Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA961I I I I ·., I .. ' ~.~ .~: .. . .·_.. ...~·: . . . ·.· .. .,;; ' •' PLAN FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PRODUCTION OF SALMON AND STEELHEAD FOR COOK INLET RECREATIONAL FISHERIES 1981 Division of Sport Fish Alaska Department of Fish and Game Rupert E. Andrews, Director Ronald 0. Skoog, Commissioner ~ .· -, "1 " ::; .,. • .. ... ... 1 1 .. .., .. l .. :! ,. -!' ... .. ~ _.~1~~ '1 (J') co co 1'-.. co C\1 ...... 0 1 0 1.() i 1.() 1'-.. (Y) (Y) r October 27 1 1981 PLAN FOR SUPPLEMENTAL PRODUCriON OF SAlMON AND STEELHEAD FOR COOK INLE.I' ROCREATIONAL FISHERIES Ii-n'RODUcriON AND SCOPE Legislation passed in 1977 (AS 16.10.375) mandated the creation of com- prehensi ve salnnn enhancement plans for each area of the State desig- nated by the Comnissioner of Fish arrl Game for such activities. Cook Inlet has been so designated, arrl a regional aquaculture association has been fanned and recognized. In addition to the legislative mandate, the Department of Fish and Game fishery staff firmly believes a comprehensive plan for each area is necessary to guide the multitude of proposed public and private enhance- ment facilities, projects, etc., in a manner which will result in :maximum public benefit . In 1979, a statewide salnnn plan was written. This plan established major goals for salnnn harvesting areas of the State. However, the plan ~id not include many specific projects for the various areas (i.e., specifically how goals and objectives would be net). The purpose of tHis plan is to define specific sites, salmon stocks and other factors neeessary to address the goals of that segment of the Alaska Salmon Plan ~ch deals with recreational fishing for salmon arrl steelhead in Cook Inl~t. ARLIS Alaska Resources Library & Information Services Library Building, Suite 1 II 321 I Providence. Drive Anchorage, AK 99508-4614 )~. c" l--4! ~ ! 15 7 ;("f# ~I f l PS6 l rl} 10 ' ' ,, M:>re fish will have to be prcxiuced in Cook Inlet, not only to increase the anglers' catch but even to maintain the catch at the present rate. The objective of this plan is to prcxiuce an additional 106,000 artificially prcxiuced chinook, coho arrl sockeye salm:::m and steelhead for recreational anglers harvest by 1988'. While the conmercial fishery is stable in size due to limited entry, the sport fishery is still increasing. In 1979, sport anglers fisherl an estimated 435,000 angler-days in Cook Inlet and Kenai Peninsula waters for chinook, coho and sockeye salm:m. By 1988, the end of the short-term objective period of this plan, the number of angler-days is expected to increase to 522, 000 based on an annual increase of 2.3% (growth data from Alaska population overview). While the 2.3% figure is a low-case estimat~, it is considered appro- ~ priate for the next several years because: (l) sport fish license sales arrl population growth have slowed in recent years; and (2) sport fishing effort for salmon will probably not increase at the high-case annual growth rate because of limited access and the fact some major fisheries are approaching an angler carrying capacity. 'Ib maintain the present catch rate of 0.35 salmon per ~gler-day, the y annual ~tch of these species must rise from 154,000 to approximately 184,000 by 1988. Sport anglers fished an estimated total of 435,000 angler-days in Cook Inlet and Kenai Peninsula waters in 1979, and caught an estimated 154,000 chinook, coho and sockeye salmon. By 1988, if the increase in recreational angling effort continues at a 2.3% annual rate, an additional 87,000 angler-days must be accorrm::dated. - 2 - [~ I -j r-, r···, I r·~ "'f' "' f ~1 \, ! •' L . r ~, I [ [ l l j l ~ ' r lc ~ '"· .. [ " I. L~~ f ' ! L~ r L~ L~ ' 'I • ~ 1 11 ~ ' ~ ~ .. _; '' Therefore, if population growth projections are borne out and if existing natural stocks continue to produce 154,000 chinook, coho and sockeye salm::m to anglers each year, and the objectives of the plan to increase the sport harvest by 106,000 chinook, coho and sockeye salrocm and steelhead are met, rrore than one-quarter (30,000) of the artifi- cially produced salrron will be needed just to keep catch rates at the current level. Recent public expression indicates the current catch rate is unsatisfactory. Therefore, the remaining 76,000 supplemental salrron will serve to increase angler catch rates of chinook, coho and sockeye salrron to approximately 0. 50 per day. The 10 projects in this plan will support 270,000 angler-days of recreational fishing, at acceptable catch rates, if the respective projects are realized. Allocation between sport and comnercial users is currently a critical issue in Cook Inlet. Increasing recreational demand will contribute to the intensity of present allocation conflicts within Cook Inlet, as will greater use of the same salrron stocks by increasing numbers of subsis- tence fishermen. If total harvests of Cook Inlet salrron stocks remain the same, individual sport catches will decrease as the number of anglers increase. Therefore, rrore opportunities provided recreational anglers to use artificially produced salrron and new fishing areas created by improved access will reduce disruption and impacts on the commercial and subsistence fisheries. ~ince sportsmen desire chinook and coho salrron above all others, the present plan is aimed primarily at production of these species. One - 3 - r project also recommends increased sockeye production and one project recornnends steelhead prcx:luction. The plan also recOI'Cliiends that coho salrron shall be of higher priority than chinook or steelhead for artificial production in the imnediate future. Both Alaskan and numerous west coast hatchery programs have repeatedly demonstrated that coho salmon provide higher and more consistent returns of adult salmon than do chinook. M:>reover, since cohos rerna.in at sea only about 15 months after srnolt release, benefits can be achieved in a shorter time interval than with chinook salmon, most of which return after three or four years. Chinook salrron are recornnendErl principally for exper:i.Irental releases at this time. Hatchery returns of spring chinook have been quite low in most west coast and canadian releases. LimitErl releases to date in Alaska have also producErl low results, and sufficient numbers of eggs are difficult and expensive to obtain. However, public demand for chinook salrron is great and we feel a l:imi tErl experimental program should be conducted in an attempt to solve rearing and release problems and prcx:luce srnolts which return at a rate that will justify rearing costs. Finally, public derna.nd for artificial production of steelhead is growing. We feel a supplemental production program for steelhead should logically be includErl in this salrron enhancerrent plan because steelhead: (1) are as desirable as salmon to sport anglers; - 4 - [ r-- r [ .. r- :~ L t ~-~ ,[ f - L_ r -, L~ [ [ ~- L_· l~~: [ [ [~ [ [ [ ., • ~ 1 ~ 1 .. ., -' ~ '1 -' -! .~ _. .. .. -" -' (2) could be made available in the same waters and within the same time frames as salmon; (3) have life histories and management considerations similar to chinook and coho salmon; and (4} require nearly identical rearing facilities as do chinook and coho salmon . In Cook Inlet, . C-to occur only in several small streams located on the southwestern Kenai Peninsula. Little is known of their numbers or life history. The time and locations of spawning have rot been canpletely definal. ~ recomnends exp3Ilding a pcogram of collecting life history data, defining existing stock size and current harvest, testing methcrls of holding ripening adults with an ultimate goal of artificially rearing this species and expanding the number of stream systems in Cook Inlet containing steelhead. The geographical scope of this salmon/s,:teelhead plan includes all Cook Inlet waters and those coastal waters adjacent to the conmmities of Honer, Seldovia and Seward. No time schedules have been established, as the fishery staff believes it is far more important to clearly set out priorities between various potential projects than propose a time schedule which is contingent not only upon rnonies allocated to these new enhancement projects but also to modification and expansion of existing pr9jects and/or facilities. - 5 - Finally, the plan recorrmends projects which are area and/or site speci- fie basoo on the anglers' ability to harvest the returning fish. Future chinook, coho and steelhead enhancerrent programs will primarily involve the use of plan too smol ts. The plan advocates the use of local stocks and, where possible, those native to the release site. - 6 - ~~ [ ~ - lr ~r--l -l - j f' [ __ j f [ ~' [: l~ [ [ [' l' ~ [ l ' [~ L ,. ~ -' ~ _. " ' _;, ~ -, ,i _j J< ~· -' -" "' DESCRIPTION OF THE COOK INLET RECREATIONAL FISHERY Sport fishing effort in Cook Inlet is far more intense than in any other area of the State, since half of the State's population lives in this region. Beginning in 1977, an annual angler survey, conducte:i by a series of mail questionnaires, has provide:i an accurate estimate of statewide and regional angler use. In 197 9, this survey indicated a total of 213,309 anglers fishe:i in Alaska, of which 59% fishe:i in Cook Inlet and Kenai Peninsula waters. Based on license sales, statewide angling effort during the last three years has increase:i approximately 3. 0% per year. Sampling indicate:i that unlicensed juveniles accounted for 25% of the total number of anglers. Anglers, adult and juvenile combined, have increase:i on a statewide basis from about 75,000 persons in 1961 to over 213,300 in 1979. While it is not possible to determine exactly the number of irrlividual sport anglers who fishe:i in Cook Inlet waters, it is known that in 1979 there were 101,639 license:i and juvenile anglers who live:i in the Cook Inlet area. In addition to the local resident fishennen, there were visiting non-resident anglers utilizing the Cook Inlet fisheries; therefore, the total number of participants becOllEs much greater. It is estimate:i, based on the postal questionnaire data, that more than 125, 000 licensed and juvenile anglers currently participate in the Cook Inlet sport fisheries. - 7 - -~·· -\:· The total catch of salmon within Cook Inlet has been assessed since 1977 by the aforerrentioned .POStal survey. Angler use and harvest infonnation received from the series of .POstal surveys are cross-checked against a number of statistically designed "on-the-ground" creel census programs of ma.jor Cook Inlet sal.rron fisheries. The correlation between infonnation received from the creel census programs and that of the .POStal questionnaire has been very high, rarely differing by rrore than 10%. As a result, the staff has developed a high degree of confidence in the .POStal survey results. In same areas of the State where "in season" managerrent data are unnecessary, the "marmed" creel censuses have been terminated in favor of the .POStal survey. Presented in Table 1 is the estimated sport harvest of sal.rron from Cook Inlet and Resurrection Bay for the years 1977-1979: Table 1. Estimated S.POrt Harvest of Sal.rron from Cook Inlet-Resurrection Bay Area, 1977-1979.* Year Chinook Coho Red Pink Churn 'Ibtal . 1977 16,210 51,907 82,363 45,484 2,287 198,251 1978 17,856 65,230 105,532 105,446 18,419 312,483 1979 25,853 64,039 63,731 25,696 5,826 185,145 * Da.ta from Departirent of Fish and Gaire .POStal survey. Includes Resurrection Bay marine fishery. - 8 - r l~ I I l 'n[ • ·r 'L_ [- [ [ II L~ [ -, __ j l_ r-1 I , L l-, ~ [_ [ [~ [~ l~ .. ~ ' ~ With the exception of some marine effort and very few intnature feEder chinook taken near Seldovia and Seward, the salrron sport fishery in southcentral Alaska is conducted entirely on adult salmon as they either approach their spawning streams or are within those streams. Therefore, rrost fisheries in this region are fairly brief in duration, with anglers rroving from one fishery to another as the various runs arrive . The marine effort in Cook Inlet is somewhat limited. Relatively few anglers within the Cook Inlet area have boats of sufficient size to handle rough marine waters. Launching and berthing facilities at all popular marinas are at capacity. Current angler use levels and trends at Kachemak Bay are undefinEd. A major marine fishery for salrron is the chinook salmon troll fishery conductEd along the Kenai Peninsula beaches south of Deep Creek. Effort in this fishery has grown rapidly from 5,000 angler-days in 1974 to 35,000 in 1979, but has shown significant fluctuations in angler effort due to inclerrent periods of weather and availability of fish stocks. In contrast to rrost marine fisheries, the Deep Creek troll fishery takes place within 100-200 yards of the beach and in relatively small boats. Therefore, weather dictates to a large extent the angler effort expendEd in this fishery. River fisheries on the other hand have increasEd far rrore rapidly. For exarcple, the Kenai River chinook salmon fishery has increasEd from ' 45,000 angler-days in 1974 to 98,600 angler-days in 1979. Figure 1 presents a comparison of major Oook Inlet chinook salmon fisheries dliring the years 1974-79. ·!' - 9 - :!_ ., . it:.l,OOil l.\0,000 1~0,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 s 1974 LEGEND Kenai River • Anchor River, Deep Creek and ~inilchik P.iver D Deep Creek ~Iarine rum Northern Cook r·:"'l Inlet ·:·~·.· ...... 1975 (134) 1976 -10 - Figure l. Cook Inlet -Total An~rlin!! F.ffor1' for ICin<> <;~l.,nn l~ l~ " r' [ l" . ~~ \ -~~ (181' [ n (158 (150) I' L~ [ [ [ lj . r.~ [ l_ [ 1977 1978 1979 f c L" [_~ ., ' " .., ~ ... -· ... ""' _; ~ ~· -, _. The high percentage of lower Cook Inlet sport fishing effort which occurs on the Kenai Peninsula appears to be maintaining itself and is undoubtedly due to two major reasons: 1. The availability of large chinook, sockeye and coho salrron stocks in a generally healthy condition which provide at least an acceptable catch rate. 2. Good access to those waters having chinook, sockeye and coho stocks. In upper Cook Inlet, access to waters west of the Susitna River is restricted to riverboat or light aircraft. Angling effort, as a result, has not grown as rapidly as in other areas. In addition, upper Cook Inlet chinook salrron fishing was only reopened to sport fishing in 1979 following a 5-year closure. While the sport catch rate for coho has improved in the last two to three years, it has been unsatisfactory for many years prior to the recent improvement. Table 2 shows the distrib- ution of Cook Inlet salrron angling. -11 - Table 2. Distribution of Cook Inlet Salmon Angling Effort, 1977-1979.* Angler-Days Angler-Days Percent Effort of Effort of Total Year Cook Inlet Upper Inlet Kenai Pen. Upper Inlet Kenai Pen. 1977 606,763 225,606 381,157 37.2 62.8 1978 699,611 231,468 468,143 33.1 66.9 1979 766,556 274,305 491,751 35.9 64.1 Three Year Average 35.4 64.6 * Resurrection Bay excluded. The impending capitol move to the Willow area will increase the a.rrount and affect the distribution of recreational fishing demand in Cook Inlet. The new capitol is forecasted. to have a population of approxi- rnately 30,000 people, which will likely result in a significant increase in the number of Cook Inlet anglers. M:>st Anchorage anglers now drive 150 to 200 miles each way to fish for salmon on the Kenai Peninsula. However, the new capitol site is approximately 70 road miles farther north of Anchorage, and this additional distance may make anglers living in this new conmunity more reluctant to drive to Kenai Peninsula waters for weekend fishing. Therefore, the Department anticipates increaserl demands for recreational salmon fishing in northern Cook Inlet waters. Since marine waters of northern Cook Inlet are silty and thus unsuiterl to sport fishing, recreational fishing must be conducterl in fresh water. In an attempt to meet the recreational demand of an increasing popu- lation, the Division of Sport Fish has undertaken a sizeable lake reba- bili tation and stocking program with associated. research programs to -12 - ~­ [ [_ [ -l' r -1 . 1 L_! ,. I L r-.. , l_' [ [ [ [ [ [' l ' r L~ r~ L r·, ( L~ I . L.., l increase the recreational harvest of lake-reared resident game fish, primarily trout and landlocked silver sal.non. This program has been very successful, chiefly in producing spring and fall fisheries. '!his accomplishment results from the fact that catch rates within the stocked lakes drop during the wann midsurruner period and rrost anglers prefer ~. salrron when they are available rather than resident game fish species. Many, if not rrost, anglers in southcentral Alaska tend to fish the lakes until the salrron runs arrive. They then turn to salrron fishing until these runs are over, at which time they return to the lakes for fall fishing. The lake stocking program does provide an alternative to salrron fishing for rrany anglers. However, it is not an acceptable -" alternative for the vast majority of the Oook Inlet angling public. "'!l ::.; -, -" -' -- .. -13 - SPORI' FISHERY ENHANCEMENT CONSIDERATIONS Sport sal.Iron fisheries in Cook Inlet can be developed or enhanced in three different types of waters: 1. Marine bays. 2. Large rivers such as the Kenai. 3. Srna.ll streams such as Anchor River, Willow Creek, etc. Each type of development has certain advantages and disadvantages. It is critically ilrq;x:)rtant that the public, planners and managers fully understand the problems and opportunities associated with each type of fishery. Fisheries in Marine Bays This type of fishery requires large bo~ts capable of withstanding rough water. Extensive berthing and support facilities are needed for fueling, repair, etc. This type of fishery usually has little angler congestion, and very seldom will a sal.Iron stock be overharvested by a saltwater sport fishery. Weather is a critical factor and continuing bad weather at the time a sallron run is passing through can sharply reduce the harvest. The ability to assess the sport catches in this -14 - r-·: --[ -., r -~ l ' -r- • r ' J L.J [ 1 -~ r-1 LJ [~ l ' r ~ [ l ~ L l' l~ f 1 l_ L l -. ~ -:- "' -" envirol1ITEI1t is often dependent upon points of access; i.e. , launch and dock facilities, and the Deparbnent' s ability to contact anglers at the completion of the day at these respective departure areas. The single most critical problem in developing or enhancing marine fisheries is in achieving a high enough density of fish to provide a minimum acceptable catch rate. Where salmon enter a large bay, very large numbers of salmon are necessary to produce an acceptable catch rate. It is not enough that some fish return to the fishing area--enough fish must return to a given location at the same time so that a rninirm.ml satisfactory catch rate is achieve::l. If such a rate is not achieve::l, anglers move to another fishery and the fish produce::l for the original fishery are wasterl. What is a minimum acceptable catch rate? The lowest catch rate that anglers will tolerate varies with species, weather, difficulty of access and a host of other factors. We do know that anglers will settle for a lower harvest rate on chinook salrnon and steelhead trout than other species, and probably a lower rate on coho than on the remaining three salmon species. Minimum acceptable catch rates per angler-day of Cook Inlet salrnon fishing, by species, are estimated. to be as follows : Chinook salrnon, 0. 2; coho salmon, 0. 5; sockeye salmon, 0. 6; pink salmon, 1.0; chum salrnon, 0. 7; steelhead trout, 0.1. Large Rivers fisheries taking place in large rivers neerl launching, parking and camping facilities. Streambank access may or may not be important. -15 - Some angler congestion and/or interference is ccmnon, particularly between boat and shore anglers. Weather typically does not interfere with angling except when rain prcxluces turbid or high flow corrlitions. Assessment of catch depends upon the number of angler access points, and usually this type of fishery is the most difficult to accurately assess catches. It is possible, at current sport fish utilization levels in Cook Inlet, to overharvest specific salmon stocks in a large river system. Currently, a series of rivers in southcentral Alaska are manage:i on a day-to-day basis to avoid this eventuality. The number of fish required for a successful river fishery is a very important consideration. Far fewer fish are needed than for a marine fishery as the confining nature of a river serves as a mechanism to increase density and thus provide a greater catch rate. An excellent ex.a:rrple is the Kenai River where a rapidly expanding coho and sockeye fishery is taking place. This is a very successful freshwater fishery, but the sa.rre fish migrating to the river along the Kenai Peninsula beaches do not support a successful marine fishery (as do Kenai chinook salmon) because the catch rate, as a result of fish density, is appar- ently too low until they are within the confines of the river. -16 - L r, [ r ~ T.1 .-.! -r -: 't _; f' ,-, LJ c c [ ---, _j I' L_._j lj r - L.J LJ r--- L_j [' [ [ Small Streams In smaller streams, continuous linear strearnbank access is ItEildatory since little or no use of boats is p:>ssible. Angler congestion is usually high, but is tolerate:i by anglers if the catch rate is satisfactory. Weather is not a factor except when rain prcx:luces turbid or high flow concli tions. Stocks of fish can easily be overharveste:i if the fishery is not strin- gently managed. However, it is possible with monitoring to conduct intensive, short duration fisheries in small streams which can prcx:luce thousands of angler-days of fishing arrl yet not damage the resource. '1.\oJo examples in this region are the Anchor River chinook salrron fishery and the Russian River sockeye sal:rron fishery. The three lower Kenai Peninsula streams (Anchor, Deep and Ninilchik) have provide:i an average of 37 1 000 angler-days of fishing for chinook salrron the last few years (1978-80) on only 2 miles of each river during a 12-day season. The average harvest during this period has been about 2,100 chinook salrron and the stocks renain in excellent condition. In the Russian River, 60 1 500 angler-days of fishing produce:i a harvest of approximately 52,700 .-sockeye salmon (1978-1980 data) and the stock continues to be in excellent condition. A major consideration is that far fewer fish are nee:ie:i to prcx:luce a ~ {•. successful fishery in a small stream. The small stream confines the fish into "holes" easily recognize:i by the angler. This type of fishery " -17 - t :. c- is also better suited to less skillful anglers and children due to the increased harvest potential. It is critical, havever, that the stream selected for enhancement not be too small. If so, the high level of angler activity on the strearnbank will impede the upstream migration of salrron. '!his effect has been documented on several small streams in Cook Inlet. Also, it is manda- tory that any stream selected for enhancement have public access along the banks. A single land parcel in private ownexship can block access to all fishing waters beyond that property. Enhancement of small streams within an urban area is not reasonable from a management viewpoint. Angler use becomes too intense and it is impossible not to create trespass and property damage problems on adjacent properties, inevitably resulting in a closure. -18 - [ -, ... ~ n r·, r ~ -r· -r~ Li ~: [__J [ L [ [ n lJ [ lJ r, L. [ l [ -, RFALITIFS OF ENHANCING RECREATIONAL FISHERIES All proposals to enhance Cook Inlet chinook, coho and sockeye stocks -. generally share the following difficulties that demand solution: ~, 1. Corrmercial Interception: Unless recreationally enhanced Cook Inlet stocks can be returned either before or after COITI!rercial fishing seasons, those stocks will be subject to corrmercial utilization prior to entering recreational fisheries. Unless major accorrplishments in stock separation occur, it is likely the commercial harvest of artificially produced coho will ~ greatly exceed that of the recreational fisheries. Intercep- l tion of an enhanced stock by commercial fisheries may not 1 necessarily be undesirable, but it can generate problems when _>J recreational anglers are seeking the same fish and, partie- ularly, where enhancerrent is corrlucted for recreational bene- ::;o fit. For exarrple, cost-benefits of a srrolt plant may be ., favorable when rrost fish are sport caught but undesirable if a _. great many are harvested conmercially. Assessment of the total adult return is another consideration that would become exceedingly difficult if recreationally enhanced fish are _. harvested in Cook Inlet marine waters. ""· Measuring the total contribution of an enhanced coho popu- lation would be particularly troublesome because these fish are captured throughout much of the corrmercial fishery. Many returning enhanced adults are harvested in the mixed _, -19 - stock corrmercial fishery; i.e. 1 it will be difficult if not impossible to re:iuce harvest rrortality during the rebuilding process. The Board of Fisheries comprehensive rranagement plan recog- nizes and addresses this very serious issue. 2. Access: One of the major problems in managing sport salmon fisheries in Cook Inlet is the matter of access. Only on the Kenai Peninsula is the highway system relate:i to streams in such a manner that anglers have good access. In northern Cook Inlet 1 the population centers are locate:i on the east side of the Inlet (an::l the east side of the Susitna River) 1 while the major clearwater streams are west of the Susitna River. It is currently difficult even to launch a boat on the Susi tna River for boat access to west side tribu- taries. East side Susi tna tributaries are 1 in rrost cases 1 intersecte:i by highways rather than being parallel to the highway. When the highways were constructe:i 1 rrost adjacent streambanks rrove:i into private ownership leaving only small access points at the highway intersection. Stream banks farther from the highway system often remain blocked to angler access by these private holdings. -20 - [ C [ [ T' . r~, 'L__ j f c u c n [l [ [ ~u [ r· L L l • 3 Therefore, enhancing the Cook Inlet saLrcon sport fishery, particularly in northern Cook Inlet, involves IIDre than SIIDl t releases. It must include considerp.tion of and, in same ~-- "'! instances, developmen~ of access sit~ where significant numbers of anglers can get to waters and where artificially produced fish can be harvested in large numbers. '1 At the present time, two of the three top priority projects -., listed in this plan will be developed at sites where large numbers of anglers could harvest artificially produced sa:IJron ., only with access improverrent. These streams are Willow Creek and the Little Susi tna River. This need prampterl the ~ inclusion of access development projects for these streams in the Alaskan fish plan. They are also reconmenderl in this plan 1 _. for enhancerrent with hatchery coho and/or chinook saliiDn only .,. with irnproverl access . _. _. In addition, there are presently very fe~~:~ili~ '------------·--------····----/ (campgrounds, boat launches, -etc.) adjacent to upper Cook -, Inlet salnon streams. The major clearwater systems that enter .. the Susitna River from the west are only accessible by diffi- ~ cult river travel or air. A scarcity of public access is therefore a serious deterrent, at this time, to enhancerrent of .Ji,. numerous systems that may otherwise be satisfactory for enhancerrent. _. .i< ... -21 - 3. Research Support: Tb provide a feasible supplement to natural production requires the relationships between the environment and fish be known, and that the rearing nee:J.s of the propagated fish be satisfied. This encompasses everything associated with survival 1 growth and behavior 1 as well as a host of other factors that affect fish. Much of the knowledge necessary to guide enhancement in upper Cook Inlet is lacking. Our understanding of chinook vividly illustrates this problem; e.g. 1 when do most upper Cook Inlet chinook migrate seaward; what is the size and condition index of these smolts; what role do glacial streams play in the rearing of these fish; and what is the response of chinook to associated fishes? -5~ i -22 - [ n n n [ -!.' . . ·n n c [ [ [ n [ [ :L t L L L ~ -l ~, '! l ,.; -, :i '1 -' -, -' -". _; ~ j _. _, SUMMI\l{Y Because of these corrrron problems, a rro:iest enhancement effort for upper Cook Inlet is recomnended at this time. The short range goal of enhancement in this area rrust be research oriented and directed to development of reliable brood sources for use in the future production programs. In the case of coho, enhancement activities should strive to develop stocks that migrate through Cook Inlet after the period of rrajor commercial fishing activity. The recreational and social demand for chinook and coho in upper Cook Inlet is such that a sizeable investment is warranted to overcome the difficulties confronting enhancement. Research and development projects to acquire needed life history and stock separation data as well as the development of public access, are included in the Alaska Salmon Fisheries Plan. In keeping with modest enhancement objectives, Table 3 lists by priority 10 sites recommended for enhancement. "Each site has one or more species recommended for use and a numerical objective to provide a minirrum specified level of catch. Further, the plan specifies for each site the estimated total run of artificially produced fish necessary to produce the minimum desired catch. _......,.-··· -~ 'f'he ratio between catch and total run shown in this table (i.e., an estimate of the relative effectiveness of anglers to harvest returning -23 - salmon) was computed somewhat arbitrarily by fishery managers of the Division of Sport Fish based on what we have observed in numerous existing fisheries. It must be clearly understood that angler cffcc- tivcncss is influencal by many factors such as access, fish dc~nsity, water clarity, ease of boating, angler density, weather, etc. These factors will result in day-to-day changes in the effectiveness of anglers. Therefore, the ratios of harvest to total run size shown in the plan are our best estimates as to average expected rate at each site based on the particular set of factors which prevail at that site. A series of factors were considered in establishing priorities of tl1e various projects. Angler effectiveness in harvesting returning fish was one major consideration in establishing priority. Other important factors were access, existing facilities, distance from population centers, arrount and quality of fishing which could be produced and size of natural runs at the site and in adjacent waters. It should be emphasized that additional numbers of salmon can be utilized at rrost sites recorrmende::l in this report if enhanceme..'1t facilities are able to produce and return more fish than are called for in this plan. The figures shown in this plan are, in most cases, the minimum number of adults which we believe must return to result in a successful fishery. A successful fishery for the purposes of this plan is defined as one which results in a minimum acceptable catch rate and will provide a minimum of 10,000 angler-days of fishing opportunity. -24 - r~ L. F L, ['' [ .·1--·, .~ . r--1 L [ [ r--, l~ [ r-, l_j [ [ L r·· L ['' L [ L L ... PRIORITY NUMBER I-(A) -LI'ITLE SUSI'INA RIVER COHO ENHANCEMENT -. Project Goal--To provide a harvest of 10,000 late run coho which will l support an estimated 20,000 angler-days of additional recreational fishing opportunity. ,. 9l l. Management. Little Susitna River coho, as is the case with all coho of northern Cook Inlet origin, are currently harvested by both sport and cornrrercial users. Corrmercial exploitation of this system's natural stock is substantially -. greater than the sport harvest. This catch disparity in turn -" fosters substantial ever-growing user group conflict. Present ~ stock separation knowledge does not permit management to allow ~ greater numbers of coho through the mixed stock commercial j fishery in the central drift net district without greatly ·~ reduced catches of very valuable associated salmon; i.e., the ... Little Susitna River coho migrate through the entire length of -, the inlet at similar times when large numbers of sockeye, pinks and chums are IIDving through the same area. Reducing commercial opportunities to ensure additional coho for recreational fishing is also contrary to existing Board of Fisheries policy which states that insofar as it is consistent with the subsistence priority, stocks which nonnally IIDve in .. Cook Inlet after June 30 shall be managed primarily as a conmercial resource until August 15. While Susi tna coho a.J;"e -' recognized as a target species for sport fishermen and Cook -"'";). ... -25 - [ Inlet management is designed to stabilize the incidental [ commercial harvest of these fish, same level of commercial l-, utilization is unavoidable. Development of an artificially aided run having natural migrational timing would undoubtedly [ enhance harvest opportunities for all users; however, place- ment of large numbers of coho, which have been designated by ·L the Board of Fisheries as a species to be principally harvested by sport users, into areas where rrost are harvested J '· "" ! ! u commercially is certain to generate additional conflict. On r -~ the other hand, enhancerrent of coho stocks that migrate after L the period of major coiT~TBrcial activity would be expected to u lessen existing and future allocation disputes. Establishrrent of a late run, therefore, should become the primary goal of c this supplemental production effort. c 2. Fishing Areas and Access. The Little Susitna River provides [ an exceptional opportunity to harvest coho in an aesthetically pleasing manner, and the waterway's physical features would [J accommodate substantial recr~ational use without excessive congestion. More than 75 miles of river are available for [ boat fishing, and rrost land surrounding this section of the river is public. A portion of the river borders the Nancy [ Lake Recreation Area and a canoe portage system presently -[ links the recreation area to the stream. The river is located within a convenient 1-1/2 hour drive of Anchorage and is also [ adjacent to the proposed Willow Capitol Site. [ L -26 - [ '- ~ j ., .. ~- ,. _; ' _. _. Logistical access to much of the river is very limited, there- fore, improved access would compliment major enhancement efforts. Currently the stream can only be reached by the Parks Highway (the uppermost area open to salmon fishing) and via the Burma Road (middle section of harvest area). The last three to four miles of the Burma Road is restricted to 4 X 4 vehicles only and seriously restricts general public access. 3. Existing Fishery and Use. Present recreational use is relatively light due primarily to poor access. During rainy periods in the spring, the Burma Road is nearly impassable and fishing effort in the lower river, therefore, is often a function of road condition. The system's coho fishery extends from July 15 to approximately September l. 4. Other Fish Species Present. Good pink salmon fishing is available, particularly on "even" years. Fair to good chinook salmon fishing is also available; however, poor spring road conditions often restrict angler use. Sockeye and chum salmon enter the sport harvest in significant numbers, and rainbow and Dolly Varden residing in the system also provide added angling opportunity. Recreational use during recent years has ranged between 12, 000 and 21, 000 angler-days fishing for all fish species. -27 - 5. 6. 7. Public Facilities. Tburist accommodations are available in the nearby corrmuni ties of Houston, Big Lake and Wasilla. A small public campsite is also operated by the City of Houston adjacent to the river ncar the Parks Highway. Additional State campgrounds are located in the Nancy Iake Recreational Area. Several corrmercial fishing guides currently operate on the river. No public boat launch site exists on the system. Brocd Source. The system's coho are arrong the largest in upper Cook Inlet and there is an ample stock from which to secure eggs. Whether "late arriving" subpopulations exist has not yet been determined. Capture of brocd for eggs may be difficult because the stream would be costly if not impossible to weir and spawning appears to be spread over a wide area. Road access is, however, available to many of the upriver spawning sites. Evaluation Potential. Since existing adult returns are subject to intense, widespread corrmercial use, evaluation would be both costly and difficult if enhanced coho follow normal migration timing. A late arriving enhanced stock would, however, eliminate the need for assessrrent of the commercial catch. Estimation of the sport harvest could be readily accomplished because of the scarcity of access points; i.e., there are only two primary access points which could -28 - [ L [ [ :[ -.[ [ [ c c [ L [ [ -[ [ [ [ l be easily surveyed. Assessrrent of escapement would be relatively difficult due to the size of the system, extensive distribution of spawners, silty water arrl magnitude of fall stream flaws. No permanent ADF&G facilities are currently available on the system to assist with evaluation. ~. 8. Imprint and Release Sites. Potential lentic and lotic release sites can be reached by gocrl roads in the upper portion of the system. Imprinting srrolts in one or rrore of the river's nurrerous small lateral tributaries may also be practical. - -" 9. Miscellaneous. This system has the potential for providing 1 diverse fishing opportunities that cannot be fourrl elsewhere on the Cook Inlet Basin road system. Presently the river ~ provides shore based fishing and angling from drift or jet __; powered boats in an environrrent that has undergone few human , ... related changes. A float trip from the Parks Highway to the .., Burma Road pull-out can be accorrplished in as fet~ as two days . A canoe trip starting in the . Nancy lake Recreational Area can also be corrpletErl. in two to three days. Standard outlx>ard __; power boats (without jet drives) can be operated safely from the Burma Road downstream to tidewater. ~- 10. Research and Development Needs: ..... _,; a. Irrprove Burma Road access to lower portions of the Little _., Susitna River. -' -29 - -" b. Determine magnitude, distribution and timing of all segments of the escapement. b. Identify various adult capture and juvenile release sites. lakes of the Nancy Lake Recreation Area, including Nancy lake, should be included in these studies. d. Determine optimum srnolt release size, age, timing and locations. Assess contribution to the recreational fisheries of the Little Susi tna River. e. Evaluate the effect of coho plants on other rearing species; i.e. , chinook, sockeye, etc . Chinook salmon enhancement rna.y be practical in this system if it can be demonstrated that such a program does not conflict with the primary goal of coho production (see chinook project 1-B). -30 - [ L [ [ ·c ~ -~~ -ll .LJ [ D c c [ c [ [ I" • ....,J [ [ [ [ PRIORI'I'Y NUMBER I-(B) -LITI'LE SUSITNA RIVER CHINOOK ENHANCEMENT Project Goal--To provide a harvest of 6, 000 chinook sa.lrron which will 1 result in an estimated 30,000 angler-days of additional recreational .. opportunity . .,, l. Management. Little Susitna chinook sa.lrron are presently l -' harvested by sport, subsistence and comnercial users and -. considerable conflict currently characterizes the division of catch for this stock. Little Susi tna chinook, as is the case , with all chinook of northern origin, arrive early in Cook -' Inlet marine waters (prior to July 1) and are incidentally ~ harvested in the comnercial fisheries of the northern district -' and, to a lesser degree, along the beaches of the central 1 district. This early arrival places them within the time period designated by the Board of Fisheries as a period to be ::l managed primarily for recreational benefits, as long as the 1 subsistence priority is accorrm:Xlated. Sport fishing for this -' chinook stock extends from late May until July 6, and the catch is restricted to a maximum harvest of 1,000 fish. Jl Supplemental chinook sa.lrron production in the Little Susi tna -, _. River would, because of current Board of Fisheries directives, -.. have maximum benefits to recreational and/or subsistence ,iii , users. _. 2. Fishing Areas and Access. Refer to Project I-(A) . ., --, _. -31 - _j 3. 4. 5. 6. Existing Fishery and Use. Present recreational use is rela- tively light due primarily to poor physical access. Fishing effort in the lower river is often a frmction of the condition of the Burma Road rather than stock abundance. The system's chinook fishery extends from late May to early July and is confined to that portion of the river downstream from the Parks Highway. Early fishing use is normally heaviest along the lower reach of the river near the Bunna Road access, whereas in late June and early July anglers shift their attention to water near the Parks Highway. A total of 500 to 900 chinook have been harvested annually from the system in recent years. Other Fish Species Present. Refer to Project I-(A). Public Facilities . Refer to Project I-(A) . Brood Source. The system supports ample stock from which to secure eggs. Capture of brood for eggs may, however, be difficult because the stream would be costly, if not inpossible, to weir and spawning occurs over a wide area. Road access is available to many upriver spawning sites. 7. Evaluation Potential. M:rlerate costs would be associated with assessment of the marine commercial and subsistence catches of Little Susi tna chinook sal.rron. Significant changes in current subsistence regulations could, however, increase the -32 - [ [ [ n -[l _j -c [ c c c c c n [ . . TJ E [ [ l .., difficulty of evaluation. Estimation of the sport harvest could be readily accomplished because of the scarcity of access points; i.e., there are only two primary access points ~ that could be easily rronitored. Assessrrent of escaperrent would be relatively difficult because of the system's size, extensive distribution of spawners and silty water. No permanent ADF&G facilities are currently available on the system to assist evaluation. 8. Imprint and Release Sites. Refer to Project I-(A). 9. Miscellaneous. Refer to Project I-(A). -. :! 10. Research and Development Needs: a. Upgrade Burma Road to allow all weather use to ensure ...; greater utilization of the lower portions of the Little Susi tna River. "' b. Detennine magnitude, distribution and timing of all segments of the escaperrent. ~- c. Identify various adult capture and juvenile release sites " . and detennine optimum srrol t size and time of migration. ~ _. d. Evaluate the effect of chinook plants on other rearing 'l species such as coho (refer to Project I-(A)). -32 - [ PRIORITY NUMBER II -EARLY RUSSIAN RIVER SOCKEYE SAlMON ENHANc::Er--IEN"T [ Project Goal--Provide an additional harvest of 20,000 sockeye salrron to [ satisfy 33,000 angler-days of effort. [ 1. Management. At the present time, the early Russian River -li __ j sockeye salmon run is not harvested significantly by the commercial gill net fishery due to the late June opening date. -r L"J Although annual efforts are made by commercial fishermen to open earlier in June, the current Board of Fisheries policy on [ Cook Inlet salmon allocation states that salmon stocks which c normally move in Cook Inlet to spawning areas prior to June 30 shall be managed primarily as a recreational resource, to the c extent that such management is consistent with the subsistence priority. The harvest is monitored by a Division of Sport C Fish creel census program and the escapement by a weir, above the area open to fishing, at the lower Russian lake outlet. [ 2. Fishing Areas and Access. Goqd access exists via the Seward [ Highway 110 miles from the Anchorage population center. The [ Russian River fishery occurs on both public lands of the Chugach National Forest and Kenai National Wildlife refuge. [ There are two federal campgrounds adjacent to the open fishing area. _-[ [ [ -34 -[ [ , ~, -, -, ~ :... "- """ 3. Existing Fishery and Use. A good shore fishery exists from a point two miles upstream on the Russian River to the Kenai River confluence area. During 1980, an estimated 27,200 early run sockeye sal.Iron were taken by 31,430 angler-days of effort. The fishery extends from early June through mid-July. 4. 5. 6. other Fish Species Present. '!his stream has coho salmon stocks in fair to good condition, as well as rainbow trout and D:>lly Varden. Public Facilities. There are good commercial tourist accom- m::xlations available in the Cooper Landing area. '!here are also five additional federal campgrounds within a 10-mile radius of the stream. Brood Source. An excellent brood source is available from Upper Russian Creek which is primarily used by the early sockeye salmon run. '!his is a small stream which could be temporarily weired for egg take purposes. 7. Evaluation Potential. 'Ihe potential for evaluation is excel- lent because currently there is no corrmercial set gill net fishery on returning early sockeye salmon adults until late June. 'Ihe recreational catch is presently being nonitoring by a creel program conducted over the area open to fishing. -35 - [ Escapement m:mi toring is corrplete because of the Lower Russian r lake weir. There is housing available at the Russian Lake l. weir for monitoring the escapement as well as a cabin on Upper Russian lake for conducting egg takes. [ 8. Imprint and Release Sites. The sockeye salmon fry release -D sites should be confined to Upper Russian Creek or Upper ·r L, Russian lake. [ 9. Miscellaneous. This project is of rrajor irrportance because of the high existing angler use and the ability of this intensive [ fishery to corrpletely harvest any excess fish above the [ escapement goal. A stable sockeye salmon incubation facility (spawning channel, incubation boxes, excess stream flow [ bypass, etc.) is required to provide stable early run production. During 1976 and 1977, years in which excellent [ early sockeye salmon escapements were achieved, flooding conditions drastically reduced the egg deposition. With [ corrpletion of the Russian River-Fall ' s fishpass , more "2-ocean" sockeye salmon are now able to enter the system, [ which may ultirrately increase the magnitude of the early run. [ ~ 10. Research and Development Needs: [ a. Determine the optimum sockeye salmon fry release size and [ timing into Upper Russian Lake. [ -36 -L L -. -, ·- -. , J ~ -' 1 :.l ~ -' ~- ... -' -' _.. " b. Initiate studies on types of sockeye salmon egg incubation systems or flood bypass systems to provide stable fry production from Upper Russian Creek. c. Determine the feasibility of selective breeding to prorrote a greater return of "2-ocean" sockeye salmon to the system which can utilize the fishpass at Russian River Falls. -37 - PRIORITY NUMBER III -WILLC:W CREEK COHO AND CHINOOK SAlMON ENHANCEMENT Project Goal--Tb provide a harvest of 6,000 chinook salmon and 6,000 coho salmon which will result in an estimated 42,000 angler~ays of additional fishing opportunity. Note: l. This proposal is contingent upon development of an access road along the lower portion of Willow Creek to its junction with the Susitna River. Management. Willow Creek chinook salmon, as is the case with all chinook of northern Cook Inlet origin, are presently harvested by sport, conmercial arrl subsistence users. Consid- erable conflict currently characterizes the division of catch for this species. Unlike northern coho, chinook salmon arrive early in Cook Inlet marine waters (prior to July 1) and follow rrore specific migrational paths; i.e. , they are harvested primarily in the northern district and, to a IIDch lesser degree, along the beaches of the central district. This early arrival places them within the time perioo that has been designated by the Board of Fisheries as a perioo to be managed primarily for recreational benefits, as long as the subsistence priority is accorrmxlated. Supplemental chinook salmon proouction in Willow Creek and other northern Inlet waters would, therefore, presumably have maximum benefit to -38 - [' F [ [ ·[ ~c [ c C C [ [ [ [ :c [ [ L L .., , ~- ,, l -' ~ " 2. recreational and subsistence users; i.e., corrmercial fishing could be restricted if such harvests significantly reduce these other opportunities. Fishing Area and Access. The system is located within a 2-hour drive of Anchorage and is within the proposed capitol Site. The creek is accessible by highway and has public lands in the major sallron fishing area, however, access to this area is restricted to hazardous river travel. Improved access, therefore, rmst be a prerequisite to any major enhancement effort on this system (such an access proposal is included in the Alaska Salrron Fisheries Plan). Chinook sallron terrl to linger at the rrouth of the creek until approaching maturity, hence the prime fishing area is physically confined; i.e., the fish school at the rrouth or the lower pools of the river and then ascend the creek rapidly to protected upstream spawning areas. An access road (about 3 l/2 miles in length) bordering the stream to its confluence with the Susi tna River wuuld be necessary to adequately harvest supplemental production. This road would also provide relatively easy boat access to other potential harvest areas located at the rrouths of the Deshka River and Alexander Creek. In addition, this access road would also enhance potential for supplemental coho prcx'luction originating in the Caswell Creek drainage (Proposal V). -39 - 3. 4. 5. 6. Existing Fishery and Use. The stream has historically sup- ported a m:xlest chinook salnon fishery that has been limited because of access difficulties. The fishery occurs during June and early July and is presently confined to four consecu- tive weekends. A max.i.rnu.ll allowed harvest of 300 chinook governs the seasonal catch from the system. Other Fish Species Present. A substantial pink salnon fishery occurs particularly on "even" years. Unlike chinook salnon, these fish are primarily harvested near the Parks Highway at a time when flesh condition is beginning to deteriorate. Improved access to the stream mouth would also be beneficial to this fishery. Grayling and Dolly Varden are also available and enter sport fisheries in small numbers. Public Facilities. There are numerous tourist acconm:dations adjacent to the Parks Highway near Willow Creek. A State wayside is also present on Willow Creek near the Parks Highway, and excellent State camping facilities are located in the nearby Nancy Lake Recreational Area. Private campgrounds and commercial fishing guides are also present. Brcxxl Source. An adequate chinook salnon brcxxl stock is available and capturing adults for eggs would be reasonably easy (by weir, electroshocking or seine) • Because of limi te:i numbers, coho brcxxl stock will have to be obtained from other -40 - L F r~ r~. "[ -,-; L [ L C [ [ [ [ [ _·[ l [ l L • sources. Spawning areas are accessible by road at numerous locations. Spawning distribution arrl magnitude are well documented for both coho and chinook within the system. ~ 7 . Evaluation Potential. Assessment of the sport harvest in ,_ Willow Creek would not be difficult; however, costs for creel checks would increase if chinook are taken at downstream Susitna River tributary rrouths. M:Jderate costs would also be associated with assessment of the marine catch of Willow Creek chinook salrron. Escapement can accurately be measured by visual :rreans and examination of carcasses for "ma.rks" . No ~ ADF&G facilities are currently available on the system to aid the program, however, there is considerable background infor- ma.tion for the river; i.e., escapement magnitudes, distribu- tion, sex and age composition, juvenile growth rates and various physical and chemical data. 8. Imprint and Release Sites. Potential lotic release sites are available by road at numerous" locations in the drainage. Deception Creek, a tributary of Willow Creek, may prove to be an excellent imprint site; i.e., easy to weir and locatEd upstream of the area open to salrron fishing . ...... 9. Miscellaneous. This system was chosen for supplemental pro- duction studies for the following basic reasons: (1) to determine the feasibility of harvesting chinook salrron as they -41 - 10. pass through and/or school off the mouths of downstream Susitna River tributaries (2) to obtain available background data from these downstream fisheries and, (3) due to the ease of evaluation. Stated harvest and effort goals will not likely be achieved if Willow Creek proves to be the sole harvest area. An understanding of the harvest p::>tential at downriver tributary mouths will undoubtedly guide future enhancement site selections throughout the Susitna River drainage. Research and Development Needs: a. b. c. d. Improve access to the mouth of Willow Creek by road and boat launch construction. Identify various adult and juvenile release sites. Determine optimum srnolt and/or fingerling stockli1g densities, sizes and release times. Evaluate enhancement contributions to the Willow Creek fishery and to the downstream Deshka River arrl Alexander Creek fisheries (downstream Susitna River tributaries). -42 - [ F [ [ -[ "[ [ [ c c [ [ [ [ ~[ [ [ [ l ~ ,_ "' j ~ ., ~ .. --, .. ~- ~· ... e. Evaluate the effects of chinook saJ.non enhancement on the system's coho population. Coho enhancement may be practical in this system if it can be demonstrated that such a program does not conflict with the primary goal of chinook saJ.non enhancement. -43 - PRIORITY NUMBER N -ANCHOR RIVER STEELHEAD ENHANCEMENT Project Goal--Provide an additional harvest of 1,000 steelhead to satisfy 10, 000 angler-days of effort. 1. Management. Little comnercial and recreational fishery conflict exists on this stream, as the corrmercial gill net fishery begins one mile north of the Ninilchik River. The current Board of Fisheries policy on Cbok Inlet salmon allo- cation states that commercial salmon gill net fishing after August 15 will be curtailed or eliminated in areas where these fisheries intercept stocks bound for Kenai Peninsula spawning areas. This policy further reduces the already limited incidental harvest of steelhead that are taken in the corrmer- cial salmon set net fishery. There are areas south of Anchor River where steelhead bound for the Anchor River are subjected to subsistence fishing. The closely regulated fishery averages less than 100 fish per year. 2. Fishing Areas and Access. There is a good access via the Seward and Sterling Highways about 190 to 210 miles from the Anchorage population center. The entire stream is open to steelhead fishing and is generally accessible to the public. There is considerable State land along the Anchor River. -44 - [ [ - [ [ -D ·c [ c c c c [ [ [ ~[ t [ [ [ "'! ~ ~- ~ ~ -' -' J _,- ~- 3. Existing Fishery and Use. There is a fair to good steelhead fishery with high existing use from late August through the end of CX::tober. The harvest from 1977 to 197 9 has ranged from 780 to 1, 750 steelhead. Angler effort exceeds 15,000 angler- days armually. 4. Other Fish Species Present. This stream has chinook salm::m stocks in excellent condition as well as good anadrarrous IX:>lly Varden stocks and a fair to good coho salmon population. 5. 6. Small rainbow trout stocks occur in the upper portions of the streams with small numbers of pink salmon present in the lower areas on "even" years. Public Facilities. There are limited tourist rrotel facilities adjacent to this stream, but excellent accomnodations are available in Horner 20 miles away via the Sterling Highway. The State Division of Parks has two campgrounds adjacent to the Anchor River. Brood Source. A good steelhead brood source is available from Stariski Creek. This stream has a close geographical proximity to these streams (six miles from the Anchor River). It is a fairly small stream which could be easily weired. In the event it was selected as a brood stock, it could be completely closed to fishing without the loss of substantial recreational opportunity. CrookErl Creek, located 45 miles -45 - 7. 8. 9. north of Anchor river, has a F .R.E.D. Division weir on it and could also be used as a location to establish a steelhead "over-wintering" holding facility for spring egg takes. Evaluation Potential. Good evaluation potential already exists as returning adults are subjected to a limited subsistence fishery and no commercial fishery. A creel census is currently being conductErl on the Anchor River coupled with a tag and recovery program and escapement surveys. Imprint and Release Sites. Good imprint and release sites ' are available below the North and South Forks of the Anchor River which are accessible at several points by a gravel road. Miscellaneous. Steelhead could be rearErl at the existing Anchorage Area Hatchery Complex where warmer water conditions could be utilizErl to shorten the freshwater phase of srrol t rearing by possibly two years: The greatest problem facing this program will be in holding returning rna.ture steelhead adults which arrive in September and October until their spawning ·tine in April and May. If this program is sue- cessful, it could be expandErl to other streams such as the Ninilchik River and Deep Creek and possibly the lower Kenai River. -46 - [ F r [ -[ "[ [ [ c c [ [ [ [ _-[ [ [ L [ .., ""1 ~ ~- :; : ~ -, _j "' ~- ~ ~ 10. Research and Development Needs: a. Determine optimwm smolt release size and timing. b. / Determine the effect of steelhead srrol t plants on other rearing species; i . e. , chinook and coho salmon. -47 - PRIORITY NUMBER V -CASWELL CREEK COHO SAlMON ENHANCEMENT ~··, \ Project Goal--To provide a harvest of 6, 000 lat' run coho which will result in an estimatfd 12,000 angler-days o~ditional recreational fishing opportunity;\~ to evalu~~-~t and catch distribution at --··~-~~---· the rrouths of downstream Susitna River tributaries. 1. Management. Sport and corrmercial user group concerns described previously for the Little Susitna River apply in this system. Precise manipulation of sport catch and escape- ment nay prove difficult if substantial numbers of coho are harvested at the rrouths of downstream tributaries. 2. Fishing Areas and Access. The system is locatErl within a 2-hour drive of Anchorage and lies just north of the proposErl Willow Capitol Site. Highway access is available to the rrouth of the creek where rrost salmon fishing occurs. Public lands border this portion of the creek. The harvest area at the rrouth of Caswell Creek is physically very restricted and, therefore, can only accorrm:Jdate limitErl fishing pressure. Fishing areas would be greatly expanded, however, if the rrouths of downstream Susitna River tributaries develop into significant harvest sites. 3. Existing Fishery and Use. Present fishing pressure is rela- tively light and, for the rrost part, the harvest occurs on coho stocks bound for tributaries in the upper Susitna River -48 - [ f " [ [ l~ [ [ [ C [ [ [ [ I [ [ [ [ ~ ' -, ~ _j drainage. The system's fishery occurs from mid-July until early September. 4. Other Fish Species. Impact on indigenous salmonids would be minirral; i.e., only a few grayling and a small rainbow popu- lation exist in the drainage. Angling effort is currently very light on these fishes. Srna.ll chinook and pink salmon fisheries also occur at the rrouth on stocks that are rroving further upstream in the Susi tna River. 5. Public Facilities. Tburist accommodations are available at numerous Parks Highway lodges in the vicinity of caswell Creek. No public campgrounds are present on the system and/ or at the rrouths of potential downstream harvest sites. If supplemental production is successful, a lack of public facilities will generate the need for garbage rerroval, parking, restrooms, etc. 6. Brood Source. Existing coho l)rood stock is limited. However, procurement of eggs could easily be achieved by weiring this srrall creek although the system's coho are srrall and have low fecundity. The small size of this population and its rela- tively minor contribution to existing fisheries suggest that late arriving coho from other drainages rray be suitable for building this population. -49 - 7. Evaluation Potential. Problems of accurately assessing adult returns in the commercial fishery would be identical to those described for the Little Susi tna River. Estima.tion of the SfX)rt harvest at the rrouth of Caswell Creek and determination of escaperrent could be efficiently accomplished. Evaluation of catches from downstream Susitna River tributaries would be rroderately costly; i.e., this would involve census at Alexander Creek, Deshka River, Willow Creek and Little Willow Creek. Assessment of out-migration could be obtained by weir. The headwaters of the system are accessible by road and the entire system can be foot surveyed in one day. The system offers opportunities for lentic and lotic rearing and release experimentation. There are currently no ADF&G facilities on the creek. 8. Irrprint and Release Sites. Road accessible lentic and lotic release sites are available at several locations in the drain- age. 9. ·Miscellaneous. This is a small system that only affords rrodest opportunities for production supfX)rted solely by fry- fingerling plants. The primary basis for selecting this site is to determine the feasibility of harvesting coho as they pass through downstream tributarial fisheries. Stated harvest and effort goals will not be achievai if coho do not contri.b- ute to downstream tributary catches. An tm:lerstanding of the harvest fX)tential from upstream Susitna River hatchery -50 - [ [ r-· [ ·[ . r-· L___, C' L [ [ [ [ [ [ [ .L [ [ L l ,. releases will play an important role in future enhancement site selection throughout the Susitna River drainage. 10. Research and Development Needs: a. Determine magnitude, distribution and timing of all segments of the escapement into the system. b. Identify various adult capture and juvenile release sites. c. Determine optimum fry and/or smolt release densities, size, age, timing, etc. These studies must include, but not be limited to, evaluation of lotic and lentic releases, fry-fingerlings vs. smolt releases and accelerated vs. full term srnolt releases. d. Assess the contribution of enhanced coho to the Caswell Creek fishery and to fisheries of the lower Susitna River. -51 - PRIORITY NUMBER VI -RESURRECI'ION BAY COHO SAlMON ENHANCEMENT Project Goal--Provide an additional harvest 10,000 coho salmon to satisfy 20,000 angler-days of effort. l. Management. There currently exists a limitEd conflict between recreational and corrmercial users in Resurrection Bay. This area was closEd to commercial fishing for coho salmon by the Board of Fisheries in 1965. There is some overlap in timing of adult returns between pink salmon which are harvestEd by corrtrercial purse seiners, and coho salmon stocks. Conflicts in this area have been minimizEd through implerrentation of a 1976 Board of Fisheries policy which prohibits the corrrnercial taking of coho. The Division of Sport Fish has collectEd substantial backgrourrl information on coho salmon catch to escapement ratios neEdEd to formulate sound management practices. 2. 3. Fishing Areas and Access. GoCd access is available via the Seward Highway 130 miles from the Anchorage population center. Resurrection Bay is 15 miles long and 3 miles wide and is generally shelterEd from weather during the summer with some protectEd coves. Existing Fishery and Use. A high-use marine boat fishery exists which provides 20,000 to 30,000 angler-days and takes 10,000 to 20,000 coho salmon from the middle of July through -52 - f ' F [ [ T' . ' r~, - [ [ [ [ [ [ L [ ~[ [ L L L & r> the middle of September. While shore fishing opportunities for coho salmon are available, the catch rates are substantially lower. 4. Other Fish Species Present. A good pink salmon fishery exists primarily on "even" years. Rockfish and ling cod are also available near the Resurrection Bay entrance. Other species present are halibut, chinook salmon, COlly Varden, greenling, cod, etc. 5. Public Facilities. There are good tourist accommodations available as well as developed public parking and boat launching sites. There are also numerous charter boat services available. The Seward Silver Salmon Derby has been held during mid-August since 1956. 6. Brood Source. Excellent coho brood sources exist from the Seward Lagoon and Bear Lake stocks. This area is currently the major brood source for southcentral Alaska coho salmon programs. 7. Evaluation Potential. Excellent evaluation potential exists through the Resurrection Bay creel census program and the Bear Creek weir. The adult coho salmon returns are subjected to virtually no corrmercial fishing effort. Tributary streams, except for the mainstem Resurrection River, are relatively small and can be easily foot surveyed. The Department has -53 - existing permanent facilities at Bear Creek for housing personnel to rronitor this project. The Bear Creek weir has excellent adult capture, holding and egg take facilities as / well as smolt enumeration and marking capabilities. An adult capture and holding facility was constructed at the Seward I.a.goon Inlet during 1978. 8. Imprint and Release Sites. Excellent proven coho salmon smolt 9. 10. imprint and release sites exist at Bear Creek and Seward I.a.goon. Seward I.a.goon smolt plants have achieved smolt sur- vivals as high as 15%. Numerous small tributary streams and Grouse Lake are also available as sites. Miscellaneous. This proposed coho salmon enhancement effort will supplerrent the existing fry stocking in Bear Lake and the planting of smolts in the Seward Lagoon. The present program has been responsible for increasing the Resurrection Bay recreational coho salmon harvest by approximately one-third. Research and Development Needs: a. b. Detennine the optimum coho salmon fry stocking density for rehabilitated Bear Lake. Detennine optimum coho salmon smolt release size and timing for the Seward Lagoon and Resurrection Bay tributary streams. -54 - [ F ~ [ =[ ·. [' E [ • [ [ [ [ [ [ ~L [ L L L c. Construct a rearing pond system in the lower Resurrection River area to utilize coho salrron fry "downstream drift". ' d. Investigate the feasibility of increasing the stocked coho salrron fry to srrol t production in Bear Lake by employing artificial fertilization methods . .J ., -, l l _.J ~ .•. ,· ..... ·-' -55 - [ PRIORITY NUMBER VII -EARLY KENAI RIVER CHINOOK SAlMON ENHANCEMENT f Project Goal--Provide an additional harvest of 5,000 chinook salmon to I' satisfy 25, 000 angler-days of effort. [ l. Management. At the present time the early Kenai River chinook f -, . _, salmon run is essentially not harvested by the commercial gill net fishery due to the late June opening date. Although •[ annual efforts are made by commercial fishermen to open earlier in June, the current Board of Fisheries policy on Cook [ Inlet salmon allocation states that salmon runs prior to July [ 1, destined for Kenai Peninsula spawning areas, will be managed primarily for the recreational fishery as long as the [ subsistence priority is accC!"£UtKXlated. The Kenai River early run is subjected to a limited harvest by sport fisherrren C during the Deep Creek marine fishery. Both fisheries are rronitored by a Division of Sport Fish creel census program. [ [ 2. Fishing Areas and Access. Th~e is gcxxl access via the Seward Highway 130 to 160 miles from the Anchorage population center. [ The Kenai River near the Skilak I.ake outlet is on public larrls of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. The lower portion of [ ... the river is mainly private larrl, but there are five public ~[ boat launching sites in addition to the numerous private sites. [ [ L -56 - [ 3. Existing Fishery and Use. A good boat fishery exists from the Skilak Lake outlet to the Kenai River's termination with Oook Inlet. During 1979, an estimatErl 3,660 early run chinook : salrron were taken by 39,670 angler-days of effort. The fishery extends from early June through early July. ,, 4. other Fish Species Present. This stream has coho sal.non' ~. stocks in fair to good condition as well as rainbow trout, Dolly Varden and sockeye salmon. Pink salmon are very abundant during "even" years. ~ 5. Public Facilities. There are excellent tourist accommodations available in the Kenai, Soldotna and Sterling areas. There are guide charter services available as well as boat rentals. There are numerous camping sites and boat launching ramps along the entire length of the lower Kenai River. 6. Brood Source. An excellent source is available from Benjamin Creek, a tributary to the KiL!.ey River. It is considered undesirable to introduce non-indigenous stocks to this major system. _., 7 . Evaluation Potential. The I:X>tential is good because there ~·. currently is no commercial set gill net fishery on returning adults until late June. The recreational catch is presently being rroni tored by a creel census program conducted over the bulk of the area open to fishing. Escapement rronitoring is difficult at the present time but will be I:X>Ssible after the -57 - lower Kenai River trap is operational. There is housing available at Soldotna for nonitoring the overall stock returns. 8. Imprint and Release Sites. Returning adult chinook saliiDn 9. 10. should be as concentraterl as possible to ensure maximum recreational harvest. Primary release sites should be confinerl to the lower Kenai River, probably at the nouths of Slikok and Soldotna Creeks, because future needs ma.y necessitate eggs being taken from these returning adults. Secondary release sites should be further upstream, probably at the nouths of Killey and Frmny Rivers. Miscellaneous. This project is of considerable importance because of the present high existing use of the fishery (35,000 angler-days over a 30-day pericd.). Research and Development Neerls: a. b. Determine optimum chinook saliiDn SIIDl t release size and timing. Assess supplemental chinook saliiDn prcd.uction utilizing tag and recovery methcd.s. -58 - r F [ [ ·[ ·c [ c [ [ [ [ [ [ ,._ ..[ [ [ [ [ , PRIORITY NUMBER VIII -KNIK ARM TRIBUTARIES COHO SAlMON ENHANCEMENT (Including Fish, Cottonwocx:l and Wasilla Creeks) . 'Project Goal--To provide a harvest of 9,000 late run coho which will result in an estimated 18,000 angler-days of additional fishing oppor- ', tunity; and to develop and evaluate various coho enhancement practices. ~. '• 1. Management. Sport and corrmercial user-group concerns described previously for the Little Susitna River coho apply to each of these systems. Manipulation of sport catch and escapement can readily be accomplished for each stream because salmon fishing areas are restricted and escapements can be assessed easily by visual or weir methods. 2. Fishing Areas and Access. All systems are locaterl within a 1 to 1 1/2 hour drive of Anchorage and are also near the commun- i ties of Palmer and Wasilla. Highway access is available to all three streams. Public larrls border most areas open to salmon fishing, however, a potential access problem could develop along an existing road to Wasilla Creek. Harvest areas are restricted to brackish water portions of each stream, and these confined areas can only accorrmodate :m::derate ~ fishing pressure without causing substantial streambank congestion. ',, -59 - 3. 4. 5. 6. Existing Fishery and Use. Each of the Knik. Ann systems have substantial existing recreational use which fluctuates con- siderably each year according to run strength. Salmon fishing is currently restricted to weekends only because a~gling demands far exceed present stock levels. These fisheries are characterized as being intense and of short duration due to restricted fishing areas and time. Other Fish Species Present. Both Fish and Cotton'WOCrl systems have sizeable sockeye salmon populations that do not presently contribute significantly to a recreational fishery. These two systems also have healthy rainbow stocks that enter lentic fisheries in rroderate numbers. Big Lake, within the Fish Creek drainage, supports a quality winter Dolly Varden fishery. Wasilla Creek contains a resident Dolly Varden popu- lation that supports light fishing pressure. Public Facilities. There are favorable tourist accommodations available in the nearby c0lll11ll!li ties of PaJmer and Wasilla. An unmaintained campground (formerly Borough-operated) is present at Fish Creek; however, a lack of public facilities on or near the other streams could cause difficulties if angling inten- sity increases substantially; i.e., limited parking, no garbage or restroom facilities, etc. Brood Source. Acquisition of eggs could readily be accomp- lished, however, the size of the population in Cottonv.u.rl Creek is often limited. Brood exchange between the streams -60 - [ F ~ [ [ T~ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ ~ ~[ [ L L l' " '· ,., -' l i may be possible because the drainages are located within close proxirni ty of one another arrl they appear to have rrany similar characterist.ics. Egg takes have been conducted in both Fish and Cottonwcxxl Creeks in the past and brocxl fish can be captured efficiently with low cost weirs. The fecundity of coho in all three systems is relatively low; i.e., 2,300 to 2,600 per female. No known late arriving sub-populations have been documented for these systems. 7. Evaluation Potential. Problems of accurately assessing adult returns in the commercial fishery would be identical to those described for the Little Susi tna River. Estimation of both recreational harvest and escapements could be efficiently accomplished in all drainages. Fish and Cottonwocrl Creeks currently have both up and downstream migrant weirs. Road accessibility is excellent along the entire length of each drainage. Environmental similarities suggest the enhancement techniques developed in one watershed may be applicable to the other systems. The existing staff and incubation facility at Meadow Creek would readily facilitate enhancement evaluations. Although Meadow Creek currently has numerous ADF&G facilities, it may be desirable to conduct definitive coho enhancement research in the Cottonwood drainage where a larger sockeye population would not complicate investigations; i.e., accurate enumeration of both adult and juvenile coho would be difficult in Fish Creek because of the rrore numerous sockeye. -61 - 8. Imprint and Release Sites. Both lentic and lotic imprint and release sites are available by road in all drainages. All sites are within a one-hour drive of the Fort Richardson- Elmendorf Hatchery and within a half-hour drive of the 11.1eadow Creek incubation facility. 9. Miscellaneous. The Knik Ann system appears to be ideal for enhancement related coho research. Substantial biological, chemical and physical data are available for these systems and they are very accessible and easy to weir. Lentic and lotic rearing and release sites are plentiful in two systems, and environmental similarities allow for comparative investi- gations. 10. Research and ~velopuent Needs: a. Determine magnitude, distribution and timing of all segments of the escapement into CottonMJ<Xi and Wasilla Creeks. b. Identify various adult capture and juvenile release sites. c. ~terrnine optimum fry and/or smolt release densities, size, age, timing, etc. These studies must include, but not be limited to, evaluation of !otic vs. len tic -62 - [ L [ [ ) L~ l~ r· \ L [ [ [ [ [ [ c [ [ [ [ [ « ' . .J ~ ' ' ~ ' .J d. releases, fry-fingerling vs. smolt releases and accelerated vs. full term smolt releases. The contrib- ution of enhanced stocks to the recreational fisheries of the respective systems will be evaluated. Evaluate the effect of coho plants on other species. Emphasis should be directed toward inter-reactions with sockeye and rainbow trout. Coho production MUST Nor significantly interfere with or impact the enhancement of Fish Creek sockeye. -63 - PRIORITY NUMBER IX-(A) -KACHEMAK BAY COHO ENHANCEMENT Project Goal--Provide an additional harvest of 15,000 coho salmon to satisfy 30,000 angler-days of effort. l. 2. 3. Management. There currently exists a limited conflict between recreational and corrmercial users in Kachemak Bay. The area adjacent to the northeast side of the Horrer Spit was closed to coillr!lercial fishing by the Board of Fisheries in 1976 although it still remains open to subsistence gill net fishing. There is sorre overlap between pink salmon, which are harvested by COillr!lercial purse seiners and coho salmon stocks. Fishing Areas and Access. There is good access via the Sterling Highway 240 miles from the Anchorage population center. Kachernak Bay is 20 miles long and 4 miles wide and has numerous protected coves on its south side as well as sheltered water on the east side of the Horner Spit. Existing Fishery and Use. This is a good recreational fishery with angling effort for all finfish exceeding 50,000 angler- days in 1979. The Kachemak Bay coho salm:m catch by sport anglers was approximately 1,800 in 1979. While shore fishing opportunities for coho salmon are also available, the catch rates are substantially lower than for boat anglers. -64 - L [ [ [ r LJ ~ -' ·[· [ [ c [ [ [ [ r ., ~ r· L [ [ [ f' L ·. ~ : ' 1;, ,• 4. Other Fish Species Present. There is a gocx1 pink salmon fishery on both "even" and "cxld" years, particularly in the Tutka Bay area. There is an excellent halibut fishery in Kachemak Bay west of the ''Spit". Other species present are chinook salmon, Dolly Varden, crab, shrimp and hardshell clams. 5. Public Facilities. There are gocxl tourist accommodations available in Homer as well as developed public parking, camping and boat launching sites. There are numerous charter boat services available although they are primarily oriented toward halibut fishing at the present time. 6. Brocxl Source. There are gocxl coho brocxl sources from both the Seward lagoon and Bear lake coho salmon stocks. These stocks spend at least two rronths feeding in saltwater prior to entering their spawning streams, so they would be available to the recreational fishery for a long pericxl of time. 7. Evaluation Potential. There is gocxl evaluation potential through a Kachernak Bay creel census program. The adult coho salrron returns are not subjected to an intense corrmercial fishing effort but are taken by the subsistence gill net fishery. Because of this, some rronitoring may be required. Tributary streams, where srrol ts may be plantErl, are relatively small and can easily be foot surveyErl. The Department has existing permanent facilities at the Anchor River for housing personnel to monitor this project. -65 - 8. Imprinting and Release Sites. Imprint and release sites in Kachernak Bay should be confined primarily to the vicinity of the Horner Spit where maximum utilization by recreational anglers can be achieved. Sites that should receive prirrary initial consideration are Fritz Creek and the MUd Bay area (direct saltwater). 9. Miscellaneous. This proposed coho salnon enhancement effort is of lower priority because good marine fishing occurs in Kachernak Bay for other finfish and shellfish species. Also, the program has to be relatively successful to provide a sufficient number of coho salmon to establish a marine sport fishery. 10. Research and Development Needs: a. Determine optimum coho salmon smolt release size and timing. -\ b. Determine optimum coho salmon smolt imprint and release sites in the Horner Spit area. c. Determine the degree of interception of returning coho salmon adults by the commercial purse seine and gill net fisheries. -66 - [ F [ [ r l_: 1J [ c c c c c [ r r 1_; [ [ [ [ '"' ~ ~ ' PRIORITY NUMBER IX-(B) -KACHEMAK BAY CHINOOK SAlMON ENHANCEMENT Project Goal--Tb provide an additional harvest of 2,000 chinook salmon to satisfy 10,000 angler-days of effort. 1. Management. Generally the same considerations exist as IX-(A) except that early run chinook salm::m will tend to concentrate IOC>re in the south side of Kachemak. Bay and be subject to the commercial set gill net fishery. 2. Fishing Areas and Access. Refer to IX-(A) . 3. Existing Fishery and Use. There is a good recreational fish- ery with high existing use for all finfish. More than 50,000 angler-days were recorded in 1979. The chinook salmon catch by boat anglers fishing mainly the south side of Kachernak Bay, was 400 chinook in 1979--IOC>stly "feeders". ' 4. Other Fish Species Present. A. good pink saliOC>n fishery exists on both "even" and "odd" years particularly in the Tutka Bay area. There is a good halibut fishery in Kachemak. Bay west of the "Spit" and in the Seldovia area. Other species present are coho saliOC>n, D::>lly Varden, crab, shrimp and hardshell clams. 5. Public Facilities. Refer to IX-(A). -67 - 6. Brood Source. CrookErl Creek stocks are currently in use as a brood stock. 7. Evaluation Potential. It has fair evaluation potential through a Kachemak Bay creel census program. The adult chinook salm:m returns will be subject to the corrrrercial set gill net fishery in the English Bay to Kasitsna Bay areas, so these sites will require monitoring. Depen::ling on the locations of chinook salmon srnolt releases, monitoring of adult returns should be possible at the tributary streams (Tutka Bay lagoon Creek) or marine rearing pens. B. Imprint and Release Sites. Suitable experimental release sites may be available in protectErl coves on the south side of Kachernak Bay, its tributary streams or the marine rearing pens at Halibut Cbve. 9. Miscellaneous. An experimental plant of 26, 000 chinook salrnon srnolts was made in Tutka Bay lagoon Creek in 197 6, however, only three adult chinook from this plant returnErl in 1978. In addition to satisfying the research needs on this project, it is important that the returning chinook salrnon adults remain in saltwater a sufficient length of time (a minimum of one month) to provide a viable sport fishery. If they tend to return to the release sites as rapidly as Cook Inlet chinook -68 - [ f [ [ r L r [ [ c [ [ [' J [ fJ [ :. [ [ L [ ~ " ~ ; ' .J \ -· _; salm::m normally do, without any saltwater delay, no recrea- tional fishery can occur. Ibnor streams entering Kachemak Bay are too small to provide an aesthetically acceptable fishery. 10. Research and Development Needs: a. Determine the success of various brood stocks available in the Cook Inlet area for establishing chinook salmon runs in areas where they are not currently indigenous. b. Determine optimum smolt release size and timing. c. Initiate studies to determine the period of saltwater availability to the recreational fishery of returning adult chinook salmon. -69 - PRIORITY NUMBER X -LATE KENAI RIVER COHO SAlMON ENHANCEMENT Project Goal--Provide an additional harvest of 10,000 coho salmon to satisfy 20,000 angler-days of effort. 1. 2. 3. Management. Although there presently exists considerable user group conflict between sport and commercial fishermen over the late Kenai River coho salmon run, existing commercial fishing effort is virtually nonexistent. The current Board of Fisheries policy on Oook Inlet salmon allocation states that the conmercial effort after August 15 will be rErluced or eliminated. This essentially allocates this segment of the run to the recreational fishery, as long as the subsistence priority is accorrm::datErl. This fishery has been IIDnitorErl by a creel census program since 1976. Fishing Area and Access. Good access via the Seward Highway llO to 160 miles from the Anchorage population center. The upper section of the Kenai River is on public lands of the Chugach National Forest and Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. The lower portion of the river is mainly private land but there are five public boat launching sites in addition to the numerous private sites. Existing Fishery and Use. Good boat fishery from the Skilak Lake outlet to the Kenai River's termination with Oook Inlet. During 1979, an estimated 5,700 late run coho saliiDn were -70 - [ F [ [ "' >'' l r [ [ c [ [ [ [ ~ [ L l [ [ taken by 12,300 angler-days of effort. The fishery is long, extending from the middle of August through October. 4. Other Fish Species Present. This stream has chinook salrron stocks in good condition as well as rainbow trout, Dolly Varden and sockeye salrron. Pink salrron are very abundant during "even" years. 5. Public Facilities. There are excellent tourist accammoda- tions available in the Kenai, Soldotna and Sterling areas. There are guide charter services available as well as boat rentals. There are numerous camping sites and boat launching ramps along the entire length of the Kenai River. 6. Brood Source. Brood stock for an enhancement program should come from the late run itself. This segment of the run, however, is believed to be comprised primarily of mainstem Kenai River spawners and would not lend itself to easy capture for egg take purposes. Spawning concentrations of these fish I which return during the optimum time of late August through September are unknown at this time. ,. 7. Evaluation Potential. Good recreational harvest evaluation .. potential through the existing Kenai River creel census program. The potential subsistence catch could be determined by a monitoring program on the east side set net beaches after -71 - August 15. Escapement assessrrent would be very difficult because the late run fish are believed to be mainstem spawners and do not utilize the clear lateral tributaries as does the early run. There is seasonal housing available for creel census rroni toring in Soldotna. 8. Imprint and Release Sites. Returning adult coho salrron should be as concentrated as possible to ensure maximum recreational harvest. Because of this, release sites should be confined to the lower Kenai River probably at the rrouths of Slikok and Soldotna Creeks. 9. Miscellaneous. This project has a lower priority because late Kenai River coho salrron stock size may improve substantially with the elimination of or reductions in the commercial fishery. Also, because of the large size of the stream and possible inclement weather during this pericd, catch to escapement ratios will be less favorable. 10. Research and Development Needs: a. Identify major concentration areas of late run spawning coho salrron for brood stock development. b. Determine optimum coho salrron smolt release size and timing. -72 - L F I' [ [ I r' L [ [ c [ [ [ c T' L 4 [ L f ~ [ [~ ~ Table 3. Listing hyi;Priority of Specific Cook Inlet Streams and Marine Bays Recam:nended for Enhancement with Desired Number of Fish by Species Recormren:led for Each Project.*** Name of Site Anticipated catch:Escapement Little Susitna River Russian River Early 1:1, 3:1 Rlm Total catch Willow c:ree..1<. Anchor River caswell Lakes Resurrection Bay Kenai River Early Run Knik Arm Tributaries Kacherrak Bay Kenai River Late Run Total by species Total Catch 3:1 1:1 3:1 1:1 1:1 3:1 1:1, 2:1 1.2 106,000 Total Enhancement Run 179,000 Coho catch* Run** 10 6 6 10 9 15 10 66 20 8 8 20 12 30 30 128 * Minimum desired catch of artificially produced fish. Species King Steelhead Sockeye Catch Run catch Run Catch 6 8 20 6 8 l 2 5 10 2 3 -- - - 19 29 1 2 20 ** Total number of artificially produced fish required to produce desired catch at estimated catch to escapement rates. *** All totals are in l, 000 increments,. ," ~ , .. !., F·" I ro-••r 1 '1 , 1 • ·;>' " ,, .. !"' ., Run 20 - 20 I (""') r--