HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA3339SUSITNA
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
\'
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
PROJECT No.7114
FURBEARER STUDIES
SPRING 1985 TRAPPER SURVEY
FINAL REPORT
FEBRUARY 1986
DOCUMENT NO.3339
Alaska Power Authority ---
-
"...,
-
SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FURBEARER STUDIES
SPRING 1985 TRAPPER SURVEY
Report by
LGL Alaska Research Associates,Inc.
James D.Woolington
Under contract to
Harza-Ebasco Susi tna Joint Venture
Prepa red for
Alaska Power Authority
Documen~No.JJJ9
Susitna Fil I No.4.3.3.2
TK
\L-\;;1S
,sg
Fg~
~.3331
Final Report
February 1986
ARL S
Alaska Reso fees
Library &lnfonnat on ServIces
Anchorage.raska
-
-
.....
..-
-
-
-
NOTICE
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS CONCERNING
THIS REPORT SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO
THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
SUSITNA PROJECT OFFICE
Alaska Reso rees
Library &Informatl n ServIces
Anchorage.Ar
I
..-
TRAPPER SURVEY
I.Introduction
Trappers in the Susitna River drainage are able to make firsthand obsen at ions
of wildlife resources in the region.Many trappers maintain informal rec rds of
the furbearers they catch,the distribution of the furbearers,and a parent
population fluctuations.A survey was conducted of trappers in the ar a that
might be affected by the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Proj ect.S ecific
objectives of the survey were:
1.To gain information on historical and present use of fu bearer
resources in the Susitna basin,and especially in areas that m'ght be
affected by the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project;and
2.To gain insight into furbearer distribution and abundance from Jersons
directly utilizing the furbearer resource.
II.~I,.pproach and Methods
A.Definition of Survey Area
TrappE~rs interviewed for this survey included those that trapped within
definE~d as:north and east of the Talkeetna River,east of the Parks
between the Susitna River bridge and Cantwell,south of the Alaska Range
the Parks Highway and the Richardson Highway,west of the Richardson
between Paxson and Glennallen,and north of the Glenn Highway between Gle
and the Chickaloon River (Figure 1).
B.Compilation of List of Trappers
n area
ighway
etween
ighway
nallen
The sources used to compile the list of names of trappers to be inte viewed
included:Appendix A from Gipson et al.(1984)listing names of trappers and
other persons knowledgeable about furbearers in the area,furbearer ealing
forms from Alaska Department of Fish and Game records,and information p ovided
by trappers during interviews.
C .•Development of Interview Guide
<:"""
ex>
'¢
0,-.....
'¢
'¢
0
0
0
lD
lDr--
(")
(")
""""
""
A qUE~stionnaire was prepared for use during the interviews (Append X A).
Categories of questions included:
1.Trapping operations
-location and size of trapping area
-number of years the person had trapped in that area
mode of transportation
portion of income derived from trapping
2~Furbearer species
what furbearer species were present
what furbearer species were sought by trappers
1
-~1 '..·~··l )~.1 J t 1 ~-).:'_.")/-~J -)-J
miles
o 10 20 40i,
'"......~.
,.
~
~
\,\
\-_--I'.>-~:~.g
~
,~s:\\I.~
Q
Glenn
II .-----..-c:__.-,-,....:,-..
~~
I Ei:&'--~-r ~R
Figure 1.Susitna River above Talkeetna.Dashed line encloses trapper survey area.
-
.....
numbers and species of furbearers trapped
information on the population status of each species
3.Other comments
how the Susitna project might affect the trapping area
-names of other trappers
information regarding moose or caribou falling through ice an lor
drowning
D.Interviews with Trappers
Interviews were conducted during April.May.and June 1985.Persons on t e list
to be interviewed were contacted by telephone and in person at their resi ences.
Trappers in remote areas were sent letters requesting them to call the inter-
viewer at their convenience.
III.Results
Twenty-three trappers from the survey area were successfully contact d and
interviewed.Of these.17 responded that they had trapped within the survey
area during the 1984-85 trapping season.Six responded that they h d not
trappl~d in the area during the 1984-85 season.but that they had trapped in the
area during previous seasons,and would probably trap in the area agai.Two
persons trapping only within the proposed impoundments and adj acent areas
responded.It is probable that other trappers operated inside or adj a ent to
'the impoundment areas during the 1984-85 season.Evidence of possible tlapping
activity along the lower parts of the Oshetna and Tyone rivers and in the Fog
Lakes area was observed in mid-February 1985.Trappers subsequentlyinte viewed
did not know who might have been trapping in those areas,or how many tappers
might have been involved.Because these unknown trappers could ot be
contaeted,information concerning their numbers and the distribution of their
trapping areas could not be obtained.The total number of trappers opera ing in
the survey area during the 1984-85 season is unknown,but survey re ponses
indicated that as many as twice the number of trappers interviewed may a tually
trap :i.n the area.
In this report.information on most trapping operations (size of
method of transportation.and portion of income)and numbers
caughlt is presented only for persons trapping during the past season.
tional information on the number of years the person had trapped in th
opinions on furbearer population status,and other comments are present
inte~liews of persons trapping during the past season and also from int
of those that did not trap during the past season,if they had remained
edgeable about furbearer populations in the area.
A.Trapping Operations
area,
earers
Addi-
area.
d from
rviews
knowl-
To protect trappers'proprietary information.locations of the operatin areas
of individual trappers are not presented in this report.Trappers report d that
the amount of area trapped varied among different seasons and during the same
season.Trapping area size also varied by mode of transportation.For e ample,
3
-
trappers who walked covered small areas,whereas trappers using ai planes
usually covered the entire survey area (including the impoundment ones).
Length of trap line was considered the basis of measurement for trappe s not
using aircraft to cover the entire area,and ranged between 5 and 150 miles
(Table 1).-Length of trapping experience in the area varied greatly (Table 2),rangi g from
2 to 40 years.No trappers were interviewed that reported the 1984-85 season
as their first year of trapping in the area.Because the interview I"st was
based on known trappers,it is likely that some persons trapping in the a ea for
the first time during the 1984-85 season were overlooked.
r A variety of methods of transportation was reported by trappers (Tab e 3).
Snowmachine was the most common.Most trappers used more than one method of
transportation;for example,a common combination was snowmachine and dog team.
Most of the trappers interviewed considered trapping income supplemen al to
their regular income,with ten of the 17 trappers active in 1984-85 stati g that
25%or less of their income came from trapping.Three trappers con idered
trapping income to be over 50%of their total income (Table 4).The ortion
contributed by trapping income varied annually for trappers,depend ng on
trapping success,fur prices,opportunities for employment,and other fac ors.
B.Furbea.rerSpecies
m only
and
the
the
his
1.Wolf:The wolf population of the survey area was considered
though some trappers reported localized increases or decreases
the past several years within their respective areas.In g
trappers felt wolves were stable to decreasing in the northern
of the survey area,stable to increasing in the southeastern p
and occurred only infrequently in the southwestern portion.0 ly
of the 17 active trappers reported they did not trap for wolves.
2.Coyote:Coyote numbers apparently increased wi thin the past
years in the eastern and southwestern portions of the survey ar
were perceived to be low in the northwestern portion.Ten of the 17
active trappers reported trapping for coyotes,though numbers taken
were low.Several of the coyotes reported trapped were taken i ciden-
tally to trapping for other furbearers.
The n!ported numbers of furbearers caught (Appendix B)were obtained fr
the 17 trappers interviewed that had been active during the 1984-85 seas
should be considered minimum estimates of numbers of each species taken
area.In Appendix C,the status of each furbearer species is presented
apparEmt abundance noted by each trapper during the past several years,
or her particular trapping area.
3.Fox:Fox numbers were thought to be stable,though some ar as of
localized decrease were noted.Fox continued to be an im ortant
furbearer,and all but one trapper reported actively trapping f r fox.
4
Table 1.Trapline lengths reported by trappers interviewed.
limitl:!d to trappers operating in the Susitna basin survey area
1984-135 trapping season.
-Length of traplines reported 1Numberoftrappers
Info at ion
duri g the
-
-
1
variable 1
5 miles 1
10 1
16 1
25 1
30 2
40 1
50 2
60 2
80 2
150 1
trapped entire 2 4area
Three trappers reported having more than one trapping area.
reported traplines are presented.
Lengths of all
-
2 Used aircraft.Note:one other trapper used an aircraft in the sa e area
,.here he trapped by dog team and snow machine.
5
-
-
Table 2.Number of years each person interviewed had trapped in the
River basin.Includes trappers that operated in the area during the
trapping season,and others that had trapped during previous seasons
during the 1984-85 season.
usitna
984-85
b t not
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
Number of trappers
Number of Impoundment Entire 1yearsareasrea
2 0 3
4 0 1
5 0 1
6 1 3
7 1 2
10 0 4
12 0 2
16 0 2
17 0 2
25 0 1
31 0 1
40 0 1
Includes trappers from impoundment areas.
6
-
Table 3.Method of transportation reported by trappers interviewed.I eludes
only t:hose persons that trapped in the area during the 1984-85 season.
Number of 1-trappers
Method Impoundment Entire 2areasrea
"""
walking a 1
horse 1 1
dog team 2 6
snowmachine 2 12
automobile a 1
airplane 0 5
-
1
2
Eight trappers reported using more than one method of transportation.
Includes trappers from impoundment areas.
7
Table 4.Portion of income derived from trapping during the past y ar as
reported by trappers interviewed.Includes only those persons surveyed t at had
trappe:d in the area during the 1984-85 season.
-Number of trappers
Portion of income Impoundment Entire 1areasrea
r""I
up to 10%0 6
11 to 25%0 4
26 to 50%0 3
51 to 75%2 2
76 to 100%0 1-did not respond 0 1
-
-
-
1 Includes trappers from impoundment areas.
8
-.
4.Wolverine:Wolverine generally occur in low numbers through ut the
Susitna basin.Trappers described wolverine fluctuations as di ficult
to determine (because of low density),although ten trappers felt
wolverine numbers had decreased during the past several years This
trend was particularly noted in the central and southern port ons of
the survey area.
-
~,
5.Marten:Marten remained one of the most actively sought and e
cally important furbearers in the area.Only six of the 17
trappers reported they did not trap for marten,usually because
did not occur in their areas.Marten numbers appeared to be i
ing within the past several years,particularly in the eastern
of the survey area.Some trappers reported marten in areas whe
had not observed them before.Throughout the rest of the surve
marten appeared to be locally distributed in areas of suitable
forest.The area along the Susitna River between Talkeetna a
Creek continues to be an area with few marten.
onomi-
active
marten
creas-
ortion
e they
area,
mature
d Gold
-
6.River Otter:Most trappers reported that river otter numbers were
stable or increasing throughout the survey area,but only six tappers
stated that they actively sought to catch otter.Low pelt pric s were
generally cited as the reason for not trapping otter.
7.Mink:Mink numbers were reported as generally stable througho
of the survey area,with some areas of localized decrease or in
Despite areas of local abundance,ten of the 17 active t
reported they did not trap for mink.Low pelt prices were ofte
as the reason for not trapping mink.
appers
cited
-
~
I
-
8.Weasel spp.:A notable increase in short-tailed weasels was r
from the eastern portion of the survey area.No trapper r
trying to catch them~but large catches of up to 40 or 50 wease
made by some trappers incidentally to trapping for other fur
(mostly marten).
9.Lynx:Low lynx numbers were reported for the entire survey a
decrease in already-low lynx numbers was reported by trappers
eastern portion of the survey area.Trappers in the western
reported that lynx numbers were so low that it was difficult
anything about trends in the population.Because of low lynx n mbers~
most trappers did not trap for lynx even though pelt price were
relatively high.
10.Beaver:Beaver numbers were described as stable or increasing
trappers.Beaver were reported from throughout the survey are
suitable aquatic habitat occurred.Only six of the 17 active t
reported they trapped for beaver.Most trappers did not a
trap for beaver because of low pelt prices.
11.Muskrat:Muskrat were reported from throughout the survey are where
suitable aquatic habitat occurred.Trappers generally de cribed
muskrat numbers as stable and low,and most (15 of the 17)did not
trap for muskrats.
9
'"""
-
.....
..-
-
12.Snowshoe hare:Although the snowshoe hare is not considered fur-
bearer,information on hare abundance and distribution was re uested
from trappers because hares are prey for many furbearers.Most
trappers described the snowshoe hare population as having de reased
from past levels,with few or none in most places.A notable excep-
tion was in the Talkeetna area,where most of the trappers inte viewed
felt the previously low population had increased slightly duri g the
past several years.It is likely that low snowshoe hare ab ndance
contributes to the correspondingly low lynx abundance reported by the
trappers.
C.Other Comments
Most of the trappers interview~d indicated that the increased access cre ted by
project construction would be more detrimental to the area furbearer pop lation
than 'would habitat loss.Some expressed concern that increased numb rs of
people in the area,including other trappers displaced by the impoun ments,
would create competition in their own trapping areas.Many felt th t the
Susitna project would have beneficial effects on the local economy.
Trappers were asked if they had observed moose or caribou falling throu h ice
and drowning.Most indicated they had observed this,though it was not c romon.
IV.Conclusions
Because the interview list was based on known trappers,and because a nu er of
trappE~rs on the list were not available to be interviewed,the results pr sented
on thl=extent of trapping that might be affected by the Susitna Hydroe ectric
Project·should be considered a minimum.As noted by Gipson et al.(1984),only
several persons trapped exclusively within or immediately adj acent 0 the
proposed impoundment areas during anyone year.However,this should ot be
taken to imply that only those few trappers might be affected by the p oj ect.
Most of the five trappers using aircraft trapped over an extended area f the
SusitIla basin,and reported taking furbearers from the impoundment area.In
addition,numbers of persons trapping,areas trapped,and take of fur earers
during the period covered by this survey reflected conditions such as i terest
in trapping,employment opportunities,furbearer population levels,an pelt
prices;.These conditions would not likely remain the same from year to year.
Consequently,the number of trappers operating within the area that mi ht be
affect:ed by the Susitna project could change from year to year.
Most of the trappers interviewed indicated that they tried to catch all
of furbearers occurring in the survey area except beaver ,muskrat,weasel,and
river otter.Few reported trapping for lynx because of low lynx n mbers.
IncomEl from trapping was considered by most of the trappers to be suppl mental
to income derived from other sources.
V.Literature Cited
Gipson,P.S.,S.W.Buskirk,T.W.Hobgood,and J.D.Woolington.1984.usitna
Hydroelectric Project.Furbearer Studies.Phase I Report Update.Alaska
Cooperative Wildl.Res.Unit.Prepared for Alaska Power Aut ority.
100pp.
10
-
APPENDIX A:Trapper Questionnaire
Name:
Address ::
"'""Trapping area:
size:
Number of years:
Mode of Transportation:
-
Species
Wolf
Coyote
Fox
Wolverine
Marten
River 01:ter
-.Mink
Weasels
Lynx
Beaver-
Muskrat
SnowshoE~
hares
Present?
This Year
Trapped for?
Number caught
Last Year
Trapped for?
Number caught
Population
Status Comn ents
-What part of income is derived from trapping?:
-How might the hydroelectric project affect your trapping area?:
-Name of other trappers,or knowledge of other areas being trapped:
-Information regarding moose or caribou drowning,or falling through ice:
11
1 Includes trappers from impoundment areas.
12
~(cant.)APPENDIX B
Number of trappers
SpeciE~s Number trapped Impoundment Entire 1areasarea
f""'"Marten 0 0
2 0
3 0
5 1
7 0
20 0
22 0
~.25 0
32 0
44 0
45 0
110 0
did not trap
for marten 1
River Otter 0 1
3 0
did not trap
for river otter 1 1
Mink 0 0
1 0
3 1
4 0
5 0
6 0
did not trap
for mink 1 1-
Weasels Trapping of short-tailed and least weasels
was usually incidental to trapping for other
furbearers,and numbers were not recorded.
Lynx
Beaver
0 1
did not trap
for lynx 1
0 1
2 0
20 0
did not trap
for beaver 1
1
1
1 Includes trappers from impoundment areas.
13
APPENDIX B(cont.)
Number of trappers
-
-
,....
!
SpeciE~s Number trapped Impoundment areas
Muskrat 3 1
40 0
did not trap
for muskrat 1
1Entirearea
1
1 Includes trappers from impoundment areas.
14
APPENDIX C:Apparent furbearer abundance in the Susitna basin survey a ea as
described by trappers interviewed.Information is from persons that tra ped in
the area during the 1984-85 season.and others that had trapped during p evious
seasons but not during the 1984-85 season.
Descriptions.of Relative Furbearer Abundance by All Trappers
r
.-
,.....
,.....
-
-
SpeciE~s
Wolf
COyotE~
Fox
Wolverine
Marten
Number of trappers
Status Impoundment Entire 1areasarea
stable 1
increased 0
decreased 1
unknown a
very few,or not present a
stable a
increased a 1
decreased 0
unknown a
very few.or not present 2
stable 0 1
increased 1
decreased 1
unknown 0
very few,or not present a
stable 1
increased a
decreased 1 1
unknown 0
very few,or not present 0
stable 0
increased 2
decreased 0
unknown a
very few,or not present a
1 Inc.ludes trappers from impoundment areas.
15