HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA1450,....
-
!"-
'
r
-
Document No.
Susitna File No.
TK
\Y':A 5
.$8
A'i?
~'\o. \'150
ADULT ANADROMOUS FISH INVESTIGATIONS:
MAY -OCTOBER 1983
by
Bruce M. Barrett
Frederick M. Thompson
Susari N. Wick
1984
ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
SUSITNA HYDRO A1.1UATIG STUDIES
REPORT NO. 1
2207 ':lfl•mard Road
Anchora•:Je, Alaska 99503
Alaska Power Authority
334 W. 5th Avenue, Second Floor
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
ARLIS
Alaska Resources
Library & Information Services
lUichorage,AJaska
1450
4.3.1.6
.....
-
-
,....
NOTICE
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS CONCERNING
THIS REPORT SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO
THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
SUSITNA PROJECT OFFICE
1981 l/ 1982 l/
Sockeye 272,900 265,300
Pink 85,600 890,500
Chum 282,700 458,200
Coho 36,800 79,800
These escapement numbers are minimum values as they do not include
escapements in the lower Susitna River reach downstream of river mile (RM) 80
excluding the Yentna River (RM 28). This unmonitored reach supports major
salmon spawning populations, particularly pink and coho salmon stocks.
The Alaska Power Authority (APA) has proposed the construction of two
hydroelectric facilities on the upper Susitna River. The Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission ( FERC), the 1 icensing authority, requires that APA
provide an analysis of the environmental issues of the project. To this end
APA has contracted the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) to assess
the Susitna River fishery resources. This report addresses the adult
anadromous fish investigations contracted to ADF&G for the open water period
in the Susitna River from May to October 1983. It is one of several reports
prepared by ADF&G for APA since 1981. It is the first to be included in the
A 1 ask a Department of Fish and Game Susi tna Hydro Aquatic Studies Report
Series.
3Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Adult Anadromous Fish Studies,
1982.
-ii-
~
-
.....
-
-
-
-
-!
All questions concerning this report should be directed to:
Alaska Power Authority
334 West 5th Avenue, Second Floor
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Telephone (907) 277-7641
-iii-
-
-
r
Report
Number
1
2
3
4
Titles In This Series
Title
Adult Anadromous Fish Investigations:
May -October, 1983
Resident and Juvenile Anadromous Fish
Investigations: May -October, 1983
Aquatic Habitat and Instream Flow
Investigations: May -October, 1983
Access and Transmission Corridor Aquatic
Investigations: May -October, 1983
-iv-
..
Date
April, 1984
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
3.2.1.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring .••.••••....•....... 64
3.2.1.2.2 Spawning Ground Surveys............................... 73
3.2.1.2.2.1 Main Channel ....................................... 73
3.2.1.2.2.2 Sloughs and Streams ..•....••...•.•..•...........•. 73
3. 2.1. 3 Escapement Index Surveys................................... 75
3. 2. 2 Sockeye Salmon...... . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
3.2.2.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna .•••.••••••.•.••.•.•••..•...•...... 81
3.2~2.1.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring .....•....•......... 81
3.2.2.1.1.1 First Run •.•.•....•....•.•••....•....•.•.......... 81
3. 2. 2. 1 . 1 . 2 Second Run. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
3. 2. 2.1.1. 3 Fecundity......................................... 91
3. 2. 2. 1 . 2 Spawning Ground Surveys. • . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
3.2.2.1.2.1 Sloughs and Streams............................... 94
3.2.2.1.2.1.1 First Run ••..••..•....•.. ~ •...•............... 94
3.2.2.1.2.1.2 Second Run •.......•..•.•...•....•............. 96
3.2.2.2 Talkeetna To Upper Devil Canyon .......................... 96
3.2.2.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring.................... 96
3.2.2.2.1.1 First Run ••...•....•...•....•...••............••.. 96
3.2.2.2.1.2 Second Run ....••••.•••.........•.................. 97
3.2.2.2.2 Spawning Ground Surveys ............................... 101
3.2.2.2.2.1 Main Channel ....................•..•....••.••..•.. 101
3.2.2.2.2.2 Streams .••.•.•.•......•.•.••••...•.•..•..•.•...•.. 102
3.2.2.2.2.3 Sloughs .••.•..•..•.•.•.•....•...••.•.....•........ 102
3.2.2.2.2.3.1 Observation Life •••.•••.....••...•............ 102
3.2.2.2.2.3.2 Escapement .................................... 106
3.2.2.2.2.3.3 Egg Retention ....•.......••......•.........•.. 110
3.2.3 Pink Salmon •..•.•....•......•.•.•.....•...•.......•.•.•.•...•. 112
3.2.3.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna •..•.•.•.......•.........•........• 112
3.2.3.1.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring .................... 112
3.2.3.1.2 Fecundity ............................................. 116
3.2.3.2 Talkeetna To Upper Devil Canyon ........................... 119
3.2.3.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring ....••••.....•...... 119
3.2.3.2.2 Spawning Ground Surveys ..••.•••••••....••..•••........ 121
3.2.3.2.2.1 Main Channel ..••.•..•..•..•.•.•.••...•...•...•.... 121
3.2.3~2.2.2 Sloughs and Streams •....•...•............•....•... ~23
3.2.4 Chum Salmon ................................................... 125
3.2.4.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna ................................... 125
3.2.4.1.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring .•.................. 125
3.2.4.1.2 Fecundity ............................................. 133
3.2.4.2 Talkeetna To Upper Devil Canyon ....•....•......••.......• 138
3.2.4.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring ....•........•...... 138
3.2.4.2.2 Spawning Ground Surveys ............................... 143
3.2.4.2.2.1 Main Channel ..............•....•.•........•....... 143
3.2.4.2.2.2 Streams ........................................... 143
3.2.4.2.2.3 Sloughs .•.•.............•...••........•........... 146
3.2.4.2.2.3.1 Observation Life ..•......•.................... 146
3.2.4.2.2.3.2 Es·capement .................................... 150
3.2.4.2.2.3.3 Egg Retention •.......•....•.......•........... 153
-vi-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
r-
1
-
r
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
·3.2.5 Coho Sa 1mon ••••••••••.••••.••••••••••••••••••..•••••••.•••••••
3.2.5.1 Intertidal to Ta 1 keetna ...................... .
3.2.5.1.1 Main Channel Escapement ~onitoring ..•..••....•.•.
3.2.5.2 Talkeetna to Upper Devil Canyon ..•.•••.•...•...••.•..
3.2.5.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring ••••••••••.•.•.
3.2.5.2.2 Spawning Ground Surveys ....•••.••.•••..•••.•
3.2.5.2.2.1 Main Channel ••.••...•.•
3.2.5.2.2.2 Sloughs and Streams ••...•..•....•.......
3.3 Bering Cisco .•.•.••.•..•••••..•..•..•.•.••...•...•...•..•..•..•.
4.0
3.3.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna •.••••••.•.•.••.••.•.••
3.3.1.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring •••••••.......•..••..•
3.3.2 Talkeetna to Upper Devil Canyon •..•.••.•.•.••.•.•.•.
3.3.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring ••.••.••..•.•.•..•....
SUMMARY ••...•
4.1 Eul achon ••.••
4.2 Adult Salmon .....................................................
4.2.1 Chinook Salmon ••••••••..••••.•.•••..•••••••••••••.••••.•
4.2.1.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna ..•...•..•.••••••.••
4.2.1.2 Talkeetna to Upper Devil Canyon .••••..••.•.
4.2.1.3 Escapement Index Surveys .•••..•..•••.•...•.
4.2.2 Sockeye Salmon ••••.••••••...•.•..
4. 2. 2. 1 First Run ................... . ................
Run ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 4.2.2.2 Second
4.2.2.2. 1
4.2.2.2.2
Intertidal to Talkeetna .•...••.••••••••..
Talkeetna to Upper Devil Canyon ••••..•.••
Pink Salmon ..........•.......... 4.2.3
4.2.3. 1
4.2.3.2
Intertidal to Talkeetna ••••.•••••.•••..•••••.••
Talkeetna To Upper Devil Canyon .•••••••••••.••.••
Chum Salmon .••••••••...••••••••.•.•.••••••••.•••••.••••.•••.• 0 4.2.4
4.2.4.1
4.2.4.2
In terti da 1 to Ta 1 keetna •••••.•.•.••••••.•
Ta"l keetna To Upper Devi 1 Canyon .•.•...••
Coho Salmon •••••••..••••••.• ~···········~···· 4.2.5
4.2.5.1
4.2.5.2
4.3
Intertidal to Talkeetna ••••••••••.••..•••
Talkeetna to Upper Devil Canyon •••••.•.••
Bering Cisco.
155
155
155
162
162
167
167
167
171
171
171
172
172
174
174
177
177
177
180
183
183
183
184
186
189
194
194
198
200
202
204
212
212
216
218
REFERENCES •••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••• 222
-vii-
....
Figure
2-2-1.
....
2-2-2.
2-3-1.
2-3-2.
2-3-3.
2-3-4.
2-3-5.
2-3-6.
2-3-7.
2-3-8.
2-3-9.
2-3-10.
2-3-11.
LIST OF FIGURES
Susitna River intertidal with set net sites defined,
1983 •
Susitna River basin map showing field stations and
major glacial streams, 1983.
Age composition by sex of first (a-b) and second
(c-d) migrant pre-spawning condition eulachon
collected from the Susitna River intertidal in 1983.
Eulachon set net catches at RM 4.5 with associated
water temperatures and high tide heights in 1983.
Male to female sex ratios of eulachon sampled between
RM 12.1 and 25.1 on May 24, 1983.
Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch
of chinook salmon by two day periods at Yentna and
Sunshine stations in 1983.
Age composition of fishwheel intercepted chinook
salmon at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry
stations in 1983.
Length frequency distribution of chinook salmon at
Yentna Station in 1983 ~nd length and age distribution
of chinook salmon at Sunshine Station in 1983.
Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch
.of chinook salmon by two day periods at Talkeetna
and Curry stations in 1983.
Migrational rates of chinook salmon between (a)
Sunshine and Talkeetna stations, (b) Talkeetna
and Curry stations and (c) Sunshine and Curry
stations, 1983.
Length frequency distribution of chinook salmon
sampled for age at Talkeetna and Curry stations
in 1983.
Susitna River basin with chinook salmon index
streams defined, 1983.
Age composition of fishwheel intercepted sockeye
salmon at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry
stations in 1983.
-viii-
Page
3
9
38
40
52
59
63
65
69
71
72
76
86
.,
I
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Figure Page
2-3-12. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch 89 ~
of sockeye salmon by two day periods at Yentna and
Sunshine stations in 1983.
2-3-13. Number of eggs for sockeye salmon sampled at 93 -;
Sunshine Station in 1983 as a function of length
and weight. -2-3-14. Destination of first run sockeye salmon tagged at 95
Sunshine Station on the Susitna River in 1983.
2-3-15. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch 99
of sockeye salmon by two day periods at Talkeetna
and Curry stations in 1983.
~
2-3-16. Migrational rates of sockeye salmon between (a) 100
Sunshine and Talkeetna stations, (b) Talkeetna
and Curry stations and (c) Sunshine and Curry -stations, 1983.
2-3-17. Periodicities of restricted visibility conditions 104
and sockeye salmon life observations in 1983 at
sloughs Moose, SA and 11.
2-3-18. Percent frequency of number of eggs retained by 111 -female sockeye salmon sampled in sloughs above
RM 98.6 in 1983.
2-3-19. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch 114 ~
of pink salmon by two day periods at Yentna and
Sunshine stations in 1983. -2-3-20. Number of eggs for pink salmon sampled at Sunshine 118
Station in 1983 as a function of length and weight. -2-3-21. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch 120
of pink salmon by two day periods at Talkeetna and
Curry stations in 1983. -2-3-22. Migrational rates of pink salmon between (a) Sunshine 122
and Talkeetna stations, (b) Talkeetna. and Curry
stations and (c) Sunshine and Curry stations, 1983. -
2-3-23. Peak pink salmon ground survey counts of Indian River 125
and Portage Creek in 1983. -
-ix-
-
Figure
2-3-24.
2-3-25.
2-3-26.
-
2-3-27.
2-3-28.
2-3-29.
....
2-3-30.
2-3-31.
2-3-32.
2-3-33.
2-3-34.
2-3-35. -
2-3-36.
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued}
Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch of
chum salmon by two day periods at Yentna and Sunshine
stations in 1983.
Provisional USGS discharge data from July 1 through
August 30~ 1983 for the Susitna and Yentna rivers.
Age composition of fishwheel intercepted chum salmon
at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations
in 1983.
Number of eggs for chum salmon sampled at Sunshine
Station in 1983 as a function ~f length and weight.
Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch
of chum salmon by two day periods at Talkeetna and
Curry stations in 1983.
Migrational rates of chum salmon between (a) Sunshine
and Talkeetna stations, (b) Talkeetna and Curry
stations and {c) Sunshine and Curry stations, 1983.
Peak chum salmon ground and helicopter survey
counts of Indian River and Portage Creek in 1983.
Periodicities of restricted visibility conditions
and chum salmon life observations in 1983 in sloughs
Moose, A•, 8A, 9 and 11.
Chum salmon live counts by date in 1983 in sloughs 9,
11 and 21.
Percent frequency of egg numbers retained by female
chum salmon sampled in sloughs above RM 98.6 in 1983.
Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch
of coho salmon by two day periods at Yentna and
Sunshine stations in 1983.
Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch
of coho salmon by two day periods at Talkeetna and
Curry stations in 1983.
Age composition of fishwheel intercepted coho salmon
at·Yentna, Sunshine~ Talkeetna and Curry stations in
1983.
-x-
Page
128
130
132
137
140
142
145
148
153
155
158
159
161
Figure
2-3-37.
2-3-38.
2-4-1.
2-4-2.
. 2-4-3.
2-4-4.
2-4-5.
2-4-6.
2-4-7.
2-4-8.
2-4-9.
2-4-10.
2-4-11.
2-4-12.
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Migrational rates of coho salmon between (a) Sunshine
and Talkeetna stations~ (b) Talkeetna and Curry stations
and (c) Sunshine and Curry stations~ 1983.
Peak coho salmon ground and helicopter survey counts
of Indian River and Portage Creek in 1983.
Minimum Susitna River chinook salmon escapement for
1982 and 1983.
Migrational timing of chinook salmon based on
fishwheel catch per unit effort at selected locations
on the Susitna River in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
Minimum Susitna River sockeye~ pink, chum and coho
salmon escapements for 1981, 1982 and 1983.
' Minimum Susitna River sockeye salmon escapements for
1981, 1982 and 1983.
Migrational timing of second run sockeye salmon based
on fishwheel catch per unit effect at selected locations
on the Susitna River in 1981~ 1982 and 1983.
Minimum Susitna River pink salmon escapements for
1981, 1982 and 1983.
Migrational timing of pink salmon based on fishwheel
catch per unit effort at selected locations on the
Susitna River in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
Minimum Susitna River chum salmon escapements for
1981, 1982 and 1983.
Migrational timing of chum salmon based on fishwheel
'catch per unit effort at selected locations on the
Susitna River in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
Chum salmon spawning areas identified in the main
channel Susitna River in 1981-83.
Minimum Susitna River coho salmon esrapements for
1981, 1982 and 1983.
Migrational timing of coho salmon based on fishwheel
catch per unit effort at selected locations on the
Susitna River in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
-xi-
Page
166
170
177
179
185
187
188
195
196
206
205
208
213
214
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
!"""
!
r
'
....
I
I
-
-
-
r
Table
2-2-1.
2-2-2.
2-2-3.
2-3-1.
2-3-2.
2-3-3.
2-3-4.
2-3-5.
2-3-6.
2-3-7.
2-3-8.
2-3-9.
2-3-10.
2-3-11.
LIST OF TABLES
Operation schedules at main channel Susitna and
Yentna River escapement monitoring stations, 1983.
Tag type and color code used in 1983 at Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Location and schedule of tag recovery surveys of 1983
selected spawning areas between RM 84 and 98.6.
Eulachon set net catches in the Susitna River
intertidal, 1983.
Dip net catches of eulachon in the Susitna River
intertidal at river mile 4.5 with corresponding
water temperatures, May 10 -June 8, 1983.
Summarization of sex composition samples (not weighted
by CPUE) from eulachon dip net catches at RM 4.5 in 1983.
Length and weight of pre-spawning condition first and
second migration eulachon segregated by age and sex from
dip net samples collected in 1983 in the Susitna River
intertidal.
Eulachon spawning areas in the Susitna River main channel
in 1983.
Summarization of eulachon sex composition samples
collected in 1983 by dip netting and electroshocking
between Susitna River mile 4.5 and 60.0.
Length and weight of pre-spawning condition eulachon
segregated by age and sex from samples collected in 1983
in the Susitna River intertidal and main channel.
Minimum Susitna River salmon escapements for sockeye,
pink, chum and coho salmon in 1983.
Escapement of chinook salmon 350 mm or less in length
in 1983 at Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Petersen population estimates with associated 95%
confidence intervals for 1983 chinook salmon escapements
to Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Summary of 1983 fishwheel catches by species and
sampling locations.
-xii-
10
15
19
31
34
36
37
42
50
53
54
56
57
60
Table
2-3-12.
2-3-13.
2-3-14.
2-3-15.
2-3-16.
2-3-17.
2-3-18.
2-3-19.
2-3-20.
2-3-21.
2-3-22.
2-3-23.
2-3-24.
2-3-25.
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Analysis of chinook salmon lengths, in millimeters,
by age class from escapement samples collected
at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations
in 1983. ·
Analysis of chinook salmon age data by percent from
1983 escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Sex ratios of male and female chinook salmon by age
from 1983 escapement samples collected at Yentna,
Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Chinook salmon peak 1983 escapement counts for streams
above RM 98.6 in order of contribution.
1983 escapement surveys of chinook salmon index
streams in the Susitna River drainage.
Chinook salmon peak survey escapement counts of Susitna
River basin streams from 1976 to 1983.
Petersen population estimate for 1983 first run sockeye
salmon escapement to Sunshine Station.
Analysis of sockeye salmon age data by percent from
1983 escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Analysis of sockeye salmon lengths, in millimeters,
by age class from escapement samples collected at
Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations in 1983.
Sex ratios of male and female sockeye salmon by age
from 1983 escapement samples collected at Yentna,
Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Apportioned 1983 sonar counts of chinook, sockeye, pink
chum and coho salmon at Yentna Station.
Petersen population estimates with associated 95%
confidence intervals for 1983 sockeye salmon escapements
to Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Number of eggs, length, weight and associated statistics
for sockeye salmon samp1ed for fecundity at Sunshine
Station in 1983.
Escapement survey counts of tagged and untagged first
run sockeye salmon tagged at Sunshine Station in 1983.
-xiii-
Page
61
64
66
74
77
80
81
82
83
87
88
88
91
94
-
-
-
-
-
-
-!
.....
Table
2-3-26.
2-3-27.
2-3-2S.
2-3-29.
2-3-30 • ....
2-3-31. -
..... 2-3-32 •
-2-3-33.
2-3-34.
2-3-35.
2-3-36.
2-3-37.
2-3-3S.
2-3-39.
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Summary of mean number of days individual sockeye
salmon were observed in 19S3 in sloughs Moose, SA and 11.
Percentages of sockeye salmon monitored for observation
life in 19S3 that spawned, by habitat zone, in sloughs
Moose, SA and 11.
Sockeye salmon peak survey counts of sloughs above
RM 9S.6, 19S3.
Total 19S3 sockeye salmon slough escapements between
RM 9S.6 and 161.0.
Egg retention of sockeye salmon at selected sloughs
between RM 9S.6 and 161.0, 19S3.
Petersen population-estimates with associated 95%
confidence intervals for 1983 pink salmon migration to
Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Analysis of pink salmon lengths, in millimeters, from
escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations in 19S3.
Number of eggs, length, weight and associated
statistics for pink salmon sampled for fecundity
at Sunshine Station in 19S3.
Peak pink salmon index escapement counts of streams
surveyed by foot above RM 98.6 in order of contribution,
19S3.
Petersen population estimates with associated 95%
confidence intervals for 1983 chum salmon migration
to Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Analysis of chum salmon age data by percent from 19S3
escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Analysis of chum salmon 1 engths, in millimeters, by
age class from escapement samples collected at
Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations in 19S3.
Sex ratios of male and female chum salmon by age from
19S3 escapement samples collected at Yentna,
Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Number of eggs, length, weight and associated statistics
for chum salmon sampled for fecundity at Sunshine
Station in 19S3.
-xiv-
Page
104
105
109
10S
111
112
115
116
124
126
131
134
135
136
Table
2-3-40.
2-3-41.
2-3-42.
2-3-43.
2-3-44.
2-3-45.
2-3-46.
2-3-47.
2-3-48.
2-3-49.
2-3-50.
2-3-51.
2-3-52.
2-4-1.
2-4-2.
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Chum salmon peak 1983 escapement counts for streams
above RM 98.6.
Summary of mean number of days individual chum salmon
were observed in 1983 in sloughs Moose, A1
, 8A, 9
and 11.
Percentages of chum salmon monitored for observation life
in 1983 that spawned, by habitat zone, in sloughs Moose,
A1
, 8A, 9 and 11.
Chum salmon peak 1983 escapement counts for sloughs
above RM 98.6.
Total 1983 chum salmon slough escapements between RM 98.6
and 161. 0.
Egg retention of chum salmon at selected spawning habitats
in 1983 between RM 98.6 and 161.0.
Petersen population estimates with associated 95%
confidence intervals for 1983 coho salmon migration to
Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Analysis of coho salmon age data by percent from
1983 escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Analysis of coho salmon lengths, in millimeters, by
age class from escapement samples collected at Yentna
Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations in 1983.
Sex ratios of male and female coho salmon by age from
1983 escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Peak coho salmon index counts of streams surveyed by foot
above RM 98.6, 1983.
Coho salmon peak 1983 counts by helicopter of .selected
streams above RM 98.6.
Summary of 1983 Bering cisco interceptions by location
and gear type.
Escapement by species and sampling locations for 1981,
1982 and 1983.
Analysis of chinook salmon age data by percent from
escapement samples collected at Sunshine, Talkeetna
and Curry stations for 1981-83.
-xv-
Page
144
147
149
151
152
154
156
162
163
164
168
169
171
178
181
"""1!
-
-
-
-
-
....
....
-
Table
2-4-3.
....
2-4-4.
2-4-5.
2-4-6.
2-4-7.
2-4-8.
2-4-9.
2-4-10.
-
....
-
LIST OF TABLES (Continued}
Average male to female sex ratios of chinook salmon
escapements at Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry
stations for 1981-83 •
Minimum Susitna River escapements for sockeye, pink,
churn and coho salmon in 1981, 1982 and i983.
Percent distribution of second run sockeye salmon
in sloughs above RM 98.6 based on peak survey counts
of live plus dead fish in 1981-83.
Percent distribution of pink salmon in sloughs above
RM 98.6 based on peak survey counts of live plus dead
fish in 1981-83.
Percent distribution of pink salmon in streams above
RM 98.6 based on peak index counts in 1981-83.
Chum salmon peak index counts in streams above
RM 98.6 in1981-83.
Percent distribtion of chum salmon in sloughs above
RM 98.6 based on peak survey counts of live plus dead
fish in 1981-83.
Percent distribution of coho salmon in streams above
RM 98.6 based on peak index counts in 1981-83.
-xvi-
Page
181
186
193
201
202
209
210
219
LIST OF PLATES
Plate Page -
2-2-1. Sinking gill net set in the Susitna River intertidal, 1983. 4
2-2-2 .. Removing eulachon from.a set net set in the Susitna 5
River intertidal, 1983.
2-2-3. Electroshocking eulachon in the lower Susitna River in 8
1983.
2-2-4. One of 12 fishwheels operated on the Yentna and Susitna 13
rivers in 1983.
2-2-5. Chinook salmon being marked in· 1983 with a Petersen disc 14
:-tag.
2-2-6. Chum salmon tagged in 1983 with a Flay FT-4 spaghetti tag. 14 -2-3-1. Eulachon set net catch at RM 4.5 on May 23, 1983. 35
2-3-2. Dead and dying pre-spawning eulachon, mainly females, at 47
RM 17 on May 24, 1983.
2-3-3. Thousands of stressed, pre-spawning condition eulachon 48
dying at RM 17, May 24, 1983.
2-3-4. Dead unspawned eulachon in the Susitna River at RM 17.1, 48
1983. -
-xvii-
Appendix Figure
..... 2-A-1.
-2-A-2.
2-A-3.
2-A-4. -
2-C-1. -
2-D-1.
2-D-2.
2-D-3.
2-D-4.
2-D-5.
2-E-1.
LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES
Yentna Station with sonar and fishwheel
locations defined, 1983.
Sunshine Station with fishwheel locations
defined, 1983.
Talkeetna Station with fishwheel
locations defined, 1983.
Curry Station with fishwheel locations
defined, 1983.
Daily and cumulative percent sonar counts
by species at Yentna Station, 1983.
Migrational timing of chinook salmon, based
on cumulative fishwheel catch per hour at
selected sampling locations in the Susitna
River basin in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
Migrational timing of second run sockeye
salmon, based on cumulative fishwheel catch
per hour at selected sampling locations in "
the Susitna River basin in 1981, 1982 and
1983.
Migrational timing of pink salmon, based on
cumulative fishwheel catch per hour at
selected sampling locations in the Susitna
River basin in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
Migrational timing of chum salmon, based on
cumulative fishwheel catch per hour at
selected sampling locations in the Susitna
River basin in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
Migrational timing of coho salmon, based on
cumulative fishwheel catch per hour at
selected sampling locations in the Susitna
River basin in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
Length frequencies of chinook salmon by
sex from fishwheel catches at Yentna
Station, 1983.
-xviii-
A1
A2
A3
A4
A32
A77
A78
A79
ABO
A81
ASS
-
""""
LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES (Continued)
Appendix Figure Page """'!
2-E-2. Length frequencies of chinook salmon by A86
sex from fishwheel catches at Sunshine ~
Station, 1983.
2-E-3. Length frequencies of chinook salmon by A87 _JJJ:l!lfl
sex from fishwheel catches at Talkeetna
Station, 1983.
2-E-4. Length frequencies of chinook salmon by A88 -sex from fishwheel catches at Curry
Station, 1983. -2-E-5. Length frequencies of sockeye salmon by A89
sex from fi shwhee 1 catches at Yentna
Station, 1983.
2-E-6. Length frequencies of sockeye salmon by A90
sex from fishwheel catches at Sunshine
Station, 1983. """
2-E-7. Length frequencies of sockeye salmon by A91
sex from fishwheel catches at Talkeetna
Station, 1983.
2-E-8. Length frequencies of sockeye salmon by A92
sex from fishwheel catches at Curry -
Station, 1983.
2-E-9. Length frequencies of pink salmon by sex A93 -from fishwheel catches at Yentna Station, 1983.
2-E-10. Length frequencies of pink salmon by sex A94
from fishwheel catches at Sunshine -Station, 1983.
2-E-11. length frequencies of pink salmon by.sex A95 -from fishwheel catches at Talkeetna
Station; 1983.
2-E-12. Length frequencies of pink salmon by sex A96 ....
from fishwheel catches at Curry Station, 1983.
2-E-13. Length frequencies of chum salmon by sex A97 ~
from fishwheel catches at Yentna Station, 1983.
2-E-14. Length frequencies of chum salmon by sex A98
from fishwheel catches at Sunshine
Station, 1983.
~ -xix-
-
LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES (Continued)
~ Appendix Figure Page
2-E-15. Length frequencie~ of chum salmon by sex A99
from fishwheel catches at Talkeetna
Station, 1983.
,_
2-E-16. Length frequencies of chum salmon by sex A100
from fishwheel catches at Curry Station, 1983.
r-2-E-17. Length frequencies of coho salmon by sex A101 I
I from fishwheel catches at Yentna Station, 1983.
2-E-18. Length frequencies of coho salmon by sex A102
from fishwheel catches at Sunshine
Station, 1983.
r 2-E-19. Length frequencies of coho salmon by sex A103
from fishwheel catches at Talkeetna
Station, 1983. -2-E-20. Length frequencies of coho salmon by sex Al04
from fishwheel catches at Curry Station, 1983.
2-G-1. Slough locations and primary tributary Al07
streams of the Susitna River from the
confluence of the Talkeetna and Chulitna
!""" rivers to Upper Devil Canyorr, 1983.
2-G-2. Moose Slough map with habitat locations A112
r defined, 1983.
2-G-3. Slough 8A map with habitat locations A113
defined, 1983. -2-G-4. Slough 9 map with habitat locations Al14
defined, 1983. -2-G-5. Slough 11 map with habitat locations AllS
defined, 1983.
~ 2-G-6. Mainstem Susitna River chum salmon spawning A116
areas at RM 115.0 approximately, 1983.
r-2-G-7. Mainstem Susitna River chum salmon spawning A117
area at RM 119.0 approximately, 1983.
2.:G-8. Mainstem Susitna River chum and coho A118 -salmon spawning areas at RM 131.1
approximately, 1983.
-xx-· ·
Appendix Figure
2-G-9.
2-G-10.
LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES (Continued)
Mainstem Susitna River chum salmon
spawning areas at RM 136.1 and 136.8
approximately, 1983.
Mainstem Susitna River sockeye and chum
salmon spawning areas at RM 138.6 to
138.9 approximately, 1983.
-xxi-
A119
A120
-
-
-
-
""!!'!
I
I
-
-
.....
.....
I
-
-
-I
-
Appendix Table
2-B-1.
2-C-1.
2-C-2.
2-C-3.
2-C-4.
2-C-5.
2-D-1.
2-D-2.
2-D-3.
2-D-4.
2-D-5.
2-D-6.
2-D-7.
2-D-8.
LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES
Dip net and electroshocker catches of
eulachon in the Susitna River main channel,
1983.
Yentna Station north bank daily and
cumulative sonar counts by species, 1983.
Yentna Station south bank daily and
cumulative sonar counts by species, 1983.
Yentna Station daily and cumulative sonar
counts by species, 1983.
Sector distribution of north bank sonar
counts, adjusted for debris, at Yentna
Station, 1983.
Sector distribution of south bank sonar
counts, adjusted for debris, at Yentna
Station, 1983.
Yentna Station north bank fishwheel daily
and cumulative catch by species, 1983.
Yentna Station south bank fishwheel daily
and cumulative catch by species, 1983.
Yentna Station fishwheels daily and
cumulative catch by species, 1983.
Sunshine Station east bank fishwheels daily
and cumulative catch by species, 1983.
Sunshine Station west bank fishwheels daily
and cumulative catch by species, 1983.
Sunshine Station fishwheels daily and
cumulative catch by species, 1983.
Talkeetna Station east bank fishwheels daily
and cumulative catch by species, 1983.
Talkeetna Station west bank fishwheels
daily and cumulative catch by species, 1983.
-xxii-
AS
A19
A22
A25
A28
A30
A33
A36
A39
A42
A46
ASO
A 54
A 58
LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES (Continued)
AEEendix Table Page
"""'1
2-0-9. Talkeetna Station fishwheels daily and A62
cumulative catch by species, 1983. -
2-0-10. Curry Station east bank fishwheel daily A66
and cumulative catch by species, 1983. -· 2-D-11. Curry Station west bank fishwheel daily A70
and cumulative catch by species, 1983.
2-D-12. Curry Station fishwheels daily and A74
cumulative catch by species, 1983.
2-0-13. Migrational timing of species at main A82 """'1
channel sampling locations on the
Yentna and Susitna rivers based on
cumulative percent of fishwheel catch per -unit of effort, 1983.
2-F-1. Regression analysis of age class 42 and A lOS
52 sockeye salmon fecundities as a -
function of length and weight, 1983.
2-F-2. Regression analysis of age class 4 1 and 5 1 A106 -chum salmon fecundities as a function of
length and weight, 1983.
2-G-1. Mainstem Susitna River salmon spawning A121
locations and survey results, 1983.
2-G-2. Es~apement survey counts of Susitna River A122 -sloughs between Chulitna River and Lower
Devil Canyon, 1983.
2-G-3. Escapement survey counts of Susitna River A133
tributary streams between Chulitna River
and Upper Devil Canyon, 1983.
~'
2-G-4. Chinook salmon spawning ground surveys of A139
selected spawning areas and resultant
tagged to untagged ratios, 1983. -
2-G-5. Sockeye salmon spawning ground surveys of A140
selected spawning areas and resultant
tagged to untagged ratios, 1983. ~
2-G-6. Pink salmon spawning ground surveys of A142
selected spawning areas and resultant
tagged to untagged ratios, 1983.
-xxiii--
-
i"""'
.....
-
....
-
,.....
r-
-
-;
r
Appendix Table
2-G-7.
2-G-8.
2-G-9.
2-G-10.
2-G-11.
2-G-12.
2-G~13.
2-G-14.
2-G-15.
LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES (Continued)
Page
Chum salmon spawning ground surveys of A144
selected spawning areas and resultant
tagged to untagged ratios~ 1983 .
Coho salmon spawning ground surveys of A149
selected spawning areas and resultant
tagged to untagged ratios, 1983.
Total 1981 sockeye salmon slough escapements AlSO
between RM 98.6 and 161.0, 1983 .
Total 1982 sockeye salmon slough escapments A151
between RM 98.6 and 161.0, 1983.
Estimated pink salmon slough escapements Al52
for 1981, 1982 and 1983.
Total 1981 chum salmon slough escapements A153
between RM 98.6 and 161.0~ 1983.
Total 1982 chum salmon slough escapements A154
between RM 98.6 and 161.0, 1983.
Evaluation of chinook salmon Petersen disc A155
tag loss based on fishwheel recaptures and
spawning ground surveys conducted between
Sunshine Station and Devil Canyon, 1983.
Evaluation of adult salmon tag loss for A155
·all species except chinook salmon based
on spawning surveys conducted between
Sunshine Station and Devil Canyon, 1983.
-xxiv-
.....
'
-
-
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Project funding was pr~.vided by the State of Alaska, Alaska Power Authority .
The authors sincerely appreciate the technical assistance provided by the
following Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) employees:
Fisheries Biologists
Beers, Dean
Bigler, Jeffrey
Gustin, Richard
Kerkvliet, Carol
Richards, Craig
Sharp, Dan
Volk, Don
Fisheries Technicians
Badgley, Albert
Blaney, Alden
Crowe, Thomas
Fusco, Robert
Harris, Patricia
Jones, Craig
Patrick, James
Stratto·n, Barry
Wi 1 key, Robert
Additional credit is due Carol Kerkvliet (ADF&G) for her assistance on the
eulachon, sockeye and chum salmon sections.
The authors thank Gene and Rose Jenne (Three Rivers Union, Talkeetna), the
Alaska Railroad and Robert Bacon (Snafu Freight Inc.) for field support
services.
Appreciation is also extended to Thomas Trent, Larry Bartlett, Robert Dieryck
and Kyle Watson and other ADF&G staff for administrative support services.
Special thanks is given to Allen Bingham and staff (ADF&G) for data
.,_ -xxv-
. ----:--_·-----------~----------------------------
processing services, Mary Gressett (ADF&G) for typing this report and Sally
Donovan (ADF&G) for drafting services.
We also extend thanks to the following individuals and agencies for reviewing
earlier drafts of the manuscript:
Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center
Larry Bartlett (ADF&G, Su Hydro)
Allen Bingham (ADF&G, Su Hydro)
Drew Crawford (AOF&G, Su Hydro)
Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture
Bruce King (ADF&G, Soldotna)
Larry Molten (Woodward Clyde Consultants)
Dana Schmidt (ADF&G, Su Hydro)
Ken Tarbox (ADF&G, Soldotna)
-xxvi-
~
I
-
....
-
-
-
-
-
....
-
-
-
r
-
,....
1. 0 OBJECTIVES
In 1983 a third year of study was i.. i ti a ted of the adult anadromous fish
populations in the Susitna River basin. The main emphasis in 1983 was the
salmon populations particularly emphasizing the Talkeetna (RM 98.6) to upper
Devil Canyon (RM 161.0) reach (Figure 2-2-1). The principle study objectives
were:
1. Determine the escapements~ timing and mi grati ona 1 characteristics
of the sockeye~ pink~ chum and coho salmon populations in the
Yentna River (RM 28) and Susitna River main channel at RM 80, 103
and 120. Additionally, determine the same for chinook salmon in
the Susitna River main channel at RM 80, 103 and 120.
2. Define where salmon spawn· between Talkeetna (RM 98.6) and upper
Devil Canyon (RM 161.0) with emphasis on streams and sloughs.
3. Determine the seasonal distribution, relative abundance and
spawning areas of eulachon in the Susitna River.
Anadromous fish species addressed in this report are:
Eulachon
Pacific Salmon
Chinook Salmon
Sockeye Salmon
Pink Salmon
Chum Salmon
Coho Salmon
Bering cisco
Thaleichthys pacificus
Oncorhynchus 2.£
Q:_ tshawytscha
0. nerka
Q:. gorbuscha
0. keta
0. kisutch
Coregonus laurettae
2.0 METHODS
2.1 Eulachon
2.1.1 Intertidal
From May 10 to June 8, 1983, a standard sinking gi 11 net measuring 25 feet
(ft.) long, 5 ft. deep with 1.5-inch (in.) stretch mesh was fished
intermittently at two locations in the Susitna River intertidal, Sites II and
III (Figure 2-2-1),_according to the following schedule:
1. May 10 through May 16 -Once every high tide beginning on the
second high tide on May 10.
2. May 17 through May 23 -Once every fourt·h high tide.
·3. May 24 through June 8 -Once every fifth high tide minimum.
At each fishing location the net was released perpendicular to the river
channel with a 20-ft. riverboat powered by a 75-horsepower (hp) jet outboard.
The net was secured at each end by a 20-pound {lb.) navy anchor and marked at
each surface end with a single 18-in. diameter buoy {Plate 2-2-1).
Set net sites II and III were fished 30 minutes each during each selected
high tide. Netting was terminated at any time in a 30-minute set when visual
observation indicated 200 or more eulachon in the net. Fishing began at Site
II, 15 minutes fo1lowing high tide and at Site III, 45 minutes preceding high
tide. Fishing time ·at each location was recorded to the nearest minute. The
-2-
-
-
-
-
-I
'
-
-
-I
-
BIG
ISLAND
COOK INLEr
"'-:_.
""~-.. .. ..
MAGOT ·\.
POINT ~ •.
. .
COOK INLEr
SCALE: 1"=7/g~nlle
RM • R IVERMILE
··;.,
Figure 2-2-1. Susitna River intertidal with set net sites defined, 1983.
-3-
time of high tide for the Susitna River intertidal was determined by
subtracting 36 minutes from the 1983 high tide table for the Anchorage
District (U.S. Coast Guard, pers. com. 1982).
Plate 2-2-1. Sinking gill net set in the Susitna River intertidal, 1983.
The eulachon caught at each set net location were separated into two
categories: inmigrants and outmigrants. The pre-spawning and spawning
condition fish were classified as inmigrants and post-spawning condition fish
as outmigrants. The reason pre-spawning and spawning condition eulachon were
placed into a single category was because net caught fish were often damaged
to where it was not possible to accurately separate these development
-4-
-
-
-I
-
-
stages (Plate 2-2-2}. Net caught post-spawning eulachon were easy to
distinguish from pre-and spawning condition eulachon and were classified as
outmigrants. All spawning condition classifications were determined by
morphological examination and when necessary by exerting slight hand pressure
to the abdominal region of each fish.
Plate 2-2-2. Removing eulachon from a set net set in the Susitna River
intertidal, 1983.
A sample of 100 eulachon were collected with a standard dip net for sex, and
spawning condition data at Site II either prior to, or after net duties. The
minimum amount of time expended to obtain the 100 fish sample was 0.5 hours
(hrs.) and the maximum, 1.0 hrs. The eulachon caught were sorted and
recorded by spawning condition and sex. Age, length and weight samples were
taken from t.he first 10 pre-spawning eulachon per sex caught.
-5-
The criteria used to classify the male spawning development stages were
somewhat subjective due to free expulsion of milt among male fish in the pre-
and spawning conditions. The criteria followed were:
Pre-spawners -bright coloration and thick milt.
Spawners -dark coloration and watery milt.
Post-spawners -essentially void of milt.
Female spawning condition classifications were determined by the following
criteria:
Pre-spawners -eggs are not expelled freely.
Spawners -eggs are expelled freely.
Post-spawners -essentially void of eggs.
Age samples were collected by taking the two otoliths from each eulachon
sampled. Each otolith set was stored in a water-dampened paper towel in an
individually labeled vial until aged with a standard microfiche reader.
Eulachon lengths were taken from the tip of the mouth to the fork of the tail
to the nearest millimeter (mm). The weights were registered to the nearest
decigram (0.1 g) with an Ohaus, Triple Beam balance. Sex was determined by
morphological examination and when necessary by exerting slight hand pressure
to the abdominal region of each fish.
-6-
-
-
....
....
-
-
-·
.....
-
-
2.1.2 Main Channel
The main cn~nnel reach between RM 4.5 and 60 was sampled daily for eulachon
presence and spawning areas from May 15 to June 6, 1983 using a combination
of an electroshocking equipped boat and hand-held dip nets (Plate 2-2-3).
The electroshocking unit was a Model VVP-3E Coffelt electroshocker powered by
a 3500 watt Homelite generator. Input into the electroshocker was 230 volts
of alternating current (AC) and the output, direct current (DC). The output
was setup with the anode (+) electrode wired to a hand supported dip net and
the cathode (-) electrode grounded to the boat hull. Activation of the
circuit ranged from five to 10 seconds followed by a 20 to 40 second pause to
avoid herding fish. The most effective output for electroshocking eulachon
was 1. 0 to 2. 0 amperes (amps).
A eulachon spawning area was considered a site where a single sample by dip
net or electroshocker produced a catch with a ratio of 23 free-swimming (male
and female) eulachon : 2 female eulachon with one of the two females being in
spawning condition. The basis for implementing this procedure can be found
in the Phase II, ADF&G/Su Hydro Adult Anadromous report, 1982 (ADF&G, 1982).
A sample of 10 pre-spawning eulachon, males and females, were collected by
dip net for age, length and weight data once every three days from May 15 to
June 6, 19B3.
-7-
Plate 2-2-3. Electroshocking eulachon in the lower Susitna River in 1983.
2.2 Adult Salmon
2.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
Four escapement monitoring stations were operated in 1983 on the Susitna and
Yentna rivers at locations indicated in Figure 2-2-2 accordin~ to the
schedule in Table 2-2-1. A map of each station is in Appendix 2-A.
-8-
.....
-
-
-
-
.....
....
-
.....
'
-
-
SUNSHINE STATION
Figure 2-2-2. Susitna River basin map showing field stations and major
glacial streams, 1983.
-9-
Table 2-2-1. Operation schedules at main channel Susitna and Yentna River
escapement monitoring stations, 1983.
Sampling Location Period
Site River River Mile Begin End
Yentna
Station Yentna 04 6/30 9/5
Sunshine
Station Susitna 80 6/3 9/11
Talkeetna
Station Susitna 103 6/7 9/12
Curry
Station Susitna 120 6/9 9/14
Two basic gear types were used to monitor Susitna and Yentna rivers salmon
escapements. On the Yentna River (RM 28) at Yentna Station {TRM 04) two 1980
Model Bendix side scan sonar (SSS) counters were deployed in combination with
two fishwheels. On the Susitna River four fishwheels were operated both at
Sunshine (RM 80) and Talkeetna (RM 103) stations. At Curry Station (RM 120)
two fishwheels were used to intercept salmon.
2.2.1.1 Sonar Operations
The two SSS counters, one off each bank, at Yentna Station (TRM 04) on the
Yentna River (RM 28) were operated consistent with the 1980 Side Scan Sonar
-
"""
-
-
-
-
Counter Installation and Operation Manual by Bendix Corporation. Counter -.
accuracy was checked four or more times daily by hand tallying fish
registered echos on a Model 323, Sony Oscilloscope. Counter adjustments were
-10-
-
-
-
made when the percent agreement between hand tallied oscilloscope counts and
SSS counts for a 30 or more minute period was less than 90 or more than 110
percent.
Each SSS unit is capable of counting from 1 to 59 feet with the counting
range divided into twelve equal sectors, the width of each a function of the
distance being counted. Sonar counts were printed out for each sector every
hour. The data form used to tabulate this information was divided into two
sections, each consisting of six sectors, or 144 hourly blocks (ADF&G, 1983).
Adjustment for debris counts followed these steps:
1. Total all counts for 144 hourly blocks (sectors 1-6).
2. Subtract debris counts from total counts leaving total good counts.
3. Multiply total good counts by 144 (number of hourly blocks) and;
4. divide by the total number of good blocks.
5. Repeat the above procedure for sectors 7-12 and then,
6. add the two adjusted totals from sectors 1-6 and 7-12 for the total
adjusted sonar count for a 24 hour period.
-11-
'
The tot a 1 adjusted sonar counts are apporti a ned to species based on the
percent fi shwhee 1 catch, by species, for the corresponding 24 hours. This
procedure provided the estimated daily ~scapements as reported in Appendix
Table 2-C-3.
Sector distribution of salmon (i.e., spatial distribution of salmon through
the son!ar counting range) is based on the array of total single sector counts
for a 24 hour period. Unlike the above procedure, debris adjustments were
made for i ndi vi dua 1 hourly b 1 ocks. This was accomp 1 i shed by summing the
hourly blocks before and after the debris block and using the average as the
probable count for that hour. These values were not considered total sonar
counts and were used only for identifying salmon distribution across the
substrate.
2.2.1.2 Fishwhee1 Operations
The fishwheels used at Yentna (TRM 04), Sunshine (RM 80), Talkeetna (RM 103)
and Curry (RM 120) stations in 1983 were of a 1981 design by ADF&G/Su Hydro
Adult Anadromous staff (Plate 2-2-4). Construction specifications,
maintenance and deployment procedures are outlined in the Phase I, ADF&G/Su
Hydro Adult Anadromous report and Phase II, ADF&G/Su Hydro Adult Anadromous
report (AOF&G, 1981 and 1982). The fishwheels were operated at Sunshine,
-
-
-
-
-
Ta 1 keetna a~d Curry stations 24 hours per day through the samp 1 i ng season ~
·(Table 2-2-1). Occasionally the fishwheels were shut-down for maintenance,
debris and at Sunshine Station, excessive catches. At Yentna Station the
fishwheels were run a minimum of twelve hours per day during site operation.
-12-
-
-
-
Plate 2-2-4. One of 12 fishwheels operated on the Yentna and Susitna rivers
in 1983.
2.2.1.3 Tagging Operations
In 1983, all chinook ( ~ 351 mm length}, sockeye, pink, chum and coho salmon
caught in fishwhee1s at Sunshine (RM 80), Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry
(RM 120) stations were marked with color coded Petersen disc or Flay FT-4
spaghetti tags and released (Plates 2-2-5 and 2-2-6). Petersen disc tags
were used to mark the chinook salmon caught at these stations. Additionally
they were used to mark sockeye, pink, chum and coho salmon at Curry Station.
At Sunshine and Talkeetna stations Floy FT-4 spaghetti tags were used for
marking sockeye, pink, chum and coho salmon (Table 2-2-2). A percentage of
-13-
'""'
-
"""!
-
Plate 2-2-5. Chinook salmon being marked in 1983 with a Petersen disc tag. ....
....
-
-
....
Plate 2-2-6. Chum salmon tagged in 1983 with a Flay FT-4 spaghetti tag.
-14-
....
-
the spaghetti and disc tags were numbered to provide data on travel time of
species between stations. All recaptures made at upstream sampling locations
were re 1 eased fo 11 owing species i dent i fi cation and recording of tag type,
color and number.
Table 2-2-2. Tag type and color code used in 1983 at Sunshine, Talkeetna and
Curry stations.
River Tag
Sampling Site Mile Type Color
Sunshine Station 80 FT-4/Spaghetti pink
Petersen Disc white and red
Talkeetna Station 103 FT-4/Spaghetti blue
Petersen Disc green
Curry Station 120 Petersen Disc orange
The methodology followed for applying the Petersen disc and Floy FT-4
spaghetti tags is covered in the Phase I, ADF&G/Su Hydro Adult Anadromous
report, 1981 (ADF&G, 1981}.
2.2.1.4 Age, Length and Sex Composition Sampling
Sixty chinook, 30 sockeye, 20 chum and 20 coho salmon were sampled daily for
age, length and sex from respective station fishwheel catches in 1983 at
Yentna (TRM 04), Sunshine (RM 80), Talkeetna (RM 103} and Curry (RM 120)
stations. Thirty pink salmon were also sampled daily for length and sex data
at each site.
-15-
Age samples were not obtained from pink salmon due to their generally
accepted age of two years. Age sampling of the other salmon species was
accomplished by taking a 1 preferred scale• from each fish sampled. The
location of this scale is two rows dorsal to the lateral line on a diagonal
between the posterior insertion of the dorsal fin and the anterior insertion
of the anal fin. All length measurements were taken from the middle of the
eye to the fork of tail to the nearest 10 mm on chinook salmon, and five mm
on the other salmon species. Sexes were determined by standard morphological
examination. The time for composite age, length and sex sampling was about
25 seconds per fish. Each fish was released immediately following sampling.
2. 2.1. 5 Fecundity Sampling
In 1983, Susitna River sockeye, pink and chum salmon fecundities were
estimated from samples collected at Sunshine Station (RM 80). A total of 25
sockeye, 22 pink and 27 chum salmon were obtained between July 28 and 31 for
use in the analysis. Samples were collected throughout the length ranges of
sockeye, pink and chum salmon available during this time period
Prior to egg removal all salmon were measured to the nearest mm (FL) and
weighed to the nearest gram (g). In addition, three scales were removed from
the • preferred area • on sockeye and chum salmon and mounted onto gum cards
for later age determination.
Eggs from each fish sampled were bagged, placed in coolers and transported to
Talkeetna for freezing. The eggs were processed by boiling each sample for
approximately five minutes. Once the eggs had separated the water was
drained off, and the eggs were enumerated by a volumetric estimation method.
-16-
.....
-
-
-
-
-
....
-'
Pink and chum salmon fecundities were determined by filling a 50 milliliter
(ml) graduated cylinder to the 50 ml level with eggs and counting each egg in
the graduated cylinder. This process Wi") repeated three times for each
female. The mean number of eggs from the three sampling trials was
multiplied by the number of times the 50 ml graduated cylinder was filled to
the 50 ml level for each sample. Residual eggs for each sample (those left
that did not fill a 50 ml volume) were individually counted and added to the
total estimate obtained by the volumetric method. This is mathematically
represented by the following formula:
Te = A (.Y) + r
where: Te = Total numbers of eggs in sample
A= Mean number of eggs in the three 50 ml volumetric sampling
trials.
Y = Number of times the 50 ml graduated cylinder was filled for
each sample.
r = Residual number of ~ggs from sample, individually counted.
Sockeye salmon egg diameters were smaller than pink and chum salmon and
approximately one half of the total number of eggs filled a 50 ml volume .
Therefore, only one 50 ml sampling trial was performed. In all other
respects the counting procedures used were identical to those of pink and
chum salmon.
-17-
2.2.2 Spawning Ground and Tag Recovery Surveys
2.2.2.1 Sloughs and Streams
In 1983, all known and suspected chinook salmon spawning areas in the Susitna
River drainage upstream of the Chulitna River confluence (RM 98. 6) were
surveyed twice between July 15 and August 9. The surveys were conducted by
helicopter and where possible on foot. Each of the spawning areas were
surveyed in their entirety except Chase Creek {RM 106.9) which was surveyed
for the first mile.
Additional escapement surveys, non-specific to chinook salmon, were made
almost weekly between July 25 and October 11 of all probable salmon spawning
streams and sloughs between RM 98.6 and 161.0 in 1983. The sloughs were
surveyed on foot in total. Streams were surveyed to standard index markers
on foot. The exceptions were Indian River (RM 138.6) and Portage Creek
-
_,
!
(RM 148.9) which were also surveyed by helicopter to the upper spawning -
limits, and Cheechako (RM 152.4), Chinook (RM 157.0) and Devil (RM 161.0)
creeks 1 ocated above De vi 1 Canyon that were surveyed by he 1 i copter to the
upper limits of spawning.
Tag recovery surveys were also made in 1983. Between RM 80 and 98.6 selected
spawning areas were surveyed for live tagged and untagged fish (Table 2-2-3).
Above RM 98.6 tag recovery surveys were conducted concurrent with the regular ~
scheduled "slough and stream escapement surveys.
All spawning ground surveys including the tag recoveries surveys were
performed by trained observers outfitted with polaroid sunglasses and
hand-held tally counters.
-18-
-
-
,....
....
~
.....
-
-
-
Table 2-2-3. Location and schedule of tag recovery surveys of 1983 selected
spawning areas between RM 84 and 98.6.
Spawning Area Location !/ Period Frequency
Answer Creek 84.1 9/15-28 Once
Question Creek 84.1 9/15-25 Once
Birch Creek 88.4 8/10-25 Once
( 1 ower) 9/15-28 Once
Fish Creek 97.1 8/10-25 Twice
Clear Creek 97.1 7/20-8/7 Once
Prairie Creek 97.1 7/20-8/7 Once
Byers Creel< 98.6 8/10-15 Once
Troublesome Creek 98.6 9/5-15 Once
Chulitna River 98.6 7/25-8/7 Once
Bunco Creek 98.6 7/25-8/7 Once
!/ Location designated by river mile for the confluence of the spawning
area or the junction of its receiving waters with the Susitna River main
channel.
2.2.2.1.1 Chinook Salmon Index .Surveys
In 1983, index surveys of the chinook salmon escapement were conducted in
pre-selected spawning areas in the Susitna River drainage (ADF&G, 1981). The
index surveys conducted above RM 98. 6 were performed as defined in Section
2.2.1.5. The surveys in index areas downstream of RM 98.6 were conducted
between July 13 and August 3 by ADF&G, Region II, Sport Fish Division staff
with some assistance from ADF&G, Su Hydro personnel.
-19-
The chinook salmon index surveys in 1983 were performed by helicopter, foot
and inflatable raft depending on accessibility. All observers conducting
index surveys wore polaroid sunglasses and used hand-held counters.
2.2.2.1.2 Observation Life Surveys
At Curry Station (RM 120) between July 6 and September 9, 1983, 130 sockeye
and 667 chum salmon were caught by fishwheels that were marked and released
with large numbered Petersen disc tags (Section 2.2.1.3). An additional 18
sockeye and 13 chum salmon were similarly marked and released off the mouths
of Moose Slough (RM 123.5) and Slough 11 (RM 135.3) on August 11 and 14, 1983
respectively. These fish were captured using a standard beach seine {60 ft.
long, 6ft. deep, and 1.5 in. stretch mesh).
In 1983, five sloughs upstream of RM 120 were intensely surveyed for marked
sockeye and chum salmon released from Curry Station (RM 120) and off the
mouths of Moose Slough (RM 123.5} and Slough 11 (RM 123.5). The study
sloughs were: Moose (RM 123.5), A• (RM 124.6}, SA {RM 125.1), 9 (RM 128.3)
and 11 (RM 135.3). The surveys were performed between August 11 and
October 12 at a minimum of four day intervals. Ongoing with this work,
enumeration surveys of live and dead salmon by spec.ies were conducted between
July 26 and October 8 in these and other known salmon sloughs between RM 98.6
and 161.0 at seven day intervals (Section 2.2.2).
Individually tagged sockeye and chum salmon were surveyed in the five study
s 1 oughs by foot and occas i ana 11y from a powered riverboat. The observers
used polarized sunglasses and polarized 7X35 Bushnell binoculars to improve
-20-
-
....
-
,
r
r
....
~ i
observation. A record was kept of each tagged fish sighting. Information
-recorded included the date of observation, fish tag number, species, sex,
behavior and location within the habitat. There were two categories of fish
behavior recorded for each live tagged fish: milling or spawning. Milling
activity was assessed by a judgemental observation of there being no
'significant' caudal fin erosion, and spawning activity by the fish bearing
'significant' caudal fin erosion or observed spawning. Within sloughs fish
sightings were recorded by habitat zone. These zones were standardized
reaches between major riffles areas as depicted in Appendix Figures 2-G-2
thru 2-G-5. Due to an absence of major riffle divisions in Slough A'
(RM 124.6), no record was made of individual fish locations in this slough.
2.2.2.1.3 Egg Retention Sampling
In 1983, fema 1 e sockeye and chum salmon carcasses were checked for egg
retention in several slough and main channel spawning habitats between
RM 98.6 and 161.0. There was no pre-defined minimum or maximum number of
female sockeye or chum salmon sampled in this study. Sampling intensity was
based on the ava i 1 abi 1 i ty of fish, that is when an escapement survey crew
encountered a dead female sockeye or chum salmon the abdomen of the fish was
incisioned and the eggs counted.
2.3 Bering Cisco
In 1983, the Bering cisco escapement into the Susitna River was not
specifically sampled. However, a record was kept of the date and location of
each catch made in association with other scheduled sampling operations.
-21-
2.4 Data Analysis and Evaluation
2.4.1 Eulachon
The Student's t test (Dixon and Massey, 1969) and the Mann-Whitney median
test (Daniel, 1978) were used to test a null hypothesis that lengths of first
and second run eulachon were not significantly different.
2.4.2 Salmon Tag and Recapture Escapement Estimates
Adult salmon escapements to Sunshine (RM 80), Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry
(RM 120) stations were calculated using tag/recapture population estimation
techniques. Chinook salmon 1ess than 351 mm in length were not tagged and
the method used to estimate their escapement is discussed later in this
section.
The Petersen tag/recapture model was used to estimate escapements to the
three tagging 1 ocati ons. Cousens et a l . (1980) cite sever a 1 recent studies
-
~
I
in which the Petersen model is used to estimate sa1mon escapements. The -
method is not new and is considered a useful management tool.
Escapement estimates were derived using the following modified Petersen model
(Ricker, 1975):
1\ N = (m+1)•(c+l)/(r+l)
where:
m = Number of fish successfully marked = (number
originally tagged). (tag retention (R) factor)
-22-
[!11!1!1!1,
-
-
-
-
c = Total number of fish examined for marks (tags) during
sampling census
r = Total number of marked (tagged) fish observed during
sampling census
1\ N = Population estimate
The Petersen model incorporates six basic assumptions (Began, 1979; Seber and
Felton, 1981). These assumptions are:
1. Sampling is random with respect to the population.
2. There was no mortality associated with the tagging process.
3. Marked and unmarked individuals experience no differential
mortality.
4. Once marked, the individual mixes randomly back into the
population.
5. Recovery of the marked individual is not influenced by the presence
of the mark.
6. The population is closed.
The Petersen model is typically associated with closed systems (i.e., no
immigration or emigration), not open systems characterized by spawning
migrations of salmon. We have not adhered to this format. The need for a
closed system with the Petersen model is readily apparent, any additions or
substrations to the population will dilute or concentrate the population of
marked individuals thereby affecting the outcome of the final population
-23-
estimate. However, if you continually mark individuals entering the
population ultimately, if the proportion of fish being marked remains
constant and behave in the same manner as marked fish, there wi 11 be no
change in the estimate, although it is an open system. This would_ require
that the probability of initial capture did not change throughout the season.
The alternative is to stratify the catch effort into several time intervals
which would, if the intervals were of relatively short duration, account for
a change in the probability of capture with respect to time. This is how
Schaefer (1951) approached the problem in estimating sockeye salmon
populations in the Harrison River, Canada. He found that the unequal
probability of capture in the first sample was not a factor when repetitive
tag recovery surveys were conducted throughout the entire spawning period.
The results of the simple model (Petersen) were then comparable to the
results of the model which stratified catch sampling effort with respect to
time.
Tag/recapture population estimates are based on discrete frequency
-
-
distributions such as the hypergeometric, Poisson or binomial distributions. ~
Large sample sizes allow normal approximation of these distributions and for
r values of 50 or more the confidence intervals were calculated from the
following formula (Dixon and Massey, 1969): -
r/c + 1.96 ~/c (~-r/c) < r/c < r/c -1.96 ~r/c (~-r/c) -
and; 1\ r/c (1/m) < 1/N < r/c (1/m)
upper lower
-24-
-
-
-
.....
The Poisson distribution was considered appropriate when r values were less
than SOt and the confidence limits were taken from Appendix II of Ricker
(1975).
Tag losses for all adult salmon species except chinook salmon were estimated
for each station from data collected during repetitive surveys of spawning
areas. Data used for these determinations were restricted to those surveys,
primarily in sloughs, in which visibility conditions allowed positive
identification of shed tags, tag scarred fish (where applicable} and live
tagged fish (Appendix Tab 1 e 2-G-2}. Tag retention by tag type and tagging
location was calculated in the following manner:
where:
T
R =
S + T
T = Number of live tagged fish observed by tag type and tagging
station.
S = Number of shed tags by tag type and tagging station or
when applicable, number of tagged scarred fish .
R = Tag retention factor
For examplet if 1,000 salmon were observed with tags and 10 shed tags found
the tag retention factor would be: .
-25-
AL.A.:IKA RJ;iSOUHCF~[-15 LlFP ~~J'*ll;;:
lf.& DEPT. OF INT£I~lGit
R = _....;1;...;.,_00_0_
10 + 1,000
= • 99
The total number of marks available is adjusted by this factor before
calculating population estimates. Since it is not possible to identify the
species from which the tags were shed the assumption was made that tag loss,
by tag type, was the same for all species at each station.
Chinook salmon tag losses were calculated in essentially the same manner with
the excep~ion that tag loss infonnation from fishwheel recaptures of tag
scarred fish were included in the analysis. Survey and fishwheel tag
retention factors were calculated, weighted by sample size and reported as
the overall tag retention factor for chinook salmon (Appendix Table 2-G-1).
The formula used to estimate the number of chinook salmon 350 mm and less in
length (FL) migrating to Sunshine (RM 80), Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry
(RM 120) stations was:
where:
1\
1\
J = Nb e
N = Population estimate for fish larger than 350 mm in length (Fl).
b = number of fish intercepted at tagging location equal to or less
than 350 mm in length (FL)
-26-
-
-
-
-
.....
-
-
-
-I
-
e = number of fish intercepted at tagging location larger than
350 mm in length (FL).
J = Population estimate of fish with length (FL) 350 mm and less.
2.4.3 Calculation of Main Channel Escapement Timing
Escapement timing by species was determined for each main channel station
through interpretation of fishwheel catch rate data. The migration was
defined to have 'started', 'reached a midpoint' and 'ended' on the date when
5.0, 50.0 and 95.0 percents, respectively, of the cumulative daily mean
hourly fishwheel catch was attained at each station.
Timing for each species is also provided graphically as the fishwheel catch
per unit effort as a function of time. The fishwheel catch per unit effort
curves were smoothed using the von Hann linear filter method (BMDP, 1981).
2.4.4 Age Determination
Adult salmon are aged by standard scale analysis techniques using a portable
microfiche reader (Clutter and Whitesel, 1956). Age classes are described
using Gilbert-Rich notation. Ages are presented as Xi+1 where X is the
total age of the fish and the subscript i+l, the number of freshwater annuli
plus one. The addition of one to the freshwater age accounts for the year
spent in freshwater prior to the formation of the first annulus. For
examp_le, age s2 fish are those fish which return to spawn in their fifth
year of 1ife having migrated or smelted from freshwater to the marine
-27-
environment in their second year of life after having spent one winter (plus
one winter in which development from egg to fry occurred and no annulus was
formed) rearing in freshwater.
Total age for adult salmon, as reported in this text, represents only the age
at which the fish returned to spawn regardless of their freshwater life
histories.
Eulachon ages were detennined from otoliths and are not reported in
Gilbert-Rich notation but instead aged as to the total number of annuli
observed. For example, eulachon reported to be age 3 would actually be in
its fourth year of life.
2.4.5 Slough Escapement
Individual slough escapements of sockeye and chum salmon were calculated
using 1983 observation 1 ife data and slough survey counts. Slough survey
-
-'
-
-
-
counts were plotted by date and areas beneath the curves were expressed in ._
tenns of fish-days. Areas were determined using a Numonic_ DigiTablet
digitizer. The total number of fish-days per slough was divided by the mean
observation life to estimate total slough escapement. For 1983 data,
individual observation life values were used in calculating total escapement
for study sloughs; all other 1983, 1982 and 1981 total slough escapements
were calculated using the 1983 composite mean observation life values. There
were two exceptions to this method: 1) when peak slough survey counts were
less than 15 fish and 2) when spawning fish were counted on only one survey.
-28-
-
....
I
'
r
r
r--
'
Total slough escapements in these cases were calculated by adjusting the peak
live and dead survey· count. The adjustment was made as follows:
X = ~ (T)
where: x = es~imated slough escapement
A = estimated total escapement of sloughs with peak
surveys greater than 50 fish
B =peak live and dead survey counts in sloughs
where counts totaled greater than 50 fish
T =slough surveys where peak live and dead counts
were less than 15 fish or when fish were counted
on one survey only
Slough escapement estimates for pink salmon were made by adjusting peak live
and dead survey counts. Peak surveys for a species with short spawning
duration~ as exhibited by pink salmon, may account for 80 to 90 percent of
the spawning population (Cousens et al., 1982). Less than ideal survey
conditions made it appropriate to use the lower value for adjustment and all
peak surveys were increased by a factor of 1.2 to estimate total slo1.1gh
escapement.
-29-
3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.1 Eulachon
3.1.1 Intertidal
In 1983, eulachon entered the intertidal reach of the Susitna River in two
distinct migrations. The first migration began on or about May 10, peaked on
May 14 and ended on May 17, as determined by set and dip net catches (Tables
2-3-1 and 2-3-2). The second eulachon migration began on May 19, peaked on
May 23 and ended on June 6.
Set and dip net catches in the intertidal indicate that the first migration
of eulachon in 1983 was considerably smaller in numbers of fish than the
second migration (Tables 2-3-1 and 2-3-2). For example, the highest set net
CPUE of inmigrant {pre-spawning and spawning condition) eulachon in the first
migration was 3.7 fish per set net minute fished on May 13. In the second
migration, there were three days where catch rates were higher with CPUE's of
11.3, 13.0 and 3.8 on May 21, 23 and 26, respectively (Plate 2-3-1). The
highest dip net catches of inmigrants (pre-spawners) in the first migration
were 2.2 and 1.7 eulachon per dip on May 13 and 14, respectively. During the
second migration the highest catches were 41.7 and 49.0 fish per dip on May
21 and 23, respectively.
In 1983, there were two peri ads when outrni grant or post-spawning condition
eu 1 a chon were intercepted in the i nterti da 1 reach: between May 16 and 19
(first migration fish) and between May 26 and June 8 (second migration fish)
(Tables 2-3-1 and 2-3-2). The largest catches were recorded from May 26 to
31 at an average of 2.0 per minute in the set nets and 4.2 per dip in the dip
nets.
-30-
-
.....
-
-
-
-
-
-
....,
1
Tab 1 e 2-3-1. Eulachon set net catches in the Susitna River intertidal, 1983.
Fishing Time Eulachon Catch ~7
Tide l/ location Net Total In-Out-Total CPUE
Date Ht. Time £/ Site # ~/ RM 1/ In Out Min. Migrants Migrants §.1
5/10/83 27.8 1722 III 2.3 1647 1710 23 2 0 2 0.2 5/10/83 27.8 1722 II 4.5 1737 1807 30 7 0 7
5/11/83 29.8 0532 III 2.3 0512 0530 18 4 0 4 0.5 5/11/83 29.8 0532 II 4.5 0547 0617 30 21 0 21
5/11/83 28.8 1802 III 2.3 1720 1750 30 8 0 8 0.5 5/11/83 28.8 1802 II 4.5 1817 1847 30 19 0 19
5/12/83 30.7 0604 III 2.3 0619 0649 30 7 0 7 0.7 I 5/12/83 30.7 0604 II 4.5 0720 0750 30 32 0 32 w 5/12/83 29.5 1844 III 2.3 1759 1829 30 11 0 11 I-' 1.2 I 5/12/83 29.5 1844 II 4.5 1859 1929 30 58 0 58
5/13/83 31.4 0636 III 2.3 0551 0621 30 86 0 86 2.5 . 5/13/83 31.4 0636 II 4.5 0651 0721 30 61 0 61
5/13/83 29.7 1926 III 2.3 1845 1915 30 66 0 66 3.7 5/13/83 29.7 1926 II 4.5 1941 2011 30 157 0 157
5/14/83 31.7 0711 III 2.3 0631 0701 30 28 0 28 3.3 5/14/83 31.7 0711 II 4.5 0726 0756 30 171 0 171
5/14/83 29.6 2009 III 2.3 1924 1954 30 96 0 96 2.8 5/14/83 29.6 2009 II 4.5 2024 2054 30 69 0 69
5/15/83 31.5 0749 III 2.3 0704 0734 30 27 0 27 1.6 5/15/83 31.5 0749 II 4.5 0804 0834 30 70 0 70
5/15/83 29.2 2055 III 2.3 2010 2041 31 10 0 10 1.4 5/15/83 29.2 2055 II 4.5 2110 2140 30 75 0 75
Tab 1 e 2-3-1. Continued.
Fishing Time Eulachon Catch ~/
Tide 1/ location Net Total In-Out-Total CPUE
Date Ht. Time ~/ Site # 11 RM 1/ In Out Min. Migrants Migrants §_I
5/16/83 30.7 0832 III 2.3 0750 0820 30 1 0 1 1.3 5/16/83 30.7 0832 II 4.5 0847 0917 30 78 1 79
5/17/83 29.5 0922 III 2.3 0837 0907 30 4 1 5 0.8 5/17/83 29.5 0922 II . 4. 5 0937 1007 30 44 8 52
5/19/83 26.6 1129 III 2.3 1044 1114 30 10 0 10 0.7 5/19/83 26.6 1129 II 4.5 1144 1214 30 29 2 31
I 5/21/83 26.5 1420 III 2.3 1335 1405 30 260 0 260 11.3 w 5/21/83 26.5 1420 II 4.5 1435 1445 10 190 0 190 N
I
5/23/83 28.5 1634 III 2.3 1549 1604 15 140 0 140 13.0 5/23/83 28.5 1634 II 4.5 1649 1702 13 225 0 225
5/26/83 30.4 0604 III 2.3 0521 0551 30 113 54 167 3.8 5/26/83 30.4 0604 II 4.5 0619 0649 30 115 56 171
5/28/83 29.0 2008 III 2.3 1923 1953 30 94 87 181 2.6 5/28/83 29.0 2008 II 4.5 2023 2053 30 61 78 139
5/31/83 26.6 0844 III 2.3 0759 0829 30 7 7 14 2.4 5/31/83 26.6 0844 II 4.5 0859 0929 30 135 70 205
6/03/83 22.5 1121 III 2.3 1036 1106 30 0 0 0 1.3 6/03/83 22.5 1121 II 4.5 1136 1206 30 77 38 115
_) ) 1
I w w
I
1 ]
Table 2-3-1. Continued.
Tide !/ location
Date Ht. Time £7 Site # 17 RM !7
6/05/83 22.6 1356
6/05/83 22.6 1356
6/06/83 23.8 1509
6/06/83 23.8 1509
6/07/83 25.3 1608
6/07/83 25.3 1608
6/08/83 26.7 1658
6/08/83 26.7 1658
11 High Tide In Feet
~/ Military Time
III
II
III
II
III
II
III
II
ll Site III: (T14N R7W Section 17 AAC)
Site II: (T14N R7W Section 5 AAC)
41 River Mile
2.3
4.5
2.3
4.5
2.3
4.5
2.3
4.5
1
Fishing Time
Net
In Out
1311 1341
1411 1441
1424 1454
1524 1554
1523 1553
1623 1653
1613 1643
1713 1743
1 J
Eulachon Catch ~/
Total In-Out-Total CPUE
Min. Migrants Migrants §_I
30 0 1 1 0.3 30 15 6 21
30 0 0 0 0.1 30 6 53 59
30 0 1 1 0.0 30 0 15 15
30 0 0 0 0.0 30 0 0 0
~/ Eulachon catch divided into inmigrants and outmigrants wherein inmigrants include both pre-spawners and
spawners. and outmigrants represent post-spawners
61 CPUE = Mean Number of Inmigrants/Net Minute
I w +>-I
Table 2-3-2. Dip net catches of eulachon in the Susitna River intertidal at river mile 4.5 with corresponding
water temperatures, May 10 -June 8, 1983.
Eulachon Catch CPUE ~/ Water
Ma]es Eema1e~ Fishing 11 Pre-Spawning Post-Temperature
Date Pre-Spawning Post-Pre-Spawning Post-Effort -(a c)
5/10 0 0 0 2 0 0 80 o.o 0.0 0.0 4.8
5/11 3 0 0 1 0 0 70 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.5
5/11 7 0 0 2 0 0 50 0.2 0.0 0.0 4.5
5/12 39 6 0 12 0 0 64 0.8 0.1 0.0 5.2
5/12 19 2 0 5 0 0 35 0.7 0.1 0.0 5.4
5/13 56 4 0 22 1 0 43 1.8 0.1 0.0 5.5
5/14 39 14 0 45 2 0 49 1.7 0.3 0.0 6.0
5/15 2 1 0 0 0 0 64 0.0 0.0 o.o 5.8
5/15 11 0 0 3 0 0 186 0.1 0.0 0.0 6.8
5/16 10 3 0 4 0 0 100 0.1 0.0 0.0 6.0
5/17 10 1 4 5 1 0 230 0.1 0.0 0.0 5.8
5/19 12 24 10 22 0 0 125 0.3 0.2 0.1 7.6
5/21 34 9 0 86 0 0 134 1.0 0.1 0.0 9.2
5/23 37 13 0 61 0 0 2 49.0 6.5 0.0 8.3
5/26 58 203 96 10 13 16 78 0.9 2.8 1.4 9.0
5/28 5 156 203 0 1 13 30 0.2 5.2 7.2 9.2
5/31 0 173 130 0 9 3 55 0.0 3.3 2.4 10.0
6/3 0 17 18 1 0 .1 100 0.0 0.2 0.2
6/5 0 1 0 0 0 1 80 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.2
6/6 0 0 6 0 0 50 75 0.0 0.0 0.8 12.2
6/7 0 0 2 0 0 28 100 0.0 0.0 0.3 12.8
6/8 0 0 0 0 0 4 75 0.0 0.0 0.1 13.4
!/ Number of dip net sub-samples.
~/ Catch per unit effort for pre-, spawning and post-spawning eulachon.
J J .I ... J I
....
r
r
r
-
-
Plate 2·3-1. Eulachon set net catch at RM 4.5 on May 23, 1983.
Pre-spawning rna 1 es in 1983 were more numerous than fema 1 es in the first
migration (May 10-17) and pre-spawning females were more numerous than males
/
in the second migration {May 19 -June 8) based on dip net catch data not
weighted by CPUE. The respective male to female ratios were 1.8:1 and 0.8:1
(Table 2-3·3). Comparatively, among spawning condition eulachon the male to
female ratios were 6.2:1 in the first migration and 25.9:1 in the second
migration. The increase of males to females in spawning condition indicate
that individual male eulachon ripen earlier and spawn over a longer period
than their fema~e counterparts. A probable advantage of male eulachon having
-35-
a longer spawning life than female eulachon would be that the eggs released
by a female would have a higher chance of being fertilized by available males
due to the longer time individual males are in spawning condition compared to
females.
Table 2-3-3. Summarization of sex composition samples (not weighted by CPUE)
-
-
from eulachon dip net catches at RM 4.5 in 1983. ~
First Migration l/ Second Migration 11
Development Sam2le Size M:F SamJ:!le Size M:F
Stage Males Females Ratio Males Females Ratio
Pre-Spawners 203 110 1.8:1 151 180 0.8:1
Spawners 31 5 6.2:1 596 23 25.9:1
Post-Spawners 4 0 465 116
ll First migration samples collected from 5/10-17 for pre-spawners,
5/10-22 for spawners and 5/10-23 for post-spawners.
?:./ Second migration samples collected from 5/18-6/6 for pre-spawners,
5/23-6/6 for spawners and 5/24-6/6 for post-spawners.
I
4.0:1
Age composition samples collected in 1983 from pre-spawning condition
eulachon (weighted by set net CPUE data) indicate the first migration was
-
-
-
comprised of two, three and four year old fish (Table 2-3-4 and Fig•Jre -
2-3-1). Most of the first migration fish were three year olds, which
accounted for 92.6 perc.ent of the rna 1 es and 97.2 per cent of the fema 1 es
sampled. In the second migration the three year olds again were the most
-36-
-
-
I w
-....J
I
J ]
Table 2-3-4. length and weight of pre-spawning condition first and second migration eulachon segregated by age and sex
from dip net samples collected in 1983 in the Susitna River intertidal.
length (mm) Weight (g)
Sample Range 95% Conf. Sample Range 95% Conf.
Age Sex Migration Size limits Mean Interval Median Size limits Mean Interval Median
2 M 1st 2 191-216 203 ---202 2 50.6-68.8 59.1 ---58.6
3 M 1st 50 186-229 212 210-215 213 50 45.1-86.0 69.1 66.9-71.2 69.3
4 M 1st 2 200-222 211 ---211 2 59.4-78.7 69.1 ---69.1
2 F 1st 1 195-195 195 ---195 1 54.3-54.3 54.3 ---54.3
3 F 1st 35 180-222 203 199-206 204 35 45.1-74.8 60.2 57.4-63.1 60.3
2 M 2nd 1 182-182 182 ---182 1 44.2-44.2 44.2 ---44.2
3 M 2nd 36 187-228 207 204-210 207 36 44.3-82.8 67.4 64.7-69.4 67.6
4 M 2nd 2 219-231 220 ---219 2 89.4-93.5 89.6 ---89.5
2 F 2nd 2 174-193 191 ---192 2 43.4-48.0 47.3 ---47.6
3 F 2nd 35 186-218 201 198-203 199 35 48.8-71.3 59.7 57.5-62.0 59.6
4 F 2nd 1 203-203, 203 ---203 1 60.6-60.6 60.6 ---60.6
All 1./ All All 202 179-231 205 204-206 204 202 43.4-93.5 64.2 63.0-65.4 63.6
!/ Composite of all· aged and non-aged eulachon.
MALE EULACHON 100 FEMALE EULACHON
5/10-5/17 5/10-5/17
n=54 n = 36
>-80 80 (.) >-z 0
1&.1 z
:J &1.1
0 60 :J 60
1&.1 0
a:: &1.1
LL a::
40 LL 40
~ ~ 0 0
20 20
0 0
2 YR. 3 YR. 4 YR. 2YR. 3 YR. 4YR.
(a) AGE ( b) AGE
100 MALE EULACHON 100 FEMALE EULACHON
5/19-6/6 5/19-6/6
n =39 n = 38
80 80
>
(.) >-z 0
LLI
:J 60 z 60 &1.1
0 :J
&1.1 a
a:: &1.1
LL 40 a:: 40 LL
~ :=e 0 0
20 20
0 0
2 YR. 3YR. 4YR. 2Y R. 3YR. 4YR.
{c) AGE (d) AGE
Figure 2-3-1. Age composition by sex of first (a-b) and second (c-d) migrant
pre-spawning condition eulachon collected from the Susitna
River intertidal in 1983.
-38-
-
-
-
1'1'!'!!1
~
'~
i
~
~
~
'""'9
'""'9
~
-
-
-'
-
-
-
numerous, representing 92.3 percent of the rna 1 es and 92.1 percent of the
females sampled.
Length (TL} and weights of 1983 dip netted pre-spawning condition eulachon
are presented in Table 2-3-4. The results, weighted by CPUE dip net data of
inmigrants, indicate three year old fish averaged 212 mm for males and 203 mm
for females in the first migration, and 207 mm and 201 mm, respectively, in
the second migration. The average weights of three year old males and
females were 69.1 g and 60.2 g respectively in the first migration and 67.1 g
and 59.7 g in the second migration. The same size difference was evident
among the two and four year old fish of the first migration, that is, they
were generally larger in length and weight than corresponding age fish in the
second migration. Student 1 S t and Mann-Whitney tests showed no significant
differences in lengths among the first and second migration female eulachon
(p > .90}. For the age three eulachon, both tests established males were_
significantly larger in the first migration than in the second migration
(p >. 99).
A comparison of 1983 Cook Inlet tidal heights, Susitna River water
temperatures and eulachon inmigrant catches is provided in Figure 2-3-2. Set
net catches of first migration i nmi grants occurred in the Sus i tna River at
high tides ranging from 27.8 to 31.7 feet and water temperatures between 3.5
and 7.5°C. The peak catch was made on May 13 at a high tide of 29.7 feet and
water temperature at 6.6°C. Comparatively, the second migration catches of
inmigrants occurred at high tides ranging from 22.1 to 30.5 feet with water
temperatures ranging from 6.0 to 10.5°C (Figure 2-3-2). Set net catches
peaked on May 23 at a high tide of 28.5 feet and water temperature of 8.3°C
(Figure 2-3-2}.
-39-
13
12
II
10
~ 9 La.l
z
..... 8 w
.....
::> 7 z
:l: ..... 6
I J:
.f:;o 0
C> ..... 5 I <t
0
4
3
2
0
I
10
I
12
I
14
I
16
I
18
I
20
...,._ __________ MAY
" I \
I \
I l I
I \
I \
,' ' f \
.............. __.. .... "".-.· ..... ---·-·
I
22
.... \
\
I
24
\
\
\
\
' !.
I
26
' ' ' '
I
28
._ __ --...
I
30
-·-·-Temperatura
----Catch
--Tidal HliQht
' I .
I .
,.. ,.
/
/
I . .__·~·-·-·-·
...... ... ...... '-.,
I
3
.... .... .........
I
5
.. .... ....,_ ...
I
7
I
9
JUNE--••~1
32
31
30
-29:: -....
:I:
28 ~
l&J
:I:
27w 0 -....
26 :I:
~ -:I:
2!5
24
23
22
21
Figure 2-3-2. Eulachon set net catches at RM 4.5 with associated water temperatures and high tide
heights in 1983.
. J . .. J
14
13
12
II 0
!.,..
10 l&J
0::
::l
9 .... <
8 0:::
l&J
Q.
1 2
l&J
6
....
0::
5 l&J .... <
4 ~
3
2
0
....
-
Eulachon set net catches in the Susitna River intertidal do not appear to be
correlated to daily changes in Susitna River water temperatures or Cook Inlet
high tide heights (Figure 2-3-2). The eulachon migration into the Susitna
River may, however, be influenced by water temperature. Synder (1970)
reported most eulachon enter the Columbia River (Washington) when river
temperatures average around 7°C, and if temperatures change much above or
below normal eulachon schools act erratically, i.e., they are delayed,
migrate farther upstream or do not enter spawning tributaries. Smith and
Saalfeld (1955) stated that Columbia River eulachon showed preference for a
narrow water temperature range of zo to 10°C. In the Stikine River the 1979
and 1980 migration occured at water temperatures ~f 2° to 8°C (Franzel and
Nelson, 1981). The 1983 eulachon migration into the Susitna River intertidal
occured when the river temperature was between 3.5° and 10.5°C.
For the Columbia River (Washington), Smith and Saalfeld (1955) found that
eulachon migration and availability were correlated with water temperature
around 7 to 8°C. In the Susitna River intertidal reach in 1983, about 50
percent of the set net catches of first migration inmigrant eu 1 achon were
made between May 13 and 14 when water temperature ranged between 6. 0 and
7.5°C. During the second migration, about 50 percent of the catches were
made from May 21 to 23 at water temperatures between 8.0 and 9.0°C. It is
concluded that the major movement of eulachon into the Susitna River follows
ice-out at water temperatures be~een 6.0 and 9.0°C.
3.1.2 Main Channel
The results of sampling the Susitna River main channel (RM 4.5 -60.0) in
1983 for eulachon presence, spawning habitat and sex composition are
presented in Table 2-3-5.
-41-
Table 2-3-5. Eulachon spawning areas in the Susitna River main channel in 1983.
S~awn1ng Location Water !I Substrate Eulachon Catch ~ General
Date RM !/ Geographic Code Temp. Depth Velocity Type Male Female Habitat
Pre-se. Post-Pre-se. Post-Notes
5/15 12.5 S15N07W11ACO 130 1.0 1001 s 11 ty sand 10 4 2 7 1 1 cutbank
5/15 13.8 S15N07W02ADA 6.4 140 1.5 1001 silty sand 24 48 18 18 5 4
5/17 23.0 S17N07W33BBB 5.8 170 2.0 75% gravel 4 11 2 7 1 0
25S sand
5/20 9.8 S15N07W10DOB 7.4 100 1.5 100S s 11 ty sand 22 10 2 10 2 0
5/20 12.5 S15N07Wl1ACO 7.4 130 1.0 100% silty sand 18 33 1 10 6 0 cutbank
5/20 18.2 S16N07W22AAD 100 1.0 90S sand 14 13 8 3 3 0
101 gravel
5/21 15.0 S16ti07W35BCO 8.1 130 1.5 6Q.% sand 54 64 0 22 7 0
40% gravel
5/21 25.5 Sl7N07W22ACA 120 2.0 1001 silty sand 17 13 3 5 2 0 cutbank i 5/22 25.5 S17N07W22ACA 7.8 120 2.0 100% silty sand 16 14 0 17 2 0 cutbank .p.
N 5/22 27.1 S17N07W23BAD 7.8 130 1.5 1001 silty sand 38 3 1 18 2 0 cutbank I
5/22 27.3 S17N07W13DCO 7.6 110 1.0 100% silty sand 11 21 2 5 3 0 cutbank
5/22 27.7 S17N07W130CA 7.6 150 100% silty sand 21 47 0 30 2 0 back eddyi
cutbank
5/23 9.0 S15N07W15AOA 8.0 110 1.0 100% silty sand 6 J5 0 26 5 0
5/23 9.7 S15N07W10CDA 7.6 100 0.5 1001 sand and 10 14 0 38 5 0 cutbank
gravel mix
5/23 21.4 S16N07\~09CCD 8.4 160 1.0 100% silty sand 26 14 0 25 2 0 beach
5/23 22.1 S16N07W09ACB 8.6 16 10 0 34 1 3
5/23 23.0 S17N07W33BBB 7.8 170 2.0 75% gravel 28 21 0 43 5 0
251 sand
5/24 12.5 S15N07~111ACO 6.6 100% s 11 ty sand 3 11 1 50 10 1 cutback
5/24 13.1 S15N07W12BBB 6.6 80 2.0 100% silty sand 2 15 0 69 15 0 cutbank
5/24 13.3 S15N07W01DDC 6.6 110 1.5 100% sflty sand 1 4 0 35 8 0 cutbank
5/24 13.4 S15N07W02CCC 7.6 120 1:5 100% silty sand 4 20 0 20 4 0
5/24 13.8 S15N07W02ADA 6.7 100% sand 5 12 0 38 9 1
5/24 13.8 S15N07W02ACA 7.8 130 1.0 100% silt 5 8 0 8 1 3 gradual slope
5/24 14.7 S16N07~135COA 8.0 40 3.0 100% sand and 6 15 0 19 8 0 gradual slope
gravel mix
5/24 14.9 S16N07W35BCD 6.8 100% silty sand 2 19 0 45 21 0
5/24 )5.0 S16N07W35AOB 7.6 100% sand and 7 30 0 26 8 0
gravel m1x
5/24 15.5 Sl6N07W35BAD 7.0 120 2.0 100% silty sand 4 16 0 19 14 0 cutbank
_I .~. J .J . I
... 1 J .1
Table 2-3-5. Continued.
S~awning Location WaterY Substrate Eulachon Catch ~/ General
Date RM _] Geographic Code Temp. Depth Velocity Type Male Female Habitat
Pre-SJ!. Post-Pre-se. Post-Notes
5/24 15.5 S16N07W35ABD 7.8 130 3.0 100% silty sand 2 12 0 32 29 1 cutbank
5/24 15.7 S16N07W35BAA 6.8 100 100% s11 ty sand 4 18 0 50 9 0 back eddy
5/24 16.2 S16N07W26CDB 8.0 100% silty sand 4 14 0 58 5 0 beach
5/24 16.5 S16N07W26BCD 7.0 130 1.0 100% silty sand 3 3 0 60 10 0
5/24 17.1 S16N07W26BBC 7.4 130 100% silty sand 1 8 0 39 8 0
5/24 17.2 S16N07W26BBB 7.2 100 1.5 100% stlty sand 1 46 0 3 6 0
5/24 17.7 S16N07W23DAB 8.2 150 2.0 100% silty sand 24 54 0 50 9 0
5/24 18.2 S16N07W22AAD 7.2 100 1.0 90% sand 6 94 0 4 28 2
10% gravel
5/24 18.7 S16N07W22ABA 7.4 130 1.0 75% gravel 0 25 5 0 3 1
25% sand
5/24 19.3 S16N07W22BBA 6.8 140 100% stlty sand 2 39 1 1 3 4 back eddy
I 5/24 19.8 S16N07W16ADD 7.1 100 3.0 100% stlty sand 0 32 0 7 10 2 cutbank
+::> 5/24 19.8 S16N07W09CDD 8.4 80 1.5 100% silty sand 0 47 3 9 7 8 w 5/24 21.3 S16N07W08ACC 9.6 80 2.0 100% stlty sand 0 42 7 4 7 12 I
5/24 22.5 S16N07W05ABD 7.4 120 4.0 100% stlt 0 25 0 0 12 0 cutbank
5/24 23.7 S17N07W33BAB 8.0 100 100% sand 0 40 2 12 7 2 back eddy;
cutback
5/24 24.8 S17N07W28ACB 8.6 90 1.5 50% sand 0 54 0 20 18 0
50% gravel
5/25 6.1 S16N07W090CB 8.0 100% silty sand 2 11 16 0 2 5
5/25 9.0 S15N07W15BCD 7.6 120 1.0 3 22 0 1 3 0
5/25 9.8 S15N07WlODDB 7.6 100% s t1 t and 1 18 2 2 7 1
gravel mtx
5/25 11.7 S15N17W11CCB 8.0 90 2.0 100% silt and 1 35 2 1 7 0 cutback
gravel m1x
5/25 14.3 S15N07W02ABA 7.4 150 2.5 100% s t1 ty sand 0 24 3 2 4 1 cutback
5/25 17.1 S15N07W16CBO 8.1 100% silty sand 0 27 0 0 42 0 cutback
5/25 19.0 S16N07W22BBB 7.4 140 3.0 100% silty sand 0 12 1 3 11 2 gradual slope
5/25 22.0 S16N07W04BilA 7.8 80 2.0 100% sand 0 8 1 5 18 0 gradual slope
5/25 24.3 S17N07W33ABB 9.4 90 1.5 100% silty sand 1 19 2 5 22 2 gradual slope
5/25 27.8 S17N07W13BCA 8.4 70 1.5 100% silty sand 0 18 0 2 12 0
5/25 29.6 S17N06W07CCC 8.5 70 1.5 100% silty sand 0 24 0 4 6 0 gradual slope
5/25 32.0 S17N06W04ABA 8.2 100 2.0 100% silty sand 1 23 0 15 9 0
Table 2-3-5. Continued.
seawning location WaterY Substrate Eulachon Catch ~ General
Date RM !I Geographic Code Temp. Depth Velocity Type Male Female Habitat
Pre-se. Post-Pre-Sj!. Post-Notes
5/25 34.0 S18N06W280CD 10.2 80 98% silty sand 0 23 0 7 12 0 back eddy
2% organic
5/25 36.0 S18N06W22BBB 9.2 70 1.5 100% s 11 t and 1 22 0 14 13 0
gravel mix
5/25 38.2 S18N06WllBDB 9.4 70 1.5 50% sand 5 24 0 10 4 0
50% gravel
5/25 41.6 S 19ti06W25DDB 11.4 80 3.5 100% s11ty sand 3 25 0 2 8 1
5/25 44.0 S19N05W20CBD 10.8 70 3.5 50% sand 0 20 0 4 5 0
50% gravel
5/25 44.9 S19N05W17CCC 10.2 80 2.0 50% sand 3 12 . 0 1 9 1
50% gravel
5/25 47.0 S19N05W04CCA 9.8 60 1.5 50% sand 3 8 0 10 5 0
50% gravel
I 5/25 49.2 S20N06W28AAA 10.0 40 2.0 50% sand 9 40 .0 0 5 0
+:> 50% gravel
""" I 5/26 4.5 S14N07W05AAC 9.0 100% silty sand 58 203 96 10 13 16 gradual slope
5/26 12;0 Sl5N07W11BAB 10.2 80 1.5 100% silty sand 0 29 2 2 4 0 gradua 1 slope
5/26 25.5 S17N07W22CCA 100% sand and. 12 65 95 22 34 50
gravel m1x
5/27 41.5 S19N06W24BCA 9.8 90 3.5 100% silty sand 1 64 14 0 7 2
5/27 41.7 S19N06W25DDC 8.6 110 1.5 100% sand and 0 121 5 1 19 1 cutbank
gravel mb
5/27 50.5 S20N05W22DDA 9.2 90 0.5 100% silty sand 0 37 5 0 4 50
5/28 26.2 S17N07W23DAB 0 13 0 0 34 0
5/29 27.5 S17N07W24BBA 10.0 100% s11ty sand 0 30 5 0 3 0
5/30 25.5 S17N07W22ACA 100% s 11 ty sand 0 81 6 0 43 1 cutbank
5/31 4.5 S14N07W05AAC 10.0 100% silty sand 0 173 130 0 9 13 gradual slope
5/31 6.4 S16N07W09DCB 100% s 11 ty sand 0 41 0 0 31 0
5/31 12.5 S15N07WllACD 8.2 100% s 11 ty sand 0 43 27 0 4 2 cutbank
1/ RM " River Mile
'{I Temperature recorded to nearest 0.1QC, depth to nearest 10cm and surface velocity to nearest 0.5 ft/sec.
!_I Eulachon catch: Pre-= pre-spawners; Sp. = spawners; Post-= post-spawners
I J J J I -··" j J I __ _I .I J ---J l ]
CJ ) -.. ----
'"""
,...,
-
The first migration of eulachon, which passed through the intertidal reach
between May 10 and 17, 1983, initiated spawning in the Susitna River main
channel on or about May 15 and concluded spawning about May 22 (Table 2-3-5).
The second migration, which was intercepted in the intertidal reach from May
19 to June 6, began spawning in the Susitna River main channel on or about
May 23. Spawning was essentially over among second migration fish by June 5.
In 1983 the upper spawning limit of 'first migration eulachon in the Susitna
River main channel was approximately RM 28.5 and among fish of the second
migration, RM 50.5 (Table 2-3-5). The largest concentrations of eulachon in
both migrations were found downstream of RM 28.0 (Yentna River confluence).
Both migrations entered the Yentna River (RM 28), but the extent of
utilization was not determined.
A total of 61 separate eulachon spawning areas were identified in the Susitna
River main channel in 1983. Ten of the spawning areas supported first
migration spawning and 57 of the sites supported spawning by second migration
fish. At least six of the ten areas ~dentified as first migration spawning
areas were also used for spawning by second migration fish. About 70 percent
of all the first and second migration spawning areas located were between RM
12 and 27.
In 1983, the first migration eulachon spawning areas were located in moderate
surface velocity areas near cutbanks where the riverbed composition was
mainly loose sands and gravels. The surface velocity at these sites ranged
from 1.0 to 2.0 ft/sec and averaged 1.5 ft/sec. Depths averaged 130 em and
ranged from 100 to 170 em. Water temperatures ranged from 5.8 to ~.1°C and
averaged 7.3°C.
-45-
The spawning areas for the second migration of eulachon in 1983 were similar
to those i denti fi ed for the first migration. However, avera 11 the second
migration spawners generally spawned in higher velocity areas and showed less
preference toward areas offshore of cutbanks. Surface ve 1 aciti es at the
second migration eulachon spawning areas ranged from 0.5 to 3.5 ft/sec and
averaged 2.0 ft/sec. Depths ranged from 40 to 170 em and averaged 100 em.
The water temperatures ranged from 6.6 to 11.4°C and averaged 8.3°C.
The minor variation in spawning habitat utilization among first migration
eulachon and second migration eulachon in 1983 was probably due in part to
the marked difference in abundance between the two migrations. The second
migration was at least seven times larger than the first migration as
-
-
determined from intertidal set net catches. Space was probably less of a ~
limiting factor for first migration eulachon than for second migration fish.
Since the majority of all spawning sites used by first migration spawners
were utilized by second migration spawners, crowding most likely forced
second migration fish to utilize less preferred spawning habitats or die
prior to spawning (Plate 2-3-2).
In addition to the suspected utilization of less preferred spawning habitat
by second migration eulachon in 1983, observations made at one location
indicate that second migration eulachon into the Susitna River experienced
crowding to levels that induced mortality. On May 24, 1983, one day
following the peak catch of second migration fish in the intertidal reach,
-
-
-
hundreds of thousands (visual estimate) of eulachon were migrating along the -
banks of the Susitna River between RM 12.5 and 24.3. At the same time,
-46-
-
....
Plate 2-3-2. Dead and dying pre-spawning eulachon, mainly females, at RM 17
on May 24, 1983.
eulachon were spawning between RM 17.2 and 18.2. The spawning fish were
noticeably thin, had dull coloration, and fin erosion typical of spawning
condition fish. By contrast, nearly all of the second migration eulachon
around and below RM 17.1 were in pre-sp_awning condition with bright
coloration and no recognized fin erosion. These fish were crowded near shore
to the extent that the fish near the surface were half out of the water and
rolling over on their sides (Plate 2-3-3). The adjacent banks to this
location (RM 17.1) were littered with dead, unspawned eulachon in depths up
to four feet (Plate 2-3-4). The majority (80%) of these were female
-47-
Plate 2-3-3. Thousands of stressed, pre-spawning condition eulachon dying
at RM 17, May 24, 1983.
Plate 2-3-4. Dead unspawned eulachon in the Susitna River at RM 17.1, 1983.
-48-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I"""
l
"""
I
I
r
carcasses. Comparatively, where spawning was occurring between RM 17.2 and
18.2, approximately 80 percent of the fish were live, spawning males.
To understand what may have caused this mortality at RM 17.1 it is necessary
to define the general migration movement of eulachon in the Susitna River.
Eulachon enter the intertidal reach in schools. Once through the intertidal,
the eulachon schools migrate upstream along the near shore zone where there
is direct flow. When eulachon encounter inshore areas that are placid, they
move offshore with the current. The preference of eulachon schools to follow
near shore currents is apparently strong. On several occasions the crew,
when sampling, moored their 20 ft. boat semi-perpendicular to the shore.
Moored in this manner the boat acted as a partial migrational block. The
eulachon that first reached the boat were literally pushed by fish from
be 1 ow, to the extent many were forced up on the shore to die. A possi b 1 e
scenario that may have resulted in the mass mortality at RM 17.1 is that an
advancing eu 1 achon schoo 1 ( s) of pre-spawners ( i nmi grants) approached
threshold density or an aggregation of eulachon which were not moving
upstream but were spawning. This encounter may have provided a stimulus that
caused the inmigrating fish at the head of the school to stop or slow their
upstream migration. The inmigrating fish from below, having not received
this stimulus, continued moving upstream which lead to crowding to where
individual fish were literally pushed on shore or to the surface where from
oxygen deficiency and stress ,associated with trying to regain entry to the
water, they died. Once the process started, a chain reaction followed until
the schooling behavior was lost by reduction to recruitment from below.
-49-
In 1983 the male to female eulachon ratios differed between spawning
development stages (Table 2-3-6). Unweighted catch samples collected in the
main channel of first migration fish showed average male to female ratios for
pre-spawners at 1.2:1, spawners at 18.9:1 and post-spawners at 15.6:1. In
the second migration, pre-spawner ratios averaged 0. 6:1, spawners 4. 7: 1 and
post-spawners 3.4: 1. The changes in sex ratios are due to differences in
length of spawning time between sexes, that is individual males ripen earlier
and remain in the river longer than individual females.
Table 2-3-6. Summarization of eulachon sex composition samples collected in
1983 by dip netting and electroshocking between Susitna River
mile 4.5 and 60.0.
Development
Stage
Pre-Spawners
Spawners
Post-Spawners
First Migration !I
Sample Size M:F
Males Females Ratio
316
1320
249
253
70
16
1. 2: 1
18.9:1
15.6:1
Second Migration £I
Sample Size M:F
Males Females Ratio
1341
3730
1388
2084 0.6:1
788 4.7:1
403 3.4:1
11 First migration samples collected from 5110-17 for pre-spawners,
5110-22 for spawners and 5110-23 for post-spawners.
~I Second migration samples collected from 5118-6t6 for pre-spawners,
5123-616 for spawners and 5124-616 for post-spawners.
-50-
-
-
-'
-
-
-
-l
-
"""!
'
r
-
-
-
-
-
-
Variations in second migration eulachon sex ratios between spawning
development stages are further illustrated through Figure 2-3-3. The sex
compositi ·n of 1,956 second migration fish between RM 12.1 and 25.1 on May
24, 1983 indicates that overall, male eulachon were less abundant than
females by a ratio of 0.8:1. Above and below RM 17.1 where the previously
referenced mortality was noted, more females were in pre-spawning condition
than males, more males were in spawning condition than females and lastly,
more females were in post-spawning condition than male eulachon. While the
overall male to female ratio between RM 12.1 and 25.1 was 0.8:1, the
subsample ratios above RM 17.1 averaged 2.3:1 and bela~ RM 17.1 averaged
0.4:1. Differential male and female migration rates, spawning time, sexual
development and mortality are probable causes for the observed differences in
sex ratios.
In 1983, a total of 267 first and second migration eulachon were aged from
samples taken between RM 4.5 and 60. This information is summarized in Table
2-3-7 along with corresponding length, weight and sex data. The data in
Table 2-3-7 were not weighted by CPUE due to variations in sampling intensity
and collection sites. Three year old eulachon comprised the majority of both
migrations and two and four year old eulachon were present in both
migrations. Three year old fish accounted for 90.4 percent of the males and
95.5 percent of the females sampled in the first migration, and 83.3 percent
'bf the males and 91.4 percent of the females in the second migration samples.
As indicated in Table 2-3-7, there were no notable differences in the
unweighted length and weight data between the samples of first and second
migration fish.
-51-
A
B 2.1:1--~
C
A-
B 6.0: I
C 0.6: I
A 0.1 : I
B 5.9: I
C 0.3: I
- - R M 17.1 - - -
~oCOMPOSITlON n = 1100
Below RM 17.1
0.0: I
9.2: I
1.0: I
males females
Pre-spawners
Spawners
Post-spawners
EULACHON
A-Pre-spawning
B-Spawnino
C-Post-spawnino
5.00J'o
21.4%
0. 2°/o
%COMPOSITION n = 856
Above RM 17.1
Pre-spawners
Spawners
Post-spawners
males
4.0%
63.2°/o
2. I OJ'o
females
14.0°/o
13-1%
3.6%
I.~ : I
3.8 : I
I. 7: I
0.~: I
6.6: I
--RM17.1
A 0.1: I
\~--B 1.1: I
c
A 0.1 :I
!\.:.--B 0.9: I
C 0.5: I
A 0. I : I
B 0.2: I
c--
A 0.1 :I .....,!;,0--B I. I : I
C 0.5: I
Figure 2-3-3. Male to female sex ratios of eulachon sampled between RM 12.1
and 25.1 on May 24, 1983.
-52-
-
....
'
-
~ I
-
-
-
-
-
I
01 w
I
] .. 1
Table 2-3-7. Length and weight of pre-spawning condition eulachon segregated by age and sex from samples
collected in 1983 in the Susitna River intertidal and main channel.
length (mm) Weight (g)
Age Sex Migration n Range X 95% c. I. !/ Median n Range X 95% c. I. !/
2 M 1st 4 191-216 199 ---195 4 50.6-68.8 57.1 ---
3 M 1st 57 178-229 210 208-212 210 57 39.4-86.0 67.1 64.7-69.6
4 M 1st 2 200-222 211 ---211 2 59.4-78.7 69.1 ---
2 F 1st 2 188-195 192 ---192 2 53.0-54.3 53.7 ---
3 F 1st 43 180-222 202 199-205 202 43 42.3-76.6 59.7 57.1-62.2
4 F 1st 0 --------. 0 -----
2 M 2nd 4 182-208 198 ---201 4 44.2-65.1 55.7 ---
3 M 2nd 65 187-228 209 207-211 210 65 44.3-84.3 68.1 66.1-70.1
4 M 2nd 9 213-231 221 ---219 9 66.9-93.5 79.8 --~
2 F 2nd 4 179-193 185 ---183 4 40.4-48.0 43.8 ---
3 F 2nd 74 176-221 203 201-205 203 74 45.3-77.3 60.7 59.1-62.3
4 F 2nd 3 199-212 205 ---203 3 60.2-71.1 64.0 ---
All ?:_/ All All 308 176-231 206 205-207 206 308 39.4-93.5 64.2 63.2-65.3
!/ Confidence Interval
?:.1 Composite of all aged and non-aged eulachon
l
Median
54.5
67.1
69.1
53.7
59.2 -
56.8
68.5
79.3
43.4
60.1
60.6
64.4
No empirical estimate of the total 1983 escapement of first and second
migration eulachon is available for the Susitna River. General observations
of eulachon densities, particularity associated with the second migration,
indicate that the Susitna River in 1983 supported an escapement ranging in
the millions of fish.
In 1983, only a minor amount of sport fishing effort occurred in the Susitna
River for eulachon. In the thirty days of sampling operations, two parties
of fishennen were observed dip netting eulachon on the Susitna River main
channel. Overal1, the total sport fish catch of eulachon below RM 28 in 1983
was probably in the range of 500 to 2,000 fish.
3.2 Adult Salmon
The estimated escapements of Pacific salmon into the Susitna River basin
for 1983 with exception of chinook salmon are reported in Table 2-3-8. These
Table 2-3-8. Minimum Susitna River salmon escapements of sockeye, pink,
chum and coho salmon in 1983.
Year
1983
~I
Escapement Estimates l/
Sockeye ?/ Pink Chum Coho Tot a 1
175,900 101,200 276,600 24,100 577,800
Defined as the summation of the Yentna River escapement obtained by side
scan sonar at Yentna Station and the Susitna River escapement obtained
by tag/recapture population estimates at Sunshine Station. These
estimates do not include escapements to Susitna River tributaries below
RM 80 excluding the Yentna River (RM 28).
Sockeye salmon escapement estimates do not include first run sockeye
sa1mon.
-54-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
....
-
.....
estimates should be considered conservative as they do not account for salmon
escapements to systems downstream of RM 80 except into the Yentna River
( RM 28). Mini mum sa 1 men escapements for the Sus itna River reach ab0ve RM 80
are quantified in sections 3.2.1.1 and 3.2.1.2.1 of this report.
Specific results of the 1983 salmon escapement work follow by order of
species and river reach. The order of presentation of salmon species are:
chinook, sockeye, pink, chum and coho salmon .. The river reach divisions are:
(1) from the intertidal (RM 0.0) to Talkeetna (RM 98.6); and (2) from
Ta 1 keetna to Upper Devil .Canyon ( RM 161.0).
3.2.1 Chinook Salmon
3.2.1.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna
3.2.1.1.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
In 1983, chinook salmon entering the Yentna River (RM 28) were monitored by
SSS counters and fishwheels at Yentna Station (TRM 04) beginning June 30
{Appendix 2-C and 2·0). Most of the chinook salmon escapement was already
past Yentna Station by this date (ADF&G, 1982). Therefore, total escapement
was not quantified .
At Sunshine Station (RM 80), on the Susitna River, chinook salmon were
monitored in total. The 1983 escapement was an esQtimated 90,100 fish (Tab1es
2-3-9 and 2-3-10). This estimate includes: (1) 45,200 fish larger than 350
mm in length and 1,700 fish smaller than this (3.6%~350 mm) which migrated
along the east side of the river; and (2) 41,000 fish larger than 350 mm in
length and 2,200 fish smaller than this (5.1%~350 mm) which migrated along
the west side of the Susitna River at RM 80 (Tabl~s 2-3-9 and 2-3-10).
·55·
Table 2-3-9. Escapement of chinook salmon 350 mm or less in length in 1983
at Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Chinook Salmon Escapement ~ 350 rnrn
Sunshine Station Talkeetna Curry
East Bank West Bank Total Station Station
1,664 2,209 3,873 2,692 477
Two sub-estimates of the (1983) chinook salmon escapement to Sunshine Station
(RM 80) were computed because of differences in tagged to untagged ratios.
The surveys performed on the east side of the Susitna River between RM 80 and
98.6 and the upper Susitna River drainage above RM 98.6 revealed an overall
ratio of tagged to untagged chinook salmon spawners of 1:15.3. Tag recovery
surveys on the west side of the Susitna River of west side entering
,....,
I
-I
"""'i
-
-
tributaries between RM 80 and 98.6, provided tagged to untagged ratios ~
averaging 1:136.3. These ratios indicate: (1) the chinook salmon escapement
to RM 80 was segregated with the Chulitna River stocks (RM 98.5) mainly
migrating along the west side of the river at RM 80, and the east side
tributaries and Susitna River stocks above RM 98.6 mainly migrating along the
east river bank at RM 80; and (2) the chinook salmon escapement to RM 80 was
not sampled equally on the east and west sides of the river even though
fishing effort was identical with two fishwheels operated on each side. Based ~
on this, it was decided that east and west bank migrating fish should be
treated independently as two separate populations in estimating the total
chinook salmon escapement to RM 80. In accomplishing this the tagged chinook
salmon release data generated on the east side of the Susitna River at RM 80
-56-
-
-
-
-
.....
-
was combined with tag recovery survey data collected from east side spawning
areas to compute an east side escapement estimate. The west side escapement
was computed in the same manner using west side tag release and tag recovery
data.
Table 2-3-10. Petersen population estimates with associated 95% confidence
intervals for 1983 chinook salmon escapements to Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Population Estimate Location Y
Parameter 11 Sunshine Station Talkeetna Curry
East Bank West Bank Total y Station Station
m
c
r
" N
95% c. I.
2,777
3,770
231
45,154
40,149-
308
5,178
38
41,034
30,081-
3,085 650 792
8,948 1,290 275
269 71 23
86,188 11,673 9,120
70,230-9,533- 6,148-
51,585 57,565 109,150 15,051 14,212
11 ni = Number of fish marked (adjusted).
c =Total number of fish examined for marks during sampling census.
r = Total number of marked fish observed during sampling census.
/\ N = Population estimate. . /\ C.I. = Confidence 1nterval around N.
Y Chinook salmon escapements do not include fish 350 mm and less in
length (FLL
~ All totals are a summation of east and west bank values and do not
represent calculated population estimates.
-57-
Fishwheel catches at Yentna Station {TRM 04) indicate that the 1983 migration
of chinook salmon into the Yentna River (RM 28) began before June 30 and
ended in the first week of August {Appendix Table 2-D-3 and Figure 2-3-4).
Additionally, there was no strong migrational preference for chinook salmon
movement along either bank at this site after June 30. The north bank Yentna
Station fishwheel intercepted 57.5 percent and the south bank fishwheel
captured 42.5 percent of the station catch {Appendix Tables 2-D-1 and 2-D-2).
The overall timing of the 1983 chinook salmon migration at Sunshine Station
{RM 80) can be determined from the total catch of 3,832 fish in the four
fishwheels operated at this location between June 3 and September 11 (Table
2-3-11 and Figure 2-3-4). The migration essentially covered a 31 day period
which began on June 9, reached a midpoint on June 18 and ended on July 9.
The peak migration occurred on June 14. The average fi shwhee 1 catch on this
date was about 3.7 chinook salmon per hour. A plot of the daily east and
west bank fishwheel catches at Sunshine Station indicate that the majority of
the escapement traveled along the east side of the river with 90.3 percent of
the total station catch being caught in the east bank fishwheels (Appendix
2-D). The results from tag recovery surveys performed upstream of RM 80 on
the east and west sides of the river indicated the difference in interception
ratios between the east and west bank fishwheels was primarily related to
fishwheel efficiency: the east bank fishwheels caught in the range of six
-
-
-
-
.....
-
-
percent of the escapement on the east side of the river "nd the west bank "'""'1
fishwheels intercepted about one percent of the west bank escapement. -
-58-
-0.16 tee .------....,...,-------./'"
/' I YENTNA STATION 80
Q) 0.12 t) Nort.h Bank ~ Q) /\ Sout.h Bank --
..£. SIIIOot.hed by a +2b+c Q) 3 I \ 4
......... l I CUIIIU I at. 1 ve x---60 > \
L I
J 0.08 I ~ -" I 0 0 'I I
::r::::
, ~ I
I 40 J ......... I
..£. ! I E
fiJ J
0.04 I u
LL.. !I 20
I
e.era ra
23 ~0 7 14 21 28 -4 II 18 2!5 8
I-JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT.--J· -5 ......------------tara
~ -/ SUNSHINE STATION I East Bank
4 / West. Bank ----··---80
Q) Smootned by a+ 2b+c
Fllftll Q) 4 ~
..£. I Cumu I at. i ve r.---CD 3
......... 3 60 >
L I ~ J 0 0 I I 2 40 J ......... -..£. I E
(I) J
L
u
LL.. 20
f\ " \ \ .....
ra ~, ra
8 16 22 29 6 13 20 27 ~ Ul 17. 2 .. 8 1!5
I• JUNE JULY AUG. SE PT.---1
Doi:.e
-Figure 2-3-4. Mean hourly and cumulative per.cent fishwheel catch of chinook
sa 1 mon by two day periods at Yentna and Sunshine stations in
1983.
-59-
Table 2-3-11. Surranary of 1983 fishwheel catches by species and sampling
locations.
Catch
Sampling River
Location Mile Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum
·ventna
Station 04 87 4,648 4,489 775
Sunshine
Coho
574
Station 80 3,832 8,147 3,085 17,600 2,254
Talkeetna
Station 103 1,030 536 2,213 2,467 422
Curry
Station 120 1,064 201 589 861 93
The results of sampling chinook salmon for age at Yentna River (RM 28) and
Sunshine Station (RM 80) are summarized in Table 2-3-12 and Figure 2-3-5. An
insufficient number of samples were collected at Yentna Station (TRM 04) to
define other than that the escapement inc 1 uded fish ranging from three to
seven years old. At Sunshine Station 1,307 legible scales indicate the
escapement was about 85 percent five and six year old fish (Figure 2-3-5).
The balance of the escapement sample was comprised of fish seven, four and
three years old in order of abundance. Nearly all the adults sampled from
Sunshine Station were fish that had gone to sea (smelted) in their second
year of life (Table 2-3-13).
Length composition data collected from fishwheel caught chinook salmon at
Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations in 1983 is summarized in
Table 2-3-12. A near linear correlation exists between the age and length of
-60-
-
-;
....
-
-I.
-
I
0'1 ......
I
] 1 ]
Table 2-3-12. Analysis of chinook salmon lengths, in millimeters, by age class from escapement samples
collected at Yentna, Sunshine. Talkeetna and Curry stations in 1983.
Co11 ection Age n Range limits He an 95% Conf. Interval Y Hedhn
Site Class "y Fy ., F H F 11 F H
Ventna 32 5 -286-367 -323 ---325
Station 42 1 1 442 524 442 524 --442
52 -2 -542-785 -664 ---
62 2 2 825-845 750-872 835 811 --835
72 1 1 940 945 940 945 --940
Ally 58 25 286-940 436-985 530 741 470-591 680-802 399
83 286-985 594 544-644 590
Sunshine 32 19 -325-410 -373 -363-382 -370
Station 42 41 10 3fi0-720 445-690 522 548 495-548 494-604 515
51 1 -635 -635 ---635
52 338 170 420-1015 455-1100 631 670 620-642 649-692 610
62 238 352 550-1200 505-1250 879 873 861-896 862-883 900
72 46 92 710-1250 715-1040 993 927 963-1022 915-940 1000
Ally 936 810 325-1250 430-1250 714 815 702-726 805-826 655
1746 325-1250 761 752-769 790
Talkeetna 31 9 -300-400 -343 ---340
Stat; on 32 140 -290-430 -346 -342-349 -350
41 1 -430 -430 ---430
42 56 5 330-680 460-530 492 494 464-520 -515
51 5 2 530-720 590-730 616 660 --620
52 178 41 460-860 500-840 616 623 605-628 597-650 610
62 60 126 680-1100 630-1000 854 840 828-879 828-853 840
72 9 32 870-1040 830-1050 956 927 -904-949 960
All ~/ 634 268 290-1100 460-1050 555 795 541-570 779-811 560
902 290-1100 626 613-640 620
F
-
524
664
811
945
779
-
555
-
630
890
923
870
-
-
-
490
61)0
600
840
915
820
I
0'1
N
I
I
Table 2-3-12. Continued.
Collection
Site
Curry
Station
tla 1 es
Females
Age
Class
31
32
42
52
62
72 All~
H!/
2
65
27
158
129
31
535
n
907
Confidence Interval of the Hean.
F !/
-
-
1
16
180
103
372
!I
'!I
'}_/
!I CompQsite of all aged and non-aged samples.
Range ltmtts
·~ F
280-345 -
300-400 -
360-680 510
460-810 600-790
530-1100 700-970
840-1140 800-1070
280-1140 510-1070
280-1140
j
~tean
·~ F
313 -
346 -
499 510
627 675
845 841
1001 924
665 e5s
743
I
95~ Conf. Interval Y
., F
--
340-352 -
463-529 -
617-637 643-707
fl29-861 834-849
977-1025 916-932
645-683 847-864
731-756
tl
313
345
500
630
840
1000
650
lied ian
F
-
-
510
670
840
930
860
800
,--~
'
I m w
I
1--z w u
(k: w a..
.. a
28
fJ
3 .. 5 6 7
AGE
YENTNA STATION
n • 16
Figure 2-3-5.
1
t:
t-z w u .. a
0:!: w a..
28
" 3 4 5 8 7
AGE
SUNSHINE STATION
n • 1307
Age composition of fishwheel
and Curry stations in 1983.
···~ ]
ea ea
t-.,_
z z w ""' w u u .. a
eJ f5 a.. a..
za 2a
0 0
3 .. 6 6 7 3 .. 6 6 7
AGE AGE
TALKEETNA CURRY STATION STATION
n • 664 n • 712
t::J fEMALES
t::::?J MALES
intercepted chinook salmon at Ventna, Sunshine, Talkeetna
Table 2-3-13. Analysis of chinook salmon age data by percent from 1983
escapement samples call ected at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna
and Curry stations.
Collection Site n
Yentna Station
Sunshine Station
Talkeetna Station
Curry Station
15
1307
664 i.4
712 0.3
ll Gilbert-Rich Notation
33.3
1.5
21.1 0.2
9.1
Age Class 1/
13.3
3.9 0.1
9.2 1.1
3.9
13.3
38.9
32.9
24.4
26.7 13.3
45.0 10.6
27.9 6.2
43.5 18.8
the chinook salmon sampled at Sunshine Station as illustrated in Figure
2-3-6. Sex composition sampling at this station established that males were
more numerous than females among the three and four year old fish, and
females were more numerous than males among fish five, six and seven years
old (Table 2-3-14).
3.2.1.2 Talkeetna To Upper Devil Canyon
3.2.1.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
The 1983 escapement of chinook salmon at Talkeetna Station (RM 103) was an
estimated 14,400 fish. Represented in this estimate are 11,700 chinook
-
-
-
....
-
-
-
salmon larger than 350 mm in length and 2,700 fish smaller than thi: length -
(18.6% 350 mm) (Tables 2-3-9 and 2-3-10).
The 1983 chinook salmon escapement at Curry Station (RM 80) was an estimated
9,600 fish or about 4,800 fish less than the estimate for Talkeetna Station
(RM 103) (Tables 2-3-9 and 2-3-10). About 9,100 of the 9,600 chinook salmon
-64-
-
> 0 c
(])
J
~
(])
'-LL.
> 0 c
a)
J
0" 4 w
'-LL.
4eB 6Be See 100e
Length Cmm)
YENTNA
n = 83
i = 594
1200
t----"'i4':;+...._·=: ------11 AGE 7
:·'·'· 1-------~,,,,~,. -------1 AGE 6
t-----f! ..... ,,---------1 AGE 5
:~;;!'' I AGE 4
I .f( I AGE 3
SUNSHINE
n = 1744
i= 761
6Be see teee
Length (mm)
t---t ranoe
El 95% conf. interval
• mean
1200
Figure 2-3-6. Length frequency distribution of chinook salmon at Yentna
Station in 1983 and length and age distribution of chinook
salmon at Sunshine Station in 1983.
Table 2-3-14. Sex ratios of male and female chinook salmon by age from 1983
escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna
and Curry stations •
. Sample Number Sex
Collection Site Age Size Males Females Ratio
{M: F)
Yentna Station 3 5 5 0
4 2 1 1 1. 0.1
5 2 0 2
6 4 2 2 1. 0:1
7 2 1 1 1. 0:1
All y 83 58 25 2.3:1
Sunshine Station 3 19 19 0
4 51 41 10 4.1:1
5 509 339 170 2.0:1
6 590 238 352 0.7:1
7 138 46 92 0.5:1
All y 1746 936 810 1. 2:1
Talkeetna Station 3 149 149 a
4 62 57 5 11.4:1
5 226 183 43 4.3:1
6 186 60 126-0.5:1
7 41 9 32 0.3:1
All y 902 634 268 2.4:1
Curry Station 3 67 67 0
4 28 27 1 27.0:i
5 174 158 16 9.9:1
6 309 129 180 0.7:1
7 134 31 103 0.3:1
All y 907 535 372 1. 4: 1
y Includes all aged and non-aged samples.
-66-
-
~
""''
-
"'"'1
-
-' '
,
' I
-,
' I
!
..,
i
...,
-
.....
I
....
-
escapement estimate to Curry Station were fish larger than 350 mm in length.
The balance of the estimate were fish smaller than this length
(5. 2% $ 350 mm).
About 19 percent of the estimated chinook salmon escapement to Talkeetna
Station (RM 103) were jacks ( ~ 350 mm}. At Curry Station (RM 120) the
escapement was about five percent jacks (Tables 2-3-9 and 2-3-10). The
relatively high percentage of jacks at Talkeetna Station as compared to Curry
Station may be due to: (1) general selectivity of fishwheels toward smaller
fish and (2) less milling activity in the lower Susitna River reach by adult
chinook salmon (> 350 mm} than by jack salmon. The fishwheels operated at
Talkeetna and Curry stations likely caught an artificially high percentage of
the jack chinook salmon population due to the near shore placement of the
fishwheels. It is reported that adult chinook salmon tend to migrate further
offshore, favoring higher water velocities, than jack chinook salmon (Meehan,
1961). The Curry Station fishwheels were probably less selective toward
jacks than the Talkeetna Station fishwheels due to differences in inshore
velocities. At Curry Station water velocities were generally higher near
shore than at Talkeetna Station. Because of higher near shore velocities at
Curry Station adu1t chinook salmon were likely more abundant in the inshore
area here than at Talkeetna Station and this is evident in the fishwheel
catches (Table 2-3-11}. At Talkeetna Station the four fishwheels caught
1,030 chinook salmon. Upstream at Curry Station, the two fishwheels
surpassed this with a catch of 1,064 chinook salmon. Whether differential
milling activity occurred between adult and jack chinook salmon in the area
of Talkeetna Station is unknown. We know that tagged adult chinook salmon
generally mill less the farther they ascend the Susitna River main channel as
-67-
will be later addressed in this report, but we have no information. to
determine this for jacks as they were not tagged at either station in 1983.
-
In 1984 we intend to independently mark the jacks and adults caught at -
Sunshine (RM 80), Talkeetna {RM 103) and Curry {RM 120) stations and monitor
the recoveries upstream. This information will permit an evaluation of the
milling activity by jacks and adults and also fishwheel selectivity.
Migration timings of the 1983 chinook salmon escapements to Talkeetna
(RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations have been determined by interpretation
of fishwheel catches {Figure 2-3-7). At Talkeetna Station, the migration
began on June 18, reached a midpoint on June 28 and ended on July 21. The
migration peaked on June 22 at an average catch rate of 0.8 fish per
fi shwheel hour. Seventeen miles up river at Curry. Station, the chi nook
migration began on June 18, reached a midpoint on June 25 and ended on
July 13. The highest daily catch rate at this site occurred on June 23 with
1.9 fish per fishwheel hour being recorded (Appendix 2-0).
In 1983, the majority of the chinook escapement migrated along the east bank
of the Susitna River at both Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations.
About 55 percent of the total 1,030 chinook salmon fishwheel catch at
Talkeetna Station and 55 percent of the total 1,064 fishwheel catch at Curry
Station were made by east bank fishwheels at these locations (Appendix
Tables 2-0-9 and 2-D-12). Inseason catch rates held relatively constant
between the east and west bank fishwheels at both locations as indicated in
Figure 2-3-7.
-68--
"'"'
Q)
Q) .... ..c.
3
........
L .... J
0
J:
........ ..c.·
!"""' Cl)
lL..
....
'
Q)
Q)
..c.
3 -........
~
J
0
I -........
-' IJ)
""" LL..
0.60 _,..,..----------------100
/"' .
, .. / TALKEETNA STATION I I / I I East Bank 80 I I I West Sank ----------0.45 I I
I I Smoothed by a+2b+c I ' I I 4 I I Cu~nulative %---I t 60 I X, I
I
0.30 I I \ I I. t-
I
I 40 I
I I I
I
! I B. IS
ll I 20
a·.aa //
0
a IS 22 Zl 6 IS 20. ~ 3 18 IT 24 31 7 14 21
I• JUNE JULY AUG. •1• SEPT.--.j
2.0
/ -------------100
/ CLIRRY STATION
1 • 6 I East Bank 80
West Bank --------
I S~noot.ned by a+2b+e
4
1.2 Cu~nu I at i ve " ---se
ra.8 40
0.4 20
8 15 22 29 6 13 20 27 3 UJ 17 24 31 7 14 21
~ J UN E ---~-+--J U L Y --~----AU G.
Dot.e
Figure 2-3-7. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch of chinook
salmon by two day periods at Talkeetna and Curry stations in
1983.
-69-
~
Q)
>
.-J
0
J
·E
J u
~
Q)
>
.....,
0
J
E
J u
A comparison of the migration rates of fish tagged and released at Sunshine
Station (RM 80) and later recaptured at Talkeetna {RM 103) and Curry (RM 120)
stations indicates that adult chinook salmon traveled at a faster speed or
spent less time milling in 1983 the further they traveled upstream (Figure
2-3-8). Chinook salmon released at Sunshine Station averaged a 1.8 miles per
hour (mph) travel speed to Talkeetna Station (23 miles) and an overall speed
of 3.0 mph to Curry Station {40 miles).
The results of age samples collected in 1983 from 664 and 712 chinook salmon
caught in fishwheels at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations are
summarized in Table 2-3-13. Approximately 62 percent of the escapement
sampled from Talkeetna Station were five and six year old fish. The balance
of the sample was comprised of fish three, four and seven years old in
respective order. About 97 percent of the escapement sample from Talkeetna
Station were fish that had gone to sea (smelted) in their second year of
life. The remainder of the sample had gone to sea in their first year of
life. At Curry Station five and six year old fish represented 68 percent of
the escapement sample with the remaining 32 percent represented by fish
seven, three and four years old in order of contribution. Nearly all (97.7%)
of the escapement sampled for age from Curry Station were fish that had gone
to sea in their second year of life.
Length composition data of chinook salmon sampled at Ta'~eetna (RM 103) and
Curry (RM 120) stations in 1983 are presented in Table 2-3-12 and Figure
2-3-9.
-70-
-
-
-
~-
a
--....j
B-'
0
... J
20 SUNSHINE TO TALKEETNA
n = 73 (23 miles)
i = 13.1
::... 15 Range= 2-28
()
c: • !:1 10 0" • ...
LL
~ 5
0
0 15 30
(a) Number of Days Between Capture 1
20
>-!5 ()
c • :J
0"
! 10
lL.
!:!! 0 5
0
. 1 l
20 TALKEETNA TO CURRY
n =50 (17 miles)
i= 6.4
t-15 Range: 1-26
c: • :J
0' • 10 ....
lL.
~
5
0 15 30
(b) Number of Days Between Captures
SUNSHINE TO CURRY
n = 39 (40 miles)
i = !3.4
Range= 3-30
15 30
(c) Number of Days Between Captures
Figure 2;..3-8. Migrational rates of chinook salmon between (a) Sunshine and Talkeetna stations,
(b) Talkeetna and Curry stations and (c) Sunshine and Curry stations, 1983.
l
>
0 c
Q)
:l
0"
Q)
t..
!J...
>
0 c
Q)
J r:r ...
Q)
L
lJ...
Jo """l. 4 AGE 3 TALKEETNA
n=901
x=626
~o----;,;p-.;~:-----ll AGE 5
t-----i!iJiili:r;::·;.._----11 AGE 6
J--...;:aJJl!....._---11 AGE 7
899 899 1009
Length (mm)
r--; range
ED 95%conf. interval
• mean
1200
.,_~•~'-... .._.;_· ----11 AGE 7
t------~'f-; ------11 AGE 6
AGE 5 1-l ----4:·'"""· --......!
'--..oi.~'-:: .....11 AGE 3
490 e0a sea 1000
Length (mm)
CURRY
n =907
i =743
I--f range
liE] 95% con f. interval
• mean
1200
Figure 2-3-9. Length frequency distribution of chinook salmon sampled for
age at Talkeetna and Curry stations in 1983.
-72-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
r
-
Sex composition data collected at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120)
stations in 1983 are presented in Table 2-3-14. Overall male to female
ratios were 2.1:1 and 1.4:1 respectively for samples collected at Talkeetna
and Curry stations. At both stations there were more females among the six
and seven year old fish than males. Among the three, four and five year old
fish males were more numerous than females.
3.2.1.2.2 Spawning Ground Surveys
3.2.1.2.2.1 Main Channel
In 1983, there was no specific sampling for chinook salmon spawning in the
Susitna River main channel. General observations in 1983 by the crews
assigned to main channel stations at RM 80, 103 and 120 and at Gold Creek
(RM 136. 7) provided no evidence that chinook salmon spawned in the Susitna
River main channel.
3.2.1.2.2.2 Sloughs and Streams
A total of 35 sloughs between RM 98.6 and 161.0 were routinely surveyed for
salmon escapements between July 25 and October 11, 1983. Twenty streams were
likewise surveyed in this reach between July 15 and October 8, 1983.
The results of the sloughs surveyed above RM 98.6 indicate chinook salmon did
not use these habitats in 1983 for spawning or milling. A single chinook
salmon carcass was found in Slough 15 (RM 137.2) on July 25, 1983.
Considering the close proximity of Slough 15 to Indian River (RM 138.6) it is
likely this carcass was washed out from Indian River.
-73-
In 1983 chinook salmon were found in 11 streams above RM 98.6 (Table 2-3-15).
A total of 4,432 chinook salmon were enumerated in the peak survey counts of
these streams. The majority (97.8%) of these counts were recorded at Indian
River (RM 138.6) and Portage Creek (RM 148.9). The remaining nine streams
accounted for 2.2 percent of the total peak count (Table 2-3-15).
Table 2-3-15. Chinook salmon peak 1983 escapement counts for streams above
RM 98.6 in order of contribution.
River Number Counted Percent
Stream Mile Date Live Dead Total Contribution -
Portage Creek 148.9 7/25 3,123 17 3,140 70.8
Indian Rfver 138.6 7/25 1,172 21 1,193 26.9
Cheechako Creek 152.5 8/1 25 0 25 0.6
Gold Creek 136.7 7/24 19 4 23 0.5
Chase Creek 106.9 8/11 8 7 15 0.3
Lane Creek 113.6 8/2 10 2 12 0.3
Chinook Creek 156.8 8/1 8 0 8 0.2
Whiskers Creek 101.4 8/4 3 0 3 0.1
4th of July Creek 131.0 8/2 4 2 6 0.1
Jack Long Creek 144.5 8/1 3 3 6 0.1
Devil Creek 161.0 8/1-2 1 0 1 < 0.1
TOTAL 4,376 56 4,432 100.0
A peak survey count of chinook salmon probably represents less than about 52
percent of the tot a 1 escapement (Neil sen and Geen, 1981). The total peak
survey count in 1983 of 4,432 fish to 11 streams above RM 98.6 therefore
-74-
-
-
~
"""
~
~
-
-
.....
-
-
-
-
probably represents an escapement in the range of 8,500 fish. Inasmuch as
there has been no record of chinook salmon spawning in the main channel of
the Sus"'tna River above RM 98.6 and there was a complete survey of all
suspected and known salmon spawning tributaries above RM 98.6 in 1983, it is
reasonable to assume that the 14,500 (1983) escapement estimate for Talkeetna
Station (RM 103) represents a combination of both milling fish that reached
RM 103 but spawned below RM 103 and fish which migrated past RM 103 to
upstream spawning areas. Salmon ascending a river beyond _their final
spawning designation has been reported in several Susitna River studies.
Barrett (1974) reported that a portion of the adult salmon escapement that
reached RM 103 in 1974 spawned in downstream spawning areas. Radio telemetry
observations of four chinook salmon released at RM 103 in 1981 revealed that
three of the four fish spawned above RM 103 and the remaining fish spawned
below this location (AOF&G, 1981). In 1982, five of seven radio tagged
chinook salmon released at RM 103 spawned in tributaries below RM 103,
including the Talkeetna River (RM 97.1) (ADF&G, 1982). In 1983, chinook
salmon tag recovery surveys conducted in tributaries of the Talkeetna and
Chulitna rivers (RM 98.5) further substantiate that a portion of the 1983
escapement to RM 103 descended to downstream spawning areas (Appendix
Table 2-G-4).
3.2.1.3 Escapement Index Surveys
In 1983, escapement surveys were conducted at 19 of 26 designated chi nook
salmon spawning index streams in the Susitna River drainage (Figure 2-3-10
and Table 2-3-16). The results indicate that escapements in 11 of the 19
index streams in 1983 were higher than the previous seven year average and
-75-
•••••
1 • ALEXANDER CREEK 10.
2. TALACHULITNA R. 11 •
3. QUARTZ CREEK 12.
4. CANYON CREEK 13. s. RED CREEK 1fl..
6. LAKE CREEK 15.
7. PETERS CREEK 16.
8. DESHKA RIVER 17.
9. BUNCO CREEK 18.
CHULITNA MIDDLE FORK 19.
CHULITNA EAST FORK zo.
CHULITNA RIVER 21.
HONOLULU CREEK 22.
PORTACE CREEK 23.
INDIAN RIVER 24.
BYERS CREEK 25.
TROUBLESOME CREEK 26. LANE CREEK
CLEAR CREEK
PRAIRIE CREEK
MONTANA CREEK
COOSE CREEK
SHEEP CREEK
' ' .... __
KASHWITNA RIVER NORTH FORK
LITTLE WI UOW CREEK
WILLOW CREEK
Figure 2-3-10. Susitna River basin with chinook salmon index streams
defined, 1983.
-76-
-
....
-
.....
....,
....
-
....
Table 2-3-16. 1983 escapement surveys of chinook salmon index streams in the Susitna
River drainage.
Survey No. of Chinook Salmon Counted
Stream Surveyed Date Method Conditions Live Dead Total
Alexander Creek 7/19 Hel. Good 3,755 0 3,755
(Mouth to Lake)
Wolverine Creek 7/19 Hel. Good 491 0 491
(Alexander Cr.
drainage)
Sucker Creek 7/19 Hel. Good 597 0 597
(Alexander Cr.
drainage)
Bunco Creek 8/2 Foot Good 277 2 523 .
Canyon Creek 7/13 S.Cub Excellent 575 0 575
Cheechako Creek 7/24 He1. Excellent 16 0 16
(Devil Canyon) 8/1 He1. Excellent 25 0 25
Chinook Creek 7/24 Hel. Excellent 4 0 4
(Devil Canyon) 8/1 He1. Excellent 8 0 8
Chu 1 i tna River 7/19 Raft Excellent 3,842 4 3,846
(Middle Fork) 8/3 Raft Excellent 883 75 958
Clear Creek 8/1 Hel. Good 758 48 806
Desh ka River 7/26 He1. Excellent 19,237 0 19,237
Devil Creek 8/2 Hel. Excellent 1 0 1
Goose Creek 7/18 Hel. Fair 472 5 477
Indian River 7/25 Hel. Excellent 1,172 21 1,193
8/2 Hel. Excellent 417 76 493
Kashwitna River 7/18 Hel. Good 297 0 297
(North Fork)
Lake Creek 7/26 Hel. Excellent 7,025 50 7,075
Camp Creek 7/29 Hel. Excellent 1,050 0 1,050 (Lake Cr. drainage)
Sunflower Creek 7/29 Hel. Excellent 2,250 0 2,250
(Lake Cr. drainage)
Lane Creek 8/2 Hel. Excellent 10 2 12
-77-
Table 2-3-16. Continued.
....
Survey No. of Chinook Salmon Counted -Stream Surveyed Date Method Conditions Live Dead Total
-··
Little Willow Creek 7/19 Hel. Good 1,039 3 1,042 -
Montana Creek 7/14 Foot Excellent 1,638 3 1,641
Peters Creek 7/14 Hel. Excellent 2,272 0 2,272
Portage Creek 7/25 Hel. Excellent 3,123 17 3,140
8/1 Hel. Excellent 2,172 384 2,556
Prairie Creek 7/20 Foot & Excellent 871 0 3,200
Cessna -Sheep Creek 8/18 Hel. Fair 942 3 945
Talachulitna River 7/29 Hel. Excellent 9,714 300 10,014
Willow Greek
Parks Hwy to Mouth 7/18 Hel. Good 83 0 83
Canyon to Highway 7/19 Raft Excellent 690 4 694
....
-
-78-
....
nine of these supported escapements higher than any year between 1976 and
1982 (Table 2-3-17). Overall, the 1983 chinook salmon escapement in the
Susitna River drainage index streams was about six percent high~r than the
escapement average for the previous seven years {1976-1982).
Chinook salmon escapements to index streams in 1983 averaged about 50 percent
more fish than in 1982 (Table 2-3-17). For the west side of the Susitna
River below RM 97 the 1983 escapement was about 60 percent more than the 1982
escapement. The east side Susitna River index streams below RM 97 were not
surveyed during the peak of spawning in 1982 and therefore no comparison can
be made with the 1983 escapement data. The Talkeetna River drainage
(RM 97.1) index streams in 1983 supported about 15 percent less escapement
than in 1982. For the Chulitna River drainage (RM 98.5) the escapements were
about 430 percent higher in 1983 than in 1982. In the Susitna River reach
above RM 98.6 approximately 80 percent higher escapements were rea1ized in
1983 than in the previous year .
-79-
Table 2-3-17. Chinook salmon peak survey escapement counts of Susitna River basin streams from 1976 to 1983.
Year
Stream 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983
Alexander Creek 5,412 9,246 5,854 6,215 a/ a/ 2,546 3,755
Deshka River 21,693 39,642 24,639 27,385 a/ a/ 16,000 e/ 19,237
Willow Creek 1,660 1,065 1,661 1,086 a/ 1,3"57 592 a/ 777
Little Willow Creek 833 598 436 324 ~/ !I 459 316 ~/ 1,042
Kashwitna River
(North Fork) 203 336 362 457 a/ 557 156 d/ 297
Sheep Creek 455 630 1,209 778 a/ 1,013 527 a/ 945
Goose Creek 160 133 283 b/ a/ 262 14o a/ 477
Montana Creek 1,445 1,443 881 1,094 C/ a/ 814 887 ~/ 1,641
Lane Creek b/ b/ b/ b/-b/ 40 47 12
Indian River 537 393 114 285 a/ 422 1,053 1,193
Portage Creek 702 374 140 190 a/ 659 1,253 3,140
Prairie Creek 6,513 5,790 5,154 a/ a/ 1,900 3,844 3,200 f}_/
I Clear Creek 1,237 769 997 864 ~/ ~I ~I 982 806
(X) Chulitna River 0
I (East Fork) 112 168 59 a/ a/ a/ 119 d/ b/
Chulitna River (MF) 1,870 1,782 900 a/ a/ a/ 644 a/ 3,846
Chulitna River 124 229 62 a/ a/ a/ 100 a/ b/
Honolulu Creek 24 36 13 37 a/ a/ 21 af b/
Byers Creek 53 69 a/ 28 a/ a/ 1 a! b/
Troublesome Creek 92 95 a/ a/ a/ a/ 36 ~/ b/
Bunco Creek 112 136 a/ 58 a/ a/ 198 5"2"3
Peters Creek 2,280 4,102 1,335 a/ a/ a/ a/ 2,272
Lake Creek 3,735 7,391 8,931 4,196 a/ a/ 3,577 7,075
Talachulitna River 1,319 1,856 1,375 1,648 a/ 2 ,1"29 3,101 10,014
Canyon Creek 44 135 b/ b/ o/ 84 b/ 575
Quartz Creek b/ 8 o/ of o/ .8 o/ b/
Red Creek ~I 1,511 385 ~I ~I 749 ~I ~I
a/ No total count due to high turbid water
b/ Not counted
cf Poor counting conditions
af Counts conducted after peak spawning
~I Estimated peak spawning count
J J 1 I J I J ] J ]
-
-
-
-
3.2.2 Sockeye Salmon
3.2.2.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna
3.2.2.1.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
3.2.2.1.1.1 First Run
The first run sockeye salmon escapement into the Yentna River (RM 28) was not
monitored at Yentna Station (TRM 04) in 1983. This station was operatiopal
in late June 1983 which is after first run sockeye passed through the lower
Yentna River.
Sunshine Station (RM 80) on the Susitna River main channel was operated early
enough in the 1983 season to record the first run sockeye salmon escapement.
An estimated 3,300 first run sockeye salmon migrated past this location in
1983. The 95 percent confidence interval associated with this estimate is
3,000 to 3,700 fish (Table 2-3-18). Based on fishwheel catches the migration
began at Sunshine Station on June 6, reached a midpoint on June 10 and ended
on June 19. The peak of migration occurred on June 14 with 3.7 fish caught
per fishwheel hour (Appendix Table 2-D-6).
Table 2-3-18. Petersen population estimate for 1983 first run sockeye salmon
escapement to Sunshine Station.
Location
. Sunshine
Station
R,·ver T d Examined · agge for Tags Mile
(m) (c)
80 415 2,296
Recaptures
(r)
286
Population l/
Estimate ,...
(N)
3,332
95%
Confidence
Interval
3,006-3,737
11 Migration period of first run sockeye salmon extended from June 5 through
June 28, 1983.
-81-
In 1983, the escapement of first run sockeye salmon passed essentially along
the east side of the Sunshine River at Sunshine Station (RM 80). The two
east bank station fishwheels caught 399 first run fish and the two west bank
fishwheels caught only one first run sockeye salmon (Appendix Table 2-D-6).
Age composition data was collected from 290 first run fish at Sunshine
Station (RM 80) in 1983 (Table 2-3-19). The escapement was comprised mainly
of four (26.9%) and five (71.4%) year old fish which had gone to sea after
one winter in freshwater (Table 2-3-19).
Table 2-3-19. Analysis of sockeye salmon age data by percent from 1983
escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna
and Curry stations.
Age Class Y
Collection Site n
31 32 41 42 43 51 52 53 62 63
Yentna Station 1024 0.4 4.7 0.4 66.8 0.9 0.5 22.6 1.8 0.2 1.7
Sunshine Station
First Run 290 26.9 71.4 0.7 1.0
Second Run 994 0.1 0.1 63.4 0.5 0.1 33.7 1.7 0.4
Talkeetna Station 344 0.3 4.1 50.9 4.9 38.1 1.7
Curry Station 118 0.8 5.9 69.6 2.5 0.8 18.7 1.7
)j Gilbert-Rich Notation
Length data was collected from 334 first run sockeye salmon at Sunshine
Station ( RM 80}. The results are presented in Table 2-3-20. The five and
-82-
-
-
.....
-
-
-
"""'
-
~
-
~
-
"""
I
00 w
I
-] I 1 1 l
Table 2-3-20. Analysis of sockeye salmon lengths, in millimeters, by age class from escapement samples
collected at Ventna, Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations in 1983.
n Range limits He an 951 Conf. Interval '1.1 Median
Collection Age
Site Class H!/ F'f/ H F H F H F H
Yentna 31 4 -380-436 -403 ---399
Station 3z 47 1 291-465 403 329 403 --324
41 3 1 448-502 570 469 570 --456
4z 377 308 342-622 422-566 473 484 469-478 481-486 464
43 8 I 324-388 571 358 571 --361
51 2 3 584-587 535'"554 586 543 --586
5z 134 98 442-645 439-615 577 548 571-582 541-555 583
53 13 5 426-551 492-522 490 507 --499
62 -2 -540-587 -564 ---
63 10 7 520-600 498-568 564 544 --569
ALL !/ 722 493 291-652 403-615 488 502 483-494 499-506 481
1215 291-652 494 490-498 489
Sunsht ne 4z 39 39 355-565 370-640 477 499 460-495 478-520 480
Station 52 119 88 355-690 400-615 527 521 516-538 512-529 540
First Run 53 -2 -430-480 -455 ---
62 2 1 505-590 505 548 505 --548
ALL !/ 186 148 355-690 370-650 515 514 506-524 506-522 525
334 355-690 515-508-521 520
Sunshine 31 1 -400 -400 ---400
Statton 41 -1 -460 -460 ---
Second Run 42 309 321 325-665 390-580 476 482 470-481 478-486 470
43 3 2 360-405 370-550 382 460 --380
51 -1 -565 -565 ---
52 165 170 400-655 420-640 573 541 567-579 536-547 580
l
F
-
403
570
483
571
539
552
510
564
546
495
505
520
455
505
515
-
460
480
460
565
540
I
CX>
.j:>o
I
Table 2-3-20. Continued.
Collection
Site
Sunshine
Statton
Second Run
(Continued)
Talkeetna
Station
Curry
Station
Males
Female
Age
Class
53
63
All 1/
31
32
42
43
!in
'-
53
All 1/
31
32
42
43
51
5~ '· 53
ALL 1/
M!/
8
-
554
J
13
101
17
73
4
267
1
7
51
3
1
7
J
82
n
1138
438
132
Confidence Interval of the Mean.
F 'f/
9
4
584
-
1
74
-
58
2
171
-
-
31
-
-
15
1
50
!I
?_I
}_I
11 Compos He of a 11 aged· and non-aged samples.
Range lia1i ts
M F
400-580 430-520
-485-560
325-695 370-640
325-695
420 -
320-435 365
330-625 375-600
320-460 -
480-670 480-690
440-570 5)5-550
320-690 365-690
320-690
(00 -
300-405 -
4Z0-640 435-545
320-365 -
485 -
520-605 480-580
570 380
300-640 380-580
300-640
.1
Mean 951 Conf. Interval ~./ Median
H f M f M f
506 483 --515 485
-530 ---538
510 502 504-515 499-506 510 500
506 503-509 505
420 ---420 -
343 365 --340 365
472 496 46l-482 487-505 465 500
355 ---350 -
590 561 583-597 550-571 595 560
521 53) ~ -538 533
498 526 487-509 518-534 500 525
509 502-516 515
400 ---400 -
337 ---320 -
467 502 --450 505
347 ---355 -
485 ---485 -
569 551 I 580 560 --
570 380 --570 380
459 515 443-475 504-526 450 515
481 469-492 488
J ) .J
-
-
-
-
r
six year old males sampled at this station averaged a larger length than the
. fema 1 es. The four year o 1 d fema 1 es averaged a 1 arger 1 ength than the four
year old males. The overall average l~ngth of all male and female first run
sockeye salmon sampled at Sunshine Station was 515 mm.
Figure 2-3-11 shows a percent comparison of the male and female first run
sockeye salmon sampled for age at Sunshine Station (RM 80) in 1983. There
were about an equal number of male and female four year old fish and about 25
percent more males than females among the five year old fish. The overall
male to female ratio of all aged and nan-aged first run sockeye salmon
sampled averaged 1.3:1 (Table 2-3-21).
3.2.2.1.1.2 Second Run
The 1983 escapement of second run sockeye salmon in the Yentna River (RM 28)
at Yentna Station (TRM 04) was determined by SSS counters and in the Susitna
River at Sunshine Station (RM 80) by the Petersen tag/recapture method
(Table 2-3-8). The 1983 escapement into the Yentna River was an estimated
104,400 fish (Table 2-3-22). For the Susitna River at Sunshine Station
the escapement was an estimated 71,500 fish (Table 2-3-23).
The migrational timing of the 1983 second run sockeye salmon escapements to
Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations can be calculated from station
fishwheel catches (Figure 2-3-12). The Yentna River (RM 28) migration began
on July 14, reached a midpoint on July 22 and ended on August 15. In the
Susitna River at Sunshine Station the escapement migration began on July i7,
reached a midpoint on July 23 and ended on August 14.
-85-
I
CX> m
I
.... z w u ....
lk: w
11..
211
•
3 .. 6 I
AGE
YENTNA STATION
n ~ 1024
Figure 2-3-11.
.... z w
..
u 411
~ ·W
11..
211
• 3 .. 6 8
AGE
SUNSHINE STATION
Run I
n • 2QB
Age composition of fishwheel
Curry stations in 1983.
• f) •
3 .. 6 8 3 .. 6 8 3 .. 6 8
AGE AGE AGE
SUNSHINE TALKEETNA CURRY STATION STATION STATION
Run 2 n • 344 n • I 18 n • 994
CJ fEMALES
l2'.:l MALES
intercepted sockeye salmon at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna and
J J
-
-
....
.....
-
-
Table 2-3-21. Sex ratios of male and female sockeye salmon by age from 1983
escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna
and Curry stations ..
Sample Number Sex
Co1lection Site Age Size Males Females Ratio
(M: F)
Yentna Station 3 52 51 1 51.0:1
4 698 388 310 1. 3:1
5 255 149 106 1.4: 1
6 19 10 9 1.1:1
A11 1/ 1215 722 493 1. 5:1
Sunshine Station
First Run 4 78 39 39 1. 0: 1
5 209 119 90 1. 3:1
6 3 2 1 2.0:1
All 1/ 334 186 148 1. 3:1
Second Run 3 1 1 0
4 636 312 324 1. 0: 1
5 353 173 180 1. 0: 1
6 4 0 4
All 1/ 1138 554 584 0.9:1
Talkeetna Station 3 15 14 1 14.0:1
4 192 118 74 !.6:1
5 137 77 60 1. 3: 1
All ]/ 438 267 171 1. 6: 1
Curry Station 3 8 8 0
4 85 54 31 1. 7: 1
5 25 9 16 0.6:1
All l/ 132 82 50 1. 6: 1
ll Includes all aged and non-aged samples.
-87-
Table 2-3-22. Apportioned 1983 sonar counts of chinook, sockeye, pink, chum
and coho salmon at Yentna Station.
Sampling Operational Apportioned Sonar Counts
Location Period Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho
Yentna 6/30 to 9/5 613 104,414 60,661 10,802 8,867 Station
Table 2-3-23. Petersen population estimates with associated 95% confidence
intervals for 1983 sockeye salmon escapements to Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Parameter Y Population Estimate Location
m
c
r
A
N
95% C.I.
Sunshine Station Y
7,677
2,570
275
71,522
64,349-
80,495
Y m = Number of fish marked (adjusted).
Talkeetna Station Curry Station
421 130
1.675 1,474
166 102
4,235 1,876
3,702-1,581-
4,947 2,305
c = Total number of fish examined for marks during sampling census.
r = Tot~l number of marked fish observed during sampling census.
1\ N = Population estimate.
1\ C.I. =Confidence interval around N.
Y Sockeye salmon escapement estimate for Sunshine Station does not include
the population estimate for first run sockeye.
-88-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
16
Q) 12
Q)
..s:.
3
' L
J 8
0
J:
' ..s:.
(J)
LL..
Q)
Q)
..s:.
3
' L
J
0
J:
' ..s:.
(J)
LL..
4
15
12
9
6
3
..
YENTNA STATION
Nori:h Bank
Sout.h Bank ------
Smoothed by g+2b+c
4
Cumu I at i ve %---
23 30 7 14 21 ZB o4 II 18 ZS 8
1-JUNE-...----JULY __ _.,..,._ ____ AUG.---..,,.+-1•'"'"' SEPT. -f
8 16 Z2 29 6
/.--./"""
,.,..----
I
13 20 27 3
SUNSHINE STATION
Ea.!: Bank
Weal: Bank -------
Smoot.ned by a+2b+c
4
Cumulat.lve %---
10 17 2o4 31 7 14
--"""""'---AUG. --•+-1,.-SEPT.--f !1-4•--JUNE ----~~---JULY
Dole
raca
s0
Q)
60 >
20
s0
Q)
6121 >
20
Figure 2-3-12. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch of sockeye
salmon by two day periods at Yentna and Sunshine stations in
1983.
-89-
·Based on fishwheel catches, second run sockeye salmon in 1983 had a
mi grati ana 1 preference for the south bank of the Yentna River ( RM 28) at
Yentna Station (TRM 04) and the east bank of the Susitna River at Sunshine
Station (RM 80) assuming mixed stocks and no differential fishwheel
selectivity. At Yentna Station the south bank fishwheel caught about 80
percent of the total station catch of 4,648 second run sockeye salmon
(Appendix Table 2-D-2). The remaining percentage (20%) was landed in the
north bank fishwheel (Appendix Table 2-D-1). At Sunshine Station, the two
east·bank fishwheels caught approximately 67 perGent of the total 7,707
station catch and the two west bank fishwheels caught the remaining 33
percent (Appendix Table 2-0-4).
Age composition data of second run sockeye salmon sampled in 1983 at Yentna
(TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations are provided in Table 2-3-19. The
escapement into the Yentna River (RM 28) in 1983 was primarily four (66.8%)
and five (22.6%) year old fish that had traveled to sea (smelted) in their
second year of life. Also represented in the Yentna River escapement sample
were three (5.1%) and six (1.9%) year old fish, and four (1.3%) and five
(2.3%) year old fish that had migrated to sea in their first or third years
of life. Age samples collected at Sunshine Station indicate the majority of
the escapement was comprised of four (63.4%) and five (33.7%) year old fish
that had left freshwater in their second year of life. Three and six year
o 1 d fish represented 1 ess than one percent of the escapement samp 1 e from
Sunshine Station.
-90-
....
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.....
!"""'
-
Length data from second migration sockeye salmon sampled at Yentna (TRM 04)
and Sunshine (RM 80) stations in 1983 have been summarized in Table 2-3-20.
Sockeye salmo•: in the Yentna River (RM 28) averaged about 12 mm smaller than
the fish sampled in the Susitna River at Sunshine Station. The average
length measured at Yentna Station was 494 mm and at Sunshine Station 506 mm.
Sex composition data from escapement sampling of second migration sockeye
salmon at Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations are presented in
Table 2-3-21. The overall male to female ratio of the Yentna River (RM 28)
escapement sample calculates at 1.5:1 and for the Susitna River at Sunshine
Station 0.9:1.
3.2.2.1.1.3 Fecundity
In 1983, 25 sockeye salmon fecundities were determined from samples obtained
at Sunshine Station (RM 80). These samples were collected from July 28 to
30. The mean number of eggs per female sockeye salmon for this sample was
3,543 eggs and ranged from 2,954 to 4,792 eggs (Table 2-3-24).
Table 2-3-24. Number of eggs, length, weight and associated statistics for
sockeye salmon sampled for fecundity at Sunshine Station in
1983.
Statistic
Variables
Sample Standard Standard Error
Size Mean Deviation of the Mean Range
Number of Eggs 25 3,543 531 106 2,954 -4,792
Length {mm} 25 513 37 7 465 -575
Weight (g) 25 1,979 495 99 1,325 -2,775
-91-
The relationship between length and the number of eggs per female sockeye
salmon for the sample was determined using regression and correlation
analysis with the results of these analyses presented in Figure 2-3-13. The
correlation between the two variables had a correlation coefficient (r) value
of 0.73. Replacing length with weight as the independent variable increased
the correlation (r=0.78) as portrayed in Figure 2-3-13.
North American sockeye salmon fecundities vary from under 2,200 to more than
4,300 eggs per female. The average fecundity is about 3,700 eggs per
individual (Hart, 1973). The predicted mean fecundity for Susitna River
-
-
sockeye salmon, as determined from a mean length of 502 mm for 584 sockeye -
salmon measured at Sunshine Station, is 3,350 eggs per female.
Susitna River sockeye salmon fecundities can also be predicted by utilizing
the following multiple regression equation:
where: Yc = predicted number of eggs
x1 = length measurement
x2 = weight measurement
and: coefficient of determination (r2) = .61
correlation coefficient (r) = .78
Any further analysis of _this data for the purposes of predicting egg
-
....
-
-
deposition should provide for sockeye salmon egg retention. This information ~
is provided in report section 2.4. It should also be noted, for further
analysis, that it is assumed there are essentially no differences in
fecundities between Susitna River sockeye salmon stocks.
-92--
.. ]
0
0 -
JC
U)
(!)
(.?
l1J
lL
0
0:::
LaJ m
~
:::>
z
-~1 -1 . 1 J J --~ ]
ISO 50
• • • •
45 415
0
40 0 40 -•
• •
M
35 315 • •• •
Cl) • • •
c:>
30
(!)
30 1IJ •
lL
0
25 215
0:
LLI m 20 ~ 20
y • -3711.38+14.10(1) :::» y • 1288.38 + 1.13( x)
liS r2= .53
z liS r2• • 61
r • . 73 r • . 78
• • 10 10
400 430 460 490 520 550 580 610 800 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 3000
LENGTH (mm) WEIGHT (grams)
Figure 2-3-13. Number of eggs for sockeye salmon sampled at Sunshine Station in 1983 as a function of
length and weight.
Analyses are also provided for sockeye salmon fecundities segregated by age.
This information is presented in Appendix 2-F but because of the small sample
sizes should be considered as informative and not analytical.
3.2.2.1.2 Spawning Ground Surveys
3.2.2.1.2.1 Sloughs and Streams
3.2.2.1.2.1.1 First Run
In 1983, Papa Bear Lake and its inlet stream were primarily surveyed for tag
recovery data to quantify the first run sockeye salmon escapement to Sunshine
Station (RM 80). Papa Bear Lake and its inlet stream are located in the
Talkeetna River watershed (RM 97.1) as shown in Figure 2-3-14. The tag
recovery results are provided in Table 2-3-25.
Table 2-3-25. Escapement survey counts of tagged and untagged first run
sockeye salmon tagged at Sunshine Station in 1983.
Sunshine Tags
Area River Y Survey Tagged Untagged Total Ratio
Surveyed Mile Date Conditions (r) (c) (c/r)
Papa Bear Lake 97.1 6/29 Good 134 676 810 6.1
Papa Bear Lake 97.1 6/29 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0
Inlet Stream
Papa Bear Lake 97.1 6/30 Excellent 22 149 171 7.8
Papa Bear Lake 97.1 7/19 Poor Y
Papa Bear Lake 97.1 7/19 Good 128 1175 1303 10.2
Inlet Stream
Y Confluence of stream or rece1v1ng system with Susitna River mainstem.
~ Fish not surveyed for tag recovery data. Approximately 50-100 sockeye
salmon were milling at the lake inlet.
-94-
-
-
-
,.,
-
-
-
~'
.....
-
....
....
-
-
SCALE: I"= 6.2S mil ..
Figure 2-3-14. Destination of first run sockeye salmon tagged at Sunshine
Station on the Susitna River in 1983.
The inlet stream of Papa Bear Lake in the Talkeetna River watershed was the
only area where the first run sockeye salmon, that passed Sunshine Station
(RM 80) between June 6 and 19, spawned in 1983. Tag recovery collections and
ground and aerial escapement surveys of other Susitna River tributaries, in
association with work reported in Section 3.2, support this. Based on
escapement surveys conducted at Papa Bear Lake and its inlet stream, first
run sockeye salmon reached peak spawning between the second and fourth weeks
-95-
------------------
of July 1983 (Table 2-3-25). On the June 29 and 30 surveys of this area,
nearly a11 the fish observed were hal ding off the mouth of the Papa Bear
inlet stream with the exception of one fish which had ascended the inlet
stream. On July 19, a relatively 1ow number of fish (50-100) were holding
off the mouth of Papa Bear Lake inlet stream and approximately 1,300 fish had
ascended the creek and were actively spawning.
3.2.2.1.2.1.2 Second Run
In 1983, second run sockeye salmon escapement surveys were conducted in five
tributaries which enter the Sus i tna River reach between RM 80 and 97. 8.
These surveys were performed exclusively for tag recovery data to calculate
an escapement estimate to Sunshine Station (RM 80). The results have been
tabulated in Appendix Table 2-G-5. The tagged to untagged ratios recorded
for samples greater than 10 fish ranged from 1:2.3 to 1:18.3. Generally the
highest ratios·were recorded in the Chulitna River drainage (RM 97.8) and the
lowest in the Talkeetna River drainage (RM 97.1).
3.2.2.2 Talkeetna to Upper Devil Canyon
3.2.2.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
3.2.2.2.1.1 First Run
The four fishwheels operated in 1983 in the Susitna River at Talkeetna
Station (RM 103} caught 11. first run sockeye salmon between June 12 and 24
(Appendix Table 2-D-9). Four of the 11 fish were caught between June 21 and
22. Two of the 11 fish caught were recaptures from Sunshine Station (RM 80).
The first recapture at RM 103 was made on June 13 of a fish that had been
-96-
-
-
-
-
.....
-
....
-
-
-
-
!"""
I
r
released on June 9 at RM 80. The second recapture occurred on June 16 of a
fish tagged four days earlier at Sunshine Station.
No estimate was made of the 1983 escapement of first run sockeye salmon to
Ta 1 keetna Station ( RM 103) due to the 1 ack of recaptures at Curry Station
(RM 120) and the absence of first run fish spawning areas above RM 103. The
first run sockeye salmon that migrated to Talkeetna Station in 1983 were
probably milling fish which spawned below RM 103 in the Talkeetna River
drainage (Section 3.2.2.1.2.1.1).
The two fishwheels at Curry Station (RM 120) on the Susitna River ran
continuously between June 9 and July 5, 1983 without catching any sockeye
salmon (Appendix Table 2-D-12). It is concluded that the first run sockeye
salmon escapement, which passed Sunshine Station (RM 80) between June 6 and
19, did not migrate to or above RM 120 in 1983.
3.2.2.2.1.2 Second Run
The 1983 escapement of second run sockeye salmon to Talkeetna Station
(RM 103) is estimated at 4,200 fish and to Curry Station (RM 120), 1,900 fish
{Table 2-3-23). The 95 percent confidence intervals associated with these
estimates are provided in Table 2-3-23.
The migrational timing of the 1983 escapements to Talkeetna (RM 103) and
Curry (RM 120) stations can be determined from fishwheel catches
(Section 2.4.3). At Talkeetna Station the second run migration of sockeye
salmon began on July 15, reached a midpoint on August 1 and ended on
-97-
August 18. The peak migration occurred on August 3 with 41 fish being caught
in the four fishwheels. Upstream at Curry Stationt the migration began on
July 17, reached a midpoint on August 5 and ended on August 25 (Figure
2-3-15). The peak catches were made on August 2t 12 and 13. Ten fish were
landed on each of these days in the two station fishwheels.
In 1983, there was not strong preference by second run sockeye salmon to
passage along either the east or west banks of the Susitna River at Talkeetna
Station (RM 103) based on fishwheel catches (Appendix 2-D). The east bank
fishwheels caught about 47 percent of the station catch and the west bank
fishwheels caught 53 percent. At Curry Station (RM 120) sockeye salmon were
more abundant along the east bank than the west bank. About 80 percent of
the station catch was made by the east bank fishwheel.
In 1983, 101 second run sockeye salmon were caught at Talkeetna (RM 103) and
....
-
-
-
Curry (RM 120) stations that had been tagged at Sunshine Station (RM 80}. -
Another 17 recaptures were made at Curry Station from releases at Talkeetna
Station. The migration rates of these fish are graphed in Figure 2-3-16. In
comparing the average travel times between Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry
stations it appears that migration speed increased and/or milling behavior
decreased the further distance these fish traveled upstream. The average net
speed traveled between Sunshine and Talkeetna stations was 2.4 mpd, between
-
Talkeetna and Curry stations 3.0 mpd, and between Sunshine and Curry stations """1
3.8 mpd (Figure 2-3-16}.
--98-
-
-
Q)
Q)
L .... 3
..........
L
J -0 :::c
..........
L
CJ)
u...
-
....
I"""
r
Q)
,_ Q)
L
3
..........
L r""' J
0 :::c
.......... -L i
'
CJ)
u...
1'"'"
I
I
0.32 ~ ----·--100
/
/ TALKEETNA STATION s0 Eaat. Bani<
0.24 Wea t Bank --------Smoo~ned by O+Zb+C
4
CuiiiU I a~ I ve "---60
a. r s
40
0.ras
20
; ra 0.00
8 ,, 22 29 6 13 20 Z7 3 18 17 Z4 31 7 14 21
I• JUNE •I• JULY ., .. AUG. •I• SEPT.~
0.28 ,.----100
/
CURRY STATION / Eaet. Bani< w .. t Bank --------sra
0.21 Smoolned bya+2b+C
4 lj Cumulative %---
I se
a. r 4 I
I 40
0.07 ,-, 20 I \
I \
I \
\
\ .. .. e.ara 0
8 16 22 29 6 13 20 27 3 18 17 2-4 !I 7 14 21
I• JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT.~
Dof:.e
Figure 2-3-15. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwhee1 catch of sockeye
salmon by two day periods at Talkeetna and Curry stations.in
1983.
-99-
~
Q)
>
~
0
J
E
J
·'-'
~
Q)
>
~
0
J
E1
J u
I .....
0
0
I
20
5
SUNSHINE TO TALKEETNA
n=71 (23 miles)
i=9.6
Ranoa 2-29
0 15 30
20 TALKEETNA TO CURRY
n=l7 (17miles)
1'= 6.6
Ranoa I-27
0~--~~~~-"~----~--~ .. --.
0 15 30
(a) Number of Oaya Between Capture• (b) Number of Oaye Between Capture•
20
~ 15
.:::: • :I
: 10
~
lL.
~ 5
SUNSHINE TO CURRY
n = 30 (40 miles)
i = I 0.7
Ranoa 3-25
0 15 30
(c) Number of Oaye Between Capture a
Figure 2-3-16. Migrational rates of sockeye salmon between (a) Sunshine and Talkeetna stations, (b)
Talkeetna and Curry stations and (c) Sunshine and Curry stations, 1983.
1 I J J ]
-
-
-
....
....
r
Age composition data of second run sockeye salmon sampled at Talkeetna
(RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations in 1983 are presented in Table 2-3-19.
The majority of the escapements to both locations were four and five year old
fish which had traveled to sea after spending one winter in freshwater.
Three year old fish accounted for less than seven percent of the sample from
each station.
Length measurements collected from second run sockeye salmon at Talkeetna
(RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations are summarized in Table 2-3-20. In
1983, the second run fish averaged about 28 mm larger in length at Talkeetna
Station than at Curry Station. The average 1 ength measured at Talkeetna
Station was 509 mm and at Curry Station 481 mm.
Results of samp1 ing second migration sockeye salmon for sex at Talkeetna
(RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations are provided in Figure 2-3-11 and
Table 2-3-21. A higher number of males than females in nearly every age
class were sampled at both stations. The overall male to female sex ratio at
Talkeetna Station was 1.6:1 and at Curry Station 1.6:1.
3.2.2.2.2 Spawning Ground Surveys
3.2.2.2.2.1 Main Channel
In 1983, there was no inclusive sampling of the Susitna River main channel
for sockeye salmon spawning. Project crews assigned to escapement monitoring
sites at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations did not observe any
main channel spawning by this species in 1983. The stream and slough survey
-101-
crew based at Gold Creek (RM 136.7) located a single spawning site that
extended along the west bank of the Susitna River main channel between
RM 138.6 and 138.9 {Appendix Table 2-G-1). This site was located on
September 15, and on that date it supported about 11 spawning sockeye salmon.
A map depicting the location can be found in Appendix 2-G.
3.2.2.2.2.2 Streams
A total of 20 streams were surveyed in 1983 for sockeye salmon between
RM 98.6 and 161.0. The results are presented in Appendix Table 2-G-3. A
single sockeye salmon was observed in Indian River (RM 138.6) on August 19.
This was the only sockeye salmon observed in a Susitna River stream above
RM 98.6 in 1983. It can be concluded that sockeye salmon spawning did. not
occur in any stream above RM 98.6 in 1983.
3.2.2.2.2.3 Sloughs
3.2.2.2.2.3.1 Observation Life
A total of 77 sockeye salmon were monitored to define the average number of
days a single fish could be visually seen in sloughs Moose {RM 123.5), 8A
(RM 125.1) and 11 {RM 135.3). The results, presented in Table 2-3-26,
indicate differences existed between the observation life of male and female
sockeye wherein generally, the individual male sockeye salmon spent less time
in a slough than the individual female. The combined average observation
life of both male and female sockeye salmon was 8.1 days at Moose Slough,
13.0 days at Slough SA and 14.5 days at Slough 11. The differences between
these numbers can be partially explained by differences in visibility in
-102-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
these sloughs (Figure 2-3-17}. The lowest average observation life was
recorded in Moose Slough, the s 1 ough which had the highest frequency of
restricted visibilities. Comparatively, in Slough 11 where the average
observation life was the highest, visibility was the least restricted. The
problem of res~ricted visibility however does not limit the usefulness of the
data for computing total sockeye salmon escapement to sloughs. The
observation life surveys were conducted during the same time that regular
escapement counts were conducted with both crews encountering similar
visibility conditions. For example, several times the Susitna River breached
the head of Moose Slough and restricted visibility. When this occurred the
crew making individual fish observations were often unable to locate fish
previously identified. At least some of the previously identified fish were
probably present but not visible and therefore were considered absent. The
crew conducting escapement counts encountered the same conditions and
registered corresponding results with the counts reflecting 1 ess fish than
were probably present.
The average observation life of a sockeye salmon using sloughs. in 19S3 was
ll.S days, determined by averaging the observation 1 ife means from results
recorded at sloughs Moose (RM 23.5}, SA (RM 125.1) and 11 (RM 135.3}
(Table 2-3-26). This estimate will subsequently be applied with the regular
escapement count data to calculate the escapement to sloughs other than
Moose, SA and 11 between RM 9S.6 and 161.0 where respective peak survey
counts exceeded 15 fish. Escapements to sloughs Moose, SA and 11 will be
determined in Section 3.2.2.2.2.3.2 by using the respective slough
observation life estimate in conjunction with the respective slough
escapement count data. The mathematical method, for calculating total
escapement by respective sloughs can be found in Section 2.4.
-103-
Table 2-3-26. Summary of mean number of days individual sockeye salmon were
observed in 1983 in sloughs Moose, SA and 11.
Males
Slough
with RM n Range·
1/ (days)
Moose 3 2.0-12.0
RM 123.5
SA 13 2.0-38.0
RM 125.1
11 35 0.5-37.0
RM 135.3
11 RM = River Mile
Slough
II
Slough
SA
Moose
Slough
qzzzza
Mean n (days)
9.1 4
10.2 3
13.0 20
m
f?ZZZZ/73
ilii?ZIIZZIJ
Females Combined
Range Mean n Range Mean
(days) (days) (days} (days)
8.0-10.5 6.7 7 2.0-12.0 8.1
18.0-35.0 25.0 16 2.0-3S.O 13.0
2.0-40.0 17.2 55 0.5-40.0 14.5 --
Mean average = 11.S
Sockeye Salmon
2Z2ZZZZZI Restricted Visibility
8/5 -10112
8/5 -1018
Figure 2-3-17. Periodicities of restricted visibility conditions and sockeye
salmon life observations in 1983 at sloughs Moose, SA and 11.
-104-
.....
-
-
~
-
-
_,
-
-
....
-
In 1983 between 57.1 and 76.4 percent of the sockeye salmon monitored for
observation life in sloughs Moose (RM 123 .• 5), 8A (RM 125.1) and 11 (RM 135.3)
initiated or completed spawning in the slough of first recorded ent:v
(Table 2-3-27) •. The remainder (23.6-42.9%) did not spawn. These fish either
departed the slough or died from bear predation or stranding. At least one
of the seven sockeye salmon monitored in Moose Slough spawned elsewhere, as a
fish observed in Moose Slough in mid August was 1 ater found in mid Septembe.r
at Slough 11 where it was observed to have spawned. Of 55 sockeye salmon
monitored in Slough 11 one fish experienced pre-spawning mortality by being
stranded in a riffle. At sloughs Moose and 8A there were no recorded
mortalities associated with stranding.
Tab 1 e 2-3-27. Percentages of sockeye sa 1 man monitored for observation 1 i fe
in 1983 that spawned, by habitat zone, in s 1 oughs Moose, 8A
and 11.
Slough
with RM
]./
n
!:_/
Moose 7
RM 123.5
8A 16
RM 125.1
11 55
RM 135.3
Percent
Spawning
57.1
75.0
76.4
!/ RM = River Mile
1 2
Spawning Location ~/
by Habitat Zone
3 4 5
50.0 50.0 0.0
8.3 0.0 91.7
6 7
7.1 7.1 0.0 45.3 0.0 28.6 11.9
Percent
Non-
spawning
~/
42.9
25.0
23.6
£! Total sample for all sloughs equals 78 fish; actually 77 individual
fish were monitored with one individual occupying both Moose Slough and
Slough 11.
~/ Habitat zones defined in Appendix Figures 2-G-2 thru 2-G-5.
il Includes milling fish and also bear killed and other non-spawning
mortalities.
-105-
In the process of monitoring sockeye salmon for observation life a record was
kept of where these fish spawned in s 1 oughs Moose ( RM 123.5) , 8A ( RM 125. 1)
and 11 (RM 135.3) in 1983 (Table 2-3-27). At Slough 11 where 42 spawning
fish were monitored, approximately 86 percent of them spawned in the middle -
to upper reach of the s 1 ough above habitat zone 3 (Appendix Figure 2-G-5).
In Slough 8A, the predominate spawning area was zone 3 (Appendix
Figure 2-G-3). At Moose Slough, half of the sockeye salmon monitored spawned
in zone 1 and the balance used zone 2 (Appendix Figure 2-G-2).
3.2.2.2.2.3.2 Escapement
A tota 1 of 35 s 1 oughs between RM 98.6 and 161. 0 were surveyed in 1983 for
sockeye salmon. The results are in Appendix Table 2-G-2.
The fa 11 owing 11 s 1 oughs were found to contain sockeye sa 1 man in 1983:
1. Slough 38 (RM 101.4) 6. Slough 9A ( RM 133.8)
2. Moose Slough (RM 123.5) 7. Slough 10 (RM 133.8)
3. Slough 8A (RM 125.1) a. Slough 11 (RM 135.3)
4. Slough B (RM 126.3) 9. Slough 17 (RM 138.9)"
5. 51 ough 9 (RM 128.3) 10. Slough 19 (RM 139.7)
11. Slough 21 (RM 141.1)
The sockeye sa 1 man observed in these s 1 oughs were considered second run
escapement as determined from fishwheel catches and tag releases at Talkeetna
(RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations. (Section 3.2.2.2.1).
-106-
-
-
-
-
....
....
-
-
"""" !
....
'
-
-
-
Sockeye salmon spawned in all but three of the sloughs listed above. Sloughs
9, 9A and 10 were not considered spawning areas. Relatively few fish were
found in these sloughs and those observed were not paired-up or engaged in
spawning (Appendix Table 2-G-2).
The total peak count of sockeye salmon to sloughs above RM 98.6 in 1983 was
555 fish (Table 2-3-28). This total peak count of 555 does not represent
total escapement or even a consistent portion of the total escapement, due to
variability in spawning timing and duration. A peak count is at best an
escapement index (Cousens et al., 1982). A more reliable estimate of
escapement to sloughs can be obtained by developing, for each slough, a
spawner abundance curve expressed in number of live fish days and then
calculating escapement from the curve on the basis of the mean observation
life data provided in report Section 3.2.4.2.2.3.1. These calculations were
made for sloughs Moose, 8A, 11 and 21 where,the peak survey counts exceeded
15 fish (Table 2-3-29). The escapements to sloughs 38, B, 17 and 19 were
computed by multiplying the respective peak survey count by 1.9. This value
represents the summation of the va 1 ue of the estimated s 1 ough escapement
divided by the summation of the total peak survey count for those sloughs
with a peak survey count of more than 49 fish.
In 1983 the total sockeye escapement to sloughs above RM 98.6 was an
estimated 1,060 fish (Table 2-3-29). About 93 percent of the escapement
occurred in sloughs 11, 21 and 8A in order of contribution.
-107-
. I ......
0
(X)
I
Table 2-3-29. Total 1983 sockeye salmon slough escapements between RM 98.6 and 161.0.
River Total Fish 11 Peak U ve-Dead Mean Observation Slough \ of Total \ of Curry Y
Slough Mile Days Survey Count U fe in Days Escapement Slough Escapement Statton Escapement
38 101.4 5 10 !/ 0.9 0.5
Moose 123.5 249.5 22 8.1 31 2.9 1.6
8A 125.1 1.687.8 66 13.0 130 12.1 6.8
B 126,3 5 10 !/ 0.9 0.5
11 135,3 8.182.0 248 I 14.5 564 51.2 29.7
17 138.9 6 11 !I 1 • 1 0.6
19 139.7 5 10 !I 0.9 0.5
21 141.1 3.470.4 197 11.8 294 27.8 15.5
TOTAL 13 589.7 554 1 060 100.0 55.7
!/ Number of fish days were calculated for sloughs that had peak survey counts > 15 fish. Refer to Sect inn
2.4 for detailed data analysis procedures.
~ Total slough escapement into sloughs having peak live-dead survey counts of~ 15 fish were computed by
multiplying the peak live-dead survey count by 1.9. This value represents the summation of the
estimated slough escapement divided by the summation of the peak live-dead survey counts for all sloughs
with peak survey counts 2 50 fish.
~ 1983 Curry Station sockeye salmon escapement was approximately 1,900 fish.
J J
-
!"""'
f"""
,...,
-
Table 2-3-28. Sockeye salmon peak survey counts of sloughs above RM 98.6,
1983.
Number Counted
Slough River
Mile Date Live Dead Total
38 101.4 9/19 5 0 5
Moose 123.5 9/9 21 1 22
SA 125.1 9/11 63 3 66
B 126.3 9/18 2. 0 2
9 128.3 9/7 2 0 2
9A 133.8 9/11 1 0 1
10 133.8 10/1 1 0 1
11 135.3 9/11 237 11 248
17 138.9 9/22 6 0 6
19 139.7 9/9 4 1 5
21 141.1 9/9 180 17 197
TOTAL 522 33 555
The estimated (1,060 fish) escapement of sockeye salmon to sloughs above
RM 98.6 in 1983 is about 44 percent less than the same year estimated
escapement (1,900) to the Susitna River at Curry Station (RM 120). The
approximate 800 fish difference represents a combination of several factors:
(1) an unquantified number of milling fish reached RM 120 which spawned below
RM 98.6 (Appendix Table 2-G-5); (2) a percentage of the sockeye escapement
spawned in the Susitna River main channel above RM 98.6; (3) the 1,900 fish
population estimate for Curry Station has a 95 percent confidence interval
of 1,582 to 2,311 fish; and (4) the observation life and peak survey count
data have some undefined levels of errori While all of these factors
contributed to the 800 fish difference between the estimated total slough
-109-
escapement and Curry Station escapement estimate, the two factors likely to
have the greatest influence are the percentage of fish which migrated to
RM 120 and then spawn~d below RM 98.6, and the 700 fish confidence level
spread on the Curry Station escapement estimate.
Assuming the two 1983 escapement estimates of second migration sockeye salmon
to Curry Station (RM 120) and sloughs above RM 98.6 are accurate, and that
less than 100 sockeye salmon spawned in the Susitna River main channel above
RM 98.6 in 1983, the best estimate of milling activity at Curry Station is
that approximately 39 percent of the 1,900 fish escapement that reached this
station in 1983 spawned below RM 98.6. By the same analysis about 72 percent
of the estimated 4,200 fish that reached Talkeetna Station· in 1983 were
probably milling fish that spawned ·below RM 98.6.
3.2.2.2.2.3.3 Egg Retention
In 1983, a total of 56 female sockeye salmon carcasses were sampled for egg
-
.....
-
.....
retention at four sloughs between RM 98.6 and 161.0. There was an average """'
retention of approximately 250 eggs per female from combined samples at
sloughs Moose (RM 123.5), SA (RM 125.1), 11 (RM 135.3} and 21 (RM 141.1}
(Table 2-3-30). Nearly all the females sampled in these sloughs had
completely spawned. About 80 percent of the females retained less than 25
eggs each (Figure 2-3-18). Seven percent of the sample were from fish that
had retained more than 1,000 eggs each.
-llO-
-
-
-
I"""'
!"""
....
-
Table 2-3-30.
Slough
with RM
Moose Slough
RM 123.5
Slough SA
RM 125.1
Slough 11
RM 135.3
Slough 21
RM 141.1
Egg retention of sockeye salmon at selected sloughs between
RM 98.6 and 161.0, 1983.
Egg Retention
Sample Mean Median Range
Size
1 7.0 --
2 0.0 -0
33 384.7 1.5 0-3542
c
20: 62.7 2.0 0-858
Composite of all
sloughs sampled 56 249.2 2.0 0-3542
eo SOCKEYE
n =56
mean= 249.2 eggs
median = 2. 0 eggs
so range o-3542
>
u
z
LLJ
::::)
0 . 40
LLJ
a::
LL.
~ 0
20
0 -2!5 26-!50
N 0. 0 F RETAINED E G G S
Figure 2-3-18. Percent frequency of number of eggs retained by female
sockeye salmon sampled in sloughs above RM 98.6 in 1983.
-111-
3.2.3 Pink Salmon
3.2.3.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna
3.2.3.1.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
Escapement estimates for Susitna River pink salmon were obtained for Yentna
(TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations in 1983 (Table 2-3-22 and 2-3-31).
The 1983 pink salmon escapement to the Yentna River ( RM 28) based on sonar
counts at Yentna Station was about 60,700 fish (Table 2-3-22). Daily and
cumulative SSS counts for Yentna Station are presented in Appendix 2-C~
Table 2-3;..31. Petersen population estimates with associated 95% confidence
intervals for 1983 pink salmon migration to Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Parameter Y Population Estimate Location
Sunshine Station Talkeetna Station Curry Station
m 2,942 1,987 446
c 6,816 3,548 2,851
r 494 743 232
1\
N 40,530 9,483 5,471
95% c. I. 37,361-8,914-4,872-
44,287 10,130 6,239
Y m = Number of fish marked (adjusted).
c =Total number of fish examined for marks during sampling census.
r = Total number of marked fish observed during sampling census.
~ = Population estimate.
. 1\ C.I. =Confidence 1nterval around N.
-112-
-
-
-
-
-I
-',
r
I
F"'
!
.....
I
I
-I
-
For the Susitna River at Sunshine Station (RM 80) the escapement was about
40,500 fish as determined by the Petersen method (Table 2-3-31). The 95%
confidence interval for this estimate is 37,400 to 44,300 fish.
The two fishwheels at Yentna Station (TRM 04) captured 4,489 pink salmon in
1983 (Table 2-3-11 and Appendix Table 2-D-3). Daily fishwheel catches
indicate the migration began, reached a midpoint and ended on July 14, 26 and
August 15, respectively (Figure 2-3-19). The migration peak occurred on July
24 with 298 pink salmon caught in the two fishwheels for an average catch of
6.2 fish per hour. Pink salmon showed little migrational preference for
either the north or south bank. The north bank fishwheel intercepted 59.4
percent of the pink salmon and the south bank fishwheel captured the
remaining 41.6 percent (Appendix 2-D).
At Sunshine Station (RM 80), fishwheels intercepted 3,085 pink salmon in 1983
(Table 2-3-11 and Appendix Table 2-D-6). Based on these catches, the
migration began on July 20, reached a midpoint on July 30 and terminated on
August 15 (Figure 2-3-19). The peak fishwheel catch occurred on July 25. Of
the 3,085 fish intercepted at Sunshine Station, 91.6 percent were captured by
the east bank fishwheels.
Length (FL) data associated with 1,126 Yentna Station (TRM 04) pink salmon
samples and 987 fish from Sunshine Station (RM 80) are summarized in
Table 2-3-32 and Appendix 2-E. The average overall lengths at Yentna and
Sunshine stations were 426 and 429 mm respectively. Females at Yentna
Station were 11 mm smaller in length than males while Sunshine Station
females averaged 12 mm less than·males. Of the 1,126 pink salmon sampled at
-113-
C])
C])
~
3
........
!..·
J
0
:I:
........
~
U)
LL.
8
\
' \
' \
\
\
/
~-------
~~--------------~ YENTNA STATION
North Bank
South Bank ------
Smoothed by q+2b+c
4
Cumu I at. I ve %---
', .......... , , __
100
60
4ta
20
el-------~~--~~~---.--------.~~--~--~~a
23 30 7 14 21 28 8
f-JUNE )6.)1•• ----JULY_. _ _...,__ __ _ ---...w-S EP T . .-.f
3.2 .,.---.---100
/
SUNSHINE STATION / East Bank
80 West Bank· -----
2.4 Smoothed by a+ 2b+C I 4
Cumu I at i ve %---I 60
1 . 6 I
I 40
0.8 I
20
ta 0
8 IS 22 2S 6 13 20 27 3 ta 17 24 31 7 14
I• JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT-t
Dot.e
~ .....
C])
>
.-J -0 -J s
J u
""""'
-
"""!
~
C])
> -
.-J
0
J -s
J u """
....,
~
....
Figure 2-3-19. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch of pink -
salmon by two day periods at Yentna and Sunshine stations in
1983. --114-
I .... ,_.
c.n
I
1
·Table 2-3-32. Analysis of pink salmon lengths. in millimeters. from escapement samples collected at Yentna.
Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations in 1983.
Collection
Stte
Yentna
Station
Sunshfne
Statton
Talkeetna
Statton
Curry
Station
Y Hales
Y Female:;
My
535
SOl
309
199
n Sex Ratto
fy (M:F)
591 0.9:1
1126
484 1.0:1
987
365 0.8:1
674
192 1.0:1
391
11 Confidence Interval of the Mean.
Range Umtts
M F
335-531 312-485
312-531
350-590 345-570
345-590
310-605 330-580
310-605
365-645 370-490
365-645
He an 951 Conf. Interval Y Medhn
M F H F M F
432 421 430-434 419-423 431 421
426 425-428 425
435 423 432-438 421-425 430 420
429 427-431 425
428 426 425-431 423-429 425 425
427 425-429 425
425 425 421-428 422-429 420 425
425 422-428 420
Yentna Station 535 were males for a male to female sex ratio of 0.9:1, and
503 of the 987 fish sampled at Sunshine Station were males for a sex ratio of
1.0:1 (Table 2-3-32}.
3.2.3.1.2 Fecundity
In 1983 Susitna River pink salmon fecundities were determined for 22 samples
collected at Sunshine Station (RM 80). These samples were obtained between
July 29 and 31. Fecundities of the sample averaged 1,475 eggs per female and
ranged from 1,125 to 1,975 eggs (Table 2-3-33).
Table 2-3-33. Number of eggs, length, weight and associated statistics for
pink salmon sampled for fecundity at Sunshine Station in 1983.
Statistic
Variables
Sample Mean. Standard Standard Error Range Size Deviation of the Mean
Number of Eggs 22 1,469 273 58 1,124 -1,982
Length (mm} 22 433 25 5 388 -474
Weight (g) 22 1,044 270 58 500 -1,500
The predicted mean fecundity for Susitna River pi~k salmon stocks in 1983,
based on a mean length of 423 rrm for 484 pink salmon measured at Sunshine
Station, is 1,350 eggs per female.
Susitna River pink salmon fecundities appear to be similar to other Alaskan
and Canadian stocks. McPhail and Lindsey ( 1970) report 1 arge females may
-116-
-,
i
-'
-
....
-
-
....
-
-
contain up to 2,000 eggs. Morrow (1980) lists the fecundity range between
800 and 2,000 eggs with larger females generally containing more eggs •
For the pink salmon sampled, length and weight were excellent indicators of
the number of eggs per female as illustrated by correlation coefficients (r)
of 0.97 and 0.87 respectively in the two regression analyses shown in Figure
2-3-20. The greatest predictive precision came from a multiple regression in
which length and weight were both used as independent variables. The
equation of the regression line had the form of:
Yc = 3288.81 + 11.15 (x 1) + (0.06) (x 2)
where: Yc = predicted numbers of eggs
x1 = length measurement
x2 = weight measurement
and: coefficient of determination (r2) = 0.93
correlation coefficient (r) = 0.97
Given the difficulty in collecting weight values from large numbers of fish
in field situations and the small difference in multiple and length
regression r factors, a very good estimate of pink salmon fecundities ca.n be
obtained by using a length/number of eggs regression as illustrated in
Figure 2-3-20. These values assume that there is essentially no difference
in fecundities of Susitna River pink salmon stacks.
-117-
2000
~
1800
Cl)
~
(!) 1600 I&J
Lt..
0 1400
0:
LfJ -m 1200
:1 • :::> y = -3 082.2 + I 0.5 2 ( X )
z 1000 r 2 = • 93
r = • 97 -800
. 350 370 390 410 430 450 470 490 510 -LENGTH ( mm)
-
2000 • • • -•
(I) 1800
(!)
(!) •
1.1.1 1600 •
Lt.. -0
1400
0: ••
LfJ
m 1200 • :1
:::>
'I =544.99-+-.89(x) z 1000 r2=. 76
r = • 87
800
400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
~
WEIGHT (grams)
Figure 2-3-20. Number of eggs for pink salmon sampled at Sunsh1ne Stat1on in -1983 as a function of length and weight.
~
-118-
-
-
r
-
-
-
3.2.3.2 Talkeetna to Upper Devil Canyon
3.2.3.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
~he 1983 pink salmon escapement to Talkeetna Station (RM 103) was about 9,500
fish. The 95 percent confidence interval for this estimate is 8,900 to
10,100 fish (Table 2-3-31). At Curry Station (RM 120) the pink salmon
escapement in 1983 was about 5,500 fish (Table 2-3-31). The 95 percent
confidence interval for this estimate is 4,900 to 6,200 fish. The pink
salmon escapements to Talkeetna and Curry stations were determined by the
Petersen method .
. The four fishwheels at Talkeetna Station (RM 103) in 1983 caught 2,213 pink
salmon with 64.6 percent of the catch made by the two west bank fishwheels
(Table 2-3-11 and Appendix Table 2-D-9). Based on fishwheel catch rate
interpretation, the pink salmon migration began on July 23, reached a
midpoint and peak on July 30 and ended on August 8 (Figure 2-3-21). The peak
catch rate on July 30 averaged 3.2 fish per hour.
A total of 589 pink salmon were intercepted by the two fishwheels at Curry
Station (RM 120) in 1983 (Table 2-3-11 and Appendix Table 2-D-12). The
migration began and terminated on July 24 and August 12 respectively with the
peak and midpoint catch both occurring on August 1. Of the 589 pink salmon
captured at Curry Station 64.2 percent were intercepted by the east bank
fishwheel and 35.8 percent by the west bank fishwheel showing a preference
for migration along the east side of the Susitna River at this location
(Figure 2-3-21).
-119-
Q)
Q)
_c
3
' L
J
0 :c
' _c
(/)
u..
Q)
Q)
_c
3
' L
J
0
J:
' _c
(/)
lL..
3.0 -------~--TAL~EETNA STATION ' I Ecat. Bank 1\
I 1 2.4 West. Bank ------I I( 80 Smoothed by a+2b+c I I
I I
4 I ~
Cumul at. i v• "---I /' I I Q) I I
1.8 I I 60 > I I
I I
I ' .....,
' I 0 I \
I I -1.2 • ' 40 J I I ' ' E I ' J I I
l I u I \
0.6 I \ 20 I I I \ I \
I \ ~ \ I ' ...... , ~---~ Ia ; Ia
a 1& 22 29 6 13 20 1:1 3 18 17 24 31 7 14 21 , .. JUNE JULY AUG. • I• SEPT.--i
I .6 .,-------109
/
CURRY STATION I East. Bank
w .. t. Bank -·--80
1.2 StnOOtn•d by a•2b+e ~ 4 I Cu....., I at. i v• X---Q)
I
era >
.....,
0.8 I 0
40 J
E
J
li3.4 u
213
8 15 22 29 6 13 20 Z'1 3 18 17 24 31 7 14 21
1"11•----JUNE--~--JULY--~---AUG. --•'1-"j•t-SEPT .--j
Dote
Figure 2-3-21. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch of pink
salmon by two day periods at Talkeetna and Curry stations in
1983.
-120-
-
-
-"'\
-,
-
-
-
-
-
-
In 1983, based on tagged fish recapture data, pink salmon averaged a 5.8 mpd
travel speed between Sunshine (RM 80) and Talkeetna (RM 103) stations (Figure
2-3-22). The average travel speed between Talkeetna and Curry (RM 120)
stations, based on 85 tag rec?ptures was 7.1 mpd. Curry Station capt~red 26
Sunshine Station tagged pink salmon. These fish averaged a travel speed of
7.5 mpd in the 40 miles between the two stations (Figure 2-3-22). It can be
concluded that pink salmon migrate at a faster speed or spend less time
milling in the 17 miles between Talkeetna and Curry stations than in the 20
mile reach between Sunshine and Talkeetna stations.
A total of 674 and 391 pink salmon were sampled for length (FL) and sex data
at Talkeetna {RM 103) and Curry {RM 120) stations in 1983, respectively
(Tab 1 e 2-3-32). At Ta 1 keetna Station about 18 percent more fema 1 es than
males were sampled, for a sex ratio of 0.8:1. The males sampled at this
station averaged a length of 428 mm and the females, 426 mm. At Curry
Station the male to female sex ratio was 1.0:1. Both male and female pink
salmon lengths averaged 425 mm at Curry Station in 1983.
3.2.3~2.2 Spawning Ground Surveys
3.2.3.2.2.1 Main Channel
In 1983, the Susitna River main channel was not surveyed for adult salmon
spawning. Personnel assigned to main channel escapement monitoring at
Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations in addition to the Gold Creek
stream and slough survey crew did not observe pink salmon spawning in the
Susitna River main channel above RM 98.6.
-;-121-
I
t-'
N
N
I
]
:>.
()
c .,
::::t
D" • ...
lL
~ 0
SUNSHINE TO TALKEETNA
n • 98 (23 miles)
i= 3.9 ..
Range 1-14
>-(,) c: • =a
0" • ...
lL
:=e 0
TALKEETNA TO CURRY
n=85 (17miles)
i= 2.4
Range 1-14
>-(,) c: • :I
0" • ..
lL
:=e 0
4S
35
2S
15
5
SUNSHINE TO CURRY
n = 26 (40 miles)
i= 5.3
Range 3-15
0 ~ 10 IS 20 0 ~ 10 IS 20 0 5 10 15 20
·(a) Number of Days Between Capturea (b) Number of Days Between Capture• (c) Number of Daya Betw11n Captures
Figure 2-3-22. Migrational rates of pink salmon between (a) Sunshine and Talkeetna stations, (b)
Talkeetna and Curry stati'ons and (c) Sunshine and Curry stations, 1983.
I ] J .I
....
1
-'
-
-
3.2.3.2.2.2 Slough and Streams
In 1983t 35 sloughs and 20 streams were surveyed for salmon presence between
RM 98.6 and 16l.D {Appendix Table 2-G-2 and 2-G-3).
A total of 21 pink salmon were observed in 7 of the 35 sloughs surveyed above
RM 98.6 in 1983. Seven fish were observed in Slough 11 (RM 135.3) and Slough
20 {RM 140.0) while the remaining seven were in sloughs 8 {RM 124.7)t SA
(RM 125.7), 15 (RM 137.2), 19 (RM 129.7) and 21 (RM 141.1). All 21 of these
fish were considered milling, not spawning, pink salmon and consequentially
pink sa 1 man s 1 a ugh escapement in 1983 is reported as zero fish (Appendix
Table 2-G-11).
In 1983 pink salmon spawned in 11 streams between RM 98.6 and 161.0 (Appendix
Table 2-G-3). A peak count of 1,329 pink salmon was recorded in the index
areas of these streams {Table 2-3-34). The majority (88%) of the fish were
counted in Indian River (RM 138.6) and Portage Creek (RM 148.9). Total
(1983) escapement into the 11 streams where pink salmon were found is
unknown. Each index count made in 1983 was an enumeration of the number of
pink salmon, present on a particular survey date, in a standard survey area.
The length of the survey area depending on the stream, covered a one quarter
to one mile reach starting at the stream mouth.
In 1983 t aeri a 1 surveys by he 1 i copter were conducted over Indian River ( RM
138.6) and Portage Creek (RM 148.9) during the pink salmon spawning period
(Appendix Table 2-G-3). Inadequate results were obtained namely due to
frequent turbid water conditions and problems in scheduling helicopter time.
-123-
Peak spawning of pink salmon in streams in 1983 occurre~ during the first and
third weeks of August (Figure 2-3-23 and Table 2-3-34).
Table 2-3-34. Peak pink salmon index escapement counts of streams surveyed
~I
by foot above RM 98.6 in order of contribution, 1983. .-
-,
River Number Counted Percent
Stream Date Live Dead Total Contribution Mile -
Indian River 138.6 8/19 837 49 886 66.7 -Portage Creek 148.9 8/4 285 0 285 21.4
4th of July Creek 131.0 8/20 63 15 78 5.9 -Lane Creek 113.6 8/15 28 0 28 2.1
Lower McKenzie Creek 116.2 8/15 17 0 28 1.3
5th of July Creek 123.7 8/13 9 0 9 0.7 -
Gold Creek 136.7 8/7 7 0 7 0.5
Little Portage Creek 117.7 8/22 7 0 7 0.5 ....
Chase Creek 106.9 8/12 5 1 6 0.5
Jack Long Creek 144.5 8/12 5 0 5 0.4
Skull Creek 124.7 8/20 1 0 1 0.1
TOTAL 1,264 65 1,329 100.0 -
-
-
-
-124-
,.-
-
-
-
0
l&.l ....
z
:;:)
0
0
z
0 :::e
..J
~
rn
~ z
Q.
l&.l
>
..J
LL.
0
a::
l&.l
CD
::E
:;:)
z
9
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\ '----, ",,
---INDIAN RIVER
----PORTAGE CREEK
26 2 9 I 6 2 3 3 0 6 13 20 2 7 4
rJULY:.+-•1 ... • --AUGUST----.-+---SEPTEMBER --+"~•1 OC"t:l
DATE
Figure 2-3-23. Peak pink salmon ground survey counts of Indian River and
Portage Creek in 1983.
3.2.4 Chum Salmon
3.2.4.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna
3.2.4.1.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
In 1983 chum salmon escapements were monitored in the Yentna River (RM 28) at
Yentna Station (TRM 04) and in the Susitna River at Sunshine Station (RM 80)
(Table 2-3-8). The Yentna River escapement, determined by SSS counters, was
about 10,800 fish (Table 2-3-22). The Susitna River escapement at
-125-
Sunshine Station was about 265,800 fish as determined by the Petersen
tag/recapture method (Table 2-3-35).
Tab 1 e 2-3-35. Petersen population estimates with associ a ted 95% confidence -
intervals for 1983 chum salmon migration to Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Parameter Y Population Estimate Location
Sunshine Station Talkeetna Station Curry Station
m 16,845 2,086 667
c 16,533 12,139 11,238
r 1,047 502 355
1\
N 265,775 50,370 21,089
95% c. I. 251,064-46,400-19,133-
282,317 55,083 23,490
Y m =Number of fish marked (adjusted).
c = Total number of fish examined for marks during sampling census.
r =Total number of marked fish observed during sampling census.
~ = Population estimate.
A C.I. = Confidence interval around N.
The timing of the 1983 chum salmon escapements into the Yentna River (RM 28)
at Yentna Station (TRM 04) and in the Susitna River at Sunshine Station
(RM 80) can be determined by f;shwhee1 catches (Appendix 2-D). The migration
at Yentna Station began on July 15, reach a midpoint on July 30 and ended on
August 23. At Sunshine Station the onset of the migration began on July 22,
reached a midpoint on August 1 and ended on September 2.
-126-
~
-
-
-
,...,
-
-
-
-
-
-
r-
i
A comparison of the inseason (1983) fishwheel catches at Yentna (TRM 04) and
Sunshine (RM 80) stations indicate chum salmon passed these locations in two
di sti net waves (Figure 2-3-24). The bimoda 1 migration recorded at these
locations may be related to: (1) differential commercial fishing effort in
Cook Inlet, (2) stock differences, such as timing differences between stream
and slough spawning stocks, and (3) variations in river discharge levels
which caused migration cessation and or altered fishwheel catch efficiency.
A review of preliminary 1983 commercial salmon fishing data for Upper Cook
Inlet indicates that fishing pressure was relatively static between early
July and early August except for an eight day period beginning and ending on
July 17 and 23 when extra fishing time was given to the inlet drift net
fishermen. This extra fishing time resulted in 1 markedly increased 1 catches.
In fact, the highest 1983 chum salmon catch in the Centra 1 District drift
fleet was recorded on July 20 at approximately 123,000 fish. · Sockeye, pink
and coho salmon were also caught at seasonal high levels during the July 17
to 23 commercial openings (Ruesch, pers. comm., 1983). Preliminary results
of 1983 tag recovery data indicate chum salmon averaged a 10 day travel time
between the inlet fishery and the lower (RM 26) Susitna River (Tarbox, pers.
comm., 1983). It is therefore likely that the dramatic decline in inseason
chum salmon catches at Yentna and Sunshine stations may have been partially
influenced by commercial fishing in Cook Inlet as the first migration wave at
Yentna and Sunshine stations ended in the first week of August about 11 and
1€i days respectively after the peak commercial catch.
With respect to potential stock timing differences in the Yentna .River
(RM 28) affecting the chum salmon mitigation at Yentna Station (TRM 04) in
-127-
Q)
Q)
..!:.
3
' I..
J
0 ::c
' ..!:.
(I)
u...
(I)
(I)
..!:.
3
' L
J
0
J:
' ..!:.
(IJ
u...
I. 0 /----u:1ra
YENTNA STATION
Not-t:h Bank
/ Sou~h BanK ---S11100thed by a•2b+e
,\ / 0.8 ... sa C..Uiailv• X---I \ i/ ~
!. Q)
0.6 era > --....,/": .-J ..,.--: 0 I
I ra.4 I 40 ;, I s I
I ..... J I \
I I \ u I I ' I I \ I " \ 20 0.2 I \ I \ I '
ra 0
23 30 7 14 21 28 .. It 18 zs 8
jcJ U NE»f• JULY AUG. SEPT. -t
24 -1rara /
SUNSHZNE STATION /
East Bank / 80 \J-t Bank -----/ 18 Srnoo t.ned by a+ 2 b+ c ~ -4 ..,--/ Cumu I at i ve %----Q)
I ae >
.-J 12 0
41a ;, s
J
6 u
20
0
_______ ... -.... _
0
8 IS 22 29 6 13 20 27 3 Ill 17 2'4 31 7 14
I• JUNE JULY AUG. • I~ SEPT.--j
Date
Figure ~-3-24. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fi shwheel catch of chum
salmon by two day periods at Yentna and Sunshine stations in
1983.
-128-
-
~
-
-
"""!
I"'"'
-
~
-
-
......
-
-
1983 there were no slough or stream surveys performed in this drainage to
allow such an evaluation. However, stream and slough escapement surveys were
conducted in 1983 upstream of Sunshine Station and the data indicate chum
salmon in this reach of river were not segregated by time of arrival to these
habitats. The surveys indicate that chum salmon were abundant in both
habitats during the last week of July in 1983 {Appendix 2-G). It can
therefore be surmised that the first mode that passed Sunshine Station
between July 22 and August 7 was comprised of both slough and stream spawning
fish as the second mode did not begin at Sunshine Station until after the
second week of August. The second mode that passed Sunshine Station also was
probably not a separate stock based on upstream stream and slough surveys
(Appendix 2-G).
The third possible factor influencing the bimodal chum salmon migration at
Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations in 1983 is a change in river
discharge levels. A plot of the 1983 Yentna River (RM 28) and Susitna River
USGS (United States Geological Survey) provisional flow data for the months
of July and August show that both river systems sustained high flow events in
the first week of August (Figure 2-3-25). This was the same time fishwheel
catches declined at Yentna and Sunshine stations (Appendix 2-D). The sonar
counts at Yentna Station also declined in this period. It appears that the
high flow in early August probably was the major cause for the delay in the -,
chum salmon migrations at Yentna and Sunshine stations and corresponding
declines in station fishwheel catches. At both stations when flows returned
to pre-high water levels chum salmon catches increased in the fishwheels and
at the same time sonar counts also increased at Yentna Station. A similar
pattern was observed in 1981 (ADF&G, 1981).
-129-
-• ...
C) -tiJ
0
)(
IJJ
(!)
0::
<(
:J:
()
en -c
120
SUSITNA RIVER AT
USGS STATION ~ 110 NO. 1!5292780
I\
100 YENTNA RIVER AT I I
----USGS STATION I
NO. I !529434!5 I
I 90 I \
I \
80 I \
I \
70 I \ I \
I \
60 \
1\ I '/\ .... I ' 50 \ I \ \ ...,/ I \ --,-\ ,-40 I I \ \ \ I .... \ , ..... '.J
30 \
\ /-,_
20
7/1 7/6 7/ II 7/16 7/21 7/26 7/31 8/5 8/10 8/15 8/20 8/25 8/30
1.,..~,__ ______ J U L y ___ _.,,+-1•"------AUGUST
DATE
Figure 2-3-25. Provisional USGS discharge data from July 1 thro~gh August 30,
1983 for the Susitna and Yentna rivers.
·I
Fishwheel catches recorded in 1983 at Yentna Station (TRM 04) indicate chum
salmon had no strong migrational preference for the south or north bank of
the Yentna River (RM 28) at this location (Appendixes Table 2-D-1 and 2-D-2).
The south bank Yentna Station fishwheel caught approximately the same number
of fish (50.2%) as caught by the north bank fishwheel (49.8%) (Appendix 2-D).
-130-
~
-i
I
I
"'"1
~
-
-
~
~
-
-
-
-
"F"'
~
-
In the Susitna River at Sunshine Station (RM 80} about 96 percent of the
station catch was made in the two east bank operated fishwheels and the
remaining four percent of the catch was made in the two west bank wheels.
This would indicate a strong preference for the east side of the river at
Sunshine Station, based on the assumpti.ons that stocks were mixed and
fishwheel catch efficiency remained constant.
Age composition data was collected from 553 chum salmon at Yentna Station
(TRM 04) and 1,043 chum salmon at Sunshine Station (RM 80) in 1983 (Table
2-3-36.) The majority of the escapement sampled at both stations were five
and four year old fish in order of abundance (Figure 2-3-26). Other ages
sampled included fish three and six years old. These ages accounted for less
than three percent of the total age sample from each station.
Table 2-3-36. Analysis of chum salmon age data by percent from 1983
escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna
and Curry stations.
Age Class Y
Collection Site n
31 41 51 61
Yentna Station 553 2.2 46.1 51.3 0.4
Sunshine Station 1043 0.3 40.1 58.4 1.2
Talkeetna Station 620 0.8 30.3 68.7 0.2
Curry Station 456 27.9 72.1
Jj Gilbert-Rich Notation
-131-
I ....... w
N
I
88
ea
t-z w
U18
ffi a..
28
3 .. 6 6
AGE
YENTNA STATION
n • 663
3 4 s 6
AGE
SUNSHINE STATION
n • 1043
D fEMALES
I7J MALES
3 4 6 6
AGE
TALKEETNA STATION
n • 620
3 4 s 6
AGE
CURRY STATION
n • "58
F1gure 2-3-26. Age composition of fishwheel intercepted chum salmon at Yentna. Sunshine. Talkeetna
and Curry stations in 1983.
J
....
......
Length composite data from (1983) escapement sampling at Yentna (TRM 04) and
Sunshine (RM 80) stations are presented in Table 2-3-37 and Appendix Tables
2-E-13 and 2-E-14. Chum salmon averaged 593 mm in the Yentna River (RM 28)
and 595 mm in the Susitna River at Sunshine Station. At Yentna and Susitna
river sampling locations female chum salmon lengths were about 20 to 30 mm
larger than the males.
Sex ratio data collected in 1983 from fishwheel caught chum salmon at Yentna
(TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations are sunJilarized in Table 2-3-38. At
both stations males were more numerous among the three, five and six year old
fish sampled, and females outnumbered males among the four year old fish
sampled. The chum salmon male to female sex ratio at Yentna Station without
respect to age was 1.3:1 and at Sunshine Station, 1.0:1.
3.2.4.1.2 Fecundity
Fecundities of 27 Susitna River female chum salmon were determined from
samples collected at Sunshine Station (RM 80} between July 29 and 31, 1983.
The mean fecundity of the sample was 3,189 eggs per female and ranged from
2,478 to 4,076 eggs (Table 2-3-39).
The mean fecundity of Susitna River chum salmon stocks, determined from a
mean length of 580 mm for 565 female chum salmon measurements collected at
Sunshine Station (RM 80), is 2,850 eggs per female •
Susitna River chum salmon fecundities fall into the range reported for other
stocks. The fecundity of individual female chum salmon can range from
-133-
I ,_.
w
""" I
Table 2-3-37. Analysis of chum salmon lengths~ in millimeters, by age class from escapement samples
collected at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations in 1983.
Collection Age n Range limits tie an 95S Cont. Interval !/
Site Class Hy F !/ H F H F ,. F tl
Yentna 31 7 5 492-528 452-553 508 515 --504
Stilt ion 41 121 134 462-666 489-652 582 570 575-589 566-575 584
51 173 111 448-700 509-658 616 598 611-622 593-604 621
61 2 -558-610 -584 ---584
ALL 1f 351 280 448-700 452-658 602 582 597-606 578-586 606
631 448-700 593 590-596
Sunshine 3 -3 -515-540 -525 -- -
Station 41 168 250 410-685 450-650 579 561 573-585 557-565 580
51 339 271 495-750 460-750 622 598 618-626 593-603 625
61 10 2 500-895 650-720 664 685 --648
ALL ~/ 560 565 410-895 450-750 609 580 605-613 577-584 610
1125 410-895 595 592-597
Talkeetna 31 2 3 510-510 500-520 510 512 --510
Stilt ion 41 89 99 470-680 465-630 585 572 577-593 566-579 590
51 261 145 515-700 510-710 625 610 621-629 605-615 630
61 1 -650 -650 - --650
ALL ~/ 441 287 470-700 365-710 614 594 611-618 589-599 620
728 365-710 606 603-609
Curry 41 77 50 505-640 470"640 586 579 579-592 569-588 590
Station 51 220 109 500-715 555-690 631 610 627-635 613-623 630
ALly 319 168 500-715 445-690 619 605 615-623 599-610 620
487 445-715 614 611-617
---
!I J1ales ?../ Females ll Confidence Interval of the Hean. ~/ Composite of all aged and non-aged samples.
J __ ) I ---) 1 I _I -,I J J
tled ian
F
526
572
600
-
583
596
520
560
600
6e5
580
600
515
575
610
-
600
610
590
620
610
615
-
-
-i
,....
-
900-8,000 eggs. The mean fecundities of North American and Asian stocks
usually range between 2,000 and 3,000 eggs per female chum salmon (Bakkala,
1970).
Table 2-3-38. Sex ratios of male and female chum salmon by age from 1983
escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna
and Curry stations.
Co 11 ecti on Site
Yentna Station
Sunshine Station
· Ta 1 keetna Station
Curry Station
Age
3
4
5
6
Ally
3
4
5
6
Ally
3
4
5
6
All 1/
4
5
All 1/
Sample
Size
12
255
284
2
631
3
418
610
12
1125
5
188
426
1
728.
127
329
487
1/ Includes all aged and non-aged samples.
-135-
Number
Males Females
7
121
173
2
351
0
168
339
10
560
2
89
281
1
441
77
220
319
5
134
111
0
280
3'
250
271
2
565
3
99
145
0
287
50
109
168
Sex
Ratio
(M: F) ·
1.4:1
0.9:1
1. 6:1
1.3:1
0.7:1
1.3:1
5.0:1
1. 0:1
0.7:1
0.9:1
1. 9:1
1.5:1
1. 5:1
2.0:1
1. 9: 1
Table 2-3-39. Number of eggs, length, weight and associated statistics for
chum salmon sampled for fecundity at Sunshine Station in 1983.
Statistic
Variables
Sample Mean Standard Standard Error Range Size Deviation of the Mean
Number of Eggs 2.7 3,189 462 89 2,475 -4,076
Length (mm) 27 617 43 8 524 -708
Weight (g) 27 3,566 783 151 2,225 -5,475
A linear regression for the chum salmon sampled for length and fecundity, and
weight and fecundity had correlation coefficients of r=0.83 and r=0.84,
respectively (Figure 2-3-27).
Utilizing both length and weight as independent predictor variables the
following multiple regression equation was derived:
where: Yc = predicted number of eggs
xl = measured length
x2 = measured weight
and: coefficient of determination {r~) = 0.72
correlation coefficient (r) = 0.85
-136-
.....,
-
-
-
-
~
-
-
-'
0
0 4~
K
(/) 40 •
~ • (!) •
"" •
LL 35
0
a::
~ 30 •
CD • :E • ::> 25 '1 = -2309.9+8.9(x)
z r 2 = • 69
I""" r = • 83
I 20
400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800
~ LENGTH (mm)
r
5o
0 45 0· -K
CJ) 40 •
(!)
(!) •
LIJ • • • LL •
I""" 0 • a:: •
I.LJ m • ::E •
::> 25 y = I 413. 5 + . 4 9 ( X}
z r 2 = • 71
I'-r = .84
20
2000 2500 3000 3"500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 -WEIGHT (grams)
r
Figure 2-3-27. Number of eggs for chum salmon sampled at Sunshine Station in
..... 1983 as a function of length and weight •
-137~
Utilization of this data for predictive purposes must include an adjustment
for egg retention. This information, for chum salmon, is provided in Section
3.2.4.2.2.3.3. It should also be noted that in calculating chum salmon
fecundities it was assumed that there were essentially no stock differences
in number of eggs per individual female for Susitna River stocks.
Chum salmon fecundity data was further reduced for analysis by age class.
This information is presented in Appendix Table 2-G-15 but due to
insufficient samples sizes should be considered informative and not
analytical in nature.
3.2.4.2 Talkeetna to Upper Devil Canyon
3.2.4.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
In 1983, chum salmon escapement estimates were obtained for the Susitna River
main channel at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations by the
Petersen tag/recapture method (Table 2-3-35). Escapement to Ta 1 keetna
Station was about 50,400 fish and to Curry Station, about 21,100 fish. The
95 percent confidence limits associated to these estimates are 46,400 -
55,100 and 19,100 -23,500 fish, respectively.
The migrational timings of the 1983 chum salmon escapements to Talkeetna
(RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations can be determined by fishwheel catches
made at these locations (Appendix 2-D). At Talkeetna Station the chum salmon
migration began on July 25, reached a midpoint on August 1 and ended on
August 29. Upstream 17 miles at Curry Station, the migration began on
July 22, reached a midpoint on August 3 and ended on August 29.
-138-
....
-
·-
.....
-
-
......
-
....
-
In 1983, Talkeetna Station (RM 103) fishwheels caught 2,467 chum salmon and
at Curry Station fishwheels caught 861 (Table 2-3-11). At Talkeetna Station
the catch was nearly equally distributed between the east and west bank
fishwheels (Figure 2-3-28). The two east ·bank fishwheels caught 47.3 percent
of the station catch and the two west bank fishwheels landed the remaining
52.7 percent. These catch percentages indicate chum salmon had a slight
preference for movement along the west bank at this location. Upstream at
Curry Station, chum salmon were more numerous a 1 ong the east bank than the
west bank (Figure 2-3-28). The east bank fishwheel caught 68.4 percent of
the station catch. The remaining 31.6 percent was landed by the west bank
fishwheel. The reported preference of chum salmon for migration along the
west bank at Talkeetna Station and east bank at Curry Station should be
considered valid assuming no stock differention or difference in catch
efficiency between east and west bank operated fishwheels at either station.
Probable factors influencing chum salmon migration along a particular bank
are velocity, channel configuration and water depth.
The results of sampling the 1983 chum salmon escapements to Ta~lkeetna
(RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations for age are provided in Table 2-3-36.
The escapements to both stations were comprised almost exclusively of five
and four year old fish by respective order (Figure 2-3-26). Three and six
year old chum salmon were represented at a minimal level at Talkeetna Station
and were not present in the escapement sampled at Curry Station.
-139-
-
2.4 _.,...-tiara ~
I ,..-_./ TALKEETNA STATION
Ecrst Berni< / """1 West Bonk --------/"' sa
G) 1 . 8 Smoothed by 0+2b•c I ~ Q) ~
.£. Cumulative %---Q) 3 60 > ' l. ~ J 0 0
J: 41a :J ' E .£. J fl) I u I ·-0.6 ,: I u... 20
/; .~
I
ra ,
ra
a 16 22 29 6 13 20 Z1 3 18 17 24 31 7 14 21
SEPT-f
..... I• JUNE JULY AUG.
2.0 ,.,.---tiara
CURRY STATION /
/ Ea•i: Bank / 1 . 6 w-t Bank ---80
Q) S11t00thed by 0+2b+c I ~ G) -4
.£. Cumulative %---Q) -::3 I .2 61a > ........
l. ~ J 0 0
J: 0.8 40 :J ........ E .£. J (I) u
u... 0.4 20
S IIi 22 29 6 13 20 Z1 3 18 17 24 31 7 14 21
1---JUNE -.....,j---JULY-_ _... __ AUG. --~~~+o~--5 EPT --l
Dot.e
Figure 2-3-28. Mean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch of chum """'\
salmon by two day periods at Talkeetna and Curry stations in
1983.
-140-
-
-
-
-
-
-
In 1983, chum salmon tagged at Sunshine Station (RM 80) were recaptured at
Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations. Recaptures were also made at
C'lrry Station of fish released at Talkeetna Station. The results are
provided in Figure 2-3-29. The data indicate chum salmon migrated upstream
at an average rate of 3.8 mpd for the 23 miles between Sunshine and Talkeetna
stations. About 75 percent of the tagged fish migrated from Talkeetna to
Curry stations in one to five days with a mean travel rate of 6.3 mpd. A few
stragglers reduced the mean. The mean rate of 3.8 mpd for the 23 miles
between Sunshine and Talkeetna stations and the mean rate of 6.3 mpd for the
17 miles between Talkeetna and Curry stations equals a 4.9 mpd mean rate for
40 miles. This is close to the 4.7 mpd mean rate for fish released at
Sunshine Station and recaptured at Curry Station. Overall the data indicates
that chum salmon ascended at a faster rate or spend less time milling between
Talkeetna and Curry stations than in the 23 miles rea.ch downstream
(Figure 2-3-29).
Length composition data collected in 1983 at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry
(RM 120) stations are provided in Table 2-3-37 and Appendix 2-E. Generally,
the male chum salmon sampled at these stations were of a larger length than
the females. The average chum salmon length measured at Talkeetna Station
was 606 mm and at Curry Station, 614 mm.
Sex composition (1983) data collected from~scapement sampling of the Susitna
River main channel above Talkeetna (RM 97.1) are provided in Table 2-3-38.
The male to female chum salmon sex ratio was 1.5:1 at Talkeetna Station
(RM 103). At Curry Station (RM 120), 17 miles upstream, the ratio was 1.9:1.
-141-
I .......
+=>
N
I
.I
20
"' I 5 C)
c • :a fW ...
II..
at 5
SUNSHINE TO TALKEETNA
n = 221 (23 miles)
f{ = 6.0
Ranoe 1-20
0 15
~
C) c • :a cr • ...
II..
;1.
TALKEETNA TO CURRY
n = 61 ( 17 mile&)
I= 4.7
Range 1-24
15
0
15 30
(a) Number of Daya Between Capture• (b) Number of Daya Between Capture a
"' C) c • :::1
0' • ...
II..
~
20
15
10
5
SUNSHINE TO CURRY
n = 71 (40 mllaa)
i= 8.6
Ranoe 3-27
0 15 30
(c) Number of Daya Between Capture•
Figure 2-3-29. Migrational rates of chum salmon between (a) Sunshine and Talkeetna stations, (b)
Talkeetna and Curry stations and (c) Sunshine and Curry stations, 1983.
.J J J ·-·--·~ -I
-
-I
'
' I
3.2.4.2.2 Spawning Ground Surveys
3.2.4.2.2.2.1 Main Channel
In 1983, no inclusive main channel spawning ground surveys were conducted.
However, six main channel chum salmon spawning areas were found in the
Susitna River between RM 115.0 and 138.9 by the stream and slough survey crew
stationed at Gold Creek (RM 136.7). A list of these spawning areas are
provided in Appendix Table 2-G-1.
Appendix 2-G.
Maps of these locations are in
Chum salmon spawning was recorded at these main channel sites between
September 9 and October 1. The site supporting the highest number of
spawners was located downstream of the mouth of Slough 11 (RM 136.3) at
RM 136.1 (Appendix Figure 2-G-9). At this location a total of 177 chum
salmon were observed on September 9 and 17, 1983. The numbers of spawning
chum salmon observed at the other five locations ranged from 4 to 56 fish.
3.2.4.2.2.2 Streams
In 1983, a tota 1 of 20 streams were surveyed for salmon presence bet'tJeen
RM 98.6 and 161.0. · The results are in Appendix Table 2-G-3.
Seven streamt above RM 98.6 contained chum salmon in 1983 (Table 2-3-40).
Peak spawning ground counts indicated a minimum escapement of 1,411 fish in
these streams. The majority (88.4%) of the fish were counted in Indian River
(RM 138.6) and Portage Creek (RM 148.9).
-143-
-Table 2-3-40. Chum salmon peak 1983 escapement counts for streams above
RM 98.6.
~I
River Number Counted
Stream Date Live Dead Total ~
Mile
Lane Creek 113.6. 8/15 6 0 6
Lower McKenzie Creek 116.2 8/15 1 0 1
5th of July Creek 123.7 8/5 6 a 6
4th of July Creek 131.0 8/27 143 5 148
Indian River 138.6 8/19 673 49 722
Jack Long Creek 144.5 8/12 2 0 2 -
Portage Creek 148.9 8/26 424 102 526
TOTAL 1,255 156 1,411 -
In 1983, counts of chum salmon in Indian River (RM 138.6) made by helicopter
were 1 ess than counts made on the ground {Figure 2-3-30). Si nee 16 miles of ~
stream were surveyed by air and on foot only the first stream mile was
surveyed, it could be concluded that: (1) aerial counts provide a poor
measure of Indian River chum salmon escapement, and (2) the first mile reach
of Indian River in 1983 was probably more valuable chum salmon spawning
habitat than the remaining (15 miles) upstream reach.
At Portage Creek (RM 148.9) in 1983, more chum salmon were counted by
helicopter in the total 25 mile reach of stream than on foot in the first
quarter mile reach (Appendix 2-G-3). From a comparison of ·L:1e timing
differences between the ground and helicopter counts, it could be concluded
that the first quarter mile reach of Portage Creek is mainly a migrational
corridor and the majority of the fish enumerated in this reach during ground
counts were fish that spawned upstream (Figure 2-3-30). If the first quarter
-144-
-
-
-
c
laJ
~ z
:l
0 u
z
0
2
...J
ct
(I)
:E
:l
:z::
0
i
I-" I.a.
""" 0 01
i
0:::
laJ m
:E
::>
z
.... I l 1 .. 1 1 .. )
900 INDIAN RIVER 450
-GROUND SURVEY OF -GROUND SURVEY FROM
. THE 11 1 TRM. 4 MOUTH TO STANDARD
INDEX POINT (Approx.l/4 ml).
800 HELICOPTER SURVEY c I\
---TO UPPER SPAWNING laJ I \ ---HELICOPTER SURVEY OF LIMIT (Approx. l6ml.) ~ I \ z TOTAL DRAINAGE.
700 :l I \
0 ,' ' 0
z I ' 600 300 0 I ' 2 ' ...J I
500 c:( I ' (I) ' 2 ' 400 :::> ' ::1:
0 ' lL ' 300 150 0 ' a:: ' 200 lLI \ m
2 \ :::> \ 100 z
\
\
0 0
\ --
24 29 3 8 13 18 23 28 2 7 12 17 22 27 2 7 12 24 29 3 8 13 18 23 28 2 7 12 r. 22 27 2 7 12
~JULY I• AUG. •loi SEPT. •loe OCT~ j-JULYI-« AUG. )tlo( SEPT. ...... OCT...,
DATE DATE.
Figure 2-3-30. Peak chum salmon ground and helicopter survey counts of Indian River and Portage Creek
in 1983.
mile reach of Portage Creek were of similar spawning habitat value as the
upper stream reach the difference in timing of the peak counts would not be
as apparent as illustrated in Figure 2-3-30.
Escapement counts in 1983 indicate chum salmon spawned in streams above RM
98.6 from the last week of July through the second week of September. The
peak of spawning occurred between the first and last weeks of August.
3.2.4.2.2.3 Sloughs
3.2.4.2.2.3.1 Observation Life
In 1983, a total of 68 chum salmon were monitored for observation life in
sloughs Moose (RM 123.5), A1 (RM 124.6), SA (RM 123.1), 9 (RM 128.3) and 11
(RM 135.3) The results are in Table 2-3-41.
The average observation life of a chum salmon in five sloughs was 6.9 days in
1983 (Tab 1 e 2-3-41). However, observation 1 i fe averages varied between
sloughs and between male and female chum salmon. For example, chum salmon
averaged 4.1 observation days in Slough 9 (RM 128.3) whereas in Slough 11 (RM
135.3) the average was 7.5 days. In these same sloughs the average
observation life of male chum salmon was less than that recorded of female
chum salmon. The difference in chum salmon observation life between sloughs
can be partially attributed to variations in the visibility of fish in the
sloughs. As shown in Figure 2-3-31, visibility in 1983 was restricted in
Slough 9 much of the time chum salmon were present and it was here that chum
-146-
....
-
-
-
-
r
I
-
.....
r
Tab 1 e 2-3-41. Summary of mean number of days i ndi vi dua 1 chum salmon were observed
in 1983 in sloughs Moose. A1
, 8A, 9 and 11.
Males Females Combined
Slough
+ RM 1/ n Range Mean n Range Mean n Range Mean
(days) (days) (days) (days) (days) (days)
Moose 6 2. 5-11.0 9.6 1 ---11.0 7 2.5-11.0 9.8
RM 123.5
A' 10 2.0-14.5 7.4 3 2.0-8.0 5.5 13 2.0-14.5 6.7
RM 124.6
8A 3 4.0-6.0 4.7 2 8.5-10.0 9.3 5 4.0-10.0 6.5
RM 125.1
9 8 1.0-10.0 3.1 6 2.0-10.0 5.3 14 1.0-10.0 4.1
RM 128.3
11 13 1.5-15.5 4.8 16 1. 5-30.5 9.7 29 1. 5-30.5 7.5
RM 135.3 -
Mean Average = 6.9
ll RM = River Mile
salmon averaged the lowest observation life of 4.1 days. In sloughs such as
Slough 9 where restricted visibility conditions were often encountered it was
difficult to locate fish. This generally lead to less observation time per
fish being recorded in these habitats. There may be some differences in the
average stre.am 1 ife of chum salmon between sloughs, with stream 1 ife being
defined as a measure of the number of days a fish is physically present in a
habitat without regard to visibility. However, a limitation of the
observation life data we collected in 1983 is that our sample is too small to
account for each differences.
-147-
Slough
II
Slough
9
Slough
SA
Slough
A'
Moose
Slough
Chum Salmon
V/1207171 Restricted Visibility
1---------------------------t ale-lOIII
p??I/11/7/IIIZIIIIOZIIIIII/IJ
t--------------t 8/1e-~te
Vlli/1/J
~--------------------------------t~s-1 ~e
Vl/1?171 VZII/III/14
Date
Figure 2-3-31. Periodicities of restricted visibility conditions and chum
salmon life observations in 1983 in sloughs Moose, A', SA, 9
and 11.
In 1983, not a 11 the fish moni tared for observation 1 i fe were confirmed
spawners (Table 2-3-42). The percentage of confirmed non-spawners varied
-
....
-
-
....
between sloughs. At sloughs A' (RM 124.6} and SA (RM 125.1) all the fish -
monitored were observed at one time to be spawning. At Moose Slough
(RM 123.5) only one of the. seven fish monitored spawned. In sloughs 9
(RM 128.3) and 11 (RM 135.3), 10 of the 14 fish monitored and 23 of the 29
fish monitored, respectively, spawned. The high percentage of non-spawners
in Moose S1ough can be attributed in part to milling activity. Of the seven
fish monitored six were classified as mi11ing fish. Two of these six fish
later spawned in Slough 11.
-148-
~.
-I
-
-I
-
-
-
Table 2-3-42. Percentages of chum salmon monitored for observation life in
1983 that spawned, by habitat zone, in sloughs Moose, A', 8A,
9 and 11.
Percent
Slough Percent Spawning Locations Non-
with RM n Spawning by Habitat Zone g;
spawning
.!1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 'll
Moose 7 14.3 100.0 0.0 85.7
RM 123.5
A' 13 100.0 0.0
RM 124.6
8A 5 100.0 20.0 80.0 0.0 0.0
RM 125.1
9 14 71.4 0.0 40.0 60.0 28.6
RM 128.3
11 29 79.3 39.1 52.2 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.7
RM 135.3
.!I RM = River Mile
'f/ Habitat zones defined in Appendix Figures 2-G-2 thru 2-G-5.
11 Includes mi 11 i ng fish and also bear killed and other non-spawning
mortalities.
Table 2-3-42 in combination with Appendix Figures 2-G-2 thru 2-G-5 summarize
where the chum salmon monitored for observation life in 1983 spawned within
sloughs Moose (RM 123.5), SA (RM 125.1), 9 (RM 128.3) and 11 (RM 135.3). The
most obvious finding was that spawning chum salmon generally had a higher
preference towards the lower slough habitat zones than sockeye salmon. At
-149-
Slough 11 about 90 percent of the chum salmon spawned in habitat zones 1 and
2 whereas about 85 percent of the sockeye salmon spawned above habitat zone 3
(Section 3.2.2.2.2.3.1).
3.2.4.2.2.3.2 Escapement
In 1983, 35 sloughs above RM 98.6 were surveyed for salmon. The results are
in Appendix Table 2-G-2.
Twenty three of the 35 sloughs surveyed above RM 98.6 contained chum salmon
in 1983 (Table 2-3-43). Eighteen of these sloughs were used for spawning.
Sloughs 38 (RM 101.4), 5 (RM 107.6), 6A {RM 112.3), 80 (RM 121.8) and 10
(RM 133.8) were considered milling areas based on the absence of carcasses
and spawning activity.
The highest concentrations of spawning chum salmon were found in sloughs 11
(16.2%), 21 (21.8%) and 9 (11.5%) between the second week of August and the
last week of September, 1983. Spawning peaked in these sloughs between the
last week of August and the first week of September (Figure 2-3-32 and
Appendix 2-G).
The total peak spawning count of chum salmon to sloughs above RM 98.6 for
1983 is 1,467 ,fish (Table 2-3-44). This count {1,467) represents an index of
the total escapement (Cousens et al., 1982). An estimate of the total
spawning escapement into sloughs as provided in Table 2-3-44 is 2,950 fish.
This estimate represents about 14 percent of the estimated chum salmon
-150-
-
....
-
-
-
I
-
-
-
-
.....
-
-
["""
I
-
-
-
Table 2-3-43. Chum salmon peak 1983 escapement counts for sloughs above
RM 98.6.
River Number Counted
Slough Date
Mile Live Dead Total
2 100.2 9/12 37 12 49
3B 101.4 8/26 3 0 3
5 107.6 8/15 1 0 1
6A 112.3 9/5 6 0 6
80 121.8 8/3 1 0 1
8C 121.9 9/9 2 2 4
8B 122.2 9/9 104 0 104
Moose 123.5 8/5 68 0 68 Al 124.6 8/15 76 1 77
A 124.7 8/27 1 1 2
8A 125.1 8/30 34 3 37
B 126.3 9/11 3 4 7
9 128.3 9/11 105 64 169
9A 133.8 9/18 88 17 105
10 133.8 10/1 1 0 1
11 135.3 9/18 94 144 238
13 135.9 9/1 0 4 4
15 137.2 8/25 1 1 2
17 138.9 8/25 89 1 90
19 139.7 9/3 2 1 3
20 140.0 9/3 33 30 63
21 141.0 9/9 149 170 319
22 144.5 8/18 109 5 114
TOTAL 1,007 460 1,467
escapement to Curry Station (RM 120) of 21,100 fish. The balance of the
escapement, about 18,000 chum salmon, are fish which were milling and later
spawned below RM 98.6, and fish which spawned in the Susitna River main
channel and streams above RM 98.6.
-151-
I
I-'
Ul
N
I
Table 2-3-44. Total 1983 chum salmon slough escapements between RM 98.6 and 161.0.
Slough
2
BC
8B
Moose·
A'
A
SA
B
9
9A
11
13
15
17
19
20
21
22
TOTAL
River
Mile
100.2
121.9
122.2
123,5
124.6
124.7
125.1
126.3
128.3
133.8
1~5.3
135.9
137.2
138,9
139.7
140,0
141.1
-1'14.5
Total Fhh Y
Days
659.0
1,799.8
846.1
1,036.8
730.0
1,765.0
1,595.6
5,055.2
1,143.4
713.1
3,321.0
722.8
. 19 387.8
Peak U ve-Dead
Survey Count
49
4
104
68
77
2
37
7
169
105
238
4
2
90
3
63
319
114
1 455
Mean Observation Slough
Life tn Days Escapement
6.9 96
8 y
6.9 261
9.8 86
6. 7 155
6.5
4.1
6.9
7.5
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
4 y
112
14 y
430
231
674
8 y
4 y
166
6 y
103
481
105
2 944
\ of Total
Slough Escapement
3.3
0.3
8.9
2.9
5.3
0.1
3.8
0.5
14.6
7.9
22.9
0.3
0.1
5.6
0.2
3.5
16.3
3.5
100.0
\ of Curry'Y
Statton Escapement
0.5
0.1
1.2
0.4
0.7
0.1
0.5
0.1
2.0
1 • 1
3.2
0.1
0.1
0.8
0.1
0.5
2.3
0.5
13.8
11 Number of fish days were calculated for sloughs that had peak survey counts > 15 fish. Refer to Section
2.4 for detailed data analysis procedures.
~ Total slough escapement into sloughs having peak live-dead survey counts of 5 15 fish were computed by
multiplying the peak live-dead survey count by 2.0. This value represents the sununation of the
estimated slough escapement divided by the summation of the peak live-dead survey counts for all sloughs
with peak survey counts ~ 50 fish.
ll 1983 Curry Station chum salmon escapement was approximately 21,100 fish.
_ _1
-
-
.....
-
-
::r:
(/)
&L
UJ
>
..J
&L
0
d
z
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 1/
I
I
26 2
I
I
I
I
I
9
I
I
,-----------,
I
I
I
I
I
16 23 30 6
--SLOUGH II
----SLOUGH 21
-·-SLOUGH 9
~ \..~,_ , .... _ ........ . ' '
13 20 27 4 II
1-JULY+----AUG.-----t ........ ---SEPT.----++--OCT.-+-!
DATE
Figure 2-3-32. Chum salmon live counts by date in 1983 in sloughs 9, 11 and
21.
3.2.4.2.2.3.3 Egg Retention
In 1983, 229 female chum salmon carcasses were sampled for egg retention in
12 sloughs and one main channel spawning area between RM 98.6 and 161.0
(Table 2-3-45). The average egg retention from a composite of these samples
is 114.1 eggs per female. The median retention is 5.0 eggs which indicates
nearly all the females sampled had completely spawned. Less than four
percent of the females sampled had died with an egg retention of more than
1,000 eggs each (Figure 2-3-33).
-153-
Table 2-3-45. Egg retention of chum salmon at selected spawning habitats in
1983 between RM 98.6 and 161.0.
Spawning Egg Retention
Habitat ]J Sample
with RM Size Mean Median Range
Slough 2
RM 100.2 1 335.0
Moose Slough
RM 123.5 7 386.4 5.0 0-1719
Slough A1
RM 124.6 17 56.1 5.0 0-754
Slough SA
RM 125.1 2 4.0 4.0 1-7
Slough 9
RM 128.3 51 101.4 9.0 0-1765
Slough 9A
RM 133.8 1 21.0
Main Channel
RM 135.2 13 125.0 16.0 0-539
Slough 11
RM 135.3 53 150.0 2.0 0-3188
Slough 17
RM 138.9 4 39.3 27.0 3-102
Slough 19
RM 139.7 2 87.0 87.0 2-172
Slough 20
RM 140.0 12 146.3 4.0 0-1674
Slough 21
RM 141.1 64 82.5 3.5 0-1074
Slough 22
RM 144.5 2 0 0
Composite of a 11
sloughs sampled 229 114.1 5.0 0-3188
]J RM = River Mile
-154-
-
-
""""
~
-
_,
I
~
.....
-
I!JII!lli!!
-
~
-
r-
!"""
80
CHUM
n = 229
mean = I 14. I eggs
median = 5.0 eags
60 range= Q-318
>
0
z
I.U
:J 40 0
I.U
a:
I.&.
:=e 0
20
0 e 25 28 • 0() 51• 100 101•200 20f•lp00 !p0f•4p00
NO. OF RETAINED EGGS
Figure 2-3-33. Percent frequency of egg numbers retained by female chum
salmon sampled in sloughs above RM 98.6 in 1983.
3.2.5 Coho Salmon
3.2.5.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna
3.2.5.1.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
The 1983 escapement of coho salmon into the Yentqa River (RM 28) was
monitored by SSS counters located at Yentna Station (TRM 04). The escapement
-155-
was about 8,850 fish (Table 2-3-22). Daily coho salmon passage rates are
presented in Appendix Table 2-C-3 and Appendix Figure 2-C-1.
At Sunshine Station (RM 80) the coho salmon escapement was an estimated
15,200 fish in 1983 {Table 2-3-46). This value was derived using
tag/recapture estimation techniques and has an associated 95 percent
confidence interval of 13,400 to 17,500 fish (Table 2-3-46).
Table 2-3-46. Petersen population .estimates with associated 95% confidence
intervals for 1983 coho salmon migration to Sunshine,
Talkeetna and Curry stations.
Parameter Jj
m
c
r
1\
N
95% c. I.
Population Estimate Location
Sunshine Station
2,243
1,243
183
15,171
13,386-
17,506
Talkeetna Station
364
275
41
2,399
1,774-
3,325
ll m = Number of fish marked (adjusted).
Curry Station
70
117
10
761
425-
1,551
c = Total number of fish examined for marks during sampling census.
r = Total number of marked fish observed during sampling census.
" N = Population estimate.
1\ C.I. = Confidence interval around N.
-156-
-
-
"""'
-
"""'!
!
-
"""' I
"l""
I
r
I"""
I
-1
-
In 1983, 574 coho salmon were intercepted by the two fishwheels operated at
Yentna Station (TRM 04) over a 59 day migrational period (Table 2-3-11).
Based on these fishwheel catches, the migration began on July 15, reached a
midpoint on July 27 and extended through the last operational day,
September 4. The migration peak occurred on about July 23 (Appendix Table
2-D-3}. Coho salmon were more abundant a 1 eng the south bank, where 63
percent of the fishwheel catch at this station was recorded (Figure 2-3-34).
Based on fishwheel catches the coho salmon migration to Sunshine Station
(RM 80}, in 1983, began on July 23, reached a midpoint on August 5 and was
essentially complete by August 25. The migration reached a peak on August 4
(Appendix Table 2-D-6). Eighty-two percent of the 2,254 coho salmon were
captured along the east bank at this station (Table 2-3-11 and Figure
2-3-34}.
The distribution of fishwheel catch per hour as a function of time is
illustrated in Figure 2-3-34 and reveals a distinct bimodal pattern in the
coho salmon catch curve for fishwheels located on both banks of the river at
Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations. This pattern is also apparent
for fishwheels located at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations
(Figure 2-3-35). Three possible explanations may serve to explain this
distribution. They are: 1) delayed response to coho salmon catches in the
Cook Inlet commercial fishery, 2} stock differences in migrational timing of
coho salmon, and 3) alteration in migrational movements in response to a
variation in seasonal Susitna River discharges. In reviewing the fishwheel
-157-
~~ -~------~------------------------
0.8 --100
........ , ,....---
I \
J \ ~ J I
I \ / I \ YEN TNA STATION 80 I ' Nor-tn Bank q) 0.6 I I ...........,.
J \ / Soutn Bonk -------~ cJ) \ Smoot ned by a.P2b.Pc liD I \ .£. I I / -4
3 I ' CUIIIUiatlve x·----Q) ';co,.
I ' 60 > ........ I -1, L. I --, I .-.,) 1111
J 0.4 I I :.i)-i
J \ li;.
I I 1 0 ('~ 0 \ I I \ \ ::c I I I I
I \ I I 40 J ........ I \ , I \ E ~ .£. I \ ,, I \ ,_, \ I I J -~.j rn I
I I I I u 0.2 I I I I
u... ' .. , ~ \
\ 20 \ ~
!n
tl{!
0.9 0 I'll ii
23 30 7 14 21 28 II 18 z~ a '.::H
M&
fcJUNE JULY AUG. SEPT.~
II"'
2.5 ----10.0 ,...-~I
SUNSHINE STATION /
2.0 East 6CII"'k I w •• t Bank -----------80 ~-
cJ) SMOotheci by CS+2b+C I ~ cJ) ..
.£. Cumulative x--.-.-
3 Q)
........ 1.5 60 >
L. I .-.,) J 0 0 I ::c ....
........ I .0 40 J
.£. I E
rn J
I u ~
u... 0.5 20
~
ra 0
8 IS 22 29 6 13 20 Z7 3 19 17 24 31 7 14 -J-+--JUNE JULY AUG. •[• SEPT.--i
Dot.e
~
Figure 2-3-34. r4ean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch of coho """
sa1mon by two day periods at Yentna and Sunshine stations in
1983.
-158-
r
-
9.32
a> e. 24
Q)
_c
3
' L
:J e. ts
0
I
' .L
(I)
LL.
e.e8
a .16
Ql e. 12
Q)
_c
3
' L
:J 0. as
0
I
' _c
(I)
LL.
0.04
TALKEETNA STATION
East Bank
West Bank ---------
Smoothed by a+2b+c
4
Cumu I at i ve % ---
~~ / : \ ;,
I I I I /
I 1 I \ /
I 1 I I /
I 1 : 1
1 ! I : ~
: ~ : I~
1 ~ I I ; \ :; \
I I I I
I l Y ~
: )': I : I \
/ I
I , ,
I
I
I
I
8 16 22 29 6 13 20 'D 3 18 17 24 31
/~
7 14 21
1-4!"----JUNE -----1-t---JULY __ ..._ __ AUG. ----•~~~~o~j ... .--SEPT. -..j
CURRY STATION
Ea•t Bank
We•t Bank ----
Smoothed by G+2b+e ...
Cumulative %---
8 16 22 29 6 19 17 2.. 31 7
1-111•~-----JUNE --J•...,I••--JULY --J•..j.l....,.~ --AU G. ---+-l~-
Dat.e
14 21
SEPT.---f
tee
80
Cl)
60 >
20
100
80
60
40
2e
(I)
>
~
0
:J
E
:J u
Figure 2-3-35. ~1ean hourly and cumulative percent fishwheel catch of coho
salmon by two day periods at Talkeetna and Curry stations in
1983.
-159-
catch figures it can be seen that the low catches occur on about the same
days, August 9 and 10, at all four sampling stations. Differential
migrational rates for individual stocks and low catches as a result of the
commercial fishery would result in low points in the fishwheel catch
distribution at time intervals corresponding to coho salmon migrational rates
between stations. An examination of 1983 USGS provisional Susitna and Yentna
rivers discharge data shows that peak flows (flooding conditions) occurred
from August 9 to 11 in both rivers (Figure 2-3-25). These peak flows
correspond to the 1 ow points in the fi shwheel catch per hour curve and
cessation of migration during these flows would seem to be the most plausible
explanation to the bimodal catch distribution at these stations.
A portion of the 1983 coho salmon escapement passing Yentna (TRM 04) and
Sunshine (RM 80) stations were sampled to identify population age
composition. Results are summarized in Figure 2-3-36 and Table 2-3-47. Coho
salmon migrating to Yentna Station were comprised of 80.4 percent four year
old fish, 16.1 percent three year old fish and 3.5 percent five year old
fish. All coho salmon sampled spent at least one winter rearing in
freshwater and 80.7 percent migrated to sea in their third year of life.
Interestingly, 2.6 percent of the sample did not overwinter in the ocean
environment but returned in the fall of the same year they migrated to sea.
At Sunshine Station, 516 coho salmon ages were collected from the escapement
(Table 2-3-47). About 63.3, 35.9 and 0.8 percents represented four, three
and five year old fish, respectively. The majority of the coho salmon
sampled (63.1%), outmigrated in their third year of life.
-160-
-
-
-
-
I 1-' m ~ I ) 1 l .. .. .... ~-ffi Q.. 211 • I "t ll<i 1r jQ 3 4 6 AGE YENTNA STATION n • 311 I •• .. !Z tt .. ei a. 211 ., Vf"·'t" i 3 4 6 AGE swSHINE S ATION n • liil8 1 •• .. I· A. n • I "f 'U, J I 3 4 6 AGE TALKftlNA STA ON n • 231 CJ fEMALES tzd HALES •• .. .... z w U18 ffi Q.. 211 II ) I J 3 4 6 AGE CORRY STATION n • .. 1 Figure 2-3-36. Age composition of fishwheel intercepted coho salmon at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna and Curry stations in 1983. 1
Table 2-3-47. Analysis of coho salmon age data by percent from 1983
escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna
and Curry stations.
Age Class Y
Co 11 ecti on Site n
32 33 42 43 44 54
Yentna Station 311 14.5 1.6 0.3 79.1 1.0 3.5
Sunshine Station 516 35.9 0.2 63.1 0.8
Talkeetna Station 231 39.4 0.4 60.2
Curry Station 47 46.8 53.2
y Gilbert-Rich Notation
Length (FL) and related age information collected from a subsample of coho
salmon at Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations in 1983 are
summarized in Table 2-3-48. The mean length of all coho salmon measured at
-
-
Yentna Station was 528 mm. The composite mean length of all coho salmon -
measured at Sunshine Station was 523 mm. Sex composition relative to age for
coho salmon collected at Yentna and Sunshine stations in 1983 indicate that
rna 1 es were consistently more abundant than fema 1 es for a 11 ages at both
sites, with overall sex ratios of 2.3:1 and 1.2:1 in the above station order
(Table 2-3-49).
3.2.5.2 Talkeetna to Upper Devil Canyon
3.2.5.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
The coho salmon escapement to Talkeetna Station (RM 103) was about 2,400 fish
in 1983 (Table 2-3-46). At Curry Station (RM 120) the escapement was about
800 coho salmon (Table 2-3-46). Both estimates include an unknown number of.
-162-
.... ,
-
-
I ......
0\ w
I
1
Table 2-3-48. Analysis of coho salmon lengths. in millimeters. by age class from escapement samples
collected at Yentna, Sunshine. Talkeetna and Curry stations in 1983.
--
n Range Ltmfts Mean 95S Conf. Interval 'Y
Collection Age
Site Class Hl/ F 'J./ M F M f H F f.1
Yentna 32 30 15 405-598 395-571 492 492 472-511 464-521 481
Station 33 5 -240-330 -293 - --286
42 -1 -531 -531 ---
43 170 76 320-655 387-609 543 538 534-551 528-549 556
44 3 -300-331 -315 ---315
54 9 2 552-625 542-597 596 570 --592
All ~I 349 149 240-679 348-613 527 530 519-535 522-539 548
498 240-679 528 522-534
Sunshine 32 110 75 385-625 400-585 487 491 478-496 480-502 488
Station 42 -1 -475 -475 ---
43 179 147 395-630 410-640 539 540 531-547 534-547 545
54 3 1 600-645 570 625 570 --630
All !I 438 356 385-665 400-640 523 524 517-528 519-530 520
794 385-665 523 520-527
Talkeetna 32 59 32 380-595 395-590 482 499 468-496 481-517 470
Statton 42 1 -450 -450 ---450
43 77 62 430-640 450-680 542 552 530-553 542-561 550
All !I 226 135 340-690 395-700 522 538 514-530 530-546 530
361 340-700 528 522-534
Curry 32 16 6 430-530 354-555 477 480 461-493 -470
Stat inn 43 17 8 480-610 500-590 554 553 534-575 -555
All~ 48 24 420-610 354-600 518 530 503-534 -515
72. 354-610 522 509-535
Y Males Y Females Confidence Interval of the Hean. Composite of all aged and non-aged samples.
tied fan
F
505
~
531
552
-
570
542
544
500
475
540
570
530
525
510
-
555
540
540
500
560
543
530
milling fish which returned downstream to spawn below the respective
stations.
Table 2-3-49. Sex ratios of male and female coho salmon by age from 1983
escapement samples collected at Yentna, Sunshine, Talkeetna
and Curry stations.
Collection Site
Yentna Station
Sunshine Station
Talkeetna Station
Curry Station
Age
3
4
5
All y
3
4
5
All y
3
4
Ally
3
4
All y
Sample
Size
50
250
11
498
185
327
4
794
91
140
361
22
25
72
Y · Includes all aged and non-aged samples.
Number
Males Females
35 15
173 77
9 2
349 149
110 75
179 148
3 1
438 356
59 32
78
226
16
17
48
62
135
6
8
24
Sex
Ratio
(M!F)
2.3:1
2.2:1
4.5:1
2.3:1
1. 5:1
1. 2:1
3.0:1
1. 2: 1
1. 8:1
1. 3:1
1. 7:1
2.7:1
2.1:1
2.0:1
As depicted in Appendix Table 2-D-9 and Figure 2-3-35, fishwheel catches
indicate the 1983 coho salmon migration at Talkeetna Station (RM 103) began
on July 30, reached a median on August 14 and was essentially complete by
-164-
-
-
-
-
r
September 7. The migration peak was on August 16. Coho sa 1 mon were more
abundant along the west bank where 69 percent of the fishwheel catch at this
station was recor1ed (Figure 2-3-35).
At Curry Station (RM 120}, the 1983 coho salmon migration started on July 28,
was mid-way through on August 12 and virtually complete by September 2
{Appendix Table 2-D-12 and Figure 2-3-35). The peak of migration occurred on
August 15. Sixty-three percent of the 93 captures were recorded along the
east bank (Figure 2-3-35).
Migrational rates were calculated from recaptures of coho salmon tagged at
Sunshine (RM 80} and Talkeetna (RM 103) stations in 1983 (Figure 2-3-37). As
illustrated, coho required an average of 17 days to navigate the 23 miles
between Sunshine and Talkeetna stations, for a mean travel rate of 1.4 mpd.
The 17 miles between Talkeetna and Curry (RM 120} stations were traveled in
an average of three days for a rate of 5. 7 mpd. Between Sunshine and Curry
stations the average travel time was 21 days or 2.0 mpd. These differences
indicate that coho salmon spend more time mi 11 i ng between RM 80 and 103 than
between RM 103 and 120.
Two hundred thirty-one and-47 coho salmon intercepted by fishwheels at
Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations were sampled for age in 1983
(Table 2-3-47 and Figure 2-3-36}. The sample collected at Talkeetna Station
segregated to 60.6 percent four year old fish and 39.4 percent three year old
fish. The majority of the coho salmon (60.2%) migrated to sea in their third
year of life. The escapement sampled at Curry Station were comprised of 53.2
and 46.8 percent four and three years old fish, respectively. Again the
-165-
I ......
O'l
O'l
I
10
8
>-0
c: 6 .,
:I
CT
G 4 ...
lL
~ 0 2
(a)
SUNSHINE TO TALKEETNA
(23 miles) n = 22
f= 16.6
Ranoe 4-29
0 15 30
Number of Days Between Capturu
20
> 15
0
c:
G
::1 i 10 ...
lL
~ 5
0
8UN8H INE
TO CURRY
(40 miles)
n=5
i=21.2
Ranoe 13-35
45
TALKEETNA TO CURRY.
n=7 ( 17 miles)
i = 3.0
~ 30 Ranoe 2-5
c:
G
:I
0" • ...
lL 15
::-e 0
0 15 30
(b) Number of Daya Between Captures
15 30
(c) Number of Day a Between Capture a
Figure 2-3-37. Migrational rates of coho salmon between (a) Sunshine and Talkeetna stations, (b) Talkeetna
and Curry stations and (c) Sunshine and Curry stations, 1983.
.J .J J J
-
-
-
-
-
.....
....
-
majority of the fish, 53.2 percent, migrated to sea in their third year of
1 i fe.
Length (FL) and associated age data were also collected from a subsample of
the coho salmon intercepted at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations
in 1983. The results of these measurements are presented in Table 2-3-48 ~nd
Appendix 2-E. The coho salmon sampled at Talkeetna Station averaged 528 mm
and at Curry Station, 522 mm. The number of males was consistently greater
than the number of females among all ages sampled at both Talkeetna and Curry
stations as shown in Table 2-3-49. The overall male to female sex ratios for
all fish sampled at these two stations was 1.7:1 and 2.0:1, respectively.
3.2.5.2.2 Spawning Ground Surveys
3.2.5.2.2.1 Main Channel
There was no specific Susitna River main channel spawning survey program in
1983. However, while conducting slough and stream surveys one main channel
coho salmon spawning site was located at RM 131.1. As illustrated in
Appendix Figure 2-G-8 this site was approximately 150 yards upstream from the
confluence of 4th of July Creek. Two coho salmon were observed near redd
sites here on October 1 (Appendix Table 2-G-1).
3.2.5.2.2.2 Sloughs and Streams
All 35 known Susitna River sloughs between RM 98.6 and 161.0 were
surveyed for coho salmon presence in 1983. These surveys were conducted
between July 26 and October 8 with the results listed in Appendix
1able 2-G-2.
-167-
Coho salmon were observed in three of the 35 sloughs surveyed in 1983
although this presence was considered to represent milling, not spawning
activity (Appendix Table 2-G-2).
Tributary streams to the Susitna River above RM 98.6 and below 161.0 were
also surveyed regularly for coho salmon in 1983 (Appendix Table 2-G-3). Ten
streams were found to have coho salmon (Table 2-3-50). These survey counts
do not represent total escapements into tributaries but were counts of
standard index reaches for each tributary. He 1 i copter surveys of se 1 ected
Table 2-3-50. Peak coho salmon index counts of streams surveyed by foot
above RM 98.6, 1983.
Number Counted
River
Stream Mile Date Live Dead Total
Whiskers Creek 101.4 9/15 55 0 55
Chase Creek 106.9 10/8 0 1 1
Slash Creek 111.2 10/2 2 0 2
Gash Creek 111.6 9/19 18 1 19
Lane Creek 113.6 9/19 2 a 2
L. McKenzie Creek 116.2 10/1 18 0 18
4th of July Creek 131.0 9/18 2 1 3
Indian River 138.6 8/19 27 0 27
Jack Long Creek 144.5 10/1 1 0 1
Portage Creek 148.9 8/18 2 0 2
TOTAL 127 3 130
-168-
-
-
-
~~
-
"""
-
-
-
~
"""!
-
....
-
f""'
-
....
....
-
tributaries indicate that Whiskers Creek (RM 101.4) and Indian River
(RM 138.6) were the two most important spawning tributaries in 1983 (Table
2-3-51).
Table 2-3-51. Coho salmon peak 1983 counts by helicopter of selected streams
above RM 98.6.
River Number Counted
Stream Mile Date Live Dead Total
Whiskers Creek 101.4 9/24 110 5 115
Chase Creek 106.9 10/1 5 1 6
Indian River 138.6 9/10 53 0 53
Portage Creek 148.9 9/25 15 0 15
TOTAL 183 6 189
Survey observations indicate coho salmon spawning activity in streams reached
a peak between the first week of September and the first week of October in
1983. At Whiskers Creek (RM 101.4) peak spawning occurred during the last
two weeks of September (Appendix Table 2-G-3).
Ground and h,l!licopter surveys in Indian River (RM 138.6) indicate that the
coho salmon observed initially during foot surveys of the first mile continue
to move upstream and presumably spawn in the middle and upper reaches of
Indian River (Figure 2-3-38) .
-169-
c
ILl .... z
::>
0 u
z
0 ::,;
_J
ct
(I)
0
:I:
I 0 ..... u "'-..1
0
I LL
0
a:: w
ID
::1:
::>
z
90 INDIAN RIVER 90 PORTAGE CREEK GROUND SURVEY OF _GROUND SURVEY FROM
THE t•ITRM. MOUTH TO STANDARD
60 HELICOPTER SURVEY c 80 INDEX POINT (Approx.l/4 mi.).
LIJ
TO UPPER SPAWNING ... ---HELICOPTER SURVEY Of
LIMIT(Approa.l6 mi.) TOTAL DRAINAGE. z
70 :::;) 70
0
(.)
60 z 60
0
l:
...J 50 ct 50
(I)
0 4.0 40 :I:
0
\ 0
\ LL 30 30 \ 0
\ a:: \ LIJ 20 \ m 20
\..--~ 1\ :::> I \
10 z to / \ /
/ \ ,. ,,. "' ,
0 0
24 29 3 8 13 18 23 28 2 7 12 17 22 27 2 7 12 24 29 3 8 13 18 23 28 2 7 12 17 12
NULY I• AUG. ,. , .. SEPT. 1,. OCT.+-J NULY~-c AUG. ~, .. SEPT. ,..f-c OCT.-toi
DATE DATE
Figure 2-3-38. Peak coho salmon ground and helicopter survey counts of Indian River and Portage Creek
in 1983.
-J J j J J . I .I .I
-
I"""
I"""
r
3.3 Bering Cisco
3.3.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna
3.3.1.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
No provision was made to estimate Bering cisco escapements or ascertain their
migrational timing characteristics in 1983. However, fishwheel catches of
Bering cisco were recorded incidental to adult salmon studies at both Yentna
(TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations {Table 2-3-52).
Table 2-3-52. Summary of 1983 Bering cisco interceptions by location and
gear type.
Sampling River Date Number Gear Type Location ~1i 1 e First Capture Last Capture Caught
Yentna 04 Fishwheel 8/20 9/4 24
Station
Sunshine 80 Fishwheel 8/28 9/10 29
Station
Talkeetna 103 Fishwheel 8/30 9/10 5
Station
Main 101.0-Gillnet and 9/15 10/6 9
Channel 131.1 Electroshocker
At Yentna Station (TRM 04) fishwheels intercepted 24 Bering cisco in 1983.
The first capture was recorded on August 20 and the last capture on
September 4, the last day of fishwheel operation at this station
(Appendix Table 2-D-3). There is insufficient information available to
-171-
define any migrational timing characteristics. Most Bering cisco were found
to migrate along the south bank where 67.7 percent of the fishwheel captures
occurred.
Sunshine Station {RM 80) fishwheels, operational from June 3 until
September 11, intercepted 29 Bering cisco in 1983 (Appendix Table 2-D-6).
The first recorded fishwheel catch was on August 28 with catches continuing
through September 10 (Table 2-3-52). Bering cisco exhibited an affinity for
migration along the east bank at this station as evidenced by 86.2 percent of
the catch occurring in east bank fishwheels.
3.3.2 Talkeetna to Upper Devil Canyon
3.3.2.1 Main Channel Escapement Monitoring
There was no program designed specifically to monitor Bering cisco abundance,
migrational characteristics or spawning activities in 1983. Bering cisco
information was gathered incidental to adult salmon and resident and juvenile
studies.
Talkeetna Station (RM 103) fishwheels, operating from June 7 through
September 12, intercepted five Bering cisco in 1983 (Table 2-3-52). The
first capture was recorded on August 30 and the last on September 10
(Appendix Table 2-D-9). Three of these captures occurred in east bank
fishwheels and two in west bank fishwheels. No age, length or sex data were
collected from the Bering cisco intercepted at this station.
-172-
-
.....
-
-
....
.....
-
I~
.....
Curry ~station (RM 120) fishwheels were operational from June 9 through
September 14 in 1983. There were no recorded captures of Bering cisco in
this time period at this station (Appendix Table 2-D-12).
While conducting related resident and juvenile studies, Su Hydro biologists
captured or observed nine Bering cisco between September 16 and October 6,
1983. Eight Bering cisco were electroshocked or gillnetted in main channel
sites between RM 101.0 and 102.2. The ninth was electroshocked near the
confluence of Fourth of July Creek (RM 131.1) on October 6. None of the nine
Bering cisco captured in the main channel were in spawning condition at the
time of capture.
-173-
4.0 SUMMARY
The 1981 and 1982 data referenced in this section have. been taken from the
ADF&G, Phase I (1981) and Phase II (1982) Adult Anadromous Fisheries reports.
4.1 Eulachon
For the last two years (1982-83), two eulachon migrations have entered the
Susitna River. In 1982 the first migration passed through the intertidal
reach (RM 0-7) after ice breakup, in late May (5/16-30). A second migration
followed in early June (6/1-8). In 1983, the first migration occurred ~n mid
May (5/10-17) followed by a second migration in mid May and early June
(5/19-6/6).
In 1982 eulachon entered the Susitna River at a river temperature range of 2°
to 10°C and in 1983, 3° to 11°C. This is similar to the 2° to 10°C
temperature range of the Columbia River (Washington) when eulachon enter that
system (Smith and ·saalfeld, 1955). No correlation was found between daily
fluctuations in Susitna River temperature or Cook Inlet high tide level and
eulachon abundance in the intertidal reach (RM 0-7).
The upper distance of eulachon migration in the Susitna River was about 50
miles in 19R2 and 1983. The first migration reached RM 40.5 in 1982 and
RM 28.5 in 1983. The second migration reached RM 48.5 and 50.5 in 1982 and
1983, respectively. The largest concentrations of first and second
migration eulachon in both years remained in the initial 29 miles of the
Susitna River main channel.
-174-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1"
!
..
Eulachon started spawning in the Susitna River main channel within about five
days of entering the river in 1982 and 1983. First migration fish spawned in
1982 between May 21 and 31 and in 1983, betwee11 May 15 and 22. Second
migration eulachon spawned in 1982 between June 4 and 9 and .in 1983, between
May 23 and June 5.
In 1982 and 1983, first and second migration eulachon generally spawned in
the same habitat type in the Susitna River main channel. In both years major
spawning occurred near cut banks and riffle areas with loose sand and gravel
substrate and moderate water velocity (approximately 1.5 ft/sec).
Water temperatures were colder in the Susitna River when first and second
migration eulachon spawned in 1982 as compared to 1983. First migration fish
spawned at temperatures averaging 5.8°C (1982) and 7.3°C (1983).
Temperatures averaged 7.5°C {1982) and 8.3°C (1983) when the second migration
spawned.
In 1982 and 1983, eul a chon did not spawn in clear water tributaries or
sloughs associated with the Susitna River. Spawning occurred in both years
in the glacial Yentna River tributary but the extent was not determined.
Eulachon age, length and weight data were collected in 1982 and 1983. The
two eulachon migrations in both years were comprised mainly of three year old
fish (80-90%). Overall the eulachon were larger in 1982 as compared to 1983 .
The average fish 1 ength in 1982 for combined first and second migration
eulachon was 213 mm and in 1983, 206 mm. Average fish weight in 1982 was 72
g and in 1983, 64 g.
-175-
In both years (1982-83) male eulachon ripened earlier and remained in
spawning condition longer than females. Also, they lived longer. In 1982
the average pre-spawning condition male to female ratio was 1.6:1 in the
first migration and 1.3:1 in the second migration. In 1983 the respective
ratios were 1.2:1 and 0.6:1. These ratios were dissimilar to the male to
female spawning and post-spawning condition ratios which were biased toward
males due to female eulachon having a shorter stream life.
The Susitna River eulachon population supported a limited sport fishery in
both years (1982-83). The 1982 harvest was in the range of 3,000 to 5,000
fish and in 1983, 500 to 2,000 fish.
In 1982 and 1983 the Susitna River escapement of first migration eulachon was
in the range of several hundred thousand fish. The second migration
escapement was in the range of several million eulachon in both years.
-176-
-
-
-
-
-
-
4.2 Adult Salmon
4.2.1 Chinook Salmon
4.2.1.1 Intertidal to Talkeetna
Chinook salmon escapements have been monitored for the last two years in the
Susitna River at Sunshine Station (RM 80). In 1982, the escapement was about
52,900 fish and in 1983, 41 percent higher at 90,100 fish (Figure 2-4-1 and
Table 2-4-1).
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STATION
Ill 1982
~ 1983
CHI NOOK SALMON ESCAPEMENT ( x IPOO)
Figure 2-4-1. Minimum Susitna River chinook salmon escapements for 1982 and
1983.
Generally chinook salmon occupy the Susitna River main channel at Sunshine
Station (RM 80) for a month between mid June and mid July. At Sunshine
Station in 1982, the chinook salmon migration occurred between June 18 and
-177-
Table 2-4-1. Escapements by species and sampling locations for 1981, 1982
and 1983.
Sampling
Location Year
Yentna
Station
Sunshine
Station
Talkeetna
Station
Curry
Station
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
Chinook Sockeye £1
~/
~./
52,900
90,100
1/
10,900
14,400
1/
11,300
9,600
139,400
113,800
104,400
133,500
151,500
71,500
4,800
3' 100
4,200
2,800
1,300
1,900
Escapement ];/
Pink
36,100
447,300
60,700
Chum
19,800
27,800
10,800
49,500 262,900
443,200 430,400
40,500 265,800
2.,300
73,000
9,500
1,000
58,800
5,500
20,800
49,100
50,400
13,100
29,400
21,100
Coho
17,000
34,100
8,900
Total
212,300
623,000
184,800
19,800 465,700
45,700 1,123,700
15,200 483,100
3,300
5,100
2,400
1,100
2,400
800
31,200
141,200
80,900
18,000
103,200
38,900
11 Escapement estimates were derived from tag/recapture population
estimates except Yentna Station escapements which were obtained using
side scan sonar.
£1 Second run sockeye salmon escapements.
ll Yentna Station side scan sonar equipment was not operation a 1 on the
dates required to estimate the total Yentna River chinook salmon
escape1uent.
1/ Chinook salmon were not monitored for escapement in 1981.
July 9. In 1983 the migration started nine days earlier. The beginning and
end dates were June 9 and July 9, respectively (Figure 2-4-2 and Appendix
Table 2-0-13).
-178-
-
tii!'JWJ.:
-
"""' I
....
-
-
-
~ "]
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STATION
6/5
CHINOOK SALMON
5°/o Cumulative
Calc fi pei Effort
---------11981
------------...o:--------------------------.--
~-------------~ 1983
~--------------------~ 1982
6/19 7/3 7/17 7/31 8/14 8/28
DATE
figure 2-4-2. Migrational timing of chinook salmon based on fishwheel catch per unit effort at selected
locations on the Susitna River in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
~ j
The chinook salmon escapements at Sunshine Station (RM 80) have been
monitored for age, length and sex composition for the last three years. The
1981-83 escapements have included fish ranging in age from three through
seven years old (Table 2-4-2). Nearly all the fish sampled in these
escapements had gone to sea ( smo 1 ted} in the second year of 1 i fe. The
dominant age group in the 1981 escapement was the four year olds (32%), in
1982 the six year olds (37%} and in 1983 again, the six year olds (45%). The
average length of chinook salmon at Sunshine Station was smaller in 1981 than
in 1982 and smaller in 1982 than in 1983 due to escapement age composition
changes. Male to female ratios in the three years ranged from 3.5:1 (1981)
to 1.2:1 (1982 and 1983) (Table 2-4-3). Generally the females were dominant
in the older age groups of the 1981-83 escapements, i.e., among the five, six
and seven year old fish.
4.2.1.2 Talkeetna To Upper Devil Canyon
Chinook salmon escapement estimates have been obtained by the Petersen method
in the 1 ast two years for the Susitna River rna in channe 1 at Ta 1 keetna
(RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations. In 1982 about 10,900 chinook salmon
reached Ta 1 keetna Station. A 35 percent higher escapement of 14,400 fish
occurred in 1983. Seventeen miles upstream at Curry Station an estimated
11,300 chinook salmon reached this location in 1982. The 1983 escapement was
about 9,600 fish (Table 2-4-1 and Figure 2-4-1).
In 1981, 1982 and 1983 chinook salmon were abundant in the Susitna River main
channel at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations for about a month.
The migration began in each of these years around the third week of June and
ended in the third week of Ju1y (Figure 2-4-2 and Appendix Table 2-D-13.)
-180-
-
-
-
-
-
-
....
I
-
-
-
r
.....
Table 2-4-2. Analysis of chinook salmon age data by percent from escapement
samples collected at Sunshine t Talkeetna and Curry stations for
1981-83.
AGE GROUP BROOD YEAR
LOCATION YEAR 3 4 5 6 7 74 75 76 77 78 79 80
SUNSHINE 1981 27.6 31 .9 23.1 16.9 0.5 0.5 16.9 23.1 31 .9 27.6 --
STATION
1982 15.0 27.4 20.9 36.1 0.4 -0.4 36.1 20.9 27.4 15.0 -
1983 1.5 3.9 39.0 45.0 10.6 - -
10.6 45.0 39.0 3.9 1.5
TALKEETNA 1981 15.8 29.8 21.4 30.1 2.9 2.9 30.1 21 .4 29.8 15,8 --
STATION
1982 20.7 35.8 20.6 22.3 0.6 -0.6 22.3 20.6 35.8 20.7 -
1983 22.5 9.4 34.0 27.9 6.2 --6.2 27.9 34.0 9.4. 22.5
CURRY 1981 18.5 34.3 27.8 19.4 o.o 0.0 19.4 27.8 34.3 18.5 --
STATION
1982 17 .o 29.3 22.5 30.8 0.5 -0.5 30.8 22.5 29.3 17.0 -
1983 9.4 3.9 24.4 43.5 18.8 --18.8 43.5 24.4 3.9 9.4
Table 2-4-3 .. Average male to female sex ratios of chinook salmon escapements
at Sunshinet Talkeetna and Curry stations for 1981-83.
YEAR
LOCATION 1981 1.982 1983
SUNSHINE STATION 3.5:1 1. 2:1 "' 1. 2:1
TALKEETNA STATION 2.6:1 2.3:1 2.1:1
CURRY STATION 1. 9:1 2.3:1 1. 4:1
-181-
Chinook· salmon in 1982 and 1983 migrated at a slower rate in the 23 miles
between Sunshine (RM 80) and Talkeetna (RM 103) stations than in the 17 miles
between Talkeetna and Curry (RM 120) stations. The average travel rates
between Sunshine and Talkeetna stations in 1982 and 1983 were 2.1 and 1.8 mpd
respectively. Between Talkeetna and Curry stations for 1982 and 1983 the
rates averaged 2.2 and 2.7 mpd respectively.
The ages of chinook salmon sampled in 1981-83 at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry
(RM 120) stations have ranged from three to seven years. The majority of the
escaping fish have been four, five and six year olds that went to sea
(smolted) in the second year of life (Table 2-4-2). In the last three years
the average length of chinook salmon at Talkeetna and Curry stations has
varfed primarily due to annual changes in the escapement age composition. At
Talkeetna Station the average lengths were: 710 mm (1981), 642 mm (1982) and
626 mm (1983). Seventeen miles upstream at Curry Station the averages were:
668 mm (1981), 725 mm (1982) and 743 mm (1983). In all three years males
were more numerous than females in the Talkeetna and Curry stations
escapements (Table 2-4-3).
In 1981, 1982 and 1983 chinook salmon spawned exclusively in streams in the
Susitna River reach above RM 98.6. No spawning was observed in any other
habitat type including sloughs, _side channels and mainstem areas. The two
important chinv~k salmon spawning streams for the last three years have been:
Indian River (RM 138.6) and Portage Creek (RM 148.9). Chinook salmon
escapements into these streams have increased since 1981. The peak
escapement counts recorded at Indian River were: 422 fish (1981), 1,053 fish
(1982) and 1,193 fish (1983). At Portage Creek, the respective counts were:
659 fish (1981), 1,253 fish (1982) and 3,140 fish (1983).
-182-
~""'" '
-
4.2.1.3 Escapement Index Surveys
In 1983, chino k salmon escapement surveys were conducted at 19 designated
index streams throughout the Susitna River 'drainage. Escapement counts
averaged about six percent higher in 1983 than the previous seven year
(1976-82) average and 50 percent higher than in 1982. The largest increases
were recorded in the Chulitna River drainage (RM 98.5) and upper Susitna
River reach above RM 98.6. Several chinook salmon spawning areas in 1983
supported higher escapements than in any year between 1976 and 1982.
4.2.2 Sockeye Salmon
4.2.2.1 First Run
First run sockeye salmon escapements were monitored in the Susitna River main
channel at Sunshine Station (RM 80} in 1982 and 1983. The escapement in 1982
was about 5,800 fish and in 1983, about 43 percent less at 3,300 fish.
Based on fishwheel catches, first run sockeye salmon were abundant at
Sunshine Station (RM 80) for three weeks, between the first and third weeks
of June in 1982 and 1983 (Appendix Table 2-D-13). In both years, nearly the
entire escapement migrated along the east side of the Susitna River at
Sunshine Station.
The first run sockeye salmon intercepted at Sunshine Station (RM 80) ·in 1982
and 1983 ranged in age from four to six years o 1 d. Five year o 1 ds were
dominant at 90 percent in 1982 and 71 percent in 1983. Nearly all the fish
sampled in the two escapement years had gone to sea (smelted) in the second
year of life (96-98%). The average length of first run fish was about 23 mm
-183-
longer in 1982 at 538 mm than in 1983 at 515 nun. Sex composition samples
indicated that females were more numerous than males in 1982 by 0.6:1 and in
1983 by 1.3:1.
The destination of the first run sockeye salmon in 1982 and 1983 was the
Talkeetna River drainage (RM 97.1), specifically the inlet stream of Papa
Bear Lake. In 1982 the peak of spawning occurred between the third week of
July and the first week of August. In 1983 pea·k spawning occurred between
the second and fourth weeks of July.
Based on fishwheel catches a small number of first run fish migrated past
Sunshine Station (RM 80) and extended upstream to Talkeetna Station (RM 103)
in 1982 and 1983. These fish were not documented any further upstream in the
Susitna River than RM 103. The first run fish which reached Talkeetna
Station in 1982 and 1983 were considered milling fish that later descended
and spawned in Papa Bear Lake inlet stream.
4.2.2.2 Second Run
For three consecutive years (1981-83) second run sockeye escapements have
been monitored in the main channel of the Yentna and Susitna rivers at four
locations: Yentna Station (TRM 04) in the Yentna River (RM 28) and. Susitna
River stations, Sunshine {RM 80), Talkeetna {RM 103) and Curry (RM 120).
The 1981-83 escapements of second run sockeye salmon were at minimum:
273,000 fish (1981), 265,000 fish (1982) and 176,000 fish (1983)
{Figure 2-4-3 and Table 2-4-4). These estimates represent the combined,
-184-
-
-i
....
-
-
"""
-
....
....
I
r
I
L
......
I
-I
respective year escapements to the Yentna River (RM 28) at Yentna Station
(TRM 04) and Susitna River at Sunshine Station (RM 80). They do not include
escapements to Susitna River tributaries ~elow RM 80 with exception of the
Yentna River and therefore, should be considered minimum values.
COHO
CHUM
Pl NK
IIIII/// ///1111111111/J
~ 1981
litl982
rZJ I 983
==---~ 'I I I I I I II ·
·;·>:.: ............ , .' •:.':';'.):.; :-.·.:.·':.','i:·{.''.i\•:,:; .,,,,:.::•::: .:; !1
SOCK EYE ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,~,,,,i:::~=''''~'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''*~'"~~''''''''''''''*'''t
'I I I I I I I I I I I~
~--~.-----.-~--~~~---.-,----.~J--~.----~,-----.-1-
1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9
ESTIMATED ESCAPEMENT ( x I 00,000)
Figure 2-4-3. Minimum Susitna River sockeye, pink, chum and coho salmon
escapements for 1981, 1982 and 1983.
-185-
!/ Defined as the summation of the Yentna River escapement obtained by side
scan sonar at Yentna Station and the Susitna River escapement obtained
by tag/recapture population estimates at Sunshine Station. These
estimates do not include escapements to Susitna River tributaries below
RM 80 excluding the Yentna River (RM 28).
!:/ Sockeye salmon escapement estimates do not include first run sockeye
salmon.
4.2.2.2.1 Intertidal To Talkeetna
The 1981-83 second run sockeye sa 1 man escapements into the Yentna River
(RM 28) at Yentna Station (TRM 04) were: 139,400 fish (1981), 113,800 fish
(1982) and 104,400 fish (1983) (Table 2-4-1). The Susitna River escapements
at Sunshine Station (RM 80) were:
and 71,500 fish (1983).
133,500 fish (1981), 151,500 fish (1982)
The Yentna River (RM 28) at Yentna Station (TRM 04) has averaged about the
same escapement 1 eve 1 of second run fish for the 1 ast three years as the
Susitna River at Sunshine Station (RM 80) (Figure 2-4-4). Record high, 1983
....
-
-
commercial catches in Upper Cook Inlet contributed to law 1983 escapements at ~
Yentna and Sunshine stations as compared to the escapements in 1981 and 1982.
-186-
-
CURRY
STATION
D 1981
mJ 1982
rl.J 1983
r TALKEETNA
STATION
SUN$HINE
i STATION
-
....
....
.....
YENTNA
STATION
SOCKEYE SALMON ESCAPEMENT ( x 1,000)
Figure 2-4-4. Minimum Susitna River sockeye salmon escapements for 1981,
1982 and 1983.
In the last three years (1981-83} second ·run sockeye salmon have been
generally abundant in the Yentna River (RM 28} at Yentna Station (TRM 04)
between the second week of July and the second week of August (Fig·ure 2-4-5
and Appendix Table 2-D-13}. Most of the second run fish reaching Yentna
Station in 1981-83 passed a 1 ong the south bank based on fi shwhee 1 catches.
In the Susitna River at Sunshine Station (RM 80} second run fish have been
abundant between the third week of July and the second week of August, and
the majority of the fish passage has been along the east side of the river in
a 11 three years.
-187-
I ...... co co
I
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STATION
YEN TNA
STATION
1983
1981
---------------------------------------------
1983
1982
19 81
--------------------~----------------------
----------------------------------------
198 3 t-----f;
SECOND RUN
SOCKEYE SALMON
5% Cumulative
Catch per Effort
6/12 6/26 7/ 10 7/24
DATE
8/7 8/21 9/4 9/18
Figure 2-4-5. Migrational timing of second run sockeye salmon based on fishwheel catch per unit effort at
selected locations on the Susitna River in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
) I ! .
-'
-
....
r
The 1981-83 second run escapements into the Susitna River drainage have
included fish ranging in age from three to six years old. In 1981 and 1982
five year old fish were dominant at Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80)
stations. (57-84%). In 1983, the majority of the returning fish to these
stations were four year alds (64-68%). Nearly a11 the fish in the 1981-83
escapements to bath stations went to sea (smelted) in the second year of life
(93-97%).
The average male to female ratios in the 1981-83 escapements at Yentna
Station (TRM 04) were: 1.2:1 (1981), 2.1:1 (1982) and 1.5:1 (1983). At
Sunshine Station (RM 80) the ratios were: 1.0:1 ( 1981), 0. 9:1 (1982) and
1. 3: 1 (1983).
In 1983, sampling at Sunshine Station (RM 80) established the mean fecundity
of second run sockeye salmon at 3,350 eggs per female. This is about 350
eggs less than the average 3,700 eggs per female for North American stocks
(Hart, 1973). In 1981 and 1982 sockeye .salmon fecundities were not
_evaluated.
4.2.2.2.2 Talkeetna To Upper Devil Canyon
In the last three years (1981-83), escapements of second run sockeye salmon
at Talkeetna Station (RM 103) have ranged from!3,100 fish (1982) to 4,800
fish (1981) and averaged 4,000 fish (Table 2-4-1). Curry Station (RM 120)
escapements have ranged between 1,300 fish (1982) to 2,800 fish (1981) and
averaged 2,000 fish.
-189-
Generally, second run fish of the 1981-83 escapements have been abundant in
the Susitna River main channel at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry {RM 120)
stations for about five weeks from the third week of July to the fourth week
of August (Figure 2-4-5 and Appendix Table 2-0-13).
In the 1 ast three years ( 1981-83) the second run escapement have shown no
particular preference for movement along the east or west banks of the
Susitna River at Talkeetna Station (RM 103) based on fishwheel catches.
Seventeen miles upstream at Curry Station (RM 120) second run fish have
favored the east bank for migration.
Second run sockeye salmon migrated above Sunshine Station (RM 80) at a slower
speed in 1981 than in 1982 or 1983. The rate of travel between Sunshine and
Talkeetna (RM 103) stations was 1.8 mpd in 1981 compared to 2.7 and 2.4 mpd
in 1982 and 1983 respectively. A similar pattern was recorded for sockeye
salmon traveling between Sunshine and Curry (RM 120) stations. In 1981 the
average travel rate was 2.7 mpd whereas in 1982 and 1983, the rates were 3.4
and 3.7 mpd respectively. Further comparison of these rates indicate that in
all three years second run fish milled more in the 23 miles between Sunshine
and Ta"lkeetna stations than in the 17 mi1es between Talkeetna and Curry
. stations.
Second run sockeye salmon agt. t length and sex samples were collected in the
last three years at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations. The
1981-83 escapements to these stations have included fish ranging in age from
three to six years old. In 1981, five year olds {69-72%) were more plentiful
than four year olds {25-29%) at both stations. In 1982 at Talkeetna Station
-190-
-
-
....
-
-
....
.....
....
five year olds (72%) were also more numerous than four year olds (23%), but
at Curry Station five year olds (37%) were about equal in frequency with the
four year olds (,'0%). In 1983 four year olds (56-72%) were more plentiful
than five year olds (21-40%) at b.oth stations. In all three years nearly all
second run fish sampled at Talkeetna and Curry stations had gone to sea
(smolted) in the second year of life (90-96%).
The average length of second run fish at the two stations varied in the last
three years due to annua 1 changes in the escapement age composition. At
Talkeetna Station the average lengths were: 548 mm (1981), 547 mm (1982) and
509 mm (1983). Seventeen miles upstream at Curry Station the average lengths
were: 549 mm (1981), 466 mm (1982) and 481 mm (1983). In the last three
years females were more numerous than males only in 1981. The male to female
ratios at Talkeetna Station were: 0.6:1 (1981), 1.3:1 (1982) and 1.6:1
(1983). ·The ratios at Curry Stations were: 0.8:1 (1981), 2.1:1 (1982) and
1.6:1 (1983).
The rna in channe 1 of the Sus i tna River above the Chu 1 i tna River confluence
(RM 98.6) was not a second run sockeye salmon spawning area in 1981 or 1982.
A single main channel location was used for spawning in 1983. Eleven second
run fish were observed spawning at the site, located between RM 138.6 and
138.9, on September 15, 1983.
Second run sockeye salmon did not spawn in streams above RM 98.6 in 198L
1982 or 1983. They occupied 12 sloughs above RM 98.6 in 1981 and spawned in
nine of them. In 1982 the respective numbers were 10 and 8, and in 1983, 11
and 8. The 1981-83 peak slough counts (highest live plus dead count) of
-191-
second run fish were: 1,241 fish (1981), 607 fish (1982) and 555 fish (1983)
(Table 2-4-5). The three important spawning sloughs for all three years
were: Slough 11 (RM 135.3), Slough BA (RM 125.4) and Slough 21 (RM 141.1) in
order.
In 1983 the average observation life of a sockeye salmon in a slough above
RM 98.6 was 11.8 days. Using this observation life estimate and slough
escapement counts of live fish over time the 1983 second run escapement to
sloughs above RM 98.6 calculated at 1,600 fish (Table 2-3-29). Assuming
sockeye salmon averaged the same (1983) observation life, the 1981 and 1982
second run slough escapements were 2,200 and 1,500 fish respectively
(Appendix Tables 2-G-12 and 2-G-13).
A percentage of fish monitored for observation life in 1983 did not spawn in
the slough of first entry. A number left the slough of first entry, entered
another slough and spawned. A few died before spawning from bear predation
or stranding.
In 1983, slough spawning second run sockeye salmon were examined for egg
retention. The average retention was 250 eggs per female. About 80 percent
of the females examined had completely spawned, i.e. retained less than 25
eggs each. A similar study in the Cook Inlet drainage found that. depending
on the escapement year between 17 and 100 percent of the ~emale population
will completely spawn-out (retain less than 25 eggs/female) and the number of
eggs retained per spawning female is correlated to spawner density (Barrett,
1974).
-192-
-
-
-
-
-
r
I
I
....
-
....,
1'"""
....
r
.....
-
Table 2-4-5.
Slough
1
2
38
3A
4
5
6
6A
7
8
80
8C
88 0
Moose
At
A
SA
8
9
98
9A
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
21A
Total Percent
Percent distribution of second run sockeye salmon in sloughs
above RM 98.6 based on peak survey counts of 1 i ve p 1 us dead
fish in 1981-83.
River Percent Distribution
Mile 1981 1982 1983 Average
99.6 0 0 0 0
100.2 0 0 0 0
101.4 0.1 0 0.9 0.3
101.9 0.5 0 0 0.3
105.2 0 0 0 0
107.6 0 0 0 0
108.2 0 0 0 0
112.3 0.1 0 0 0
113.2 0 0 0 a·
113.7 0 0 0 0
121.8 0 0 0 0
121.9 0 0.3 0 0.1
122.2 0 0.8 0 0.3
123.5 0 1.3 4.0 1.2
124.6 0 0 0 0
124.7 0 0 0 0
125.4 14.3 1L2 11.9 13.0
126.3 1.3 0.3 0.6
128.3 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.7
129.2 6.5 0.2 0 3.4
133.8 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1
133.8 0 0 0.2 0
135.3 72.0 75.2 44.7 66.3
135.4 0 0 0 0
135.9 0 0 0 0
135.9 0 0 0 0
137.2 0 0 0 0
137.3 . 0 0 0 0
138.9 0.5 0 1.1 0.5
139.1 0 0 0 0
139.7 1.9 0 0.9 1.1
140.0 0.1 0 0 0.1
141.1 3.1 8.7 35.5 12.0
144.5 0 0
145.3 0 0 0 0
100.0 100.0 10"0.0 100.0
Total Fish Count 1,241 607 555 802
-193-
4.2.3 Pink Salmon
Pink salmon escapements have been monitored for the last three years
(1981-83) at Yentna Station (TRM 04} in the Yentna River (RM 28) and at
Sunshine (RM 80), Talkeetna (RM 103), and Curry (RM 120) stations in the
Susitna River.
The 1981-83 escapements of pink salmon into the Susitna River drainage were
at minimum: 86,000 fish (1981), 891,000 fish (1982) and 101,000 fish (1983)
(Table 2-4-4). These estimates were based on the addition. of the Yentna
River (RM 28) and Susitna River escapements to RM 80 and do not include pink
salmon escapements in systems below RM 80 with the exception of the Yentna
River.
4.2.3.1 Intertidal To Talkeetna
Pink salmon generally have a two year life cycle. In the Susitna River the
even year is the dominant escapement year. Pink salmon escapements have been
monitored in the Yentna River (RM 28} at Yentna Station (TRM 04) and in the
Susitna River at Sunshine Station (RM 80) for two odd (1981 and 1983) years
and one even (1982) year. The 1981 odd year escapement at Yentna Station
was about 36,100 fish. The 1983 escapement was about 60,700 fish, nearly
twice the preceding (1981) odd year escapement. In 1982, an even escapement
year, an estimated 447,300 pink salmon passed Yentna Station (Table 2-4-1 and
Figure 2-4-6). At Sunshine Station the odd year pink salmon escapements of
49,500 fish (1981) and 40,500 fish. (1983) were similar in magnitude while the
1982 even year escapement was considerably larger at 443,200 fish.
-194-
.....
-
-
"""'
-'
.....
-
.....
~
!"""'
-
!!"""
-
-
-I
I
I
-
-·
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHI-NE
STATION
YENTNA
STATION
[] 1981
II .1982
tzl 1983
~-t--~~--~--~~--~--~~--~
4 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
PINK SALMON ESCAPEMENT (xi,OOO)
Figure 2-4-6. Minimum Susitpa River pink salmon escapements for 1981, 1982
and 1983.
For the past three consecutive years (1981-83) pink salmon migrational timing
information has been obtained at Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80)
stations. The odd year (1981 and 1983) migrations of pink salmon in the
Yentna River (RM 28) at Yentna Station generally extended between the second
week of July and third week of August. The even year (1982) pink salmon
migration, however, was shorter in duration (Figure 2-4-7 and Appendix Table
2-D-3). The majority of the pink salmon passing Yentna Station in 1981 and
1982 migrated along the south bank, while in 1983 the majority passed along
the north bank. At Sunshine Station the odd year (1981 and 1983) pink salmon
-195-
I
t-'
1.0
0'1
I
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STATION
YENTNA
STATION
PINK SALMON
--------------------------------------------
~----------~1983
~----------~1982
-----------------------41982
;J--------------1 1981
-------------------~------------------------
--------------~1983
a---------------~ 1982
6/28 7/8 7/1~ 7/28 8/7 8/17 8/27 . 9/8
DATE
Figure 2-4-7. Migrational timing of pink salmon based on fishwheel catch per unit effort at selected locations .
on the Susitna River in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
I I ... J l j
.....
!
....
-
-
-I
....
migration generally extended from the third week of July through the second
week of August. Again, as at Yentna Station, the even year (1982) pink
salmon migration was shorter in duration than the odd year (1981 and 1983)
migrations. At Sunshine Station in each of the last three years (1981-83),
over 90 percent of the pink salmon migration has been along the east bank.
Length and sex data were collected from pink salmon escapements at Yentna
(TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations for the last three years (1981-83).
Pink salmon were not sampled for age because the returning adults essentially
represent only one age class, ·;.e., two year old fish. Pink salmon lengths
averaged 1 arger in 1981 than in 1982 and 1983 at both Yentna and Sunshine
stations. The lengths at Yentna Station averaged: 474 nun (1981), 428 mm
(1982) and 426 mm (1983). The average lengths at Sunshine Station were: 447
mm (1981), 435 mm {1982) and 429 nun (1983). Since pink salmon spend little
of their life in freshwater these length differences .were probably a function
of the between year variability in oceanic growth. The male to female pink
salmon sex ratios for the last three escapement years at Yentna Station were:
1.0:1 (1981), 0.8:1 {1982) and 0.9:1 (1983). At Sunshine Station these
ratios were: 0.8:1 (1981), 1.8:1 {1982) and 1.0:1 {1983).
In 1983, the mean fecundity of pink salmon migrating to Sunshine Station
(RM 80) was 1,350 eggs per female. This is within the range of average pink
salmon fecundities (800-2,000) reported by Morrow (1980).
-197-
The Susitna River main channel between RM 7 and 98.6 was surveyed for pink
salmon spawning in 1981 and 1982. Results indicated that pink salmon did not
spawn in the main channel in either of these years. In 1983 the main channel
was not specifically surveyed for spawning.
4.2.3.2 Talkeetna To Upper Devil Canyon
Pink salmon escapements have been monitored at Talkeetna (RM 103) a~d Curry
(RM 120) stations for three consecutive years (1981-83). The (1981) odd year
pink salmon escapement of 2,300 fish at Talkeetna Station was 76 percent less
than the (1983) add year escapement of_ 9,500 fish. The even year (1982)
escapement of pink salmon was 73,000 fish (Table 2-4-1 and Figure 2-4-6). At
Curry Station the 1981 pink salmon escapement was 1,000 fish, 82 percent less
than the 1983 escapement of 5,500 fish. The even year (1982). escapement of
pink salmon was 58,800 fish.
For the last three years (1981-83) pink salmon have been generally abundant
in the Susitna River at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations from
the last week of July through the third week of August (Figure 2-4-7 and
Appendix 2-D). As at Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations the even
year (1982) migration occurred over a shorter time span than the odd year
(1981 and 1983) migrations. Based on fishwheel catches, pink salmon migrated
-
-
-
-,
i
-
-
-
primarily along the east bank at Talkeetna and Curry stations in all three ....
years. The exception was in 1983 at Talkeetna Station when the majority of
pink salmon migrated along the west bank.
-198-
-
,....
-
.....
Migrational rates of pink salmon, for the past three years ( 1981-83), were
determined by the recapture of individua 1 s previously tagged at downstream
· sites. This data (~981-83) indicated that pink salmon migrated at a slower
rate between Sunshine (RM 80) and Talkeetna (RM 103) stations than between
Talkeetna and Curry (RM 120) stations. This may be due, in part, to an
increase in gradient and consolidation of the main channel above the
Chulitna-Susitna rivers confluence. Average 1981-83 pink salmon migrational
rates'between Sunshine and Talkeetna stations were: 2.6 mpd (1981), 7.4 mpd
(1982) and 5.9 mpd (1983). The 17 miles between Talkeetna and Curry stations
were traveled at rates averaging: 6.0 mpd (1981), 10.0 mpd (1982) and 7.1
mpd (1983).
Length and sex information were collected from a portion of the pink salmon
escapement passing both Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations for
three consecutive years (1981-83). Age information was not collected because
pink salmon are generally two year old fish when returning to spawn. The
average lengths of pink salmon generally did not vary between odd and even
years or within years. In 1981 at Talkeetna and Curry stations pink salmon
averaged about 430 mm in length, and in 1982 and 1983 they averaged about 425
mm in length. The male to female sex ratios at Talkeetna Station were:
1.2:1 (1981), 2.0:1 (1982) and 0.8:1 (1983). At Curry Station the sex ratios
were: 0.8:1 (1981), 2.5:1 (1982) and 1.0:1 (1983).
No pink salmon spawning has been identified in the Susitna River main channel
above RM 98.6 in the last three years (1981-83).
-199-
In 1981, 1982 and 1983, sloughs above RM 98.6 were not extensively used by
pink salmon. Peak survey counts for these years, which include both milling
and spawning pink salmon, were: 28 (1981), 507 (1982) and 21 (1983) (Table
2-4-6). The total number of pink salmon actually s_pawning in sloughs has
been estimated for each of the last three years (1981-83). In 1981 an
estimated 38 pink salmon spawned in Slough 8 (RM 113.7), the only slough used
by pink salmon for spawning that year. In 1982 an estimated 297 pink salmon
spawned in five sloughs. The majority of the spawning occurred in Slough 11
....
-
....
(RM 135.3) and Slough 20 (RM 140.0). In 1983 pink salmon did not spawn in .....
sloughs above RM 98.6.
Tributary streams to the Susitna River between RM 98.6 and 161.0 supported
essentially all the pink salmon spawning in this river reach for the last
three years (1981-83). The peak index counts for all streams were: 378
(1981), 2,855 (1982) and 1,329 (1983). The two important spawning streams in
1981 were Chase (RM 106.9) and Lane (RM 113.6) creeks (Table 2-4-7). In 1982
the streams were Indian River (RM 138.6) and Fourth of July Creek (RM 131.1).
The primary spawning in 1983 occurred in Indian River and Portage Creek
(RM 148.9).
4.2.4 Chum Salmon
Chum salmon escapements in the Susitna River drainage for '"ne last three
years were at minimum: 283,000 fish (1981), 458,000 fish (1982) and 277,000
fish (1983) (Table 2-4-4). These estimates do not include respective year
escapements to Susitna River tributaries below RM 80 with the exception of
-200-
-
-
-
-
-
-
....
Table' 2-4-6. Percent distribution of pink salmon in sloughs above RM 98. 6
based on peak survey counts of live plus dead fish in 1981-83. -
River Percent Listribution
Slough Mile 1981 1982 1983 Average
-1 99.6 0 0 0 0
2 100.2 0 0 0 0
38 101.4 0 0 0 0
1"'"" 3A 101.9 3.6 0 0 * 4 105.2 0 0 0 0
5 107.6 0 0 0 0 -6 108.2 0 0 0 0
6A 112.3 0 6.9 0 6.3
7 113.2 0 0 0 0
8 113.7 89.3 0 0 4.2 ~ 80 121.8 0 0 0 0
8C 121.9 0 0 0 0
88 122.2 0 0 0 0
Moose 123.5 0 1.6 0 1.6 AI 124.6 0 0 0 0
A 124.7 7.1 0 4.8 0.5
8A 125.4 0 5.5 14.2 5.2 r-B 126.3 6.3 0 8.4
9 128.3 0 2.4 0 2.1
98 129.2 0 0 0 0
I""" \ 9A 133.8 0 0 0 0
10 133.8 0 0 0 0
11 135.3 0 25.8 33.3 24.1 -12 135.4 0 0 0 0
13 135.9 0 0 0 0
14 135.9 0 0 0 0
15 137.2 0 26.1 4.8 23.0 .... 16 137.3 0 0 0 0
17 138.9 0 0 0 0
18 139.1 0 0 0 0 -19 139.7 0 0.2 4.8 0.5
i 20 140.0 0 12.6 33.3 12.6
21 141.1 0 12.6 4.8 11.5
22 144.5 0 0
21A 145.3 0 0 0 0
Total Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 r-Total Fish Count 28 507 21 191
* Trace
-201-
Table 2-4-7. Percent distribution of pin~ salmon in streams above RM 98.6
based on peak index counts in 1981-83.
River Percent Distribution
Stream Mile 1981 1982 1983
Whiskers Creek 101.4 0.3 4.8 0
Chase Creek 106.9 10.1 3.8 0.5
Lane Creek 113.6 76.9 22.4 2.1
Lower McKenzie Creek 116.2 0 0.8 1.3
McKenzie Creek 116.7 0 0.6 0
Little Portage Creek 117.7 0 4.9 0.5
Fifth of July Creek 123.7 0.5 4.0 0. 7
Skull Creek 124.7 2.1 0.4 0.1
Sherman Creek 130.8 1.6 0.8 0
Fourth of July Creek 131.1 7.7 24.6 5.9
Gold Creek 136.7 0 0.4 0.5
Indian River 138.6 0.5 25.9 66.6
Jack Long Creek 144.5 0.3 0.7 0.4
Portage Creek 148.9 0 5.9 21.4
Total Percent mr.o 1'tiir.O 100:0
Total Peak Counts 378 2,855 1,329
the Yentna River (RM 28) and are based on the respective year Yentna River
escapement and Susitna River escapement at Sunshine Station {RM 80).
4.2.4.1 Intertidal To Talkeetna
The Yentna River {RM 28) supported higher escapement returns of chum salmon
in 1981 and 1982 than in 1983. At Yentna. Station (TRM 04), the 1981
escapement was about 19,800 fish, in 1982 27,800 fish and in 1983 10,800 fish
(Table 2-4-1).
The 1981 chum salmon escapement into the Susitna River at Sunshine Station
(RM 80) was about 40 percent lower than the 1982 escapement and nearly the
-202-
-
-
-'
-
....,
I
....
-
-
-
....
.....
r
-
-
-
-
-
same as
262,900
the 1983 escapement.
fish ( 1981), 430 ,'400
The 1 ast three years of escapements were:
fish (1982) and 265,800 fish (1983)
(Table 2-4-1). These escapements average about 16 times larger than the
Yentna River (RM 28) escapements.
For three consecutive years (1981-83) chum salmon have been generally
abundant in the Yentna River (RM 28) at Yentna Station (TRM 04) between the
third week of July and the third week of August (Appendix Table 2-D-13). The
majority of the escapement return in 1981 and 1982 traveled along the north
bank at Yentna Station. In 1983, there was about an equa 1 number of chum
salmon migrating off the south and north banks based on fishwheel catches.
At Sunshine Station (RM 80) on the Susitna River chum salmon have been
abundant in the 1 ast three years (1981-83) for about a five week period
between the fourth week of July and the first week of September (Appendix
Table 2-D-13). In all three years the majority of the fish passage has been
along the east side of the river based on station fishwheel catches.
The 1981-83 chum salmon escap~ments into the Yentna River (RM 28) at Yentna
Station (TRM 04) and in the Susitna River main channel at Sunshine Station
(RM 80) have included fish ranging in age from three to five years old. Six
year old fish were only identified at a low level in 1983 at these stations
(0.4-1.2%). Four year old chum salmon were dominant in the 1981 and 1982
escapements to Yentna and Sunshine stations (84.1-90. 3%). Five year ol ds
were dominant (51.3-58.4%) followed by four year olds (.40.1-46.1%) in 1983.
The male to female ratios in the 1981-83 chum salmon escapements at Yentna
Station (TRM 04) were: 1.0:1 (1981), 1.3:1 (1982) and 1.3:1 (1983). At
-203-
-Sunshine Station (RM 80) the ratios were: 0.8:1 (1981), 1.0:1 (1982) and
1. 0: 1 ( 1983) . -
In 1983, the mean fecundity of chum salmon reaching Sunshine Station (RM 80) -
was 2,800 eggs per female. This is within the mean chum salmon fecundity
range (2,000-3,000 eggs) for North America stocks reported by Bakkala (1970).
In 1981, chum salmon were identified spawning in the Susitna River main
channel at six locations between RM 68.3 and 97.0. In 1982, there was no
spawning at these sites nor in any other main channe1 area between RM 7 and
98.5. In 1983, no main channel spawning surveys were conducted.
4.2.4.2 Talkeetna To Upper Devil Canyon
Over the 1 ast three years, chum sa 1mon escapements at Ta 1 keetna Station
-
-
-
-
-
-
(RM 103) have ranged from 20,800 fish (1981) to 50,400 fish (1983) and .....
averaged 40,100 fish (Table 2-4-1 and Figure 2-4-8). The range of
escapements at Curry Station (RM 120) has been 13,100 fish (1981) to 29,400
fish (1982). The average escapement has been 21,200 fish.
At Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations for the last three years
chum salmon have been abundant in the main channel between the end of July to
the end of August (Figure 2-4-9). In 1983 the migration began about a week -
and a half earlier than in 1981 or 1982 but ended about the sam~ time
(Appendix Table 2-D-13). In 1981, 1982 and 1983, chum salmon migrated in
higher numbers a 1 ong the west side of the river at Ta 1 keetna Station than
along the east side. At Curry Station mast of the escapement migrated along
the east side based on fishwheel catches in all three years.
-204-
~
I
-'
-
I
N 0.
U1
I
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STATION
YENTNA
STATION
1 ] -) 1 1 1 -1
CHUM SALMON
Median Peak
------------------------------------------
1982 t------
-----------------------------------------
~--------------~ 1982
-------------------------------------------
1985
6/21 7/6 7/19 8/2 ' 8/16 8/50 9/13 9/27
DATE
Figure 2-4-9. Migrational timing of chum salmon based on fishwheel catch per unit effort at selected locations
on the Susitna River in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
I
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STAT10N
YENTNA
STATION
50 100 150 200 2.50 300
tJ 1981
I] l982
fZl 1983
350 400
CHUM SALMON ESCAPEMENT ( x 1,000)
Figure 2-4-8. Minimum Susitna River chum salmon escapements for 1981, 1982
and 1983.
In 1981, 1982 and 1983, chum salmon migrated faster in the 23 miles
between Sunshine (RM 80) and Talkeetna (RM 103) stations than in the 17
miles between Talkeetna and Curry (RM 120) stations. The average
migrational rates between Sunshifle and Talkeetna stations were: 5.1 mpd
(1981), 7.4 mpd (1982) and 3.8 mpd (1983). The average rates between
Talkeetna and Curry stations were: 3.8 mpd (1981), 6.5 mpd {1982) and 3.6
mpd (1983). Chum salmon are capable of averaging faster speeds. In 1982 and
1983, a number of tagged chum salmon migrated between Sunshine and Talkeetna
-206-
-
...,
-
....
I'JII!I!Il,
""" i
-
-'
-
-
r-
1
.....
stations in one day (23 mpd); several fish in 1981, 1982 and 1983 traveled
between Talkeetna and Curry stations in one day (17 mpd); and in 1982,
' several fish covered the 40 miles between Sunshine and Curry stations in two
days ( 20 mpd) •
Chum salmon were sampled for age, length and sex for the last three years
(1981-83) at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations. The 1981 and
1982 escapement returns to both stations were mainly four year old fish
(84-87%) compared in 1983 to five year old fish (69-72%). In all three years
the average chum salmon 1 ength was about 600 mm. A 1 so ma 1 es were more
numerous than females at the two stations. The male to female ratios at
Talkeetna Station were: 1.5:1 (1981), 1.9:1 (1982) and 1.5:1 (1983). At
Curry Station the respective ratios were: 1.1:1, 1.1:1 and 1.9:1.
Chum salmon spawning was identified at four main channel locations above
RM 98.6 in 1981, nine locations in 1982 and six locations in 1983 (Figure
2-4-10). Main channel spawning occurred in September in all three years.
In 1981 and 1982, chum salmon occupied eight streams above RM 98.6
(Table 2-4-8). In 1983, seven streams were occupied. Chum salmon were
mast numerous in 1981 in Fourth of July Creek (RM 131.1L Lane Creek
(RM 113.6) and Indian River (RM 138.6) where the respective peak index
counts were 90, 76 and 40 fish. In 1982, chum sa,lmon were most abundant
in Indian River, Fourth of July Creek and Portage Creek (RM 148.9) where
1,346, 191 and 153 fish, respectively, were counted in the index areas.
In 1983, Indian River, Portage Creek and Fourth of July Creek supported
the highest index area counts of 722, 526 and 148 fish, respectively.
-207-
-
-
.....
-
Location Spawning
Site Highest No. Observation
Number RM Legal Year Caught/Observed Dates
1 114.4 S28N04W06CAB 1982 10 9/2 """' 2 115.0 S07N28W04BCB 1983 20 9/12
3 119.0 S16N29W04CDO 1983 17 9/19
4 128.6 S30N03W16BCA 1982 10 9/5 & 9/7
5 129.2 S30N03W09B--1981 2 9/8
6 129.8 S30N03W090AB 1982 5 9/12
7 130.5 S30N03W10B--1981 3 9/8
8 131.1 S30N03W030A-1981 3 9/7
S30N03W03DAB 1983 4 10/1
9 131.3 S30N03W030AO 1982 12 8/19 & 9/4
10 135.2 S31N02W19AOA 1981 6 9/6 11ft"/!
11 136.0 S31N02W19AO-1982 so 8/12 & 9/4
12 136.1 S20N31W02BBD 1983 110 9/9 & 9/17
13 136.8 S20N31W02BAA 1983 12 9/9
14 137.4 S31N02W17DBB 1982 25 8/19 & 9/5 1 15 138.6 S09N31W02DCB 1983 56 9/15
16 138.9 S31N02W090BO 1982 16 9/4
17 143.3 S32N01W31BCB 1982 22 9/4 .....
' 18 148.2 S32N01W26DCA 1982 400 8/18 & 9/5
-
Figure 2-4-10. Chum sa 1 mon spawning areas identified in the main channel
Susitna River in 1981-83.
-208-
,....
r-
.....
-
-!
Table 2-4-8. Chum salmon peak index counts in streams above RM 98.6 in
1981-83.
Stream River 1981 1982 1983 Mile
Whiskers Creek 101.4 1 0 0
Chase Creek 106.9 1 0 0
Lane Creek 113.6 76 11 6
Lower McKenzie Creek 116.2 14 0 1
Little Portage Creek 117.7 0 31 0
Fifth of July Creek 123.7 0 1 6
Skull Creek 124.7 10 1 0
Sherman Creek 130.8 9 0 0
Fourth of July Creek 131.1 90 191 148
Indian River 138.6 40 1,346 722
Jack Long Creek 144.5 0 3 2
Portage Creek 148.9 0 153 526
In 1981 the chum salmon escapement to streams above RM 98.6 was lower than in
1982 or 1983 (Table 2-4-8). The peak chum salmon escapement counts for all
stream index areas above RM 98.6 were: 241 fish {1981), 1,737 fish {1982) and
1,411 fish_{1983).
Generally chum salmon spawning in streams above RM 98.6 occurred over a
six week period from about the first week of August to the third week of
September in each of the last three years (1981-83). Peak spawning
occurred around the end of August in all three years.
Chum salmon occupied 20 sloughs in 1981, 17 sloughs in 1982 and 23 sloughs in
1983. The three major spawning sloughs used in 1981 and 1982 were: Slough
SA (RM 125.4), Slough 11 (RM 135.3) and Slough 21 (RM 141.1); and in 1983
the sloughs were Slough 9 {RM 128.3), Slough 11 and Slough 21
(Table 2-4-9). Slough escapements of chum salmon were higher in 1981 and
1982 than in 1983.
-209-
~
Table 2-4-9. Percent distribution of chum sa 1 man in sloughs above RM 98.6
based on peak survey counts of live plus dead fish in 1981-83.
River Percent Distribution
Slough I!!Mq
Mile 1981 1982 1983 Average
1 99.6 0.2 0 0 0.1 ....,
2 100.2 1.1 0 3.4 1.2
38 101.4 0 0 0.2 * 3A 101.9 0 0 0 0
4 105.2 0 0 0 0
5 107.6 0 0.1 * * 6 108.2 0 0 0 0
6A 112.3 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.3 -
7 113.2 0 0 0 0
8 113.7 11.6 0 0 4.6
80 121.8 0 1.0 * 0.4 -8C 121.9 0 2.1 0.3 0.8
88 122.2 * 3.6 7.1 2.8
Moose 123.5 6.4 1.0 4.7 3.9 -A' 124.6 5.4 0 5.3 3.3
A 124.7 1.3 0 0.1 0.6
SA 125.4 23.9 15.0 2.5 15.1
B 126.3 2.6 0.5 1.5
9 128.3 10.0 13.4 11.5 11.1
98 129.2 3.5 0.2 0 1.5
9A 133.8 7.0 5.3 7.2 6.2 ~ 10 133.8 0 0.1 * *
11 135.3 15.8 20.5 16.2 16.9
12 135.4 0 0 0 0
13 135.9 0.2 0 0.3 0.1
14 135.9 0 0 0 0
15 137.2 '* * 0.1 * 16 137.3 0.1 0 0 * ~
17 138.9 1.5 0.9 6.1-2.3
18 139.1 0 0 0 0
19 139.7 0.1 0 0.2 0.1
20 140.0 0.6 1.3 4.3 1.7 -21 141.1 10.6 ' 32.8 21.8 20.2
22 144.5 7.8 5.2
21A 145.3 0.3 0 0 0.1
Total Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Tota1 Fish Count 2,596 2,244 1,467 2,190 -
* Trace
-210-
-
....
-
-I
I. '
The peak escapement count (highest live plus dead count) for all sloughs
above RM 98.6 totaled 2,596 fish in 1981, 2,244 fish in 1982 and 1,467 fish
in 1983.
Chum salmon spawning in sloughs above RM 98.6 generally occurred over a
six week peri ad from the second week of August to the fourth week of
September in each of the last three years (1981-83). Peak spawning
nonnally occurred in the first week of September or about a week later
than in neighboring streams.
The average observation 1 ife of a chum salmon in sloughs in· 1983 was 6.9
days. The total chum salmon escapement to sloughs above RM 98.6 in 1983,
calculated using the observation life estimate (6.9 days) and escapement
survey counts of live fish over time, was about 3,000 fish. Assuming the
same (1983) observation life, the 1981 and 1982 chum salmon escapements to.
sloughs wer~ 4,500 and 5,100 fish, respectively {Appendix Tables 2-G-12 and
2-G-13) •
In 1983, s1 a ugh spawning chum salmon were ex ami ned for egg retention.
The average retention was 114 eggs per female. About 80 percent of the
female carcasses examined contained less than 25 eggs each indicating
high spawning success. Fewer than four percent of· the fema 1 es samp 1 ed
..
retained more than 1,000 eggs each. Egg retention generally has not been
considered important except when spawning density is high. A retention of
about 100 eggs per female would indicate spawner density was not a problem
(Bakkala, 1970).
-211-
4.2.5 Coho Salmon
Coho salmon escapements have been monitored in the Yentna River (RM 28)
at Yentna Station (TRM 04) and in the Susitna river at Sunshine (RM 80),
Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations for the last three
years (1981-83).
Escapements into the Susitna River excluding systems below RM 80 except
.....
-
-
the Yentna River (RM 28) have been at minimum: 37,000 fish ( 1981), """1
80,000 fish (1982) and 24,100 fish (1983) (Table 2-4-4).
4.2.5.1 Intertidal To Talkeetna
The 1981 coho salmon escapement into the Yentna River (RM 28) was 50
percent 1 ess than the 1982 escapement 1 eve 1 and 48 percent greater than
the 1983 escapement level. Coho salmon escapements to Yentna Station
(TRM 04) for the last three years were: 17,000 fish (1981), 34,000 fish
(1982) and 8,900 fish (1983) (Table 2-4-1 and Figure 2-4-11).
The Susitna River coho salmon escapement return at Sunshine Station
(RM 80) in 1981 was 58 percent less than the 1982 escapement and 21 percent
larger than the 1983 escapement. The three previous years escapements were:
19,200 fio::h (1981), 45,700 fish (1982) and 15,200 fish {1983) (Table 2-4-1
and Figure 2-4-11).
Coho salmon were abundant in the Yentna River (RM 28) at Yentna Station
(TRM 04) between the third week of July and the third week of August for the
-212-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STATION
YENTNA
STATION
[J 1981 m 1982
~ 1983
----------~-----t~I0--------~20--------~30~-------4~0--------~50-
COHO SALMON ESCAPEMENT (x 1,000)
Figure 2-4-11. Minimum Susitna River coho salmon escapements for 1981, 1982
and 1983.
last three years (1981-83) (Figure 2-4-12). The majority of the coho salmon
migrating past Yentna Station did so along the south bank in all three years
.t'
(1981-83).
The coho salmon migration in the Susitna River at Sunshine Station
{RM 80) generally extended between the fourth week of July and the last
week of August in the three previous years {1981-83) (Figure 2-4-12).
-213-
I
N
I-' .p.
I
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STATION
YENTNA
STATION
1983
------t Utll
-----------------~------.... ----------
1983
COHO SALMON
Ned loll
\
0°.4 Cumulative t~0/oCumulatlve
Catch per Effort Catch per Effort
-----------------------~--------------
r----------1 19 8 3
------------~ 1982
----"""--{ 1981
....... -------------------------------------
7 I 7 7/21 8/4 8/18
DATE
1883
-----1 1982
9/1 9/15 9/29
Figure 2-4-12. Migrational timing of coho salmon based on fishwheel catch per unit etfort at selected
locations on tne Susitna Kiver in 19H1, 1982 and 1983.
I
....
-
-
-
-
In all three years, the majority of the coho salmon migration has occurred
along the east bank.
Coho salmon sampled at Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations have
ranged from three to five years of age in the last three years (1981-83).
The majority of the coho salmon escapement sampled at Yentna Station were age
class 4 3 in 1981 (82.9%), 1982 (66.8%) and 1983 (79.1%). Age class 3 2 coho
salmon accounted for most of the remaining sample for all three years. Coho
salmon sampled at Sunshine Station also were predominantly age class 43
fish and were: 65.1% (1981), 50.1% (1982) and 63.1% (1983). The majority of
the coho salmon sampled at both Yentna and Sunshine stations in all three
years (1981-83) had migrated to the ocean (smelted) in their third year of
1 ife.
A portion of the coho salmon escapements to Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine
(RM 80) stations were measured for length in 1981, 1982 and 1983. The mean
lengths of coho salmon measured at Yentna Station were: 535 mm (1981), 544
mm (1982) and 528 mm (1983). At Sunshine Station coho salmon had identical
~
mean lengths (523 mm) in 1981 and 1983 while in 1982 this mean length was 27
mm greater.
Male coho salmon were generally more numerous than females at both
Yentna (TRM 04) and Sunshine (RM 80) stations for the past three years
(1981-83}. The male to female coho salmon sex ratios at Yentna Station
were: 0.9:1 (1981), 2.3:1 (1982) and 2.3:1 (1983). At Sunshine Station
these ratios were: 1.2:1 (1981), 1.4:1 {1982) and 1.2:1 (1983).
-215-
The main channel Susitna River between RM 7 and 98.6 was surveyed for
coho salmon spawning in 1981 and 1982. Survey results indicated that coho
salmon did not spawn in the main channel in either of these years.
the main channel was not surveyed for adult salmon spawning.
4.2.5.2 Ta'lkeetna To Upper Devil Canyon
In 1983
Coho salmon escapements have been monitored in the Susitna River at
Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120) stations for the past three years
(1981-83). The escapements have ranged from 2,400 fish (1983) to 5,100
-
-J
-
-
-
fish (1982). The three year average was 3,600 fish (Table 2-4-1 and ~
Figure 2-4-11). At Curry Station the coho salmon escapements have
ranged from 800 fish (1983) to 2,400 fish {1982) and averaged 1,400 fish
for the three year period (1981-83).
Coho salmon were abundant in the Susitna River at Talkeetna (RM 103) and
Curry (RM 120) stations for about six weeks from the last week of July
through the first week of September in each of the 1 ast three years
{1981-83) {Figure 2-4-12). The majority of the coho salmon migration at
Talkeetna Station occurred along the west bank in all three years. At
Curry Station coho salmon passed predominantly along the east bank in 1981
and 1983 and along the west bank in 1982.
Migrational rates of coho salmon in the last three years (1981-83) have
been determined from recaptures of previously tagged individuals. Coho
salmon traveled at a slower rate between Sunshine (RM 80) and Talkeetna
(RM 103) stations in 1981 than in 1982 and at a faster rate than in 1983.
-216-
-
-
.....
!
-
-
-
-'
The rates were: 4.0 mpd (1981), 5.3 mpd (1982) and 1.4 mpd (1983). Coho
salmon migrated faster between Talkeetna and Curry (RM 120) stations than
between Sunshine and Talkeetna stations in all three years. The travel rates
between Talkeetna and Curry stations were: 11.3 mpd (1981), 10.0 mpd (1982)
and 5.7 mpd (1983).
The coho salmon escapements at Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120)
stations were sampled for age, length, and sex for three consecutive years
(1981-83). Coho salmon sampled at both Talkeetna and Curry stations were
generally in the 520-530 mm 1 ength range in a 11 three years ( 1981-83). . The
exception was in 1982 at Talkeetna Station when coho salmon averaged 553 mm
in length. The majority of the coho salmon escapement sampled for age at
Talkeetna Station in 1981 were age class 4 3 fish (84.8%). In 1982 age
class 32 coho salmon dominated the sample (59.0%). Age class. 4 3 fish were
again dominant in 1983 (60.2%). This pattern was repeated at Curry Station
where age class 4 2 coho salmon were dominant in 1981 (68.8%) and 1983
(53.2%), while age class 3 2 fish were dominant in 1982 (54.0%). Males were
more numerous than females in all three years at Talkeetna and Curry
stations. The coho salmon male to female sex ratios at Talkeetna Station
were: 1.5:1 (1981), 1.5:1 (1982) and 1.7:1 (1983). At Curry Station these
ratios were: 2.0:1 (1981), 1.3:1 (1982) and 2.0:1 (1983).
The Susitna River main channel between RM 98.6 and 161.0 was surveyed
for coho salmon spawning in 1981 and 1982. In 1983 main channel coho
salmon spawning information was acquired incidental to slough and stream
surveys. In 1981 a single main channel spawning coho salmon was
-217-
captured at RM 129.2 on September 2. In 1982 no main channel spawning
sites were identified. One main channel coho salmon spawning site (RM 131.7)
was located in 1983. This was the only main channel spawning by coho salmon
reported in 1983.
Sloughs in the Susitna River between RM 98.6 and 161.0 were repetitively
surveyed. for coho salmon from 1981 to 1983. Based on these surveys,
coho salmon did not spawn in sloughs in 1981 or 1983. In 1982, two coho
salmon were observed spawning in Slough 8A (RM 125.1) on October 2.
This was the only slough used by coho salmon for spawning in all three
years (1981-83).
Streams tributary to the Susitna River between RM 98.6 and 161.0 were
also repetitively surveyed for coho salmon in 1981, 1982 and 1983. The
total peak index counts by ground survey of all streams were: 367
(1981), 428 (1982) and 130 (1983). In 1981, based on peak index counts, coho
salmon were most abundant in Gash (RM 111.6) and Chase (RM 106.9) creeks
(Table 2-4-10). In 1982 the streams were Whiskers (RM 101.4) and Lower
McKenzie (RM· 116. 2) creeks. Coho salmon were found primarily in Whiskers
Creek and Indian River (RM 138.6) in 1983.
4.3 Bering Cisco
Bering cisco were initially documented in the Susitna River in August,
1981. The escapement was monitored for migrational timing, relative
abundance and population meristic information at Sunshine Stati an
(RM 80) in 1981 and 1982. Bering cisco were incidentally sampled at
-218-
-
....
-
-
....
-
~
-
-
I"""'
-
-
"""' I
I
Table 2-4-10. Percent distribution of coho salmon in streams above RM 98.6
based on peak index counts in 1981-83.
River Percent Distrioution
Mile 1981 b82 1983
Whiskers Creek 101.4 19.0 36.5 42.3
Chase Creek 106.9 21.8 7.5 0.8
Slash Creek 111.2 0 1.2 1.5
Gash Creek 111.6 38.4 15.4 14.6
Lane Creek 113.6 0.8 1.0 1.5
Lower McKenzie Creek 116.2 15.3 27.6 13.9
Little Portage Creek 117.7 0 1.7 0
Fourth of July Creek 131.1 0.3 0.8 2.3
Gold Creek 136.7 0 0.2 0
Indian River 138.6 4.4 7.7 20.8
Jack Long Creek 144.5 0 0.2 0.8
Portage Creek 148.9 0 0.2 1.5
Total Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0
Total Peak Counts 367 482 130
Susitna (RM 26), Yentna (T~M 04), Talkeetna (RM 103) and Curry (RM 120)
stations in 1982 and also in 1983 with the exception of Susitna Station.
In 1981, the Bering cisco escapement to the Susitna River was approximately
2.4 times greater than the 1982 escapement based on comparative year
fishwheel catches at Sunshine Station (RM 80). In both years Bering cisco
were abundant in the Susitna River a~ Sunshine Station for eight weeks from
the last week of August through the third week of October.
Bering cisco were not present above the three rivers confluence
(RM 98.6) in any appreciable numbers. In 1982 only one Bering cisco was
captured at Talkeetna Station (RM 103) and no Bering cisco were
intercepted at Curry Station (RM 120).
-219-
The Bering cisco escapement was monitored to determine population age,
1 ength and sex characteristics in 1981 and 1982. In both years
information collected at all sampling locations was pooled for analysis.
The Bering cisco escapement was comprised of four, five and six year old
fish in 1981 and 1982. The majority in both years were five year old
fish. Average lengths of Bering cisco between years were essentially
the same, 335 nun in 1981 and 338 mm in 1982. Male to female sex ratios
for these years were: 1.0:1 (1981) and 1.4:1 (1982).
The Susitna River main channel, side channels, sloughs and stream
mouths were surveyed in 1981 and 1982 to identify Bering cisco spawning
areas. No surveys were conducted in 1983. Bering cisco spawned only in
Susitna River main channel habitats in 1981 and 1982. The major spawning
area was the 10 mi 1 e reach between RM 75 and 85. Bering cisco spawning
occurred in September and October and peaked the second week of October in
both years (1981 and 1982).
Susitna River Bering cisco are probable successive year spawners {ADF&G,
1982). Further support for this premise was provided by the recapture
of a Bering cisco in lower Cook Inlet in August, 1983 which had been
initially tagged at RM 77.0 on October 5, 1981. The specimen was a five
year old, gravid female. It is probable that this fish spawned as many
as two times and was prepared to spawn again in 1983.
Tile known distribution of Bering cisco in the Susitna River was extended
in 1983. A single Bering cisco was captured at Fourth of July Creek
(RM 131.1) on October 6 redefining the upper limit of this species in
-220-
....
Mli',
.....
-
-
-
.....
-
....
-
r
the Susitna River. The previous known upper limit of the Bering cisco
range was RM 103 (Talkeetna Station) based on a single capture in 1982.
-221-
REFERENCES
Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 1981. Adult anadromous fisheries
project, phase I final draft report. Alaska Department of Fish and
Game, Su Hydro Aquatic Studies. Program, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
1982. Adult anadromous fish studies, volume 2 phase II
final data report. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Su Hydro
Aquatic Studies Program, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
1983. Procedures manual final draft. Alaska Department of Fish
and Game, Su Hydro Aquatic Studies Program, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
Bakkala, R. G. 1970. Synopsis of biological data on the Chum Salmon,
Oncorhynchus keta (Walbaum) 1792. FAO Species Synopsis No. 41, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 315, Washington, D.C., USA.
Barrett, B. M. 1974. An assessment of the anadromous fish populations in
the upper Susitna River watershed between Devil Canyon and the
Chulitna River. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of
Commercial Fisheries, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
-
1974. 1971-1973 Sockeye Salmo~ Fry Production Studies on Selected -·
Streams in the Kasilof River Watershed. Alaska Department of Fish and
Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries, Cook Inlet Data Report Series
No. 73-8, Soldotna, Alaska, USA.
-222-
-
-
-
Began, M. 1979. Investigating animal abundance: capture -recapture for
biologists. Edmond Arnold, London, England.
Bendix Corporation. 1980. Installation and operation manual side scan sonar
counter (1980 Model). Report No. SP-78-017~ North Hollywood,
California, USA.
BMDP. 1981. BMDP statistical software. University of California Press,
Berkley, California, USA.
Clutter, R. I and L. E. Whitesel. 1956. Collection and interpretation of
·sockeye salmon scales. Bull. Int. Pac. Salmon Fish. Com., No.9,
Canada.
Cousens, N. B. F., G. A. Thomas, C. G. Swann, and M. C. Healey. 1982. A
review of salmon escapement estimation techniques. Canadian Technical
Report_ of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, No. 1108, Nanaimo, British
Columbia, Canada.
Daniel, W. W. 1978. Applied nonparametric statistics. Houghton Mifflin
Company, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Dixon, W. J. and R. J. Massey. 1969. Introduction to statistical analysis.
McGraw-Hill. New York, New York, USA.
i -223-
Franzel, J. and K. A. Nelson. 1981. Stikine River eulachon (Thaleichthys
pacificus). U.S. Forest Service Report, Petersburg Ranger District,
Petersburg, Alaska, USA.
Hart, J. L. 1973. Pacific fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of
Canada, Bulletin 180, Ottawa, Canada.
Lagler, K. F., J. E. Bardach and R. R. Miller. 1962. Ichthyology. John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, New York, USA.
McPhail, J. D. and C. C. Lindsey. 1970. Freshwater fishes of northwestern
Canada and Alaska. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Bulletin 173,
Ottawa, Canada.
Meehan, W. R. 1961. Use of a fishwheel in salmon research management.
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society Vol. 90: 490-494.
Morrow, J. E. 1980. The freshwater fishes of Alaska. Alaska Northwest
Publishing Company, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
Neilson, J. 0, and G. H. Geen. 1981. Enumeration of spawning salmon from
spawner residence time and aerial counts. Transactions of the
American Fisheries Society 110:554-556.
Ruesch, P. 1983. Personal Communication. Alaska Department of Fish and
Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries, Soldotna, Alaska, USA.
-224-
/
-
-
-
"""' '
-i
-
-
r
I
-
.....
Schaefer, M.B. 1951. A study of the spawning populations of sockeye salmon
in the Harrison River system, with special reference to the problem of
enumeration by means of marked members. International Pacific Salmon
Fisheries Commission, Bulletin IV, New Westminster, British Columbia,·
Canada.
Seber, G. A. and R. Felton. 1981. Tag loss and the Petersen mark-recapture
experiment. Biometrika 68 (1): 211 -219.
Smith, W. E. and R. W. Saalfeld. 1955. Studies on Columbia River smelt
Thaleichthys pacificus (Richardson}. Fisheries Research Papers,
Washington Department of Fisheries, 1(2):2-26.
Snyder, George R. 1970. Thennal Pollution of Columbia River Might Threaten
Smelt. Commerical Fisheries Review, 27(1):58-74.
Tarbox, K. 1983. Personal Communication. Alaska Department of Fish and
Game, Division of Cormnercial Fisheries, Soldotna, Alaska, USA.
Thompson, F. M. and B. M. Barrett. 1983. Analysis of the species
selectivity of fishwheels for the capture of adult salmon in the
Susitna River~ Synopsis of the 1982 aquatic studies and analysis of
fish and habitat relationships. Alaska Department of Fish and Game,
Su Hydro Aquatic Studies Program, Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
U.S. Coast Guard. 1982. Personal Communication. Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
-225-
-
-
-
-'
APPENDIX 2-A
SUSITNA AND YENTNA RIVERS
SAMPLING LOCATIONS
--1 1 1 1 .. --1
)>
,
YENTNA STATION
Appendix Figure 2-A-1. Yentna Station with sonar and fishwheel locations defined,l983.
SUNSHINE STATION
Appendix Figure 2-A-2. Sunshine Station with fishwheel locations defined ,1983.
J _] J J J
... 1 ]
EB
River mile 103
1'81
CABIN
1
SUSITNA liiV£1?_
TALKEETNA STATION
Appendix Figure 2-A-3. Talkeetna Station with fishwheel locations defined,l983.
]
CURRY STATION
Appendix Figure 2-A-4. Curry Station with fishwheel locations defined ,1983.
I )
-
.....
.....
-
-
....
-
APPENDIX 2-8
DIPNET AND ELECTROSHOCKER
EULACHON CATCH
... 1 . -1 ]
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Dipnet and electroshocker catches of eulachon in the Susitna River
main channel,l983. ______________ ...,..__ ________ . ··-·----------------------Eulachon Catch --------------------
Hale Female
--------------------------------------Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method ---------------. --··---------------.._._..... _____________________
HAY
10 4.5 0 0 0 2 0 0 DIPNET
11 4.5 3 0 0 1 0 0 DIP NET
11 4.5 7 0 0 2 0 0 DIPNET
12 4.5 39 6 0 12 0 0 DIPNET
12 4.5 19 2 0 5 0 0 DIPNET
)> 13 4.5 56 4 0 22 1 0 DIPNET .
01 14 4.5 39 14 0 45 2 0 DIPNET
15 4.5 2 1 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
15 4.5 11 0 0 3 0 0 DIPNET
15 12.5 10 4 2 7 1 1 DIP NET
15 13.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
15 13.8 24 48 18 18 5 4 DIPNET
15 14.4 2 2 0 2 0 0 DIPNET
15 14.5 8 6 0 13 0 0 DIPNET
16 4.5 10 3 0 4 ·O 0 DIPNET
16 7.6 34 12 0 50 4 0 DIPNET
16 7.6 1 1 0 1 1 0 DIPNET
16 8.3 0 1 0 2 1 0 DIPNET
16 8.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
17 4.5 10 1 4 5 1 0 DIPNET
17 9.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
17 13.8 0 1 1 0 0 0 DIPNET _________________________________________ ...._ ____________
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Continued.
------------------------------------------------------Eulachon Catch
----------------~-------
Male Female
~-~ -.-----------Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method ---------· --·--------···-· ------------------------------------------
MAY
17 15.0 10 10 9 15 1 2 DIPNET
17 16.5 1 3 3 0 0 0 DIPNET
17 16.2 17 62 16 3 0 1 DIPNET
17 19.7 5 6 3 3 0 0 DIPNET
17 19.6 2 0 0 2 0 0 DIP NET
17 21.5 ·2 7 1 29 1 3 DIPNET
17 22.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIP NET
17 23 .o 4 11 2 7 1 0 DIPNET > 18 26 .6 0 15 39 0 0 1 DIPNET
' m 16 26.6 2 47 15 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
18 27.1 0 0 1 0 0 0 DIPNET
18 27 .5 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
18 26.1 1 1 1 0 0 0 DIPNET
18 28.5 0 0 3 0 0 0 DIPNET
18 31.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
18 34.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
18 36.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
18 47 .8 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
19 4.5 12 24 10 -22 0 0 DIPNET
19 5.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
19 6.9 1 1 0 0 0 0 . DIPNET
19 9.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPt{ET
19 12.5 3 52 22 5 1 0 DIPNET
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I
1 l
Appendix Table .2-B-1. Continued.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Eulachon Catch
--------------------------------------------Male Female -------------------·nate River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method ----------....-------------------------------------------------------
MAY
19 13.8 0 1 0 0 0 0 DIP NET
19 15.0 11 17 7 8 1 0 DIPNET
19 15.0 10 21 6 2 1 0 DIPNET
19 16.2 4 53 8 2 0 0 DIPNET
19 16.5 0 3 4 0 0 0 DIPNET
19 18.2 0 11 0 0 8 0 DIPNET
19 20.2 3 8 0 0 1 0 DIPNET
> 19 22.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
19 22.5 0 1 2 0 0 0 DIPNET -..a 19 22.6 0 4 1 0 1 0 DIP NET
20 6.3 0 0 3 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 7.9 6 2 0 1 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 9 .8· 22 10 2 10 2 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 12.5 18 33 1 10 6 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 14.0 17 25 8 2 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 16.2 2 22 5 1 1 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 18.2 14 13 8 3 3 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 20.3 2 3 0 2 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 21.8 1 5 2 1 2 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 26.6 14 90 21 1 1 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 28.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 31.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCY
20 35.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
----------..-...----------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-B-1 •. Continued.
-------------------------------------------
Eulachon Catch -----·. , .. --------~-----.....-.---
Male Female ---------------Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method ----------------------------------------------------
MAY
20 35.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 '36 .8 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 38.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 39.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 41.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
20 43.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
21 4.5 39 9 0 86 0 0 DIP NET
21 6.7 43 17 1 54 0 1 DIP NET )> 21 12.8 4 0 0 3 0 0 DIPNET
Q) 21 14.1 9 3 0 22 0 0 DIPNET
21 14.5 52 26 0 35 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
21 15.0 52 64 0 22 7 0 ELECTROSHOCK
21 15.8 0 0 0 3 0 0 DIPNET
21 18.2 20 40 4 16 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
21 18.9 35 190 6 3 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
21 23.2 31 25 0 18 0 0 DIPNET
21 25.5 17 13 3 5 2 0 DIPNET
22 23.7 40 20 0 60 0 0 DIPNET
22 24.2 38 10 0 19 0 0 DIPNET
22 24.7 15 16 2 21 1 0 DIPNET
22 25.4 21 11 0 6 0 0 DIPNET
22 25.5 16 14 0 17 2 0 DIPNET
22 25.5 10 4 0 17 1 0 DIPNET
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-J .... J
1 ... 1 ] i 1
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Continued.
----------------------------------------------------------------Eulachon Catch
-------------------------------------Male Female --------------------------------Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method ------------------------------------------------------------
HAY
22 26.2 33 22 1 20 1 0 DIPNET
22 27.1 38 3 1 18 2 0 DIPNET
22 27.3 11 21 2 5 3 0 DIPNET
22 27.4 21 7 0 10 0 0 DIPNET
22 27.7 21 47 0 30 2 0 DIPNET
22 27.8 22 14 0 22 0 0 DIPNET
22 28.9 10 10 0 45 2 0 DIPNET
22 31.0 20 18 1 35 0 0 DIPNET
)> 22 31.0 1 0 0 0 0 0 DIP NET
co 22 32.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
22 33.7 62 11 0 45 0 0 DIPNET
22 34.7 7 1 0 3 0 0 DIP NET
22 34.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
22 34.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
22 35.0 25 7 0 15 0 0 DIPNET
22 35.4 4 2 0 5 0 0 DIPNET
22 36.8 21 4 0 9 0 0 DIPNET
22 37.1 9 2 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
22 38.5 1 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
22 38.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
22 39.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
22 41.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
22 41.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
--------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Continued.
-------------------------~--------------------------------------Eulachon Catch ------------------------------Hale Female
~------------------------Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method ---------------------------------------------------------
MAY
22 43.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
23 4.5 37 13 0 61 0 0 DIP NET
23 8.4 9 10 0 44 2 0 DIPNET
23 9.0 6 15 0 26 5 0 DIPNET
23 9.7 10 14 0 38 5 0 DIP NET
23 11.5 31 9 0 46 1 0 DIPNET
23 20.7 16 16 0 39 0 0 DIPNET
23 20.8 24 12 0 ·52 2 0 DIPNET
)> 23 21.3 18 20 0 28 0 0 DIPNET -23 21.4 26 14 0 25 2 0 DIPNET
0 23 22.1 16 10 0 34 1 3 DIP NET
23 22.5 14 17 0 49 1 0 DIPNET
23 23.0 28 21 0 43 5 0 DIPNET
24 12.5 3 11 1 50 10 1 DIPNET
24 13.1 2 15 0 69 15 0 DIPNET
24 13.1 1 2 0 0 0 1 DIP NET
24 13.3 1 4 0 35 8 0 DIPNET
24 13.4 4 20 0 20 4 0 DIPNET
24 13.8 5 12 0 38 9 1 DIP NET
24 13.8 5 8 0 8 1 3 DIP NET
24 14.7 6 15 0 19 8 0 DIPNET
24 14.9 2 19 0 45 21 0 DIPNET
24 15.0 7 30 0 26 8 0 DIP NET
-----------------------------------------------------------------------~----------------------
, ... J J .. I . .1
l l -1 -~ 1 J
Appendix Table 2-R-1. Continued.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Eulachon Catch -------------------------.--------
Male Female ---------------------Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method -----------------------------------------------------------------
MAY
24 15.5 4 16 0 19 14 0 DIPNET
24 15.5 0 8 0 6 7 1 DIPNET
24 15.5 1 20 1 32 28 0 DIPNET
24 15.5 2 12 0 32 29 1 DIPNET
24 15.7 4 18 0 50 9 0 DIPNET
24 16.2 4 14 0 58 5 0 DIPNET
24 16.5 3 3 0 60 10 0 DIPNET
24 17 .1 1 8 0 39 8 0 DIP NET
24 17.2 1 46 0 3 6 0 DIPNET
)> 24 17.7 24 54 0 50 9 0 DIPNET ..... 24 18.2 6 94 0 4 28 2 DIPNET
...... 24 18.7 0 25 5 0 3 1 DIPNET
24 19.3 2 39 1 1 3 4 DIPNET
24 19.8 0 32 0 7 10 2 DIPNET
24 19.8 0 47 3 9 7 8 DIPNET
24 21.3 0 42 7 4 7 12 DIPNET
24 22.5 0 25 0 0 12 0 DIPNET
24 23.3 1 43 0 10 2 0 DIPNET
24 23.7 0 40 2 12 7 2 DIPNET
24 24.8 0 54 0 20 18 0 DIPNET
25 6.1 2 11 16 0 2 5 DIPNET
25 8.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIP NET
25 9.0 3 22 0 1 3 0 DIPNET
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Continued.
--------------····-· ·----..---------------------------------------Eulachon Catch -------------------------Male Female
----------------------------
Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MAY
25 9.8 1 18 2 2 1 1 DIPNET
25 11.7 1 35 2 1 1 0 DIPNET
25 14.3 0 24 3 2 4 1 DIPNET
25 17.1 0 27 0 0 42 0 DIPNET
25 19.0 0 12 1 3 11 2 DIPNET
25 22.0 0 8 1 5 18 0 DIPNET
)> 25 24.3 1 19 2 5 22 2 DIPNET
25 27.8 0 18 0 2 12 0 DIPNET ..... 25 29.6 0 24 0 4 6 0 DIPNET
1\) 25 32.0 1 23 0 15 9 0 DIPNET
25 32.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
25 34.0 0 23 0 1 12 0 DIPNET
25 36.0 1 22 0 14 13 0 DIPNET
25 38.2 5 24 0 10 4 0 DIPNET
25 39.8 0 1 0 1 2 0 DIPNET
25 39.8 10 26 0 3 1 0 DIPNET
25 41.6 3 25 0 2 8 1 DIPNET
25 44.0 0 20 0 4 5 0 ELECTROSHOCK
25 44.9 3 12 0 1 9 1 ELECTROSHOCK
25 47.0 3 8 0 10 5 0 ELECTROSHOCK
25 47.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
25 49.2 9 40 0 0 5 . 0 ELECTROSHOCK
25 53.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1
1 ] ~1 --) } --1 J 1 1 1 -c 1 I -1
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Continued.
----------------------------------------~----------------------------------------Eulachon Catch ----.... ----------------------------Hale Female -------------------------------Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method ---------------------------------------------------------
MAY
25 53.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
25 55.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
26 4.5 58 203 96 10 13 16 DIPNET
26 6 .l 0 15 11 1 1 1 DIPNET
26 7.5 0 2 1 0 0 0 DIPNET
26 8.5 0 25 10 1 2 1 DIPNET
26 9.0 0 24 11 0 2 0 DIPNET
26 12.0 0 29 2 2 4 0 DIPNET
26 25.5 12 65 95 22 34 50 DIPNET
)> 27 41.5 1 64 14 0 7 2 ELECTROSHOCK -27 41.7 0 121 5 1 19 1 ELECTROSHOCK
27 43.2 0 0 1 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK • I
(a) I
27 43.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK I
27 43.7 0 65 15 0 3 6 ELECTROSHOCK
27 44.1 0 10 0 0 5 0 ELECTROSHOCK
27 46.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
27 47.6 0 1 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
27 49.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
27 49.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
27 50.3 0 37 5 0 4 50 ELECTROSHOCK
27 50.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
27 51.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
27 52.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
---------------------------------------------------------~--------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Continued.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Eulachon Catch --------------------------Male Female ----------····-· -----------
Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method ------------------------------------------------------------
MAY
27 55.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
27 57 .o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
27 59.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
28 4.5 5 156 203 0 1 13 DIP NET
28 4.8 0 24 19 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
28 14.5 0 36 28 0 1 3 ELECTROSHOCK
28 14.9 0 14 33 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
)> 28 15.3 0 53 20 0 2 0 ELECTROSHOCK
-4 28 26.2 0 13 0 0 34 0 DIPNET
,Jlo. 28 26.6 0 50 61 0 0 0 DIPNET
28 27.1 0 56 53 0 3 1 DIPNET
28 21 .a 0 33 25 0 1 0 DIPNET
28 31.5 0 0 1 1 0 0 DIPNET
28 34.3 0 5 1 0 1 0 DIPNET
28 36.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
28 38.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 DIPNET
28 39.2 4 30 4 2 1 0 DIPNET
28 40.3 0 22 3 0 0. 0 DIPNET
29 27.4 3 20 16 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
29 27 .5 0 30 5 0 3 0 DIP NET
29 30.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
29 31.4 0 63 24 0 3 0 ELECTROSHOCK
29 31.7 0 54 10 1 1 0 ELECTROSHOCK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
) J
) l 1
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Continued.
----------------·· . --------------------------------------------------------------Eulachon Catch ----------..-----------------
Male Female ___ .,._ _________ ---------------
Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method -----------------------------------------------------------
MAY
29 33.0 0 19 5 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
29 33.7 0 75 8 0 5 0 ELECTROSHOCK
29 35 .o 0 24 18 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
29 35.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
29 37.0 0 60 35 0 2 0 ELECTROSHOCK
29 37.0 0 . 57 33 0 3 0 ELECTROSHOCK
29 38.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
29 39.0 0 54 12 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
)> 30 25.5 0 81 6 0 43 1 DIPNET
...... 30 44.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
01 30 48.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
30 50.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
30 53.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
30 56 .o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
30 56 .2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
30 58.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
31 4.5 0 173 130 0 9 3 DIPNET
31 6.4 0 41 0 0 31 0 ELECTROSHOCK
31 8.2 0 60 17 0 2 0 ELECTROSHOCK
31 9.8 0 39 45 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
31 12.5 0 43 27 0 4 2 ELECTROSHOCK
31 15.0 0 43 26 0 2 1 ELECTROSHOCK
31 18.2 0 48 32 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Continued.
--------------------------.. --------------------------------------------------------------Eulachon Catch _____ .,._.,. ___________________
Male Female ··---------------------------~ Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method
~--------------------------.---------.---------------------------------------------------
t
MAY
31 21.0 0 2 1 0 0 1 ELECTROSHOCK
31 23 .o 0 1 5 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
31 25.4 0 20 19 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
31 29.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
31 31.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
31 37.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
31 39.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
)> 31 39.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
-4
0> JUNE
01 3.0 0 1 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
01 4.0 0 4 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
01 6.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
01 10.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
01 16.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
01 17.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
01 29.5 0 9 1 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
01 31.3 0 .o 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
02 5.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
02 6.5 0 2 5 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
02 9.5 0 0 4 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
02 9.8 0 2 3 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
·----_I .. J 1 I
1 ~-. ,----1 ....... J
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Continued.
---------------------------------------------------------
Eulachon Catch ---------------· ~· --------------Male Female ------------------------------Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method ------•w----------------~-------~-~----------------------------------------------
JUNE
02 12.5 0 12 11 0 0 1 ELECTROSHOCK
02 13.8 0 2 6 0 0 0 .ELECTROSHOCK
02 15.0 0 4 6 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
02 15.0 0 4 8 0 1 0 ELECTROSHOCK
02 16.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
02 16.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
02 18.2 0 4 11 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
02' 18.9 0. 56 54 0 2 1 ELECTROSHOCK
)> 02 21.5 0 1 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
..... 02 22.5 0 3 1 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK ..., 02 23.0 0 0 3 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
02 23.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
03 4.5 0 17 18 1 0 1 DIPNET
04 6.3 0 16 7 0 0 1 ELECTROSHOCK
04 9.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
04 12.5 0 1 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
04 14.9 0· 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
04 18.9 0 36 0 0 2 1 ELECTROSHOCK
04 23 .o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
04 25.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
04 27.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
04 37.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
04 39.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
---------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-B-1. Continued.
--------------------------------------~-----------------------------------------------Eulachon Catch ---------------' ··~----------
Hale Female -------------------------Date River Mile Pre Spawning Post Pre Spawning Post Method ---·--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUNE
04 44.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
04 48.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
04 50.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTRQSHOCK
05 4.5 0 1 0 0 0 1 DIPNET
06 4.5 0 0 6 0 0 50 DIPNET
06 6.3 0 0 4 0 0 111 ELECTROSHOCK
)> 06 9.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
06 12.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
-A. 06 13.8. 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
Q) 06 15.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
06 16.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
06 18.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
06 18.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
06 21.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
06 22.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
06 23 .o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ELECTROSHOCK
07 4.5 0 0 2 0 0 28 DIPNET
08 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 4 DIPNET
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.l - J I
....
i
r-
'
-
.....
.,
APPENDIX 2-C
SONAR
1. DAILY YENTNA STATION SONAR COUNTS
2. FIGURE OF DAILY AND CUMULATIVE PERCENT
OF SONAR COUNTS BY SPECIES
1 J
Appendix Table 2-C-1. Yentna station north bank daily and cumulative sonar counts by species,1983.
------------
DATE TOTAL CHINOOK SOCKEYE PINK CHUM COHO MISC.
DAILY COUNT DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM _______ ...,. ---------___ _.....,_ __ -------
063083 91 19 19 37 37 20 20 2 2 5 5 8 8
070183 59 12 31 24 61 13 33 1 3 4 9 5 13
970283 73 15 46 30 91 16 49 1 4 5 14 6 19
070383 27 6 52 11 102 6 55 0 4 2 16 2 21
070483 59 12 64 24 126 13 68 1 5 4 20 5 26
070583 47 10 74 19 145 10 78 1 6 3 23 4 30
070683 59 12 86 24 169 13 91 1 7 4 27 5 35
0707 83 29 6 92 12 181 6 97 1 8 2 29 2 37
070883 35 7 99 14 195 8 105 1 9 2 31 3 40
070983 57 12 111 23 218 13 118 1 10 3 34 5 45
)> 071083 59 12 123 24 242 13 131 1 11 4 38 5 50
~ 071183 63 13 136 26 268 14 145 1 12 4 42 5 55
CD 071283 86 18 154 35 303 19 164 2 14 5 47 7 62
071383 73 1 155 23 326 40 204 7 21 2 49 0 62
071483 380 5 160 119 445 206 410 36 57 12 61 2 64
071583 386 7 167 128 573 163 573 55 112 24 85 9 73
071683 647 12 179 215 788 273 846 92 204 40 125 15 88
0717 83 815 5 184 107 895 586 1432 76 280 31 156 10 98
071883 1068 0 184 91 986 920 2352 27 307 15 171 15 113
071983 1901 0 184 162 1148 1638 3990 47 354 27 198 27 140
072083 4627 0 184 964 2112 3036 7026 217 571 169 367 241 381
072183 3309 0 184 689 2801 2172 9198 155 726 121 488 172 553
072283 1191 0 184 288 3089 495 9693 241 967 154 642 13 566
07 2}83 2385 0 184 446 3535 1559 11252 234 1201 124 766 22 588
07 2483 1713 0 184 321 3856 1119 12371 168 1369 89 855 16 604
---------------------------------------------____ _...,.._ _______
Appendix Table 2-C-1. Continued.
----------------------------...---------
DATE TOTAL CHINOOK SOCKEYE PINK CHUM COHO MISC.
DAILY COUNT DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM ------------------------------··--------------------
072583 981 0 184 155 4011 708 13079 75 1444 26 881 17 621
0726 83 1446 0 184 229 4240 1044 14123 110 1554 38 919 25 646
072783 1223 0 184 197 4437 915 15038 66 1620 35 954 10 656
072883 1266 0 184 244 4681 920 15958 56 1676 36 990 10 666
07 2983 594 0 184 111 4792 450 16408 14 1690 19 1009 0 666
073083 365 2 186 51 4843 286 16694 9 1699 13 1022 4 670
073183 193 1 187 30 4873 157 16851 2 1701 2 1024 1 671
080183 215 0 187 55 4928 139 16990 7 1708 12 1036 2 673
080283 1761 0 187 452 5380 1144 18134 55 1763 96 1132 14 687
)> 080383 207 1 188 91 5471 101 18235 3 1766 8 1140 3 690
1\) 080483 211 •1 189 93 5564 103 18338 3 1769 8 1148 3 693
0 080583 168 3 192 29 5593 118 18456 7 1776 11 1159 0 693
080683 215 3 195 37 5630 152 18608 9 17 85 14 1173 0 693
0807 83 288 4 199 50 5680 203 18811 12 1797 19 1192 0 693
080883 27 8 2 201 58 5738 135 18946 49 1846 27 1219 7 700
~
080983 18 0 201 4 5742 9 18955 3 1849 2 1221 0 700
081083 0 0 201 0 5742 0 18955 0 1849 0 1221 0 700
081183 190 1 202 39 57 81 92 19047 34 1883 19 1240 5 705
081283 398 2 204 83 5864 193 19240 71 1954 39 1279 10 715
081383 386 2 206 81 5945 187 19427 69 2023 38 1317 9 724
081483 572 4 210 119 6064 277 19704 102 2125 56 1373 14 738
081583 398 2 212 83 6147 193 19897 71 2196 39 1412 10 748
0816 83 973 0 212 199 6346 298 20195 298 2494 63 1475 115 863
0817 83 1028 0 212 210 6556 315 20510 315 2809 66 1541 122 985
081883 466 0 212 95 .6651 143 20653 143 2952 30 1571 55 1040
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
] l ]
,. --~ .. 1
•
... , ] .. ] . -1
Appendix Table 2-C-1. Continued.
------~---------------
DATE TOTAL CHINOOK SOCKEYE PINK CHUM COHO MISC.
DAILY COUNT DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM ---------------------------------..-----------------------
081983 336 2 214 60 6711 54 20707 95 3047 32 1603 93 1133
082083 282 2 216 50 6761 45 20752 80 3127 27 1630 78 1211
082183 219 1 217 39 6800 35 20787 62 3189 21 1651 61 1272
082283 166 1 218 29 6829 27 20814 47 3236 16 1667 46 1318
082383 317 2 220 56 6885 51 20865 90 3326 30 1697 88 1406
082483 261 2 222 ·46 6931 42 20907 74 3400 25 1722 72 1478
082583 215 1 223 38 6969 35 20942 61 3461 20 1742 60 1538
)> 0826 83 86 1 224 15 6984 14 20956 24 3485 8 1750 24 1562
f\) 0827 83 210 1 225 37 7021 34 20990 60 3545 20 1770 58 1620
082883 197 1 226 35 7056 31 21021 56 3601 19 17 89 55 1675
...a.
082983 155 1 227 27 7083 25 21046 44 3645 15 1804 43 1718
083083 95 1 228 17 7100 15 21061 27 3672 9' 1813 26 1744
083183 130 1 229 23 7123 21 21082 37 3709 12 1825 36 1780
090183 63 0 229 11 7134 10 21()92 18 3727 6 1831 18 1798
090283 61 0 229 11 7145 10 21102 17 3744 6 1837 17 1815
090383 86 1 230 15 7160 14 21116 24 3768 8 1845 24 1839
090483 56 0 230 10 7170 9 21125 16 3784 5 1850 16 1855
090583 13 0 230 2 7172 2 21127 4 3788 1 1851 4 1859 ______ ._ ____________ ·------------
Appendix Table 2-C-2. Yentna station south bank daily and cumulative sonar counts by species,l983.
-----------·-----------....---------------
DATE TOTAL CHINOOK SOCKEYE PINK CHUM COHO MISC.
DAILY COUNT DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM ------------------I -· ----·1&& --· ·--··------· ------------
063083 30 5 5 15 15 6 6 1 1 1 1 2 2
070183 18 3 8 10 25 4 10 0 1 0 1 1 3
070283 24 4 12 13 38 5 15 0 1 0 1 2 5
070383 67 12 24 35 73 13 28 1 2 1 2 5 10
070483 123 21 45 65 138 24 52 2 4 2 4 9 19
070583 111 19 64 58 196 22 74 2 6 2 6 8 27
070683 57 10 74 30 226 11 85 1 7 1 7 4 31
0707 83 45 8 82 23 249 9 94 1 8 1 8 3 34
070883 24 4 86 13 262 5 99 0 8 0 8 2 36
070983 37 6 92 19 281 1 106 1 9 1 9 3 39
)>
1\) 071083 70 12 104 37 318 14 120 1 10 1 10 5 44
1\) 071183 127 22 126 67 385 25 145 2 12 2 12 9 53
071283 242 41 167 126 511 48 193 5 17 5 17 17 70
071383 572 13 180 355 866 164 357 19 36 13 30 8 78
071483 3642 80 260 2263 3129 1044 1401 121 157 80 110 54 132
071583 3167 0 260 2468 5597 390 1791 179 336 114 224 16 148
071683 5032 0 260 3637 9234 773 2564 170 506 433 657 19 167
0717 83 6184 0 260 3511 12745 1970 4534 254 760 449 1106 0 167
071883 9316 25 285 4974 17119 3484 8018 429 1189 404 1510 0 167
071983 25453 0 285 17817 35536 5438 13456 983 2172 1041 2551 174 341
072083 26508 46 331 21504 57040 3800 17256 602 2774 417 2968 139 480
07 2183 18668 0 331 12552 69592 4524 21780 637 3411 573 3541 382 862
072283 645{) 0 331 2730 72322 2773 24553 495 3906 366 3907 86 948
07 2383 7527 0 331 3319 75641 2899 27452 701 4607 514 4421 94 1042
07 2483 6225 0 331 2620 78261 2871 30323 210 4817 419 4840 lOS 1147
------------------------------------------------· ------------.------------
I
Appendix Table 2-C-2. Continued.
--------_________ ._..._ ___ -----------------
DATE TOTAL CHINOOK SOCKEYE PINK CHUM COHO MISC.
DAILY COUNT DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM -------------------------------------
072583 5830 19 350 3756 82017 1647 31970 130 4947 222 5062 56 1203
0726 83 6675 21 371 4302 86319 1886 33856 148 5095 254 5316 64 1267
0727 83 3715 0 371 2544 88863 833 34689 45 5140 248 5564 45 1312
072883 1710 0 371 926 89789 490 35179 98 5238 185 5749 11 1323
072983 1155 0 371 764 90553 268 35447 28 5266 95 5844 0 1323
073083 1137 0 371 753 91306 264 35711 27 5293 93 5937 0 1323
073183 763 4 375 387 91693 297 36008 4 5297 71 6008 0 1323
080183 800 4 379 406 92099 311 36319 4 5301 75 6083 0 1323
080283 760 4 383 386 92485 295 36614 4 5305 71 6154 0 1323
080383 583 0 383 331 92816 206 36820 19 5324 27 6181 0 1323
)>
1\) 080483 544 0 383 333 93149 191 37011 0 5324 20 6201 0 1323
080583 617 0 383 378 93527 217 37228 0 5324 22 6223 0 1323
(t) 080683 642 0 383 301 93828 243 37471 47 5371 51 6274 0 1323
0807 83 501 0 383 235 94063 189 37660 37 5408 40 6314 0 1323
080883 514 0 383 241 94304 194 37854 38 5446 41 6355 0 1323
080983 96 0 383 45 94349 36 37890 7 5453 8 6363 0 1323
081083 111 0 383 52 94401 42 37932 8 5461 9 6372 0 1323
081183 652 0 383 306 94707 246 3817 8 48 5509 52 6424 0 1323
081283 923 0 383 511 95218 258 38436 17 5586 75 6499 2 1325
081383 1005 ·o 383 556 95774 280 38716 84 5670 82 6581 3 1328
081483 476 0 383 200 95974 186 38902 57 5727 30 6611 3 1331
081583 335 0 383 115 96089 131 39033 64 5791 24 6635 1 1332
081683 212 0 383 73 96162 83 39116 40 5831 15 6650 1 1333
0817 83 27 8 , 0 383 102 96264 69 39185 55 5886 27 6677 25 1358
081883 332 0 383 121 96385 83 39268 66 5952 32 6709 30 1388
----------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2~c-2. Continued.
-------______________ ..___ ___________________________________
DATE TOTAL CHINOOK SOCKEYE PINK CHUM COHO MISC.
DAILY COUNT DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM
----------------------------I •• ...._ -----------------------------
081983 266 0 383 97 96482 66 39334 53 6005 26 6735 24 1412
082083 399 0 383 146 96628 100 39434 79 6084 38 6773 36 1448
082183 212 0 383 60 96688 10 39444 91 6175 24 6797 27 1475
082283 70 0 383 20 96708 3 39447 30 6205 8 6805 9 1484
0823 83 134 0 383 38 96746 6 39453 58 6263 15 6820 17 1501
082483 237 0 383 67 96813 11 39464 102 6365 27 6847 30 1531
082583 179 0 383 51 96864 8 39472 77 6442 20 6867 23 1554
0826 83 156 0 383 44 96908 7 39479 67 6509 18 6885 20 1574
)> 0827 83 323 0 383 92 97000 15 39494 139 6648 36 6921 41 1615
1\) 082883 221 0 383 63 97063 10 39504 95 6743 25 6946 28 1643
~
082983 149 0 383 42 97105 7 39511 64 6807 17 6963 19 1662
083083 64 0 383 18 97123 3 39514 28 6835 7 6970 8 1670
083183 61 0 383 17 97140 3 39517 26 6861 7 6977 8 167 8
090183 56 0 383 16 97156 3 39520 24 6885 6 6983 7 1685
090283 38 0 383 11 97167 2 39522 16 6901 4 6987 5 1690
090383 68 0 383 19 97186 3 39525 29 6930 8 6995 9 1699
090483 84 0 383 24 97210 4 39529 36 6966 9 7004 11 1710
090583 111 0 383 32 97242 5 39534 48 7014 12 7016 14 1724
----------------------------------------------
J . ) ·--J
-1 --1 ----1 1 l 1
Appendix Table 2-C-3. Yentna station daily and cumulative sonar counts by species,l983.
---------------.---------------~ --------------
DATE TOTAL CHINOOK SOCKEYE PINK CHUM COHO MISC.
DAILY COUNT DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM
------------------------~----------------. ~------------------
063083 121 24 24 52 52 26 26 3 3 6 6 10 10
070183 17 15 39 34 86 17 43 1 4 4 10 6 16
070283 97 19 58 43 129 21 64 1 5 5 15 8 24
070383 94 18 76 46 175 19 83 1 6 3 18 7 31
070483 182 33 109 89 264 37 120 3 9 6 24 14 45
070583 158 29 138 77 341 32 152 3 12 5 29 12 57
0706 83 116 22 160 54 395 24 176 2 14 5 34 9 66
0707 83 74 14 174 35 430 15 191 2 16 3 37 5 71
070883 59 11 185 27 457 13 204 1 17 2 39 5 76
070983 94 18 203 42 499 20 224 2 19 4 43 8 84
)> 071083 129 24 227 61 560 27 251 2 21 5 48 10 94
1'\) 071183 190 35 262 93 653 39 290 3 24 6 54 14 108
01 071283 328 59 321 161 814 67 357 7 31 10 64 24 132
071383 645 14 335 378 1192 204 561 26 57 15 79 8 140
071483 4022 85 420 2382 3574 1250 1811 157 214 92 171 56 196
071583 3553 7 427 2596 6170 553 2364 234 448 138 309 25 221
071683 5679 12 439 3852 10022 1046 3410 262 710 473 782 34 255
0717 83 6999 5 444 3618 13640 2556 5966 330 1040 480 1262 10 265
071883 10384 25 469 5065 18705 4404 10370 456 1496 419 1681 15 280
071983 27354 0 469 17979 36684 7076 17446 1030 2526 1o68 2749 201 481
07 2083 31135 46 515 22468 59152 6836 24282 819 3345 586 3335 380 861
072183 21977 0 515 13241 72393 6696 3097 8 792 4137 694 4029 554 1415
072283 7641 0 515 3018 75411 3268 34246 736 4873 520 4549 99 1514
07 2383 9912 0 515 3765 79176 4458 38704 935 5808 638 5187 116 1630
07 2483 7938 0 515 2941 82117 3990 42694 378 6186 508 5695 121 1751
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-C-3. Continued.
---------------------------..-------------------------------
DATE TOTAL CHINOOK SOCKEYE PINK CHUM COHO MISC.
DAILY COUNT DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAlLY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM ---------------------------------
072583 6811 19 534 3911 86028 . 2355 45049 205 6391 248 5943 73 1824
07 2683 8121 21 555 4531 90559 2930 47979 258 6649 292 6235 89 1913
0727 83 4938 0 555 2741 93300 1748 49727 111 6760 283 6518 55 1968
07 2883 2976 0 555 1170 94470 1410 51137 154 6914 221 6739 21 1989
07 2983 1749 0 555 875 95345 718 51855 42 6956 114 6853 0 1989
073083 1502 2 557 804 96149 550 52405 36 6992 106 6959 4 1993
073183 956 5 562 417 96566 454 52859 6 6998 73 7032 1 1994
080183 1015 4 566 461 97027 450 53309 11 7009 87 7119 2 1996
080283 2521 4 570 838 97865 1439 54748 59 7068 167 7286 14 2010
080383 790 1 571 422 98287 307 55055 22 7090 35 7321 3 2013
080483 755 1 572 426 98713 294 55349 3 7093 28 7349 3 2016
080583 785 3 575 407 99120 335 55684 7 7100 33 7382 0 2016
)> 080683 857 3 578 338 99458 395 56079 56 7156 65 7447 0 2016
1\) 0807 83 789 4 582 285 99743 392 56471 49 7205 59 7506 0 2016
m 080883 792 2 584 299 100042 329 56800 87 . 7292 68 7574 7 2023
080983 114 0 584 49 100091 45 56845 10 7302 10 7584 0 2023
081083 111 0 584 52 100143 42 56887 8 7310 9 7593 0 2023
081183 842 1 585 345 100488 338 57225 82 7392 71 7664 5 2028
081283 1321 2 587 594 101082 451 57676 148 7540 114 7778 12 2040
081383 1391 2 589 637 101719 467 58143 153 7693 120 7898 12 2052
081483 1048 4 593 319 102038 463 58606 159 7852 86 7984 17 2069
081583 733 2 595 198 102236 324 58930 135 7987 63 8047 11 2080
081683 1185 0 595 272 102508 381 59311 338 8325 78 8125 116 2196
0817 83 1306 0 595 312 102820 384 59695 370 8695 93 8218 147 2343
081883 798 0 595 216 103036 226 59921 209 8904 62 8280 85 2428
----------------------------------------------------------
J J . 1 J I _I
~ 1 J ] 1 1
Appendix Table 2-C-3. Continued.
-----------------· ----------------
DATE TOTAL CHINOOK SOCKEYE PINK CHUM COHO MISC.
DAILY COUNT DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM DAILY CUM
--------------------..~----~---------------------
081983 602 2 597 157 103193 120 60041 148 9052 58 8338 117 2545
082083 681 2 599 196 103389 145 60186 159 9211 65 8403 114 2659
082183 431 1 600 99 103488 45 60231 153 9364 45 8448 88 2747
082283 236 1 601 49 103537 30 60261 77 9441 24 8472 55 2802
082383 451 2 603 94 103631 57 60318 148 9589 45 8517 105 2907
082483 498 2 605 113 103744 53 60371 176 9765 52 8569 102 3009
082583 394 1 606 89 103833 43 60414 138 9903 40 8609 83 3092
082683 242 1 607 59 103892 21 60435 91 9994 26 8635 44 3136
0827 83 533 1 608 129 104021 49 60484 199 10193 56 8691 99 3235
)> 082883 418 1 609 98 104119 41 60525 151 10344 44 8735 83 3318
1\)
....., 082983 304 1 610 69 104188 32 60557 108 10452 32 8767 62 3380
083083 159 1 611 35 104223 18 60575 55 10507 16 8783 34 3414
083183 191 1 612 40 104263 24 60599 63 10570 19 8802 44 3458
090183 119 0 612 27 104290 13 60612 42 10612 12 8814 25 3483
090283 99 0 612 22 104312 12 60624 33 10645 10 8824 22 3505
090383 154 1 613 34 104346 17 60641 53 10698 16 8840 33 3538
090483 140 0 613 34 104380 13 60654 52 10750 14 8854 27 3565
090583 124 0 613 34 104414 7 60661 52 10802 13 8867 18 3583
---------------------------
Appendix Table 2-C-4. Sector distribution of north bank sonar counts, adjusted for debris, at Yentna
Station ,1983.
Sector
Date 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total
June 11 40 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 40 0 88 30 '
July
1 36 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 11 56
2 47 18 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 74
3 12 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27
4 35 21 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 61
5 16 21 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47
6 25 19 10 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 57
7 20 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31
8 10 11 9 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 35
9 14 29 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57
10 26 18 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56
11 37 ]5 7 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 64 "
12 49 24 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 86
)> 13 39 28 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 79
14 92 81 54 18 0 1 7 20 19 37 17 33 379
1\) 15 101 77 63 16 1 0 5 16 20 18 44 26 387
()) 16 122 132 177 13 1 0 13 23 36 50 22 61 650
17 174 140 122 23 4 0 24 37 54 46 72 135 831
18 320 198 138 19 1 0 29 54 33 60 75 164 1091
19 330 492 321 23 1 1 37 67 124 120 166 286 1968
20 1049 1076 794 71 8 0 71 115 187 274 376 733 4754
21 489 736 671 86 8 0 55 128 206 225 245 466 3315
22 344 342 236 17 1 0 13 17 40 83 45 69 1207
23 548 346 187 36 1 0 49 90 153 272 352 352 2386
24 604 266 149 19 1 0 28 64 79 136 183 184 1713
25 247 163 89 14 2 0 29 19 66 109 87 147 972
26 583 312 103 19 0 1 11 8 41 70 89 210 1447
27 540 232 53 13 1 0 13 19 34 67 61 191 1224
28 522 206 56 14 0 0 16 5 51 117 77 202 1266
29 255 108 66 3 0 0 4 5 12 29 51 61 594
30 165 83 60 7 2 0 1 2 ·11 13 19 2 365
31 41 70 52 18 7 1 0 0 1 1 0 3 194
August
1 20 57 69 10 8 3 0 1 1 6 12 27 214
2 19 58 40 16 7 5 3 2 4 7 3 12 176
3 13 67 51 9 4 5 1 0 2 15 22 17 206
4 42 64 49 7 0 0 0 1 2 10 19 24 218
5 52 50 34 5 0 0 1 2 1 4 6 13 168
-_) J ~-J J
l
Appendix Table 2-C-4. Continued.
Sector
Date 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total
August
6 51 70 29 0 1 0 2 2 1 3 35 19 219
7 139 57 45 14 0 0 1 6 6 8 6 33 315
8 21 59 30 1 0 0 1 2 2 0 4 7
9 "'!.! 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 -o 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 117 57 22 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 200
12 119 126 76 19 7 2 4 3 14 50 3/ 3/
13 87 127 81 16 0 1 11 13 4 2 15 12 389
14 246 64 '37 12 0 0 7 11 50 51 56 47 581
15 100 78 35 10 0 0 10 18 15 17 35 94 412
16 400 110 89 9 1 1 19 19 17 55 75 204 999
17 509 163 43 14 1 1 9 17 21 41 69 141 1029
18 295 68 21 1 2 0 9 16 10 4 26 20 472
19 202 61 12 4 1 0 1 0 5 10 26· 16 338
)> 20 156 ' 70 31 5 1 0 1 1 4 7 4 1 281
1\) 21 133 ' ~-66 6 1 2 0 1 0 3 0 5 3 220
22 167 32 11 1 0 0 3 0 4 0 4 1 223
co 23 200 77 19 3 1 0 1 4 4 3 2 14 328
24 149 55 25 0 1 0 6 1 4 12 4 9 266
25 117 36 13 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 10 34 216
26 53 4 9 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 73
27 147 41 3 2 0 0 3 0 0 1 10 3 210
28 178 9 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 • 0 196
29 138 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 154
30 86 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 95
31 118 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 136
September
1 60 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 64
2 58 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 8 1 1 73
3 69 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 14 100
4 56 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58
5 8· 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
TOTAL 11,117 6,870 4,281 590 70 20 498 808 1,341 2,000 2.479 4,130 34,204
PERCENT 32.6 20.1 12.5 1.7 0.2 o.o 1.5 2.4 3,9 5.8 7.2 12.1
f~ 60 foot substrate deplo~ed
31 No data due to extreme igh water
-No data due to debri on sectors 11 and 12
)>
(..)
0
I
Appendix Table 2-C;5. Sector distribution of south bank sonar countss adjusted for debris, at Ventna
Station, 1983.
Sector
Date 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
June
30 37 15 0 0 ·o 0 0 0 0 9 0 0
July
1 18 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 19 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 37 22 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
4 62 41 8 5 1 0 2 2 0 2 0 1
5 70 22 13 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 27 21 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 28 14 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8 23 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 r 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 56 10 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 103 15 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
12 158 58 . 14 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 5 3
13 240 149 87 17 0 0 1 6 8 9 25 30
14 1541 1266 . 631 69 4 0 15 4 .1 11 10 84
15 1207 998 665 98 14 0 31 32 12 22 13 74
16 2089 1439 1080 164 25 0 40 17 43 42 49 44
17 2351 1934 1420 230 25 1 35 45 21 33 23 65
18 3716 3110 1914 325 29 4 26 14 25 41 27 85
19 12173 7327 4477 820 98 3 135 54 50 77 86 69
20 14038 6635 4275 699 76 7 137 99 121 156 153 117
21 10018 4848 2546 385 47 1 148 141 125 158 120 132
22 3594 1930 814 54 1 0 11 5 4 23 11 3
23 3415 2182 1198 180 25 3 77 82 51 134 85 95
24 2949 1745 889 188 22 2 82 44 46 79 52 126
25 2980 1142 803 174 39 2 123 81 62 98 74 251
26 3794 1174 653 249 59 6 129 123 92 95 65 207
27 1614 763 475 135 28 5 121 135 95 89 86 168
28 592 398 241 78 13 3 60 4 72 76 34 139
29 404 264 146 25 3 0 14 9 14 24 11 241
30 509 392 184 10 2 0 10 5 2 3 19 2
31 370 254 122 13 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1
August
1 366 238 136 20 5 0 2 5 0 4 3 21 2 314 289 130 13 1 0 0 1 1 2 1 8 3 206 244 113 8 1 0 2 2 0 5 1 2 4 218 210 97 9 1 0 1 2 0 2 1 3
J I I I J J . I J J
Total
61
20
25
67
124
111
58
44
25
37
70
128
241
572
3642
3166
5032
6183
9316
25369
26513
18669
6450
7527
6224
5829
6646
3714
1710
1155
1138
763
800
760
584
544
I ) J
-] --] l 1 -...
Appendix Table 2-C-5. Continued.
Sector
Date 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total
} ~
August
5 310 211 86 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 617
6 306 226 99 9 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 642
7 199 165 117 14 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 1 500
8 316 172 84 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 581
9 2/ 18 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 11. 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11 'll 82 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12 03 325 86 16 3 0 6 4 2 7 11 34 927
13 425 426 64 24 8 1 16 4 6 6 2 22 1004
14 449 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 475
15 307 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 335
16 151 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 10 18 21 211
17 187 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 26 25 34 278
18 266. 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 20 11 331
)> 19 199 31 5 0 0 0 7 2 6 9 3 4 266
20 308 49 15 1 3 0 3 9 1 8 2 0 399 w 21 153 30 3 0 0 0 5 0 3 9 1 8 212
~ 22-61 5 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 70
23 114 10 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 142
24 181 28 4 1 0 0 0 1 2 5 3 12 237
25 90 14 3 1 1 0 7 11 4 9 23 17 180
26 75 9 1 0 0 0 3 4 2 8 27 27 156
27 220 29 17 2 0 0 6 1 6 3 23 9 322
28 154 21 10 0 0 0 1 2 1 11 12 9 221
29 130 12 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 149
30 45 8 1 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 3 64
31 35 11 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 4 0 59
September
1 40 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 1 3 55
2 20 5 2 0 0 0 1 2 0 3 3 2 38
3 52 5 1 1 4 0 0 1 0 0 3 1 68
4 63 8 7 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 84
5 50 14 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 5 0 85
TOTAL 74,707 41,053 23,786 4,064 541 38 1,283 979 888 1,348 1,142 2,196 152,025
PERCENT 49.2 27.0 15.6 2.7 0.4 0.0 0.8 0,6 0.6 0.9 0.8 1.4
1/ 60 foot substrate deplo~ed. ?_/ No data due to extreme 1gh water
..... -100 ... -100 -------, .. --_ ......
,-
I SOCKEYE _ .... PINK I / 23300 I 80 80 (/) I Ill I
I ~ 6000 I ~ ~
' ---._Cumulative
0 ...... I 0
c 0/o ( ,'~Cumulative J 15000 60 Q) J o/o 60 Q)
0 0 I > Sonar--1 > u Count& I -u -4000 Sonar __ -I 0 Counts 0
L 13003 I 40 L 40 ::J 0 ::J 0 I E E c I (
0 ::J 0 2000 ::J
(f) 5000 20 0 (/) 20 0
I ~~ -0 0 0 Ia I I I I
3111 IY za 311 Q '18 28 a :sa "' 28 3& Q IQ zg II
.JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER
)> 100 100 ,-......
(...) , --,.,"" ...... ... ...
1\) ,/ CHUH ... -"' COHO
1000 , .. 80 1000 ..... ... ... 80 Ul I Ul , ,.
~ ..... ~ -+' / ~ , 0 c _ ... -0 c
/'-.......cumulative J 750 60 J 750 Sonar--0/o 60 0 Sonar--Q) 0 Counts I Q)
u 0/o > u I >
Counts --0 L 500 40 0 L 500 40
0 ::J 0 ::J
c E c E
0 ::J 0 ::J
(f) 250 20 0 (f) 250 -20 0
0 0 0 0
:Ia 1111 za 311 a 'a 29 a 3lll 'a Zlll 38 a Ul 29 II
JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER
Date Date
Appendix Figure 2-C-1. Daily and cumulative percent sonar counts by species at Yentna Station,l983 .
] _I . I
r
APPENDIX 2-D
DAILY FISHWHEEL CATCH DATA
---------------------------------------
1 --] ] ]
Appendix Table 2-D-1. Yentna station north bank fishwheel daily and cumulative catch by-apeciea,l9B3.
-------------
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miace llaneoua All Species -----Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. --
063083 1 24.0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
070183 1 24.0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5
070283 1 24.0 4 9 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 11
070383 1 24.0 0 9 1 2 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 5 16
070483 1 24.0 6 15 5 7 2 6 1 1 0 0 0 2 3 16 32
070583 1 24.0 8 23 4 11 3 9 0 1 0 0 0 1 4 16 48
070683 1 24.0 2 25 4 15 0 9 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 7 55
070783 1 24.0 0 25 3 18 1 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 4 59
070883 1 24.0 3 28 9 27 1 11 0 1 0 0 0 1 6 14 ·73
070983 1 24.0 2 30 6 33 1 12 0 1 3 3 0 0 6 12 85
)>
(A) 071083 1 24.0 0 30 6 39 1 13 0 1 0 3 0 5 11 12 97
071183 1 24.0 2 32 10 49 7 20 1 2 4 7 0 1 12 25 122
(A) 071283 1 24.0 2 34 18 67 16 36 1 3 3 10 0 2 14 42 164
071383 1 24.0 1 35 25 92 55 91 6 9 4 14 0 0 14 91 255
071483 1 24.0 2 37 45 137 66 157 15 24 3 17 0 1 15 132 387
071583 1 . 24.0 4 41 34 171 33 190 22 46 6 23 0 3 18 102 489
071683 1 24.0 0 41 36 201 56 246 8 54 7 30 0 2• 20 109 598
071783 1 24.0 1 42 21 228 115 361 15 69 6 36 0 2 22 160 758
071883 1 24.0 ,0 42 13 241 128 489 5 74 2 38 0 0 22 148 906
071983 1 24.0 0 42 11 252 114 603 2 76 2 40 0 4 26 133 1039
072083 1 23.5 0 42 21 273 74 677 4 80 3 43 0 3 29 105 1144
072183 1 24.0 0 42 19 292 52 729 5 85 4 . 47 0 7 36 87 1231
072283 1 24.0 0 42 43 335 74 803 36 121 23 70 0 2 38 178 1409
072383 1 24.0 0 42 43 378 52 855 18 139 12 82 0 0 38 125 1534
07 2483 1 24.0 0 42 18 396 161 1016 14 153 5 87 0 3 41 201 1735
072583 1 23.0 0 42 15 411 90 1106 7 160 3 90 0 3 44 118 1853
072683 1 24.0 0 42 39 450 156 1262 19 179 6 96 0 3 47 223 2076
07 27 83 1 24.0 0 42 39 489 181 1443 13 192 7 103 0 2 49 242 2318
072883 1 24.0 0 42 48 537 181 1624 11 203 7 110 0 2 51 249 2567
--------------------··· -··-------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-1. Continued.
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miace llaneoua All Species
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cia co Other Cum. Daily Cum.
072983 1 24.0 0 42 48 585 194 1818 6 209 8 118 0 0 51 256 2823
073083 1 24.0 1 43 27 612 151 1969 5 214 7 125 0 2 53 193 3016
073183 1 23.0 1 44 26 638 135 2104 2 216 2 127 0 1 54 167 3183
080183 1 24.0 0 44 26 664 110 2214 4 220 5 132 0 1 55 146 3329
080283 1 24.0 0 44 40 704 57 2271 4 224 9 141 0 1 56 111 3440
080383 1 24.0 1 45 40 744 30 2301 0 224 1 142 0 1 57 73 3513
080483 1 24.0 0 45 41 785 60 2361 3 227 6 148 0 2 59 112 3625
080583 1 24.0 2 47 18 803 33 2394 2 229 3 151 0 0 59 58 3683
080683 1 24.0 0 47 5 808 43 2437 1 230 1 152 0 0 59 50 3733
)> 080783 1 24.0 1 48 11 819 62 2499 5 235 9 161 0 0 59 88 3821
(I)
~ 080883 1 23.0 0 48 5 824 28 2527 5 240 3 164 0 0 59 41 3862
080983 1 6.0 0 48 1 825 1 2528 0 240 0 164 0 0 59 2 3864
081083 1 3.0 0 48 0 825 0 2528 0 240 0 164 0 0 59 0 3864
081183 1 24.0 0 48 0 825 0 2528 0 240 0 164 0 0 59 0 3864
081283 1 24.0 0 48 2 827 5 2533 5 245 2 166 0 0 59 14 3878
081383 1 24.0 1 49 8 835 23 2556 5 250 4 170 0 2 61 43 3921
081483 1 24.0 0 49 11 846 6 2562 4 254 2 172 0 0 61 23 3944
081583 1 24.0 0 49 7 853 16 2578 10 264 5 177 0 2 63 40 3984
081683 1 23.0 0 49 16 869 19 2597 25 289 4 181 0 3 66 67 4051
081783 1 24.0 0 49 9 878 24 2621 19 308 4 .185 0 11 77 67 4118
081883 1 24.0 0 49 13 891 14 2635 13 321 4 189 0 8 85 52 4170
081983 1 24.0 1 50 13 904 11 2646 11 332 3 192 0 9 94 48 4218
082083 1 24.0 0 50 5 909 5 2651 7 339 2 194 1 4 99 24 4242
082183 1 24.0 0 50 2 911 3 2654 1 340 2 196 0 1 100 9 4251
082283 1 24.0 0 50 0 911 1 2655 1 341 2 198 0 0 100 4 4255
082383 1 24.0 0 50 2 913 1 2656 3 344 2 200 0 1 101 9 4264
082483 1 24.0 0 50 2 915 1 2657 9 353 0 200 0 0 101 12 4276
------· .. -··· --------------------------------------------
J .I
J ]
Appendix Table 2-D-1. Continued.
-----Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cia co Other Cum. Daily Cum.
082583 1 24.0 0 50 1 916 0 2657 5 358 1 201 1 2 104 10 4286
082683 1 24.0 0 50 3 919 1 2658 1 359 1 202 1 3 108 10 4296
082783 1 24.0 0 50 1 920 1 2659 7 366 3 205 1 5 114 18 4314
082883 1 24.0 0 50 1 921 3 2662 3 369 0 205 0 7 121 14 4328
082983 1 24.0 0 50 2 923 0 2662 0 369 2 207 0 4 125 8 4336
083083 1 24.0 0 50 1 924 0 2662 3 372 2 209 0 2 '127 8 4344
083183 1 24.0 0 50 2 926 2 2664 1 373 0 209 0 0 127 5 4349
090183 1 24.0 0 50 0 926 0 2664 2 375 2 211 1 2 130 7 4356
090283 1 24.0 0 50 4 930 2 2666 5 380 0 211 2 1 133 14 4370
090383 1 24.0 • -0 -50 2 932 0 2666 1 381 2 213 1 1 135 7 4377
).lo 090483 1 24.0 0 50 1 933 1 2667 3 384 0 213 0 1 136 6 4383
(..) -----
01
Appendix Table 2-D-2. Yentna station south bank fishwheel daily and cumulative catch by species,1983.
----Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species ----Date Ho. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. ------
063083 1 24.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
070183 1 24.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
070283 1 24.0 3 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4
070383 1 24.0 4 7 5 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 11 15
070483 1 24.0 1 8 1 7 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 20
070583 1 24.0 1 9 9 16 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 12 32
070683 1 24.0 2 11 5 21 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 9 41
070783 1 24.0 2 13 4 25 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7 48
070883 1 24.0 1 14 3 28 4 8 0 0 1 1 0 0 6 9 57
070983 1 24.0 4 18 3 31 4 12 1 1 0 1 0 0 6 12 69
> 071083 1 24.0 3 21 4 35 4 16 0 1 0 1 0 2 8 13 82
071183 1 24.J 5 26 15 50 8 24 1 2 1 2 0 2 10 32 114
(A) 071283 1 24.0 1 27 32 82 7 31 1 3 1 3 0 1 11 43 157
(]) 071383 1 24.0 3 30 34 116 33 64 0 3 3 6 0 2 13 75 232
071483 1 24.0 3 33 135 251 45 109 9 12 3 9 0 2 15 197 429
071583 1 24.0 0 33 152 403 24 133 11 23 7 16 0 1 16 195 624
071683 1 24.0 0 33 193 596 41 174 9 32 23 39 0 1 17 267 891
071783 1 24.0 0 33 180 776 101 275 13 45 23 62 0 0 17 317 1208
071883 1 24.0 1 34 197 973 138 413 17 62 16 78 0 0 17 369 1577
071983 1 15.8 0 34 308 1281 94 507 17 79 18 96 0 3 20 440 2017
072083 1 24.0 1 35 464 1745 82 589 13 92 9 105 0 3 23 572 2589
072183 1 16 .o 0 35 197 1942 71 660 10 102 9 114 0 6 29 293 2882
072283 1 18.5 0 35 127 2069 129 789 23 125 17 131 0 4 33 300 3182
072383 1 24.0 0 35 71 2140 62 851 15 140 11 142 0 2 35 161 3343
072483 1 24.0 0 35 125 2265 137 988 10 150 20 162 0 5 40 297 3640
072583 1 15.0 1 36 57 2322 47 1035 2 152 5 167 o. 2 42 114 3754
072683 1 24.0 0 36 146 2468 42 1077 5 157 7 174 0 1 43 201 3955
072783 1 24.0 0 36 113 2581 37 1114 2 159 11 185 0 2 45 165 4120
072883 1 24.0 0 36 85 2666 45 1159 9 168 17 202 0 1 46 157 4277
---------------------------------------------------
J I J J I J I J ] .J J _I J
] l 1
Appendix Table 2-0-2. Continued.
-----
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species -· ·-------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Whee la Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. ---
072983 1 24.0 0 36 91 2757 40 . 1199 3 171 10 212 0 0 46 144 4421
073083 1 24.0 0 36 46 2803 8 1207 2 173 7 219 0 0 46 63 4484
073183 1 24.0 1 37 40 2843 42 1249 1 174 10 229 0 0 46 94 457 8
080183 1 24.0 0 37 58 2901 33 1282 0 174 8 237 0 0 46 99 4677
080283 1 2440 0 37 66 2967 28 1310 1 175 8 245 0 0 46 103 4780
080383 1 23.0 0 37 56 3023 48 1358 6 181 2 247 0 0 46 112 4892
080483 1 24.0 0 37 88 3111 36 1394 0 181 3 250 0 0 46 127 5019
080583 1 24.0 0 37 48 3159 42 1436 0 181 5 255 0 0 46 95 5114
080683 1 3.2 0 37 4 3163 8 1444 0 181 2 257 0 0 46 14 5128
080783 1 24.0 0 37 35 3198 32 1476 1 182 7 264 0 0 46 75 5203
)> 080883 1 23.0 0 37 22 3220 21 1497 9 191 4 268 0 0 46 56 5259
! I (A) 080983 1 6.0 0 37 0 3220 0 1497 1 192 0 268 0 0 46 1 5260
...., 081083 1 3.0 0 37 2 3222 0 1497 0 192 0 268 0 0 46 2 5262
081183 1 24.0 0 37 14 3236 1 1498 1 193 0 268 0 0 46 16 5278
081283 1 24.0 0 37 70 3306 36 1534 13 206 11 279 0 0 46 130 5408
081383 1 24.0 0 37 148 3454 74 1608 20 226 21 300 0 1 47 264 5672
081483 1 24.0 0 37 74 3528 69 1677 21 247 11 311 0 1 48 176 5848
081583 1 24.0 0 37 52 3580 51 1728 27 274 8 319 0 0 48 138 5986
081683 1 24.0 0 37 35 3615 48 1776 21 295 10 329 0 1 49 115 6101
081783 1 23.0 0 37 22 3637 25 . 1801 9 304 4 333 0 10 59 70 6171
081883 1 24.0 o· 37 17 3654 8 1809 12 316 2 335 0 4 63 43 6214
081983 1 24.0 0 37 8 3662 4 1813 6 322 6 341 0 0 63 24 6238
082083 1 24.0 0 37 10 3672 2 1815 4 326 3 344 0 0 63 19 6257
082183 1 24.0 0 37 14 3686 3 1818 3 329 0 344 1 0 64 21 6278
082283 1 24.0 0 37 6 3692 0 1818 0 329 0 344 0 0 64 6 6284
082383 1 24.0 0 37 7 3699 0 1818 4 333 1 345 0 0 64 12 6296
082483 1 24.0 0 37 2 3701 2 1820 16 349 2 347 1 0 65 23 6319
-------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-2. Continued.
----Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hiace llaneoua All Species --Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other. Cum. Daily Cum.
082583 1 24.0 0 37 2 3703 0 1820 9 358 1 348 0 0 65 12 6331
082683 1 24.0 0 37 1 3704 1 1821 4 362 2 350 2 0 67 10 6341
082783 1 24.0 0 37 0 3704 0 1821 7 369 2 352 1 0 68 10 6351
082883 1 24.0 0 37 1 3705 0 1821 10 379 1 353 1 1 70 14 6365
082983 1 24.0 0 37 3 3708 0 1821 4 383 2 355 3 2 75 14 6379
083083 1 16.0 0 37 1 3709 0 1821 1 384 0 355 1 0 76 3 6382
083183 1 24.0 0 37 1 3710 0 H21 0 384 0 355 2 0 78 3 6385
090183 1 24.0 0 37 4 3714 1 1822 0 384 0 355 0 0 78 5 6390
090283 1 24.0 0 37 0 3714 0 1822 4 388 2 357 2 0 80 8 6398
090383 1 24.0 0 37 1 3715 0 1822 1 389 2 359 0 0 80 4 6402
090483 1 24.0 0 37 0 3715 0 1822 2 391 2 361 ··-2 .. 0 82 6 6408
)> ·-------. -----
(A)
())
.... J J __ j .. J J
--1 1
Appendix Table 2-D-3. Yentna station fiahwheela daily and cumulative catch by apeciea,l983.
------
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hi ace llaneoua All Species ---
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily . Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. ---
063083 2 48.0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3
070183 2 48.0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ·0 2 5
070283 2 48.0 7 12 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 15
070383 2 48.0 4 16 6 8 4 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 16 31
070483 2 48.0 7 23 6 14 4 9 1 1 0 0 0 3 5 21 52
070583 2 48.0 9 32 13 27 3 12 0 1 0 0 0 3 8 28 80
070683 2 48.0 4 36 9 36 0 12 0 1 0 0 0 3 11 16 96
070783 2 48.0 2 38 7 43 2 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 11 11 107
070883 2 48.0 4 42 12 55 5 19 0 1 1 1 0 1 12 23 130
070983 2 48.0 6 48 9 64 5 24 1 2 3 4 0 0 12 24 154
071083 2 48.0 3 51 10 74 5 29 0 2 0 4 0 7 19 25 179
071183 2 48.0 7 58 25 99 15 44 2 4 5 9 0 3 22 57 236
)> 071283 2 48.0 3 61 50 149 23 67 2 6 4 13 0 3 25 85 321
(I) 071383 2 48.0 4 65. 59 208 88 155 6 12 7 20 0 2 27 166 487
CD 071483 2 48.0 5 70 180 388 111 1S6 24 36 6 26 0 3 30 329 816
071583 2 48.0 4 74 186 574 57 323 33 69 13 39 0 4 34 297 1113
071683 2 48.0 0 74 229 803 97 420 17 ~ 30 69 0 3 37 376 1489
071783 2 48.0 1 75 201 1004 216 636 28 114 29 98 0 2 39 477 1966
071883 2 48.0 1 76 210 1214 266 902 22 136 18 116 0 0 39 511 2483
071983 2 39.7 0 76 319 1533 208 1110 19 155 20 136 0 7 46 573 3056
072083 2 47.5 1 11 485 2018 156 1266 11 172 12 148 0 6 52 677 3733
072183 2 40.0 0 17 216 2234 123 1389 15 187 13 161 0 13 65 380 4113
072283 2 42.5 0 17 170 2404 203 1592 59 246 40 201 0 6 71 478 4591
072383 2 48.0 0 17 114 2518 114 1706 33 279 23 224 0 2 73 286 4877
072483 2 48.0 0 17 143 2661 298 2004 24 303 25 249 0 8 81 498 5375
072583 2 38.0 1 78 72 2733 137 2141 9 312 8 257 0 5 86 232 5607
072683 2 48.0 0 78 185 2918 198 2339 24 336 13 270 0 4 90 424 6031
072783 2 48.0 0 78 152 3070 218 2557 15 351 18 288 0 4 94 407 6438
072883 2 48.0 0 78 133 3203 226 2783 20 371 24 312 0 3 97 406 6844
---· ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-3. Continued.
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. -----
072983 2 48.0 0 78 139 3342 234 3017 9 380 18 330 0 0 97 400 7244
073083 2 48.0 1 79 73 3415 159 3176 7 387 14 344 0 2 99 256 7500
073183 2 47.0 2 81 66 3481 177 3353 3 390 12 356 0 1 100 261 7761
080183 2 48.0 0 81 84 3565 143 3496 4 394 13 369 0 1 101 245 8006
080283 2 48.0 0 81 106 3671 85 3581 5 399 17 386 0 1 102 214 8220
080383 2 47.0 1 82 96 3767 78 3659 6 405 3 389 0 1 103 185 8405
080483 2 48.0 0 82 129 3896 96 3755 3 408 9 398 0 2 105 239 8644
080583 2 48.0 2 84 66 3962 75 3830 2 410 8 406 0 0 105 153 8797
080683 2 27.2 0· 84 9 3971 51 3881 1 411 3 409 0 0 105 64 8861
080783 2 48.0 1 85 46 4017 94 3975 6 417 16 425 0 0 105 163 9024
.> 080883 2 46 .o 0 85 27 4044 49 4024 14 431 7 432 0 0 105 97 9121
080983 2 12.0 0 85 1 4045 1 4025 1 432 0 432 0 0 105 3 9124
~ 081083 2 6.0 0 85 2 4047 0 4025 0 432 0 432 0 0 105 2 9126
0 081183 2 48.0 0 85 14 4061 1 4026 1 433 0 432 0 0 105 16 9142
081283 2 48.0 0 85 72 4133 41 4067 18 451 13 445 0 0 105 144 9286
081381 2 48.0 1 86 156 4289 97 4164 25 476 25 470 0 3 108 307 9593
081483 2 48.0 0 86 85 4374 75 4239 25 501 13 483 0 1 109 199 9792
081583 2 48.0 0 86 59 4433 67 4306 37 538 13 496 0 2 111 178 9970
081683 2 47.0 0 86 51 4484 67 4373 46 584 14 510 0 4 115 182 10152
081783 2 47.0 0 86 31 4515 49 4\22 28 612 8 518 0 21 136 137 10289
081883 2 48.0 0 86 30 4545 22 4444 25 637 6 524 0 12 148 95 10384
081983 2 48.0 1 87 21 4566 15 4459 17 654 9 533 0 9 157 72 10456
082083 2 48.0 0 87 15 4581 7 4466 11 665 5 538 1 4 162 43 10499
082183 2 48.0 0 87 16 4597 6 4472 4 669 2 540 1 1 164 30 10529
082283 2 48.0 0 87 6 4603 1 4473 1 670 2 542 0 0 164 10 10539
082383 2' 48.0 0 87 9 4612 1 4474 7 677 3 545 0 1 165 21 10560
082483 2 48.0 0 87 4 4616 3 4477 25 702 2 547 1 0 166 35 10595
------------------·· ------------------------------------
.I J J
1 l 1 -.... 1
Appendix Table 2-D-3. Continued.
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species -------
Date Ho. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily · Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum.
082583 2 48.0 0 87 3 4619 0 4477 14 716 2 549 1 2 169 22 10617
082683 2 48.0 0 87 4 4623 2 4479 5 721 3 552 3 3 175 20 10637
082783 2 48.0 0 87 1 4624 1 4480 14 735 5 557 2 5 182 28 10665
082883 2 48.0 0 87 2 4626 3 4483 13 748 1 558 1 8 191 28 10693
082983 2 48.0 0 87 5 4631 0 4483 4 752 4 562 3 6 200 22 10715
083083 2 40.0 0 87 2 4633 0 4483 4 756 2 564 1 2 203 11 10726
083183 2 48.0 0 87 3 4636 2 4485 1 757 0 564 2 0 205 8 10734
090183 2 48.0 0 87 4 4640 1 4486 2 759 2 566 1 2 208 12 10746
090283 2 48.0 0 87 4 4644 2 4488 9 768 2 568 4 1 213 22 10768
090383 2 48.0 0 87 3 4647 0 4488 2 770 4 572 1 1 215 11 10779
)> 090483 2 48.0 0 87 1 4648 1 4489 5 175 2 574 2 1 218 12 10791
.a:.
......
Appendix Table 2-D-4. Sunshine station east bank fishwheels daily and cumulative catch by species,l983.
----Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink. Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hour.; Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. -------
060383 1 4.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
060483 1 24.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
060583 2 28.0 5 5 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 15
060683 2 48.0 15 20 29 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 59
060783 2 48.0 32 52 33 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 124
060883 2 48.0 36 88 48 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 208
060983 2 46 .o 71 159 73 193 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 146 354
061083 2 48.0 too 259 73 266 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 174 528
061183 2 48.0 96 355 36 302 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 132 660
)> 061283 2 48.0 187 542 32 334 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 219 879
,J:ro. 061383 2 47.0 272 814 21 355 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 296 1175
1\) 061483 2 47.0 326 1140 15 370 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 341 1516
061583 2 48.0 162 1302 17 387 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 179 1695
061683 2 48.0 142 1444 13 400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 155 1850
061783 2 48.0 127 1571 9 409 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 136 1986
061883 2 48.0 161 1732 7 416 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 168 2154
061983 2 46.5 259 1991 7 423 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 266 2420
062083 2 48.0 167 2158 4 427 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 171 2591
062183 2 48.0 172 2330 4 431 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 176 2767
062283 2 48.0 155 2485 1 432 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 156 2923
062383 2 45.0 124 2609 3 435 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 127 3050
062483 2 48.0 57 2666 2 437 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 59 3109
062583 2 48.0 72 2738 0 437 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 72 3181
062683 2 48.0 77 2815 1 438 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 78 3259
062783 2 48.0 65 2880 0 438 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 65 3324
062883 2 48.0 48 2928 1 439 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 49 3373
062983 2 48.0 49 2977 0 439 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 49 3422
063083 2 48.0 32 3009 1 440 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 33 3455
070183 2 48.0 52 . 3061 1 441 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 53 3508
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I ___ ) l J J J I J
1 1 l 1
Appendix Table 2-D-4. Continued.
----Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species ------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Whee la Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. ---
070283 2 45.0 49 3110 1 442 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 50 3558
070383 2 48.0 33 3143 2 444 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 35 3593
070483 2 48.0 42 3185 1 445 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 43 3636
070583 2 47.0 25 3210 2 447 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 27 3663
070683 2 47.0 21 3231 4 451 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 25 3688
070783 2 48.0 12 3243 3 454 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 15 3703
070883 2 48.0 10 3253 3 457 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 13 3716
070983 2 47.0 25 3278 2 459 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 28 3744
071083 2 48.0 .• 27 3305 7 466 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 7 37 3781
> 071183 2 48.0 17 3322 6 472 2 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 25 3806
~ 071283 2 48.0 24 3346 16 488 2 6 1 2 0 0 0 0 7 43 3849 (I) 071383 2 48.0 14 3360 14 502 4 10 1 3 2 2 0 0 7 35 3884
071483 2 48.0 11 3371 53 555 2 12 4 7 2 4 0 0 7 72 3956
071583 2 48.0 9 3380 48 603 6 18 11 18 3 7 0 0 7 77 4033
071683 2 48.0 8 3388 102 705 11 29 25 43 2 9 0 0 7 148 4181
071783 2 48.0 13 3401 180 885 27 56 46 89 5 14 0 0 7 271 4452
071883 2 48.0 5 3406 167 1052 30 86 54 143 7 21 0 0 7 263 4715
071983 2 48.0 8 3414 175 1227 22 108 107 250 8 29 0 0 7 320 5035
072083 2 48.0 5 3419 269 1496 42 150 171 421 8 37 0 0 7 495 5530
072183 2 48.0 7 3426 764 2260 107 257 317 798 19 56 0 0 7 1274 6804
072283 2 48.0 8· 3434 1055 3315 89 346 478 1276 24 80 0 0 7 1654 8458
072383 2 48.0 5 3439 609 3924 149 495 719 1995 15 95 0 1 8 1498 9956
072483 2 48.0 4 3443 219 4143 134 629 316 2311 14 109 0 0 8 687 10643
072583 2 48.0 2 3445 211 4354 193 822 752 3063 34 143 0 0 8 1192 11835
072683 2 48.0 4 3449 151 4505 150 972 1036 4099 43 186 0 0 8 1384 13219
0727 83 2 43 .o 4 3453 108 4613 113 1085 911 5010 25 211 0 0 8 1161 . 14380
072883 2 48.0 3 3456 113 4726 108 1193 1155 6165 49 260 0 0 8 1428 15808
----------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-4. Continued.
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species ----
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum.
072983 2 48.0 0 3456 91 4817 123 1316 913 7078 46 306 0 0 8 1173 16981
073083 2 48.0 0 3456 59 4876 143 1459 854 7932 68 374 0 0 8 1124 18105
073183 2 48.0 1 3457 46 4922 171 1630 3'72 8304 90 464 0 0 8 680 18785
080183 2 48.0 0 3457 43 4965 105 1735 339 8643 87 551 0 0 8 574 19359
080283 2 48.0 1 3458 56 5021 130 1865 556 9199 115 666 0 0 8 858 20217
080383 2 48.0 0 l4S.8 62 5083 145 2010 695 9894 135 801 0 0 8 1037 21254
080483 2 48.0 1 3459 59 5142 133 2143 555 10449 143 944 0 0 8 891 22145
080583 2 48.0 0 3459 82 5224 140 2283 264 10713 133 1077 0 0 8 619 22764
080683 2 48.0 0 3459 41 5265 89 2372 198 10911 76 1153 0 0 8 404 23168
080783 2 48.0 0 3459 38 5303 41 2413 123 11034 65 1218 0 0 8 267 23435
)>
080883 2 47.0 0 3459 21 5324 25 2438 68 11102 32 1250 0 0 8 146 23581 ~ 080983 2 43 .o 0 3459 5 5329 3 2441 4 11106 1 1251 0 0 8 13 23594
~ 081083 2 48.l> 0 3459 7 5336 11 2452 15 11121 10 1261 0 0 8 43 23637
081183 2 48.0 0 3459 22 5358 39 2491 76 11197 45 1306 0 0 8 182 23819
081283 2 48.0 0 3459 34 5392 71 2562 226 11423 102 1408 0 1 9 434 24253
081383 2 48.0 0 3459 25 5417 42 2604 119 11542 47 1455 0 1 10 234 24487
081483 2 48.0 0 3459 24 5441 42 2646 117 11659 58 1513 0 1 11 242 24729
081583 2 48.0 0 3459 28 5469 45 2691 190 11849 35 1548 0 0 11 298 25027
081683 2 47 .o 0 3459 23 5492 38 2729 163 12012 45 1593 0 1 12 270 25297
0817 83 2 48.0 0 3459 25 5517 34 2763 290 12302 31 1624 0 2 14 382 25679
081883 2 48.0 1 3460 26 5543 30 2793 361 12663 34 1658 0 3 17 455 26134
081983 2 48.0 0 3460 14 5557 11 2804 461 13124 22 1680 0 0 17 508 26642
082083 2 48.0 0 3460 12 5569 10 2814 414 13538 24 1704 0 4 21 464 27106
082183 2 48.0 0 3460. 1 5570 2 2816 174 13712 13 1717 0 1 22 191 27297
082283 2 48.0 0 3460 7 5577 2 2818 252 13964 22 1739 0 4 26 287 27584
082383 2 48.0 0 3460 2 5579 1 2819 314 14278 17 1756 0 1 27 335 27919
082483 2 48.0 0 3460 1 5580 1 2820 281 14559 16 1772 0 0 27 299 28218
-------··-------------------------------
J .I J J J )
.. i l .... 1 1
Appendix Table 2-D-4. Continued.
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Ch011 Coho Miscellaneous All Species ----Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum.
082583 2 48.0 0 3460 1 5581 2 2822 200 14759 8 1780 0 4 31 215 28433
082683 2 48.0 0 3460 0 5581 0 2822 175 14934 5 1785 0 1 32 181 28614
082783 2 48.0 0 3460 0 5581 0 2822 181 15115 9 1794 0 9 41 199 28813
.082883 2 48.0 0 3460 1 5582 1 2823 381 15496 12 1806 0 5 46 400 29213
082983 2 48.0 0 3460 3 5585 2 2825 228 15724 6 1812 0 2 48 241 29454
083083 2 48.0 0 3460 0 5585 1 2826 215 15939 4 1816 2 0 50 222 29676
083183 2 48.0 0 3460 0 5585 0 ~826 45 15984 3 1819 2 0 52 50 29726
090183 2 48.0 0 3460 0 5585 0 2826 121 1610!; 9 1828 2 1 55 133 29859
. 090283 2 48.0 0 3460 0 5585 0 2826 86 16191 4 1832 1 1 57 92 29951
)> 090383 2 48.0 0 3460 1 5586 0 2826 192 16383 7 1839 5 4 66 209 30160
ol!lo. 090483 2 48.0 0 3460 0 5586 0 2826 218 16601 5 1844 4 5 75 232 30392
01 090583 2 47.0 0 3460 0 5586 0 2826 89 16690 3 1847 3 3 81 98 30490
090683 2 47 .o 0 3460 0 5586 0 2826 85 16775 2 1849 1 0 82 88 30578
090783 2 48.0 0 3460 0 5586 0 2826 20 16795 2 1851 3 1 86 26 30604
090883 2 47.0 0 3460 0 5586 0 2826 25 16820 0 1851 0 1 87 26 30630
090983 2 48.0 0 3460 0 5586 0 2826 28 16848 3 1854 1 1 89 33 30663
091083 2 47.0 0 3460 0 5586 0 2826 27 16875 4 f858 1 1 91 33 30696
091183 2 20.0 0 3460 0 5586 0 2826 14 16889 1 1859 0 0 91 15 30711
-------
Appendix Table 2-D-5. Sunshine station west bank fishwheels daily and cumulative catch by species ,1983.
-----
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species ---Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum.
060483 1 4.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
060583 1 24.0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
060683 1 24.0 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7
060783 2 31.0 8 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 15
060883 2 46.0 20 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 35
060983 2 44.0 23 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 58
061083 2 48.0 44 102 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 102
061183 2 48.0 50 152 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 153
061283 2 48.0 34 186 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 187
061383 2 48.0 56 242 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 57 244
061483 2 48.0 29 271 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 29 273
)> 061583 2 48.0 23 294 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 23 296
,J:o. 061683 2 48.0 10 304 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 306
061783 2 48.0 8 312 0 1 0 o· 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 314
0) 061883 2 48.0 9 321 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 323
061983 2 48.0 16 337 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16 339
062083 2 47.0 6 343 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 345
062183 2 48.0 2 345 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 348
062283 2 48.0 0 345 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 348
062383 2 48.0 2 347 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 350
062483 2 48.0 1 348 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 351
062583 2 48.0 1 349 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 352
0626 83 2 47.0 1 350 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 353
0627 83 2 47 .o 1 351 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 354
062883 2 48.0 0 351 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 354
062983 2 48.0 0 3S1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 355
063083 2 48.0 1 352 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 356
070183 2 48.0 0 3S2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 356
070283 2 48.0 2 354 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 358
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c .I J J J J I
l 1 . ·~· 1 1 J
Appendix Table 2~D-5. Continued.
-------
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink ChuJD Coho Miscellaneous All Species -------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum.
070383 2 48.0 0 354 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 358
070483 2 48.0 4 358 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 362
070583 2 48.0 1 359 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 363
070683 2 46 .o 1 360 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 365
070783 2 48.0 1 361 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 366
070883 2 48.0 1 362 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 367
070983 2 47.0 0 362 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 367
071083 2 48.0 2 364 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 6 373
071183 2 48.0 1 365 4 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 378
071283 2 48.0 1 366 3 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 382
)>
.,J:I. 071383 2 48.0 0 366 1 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 383
071483 2 48.0 2 368 10 23 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 13 396
...... 071583 2 48.0 2 370 17 40 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 20 416
071683 2 48.0 1 371 ·31 71 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 32 448
071783 2 48.0 0 371 55 126 1 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 4 57 505
071883 2 48.0 0 371 34 160 2 4 2 4 1 1 0 0 4 39 544
071983 2 48.0 0 371 87 247 4 8 1 5 2 3 0 1 5 95 639
072083 2 48.0 1 372 131 378 7 15 3 8 2 5 0 0 5 144 783
072183 2 48.0 0 372 249 627 8 23 10 18 5 10 0 0 5 272 1055
072283 2 48.0 0 372 318 945 12 35 5 23 5 15 0 0 5 340 1395
072383 2 48.0 0 372 417 1362 22 57 17 40 5 20 0 0 5 461 1856
072483 2 48.0 0 372 53 1415 8 65 3 43 0 20 0 0 5 64 1920
072583 2 48.0 0 372 144 1559 25 90 15 58 9 29 0 0 5 193 2113
072683 2 48.0 0 372 151 1710 27 117 30 -88 8 37 0 0 5 216 2329
072783 2 46 .o 0 372 121 1831 31 148 27 115 14 51 0 0 5 193 2522
072883 2 48.0 0 372 104 1935 27 175 40 155 12 63 0 0 5 183 2705
072983 2 48.0 0 372 147 2082 27 202 36 191 13 76 0 0 5 223 2928
--------------------------------------------------------
I I
Appendix Table 2-D-5. Continued.
---Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species --------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cuai. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum.
073083 2 48.0 0 372 46 2128 9 211 22 213 1 83 0 0 5 84 3012
073183 2 48.0 0 372 13 2141 6 217 8 221 6 89 0 0 5 33 3045
080183 2 48.0 0 372 8 2149 6 223 19 240 5 94 0 0 5 38 3083
080283 2 48.0 0 372 13 2162 1 224 6 246 5 99 0 0 5 25 3108
080383 2 48.0 0 372 21 2183 1 231 23 269 10 109 0 0 5 61 3169
080483 2 48.0 0 372 16 2199 1 238 11 280 10 119 0 0 5 44 3213
080583 2 48.0 0 372 5 2204 1 245 6 286 5 124 0 0 5 23 3236
080683 2 48.0 0 372 5 2209 0 245 1 287 6 130 0 0 5 12 3248
080783 2 48.0 0 372 3 2212 0 245 0 287 4 134 0 0 5 1 3255
080883 2 > 30.0 0 372 2 2214 0 245 2 289 1 135 0 0 5 5 3260
,f:lo. 080983 1 24.0 0 372 0 2214 0 245 0 289 0 135 0 0 5 0 3260
Q) 081083 1 24.0 0 372 0 2214 0 245 0 289 0 135 0 0 5 0 3260
081183 2 36.0 0 372 25 2239 3 248 5 294 10 145 0 0 5 43 3303
081283 2 48.0 0 372 72 2311 1 255 13 307 41 186 0 0 5 133 3436
081383 2 48.0 0 372 18 2329 1 256 1 314 8 194 0 0 5 34 3470
081483 2 48.0 0 372 15 2344 1 257 12 326 4 19'8 0 0 5 32 3502
081583 2 43.0 0 372 48 2392 1 258 5 331 37 235 0 0 5 91 3593
081683 2 48.0 0 372 18 2410 0 258 1 338 13 248 0 0 5 38 3631
081783 2 48.0 0 372 30 2440 1 259 25 363 34 282 0 1 6 91 3722
081883 2 48.0 0 372 36 2476 0 259 25 388 27 309 0 0 6 88 3810
081983 2 48.0 0 372 26 2502 0 259 39 427 11 320 0 3 9 79 3889
082083 2 48.0 0 372 26 2528 0 259 24 451 23 343 0 3 12 76 3965
082183 2 48.0 0 372 11 2539 0 259 16 467 9 352 0 0 12 36 4001
082283 2 48.0 0 372 1 2540 0 259 9 476 6 358 0 0 12 16 4017
082383 2 48.0 0 372 1 2547 0 259 14 490 9 367 0 0 12 30 4047
082483 2 48.0 0 372 3 2550 0 159 17 507 5 372 0 0 12 25 4072
082583 2 43 .o 0 372 4 2554 0 259 6 513 3 375 0 0 12 !3 4085
-------------------------------------------------
I J J J
~--. -.. 1
Appendix Table 2-D-5. Continued.
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hiace1laneous All Species ----
Date No. of Wheel 'Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. ------
082683 2 48.0 0 372 1 2555 0 259 14 527 3 378 0 0 12 18 4103
082783 2 48.0 0 372 0 2555 0 259 36 563 1 379 0 0 12 37 4140
082883 2 48.0 0 372 1 2556 0 259 67 630 6 385 1 10 23 85 4225
082983 2 48.0 0 372 2 2558 0 259 23 653 2 387 1 2 26 30 4255
083083 2 48.0 0 372 0 2558 0 259 10 663 1 388 0 2 28 13 4268
083183 2 46 .o 0 372 0 2558 0 259 5 668 2 390 1 1 30 9 4277
090183 2 48.0 0 372 1 2559 0 259 1 669 0 390 0 0 30 2 4279
090283 2 48.0 0 372 0 2559 0 259 3 672 1 391 0 1 31 5 4284
090383 2 48.0 0 372 0 2559 0 259 7 679 0 391 0 0 31 7 4291
)> 090483 2 48.0 0 372 1 2560 0 259 10 689 0 391 0 1 32 12 4303
,t:..
090583 2 48.0 0 372 1 2561 259 8 1 392 0. 1 11 4314 0 697 33 co 090683 2 26 .o 0 372 0 2561 0 259 7 704 2 394 1 0 34 10 4324
090783 1 21.0 0 372 0 2561 0 259 1 705 1 395 0 0 34 2 4326
090883 1 24.0 0 372 0 2561 0 259 1 706 0 395 0 0 34 1 4327
090983 1 24.0 0 372 0 2561 0 259 2 708 0 395 0 0 34 2 4329
091083 1 24.0 0 372 0 2561 0 259 1 709 0 395 0 0 34 1 4330
091183 1 10.0 0 372 0 2561 0 259 2 711 0 395 0 0 34 2 4332
Appendix Table 2-D-6. Sunshine station fiebwheele daily and cumulative catch by species ,1983.
-··---
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hisce llaneous All Species
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. -----
060383 1 4.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
060483 2 28.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
060583 3 52.0 6 6 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 16 16
0606 83 3 72.0 21 27 29 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 66
060783 4 79.0 40 67 33 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73 139
060883 4 96 .o 56 123 48 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 243
060983 4 90.0 94 217 73 193 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 169 412
061083 4 96 .o 144 361 73 266 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 218 630
061183 4 96 .o 146 507 37 303 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 183 813
061283 4 96 .o 221 728 32 335 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 253 1066
)> 061383 4 95.0 328 1056 21 356 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 353 1419
01 061483 4 95.0 355 1411 15 371 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 7 370 1789
061583 4 96 .o 185 1596 17 388 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 202 1991
0 061683 4 96 .o 152 1748 13 401 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 165 2156
0617 83 4 96 .o 135 1883 9 410 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 144 2300
061883 4 96 .o 170 2053 . 7 417 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 177 2,477
061983 4 94.5 275 2328 7 424 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 282 2759
062083 4 95.0 173 2501 4 428 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 177 2936
062183 4 96 .o 174 2675 4 432 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 179 3115
062283 4 96 .o 155 2830 1 433 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 156 3271
0623 83 4 93.0 126 2956 3 436 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 129 3400
062483 4 96 .o 58 3014 2 438 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 60 3460
062583 4 96 .o 73 3087 0 438 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 73 3533
062683 4 95.0 78 3165 1 439 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 79 3612
0627 83 4 95.0 66 3231 0 439 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 66 3678
062883 4 96 .o 48 3279 1 440 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 49 3727
062983 4 96 .o 49 3328 0 440 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 50 3777
063083 4 96 .o 33 3361 1 441 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 34 3811
070183 4 96 .o 52 3413 1 442 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 53 3864
---------~-------------------------------------------------------
.J J _j -~~ J J J J I 1 ] J I I
~] ...... 1 1 1 1
Appendix Table 2-D-6. Continued.
To~al Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Misce llaneou a All Species ------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily CUID. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cia co Other Cum. Daily Cum. ---
070283 4 93 .o 51 3464 1 443 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0. ~ 9 52 3916
070383 4 96 .o 33 3497 2 445 0 0 0 0 o' 0 0 0 9 35 3951
070483 4 96.0 46 3543 1 446 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 47 3998
070583 4 95.0 26 3569 2 448 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 28 4026
070683 4 93 .o 22 3591 5 453 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 27 4053
0707 83 4 96 .o 13 3604 3 456 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 16 4069
070883 4 96 .o 11 3615 3 459 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 14 4083
070983 4 94.0 25 3640 2 461 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 28 4111
071083 4 96 .o 29 3669 10 471 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 11 43 4154
071183 4 96 .o 18 3687 10 481 2 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 11 30 4184
)>
071283 4 96 .o 25 3712 19 500 2 6 1 2 0 0 0 0 11 47 4231
01 071383 4 96 .o 14 3726 15 515 4 10 1 3 2 2 0 0 11 36 4267
-4 071483 4 96 .o 13 3739 63 578 2 12 5 8 2 4 0 0 11 85 4352
071583 4 96 .o 11 3750 65 643 7 19 11 19 3 7 0 0 11 97 4449
071683 4 96 .o 9 3759 133 776 11 30 25 44 2 9 0 0 11 180 4629
071783 4 96 .o 13 3772 235 1011 28 58 47 91 5 14 0 0 11 328 4957
071883 4 96 .o ·~ 5 3777 201 1212 32 90 56 147 8 22 0 0 11 302 5259
071983 4 96.0 8 3785 262 1474 26 116 108 255 10 32 0 1 12 415 5674
072083 4 96 .o 6 3791 400 1874 49 165 174 429 10 42 0 0 12 639 6313
072183 4 96 .o 7 3798 1013 2887 115 280 387 816 24 66 0 0 12 1546 7859
072283 4 96 .o 8 3806 1373 4260 101 381 483 1299 29 95 0 0 12 1994 9853
072383 4 96 .o 5 3811 1026 5286 171 552 736 2035 20 115 0 1 13 1959 11812
072483 4 96 .o 4 3815 272 5558 142 694 319 2354 14 129 0 0 13 751 12563
072583 4 96 .o 2 3817 355 5913 218 912 767 3121 43 172 0 0 13 1385 13948
072683 4 96 .o 4 3821 302 6215 177 1089 1066 4187 51 223 0 0 13 1600 15548
072783 4 89.0 4 3825 229 6444 144 1233 938 5125 39 262 0 0 13 1354 16902
072883 4 96 .o 3 3828 217 6661 135 1368 1195 6320 61 323 0 0 13 1611 18513
--------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-6. Continued.
----
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miace'llaneoua All Species
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum.
l ---------------
072983 4 96 .o 0 3828 238 6899 150 1518 949 7269 59 382 0 0 13 1396 19909
073083 4 96 .o 0 3828 105 7004 152 1670 876 8145 75 457 0 0 13 1208 21117
073183 4 96 .o 1 3829 59 7063 177 1847 380 8525 96 553 0 0 13 713 21830
080183 4 96 .o 0 3829 51 7114 111 1958 358 8883 92 645 0 0 13 612 22442
080283 4 96.0 1 3830 69 7183 131 2089 562 9445 120 765 0 0 13 883 23325
080383 4 96.0 0 3830 83 7266 152 2241 718 10163 145 910 0 0 13 1098 24423
080483 4 96 .o 1 3831 75 7341 140 2381 566 10729 153 1063 0 0 13 935 25358
080583 4 96.0 0 3831 87 7428 147 2528 270 10999 138 1201 0 0 13 642 26000
080683 4 96 .o 0 3831 46 7474 89 2617 199 11198 82 1283 0 0 13 416 26416
)> 080783 4 96.0 0 3831 41 7515 41 2658 123 11321 69 1352 0 0 13 274 26690
01 080883 4 77 .o 0 3831 23 7538 25 2683 70 11391 33 1385 0 0 13 151 26841
1'\) 080983 3 67.0 0 3831 5 7543 3 2686 4 11395 1 1386 0 0 13 13 26854
081083 3 72.0 0 3831 7 7550 11 2697 15 11410 10 1396 0 0 13 43 26897
081183 4 84.0 0 3831 47 7597 42 2739 81 11491 55 1451 0 0 13 225 27122
081283 4 96 .o 0 5831 106 7703 78 2817 239 11730 143 1594 0 1 14 567 27689
081383 4 96.0 0 3831 43 7746 43 2860 126 11856 55 1649 0 1 15 268 27957
081483 4 96.0 0 3831 39 7785 43 2903 129 11985 62 1711 0 1 16 274 28231
081583 4 91.0 0 3831 76 7861 46 2949 195 12180 72 1783 0 0 16 389 28620
081683 4 95.0 0 3831 41 7902 38 2987 170 12350 58 1841 0 1 17 308 28928
0817 83 4 96 .o 0 3831 55 7957 35 3022 315 12665 65 1906 0 3 20 473 29401
081883 4 96 .o 1 3832 62 8019 30 3052 386 13051 61 1967 0 3 23 543 29944
081983 4 96 .o 0 3832 40 8059 11 3063 500 13551 33 2000 0 3 26 587 30531
082083 4 96.0 0 3832 38 8097 10 3073 438 13989 47 2047 0 7 33 540 31071
082183 4 96.0 0 3832 12 8109 2 3075 190 14179 22 2069 0 1 34 227 31298
082283 4 96 .o 0 3832 8 8117 2 3077 261 14440 28 2097 0 4 38 303 31601
082383 4 96 .o 0 3832 9 8126 1 3078 328 14768 26 2123 0 1 39 365 31966
082483 4 96 .o 0 3832 4 8130 1 3079 298 15066 21 2144 0 0 39 324 32290
------------------------------------------------------------------
J --J --" "J 1 J J . J J J
)
Appendix Table 2-D-6. Continued.
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species --------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. -------
082583 4 91.0 0 3832 5 8135 2 3081 206 15272 11 2155 0 4 43 228 32518
082683 4 96 .o 0 3832 1 8136 0 3081 189 15461 8 2163 0 1 44 199 32117
082783 4 96 .o 0 3832 0 8136 0 3081 211 15678 10 2173 0 9 53 236 32953
082883 4 96 .o 0 3832 2 8138 1 3082 448 16126 18 2191 1 15 69 485 33438
082983 4 96 .o 0 3832 5 8143 2 3084 251 16377 8 2199 1 4 74 271 33709
083083 4 96 .o 0 3832 0 8143 1 3085 225 16602 5 2204 2 2 78 235 33944
083183 4 94.0 0 3832 0 8143 0 3085 50 16652 5 2209 3 1 82 59 34003
090183 4 96 .o 0 3832 1 8144 0 3085 122 16774 9 2218 2 1 85 135 34138
090283 4 96 .o 0 3832 0 8144 0 3085 89 16863 5 2223 1 2 88 97 34235
090383 4 96.0 0 3832 1 8145 0 3085 199 17062 7 2230 5 4 97 216 34451
)..
OJ 090483 4 96.0 0 3832 1 8146 0 3085 228 17290 5 2235 4 6 107 244 34695
(A) 090583 4 95.0 0 3832 1 8147 0 3085 97 17387 4 2239 3 4 114 109 34804
090683 4 73.0 0 3832 0 8147 0 3085 92 17479 4 2243 2 0 116 98 34902
090783 3 69.0 0 3832 0 8147 0 3085 21 17500 3 2246 3 1 120 28 34930
090883 3 71.0 0 3832 0 8147 0 3085 26 17526 0 2246 0 1 121 27 34957
090983 3 72.0· 0 3832 0 8147 0 3085 30 17556 3 2249 1 1 123 35 34992
091083 3 71.0 0 3832 0 8147 0 3085 28 17584 4 2253 1 1 125 34 35026
091183 3 30.0 0 3832 0 8147 0 3085 16 17600 1 2254 0 0 125 17 35043
------
Appendix Table 2-D-7. Talkeetna station east bank fishwheels daily and cumulative catch by species,l983.
---------
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hisce llaneous All Species ---------Date No. of Wheel Bering
Whee la Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. ----
060783 2 48.0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
060883 2 48.0 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4
060983 2 48.0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6
061083 2 48.0 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7
061183 2 48.0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
061283 2 48.0 4 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11
061383 2 48.0 ,1 12 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13
061483 2 48.0 2 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 15
061583 2 48.0 5 19 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 20
061683 2 48.0 2 21 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 23
061783 2 48.0 1 22 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 24
)> 061883 2 48.0 19 41 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 43
(11 061983 2 48.0 27 68 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 29 72
-1:1-062083 2 48.0 13 81 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13 85
062183 2 48.0 23 104 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 23 108
062283 2 48.0 41 145 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 42 150
0623 83 2 48.0 26 171 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 27 177
062483 2 48.0 25 196 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 27 204
062583 2 46 .o 29 225 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 29 233
062683 2 48.0 30 255 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 30 263
0627 83 2 48.0 33 288 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 33 296
062883 2 48.0 21 309 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 21 317
062983 2 48.0 25 334 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 25 342
063083 2 48.0 24 358 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 24 366
070183 2 47.5 15 373 1 --5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16 382
070283 2 48.0 16 389 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16 398
070383 2 48.0 20 409 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 22 420
070483 2 47.5 11 420 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 11 431
070583 2 48.0 16 436 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 16 447
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
J -_j .-~ --.I I ) J -J J J J ·I
.. 1 J ] J
Appendix Table 2-D-7. Continued.
--·······---
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species -----
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Whee 1a Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. -------
070683 2 48.0 11 447 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12 459·
070783 2 48.0 15 462 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 17 476
070883 2 48.0 12 474 2 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 14 490
070983 2 44.0 10 484 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 o· 0 1 7 11 501
071083 2 44.0 6 490 0 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 8 509
071183 2 46 .o 3 493 1 11 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 8 5 514
071283 2 48.0 9 502 0 11 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 9 523
071383 2 48.0 8 510 1 12 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 9 532
071483 2 48.0 7 517 0 12 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 7 539
071583 2 48.0 3 520 2 14 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 5 544
)> 071683 2 46 .o 4 524 2 16 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 10 8 552
01 071783 2 48.0 7 531 3 19 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 2 12 13 565
01 071883 2 48.0 2 533 1 20 1 3 0 1 1 1 0 0 12 5 570
071983 2 48.0 1 534 1 21 1 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 12 3 573
072083 2 44.0 4 538 2 23 6 10 1 2 0 1 0 2 14 15 588
072183 2 45.5 6 544 2 25 12 22 2 4 3 4 0 1 15 26 614
072283 2 48.0 0 544 4 29 10 J2 3 7 0 4 0 3 18 20 634
072383 2 46 .o 1 545 3 32 25 57 10 17 0 4 0 0 18 39 673
072483 2 48.0 2 547 4 36 24 81 14 31 1 5 0 0 18 45 718
072583 2 48.0 1 548 4 40 20 101 12 43 1 6 0 0 18 38 756
072683 2 48.0 1 549 9 49 30 131 30 73 0 6 0 0 18 70 826
072783 2 48.0 2 551 3 52 43 174 88 161 1 7 0 0 18 137 963
072883 2 46 .o 3 554 10 62 47 221 99 260 0 7 0 0 18 159 1122
072983 2 46 .o 0 554 12 74 104 '325 119 379 1 8 0 1 19 237 '1359
073083 2 48.0 2 556 15 89 120 445 110 489 1 9 0 0 19 248 1607
073183 2 48.0 3 559 13 102 68 513 72 561 1 10 0 0 19 157 1764
080183 2 41.0 2 561 9 111 36 549 49 610 4 14 0 0 19 100 1864
----------------------------·-------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-7. Continued.
.. ··--------Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hisce llaneoua All Species ------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily CUlllo Daily Cwo. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. --··--·--
080283 2 48.0 1 562 8 119 34 583 34 644 3 11 0 0 19 80 1944
080383 2 48.0 0 562 23 142 71 654 101 745 9 26 0 0 19 204 2148
080483 2 48.0 2 564 11 159 39 693 58 803 4 30 0 0 19 120 2268
080583 2 48.0 0 564 12 171 21 714 43 846 2 32 0 0 19 78 2346
080683 2 47.5 1 565 8 179 14 728 15 861 2 34 0 0 19 40 2386
080783 2 47.0 0 565 14 193 6 734 20 881 2 36 0 0 19 42 2428
080883 2 48.0 0 565 6 199 12 746 15 896 2 38 0 0 19 35 2463
080983 2 46 .o 0 565 1 200 1 747 4 900 2 40 0 0 19 8 2471
081083 2 47.0 1 566 0 200 0 747 1 901 0 40 0 0 19 2 2473
> 081183 2 47.5 0 566 2 202 2 749 6 907 4 44 0 0 19 14 2487
01 081283 2 48.0 0 566 5 207 0 749 18 925 2 46 0 0 19 25 2512
m 081383 2 48.0 0 566 1 205 3 752 2 927 2 48 0 0 19 8 2520
081483 2 48.0 0 566 0 208 2 754 4 931 2 so 0 0 19 8 2528
081583 2 48.0 0 566 2 210 2 756 9 940 3 53 0 0 19 16 2544
081683 2 46 .o 0 566 3 213 3 759 1 947 1 60 0 1 20 21 2565
0817 83 2 48.0 0 566 6 219 3 762 21 968 5 65 0 0 20 35 2600
081883 2 48.0 0 566 1 226 4 766 19 987 6 71 0 2 22 38 2638
081983 2 48.0 0 566 2 228 4 170 12 999 4 15 0 0 22 22 2660
082083 2 48.0 0 566 4 232 3 773 5 1004 1 76 0 2 24 15 2675
082183 2 48.0 0 566 0 232 1 780 17 1021 12 88 0 0 24 36 2711
082283 2 48.0 0 566 4 236 1 781 3 1024 3 91 0 0 24 11 2722
082383 2 48.0 0 566 3 239 1 782 2 1026 2 93 0 0 24 8 2730
082483 2 48.0 0 566 2 241 0 782 4 1030 2 95 0 0 24 8 2738
082583 2 47.5 0 566 0 241 0 782 4 1034 0 95 0 1 25 5 2743
0826 83 2 48.0 0 566 0 241 1 783 0 1034 1 96 0 0 25 2 2745
0827 83 2 48.0 0 566 0 241 0 783 0 1034 2 98 0 0 25 2 2747
082883 2 45.0 0 566 1 242 0 783 26 1060 4 102 0 1 26 32 2779
----------------------------------------------------------
J .I I
l l -1 1 1 )
Appendix Table 2-D-7. Continued~
----------------
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hiacellaneoua All Specie& -----
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheela Houra Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cia co Other Cum. Daily Cum. ----
082983 2 48.0 0 566 1 243 0 783 12 1072 1 103 0 3 29 17 2796
083083 2 48.0 0 566 2 245 0 783 11 1089 2 105 1 2 32 24 2820
083183 2 48.0 0 566 0 245 0 783 3 1092 0 105 0 2 34 5 2825
090183 2 48.0 0 566 0 245 0 783 4 1096 3 108 0 0 34 7 2832
090283 2 48.0 0 566 0 245 0 783 0 1096 3 111 0 0 34 3 2835
090383 2 48.0 0 566 0 245 0 783 20 1116 2 113 0 0 34 22 2857
090483 2 46 .o 0 566 0 245 0 783 18 1134 3 116 0 0 34 21 2878
090583 2 48.0 0 566 0 245 0 783 1 1135 0 116 0 1 35 2 2880
090683 2 46 .o 0 566 1 246 0 783 15 1150 3 119 0 0 35 19 2899
)ll 0907 83 2 44.0 0 566 0 246 0 783 5 1155 4 123 0 0 35 9 2908
01 ...., 090883 2 48.0 0 566. 0 246 0 783 0 1155 1 124 1 0 36 2 2910
090983 2 48.0 0 566 0 246 0 783 1 1156 0 124 0 0 36 1 2911
091083 2 48.0 0 566 0 246 0 783 4 1160 2 126 1 0 37 7 2918
091183 2 48.0 0 566 0 246 0 783 6 1166 2 128 0 0 37 8 2926
091283 2 24.0 0 566 0 246 0 783 2 1168 4 132 0 2 39 8 2934
--
Appendix Table 2-D-8. Talkeetna atation west bank fishwheela daily and cumulative catch by apecies,l983.
---Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species ------Date Ho. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. ---
060783 2 35.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
060883 2 48.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
060983 2 48.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
061083 2 48.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1
061183 2 48.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
061283 2 48.0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3
061383 2 48.0 2 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5
061483 2 48.0 2 5 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 8
061583 2 48.0 5 10 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 13
061683 2 47 .o 1 11 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 14
~ 061783 48.0 3 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 17 2 2 01 061883 2 48.0 9 23 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 26
(X) 061983 2 48.0 9 32 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 11 37
062083 2 48.0 13 45 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 14 51
062183 2 48.0 15 60 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 17 68
062283 2 48.0 33 93 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 34 102
062383 2 47.5 25 ll8 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 25 127
062483 2 48.0 24 142 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 24 151
062583 2 48.0 28 170 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 28 179
062683 2 45.5 24 194 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 24 203
0627 83 2 48.0 32 226 0 7 .o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 32 235
062883 2 48.0 8 234 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 243
062983 2 48.0 12 246 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12 255
063083 2 48.0 9 255 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 264
070183 2 42.0 13 268 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 13 277
070283 2 48.0 9 277 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 286
070383 2 48.0 23 300 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 24 310
070483 2 46.0 15 315 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 15 325
070583 2 48.0 19 334 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 19 344
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I ' __ .cl t J I
. ---]
Appendix Table 2-D-8. Continued.
l'otal Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species ----I---------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Whee la Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. ------
070683 2 48.0 16 350 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 16 360
070783 2 48.0 17 367 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 2 17 .377
070883 2 48.0 4 371 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 381
070983 2 48.0 4 375 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 385
071083 2 48.0 12 387 0 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 14 399
071183 2 46 .o 5 392 1 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 405
071283 2 48.0 8 400 0 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8 413
071383 2 48.0 5 405 0 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 418
071483 2 48.0 6 411 1 10 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7 425
I" )> 071583 2 48.0 8. 419 2 12 0 1 0 ,0 0 0 0 1 4 11 436
(J1 071683 2 44.0 3 422 4 16 1 2 0 0 0 () 0 1 5 9 445
co 071783 2 48.0 5 427 . 1 17 5 7 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 13 458
071883 2 48.0 4 431 1 18 4 11 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 11 469
071983 2 48.0 1 432 3 21 6 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 10 479
072083 2 46 .o 3 435 3 24 17 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 23 502
072183 2 48.0 4 439 3 27 15 49 8 8 0 0 0 1 10 31 533
072283 2 48.0 6 445 6 33 27 76 16 24 0 0 0 2 12 57 590
072383 2 48.0 2 447 11 44 77 153 17 41 1 1 0 1 13 109 699
072483 2 48.0 3 450 7 51 67 220 35 76 1 2 0 1 14 114 813
072583 2 48.0 2 452 9 60 41 261 20 96 0 2 0 1 15 73 886
072683 2 44.0 1 453 16 76 70 331 28 124 3 5 0 1 16 119 1005
072783 2 48.0 1 454 18 94 128 459 95 219 2 7 0 0 16 244 1249
072883 2 46 .o 2 456 6 100 80 '539 91 310 4 11 0 1 17 184 1433
072983 2 48.0 0 456 13 113 140 679 168 478 1 12 0 1 18 323 1756
073083 2 48.0 0 456 15 128 185 864 117 595 5 17 0 1 19 323 2079
073183 2 48.0 0 456 10 138 96 960 38 633 6 23 0 0 19 150 2229
080183 2 48.0 1 457 9 147 72 1032 60 693 3 26 0 0 19 145 2374
-------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-8. Continued.
-----Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miacellaneoua All Species ----
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cia co Other Cum. Daily Cum. -----------·---
080283 2 48.0 0 4~7 1~ 162 ~1 1083 23 716 2 28 0 0 19 91 246~
080383 2 48.0 2 4~9 18 180 106 1189 llO 826 13 41 0 0 19 249 2714
080483 2 48.0 1 460 ll 191 69 12~8 l12 938 21 62 0 0 19 214 2928
080583 2 48.0 1 461 10 201 43 1301 40 978 17 79 0 0 19 l11 3039
080683 2 48.0 0 461 12 213 30 1331 ~2 1030 18 97 0 0 19 l12 3151
080783 2 48.0 2 463 10 223 12 1343 30 . 1060 ll 108 0 0 19 65 3216
080883 2 47.0 ·o. 463 15 238 13 1356 16 1076 6 l14 0 0 19 50 3266
080983 2 47.0 0 463 s· 243 2 1358 6 1082 3 ll7 0 1 20 11 3283
081083 2 48.0 0 463 1 244 1 1359 3 1085 0 l17 0 0 20 5 3288
)>
08l183 2 47.0 0 463 0 244 2 1361 10 1095 3 120 0 1 21 16 3304
0) 081283 2 48.0 0 463 6 250 5 1366 21 l116 20 140 0 0 21 52 3356
0 081383 2 48.0 0 463 2 252 6 1372 26 ll42 12 152 0 0 21 46 3402
081483 2 48.0 0 463 4 256 4 1376 12 l154 13 165 0 1 22 34 3436
081583 2 48.0 ·o 463 6 262 1 1383 4 l158 12 111 0 1 23 30 3466
081683 2 48.0 0 463 2 264 6 1389 1 l165 16 193 0 2 25 33 3499
081783 2 48.0 0 463 3 267 1 1396 6 l111 12 205 0 1 26 29 3528
081883 2 48.0 1 464 5 272 ll 1407 19 ll90 9 214 0 0 26 45 3573
081983 2 48.0 0 464 5 277 6 1413 8 l198 9 223 0 0 26 28 3601
082083 2 46 .o 0 464 2 279 4 1417 6 1204 . 8 231 0 0 26 20 3621
082183 2 48.0 0 464 1 280 9 1426 9 1213 5 236 0 1 27 25 3646
082283 2 48.0 0 464 2 282 0 1426 1 1214 4 240 0 0 27 1 3653
082383 2 48.0 0 464 1 283 1 1427 0 1214 2 242 0 0 27 4 3657
082483 2 48.0 0 464 3 286 2 1429 5 1219 6 248 0 0 27 16 3673
082583 2 48.0 0 464 0 286 0 1429 0 1219 0 248 0 0 27 0 3673
0826 83 2 48.0 0 464 0 286 1 1430 1 1220 0 248 0 0 27 2 3675
082783 2 48.0 0 464 0 286 0 1430 0 1220 2 250 0 1 28 3 3678
082883 2 48.0 0 464 0 286 0 1430 27 1247 5 255 0 6 34 38 3116
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J __ ] J -.J .J __ J ~ __ I ·--J J
] J 1 l
Appendix Table 2-D-8. Continued.
------
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species · ------------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. -------
082983 2 48.0. 0 464 0 286 0 1430 13 1260 1 262 0 1 35 21 3737
083083 2 48.0 ... , 0 464 1 287 0 1430 6 1266 1 263 0 0 35 8 3745
083183 2 48.0 0 464 0 287 0 1430 2 1268 0 263 0 2 37 4 3749
090183 2 48.0 0 464 2 289 0 1430 1 1269 2 265 0 0 37 5 3754
090283 2 48.0 0 464 0 289 0 1430 2 1271 4 269 0 1 38 1 3761
090383 2 48.0 0 464 0 289 0 1430 1 1272 5 274 0 0 38 6 3767
090483 2 48.0 0 464 0 289 0 1430 9 1281 6 280 0 4 42 19 3786
090583 2 48.0 0 ·464 1 290 0 1430 5 1286 0 280 1 0 43 1 3793
090683 2 44.0 0 464 0 290 0 1430 4 1290 4 284 0 0 43 8 3801
090783 2
)>
48.0 0 464 0 290 0 1430 6 1296 1 285 1 1 45 9 3810
0) 090883 2 48.0 0 464 0 290 0 1430 2 1298 4 289 0 1 46 1 3817
I -.4 090983 2 48.0 0 464 0 290 0 1430 0 1298 0 289 0 0 46 0 3817
091083 2 48.0 0 464 0 290 ·o 1430 0 1298 0 289 0 0 46 0 3811
091183 2 48.0 0 464 0 290 0 1430 0 1298 1 290 0 1 47 2 3819
091283 2 24.0 0 464 0 290 0 1430 1 1299 0 290 0 0 47 1 3820
Appendix Table 2-D-9. Talkeetna station fishwheels daily and cumulative catch by apeciea,l983.
------Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum.
060783 4 83 .o 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
060883 4 96 .o 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4
060983 4 96 .o 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6
061083 4 96 .o 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 8
061183 4 96 .o 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 8
061283 4 96 .o 5 12 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 14
061383 4 96 .o 3 15 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 18
061483 4 96 .o 4 19 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 23
061583 4 96 .o 10 29 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 33
061683 4 95.0 3 32 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 37
)> 0617 83 4 96 .o 4 36 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 41
061883 4 96 .o 28 64 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 28 69 en 061983 4 96 .o 36 100 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 40 109
1\) 062083 4 96 .o 26 126 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 27 136
062183 4 96.0 38 164 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 40 176
062283 4 96.0 74 238 2 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 76 252
062383 4 95.5 51 289 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 52 304
062483 4 96 .o 49 338 1 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 51 355
062583 4 94.0 57 395 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 57 412
062683 4 93.5 54 449 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 54 466
0627 83 4 96 ·" 65 514 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 65 531
062883 4 96 .o 29 543 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 29 560
062983 4 96 .o 37 580 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 37 597
063083 4 96 .o 33 613 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 33 630
070183 4 89.5 28 641 1 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0· 0 6 29 659
070283 4 96 .o 25 666 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 25 684
070383 4 96 .o 43 709 3 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 46 730
070483 4 95.5 26 735 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 26 756
070583 4 96 .o 35 770 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 35 791
---------------------------------------------------------------------
j 1 _I J _J ] I J J .J
l 1 l .. ] 1
Appendix Table 2-D-9. Continued.
--Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species ----
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum.
070683 4 96 .o 27 797 1 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 28 819
070783 4 96 .o 32 829 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 34 853
070883 4 96 .o 16 845 2 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 18 871
070983 4 92.0 14 859 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 15 886
071083 4 92.0 18 877 0 18 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 11 22 908
071183 4 92.0 8 885 2 20 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 11 11 919
071283 4 96 .o '" 17 902 0 20 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 11 17 936
071383 4 96 .o 13 915 1 21 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 11 14 950
071483 4 96 .o 13 928 1 22 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 11 14 964
071583 4 96 .o 11 939 4 26 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 12 16 980
> 6 1 15 997 0716 83 4 90.0 7 946 32 3 0 1 0 0 0 3 17
(J) 071783 4 96 .o 12 958 4 36 6 9 0 1 0 0 0 4 19 26 1023
(I) 071883 4 96 .o 6 964 2 38 5 14 0 1 1 1 0 2 21 16 1039
071983 4 96 .o 2 966 4 42 7 21 0 1 0 1 0 0 21 13 1052
072083 4 90.0 7 973 5 47 23 44 l 2 0 1 0 2 23 38 1090
072183 4 93.5 10 983 5 52 27 71 10 12 3 4 0 2 25 57 1147
072283 4 96 .o 6 989 10 62 37 108 19 31 0 4 0 5 30 71 1224
072383 4 94.0 3 992 14 76 102 210 27 58 1 5 0 1 31 148 1372
072483 4 96 .o 5 997 11 87 91 301 49 107 2 7 0 1 32 159 1531
072583 4 96 .o 3 1000 13 100 61 362 32 139 1 8 0 1 33 111 1642
072683 4 92.0 2 1002 25 125 100 462 58 197 3 11 0 1 34 189 1831
072783 4 96 .o 3 1005 21 146 171 633 183 380 3 14 0 0 34 381 2212
072883 4 92.0 5 1010 16 162 127 760 190 570 4 18 0 1 35 343 2555
072983 4 94.0 0 1010 25 187 244 1004 287 857 2 20 0 2 37 560 3115
073083 4 96 .o 2 1012 30 217 305 1309 227 1084 6 26 0 1 38 571 3686
073183 4 96 .o 3 1015 23 240 164 1473 110 1194 7 33 0 0 38 307 3993
080183 4 89.0 3 1018 18 258 108 1581 109 l303 7 40 0 0 38 245 4238
-··-·------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-9. Continued.
--Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hi ace 11aneoua All Species -------Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wbeela Houra Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cia co Other Cum. Daily Cum. --------
080283 4 96.0 1 1019 23 281 85 1666 57 1360 5 45 0 0 38 171 4409
080383 4 96 .o 2 1021 41 322 177 1843 211 1571 22 67 0 0 38 453 4862
080483 4 96.0 3 1024 28 350 108 1951 170 1741 25 92 0 0 38 334 5196
080583 4 96 .o 1 1025 22 372 64 2015 83 1824 19 111 0 0 38 189 5385
080683 4 95.5 1 1026 20 392 44 2059 67 1891 20 131 0 0 38 152 5537
080783 4 95.0 2 1028 24 416 18 2077 50 1941 13 144 0 0 38 107 5644
080883 4 95.0 0 1028 21 437 25 2102 31 1972 8 152 0 0 38 85 5729
080983 4 93 .o 0 1028 6 443 3 2105 10 1982 5 157 0 1 39 25 5754
081083 4 95.0 1 1029 1 444 1 2106 4 1986 0 157 0 0 39 7 5761
081183 4 94.5 0 1029 2 446 4 2110 16 2002 7 164 0 1 40 30 5791
>
0) 081283 4 96 .o 0 1029 11 457 5 2115 39 2041 22 186 0 0 40 77 5868
081383 4 96 .o 0 1029 3 460 9 2124 28 2069 14 200 0 0 40 54 5922 ~ 081483 4 96.0 0 1029 4 464 6 2130 16 2085 15 215 0 1 41 42 5964
081583 4 96.0 0 1029 8 472 9 2139 13 2098 15 230 0 1 42 46 6010
081683 4 94.0 0 1029 5 477 9 2148 14 2112 23 253 0 3 45 54 6064
081783 4 96 .o 0 1029 9 486 10 2158 27 2139 17 270 0 1 46 64 6128
081883 4 96 .o 1 1030 12 498 15 2173 38 2177 15 285 0 2 48 83 6211
081983 4 96.0 0 1030 7 505 10 2183 20 2197 13 298 0 0 48 50 6261
082083 4 94.0 0 1030 6 511 7 2190 11 2208 9 307 0 2 50 35 6296
082183 4 96.0 0 1030 1 512 16 2:.:06 26 2234 17 324 0 1 51 61 . 6357
082283 4 96 .o 0 1030 6 518 1 2207 4 2238 7 331 0 0 51 18 6375
082383 4 96 .o 0 1030 4 522 2 2209 2 2240 4 335 0 0 51 12 6387
082483 4 96 .o 0 1030 5 527 2 2211 9 2249 8 343 0 0 51 24 6411
08258~ 4 95.5 0 1030 0 527 0 2211 4 2253 0 343 0 1 52 5 6416
082683 4 96 .o 0 1030 0 527 2 2213 1 2254 1 344 0 0 52 4 6420
0827 83 4 96 .o 0 1030 0 527 0 2213 0 2254 4 348 0 1 53 5 6425
082883 4 93 .o 0 1030 1 528 0 2213 53 2307 9 357 0 7 60 70 6495
-------------··---·-----------------------...=a.--------------------
__ ] .... J
1 1 l
Appendix Table 2-D-9. Continued.
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species ------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. -----
082983 4 96.0 0 1030 1 529 0 2213 25 2332 8 365 0 4 64 38 6533
083083 4 96.0 0 1030 3 532 0 2213 23 2355 3 368 1 2 67 32 6565
083183 4 96.0 0 1030 0 532 0 2213 5 2360 0 368 0 4 71 9 6574
090183 4 96.0 0 1030 2 534 0 2213 5 2365 5 373 0 0 71 12 6586
090283 4 96.0 0 1030 0 534 0 2213 2 2367 7 380 0 1 72 10 6596
090383 4 96.0 0 1030 0 534 0 2213 21 2388 7 387 0 0 72 28 6624
090483 4 94.0 0 1030 0 534 0 2213 27 2415 9 396 0 4 76 40 6664
090583 4 96.0 0 1030 1 535 0 2213 6 2421 0 396 1 1 78 9 6673
090683 4 90.0 0 1030 1 536 0 2213 l9 2440 7 403 0 0 78 27 6700
> 090783. 4 92.0 0 1030 0 536 0 2213 11 2451 5 408 1 1 80 18 6718
<» 090883 4 96.0 0 1030 0 536 0 2213 2 2453 5 413 1 1 82 9 6727
en 090983 4 96.0 0 1030 0 536 0 2213 1 2454 0 413 0 0 82 1 6728
091083 4 96.0 0 1030 0 536 0 2213 4 24~8 2 415 1 0 83 7 6735
091183 4 96.0 0 1030 0 536 0 2213 6 2464 3 418 0 1 84 10 6745
091283 4 48.0 0 1030 0 536 0 2213 3 2467 4 422 0 2 86 9 6754
----
Appendix Table 2-D-10. Curry station east bank fishwheel daily and cu111ulative catch by species,l983.
--------------------··---------------
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chu111 Coho Miscellaneous All Species ------------------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cu111. Daily CUID. Daily Cu111. Daily Cu111. Daily Cu111. Cisco Other Cu111. Daily Cum. ----··--· --...--.---.-----
061083 1 7.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
061183 1 24.0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
061283 1 24.0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2
061383 1 24.0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3
061483 1 24.0 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5
061583 1 24.0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 6
061683 1 24.0 4 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 10
061783 1 21.0 7 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 8 18
061883 1 24.0 21 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 22 40
061983 1 24.0 39 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 40 80
)> 062083 1 24.0 21 97 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 22 102
C» 062183 1 24.0 55 152 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 57 159
C» 062283 1 24.0 38 190 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 10 41 200
062383 1· 24.0 59 249 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 59 259
062483 1 24.0 37 286 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 37 296
062583 1 24.0 53 339 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 53 349
062683 1 24.0 34 373 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 35 384
0627 83 1 24.0 18 391 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 18 402
062883 1 24.0 15 406 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 15 417
062983 1 24.0 9 415 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 ·g 426
063083 1 24.0 18 433 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 11 18 444
070183 1 24.0 23 456 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 23 467
070283 1 24.0 17 473 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 17 484
0703 83 1 14.0 6 479 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o· 1 12 7 491
070483 1 24.0 10 489 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .2 14 12 503 ..
070583 1 24.0 26 515 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 26 529
070683 1 24.0 7 522 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 8 537
0707 83 1 24.0 4 526 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 5 542
070883 1 24.0 10 536 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 10 552
----------------"----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.J ) I 1 J c~
---J 1 ] 1 .. -1 l ..... --~
Appendix Table 2-D-10. Continued.
-·I --··------------Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hisce llaneous All Species -----'·----
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. ---------
070983 1 20.0 4 S40 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 4 S56
071083 1 23.S 7 S47 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 7 563
071183 1 24.0 4 SS1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1~ 4 S67
071283 1 24.0 9 S60 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 9 S76
071383 1 24.0 3 S63 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 IS 4 sao
071483 1 24.0 4 S67 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 16 7 S87
071S83 1 24.0 6 513 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17 7 S94
071683 1 22.0 0 S73 · 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 S94
071783 1 24.0 1 S74 2 6 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 18 s 599
071883 1 24.0 0 S74 1 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 18 1 600
>
,0) 071983 1 24.0 2 S76 1 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 18 3 603
072083 1 24.0 2 518 1 '9 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 19 s 608 ...... 072183 1 24.0 0 S78 3 12 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 19 4 612
072283 1 24.0 0 S7 8 3 IS 0 2 1 2 1 1 0 0 19 5 617
072383 1 24.0 3 581 4 19 6 8 3 s 0 1 0 1 20 17 634
072483 1 24.0 4 S8S 7 26 11 19 10 IS 0 1 0 0 20 32 666
07 2S83 1 24.0 0 58S s 31 10 29 3 18 1 2 0 1 21 20 686
072683 1 24.0 0 S85 3 34 8 37 16 34 0 2 0 0 21 27 713
072783 1 24.0 0 S8S 7 41 17 S4 16 so 0 2 0 1 22 41 754
072883 1 24.0 0 585 5 46 6 60 20 70 1 3 0 0 22 32 786
072983 1 24.0 1 S86 1 47 6 66 42 112 1 4 0 1 23 52 838
073083 1 24.0 0 S86 3 so 21 87 44 IS6 1 s 0 0 23 69 907
073183 1 24.0 1 S87 3 S3 43 130 18 174 2 7 0 0 23 67 974
080183 1 24.0 0 S87 4 S7 so 180 31 20S 0 7 0 0 23 85 1059
080283 1 24.0 0 581 9 66 40 220 S4 2S9 1 8 0 0 23 104 1163
080383 1 24.0 0 581 1 67 36 256 S3 312 1 9 0 0 23 91 1254
080483 . 1 24.0 0 S&7 7 74 38 294 40 352 0 9 0 0 23 8S 1339
080S83 1 24.0' 0 S87 s 79 18 312 19 371 3 12 0 0 23 45 1384
080683 1 24.0 0 S87 4 83 18 330 14 385 4 16 0 0 23 40 1424
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-10. Continued.
1111 ________ ------Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species --------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. --------------
080783 1 24.0 0 587 5 88 9 339 28 413 4 20 0 0 23 46 1470
080883 1 24.0 0 587 4 92 10 349 30 443 3 23 0 0 23 47 1517
080983 1 24.0 0 587 6 98 3 352 4 447 0 23 0 0 23 13 1530
081083 1 24.0 0 587 3 101 2 354 4 451 2 25 0 0 23 11 1541
081183 1 24.0 0 587 3 104 4 358 17 468 3 28 0 0 23 27 1568
081283 1 24.0 0 587 6 110 5 363 22 490 5 33 0 0 23 38 1606
081383 1 24.0 0 587 10 120 2 365 5 495 0 33 0 0 23 17 1623
081483 1 24.0 0 587 5 125 5 370 5 500 4 37 0 0 23 19 1642
081583 1 24.0 0 587 4 129 4 374 3 503 7 44 0 0 23 18 1660
)> 081683 1 24.0 0 587 2 131 1 375 1 504 1 45 0 1 24 6 1666
0) 0817 83 1 24.0 0 587 3 134 2 377 2 506 0 45 0 0 24 7 1673
()) 081883 1 24.0 0 587 4 138 1 378 4 510 1 46 0 1 25 11 1684
081983 1 24.0 0 587 1 139 0 378 1 511 0 46 0 1 26 3 1687
082083 1 24.0 0 587 4 143 0 378 0 511 2 48 0 1 27 7 1694
082183 1 24.0 0 587 1 144 0 378 3 514 0 48 0 1 28 5 1699
082283 1 24.0 0 587 4 148 0 378 8 522 2 50 0 1 29 15 1714
082383 1 24.0 0 587 2 150 0 378 6 528 1 51 0 0 29 9 1723
082483 1 24.0 0 587 3 153 0 378 4 532 1 52 0 0 29 8 1731
082583 1 24.0 0 587 1 154 0 378 4 536 0 52 0 0 29 5 1736
082683 1 24.0 0 587 1 155 0 378 2 538 1 53 0 0 29 4 1740
0827 83 1 24.0 0 587 2 157 0 378 7 545 0 53 0 0 29 9 1749
082883 1 24.0 0 587 0 157 0 378 11 556 1 54 0 3 32 15 1764
082983 1 24.0 0 587 2 159 0 378 3 559 0 54 0 1 33 6 1770
083083 1 24.0 0 587 1 160 0 378 7 566 0 54 0 0 33 8 1778
083183 1 24.0 0 587 0 160 0 378 0 566 0 54 0 0 33 0 1778
090183 1 24.0 0 587 0 160 0 378 5 571 0 54 0 2 35 7 1785
090283 1 24.0 0 587 0 160 0 378 3 574 3 57 0 3 38 9 1794
090383 1 24.0 0 587 1 161 0 378 0 574 1 58 0 1 39 3 1797
090483 1 21.0 0 587 2 163 0 378 6 580 0 58 0 0 39 8 1805
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
J J I I . . I ~--' J I J I ) J I J
l
Appendix Table 2-D-10. Continued,
--------
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hiace llaneous All Species --
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. --_____ , .......
090583 1 24.0 0 587 0 163 0 378 3 583 0 58 0 1 40 4 1809
090683 1 24.0 0 587 0 163 0 378 1 584 1 59 0 0 40 2 1811
090783 1 24.0 0 587 0 163 0 378 4 588 0 59 0 0 40 4 1815
090883 1 24.0 0 587 0 163 0 378 0 588 0 59 0 0 40 0 1815
090983 1 24.0 0 587 0 163 0 378 1 589 0 59 0 0 40 1 1816
091083 1 24.0 0 587 0 163 0 378 0 589 0 59 0 0 40 0 1816
091183 1 24.0 0 587 0 163 0 378 0 589 0 59 0 0 40 0 1816
091283 1 24.0 0 587 0 163 0 378 0 589 0 59 0 0 40 0 1816
091383 1 24.0 0 587 0 163 0 378 0 589 0 59 0 0 40 0 1816
091483 1 12.0 0 587 0 163 0 378 0 589 0 59 0 0 40 0 1816
~ ---------
en
<0
Appendix Table 2-D-11. Curry station vest bank fishvheel daily and cumulative catch by species ,1983.
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species -·t -----------. ·---------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cu~.
060983 1 11.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
061083 1 24.0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
061183 1 24.11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
061283 1 24.0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
.061383 1 24.0 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4
061483 1 24.0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5
061583 1 24.0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 6
061683 1 24.0 4 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o· 0 1 4 10
0617 83 1 24.0 2 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 12
061883 1 24.0 17 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17 29
)> 061983 1 24.0 19 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 19 48
...... 062083 1 24.0 21 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 22 10
062183 1 24.0 23 91 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 23 93
0 062283 1 24.0 23 114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 23 116
062383 1 24.0 30 144 0 0 0 0 0 (i 0 0 0 0 2 30 146
062483 1 24.0 26 110 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 27 173
062583 1 24.0 33 203 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 33 206
0626 83 1 24.0 36 239 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 36 242
062783 1 24.0 26 265 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 26 268
062883 1 24.0 13 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ·o 3 13 281
062983 1 24.0 21 299 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 21 302
063083 1 24.0 19 318 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 19 321
070183 1 24.0 11 329 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11 332
070283 1 24.0 26 355 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 26 358
070383 1 24.0 19 374 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 19 377
070483 1 24.0 9 383 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 386
070583 1 24.0 12 395 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 12 398
0706 83 1 24.0 6 401 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 8 406
070783 1 24.0 5 406 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 411
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J J J -J I J I I J I J
1 ]
Appendix Table 2-D-11. Continued.
-------------Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species ..........___ ------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cia co Other Cum. Daily Cum. . ..... ---
070883 1 24.0 7 413 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 418
070983 1 24.0 12 425 0 l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12 430
071083 1 24.0 2 427 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 5 4 434
071183 1 24.0 13 440 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 13 447
071283 1 24.0 7 447 1 2 0 0 l 2 0 0 0 0 5 9 . 456
071383 1 24.0 10 457 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 10 466
071483 1 24.0 3 460 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 3 469
071583 1 24.0 4 464 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 4 473
071683 1 24.0 2 466 1 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 6 4 477
0717 83 1 24.0 0 466 1 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 6 1 478
071883 1 24.0 0 466 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 6 0 478
)> 071983 1 24.0 2 468 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 6 2 480
...... 072083 1 24.0 1 469 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 6 1 481
072183 1 24.0 2 471 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 6 2 483
~ 072283 1 24.0 1 472 0 4 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 6 3 486
072383 1 24.0 2 474 0 4 5 6 1 4 1 1 0 0 6 9 495
072483 1 24.0 0 474 0 4 10 16 0 4 0 1 0 0 6 10 505
072583 1 24.0 1 475 2 6 2 18 4 8 0 l 0 0 6 9 514
072683 1 24.0 0 475 2 8 18 36 5 13 1 2 0 0 6 26 540
0727 83 1 24.0 0 475 1 9 16 52 12 25 0 2 0 0 6 29 569
072883 1 24.0 0 475 4 13 17 69 8 33 0 2 0 0 6 29 598
072983 1 24.0 0 475 1 14 9 78 14 47 0 2 0 0 6 24 622
073083 1 24.0 1 476 3 17 12 90 12 59 1 3 0 1 7 30 652
073183 1 24.0 1 477 1 18 15 105 11 70 1 4 0 0 7 29 681
080183 1 24.0 0 477 0 18 17 122 12 82 1 5 0 0 7 30 711
080283 1 24.0 0 477 1 19 17 139 24 106 0 5 0 0 7 42 753
080383 1 24.0 0 477 0 19 11 150 14 120 0 5 0 0 7 25 778
080483 1 24.0 0 477 2 21 14 164 23 143 1 6 0 0 7 40 818
080583 1 24.0 0 477 2 23 15 179 13 156 1 7 0 0 7 31 849
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-11. Continued•
-----Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Hiacel1aneoua All Species ------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other Cum. Daily Cum. --------
080683 1 24.0 0 477 1 24 12 191 8 164 3 10 0 0 7 24 873
080783 1 24.0 0 477 0 24 2 193 ~ 169 4 14 0 0 7 11 884
080883 1 24.0 0 477 0 24 2 t9~ 11 180 1 15 0 0 7 14 898
080983 1 24.0 0 477 0 24 0 19~ 4 184 0 1~ 0 0 7 4 902
081083 1 24.0 0 477 1 25 0 195 1 185 0 15 0 0 7 2 904
081183 1 24.0 0 477 0 2~ 1 196 6 191 0 15 0 0 7 7 911
081283 1 24.0 0 477 4 29 2 198 19 210 3 18 0 0 7 28 939
081383 1 24.0 0 477 0 29 6 204 4 214 1 19 0 0 7 11 950
081483 1 24.0 0 477 1 30 1 205 6 220 3 22 0 0 7 11 961
081583 1 24.0 0 477 0 30 0 20~ 4 224 3 25 0 0 7 7 968
> 081683 1 24.0 0 477 4 34 1 206 4 228 1 26 0 0 7 10 978
081783 1 24.0 0 477 1 3~ 1 207 10 238 2 28 0 0 7 14 992 ..... 081883 1 24.0 0 477 0 3~ 2 209 8 246 0 28 0 0 7 10 1002
1\) 081983 1 24.0 0 477 0 35 1 210 4 250 0 28 0 1 8 6 1008
082083 1 24.0 0 477 2 37 0 210 2 252 1 29 0 0 8 5 1013
082183 1 24.0 0 477 0 37 0 210 0 252 0 29 0 0 8 0 1013
082283 1 24.0 0 477 0 37 0 210 3 255 0 29 0 1 9 4 1017
082383 1 24.0 0 477 0 37 1 211 1 256 0 29 0 0 9 2 1019
082483 1 24.0 0 477 0 37 0 211 0 256 1 30 0 0 9 . 1 1020
082583 1 24.0 0 477 0 37 0 211 0 256 0 30 0 0 9 0 1020
0826 83 1 24.0 0 477 0 37 0 211 0 256 0 30 0 0 9 0 1020
0827 83 1 24.0 0 477 0 37 0 211 2 258 2 32 0 0 9 4 1024
082883 1 24.0 0 477 0 37 0 211 2 260 1 33 0 0 9 3 1027
082983 1 24.0 0 477 1 38 0 211 8 268 0 33 0 0 9 9 1036
083083 1 24.0 0 477 0 38 0 211 1 269 0 33 0 0 9 1 1037
083183 1 24.0 0 477 0 38 0 211 0 269 0 33 0 0 9 0 1037
090183 1 24.0 0 477 0 38 0 211 0 269 0 33-0 0 9 0 1037
090283 1 24.0 0 477 0 38 0 211 1 270 1 34 0 0 9 2 1039
090383 1 24.0 0 477 0 38 0 211 0 270 0 34 0 0 9 0 1039
---------------------------------------------------------------------
J I _) I .I I •-J J 1 J ]
. ---1 1 l l 1 1 -J
Appendix Table 2-D-12. Curry station fishwheels daily and cumulative catch by species,l983.
------Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All Species -------------------------Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other CUM. Daily Cum. -------
060983 1 u.s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
061083 2 31.5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
061183 2 48.0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
061283 2 48.0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3
061383 2 48.0 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 7
061483 2 48.0 3. 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 10
061583 2 48.0 1 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 12
061683 2 48.0 8 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 20
061783 2 45.0 9 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 10 30
061883 2 48.0 38 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 39 69
)> 061983 2 48.0 58 123 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 59 128
....... 062083 2 48.0 42 165 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 44 172
~ 062183 2 48.0 78 243 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 80 252
062283 2 48.0 61 304 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 12 64 316
062383 2 48.0 89 393 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 89 405
062483 2 48.0 63 456 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 13 64 469
062583 2 48.0 86 542 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 86 555
062683 2 48.0 70 612 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14 71 626
0627 83 2 48.0 44 656 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 44 670
062883 2 48.0 28 684 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 28 698
062983 2 48.0 30 714 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 30 728
063083 2 48.0 37 751 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 37 765
070183 2 48.0 34 785 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 34 799
070283 2 48.0 43 828 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 43 842
070383 2 38.0 25 853 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 15 26 868
070483 2 48.0 19 872 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 17 21 889
070583 2 48.0 38 910 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 38 927
070683 2 48.0 13 923 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 18 16 943
0707 83 2 48.0 9 932 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 10 953
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 l ---1 .J ] ··. ) J I j . I I
---1 ---1 --1 ' I ~----1 ----~---l --) --~~ ----c-] ----1 c----1 ---1 -------l ----1 -,--·--cl -~
Appendix Table 2-D-12. Continued.
-----------
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Misce llaneoua All Species ------------
Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cisco Other CUM. Daily Cum. -------
070883 2 48.0 17 949 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 17 970
070983 2 44.0 16 965 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 16 986
071083 2 47.5 9 974 0 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 19 11 997
071183 2 48.0 17 991 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 19 17 1014
071283 2 48.0 16 1007 1 4 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 19 18 1032
071383 2 48.0 13 1020 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 20 14 1046
071483 2 48.0 7 1027 2 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 21 10 1056
071583 2 48.0 10 1037 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 22 11 1067
071683 2 46 .o 2 1039 1 7 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 23 4 1071
071783 2 48.0 1 1040 3 10 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 24 6 1077
');loo
071883 2 48.0 0 1040 1 0 3 0 0 0 24 107 8 11 0 0 0 1 ...... 071983 2 48.0 4 1044 1 12 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 24 5 1083
c.n 072083 2 48.0 3 1047 1 13 1 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 25 6 1089
072183 2 48.0 2 1049 3 16 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 25 6 1095
072283 2 48.0 1 1050 3 19 1 3 2 5 1 1 0 0 25 8 1103
0723 83 2 48.0 5 1055 4 23 11 14 4 9 1 2 0 1 26 26 1129
072483 2 48.0 4 1059 7 30 21 35 10 19 0 2 0 0 26 42 1171
072583 2 48.0 1 1060 7 37 12 47 7 26 1 3 0 1 27 29 1200
072683 2 48.0 0 1060 5 42 26 73 21 47 1 4 0 0 27 53 1253
072783 2 48.0 0 1060 8 50 33 106 28 75 0 4 0 1 28 70 1323
072883 2 48.0 0 1060 9 59 23 129 28 103 1 5 0 0 28 61 1384
072983 2 48.0 1 1061 2 61 15 144 56 159 1 6 0 1 29 76 1460
073083 2 48.0 1 1062 6 67 33 177 56 215 2 8 0 1 30 99 1559
073183 2 48.0 2 1064 4 71 58 235 29 244 3 11 0 0 30 96 1655
080183 2 48.0 0 1064 4 75 67 302 43 287 1 12 0 0 30 115 1770
080283 2 48.0 0 1064 10 85 57 359 78 365 1 13 0 0 30 146 1916
080383 2 48.0 0 1064 1 86 47 406 67 432 1 14 0 0 30 116 2032
080483 2 48.0 0 1064 9 95 52 458 63 495 1 15 0 0 30 125 2157
080583 2 48.0 0 1064 7 102 33 491 32 527 4 19 0 0 30 76 2233
----------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Table 2-D-12.· Continued.
----------
Total Catch
Chinook Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Miscellaneous All. Species --Date No. of Wheel Bering
Wheels Hours Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Daily Cum. Cii:ico -Other CUM. Daily Cum. ----------
080683 2 48.0 0 1064 5 107 30 521 22 549 1 26 0 0 30 64 2297
080783 2 48.0 0 1064 5 112 11 532 33 582 8 34 .() ·-0 30 57 2354
080883 2 48.0 0 1064 4 116 12 544 41 623 4 38 0 0 30 61 2415
080983-2 48.0 0 1064 6 122 3 547 8 631 0 38 0 0 30 17 2432
081083 2 48.0 0 1064 4 126 2 549 5 636 2 40 0 0 30 13 2445
081183 2 48.0 0 1064 3 129 5 554 23 659 3 43 0 0 30 34 2479
081283 2 48.0 0 1064 10 139 1 561 41 700 8 51 0 0 30 66 2545
081383 2 48.0 0 1064 10 149 8 569 9 709 1 52 0 0 30 28 2573
)> 081483 2 48.0 0 1064 6 155 6 575 11 720 1 59 0 0 30 30 2603
081583 2 48.0 0 1064 4 159 4 579 1 727 10 69 0 0 30 25 2628 ......
m 081683 2 48.0 0 1064 6 165 2 581 5 132 2 71 0 1 31 16 2644
0817 83 2 48.0 0 1064 4 169 3 584 12 744 2 13 0 0 31 21 2665
081883 2 48.0 0 1064 4 173 3 587 12 756 1 74 0 1 32 21 2686
081983 2 48.0 0 1064 1 174 1 588 5 761 0 74 0 2 34 9 2695
082083 2 48.0 0 1064 6 180 0 588 2 763 3 17 0 1 35 12 2707
082183 2 48.0 0 1064 1 181 0 588 3 766 0 77 0 1 36 5 2712
082283 2 48.0 0 1064 4 185 0 588 11 117 2 79 0 2 38 19 2731
082383 2 48.0 0 1064 2 187 1 589 7 784 1 80 0 0 38 11 2742
082483 2 48.0 0 1064 3 190 0 589 4 788 2 82 0 0 38 9 2751
082583 2 48.0 0 1064 1 191 0 589 4 792 0 82 0 0 38 5 2756
082683 2 48.0 0 1064 1 192 0 589 2 794 1 83 0 0 38 4 2760
082783 2 48.0 0 1064 2 194 0 589 9 803 2 85 0 0 38 13 2773
082883 2 48.0 0 1064 0 194 0 589 13 816 2 87 0 3 41 18 2791
082983 2 48.0 0 1064 3 197 0 589 11 827 0 87 0 1 42 15 2806
083083 2 48.0 0 1064 1 198 0 589 8 835 0 87 0 0 42 9 2815
083183 2 48.0 0 1064 0 198 0 589 0 835 0 87 0 0 42 0 2815
090183 2 48.0 0 1064 0 198 0 589 5 840 0 87 0 2 44 7 2822
090283 2 48.0 0 1064 0 198 0 589 4 844 4 91 -0 3 47 11 2833
090383 2 48.0 0 1064 1 199 0 589 0 844 1 92 0 1 48 3 2836
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J J . ) j I _I ,J .I J J l
I
CHINOOK SALMON
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STATION
6/5
1983
!5"/o Cumulative
Cotcli _per Effort
------~-----------------------------
1983
1982
1982
6/19 7/3 7/17 7/31 8/14 8/28
DATE
Appendix Figure 2-D-1. Migrational timing of chinook/salmon, based on cumulative fishwheel catch per hour
at selected sampling locations in the Susitna River basin in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
. ] 1
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STATION
YEN TNA
STATION
1983
1981 __________ ._ _______________ -----------------
1983
1982
19 81
-------------------------------------------
---~-----------------.-------------------
1982~----------~
1981
SECOND RUN
SOCKEYE-SALMON
5°/0 Cumulative
Catch par Effort
6/12 6/26 7/ 10 7/24
DATE
8/7 8/21 9/4 9/18
Appendix Figure 2-D-2. Migrational timing of second run sockeye salmon~ based on cumulative fishwheel catch
per hour at selected sampling locations in the Susitna River basin in 1981~ 1982 and
1983.
l ... 1 J . J
.. ··~
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSHINE
STATION
YENTNA
STATION
. )
PINK SALMON
Peak
C tch
~-· / \
5% Cumulative 95% Cumulative
Catch per Effort Catch per Effort
-----t 1983
--------___ ....., __ ....... ----------------·-------------
M-----------~1983
K-------------~1982
----------------... -------------..... ------------
it--------t I 9 8 3
----------------~1982
---------1 1981
--~-----------------------------------------
._ _____________ ~1983
---------~ 1982
6/28 7/8 7/18 7/28 8/7 8/17 . 8/27 9/6
DATE
Appendix Figure 2-D-3. Migrational timing of pink salmon, based on cumulative fishwheel catch per hour at
selected sampling locations in the Susitna River basin in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
)>
CD
0
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION.
SUNSHINE
STATION
YENTNA -
CHUM SALMON
___ ..,. ____ ..,. __ _. ________ .... ______________ -------
----------------------------------------
~------------------~ 1982
1983
,.---------1 19 8 2
STATION I
~~~~--~.--~--~--~--~--~---p--~--~.--~---.~~~~.----
6/21 7/ 5 8/3 0 9/ 13 9/27
DATE
Appendix Figure 2-0-4. Migrational timing of chum salmon, based on cumulative fishwheel catch per hour at
selected sampling locations in the Susitna River basin in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
]
CURRY
STATION
TALKEETNA
STATION
SUNSH.INE
STATION
YENTNA
STAT ION
] l -I
COHO SALMON
1983
~0/0 Cumulative 9~0/oCumulatlvt
Catch per Effort Catch per Effort
------------------------------------
1983
e-----~--------------~ 1982
f---------1 1981
~---------------------------------~---
7/7 7/21 . 8/4 8/18
DATE
1983
9/1 9/15 9/29
Appendix Figure 2-0-5. Migrational timing of coho salmon, based on cumulative fishwheel catc:. per hour at
selected sampling locations in the Susitna River basin in 1981, 1982 and 1983.
-I
-
Appendix Table 2-D-13 • Migrational timing by species at main channel
sampling locations on the Yentna and Susitna rivers
based on cumulative percent of fishwheel catch per
unit of effort,l983. -
-
Cumulative Percent of Fishwheel
Catch Per Unit Effort l/ -
Station Species Year 0% 5% 50% 95% 100%
Sunshine Chinook 1981
1982 6/6 6/18 6/30 7/9 8/15
1983 6/5 6/9 6/18 7/9 8/18 .....
Talkeetna 1981
1982 6/9 6/26 7/4 7/23 8/1
1983 6/7 6/18 6/28 7/21 8/18 -Curry 1981 6/15 6/17 6/24 7/24 8/20
1982 6/15 6/25 7/3 7/19 8/6
1983 6/10 6/18 6/25 7/13 7/31 -
Yentna Sockeye 1981 6/28 7/10 7/18 7/30 8/27
2nd run 1982 6/27 7/18 7/24 8/6 9/5 -1983 7/2 7/14 7/22 8/15 9/4
~
Sunshine 1st run 1981
1982 6/4 6/9 6/13 6/21 6/28
1983 6/5 6/6 6/10 6/19 6/28
"'""'
Sunshine 2nd run 1981 6/29 7/16 7/22 8/8 9/4
1982 7/1 7/20 7/27 8/3 9/13 ~'
1983 6/30 7/17 7/23 8/14. 9/5
Talkeetna 2nd run 1981 7/7 7/23 7/31 8/26 9/9 ....
1982 7/8 7/27 8/1 8/18 9/9
1983 . 7/1 7/15 8/1 8/18 9/6 -
Curry 2nd run 1981 7!17 7/23 8/5 8/22 9/12
1982 7/16 7/27 8/5 8/28 9/18
1983 7/6 7/17 8/5 8/25 9/4 -
A 8 2
Appendix Table 2-D-13. Continued.
Cumulative Percent of Fishwheel
Catch Per Unit Effort 11
Station Species Year 0% 5% 50% 95% 100%
Yentna Pink 1981 6/28 7/10 7/30 8/24 8/26
1982 7/7 7/23 7/29 8/7 8/28
1983 7/2 7/14 7/26 8./15 9/4
Sunshine 1981 -7/3 7/26 8/1 8/14 9/1
!!""' 1982 7/12 7/29 8/3 8/10 9/10
1983 7/10 7/20 7/30 8/15 8/30
Talkeetna 1981 7/25 7/29 8/6 8/20 8/28
1982 7/16 8/2 8/6 8/13 8/30
1983 7/10 7/23 7/30 8/8 8/26
Curry 1981 7/18 7/30 8/8 8/21 8/29
1982 7/22 8/2 8/6 8/13 8/26
1983 7/20 7/24 8/1 8/12 8/23
!!""' Yentna Chum 1981 6/28 7/18 7/27 8/21 9/4
1982 7/17 7/20 8/2 8/18 9/5
1983 7/4 7/15 7/30 8/23 9/4 -
Sunshine 1981 7/4 7/26 8/18 9/5 9/15
1982 6/24 7/29 8/7 8/21 9/28
1983 7/10 7/22 8/1 9/2 9/11
Talkeetna 1981 7/20 7/28 8/17 9/4 9/13
1982 7/17 8/2 8/8 8/22 9/13
1983 7/11 7/25 8/1 . 8/30 9/12
~
Curry 1981 7/20 8/5 8/17 8/26 9/15
1982 7/25 8/3 8/12 8/26 9/14
1983 7/10 7/22 8/3 8/29 9/9
-
A83
Appendix Table 2-D-13. Continued.
Station Species Year
Yentna
Sunshine
Talkeetna
Curry
Coho 1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
1981
1982
1983
0%
717
7/15
7/8
7/23
7/18
7!13
7/29
8/2
7/18
8/4
8/2
7/22
Cumulative Percent of Fishwheel
Catch Per Unit Effort 11
5%
7/22
7/20
7/15
8/1
8/3
7/23
8/4
8/5
7/30
8/6
8/5
7/28
50%
7/31
8/2
7/27
8/20
8/12
8/5
8/26
8/13
8/14
8/23
8/18
8/12
95%
8/17
. 8/24
8/23
8/28
8/23
8/25
9/3
9/2
9/7
9/5
9/2
9/2
100%
9/4
9/5
9/4
9/15
9/28
9/11
9/13
9/13
9/12
9/19
9/11
9/6
]j Date upon which greater than or equal to 0, 5, 50, 95 and 100 percent of
the cumulative catch per unit of effort occurred. Unit effort is
defined as fishwheel catch per hour. These dates were defined only for
salmon escapements w~ich were monitored from start to completion.
A84
....
-
-
-
-
-
r
-I
-
APPENDIX 2-E
LENGTH FREQUENCIES OF
CHINOOK, SOCKEYE, PINK, CHUM
AND COHO SALMON
-
-I
-
r
-
-
.....
18 MALES
II!' n =56 x = 530
1 ..
> 12 0 c
4J Je ;:,
0"
Q) 8
'-LL.
8
~ ..
2
e
.. ae eee aae uaee 1290
Length Cmm)
~ !"""" FEMALES
n = 25
0 x= 741
--.
-
---~
-
I I I eae aae 1aae 1299
Length Cmm)
Appendix Figure 2-E-1. Length frequencies of chinook salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Yentna Station,l983.
A85
e00 see 1000
Length (mm)
490 ecae aae 1 a0e
Length (mm)
MALES
n=936
i= 714
1200
FEMALES
n=809
x= 815
Appendix Figure 2-E-2. Length frequencies of chinook salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Sunshine Station,I983.
A86
-
-
"""'l
I
-
....
~
1"""
-
-
~
'
.....
> u c
<»
:J
fJ
<»
L
LL..
~
> 0 c
G)
J
0"
G)
r..
LL..
1-4
12
10
8
6
-4
2
e
4rae
12
10
-400
sea sea 1eea
Length Cmm)
sera s0ra 1 eea
Length Cmm)
MALES
n =634
i== 555
120e
FEMALES
n= 268
i= 795
120e
Appendix Figure 2-E-3. Length frequencies of chinook salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Talkeetna Station,1983.
A87
> u c
4)
:J
CT 4
Q)
'-LL.
12
19
>
0 e c
4)
:J
CT 6
Q)
t..
LL.
4
~
sea 809 1000
Length Cmm)
490 600 800 1000
Length Cmm)
MALES
n = 535
x= 665
1209
FEMALES
n= 372
i= 855
1280
Appendix Figure 2-E-4. Length frequencies of chinook salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Curry Station,l983.
ASS
-
.....
-
-
-
....
-
-
-
-
-
....
-
.....
r
r
>
0 c
ll)
:J
0"
Q)
t..
lJ..
> 0 c
Q)
:J
r:J'
Q)
t..
lJ..
~
398
IS
19
308
499 598 689
Length Cmm)
480 598 689
Length Cmm)
MALES
n= 722
i= 488
799 800
FEMALES
n = 493
i= 502
798 800
Appendix Figure 2-E-5. Length frequencies of sockeye salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Yentna Station,l983.
A89
'
>
0 c
G)
~ rr 4
QJ
L
LL.
19
8
> 0 c 6 q)
:J
0"
q)
L. 4 LL.
~
2
300
399
490 599 699
Length Cmm)
4ee see 699
Length Cmm)
MALES
n= 740 x= 511
799
FEMALES
n = 732 x = 505
799 899
Appendix Figure 2-E-6. Length frequencies of sockeye salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Sunshine Station,l983.
A90
.....
...,
~
....
-
-
-
....
-
-
-
.....
> u c
Q)
J
8-
s-
fj 4e
Q)
L.
L1..
2-J
MALES
n= 267 x= 498
r l nn 0~--T---~~U-~-------.~-----~.~~~~~---,,
12
10
> 0 8 c
Q)
J
CT 6
Q)
L.
L1..
2
30e 400 see see 7raa soo
Length (mm)
300 490 sea 690
Length (mm)
FEMALES
n = 171
x=526
70e
Appendix Figure 2-E-7. Length frequencies of sockeye salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Talkeetna Station,l983 .
A 9 1
> 0
16
1-4
12
c 19
Q)
~
fj 8
CD
'-IJ... 6
> 0
2
16
'"'
12
c 19
(IJ
~
0" 8
(IJ
L.
IJ... e
2
-499 599 690
Length Cmm)
399 -499 see sa0
Length Cmm)
MALES
n= 62
i=459
799 800
FEMALES
n =50
i= 515
799
Appendix Figure 2-E-8. Length frequencies of sockeye salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Curry Station,l983.
A92
-
-
....
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
....
-
> 0
IS
1-4
12
c 10
Q)
:;,
'(j 8
Q)
L.
Lt... 6
2
18
16
\-4
>·
0 12 c
~ 10
rJ'
G) 8
L.
Lt...
6
300
590
(mm)
-409 500
Lengt.h (mm)
MALES
n = 535
i=432
690 700
FEMALES
n = 591
x=421
690 700
Appendix Figure 2-£-9. Length frequencies of pink salmon by sex from
fishwhee1 catches at Yentna Station,l983.
A93
14
12
> Ia
0 c
~
J 8
r:r
q)
6 L
LL.
X 4
2
a
18
IS
14
> 0 12 c
Q) Ia J r:r
Q) 8 L
IJ... e
~
4
2
a
3aa 4a0 sea
Lengi:h (mm)
3aa o4aa sea
Lengi:h (mm)
MALES
n = 503
x=435
sea 1aa
FEMALES
n=484
i=423
sea 700
Appendix Figure 2-E-10. Length frequencies of pink salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Sunshine Station ,1983.
A94
-
~
-
'""',
-
-
-
-
......
.....
-
-
r-
,....
\
,....
.....
IS MALES
n = 309
I~ x= 428
12
> 0 c 10
Q)
::t
0" 8
Q)
L.
~ s
~
~
2
0
300 ~00
Length
16 FEMALES
n= 365
~~ i= 426
12
>
0 c 10
Q)
:;I
0'" 8
Q)
'-~ e
~ ..
2
0
~00 500 600 70<.3
Length Cmm)
Appendix Figure 2-E-11. Length frequencies of pink salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Talkeetna Station ,1983.
A95
18 MALES
16 n=l99
x= 425
1-4
> 12 0 c
~ 19 ~
fT
Q) 8
'-LL...
8
~·
.o4
2
a
300 .o499 sae eera 700
Length Cmm)
IS FEMALES
16 n = 192
i=425
1-4
> 0 12 c
~ 10 ~
fT
~ 8 t..
LL...
6
~
-4
2
a
309 -490 500 sara 700
Length Cmm)
Appendix Figure 2-E-12. Length frequencies of pink salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Curry Station~l983.
A 9 6
-
~
-
~~
"""!
~
-
~
-
-
.....
""'" I
-
~
-
....
-
-
>
() c
(I)
:J
0"
Q)
(..
lL...
> 0 c
(I)
:J
r;]"
(1)
t..
lL...
~
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
e
309 40B see s0e
Length Cmm)
309 490 see 600
Length Cmm)
MALES
n= 351
x=so2
FEMALES
n = 281
i = 582
709 800
Appendix Figure 2-E-13. Length frequencies of chum salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Yentna Station ,1983.
A97
14
12
> le
0 c
CD 8 ~ c:r
<l) 6 L
I.&...
~ 4
2
e
300 4ee 50e 6e0
Lengt.h Cmm)
s00 see
Length Cmm)
MALES
n = 559 x= soa
7ea see
FEMALES
n= 565 x= 5so
7ee
Appendix Figure 2-E-14. Length frequencies of chum salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Sunshine Station ,1983.
A98
-
-
-
-
-
""'1
!
-
-
-
-
,,_
-
....,,
-
-
!"""
~
F"
-
12 MALES
n =441
19 i = 614
>
0 8
c
<I)
:;,
r:J' 6
Q)
L u..
4
~
2
e
309 400 509 600 71219 80121
lengi:.h (mm)
16 FEMALES
n= 286
t-4 x= 594
12
> 0 c !Ia
<I)
:;,
r:J' 8
<I)
L u.. 6
~
-4
2
ra
40121 sea scae 700 8121121
lengi:.h (mm)
Appendix Figure 2-E-15. Length frequencies of chum salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Talkeetna Station,l983.
A99
1-4 MALES
n = 319
12 x = 619
> HI
0 c
q)
:;, 8
r:1'
q) e '-lL
~ ...
2
0
-490 500 800
Length (mm)
18 FEMALES
16
n= 168
x=605 , ...
> 0 12 c
Q)
10 :;,
r:1'
q) 8 '-lL e
~
-4
2
a
400 500 800 700 800
Length (mm)
Appendix Figure 2-E-16. Length frequencies of chum salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Curry Station ,1983.
A 1 0 0
-
~
.,..,
-,
~
~
-I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-' !
....
-
,...
-
-
-
....
309 400 see se0 700 800
Length Cmm)
16 FEMALES
16 n= 149
i=5:30
14
> 0 12 c
(J)
10 ~ r:r
(J)
L 8
IJ...
6
~
4
2
a
300 400 500 600 709
Length Cmm)
Appe~dix Figure 2-E-17. Length frequencies of coho salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Yentna Station,l983 .
A 1 0 1
8
6
> u c
Q)
J
0" 4
Q)
L
LL.
~
2
> 0 c
Q)
J
0"
Q)
L
LL.
~
300
499 500 690
Lengi:.h (mm)
100 500 600
Lengi:.h Cmm)
MALES
n = 438 x= 523
709
FEMALES
n = 356
i = 525
700
see
800
Appendix Figure 2-E-18. Length frequencies of coho salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Sunshine Station ~1983.
A 1 0 2
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
~
,...,
.....
.....
-I
F"
-
....
-
-
....
-I
I
.....
MALES
n= 226
i= 522
>
0 c
Q)
::)
r7
Q)
L.
LL.
~
399 499 see eea 799 800
Length Cmm)
te FEMALES
te n = 135 x = 538
14
> 0 12 c
~ 10 :J
0"
Ct 8 L.
lL. e
~ ..
2
e
399 ....ae sea eae 798 800
Length Cmm)
Appendix Figure 2-E-19. Length frequencies of coho salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Talkeetna Station,l983 .
A 1 0 3
9 -· 399 488 sa9 eee 799 800
Leng\:.h (mm)
"""'!
32 FEMALES ~
n = 23 28 x= 537
24
> 0 c 20
<I)
:J
fj 16
(J)
L.
LL.. 12 -
~
8
4
e ~
399 499 509 699 799 800
Length (mm) -
Appendix Figure 2-E-20. Length frequencies of coho salmon by sex from
fishwheel catches at Curry Station,l983.
-A 1 0 4
.....
-
.....
APPENDIX 2-F
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF
SOCKEYE AND CHUM SALMON FECUNDITIES
.....
....
Appendix Table 2-F-1. Regression analysis of age class 42 and 52 sockeye
salmon fecundities as a function of length and weight
,1983 .
FA Age Class 42 Sockeye Salmon
-
r-
1
'
No. Eggs/Length No. Eggs/Weight
1654.19 + 10.21 (x) = y 1752.91 + 0.92 (x) = y
Standard error of estimate = 464.59 Standard error of estimate = 386.26
Coefficient of Coefficient of
determination (r 2) = 0.32 determination (r2) = 0.53
Correlation coefficient (r) = 0.57 Correlation coefficient (r) = 0.73
Sample size = 17 Sample size = 17
Age Class s2 Sockeye Salmon
No. Eggs/Length
1344.94 + 4.94 (x) = y
Standard error of estimate = 572.49
Coefficient of
determination (r 2) = 0.02
Correlation coefficient (r) = 0.16
Sample size = 8
No. Eggs/Weight
2295.06 + 2.51 (x) = y
Standard error of estimate = 295.16
Coefficient of
determination (r 2) = 0.74
Correlation coefficient (r) = 0.86
Sample size = 8
A 1 0 5
Appendix Table 2-F-2. Regression analysis of age class 41 and 51 chum salmon
fecundities as a function of length and weight,1983.
Age Class 41 Chum Salmon
No. Eggs/Length
3326.88 + 10.66 (x) = y
Standard error of estimate = 274.44
Coefficient of
determination {r 2) = 0.74
Correlation coefficient {r) = 0.86
Sample size = 16
No. Eggs/Weight
995.78 + 0.64 (x) = y
Standard error of estimate = 231.66
Coefficient of
determination (r 2) = 0.82
Correlation coefficient (r) = 0.90
Sample size = 16
Age Class s1 Chum Salmon
No. Eggs/Length No. Eggs/Weight
1344.94 + 7.12 (x) = y 1766.14 + 0.38 (x) = y
Standard error of estimate = 210.05 Standard error of estimate = 213.36
Coefficient of Coefficient of
determination (r2) = 0. 72 determination (r2) = 0.71
Correlation coefficient {r) = 0.85 Correlation coefficient (r) = 0.84
Sample size = 11 Sample size = 11
A 1 0 6
-
~:
....
-
-
-
-
~
-
-
-
-
-
~-
....
-
-
-
-i
-
APPENDIX 2-G
1. SLOUGH AND STREAM LOCATIONS FROM RM 98.6 TO 161.2
2. OBSERVATION LIFE SLOUGHS WITH HABITAT ZONES DEFINED
3. MAINSTEM SUSITNA RIVER SPAWNING SITE TABLE AND FIGURES
4. ESCAPEMENT SURVEYS OF SLOUGHS AND STREAMS
5. TAGGED/UNTAGGED RATIOS FROM SPAWNING GROUND SURVEYS
....
"""' I
I
I
-
-
-I
-
-
I""'
I
I
I
-
\ • -River Mile
TALKEETNA STATION
Appendix Figure 2-G-1. Slough locations and primary tributary streams of the
Susitna River from the confluence of the Talkeetna and
Chulitna rivers to Upper Devil Canyon,l983.
A107
115
<Slough 8
Lane Creek
Slougi'l 6A,..
Oxbow
Slougi'l S ,..
A
Appendix Figure 2-G-1. Continued.
A 1 0 8
[ • -River Mile
""'~' Moose Slougi1
~lougll ac
--c Slougi1 80
Mckenzie Creek
Lower Mckenzie Creek
-
-
-
....
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
D 1 • -River Mite
-Sllerman Creek
-
-
-!
-
Slougn SA
Slough 9A
Appendix Figure 2-G-1. Continued.
A 1 0 9
-
• -River Mile I
Portage Creek
-
....
-
Slaugh 22 -
-
E -~ Slougtl 21
Appendix Figure 2-G-1. Continued.
-A 1 1 0
-
-
-
-
.....
-
1•-RIVER MIL.Ej
Appendix Figure 2-G-1. Continued.
-PROPOSED
DEVIL CANYON
DAM SITE
A 1 1 1
----------~---
MOOSE SLOUGH . ·.:
·~:
..
~
/
123.5 EB
0
I
FEET
400
I
Appendix Figure 2-G-2. Moose Slough map with habitat locations defined,l983.
A 1 1 2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
....
-
-
-,
-
-
-
-I
ZONE 2
\-:i
'• -
tl) -~ ..
::::, . . , .. . , ..
'·.
~; ..
' ..
·: ..
:
'• ..
SLOUGH SA
0 400
Appendix Figure 2-G-3. Slough 8A map with habitat locations defined,l983.
A 1 1 3
-
....
-
-
~
~
1---tl)
~
(/) -
\ ~
SLOUGH 9
0 400
I I
FEET -'1
Appendix Figure 2-G-4. Slough 9 map with habitat locations defined,l98J.
-
A 1 1 4
-
-
Q::
~ ~
~
'
~ Q::
~
<:
~
......
r-<I)
~
Cl) -
-
SLOUGH II
0
I
FEET
Appendix Figure 2-G-5. Slough 11 map with habitat locations defined,l983.
A 1 1 5
5
400
I
BCHUM
~ SPAWNING AREA
0 500
I I I
FEET
Appendix Figure 2-G-6. Mainstem Susitna River chum salmon spawning areas at RM 115.0 approximately,l983.
J . -]
-1 1
Ef) RM 119
W/21 CHUM SPAWNING
fllll AREA
0 GOO
I I I
ftET
Appendix Figure 2-G-7. Mainstem Susitna River chum salmon spawning area at RM 119.0 approximately,l983.
)>
J
E9
RM 131.0
~ CHUM a COHO
W SPAWN INI ARlA
0 rK>O
I I I
FEET
Appendix Figure 2-G-8. Mainstem Susitna River chum and coho salmon spawning areas at RM 131.1 approximately,
1983.
I .J .I J 1
)>
1 1 --1 1 1
ffi RM 1'36
FJJJJ CHUM SPAWNING
ftiUJ AREA
o roo
I I I
FEET
Appendix Figure 2-G-9. Mainstem Susitna River chum salmon spawning areas at RM 136.1 and 136.8
approximate1y,l983.
......
1\)
0
J
E9 RM 138.5
RIVER----
~SOCKEYE 6 CHUM
W SPAWNING AREA
0 GOO
l I I
FEET
Appendix Figure 2-G-10. Mainstem Susitna R1ver sockeye and chum salmon spawning areas at RM 138.6 to
138.9 approximately, 1983.
.I J ] J
.. J 1 --I
Appendix Table 2-G-1. Mains tern Sus itna River salmon spawning locations and survey results, 1983.
location Survey
River Mile legal Date Method Distance Chinook
No, Caught/Observed
Sockeye Pink Chum Coho Remarks
115.0 S07N28W040CB 9/12 Visua 1 300 yards 0 0 0 20 0 low mainstem flows exposed chum salmon.
119.0 S16N29W04CDD 9/19 Visua 1 1/8 mile 0 0 17 0 Chum observed spawning over redds in mainstem
water. low turbidity and water flow allowed
)> high visibility of mainstem water.
~
1\) 131.1 S03N03W03DAB 10/1 Visua 1 200 yards 0 0 0 4 2 Spa111ning occurred 150 yards upstream of Fourth
~ of July Creek. Fish holding over redds.
136.1 S20N31W02080 9/9 Visual 50 yards 0 0 0 110 0 This mainstem side channel is described as
mainstem side channel zone Ill of Slough 11.
9/17 Visual 50 yards 0 0 0 67 0 Spawning in a 50 yard long pool.
136.8 S20N31W02BAA 9/9 Visual 100 yards 0 0 0 12 0 Chum were spawning along bank upstream from the
mouth of Gold Creek -freshly ~rted chum
salmon carcass found on the same bank.
138.6 to S09N31W020CD g/15 Vlsua 1 1/4 mfl e 0 11 0 56 0 Chum and sockeye observed spawning along rtver
138.9 bank upstream of the mouth of Indian River and
Slough 17. low mainstem water flow and low
turbidity allowed for high visibility at the
time of sighting.
N
N
I
Appendix Table 2-G-2. Escapement survey counts of Susitna River sloughs between Chulitna River and Lower
Devil Canyon.l983.
Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Percent· Ch1no6K Ptnk ChUm Coho Survey
Slough Mile Date Conditions Surveved [ive Oeaa Tofa1 rtve
-s-offeye
De air Tofa1 [ive De ail Tofa1 ll1ve Dead Total [fve Deail Total
Slough 1 99.6 7/27 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/07 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/22 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 Excellent 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/05 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/12 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 2 100.2 1/21 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/07 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/22 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 Excellent 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 0 0 0
9/05 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2 23 0 0 0
9/12 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 12 49 0 0 0
9/19 Good 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 2 21 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 38 101.4 1/21 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B/04 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0· 1 0 1 0 0 0
B/12 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/26 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0
9/05 Excellent 100 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 Excellent 100 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/B Excellent 100 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 3A 101.9 7/15 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/27 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B/04 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B/12 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/26 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/05 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o· 0 0 0
9/19 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-~-·
I ) J
1 1 -1
Appendix Table 2-G-2. Continued.
-
Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Percent (;htnook sockeye rtnk Chum _l:_OilO
Slough Mtle Date Conditions Surveyed [ive De a a To£a1 [he Deao ToEal nve De a a Total [ive DeaC.I ToEal [ive Deaa Total
Slough 4 105.2 8/07 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/22 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/05 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .o
9/12 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/l Exc'ellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
)0/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
·Slough 5 107.6 7/27 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/07 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
8/22 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/05 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/12 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/l Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 o. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 6 108.2 1/27 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/07 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/22 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/05 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/12 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/)9 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 heel lent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 (j 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 6A 112.3 7/26 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/05 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 'l
8/22 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/05 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0
Appendix Table 2-G-2. Continued.
Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Percent Chinook Sockeye P1nk Chum Coho
Slough Htle Oate Conditions Surveyed [he De a <I Tohl [fve De a a Total [ive De a a Total ['ive Dea<l IOtaT ['ive Oea<l Total
Slough 6A 112.3 9/12 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(Continued) 9/19 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 .o 0 0 0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 7 113.2 8/22 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/05 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/12 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 8 113.7 8/05 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/22 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/05 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/12 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
---
Slough 80 121.8 7/26 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/03 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
8/12 Fair 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/18 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/25 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/01 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/09 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/17 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/25 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 8C 121.9 7/26 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/03 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/12 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8!18 Fair 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
J J -J _I .J
l 1 l ] ]
Appendix Table 2-G-2. Continued.
Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Percent Chinook Socke):e _Plnk cnum Coho
Slough Mile Date Conditions Surveyed [fve De ail Tofal [he De ail Tot:al [ive Deaf.l Total [Jve De ail ToEal [ive Deail ToEal
Slough 8C 121.9 8/25 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(Continued) 9/01 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/09 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 0 0 0
9/17 Good 100 0 0· 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
9/25 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 88 122.2 7/26 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/03 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/12 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/18 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/25 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/01 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
9/09 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 0 104 0 0 0
9/17 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 0 93 0 0 0
9/25 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 19 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 5 20 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0
Moose Slough 123.5 7/26 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/05 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 0 68 0 0 0
8/13 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/14 Poor 20 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 0
8/15 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/17 Poor 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 0
8/18 Good 100 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 13 2 15 0 0 0
8/20 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0
8/21 Good 100 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 17 0 17 0 0 0
8/23 Good 100 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 32 1 33 0 0 0
8/27 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/30 Poor 100 0 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 24 6 30 0 0 0
9/01 Poor 100 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 12 18 0 0 0
9/02 Poor 100 0 0 0 2 0 'l 0 0 0 4 8 12 0 0 0
9/0l Poor 100 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 4 13 17 0 0 0
9/05 Fair 100 0 0 0 13 0 13 0 0 0 8 11 19 0 0 0
9/07 Excellent 100 0 0 0 19 0 19 0 0 0 5 7 12 0 0 0
9/09 Excellent 100 0 0 0 21 1 22 0 0 0 6 9 15 0 0 0
9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 18 0 18 0 0 0 3 10 13 0 0 0
9/18 E:xcellent 100 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1\)
0>
Appendix Table 2-G-2. Continued.
River Survey
Slough Mile Date Conditions
Slough A1 124.6 7/26 Excellent
8/05 Good
8/15 Excellent
8/17 Excellent
8/19 Good
8/20 Excellent
8/21 Excellent
8/23 Excellent
8/27 Excellent
8/28 Good
8/30 Poor
9/01 Good
9/02 Excellent
9/03 Good
9/05 Excellent
9/07 Excellent
9/11 Excellent
9/18 Excellent
10/1 Excellent
10/8 Excellent
Slough A 124.7 7/26 Poor
8/05 Good
8/13 Good
8/20 Excellent
8/27 Excellent
9/02 Excellent
9/11 Excellent
9/18 Excellent
10/1 Excellent
10/8 Excellent
Slough 8A 125.4 7/26 Excellent
8/05 Good
8/13 Excellent
8/14 Excellent
8/15 Excellent
8/17 Excellent
8/19 Excellent
8/20 Good
J .I
Percent
Surveyed
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
too
20
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
too
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
50
50
50
50
100
·•··· ... I
Ch1nook SoCKele
[fve De ail Total [fve Oeaa
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 30 0
0 0 0 0 0
_)
Adult Salmon Enumerated
P1nk Chum Coho
Total [fve lleaa Total [fve lie a a Total [ive Deail Total
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 76 1 77 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 67 2 69 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 49 7 56 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 47 5 52 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 48 7 55 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 47 8 55 0 0 0
0 0 I 0 0 10 0 10 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 8 5 13 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 5 12 17 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 8 14 22 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 6 5 11 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 13 t6 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 21 21 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 43 43 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 3 0 3 2 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 16 0 16 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 25 0 25 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 29 0 29 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 31 0 31 0 0 0
30 0 0 0 16 1 17 0 0 0
0 0 ·o 0 21 5 26 0 0 0
J
~-'N
j ] I J ]
Appendix Table 2-G-2. Continued.
Adult Salmon fnumerated
River Survey Percent Chtnook Socke):e !_11'1~ Chum Coho
Slough Mile Date Conditions Surveyed [ive De a a Tobl [ive De a a Tofal [he Dead ToEal [he De a a ToEa I Dve Deail Total
Slough 8A 125.4 8/21 Good 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 29 0 0 0
(Continued) 8/23 fxcellent 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 1 25 0 0 0
8/27 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/28 Fair 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 1 19 0 0 0
8/30 Fair 100 0 0 0 32 0 32 0 0 0 34 3 37 0 0 0
9/01 Good 50 0 0 0 30 0 30 0 0 0 28 6 34 0 0 0
9/03 fxcellent 100 0 0 0 36 0 36 0 0 0 32 4 36 0 0 0
9/05 fxcellent 50 0 0 0 53 1 54 0 0 0 16 3 19 0 0 0
9/07 fxcellent 100 0 0 0 41 1 42 0 0 0 14 7 21 0 0 0
9/09 fxcellent 50 0 0 0 56 1 57 0 0 0 8 10 18 0 0 0
9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 63 3 66 0 0 0 7 4 11 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 53 3 56 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 25 3 28 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
)> 10/8 fxcellent 100 0 0 0 6 2 8 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
Slough 8 126.3 7/26 fxcellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/13 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 0 0
8/20 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/03 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/11 fxcellent 100 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 3 4 7 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 9 128.3 7/26 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/13 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/18 Poor 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0
8/20 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 2 51 0 0 0
8/20 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 50 0 0 0
8/27 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/03 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/05 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 31 152 0 0 0
9/07 Excellent 100 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 116 46 162 0 0 0
9/09 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120 36 156 0 0 0
9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 105 64 169 0 0 0
9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 91 76 167 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 125 165 0 0 0
10/l Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Appendix Table 2~G-2. Continued.
Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Percent Chinook Sockele P1nk Chum Coho
Slough Mile Date Conditions Surveved Clve De a a Total [tve Deaa Total Clve Deaa Total [ive OeaiJ Total [fve J:ieaiJ Total
Slough 98 129.2 7/26 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/13 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/20 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q. 0 0 0 0
8/27 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/03 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 9A 133.8 7/26 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/13 Ex-cellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/20 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/27 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
)> 9/03 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 93 4 97 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 88 17 105 0 0 0
10/1 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 4 14 0 0 0
Slough 10 133.8 7/26 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/13 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/20 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/27 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/03 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 Excellent 100 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
10/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
11 Mainstem 135.2 9/09 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 18 128 0 0 0
lone 3 9/16 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 67 57 124 0 0 0
9/23 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
--
Slough 11 135.3 7/26 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/05 Good 100 0 0 0 68 0 68 0 0 0 70 1 71 0 0 0
8/11 Excellent 50 0 0 0 48 0 48 7 0 7 12 0 12 0 0 0
8/12 Excellent 100 0 0 0 52 0 52 0 0 0 32 1 33 0 0 0
8/13 Good 100 0 0 0 36 0 36 0 0 0 54 1 55 0 0 0
.J J -J ]
l 1
Appendix Table 2-G-2. Continued.
Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Percent Chtnook Sockel:e l'lnk t.:num t.:ohO
Slough Mile Date Conditions Surveyed Uve De ail Toh1 Bve Ilea <I Tofal [ive Ilea <I Tofal [ive Ilea <I Tofal [ive Oea<l Tofal
Slough 11 135.3 8/14 Excellent 100 0 0 0 40 0 40 0 0 0 51 1 52 0 0 0
(Continued) 8/15 Excellent 100 0 0 0 27 0 27 0 0 0 91 0 91 0 0 0
8/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 71 0 71 0 0 0
8/20 Excellent 100 0 0 0 34 0 34 0 0 0 70 5 75 0 0 0
8/22 Good 100 0 0 0 64 0 64 0 0 0 106 2 108 0 0 0
8/25 Good 100 0 0 0 56 0 56 0 0 0 76 2 78 0 0 0
8/27 Good 100 0 0 0 98 0 98 0 0 0 119 6 125 0 0 0
8/28 Good 100 0 0 0 92 0 92 0 0 0 125 13 138 0 0 0
8/30 Good 100 0 0 0 105 0 105 0 0 0 132 19 151 0 0 0
9/01 Good 100 0 0 0 109 0 109 0 0 0 114 24 138 0 0 0
9/03 Excellent 100 0 0 0 128 2 130 0 0 0 135 48 183 0 0 0
9/05 Excellent 100 0 0 0 133 5 138 0 0 0 105 60 165 0 0 0
9/07 Excellent 100 0 0 0 192 5 197 0 0 0 128 72 200 0 0 0
9/09 Excellent 100 0 0 0 236 5 241 0 0 0 104 83 187 0 0 0
9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 237 11 248 0 0 0 77 73 150 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 229 9 238 0 0 0 94 144 238 0 0 0
9/25 Excellent 100 0 0 0 180 21 201 0 0 0 53 108 161 0 0 0
10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 111 13 124 0 0 0 17 63 80 0 0 0
10/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 60 13 73 0 0 0 10 65 75 0 0 0
Slough 12 135.4 9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 13 135.9 8/20 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/27 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/01 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0
9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 14 135.9 8/20 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/27 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/01 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/11 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Appendix Table 2-G-2. Continued.
Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Percent Chinook s-ockeye Pfnk Chum Coho
Slough Mile Date Conditions Surveved [1ve De ail Toh1 nve Ilea a Tot:a 1 [he De ail Total [lYe De ail Total llfve Dead Total
Slough 15 137.2 7/25 Fair 100 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/04 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/11 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/18 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/25 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 0
9/03 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 14
9/09 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
9/15 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/24 . Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 16 137,3 7/25 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
)> 8/04 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/11 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/25 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/03 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/09 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/15 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/22 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 17 138.9 7/25 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/04 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/11 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 28 5 0 5
8/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 33 0 33 0 0 0
8/25 Excellent 100 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 89 1 90 0 0 0
9/03 Excellent 100 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0
9/09 Excellent 100 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 2 4 6 0 0 0
9/15 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0
9/22 Excellent 100 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 18 139.1 9/09 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/15 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/22 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
] J J J .J
~~~ l ~1 ~·· ~l 1 1 I -l
; ;f'
Appendix Table 2-G-2. Continued.
Adult Salmon Enumerated
Rfver Survey Percent Cbtnook Sockeye Ptnk Chum Coho
Slough Mile Date Condfttons Surveyed [ive De ail To£a1 [lve De a a To£a1 [tve De ail Total [lve De ail Total [ive Oeaa To£a1
Slough 19 139.7 7/25 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/04 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/11 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/25 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I 2 0 0 0
9/03 Excellent 100 0 0 0 I 0 I 0 0 0 2 I 3 0 0 0
9/09 · Excellent 100 0 0 0 4 I 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/15 Excellent 100 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/22 Excellent 100 0 0 0 2 I 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I , 10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 20 140.0 7/25 hcellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
)> 8/04 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 7 0 7 0 0 0
8/11 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0· 0 0 57 5 62 0 0 0
8/25 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/03 Good 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 30 63 0 0 0
9/09 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 34 39 0 0 0
9/15 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 23 0 0 0
9/22 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Slough 21 141.1 7/25 hcellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (I 0 0
8/04 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 1 0 0 0
8/11 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0
8/18 Excellent 100 0 0 0 45 0 45 0 0 0 149 5 154 0 0 0
8/20 Poor 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I 0 0 0
8/22 Poor 75 0 0 0 34 0 34 0 0 0 76 5 81 0 0 0
8/23 Poor 100 0 0 0 53 0 53 I 0 I 99 19 118 0 0 0
8/25 Poor 100 0 0 0 0 I I 0 0 0 I 6 7 0 0 0
9/02 Excellent 50 0 0 0 86 0 86 0 0 0 Bl 0 81 0 0 0
9/09 Excellent 100 0 0 (I 180 17 197 0 0 0 149 170 319 0 0 0
9/15 bcellent 100 0 0 o. 139 30 169 0 0 0 86 161 247 0 0 0
9/22 Excellent 100 0 0 0 45 33 78 0 0 0 20 180 zoo 0 0 0
10/3 Excellent 100 0 0 0 4 6 10 0 0 0 9 7 16 0 0 0
10/8 Excellent 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 I 0 0 0
(U
1\)
Appendix Table 2-G-2. Continued.
River Survey Percent
Slough Hile Date Conditions Surveyed
Slough 22 144.5 8/18 Excellent 100
8/25 Poor 100
9/0l' Poor 100
9/09 Excellent 100
9/l!i · Excellent 100
9/22 Excellent 100
10/3 Excellent 100
Slough 21A 145.3 8/18 Excellent 100
8/25 Excellent 100
9/02 Excellent 100
9/09 Excellent 100
9/15 Excellent 100
9/22 Excellent 100
10/3 Excellent 100
J J 1 -J --I -:-1
Ch1nook
Uve De ail Tohl
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
I
Adult Salmon Enumerated
Sockeye !'_lnk Chum Coho ·
ll fve ueaa JOta! rrve-·neail Total .1ve Dead Total nve lleail Total
0 0 0 0 0 0 109 5 114 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 25 73 98 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 12 39 51 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 11 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .o 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I "--_I J ~ ]
l -----. -~-1
Appendix Table 2-G-3. Escapement survey counts of Susitna River tributary streams between Chulitna River
and Upper Devil Canyon,l983.
Survey ~dult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Survey Distance Cninook ~s-ocYeve P1nk Chum Coho
Stream Mile Date Method Conditions Hiles Tlve -rread Total L1Ve Dead Total lhe Dead Total Uve Dead Total Uve Dead Total
Whiskers Creek 101.4 7/15 F Excellent 0.25 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/25 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/4 F Poor 0.25 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/12 F Poor 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4
8/26 F Poor 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5
9/5 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 0 55
9/9 F Fafr 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 50
9/10 F Poor 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 32
9/24 A Excellent 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 5 115
10/1 A Poor 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 A Good 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 6
Chase Creek 106.9 7/21 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/22 F Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/1 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/12 F Good 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/27 F [llcellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/6 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/24 A Excellent 1.20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 12
10/1 A Good 1.20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 6
10/1 F bee 11 ent 0,75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 A hcellent 1.20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
10/8 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Slash Creek 111.2 1/21 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/5 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/22 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 F Excellent 0,25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (l 0
9/5 F Ellcellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/12 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 F heel lent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/2 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Gash Creek 111.6 7/27 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/5 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/22 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/5 F Excellent 0. 75 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
--
Appendix Table 2-G-3. Continued.
Survey Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Survey Distance Ch1nook sock eve P1nk Chum Coho
Stream Mile Date Mettiod Conditions Hiles live Dead Total Uve Dead Total uve ueao 1otal L1Ye Dead Total llve Oead Total
Gash Creek 111.6 9/12 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(Continued) 9/19 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 1 19
10/2 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 I 16
lane Creek 113.6 7/12 F Excellent 1.50 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 ··-0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/21 F Excellent 1.50 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/28 F Excellent 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/2 A Excellent 1.50 10 2 12 0 0 0 0 0 ··o 0 0 0 0 0 0
815 F Excellent 0.25 6 0 6 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
u/15 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 18 ~6 0 6 0 0 0
8/22 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 28 2 1 3 0 0 0
8/29 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 2 14 1 0 1 0 0 0
9/5 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/12 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
9/24 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
10/1 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 A Excellent 2.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
lower McKenzie 116.2 1/21 F Excellent 0,75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'
Creek 8/5 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 17 1 0 1 0 0 0
8/22 F Excellent o. 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 5 1 0 1 0 0 0
8/29 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/5 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 o· 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/12 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4
9/24 F Fair 3.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 5
10/1 F Excellent 0.75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 18
10/8 A fxcellent 2.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 F Excellent o. 75 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 4
Upper McKenzie 116.7 1/21 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Creek 8/5 F · Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
fl/15 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/22 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 F fxcellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/5 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/12 F fxcellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/l F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
J J J
. ) 1 l 1 ~···~·}
Appendix Table 2-G-3. Continued.
Survey Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Survey Oi stance Chinook ~ockeve Pfnk Chum Coho
Stream Mile Date Method Conditions Mtles uve oead TotaT Tive lrea<f T citaT T ve ueaa Iota 1 Uve Dead Total uve uead Total
little Portage 117.7 7/27 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Creek 8/5 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/15 F Exct>llent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0
8/22 F Fair 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/5 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/12 F Excellent 0,25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/19 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/l F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
•..
Oeadhorse Creek 120.8 8/15 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/22 F .Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ·o 0 0 0 0
8/30 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/6 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/13 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
)> 9/17 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/25 F Exce 11 ent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5th of July 123.7 ·7/21 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 'o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Creek 7/26 F Excellent 0.25' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/5 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0
8/13 F Good 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/20 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 (l 0 0 0 0 0
8/27 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 J 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/3 F Good 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/11 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 F Poor 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 A Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Skull Creek 124.7 8/5 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/13 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/20 F Exce 11 ent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/27 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/3 F Good 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/11 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 F Excellent 0,25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 A Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Appendix Table 2-G-3. Continued.
Survey Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Survey Dt stancE Ch1nook soc~eye Ptnk Chum Coho
Stream Mile Date Method Conditions Miles Uve Oead Total uve oead Total uve Dead Total Uve Dead lotal uve Dead Total
Sherman CrPek 130.8 8/7 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/14 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/21 F Good 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/29 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/11 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 A Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4th of July Creek 131.0 7/10 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/21 F Excellent 1.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/26 F Excellent 1.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/2 F Excellent 0.50 4 2 . 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/5 F Excellent 0.50 6 0 6 0 0 0 25 0 25 11 0 11 0 0 0
8/13 F Good 0.50 3 0 3 0 0 0 20 0 20 53 1 54 0 0 0
)> 8/20 F Excellent 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 15 78 109 3 112 0 0 0
8/27 F Good 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 9 32 143 5 148 1 0 1·
...... 9/3 F Fair 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 11 16 14 30 0 0 0
9/11 F Excellent o.so 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 6 24 2 0 2
9/18 F Excellent 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 6 54 2 1 3
10/1 F Poor 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 F Excellent 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 5 14 2 0 2
Gold Creek 136.7 7/24 A Excellent 7.00 19 4 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/29 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/1 A Excellent 7.00 13 2 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
R/7 f' Excellent 0.25 5 1 6 0 0 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/14 F Poor 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/21 F Poor 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
d/29 F Good 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/10 F Poor 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 F Poor 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 F Good 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 A Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Indian River 138.6 7/?.5 A Excellent 16.00 1172 21 1193 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B/2 A Excellent 16.00 366 40 406 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/9 A Poor 16.00 6 2 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/26 A Good 16.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 104 151 174 187 361 16 0 16
9/3 A Good 16.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 50 118 33 0 33
9/10 A Excellent 16.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 65 120 53 0 53
.I 1 .I J _I _j
1 1 ] l
Appendix Table 2-G-3. Continued.
Survey Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Survey Distance l:htnook Sockeve l'lnk ~.;num Coho
Stream Mile Date folethod Conditions foliles uve Dead total Uve Dead Total Llve ueaa total uve ueaa Tota 1 llVe Dead Total
Indian River 138.6 9/24 A Excellent 16.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 38
(Continued) 10/l A Good 16.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 17
10/8 A Good 16.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 18
7/27 F Fair 1.00 22 18 40 0 0 0 36 0 36 76 0 76 0 0 0
8/4 F Good 1.00 3 1 4 0 0 0 692 4 696 314 0 314 0 0 0
8/12 F Good 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 667 8 675 455 39 494 0 0 0
8/19 F Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 1 0 1 837 49 886 673 138 811 27 0 27
8/27 F Fair 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 185 289 295 439 734 21 1 22
9/3 F Poor 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/10 f Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 153 171 15 0 15
9/16 f Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 94 I08 7 0 7
9/22 f Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I5 0 15
10/3 F Excellent l.OO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5
Jack long Creek 144.5 7/24 A Excellent 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/1 F Excellent 0.25 3 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/4 F Excellent 0.25 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/12 f Excellent 0.25 0 1 1 0 0 0 5 0. 5 2 0 2 0 0 0
8/18 f Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 2 0 0 0
8/25 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/2 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/10 f Excellent 0.25 0 0 o· 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/15 f Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0 ! 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/22 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I0/1 f Excellent 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 I
10/3 A Poor 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Portaqe Creek 148.9 7/25 A Excellent 25,00 3123 17 3I40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/9 A Poor 25.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/26 A Excellent 25.00 3 2 5 0 0 0 15 20 35 424 102 526 0 0 0
9/4 A Good 25.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 86 55 141 0 0 0
9/10 A Excellent 25.00 0 .o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 8 0 1 1
9/18 A Excellent 25.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 8
9/24 A Excellent 25.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 15
10/1 A Fafr 25.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
10/8 A Excellent 25.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6
9/9 f Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/4 F Excellent 0.25 5 0 5 0 0 0 285 0 285 762 0 262 0 0 0
8/12 F Good 0.25 1 3 4 0 0 0 50 0 50 67 I 611 0 0 0
8/18 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 1 57 25 1 26 2 0 2
B/25 F Fair 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0
Appendix Table 2-G-3. Continued.
Survey Adult Salmon Enumerated
River Survey Survey Distance Ch1nook sockeye PtnJ( Qtum Coho
Stream •me Date Method Conditions Miles LlYe Dead Total uve Dead Total uve Dead Total uve Dead Total ltve Dead Total
Portage Creek 146.6 9/2 F Poor 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(Continued) 9/9 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/15 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
9/22 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/3 F Excellent 0.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cheechako Creek 152,5 7/24 A Excellent 1.25 16 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6/1 A Excellent 1.25 25 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/9 A Good 1.25 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/26 A Fair 1.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/4 A Good 1.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/10 A Excellent 1.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/16 A Excellent 1.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/24 A Excellent 1.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 A Excellent 1.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
)> 10/6 A Excellent 1.25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chinook Creek 156.6 7/24 A Excellent 1.00 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/1 A Excellent 1.00 8 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/9 A Poor 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/26 A Fair 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/4 A Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/10 A Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/17 A Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/24 A Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 A Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/6 A Excellent 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Devil Creek 161.0 7/24 A Excellent 0,50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/l A Excellent 0,50 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/2 A Excellent 0.50 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/9 A Excellent 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8/26 A Excellent 0.50 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/4 A Excellent 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/10 A Excellent 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/18 A Excellent 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9/24 A Excellent 0.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/1 A Excellent 0,50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
10/8 A Excellent 0.50 0 0 0· 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
J .I .I J
)>
1 1 I .. ) 1
Appendix Table 2-G-4. Chinook salmon spawning ground surveys of selected spawning areas and resultant
tagged to untagged ratios,l983.
LOCATION SUNS~INE TAGS TALKEETNA TAGS CURRY TAGS
River Survey rayged Total Ratto Talged Total Ratio Tag~ed Total
Spawning Area Htle Date Conditions r) Untagged (c) (c/r) r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c)
..
Montana Creek 77.0 7/14 Excellent 63 1578 1641 26.0 6 1635 1641 273.5 .4 1637 1641
7/16 Excellent 4 64 68 17.0 2 66 68 34.0
Rabideaux Creek 83.1 8/4 Good 1 23 24 24.0
Clear Creek 97.1 7/7 Excellent 33 461 494 15.0 7 487 494 70.6
8/1 Excellent 15 245 260 17.3 1 259 260 260.0 1 259 260
Prairie Creek 97.1 7/20 Excellent 57 814 871 15.3
8/10 Excellent 0 10 10 0.0
Fish Creek 97.1 7/19 Excellent 1 6 7 7.0
Chulitna River 97.8 7/19 Excellent 26 3816 3842 147.8
Middle Fork 8/3 Excellent 4 879 883 220.8 1 882 883 883,0
Bunco Creek 97.8 8/2 Excellent 8 483 491 61.4 3 488 491 163.7 1 490 491
Whiskers Creek 101.4 7/15 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0
lane Creek 113.6 7/21 Excellent 0 4 . 4 0.0 1 3 4 4.0 1 5 6
8/5 Excellent 1 5 6 6.0 2 4 6 3.0 1 5 6
4th of July 131.0 8/5 Excellent 0 6 6 o.o 0 6 6 0.0 0 6 6
Creek 8/13 Good 1 2 3 3.0 1 2 3 3.0 0 3 3
Gold Creek 136.7 8/7 Excellent 0 5 5 o.o 0 5 5 0.0 3 2 5
Indian River 138.6 1!27 Fair 2 16 18 9.0 1 17 18 18.0 2 16 18
8/2 Excellent 4 47 51 12.8 4 47 51 12.8 5 46 51
8/3 Excellent 2 80 82 41.0 4 78 82 20.5 10 72 82
8/4 Good 0 3 3 o.o 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3
Jack long Cr. 144.5 8/1 Excellent 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3
Portage Creek 148.9 8/1 Excellent 3 95 98 32.7 7 91 98 14 .o· 3 95 98
8/4 Excellent 0 5 5 0.0 0 5 5 o.o 0 5 5
8/12 Good 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1
Ratio
(c/r)
410.3
260.0
491.0
6.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
1.7
9.0
10.2
8.2
0.0
o.o
32.7
0.0
0.0
)>
Appendix Table 2-G-5. Sockeye salmon spawning ground .surveys of selected spawning areas and resultant
tagged to untagged ratios,l983.
LOCATIOil SUNSHlNE TAGS TALKEETNA TAGS CURRY TAGS
River Survey Tafged Total Ratio Tag~ed Total Ratio Tag~ed Total
Spawning Area Mile Date Conditions r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c)
Prairie Creek 97.1 8/10 Good 12 27 39 3.3
Fish Creek 97.1 8/16 Excellent 2 10 12 6.0
8/22 Good 0 1 1 o.o
Larson Creek 97.1 8/4 Excellent 1 15 16 16.0
flyers Creek 97.8 8/16 Excellent 3 55 58 19.3
Unnamed Trlb. to 97.8 8/5 Excellent 17 220 237 13.9
Tokositna R.
Slough 38 101.4 9/5 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0
9/19 Excellent 0 5 5 0.0 1 4 5
10/8 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0
Moose Slough 123.5 8/14 Poor 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 o.o 0 3 3
8/24 Good 0 2 2 0.0 1 1 2 2.0 1 1 2
8/30 Poor 1 6 7 7.0 0 7 7 o.o 2 5 7
9/7 Excellent 5 14 19 3.8 5 14 19 3.8 4 15 19
9/13 Excellent 3 11 14 4.7 5 9 14 2.8 3 11 14
9/19 Excellent 0 8 8 0.0 ?. 6 8 4.0 0 8 8
Slough SA 125.1 ' 8/5 Good 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 o.o 0 1 1
8/19 Excellent 0 30 30 0,0 0 30 30 0.0 1 29 30
9/3 Exce 11 ent 3 33 36 12.0 7 29 36 5.1 4 32 36
9/11 Excellent 2 61 63 31.5 9 54 63 7.0 8 55 63
9/18 Excellent 1 52 53 53.0 7 46 53 7.6 7 46 53
10/l Excellent 0 25 25 0.0 1 24 25 25.0 3 22 25
10/8 Excellent 0 6 6 0.0 0 6 6 0.0 1 5 6
_I J . I _ .. 1 -J ... _J _j
Ratio
(c/r)
5.0
0,0
2.0
3.5
4.8
4.7
0.0
0.0
30.0
9.0
7.9
7.6
8.3
6.0
- l ] 1 ~-··· -~ 1 1
~-·
Appendix Table 2-G-5. Continued.
lOCATION SUNSHINE TAGS TAlKEETNA TAGS CURRY TAGS
River Survey Talged Total Ratto Tag)ed Total Ratto Tag;ed Total Ratio
Spawning Area Mile Date Conditions r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c) (c/r)
Slough B 126.3 9/11 Excellent 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 o.o 0 2 2 o.o
9/18 Excellent l 4 5 5.0 l 4 5 5.0 0 5 5 0.0
Slough 9 128.3 9/7 Excellent 0 2 2 0.0 l 1 2 2.0 0 2 2 0.0
Slough 9A 133.8 9/11 Excellent 0 l 1 0.0 0 l l 0.0 0 l l 0.0
)> Slough lO 133.8 10/l Excellent 0 1 l 0.0 0 l l 0.0 0 l l 0.0
Slough ll 135.3 8/5 Good 12 56 68 5.7 18 50 68 3.8 5 63 68 13.6
8/13 Good 8 28 36 4.5 7 29 36 5.1 0 36 36 0.0
8/20 Excellent 2 32 34 17.0 3 31 34 11.3 4 30 34 8.5
8/27 Good 11 67 98 8.9 6 92 98 16.3 10 88 98 9.8
9/3 Excellent 17 111 128 7.5 10 118 128 12.8 10 118 128 12.8
9/11 Excellent 23 214 237 10.3 12 225 237 19.8 17 220 237 13.9
9/18 Excellent 15 214 229 15.3 13 216 229 l7 .6 11 218 229 20.8
9/25 Excellent 13 167 180 13.8 11 169 180 16.4 7 173 180 25.7
10/3 Excellent 11 100 Ill 10.1 9 102 Ill 12.3 3 108 Ill 37.0
10/11 Excellent l 59 60 60.0 2 58 60 30.0 0 60 60 0.0
Slough 17 138.9 8/18 Excellent 0 1 l 0.0 0 1 l 0.0 0 1 1 o.o
8/25 Excellent 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 . 0.0 0 2 2 0.0
9/3 Excellent 0 l l 0.0 0 1 l ·o.o 0 1 1 o.o
9/9 Excellent 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 0.0
9/22 Excellent 0 6 6 0.0 0 6 6 0.0 l 5 6 6.0
10/8 Excellent 0 2 2 o.o 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 o.o
Appendix Table 2-G-6.
LOCATION
River
Spawn t ng Area Mile
Birch Creek 88.4
Fish Creek 97.1
Chase Creek 106.9
Lane Creek 113.6
..... Lower McKenzie 116.2
Creek
Little Portage 117.7
Creek
5th of July 123.7
Creek
Skull Creek 124.7
Slough A 124.7
Slough BA 125.1
4th of July 131.0
Creek
Slough 11 135.3
Gold Creek 136.7
·-J
Pink salmon spawning ground surveys of selected spawning areas and resultant
tagged to untagged ratios,1983.
SUNSHINE TAGS TALKEETNA TAGS CURRY TAGS
Survey Ta7ged Total Ratto Tafged Total Ratto Tag~ed Total
Date Conditions r) Untagged (c) (c/r) r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c)
8/16 Excellent 62 440 502 8.1 2 500 502 251.0
8/16 Excellent 45 441 486 10.8 2 466 468 234.0 1 467 468
8/22 Good 10 57 67 6.7
8/12 Good 0 5 5 o.o 2 3· 5 2.5 2 5 7
8/5 Excellent 0 5 5 0.0 0 5 5 0.0
8/15 Excellent 1 27 28 28.0 1 27 28 28.0
8/22 Excellent 4 24 28 7.0 3 25 28 9.3 1 27 28
8/29 Excellent 0 12 12 0,0 2 10 12 6,0
8/15 Excellent 1 16 17 17.0 4 13 17 4.3 4 13 17
8/22 Excellent 1 3 4 4.0 2 2 4 2.0
8/29 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0
8/22 Excellent 0 6 6 0.0 0 6 6 0.0 1 5 6
8/29 Excellent 1 1 2 2.0 1 r 2 2.0 1 1 2
8/13 Good 3 6 9 3.0 4 5 9 2.3 0 9 9
8/20 Excellent 0 6 6 o.o 3 3 6 2.0 0 6 6
8/27 Excellent 0 3 3 0.0 2 1 3 1.5 0 3 3
8/20 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1
8/27 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1
8/5 Good 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 0.0 1 2 3
8/15 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1
8/5 Excellent 2 23 25 12.5 7 18 25 3.6 5 20 25
8/13 Excellent 2 18 20 10.0 6 14 20 3.3 4 16 20
8/20 Excellent 7 56 63 9.0 16 47 63 3.9 3 60 63
8/27 Good 3 20 23 7.7 4 19 23 5.8 2 21 23
Bill Excellent 0 7 7 0.0 1 6 7 7.0 0 7 7
8/7 Excellent 0 7 7 o.o 2 5 7 3.5 3 4 7
.J ]
Ratto
(c/r)
468.0
3.5
28.0
4.3
6.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
0,0
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.0
5.0
5.0
21.0
11.5
0.0
2.3
]
l ) l -l
Appendix Table 2-G-6. Continued.
lOCATION SUNSHINE TAGS TAlKEETNA TAGS CURRY TAGS
-
River Survey Tafged Total Ratio Tafged Total Ratio Tagged Total Ratio
Spawning Area Mile Date Conditions r) Untagged (c) (c/r) r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r) Untagged (c) (c/r)
I
i t )>
t ...... !
Slough IS I37.2 8/25 Good 0 1 1 0.0 0 I I 0.0 0 1 I 0.0
Indian River 138.6 7/27 Fair 0 36 36 o.o 22 I4 36 1.6 7 29 36 5.1
8/4 Good 75 616 691 9.2 172 519 691 4.0 55 636 69I I2.6
8/12 Good 62 605 667 10.8 146 521 667 4.6 56 611 667 11.9
8/19 Excellent 38 798 836 22.0 120 716 836 7.0 49 787 836 17.1
8/27 Excellent 3 101 104 34.7 1 I03 104 104.0 7 97 104 14.9
~ Jack Long Creek 144.5 8/12 Excellent 0 5 5 o.o 2 3 5 2.5 1 4 5 5.0
(,.) Portage Creek I48.9 8/4 Excellent 32 214 246 7.7 77 169 246 3.2 27 219 246 9.I
8/12 Good 5 35 40 8.0 15 25 40 2.7 6 34 40 6.7
8/18 Excellent 2 54 56 28.0 15 41 56 3.7 6 50 56 9.3
)>
Appendix Table 2-G-7. Chum salmon spawning ground surveys of selected spawning areas and resultant
tagged to untagged ratios .1983.
lOCATION SUNSHINE TAGS TAlKEETtiA TAGS CURRY TAGS
River Survey Tagged Total Ratto Ta~ged Total Ratio Tag~ed Total
Spawn1 ng Area Mile Date Conditions (r) Untagged (c) (c/r) r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c)
Prairie Creek 97.1 8/10 Excellent 0 1 1 o.o
Clear Creek 97.1 8/1 Excellent 165 1551 1716 10.4 1 1715 1716 1716.0
Fish Creek 97.1 8/16 Excellent 1 7 8 8.0
8/22 Excellent 1 6 7 7.0
Troublesome 97.8 8/23 Excellent 0 79 79 0.0 1 78 79 79.0
Creek
Byers Creek 97.8 8/16 Excellent 0 27 27 0.0
Slough 2 100.4 8/29 Excellent 1 9 10 10.0 2 8 10 5,0
9/5 Excellent 2 19 21 10.5 2 19 21
9/12 Excellent 3 34 37 12.3 2 35 37 18.5 1 36 37
9/19 Good 2 19 21 10.5
Slough 6A 112.3 9/5 Good 0 6 6 o.o 0 6 6 0.0 1 5 6
-lane Creek 113.6 6/15 Excellent 0 6 6 o.o 0 6 6 0.0
8/22 Excellent 0 3 3 o.o 0 3 3 0.0
8/29 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 o.o
lower McKenzie 116.2 6/15 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0
Creek 8/22 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0
~Ia ins tern 1 '9.0 9/19 Excellent 0 17 17 0.0 0 17 17' 0.0
Slough 8C 121.9 9/9 Good 1 3 4 4.0 0 4 4 0.0
9/17 Good 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 o.o
Slough 811 122.2 9/9 Good 0 104 104 0,0 0 104 104 0.0 0 104 104
9/17 Good 0 93 .93 0.0 0 93 93 0.0 0 93 93
9/25 Good 0 19 19 0.0 0 19 19 0.0 0 19 19
10/l Excellent 0 20 20 0.0 0 20 20 o.o 0 20 20
10/8 Excellent 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3
Hoose Slough 123.5 8/5 Excellent 11 57 68 6.2 16 52 68 4.3 4 64 68
B/18 Good 0 15 15 0.0 0 15 15 0.0 1 14 15
.I J ]
Ratio
(c/r)
10.5
37.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 o.o
17.0
15.0
1 1
Appendix Table 2-G-7. Continued.
LOCATION SUNSHINE TAGS TALKEETNA TAGS CURRY TAf.S
River Survey Targed Total Ratio Tafged Total Ratio Tag~ed Total Ratio
Spawning Area Mile · Date Condit tons r) lin tagged (c) (c/r) r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c) (c/r)
Moose Slough 123.5 8/21 Good 1 16 17 17.0 0 17 17 0.0 0 17 17 0.0
(Continued) 8/23 Good 2 31 33 16.5 0 33 33 o.o 0 33 33 0.0
9/5 Fafr 0 19 19 o.o 0 19 19 0.0 0 19 19 0.0
9/7 Excellent 0 12 12 0.0 0 12 12 0.0 0 12 12 0.0
9/9 Excellent 1 14 15 15.0 0 15 15 0.0 0 15 15 0.0
9/11 Excellent 0 17 17 0.0 1 16 17 17.0 0 17 17 0.0
9/18 Excellent 0 8 8 0.0 0 8 8 0.0 0 8 8 o.o
5th of July Cr. 123.7 8/5 Good 0 4 4 0.0 0 4 4 0.0 1 3 4 4.0
Slough A' 124.6 8/5 Good 0 4 4 0.0 0 4 4 o.o 0 4 4 0,0 I
8/15 Excellent 6 71 77 12.8 4 73 77 19.3 5 72 77 15.4
8/17 Excellent 7 62 69 9.9 .6 63 69 11.5 5 64 69 13.8
8/19 Good 5 51 56 11.2 4 52 56 14.0 5 51 56 11.2
8/20 Excellent . 1 51 52 52.0 8 44 52 6.5 5 47 52 10.4
8/21 Excellent 0 55 55 o.o 5 50 55 11.0 4 51 55 13.8
8/23 Excellent 2 53 55 27.5 4 51 55 13.8 7 48 55 7.9
8/27 Excellent 1 9 10 10.0 0 10 10 0.0 0 10 10 0.0
8/28 Good 0 4 4 0,0 0 4 4 0.0 0 4 4 0.0
9/l Good 0 17 17 0.0 0 17 17 o.o 0 17 17 0.0
9/2 Excellent 1 21 22 22,0 0 22 22 0.0 0 22 22 0.0
9/3 Good 0 11 11 0.0 0 11 11 0.0 0 11 11 0.0
9/5 Excellent 0 16 16 0.0 0 16 16 o.o 0 16 16 0.0
9/7 Excellent 0 21 21 0.0 0 21 21 0.0 0 21 21 o.o
9/11 Excellent 0 43 43 0.0 0 43 43 0.0 0 43 43 0.0
Slough A 124.7 8/27 Exce 11 ent 0 2 2 o.o 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 0.0
Slough 8A 125.1 8/5 Good 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 0.0
8/13 Excellent 1 15 16 16.0 0 16 16 0.0 0 16 16 0.0
8/15 Excellent 2 23 25 12.5 0 25 25 o.o 0 25 25 0.0
8/17 Excellent 2 29 31 15.5 2 29 31 15.5 1 30 31 31.0
8/19 Excellent 3 14 17 5.7 0 17 17 0.0 1 16 17 17.0
8/20 Good 3 23 26 8,7 0 26 26 0.0 1 25 26 26.0
8/21 Good 2 27 29 14.5 4 ?5 29 7.3 3 26 29 9.7
8/23 Excellent 1 24 25 25.0 1 24 25 25.0 1 24 25 25.0
8/28 Fair 2 17 19 9.5 1 18 19 19.0 1 18 19 19.0
8/30 Fair 3 34 37 12.3 2 35 37 18.5 2 35 37 18.5
9/1 Good 0 34 34 0.0 1 33 34 34.0 2 32 34 17,0
Appendix Table 2-G-7. Continued.
lOCATION SUNSHINE TAGS TAlKEETNA TAGS CURRY TAGS
River Survey Tafged Total Ratio Talged Total Ratio Tag~ed Total Ratio
Spawning Area Mile Date Conditions r) Untagged (c) (c/r) r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c) (c/r)
Slough 8A 125.1 9/3 Excellent 3 33 36 12.0 0 36 36 o.o 2 34 36 18.0
( Con t1 nued) 9/5 Excellent 4 15 19 4.8 0 19 19 0.0 2 17 19 9.5
9/7 Excellent 1 20 21 21.0 0 21 21 o.o 1 20 21 21.0
9/9 Excellent 0 18 18 o.o 0 18 18 o.o 0 18 18 o.o
9/11 Excellent 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 0.0
9/18 Excellent 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 o.o 0 2 2 0.0
10/1 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0
10/8 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0
Slough 8 126.3 9/11 Excellent 0 7 7 0.0 0 7 7 0.0 1 6 7 7.0
)>
Slough 9 128.3 8/20 Good 2 48 50 25.0 3 47 50 16.7 2 48 50 25.0
9/5 Good 5 147 152 30.4 4 148 152 38.0 5 147 152 30.4
9/7 Excellent 5 157 162 32.4 6 156 162 27.0 6 156 162 27.0
9/9 Excellent 9 147 156 17.3 7 149 156 22.3 5 151 156 31.2
9/11 Excellent 10 157 167 16.7 6 161 167 27.8 3 164 167 . 55.7
9/18 Excellent 0 165 165 o.o 2 163 165 82.5 3 162 165 55.0
4th of July 131.0 8/5 Excellent 2 9 11 5.5 1 10 11 11.0 2 9 11 5.5
Creek 8/13 Good 10 44 54 5.4 3 51 54 18.0 3 51 54 18.0
8/20 Excellent 10 102 112 11.2 10 102 112 11.2 8 104 112 14.0
8/27 Good 10 190 200 20.0 6 194 200 33.3 3 197 200 66.7
9/3 Fair 2 28 30 15.0 0 30 30 o.o 0 30 30 0.0
9/10 Excellent 2 22 24 12.0 0 24 24 o.o 0 24 24 o.o
9/18 Excellent 4 50 54 13.5 4 50 54 13.5 2 52 54 27.0
10/8 Excellent 0 14 14 o.o 0 14 14 o.o 0 14 14 0.0
Slough 9A 133.8 9/11 Excellent 7 90 97 13.9 6 91 97 16.2 2 95 97 48.5
9/18 Excellent 5 100 105 21.0 6 99 105 . 17.5 2 103 105 52.5
10/8 Excellent 0 14 14 0.0 0 14 14 0.0 0 14 14 0.0
Slough 10 133.8 10/l Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0
10/11 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0
Mainstem 135.2 9/9 Excellent 3 125 128 42.7 4 124 128 32.0 6 122 128 21.3
9/16 Excellent 4 120 124 31.0 0 124 124 0.0 1 123 124 124.0
Slough 11 135.3 8/5 Good 9 62 71 7.9 12 59 71 5.9 9 62 71 7.9
8/11 Excellent 1 11 12 12.0 0 12 12 0.0 0 12 12 0.0
8/12 Excellent 3 30 33 11.0 2 31 33 16.5 0 33 33 0.0
I --
__ .J .·. J .J
--] ]
Appendix Table 2-G-7. Continued.
LOCATION SUNSHINE TAGS TALKEETNA TAGS CURRY TAGS
River Survey Tafged Total Ratio Tar 9ed Total Ratio Tag~ed Total Ratio
Spawning Area Mile Date Condit ions r) Untagged (c) (c/r) r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c) (c/r)
Slough 11 135.3 8/13 Good 8 47 55 6.9 6 49 55 9.2 6 49 55 9.2
(Continued) 8/14 Excellent 5 47 52 10.4 7 45 52 7.4 2 50 52 26.0
8/15 Exce 11ent 7 84 91 13.0 3 88 91 30.3 4 87 91 22.8
8/18 Excellent 1 70 71 71.0 5 66 71 14.2 1 70 71 71.0
8/20 Excellent 3 72 75 25.0 5 70 75 15.0 7 68 75 10.7
8/22 Good 5 103 108 21.6 5 103 108 21.6 5 103 108 21.6
8/25 Good 2 76 78 39.0 1 77 78 78.0 4 74 78 19.5
8/27 Good 7 118 125 17.9 1 124 125 125.0 8 117 125 15.6
8/28 Good 11 127 138 12.5 3 135 138 46.0 8 130 138 17.3
8/30 Good 8 143 151 18.9 5 146 151 30.2 5 146 151 30.2
9/l Good 7 131 138 19.7 2 136 138 69.0 4 134 138 34.5
9/3 Excellent 10 173 183 18.3 3 180 183 61.0 6 177 183 30.5
)> 9/5 Excellent 8 157 165 20.6 3 162 165 55.0 3 162 165 55.0
9/7 Excellent 13 187 200 15.4 4 196 200 50.0 5 195 200 40.0
9/9 Excellent 4 183 187 46.8 12 175 187 15.6 4 183 187 46.8
9/11 Excellent 23 127 150 6.5 12 138 150 12.5 17 133 150 8.9
9/18 Excellent 4 234 ?38 59.5 6 232 238 39.7 1 237 238 238.0
9/25 Excellent 6 155 161 26.8 5 156 161 32.2 0 161 161 0.0
10/3 Excellent 0 80 80 0.0 0 80 80 0.0 0 80 80 o.o
10/11 Excellent 1 74 75 75.0 2 73 75 37.5 0 75 75 0.0
Mains tern 136.7 9/9 Excellent 0 4 4 0.0 0 4 4 0.0 0 4 4 o.o
Slough 13 135.9 9/l bcellent 0 4 4 0.0 0 4 4 0.0 0 4 4 0.0
Slough 15 137.2 8/25 Good 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 o.o
9/9 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 o.o 0 1 1 0.0
Indian River 138.6 7/27 Fair 7 66 73 10.4 13 60 73 5.6 13 60 73 5.6
8/4 Good 29 272 301 10.4 43 258 301 7.0 15 286 301 20.1
8/12 Good 20 479 499 25.0 24 475 499 20.8 35 464 499 14.3
8/19 Excellent 23 594 617 26.8 27 590 6)7 22.9 22 595 617 28.0
8/26 Excellent 0 361 361 o.o 0 361 361 0.0 0 361 361 0.0
8/27 Excellent 12 710 722 60.2 8 714 722 90.3 12 710 722 60.2
9/3 Excellent 0 118 118 0.0 0 118 118 0.0 0 118 118 0.0
9/10 Excellent 4 161 165 41.3 0 165 165 o.o 0 165 165 0.0
9/16 Excellent l 106 107 107.0 0 107 107 o.o 0 107 107 0.0
Appendix Table 2-G-7. Continued.
LOCATION SUNSHINE TAGS TALKEETNA TAGS CURRY TAGS
Rtver Survey Tafged Total Ratio Tafged Total Ratio Tag,ed Total Ratio
Spawning Area Mile Date Conditions r) Untagged (c) (c/r) r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c) (c/r)
Matnstem 138.9 9/15 Excellent 1 55 56 56.0 1 55 56 56.0 2 54 56 28.0
Slough I7 I38.4 8/11 Good 1 27 28 28.0 1 27 28 28.0 1 27 28 28.0
8/18 EKcellent 4 29 33 8.3 0 33 33 o.o 2 31 33 16.5
8/25 Excellent 3 87 90 30.0 1 89 90 90.0 1 89 90 90.0
9/3 Excellent 0 2 2 o.o 0 2 2 o.o 0 2 2 0.0
9/9 Excellent 0 6 6 o.o 0 6 6 0.0 0 6 6 o.o
., 9/15 Excellent 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 o.o
Slough I9 139.7 8/25 Excellent 0 2 2 o.o 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 o.o
9/3 Excellent 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 0.0 0 3 3 0.0
)> Slough 20 140.0 8/4 Excellent 1 6 ' 7 7.0 0 7 7 0.0 1 6 7 7.0
8/18 Excellent 2 60 62 31.0 2 60 62 31.0 6 56 62 10.3 ....... 9/3 Good 1 62 63 63.0 0 63 63 0.0 1 62 63 63.0
-1:>-9/9 Excellent 1 38 39 39.0 0 39 39 0.0 0 39 39 0.0
00 9/15 Excellent 0 23 23 0.0 0 23 23 0.0 0 23 23 0.0
Slough 21 141.1 8/18 Excellent 7 147 154 22.0 6 I48 154 25.7 2 152 154 77.0
9/2 Excellent 4 77 81 20.3 3 78 81 27.0 1 80 81 81.0
9/9 Excellent 17 302 319 18.8 8 311 319 39.9 6 313 319 53.2
9/15 Excellent 8 239 247 30.9 3 244 247 82.3 1 246 247 247.0
9/22 Excellent 1 199 200 200.0 0 200 200 0.0 0 200 200 0.0
10/3 Excellent 0 16 16 0.0 0 16 16 0.0 1 IS 16 I6.0
10/8 Excellent 0 1 1 o.o 0 1 1 o.o 0 1 1 0.0
Slough 22 I44.3 8/18 Excellent 1 113 114 114.0 1 113 114 114.0 4 110 114 28.5
9/9 Excellent 1 97 98 98.0 0 98 98 o.o 0 98 98 0.0
9/15 Excellent 1 50 51 51.0 0 51 51 0.0 0 51 51 o.o
9/22 Excellent 0 11 11 0.0 0 11 11 0.0 0 11 11 0.0
Jack long Creek I44.5 8/12 Excellent 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 0.0
8/18 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0
Portaqe Creek I48. 9 8/4 Excellent 22 218 240 10.9 24 216 240 10.0 I4 226 240 17 .I
8/I2 Good 11 35 46 4.2 I 45 46 46.0 2 44 46 23.0
8/18 Excellent 4 22 26 6.5 1 25 26 26.0 0 26 26 o.o
8/26 Excellent 1 222 223 223.0 I 222 223 223.0 5 218 223 44.6
9/4 Good 0 220 220 0.0 1 2I9 220 220.0 1 219 220 220.0
9/10 Excellent 0 8 8 0.0 0 8 8 o.o 0 8 8 0.0
9/15 Excellent 0 1 I 0.0 0 I 1 0.0 0 I 1 0.0
J J 1 I 1 .I ) J
)>
l 1 -] 1 --1 ----1
g
Appendix Table 2-G-8. Coho salmon spawning ground surveys of selected spawning areas and resultant
tagged to untagged ratios,l983.
' LOCATION 1 SUNSHINE TAGS TALKEETNA TAGS CURRY TAGS
River Survey Ta~ged Total Ratto Ta~ged Total Ratio Tagrd Tota 1
Spawning Area Mile Date Conditions r) Untagged (c) (c/r) r) Untagged (c) (c/r) (r Untagged (c)
Question Creek 84.1 9/11 Fatr 45 105 150 3.3 8 142 150 18.8
Birch Creek 88.4 8/16 Excellent 42 218 260 6.2 1 259 260
Fish Creek 97.1 8/16 Excellent 6 29 35 5.8 1 34 35 35.0
8/22 Good 1 9 10 10.0
Byers Creek 97.8 8/16 Good 0 3 3 o.o
Whiskers Creek 101.4 8/26 Excellent 1 0 1 1.0
9/5 Excellent 8 47 55 6.9 5 50 55 11.0
9/19 Excellent 6 26 32 s.j 2 30 32
Slash Creek 111.2 10/2 Excellent 0 2 2 0.0 1 1 2 2.0
Gash Creek 111.6 9/19 Excellent 3 15 18 6.0 4 14 18 4.5 3 15 18
10/2 Excellent 0 14 14 0.0 0 14 14 0.0 1 13 14
Lane Creek 113.6 9/19 Excellent 0 2 2 o.o 1 1 2 2.0 1 1 2
9/24 Excellent 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0
Lower McKenzie 116.2 9/19 Excellent 2 2 4 2.0 0 4 4 0.0
Creek 9/24 Fair 0 4 4 0,0 0 4 4 0.0
10/1 Excellent 2 16 18 9.0 1 17 18 18.0 1 17 18
10/8 Excellent 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 0,0
4th of July 131.0 8/27 Good 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1 0.0 0 1 1
Creek 9/11 Excellent 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2 o.o 1 1 2
9/18 Excellent 1 1 2 2.0 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2
10/8 Excellent 0 2 2 o.o 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2
Slough 15 137.2 9/3 Excellent 3 11 14 4.7 1 13 14 14.0 2 12 14
9/24 Excellent 1 1 2 2.0 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2
Indian River 138.6 8/19 Excellent 6 21 27 4.5 10 17 27 2.7 3 24 27
8/27 Excellent 4 17 21 5.3 1 20 21 21.0 1 20 21
9/10 Excellent 2 11 13 6.5 0 13 13 0.0 2 11 13
9/16 Excellent 0 6 6 o.o 0 6 6 0.0 1 5 6
9/22 Excellent 5 10. 15 3.0 2 13 15 7.5 0 15 15
10/3 Excellent 1 4 5 5.0 2 3 5 2.5 0 5 5
Portage Creek 144.5 8/18 Excellent 1 l 2 2.0 0 2 2 0.0 0 2 2
Ratio
(c/r)
260.0
16.0
6.0
14.0
2.0
18.0
0.0
2.0 o.o
0.0
7.0 o.o
9.0
21.0
6.5
6.0
0.0
0.0
o.o
01
0
Appendix Table 2-G-9. Total 1981 sockeye salmon slough escapements between RM 98.6 and 161.0.
Slough
3A
8A
9
96
9A
11
17
19
21
TOTAL
River
Mile
101.9
125.1
128.3
129.2
133 •.
135.3
138.9
139.7
141.1
Total Fish.!/
Days
2,302.5
2,506.0
19,116.0
494.1
739.1
25 157.7
Peak Live-Dead Mean Observation !/ Slough
Survey Count Life fn Days Escapement
7
177
10
81
2
893
6
23
38
1 237
11.8
11.8
11.8
11.8
11.8
13 !/
195
18 !I
212
4!1
1,620
11 y
42
63
2 178
\ of Total
Slough Escapement
0.6
9.0
0.8
.. 9. 7
0.2 !
74.4
0.5
1.9
2.9
100.0
\ of Curry '!./
Station Escapement
0.5
7.0
0.6
7.6
0.1
57.9
0.4
1.5
2.3
77.9
l/ Number of fish days were calculated for sloughs that had peak survey counts > 15 fish. Refer to Section
2.4 for detailed data analysis procedures.
~/ Mean observation life values were computed from 1983 composite observation data.
ll Total slough escapement into sloughs having peak live-dead survey counts of~ 15 fish were computed by
multiplying the peak live-dead survey count by 1.8. This value represents the summation of the
estimut.Pd slough escapement divided by the summation of the peak live-dead survey counts for all sloughs
\-Jith peak survey counts ~50 fish.
il 1981 Curry Station sockeye salmon escapement was approximately 2,800 fish •
j . ]
-l 1 1 l 1 l
Appendix Table 2-G-10. Total 1982 sockeye salmon slough escapements between RM 98.6 and 161.0.
Slough
BC
BB
Moose
BA
B
9
11
21
TOTAL
River
Mile
121.9
122.2
123.5
125.1
126.3
128.3
135.3
141.1
Total Fish
Days
1 ;551 .4
14,149.0
1 ,022. 7
16 723.1
1/ Peak live-Dead
Survey Count
2
5
8
68
8
5
456
53
605
Mean Observation
Ufe in Days
11.8
11 .8
11.8
21 Slough
Escapement
s.!'
nY
20 .!1
131
20 y
nY
1 t 199
87
488
\ of Total
Slough Escapement
0.3
0.9
1.3
8.8
1.3
0.9
80.6
5.9
100.0
\ of Curry 41
Station Escapement
0.4
1.0
1.5
10.1
1.5
1.0
92.2
6.7
114.4
11 Number of fish days were calculated for sloughs that had peak survey counts > 15 fish. Refer to Section
2.4 for detailed data analysis procedures.
~ Mean observation life values were computed from 1983 composite observation data.
Total slough escapement into sloughs having peak live-dead survey counts of S 15 fish were computed by
multiplying the peak live-dead survey count by 2.5. This value represents the summation of the
estimated slough escapement divided by the summation of the peak live-dead survey counts for all sloughs
with peak survey counts ~ 50 fish. ·
1982 Curry Station sockeye salmon escapement was approximately 1,300 fish.
-l
Appendix Table 2-G-11. Estimated pink salmon slough escapements for 1981,
1982 and 1983.
River Peak Live-Dead ll Slough 1f 'Ia of Total % of Curry Y
Year Slough Mile Survey Count Escapement Slough Escapement Station Escapement
1981 8 113.7 25 38 100.0 3.8
TOTAL 25 38 100.0 3.8
1982 Moose 123 .s 1 2 0.7 < 0.1
SA 125.1 3 s 1.7 < 0.1
B 126.3 12 18 6.1 < 0.1
9 128.3 12 18 6.1 < 0.1
11 135.3 113 170 57.2 0.3
20 140.0 so 75 25.2 0.1
21 141.1 6 9 3.0 <~
TOTAL 197 297 100.0 0.4
1983 0 0 0
1/ Peak live-dead survey counts represent counts of spawning fish only.
Milling fish were not considered in the analysis.
£I Slough escapement was calculated by multiplying peak live-dead counts by
1.2.
~/ Curry Station pink salmon escapements for 1981, 1982 and 1983 were
1,000, 58,800 and 5,500 fish respectively.
A 1 5 2
....
-
-
~
i·
.....
~
01!"!'11
-
-
-
t
i
I
I
i
1 J
' Appendix Table 2-G-12. Total 1981 chum salmon slough escapements between RM 98.6 and 1161~0.
River
Slough Mile
2
6A
8
Moose
A'
A
SA
9
9B
9A
11
13
16
17
19
20
21
21A
TOTAL
99.6
100.2
112.3
113.7
123.5
124.6
124.7
125.1
128.3
129,2
133.8
135.3
135.9
137.3
138,9
139.7
140.0
141.1
144.3
Total Ftsh
Days
296,1
4,797.5
1 ,531.8
1,382.4
558.2
3,314.0
2,541.0
1,907.6
963.0
7,719.0
931.8
4,535.0
30 477.4
Peak Uve-Dead
Survey Count
6
27
11
302
167
140
34
620
260
90
182
411
4
3
38
3
14
274
8
2 594
Mean Observation
U fe in Days
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6,9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
Slough
Escapement
10 ~/
43
19 ~/
695
222
200
81
480
368
277
140
1 '119
7 ~I
5Y
135
5Y
24 y
657
3/
14 -
4 501
'.II of Total
Slough Escapement
0.2
0.9
0.4
15.4
4.9
. 4.4
1.8
10.6
8.2
6.1
3.1
24.8
0.2
0.5
3.0
0.1
0.5
14.6
0.3
100.0
'.II of Curry 41
.Station Escapement
o. 1
0.3
0.2
5.3
1.7
1.5
0.6
3.7
2.8
2.1
1.1
8.5
0.1
< o. 1
1.0
< 0.1
0,2
5.0
o. 1
34.3
ll Number of fish days were calculated for sloughs that had peak survey counts > 15 fish. Refer to Section
2.4 for detailed data analysis procedures.
~/ Mean observation life values were computed from 1983 composite observation life data.
ll Total slough escapement into sloughs having peak live-dead survey counts of~ 15 fish were computed by
multiplying the peak live-dead survey count by 1.7. This value represents the summation of the
estimated slough escapement divided by the summation of the peak live-dead survey counts for all sloughs
with peak survey counts ? 50 fish. ; 1
~/ 1981 Curry Station chum salmon escapement was approximately 13,100 fish.
)>
....L
01
.J:a.
Appendix Table 2-G-13. Total 1982 chum salmon slough escapements between RM 98.6 and 161.0.
River Total Fish y Peak lt ve-Dead Mean Observation y Slough \ of Total \ of Curry y
Slough Mile Days Survey Count Life in Days Escapement Slough Escapement Station Escapement
6A 112.3 2 5 3/ 0.1 0.1
80 121.8 23 53 y 1.1 0.2
ac 121 .9 744.0 48 6.9 108 2.1 0.4
8B 122.2 683.4 80 6.9 99 2.0 0.3
Moose 123.5 409.3 23 6.9 59 1.2 0.2
8A 125.1 7,328.5 336 6.9 1,062 21.0 3.6
B 126.3 717.6 58 6.9 104 2.1 0.4
9 128.3 4,163.5 300 6.9 603 11.9 2.1
9B 129.2 5 12 3/ 0,2 0,1
9A 133.8 596.0 118 6.9 86 1.7 0.3
11 135.3 7,437.0 459 6,9 1,078 21.3 3.7
17 138.9 158.1 21 6.9 23 0.4 0.1
20 140.0 194.9 30 6.9 28 0.5 0.1
21 141.1 11,982.0 736 6.9 1,737 34.4 5.9
TOTAL 34 414.3 2 239 5 057 100,0 17.3
Jj Number of fish days were calculated for sloughs that had peak survey counts > 15 fish. Refer to Section
2.4 for detailed data analysis procedures.
2/ Mean observation 1 ife values were computed from 1983 composite observation data.
~/ Total slough escapement into sloughs having peak live-dead survey counts of s 15 fish were computed by
multiplying the peak live-dead survey count by 2.3. This value represents the summation of the
estimated slough escapement divided by the summation of the peak live-dead survey counts for all sloughs
with peak survey counts 2 50 fish.
~/ 1982 Curry Station chum salmon escapement was approximately 29,400 fish.
J .I
-
-
.....
Appendix Table 2-G-14. Evaluation of chinook salmon Petersen disc tag loss
based on fishwheel recaptures and spawning ground
surveys conducted bet\'teen Sunshine Station and Devi 1
Canyon, 1983.
No. Tagged Fish Examined
Fishwhee1 Survey
181 387
No. Shed Tags Total No. Tags
Fishwhee1 Survey Fishwheel Survey
5 . 76 186 463
Overa 11
Percent Tag
Retention
87.4
Appendix Table 2-G-15. Evaluation of adult salmon tag loss for all species
except chinook salmon based on spawning surveys
conducted between Sunshine Station and Devil Canyon,
1983.
No. of Tagged Total ·
Tagging Tag Type Fish No. Shed No. Percent Tag
Station Examined Tags Tags Retention
Sunshine FT-4/Spaghetti 1508 33 1541 97.9
Talkeetna FT-4/Spaghetti 1508 30 1538 98.0
Curry Petersen Disc 486 0 486 100.0
A 1 55