HomeMy WebLinkAboutChakachamna Hydroelectric Project Interim Feasibility Assessment Report Vol.IV 1983CHAKACHAMNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
INTERIM FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT
VOLUME IV
ADDENDUM
BECHTEL CIVIL & MINERALS INC.
ENGINEERS-CONSTRUCTORS
OCTOBER 1983
PROPERTY OF:
Alaska Power Authority
334 W. 5th Ave.
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
ALASKA POWER AIJTHORITY --~
Y111 NICBl.NIHd ~ HJ.IWSHOIH I
r
~
·,
l
oJ.o3nsst 3J.YO
j
'A
CHAKACHAMNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
INTERIM FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT
VOLUME IV
ADDENDUM
BECHTEL CIVIL & MINERALS INC.
ENGINE E AS-CONSTRUCTORS
•
OCTOBER 1983
....___ ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY __ __,
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
CHAKACHAMNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
INTERIM FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT
MARCH 1983
ADDENDUM TO VOLUME I
VOLUME IV
ADDENDUM -OCTOBER 1983
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.0 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
3.5.3 Upstream Migrants Facility
4. 0 HYDROLOGICAL AND POWER S'rUDIES
4.6 Results
10.0 COORDINATION
10.3 Biological Studies
10.3.3 Meeting -December 9, 1982
10.3.3.1 Response
10.3.3.2 Further Response -September 1983
10.3.4 Meeting -June 8, 1983
10.6 Distribution of Report -Comments and Responses
National Park Service
3-1
4-1
10-1
10-1
10-1
10-1
10-4
10-17
10-18
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ADDENDUM TO VOLUME I
APA Response
Department of the Army
APA Response
Department of Environmental Conservation
APA Response
Department of Fish and Game
APA Response
Community and Regional Affairs
APA Response
·Department of Natural Resources
APA Response
Department of Natural Resources
APA Response
ADDENDUM TO VOLUME II
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Volume II, Errata
Volume II, Supplementary Table References
6.10 Environmental Hydrology -1983
6.10.1 Introduction
6.10.2 Stream Flow Characteristics
6.10.3 Water Temperature
6.11 Aquatic Biology -1983
6.11.1 Introduction and Objectives
6.11.1.1 Winter 1983 Study
6.11.1.2 Spring 1983 Program
6.11.1.2.1 Adult Anadromous Fish
6.11.1.2.2 Resident and Juvenile
Anadromous Fish
6.11.1.2.3 Habitat Data Collection
10-19
10-20
10-21
10-23
10-24
10-25
10-30
10-34
10-36
10-38
10-39
10-40
10-41
6-l
6-l
6-2
6-2
6-3
6-7
6-8
6-8
6-8
6-8
6-9
6-9
6-10
TABLE OF CONTENTS
AOD~NDUM TO VOLUME II
6.11.2 Methodology
6.11.2.1 Salmon Spawning Escapement
6.11.2.2 Fyke Nets
6.11.2.3 Minnow Traps
6.11.2.4 Electrofishing
6.11.2.5 Gill Nets
6.11.2.6 Inclined Plane Trap
Outmigrant Sampling
6.11.2.7 Habitat Data Collection
6.11.2.8 Data Management and Analysis
6.11.3 Results
6.11.3.1 Winter 1983 Studies
6.11.3.1.1 Resident and Juvenile
6-10
6-11
6-11
6-12
6-12
6-13
6-13
6-15
6-15
6-16
6-16
Anadromous Fish 6-16
6.11.3.1.2 Habitat Data Collection 6-23
6.11.3.2 Spring 1983 Studies 6-25
6.11.3.2.1 Adult Anadromous Fish 6-25
6.11.3.2.2 Resident and Juvenile
Anadromous Fish 6-27
6.11.3.2.3 Habitat Data Collection 6-41
6.11.3.3 Habitat Utilization
6.11.3.3.1 Dolly Varden
6.11.3.3.2 Coho Salmon
6.11.3.3.3 Chinook Salmon
6.11.3.3.4 Sockeye Salmon
6.11.4 Discussion
6.11.4.1 Sockeye Salmon
6.11.4.2 Chinook Salmon
6-42
6-43
6-45
6-46
6-47
6-48
6-48
6-50
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ADDENDUM TO VOLUME II
6.11.4.3 Pink Salmon
6.11. 4. 4 Chum Salmon
6.11.4.5 Coho Salmon
6.11.4.6 Dolly Varden
6.11.4.7 Pygmy Whitefish
6.11.4.8 Rainbow Trout
6.11.5 Summary and Conclusions
6.12 References
TABLES
FIGURES
APPENI.HXES
6-52
6-53
6-53
6-54
6-55
6-55
6-55
6-57
ADDENDUM TO VOLUME I
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
CHAKACHAMNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
INTERIM FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT
MARCH 1983
VOLUME IV
ADDENDUM -OCTOBER 1983
3.0 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
3.5.3 Upstream Migrants Facility
The upstream migrants facility has been revised in response
to comments received from the fishery agencies. Figures
3-9 Rev. 1 and 3-10 Rev. 1 included herewith in this
Addendum supersede the original Figures 3-9 and 3-10
appearing in Volume 1, Section 3.0, after page 3-32.
The written responses to the agency comments appear in
Section 10.3.3.2 of this Addendum.
3-1
I
1155 MAX . WL.
11'15 MIN. WL
/122M~
I II 2 .MIN. WL.
113 3 MA~
/123 MIN. WL.
/
C.IJTED OIVFICE DR.
VfoR.TICAL. SLOT
TYPIC AL AT EACH POOL.
~/:"\.--"1-::\
PLAN EL. 11 4? -E L . 1133
/11 = 10'
---DENOTES DtR.ECTION OF WATER. FLOW
FUGUR.€5 DENOTE WATER SURFACE ELE VATION I N FEET MS L
PLAN EL. 1132 -EL . Ji ll
, .. = 10 1
.4cu: S':> TuNNeL SECTION
(TYPICAL OOWNSTR.E:AM Fll-O>Jl
IIJTER.St;CTIOIJ WI TH IN '>TR.E:AM
FLOW ll.t;L&A'>£ F'L..tJKE:)
, •• -/0
WATER SUPPLY CHAMBER.
9 ' II 92 11 93 II 94 II 9s 11 96 II 97 II 98----l\=--!9 11
lrc;AATIN Jr
TYP.J
09 08 07 _jl 06 Jl OS Jl 04-0 JJ 02 01 JJ
II II II II II II II lL II
WATER SUPPLY CHAMBER.
Ill
TUNNEL -. ..
1089 11
---;-
.11 !088 ,JJ 87 8t:. 85 84 .Jl 8~ Jl 82 -IH
:-~--~~~-.-~11_,-~IIIIT<r--~11,_-~11 ,_-a,ll,__~~~-----l-_G_R_A_T_IN_G_r_r_~_-> ______ ~-f~----.--l
1089 MAX .WL Ill -WATER SUPPLy CIIAM8~R. \I
/083A1fNWL ~~~~~.~~.-.~-~--------------------~} ~
PLAN EL . 1088 -~L .I082
1'' = 10 '
10
No. DATE
10
GRAPHIC SCALE FEET
1" .. 10'
REVISION
20
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
CHAKACHAMNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
UPSTREAM FISH PASSAGE FACILITIES
PLANS AND SECTION
BECHTEL CIVIL & MINERALS, INC.
SAN FRANCISCO
DESIGNED DRAWN CHECKED
ENGR SUPY PROJ EN GR ... '0
DRAWING No. I REV .
FIGURE 3-9 j I
UAT. Gli!.OIJIJO LCVE.L • 5AIJO ~ G/i!AVE.L
I
.CIIAt:.ACIIAMUA LA E MAX. OF/ W.L . li.L>./155
MIIJ. W.l... EJ.. 1083 t
R OCK. MOUNTAINSIDe
AV. SUJP€ APPRO)(. 40•
ScCTI0"-1
1''•10 '
No . DATE
se.crtoA.L
10 10
GRAPHIC SCA LE FEET
1"•10'
REVISION
• 20
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
CHAKACHAMNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
UPSTREAM FISH PASSAGE FACILITIES
SECTIONS
BECHTEL CIVIL & MINERALS, INC.
SAN FRANCISCO
CHECKED
""'0
DRAWI NG No. REV .
FIGURE 3-10
4.0 HYDROLOGICAL AND POWER STUDIES
4.6 Results
Page 4-22, Volume I, Errata. The first three lines of the
last paragraph should read as follows:
"Alternatives A through D can firmly support the
capacities termined from the 11 years of inflow
during the 1981 studies. The recommended"
4-1
10.0 COORDINATION
10.3 Biological Studies
10.3.3 Meeting -December 9, 1982
10.3.3.1 Response
See Volume I page 10-48.
10.3.3.2 Further Response -September 1983.
Following receipt of the NMFS February 1, 1983 letter and
the u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service March 9, 1983 letter,
the conceptual designs for the proposed fish passage
facilities near the present outlet of Chakachamna Lake have
been reviewed and certain revisions have been made at this
time. In particular, the layout of the upstream migrant
facility has been re~ised to increase the length of the
turn pools at all ladder turns to at least 10 feet in
compliance with the comments of both agencies. All ladders
and channels will be lighted, this having been the original
intent, but details are not shown on the drawings. The
objective is to illustrate a concept for the movement of
water and fish through the system. Full details of
mechanical and electrical equipment will be developed in
final design.
Flow of water through the upstream passage facility could
be controlled by throttling gates (not shown) installed a
short distance downstream from the inlet bulkhead gates
presently shown. Closure of the inlet bulkhead gates would
enable dewatering to be performed for maintenance or repair
of the throttling gates.
10-1
Access to the various levels of the upstream passage
facility would be provided via the elevator and stairwell.
Grating type walkways would be provided over all weirs and
pools to give access by foot.
The ladder exits to the lake, as presently shown are 60
feet minimum from the lakeside entry to the downstream
passage facility. This distance could be increased if
considered necessary, at the cost of increasing the volume
of open cut excavation in the vicinity of the portals to
the fish passage facilities.
It is evident from the comments on the proposed schemes for
the downstream passage of juveniles, that additional
conceptual evaluation will be required and present funding
limitations do not permit that to be done at the present
tim~. The provision of conventional spillway crests
downstream from the gates was purposely avoided in the
proposed layouts because of reported heavy losses of
fingerl1ngs. For example, in a paper entitled "Fish
Handling Facilities for Baker River Project" published in
the November 1961 Journal of the Power Division of the
American Society of Civil Engineers, it was reported that
64% of the sockeye fingerlings passing over the Lower Baker
spillway were killed. In a subsequent test, it was found
that 85% survival rate was achieved under conditions
approximating free fall between the reservoir and
tailwater, a drop of about 160 feet. Our consultants
leaned toward the view that provided a sufficient depth of
plunge pool were provided, some fish might be temporarily
stunned when passing through the 80 foot free fall but that
adequate time would be available for their recovery while
passing through the 1-1/2 mile long flume in the tunnel to
10-2
the downstream portal where they would return to the
river. Because of the divergences, it is considered
advisable to defer resolution of this issue until such time
as the project studies are resumed.
For the time being, the breakwater in the lake has been
deleted. It is to be noted, however, that waves of 5 feet
to 6 feet in height have been observed on the lake during
times of strong wind and for this reason, some form of wave
protection may be necessary to prevent damage to the
approach channel.
With the parameters established for project studies, the
maximum flow of water diverted for power generation would
be approximately double the average annual inflow to the
lake or 7200 cfs. The intake opening for power diversions
is at depth to avoid, within practical limits, the
attraction of fish into the power tunnel.
New studies of ablation and ice movement in the Barrier
Glacier near the lake outlet are planned to be performed
when proJect studies are resumed.
Flows in the vicinity of the rockfill fish barrier should
be determined in the final design stage.
The recommended fishway baffle design parameters have been
noted for further consideration during the final design
stage.
Gates and their operating mechanisms would be simple and
robust in order to give best assurance of trouble free
operation.
10-3
The proposed fish ladder concept is based on a peak daily
run of 4,000 fish, and a maximum hourly run of 1,000 fish
and a rate of ascent of 5 minutes per pool. With 72 pools
between maximum reservoir operating level, elevation 1155,
and the bottom of the ladder, elevation 1183, the average
number of fish per pool is 69, say 70. If 4 cubic feet of
water is provided for each fish, the required pool volume
is 280 cubic feet, and if the depth of the water in the
pool is 6 feet, the required surface area is 47 sq. feet.
For conservatism 60 sq. feet is provided in the layouts.
The passage of ice through the system or its prevention are
problems that may require special considerations in
addition to those already given. The suggestion for an
angled vertical rack in place of the horizontal grating
shown is noted and will be considered in future studies.
10.3.4 Meeting -June 8, 1983
Representatives of interested agencies were invited to
attend a meeting in Anchorage, Alaska on June 8, 1983 to
discuss the proposed study plan for the Chakachamna
Hydroelectric Project. At this meeting, representatives of
Alaska Power Authority, Bechtel Civil & Minerals, Inc. and
Woodward-Clyde Consultants summarized the results of
Volumes I, II, and III of the March 1983 Chakachamna
Hydroelectric Project Interim Feasibility Assessment Report
and described a proposed scope of continuing studies
designed to meet the requirements of filing a Fede~al
Energy Regulatory Commission Application for a license to
construct the project.
A copy of the invitation letter follows. The agencies
invited are listed on the attachment to that letter which
is then followed by a copy of the notes of record covering
the meeting.
10-4
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
334 WEST 5th AVENUE· ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501
RECEIV~O
MAY 3l 1983
R. T. LODER
The Honorable Esther Wunnicke
Commissioner
Department of Natural Resources
Pouch M
Juneau, Alaska 99811
Dear Ms. Wunnicke:
May 25, 1983
Phone: (907) 2n-7641
(907) 276-0001
Please reference my February 9, 1983, letter which transmitted a
summary of our meeting with your staff on December 9, 1982. During the
meeting, it was agreed that the Power Authority through its contractors,
Bechtel Civil & Minerals and Woodward-Clyde, would develop a study plan
which would encompass the necessary data collection and analysis on the
Chakachamna hydroelectric project in order to meet the requirements of
filing a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Application.
I have attached a draft copy of the proposed study plan for the
Chakachamna hydroelectr1c project for .your review. The budget and scope
of work are included in this plan. This is the first draft and will be
modified as necessary. I must stress that total funding for this plan
in the upcoming year is unlikely and that a prioritization of the items
will be required in order to make the best use of available funding.
I would like to invite you and your staff to a meeting on
Wednesday, June 8, 1983, to discuss this study plan. The meeting will
be held at the Alaska Power Authority in the downstairs conference room
at 1:30 p.m.
If you have any questions prior to the meeting, please feel free to
contact me or Mr. Eric Marchegiani of my staff.
Eric P. Yould
Executive Director
Attachment as stated.
cc: ~ lobert looer, Bechtel, San Francisco
Mr. Wayne Lifton, Woodward-Clyde, Anchorage
Mr. Roland Shanks, DNR, Anchorage
8873
Mr. Ty Dilliplane, Division of Parks, Anchorage
Ms. Kay Brown, Division of Minerals and Energy Management,
Anchorage
10-5
DISTRIBUTION LIST FOR THE CHAKACHAMNA STUDY PLAN
The Honorable Esther Wunnicke
Commissioner
Department of Natural Resources
Pouch M
Juneau, Alaska 99811
cc: Mr. Roland Shanks, DNR, Anchorage
Division of Research & Development
555 Cordova Street
Pouch 7-005
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
Mr. Ty Oilliplane, Division of Parks, Anchorage
State Historic Preservation Officer
619 Warehouse Drive, Suite 210
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
Ms. Kay Brown, Director
Division of Minerals and Energy Management
Pouch 7-034
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
ATT: Ms. Karen Oakley
Mr. Keith Schreiner
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
1011 E. Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
cc: Mr. Gary Stackhouse, USF&WS, Anchorage
1011 East Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
Mr. Lenny Carin, USF&WS, Anchorage
605 West Fourth Avenue, Suite G-81
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
Mr. Roger J. Cantor
Regional Director
National Park Service
540 West Fifth Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
cc: Mr. Larry Wright, National Park Service, Anchorage
540 West Fifth Avenue
8873
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Mr. Paul Haertel
Superintendent
Lake Clark National Park
701 "C" Stteet, Box 61
Anchorage, Alaska 99513
10-6
The Honorable Richard Neve
Commissioner
Department of Environmental Conservation
Pouch 0
Juneau, Alaska 99811
cc: Mr. Robert Martin, Dept. of Environ~er~al Conservation, Anchorage
Regional Supervisor
437 E Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Honorable Mark Lewis
Commissioner
Department of Community &
Regional Affairs
Pouch B
Juneau, Alaska 99811
cc; Mr. Mark Stephens, OC&RA, Anchorage
225 Cordova, Bldg. B
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
The Honorable Richard A. Lyon
Commissioner
Department of Commerce &
Economic Development
Pouch D
Juneau, Alaska 99811
cc: Mr. Edward Eboch, DEPO, Juneau
Director
Pouch 0
Juneau, Alaska 99811
8873 10-7
Mr. Robert McVey, Director
Alaska Region
National Marine Fisheries Service
P.O. Box 1668
Juneau, Alaska 99802
cc: Mr. Ronald Morris, National Marine Fisheries Service, Anchora
701 C Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99513
Mr. Brad Smith, National Marine Fisheries Service, Anchorage
701 C Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99513
The Honorable Donald W. Collingsworth
Commissioner
Alaska Department of Fish & Game
P.O. Box 3-2000
Juneau, Alaska 99811
cc: Mr. Carl Yanagawa, ADF&G, Anchorage
Regional Supervisor
8873
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage, Alask?. 99503
Mr. Don McKay, ADF&G, Anchorage
Habitat Division
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Mr. Phil Brna
Habitat Division
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Mr. Ken Tarbox
Alaska Department of Fish & Game
P.O. Box 3150
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Mr. Keven Delaney
Sport Fish
ADF&G
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99502
10-8
Mr. Curtis McVey
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Bureau of Land Management
701 C Street, P.O. Box 13
Anchorage, Alaska 99513
cc: Mr. John Benson, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Anchorage
U.S. Bureau of Land Management
701 C Street, P.O. Box 13
Anchorage, Alaska 99513
Mr. Don Hendrickson
Pennisula Resource Area
U.S. Department of the Interior
Bureau of Land Management
4700 East 72nd Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
Mr. Wayne Bowden
Bureau of Land Management
Anchorage District Office Manager
4700 East 72nd Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
Mr. Fred Lohse
Bureau of Land Management
4700 East 72nd Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99507
Director of Indian Affairs, Dept. of Interior, Juneau
P.O. Box 3-8000
Juneau, Alaska 99802
8873 10-9
DATE:
LOCATION:
SUBJECT:
CHAKACHAMNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
MEETING NOTES
June 8, 1983
Alaska Power Authority Office
Anchorage, Alaska
Chakachamna Project Review and Seeping Meeting
PARTICIPANTS:
Alaska Power Authority National Park Service
Eric Marchegiani Floyd Sharrock
Larry Wright
Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game Bureau of Land Management
Bruce King Don McKay
Mike Kasterin
Kevin Delaney
Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources Bureau of Indian Affairs
Sam Murray Don Barrett
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bechtel
Gary Stackhouse Bob Loder
Jock Langbein
Dudley Reiser
National Marine Fisheries Service Woodward -Clyde Consultants
Brad Smith Wayne Lifton
Larry Rundquist
Mike Joyce
Paul Hampton
Jon Issacs
Representatives from the Alaska Power Authority, Bechtel Civil and
Minerals, and Woodward-Clyde Consultants {WCC) met with representatives
of various state and federal agencies to review and,~scuss the proposed
environmental program for FY 1984 and the results of the 1983 Interim
Feasibility Report. The purpose of the meeting was to present the
individual components of the proposed program and to solicit and receive
agency comments concerning the proposed studies. Eric Marchegiani of the
9597/020 10-10
Chakachamna Hydro List
July 26, 1983
Page 2
Alaska Power Authority (APA) initiated the meeting with introductions of
those present. Eric reviewed the funding prospects for FY 1984 and
indicated that total funding was unlikely. Therefore, he wanted to use
the meeting as a workshop in an effort to prioritize the various program
elements. Eric noted that this would not be the only meeting for this
purpose.
0
0
Gary Stackhouse (USFWS) asked about the present schedule
for completing the FERC license application.
-Eric Marchegiani (APA) responded by noting that if
funding becomes available it would be about 1-2 years
before the application would be filed.
Gary Stackhouse (USFWS) inquired as to how long it would
be before filing an application if sufficient funding is
not obtained.
-Eric Marchegiani (APA) noted that an additional 1-1/2
years would probably be required.
Wayne Li~ton (WCC) then presented the aquatic biological studies
proposed for FY-84 as contained in the Scope of Services document. This
document had been distributed to the various agencies about two weeks
prior to the meeting. Wayne briefly reviewed the major components of the
program: Adult Anadromous studies would include the installation and
operation of four fishwheels (3 on the McArthur River and one on the
Chakachatna River), tag recovery operations, aerial surveys, mainstream
electrofishing operations, and studies of Chakachamna Lake spawning;
Outmi rant studies would include the use of two inclined plane smolt
traps one on the McArthur River and one on the Middle River) Resident
and Juvenile Anadromous studies would include minnow trapping, electro-
fishing, Fyke nettings, and for Chakachamna Lake, electrofishing, gill
netting, twawling and hydroacoustic surveys; Habitat studies would
include the characterization of juvenile, spawning and egg incubation
habitat.
0
0
9597/020
Bruce King (ADF&G) requested the locations of the fish
wheels.
-Wayne Lifton (WCC) noted that fish wheels would be
located at Station 10 (3 wheels) and Station 6 (1
wheel); fyke nets would also be set in these areas.
Brad Smith (NMFS) asked if the program described was for
license application (i.e. no priorization of study com-
ponents).
-Wayne Lifton (WCC) acknowledged that the entire scope of
work was being presented and that studies had not been
prioritized.
10-11
Chakachamna Hydro list
July 26, 1983
Page 3
0 Bruce King (ADF&G) asked if the level of hydroacoustic
surveys proposed for the winter were the same as for the
summer.
-Wayne Lifton (WCC) noted that the winter studies would
be at a lower level of effort. Lifton replied that the
winter studies were designed to statistically describe
the distribution of fish under the ice and near the
proposed intake, however, it would not be possible to
tow the transducers around on the ice.
Larry Rundquist (WCC) then presented the hydrology and instream flow
studies program and the proposed sampl~ng schedule. Rundquist noted that
two continuous recording gages .would be operated, one at the location of
the former U.S. Geological Survey gage on the Chakachatna River, and one
on the upper McArthur River below the power house location. Staff gages
would also be installed in various drainages to provide additional
streamflow information.
Rundquist described the proposed instream flow studies and indicated
a preference for conducting the studies in the spring on an ascending
limb of the hydrograph. He noted that the U.S.F.W.S. Instream Flow
Incremental Methodology (IFIM) was being proposed for the instream flow
studies. Rundquist stated that presently 10 representative reaches and 5
critical reaches {for passage) had been selected for study based on
various channel configurations. Rundquist also briefly described the
ground water program which was proposed between the Chakachatna and
McArthur River.
0 Gary Stackhouse (USFWS) asked where tidal influence occurs
in the system and whether it might affect spawning.
-Larry Rundquist {WCC) noted that tidal influence does
not extend very far upstream on the Middle River and
that the subtrate in the lower reaches of the system
was poor for spawning. Rundquist indicated that the
reaches for instream flow studies would be above tidal
influence.
-Wayne Lifton (WCC) added that to date the only species
of fish using the lower reach of the system for rearing
was stickleback.
Mike Joyce (WCC) followed this discussion with a presentation of the
wildlife program. Joyce reviewed the major wildlife issues which need to
be addressed, including the effects of altered flows on moose and swan
habitat, and the impacts of altered fish escapement and distribution on
eagle and bear populations. Joyce then introduced and described the
proposed use of the Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP) for the wildlife
studies. He stated that the existing models for the HEP model would be
reviewed and appropriately modified to more accurately depict the wild-
life species present in the Chakachamna Project area. Joyce noted that
for this HEP study, no attempt would be made to evaluate the cumulative
10-12
Chakachamna Hydro List
July 26, 1983
Page 4
impacts of other projects in conjunction with the Chakachamna Project;
impact analysis would be limited to only the Chakachamna Project.
Indicator species proposed for HEP analysis included: moose, trumpeter
swan, bald eagle, brown bear, beaver and wolf. Joyce then reviewed other
programs proposed for study including vegetarian mapping, bird studies
(waterfowl nesting, and migration and staging activities) and mammal
studies (bear denning and feeding; moose winter range and seasonal
studies).
Jon Issacs (WCC) then presented the proposed Human Resources pro-
gram. He noted that the major components of the program as listed in the
FERC requirements included evaluations of the project areas historic and
archeological value, land use, socioeconomic structure, aesthetics and
recreational use. Major project related issues identified by Issacs
included regulatory compliance, construction and access impacts, effects
of the project on Lake Clark National Park, project effects on the
commercial and subsistence fishing, and project effects on viewer access
and aesthetics.
Issacs stated that, at the request of Eric Marchegiani (APA), the
proposed study also included a public participation program which would
involve 1-2 sets of meetings to occur in Tyonek, Soldotna and Anchorage.
0
Q
Don Barrett (BIA) asked whether a specific time had been
set for the meetings in Tyonek.
-Jon Issacs (WCC) stated that the meetings would be
scheduled when subsistence activities slow down,
probably in the fall when villagers are present.
Don Barrett (BIA) questioned whether ADF&G had done
previous subsistence studies in the area.
-Jon Issacs (WCC) noted that the Subsistence Division of
ADF&G had been conducting studies in the area, as had
Darbyshire and Associates for a coal development study.
Eric Marchegiani (APA) commented that the question had been raised
as to whether a fly-over of the area could be arranged. He noted that
this had been done before, with the agency personnel providing their own
transportation to Shirleyville and APA providing helicopter transport
from there. He added that a site visit would be contingent upon receiv-
ing funding for the project.
Eric Marchegiani (APA) then opened the meeting for discussion and
asked about the suitability of the programs. He stated that four areas
of study had been identified including aquatic biology~ hydrology,
terrestrial wildlife and human resources. He requested that any comments
concerning the programs be brought out now for discussion, and that
formal written comments could be submitted later.
9597/020 10-13
Chakachamna Hydro List
July 26, 1983
Page 5
0
0
0
0
0
0
9597/020
Kevin Delaney (ADF&G) asked what type of studies were
being proposed for pink and chum salmon?
-Wayne Lifton (WCC) replied that outmigrant traps would
be used to determine the timing and numbers of out-
migrants.
Kevin Delaney (ADF&G) stated that for the Susitna Project,
Fyke nets had been successfully used to monitor downstream
migrants, and therefore suggested they be used for the
project. He cited the work of Dana Schmidt (ADF&G) which
indicated that Fyke nets were more effective than minnow
traps and electrofishing.
-Wayne Lifton (WCC) indicated that use of this method
would be investigated if funding becomes available.
Kevin Delaney (ADF&G) also noted that from a priority
standpoint, more years of aquatic information would be
needed than for terrestrial studies. He stated that the
objectives of the juvenile studies were right on line,
including the studies of distribution, abundance,
timing, smelting and habitat.
Bruce King {ADF&G) concurred with the objectives of the
program. In terms of priorities, King felt that primary
emphasis should be on adult enumeration and spawning dist-
ribution studies (last to be cut from the program).
He believed that the smolt outmigration studies could be
puton hold since outmigration is already ocurring. He
recommended that outmigrant studies be postponed until
next spring when the entire smolt outmigration could be
monitored. As an alternative, he suggested looking at
Chakachamna Lake fry.
Kevin Delaney (ADF&G) agreed with these priorities and
noted that the objectives of the resident and juvenile
anadromous fish studies would be to define the extent of
their distribution throughout the season.
Brad Smith (NMFS) asked whether one winter trip would be
sufficient for the studies.
Kevin Delaney (ADF&G) indicated that if money is to be
spent, it would be better to use it during the summer,
at or prior to breakup, rather than on exploratory winter
studies. He felt that during the winter, sample sizes are
too small and therefore no conclusions can be made.
Delaney felt that winter studies were best reserved for
looking at habitat.
10=14
Chakachamna Hydro list
July 26, 1983
Page 5
0
0
0
9597/020
Brad Smith (NMFS) noted that nothing specific was shown
related to fish passage in the study plan and asked
whether studies were planned.
-Bob Loder (Bechtel) stated that the best way to address
the problems of fish passage would be to meet with the
appropriate agencies. He stated that the passage
criteria would be based on the peak run with the
facilities designed to meet the criteria. Loder noted
that comments had been received concerning the proposed
facility but that recommended changes had not yet been
incorporated into the design. He stated that the
changes would be addressed in the next few weeks and
will be included in an addend~m report.
-Eric Marchegiani (APA) agreed that the best way to
establish criteria is to sit down with the agencies.
He then requested comments specific to the Hydrology
and/or the Terrestrial programs.
Don McKay (ADF&G) recommended that the terrestrial wild-
life program proceed using a planned approach. He stated
that their (ADF&G) comments would probably increase the
scope of work, and recommended a seeping session to
pinpoint details. McKay felt that the intent of the study
for FERC is to complete all required components. He thus
felt somewhat uneasy about prioritizing the studies since
the entire results would be needed at some time.
-Eric Marchegiani (APA) explained the potential funding
limitation for the Chakachamna Project, and stated that
APA had been criticized in the past for wasting money
on studies which had not been prioritized properly.
He then asked if the National Park Service had any
comments?
Floyd Sharrock (NPS) stated he detected, in the present-
ation on human resou.rces, some uncertainty as to whether
FERC dictates requirements for inventory and analysis, or
whether the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has
a say in the FERC requirements. Sharrock recommended
that the Advisory Council be approached first and ask
them for what they will require. He noted that the
Advisory Council will comment at any time and that they
should have already been contacted. Sharrock felt that a
statement of intent may be adequate and that it can make
this whole process more simple and straightforward with
less money being spent. He stated that the Compliance
Officer for the western states is located in Denver and
that he should be contacted. Sharrock asked Jon Issacs
(WCC) how the Anchorage (WCC) office related to the San
Francisco office, specifically to Ruth Ann Knudson?
10-15
Chakachamna Hydro List
July 26, 1983
Page 7
0
-Jon Issacs (WCC) noted that Ruth Ann Knudson is the
cultural resource specialist on the project and the
project and that she wrote the human resources section.
Issacs stated that Knudson would oversee the program.
Don Barrett (BIA) asked several specific questions con-
cerning the elevation of the lake, nature of the terrain
downstrea~ of the lake, and land ownership.
-Larry Rundquist {WCC) indicated the lake elevation to
be 1142 ft; terrain downstream of the lake is relatively
flat although the rivers are very steep in the Canyon.
-Jon IssaGs (WCC) added that the area around the lake and
1/4 mile from the river floodplain is a federal power
withdrawl area. Issacs noted that the remaining area
belongs to a mixture of landowners.
Eric Marchegiani (APA) reiterated the importance of providing
comments which will be used in prioritizing the program. He stated that
before going too far in defining and finalizing the program, another
meeting would be held to better define priorities. He stressed however,
that the availability of funds would largely dictate whether or not
specific comments could be addressed. The meeting was adjourned at
3:30 p.m.
10-16
9597/020
10.6 Distribution of Report -Comments and Responses
The distribution for this Addendum, Volume IV, will be
similar to that for Volumes I, II and III of the
Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project Interim Feasibility
Assessment Report.
Comments on Volumes I, II and III were received from the
following agencies by letters dated as indicated.
National Park Service, 20 May 1983;
Department of the Army, 23 May 1983;
Department of Environmental Conservation, 25 May 1983;
Department of Fish and Game, 26 May 1983;
Community & Regional Affairs, 31 May 1983;
Department of Natural Resources, 9 June 1983;
Department of Natural Resources, 14 June 1983.
Copies of the above letters are reproduced on the pages
following together with copies of the Power Authority's
responses to the Agencies' comments.
10-17
IN R.EPLY REPY.R TO:
United States Department of the Interior
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Alaska Regional Office
540 West Fifth Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
L3031 (ARO-P) 2 (l MAY )OC~
Mr. Eric P. Yould
Executive Director
Alaska Power Authority
334 West 5th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Dear Mr. Yould:
}
Staff of this office and the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve have reviewed
the Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project Interim Feasibility Assessment Report.
We have the following comments.
The cultural resources section is composed of a brief overview of the prehistory
and history of the project area, an evaluation that few factual data were
(are) available for reconstructions or for estimating impacts, and a recognition
of the need for field investigation prior to project activity. It would be
desirable and beneficial for analytical purposes to also include a statement
outlining the process that will be followed to inventory and evaluate cultural
resources, including coordination with the appropriate state and federal
agencies (the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation) should the project proceed.
We are pleased to note the attention being given to coordination with the
staff of the Lake Clark National Park and Preserve and to the analysis of
existing recreational use within the project area. While the study report
does recognize the close proximity of the project to the park, it does not
attempt to identify the potential primary and secondary impacts to park (wilder-
ness) resources. Perhaps the most obvious questions that should be addressed
are: What effects, if any, will occur as a result of the project construction
and operation to the fish and wildlife resources that normally gain access to
the park from the project area? And what effect(s), if any, will result from
an increased level of public use within the park as a result of improved ro~
access via the project roads which might later be linked to the Matanuska
Valley and Anchorage via a road from the lower Susitna River Valley to Tyonek?
Future study reports should attempt to quantify the potential project impacts
to park resources.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely, ~ ;,1
c...?k -1 t: IJ.lr:!~}C -fJ ~ Assoc&::: Regional Director
Planning, Recreation and Cultural Resources
cc:
Superintendent, lake Clark
10-18
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
334 WEST 5th AVENUE· ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501
Mr. Hugh L. Watson
Associate Regional Director
U.S. Department of the Interior
National Park Service
540 West Fifth Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
September 7, 1983
Subject: Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project
Dear Mr. Watson:
Phone: (907) 2n·7&41
(907) 276-0001
Receipt is acknowledged of your May 20, 1983, letter conveying
comments of your staff and that the Lake Clark National Park and
Presence on the March 1983, Interim Feasibility Assessment Report
of the above-referenced project.
When funding permits, a study plan for the cultural resources
studies to be performed in future project studies will be final-
ized. A first draft of the proposed study plan was transmitted to
you with our letter dated May 25, 1983. and discussed at the
meeting in our offices on June 8, 1983. We are pleased to note
that you were represented and participated in those discussions.
The final study plan will include revisions to reflect your
comments regarding the processes to be followed to inventory and
evaluate cultural resources and to coordinate with the State
Historic Preservation Officer and Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation.
Potential primary and secondary impacts on park resources will
be addressed, particularly those on fish and wildlife arising from
construction and operation of the project, and the effects result-
ing from increased public use created by imprQved overland access.
We appreciate having received your comments on the March 1983,
report and look forward to working closely with your staff when
funding permits some of these studies ~? proceed.
c?.u~lY
Eric P. Yould \
Executive Director
cc:• Mr. Robert Loder, Bechtel, San Francisco
Mr. Wayne Lifton, Woodward-Clyde, Anchorage
9782/057 10-19
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
ALASKA DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
POUCH 898
ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99506
May 23, 1983
JUU•LY TO
Hydropower and Comprehensive
Planning Section
Mr. Eric P. Yould
Executive Director
Alaska Power Authority
334 West 5th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Dear Mr. Yould:
hi::.. . \ --
'-' t: f L· I: •
..... l_l
I appreciate the opportunity to review the Chakachamna
Hydroelectric Project Interim Feasibility Assessment Report
furnished to this office on 12 April 1983.
Much time and effort has obviously gone into the prepara-
tion of this interim assessment report. I agree with you and
other interested parties that there are some problem areas
where more information and study are needed to permit a deter-
mination of project economic feasibility. Such studies would
include the considered outlet dike proposal, which would be
very sensitive to possible dike failure, and the most effective
movement of fishery resources through the outlet barrier.
Also; 1 presume a rock trap would be provided to prevent
b 1 as ted -,rock from being washed into the power tunne 1. Figure
3-4 of Volume I is unclear on this feature.
If further assistance is required, please do not hesitate
to contact Mr. Carl Borasll of Planning Branch .at 5"52-3461.
N E. Sa 1 i ng
Colonel, Corps of Engineers
District Engineer
10-20
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
334 WEST 5th AVENUE· ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501
Mr. Neil E. Saling, Colonel
Alaska District Corps of Engineers
Department of the Army
Pouch 898
Anchorage, Alaska 99506
September 7, 1983
Subject: Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project
Dear Colonel Saling:
Phone: (907) 2n·7641
(907) 276-0001
Receipt of your May 23, 1983, letter is acknowledged. Your
comments on the Feasibility Assessment Report for the project are
very much appreciated.
You cited the proposed outlet dike as an area where more
information and study are needed. We and our consulting engineers
fully agree in this regard and plans for future studies of the
project provide for additional surface and subsurface explorations
to be performed in this area. We are thinking in terms of design-
ing this dike as an 11 0verflow 11 or "flow through 11 type rockfill dike
in order to reduce its sensitivity to the possibility of a dike
failure. The provision of a spillway will limit the depth of
overflow that can occur and thus prevent the onset of conditions
that could lead to that type of failure.
In the natural process presently working at the lake outlet,
melting of the ice at the toe of Barrier Glacier causes the sand,
gravel and boulders being carried along in the ice flow to be
deposited in the outlet channel. A bar of gravel and boulders
builds up until the lake water level reaches Elev. 1,155 feet, or
thereabouts, after which a condition arrives where the gravel bar
is overtopped to a sufficient degree to cause a significant part of
it to be swept away and a lake outbreak flood such as the
August 12, 1971, event occurs. The process then repeats itself.
A barrier formed, as described above, would be composed of a
random assortment of particle sizes, and being deposited without
control, would be more sensitive to failure than an artificial
barrier constructed of selected materials under controlled condi-
tions. Subsurface explorations would be oriented to provide
information that would enable the design to guard against a piping
or blowout-type of failure. It should be borne in mind that dike
failure would cause a downstream flood no greater than has occurred
naturally with the breakout type of flood such as occurred in 1971.
9782/057
10-21
Mr. ~a 1 1 ng
September 7, 1983
Page 2
No attempt has been made to finalize details of the rock traps
for the lake tapping. Traditionally, the geometry selected would
have been based on a trap below the tunnel, but it was noted that
this arrangement may possess a number of disadvantages. When
details are carried further forward, it was planned to engage
Christian Groner as a special consultant in this field. He has
been involved in a significant number of lake taps.
It is intended to further study the provisions of fish passage
facilities past the outlet barrier in response to a number of
comments received from the State and Federal fishery agencies.
These will be covered in an addendum to the report schedule to be
issued in the near future.
S t.ti'tere 1 y,
ky~·d y '-_h
9
Executive Director
fiP cc:-Mr. Robert loder, Bechtel, San Francisco
Mr. Wayne Lifton, Woodward-Clyde, Anchorage
9782/057 10-22
rcDARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
ME.MORANDUM State of Alaska
TO:
FROM.
437 E Street/Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501
DATE: May 25, 1983 RL:CEIV~ Mr. Eric Yould, Director
Alaska Power Authority
FILE NO Chakachamna ~ .• ... ·. ·6: ~~ ·,r,;;~
\ ' -' _, ..... -~
Bob Martin, P.~
Deputy Directo~E6o
TELEPHONE NO:
SUBJECT:
274-2533
Chakachamna Iterim
Feasibility Report
March 1983
In reviewing the Chakachmna Iterim Feasibility Report, March, 1983,
the study provides an interesting overview of potential project
scenarios. However, in terms of detailed analysis, the report
poses more questions thar. answers. The environmental field studies
are extremely limited, providing a preliminary "reconnaisance level
only" review of possible project impacts. Considering that the
Department of Environmental Conservation was not invited to partici-
pate in any "environmental field study scoping process," it would
appear that what has been done to date was not intended to provide
a detailed project assessment.
Potential problems noted which would require a mitigation
strategy are as follows:
Exposure of the entire McArthur River stream delta during maximum
drawdown (45 1 below pre-project minimum flow);
-Inundation of lower stream reaches currently unaffected;
Increased turbidity during winter months in the McArthur River;
-Possible gas saturation in excess of 100% at powerhouse location;
-Increase in water temperature by • go C at powerhouse, above ambient
temperature in McArthur River;
-Possible turbidity increase due to increased glacial meltwater;
-Increased bed scour and bank erosion due to increased flooding of
the McArthur River.
In contrast to the excellent coordination and environmental field
effort for the Silver Lake Hydroe 1 ectri c project, the Chakachamna
project effort has been minimal at best. At such time as the Alaska
Power Authority decides to give serious consideration to the
Chakachamna project, the Department would be happy to work with you
in scoping out an effective environmental studies program.
0\oi/BM/jfr
10-23
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
334 WEST 5th AVENUE· ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501
Mr. Robert Martin~ P.E.
Deputy Director, EQO
State of Alaska
Dept. of Environmental Conservation
437 E. Street -Suite 200
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
September 7, 1983
Subject: Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project
Dear Mr. Martin:
Phone: (907) 2n·7641
(907) 276-0001
Receipt is acknowledged of your May 25, 1983, letter conveying
comments on the March 1983, Interim Feasibility Assessment Report
for the subject project.
You are entirely correct in noting that the project studies
have thus far been quite limited in scope and consequently the
report gives only a review of possible project impacts rather than
a detailed impact assessment.
The draft copy of the proposed study plan for the project
transmitted with my May 25, 1983, letter contains study elements
that will address the problems you noted requiring mitigation
strategy. We regret that you were unable to be represented at the
June 8, 1983, meeting when these plans for future studies were
discussed in an open workshop.
We shall be sure to notify you when further activities are
contemplated and shall look forward to your participation when
funding permits further studies of the project to go forward.
s:::v. u '-l_,-X
Eric P. Yould \
Executive Director
cc: 4Mr. aobert loder, Bechtel, San Francisco
Mr. Wayne Lifton, Woodward-Clyde, Anchorage
9782/057 10-24
1-t<12LH
BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR
Df:P.-\RT'tlf::'\T OF FISII :\ ~D Gt\ 'tiE PO BOX 32000
JUNEAU. ALASKA 99802
PHONE !907} 465-4700
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER
;
1·1ay 26, 1983
Alaska Power Authority
334 West 5th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Attention: Mr. Eric P. Yould, Executive Director
Gentlemen:
Re: Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project Interim Feasibility Assessment
Report
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the
Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project Interim Feasibility Assessment Report
dated March 1983 and offers the fcl1mving comments for ycur
consideration:
A. General
Overall, the paucity of quantitative data and general
conclusions presented in this Interim Feasibility Report
confirm the need for a far more encompassing and detailed
level of study effort designed to document fully fish and
wildlife species and their use of habitats within the study
area. The minimal field studies accomplished to date evidence
the need for more deta i1 ed, site-specific and 1 onger term
inventory data before a thorough understanding of the
pre-project and post-project conditions can be attained.
Additional study elements which are needed include the
collection of sufficient physical and biological environmental
information to accomplish an instream flow analysis. This
analysis would quantify the optimum flows required to maintain
spawning, rearing, migration and incubation habitat for
resident and anadromous fish species present within the
Chakachamna and McArthur Rivers.
In addition to the instream flow analysis, information
sufficient to quantify potential impacts to fish and wildlife
resources and public use attributable to the proposed project
should be presented. This information should be developed in
10-25
Mr. Eric Yould -2-May 26, 1983
enough detail to provide for the development of an effective
mitigation plan.
We understand that a study plan for the 1983/84 field study
program has been drafted and will soon be available for agency
review and comment. We look forward to the opportunity to
review and provide comments/recommendations on this study
plan.
B. Aquatic Biology
1. It does not appear that the study objectives outlined on
page 6-28 have been accomplished. Specifically the text
does not:
a. evaluate those species and habitats potentially
vulnerable to impacts that might occur during the
construction and operation of one of the proposed
alternatives;
b. provide an evaluation of
studies that would be
minimum amount of water
viable salmon fishery,
the nature and extent of
necessary to assess the
necessary to maintain a
c. identify critical habitats and · 1 ife functions
occurring within the system in sufficient detail for
use in evaluating potential impacts to such areas or
1 ife functions,
d. address in adequate deta i 1 the
hydraulic and biological studies
initiate the proposed I nstream Flow
the IFG Incremental Methodology.
C. Juvenile Salmon Studies
morphologic,
required to
Analysis using
1. The winter-spring sampling program was very sporadic.
The information presented does not appear to be based
upon a field program designed to sample systematically
those stations in stream reaches which are believed to be
important overwintering areas.
2. Presentation of the field data lacks pertinent analysis
parameters including the omission of sample size data and
the electrofishing and seining data are not addressed in
terms of catch per unit effort (CPUE). The text
discusses data without reference to tab 1 es or by
referencing the wrong tables; and the report contains no
summarization of juvenile catch data comparing seasonal
variation by sampling station.
10-26
Mr. Eric Yould -3-May 26, 1983
3. Conclusions drawn about habitat utilization by juveniles
during the winter and spring period are based on limited
and inadequate sample sizes. It appears that no effort
has been made to ana 1 yze the ravJ data to determine if
hypothesized changes are statistically significant or
simply a function of sample variability.
4. Techniques used to survey and evaluate smolt outmigration
(use of plankton nets) are inappropriate. More effective
and standard methods include the use of fyke nets,
inclined plane traps, and rigid smolt traps.
5. Hydroacoustic sampling on Chakachamna Lake was very
superficial and inadequate due to:
a. Use of only one sampling period for the study
duration;
b. Inadequate number of transects;
c. Species composition was not verified by other
sampling means (tow-netting, etc.);
d. Evaluation of juvenile presence and near surface
water column fisheries use was not performed. An
upward looking transducer would provide this
information.
D. Adult Salmon Studies
1. For the most part, fyke nets are not suitable for
obtaining a representative sample of adult salmon
migrating past sampling stations. Nets can only be
placed in areas of minimal current and as such do not
capture species which do not exhibit shore oriented
behavior.
2. Some of the techniques used (overflights and netting) do
not seem suitable for identification of potential
mainstem spawning in glacially occluded areas (and
subsequent enumeration of spawners). As a result, very
little effort has been made to evaluate the extent of
spawning in the mai"nstem Chakachamna and McArthur rivers.
Further, the discussion assumes all spawning occurred in
clearwater areas and, therefore, habitat requirements for
spawning are limited to those areas. The ADF&G, through
the Susitna Hydro Study, has developed highly successful
and efficient electroshocking sampling techniques which
would have application for the McArthur and Chakchamna
River inventories.
10-27
Mr. Eric Yould -4-May 26, 1983
3. Potential lake spawning was addressed only superficially
and in no way represents an adequate evaluation of that
possibility.
4. No data are presented concerning the "correcting" of
aerial counts by ground truthing (how much of each
spawning area worked, how often repeated, how did counts
compare, etc.).
5. No streaml ife data are presented in this report (number
tagged fish observed, frequency of observation, etc.).
This information directly affects escapement estimates
and should be well documented.
E. Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife -Mammals
The information presented in this report pertaining to
wildlife and human use of vii 1 dl ife does not meet the study
objective on page 6-59 which states: " ... to identify
important wildlife resources in the study area, their use of
the area, and the importance of identified vegetative and
aquatic communities to these resources." The data and
conclusions presented will not enable a meaningful assessment
of the potentia 1 project impacts on the wi 1 dl i fe resources,
their habitats or the secondary effects of public use of these
resources. The ADF&G believes that the level of effort used
to define existing wildlife use was not adequate to evaluate
fJlly wildlife use of the area. A two-week field program does
n·Jt allow enough time to quantify terrestrial mammal use of
S'JCh a large area displaying such a wide range of habitat
types. The species list compiled lacks several species known
to occur in this area including fox, hare, martin and weasel.
Table 6.2, page 6-7 should be amended to include these
species. Gray wolves are occasional users of this area and
should not be considered common users as indicated in table
6.2. Moose, bear and furbearer harvest statistics for the
study area should be included or summarized in this report.
The limited aerial survey data are suspect due to seasonal and
nocturna 1 variations. Methodologies used to identify moose
calving and wintering areas are also questionable. The
presence of juvenile skeletal remains should not be construed
to confirm a calving area nor should shed antlers be relied
upon to denote a moose wintering area.
In surrmary, while there are a significant amount of new data in this
report, they are not properly presented, and in some cases the
conclusions based on the data are questionable. In addition, given the
unplanned and sporadic nature of the data collection, conclusions drawn
based on this information may be of little value in determining the
potential effects of the proposed project on the anadromous fish
resources of the two drainages studied. We suggest that the report data
10-28
Mr. Eric Yould -5-May 26, 1983
be used as background for preparing a more detailed study plan which
will meet the objectives necessary to evaluate the project. We look
forward to working with the APA and its contractors to develop a study
plan to collect the information necessary to quantify impacts
attributable to the project and to develop an acceptable mitigation
plan.
Should you have questions or require clarification regarding our
comments, please contact Habitat Division Staff in Anchorage.
Sincere 1 y,
'0~ D ~J~.~ ,("L._oo~Coll i nsworY~
{' Commissioner
10-29
ALASKA POWER AUmORITT
334 WEST 5th AVENUE· ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501
The Honorable Don W. Collinsworth
Commissioner
State of Alaska
Dept. of Fish and Game
P.O. Box 3-2000 -
Juneau, Alaska 99802
September 12, 1983
Subject: Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project
Dear Conmi ss ioner Call inS\t~orth:
Phone: (907) 2n·7641
(907) 276-«)01
Receipt is acknowledged of your May 26, 1983, letter conveying
the comments of your Department on the Interim Feasibility Assess-
ment Report for the subject project.
During our December 9, 1983, meeting in Anchorage, it was
agreed that the Alaska Power Authority would develop a study plan
as considered necessary to meet Federal Energy Regulatory Commis-
sion (FERC) license application filing requirements. Our consult-
ing engineers and environmental advisors developed such a study
plan and it was transmitted to the various resource agencies by
letter dated May 25, 1983.
Subsequently, a meeting was called in our Anchorage office on
June 8, 1983. At this meeting a brief presentation covering the
study plan was made and representatives of the resource agencies
were then invited to participate in a workshop during which much
useful dialogue ensued. The study plan specifically addressed
collection of data that will provide the level of information
needed for detailed impact assessment and mitigation planning.
Commencement of the study plan is, however, dependent upon the
allocation of funds for its implementation.
We were pleased to receive your comments on the March 1983,
Interim Feasibility Assessment Report and offer the responses
discussed below by heading:
(B) Aquatic Biology -The initial studies conducted in 1981
and winter/spring 1982, were designed to address and to meet
the objectives mentioned insofar as the timing, budgets, and
authorization of the studies allowed. It is recognized that
such reconnaissance studies are not sufficient by themselves
to meet all of the study objectives. The proposed studies for
1983-84 are an expansion of those conducted in the summer/fall
9782/057 10-30
uon Cot t1nswortn
September 12, 1983
Page 2
of.1982, and are described in the recently prepared study plan
wh1ch was presented to representatives of your agency on
June 8, 1983. Instream flow studies have been identified as
important to meeting the project objectives, and baseline data
h~ve been collected on the morphology, hydraulics, and aquatic
b1ology of the Chakachatna and McArthur River systems. This
has led to a selection of river segments within which instream
flow study reaches will be selected. As stated in the study
plan, it is proposed to collect data in these study reaches
for analysis using the IFG Incremental methodology.
(C) Juvenile Salmon Studies -
1. The winter/spring 1982 sampling was conducted at a
reconnaissance level and on an ad hoc basis as funds
became available during the spring of 1982. These
studies were primarily exploratory in nature, with most
field programs of limited duration. The primary purpose
of the winter studies was to discover areas of potential
fisheries over-wintering habitat.
2. Since the data collected in winter/spring 1982 were
basically exploratory in nature, seasonal comparisons
with more detailed data collections were not warranted.
Equal sampling efforts for seining and electrofishing
were used at each station; catch per unit effort data for
these techniques were presented in Volume III,
Appendix AS of the March 1983 report. An errata sheet
for incorrect table references will be prepared and
issued with the Addendum to the report in the near
future.
3. Because the study was largely exploratory in nature,
no detailed prior statistical comparisons were planned
and we do not believe they were warranted at that time.
The data were purposely presented as observations related
to species presence and timing so that the reader would
not confuse the results with those of more detailed
studies to be conducted later.
4. Outmigrant sampling, as stated in the text, was
conducted briefly in different areas of the river systems
and by helicopter to aid in evaluating timing of
outmigration during a one-day investigation. We concur
that an inclined plane trap is a superior method for
conducting full-scale programs; an inclined plan trap was
utilized in the spring 1983 work, and provision for this
methodology is included in our 1983-84 study plan.
5. Weather and safety conditions during September 1983,
limited the type and extent of hydroacoustic studies that
Don Collinsworth
September 12, 1983
Page 3
could be done. The studies were originally planned to be
far more detailed. The hydroacoustic surveys proposed
for 1983-84 and presented in the study plan, address all
stated concerns.
D. Adult Salmon Studies -
1. During 1982, fyke nets were the only gear available
to the project. The nets provided useful data and, in
some instances, fished 50 to 100 percent of the stream.
As stated in the 1983 study plan, a combination of fish
wheels and fyke nets will be used for more detailed
studies.
2. Relatively low levels of effort were expended to
sample for mainstem spawning in areas where there was no
suitable substrate. Many areas of both rivers are also
unsuitable due to velocity or depth. Such areas include
the vast majority of both the McArthur and Chakachatna
River mainstem areas. We concur that electrofishing is
an efficient sampling technique in mainstem areas, and we
have used it for that purpose in both rivers. An
expanded electrofishing program is included in the
1983-84 study plan.
3. Lake spawning was only investigated in areas with
substrate suitable for sockeye salmon spawning. The
1983-84 study plan calls for more intensive studies in
the future.
4 & 5. These data will be supplied in a future report.
E. Terrestrial Vegetation and Wildlife -During September
1981, a two-week reconnaissance level survey was conducted on
the vegetation and wildlife at Chakachatna area. The intent
of this survey was to gain a basic understanding of species
presence and distribution, or absence. The results of the
survey were to be used for planning the scope and level of
effort for future studies. To date, funding for additional
terrestrial studies has not been available • .
A description of future studies was prepared and was
discussed with ADF&G representative at our June 8, 1983,
meeting. These studies included:
0
0
9782/057
The preparation of vegetation maps;
Aerial and ground transects to quantitatively
describe the wildlife resources; and
10-32
Don Collinsworth
September 12, 1983
Page 4
0 The use of a modified Habitat Evaluation Procedures
analysis to quantitatively describe anticipated
project impacts.
This program will be conducted during the course of a
year to identify seasonal changes in habitat availability and
use when funds become available.
Again, thank you for your comments on the March 1983, report.
We look forward to the continuing cooperation of your staff in the
implementation of our future studies for this project.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact
me or Mr. Eric Marchegiani.
CY .. ~
Eric P. Yould ~
Executive Director
cc: •Mr. -Robert toder, Bechtel, San Francisco
Mr. Way.ne Lifton, Woodward-Clyde, Anchorage
Mr. Don McKay, ADF&G, Anchorage
9782/057 10-33
MEMORANDUM State of Alaska
Community and Regional Affairs
TO Eric P. Yould, Executive Director DATE
Alaska Power Authority
Department of Commerce and EconQA.~~o:
Development
REC Ef'VlfBNENo
FROM ?' Lommi ss ioner suBJECT ~~~Regional JUN 0 9 1983
Affairs
Al.J.SKA POWER AUTliORITY
31 May 1983
Chakachamna Interim
Feasibility Study
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Chakachamna Interim
Feasibility Study. With regard to the study, and the major
hydroelectric project which it presents, this Department
submits the following comments for your consideration.
The report's introduction (p. 1-1) presents a study objective:
" ••• to provide a preliminary assessment of the effects that the
project would have on the environment". Further in the report,
the study environment is defined to include a component of
"Human Resources", as well as hydrology and biology. In
reading the study, we therefore anticipated the presentation of
a preliminary assessment of the effects of the development on
the human environment. In this case, the potentially~~ffected
human environment is represented at four different levels: by
the village of Tyonek; by the Kenai Borough: by the
Matanuska-Susitna Borough; and by the Municipality of Anchorage.
However, while this feasibility study did
thorough baseline portraits of these four
stopped short of any actual assessment of
of project development, either beneficial
the human .·resource.
include reasonably
human habitats, it
the potential effects
or detrimental, on
A final feasibility study for this proposed project should
include specific assessments of the effects of the development
on the human resource. Such assessments should be undertaken
and presented in such detail and manner so as to permit the
potentially4~ffected populations and their representatives to
clearly understand the implications of the development relevant
to their community(ies).
An example of the kind of further assessment that should be
undertaken is a comparison of the existing and potential
relationship between the wildlife resource and the use of that
resource for subsistance and commercial purposes. The Interim
feasibility study presents a detailed account of the area's
wildlife, particularly its fisheries resources. The study also
10-34
Mr. Eric P. Yould
31 May 1983
Page Two
indicates that the residents of Tyonek have a strong
subsistance relationship to that resource. However, a next
step should be taken which specifically relates the acquired
data on fisheries to the data on human use of that resource.
That is, who fishes for what kind of fish, when and where, and
how is the-fish used? Knowing this, a further step should be
taken which would superimpose the various development scenerios
onto the existing framework; assessing the possible range of
effects that the development could produce.
The final feasibility study should carry the human resource
assessments at least to this point. However, a further useful
step in the feasibility process would be the formulation and
assessment of possible strategies that~&ffected populations
could employ to obtain the maximum benefit (and minimum
detriment) from the development, should it actually occur.
Most importantly, the above described assessment and strategy
formulation process should include effective participation
opportunities for potentiallyA&ffected populations.
Three areas of concern for which the above process should be
employed are: 1) Tyonek village subsistance activity; 2) the
economics of commercial fisheries interests in Upper Cook
Inlet; and 3} increased service demands on the Kenai Peninsula
Borough resulting from construction and operations phases of
the project. We feel that it is appropriate and necessary that
the final feasibility study reflect a fundamental understanding
of the potential futures of these areas of concern relative to
the proposed hydroelectric project.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on the study.
10-35
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
334 WEST 5th AVENUE· ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501
The Honorable Mark Lewis
Corrrnissioner
State of Alaska
Community & Regional Affairs
Pouch B
Juneau, Alaska 99811
September 7, 1983
Subject: Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project
Dear Commissioner Lewis:
Phone: (907) 277-7641
(S07) 276-0001
Receipt is acknowledged of your memorandum dated May 31, 1983.
We were pleased to receive your comments on the March 1983, Interim
Feasibility Assessment Report for the subject project and have
carefully reviewed them. The Report had a limited set of objec-
tives which included:
0
0
0
0
Identify issues and conflicts to be addressed by project
studies;
Summarize available environmental data with additional
data gathered dependent on funding priorities;
Identify potential impacts without detailed analysis;
Compare project alternatives from engineering, economic
and environmental perspectives.
When sufficient funds can be allocated to this project, it is
intended to prepare baseline data for a Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission License application. At that time, impacts and mitiga-
tion measures, including those cited in your memorandum, will be
examined. Your concerns such as impacts on Tyonek, the Kenai
Peninsula and Mat-Su Boroughs and the Municipality of Anchorage
will be addressed as will the impacts on commercial fishing and
Tyonek subsistence activities. The preparation of development
scenarios, mitigation measures and public participation programs
and the definition of project benefits, would also take place at
that time. The draft of a proposed study plan for that work was
transmitted to you with our letter dated May 25, 1983. It is
regretted that you were unable to be represented at the June 8,
1983, meeting when that study plan was discussed.
9782/057 10-36
• The Honorable Mark Lewis
September 7, 1983
Page 2
We shall look forward to your participation and cooperation
when funding considerations permit some of these studies to pro-
ceed.
C\? J!L
Eric P. Yould j
Executive Director
cc: Mr. Robert Loder, Bechtel, San Francisco
Mr. Wayne Lifton, Woodward-Clyde, Anchorage
9782/057
10-37
·MEMORANDUM
DEPARTKEBT OP IATURAL RESOU'RCES
TO:
FROM:
Eric Tould
Executive Director
Alaska Power Authority
Roland Shanks l
Director !{!
State of Alaska
DIVISIOR OF RESEARCH AID DEVELOPMENT
DATE: June 9, 1983
FILE NO:
TELEPHONE NO:
SUBJECT:
The Department of latural Resources has reviewed the Chackachamna
Hydroelectric Project Interim Feasibilit,y Assessment Report. The
4epartment's clearinghouse, which is located in this division, has received
the following information.
The geologic hazards associated with this project are immense and difficult
to predict. Effects of an eruption of Mt. Spurr on the Barrior Glacier and
Chakach&mna Lake could be devastating to attempts to produce hydropower.
The project's proximity to the Castle Mountain Fault also needs to be
considered.
I hope that the tardiness of these comments doe& not affect their
usefulness. !he delay was due to probleu rl th the postal service and was
beyond our control.
cc: Gary Prokosch, SCDO
Gail Karch, DGGS
LV:rh
10-38
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
334 WEST 5th AVENUE· ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501
Mr. Roland Shanks
Director
Department of Natural Resources
Division of Research & Development
555 Cordova
Pouch 7-0005
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
September 7, 1983
Subject: Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project
Dear Mr. Shanks:
Phone: (907) 277·7641
(907) 276-0001
Thank you for your June 9, 1983, memorandum conveying your
comments on the Interim Feasibility Assessment Report for the above
referenced project.
Please rest assured that the Alaska Power Authority staff, and
our consulting engineers studying the project, are well apprized of
the hazards associated with an eruption of Mt. Spurr, and with the
seismic risk posed by the proximity of the Castle Mountain Fault.
The underground arrangement presently proposed for the project
should be less vulnerable than surface structures to seismic
damage. For example, a surface powerhouse in the McArthur Valley
would be subject to rock falls from the high valley walls above the
powerhouse during a seismic event.
Your comments are well taken and further investigations of
these phenomena are planned when funding permits that to be done.
C? ~
Eric P. Yould ~
Executive Director
cc: ~r. iobert Loder, Bechtel, San Francisco
Mr. Wayne Lifton, Woodward-Clyde, Anchorage
9782/057 10-39
MEMORANDUM State of Alaska
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
TO. ERIC MARCHEGIANI
Alaska Power Authority
FROM. ROLAND SHANKS I}
Director j' /I
DATE
FILE NO
TELEPHONE NO.
SUBJECT
June 1 4 , 1 983
RECEIVED
DNR 83053102
276-2653 ,· ~ N 2 0 1983
AL.ASK.·, PQW!;.P. /'JTHORITY Chakachamna Hydro
Project
The Department of Natural Resources has received the draft study plan of the
proposed hydroelectric project. Reviewers have two concerns:
Page B-8 What is the purpose of building a dike at the end of the
lake? If the dike is intended to raise the water level, this
may create problems by making Barrier Glacier unstable.
Page 13 We recommend that the study plan include an evaluation of
whether the glacier is thickening or thinning. Barrier
Glacier holds back the lake. If the glacier moves, then the
lake moves also.
Please contact Gail March at the Division of Geological and Geophysical
Survey, 474-7147, if you have any questions.
RS/LW/dpj
02-00IA (Rev 10179) 10-40
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
334 WEST 5th AVENUE· ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 Phone: (9<m 2n-7641
(907) 276-0001 September 7, 1983
Mr. Roland Shanks, Director
Department of Natural Resources
Division of Research & Development
555 Cordova
Pouch 7-0005 SEP 1 9 1983 Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Subject: Chakachamna Hydroelectric Project
Dear Mr. Shanks:
ft T. LODER
Receipt is acknowledged of your memorandum dated June 14, .
1983, conveying two comments on the Interim Feasibility Assessment
Report. Our response is as follows:
(1)
(2)
Page B-8. Building a dike at the end of the lake, near its
present outlet, is proposed for several reasons, principal
among which is the need to develop regulatory storage that
will enable surplus water to be stored during the high runoff
months and then be diverted for power generation during the
low runoff months. The dike would not cause the water level
in the lake to rise above the maximum level to which it has
risen in the past under natural conditions. Thus, the Barrier
Glacier would not be exposed to lake water levels any higher
than it has in the past. As may be seen by reference to the
Appendix to Section 4.0, Power Studies, in Volume I of the
report, Alternative E, Page 1, the mean lake level during
operation of the power plant in the 30-year period study would
have been Elev. 1,130 feet. According to the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) records, the mean water level at the lake outlet
gauge was 1,139 feet so that operation of the lake for power
generation would have caused a net lowering of about 9 feet in
the mean water level during that period.
Page 13. Plans for future studies of the project provide for
measurements of ablation, advance or retreat of the glacial
ice in the vicinity of the lake outlet. Ice thicknesses were
measured by the USGS in 1981, but the results have not yet
been released.
~rely,Q ~\. \~\._JJ
Eric P. Youl d "\
Executive Director
cc: ~r. Robert loder, Bechtel, San Francisco
~r. Wayne Lifton, Woodward-Clyde, Anchorage
9782/057 10-41
ADDENDUM TO VOLUME II
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Volume II, Errata
6.8.3.1.4 Spring Studies June 8-11, 1982
Page No.
6-167
6-170
6-172
6-173
6-174
6-174
6-175
6-175
6-175
6-176
Page 6-170, Chi1ligan River, third line "Table 19"
should read "Table 20."
Page 6-171, Chakachatna River, second paragraph,
third line, "Table 22" should read
"Table 23."
Page 6-173, McArthur River Drainage, second
paragraph, first line, "Table 33" should
read "Tables 32 and 33."
Supplementary Table References
Location Volume III Table Reference
Straight Creek Appendix A3 -Table 13
Another River Appendix A3 -Table 18
Lower Chakachatna Appendix A3 -Table 26
River
Straight Creek Appendix A3 -Table 31
McArthur R. Sta. 11.5 Appendix A3 -Table 36
McArthur R. Sta. 11 Appendix A3 -Table 37
Chakachatna R. Sta. 17 Appendix A3 -Table 39
Middle River Appendix A3 -Tables 40
& 41
Straight Creek Clear-Appendix A3 -Table 42
water Tributary
McArthur River Appendix A3 -Tables 43,
44, & 45
6-1
6.10
6.10.1
ENVIRONMENTAL HYDROLOGY -1983
Introduction
The purpose of this section is to describe the
hydrologic studies conducted in the late fall,
winter, and spring of 1982-83 (FY83) in support of
the environmental program leading toward the
feasibility assessment of the Chakachamna Lake
Hydroelectric Project. The overall objective of the
environmental hydrology studies was to collect
baseline data to assist in future evaluation of the
physical processes of the Chakachatna and McArthur
River systems, correlation of these processes with
fish and wildlife habitats, and to aid in the design
of future studies. Previous environmental hydrology
studies are summarized in Volume II, Sections 6.2 and
6.7 of the 1983 Interim Feasibility Assessment (1983
IFArt) Report.
The study area is described in Volume II, Sections
6.1 and 6.2 (1983 IFAR). The FY83 winter/spring
hydrologic studies were conducted on the Chakachatna
River at the Chakachamna Lake outlet and on the
McArthur River downstream of the powerhouse location.
The studies at these sites concentrated on baseline
data collection of stream flow and water temperature.
Two recording gages (Datapod Model DP211SG dual
channel recorders) were used to record water stage
and temperature at the two study sites. The
installation and initial data collection of these
recorders is discussed in Volume II, Section 6.7.2 of
the 1983 !FAR.
6-2
6.10.2 Stream Flow Characteristics
Collection of streamflow data was initiated in 1982
with the installation of two recording gages and
numerous staff gages distributed through the
Chakachatna and McArthur River systems. A single
discharge measurement was taken in October at a
number of the sites to form the basis of preliminary
rating curves. These discharges, along with
comparable discharges measured in September 1981,
were presented in Section 6.7 of the report.
Additional discharge measurements were made in Spring
of 1983 at five sites in the project area (Table
6.85}. Two of these measurements were conducted at
the two recording gage sites; these were used to
improve the reliability of the rating curves at these
sites.
Chakachatna River. The preliminary rating curve used
to calculate the Chakachatna River discharges
reported in Section 6.7 (1983 IFAR} was revised based
on the additional discharge measurement conducted in
spring of 1983 and on a review of u.s.G.s. rating
curves. The stages corresponding to the two
discharges were adjusted to approximately the same
reference elevation as the u.s.G.S. gage reference
elevation by adding 7 ft. to the datapod readings.
The zero datapod reading does not correspond to a
zero discharge because the datapod was installed in
the existing u.s.G.S. gage stilling well, which did
not extend all the way to the bottom of the channel.
The adjustment shifts the stage corresponding to a
zero discharge on the datapod to 7 ft. below the
datapod, close to the actual stage for zero flow.
The two measured discharges and corresponding
6-3
adjusted stages were found to fit closely to the
rating curve developed for the period June 1959 to
May 1960 by the u.s.G.s. This curve was based on six
discharge measurements and was considered by the
u.s.G.S. to be fairly well defined between 800 cfs
and 14,000 cfs. Although the U.S.G.S. rating curves
shifted from one year to the next, they tended to
have similar shapes. It was assumed that using the
U.S.G.S. rating curve for the 1959-60 period would be
preferable to using a rating curve based on only two
measurements in 1982-83. The resulting rating
equations are:
Q = 1.09 (Sd + 7)3.28
for 0 s 6.2 and -d-+ 7)2.34 Q = 12.26 (Sd
for 6.2 sd 15
where
Q = computed discharge, in cfs and
Sd = stage recorded on the datapod, in ft.
The rating curve equations were applied to the stage
values recorded by the datapod from its installation
on 11 August 1982 through 17 May 1983. The resulting
mean daily discharges are presented in Table 6.86,
which supersedes the Chakachatna River values
presented in Table 6.26 (1983 IFAR) based on the
preliminary rating curve. The discharge hydrograph
for this period is shown in Figure 6.144. Discharge
records for the period August through September are
considered poor due to the lack of discharge
measurements to verify the rating curve. Discharge
records after November are considered very poor due
to lack of discharge measurements and insufficient
depth of water over the gage.
6-4
The stilling well housing of the Chakachatna River
gage was destroyed by ice and/or rock falls on or
about 17 May 1983. The lower sections of the
stilling well were severed from the upper sections at
a level roughly 10 to 12 ft. above the level of the
gage. The transducer and connector cable for the
datapod unit were damaged in the process. The unit
was retrieved on 26 May 1983 for repair. The
repaired unit was reinstalled on 18 June 1983 on the
opposite bank with the pressure transducer at a lower
level. The damaged unit precluded the opportunity to
check the unit for drift of the transducer readings.
McArthur River. The preliminary rating curve used to
calculate the McArthur River discharges presented in
Volume II, Section 6.7 (1983 IFAR) does not need to
be revised based on the discharge measured in April
of 1983. The measured discharge fit the straight
line log-log relationship defined by a single field
measurement, which was supplemented by a number of
values computed using the Manning equation. The
equation for this rating curve, which is applicable
to the condition of having sand dunes in the channel
(see Volume II, Section 6.7.3 1983 IFAR) for a
discussion of these dunes), is as follows:
Q = 6.59 sd 3.85
where
Q = computed discharge, in cfs, and
sd = stage recorded on the datapod, in ft.
A rating curve was also developed for the period
prior to the mid-September 1982 flood when there were
no sand dunes in the cross section at the gage. This
6-5
curve was based only on discharge values calculated
from the Manning equation. There were no measured
discharges at this cross section prior to the
mid-September flood. The resulting rating curve can
be written:
o = 141.1 sd 1 •81
where Q and sd are as defined above. It is assumed
for both curves that the discharge is zero when the
gage is zero (no offset constant); this assumption
appears reasonable based on observations at the site.
Surveyed water surface elevations were compared with
datapod readings to check for drift on the datapod's
pressure transducer; a drift of almost 1.5 ft. was
calculated from June 1983 measurements. Adjustments
to the datapod readings were made assuming linear
drift at a rate equal to that during the period from
6 April to 19 June 1983. Based on these assumptions,
the datapod readings were adjusted by a constant
amount each day beginning on 24 September 1982.
The Adjusted stage values were input to the
applicable rating curve equation to compute the
corresponding mean daily discharges (Table 6.87).
This table supersedes the McArthur River values
presented in Table 6.26 (Volume II, 1983 IFAR). The
discharge hydrograph for this period is shown in
Figure 6.145. Discharge records are considered poor
due to the lack of discharge measurements defining
the rating curves and the shifting bed.
The datapod gage was replaced on 29 June 1983 to
allow for servicing of the drift in the old
6-6
6.10.3
transducer. The new datapod unit was installed a
short distance upstream of the previous gage.
Selection of the new gage site was based on (1) the
desire to install the gage in a way that it could
more easily be removed for servicing and (2) finding
a cross section with a lower potential for sediment
deposition.
Water Temperature
Water temperatures were measured on a continuous
basis at the recording gage locations on the
Chakachatna and McArthur Rivers. The daily
fluctuations during the late summer and fall are
presented in Section 6.7.4, Volume II, 1983 IFAR.
Water temperature data for the late fall and winter
period at the Chakachatna and McArthur River gage
locations are presented in Tables 6.88 and 6.89,
respectively of this addendum.
Water temperature in the Chakachatna River decreased
to near 0°C by early December. Insufficient depth of
water over the transducer limits the usefulness of
the temperature data after that time. Water
temperatures in the McArthur River decreased to 0°C
by early November, began to increase in early April
and exceeded 4.0°C by mid-May.
6-7
6.11
6.11.1
6.11.1.1
6.11.1.2
AQUATIC BIOLOGY -1983
Introduction and Objectives
Two aquatic biology studies were conducted during
1983; one during winter 1983, and the other during
spring 1983.
Winter Study
During April 1983 a brief winter field study was
carried out with a limited scope of work. This study
was carried out in conjunction with environmental
hydrology studies and was designed to supplement work
carried out during the fall of 1982 (Volume II, 1983
IFAR). The objectives of this study were:
~ Extend the data base on habitat use and seasonal
distribution of fish;
, Examine the success of spawning and incubation at
selected sites;
~ Extend the data base on habitat characteristics
and water quality including water temperatures in
salmon incubation areas.
Spring 1983 Study
This study was carried out in the period of mid-June
to early July, with the start date based upon permit
authorization. Studies were carried out under FYB3
funds and were terminated when the authorized
scope-of-work had been met. These studies were
6-8
conducted to the extent feasible, (and authorized} at
the level of effort described in the 1983 study plan
(Alaska Power Authority, 1983}.
This level of effort included more stations than
sampled during 1982 and more sample replicates. The
study program objectives are described below by
program task.
6.11.1.2.1 Adult Anadromous Fish
Although this program was not included in the
original scope of work, the presence of adult
anadromous fish within the river systems allowed
opportunistic data collection to increase the
information available about the early migration of
salmon into the Chakachatna and McArthur River
Systems. The objectives of the program were:
~ Determine the timing of upstream migrations by
adult anadromous fish;
~ Determine migratory pathways within the Chakachatna
and McArthur River Systems as efforts permitted;
and
, Estimate the escapement to spawning areas in
sloughs, tributaries, and mainstream areas as time
permitted.
6.11.1.2.2 Resident and Juvenile Anadromous Fish
This program was carried out at a greater level of
effort than in previous studies (see Section 6.11.2).
6-9
Since the program consisted of only one time period
it was designed to contribute to meeting the following
objectives:
~ Determine the relative seasonal distribution and
abundance of R&JA fish;
, Identify important rearing areas of R&JA fish; and
' Identify movement patterns of R&JA fish.
Outmigrants were also studied. Due to the timing and
duration of the study, a limited amount of data was
collected to meet the overall objectives of:
' Determine the timing of outmigration of salmon
juveniles; and
1 Quantify the number of juveniles migrating to sea.
6.11.1.2.3 Habitat Data Collection
6.11.2
This program was directed at measuring the physical
characteristics of habitats at each sampling station.
The overall objective was to Determine the use and
characteristics of important habitats and characterize
these in terms of stream-flow variables.
Methodology
Methodologies used during the winter and spring 1983
studies were basically similar to those used during
the 1982 summer-fall fisheries program. Where
methods used were the same these have been referenced
6-10
6.11.2.1
6.11.2.2
to Volume II, 1983 IFAR. Where methods or intensity
differed, the differences are discussed below. The
study periods during which each gear was operated are
noted in Tables 6.90 and 6.91. The sampling stations
used in this study are shown in Figure 6.146 with
details of the McArthur tributaries shown in Figures
6.147 and 6.148.
Salmon Spawning Escapement. Although estimation of
salmon spawning escapement during the spring
(June-July) 1983 studies was not included in the
scope of work, observations and counts were made on
an opportunistic basis. Methodology generally
followed that used during 1982 (see Volume II,
Section 6.8.2.1, 1983 IFAR). Ground-truthing was
performed for species identification at each site,
but counts were not ground-truthed during these
surveys.
Fyke Nets
During the spring 1983 study, fyke nets were set as a
supplement to electrofishing and minnow trap
sampling. Nets were initially set at stations lD, 4,
and 6 for dates shown in Table 6.91. The methodology
used to fish and sample these nets was the same as
that used during the summer-fall 1982 program (Volume
II, Section 6.8.2.2 1983 IFAR). Difficulties with
heavy debris loads associated with increasing flows
occurred at all three stations, and moving sand dunes
in the McArthur River were a problem at station lD.
These problems resulted in early removal of the nets.
6-11
6.11.2.3
6.11.2.4
Minnow Traps
Minnow trap methodology for the winter 1983 study was
the same as that employed during the 1982 studies
(Volume II, Section 6.8.2.3, 1983 IFAR). Four
replicate traps were set at each station listed in
Table 6.90.
For the spring 1983 study, the methodology was
altered in accordance with the draft Chakachamna
Hydroelectric Project Feasibility Study Environmental
Study Plan (APA, 1983). As stated in that plan, the
number of sampling stations below Chakachamna Lake
was increased from 26 to 40 (Figure 6.147). Ten
baited minnow traps were set at each station (Table
6.91). The minnow traps used were 43.2 x 22.9 em (17
x 9 in), with 1.6 mm (0.063) in mesh. These traps
were set overnight (24 hours) and each set was
considered a unit of effort.
Electrofishing
Electrofishing during the April and spring studies
generally followed the same methodology used during
1982 (Volume II, Section 6.8.2.6, 1983 IFAR). During
the April study, electrofishing was used to
supplement minnow trap collections, particularly in
those areas where turbidity, cover objects, or depth
did not allow an adequate determination of fish
abundance by observation.
During the spring 1983 study, electrofishing was used
at all stations sampled (Table 6.91). Three
replicate collections were made at each of the
6-12
6.11.2.5
6.11.2.6
resident and juvenile anadromous fish sampling
stations below Chakachmna Lake. Electrofishing was
generally used by means of localized intermittent
application of electrodes to avoid the effect of
"driving" the fish. Electrofishing collections were
standarized to a catch-per-effort of number of
fish/100 shocking-seconds/replicate (100/s-S).
Gill Nets
Vertical experimental gill nets were used for
sampling fish in Chakachamna Lake during the winter
1983 study. The nets consisted of vertically
oriented panels of nylon monofilament netting of
varying mesh sizes. The mesh sizes on each net were
ordered on the basis of a randomized block design
with each mesh size appearing twice on each net. The
nets were 3.0 m wide by 51.2 m long (10 by 168 ft).
Meshes used were 1.3 em (0.5 in), 2.5 em (lin), 3.8
em (1 1/2 in), 5.1 em (2 in), 6.4 em (2 1/2 in), 7.6
em (3 in), and 8.9 em (3.5 in). Each net was made to
be deployed using a weighted pipe at the bottom with
rigid horizontal spreaders set perpendicular to the
vertical axis along the length of the net. The top
of the net was floated and anchored to the ice cover
with ice screws. Net effort consisted of a 24 hour
set. No fish were caught by this technique during
the April study.
Inclined Plane Trap Outmigrant Sampling
An inclined plane trap was utilized to sample for
outmigrants during the spring 1983 study. The trap
was deployed at station lD and operated from mid-June
6-13
through early July (Table 6.91). The inclined plane
smolt trap is similar in design to that used by ADF&G
Commercial Fisheries Division at Crescent Creek.
Similar designs have been shown to be effective for
sampling the downstream migration of salmon smolt in
turbid glacial rivers in Alaska (Meehan, 1964).
The trap (Figure 6.149) is suspended in the water
column on each side by floats (pontoons) made of
styrofoam and plywood 2.2 m (86 in) long. A frame
located slightly in front of the trap center supports
a winch system to raise and lower the front of the
trap. The trap consists of a perforated aluminum
plate floor (0.8 em, 0.3 in dia. holes} 2.4 m (9.6
in) long and 1.2 m (4 ft) wide at the mouth tapering
to the rear where it attaches to the live box. This
floor is inside an aluminum frame to which 1.3 em
(0.5 in) mesh wire netting is attached forming the
trap sides. The live box is suspended in the water
by adjustable styrofoam and plywood floats. The 1.2
m (4.0 ft) long, 0.9 m (3ft) wide, and 0.6 m (2ft)
deep box has a plywood bottom and perforated aluminum
plate sides (0.3 em, 0.125 in diameter holes). A
10.3 em (4.1 in) mesh net held in place by a frame is
placed inside the box. This net is removable for
fish collection. The entire assembly is anchored in
place.
Fish were removed daily from the live box and
processed, water depth and velocity were also
measured to estimate flow through the trap. The trap
was cleaned daily and moved if the water depth had
changed due to rising water or bed load movement.
Such changes were not unusual due to the increasing
flow and shifting sand in that portion of the river.
6-14
6.11.2.7
6.11.2.8
Habitat Data Collection
Habitat data were collected in the same manner as
described in Volume II, Section 6.8.3, 1983 IFAR. In
addition to those data previously collected,
measurements of incubation habitat were made during
the winter 1983 field trip. Incubation data were
collected by means of 2.5 em (1.0 in) inner diameter,
1.0-2.0 m (3.3-6.6 ft.) long standpipes installed in
previously identified spawning areas. These
standpipes were installed with their openings as deep
as 0.4-1.0 m (1.5-3 ft) below the surface of the
substrate. The standpipes were "bailed-out" by means
of a hand pump and intergravel water temperature was
measured within the standpipe.
Data Management and Analysis
Data management and analysis for the winter and
spring 1983 studies had the same objectives and were
generally similar to these reported in Volume II,
Section 6.8.2.11, 1983 IFAR. Data management was
conducted using the INFO database management system
on the Prime computer. Statistical analyses were
carried out using the Statpro and BMDP statistical
packages. The basic analysis used was Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) with individual comparisons made by
group variance-adjusted (Bonneferoni) probabilities.
Habitat utilization data were summarized by
Woodward-Clyde Consultant's computer programs
following methodologies described by Baldridge (1981)
and Bovee and Cochnauer (1977).
6-15
6.11.3
6.11.3.1
Results
The two studies conducted in 1983, were carried out
at different levels of effort using a somewhat
different set of stations and are therefore presented
separately below.
Winter 1983 Study
Winter studies were carried out during April 5-11,
1983 primarily to provide supplementary information
on the seasonal distribution and habitat use of fish
in the study area. Site specific data collection on
incubation and overwintering habitats were emphasized.
Sampling was generally conducted where site access
was available and at a reduced level of effort as
compared to that used during the summer-fall 1982
studies. Oata collections were made on an
opportunistic basis and emphasized those areas where
spawning was observed or where potential overwintering
sites had been located based on previous data (see
Volume II, Section 6.8.3.2., 1983 IFAR).
6.11.3.1.1 Resident and Juvenile Anadromous Fish
Studies of seasonal fish distribution and
examinations for successful incubation were conducted
using a variety of methods including minnow traps,
electrofishing, observation, dip netting and vertical
gill netting. Stations were selected for sampling on
the basis of accessibility, time, and budget
constraints. Results of collections made by these
methods are presented in Appendix B2, catch per
effort (c/f) data for these results are presented in
6-16
Appendix B3. Vertical gill net results are not
presented because no fish was caught using this
method. Dates of gear deployment for this study are
presented in Table 6.90.
Results of the studies are discussed by species below.
Dolly Varden. During April, age 0+ Dolly Varden
had generally reached the stage of complete yolk-sac
resorption. In some sloughs and tributaries, the age
0+ fish were found to be free-swimming in the water
column, while in other areas they appeared to remain
within the interstices of the substrate and could
only be observed or collected by the use of
electrofishing. Incubation was apparently complete
at that time.
Other Dolly Varden collected were limited to those
fish no older than age II+. Older Dolly Varden had
apparently moved to areas of the river systems that
were still ice covered, or they moved into marine
waters. There was mark-recapture evidence that at
least one adult fish had moved through marine waters.
Dolly Varden were widely dispersed throughout the
river systems. Largest numbers of Dolly Varden
collected by minnow traps were found in the upper
Chakachatna River, Noaukta Slough, and the upper
McArthur River. This distribution was similar to
that found during the October 1982 sampling (Volume
II, Section 6.8.3.2.2, 1983 IFAR). At that time, the
largest catches of Dolly Varden were made in the
Upper McArthur River, Noaukta Slough and mid-
Chakachatna River reaches (Table 6.63, Volume II,
IFAR) •
6-17
Dolly Varden were sampled at accessible sampling
stations by means of observation, minnow traps, and
electrofishing (Appendices B2 and B3). Minnow trap
sampling indicated that Dolly Varden collections
(Table 6.92) were not significantly different in c/f
(pl0.90). Examination of the distribution of Dolly
Varden caught by minnow traps among reaches (Table
6.93) indicated that the differences in c/f by reach
were of marginal significance (p_0.09). However, the
largest c/f for Dolly Varden, 2.25 fish/trap/day
occurred in the upper Chakachatna River reach. The
c/f was approximately twice as great as at any other
station and was significantly greater than most
stations (p_0.07 to 0.01). The exceptions were the
Noaukta Slough (p_O.l4) and the Upper McArthur River
(p_O.l8) reaches. The catches at those stations were
1.08 and 1.13 fish/trap/day, respectively.
Electrofishing (Table 83-1, Appendix B3) conducted at
the same time indicated the general absence of large
Dolly Varden as were observed during the October 1982
field program. It is likely that the larger
anadromous Dolly Varden had moved downstream to
deeper, ice-covered waters, or had left fresh water
by that time. The reduced turbidity present during
the study period allowed aerial observations to be
conducted to confirm the absence of these larger fish
in the upper McArthur River. The recapture of an
adult Dolly Varden tagged during August 1982 outside
of the McArthur and Chakachatna River drainages
during this period suggested movement of adult Dolly
Varden into marine and other fresh waters.
6-18
Electrofishing operations resulted in the collection
+ of age 0 Dolly Varden that were apparently not
vulnerable to minnow trap collections. The
collection of small age o+ Dolly Varden from the
substrate interstices was evidence of successful
spawning and incubation in those areas. Collections
of such Dolly Varden were made at stations 15, 17 (by
dip net alone, Table B2-3, Appendix B2), 40A and 42.
The distribution of Dolly Varden as collected by all
sampling methods is shown in Table 6.94. The
percentage occurrence of Dolly Varden at stations
sampled during April was 66.7 percent (Table 6.95),
which was only matched by coho salmon.
Examination of Dolly Varden occurrence on a reach
basis (Table 6.96) indicated that they occurred in
all reaches sampled during this study.
Coho Salmon. Coho salmon were widely dispersed in
lower portions of both river systems. The greatest
numbers of older fish (age II+) were collected in
the Noaukta Slough and Middle River. Fry were found
at varying stages of development in the spawning
areas examined. These were found ranging from fry
with prominent yolk-sacs to free-swimming juveniles
with fully resorbed yolk-sacs.
Coho salmon were widely dispersed during the winter.
They were found at 66.7 percent of all sampling
stations (Table 6.95) but were not found in all
reaches (Taole 6.96). Coho salmon have not been
found in the Chakachatna River Canyon during any
study, nor have they been observed to spawn above
this area.
6-19
Analysis of collections of coho salmon juveniles made
by means of minnow traps indicated that there were
statistically significant differences between
stations (p 0.0001). Significantly greater (p 0.001)
numbers of juvenile coho salmon were found in station
4 in the Middle River (c/f of 4.50 fish/trap/day)
than at any other station. Collections of coho
salmon from stations a and 16A in the Noaukta Slough
were significantly (p 0.01} larger than those found
at the remaining stations with c/f's of 1.75, and
1.25 fish/trap/day, respectively.
Cono salmon collected at station 4 (Middle River)
consisted primarily of a mix of age I+ and II+
fish. Coho collected from stations a and 16A were
primarily age II+ fish. Coho collected from other
locations were primarily age I+ fish.
Examination of coho salmon captures by reach (Table
6.93} did not show a significant difference between
reaches (pl0.66). This is likely attributable to the
high variability in captures among stations within
reaches.
Comparison of the distribution of coho juveniles
collected by minnow traps by reach between April 19a3
and October 19a2 (Volume II, Table 6.63, 1983 lFAR)
shows some differences in c/f among reaches. The
absence of significant differences between reaches
precludes any meaningful interpretation of the
numerical differences.
Electrofishing was successful in collecting age 0+
and I+ coho from most other stations (Appendix B2l
6-20
sampled. + The presence of age 0 coho fry and parr
at station 15, 17, and 42 suggested that successful
spawning and incubation had occurred in these areas.
At the time of collection, many coho had not
completed yolk-sac resorption, while others had and
were free-swimming in the water column.
Chinook Salmon. Chinook salmon were caught at only
two sampling stations~ station 15 in the McArthur
River Canyon (one age a+ fry) and station 19 (one
age I+ parr} in the clearwater tributary to
Straight Creek (Figure 6.146).
Some juvenile chinook salmon have been collected from
station 15 previously (Volume II, 1983 !FAR),
suggesting the probable presence of some limited
spawning there. Extensive electrofishing at station
19 failed to detect any other chinook juveniles.
Electrofishing in station 19 was conducted in an area
where many chinook salmon had been observed
spawning. Since this area was subject to a major
channel alteration during September 1982 flooding
(Volume II, 1983 IFAR}, it is likely that a
significant loss of juvenile production may have
occurred as a result of that flood (extensive
sampling was also conducted through this area during
spring 1983, see Section 6.11.3.2.2).
Sockeye Salmon. As in previous studies (Volume II,
1983 IFAR), sockeye salmon juveniles were not
vulnerable to capture by minnow traps. Sampling by
means of electrofishing and dip nets (Appendix B2)
resulted in collection of age a+ sockeye at
stations 15 (upper McArthur River), 17 (sloughs near
6-21
DNR bridge site, Chakachatna River) and 42 (Stream
12.1, tributary to the McArthur River, Figure
6.146). The sockeye collected, consisted of fish in
varying stages of yolk-sac resorption, ranging from
those with prominent yolk-sacs to those with
yolk-sacs fully resorbed (button-up stage). At each
location sampled, full development of sockeye fry was
still incomplete.
Chum Salmon. Juvenile chum salmon were collected at
station 17 (Figure 6.146) in sloughs of the
Chakachatna River. Chum salmon were collected by dip
net and electrofishing. The age 0+ chum salmon
were found in varying stages of yolk-sac resorption,
although many of the chum salmon had fully resorbed
their yolk-sacs. Chum juveniles, in general, were
more fully developed than other salmon species. The
mean length of chum salmon collected ranged between
3.90 and 4.05 em (Appendix B2).
Rainbow Trout. One rainbow trout juvenile was
collected during the April study. This was an age
I+ juvenile found in station 40A (Stream 13u,
Figure 6.147).
Pygmy Whitefish. Pygmy whitefish have generally been
abundant and widely dispersed in collections made in
these river systems. However, during the April study
only one juvenile pygmy whitefish was collected at
station 22 (Table 6.94). The reason for the paucity
of pygmy whitefish in collections is unclear.
6-22
6.11.3.1.2 Habitat Data Collection
Detailed habitat observations and measurements were
routinely made in conjunction with electrofishing and
minnow trap collections to aid in establishing a data
base for characterizing fish habitat relationships.
Habitat data collected included water temperature,
dissolved oxygen, conductivity, turbidity, water
depth, water velocity, river stage {staff gage
reading) , substrate, cover and the presence/absence
of upwelling or slough flow. Measurements were taken
at the same locations at which fish sampling was
conducted. The methodology employed in collecting
habitat data was discussed in Section 6.8.2 {Volume
II, 1983 !FAR).
Water Quality. This section summarizes water quality
for the April field trip at collecting stations
{including Chakachamna Lake) during the time of
sampling. As stated in Section 6.8.2 (Volume II,
1983 !FAR), water quality data were collected at each
station at the time fish were sampled.
A water quality profile was also taken in Chakachamna
Lake near mid-lake {Table 6.97). At the time of
sampling, there was a 0.6m {2.0 ft) ice cover present.
Data collected from Chakachamna Lake indicated
considerable variability among certain parameters.
The water temperature profile indicated that the
highest water temperature occurred close to the
bottom, this was also observed during the March 1982
study {Table 6.34, Volume II, 1983 IFAR). Near-
surface water temperature as measured may have been
6-23
anomalously higher than temperatures at similar
depths under the ice during the April survey due to
high air temperatures and the large size of the
sampling hole. Dissolved oxygen values were well
below saturation near the surface (Hutchinson, 1957)
and well below gas saturation at greater depths.
Water quality is presented for each river/stream
station sampled in Table 6.98. Water temperatures
varied extensively between stations and appeared to
be greatly affected by the presence of local ice and
other sources of inflow.
The intergravel water temperatures present in salmon
egg incubation areas were also studied (Table 6.99).
Eleven salmon spawning areas were investigated
including sloughs, side channels, tributaries to the
McArthur River, and tributaries to the Chakachatna
River. Water temperatures in all areas were well
above freezing, even those areas with negligible
water depths. Differences between intergravel waters
and surface waters varied with location. With the
exception of one area (station 42A}, intergravel
water temperatures were similar to or lower than
surface water temperatures. The lowest intergravel
temperatures were measured in the Chilligan River and
in the clearwater tributary to Straight Creek
(station 19). Both of these areas had extensive ice
and snow present.
6-24
6.11.3.2 Spring 1983 Studies
6.11.3.2.1 Adult Anadromous Fish
During the spring of 1983, the collection and
observation of adult anadromous fish were conducted
on an opportunistic basis (see Section 6.11.1.2.1).
Chinook Salmon. Chinook salmon were observed in
fresh water at the start of the spring study. Milling
chinook were observed in areas near the mouth of
Streams 13x and 12.1 (Figure 6.150, Area A) on June
17. A total of 22 chinook salmon were observed in
the Noaukta Slough/stream mouth area (Area B, Figure
6.150). No salmon was observed in spawning areas of
Stream 13x at that time (Appendix Bl). By June 22,
180 chinook salmon were observed in the milling area
near the mouths of Streams 13x and 12.1 (Area A,
Figure 6.150) and 89 chinook salmon were observed
further into the slough near the mouths of Streams
12.2 to 12.4 (Area B, Figure 6.150). No chinook
salmon was observed upstream in any of the McArthur
River tributaries during this period. An overflight
made on July 20 resulted in the observation of
chinook salmon in upstream areas of Stream 13x.
Approximately one third of the stream was overflown
and 72 chinook salmon observed (Appendix Bl}. During
that same overflight, about 100 milling chinook
salmon were observed at the mouth of Stream 13u
(Figure 6.151).
Tributaries of the Chakachatna River were examined
for the presence of salmon. On June 22, only one
chinook salmon was observed near the mouth of the
6-25
clearwater tributary to Straight Creek. One chinook
salmon was collected moving upstream in the
Chakachatna River {station 6) on the same date
(Figure 6.146). On July 20, 335 chinook salmon were
observed well upstream in the clearwater tributary to
Straight Creek (station 19). No chinook was observed
at any other location in the Chakachatna River.
Sockeye Salmon. Aerial reconnaissance conducted on
June 17, 1983 resulted in the observation of two
groups of sockeye milling in the mouth area of
Streams 13x and 12.1 (Area A, Figure 6.150).
Approximately 750 sockeye salmon were estimated
further to the northeast (Area B, Figure 6.150) near
the mouths of Streams 12.2, 12.3, and to 12.4,
another 93 sockeye were observed at area C (Figure
6.150). The milling sockeye were generally "fresh"
showing little or no spawning coloration. No sockeye
was present near the mouth of Stream 13u (Figure
6.147) at that time. No sockeye salmon was observed
in upstream areas of any of the McArthur tributaries
during that period.
On June 22, 650 sockeye were observed milling in the
mouth area of Streams 13x and 12.1 (Figure 6.150,
Area A) and 950 sockeye were noted in the mouth area
of Streams 12.2, 12.3, and 12.4 (Figure 6.150, near B
and C). By June 24, approximately 900 sockeye were
also milling near Area A (Figure 6.150).
By July 20, sockeye had begun to ascend the McArthur
River tributaries and 70 sockeye were observed in
Stream 13x. Over 1,000 sockeye were observed in
milling areas A and B at the same time. Many of the
6-26
fish showed spawning coloration. While other
relatively "fresh" fish were also present, at that
time, 16 sockeye were observed in upstream areas of
Stream 13u, and approximately 300 were observed
milling in the mouth area (Figure 6.151).
Fyke net sampling (Table B2-8, Appendix B2) resulted
in the collection of sockeye salmon at station lD at
the mouth of the McArthur River (Figure 6.146).
Sockeye were collected starting on June 18, these
fish were "fresh" and copepods were sometimes
attached indicating recent entry to fresh water. The
sockeye were tagged and some were later observed in
milling areas A, B, and C, shown on Figure 6.150.
None of the overflights of the sloughs or tributaries
of the Chakachatna River resulted in the observation
of any sockeye. Only one sockeye salmon was
collected by a fyke net set at station 4 in the
Middle River on June 22.
6.11.3.2.2 Resident and Juvenile Anadromous Fish
As stated in Section 6.11.2, the intensity of
sampling used in the spring 1983 study was greater
than in previous studies. This greater intensity
increased the sensitivity of statistical testing as
well as increasing areal coverage. Results reported
here consist primarily of minnow trap and electro-
fishing collections as supplemented by fyke nets.
Dolly Varden. Dolly Varden were abundant and widely
dispersed in the study area during the spring study.
Dolly Varden juveniles were collected throughout both
6-27
+ + river systems and younger age classes (0 and I )
were found at high catch per effort (c/f) in areas
where Dolly Varden spawning had occurred during
1982. This included the upper McArthur and middle
Chakachatna Rivers. The Noaukta Slough also
contained abundant younger Dolly Varden. Older
juvenile Dolly Varden (age II+ and older) were
found at higher c/f's in the upper Chakachatna River,
the Noaukta Slough, and lower portions of the
Chakachatna and McArthur Rivers. Adult Dolly Varden
were only collected at stations lD and 4 by fyke nets.
Dolly Varden were abundant and widely dispersed
during the spring study being collected at 95.1
percent of all sampling stations below Chakachamna
Lake (Table 6.100 and 6.101). The majority of Dolly
Varden collected were juveniles. Adults were
collected by fyke nets at stations lD, and 4. No
movement of marked fish was detected between stations
based on recaptures. By July, adult Dolly Varden
were observed in the vicinity of salmon milling and
spawning areas at Streams 13x, 13u, and the
clearwater tributary to Straight Creek (station 19).
Collections of juvenile {parr or smolting juvenile)
Dolly Varden from minnow traps (Table B2-4, Appendix
B2) were tested by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and
found to be significantly different (p 0.001) among
stations sampled. The c/f at station 13 (upper
McArthur River), 5.33 fish/trap day, was
significantly greater {p 0.003, maximum among
stations) than all other stations except station 10
(Noaukta Slough), c/f of 3.80 fish/trap/day, (p_0.09,
marginally significant). The c/f at station 10 was
6-28
greater than most other remaining stations (p 0.05,
maximum) except station 12 (lower McArthur River near
the Noaukta Slough), c/f of 2.40 fish/trap/day and
station 40 (Stream 13u, downstream area), with a c/f
of 2.60 fish/trap/day. Dolly Varden minnow trap
c/f's tested by ANOVA among reaches were also
significantly different (p_0.008). Data in Table
6.102 indicated that the largest c/f for a reach
{2.18 fish/trap/day} occurred in the upper McArthur
River. The c/f was significantly greater (p 0.009)
than all other reaches except the Noaukta Slough
(p = 0.29). The c/f in the Noaukta Slough,l.64
fish/trap/day, was significantly greater {p 0.06)
than the remaining reaches except the lower
Chakachatna River (p_0.49), c/f of 1.37 fish/trap/day,
and the lower McArthur River (p_0.65), c/f of 1.42
fish/trap/day.
The Dolly Varden collected by minnow traps in the
upper McArthur River were primarily age o+ and age
I+, with age II+ fish found primarily in the
lower part of the reach. The Dolly Varden at station
+ 12, just below that reach, were also mostly age II
+ and I • The Dolly Varden collected in the Noaukta
. . + . I+ Slough were pr1mar1ly age II w1th some age
and few age 0+ fish.
Dolly Varden c/f's collected by electrofishing varied
significantly (p_0.0004} among the sampling stations.
The largest c/f's were at stations 16A (Noaukta
Slough), 17D (middle Chakachatna River), and 13
(upper McArthur River), c/f's of 5.48, 4.84, and 3.66
fish/100 shocking-seconds (s-s), respectively. Catch
per effort at station 16A was significantly greater
6-29
p 0.03, maximum) than all other stations except
station 17D {pl0.54). C/f at station 17D was
significantly greater than most of the remaining
stations {p_0.04) with the exception of stations 13,
10 and 21 (pl0.20), c/f's of 3.66, 3.41 and 2.21
fish/100 s-s, respectively.
Electrofishing c/f's were significantly different
(p 0.0001) among reaches {Table 6.103). The largest
c/f's were found in the middle Chakachatna River
{stations 17, 17D, 20 and 21}, the Noaukta Slough
(stations 8, 9, 10, 16, and 16A), and the upper
McArthur River (stations 13, 14, and 15), 2.56, 2.56,
and 2.25 fish/100 s-s, respectively. The c/f for the
middle Chakachatna River (2.56 fish/100 s-s) was
significantly greater (p 0.003, maximum) than the
lower Chakachatna, lower McArthur, and tributary
reaches but not significantly greater than the upper
Chakachatna River reach. The Noaukta Slough reach
c/f was the same as that for the mid-Chakachatna
Reach. It was not significantly different from the
upper McArthur reach (p_0.37} or the upper
Chakachatna reach (p_0.26), but was significantly
larger than the remaining reaches (p_0.002). The
upper McArthur reach had a c/f of 2.25 fish/100 s-s,
which was not significantly different from the above
reaches or the upper Chakachatna reach (p_0.83), but
was significantly larger (p_0.05) than the other
reaches (Table 6.103).
Dolly Varden collected by electrofishing included age
0+ through III+ fish, with age I+ and II+
making up the majority, overall. Fish collected from
the middle Chakachatna River reach were generally
6-30
dominated by age I+ with both age o+ and II+
+ fish present. In the Noaukta Slough, age 0 and
I+ made up the majority of the collection although
fish to age III+ were present. Collections from
the upper McArthur reach consisted entirely of age
0+ and I+ fish. Dolly Varden collected from the
upper Chakachatna River reach consisted of
approximately 2/3 age I+ fish and 1/3 age II+ or
older.
Coho Salmon. Coho salmon juveniles (parr and
smolting juveniles) were widely distributed in the
Chakachatna and McArthur River systems during the
spring study. Large numbers of coho were collected
from the upper McArthur River, Noaukta Slough, while
fewer were captured in the lower river systems. Coho
found in upstream areas were generally age 0+ fish,
with older fish found in downstream locations. Age
0+ and I+ coho were found in the Noaukta Slough,
and age II+ were more common in downstream areas.
Outmigrants, as determined from inclined plane trap
sampling, included age 0+ to II+ fish.
Coho salmon juveniles were widely dispersed during
the spring study and were found at most collection
stations (Table 6.100). The percentage incidence of
coho juveniles collected by all sampling methods was
68.3 percent (Table 6.101).
Analysis of minnow trap collections of coho juveniles
(Appendix B2) by ANOVA indicated that there were
significant (p 0.0001) differences between stations.
The largest minnow trap c/f (6.3 fish/trap/day)
occurred at station 16A in the Noaukta Slough. This
6-31
was significantly larger (p_0.0002) than c/f at any
other station. The second largest c/f, 3.11
fish/trap/day, occurred at station 14 in the upper
McArthur River. This c/f was significantly greater
(p_O.Ol) than stations other than 16A, 13(p_O.l0), or
12 (p_O.lO). Stations 13 and 12 are sequentially
downstream of station 14 in the McArthur River. The
c/f's at stations 13 and 12 were 1.67 and 1.40
fish/trap/day, respectively.
Examination of the minnow trap c/f's on a reach basis
indicated that c/f's were significantly different
among reaches (p_0.002). The largest c/f (1.54
fish/trap/day) was found for the upper McArthur River
which was significantly (p 0.05) greater than all
other reaches except the Noaukta Slough. The Noaukta
Slough had a c/f of 1.36 fish/trap/day, which was
significantly greater than all but one of the
remaining reaches (p_O.Ol, maximum) (lower McArthur
River p_0.06, marginally significant).
The juvenile coho salmon collected by minnow traps in
+ the upper McArthur River were primarily age 0
fish. These fish may have been produced in spawning
areas in the McArthur River Canyon. Coho salmon
collected in the Noaukta Slough were primarily age
+ + + + . 0 and I • Age I and II f1sh were more
common in collections from lower portions of both the
Chakachatna and McArthur rivers.
Examination of electrofishing c/f's indicated results
similar to those obtained from minnow trap
collections. Electrofishing captures were
significantly different (p_O.OOOl) between stations.
6-32
The largest c/f for coho salmon was found at station
14 with a c/f of 14.91 fish/laa shocking-seconds
(s-s). This was significantly greater (p_a.aaal)
than any other station. The c/f for station l6A in
the Noaukta Slough, s.a3 fish/laa s-s, was the second
largest. It was significantly larger (p_a.as,
maximum) than c/f's at all remaining stations except
2a(p_a.a8 marginally significant, c/f = 1.79),
4(p_a.ll, marginally significant, c/f = 1.82) and
S(p_a.Sl, c/f = 3.93).
Examination of electrofishing c/f by reach (Table
6.la3) showed that there were statistically
significant (p_a.aaa8) differences between reaches.
The largest c/f was for the upper McArthur River,
4.97 fish/laa s-s. This was significantly greater
(p a.a06) than c/f's for other reaches. The second
largest c/f was for the lower Chakachatna reach with
a c/f of 1.23 fish/laa s-s, and the third for the
Noaukta Slough with a c/f of 1.18 fish/lOa s-s.
However, these were not significantly greater than
the c/f's for the other reaches (pla.lS).
Coho salmon collected by electrofishing in the upper
McArthur River were all age a+ fish caught at
station 14 (lower McArthur River Canyon, Figure
6.146). Coho collected in the lower Chakachatna
River consisted of a mix of age I+ and a+ fish.
Coho collected in the Noaukta Slough were primarily
age a+ with few age I+ fish present. Larger,
older coho were generally poorly represented in
electrofishing collections.
6-33
Collections from inclined plane trap outmigrant
sampling at station lD (Appendix B2, Table B2-7)
indicated that some older (age I+ and II+) coho
+ may have been migrating to sea. Age 0 coho were
also represented in these collections. Sampling did
not extend for a sufficiently long duration to
determine if the peak outmigration occurs in spring
or in the fall.
Chinook Salmon. Chinook salmon juveniles were found
in a limited number of locations during the spring
study. Most chinook were age 0+ and were found in
the tributaries to the McArthur River. Since all of
the lower tributaries (13x, 12.1 through 12.5) share
a common confluence area it is unclear what movements
of chinook juveniles may have occurred subsequent to
+ emergence. Only one age I chinook was collected,
this was found in the lower river system. One age
0+ chinook was collected in the outmigrant trap.
No chinook was collected from the clearwater
tributary to Straight Creek, despite observation of
extensive spawning in that location. This may have
been a result of the flooding and channel changes
caused by the September 1982 storm.
During the spring study, although chinook salmon
juveniles were found at relatively few stations,
these were many more stations than were found during
previous studies (Table 6.100), 26.9 percent of the
stations sampled (Table 6.101). However, this was
the first study in which the McArthur River
tributaries were intensively sampled.
6-34
Examination of minnow trap collections of chinook
salmon indicated that there were significant
differences (p_0.05) between collections made at the
sampling stations. The largest c/f (14.60 fish/trap/
day) occurred at station 43A (upstream area of Stream
12.2, see Figures 6.146 and 6.148). This was
significantly larger (p_0.025) than other stations.
The next largest c/f, 7.60 fish/trap/day, occurred at
station 42 (Stream 12.1, downstream area) this was
significantly larger (p_O.Ol) than at stations other
than 42A (Stream 12.1, upstream area), 44A (Stream
12.3, upstream area), and 44 (Stream 12.3, downstream
area}, c/f's of 4.00, 5.88, and 3.40 fish/trap/day,
respectively.
When examined on a per reach basis (Table 6.102), the
c/f (3.26 fish/trap/day) for the McArthur tributaries
was significantly (p_0.05} larger than any other
reach. Only a few chinook salmon (c/f = 0.03) were
collected in the lower Chakachatna system.
All of the chinook salmon collected by minnow traps
in the McArthur River tributaries were age o+ fish.
One age I+ chinook was collected at station 1 in
the lower Chakachatna River.
Electrofishing results for chinook salmon juveniles
did not indicate a significant difference (p_0.31) by
ANOVA between stations. The larger electrofishing
c/f's were found at station 44A (Stream 12.3,
upstream area; 9.65 fish/100 s-s}, 43A (Stream 12.2,
upstream area; 5.83 fish/100 s-s), and 42A (Stream
12.1, upstream area; 3.09 fish/100 s-s).
6-35
Electrofishing c/f examined by reach showed a
marginally significant (p_O.l2) difference. The c/f,
1.89 fish/100 s-s, of the McArthur tributaries was
significantly (p_O.OS) larger than the other reaches.
Electrofishing resulted in the collection of
exclusively age 0+ fish at each station. One age
0+ chinook salmon was collected during outmigrant
sampling at station lD on June 23, 1983. This was an
insufficient sample from which to draw any
conclusions concerning Chinook outmigrant patterns.
Sockeye Salmon. Sockeye salmon were found in several
areas of the river systems. The largest numbers were
collected from Chakachamna Lake, which was also the
location where age I+ and age II+ fish made up
the largest percentage of the collection. Downstream
of the lake at station 22 (the downstream end of the
Chakachatna River Canyon), age I+ fish made up the
majority of sockeye salmon collected. In other
locations, age 0+ dominated the collections. Age
0+ sockeye were caught consistantly in areas near
the confluence of the Chakachatna with the McArthur
River, stations 1, lD, and 2.
located in the vicinity of the
station (near lD) which caught
These stations are
outmigrant sampling
+ + age 0 and I
sockeye juveniles. Based upon the outmigrant
collections, it appeared that the number of sockeye
outmigrants was decreasing during the course of
sampling. This indicated that the peak outmigation
may have occurred prior to the sampling period. The
apparent low numbers of younger age classes in the
lower river system also suggests an earlier
outmigration. The apparent movement of older fish
6-36
from Chakachamna Lake to station 22 (Figure 6.146),
may be an indication that further outmigrations of
sockeye may occur later in the year.
Sockeye salmon juveniles were collected at 29.3
percent of the samples (Table 6.101) during the
spring study.
As in previous studies, minnow traps were a
relatively inefficient method of collecting sockeye
salmon (Table B2-4, Appendix B2). There were
significant differences (p 0.001, by ANOVA) between
cjf•s at the sampling stations. The largest c/f
(1.10 fish/trap/day) was found at station 20 in the
middle Chakachatna reach; the c/f was not
significantly different from the other stations
(p_O.lS).
Examination of sockeye minnow trap c/f by reach
(Table 6.102) indicated that the largest c/f (0.28
fish/trap/day) occurred in the mid-Chakachatna River
reach. The only other reach where sockeye were
collected by minnow traps (all age 0+ fish) was the
lower McArthur River reach with a c/f of 0.09
fish/trap/day.
Electrofishing resulted in the collection of sockeye
salmon in more stations than minnow traps, a total of
12 as compared to four. There was not a significant
difference (p 0.45) between c/f at the stations. The
largest c/f (7.56 fish/100 s-s) was obtained from
station 26 near the Nagish1amina River delta in
Chakachamna Lake (Figure 6.146). The second largest
c/f (3.03 fish/100 s-s) was collected at station 1
6-37
(Figure 6.146), c/f's of 1.43 and 1.41 fish/100 s-s
occurred at stations 22 and 20, respectively.
Analysis of c/f by reach including Chakachamna Lake
indicated that there was not a significant difference
among reaches (p_O.l9). The largest c/f was 1.89
fish/100 s-s in Chakachamna Lake, followed by the
upper, lower, and rnid-Chakachatna River reaches with
c/f's of 0.59, 0.53, and 0.43 fisn/100 s-s,
respectively.
The sockeye collected from Chakachamna Lake were
. '1 + d + s d pr1mar1 y age I an II • ockeye foun
downstream of the lake at station 22 were age I+.
Sockeye juveniles collected at station 1 were age
0+, as were the sockeye at station 20.
Outmigrant sampling at station lD resulted in the
collection of numerous sockeye. The largest number
(16 fish) were collected on June 19 (Table B2-7,
Appendix B), these were age 0+ and I+ fish. The
numbers of sockeye collected after that dropped off.
+ + All sockeye collected were age 0 and I •
+ In general, the age 0 sockeye appeared to have
grown 5 to 10 mm since the winter study. However,
since there were length differences between juveniles
originating in different areas of the system it is
difficult to ascertain the change after these groups
have "mixed".
Chum Salmon. Chum salmon were collected in numerous
locations in the lower portions of the Chakachatna,
Middle and McArthur rivers. Although some chum
6-38
juveniles were found in upstream areas, the majority
were downstream. The mean lengths of the chum
juveniles varied considerably, but were generally
larger than fish collected during the winter study.
Chum outmigration took place during the study but it
is likely that the peak outmigration occurred prior
to the sampling period.
Chum salmon were caught in a limited number of
stations (Table 6.100) during the spring study,
occurring at 29.3 percent of the stations below
Chakachamna Lake (Table 6.101).
Minnow traps were relatively ineffective for
collecting chum salmon juveniles (Table B2-4,
Appendix BJ • Chum salmon were collected at stations
lD (lower McArthur River), 8 (Noaukta Slough), and 13
(upper McArthur River) with c/f's of 0.22, 0.20, and
0.11 fish/trap/day, respectively. All three areas
are located downstream of areas where chum salmon
were observed to spawn in 1982 (Volume II, Section
6.8.3, 1983 !FAR).
Electrofishing resulted in the collection of chum
juveniles in many more locations. Comparison of
c/f's among stations did not indicate a significant
difference (p_O.l4) among the group of stations.
Pair-wise t-testing did indicate that stations 4 and
5 (Middle River, lower Chakachatna River reach,
Figure 6.146) had significantly (p_0.04) larger c/f's
(2.45 and 2.31 fish/100 s-s, respectively) than all
other stations except stations 2 (p_0.09) and 21
(p_O.l8) (with c/f's of 1.23 and 1.64 fish/100 s-s,
respectively).
6-39
Examination of c/f by reach (Table 6.103), indicated
that there were significant (p_O.OOS) differences
between the reaches. The largest c/f was in the
lower Chakachatna River reach (0.99 fish/100 s-s)
which was significantly larger (p 0.04, maximum) than
all other reaches. The middle Chakachatna River
reach had the next largest c/f (0.41 fish/100 s-s)
but this was not significantly different (p_0.36)
than the other reaches. The only other reach chum
salmon were collected from was the Noaukta Slough
(c/f of 0.17 fish/100 s-s).
Inclined plane trap sampling for outmigrants at
station lD (Table B2-7) resulted in the collection of
numerous chum outmigrants. The number of outmigrants
decreased during the period of sampling from a high
of 10 fish/day to 0 fish/day. The mean length of the
outmigrants varied from 3.97 em to 4.74 em in length.
Pink Salmon. Pink salmon juveniles were collected at
station 40 (Stream 13u, downstream area; Figure
6.147) by electrofishing (Table 82-5) and by means of
the outmigrant trap at station lD. Pink salmon
outmigrants were collected during the first week of
sampling with the numbers caught declining during
that period. This indicates that the peak
outmigration of pink salmon juveniles had occurred
prior to mid-June. The pink salmon outmigrants were
under 4.0 em in length.
Rainbow Trout. Rainbow trout were only collected by
means of fyke nets (Table 82-8) at stations lD, 4,
and 6 during the study. During this period, adult
fish dominated the catch.
6-40
Marked rainbow trout were recaptured in other area of
Trading Bay during the study. Three rainbow trout
tagged at station 4 (Middle River) during 1982 were
recovered in the Chuitna River during 1983. One
adult tagged at station 6 (Chakachatna River) on June
20, 1983 was recovered in Chuit Creek on June 30,
1983. Another rainbow trout adult was recaptured
having moved from station 6 to station 4, downstream.
Such data suggest considerable coastal movement of
rainbow trout between streams entering Cook Inlet.
Pygmy Whitefish. Very few pygmy whitefish were
collected during the spring study. None was collected
by minnow traps and only two, one each at stations 6A
and 12, were collected by electrofishing. One pygmy
whitefish was collected by a fyke net at station 4
and three very small (less than 3.30 em total length)
pygmy whitefish parr were also collected by the
inclined plane trap. As in the winter study, the
reason for the small c/f of pygmy whitefish is
unknown.
6.11.3.2.3 Habitat Data Collection
Habitat data were collected in conjunction with fish
sampling at most sites. Detailed habitat observations
and measurements were routinely made with electro-
fishing and minnow trap collects to add to the data
base characterizing fish habitat relationships.
Water Quality. Water quality data were collected at
41 stations in the spring study (Table 6.104). There
was considerable variation in water quality among the
stations. This is understandable as different
6-41
6.11.3.3
stations are subject to differing flows, riparian
growth, and stream gradient conditions. Areas
influenced by meltwater such as stations 15, 13, and
18A (Figure 6.146) had lower water temperatures.
Sloughs and tributary streams generally had low
turbidity, since they were not influenced by mainstem
conditions.
A water quality profile was obtained of selected
parameters in Chakachamna Lake. These data are
presented in Table 6.105. There was evidence of
surface heating of the lake's surface with apparent
mixing in deeper water. The turbidity data indicated
the presence of extremely low turbidity water near
the bottom (83.8 meters, 275.0 ft).
Water temperatures were also measured for incubation
areas at station 17 (see Section 6.11.3.1.2).
Intergravel water temperatures (Table 6.106) in the
leftmost (LB+O) slough were 0.7-0.8°C lower than
surface water temperatures. In the Chakachatna River
side channel (LB+2) downstream of a slough area,
intergravel water temperatures were similar to the
surface water temperature.
Habitat Utilization
One of the objectives of the habitat data collection
is to obtain information about the relationship of
fish distribution to stream-flow related variables
such as depth and velocity. These data would
eventually be incorporated into the preparation of
habitat utilization curves {Bovee and Cochnauer,
1981) for analyzing project effects (APA, 1983) •
6-42
The present analysis is a summarization of habitat
utilization for those species and life-stages for
which sufficient data have been collected. These are
Dolly Varden juveniles, Coho salmon juveniles,
Chinook salmon juveniles, and sockeye salmon
juveniles. For ease of discussion, English units
will be listed first. Observation (and collections)
of these groups at various depths and velocities have
been compiled and tabulated in intervals of 0.2 ft/s
(0.5 crn/s) velocity and 0.3 ft (0.8 ern) depth. A
statistically significant correlation of r = 0.09
(p_.006) exists between velocity and depth in the
data base used to analyze habitat utilization. This
is a result of lower velocities being found at the
shallow edges of the streams studied, and higher
velocities being found in the deeper mid-channel
areas (relatively few, low velocity deep pools were
present). The correlation between velocity and depth
somewhat confounds the combined analysis of both.
6.11.3.3.1 Dolly Varden
Table 6.107 presents the distribution of observations
of Dolly Varden among velocity intervals. The
majority of Dolly Varden observed utilized velocities
of 0.6 ft/s (18.3 crn/s) or less with 32.2 percent
found in velocities of less than 0.2 ft/s (6.1 crn/s)
and a total of 50.2 percent observed at velocities
less than 0.5 ft/s (15.2 crn/s). The maximum water
velocity used by juvenile Dolly Varden was in the
interval 3.2-3.4 ft/s (97.5-103.6 crn/s). A plot of
the number of observations versus velocity is shown
in Figure 6.152. The shape of the plot clearly
indicates that although juvenile Dolly Varden were
6-43
observed at velocities up to 3.4 ft/s (103.6 cm/s).
Relatively high velocity waters were readily
available as observed in the field, however, lower
velocity waters were apparently used preferentially.
The distribution of juvenile Dolly Varden at velocity
intervals was also examined to determine the effect
of object cover on velocity utilization (Bovee,
1982) • Data were sorted by the presence or absence
of cover. Rank order tests were used and it was
found that higher velocities were used to a
significantly greater extent when object cover was
present (O.l_p_O.OS).
Observations of depth utilization by Dolly Varden
(Table 6.108) indicated that 72.1 percent of the fish
utilized depths between 0.3 and 1.2 ft (9.1 em and
36.6 em). Juvenile Dolly Varden, however, were found
in each depth interval examined.
Kruger's (1981) review of the available literature
concerning velocity and depth utilization by juvenile
Dolly Varden indicated a general preference for
shallow areas and low velocity currents. Work
performed at Terror Lake by Baldrige (1981) resulted
in the development of habitat suitability criteria
for juvenile Dolly Varden. The criteria derived were
based upon frequency analysis of data resulting from
a total of 344 observations (as compared with 1042 in
this study). In the Terror Lake study, juvenile
Dolly Varden were observed to primarily utilize lower
velocities of 1.0 ft/s (30.5 cm/s) or less. The
suitability curves in that case represented the
frequency analysis corrected by the amount of each
6-44
habitat actually available to the fish. Apparent
depth use in the Terror Lake study was greatest for
depths of approximately 0.2 to 2.0 ft (6.1 to 61.0
em} • The data from this (Chakachamna) study
indicated that utilization dropped off at depths
greater than 1.2 ft (36.6 em}, and few juvenile Dolly
Varden were found in depths in excess of 2.1 ft
(64.0 em}.
6.11.3.3.2 Coho Salmon. Coho salmon juveniles were observed to
utilize the lower velocities found. 77.5 percent
utilized velocities of 0.6 ft/s {18.3 cm/s) or less
and 90.8 percent utilized velocities of less than 1.0
ft/s (30.5 cm/s, Table 6.109). Of the 422 fish
observed, only one fish was found at velocities in
excess of 2.0 ft/s (61.0 cm/s). A plot of the
distribution of these observations is shown in
Figure 6.154.
The effect of the presence of object cover on velocity
utilization by coho salmon was examined. No
significant (p!O.l) difference was found in velocity
utilization with or without the presence of object
cover.
Observations of depth utilization by coho salmon
juveniles are tabulated in Table 6.110. The majority
of fish (77.4 percent} were observed in the depth
interval 0.3 to 1.2 ft {9.1 to 36.6 em), 96.6 percent
of the coho occurred in depth of less than 2.1 ft
{64.0 em) (Figure 6.155).
Juvenile coho salmon habitat suitability curves from
the Terror Lake study (Baldridge, 1981) indicated
6-45
apparent preferred utilization of velocities of
approximately 0.0 to 0.5 ft/s (15.2 cm/s) based upon
199 observations. Results from this study were
similar, however, maximum utilization occurred in the
0.0 to 0.3 ft/s (9.1 cm/s) range, with considerably
lower utilization of velocities in excess of 0.5 ft/s
(15.2 cm/s). Water depth utilization from Baldridge
(1981) for the Terror Lake study indicated preferred
depths of up to 2.0 ft (61.0 em). Peak utilization
for this study occurred in a smaller interval, as
discussed above.
6.11.3.3.3 Chinook Salmon. Observations of velocities utilized
by juvenile chinook salmon are presented in Table
6.111. There is preferential utilization of lower
velocities, with 69.0 percent of the chinook
juveniles observed, using velocities of less than 0.2
ft/s (6.1 cm/s) and 90.7 percent using velocities of
less than 0.6 ft/s (18.3 cm/s). The utilization of
velocities is depicted in Figure 6.156.
Velocity utilization in the presence of object cover
was also examined for chinook salmon juveniles.
There was no significant difference (pi IO.l) in
velocity utilization in the presence or absence of
object cover.
Depth utilization by juvenile chinook salmon is
presented in table 6.112. Peak utilization of water
depth occurred in the interval 0.6 to 1.5 ft (18.3 to
45.7 em), in which 69.2 percent of the chinook salmon
were observed. Another 26.1 percent of the chinook
were observed in depths in excess of 1.5 ft (45.7
em) • A plot of depth utilization is shown in Figure
6.157.
6-46
Generalized probability of use criteria derived by
Bovee {1978} for juvenile chinook salmon indicated a
high probability of use of velocities around 0.5 ft/s
{15.2 cm/s). This is somewhat higher than indicated
by the present study. Bovee's (1978} curves also
indicated a high probability of use of depths in
excess of 1.2 ft {36.6 em), while the present study
indicates preferential utilization of depths of 0.9
to 1.8 ft (27.4 to 54.9 em). It is probable that
Bovee's {1978) generalized curves are not applicable
to the present study, based upon the 399 observations
tabulated here.
6.11.3.3.4 Sockeye Salmon. Observations of juvenile sockeye
salmon velocity utilization are listed in Table
6.113. There appeared to be a preferred utilization
of lower velocities, 64.8 percent of the sockeye
juveniles observed used velocities of 0.4 ft/s (12.2
cm/s) or less. Over 80 percent of the sockeye
observed occurred at velocities less than 1.2 ft/s
(36.6 cm/s). No sockeye was observed at a velocity
in excess of 1.8 ft/s (54.9 cm/s).
Examination of the effect of object cover on
utilization of velocities resulted in no statistically
significant (pi 10.1) difference in velocity
utilization in the presence or absence of object
cover.
Utilization of water depth by sockeye salmon
juveniles is presented for observations not including
Chakachamna Lake. Hydroacoustic observations (Volume
II, 1983 IFAR) indicated that juvenile sockeye
probably occur to depths of more than 100ft (30.5 m)
6-47
6.11.4
6.11.4.1
at times and such data would not be applicable in
analysis of sockeye behavior in a riverine situation.
Table 6.114 presents the water depth utilization data
for sockeye juveniles as determined by observations
in rivers and streams. A plot of this data is shown
in Figure 6.159, and it clearly appears to be
bimodal. However, this may be an artifact due to an
insufficient number (138) of observations (Table
6.114). If more observations are added through
additional studies, the distribution may change.
Sockeye utilization of depths of 0.3 to 1.2 ft (9.1
to 36.6 em) represented 63.0 percent of the total and
utilization of depths of 1.8 to 2.1 ft (54.9 to 64.0
em) represented 23.9 percent. Sockeye juveniles did
not appear to utilize depths of less than 0.3 ft
(9.1 em) or over 2.1 ft (64.0 em) to any great extent
in riverine waters.
Discussion
The 1983 winter and spring studies provided
additional information concerning the fish
distribution and abundance in the Chakachatna and
McArthur River systems. For various species, the
data provide clarification of habitat use and timing
of life history events. The following section
provides a discussion of the new information.
Sockeye Salmon
During 1983 adult sockeye salmon entered the McArthur
River prior to June 18. Sockeye continued to enter
the McArthur River through early July and gathered at
6-48
the mouths of tributaries to the McArthur River in
milling areas identified during 1982 and 1983 (Volume
II, Sections 6.8.3.2.1, 1983 IFARr 6.11.3.2.1). Fish
continued to enter these areas to mill and mature
through July 20 (the last date of sampling). During
the period July 9-20, 1983, sockeye salmon ascended
Streams 13x and 13u which are tributaries to the
McArthur River (Figures 6.146, 6,147, and 6.148).
Other sockeye salmon were observed milling in the
mouth areas of those streams at the same time. The
fish observed milling varied from those newly arrived
from salt water to those of stage IV maturity
(Nikolsky, 1963). Although the timing of the entry
of sockeye into fresh water in the McArthur River
appeared to occur earlier than during 1982, their
ascent of Streams 13x and 13u was probably no more
than seven days earlier than the comparable event the
year before (Volume III, Tables A2-7, A2-8, 1983 IFR).
During that same period, sockeye salmon were not
observed in any of the known milling or spawning
areas in the Chakachatna River drainage. This
appears to be in agreement with data gathered during
1982 {Volume III, Appendix A, 1983 IFR). During
1982, sockeye adults were not observed in streams of
the Chakachatna River drainage prior to July 31. The
collection of only one sockeye adult in the Middle
River during the sampling period, by a net blocking
the entire stream, suggests that sockeye adults
entering the Chakachatna River may ascend the Middle
River subsequent to the period sampled. The majority
of adult sockeye may also enter through the McArthur
River where sockeye adults were caught regularly by a
net blocking less than 5 percent of the river width.
6-49
6.11.4.2
Information on the timing of emergence and
outmigration of sockeye was also gathered during the
studies. Sockeye fry were in the process of emergence
during early April 1983. In the incubation areas
examined, both yolk-sac fry and fully emergent
"button-up" fry were present.
By mid-June the emergent sockeye fry had left their
incubation areas below Chakachamna Lake and were
found in mainstream areas of the middle Chakachatna
and lower Chakachatna and McArthur River reaches.
Outmigration of juvenile sockeye salmon occurred
during mid-to late June; most likely prior to that
period. Age 0+ and I+ outmigrants were observed.
Older juveniles including age I+ and II+ sockeye
were observed in and below Chakachamna Lake which
suggests that at least some of these juveniles
migrate to sea later in the year. Data compiled on
habitat utilization suggest that juvenile sockeye
prefer slow velocity, shallow water habitats.
Chinook Salmon
Chinook salmon adults had entered the McArthur River
prior to June 17, 1983 when they were observed
milling near the mouth area of Stream l3x (Figure
6.150, Area A). Numbers of milling chinook in that
area increased through late June, but adults were not
observed to have ascended the streams (specifically
l3x) prior to early July. By July 20 chinook salmon
adults were present in Stream 13x. This represents
migration times comparable to 1982 (Volume III, Table
A2-7, 1983 IFR). Chinook adults were not observed
milling at Stream 13u until July 20. At that time,
6-50
no chinook had ascended the stream. This represents
a delay in timing over 1982, when spawning chinook
adults were observed in the stream on July 17.
One chinook salmon was collected migrating up the
Chakachatna River on June 22. This fish apparently
entered fresh water in the McArthur River, since the
Middle River was blocked by a fyke net and no chinook
salmon had been caught. In the Chakachatna River
drainage, one chinook salmon adult was observed in a
spawning area in the clearwater tributary to Straight
Creek on June 22, 1983. No other chinook salmon was
observed either in the stream or in the milling area
at the stream confluence with Straight Creek until
July 20. At that time 335 chinook salmon were
observed spawning. This timing was similar to that
observed during 1982 when chinook salmon were first
observed in this stream on July 22.
Successful incubation of chinook salmon occurred in
the McArthur River tributaries and to at least a
limited extent in the McArthur River Canyon. No
evidence of successful chinook incubation or fry
production was found in the clearwater tributary to
Straight Creek. It is likely that the stream channel
changes which occurred during September 1982 may have
seriously decreased chinook juvenile production from
that stream. It is unclear if there was successful
chinook fry production from Stream 13u, since no fry
or juveniles was collected from there during 1983.
The age 0+ chinook juveniles appeared to be rearing
in many areas in the downstream areas of the McArthur
tributary streams. Since these streams interconnect
6-51
6.11.4.3
at their mouths, it suggests that there may be
considerable interstream movement. Age I+ fish
apparently leave these streams at some point and
either migrate to sea or rear in portions of the
lower Chakachatna and McArthur Rivers. The age I+
chinook found in the lower river systems may however
be outmigrants rather than rearing juveniles.
However, the only chinook collected by means of the
outmigrant trap was an age o+ fish. Only one age
I+ chinook was collected from the clearwater
tributary to Straight Creek during April, and no
chinook was collected during the spring study,
indicating both a paucity of juveniles and possible
downstream movement of those present.
Data compiled on habitat utilization suggest that
juvenile chinook preferentially use relatively low
velocities and relatively shallow water depths.
Pink Salmon
Pink salmon adults were not observed during the 1983
sampling programs. The first milling pinks observed
during 1982 were found on the July 22 weekly survey.
This may indicate a somewhat later entry into fresh
water for the 1983 run in these rivers.
Pink salmon fry were not collected during the April
study in areas where pink salmon spawning had been
observed (stations 13, 18, 19, 40A, and 42). However,
during the spring study, pink juveniles were found in
station 40 (Stream 13u) downstream of the April
sampling area; and pink juveniles were collected by
the outmigrant trap. Data from outmigrant trap
6-52
6.11.4.4
6.11.4.5
sampling suggested that the peak outmigration of pink
salmon juveniles probably occurred prior to mid-June.
Chum Salmon
Chum salmon fry were found at varying stages of
development during early April 1983. Many of the fry
collected had fully resorbed their yolk-sacs and were
free-swimming in the water column while others had
prominent yolk-sacs present. By June, the chum
salmon juveniles had migrated from their incubation
areas and were found in the downstream areas of the
system including the Middle River, lower Chakachatna
River, and lower McArthur River. Outmigrant sampling
results suggested that the peak chum outmigration
probably occurred prior to mid-June.
Analysis of lengths of juvenile chum collected during
April and June suggested that growth of emergent fry
occurs in fresh water. This supports similar
observations made during 1982.
Coho Salmon
Development of coho salmon fry was still taking place
during early April 1983. Many fry had fully resorbed
their yolk-sacs while others had not. Age 0+ fish
generally appeared to remain in the vicinity of their
incubation areas at that time. Older juveniles were
prevalent in the Noaukta Slough and Middle River. By
June, coho juveniles were abundant and well dispersed,
with age 0+ and I+ fish found in upstream areas
of the McArthur River and the Noaukta Slough. Age
I+ and II+ fish were most abundant in the
6-53
6.11.4.6
McArthur River tributaries and downstream areas of
the Chakachatna, McArthur and Middle Rivers.
Juveniles appeared to preferentially utilize very low
velocities and relatively shallow depths.
Outmigrant trap sampling indicated that age o+,
I+, and II+ fish were migrating to salt water.
Data were not sufficient to determine timing.
Dolly Varden
Dolly Varden continued to be the most widely
distributed and abundant species collected.
Development of Dolly Varden fry was completed earlier
than the other species studied, and during early
April all Dolly Varden collected had fully resorbed
their yolk-sacs. During late winter, Dolly Varden
juveniles (age 0+-II+) were generally more
abundant in upstream areas of the McArthur and
Chakachatna Rivers and the Noaukta Slough. Most
+ III and older fish apparently move to downstream
areas of the river or enter salt water some time
between October and April.
By June, Dolly Varden have become more widely
. + d + f" h dispersed, part1cularly age 0 an I 1s •
Older juveniles (age II+) were found in the same
reaches as in April but had also dispersed further
downstream. Adult Dolly Varden were also collected
in the Middle River and lower McArthur Rivers, and in
July were found in the vicinity of salmon spawning
and milling areas in both the Chakachatna and
McArthur River systems. Juvenile Dolly Varden
appeared to preferentially utilize relatively low
6-54
6.11.4.7
6.11.4.8
velocities, but may utilize higher velocities when
cover is present. The juvenile Dolly Varden also
appeared to utilize relatively shallow water.
Pygmy Whitefish
Few pygmy whitefish were collected during 1983. The
reason for the paucity of this species compared to
1981 or 1982 collections remains unknown.
Collections made by the outmigrant trap indicated
that age 0+ juveniles were present in the lower
McArthur River by mid-June. This supports
preliminary observations made during 1982 about the
timing of the completion of pygmy whitefish fry
development (Volume II, Section 6.8.4.7, 1983 !FAR).
Rainbow Trout
As in 1982, few young rainbow trout juveniles were
collected in areas of either the McArthur or
Chakachatna River drainages.
Mark-recapture information on adult rainbow trout
suggested that there is considerable interdrainage
movement between rainbow trout found in the
ChaKachatna and McArthur Rivers and the Chuitna River
and its tributaries.
6.11.5 Summary and Conclusions
The 1983 studies provided additional information on
the fisheries of the Chakachatna and McArthur River
systems. These studies have also provided an
6-55
improvement in our understanding of the system. The
findings of these studies include:
o The movement of adult sockeye and chinook salmon
into freshwater apparently occurred earlier in the
season in 1983 than in 1982.
o The timing of adult sockeye and chinook salmon
ascents of spawning streams was similar to that of
1982, and in some cases slightly earlier in the
season.
o Spring rearing and distribution areas of resident
and juvenile anadromous fish were identified.
o Chinook salmon juvenile rearing areas were
identified in the McArthur River tributaries.
o Outmigrations of sockeye, chum, pink, and coho
salmon were identified as taking place. The peak
outmigration apparently took place prior to
mid-June.
Other findings summarized in the text include:
o Habitats utilized by juvenile Dolly Varden and
coho, sockeye, and chinook salmon were
characterized.
o Interdrainage movements of rainbow trout were
identified.
o Fish habitats were characterized including
incubation areas.
6-56
6.12 REFERENCES
Aquatic Biology
Alaska Power Authority. 1983. Chakachamna Hydroelectric
Feasibility Study Environmental Study Plans FY 1984.
Prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants. Anchorage, AK.
Baldridge, J. 1981. Habitat Suitability Curves, In Wilson, w.,
E. Trihey, J. Baldridge, c. Evans, J. Thiele and D. Trudgen.
1981. An assessment of environmental effects of construc-
tion and operation of the proposed Terror Lake hydroelectric
facility, Kodiak, Alaska. Instream flow studies final
report. Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center.
University of Alaska, Anchorage, Alaska. 419 p.
Bovee, K. D. 1978. Probability of use criteria for the family
salmonidae. Instream Flow Information Paper 4. u.s. Fish
Wild. Serv. FWS/OBS-78/07. Ft. Collins. Co.
Bovee, K. D. 1982. A guide to stream habitat analysis using
the instream flow incremental methodology. Instream Flow
Information Paper 12. u.s. Fish Wild. Serv. FWS/OBS-82/16.
248 pp.
Bovee, K. D., and T. Cochnauer. 1977. Development and
evaluation of weighted criteria, probability-of-use curves
for instream flow assessments: fisheries. Instream Flow
Information Paper 3. u.s. Fish Wild. Serv. FWS/OBS-77/63.
38 pp.
Hutchinson, G. s. 1957. A Treatise on Limnology, Vol. 1.
John-Wiley and Sons. N. Y.
6-57
Krueger, s. w. 1981. Freshwater habitat relationships -Dolly
Varden Char (Salvelinus malma) (Walbaum). Alaska Dept. of
Fish and Game. Habitat Division. Anchorage, Alaska.
38 pp.
Meehan, w. R. 1964. A modified scoop trap for sampling
downstream migrant salmon in turbid glacial rivers. Prog.
Fish. Cult. 42-46.
Nikolsky, G. v. 1963. The Ecology of Fishes. Academic Press.
N.Y.
6-58
•
TABLES
Table 6.85. Measured discharges in spring 1983.
Sitea
Date DJ.scharge
Description 1983 cfs
6 Lower Chakachatna above Middle 6 April 71
13.5 Upper McArthur at Rapids 6 April 45
17 Spawning Channel at Source 26 May 0.79
Spawning Channel 26 May 2.3
Side Channel 26 May 2.3
22 Chakachatna below Canyon 6 April 440
c Chakachatna at Lake Outlet 26 May 1610
aFar location of sites refer to Figure 6.30.
0400c-20
Table 6.86 Mean daily discharges in cfs of the Chakachatna River at the Chakachamna
Lake outlet for the period August 1982 through Hay 1983.a
Day Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
1 7160 6180 1280 710 100 680 710 670 740
2 7570 5820 1280 110 700 /';,0 9:l0 710 110
3 7340 5570 1240 100 660 710 1020 100 840
4 7010 5300 1220 100 660 840 1030 780 660
5 6800 5070 1180 680 670 970 970 660 640b
6 7110 4660 1140 670 980 870 930 660 740
1 7290 4270 1090 680 900 100 970 100 680
8 7290 4000 1070 100 750 120 900 750 100
9 1010 3820 1090 100 930 870 710 100 660
10 6880 3520 1020 100 950 920 740 740 640b
11 8870 6660 3320 1020 660 670 870 720 100 640b
12 9710 6280 3210 1000 680 710 750 660 710 640b
13 9830 6010 2980 1030 100 900 1030 640b 640b 660
14 9710 5780 2810 1070 100 890 1360 670 670 120
15 9940 5850 2630 1000 100 820 1340 810 680 790
16 10160 7630 2500 1000 100 740 1160 890 780 900
17 9940 8920 2440 950 100 680 950 890 740 1000
18 9610 9830 2280 930 680 810 850 890 900
19 9390 10380 2200 920 640b 100 710 840 890
20 9130 10380 2170 870 640b 100 640b 710 860
21 8970 10450 2020 870 640b 660 680 670 100
22 8870 10500 1940 870 640b 720 660 710 640
23 8760 9990 1840 870 640b 810 810 710 680
24 8660 9390 1760 870 680 110 750 670 100
25 8610 8820 1650 870 640b 110 670 64ob 680
26 8450 8260 1590 870 640b 920 670 680 670
27 8260 7810 1450 840 640b 890 660 170 150
28 8140 1290 1410 810 640b 100 670 170 100
29 8060 6930 1380 810 680 680 790 640b
30 8060 6580 1300 810 100 660 110 640b
31 7960 1280 100 640b 640b
a Records are poor during August and September and very poor after November.
b Corresponds to 0.0 data pad reading.
Table 6.87 He an daily discharges in cfs of the HcArthur River at the rapids for the
period August 1982 through June 1983. a
Day Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June
1 74:3 319 7:3:3 :341 72(1 364 61 40 123 859
·-:· 791 3(11 78:::: 4"".-1 481 273 57 51. 129 716 .:-·..)..:..
3 :339 278 74:3 . 504 291 192. 89 4;3 126 691
4 897 257 609 516 217 14:3 117 51 131 559
5 . 935 265 4~-ii9 497 327 118 74 52 137 596
6 983 236 52:2: 377 920 •:)•J ...... 53 5l) 136 640
7 1031 219 5:35 387 147 9:3 55 47 143 649 .-. 0:) 1(179 207 5:3:3 239 4:37 123 89 49 145 6"51"
9 1127 203 481 168 389 258 145 55 155 610
10 1175 1E:9 420 207 330 469 178 54 1 &:"iC' ·-''-J 565
11 1223 189 :37:3 16:3 ~:2(J 590 101 51 15() 55(1
1 ') 1271 197 428 159 265 t:1 (I 63 53 15'?' 552 . ._
1 ~'3 1319 180 45:3 167 "'"':•?.":) ..... ~Jk 5:38 44 55 186 577
14 1-367 173 32C .. 24~f 23'~ 539 44 56 187 63:3
1 c.· ~· 1415 167 291 201 262 46:3 42 55 193 641
1.6 1463 157 348 167 273 307 4(1 55 235 625
17 23 1511 147 ~"387 14:2 150 210 44 52 231 697
1E: 71 1e.i43 1 e.~6 3::::3 1111 166 17:::: 45 54 212 1
19 •119 144 416 101 139 20'~ 4'~ 51 21(1
20 167 160 41:::: 9!1. 120 1~74 46 52 '243 • 84 117 134 :37 57 'r 21 215 222 32:=: 238 .... ,.-. 263 404 225 23(1 113 114 48 65 242 .,:.:. .. :.:.
2:3 311 (:.97 254 519 11.:::: 108. 3'~ 67 26:3
24 35·~-545 954 228 662 114 112 29 78 263
25 407 472 907 223 61e; 108 96 31 90 24:? .
2(:, 455 533 759 174 525 107 98 3;2 98 259
27 503 427 Et27 1"'"-1 6"" ... 11 119 ·~:3 32 107 273 -'•· ~...:>
.,.... .. -. 551 407 8:37 ~34 759 105 69 35 105 I
s:-•::-29~
2'" 5'~9 :3·~7 766 177 1665 1·00 40 115 53~
727 I 11 ::;;(:. :,::o 647 368 ~03 11:3 48 126 77:'fj
31 695 729 856 150 56 ·;:.28
a Records for the entire period are poor.
Table 6.88
Day
1
•"") ..:..
3
4
5
6
7
1 (l
11
l.2
1 ~'3
14
1 ::~
16
17
1 .-. -=·
L~(J
21
2:3
.-,r:
.L.oJ
26
27
29
3(1
31
Hean daily water temperatures in °C of the Chakachatna River at the
Chakachamna Lake outlet for the period August 1982 through November 1982.
Aug
6.5
:3. 1
::; . 1
:3. (J
8.4
:3.4
::::. l.
:3.3
:::. (J
7.6
7. 1
6.8
7. ~i
:3.5
8.9
7. ·~
6.1
7.6
8.5
Sept
8.4
7.9
8.1
8.(1
6.4
5.6
13.4
e:. s
7. '7
7.0
7.6
3. 1
5.8
6.5
6. t~
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.9
6.6
6.6
7.1)
6.9
7.0
7.(1
7.o·
7.0
7.0
7.0
Oct
7.0
6.9
/.:. .• :3
6.5
6.5
(:. •• (I
6.0
6. 1
6.0
6.(1
6.0
5.9
5 .. 5 ... .:' ._ .. ~
C' C' ·-· .. _.
s: c
·-..J. ·-· c:.· c-
.:;) .....
5.5
5.5
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.:3
4 •. 5
4.·5
4. 0·
4.:3
4.3
4.0
4.0
4.0
Nov
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0 -· ,-, ._:.. C•
.-. &:" .:.,. ......
3.4
~:. (J
3.5
.-. ~... ") . ._.)
3.5
..... a;. ..
-~. -·
:3.4
.-·, ..... .;. .. ...::•
2. ()
1. ~j
1.1
1.9
l. • !::i
~:. 4
:3. (I
:.;: • (J
:3. I)
2. e:
2.1
1.9
1.0
(1.8
-0.3
-1.1
-1 .. 5
-(),. :.::
-12.5
0.5
1.:3
-0.1
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
(J. :3
0.9
0.5
0.0
-·0. 1
·-0. 5
-12.8
-12.3
-25.1
-50.'0
-15.9
.-,.-. ~ -.:.·-=·· .J
-:37.6
-50.0
0.6
-0.8
-0.6
·-0. 5
-0 •. 8
-26.(1
-38.9
-12.6
-14.5
-12.4
-12.1
-.20. (l
-11.. '?."
-12.6
-12.:=:
-9.6
C' "" -._ .. ·-·
-7.0
-7.1
-16.0
-3.(1
-14.:3
-2.5
-1.6
-1.4
-1.0
-·1. 1
-4.6
-5. 9.
-19.6
-12.5
-14.3
-15.1
-13.1
-15.6
-17.0
-17.4
-16.4
-15.6
-14.0
-10.0
-19. 1
-7.3
-4.5 -17.5
-·~. 6 -5.5
-9.9 -~5. 0
-1 7. 5 -6. ::::
-5.0 -6.1
-3.4 -27.4
-3. 1 -15.5
-5.6
-3·~. 5
-50.(1
-4.6
-10.:3 -5.3
-12.1 -4.0
-10.3 -2.5
-7.1 -26.0
-·6. 9 -13. (;,.
-·~. 3 -1.3
-11. 1 -1.5
-11.4 -2.0
-11.5 -3.1
-9.(1 -14.8
-28.8 -2.4
-5(1.(1 -38.1
-16.6 -15.3
-5.(1 -13.5
-4.9 -1. 1
-6.0 -2.'0
-6.0 -1.3
-5.9 -0.8
-4.6 -1.'1
-4. (:., -0.9
-5.9 -37.5
-6. (I o. (I
-16.3 o.o
-26.8 o.o
-3. 1 -25. 1
-3.0 o. 0
-2.5 (1.(1
-3.11 -37.5
-5.3 -25.0
-5.6
Maya
-o.1.
0.1
0.1
-37.5
-24.·~
-0.1
-0.1
0.3
0.6
-24.5
-50.0
-37.0
'-2:3. 1
2.0
1.4
1.3
alnsufficient water depth over transducer.
Table 6.89 He an daily water temperatures in oc of the HcArthur River at. t.he rapids for
the period August 1982 through June 1983.
Day Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June
1 s. 2' .-, C• 0.5 0.0 o.o o.o 0.0 1 .-, 3.9 3.3 . ....:•. v . .::~ 4 c: 3.8 0.6 o.o o.o o.o 1.4 "') o;;;J o.o 3 .. e . 4.0 ..:..
3 4. 'il 3.6 1. 0 o.o o.o o.o o.o 1.5 3.8 3.1 4 .... 3.3 0.9 o.o o.o o.o 4 • ..:> 0.0 1.1 3.9 :3. 1
5 4.5 3.(1 0 c:.· o.o o.o o.o o.o 0.4 • 3. s 4.0 .;;;;)
~') 4.1 1.6 (1. (I o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o ... ~ .-. 5.4 woO
7 4.0 2.5 o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o o.o 4.1 4.3
•'::> 4.0 :2.5 o.o o.o o.o 0.0 o.o o.o .4.1 4;-t· ''-'
9 :3. ';"/ 2.5 o.o o.o o.o 0.0 0.0 0.4· 4.3 4.4
,1.(1 4.0 2.5 (1.(1 o.o· o.o o.o o.o 1.0 4.0 4.1
11 4.7 2 • .2 o.o o.o 0.0 (1. 0 o.o 1.0 -4.0 5.1
1 "'":• . ..:.. 3.0 2.1 o.o (1.(1 o.o (1.(1 o.o 1.0 .4.0 4.5
1 ~3 4.2 2.1 o.o (1.(1 o.o o.o o.o 1.5 4.0 4.5
14 4.4 2.0 o.o o.o 0.0 o. (1 o.o "1. 5 4.0 4.6
11:."" 5.4 1. 7 o.o o.o 0.0 o.o .o.o 1.5 4.0 4.0 ......
16 4.8 1. 9 o.o o.o 0.0 o.o o.o 1. 5 4.0 3.9
17 5.9 6.3 2.0 o.o o.o 0.0 o.o. o.o 1. 6 4.3 5.~ 1
1€~ !5. 8 6.6 1.0 o.o. (1. (I o.o o.o 0.0 t. e: 4.4 5.0
19 5.7 1. 5 0.0 0.0 (1. (I o.o o.o 1. 9 .. 4.5 4.5
20 5.8 1.1 o.o (1.(1 0.0 o.o o.o 1. 3 4.8
21 5. e. o. :3 0.0 0.1 0.0 o.o o.o 1.6 4.6
...... ,_, 4. ';il (1.9 (1.(1 o.o 0.0 o.o o.o 2.4 4.5 ..:: . ....:...
2:3 &::"' ....... o. :.;: c). (I o.o o.o 0.0 0.1) •") 1:" 4.4 ~ • ..:> .... ;;;;)
~:4 4.6 4.(1 (1. :3 (1. (I o.o o.o o.o o.o 3.(1 4.~ .-..-4.::: 3.1 1.0 0.0 o.o o.o o.o 0.1 3. 5· 4.5 ..:.;:)
2(.";1 c:" -, • .;J •.... 3.9 1.0 o.o o.o o.o o.o 0.3 3.5 4.5
27 5.4 3.7 1.0 o.o o.o o.o 0.0 O.c) 3.8 4.4
28 4.3 3.6 0.9 0.0 o.o o.o o.o 0.1 ..... c: .:J.;;;J .4. 4"
2';il 5.0 3.6 0.9 o.o o.o (1. (I 0.6 .3.5 4.1
30 4.2 4.0 0.5 (1.(1 o.o o.o 0.8 "3.5 .3.4
31 4.9 0.5 o.o o.o 0.8 3.0
0400c-7
Table 6.90. Stations sampled by gear type and date for April 1983
field program
Minnow Electro-Dip Gill
Station Trap Shock Net Net
1 4-10-83
2 4-10-83
3 4-9-83
4 4-9-83
5 4-9-83
6 4-9-83
8 4-9-83
11 4-10-83
12.1 4-5-83
13 4-5-83
13u 4-8-83
14 4-10-83
15 4-10-83 4-5-83
16 4-10-83
16A 4-10-83
17 4-10-83 4-10-83 4-10-83
22 4-10-83 4-05-83
25 Kid Lake 4-09-83
4-10-83
0400c-8
Table 6.91. Stations s~pled by sear type and date for June/July
1983 field program
Inclined
Minnow Electro-Fyke Dip Plane
Station Trap Shock Net Net Trap
1 6-23-83 6-29-83
1D 6-19-83 6-23-83 6-18-83
-6-28-83
2 6-24-83 6-30-83
3 6-26-83 6-30-83
4 6-20-83 7-3-83 6-19-83 6-20-83 6-19-83
-6-28-83 -7-5-83
5 6-20-83 7-4-83
6 6-20-83 7-30-83 6-19-83
-6-28-83
6A 6-29-83 7-4-83
8 6-22-83 7-4-83
9 6-28-83 7-4-83
10 6-22-83 6-29-83
11 6-23-83 6-29-83
11.5 6-28-83
12 6-27-83 6-29-83
13 6-25-83 7-4-83
14 6-26-83 6-23-83
15 6-27-83 6-23-83
16 6-22-83 7-4-83
16A 6-22-83 7-4-83
17D 6-29-83 7-2-83
18 6-30-83 6-30-83
18A 7-1-83 7-1-83
0400c-9
Table 6.91. Stations s~pled by gear type and date for June/July
1983 field progr~ (concluded)
Inclined
Minnow Electro-Fyke Dip Plane
Station Trap Shock Net Net Trap
19 6-30-83 6-30-83
19A 7-01-83 7-01-83
20 6-30-83 6-30-83
21 6-30-83 7-04-83
22 7-01-83 7-02-83
23 7-01-83 7-01-83
24 7-02-83 7-02-83
25 7-02-83
26 7-02-83
27 7-02-83
28 7-02-83
40 6-26-83 7-03-83
40A 6-26-83 7-03-83
41 6-23-83 7-03-83
41A 6-24-83 7-03-83
42 6-25-83 7-03-83
43 6-27-83 7-03-83
43A 6-27-83 7-03-83
44 6-28-83 7-04-83
44A 6-28-83 7-04-83
45 6-29-83 6-29-83
0400c-1
Table 6.92. Catch/effort by station for minnow traps -April 1983
Station
1
2
3
4
s
6
8
11
14
1S
16
16A
17
19
22
Dolly
Varden
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
0.00
1.00
0.00
1. so
0. 7S
1.00
1. 2S
0. so
0.00
2.2S
Coho
Salmon
0.00
0.00
o.so
4.SO
0.2S
0.00
1. 7S
o.so
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.2S
0.7S
0.00
0.00
Pygmy
Whitefish
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.2S
0400c-4
Table 6.93. Mean minnow trap c/f for each reach for juvenile Dolly
Varden and coho salmon -April 1983
Dolly Varden
(parr & juveniles)
Coho Salmon
(parr)
Upper Chakachatna
River (Canyon)
Mid-Chakachatna River
Noaukta Slough
Lower Chakachatna River
Upper McArthur River
Lower McArthur River
Chdkachatna Tributaries
Upper Chakachatna River (Canyon)
Mid-Chakachatna River
Noaukta Slough
Lower Chakachatna River
Upper McArthur River
Lower McArthur River
Chakachatna Tributaries
2.25 0.00
0.50 1.25
1.08 1.08
0.17 0.91
1.13 0.00
0.00 0.29
0.00 0.00
Stations 22, 23, 24
Stations 17, 17D, 20, 21
Stations 8, 9, 10, 16, 16A
Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6A
Stations 13, 14, 15
Stations 10(1). 11,12
Stations 18, 19
0400c-5
Table 6.94. Incidence of fish at sampling stations -Ap~il 1983
all collection methods
Station Dolly Coho Chinook Sockeye Chum Rainbow Pygmy
Numbe~ Va~den Salmon Salmon Salmon Salmon T~out Whitefish
1
2
3 +
4 + +
5 +
6
8 + +
11 +
13 + +
14 +
15 + + + +
16 +
16A + +
17 + + ... +
19 + +
22 + +
40A + t
42 + + +
0400c-3
Table 6.95. Percentage incidence of fish species at sampling
stations -April 1983
Species Percentage
Do 11 y Varden 66.7
Coho Salmon 66.7
Chinook Salmon 11 .1
Sockeye Salmon 16.7
Chum Salmon 5.6
Rainbow Trout 5.6
Pygmy Whitefish 5.6
0400c-2
Table 6.96. Collection by reach for juvenile salmonids by all methods -April 1983
Dolly Coho Chinook Sockeye Chum Rainbow Pygmy
Varden Salmon Salmon Salmon Salmon Trout Whitefish
Upper Chakachatna
River (Canyon)
Mid-Chakachatna River
+
+
Noaukta Slough + +
Lower Chakachatna River + +
Upper McArthur River
Lower McArthur River
+
Chakachatna Tributaries +
McArthur Tributaries +
Upper Chakachatna River (Canyon)
Mid-Chakachatna River
Noaukta Slough
Lower Chakachatna River
Upper McArthur River
Lower McArthur River
Chakachatna Tributaries
McArthur Tributaries
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ +
Stations 22, 23, 24
Stations 17, 170, 20, 21
Stations 8, 9, 10, 16, 16A
Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6A
Stations 13, 14, 15
Stations 10(1), 11, 12
Stations 18, 19
+
Stations 40, 40A, 41, 41A, 42, 42A, 43, 43A,
44, 44A, 45
0400e-ll
Table 6.97. Water quality profile of Chakaehamna Lake-April 1983
1 Dissolved Specific
Deeth Temeerature OX:J:&en Turbiditi Conducti viti 2114
(meters) (feet) (•C) (mg/1) (ppm) (mg/1) (umbos/em)
o2 o2 0.8 10.8 57 42 4.94
0.32 12 0.8 11.5 55 35 4.64
0.62 22 o. 1 11.9 56 31 4.04
0.9 3 0.1 12.3 58 28 4.14
1.2 4 0.1 12.4 63 27 3.94
1.5 5 0.6 12.6 63 22 3.74
3.0 10 0.6 12.4 64 27 3.94
4.5 15 0.6 12.5 66 22 3.94
6.1 20 0.6 12.5 69 21 3.94
7.6 25 0.6 12.4 73 20 4.04
9.1 30 0.6 15.0 67 20 7.0
15.2 so 0.6 15.2 69 19 7 .o
22.9 75 o. 7 16.1 67 23 7.0
30.5 100 0. 7 20.5 65 21 7 .o
45.7 150 1.3 20.9 64 20 7.0
61.0 200 1.5 14.3 65 21 7.1
76.2 250 1.7 14.2 62 20 7.2
85.3 280 1.8 22.1 74 20 7.2
86.93 2853
1 1 ft of snow on top of ice
2 ice greater than 2 ft in depth
3 bottom
4 possible instrument malfunction
0400e-15
Table 6.98. Water quality data by station -April 1983
Water Dissolved
Temeerature Ol!&en Conduetivit! Turbidit!
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Station <•c> (m&/1) (umbos/em) (m&ll)
1 2.7 1. 57 10.9 1.59 166.8 11.65 205.8
2 4.6 .12 12.6 .31 107.3 .83 104.3
3 3.9 .12 13.0 .11 103.0 1.23 61.5
4 4.5 .08 10.3 .96 93.0 1.0 75.5
5 .4 12.7 .80 41.0 18.0 73.5
6 3.6 .45 12.0 .75 104.3 .47 61.3
8 1.68 .11 12.9 .14 15.0 15.0
11 .77 .09 13.8 99.0 71.7
13 3.3 .85 11.05 1. 55 39.0 19.0 56.0
13U 1.8 12.5 13.0 2.0
14 3.5 .36 12.2 .51 15.8 .44 24.8
15 2.8 .52 12.3 .51 16.6 3.32 9.4
16 3.68 .18 12.4 .39 101.8 .74 43.8
16A 2.4 .43 12.5 .42 15.0 7.18 24.3
17 4.1 .09 12.7 .15 73.8 1.17 7.08
19 0.15 .09 13.9 .38 20.3 1. 79 25.5
22 1.4 .55 14.0 .68 117.6 7.78 34.9
24.11 16.4 8.3 27.0 83.0
24.2 2 14.2 7.9 855.0 84.0
1 Feeder stream from Mt. Spurr into Chakaehatna River near Station 24.
2 Another feeder stream from Kt. Spurr into Chakaehatna River near
Station 24.
48.98
4.92
6.10
11.86
25.5
5. 71
2.00
15.09
2.00
6.83
12.40
3.42
7.50
3.42
6.80
14.22
0400c-12
Table 6.99. Standpipe readings for selected incubation locations -April 1983
Descri(!tion
Side of Depth Velocity
Bank Distance Temgerature °C Surface 8 0.6 Total Depth
(Facing Up From Bank Surface Stand Water Surface Water
Stationl Stream) (m) (ft) Water Pipe (m) (ft) (cm/s) ( ft/s)
42A 0.9 3 3.5 4.7 0.5 5 39.6 1.3
42 2Mc 4.7 4.4 0.3 1.1 42.7 1.4
43 MC 6.1 4.3 0.2 0.8 27.4 0.9
44 3RB 0.9 3 5.0 3.7 0.1 0.4 35.1 1.15
45 4La 1.5 5 4.2 3.9 0.2 0.5 12.2 0.4
15 MC 3.9 3.7 0.1 0.3 24.4 0.8
15A 4La 1.5 5 3.9 3.9 0.1 0.4 21.3 0.7
11A (LB+O) North LB 0.2 0.5 4.2 4.1 0.1 0.4 6.1 0.2
End Left Most
Channel
17 ( LB+O) North LB 0.2 5 4.0 3.1 0.2 0.5 6.1 0.2
End Left Mqst
Channel
17 (LB+O) to sRa <0.03 <0.1 6.9 3.1
South End of Left
Most Channel
17 (LB+O) South RB 0.9 3 6.8 4.2 0.1 0.3 <3.0 <0.1
End of Left Most
Channel
11 (LB+2) 5LB <0.03 <.01 4.7 3.7
Adjacent Channel
Opposite 11 A
17 ( L8+2) LB 0.8 2.5 4.4 3.7 0.2 0.8 <3.0 <0.1
Adjacent Channel
Opposite 17 A
0400c-13
Table 6.99. Standpipe readings for selected incubation locations -April 1983 (concluded)
Description
Stationl
Side of
Bank
(Facing Up
Stream)
19 lB
19A 2 miles lB
North of 19
Chilligan River MC
Slough -
Upstream Portion
Chilligan River lB
Slough -
Downstream Portion
lsee Figure 6
2Mc = Mid-channel
3RR = Right Bank
4lB = left Bank
5wE = waters Edge
Distance
From Bank
(m) ( ft)
0.6 2
1.2 4
0.9 3
Temperature oc
Surface Stand
Water Pipe
1.6
l.B
3.2
1.4
1.4
1.7
3.1
0.9
Depth
Surface
Water
(m) (ft)
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
Velocity
@ 0.6 Total Depth
Surface Water
(cm/s) (ft/s)
21.7
30.5
1B.3
9.1
0.1
1.0
0.6
0.3
0400c-19
Table 6.100. Incidence of fish at sampling stations: all collection methods
Spring 1983
Dolly Coho Chinook Sockeye Chum Rainbow Pygmy Pink
station Varden Salmon Salmon Salmon Salmon Trout Whitefish Salmon
1 + ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
10 + + ... ... ...
2 + ... ... +
3 + + ...
4 + + A A ... ... ...
5 + + ... +
6 + ... +
6A + ... ... ...
8 + ... ...
9 + ...
10 + +
11 + +
11.5 +
12 + + + ...
13 + +
14 + +
15 + +
16 + + ...
16A + ... t
17 + + +
170 + +
18 + +
18A +
19 +
19A +
20 + ... +
21 + + ..
22 + +
23 +
24 + +
40 + +
40A + + ...
41 + ...
41A +
42 + + ...
42A + ... +
43 + + +
43A + +
44 + + +
44A ... + +
45
25
26 + +
27
28 +
A = Adults only
+ = Juveniles with or without adults
0400c-18
Table 6.101. Percentase incidence of fish species at samplins
station below Chakachamna Lake -June/July 1983
Species Percentase
Dolly Varden 95.1
Coho Salmon 68.3
Chinook Salmon 29.3 {26.9)1
Sockeye Salmon 31.7 (29.3)1
Chum Salmon 29.3
Pink Salmon 4.9
Rainbow Trout 7.3
Pygmy Whitefish 9.8
1 Juveniles only
0400c-14
Table 6.102. Mean minnow trap c/f for each reach for juvenile salmonids -Spring
1983
Dolly Varden Coho Salmon Chinook Sockeye
(parr & juveniles) (parr) (parr) (parr)
Upper Chakachatna 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00
River (Canyon)
Mid-Chakachatna 0.81 0.28 0.00 0.28
River
Noaukta Slough 1.64 1.36 0.00 0.00
Lower Chakachatna 1.37 0.37 0.03 0.00
River
Upper McArthur River 2.18 l. 54 0.00 0.00
Lower McArthur River 1.42 0.51 0.00 0.09
Chakachatna Tributaries 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00
McArthur Tributaries 0.88 0.22 3.26 0.00
Upper Chakachatna River (Canyon) Stations 22, 23, 24
Mid-Chakachatna River stations 17, 17D, 20, 21
Noaukta Slough stations 8. 9. 10, 16, 16A
Lower Chakachatna River stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. 6. 6A
Upper McArthur River Stations 13, 14, 15
Lower McArthur River stations 1D(l), 11, u.s, 12
Chakachatna Tributaries Stations 18, 19, 18A, 19A
McArthur Tributaries Stations 40, 40A, 41, 41A, 42, 42A.
43, 43A, 44, 44A, 45
0400c-17
Table 6.103. Mean electrofishing c/f for each reach for juvenile salmonids -
Spring 1983
Pygmy Round
Dolly Coho Chinook Sockeye Chum White-White-
Varden Salmon Salmon Salmon Salmon fish fish
Upper Chakachatna 1.45 0.00 0.00 0. 59 0.00 0.00 0.00
River (Canyon)
Mid-Chak.achatna 2. 56 0.52 0.11 0.43 0.41 0.00 o.oo River
Noaukta Slough 2.56 1.18 0.00 0.05 0.17 0.00 0.00
Lower Chakachatna 0. 55 1.23 0.04 0. 53 0.99 0.03 0.37
River
Upper McArthur River 2.25 4.97 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00
Lower McArthur River 0.66 0.68 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.06 0.06
Chakachatna Tributaries 0. 54 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
McArthur Tributaries 0.30 0.03 1.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Upper Chakachatna River (Canyon) Stations 22, 23, 24
Mid-Chakachatna River Stations 17, 170, 20, 21
Noaukta Slough stations 8, 9, 10, 16, 16A
Lower Chakachatna River Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6A
Upper McArthur River Stations 13, 14, 15
Lower McArthur River Stations 10(1), 11, 11.5. 12
Chakachatna Tributaries Stations 18, 19, 18A, 19A
McArthur Tributaries Stations 40, 40A, 41, 41A, 42, 42A,
43, 43A, 44, 44A, 45
0400c-l6
Table 6.104. Water quality data by station -Spring 1983
Water Dissolved
TemRerature Ox~gen Conductivit~ Turbid it~
Mean SD Mean so Mean so Mean SD
Station <•c> (mg/1) (umhos/cm) (mg/1)
1 9.8 10.8 41 83
lD 9.0 12.5 29 155
2 5.4 12.8 30 133
3 5.4 12.3 33 82
4 8.2 12.6 47 95
5 9.7 2.22 l 0. 5 1.98 54.7 24.99 85.7 49.98
6 7.4 12.8 39 92
6A 6.5 12.2 32 93
a 7.2 13.0 35 74
g 6.8 12.0 33 90
10 9.0 11.2 38 84
11 6.7 0.21 11.35 . 15 34.4 1.2 93.9 6.3
11.5 7.0 12.5 33 125
12 4.9 12.8 g 220
13 4.2 11 .1 ~2 160
14 9.6 9.4 16 19
15 3.5 12.7 12 194
16 5.3 13.2 31 86
16A 11 .7 3.06 10.3 1.96 70.3 24.42 54.1 18.32
11 5.9 10.5 31 74 30.00
110 5.7 12.3 31 112
18 6.7 10.7 42 51
18A 3.2 12. g 33 180
19 9.4 10.8 12 8
19A 5.8 12.3 8 11
20 11.3 11.7 65 3
21 6. 1 12.9 39 59
22 5.1 12.6 27 63
23 4.7 12.7 26 56
24 5.1 15.5 28 21
40 5.5 12.2 1 1
40A 5.2 12.4 1 4
41 6.7 12.6 1 16
41A 5.2 12.5 6 34
42 10.7 10.7 74 1
42A 7.2 12.1 64 12
43 9.3 13.3 76 1
43A 7.6 10.6 75 5
44 7.9 11.2 102 6
44A 7.0 12.5 102 12
45 9.2 7.0 46 18
0400c-10
Table 6.105. Water quality profiles of Chakachamna Lake, July 1983
Dissolved
Depth Temperature Oxygen Conduct hity Turbidity
(meters) (feet) c·Cl (mg/1) (umhos/cm) (mg/1)
0.0 0.0 11.1 10.8 35 36
0.3 1.0 9.5 11.3 35 40
0.6 2.0 9.1 11.2 35 39
0.9 3.0 8.9 11.1 33 40
1.2 4.0 8.9 11 .1 33 40
1.5 5.0 8.9 11.1 31 35
3.0 10.0 8.2 11 . 3 29 35
4.6 15.0 7.8 1l .3 27 38
6.1 20.0 7.7 11.4 26 36
9.1 30.0 7.1 11.3 25 31
15.2 50.0 7.0 11.6 25 14
30.5 100.0 6.9 11 . 1 32 11
83.8 27.0 6.5 12.3 28 3
0400c-6
Table 6.106. Standpipe readings for station 17 July 1983
Upstream Standpipe
Downstream Standpipe
Surface Water Temperature
SIDE CHANNEL (LB+2)
LEFT-SIDE CHANNEL -(LB+O)
Left Standpipe 4.6°C
Right Standpipe (closes to bank) 4.7°C
Surface Water Temperature 5.4°C
T~~LE b.l07e OISTRI6UTION OF CBSERVATIO~S JF DOLLY VA~C(N
ay VELOCITY INTE~VAL liN Oe2 FT/S INTER~ALSJ
v::LOCITY INTERVAL !IJU'IIII8ER OF PERCE:NTA:;E
IF TS/SJ 06SERVATIO~S OF TlTAL
-~--~---------------------------------
o.o 0.2 ~35 32.15
0.2 0.4 131 12.57
0.4 0.6 llq 11.tt2
c.& o.a 120 11.52
o.s 1.0 78 7 •'H
leO t.2 60 :.76
1.2 1.11 45 4e.S2
1elt 1.~ 52 5.-35
t.:; 1.8 =-.,.:) 5.2S
1.3 2.0 ~ o.s~
2.0 2.2 4 o.~s
2.2 2.'f 5 0.4~
z.tt 2.& 3 0.2~
2.5 2.~ 8 0.77
2.8 ~.o " 0.38
3.0 3.2 3 Ce2?
3.2 3.4 1 o.to
3.4 3.6 0 c.ao
3.~ 3.6 0 o.co
3.!) 4.0 0 G.GO
TOTAL = 1~lt2 TOT P::R = lCOeld
TA3LE 6.10?. DISTRIBUTIO~ OF OBSE~VATIJ~S JF )JLLY VARDE~
~y QEPTH I~TERVAL Cl~ 0.3 FT I~TERVAL$)
JEOJI"f I'JTERV~L
( F T)
a.J 0.3
0.3 0.6
D.~ 0.3
0.3 1.2
1.2 1.S
1.3 1.3
1.8 2.1
2.1 2.tJ
2.'1 2.7
2.7 .3.0
3.() .3.3
3.3 3.:,
.3.:, "!. ·)
NU"'BER OF
OESERYATIO~S
14
2.36
2!34
29~
~7
93
59
q
15
lit
<;I
2
"3
T:JTAL = 1110
PERCENTAGE
oF r::>u;..
1 • 2 ~
21.26
25.SQ
25.23
8.71+
8.33
=s.32
0.3&
1.~~
1.26
0 I Jl
Q .l.~
0.27
r:::r r-::R = l~J.Jl
TA3LE 6.109. DISTRI3UTIO~ OF oqs£RVATIO~S OF
COHO SAL140N
qy VELOCITY INTERVAL CI~ 0.2 FT/S I~TERVALSJ
V~LO:ITY l~T£RVAL
f~TS/S)
o.J 0.2
0.2 0.4
,J.I+ o.G
" , c.a .J•;)
0.3 laO
t.Q 1.2
1.2 1.4
lei+ 1.6
t.s 1.B
l.S 2.0
2.0 ?.~
2.2 2.~
2.4 2 • .;
2.!3 2.3
~.~ "3.~
3.J 3.2
3.2 3.4
3.'+ 3.6
3 • .; 3.0
3.'3 tt.:l
-.uM~fR OF
:JeS(RVATIO"'JS
205
7?.
'+3
32
2'+
21
7
'5
0
5
c
1
0
,)
0
a
0
0
c
\)
TOTAL = 422
PERCE\ITAj(
OF TO UL
43.32
19.'+3
1 0 .19
7.5~
'i.G~
'+ • , •j
l.GE:
l.lq
o.ao
l.ld
o.oo
:J.2tt
0. 3 0
o.ca
o. o a
J.OO
o.Jo
J.oa
o.oa
o.cJ
T)T p:::q = lCO.::::J
TABLE 6.110. DISTRIBUTION OF JcSE~VATIO~S OF
C011u SAL~Ol'.i
BY OEPTH I~TER~AL <IN 0.3 FT I~TERVALS)
DEPTH PHERVAL
(fJ)
o.u c.3
0.3 0.6
1.6 0.':1
!J.'; 1.~
1.2 1.3
1.5 1. ,")
1.8 2.1
?.1 2.4
2.4 ?..1
2.7 3.(1
3.J 3.~
.3.3 ? , ..;e.:>
3.!) 3.9
'.IU"'ciER OF
OBSERVATIONS
2
96
153
107
2&
41
17
1
1 a
3
1
J
G
r ::r ~L = 447
~ERC::"TA:iE
OF TJU_
0.45
13.24
~4.23
23.34
5.::12
~.17
3.>30
0.22
2.21+
a • ~, 1
3.:22
J • .)J
o.ao
TJT ~::R = HO .co
TAOLE 6.111. DISTq{~UTIJ~ OF OJSE~V4TIO~S ~F
CHI'IIJ)I( S.lU~0\1
3Y VELJCITY l~TE~VAL CIN 0.2 FT/S I~TER~ALS)
V~LJ:ITY I~TERVAL ~U~SER OF
C~TS/S) OSSERVATIONS
o.o 0.2 260
0.2 o.ct 21
J.!+ o.s S1 ,., '
l • :I o.~ 8
G.3 1.0 5
1. 0 1.2 17
1 • 2 1.4 3
1.,. 1.S u
1.s 1. 3 1
l.R 2.0 1
z.o 2.2 0
2.2 2.4 J
2.4 2.S 0
2.; 2.':! 0
2.3 3.J c
~.o 3.2 0
3.2 3.4 D
3.4 3.6 a
3.6 3.g 0 3., 4.J :J
TJTAL = 377
PER;:E-.TAGE
JF TOTAL
::~.:n
5.37
16.1~
2.12
1.33
4.'31
0."10
o.oo
0.27
0.27
0. 0 0
o.oo
o.oo
o.Jo
:J. ;j J
0. G 0
o.oo
o.Jo
:J.QO
o.oo
T JT P::R = 1JO.J2
TJBLE &.112. DISTRI~UTION OF 08SERVATIO~S OF
C'"ll"J1JK S4U10~
BY DEPTrl INTERVAL Cl~ 0.3 FT INTE~VALS)
DEPTH PHE~V~L
( FJ)
a.o 0.3
0.3 0.6
0.5 c.3
0. 3 1.2
1.2 1.5
1.3 1 ;:I . -
1.3 2.1
z.1 ?.4
2.4 2.7
2.7 3.J
3.0 3 •. 3
3.3 3.El
3.:, .3.7
'4U'1eEq ~F
•JBSERVATIJ~S
1
18
95
65
116
21
42
1 0
.5
1
a
21
(1
T 0 T \L = 3q9
PERCE'1!Ta\3E
OF TJTA!.
J.25
4.51
23.gl
1f.2~
2'-;.07
5.26
1~.5.5
~.'it
J.75
1. 75
c.oo
5.2:,
c. c 0
T'JT p~~ = ''1.~~
TABLE &.113. DISTRIBUTIO~ OF ~SSERVATIO~S OF
SOC«EYE SALMON
qy VELOCITY I~TEqVAL CI~ Oe2 FT/S I~TERV4LS)
v::LOCITY !'.jTERVAL \1~~:3ER OF PE C{C£\1 TA :;E
lFTS/S) OSSE~VATI'JNS JF T::>U:_
--------------------------------------
o.~ o.~ 76 54.&8
J.2 il.'+ llt 13.07
0.4 G.F. 12 3.~3
8.6 o.a 1 0.72
G.9 t.o 11 1.:n
t.o 1.2 ~ 6.47
1.~ lalt 1 0.72
t.4 l.S 7 5.0't
1.; 1.3 !::l 5.76
1.9 2.0 0 o.ao
2.0 2 ") .... c 0. 0 J
2.2 2.4 ·J o.':to
?.4 2.€:1 D o.oo
2.6 2.3 0 o.oo
::?.3 3.0 J o.oo
3.0 .3.2 0 a.oc
3.2 3.4 I) J.OO
3.~ .3. s G O.GO
3.:, 3.15 0 J.co
5.:i 't.O 0 o.oo
TOTAL = 13 J TOT P::R = 1J0.}'::
TABLE 6.114. DISTqi~UTI1l JF 03SE~VATtO~S JF
S1C<EYE SAL~Q•J
9Y DEPTH INTERVAL (J~ 0.3 FT I~TERVALS)
JE~T4 I~TERVAL ~U~dER OF
<FT) J8SE~VAT1U~S
:J.:J ::1.3 2
1.3 J.6 2'3
o.~ 0. '} ?.3
J. , 1.2 ~.5
1.2 1.3 5
1.3 1.6 9
1. 3 2.1 ~3
2.1 2.~ 0
2.4 2.1 1
.? • 7 3.() 1
~.J .3.3 0
3. 3 3.b 0
3.S 3. ~ 0
TJTAL = 1.3~
PF.:RC~"TA::;E
JF T')T!\L
1.45
21.01
1 ~ .• ~) 7
25.:.6
3eS2
s.s2
23.:;1
o.oo
0.72
~.72
c.:!o
G.oo
c.oo
TH P::ti = .:. 9 • LJ (
...
FIGURES
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,000
10,000
9000
-;;;-8000 -2
w 7000 (!)
a:
<(
J: u 6000
(J)
0 5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
August September October November December January
LEGEND
('\ Hydrograph based on datapod records
* Measured discharges
Note: Records are poor during August and
September and very poor after November.
February March April
FIGURE 6.144
May
Discharge Hydrograph of the
Chakachatna River at the
Chakachamna
*
Lake Outlet for the Period
August 1982 through May 1983
2800
2600
2400
2200
2000
1800
.!!! 1600
~
w 1400 ~ a:
<(
J: 1200 u
(/)
0 1000
800
600
400
200
0
August September October November December January February
LEGEND
;"\ Hydrograph based on datapod records
* Measured discharges
Note: Records are poor.
March April May June
FIGURE 6.145
Discharge Hydrograph of the
McArthur River at the
Rapids for the Period
August 1982 through June 1983
\ /
-~-"
,/ .... : '
'
\
'
:-:¥ , ..... ·/.,/ }
_.-"· .,. .,'')...,-L·-
/ ~
.,
\ ···-
\
'I\ \ __ t) (
':i \ ·' I n !f ",
\' ' '" \ '~ . '
'
\
\.
\
\ \ :~
\ ,,
\ \ ',
\ -· ~-\
,
I I ~'?wf
T R A
D
0
0
Recording Gauge Location
Staff ~auge Location and Sampl ing Station
Samplmg Stat i on Only
...
w
. ·' ll
........ -' ;.
FIGURE 6 .146
Location and Identification of
1983 Sampling Stations
Stream Stations
18A, 19A and 40-45A Added to
1982 Stations
D Recording Gauge Location
Q Staff Gauge Location and Sampling Station
Q Sampling Station Only
0 2 3 4
miles
\ •
·'
I
'
•. ..
~
5
I' , .,.
..
.......
.,
\ ·~
/
..-.. "· ,_
.c?/ .. __
-.....
: : "' ~
•' ' •
'~ '"<:'
v •• . .
t. .'· .
J ~ ..., ..,.
F I G U R E 6. 146
Location and Identification of
1983 Sampling Stations
Stream Stations
18A, 19A and 40-45A Added to
1982 Stations
0
MILE
1/2
FIGURE 6.147
Detail of McArthur River
Sampling Stations
at Stream 13u
1982
Detail Area F
1~
MILE
0 1/2 1 ---==:=:l
13 18
...
--. "l -... 1. -· ~-·ltJr..-
..., ..., ·-__,~ ... _ .. :::..
.,1 ... -...
FIGURE 6.148
Detail of 1983
Sampling Station
McArthur River Tributaries
E
Flow
A Frame with
Winch System
Plane Trap Floor
T
I
FIGURE 6.149
Inclined Plane Outmigrant Trap
14
a Millino Areas ~
-N-
MILE I 0 1/2
IJ 18
-----
FIGURE 6.150
~ ... -... ,.._
" ,-. .,
E
E
Chinook and Sockeye -Milling Areas
Streams 13X, 12.1,
12.2, 12.3
1983
Detail Area E
8 MUlino Areas
MILE
0 1/2
FIGURE 6.151
Chinook and Sockeye Milling Area
at Stream 13u
1983
Detail Area F
tn c
0
+'
30
d 24 >
L
Q)
tn
..0
0
...... l 8
0
v
0)
d
+' c 12
v
(J
L
Ct.)
a_
6
. 2 . 6 1.0 1. 4 1. 8 2. 2 2. 6 3. 0 3.4 3.8
Veloc1ty (ft/s)
f1gure 6.152
Percentage of Cbservattons of
Dolly Varden Juven1les
by veloc•tu Intervals
1982 and 1983 data
l
30~------------
Ul c
0
+'
25
0 20 >
L
v
U'l
,.0
0
....... 15
0
v
IJ)
0 I
fo1
o.. I
5
.3 . 9 1. 5 2. 1
Water O~pth
2. 7
( f t)
f•gure 6.153
3.3 3.9
Percentage of Observat1ons of
Oollu Varden Juventles
bu depth tntervals
1982 and 1983 data
l
I
s 4 -r------------------------------·---I
i
Ill c
0
+'
4.5
d 36 >
L
(\.)
lll
..0
0
(\.)
C))
d
+' c 18
(\.)
(,)
L
(\.)
Q_
9
• 2 . 6 1.0
'
1. 4 1. ~ 2. 2 2. 6 3. 0
Veloc1ty (ft/s)
3. 4 3.8
f1gure 6.154
Percentage of Observat1ons of
Coho Salmon Juven1les
by veloc1tu 1ntervals
1982 and 1983 data
I
I
361
I
I
30
Ul c
0
I +' I
d '"'4i > '·
L I (\)
Ul ! .0
0 I ...... 181
0 !
(\) I 0) l d
+' ... ~ C L:::
l\.) I
0 I
L I Cl)
a_
6 I l
i l
0
. 3 . 9 1. 5 2. 1 2. 7 3.3 3. 9
Water Depth (ft)
frgure 6.155
Percentage of Dbservatrons of
Coho Salmon Juvenrles
bu depth rntervals
1982 and 1983 data
12~0 r
I
i
I
I
1001
IJ)
c
0
+'
d
>
L
(\)
IJ)
..0
0
~ 60
0
~
0)
d
+' 40 c
(\)
0
L
(\)
o_
20
• 2 . 6 1.0
I
1. 4 1. 8 2. 2 2. 6 3.0 3. 4 3.8
Veloc1t~ (ft/s)
f1gure 6.156
Percentage of Observat1ons of
Ch1nook Salmon Juveniles
by velocity Intervals
1982 and 1983 data
!
i
I
i
I
l
i
I
lll c
0
..f-1
25
d 20 >
L
O.l
lll
..0
I
0 I
~ 151
v I
Ol I
d I
] lOi
u I
L r
O.l I
CL i
si
'
. 3 . 9 1. 5 2. 1 2. 7 3. 3 3.9
Water Depth (ft)
f1gure 6.157
Percentage of Observat1ons of
Ch1nook Salmon Juven1les
b~ depth Intervals
1982 and 1983 data
60T
I ' I
50
Ul c
0
.....
d 40 >
L
Ill
\II
.0
0
....... 30
0
Ill
(J)
d
...., ~)a c .:.
(U
0
L
~
a_
:a
• 2 . 6 1.0 1. 4 1. 8 2. 2 2. 6 3. 0 3. 4 3.8
Velocltl:J (ft/s)
F 1 gure 6. 158
Percentage of Observations of
Sockeye Salmon Juveniles
by velocaty antervals
1982 and 1983 data
l
I
I
! '
.iJ
d 20 >
'-~ I -g I
'~-lSi
0
rv
rn
(j I
~ lOi
(\) I
0 i
'-
(\)
CL
5
0
.3
-..
3.9
6 159 t ons of FIgure • Clbserva I
percent age of J uven I l es
Salmon Socke~e tervals d th In
b,y ep 1983 data 1982 and
..
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX B
Bl. ESCAPEMENT COUNTS BY STREAM
TABLE Bl-1. Chakachatna Bridge Area Sloughs (Station 17) Escapement Surveys
Date
June 18
22
July 20
Chinook
live carcass
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sockeye
live carcass
0
0
0
0
0
0
Water
Clarity
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Percent
Surveyed
100
100
100
TABLE B1-2. Chakachatna Canyon Sloughs Escapement Surveys
Chinook
Date live carcass
June 22 0 0
July 20 0 0
Sockeye
live carcass
0 0
0 0
Water
Clarity
Good
Good-Excellent
Percent
Surveyed
100
100
TABLE B1-3. Straight Creek Mouth and Sloughs Esca~ement Surve~s
Chinook Water Percent
Date live carcass Clarity Surveyed
June 18 0 0 Fair 100
22 0 0 Good 100
July 20 0 0 Good 100
TABLE B1-4. Chakachatna Tributar~ C1, EscaEement Surve~s
Chinook Socke~e Water Percent
Date live carcass live carcass Clarity Surveyed
June 18 0 0 0 0 Excellent 100
22 0 0 0 0 Excellent 100
July 20 0 0 0 0 Excellent 100
TABLE Bl-5. McArthur Tributary 13x Escapement Surveys
Chinook Sockeye
Date live carcass live carcass
June 22 0 0 0 0
July 20 72 0 70 0
Water
Clarity
Good
Excellent
Percent
Surveyed
100
33
TABLE 81-6. McArthur Tributary 13u Escapement Survey
Date
June 17
24
July 20
Chinook
live carcass
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sockeye
live carcass
0
0
16
0
0
0
Water
Clarity
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Percent
Surveyed
100
100
100
TABLE B1-7. McArthur Tributart 12.1-12.5 EscaEement Survets
Chinook Sockete Water Percent
Date live carcass Hve carcass Clarity Surveyed
June 17 0 0 0 0 Excellent 100
24 0 0 0 0 Excellent 100
TABLE 81-8. Clearwater Tributary to Straight Creek {19)
Chinook
Date live carcass
June 22 1 0
July 20 335 0
Sockeye
live carcass
0 0
0 0
Water
Clarity
Good
Excellent
Percent
Surveyed
100
100
APPENDIX B
82. CATCH SUMMARIES
",/ 2/83 HGE
TABLE 82-1. SUI'l~A~Y OF RESULTS: !"lN"'O.I TRAP SA"!PLES • APRIL. 17'3 3
LE"iGTH (("') .. STATION DHE REPLlCHE SPECIES LIFE STAGE IIIUMf:.ER :~EA~ s.c. •;
------------------------------------------------------------------------
• 1 DOH3 01 NI!\IE•SPI'fE STICKLEBACK Ji.JH'III:..E 1 0
02 'H"lE•SPI'IE STICI<LE8ACK JUt'EI•I LE :: 5.20 o.r.t~ ;) .. 0.5 'H~E-SPBE STICKLEBACK JUVENILE 6 5o'+k 0.30 c
03 "li'IE-SPIIIIE STICKLESA:K AOUL T 2 6.60 0.42 " 04 \IUC:-SPI"''E STICP<LEeA.CK JU\IE~HLE 9 :,.31' C·2C
04 \IUE-SPI\IE S TICKLEBAC ~ ADJLT 1 7.30 G. DO 1 • 2 ll04~3 Jl ~() FISH 1 G
)2 \IJ FISH 1 ,:;
B ljQ IZISH 1 "' i)lt 'lO FISt1 1 0
·• 3 B0433 ()1 :::01-10 SAL"10"l PA~R 1 7.60 o.oo 1
02 SL PlY SCJL=>I'.! AJJL T 1 9.30 c.ro 1
03 CJHJ SAL 'IJ\1 PAU 1 12.3 a o.co 1 • (}3 SLI11Y SC:.JL'.:)IN JUt'ENILE 1 &.Oii lh~O 1
H NO FISH 1 0
J30433 Jl :::OliO SAL"!0\1 PA~~ ? 1C.35 0. lC " 02 :o~;o SAL~0'4 PA~R 8 7at'l 2.41 :;.
:}3 JOLLY VARDE• ?A'<R 7 lC. 3 0 1.~~~ 3
03 COHO SAL"!O'.I I='A~R 5 8.31' 2.'+2 5
0'+ JOLLY VAROE-. ?A~R 1 ~.10 0. 10 1
• 04 COliC SAL "1J'i P4~R 5 r.oo 1.::1 j
0'+ SLl:"'Y SCJL=>I"' AJJ:...T 1 9.70 c. c c 1
':i 030'133 J1 TRAP OUT :lF wATER c
' -' 02 ~~0 FISH 1 l
03 ~0 FISH 1 .
~
04 Cv'"IO SAL"O'II PA~R 1 5.20 o.e:o 1
') lJJI+g,) 01 'iJ FIS11 1 ()
• 02 ~J Fr Sl1 1 0
6 030'+33 :ll 'JO FISH 1 ('
J2 TRAP MISsnG 0 .. 0.3 NO FISH 1 c
H 'JI:'>iE-SPI\<E STICKLE BACK 4JJL T 1 E:. 6 0 0. 00 1
100H3 01 JOLLY VA.ROEN PUR 2 s.oa 2.55 2
01 COHO SAL"'O ... PARR 1 11.80 0. no 1
01 COHO SAL'10'l JUvENILE 1 12.1!3 0. 00 1 • 01 SLI~Y SCUL 0 IN JUVENILE E.OO o.co 1
Ot \II!IIE-SPI'IE STICKLEBAC< JUiE!III..E .. t:.oo O.!'C 3 '"
01 'IIINE-SPI'IIE STICKLE9ACi< ADJLT 1 7.10 0 • [J c 1 • 02 :JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 1 Ua70 G.LO 1
02 COHO SAL"'O~ PARR 3 7.8C ~. (,4 3
02 "liNE-SPl'<E STICKLEBACK ADULT 2 7.10 0. 14 2
03 COHO SAL'10~ PA'lR 1 7.3G o.oo 1
0.5 SLI'4Y SCUL=>I'\1 AJJLT 1 ''h40 o.oo 1
"-··
(
.. --..... ~
. ..,
l
c
Rl 21R3
.J STATION DHE
T49LE B2-1. SU~~ARY CF ~ESULTS: ~INN3J TR~P SA~PLES
IIPR IL. 1983
REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUMBER
L E'J G TH < C" )
s. c.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(. 11
1 '+
15
16 c
j
17
• 1 1
22
•
J ..
lJOl!-43 03
H
04
04
04
U04'n 01
02
02
03
04
Ott
1J0'+~3 01
01
02
03
0'1
1J0433 01
02
03
H
1J0'133 01
01
02
J3
04
1J0'+~3 01
n
03
04
100433 01
02
03
04
04
o•
1)0433 01
02
03
05
~I~E-SPINE STICKLEBA:<
COLLY ~AR:JEN
COHO SAU101',1
~I~E-SPINE STICKLEBACK
~l~E-SPI~E STICKLEBACK
~I~E-SPI~E STICKLEBA:<
SOHO SAL~O~
NO FISH
::JOLLY VARDE~
'10 FISH
J 0 L L Y V A R D E ~i
~0 FISH
JOLLY YARDE~
SLI"Y SCJLillN
JOLLY VARDE'II
SLI~Y SCULPIN
JOLLY VARDEN
'10 FISH
\10 FISH
~0 FISH
~'JLLY VARD~'I
'JO FISH
\10 FISI-'
JOLLY VA~DEN
COrlO SAL"0'4
JOLLY VARDEf>4
'I::J FISH
~0 FISH
TR4P FROZE'II
TRAP FROlE'I
SLI.11Y SCULPIN
~0 FISH
JOLLY VARDEN
DOLLY VARDE.,.
'110 FISH
JOLLY VARDE'II
JOLLY VARDE!'l
PYGMY wHITE FISii
'10 FISH
COHO SAL"~O'II
J 0 LL Y VA 'l DE'~
JOLLY VARDEN
A::JJL T
P~H
PAH
JUVENILE
AJJLT
JU't'E ~H LE
PAH
PA~R
PA~R
PA~R
JU~ENILE
Po\~R
JU~EIIIl:..E
PA~R
PA~R
PARR
PA~R
JUV E''HLE
PA~R
Po\~R
PA~R
JU~El\IILE
JUVE'III i.E
PHR
P~~R
JU't'ENILE
2
1
1
4
1
1
2
4
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
'+
l
1
~
1
1
1
c
0
1
1
1
1
6
1
1
1
2
'+
1
7.1::10
12 .7 0
5.30
6o07
to90
5o40
5o5u
10.C5
9o&5
7.70
9.52
9o20
3.93
11.40
llo :'>0
10.27
15o3C
llo 10
Ool4
c.oo
D • JO
o.El
o.co
0 • G 0
0.'+2
3. 33
3. f:2
2. 1 c;
o.co
CebA
.::.co
J • C G
c 0 :-&
Q o G 0
0. ::.2
o.co
o.ao
0. 0 0
1. r.2
0 0 0 0
0. 0 0
2. 7b
011 .., l
~· ~ o.cG
2
2
1
1
4
1
l
2
4
0
Q
2
l
?
1
1
c
" r
0
1
0
0
1
1
~
0
2
"
l .. .,
3/ 2/!33
• , STATI31'1
t 16 A
" .. ..
•
••
•
•
·~
•
•
1
• ,
··-
c ..
DHE
1J0~~3
TAaLE 32-1. SUM~ARY OF RESULTS: ~~~~JJ T~AP SA~FLES
APRILo 1993
~EPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUMBER
03
03
03
04
COHO SAU10~
~I~E-SPI~E STICKLEGAC~
~l~E-SPI~E STICKLEBAC<
~I~E-SPI~E STICKLEBAC<
PA~R
JJVniLE
ADULT
Ai:JJLT
3
5
3
2
LDlGTI-: I C1-4)
s.r.
1 '::. 10 0.'78
5.52 1. lJ {.)
ho30 u. 1 7
7.55 c. c;o 2
'?,/ 2/83 F~CE
TABLE 62-2. SU'4~.\RY 'JF RESULTS: EL::CTRJFISHI'-IG SA"'PLES _f APRIL• 1B3
LENGTH ( C~D .. STATION DUE REPLICATE SPEC IE S L1 FE STAGE ~U'1£3ER 'lEAN s.c. N
------------------------------------------------------------------------,.
13 050~33 01 JOLLY VAil.DEN PARR 17 5. 82. Co OE: 17 •
01 SLI illY SCJL;)I'Il JUVENILE 1 6.oc c.cc
02 JOLLY VA'l0EI'4 PA~R 7 5.72 1. ~6 t .c 02 COHO SALI'I0'\1 PA~R 1 c
1 5 03H33 01 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 3 ... Q~ 1oce1 ~ -. ~ ..... ( 01 COHJ St.L'101'4 Pll'lR 8 3.20 0.22 F
01 SOCKEYE SALMON FRY 1 3.3(' o.ro 1
01 SOCKEYE SAL'10N PA'l.R 2 3.15 0. l 0 2
01 :t-ti~OO'< SAL'10N PARR 1 :~. 8 G 0 • G C 1
17 1)0433 01 COHO SAL '10'11 FRY 2 3.0G o.~f' 2
J 1 COHO SAL'40'11 PARR 9 3.66 0. t6
0 1 SLI'1Y SCJLPI!If JUVE'IIILE 5 4o'l2 1. c;e, .,
c J1 CHU~ SAL"'0'\1 PA~=t 2 4.05 0. 36 2
19 1J 0 4:!3 01 DOLLY VARDEI'4 PA=tR q e. o o ?. • 73 S·
01 :OHO SAL'10'\I PARR 1 7 • .50 o.co 1
01 :11INOOK SAL'1CN PARR 1 7o2G voi:C 1
01 SLI!'lY SCUL;) I.~ JJVENI:..E 1 6o4G O.;...C 1
01 SLI'1Y SCJL;)l"' AJJLT 1 8. 3 0 o.oc.
22 05H'J3 )1 DOLLY VAHDn PA~R 3 8.10 3.~B ?:
J2 JOLLY VA ROE"-P\RR 5 11.42 2. u " ( J3 JJLLY VII=IDE'II P4il.R 2 lvo!'5 Q ol u ;:
03 JJLLY VARO::~ JUVE~ILE 4 12.'15 1. 71 '+
~2 c 50 4g 3 01 ::J)LLY VA~DC::'II PA~R 7 5o29 0. 52 7
[)1 COHO SAL":J'II FRY 1 3.10 ~.oo 1
Jl COHO S.AL"'0'\1 Pb=tR 1 3.20 C.30 1
0 1 SOC'< EYE SAL "'ON FR 1 1 .! • 1 a G • C 0 l
40A 010'133 :n DOLLY VARDE:'ol PnR t '5.23 1 • 10 b
<I 01 COHO SAL~O'II PAH :3 6o2C 1. t' 2 . _,
01 RAlii;BOW TROUT p~~R 1 ~.3C e.cc 1
01 SLl"'Y SCULPIN JUV~~ILE 3 5.65 L.. !.Jb. . _,
• 01 SLI"'Y SCUL;)I'\1 ADJLT 1 c
01 ~IIIE-SPIIJE STICt<LEBAC< JUVENI ;.E 3 4.47 0 • ri 1 3
•
I
l
-·,, H 2 I 9 3 F .:. C. E
TA3LE 32-3. SUMMARY OF ~ESULTS: DIP ~ET SAMPLES
' APRIL, 1393
LE\GTH <U'l
.j STATION OI!.TE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NU~BER s. r.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
• 17 130~33 01 JOLLY YARDE'II P~~R 1 4.10 o.oo 1
ill CO>iO SAL'10~ PA~R 28 3.7"' Oo't2
01 SJC!{EYE SALI'ION n1 1 • n S::lCKEYE SAL'1QN PARR 12 4.01 o.~o F.
01 CHU'1 SAL'-10~ FRY 4 ~.92 0 • 3C 4
01 CnU:-1 SAL~ D ~ p~~~ &f' 3.90 0. 22 ?2 ..
•
•
•
•
•
(
,~ .....
( 3/ 2/83 r~:;E
TA9LE 52-4. SJ'1'1AR't OF RESULTS: '41NNOii TRAP SA'1FLES ,_.
JU"'Et 1983
LE:'IGTH ( CP•l) • STATION OHE REPLICATE SPECIES LlC'E STAGE NUH!?ER MEAN SoLo '· -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I 1 2H&n 01 THREE-SPINE STIC'<LEBACt< AilJLT p. a.oJ 1o 11 " 02 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADJL T 2 8.35 0 0 .:.6 <'
03 COHO SAL "'ON PARR 1 9o70 u. :j a .... 03 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 12.2 () Oo2C
04 DOLLY VA~ DE~ PA~R 2 l.3o50 0. lll 2
04 JOLLY VARDEN JUII;:NILE 2 13. 10 1o ge 2 • H THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK AJJLT q Ho2'S ()o42 4
05 DOLLY VAROEr• PAH 2 lloS 0 c 0 71 ;_
0'5 COHO SAL~ON PA~R ? 9oo0 1 0 70 ~ ~ 05 COLLY VARDEN JU~E~ILE c 14.70 1o'JP. 2
05 THREE-SPII\IE STICKLEBACK AIJJL T 12 Ro15 Oo42 12
0& JOLLY VARDEN PA~R ;> llo 35 1 0 Q(, ? '~ ~5 JOLLY VAR::JE~ JUIJE~I LE 2 HolD 1o 13 2
J& THREE-SPI"E STIC'<LEB-'.CK AJULT 1 0 11.5.5 0. -~l:t 1 0
07 JOLLY VARDEIIi JUVENILE 2 15.15 1 0 ""
.! • 07 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ACJLT 10 8.37 0. 24 1 0
09 'lilliE-SPINE STICKLEBACK JlH E"'I ~E 1 4.70 OoOO 1
t OS JOLLY VARDEN JUIIEr'H LE 1 13.10 0. c 0 1
09 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK AJULT 5 q.22 0. ::r:< r:
OS SLIMY SCULPI"l ADULT 3 2o87 Go41 3
~, 0, SLII"Y SCULP PI JUVENILE 2 5o8U G. 71 ;
03 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT 1 7.60 ooro 1
1 0 CHINOOK SAL "'ON PA~R 1 9 ol 0 O.CG 1 • 10 JOLLY VARDE'4 JUIJ£~1LE 2 14. 1 () Go C C 2
l 0 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK AD JL T 11 p,. 4 1 G •. ~ 1 11
2 23J~93 02 ~OLLY VAfiDEN PA~R 1 7o53 c.:r 1 J 02 COHO SAL'10N PA~R 1 10.00 o.cc 1
02 JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 3 11 0 23 1o ':12 3
,.,~,..,
t 2 2'3533 01 '10 FISH 1
32 COLLY VAROE"' PA~R 3 4C.AO 51 ... 7 :
02 ;:>OLLY VAq DEN JUHNI LE 5 12.4 4 1. 44 5 • 03 LlOLLY VARDEN PII~R 2 9.3~ c. 7e 2
03 LlOLLY VARDEN JU~ENILE 1 1:!..50 o.co 1
03 SLI"'Y SCULPIN JUYE~ILE 1 bolO 0 0 ~ 0 1 .J G3 SliMY SCULPIN ADULT 1 e.3o OoCG 1
Jl+ DOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 1 11.30 0. 0C 1
01+ Sllfi1Y SCULPIN JUVENI:..E 1 f: .• 7 0 uoGC 1 ~ 0'5 SLIMY SCULPII\I AJUL T 1 7.90 0 0 00 1
06 ~0 FISH 1 c
07 DOLLY y.aqDE"' JUH'41 lE 1 1 0. 10 a.oo 1 J a~ THREE-SPI"JE STICI<LEBACK JUIIE~ILE 1 8.20 o.cc 1
08 SLI~Y SCULPIN ADJLT 2 8.30 u. 2e 2
Ol '40 FISH 1 r • 10 COHO SAL"10'4 PARR 1 3.30 o.oo 1
10 JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 2 13. 1 '5 0. 1 c 2
10 SLI1'lY SCULPIN JUVE'4ILE 1 4.30 O.GC 1
10 THREE-SPINE STICKLE3ACK AJJLT 1 6 olC 0 • .j L, 1
.,.(
~-I
'3/ 2/83 PA&E 2
Jt TABLE 32-4. SUM'1ARY OF RESULTS: "'lNNO.J TRAP SAI'!PLE S
JUNE• 1993
LENGTr CC"1) • STATION OHE REPLICATE SPECIES LI=E STAGE NUMBER MEAN s. o. ~~ ------------------------------------------------------------• "5 2:.06133 1)1 ~OlLY VARDEN PARR 2 9.4~ 0.10 2
02 DOLLY YARDE'.~ PARR 2 11.'5~ 0. 10 2 .. (J2 DOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 2 12.25 2.33 2
03 'tO FISH 1 0
0'4 'tO FISH 1 0 • 05 DOLLY VARDEN PUR 1 5.8\l o.oo 1
05 SLIMY SCULPIN ADULT 1 7.10 0. 00 1
0!3 TRAP BURl EO 0 • 07 DOLLY VARDEN JUIJE'4I!.E 2 11.'+5 1.!03 2
H THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK AClJLT 1 s.oc a.co 1
()9 NO FISH 1 c
H OOLLY VAROE!<4 PUR 1 <>o5C O.GO 1 ·1 09 SLII'IY SCULPIN ADULT 1 1C obu Q • ilO
10 '\10 FISH 1 (j
• 2il0593 01 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R ?. 9.45 lo 'il 2
01 THREE-SPINE STIC'<LEBACK AOJLT 1 F..oo 0 • OC 1
(12 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 3 Aol3 0. 79 7 • "" 03 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 4 11.45 2. 51 '+
03 SLIMY SCULPIN JUVENILE 1 8o10 o.uc 1 , 0'+ ~0 FISH 1 c
05 '\10 FISH 1 G or. !J()LLY \IAR0£'1 PA~R 1 11. 1 J 0 • G C 1 • 0!3 <;LIMY SCULPt"' AOJLT 1 10.40 n.;,; o 1
J7 JOLLY VARr>E'I P'~R 1 10.6:1 c. 0 0 1
01 COHO SAL..._0'4 P.\'R 1 8. 7C a. 8 c 1
07 DOLLY VARDEN PA'R 1 13.20 0. oc 1 .. 07 COHO SALMON PA~R 1 7.50 o.oo 1
07 SLIIIC't SCULPI"' A~JL T 1 lC • 0 !l 0 • GO 1 • JB DOLLY VARDE"J PA.U 1 13.3C 0. JC 1
OR SLIMY SCULPI"' AJULT 1 8.5G c.co 1
09 ·w FISH 1 0
1 0 COHO SAUI0'4 PAU 6 5.12 0. 92 6 J, 10 SLII"Y SCUL>'IN AJJLT 1 9.30 o.co 1
5 210!:.33 01 COHO SAL"'J'i PA~R 2 lloilii I;. 3~ ;' ., 01 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT 3 8.55 Oob5 3
02 COHO SAL !'ION PAitR 5 12.0'\ lo '+6 5
02 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK AOUL T 35 8o45 O.h5 .35 • 03 SOCKEYE SAL "'ON PHR 1 5.60 0. 00 1
03 SLIP'Y SCULPIN JUVENILE 1 3.50 c. ao 1
03 THREE-SPINE STICI<LEB,CK AJJLT 2 8o65 JolC 2 • 0~ THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADJL T 1 8.'+0 il. ()() 1
0~ THREE•SPINE STICKLEBACK AD:JLT 2 &.3~ 0.50 2
05 SLIMY SCULPIN ADULT 1 9.70 o.cc 1 • 05 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADJLT 1 8o2C o.co 1
0& COHO SAL "'ON PHR 1 8 .lll o.oo 1
IH, THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK AD LILT 4 7.07 1o 12 4
07 THREE-SPUE STICKI.EaACK AJJL T 1 8 • .30 0. \JC 1
OS JOLLY VARDEN Pfo'tR 2 10.85 2. 48 2
1 d/ 2/83 i'AGE 3 .. TABLE 82-'1. SJP414A R Y OF RESULTS: 14INNOil Tf< AP S~MPLES
JUNEt 1993
LE~1GTh CC'-'l
.I ST HI ·JN :::li\TE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUMBER -.n~ s. r. N -----------------------------------------------------------------------··-r 5 2aOt>33 03 SLIMY SCULDIN JUVENI:..E 1 '+o6C o.oo 1
09 THREE-SPINE STICKLESo\CK A::l JL T 1 !:lo30 0. ~(l l 0~ THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT " 8.05 0.20 4 , 10 TRAP MANGLED 9Y BE fiR 0
210633 01 DOLLY VA~OEN PHR 2 10.90 1.:'11'1 2 '4l 01 SLIMY SCULPIN ADJLT 1 l G. 8 0 o.co 1 '.)2 ::lOLLY VA~OE-. Pl\~q 1 12.00 0 • GO 1
" 03 DOLLY VARDEN Pf;~R 5 ll • .3 u 2. ::& ';)
(]I! SLIMY SCULPI"' uUIIE'HLE 2 5.'1~ a. 14 2
0'+ THREE-SPINE STIC'<LEBACK AO:JL T 1 8.70 0. 00 1
1 !)5 '40 FISH 1 c
06 JOLLY VARDEN PAqR 1 12.90 o.oo 1
06 :OHO SAL'10~ Po\~R 1 9.40 o.oc 1
06 SLI!o!Y SCULD ll'i JUVENILE 1 s.o:.o 0. co 1 ( 07 JOLLY VAil DEN PA~R 1 10.20 0. lJO 1
:J7 COHO SAL 140"1 PARR " 5.75 .3. 18 2
J 01 SLI~Y SCULPI!'t ADJLT 1 Fso6£i o.~:o 1
~ 03 JOLLY VARDEN PHR 4 11.35 J.f5 q
ll3 SLIMY SCUL;>I~ JUVENILE 1 5.00 o.co 1
[)3 JOLLY VARuEN ~ARR 1 3.0C 0. c 0 1 --: 09 THREE-SPINE STICKLE3ACK A!)UL T 2 8.25 J. 10 2
09 SLIMY SCULDIN ADULT 1 8.50 c.co 1 .. 10 ~0 FISH 1 0
nos33 a 1 CHlJ"' SAL~J\l PA~~ 1 3.30 (!. 0 0 1
::11 SLIMY SCULPI'J JUH!'<ILE 1 e..sc G.uo 1
02 COHO SAL'~JN PA~R 1 4.10 0. (; 0 1
'.l.S THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK AD :JL T 1 Ro20 o.co 1
04 '40 FISH 1 0 ", 05 HtREE-SPP.IE STICKLE34CK A!)ULT 1 6.1C o.no 1
0& J;JLLY VA:/.ClE'11 PA~R 1 11 • 2 c c.oo 1
H '10 FISH 1 c • 'JB CHUI4 SAL"'O\j PARR l 'lo6C (J. [i(l 1
H NO FISH 1 0
1 0 :OHO SAL 'lOlii PA'I.'l 4 4.9'5 0. !,<; 4
1 0 SLI!'IY SCULPIN ADULT 1 Ro4C 0. c 0 1
9 2~%3.5 01 JOLLY VARDEN PA ~R 4 5.27 1. 37 4
02 DOLLY VARDEN PA'lR 2 9.75 3.(;4 2
03 NO FISH 1 0
04 :JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 4 9.35 1. 36 q c IH SLP1Y SC:JL 0 I'i JUV'E'H:..E 1 5.70 Oo(;C 1
05 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 11.0 c O.GO 1
0& 1110 FISH 1 0 .. 07 SLI~Y SCULPIN JUHNILE 1 5 • .50 o.co 1
08 '<0 FISti 1 G
03 SLIMY SCULPIN JUVENILE 1 4a'O'O 0 • 00 1
03 <;LI"'Y SC:JL:>n A)JLT 1 llo30 c. co 1
10 \10 FlSH 1 Q
< '')
31 2/3j P ~ GE 4
TA3LE 32-4. SUM"'ARY OF RESULTS: _,I 'P4Jti TRIIP SA"'PLE S c JUNEt 1983
u.:~CTI-' (Cl'!) .. .... STo\TID~ DUE R-EPLICATE SPECIES LI>='E STAGE NU!1!6Ef? MEAN s.c. ~ ---------------------------------------------------------------------t
1 0 220&35 ()1 DOLLY VARDE:'>4 PA~q 2 10.:30 4 • ..::8 ;:
02 GOLLY VARDEN PA~R 4 13.j() lo'tl .. • 03 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 3 9.50 2. ()0 3
011 '(0 FISH 1 c
05 JOLLY VAROE!\4 PA~R 1 Hl.'H 2.2& 7 ( 0& DOLLY YARDE~ PA.~R p '?ol3l 1.6(. B
0& THREE-SPl'lE STIC!(LEBAC"< A3JLT 2 8.40 0.14 :::
07 !:JOLLY VARDEIII PA~~ " 11.1+2 0.67 4
0:! JOLLY VA~ DEN ?4~~ 1 llo6U o.co l
O:J DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 2 11.90 I. :1& 2:
10 ::lOLLY YARDE~ PA~R 7 '1.64 1 • .?~ 1 ,.r:; 10 THREE-SPINE STICJ<LEBACK AC!JLT 2 e.75 0. :<2 ~. <.
11 2306!!3 Ol \10 FTSH 1 ~ c 02 T!-tREE-SPUE STIC<L.EBAC'( AJJL T 1 l:lo30 0 • GO 1
03 COHO SAL'IO'l PA~R 5 9oOG 1. a 1 '5
J3 DOLLY VAROE"C PHR 1 10.80 !) • ~ 0 1
J3 COHO SAL "'ON PHR 1 9.00 J.:c 1
03 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 1i.l.9C a.cu 1 ... 03 THREE-SPINE STICKL[EiACt< PA~R 1 8.50 0 • L·O 1
03 C O'iO SAL "'O!If PA~R 1 6.20 c. 00 l
03 SLil1Y SCUL.?I-. PA'Ht 1 2o6U 0. 0 c 1
03 'H'II£-SPINE STICKLE oACK JU~EI,IILE 1 '3.30 o.oc 1 c J3 TnREE-SPI:'iE STICI<LEBA~K A'JJL T -~ 8.33 "" '( ~ .5 .J ..... c.:
01+ DOLLY VAROE"l Ai:JJLT 1 9o40 c.co 1
05 .-.o FISH 1 0
05 "40 FIS11 1 ()
ill DOLLY VARDE'4 PA~R 1 13.'30 0. ~ Q 1
o-···-.. 07 ;:lOLLY VARDEN JU'iENI LE 1 14.00 o.c.o 1
OB 'iO FISH 1 c
03 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK A)~L T 1 8.50 u • L 0
c 10 TRAP MISSING 0
12 270!id3 Jl TRAP BUR I ED 0
J2 'JOLLY VAROE'i PHR 1 7.70 :;.co 1 -32 JOLLY VARDEN JU'iE,.I LE 2 11.9G 1. 27 2
03 TRAP BURIED 0
04 COHO SAL't0'4 PA~q 3 6.15 1ol+7 3
01+ JOLLY VARDE:N PHR 1 10.2 0 0. 00 1
01\ CJHO SAL"''::l'4 P&.~R 1 7.70 o.oo 1
01\ DOLLY VA~ DEN PA~R 1 10.10 0. 00 1 • 01+ COHO SAL"'O~ PA'R 3 s.oo C.<:~& 3
01+ DOLLY VARDE!II JUVENILE 4 12.75 1.16 4
04 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK AOJLT 1 B.E.O o.oo 1 • 05 'JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 10.3 0 a.co 1
05 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK AD~LT 1 a.so (). c 0 1
05 SLIMY SCULPI!\1 ADJL T 1 bo20 c.co 1
0!> J::ILLY YARDE~ PARR 1 Ulo8C G • GO 1
OS \lOLLY VARDEN JUYENIL.E 1 12.40 O.GO 1
1
t
dl 2/83 P~GE c:;
' TARLE 82 _,.. SU'111ARY JF RESULTS: 'l["ll"':l~ HAP SA"PLES
JUNE. 1983
LE'liiTH (C~,
• ... STHl::J"ll <:I HE ~EPLICATE SPECIES LIc-e:: STAGE NUMEER .. EAN S.D. N ----------------------------------------------------------------------
12 2706~3 0& SLIMY SCULPIN A):.JLT 1 <lo20 fJ. 00 1 07 SOCKEYE SAUl ON PA~~ 1 .s.so o.co 1
03 TRAP BUR lEv 0 I 03 TRAP MISSI~G 0
10 TRAP HISSI~G 0
( 13 250633 01 DOLLY VA~DE"ll P4~R 4 6o50 2.13 '!
::12 CHUM SAL'10 .. PA~R 1 3.50 o.oo 1
02 !JOLLY VAROE"' PA~R 1 (,. 70 0. c 0 1 ()3 DOLLY VARDEN PHR 1 c..ttil G. C 0 l
H JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 2 5.35 1. 63 2
05 "JO FISH 1 r '~ 0& 'tO FISI'i 1 c
07 TRAP our OF iiATER 0
03 CO'iO SALII!J't PHR 1 6.30 0. 0 0 1 ( 0~ DOLLY VARDEN P•HR 10 5.88 1. lilt 16
~B COHO SAL'10~ PA~R 2 4.30 o.co 2
03 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 b.30 0.:::0 1
::l~ COHO SAL~O"' PA~R 1 3.go o.cc
0~ OOLLY VARDEN PA~R 4 5o82 lo 14 4
• 09 COHO SAUl ON PAi'lR 4 '+o35 0. 2.6 4 oe JOLLY VARDEN PA'{R 1 5.30 o.::o 1 oa CJHO SAL"''O'II PA~R 7 4o33 0.35 7
08 JOLLY VA!10EN JUI/ENILE 1 11.20 c. co 1
iJ3 JOLLY VAROE\1 PA~~ 14 .'1.25 1.:3 14
H JOLLY VARDEN JuvENILE e 11.25 0. ')7 ~
0~ SLIMY SCuLPIN A:CvLT 1 9.40 .:io~D 1
10 JOLLY VA~DEN P~~R 1 10.20 o.co 1
14 2506'!3 01 COriO SAL'I:l't PARR 7 :.59 3. 35 7
Jl J:lLLY VA~DEI'I PA.~R 3 4.47 0.1'1 3
01 COHO SAL'1J'i PA~1! 1 3o70 iJ.!;O l
01 JOLLY 'JARDE!'-4 PA'R 1 4.3:; 0.80 1 ' 02 JOLLY VA11DHI ?A~~ 1 7.30 J. ~0 1
03 \10 FISH 1 ll
'H JJLLY VARDE\1 J:.h'E'HLE 1 12.1+\l c.eJ 1
J5 COHO SAL "'ON PARR 1 s.<:Jo o.co 1
05 JOLLY VAR::JE::-.1 PARR 1 6.30 o.oo 1
05 JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 2 11.35 0.10 2
Qf, COriO SAL '10, PA~R 1 3.30 o.oo l
07 'tO FISH 1 (j
OS COHO SAL'!J, PARR 17 4.1+9 0. 30 17 .I as JOLLY VARDEN PA~R l :-.50 c. co 1
D~ COHO SAL"'0!\1 PA'l.R 1 'h10 c..oo 1
a~ \10 FISH 1 0 • 10 TRAP HISSl'tG 0
1:, 270o33 01 DOLLY VARDEN JUwE:.;ILE 1 7.00 o.oo 1
02 \10 FISH 1 " 03 !110 FISH 1
J.
"1 8/ 2/33 FA..>!:
f TA3LE 82-4. SU'1)lARY OF RESULTS: "'INNOW Tl<; AP SII,.FLES
JUNE., 1363
LE'H7TH < C" > .. STATTON Do\TE REPLICATE SPECIES LI =E STAGE ~U~BER ~EAt-. s.o. '; ------------------------------------------------------------------------
' 15 270€.93 04 'tO FISH 1 J
05 '10 FISH 1 c
06 '40 FISH 1 c ~· 07 'tO FISH 1 ~
OB 'lO FISH 1 :
09 :JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 <t.lG 0. 110 ' 10 ~0 FISH 1 ~
1":. 220533 01 '110 FISH 1 (I r J2 JOLLY VAf!OE"l P4~R 1 flo20 0.!:0
03 -..o FISH 1 8
H JOLLY VARDEN PARR 1 'h1D o.r.o , .. il5 ... o FISti 1 0
01> SLIMY SCUL 0 I'II AOJLT 1 12.0 J o.oo 1 1)7 JOLLY VA~ DEN JUVE'III!...E 1 1~.130 0 • GO 1 ( 0'1 JOLLY VAROE'II PA~R 't 10.85 1. 44 4
H DOLLY VAROE~ PA~R 2 1C .'+5 0. 92 2
10 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 3 9.40 1. 15 3 c 10 JOLLY VARDEN JUV£:t-41LE 13.80 o.c& 1
17 2'106~3 01 JOLLY VARDE'I PA~R 1 'lo'iG 0. C'O 1 ·"{ 01 ::lOLLY VAROE'II JUVE'I!LE 1 10.20 o.oo 1
02 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 9.60 o.oc 1
03 :\10 FISH 1 C· ( Ofle COH(J SAL '10 ... PA~R 1 4.70 o. ou 1
05 \jO FISH 1 0
05 :JOLLY VARDEN N~R 1 9o3J 0. Q() 1 !'" (]f, JOLLY VA~ DElli JUVE"'ILE 1 11.5 0 :~.co 1 ..
07 JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 1 11.0 c o • ..;o 1
B DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 <;.ao ::1. C·O 1 t B 'JOLLY VARDEti JUVE~lLE 1 1't.30 c..oc 1
;1'1 JOLLY VA~ DEN JUVENI~E 2 11.1:> lo<.O L
03 SLl~Y SCUL.,II'-4 A~ULT 1 '::o90 o.oo 1 c 10 '10 FISti 1 c
1 8 3J0&33 :J1 vo FISH 1 c l 02 ~0 FISH 1 t
03 ~0 FISH 1 c
'" 0'+ JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 !'io10 o.r;o 1 .. .. 05 SLII'IY SCULPI"4 ADULT 1 7.70 o.co 1
Of:. \jQ FISH 1 :1
07 'JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 1 12.20 O.C\0 1 ' og :JOLLY VARDEI'O PA~R 1 9o90 o.cc
H ljQ FISH 1 u
.t 10 'iO FISH 1 0
l':J 3JJ!)33 01 TRAP HANGLEO BY BEAR 0
02 NO FISH 1 e
03 \JO FISH 1 G
04 \jQ FISH l ()
.{
(
'l/ 2/83 PAGE. 7
TABLE 32-~. SJM"'ARY OF RESULTS: ~IN'IIOioi TRAP SA!'1PLE S .~ JUNE• 1983
LENGTH ( CM) .. STATIO\! DHE ~::PLICATE SPECIES LI "'E STAGE 'lUMBER "'E liJ s.o. ~1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
19 3JOo33 03 DOLLY VAROE'j JUVE'IILE 1 11.20 o.oo 1
06 '110 FISH 1 0
J7 '110 FISH 1 G I. J'3 DOLLY VARDE'II JUH~I !..E 1 12.60 o.oo 1
H ~•o FISH 1 (
10 '110
{:
FISH 1 0
10 1'10633 01 TRAP 8URIEQ 0
02 ~OLLY VA~O~'II Po\~ll 1 <:lo10 0. 2 0 1
J2 SOC<EYE SAL~0'-4 PA~'l. 1 lfo4C o.cc 1
02 ThREE-SPINE: STICKLEBACK AJ JL T 4 8.02 0.49 4
~. J3 THREE-SPINE STICI<L~BACK ADJLT 2 8.50 u.oo " 04 THREE-SPINE STICKLEaAC'< AJJI.. r 20 7.99 0. :3.9 2G
05 CliUM SAU"O" PA~R 1 0
( 05 'Jl'IIE-SPI'IIE. STICKLE:3ACI( JJV'E'IIli..E 1 3.qu o.co 1
05 THREE-SPI:'-<E STICKLEBACK AD JL T 3 8.13 o.~5 ~
Do DOLLY VA.,DEN PA~R " 11 • 12 2.32 4
0~ COHO SAL"'H PnR 1 3.90 o.oo 1
oo THREE-SPI~E STIC<LEBAC'< AJJLT 5 7.82 c. 50 5
37 DOLLY VAll DEN :>A~R 3 9.o7 0.'19 3
""'' J7 COHO SAL "'0'11 PA~R 1 4.10 o.co 1
07 TnREE-SPINE <;T ICKLEBACK ADJLT 9 8.14 J. 40 c;
07 SLI!'IY SCULPIN ADJLT 1 7.00 o • r c 1
c 01 THREE-SPI'IIE. STICt<LEBACK ADJL T 2 e.3s J. 92 2
O'l JOLLY YARD::'~ PA~R 1 10.60 o.co 1
03 T-tPEE-SPii\E STIC-<LE3A:'< PA ~ R 1 9. 50 J.cc 1
D'l COHO SAL"'O"l PA~R 1 lle10 a • co 1
j3 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 s.oc 0 • ~ 0 1 og CHUM SAL~ON PAH 1 4.90 c.c:o 1
0~ THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACJ< AOJL T 6 !le08 0.~2 !':
J3 JOLLY VA ROE~ PA~R 2 10. :'15 1oCt 2
03 JOLLY VARDE'J JUVE".ILE 1 13 • G 0 o.ca 1
09 T t-1 R ~E-SP I N E STICKLEBACK ADJLT e. sa o.co 1 € 10 JOLLY VA'! DE~ Po\q~ 5 11.00 1.41> :,
1 0 SLL"'Y SCJLPIN JUV'~'-iiLE 1 2.50 o.oo 1
20 3JJS~3 ll SLIMY SCULPIN ADJL T 1 R.au O.GO 1
02 COHO SAL~ON PA~R 3 4.80 () .72 3
02 SOCKEYE SAL Ill! ON PA'l.R 1 4.20 o.oo 1
03 JOLLY VAROE"4 PA~R 1 9.90 0. c 0 1
03 SOCr<EYE SALMON PA'lR 1 4.23 0.77 1
01+ JOLLY VARDEN PA.~R 1 8.£0 0 • G 0 1 ,, 04 SOCKEYE SAL"lJN PA~R 2 4 .3 3 0 • c 0 2
H COHO SAL!'10'4 PA~R 1 3.9G 0 • CG 1
04 Sll"'Y SCULPIN ADJLT 1 7.90 o.oo 1 • 05 SLH4Y SCULPIN AJJL T 1 6.60 ~. 0 0 1
05 '110 FISH 1 c
07 '10 FISH 1 0
3~ SOCKEYE SAL :-ION PA~R 1 't.2C 0. ,, 0 1
09 COHO SAL!'10"l Po\RR 1 3.60 o.co 1
L., ..
a/ 2/83 PAGE B
{ TABLE 62-.11. SIH1HAR Y OF RESULTS: ~l\1\IJ'ol TR liP SA"'PLES
JUNE, 1983
LE~>G Th (Clot)
~
"" STATIO~ OHE ~[PliCATE SPECIES LI:"E STAGE NUM6E~ MEAN s. u. '-4 ----------------------------------------------------------
20 3aLl&83 08 SLIMY SCULPIN A::IJLT 1 8.20 0. 00 1
0'1 \10 FISH 1 i)
! 10 '>;Q FISH 1 0
21 .3()06~3 01 '10 FISH 1 Q
02 ~0 FISH 1 (]
\_ 03 'lO FISH 1 c
0.11 \10 FISH 1 0
05 COHO SAL"'O'f PA~R 5 3.66 0. 14 '5
06 \10 FISH 1 c
07 \10 FISH 1 .
09 DOLLY VAROE:-4 JUvENILE 2 12.•H 2.26 ;': c a~ DOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 3 13.40 2. 14 ~
10 DOLLY VARDEN PAU 1 '3.90 0. [lQ 1
( 22 (!10H3 01 \10 FISH 1 0
02 '\10 FISH 1 c
33 DOLLY VAROE!II PA~R 1 4.00 0. 00 1
H :'lOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 .3.83 0. co 1 as \10 FISH 1 G
0~ TRAP OUT OF •ATER 0 s 07 \10 FISH 1 0
\13 '<0 FISH 1 D
O'J \10 FISH 1 c ( 10 \10 FISH 1 0
23 ()10733 01 \lO FISH 1 Q
02 ':lOLLY YARDE"' PA~R 1 11.90 0. co 1
02 JOLLY VARD[ilj JUiDH LE 1 Lh50 0. cc 1
J3 -.o FISH 1 (j
04 IJOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 1.an 0. co 1
05 DOLLY VARDEt< PA~R 2 3.45 0. 22 2
06 \10 FISH 1 ()
( 07 \lO FISH 1 0
09 \10 FISH 1 0
H DOLLY VA'lOEN JUVENILE. 1 13.20 o.uc 1
10 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 9.'50 o.oo 1
24 020H3 01 ~0 FISH 1 a
02 ~0 FISH 1 0
03 \10 FISH 1 0
!lit \10 FISH 1 c .. 1 05 ~0 FISrt 1 0
06 \10 FISH 1 0
07 -.o FISH 1 0 • 08 JOLLY VARDEN ..JUVENILE 1 10.80 G. 00 1
n NO FISH 1 0
10 ~0 FISH 1 G
'+0 2:00&:l3 01 :JOLLY VARDEN PUR 1 E..lO o.co 1
1
:>.I 2/93 Pt.GE •7
TABLE B2-4o SJr-l"lARY '1F RESULTS: --r~~•ow TR ~p S AIIPLE S ( JUNE, 1993
LErvC.TH lCIO
STliTI~'II DH:: R.::PLIOTE SPECIES LIFE STAGE i'4UMHR '1EAN s.o. ~~ --------------------------------------------------------------------
40 2~069:5 H THREE-SPINE STICKLESACK AOULT 4 BollS ().to 4 02 .,a FISH 1 r: 03 ')JLL Y VARDEN PHR 1 llo30 0 • GO 1 ( 03 JOLLY VARDEN JUVE'HLE 1 12.2 0 o.co ' ... o• JOLLY VAR OE~I JUVENILE 4 12.67 u. ~~ 0 4
H T11REE-SF-INE STICKLEBACi< AJJLT 1 8.7!) (j. J (j
05 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 3 7.83 1. 11 :3 05 JOLLY VARDEN JUIIENILE 1 12.6'i 1. jQ 7
05 THREE-SP!'IIE STICKLE3A:K JUVENILE 1 '!oOC o.t:o 1 05 THREE -SP I \IE STIC<LE'iAC< ~JJL T 11 e • .32 0.17 ! 1
05 'H ..,E-SPI \IE STIC'<LEEAC'< AJJL T 1 So20 o.co 1
05 TkREE-SPI~E ST1CI(LE:3ACI< AJJLT 1 8.70 c. co 1 I J!. :::OLLY VAROE~l PA~R 2 9.20 Go14 2
05 DOLLY VAQOE~ JUVEN!t..E 2 15,90 l. 7G ;;.
H JOLLY VAROEi'i PHR 2 7o50 1.1:3 ' < \. 03 '10 FISH 1 [:
H JOLLY VARDEN PARR l 5.10 o. ::c 1
03 )OLLY VA~DE~ JUVENILE 1 13.10 c. co 1
03 SLIMY SCUL~lN A)'JLT 1 7.90 c.uc 1
OJ THREE-SPU~E. STIC'<LE3ACI< A)JLT 1 7o!lG 0. r, c
.!, lJ OOLLY VA~OEN PA~R 1 7.60 c. :.o
II 1 230~d; a 1 \0 FISH 1
( 02 \10 FISH 1 ('
03 .10LLY VA~DE~ PA~R 1 7.40 o.rc
(13 :JOLLY VA·~JE~ JU\IENILE 2 13.4:J G • 14 2
04 SLI" Y SCJLPJ'I JU\IC:~HLE 1 f,.7 D 0. QC
J5 00LLY VA~ DE'< PA~R 1 7.70 a. cc 1
tl5 Sllf"Y SCUL?I'>I A)JLT 2 e.1c 1.<:7 ;:
J5 CJHO SAL '1J'i PA~R 2 4o5C Q. 't2 ?
05 JOLLY VAil DEN PH=! 2 1'1.05 1. 77 " ~5 ::OHO SAL "ON PA~R 3 '5.8C 1.~1 ~
0 1 JOLLY VA:iOE11i JU'IE'H LE 1 14.10 o.co 1 ( as COHO SAL'1iJN PARR 1 3.70 0. c c 1
J'3 JOLLY VAROE.'~ PARR 2 q .n 1. ')6 ~
03 JOLLY VA~ClE"' JV\IE'JILE 2 12.05 ().22 2
10 '10 FISH 1 c
42 2)~5'!3 01 CHINCOK SAL"'O"' PA'R 4 5o05 l· 2& 4
Jl COHO SALMON PAU 1 7.70 o.oo l
01 CHINOOK SAL~ ON PARR 3 4.40 0.40 3
01 THR~E.-SPI>ct: STICI(LEBACK ADULT 1 '?olO o.oo 1 • 01 'l IIIIE-SPV~E STlCI(LE!:!A:I< AJUL T 1 4.70 0. c (j
02 :HI NOOK SAL'1JN PI\U 1 4o70 c.co 1
02 su-.y SCUV I'll AJJLT 1 5.50 o.co 1 -03 !::OHO SAL"'J'If PA'R 1 bo70 c.oo 1
03 OOLLY VAROE~ PA~R 1 7.90 o.oo 1
03 CHI~100K S<\L"'ON PA~~ 1 'to40 O.GO
0:! COHO SALMO:<.I ?A~~ 2 E:-.'l:-(j.:'C ;;
03 ::HINOOK SAL~ ON PA~R lC 4o3'l (j. 44 1 G
8/ 2/83 PAGE l. c
TABLE 82-4. SJ'1'tA'!Y OF RESULTS: ... I ~NJ 1o1 TRAP Sj\"lPLE S • JUNE• 1983
LENGH' tC!")
• STATIO~ DHE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUP1£ER I'IEAN s.r.. N ---------------------------------------------------------------------
'+2 2:!0613 3 04 CHI"OOK SAL"'O'f PARR 3 4. 0 3 0. 2b 3 ~4 SLli'!Y SCUL~I"i .JUVENILE 3 5,.6j c;.::,g 3
05 CHINOOK SAUl:>N PA~R 10 8.15 ". 46 H • 05 'HNE-SPJ',IE STICKLEBACK JUliE NILE 2 '+.20 0. 71 2
35 "'INE-SPI"4E S T I CK L E 8 A C I( AOJLT 4 ">.47 1. i.l2 q
OS CHINOOK SALMON PA.~R 21 <~.11€. 0. 71 21 • o& 'II-.JE-SPI"E STICKLEBACK ADJL T f, 5.25 1.32 ~
07 ~0 FISH 1 ~
08 CHINOOK SALMON PA~R 12 4.42 1. uS 1 2
G9 'H"4E-SPI'4E. S TI Cl(. L E 3 A C < ADULT 1 7.5J G.co 1
07 COHO S AU10'W PA~R 1 9.50 o.co 1
03 CHtr~OOK SAL "'ON PA~R 5 4,.02 o.:1 " .. 10 CHINOOK SALl<QN PA~R 5 6.56 3 .Hi " .;
10 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 ... 20 0. 0 0 1
10 CHINOOK SAL).~ ON PARR 1 4.20 0. 00 . 1 • 10 JOLLY YARDE" .JUVENILE 4 ll.f>5 2. 't2 ..
'+3 270633 01 C:lo-fO SAL"lJ'J PA~R 1 9.30 c.oo 1
J1 CHI~OOK SAL.,. ON PA~R 1 4.20 (). 00 l
01 :JOLLY VAROn .JUV!::NILE 1 13. 7G 0. co 1
02 JOLLY VA~DE'I PH~ 1 9.70 o.co 1
02 ;:JOLLY VARDEN JUVENL .. E 2 12.9 0 0. 28 2
03 CHINOOK SAL"~ON PA~R 4 4.52 o.:o; " 03 Sll~Y SCULPI!Il JUVE'H!..E 2 3.05 ColO 2 • 0~ SLI'"Y SCULPIIIl JUVE'HL.E 1 b.6G c.co
05 ~JLLY VARDEN Pt.RR 3 q.c..O 2.77 :
O!:o JOLLY YA~DE'4 PA~R 2 8.35 0.10 2 -07 JOLLY YARDE~ PA~R 1 10 ob 0 c.uo 1
07 ')0LLY VARDEN JUYENH.E 1 14.10 o.:Jo t Qg DOLLY YARDE 'II PA~R 2 8.90 0 • .J5 2
H "40 FISH 1 r.
10 '10 FISH 1 G
I 44 230&33 Ol CHINOOI( SALMON P4~R 5 4.01:1 0.40 <;
02 :HI-.OOK SALMON PARR ~ 3o7G ().':':6 ":
02 •I"4E-SPI\lE STICKLEBA:"<: AJULT 3 5.87 c. 24 7 " • 0 :s CHINOOK SALMON PUR 5 3.84 0. 33 5
H CHINOOK SALMON PUR 2 '+.15 1).64 2
05 COHO SALMO~ PARR l 10.50 0. co 1
05 CHINOOK SALMON PA'lR 12 4.00 0.49 12
05 SLII"IY SCULPIN ADJLT 1 6.90 o.oo l
OS COHO SAL140'f PUR 1 7.10 0. 00 1 & 06 CHINC()K SALI-10114 PARR 2 4.05 O.Z2 2
07 :\10 FISH 1 c
08 CHINOOK SALMON PARR 3 3,87 OoE:O 3 I 09 '\10 FISH 1 ()
10 DOLLY YARDE~ JUVENILE 1 to.eo o.co 1
45 210:>33 ()1 ·~I~E-SPII\it STICKLEBACK JUVENILE ~ 2.65 0.14 " 01 NINE•SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT 3 4o73 0. 95 3
'.
>j/ 2/93 PAGE 1 1
• TAaLE 32-'+. SJ1111ARY :JF RESULTS! "I "H~::loi TRAP SA"'PLES
JUNE• 1983
LENGTH (C~l
J STATION DHE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE ~UMbEr! MEAN s. (J. !lj ---------------------------------------------------------------<;-;<j
~ '+5 2Hon 02 "jl~E-SPINE STICKLEBACK AJULT '! 5.80 1.21 3
0:5 'H ~E-SPI"'E STICKLEBACK AOUL T 12 l+o9u 0. !0 12
.! Qlf 'H~E-SPI ~E STICKLE BAC< AClJLT 12 5.21 0.<+7 12
05 ~0 FISH 1 0
:IS \10 FISH 1 0
':J7 NO FISH 1 .. 09 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADJL T 1 5.RO o.co 1
Oll 'H"'E-SPHlE S T I CK L E 6 A C K ADJLT 40 5o5R C.I:<B 4G
0~ "10 FISH 1 c
10 COiiO SAL\10'11 PA~R '+ f<!.&5 0. 72 4
• 6A 230!>'33 03 "0 FISH 1 !')
6.\ 2'10!)33 01 NO FISrl 1 G
02 DOLLY VARDE~ PA.'l.R 1 10. 0 c o.oo 1 • 02 JOLLY VARDEN JU~E~ILE 1 llo90 0 • GO 1
03 "jQ FISH ~ (I
011 DOLLY VAROE'\1 P~RR 1 9o7G 0. cc 1
01+ JOLLY VARJEI\i JUVE'HLE 5 12.56 Q. b3 !5
05 llOLLY VUOEN PARR 2 9olC 1. 70 ? .. 06 JOLLY VUDE"' PII'R 2 6.95 1 • .35
07 JOLLY VARDEN PHR 1 <;.7(1 o.co
(lfi JOLLY VARDEN Ji.llfE~I -E 3 eo37 0. 71 3
J8 SliMY SCULPIIII ADJL T 1 "1.70 "" 't) 1 • .... vw
1 0 '10 FISH 1 [:
loA 22053.3 01 :OHO SAL 'ION PAI:!::t 1 .3.60 0 • GC 1
02 SLIMY SC\JLi)l'-1 AJJL T 1 P..20 o.~o 1
03 SLH1Y SC\JL::OI'It JUVE~H LE 2 5.9') Oo't? 2
03 SLII'IY SCUL 0 n 1\DJLT 1 7.70 o.oo 1
011 DOLLY VA R Dnl PII~R 1 7.70 0. ~ 0 1
0\ DOLLY '/AROEN J\J~ E."'I L.E 1 10.70 o.oc. • 04 SLIMY SCULPIN ADJL T 't <t.oo 0 • 54 't
J5 JOLLY VARJEN Pf.~R 'I '?.22 2.21 4
l5 :OHO SAL 11014 PA~R 6 Sol+? 1·1"' E
05 THREE-SPINE STICKLE311CK AD:.JL T 1 e.i":.O o.cc 1
0& COHO SAL"'O~ PARR 3 & .37 o.:-1 3
0& :lOLLY VA::tOE~ PII~R 1 '3.co 0. 00 1
06 ::OHO SAL'40'4 PA~R 11 4.5~ 0. ~·1 11
o;, THREE-SPINE ST IC!(LEBACK A:lJLT 1 8o30 o.oo 1
07 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 9.10 0. 00 1
07 COHO SAL "'ON PA~R 8 5.05 1.10 8 • 07 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADJLT 1 7o6C c.co 1
07 SLI!'!Y SCULPI"i ADJL T 1 R.2C 0. co l
08 :OHO SALI~0'4 PA.~R 4 11.32 0.45 4 ... 08 JOLLY VARDE'4 PA~R 2 ':.55 2ol9 2
08 COHO SAL~OI\I PA~R 8 1+ • .35 0 .·47 f'
)8 JOLLY VARDE~ PII~R 1 3.8il 0 • vC 1
J~ COHO SAL'IO"f PA.B 2 .5.3~ 0. '72 2
03 :JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 1h10 o.oo
31 2183 P ~ SE lZ .. TABLE 82-'t. SJM'1ARY OF RESULTS: '1[N~(hl TR~P S.A"lPLES
JUNE 9 19'33
LENGTti < c~o .. S TA Tl 01\1 JHE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUM&ER MEA !It S.D • N ----------·----------------------------------------------------------------
16A 2206B 08 COHO SAL"!O~ PUR 6 3.83 0. 49 &
08 'H~E-SPl~E STICKLEBA:< PHR 1 4.50 o.co l as COHO SALilO~ PHR 1 4.30 o.oo 1 • OB THREE•SPINE STICKLEBACK A)JLT 1 R.30 o.uo
:J!l SLl!'4Y SCUL;:)I'.I ADJL T 'i !Jo68 1o18 5
O!l THREE-SP[NE STICi<LEBAC'( ADJLT 2 8.40 0 .14 2 • :n COHO SALMON PA~R 3 5.23 c.•o -~ 0~ SLIMY SCULPI!Il JUVENILE 2 7.45 0.22 2
10 COHO SAUI!O"' PtiRR 10 4.72 0.51 1(,
10 SLI~Y SCUL::III\4 t.)ULT l 7.1;) 0. co 1
170 2~0693 01 TRAP OUT OF lolA TE R 0 A (12 NO FISH 1 c
(15 SlifotY SCULPIN ~OJL T l 9.30 c.co 1
Ott NO FISH 1 ,, c " 05 JOLLY VARDEI\I PA~R 1 8.40 0. 00 1
05 :JOLLY VA~O~I\4 JUVENILE 3 11.40 2.10 3
06 DOLLY VAROEI't JUII'ENILE 1 10.50 o.:Jo 1
()7 :JOLLY VARDC:'I PI\~R 1 9.70 c.co 1
07 :JOLLY VARDEN JU~E\IILE 2 13.70 2.'lC 2
JR '.;0 FISH 1
H :JOLLY VARDEN P4U 2 10.8 0 c. ~7 (.:
H JOLLY VARDEN JUVE"4L.E 3 12 .6 3 1. b6 3
(
10 '10 FIS ... 1 J
l '3A Jl073:5 !11 TRAP OUT o> IJATER c
02 DOLLY URDE"' PARR 2 ,:;.so 1o ,'4 :.:
03 NO FISH 1 0
04 JOLLY VARDEN PA.~R 1 7.20 C.t;O l
H DOLLY VARDE~ JU~E~ILE 3 11. 1 a 0. 79 7
J5 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 10.30 0 • DO
J =. JOLLY VARDE~ Pt.:t R 1 10.90 u • ~c 1 • 07 JOLLY VARDEN PARR 2 10.95 0.10 2
H TRAP OUT OF iiATER G
10 'fO FISH 1 c -l9A C1019 3 01 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 2 6.50 ilo2" 2
02 SLI11Y SCULPIN A::>JLT 1 8.10 o.c.c 1
J3 TRAP OUT OF WATER 0
()4 NO FISH l D
05 -.o FISH 1 ~
OS '10 FISH 1 r I. 07 DOLLY VARDEN PA!:!.R 5 8.32 1. f" ~
OB '10 FISH 1 c
09 ~0 FISH 1 f! • lD .'lO FISH 1 0
4JA 2:>06~3 01 DOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 2 1". 55 o.::.~.t 2
02 'lOLLY VARDEN PII~R 2 9.::5 J.~z 2
02 :JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 5 12.06 1.31 5
L.
(
"'~"·
81 2183 PI\G£ 1 ~
TA3LE 82-'+. SJ"1"1ARY :>F RESULTS: "'['II'II:Jol TRAP SA"P LE S ,~ JUNE• 1,83
LENGTH (C~)
' S T UI ON D HE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE I\IU"'BER MEAN s.u. \ ------------------------------------------------------------------------
'+DA 2:>06'n 03 ::ot-to SAL"0"4 PAqR 2 3.30 0. ?8 -, <.
03 JOLLY YARDE~ PAqR 1 .3.30 o.no 1
04 'lO FISH 1 0 .t: 05 DOLLY VARDEN P<\~R 2 cio'35 2oC5 2
05 DOLLY VARDEN JUVEVI LE 1 1?.00 o. r c 1 o:. 'iO FISH 1 c c ()7 JOLLY VARDEN JUHNI LE 1 13.80 0. 00 1
OS DOLLY VARDEN PARR 2 iloR3 0. ':'2 2
08 ~OLLY VARDEN JUVE"'ILE 2 11.2 0 1. 27 2
08 SLIMY SCULPIN AJJLT 1 e.sa n.co 1
03 JOLLY VARDE'II PA~R 3 6.43 0. ~0 ~
J3 CHI'IIOOK SAL" ON PA~R 1 3."0 0 • GC 1 .r.:: 10 'iO FISH 1 0
4lA 2H533 01 '\10 FISH 1 0 c 02 '10 FISH 1 0
03 'lO FISH 1 0
04 '10 FISH 1 G
05 'lO FISH t "· ~
06 TRAP OUT OF !lATE~ 0
07 \10 FISH 1 c
B \iO FISH 1 <1
B DOLLY VARDEN PA~q 2 6.15 C. o4 2
( 1 J ·~o FISH 1 (;
42A 2436'3.3 01 'lO FISH 1 G
02 JOLLY VARDEN PAqR 1 7.10 0. co 1
03 \10 FISH 1 c
04 CHINOOK SALMON PA~R 1 3.50 0 • G 0 1
H DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 4.00 o .... o 1
05 'JOLLY V_,RDE~ PAH 2 7.45 0. <;12 2
D& COHO SALI<ION PA~R 1 3.90 0. 00 1
• OS JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 1 11.70 0. 00 1
0 7 JOLLY YARDE:-. PA~R 1 7.90 o.co 1
0 7 CHINOOK SAL"'ON ?ARR 1 3.90 0. 8 0 1
nB TRAP OUT OF liA TE R c .,J O'J CHINOOK SALMON PBR 1 3o80 0. 00
10 CHINOOK SAUl ON PA~R 6 3.ou 1. 66 b
10 DOLLY YARDE 'I PA~R 1 4.30 o.oo 1
1 0 CHINOOK SALMON PARR 4 4.47 1. 29 4
10 !JOLLY VARDEN PARR 2 3.95 0. 78 2
,( 10 CHINOOK SALMO~ PARR 5 3.88 c. 26 5
10 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 3o30 o.uo t
10 CHI .~OOK SALMON PARR 8 3.85 0. 46 3
10 !JOLLY VARDE~ PA~R 1 3 o9 0 0. 0 0 1 • 10 C!"I~OOK SALMON P~RR 3 3.73 0. ~~ :.
10 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 2 4.1~ 0.<:2 ~
10 CHINOOK SALMON PAH 7 3.61 o.:<o 7
43A 270&33 01 CHINOOK SALMON PAH 37 11.38 0.57 37
I , ..
""'" 3/ ; 2/83 PAGE 14
T ~8LE 92-4. SJ"''4ARY :JF RESULTS: "'I~'.lD'.' TRAP S .f" r LE '5 c JUNE, 19S3
L[:~GTH ( c ~ )
p ... STHIOl'l ~HE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE "'U"'bER 1-1EAIII s.:;. • .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
''t 43A 270&33 02 ::HINOOK SALMON P~RR 79 4.50 Oo48 ?'?
02 I<I"'E-SPnE STICKLEBA:K A::JULT 1 1o00 o.co 1
a.s COHO SAL"'O,. P~RR 1 llo20 u.oo 1 ~ OIJ CHI.'~OOK SALf'ION PUR 3 3o67 0."15 3
05 ~0 FISH 1 G
OS SOHO SAL'10"1 PHR 2 3.&0 0 "Q • 7-2 • "' 07 "10 FISH 1 0
og SLII'IY SCULPI"' ADJLT 1 'loOO o. c a 1
03 SLI f"Y SCULPI'4 ADULT 1 10.30 o.co
10 CMINOOK SAL~JN PARR 7 3.67 o.::c 7
44A 2 3 0 63 3 01 \10 FISH 1 0 • 02 CHI1'400K SALf'ION PUR 13 ~.A8 0. £9 13
02 SLI "!Y SCULPI\1 AJJLT 1 8.60 o.oo 1
J3 !\10 FISH 1 c c 011 CHINOOK SALMON PA~R ~ 4.47 0. 42 3
H SLIMY SCULPU ALJJL T 1 8.30 c.oo 1
0'5 CHINOOK SALMON PARR 1 4.70 o.co 1
05 JOLLY VARDE'l JUI/E~I LE 1 14oCD 0 • JO 1
:JS 110 FISH 1 c
H CHINOOK SAL'10N PHR 3 '1.53 Oob4 ~
"6. 07 SLif'IY SCUL 0 I~ ADJL T 1 9.50 G.oo 1
J9 CHINOOK SALMON PHR 1S 3.72 0.47 16
( 09 \liNE-SPINE STICKLEBACK PHR 1 4o'50 c. 0 c 1
B CHI'JGJK SALMON PA~R 17 3o4G Co ?E 17
08 '<!\IE-SPINE S TI C"(LEBAC'< ADJLT 1 ho30 o.co 1
09 SL[MY SCULPIN ADULT 1 7.70 0. 0 0 1
1 0 TRAP MISSIIIG 'l
11 • 5 230;33 ·-"" 0 1 JOLLY VAROE"' P4~R l 9.50 2. i\2 "'!
' 02 80LLY VARDE\1 PA~R 2 9.65 0.22 <-
0 3 NO FISH 1 L
011 SLIMY SCuLPIN AOUL T 1 bo30 o.ro « 05 JOLLY VAll DE'l p~~R 3 7. 2 -'3 0.49 .5
0& JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 2 A.15 0.10 2
D 7 ::JJLLY VAI<DE'l PA~R 1 f;o'30 uo80
j 03 SLIMY SCUL::II'I JUVENILE 2 5.~0 3.28 2
03 :JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 8.40 o.oo 1
~ .. ,.__ ... 10 SLIMY SCULPIN JUvENILE 1 &.80 o.oo 1
•
I •
. (
'3/ 2/R3 PA c,r
TAHLE 52-5. SU.'!Mf4RY OF ~ESULTS: EL::CTROFISHIIlG SA'· P Ll S ( JU~Et 1983
LENGTH (c .... ) .. STATI::l'll JH:: ~ EPLICHE SPECIES LIFE STAGE 'JUMBER t1EA~ s. ::=.~. '-: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 2JOfd3 01 SOCKEYE SAL 'ION Pf4~R 1 4o'IO o.co
01 CHUM S Al'1 Jll P~~R 1 s.oc c.c.c
,{ 01 COHO SAL '10'11 PA''t 1 4.60 o.co
J1 SOCKEYE SAL'10'11 CA:jR 6 4.55 c.:s 5
01 JOLLY VARDEN JUVE'III LE 1 14.2: c.co 1
32 SOCKEYE SALMON P.HR 2 4.9G C· • ::. C L
02 COHO SAL'10'11 PARP. 1 4oRC o.co 1
02 SOCKEYE SAL 'ION p~:jR 1 ~.a~ c. cc 1
02 ::OH':J SAL"lO'II PA~R 1 4of'C o.c0
02 SOC>< EYE SA'..~ON P~H 2 '+.30 c. 71 2
02 C:OHJ SAL "'J ... PA'R 1 4. ('. 0 c. c 0
0 3 ·~o FISH 1 ,,
~ 330:>33 Jl ROUND wHITE FISH PA~R 1 7.6G C.00
01 .::HUM SAL'10:\I PA'R 3 5.33 0. 22 3
01 CJHO SAL 'IJ'-6 PHR 1 4.3C 0. J 0
01 SOCKEYE SAL"lON Pt4il.R 2 4.'+5 u. 22 2
01 ROUNiJ IIHI TE FISH JUVEili LE 11.2 G c. co
01 JOLLY VARDEN JU'JE'1I LE 1 11. ~C ~ • 2 c 1
01 RJU'-60 lotH I TE FISH JUVE'IIIlE 1 u. 7 c 0. 0 c 1
A~ 0 1 SLI !'lY SCJLPI~ AJJLT 1 7.20 c. J 0
J2 JOLI. Y VA~D['j P"-n 2 '1.7a Jo'd 2
J2 CHUM SAL'!O'II PA~R 1 '+.3G 0.00 1
02 :::HP~OOK SAL"'ON PARR 1 4.BG ~.to ( 02 ::~;u~ SAL~O'I Pt.~!:( 'i • l c ( • :0 n '!JU'IIc::i .Jr.ITE F1SN JU't'E'.IILE ~ 12.5:1 c. 7f. .,
(. '· 02 JOLLY VARDE~ JU't'E\IIL.E 1 12.6G c.:o
02 ~JU\iD IJH!E =-rsrt JUVEIIIL.E 1 i'o70 c. : c
02 Sll:-1Y SCUL;,I'II Ji.J V E ~II L E 1 ~.oc G • J C
02 SLI"'Y SCJLCI'II AJJLT 2 bo8;: c. 2: 2
03 'JO FISH 1
3 3DOS33 01 DOLLY VARDE~ PA~R 1 12.2 0 0. f! 0 1 ' 0 1 :::OHO SAL '10'1 PA~R 1 7o1G 0. G G 1
0 1 CHUf'l SAL~O'II PA~R l 3.RC u. c c 1
01 JOLLY VAR.D::'J JUVENILE 1 12.HG c ..... c 1 .. 01 ROU'IO IIHITE FISt-! JUVE~ILE 2 0 o30 2.23 2
01 Sll:-IY SCJL 0 IN JuvENILE 3 5.20 0. ~b 3
01 SLIMY SCJL"I'I AJJLT 1 7.60 c.cc 1
J2 '10 FISH 1 0
J 3 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 llo30 o.oo 1
03 CHUM SAL~ON PA~R 3 3.87 0. 14 3 I 03 JOLLY VAROEI'l JUVENILE 1 11o5J C • G Q 1
0:3 SL U1Y SCJU' I~~ AJJL T 2 b.2:, c. l 0 ;:
• '+ 0 30 7'3 3 01 COHO SAL 'IJ'I PA'!R '+.60 0. c 0
01 CHUM SALIIIO'I PARR II ~.50 c. t.2 4
01 ROUND IIHlTE FISH PA:jR 1 e.Jo c. La l
0 1 CHUM SAL"'O'I PA~R 1 4o6C C • ~ G 1
01 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 2 11.10 o.co 2
L
(
. -. --
f3/ 2183 PAGE .. ..,
TABLE s2-s. SUMMARY OF FIE:SUL TS: ELECT~~fiSHING S~~PLES (" JUNE:, 1993
LE'iGTH (CI4)
ST HION DUE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUMBER ~EAN s. o. N -----------------------------------------------------------------
11 270633 01 DOLLY VARDEN PAU 1 7.30 o.oo 1
01 COHO SAL!oiON PA~R 1 4o40 o.oo 1
02 :JOLLY VARO[tf PA~R 1 7o30 0 • 00 1 .. r 02 COHO SAL'tOI\I PA~R 1 4o40 0. co 1
03 JOLLY VARDEN PIIRR ;; 5.55 2. 48 2
0.5 JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 1 10.50 o.uo 1
1 2 2~063 3 01 '10 FISH 1 0 a2 COHO SAL'10'1 P~H 1 s.go c. 00 1
02 :JOLLY VARDEN PA=tR 2 8.70 3 .:.A 2
02 THREE•SPINE STICKLEBACK AOULT ?. 8o07 0. 26 3
03 SOCKEYE SALMON PARR 1 'lo50 c. 00 1 I_ 03 COHO SAL'10'11 PUR 1 7.60 o.;:.o 1
03 SOCKEYE SALMON PUR 1 '+o20 0 • GO 1
03 COHO SAL"''O'II PfiU '+ '+.92 lo::lf .. ( 03 SLIMY SC.JL::IIN PHR 1 2.60 0. 00 1
03 ROUNO WHITE FISH JUVENILE 1 11.2J 0 • IJO 1
03 SLIMY SCULPIN JUVE~IL.E '+ 3.40 Oof1 ..
03 PYGMY WHITE FISH ADJL T 1 5.20 a.co 1
1.5 0 I+ 0 73 3 ill JOLLY VARDE'I p~~R :; bo33 0. 7': .3
02 DOLLY VARDE!\1 PARR It 8.07 1 .. 7l " 03 JOLLY VArlCEN PARR (, 5.87 J • .35 b
( 1 4 2~C6'J.3 01 C~HO SAL '10'1 P<\i<R 2 .5.75 0. 1 0 ·~ 02 COHO SAL~O~ PA~R ~8 3.79 (!. ~6 37
ll3 COHO SAL '10'1 p~~R 6 3."H\ 0.47 f:,
iJ3 DOLLY YARDE~ PAR~ 2 10.0~ 3. 19 2
03 COHO SAL140N PHR 5 3.9~ Oo20 ..
03 JOLLY VARDEN PARR 1 5.30 c. co 1
03 COHO SAL"10"4 PAU 3 4.57 0. 7 2 5
15 230 6.,3 01 DOLLY VARDEI'4 PARR 3 7.93 2. 46 3 ( 02 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 3 7.10 1. 7l ,!
03 jOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 .3.60 o.~o 1
03 SLI~Y SC:JLPIN JuH"li LE: 1 3.90 G • C' 0 1 .. 0~ DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 D
04 SOCKEYE SAL110N PA~R 1 0
10 o~o H3 01 COHO SAL"lOIIl PA~R 1 3.qo 0 • !JO 1
02 :lOLLY VUOEN PA~R 2 7.20 0.28 2
03 JOLLY VARDEN PARR 1 SolO 0. 00 1 ,, 03 SOCKEYE SAL~ON PA~R 1 7.1G o.co 1
17 :J ?0 7!)3 01 NO FISH 1 0 • 02 COHO SAL'!OIIf PARR 1 5.50 0. co 1
02 DOLLY VARDEN PARR 3 6o07 2abl 3
02 DOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 5 llo 72 1. !l'? 5
03 JOLLY VARDEN PAqR 2 8.30 c.!'+ 2
03 SOCKEYE SALMON PAiiR 1 5.20 o.~o 1
{,
l
--~ ·---r -·-..---._or --""
'"•""-r • 81 2183 FAGE
TABLE 82-5. SU'1!'!A~Y Of RESULTS: EL;:CTR:>FIStHNG SAI"PLES ,, JU~E, 1983
LENGTH C CM » .,
STHI::lfll JUE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUMBER I"EA't So Do ' " -------------------------------------------------------------------
t 17 0?07!33 03 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 3.60 !1.00 1
03 DOLLY 1/ARDE:'i JJitE'H L.E 1 13.10 o.ro 1
1 18 310!>33 ill COHO SAL "'ON P6~R 1 4.40 0. ii!l
02 '10 FISH 1 c
03 COHO SAL "10~ PUR 1 &.70 G • 00 1 ( 03 JOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 6.40 o.ac 1
1 9 3)05.33 01 '10 FISH 1
02 '<0 FISH 1 .:,
03 \jQ FISH 1
"~ lD 2~0!d3 H DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 1 2
01 SOCKEYE SAL~JN PA~R 1 3.60 0. ::o 1
il2 DOLLY VAi1.0EN PA~R 1 c· c 02 ::OH\l SAL!II!C~ PARR 1 G
03 '10 f'I SH 1 C:
20 3CJOE.33 01 \JO FISH c n SOCKEYE SAL'4Q~ PAU 3 ~.07 Ool4 3 ...... J2 COHO SAL "10'1 FA~R 1 ~5o 4 G c.co l • 02 SOCKEYE S.I\LMOtf PA~R 1 3.'50 o.cc 1
02 SLI"'Y SCJLC)I'I JUVE"'ILE 1 lf.o'10 c.cc l
il3 COHO SAL'10'4 PA~R 4 5o 55 c.-:.1 4 c B SOCK~YE SAL'~:JN PA~R 1 3 oll) J.cc
()3 COHO SAL "10~ FHR 1 4o'l0 G • C C l
03 DOLLY VAR0('4 JIJVE'\II.,.E 1 1.5.10 a.cc 1 j 03 SLII'!Y SCULPIN AOJLT ~ Ao70 o.~o :~
'""t 2 1 0f0H3 0 1 !JOLLY VARO£:\ PA~R E 7.97 c. ::.4 1:1
01 JOLLY VAf.1DE~ JUVENILE ~ 14 o43 c. h~ 3
02 CHU~ SAL"!0'4 PI\~R b 4.27 n.t-.3 b • 03 JOLLY VHDEN PA~R 1 7.60 o.so
22 J207'!3 H SOCKEYE SAL~:J!\1 P.I\H 3 £ .. "13 1 • ·~:: :s
' J2 SOCr(f.:'fE SAL~ OS PAH 2 7.35 c. 22 ~ • 03 10LLY VARDC:N JUVENILE 4 12.20 Oo'tl 4
03 SLI~Y SCULPIN AOJL T 2 8.85 Do?2 2
2.5 010 79 3 01 SLIMY SCULPII\I JUVENILE 1 4.60 0 o GO
01 SLIMY SCJL0['\1 A)JLT 1 6.60 c.cc
02 DOLLY VAil DE;>,~ PA=lR 3 E..sa 1 ollt 3 • 02 'JOLLY VA~OEN JU V €: ·'U LE 1 1.3.00 0. 00 1 oa SLIMY SC~LPI~ ADJLT 1 1C.l0 G • C C 1
03 DOLLY VAROEIIJ PA1R 4 9o40 0.69 4 • 24 020B3 01 ~0 FISH 1 a
02 SOCKEYE SAL'~ON PBR 2 5.45 0.10 2
02 JOLLY VARDf.:.'\1 JUVENILE 1 12.20 c • .:o l
03 JOLLY VAROn PUR 7 8.30 1oeli 7
I.
(
l
~ 3/ 2183 PAC,£ "'
TA!:lLE 82-5. SU ... MARY OF RESuLTS: EL~Cfq'JfiS!-il:\G SAII'PLES • JUNE, 1983
LEIIlGT!-1 tC~) ., STATIO-. DlTE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUI"6ER MEAl\/ s.o. ~~ ---------·-----------------------------------------------------• 2/t 0~0733 03 SLIMY SCUL 0 lN JUI/S:~ILE 2 6.30 0.2~ " <-
0 :s OOLLY VAll DEN JU\IS:'IIILE 1 11.30 o.~o -• 03 SLIMY SCULPI~ AJJLT 4 9.00 0. '18 'I
25 HOB3 ill '10 FISH 1 [: .. n 'lO FISH 1 c
26 O?.OB3 01 SOCKEYE SAL 'ION PAqR 6 3.3: 0 • fou 6
01 SLIMY SCJL3IN PtdR 1 3o4i.J 0. ( 0 1 • 0 1 SOCKEYE SAL'1J'II PAiR 19 4 • .?5 0 • 7P 1" n SLIMY SCULP I'l PA~R 1 2.1:10 c. c c 1
Jlt 0 1 SOCKEYE SALI'!ON PAqR 2 4o'+G 0.14 2
01 SLPIY SCULPPI JUHNI LE 3 3.87 0. b5 ~
02 I..A~E TROJT 1 :c.oo c.oo 1
03 JJLL Y VAROE'J PA~R 3 6o40 1 • ')"' 3 • 03 SLIMY SC:.JL 3 Pl PAiR 1 5.3C O.lO 1
03 SLIMY SCUl"I!If AJuL T 2 4.90 o. <:c 2
03 LAKE TROvT AJJL T 1 37.70 c. oc 1
2 7 020 B 3 01 '10 FISH 1 r ,_.., 02 '4\l FISH 1
28 020 7-33 01 'JO FISH c • 02 JOLLY VA~DE'I PARR c;.30 0 ·' ~ • '-'-I 1
4') 030B3 ~1 JOLLY VAROE'J PAH 4 7.22 2. ( 1 4
H Pl"'K SAL'-10'<1 P~iR 1 4.50 a.co 1
Jl JOL.LY VARDE~ JuvE'llLE 1 1 '5. 1 (I 0. -:0 1 n SLI"Y SCULF'IN ADJLT 1 10.80 0. ~ ~ 1
) 02 '110 FISH 1
03 SLI'1Y SCULPIN JU't'E~ILE l 6.6G [j • OL l
03 SLIMY SCULPIN A)JLT l 7olC c.~c 1 • 03 \II'.IE-SPI'4E S T l C'<LEBA:>< AJ JL T 1 4o70 0. c 0 1
41 G30 B3 a 1 ~0 FISH 1 " 02 C:hiO SAL "0'<1 PA~R 1 5o'tC C • L G 1 ..,) :J2 SLI~'+Y SCULF'IN AOJLT 1 7.20 c.~o 1
03 'lO FISH 1 Q
'+2 030H3 01 \10 FISH 1 c
02 '<10 FISH 1 L • 03 SLIMY SCULPI~ JUVENILE 1 5.10 0. co
43 0!0733 01 CHINOOK SAL~o!ON Fl\'R 4 ll.82 8 •. c .3 4
01 SLIMY SCULPIN AJJLT 3 7.83 \Jo97 j .., ()2 NO FISH 1
03 CHINOOK SAL "tON PA'1R 1 'lo50 o. ~:o
03 SLI!'4Y SCULPIN JU'V'ENILE 2 6.00 0.14 2
03 SLIMY SCULPIN AJJL T 1 11.10 G. G 0 1 ..
(
':31 2/83 PAGE ;~
TABLE 62-5. SU"'I1ARY OF RESULTS: EL~CTRJFISHI~G SA "'PLES ( JUNE, 1983
LENGTH C CM)
STATIJ~ DUE REPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUMEER "EAN s.o. r; -------------------------------------------------------------------------
44 HOB3 01 CHINOOK SAL "'ON PAU 2 3.95 O.f4 2
01 DOLLY VARDE"l PAH 2 '1.75 2. Gl2 2
Jl CHINOOK SALMON PA~R 2 <+.::>o 0. 14 2 ,f Jl SLII'IY SCULPIN JU~ENILE 2 <::.55 2.48 ~
"-
02 CHP.JOOK SALMON PARR 2 3.70 0.23 2
03 \10 FISH 1 (
'-
45 2306~3 01 \10 FISH 1 0
6A 8l on 3 01 DOLLY VARDEN PA ~ R 2 3.<+5 0.10 ;>
01 SLI1'1Y SCULP P.l JU'JENILE 1 3.20 0. : c 1
"~ 01 SLI ~y SCULPI!14 ADJLT 1 7.8') o • G a 1
02 COHO SAL"10'1 PAH! 1 <+.10 c.uo 1
02 SLIMY SCULPIN JUVENILE 1 4.50 c.cc 1
02 SLI "'Y SCuLPIN A::JJLT 3 9eb0 1.E:1 3 c G3 DOLLY VAR:JE"l PARR 1 3.90 0. c 0 ~
03 SJCKEYE SALOl! ON PARR 1 <+.313 o.ao
03 SLIMY SCJL~ I:\1 JUVENILE 3 'lo53 1.~1 3
0 3 PYG:o!Y WHITE FISrt AJJLT 1 8.70 0. c c
0 3 SLIMY SCUL?I\1 AJJLT 2 8.6': 0. ~(, 2
« 1 b A OlJ73.5 01 DOLLY VARDE!\4 PAH 3 4.20 0. 10 ::
01 :01'10 SAL~ON PA~R 1 5.50 ~. 2 0
' 01 JOLLY 'OR;:>E~ PA~R 3 4."'17 1 • 8 3 3
Q1 CJrlO SAL~O'l PAH 1 3o<'u 0 • G :J 1
01 'lOLLY VARJEN P~~R 1 5.01) a. c c 1 a 1 :::OHO SAL'10)ol PII.~R 3 5e17 0.20 .5
Jl JOLLY VARDEN PII.~R 4 5.65 2. 32 4
:n :::OHO SAL'10ill P4~R 1 4.80 c. c 0 1
Jl SliMY SC:.JL?I~ JUvENILE 1 3o4u J.co 1
D2 DOLLY VAKDEN PHR 5 "'.14 1.'"'3 :
02 COHO SAL ·~a 'I PA~R 11 ::.06 0.47 1 1
c 02 SLI"'Y SCULPIN ADJLT 1 8o30 o.oo 1
J3 ::JOLLY VA~DE~l PAi!R 1 3.50 c.co 1
03 ::HUM SAL~ON PARR 1 4.'JJ 0. c 0 1
0 3 JOLLY VA~DE-.t PA~R 5 3.72 0. ~.3 .,
03 COriO SAL"'0'1 PAH 1 '+olD o.co 1
03 CHU"' SAL '10~ PA~R 1 4.40 o.ro 1
03 DOLLY VARDE'4 PO.~R 1 4.10 o.co 1
J3 COHJ SAL "'ON ?A ;til 1 3.30 o.co 1
03 DOLLY VARDEN PAU 1 4.5C o.uo 1
' 1 7 D non3 01 JOLLY VA~DEN PA~R 7 R.27 1.~2 7
01 JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE ::'\ 12.7 3 1.29 ~
01 SLIMY SCULCOI~ ADULT 2 7.80 0.71 2 • 02 DOLLY VARDE'I PA~R 7 9.63 3.t7 7
02 DOLLY VARDi:N JU~E~ILE 2 lC o1 0 5.52 2
()2 SLIMY SCULPIN AD'JL T 1 8.30 o.co
03 CHI "'OOK SALMJN Pll.n 2 5.40 r 'c u. £:..._ 2
03 DOLLY VARDEN PA'R 2 8.95 J.':i2 2
!
l
·-·-.. --... ---.. --
",r
l 'JI 2/83 P H1[
• TABLE 82-5. SU ,414 AR Y OF RESULTS: EL.:::CTR:JFISHI:'>G SA~PLES
JU'H, 19!13
LE~Gltl CCMJ
" ST<\H::lN on:: REPLICATE: SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUMBER I" EA-.. S.D. ~;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
l 170 020733 03 ROUND WHITE Fl SH JUVENILE 1 18. 50 o.co 1
03 SLPIY SCJLPI'.i JUVDH I.E 1 ;.so c. c 0 1
•• 03 SLIMY SCULPt \I ADULT 5 8o36 \lo"3 ~
15 A 011)733 01 '110 FISH 1 c
02 JOLLY VA'\ DEN JUV'EIIIILE 1 H.lo30 c .oo 1 • 0.3 '00 FISH 1 !:
19A 01:!733 01 'JOLLY VII ROE"' PA!lR 4 7.52 1.cq q
01 SLI~Y SCULPIN JUVENILE 1 E.1'J c.co 1
01 '>LII'IY SCUVI'II AO UL T l 9.10 c.r.o 1
02 \10 FISH 1 0 ,-. 03 DOLLY VARDEN PA~R 2 ::.70 0. 71 ~
If :lA osJ n 3 01 NO FISH 1 c • :12 ljQ FISH 1 ()
03 JOLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 1 4o00 o.oo 1
'ItA 030733 01 DOLLY YARDE~ PA::tR 1 7e7G 0. co 1
02 JOLLY VA'lDE'I PA~R 2 (,.75 2. ;j5 2
J2 SLI'IY SCUL?I~ A'JJLT 1 5.70 c. l 0 1
; J3 "lO FISH 1 !'!
42A 030733 :n SLIMY SCULPIN JUVE'.!L.E 1 5.10 O.JO l • 02 JOLLY VARJOJ PA~R 2 "ioOG 0. '" ( ?
02 Sll ~y SCULP I IJ II:IJLT 1 5.4C G • GO 1
C3 CHINOOK SALMON PA~R 21 ll • 0 1 c. 4'5 ~,
~L
..)
43 A 0 3 0 79 3 01 CHI~OOK SAL'1::lN PARR 2 4.80 0.~7 ?
02 CHI'\iOOK SAi..~JN PA'R 11 '+.35 0.28 11
02 'II'IIE-SPI~E S TICKLEBA::'( AJJL T 1 fu 8 G c. ( c 1
03 CHINOOK SAL 'I JN Pl'd~ 'l 4e12 .... j,.,.,
U • JU '"'
.! 4 'I~ (;~3733 J1 CHINOOK SALMOI\I PA~R :.6 3.9!.1 o.~e, .:.~
01 SLI'1Y SCULPI'\i JUVENILE ~ 3.80 1 • 74 ~
:J2 'j\) FISH 1 (
.,; 03 :;HI~OOK SALMON PARR 1 4o30 o.co 1
•
•
''L
(
i!,/ 2183
(
TABLE 82-6. SJ!'111ARY OF RESULTS: DIP NET SAMPLES
JUNE• 1963
' ~UTIJ'f !JUE ~EPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NU~eER
l
(
.I
(
200&~3 01
01
COHO SAL"'J'II
CHUM SAL~O'll
PA.~R
PHR
7
1
PAC£
LDIGTk (C"l)
s.o.
c.sg
Q • GO
7
1
I
I.
L.~ . • V,l 2183 PACE
• TABLE 62-7. SUMMARY OF RESULTS: I"4CL1NE PLA~E TRAP SA!"FLES
JUNE• 19S3
LENGTH coq • STATIIJ~ OHE REPLICATE SPECIES LFE STAGE NUI18ER /'lEAN s.c. ~; ---------------------------------------------------------------------~ 10 020133 til NO FISH 1 n -
• 10 030H3 01 SOCKEYE SAL" ON PA~R 4o00 o.oo 1
lD G!t0793 01 C::l HJ SAL"':l'4 Pli~R 1 1+.20 C • C· 0 • 1 D Q 50 7::!3 01 COHO SAL"'O~ PA~R 1 f:.oo 0. J 0 1 :n THREE:•SPI~E STICII:LEBAC!< A::JJLT 1 7.30 o.:,o
• lD U0533 IJ1 SOCKEYE SALMON JUVENILE ~ 7.07 0.77 b 01 CHU"' SAL!"ON JUVE'HLE 5 4.10 0. 6! ~ .. 01 EULACHON JUVENILE 1 !.40 G • 00 1
01 :HUM SAL\10'4 JUVENILE 1 4.50 G • (, 0 1
01 SOCKEYE SAL'40N JUI/E~I:.E 1 6.70 G. ;JO 1
01 CHUM SAL'10'1 JUI'E'HI.E 2 ~~.~c c. 71 2 • ::11 SOC)'( EYE SAL'40N JUH\L .. E 2 !o95 0. 50 2
01 CHUM SALl10~ JUH'IIILE 1 3.70 D.CG 1
01 PINK SAL.'40'11 JUVENILE 2 3oil5 0. 1() 2
01 SOCKEYE SALP"ON JUVENILE 2 4o.!O .:; • 71 2
01 :.:HUM SAL'10N JUVE"H LE 1 4.00 c. I) 0 1
•) 01 SOCKEYE SALMON JUVE~I:.E 2 3.50 C.lf2 c.
:Jl OI'41( SilL "'Oll JUVE'HLE 1 3 ol 0 o.oo
01 SOCKEYE SAL"lO:II JJVESii...E 1 3.E.O 0. 00 • n PI"JK SAL'10'4 JU't'E'.ILE ;: 3.40 O.':G 2
01 THREE-SPI~E STICKLEBACK AJJL T lE E'oOT G. 42 H.
01 'II N E-SP I 'IE STICKLEBAC'< AJJLT 1 4.30 c • c 0 1
J 1!:1 2J0Eo'3i a 1 COHO SAL~O'I PARR 1 3.'10 0 • C· D l
ill COHC SAL110N JUI'ENILE 1 11.3 0 o.cc 1
IJl THREE-SPI~E STICKLEBACK JLVENILE 1 7.6;; o.cu l • 01 SOCKEYE SAL 'ION JUVENILE ! 4.9iJ u.cc 3
01 CHUM SAL '10.\1 JIJVE"fii...E 5 lfob6 o. s& ~ • 01 SOCKEYE SALI10N JUI/E"'lLE 1 f-.90 o.co 1
til PI'IIK SAL .. ::l"' JUIIE'4I-E 1 3.7~ c. 00 1
ill CHUM SAL~O~ JUIIENILE 1 4.10 o.co ' .. n SOCK£. 'tE SAL'10N JUVE!ollLE 2 4o1!l (j. ::,o '"' ,.) 01 PINK SAL'10N .JU't'ENii..E 5 3.68 0.22 5
01 EULACHON ADJL T 1 21.40 c.co 1
1:) 210693 01 CHUM SAL'10 .. JUI'ENILE 2 5o45 0.22 2
01 SOCKEYE SALMON JUVENILE 1 7.70 o.co 1
01 PINK SALII!O"' JUVENILE 1 3.80 0. co 1 • 01 SOCKEYE SAL I'! ON .JUt' PH LE 1 6.80 o.uc
01 CHUI'I SAL"0.\1 JUI'E'Hi..E 2 o\.35 0. ')0 2
01 SOCKEYE SAL "'ON JUVENILE 1 6.90 0. co 1 • :n CHUM SAL 'ION JUVENILE 1 4o80 0. co 1
01 SOCKEYE SALMON JUVENILE 2 7.05 0.10 :2
01 CHUI'I SAL!o!O" JUVENILE :" 4.'50 0.35 3
01 SOCHYE SA.t..MON JU't'E:'tL .. E 1 7.70 G•GO 1
01 ThREE-SPINE STICI<LEBAC!( AJJL T 5 bo04 u.•H 5
•
I
tj/ 2/83 FAG[ 2
,J TABLE 82-7 • SUMMARY OF RESULTS: I '.1 CLI ~E PL li\IE TRAP SA'1PLES
.JUNE, 1993
LE"iGTH (C"')
..: ST HIOIII DHE ~[PLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUfo'BER III[AI\I s. J. ';
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 2 2 0 &3 3 01 CHUI'I SAL .. ON JUIIE'HI..E 1 3.2 0 Q,:)Q 1
01 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK A!hll T 3 7.63 0. ~6 "5
,,t:: lD 2~0 &H 01 SOCKEYE SALMON PARR 1 ... 20 0. co l
01 PI'.IK SAL "'ON PARR 1 3.9:1 o.c:~ 1
01 SOCKEYE SALMON PA~R 1 3o9C o.co 1
( 01 CHU'1 SAL '10N PA~R 3 3.97 0.10 3
01 CHII\jQQI( SALMON PA~R 1 3.60 o.co 1
0 l PYGMY IJHITE FISH Pf.~R 2 2o65 o.tr 2
01 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADJL T If 7o8G 0. 36 4
10 21+0533 01 COHO SALMON PARR 1 3.7() o.oG 1
,,(.". D1 PYGMY I.IHITE FISH PHR 1 3.30 0. co 1
01 THREE-SPINE S TICKL EB ACt< li:J J L T 1 8.10 0. 00 1
1 ;) 2:.0633 01 '10 FISH [
10 270533 01 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ACJL T 1 8.50 0. ()0
10 23053 5 00 THREE-SPINE STICKLEBAC><: ADJI..T 1 5.30 0. GO 1
00 ~I~<E-SPI'lE STICKLEBA:l( ADJLT 1 lfo30 a.co 1
1n n06:13 01 'iO FISH 0
( lD 3:!C633 01 COHJ S AL'Hl'4 PA ~ R 1 1 c. fl 0 0. ( 0
r •
•
I
, B/ 2/83 Pdu~ 1
• TABLE 82-B. SJ'lMARY OF RESULTS: FYH NET SAMPLE.S
JUNE• 198.3
LE~IGTH ( c~,
J STATIO~ DUE ~EPLICATE SPECIES LIFE STAGE NUMBER MEAN s.o. ~j --------------------------------------------------------------------------"" • 4 U06~3 01 RAI1'4BOW TROUT JUVE"41LE 1 20.10 o.oo 1 () 1 RAI~BOW TROUT ADJL T 1 2 7 • ::Hj (·. ~ 0 1 • 01 PYGMY IIHITE FISH A:JJLT 1 0
01 ROUND OIHITE FISH AD~LT 1 .36.70 0. 00 1
01 RAINBOW TROUT A[hJL T 1 43.20 0. co 1
.,.) 20 0 69 3 01 :U I NBOW TROUT AJUL T 1 44.70 a. oo 1
01 OOLLY VARDE~ ADJLT 1 37.60 OoLC 1
D1 RAI~BOW TROUT o\JJLT 1 '11.20 Q. c 0 1
2:!0!>'13 01 'l.OU!\40 W~T TE FISH JU~E'JILE 2 1'1. 7 5 1o C6 2 • 01 RAI~BOW TROUT ADJLT 1 27.0C 0 0 oc 1
J1 SOCKEYE SALMON AJJL T 1 63.70 0. c 0 1
01 SLI""Y SCUL?IN ADULT 1 11.0 0 o.ca 1
• 4 2H6'l3 01 R4I!VBOW TROUT JUVENILE 1 26.50 0. c c 1
01 ~OUND IJHI TE FISH A;JtJL T 1 32.50 0. 00 1
01 RAINBOW TROUT AJULT 4 ~2.62 9. J5 q
4 z;a.;33 01 TRAP BURIED 0
• 4 2'30·S:LS J1 TRAP BURIED 0
6 130633 01 ROUND WHITE FISH JUIIENILE 1 24.70 c. c c 1 • 01 ROU~D ioj"f I TE: FIS-t 4 J JL T 2 32. 1C 1. 13 2
0 1 ~APIAOIJ TR<lUT AJuLT 5 3fl. 3f< 3.15 "· 01 RvU'JD WHITE FISH AJJLT 2 35 .sc 4.24 ;;_
6 2~0!:.33 0 1 ROUND WHITE FISH A::IJL T 1 35o30 0 o GO 1
··Jill 01 RAI"'BOW TROUT AJJL T 2 '13o'I'J h. 29 2
6 2~0533 01 ROU"'C WHITE FISH JJIIENILE 1 13.60 :.~o
01 ROUND IOHITE FISH ADULT 5 28.10 3. 36 5 • 01 ~AI'IIBOW TROUT ADJL T 1 '14.'10 c.co 1
01 CHINOOK SAL"'ON ~)JL T 1 59.0 0 O.GC 1
6 2~0 r,g 3 0 1 ROUND iiHITE FISH ACJJL T 7 23.57 11.'5!" 7
6 2~0!:.33 J1 TRAP BURIED 0
6 2H&33 01 ROUND WHITE Fl SH JUVENILE 2 16.15 Oo22 2
01 ~OUND WHITE FISH ~:lUL T 1 25.20 OoCO 1 • 01 RAINBOil TR'JUT AJULT 3 41.47 2o"C: 7 ...
10 BOE.~3 01 DOLLY VARDE~ JUVENILE 1 c
01 SOCKEYE SALMON ADJL T 3 50.7 3 5. 23 3
01 DOLLY VARDEN ADJLT 1 '17.60 Oo~c l
01 EULACHON ALJJL T 1 20.00 o.co 1
10 130!:.~3 01 SOCK EYE SALMON AD JL T 4 &3 • .30 2. '/8 "
~.
"-
(
'
•
' ·-
'J,f 2/8.3
STATION
------
10
lQ
1 D
lJ
10
OHE ------
2H~B3
2 2 G 63 3
23C!.33
25~53.3
27063.3
TABLE 92-8. SJM"lARY OF RESULTS: FY'<E: NET
JUNE• 1983
~£:PLICATE SPECIES LIFE SUGE --------------------------------
01 SOCKE:YE SAL 'ION ADULT
01 EULACHON ADJLT
01 RAINBOW TROUT AOJLT
01 !)OLLY VARDEN ADJLT
01 SOCKEYE SALl'll.iN ADJLT
01 :"ULACHON AJUL T
01 JOLLY VARDE'4 AJJL T
01 SOCt<EYE SAL"lCN AJJL T
01 EULACHON AJJLT
ill C:ULACHON Ai) J L T
01 RAI'IiBOW TROUT AOUL T
01 JOLLY VARDEN AOJL T
01 TRAP BURIE::J
PAGE 2
SAMPLI:.S
LE~GTH <CIV)
NUMBER MEAN s. o. N
---------------------
3 '=:7.57 s.F4 j
2 1~:>.65 d.~6 2
2 4!).20 l4ot::5 ?
3 42.'27 5.32 !·
2 59."5 So 27 2
1 2loOC 0. ()0 1
2 31.50 2 ~ 't •• w :2
3 '09.&3 '.2.f7 ~
3 1'?.90 o.t:'< 3
14 C'lolb 0.1:9 l'+
? 25 ol !J 2.69 2
1 42.50 o.Jo 1
0
APPENDIX B
B3. CATCH PER EFFORT SUMMARIES
8/ 5/83 PAGE 1
TABi..E 83•1• CATCH PER EFFORT: ELECTROSHOCKl~G SAMPLES
APRIL 1983
LBIGTH
LIFE CATCH/
ST4 TI ON sc:.E.CIES STAGE EFFORT ME'. AN s.o. N ----.-.-------------_........_ ______ ......., __ ___ ....,..._
....__._._....,..., ----------------...
13 DJI.LY VA~DEN PARR 2e49 5e 90 0.95 23 C)HO SAL'fON PARR OelO 0 SI...IHr SCULPIN JUVENILE Dell 6e00 OeOO 1
15 OJI.LY VARDEN PARR Oe38 3e93 le19 3 CJI"'J SAi.HON PARR 1.02 3e20 Oe21 8 SJC<;:YE SALMON FRY Oe13 3e30 OeOO 1
SlC-<~YE SALMON PARR Oe25 3.15 Oe07 2
C"ti"JOI( SALPfON PARR 0.13 3e80 OeOO 1
17 CJ-tJ SAL.fiiiON FRY Oe50 3e00 Oe28 2 C)Hj SAL.MON PARR 2.26 3e66 Oe70 9
SLIMY SCULPIN JUVENILE 1e25 lt.lf2 le96 ~
CHUI1 SALMON PARR Oe50 ~t.os Oe35 2
19 DJLLY VA~OEN PARR 1elf8 a.oo 2e73 9
CJH) SAL'!ON PARR 0 elel 7.30 o.oo 1
CHINJJI( SALMON PARR 0.16 7.20 OeOO 1
SI...IMY s:ULPUI JUVENILE 0 ell) 6elf0 OeOO 1
SI.IMf SCULPIN ADULT Oe16. 8e30 OeOO 1
22 D'JLL'f VARDEN PARR 3e66 10e31 2e63 1'J
DJI.Lf YARDE~ JUVENILE 1.01 12.'45 1e77 It
42 DlL.LY V~RDP.I PARR 4e73 5.29 Oe56 7
Cl·O SAi..MON FRY 0.68 3.10 o.oo 1
CliofJ SA~t10N PARR Oe69 3e20 o.oo 1
SJCI(~YE SALMON FRY 0.68 3e10 0 .o 0 1
ttOA OJLLf V-ROEN PARR Oe25 5.23 1e08 6
ChtJ SAL.MON PARR Oe12 6e20 1e82 3
RIUNBO~ TROUT PARR o.o~t 5e30 o.oo 1
Sl...l '11 SCULPIN JUVENILE Oel2 5e63 2e57 3
Sa.IHr SCIJLPIN ADULT OeOtt 0
NINE-SPINE STICKLEBACK JUVENILE'. Oe12 lte47 Oe83 3
8/ 2/83
TloL~ 83-2. CATCH PER EFFORT: MINNOW TRAP Sl~PLES
APRIL 19@3
PAGE
LE~GTH
STATION SPECIES
LIFE
STAGE
CATCH/
EFFORT S.D.
---~---~~--~---~--------------------------------~------------
1
3
4
5
6
11
14
115
16
17
19
22
16 A
~~~E-SPI~E STIC~LEBACK
~~~E-SPI~E STIC~LEBAC~
CJ-il SA .. ~ON
S .. I14t S:JLPIN
Sl..l~Y SCULPIN
DJLLY YARDE ...
C:HJ SAL.'tvN
S~l"'Y S:uLPIN
~I~E·SPI~E STICKLEBACK
D J L L 1 VA ~ D P.J
DJLL.'f VA~uEN
C:HJ SA.~ON
C)-i') SA .. 'H)N
S .. l14l' S:JLPii'll
S~Pil' s:JLPIN
~1~£-SPI~E STIC~LEBACK
NI~E-SPI~E STICKLESACK
C::J~J SA.-..ON
~I~E-SPI~E STICKLEBACK
:!:ILLY' V6.~DE".i
S .. II1Y' S:JLPI'-.1
DlLLY' VA~~EN
S .. l"'!t S::::.JLPI~
!JJLLY' VARDEN
OlLL'f V'R:::>EN
C:Hl SA.~'.l"'l
S:..I'U S:ULPIN
DJ~lf' VUDE~
OJLLY VARDEN
PYG\41' IJriiTE FISH
':>lLL't VARDEN
D>l..Ll' VI.RDEN
CJ-tl SA._li!ON
~I~E-SPI~E STICKL~BACK
~I~E·SPI~E STICKL~&AC~
JUVENILE
ADULT
PARP
JU._,ENILE
A~ULT
PAQ~
P!RF;
,t.OULT
A:JULT
PAR~
JJVnJlL E
PAPR
JuVENILE
JUV[NILE
A')UL T
JuVrNILE
AJULT
PA~R
JUV E'"HL [
PARR
JUVE~ILE
P4RR
JUVE~ILE
PARR
PARR
PARR
JUV:::NILE
PARR
JUVENILE
JUVENILE
PARR
JUVENILE
PARR
JUVENILE
A~ULT
5.250
0.750
0.500
0.250
0.250
1.000
~t.5:l0
0.250
0.250
0.333
0.750
C.250
1.500
0.250
0.250
0.250
1.75C
1.500
O.f-66
0.333
2.00::1
0.250
0.750
0.250
1.000
c.soo
0.750
0.50()
2. co 0
0. 2':1 0
0.250
1.0::10
0.250
1.250
1.250
1.250
1o.co
e.12
9.70
5.20
9.57
13.70
7.37
12.~0
f:.:JO
9.ft0
6.04
7.30
a.e.o
10.34
15.30
11.10
10.35
9.70
9.52
5.52
6.CJO
0.46
o.so
3.32 o.oc
c.oo
l.tl
::.21
c.cr
c.oc
o.oo
.3e26
o.oo
2.~F
c.c:o
c.cc
o.co
c. 71
o.t.to
Oe71 c.{, 0
0.56
o.oo
o.se
o.oo
1.48
o.oo
o.oo
3.03
o.co
1.7lf
1.01
o.7~t
1
t'
1
1
4
1R
1
1
1
3
1
~
1
J.
1
7
f.,
?
1
~
1
3
1
4
1 ,
"
1
!:S
1
1
8/ 2/83 PAGE 1
TAaLE 83•3• CATCH PER EFFORT: ELECTROSHlCKI~G SAMPLES
.JUNE 1983
LENGTH
LIFE CATCH/
STATION SPECIES STAGE EFFORT "EAN S.D. N
..,_...,_,...,_., ................ __ -_______ ._..._ ---....,_--------.. ....,....,_,....,_ ..
1 DlLL't' VAitDEN JUVENILE 0.23 14.20 o.oo 1 ClHJ SALMON PARR 1.07 4.75 o.to 4 S~CKEYE SAL"ON PARR 3.03 4.63 0.49 12 CriU,_. SAL-.ON PARR 0.23 5.oo o.oo 1
2 DJLLY VARDEN PARR 0.53 8.70 0.99 2 DJLL't' VAitOEN JUVtNILE 0.50 12.05 0.78 2 ClHl SAi..P10N PARR 0.23 4.30 o.oo 1 S)CI(EYE SALMO~ PARR OeHt 4.45 0.21 2 C-ti"4J01( SALII40"4 PARR 0.27 4.90 o.oo 1 RJUNJ W!iiTE FISH PARR Oe23 7.60 o.oo 1
RJU~) \HUT£ FISH JUVENILE le26 11.34 1.63 5
SL Hl't' SCULPIN .JUVENIL£: 0.27 s.oo o.oo 1
SLIP1Y SCULPIN ADULT 0.76 (u97 0.25 3
CiU't SAL-.ON PARR le23 5.oe 0.45 5
3 OJLL't' VARDEN PARR 0.37 10.25 2.76 2
DlLL't' VARDEN JUVENILE 0.37 12.15 0.92 2
CJ"tJ SALIItON PARR 0.20 7.10 o.oo 1
RlUNl WHITE FISH JUVtNILE 0.40 9.30 2.83 2
SLHI1 SCULPIN JUVE~ILE De59 5.20 o.3& 3
S.,.l'tY SCULPIN ADULT 0.55 8.D3 0.38 3
CiUM SAL'tON PARR 0.72 3.85 0.21 "
OJLL't' VARDEN PARR 0.77 5.93 3.18 3
C:HJ SA:..'ION PARR le82 6.81 2.81 7
Rl.JNJ WHITE FISH PARR 0.24 e.oo o.oo 1
RJIJ',!i) WI'UTE FISH JUVENILE 0.48 7.60 0.71 2
S;..IIH SCULPIN JUVENILE o.1a 4.10 o.oo 1
S:..l~~tY SCULPIN ADULT Oe24 11.50 o.oo 1
CiU't SAL.,.ON PARR 2.45 4.77 0.45 10
5 ClotO SALII!ON PARR 3.93 4.64 o.s& 14
S.l .. 't s:ULPIN PARR 0.31 4.60 o.oo 1
CiU"t SAL.'ION PARR 2.31 4.25 0.40 10
6 DJLLf VARDEN PARR 0.36 8.50 o.oo 1
CJHJ SALP10N PARR 1e10 3.95 0.44 4
8 DlLLY VARDEN PARR 0.74 11.03 0.21 3
OJLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 0.25 14.80 o.oo 1
S;..l'tY S:ULPIN .JUVENILE Oe49 5.65 o.o7 2
CiU't SAL-.ON PARR 0.32 4.20 o.oo 1
DlLL.'t' VARDEN PARR 2e24 7.10 1e43 8
CJtil SA:.'ION PARR 0.31 il\e70 o.oo 1
SLI~f SCULPIN JUVENILE o.s7 5.30 Oe42 2
10 D:>L .. LY VARDEN PARR 3.41 7.09 1.92 12
8/ 2/83 PAGE 2
TA3l..E 33-3. CATCH PER EFFORT: ELECTROSHOCKI~G SAMPLES
JUNE: 1983
LENGTH
LIFE CATCH/
STATION SPECIES STAGE EFFORT 1111EAN s.o. N
__......,...._,_.._ ........ --~-_.__,.........._.__,
__ _,_ ___ .......... _., __ _ ... ...._ ...... _ -........ _. ___
1D CJ-Il SAi..'tON PARR 0.32 6.90 o.oo 1 SL.HH SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.87 lte83 0.38 3 Si..l"J SCwLPIN ADULT 0.24 7.40 0 .o 0 1
11 OJLLJ VARDEN PARR 1.09 6.lt2 1.75 It DlLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 0.23 10.50 o.oo 1 ClrtJ SAL'tON PARR 0.63 lt.ltO o.oo 2
12 DJLLJ VARDEN PARR 0 ·" 2 8.70 3.5lt 2 CJ:iJ SA;..'tON PARR 1eD 8 5.52 1.49 6
Pfii"'f w;ITE FISH ADULT 0.17 5.20 o.oo 1
SJC<~YE SALH0"4 PlRR 0.35 lte35 Oe21 2
RJU~) WHITE FISH JUVENILE 0.17 11.20 o.oo 1
SL.l lit t SCULPIN PARR 0.17 2.&0 o.oo 1
SL.l,.Y SCULPIN JUV£:NILE 0.69 3.ltO 0.61 It
T;RE~·SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT Oe6lt 8.07 o.os 3
13 DJL.LY VARDEN PlRR 3.66 7.12 1e52 13
llt DJL.L.f VA~DEN PARR 0.9. 8.47 3.55 3
CJ!i) SA;.. .. ON PARR 14.91 3.!37 0 • .39 53
15 DJL.LY VARDEN PARR 2e14 6e96 2.31 7
SJCI(t:YE SALMON PARR Oe25 0
SL.llllY SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.22 3.90 o.oo 1
16 DJL.Lf VARDEN PARR 0.68 7.50 Oe56 3
CJri) SA ... ON PARR 0.22 3.tto o.oo 1
SJC<£Y( SALHO~ PARR 0.23 7.10 o.oo 1
17 OJL.Lf VA~OE:N PARR 1.67 6.40 2.50 6
DlLL'f VARDEN JUVENILE 1.62 11.~5 1e79 6
C)iofl SAL.flfON PARR 0.27 s.so o.oo 1
SJC"(EYE: SALMON PARR 0.29 5.20 o.oo 1
18 O)L.L.Y VARDEN PARR 0.22 6.40 o.oo 1
CJ-tl SAL. .. ON PARR o.so 5.55 1.63 2
10 DJLLJ VARDEN PARR 0.65 0
C)rtJ SAl..'tON PARR 0.34 0
SlCKEYE SALMON PARR 0.31 3.60 o.oo 1
20 OllLY VARDEN JUVCNILE 0.30 13.10 o.oo 1
ClH~ SALfltON PARR 1.79 s.•o 0 ·" 1 6
SJCKEYE SALMON PARR 1.41 3.16 o.2~t 5
S-l"Y SCULPIN JUVENIL£: 0.28 lt.90 o.oo 1
S-I'tf S::UL.PIN ADULT 0.91 8.70 0.30 3
21 DlLI..f VARDEN PARR 1.70 7.93 0.4 3 9
81 2/83 PAGE
Tl31..E 33-3. CATCH PER EffORT: ELECTROSHOCKI~G SAMPLES
JUNE 1983
LENGTH
LIFE CATCH/ STATION SPE'CIES STAGE EFFORT "EAN s.o. N ------,..,. __________ ..., ___ ,..._._ ...... _ ...... ------... ...... ___ ____ _.. _____
.-._,_,..._._.... ....
21 DlLLY VARDEN JUVENILE o.s1 ~~-~3 0.51 3 C:iU" SALMON PARR 1.64 ~-27 0.65 6
22 DJLLY VAitOE'N JUVENILE 0.86 12.20 0.41 • SJ:'C~YE SAL~ON PARR 1.,3 7.10 1.38 5 s:.I"tY SCULPIN ADULT 0.43 8.95 Oe21 2
25 DOLLY VARDEN PARR 1.78 8.16 t.8o 7 DJLLY VARDEN JUVENILE Oe24 13.00 o.oo 1 Sl..l'IY SCULPIN -JUVENILE 0.29 ~.60 o.oo 1 Si..IMY SCULPIN ADULT 0.53 8e35 2.47 2
24 Oli..LY VARDEN PARR 1.1~ 8.:50 1.60 7 DJLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 0.33 11.75 0.64 2 SJCI<::YE SALM0'4 PARR 0.33 5.45 o.o7 2 Si..l'h' SCJLPIN JUVENILE 0.33 6.30 0.28 2
s:.. I "fY SCULPIN ADULT 0.65 9e00 0.48 '
25 N:l FISH o.oo 0
26 DlLL't VARDEN PARR 0.62 6.40 1.59 3
SJC<::YE SALH0'4 PARR 7.56 •• 19 0.71 27
S!..l"tY S:ULPIN PARR 0.77 3e83 1.30 3
S .. I"tY SC:iJLPIN JUVENILE o.s. 3.97 0.87 3
S:..l'lY SCULPIN Ai)ULT 0 •• 1 ~.90 0.28 2
Lli(E TROUT ADULT 0.21 37.70 o.oo 1
Lli<E TROUT 0.28 30.00 o.oo 1
27 Nl FISH o.oo 0
28 j)I..LY VARDEN PARR 0.38 9.30 o.oo 1
40 DJLL.Y VAJlOEN PARR 1.03 7.22 1.99 4
Dli..L.Y VARDEN JUVENILE 0.26 15.10 o.oo 1
S:..PIY SC:JLPIN JUVENILE 0.24 6.60 o.oo 1
SL.IHY SCULPIN ADULT o.so 8.95 2.62 2
~I~E-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT 0.24 ~.70 o.oo 1
PJ-.K SAL!ItON PARR 0.26 •• so o.oo 1
ttl Cl-tl SA .. "tON PARR 0.27 5.40 o.oo 1
s:..IIIIY S:JI..PIN ADUlT 0.27 7.20 o.oo 1
42 Si..I'IY SCUlPIN JUVENILE 0.23 5.10 o.oo 1
43 C-tJa,)QI( SAlMON PARR 1.09 ··76 0.23 5
SI..IHY SCUlPIN JUVENILE Oe47 6.00 0.14 2
S:..I'1Y s:ULPIN ADULT o.a7 8e65 1.80 • ,.. DlL.L't VARDEN PARR 0.58 5.75 2.05 2
8/ 2/83 PAGE
TABl..E B3-3e CATCH PER EFFORT: ELECTROSHlCKI~G SAMPLES
JUNE 1983
LENGTH
LIFE CATCH/
STATION s~>ECIES STAGE EFFORT MEAN S.D. N ................ -~ -------------....,_,.... -----.......--~....._..-........ _.... ....... ---------.
44 C"'IIVJOK SALMON PARR 1.11 3.~5 0.39 6
SL.IMY SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.58 6.55 2eft7 2
45 NJ FISH 0 .o 0 0
6A DJL.L.f VARDEN PARR 0.69 3.60 0.26 3
CJ:il SA:..'ION PARR 0.25 4.10 o.oo 1
Pf:illfY li"'ITE FISH ADULT 0.21 8.70 o.oo 1
SJCI(EYC SALI10N PARR 0.21 4.30 o.oo 1
S..I ~'f SCULPIN JUVENILE 1.12 4.26 1.21 ~
Sl..l~'f SCULPIN ADULT 1.42 9.08 1.33 &
1&A DJLLf VARDEN PARR 5.48 5.48 2.37 24
COiofJ SAl..,.ON PARR 5.03 4.88 0.&3 19
S~PIY SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.15 3.~0 o.oo 1
S ... I n SCJLP IN ADULT 0.32 8.30 o.oo 1
c .. u-. SA:..~ON PARR 0.54 4.20 0.28 2
170 DJL.Lf VARDEN PARR 3.70 8.95 2.57 16
OJLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 1.14 11.68 3.23 5
C-ti'4JOK SALMON PARR 0.46 5.40 0.28 2
R:>U~) WHITE FISH JUVENILE 0.23 18.50 o.oo l
SI..I'fY SCULPIN JUVENILE ·0.23 5.50 o.oo 1
S...I llfY SCULPIN ADULT 1.81 8.21 0.79 8
18A DJL.LY VUtOCN JUVENILE 0.20 10.30 o.oo 1
19A DJL.l..f VA~DEN PARR 1.75 6.92 1.82 6
Sl..I'f't SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.33 8.70 o.oo 1
SL.l"Y SCULPIN ADULT 0.33 9.10 o.oo 1
40A DJLLY VARDEN JUYE:t4ILE 0.30 4.oo o.oo 1
41A DlL.L.'f VARDEN PARR 0.64 7.07 1.55 3
s;.. J'il '( SCULPIN ADULT 0.21 5.70 o.oo 1
42A DJLLf VAi\DEN PARR 0.45 5.00 0.42 2
C!iiNJOK SALMON PARR 3.09 •• 01 0.40 21
SL.l)ll'f SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.28 5.to o.oo 1
SL.l"'f SCULPIN ADULT 0.22 5.40 o.oo 1
43A C·U ~J 01( SALMO~ PARR 5.83 4.30 o ••• 22
Nl~E-SPI~E STICKLEBACK ADULT 0.24 6.80 o.oo 1
44 A C-ti~JJK SALMO,. PARR 9.65 3a91 0.58 37
Sd)IIY SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.78 3.80 1.74 3
8/ 2/83 PAGE 1
T4BLE 83-.-. CATCH PER EFFORT: "l'l'fOW TRAP SAIIIIPLES
JUNE 1983
LE~GTH
LIFE CATCH/
STATION SI>ECIES STAGE EFFORT "EAN s.o. N
_....__.... ..... ~-~--.. -~---·-------. --------.... ....... _.__... .. ........ ..........., ....... .._...,.__......__
1 DJLL't VARDEN PARR 0.70 12.21 1.06 7
DJLL't VARDEN .JUVENILE lelO 14.13 le31 11 CJHl SAL.'ION PARR 0.30 9.11 le20 3 C·ti 'fJOK SAL"O,. PARR 0.10 9.10 o.oo 1
SI..IPtt SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.20 5.80 0.71 2
S;.I'tY S:ULPUI ADULT Oe30 8.87 0.51 3
~~~~-SPI~E STICKLEBACK JUVENILE 0.10 4.70 o.oo 1
TiRE~·SPlNE STICKLEBACK ADULT 6.30 8.28 o.s.-63
2 D:>LLf VA~ DEN PARR 0.60 24.77 36.BB 6
O:>LLY VARDEN JUVENILE 1.30 12.08 1.42 13
C:>rtJ SAI..!iiJ:lN PARR 0.20 6.65 4.74 2
S;.I!IIIY SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.30 5.70 1.25 3
S:..l!'IY SCULPIN ADULT 0.40 8.20 0.26 4
T~~ES-SPINE STICKLEBACK JUVENILE 0.10 8e20 o.oo 1
T1RE~·SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT 0.10 8.10 o.oo 1
3 Dli..LY V4RDEN PARR 0.67 10.22 1.0tt 6
D)LL't VARDEN JUVENILE 0.44 11.!5 1.71 It
SL.PlY SCULPIN ADULT 0.22 8.85 2.47 2
TiREE•SPlNE STICKLEBACK ADULT 0 ell 8.oo o.oo 1
DlL.LY V4RDEN PARR 1.30 10.56 2.23 13
C)ofJ SA:..IIIION PARR o.ao 5.86 le63 8
S-l'tf SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.10 8e10 o.oo 1
s:..t"r SCULPIN ADULT Oe40 9e55 De83 It
TiREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT Oe10 s.oo o.oo 1
5 DlL.LY VARDEN PARR Oe22 10.85 2 • .-7 2
Cl'il SAL. .. ON PARR 0.89 11e29 2.42 8
SJC'<E:YE SAL .. ON PARR Dell 5e60 o.oo 1
Sl..l 'IY SCULPIN JUVENILE Oe22 4.05 o.1a 2
S.I"tY SCULPIN ADULT 0 ell 9e70 0 .o 0 1
TiRE~-SPI'fE STICKLEBACK ADULT s.~g 8.32 0.74 54
6 D:>LL.Y VARDEN PARR le50 11.19 2.30 15
ClliJ SAI..'ION PARR Oe30 6e~7 3.08 3
SLI"Y SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.40 5.35 0.26 • Si..lMY SCULPIN ADULT Oe3D 9e30 le30 3
TiREE-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT De30 8e40 0.26 3
8 DlL.L.Y VARDEN PARR o.1o lle20 o.oo 1
Clri) SAI..'t~N PARR Oe50 4e78 Oe70 5
SL.I"lt SCULPIN JUVENILE OelO 6e50 o.oo 1
s .. I "'1 SC:JLPIN ADULT 0.10 a.oto o.oo 1
Ti~ES-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT 0.20 7el5 lelt8 2
C~U .. SAL. .. ON PARR Oe20 3e95 0.92 2
9 DJL.LY VARDEN PARR 1.10 8.09 2.69 11
8/ 2/83 PAGE 2
T'BL:: B3-4e CATCH PER EFFORT: PHN .. OW TRAP SA'tPLES
JUNE 1983
LENGTH
LIFE CATCH/
STATION SPE: Cl ES STAGE EFFORT MEAN s.o. N _...._. ____
~~--~-~--~~~~---------... ------------_.._,._....._. ____ .......... ....._.__.. ..
9 Si..l'tt s::ULPIN JUVENILE 0.30 5.30 o .~o 3
S~HU s::ULPIN ADULT OelO 11.30 o.oo 1
10 DJL1..1 VA~ DEN PARR 3.80 lOeH:~ 2e00 38
TiRE!•SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT De40 8.57 De25 "
11 DJLL1 VARDEN PARR De33 11.87 1.76 3
DJLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 0 ell 14eDD D.oo 1 DJLLY VARDEN ADULT 0 ell 9.40 o.oo 1
C'J-IJ SA!..IIIION PARR 0.78 8.69 le39 7
S-11111 s:uLPIN PARR Dell 2.60 o.oo 1
NI~E·SPI~E STICKLEBACK JUVENILE Dell 5.30 o.oo 1
1-IRE!•SPINE STICKLEBACK PARR Dell 8.so 0 .oo 1
T-IRE~·SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT Oe55 8e36 0.13 !)
12 DJLLY VARDEN PARR leOO 9.82 le22 5
DlLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 1.~D 12eH:a 1.0!) 7
Cl..fl SA ... 'IION PARR 1.40 6e13 le50 7
SJCK~YE SALMO .. PARR Oe20 3e50 D.oo 1
Sl.l11t SCULPIN ADULT 0.40 7.70 2el2 2
T-I~EE-S~I~E STICKLEBACK ADULT 0 ·' 0 BeSS D e07 2
13 DlLLY VARDEN PARR 4e33 6eJO 1.65 39
DJLLY VARDEN JUVENILE leOO lle2t\ 0.91 9
Cl!il SA~IIIJON PARR 1.66 t\et\6 0 .6D 15
SLI!ItY S::ULPIN ADULT Dell 9.40 o.oo 1
CiU't SAL. .. ON PARR 0 ell 3.50 o.oo 1
14 OJL.L\' VARDEN PARR Oe78 4e93 leSS 7
DlLI..Y VA~DEN JUVENILE De33 lle70 Oe61 3
ClrtJ SAL.'tON PARR 3ell 4.76 le76 28
15 D'JLL1 VARDEN PARR 0 el 0 4.10 o.oo 1
DJLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 0.10 7.00 o.oo 1
16 DJLLY VARDEN PARR lelO 9e98 1.35 11
OJLL1 v•ROEN JUVENILE 0.2.0 13.80 o.oo 2
SLI'IY SCULPIN ADULT 0.10 12.00 OeOO 1
17 DJLL.'I VARDEN PARR 0 •• o 9.&5 0.26 4
OlLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 0.60 11.55 1.51 6
Clrtl SAL'10N PARR 0.10 4e7D OeOO 1
S:..I"Y SCULPIN ADULT 0 elO 5.90 o.oo 1
18 DJL.L.Y VARDEN PARR Oe20 7.50 3e39 2
OJL.L.'f VARDEN JUVENILE OelO 12.20 o.oo 1
S .. l'fY SCULPIN ADULT OelO 7.70 o.oo 1
19 DJL.LY VARDEN JUVENILE 0.2.2 11.90 0.99 2
8/ 2/83 PAGE
TlBLE B3•4• CATCH PER EFFORT: MINNOW TRAP SA .. PLES
JUNE 1983
LENGTH
LIFE CATCH/
STATION SPECIES STAGE EFFORT Mf:&N s.o. N ___ ,_ ... ___ ....., _____ ._,...._...._...,_ __ ....... ---------....... ....._ ......... --~-.... -.... _...__._.._ ...
10 DJLLt V-RDEN PARR 1.89 10.44 1.58 17
DJLLY VARDEN JUVENILE 0.11 13.00 o.oo 1 Cl .. J SAI..'ION PARR 0.33 5.37 2.37 3 SlCKEYE SALMO'I& PARR 0.11 4.~to o.oo 1 S.I .. Y SCULPIN JUVENILE Oell 2e50 OeOO 1 S:.I .. 'f SCJLPIN ADULT 0.11 7e00 o.oo 1
NINE•SPI~E STICKLEBACK JUVENILE Dell 3e~O o.oo 1
T~REE•SPINE STICKLEBACK PARR 0 ell 9e50 OeOO 1
T-tRE~-SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT 5.77 8.07 0.38 52
C-tU!II SAL.!IION PARR 0.22 4.90 o.oo 1
20 OlL.Lf V-FtOEN PARR 0.20 9e25 0.92 2
Clrofl SAI..MON PARR Oe50 4e58 0.78 ~
SJC:!(E:YE SAL .. O~ PARR lel D 4.24 0.61 11
Si.l~H SC:JLPIN ADULT 0.40 7.!H 0.93 4
21 DlLLY V4~DEN PARR o.1o 9e90 o.oo 1
DJLLY VAFtOEN JUVHHLE 0.50 13.20 1.91 5
C:JrtJ SAI..MON PARR o.~o 3.66 0.17 5
22 OJ!..L.f VUDE .. PARR 0.22 3 .. ~0 0.14 2
23 DlL.Lf VA~DEN PlRR o.so 7.22 3e74 5
DJLL'f VARDEN JUVENILE 0.20 13.35 0.21 2
24 O:lLLY VARDEN JUVENILE o .to 10.80 o.oo 1
40 OlL.L.Y VARDEN PARR 1.10 7.~1 1.84 11
DH.LY VARDEN JUVENILE 1e50 12.84 1.46 15
S.l"f SCULPIN ADULT 0.10 7.90 o.oo 1
NI~E-SPI~E STICKLEBACK ADULT 0.10 6e20 OeOO 1
T-t~E~·SPINE STICKLEBACK JUVENILE 0.1 D 9.00 o.oo 1
T-t~EE•SPI~E STIC~LEBACK ADULT 1.90 8 • .56 0.27 18
'+1 DlL.LY VARDEN PARR 0.60 8e23 le27 6
OJLLY YARDE~ JUVENILE 0.50 13.00 0.92 5
C:lHJ SALMON PARR 0.60 5.02 le38 6
S;..l'11 SCJLPlN JUVENILE o .to 6.70 o.oo 1
S .. I'tf SCULPIN ADULT 0.20 8.70 1.27 2
42 DJLLY VARDEN PARR o.2o 6e05 2e62 2
DJLLY' VARDEN JUVENILE o.,o 11.65 2.~t2 " C:lttJ SAL. .. ON PARR o.so 7.56 1e17 5
C-tJ~:lOK SALMON PARR 7e60 s.o5 1.86 76
St..l"IY SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.30 5.63 0.55 3
S:..lll1't SCULPIN ADULT Oe1D 5.50 o.oo 1
Nl~~-SPI~E STICKLEBACK JUVENILE Oe20 ... 20 0.71 2
NI~E-SPI~E STICKLtBACK ADULT 1e20 5 •• 7 1.23 12
T .. RtE•SPINE STICKLEBACK Ai)ULT 0.10 9.10 o.oo 1
81 2/83 PAGE
UBLE Bl-•• CATCH PER EFFORT: MINNOW TRAP SA'IPLES
JUNE 1983
LENGTH
LlFE CATCH/
STATION SCtECIES STAGE EFFORT MEAN S.D. N ___ .__._ ....
--------~~-~~-~--~~--~
_______ ..._._ ----._._,-_,.......,..__,.,... -------
lfl DlLL'I VARDEN PARR o.CJo 9e36 1.61 9
DJLLY V-'ROEN JUVENILE o.•o 13.40 0.62 ..
CJrtO SAi..'tON PARR 0.10 9.30 o.oo 1
C·U '40 Jl( SAUIO~ PARR o.so 4.46 0.26 5
S-I't'l SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.30 4.23 2..05 3
44 OJLLY VARDEN JUVENILE o .to 10.80 o.oo 1 CJ!iJ SA;.."10N PARR 0.20 8.!0 2elf0 2
C·U"JOK SALMON PARR 3.40 3.9. 0.46 34
Si.IIIIY SCULPIN ADULT Oe10 6e90 o.oo 1
NI~E-SPI~E STICKLEBACK ADULT o.:so 5.87 0.35 3
lf5 CJrt' SA;.-tON PARR 0 ... o e.es 0.72 4
~~~E·SPI~E STICKLEBACK JUVENILE 0.40 2.65 0.13 ..
"I~E-SPI~E STICKL~BACK ADULT 7.00 5.38 0.79 70
Ti~E~·SCli~E STICKLEBACK ADULT 0.10 s.so o.oo 1
6A DJLLY VA~DEN PARR 0.70 9.36 0.98 7
DJLL'f VARDEN JUVENILE Oe9D 11.09 2.17 9
S.I'tY SCULPIN ADULT 0.10 9.70 o.oo 1
16A DJLLY VlROEN PARR 1e10 7.4 3 2e62 11
OlL..Lt' VARDEN JUVENILE 0.10 10.70 o.oo 1
CJiiJ SAI.."10N PARR 6.30 ... so 1.13 63
S .. I"tt SCuLPIN JUVtNILE 0 •• o 6.67 0.94 If
S.II41' SCJLPIN ArlULT 1.30 8.51 0.93 13
NI~E·SPI~E STICKLEBACK PARR 0.10 4.50 o.oo 1
T~RE~·SPl"E STICKLEBACK ADULT 0.60 8.30 0.39 6
17D :>:JLLY VARDEN PARR 0.44 9.92 1.19 If
OJLLY VlROEN JUVENILE 1.0 0 12.22 1e93 9
S.l'lt' s:~LPIN ADULT 0.11 9.30 o.oo 1
18A OJi.LY VA~OEN PARR 1e00 9.70 1e64 7
DJLLt VARDEN JUVENILE 0 •• 3 11.10 0.79 3
lCJA DlLLt' VARDEN PARR 0.78 7.80 leTS 7
Si.. PlY SCULPIN ADULT 0 .u 8.10 o.oo 1
40A OJLLY VARDEN PARR 1.oo 7. 61 2e10 10
DlL.Lf VARDEN JUVENILE 1.10 12.51 1.54 11
CJ-t~ SAL'tON PARR 0.20 3.30 0.28 2
C-tl~J~I( SlLMO~ PA~R 0.10 3.90 o.oo 1
Sl.I!IIf SCULPIN ADULT 0.10 8.so o.oo 1
4lA DJLLY VI\ lit DEN PARR 0.22 6e15 0.64 2
424 DJLLf VARDEN PARR 1.33 5.18 1.74 12
DJLLf VARDEN JUVENILE 0 .u 11.70 o.oo 1
-. . -
8/ 2/83 PAGE 5
TABLE 83-4e CATCH PER EFFORT: MINNOW TRAP SA!1PLES
.JUNE: 1983
LEN 6TH
LIFE CATCH/
STATIO~ Si'~CIES STAGE EFFORT MEAN S.D. N ____ ......,..,.... ___ '-' ___ ._. ... _.,....,__....._._.... __ ....... ...._....._ -.-.-.... -----.-----....... -----.....--
~2A CliU SA. 'ION PARR 0.11 9.90 o.oo 1
CHI'4)JK SALMO~ PARR 4.00 4.05 0.92 36
~3A C:lHl SAL."ON PARR Oe30 10e27 1.07 3
C"fiNJOK SALMON PARR 14.60 4.41 0.56 146
s .. t!1Y SCULPIN ADULT 0.20 9.65 0.92 2
~1'4E•SPI'4E STICKLEBACK ADULT 0.10 7.00 o.oo 1
~4A Dll..LY VA!'« DEN JUVENILE Oe11 14.00 o.oo 1
C·fi1'4JQK SALMON PARR 5.88 3.76 o.s9 53
SL. I MY SCULPIN ADULT 0.44 8.52 0.75 4
NINE•SPINE STICKLEBACK PARR 0 ·11 4.50 o.oo 1
~I'4E•SPINE STICKLEBACK ADULT o.u 6.30 o.oo 1
11.5 DJL.I..Y VARDEN PARR 1·20 8.42 1e64 12
s;..I "'' SCULPIN JUVENILE 0.30 5.93 0.78 3
Sl..l MY SCuLPIN ADULT o.to 6.30 o.oo 1
'dl 2/83 PtGE 1
TA9L.E 83-5. CATCH PER EFFOPT: FYKE ~[ T SAMPLES
JuNE 1983
LE~GTH
LIFE CATCH/
STATION SP~CIES STAGE E:FFORT MEAN s.c. ~ _____ ....
-~~----~~~----~--------...-----~--
_ .... _____ _ __ ...,,.._.__ -------
It OJL.Lr VARDEN ADULT 0.14 37.60 o.oo 1
PYGIIi!Y w""ITE FISH AuULT 0.14 0
SJ:K::YE: SALMO~ A'ULT O.l4t 63.70 o.oo 1
RH 'BOW TROUT JUVE:NILE: 0.28 23.30 4t.~3 ?
RAI'43)W TROUT ADULT 1.28 34.30 R.5P '?
R)J'O iHI TE FISH JUVENILE 0.29 14.75 1.Cf "' .;.
RJJ'4J IHITE FIS"i A:JULT 0.2S 34.50 ?.97 ;-
So..1'4t SCJLPIN ADULT 0 .1,. 11.00 o.oo 1 ...
6 CiiNJOK SAL~ON ADULT 0 .tl 59.!:0 r.oo 1
RAI'l3JW T~OUT ADULT 1 .21 ttC.c9 ~.ec; 11
R:JU\fJ W-IITE FISH JUVE~ILE 0.44 l 7. 55 tt.ec: 4
R)J") W·H TE FISH AJUL T 1.,13 27.!l't p ·" :!-lP
1[1 JJLLt VARDEN JUVE~IL( 0.11 ~
.,
DJL.L.t VA~ DEN ADULT 0.78 31?.!19 6e9'4 7
SJC<£YE SAL'10\I ADULT 1.:,7 5~.'+6 6.19 15
RAI\13JW TROUT A:JULT 0.44 3~.15 14 .:.t ~
EJLAC-i0'\1 A:JULT 2.3 .. 21:.~9 ;'1.61 21
1:31 2/83 PACE 1
TA9LE 83-5. CATCH PER EFFO~T: FYKE ~E T SAMPLES
JuNE 1983
LE"'GTH
LIFE CATCH/
STATION SPE:CIES STAG£ E:FFORT MEAN s.o. "' --------~-----~ .. ~----~--------
,.. ______ ____ ..., __ --------__,.. ____
I+ OJLLY VARDEN ~OULT Oal4 37.60 o.co 1
PVG~Y 111-tlTE FISH AuULT G.14 0
SJ:K::YE SALMOI\J A'JULT Oal't 63.70 o.oo 1
R41'430W TROUT JUVENILE 0.28 23.30 4a!:3 I'
RI\I 'BJil TROUT ADULT 1.28 34.30 Ra5F c:
RJ:.J'O wil TE FISH JUVENILE 0.29 14.75 laCf "' ..
R)J'O ililTE FIS'i AJULT Oa28 :H.f>O 1?.31 •,
~
S.l"ff SCJLPIN AOULT 0.14 11.00 o.oo , .
6 Cil~JOK SAL~ON ADULT 0 all 59.!:0 r.oo 1
Rq~3JIII T~OUT ADULT 1.21 4C.&9 ~.ES ll
R)U'O W-IIT£ FISH JU~EI\JILE 0.4'4 17. ~5 ~+.ec: 4
Rl:.J'O il-tlTE FISH AJULT 1.3~ 27.Ptt p. 4 3 1F
lD ::llLLf VU!JEN JUVE~ILf 0.11
:::lil..LY VA~OEN ADULT 0.78 39.=?9 6et;l'+ 7
SlC-<::YE SAL_.,O~ ~DULT 1.;7 5~.1+6 6.1'? 15
R&.PBJW TROUT AJULT 0.'14 35.15 l4 .51 4
EJL4C-t0~ A:JULT 2.~-2C. V7 ?ebl 2 1