HomeMy WebLinkAboutSuWa73Alaska Resources Library & Information Services
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document
ARLIS Uniform Cover Page
Title:
Distribution of spawning Susitna River chinook Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
and pink salmon O. gorbuscha, 2012
SuWa 73
Author(s) – Personal:
Richard J. Yanusz, Pete Cleary, Sam Ivey, Jack W. Erickson, Dan J. Reed, Raye Ann Neustel, and
Jan Bullock
Author(s) – Corporate:
Prepared by Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Sport Fish
AEA-identified category, if specified:
2012 Environmental Studies
AEA-identified series, if specified:
Series (ARLIS-assigned report number):
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project document number 73
Existing numbers on document:
Published by:
[Anchorage, Alaska : Alaska Energy Authority, 2013]
Date published:
April 2013
Published for:
Prepared for Alaska Energy Authority
Date or date range of report:
Volume and/or Part numbers:
Final or Draft status, as indicated:
Document type:
Pagination:
iii, 40 p.
Related work(s):
Pages added/changed by ARLIS:
Notes:
All reports in the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document series include an ARLIS-
produced cover page and an ARLIS-assigned number for uniformity and citability. All reports
are posted online at http://www.arlis.org/resources/susitna-watana/
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
(FERC No. 14241)
Distribution of Spawning Susitna River Chinook
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha
and Pink Salmon
O. gorbuscha, 2012
Prepared for
Alaska Energy Authority
Prepared by
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Division of Sport Fish
Richard J. Yanusz, Pete Cleary, Sam Ivey, Jack W. Erickson,
Dan J. Reed, Raye Ann Neustel, and Jan Bullock
April 2013
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page i April 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................1
2. Study Objectives.................................................................................................................2
3. Study Area ..........................................................................................................................2
4. Methods ...............................................................................................................................3
4.1. Radio Tag Application for Chinook Salmon ..............................................................3
4.2. Radio Tag Application for Pink Salmon ....................................................................4
4.3. Radio Tag Relocation .................................................................................................5
4.3.1. Tracking Stations ........................................................................................ 5
4.3.2. Aerial Surveys ............................................................................................. 5
4.4. Inter-observer Variation in Aerial Survey Counts of Chinook Salmon .....................6
4.5. Deviations from Study Plan .......................................................................................6
5. Results .................................................................................................................................6
5.1. Radio Tag Application ...............................................................................................6
5.2. Tracking Stations ........................................................................................................7
5.3. Aerial Surveys ............................................................................................................7
5.4. Spawning Locations ...................................................................................................7
5.4.1. Chinook Salmon.......................................................................................... 8
5.4.2. Pink Salmon ................................................................................................ 8
5.5. Inter-observer Variation in Aerial Survey Counts of Chinook Salmon .....................9
6. Discussion............................................................................................................................9
6.1. Chinook Salmon Spawning Distribution ....................................................................9
6.2. Feasibility of Conducting a Capture–Recapture Experiment for Chinook Salmon ...9
6.3. Pink Salmon Spawning Distribution ........................................................................10
6.4. Inter-observer Variation in Aerial Survey Counts of Chinook Salmon ...................10
7. References .........................................................................................................................12
8. Tables ................................................................................................................................14
9. Figures ...............................................................................................................................29
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page ii April 2013
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Total Chinook salmon catch, radio tags applied, and total daily fishwheel and gillnet
effort at the mainstem Susitna River site (RM 30) in 2012. ................................................. 15
Table 2. Total daily pink salmon catch, radio tags applied, and total daily fishwheel effort
at the Flathorn (RM 24.5) tagging site in 2012. .................................................................... 17
Table 3. Locations of radio logger stations to monitor the movements of radio-tagged
Chinook salmon in the Susitna River during 2012. .............................................................. 19
Table 4. Definitions of movement patterns used to determine Chinook salmon spawning
location. ................................................................................................................................. 20
Table 5. Aerial survey distribution of Chinook salmon that were radio-tagged at Susitna
River RM 30 in 2012. ........................................................................................................... 21
Table 6. Definitions of movement patterns used to determine pink salmon spawning location. . 22
Table 7. Aerial survey distribution of pink salmon that were radio-tagged at Susitna
River RM 24.5 (Flathorn) in 2012. ....................................................................................... 23
Table 8. Unweighted spawning distribution (number of fish and percent) of radio-tagged
Chinook salmon in the Susitna River drainage in 2012, by tagging gear. ............................ 24
Table 9. Susitna River Chinook and pink salmon radio tags returned to ADF&G by the
public in 2012. ...................................................................................................................... 25
Table 10. Unweighted spawning distribution (number of fish and percent) of radio-tagged
pink salmon in the Susitna River drainage in 2012, by tagging gear. .................................. 26
Table 11. Comparison of helicopter counts of spawning Chinook salmon on six index
tributaries of the Susitna River by three observers during 2012. .......................................... 27
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page iii April 2013
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Locations of the tagging sites and radio telemetry stations used in this study for
Chinook and pink salmon in the Susitna River in 2012. ....................................................... 30
Figure 2. Locations of the mainstem and Flathorn sites for tagging Chinook and pink
salmon, and river miles, in the lower Susitna River in 2012. ............................................... 31
Figure 3. Spawning locations of radio-tagged Chinook salmon in the Susitna River for
all capture gears combined, 2012. ......................................................................................... 32
Figure 4. Spawning locations of Chinook salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 1 (west) in the
Susitna River, 2012. .............................................................................................................. 33
Figure 5. Spawning locations of Chinook salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 2 (east) in the
Susitna River, 2012 ............................................................................................................... 34
Figure 6. Spawning locations of Chinook salmon radio-tagged from drift gillnets in the
Susitna River, 2012. .............................................................................................................. 35
Figure 7. Spawning locations of radio-tagged pink salmon in the Susitna River for all
fishwheels combined, 2012. .................................................................................................. 36
Figure 8. Spawning locations of pink salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 1 in the Susitna
River, 2012. ........................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 9. Spawning locations of pink salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 2 in the Susitna
River, 2012. ........................................................................................................................... 38
Figure 10. Spawning locations of pink salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 3 in the Susitna
River, 2012. ........................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 11. Spawning locations of pink salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 4 in the Susitna
River, 2012. ........................................................................................................................... 40
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND SCIENTIFIC LABELS
Abbreviation Definition
ADF&G Alaska Department of Fish and Game
AKSSF Alaska Sustainable Salmon Fund
AEA Alaska Energy Authority
ATS Applied Telemetry Systems
CF Commercial Fisheries
CFR Codified Federal Regulations
CIP Capital Improvement Project
CPUE Catch per unit effort
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
ft Feet, foot
GCL Gene Conservation Laboratory
GIS Geographic Information System
GPS Geographic Positioning System
ILP Integrated Licensing Process
in Inch
km Kilometer
LGL LGL Inc.
m Meter
METF Mid eye to tail fork length
mi Mile
MHz Megahertz
mm Millimeter
NCI Northern Cook Inlet
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
RSP Revised Study Plan
RM River Mile
s Second
SF Sport Fisheries
USGS United States Geological Survey
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 1 April 2013
1. INTRODUCTION
This report provides the results of Alaska Department of Fish and Game’s (ADF&G’s) Chinook
and pink salmon tasks of the 2012 Adult Salmon Distribution and Habitat Utilization Study
(Chinook and Pink Salmon Spawning Distribution).
The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) is preparing a License Application that will be submitted to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the Susitna–Watana Hydroelectric
Project (FERC No. 14241) using the Integrated Licensing Process (ILP). The Project is located
on the Susitna River, an approximately 300-mile long river in Southcentral Alaska. The Project’s
dam site will be located at river mile (RM) 184. The results of this study provided information to
support the development of the Salmon Escapement Revised Study Plan (AEA 2012), filed with
FERC in December 2012, and will provide information for preparing Exhibit E of the license
application (18 CFR 4.41) and for use in FERC’s National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
analysis for the Project license.
In recent years, ADF&G conducted studies to determine the distribution and abundance of
sockeye Oncorhynchus nerka, coho O. kisutch, and chum O. keta salmon in the entire Susitna
drainage. From 2006 to 2008, ADF&G estimated the abundance and distribution of sockeye
salmon within the Susitna River drainage (Yanusz et al. 2007; Yanusz et al. 2011a; Yanusz et al.
2011b). In 2009, ADF&G conducted a study to determine the spawning distribution of chum
and coho salmon in the Susitna River (Merizon et al. 2010). From 2010 to 2012, ADF&G
conducted annual studies to determine both the distribution and abundance of spawning Susitna
River chum and coho salmon (Cleary et al. in press; Cleary et al. in prep a; Cleary et al. in prep
b).
Historic studies found that adult pink salmon were present in the Susitna River basin from the
mouth to Devils Canyon (RM 151) and in most accessible tributaries (ADF&G 1982C;
Woodward-Clyde Consultants and Entrix 1985). Information on spawning distribution came from
surveys conducted annually from 1981 to 1985. Spawning was documented primarily in Susitna
River tributaries.
More recent data was collected in 2012 when adult pink salmon were captured, radio-tagged, and
released from four fishwheels operated by ADF&G. One hundred fish were tagged at one of the
fishwheels near Flathorn (RM 24.5) as part of Alaska Sustainable Salmon Fund [AKSSF],
Studies 45921 and 45912, and a Captial Improvement Project from the State of Alaska. This
study deployed an additional 100 tags at each of the three remaining fishwheels and tracked all
400 radio-tagged pink salmon. Pink salmon were tracked via a network of ground-based radio
receivers and a series of fixed-wing and helicopter flights.
Chinook salmon are distributed throughout the Susitna River upstream from the mouth to at least
the Oshetna River (RM 225) (Buckwalter 2011). Very few adults and juvenile Chinook salmon
have been observed above Devils Canyon and the majority of spawning has been documented in
tributaries downstream (Thompson et al. 1986, Barrett 1985, Barrett 1984, Barrett 1983).
Apportionment of Chinook salmon among the major Susitna River subbasins from peak
spawning surveys is confounded by inconsistent surveys, poor visibility during the spawning
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 2 April 2013
migration and past differences in annual surveying priorities. Nevertheless, major patterns in the
distribution of Chinook salmon spawning during the late 1970s and early 1980s were evident
(Woodward-Clyde Consultants and Entrix 1985). Tributaries to the Lower Susitna River
(including the Deshka River, Alexander Creek, Yentna River, Talkeetna River and Chulitna
River) accounted for 50 percent or more of the Chinook salmon spawning while Middle River
tributaries (Portage River and Indian Creek) typically accounted for about 5 percent of the
Chinook salmon spawning in the Susitna River.
The Adult Salmon Distribution and Habitat Utilization Study was developed to determine the
current spawning distribution of Chinook salmon in the Susitna drainage upstream of the
confluence of the Yentna River in 2012 by deploying radio tags in Chinook salmon captured by
two fishwheels and drifted gillnets. Chinook salmon were tracked in the same manner as the pink
salmon were tracked. The results from the 2012 field season will be used to design a capture–
recapture study to estimate the distribution and abundance of Chinook salmon for the entire
Susitna drainage in 2013 and 2014 (see Salmon Escapement Study, Revised Study Plan [RSP]
Section 9.7, AEA 2012).
Aerial survey counts of Chinook salmon have been conducted on 24 streams within the Northern
Cook Inlet (NCI) Management Area since 1979 to provide an index of spawning escapement.
Trends in Chinook salmon escapement are used to assist fisheries managers with future
management strategies and refinement of escapement goals. Common practice is to use 3–5
observers in a given year to conduct these surveys. As part of this study, variation between
observers was examined and areas for improvement were identified in the current practice of
using multiple observers to conduct annual aerial surveys in NCI.
This report documents the results for the 2012 field season.
2. STUDY OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this study is to determine the spawning distribution of Chinook salmon in the
Susitna drainage upstream of the confluence with the Yentna River as well as the spawning
distribution of pink salmon in the entire Susitna drainage. The information collected during the
2012 field season will be used to address the feasibility of conducting a basin-wide capture–
recapture study of Chinook salmon in 2013 and 2014.
3. STUDY AREA
The study area consisted of the Susitna River basin upstream from Flathorn Station. Fish were
radio-tagged by ADF&G at fishwheels operated at RM 30 and between RM 24-25. Eleven fixed
antenna arrays were placed throughout the study area (Figure 1). The Susitna River drainage
comprises 49,210 square kilometers (km2) and originates in the Alaska Range north of
Anchorage (Figure 1). It is the fourth largest drainage in Alaska, and flows generally south from
the Alaska Range for approximately 400 km before entering Cook Inlet west of Anchorage. The
largest tributaries are the Yentna, Chulitna, and Talkeetna rivers, and there are numerous small
lakes (King and Walker 1997). The morphology of the Susitna River varies by location. Rivers
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 3 April 2013
in the drainage originate in the Alaska or Talkeetna Mountain ranges and some are clear water or
glacially turbid (Sweet et al. 2003).
4. METHODS
4.1. Radio Tag Application for Chinook Salmon
Two fishwheels were operated in 2012 at the mainstem Susitna site (RM 30 [R&M Consultants
1981]) to collect Chinook salmon, one on each bank (Figure 2, Table 1). Each fishwheel had 2 ×
2 meter (m) baskets that were adjusted as needed to fish 0.3 m or less from the river bottom.
Picket weirs, located between the fishwheel and the river bank, were used to lead migrating
salmon into fishwheel baskets and were operated the entire season. Two crews worked two
shifts, such that each wheel was operated for a total of 12 hours per day, from 5 AM to 10 PM,
with a break each day from 1 PM to 2 PM. It was assumed that there was no substantial diel
variation in the stock composition of fish passage and that all stocks of fish were subject to some
non-zero probability of capture during this fishing schedule.
Fishwheels were checked at least once an hour during sampling shifts. Only uninjured Chinook
salmon at least 400 millimeters (mm) in length from mid eye to tail fork (METF) were radio-
tagged. Most Chinook salmon less than 400 mm METF were jacks (males that spent only one
winter at sea) and may not have had the same capture probability at the fishwheels as older fish
because of their small size; these fish were also too small for the size of the radio tags used in
this study. To minimize handling effects, Chinook salmon receiving a radio tag were either 1)
tagged immediately after capture, or 2) tagged if the fishwheel live box hold time did not exceed
1 hour (Yanusz et al. 1999; Carlon and Evans 2007). A radio tag was not applied to Chinook
salmon if the live box hold time exceeded 1 hour; these fish were counted and released.
All captured Chinook salmon were counted, inspected, and recorded. All radio-tagged Chinook
salmon were sampled for tissue (axillary process clip) that was stored in ethanol for later genetic
assay. An equal number of tags (200) was scheduled at each fishwheel to ensure that all stocks,
no matter their abundance or distribution among the two wheels, had some non-zero probability
of being marked. Crews started the season by radio-tagging every healthy Chinook salmon. As
the run continued, the tagging rate was adjusted to avoid running out of tags before the run was
complete for the season (Table 1). Crews continued to operate the fishwheels to achieve the full
12 hours/day of effort after the scheduled radio tags were deployed in order to establish a
database of catch rates, run timing, and fish size.
Drift gillnetting was conducted in the vicinity of the fishwheels with 100 tags scheduled to be
deployed in net caught fish (Figure 2). Gillnets were 5⅜-inch or 7-inch (stretch measure) mesh,
multi-strand web, in nets 50 to 150 feet long, and 60 meshes deep. Drift duration was dependent
upon the fishing site. The net was watched continuously until corks began to bob, signaling a
fish was in the net, at which point the entire net was immediately pulled in. To reduce bias due
to the run timing of any individual stock and to ensure that all individual stocks of fish,
regardless of run timing, had some non-zero probability of being marked, one crew of two
technicians fished for up to 7.5 hours/day, with start times rotating daily, until a cycle was
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 4 April 2013
completed each week. Once the scheduled number of radio tags per day was deployed, the crew
stopped netting to minimize stress to additional fish.
The radio transmitters used in this study were manufactured by Advanced Telemetry Systems,
Inc.1 (ATS, Isanti, MN) and operated on 11 frequencies within the 150.000 to 151.999 megahertz
(MHz) range. Each frequency had 100 different transmitting patterns (i.e., pulse codes),
resulting in 500 uniquely identifiable transmitters. All Chinook salmon received ATS model
F1845B transmitters, which were 52 mm long, 19 mm in diameter, and had a mass of 26 grams
(g), a 30-centimeter (cm) external whip antenna, and a nominal battery life of 311 days from
activation. Each transmitter was equipped with an activity monitor. The activity monitor
changes the signal pattern to an inactive mode if the transmitter is inactive for 24 consecutive
hours. Fish were tagged without anesthesia while restrained in a padded cradle held in a tub of
river water. Radio tags were inserted through the esophagus and into the upper stomach of the
fish using a 10-mm diameter, 30-cm long plastic tube.
4.2. Radio Tag Application for Pink Salmon
Pink salmon were radio-tagged in conjunction with existing ADF&G research projects funded by
the AKSSF, Studies 45921 and 45912, at Flathorn, RM 24.5 of the Susitna River, where four
fishwheels were operated, one on each bank of the two channels in the river in that area (Figure
2, Table 2).
The ADF&G Commercial Fisheries Division (CF) only operated Fishwheel 1 from July 10 to
August 14, 2012 as part of AKSSF Study 45912. During this period, Sport Fish Division (SF)
crews were responsible for Fishwheels 2, 3, and 4 (Figure 2). SF crews took over operations of
Fishwheel 1 when the CF study concluded.
SF crews, working four 7.5-hour shifts each day, operated Fishwheels 2–4 during daylight hours
until they reached the goal of 12 hours/day of effort per wheel. CF crews, working two 9-hour
shifts each day, operated Fishwheel 1 until they reached the goal of 18 hours/day of effort, to
achieve the sample size needed for AKSSF Study 45912. Fishwheel 1 effort was reduced to 12
hours/day when the SF crew replaced the CF crew after August14, 2012. All four fishwheels
were operated every day of the season, except during mechanical breakdowns, crew shortages, or
unsafe weather (Table 2).
A subsample of healthy pink salmon captured at Flathorn, as above, were marked with an
internal (esophageal) radio transmitter. A nearly equal number of tags were deployed at each
fishwheel so that all stocks, no matter their abundance or distribution among the four wheels, had
a non-zero probability of being marked (Table 2). Given that a fixed number of tags were to be
deployed, tags were deployed systematically based on average historical run timing.
To minimize handling stress on pink salmon, only fish that had been held in the live box for less
than 1 hour were radio-tagged. Three-person SF crews processed selected pink salmon one at a
time and as quickly as possible, to reduce handling time and associated stress. Fish were in a
holding tank onboard a boat during tagging. A bucket was used frequently to add fresh water to
the tank. A padded, aluminum cradle (Larson 1995) was slipped around the fish to restrain it
during tagging. One person restrained fish, the second inserted a radio tag into the stomach via
1 Product names used in this report are included for scientific completeness, but do not constitute a product endorsement.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 5 April 2013
the esophagus, and the third person recorded data. The crew measured METF and recorded the
time taken to process the fish.
Radio tags were inserted through the esophagus and into the upper stomach of the fish using a
10-mm diameter, 30-cm long plastic tube. Pink salmon less than 400 mm METF were not radio-
tagged because the size and weight of the radio tags (about 1.6 percent of the body weight of a
400-mm METF fish) might have had a greater negative effect on such small fish than on larger
fish. Smaller radio tags were used for pink salmon between 400 and 420 mm METF. The plastic
tube was marked with reference points to assist in proper tag insertion depths. All marked pink
salmon were released into the river adjacent to each fishwheel immediately after all data were
recorded.
Pink salmon less than 420 mm METF received ATS F1835B transmitters, which are 48 mm
long, 17 mm in diameter, have a mass of 16 g, and have a 30-cm external whip antenna and a
nominal battery life of 96 days after activation. All other pink salmon received ATS F1840B
transmitters, which are 56 mm long, 17 mm in diameter, and have a mass of 20 g, a 30-cm
external whip antenna, and a battery life of 126 days after activation.
4.3. Radio Tag Relocation
4.3.1. Tracking Stations
Radio-tagged Chinook and pink salmon movement upriver was tracked by ADF&G and LGL
Alaska Research Associated, Inc. (LGL) at 11 stations placed on the mainstem river and major
tributaries throughout the Susitna River drainage (Figure 1; Table 3; Nass et al. 2013). Tracking
station equipment consisted of an ATS Model 4500 receiver/data logger and a self-contained
power system. The equipment was housed in a waterproof enclosure and attached to a 9-m mast.
An ATS Model 200 antenna switch was coupled with two Yagi antennas at each tracking station.
One antenna was oriented downstream, and the other upstream. Signal strength and time of
reception were recorded separately for each antenna and provided information on direction of
travel. Reference radio tags were deployed at each station to emit regular pulses to document
continuous station operation. The ATS receiver detected radio-tagged fish and recorded signal
strength, activity pattern of the transmitter (active or inactive), date, time, and location of each
fish in relation to the station (i.e., upriver or downriver from the site). Data were written to the
logger memory in 10-minute intervals. ADF&G tracking sites were visited 4 to 12 times over
the season, with the more remote sites visited less often due to the extensive travel required.
4.3.2. Aerial Surveys
ADF&G surveys were conducted with a fixed-wing aircraft, travelling at approximately 90 knots
and 1,000-feet elevation above ground. The aircraft was equipped with two, 4-element Yagi
receiving antennas, one mounted on each side of the aircraft and oriented forward. Two ATS
Model 4520 receiver/data loggers, with integrated global positioning system (GPS), were used to
identify radio tags and record locations. Each receiver had an operator who listened for tag
frequencies, held the receiver on a detected frequency until all tags at that frequency appeared to
be decoded, and then released the receiver from that frequency to continue scanning the
remaining frequencies for other tags. The 11 possible frequencies were divided between two
receivers to reduce scan times and reduce the chance of missing fish. Automatically recorded
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 6 April 2013
data included the following: date and time of decoding, frequency and pulse code, latitude and
longitude, signal strength, and activity mode of each decoded transmitter. For Chinook salmon,
the mainstem and major tributaries of the mainstem Susitna River were flown approximately
every 2 weeks, and the Yentna River once. For pink salmon, the Yentna and Susitna rivers were
flown approximately every 2 weeks.
Aerial survey coverage described above was augmented by rotary wing surveys by an affiliated
AEA-sponsored study task to examine the distribution of fish in the Susitna River mainstem
(Nass et al. 2013).
4.4. Inter-observer Variation in Aerial Survey Counts of Chinook
Salmon
In 2012, counts between three observers were compared on six streams draining into the east side
of the Susitna River in order to assess count agreement: Willow, Little Willow, Montana, Clear,
and Prairie creeks and the North Fork Kashwitna River. Survey methodology mirrored past
annual surveys conducted by ADF&G (Oslund and Ivey 2010; Lafferty 1997). Standard
procedure is to make a single pass survey by helicopter during peak spawning time. Observers
wear sunglasses with polarized lenses and try to keep the sun behind their shoulders. The chosen
air speed and height above the ground varies with light condition and terrain but generally the
aircraft flies approximately 50 to 75 feet over the water. Generally, the streams were surveyed
from their confluence with tidewater or a glacial river, upstream to the uppermost reach to which
Chinook salmon can ascend. All major clear water tributaries of each stream were also surveyed.
Observers used two hand-tally registers to count fish. One register was used to count single fish
and the other register was used to count by 5s or 10s when estimation of aggregate fish was
necessary. Total numbers of live and dead salmon were recorded in addition to date, weather
condition, stream level, and water visibility. In this study, each observer fl ew all six streams
over a 2-day period with start dates staggered 2 days apart. In this way, each stream was counted
2 days apart over the course of 6 total days. Additional observations were noted, such as number
and general location of congregations where estimation of fish was necessary, presence of other
fish species, and any other factors that might affect counting accuracy.
4.5. Deviations from Study Plan
The study plan called for ADF&G to tag every adult Chinook salmon caught. High catch rates
required modifying this protocol on May 31 to ensure that fish were tagged throughout the run
(Table 1). Because of a period of high water around June 10 and the unexpectedly early end of
the Chinook salmon run, the target of deploying 200 radio tags from each fishwheel was not met.
5. RESULTS
5.1. Radio Tag Application
In 2012, fishwheels were operated from May 25 to August 26 at the mainstem Susitna tagging
site, while the last Chinook salmon was captured on August 18 (Table 1). From the two
fishwheels, a total of 1,690 Chinook salmon were caught, of which 338 were radio-tagged (Table
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 7 April 2013
1): 178 radio tags were deployed in Chinook salmon from Fishwheel 1 and 160 from Fishwheel
2. A total of 226 Chinook salmon were caught in drift gillnets, of which 105 were radio-tagged
(Table 1).
To capture pink salmon, fishwheels were operated at Flathorn from July 10 to August 26, 2012
(Table 2). Among four fishwheels, a total of 37,490 pink salmon were caught, of which 401
were radio-tagged (Table 2): 101 radio tags were deployed in pink salmon from Fishwheel 1 and
100 each from Fishwheels 2–4.
5.2. Tracking Stations
Tracking stations were installed in the Yentna River drainage between May 9 and June 6 and
removed between September 12 and October 2, 2012. The Skwentna tracking station was found
to be nonfunctional on October 2, for unknown reasons. Tracking stations within the mainstem
Susitna, Talkeetna, and Chulitna rivers were installed between May 9 and 26 and removed
between September 10 and October 4, 2012. The Talkeetna station was destroyed by an extreme
flood on September 21, 2012. Nass et al. (2013) describe the operational periods for the other
tracking stations used to track fish tagged in 2012.
5.3. Aerial Surveys
There were 360 Chinook salmon spawning locations (Table 4 and Table 5) and 390 pink salmon
spawning locations determined by aerial surveys (Table 6 and Table 7).
Of the 443 radio-tagged Chinook salmon, one was never detected after release. Spawning
locations were assigned to 385 Chinook salmon (including 25 that never migrated upstream of
the tagging site) based on aerial surveys and corroboration with ground tracking stations. Aerial
survey efforts for Chinook salmon yielded four complete drainage-wide surveys of the Susitna
River and one of the Yentna River drainage. These surveys relocated 406 different radio-tagged
fish (92 percent of the 442 detected by any means). Radio tags returned by anglers were not
assigned spawning locations, given the possibility that Chinook salmon may have been
intercepted prior to reaching their spawning site.
Of the 401 radio-tagged pink salmon, spawning locations were assigned to 390 (including 5 that
never migrated upstream of Susitna Station) based on aerial surveys and corroboration with
ground tracking stations. Aerial efforts for pink salmon yielded four complete drainage-wide
surveys of the Susitna River and Yentna River drainages. These surveys relocated 390 different
radio-tagged fish (97 percent of the 401 released).
5.4. Spawning Locations
Radio-tagged Chinook and pink salmon were assigned a spawning location based on aerial
surveys; tracking station data were used only to corroborate these locations. Radio-tagged
salmon were assigned one of 11 movement patterns (Table 4 and Table 6). This assignment was
used to determine the most likely spawning location of each fish. No ground surveys were
conducted to verify if radio-tagged fish were indeed on spawning grounds or exhibiting
spawning behavior at any time.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 8 April 2013
5.4.1. Chinook Salmon
Of the 443 radio-tagged Chinook salmon, 360 (81 percent) could be assigned to a spawning
location (Table 5, Figure 3). There were 25 radio-tagged Chinook salmon that never migrated
upstream of the tagging site (Table 4). These fish were excluded from the experiment and
locations were not reflected in the spawning distributions. One radio-tagged Chinook salmon
was never relocated by either ground or aerial methods. Approximately 8 percent of the radio-
tagged Chinook salmon were assigned to the mainstem Susitna River (Table 5).
The spawning locations of Chinook salmon tagged at RM 30 suggest that fish showed bank
orientation. Based on aerial relocations, 24 (17 percent) of 144 Chinook salmon tagged on
Fishwheel 1 migrated to the Yentna River, while two (1 percent) of 139 Chinook salmon tagged
on Fishwheel 2 migrated to the Yentna River (Table 8, Figures 4 and 5). Similarly, 9 (6 percent)
of 144 Chinook salmon tagged on Fishwheel 1 migrated to the eastside Susitna River tributaries,
while 44 (32 percent) of 139 Chinook salmon tagged on Fishwheel 2 migrated to eastside Susitna
River tributaries (Table 8, Figures 4 and 5).
Gillnet-caught Chinook salmon appeared to be more evenly distributed among the Yentna and
eastside Susitna rivers tributaries. Based on aerial relocations, 5 (6 percent) of 77 Chinook
salmon captured with gillnets migrated to the Yentna River, and 20 (26 percent) migrated to
eastside Susitna River tributaries (Table 8, Figure 6).
Anglers voluntarily returned 16 radio tags found in harvested Chinook salmon (Table 9).
Locations of harvested fish were not used for spawning location calculations because it was
assumed that these fish could have been intercepted prior to reaching their spawning sites.
Tissue samples were collected from all radio-tagged Chinook salmon (443) and were stored at
the ADF&G Gene Conservation Lab in Anchorage, AK.
5.4.2. Pink Salmon
Spawning locations were assigned to 385 (96 percent) of the 401 radio-tagged pink salmon
(Table 7, Figure 7). There were five radio-tagged pink salmon that never migrated upstream of
the Susitna Station (Table 6). These fish were excluded from the experiment and locations were
not reflected in the spawning distributions. Eleven radio-tagged pink salmon were never
relocated by aerial methods.
The spawning locations of pink salmon tagged near Flathorn suggest that fish showed strong
bank orientation. Based on aerial relocations, 88 (92 percent) of 96 pink salmon tagged on
Fishwheel 1 migrated to the Yentna River, while 6 (6 percent) of the 96 pink salmon tagged on
Fishwheel 4 migrated to the Yentna River (Table 10, Figures 8–11). Similarly, zero (0 percent)
of 96 pink salmon tagged on Fishwheel 1 migrated to the eastside Susitna River tributaries, while
25 (26 percent) of 96 pink salmon tagged on Fishwheel 4 migrated to eastside Susitna River
tributaries (Table 10, Figures 8-11).
Anglers voluntarily returned three radio tags they found, either in pink salmon they harvested or
found on the ground (Table 9). Unlike for Chinook salmon, harvested fish were included in
spawning location calculations for pink salmon because all three were captured in tributaries of
the Susitna River and the aerial flights corroborated the location of each fish.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 9 April 2013
5.5. Inter-observer Variation in Aerial Survey Counts of Chinook
Salmon
Surveys commenced on July 16, 2012. Stream level and visibility was considered normal and
clear in most streams throughout the period of study. Each stream was flown 2 days apart with
the following exception: during the third set of surveys flown by the third observer, Prairie and
Clear creeks were counted 1 week later than scheduled due to poor weather (Table 11). Percent
agreement between observers was greatest for the North Fork Kashwitna River (99 percent
between Observers 1 and 2; 96 percent between 1 and 3; 98 percent between 2 and 3) and least
for Montana Creek (97 percent between Observers 1 and 2; 62 percent between 1 and 3; 64
percent between 2 and 3).
6. DISCUSSION
6.1. Chinook Salmon Spawning Distribution
In 2012, ADF&G successfully radio-tagged 443 Chinook salmon captured in fishwheels and
gillnets in the Susitna River upstream from the confluence with the Yentna River (RM 30).
Spawning locations were assigned to 360 (81 percent) of the fish.
Although Chinook salmon were not tagged in proportion to the daily fishwheel catches, radio
tags were deployed throughout the entire run (Table 1). However, care should be taken in
interpreting the results. First, the distributions (Figures 3–6, Tables 5 and 8) are for radio-tagged
fish and should not be considered representative of the distribution of the entire population of
Chinook salmon. Fish were not tagged in proportion to apparent abundance (i.e., fishwheel
catches), and if the run timing of individual stocks differed, it is possible that stocks were tagged
at different rates. Second, size-selective tagging was not directly examined in 2012. Similar to
the effects of different run timing among stocks, size-selective tagging could have influenced the
distribution of tagged fish to represent the entire run.
This study provides the first drainage-wide documentation of spawning sites for Chinook salmon
moving through the lower mainstem Susitna River (upstream of the confluence with the Yentna
River) using radio telemetry on such a large scale.
6.2. Feasibility of Conducting a Capture–Recapture Experiment for
Chinook Salmon
The results from this study are being used to design a capture–recapture abundance experiment
to estimate the spawning escapement for the entire Susitna drainage in 2013 and 2014 (see RSP
Section 9.7, Salmon Escapement, AEA 2012). Chinook salmon captured in fishwheels and
gillnets will be marked with radio tags and recaptured at fish weirs established on upstream
tributaries. The 2012 results suggest the weir ADF&G operates on the Deshka River will be a
good recapture site because more than 20 percent of the fish tagged at Fishwheel 1, Fishwheel 2,
or by gillnet are likely to be recaptured at the Deshka River weir (Tables 5 and 8). As described
in RSP Section 9.7 (AEA 2012), ADF&G will establish and operate fish weirs on the middle
fork of the Chulitna River (below the confluence with the east fork) and Montana Creek. In
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 10 April 2013
2012, 25 (7 percent) of the radio-tagged Chinook salmon (Table 5) were assigned a spawning
location upstream of the proposed fish weir site on the middle fork of the Chulitna River and 8 (2
percent) were assigned to a spawning location upstream of the proposed fish weir site on
Montana Creek. The number of tags to be deployed in 2013 was increased to 700 radio tags in
order to increase the number of recaptures at the fish weirs and improve the precision of the
escapement estimate.
In 2012, fish radio-tagged at RM 30 had bank orientation (Table 8), which would need to be
accounted for in an abundance model unless equal probability of capture was maintained
throughout the marking event. When designing a capture–recapture experiment to estimate the
abundance of Chinook salmon for 2013, it is anticipated that assumption of equal probability of
capture for all Chinook salmon may be violated during one or both sampling events. Diagnostic
tests described in Seber (1982) and in more specific detail relative to the 2013 experiment in
Cleary et al. (In press) will be used to detect evidence of unequal probability of capture by size,
across time, and between sampling sites. Sufficient numbers of radio-tagged fish released and
recaptured will allow for the necessary diagnostic testing and model selection to produce an
unbiased abundance estimate. The low probability of recaptures anticipated at Montana Creek
may be marginal for diagnostic testing and testing of different tag rates among stocks, but a
larger number of deployed tags planned for 2013 should help to address this issue. Size-selective
tagging was not examined in 2012 but will be looked at in future years in the event that size
stratification is required for an abundance estimate.
6.3. Pink Salmon Spawning Distribution
In 2012, ADF&G successfully radio-tagged 401 pink salmon captured in four fishwheels in the
Susitna River at Flathorn (RM 24.5). Spawning location was assigned to 385 (96 percent) of the
fish (Table 7).
As above, pink salmon were not tagged in proportion to the apparent abundance (fishwheel
catch), but radio tags were deployed throughout the entire run (Table 2). The spawning
distributions (Figures 7–11, Tables 6–7) reflect only radio-tagged fish and not the entire
population of pink salmon. If different stocks were tagged at different rates, then the
distributions would be biased.
Although ADF&G estimated pink salmon escapement for the Susitna River in the 1980s
(Thompson et al. 1986), the data presented here are the first drainage-wide documentation of
spawning sites for pink salmon in the Susitna and Yentna rivers.
6.4. Inter-observer Variation in Aerial Survey Counts of Chinook
Salmon
High agreement was found among the three observers who surveyed six streams over a 6-day
period. Between observers on the escapement surveys, agreement in escapement estimates
above 80 percent was considered to be acceptable for the purpose of this study and in most cases
this standard was met. Several instances where agreement was less than 80 percent on Prairie
and Montana creeks may be explained by variations in stream morphology between streams and
in fish behavior. Prairie Creek is noted as a somewhat difficult system to count fish in due to the
presence of multiple pools of fish; estimation is necessary and the common occurrence of cut
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 11 April 2013
banks make sighting fish difficult. Run timing is also much later in Prairie Creek relative to
other NCI streams due to its location farther upstream on the Susitna River drainage.
Considering the late run timing, Prairie Creek may not fit within this study design and the
condition of peak spawning may not have been fully met. A better approach in the future might
be to conduct three consecutive surveys flown late in July, e.g., after about July 26. In Lafferty
(1997), agreement between observers was lowest (80 percent) in a 1994 survey of Prairie Creek.
In Montana Creek, it is possible that fish noted by the first two observers as holding at the mouth
may have been, at least in part, destined for upstream tributaries of the Susitna River because the
third observer did not note any fish at the mouth and only counted about half what the first two
observers counted. The phenomena of fish holding at the mouth of Montana Creek has not been
noted in past years’ surveys. Agreement was highest in streams holding fewer fish, which was
expected.
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We wish to thank Wayne Dyok and Betsy McGregor from the Alaska Energy Authority for
supporting this project. We wish to acknowledge the assistance received from Christopher Rutz
(AEA) in 2012 with budgetary issues and helping draft the data sharing agreement between AEA
and ADF&G.
From LGL Alaska Research Associated, Inc., Michael Link provided suggestions and assistance
with the study design and review of the study proposal. LGL staff were quick to respond to
comments regarding shared telemetry data sets. LGL staff also agreed to manage the operations
of the Lane Creek and Devils Creek radio towers in 2012. This allowed ADF&G to focus on
maintaining the other towers and tag salmon successfully. Many thanks to Steve Crawford,
Brian Nass, and Dave Robichaud: each of these individuals provided assistance with sharing data
files and data quality relating to GIS coverage and telemetry data sets from the two affiliated
projects. Each of these individuals provided assistance with sharing data files and checking data
quality relating to GIS coverages and telemetry data sets.
Mark Willette and Robert Decino from the Division of Commercial Fisheries in Soldotna
supervised the radio tag deployment and fish wheel operations associated with fish wheel 1 at
Flathorn. Stephen Dotomain, Annette Oels, and Douglas Miller from the Division of Sport Fish
in Palmer provided logistical support. Judy Berger and Andy Barclay from the ADF&G Gene
Conservation Laboratory (GCL) provided instructions and supplies for collecting tissues
samples. Chris Habicht and Bill Templin from the GCL provided valuable advice for questions
relating to population genetics and sampling Chinook salmon within the Susitna drainage.
We wish to thank Joseph Klein at ADF&G in Anchorage for his efforts coordinating meetings
and correspondence between AEA and ADF&G relating to the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric
Project.
Samuel Hochhalter from the Division of Sport Fish in Anchorage assisted summarizing Chinook
salmon aerial telemetry data, and Skip Repetto from the Division of Sport Fish developed
numerous GIS tools for automating the process for summarizing the radiotelemetry data.
Suzanne Hayes and Samantha Oslund assisted with the Chinook salmon inter-observer variation
and aerial survey counts.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 12 April 2013
Nicholas Logelin, Aaryn Valencia, and Ross Oleck conducted the aerial radiotelemetry surveys
and stationary site downloads. Stephen Dotomain and Will Newberry in Palmer provided field
supervision and logistical support for the tagging camps.
Clint McBride (crew leader), Keegan Egelus, Robin Simms, Luke Warta, Aaryn Valencia, and
Ross Oleck tagged Chinook salmon at the mainstem Susitna camp. Taylor Hendricks (crew
leader), Leif Korth, Sarah Woods, Misty McNellis, Chase Jalbert, Jesse Dahms, Herman Miller,
Michael Knutson and Aaryn Widmyer, assisted with tagging pink salmon at Flathorn for the
Division of Sport Fish.
We wish to thank our editor, Tania Vincent, at ADF&G in Anchorage for her assistance in
editing, reviewing, and preparing this document.
The radio tags and the tagging operation on fish wheel 1 at Flathorn for pink salmon, the
operation of fish wheels 2–4 at Flathorn, and the radiotelemetry stations were funded by the
Alaska Sustainable Salmon Fund (Studies 45921 and 45912). The data were prepared by
ADF&G staff under award #NS08NMF438059 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, administered by the Alaska Department of Fish
and Game. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, the U.S. Department of Commerce, or the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
8. THE TELEMETRY STATIONS WERE, IN PART, FUNDED BY A
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FROM THE ALASKA STATE
LEGISLATURE.REFERENCES
AEA (Alaska Energy Authority). 2012. Revised Study Plan: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric
Project FERC Project No. 14241. December 2012. Prepared for the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission by the Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage, Alaska.
http://www.susitna-watanahydro.org/study-plan.
Buckwalter, J. D. 2011. Synopsis of ADF&G’s Upper Susitna Drainage Fish Inventory, August 2011. November 22, 2011. ADF&G Division of Sport Fish, Anchorage, AK. 173 pp.
Carlon, J. A., and D. Evans. 2007. Abundance of adult Chinook salmon in the Kenai River, Alaska, 1999-2003. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Data Series No. 07-81, Anchorage. http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/FedAidpdfs/fds07-81.pdf
Cleary, P.M., R. A. Merizon, R. J. Yanusz, and D. J. Reed. (In press). Abundance and Spawning Distribution of Susitna River chum Oncorhynchus keta and coho O. kisutch salmon, 2010. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Data Series No. YY-XX, Anchorage.
King, B. E., and S. C. Walker. 1997. Susitna River sockeye salmon fry studies, 1994 and 1995. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries, Regional Information Report 2A97-26, Anchorage.
http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/FedAidPDFs/RIR.2A.1997.26.pdf
Lafferty, R. 1997. Summary of escapement index counts of Chinook salmon in the Northern Cook Inlet management area, 1958-1996. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Data Series No. 97-8, Anchorage.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13 April 2013
Larson, L. 1995. A portable restraint cradle for handling large salmonids. North American
Journal of Fisheries Management. 15:654-656.
Merizon, R. A., R. J. Yanusz, D. J. Reed, and T. R. Spencer. 2010. Distribution of spawning Susitna River chum Oncorhynchus keta and coho O. kisutch salmon, 2009. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Data Series No. 10-72, Anchorage.
Nass, B. A., M. R. Link, J. J. Smith, D. Robichaud, S. E. Burril, K. E. English, S. T. Crawford, J. T. Priest, and M. J. Nemeth. 2013. Adult Salmon Distribution and Habitat Utilization Study, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 14241). Prepared by LGL Alaska Research Associates, Inc., for Alaska Energy Authority, 813 West Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. 141 p. + Appendices.
Oslund, S. and S. Ivey. 2010. Recreational Fishers of Northern Cook Inlet, 2009-1010: Report to the Alaska Board of Fisheries, February 2011. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Management Report No. 10-50, Anchorage.
R&M Consultants. 1981. Susitna River Mile Index, Mouth to Susitna Glacier. Prepared for Acres American Incorporated, Buffalo, NY.
Seber, G.A.F. 1982. On the estimation of animal abundance and related parameters. 2nd. ed. Charles Griffin and Sons, Ltd., London. 654 p.
Sweet, D., S. Ivey, and D. Rutz. 2003. Area management report for the recreational fisheries of Northern Cook Inlet, 2001 and 2002. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Management Report No. 03-10, Anchorage.
http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/FedAidPDFs/fmr03-10.pdf
Thompson, F. M., S. N. Wick, and B. L. Stratton. 1986. Adult salmon investigations May –
October 1985. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies
Report Series 13, Anchorage.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants and Entrix, Inc. 1985. Fish Resources and Habitats in the Middle
Susitna River. Technical Report No. 1. Instream Flow Relationships Series. Alaska Power
Authority Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Vol. 1.
Yanusz, R., R. Merizon, D. Evans, M. Willette, T. Spencer, and S. Raborn. 2007. Inriver abundance and distribution of spawning Susitna River sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus
nerka, 2006. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Data Series No. 07-83, Anchorage.
Yanusz, R., R. Merizon, M. Willette, D.G. Evans. and T.R. Spencer. 2011a. Inriver abundance and distribution of spawning Susitna River sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka, 2008. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Data Series No. 11-12, Anchorage.
Yanusz, R., R. Merizon, M. Willette, D.G. Evans. and T.R. Spencer. 2011b. Inriver abundance and distribution of spawning Susitna River sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka, 2007. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Data Series No. 11-19, Anchorage.
Yanusz, R. J., S. A. McPherson, and D. R. Bernard. 1999. Production of Chinook salmon from the Taku River, 1997-1998. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Data Series No. 99-34, Anchorage. http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/FedAidPDFs/fds99-34.pdf
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 14 April 2013
9. TABLES
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 15 April 2013
Table 1. Total Chinook salmon catch, radio tags applied, and total daily fishwheel and gillnet effort at the mainstem
Susitna River site (RM 30) in 2012.
Fishwheel 1
(west)
Fishwheel 2
(east) Gillnet
Total
catch
Total
radio-
tagged
Gillnet
effort
(min)
Fishwheel
effort (min)
Date
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged 1 2
5/25 2 2 0 0 3 0 5 2 174 782 738
5/26 4 3 1 1 0 0 5 4 173 720 494
5/27 3 3 2 2 2 1 7 6 154 738 720
5/28 4 4 3 3 4 2 11 9 205 720 720
5/29 3 3 0 0 3 3 6 6 163 720 720
5/30 7 7 6 5 6 3 19 15 122 720 720
5/31 14 12 14 13 8 4 36 29 207 720 720
6/1 38 10 38 6 6 3 82 19 173 720 720
6/2 71 6 62 6 16 3 149 15 163 720 720
6/3 62 6 46 6 8 3 116 15 217 720 720
6/4 42 6 11 6 10 3 63 15 230 720 720
6/5 38 5 16 5 15 5 69 15 192 721 720
6/6 75 5 39 5 9 5 123 15 198 722 720
6/7 58 5 14 5 11 5 83 15 186 723 720
6/8 37 5 12 5 7 5 56 15 217 720 720
6/9 78 5 16 5 11 5 105 15 181 720 720
6/10 3 2 7 4 3 2 13 8 170 720 720
6/11 14 6 20 6 2 2 36 14 216 720 720
6/12 26 5 23 5 4 4 53 14 171 720 728
6/13 32 6 21 6 24 5 77 17 163 720 720
6/14 17 5 33 5 9 6 59 16 165 720 720
6/15 36 6 56 6 15 5 107 17 176 720 720
6/16 41 5 60 5 21 7 122 17 166 720 720
6/17 40 5 72 5 5 5 117 15 170 720 720
6/18 36 5 41 5 4 4 81 14 247 727 720
6/19 15 5 29 3 7 4 51 12 220 720 720
6/20 14 5 17 4 2 2 33 11 231 720 730
6/21 12 7 18 8 5 4 35 19 233 720 720
6/22 12 7 19 3 4 4 35 14 239 720 720
6/23 8 3 8 3 2 1 18 7 293 720 720
6/24 5 3 6 2 0 0 11 5 250 720 720
6/25 5 1 8 4 0 0 13 5 286 720 720
6/26 1 1 5 1 0 0 6 2 291 720 720
6/27 6 4 12 4 0 0 18 8 295 720 720
6/28 4 0 11 2 0 0 15 2 279 720 720
6/29 4 1 8 0 0 0 12 1 310 727 728
6/30 2 1 6 2 0 0 8 3 335 720 720
7/1 6 2 6 0 0 0 12 2 249 721 722
-continued-
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 16 April 2013
Table 1. Part 2 of 2.
Fishwheel 1
(west)
Fishwheel 2
(east) Gillnet
Total
catch
Total
radio-
tagged
Gillnet
effort
(min)
Fishwheel effort
(min)
Date
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged 1 2
7/2 6 0 7 0 13 0 720 720
7/3 1 0 6 1 7 1 720 720
7/4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7/6 1 0 5 1 6 1 720 360
7/7 3 2 1 0 4 2 720 720
7/8 0 0 2 0 2 0 721 723
7/9 1 0 2 0 3 0 720 720
7/10 2 0 2 0 4 0 720 721
7/11 1 1 1 0 2 1 720 720
7/12 1 1 2 0 3 1 728 722
7/13 2 1 1 1 3 2 720 720
7/14 0 0 0 0 0 0 720 722
7/15 0 0 0 0 0 0 722 722
7/16 0 0 1 1 1 1 720 720
8/18 1 1 0 0 1 1 720 720
Total 894 178 796 160 226 105 1,916 443 8,110 37,552 36,910
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 17 April 2013
Table 2. Total daily pink salmon catch, radio tags applied, and total daily fishwheel effort at the Flathorn (RM 24.5)
tagging site in 2012.
Fishwheel 1 Fishwheel 2 Fishwheel 3 Fishwheel 4 Fishwheel effort (min)
Date
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged 1 2 3 4
7/10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,200 720 732 724
7/12 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,200 723 720 720
7/13 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,200 720 738 720
7/14 5 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 1,200 720 720 720
7/15 15 2 3 0 1 1 0 0 1,200 720 720 720
7/16 18 3 6 1 2 1 2 1 1,200 720 720 720
7/17 25 3 10 1 1 1 6 2 1,200 720 720 720
7/18 33 3 5 0 1 1 2 1 1,200 720 720 720
7/19 67 3 4 3 2 2 6 5 1,200 720 720 722
7/20 101 3 25 7 6 4 13 4 1,200 720 720 720
7/21 145 3 28 4 10 7 28 4 1,200 720 720 720
7/22 595 4 130 4 51 4 212 4 1,200 720 720 730
7/23 640 5 81 6 95 6 143 6 1,200 720 720 720
7/24 941 4 81 8 103 8 145 8 1,200 720 720 720
7/25 973 3 111 9 151 9 252 9 1,200 720 720 725
7/26 2,050 2 279 7 775 7 643 7 1,200 720 720 720
7/27 2,396 3 574 6 1,214 6 782 6 1,200 720 720 722
7/28 3,045 4 577 6 1,251 6 629 6 1,200 720 720 720
7/29 2,438 4 667 6 1,212 6 630 6 1,200 720 720 720
7/30 1,825 4 737 5 828 5 879 5 1,200 720 720 720
7/31 670 4 340 4 249 4 546 4 1,200 720 720 720
8/1 453 5 160 4 221 4 351 4 1,200 720 720 720
8/2 386 6 201 4 215 4 341 4 1,200 720 720 720
8/3 308 3 115 2 145 2 381 2 1,200 720 720 720
8/4 392 3 137 1 225 1 376 1 1,200 720 720 722
8/5 707 7 166 1 167 1 265 1 1,200 720 720 720
8/6 193 1 77 1 58 1 147 1 1,200 720 720 720
8/7 130 6 15 1 43 1 46 1 1,200 720 725 720
8/8 85 2 16 1 20 1 37 1 1,200 720 720 720
8/9 61 2 9 1 9 1 30 1 1,200 720 720 720
8/10 59 0 12 1 8 1 24 1 1,200 720 720 720
8/11 12 0 6 1 7 1 11 1 1,200 720 720 720
8/12 6 1 7 1 3 0 13 1 1,200 720 720 720
8/13 14 1 4 1 2 1 4 1 1,200 720 726 720
-continued-
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 18 April 2013
Table 2. Part 2 of 2.
Fishwheel 1 Fishwheel 2 Fishwheel 3 Fishwheel 4 Fishwheel effort (min)
Date
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged
Total
catch
Radio-
tagged 1 2 3 4
8/14 6 0 4 1 6 2 11 1 899 720 720 720
8/15 5 0 1 0 4 0 6 0 720 720 720 720
8/16 0 0 3 1 1 0 6 0 728 720 720 720
8/17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 720 720 720 720
8/18 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 727 720 720 720
8/19 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 720 720 720 720
8/20 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 724 720 720 720
8/21 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 720 720 720 720
8/22 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 0 720 720 723 720
8/23 0 0 2 0 2 1 2 0 720 720 720 720
8/24 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 733 726 720 720
8/25 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 720 720 720 720
8/26 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 720 720 720 724
Totals 18,811 101 4,605 100 7,091 100 6,983 100 50,371 33,849 33,884 33,869
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 19 April 2013
Table 3. Locations of radio logger stations to monitor the movements of radio-tagged Chinook salmon in the Susitna
River during 2012.
Miles from salt water River Station Operator
Susitna Susitna Station ADF&G 25.6
Deshka Mouth ADF&G 40.6
Sunshine ADF&G 83.8
Talkeetna ADF&G 101.6
Lane Creek (Middle Susitna River) LGL 113.6
Chulitna ADF&G 112.1
Devil Creek LGL 161.3
Yentna Lower Yentna ADF&G 37.2
Skwentna ADF&G 89.2
Upper Yentna ADF&G 101.7
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 20 April 2013
Table 4. Definitions of movement patterns used to determine Chinook salmon spawning location.
Chinook salmon
Criterion Movement patterns Number Percent
1 Did not migrate upstream at least 1 river mile.
25 5.7
2 Progressive upstream movement through all aerial surveys.
81 18.3
3 Progressive upstream movement except the last 1-2 aerial surveys, assigned
the farthest upstream location.
106 24.0
4 Initially display upstream movement but then display downstream
movement >2 aerial surveys, assigned the farthest upstream location.
13 2.9
5 A cluster of locations (within 20 miles), assigned a known location in the
middle of cluster.
57 12.9
6 A cluster of locations except one outlier, assigned location in the middle of
cluster, unless the outlier was observed during a late season (>15
September) survey; then it was assigned the farthest upstream location.
42 9.5
7 Migrated up river A and then had >2 locations up river B. If strong signal
strengths (>120) exist among cluster in river B then fish was assigned to
river B, otherwise river A.
27 6.1
8 Single aerial relocation only. 34 7.7
9 Sport caught by angler. 16 3.6
10 Aerial records exist, but station is farthest upstream location. 5 1.1
11 No aerial records, farthest upstream station used. 36 8.1
Totala 442 100.0
a Does not include one tag never located by any method.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 21 April 2013
Table 5. Aerial survey distribution of Chinook salmon that were radio-tagged at Susitna River RM 30 in 2012.
Radio tags
River Major tributary Spawning location Number a Percent
Susitna River Susitna River RM 0–30 Alexander Creek 1 0.3
Susitna River RM 31–98 mainstem 24 6.7
Deshka River 104 28.9
Willow Creek 20 5.6
Goose Creek 2 0.6
Little Willow Creek 22 6.1
Kashwitna River 12 3.3
Sheep Creek 9 2.5
Montana Creek 8 2.2
Talkeetna River mainstem 8 2.2
Chunilna Creek (Clear Creek) 27 7.5
Sheep River 2 0.6
Iron Creek 7 1.9
Prairie Creek / Stephan Lake 6 1.7
Susitna River RM 99–154 mainstem 4 1.1
Portage Creek 11 3.1
Indian River 6 1.7
Chulitna River mainstem 21 5.8
East Fork 7 1.9
Tokositna River 6 1.7
Troublesome Creek 2 0.6
Middle Fork 18 5.0
Susitna River above RM 154 mainstem 0 0.0
Kosina Creek 2 0.6
Yentna River Yentna River mainstem 1 0.3
Cache Creek 3 0.8
Peters Creek 10 2.8
Lake Creek 11 3.1
Johnson Creek 1 0.3
Kichatna River 1 0.3
Skwentna River mainstem 1 0.3
Talachulitna River 2 0.6
Talachulitna Creek / Judd Lake 1 0.3
Susitna/Yentna All All 360 100.0
a Does not include 16 fish that were reported captured, 36 that had no aerial detections, five with spawning locations determined
from stationary records, and 25 fish that did not move at least 1 mile upstream of the tagging site at RM 30.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 22 April 2013
Table 6. Definitions of movement patterns used to determine pink salmon spawning location.
Pink salmon
Criterion Movement patterns Number Percent
1 Did not migrate upstream at least 1 river mile.
5 1.3
2 Progressive upstream movement through all aerial surveys.
54 13.8
3 Progressive upstream movement except the last 1-2 aerial surveys, assigned
the farthest upstream location.
123 31.5
4 Initially display upstream movement but then display downstream
movement >2 aerial surveys, assigned the farthest upstream location.
136 34.9
5 A cluster of locations (within 20 miles), assigned a known location in the
middle of cluster.
51 13.1
6 A cluster of locations except one outlier, assigned location in the middle o f
cluster, unless the outlier was observed during a late season (>15
September) survey; then it was assigned the farthest upstream location.
5 1.3
7 Migrated up river A and then had >2 locations up river B. If strong sig nal
strengths (>120) exist among cluster in river B then fish was assigned to
river B, otherwise river A.
5 1.3
8 Single aerial relocation only. 9 2.3
9 Sport caught by angler. 2 0.5
10 Aerial records exist, but station is farthest upstream location. 0 0.0
11 No aerial records, farthest upstream station used. 0 0.0
Total 390 100.0
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 23 April 2013
Table 7. Aerial survey distribution of pink salmon that were radio-tagged at Susitna River RM 24.5 (Flathorn) in 2012.
Radio tags
River Major tributary Spawning location
Number a Percent
Susitna River Susitna River RM 25.8–98 mainstem 21 5.5
Deshka River 41 10.6
Willow Creek 16 4.2
Goose Creek 0 0.0
Little Willow Creek 5 1.3
Kashwitna River 4 1.0
Sheep Creek 0 0.0
Montana Creek 6 1.6
Talkeetna River mainstem 8 2.1
Chunilna Creek (Clear Creek) 20 5.2
Sheep River 0 0.0
Iron Creek 0 0.0
Prairie Creek / Stephan Lake 0 0.0
Susitna River RM 99–154 mainstem 1 0.3
Portage Creek 0 0.0
Indian River 5 1.3
Chulitna River mainstem 60 15.6
Byers Creek 30 7.8
East Fork Chulitna River 0 0.0
Tokositna River 4 1.0
Troublesome Creek 2 0.5
Middle Fork Chulitna River 0 0.0
Susitna River above RM 154 mainstem
0 0.0
Kosina Creek 0 0.0
Yentna River Yentna River mainstem 17 4.4
Cache Creek 0 0.0
Kahiltna River 9 2.3
Peters Creek 1 0.3
Lake Creek 49 12.7
Johnson Creek 5 1.3
Kichatna River 1 0.3
Skwentna River mainstem 10 2.6
Shell Creek 2 0.5
Talachulitna River 52 13.5
Talachulitna Creek / Judd
Lake
16 4.2
Susitna/Yentna All All 385 100.0
a Does not include 5 fish that did not move upstream of Susitna Station (RM 25.8).
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 24 April 2013
Table 8. Unweighted spawning distribution (number of fish and percent) of radio-tagged Chinook salmon in the Susitna
River drainage in 2012, by tagging gear.
Gillnet Fishwheel 1
(west) Fishwheel 2
(east) Total
System Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Alexander Creek 0 0
1 1
0 0
1 0
Yentna River 5 6
24 17
2 1
31 9
Chulitna River 10 13
22 15
22 16
54 15
Talkeetna River 16 21
14 10
20 14
50 14
Deshka River 15 19
56 39
33 24
104 29
East Side Susitna
Rivera 20 26 9 6 44 32 73 20
Susitna River
RM 99–154 4 5 11 8 8 6 23 6
Susitna River
RM 31–98 7 9 7 5 10 7 24 7
Grand Total 77 100 144 100 139 100 360 100
a Willow, Little Willow, Montana, and Sheep creeks, and Kashwitna River.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 25 April 2013
Table 9. Susitna River Chinook and pink salmon radio tags returned to ADF&G by the public in 2012.
Frequency Pulse code Species Date recovered Location of radio tag
151.514 18 Chinook salmon 6/16/2012 Deshka River
151.514 43 Chinook salmon 7/18/2012 Deshka RM 3
151.514 63 Chinook salmon 6/8/2012 Deshka River mouth
151.514 87 Chinook salmon 7/20/2012 Sunshine Creek mouth
151.524 51 Chinook salmon 6/12/2012 Deshka River
151.524 54 Chinook salmon 2nd week of August Chulitna River
151.533 37 Chinook salmon 7/10/2012 Clear Creek
151.533 59 Chinook salmon 7/30/2012 Willow Creek
151.533 88 Chinook salmon 7/10/2012 Clear Creek
151.544 17 Chinook salmon 6/15/2012 Deshka River
151.544 31 Chinook salmon 6/19/2012 Deshka River mouth
151.544 56 Chinook salmon 6/4/2012 Deshka River mouth
151.544 56 Chinook salmon 6/4/2012 Deshka River
151.544 73 Chinook salmon 6/15/2012 Deshka River mouth
151.584 48 Chinook salmon 8/19/2012 Sheep Creek
151.584 50 Chinook salmon 9/1/2012 Montana Creek
151.504 9 pink salmon 9/15/2012 Montana Creek
151.573 1 pink salmon 8/27/2012 Willow Creek
151.573 54 pink salmon 7/18/2012 Indian River
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 26 April 2013
Table 10. Unweighted spawning distribution (number of fish and percent) of radio-tagged pink salmon in the Susitna River drainage in 2012, by tagging gear.
Fishwheel 1 (west
bank of west channel)
Fishwheel 2 (east
bank of west channel)
Fishwheel 3 (west
bank of east channel)
Fishwheel 4 (east bank
of east channel) Total
System Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Alexander Creek 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Yentna River 88 92
39 40
29 31
6 6
162 42
Chulitna River 4 4
25 26
36 38
31 32
96 25
Talkeetna River 1 1
6 6
11 12
10 10
28 7
Deshka River 1 1
15 15
11 12
14 15
41 11
East Side Susitna
Rivera 0 0 3 3 3 3 25 26 31 8
Susitna River
RM 99–154 0 0 2 2 1 1 3 3 6 2
Susitna River
RM 31–98 2 2 8 8 4 4 7 7 21 5
Grand Total 96 100
98 1
95 100
96 100
385 100
a Willow, Little Willow, Montana, and Sheep creeks, and Kashwitna River.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 27 April 2013
Table 11. Comparison of helicopter counts of spawning Chinook salmon on six index tributaries of the Susitna River by three observers during 2012.
Index Stream
Observer
1
Observer
2
Observer
3
% Agreement
Observer comments 1 & 2 1 & 3 2 & 3
Clear Creek
Date 17-Jul 19-Jul 26-Jul 1st- low water, excellent visibility
Count 1,177 990 805 2nd- Viewing conditions were excellent. 84% 68% 81%
Weather C C C 3rd-Bright sun made for dark shadows in the water.
Stream C L C Lots of other salmon in the 1st half not as many KS at mouth.
Visibility E E N Fish very spread out KS all the way to the end.
Counted 1 week later than planned due to bad weather.
Prairie Creek
Date 17-Jul 19-Jul 26-Jul
Count 853 970 1,185 1st-Fish still holding at the mouth - not as many just below lake as normal. 88% 72% 82%
Weather C C C Grizzly Creek not counted
Stream C L L 3rd- counted 1 week later than planned due to bad weather.
Visibility N E E
Montana Creek
Date 17-Jul 19-Jul 21-Jul 1st-At least 200 fish holding at the mouth, most fish just below
Count 416 402 258 forks (east) holding. Hardly any fish in forks. 97% 62% 64%
Weather C C O 2nd - 60 at the mouth. Included group at forks with mainstem count.
Stream N N N 3rd -none at mouth, solid rain came back to Wasilla at 3pm.
Visibility E E N
N. Fork Kashwitna
Date 16-Jul 18-Jul 20-Jul
Count 82 83 85 1st -Viewing conditions were dark due to dense cloud cover. 99% 96% 98%
Weather O C O Lots of log jams first 2 miles.
Stream C N N 3rd- Flew pretty fast, still some groups of 4-6 fish, no groups of 10.
Visibility O E E
-continued-
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 28 April 2013
Table 11. Part 2 of 2.
Index Stream
Observer
1
Observer
2
Observer
3
% Agreement
Observer comments 1 & 2 1 & 3
2 &
3
Little Willow
Creek
Date 16-Jul 18-Jul 20-Jul
Count 437 427 494 1st-Viewing conditions were dark until parks hwy bridge, hard to see 98% 88% 86%
Weather O O O into deep holes until reached bridge where conditions improved to good.
Stream N N N Most fish upstream of power lines
Visibility N E E 3rd - Few fish upper end, less than 10 last 5 miles. Small groups of fish, 1-10.
Willow Creek
Date 16-Jul 18-Jul 20-Jul
Count 712 756 744 1st-Partly sunny conditions, most fish were above RR bridge. 94% 96% 98%
Weather O C O 2nd - Groups of 10-12 common from Parks Hwy to Ghett's bridge.
Stream N N N 3rd- one dead
Visibility N E E
Note: Survey conditions for weather are C = clear, O = overcast, T = turbulent; conditions for stream are L = low, N = normal, H = high, C = clear, and S = silty; conditions for
visibility are E = excellent, N = normal, and P = poor.
FINAL REPORT CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 29 April 2013
10. FIGURES
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 30 April 2013
Figure 1. Locations of the tagging sites and radio telemetry stations used in this study for Chinook and pink salmon in the Susitna River in 2012.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 31 April 2013
Figure 2. Locations of the mainstem and Flathorn sites for tagging Chinook and pink salmon, and river miles,
in the lower Susitna River in 2012.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 32 April 2013
Figure 3. Spawning locations of radio-tagged Chinook salmon in the Susitna River for all capture gears combined, 2012.
Note: RM is river mile.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 33 April 2013
Figure 4. Spawning locations of Chinook salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 1 (west) in the Susitna River, 2012.
Note: RM is river mile.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 34 April 2013
Figure 5. Spawning locations of Chinook salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 2 (east) in the Susitna River, 2012
Note: RM is river mile.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 35 April 2013
Figure 6. Spawning locations of Chinook salmon radio-tagged from drift gillnets in the Susitna River, 2012.
Note: RM is river mile.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 36 April 2013
Figure 7. Spawning locations of radio-tagged pink salmon in the Susitna River for all fishwheels combined, 2012.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 37 April 2013
Figure 8. Spawning locations of pink salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 1 in the Susitna River, 2012.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 38 April 2013
Figure 9. Spawning locations of pink salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 2 in the Susitna River, 2012.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 39 April 2013
Figure 10. Spawning locations of pink salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 3 in the Susitna River, 2012.
CHINOOK AND PINK SALMON SPAWNING DISTRIBUTION
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 40 April 2013
Figure 11. Spawning locations of pink salmon radio-tagged at Fishwheel 4 in the Susitna River, 2012.