Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBradley Lake Salmon Escapement 1992 1is NORTHERN coECOLOGICAL SERVICES 17120 Tideview Drive »Anchorage,Alaska 99516 «(907)345-4944 FINAL REPORT BRADLEY RIVER SALMON ESCAPEMENT MONITORING -and TAILRACE ATTRACTION STUDIES 1992 Prepared for: ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY December 1992 FINAL REPORT BRADLEY RIVER SALMON ESCAPEMENT MONITORING AND TAILRACE ATTRACTION STUDIES 1992 By John W.Morsell Northern Ecological Services Randall L.Howard LGL Alaska Research Associates,Inc. and Mary M.Bingham Northern Ecological Services Prepared for Alaska Energy Authority December 1992 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I -BRADLEY RIVER SALMON ESCAPEMENT MONITORING STUDY.... INTRODUCTION ..ccccccccccvcsccccccecccesecccceecccccecccccece METHODS ..cccccccccccceseevesvccveeeceeecereencececececccecees Study Area cece ceccccccccvcceccescessessessevcccccsvesce Study Duration ..ccc ccccccccvcvcccvvccccvsscccsccscccccce Trap Net Sampling .cccccccccccvcccccccvesccccccccscscscces Beach Seine Sampling ...cccecvcccccccccvccscvcsscscscvece CALCASS COUNTS.cece cccesesecvesessccsesvccsecssessscscsecse °a Cree CYS ccccccsccccesvccccnscecscsccscces Biological Data Management.....ccccccccccceccccscvsscces Population and Escapement Estimation ....ccceccccccccevce Physical Data Collection ....cree ccccccvcccvccccccccccce Miscellaneous ObServationS .cccccccccccccccccccessccccce RESULTS .ccc cence ccccccn ccc cccc csc c cece ese cece erence eee cence Overall Catch cece ccc ccccvcsccevevcccccccccerescccccece Trap Net Index Sampling ....cceccccvcscncscccsecescvcess Pink Salmon .ccccccccccccccvcccvccvcccvcssccccccccces Chum Salmon .ccccccccccvcccecsccscccccssccessssvsess CONHO SAlMOMN.ccc wcccccncccccccscescesccevessssccsees Sockeye Salmon ..cccccccccccccccscccscssnccncvecece Chinook Salmon .occccccccccccccveccccscsscsccccccccs Dolly Varden ..ccceccccecccccccccssccvccccscceseces Beach SEining ..crcccnccccccccsenccccccscsscccccscscseses CArCASS COUNTS..ccccccescvesecsesccnvcssceseseesssscecsese Fish CONGItCiON .c.ccccecscccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccs Pink Salmon .eccccccccccccsccscccccccscccsnsccccces Chum Salmon ...ccccevecccscsevcvevsesccvevscccscescecscves COMO SAlMON cc wee cree cccccccsccssceseesccssesscces Sockeye Salmon 2...ccc ccccccccccccscccscccssccscvesChinookSalmon2...ccccccccccccccsscessvccccccccccesStreamLifeDuration..ccccccvvcvcccccsccccccccsnvecscces Pink Salmon ..cccccccccccccvcccccsccssccecccccccces Chum Salmon ..cccsccccsesesesevvsesvesvsevesesesscece Spawning Area Location...ccencccccvcccccccsvescsscccscsees Ox Cree S CVS cevcceccesveesnseseceseeresecensces Population Estimates eeoeoeoeevneeevneeevanveeeeeveeeeeeeaeeeaeeveeved Pink Salmon .eccccccccccvcccccscccsccccccsscccssccces Estimates of Total Escapement ..cc cceccccccvcccccccccece Pink SAL]MON .ccccccecccccccccccecccccccnscccccccces Chum Salmon ..ccccccccccsescvevesescececsssesesscees COHO Salmon ..ccwccccccccevesvvvsesesesevsscsecsesveces Sockeye SalMOn ..ccccccescccccscccsccccccsscccescscess Chinook Salmon..cccccccccccccvcvscscccccsccscccvecsece Ete)]0)OUUMOUOUWWDAAOANNNNNIAKHDAUOOFPWWW=PRPHPPPPEPPRPPPPRPPP&®PWWWWYODHPPeeOOOo TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.) Page Tag Returns From Outside the Study Area .....cceeeecesee 14 Physical Data eeeooeeoeeeseeeeeeoseseeeeseeeeseeveeeeeweeeeeetseeoeeveesnee 14 Miscellaneous ObServationS ..cccceccccvccsescccvscsscceces 15 DISCUSSION ...cccccccccccccccrccnnnccccecccnsccasessvasacscccscecs 15 Comparison With Prior YearS .....cccsscceseccccccvscccee 15 Pink Salmon ..occccccccccvccscccecccccccsccsscsecesee 15 Chum Salmon ....cc ecccccccccesescccveveveccsesescce 16 COMO SAlMON 2.cw wcccecccccncsvcscsscccecscccccscesee 16 Sockeye Salmon ....ccc cccccvcccsccccssvcecceseveese§16 Chinook Salmon ...ccccccvccccccccccccccsccccccccccce 16 Valid °ance In es and Estimates ........2.--17 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE YEARS ...cccccnccccrccccesecvvevsecse 17 PART II -TAILRACE ATTRACTION STUDY @eeeeoeeneeenseeeeeeeeeeaeewneeeene 18 INTRODUCTION .cccccccccccvvcsessecrvccecccccceeesceesereceecccc.s 18 METHODS .ccccccccncccccecccseccesscenceeesreceeeeeeccceccesese 19 Study Area wccccecerccnvccvcccecvccccccscsccsccscecesssese ILO Tailrace DeESCription wc cwccccccccccssscccccceseeee 19 Tailrace Water Volume ...ccccccccccccccccscccccccccee 20 Study Duration ...cccccccccccscccccccscccsssccssecsseses 20 Trap Net Sampling ....c.cccrccccccccscccssaccsseccseseses§21 Beach Seine Sampling .............wee meee ewe secesesecece 22 Ultrasonic Tag Tracking .....ccccncesecececsesessssccese 22 RESULTS .cccccnnccnnrccccccncvcccccnnesasesecsesccccccccessees 23 Trap Net Catch 2...ccccccvcccccccccvesvcccesccsvccevceses 23 Seine Sampling 2...ccccccccccccccnsnncccccccsessecsecces 24 Tag Returns From Outside the Tailrace Area ..........2.5.5 24 Ultrasonic Tagging ..ccccccccccvcccsccccsccccseccseseses 24 DISCUSSION .ccccccvccccsccncccssesecccesscesesecesesesecesesee 26 Presence of Salmon in the Tailrace .....cecccccccccccceese 26 Behavior of Salmon in the Tailrace Area ...ccccccccceces 27 Pink Salmon eeeseeoeeeseeseeseeee21espeoeensneeseeeseees#s#e2ee21#e#e#es#se4eneeseaeneeoeesV#9#ees#e¢?s 27 Sockeye Salmon eoeevoeneveevee eee ees eeweeseeeeeeveeeneeneeeeeoe 28 Coho Salmon eeeseoeevnenveoevoeveeneeoeeeweeeeeeeeeeeeeveeeeeene 28 Tailrace Impac ts @eeoeeeeewneeeeneeeneeeeveeees eee eeeeeeeeeeeeeneosn 29 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 199 3 eoeoeveneeeaevreeveeneeneeeeev eevee eseeseoevenvneeenesn 3 (@] ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS eooeeeeeeeesreeereereee eee ee eer eeerereeereeeeeees 3 1 REFERENCES eeoeoeenvnenvneeeeneeeeeeeeeteeeeeeeeeneeneeeneeeeeeeenee ea eenve 32 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1.Total catch for all sample methods combined.........34 Table 2.Trap net catch statistics for pink salmon...........35 Table 3.Trap net catch statistics for chum salmon...........35 Table 4.Trap net catch statistics for coho salmon...........36 Table 5.Trap net catch statistics for sockeye salmon........36 Table 6.Trap net catch statistics for chinook salmon........37 Table 7.Trap net catch statistics for Dolly Varden..........37 Table 8.Seine catch summary for pink salmon.............2...38 Table 9.Carcass count SuMMAry.......weer creer cree cer ceseeee dD Table 10.Comparison of the week of marking with the week of recapture for all recaptured pink salmon.........40 Table 11.Fox Farm Creek visual survey observations...........41 Table 12.Fish tagged with ultrasonic tags.......cccccvceeeee42 Table 13.Tracking history for salmon with ultrasonic tags....43 4.fw.- LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1.Lower Bradley River with salmon escapement study ALCAN.cc wr evecceccvcrcescccevecsecesseeececeseccecececcseeesee 44 Figure 2.Bradley River trap net desSign.......ccccecsccccseese 45 Figure 3.Trap net and seine SiteS.....crececccccsesscccseseee 46 Figure 4.Catch-per-unit-effort for pink salmon by Study Week...cccccvccscccsccscesccscesccsessccscer 47 Figure 5.Catch-per-unit-effort for chum salmon by Study Week...ccccccvcccccvccevsccccscccesvcssccsccce 48 Figure 6.Catch-per-unit-effort for coho salmon by Study Week...ccccccccccscrccccsscaccccccesecessscees 49 Figure 7.Catch-per-unit-effort for sockeye salmon by Study week...cccccccccccccccccscvesvecvsccccesccese 50 Figure 8.Catch-per-unit-effort for chinook salmon by Study Week...cc ccwcecccacccccnvcccvccccscccscncccce 51 Figure 9.Catch-per-unit-effort for Dolly Varden by Study Week...cccccccccccnvvcccccvccscsecsvecscvcece 52 Figure 10.Percent frequency of occurrence of ripe pink Salmon by study week...cccccccccceccccvesccsecvesce 53 Figure 11.Estimated total annual escapements for pink salmon -1986 through 1991.......ccccvscccesce 54 Figure 12.Tailrace study area and net site locations.........55 Figure 13.Recovery locations of salmon tagged in the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project tailrace........56 iv Appendix A. Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix B. Appendix C. Appendix D. Appendix Appendix Appendix LIST OF APPENDICES Catch records A-1.Pink salmon catch records. A-2.Chum salmon catch records. A-3.Coho salmon catch records. A-4.Sockeye salmon catch records. A-5.Chinook salmon catch records. A-6 Dolly Varden catch records. Fishing effort summary for each net by week 1992 Bradley River sampling. Physical Data. Tailrace catch records. D-1.Tailrace pink salmon catch. D-2.Tailrace chum salmon catch. D-3.Tailrace coho salmon catch. Appendix D-4.Tailrace sockeye salmon catch. Appendix D-5.Tailrace Dolly Varden catch. during PART I BRADLEY RIVER SALMON ESCAPEMENT MONITORING STUDY INTRODUCTION The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license granted to the Alaska Power Authority (now Alaska Energy Authority) for the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project No.8221) stipulates that a plan be developed and implemented to monitor the abundance of salmon in the Bradley River.A salmon monitoring plan was submitted to FERC in June of 1986 (Alaska Power Authority 1986a).The intent of this monitoring plan is to provide a yearly index of salmon abundance during both the pre-operational and post- operational periods to allow an appraisal of project impacts to salmon resources of the Bradley River.This report summarizes the results of the eighth year (1992)of studies of salmon escapement to the Bradley River per the proposed scope of work described in the Salmon Monitoring Plan. Operation of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project began in the fall of 1991,consequently 1992 was the first full year of project operation.However,operational flows were in effect during the summer of 1991 while the reservoir was filling. Therefore,1992 was the second year of the study to examine the salmon resources under the operational flow regime.Studies of salmon attraction to the powerhouse discharge channel (tailrace) were instituted in 1992 and comprise Part II of this report. Biological activities that occur in the Bradley River are inter- related with activities that occur at the tailrace.These inter- relationships are examined in Part II. The salmon resources of the Bradley River have been documented in considerable detail through a series of studies (USFWS 1982; Woodward-Clyde Consultants 1983,1984;Northern Technical Services 1 1985).The Bradley River is a turbid stream of glacial origin, consequently fish cannot be visually detected.Various active and passive sampling techniques were utilized to gain insight into the fish populations.The results of these early studies indicated that pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha)was the principal salmon species using the river for spawning,although smaller numbers of chum (QO.keta),coho (0.kisutch),and chinook (0.tshawytscha) also utilized the river.These studies also indicated that potential spawning habitat was limited to a short segment of the river due to high gradient and coarse substrate at the upstream end and silty tideflats at the lower end. The 1985 study by Northern Technical Services represented the first year of study for the pre-operational salmon monitoring program.However,the sampling methodology was modified in 1986 per the approved Salmon Monitoring Plan;therefore,data comparable to the 1992 study have only been collected during the 1986 through 1991 field seasons.The 1986-1988 studies were conducted by Dames &Moore (Alaska Power Authority 1986b,1987,and 1988).The 1989 through 1991 studies (Alaska Energy Authority 1989,1990 and 1991) as well as the 1992 field studies,which this report addresses, were conducted by Northern Ecological Services/LGL Alaska Research Associates,Inc.The 1986-1991 studies confirmed that pink salmon were the major spawners and that the river also supports small runs of the other salmon species.Considerable information on the abundance,spawning distribution,and other aspects of life history has been collected over the last eight years. The primary objectives of the 1992 field effort were to: -Continue the sampling methodology for the operational flow regime which was initiated in 1991 in order to allow estimates of salmon abundance to be compared with past years and,at the same time,provide standard catch procedures to be used for catch-per-unit-effort comparisons with 1991 and future years. Continue the general assessment of the habitat value of the river under the operational flow regime as compared to the pre-operational flow regime -Maximize the amount of biological information obtained from the study by thoroughly analyzing the data. METHODS Study Area The primary study area was essentially identical to that in the 1986-1991 studies consisting of a 2,011l-m (6600-ft)stream segment extending from the downstream end of Riffle Reach to just above the upstream end of Bear Island Slough (Figure 1).The reduced flow in 1991 and 1992,compared to previous years,allowed access by both fish and study team investigators above Bear Island Slough for a distance of about 300 m,thus the effective study area was lengthened slightly from years prior to 1991.The study area encompasses almost all of the known spawning habitat in the Bradley River systen. One study site was located outside of the primary study area. Fox Farm Creek,a small clear-water tributary to the Bradley River at RM 2.5 was monitored for salmon escapement (Figure 1). Study Duration The study was conducted over a 9 week period from July 14 through September 10.The general timing of the study was originally selected to coincide with the duration and timing of the pink salmon run based on the results of the earlier studies and confirmed in recent years. Under the normal schedule of sampling,the field crew traveled to the site on Monday evening of each calendar week and intensive 3 sampling took place on every Tuesday,Wednesday and Thursday. Trap Net Sampling Trap nets were again used as a primary sampling technique as in the 1986-1991 efforts.The standard project trap nets as redesigned in 1990 (see Alaska Energy Authority 1990)were designed to fish in water as shallow as 0.5 m and proved to work well at selected deeper sites in the river.The redesigned nets are illustrated in Figure 2.These nets were made from 6.35 cm (2.5 inch)stretch mesh nylon.Net wings were attached to the main frame of the net in various configurations depending on the location of the net in the river. The 6 trap net sites established in 1991 for the operational flow regime were utilized again in 1992 (Figure 3).There was no indication that significant stream channel changes had occurred since the 1991 season,consequently the conditions at each net location effectively duplicated the conditions present during the 1991 study.Some of the nets were accessible by boat and some were only accessible by foot. During each typical weekly sampling period,the trap nets in the primary study area were set Tuesday morning and fished until Thursday morning for a total of approximately 48 hours,after which they were removed from the water until the following week.During normal operations,each net was checked every 4 hours during the daytime and then allowed to fish overnight.Some variation in the typical sampling regime occurred in some weeks to avoid having to check the nets during extreme high tides. The fish were removed from the nets at each check,identified to species,measured,and salmon species were tagged using sequentially numbered Floy spaghetti tags.Larger Dolly Varden were marked by punching a hole in the upper lobe of the caudal fin with a standard paper punch.Sex and spawning condition were 4 recorded for all salmon.Spawning condition codes were as follows: Code Condition 1 Fresh,non-spawning coloration, silvery 2 Spawning coloration,not spawned out - 3 Ripe,eggs or milt readily stripped 4 Spawned out,little deterioration 5 Spawned out,visible deterioration 6 Dead Beach Seine Sampling As a supplemental sampling method,beach seining was conducted during weeks 1 through 9 of the study period.Seine sites are indicated on Figure 3.Sites S1,S3 and S7 were seined consistently each week whereas seining at the other sites was irregular.The seine utilized was 100 ft.long by 6 ft.deep constructed of 2.5 in.stretch mesh netting.Captured fish were processed in a manner similar to that described for the hoop net sampling. Carcass Counts All salmon carcasses were counted and tags were noted. Fox Farm Creek Surveys Visual foot surveys of fish present in Fox Farm Creek,a clear tributary to the Bradley River (Figure 1),were conducted once during each sample week.Observors walked the entire habitable length of the creek at low tide and recorded the numbers of fish present for each species of salmon and the numbers of fish showing visible project tags. Biological Data Management Data from field data books were entered into a computer spreadsheet (Quattro Pro)using an IBM compatible microcomputer. Printouts from the spreadsheets were checked by field personnel against the field notebooks.The spreadsheets were edited, correcting any observed errors.Graphs were prepared using the Quattro Pro program. Population and Escapement Estimation The principal methods used for estimating populations were the same as those used in past years to assure comparability of data.Population estimates based on trap net catches were calculated for the primary species of salmon present during each sample week using the Peterson model,as modified by Chapman (Ricker 1975).The following assumptions were used in constructing the model: 1.Salmon numbers remained constant during the 3-day sample period. 2.All fish marked during the previous 2 sample weeks were still present in the study area. 3.Fish marked 3 or more weeks prior to the sample week were no longer present in the study area. 4.Marked and unmarked fish were equally susceptable to capture. In addition,population estimates were also calculated based on selected seine catches. hysical Data Collect Air temperature,water temperature,turbidity,and stream stage were recorded daily at the field camp (Figure 1)on those days that the study crew was in the field.Turbidity was measured 6 in the field using an HF Instruments Model DRT15 nephelometric turbidity meter.Stream stage was measured using a staff gauge. The gauge measurements were strictly relative and were not tied to any datun. Miscellaneous Observations Miscellaneous biological events were noted as they occurred. RESULTS Overall Catch Overall catch for all methods combined is summarized by week in Table 1.Complete catch records for each species are presented in Appendix A. As in past years,all five species of Pacific salmon indigenous to Alaska were captured in the Bradley River.Pink salmon were again the most abundant species with a total catch of 125 fish.Substantial numbers of chum,coho,and sockeye salmon were also caught,as well as smaller numbers of chinook salmon. Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma)were also caught in significant numbers. Trap Net Index Sampling Trap nets were the primary sampling technique and proved to be effective at catching adult salmon.The sampling effort for the 6 index nets was uniform throughout the study period.Trap net fishing times for each net and week are summarized in Appendix B. Pink Salmon Pink salmon catch and catch-per-hour are presented in Table 2.The catch-per-hour reached its peak during week 3 (July 28 - 7 July 30),declined through week 6 then increased somewhat and remained stable through the end of the study period (Figure 4). The maximum catch rate reached in week 3 was 0.107 fish per hour as compared to 0.01 fish per hour in week 6 (Table 2). Chum Salmon Small numbers of chum salmon were present in the study area during weeks 1 through 5 (Table 3).The chum salmon catch peaked during week 3 (July 28 -July 30)then declined rapidly with few fish remaining after the second week of August (Figure 5).The maximum catch rate occurred during the third week of the study at 0.052 fish per hour (Table 3). Coho Salmon Coho salmon (Table 4 and Figure 6)were first seen in the study area during week 5 (August 11-13).The catch rate increased reaching a peak in early September then decreased somewhat during the last week of the study. Sockeye Salmon Sockeye salmon were present in the Bradley River from week 2 through week 9 (Table 5 and Figure 7)with the highest catch rate occurring during week 6 (Aug.18-20).A relatively high catch was also recorded in week 9. Chinook Salmon Chinook salmon were present in small numbers through the first week of August (Table 6).The maximum catch rate of 0.055 fish per hour occurred in week 2 (July 21-23)with catch gradually declining thereafter (Figure 8).No chinooks were caught in weeks 5 through 9. Dolly Varden Dolly varden caught in the trap nets were limited to larger fish (generally greater than 250 mm)because of the size of the net mesh.Dolly Varden (Table 7 and Figure 9)were present in the catch from late July through the end of the study period.The highest catch occurred in week 7.The abundance of Dolly Varden in the Bradley River appeared to correspond to the abundance of pink salmon and was probably related to the availability of salmon eggs as a food source. Beach Seining Beach seine catch data are presented in Appendices A-1 through A-6 and summarized for pink salmon in Table 8.Because of the apparently low numbers of pink salmon,seining was much less successful in 1992 as compared to 1991.A total of 40 pink salmon were caught by the beach seine in 1992,of which 5 were fish that had been tagged previously. Seine site S1 (Figure 3)yielded by far the greatest number of fish.This site corresponded with a major pink salmon spawning area.Other salmon species were not caught in significant numbers in the seine. Carcass Counts The results of carcass counts are presented in Table 9.Few carcasses were observed in 1992,reflecting the generally low numbers of salmon in the river. Fish Condition Pink Salmon The condition codes for all pink salmon captured are presented 9 in Appendix A-1.Condition 3,"ripe",is indicative of spawning condition and was the least subjective of the condition codes since it depended on the actual presence of eggs or milt.Figure 10 shows the percent frequency of occurrence of Condition 3 fish for both male and female pink salmon.As has been the case in past years,males reached spawning condition earlier than females; nearly all males were in spawning condition from week 4 until the end of the study.About half of the females caught in weeks 4 through 7 were ripe and about 75 percent of the females caught in weeks 8 and 9 were ripe.The pattern of maturity was somewhat irregular in 1992.It appeared that there were 2 small runs of pink salmon,an early run that spawned in mid-August and a later run that reached a spawning peak in mid-September. Chum Salmon The small number of chums caught in 1992 make conclusions regarding the timimg of spawning somewhat difficult.As has been the case in past years,most of the male chum salmon were already in spawning condition at the start of the study in mid-July (Appendix A-2).It is likely that most spawning occurred during late July and early August.The number of chum salmon in the river decreased dramatically by week 5 (August 11-13). Coho Salmon Most of the cohos observed during the study period were in fresh condition or in the early stages of acquiring their spawning coloration (Appendix A-3).Some males in weeks 8 and 9 had reached spawning condition but no ripe females were observed during the study.The peak of coho spawning undoubtedly occurred after the end of the study period in late September or early October. Sockeye Salmon Sockeyes were present in the Bradley River in significant 10 numbers throughout the entire study period except for week 1. Percentages of ripe fish in weeks 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,and 9 were 33,28,12,30,67,100,100,and 73 percent respectively, suggesting that the peak of spawning occurred from late August to early September. Chinook salmon Almost all chinook salmon captured in weeks 1 and 2 (July 14 -July 23)were ripe suggesting that the peak of spawning occurred during this time.In early August most chinooks were in post- spawning condition and no chinooks were caught after week 4.The study period did not overlap the beginning of the chinook run, therefore the maturation data were incomplete for this species. Stream Life Duration Pink Salmon Table 10 provides information on the tagging history of all pink salmon recaptured in trap nets.Because of the small number of recaptures,little information on stream life duration was obtained from the 1992 study program.One fish that was originally tagged on July 29 was recaptured on August 27 indicating a minimum stream life for that fish of 32 days. Chum Salmon The chum salmon catch was small in 1992 and chum salmon were present in the Bradley River at the start of the study;therefore, information on duration of stream life based on the 1992 study is limited.None of the recaptured fish had been in the river for longer than 2 weeks based on mark and recapture dates. 11 Spawning Area Location The small number of most species of salmon prevented any meaningful delineation of spawning areas.Based on the results of seine hauls and visual observations,it appeared that the majority of pink salmon spawning occurred in Tree Bar Reach (Figure 3)with little spawning noted in downstream areas. Fox Farm Creek Surveys The results of the visual surveys of Fox Farm Creek are presented in Table 12.Fox Farm Creek was not utilized by pink salmon in 1992 and only a few chum salmon were observed.Stream flow appeared adequate to support spawning. Population Estimates Pink Salmon Because of the low trap net catch (Table 2)and the very low number of recaptures (Table 10),population estimates using mark and recapture methods for trap net fish comparable to previous years were not considered possible for 1992.In no study week was there more than 1 recapture from the previous 2 weeks suggesting that any estimates would not be statistically meaningful. Seining in week 9 provided some catch data that were utilized to make a single estimate: Week Total Catch Tags Out Recaps.Pop.Est.95%Conf.Limits 9 19 15 2 106 44 -1600 12 Estimates of Total Escapement Pink Salmon The limited catch and recapture data prevent accurate estimates of escapement.There is no doubt that the population was small compared to other years.The total number of untagged pink salmon caught in 1992 was 112 which represents a minimum escapement.Of the total captures,about 12 percent were tagged fish suggesting that significant numbers of fish were present but not captured.It is reasonable to speculate that the total escapement was between 300 and 1000 fish. Another approach to escapement estimation is to compare the overall catch-per-hour for 1992 with the catch-per-hour for 1991 and relate to the 1991 escapement estimates.Overall catch per hour in 1992 was 0.033 compared to 0.466 in 1991.Therefore,catch per unit effort was 14 times greater in 1991.Dividing the 1991 escapement (about 8400 fish)by 14 results in an estimate for 1992 of about 600 fish. Chum Salmon Estimating the total escapement of chum salmon is difficult since the catch and population data are minimal and no data are available during the beginning of the chum run.The total number of untagged chums caught during the study was 22 which represents the minimum number of fish using the study area.About 19 percent of the total captures were marked fish.A reasonable estimate of total escapement is 60 to 150 fish. Coho Salmon The study ended early in the coho run,therefore escapement cannot be estimated.The total trap net catch was 72 cohos,of which only 6 were recaptures.The data suggest that several 13 hundred coho salmon were present in the river during the study period and that more would likely be arriving after the end of the study. Sockeye Salmon A total of 50 sockeye salmon were caught during the study (not including recaptures).Approximately 26 percent of the total catch consisted of recaptures.Mark and recapture estimates were not conducted for sockeyes because of a definite tendency for fish to be recaptured multiple times in the same net.A conservative estimate of the number of sockeyes present in the Bradley River based on observations during the 1992 season is 75 to 150 fish. Chinook Salmon The total number of chinook salmon caught (not including recaptures)was 36 fish.About 23 percent of the total trap net catch were recaptures.There are insufficient data to accurately estimate escapement.The actual number of fish captured (36)is the minimum escapement.If the percent recaptures is a reasonable representation of the proportion of chinooks that were marked,then escapement may have been as high as 150.It is likely that the number of chinooks utilizing the Bradley River in 1992 was greater than 50 but less than 200. Taq Returns From Outside the Study Area No returns of fish tagged in the Bradley River were reported to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game or the Alaska Energy Authority in 1992. Physical Data Air and water temperature,turbidity,and relative water level data are presented in Appendix C.Temperature data were collected 14 at about 8:00 a.m.and,thus,are approximately representative of daily minimums.Water temperature varied from 5.4 to 10 degrees C.indicating a very constant temperature regime.Turbidity ranged from 10 to 84 NTU.Turbidity was generally lower during the early weeks of the study and gradually increased with highest levels in September.Base water level was very stable varying only 0.3 ft. over the course of the study period (not including tidal variation which occurred during extreme tides). Miscellaneous Observations Wildlife was generally less abundant along the Bradley River in 1992 than in 1991,probably because of the small salmon run. A black bear moved into the area in mid-August and remained for several weeks.Seals were observed in the Bradley River on several occasions during high tides as far upstream as Riffle Reach. DISCUSSION Comparison With Prior Years Pink Salmon Figure 11 compares the estimated total escapements for the years 1986 through 1992.The data clearly indicate that escapement in 1992 was one of the lowest that has been observed during the seven year period of record.Even year returns to the Bradley River have been poor since 1988,probably because severe flooding that occurred in the fall of 1986 destroyed eggs that had been spawned in that year.In addition,returns of both hatchery and wild pink salmon to southcentral Alaska streams was unusually poor in 1992,suggesting that saltwater survival of pink salmon was generally low.Pink salmon returns to Humpy Creek,the most productive pink salmon stream in Kachemak Bay,were about 25 percent of the long term average (Hammarstrom,personal communication).The low number of pink salmon observed in the 15 Bradley River in 1992 probably resulted from the combination of a low spawning population in 1990 and poor saltwater survival. Chum Salmon The number of chum salmon using the Bradley River in 1992 also appeared to be low compared to past years.Estimated chum salmon escapements have varied from 50 fish to 1600 fish since 1986 with 3 years having escapements of greater than 500 fish.Chum salmon returns in general to Kachemak Bay were very low in 1992 (Hammarstrom,personal communication),consequently the low number in the Bradley River is consistent with area trends. Coho Salmon Study timing in 1992,as well as in previous years,has prevented estimates of coho salmon escapement and meaningful comparisons are difficult.The 1992 catch was significantly lower than the catch in 1991 but close to the numbers caught in 1988- 1990. Sockeye Salmon The number of sockeyes caught in 1992 was less than the numbers observed in 1989 through 1991 but greater than in 1986, 1987,and 1988.Some fish clearly matured and may have spawned in the Bradley River.Whether or not the Bradley River has a self- sustaining population of sockeye salmon is still open to question. No juvenile sockeyes have been observed in the river. Chinook Salmon The number of chinook salmon utilizing the Bradley River study area in 1992 was probably similar to the number present in 1988 through 1991 but greater than was present in 1986 and 1987.Over the 7 year study period the number of chinooks caught has been very 16 consistent suggesting relatively uniform use of the river during the study period. Validity of Abundance Indices and Estimates The generally small number of pink and chum salmon caught during the 1992 study prevented the use of mark and recapture population estimating techniques.Therefore,realistic estimates of weekly abundance and total escapement could not be made. However,it is certain that numbers were very small.The trap net catch-per-hour combined with visual observations,carcass counts and seining of known spawning areas indicated that few pink andchumsalmonwerepresent. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE YEARS The basic methodology developed in 1991 and continued in 1992 should be continued in future years.An index of abundance based on trap net catch-per-hour will be roughly comparable from year to year starting in 1991,and mark and recapture population estimates will provide valuable additional information as has been the case in past years. Some of the trap nets as sited and configured in 1991 did not fish efficiently in 1992;nets 1 and 3 caught very few fish.It is recommended that minor changes in location and wing configuration be made at some of the sites to improve catch success and allow a better sampling of the fish present in the river.Any such changes will partially invalidate catch-per-unit-effort comparisons with 1991 and 1992,but the additional catch success will improve population estimates and provide a better basis for future comparisons. 17 PART ITI TAILRACE ATTRACTION STUDY INTRODUCTION The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)license granted to the Alaska Power Authority (now Alaska Energy Authority) for the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project (Project No.8221) stipulates that a plan be developed and implemented to study the extent of attraction of salmon to the powerhouse discharge (tailrace)area.The overall intent of the tailrace attraction study (in combination with the Bradley River salmon escapement study)is to provide insight into the question of whether the operation of the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project is causing a significant impact to the salmon resources of the Bradley River and to provide information regarding possible mitigation measures.The tailrace attraction study was scheduled to begin during the first full year of project operation and to continue for a minimum of 2 years.This report summarizes the results of the first year of tailrace studies per the proposed scope of work approved by FERC in 1986. The Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project consists of the Bradley Lake reservoir formed by constructing a dam at the original lake outlet,a power tunnel which diverts reservoir water through a mountainside,and a powerhouse located at tidewater at the extreme head of Kachemak Bay.Water used for power generation is released from the powerhouse onto an intertidal flat.The Bradley River is totally bypassed by the water used for power generation.A minimum flow of water consistent with permit requirements is maintained in the Bradley River by discharging water from the dam into the natural channel of the river.Water released from the powerhouse enters an excavated tailrace channel and then is allowed to find its way through the intertidal flat into Kachemak Bay.The tailrace discharge is opposite the mouths of the Bradley River and adjoining Sheep Creek. 18 The primary objectives of the 1992 tailrace attraction study were to: -Determine whether,and to what extent,salmon are attracted to the tailrace drainage. -Gain information regarding the behavior,movements,and duration of residence of fish in the tailrace drainage area -Evaluate methodologies that can be used to capture and monitor fish within the tailrace environment -Evaluate possible project impact by integrating information from the tailrace attraction and Bradley River escapement monitoring study components METHODS Study Area The overall study area consisted of the intertidal area through which the tailrace discharge flows prior to entering Kachemak Bay plus portions of the Bradley River and the estuarine environment between the tailrace discharge and the Bradley River (Figure 12). Tailrace Description The portion of the tailrace immediately downstream from the powerhouse consists of a riprapped basin about 200 ft.by 200 ft. The depth is approximately 15 ft.A riprap sill separates this inner basin from the remainder of the tailrace.When power is being generated,conditions within the inner basin are generally turbulent except at the margins because of the water entering from the turbine discharge.Downstream from the rock sill,the 19 excavated tailrace continues for an additional 700 ft.(Figure 12). This portion is a uniform trapezoidal channel about 200 ft.wide and 3 ft.deep under moderate generation flows.When no power is being generated the channel goes dry.The elevation of the bottom of the excavated tailrace is near mean high tide elevation and the tailrace flow is normally not significantly affected by high tides. However,extreme tides above about 20 ft.inundate the tailrace area.Bottom substrate in the lower portion of the excavated tailrace is glacial silt.Surrounding terrain consists of salt marsh vegetation growing on glacial silt. During power generation,water exits the excavated tailrace at several locations.About 30 percent of the water flows into a natural tidal channel that connects with the southwest corner of the tailrace (Figure 12).This channel then enters a larger tidal channel which flows westward and dumps into Kachemak Bay through a short section of excavated channel just east of the project barge dock.The remainder overflows the tailrace along the northern edge and at the northwest corner and flows over the salt marsh where it converges onto an eroding area prior to entering the large tidal channel.It is likely that continuing erosion will eventually create a channel that meets the excavated tailrace at its northwestern portion.The resulting channel would then carry most of the water. Tailrace Water Volume The volume of water discharged from the tailrace varies from 0-1500 cfs.During most of the study period normal mid-day discharge ranged from 800-1000 cfs.However,during most nights from about midnight to about 6:00 a.m.power generation ceased completely,allowing the tailrace to go dry. Study Duration The study was conducted over an 8 week period from July 20 to 20 September 10,1992.The general timing of the study was selected to coincide with the duration and timing of the pink salmon run based on the results of the earlier studies and confirmed in recent years.During the normal schedule of sampling,the field crew traveled to the site on Monday of each week and worked through Thursday in coordination with the Bradley River escapement study. Trap Net Sampling It should be emphasized that much of the sampling effort in 1992 was experimental and not all attempts were successful.Water levels in the tidal channels downstream from the tailrace fluctuated widely depending on tide stage and the muddy substrate limited access to some areas.Also,current velocity in tidal channels during conditions of low tide and high power generation was often too high to permit use of trap nets.Velocity impacts were complicated by the fact that detritus originating from the salt marsh vegetation often accumulated on the netting creating high water resistance.Nevertheless,trap nets proved to be the most valuable sampling technique. Standard project trap nets as described in Part I (Figure 2) were utilized.Three net sites proved to be feasible for consistent use (Figure 12).A fourth net site was was abandoned early in the study because of difficult conditions resulting from tidal variation.The two net sites in the tailrace proper fished effectively at all tide stages.Net Site No.3 in the tidal channel downstream from the tailrace only fished effectively at half tide or higher.All nets were checked at approximately 4 hour intervals during the day from 8:00 am to 9:00 pm.For most of the study period,the nets were either pulled out or propped up so that traps were out of the water after 9:00 p.m.to avoid fish mortality when power generation ceased at night (causing the nets to go dry). Fish were removed from the nets at each check,identified to species,measured,and salmon species were tagged using 21 sequentially numbered Floy spaghetti tags.All tailrace fish were tagged with yellow tags to allow easy recognition offsite.Dolly Varden were marked by punching a hole in the upper lobe of the caudal fin with a standard paper punch.Sex and spawning condition were recorded for all salmon using the condition codes described in Part I. Beach Seine Sampling Beach seining was conducted during weeks 1 through 3 of the study period in the lower part of the excavated tailrace.The seine utilized was 150 ft.long,6 ft.deep,and constructed of 2.5 in.stretch mesh nylon.The seine was deployed by anchoring one end to shore and stacking the remainder on the bow of the boat. The boat backed up while playing out the seine in a semi-circle and coming back to shore.The net was then pulled in from shore. Seine hauls were made from both the north and south banks of the tailrace.Captured fish were processed in the same manner as described for the trap net sampling.Seine sampling was discontinued after the third week because of poor success. Ultrasonic Tag Tracking As an additional means of examining behavior of fish in relation to the tailrace,selected salmon were monitored using ultrasonic tags.Transmitters that emit individually coded ultrasonic signals were implanted into the stomachs of the fish. The cylindrical ultrasonic tags (Sonotronics CT-82-2)were 60 mm long and 16 mm in diameter.The tags were lubricated with glycerin and pushed past the gullet and into the stomach of the salmon using a dowel of the same diameter as the tag.The first two fish were anesthetized with tricaine sulfonate (MS-222)prior to tag implantation.Initial experimentation suggested that the total trauma to the fish was greater when anesthesia was involved than when the fish were tagged without anesthesia because of the increased handling.With subsequent fish,tag insertion was 22 accomplished without anesthesia usually at the same time that the fish were measured and Floy tagged.Salmon carrying ultrasonic tags were also marked with a hole punched in the upper lobe of the caudal fin so that they could be recognized if recaptured. Ultrasonic tagged salmon were held for varying periods of time prior to release,usually ranging from 1 to 4 hours. After release,the fish were tracked using a directional hydrophone (Sonotronics DH-2)that was connected to a standard ultrasonic receiver (Sonotronics USR-4D).The operator utilized headphones to hear the coded signal and controlled the hydrophone direction by rotating it on a PVC shaft.In most cases fish were tracked from a boat.However,some tracking also occurred on foot from stream banks. Ultrasonic tagging gear was not available until week 3 of the study and tagging was initiated on August 4.Normally,tagged fish were actively tracked for a period of several hours after release. Subsequently,ultrasonic monitoring transects were established in the tailrace to detect fish presence from day to day.Ultrasonic monitoring also was conducted on the Bradley River in weeks 6,7, 8,and 9 and intermittantly in Kachemak Bay near the outlet of the tidal channel carrying the tailrace discharge. RESULTS Tra et Catc Trap nets 1,2,and 3 were successful at catching salmon in the tailrace environment.Catch records for all fish caught in the tailrace study are listed in Appendices D-1 through D-5.During the study period 8 pink salmon,1 chum salmon,15 coho salmon,62 sockeye salmon,and 25 Dolly Varden were caught.Nets 1 and 2 within the tailrace proper appeared to be reasonably efficient at sampling fish within the tailrace.Net 3 in the tidal channel downstream from the tailrace was less successful. 23 Of the salmon caught in the trap nets,81 percent were in pre- spawning condition.Significant numbers of the sockeye salmon caught in late August were ripe. Seine Sampling No salmon were caught in the seine and only a few Dolly Varden (Appendix D-5).Seining as a technique appeared to work well in the lower tailrace.Uniform depth,smooth bottom and moderate current velocity allowed the seine to be deployed successfully. The lack of catch success most likely reflected a very low density of fish. Taq Returns from Outside the Tailrace Area Five salmon with distinctive yellow Floy tags were recovered outside of the tailrace area including 3 sockeye salmon recovered from the Bradley River and 2 salmon recovered from Fox Creek, across Kachemak Bay from the tailrace (Figure 13): 1.Sockeye salmon tagged at Net 3 on Aug.11 was recovered in Bradley River Net 6A on Aug.20. 2.Sockeye salmon tagged at Net 2 on Aug.18 was recovered in Bradley River Net 4 on Aug.26. 3.Sockeye salmon tagged at Net 2 on Aug.18 was recovered in Bradley River Net 3 on Sept.9. 4.Coho salmon tagged at Net 1 on Aug.13 was recovered in Fox Creek by a subsistence fisherman on Aug.21. 5.Sockeye (?)salmon tagged at Net 2 on July 28 was recovered by a subsistence fisherman on Fox Creek on Sept.3 (identified by fisherman as a coho salmon). Ultrasonic Tagging Ultrasonic tags were placed in 20 fish including 5 pink 24 salmon,9 sockeye salmon,and 6 coho salmon.Table 12 summarizes information on tagged fish.The original study plan called for an emphasis on pink salmon.However,the small number of available pink salmon necessitated that other species be utilized to make the most of the limited study season and to provide a firm basis for planning the 1993 sonic tagging effort. The ultrasonic tags and the receiving equipment functioned reasonably well in the tailrace environment and surrounding area. Background noise was a concern at some locations and at some times. Noise and bubbles resulting from the turbine discharge prevented ultrasonic monitoring in the center portion of the upper tailrace, between the powerhouse and the rock weir.High wind and the resulting wave action caused noise and reduced the listening range at times within the lower tailrace.However,for the most part, the lower tailrace allowed a listening range of between 150 and 1000 ft.depending on conditions.One longitudinal drift transect down the center of the tailrace channel allowed easy recovery of all signals present in the area.Limited tracking experience in the open water of upper Kachemak Bay suggested that signals could be heard for a distance of at least 1000 ft.and probably substantially farther.Tracking in the Bradley River also was successful,but as would be expected,shallow,turbulent reaches prevented signal propagation;therefore,ultrasonic monitoring involved moving from pool to pool where conditions were favorable. Table 13 provides a summary of the tracking history of all salmon fitted with ultrasonic tags.The movements of these fish fell into 3 general categories:1)fish that moved quickly out of the tailrace area and were not heard again;2)fish that moved out of the tailrace but were subsequently heard at another location (e.g.Bradley River);or 3)fish that remained in the tailrace area for a prolonged time (more than 3 days).Of the 20 tagged fish, 12 left the tailrace or adjoining area within 24 hours and were not located again.Four fish (all sockeye salmon)remained in the tailrace for an extended time;at least one of those fish appeared 25 to have died in the tailrace.One sockeye salmon was relocated in Kachemak Bay northeast of the barge dock.Three salmon (one each pink,sockeye and coho)were relocated in the Bradley River 7-8 days after release in the tailrace.Figure 13 provides a visual summary of the recovery locations for fish with ultrasonic tags. The response of fish to tag insertion was variable.Most fish tended to remain relatively inactive for 1-3 hours after tag insertion then resumed activity.One tagged fish died after several days in a holding net prior to release;autopsy revealed no obvious damage to the digestive tract from the sonic tag and no obvious cause of death.At least one released fish (#447) apparently died after several days in the tailrace.Several fish were known to have survived for at least a week after tagging and one fish (#97)was probably alive more than 20 days after tagging. The life span of salmon in spawning condition is short and conclusions regarding the effect of tag insertion would be difficult.Most of the fish with ultrasonic tags resumed movement after a period of several hours and 8 of the 20 tagged fish were known to have survived for at least 2 days following tag insertion. DISCUSSION Presence of Salmon in the Tailrace The results of the trap netting clearly showed that some salmon,especially sockeyes,were attracted to the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project tailrace discharge.The trap nets in the tailrace channel proper effectively blocked about 50 percent of the channel including the area along each bank.It is suspected that these nets caught a significant proportion of the fish within the tailrace;the number of fish present in the tailrace at any given time was probably small. Only 8 pink salmon and 1 chum salmon were caught in 7 weeks of active sampling indicating that few fish of these species were 26 present.The Bradley River sampling indicated that the spawning populations of both of these species was unusually low in 1992 and, therefore,it is not surprising that few of these fish were caught in the tailrace.On the other hand,the small number of pinks and chums in the tailrace provides reasonably strong evidence that tailrace attraction was not the cause of the poor returns to the Bradley River. Sockeye salmon accounted for 72 percent of the total salmon catch in the tailrace.Increasing numbers of sockeye salmon have been noted in recent years in the Bradley River and their presence in upper Kachemak Bay is somewhat puzzling.There has been no evidence of spawning success in the Bradley River and it is suspected that most of these fish are strays from the various enhanced fisheries on Kenai Peninsula drainages or perhaps strays from the small natural runs of sockeyes that occur in the Martin and Fox Rivers.Most of the sockeyes caught in late August were ready to spawn. Fifteen coho salmon were caught in the tailrace in late August and early September.None of these fish were in spawning condition. Behavior of Salmon in the Tailrace Area Some indication of salmon behavior relative to the Bradley Project tailrace can be inferred from Floy tag return information and ultrasonic tag tracking (Figure 13). Pink Salmon Information is limited because of the small number of pinks captured and tagged in the tailrace.Four pink salmon captured in the tailrace area were tagged with sonic tags and 1 pink from the Bradley River was transported to the tailrace,tagged,and released.All 5 of these fish actively departed the tailrace area 27 within a few hours of release,prior to being forced downstream by the lack of water that occurred each night when power generation was shut down.One of the fish was located again 8 days later in the Bradley River near Fox Farm Creek.Based on this small sample, there was no tendency to remain in the tailrace. Sockeye Salmon Three of the sockeye salmon tagged with Floy tags in the tailrace were subsequently recaptured in the Bradley River.The time lapse between initial tagging and recapture varied from 8 days to 22 days.Another sockeye tagged in the tailrace with a sonic tag was relocated in the Bradley River 8 days after release.The histories of these 4 fish clearly indicate that sockeyes can and do move from the tailrace to the Bradley River.On the other hand, 4 of the 9 sockeye salmon fitted with sonic tags remained in the tailrace for periods of time ranging from several days to 2 weeks. Because the flow of water decreased to near 0 in the early morning hours,the fish that remained in the tailrace area had to either seek refuge in the ponded water of the upper tailrace basin or go downstream to the point of tidal influence and subsequently swim back upstream into the tailrace after flow resumed.Sockeye salmon appeared to have more of a tendency to remain in the tailrace area than the other salmon species. Coho Salmon Of the 11 coho salmon that were tagged with Floy tags in the tailrace,one was recaptured in Fox Creek across Kachemak Bay from the tailrace.Of the 6 coho salmon fitted with sonic tags,all left the tailrace area within a few hours after release and one was relocated in the lower Bradley River 7 days after release.The cohos appeared to have little tendency to remain in the tailrace. 28 Tailrace Impacts It should be noted that power production at the Bradley Lake hydroelectric facility was shut down in the early morning hours (usually midnight to about 6:00 am)of most days.This operating regime was unexpected and had a number of effects on the study progran.During these shutdown periods,most of the tailrace downstream from the rock sill was dry (except during periods of extreme tides)and the tidal channels that carried the tailrace water also had greatly decreased flow depending on tide stage. Trap nets obviously did not function during these periods.Salmon movements often occur during hours of reduced light and, consequently,the shut down period probably eliminated the best fishing time for the nets.The shut down period undoubtedly also discouraged fish from entering or remaining in the tailrace.In effect,the shutdown regime acted like a mitigation measure to prevent fish from being attracted to the tailrace flow.Future power demands or altered generating strategies could change this regime and,thus,create different conditions.This fact should be kept in mind when considering the results of this study. The number of pink salmon utilizing the Bradley River drainage was small in 1992 and,therefore,data on the key evaluation species are lacking.Also,the capture methods and use of ultrasonic tagging were in a somewhat experimental stage during the 1992 study progran. Given the above precautionary considerations,the results of the 1992 tailrace study program suggest that most salmon did not remain in the tailrace area for an extended time.A significant proportion of the fish originally caught in the tailrace were subsequently located in the Bradley River;whereas,there was no indication of movement from the Bradley River to the tailrace. 29 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1993 The timing,logistics and basic methodology of the overall study program worked well in 1992.It is recommended that the basic study program be continued and expanded in 1993 with the following improvements: 1.Consider the purchase of additional trap net leads so that the length of the wings on the tailrace trap nets can be expanded to cover additional area. 2.Consider the purchase of 2 additional trap nets of the seal-proof open top design.Place an additional trap net at the end of the tidal channel that discharges the tailrace water (near the barge dock)to intercept salmon before they reach the tailrace.The net would have to be configured to float at higher tide stages.The other trap net would be used as a spare for both the tailrace and Bradley River study efforts since all nets were used in 1992. 3.Consider the use of longer seines for use in the tailrace area,possibly deployed from 2 boats.Existing nets could probably be adapted for use. . 4.Consider expanding the sonic tagging program to include automatic recording receivers to provide constant monitoring at 2-3 locations.At a minimum,receivers should be placed in the lower Bradley River and near the outlet to the tidal channel that carries the tailrace water (to detect fish leaving the tailrace influence).A third receiver could be placed at the lower end of the excavated tailrace channel. It would be desirable to place ultrasonic tags in at least 100 fish to obtain a reasonable sample size. 30 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank the Alaska Energy Authority Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project field staff for their cooperation and logistical support of the river and tailrace crews during the course of the 1992 field study.Field technicians -Ms.Elizabeth Neumann and Mr.Scott Morsell -are thanked for conducting the field work in a safe,efficient and professional manner. 31 REFERENCES Alaska Power Authority,1986a.Salmon monitoring plan for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ProjectNo.P-8221-000.Prepared by Stone and Webster Engineering Corp.,Anchorage,Ak. ,1986b.Bradley River salmon escapement monitoring report for 1986.Prepared by Dames &Moore under contract to Bechtel Civil &Minerals,Inc.for the Alaska Power Authority,Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project.Anchorage,Ak. ,1987.Bradley River salmon escapement monitoring report for 1987.Prepared by Dames &Moore under contract to Bechtel Civil &Minerals,Inc.for the Alaska Power Authority,Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project.Anchorage,Ak. ,1988.Bradley River salmon escapement monitoring report for 1988.Prepared by Dames &Moore under contract to Bechtel Civil &Minerals,Inc.for the Alaska Power Authority,Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project.Anchorage,Ak. Alaska Energy Authority,1989.Bradley River salmon escapement monitoring study-1989.Prepared by Northern Ecological Services for the Alaska Energy Authority,Anchorage, Alaska ,1990.Bradley River salmon escapement monitoring study- 1990.Prepared by Northern Ecological Services for the Alaska Energy Authority,Anchorage,Alaska ,1991.Bradley River salmon escapement monitoring study - 1991.Prepared by Northern Ecological Services for the Alaska Energy Authority,Anchorage,Alaska Beland,Tom (Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game),1992.Personal communication with John Morsell,Northern Ecological Services. 32 Hammarstrom,Lee (Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game),1992.Personal communication with John Morsell,Northern Ecological Services. Northern Technical Services,Inc.,1985.1985 salmon escapement survey report.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority, Anchorage,Ak. Pirtle,R.B.and M.L.McCurdy,1980.Prince William Sound general districts 1976 pink and chum salmon aerial and ground escapement surveys and consequent brood year egg deposition and pre-emergent fry index programs.Alaska Dept.of Fish & Game Technical Data Report No.51. Ricker,W.E.,1975.Computation and interpretation of biological statistics of fish populations.Bull.Fish.Res.Board Can. 191.383 pp. U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,1982.Appendix B:Bradley Lake 'Hydroelectric Project,Homer,Alaska.Final coordination report.USFWS Western Alaska Ecological Services,Anchorage, Alaska.131 pp.In:U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,1982. Bradley lake Hydroelectric Project,Alaska.Final Environmental Impact Statement.Alaska District,U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. Woodward Clyde Consultants,1983.Bradley River instream flow studies.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage, Ak.77 pp. Woodward Clyde Consultants,1984.Report on salmon fry sampling in the Bradley River.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,Ak.6 pp. 33 TABLE 1.TOTAL CATCH FOR ALL SAMPLE METHODS COMBINED WEEK DATES PINK CHUM COHO SOCKEYE CHINOOK DOLLY NO.SALMON SALMON SALMON SALMON SALMON VARDEN 1 JUL 14-16 11 5 0 0 14 1 2 JUL 21-23 9 3 ¢)6 16 11 3 JUL 28-30 31 16 0 7 13 7 4 AUG 4-6 13 1 0 8 5 4 5 AUG 11-13 15 2 1 10 0 9 6 AUG 18-20 3 0 6 15 0 15 7 AUG 25-27 10 0 12 8 0 25 8 SEP 1-3 8 0 40 2 0 18 9 SEP 8-10 25 8)19 15 0 12 TOTAL 125 27 78 71 48 102 34 TABLE 2 TRAP NET CATCH STATISTICS FOR PINE SALMON-1992 SAMPLING WEEK 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 TOTAL NET CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH.CATCH CPH CATCH CPH 1 1 0.021 0 0.000 1 0.021 0 0.000 2 0.042 0 0.000 0 0,000 0 0,000 0 0,000 4 0.009 3 0 0.000 1 0.021 1 0.021 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 2 0.005 4 1 0.021 2 0.041 9 0.186 2 0.042 4 0.084 1 0.021 0 0.000 2 0.043 1 6.021 2 0.051 SA 1 0.021 1 0.021 6 0.124 1 0.021 1 0.021 1 0.021 3 0.063 0 0.000 1 0.021 15 0.035 6A 1 0.021 2 0.042 3 0.063 4 0.085 3 0.063 0 0.000 2 0.042 1 0.021 0 0.000 16 0.037 TA 2 0.042 1 0.021 ii 0.229 3 0.064 0 6.000 1 0.021 1 0.021 3 0.064 4 0.084 26 0.061 TOTAL 6 0.021 7 0.024 31 0.107 10 0.035 10 0.035 3 0.010 6 0,021 6 0.021 6 0.021 85 0.033 w On TABLE 3.TRAP NET CATCH STATISTICS FOR CHUM SALMON-1992 SAMPLING WEEK 1 2 3 4 s 7 8 9 TOTAL NET CATCH CPH CATCH CPH_CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH GH CATCH CPH 1 0 0.000 0 0.000 1 6.021 0 0.000 1 0.021 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0,000 0 0.000 2 0.005 3 1 0.021 2 0.042 1 6.021 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 4 0.009 4 1 0.021 1 0.021 4 0.083 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0,000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 6 0.014 SA 1 0.021 0 =-0,000 1 0.021 0 0.000 1 6.021 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 3 0.007 6A 1 0.021 0 0.000 4 0.083 1 0.021 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 6 0.014 TA 0 0,000 0 0.000 4 0.083 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 4 0.009 TOTAL 4 0.014 3 0.010 15 0.052 1 0.004 2 0.007 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0,000 0 0.000 3 0.010 TABLE 4.TRAP NET CATCH STATISTICS FOR COHO SALMON-1992 SAMPLING WEEE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 TOTAL NET CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH_CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH 1 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 1 0.021 1 0.002 3 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 4 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 1 0.021 6 0.129 1 6.021 8 0.019 SA 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 3 0.063 0 0.000 3 0.063 6 0.014 6A 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0,000 0 0.000 0 0.000 1 0.021 5 0.104 3 0.063 5 0.105 14 0.033 TA 0 0.000 0 .0000 0 0.000 0 0.000 1 0.021 3 0.063 0 0.000 31 0.664 8 0.167 43 0.100 TOTAL 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 _0,000 0 0,000 1 0,003 4 0.014 9 0.031 490 0.142 18 0.063 72 0,028 Ww n TABLE 5.TRAP NET CATCH STATISTICS FOR SOCKEYE SALMON-1992 SAMPLING WEEE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 TOTAL NET CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH 1 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0,000 0 0.000 1 0.021 0 0.000 3 0.063 4 0.009 3 0 0.000 2 0.042 0 0.000 0 0.000 2 0.042 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 1 0.021 5 0.012 4 0 0.000 1 0.021 4 0.083 1 0.021 0 0.000 1 6.021 1 0.021 0 0,000 1 0.021 9 0.021 SA 0 0.000 °0.000 1 0.021 0 0.000 2 0.042 5 0.104 1 0.021 1 0.021 3 0.063 13 0.030 6A 0 0.000 1 0.021 0 0.000 5 0.106 5 0.104 7 0.146 3 0.104 1 0.021 6 0.126 30 0.070 7A 0 0.000 1 0.021 1 0.021 2 0.043 1 0.021 2 0.042 0 0,000 0 0.000 1 0.021 8 0.019 TOTAL 0 0.000 $0.017 6 0.021 8 0.028 10 0.035 15 0.052 8 0.028 2 0,007 15 0.052 6 0.027 TABLE 6.TRAP NET CATCH STATISTICS FOR CHINOOK SALMON-1992 SAMPLING WEEK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 TOTAL NET CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH.CATCH CPH CATCH CPH 1 0 0.000 0 0,000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 3 0 0.000 1 0.021 0 0.000 1 0.021 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 2 0.005 4 0 0.000 1 0.021 1 0.021 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 6.000 2 0.005 SA 2 0.043 3 6.062 2 0.041 4 0.085 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 11 0.026 6A 5 0.105 3 0.104 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0,000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 10 0.023 TA 7 0.148 6 6.125 10 0.208 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 3B 0.054 TOTAL 14 0.049 16 0.055 130.045 5 0.018 0 0,000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 48 0.019 Ww J TABLE 7.TRAP NET CATCH STATISTICS FOR DOLLY VARDEN-1992 SAMPLING WEEK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 TOTAL NET CATCH CPH_CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH CATCH CPH 1 0 0.000 0 0.000 1 0.021 1 6.021 1 0.021 1 0.021 2 0.042 4 0.084 1 0.021 11 0.026 3 0 0.000 0 0.000 1 0.021 1 0.021 1 0.021 2 0.042 4 0.083 3 0.065 2 0.042 14 0.033 4 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 6 0.000 0 0,000 1 0.021 1 0.021 1 0.022 0 0.000 3 0.007 SA 0 0.000 0 0.000 2 0.041 1 0.021 1 0.021 1 0.021 4 0.084 2 0.043 1 0.021 12 0.028 6A 0 0.000 0 0.000 3 0.063 1 6.021 3 0.063 6 0.125 8 0.167 6 0.127 4 0.084 31 0.072 TA 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 1 0.021 3 0.063 1 0.021 1 0.021 6 0.014 TOTAL 0 6,000 0 0.000 7 0.024 4 0.014 6 0.021 12 0.042 22 0.076 17 0,061 9 0.031 71 0.030 TABLE 8.SEINE CATCH SUMMARY FOR PINK SALMON DATE UNTAGGED TAGGED TOTAL 7/15 3 *)3 7/16 1 4 2 7/23 2 *)2 8/4 1 2 3 8/11 5 )5 8/25 4 0 |4 9/1 2 )2 9/8 17 2 19 TOTALS 35 5 40 38 TABLE 9.CARCASS COUNT SUMMARY SPECIES DATE UNTAGGED TAGGED TOTAL PINK SALMON 7/29 1 0 1 9/8 0 1 1 9/9 1 0 1 2 1 3 CHUM SALMON 7/23 0 1 1 CHINOOK SALMON 7/29 0 1 1 8/7 1 )1 1 1 2 SOCKEYE SALMON 8/13 1 0 1 8/20 1 0 1 2 0 2 39 TABLE 10.COMPARISON OF THE WEEK OF MARKING WITH THE WEEK OF RECAPTURE FOR ALL PINK SALMON TRAP NET RECAPTURES RECAPTURE MARKING WEEK WEEK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7F 8 9 TOTAL 1 0 2 0 3 1 1 2 4 0 5 1 1 6 0 7 1 1 2 8 0 9 2 2 TOTAL RECAPS.0 1 2 1 0 0 14 0 2 7 TOTALTAGSOUT 9 7 27 9 8 3 8 7 19 97 %RECAPTURED 40 TABLE 11:FOX FARM CREEK VISUAL SURVEYS-1992 DATE SPECIES TOTALLIVE LIVE W/TAGS TOTAL DEAD DEAD W/TAGS JUL 15 NO FISH OBSERVED JUL22 CHUM 4 1 0 0 JUL30 CHUM 2 0 0 0 AUGS5 CHUM 2 0 0 0 AUG 12 NO FISH OBSERVED AUG 19 NO FISH OBSERVED AUG 26 NO FISH OBSERVED SEP 2 NO FISH OBSERVED SEP 9 NO FISH OBSERVED 41 TABLE 12.FISH TAGGED WITH ULTRASONIC TAGS DATE TAG SPECIES CAPTURE SEX COND.INSERTION RELEASE RELEASE CODE LOCATION TIME TIME LOCATION 8/05 2446 PINK NET 3 M 2 08:57 09:10 NET 3 8/05 2255 SOCK.NET 3 F 1 13:45 14:52 UPPER T.R. 8/11 2345 SOCK.NET 2 M 2.10:05 10:20 UPPER T.R. 8/12 2426 PINK BRAD.R.M 3 16:50 ?UPPER T.R. 8/13 2336 COHO NET 2 M 1 09:20 10:45 MID T.R. 8/18 88 PINK NET 3 F 2 08:50 09:45 UPPER T.R. 8/18 97 SOCK.NET 2 F 1 12:45 13:50 LOWER T.R. 8/18 555 SOCK.NET 2 M 3 12:47 15:43 UPPER T.R. 8/19 384 COHO NET 2 M 1 14:51 16:15 MID T.R. 8/20 2228 SOCK NET 3 F 2 09:00 10:43 LOWER T.R. 8/20 447 SOCK NET 1 F 2 09:00 11:25 UPPER T.R. 8/25 456 SOCK NET 2 M 3 08:35 14:05 BARGE D. 8/25 375 SOCK NET 1 M 1 08:40 10:07 LOWER T.R. 8/26 2237 SOCK NET 2 F 2 08:55 09:00 MID T.R. 8/27 2264 COHO NET 2 F 1 08:50 10:50 MID T.R. 8/27 465 COHO NET 1 M 1 08:52 13:25 MID T.R. 8/27 2363 PINK NET 3 M 3 08:54 09:00 LOWER T.R. 9/01 339 PINK NET 1 F 2 13:10 13:15 MID T.R. 9/01 249 COHO NET 1 M 1 20:15 08:59 MID T.R. 9/01 258 COHO NET 2 F 1 20:25 10:25 MID T.R. 42 TABLE 13.TRACKING HISTORY FOR SALMON WITH ULTRASONIC TAGS. #2446 Pink Salmon Aug.5 -Released in S.tidal channel near Net 3 at 09:10 -began tomovedownstreamat09:22 -followed downstream until 10:20 when the signal was lost near the confluence of N.and S.channels -not heard again 22)ckeye Salmon Aug.5 -Released near Net 1 in tailrace at 14:52 -remained near release point until 15:40 then moved downstream out of tailrace - signal was fost at 16:40 -out of study area #2345 Sockeye Salmon Aug.11 -Released near Net 1 in Tailrace at 10:20 -remained in same area through evening Aug.12 -Relocated in upper tailrace at 08:40 -moved actively in the upper tallrace until noon -relocated in the lower tailrace at 13:10 Aug.18 -Relocated in tailrace near Net 2 at 09:20 -remained in lower tailrace through evening Aug.19 -Could not locate -out of study area #2426 Pink Salmon from Bradley River Aug.13 -Escaped from holding net -located in upper tailrace at 08:30 -moved to lower tailrace in early afternoon Aug.18 -Could not locate -out of study area ho Salmon Aug.13 -Released in middle tailrace at 10:45 -moved downstream and remained in lower tailrace through the afternoon Aug.17 -Could not locate -out of study area 88 Pink Saimon Aug.18 -Released in upper tailrace at 09:45 -Lost signal at 10:00 - could not relocate -out of study area ke'Imon Aug.18 -Released in upper tailrace at 13:50 -remained in same area until evening Aug.19 -Relocated in upper tallrace at 08:55 -moved downstream to middle tailrace -remained until evening Aug.20 -Relocated in upper tailrace at 08:35 -moved throughout tailrace over the course of the day Aug.24 -Relocated in tailrace near Net 2 -remained in same area through evening Aug.25 -Remained in lower taiirace Aug.26 -Remained in lower tallrace Aug.27 -In upper tailrace at 08:30 then moved to lower tailrace Sept.1 -Could not locate -out of study area 7 ke'mon Aug.18 -Released near Net 1 in tailrace at 15:43 -could not relocate in the evening -out of the study area Aug.20 -Relocated in middle of tailrace at 08:35 -remained in tailrace throughout the day Aug.24 -Could not relocate in tailrace Aug.26 -Located in the Bradley River near Eagle Pool Sept.1 -Relocated in the Bradley River near Eagle Pool Sept.8 -Relocated in the Bradley River near Eagle Pool Sept.9 -Could not locate in the Bradley River ho Salmo Aug.19-Released in the middle of lower tallrace at 16:15 -remained in lower tailrace through evening Aug.20 -Could not locate -out of study area 222 ke monAug.20 -Released at lower end of tailrace at 10:43 -moved to upper end by early afternoon Aug.24 -Relocated in lower tailrace at 17:00 Aug.25-27 -Remained in tailrace Sept.1-2 -Remained in same area of tailrace -possibly dead Sept.9 -Could not locate -out of study area 43 447 Socke mon Aug.20 -Released near Net 1 in tailrace at 11:25 -remained near same spot through the afternoon Aug.24-27 -Relocated in tailrace -remained near same spot in upperpartoflowertailrace-probably deadSept.1-2 -Relocated at same spotSept.9 -Relocated at same spot -undoubtedly dead e mon .Aug.25 -Released into Kachemak Bay northeast of Barge Dock at14:05 -moved within a radius of 1000 ft.until 14:35 then headed north toward the mouth of Sheep Creek -discontinued tracking at15:10 because of outgoing tide Aug.26 -Could not relocate at release point #375 Sockeye SalmonAug.25 -Released in lower end of tailrace at 10:07 -littie or nomovementthroughearlyafternoon-couid not relocate at 16:00 -out of study area Aug.26 -Relocated in Kachemak Bay northeast of Barge Dock at 12:50 -remained in same area until 15:30 Sept.1 -Could not relocate in Kachemak Bay 2237 Socke mon Aug.26 -Released in middle of lower tailrace at 09:00 -moved to entrance of south outlet channel by 09:40 -remained in lower portionoftailracethroughlateafternoon Aug.27 -Could not relocate -out of study area 2363 Pink Salmon Aug.27 -Released in lower end of tailrace at 09:00 -moved toward south outiet channel and signal disappeared at 09:10 -tried to track in channel!but no signal heard -out of study area #2264 Coho Salmon Aug.27 -Released in middle of lower tailrace at 10:50 -moved to near south channel outlet at 11:35 and remained in same generalareathroughtheafternoon Sept.1 -Could not relocate -out of the study area #485CohoSalmonAug.27 -Released in middle of lower tailrace at 13:25 -remained near same spot through the afternoon Sept.1 -Could not relocate -out of the study area Pink Salmon Sept.1 -Released in middie of lower tailrace at 13:15 -moved upstream to near weir at 14:35 -remained in tailrace through eveningSept.2 -Could not locate-out of the study areaSept.9 -Located in the Bradley River near the mouth of Fox FarmCreekat15:30 #249CohoSalmonSept.2 -Released in middle of lower tailrace at 08:59 -moved to north outlet channel area by 09:15 -moved down channel and lost signal at 09:22 -fish was visually observed in north channnel near eroding falls at 13:45 #258CohoSalmonSept.2 -Released in middie of lower tailrace at 10:25 -moved to south channel entrance at 10:32 and signal disappeared -out of study area Sept.9 -Located in the lower Bradley River at Mile 3.4 at 15:35 SHORT SLOUGH HOOLIGAN SLOUGH STUDY AREA $8.0 etc.»RIVER MILES fe]feet 500 SCALE BEAR ISLAND SLOUGH _. '\TREE BAR A REACHFISHSTUDYCAMP\* RIFFLE REACH FOX FARM CREEK FIGURE 1 LOWER BRADLEY RIVER WITHSALMONESCAPEMENTSTUDYAREA | 44 S¥12" BOTTOM END VIEW Showing offset throat Open Top Float Line COC Ca 6 4! 4' SIDE VIEW 4!Figure 2 Bradley River Trap Net Design (As Modified in 1990) -- Key Trap Nets Seine Sites oo.Figure 3. Scale in Feet Trap Net Locations and Seine Sites 46 CATCHPERHOURPINK SALMON -1992 0.125 JULY AUGUST SEPT 0.1- 0.08- 0.06- 0.04- 0.0271 Figure 4.Catch-per-unit-effort for pink salmon by study week. 2 3 4 5 6. STUDY WEEK 47 CATCHPERHOURCHUM SALMON -1992 JULY +AUGUST |SEPT0.06- 0.05- 0.04- 0.03- 0.02- 0 'T i U a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 STUDY WEEK Figure 5.Catch-per-unit-effort for chum salmon by study week. 48 CATCHPERHOURCOHO SALMON -1992 JULY AUGUST SEPT ae fone Figure 6.Catch-per-unit-effort for coho salmon by study week.Necedeeaiessceemaemeaeenecss3 4 5 6 STUDY WEEK 49 7 CATCHPERHOURSOCKEYE SALMON -1992 0.06,JULY AUGUST 4+SEPT]0.05- 0.04- 0.03 0.025 Figure 7. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 1 1 "Tt T Tt Tt STUDY WEEK Catch-per-unit-effort for sockeye salmon by study week. 50 CATCHPERHOURCHINOOK SALMON -1992 JULY AUGUST +SEPTI0.065 0.05- 0.04- 0.03 0.02- @)f ,f >»1 COE”ANP”eitneinntene”¢”gtenactiione”4 gta 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 STUDY WEEK Figure 8.Catch-per-unit-effort for chinook salmon by study week. 51 CATCHPERHOURDOLLY VARDEN -1992 JULY AUGUST SEPT SOE 3SRPRESE,Figure 9.cepSecioMaeSaaeess3 4 STUDY WEEK 5 6 7 Catch-per-unit-effort for Dolly Varden by study week. 52 PINK SALMON RIPE MALES AND FEMALES SEPTAUGUSTJULY bot |ifoti|H H Hy ' tUREAPONS LEN NESS corres % ---LALLA, * ji oeaA AEDFR HARALD=| WLLL LLL ° NE\NiNNENN NymaN-RN |NFNE WNRQ"®CNGLN 7 imirainscreaseeeorlSPARC? Ps RRO paneWZsill|"6 STUDY WEEK"TILLILALLLLIDELTELEE screener Serraa)5 CAAA TTLITTOE;PoseSETSa47TTI| carr aeteoremrcereerltale|23|oeWL,3)22999000000Oorow strON & 100- AONANDAYA LN3A0"3d "”) LuI<<=LuLLMALES Percent frequency of occurrence of ripe pink salmon by study week. Figure 10. 53 NUMBEROFFISHESTIMATED ESCAPEMENT-1986 THROUGH 1992 PINK SALMON Yj(Thousands)Figure 11.LAEeaEMEROLSNEAIESREEDSLALODIODEODEYrerneeey1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991"4992 STUDY YEAR Estimated total annual escapements for pink salmon - 1986 through 1992. 54 SSNN Salt Marsh Kachemak Bay Barge Dock 4 Marsh AWoodedUplandVA Mud Flats Bradley River Uy Salt Marsh se alld,C Wooded UplandTailrace°°eee a CA Figure 12. SEE Tailrace study area and net site locations. Fox Creek ule 6 alls 'Salt Marsh NTE alle MachemakBay Mod Flats ©ftir tive Barge Deck .alls ius alle wld Marsh .altheaaluaieSSLOLu).ln : Zz CA FLOY TAGS wl aula San tar dle PsNEEow alle iachematBay °Mod Flats ©hreteyhive Borge Dock able dts alle allée :Marsh °altWeededUptindalla2oonawootedUnand alu ULTRASONICLEEremTAGS Hl Number tagged @ 'Number recovered Figure 13.Recovery locations of salmon tagged in the Bradley LakeHydroelectricProjecttailrace. 56 APPENDIX A-1. WEEK WwWbhAbHLAHAAAHLhbAAaAaajaannawnnawaaagSssdSsNAANwanooaDAY 7/30 7/30 8/04 8/04 8/04 8/04 8/04 8/04 8/04 8/05 8/05 8/05 8/05 8/05 8/06 8/11 8/11 8/11 8/11 8/11 8/11 8/12 8/12 8/12 8/12 8/12 8/12 8/12 8/13 8/13 8/18 8/19 8/20 8/25 8/25 8/25 8/25 8/25 8/26 8/26 8/26 8/27 8/27 9/01 9/01 9/01 9/01 METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG COL.PREPRPRPRPENNNEPRPEPPERPREPEEPRPPERPPRPPNYNDNDPPRPRPRPNUNNNPeNdPINK SALMON CATCH RECORDS TA TA 6A 6A 5A Sl sl s3 6A 7A TA 7A 4 4 6A 83 83 S3 83 83 6A 1 5A yeySEIRMTIRESRSITISBISTSTIRRIIRSWwWNWWAAWWWWWDDWNOWNWWWWWwWWwWNWWwWWAWWWDWYWWWWWWwWWWWwW431 470 500 445 424 346 438 475 452 522 462 467 480 466 483 435 463 425 449 429 464 435 533 452 429 443 490 484 446 463 526 482 499 450 469 504 462 447 536 489 503 442 500 495 530 495 497 OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR SAVE SAVE OR OR OR OR OR SAVE SAVE OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR TAG# 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 75 76 77 78 OR 19 OR 41 OR 47 OR 68 OR 39 APPENDIX A-1.PREPPPPRPEPeNNONNNNNNNWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWDAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND. PINK SALMON CATCH RECORDS NNEPRPNNNERPRPENNERBBEPREPPPPPPPPEPPPRRPRPBPPPEPERPPPPEP6A OvPHPALAADolBYWAYSIRISTAVISISSIRRASRSRISRRFRVTFDBRIDESAIDISLENGTH TAG COL.TAG#RECAP.# Al-1 NNyNNNWWDWYNWNNNNWNNNNDWWNHNNNWNHNNNNWWNNDNNWNHDNWNWWDWOvfon)OR 08 OR 11 APPENDIX A-1. WE OonoryWOUWUWYHWUUUUUUWUUWUHWHWHWWHO100ADAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND. 9/02 9/02 9/02 9/03 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/09 9/09 9/09 9/10 9/10 9/10 PREPFPREPEPRPRNUNUNUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNPINK SALMON CATCH RECORDS 6A 7A 4 7A Sl sl s1 sl sl sl sl sl sl sl sl sl sl s1 sl Sl sl $1 83 7A 5A 7A TA 7A 4 ickeiekeieWeeeiBeeciece|WANWWWWWWAWWWWWWWWWWWWbhWWWbwdbLENGTH TAG COL.TAG#RECAP.# 520 477 413 545 492 554 489 456 497 533 508 477 532 528 509 492 500 463 495 521 569 489 524 458 425 479 475 505 423 OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR OR 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 OR 75 86 87 88 89 90 OR 76 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 100 101 OR 88 OR 100 Al-3 APPENDIX A-2. DAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND. CHUM SALMON CATCH RECORDS LENGTH TAG COL.TAG#RECAP.# A2-1 WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWwWNNN>onPeePRPBPPEPRPPRPPRPPPPPRPEPPSSSFRRFSAVFZIIZZSMSREZSBARAREAWPNVWUNNNWWNDNSWNNWWwDnOnWWwWWwWOhwheQ44 17 18 19 038 03 09 08 44 APPENDIX A-3.COHO SALMON CATCH RECORDS A3-1 WEEK DAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG COL.TAG#RECAP.# 5 8/12 1 7A M 1 589 G 68 6 8/19 1 7A M 2 638 G 81 6 8/19 2 S7 M 1 504 G 83 6 8/19 2 S7 M 1 497 G 84 6 8/20 1 6A F 1 552 G 87 6 8/20 1 7A F 1/6 618 6 8/20 1 7A M 1 595 G 88 7 8/25 1 5A F 2 545 G 87 7 8/25 2 S7 M 2 578 G 89 7 8/25 2 S7 F 1 556 G 90 7 8/25 2 S7 M 1 449 G 91 7 8/25 1 6A ?1 573 G 92 7 8/25 1 6A ?1 601 G 93 7 8/25 1 5A F 2 446 G 94 7 8/25 1 4 F 1 556 G 90 7 8/26 1 6A M 2 658 G 95 7 8/26 1 6A M 2 534 G 96 7 8/26 1 5A F 2 600 G 100 7 8/27 1 6A F 1 680 G 101 8 9/01 1 7A F 1 592 G 102 8 9/01 1 7A M 1 662 G 104 8 9/01 1 7A M 2 594 G 105 8 9/01 1 4 M 2 G 106 8 9/01 1 7A M 2 608 G 107 8 9/01 1 7A M 2 614 G 108 8 9/01 1 7A M 2 580 G 109 8 9/01 1 7A F 2 655 G 110 8 9/01 1 7A M 2 649 G 111 8 9/01 1 7A M 2 674 G 112 8 9/01 1 7A F 2 643 G 113 8 9/01 1 7A F 2 651 G 114 8 9/01 1 7A M 2 689 G 115 8 9/01 1 7A M 2 638 G 116 8 9/01 1 7A F 2 672 G 117 8 9/02 1 6A M 3 480 8 9/02 1 7A M 2 724 G 118 8 9/02 1 7A M 6 646 8 9/02 1 7A M 3 435 G 91 8 9/02 1 7A M 1 700 G 119 8 9/02 1 7A F 2 653 G 120 8 9/02 1 7A F 1 554 G 121 8 9/02 1 7A M 1 548 G 122 8 9/02 1 7A M 2 601 G 123 8 9/02 1 7A ?1 608 G 108 8 9/02 1 7A M 1 604 G 124 8 9/02 1 7A F 2 678 G 125 8 9/02 1 4 M 3 570 G 109 8 9/02 1 7A M 1 564 G 126 APPENDIX A-3.COHO SALMON CATCH RECORDS WEEK DAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG COL.TAG#RECAP.# 8 9/02 1 7A M 1 669 G 127 8 9/02 1 4 M 2 657 G 128 8 9/02 1 7A M 1 620 G 129 8 9/03 1 6A F 1 700 G 130 8 9/03 1 6A M 1 624 G 131 8 9/03 1 4 M 2 674 G 112 8 9/03 1 4 M 2 560 G 133 8 9/03 1 4 M 2 528 G 134 8 9/03 1 7A M 3 700 G 135 8 9/03 1 7A F 2 654 G 136 8 9/03 1 7A F 2 625 G 137 9 9/08 2 S3 F 1 622 G 138 9 9/08 1 5A F 1 608 G 140 9 9/08 1 6A F 1 465 G 143 9 9/08 1 5A M 3 740 G 144 9 9/08 1 5A F 1 625 G 145 9 9/09 1 6A M 2 519 G 146 9 9/09 1 7A M 2 700 G 151 9 9/09 1 7A M 2 709 G 153 9 9/09 1 7A M 2 680 G 154 9 9/09 1 7A M 1 728 G 155 9 9/09 1 6A M 3 604 G 156 9 9/10 1 6A F 2 474 9 9/10 1 6A F 1 434 9 9/10 1 1 M 3 732 G 118 9 9/10 1 7A F 1 595 9 9/10 1 7A F 1 665 9 9/10 1 7A M 1 601 9 9/10 1 7A F 1 648 9 9/10 1 4 M 3 424 APPENDIX A-4.NNNNNNWWWWWWWAMNOna1nwnonabrhhhhhhbNNDANHAAAAAAHAAARAAAANDAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG COL.TAG#RECAP.# SOCKEYE SALMON CATCH RECORDS 7/21 7/23 7/23 7/23 7/23 7/23 7/28 7/29 7/29 7/30 7/30 7/30 7/30 8/04 8/05 8/05 8/05 8/05 8/06 8/06 8/06 8/11 8/11 8/12 8/12 8/12 8/12 8/13 8/13 8/13 8/13 8/18 8/18 8/19 8/19 8/19 8/19 8/19 8/19 8/19 8/19 8/19 8/19 8/20 8/20 8/20 NPPPPPPREPRPEPPPEPPBRPRPPRPRPPEPPPPPPRPPRPRPRPPRERPPRPERPee6A 3 3 TA 4 S7 S7 TA 4 5A YSRTSSTARTSSRSRRRITARTIRRIARVAIRDRRRRRVEZEBEIESHPWHNwWDNWWWWrRBWNHWWWWWNWNNDNDWHWNHDFEPNRRPWRePeNNNNWEWwaAaAAHANOAQAARAAAQAAAAANANAAAAANDAAAANRAOR 11 OR 11 G 67 Y 34 G 45 APPENDIX A-4.SOCKEYE SALMON CATCH RECORDS WEEK DAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG COL.TAG#RECAP.# 7 8/25 1 5A M 3 419 G 86 7 8/26 1 6A M 3 444 G 59 7 8/26 1 4 M 3 371 ¥55 7 8/26 1 6A F 3 410 G 57 7 8/26 1 6A M 3 686 G 97 7 8/26 1 6A M 3 549 G 98 7 8/26 1 6A M 3 354 G 99 7 8/27 1 1 M 3 422 G 102 8 9/02 1 6A M 3 378 G 74 8 9/03 1 5A M 3 442 G 132 9 9/08 1 6A F 5 483 OR 99 9 9/08 1 SA M 3 550 G 139 9 9/08 1 4 M 5 380 G 141 9 9/09 1 1 M 3 508 G 147 9 9/09 1 5A M 3 510 G 148 9 9/09 1 5A M 3.414 G 149 9 9/09 1 3 M 3 528 Y 58 9 9/09 1 6A F 3 606 G 157 9 9/09 1 7A M 3 446 G 158 9 9/10 1 6A M 3 509 G 147 9 9/10 1 6A M 3 590 9 9/10 1 6A M 3 664 9 9/10 1 6A F 4 425 G 91 9 9/10 1 1 M 3 525 Y 58 9 9/10 1 1 F 5 490 OR 99 APPENDIX A-5.CHINOOK SALMON CATCH RECORDS A5-1 WEEK DAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG COL.TAG#RECAP.# 1 7/14 1 6A M 3 639 G 1 1 7/14 1 6A M 2 381 G 283 1 7/14 1 6A M 3 696 G 4 1 7/14 1 6A F 3 950 G 5 1 7/14 1 5A M 3 483 G 6 1 7/14 1 6A F 3 905 G 7 1 7/14 1 5A M 3 685 G 9 1 7/15 1 7A M 3 705 G 10 1 7/15 1 7A M 3 540 G 11 1 7/15 1 7A M 3 630 G 13 1 7/15 1 7A M 3 604 G 14 1 7/15 1 7A M 3 609 G 15 1 7/15 1 7A M 3 684 G 16 1 7/16 1 7A M 3 650 G 17 2 7/21 1 7A M 3 700 G 10 2 7/21 1 6A M 3 687 G 19 2 7/21 1 6A M 3 910 G 20 2 7/21 1 5A M 3 430 G 21 2 7/21 1 3 M 3 662 G 22 2 7/22 1 6A M 3 708 G 23 2 7/22 1 6A M 3 654 G 24 2 7/22 1 5A M 4 639 G Ol 2 7/22 1 7A M 3 637 G 26 2 7/22 1 7A M 3 480 G 06 2 7/22 1 7A M 3 997 G 27 2 7/22 1 7A M 3 400 G 28 2 7/22 1 7A M 3 640 G 29 2 7/22 1 6A M 3 681 G 09 2 7/23 1 5A M 3 636 G 30 2 7/23 1 4 M 3 640 G 26 3 7/28 1 5A M 3 698 G 35 3 7/28 1 4 M 3 660 G 36 3 7/28 1 7A M 4 690 G 37 3 7/28 1 7A M 3 560 G 38 3 7/28 1 SA M 3 549 G 38 3 7/28 1 7A M 3 633 G 30 3 7/28 1 7A M 3 714 G 41 3.7/29 1 7A M 3 660 G 36 3 7/29 1 7A M 5 609 G 13 3 7/30 1 7A F 5 671 G 46 3 7/30 1 7A M 5 649 G 24 3 7/30 1 7A M 3 617 G 47 23 7/30 1 7A F 5 746 G 48 4 8/04 1 5A M 3 714 G 52 4 8/05 1 5A M 3 668 G 54 4 8/05 1 5A ?6 560 4 8/06 1 5A M 5 671 G 62 4 8/06 1 3 M 5 661 LOST TAG APPENDIX A-6.NNNNNNNNNNNhbdb&WWWWWWWNNIannana»ngauoADNADAANAHAAAHRAAAADAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND.NNNNNNNNNNNPRERPPRPPNNEPPRPNFPRPRPRPRPRPNNNFPRERPRPPRPPPRDOLLY VARDEN CATCH RECORDS A6-1 LENGTH TAG COL.TAG#RECAP.# T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. OLD T.P. OLD T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. APPENDIX A-6. WEEK 6 NNNSSSSSSSSSsDODDDDDMDDBDDBDDADDMDDADADMDOwowovoDAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND. 8/20 8/25 8/25 8/25 8/26 8/26 8/26 8/26 8/26 8/26 8/26 8/26 8/26 8/26 8/27 8/27 8/27 8/27 8/27 8/27 8/27 8/27 8/27 8/27 8/27 8/27 9/01 9/01 9/02 9/02 9/02 9/02 9/02 9/02 9/02 9/02 9/02 9/02 9/02 9/03 9/03 9/03 9/03 9/03 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 9/08 1 PRPERPPPBEPRPPPEPPBPPRPPPPPRPPPPRPPHPPPEPEPPErPRNUNNDOLLY VARDEN CATCH RECORDS 4 S7 S7 S7 6A 6A 1 5A 4 7A 7A 6A 5A 6A 6A 6A 6A 6A 1 5A 5A 3 LENGTH TAG COL. 262 276 284 254 330 339 298 292 306 288 290 355 273 309 274 296 310 355 292 302 335 324 341 306 309 342 298 309 290 309 291 312 294 286 286 310 295 254 307 264 310 254 310 324 278 322 325 282 338 T.P.TAG#RECAP.# T.P. T.P. A6-2 APPENDIX A-6. WE wwonwnwovoooBIPaDAY 9/08 9/09 9/09 9/09 9/09 9/10 9/10 METHOD SITE#SEX COND.PRPRPRPRPEPDOLLY VARDEN CATCH RECORDS 7A 6A 6A 5A 1 3 3 LENGTH TAG COL.TAG#RECAP.# 269 272 275 275 273 260 345 T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. A6 -3 APPENDIX B: WEEK NET 1 TRAP NET FISHING EFFORT SUMMARY-1992 DATE/TIME SET DATE/TIME PULLED 07/14 07/14 07/14 07/14 07/14 07/14 07/21 07/21 07/21 07/21 07/21 07/21 07/28 07/28 07/28 07/28 07/28 07/28 08/04 08/04 08/04 08/04 08/04 08/04 08/11 08/11 08/11 08/11 08/11 08/11 08/18 08/18 08/18 08/18 08/18 08/18 08/25 08/25 08/25 08/25 08:56 10:00 09:20 10:00 08:40 09346 08:40 09:04 09:20 08:52 08:30 09:16 08:45 09:35 09:54 09:15 08:30 10:10 08:55 09:30 09:52 09:20 08:30 09:45 08:55 09337 09:53 09322 08:32 09:48 08:55 09:22 09:40 09:10 08:42 09:33 08:55 09:25 09:46 09:15 07/16 07/16 07/16 07/16 07/16 07/16 07/23 07/23 07/23 07/23 07/23 07/23 07/30 07/30 07/30 07/30 07/30 07/30 08/06 08/06 08/06 08/06 08/06 08/06 08/13 08/13 08/13 08/13 08/13 08/13 08/20 08/20 08/20 08/20 08/20 08/20 08/27 08/27 08/27 08/27 08:45 09:00 09:24 08:51 08:27 09:06 08:45 09:10 09:32 09:00 08:26 09:16 08:50 09:45 10:20 09:29 08:27 10:07 08s3;01 08:31 08:55 08:17 07:49 08:42 08:43 08:58 09:40 09:14 08:29 09:28 09:00 09:19 09:51 09:12 08:39 09333 08:58 09:25 09:55 09:10 EFFORT (HRS) 47.8 47.0 48.1 46.9 47.8 47.3 48.1 48.1 48.2 48.1 47.9 48.0 48.1 48.2 48.4 48.2 48.0 48.0 47.1 47.0 47.1 47.0 47.3 47.0 47.8 47.4 47.8 47.9 48.0 47.7 48.1 48.0 48.2 48.0 48.0 48.0 48.1 48.0 48.2 47.9 APPENDIX B:TRAP NET FISHING EFFORT SUMMARY-1992 WEEK NET DATE/TIME SET DATE/TIME PULLED EFFORT (HRS) 6A 08/25 08:45 08/27 08:40 47.9 7A 08/25 09:40 08/27 09:40 48.0 8 1 09/01 08:54 09/03 07:31 47.4 3 09/01 09:17 09/03 07:49 46.5 4 09/01 09:40 09/03 08:02 46.4 5A 09/01 09:06 09/03 07:39 46.6 6A 09/01 08:35 09/03 07:17 47.3 7A 09/01 09:31 09/03 08:10 46.7 9 1 09/08 08:39 09/10 08:29 47.8 3 09/08 08:56 09/10 08:44 47.8 4 09/08 09:14 09/10 09:10 47.9 5A 09/08 08:49 09/10 08:39 47.8 6A 09/08 08:26 09/10 08:13 47.8 TA 09/08 09:08 09/10 08:54 47.8 APPENDIX C:; DATE JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL JUL AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG AUG 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 WATER TEMP.(C) 8.3 10.0 PHYSICAL DATA TURBIDITY (NTU) 24 22 24 17 16 17 27 24 34 19 10 32 36 40 40 58 45 48 46 40 62 AIR TEMP.(C) 14.4 12.0 11.2 11.8 11.8 12.4 12.0 12.0 13.2 13.0 12.2 13.5 11.8 10.4 7.0 11.0 10.6 mo@eo6806hlUmomOVCc-1 STAFF GAUGE(FT) 1.00 0.98 0.70 0.71 0.72 0.74 0.74 0.76 0.76 0.90 0.74 0.78 0.82 0.74 0.74 0.78 0.84 1.04 0.92 APPENDIX C:PHYSICAL DATA DATE SEP SEP SEP SEP SEP SEP SEP SEP SEP SEP 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 WATER TEMP.(C)SnoeeeNUOlOTURBIDITY (NTU) 84 74 73 76 75 AIR TEMP.(C) 9.0 8. 6.1 10.8 5.8 -1.2 C-2 STAFF GAUGE(FT) 0.72 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.75 APPENDIX D-1. WEEK DAY 2 7/28 2 7/29 3 8/04 3 8/05 4 8/11 4 8/12 6 8/26 TAILRACE PINK SALMON CATCH METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG #RECAP#SONIC# F M M M M F M F 2 478 452 599 530 556 468 552 656 Y Y Y XY +s02 09 18 15 38 77 80 Di-1 APPENDIX D-2.TAILRACE CHUM SALMON CATCH WEEK DAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG #RECAP#SONIC# 3 8/10 1 1 F 2 515 Y 19 APPENDIX D-3.TAILRACE COHO SALMON CATCH WEEK DAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG #RECAP#SONIC# 4 8/12 1 2 M 1 588 Y 39 4 8/13 1 1 M 1 572 Y 41 5 8/19 1 2 M 1 597 Y 61 384 5 8/20 1 1 F 1/6 667 5 8/20 1 1 F 1 655 Y 64 456 6 8/24 1 2 F 1 475 Y 66 6 8/24 1 3 F 1/6 618 6 8/24 1 3 M 1/6 619 6 8/26 1 1 F 1/6 625 6 8/26 1 1 M 1 582 Y 72 465 6 8/26 1 2 F 1 675 Y 75 2264 6 8/26 1 3 F 1 500 Y 78 6 8/26 1 1 F 2 594 Y 79 7 9/01 1 1 M 1 695 Y 81 249 7 9/01 1 2 F 1 604 Y 82 258 APPENDIX D-4.TAILRACE SOCKEYE SALMON CATCH WEEK DAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG #RECAP.SONIC TA 1 7/23 1 4 M 1 430 Y 02 1 7/23 1 4 F 1 380 Y 03 2 7/28 1 1 M 2 634 Y 04 2 7/28 1 1 M 2 584 Y 05 2 7/28 1 2 F 1 549 Y 06 2 7/28 1 2 F 1 534 Y 07 2 7/28 1 1 F 1 545 Y 06 2 7/29 1 2 M 2 610 Y 10 2 7/29 1 2 F 1 400 Y 11 2 7/29 1 3 M 2 478 Y 12 2 7/30 1 2 F 2 563 Y 13 3 8/04 1 2 M 1 544 Y 14 3 8/05 1 1 M 2/6 690 3 8/05 1 1 F 2/6 511 3.8/05 1 1 M 1/6 341 3 8/05 1 3 M 2 369 Y 16 3.8/05 1 3 F 1 550 Y 17 2255 4 8/10 1 1 M 3 521 Y 20 4 8/10 1 2 F 2 524 Y 22 4 8/10 1 2 M 3 525 Y 23 4 8/10 1 2 M 3 414 Y 27 4 8/11 1 1 M 1/6 581 4 8/11 1 1 F 2/6 616 4 8/11 1 1 F 1/6 499 4 8/11 1 1 M 2/6 515 4 8/11 1 1 M 1/6 488 4 8/11 1 1 M 3/6 518 Y 23 4 8/11 1 2 M 2/6 596 4 8/11 1 3 F 2/6 525 4 8/11 1 2 M 2 620 Y 28 2345 4 8/11 1 2 F 3 549 Y 31 4 8/11 1 2 M 2 383 Y 32 4 8/11 1 3 M 1 404 Y 34 4 8/12 1 2 M 1 537 Y 37 4 8/13 1 1 F 2 514 ¥40 4 8/13 1 1 M 3 534 Y 45 4 8/13 1 1 F 3 578 Y 46 4 8/13 1 1 M 1 479 Y 49 4 8/13 1 2 M 2 423 Y 51 5 8/18 1 2 M 3 405 Y 52 5 8/18 1 2 F 1 549 Y 53 97 5 8/18 1 2 M 3 418 Y 54 5 8/18 1 2 F 1 372 Y 55 5 8/18 1 2 M 3 601 Y 56 555 5 8/18 1 2 F 3 476 Y 57 5 8/18 1 2 M 2 533 Y 58 5 8/19 1 2 F 1 346 Y 59 APPENDIX D-4. WE UVoaa»nwoDAANAAAAAAAGADAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND. 8/19 8/19 8/19 8/20 8/20 8/24 8/24 8/24 8/24 8/25 8/25 8/25 8/25 8/25 8/26 PREPEERPERPRPPeTAILRACE SOCKEYE SALMON CATCH NEPWHNNWNNNNNNEFSSIDSSSIPRIMES1 3/6 WNWWNHWN.WWWWfey)LENGTH TAG # 429 547 512 550 549 511 432 430 534 527 545 510 492 431 548 Y 60 Y 62 Y 63 65 67 68 69KSKK 70 71KK RECAP. D4-2 SONIC TA 2228 447 97 456 2228 2237 APPENDIX D-5.TAILRACE DOLLY VARDEN CATCH WEEK DAY METHOD SITE#SEX COND.LENGTH TAG #RECAP#SONIC# 1 7/23 1 7/23 2 7/28 2 7/28 2 7/30 3 8/06 3 8/06 uohbhbbhf&bhbhC)09"\'"\reoNONADAHAAAAAAfos)"\Nfey)PREEEEEPPEPFPPRPRPRPPPPPPRPPPTR 362 T.P. TR 270 T.P. TR 379 T.P. 1 302 T.P. 1 304 T.P. 3 6 315 3 6 310 1 344 T.P. 2 399 T.P. 2 369 T.P. 2 354 T.P. 2 300 T.P. 2 308 T.P. 1 299 T.P. 2 331 T.P. 1 363 T.P. 2 359 T.P. 2 300 T.P. 2 6 277 3 305 T.P. 1 342 T.P. 2 312 T.P. 2 355 T.P. 2 310 T.P. 2 354 T.P.