands to their mouths and patted their stomachs with satisfaction to demonstrate that fish fulfilled their hunger. In 1866, an Indian agent estimated that salmon make up five-eighths of the total diet of the Spokane Tribe. The Spokanes were effective salmon fishers. The first big fishery on the Spokane was just below Little Falls, where the Indians built a rock wall part way across the river and a weir of willow poles just upstream, thus funneling the returning fish into an area where they could be trapped and speared when the weir was closed. In 1839, Christian missionary Rev. Elkanah Walker observed Indians fishing at Little Falls and wrote, “It is not uncommon for them to take 1,000 in a day. It is an interesting sight to see the salmon pass a rapid.

The number was so great that there were constantly hundreds out of the water.” In the spring, when the salmon began to return up the Spokane River, news of their arrival traveled quickly to other tribes in the area, including the Coeur d’Alene, Kalispel, Colville, Palouse, San Poil and Columbia tribes, and it was not unusual for 1,000 or more Indians to participate in the Spokane River fisheries. In addition to the fishery at Little Falls, there was a fishery at the mouth of the river, another near the mouth of the Little Spokane River and another at the base of the Spokane Falls in what is now downtown Spokane. The Spokane Falls fishery was claimed by the Coeur d’Alene Tribe as well as the Spokanes. In 1826, botanist David Douglas watched Spokane Indians fishing near the Little Spokane River and wrote, “The natives constructed a barrier across the Little Spokane [where it enters the Spokane River]. . .After the traps were filled with salmon, the Indians would spear them.

1,700 salmon were taken this day, now 2 o’clock; how many more may still be in the snare, I do not know.” At some of these fisheries, the catch regularly topped 800 salmon in a day, many weighing 40 pounds or more. The Spokanes traded dried salmon to Blackfeet Indians, who lived east of the Rocky Mountains in present-day Montana, for buffalo hides. In the modern era, salmon are gone from the Spokane River as the result of Grand Coulee Dam . A sizeable harvest The size of the total harvest by Indians in the Columbia River Basin is difficult to estimate. In 1940, researchers Joseph A. Craig and Robert L. Hacker estimated the catch at 18 million pounds per year, or more than half the size of the commercial harvest in 1933, which was 26 million pounds. The Indian harvest before the first contact with Europeans was a “very significant proportion” of the commercial catch of the modern era, the authors wrote. They based their estimate on an Indian population of 50,000 and consumption of one pound of salmon per day.

Another researcher used a larger estimate of the Indian population (61,500) and, accounting for wastage (Craig and Hacker did not), estimated a Columbia River annual catch of 22, 274,500 pounds, which made the aboriginal fishery about the same size as the fishery of the 1940s. Estimates in the 1980s, using further revised population and consumption estimates, were even higher — more than 41 million pounds on average. Taylor points out that this would make the aboriginal fishery “fully comparable to the industrial fishery during its heyday between 1883 and 1919, which surpassed 41 million pounds only nine times.” Decline of the fishery While the biggest and most important Indian fishing sites were at Celilo and Kettle Falls, there were hundreds of smaller but nonetheless important fishing sites on the Columbia and its salmon and steelhead-bearing tributaries. As non-Indian settlers steadily moved into the Columbia River Basin beginning in the 1840s, Indians increasingly were crowded off their traditional fishing and village sites.

In 1850 near The Dalles, artist George Catlin observed: “The fresh fish for current food and the dried fish for their winter consumption, which had been from time immemorial a good and certain living for the surrounding tribes, like everything else of value belonging to the poor Indian, has attracted the cupidity of the ‘better class,’ and is now being ‘turned into money,’ whilst the ancient and real owners of it may be said to be starving to death; dying in sight of what they have lost, and in a country where there is actually nothing else to eat.” Through the Treaties of 1855 , negotiated during a time of escalating tension between Euro-Americans and Columbia River tribes, the federal government attempted to secure title to Indian land and create reservations for tribes. The tribes sought to reserve for themselves access to their usual and accustomed fishing places, and the United States agreed. But the tide of immigration and lax enforcement of fishing rights overwhelmed traditional practices. Author Click Relander wrote, “The days [were] long past when the River People [specifically, the Wanapum Tribe near Priest Rapids] were able to spear or net most of their food from the river.

The old men say that the last runs of the big red-fleshed salmon ended around 1905. That was when the fish wheels were dragging salmon out of the water by the hundreds of thousands and the commercial slaughter was at its height.” In 1942, Edward J. Swindell, an attorney who was investigating Columbia River fishing sites as part of the proceedings in a lawsuit, observed the fishing activity in the vicinity of Celilo Falls and later wrote that if a dam were built at The Dalles, as was under consideration at the time, “. . .the few remaining places in the mid-Columbia River area which constitute the bulk of the commercial Indian fishery on that river will be inundated by the backwater from such dam. Since they are practically the only places in that area where the Indian’s catch can be disposed of commercially, they are of inestimable value to the Indians. The loss of such places would be as calamitous to them as was the loss they sustained as a result of the flooding of a considerable number of commercial and subsistence fishing grounds on account of the construction of the Bonneville and Grand Coulee dams.” In fact, that is precisely what would happen.

On April 27, 1945, the Colonel in charge of the Portland district of the U.S. Army Engineers met with local Indians at The Dalles to listen to their concerns about the government’s proposal to build The Dalles Dam, which indeed would flood the historic fishing grounds at Celilo Falls about five miles upstream of the dam site. Francis Seufert, a fish buyer for his family’s local salmon fishing and canning business, was invited to attend the meeting by a friend, an attorney representing the Indians. In Wheels of Fortune, Seufert’s book of recollections about the Seufert family business and salmon fishing, he recalls the meeting, which took place in a room in The Dalles City Hall: “The Indian chiefs were all old men, very dignified. Each of the old chiefs came forward, one at a time, shook the colonel’s hand and talked through an interpreter giving the Indians’ story of their dependence on Columbia River salmon, and the serious effect that the building of the dam at The Dalles would have on the Indians’ livelihood. The old chiefs made many references to the Indian Treaty of 1855, the terms of the treaty and the obligations of the U.S.

government to uphold the sacredness of the treaty and not build The Dalles Dam. “The elegance and dignity of the old Indian chiefs in stating the Indians’ case, their choice of words, the beautifully put phrases, excellent prose, their poetic way of using picturesque and yet descriptive speech, was something that no one present would ever forget. The simplicity of the old chiefs’ speech was a moving thing to hear. I was impressed with the respect that the old chiefs were held in by the younger Indians. I had never seen anything like it before. After all the old chiefs had spoken, a number of the old women also addressed the colonel, these old Indian women telling the Indians’ side of the story of previous promises, and only receiving broken promises and excuses from the U.S. government. These old women pleaded with the colonel not to let that history from the Indian standpoint repeat itself again. “After the old chiefs and the old Indian women had all had their say, the good colonel expressed extreme sympathy for the Indians, and wanted them to know that the Army Engineers would have nothing to do with the decision to build a dam at The Dalles, only Congress could do that.

“As I left the meeting and walked down the stairs, I couldn’t help feeling I had witnessed another bit of history in our government’s dealing with the American Indian, and I was sure of one thing at the time: if local merchants saw a chance to make money through the building of a dam at The Dalles, then nothing as simple as an Indian treaty signed some 90 years before was going to stand in the way.” Seufert believed the government treated Indians and non-Indians equally in providing compensation for the impacts of The Dalles Dam. Compensating Indians for the loss of fishing opportunities at Celilo Falls was no different than compensating his business for the loss of fishing sites when the reservoir rose behind The Dalles Dam, he wrote. To Seufert and other non-Indian fish processors, salmon were a commodity; the historic cultural significance of the Celilo fishery to Indians was important, but not an overriding concern. Fishing was a business, whether the fishers were Indians or not. As a consequence of the construction of The Dalles Dam and the impending blockage of the river, 1956 was the last year for the treaty Indian fishery at Celilo Falls.

Until that year, commercial fishing above Bonneville Dam was open to both Indians and non-Indians. Using dip nets, the Indian fishers caught 910,000 pounds of salmon and steelhead in 1956, the second-lowest catch since 1938 (also in 1956, non-Indian commercial fishers caught 1,023,000 pounds of salmon and steelhead above Bonneville Dam). The lowest Celilo catch of the 1938-1956 period was 796,000 pounds in 1954. In 1955, the Celilo fishers took 1,983,100 pounds. The greatest Celilo catch between 1938 and 1956 was in 1941: 3,464,900 pounds. Litigation In 1957, Washington and Oregon closed the fishery above Bonneville Dam, the fishing area designated by the states as Zone 6, to all commercial fishing.

Indian-only fisheries occurred in Zone 6 between 1957 and 1968, but these were for ceremonial and subsistence purposes, not commercial purposes, and were regulated by the treaty tribes, not by the states. Meanwhile, tribes battled in court to restore their commercial fisheries in Zone 6. In 1968, responding to a lawsuit, Oregon and Washington re-established the Indian-only commercial fishery in the Columbia mainstem above Bonneville Dam. In 1969, responding to another lawsuit, the states defined the area of the fishery, extending the eastern limit from the mouth of the Deschutes River, which was the limit prior to 1957, to McNary Dam. It is 140 miles between the two dams. The Zone 6 fishery is conducted primarily with set nets — nets that are anchored in the river — and with dip nets from fishing platforms along the shore.

In the 1960s, Oregon decided to regulate Indian fishing and non-Indian fishing in the same way, believing that language in the 1855 treaties guaranteeing Indians the right to fish “in common with” non-Indian citizens meant all had equal rights to the fishery, and that all could be regulated equally. A group of Indians led by Richard Sohappy, a Yakama member, sued the state. The United States government joined the Indians as plaintiffs, and the case was named U.S. v. Oregon. The case was argued before U.S. District Judge Robert Belloni of Portland. In his decision, handed down on July 8, 1969, Belloni ruled that the Indians have “an absolute right” to the fishery and are entitled to “a fair share of the fish produced by the Columbia River system.” Accordingly, Belloni ruled, Oregon: “. .

.must so regulate the taking of fish that, except for unforeseen circumstances beyond its control, the treaty tribes and their members will be accorded an opportunity to take, at their usual and accustomed fishing places, by reasonable means feasible to them, a fair and equitable share of all the fish which it permits to be taken from any given runs.” Belloni wrote that most of the argument in the lawsuit centered around Oregon’s interpretation of that “fair and equitable” provision. Attorneys for the state argued that the provision only gave the Yakamas and other treaty Indians the same rights as all other citizens.

The judge dismissed that argument, commenting: “There is no evidence in this case that the defendants have given any consideration to the treaty rights of Indians as an interest to be recognized or a fishery to be promoted in the state’s regulatory and developmental program.” He called the state’s actions “discriminatory,” and added: “Such a reading would not seem unreasonable if all history, anthropology, biology, prior case law and the intent of the parties to the treaty were to be ignored.” Belloni held the state’s argument that the treaties only gave the Indians an equal right to fish with other residents of the state simply was not fair compensation for the lands they had ceded to the United States in the treaties, which amounted to more than 64 million acres. There were far more non-Indian fishers than Indian fishers, and the judge declared that the effect of the state’s approach was to “crowd the Indians out” of their historic fishing sites. This was a violation of the treaties, Belloni said.

It was not the intent of the parties to the treaties that the Columbia River Indians should “occasionally dip their nets,” he wrote, but that they fish, according to the language of the treaties, “in common with” non-Indians. In 1974, U.S. District Judge George Boldt of Tacoma refined Belloni’s “fair and equitable share” rule in United States v. Washington to mean 50 percent, and in 1975 Judge Belloni applied the 50-percent rule to the Indian fishery on the Columbia. In 1979, the 50-percent issue reached the United States Supreme Court in Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Association. The Supreme Court rejected Washington’s argument that Indians and non-Indians had an “equal opportunity” to the fishery, stating: “In our view, the purpose and language of the treaties are unambiguous; they secure the Indians' right to take a share of each run of fish that passes through tribal fishing areas.” Harvest management complexities As tribes sought to defend and clarify their fishing rights in court, fisheries management became increasingly complex.

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife described the problem in a 1976 press release: “Legal decisions have substantially increased the complexity of the management problems facing state agencies. In the course of clarifying basic legal issues, the courts have been interjected into the entire scope of fisheries management. The final results have rarely been satisfactory to either side. . . .[The role of Indian tribes] has been to secure and preserve fishing rights provided by the treaties with the United States. The role of the states . . .has been to balance biological, legal, cultural, political and economic realities of uneven proportions.” In February 1977, the four Columbia River treaty tribes — Yakama, Warm Springs, Umatilla and Nez Perce — and the states of Washington and Oregon completed negotiations on “A Plan for Managing Fisheries on Stocks Originating from the Columbia River and its Tributaries Above Bonneville Dam.” For five years, the 1977 Plan, as it was called, was the basis for salmon harvest management decisions in the tribal-only fishing zone between Bonneville and McNary dams. The agreement expired in 1982.

Nonetheless, Indian commercial fishing in Zone 6 continues to be regulated jointly by the states of Oregon and Washington under the 1977 Plan and the continuing supervision of the federal court in U.S. v. Oregon. On this same stretch of river, ceremonial and subsistence fisheries also are regulated under U.S. v. Oregon. It is up to the tribes to allocate between commercial and ceremonial/subsistence fisheries within the confines of U.S. v. Oregon. In Phase II of United States v. Washington, decided in 1980, U.S. District Judge William Orrick of Tacoma ruled that the treaty promise is meaningless if there are no fish to harvest and that the tribes were entitled to more than the “right to dip one’s net into the water . . .and bring it out empty.” Orrick ruled that the treaty right extended to environmental conservation, as the tribes have a right “not to have the fishery habitat degraded by the actions of man which cause environmental damage resulting in such a reduction of available harvestable fish that the moderate living standard, as implemented through the allocation orders of the District Court in Phase I, cannot be met.” In 1988, the U.S.

District Court in Portland approved the Columbia River Fish Management Plan negotiated by Oregon, Washington, the United States and the four mid-Columbia River treaty tribes. In essence a renegotiation of the plan that expired in 1982, the goal of the new plan was to restore runs and allocate harvest of fish in the Columbia River. All management of Columbia River fish runs and fisheries by the states of Oregon and Washington is based on the plan. Idaho and the Shoshone-Bannock Tribe dissent from certain features of the plan. Harvest in an era of scarcity As management plans and their complexity increased, the number of fish available for harvest continued to decline. In December 1992, Bob Tomanawash, a Wanapum Indian living at Priest Rapids, Washington, on the Columbia, told the Tri-City Herald newspaper of Kennewick, “Now, you catch fish just a little here and little there.” It was a sentiment that would be expressed over and over as Indian fishers, like their non-Indian counterparts, confronted the problem of declining runs in the middle and late 1990s.

Over time, many creative responses were attempted to allow harvest while also permitting enough fish to escape capture to spawn and preserve the runs. In the lower Columbia, a terminal fishery was developed for non-Indian commercial fishers. Salmon are raised in floating net pens in bays and sloughs and released the appropriate age to go to the ocean. The fish instinctively return to the same bays and sloughs to spawn, and are harvested by commercial fishers using their traditional gillnets. This reduces the harvest pressure on the upriver stocks, some of which are threatened and endangered species, and allows for a greater harvest in Zone 6. Meanwhile in Zone 6, there were experiments to fish more selectively. In September 2000, Indian fishers tried a new kind of net in Zone 6. This one had larger-mesh (eight or nine inches) than the nets the fishers used previously (six or seven inches). The intent was that Endangered Species Act-listed wild B-run steelhead from the Snake River would escape capture and return to Idaho to spawn. The fish are smaller than fall Chinook salmon, which are fished at the same time.

The alternative was to shut down all fishing in Zone 6 until the steelhead had passed. On the opening day of the season, the agency counted 626 nets in the river. Of these, only 191 were of the new variety (the nets could be identified by their color-coded floats). The nets were purchased for the fishers by the Bonneville Power Administration , as part of its legal requirement to mitigate the impacts of hydropower dams on fish and wildlife of the Columbia River Basin. Researchers who monitored the deployment of the nets for Bonneville were not discouraged by the initial deployment, even though it was lower than anticipated. In a report, issued a year later, in September 2001, they commented that “fishers did not have time to complete assembly of all nets, but remaining nets are expected to be phased into future fisheries.” In all, the experiment was considered a success. The larger-mesh nets allowed Indians to fish longer for fall Chinook because fewer of the wild, and less numerous, steelhead were caught. Another experiment that also proved successful was the deployment of nets with a very small mesh that entangle fish by their teeth.

Unlike traditional gillnets, in which fish suffocate, so-called tangle nets ensnare but do not kill the fish, allowing the fisher to release fish that are not designated for harvest. Fishing is more than a livelihood for Columbia River Indians. It is culture. Not only is harvest important for Indians, but restoring salmon and steelhead runs is, too. The tribes manage important habitat restoration programs and hatcheries . These are having successes. Salmon are returning back up the Umatilla River of Oregon after being eliminated for more than 60 years because irrigation withdrawals drained the lower reaches of the river dry every spring and summer. But thanks to an innovative water exchange program negotiated by the tribe, irrigators, and state and federal officials, water is flowing in the river again, and the tribe operates a state-of-the-art hatchery with the goal of rebuilding naturally spawning runs and improving fishing opportunities on the reservation over time. The same thing is happening in the Yakima River Basin, where the Yakama Nation operates a hatchery that is producing fish to repopulate streams throughout the Yakima Basin, which once was one of the largest contributors of salmon and steelhead to the Columbia River runs.

Another large tribal facility is being planned and constructed by the Nez Perce in the Clearwater and Salmon river basins of Idaho, tributaries of the once-prolific Snake River. It is hoped that over time, these facilities and activities will rebuild salmon and steelhead runs and increase harvest opportunities for both Indians and non-Indians. The importance of the salmon culture to Columbia River Indians, the culture that is the driving force behind the long history of litigation over fishing rights, the tribes’ fisheries management, and the efforts to both conserve and produce fish, cannot be understated. In 1992, Louie Dick, Jr., a member of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation, commented on the cultural legacy of fishing: “Don’t call us a minority. We come from the land. We are the earth, we are the land. The others occupy the land. When you destroy the salmon, you destroy me. The salmon made a commitment to return and to give life. He’s following his law by coming. We are violating our own law by not doing everything we can to get him back.” Illustration: Joan Barbour.

Oregon Indian Tribes - Access Genealogy Oregon Indian Tribes Updated: July 6, 2012 | Native American , Oregon | 0 | The history of the Oregon Indians was similar to that of the Indians of Washington. The coast tribes seem to have been affected little or not at all by the settlements of the Spaniards in California, and those of the interior were influenced only in slightly greater measure by them through the introduction of the horse. Nor were these tribes reached so extensively by the employees of the great fur companies. Contact with such advance agents of civilization was principally along the valley of the Columbia River, and Astoria will always be remembered as bearing witness to the transient attempts of the American Fur Company to establish a permanent trading organization in this region under the American flag. As in the case of Washington, Oregon and its tribes were first brought to the acquaintance of our Eastern States in an intimate way by the expedition of Lewis and Clark in 1805-6. Here also settlement was delayed until the fixation of the International Boundary line and the rush westward following upon the discovery of gold in California. From the middle of the nineteenth century onward, however, the native tribes were rapidly dispossessed, placed upon reservations, and reduced in numbers.

At a later period the decrease became less marked, but it has continued nevertheless, partly as an actual extinction of the aboriginal population and partly as an absorption in the dominant race. Most of the Chinookan tribes were finally placed upon Warm Springs and Grande Ronde Reservations and on Yakima Reservation in Washington; all of the Athapascan tribes upon the Siletz Reservation, except the Umpqua, who went to Grande Ronde; the Kusan and Yakonan tribes upon the Siletz Reservation; the Salishan peoples of Oregon upon the Grande Ronde and Siletz Reserves; most of the Kalapooian peoples upon the Grande Ronde, though a few on the Siletz; most of the Molala upon the Grande Ronde; the Klamath upon Klamath Reserve; the Modoc mostly on Klamath Reserve but a few upon the Quapaw Reservation in Oklahoma; the Shahaptian tribes of Oregon upon the Umatilla Reservation; and the Northern Paiutes upon the Klamath Reservation. The following tribes at one time are recorded in history as having resided within the present state of Oregon.

If the tribe name is in bold, then Oregon is the primary location known for this tribe, otherwise we provide the tribes specifics as it pertains to Oregon and then provide a link to the main tribal page. Ahantchuyuk Indians . Ahantchuyuk Indians were located on and about Pudding River, which empties into the Willamette from the east about 10 miles south of Oregon City. Alsea Indians . Alsea Indians were located on Alsea River and Bay in Oregon. Atfalati Indians . Atfalati Indians were located on the Atfalati plains, the hills about Forest Grove and the shores and vicinity of Wapato; they are also said to have extended as far as the site of Portland Bannock Indians . The Bannock came over into the eastern borders of the state between Powder and Owyhee Rivers in more recent times. Calapooya Indians . Calapooya Indians were located on the headwaters of Willamette River including McKinzie, Middle, and West Forks Cayuse Indians . Cayuse Indians were located about the heads of Walla Walla, Umatilla, and Grande Ronde Rivers and extending from the Blue Mountains to Deschutes River, Washington and Oregon.

Chastacosta Indians . Chastacosta Indians were located on the lower course of Illinois River, both sides of Rogue River for some distance above its confluence with the Illinois, and on the north bank somewhat farther in Oregon. Chelamela Indians. Significance unknown. Also called: Long Tom Creek Indians. Connections. The Chelamela belonged to the Calapooya dialectic division of the Kalapooian linguistic stock. Location. On Long Tom Creek, a western tributary of the Willamette River. Population. (See Calapooya Indians ) Chepenafa Indians. Significance unknown. Also called: Api’nefu, or Pineifu, by the other Kalapuya. Marys River Indians, the official and popular name. Connections. The Chepenafa belonged to the Calapooya dialectic division of the Kalapooian linguistic stock, and were sometimes regarded as a subdivision of the Luckamiut. Location. At the forks of St. Marys Creek, near Corvallis. Population. (See Calapooya Indians .) The census of 1910 returned 24. Chetco Indians .

Chetco Indians were located on each side of the mouth of Chetco River and about 14 miles up it as well as on Winchuck River in Oregon and California. Clackamas Indians . Clackamas Indians were located on Clackamas River, claiming the country on the east side of Willamette River from a few miles above its mouth nearly to Oregon City and east as far as the Cascade Mountains. Clatskanie Indians . According to Gibbs (1877) the Clatskanie at one time owned the prairies bordering Chehalis River, Washington, at the mouth of Skookumchuck River, but on the failure of game, crossed the Columbia and occupied the mountains about Clatskanie River, their best-known historic seat. For a long time they exacted toll of all who passed going up or down the Columbia. Clatsop Indians . The Clatsop centered about Cape Adams, on the south side of Columbia River, extending up the latter as far as Tongue Point and southward on the Pacific coast to Tillamook Head. Clowwewalla Indians . Clowwewalla Indians were located at the falls of Willamette River.

Dakubetede Indians . Dakubetede Indians were located on Applegate River. Hanis Indians . Hanis Indians were located on Coos River and Bay. Klamath Indians . Klamath Indians were located on Upper Klamath Lake, Klamath Marsh, and Williamson and Sprague Rivers. Kuitsh Indians . Kuitsh Indians were located on Lower Umpqua River. Latgawa Indians. Signifying “those living in the uplands.” Also called: Walumskni, by the Klamath. Connections. With the Takelma proper, the Latgawa constituted the Takilman linguistic family which, in turn, was probably affiliated with the Shastan stock. Location. On Upper Rogue River eastward about Table Rock and Bear Creek and in the neighborhood of the present town of Jacksonville. Village. Sapir (1915) records one village belonging to this tribe known by the tribal name and also called Latgauk. Population. See Takelma Indians. Lohim Indians. Significance unknown. (See Northern Paiute Indians ) Connections. Reported as a band of Shoshoneans which entered Oregon at a late period. Location.

On Willow Creek, a southern affluent of the Columbia. Population. In 1870 the number of Lohim was reported as 114, but the name has not appeared in recent official reports. They have generally been regarded as renegades belonging to the Umatilla Reservation, and Ray’s (1938) informants denied the presence of Shoshoneans here, asserting that the name was applied to Yakima. Luckiamute Indians . Luckiamute Indians were located on the Luckiamute River. Miluk Indians . Miluk Indians were located at the mouth of Coquille River. Mishikhwutmetunne Indians . Mishikhwutmetunne Indians were located on the upper Coquille River Modoc Indians . Modoc Indians were located on Little Klamath Lake, Modoc Lake, Tule Lake, Lost River Valley, and Clear Lake, extending at times as far east as Goose Lake. Molala Indians. Derived from the name of a creek in the Willamette Valley from which one of their bands drove the original inhabitants. Also called: Amolélish, by the Kalapuya. Láti-u or La’tiwé, their own name.

Ya’-ide’sta, by the Umpqua. Connections. Together with the Cayuse, the Molala constituted the Waiilatpuan division of the Shapwailutan linguistic stock. According to Cayuse tradition, the Molala formerly lived with them and were separated and driven westward in consequence of wars with hostile tribes. Location. At an early date the Molala are believed to have been in the valley of the Deschutes River and to have been driven west, as above intimated, into the valleys of the Molala and Santiam Rivers. Either part of them subsequently went south to the headwaters of Umpqua and Rogue Rivers or they were separated from the rest in the movement above mentioned, as Berreman (1937) thinks. Subdivisions. The following are said to have been Molala bands or settlements: Chakankni, on the headwaters of Rogue River, northwest of Klamath Lake, absorbed later by the neighboring tribes, particularly the Klamath. Chimbuiha, on the headwaters of Santiam River. Mukanti, on the western slope of the Cascade Mountains. Population.

Mooney (1928) believes the Molala were still with the Cayuse in 1780, whose numbers he fixes at about 500. In 1849 the Molala were estimated at 100. In 1877 Gatschet found several families living on the Grande Ronde Reservation, and in 1881 there were said to be 20 individuals in the mountains west of Klamath Lake. The census of 1910 returned 31, all but 6 of whom were in Oregon. (See Cayuse.) Connection in which they have become noted. The Molala are note worthy in the first place for the uniqueness of their language, which is closely related only to Cayuse. Molalla River or Creek and a post village, both in Clackamas County, Oreg., bear the name. Multnomah. Significance unknown.

Also called: Wappato, originally the Cree or Chippewa name of a bulbous root (Sagittaria variabilis) used as food by the Indians of the west and northwest It means literally “white fungus.” It passed into the Chinook jargon with the meaning “potato” and became applied to Sauvies Island in Columbia River, at the mouth of the Willamette, and the Indian tribes living on or near it. It was so used by Lewis and Clark, though there was little or no political connection between the numerous bands so designated. Connections. The Multnomah belonged to the Clackamas division of the Chinookan linguistic stock. Location. As above indicated, on and near Sauvies Island. Subdivisions or Bands Cathlacomatup, on the south side of Sauvies Island on a slough of Willamette River. Cathlacumup on the west bank of the lower mouth of the Willamette River and claiming as their territory the bank of the Columbia from there to Deer Island. Cathlanaquiah, on the southwest side of Sauvies Island. Clahnaquah, on Sauvies Island.

Claninnata, on the southwest side of Sauvies Island. Kathlaminimin, at the south end of Sauvies Island, later said to have become associated with the Cathlacumup and Nemoit. Multnomah, on the upper end of Sauvies Island. Nechacokee, on the south bank of Columbia River a few miles below Quicksand (Sandy) River. Nemalquinner, at the falls of the Willamette but with a temporary house on the north end of Sauvies Island. Shoto, on the north side of Columbia River, a short distance from it and nearly opposite the mouth of the Willamette. Population. Mooney (1928) gives the population of all of these bands of the Multnomah as 3,600 in 1780. Their descendants are probably included among the 315 Indians returned as Chinook by the census of 1910. (See Clackamas.) Connection in which they have become noted. There is a county, town, and river channel of the name in Oregon.

The name “Wappato” secondarily applied to the Multnomah besides its former use as a name of Sauvies Island, is given, with the spelling Sapato, to a lake and place near Portland in Oregon-the latter in Multnomah County, the former between Yamhill and Washington Counties and to a place in the State of Washington. Naltunnetunne, a small Athapascan tribe between the Tututni and Chetco, apparently, included by later writers under the former. Nez Percé. They extended into northeastern Oregon. (See Idaho.) Paiute, Northern. These people occupied the southeastern part of Oregon and formerly extended far enough north to include the valley of Powder River and the upper course of John Day River of which they were dispossessed by Shahaptians. (See Nevada.) Santiam. Significance unknown. Also called: Aha’lpam, by the Atfalati Kalapuya. Connections. The Santiam belonged to the Calapooya dialectic division of the Kalapooian linguistic stock. Population. (See Calapooya.) In 1906 there were 23 Santiam on Grande Ronde Reservation.

The census of 1910 returned 9. Connection in which they have become noted. The name Santiam is perpetuated in Santiam River, a branch of the Willamette. Shasta. The Shasta extended at least into the territory watered by Jenny Creek from their main seats in California. Siletz. Significance unknown. Also called: Tsä Shnádsh amím, Luckiamute Kalapuya name. Connections. The Siletz belonged to the Salishan linguistic stock. Location. On Siletz River. Population. Mooney (1928) estimates the population of all of the Salishan tribes of Oregon as 1,500 in 1780. They are not now separately recorded, but in the census of 1930, 72 Salishan Indians were returned from Oregon besides the Tillamook. Connections in which they have become noted. The Siletz are of note as having been the southernmost of the Salishan linguistic family. Siletz River and a post village, both in Lincoln County, Oreg., preserve the name. Siuslaw . Significance unknown.

Also called: K’gu-gwic’tlnne, Naltunne name. K’glo-gwec tQnn6, Chastacosta name. Tsana-uta amfm, Luckiamute Kalapuya name. Connections. The Siuslaw belonged to the Siuslawan division of the Yakonan linguistic stock. Location. On and near Siuslaw River. Villages Dorsey (1884) gives the following: Chimuksaich Tsatauwis Population. (See Alsea.) The census of 1910 reported 7 Siuslaw. Connection in which they have become noted. The name Siuslaw is preserved by Siuslaw River, in Lane County, Oreg. Skilloot. The Skilloot occupied part of Oregon opposite the mouth of Cowlitz River. (See Washington.) Snake. (See Northern Paiute under Nevada.) Takelma. Own name, meaning “those dwelling along the river.” Kyu’-kŭtc hítclûm, Alsea name meaning “people far down the stream (or country).” Lowland Takelma, of Berreman (1937).

Na-tcté tûnnĕ, Naltunne name. Rogue River Indians, from their habitat. Connections. Together with the Latgawa, the Takelma constituted the Takelman linguistic stock. It is possible that this is distantly connected with the Shastan stock of northern California. Location. On the middle course of Rogue River from above Illinois River to about Grant’s Pass and on the northern tributaries of Rogue River between these limits and the upper course of Cow Creek; also south nearly to the California boundary. Villages The following names were recorded by J. O. Dorsey mainly in one of the Athapascan dialects of the region: Hashkushtun, on the south side of Rogue River. Hudedut, at the forks of Rogue River and Applegate River. Kashtata, on the south side of Rogue River above Leaf Creek and Galice Creek. Kthotaime, on the south side of Rogue River. Nakila, on the south side of Rogue River about 10 miles above Yaasitun. Salwahka, near the mouth of Illinois River or one of its tributaries.

Seethltun, on the south side of Rogue River, the village nearest the Chastacosta. Sestikustun, on the south side of Rogue River. Sewaathlchutun, ibid. Somouluk. Hatonk. Population. Mooney (1928) estimates the entire Takilman stock at 500 in 1780. Only 1 was returned under that name by the census of 1910, but under the general head of “Rogue River” the Indian Office Report for 1937 gives two bodies of Indians numbering 58 and 46 individuals, respectively. Connection in which they have become noted. Together with the Latgawa, the Takelma are remarkable for the peculiarity of their language, accentuated by the fact that they are almost entirely surrounded by Athapascan peoples. A post village called Takilma in Josephine County, Oreg., perpetuates the name. Taltushtuntude. Own name, meaning unknown. Also called: Galice Creek Indians, from their habitat. Kû-līs’-kitc_hītc’lûm, Alsea name. Connections.

The Taltushtuntude belonged to the Athapascan linguistic stock, and spoke the same dialect as the Dakubetede but culturally had become assimilated with the Takelma. Location. On Galice Creek. Population. In 1856, 18 Taltushtuntude were reported living on the Siletz Reservation. Under the name “Galice Creek” 42 Indians were reported in 1937. Tenino. Significance unknown. Also called: Mĕli’-lĕma, own name. Warm Springs Indians, the common official designation. Connections. The Tenino constituted a division of the Shahaptian branch of the Shapwailutan linguistic stock. Subdivisions and Villages Ochechote or Uchichol, on the north bank of Columbia River, the exact region being uncertain though they derive their name from a rock near the mouth of the Deschutes River. Skinpah, on the north bank of Columbia River above the mouth of the Deschutes. Tapanash, on the north bank of Columbia River, near the mouth of the Deschutes and a little above Celilo, the name being later extended over most of the above bands.

Tilkuni, between White and Warm Springs Reservations. TukspuAh on John Day River, and hence called often John Day Indians. Wahopum, on the north bank of Columbia River near the mouth of Olive Creek. Waiam, near the mouth of the Deschutes River. History. The Tenino were mentioned by Lewis and Clark in 1805. By the treaty of 1855 they gave up their lands and settled, along with other Shahaptian tribes and some Salishan tribes, on Yakima Reservation, Washington. Since then they have not had separate official recognition. Population. Mooney (1928) estimated that in 1780 there were 3,600 including the Atanum of the Yakima and the Tyigh. The United States Office of Indian Affairs reported 460 in 1937 of the Yakima and associated bands. Connection in which they have become noted. A town in Thurston County, Wash., perpetuates the name. Tillamook. A Chinook term meaning “people of Nekelim (or Nehalem). Also spelled Calamox, Gillamooks, Killamook, etc.

Higgahaldahu, Nestucca name. Nsietshawas, so called by Hale (1846). Si ni’-tĕ-lǐ, Mishikwutmetunne name for this tribe and the Alsea, meaning “flatheads.” Connections. The Tillamook were the principal tribe in Oregon belonging to the Salishan linguistic family, coastal division. Location. The coast from the Nehalem to Salmon River. Subdivisions and Villages Nehalem, on Nehalem River. Nestucca, on Nestucca Bay and the streams flowing into it. Salmon River, on the river of that name. Tillamook, on Tillamook Bay and the streams flowing into it, including the following villages enumerated by Lewis and Clark: Chishucks (at the mouth of Tillamook River), Chucktin (the southernmost Tillamook village, on a creek emptying into Tillamook Bay), Kilherhursh (at the entrance of Tillamook Bay), Kilherner (on Tillamook Bay, at the mouth of a creek 2 miles from Kilherhursh), Towerquotten (on a creek emptying into Tillamook Bay). Population.

See Siletz. Lewis and Clark estimated 2,200 Tillamook in 1805. In the reports of the Wilkes Exploring Expedition (1845) their number is given as 400, and by Lane in 1849 as 200. The census of 1910 returned 25, and that of 1930, 12. Connection in which they have become noted. The Tillamook seem to have been the most powerful tribe on the coast of Oregon. A bay, and also a county and its capital in the former country of the tribe preserve the name; also a cape, Tillamook Head. Tututni . Meaning unknown. Also called: H’lilush, Nestucca name. Lower Rogue River Indians, or Rogue River Indians, from their habitat. Talemaya, Umpqua name. Ta-qu’-gflc-cis, Chetco name, meaning “northern language.” Connections. The Tututni belonged to the Athapascan linguistic stock, and were related closely with the Mishikhwutmetunne. Location.

On lower Rogue River and the Pacific coast north and south of its mouth. Villages J. O. Dorsey (1884) gave the following villages or bands: On the north coast of Rogue River: Chemetunne, popularly called Joshuas, just north of Rogue River. Kaltsergheatunne, at Port Orford. Kosotshe, between Port Orford and Sixes Creek, perhaps earlier on Flores Creek. Kwatami, on or near Sixes River. Kthukwuttunne. Kthutetmeseetuttun, just north of Rogue River. Kwusathlkhuntunne, said to have been at the mouth of Mussel Creek, 5 miles south of Mount Humbug. Natutshltunne, between Coquille River and Flores Creek. Niletunne, the first village south of the Miluk village of Nasumi, south of Coquille River. Yukichetunne, on Euchre Creek. Kusu’me, on what is now called Flores Creek. Kwataime, a short distance north of last.

Kwuse’tun, near and possibly a suburb of Megwinb’tun, on the coast. Megwino’tun, a few miles up river. Skame’me, between Pistol River and mouth of Rogue River; Waterman places it at Hunter’s Creek. Sukwe’me or Sukwe’tce, at mouth of Sixes River. Tagrili’tun, a suburb of Tu’tutun. Tce’metun or Tce’me, really two towns, one on each side of the river’s mouth. Tce’tlersh tcuntun, on Pistol River, perhaps belonging to the Chetco. Tu’tutun, 5 to 6 miles from the river’s mouth, divided into two parts called Tatre’tun, “downriver,” and Na’gutretun “upriver.” Yukwe’tce or Yu’gwitce, on what is now called Euchre Creek. Berreman (1937) makes seven major divisions as follows: Kwatami or Sixes River; Euchre Creek (Yukichetunne); Mikono tunne; Kwaishtunne Khustenete. Population.

(See Chastacosta.) In 1854 the Tututni population was 1,311. The census of 1910 returned 383, but in 1930 the United States Indian Office gave only 41 under this name, 55 under that of “Meguenodon” (see above), and 45 under that of “Joshua” (Tce’metun). Tyigh. Significance unknown. Also spelled Attayes, Iyich, Ta-ih, Thy, Tyh, etc. Teéχtkni, or Télknikni, Klamath name. Tsĕ Amínĕma, Luckiamute Kalapuya name. Connections. The Tyigh belonged to the Tenino branch of the Shahaptian division of the Shapwailutan linguistic stock. Location. The country about Tygh and White Rivers. Subdivisions and Villages. No names are recorded. History. The history of the Tyigh was identical with that of the Tenino. Population.

With the other Oregon tribes of the Tenino group, the Tyigh numbered 1,400 in 1780 according to Mooney’s (1928) estimate. In 1854 they were said to number 500 and in 1859, 450; but both of these figures must be overestimates. They are not now enumerated separately from the Warm Spring Indians, placed at 550 by the census of 1910. Connection in which they have become noted. Tygh Creek and a place called Tygh Valley in Wasco County, Oreg., bears the name of the Tyigh. Umatilla. Significance unknown. Connections. The Umatilla belonged to the Shahaptian division of the Shapwailutan linguistic stock. Location. On Umatilla River and the banks of Columbia River adjacent to the mouth of the Umatilla. Population. Mooney (1928) estimates this tribe and the Walla Walla together at 1,500 in 1780.

The census of 1910 returned 272, the United States Indian Office Report for 1923, 145, and the Indian Office Report for 1937, 124. Connections in which they have become noted. An Indian reservation has received the name Umatilla, and it has also been applied to a river, a county, and a post village, all in Oregon; also to a place in Lake County, Fla. Umpqua. Significance unknown. Cactan’-qwût-me’tûnne, Naltunne name. Ci-cta’-qwŭt-me’tûnnĕ, Tututni name, meaning “Umpqua River people.” Ci-sta’-qwût, Chastacosta name. Etnémitane, own name (Gatschet, 1877). Tsan Ámpkua amín, Luckiamute Kalapuya name, meaning “people on the Umpqua.” Upper Umpqua, Berreman (1937). Connections. The Umpqua belonged to the Athapascan linguistic stock. Location.

On upper Umpqua River, east of the Kuitsh. Subdivisions. The Umpqua on Cow Creek are often spoken of separately under the name Nahankhuotana. Parker (1840) mentions a people called Palakahu which was probably an Athapascan or Yakonan tribe but cannot now be identified, and also the Skoton and Chasta, probably parts of the Chastacosta or Tututni. This is all the more likely as he includes the Kwatami band of the Tututni and the entirely independent Chilula of California. Their chief village was Hewut. Population. (See Dakubetede.) Hale (1846) says that in his time the Umpqua were supposed to number not more than 400. In 1902 there were 84 on Grande Ronde Reservation. The census of 1910 returned 109. In 1937, 43 Indians are given under this name. (See Chastacosta and Dakubetede.) Connection in which they have become noted.

Umpqua River, and the settlement of Umpqua or Umpqua Ferry in Douglas County, preserve the name. Wallawalla. The Wallawalla extended somewhat into northeastern Oregon. (See Washington.) Walpapi. Significance unknown. Commonly called Snakes. A part of the Northern Paiute. (See under Nevada.) Wasco. From a native word wacq!ó, “cup or small bowl of horn,” the reference being to a cup-shaped rock a short distance from the main village of the tribe; from this the tribal name Gałasq’ó, “those that have the cup,” is derived and variations of it frequently appear in the literature. Also called: Afúlakin, by the Kalapuya. Ámpχänkni, meaning “where the water is,” by the Klamath. Awásko ammim, by the Kalapuya. Sáχlatks, by the Molala. Connections. They belonged to the upstream branch of the Chinookan linguistic stock, their closest relatives being the Wishram on the opposite side of the river. Location. In the neighborhood of The Dalles, in the present Wasco County. Villages and Fishing Stations.

The following are given by Sapir (1930) in order from east to west: Hlgahacha, Igiskhis, Wasco (a few miles above the present town of The Dalles), Wogupan, Natlalalaik, Gawobumat, Hliekala-imadik, Wikatk, Watsokus, Winkwot (at The Dalles), Hlilwaihldik, Hliapkenu/n, Kabala, Gayahisitik, Itkumahlemkt, Hlgaktahlk, Tgahu, Hliluktik, Gahientlich, Gechgechak, Skhlalis. Population. Morse (1822) estimated the number of Wasco at 900. The census of 1910 returned 242, and the United States Office of Indian Affairs, 227 in 1937. (See Clackamas and Watlala.) Connections in which they have become noted. The Wasco were the strongest Upper Chinook tribe and that which ultimately absorbed the rest.

The name is preserved by Wasco County, Oreg., and a town in Sherman County in the same State; also places in Kern County, Calif., and Kane County, Ill. Watlala. Significance of word is unknown. Also called: Cascade Indians, the popular English name. Gila’xicatck, by the Chinook. Katlagakya, own name. Shahala, from Chinook saxala, meaning “above,” by Chinook. Connections. The Watlala belonged to the Chinookan linguistic stock and the Clackamas dialectic group. Location. At the Cascades of Columbia River and extending down to the mouth of the Willamette River. Subdivisions. The following names have been applied by various writers to the Indians in this neighborhood and may be subdivisions of this tribe, or perhaps refer to the entire tribe itself: Cathlakaheckit, at the Cascades. Cathlathlala, just below the Cascades. Clahclellah, near the foot of the Cascades. Neerchokioon, on the south side of Columbia River a few miles above Sauvies Island. Washougal, near Quicksand River.

Yehuh, just above the Cascades. Population. Mooney (1928) estimates that the Watlala and the Wasco together numbered 3,200 in 1780. In 1805-6 Lewis and Clark estimated that there were 2,800. In 1812 the two first-mentioned bands were estimated to number 1,400. They are no longer enumerated separately and are probably incorporated at the present time with the Wishram and the Wasco. Yahuskin. One of the two chief peoples in Oregon belonging to the Northern Paiute division of the Shoshonean and therefore Uto-Aztecan linguistic stock. (See Nevada.) Yamel. Significance unknown, often spelled Yam Hill. Also called: Ychă-yamel-amirn, by the Atfalati Kalapuya. Connections. The Yamel belonged, along with the Atfalati, to the northern dialectic division of the Kalapooian linguistic stock. Location. Yamhill River. Subdivisions.

Gatschet (1877) records these as follows: Andshankualth, on a western tributary of the Willamette. Andshimmampak, on Yamhill River. Chamifu, in the forks of Yamhill River. Chamiwi, on Yamhill River. Champikle, on Dallas (La Creole) Creek. Chinchal, on Dallas Creek. Population. (See Calapooya.) The census of 1910 returned 5 Yamel. Connection in which they have become noted. The name of the Yamel, in the form Yamhill, is perpetuated by an affluent of the Willamette and by the county through which it flows. Yaquina Indians. Yaquina Indians were located about Yaquina River and Bay Yoncalla. From Ayankeld, or Tch’Ayanke’ld, “those living at Ayankeld,” own name. Connections. The Yoncalla were the southernmost tribe of the Kalapooian linguistic stock, forming one of the three dialectic divisions. Location. On Elk and Calapooya Creeks, tributaries of Umpqua River. Subdivisions.

According to Gatschet (1887), there were two bands, called Chayankeld and Tsantokayu by the Luckiamute, but it seems likely that the former name (Tell’ Ayanke’ld) is merely the native tribal name. Population. (See Calapooya.) The census of 1910 returned 11 Yoncalla. Connection in which they have become noted. Yoncalla, a post village of Douglas County, Oreg., preserves the name. Alsea Indians were located on Alsea River and Bay in Oregon. Collection:

Question: What is the largest species of the salmon family that also shares its name with an Indian tribe?
Answer: Chinook