Research ArticleArticles

An Examination of Indigenous Halibut Fishing Technology on the Northwest Coast of North America

Jacob Salmen-Hartley and Iain McKechnie
Arctic Anthropology, September 2023, 59 (1) 87-105; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/aa.59.1.87

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Figure 1.
    Figure 1.

    Example of bentwood U-shaped halibut hook (bottom) from Haida Gwaii (Reciprocal Research Network 1900.14.3) and composite V-shaped hook from a Tlingit community in southeast Alaska (University of British Columbia Museum of Anthropology A2434). Marks and abrasions on the wood near the barb suggest both hooks had been fished. See Figure 3 for additional examples of hooks.

  • Figure 2.
    Figure 2.

    Hook measurement dimensions adapted from Scordino et al. (2017:19), with a photo showing a halibut’s mouth in a natural swimming orientation with relevant morphology labeled. The illustration depicts a halibut approaching a baited V-shaped hook.

  • Figure 3.
    Figure 3.

    A range of observed hook styles demonstrating variation in construction methods (RBCM:709, 719, 9943, 3229, 16203, 15842). Note the bent, solid, and composite construction methods. The dashed line indicates the missing barb location on 3229.

  • Figure 4.
    Figure 4.

    Measured values for all hooks (n = 120) and comparisons of Dimensions A and C by hook type. Boxplots indicate the median, quartiles, and range. The interquartile range is indicated on the top chart. The width of the notches on the bottom boxplots indicate 95% confidence intervals around the median. Overlap between the horizontal extent of the notches suggest statistical similarity across hook types.

  • Figure 5.
    Figure 5.

    Study area showing locations, numbers, and style categories for halibut hooks from examined museum collections with provenance information (n = 84). The U-shaped category is combined with both metal and wooden hooks as they represent expressions of the same style with different materials. The maximum sample size is 17 hooks for Masset in northern Haida Gwaii. The inset chart shows the average halibut abundance (% fish NISP) from fine-screened archaeological assemblages, where n is the number of zooarchaeological assemblages from different regions (data from McKechnie and Moss 2016).

  • Figure 6.
    Figure 6.

    Estimated size selectivity for each hook, sorted top to bottom by descending range with bars colored by hook style. The y-axis shows each specimen’s catalog number, while the x-axis shows the range of estimated size selectivity in centimeters. Note that three of the 120 measured hooks had one of the two key size selective dimensions, they were excluded here.

Tables

  • Table 1.

    Traditional halibut-hook sample composition.

    InstitutionAnalysisNumber Measured
    UBC Museum of Anthropology (MOA)Measured/Observed26
    Royal British Columbia Museum (RBCM)Measured/Observed80
    Campbell River Museum (CRM)Observed—
    Makah Culture and Research Center (MCRC)Observed—
    Reciprocal Research Network (RRN)Measured†/Observed14

    • ↵† Measured using ImageJ software with the “analyze” tool.

  • Table 2.

    Regression relationships used to estimate hook selectivity where Y represents halibut fork length in cm and X the mouth measurement in cm. See Supplementary Materials for graphical relationships and additional regression statistics.

    Mouth MeasurementR2NRelationship
    Dorsal commissure0.4665Y = 50.3X + 68.67
    Ventral commissure0.3765Y = 35.1X + 78.78
    Gape†0.86745Y = 9.2X + 6.20

    • ↵† Webster (2014).

  • Table 3.

    Qualitative attributes of measured ethnographic hooks.

    Construction MethodAllU-shapedV-shapedHybridMetal
    Total Measured12035412222
    Bite Marks50 certain11 certain26 certain13 certain—
    9 possible4 possible5 possible0 possible
    38 not visible20 not visible10 not visible9 not visible
    Material22 metalWoodWoodWoodMetal
    98 wood
  • Table 4.

    Estimated halibut size (fork length) and weight from hook morphology. Weight estimated from the typical fork length to round weight conversion (Clark 1991). See Supplementary Materials for all estimates.

    Hook(s) Used for Size EstimationNumberCatalog Number (if single hook)Minimum Size Estimate (cm)Maximum Size Estimate (cm)Length Range (cm)Estimated Weight (kg)
    Average dimensions from all hooks120n/a531541011.6–51
    Hook selecting for max1RBCM 989.2.27432702260.8–315
    Hook selecting for min1RBCM 10962281541260.2–51
    Hook with the most range1RBCM 989.2.27432702260.8–315
    Hook with the least range1MOA 1768/2081120396.4–22.8
    Average dimensions of wooden hooks98n/a56149932–46
    Average dimensions of hooks with bite marks50n/a561479112–44
    Average dimensions of metal hooks22n/a431751320.8–77.3
    Average dimensions of hybrid hooks22n/a62153912.7–50
    Average dimensions of U-shaped hooks35n/a49142931.3–39.3
    Average dimensions of V-shaped hooks41n/a54153992.7–50
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
An Examination of Indigenous Halibut Fishing Technology on the Northwest Coast of North America
Jacob Salmen-Hartley, Iain McKechnie
Arctic Anthropology Sep 2023, 59 (1) 87-105; DOI: 10.3368/aa.59.1.87
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Bookmark this article

Jump to section