'· BRISTOL BAY DATA REPORT NO. 85-4 Summary of Historical Escapement Data for King, Chum, Pink, and Coho Salmon in the Naknek-Kvichak, Egegik and Ugashik Drainages 1926-1984. By Richard B. Russell Fisheries Biologist Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Commercial Fisheries King Salmon, Alaska April 1985 ARLI§ . . Alaska Resources Lihrary & Ubrary Bui\(\ing, 111 3211 Providence Dnve Anchorage. AK 9950R-Hi 1.1
29
Embed
Summary of historical escapement data for king, chum, pink ... · Summary of Historical Escapement Data for King, Chum, Pink, and Coho Salmon in the Naknek-Kvichak, Egegik and Ugashik
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
'·
BRISTOL BAY DATA REPORT NO. 85-4
Summary of Historical Escapement Data for King, Chum, Pink, and Coho Salmon in the Naknek-Kvichak, Egegik
and Ugashik Drainages 1926-1984.
By Richard B. Russell Fisheries Biologist
Alaska Department of Fish and Game Division of Commercial Fisheries
AREA PATA REPORTS: This series of reports is designed to facilitate archiving of small data sets and internal agency information. It generally consists of data sets of less significant nature that frequently are combined on an annual basis and published through the ADF&G Technical Data Report-Series. This series also includes noteworthy field observation, feasibility ~tudies, Board of Fisheries Reports and staff meeting notes. To pranote docunentation of as many observations as possible which would otherwise remain unreported, this informal report series receives very little editing, thus caution is recommended in use of data and any analysis persented within.
List of Tables.
List of Figures
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
Literature Cited
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-i-
Paae
i i
iii
l
l
17
24
LIST OF TABLES
Tab 1 e l. Salmon counts, Kvi chak River, 1932-1984 . .
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
Table 8.
Table 9.
Table 10.
King salmon escapement counts, Alagnak (Branch) River, 1961-1984. . . . . .
Chum salmon escapement counts, Alagnak (Branch) River, 1961-1984. . .
Pink salmon escapement counts, Alagnak (Branch) River, 1961-1984. .
The Kvichak, Naknek, Egegik, and Ugashik River drainages of Bristol Bay (Figure 1) support runs of sockeye, king, chum, pink, and coho salmon. Sockeye are the most noteworthy species in terms of numbers and commercial value and hence have been studied the most extensively. Total run data (catch plus escapement) are available for sockeye from the early 1950's to the present, permitting managers to evaluate escapement-return relationships and set appropriate escapement goals on a drainage by drainage basis. Total run data for the other four salmon species are far less complete and escapement goals have not been set for these species in the above drainages.
As part of an effort to detail what data exists pertaining to the escapements of king, chum, pink, and coho salmon in east side Bristol Bay drainages a revie\"1 of the literature (both published and unpublished) was conducted. Additional data was extracted from the files of both the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in King Salmon. Results of that review are presented in this report.
METHODS
Escapement data for king, chum, pink, and coho salmon have been collected periodically from east side Bristol Bay drainages since 1926. Data have been obtained using a variety of methods including \"leirs, aerial surveys, foot surveys, float surveys, and counting towers. Numerous observers have participated in the data collection. Often projects generating the data \"/ere principally targeting on other species (generally sockeye salmon) so entries pertaining to the above incidental species may be incomplete or not totally descriptive for use as an escapement index for a particular stream in a given year. Data listed in this report are subject to the above constraints. Raw counts rather than expansions are presented whenever a distinction could be made between them.
Any potential user of the data listings in this report should consider the above constraints and use the data with appropriate caution. In nearly all cases the escapement data presented should be considered index values rather than total escapement values.
RESULTS
Kvichak River
Historic Kvichak River escapement counts for king, chum, pink, and coho salmon are presented in Table 1. Very little data exists for any species other than pink salmon. Aerial ·surveys during six years have yielded a mean escapement index value of 115,000 pinks. With a few more years data some escapement return relationships for pinks may become apparent. King salmon are known to spawn in the upper mainstem Kvichak, Pecks Creek, Kaskanak Creek, and possibly in some smaller tributaries such as Yellow Creek. Afew also enter Iliamna Lake but the numbers are very small. The data in Table 1 are too spotty to yeild anything other than a possible range of spal"lning indices for kings. There is
-1-
- ...
N
I
Flgure r.
DRISTOL DAY AREA
RlVtUD ltrl
DIIAWN IY t. ILINIQ
••••
~ "~" .~ ·-. wcioo RIVEII
t.AKEI
GAPI CONU ANTIHI.
BRISTOL BAY
N
CAP I
ta 1 o to aa :aa •• -•••~===-d--..::;-,====----a
... ll ( •
EDIGIK
.... /' r
....... _. __ _
H..IANNA lA~E
ICUMAKlli!J-'""
_)~] I HONVIAHUM
~.,
l(f-...... ------- .... ..........__
.,.
OECHAHOF LAKE ~
vr ..... r·~ L ~j~--
Table l. Salmon counts,ll Kvichak River, 1932-1984.
Year King Salmon Chum Salmon Pink Salmon Coho Salmon
1932 y 6 '113 l ,018 200 No surveys
1966 67,500 "
1968 88,000 "
1976 35 16 'l 00 "
1978 440,000 "
1980 1,000 25,000 "
1984 200 165,000 "
Totals 7,348 l ,018 801 ,800 Mean Index l ,837 l ,018 114,543
ll Aerial peak counts unless otherwise noted
y Weir count
(Literature Cited: 2 and 5)
-3-
only one observation regarding Kvichak chums and there are no data on file describing coho escapements although small numbers of cohos have been recorded at locations around Iliamna Lake such as the Lower Talarik Creek weir (n = 109 in 1973, n = 13 in 1974). Additional surveys will be necessary in the future if escapement trend information for the above species is desired.
Alagnak (Branch) River
Salmon escapement counts for species other than sockeye date from 1961 to the present. King salmon counts are presented in Table 2. Counts from both counting towers and aerial surveys are presented with the aerial counts probably serving as a more reliable indicator in this case. Counting tower operations generally terminated during early August while kings were still migrating up the river to spawning areas so fish were probably missed at the tower for that reason. Additionally, kings are often mid river migrants making them more difficult to count from counting towers. The aerial surveys conducted since at least 1968 were scheduled to target directly on spawning kings and they provide the most useful indicator of king escapement trends. Overall, aerial surveys have yielded a mean annual escapement index of 5,348 kings in the Alagnak River and the run currently appears to be quite healthy. Chum salmon counts are presented in Table 3. Aerial survey counts during recent years have yi e 1 ded much higher mean index va 1 ues than tower counts from earl i er-·years. It is strongly suspected that the aerial survey counts again are a more accurate indicator of chum escapement magnitudes than the earlier tower counts for the same reasons mentioned above in discussing king counts. The Alagnak is the most significant chum salmon spawning area in the Naknek-Kvichak drainage and as such should be considered a prime chum index stream for future escapement monitoring.
Alagnak River pink salmon counts are presented in Table 4. Both counting tower and aerial counts are listed but much more reliance should be placed on the aerial counts. Again, the tower counts were terminated too early to yeild accurate pink tallies and also many pinks spawn in lower river areas downstream of the counting tower sites. An even year mean escapement index of 283,079 pinks has been obtained.
Alagnak cohos have been aerially counted during four different years, see Table 5. These counts were incidental to counts of spawning kings and should be considered minimal indices. Cohos are the latest salmon annually to enter spawning areas and these counts occurred too early in August to yield accurate indices.
Naknek River
King salmon escapements in the Naknek River have been monitored more extensively than those in adjacent drainages, see Table 6. Weirs constructed for several years at the foot of the Naknek River "rapids" yielded accurate counts of migrants entering the rapids in those years. It should be noted ho~1ever that during recent years approximately 15% of the main river kings counted during aerial surveys have been observed spawning downstream of the old weir site and thus the earleir weir counts may have been low by a similar proportion. Float surveys of some major Naknek River tributaries were conducted during the mid
-4-
Table 2. King salmon escapement counts, Alagnak (Branch) River, 1961-1984.
l/ Peak aerial counts unless otherwise noted. Z! Heir counts If Float survey counts Note: The Naknek weir, 1929-1957 was located upstream of approximately 15% of the
known king spawning areas in the mainstem Naknek River so weir counts for those years probably underestimate the total mainstem population accordingly.
(Literature Cited: 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6)
_a_
1960's and peak aerial surveys of these same streams have been flown annually since 1970 yielding (when combined with main stem counts) a system wide annual spawning index. As these kings are exploited by four user groups (commercial, sport, subsistence, and personal use fishermen) continued escapement monitoring should be considered a management priority for the future.
Naknek River chums have been counted much less frequently than kings, see Table 7. The counts obtained were generally made incidental to king counts and may not have occurred at the peak of chum spawning. The data indicate that Big Creek and King Salmon Creek are the major spawning components for chums in the tlaknek drainage and that further attention to chum escapement monitoring will be necessary if trends are to be identified.
Pink salmon have been counted using weirs and aerial surveys in the Naknek drainage. The aerial surveys should be considered a much more reliable indicator of actual escapement strength than the weir counts as most of the pinks spawn downstream of the weir sites. The recent even-year mean index value of 261,833 pinks indicates the Naknek escapement is currently in good shape.
Coho escapements have received very little monitoring in the Naknek drainage, see Table 9. Mainstem weirs were terminated about the time cohos really begin to move upriver (mid-August). Counts in the kno~m main spawning streams, Big Creek and King Salmon Creek, are practically nonexistent. The only consistent counts occurred at the Brooks River weir operated by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. A program similar to the present day Naknek king escapement survey program needs to be instituted soon to provide a coho escapement data base.
Egegik River
Egegik River drainage king salmon have been counted using weirs and aerial surveys, see Table 10. Weirs were constructed just below the Egegik River rapids and were operated primarily to count sockeye salmon. The counts obtained indicate only a small number of kings entered the Egegik rapids each year. Aerial king salmon counts are a recent addition to the overall Egegik district management program and are designed to yield a system wide index of king salmon spawning numbers. Several years of data will be necessary before escapement trends can be described. It does appear, however, that the King Salmon River and its tributaries are the major producers of kings in the Egegik River system.
Chum salmon counts in the Egegik drainage have been obtained at the Egegik River weirs and during aerial king salmon surveys, Table 11. Again the data indicates the King Salmon River and its tributaries are the main chum salmon producers.
Pink salmon have been observed spawning at the foot of the Egegik River rapids during recent years, Table 12. Weir counts probably under estimated historic escapement levels as the weirs were located at the upper end of the spawning area. Egegik pinks appear to follow the even year peak pattern common to other Bristol Bay drainages. It is possible that some pinks may spawn in the glacially turbid waters of King Salmon River where they cannot be visually counted.
Naknek weir (1929-1956) was located too far upstream to accurately reflect pink escapement numbers in the river so only years 1974 - 1984 were used to compute mean index.
Egegik Shosky Gertrude Takayoto Contact Year River Creek Creek Creek Creek
1932 513 y 1952 346 y 1953 270 y 1954 669 y 1955 745 y 1956 26 y 1982 12,000 2,000 1983 5,000 3,500 6,000 1984 800 200 13,000 2,400 10,000
Total 3,369 200 30,000 5,900 18,000 Mean Index 481 200 10,000 2,950 6,000
ll Aerial peak counts unless otherwise noted.
y Weir counts
(Literature Cited: 2, 3, and 5)
-15-
Table 12. Pink salmon
Egegik Year River
1952 183 y 1953 82 y 1954 310 y 1955 80 y 1956 206 y 1982 15,000 1983 1984 17 ,obo
Totals 32,861 ~lean Index 4,694
escapement counts
Shosky Creek
No surveys H
H
H
H
H
H
H
l! , Egegik River
Gertrude Creek
5sll
58 58
lJ Peak aerial counts unless otherwise noted
Y Weir counts
l/ Float count
(Literature Cited: 3 and 5)
-16:..
drainage, 1952-1984.
Takayoto Contact Creek Creek
No surveys No surveys H " H H
H H
H H
H H
H H
" H
Historic coho salmon counts for the Egegik drainage are very incomplete, see Table 13. Weir counts terminated too early to yield accurate escapement indices. Aerial surveys have identified some spawning streams but a systematic annual survey program has not been implemented. Such a program will be necessary if escapement trends and a realistic escapement goal for the Egegik system are to be obtained.
Ugashik River
Historic king salmon escapement counts in the Ugashik River drainage are presented in Table 14. Counts were obtained at the Ugashik River weirs and through use of aerial surveys. Weirs were constructed on the Ugashik River just upstream of Ugashik Lagoon and ~Jere operated primarily to count sockeye salmon. Weir counts indicate that only a few kings utilize the Ugashik River itself for spawning. Aerial survey counts indicate the bulk of king salmon escapement occurs in the King Salmon River and its tributaries. These aerial surveys target on spawning kings and are an ongoing component of the Ugashik district salmon management program.
Ugashik drainage chum counts are presented in Table 15. Weir counts were obtained as described above for kings. Aerial counts were obtained incidental to king counts on peak king salmon surveys and as such may have been a few days one side or the other of the actual peak of chum spawning. Again it is apparent that the King Salmon River and its tributaries are the major chum spawning areas within the Ugashik drainage. Also, recent catch and escapement totals indicate the chum run in the Ugashik district is in a very healthy condition. The 1984 run of at least 380,000 chums is the largest on record for the district.
Pink salmon escapements to the Ugashik River drainage have not been monitored very extensively, see Table 16. Weir counts may have terminated too early to accurateiy reflect pink escapement numbers in the upper Ugashik River. Aerial counts have largely been obtained during king and sockeye escapement surveys. The mainstem King Salmon River may be the most significant pink spawning area
. in the Ugashik drainage.
Coho escapement counts in the Ugashik drainage are presented in Table 17. Again, the data are very incomplete. Cohos enter spawning areas from late August through at least mid-October (personal observations) and the duration of spawning lasts until at 1 east mid-December in some areas. Weir counts terminated too early to accurately reflect coho escapement numbers. Aerial counts were obtained incidental to kings and sockeye during mid-August surveys. A program to identify coho spawning··areas, index spawning abundance, and eventually yield a realistic spawning escapement goal needs to be implemented at Ugashik.
DISCUSSION
While research and management programs in east side Bristol Bay drainages have yielded a great deal of information regarding sockeye spawning areas, escapement numbers, escapement return ratios, desired escapement goals, etc. these same biological concerns remain much less well defined for the other four salmon species sharing the same watersheds. With commercial, subsistence, sport, and in some cases personal use fisheries now utilizing these other salmon species a better
?J Weir counts (partial only as weirs normally pulled before peak of coho migration arrived.
(Literature Cited: l, 2, 3, 5, and 6)
-22-
understanding of escapement needs, drainage by drainage, is necessary if proper management of runs and individual stocks is to occur. Until data leadi.ng to such understanding is obtained the establishment of realistic escapement goals for· these species in the respective river systems will be either a very subjective process or not possible. Hopefully, escapement monitoring programs can be implemented in the near future to address these data needs and provide information to fishery managers with which they can adequately protect the long term spawning requirements of these important salmon runs.
-23-
LITERATURE CITED
1 . UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF CDr·1MERCE. 1926-1928. A 1 aska fishery and fur-seal industries. Bureau of Fisheries. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
2. UNITED STATES DEPARH1ENT OF C0~1t~ERCE. 1929-1939. Annua 1 report of the Bristol Bay district. Bureau of Fisheries. Washington, D.C.
3. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR. 1940-1956. Annual report Bristol Bay. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
4. ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME. 1963-1984. Division of Sport Fisheries, Bristol Bay management files, unpublished records.
5. ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME. 1963-1984. Division of Commercial Fisheries, Bristol Bay management files, unpublished records.
6. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR. 1940-1967. Fish and Wildlife Service. Bristol Bay files, unpublished records.