HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA549•
•-
..
,
•
•
-
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
ANCHORAGE,ALASKA
SOUTH CENTRAL RAILBELT AREA -SUSITNA RIVER BASIN
FISH AND WILDLIFE STUDIES RELATED TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
DEVIL CANYON,WATANA RESERVOIR HYDROELECTRIC PROJf...:T
LJ.J~~
RSfTV OF
:.:ltRONMF-:ALASKA\..\'t~4"D Dr.TA";;~lJ;~~OR"'4noN
WILD AN",O'"A"""(AG~At.-'ISKA
STUDIES WERE CONDUCTED BY THE ALASKA DEPART~bF
FISH AND GAME UNDER A CONTRACT AGREEMENT WITH THE
U.S.FISH AND WLLDLIPE SERVICE
ALASKA
FEBRUARY 1916
•
•
•
.I.ItW:lr}19,1971>
",S OH,,'••_
•
r..
~Ir.,;oedun Watson
fish :lId Wildlife Service
lI.s rCf!:lrtl'llf>nt of the Interior
1'1.'II Stn'ct
'\lIdlOT.31:(',Alaska 99501
Ill'aT fir.h'aUion:
Contained hcrtdu arc reports submitted hy the Atas""Department
of Fish unu Came to fulFill contract obligatlon~to the U.S.fish nnd
\'1:1.lli~r Servicl'for studlc~of the llroflO!lC'd Susitna River hyul"OC'lcctric
IWO)('et •
Tin't-,inl(l,~i("al studies attuchctl werc cnnductC'd !ly three separnlc
t1ivi·;iolls of tlds lIJ:cncy,resulting in .3 segmented report.The r.amc
lJivj~iOl'conducted studies of lIlOOse and caribou within IlInd adjacent to the
iml)o"llIdmcnt 3Te:I.-n,e COJllllcrdaJ Fish DividoR studied primarily the
iHl."lnll:.'U!'nch 1101pul3tions and aquatic habitlit downstream of the prC)pu~ell
i"'I".um1ment site,and the Sport Pish llivision conducted It 1i.mnologicAI
,.,11101 ..:-upplemt.!nted ""it.h fi!';hcry inforllation for both resident and anadrO!llllllS
fi·,11 :-pecies.
The furl inpact:>of hydroelectl"ic development of tht>Su!';itna
Rivcr are 3S yet Imdcte~in...d.The rotential iapacts depicted in each of
the-fish division repnrt !';ei:ments iJre not necc~sarUy impacts this project
\o,'il1 have,hut illust.rate aren!';of hiological ~onccrn.As stated prcvioll!lly,
ina,lp'Iuatc funding :lnd timc have been HlIlittnR factors in carrying out more
l'xr ..'ll:,ivc !'tuaie!';.
We think the collective findina!';oi these reports wi 11 be
\':11".1101<:as preliminury baseline dAtA and .s Hn Rid in plannina future
ill,,\.stigations.
If I lIIay ht'C)f ll!,;:ilstanco in Intcrrrerinf.or clarifying lIuy of
Ihe :ltt:IChcd study ftndings fee)free t.o c:ontact "'c.
vn:,~;'truly./
i."~-rj .
I..Il·ry J.Heckart
\lgl-Ilesearch Coordinator
IJivision of Sport Fish
Attachments:
PREAUTHOR IZATI ON ASSESSt1ENT OF ANADR8tmUS FI SH popuun IONS
OF THE UPPER SUSITNA RIVER WATERSHED IN r:E V~CI~ITY
OF THE PROPOSED DEVIL CANYON HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
·.
0"
juf
FsJ2.(..,~~l T
-rK
ltf~S
,se
A~3 '
nt'"S~\
by:
Nancy V.F";ese
Fisheries Re~earch Biologist
Alaska D~partment of Fish and Game
Division of Commercial ?isheries
Anchorage,Alaska
November.1975
ARLIS
Alaska Resources
Library &Infonnation ServIces
Anchorage.Alaska
",,"':t',iI8 File CopyF~
Susitna File Copy
File #~{g.d.::l.d-
I~
."
TABLE OF COHTENTS
List of Tables.
List of Figures
Introduction .••
Description of Study Area ..
Methods of Investigation .
Sampling Procedures
Winter Sampling
..". .
iii
v
1
2
.,..
2
2
"'9.Spring Sampling
Surrrner Sampling
Laboratory Analyses .
6
6
8
Rearing Fry and Escapement Investigations .
Susitna River Winter Sampling
Resu1ts
Adult Investigations
• •i •
.-'
8
8
16
16
Susitna River Summer and Fall Surveys
Escapement Surveys .
Talkeetna and Chulitna River Investigations
Climatological Observations
L Discussion and Summary .....
..-
Ln..-
I"
'¢
'¢
..0
0
0
Ln
Ln
I"
('t)
('t)
-~
Potential Impacts and Reconmendations
Acknowledgements
Literature Cited
Appendixes:
I Maps of sloughs and clearwater streams on the Susitna.Talkeetna
and Chul i tna Rivers . . . . . . . . . . . . .50
Appendixes (cont.)
...4 .•
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cant.)
.......
II Escapement surveys of sloughs and tributary streams of the Susitna
River tributaries and Talkeetna River.. . . . . . . .93
III Notes on the more common benthic invertebrates found in the
Susitna River tributaries.. . . • . . . . . • . . .105
IV Estimated monetary values of the Susitna River salmon stocks 107
~.
i i
...
"'.
..•
""'"
Table
LIST OF TABLES
Pace--
1 East bank fishwheel catch of salmon by species from July 7 through
August 27,Devil 's Canyon Project,1975 . • . . . .9
2 West ta:1k fishwheel catch of salmon from July 9 through July 31,
Devil's Canyon Project,1975 . . . . . . . . • • • • • . . .10
3 Number of tagged fish submitted into the salmon populations and
the num~~r of tagged to untagged fish observed on the spawning
grounds ~","ith the resul tant 'population estimates by species.Dev'il's
Canyon ProJ~:c,1975 . • . . . . . • • . . • . • • . . . ... . .14
4
-
5
r~
6
r;l'-Jl!2>.,
;4"'~7
a
9
10
Record of tagged salmon recovered below the Devil Canyon fishwhEel
camp,Devi 1 1 s Canyon Project,1975 . . • . . • . • • . • .•. . .IS
Analysis of chum salmon age and sex data by percent from escape-
ment samples collected at fishwheel camp,Devil 's Cany,on Project,
1975 i ......................•17
Analysis of sockeye salmon age and sex data by percent from escape-
ment samples collected at fishwheel camp,Devil's Canyon Project,
1975 ..... . . . . . . ...• . . . . • . . . . . • • . . . ... . ]7
Analysis of pink salmon sex data by percent from escapement sarn~1es
collected at fishwheel camp,Devil 's Canyon Project,1975 ....17
Survey of winter conditions and fry distribution in slough numbers
8 through 21,Devi 1 1 s Canyon Project,1974-1975 . . . . . . . . .20
Age,length and weight analysis of coho fry collected in the Susitna
River and sloughs numbers,SA through 21,Devil's Canyon Winter
Project,1974-75 ...•..••...•....•.0 •••••••23
Survey of winter conditions in Indian River,Lane Creek and Gold
Creek,Devil·s Canyon Winter Project,1974-75 24
11 Analysis of water conditions at Chase Creek,Devil IS CanyG~Project,
1974-1975 ...".0'• • •••• • • • • •••••••2S
12 Analysis of water ~onditions at Gold Creek,Devil IS Canyon Project,
1974 -1°75 2~J _........II ..•.. ..• ••...... .. ..II • •II ......... ......w
1 13
14
Analysis of water conditions at the Anchorage-Fairbanks Highway
Bridge crossing,Devil 's Canyon Project,1974-1975 .
Age and length samples of coho fry collected at sloughs numbers 1
through 21 and Fishwheel Slough,Susitna River,Devil 's Canyon
Pro j ec t ,1975 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . .
26
7"7-,
15 Age and length samples of coho fry collected at Whisker's,Ch~se
Lane and McKenzie Creeks,Susitna River,Devil IS Canyon Project,
1975.. . . . . . . . . . .•....•..........28
iii
Table
16
LIST OF TABLES (cant.)
Age and length samples of king salmon fry in slough number 15,
Susitna River,Devil's Canyon Project,1975 . ........28
31
36
17
18
19
20
21
Stomach content analysis of coho salmon fry collected in slou(lhs
numbers 9,11 and 15,Susitna River,and slough number 2,Talkeetna
River,pevil1s Canyon Project,1975 . . . . . . . . ... .30
Peak adult escapement survey counts for chum,pink,sockeye and
King salmon,Susitna River,Devi1 's Canyon Project,1975
Age and length samples of chum salmon fry from slough n~mber 1,
Beaver Pond Slough,and slough number 4,Talkeetna River,Devil IS
Canyon Project,1975 . . • • • . ..• • . . • .•. • . ••...33
Age and length of coho salmon fry from slough numbers 1,2,Beaver
Pond,Billion,3A,5,6,7,Whiskey and 9,Talkeetna River,Devil 's
Canyon Project,1975 . • . • . . • . • • • • . . . . . ...34
Analysis of water conditions of the Talkeetna River at the Alaska
Ra i 1road bridge,Dev;1 1s Canyon Project,1975 . . . . . .
'.
-
--
22 Climatological observations at the fishwheel camp,Devil Canyon
Project,1975 ....e ~•••••••••~•••e _$••~
iv
37
-
,~.LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
..
1
2
Devil Canyon iR reference to the Susitna River wa:e,3ned
and northern Cook Inlet,Devil 's Canyon Project,1975
Map of ~r~upper Susit~a R~ver ...stuc.y area encompassed in
the Dev11 s Canyon ProJect,19i5 ...••0 ••••
3
4
3
4
5
6
Map of the Talkeetna River study area encompassed in the
Devil's Canyon Project,1975 . . . . . . . . . . . ...5
Average hourly cetch of pink and chum salmon per day from
the east bank fishwheel,Oevills Canyon Project,1975 ..11
Average hourly catch of sockeye salmon f~om the east bank
fishwheel at the Devil 's Canyon fishwheel camp,Devil1s
Canyon Project,1975 ... ._. . . . . . . . • . . ...12
Reference map of the downstream recovery areas for salmon
tagged at the fishwheel site,Devil IS CanY0n Project,1975 15
.~'.--.
._.7-.Length frequency of the cu~o salmon catch from the east
and west bank fishwhee1s,Devil IS Canyon Project,1975 18
-8
9
Length frequency of the chum salmen catch from the east
and west bank fishwheels,Devil's Canyon Project,1975 18
Length frequency of the sockeye salmen catch from the east
and west bank fishwhee1s,Devi1 1 s Canyon Project,1975 19
10.Length frequency of the pink salmon ca:ch from the east and
west bank fishwheels.Devil's Canyon Project.1975 19
,~
11
12
Water temperature profi'les recorded daily in the Susitna
River at Gold Creek,Devil IS Canyon ~;nter Project,1975 38
Profile of water and air temoeratures recorded daily (2000
hours)at the east bank fishwhee1 cam~,Devil 's Canyon
Project.1975 39
v
-
,~
..
:..1972 Senate Public ~Jorks Committee resolution requested the U.S.
CorDs of Engineers to consider the possibilities of hydroelectric power
develooment alonq the Upper Susitna River in the area of Devil Canyon.
In 1974 the Hational r1arine Fishe!'ies Service (N~~FS)contracteG the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Division of Commercial Fisheries,
to conduct a preauthorization assessment of the salmon nooulations
(Oncorhynchus so.)utilizing the Susitna River in the vicinity of the
proposed DevillCanyon damsite.The objectives of these studies were to
determine the spawninq distribution,relative abundance,migrationa~
timinq,representative age-length-sex composition by spec;es t and
juvenile rearing areas (Barrett,1974,1975a,1975b,1975c).Investiqa-
tions were exoanded in 1975 to include the lower reaches of the
Talkeetna and Chulitna Rivers through funds provided by U.S.Fish and
Hildlife Service.
Several sites within the Susitna River drainaqe have been under
consideration for construction of a hydroelectric comnlex since the
early 1950 1 s.The current recommended plan includes the construction
of dams and powerolants on the Susitna River at Devil Canyon and Watana
and electric transmission facilities to the Alaska Railbelt load centers.
Construction is expected to commence in 1981 with Watana Dam followed by
Devil Canyon DafT!.Pronosed construction time for the project is 12 years.
The proposed plan for the Watana site inclUdes the construction of
an earthfil1 dam with a structural height of 810 feet (247 m)at river
.nile 165 (266 km).The reservoir would have an elevation of 2,200 feet
(671 m)and a crest elevation of 2,210 feet (674 m).It would cover a
surface area of approximately 43,000 acres and extend about 54 river
miles (87 km)upstream from the damsite,i.e.,4 miles (6 km)above the
confluence of the Susitna and Oshetna Rivers (personal cOTl111Un;cation,
J.Rei d,1 975).
The plans for the Devil Canyon site include the construction of a
concrete tlli n-arch dam ''Ii th a s tructura 1 hei qht of 635 feet (194 m)
located at river mile 134 (216 km).The reservoir created would have a
surface area of about 7,550 acres and would extend upstream approximatelY
23 river miles (37 km)to the Watana Dam site (personal comnunication,
J.t:{e;d,1975).
Barrett's studies (1974)provide the only recent information avail~
able on the extent of salmon utiliz;na the Susitna River and its triblltaries
beb~een Devil Canyon and its confluence with the Chulitna River.Investi-
gations by u.S.Fish and Wildlire Service in 1956 documented the presence
of salmonid populations in the Susitna River and four tributary streams
between Gold Creek and the Devil Canyon site (Anonymous,1957).Anadromous
species \'!ere not round above Devi 1 Canyon .
This study included continued monitorinq of spawninq distribution,
relative abundance and reoresentative aqe-length-sex composition by species
and surveys of juvenile rearinq areas.Reconnaissance surveys were initiated
on the Talkeetna and Chulitna Rivers in June 1975 and weeklv surveys were
conducted from July through September 1975.Adult and juvenile fish pOpJ-
lations were monitored in the Susitna ~iver and its tributaries between
Devil Canyon and its confluence with the Chulitna River from July through
September 1975.
Description of Study Area
The Susitna River rises in Alaska Range of sQuthcentral Alaska and
drains an area exceeding 19,000 square miles (49,210 sq km).The Susitna
R·iver is approximately 275 miles (443 krri)long from its source to its point
of discharge into Cook Inlet (Fiqure 1).The major tributaries of lower
basin originate in glaciers and carry a heavy load of glacial silt.~Jlost
of the tributaries are turbulent in their upper reaches and slow-flowing
in the lower regions.Thirty-seven sampling sites were roonitored on the
Susitna River between Devil Canyon and the confluence of the Chulitna River
in 1975 (Figure 2).Twenty-eight of these sites were clearwater slough
areas adjunct to the Susitna River.The remaining locations were clearwater
creeks and rivers flowing into the Susitna P,.;ver (Appendix I,Figures 1-27).
The Talkeetna River originates in the Talkeetna ~~ountains and flows
in a westerly direction to its point of discharge into the Susitna River
80 miles (129 km)upstream from its mouth.An aerial reconnaissance of
the 'ri ver was conducted in June 1975.Potenti a1 spawni ng and reari ng areas
were mapped and later surveys by riverboat established 16 sampling sites
from Clear Creek downstt·eam to the confluence of the Tal keetna and Susitna
Rivers (Figure 3).Two of these sites are clean~ater streams and 14 are
slough areas adjunct to the Tal keetna River (Appendix 1,Fi gures 28-40).
The Chulitna River originates in the Alaska Range and flows in a
southerly direction,joining the Susitna River opposite the Talkeetna River
confluence.The braided nature of this river at its mouth prevents exten-
sive surveying by riverboat.One sampling location was established on the
Chulitna River approximately one-half mile (0.3 m)above its confluence
with the Susitna River (Appendix I,Figure 41).
r1ETHOOS OF INVESTIGATION
Sampling Procedures
Winter Sampling.
Winter samp1inq was conducted from a base camp located at Indian River.
Access to slough areas was provided by a sinq1e track snow vehicle.Fifteen
sloughs and 3 c1earwater streams were surveyed from March 11 to March 14,
1975.Sloughs were sampled for temperature,dissolved oxygen,pH,relative
water height and flow,ice cover and thickness,and snow depth.Dissolved
oxygen was measured with a Edmondson-Wilson D.O.and temperature analyzer
(Model #60-620).Fry were sampled from sloughs with minnow traps when water
depths permitted.Samo1es cauQht were frozen and returned to the Anchoraqe
laboratory for analysis.Standard lenqth (SL)data was obtained for all·
specimens.Scale samples were taken for age analysis.
A Ryan thermoqraph was installed at Gold Creek (river mile 119)to
monitor daily water temperature fluctuations.Water conditions at Gold
Creek and the Anchorage-Fairbanks Highway Bridge crossing below Talkeetna
were monitored biweekly.Water conditions at Chase Creek,river mile 91
(146 km).were sampled monthly.Two liter water samples were collected at
each site for total dissolved solid analysis.Temperature,dissolved oxygen,
pH,water depth,ice cover and snow cover were recorded at each site.
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
.WIUc*
r
N
128 miles
Figure 1.Devil Canyon in reference to the Susitr.a River watershed and
northern Cook Inlet.Devil 's Canyon Project,1975.
3
Portage Cr.
~,
.....
-
-
-
N
Cr.
R.
Cr.
Indian R.
~.8A
no.Sa no.A
"no.Seno.80
Clear Cr.
Fourth of July Cr.
Talkeetna
no.4
no.2
no.1
cc--=';C
(,)
Figure 2.Map of the uoper Susitna River study area encomoassed in the
Devil's Canyon Project,1975.-
4
-
:l""••••
Sol.na.5
\
WhistceYSi.
Figu,:,e 3.~ap of the Talkeetna River study area encomnassed in tile
Devil's Canyon Project,1975.
5
Additional
Spring SamplinQ
A base camp was established on Billion Slough at the confluence of the
Susitna and Talkeetna Rivers June 2,1975.Surveys by riverboat were con-
ducted on the Talkeetna,Chulitna,and Susitna (from Talkeetna downstream
to the Anchorage-Fairbanks Highway bridge crossing)Rivers to investigate
potential adult spawning areas and locate areas utilized by rearing fry.
High water conditions during this period made surveying difficult and in
some areas imposs'ible.Slough areas were identified and mapped where the
mainstem river was not flowing through them.Permanent depth stakes were
installed.Fry samples were taken with a dip net or minnow seine and pre-
served in 10 percent fm-malin solution.
Two liter water samples were taken in the Talkeetna River at the Alaska
Railroad bridge and the Susitna River at the Anchorage-Fairbanks Highway
bridge biweekly.Air and water temperature and depth were taken when
possible.Samples were processed in the Anchorage laboratory for total dis-
solved solids.
An aerial survey of the area was conducted June 26,1975.
slough areas were noted.
~ummer Samplinq
Fishwheels were operated on the Susitna River from July 7 through August
27~1975 at the same locations as 1974 studies.One wheel was located adja-
cent to the east bank of the river approximately 5 miles (8 m)upstream from
the town of Talkeetna;the second was located adjacent to the west bank of
the river approximately 2.3 miles (3.7 m)downstream from the first.Fish-
wheels were operated on a twenty-four hour a day schedule with exception of
occationa.l breakdown periods.The east and west bank fi shwheel s averaged
2.25 and 2.5 revolutions per minute,respectively,during the season.Fish-
wheels were normally fished 2 feet (0.6 m)above the river bottom due to
daily fluctuation of water levels.Fishwheel des;qn is discussed by Barrett
(1974).Complete structural failure of the west bank fishwheel axel occurred
on August 1.Fishwheel sampling at this site was discontinued due to the
low catch prior to the breakdown.r,ill net sets were made on the west bank
approximately 100 yards (91 m)above the fishwheel site to continue monitor-
ing salmon migration.
Fishwheel catches were recorded daily by species and all salmon were
taqged immediately below their dorsal fin with a color and number coded 1
inch (2.54 em)diameter Peterson disc.Buffer discs were also applied.
Length and sex data were collected on all species of salmon.Scale samples
for age analysis were taken on all species with the exception of pink salmon
(Q.gorbuscha).Fish were measured from mid-eye to fork of tail.Fish
were released immediately after sampling.
A stream survey camp was established July 17 and maintained through
September 27 at the mouth of Gold Creek.Boat,foot,and aerial surveys
monitoring spawning and rearing areas between Devil Canyon and the con-
fluence of the Susitna and Chulitna Rivers and the Talkeetna River were
6
i
-
-
-
""'"
-
conducted.A11 spawni ng and reari ng areas were scheduled to be surveyed
weekly,but due to poor weather,substandard survey conditions.and the
distance involved in surveying,a strict schedule could not be adhered
to.The section of the Susitna River from the community of Chase down-
stream to the Chulitna River and the one accessible slough on the Chulitna
River was surveyed by the crew stationed at the fishwheel camp.
Sloughs were surveyed in their entirety.Streams were surveyed within
established index areas,usually located from the mouth upstream 0.5 mile
(0.8 km).Limited manpower did not permit surveying the streams in their
entirety,although adults do occur above most established index areas.
Water and air temperature,survey conditions as determined by the survey
crew,and water depth were recorded on each slough survey.Stream flow
was taken on limited streams with a flow rod.
A two man crew conducted escapement surveys in streams and sloughs;
one person counted live fish while the other individual counted carcasses.
Tagged fish observed were recorded by tag color and t when permissable.by
tag number.Sampling adult salman for age and length in the spawning
areas was discontinued in 1975 due to the condition of the scales.Most
scales sampled were reabsorbed and accurate age determination could not
be made.
Rearing fry data was collected in sloughs of the Susitna,Talkeetna
and Chul itna Rivers.The total number of fry observed was recorded and
species composition noted.A dip net and/or minnow seine was employed to
capture fry for positive species identification,age-length composition
samples and foregut analysis.
Biweekly water samples were collected from three locations for total
dissolved solid content.The Susitna River was sampled at Gold Creek and
Anchorage-Fairbanks Hignway bridge below Talkeetna.The Talkeetna River
was sampled at the Alaska Railroad bridge above the confluence of the
Susitna River.Air and water temperatures were recorded.
Benthic invertebrates were collected with art'ificial substrates.The
artificial substrates consisted of a wire vegetable basket lined with nylon
cloth with 210 micrometer ~)mesh and filled with rocks collected from
the streambed sampled.Four traps were instalied in Indian River and Water-
fall Creek.Four types of habitat were sampled in Indian River.These
included a deep pool t deep riffle,shallow riffle and quiet water.Two
traps were placed in a shallow riffle and two in a shallow POOt near the
mouth of Waterfall Creek.The substrate was placed in a bucket immediately
after retrieval.Specimens were preserved in 70 percent methyl alcohol.
Insects were identified to the generic level in most cases with the aid
of a Bausch and Lomb dissecting scope.
Juvenile insects are often good indicators of water conditions t i.e .•
dissolved oxygen and temoerature.Many groups are extremely sensitive to
even slight changes in temperature.A temperature chanqe of SoC could result
in the elimination of certain insect populations within slough areas,re-
sulting in a complete change in the food chain.
7,
Climatological observations were recorded daily at the fishwheel camp.
Conditions monitored included air and water temperature,relative water
level and general atmospheric conditions,such as cloud cover and precipitation.
Laboratory Analyses
Total dissolved solids were determined by methods adapted from Stand-
ard Methods (APHA,et.al.,1971).The water sample was shaken vigorously
for a m;nimum of 15 seconds and then 1000 mi 1'1 i 1i ters (ml)\"/a5 poured into
a graduated cylinder and allowed to settle for a 24 hour period.After
settlinq,the water was filtered through preweighed 1.2 ~(0.0012 mmj
~~i1lipore filters.The first few hundred ml were filtered taking care
not to disturb the residue of the sample.The volume of water filtered
was recorded.The remainder of the sample was filtered through a second
r1i11ipore filter,usinq distilled water to completely rinse the residue
from the qraduated cylinder.
r1i11ipore f-ilters were placed in Petri dishes and dried in a drying
oven at 103-105°C until constant weights were attained.The settlable
and nonfilterable residue ~~eights were computed by determining the dif-
ference between the weights of the filters before and after filtration.
Total suspended solids (mg/l)are the summation of the settlable and non-
filterable residues.
Age data presented in tnis report is expressed by the European method.
The number of wi nters spent in freshwater is \'I1T'i tten to the 1eft of the
decimal.The number of winters reared in saltwater appears to the right
of the decimal.
RESULTS
Adult Investigations
A total of 618 salmon (Oncorhvncus ~.)were captured in the two fish-
wheels from July 7 through August ~7,1975.The composition by species
was 291 pink (0.gorbuscha),139 chum lQ...keta),27 coho lil.kisutch),
103 sockeye (Q.nerka)and 58 king sall1lJn (0.tSha~tscha).The catch
of the east bank riSiiwheel comprised 98.7 percent 0-the total catch for
the season.The west bank fishwheel was removed from the water on August
1.Limited gill netting was initiated on the west bank of the river at
that time.Sampling on the west bank indicated only a minor portion of
the fish migrate along this bank.Catch of the east and west bank fish-
,,,,heels by species and date is presented in Tables 1 and 2,respectively.
Average hourly catch of pink and chum salmon ;s presented in Figure 4.
The chum salmon fishwheel catches peaked on August 14.Fishwheel catches
indicate about 70.5 percent of the chum salmon migration occurred between
August 5 and August 15.Approximately 69 percent of the pink salmon migra-
tion occurred during the 9 day period between August 1 and August 9.Sock-
eye salmon catch was significantly higher than that of 1974.About 48.5
percent of the migration occurred between August 2 and August 10 (Figure 5).
The accumulative catch of coho salmon shows a marked decline over 1974.
About 52 percent of the coho catch occurred from August 12 through August
8
...
eo
-
-
,-
~,
~-
~Table 1.East bank fishwheel catch of salmon by spec~es from July 7 through August 27,
Devil l s Canyon Project.1975.
Date No.Hours Pink Chum Coho So~keye Klng
~Fished Daily Cum Oa i1y Cum Dailv Cum Daily Cum Oa i 1y CUri'
July
l:572400aaa a a 0 ..
~8 24 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 a 3 8
9 24 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 a 6 l'
10 24 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 a 4 18
11 24 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 4 2Z-12 24 0 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 .....
'""13 24 a 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 2 24
14 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 26
15 24 a a 0 0 a 0 a a 4 30.-16 24 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 2 32
17 24 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 2 3<1
18 24 a 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 2 35
19 24 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3i-20 24 a 0 a 0 a 0 0 0 0 37
21 24 a 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 a 37
22 24 0 0 0 0 0 a 1 2 0 37
23 24 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 5 1 38
24 24 4 5 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 38
25 24 6 11 0 a 0 0 1 7 a 38
26 24 13 24 0 0 0 0 4 11 1 39
~27 24 9 33 0 0 0 0 1 12 2 41
28 24 1 40 1 1 0 0 6 18 2 43
29 24 14 54 0 T 1 1 5 23 1 44
30 20.0 5 59 0 T 0 T a 23 0 44-31 0 0 59 0 1 0 1 0 23 0 44
August
1 2.5 13 72 0 1 0 1 0 23 0 44,-2 24 46 118 5 6 1 2 10 33 1 45
3 24 36 154 9 i5 0 2 4 37 a 45
4 24 31 185 1 16 0 2 6 43 a 45
5 24 32 217 10 26 2 4 9 52 0 45
~6 24 17 234 14 40 a 4 4 56 a 45
7 24 11 245 2 42 2 6 3 59 0 45
8 24 8 253 7 49 3 9 2 61 0 45
9 24 8 261 2 51 0 9 5 66 a 45
\~10 24 4 265 9 60 0 9 7 73 a 45112422678680937614612246273107809278a46132462791290312381046~'!\14 24 4 283 15 105 0 12 2 83 C 46152422859114315487147162402852116217087249
17 24 1 286 1 117 1 18 0 87 a 49,.".18 24 0 286 1 118 1 19 5 92 1 50
19 24 1 287 3 121 0 19 0 92 1 51202402878129322496051-21 24 1 288 1 130 1 23 1 97 1 52~22 24 0 288 4 134 1 -24 2 99 0 522324028821361252101153242402BB11371262103053
~25 24 0 283 0 137 0 26 0 103 a 53
26 24 0 288 0 137 0 26 0 103 a 53
27 24 0 288 2 139 1 27 0 103 a 53
,~,Season
Tota 1 1198.5 288 139 21 103 53
9
-
Table 2.West bank fishwheel catch of salmon from July 9 through July 31.Devil's
Canyon Project.1975.-
No.Pink Chum Coho Sockeye King
Date Hours
Fished Daily Cum Daily Cum Daily Cum Daily Cum Dai 1y Cum -
July ""
9 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -10 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 2 2
11 24 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
12 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 1 3
13 24 0 0 0 O'0 0 0 0 0 3 ~.
14 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
15 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
16 24 0 0 0 O.0 0 a 0 0 3
17 24 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 1 4 --18 24 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 1 5
19 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
20 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 5
"'"'"21 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
22 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5
23 24 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
24 24 0 1 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 5 -,25 24 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
26 24 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
27 24 1 3 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 5
28 24 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 ~
29 24 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
30 24 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
31 24 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5'-Season
Tatal 549 3 0 0 0 5
-
10
'f ~
}]1 '~
~i j J --}]j }-}1 l
. ...
1 t J
(5.2)
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
August
,
I
24 26
.;
"
"I \,,
I ,'"
/\/\.~../'......Y ......
pink
-----.chum
Ii <
"/,
I \,,,....//\
I ,
\
\
\
<'!,
j.,
4 \;6
It/,
I ,,,
,\,,
J \ ' ,
I ,'",,;,,",'~'"\I"",I"~V,
22527293117 19 21 23
July
11 II 1597I-~
1--'
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
;1.4
0
.E=
S-
[1.2
~u
~
J 1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
figure 4.Average hourly catch of pink (Oncor~ync~~<~_.9!!rbUs~!la)and chum {Q..ke!~J salmon per-day from the east
bank f1shwhee1,Devi1's Canyon Project,1975.
,0.5
v.
I •. I
0.4
I 1\~
L
:::J
0
:I:
@ 0.3
0-.
.cu....I •"'u
0.2 I 1\.1\I \I \
,
.....
I\}
I I I I ,•-\
\1\/o.lJ 1\I \I ,I V ••~\I
!..-..-..•
!
21 23 25 27 29 31 2 4 6
8 '0 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28
July August
;Figure 5.Average hourly"catch of sockeye salmon from the east bank fishwheel
at the Oevil's Canyon fishwhee1 camp.Devi1"s Canyon Project.1975.
,J
"
I J l I ,l I )}1 J )!
;i,f
"
J
!
t I I
-
24,1974.The peak in migration may have occurred after removal of the
fishwheels in 1975,but escapement surveys of echo salmon were also signifi~
cantiy less in 1975.The peak king salmon migration occurred prior to ~n
stallation of the fishwheels and a steady decline in catch was observed a
few days after operations began.Catch did increase over 1974,but this
was due to earlier installation of fishwheels.
Population estimates were obtained for pink,chum and sockeye sal-
mon migrating into the Susitna River and susceptible to capture at the
fishwheel sites by the Peterson mark and recapture formula (Table 3).
The number of fi sh tagged in the popul ation (m)~number of fish sampl ed
(c),and number of fish sampled (r),were used to calculate the estimated
size of the population with 95 percent confidence limits using the
followinq expressions:
N =!!L.f.+N (t~-m)tN-C ~•
r -mc N-'.
The population estimates for each species were as follows:-Chum
Pi nk
Sockeye
11,850 +4,044
6,257:;261
1 ,835 +337
The populati on estimates refl ect the densi ty of the sa lmon populati ons
that were susceptible to capture at the fishwheel sites rather than the
spawning ground density above the fishwheel sites.The number of live fish
sampled were from sloughs and index areas of streams above the fishwheel
sites surveyed by the escapement survey crew (Append i x II,Tab 1e 1).
Insufficient numbers of coho salmon were observed to obtain population
estimates for this species.The peak king salmon migration occurred prior
to·;nsta1lation of fishwheels so population estimates based on catch and
recovery data could not be determined.
The population estimates would be increased directly proportional to
possible tag loss and/or tag induced mortalities.The possibility of
either of these having occurred above the fishwheel sites is unlikely
since no tag scarred fish were observed on spawning grounds and tags were
difficult to remove from carcasses.The population estimates contain some
positive bias since these factors are not taken into consideration in the
computation.
Sportfishermen provided tag recoveries from below the fishwheel camp
(Table 4).This is concurrent with 1974 findings.Two possible implica-
tions still ex~s~:(1)a proportion of the tagged fish become disoriented
after the capture-tag process and finally migrate downstream soawninq in
a different location than their homestream,or (2)fish passing the tagging
site are not all destined for upstream areas and later migrate downstream
to spawn in areas below the site.Further studies are needed to provide
an explanation for this phenomenon.Either possibility adds bias to est1-
mates of population size above the fishwheel sites.
13
Table 3.Number of fish tagged at the fishwheel site and the number of tagged to untagged
fish observed on the spawning grounds with the resultant population estimates by •
species,D~wl1ls Canyon Project,1975.
d
No.Fish No.Fish Samoled Population
SpeC'ies Tagged (m)(live counts)Estimates
(Fishwheel)Untagged 1agged.(r)Total 1CT (N)
Chum 139 674 8 682 11850 :!:.4044
Pink 291 943 46 989 6257 :!.261
Sockeye 103 370 22 392 1835 +337
-.
14
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Table 4.Record of ta gged sa 1man recovered below the Devi 1 Canyon
.:,:~fi shwheel Dev;1 IS Canyon Projec:,1975.camp,
Tagging Recovered
Species Date Date Location Activi ty
,;m~•
~2£~~l~§L~:§~~§a!g~e ~~'1_h~.~!!§p~~!:i !:9 _
Pink 7/27 8/3 Birch Creek
8/3-8/4 8/17 Clear Creek----'-----------------_..-----------------------------------------------_..-------
Chum 8/12~8/14 8/17 Chunilna Creek Spawning
8/9-8/11 8/20 Montana Creek Spawning
8/9-8/11 Byers Cree~________________~tl~:§Ll~~~r~r~_~r.~~~~_-
~1~9 ~ZLZ:ZLIQ Zll§~~~~!~~_~r~~~_
echo 8/2 8/11 Bi rch Creek
8/5-8/7 8/23 Ciear Creek
8/21-8123 7/29 C1ear Creek---------------------------------------------------------------------_.--------
Figure 6.Reference map of
the downstream recovery a~eas
for salmon tagged at the fish-
wheel site.Devil 1 s Canyon
Project,1975.
heap Ct
15
Analysis of chum salmon age samples revealed the 1975 escapement was
composed of primarily three and four-year-old fish produced from the 1971
and 1972 brood year,respectively (Table 5).Eighty-two percent of the
samples coliected at the fishwhee1 camp were four-year-old fish.The sex
ratio was 1 female to 1.1 males.Length frequency distribution for chum
salmon is presented in Figure 8.
Sockeye salmon sampled at the fishwheels were represented by five age
cl asses produced from the 1970 through 1972 parent years (Tab 1e 6).The
largest percentage of individuals (46.3 percent)spent one year in fresh-
water and two years in the ocean prior to returning as adults to spawn.
The sex ratio was 1.3 females to 1 male.Precocious males (1.1 age)com-
prised 14.8 percent of the fish sampled.The mean length frequency of
sockeye,including precocious males,was 511.7 rrm (Figure 9).
Pink salmon were not sampled for age composition.Sex composition
and length frequency were recorded.The sex ratio was 2.1 females to 1
male (Table 7).The mean length of pink salmon sampled was 445.8 mm
(Figure 10).
Escapement sampling of coho salmon for age was limited due to the
small number of fish captured and condition of the scale samples.The
prominent age class of the migrants was 2.1 or four-year-old fish fram
the 1971 brood year:Males comprised 48.3 percent of the samples.The
29 individuals sampled had a mean length of 522.1 nm (Figure 7).
Rearing Fry and Escapem~nt Investigations
Susitna River Winter Samplinq
Winter investigations were continued in March 1975 to monitor the
distribution of rearing fry and winter conditions of the sloughs and majn~
stem Susitna River.Studies conducted during December,January and February
established that coho fry were wintering in Sloughs Numbers 8-A,9,9-A,
11 and 19 (Barrett 1975a,1975b,1975c).
All sloughs upstream from Slough Number 8 were monitored for winter
conditions and fry distribution during r1arch (Table 8).Sloughs surveyed
had ice cover ranging from 25 to 100 percent.Minnow trap~were installed
in sloughs with sufficient water levels.Rearing fry were found in Sloughs
13,17 and 2'1.Dissolved oxygen was below minimum levels required for fish
survival at all sampling locations.Data is presented in the report,al-
though the proper functioning of the dissolved oxygen analyzer is in question.
Slough Number 13 was 60 percent ice free and water temperature was 38°F.
Minnow traps were fished for a 26 hour period.Seven 0.0 age class coho fry
were captured (Table 8).
Slough Number 21 had a 100 percent ice cover and water temperature was
33°F.Minnow traps installed in the siough for a 21.4 hour period captured
five 0.0 age coho fry (Tabl e 8).
16
'"""
-
-
-
-
-
Table 5.Analysis of chum salmon age and sex data by pe~cent from escapement
samples collected at fishwheel camo,Devii's Canyon Project.1975.
'fear
of Age Class Brood Year Sample
Return 0.2 0.3 0.4 1972 1971 1970 Size
1975 percent 16.4 82.0 1.5 16.4 82.0 1.6 100.0
number 21 105 2 21 105 2 128
Sex Ratio Sample
Male Female Sizl!
percent 52.5 47.5 100
number 73 66 139
Table 6.Analysis of sockeye salmon age and sex data by percent from escapement
samples collected at fishwhee1 camp,Oevil's Canyon Project.1975.
Yea~
of
Return
1975
Age Class Brood Year Sample
1.1 1.2 1.3 2.1 2.2 i97Z 1971 1970 Size
percent:14.8 46.3 25.9 3.7 9.3 14.8 50.0 35.2 100.0
number 8 25 14 Z 5 a 27 19 54
Sex Ratio SampleMaleFemaleSize
percent 43.3 56.7 100.0
number 42 55 .97
Table 7.Analysis of pink salmon sex data by percent from escapement samples
collected at fishwheel camp,Devil's Canyon Project,1975.
Year
of
Return
Sex Rat"io
Male Female·
Sample
Size
..-
-
percent
number
31.8
92
68.2
197
17
100.0
289
-
i
430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530 540 550 560 570 580 590 600
length (m)
Figure 7.Length frequency of the coho salmon (Onc~rhynchus kisutch)catch
from the east and west bank fishl'Jheels.Devil's Canyon Project,1975.
!fJ ~
>,~,us:15q,;x =522.1::::
r:::T n =29 -.IV
~
LL.""'1...,
s:10wu
~
Cl.'.#!iOii1,
Q,.,
5
~
-x =577.5
n =139
25 -'
20
>,
tJc 15w:::sc:r -,
Cll
~
LI.
~c 10w ~u
~
CIJ
C.
....
5
"""':
O-+-....,.--,.--~--r--....,..--r--,......--r--...,..-.....,.--,......-----I
520 530 540 550 560 570 5S0 590 600 610 620 630
length (JmI)
~,
figure 8.Length frequency of the chum salmon (0.ketal catch from the east
and \-lest bank fish\'/heels,Oevil's Canyon-Project,1975.
18 -
x =5'1';.7
n ..9i'
Figure 9.
350 400
Length frequency
bank fishwhee1s,
450 500 550
1ength (l1I:l)
of the sockeye salmon catch from
Devil's Canyon Project,1975.
600 650
the east and west
560
J
5405205003403603~O 400 420 440 460 4~O
length (IT.l)
I
320
22
20 i'II:445.n
n ..289
18
16
>t 14uc
III::se-
III 12~
l.l....
C
tU 10u
CIt
~
Q.
8
6
·4
2
.-Figure 10.Length frequency of the pink salmon catch from the east and
west bank fishwheels,Devil IS Canyon Project,1975 .
19
Table 8.Survey of wInter condItIons .nd fry distribution tn Slough Numb."e,flA,9,9A,10,11, 12,DevU',(llnyan Project,1974·1975.
10 A 2/11/15 1615 24 34.~1.4 5.4 0.1-4 55 1-16 6.a yes no 0.0_______•__.___..4.___~~__•__.•__••________.________.________.__•••~._____••_•••_______•___________._.___._.~._~______•__4_~.___•__________________~
11 A 12/4/74 1300 15 14 9.6 5.6 0.5 80 1-2 14.5 yes no n5 2 0 0 0
l/H/75 lH5 4 35 7.0 5.1 0.5·1 95 5-1 12.0 yes no 24.8 1.0 1 0
2/13/75 1025 -6 36 8.1 5.8 0.4-9 9S 0-0.3 20.0 yes 110 24.5 0 0 0 0
3/12175 H2O 32 36 9,5 60 0.1-3 60 1·2 18.0 yes no 0.0•__•••____•____•______________~_~__________._.--__________••__•___________._••__~__.~____~________________•___•____•_____·_~~______~._~__v ____•____
11 B 12/4/74 1320 .----------...._----_...~.~..----yes no 43.2 6 0 0 0
I/W75 1430 4 35 8.8 5,1 0.5-2,'95 1-3 9.0 yes no 24.8 6 0 0 0
2/13/75 1100 -2 36 1.4 5.4 0.3-8 95 0-0.3 14.0 yes no 68.5 2 0 0 0
3/12/75 1430 31 37 9.5 5.9 0.1-3 80 1-2 It .5 yes no 0.0
12 A 12/4/74 1330 IS 32.5 !j.O 6.0 4:6 95 1 1.8 no yes 0.0___...~__~~_..~g~~~_~_~_Q~~..._._.__~_.__. .~"~.q_~~_._.v_._.. _
12 B 12/1,/14 1345 15 32.5 .------4.3'95 2-36 5.8 no yes 0.0
1/14/75 1515 4 33 5,8 5.7 6.25 100 3-24 ·8.0 yes no 0.0
2/13/75 1230 0 34 8.5 5.8 0.5-2 99 8-18 11.5 yes no 0.0
3/12175 1503 J3 34 14.5 5.8 0.0-2 99 0·36 8.5 yilS 00 0.0__~.._~.~---.-----------------R-~~M . .._..__~_w __••__•••__~~.••."_.
12 C 1214/74 1400 .15 34 5.2 5.8 0.1-2 95 1 2.0 yes no 0.0
1/14/15 1505 4 34 6.8 5.6 O.i-3 70 5-36 4.0 yes no 0.0
2/13/15 1155 3 34 9.4 5.2 0.3-9 98 1-24 4.5 no no 0.0
3/12/75 1510 32 36 18.0 5.9 0.0-13 30 O~5 3,5 yes no 0.0
--------_._-~----_.------------.----------._------------~----~---_&_.-------_.---.---_.-----------------------------~----~----~...-._---------.-._-
I I .!..1 J .1 J I )~.l ,....
J I I
1 J J ]1 ~J 1 J J 1 )J 1 1 i ii,
jJ
"
,
hblt 8.Suney of "tnter condItIons .nd fry distribution In Slougl .....t'.rl IJ,14,IS,16,11,18,19,20,21,Devil',C.nyun ProJlct.1lI"-191~.
(contlnuutlon p.ge 2 of 21..
lempnu IIr.
Slough Survey P.tt TIme (oF)
No.SIt~I_III tary)Xlr1iiw
--------~----
lee Ice
pH ThIckness (over
(Inchu)(~)
Rlnno:..rr.'p-C.tcii
fl$h SEtcles
go j "---......-...-::aa.2 M
0.0
0.0
O.P
0.0
,,0
flO
no
no
YII
yes
yes
yes
I.,
U
4.0
l.5
3048
1-12
0·10
0·24
Snow Depth WHer Anchor "umber
tn Ice Depth---no;;--Ice hOUri
Ilnch'l)(Inches)OetecUbl.preUnl fished !
3
'590
75
50
P.O,
(,pm)
6.$5.6 0.8
1.4 5.5 9.5·Z
9.Z 5.7 0.5-2
16.0 6.2 0.0-1
15 II
8 N
1 ~
31 n
A lU4/H 1440
1114175 1531
211l/75 135S
3/1 2/15 I S20
II
........-_-_---------..,.--_-_---_--_.-..--_..-----_.-_----------..__"'_--.-..-
1)•12/4/74 150U
1114115 1541
Zlll/15 1420
l/l2IJ5 1515
15 Jl
8 Nol4
12 38
5.2 5.6 1.0
7.0 5.6 1).5-"5
'.2 5.6 0.5-2
17.0 5.9 0.2
95
90
15
40
1
5-12
5-10
0·24
7.6a.o
1.5
1.5
yel
yes
yu
yes
no
nO
no
no
0.0
0.0
0.0 .
26.0 7 0 0._-_----..-_~-----.-.-.----_-..----_---__--------..__-..__-_-----__.__.._-_..-.
14 A 1215114
1114115
2116115
l1l2/15
1510
1105
1140
1l2S
25 34
6 35
16 l4
ll,n.s
11.8 5.4 1.0
9.1 5.5 0.5·1
8.8 5.1 O.HO
IU 5.j 0.)·1
50
ga
9!)
50
8-36
5·9
I-IS
5-6
l.l
5.0
1.1
5.5
yes
)'11
)'11
yll
no
no
no
nO
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0---__.-~----_--__..-_-..--.-__----------_..--..----.-_.-_-----_.-.._-_._--_..-
14 •1114115 IOl5 6 15 8.2 5.5 2.5·5 100 5-\2 1.0 yll _no 0.0
21161.15 1210 16 .•II 9.7 5.7 O.J-l 100 1-14 4.5 )'tS nO 0.0
l/l2/75 lJlO 31 35 1.1 5.l 1.5 100 1-8 4.0 )'U nil 0.0-----_..-.._-.--_ -..-_-_._..--_-----_-_-..-oo ___.._--___•__-___..- _ _ -.._••_••._.__•___
15'A 1ZJ4/14 '1000 10 -..-.-••~9.p 100 19 0.0 no no 0.0
31l2tlS 1230 28 )J .-..5.4 22 lOO l-24 •.0 no no 0.0....------••_ _ --.._-•._--oo-__~-••_•••_ _ _ _•••••••___••_ _•••__••••_._
I\)
I-'
n •1214/14 lOIS
1115115 1000
2115/15 12Q5
3112115 1240
10 l4
18 JZ
9 II
l2 l.
a.4 5.2 9.0
6.4 $.4 10
8.1 5.5 II
11.£1 5.5 0.3-5
100
100
100
90
11
"-C8
H5
0-36
1.3
14.0
,9.0
2.0
yel
no
yes
110
no
"0
no
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
15 C III ~115 0910
2115115 1210
18 34
8 l4
7.4 5.l 0.5-l
7.4 5.l 0.1-1
95
100
2-24
5·10
l.O
5.0
yel
no
no
no
0.0
0.0----_-•••_-------.--------- -_~-"'----_-_..__"'._---oo _ ____.._
16 A 2111115 0942 26 35 6.5'5.2 0.5-2 10 1-18 l.O yel /10 0.0
l{lUIS !liD 28 II 12.0 5.l 6.5-12 loa 1-12 5.0 no '0.0
17 A 1{l6/15 11~5
2113/15 1700
3/11175 1400
26 l5
·2 13
26 l5
U 5.7 0.5-1
8.5 5.l 0.1-)'
1.4 5.4 0.5·.
20
95
l5
5·16
0-12
0..!2
10.5n.o
6.5
yel
)'ei
yel
no
no
no
0.0
U.S 0 0 0 0
20.4 )0 0 0
17 B IlIii1IS IIC5
2IIJIIS 1700
1/11115 1410
~~34
-)16
21 36
10.,5.1 0.2
8.1 5.5 O.l-~
1,4 5.5 0.0-5
10
50
40
.-24
0·8
0-15
l.O
4.0
2.5
yu
)U
yu
no
no
no
0.0
0.0
IS A 1116/15 12£5
2114115 1015
1111"'5 Ill!)
29 14 9.2 5.5 6.5
5 l3.5 1.2 5.1 0.5-9
28 l4.5 1.3 5.4.0.l-5
100
100
95
12-24
0-28
P'24
6.0
6.5
7.l
no
no
yes
110
no
110
0.0
0.0
I~A 2116175 1710
111111 5 13115
15
16
14
34
9.0 5.5 05-5
I.l 5.4 0.1-2
98
15
14-28 '
0-12
9.5
18.0
no
yes
no
no
16.1\1 0 0 0
2U 0 0 0 0
u B Jill/IS \laO 25 34 1.4 5.6 0.1-2 15 0-20 I?.0 )es no
20 A 1116115 1410 17 l2 10.l 5.5 0.6-15 100 2)·16 2.0 ye~no 0.0
111105 113()--••---••••0.9-12 100 12-36 0.0 none yei 0.0.._--_-----~--..-..~~---------~--------------_..__..--__~..-~.._.._~..--~_..-------___-------.._..---..-__._--~.._-----_.--..--..
20 •2116115 1510 1~12 .---5.4 14 100 Zl-]6 9.0 IIG 110 0.0
3/11115 1115 24 JZ ---.5.724.5 Ion 12-31\2.5 none /10_..-..--__------___-----..------_------__--__~-_-----------~~-_---_--_----_.--_-
21 A 2116.'15 1620 11 14 9.4 5.7 0.1-12 100 5-10 5.0 yH ."0\1 0.0
1/11115 1200 24 l2 1.1 5.5 IU-S 100 0-24 II.S yes :lil 21.4 4 0 0
·-2 j_..-'-8""-2/i ii IS ·_··iijs ---.-i~···-ii T···9~.·-s~i··cTi0"'·'ioa .---.'-5~i6 ..•---..~-5.-.-.•--~~.-..-...-;;--····0·0-····------·..--.._...-.
The mainstem Susitna River was sampled for rearing fry at three
locations.A minn~"trap installed in the mainstem river near Slough 17
captured 3 coho fry.There was a 35 percent ice cover at this location.
One age 0.0 coho fry was captured in the mainstem Susitna River at Curry.
This specimen was 69.0 mm in length,weighed 3.3 qm,and had a condition
factor of 1.005 (Table 9).
Twelve coho fry were captured in the mainstem Susitna River,2.5
river miles south of the Talkeetna River during Anril.Age analysis
revealed all '."Iere 0.0 age fish produced from the 1973 brood year.r1ean
length,'""eight and condition factor \~ere 64.2 mm.2.7 gm and 1.020,
respectively.
ioJi nter condi ti cns \-Iere moni tared on I nd i an Pi ver,Lane Creek and
Said Creek (Table la).Water flow was noted in all three locations.
Ice cover was 50 nercent in Lane Creek,95 percent in Gold Creek and 99.5
percent in Indian ~iver.Water samples were taken at Gold Cre~k,Chase
Creek,and the I\nchoraqe-Fairbanks Hiqhwav bridqe.Total suspended solid
content decreased fram the previous three months.Total suspended solid
levels at Chase Creek were 4.0 mq/l (Table 11).The settleables,that
portion of the total suspended solids which settle within a 24 hour
period.comprised 50 percent of the sample.Ice cover was 100 percent
and anchor ice was present on the stream bottom.
Total dissolved _solid levels averaged 6.5 and 3.5 mq/l at Gold
Creel<and the Anchorage-Fairbanks Hiqhway bridge,respectively (Tables 12
and 13).The settleable portions were approximately 54 percent at Gold
Creek and 71 percent at Anchorage-Fairbanks Highw~y bridge.Dissolved
oxygen levels avera'le 5 ppm higher at Gold Creek.
Susitna Riv~~su~er and fall sur.veYl .,....~."~
"
Surveys during 1974 located 21 potential spawninq and rearing sloughs
on the Susitna r.iv~r be~Neen Devil Canyon and the Chulitna River ..Seven
additional slough areas were located durinq the winter and summer of 1975
(Figure 2).Rearing fish were observed in 22 of the slough areas.Adult
sa lmon were present in 8 of the 21 bacblater areas.Seven cl earvJater
streams along the Susitna River were also surveyed.Adult salmon were
observed spawnino in all streams and rearinq fry were observed in four.
The adult salmon and rearin9 fry densities are summarized in Appendix II,
Table 2.
Coho fry populations were the most numerous rearinq fry species
observed.Coho frY were observed in 19 slough areas and 3 streams
(Appendix II,Tables 2-6).The majority of fry sampled for aqe analysis
were 0.0 aqe fish (Table 14).
Only three 1.0 age fry were collected during the season and these
were located above a beaver dam in Fishwheel Slough (located at the east
bank fishwhee1 camo)suqgestinq a possible migrational barrier to these
individuals,Coho fry were found in Whisker's,Chase,Lane and McKenzie
Creek (Appendix II,Table 7).All fry sampled were 0.0 age class.The
mean lenqth ranged from 49.8 to 61.3 mm (Table 15).
22
'.
'.
-.
-
l J I I I j j I ))l "I j ]I l j
.'.
Tlble I.Ale.t~,th Ir.d weight .Rllysls of ~oho fry eollecttd 'n the SUI'tn.River .nd Sloughl "~rs IA.I.'A.11.'13.17.It.21.Dlv"·,C.nron
N nter Project.1974-1975..
Slough No.Date
o.OwAy'Cllll 1.0 Agi CllllSamplePercent'----.r(e~n-gnth~"Sr.t~l~nd~.~rd-e fit -St.nd.lrd CondItion ~Percent [,09th Stlndlra Weight It.ndlrd Condition Brood
Sire Composition (rom)Dtyl.tton (,Oeyl.tton Flctor 'e.r Composltton (Ra)Davtltlnn (,)Dev,.t'on F.ctor 'e.r
11/6/14 10
'117115 Z
2/18/75 7
84,
SA
1117175
Z/lon5
z
8
50.0
100.0
50.0
100.0
100.0
64
64.3
64
10.1
1l.5
5.8
4.3
4.5
l.O
3.1
3.0
3.1
4.9
1.1
0.15
11.9
1.144
1.166
1.144
1.074
1.234
un
unun
I"i
1913
50
50.0
74
8l
4.8
5.8
1.185
1.014
III 7I
1972
II 1116114
1115115
2115/75
B
6
2
100.0
85.7
100.0
61.0 6.S
62.3 5.0
62.0 2.8
2.8
J.4
2.8
0.'
Q.'
0.1
1.242
\.406
1.115
ununun 14.3 &:J 1i.8 1.014 n71
_.-~~-_._---~._-----_._--------.---~-----------------------------~------------_.------_._--._------~------._..._-------------~._------------..__._-----------------------~.--u 3/1U75 100.0 67.4 4.6 3.1 0.11 1.013 1971
J\)w
__•~__~••_._••_•••._.._••_••__•~__••__•••••A_.••~__~.w.•••_.G~u.G ~~__._.~O.~~~••__•._.n ••
SUIttna R.1/16/15 I 100.0 62.0 2.7 Lin Ull
e1 Gold Cr.2/14-16/75 6 100.0 70.0 4.'1.9 O.g 1.137 1913
($\'110.17)3/12/75·]100.0 68.0 1.0 2.9 0.7 0.922 1971•._••~.•••••_~._.•••••~__•__•__n ~•••R_••_.._~•••__~...~..~w r •_
19 2/17/15 I 100.0 67.0 3.4 1.Ill)1913__~W ••__~_••_._•••••_.•••_.M __•._.••••.~..~•••~._.._A •__._._.__••••~_~.__~__••a •.._
21 3112/15 5 100.0 65.Z 3.8 t.'0.5 0.938 1971__~__.~_..•..~._.__....__•.~__~_.._••4._.~._~•..••4_._~-.._•••_..._.A._~•.__
Sus Itna R.
a t Curry 3/14115 100.0 69.0 3.3 1.005 \1113._........._.~__~__..~...._A._..__._._...._~~.~a_....__••__~-._._.~._~••-~~G_~~w . .__..-~_
Susltnl R.
2.5 miles
south
t.lkeelnA~.4/4/75 IZ 100.0 64.2 4.9 2.7 0.8 1.0Z0 un
Table 10.Survey of winter conditions in Ind1an River.Lane Creek.and Gold Creek.Oevil's Canyon Winter Project.1974~1975.
---._---~----
Temperature Ice Ice Snow Depth ~Iater .I\nchor
Stream Survey Date Time (oF)Thickness Cover on ice Depth Ice
Site (military)Air Water (inches)(X)(1 nches)(inches)Flow Present
Indian River 3.0 12/6/74 0930 21 34 1.5-3.5 50 4-24 12-14 yes no
3.0 1/15/75 1155 18 34 3.0-5.0 100 8-36 12 yes no
0.2 2/18/75 0934 27 32 7-12 100 .14-40 7 yes no
0.3 3/11/75 1030 27 32 9.5 99.5 24-35 12 yes no
--~------------------------------------------------------------------~------------------------------------------------------
Lane Creek 0.1 12/6/74 1500 28 35.5 0.5-1.0 90 6-24 8-12 7.21 11 no
O.1 1/13/75 1405 6 33 1.0-12.0 99 2-36 5 yes no
0.1 2/18/75 1538 28 33 6.0-14.0 100 5-36 7 yes no
0.1 3/14/75 1300 30 33 0.0-1.0 50 0-36 7 yes no
-----~--------~------------~---------------------------------------------------.--------------------------------------------
Gold Creek 0.3 12/6/74 0830 21 32.5 12.0-14.0 98 24-48 6-9 yes no
0.3 1/15175 1006 21 33 2,0-12.0 100 12-48 7 yes no
0.3 2/16/75 1100 15 32.5 1.0-7.0 100 28-36 7.2 yes no
0.3 3/13/75 1145 30 33 0.0-36.0 95 0-24 15 yes no..---_.
!I Cubic feet per second
f\)
f:'"
t I !
Ito,0111
)!I J I )I I J I )J
..,
J J J J
J ~•I ]E j 1 ]]J }J J j
~J
..'.
T~ble 11.Analysis of water condtttons at Chase Creek.Oevil's Canyon Project.19t~-1975.
]ID
S-ample Water Ice --500\.,---Anchor
bate Time Te~rra ture Size Settlable Hon M fl1 terable Su.pended D.O.pH Depth Cover Depth on Ice
(tnt 1t ta!.YL-~L-W'i~rrn lLJ (mg/1 )(mg/l)hm/ll (ppm)Hm:hes )(l)Ice (inches)Present
.';
',.1:·
12/6/74 1700 28 34 2.0 ..r 6 6 1~14.8 6.7 >96 95 1.0-24 no
,~.
1/13/75 1145 -9 .32 I '1 1 10.4 5.72',0 ~':..,51 •'58 48 15 0.5-12 no
2/18/75 1630 21 32 2.q .If·J4 ~_1 9 9.0 5.8 50 .100 24 M 30 no
".
3/14/75 1430 30 32 2.0 2 2 4 19.0 5.3 20 .100 1-24 yes
Table 12.Analysts of water tondittons at Gold Creek.Devil's Canyon Project.1914-1975.
----------
Sample Sus~ended Soltds !Water Ice Snow AnchorDateTemperatureSheSettlableNon-I ltera6Te Total Susponaea 0.0.pH Depth Cover Oppth IceJ:I r(l'F}Wa terlTt}"(1)(mgl1 )(mg/l)(mg/l)(ppm)(inches)(I)(inches)Present--
'.12/5/75 30 33.5 2.0 21 4 25 >6.4 5.6 48 30 0.5-6 no
1/14/75 6 32 2.0 57 1 58 10.4 5.7 48 75 0.5-12 no
2/14/75 14 32 2.0 19 1 .20 10.1 5.8 41 95 0.0-18 no
3/16/75 25 32 2.0 2 2 4 17.0 5.5 >50 95 0.0-12 no
3/29/75 32 2.0 5 4 9 15.0 6.4 >50 95 0.0-8 no
1/23/75 68 48 2.0 329 52 381
8/4/75 2.0 189 16 205 >60
8/14/75 53 42 .2.0 1103 10 123 >50
8/27175 56 45 2.0 141 20 161 >60
9/2/75 55 44 t.O 33 1 -,34 >60
Table .3.Analysis of water cond1t1Qns at the Anchorage-fairbanks Highway Bridge crossing.Devi1·s Canyon Project.1974-1975.
~"
Sample Suspended Solids Water Ice Snow Anchor
Date·TemJlera ture She Settlable Non-fil terabte Total Suspended D.O.pH Depth Cover Depth lee
Air(oF)~ater(6F).(1)(mg/1 )(mg/l)(mg/1 )(ppm)(inches)(%)(inches)Present
12/19/74 16 32.5 2.0 2 2 4 14.2 6.8 :>96 75 9.7-13
1/12/75 2 33 ',I 2.0 4 224 228 12.8 5.6 42 90 9 no
1/22/75 'jV 2.0 Z 2 4 12.1 7.8 90'il fl
2/18/75 23 32 2.0 10 2 12 8.8 5.9 50 100 12 no
2/20/75 .2.0 6 1 7 9.7 no
3/9/75 25 32 2.0 4 1 5 10.8 5.9 :>50 100 1-36 no
3/25/75 2.0 1 1 2 11.0
4/4/75 22 32.5 2.0 2 1 3 11.0 5.7 >50 99 10.3 no
4/2.1/75 39 33 2.0 6 4 10 14.5 6.0 >50 99 0-12 no
4/24/75 2.0 3 2 5 13.2 7.8
5/14/75 2.0 84 2 86
5/27/75 2.0 264 6 270
6/9/75 50 45 2.0 155 22 177
6/20/75 2.0 163 13 177
7/21/75 2.0 358 74 432
I\)
0'\
I I t
..
J J i J I J .1 I I J J J
..
1
,
1 I I
Taole 14.Age and length samples of coho fry col1ected at Sloughs Numbers 1.2.3.4,5,6.9',
10,11,13,14,15,17,20,21 and Fishwheel Slough,Susitna River,Devil's Canyon
Project.1975.
Slough No.
1
Date
8/11
Sample
Size
8
Percent
Composition
100
0.0 Age Class
Mean
Length(mm)
5J.3
Standard
Devia~ion
6.4
1.0 Aoe Class
Percent
Campos i ti on
r1ean
Lengt.h(lmi)
Sta"dard
Devi3.tion
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~-2 8/5
9/2&,
8
5
iOC
100
52.9
60.4
Z.3
Z.O
--------------------------------------------------------~---------------------------------------3
3A
38
7129
7/29
8/5
81Z3
4
4
8
9
100
100
100
100
57.3
55 ..3
55.8
60.0
--------------------------~----------------------------_--._--------------------------~-----~-_..8/2 8 100 49.9 5.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 7/26 8 100 57.9 7.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8 9/27 1 100 69.0
--------------------~--------------------------------------------------------------------------9 8/9 8 100 53.5 5.3
----------------.--~------------_-._-------------------------------~--------------------~------10
11
8/7
8/7
8
8
100
100
50.8
55.0
7.8
3.2
-------------------------------------------------~---------------------------------------------13
14
3/12
7/28
9(25
7/23
9/4
7
7
2
8
6
100
lOO
100
100
100
67.4
50.1
64.0
61.3
61.3
4.6
8.8
7.0
4.1
1-.9
--------------------------------------------------~-----------------------------~-------------15 7/29
8/14
8
9
100
100
59.1
52.2
5.7
3.0----------------------------------------_._---------_.---------------------_._-------------------
17
20
3/12
7/29
8/14
3
8
8
100
100
100
68.0
54.9
60.6
1.0
2.4
3.4
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21 3/12 5 100 65.2 3.8
-----------------------------~-----------------------------------------------------------------Ffshwhee1
Fishwheel
8/2
8/25
4
4
25
100
65.0
70.3
27
6.7
75 99.0 9.5
Table 15.Age and 1ength samples of coho fry collected at Whisker's Creek,Chase.Lane
and McKenzie Creeks.Susitna River.Devil's Canyon Project,1975.
-
Slough No.
0.0 Age Class 1.0 Aae Class
Date Sample Percent Mean Standard Percent Mean Standard
Size Composition Length(mm}Deviation Composition Length(mm)Deviation
Whiskers
Cret~k
Chase
Creek
l.ane
Creek
McKenzie
Creek
i/28
7/17
7/26
8/6
8
8
8
8
100
100
100
iOO
49.8
50.0
61.3
51.0
4.6
5.0
5.7
'-
-
Table 16.Age and length samples of king salmon fry in Slough Number 15.Susftna River.
Devil's Canyon Project.1975.-.'
~i
0.0 Age Class -Slough Date Sample Percent Mean Standard Mean Standard Condition
Size Camposition Length(lIiII)Deviation Weight Deviation Factor -15 8114 6 100 50.1 3.7 L3 0.23 1.013
flIfI!Pf',
-
28
.'
King salmon fry (Q..tshawytscha)were collected in Slough Number 15.
The mean length and mean weight were 50.7 mm and 1.3 gm,respectively (Table
16).No sockeye salmon fry were observed in the sloughs by survey cre\>lS
in 1975.
Resident fish species were found in slouqhs containing salmon fry.
Grayling fry (Thymallus arcticus)were observed in Sloughs Numbers 2,10,
1"13,20 and 21.Whitefish fry (Coregonidae)were found in Slough
!~umbers 8,10,13,20 and 21.Juvenile rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri)
were observed in Slough Number 20.Scu1pins (Cottidae)and suckers
(Catostomidae)were observed in many slough areas.
Limited artificial substrate sampling was conducted to determine
species composition of the insect population in tributary streams of the
Sus;!.na River.Foregut analysis of salmon fry provided comparative data
on foed availability.The most common insects were stoneflies (Plecoptera:
Perlodidae:Isoperla sp.)and "no-see-urns"(Diptera:Ceratopogonidae:
Dasyhelea sp.).Also present were:
Simuliidae:Diptera (black-flies)
.Heptageni idae:Ephemeroptera (mayfl i es):
Rhyacophil i dae:Tri coptera (caddis fl i es):Rhyacophil a sp.
Psychomyiidae:Tricoptera (caddis flies):Psychomyia sp.
The low number of insects captured was due to the late dates of substrate
installation.~ID Plecoptera were found in Waterfall Creek samples.Plecop-
tera adults were,however,very common after late July.No-see-ums adults
were also very common accounting for the low number of larvae in the samples.
Large numbers of Psychomia sp.larvae (up to 4 per sq ft)were observed in
the sil t bottoms of some areas (Sloughs Numbers 4,14 and ~1cKenz;e Creek).
Substrates should be installed in early June to provide rrore detailed da-:a
on species composition.
Foregut analysis of coho fry demonstrated the importance of insect
larvae in the diets of rearing fish (Table 17).Salmon eggs were also an
important food source.A larger variety af insects were present i~the Tal-
keetna River stomach samples.This is probably due to the time of year these
fry were collected.More detailed studies on insect populations and their
importance in salmon fry diets is required.
Escaoement Surveys
Chum salmon spawning occur!'"ed in Sloughs Numbers 3,9,13,15,
16,21,Lane Creek and Indian River.Peak soawning occurred durinq
1ast week of August and first three weeks of September (Table 18).
Numoers 9 and 21 contained the largest numbers of spawning adults.
the
Sloughs
Spawning sockeye salmon were observed in four sloughs and three streams.
Sloughs Number 3-8 and 21 contained spawning sockeye and chum salmon.The
highest density of spawning occurred in Sloughs Numbers 11 and 21.The peak
of soawning occurred between August 26 and September 27 (Table 18).
29
Table 17"Stomach content analysis of coho salmon fry collected at Sloughs Numbers 9,
11 and 15.Susitna River and Slough Number 2.Talkeetna River.Devil's
Canyon Project.i97S.
,",,-
Length Weight Relative
Slough"No.Date (mm)(9)Condition Contents ..Susitna River'
15 8/14/75 50 1.6 fun 1 egg,1 Diptera larvae
5 Trichoptera larvae
50 1.3 empty
50 1.4 1/2 Trichoptera larvae.detritus
Diptera 1arvae
58 1.8 full l'egg.detritus.Diptera larvae
55 1.5 liZ 1 egg
54 1.4 3/4 Diptera larvae.algae.Trichoptera
larvae.detritus
50 1.3 empty
50 1.4 empty
53 1.5 1/2 D1ptera larvae &pupae.algae}
Trichoptera larvae.detritus
__......Cl .,,..__,'~-----------
9 9/6/74 78 6.1 full 2 'eggs
65 3,6 1/2 D1pt2ra nymphs
61 3.Z full 2 eggs.Diptera nymphs
60 2.6 il2 J Oip~era larvae
69 4.2 full 2 eggs,1 Trichoptera larvae
·1S5 3.3 empty
68 3.7 1/3 1 egg
66 3.4 empty
63 3.0 .empty
54 2.3 1/4 detritus
------------------------------------~-------------------_.._--------------------------11 9/6/75 67 4.0 full 2 eggs
63 2.9 empty
60 2.7 full 2 eggs.?Trichoptera
57 2.4 1/2 1 Trichoptera.detritus.algae
58 Z~5 full 2 eggs.detritus
55 2.0 full 1 egg.8 Trichoptera (he3ds)
Talkeetna River
2 6/5/75 49 1.4 3/4 8 Trichoptera larvae,blue-green
!'Igae."1 Diptera larvae
49 1.5 full Diptera larvae &pupae,algae,
detritus.Trichoptera.Odonata,
~Plecoptera.Coleoptera
56 1.8 3/4 Trichoptera larvae.algae,detritus.
Plecoptera.Diptera larvae
48 1.3 empty ~1l_47 1.3 i/2 Trichoptera larvae,detritus.algae
45 1.2 full Trichoptera larvae,Diptera larvae -Odonata (1).detritus .
46 1.3 3/4 1 egg.Trichoptera larvae,algae ---D1ptera larvae
-'
30
Table 18.Peak adult escapement survey counts for chum,pink.sockeye and king salmon,
Susitna River,Oevil's Canyon Project.1975.,-
Chum Sa 1mon Surveys Sockeye Salmon Surveys
Density .Density
.Location Date Live Dead iotal Location Date ~fve Dead Tota 1
Slough ~c.3B 9/3 50 0 50 Slough 38 9/3 14 1 15
F~Lane Creek 8/17 3 a 3 4th July Creel<8/17 1 0 1
Slough No.9 9/27 54 127 181 Slough No.11 9/4 84 0 84
S'loug!;No.13 9/25 1 0 1 Slough tic.19 8/25 16 4 20
Slough No.15 9/6 1 0 1 Slough No.21 9/25 74 1 75
Slough No.16 8/26 12 0 12 ttcKenzie Creek 9/27 45 1 46
Indian River 8/12 70 0 70 Indian River 9i26 l 0 1
510ugh No.21 9/6 246 4 250
Total 235 7 242
Total 437 131 568-
31
Pink and king salmon were observed spawning only in clearwater streams.
The peak in pink spawning was from August 12 through August 17 and the peak
of king spawning from July 29 to August 12 (Table 18).The survey counts
of the clearwater tributary streams do not reflect the total number of
spawninq salmon i but only the density within the index areas {Appendix II,
Tab 1e 7j.
}Eikeetna and Chulitna River Investigations
Investigations were initiated on the Talkeetna and Chulitna Rivers
in June 1975.Surveys located 13 potential spawning and rearing sloughs
and bio c1eal""Nater tributary streams in the Tal keetna River from the con-
fluence with the Susitna River upstream about 16 miles (26 km)to Clear
Creek (Fiqure 3).The mainstem Talkeetna River flowed through some of
the potential slough areas makinq fry counts impossib1e due to silty water
conditions.Only one slough area was accessible by boat on the Chulitna
Ri ver due to the bra i ded na ture of the mouth.One slough was i dent ifi eel
on the mainstem Susitna River from the Talkeetna River downstream to the
Anchorage-Fairbanks Highway bridge (Appendix I,Figure 41).No fry were
observed in this slough.
Rearing coho and chum salmon fry were observed in the Talkeetna River
sloughs during June surveys.Chum salmon were collected from Sloughs Numbers
1,4 anc Beaver Pond Slough,Seventeen samples were collected from Slough
Number 1 (Table 19).The mean lengths of chum salmon fry from Beaver Pond
Slough and Slough Number 4 were 38.4 and 37.6 mm,respectively.No chum
salrron -fry were observed in the sloughs after the first week of June.
Coho salmon fry v/ere obse.·ved in 5loughs Numbers 1,2 t 9 and Beavpr
Pond 510ugh dud ng June surveys.The mean 1engths ranged from 42.9 mm
in Slough Number 2 to 73.6 111m in Slough Number 9.All were a.Oage fish
produced from the 1973 brood year (Table 20).The largest numbers of fry
were observed in Slough Number 2.High water conditions in mid-June pre-
vented further boat surveys.An aerial reconnaissance was conductea to
observe conditions of the river and note the presence of king salmon adults
migrating to spawninq areas.No adults were observed.Further sampling
was postponed until conditions of the river permitted.
Escapement surveys were initiated the third week of July and continued
through mi d-September.Reari ng coho fry ~'1ere observed in 8 slough areas
and one clearwater tributary stream (Appendix II,Tables 8 and 9).Only
one representative of the 1.0 age class coho fry was collected in a Talkeetna
River slough.No other salmon fry species were observed.Grayling and 'f/hite-
fish,resident species,were observed in Clear Creek slough on August 19.
Chum salmon were the only adult species observed spawning in the slough
areas of the Talkeetna River by the escapement survey crew.Reports from
sportfishermen and other department biologists did,however,document sock-
eye,pink and chum salmon spawning in clearwater tributaries.Tags were
"recovered from Chuni1na Creek,Clear Creek and Stephan Lake (Table 4).
Aero;a 1 sLlrveys ot sloughs upstream from Cl ear Creek reveal ed high densiti es
of spawning chum salmon.
32
'.
-,
-.
~-
-
-
-
Tcble 19.Age and length samples of chum salmon fry from Slough Number 1.
Beaver Pond Slough,and Slough Number 4,Talkeetna River,Devil's
Canyon Project,1975.
0.0 Age Class
Slough Number
1
Beaver-Pond
Date
6/5
6/5
Sample
Size
17
10
Mean
Length (mm)
35.7
38.4
Standa r'd
Deviaticn
2.2
3.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 6/5 20
33
37.6 3.0
,Table 20.Age and length of coho salmon fry from Sloughs Numbers 1.2.Beaver Pond.Billion.3A.5.6. 7.Whiskey and 9.
Talkeetna River.Devil's Canyon Project.1975.
------------------------------------------------,
0.0 Age Class 1,0 Age Class
Slough No.Date Sample -----Perc en t Mean l.ength Standard Percent Mean Length Standard
Size Composition (111m)Deviation Composition (nun)Davia t ion
1 6/5 5 100 48.6 8,1 0
7/25 8 100 54.8 3.0 0
9/2 8 100 62.6 5.1 0___________________w .~a ~~•_
2 6/5
8/5
19
8
100
100
42.9
58.9
7.6
2.3
oo
Beaver Pond 6/5 2 100 44.5 2.12 a
W
.I:""
Bill ion
3A
5
6 &1
Whiskey
9
.,
6/11
8/5
1125
7/25
9/9
8/5
617
8
8
4
8
8
8
8
90
100
100
100
100
100
100
65.4
55.8
42.5
54.5
60.9
58.1
73.6
4.7
3.1
5.2
<5,0
8.5
6.5
3.7
10
o
o
oo
o
o
91.0
r'
I I I I I !I !I J J )I I
-
Three slouqhs (Numbers 4,8 and 9)originally identified in June were
flooded by the mainstem Talkeetna River on August 5.These 3 sloughs were
flowing through for the remainder of the surveys.
The mouth of Slough Number 6 dried UD ben~een Auqust 19 and September
2.Approximately 1,000 coho fry were t~apped in the slough.Water levels
were sufficient to support the population,but it is not known if this area
will freeze completely and result in mortalities during winter months.
Water conditions of the Talkeetna River were monitored month1y at the
Alaska Railroad bridge (Table 21).Total suspended solid levels ranqed
from 4 mg/l in March to a peak of 185 mg/l on July 25.The settleable sus-
pended solids were normally greater than 9 percent of the total dlssoivec
sol ids.Water temperatures ranged from 33°F in '·1arch to 48°F in mid-';uqust.
Dissolved oxygen levels were not a limiting factor at this location,being
greater than 12 ppm.
The Chu 1;tna Ri ver was surveyed weekly from Ju ly 22 to Augus t 25.~'lo
fry or adults were observed in Slough Number 1,Chulitna River,througnout
the season.June surveys noted the presence of unidentifiable adult salmon
carcasses t from the 1974 season.in the clean.,ater stream below the beaver
dam (Appendix I,Figure 40).
Cl imatolog1cal·Observations
Climatological data was collected daily,at ~pproximately 2000 hO'Jrs.
at the fishwheel camp from July 7 through August 26 (Table 22).The maximum
air temperature during this period was 76°F and the minimum was 52°F.The
maximum and minimum water temperatures were 62°F and 50°F,respectiv~ly.
The Susitna River level fluctuated a maximum of 3.1 feet (0.9 m)from July
7 through Auqust 26.The maximum twenty-four hour fluctuation in the river
level was an increase of 0.9 feet (0.3 m)which occurred between July 27
and July 28.AtJoospheric observations during the 51 day period indicated
that 3 days had a cloud cover less than 5 percent of the sky and 13 days
were completely overcast.
Water temperature profiles.recorded 24 hours a day with a Ryan
thermograph,demonstrate relatively low fluctuations in water temperatures
at Gold Cre~k during winter months (Figure 11).Profiles of water and air
temperatures at the fishwheel site suggests a significant daily warminq
and cooling of water temperatures (Figure 12).
DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY
Gross indications of migrational timing.abundance by soecies and age-
length-sex data was obtained f~om fishwheel operation in the lower study
area.The total catch of salmon during the 1975 season was less than 1974.
Chum and pink salmon dominated the fishwheel catches.Population estimates
were determined by the Peterson marK and recapture method.The pODu1ation
estimates for 1974 and 1975 were:
35
Table 21.Analysis of water conditions of the Talkeetna River at th~Alaska Railroad bridge a Devll's Canyon Project.1975...
Sample SUSycnded Soli~s Water Ice Snow Anchor
Date Tem~rature SIze Seffiable Non-f lterable Total"suspt!riaea D.O.pH Vepth Cover Depth on Ice
~11 Uater(eFJ (1 )(mgl1 )(mg/l)(mgl1 )(ppm)(inches)(~)Ice (t "ches)Present
~.
3/16/75 30 33 3 3 1 4 18 5.6 ~50 100 6-12 no
4/3/15 29 33 3 36 1 37 11.9 5.5 32.5 95 10.8 no
4/21/15 40 34 2 23 1 24 18.5 5.6 >60
6/5/15 SO 42 2 69 2 71 >72
7/25/75 '57 48 2 168 17 185
8/19/75 55 48 2 171 8 179
9/1/15 56 45 2 24 1 25
--
w
0\
;""
I I I
lh ",
I 1 .,1 I I ~I 1 J J ]i
RO~
Table 22.Climatological observations at the fishwhee1 camp,Devil Canyon
Project,1975.
1:"J:;;\'l~
Date Air Temp Water Temp Water Guage Cloud Cover
(mi 1i tary)(0 fn (0 F)(feet)(percent)
,~
July
2.1721006758 10
8 2000 76 62 2.2 5
9 2000 75 62 2.3 80
10 2020 76 62 5
11 2200 65 62 2.,2 90.-12 2000 55 58 2.6 'loa
13 2000 53 54 3.2 100
14 2000 65 54 3.0 60
15 2000 52 51 2.4 100
16 2000 58 54 2.6 30
17 1945 64 55 2,1 90
18 2000 59 55 1.8 40
r-19 2000 54 52 2.0 100
20 2000 53 51 2.3 100
21 2000 53 50 2.6 100
22 2000 57 51 2.5 5
23 2000 60 52 1.8 90
24 2000 57 53 1.5 100
25 2130 54 53 1.7 100
.=.l'iil 26 2000 55 52 1.7 90
27 2000 59 53 1.5 .-:"',:.,60
2B 2020 58 53 2.4 60
29 2000 53 51 2.2 100
,~30 2000 54 53 1.7 100
31 2000 54 51 1.5 95
,(!7!i\1lRl"August
1 2130 S4 51 1.6 90
2 2000 60 56 1.5 50
3'2000 58 54 1.3 100
~4 2000 56 54 1.2 60
5 2000 58 56 0.8 10
6 2000 58 55 0.8 70
7 2000 58 54 1.0 95.~8 2000 60 S4 0.9 50
9 2000 60 S4 1.0 80
10 2000 58 53 0.8 100
~~!11 2000 59 53 0.8 60
12 2000 62 54 0.7 90
13 2000 58 56 0.5 95
14 2000 63 57 0.5 90
15 2000 55 56 0.5 100
16 2000 58 55 0.8 50
17 2000 61 53 1.3 50
@~18 2000 56 53 0.9 60
-19 2000 57 52 0.9 20-20 2000 57 53 0.5 50
21 2000 56 53 0.3 10
22 2000 54 55 0.3 70
23 2000 57 55 0.1 10
24 2000 53 52 O.1 99
25 2000 55 53 0.1 99
2£2000 53 52 O.1 50
37
~
33
32
31
30
I J :a I I I r f ...I I I
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
____n/"-~.- ,
141312111098
.January
7
February
65.432
~......•11.
1
-u.
0 33---
QJ 32L::s......31ttJ
L
QJ 300-
f:;
ClJ
to-
w
(l)
33
32
31
30
15 17 19 21 23
February
25 21 1 3 5
1 9.
March
11 13 15
Figure 11.Water temperature profiles recorded daily in the Sus1tna River at Gold Creek,Devi1!s
Canyon Winter Project,1975.
t ,•..
J I i I J J 5 I ~t I !J J }J
J 1 1
c'.'
j 1 }]I 1 -j ~1 i
I,.'.
-~i'I
.~}]
80
15
Air temperature
-----Water temperature
'\
\
\
\..."---'\/
r--,
I \1
f
I
\,LJ'V \r-J V /,,,-\A,\/---l\I "I
"\(\,......_""\"\.J ......-.......~/J
\ " \,./"v ~\/\I\,,/I \J...,.'-'.....50 I iii •i I Iii r
55
10
.....
0
II
L:s 65w+.I
\()IIIL
IICl..
KJ
I-
60
7 12 17 22 27 1 6 11 16 21 26
July August
Figure 12.Profl1e of water and air temperatures recorded daily (2000 hours)at the east bank f1shwheel
camp.Oevil's Canyon Project.1975.
chum
pink
sockeye
1974
24,386 -+-2,602
5,252 +"998
1 ,008 +"224
1975
11,850 +4,044
6,257 +261
1 ,835 +337
Comparative data is not available for king and coho salmon.Tag recoveries
from chum,pink,sockeye and coho salmon belOtI the fishwheel sites indicate
a significant,but unknown,proportion of the salmon captured were possibly
milling and not migrating to spawning grounds above the tagging project.
Twenty-one sloughs were id'entifiedand surveyed on the Susitna River
during 1974.An additional 7 sloughs were identified during winter and
sU!lll1er 1975.ReaJ'ing fry were observed in 22 of the slough areas.Adul t
salmon were found spawning in 8 of the sloughs.A.du1t sockeye salmon were
obs erved in 4 s'l oughs and adu it chum salmon were observed in 6 slough areas.
Pink,king and coho salmon adults were found exclusively in clearwater
tributaries.Chum salmon were observed spawning in Lane Creek and Indian
River and sockeye spawned in Fourth of July Creek,McKenzie Creek and
Indian River,clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River.
A minimum of 575 pink,568 chum,242 sockeye and 62 king salman
spawned in the streams and sloughs of the Susitna River between the
confluence of the Chulitna River and Portage Creek as detennined from
peak slough and stream index escapement counts.
.Thirteen sloughs and 2 clearwater streams were identified and sur-
veyed on the Talkeetna River between its confluence with the Susitna River
and Clear Creek in 1975.Coho fry were rearing in 8 sloughs and·one clear-
water stream.Rearing chum salmon fry were observed in 3 sloughs in June.
Chum salmon were the only salmon species observed spawning in the slough
areas of the Talkeetna River.Pink salmon were,however,observed in
Clear Creek by the escapement survey crew.The presence of spawning
sockeye.coho and pink salmon was confirmed by sportfishermen1s tag returns
in Chunilna Creek,Clear Creek and Stephan Lake.
Winter surveys of the slough and mainstem Susitna River established
the presence of rearing coho fry CO.kisutch)in both areas.Suspended
solid levels of the mainstem river-were extremely low during fall and winter
months resulting in clear water conditions.The combination of partial
slough dewatering and clear water conditions were contributing factors
of fry emigration into the mainstem river for rearing.
Artificial substrate sampling and fry foregut analysis was conducted
to determine species composition of invertebrates within the study area
and the importance of benthic invertebrates as food items to rearing fry.
Insects comprised 100 percent of the benthic organisms found in the sub-
strate samples.The number of species of benthic organisms identified
was extremely low.The contributing factors are the time of year they
were installed and the length of time they remained in the sampling loca-
tions.The Plecoptera (stoneflies)and Diptera ("no-see-ums")represented
the dominant orders.Simuliidae (b'lack flies),Ephemeroptera (mayflies)
40
and Tricoptera (caddis flies)were also present.
Various environmental changes will occur as a result of dam constrvc~
tion on the Susitna River.The most obvious chanoe oroduced wi 11 be the
floodinq of about 82 miles (132 km)of river above the Devil Canyon Jam-
site.Anadromous fishes are not found in this section of the river.~n
vironmental changes will,hm"ever,occur downstream as a result of river
impoundment.The effects will occur not oniy on the mainstem Susitna
~iver but also on the Talkeetna and Chulitna Rivers.
Deoosition of the Susitna,Talkeetna and Chulitna Rivers will be
altered bv dam constructi on.The Chul itna River carr;es a 1arge bed load
and suspended load to its confluence with the Susitna River.The bra~ded
nature of the Chulitna at its mouth and the extension of this condition
several miles up the Susitna,indicate that this portion of the two rivers
has a sediment transporting regime that could readily become depositional.
The loss of oeak flO\'ls in the Susitna River will f·avor deposition and
related floodinq in the flats of the Chulitna River above .its confluence
(Bishop,1974).
The Talkeetna Ri ver does not carry the sediment 1Dad of the Chul itna
River,but it may also be affected by regulation of the Susitna.The
effect would most likely be in response to the Chulitna's deposition of
sediments actina to backwater the Talkeetna River.FloodinG conditions
in the Talkeetna River would most iikely be enhanced (Bishop,1974).
Tenperature regimes and velocities in the Tal keetna and Chul;tna
Rivers are also expected to be altered.Potential changes such as these
warrant continued studies of the fish populations in these tributaries.
Descriptions of potential impacts and suggestions for further studies
have been compiled by Department of Fish and Game,Sport and Commercial
Fisheri es bi 01 oqi sts.These l'tere comoiled joi ntly,si nee many areas over ...
lap and would result in unnecessary repetition.These are included in
the next section of the report.
There are no present methods of affixing a value on the Susitna River
salmon production.Total escaoement data by species by year is not availao"le
for the Susitna River drainage due to the glacial water conditions of this
system which prohibits visual observation and total escapement counts.Test
fishing and fishwhee1 tag-recovery programs have been and are still being
conducted in the lower Susitna River and its tributaries (Yentna and Tala-
chulitna Rivers and Susitna River at Susitna Station),but have been unsuc-
cessfui in providin0 total escapement fiqures to date.The utilization of
sonar to provide escapement data for the Susitna River has not been explored
fully."An experimental program may be initiated by Department of Fish and
Game in 1976.We can only estimate the monetary values of the Susitna River
salmon stocks at this time.Department of Fish and Game Commercial Fisheries
biologists have derived a method of determining the monetary values,but
it must be emphasi zed that these figures are at best "guesstimates"(Appendi x
IV).
41
POTENTIAL H~P,A,CTS AND RECOW~ENDA TIONS
ImpDundment of the Susi tna River,from Dev;1 Canyon upstream 84 mi 1es,
by tile 8evi 1 Canyon and 'IJatana Dams wi 11 ;nundate some 50,500 acres of
land"Environmental impacts \·,i11 occur both up and downstream from the
dams.Two phases of development of the hydroe lectri c fad 1 iti es wi 11 occur:
(1)the construction period projected to extend over a 12-year period and
(2)the operation of the facilities which \'/;11 provide hydroelectric power
to the Southcentral Ra 11 be It area.Envi ronmenta 1 impacts of th i s proj ect
ca n be d i v;ded into two phases:(1)those occurri ng duri ng the constructi on
oeriod and;(2)those occurringdul"'ing the post-construction period which
wi1l encompass the entire life of the project.
Consj:ruct i on Peri od Impacts
Construction of the dams will necessitate the diversion of the Susitna
River from its natural course.The major effect during this period is
expected to be an increase in siit load due to ~onstruction activities.
This decrease in water quality may cause the following impacts:
1.Disorientation of adult salmon returning to their home streams,
resulting in a decrease or lack of production in the upper areas
of the river.
2.Change in substrate composition in sloughs resulting in decreased
spawninq area.Chum (Oncorh~nchus keta)and sockeye salmon
(Q.'!.~rka)are known to uti llze these areas for spawning ..
3.Lack of clearwater conditions during fall and winter months pre-
venting fry from utilizing the mainstem Susitna River for rearing.
4.Degradation of water quality resulting in possible alterations
in the aquatic food chain.Some orders of insects,important
food items for salmon fry,may be unable to adapt to the changed
water qua·lity and the entire food chain will be altered.
5.Reduction of flow during construction years and initial filling
of dam waul d r'emove much spawni ng habi tat and could eventually
change fish distribution below dam.During the low flow con-
struction period a substantial risk of water pollution from con-
crete pouring,oil spillage,etc.,could occur.
6.Reduction in run of salmon would follow reduction of flow (Penn,
1975).Reducing flows could result in access restrictions to
salmon utilizing the upper regions.
42
Post-Construction Impacts
1.Turbidity
The Susitna River currently carr,ies a heavy load of glacial silt
in spring and summer.The rivers water is clear during fall and
winter months.Impoundment will result in a milky color of the
water year-round.Turbidity may also be increased if ther~;s
pennafrost in the area (Afton,19i5).This condition may result
in:
a.Inability of fry to utilize the mainstem for rearinq.
b.Erosion of gills of adults and fry due to the silty condition
of the mainstem Susitna River.
c.Increased light penetration due to decreased summer turbidity
would encourage more primary production.Rate of zooplankton
deve 1opment may not necessari 1y be increased due to pass;b1e
lower temperature in the April-May period.Rearing salmon
depend on zooplankton stock at this time.
d.Influence of bedrock on imooundment water quality may affect
fisheries.(Duthie and Ostrofsky,1975).
e.Increased mortality due to decreased summer turbidity and
increased predation success might occur (~een,1975).
f.Decreased spring and summer turbidity would likely limit
downstream migration to the darker hours,thereby extending
the downstream migration periods even further than at present
since some migration occurs in the turbid water during day-
light.There is evidence suggesting that increased time to
migrate would increase younq salmon mortality (Geen,1975).
2.Temperature
Normal temperature regimes will be altered by impoundment.Various
effects may be seen.
a.Any increases in downstream fall temperatures could affect
spawning success of salmon.There is evidence that relatively
high temperatures are associated with poor returning runs
(Geen,1975).
b.Increases in temperatures could result in change in the incuba-
tion period of salmon eggs and incubation conditions.
c.Increases in temperature could result in premature fry emergence
and seaward migration due to increased rate of development.In-
creased mortality could occur because the miqration may occur
prior to development of estuarine and marine zooplankton.
43
d.Alteration of the normal thermal regime would change the over-
all productivity of the river,which could add extreme stress
to fry populations.
e.A decrease in summer temperature could effect upstream migra-
tional time for adult sa·lmon,but its critical nature is un-
known.
f.Changes in the aquatic food chain would be expected due to
the inability of some organisms to adapt to even slight thermal
alterations.The elimination of even one invertebrate species
could affect the remainder of the food chain.
3.Chemical and Physical Parameters
t.
'-
.....
-
-
a.
b.
c.
Reservoir supersaturation of both dissolved oxygen and nitrogen
resulting from stratification and spillage can be expected,
impacting downstream fishes for an unknown distance (Geen,1975).
Increases in dissolved nitrogen gas could also result from air
vented into turbines to reduce negative pressures during week-
end periods of sustained low generating levels (Ruggles and
Watt,1975).
Dams slow down water transoort which gives more time for the
biochemical oxygen demand to consume available oxygen,thus
reducing dissolved oxygen content.
-
-
d.Conduc.tivity,alkalinity,and pH can increase after impoundment
construction (Geen,1975).
e.Dissolved oxygen levels will probably be altered due to changes
in river conditions.Levels below 5 ppm would preclude the
survival of fish in slough areas.
4.Organic Debris
a.Debris has a time frame of 100-200 years.This time frame would
be reduced with time as a result of forest drowning.
b.Population explosions of fish,benthos,and plankton may
result from the addition of organic nutrients.
5.Water Flow
a.Altered lake levels may result in flooding,slumping,erosion
and general shoreline degradation.Littoral zone changes af-
fect fisheries.
b.Changed ice regimes can also affect river and lake shorelines.
A change in water quality can be expected due to erosion and
sediment processes from altered water levels,flows and ice
re~;mes (Dickson t 1975).
44
-
-
c.Changes in substrate composition of spawning areas due to lack
of natural scouring could affect winter survival of eggs.
d.Decreases in water levels during June and July could affect
adult access to spawning areas.
e.Reduced discharge during summer could delay the migration
of adult salmon upstream.
f.Reduction of discharge could affect survival of young salmonids
moving to saline water during Apl"'il-r~ay.Seaward migration is
directly related to river velocity and therefore could extend
this period (Geen,1975).
g.Reduction of normal spring and summer flows could result in
a decrease of fry rearing habitat.
RecomnendatioflS-
Before the full effects of this project are identified as related to
fish and wildlife,considerable studies are necessary which are going to
be both lengthy in time and costly in money.A brief resume of biological
studies and investigational goals required prior to final definition of
fish losses and/or gains resulting from impoundment of the Susitna River
at Devi 1 Canyon and Watana are:
A thorou~h literature review of hydroelectric facilities is needed.
This WQuid provide information on pre and post-construction studies
and i ndi cate a!'"eas of po tent ia1 concern.
A thorough hydrologic study is essential.This study may have to
be conducted in close coordination with a private engineering firm.
The following is a partial list of necessary information.
1.Current unregulated flows and projected regulated flows.
2.Temperature regimes.
3.Turbidity and sediment data.
4.Anticipated physical chan~es to the natural stream course as
a result of flow alterations.
III A comprehensive fishery study to address adult and juvenile salmonid
aoundance,distribution.migrational patterns,and age com~ositicn by
species for areas both upstream and downstream of the proposed Devil
Canyon Dam.
The Cook Inlet fishery is of mixed stock and presents many problems
for its proper management.Total escapement data by species is not
available for the Susitna River drainage.Until we are able to de-
termine total escapement into the drainage we will not be able to
45
,determine the value of the salmon stocks in the upper Susitna River.
Spawning ground surveys do,however,demonstrate the importance of
this area to churn and pink salmon.
Data collected since July 1974 provides us with baseJine information
only.Generalizations may be made,but sufficient information is
not available to determine exact impacts of dam construction and
operation upon the fishery.Intense investigational projects should
be initiated in the study area to provide pre-construction data to
adequately evaluate possible impacts.
IV &.~~ud~of affected habi tat areas wi 11 be conducted in conjunction
with the fisheries program.Productivity and limiting factors can
be defined by a thorough 1imnological study.Physical,chemical
and biological conditions of the Susitna River and its tributaries
should be examined.A few specific concerns are:
1.Changes in quality and quantity of spa\·ming habitat both upstream
and downstream of the proposed dam sites as a result of a)flow
.and releases,b)innundation of upstream areas and c)effects of
periodic pool fill and drawdown.
2.Effects upon the habitat and fisheries resource directly as a
result of construction activities.
3.Effects of increased human use resu1ting from improved air and
road access upon both the Susitna River drainage and adjacent
fisheries..
These studies can be conducted in conjunction with the fisheries studies.
Before ADF&G can completely outline the objectives of hydrological b1010g1-
ca 1 and env;ronmenta 1 studi es J the Corps of Eng;neers wi'11 also need to
supply the following data:
1.Finalized plans on locations,design criteria,and features of
dams.
2.Year-around data on current projections of regulated flows.The
flow regimes are of utmost importance in determining what is re-
quired to protect fishery values.
3.Frequency and timing regarding spilling of excess water.Seasonal
time and amount of reservoir drawd~/n is also required.
4.Description of access routes and distances and their status,i.e.,
private or public.
A means for advising this department of design or operational changes which
may necessitate alterations in investigational programs is critical.
46
-.
'-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.'
Project Time Span &Costs
Estimates from private engi neer Consu ltants i ndi cate adequate and com-
prehensive hydrologic studies will require a minimum of one year to complete,
but ideally should continue for a three year period.
Including the required personal services,equipment.and operationa1
costs,etc.,a total figure of $4-500,000 will be required annually.
The fisheries investigations required for both the upstream (above
Devil Canyon)and the downstream area will require four to five years to
complete due to the life cycles of the salmon soecies involved and the
1ength of time requi red to assess habi ta t and envi ronmenta 1 cha nges.
Costs for all fi sheri es studi es,inc ludi ng res i dent and anadromous,
for areas both upstream and downstream of Devil Canyon Dam are estimated
at $300-350,000 annually.These figures include necessary personal services,
operational costs,equipment,materials,etc.Included in this sum are
monies for fulltime professional biologists to act as project leaders and
direct the investigational programs.It can be anticipated that as the
above mentioned projects are conducted the estimated budget figures stated
may require modification.
47
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Funding for this study was provided by U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service
and National ~arine Fisheries Service.
The author wi shes to acknowl edge the techni ca 1 aS5.-i stance provided by
the following Department of Fish and Game employees:
Randy Brandon
r1ark Foll ansbee
John Gallop
Craig Hall ingsworth
Ward Knous,Project Leader
~'1i ke Stratton
Special credit is due Craig Hollingsworth for his identification of
invertebrate samples and Ward Knous for his performance in the field as
proj ect 1eader.
48
'.
'.
-
-
-
"'"
."""
-
I~
.'.
REFEREi~CES
Anonymous,19:-;7.Progress report,1956 field investioations Devil '::~.QY.0n
Damsite.Susana River Basin.U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Juneau
Alaska.15 G.
APHA.AWWA,and WPCF,1971.Standard methods for the examinat10n of wa~~~
a-nd wastewater.13th edition.American Public Hea'jtll Association~--
Washington D.C.pp 539-540.
Sarrett.8.M.,1974.An assessment study of the anadromous fish populations
in the upoer Susitna River watershed between Devil Canyon and the
Chulitna River.Alaska Department of Fish and Game)Division of
Commercial Fisheries (unpublished).56 p.
Barrett~8.M .•1975a.December investigations on the upper Susitna.Rivec
watershed between Devil Canyon and Chulitna River.Alaska Department
Fish and Game,Commercial Fisheries (unpu0li~hed).8 p.
Barrett~8.M.~1975b.Januarv investigatjons in the upper Sus;tnCL1U.Yft!:.
watershed between Devil Canvon and Chul jtna Riyer.Alaska Department
Fish and Game,Commercial Fisheries (unpublished).10 p.
Barrett~8.M.,1975c.February investigations in the uoper Susitna River
watershed between Devil Can on and Chulitna River.Alaska DeDartment
Fish and Game,Commercial Fisneric;unpublished).10 p •
Beeton~A.M.,1961.Environmental chanoes in Lake Erie:Am.Fisheries
Sodety.90,(2):153-159.
Bishop,D.M.,1974.A hydrologic reconnaissance of the Susitna River
below Devil Canyon.Unpublished report submitted to National Marine
Fisheries Service of NOAA,Juneau,Alaska.55 p.
Efford~I.E.,et.al.,1975.Environmental impact assess~ent and hydro-
electric projects:hindsicrht and foreS;lht in Canada.Journal
Fisheries Research Board of Canada.32,1):97-20D ..
Hinckin,N.E.,1968.Caddis larvae.Cranbury,N.H.~Associated Univ.
Press,Inc.,480 p.
Pennak,R.W.,1953.Fresh-water invertebrates of the United Sta~es:New
York,The Ronald Press Co.~769 p.
Reid~G.K.,19b4.Ecology of inland waters and estuaries:New York,
Publishers.Corp.,375 p.
l~ard,H.G.,and G.C.Whipple,1959.Fresh-water biolooy:John Riley
and Sons,Inc.,New York.1248 p.
49
APPENDIX I
The slough areas of the Susitna.Talkeetna.and Chulitna Rivers have
been referred to throughout the text.A diagrammatic sketch of each slough
and some cl earwater streams fo 11 m'ls.The drawi nlJs are not to scale and are
intended to define the slough area.its relative size,substrate composition,
and sampling sites.
50
"-
-.
-
~,
-
-~
~,
-
-
"'I
beaver dcm--~~~
_.
Appendix Figure 1.~ap of Slough Number 1,Susitna River~as comoosed
on Seotember 3,Devi 1 1 s Canyon ·Proj ect,1975.
51
.....-----·-ud batt om
1/3 mi.
Appendix Figure 2.Map of Slough Ilumber 2,Susitna River,as comoosed
on September 3,Devil·s Canyon Project,1975.
52
".
'-
;
-
-
"...
.'
2"_iO Il cobble bott om
..."':
beaver dams
mud bottom J!.r
30'
Appendi~Figure 3.Map of Whiskers Creek,Susitna River~as cornoosed
on September 3,Devil 's Canyon Project.1975.
53
3A
Appendix Figure 4.Map of Slough j~umber 3-A and Number 3-8,Susitna
River,.as comoosed on Seotember 4,Devil IS Canyon
Project,1975.
54
"
'.
-
-
-
-
-
.....
,~
.Appendix Figure 5.11ap of Slaugh Number 4,SUSitna River.as comoos
ed
On September 4,Devil's CanYon Project,1975.
S5
....-
N
3"-all cobble bottom
1/2 mi
Appendix Figure 6.Map of Chase Creek,Susitna River,as composed on
Seotember 4,Devil's Canyon Project,1975.'-
56
N
A1 as ka Ra i 1 road
150 ft.I"r'~tme Past236.2
i--J-
-J-"+
and boulders
904 cobbles
104 sandy silt
1/3 mile
.-
,~
I~
-
Appendix Figure 7.Map of Slough Number 5.Susitna River.as composed on
"August 16,Devil 's Canyon Project,1974.
57
-
-
-
-
-
"~1i 1e Pas t
237.0
Al aska
Rai 1road
J
I
l:
Riffles
ClearY/oter Creek lr~z:,.
and boulders
900 yds.
10;sandy silt
9at pebbles~cobbles
Appendix Pigure 8.Map of Slough Number 6.Susitna River,as composed on
August 16.Devil 's Canyon Project,1974.
58 -
trees
,//'f!r/!rfIIfI"JI1/1
'I.''!!W
/
~
~Q:V -beov er d oms
./
covered gravely
Ibottom
PfF---30 yds.:--M
t,
~
1rees
I
400 yds.
"""
".,.
A~~endix Figure 9.Map of Slough Number 6-A,Susitna River,as comDOS
on September 5,Devil 's Canyon Project,1975.
I~
59
-
'.
"
,.
75 yds.
ft.
"""'"
b
~
~"
I
It,
~Boulders
II
I
pebbles .~
~Boulder
~J
II -,
$mle Post
241
Al aska Rai 1road
Appendix Figure 10.Map of Slough Number 7,Susitna River,as composed on
August 16,Devil's Canyon Project,1974.
60
'-I
I
1200 yds
Alaska
Ra i1 read
and pebbles
90%sandy silt
104 gravel
3=
i
!
Inlet +:
~~~..)Streams i
75yds
\
I
il'!/l'nQ.
Appendi x Fi gure 11.Map of 510ugh Number 8,Sus.itna Ri ver,as composed on
August 28,Oevil's Canyon Project,1974.
61
bottom
bottom
Appendix Figure 12.Mao of McKenzie Creek,Susitna River,as composed
on September 26,Devil's Canyon Project,1975.
62
".""'"
-
-
-
-.
,~
,~
,""'"
~I
.~
,~
.'
1
~ppendix Figure 13.Mao of Slough Number 8B,8e,and 3D,Susitna
River,as comoosed on SeDtember 8,Devil IS
Canyon Project,lQ75.
63
-
-
.
-oo...
'......-..~\",:'<.~,
_~.'t "~unnamed creek--.
,'~'".-~
,.,..~.,..oi',~
~"'.'••'-oo',~~:,,..~-','".~"""':.,....~..~~\....,~'40 ~•~...•••'.::'"~
'i:l·..·..'-..•..~~'."."..,''..~..~
~..-.....-to -:..tI ....",,'"
, •f·'••: "~.~"'.'"(..',...~
....~....;'-~.'oo::;:".:.,
-...;;:.,""'.t '".'~..-:-.....•'-.
~'_~.'.,'0',.~-..'...':,'
-.;;;:..".~.....
'"~".~.~.......
:
Appendix Figure 14.Map of Slough ~umber "AU,Susitna River,as
composed on Septmeber 26,Jevil's Canyon
Proj ect,1975,
-64
,~
.~
.r
+-
Mile Past
255
Riffle
,~";-,,-;,,,-Ri ffl e
Clear l-later
Stream
T
0.7 Miies
Appendix Figure 15.Map of Slough,Number SA,Susitna River,as comnosed
on December 6,Devi1's Canyon Winter Project,1974.
65
"
I
-,
-
-,
-
-.
Appendix Figure 16.Map of Slough Number 9,Susitna River,as composed on
August 16,Devil 's Canyon Project,1974.
66
~~'<fI,
t
of
""'"J:+
-.I~
Rock ICliff
I
t :t *-*•,-t I :E
*
....
;:
~
~t
~t +~.
)"~~
I~
Appendix Figure 17.Map of Slough Number 9A,Susitna River,as composed on
February 17,Devil 's Canyon Winter Project,1975.
67
f ...
trees
...\.•...
'.
-
....
--
-
~
,
-
Appendix Figure 18.Map of Slough Number 10,Susitna River,as composed
on September 8,Qevi1 's Canyon Project,1975.
68
I
~I
75 yds.•
I~
·'
..-
SLOUGH NO.
11
85';sandy
~~.-I----1-Beaver.,................
Dams
T
Beaver
Lod~e
Appendix Figure 1~.Map of Sloughs Numbers 11,12.and 13,Susitna River as
composed on August 9,Devil Canyon Project,1974.
69
Appendix Figure 20.Map of Slough Number 14,Susitna River,as composed on
August 30,Devil's Canyon Project,1974.
70
".
-
-
~,
-
-
~,
Stream -
OSurvev
Station-
,
t-lile 264.1
...lLLLu !I I!I'.A1 ~fn;;:,~====:;::;:--jlh,l-n-rr
Ra ~~r~as 1\1\\1 1
1
\\
Bridge ~)
~(I)
8.51.sandy silt
107.gravel
51 boulders
SOO ds.
,~
Appendix Figure 21.Mao of Slough Number 15,Susitna River,as composed on
August 5,Devil 's Canyon Project,1974.
71
,~
-J
:
~.~major chum salmon
!~JJ--~V)~"1-spawning area
Clear
Water
6ft~
.,
.-~"""
""'"SOh cobbles and
boulders
Sot sa.ndy silt ,
~<:--.,
T ct
~
150 yds.
Appendix Figure 22.Map of Slough Number 16,Susitna River,as composed on
August 3,Devi1's Canyon Project,1974.
~,
72
-
..
Beaver Dam
951.sandy silt
51.cobbles and
boulders
5ft.
Appendix Figure 23.Map of Slough Number l7~Susitna River,as composed on
August 3,Devil's Canyon Project,1974.
73
~,
N
~.,',
fl ••~~-:~.:~J
Jl .....oJ ~
...,..0,...,...'
•f.'*.o •4:
"'.I'.'• • •1\
C'~.,,':/,...f..',..
•,•"1 ......
i ,~.'..~J 0 • •
I<>·~<f'.....'..'\.~,l\.•
1\'.....
'II.."...
.,'.'~fJ......,J
•11,.
,•••.'U,.••••111 _••__
...t,.,,_.1 ~_')1,.._.
~._W..•...a/L
1rf.._IfI••••
frees
mars h --i-:'=
Appendix Figure 24.Map of Slough Number 18,Susitna River as composed
on September 8,Devi1's Canyon Project,1975.
74
"-r"ajor Soawning~
~Area.....
•~
I "t:J:::.~90':sandy silt
(I')
:;:s"un.cobblesl")
Appendix Figure 25.Map of Slough Number 19,Susitna River,as composed on
August 21,Devil 's Canyon Project,1974.
75
....
""'"
cobbles .
"""
~-
-.
--
-9O't pebbles and
10%sandy silt
200 yds.
Appendix Figure 26.Map of Slough Number 20.Susitna River.as composed on
August 16.Devil IS Canyon Project,1974.~
76
....
.-,
~,
1.5.miles
Sockeye and Chum
Salmn Spa\·ming
Pools
Cl ear \'1 ate r
_~-Riffles
Chum Spawning
Area
75Z boulders,c~bh~~:
and l=Jcbblcs
Appendix Figure 27.Map of Slough Number 21,Susitna River.as composed on
September 24,Devil 's Canyon Project.1974.
77
...
Appendix Figure 28.Map of Billion Slough,Susitna River,as composed on
June 9,Devills Canyon Project.1975.
78
I
-.
Appendix Figure 29.Mao of Railroad Slough,Talkeetna River,as composed
June 9,Devil IS Canyon Project,1975.
79
601
1/2 mile
I
-
-
Appendix Figure 30.Map of Slough Number l~Talkeetna River as composed
on June 9,1975.
80 -
I~
DO
N
Appendix Figure 31.Map of Slough Number 4,Talkeetna River,as composed
on June 9,Devil IS Canyon Project,1975.
81
-----------------
\Old beaver dam
wa1 er
2 11 gravel
bottom
..
-
Appendix Figure 32.Map of Beaver Pond Slough~Talkeetna River,as
composed on June 9,Oevil IS Canyon Project,1975.
82
.'....
I~
---=1lf--C.J ear w at er
Log
Old chcnnel-_-I1l-_
_.
""",
Appendix Figure 33.Map of Slough Number 3,Talkeetna River,as comoosed
On June 9,Devil IS Canyon Project,1975.
83
-----~~-------
i .
J 1/2 mi
Appendix Figure 34.Map of Slough Number 2,Talkeetna River,as composed
on June 9,Devil IS Canyon Project,1975.
84
~--'---
-
-
".
.....-
-
-
-
..
Appendix Figure 35.~ap of Slough Number 5,Talkeetna River,as composed
on June 9,Devil 's Canyon Project,1975.
85
~I
-
-.
..
bott om:
mud with cobble to 611
1/2 mile
~~\~~;;,JJ:--;..----:::..-:=.:---____Talkeetna River
~
no.?no.6 .~-
~~r.
;6 ~
~,l '.
20 """
clear water.n ...
~~
l,;
~-,,"!fl
riffl e ,1
't ~
!l
spring area II _.
~~
Appendix Figure 36.Map of Sloughs Numbers 6 and 7.Talkeetna River.as
composed on June 9,Devil IS Canyon Project,1975.-
86
-
II'
""""~_~~_-c.iear water stream
/of?gravel boH om
400 yd s
Appendix Figure 37.Map of Hhiskey Slough.Talkeetna River.as cOllll'osedonJune9.Devil',Canyon Project.1975.
87
".
I 1/4 mi.
\
40'
Appendix Figure 38.Map of Slough Number 8,Talkeetna River,as composed
on June 9,Devil's Canyon Project,1975.-
88
:~
0"
.'
Appendix Figure 39.Map of Slough Number 9,Talkeetna River,as composed
on June 9,Devil 's Canyon Project,1975.
89
·co~
•
90
-
-
-
""......
mud bottom
log iOm/
114ft -2"
gravel
bottom --if+-_
Appendix Figure 40.Map of Clear Creek Slough,Talkeetna River,as composed
on June 9,Devil's Canyon Project,1975.
,PfIlIP:1
I~'-
-
.'
.'
Crf1bin Cree/(
muddy
dam
~,
Appendix Figure 41.Map of Slough Number 1,Chulitna River,as comoosed
June 9,Devil Canyon Project,1975.
91
-
-
-
~-~~"PfI.1'\
.~\"""'"
300 yds.~v.r lOdge)-,-I'~Jj -,j
~-
Appendix Figure 42.Map of Slough No.1,Susitna River below the
Talkeetna River confluence,as composed on
June 6,Devil's Canyon Project,1975.
92
,~
,"
APPENDIX II
Escapement surveys of sloughs and tributary streams of the Susitna
and Talkeetna Rivers are presented in this Appendix.Included are counts
of live tagged and untagged adult salmon in the Susitna River.
93
Appendix Table 1.
Location
Number of live tagged and untagged salmon by species observed
during adult escapement surveys,Susitna River,Devil's Canyon
Project,1975.
Chum Sa lmon Surveys _..•
Date Survey Number Fish Samoled (liv-e~j----~R~a~t~io~{-c/~r~)--
Conditions Untagged Tagged (r)Total {c}"
-
-
Slough 38 8/27 good
9/3 good
Lane
Creek
8/17 excellent
8/27 exce 11 ent
1
50
3
1
1o
"o
2
50
3
1
-
Slough 0 8/17 excellent 15 D lS 0.0 -..
8/25 good 64 0 64 000
9/8 good 63 0 63 0.0
9/27 excellent 54 0 54 0.0
~~---------~-_~~___,______------------------------------~----~----~----------
S'lough 13 9/25 good 1 I)1 0.0
Slough 15 9/6 good 1 o 1 0.0
Slough 1"6 8/26 good 12 0 12 0.0__......._fo,SI ___________.________._.______________________________..___________.....______
Indian 8/8 good 0 2 2 1.0
River 8/9 good 0 1 1 1.0
8/12 excellent 70 0 '10 0.0
9/26 fa'ir 1 0 1 0.0
Slough 21 9/6 good
9[25 excellent
246
92
4o 250
92
52.5
0.0 ---------------------~---------------------~--------------------~------------'Total 674 B 682 85.3
Location Date
Pink Salmon Surve s
Survey Number Fish Samo1ed (l~Ratio
Conditions Untagged Tagged (r)Totil1--G:)
.~
0.0
43.5
17.7
29.6
16.8
40
87
53
148
101
o
2
3
5
6
40
85
50
143
95
4th July'7/28 exc:ell ent
Creek 8/9 excellent
8/13 excellent
8/17 excellent
8/25 excellent
9/8 poor
------~---------------~----------------------------------------------------Indian 8/7 a 1 1 1.0
River 8/9 ---~-a 4 4 1.0
8/12 312 9 321 35.7
~~---~----~----------------------------------------------------------------'lane 7126 excellent 20 0
Creek 8/6 excellent 78 3
81'17 excellent 96 10
8/27 excellent 22 3
9/3 excel"lent 2 0
20
81
106
25
2
0.0
27.0
10.6
8.3
0.0
c
------~-~----~-------------------------------------------------------------Total 943
94
46 989 21.5 -
Appendix Table 1.Number of live tagged and untagged salmon by species observed
during adult escapement surveys,Susitna River,Devil IS Canyon
Project,1975.
.'
Socke e Salmon Surve s
Location Date Survey Number Fish Sam led
Conditions Untagged Taggea ~r
Ratic c/r
Slough 38 8/23 excellent
9/3 good
12
14
1
1
13
15
13~0
15.0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------4th July 8/17 excellent 1 o 1 ,0.0
Slough 11 8/25 excellent 24 1 25 25.0
9/4 good 78 6 84 14.0
9/25 good 72 5 77 15.4
---.-------------~---------~------------------------~----------------------Slough 19 8110 fafr 0 1 1 1.0
8/26 excellent 18 2 20 10.0
9/6 good 10 2 12 6.0
9/24 good 10 0 10 0.0
.::i'~
-----------------------------~--------------------------------------------Slough 21 9/6 good 34 2 36 18.0
9/25 excellent 48 1 49 '..49.0
mr~-~---------~---------------------------~---~---------------..~~--~~~---McKenzie 9/8 good 3 0 3 0.0
Creek 9/27 excellent 45 0 45 0.0
-------------------------------------~----~----------------------~-------Indian
River 9/26 fair 1 o 1 0.0
-----~~-~---------~-----~----~-----~--------~--------------~----------Total 370 Z2 392 17.8
1<;n Salmon Survp.',s
Location Date Survey NumDer Fish Samo1ed Ratio c/r
Conditions Untagged Tagged r)
Whiskers 7/23 poor 2 1 3 3.0
Creek 7/28 poor 1 0 1 0.0
o.8/4 poor 19 3 22 7.3
8/14 3 0 3 0.0
4th July
Creek 8/9 excellent 1 o 1 0.0
-~--------------------------------------------------------------------------Indian
River
.Portage
Creek
8/12 excellent
7/23 excellent
7129 -excellent
8/10 excellent
10
2
29
3
o
ooo
10
2
29
3.
0.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 70
95
4 74 18.5
-----------
i\pp~"d1)(
Table 2.Escapement survey counts conducted on the Susitna River tn Sloughs Numbers 1,2.3A.4.Devi1's Canyon Project,1975.
------
Fry Specl~s Identif1~d
..c
Temperature 0><II Adult Salmon Densityc:.....
Slough No.Date T1ll1e (of)Survey No.Fry .,......Chum Soc~eye...-QJ
(m1i itary)Air tn 0 EO >,.j..JWaterConditionsObservedc:;..c ::l 10 .~Live Dead Total live Dead Total.,..0 ..c:J,...1:.
llo!W u w ;;>:.-~----
1 7/22 1320 54 58 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/21 .1420 61 55 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/4 1810 66 54 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/11 1510 59 51 good 200 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/22 1555 58 48 good 200 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/3 1030 54 48 good 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/23 11 10 54 45 good 2 X 0 0 0 0 0 0___•___•___~_____________________~~_____.________________•___•____v____•___~______._~~_a~_____M ___________________.m_~_________
2 1/22 1440 59 50 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/28 1205 57 45 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/4 1740 61 48 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/11 1545 61 55 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/25 1235 57 45 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/23 1200 54 45 excellent 100 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0
lD
_____...___________..______________~______.______________~._.__.~__~w_.~.__w __.~__._••_.___~_____~~_g____~_____________________
m 3A 7/15 1245 52 44 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3B 1310 51 44 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
A 7/23 1640 66 41 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B 1610 64 49 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
A 7/20 1410 58 45 excellent 40 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
B 1435 57 50 excellent 200 X 0 0 0 0 0 ()
A 8/4 1435 65 53 excellent 40 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
B 1510 68 53 excellent 200 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
A 8/14 1220 65 53 excellent 30 X 0 0 0 0
0 0
B 1245 68 44 excellent 150 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
A 8/23 1400 62 49 excellent 150 X 0 0 0 1 0 1
0 1420 58 45 excellent 50 X 0 0 0 12 0 12
8 8/27 1315 .---excel lent.0 2 0 2 0 0 0
A 9/2 1210 55 45 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B 1130 52 45 good 0 50 0 50 15 0 15
----------------~-_.---------._----~------------------------------_._---------------------------~--~-----------~-------~.------4 7/25 1355 59 56 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B/2 1240 59 57 poor 50 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
B/9 1255 60 55 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0/21 1400 58 55 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I .J
...
I J I I I .1 I J J J .J •
~...
..1 J I j
)1 j J ]»1 i ·i 1 1•I i
\.,.
1
Appendix
Table 3.Escapement survey counts conducted on the Susitna River 1n Sloughs Numbers 5,6.7.8.BA.98.Devl1's Canyon
Project.1975.
frL~j)ecJes l~erlt1fled
.r:.
Temperature 01 III Adult Salmon DensHL__c::'r-.........Slough No.Date 11 me (oF)Survey No.Fry .....QJ Chum SockeyeQl0§>,....
(ml1l tary)Alr Water Condi tions Observed c .r.n:J .....ltve Dead'Total live Dead Total~0 .&:'-.r:.
(.)u CI ::=-
5 7/21 1200 70 56 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/26 1405 58 54 fair 200 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/6 1045 56 54 good 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/21 1215 56 55 fairy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/3 1230 ----poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
___________~_________________a ______________•_______~_____________.~___________•__~__________________~_~_____________________._
6 7/21 1220 70 56 falr +X 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/26 1405 58 53 fair 200 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
B/6 1100 56 56 good 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/21 1230 56 57 fair 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/3 --------poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
\.0 9/27 1445 --47 good 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.......____________•___________~_____M~___"__________.-_________••____~___.~___•_______•_____•_______________~._______________•_______
7 7/21 -----------------7/26 1450 59 48 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0/6 1220 56 53 exceDent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/21 -----~--poor_
9/3 --------poor.!!._"________________w ____________________________________••__________~__••_____________________~______________________________._
8 7/21 1315 70 50 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 o.
7/26 1530 56 49 excellent 500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/6 1230 55 47 excellent 400 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/17 1745 59 54 excellent 350 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/27 1315 60 47 good 500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/3 1750 55 45 excellent 1000 )(0 0 0 0 0 0
9/27 1400 55 48 excellent 60 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8A 7/76
8/9
180U
1500
59
59
48
54
excellent
good
2o
o
o
oo oo
o
o o
o
o
o
---------~-------------~-------------------~----T-----~~~~~__n
88 8/6
9/8
1600
1310
55
51
48
44
excellent
good
300
o
x o
·0
o
o
o
o
o
o
oo o
o
!I Slough area dried up.
Appendix
Table 4.Escapement survey counts conducted 011 the Sus1tna River in Sloughs Numbers A.9.9A.lOp 11!12,Oevl1 '5 Canyon
Project.1975.
---_._-----------------ATf--~ater
Temperature
(OF)
_Adult Salmon Densl!Y __
Chum SDcke~
Live Dead Total live Dead -Total
ooo
o
oo
ooo
ooo
ooo
ooo
Fry Species Identified
:t:
t1I IIIc:''-
'r"'+-
...-ClJ
010 E:>,+.1
C .c ::J R:I ....
.,..0 .I:.I...c
:.£.u U <.!l 3;
ooo
No.Fry
Observed
Survey
Conditions
excellent
excellent
excellent
45
51
50
65
64
60
1520
1700
1430
Time
(mil 1tary)
Date
7/21
8/6
8/17
A
Slough No.
._.•~~~.~.~•.M .----w----.----------~-~---~~-~_~_
lO
00
9 7/21 1545 65 50 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/26 1930 60 4B fa t r 200 X 0 0 0 0 0 a
8/9 1300 56 49 excellent 400 X 0 0 0 0 0 a
;,8/17 1400 65 62 excellent 0 15 0 157,..0 0 0-
;--'-8/25 1600 56 51 good 0 64 2 66 (-)c'0 0 0
1-'9/6 1200 48 49 good 0 63 14 77}0 0 0
1''',9/27 1100 50 45 excellent 0 54 127 lBl 0 0 0
I{,uJ 7 P
--~---_..-..-----.-~.--~----~~-----~------.--------T7-D__.*_••R_.•~~.-------~-----------
9A •8/7 --------poor-:-'_.----- --
10 7/28
B/7
8/25
9/4
9/25
1400
1050
1300
1915
1705
55
63
57
50
59
46
43
44
41
43
poor
excellent
excellent
good
good
o
1500
600
1000
10
x
x
x X
X
X
o
oooo
oooo
o
o
oooo
oo
o
()
o
oo
o
o
o
ooo
o
o_~.~-.~..D_~------._
11 7/22
7/28
8/7
8/13
8/25
9/4
9/25
1000
1325
1020
1710
1200
laoO
1640
75
55
60
59
54
50
51
44
44
41
47
44
44
45
good
excellent
excellent
excellent
excellent
good
good
o
30
4000
4500
3000
300
o
x
X
X
X
X
x
o
o
o
o
oo
o
ooooooo
oo
o
o
o
o
o
oooo
25
84
77
o
o
oo
oo
5
o
ooo I
25 (-7
84'3---
BZ '!_____c ••-.-w~•P ••._------------------~
12 7/28
8/7
8/13
B/25
9/4
9/25
1300
0940
1650
1145
1740
1620
53
57
58
52
57
55
42
43
43
47
45
45
good
excellent
excellent
good
good
good
oo
ooo
30
o
o
o
ooo
o
o
o
ooo
o
oo
o
oo
o
o
oooo
o
o
oo
oo
o
oooo
o
11 Slough area dried up.r ,.
'"
J J !J I _II c Itll ,I t JIll -II
1 1 I
"
1 1 1 1 1 )-]J 1 j ]]
\.'.
1 ~•11I
Appendix
Escapenlent survey counts conducted on the Susitna River 1n Sloughs Numbers 13.14. 15,16,17.Devil's Canyon Project,Table 5.
1975.
-'"
Fry Species Identified
.t:
Temperature at iii AdulJ Salmon Densi~yc.....
Slough Ho.Date Time ~t_~Survey No.fry .........-Chum Sockeye~GJ
(military)r ~/a ter Conditions Observed OJ 0 ~>.~nve bead Totar Live Dead To tarc:.c m
~0 .c L ..c:::u U ~3:
13 7/23 1750 62 50 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/28 1215 54 49 poor 100 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8113 1620 63 56 excellent 200 X X 0 0 0 0 0 0
6/25 1115 52 44 good 300 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/4 1715 53 44 good 50 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/25 1600 55 48 ~ood 100 X X 1 0 1 0 0 0
----~----QQ-~-----~--------------------------------------._--~-----.--~-_._------.-~-._---~-----..-----~-~.--------------------
14 7/23 1735 68 51 excellent 100 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/30 1600 63 51 excellent 600 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bn 1230 62 49 excellent 1000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/13 1600 59 47 excellent 500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/25 1100 55 45 good 200 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/4 1630 60 47 good 1000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
lO 9/25 1530 57 46 excellent 200 X 0 0 0 0 0 0lO._______________________________"_________________________4_.________~____________Q ______________________________________________
15 7/23 1700 68 51 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/29 1300 66 52 excellent 3500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/8 1205 62 56 excellent 3000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
81\4 0745 50 47 good 500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/6 1030 44 45 good 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
9/24 1030 48 46
good 7 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
-------~--.------------------------------------------~--~-------------~._------------------------------------------------------16 7/23 1645 68 56 fair 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/29 1330 66 49 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B/8 1320 61 45 excellent 10 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/14 Oill5 53 43 goud 10 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/26 1615 54 48 good 0 12 0 12 0 0 0
9/6 1110 47 47 good 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/24 1110 52 45 good 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
._----------------_.-._--------------------------------~------~-.---------------~-----._---------------------------.-----------
17 7/23 1630 76 52 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/29 1340 64 57 good 1500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/14 08'15 53 40 good 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/26 1630 56 43 !Joo~0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/6 --------poo 0
9/24 1115 50 46 good 25 0 0 0 0 0 0
Appendix
Table 6.Escapement survey counts conducted on the Susitna River in Sloughs Numbers IB,19,20.21.Devil's Canyon Project 1915.
Fry Species Ident1fled
Slough No.Date Time
(mil Hary)
Temperatul'e
(oF)
~ater
Survey
Conditions
No.Fry
Observed
.r:.
t:7l VIC.,..
~,.-'+-
....QI
t:7l 0 e >,~
C-A:::I ro'''''.,...o.t:l-~
:w:u U '";i:
Adult Salmon Density
tflum '.Sockeye
Live Dead Total [l"i~ead~~To~t-a~l
18 7/29
8/14
8/26
9/6
9/24
1400
0920
1645
1145
62
56
56
54
53
46
47
45
poor
good
good 11pooF'
good
oo
o
10
ooo
~
o
oo
o
o
ooo
o
ooo
o
ooo
o
ooo
o
--'
oo
_____._~_.."..M ._.B~~._...~..~_
19 7/23 090Q 59 44 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1/29 1415 62 48 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/10 1125 56 49 fair 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
~8/14 0950 58 42 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0)
/2 0/26 1100 54 43 good 0 0 0 0 20 0 20 (
/1 9/6 1135 45 42:good 0 0 0 0 12 0 12 ,:
It 9/24 1200 52 45 good 20"0 0 0 10 3 13)
I I~/"'".(":;1
._..~•.m •._••._.~.~~.~•_
!~:'/
20 7/23
1/29
tl/10
8/14
8/26
9/6
0915
1425
1220
1020
1000
1220
59
62
54
60
54
47
44
49
43
43
44
44
poor
poor
·excellent
excellent
excellent
good
oo
500
300
200
200
)(
)(
X
X
x X
X
X
X
oo
oooo
oo
(j
o
oo
o
ooo
O·
o
oo
oo
o
o
oooooo
oo
o
o
o
o
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~---~---------------------------------.-21 7/23
7/29
8/10
8/14
~8/26
II 9/6
)i 9/25
0940
1440
1330
1120
1830
1300
1400
62
62
61
60
54
46
54
50
48
44
48
46
45
48
poor
poor
fair
good
poor
good
exce 11ent
oo
500
500
150
300o
x
J(
X
X
oo
X 0
X 0
o
250
92
\
oo
o
oo
146
34
o 0o0
o 0o0
0,0
396 ',~".36
126}"{.49
J
oo
o
o
oo
26
oo
oo
o
36;:,~J'"~
75 \
11 Slough area dried up.
.....:....
I j !J J ,J J .Jill IJ .1 jJ ,
j )]B ]»l I j B I E I )j ]
'\I ''Q
1 ]"
a
Appendb libl,1.Escapement survey counts conducted on the'Susltn.RIver tn Whisker's Creek,Chase Creek,L.ne Creek,"ckenzle Creek,
fourth of July Creek,Indl.n River end Port.g.Creek,Devll's C'Ryfin Project,1915.
Tl!mperllture Adult Salmon Density
LOCitlon Date "me ~~fl_Survey No.fry J.J ChullI Sockeye ~---kina-PTnk
(Ill II I tary)r lIater Conditions Observed lhe Dead Total ltve Dead ToW rTYe--oea Mal'ITVP.Oe.idT"ow..
Whisker's 1123 1430 65 55 poor 1500 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 5 0 0 0
Creek lI28 \245 60 50 pfifir 1500 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 I 0 0 0
8/4 1710 68 56 poor 1500 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 1 23 0 0 0
8/\4 1320 66 55 poor 1500 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 I 4 0 0 0
8/23 1650 1i0 54 poor 1500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
913 1230 56 49 gliod 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0__________~___•_______________________m ______•__•___~_._~________~__~._._________________._.________________________•••___________________________•
Chase 7/\7 1235 59 58 poor 1500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
[ruk 1125 1445 58 57 poor 1500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/2 \)10 60 58 poor 1500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/9 1315 58 57 poor 1500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0
8/22 1125 61 51 poor 1500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/3 1515 60 54 good 0 I 1 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-~----.__.--_._----_._---------~------~..-._~~_._._~----_._-...._-----~-----.-~-_._~.._---------------------..~--~-----~----------_.---_.~----------
hne 1121 1330 10 47 enellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
[reek 1/26 1545 56 49 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 20
8/6 1245 55 47 excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 I 81 0 81
8111 1700 59 49 excellent 0 J 0 J 0 0 0 0 0 0 106 2 108
8/27 \220 57 48 ucellent O.I 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 21 46
9/3 1700 55 46 ucellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 41 43
9/27 1415 55 45 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
--'_*___~_____~~.___________~__._.___••_••________~___~_~__a •••_______•••••__________•••__••••__________••__•••__•__~__•_______________________________
a Hc.Kenzle 8/1i \410 60 49 e_cellent 250 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0--'Creek 8/11 1630 59 53 excellent 250 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0
8127 1200 54 49 excel1elll 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/8 1400 51 48 yood zoo 0 0 0 3 0 J 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/27 1300 54 46 .xcel1ent 0 0 0 0 45 I 46 0 0 0 0 0 0
_______________~___'_____A _____~_~___•_______•_______~~---.-••--~-••-••_.----~-----~-.-~---------.-••~_---_-_••________•_________•_______•____~______
Fourth 7/28 1620 63 46 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 II 0 0 0 40 0 40orJuly8/9 1600 66 56 e.cellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 I .87 0 87
Creek 8/17 1130 liS 53 excellent 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 148 3 151
1l/25 1500 60 55 e~ceHl!nt 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 70 171
9!8 0945 4)45 poor.----...--.--.-.-.-.
9/77 1030 50 46 hlr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0._._____________._.____P __________•________________~w ____________•••~.__•____•__~______~_~____________•_____________________~__~__________________~_
Indian 8/9 1600 ----good 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 4
River 8112 1415 76 57 exce~lent 0 70 0 10 0 0 0 10 8 18 JlI 0 ]21
9/6 HOG ---.poorJ -- -
.--- -----.
9/26 10]0 51 45 hi r 0 I 6 1 I 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0
._------------.~-----.~~_._------~-------_..._-----------.-----------_._--------~~------_._---_._------~----.---------~-----------._------------------Pilrhge 7/23 10]0 .78 48 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0
Creek 7/29 1700 54 41 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 ZS 0 0 0
8110 1400 58 50 good 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0 ]0 3 0 0 0
6/24 1200 52 47 ucel}ent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
9/6 1330 ----poor_
-.,.-~-'--._..
!J All fry present were coho s~lmon.
y White w~ler condItions prevented surveys.
Appendix Table 8.Escapement survey counts conducted on the Talkeetna River in Sloughs Numbers 1.2.3.4.5.and 6.nevil's
Canyon Project.1975.
fry Species Jd~rtf~
OJ 1/1
Temperature s:::....____.__Adult Salmon DenillL___.,.......
Slough tlo.Date nme (oF)Survey No,Fry .....III Chum Socke,ye .~....l:1>0 e ...i-'
(mi I Hary)Air Watet'Conditions Obsel·ved .•S .c :I lQ ....[rve-Oead 'f 0 ta 1 live Dead Totai0.c ~:;~u u (!J
~--
7/25 1300 6]49 excellent 3500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/5 1030 -69 47 excellent 1500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/19 1015 55 49 excellent 3000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/2 .0945 54 46 good 3000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/9 1200 50 45 good 2000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0_.__~.~____~__~__~_.____~~~_____•____•_________________~_____________~_______•__•______•______w _____•_____~______~=____________
2 7/25 1735 57 48 excellent 300 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
6/5 1400 17 55 exce 11 ent 1500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/19 1350 64 55 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/2 12(15 58 47 good 4 X 15 0 15 0 0 a
.....-----------_.--~-----------._------~--------_.--------~----_._----_.._--------.~-----_._----------.---------~------------------a 3 7/25 1750 57 52 poor a 0 0 0 0 0 aN8/5 1505 75 50 excellent 1400 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/19 1530 63 54 poor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/2 1235 54 49 excellent 0 6 0 6 0 0 0_____________________________________N ___~_~___~------_______~.____•____~__~__________._~____________~____________8 _____~______
4 7/25 1830 GO 48 poor 1/0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/5 1550 ----poor-0 0 0 o·0 0 0__________________•___________________________________-__~m ______~_~__•______________•___w __________________--____•__________._
5 7/25 1410 58 49 excellent 300 X 0 o·0 0 0 0
8/5 1715 S9 54 excellent 20 0 0 a 0 0 0
8/19 1050 57 55 goody 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/2 1020 ----poor_~__~________________________"_______w ________________-____•___•___________________~______~____________•____----~----.----~----
6 7125 1500 57 46 excellent 3000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/5 1730 69 48 excellent 500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8119 n05 59 47 goody 1500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/2 1040 56 46 goOdy 300 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/9 1225 48 47 good 1000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
--------------~-----------------------._-----~-------~._--------------------------~-----------~-------------_._-~-_._----------
f'>',•..
.M ,@I I ..J I J J I
1 -1 J 1 J 1 E
,.
))j
,...
]]
Appendix Table 8.Escapement survey counts conducted on the Talkeetna River In Sloughs Numbers 7,8.and 9a Devil's Canyon
.Proj~ct.1975 (cont.).
No.Fry
Observed
Slough No.Date Time
(military)
Temperature
(oF)
Air Water
Survey
Cond i,t ions
Fry Species Identified
.cen1/1c....•,..It-
r-eu
OlD E >,~
c..c:.:3 "'.......0 .t::L-..c:.
:>0(U U t!t ~
Adult Salmon Density _
thurn Sockeye
Live Dead Total live Dead Total
--'aw
7 7/25 1500 5746 excellent 1000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/5 1745 69 47 excellent 50 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/19 1130 57 48 good 3/2000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/2 1145 57 49 good!/400 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/9 1325 48 47 good-500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
----8--------8/5-------122~------::-----::-----~~~;Il---------::::.-------------------------:~----:-----:-------:-----:-----:--
----------------------------------------~----------17--------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 7/25 1700,58 49 po0'1)----- - - - - -
8/5 1240 ----poo~------ - - - -
!I The mainstem Talkeetna River flowing through the slough area.
l!The slough area completely dried up.
11 The mouth and sections of the slough area dried up.
Appendix Table 9.Escapement survey counts conducted on the Talkeetna River in Beaver Pond,Railroad,Old Channel,Whiskey,
Clear Creek Sloughs,and Wiggle Creek,Devi1's Canyon Project,1975.
No.fry
ObservedSloughDateTime
(mil1tary)
Temperature
(of)
~-~ater
Survey
Conditions
fry Species Identified
..c
01 III
C ''-.....If-
~<lJcnoEi>,.....c:.c :J '"....,...o.c L~
~U U t!J :;;
Adult Salmon Dens f ty _
Chum Sod~ye
live Dead Total live Dead Total
~fggle 7/25 1800 59 57 excellent 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Creek 6/5 1530 76 59 excellent \000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/19 1535 66 57 good 1500 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/2 1300 55 49 good 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-.-----~_.---~----~.--.---~~----.----.-------H-----T7·---~-----------------~.-.-.---------~~----~----.---------~---------------Deaver 7/25 1820 60 48 poorT!.------- - --
Pond 8/5 1540 75 48 poor.:..t ----- ---- -
Slough 9/2 1350 57 4~good 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
__________~~~~••w N ._.•~.w ~~_
Railroad 8/19 \545 65 58 poor 0 0 ·0 0 0 0 0
-"Slough 9/2 1330 55 55 good 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 ,.
~
_____~_______________•_____________•___•___~______w __:~---~--_-------_-_-------~----_-~---------.-----~-----_________~__________
Old
Channel 8/5 1600·72 59 fair ,\0 0 0 0 0 0 0..,_.______________________.___"__._______________________~-----------.--""~---.-----_.--_.-----~-------a------~_____________~____
Whiskey 7/25 1600 57 52 'excellent 3000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 8/5 1200 64 52 excellent 3000 X 0 0 0 0 0 I)
8119 1220 65 55 good ,'l'4000 X 50 0 50'0 0 0
9/2 1100 57 51 good I,;2000 X 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/9 1415 50 48 good 200 X a 0 8 3 0 3___~~8 ~M ~~•._.__M ~u ~
Clear
Creek
Slough
8/5
8/19
9/2
9/9
1300
1245
1130
1500
75
63
54
48
54
52
47
45
excellent
excellent
good
good
600
2000
oo
x 000
X X 0 0 0
139 '21 160
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
1/The mainstem Talkeetna River flowing through'the slough area.
..i","
I -,J I I !J .!,..1 ;I I J J ]]I
APPENDIX II I
NOTES ON THE ~10RE CDr.f.1ON BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES FOUND
IN THE SUSITNA RIVER TRIBUTARIES
Insecta
All of the insects collected in the Susitna River sampling sites were
larval or pupal forms of insects that are terrestrial in tne adult stage.
The major portion of the life history usually occurs in the aquatic environ-
ment.The adult stages often emerge and live as a terrestrial insect for
only a few days.In some instances the adult has no mouth parts (Ephemeroptera).
It enerQes,carries out the reproductive functions,and dies in two or three
days.The juveni1es stages of an aquatic insect may last fror.l several months
to three years,as wi th Pl ecoptera.It is duri ng thi s devel opmenta 1 stage
that all growth or increase in biomass occurs.
Plecoptera (stoneflies)
Stonefly nymphs are strictly aquatic and are found in debris,masses
of leaves and algae,and under stones in every kind of lotic environment
where there is an abundance of dissoived oxygen.They form an important
portion of the diet of fish,especially for members of the trout family.
and are commonly found in clear,cool,streams where little organic enrich-
ment occurs (Reid,1961;Pennak,1953).""'~....'
Ephemeroptera (mayflies)
This order of insects is found in all types of fresh water where there
is an abundance of dissolved oxygen.The nature of the substrate and the
rate of water movements largely determines the species composition.They
are all herbivores,very sensitive to temperature changes,and one of the
most important sources of f"j sh food (Pennak,1953).They wi 11 not surv;ve
even a short-term oxygen depletion (Beeton,1961).
Tricoptera (caddis flies)
Larval and pupal forms of caddis flies are aquatic and are found in
all types of fresh\'1ater habitats.r~st species of this order build a case
of rocks or organic debris.These cases mayor may not be attached to the
substrate.The larvae and puoa are an important source of fish food and
require an adequate suppiy of disso1ved oxygen.The species composition is
affected by rate of flow and the nature of the substrate (Pennak,1953).
In swift fiowing streams most 1arqe concentrations of caddis fly larvae are
associated with gravel or cobble bottoms (Hickin,1968).
Oiptera
The Diptera are highly specialized two-winged flies and include common
insects such as the horsefly,mosquitoes and midges.Many families have
aquatic immature stages,although adults are never found in the aquatic
105
environment.Representatives of two families,Simuliidae and Ceratopoqonidae,
were identified in the Susitna River tributary streams.
Simuliidae (black flies)
Black fly larvae are usually abundant in shallow,swift streams where
an abundance of oxygen occurs.They are always attached and feed on plankton
and detritus (Pennak,1953).
Ceratopogonidae (?iti~q midgesl
This family of insects is cOrmlonly referred to as Iino-see-ums.1I The
larvae are most cOlTlTlonly found in floatinq masses of algae,but also occur
in springs,streams,and wet mud along shores (Pennak,1953).
106
-.
".-
-
-
-.
.'
APPENDIX IV
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has been requested to assign
monetary values to the Susitna River salmorl stocks by the Carps of Engineers.
These figures will provide a basis for m'ftigation actions.Total escapement
figures are not avail ab 1e for thi s sys tern and it is therefore di ffi cul t to
assign a value to the salmon populations.The following has been compi 1 ed
by Commercial Fisheries staff biologists to partially fu1fill the request .
It must be emphasized that final figures are only estimates based on feelings
of biologists familiar with the Susitna Basin area and do not represent fact.
The estimated maximum sustained yields (MSY)for salmon produced in the
Cook Inlet gill net districts,i.e ••that area north of the latitude of
Anchor Point,based on historical catch trends are:
sockeye
king
pink
chum
coho
1.700,000
66,000
1,800.000
700,.000
300.000
The percentage of salmon produced from the Susitna River basin is estimated
to be:
sockeye
king
pink
chum
coho
.50 x
.90 x
.85 x
.90 x
.70 x
1 ,700,000 ~
66,000 •
1,800,000 •
700.000 •
300,000 •
.850,000
59,400
1 ,530,000
630.000
210,000
If we assume the above is relatively correct and we relate this to:
1.ihe average weights of adult salmon by species,i.e.,
sockeye 6.1 lbs.;king 25.0 lbs.;pink 3.5 lbs.;
churn 7.4 1bs.;and coho 6.1 1 bs.
2.The average 1975 prices paid to fishermen per pound
by species.i.e ••sockeye $0.63,king .62,pink .36,
chum .43~and coho .47.
Then:
Susitna Production x Average Weight x Average Price/lb.Value to Fishermen
Sockeye
King
Pink
Churn
Coho
850'1000
59,400
1 ,530,000
630,000
210,000
6.1
25.0
3.5
7.4
6.1
.63
.62
.36
.43
.47
$3,266,550
920,700
1,927,800
2,004,660
602,070
The estimated average annual value to fishermen is therefore approximately
$8,721 ,780.
107
This value does not include the value of salmon it takes to produce
the estimated catch produced in the Susitna basin.This may be calculated
by using estimated return by spawner by species using the 1975 price per
pound paid to fishermen:
Speci.§.
Sockeye
Ki ng
Pi nk
Chum
Coho
Return/Spawner
3.0:1
1.0:1
308:1
2.2:1
2.2:1
Spawners/MSY
283,333
59,400
402,532
286,364
95,455
'.
'.
-
The 1973 average estimated market values of drift gil1 net vessels
and gear were $12,843 and $2,411,respectively.The maximum number of
drift gill net units participating in the Cook Inlet fisheries ;s 625.
t~ith a potential loss of a portion or an of the above Susitna River pro-
duction this investment will constitute a potential loss.
Avera.ge Price
-
Value
$1,088,849
920,700
507,316
911 ,210
273,670
$3,701,745
283,333
59 AOO
402,632
286,364
95,455
Se aw,!1.ers
.63
.62
.36
.43
.47
fu'erage Hei gh.t
6.1
25.0
3.5
7.4
6.1
value of spawners
Sockeye
Ki ng
Pink
Chum
Coho
Average annual
Based on the same 1973 estimates,set gi 11 net gear and sites were
valued at $8,223 and $21 ,563 respectively t or a total of $29 Ja6 per set
net fisherman.The maximum number of set gill net units participating in
the fishery is 525.As with the drift gill net fishery a portion or all
of this investment represents a potential loss.
Other areas of interest would obviously be affected should a drastic
decline in salmon production occur.These include,but are not limited to:
(1)sport fishermen and supporting services;(2)salmon processing facilities
and seasonal employment;(3)State tax of the commercial cannery salmon pack
of Cook Inlet;(4)licensing rev'enues;(5)a variety of corrmercial fishennen
and industry supporting services;and (6)cutback in the numbers of fishermen
participating in,the fishery by the Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
accomplished thl'ough the "buy-back program ll costing the State funds.
-
-
t
108