Fish And\Fildlife

$Fish And\Fildlife$

Alasha Habitat ltlanagement Guide

Wbstern and Interior Regions

Distribution, Abundance, and HumanUse of Fish and\Fildlife

Produced by State of Alasha Department of Fish and Game Division of Habitat

Iuneau, Alasha l9E5 @TSEC BYTHE ALASKA DEPAPTMENT OF FISH AND GAIIIE Contents

Achnowledgements xxvii

Introduction 3

DTSrRIBUTION AIID ABUNDANCE OF SELECTED FISH AI.ID WITDLIFE wildlife

Ma ri ne Marma I s e 19 Regionwicle 19 -BETilffiE-whalBowhead whale 23 Regionwide 23 Pacific wal rus 27 Regionwide 27 Pacific walrus population 31 Polar bear 35 Regionwide 35 Western Alaska subpopulation 39 ffiTerrestrial Marmal s Regionwide 43 Caribou 49 Regionwide 49 Chisana Herd 57 Denal i Herd 59 Kilbuck-Kuskokwim Mountains Herd 63 Andreafsky Mountains Herd 66 Delta Hero 66 Macomb Herd 70 Yanert Herd 70 Fortymile Herd 7L Beaver Mountains Herd 75 Sunshine Mountain Hercl 75 Big River (Farewell) Hero 76 Rainy Pass Herd 76 Tonzona Herd 76 Dal I sheep 83 Regionwide 83 Alaska Range 85 Moose 103 Regionwide 103

L1,L Contents (continued)

GMU 12 105 GMU 18 106 GMU 19 106 GMS 2OA 106 GMS 2OB IO7 GMS 20C 107 GMS zOD IO7 GMS 20E 107 GMS zOF 108 GMS 21A 108 GMS 218 108 GMS 21C 108 GMS 21D 108 GMS 218 109 GMU 24 109 GMU 25 109 Bi rds and geese 115 Regionwide 115 -Ducks Yukon-Kuskokwim del ta LZt Innoko I24 Koyukuk 724 Tanana-Kuskokvrim L25 Yukon Flars L25 Tetl in-Northway I27 Management history 127

Fish

Freshwater/Anadromous Fi sh en 133 Regionw'ide 133 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area 135 South Slope Brooks Range Area 136 Fai rbanks Area I37 Arctic grayl i ng i41 Regionwide 141 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area 145 South Slope Brooks Range Area 146 Fai rbanks Area I47 Broad whitefish 169 Regi onw'ide 169 Fai rbanks Area L7I Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area I72 Sc.ruth Slope Brooks Range Area L72

11' Contents (continued)

Burbot 181 Regionwide 181 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area 183 South Slope Brooks Range Area 183 Fai rbanks Area i84 Humpback whitefish 189 Regionwide 189 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area i91 South Slope Brooks Range Area L92 Fai rbanks Area 193 Lake trout 199 Regionwide 199 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area 20I South Slope Brooks Range Area ?02 Fairbanks Area 202 Enhancement 203 Least cisco 207 Regional distribution 207 Areas used seasona'lly and for life functions 207 Factors affecting distribution 208 Movements between areas 208 Population size estimation 208 Northern pike ?LL Regionwide zLL Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area 2I3 South Slope Brooks Range Area 2I4 Fai rbanks Area 214 Rainbow trout 2L9 Regionwide distribution and relative abundance 2L9 Regional distribution maps 219 Factors affecting distribution 2L9 Movements between areas 22I Salmon 223 Regionwide 223 Kuskokwim Management Area 225 Yukon Management Area 236 Sheefish 267 Regionwide 267 Kuskokwim River population distribution and abundance 268 Lower and middle Yukon River anadromous sheefish distribution and abundance 270 Nonanadromous sheefish distribution and abundance 27L Enhancement 273 Marine Fish --TaciTic hal ibut 279 Pacific herring 285 Regionwide 285 Contents (continued)

Goodnews Bay and Security Cove districts 286 Nunivak Island and Nelson Island districts ?87 Cape Romanzof District 289 Saffron cod 29L Yellowfin sole 295 Shel I fi sh 303 Regionwide 303 -T]TdcraoNorton Sound 304 Saint Matthew-Saint Lawrence islands 305 Shrimp regional overview 309 Distribution and abundance 309 Management history and reported use 309 Management objectives and considerations 3Lz Period of use and harvest methods 313 Tanner crab regional overview 315 Distribution and abundance 315 Management history and reported use 3L7 Management objectives and considerations 319 Period of use and harvest methods 320

HUMAN USE OF SELECTED FISH Al.lD WILDLIFE

Hunting and lfapping

Brown bear 323 Population management history 323 cMU 12 323 GMU 18 326 GMU 19 327 GMU 20 328 GMU 21 330 GMU 24 331 GMU 25 332 Caribou 337 Population management history 337 Delta Caribou Herd (GMS 20C) 338 Fortymile Caribou Herd (GMU 12 ancl GMSs 208,20D,20E,25C) 341 Chisana Herd 348 Macomb Herd 351 Dal I Sheep 355 Population management history 355 , Tok Management Area (TMA) 357

114 Contents (continued)

Delta Controlled Use Area (DCUA) - portions of GMSs ZOA, ?OD, and 138 360 cMU 12 - excluding TMA ano DCUA 363 GMS 168 366 GMS 198 367 GMS 19C 370 GMS 2OA 372 Gtvls 20c 375 GMS 208 - Glacier Mountain Control led Use Area (GtvtCUA) 316 GMS 20E (except GMCUA) and that portion of GMS 20D north of the Alaska highway 377 GMU 24 379 GMS 254 381 GMS 25C 383 Moose 391 Population management history 391 GMU 12 393 GMU 18 394 GMU 19 396 GMS 20A 397 GMS 208 398 cMS 20C 399 GMS 200 401 cMs 20E 40? GMS ZOF 403 GMS 21A 403 GMS 218 404 GMS 21C 405 GMS 21D 406 GMS 21E 407 GMU 24 408 GMU 25 409 Furbearers 459 Population management history 459 Interior Region (GMUs 12, 19, 20, 2I, 24, and 25) 463 Western Region (GMU 18) 476

Commercial Fishing

Pacific hal ibut 513 Population management history 5I3 Management objectives 52I Management considerations 522 Comnercial and subsistence harvest of pacific herri ng 527 Population management history 527 Security Cove and Goodnews Bay districts 533

vuu Contents (contirrued)

Nelson Island and Nunivak Island districts 535 Cape Romanzof District 539 Conmercial and subsistence harvest of sa'lmon 543 Population management history 543 Kuskokwjm Management Area 544 ' Al 1 -species harvest 546 Chum salmon harvest 551 Coho salmon harvest 555 Chinook salmon harvest 558 Pink salmon harvest 563 Sockeye salmon harvest 567 Management objectives 57I Management considerations 573 Yukon Management Area 575 A'l 1 -speci es ha rvest 577 Chum salmon harvest 582 Chinook salmon harvest 588 Coho salmon harvest 593 Management objectives 599 Management considerations 601 ShelIfish King crab 611 Popu'lation management history 611 Norton Sound Section 616 St. Matthews and St. Lawrence islands sections 619 Shrimp regional overview 309 Distribution and abundance 309 Management h'istory and reported use 309 Management objectives and consiclerations 3L2 Period of use and harvest methods 313 Tanner crab regiona'l overview 315 Distribution and abundance 315 Management history ancl reported use 3L7 Management objectives and considerations 319 Period of use and harvest methods 320

Spor6shing

Management history 625 Alaska statewide sportfishing harvest monitoring 626 Regional harvesr summary 627 Harvest survey areas 628 Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area 628 South Slope Brooks Range Area 634 Fai rbanks Area 638

VL L.L Contents (continued)

Subsistence and Other l.ocal tlses of Resources

Location and environment 679 History and patterns of human activity 683 Population 686 Regional economy 688 Transportation 690 Use of fish ancl game and other natural resources 691 Interior Reqion 78L Location and environment 78L History and pattern of human activity 783 Population 792 Regional economy 793 Transportation 794 Land status 795 Contemporary subsistence use of wild resources 795

Appendices

A. Di rectory of reviewers and contributors 845 B. Abbreviations 847 C. l.lildlife management goals and obiectives 849

IV[aps

Wildlife Distribution and Abundance

Brown bear 1. GMUs of the Western and interior regions 44 Ca ri bou 1. Distribution of the Chisana Caribou Herd 50 2. Ranges of the Delta, Yanert, and Macomb caribou herds 52 3. Annual distribution of the Forrymile'ley Caribou Herd in Alaska 53 4. The upper Kuskokwim Ri ver va1 54 5. Major caribou calving grounds of the Denali Caribou Herd 60 6. Distribution of the Fortymile Caribou Herd 73 Dal I sheep l. NPS survey areas in the Wrangell Mountains 86 Maps (continued)

Moclse 1. GMUs of the l,lestern and Interior regions 104 Ducks and geese l. USFI.{S waterfowl breeding population survey strata L20

Fish Distrlbudon and Abundance

Arctic char/Dolly Varden 1. Western and Interior regions sport fish survey areas 134 Arctic Arayl ing 1. l,lestern and Interior regions sport fish survey areas L42 Broad whitefish 1. Arctic, Western, and Interior regions sport fish survey areas L70 Burbot 1. Western and Interior regions sport fish survey areas 182 Humpback whitefish 1. Western and Interior regions sport fish survey areas 190 Lake trout 1. Western and interior regions sport fish survey areas 200 Northern pike 1. Western and Interior regions sport fish survey areas 212 Pacific hal ibut 1. Regulatory areas for the Pacific halibut fishery 28I Yel lowfin sole 1. Yellowfin sole biomass in metric tons 297 Sh ri mp 1. Shrimp commercial fishing clistricts of the Bering Sea in Statistical Area J 311 Tanner crab 1. Tanner crab fishing subdistricts and sections of the Bering Sea District in Statistical Area J 316

Hunting and Tfapping

Brown bear 1. Gl'lUs of the tr'lesten and Interior regions 324 Ca ri bou 1. GMUs of the Western and Interior regions 339 Dal I sheep 1. GMUs of the tlestern and Interior regions 356 2. Locations of the Tok Managenent Area and the Delta Controlled Use Area 351 Moose 1. GMUs of the Western and Interior regions 392 Maps (continued)

Fu rbea rers 1. Boundaries of the Western and Interior regions of Alaska and game management uni ts 460 2. Boundaries of the nat'ional parks and preserves wjihin the Interior Region 468

Commercial Fishing

Pacific hal ibut 1. Regulatory areas for the Pacific halibut fishery, I9BZ 515 2. Regulatory areas for the Pacific halibut fishery, 1983 516 3. Regulatory areas for the Pacific halibut fishery, 1984 517 Pacific herring 1. Herring statistica'l area boundaries 528 2. Security Cove and Gooclnews Bay herring cormercial fishing di stri cts 534 3. Nunivak Island and Nelson Island herring commercial fishing di stri cts 536 4. Cape Romanzof commercial herring fishing district 540 Sa I mon 1. Salmon commercial fishing districts of the Kuskokwim ltlanagement Area 545 2. Salmon commercial fishing districts and subdistricts of the Yukon Management Area 576 King crab 1 . Ki ng crab fi shi ng di stri cts and sections of Statistical Area Q 612 spordshing

1. Western and Interior regions sport fish survey areas 635

Subsistence and Other Local Uses of Resources

1. Western A'laska subregions and comrnunities 680 2. Contemporary (1983) central Yup'ik Eskimo societies 692 1. The Tnterior Region 782 2. Athabaskan language groups in the Interior Region 785 3. Federal Conservation Units in the Interior Region 796 Figures

Subsistence and Other lpcal Uses of Pesources

ffial round of subsi stence harvest activi ties by residents of Alakanuk, Sheldon's Point, and Scarunon Bay,1983 734 2. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Atmautluak, 1983 736 3. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Bethel, 1985 737 4. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Chuathbaluk and Sleetmute, June 1982-May 1983 739 5. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Goodnews BaY, 1983 741 6. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by resi

22. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Ermonak 764 23. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Kotlik 765 24. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Mt. Village 766 25. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Nunapitchuk 766 26. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Quinhagak 767 27. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Russian Mission 767 28. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Scarmon Bay 768 29. Composi tion of per capi ta subsi stence harvest for Shel don Point 769 30. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Stebbins 770 +Interior Reqion round of subsi stence harvest activi ties by residents of Arctic Village, circa L970-L982 813 -T;---Tnxual2. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Dot Lake, 1980-1982 814 3. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Fort Yukon, circa 1970-1982 815 4. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by resiclents of McGrath, 1983 816 5. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Nikolai, 1983 8L7 6. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of upper Koyukuk River communities of Bettles/Evansville, Alatna, Al'lakaket, and Hughes , 1982-1983 818 7. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of upper Tanana River communities of Northway, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Tok, 1983-1984 819

Tables

\Pildliie Distribution and Abundance -T:iTTffialrusMa ri ne l,larma I s 1. Use by walruses of haulout areas on Alaskan shores of the northern Bering Sea and Chukchi Sea in the present century 29 ffiTerrestrial Marmal s 1. Most current popu'lation estimates and survey results for caribou herds in Western and Interior regions 58 Tables (continued)

2. Population size estjmates for the Denal i Caribou Herd, 1919-84 64 3. Peak calving period and level of use of the core calving area for the Delta Herd, 1979-83 68 4. Available abundance estimates for the Delta Herd, 1957-84 68 Dal I sheep 1. Recent and highest previous counts of Da'11 sheep in nine count units in l'lrangell-St. Elias National Park/Preserve 92 2. Composition of sheep observed in the Tok Management Area, 1974 and 1979-84 93 3. Composition of sheep observed in the Delta Controllecl Use Area, L974, 1979-83 94 4. Composition of sheep observed at Dry Creek lick, Gl,lU 20, Alaska Range East, 1979-83 95 5. Composition of sheep observed in the Lake Clark area of the Alaska Range West, I974, 1981 96 6. Composition of sheep observed in G[*lS 19C, Alaska Range 97 Ducks and geese 1. Alaska-Yukon status of adjusted waterfowl breeding population estimates L22 2. Estimated numbers of black brant nesting on the Yukon Delta Nt,lR, 1981-84 L?3 3. Duck production surveys, Innoko, 1983-84 L24 4. Duck production surveys, Koyukuk, 1983-84 I24 5. Duck production surveys, Tanana-Kuskokwim, 1983-84 L25 6. Comparative brood counf,s from two study areas in Interior Alaska, 1961-84 126

Fish Distribution and Abundance

Freshwater/Anadromous Fi sh

1. Population estimates for arctic arayling greater than 150 rnn fork length in index sections of the Chena River, 1968-83 153 2. l'lumbers of grayl i ng captu red during index sampl ing on sections of the Delta Clearwater River, L973, 1975-83 156 3. Numbers of grayl ing captured during index sampl ing on sections of the Richardson Cl ea n'later Ri ver , 1973 , 1977-83 158 4. Population estimates for grayling larger than 150 nrn in the lower Goodpaster River, 1973-82 159 5. Waterbodies in the Fairbanks Area stocked with arctic grayl ing, 1968-84 161 Tables (continued)

Broad whitefish 1. Collection locations of broad whi tefi sh ( Coregonus nasus ) Postal SurveY Area U 172 within Sport'locations Fish 2. Col lection of broad whi tefi sh ( Coregonus nasus ) within Sport Fish Postal SurveY Area V L73 3. Collection locations of. broad whi tefi sh ( Coregonus nasus ) within Sport Fish Postal SurveY Area Y I74 4. Collection locations of broad whi tefi sh ( Coregonus nasus ) within Sport Fish Postal Survey Area W L75 5. Collection locations of broad wh i tefi sh ( Coregonus nasus ) within Sport Fish Postal SurveY Area X 176 6. Collection locations of broad whi tefi sh (Coregonus nasus) wi thi n Sport F'i sh Posta I SurveY Area Z I77 Humpback whitefish 1. Humpback whitefish population estimates for the Chatanika River 194 Rainbow trout 1. l,later bod'ies stocked with rainbow trout in the Fairbanks Area, 1967-85 220 Sal npn 1. General salmon run timing in the Kuskokwim River, by species 243 2. Gbneral salmon run timing in the Quinhagak and Goodnews districts of the Kuskokwim Area, by spec'ies 244 3. Chum salmon escapement index counts 'in Kuskokwim Area Streams by district, 1974-83 245 4. C-oho salmon escapement index counts in Kuskokwim Area streams by distrjct, 1974-83 248 5. Cirinook saimon escapement jndex counts in Kuskokwim Area streams by district, L974-83 250 6. Sockeye ialmon escapement index counts in Kuskokwim Area streams and lakes by district, 1974-83 254 7. Pink salmon escapement index counts in Kuskokwim Area streams by district, 1974-83 256 8. GLneral salmon run timing in the Yukon River, by species and by river section 257 o Eicapement estimates in numbers of fish of summer chum salmon in the Yukon River drainage, 1975-84 259 10. Escapement estjmates in numbers of fish of fall chum salmon in the Yukon River drainage, 1975-84 260 11. Escapement estimates in numbers of fish of chinook salmon in the Yukon River drainage, 1975-84 26I 12. Escapement estimates in numbers of fish of coho salmon in the Yukon River drainage, 1975-84 262 13. Escapement estimatis of pink salmon in numbers of fish in the Yukon River drainage 263 Tables (continued)

Sheefi sh 1. lrlater bodies in the Interior Region stocked with sheefish, 1968-84 274 Marine Fish TaCiTic herri ng 1. Biomass estimates of herring from the Western Region 288 Saffron cod 1. Estimated biomass aM population size of the saffron cod resource in Norton Sound and the northeastern Bering Sea 293 Tfr'!'craoShel I fi sh 1. Population estimates of the lega1 size male red king crab population in Norton Sound 306 2. Annual abundance estimates in mi I I ions of crabs for St. Matthew Island blue king crabs from NI'1FS surveys 307 Shrimp 1. Cormercial harvest of shrimp in metric tons by foreign fishermen in the eastern Bering Sea, 1960-77 3L2 Tanner crab 1. Annual abundance estimates for Tanner crab in the Northern Di stri ct 318

Hunting and Ttapping

Brown bear 1. Reported brown bear harvest data for GMU 12, 1979-84 325 2. Reported brown bear harvest data for GMU 18, 1979-84 326 3. Reported brown bear harvest data for GMU 19, 1979-84 328 4. Reported brown bear harvesr data for GMU 20, 1979-84 329 5. Reported brown bear harvest data for GMU 2r, 1979-84 330 6. Reported brown bear harvest data for GMU 24, 1979-84 332 7. Reported brown bear harvest data for GMU 25, 1979-84 333 Ca ri bou 1. Hunting seasons and bag limits for the Delta Caribou Herd, 1968-85 342 2. Reportecl human use data for the Del ta Cari bou Herd, 1980-84 343 3. Significant harvest areas for the Del ta Caribou Herd, 1983 344 4. Hunting seasons, bag limits, and harvest for the Fortymile Caribou Herd, 1975-86 347 5. Significant harvest areas for the Fortymile Caribou Herd, 1983-84 349 6. Reported human use data for the Macomb Caribou Herd, 1977 -84 350 Tables (continued)

Dal I sheep 1. Dall sheep harvest information, TMA ram hunt, 1979-84 358 2. Dall sheep harvest information, Tl4A ewe hunt' L979'84 359 3. Sheep ram harvest and hunter data for TMA, 1984 360 4. Dall sheep harvest information, De'lta Controlled Use Area, 1980-84 362 5. Sheep harvest and hunter clata for DCUA, 1984 363 6. Dall' sheep harvest information, GMU 12 (excluding TMA and DCUA, i979-84) 365 7. Sheep harvest and hunter data for GMU 12, excluding TMA and DCUA, 1984 366 8. Sheep harvest information, GMSs 20E and 20D north of Alaska Highway,1984 367 9. Sheep harvest and hunter data for GMSs 20E and 20D north of the Alaska Highway, 1984 368 10. Dall sheep harvest information, GMS 20A 369 11. Sheep harvest and hunter data for GMS 20A, L984 370 I2, Dall sheep harvest 'information, GMS 25C 37I 13. Sheep harvest and hunter data for GMS 25C, 1984 372 14. Dall sheep harvest information, GMS 20C, 1983-84 373 15. Sheep harvest and hunter data for GMS 20C, 1984 374 16. Dall sheep harvest information, GMS 19C, 1980-84 375 L7. Sheep harvest ancl hunter data for GMS 19C' 1984 376 18. Dall sheep harvest information, GMS l9B, i980-84 378 i9. Sheep harvest and hunter data for GMS 198, 1984 379 20. Dall sheep harvest information, GMS 168, 1983-84 381 2L Sheep harvest and hunter data for GMS 168, 1984 382 22. Repoi-teO Da1'l sheep harvest information GMS 25A, 1981-84 384 23. Reilorted Dal I sheep harvest informat'ion for clrawing permits in GMS 25A, 1980, 1981 384 24. Reported Dall sheep harvest and permit harvest and hunter data in GMS 25A, 1983-84 385 25. Dall sheep harvest information, GMS 25C 386 26. Sheep harvest and hunter data for GMS 25C 1984 386 Moose 1. GMU LZ reportecl moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1978-80 through 1984-85 411 2. GtqU tZ minor tributary human use data, regulatory year 1983-84 411 3. GMU 12 mlnor tributary human use data, regulatory year 1984-85 4r2 4. GMU 18 reported moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years i978-80 through 1984-85 4Lz 5. GMU 18 mi nor tributary human use data , regul atory year 1983-84 413 6. GMU 18 minor tributary human use data, regulatory year 1984-85 4r4 Tables (continued)

7. GMS 19A reported moose harvest and hunter data for regu'latory years though 1984-85 4L4 'gmS i979-80 8. tgB reported moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1979-80 through 1984-85 415 9. bNS tgC reported moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1979-80 through 1984-85 415 10. bt'tS tgO reported moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory 4L6 years-gmU 1979-80 through 1984-85 11. tg reported moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1979-80 through 1984-85 416 12. bNS 19A minor tribulary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 4L7 13. GMS 19A m-inor triOutaiy human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 418 14. GMS 198 ;inor tributaiy human use data orderecl by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 419 15. GMS l9B minor t-riOutaiy human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 420 16. GMS 19C riinor t-riOutaiy human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 4?L 17. GMS 19C dinor t-ributaiy human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 422 18. GMS 19D minor t-riOutaiy-human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 423 19. GMS 19D r;inor t-ributaiy human use data ordered by number of hunter-days' regulatory year 1984-85 424 20. Hunters w;ho repirteO iruirti ng i n GMU 19 but di d_ not speci fy subunit, regu'latory years 1983-84 and 1984-85 424 2t. GMS 20A rep6rted mboie harvest and hunter data for regulatory 425 years-gNS 1979-80 through 1984-85 22. ZOn minor tribuiary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 424 23. GMS 20A ilin-or tlibutaiy-human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 426 24. GMS 208 rLporteO moose hlrvest and hunter data for regulatory 426 years-gMS 1979-80 through 1984-85 25. ZOg minor tribtitary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 427 26. GMS 208 riinor t-riOutaiy-human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 427 27. GMS 20C rbported moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory 428 -eNSyears 1979-80 through i984-85 28. 20C minor tribulary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year-human 1983-84 428 29. GMS ZOC m'inor t?iUuraiy use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 429 Tables (continued)

30. GMS 20D reported moose harvest and hunter data for regu I atory years 1979-80 through i984-85 4?9 31. GNS ZOO minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 430 32. GMS 20D minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 431 33. GMS 20E riporteo moose harvest and hunter data for regul atory years 1982-83 through 1984-85 431 34. Gt'tS ZOf minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 432 35. GMS 20E minor tributary human use data oroered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 432 36. GMS 20F rlporteO moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory 433 -gMSyears 1979-80 through 1984-85 37. ZOf minor tribulary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 433 38. GMS 21A minor t-riOutaiy-human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 434 39. GMS 21A rlportel moose- hirvest and hunter data for regulatory 434 years-gNS 1979-80 through 1984-85 40. ZtR minor tribuiary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 435 4L. GMS 21A minor t-r'iOutaiy human use data ordered by number of hunter-days,-moose- regulatory year 1984-85 436 42. Reportect harveit- and hunter data for the Nowitna orainage 'in GMS 218 for regulatory years 1979-80 through 1984-85 436 43. GMS 218 minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 437 44, GMS 218 r;in'or fributaiy human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 437 45. GMS 2lC rlportei moose-hlrvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1980-81 through 1984-85 438 46. bNS ZIC minor triOulary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory -humanyear 1983-84 438 47. GMS 21C minor t-riOutaiy use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 439 48. GMS 21D rlportei moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1980-81 through 1984-85 439 49. Gt'lS ZtO m'inor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 440 50. GMS 2lD minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year i984-85 44I 51. GMS 21E rlportei moose hlrvest and hunter data for regulatory 44I -gNSyears 1980-81 through 1984-85 52. Ztf minor tribulary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 442 Tables (continued)

53. GMS 21E minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year i984-85 442 54. GMU 24 reported moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1980-81 through 1984-85 443 55. GMU 24 minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 443 56. GMU ?4 minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year i984-85 444 57. Gf'4S 25A reported moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1980-81 through 1984-85 444 58. GMS 258 reported moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1980-81 through 1984-85 445 59. Gt'tS ZSC reported moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years i980-81 through 1984-85 445 60. gMS eSO reported moose harvest and hunter data for regu'latory years 1980-81 through 1984-85 445 61. gUU ZS reportecl moose harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1980-81 through 1984-85 446 62. GUS 25A minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days , regu'latory year 1983-84 446 63. GMS 25A minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 447 64. GMS 258 minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 447 65. GMS 258 minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 448 66. GMS 25C minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 448 67. GMS 25C minor tributary human use data orclered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 449 68. GMS 25D minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1983-84 449 69. GMS 25D minor tributary human use data ordered by number of hunter-days, regulatory year 1984-85 450 70. Hunters who reporred hunting in Gl.lu 25 but who did not speci fy the subuni t, regulatory years 1983-84 and 1984-85 450 Fu rbea rers l. Number of sealed beaver pelts from the Interior Region of Alaska, I974-75 through 1984-85 484 2. Estimated areas of game management units (GMU) within the Interior Region of Alaska 486 3. Number of sealed land otter pelts from the Interior Region of Alaska , L977-78 through'lynx i984-85 487 4. Number of sea I ed pe1 ts f rom the Interi or Regi on of Alaska , 1977-78 through 1984-85 488 Tables (continued)

5. Number of sealed wolf pelts from the Interior Region of Alaska , L974-75 through 1984-85 489 6. Number of sealed wolverine pelts from the Interior Region of Alaska, I974-75 through 1984-85 491 7. Numbers of raw pelts exported from the Interior Region of Alaska, I977-78 through 1984-85 493 8. The percentage of sealed beaver, lynx, and land otter pelts exported from Alaska, 1977-78 through 1984-85 497 9. Number of trapping licenses sold in Alaska, 1974-84 498 10. l'lumber of sea'led beaver pel ts f rom the Western Region of A1aska (GMU 18) and number of trappers, I974-75 through 1984-85 499 11. Number of sealed land otter pe)ts from the Western Region of Alaska (GMU 18), 1977-18 through 1984-85 500 12. Number of sealed lynx pelts from the Western Region of Alaska (GMU 18), 1977-78 through 1984-85 501 13. Number of sealed wolf pelts from the Western Region of Alaska (GMU 18), 1974-75 through 1984-85 502 14. Number of sealed wolverine pelts from the Western Region of Alaska (GMU 18), 1974-75 through 1984-85 503 15. Number of raw pelts exported from the Western Region of Alaska (GMU 18), 1977-78 through 1983-84 504 16. Estimated prices paid for raw pe'lts in the Western Region, 1977 -78 508

Commercial Fishing

Pacific hal ibut 1. Commercia'l harvest data for halibut taken from the North Pac'ific Ocean and fronr the Bering Sea, 1974'84 520 Pacific herring 1. Subsistence harvest of Pacific herring in metric tons 'in the Western Region, 1975-84 529 2. Commercial harvest of Pacific herring in metric tons and effort in numbers of permits for the Western Region, bY district and by year, i978-85 531 Commerci a l and subsistence harvest of salmon 1. Corrnerc'ial harvest of salmon (al I species) in numbers of f ish for the Kuskokwim Area, 1975-84 547 2. Subsistence harvest of salmon (al I species) in numbers of fish in the Kuskokwim Area, 1975-84 550 3. Conrnercial harvest of chum salmon in numbers of fish in the Kuskokwim Area, i975-84 552 4. Run timing of chum salmon in the Kuskokwim Area by fishing di stri ct , 1982-83 553 Tables (continued)

5. Subsistence harvest of chum salmon in numbers of fish in the Kuskokwim Area, 1975-84 554 6. Conmercial harvest of coho salmon in the Kuskokw'im Area, r975-84 550 7. Run timing of coho salmon'in the Kuskokwim Area by fishing district,1982-83 557 8. Subsistence harvest of coho salrnon in numbers of fish in the Kuskokwim Area, 1975-84 559 9. Conrnercial harvest of chinook sa'lmon in numbers of fish in rhe Kuskokwim Area, 1975-84 561 10. Run timing of chinook salmon in the Kuskokwim Area by fishing district, l982-83 562 11. Subsistence harvest of chinook salmon in numbers of fish in the Kuskokwim Area, 1975-84 564 L2. Cormercial harvest of pink salmon in numbers of fish'in the Kuskokwim Area, 1975-84 565 13. Run timing of pink salmon in the Kuskokwim Area by fishing clistrict, 1982, 1983 566 14. Comnercial harvest of sockeye salmon in numbers of fish in the Kuskokwirn Area, 1975-84 568 15. Run timing of sockeye salmon in the Kuskokwim Area by fishing district, 1982-83 569 16. Subsistence harvest of salmon (a'll species) in numbers of fish in the Yukon River Area, 1975-84 578 L7. Conmerc'ial harvest of salmon (al I species) in numbers of f ish in the Yukon River Area, 1975-84 579 18. Commercial harvest of chum salmon in the Yukon Rjver Area, 1975-84 583 19. Run timing of summer chum salmon in the Yukon River Area by fishing district, 1982-84 584 20. Run riming of fall chum salmon jn the Yukon River Area by fishing district, 1982-84 585 2I. Subsistence harvest of chum salmon in the Yukon River Area, 1975-84 586 ?2. Corrnerc'ial harvest of chinook salmon in the Yukon River Area, 1975-84 589 ?3. Run tim'ing of chinook salmon in the Yukon River Area by fjshing district, 1982-84 590 24. Subsistence harvest of chinook salmon i n the Yukon R'iver Area, 1975-84 591 25. Conmercjal harvest of coho salmon in the Yukon River Area, 1975-84 594 26. Run t'iming of coho salmon in the Yukon River Area by fishing district,1982-84 595 27. Subsistence harvest of coho salmon in the Yukon River Area, 1975-84 596 Tables (continued)

Shel I fi sh King- crab 1. Conmercial harvest in thousands of pounds and effort for king crab fisheries in the Norton Sound Section of the l'lorthern District of the Bering Sea, 1977-84 615 2. Subs'istence harvest'in number of pouncls of red king crab in Norton Sound and effort in number of fishermen from 1978 through 1984 618 3. Conmeicial harvest in thousands of pounds and effort in number of vessels for king crab fisheries of the St. Matthew and St. Lawrence islands sections of the Northern District, 1977-84 62r Sh ri mp i. Conmercial harvest of shrimp in metric tons by foreign fishermen in the eastern Bering Sea, 1960-77 3Lz Tanner crab l. Annual abunclance estimates (mi11ions of crabs) for Tanner crab in the Northern District 318

Spordshing 1. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area sockeye salmon sport harvest, t977-84 647 2. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area coho sa'lmon sport harvest , 1977-84 647 3. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area ch'i nook sa I mon sPort ha rvest ' 1977-84 648 4. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area pink salmon sport harvest, 1977-84 648 5. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area chum salmon sporr harvest, L977-84 649 6. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area rai nbow trout sport ha rvest ' 1977 -84 649 7. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area char sport harvest, 1977-84 650 8. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area lake trout sport harvest, 1977-84 650 9. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area arctic arayl ing sPort harvest, 1977-84 651 10. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area northern pi ke sPort harvest, 1977-84 651 i1. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area whitefish sport harvest, 1977-84 652 L2. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area burbot sport harvest, 1977-84 652 13. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area sheefish sport harvest, 1977-84 653 14. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area sportfishing effort expressed as angler-days and as a percentage of the total _sportfishing effort in the Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area each year 654 15. South Slope Brooks Range Area chum salmon sport harvest, 1977 -84 655 16. South Slope Brooks Range Area char sport harvest, 1977-84 655 Tables (continued)

L7. South Slope Brooks Range Area lake trout sport harvest, 1977-84 656 18. South Slope Brooks Range Area burbot sport harvest, 1977-84 656 19. South Slope Brooks Range Area sheefish sport harvest, L977-84 657 20. South Slope Brooks Range Area arctic arayl ing sport harvest, 1977-84 657 2L. South Slope Brooks Range Area northern pike sport harvest, 1977-84 658 22, South Slope Brooks Range Area sportfishing effort expressed as angler days and as a percentage of the total sportfishing effort in the Scruth Slope Brooks Range Area 659 23. Fairbanks Area arctic Arayling sport harvest, L977-84 660 24. Fairbanks Area land locked salmon sport harvest, 1977-84 661 25. Fajrbanks Area rainbow trout sport harvest, L977-84 662 26. Fairbanks Area northern pike sport harvest, 1977-84 663 27. Fairbanks Area whitefish sport harvest, L977-84 664 28. Fajrbanks Area burbot sport harvest, 1977-84 665 29. Fairbanks Area lake trout sport harvest, L977-84 666 30. Fairbanks Area char sporr harvest, 1977-84 667 31. Fairbanks Area sheefish sport harvest, 1977-84 668 32, Fairbanks Area chinook salmon sport harvest, 1977-84 669 33. Fairbanks Area chum salmon sport harvest, 1977-84 670 34. Fairbanks Area coho salmon sport harvest, 1977-84 67L 35. Fairbanks Area sportfishing effort expressed as angler-days and as a percentage of the total sportfishing effort in the Fairbanks Area each year 672

Subsistence and Other Local Uses of Resources

Wes te rn Western Region population, 1960-80 704 2. Western Reg'ion dverage taxable income, 1978, 198i, 1982 705 J. ChronoJogical summary of early ethnographic research in the central Yup'ik area 706 4. Tentative I ist of some groupings of modern central Yup'ik villages 707 5. Iquqmiut and Pastulirmiut seasonal subsistence moves and residence locations, ca. 1833 708 6. Surmary of recent ethnographic and 'linguistic research in the central Yup'i k area 709 7. Major fish, wildlife, and marine marunals species used by conununities in Western Alaska 7I0 8. Fish and wildlife resources used by Hooper Bay residents 7II fables (continued)

9. Selected fish and wildl'ife resources used by Kwigi'llingok resiclents 714 10. Selected fish and wildlife resources used by Stebbins and Yukon Delta residents 717 11. Selected ethnobotany for Hooper Bay 720 12. Selected ethnobotany for Kwigillingok 723 13. SubsisEence harvest levels in'pounds per household, six Western Region communities, June 1980 through May 1981 727 14. Subsistence harvest levels in pounds per household, A'lakanuk, Sheldon Point, and Scammon Bay, June 1981 through May 1982 7?8 15. Subsistence harvest levels in pouncls per household and per capita, nine l,Jestern Region commun'ities, cd. L976 729 16. Subsistence harvest levels in pounds per household and per capita, four Western Region communities, cd. 1985 730 17. Subsistence harvest composition, six Western Region corrnunit'ies, June 1980 through May 1981 731 18. Subsistence harvest compositi

This project is under the direction of the Connissioner of the Department of fisn ina-Game, Don l,l. Collinsworth, the Director of the D'iv'ision of Habitat' Norman A. Cohen, and the Deputy Director, Bruce H. Baker.

Many individuals have been involved in the production of this fourth Alaska HiU"ltut Management Guide. All narratives were reviewed first by proiect and departmental reviews. The tiafi ana distributed for both technical jn nir.t ot reviewers and other contributors are compiled in append'ix A volume 2. The following lists the production team and the portion of the guide for which authors are resPonsible.* Marianne G. See, Coordinator Bob Durr, Editor Lana C. Shea, Team Leader, l,lildlife Group Leader C. l,layne Dolezal , Fisheries Group Leader

Authors: t.li I dl i fe Steve A'lbert, Habitat Bio'logist: caribou LH (with M. McDonald) ' DA, HU-H; Habitat B'iologist: belukha LH (with J. and Sue Hi'lls, -Westlund(t't Ol-SniJ"l'#) , DA; bowhead tH (wi th J- - Westl und) , . DA;. wal rus LH !h D: iiiid;i.ri, oA; polar bear LH,'DA; dabbling and diving ducks and geese DA. Michael Masters, Habitat Bio'logist: furbearers HU-T (Western Region). Michael McDonald, Game Biolog'ist: caribou LH (with S. Albert); moose LH, DA, HU-H; brown bear LH, DA, HU-H.

Rob'i n 0' Conner, Game Bi ol ogi st: furbearers HU-T ( I nteri or Reg'ion ) . John H. tllestlund, Game Biologist: belukha LH (with s. Hil'ls); bowhead LH i"iin S. Hitls); Datl sheep LH, DA, HU-H; dabbling and diving ducks and geese ttts (with R. Mooring and F. Nelson).

* LH=life history and habitat requirements; DA=d'istribution and abundance; HU-C=human use-c-ommercial fishing; HU-T=human use-trqPping; HU-H=human use-hunting; R0=regional overview (lunrnary of DA and HU-C). Authors: Fish

Durand R. Cook, Habitat Biologist: broad whitefish LH, DA.

C. Wayne Dolezal, Habitat Biologist: chinook, coho, sockeye, chum, and pink salmon LHs. Katherine A. Rowel'l , Fisherjes Biologist: Pacific herring LH, HU-C; king crab LH, HU-C; Tanner crab LH, R0; chinook, coho, sockeye, chum, and pink salmon HU-C and P; shrimp LH, R0; salmon DA (with J. Swingle); Pacific halibut HU-C (with S. Sonnichsen).

Melinda L. Rowse, Fisheries Biologist: least cisco LH, DA; saffron cod LH, DA; Pacific halibut DA.

James S. Swingle, Fisheries Technician: chinook, coho, sockeye, chum, and p'ink sa'lmon DA (with K. Rowel I ).

Sandra K. Sonnichsen, Fisheries Biologist: arctic char/Dolly Varden LH, DA; arctic grayling LH, DA; lake trout LH, DA; rainbow trout/steelhead LH; sheefish LH, DA, HU-S (including arctic char/Dolly Varden, arctic grayling, lake trout, sheefish, burbot, northern pike, rainbow trout, whitefish, and salmon); Pacific ha'libut HU-C (with K. Rowell).

Kathleen R. Thornburgh, Habitat Biologist: burbot LH, DA: northern pike LH, DA; humpback wh'itefish LH, DA; Pacific herring DA; king crab DA: rainbow trout DA; Pacific haljbut LH (with S. Sonnichsen); yellowfin sole LH (with S. Sonnichsen).

Authors: Subsistence and 0ther Local Uses of Resources

Dave Andersen, Subsistence Resource Specialist: Interior Region

Bob Schroeder, Subsistence Resource Specialist: Western Region Support Staff Lauren Barker, Librarian Carol Barnhill, Cartographer Charlotte Bridges, Systems Manager Tom Bucceri, Cartographer Patti Frink, Drafting Technician Mjchael Frost, Drafting Technician Susan H. Grainger, Clerk/Typist Juanita R. Henderson, Clerk/Typist Frances Inoue, Drafting Technician Clare A. Johnson, Clerk/Typist Greg Mil ls, Analyst/Programmer tsrooks Pangburn, Analyst/Prograrnner RoxAnn Peterson, Fisheries Technician Gay Pulley, Graphic Artist Lavonne Rhyneer, Drafting Technician Don Shields, Drafting Technician The process of developing the injtjal plan and procedures for this project involved a number of individuals who are not otherwise ltsted as authors and j contri butors . These 'inc1 ude many staf f wi th'in the Di vi s on of Habi tat, as wel I as planners and research and management coordinators of other divjsions. This group also includes all project team members and all ADF&G regional supervisors. Special mentjon should be made of the support from Alvin Ott and Lance Trasky, Regional Supervisors of the Division of Habitat for the Interior and l,Jestern regions ( respectively), and of the contributjons of Ra'i Behnert, who was the original coordinator of this project. l,le would also ljke to acknowledge the many contributions of John A. Clark, who was Director of the Division of Habitat until his death in 1985.

Introduction

Orerviw of the Habitat Mamgernent Guides Proiect

Background Alaska is an jnnense and bountiful frontier, and until just recently it was all but inconceivable that we would ever need to worry about its capacity to sustain the wealth of fish and wildlife resources for which it is renowned. But the impetus of progress has not abated, and the pressure to develop our lands and waters intensifies daily. Every year more lands in Alaska are being proposed for uses other than as wild'life habitat, especially around citjes, towns, and v'illages. These proposed uses include logging' mining, hydroelectric projects, agriculture, settlement, geothermal development, and o11 and gas leases, among others. As the number of proposals and plans for development continues to increase, so does the need to carefully and effi- ciently evaluate their possible effects upon species and habitats and to reconnend viable managerial options to guarantee that our valuable fish and wildlife resources and habitats are adequately protected and maintained. By using appropriate planning and managerial techniques most of the potential for damage and loss of access for human use can be avoided.

One of the responsibilities of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) is to assist land managers by recornnending to them the best ways and means, based upon the best available data, for protecting local fish, wildlife, and habitats against adverse effects and impacts. Because many proposals and plans for deve'lopment and land uses require a rapid response from the department, there may not be enough time for staff to actually study the specific area in which the proposed development is to occur. However, the department still needs to accumulate and assess a wide variety of information in order to prepare recomnendations for managing habitat. Therefore, the department initiated the Alaska Habitat Management Guides (AHMC) proiect to prepare reports of the kinds of information upon which its reconunenda- tions must be founded in order to responsibly and rapidly address land and water use proposals made by land managers. These guides are a maior under- taking and will be of inestimable value to the state in its efforts to avoid or mitigate adverse impacts to Alaska's great wealth of fish and wildlife.

Purpose

The Alaska Habitat Management Guides present the best availab'le information on selected fish and wildlife species: mapping and discussing their geographical distribution; assessing their relative abundance; describing their life functions and habitat requirements; identifying the human uses made of them, including harvest patterns of rural cormun'i ties; and describing their role in the state's economy. This last kind of information, because of the variety of values humans place upon fish and wildlife, is not easily derived. There are, however, severa'l methods to estimate some of the economic values assoc'iated with these resources, and such estimates have become particular'ly important in land use planning because many potentia'l1y conflicting uses must be evaluated in economic terms. Essential to assessing what might happen to fish and wildlife if their habitats are altered is information about what effects or impacts are typically associated with particular kinds of development activities. The habitat management guides therefore also provide summaries of these known effects. This information, in conjunction with compiled I ife history information, will allow those concerned to estimate how sensitive a given spec'ies might be to a specific proposed activity - whether or not, and to what degree the fish and wildl'ife are liable to be impacted. The guidance offered (a compilatlon of existing options for habitat management) is not site-specifjc. Rather, it is general jnformation availab'le to those who seek to avoid adverse impacts without placing undue restrajnts upon other land and water uses.

The completed guides coverage of fish and wildlife resources encompasses the Fish and Game Resource Management Regions established by the Joint Board of Fjsheries and Game (map 1). These reg'ions provide the most inclusive and consistent format for presenting information about fish and wildl ife resources and relating it to management activities and data collections efforts within the department.

App'l i cati ons The choice of the term "guides" rather than "plans" for the reports is consistent with the largely advisory role of the department with respect to land management issues. The guides will provide the department was well as other state, federal, and private land managers with jnformation necessary for the development of land and water use p1ans. Thus, the gu'ides themselves are not land management plans and do not provide for the ailocation or enhancement of fish and wildl'ife. Information included in a guide will be used by the department's staff in their involvement in the land use planning endeavors of various land managers. For spec'ific land use p'lanning efforts, the department joins with other agencies to reconmend particular uses of Alaska's lancis and waters, as for example in plans by the Department of Natural Resources (Susitna Area P1an, Tanana Basin Area Plan, Southeast Tidelands Area Plan). The pub'lic, by means of the pub]ic review that is an integral part of land management agencies'planning processes, then has an opportunity to evaluate any recommendations made by the ADF&G that are incorporated by the land-manag'ing agency. The guides have been designed to provide users with interrelated subject areas that can be applied to specific questions regarding habitat management. Each type of data wi I I be presented i n a separate vol ume , dS jndicated'in figure 1. Material from the AHMG database can be used, for example, to correlate informat'ion on species' seasonal and geographic habitat use with the written and mapped jnformation on known distribution and abundance. The narratives and maps regarding human uses of fish and wildljfe can be compared with abundance and dfstribution information to oD \ \ G b l|-!=qgX- : 99;ts D g U ^gE E o.E ===ta'EL-EEEgE€ o rttttl I ot(r)tto@ o :b2 D

,0 I 0) o t A o q, ! a (9 c Q) E q) ql .E c G = (! I G'

J 6 €

q) (J 2 E

o o €

G o q)

o q)

g! tJ. obtajn an indication of the overall regional patterns of distribution, abundance, and human use for the species of i nterest. The speci fi c information on habitat requirements also will relate directly to the information on impacts associated with land and water use. This in turn will form the basis for the development of habitat management guidance. An additional purpose of this project is to identify gaps in the information available on species, human uses, and associated impacts. A particular species, for example, may be known to use certain habitats during certa'in season; yet information on the timing of these use patterns may be inade- quate. In general, there is l'ittle documentation of impacts from land and water uses on species' habitats and on the human use of those species or on the economic values associated with the use of fish and wildlife resources.

To maintain their usefulness these habitat management guides are des'igned to be periodical'ly updated as new research and habitat management options are reported to fill data gaps. Users of these guides are advised to consult with the appropriate species experts and area biologists, however, to check on the availability of more recent information.

Statewide Volumes

Besides the statewide volume detail ing the regional I ife histories and habitat requirements of selected species of fish and wildlife, three other reports have been developed as statew'ide volumes, in which information is presented for statewide as well as for specific regiona'l concerns. 1) The statewide volumes on impacts surnmarjze the effects of major types of development activities and land and water uses of fish and wildlife, the'ir habitats, and their use by people. The activities discussed are those actually occurring in the state or expected to occur in the future. This survey of impacts is founded upon the most recent pertinent literature. 2) The statewide habitat management guidance volume is a synthesis of 'informat'ion regarding habitat management based upon the impacts literature. The following uses of land and water resources and types of development occur or are like1y to occur in Alaska, and they are, therefore, addressed jn the statewide impacts and/or guidance volumes: o Oil and gas development " Harbors and shoreline structures o Water deve'lopment o Pl acer mi n'ing o Strip and open pit mining " Underground mining o Seafood process'ing Silviculture and timber processing Transportation - road, rai1, air Transmi ssion corri dors Grain and hay farming

Pi pe1 i nes

Geothermal energy development

Red meat and dairy farming

Settl ement

" Fj re management " Offshore prospecting and m'ining " Cornnercial fi shing Finally,3) a statewide economic volume provides an overview of the role of fish and wildlife resource use in the regiona'l and state economies. Fish and wildlife are renewable resources whose uses have historically formed the basis for human economies throughout the state. Although fjsh and wildlife use st'ill plays a crjtical role in economies throughout the state, the grow'ing complexity of the Alaska economy makes the valuation of these uses increasingly difficult. The recent growth in the Alaska economy has resulted in an increasing divergence between market and nonmarket use of the state's natural resources. This is further compounded by growing urbanization, which'is often centered around a large-scale project in contrast to more dispersed rural resource utilization. As the plans for development continue to increase, the need to evaluate the tradeoffs involved with sometimes competing land uses is necessary. Because of the wide variety of values (some of which are infinite), the task of translating the "infinite value" of wild resources into the more restrictive terms of economic assessment is difficult at best. Its inherent difficulty is compounded by the circumstance that the data necessary for such an assessment are, with few exceptions, incomplete or unavailable at the present time. The economic data on comnercial fisheries, for examp'le, are relative'ly complete; and in those regions with significant comrnercial fisheries the dollar value of the fish resource can be fairly accurate'ly estimated. For other regions and other resources, however, economic analysis must remain partial or tentative until a sound database ex'ists. Continuing effort is being made by the department and by other agencies to compile such a comprehensive database in order to more accurately describe the great economic value of fish and wildlife to the people both within and outside the State of Alaska.

8 Regi onal Vol uttps

Narratives. Regional information on the distrjbution, abundance, and human u lected fish and wildlife species is available for each region of the state. The narrative vo'lumes for the Southwest, Southcentral, Arctic, and l,lestern and Interior regions provide the most current estimates of species' distribution and relative abundance and delineate the regional and subregional patterns , locations, and types of human uses of fi sh and wildlife resources. The narrative information for Southeast Alaska is organized somewhat differently: a brief summary of the distribut'ion and abundance of selected species is presented within the Alaska Habitat Management Guide Reference Maps for the Southeast Region, and more detailed information on the human use of fish and wildlife is available in the Division of Habitat technical report entitled Human Use and Economic Overview of Selected Fish and Wildlife in Southeast Alaska. Regiona'l versions of the final Life History and Habitat Requirements of Fish and !'lj ldl ife volume were released with the pub'lication of each regiona'l database. Although these volumes contain much of the same information found in the fina'l report, the compiled volume supercedes each of the earlier regional volumes.

\&stern and Interior Regions

Organization and Use of the Guide

Narratives. The statewide life history volume and the guide to the Western liFiiFior regions are closely related and interdependent. The first highlights important aspects of selected species l'ife histories, emphasiz'ing the interrelationships of the species with their habitats. For many species the I ife h'istories inc'lude information for the Western, Interior, and Arctic, Southwest, and Southcentral regions. The distribution and human use volume for the Interior and b{estern regions provides the most current estimates of species' distribution and relative abundance and delineates the reg'ional and subregional patterns, locat'ions, and types of human uses of fish and wildlife resources. This volume provides an understanding of the importance of fish and wild'life to the people within and outside the Western and Interior regions.

Because of the wide spectrum of human fish and wildlife, this volume is divided into four topical categories. These include 1) hunting, 2) commercial fishjng, 3) sportfishing, and 4) subsistence use. For categories 1 through 3, data are presented by selected species, and the information pertains to the entire reg'ion and the specific management areas within the region, dS appropriate. Al I reports by species are based upon data collected by the Divisions of Game, Sport Fish, and Cormercial Fisheries, as well as the Conmercial Fisheries Entry Comnission, the North Pacific Fisherjes Management, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the International Pacific Hal ibut Corrnission. For the fourth category of human use information, the Western and Interior regions have been discussed separately to portray patterns of subsistence use of local fish and wjldlife resources. The patterns of use described in these narratives are based prinrarily upon comnunity studies coordinated by the Djvjsion of Subsistence, with addjtional source materials from other anthropo'logical stud'ies on the h'istory and patterns of activity in the subregions. Maps. A major portion of the guides proiect in the Western and Interior id!'Tons was committed to the production of updated fish and wildlife maps at two scales of resolution. Species distributions and human use were mapped at a reference scale of 1:250,000 and then r{ere mapped at the index scale of 1:1,000,000 for most subjects. Some reference maps for marine species were actually prepared at the 1:1,000,000-sca1e because that is the most appropriate scale to portray the level of detail of data on those species distributions. Reference maps are being reproduced as blue-line copies compiled in cataiogues that are available at ADF&G offices of the reg'ion. Aclditional copies will be available for other users, at cost of reproduction, from our contract vendor. These maps can quite easily be updated. The index maps are being printed'in color and will be included in atlases for al'l reg'ions except Southeast. Habitat management concerns in Southeast Alaska do not require this resolution of information. For the Western and Interior regions, there are approximately 945 reference maps that depict fjsh and shellfish species distribution, wild'life species d'istribution, subsistence, commerciai, recreational, and general use of fjsh and wi I dl i fe.

Species Selection Criteria

Each species covered in the guides was selected because it met the following cliteria: 1) its habitat is representative of some portion of the spectrum of the hab'itats in the trlestern and Interior regions (tfris criterion ensures that regional hab'itats are well represented);2) it constitutes an important resource to human users in the regjon;3) the species or its habitat is liable to be adversely affected by present or proposed land or water uses; and 4) adequate information on its life history, abundance, and distribution was avai lable.

Based on the above criteria and the prioritized requests of each division' the species l'ist for the Western and Interior regions was developed to include 29 indjvidual spec'ies, plus species groups, dabbling and diving ducks (10), and geese (4). The indiv'idual species are as follows:

10 Belukha whale Arctic char/Dol]y Varden Chinook salmon Bowhead whale Arctic grayling Chum salmon Pacific walrus Broad whitefish Coho salmon Polar bear Burbot P'ink salmon Brown bear Humpback whitefish Sockeye salmon Caribou Lake trout King crab Dall sheep Least cisco Pacific halibut Moose Northern pike Saffron cod Rainbow trout/steelhead Shrimp Sheefish Tanner crab Yel lowfin sole

Many other species, including but not limited to the following, are also important to consider when making land or water management decisions or p'lans :

Muskox Snowy ow1 Alaska blackfish hlolverine Gyr falcon Smelt Beaver Rough-legged hawk Lingcod Land otter Golden Eagle Hardshell clam Mink Ribbon seal Starry flounder Wolf Bearded seal Sand lance Lynx Spotted seal Sculpin Marten Gray whale Capel in Spruce falcon Seabirds Peregrine falcon Shorebirds Loons Grebes Tundra swan

Limitations of Information One goal of the guides project is to identify gaps in the documented information available when presenting data on species life history and habitat requirements, species distribution, abundance, and harvest, impacts from land and water development, and the value of human uses of fish and wildlife. Specific limitations of information are discussed jn the text of each of the species narratives in each volume. However, majorinadequacies jn the database on spec'ies are highlighted below so that research on fish and wildlife resources may be directed toward rectifying them. hljthin the Western and Interior regions, insufficiently documented areas for speci es i ncl ude the fol I ow'ing :

Mammal s/B'irds o Waterfowl habitat preferences and requirements by season and life stage o Capacity of drainages or other site spec'ific areas to support wildlife popu I ati ons

11 Inventory of extent and quality of habi tat

Minimum usable home range size and optimum habitat characteri stics Distribution and abundance of Dall sheep during winter and the breeding and lambing periods

Habitat requirements and limiting factors for sheep in Tanana Uplands/- Yukon o Factors influencing winter survival of younger age classes of sheep o Importance of mineral licks to sheep

" Dra i nage-spec'i fi c i nformati on on the number of hunters , trappers , effort, and harvest levels for each furbearer and game species o Ltjstribution and abundance of furbearer species " Effects of fjre on sheep and carjbou range " Recent hunter effort data for nonpermit caribou hunts o Movements, population distribution, food habits and general eco'logy of caribou in Western Alaska, the upper Kuskokw'im Va1'ley, and portions of the l.lestern Arctic carjbou herd range and the central Yukon River dra'inage.

Fish

Inforrnation spec'ifically applicable to Alaska on the life cyc'le and habitat requirements of Pacific salmon, Pacific herring, crabs, and freshwater fish

Ut'il ization of nearshore habi tats by shel I f i sh, groundf i sh, Pac'ific herring, and Pacific salmon during their marine life-stage The seasonal movements and migrational patterns of salmon, marine fjsh and shellfish, and freshwater fish The overal'l population sjze estimate of groundfish species, crab, shrimp, herring, salmon, and freshwater fish, particularly for the commercially harvested species where present abundance estimates are based Iargely on samples of 1ega1, harvestab'le individuals; along this 1ine, almost nothing is known of the magnitude of the coho salmon runs in the regions The causes and extent of the natural fluctuations in populations of groundfish, shellfish, herring, and salmon

72 o The determination of the integrity of spawning populations (stocks) and their intraspecies interaction with other populations ( i.e. , for herring, crab, shrimp, groundfish, and salmon) The subject of impacts to fish and wjld]ife from activities associated with land and water development is weakly documented in general, but it is especially'lacking in empirical studies on impacts upon nearshore habitats and the cumulative effects of chronic, low-level impacts. Studies specific to Alaska are nearly nonexistent. Final]y, with the exception of the data on the cormercial fishing industries, very little information is available regarding the economic value of fish and wildlife use, especially as regards sport hunting and fishing, whether guides or not, trapping of both sealed and unsealed species, and the various nonconsumptive uses of fish and wildlife. This last category jncludes such uses as photography, wjldlife viewing, and various recreational activities that are not easily quantified. This regional guide to habitat management is conceived therefore as necessarily incomplete: as new research and habitat management options are reported' the guide will be periodically updated. Species experts and area biologists should be contacted regarding the availability of more recent 'informati on .

Orerviw of the \ftstern and Interior Regions

The Western and Interior regions (map 2) include the Kuskokwim, Kaiyuh, Ray, l{hite, and Crazy mountains and the southern s'lopes of the Endicott and Phi I 'ip Smi th mountai ns (eastern Br"ooks Range ) . A few of the l arger ri ver basins in the regions include the drainages of the Yukon, Andreafsky, Innoko, Koyukuk, Chandalar, Sheenjek, Porcupine, Tanana, Kantishna, Delta, Nabesna, ch'isana, Fortym'i'le, Kuskokwim, Kwethluk, Aniak, Holitna, stony, Big, Kanektok, Arolik, and Goodnews rivers. Marine waters associated with the regions are compri sed of the Kuskokwim, Hazen , Hopper, Kokechi k, Scarmon, and Pastol bays and Baird Inlet, and the Bering Sea to the west of the Yukon-Kuskokw'im delta, including Nelson, Nunivak, and st. Matthew i s I ands. The biophysica'l , biotic, and human resources of the region are brief 'ly surmarized below. Readers des'iring a more detailed and extensive discussion of th-ese pharacteristics of the regions should consult the A'laska Regional Profiles.t

1 Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center. N.d. Alaska Regional profi'les: Southwest Region, Yukon Region. Prepared for the Office of the Governor and Joint Feder^al/State Land Use Planning Conmission.

13 --...- --.

occ 'a .9 trooo bbcG gvl 3E o c') }E (u L L o t (u +)

-o g (o g L (u +J v) 3o o +) (aF o (n qJ L i:. (o ! 5 o

(u -cF

C\J

.o =

t4 Biophysical Features The Yukon-Kuskokwim delta in the l.lestern Region'is'in the transitional cljmat'ic zone, with a relatively narrow range of seasonal and diurnal temperatures as compared to the continental cl'imatjc zone of the Interior Region. In the continental cl imatic zone, temperatures 9re general 1y exfreme jn both surnmer and winter, and prec'ipitation and wind are normal ly 1ight. Fog, precipitation, and winds frequent'ly occur along the coast of th; Western Region. The weather in the regions is the resu'lt of the interaction among g1oba1 air movements, land topography' and storms that move northeast across the Bering Sea and the North Pacific 0cean. Sea ice formation in the Bering Sea begins in 0ctober. The ice pack persists through May, although the ice begins to melt, break uP, and move northward in Apri1.

The topography'the of the Western Region is dominated by the Yukon .and Kuskokwim rivers ana marshy al luv'ial pla'in known as the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta. The topography of the Interior Region is also dom'inated by the Yukon and Kuskokwim rivers, a'lthough there are also extensive upland areas in addition to broad alluvial lowlands such as the Yukon and Minto flats. Permafrost is discontinuous throughout the regions. The entire marjne area of the Western Region ljes within the continental shelf.

Bi ota The vegetation of the Western Reg'ion is primari1y dry alpine tundra, wet tundra, and moist tundra. These hiShly varied tundra communit'ies are comprised of herbaceous sedges, grasses, and 1ow-growing forbs, lichens, and dwarf shrubs, with a greater percentage clf shrubs where sojl conditions are drier. The vegetation of the Interior Region is primarily closed and.gpel canopied foresis comprised of various assoc'iations of white spruce, black spruce, quaking aspen, white birch, balsam poplar, and tamarack trees. The treeline is at 1,000 ft or less along the lower Yukon, at 2'000 ft on southern slopes of the Brooks Range and northern slopes of the Alaska_Range., ancl at 2,000'to 3,500 ft a'long the Alaska-Yukon border. Low and tall shrub communities comprised primarily of willow, a1der, and shrub birch occur on f'loodpla'ins, Iowland boggy areas, and mountain slopes 'in both regions. Aquatic herbaceous communities are prevalent in lake-dotted wet tundra areas. The variety of habitats in the Western and Interior regions support harvestable popuiations of caribou, moose, Da'li sheep, brown.and black bears, furbearers, waterfowl, sma11 game such as ptarmigan and grouse, Pacific walrus, rjnged, spotted, and bearded seall , belukha whale, and a wide variety of fish, inctuO'ing salmon, whitefish, northern pike, arctic grayling, char, herring, and Pacific halibut, to name a few.

15 Human Activities in the Regions the Many human activities in the Western and Interior-re-g.ions revolve around subsistence, ,..r.utional,-iruppin6, and commercial uses of fish and wildlife. com- r..iiii fisfring, reindeer herding, guided hunting.and fishing ;;ip;;.fur tann"ii''g ani'seiing, and seafood processing are important segments of the local economics. service-related businesses and government provide the primary sources of employment in Uotfr regionsl Fairbanks, McGrath, and Bethel are the "ug.emp'loyment centers of the area.

16 MarineM

Belukha l^lhale Distribution and Abundance Western Region

I. REGiONWI DE iNFORMATION Informat'ion js organized and presented for the entire l,lestern Region rather than by gime management unit (GMU) because the data are not available by GMU. A. Regi ona'l D'i str j buti on Beiukhas in Alaska comprise two stocks: the Gu1f of Alaska stock and the Bering-Chukchi' stock. 0nty whales of the latter stock occurintheW6sternRegion(SeamanandBurns1981) Belukhas are present fiom spring through autumn along the coast from northern Kuskokwim Bay to the mouths of the Yukon River (ibid.). The earliest reported sighting along the coast was on 20 May'1978 near Cape Romanzoff; the latest was in mid November at Hoopei gay; and the largest was of over 100 whales jn July 1981 off the mouths of the Yukon River (Frost et al. 1982). "Belukhas are often sighted and occasional'ly hunted by resjdents of Kipnu!' Toksook Bay,-Tanunak, and Hooper Bay, where they are.apparently more common in spring and autumn than in mid summer" (Seaman and BurnS 1981).'j In reient years, belukhas have only occasionally been seen n Kuskokwim Bay, primari 1y near Qui nhagak 'in summer (Frost et al. 1982). A'lthough belukhas are present around Nunivak island in the ice-iree monthi, seasonal use patterns are uncjear. As the abundance of schooling fishes declines in coastal areas in autumn, most belukhas move olfshore. Depending on the_extent of the winter ice, much of the Bering-Chukchi stock of belukhas winters in the Western Reg'ion in the ice fringe (Harrison and Hall 1978, Seaman and Burns 1981). In March and Apri1, belukhas are wideiy distributed as they beg'in to move coastward or north in shore leads. B. Areas Used Seasonally and for Life Functions For more speci fi c di strj buti on i nformati on , see the pri ntec 1:1,000,000-icale Atlas that accompanies the Alaska Habj tat Nanigement Gu'ide for the Interior and l,Jestern regions and the 1:256,000-sca1e reference maps located 'in ADF&G area offices. The following categories have been used to describe belukha distribution: o Known movements assoc'iated with feed'ing " Known maior concentration areas C. Factors Affecting Distribution Although belukhas have occasiona'l1y been recorded outside their presenl range, there'is no evidence that belukhas were ever ibundant solth of it (Lowry 1985). Predation by sharks (Chondrjchthyes) and killer whales (Orcinus orca) and competitjon ior food mai ilt important factors i nTterfiTn'ing thei r- -southern limit (Sergeant 1978). Distribution of belukhas in Alaska is

19 probably most affected by sea 'ice conditions and the distribution 6t p..i (Lowry 1985). (For more details, see the belukha whale lifi History ano Haoitat Requirements narrarive.) D. l4ovements Between Areas See section A. above. E. Popu'lation Size Estimation Althougfr records of belukha s'ightings are numerous' no comprehen- tlu. iiru.yr have been undertak-en to estimate the abundance of the Bering-Chu-kchi stock. Population estimation is complicated by the whalei' large and seasonoily variable range, the unknown degree crf i niercnange of animal s between surmerin-g areas, the dark. . and belukhas' therefore inconspicuous color of iuveniles, -and the huOiiai, which is usually either among ice floes or in turbid estuarit.re areas (ibid. ). Most rel iable estimates are f rom aerial irruuyt wirh assumed correctjon factors for unseen animals_(Lourry ;; ;i. 1982). Current population estimates assunp a I imited int"..i',.ng" bf animal s beiween surmering areas (Lowry 1985)' Although iome Oelukhas are thought to. sunrner along thg ice 999e, little- information is availabll with which to estimate their numbers; consequently, CUrrent popul ation estimates can be considet'eo conservative ('ibid. ). F. Regional Abundance Beiukhas of the Bering-Chukch'i stock migrate in and out of the Wositin Region at an u-nknown rale; a popu.lation estimate for the W.ii.tn Re-gion, therefore, i s n6t possible or sensible' The i s mi nimum number of be'l ukhas i n the Beri ng-Chukchi stock estimated f,o be 15,000 to 18,000 animals (Lowry 1985). Burns.ancl a;;;;--ifg85) estimate the western arctic belukha pop_u'19!i9n' iniiuOlnb animals in Soviet waters, to be in excess gf 25'000 animal s. G. Historic Abundance flo .ltinntes of former population abundance were found, although in the early to mid i9d0's belukhas were reportedly more common neai Goodnews Bay, and Jacksmith Bay rhan they afq low Quinhadak, higher iFrori-"t ui. lg82). . Harvesis were estimated to have been ifr.n alsu (Lowry 1985). It seems unlikely that populaticin numbers have changed much from historic levels.

REFERENCES Burns, J.J., ancl G.A. Seaman. 1985. B'iology and ecology' Pages 1-129 in inu.iiigut.iorrs of bel ukha whal es i n witers of western and northern Ataska. Fi;;i rept. RU-612. Submitted to Alaska OCSEAP, Juneau, AK. Frost, K.J., L.F. Lowry, and J.J. Burrts. L982. Distribution of marine nranunals in the coaital zone clf the Bering Sea during slmmer and autumn. Final rept., l,l0AA, OcsEAP Contract NA-81-RAC-00050. 166 pp. llarrison,- c.s., and J.D. Hall. 1978. Alaskan distribution of the beluga ;h;ie (Det'phinapterus leucas). Can. Field-Nat. 92:235-24I.

20 Lowry, L.F. 1985. Belukha whale. In J.J. Burns, K.J. Frost, and L.F Lowry, eds. Marine mammal species accounts. t,'lildl. Tech. Bull. N0.7. ADF&G, Juneau. Lowry, 1.F., K.J. Frost, and R.R. Nelson. 1982. Investigat'ions of belukha whales in coastal waters of western and northern Alaska: marking and tracking of whales in Bristol Bay. Ann. rept. 0CSEAP Contract No. NA-81-00049. 43 pp.

Seaman, G.A., and J.J. Burns. 1981. Preliminary results of recent stud'ies of belukhas in Alaskan waters. Rept. Int. t^lhal. Comm. 3I:567-574, sc/32lsM 13.

Sergeant, D.E. I978. Eco'logical isolation jn some Cetacea. (Contribution to a symposium on marine mammals, International Theriological, Moscow, June 6-12, L974.) In A.N. Svertsov, €d. Recent advances in the study of whales and seals. Akad. Nauk, Moscow.

Bowhead Whale Distribution and Abundance Western Reqion

I. REGIONWI DE INFORMATION Bowheads in Alaska belong to the Western Arctic stock, wh'ich occurs in the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort seas. Information is presented for the entire western arctic stock rather than by game management uni t because of the data avai I abl e. For a more complete account of bowhead whale djstribution and abundance, see that narrative in volume 2 of the Alaska Hab'itat Management Guide for the Arctic Region. A. Regional Distribution Bowheads probably occur in the Western Region only in winter (December-February). Most of the western arctic stock is thought to winter in polynyas south and west of St. Lawrence and St. Matthew islands and in the ice front, which, in years of extensive jce coverage, ffidy extend as far south as the Pribilof Islands area (Braham et al. 1980, Brueggeman 1982). A portion of the population winters west of St. Lawrence Island in the Gulf of Anadyr, but the number is unknown. Although some bowheads remained in the Bering Sea during ice-free months as late as the late 1800's and early 1900's, recent surveys i ndicate that few, j f dry, do so now (Bockstoce and Botkjn 1980, Dahlheim et al. 1980). B. Areas Used Seasonaliy and for Life Functions No maps have been produced for bowhead whales in the Western Region because data are jnsufficient. C. Factors Affecting Distribution Bowhead whales apparently m'igrate in response to changes in ice conditions, moving north (out of the Western Region and into the Arctic Reg'ion) as leads open in the spring and south before freeze-up (Lowry et al. L978, Liungblad et al. 1985). Distribution of prey may determine whale distribution in summer (t,lursig 1985). A'lthough bowhead behavior and distribution have been shown to change in response to various types of human-caused disturbance (Reeves et al. 1984, Richardson et al. 1985), there is not,,r very little human-caused disturbance in the Western Region; it js therefore probably not an important factor affect'ing current bowhead djstribu- tjon in that region. (See the ImpaCts of Land and Water Use volume of this series for additional information regarding impacts.) When whaling began in the Bering sea in the mid 1800's, at least some bowheads summered in the Bering Sea; whalers then took more and more whales, and now most of the remaining population summers in the Canadian Beaufort Sea (Bockstoce and Botkin 1980). Nearly a century after the last major whaling efforts, the djstribution of bowhead whales continues to be affected by historical whal ing patterns

23 (ib.id). (For more information, see the bowhead whale Life iiito"V ana HaUitat Requ'irements narrative in volume 1.) D. Movements Between Areas Factors affecting movements between winter and summer areas are not known, 6ut distributions of ice and food probably hauu some infiuence. In spring, bowheads move through the stra.it of Anadyr and past the brest end of st. Lawrence Island; some iravel close to shore, and. another grgup migrates farther offshore (Braham et al. 1980). A few whales puis around the east end of the island, althougl tlit,9o?t irot appear to be as important a mi grat'ion route ( i bi d. ) . Migradion may occur in three or four waves se_gregated by age jnA sex, wiifr younger individuals in the first waves and large males and females with calves in the last waves tiUiO.l. Waves may also be a result of the perlodic.open'ing inO c'tbsing of thd migration pathway _(_tf,. lg9 leads)(Braham unO Krogmai lgl7, t-iungUtad et al. 1985). (See the bowhead whale t-ite History- an-d Habitat Requirements narrative in volume I for ro." i-nformatjon, jncluding autumn migration.) E. Popu'lation Size Estimation fii,imates of present abundance of bowheads are based on counts of an'jmal s passing Point Barrow drt!!9 spring rigiuiion. Counts have been conducted since 1978 on the sh6re-fast ice near Barrow. The technique assumes 1) thgt *ost of the populat'ion passes Point Barrow during tl. observation period; 2) that most of the whales- passing th9 observation post are seen, recorded accurate'ly, ald nol duplicated; ahO S) that the number of whales passing the post Oui^ing periods of poor v js'ibility can be. est'imated accurately from ifrb number of'animals passing iust before and after that peri oA ( Biaham Ig8? , Krogman !982 , Zeh et al ' 1985 ) ' bensusing procedures are continually being_ refjned and assumpt,i6ns'tested to increase the accuracy of the estimates (ibid.). F. Regional Abundance goiheads of the western arctic stock migrate 'in and out of lhe 1n1estern Region, and the proportion of the po.pulatjon in the region at any given-for time is not known; therefore' a popu'lation est'imaie the blestern [eg'ioq a]one is not poiriut.. The current best estimate of bowhead numbers in the western arct'ic stock is 4,417 (95% Confidence Interval 2,613-6,221) (It|lC in press). The estjmated number of bowhead whales fras increased sjnce 1978, most likely due to increased techniques. The western arctic census effort anci improved jnformation stoct< is probably increasing, but current does noi allow'calculition of the rate of increase (Breiwick.et ;i. 1984). The western arct'ic stock is the largest remaitring stock of'bowheads jn the world (Braham 1982)'

24 G. Historic Abundance Breiwick et al. (1984), using estimates of removals, the range of estimates for the current population, mortality rates of 0.04-0.08, and recruitment rates of 0.01-0.05' estimated the western arctic bowhead stock to have been 14,000 to 26,000 whales before commercial whaling began in 1848. Commercial whalers killed approximately 19,000 to 21,000 whales during the period 1848-1915 (Bockstoce and Botkin 1980). Eberhardt and Breiwick (1980) estimated that the min'imum populat'ion size, wh'ich occurred in about I9I2, was not less than 600 whales.

RE FERENCES

Bockstoce, J.R., and D.B. Botk'in. 1980. The historical status and reductjon of the western arctic bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus) population by the pe'lagic whal ing industry, 1848-1914. Final rept. to NMFS, Contract No. 03-78-M02-0212.

Braham, H.W. 1982. Comments on the world stocks of bowhead whales and estimat'ing total population abundance in the western arctjc. Paper submitted to the First conference on the biology of bowhead whales: populat'ion assessment, 25'29 January 1982, Anchorage, Al aska. Braham, H.W., and B.D. Krogman. 1977. Population biology of the bowhead (Balaena mysticbtus) and beluga (Delphinuterus l.eucag) whales in tfre Berin!;Cfiulchi, and Beaufort seas. Processed rept. NWAFC, NMFS,NOAA. 29 pp.

Braham, H.W., M.A. Fraker, and B.D. Krogman. 1980. Spring migration of the western arctic populatjon of bowhead whales. Mar. Fish. Rev. 42(9-10):36-46.

Breiwi ck n J .M. , L. L. Eberhardt, and H . l,l. Braham. 1984. Popul at'ion dynamics of western arctic Bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus). Can J. Fi sh. Aquat. Sci . 41 : 484-496. bowhead whales in Brueggemen, J.J. 1982. Early'ldl spring distribution of the Beri ng Sea. J . t^li . Manage . 46:1 ,036- 1 ,044. Dahlheim, M., T. Bray, and H. Braham. 1980. Vessel survey for bowhead whales in the Bering and Chukchi seas, June-Ju'ly 1978. Mar. Fjsh. Rev. 42(9-10):51-57. Eberhardt, 1.1., and J.M. Breiwjck. 1980. Min'imal historical size of the western arctic population of bowhead whales. Mar. Fjsh. Rev. 42(9-L0):?7 -29.

25 Itllc (Internat'ional l'lhal ing Conrnission). In press. Rept. Sci . Commi ttee.

Krogman, B.D. 198?. Methodology for ice-based censusing of bowhead whales. Pages 43-66 in T.F. Albert, €d. Proceedings of the first conference on the biology of the bowhead whale, Balaena mysticetus: popu'lation assessment. 25-29 January 1982, AncForage, Al aska .

Ljungblad, D.K., S. Moore, and D.R. Van Schoik. 1985. Observed densities of bowhead wha'le, Balaena mysticetus, in the Beaufort, Chukchi, and Bering seas from 1979 through 1983 as noted by aeria'l survey. Abstr. Third conference on the biology of the bowhead whale, 2I-23 January 1985, Anchorage, Alaska.

Lowry,1.F., K.J. Frost and J.J. Burns. 1978. Food of ringed seals and bowhead whales near Point Barrow, Alaska. Can. Field Nat. 92:67 -70.

Reeves, R.R., D.K. Ljungblad, and J.T. Clarke. 1984. Bowhead whales and acoustic seismic surveys in the Beaufort Sea. Polar Record 22:?7I-280.

Richardson, t^l.J., R.A. Davis, R.C. Evans, and P. Norton. 1985. Distribution of bowheads and industrial activity, 1980-84. Pages 255-306 jn W.J. Richardson, ed. Behavior, djsturbance responses and distTTbution of bowhead whales, Balaena mysticetus i'n the eastern Beaufort Sea, 1980-84. Unpubl.-TFfromfBryan TX, for MMS, Reston VA. 306 pp.

Wursig, B. 1985. The behavior of undisturbed bowhead whales, Ba'laena mysticetus - a rev'iew of present knowledge. Abstr.-Tffinl conference on the bio'logy of the bowhead whale, 2I-23 January 1985, Anchorage, Alaska. Zeh, J.K., D.B. Krogman, and R. Sonntag. 1985. Statistical considerations in estimating the number of bowhead whales, Balaena mysticetus, from jce-based visual census data. Abstr.-TnTm conference on the biology of the bowhead whale, 2L-23 January 1985, Anchorage, Alaska.

?6 Pacific Walrus Distribut'ion and Abundance Western Region i. REGIONWIDE INFORMATION Data are presented for the whole popu'lation of Pacif ic wal rus rather than by game management unit (Gt'lU) or region, because of the available i nformati on. A. Regional Distribution Uuiing winter, Pacific walruses are concentrated in two main breeding areas of the Bering Sea, one southwest of St. Lawrence Island ind the other in northern Bristol Bay and outer Kuskokwjnl Bay (Fay 1982, Fay et al. 1984). From late March to June, as tlte patk ice recedes, the population d'ivjdes into summering groups. broups consisting almost entirely of males move 'into the Bristol Bay irea, northein Alaska Peninsula, St. Matthew, Hall, Punuk, ald Di|mede 'islands, and several haulouts in Anadyr Gul f ( ibid. ) . 0ther groups, consisting mostly of adult females, immature animals, and a few adult males move northward into the Chukchi Sea, where they summer along the southern edge of the ice near the Siberian and Alaskan coasts and occasiona'l'ly as far north as 75o N. In Qctober and November, the northern summering groups swim southward, usually ahead of the advancing ice, ioining adult males moving north to terrestrial haulouts in the Bering Stra'it region (.ibid. ). By December and January, .wal ruses agai n concentrate 'in the two main breed'ing areas (ibid. ). (See section D. Movements Between Areas for more details.) B. Areas Used Seasonally and for Life Functions For more information concerning seasonal and life function use areas, see the 1:250,000-scale reference mapS' located jn ADF&G area offices, and the 1:1,000,000-scale maps jn the Atlas to the guide for the Western and Interior regions. The following categories have been used to describe walrus distribution: o Known haulout concentration areas o Known migration Patterns C. Factors Affecting Distribution In Alaska, two main factors affecting the distribution of walruses are water depth and the characterisi.ics of sea ice (Lowry 1985). Walruses are'primarily benth'ic feeders and, in the Bering-Chukchi reg'ion, seldom remain in water too deep for efficient feeding; th6y aie rarely seen in water deeper than 100 m (ibid.). When the suminer pack jie edge js over the deep_water of the continental slope ahO the sea bed is not accessible to the benthic-feeding walruses, many animals may use terrestrial haulouts such as Cape Ljsburne and Wrangel Island (Fay 1982). Durjng much of the year' walruses are found in association with sea ice but are generally not found in areas where thick ice covers more than 80% of the sea surface ('ibid.). The distribution of Pacjfic walruses has changed

?7 as thei r numbers have changed i n response to exp'loi tat'ion and recovery (table 1, Fay et al. 1984). Disturbance by humans can affect distribution: increased vehicle traffic has apparently caused abandonment of a traditional terrestrial haulout in the Gulf of Anadyr (ibid.); the Prib'ilof Islands haulout areas have never been reoccupied following extirpation of the walrus herds by commercjal hunters; and King Island, although not used as a haulout when the village on the island was inhabited, was used by thousands of walrusei 'in summer (Frost et al. 1982) until increas'ing disturbance caused them to again abandon the island (Ne1son, pers. comm.). (See the Life History and Hab'itat Requirements narrative 'in volume 1 of the guide for the Arctic Region for more information.) D. Movements Between Areas Fay's (1982, Fay et al. 1984) summarizations of walrus d'istribution by month are the basjs of the following section. 1. January. Because of the lack of daylight and storms. few 6ta TIe available for this month except from inhabitants of D'iomede, St. Lawrence, and Nunivak islands and from an aerial survey of the Bristol Bay area. Most of the reported walruies from near the islands are subadult and adult males; the location of females and young is not known for this month but is assumed to be similar to that of February. 2. February. From aerial surve_ys-and_ iceb.reaker cruises, it appe'ars that animals are regularly clumped jn two main areas' from the St. Lawrence polynya southv{ard and in the area south of Nunivak Island and Kuskokwim Bay. Adu'l t males and females, subadults, and young are found in these groups; the adult ratio is about I male to 10 females in areas where breeding activity has been observed. 3. March. Early in March, distribution is sim'ilar to that of E6ruary, with the main breeding herds still in p'lace. Some an'imals begin the northward migration by the end of the month in some years, depending on ice conditions. Fay and Lowry (i981) found that although breeding activity continued south of Kuskokwim Bay, over 700 nnles had moved south into Bristol Bay in March, a large increase over the two months before. Smatt groups of subadult males were found nearer the southern edge of the pack ice. 4. Rpiit. Although two main groups are still distinguishable in AFTJT, the northward m'igrat'ion is clearly underway' and the two groups appear to spread and merge to a greater extent. Animals wintering near St. Lawrence begin to move north by the thousands through Anadyr Strait, between Gambell and Cape Chaplin, and females and young from the southern group move north around Nunivak Island. Adult and subadult males, presumably from the southern wintering group, congregate at terrestrial haulouts in the Bristol Bay area. 5. May. Females and young from the St. Lawrence wintering group continue passing through Bering Strait and appear to concen-

28 Tabl e 1. Use by t^la1 ruses of Haulout Areas on Alaskan Shores of the Northern Bering Sea and Chukchi Sea in the Present Century

Hau I out 1920' s 1930' s 1940' s 1950's 1960's 1970-80' s

Egg Is. Unk. Unk. Unk. None None I rreg.

Besboro is. Unk. Unk. Unk. None I rreg. I rreg.

Cape Darby Unk. Unk. Unk. Unk. None I rreg.

Sledge Is. I rreg. I rreg. None None None I rreg. Punuk Is. ( summer) I rreg. I rreg. I rreg. I rreg. None Reg.

(fall) None I rreg. I rreg. Reg. Reg. Reg. St. Lawrence Is. Kialegak Pt. None None None None None I rreg.

N. E. Cape None None None None None I rreg.

Sa1 ghat I rreg. I rreg. None None None I rreg.

C. Chibukak I rreg . I rreg. None I rreg. Reg. Reg.

King Is. Un k. Unk. Unk. None None I rreg.

Little Diomede Unk. I rreg. None None Reg. Reg.

Cape Thompson Un k. I rreg. Unk. None None None

Pt. Hope Unk. I rreg. Unk. None None None

Cape Lj sburne Un k. I rreg. I rreg. None None I rreg.

Source: Fay et al. 1984.

?9 trate along the Alaskan Chukchi Sea coast, a'lthough data from the siberian coast are lacking. Males move only as far as Anadyr Gulf and the chirikof Basin, where they congregate on the remaining ice long after the females and young hayg passed. Females from the southern wintering group are still moving ,up the eastern side of the Bering, Sea to- eastern st. Lawrence Island and Norton sound. Ma'les still occupy haulouts in the Bristol Bay area; another smaller group of males reoccupied the St. Matthew-Hall islands area in 1980, apparently for the first time in about 50 years._ 6. Jirire. Most females, young, and a few subadul t and adul t mfiEs have moved through Bering Strait by the end of June. Animals remaining behind are mainly adult males that surmer (mainly |'l,alrus principally'in- Anadyr Gu1f, Bristol Bay in the islands) , eastern Navarjn Basin (St. Matthew and Hal I islands), and the Bering Strait area (the Punuk Islands). l{alruses haul out interm'ittently on these islands during the summer between long feeding excursions that take them far out to sea ( Fay, pers. connn. ). Again, the concentration of sightings only along the Alaskan chukchj coast may be due to a shortage of data from Soviet waters. 7. July-September. Virtually_ all female. and young wa,]ruses are m-Ih-e-mm[-i Sea by July and remain there until 0ctober, separating into two main sunrnering groups:9ne from about 17b.W to 1ne vicinity of Point Barrow, and the other along the northern coast of Chukotka to Long Strait and hrangel Island. Although many of the animals as far west as Inchoun and Kolyuchin Bay are males, animals farther west and north are mostly females and young. Animals remaining in the Bering Sea and Bristol Bay are virtually all males. 8. 0ctober. Nearly al I the animals summering in both the eesTern and western Chukchi Sea converge on the northern coast of Chukotka in 0ctober before moving southeastward into Beping Strait ahead of the pack ice. The number of males in gristol Bay declines and the number on the Punuk Islands increases as males summering in the Bering Sea move northward to meet the southward-moving females and young. 9. November. 0verall walrus distribution in Novemberis not wen-lnown, but thousands of walruses continue to haul out on the Punuk Islands until late November in most years. 10. December. Very little is known of walrus distribution 'in Dtcember. One cruise found walruses associated with the ice edge in the Bering Strait-Anadyr Gulf area; females and young were primarily along the coast, whereas adult males were found only in the stra'it between Cape Chapf in and St. Lawrence Island. E. Population Size Estimation Lowry-Estimatjon'of (1985) reports: the actual abundance of walruses is comp]icated

30 by many factors. The best method presently available is extrapolation of numbers counted from aircraft flown along transects over walrus range. Problems encountered jnclude inaccuracies in the counts by observers, the vast size of the area to be covered, the unknown number of animals which are below the surface and therefore not counted, and the tendency of walruses to be clumped rather than randomly or uniform'ly distributed. The problems can, in part, be overcome by taking aerjal photographs of large groups, organiz'ing surveys propeily in relation to known walrus behavior and distributioh, and usjng statistical techniques for survey design qnq ana'lysi s Aerial surveys can and have provided reas-onable estimates of abundance and clear indications of trends in numbers. Soviet surveys have resulted in generally lower estimates than United Statei surveys. In Soviet surveys, walruses were counted or photographed along the Siberian coast, and a correction factor was'addei for walrusLs at sea and in American waters. About 60% of their estimate was based on actual counts from photographs of large herds on the ice and on temestrial hauling_grounds (Fay et al.- 1984). Although statistical confidence limits are not available for Soviet estimates, techniques remained virtualiy unchanged through 1980, allowing more direct comparison of results from different years. American estimates are based on strip surveys, which result in and wide confidence limits. Techniques have large variability jncrease changed over the years; some of the in _ population estimates may be due to change in coverage and refinement of techn i que. F. Regional Abundance Th; Pacific walrus population is being considered as a whole; regional abundance will be discussed jn section II. A. Present Abundance.

II. PACIFIC WALRUS POPULATION A. Present Abundance Estimates of walrus abundance have changed drastically over the last l5 years, reflecting rapid growth of the population. The population was estimated at 101,000 in 1970 and at 136'000 in L97? (t-bwry-resulted 1985). Combined results of Soviet and American surveys ln i975 in a mean estimate of 232,000 (Fay et al. 1984). Preliminary data from a coordinated Soviet-American survey conducted in- September 1980 indicate that lhe population then numbered 246,000 walruses (Lowry, pers. comm.). Interpretation of survey data and population estimates are currently beilg.reexam- ined 6y statistical.experts, and new figures may be available soon (Lowry, pers. comm.). Fay et a1. (1984) rePort: Since the late 1970's, the walruses have shown dist'inct signs of decreased ferti I i ty, hi ghly vari abl e fecundi ty, poor

31 recruitment, declin'ing physica'l condition, change i.n feeding habits, increase in- average d9€, a1d . increased natural mortal i ty, al I of whi ch are- characteri sti c of stab'il'izati on or decline (Eberhardt and siniff 1977). hle think that the populati on iiieaOy reached i ts peak 'in, .the I ate 1970's and ifrut jt is-on th-e way down again at this time. That its somewhat larger decline al..iOy has begun is suggestSO -UI^the cohorts ot Voing iin.i the naiir in 1980, by t-he.Eskimos' reports of incieising fatness, and-by ,an apparently declining annual morta'lity on the Punuk Islands. We think that the poputation will-cont'inue to decline for some years, because the recru'itment still is very 1ow, the ca.tches on both sides of the Aer.inl i.u ur. still going up, and many_ of the adults i.. nearing" ih. end of theif natural life spal. The fecundity rit. probably will continue to decrease for some years J€t, io. in. maiorjty of.females are well past their i,il*. inO'capaUie onil od.producing less, not more' each y"u.. gut iaii survivai probably r'1i11 rise markedly and. soon result in irUrtuntiut increases- in recruitment. Meanwhile' population will cont'inue in a downward trend until the the ' cohorts new r'ecruiti are abundant enough to .produce- . . iuif i c.iently l arge to counterba'lance the hi gh mortal i ty. B. Historic Distribution and Abundance i n The Pac'if i c wal rui popuf at'ion before the arrj val of Europeans Beping Sea musi, have comprised at least 200,0.00 animals to the -withitood mid frive tiie-narvests that followed (Fay- 1957). By the nineteenth century, ih. large herds of bull walruses that summered " -aUoul nearly in Br.i stol Buy inJ tne Pribi lof Islands were eiti rpaieO UV tiunters for the Russi an-Ameri can Compa.ny;- herds on the 'ice to the nottt- *".. probably little affected (ibid')' From iAaA itrrougn 1880, Yankee whalers took more and more walruses as *nui. fopul"ations'declined until 1880, when the walrus-populqlion was reduced to uUoul half its former iize (Nelson and True 1887)' yankee whalers Ulr.Lt.J their hunting mainly.toward females and young in the pack-J.pi.tiu. ice north of Bering strai.t; hence their harvest was much n,or. than that of the Russians. Whalers continued to harvest walruses, although at a reduced rate, until about i914, when the world mirket foi walrus products.col.lapsed iFiV-.i if. 1984). Walruses cont'inued to be harvested by Natives of both Alaska and siberia and by "arc-tic traders" who again virtual'ly ext'itpui.O ihe southern hirds of sununering. males in. the g".int Sla, ..cuiing the population still further. 1.1alrus numbers increased to an esiimatea'Z'SO,OOO by 1931 (Kibal'chich and Borodin fg8Zj. The poo.iy-reguiateC 5ovjefharvest from 1931 through 1956 ;;;i;'resultbO in"depietion of the walrus herds' Based on harvest levels, the poputuiion ruy have reached jts lowest historical i.u.r in the *ii rgso's (Fay 1982). Kleinenberg (1951) noted that 33 former coastal concentration areas on the Chukchi Peninsula, of j at onf 3 iemai ned- i n tgSq.. The popul ati on n 1960 was est'imated V- government- 7O,bOO-100,000 (fav lgAZ). Soviet walrus harvest from

32 operated vessels was halted 'in 1962. The populatjon has probably blen increasing fairly steadily since the early 1960's.

REFERENCES Eberhardt, 1.1., and D.B. Sjniff. 1977. Population dynamics and marine mammal management po'ljcies. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 34:183-190. Fay, F.H. L957. History and present status of the Pacifjc walrus population. Pages qjt-+SS in Transactions of the twenty-second North Ambrican wildlife conference, Wild'1. Manage. Inst., Washington, DC. . L982. Ecology and biology of the Pac'ific walrus (9dobenus f-smarus divergens) ill iger. N. Am. Fauna Ser. 74. USFWS. 279 pp. . 1985. Personal communication. Professor, Univ. Alaska, ---TETrbanks. Fay, F.H., and L.F. Lowry. 1981. Seasonal use and feeding habits 9I walruses in the proposed Bristol Bay clam fishery area. Council Doc. 18, NPFMC, Anchorage. 60 PP.

Fay,- - F.H., Ke11y,8.P., P.H. Gehnrich, J.L. seaSe, and A.A. HOover. 1984. Modein popuiationi,'of migrations, demography, troph'ic-s, and historical status the Pacific walrus. Unpubl. final rept. RU-611. Environmental assessment of the Alaska continental shelf. Frost, K.J., L.F. Lowry, and J.J. Burns. 1982. Distribution of marine manrnals in the coastal zone of the Bering Sea during summer and autumn. Unpubl. final rept. RU-613. Environmental assessment of the Alaska continental shelf. 166 PP.

Kibal'chich, A.A., and R.G. Borod'in. 1982. Estimate of the basiq pafq- meters-of the Pacific walrus population. Pages 160-161 in Izuchennii, Okhrana, i Ratsional'nye Ispol'zovanie Morskikh Mlekopita'iushchikh. Ministerstvo Rybnogo Khoziaistva, Astrakhan. Cited in Fay 1984.

Kleinenberg, S. E. 1957 . 0n protection of the walrus. Piroda 1957(7): 101- 103. Lowry,-j.;. L.F. 1985. The Pacific walrus, (Odobenus rosmarus divergens,). In Burns, K.J. Frost, and L.F. UowrllElMarTne mammal specTes accounts. t,'|ildl. Tech. Bull. N0.7. ADF&G, Juneau. . 1985. Personal cormunjcation. Marine Mammal Biologist, ADF&G' ----T-il. Game, Fai rbanks.

33 Lowry,1.F., K.J. Frost, D. Calkins, G. Schwartzmann, and S. Hills. L982. -Feeding habits, food requirements, and status of Bering Sea marine manmali. Council Doc. 19, NPFMC, Anchorage. 291 pp. Nelson, 8.W., and F.ul. True. 1887. Marmals of northern Alaska.- Pages Z2l-Zgl in E.1.1. Nelson, €d. Report upon natural history collections made in ETaska between the years lB77 and 1881. No. III Arctic Ser. Publ. Signa'l Serv., U.S. Army. Govt. Printing 0ffice, Washington, D.C. Cited in FaY 1984. Nelson, R. 1985. Personal comnunication. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Nome.

34 Polar Bear Distribution and Abundance Western Reqion

I. REGIONWIDE INF0RI'|ATI0N The information is organized and presented for the Western Alaska subpopulation rather than by game management unit or region. Based on tagging study results, morphometrics, and tissue contamjnant 1eve1s, Lentfer (1974, L976) concluded that polar bears in Alaska belong to two at least partially discrete subpopulations, with the dividing line extending nortfrwest from about Point Lay. Amstrup (pers. comm. ) , basing his conclusion on results of radio-tracking studies and several more years of tagging data, agrees that there are two popu'lations but feels the placement of a dividing line is still uncertain. A. Regional Distribution 0nly bears from the western subpopulation occur in the Western Region. This subpopulation probably ranges from west of Barrow to [,'|rangel Island, dlthough its distribution and degree of interchange with bear populatjons in Soviet waters is rrot weli known (Lenrfer i983, Amstrup 1984). In w'inter, they regularly range as far as St. Lawrence Island and farther south, depenoing on the extent of the ice (Fay I974). In winter, they range t,hroughout the pack'ice fringe and flaw zone; dno during heavy ice years, when pack ice rnoves for south of its average winter extent, polar bears have been seen near Nunivak and the Prjb'ilof jslar,ds (Lentfer 7982; Patten, pers. comnr). During the ice-free season, polar bears are extremely rare in the Wesrern Region, although they are occasionally seen. From 11 July through early August 1984, Patten (pers. comm.) reported that five to seven polar bears, 'including a female and cub, a three-year-old, and at least one "large bear" were seen along the coast from Kotlik to Newtok. Patten (pers. comm. ) reported that three bears v,/ere seen in summer near Hazen Bay on the Naskonat Peninsula from I97B through 1983 and that, during winters in the 1930's, polar bears were common near Nunivak island. B. Areas Used Seasonally and For Life Functions For more information concerning seasonal arrd life function use areas, see the I:'150,000-sca'le reference maps, located in ADF&G area offices, and the printed 1:1,000,000-scale Atlas of rhe Alaska Habitat Management Gujde for the Western and Interior regions. The following category has been used to describe polar bear distribution: " General distriburion C. Factors Affecting Distribution The distribution and types of ice affect the ability of polar bears to hunt, the availability of seals, and the movements of bears (Lentfer 1972). Changes in ocean currents and cl imate affect sea ice (Vjbe 1967) ano therefore the distribut'iorr of bears

35 (Lentfer I97'l). Polar bear seasonal and life function use areas are prinrarily determirrecl by sea ice characteristics in conjunction with ringed seal populations. (See the po'lar bear Life History and Habirat Requirements narrat'ive in volume 1, and the Sea Ice narrative in volume 2 of the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the Arctic Region for more information. ) Stirling (I974) stated: When possible, polar bears remain with the ice because of the greater accessibility of seals there. l,lith the exception of females giving birth to cubs, polar bears do not den for the winter as do grtzzly or black bears. Thus, they feed throughout the year and must, if possible, remain on ice near their food source. Sex, dgc, reproductive status, suitable denning habitat, human hunting pressure, and habitat alteration al1 may affect polar bear dist,r'ibution (Lentfer 1982, 1983). (See the polar bear Life llistory and Habitat Requirements narrative in volume I of the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the Western and Interior regions for more deta'iled information. ) D. Movements Between Areas A1 though previous mark-and-recapture studies yielded data on fidelity to particular areas in sprirrg, the degree of intermixing between populations, and several population estimates, they did not give much information on seasonal movements and migration patterns; ongoing radio-tracking research should provide a clearer picture (Lentfer 1983, /\rnstrup 1984). Lentfer (L972) describeo autumn po'lar bear movenrents in Al aska: Polar bears general ly first appear a'long A'laska's north coast in 0ctober, when shore-fast ice enables uhem to travel from drifting pack ice to the beach. The first bear sightings are reported to the east of Point Barrow anct then to the scluthwest in the same sequence that fast ice forms. Eskimos indicate that polar bears travel from north to south in the 'I'al I , along the coast between Point Barrow and Cape Lisburne. Cons'idering the two nrost productive bear hunting areas along t,his section of coast, bears are first taken by Eskimos in the northernmost Point Franklin area and then tn the Icy Cape area to the south. Eskimos also report that, tradjtiona'11y, bears are more numerous along the coast in years when w'inds from the north and west bring old ice to the coast than in yea rs when newly f rozen 'ice dri f ts i n. Ba i 1ey and Hendee (1926) verify this and report that in the fall of I92I, old ice failed to come in and new ice formed for miles out front the shore. Consequently, few polar bears were killed between Barrow ano Point Hope. In the fal'l of 1967, ADF&G personnel observed that winds brought more heavy ice than usual, dnd there were more bears along the coast than usual. Bears of the westerri Alasko subpopulation range from west of Barrow to the southern edge of the seasonal jce (Lentfer 1982). Polar bear distribution is poorly known between breakup and

36 freeze-up, but bears probably remain near the edge_of th.e pack_ice and nor' i n the Western negion (Lentfer I972 , Sti 11 ing L974). Mark-and-recapture studies from 1967 through 1976 indicate ljm'ited interchange between Alaska and the northwest nra'inland coast of Canacta nut not between Alaska and the rest of Canada, Greenland, or Svalbard (Lentfer 1983). Recovery of marked animals itrd'icates some tendency for the same bears to occur in the same g_eneral area in late winier and early spring each year (ibjd.). The rate of movement and di stances travel I ed between marki ng and recovery sites, as well as the proportion of animals that move to a different area, are ngt significantly different for males and fenrales or adults and subadults ('ibid. ). Recoveries indicate that a few marked bears have moved between Alaska and Siberia, but mtlre work needs to be done i1 this area (Lentfer 1983, Amstrup 1984). E. Population Size Estintation Foilr principal sources of informatjon have been usecl to derive population estimates for Alaskan polar be_qrs: 1) multi-year mark- and-recapture clata from 1967 through I976 and from 1980 to the present; 2) single-season mark-and-recapture estimates that are ivailabie for sevepal years; 3) catch-and-effort records front aerral irophy hunting; and 4) catch, effort, and aerial observat'ion records kept in conjunction with mark-and-recapture work (Amstrup 1984). Tovey.and Scbtt (1958) were the first to report an estimate of the Alasi

37 II. WESTERN ALASKA SUIJPOPULATION A. Present Abundance Hearirrgs on a proposal to waive the moratorium on taking polar bears impuseo oy the MMPA resulted in several estimates of the size 9f Alaskan polar bear populations. The conservative estimate finally adopted was 5,700, with approximately one-third of these jrr rhe norti.rern stock ano two-thirds (3,800) in the westenn stock (schreiner 1979). Amstrup (19S4), from earlier work by__ Eley (tgZO) and Amsrrup (1981), calculated density figures of 70 km2 per Dear sighted in 1976 a1d 113 kmz per bear sighted'in 1981. Altfrougfr maiy of the bears of the western subpopulation range into the Beiing anO southern Chukchi seas, most do not reside in those as recedes in the areas yeai-round.[he and go north with the ice it spring. amount of inrerchange with Soviet popu'lations and the imporiance of the Wrangel.lsland core denning area -to the popu]a- tion are not known (ibid.). Although it is possible to say that, polar bears occur seasonally in the_ Chukchi Sea at densities at jeast comparable to those estimated for the Beaufort Sea' data are too few to give a more accurate estimate for the subpopulgllgl than t,he one given in Schreiner (1979). A1though Amst_rup. (1984) does not refir specifical ly to the western subpopulation, he states tlra r the poiar bear popul ation i n Al aska 'is about the same size as it was iir the late 1950's and is genera'lly stable. B. Historic Distribution and Abundance Elliott (I89S) noted that the last polar bear seen on St. Paui, pribilof Islands, was killed in 1848. He vis'ited St. Matthew Island in August 1874 and reported 250-30_0 very fat healthy bears on the islind, jncluding females, males, and cubs . (ibjd.). Townseno (1aeZ) found foui polar bears on Hall Island (iust off St. llatthew IsianO) 'in September 1885; his party shot one. Hanna (tgZO) visited St. Matthew Island and reported as follows: Capta'in Lane told me that bears were found up until sometime i n' the 90' s when a party f rom the revenue cutter Corui n landed and shot 16. The old trails Elliott mentions are still plainly seen, worn deep into the_ tundra. skulls of severai anjmals were found, all with bullet holes in them, arrd two were preserved. Very probably a few bears still come down in wirtter on the ice pack but they have been hunted So much tif late years that they can not be common. The sgu;ltern edge of the pack ice usually extends to or past St. Matthew Island, anO recetlt sightings show that po'lar bears Marthew and l-ial I pioOiftf y occur regul arly -on anO around St. islands-: m'if itary !ersoririel saw four in 1943; Burns saw one in Marcfi I976; anO'sbnliebe, on a cruise in March 1984, saw 30 between St: Matthew and St. Lawrence islands (Schl iebe 1983; Schl'iebe, pers. comm.). Recent sumner expeditions to the island report no'resident Summer population of.-po1ar bears, although bones, Lrai'ls, and dens can stil I be seen ( ibid. ).

38 REFERENCES Amstrup, S.C. 19B1. Polar bear research jn Alaska. Unpub'1. rept., Denver t,lildl. Res. Center. USFWS, Anchorage, AK.

. 1984. Project review. Alaskan polar bear research. Unpubl. rept., Denver }rlildl. Res. Center. USFhjS, Anchorage, AK. 70 pp.

. i985. Personal comniUhication. Polar Bear Biologist, Denver ----ilTj clt . Res. Center, USFWS , Anchorage, AK. Arnstrup, S.C., I. Stirling, ano J.W. Lentfer. In press. Size and trend of Alaska polar bear populations.

DeMaster, 0., M.C.S. Kingsley, and I. Stirling. 1980. A multiple mark and recapture estimate applied to polar bears. Can. J. Zool. 58:633-638. Eley, T.J. I976. An analysis of polar bear predatiorr on ice-'inhab'iting pinniped populations of Alaska. Unpubl. rept. USFtdS, Anchorage, AK. 27 pp.

Fay, F.H. 1974. The role of ice in the ecology of marine mammals of the Bering Sea. Pages 383-399 in D.l'l. Hood and E.J. Kel 1y, eds. 0ceanography of the Bering Sealith emphasis on renewable resources. 0ccas. Publ. No.2. Inst. Mar. Sci., Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks. Lentfer, J.W. I972. Polar bear-sea ice relationships. Pages 165-171 iri S. Herrero, ed. Bears: their biology and management. IUCN Publ. New Series 23. . I974. Discreteness of Alaskan po'lar bear popularions. Proc. Congr. Game Bio. LI:323-329. -Tnt. . 1976. Environmental contaminants and parasites in polar bears. Aid in Fish and t,j'ildl . Rest., final rept. Proj. 5.5R., ADF&G, -Tea.Juneau. 22 pp. . 1982. Polar bear. Pages 557-566 in J. Chapman and G. Feldhamer, -.G. t.li ld mammals of North Amerjca. Elltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press. L,L47 pp.

. 1983. Polar bear movements from mark and recovery. Arctic 36:282-288. Schreiner, K.M. I979. Fed. Reg'ister 44(B) :2,540-2,546. Cited in Lentfer 1982.

Stirling, I. L974. Polar bear research in the Beaufort Sea. Pages 72!-733 in J.C. Reed and J.E. Slaier, eds. The coast and shelf of the Beaufort Sa. Arct. Inst. N. Am., Arlington, VA. 750 pp.

39 Srir'ling, I., D. Andriashek, dnd [,'|. Calvert. 1981. Habitat preferences and d'istribution of polar bears in the western Canadian arctic. Rept. to Donre Petroleum Ltd., Esso Resources Ltd. and Can. hlildl. Serv. 49 pp. Tovey, P.E., and R.F.Scott. 1958. A preliminary report on the status of polar bear in Alaska. Unpubl. address to the 8th Alaska science conference. i1 pp. Vibe, C. 1967. Arctic animals in relation to climatic fluctuations. Mecldelser om Gronland Bd. i70. Nr. 5. 227 pp.

40 TerrestrialM

Brown Bear Distribut'ion and Abundance Western and Interior Regions

I. REGIONWIDE I NFORMATION The following information will be presentgg gl a regjonwide basis, w'ith area-specifja information noted where available. Seven game management units '(GMUs) are contained within the Western and Interior regions: GMUs 12, 18, 19,20, ?!, ?4, and 25 (maP 1). A. Regional Dj stribution Br6wn bears ( Ursus arctos ) occur throughout the l^lestern and Interior regiohs. fn-hlgh'est dens jties occur in the mountains, foothills, ind mountain valleys, while. lower densities are found in the forested lowlands (ADF&G 1977). In the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta, brown bears occur in extremely 1ow densities. B. Areas Used Seasonally and for Life Functions For information concerning areas used seasonally for speci_fic life functions, see the 1:250,000-scale Reference Maps, available in ADF&G arel offjces, and the 1:1,000,000-scale Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the lr|estern and Interior regions. Map categories for brown bear are as follows: " General distribution o Known spring concentrat'ion areas o Known concentrations along fish streams o Known concentrations in berry areas o Known concentrations associated with mammal'ian food sources o Known denn'ing concentration areas C. Factors Affecting Densities 1 1.y one The dens i ty of brown bears may vary seasona . .i n . any locality, iepend'ing upon ava'ilable food sources (ibid. ). Brown bear po-pulations in GMU 18 are much more dependent on salmon than in the'other GMUs in the Interior and Western regions. GMLI 1B populations are probably more similar to GMU 17 popu'lations than to'GMU 19 or GMU 27 p6pulations (Machida, pers. comm.). Human harvest of brown bears can affect the densjties of brown bears, especia'l1y on a local scale (Reynolds 1984). In the Brooks Range' cub deaths caused by adult males has been documented; however, the affect of these deaths upon overall bear density'is not known at this time (Reynolds L976, 1980; Reynolds and Hechtel 1982). 0ngoing researih in the northcentral Alaska Range may provide- a6diti6nat information pertain'ing to cub mortality in that part of the Interior Region (Reynolds and Hechte'l i984). D. Movements and Home Ranges Studies underway in the northcentral Alaska Range indicate that home range sjzes Vany by sex and age of bears. Home rang-es.of males we-re large anO included variable habitat from glacial moraine to the muskeg of the Tanana flats and traversed several river drainages. Females with young had relative'ly small home ranges that lended to be confined to a single river drainage.

43 _ll-- --,

,lo o * ,\""] l' '\ 1,- I I tol ?'W G|' ( .o '. Ct l.o, I

t\ t\ ttt'-.. o- 3 \. o\, o sl ti \'i3 'r f"---j l't L [ -,' \\- o -llNl o o :,1at tt1 \:i o L oL l- (l) g

!t (5c g ! (u ! tn t Q) - I (u I t o tn =(5

0. z

44 Frequently,-reflecting these females were observed close to escape cover' posdibly the propensity lor adult males to stalk and i

45 4. GMU 20. Casual observations and other indices suggest that Tffiost of GMU 20 the brown bear population is moderate in size and stable (Jennings 1984). Reynolds and Hechtel (1984) tentarrvely have estimated the density of brown bears in their 3,400 knr2 study area in the northcentral Alaska Range (in Gt'lS 20A) to be between 1 bear/53 km2 and 1 bear/35 kmz. The nrinimum density is an underestimate because it does not include unmarked bears in the area that were not killed by hunters or observed during the study. Based on home ranges and the distrjbution of marked bears, they believe the avtrilable habitat may support an additional 18-38 bears. They therefore be'lieve the density is similar to the density of I bear/4I kmz reported by Miller and Ballard (1982) south of the Alaska Range irr the upper Susitna River. 5. GMU 21. Field observations, nuisance reports, hunter sightings, and pilot observations indicate that the brown bear populat'ion in GMU 2I is of moderate density and apparently stable (Osborne 1984). The average density of brown bears in GMUs 24,25, and 26 (GMU 26 is in the Arctic Region) is about I bear/259 knrz (ranging from I bear/44 to 777 kmz). In Gl'lU 24, the populations are probably stable or increasing. In GMU 25, numbers are probably increasing (Reynolds 1984). G. Historic Densities L'ittle historic informatiorr is available concerning brown bear densities 'in the Western and Interior regions. 0vera11, brown bears appear to be as numerous as they have been in the past (ADF&G re7'i ) .

REFERENCES ADF&G. 1977. The status of wildlife in Alaska. Juneau. 628 pp. Jennings, L.B. 1984. Unit 20 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. Pages 43-44 j n A. Sewa rd , €d . Annua I report of su rvey- i nvento ry activities. Vol 15, Part 5. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t.'/ildl. Rest. prog. rept. Projs. W-22-2 and 3, Job 4.0. Kelleyhouse, D.G. 1984. Unit 12 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. Pages 30-31 in A. Seward, ed. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Vol. 15, Part 5. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in l'lildl. Rest. prog. rept. Projs. W-22-2 and 3, Job 4.0. Iriachida, S. 1984. Unit iB brown bear survey-inverrtory progress report. Pages 37-40 irr A. Seward, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activit'ies. Vol 15, Part 5. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in tr|ildl. Rest. prog. rept. Projs. W-22-2 and 3, Job 4.0. l'liller, S.D., and l^J.B. Ballard. 7982. Dens i ty and biomass estimates of an interior Alaskan brown bear ( Utsrls qrqle!) popu'lation. Can. Field-Nat. e6 (4 ) :448-454.

46 0sborne, T.0. 1984. Unit 2I brown bear survey-inventory progress report. Page 46 in A. Seward, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Vol 15, Part 5. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t,l'ildl . Rest. prog. rept. Projs. W-22-Z and 3, Job 4.0. Pearson, A.M. I976. Population characterjstics of the arctic mountain grizzly bear. Pages 247 -260 i n M. Pel ton, J. Lerrtfer, and E. Fo'lks, eds. Bears - their biology and management. IUCIJ New Series 40. Pegau, R.E. 1984. Unit 19 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. Pages 4I-42 in A. Seward, Bd. Annual report of survey-inventory octivities. Vol 15, Part 5. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t.Jildl. Rest. prog. rept. Projs. W-22-Z and 3, Job 4.0. Reynolds, H.V. L974. North Slope grizzly bear studies. ADF&G, Fed. Ajd 'in },lildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. t,J-17-6, Jobs 4.8R and 4.11R. Juneau. 27 pp. . 1976. North S'lope grizzly bear studies. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t,Jitdl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. t.l-17-6 and 7, Jobs 4.8R and 4.11R. Juneau. 2o pp. -TTTdl.. 1980. North Slope grizzly bear studies. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Resr. prog . rept . Proj . [,l- l7-1 1 , Jobs 4. 14R and 4.15R. Juneau. 65 PP. . 1984. Units 24, 25, and 26 brown bear survey-'inventory progress report. Pages 55-56 in A. Seward, €d. Anrrual report of survey-inventory activities. Vol 15, Part 5. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t.Jildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj s . W-22-2 arid 3 , Job 4.0. Reynolds, H.V., and J.L. Hechtel . I9E2. North Slope grizzly bear stud'ies. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-ZL-?, Job 4.14R. .luneau . 19 pp.

. 1984. Population structure, reproductive biology, and movement parterns of grizzly bears irr the northcentral Alaska Range. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in l{ildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 4.16R. Juneau. 3o pp. Ricker, W.E. I975. Computation and interpretation cf biological statist'ics of fish popu'lations. Dept. Environ. Fish. and Mar. Serv. Bull. 191. 382 PP.

Caribou Distribution and Abundance Western and Interior Regions

I. REGIONt^,IDE INFOR|\IATION Infclrmation will be organizeo and presented by individual caribou herds, because many caribou migrations cross state, regional, and game managenent unit (GMU) Ooundaries. These po'litical jurlsdict'ions ulual1y exist simply to expedite administrative enforcenrent and mariagerial concerns. In reality, the biologica'l reason(s) for some management strategies, such as bag l'imit and season length, ildJ extend weJl beyond the boundaries of a jurisdictional unit. A. Regional Distribution 1. Chisana Herd. The Chisana Herd (CH1 is one of several small caFiEou ieras uti l izing portions of the Interior and Wesrern regions (see map 1). Skoog (1968) described the approximate range of the CH to include the area from the Nabesna River southeastward to the upper White River, extend'ing northeast to the timbered portions of the upper Tanana Rjver and of the middle White River. These animals range rhrough the Nutzot'in Mountains and a'long tributaries of the White and Chisana rivers (Hemnri ng 1971 ) . 2. Denal i Herd. The Denal i Herd (DH) 'is a relatively smal I carTE'orr-ie-Fd that ranges primari 1y on the north side of the Alaska Range in the vic'irrity of Denal i Nat'iorral Park. The total area utjlized by these caribou is approximate'ly 5,000 kmz (1,930 miz) (Boertje 1981). 3. Ki lbuck-Kuskokwim Mountains Herd. The Ki lbuck-Kuskokwim mountain range has historically been occupied by borh caribou and reindeer (Parten, in press). Although the herd's range contains good caribou habitat, very low numbers clf carjbou are found in the area (ibid. ). This herd is subject to intense hunting pressure (ibid. ). 4. Andreafsky Mountailrs Herd. Very I ittle is known of the the Andreafsky Mountains. Most of the animals are believed to be feral reindeer from the Stebbins herd or fronr Stuart Island (l4achida, pers. comm.). In aerial surveys of this area during winter 1981-1982 and spring 7982, most anjmals were observed in the vicirrity of Needle Mountain and iprugalet Mountain on the East Fork of the Andreafsky River (Dinneford 1983). A 1 April 1983 aeria'l survey indicated fewer caribou in this area tharr the previous year {Machida 1984). S'inular findings were noted during an aerial survey conducted during March of 1984 (Machida, pers. comrn.). Under intense hunting pressure, it appeared that most of the caribou had moved eastward into the rugged and almost irraccessible portions of the Chuilnak and Anvik drainages (MachiCa 1984). In nrost

49 (J

tn 5- o(u

(l) an o5

(u >Z

! L (u - =

L (lJ CJ (oc tn c)-c (u +) l+

r- a

(o =

50 winters, hunteps on snowmachines have found caribou 'in the uplands near the headwaters of the Andreafsky. River, the East (Patten 1985a). Fbrk of the Andreafsky- River, and Otter Creek 5. De'lta Caribou Herd. The Delta Caribou l-lerd (DCH) (map 2'1 is ffibou herds (Denal j, Delta, Macomb, Big River, Tonzona, etc. ) that range along the northern s'lopes of the Alaska Range. This herd occupies a total range _conta'intng about 9,600 kntz (3,700 m'i2 between the Nenana River-Parks 'l ) Hi ghway-Al aska Ra i road on the west and the De I ta Riier-itichardson Highway on the east (Davis et al. 1985). 6. Macomb Herd. The Macomb Hercl (MH) is a smal I herd that 6@rfiEareasouthoftheTananaRiverbetweentheDelta and Robertson rivers (map 2). Most radiotelemetry locations for caribou from the MH occur on the l{acomb Plateau between the Johnson and Robertson rivers (Johnson 1985). 7. Yanert Herd. Davis et al. (1982) confirmed the existence of a OTSTnct-herO of several hundred caribou bccupying the Yanert River drainage and adiacent headwaters. of the Wood River (map 2). The Yanert llerd (YH) appeared to ev.ist as a separate herd, distinct from the Delta Herd, based cn aerial c;bserva- tions by ADF&G staff and discussions with local residents fanriliai with that drea. Until recently, r'lo interchange of from the YH and DCH hacl been observed radio-collared caribou ^discussed (ibid. ). Davis and Val kenburg (1983) apparent Oifferi:nces in calving behav'ioi and calving succeSs (calf recruitment) for these herds. B. Fortymi'le Her!. The Fortym'ile Herd (FH) has experiertced_majqr affi9raphicdistributionandsiglrificantpopYlation fluctuations-over the last hundred years or so. Presently' the FH occupi es much of the d rea between the Yukon and Tattatta rivers iouth of the Steese Highway, w'ith occasional use of portions of the Yukon Terrirory north of the Ladue R'iver and south of the Yukon River (maP 3). 9. Beaver Mountains Herd. The Beaver l4ountairrs Herd (BMH) ain range (map 4) (Beaver Mountain) apprbx.imately 60 km (35 nri ) west of McGrath. ln I ate Apri 1 tbbZ, six Cows from the Bl'lH, five cows from the Sunshine Mouniain Herd (SMH), and nine cov/s of ihe Bi9 River Herd (BRH) were radio-co'llared to determine the distribution and distirrct- ness of these herds. Data obtained from the collaring effort supported the idea that the three herds were distinct entities. 10. Suhifrine Mountain Herd. The Sunshine Mountain Herd (SMH) is @ widely scattered groups of caribou that occupy dense black spruce habitat throughout much of the yeaf. Aeribj surveys and observations of radio-col lared animal s indicated that SMH caribou aggregated for a short t'ime during late winter and then dispersed widely from the Nixon Fork flats to the headwaters of the Susulatna River during calving in late May (Pegau 1984). After ca'lving act'ivity was completed, [rost caribou ranged from the black spruce bogs where they had calved

51 6 =o o so Ol

s- o -o d (u o -Y. 6

CD .=

.--- | 6 , tn () t g o o ro x C:) E 6 o o -+-'-. G LI1 () 3 ,r' .rrtJi------r-- -- tt ^ r! .,-- t Ol ort .'- , g Ot .-ne^t(lt r, -. --'-. t' b-OA !E ra'_--- , go3.: a 4F- B? pE j -\r. 6 0 = P E 9; ai t ' , , U) 3= ; E i- ar , -: a Jlr/ t !- lr (u ft to lz I NTEE <:t 'q --l t rl]r o I r- ro a r< ar (J t Y gl c ct) -o a oi c Ol o , I t p=: (l, , t t P !- It (u (o 1.9 ll 16 I P Itplrrtrol !t (l) 1 -,{1.-,-r O (u P C ; a q- c o c' 2 a tn o (u

.u d.

C\l

(6 =

52 c

a r-

(lJ vl o

(u - (lJ \Z

(d -:z tJ) (o

l- o) - o -o r- (J q)

5, +) L tJ- o +) (+-

!- +)a €

(o 5 c

cf)

(o E

53 t'(a ,'d" .,t)j ,,Y -t' ,t Mlnchumlnr(} o) sl

a I t-l fa' ' rId "# Qqo". $Y 'd? o f" I a) McGre k., e od 3l 2R=t .J rrowoll Lendlng t) e q..-).. Relny J PerC

KUSX,OKWtn Sloetmulc t\ k:.'v; fa, T cl tqutnt Ltlo \?\.- JJ htt.ltth furquolto L.la ttln L.kat

I rAA I

Map 4. The upper Kuskokwim River va11eY.

54 to areas above timberl ine on Cloudy, CriPP'le' and Sunsh jne mounta'ins (ibid. ). Th'is behav jor may represent some fornr of postca'lving aggregation as demonstrated in other caribou heros. bV late summeF most carjbou were in small groups (10 caribou) in heavy t'imber ranging from the upper I'lowitna and upper Susulatna rivers to Ivy Creek on the Njxon Fork (ibid.). Frotn late October through January 1983, the SMH remained scattered from the Nixon Fork flats to an area in the vicinity of the Nowitna R'iver (ibid.). By early February, most caribou had moved from the Nixon Fork flats to the footh'i'lls between the Nowitna and Susulatna rivers and remained there until early April (ibid.). Caribou then drifted slowly as a group to the north side of Sunshine Mountain ('ibid. ). These movement patterns differecl somewhat during the 1983-1984 period; caribou from the SMH never left the Nixon Fork flats as in previ

55 B. Areas Useo Seasonal ly and for Life Functions See the 1:1,000,000-scale printed maps found in the Atlas to the guide for the l,Jester.n and Interior regions and the I:250,000-scal e reference niaps located in ADF&G offrces. The maps show the follriwjng categories: o General di stribution " Known calving areas " Krrowlr wi nter use areas " Known migration patterns C. Movements Between Areas One r.rf the most important aspects of caribou ecology is survival through adaptive behavior such as migratory movements. Sinclair (1983) proposed that the varying movement patterns (e.g., migration, emigrat'ion) of vertebrates have evolved in response to preOictably changing food resources. It appears that caribou move to exploir optinral environmental conditions. Some migrations ntay have evolved to take advantage of favorable habitats, such as calving and breeding dreas, or simply to find mates. Bergerud (1974) suggested that caribou interactions with wolves led to their gregarious nature arrd patterns of movement. For example, in northern British Columbia, Bergerud et al. (1984) hypothesizect that female caribou movemenf,s fronr va1 1 ey bottoms to hi gh south-faci ng s1 opes for calv'ing evolved as an antipredator tactic, mainly against wolves. Large groups of caribou cannot remain long in one p.lace without oepleting food resources. As a result, behavioral adaptations such as migration developed so that caribou could sustain themselves irr re'lation to their varying forage supplies and avoid predation. Because caribou frequently dre on the move and the distances animals travel vary from herd to herd and frequently from year to year', no home ranges or I ife-function area sizes have been determined. See the irrdividual herd sections for more specific information on movements. D. Factors Affect'i ng Di stribut'ion The following factors appear to affect the distribution of caribou: " Availability of preferred forage " Predat'ion " AvaiIabiIity of insect relief areas o Local winter conditions (duration, snow depth and hardness, tempera ture ) " Summer forest fi res o Human activity (development projects, hunting) " Population size of individual herds tr Population Size Esrirrra,tion Hemming and Glenn (1968) first deve'loped the Aerial Photo-Direct Count-Extrapolation (APDCE) technique to census the Nelchina Herd in 1967. After some rL'finements, the technique was first used in the arctic on the Wesrern Arctic Herd in 1970 (Pegau and Hemming 1972). In 1973, the first rigorous APDCE census was conducted on rhe Fortymile Herd (Davis et al. 1978) and on the Denali Herd (Davis and Prescon i980). Davis et al. (1979) refined the APDCE technique to

56 increase the accuracy. and preci sion of popul ation estinrares. llhitten and Cameron {1980, 1983) oescribed'results using ihe "modified" APDCE t,echnique on the Porcupine Herd in lgTg ano- tggZ and made recommendations for improvement. As currently used, the modified APDCE technique incorporates the use of radio-coliareo caribou to..locate aggregations to be visua'lly counted or photg- graphed. Adjustments have also been developeci ihat precluOe rblying ol'l surmer and fa'll composition data to extrapolate the popu'lalion estjmate (Davis and Valkenburg 1984). The modified teclinique has generally been used to census caribou herds in the Western and Inrerior regions since 1980. F. Regional Abundance Population estimates for caribou are usually not calculated at the regional level. Table f is a summary of the most recent published populat'ion estimates and caribou survey data by herd for the Western and Interior regions. By summi ng the most recent abundance estimates for the individual herds, a minjmum regional estimate of 28,460 and a maximum of 30,729 caribou were obtaineO. rI. cHISANA CARTBOU HERD (CH) A. Distribution 1. Calving area. Reynolds (1969) reported that Chisarra caribou calving activity was rtot concentrated in any certain area. Caribou tended f,o calve alone or in pairs rif cows. Local guides reported that calving activity occurs from the benchlan-ds along Sheep Creek on Mt. Sulzer to the rolling hills north of. Ptarmigan Lake. 0n June ll, 1972, small groups of caribou_(105 aclults, 20 calves) were observed, incluiing'cows with calves, scattered between the Chisana and Whire rivers, with most caribou found in Beaver Creek valley and Flat Creek flats irr shrub-birch vegetarion (BGDIF 1972). Although no traditional ca'lv'irrg areas have been identified, postcilving groups have been observecl on the alpine hills between Chisana and the Ptarmigan-Bray lakes area (ADF&G l,g7l). 2. !inter use area. skoog (i968) presume

57 L o t-

g) E L = ca oc|r) L oru) ur Jor -{@ O l.(., ctt L .occ|tr) -,-lo +) (u od o.roqr@> (u vl (-) tn @-rO C C O 0lC tl)?J.e0oO=5==:t= F J: |J P C C'F- ltt ltt'O .Et rO vl F(u)'l'ro()oro(uo(u(lJ(uq, (J rr+J c.g )- ctro)(J)or(tl 9 >z co o o-.) F: cf s4 0- o- o- o- o- (u a-

L .o O O OOOO()OCDOTr)OOOC) !- L 0., ooooooc\ro .[orfroo olr C) f\ CV sf CD N Or O F.l l'\ N tf, O (+-o Ofo . 6l I I . --lH rro Cg)Eg+)gCCCCCC l4J o5=5f(J:rJtt5:r= .) .) z. -) <. ") -f o -) - 2 -) -> o (u t-) th .Jl ,€ q, o c') (ntn ro L -u cc J o_ (t,o tn O- (J (J---e ,o o- -fo o dlLll! --ro (o o o ro rt'.o (o F (-) L)'- .r *., .l-r.F .F.F .F .tt P o L- LAO s L O O L L L t- (IJ @ orcLo- (u oc-c o o o (lJ a) (lJ (u <-< L L o (u L F - ct .P P |o (n p; E o .E tn o U, .P = P > rr= v, (u+, ,.n ttl o =.)lvt ,-E (U (l, o c F{ vl L ro -}r','+- c >o- (o (o q) c.F (.) irJ .o p [: L.r.r c o (uc ct- I (o E L >(D-cd >)O (/|4J.Q= r-rrc|q',.P>(, cN ogl .r Ce A- (J C L .O C O).e C ; ,o(U -C. U'F C O .o /O O 'J., J'F Ct C) I j- d. (Jc:|:<LL(OtncfiX}- I

5B D. Historic Distribution and Abundance During the late 1920's and early 1930's, large numbers of caribou from the Fortymile Herd utiljzed the upper drainages of the Chisana, Nabesna, and White rivers area each fall (Skoog 1968). l^lhen these movements ceased in the early 1930's, remnant groups of caribou remained on the northeastern slopes of the WrangeTl Mountains. The Chisana Herd is thought to have been derived from such groups. Based on discussions with local huntjng guides and some bribf aerial surveys, Skoog (1963, 1968) estimated 3,000 animals in this herd. By the ear'ly 1980's, this estimate had been reduced f,o less than 1,000 animals. The statewide decline in caribou numbers paralleled a decline in the Chisana Herd, which may not have been indicative of a decline in the population but rather of more intensive survey efforts. In 0ctober 1980, an ADF&G survey located 582 caribou in 51 aggregations (Kelleyhouse 1983a). An eitensive aerial survey was conducted irr late November 1981 by local hunting guides, Terry and Debby Over1y, in which 885 caribou in 70 aggregations were actually observed. 0n the basis of this survey, the CH population estimate was raised to some number in excess of 1,000 animals (ibid. ). Kelleyhouse (i985a) reported rhe CH to be stable and to contain 1,000 caribou. Local residents of Chisana beljeved this herd was perhaps twice as large in the 1960's (ibid.).

III. DENALI HERD (DH) A. Di stribution i. Calving area. The Denali Herd utilizes three major calving grounds, as defined by Troyer (i981): the Stampede Calvinq Grounds (SCG), the Wonder Lake Calving Grounds (t^lCG), and th6 cantwel l. calving Grounds (ccc) (see map 5). According to Troyer (1981), the SCG includeo the flats and rolling tiitts between the East Fork and the Clearwarer rivers. The area extends northward to the Stampede Road and southward to the base of the Alaska Range near the foot of the Wyoming Hills and Mount Sheldon. The northern portion of the SCG jncludes some wet lowlands, with sedges and grasses covering the rolling foothi 1l s. The area is genera'liy snow-f ree by the tinre par- turition is to occur. The WCG consists of the region from the headwarers of Moose Creek south to Clearwater Creek and 'its tributaries, east to rhe foot of the Muldrow G'lacier, and west to the Muddy Rjver and Brooker f'lountain. In Troyer,s (1981) sturty, the t,lCG contained scattered snow patches during the calving period. The CCG lies on the south side of the Alaska Range and includes the anea between the headwater drainages of Cantwell Creek to the Chulitna River, all of the mountains and drainages of Easy Pass westward to West Fork, and the Dunkle H1l1s (Troyer 1981). From 1976 to 1980, radio-mon'itoring of 10 adult coyrs indicated that the CCG wds the nost important calving area (Duff and Singer 1982). Even when cows utilized other areas for calving, they often moved to the CCG posrcalving (after the calf was

~~59 r-{ o)@ F{ L (u o L F 'c' L o~~

~~o L (g c)~~

~~ao g ao (lJ +) (F o tn !c o5 l-~~

~~(o (J o -o L (o (J o'- '-)(o = lr)~~

~~(o =~~

60 abour tlrree weeks old) in rn'id June. From I976 to 1982, dn estimated 70, 54,68,42,46, and 33% of the DH, respect'ively, used the CCG for calv'ing and/or postcalving during those years. Troyer (1977 ) and Duff and si nger (L982) have reported data thal suggest that calf survjval may be better at the CCG. In years oi-heavy-slopes snowfall, most calving activity occurred on the iouth-facing-In in the Cantwel I Creek and Bul I Rjver drainages. years of average or low snowfa11, the Cqmp Creek flats, Coloraoo Creek, Costello Creek, attd the Dunkle Hills were used more heavily. Hemm'ing (1971) suggested that the phenology of plant growth on the south slopes of the_Alaska ilange miy offe.r abundant succulent forage during- June. Boertie (1961) oOserved that the main predators, wolves and browtr bears, 1r,,ere at lower densities on the CCG than on the SCG. Brown bear densitjes south of the Alaska Range (CCG) were half (1 bear/Z8 km2) those found on the north side of the range in the park, probably because of bear hunting irr the Cantwell area ('ibid.). 2. tl,Jinter use areas. Frtlm 1976 io 1980, almost the entire Denali ffid i n the area around Wonder Lake and the McKinley River in early November (Troyer 1981). By late November, the herd split jnto two groups. About two-thjrds of the herd gradual ly drj fted northeast down through the Clearwater anO Stony rivers into the Starnpede flats toward the East Fork and Sushana Lakes area. Most caribou wintered around the Sushana Lakes, the Stampede Hills to the north, and in the Sushana Hills between the Teklanika and East Fork rivers. Troyer (1981) estimated two-thirds of the DH wintered in this reglon from 1976 to 1980. The remainder slowly moved westward from the Wonder Lake area, cross'ing the McKinley River and Slippery Creek to lhe Foraker River, then northward from the Foraket' Ri ver and S1 i ppery Creek i nto the spruce-covered lovllands about 25 km (15 m'i) north of the old park boundary (ibid.). B. Movements 1. Postcalving migration route. This route is -generally used by ving Grounds (SCG) or Wonde.r Lake calving- Grounds (ltlcc) (north of the Alaska Range) (Troyer 1981). Cows f rom the scG usual ly move up the s_to_ney River through the mountains to the road in Denali tlational Park (Park Road)-or up the Clearwater River to the headwaters of Moose Creek arrd then eastward along the Park Road to the Thorofare River area. Cows from the WCG also use the road corridor to reach the Thorofare area. The migration route follows the Park Road past Eielson Visitor Center up Stoney Hill and acrclss the Toklat River to Polychrome flats. Carjbou then leave the road on the east end of Polychronte flats, cross the East Fork of the Tok'lat River, and move over a 1,370 m (4,500 ft) pass iust south of Sable Pass. The caribou then descend into the Teklanika River va11ey, move up the valley about B km (5 nti) and over a 1,670 m (5,500 ft) pass into Refuge Valley, and down

61 Refuge Va)1ey to the Sarrctuary River. Steep mountains divert the lrrjnrals to the south over another 1,670 m (5,500 ft) pass that leads into the West Fork of the Windy River. The route cont i nues west 'irrto Cantwel I Creek and the Bul 1 Ri ver, where caribou disperse orrto the Cantwell Calving Grounds (CCG). The lasl two passes are very steep and snow-covered throughout the year and can be a source of mortality for three-week-old calves. Troyer ( 1981 ) mentioned that the route from Thorofare to Cantwell had been used for many years. In fact, Murie (1944) reported the same pattern of movements in the 1930's and early 1940's. Migration activity usually begins in late l'lay, with most of the caribou reaching the CCG by June 10 and some stragglers arriving as late as the end of June (Troyer 1981). uulIs general'ly do not migrate across the Alaska Range but iinger in small groups from the Sanctuary River westward to the Wonder Lake area (ib'id.). 2. Summer miqration ("return migration"). In most recent years' mid JulY and migrate 'la westwa rd i n compa rati vely rger groups tharr those of the eastward migration. The westward migration is esserrtially the same route along the Park Road to the Thorofare-E'ielson area. At this point, most caribou leave the mountains. and disperse toward Moose Creek and across the McKinley River (ibid.). Many caribou stop for a month or so to feed on the open tundra in the Gorge Creek-Upper Thorofare River area (Haber L977). J. Fall nrigration. In September and 0ctober, most caribou are generalfATfributed along the foothills between Wonder Lake ind Sl rppery Creek (Troyer 1981). In some years, caribou . concentrate from Clearwater Creek to the headwaters of Moose creek. In any case, Troyer (1981) described a definitive eastern movement cluring the fall in L976 through 1980' with mosr caribou concentrated dround Wonder Lake and the McKinley River by late October. Caribou then dispersed to the winter ranges clescribed PreviouslY. 4. Spring migrarion. In early April. of each year of Troyer's ffirom the western wintering area made a rapid rnovement to the Stampede Calving Grounds. Caribou used the Bearpaw R'iver to cross over the Kantishna Hills, while others rnigrated up the McKinley River to the Wonder Lake area and moved down the Clearwater River to the Stampede flats. There are insufficient data available to describe movements between areas fnr the remaining herds. C. Present Abundance Helicopter surveys of seven calving areas produced a count of 1,210 caribou, wirh dn estimated mjnimum 1984 postcalving populat'ion of 1,700 aninrals (Buchholtz 1985). Overall herd productivity was high, as illustrated by the high rate of survival of calves born jn 1983, a high rat'io of short year'lings to cows (46:100, N=600), a pregnancy

62 rate of 83%, dnd a high rate of calving success in 1984, whiclt varied f rom 40 to 76 ca'lves:i00 cows (ibid. ). D. Historical Distributiott and Aburidance Murie (1944), Skoog (1968), Buskjrk (1976), arrd Haber t,I97i ) have reviewed the hi stori c di stri butiort and abundance of the DH. Briefly, the DH is believed to have reached a popularion peak some rjme in the mid 1800's and was then followed by a declirre through nrost of the late 1800's (HaOer 1977). Caribou numbers in the Denali region began to 'increase again iri the late iB00's and early 1900's (Skoog 1968). From the early 1900's to the early 1940's, a peak of 20,000-35,000 animals was reaclred and maintained throughout this period (Haber L977 , Murie 1944). By the I ate i940's or early 1950's, herd numbers had decl'ined to 6,000-9,000 carjbou. The Dll apparently stabi I ized at 7,000-9,000 caribou unti I 1962. lkoog (1963) estjmated the herd at 12,000 caribou irr 1963. A calving ground survey completecl jn June L964 resulted jrr an estirnate of i4,000 adulrs (Skoog 1968). Haber's (1977 ) grouncl counts during the spring migration-In period (June) for 1966 and 1967 numbered B'000 animals. an attempr to reconcile this figure with the earlier and later ground estimates (7,000-9,000), Haber (I977 ) suggested that a poriion of the neighboring Nelchina Herd had ternporarily joined the Denal i Herd. However, from 1968 to I974 the herd iteaOily declined from 8,000 to 1,500 caribou (Haner 1977). Busklrk (1976) estirnated 1,000 caribou in the DH in I975, whereas Troyer (I977', I978,1980) estimated that the DH maintaitred a stable iopulation numbering approximately 900 to 1,500 animals between 1976 and 1980. Table 2 iummarizes available population estimates for the DH. Detailed descriptions of the h'istorical distribution are. sketchy artd complicated. llaber (1977), Skoog (1968), Buskirk (1976), and l'lurie (1944) contain the best descriptions of use of the Denali area by the DH.

IV. KILBUCK-KUSKOKWII'I I'IOUNTAINS HTRD (KMH) A. Di stribution 1. Calving area. No specif ic ca'lving area has yet been delineated ToFfiE-KTTEuck-Kuskokwim Mountai n Herd (KMH) . Patten (1985a ) ' however, observed newborn calves in a group of 10 caribou a'long Gold Creek near Kisaral ik Lake on i8 l'lay 1984. Dinneford (1983), on 14 May 1982, observed a total of 32 caribou w'ith 4 newborn calves in Quicksilver Creek, North Fork Creek, and the Kisaral'ik River 3.2-8.0 km (2'5 mi) below Kisaralik Lake. Dinneford's (1983) and Patten's (1985a) observations of caribou ca'lving occur in the sanE general area - the upper Kisaralik drainage. 2. Summer- range. Caribou are generally found 'in small, widely ffi@oups jn alpine tundra and glacral cirques in late summer (Patten 1985a). Caribou occur jn low densjties in the Ni shl i k, Chi kum'i nuk , upper Ki sa ral i k, North Fork , and Quicksilver drainages, as well as near Kisaraljk Lake, Canyorr

~~63 Table 2. Population Size Estimates for the Denali Caribou Herd, 1919-84~~

~~Yea r Es t'ima te Iype of Survey Sou rce~~

1919 25,000 Skoog 1968 1922 30,000 Skoog 1968 1 935 20,000 Murie 1935 194 1 20,0oo-30,ooo Ground counts Murie i944 1952 6,000 pl us Ground counf,s Haber 1977 sca r"tered bands 1955 8000+ Ground counts Haber 1977 1956 B,000 Ground counts Haber 1977 1959 g,000 Ground counts Haber 1977 1960 8,000-9,000 Ground counts Haber 1977 1961 7 ,7 15+ Ground counts Haber 1977 1962 9,000 Ground counts Haber 1977 1963 l2,000 Aerial su rvey Skoog 1963 1964 14,000 Aeri a I su rvey Skoog 1968 1966 B,000 Ground counts Haber 1977 1967 8,000 Ground count/aeri a I su rvey Haber 1977 1968 5,000 G rou nd count/aeri a I su rvey Haber 1977 i969 4,500 Ground count/aeri al su rvey Haber 1977 t970 4,500 Grouncl count/aeri a I survey Haber 1977 197 T 3,000 Ground count/aeri al su rvey Haber 1977 1972 1 ,5C0 Ground count/ae.rial su rvey Haber 1977 1973 1,500 Grouno count/aeria I su rvey Haber 1977 r97 1 1,500 G rou nd count/aerj a I survey Haber 1977 1976 900-1,200 Ground count/aeri al su rvey froyer 1977 L977 900-1,200 G round count/aeri a I su rvey Troyer 1978 1978 1,200-1,5oo G rou nci count/aeri a I su rvey Troyer 1979 1979 I,200-1,500 G rou nd count/aeri a I survey Troyer 1980 r9B0 1,000-1,2oo Grouno count/aeri a I su rvey Buchhol tz 798I 1981 1,200-1,500 G rou nd count/aeri a I survey Buchhol tz L982 1982 1,200-1,500 Grourrd count/aeri a I survey Buchholtz 1983 1 983 900-1,200 Ground count/aeri a I survey Buchhol tz 1984 1984 i,700 Aeri a I Buchholtz 1985

~~--- means no data were available.~~

64 Creek, Gold Creek, dnd Gold Lake (ibid.). In addition to these drainages, spring 1985 aerjal surveys revealed carjbou use in the CioolieO' Creek , uppel' Kwethl uk R'iver, and Heart Lake drainages ( ibid. ). 3. Winter use area. In aeria.l surveys completed in February 1985' caFi6ou-TFffi indicated use of Crooked Creek between the Kwethluk and Kisaral ik rivers (Patten in press). Caribou were also reported in low numbers in the upper Kisaralik drainage and in the headwaters of the Eek River. B. Present Abundance Patten (in press) est'imated ?00 anjmals"irr this herd. However' ano 1985 may eitremely heavy harvests duri ng wi rtter -ea11y- .sp.ring have reiuced ifre KMH to on'ly a few aninral s. Ci tizens reported i11ega1 and excessive harvests of at'least 90-120 caribou in three sepaiate instances by snownachine par_ty hunts.in January, February' anb March 1985. Bi April 1985, only a small ttumber of caribou (possibly only fivei remained in the northern Kilbuck Mountains' No iiribgu were observed calving in the upper Kisaral'ik-Gold Lake Oiainages in May 1985, in iontrast to May 1982 and May 1984 iOinn.io.d 1983, Patten in press). USFhJS helicopter surveys of the found no northern and central portions'These of the Kjlbuck Mountains caribou in June 1985. observations caused the Board of Garne to close the hunting season in this area during the 1985-1986 regularory year. c. H'iitorical Distribution and Abundance !f.".g tfbOAl rev'iewed the historical distribution and abundance of cari5ou in Western Alaska in great detail. Caribou numbers were an bel i eved to have peaked by f tre 1860' s. Duri rr9 .gh.i s .qeu.k' ippu.untfV huge number of Caribou ranged over the Yukon-Kuskokwinr tbi.rlanOs,-Nunivak and Nelson islancls and quite likely into the upper Kuskokwim River area. The predominant movement pattern- was north-Sguth, crossing the Yukon and Kuskokwim rivers. From 1875 to 1895, caribou tlistr-ibutign jn the area changed radical ly. The nort[-south migrations ceaSed;, carjbou - were externrinated front Nunivak Island ind disappeared from the lowlands and hills of the lower Kuskokwim River, where they had been so nulnerous previously' Stoog (igOA) attributed thjs disappearance of caribou to "1arge- icat6 slaugf'tet of an'imals by Natives." HolveVer, a large remnant herd remaiied in the Kilbucli Mountains. After 1900, severe wildfires destroyed much of the spruce forests witlr lichen understory upon which ciribou were dependent (ADF&G L977). I|q. introduct'ion of domestic reindeer herding in this area in the 1900's also nega- these reindeer iivety affected available iaribou range. ^Some of escapLO from their normal range along th_e Bering S-ea -coast and by 1925'were ranging- jn portions- of the Kilbuck and Taylor_mountains (St oog 1968) . Mlertie' ( 1938) and various A l aska Game Commi ssion i"po"[s in tne 1930's showed no caribou along the lower Yukon and Kuikokw'im livers, a few scattereo herds in the Ktrskokwim Mountains, and only feral rijndeer in the Kilbuck and laylor mountajns. There seems ft have been little change since then. Presently, however,

65 Parten (1985a) oelieves the KMH is derived from wild Mulchatna Carjbou Herd (MH) stock ancl not feral reindeer or caribou-reindeer crosses descended from the escaped oomestic stock of the 1920's and 1930's. Patten (1985a, in press) presents evidence showing the expansion of the KMH into the Kilbuck Mountajns area. This area conrains only a 1ow-density caribou population and large areas of unoccupied habitar.

\/ ANDREAFSKY MOUNTAINS HERD (AMH) A. Present Abundance No reasonably dccurate popu'lation estimate has been made for the Andreafsky Mountains Herd. Rates of inunigration from the l,lestern Arctjc Herd (hlAH) vary annual 1y, depending on winter movement patrerns of the lllAH (Parten in press). Winter weather conditions can greatly influence levels of harvest pressure from local hunters (lnio. ). Because the AMH probably contains feral reindeer and reindeer-caribou crosses, historical and current escape rates of domestic reindeer can also influence AMH population estimates (ibid.). All of these factors have caused large discrepancies jn reported population size, ranging from an estimated Pgpylation of 20b aninnis'(Machioa 1984) and 400 animals (Patten 1985a) to 5,000 animals (Patten in press). B. Htstorical Distribution and Abundance There is very I ittle h'istorical information specific to the Andreafsky Mounrains Herd. Skoog (1968) described the existence of a very llrge caribou population inhabltating the l9w_er Yukon and Kuskol

~~VI. DELTA CARIBOU HERD (DCH) A. D'istributiorr 1. Calvinq area. The traditional core calving area lies between En'-e--asTf-ork of the Little Delta River and the Delta River~~

65 (see map 2) and is believed f,o have been used since af, least the 1950's (ibid.). Table 3 describes rhe level of use of the core calving area from 1979 to 1983. Alternative areas used for calving in a year of lower use of the core area, such as 1981, include the higher ridges dnd plateaus bounded by Dry Creek, Iowa Ridge, and the East Fork of the Little Delta River, the upper Totatlanika River drainage, and the plateaus at the head of Lignite Creek (ibid.). In 1982, caribou appeared to be displaced f rom the trad'it'ional core area by a 100% snow cover of 15-45 cm depth that was heavily wincl-packed and/or crustecl (Davis and Valkenburg i9B3). Caribou were able to utilize a snow-free area of tussock tundra habitat sini'ilar to that in the core area by moving a di stance of 16 km ( 10 mi ) to the northwest. As the calving period nears 'in late April and May, cows and short yearlings move into this area of mairrly tussock tundra to feed on Eriophorum buds (Davi s et al . 1982) . Although most calves are born on tussock tundra, many others are born'in areas of low shrub and spruce woodlands (Davis et al. 1985). During the calving period, bul'ls and other short yearl ings remain widely scattered over the enti re DCI-| range (Hemming 197I). Al though the identification of peaks in calving activity may vary widely, depending on the definition, table 3 alscl presents annua'l peak calvirrg dates. 2. Winter use area. There are very few published data describing TF wTnffiiTfribution of the Delta Caribou Herci. An aerial survey made in February L964 indicated that rnost of the animals occupied the spruce flats and foothills between the Delta River ancl Dry Creek, with the largest concentrations betweeri the Little Delta R'iver and the Delta River (Lentfer 1965). The direction of observed caribou trails suggestecl use of the open ridges and plateaus at the headwaters of the Delta River, Delta Creek, and Little Delta River. Sntaller groups of caribou were found near the head of the Tatlarrika River and in the Tarrana flats between Delra Creek and the Little [.ielta River. Davis et al. (1985) suggested that foothill areas appeared f,o be used more than the flats or niciuntainous areas. Ground vegetation 'in the foothills and mountains is frequently available to caribou during winter because of strong winds (ib'id.). Since L975, when the DCH began to increase in numbers, a consisf,erit trend of caribou winter use'in the extreme western portion of the herd's annual range has been very evident (Davis and Valkenburg 1e84). B. Present Abundance Table 4 summarizes all available abundance estimates and count data for the Delta Herd. Based on the June 1984 photocerrsus, this herd numbered about 6,300 caribou (Jennings 1985). This estimate includes caribou occupying the Yanert River drainage. The average annual growth rate since I979 is approximately 14%. Currently, the herd contains about 20% of the estimated total number of caribou within the Western and Interior regions.

~~67 Table 3. Peak Calving Period and Level of Use of the Core Calv'ing Area for the Delta Herd, 1979-83~~

~~Peak Calving %of Herd Cal ving Yea l' Activity Period In Core Area~~

~~1979 25-29 Nlay 75-90+ i980 I9-2? ltray 75-90+ 1981 16-17 May 50 r982 23-26 t4ay 5-10 19B3 2I May 75-90+~~

~~Sources: Davis arrd Preston 1980; Dov'is and Valkenburg 1981, 1983, L984; Davis et al . 1982.~~

~~Table 4. Avajlable Abundance Estimates for the Delta Caribou Herd, 1957-B4a~~

~~Numbe r Yea r Courrted Estimate Sou rce~~

1957 1,500h Davis et al. 1983 1963 5,000; Skoog 1963 t964 5,000" Lentfer 1965 1965 - 1970 5,0c0 f Davis et al. 1983 1973 2,a88 2,r98-2,409: Davis and Preston 1980 1979 3,160 3,700-3,961: Davis et al. 1983 1980 3 ,156 4,194-4 ,448" Davis and Valkenburg 1983; Davis et al . 1982 1981 4 ,180-5 3?0c Davis et al. 1983 19E2 6,111 6,500-7,500 Davis and Valkenburg 1983 1983 5,425 6,300 Davis and Valkenburg 1984 1984 6,300 Jennings 1985

--- means no data were avdilable. a Census methodcrlogy varied annua'l 1y and should be considered for betweerr-year compa ri sons. b Excl udes cal ves. c Ranges are not confidence intervals but are extrapolations by two different methods

6B C. Historical Distribution and Abundance Early exp_lorers such ds Glenn and Mendenha'll reported aburrclant nunbers of caribou present on the uplands of the north side of the Alaska Rarrge and the Delta River (Skoog 1968). The Vuno.l River was considered a very_ important. hunting- area for caribou by local Natives in the early 1900's ('ioid. ). Murie (193S) repor-ted caribou movements dt the head of Delta River occurring from 1918 through i92t. Murie al so stated that caribou were common year_round residents of- the uppgr Delta River area. skr.iog (196s) polntecr out that seasonal migrations of the Fortymile Herd ind the'Denali Held, which had reached peak numbers.rn the 1920's, brought ri,,y.uribou into the current range of the DCH. After the wjnt6r of t-g:t-!g32, these massive migrations stopped. From the mid 1930's until 1954; caribou were scarce within tfre range of the DCH (Davis et al. fggil. Ptrpulation estjmates made ouring- this period indicated several hundred resident caribou in the a-rea (inib.1. sc,tt;1-;.-iigsot described smal I scattered bands of caribou inhabiting the norrh slopes of the Alaska Range between Wood River and the Delta River. These caribou were founo prinrarily- along the headwarers of the drainages and were estimated to numbei 300 aninral, , ,i tn the greatest concentration'in the vicinity of the Little Delta River. lllatson attd Scott (1956) later demonsirated that srru.y-rlchniques used by Scott et al. grossly underestimdtec actuil numbers. Hc.rwever, as Skoog (1968) pointed out, the distribution of caribou has not changed much s'ince that tinre. In Lgsl , 0l son iiesT j reported that the DCH was increasing and numberecj 1,000 to'1,50c caribou. Skgqg- (1963) estinrated 5,000 caribou (excluoing calvesi in the DCH in 1963, using reconnaisance surveys and inte-rviews with local residents: Tfis_ large increase in DCH-size nray be attributed to qn-ingress of animals frclm the Nelchina Herd, whjch was exparrding rapidly- th.at (Skoog at -time, 1968). flowever, rapid growth foi irrwing che wolf control jnitiatect in 1954 could itso' expiain the growti (Davis et a1.. 1983). From 1963 to 1g70, popuiarion tstinrates for the Dcll remained at the 5,000 level. In rgl3, the first ApDcE census of the DCH resulted irr population estimates of 2,IgB and 2'409 caribou (Davis and Preston 1980), based on two rnethods of extrapolating age and sex compclsirion o'ata. The first estimate js derived only from the calculared number of caribou photographed, whereas the second estimate attempts to account fqr dne number of caribou missed by_ the photo coverage. Although no censuses wer.L, conducted from I973 to 1979, available calf survival data suggest that the herd decl ined thrc'_ugh 1975 and begarr-wol increasing agai-n' in I976 (Davis e-t^_g^1. 19s3). tn-itiation of a i coni.ut "progrur in early winter L976, along with closure of the hunting season i'n rclq, resulted in increased calf survival and inc*reased yearl ing recruitment i.nro the pQRulation after rg7s. Froni 1976 to tggq, th; DCH.displayed a ge.neral pattern of steady growth. Througnout this period, the distribution of rhe DCH hai iemaineo constjnt, lying between the Nenana River anct the Delta River.

69 \/rr. MAC0MB HERD (MH) A. Di stributic.rn 1. Calvinq area. The main calving area was located south of Fish Lake in 1984 (ibid.), whereas in 1983 most calving activity occurred between the heaowaters of Berry and Bear creeks (Johnson 1984). 2. Winter use area. Based on radiotelemetry data, it appears rhat most of the herd winters on the Macomb Plateau and Little Gerstle highlands (Johnson 1984, 1985). A small group of 35 caribou has been observed wintering irr the upper Jarvis Creek <1r'ainage (Johnson 1984). B. Present Abundance In an extensive aerial census of the Macomb Herd completed in 0ctober 1983, almost 500 caribou were observed, resulting in a fal'l pr.rpulation estimate of approximately 700 anirnal s (Johnson i985). lJerd compositicrn data suggest the f'lacomb Herd is stable (ibid. ). Johnson (i981) stated that the APDCE census technique could not be utilized for estimating the size of the Macomb Herd, because the herd does not sufficiently aggregate after calving to allow an accuraf,e cellsus. C. Historic Distribution and Abundance Dav'is and Preston (1960) stateo that caribou hao been calving on the Macomb Plateau since at least the mid 1950's. Skoog (1968) considereo this subpopulatjon of carjbou to be part of the Delta Caribou l-ierd (DCH), whereas Hemmirrg (1971) oesignated the Macomb Herd as part of the Mentasta Herd. The Macomb llerd probab'ly existed as a separate herd during that time, but survey efforts were not sufficient to allow its identification. 0n the basis of Skoog's (1968) Oetirrition of a herd, Davis and Neilarrd (1975) considered rhe !?acomb Herd a separate drstinct herd. Davis and Preston (1980) point out that both the DCH and the Mentasta Herd have used their own traditional calving areas. Sex and age structure and recruitment rates of the MH are different from those of the DCH or Mentasta Herd. Between October 1966 and March 1968, 205 Delta caribou were niarked; none of these marked caribou have been observed east of the Delra River. The size of the MH does not appear to have fluctuated very much over time. The herd was estimated f,o number 800-1,000 animals in the mid I970' s (Johnson i98i). in the early 1980's, populat'ion estimates for the l'lH remained fairly constant at around 700 caribou (Johnson 1985). vrI]. YANERT HERD (YH) A. Di stri buii on a. Calving area. From 1981 to 1983, most caribou of the YH calved at locatjons generally above 1,500 m (5,000 ft) and as high as 2,20A n (7,200 ft) (Davis and Valkenburg 198a). Calving coribou are widely scarrered and often found on high, rocky ridges. This behavjor is considered somewhat, dissimilar to thac rcported for most bdrren-ground caribou and may well be an adaptive strategy to avoid predation by brown bears and wolves.

70 Mr,rst ca1 vi ng acti vi ty has been centered i n the headwaters of the fol l owi rrg drai nages : Dean , Di ck , Edgar, B'ig Grizzly , arlo Little Grizzly creeks (Davis et al . 1982, Da,/'is and Val kerrburg 1e84). B. Present Abundance In a caribou census conducted on 14 and 15 June 1983 withtn the range of the DCH and the YH, 92? caribou were thouEht _to be YH aniirals (Davis and Valkerrburg i984). Because the DCH was located 'in the upper Wood River drainage, an ared frequently occupied by the YH, movements of caribou aggregations between the Yanert and Wood rjvers confounded the census. Therefore, the 1983 est'imate may be of questionable value. 0bservers censusing.the YH jn June 1982 counted 680 caribou (Davis and ValkenburS 1983). C. Historic Distribution and Abundance js Because the existence of the YH was confirmed oniy jn 1981, there very little documented history associated with this herd (Dav'is et al. 1982).

IX. FORTYMILE HERD (FH) A. Di stribution 1. Calvinq area. Kelleyhouse (1981a) stated that the FH shifted calvnf areas more frequently than any other caribou herd i n Alaska. From L97B to 1983, the FH calved irr t,he southern tributaries of the Seventynri'le River and the upper drainage of rhe charley River (Ke11ey[ouse 1985b). fiow_ever, in 1984 the Fli calving arta was closer- to the traditional (pre-1978) calvttig area ii ttre upper Bi rch Creek drairrage (ib jd. ). a. Postcalvinq ar'ea. In the last six years, sitlce the FH sh'ifted ffirea to rhe Seventymile River dtrd the upper Chtrrley Rivei drainages, caribou have utilizeo the Mt. Harper area a-nd occasionalty tne upper reaches of the Middle Fork of the Fortymile River in the postcalving period. 3. w.inter use area. In recent years, rrost of the FH has ffiouthernha]fofGameMana9emelrtSubunit(G|vlS) 20E. In early 1982, FH caribou wene scattered throughou! !!9 northwestern portion of GMS 20E and mirrgled with 5'000-15'000 caribou from the Porcupine Herd that were wintering south clf the Yukon Rj ver ( Kel I eyhouse i983r, ) . In some yea rs , significant numbers of FH caribou winter in the Ladue River drainage or the Dennison Fork. B. Present Abundance A photocensus of the Fortymile Herd (FH) was c.opqleted'in June 1984. At that time, L2,356 caribou were counted, wh'ich was approximate!.V- the same known minimum number of caribou counted in the June 1983 photocensus (Kelleyhouse 1984, 1985b). The FH nrost Iikely contained 14,000 animals in 1983 (ibid.). C. Historical Distribution and Abundance Most of the printed historical information anC many verbal records describing the Fortymile Herd have been sumnrarize

77 deta'iled infornation is referred to these sources. Most of lhe followirig dccount is derived from Skoog (1968). Very I ittle historical infornrat'ion ex'ists that describes FH numbers and disrribution prior to 1900. The earliest data indjcate the distribution before 1900 was centered and ranged further east and southeast than in recent tintes, extending as far as the Skagway- tlhitehorse area. A1 I obset'vatjons during the 1880-1900 period indicated rhat a'large population of caribou occupied the Klondike courrtry and other portiorrs of southwest Yukon Terrirory but were scarce in the upper Tartana River region. At the turn of the century, the FH cl'istribution is bel ieved to have shifted to the northwest f rom the [,ihi tehorse, Skagway area. From 1900 to L920, herd numbers increased very rapidly, and the herd's range expanded in all directjons (LeResche 1975). In the early 1.900's, large numbers of caribou w'inlered near Dawson. Between 1906 and 1913' 'large fal I migrations of caribr.ru occurred in the Fairbanks-Circle area. In the fall of 1920, Murie (1935) described how he estimated a populdtion of 568,000 caribou nigrating across the Steese Highway northeast of Fairbanks. The main fall movement of FH caribou continued to the southeast, with most animals wintering in Canada along the fr'ills adjacent to the Ladue, Sixtymile, Klondike, Steward, (Davi al By the mid 1920's Pel ly, and White rivers s et . 1978). - ' cari-bou numbers ancl distrjbutjon (see map 6) in east-central Alaska hact probably peakecl. In the winter of 1924, caribou were observed in the Wh'irehorse area and near the summits of the coast range above Skagway for the first time since before 1900 (Murie 1935). _Many caribou v.,ere crossing the Tanatra River, movittg through Isabel and Mentasta passes into Southcentral Alaska, and extending as fa.r as the Lake Lc,ujse flats and Copper Center. To the east, many anima'ls were mixirrg wj th caribou f rom the Porcupine Herd wirrterirrg at the heads of ttre Porcupine and Peel rivers and in the 0gilvie ltiountains (ibid.). To the northwest, seasonal movements across the Tanatia at Nenana and the Yukon River between Rampart and Stevens Vi'l1age were common during the i920's (Skoog 1968). Murie (i935) reevaluated his I9?0 estimate of 568,000 caribou to between one arro two million animals. In the late 1920's and early 1930's, the cljstributicrt and movements of FH caribou changed. The movements into Southcentral Alaska via Isabel and Mentasta passes ceased in 1931 (Scott et al. 1950). Throughout the 1930's, the main movement pattern of caribou from southeast to northwest remained but with everl-jncreasing nlovementS to the northeast to winter in the Fort Yukon-Circle region (Skoog 1968). However, after 1939' caribou were once again scarce near Fort Yukon. Although actual observations diO not exist, Skoog and others believed that large numbers of caribou had moved into the arctic regions. During the 1940's, the FH appeared to itrcrease steadily, and the pattern of calving_in the nortirwest and wintering in the southeast was maintained. In June 1953, Skoog (1956) esrimated a herd size of 40,000 caribou, with high arrnual recruitment for the next few years. During the wint'er of-1956-1957, most of the FH wintered in the Ogilvie Mountains north

~~7? at t9 'a~~

~~t-\ +' {d Or o t , t.: t o t a, I I ot 3 rl o aa |lJ @ a l> \I F\ I O) a al:-~~

~~(6 P ."'. (u t1~~

rO Yukon o ask a '(' Al L C a I o 5 C o L (o j .a o. (u 6ao a oo o : o uJ P s- e cq ,t9 o 2-z lr- a9 t o a 7z -c :o a :o P ,?: € \ a a -) q- ;l (J ea! ?\ G6 a\tl oct o oo +) 1\ (U ol -o { GG a ut ul L .u 2Z .+J ul lll <./ C,q a Et'a a Za9;J? Zo !'.t.-.t'u : i

~~!:tv;.a_ I r.o :!-- --;-r-f-: = =~~

t3 of Dawson, an area also usecl by the Porcupine Herd. Skoog (1968) mentioned that in l'lay L957, as many as 30,000 caribou did not return to Alaska and were be'lieved to have moved northward with the Porcupine Herd. Davis et al. (i978) pointed out that evidence also exists indicating thai these animals ultimately did return to the FH. The herd contjnued t0 grow steadily through rhe late 1950's and early 1960's and may have numbered about 50'000 animals in 1962 and 1963- (Skoog 1963, 1964). Davis et al. (1978), however, presented the possibility that a significant decline in numbers clccurred from i960 to 1964. The largest rrumber of caribou observed and reported after 1960 wds 26,000- in fal I i963 (Skoog 1964). Davis et al . (1978) suggested that the numbers of caribou obse-rved bJ'Skoog il ial1 iSOf-may have comprised nearly the total population for the FH at that time. In any case, the linrited population eStimates made after 1963 suggested a lowered populat'ion from the 40'000-50'000 level tu one in-at numbered 20,000-30,000 caribou. LeResche (1975) estimated the FH population to number 20,000 animals in 1969. Jennirrgs (tglZ) furtfrer substantiated the ongoing_rqPig decline of the FH-with ari estimate of 10,000 caribou in fall L972. In I973, the f i rst cletai led census using-5,3I2 ihe APDCE population est'imation i.if,n'iqr" yiel ded an estimate of caribou (Dav'is et .al . 1978) . This pioceOure was repeated the following _year and resulted in an estimate of 4,U41 animals in 1974. The clecline in numbers of the FH uras dCConrpdnie

74 X. BEAVER MOUNTAiNS HERD (BMH) A. Distributiorr l. Calvirgareq. The- B_MH has been observed calving in the Beaver il6TiETFrrTnce re6e (Henrnrins uno F.suu Ezb'j.' plguu (iga4, 1985) confirmed calving activity on the northwest side of the Beaver Mountains near the Windy Creek drainage in lgSZ and 1983. However, i n 1984 , after niov i ng f rom wi ntir range to the area previously used for calving, the herd clispersed wiOely anO calved from the Iditarod Lakes area ro the ldwer Dishna iliver area (Pegau 1985). 0.n.6 Mqy rggz, a group of caribou moving south from the "traditional" calving area were observed with calves (Pegau 1984). B. Present Abundance In late June 1983, i,164 caribou were counted in a census based-ir,i, on aerial photographs of almost rhe entire herd (pegau 19g5). census indicated an estimated population of 1,200--1,500 caribou in the BMH. In a similar census.completed at rhe same time in lgBZ, 713 carjbou were counted (pegau 1993). previous population estimates ranged from 1,200 to 2,b00+ during the 1970,s to i low ot 1'000 caribou_ in 1980 (ibid. ). _ It appears tiat the BlvlH is currently ar least stable or increasirrg slightiy in numbers. C. Historical D'istribution and AOunOince- The Kuskokwim Mounrains have'large not supported great numbers of caribou in recent times.- Howgver, herds were i'eported to occur in rhe Innoko River val)ey (Lutz 1960). At the turn of the century there were few caribou in. the p-resent range of the BMH, but miny olo trails were still evident (Dice 1921, Hemming l97l). Until the late 1930's, the area was_ _occupied by the Tw'itchel I reindeer herd (pegau 1984). The Twitchell herd was abandoned in the eanly 194tt's, inO the rentaining reindeer probably'integrated with wilci ciribou i; the (Hemming drea 1971). Several traiti typical of reindeer have been observed irl the _BMHi (1) reduced dispersal throughout the year, (2) occurrence of calving activity two'to three weeks earlier than adjacent herds, and (3)_observatjon of an aninral with a pinto coat during caribou surveys in 1969, suggesting that at least bne of the physical characteristics of domeslic reindeer was stil I being expressed (llemming 197r, pegau 1984) . A very smal I number of caribou were reported in the Kuskokwim Mounrains west of McGrath (Scott 1952). The first calving observations along ihe crest of the Beaver Mountains were only reported in 1969 (H-emming and pegau reTo). ,XI. SUNSHINE MOUNTAIN HERD (SMH) A. Present Abundance Pegau (19S4) estinrated the_populat'ion to number 525-750 caribou, based on a survey in iune i983. During late June 1982,410 caribou were counted irr f ive groups wi rhin the range of th'is he1d, and 300-500 caribou believeo to be SMH animals weie observed ouringr the- .- winter of 1981-l99z in the I'lixon River f lats (pegau 19g3)

75 B. Historic Distribution dnd Abundance No pertinent hjstorical irrformation wds found. xlt. BIG RIVER (FAREr,,lELL) HERD (BRH) A. Present Abundance The Btg R'iver Herd was estinrated to number 650-750 animals during the i982-1983 regulatory year (Pegau 1985). However, during summer 1983 two large groups totaling 325-375 caribou dispersed from the nrain herd and apparently did not return tu the traclitional calving area in 1984 (ibid.). The remainder of the herd utilized their normal range, but the size of lhe herd hao dininished by half (ibid.). B. Historic [Ji stribution and Aburrdance No pertinent hjstorical jnfnrnrarion was fourrd. xlrr. RAINY PASS HERD (RPH) A. Present Abundance Pegau (1984) estimated approximately 1,500 caribou in the Rainy Pass Herd. B. Histor"ic Distribution and Abundance No pertinent historical inforrrration was fourrd. x r v. T0NZ0NA HERrJ ( TH ) A. Present Abundance The Tcinzona Herd c

REFERENCES ADF&G. 1977. The status of wildlife in Alaska. Reprinted from the draft Alaska Wildlife Management Plans. 628 pp. BCDIF. I97?. Big game dara index file. Unpubl. data. Anchorage. Bergerud, A.T, I974. The role of the environment in the aggregation, movement and disturbance behavior of caribou. Pages 552-584 in V. Geist and F. Walther, eds. The behavior of ungulates and its F-elation to management. iUCN Publ . New Ser. No. ?.4. I'lorges, Switzerland. Boertje, R.D. 1981. Nutritional ecology of the Denali Caribou Herd. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Alaska, Fajrbanks. 294 pp.

Buchholtz, M.J. 1985. Caribou survey-inverrtory progress report. Pages 19-20 in A. Seward, €d. Caribou survey-inventory progress report. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Resr. Vol. 15. Juneau. Buskirk, S. 1976. The h'istory of the llcKinley Caribou Herd. Mount McKinley Nati onal Park, Al aska , unpubl . rept. 9 pp.

76 Davis, J.L. 1978.._ History_and currerrt status of Alaska caribou herds. pages 1-8 in D.R. Kleirr ancl R.G. t,Jhite, eds. Parameters c;f caribou populatiSns-Uniu. in Alaska. , Proceed_ings o_f a syrnposium and workshop. Biol . pup., Alaska, Fairbanks, Spec. Rept. No. 3.

Davis, .1.1. , and K.A" Nei'land . 1975. A study proposal : evaluation of conditjon of attimals in the Delta Herd and iti oearing upon reproduction. Unpubl. minreo rept. ADF&G, Fairbanks. 40 pp. clieo in Davis and Preston 1980.

~~Davis, J.1., and D.J. Preston. 1980. Calf mortality irr the Delta Caribou Herd. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in |,Jildl. Rest. proj-. l.l-12-11, Job 3.26R: Juneau . 29 pp,~~

~~Davis, J.1., and P. Valkenburg. 1981. Yearlirrg rnorta'!ity in the Delta caribou llerd. , ADF&G, Fed. nio ir, l.Jildl. REst. Finai rept. projs. W-17-11 and W-21-1, Job 3.26R. Juneau. lg pp.~~

. 1983. Deniography of the De'lta car.ibou Herd under varying rates of natur'al mortality and harvest by hunrans. ADF&G, Fed. Aid lri Wiict. Resr. Prog. rept. Proj . W-ZZ-I, Job g .Zlg,. Juneau . 50 pp. . 1984. Demography of the Delta Caribou Herd under varying rates of natural mortality and harvest by humans. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 3.ZIR. Juneau. 55 pp. Davis. R.J. J.1., Shideler, and R.E. LeResche. I978. Forrynrjle- Caribou Herd studies. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Final rept. Prgjs. W-17-6 and /, Jobs 3.13R,3.15R, and 3.16R. juneau. 151 pp.

Davis, J.1., P. valkenburg, anc s.J. Harbo, Jr. rg7g. Refinement of the aerial photo-direct count-extrapoiarion caribou census technique. ADF&G, Feo. Aid in tlildl. Resr. Finar rept. proj. t,J-17-11. Juneau. zs pp, Davisr J.L -, P. Valke_rrb_urg, and R.D. tJtrertje . 1982. Demography of the Delta 'i ' ca ri bou Herd. ADF&G, Fed. Ai d n t,li I dl . Rest . proi'". w-zt-2, Job No. 3.27R. Juneau . 24 pp.

. 1983. Denrography of the trelta Caribou Herd, 1954_19g1. Acta Zool. . I75:135-137. --En-n . 1985. Di sturbance dno the Del ta Caribou Hero. Pages Z-6 in ---T.I[. trlartel I and D. E. Russel I , ecls. Caribou and human activity. Proceedings of rhe first North American caribou workshop, t,lhitehorsl, Yukon,28-29 sept. 1983. canad. hlildl. serv. Spec. publ., Ottawa. Dice, L.R. 792r. Notes on the manmals of Interior Alaska. J. Mammal 2(I) :20-28.

77 Dinneford, W.B. 1983. Caribou survey-inventory progress report. Pages 24-25 in J.A. Barrtett,ed. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wi ldl . Rest. Vol . i3. Proj . W-22-1, Job 3.0. Juneau.

~~Duff, S. , and F.J. Singer . 1982. Caribou use of the Cantwel'l calving grounds, Denali National Park and Preserve, Alaska. USDI-NPS. Research/Resounces Manage. Rept. AR-1. 38 pp.~~

~~Haber, G.C. 1977. Socjo-ecr-,log'ica1 dynanrics of woives and prey in a subarct'ic ecosysteni. Ph.D. Dissert. , Univ. British Columbia, Vancouver. 817 pP.~~

Hemnt'irrg, J.E. l9TL The distribution and movement patrerns of caribou in Aiaska. hlildl. Tech. Bull. ttlo. 1. ADF&G, Juneau. 60 pp. Henning, J.8., and L.P. Glenn. 1968. Caribou report. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in Wildl. Rest. Projs. W-15-R-2 and 3. Juneau. 41 pp.

Henm'ing, J.E. , and R. E. Pegau . 1970. Caribou report. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t{ildl. Rest. Proj. l,J-I7-l ano W-i7-2. Juneau. 42 pp, Fiirrman, R.A. 1985. Statewjde harvest arrd population status. Page iii iri A. Seward, Bd. Annual report of survey-inventclry activ'ities. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in !'Jiloi. Rest. Vol. 15. Juneau.

~~Jennirrgs, L.B. 7972. Annual survey and inventory report. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in j l,rl I dl . Rest. Prrrg . t^/-i7-R. Juneau.~~

~~. 1960. Caribou survey-invenf,ory progress report, L978-79. Fages i,' R.A. Hinman, Bd. Annual report oi survey-inventory activitiis. -lJl43ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wjldl. Rest. Vol. 10. Juneau.~~

. 1985. Caribou survey-inventory progress report, 1983-84. Pages in A. Seward, ed. Anrrual report of survey-inventory activities. -3::l Al-iF&G, Fed. Aid in Wjldl. Rest. Vol . i6. Proj. W-22-4. Juneau. Johnsorr, D.M. 1981. Caribou survey-inventory progress report, 1980-81 Pages 43-44 in R.A. llinman, Bd. Annual report of survey-inventory act'ivities. AIJF&G, Fed. Ai d j n Wi 1d] . Resr. Vol . 12. Juneau. __-33:S5. 1984. Caribou survey-inventory progress report, i982-83. Pages in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. ADF&G, Fed. A'id in Wildl . Rest. Vol . 14. Juneau.

~~. 1985. Caribou survey-inventory progress report, 1983-84. Pages --34:s7 irr A. Seward, ed. Carjbou survey-invenrory progress repoit. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wi ldl . Rest. Vol 15. Juneau.~~

78 progress report'.1979-80. Ke'l'leyhouse,- -'p;a;s-'39-42 D.G. 1981a. Caribou survey-inventory in R.A. Hinman, €d. Annua'l ryp-ort of- survey-inventory aciivities. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in trlildl. Rest. Vol 11. Juneau. . 1981b. Carjbou survey-irrventory progress report, 1980-81. Pages ----WiZ in-n.n. Hinman, €d. Annual report of survey-ittventory act'ivities. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wil

. 1984. Caribou survey-inventory-Annual progress report, 1982-83. Pages ----IO-gg.in,J.n. Barnett, €d. report of survey-inventory activities. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Vol 14. Juneau' . -ini985a. Caribou survey-inventory- -su'rvey-inventory progress report, 1983-84. Pages --T:iS n. Seward, €d. Caribou progress report. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Vol 15. Juneau' .-36:40. in press. Caribou survey-inventory progress report, 1983-84. Pages in'A. seward, €d. Clribou survey-inventory progress report. ADF&G, Fed. Ai d 'i n t,Ji I d] . Rest. Vol 15 . Juneau ' Lenrfer, J. 1965. Caribou report. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in hJildl. Rest. Proi. t.l-6-R-5,6. Juneau. 20 PP.

pre-s^e1t- o.f LeResche, R.E . Lg75. The international herds: ^knowledgg .the Foriymile and Porcupine caribou herds. Pages I27-I39 in J.R. Luick, p.C.-Lent, D.R. Kleiir, and R.G. lllhite, eds. First international reindeer and caribou sympc,sium proceedings, Fairbanks, Alaska' Lutz, H.J. 1960. Early occurrence of moose on the Kenai Peninsula and'in other sections of Alaska. USFS, Alaska Forest Res. Ctr. Misc. Publ. No. 1. Juneau. 25 PP. Mertie, J.8., Jr. 1938. The Nushagak district, Alaska. USGS Bull. N0.903. 96 pp. Machida, S. 1984. Caribou survey-inventory progress report.. Pages 24--25^in J.A. Barneit, .0. Annual relort of survey-inventory activities. ADF&G' Feo.Aidint^lild'l.Rest. Vol . 14. Juneau. Murie, A. 1944. The wolves of Mt. McKinley. Fauna llat. Parks' Fauna Ser. 5. 238 pp.

79 Murie, 0.J. 1935. Alaska-Yukon caribou. N. Am. Fauna Ser. 54. 93 pp. 0lson, S.T. 1957. l4anagement studies of Alaska caribou movements' Oistribution and numberi -- Steese-Fortymile Herd. Pages 45-48 in USFWS' Fed. Aid 'in Wi ld'l . Rest. , Job Completion Rept. 11(4):45-48. parren, S. 1985a. Caribou survey-inventory progress report' 1983-1984. piges 23-28 in A. Seward, €d. Caribou surv_ey-inventory progress report. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in wildl. Rest. vol. 15. Juneau. . 1985b. Caribou survey-inventory progress report, 1984-85. Draft -----M-il ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t,jildl . Rest. vol. 16. Juneau. Pegau, R.E. 1983. Caribou survey-inventory progress report.. fages 28:19^;rt. - j.n. Barnett,ed. Annua'l report of survey-inventory activities. ADF&G' Fed. Aio in Wi ldl . Rest. Vol. 13. Juneau. . 1984. Caribou survey-inventory progress report. Pages 26'?!_-y Birnett,ecl. Annual r6port of survey-inventory activities. ADF&G' --TT:Fec. Aid i n Wi I dl . Rest. Vol . 14. Juneau. . 1985. Caribou survey-inventory progress report. Pa-g-e-s- ?9-11 in-A. --Tilard, ed. Caribou survey-inventory progress report. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t,Jildl. Rest. Vol. 15. Juneau. Pegau, R.E., and J.E. Hemming. 1972. Caribou report. Fed. Aid in " Wildl. Rest. Prog. rept. Proi. W'17'2, W-17-3. 220^ADF&Q pp' Reynolds, J. 1969. Chisana Caribou l-lerd. ADF&G. Unpubl. memo. dated June 17 , 1969. abundance, distributi_on. Pages 51-56 Scott,--- - -in R.F. 1952. Caribou movements, USfWS, Fed.Aid 'in Wildl . Rest. Quart. Rept . 7(2):51-59' Scott, R.F., E.F. Chatelain, and W.A. Elkins. 1950. The status of the Dall ineep and caribou in Alaska. Trans. N. Am. t^lildl . Conf . L5:612-626. sinclair, A.R.E. i983. The function of distance movements in vertebrales. pages 240-258 in I.R. Swingland and _P.J. Greenwoocl, eds. The ecology of animal movemenil gxford, England: Clarendon Press. 301 pp. food habits of the Skogg, R.0. 1956. Range, movements., ^popu.lation, and Sreese-Fortymile CaiiOou Herd. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks. 145 PP. . 1963. Statewide caribou distribution. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in lrlildl. ----Tesr. Proj . W-6-R-3 , Workpl an C , Job 1 . 14 pp. . 1964. Caribou report. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t^lildl. Rest. Proi. -----l[:6--R-5. iuneau . 26 pp.

80 . 1968. Ecology of the caribou (Rangi{gf tarandus granti) in Alaska. ----PF.O. Dissert., Univ. Ca'lif ., Berkeley. 699 pp' Troyer,- W.A. Lg77. Popu'lation and movement studies of the McKinley Caribou Hero, L976. Prog. rept. NPS, Anchorage, AK' 12 pp' . 1978. population and movement studies of the McKinley Caribou -Tmo, L977. Proi. rept. NPs, Anchorage, AK. 17 pp. . Ig7g. Population and movement studies of the McKin'ley Caribou NPS, Anchorage, AK' 18 pp' --fero , 1978. Prog. rept. . 1980. population and movement studies of the tticKinley Caribou , Ig7g. Prob. rept. NPS, Anchorage, AK. 16 pp' --ffio . 1981. Movements of the Denali Caribou Hero. Completion rept. ----TFS, Anchorage, AK. 19 PP. Watson, G.W., and R.F. Scott. 1956. Aerial censusing of the Nelchina Caribou Hero. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Conf. 21:499-510. lllh'itten, K.R., and R.D. Cameron. 1980. Composi!i9t- and harvest of the poicupine Caribou Herd. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Final rept. Projs.W-17-19,w.L7.20,w.I7-2I,Job3.23R.Juneau.22pp. . 1983. Size and composition of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, 1982. -Tf;rim-rept. tJ Arctic Nat. l,lildl. Refuge, USFWS. August' 1983. 8 pp.

~~Dall Sheep Distribution and Abundance l.lestern and Interior Regions~~

I. REGIONWIDE INFORMATION In the tllestern and Interior regions of Alaska, Da1'l sheep are di stri buted throughout the Al aska Range from Lake Cl ark on the southwestern extreme of the range, north and east across the Alaska Range to the Tok area, and continuing into the Mentasta, Nutzotin, and northern Wrangell mountains near the Canadian border. Ljmited sheep distrjbution also occurs in the mountainous alpine regions of the Tanana-Yukon uplands. Portions of game management units (GMtjs) or subunits (GMSs) within the tJestern and Interior regions where sheep occur include L2, 168, 178, 198, 19C, 20A,20C,20D,20E, and 25C. GMSs 168 and 178 are, respectively, located within the Southcentral and Southwestern regions' boundaries. Sheep populatjcns in Alaska are recognized on a mountain range basis. Therefore, distribution and abundance i nformati on from these GMUs wi I I be i ncl uded i n thi s di scussion. A. Regional Dj stribution Sheep distribution jn areas near the southwestern extreme of the A'laska Range is discontinuous, wjth sheep locally abundant in small pockets of distribution separated by areas with few or no sheep. Most of the sheep habitat in this area has been included within the boundaries of Lake Clark National Park/Preserve, established in 1980. Distribution of sheep along the south slope of the Alaska Range is also discontinuous, with sheep occurring 'in some areas, separated from each other by areas of unsuitable habitat. There is probable interchange of sheep between the north and south slopes of the range in some of these areas of local abundance; however, the extent of interchange is unknown (Tobey' pers. comm.). Distribution of sheep along the north side of the Alaska Range is continuous from at least the Windy Fork of the Kuskokwim River eastward to the Mentasta and northern Wrangell mountains near the Canadian border (ADF&G L977). In the Tanana-Yukon up'lands, sheep occupy alpine areas of Glacier Mountain, the headwaters of the Charley River, Twin Mountain, West Point, Mount Sorenson, and the headwaters of the Salcha and East Fork of the Chena rivers. Sheep are also found in l'imited alpine habitat near Mount Victoria, Mount Schwatka, Mount Prindle, Lime Peak, Cache Mountain, and the White Mountains (ibid.). Sheep distribution in this area is disiunct, with small groups widely scattered throughout limited available alpine habitat (ibid.). B. Areas Used Seasonal'ly and for Life Functions Dall sheep utilize different ranges at different times of the year. Most popu'lations have a winter and summer range (Heimer L973), although some researchers have identified several other

B3 seasonal use areas for ntountain sheep (Geist 1971). t,Jinter range is character"ized by areas of low snow accumulation, higher elevations, wind-swept ridges, or other areas protected from snow. The enrire mour'tain block that sheep inhabit is available to sheep populations for summer range. Mineral licks are visited by most, if not all, Dall sheep populations (Heimer 19i3). In the Tanana/Yukon uplands area Dal I sheep occupy about 1,954 rni2 of alpine habitat in the eastern' interior (ADF&G 1977). Sheep habitat jn this area is I imited ancl general'ly lower in elevation than in other areas of Alaska. Spruce forests are encroaching on sheep habitat in this area, and rugged, steep outcrops typical of sheep range elsewhere in Alaska are scarce (ibjd.). Sheep must travel through forested areas to reach water or adjacent suitable sheep habitat. The scarcity of escape terrain and the necessity of trave'l1ing through forested areas make these sheep vulnerable to predators (ibid.). (For further information, see the 1:1,000,000-scale maps in the Map Atlas to the Western and Interior guide and the 1:250,000-scale maps available in ADF&G offices. These maps indicate the general clistribut'ign, known winter use areas, and known mineral licks of sheep in the Western and Interior regions.) C. Factors Affecting Distribution Sheep are found in steep, mountainous terrain, usual'ly above 2,500 ft, chroughout the year. The rugged terrain provides readily avai lable escape cover from predators. A'lso, the higher wind-blown slopes provide snow-free areas where forage is available during winter. Surnmer range use in some areas is affected by winter snow deposi- uion and the tinring of the snowmelt. Specific geographic areas tend to have deeper snow accumulations because of weather cond'itjons and physiographic features. These areas are unavailable to sheep during winter and can provide Summer range only afrer snowmelt (Heimer 19i3). The Tanana-Yukon uplands drea is drier than other sheep range because of'ttre light annual snowfall and dry interior climate and the rapid drainage provided by the porous sandstone and limestone substrate (ADF&G 1977). These cond'i tions prevent snow from beconring a serious problem for sheep, except during heavy snow years. -Sheep are therefore able to utilize most of the habitat available to them. U. I'iovements Between Areas In many areas, movements by Dall Sheep between.Seasonal use areas are associated with mineral licks (Heimer 1973). In these dreas' sheep travel fronr their winter range to the mineral lick' ihen continue to the'ir summer range. The movemenl of sheep from winter f,o summer ranges in the Dry Creek area of the Alaska Range may occur as ear'ly as late Moy or the first week in June and peaks in mid-to-late June (ibid.). Distances traveled one way range from 2 to 12 mi (3.2 to 20 km) (ib,id.).

84 Tanana/Yukon uplands sheep are also associated with mineral licks' and several have been located. In April 1983, six ewe sheep were radio-collared in this area, to study seasonal lick movements arrd use areas (Jennings 1984a). E. Population Size Estimation Oait sheep distribution and abundance informatton is obtained from aerial surveys conducted by ADF&G biologists during mjd sumnier (.luty). Aerial surveys are f I own i n predetermi ned areas of knowtl sheep habitat. Surveys are conductecl sjmilarly, in attempts to ensure that results aie comparable to previous years. Weather is a1 uncontrollable factor irr these surveys and sometimes causes partial or complete cancellation. All areas are not surveyed every year, prinrari ly because of budgetary and . weather corl- straints. Instead, most areas are surveyed every other year or at longer intervals. Sheep populat'ions can fluctuate 15 to 20% annlally, primari'ly because of natural conditions. If possible, it wouIO be preferable to survey sheep populations on a more frequent basis to establish when these fluctuat'ions occur {Heimer, pers. comm. ). Aerial survey information on populatiorr composition -'is presented in the fornt 6f total sheep observed, lambs observed, lambs_per-100 "ewes," and total number and percentage of 1ega1 rams. The last rwo categories are sometimes not available because of the difficulti in determining legal rams from the air. The ewe-lamb groups coirtain aninrals of both sexes and many age classes titrd are difficult ro classify accurately. Thereforen a.ll ewe-like animals (ewes, yearlings of both sexes, drrd young rams) are designated as ttgwes tt . F. Reg'iona I Abundance At least 70,000 Dall sheep are currently estimated to be present in the Alaikan sheep po'pulation (Heimer i984). Approx'imate'ly 24,00A sheep are present 'in the Western and Interior regions (ibid. ). Densities and populatjon composition -vary O.y -qreas. Specific regional abundance information is g'iven in the following paragraphs.

I I. ALASKA RANGE A. GMU 12 (Excluding Delta and Tok Management Areas). Irr 198f-1982, tie National Park Service (NPS) and the ADF&G determined Dlll sheep distribution and abundance wjthin the Wrangell-St. Elias National Park/Preserve (Singer 19q2)._ Portions of gi{U IZ were surveyed, i nc'ludi ng count uni ts 1 ,3,4 ,5 ,6 ,7 ,8,9, and 19 (nrap 1 ). 0ther count uni ts surveyed at that time are discussed in the Southcentral Region narrative. 1. Presenr abundance. During 1981-i982, a tota'l of 6,397 sheep ffisua11y counted in six of nine count areas jocated in GMU 12 witnin Wrangell-St. Elias Natjonal Park/Preserve (map 1) (jbid.). Two count areds (1 and 5) were not surveyed during 1981-1982 but hacl surveys conducted 'in the ear'ly 1970's (Heimer and Smith 1979). One count area

~~85 I I a frp locrtloniI I~~

~~t.]tta L.a.~~

~~Gulkrne 3 t?e4rrcet(~~

~~a :o €€ ;(~~

~~Mountains as listed in table 1 Map 1. NPS surve.y areas in the wrangell (Singer 1982).~~

86 (19) was not surveyed, and an estintate of sheep in this area was based on densities in adiacent areas (Singer 1982). Some sheep escape observation, and some areas are inevitably missed in a sheep survey of this magnitude. To adiust for this variable, the observed total was nrultiplied by a factor of 1.25, resulting in an estimated total population of 9'856 sheep. An apparent population incnease in the northern areas is evident s'ince the early 1970's. A portion of the increase was undoubteclly due to greater countirtg efficiency, as fewer changes in observers were made durjng the 1981-1982 surveys' more time was spent, and peripheral areas were counted (ibid. ). Hejmer (1984) states that approximately 12,000 sheep occur in this area. This estimate 'ls based on aerjal surveys conducted in the drea rnentioned above, plus adciitional surveys conducted in sheep habitat adjacent to hrangell-St" El ias Park/Preserve. 2. Historic abundance. Historic informat'ion on Dall sheep ffi area is very limited. It is possible that populations followed the general historic treno for sheep i n Al aska , wi th hi gh early 1900' s popul atj ons decreasing because of hunting, intermittent severe weather cgnditioni, and increasing predator numbers. Extensive mining operations and the accompanying high human populati<.rri in this area during the early 1900's probably provided for an extensive harvest of sheep for fgod during all periods of the year. Severe winters during the late 1930's and early 1940's iesulted in heavy winter sheep mortality in Some areas of the state and possfOly in this area also. Predator control reached a high point in the mid 1950's, and activity has since decl ined. In 0ctober i939, almost 500 sheep were observed in an aree adjacent to Ptarmigan Lake in the southeast corner of GMU 12 (Scott et al. 1950). During an aerial survey of that area irr September 1949, only 228 sheep were observed, with a total estimated population of not more thatt 300 animals (ibid.). These surveys were pioneer efforts at eStinlating sheep distribution attd abundance in Alaska utilizing aerial survey techniques. The aircraft available during that perigd 1 prevented observers from surveying difftcult or dangerous areas. A1so, remote areas were difficult to reach and costly to Survey. Therefore, these survey eft'grts were incomplete at best and dre not comparable to moclern techniques or effort (Heimer, pers. comm.). B. GMU 12, Tok Management Area 1. Present abundance. The Tok Management Area (TMA) encompasses @ie, 13c, and 200. It jncludes that port'iott of the Alaska Range bounded on the east by the Glenn Highway' on the north by the Alaska Highway, and on the west by the

87 Johns{)n Glacier-Johnson River (ADF&G 1979). It is managed specifical 1y for large-horned, trophy-c1ass Dal I sheep.. DLring 1983, I im'ited aerial surveys ,tl{ere conducted in the TMA. Based on these surveys, the Tl'iA sheep pop.u'lation was estimated to be approxirnately 2 ,000 sheep ( Kel I eyhouse i98aa). This is an increase of about L0% from the 1982 esrimate of I ,800 sheep ( Ke] I eyhouse 1984b) . The L982 estimate was made after the TMA sheep popu'lation hacl ol c-l asses as a experi enced some morta I i ty i n the der {9-e^ - result, of the moderately severe winter of 1981-1982. Based on the 1983 surveys, this decl ine appedrs to have been f,emporary, and the sheep.population is now considered to be stable (KelleYhouse 1984a). During igg+, ierial surveys were conducted in the portion of rhe ffqn north of the Tok River, which is approximately one-half the total area of TMA (Kelleyhouse 1985). A total rrf 998 sheep were observed, including 279 rams and 190 lambs (ib'id.). iaOle 2 presents information from sheep surveys conducted in the TMA buring 1974,1980, and 1984. The 1980 effort is the only complete Survey of the area. Surveys were attempted. in othlr years but werL incomplete because of inclement weather or limited funding, and results are not comparable. Limited 'i s compos i ti cln i nf ortati on for years . of i ncompl ete su.rveyi available from ground survey work conducted at the Sheep Creek m.ineral lilk. As seen in table 2, the percentage of lambs in the population has fluctuated but has a-veraged ZZ.6% duling tded-tgg+. The L974 aerial survey results are not directl! comparable to later surveys, primarily. because of regu'latiin changes for legal rams. .Nonethe'less, there has been an appdrent population increase since 1974, as evidenced and the number and by the tbtal number of sheep -observed percentage of lambs in the population. 2. itistoric abundance. No historic inforrnation perta'ining to @a was locatecl. C. Delta Controlled Use Area The Delta Conrrolled Use Area (OCUn; includes the drainages of the Delta River from McGinnis Creek sourh to Castner Glacier and the southern drainages of the Tarrana River from the Delta River ,poii.ut to the iohnson Rjver. Portions of GMSs 138' 20A, and 20D aie included in th'is area, which is managed for aesthetic hunting conditions (Larson 1981). 1. Present abundance. The present Sheep population estimate for m00 anrnnl s (Johnson, pers. comm. ). Jf,i t escimate was derived from aerial surveys conducted in 1980' when 1,105 sheep were observed (taOte 3). This is lower than the I;370 sheep observe

88 Ground composition counts have been conducted at the Granite f 1979 through 1983. 0n1y a port'ion of Creek mineiâl lick lom 'l the popul ation i s observed duri ng these countS , and al categories of sheep canttcrt be determined. Tabl6 3 provides the l'imited compos j t'ion information available for this population. The percentage of lambs in the populat'ion dropped considerably in 1983 to t4%, indicating a very low production ldte and subsequent recruitment into the 'tliepopulation. The 1983 ratio o'f lambs/100 ',ewes" (29) is lowest since I97! (ibid. ). . No explanation for ifyis lovt product'ion is available at this rime. 2. Historic abundance. No historic abundance information was ffiarea. D. cMU 20-Alaska Range Easi (ARE) The area designatid as Alaska Range East (ARE) covers the Central Alaska Range east of Denali Naiional Park, excluding the Tok' Management Area and the Delta Controlled Use Area. 1. Present abundance. The sheep populatiorr in the ARE portion ffimaied to be more than 5,000 aninrals (Heimer 1984). The population is dense compared to other sheep popuiations i'n'the state and js probab'ly stable. Lanb 'sui^vival and subsequent recruitment have f luctuated in recent yearS; however, variatiorrs have had a relatively mjnor.effect on che overall populatjon (Jennings 1984a). Conrpos.ition-and productivity Oata for this population determined from grounO obs6rvations conducted at Dry- Creekîs mjneral l'ick' inis type of observatiorr samples only_ a portion gf the populatibn, and not all categories of classification can be beternrineO. Table 4 I ists the I imited population informat'iori available from these observations. Lamb prcduction qnd survival has remained relatively high, except for i982. The 1982 figure of 31 lambs/100 ewes is qlobâb.ly.artributable to the sevire winter conditi

89 aircraft available during that period prevented observers front surveying diffjcult or dangerous areas. Also' remote areas were iifficutt to reach and cos-tly to survey' Therefore, these Survey efforts were incomplet-e- a! best and are not cOmparable to modern teChniques or eftort (Helmer' pers. comm. ). E. Tanana/Yukon Uplands - GMSs 20E and 25C l.iffi.itypoilu1ations,whichareprb'ab}{^:]9ylv1. Present aOunOince. Sheep in this area are characterized by productiol al.d. surviva | (Jenn'lngs Oecl ining-The because of low ige+o). total sheep popula!i9l.in this area is estimated to contain 650 animals (Heimer 1984)' Iri IgB2, aerial Surveys were conducted in this area to deteriliirre population composition. A total of 419 sheep-were which incluOed 162 rams, 216 eu,es' and 41 observed, population-lambs iJenr,ingi r98aa). The percentage.if- l9mo.1 in the. iigti uio tn. t6w tamb/ewe ratio (8 lambs/100 ewes) indicates u.ry'1ow production and recruitment into the population. Low- recruitment intg rhis popu'lation has only recently^become apparenr. giounO compositjdn surveys conducted in 1980 and 1981 inoicaieo gooo recruitment,. with 66 lambs/100 .ewe1. and These 59 I ambs/ ldd *.s respecti vely i Jenni ng-s 1982 ' 1983 ) '- ratios o".. Jetermine,i' from; relative'ly small sample size and therefore may not be representative'. Z.L' Historic abundanie. Scott et al. (1950) clescribed the sheep IT-iiTs=arffiTTmati ietict bands numbering only about 250 animals. N; ioo'itional historic information was found for th'is area. 17B F. Alaski Ringe llest (ARt^t) - GMSs 19c, 19Bl-i6P, and tf,ii i.ui inctu6es'tnui portion of the Alaska Range west and south to the area near Telaquana Lake ui O.nuii National Faik'extending 'is inO-Late Clark. Distributjon of sheep widely scattered, with areas ot moderate ineep densiiy separated by major river clrainages or areas of nonpreferred habitat. 1.r' Preserrt ununoun.u. At least 4,000 theep are estimated to ffi1.r, Alaska Range. The population"ltgld is unknown, although it is thought to be stable overal | (Pegau 1e85 ) . The Lake clark National Park and Preserve now encompasses frio'itat in GMSs 17B ano 198 of the Alaska Range' mosr sheep the The Nps .onouit.o he1 icopter aerial . surveys of . park/preserveareair.lgsl.Thetotalnumberofsheep observed *ii aOs, which i s considerably- m95e i|un. the I7B observed in L974 (taOle 5)..- The total previous totut of is sheep popuiiiiun for the Lake Clark National Park/Preserve (Pegau est,imatecl to Oe 1'000 aninral s -numb.ers1984)' The uppur.r,t incieut" in sheep in the Lake C'lark park/Preserve can be attrjbuted partially to an increase in the area tr'.u.y.d, un increase in time spent surveying, and

90 different survey techniques. Sheep p-opu.lations in this area were probably underestimated previously (ibid'l' Range_ west itre- irajoritv of sheep occurring in Alaska_. -are foiateO in ihree areas of GMS 19C: Tonzona River, South Fctlk of the Kuskokwim Ri ver, and W'indy Fgrk of the Kuskokwim Rjver. The total sheep population jn these areas 1s estimated to be about 2,000-2,500 animals' Table 6 presents aerial survey infornratjon collected front these thrbe areas. Surveys ' i n sonre cdses ' are ngt d'irect'ly comparaO'le from year to year necause of slight differences in area surveyed. There is in apparent increase in total sheep observed 1n tnese areas. tfis increase can be attrjbuted to a possible real increase 'in the sheep population or to better survey .iiu.t antl techniques. It'is most probably. a combination of those factors. Current population Status js believed to be reflected by the most recent surveys. 2. Historic abundance. No specifjc historic abundance informa- @ this area bras located.

~~91 Table 1. Recenc arrd Highest Previous Counts of Dall Sheep in Nine Count Units in Wrangel l -St. El ias National Pa rklPreserve~~

~~Recent Count % Change Last, Most Year From Last Comp'lete, & of Count Previous Accurate Last Uni t 1981 Count Count Count~~

* 1 I,07? t982 * 3 I ,;;; 1,907 L973 4 I ,366 * 622u 1973 t, oo^ r974 6 I ,343 +I40% 493: 1974 996 +r90% 343: 1974 cn 889 +388% rg?,, 1974 9 t64 - 79% 1973 t9 350 * '-2t_

~~Total count 6,397 5,525~~

~~Count pl us estimate for uncountecl uni ts 7,885 5,875~~

~~Esti mated population 9,856 7 ,344~~

~~Source: Srnger 1982. --- medns no data $rere available. a Hel icopter count.~~

* Boundaries changed or only part of the unit was counted. No comparisons were made.

~~92 (h -o sl' (v o c) c) sr E .l ttt NlCq\o (\r ol I J r{ I C\J C\l C\.1 r{ Ol r\ bs Ol tn H o .(u .lJ x e4 ttl I L(u c -\(lJ I cf, ch c\! cD r.l-) 5tn fo 6= |(o(orr, .. t~~

~~93 c.) UI I -o <+o O Ol .l.l r\ (o orc{l e - ddHr'{ ttlr*(o~~

94 @ -o P (n G' .o ul -J be (u (t) O t, ltt e4 A x(U &. \-o lr)otc)dlr) (u tn- \o(o(ocDlr) IA G' -O lrl : E= a (, +, (o o - -) cl $- O o C\j (o +) o D o o) F c (5a L * (o y * dl (J V, ]n J (o a J (J rE OJ c ! .tn g CJ sf ro ooL Ol o tn "-{ O) -o f, aJ G' /o €o J + If @ (u otE F-{ (lJ L (u |o 6tts vl g) (, qJ.+'CD -o (uE O F(t ot(uc -a d. F{ OJ o- J aro OE (t) aJ', c\t c o @.F5 (/, or(o r< (+- .o(u -ul .El o (t(o.oE F{(l)- c oJd. coLOr(u'J o J d== +) t1 rlt a -v-:z!-YJ ctrg/o(u +r o o (!,(u(l)(u(u(u(u(u(u(u o (o g-LLLL cr+ (J(J(J(-)O co (Jo =o Crctn =!(5< Dvr L.L.L3..L a(o ooooo (o(J r

95 1J u', IA a sf (u ftt co C\J J =(u O) bs o O tn (l, F{ Ut x &. \\(U (l, UI vr= (o o l4l tn (o }) -J o iU tl p +- q- o o (o o 1r) P F\ O IA (J d @ o) (u F !- ! * fo ! * (u s- ro av) C-) G' € (o E d Or c q) (.) ro (o v c an (t E J = lu u L l-) .tl gctl o co cf) (J Lr) Ol o= J .{ E qJ o(u t- (u ro IA ct, vl .rJ -o (uE (l,c -aOad. (u o a.a(d-(t (u ttt= (uc c(u t_a ct t- (t (ttno -tA(oE F. or OI' o q)(g (o (uo5 Q4 L- c J sr=Ec.ottt(J co c, rJ rl! otct! a LL F-{ +) lc' o (oruolt' ro(u o. C=r 5lt (o (d(JdL) .o ct (F 5! cDo cr(u=l (u q(u (u q)=tna r{ =L(5< O!lZ .UJ.f o-o,0 @ tnlCr(' .('1 -rOrOFCrr('(uJJ (uJJ (o(Jc: |J) r< Fh (u(u(Jc O ()ECD Flf L - d- at(o*

~~96 an D 99 (rJ co rr) sf,OroF{C\l@$ql tt F{ OJ J d C! (\J C\J C\t bs c) O r<= \(n a~~

~~c') lr, Ol \9 (o~~

~~L) Ol tt F{ cD f{ (\l c) d -o c\.t (o (\J @ !o a t\ (O CO (g Cr) ++r{F\c!c\J d (o = J =a~~

(o I' ttl ., (u (uE F(O 5- -aG a 5 otn U) o- (u (u ,J'-c (t0 CDE q- (u(o )d, l. iz^ o d. .d. l-(u I L o +, -:z il -v -:Z P . .t- (-)L E E ;-qr r E | 1 L I L (u .e .2 'C 'O a d. &, a) . c- Lti Llr-' Lu- L {-LL o (t) co, 3 ; (-l (J (J (J c-> o- .tt ,oc O c -v-v -v,.9. v,--5 E rT' C C'- P.r L O LE o-o O O- Vl- Clz 5 -V L 6 o-Q' o-1r- aP + Z= '-I;- -'; i= -c:= o ca .J. -a- i= - (n -c=u1 €tt) FF O-

~~97 oa e (o ;sf J (\, \.1 be~~

~~O O d= -\ u) aq) o= O|r) ElJJ sf~~

~~ro lr) rr) +) u) co o |J) sl' F * vl tt) .l' (, g =~~

~~a tO r.O Fld (o F-l J~~

(o q)(,(uE FrOa&, 5 U) o o (g (tt (, E(o (')E E (ufo (Jo(o J&, (u .L r-3o(u o o !L-SZ o-(o o .o +, f LU- L .ao (J L) {J G' .o=p o- ic cL oro =(u (uc o (l,c () =r(r< (U'F (u 4 <= -c. o .t1 tn ,'o (u(u(o o) (Jts !- co rif L -o (o 1'\ @ ro (u or ol ol=l F >- dF{ Lnl

~~98 REFERENCES ADF&G. I977. Alaska wildlife management plans - Interior. Fed. Aid in }Ji I d1 . Rest. Proj . l.l-17-R. 29I pp.~~

~~. I979. Alaska Departmenl. of Fish and Game hunting regulatiorrs. zo. Juneau , AK. -Xo. Geist,, V. I97I. Mountain sheep: a study in behavior an0 evoluric.rn. Ch'icago: Univ. Chicago Press. 383 pp.~~

~~Heimer, W.E, 1973. Dall sheep movements and mineral lick use. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in hjildl. Rest. final rept. Projs. w-r7-2 rhrough 5, Job 6.lR.~~

. 1984. Population status and managernent- of Dall sheep in Alaska, Unpubl . rept., ADF&G, Fairbanks . 22 pp. -13-e4. . 1985. Personal conmunication. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, -E-Trbanks. Heinter, l,'J. E. , and T. Smith . 1979. Dal I sheep in the Wrangel I I'lountains. Fed. Aio in Wildl. Rest. Projs. W-I7-2,3,4, and 5, Job 0.tn. Jennings, L.B. 1981. Alaska Range East sheep. Annual report of survey- inventory activities. Part III: Bison, cdribou, mountain goats,-proj. muskoxen, and sheep. vol. 11. Fed. Aid irr h|ildl. Rest. ld-I7-12, Jobs 9.0, 3.0, 72.0, 6.0, 16.0, and 22.0.

. 1982. Tanana Hil I s and White l'lountains sheep. Annual report of st,trvey-inventory activities. Part III: Bison, deer, elk, muskoxen, and sheep. vol . 12. Fed. Aid 'in wildl . Rest. projs. hJ-19-1 and ll|-19-2, Jobs 9.0, 2.0, 13.0, 16.0, and 6.0. . 1983. Tanana Hills and l.lhite Mounrains sheep. Annual report of Vol. 13. Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Proj. W-22-1, Jobs 12.0 and 6.0. ----Inventory. 1984a. Alaska Range East sheep.' Annua'l report of survey- -surVey.inventoryact.iv.ities.PartIV:Mountaingoatandsheep.act'iv'iries. Par-t II: streep. vol . 15. Fed. Aid in |l,jildl . Rest. Proj. W-22-3, Job 6.0. 1984b. Alaska Range Easr sheep. Annual report of survey- tnventory activities. Part II: Mountain goar ano sheep. vol. 14. Fed. Aio in Wildl. Rest. Proj. W-22-2, Jobs 12.0 and 6.0. 1985. Alaska Rarrge East sheep. Draft arrnual report of survey- activities. f pp. --inventory Johnson, D.M. 1983. Delta Controlled Use Area sheep. Arrnual report of survey-inventory activities. Parr IV: Mountain goat and sheep. vol. 13. Fed. Aid in t^/'ildl. Rest. proj. l[-zz-r, Jobs 12.0 and 6.0.

99 1984. Del ta Corrtrol I ect Use Area sheep. Annual report of survey-'inventory acti vi ties. Pa rt I I : Sheep. Vol. 15. Fed. Aid in l{ildl. Rest. Proj. W-22-3, Jcb 6.0 1985. Delta Controlled Use Area sheep. Draft annual report of survey-'utventorJ activities. 3 pp.

-----De . 1985. Personal cormunication. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, ka Junct i on . Kel leyhouse, D.G. 1981. Tok Managemerrt Area sheep. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part IIi: Bison, caribou, mountdin goat, muskoxen, gnq slgep. vol. 11. Fed. Aid in l,/ildl. Rest. proj. w-i7-z', Jobs 9.0, 3.0, 12.0, 6.0, i6.0, 22.0.

. 1982. . Tok ltlanagemerr_t_ _Area sheep. Annual report of survey- activitjes. Fart III: Bison,-oie., elk, musioxen, and sheep. ---iFen!gtyvol. 12. Fed. Aid in wildl. Rest. projs. Lt-19-1 and tJ-19-2, Joos g.b, 2.0, 13.0, 16.0, and 6.0.

1983. To.k Management . . -Part /\rea sheep. Annual report of survey- act'ivities. IV: Mountain goat and s'heep. Vol . 13. -TrwenlgryFed. Aid in hildl. Rest. Proj. W-ZZ-L, Jobs 12.0 and 6.0.' . i984a. .T9k Managem-ent-vol Area sheep.'Aid Annual report of survey- ---F,yqntory activities. . 14. Fed. in t^lirdi. Rest. proj. W-22-?, Jobs 12.0 and 6.0.

---li-venl9ry.. 1984b. . T.uk^ Manag_ement-Part Area sheep. Annual report of survey- activities. Ii: Mountain goat and sheep. vol . ih. Fed. Aid in tllildl. Rest. Proj. W-ZZ-?, Jobs LZ.O and 6.0. . 1985. Iott Management Area sheep. Draft annual report of survey- activities.' 4 pp. -Tnventory Larson, R.W. 1981. Delta Management Area sheep. Annual report of survey- inventory actjvjties. Ptrrt III: Bison, cdribou, mountain g

~~. 1985. Alaska Range West sheep. Draft artnual report of survey- activities. Z pp. --Tnventory . 1985. Personal cofimunicatiorrs. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. ----ffie, McGrarh.~~

100 scott, R.F., E.F. Chatelain, and l^/.A. Elkins. 1950. The status of the Dall jn the ifreep ano caribou in Alaska._ _P9-9es 612_-626 Transact'ions of fifteenth North American wildl ife conferenc{- San Francjsco, CA' t,Jildf ife l'lanagement Institute. I,Jashington, DC. Singer,- F.J. 1982. Wrangel'l-St. Elias Nat'ional Park/Preserve Dall sheep .ornts, 1981 arrd 1982] llPS Survey Rept. No. 82-2. NPS, Anchorage, AK' 8 pp. Tobey, R. i985. Personal communicatjon. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Gl ennal I en .

~~101~~

~~l,ioose Di stri but'ion and Abundance Western and Interior Regions~~

I. REGIONhlIDE INFORMATION (GMU) if," tof lowing information is organized by game .malragement unit. or, where iniornration is availab-le, by su-Uy1it (GMS)(s-ee map l. ) The W.itorn Region is composed of Gt'iU 18 and GMSs 19A and B. The Interior Region is iomposed of GMUs 12,20, ?I,24, and 25 ano GlvlSs 19C and D' A. Reg'ional D'istribution In the GMU 18 portion of rhe l,lestern Reg'ion, moose densities are extremely low, w'ith the exception of the Yukon River drainage above 0liogamiut (Machida .1985). IlgV ale found throughout GMSs 19A and B of the region (ADF&G 1977). Moose inhabit all of the Interior Region exceft alpine areas (LeResche et al . I974). B. Areas Used Seasonally and for L"ife Functions To supplement the distribution information presented in the text, a series of blue-ljned reference maps has been prepared fot'each region. l,lost of the maps irr this series are at 1:250,000 scaie ' but some are at 1:1,000',00C scale. These nraps are.available for review in ADF&G offiies of tfre region or may be purchased from the contract vendor responsible for the'ir reproduction. In addition, a set of colored 1:i,000,000-sca1e index maps of selected fish and wildlife species has been prepared and may be found jn the Atlas that accompanies each regional guide. The fol'lowing categories of distribution were mapped: o General distribution o Known calving concentrations o Known rutting concentrations o Known winter concentrations C. Factors Affecting Distribution Numerous factors can influence the seasonal and lclng-rernr distribution of moose. Sonre clf these factors are snow ctepth, elevation, range condition, fire, predator denSity, l'runting pressure' and I and use. D. Movements Between Areas The movem€rrrs of moose can consist of local travel within seasonal c.li sperSal to new r.lnges , mi grati on between seasonal range-s ' or ranles. ViriaOle movements by individuals Lrr segments of moose popitarjons make it difficulr to precisely delineate the patterns. boine aninral s may seasonal ly migrate during different times to di f ferent I ocations , for Lxampl e, whereas others may renta'i tt resident throughout the year (Coacly 1982). E. Population S'ize Estimation Abuntlarrce estimates are based on several techniques or combina- tions r.rf techniques. Gasaway et al . (1981) have devel oped a abundattce based on a sampl ing procedure for estimating -moose stratif ied sampl'ing design that incluOes estimating sightabi'lity

~~103 .-~~

~~o I to I $r ,a C~~

~~I \1 I , r\I I lo I N I~~

~~\\ ^t, O \ g\--.. ,;\.: r\l,?i~~

~~$t:ri \_( o d*i 'lO o fo o1 tF (u \ii tl a t- o! i L o~~

~~Eg a € : --' g a. I (u +)'- 't! IAo r>, ir =o at t +) rF o ah = =(5~~

~~g C' =~~

104 under different environmenral conditions. Such censuses have been conducted'in portions of some GlriUs within the Interior Region. The resul ts from these censuses combineo w'ith fal I composi t'ior, areas a'llow gross population estimates to be counts in specific jnstances' made for individual composition. count areas. In some gross estimates are extrapol ated for subunt ts, basecl on a iombina'tion of data from fal I composition counts and the experience of drea management biologists respcnsible for the pai"t'icular GMU or subunit. Abundance estimates should be'inter- preted cautiously, however. There arq gl_eat clifferences among iampl ing 'intensities, the experience of p'i1ots _a_nd/o| observers' nanitati,'light conditions, and so forth, all of which can drasticaily aiter estjmates and jeopardize meaningful comparisons among areas. Deteimining the number of moose present but not observed during aeria'l surieys is a major obstac'le to making accurate.estimates of population s-ize (ibid.). The sightability of is influettced not only by the habitat they dre using but alsrr-moos,e by.the climatic conditjgns prevai'ling'level at the time the surveys are made and by the experience of the observer-pi1ot. When the snow cover is not comp'lete, for examp'le, bare patches of vegetation make observatiorr of moose difficult. 0r'if the snow cover is o1d, an abundance of tracks ntay indicate only that moose have been in the area but are not necessarily present at the time of the survey' wnereas fresh snow would permit an observer to "read" tracks ntore clearly and to locate the moose more readily. F. Regiona'l Abundance Abundance estimates, where ava'ilable, w'ill be discussed by Cl'lU and/or GMS. G. H'istoric Distribution and Abundance Moose distribution has changed little in the liesrern and Interior regions in the last 20-30 years; that 'is ' nc'' tlgYious-1y unoccupied range has been populated (LeResche er al. I974). Irr the Yukorr- densities Kuskokwim delta'portion of the Wesrern Regiorr' -moo,se have been and remain extremely low (LeResche et ol. 1974, Machida igg5l. In the remainder of the Western Reg'ion and'in the Interior Regi6n, changes in abundance have occurred. Apparent'ly, moose numbers gradrially increased during the late 1940's,1950's' and early 1960's, reaching a maxinrum during che nrid 1960's. Since then, moose numbers hive declirred because of severe winters. In addition to severe winters, predation has been a major contributing factor to reduced populations since I97I (ADF&G re77).

II. GMU 12 A. Present Abundance Kelleyhouse (1985a) reports that "approximately 2,500 moose are thoug-hr f,c innaOit the 8,500 nri2 Unit 12 area. Moose densities are iow throughout much of the unit, and estimated densitjes rqn99 from 0.1 moos?/mit in the Terlin-Northway flats to 1.0 moose/nti2

105 'in the Tqk R'iver drainage." I'ioose populations in most of the suburrit are stable. In the Little Tok drainage, however, numbens may have declined in recent years but increasecl in the north- weiuorn portion of the suburrir (Kelleyho-use 1985a). Predation by be. the bears (tjrsus spp. ) and wolves .(Canis lupus) -appears to pii*ury'Tfita1 jty' factor limitinfroose populations in GMU 12 (ibid.).

III. GMU 18 A. Present Abundance tne- moose population in GMU 18 remains extremely low, with the .i-.pt',"r' it' tn" Yukon River drainage above- 0hogam-iut.. It is population numbers 600 to 800 animals in believed that the moose js GMU 18 ald that the de$siti in most areas of suitable habitat less than 0.1 moose/mia (Machida, pers. conun.). Suitable habitat is available along both the Yukon and Kuskokwin river drainages; however, heavy hunting pressure and Out of season harvest .ii..i'ively linrit the- moose population throughout the unit (l'lachi da 1984 , 1985 ) .

IV. GMU 19 A. Present Abunrlattce Abundance estimates currently are not ava'ilable for GMU 19' In Subunit 19A, [he moose popuiation appears to be increasing, and current reciu'itment shoulit provide for lts continued increase. The population in Subunit 198 apqears stable. in Subunit 19C' however, the populdtion may be declililg: The populati.on in most of Sununit igtr outside the Upper Kuskokwim Controlled Use Area'is proOuOjV stable. In the controlied use area' the popula-tion level remains re'latively low. Yearling recruitment and calf survival has cont.inued to decline in the Cloudy and Sunshine mountains area (Pegau i985).

V. GMS 204 A. Present Abundance BaseO on censuses conducred in 1978 and 1982 of the Tanana flats po.iiutr gf Subunit 20A, the moose population..jn the area numbers lnout 4,000 animals, An estimated 4,000 additional moose inhabit ine remiini,rg foothills portion of the subunjt (Haggstrom' pers' iorm. ). Cuirently, the population appears to be increasing, iiinougn the rati- of iricrease may be decl inirrg. increased pr.edation due to higher wolf numbeis in the area is probably i..ipontiof* for the reduced rate of increase. ln the foothills puiiiuu of the subunit, brown bears may be an additional factor negatively affectirrg the rate of increase. Brown bears are I iigely a-osent f rom lhe Tanana f I ats ( i b'id. ) .

106 VI. GMS 2OB A. Present Abundance The moose population i s estimated to be approximately 4 ?8Cq animals in'GMS 208. The average density estimate js 0.57 moose/m'i2 in the subunit (Crain and l'laggstrom 1985a). The population appears to be increasing in the Chena drainage. Counts conducred during fall 1983 indicate that the moose density on the eastern side of the Minto flats is low and possibly increasing from very low densities, probably because of preclator control in the centra'l portion of Subunit 208 in previous years. Mr:ose clensities on the western side of the Minto flats and the Manley Hot Springs area are lourer, an'l rhe populatjon it.ither declining or stable at low densities. Population trends in the Salcha River drainage appear to be increasing in the lower third of ihe orainage but are largely unknown in the upper two-th'irds of the drainage ( ibid. ).

VI I. GMS 2OC A. Present Abundance Li ttl e i s known about the preserit abundance of moose i rr Subunjr 20C other than that deltsities are low. Trend survey data from a portion of Denali National Park indicate that moose numbers continue to decline. Trends are unknown elsewhere iri rhe subunit. Poaching and predation are thought to be substantial nrortal ity factors in the suburrit (Crain and Haggstrom 1985b).

VIII. GI,IS zOD A. Present Abundance The moose population vanies throughout Subunit 20D. South of the Tanana River and downstneam from Johnson Rjver the populat'ion appears to be of medi um densi ty and to be i rrcreasi ng ,a.t about S%/year. South of the Tanana and upstream from Johnson River the low-to-medium-dens'ity population appears to be increasing more slowly. North of the Tanana River limiteC data.suggest a stable or declining low-densjty population (iohnson 1985).

IX. GMS 2OE A. Present Abundance There are an estimated L,400-2,000 tnoose in Subunit 20E. Densities are low at about 0.2 moose/niz and 1ike1y decljning in most of rhe subunit. It appears' that wolves and brown bears may.be significant mortal ity factors influencing the population (Kel leyhouse 1985b). Browie plant use is light and not limiting to populatjon growth (ib'id. ). Implementat'iorr of rhe Fortymile F.ire Management Plan w'ill ensure a near-natural fire regime in much of the area, which will result in a more heterogeneous habitat mosaic than currently exists and provicle fc.rr future habitat needs clf moose (ibid.).

r07 X. GMS 20F A. Present Abundance Few populat'ion data are available for Subunit 20F, but indices suggdsi a low and probably stable moose population. Although naSitat appears to be general ly 'in poor condition, it prob_ab1y is not linriting the moose popuialion Size at present. 0ther factors, including-'its p-redatiqn and poaching., may be f9l-tr!ctin9_ the popula- t'ion to current low'level (Jennings 1985b). If recru'itment improves and the nloose population increases, it appears habitat rnai rhen become a major linriiing factor. Fire management would thln play an important role 'in habitat rehabil itation through prescriOeci burning and/or reduced wildfire suppression (ibid.).

~~XI. GMS 2IA A. Preserrt Abundance l'loose population data are very linrited for Subunit ?LA. What I imi teo data exi st i ndi cate a stable populatiott (0sborne and Pegau ie85 ) .~~

XI I. GMS ?t8 A. Present-moose Abundance n population census conducted d-uring the fal I of 1980 oroduced a population estimate of 2,700 moose in Subunit 2lB iQsUornu 1985a). Baseo on trend Surveys since rhe 1980 census, a itignt decline in moose densities is indicated in the area tlf the I'lowitna-Sulatna confluence. Along the Yukon River, an'increase has beeri r.rbserved. El sewhere in the subun'it, the population appedrs f,o be stable (ioio.).

XIII.GMS 21C A. Present" Abundance Little useful infornration concerning the moose population in iubuni t zIC js available. One f,rend drea surveyed by BLM personnel irr 1983 had an observed density of 0.67 moose/niz. The moose populatjon in the Melozitna River drainage is low but thoughu to be stable (0sborne 1985b).

XIV. GMS zID A. Present Abundance Along the Koyukuk River from the Kateel R'iver mouth to Dulbi Slou!h, obserled densjt'ies during November i983 were high ar-4-6 rooi6/;tt. Both recruitnrent and ntortality were estimated at 12%, inO tf,. population was stable. l'loderate densities of 2.3-3.8 moose/mi2'were observed along the Yukon River lowlands from Ruby to Last Chance. Lower densities of 1.5 moose/mi2 were observed form Last Chance to Qua'il Island. Along the Yukon River lowlands' recruitnient and mortatity are estimated at 24%, anA the population is stable. 0bserved earty rlinter densities in the Nulato Hills and Kaiyuh foothil ls were b.S-0.6 and 0.2 moose/miz, respectively. Populat'ion trends are unknown (0sborne 1985c).

~~108 XV. GMS 21E A. Present Abundance The few trend drea counts arrd composi tion counts conducted in Subuni t ?IE indicate a hea I thy , probably i ncreas i ng Inoose population (Osborne 1985d).~~

XVI. GMU ?4 A. Present Abundance Observed moose population densjties in the Koyukuk River lowlands .in the southern one-third of 0MU 24 ranged from 1.0 to 3.3 moose/mi2, and the population appears to be stable. Moose ciensit'ies are very lbw' at 0.3 moose/mi 2 itr the Kanuti Flats portiott of the Kanuti Controlled Use Area. The populatjon appears to ne stable jn the Alatna Hills portion of the area but declining throughout the remainder of the area. That porti-on^of gMU 24 lyirrg north of Bettles has a moderate density 9f-_0:9 to. 1.5 rbos6/*i2 and an increasing population (0sborne 1985e). l'lithin the Kanutj Controlled Use- Area, moose mortolity currently, is estimated at 17 to 20%, exceeciing the recrujtment rate of 6% (ibid.).

XVII. GMU 25 A. Present Abundattce Moose density is low in most of GMU 25, and populat'iorr trends vary from stable to declining. The population in western Subunit 250 is critically 1ow. An estimated 800 animals ir,habit this area al dn average oensity of 0.i moose/miz. Movements of radio-collared moose i; westein Subunit 250 indicate that two dist'inct popu'lations exist itl the area. 0ne was founcl jrr a relatively area along the Yukorr R'iver corridor between Beaver Village i*ift the ano tlre I ower m-outh of B'irch Creek. Another group occup'ies rema'inder of westepti Subunit 25D. The two populations are jties river di stinct in Several ways. lrioose dens along the . moose while outside it the density is conridor are about 0.2 f riti2, 'inside about 0.I moose imi2. Moose are basical iy nonmigratory tfie corrirlor, whereas at least hal f the aninral s outside the corridtit' migrate between the Yukon Flats and the surroundi.ng up1and.s. Calf suivival to late winter 1984 was much greater (21% of.the herd) within the corridor,'the compared to outsicle the corlidor (9% of the h";ai. Data from previous four yedrs. indicate that calf survival to fal I was cons'istent'ly higher iriside the corridor tharr ortti Oe (3I% vs 22% of the herds, respectively). SinrilarlY' moose surv'ival to 1.5 years of age was greater jnsiOe the corridor than ,17% resplctively) (Nowl in i985). l-lunting and ortriot vs 102;, 'important wol f predation appeir ro be the most soYrce: Yf mortality. Hunters harvested betweerl 20 and 35 moose (approxt- mately iy" of the farll population) during_^the 1983-1984 hunting seus"i. liolvei probably' kiIleo aL least 120 moose (approximately 15% of the fall population) (ibid.).

i09 REFERENCES draft ADF&G. Ig77. l'he starus of w'ildlife irr Alaska._ Reprinted fronr the Alaska wildlife management plans, ADF&G, 1977. Juneau. 628 pp' cuady, J.W. 1g74. Influence of snow on behav'ior of moose. Nat' can' I01:417-436. . IgB2. Mcose. Pages 902-922 in J. Chapman ano.G. Fgldhamer, eds' --TiT; rirn,ijs oi North Airerica. Balilimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press. crain, 8.8., and D.A. Haggsrrom.-FJg.-t 1985a. Unit 20(B) moose- survey-inventory progress r;p;;;. AO-gO in A. Seward, €d. Annua'l report of survey-inverrtory activities. V6T. 15, Part 8. ADF&G, Fed' A'id in Job 1'0 LJi I dl . Rest. pr-og. rept. Proi ' W'22-3, ' . 1985b. Unit 20(c) rnoose survey-inventory progress reportt .P99es --T-1-93 ed.' Annual rep6rt of survey-inventory activi ties. i;- n.'-p*t sewaro, prog' rept' Vof .- 15, B. ADF&G, FetJ. Aid in 1^1ildl . Rest. Proi . W-22-3, Job 1 .0. procedgres Gasaway, w.c., s.D. Dubois, and s.J. Harbo. 1981 Moose survey olvelopment. ADF&G, P-R proi' rept' 66 pp ADF&G' Div' Haggstrom, D.A. i9S5. Personal communicat'ion' Game Biologist' Game, Fai rbanks. jerrrrings, L.B. 1985a. Unit 20(A) moose- survey-inventory progress. reporl' rO ecl.- re-p.ort. oL nventory p;a;, 83-g5 i n A. Sewa , _ _$nrg 1 . -s{rvey-i ac'ivjties. Vot. tS, Part B. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t'li1dl. Rest' pr0g' rept. Proi . W-22-3, Job 1 .0 ' . 1985b. Un'it 20(F) moose survey-irrventory progress report' Pages 8d. Annual rep-ort of A. Sewird, . ...survey-inventoryprog' --l['-103--jnacriviriesl' VJf . 15, pai't A. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in hJildl . Rest' rept. Proi. W-22-3, Job 1.0' D.M. 1985. Unit 20(D) moose-survey-inventory progress- report' "tohnSon,pu6.r 94-g7 in A. Seward,'ed: _Annual report. of..-survey-inventory acr.ivities. V-ot. 15, Part B. ADF&G, Fed- Aid in 1n1ildl ' Rest' prog' rept. Proi. W-22'3, Job 1.0. progress report. Kelleynouse,- -"p;Gi 'qs-qo D.G. 1gg5a. unit L2 moose survey-inventory i n A. Seward, ed. _Annual re-port. of.. -survey-inventory acrrv.ities. vn. 15, Part B. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in lllildl . Rest. pro9. rePt. Proi. W'22'3, Job 1.0. . 1985b. Unit 20(E) moose survey-inventory progress reportt .PqSes --g8:i0l-in-r# A. Seward, Bd. Annral repbrt of survey-inventory activities' v.f l- pu.t 8. ADF&G, iJo. Ai d' i n Wi I dl . ReJr. prog. rept. Proi . W-22-3, Job 1.0.

~~i10 LeResche, R.E. L971. Moose migrattons in North America. I'iat. Can' 10i:393-415.~~

LeResche, R.E., R. Bishop, and J.W. Coady., I9_74. Distribut'ion and habitats of moose 'in Al aska . Nat. Can. 10I: 143-178. l,lachida, s. 1985. Unir 18 moose survey-inventory progrL)ss report- .Pages iZ-ll in A. Seward, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activiries. i,"f . fE pi.i 8. ADF&G, Fed. A'id i n wi I dl . Rest. prog. rept. Proi . W-22-3, Job 1.0. Nowlin, R.A. 1985. Un'it 25 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages tig-t+: in A. Seward, tsd. Annual report of s-urvey-inventory ictivlties. Vol. 15, Part 8. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest' prog' rept. Proi. W'22'3, Job 1.0. 0sborne, T.0. 1985a. Unit 21(B) moose survey-inventory_ progress report. Fu6ut 106-108 i n A. Seward, e9, _ Annual re-port. of . survey-'inventory aciivities. VcrT. i5, Part 8. ADF&G. Fed. Aid in Wi ldl . Rest' prog' rept. Proi. W'22-3, Job 1.0. . 1gg5b. unir 21(c) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ln A. SewirO, €d. Arrnual report of _survey-inventory iiiiriti.5. Vol. 15, Part B. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in 1n1ildl. Rest. pro9. -m:flO--rept. Proi. W-22-3, Job 1.0. . 1985c.- Unj t zI(D) nroose survey-irtventory progress report. Pages lJ- in A. Seward, €d. Anhual report uf _survey-inventory u.iiuitius. Vol . 15, Part 8. ADF&G, Fed. Ajd in 1;i ldl . Rest. prog. -m-f rept. Proi . W-22-3, Job 1.0 . . 1gg5d. tjnit ?L(E) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ln A. Seward, cd. Anhual report of survey-inventory acrivities. Vol . 15, Part 8. ADF&G, Fed. Aid irr t^Jj ldl. Rest. pro9. -IT,f:ttS-rept. Proi. W-22-3, iob 1.0. . 1985e. Unit 24 moose survey-inventory progress report' Pages gA .i n A. Seward , pd. Arrnual report of _survey-i nventory i.iiriii.5. Vol . 15, Part 8. ADF&G, Fed. A1d in 14ildl . Rest. prog. -136'-frept. Proi. W-22-3, Job 1.0. moose 0sborne, T.0., and R.E.-Page!..104-105 Pegau. 1965. Unit 21(A) ^survey-inventory- progress ..po.t. in A. Seward, ed. Annual report of survey-'tnu.-ito.V acii"vities. VoT. 15, Part B. ADF&G, Fed' Aid in t.Jildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proi. Ul-22-3, Job 1'0'

Pegau, R.E. 1985. Unit 19 moose survey-inventory progress report'. .Pages iA-eZ.in A. ieward, ed. Annua'l refort of survey-inverttory activi!iel- V.f.- t$l purt 8. ADF&G, Fed. Aid' in Wildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proi ' W-22-3, Job I .0.

~~111~~

~~Birds~~

~~Ducks and Geese Distribution and Abundance Western and Interior Regions~~

I. REGIONt,lIDE INFORMATION Est'imates of vraterfowl di stri buti on and abundattce have been made i n Alaska annually by the USFh/S from the late 1940's to the.present. Survey methoos-have been standardizecl (Hodges and Conant 1985) so clata are c-omparaOle and are the basjs of most of the d'iscussion to fol low. Because' of USWFS survey des'ign, djstribution and abundance wiI t be giu.n to. ducks and geese as groups witi arid spec'ies-spec'ific information provided when avallable. Informat'ion^area- is org,anr'zed by survey anea, wirh separate discussions for the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delt"a (ifUl, Yukon Flati, Tetl in-Northway, Innoko, Tanana-Kuskokwim (i ncl ucl'ing the Mi nto f1ats ) , and Koyukuk areas. A. Regional D'istribution Th6 Wesrern and Interior regions contain some of the rrost productive and important waterfowl breeding_ areds in North America. Most of the waterfowl in the Pacific Flyway as well as birds from the Central and Atlantic Flyways breed in Interior and Western Alaska. Waterfowl breeding in the Arctic Regicn also may rest and stage in the Western and/or Interior reg-ions', depending on their migiation routes. In gerreral, waterfowl arrive 'in the Interior and ani Western regions shortly before breakup .i n Apri 1 or t'lay (USFWS 1964). stay through frleze-up'Dei in 0ctober 1. yukonlKuskokwim ta. Most cackl i ng Carrada geese nest 'irr ffi fringe of the delta from approxinrately 59.40'N to 63'15'N. The lrea from Nelson Island tc Cape popu.l^ati9n wi th Romanzof supports the niajori ty of_ _ the ttestinq Oeniities often exceeding ?0 nests/miz (Mickelson' 1e75).- tlJhite-fronted geese nest throughout the delta area ' but spri ng breeO'ing pai r survey data_.show that they. are more co*ron within 3b i

115 Inland frgm the coast, the country is dlier and the cl'imate less marine, resulting in slight vegetative changes; ducks rather than geese becohe the most abundant form of waterfowl (King 1972). -nortn 'l ine Yukon del ta between Apoon and Kwi kl uak pasSeS s used for fall staging by pintails (over 40,000 seen in early August) and for Urood iearing by Taverner's Canada geese in July (Byrd 1983). ino* !""t., Taverner's Canada geese, and ducks qigrate along the yirkon River from Russian Mission to Apoon Pass in late April and ear'ly May (ibid). Tire Iower reichei of the Kolomak, Kuttak, and Kwecharak rivers ancj the mudflats at the head of Kokech'ik Bay are major nrgl ting areas for white-f ronted .geese, emperor geese, brant, anc caikl ing Canada geese ('ibid. ). The Kashunui< River rnouth area from the Tutakoke River mouth to the mudf lats of f 9ld Kashunuk vi'l1age is a principa'l molting area for brant (ib'id.). The Haien Bay area, including the mouths ano lower 3 mi of the l4anokinali, Aknerkochi k, Azun, and Narokachi k rivers and the north side of the Naskonar Peninsula,'is "probably the rijo. molting- area on the refuge for emperor^geese and large nui,be.s of cacklers, brant, and white-fronted geeSe," .ip.iiutty tate in the brood-rearing period (ibid.)' The ared surrounding Dall lake and between there and Baird Inlet is a major stjging area for thousands of snow g_eese irt late September ano'eaily 0ctober; hundreds of failed and nono..oo'ing wnite-frontei geese molt there in early July (ibid.). iatst"itrt Lake, about 40 mi northwest of Bethel, is a roiiing ureu for 8,000-10,000 ducks. The rost commonly found spec'iei are greatei scaup (mostly males) and oldsquaw; others alu-plntail,- canvasback, iesser scaup' corunon and Barrow's gol deneye, and buffl ehead ( ibid. ) . ine Oays around Nunivak Islancl are impgrtant for many spec jes-, including Stel ler's eiders in sullmer and autumn' oiorqrurr in late autumn, and emperor geese in autumn. Bays with'eel grass, such as buchikthluk. Bay, .harbor thousands of nontrreediig brant in the autuntn (ibid- )-. In July, mixed flocks rr{ ihousands of failed and nonbreeding Taverner's and cackling canada geese molt on the shallow rocky lakes of Nunivak island's interior. 2. inr,oro. In July IgI4, a waterfowl-banding pqrty found ducks GnOTom" geese) to be most numerous on the Innoko River and iis tributlries between Hol ikachuk and the mouth of the Iclitarod River, the lower part of the Iditarod Rjver, and the yetna River (l'lsopei 1954). Species banded included lower pintail ma'l1ard, shoveler, wigeon, green-wingecl teal, ' whjte-frr.rnted goose, arro lesser Canada goose.

116 ? Kovukuk. lrlhite-fronted arrd Canada goose brood.s were counted ffi/e ri of the Dulbi Ftiver in July 1984 (l4otschenbacher 1984). Geese were concentrated in the lnarshy lgwer reaches of if,e Dulbi River, with the number of young increasing logarithmically w'ith distance down the river. 4. Tairana-Kuskokwim (including the Minto flats) ' The Minto Tili Prime nesting area for greater and I esser scaup , pi.n1a-'i-1_'- green-wi nged teal , shovdl , and American wigeon (Rgwinsk'i 1958; King ' pe_rs. iorr. ), as ,i,f f as being a ma3or stopgver area for waterfov'rl during migration (ADF&G 1983)- fotta[ Spiings, near the confluence of the Sushana and Toklat rivers, is ciii'icat overvjntering habitat for.a population of 500-600 ma'll ards that i s bel ieveci to be the northernmctst overwintering waterfowl population on the North American continent ( ibid. ). Areas (besides tne Minro flats) iOen-tified. in the Tanana Basi n Area Pl an as "prinre waterfowl habj tat" are Lake M'inchumina, upper Kantishna River, Bearpaw River drainage, Fi sh Lake weLl ands , shaw cpeek f l ats , Lake l'lansf iel d , F'ish Lake wet,lands, Dot Lake-Sam Creek, Bi1ly Creek t_a[e, Jn. Wotf j wetl inds, Mi neral Lakes , and the Sal chaket Sl ough artd ts tributaries (ADF&G 1983). 5. Yukon Flats. The Yukon Flats are important not on"ly for duck roduction but also as moiting area-S for waterfowl from other breeding areds and as a resting place for southward migrants each" fall (USFWS 1964). Predominant species nesting on the flats are lesser scaup, p.intajl, American ,ig.on, and whi te-wi nged ancl s-urf scoter; other spec'ies knowrr to-nest on the flats include Canada and white-fronted geese' mallard, green- and blue-winged teal, shoveler, redhead' canvasnick", common apd Barrowis goldeneye, bufflehead' and red-breasted merganser ( ibid. ). Port'ions of these wetlands dre as pro- 6. Tetl in-Northway. 'irr ducti ve as some of the best wetl ands Al aska , such as the Minto flats area and the most productive strata of the Yukon Fj;i; (spinoter and Kessel I977). 51aterfowl usu_al1y_ begin.to arrive'i'n the area during the third week of April; spring scaup migration extends lhrough mid Ma_y for .mtlst spec'ies, but conti nue to arri ve t-hrough iate lilay. Spri ng mi grants concentrate in the small streams, ponds, and marshes that are uiual ty the f irst to thaw. The nesting period is f rom m'id May through earlY August t,i tgll , "jpindler atio Kessel (I977 ) found the lowland smal I lake, pond, and marsh habitat of sctlttie creek and Tanana-Chiana valleys tc.r be the most productive habitats in their 730 mi2 studi area along a proposed pipeline route' Densjties that summLr were as fgllows: Scottie Creek va11ey smal I lakes, pclnds and marshes , 7L4.4 bl rds/mi2 wetland habitat; Tanana-Chisana val ley smal I lakes, ponds and

717 nrarshes, 503.9 birds/nti2, and large lakes , 47g.4 b'i ras/mi?. Fewest birds were observed in the Chisana River area (78.0 birds/nri2) and the smal'i upland lakes, ponds, and marshes (95.5 birds/mi2). Scottie Creek and the Tanana-Chisana valleys were the most productive areas (162.3 and 101.5 young birds/mi2, respectively). Diving ducks, especially lesser scaup but a I so i ncl udi ng buffl ehead , canvasback , and wh'ite-r,linged scoter, vrere the most abundant birds in the study area and the most abundant group using large lakes, the Tanana-Ch'isana va11ey small lakes, ponds, and marshes, and the upland small lakes, ponds, and marshes. Dabbling ducks, especially green-winged teal, and American wigeorl' were most abundant in Scottie Creek va11ey. Canada geese were most abundant alorrg the Chisana River. The flightless molting period extends from mid June to late Ju'ly for dabbling clucks and from mid July to early September for diving ducks (ibid.). Important molting areds in Spindler and Kessel's (tgll) study a.rea are Midway., Deadman, Eiiza, Yarger, Tlocogn, and F'ish (near Northway), Tetlin, Gasoline, Fish, ttathlalmund, and 0ld Albert lakes, Scottie Creek Lakes #16 and #17, and Chisana Pond # 17A. B. Areas Used Seasorrally and for Life Functions For more specific infornratjon on warerfowl distribution in Western and Interior Alaska, see the 1:1,000,000-scale index maps in the Atlas to the guicle-in for these regions and the i:250,000-scale reference maps ADF&G offices. The fo.|lowing categories are mapped: o General di stribution o Known spring concentrations " Known fal I concentrat'ions " Known nesting concentrations " Known molting concentrations o Known wirrter concentrations |. Factors Affecting Distribution Arrival of waterfowl on the breeding grounds is determined more by photopertvd and weather along the migration route than by local inowmbtt {Dou and Mickelson 1979); arrival dates are much more constarrt irom year to year than are melt dates (Newton 1977). Distribution of nest sites on the breeding grounds may be determined by local patterns and timing of snowmelt, but regional distribut'iorr is more determined by distribution of habitat types. 0rrce they have bred in an area, 'individual ly marked female geese usually return to breed in the same area yeqr after year (see references in Newton 1977';. For more detailed information uf species habi tat requi rements and preferences, see the Alaska HiOitat Management Guide, Life History and Habitat Requirements of Fish and liildlife volume. D. Movement Between Areas Pacific black brant nesting on the YKD molt ill or near the production areas (Dau and Hogan 1985).

118 Timm and Dau (Lg7g) Oelieve that over 95% of the Pacific Flyway white-fronted goose population js produced- on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. About iOZ ot'tire band recoveries from geese banded in the Innoko River Valiey occurred jn the Pacific Flyway; Lensink (1969) considerecl this [Of" to represent nrolt migrarrts from the YKD' Survey and bandi ng records i ridi cate that i rr I are Septembe-r and early- 0ctober moit white-fronted ge-e-se from the YKD migrate nonsiop more that 3,000 ml to maior foll staging areas in northern californ.ia (Lensink 1985). Most white-fronts from the Innoko and Koyukuk river drainages and all from other Interior Alaska nesting arlas are part of the nrid-cont'inent population and m'igrate directly from nesting areds to the Kinderly area on the Alberta- Saskatchewan borcler ( 'ib'id. ) . E. Populat'ion Size Estimation i.' USFWS Alaska-Yuko ' B.reeding eVs were begun in lh" late ig+O's, primari]! to'measure the status of ducks in the major North Ambrican bieeding areas. The surveys currently monitor waterfowl population and habitai c[anges over approximately miles of breeding hqPitat w'ithin Alaska' 1.3 million square 'in canada, and the northcentral states. The survey period Al aska j s f rom m'iO l"lay through mi O June , dependi ng .on the date of the spring icd breakup. Alaska'is divided'into 1i survey rt.utu'(map r). A stratum is a specific geographical unii Lnco*puttitg'ureas of sinrilar habitat type and waterfowl densities. Strata I-7 are grouped as interior Alaska Taiga' ano strata B-11 are in the Coastal Alaskan Tundra. Transects within the stratum are a selies of segmetrts, usually parallel to each other, from 14 to 60 m'i apart and equaliy spaced over the stratum.' A'laskan survey segrnenf,s comprisi ng . the transects are B or 16 m'i long and l/4 ni wide, giv'ing a sampling area of 2 or 4 m'i2 each. The'speiies popularion index is P = A*T/S*V, where A = square rnileS in thd stratum, T = f,otal observed birdS' S = Square miles in the sample flown, and V = species v'isibility factor (Conanr dnd Hodges 1984). L: in 2. USF|l/S Alaska D-uck Productiorl Survey. Duck oe'rived from-production surveYs of 38 lakes on two Study areas oriep rhe past 22-years (Conant and King fgg2i. Cor-purable data exist for 18 years from 4 the iu.g" titces near Tetlin and for 14 years _from 34 lakes on yuk6n Flars (Hooges and Conant 1985). in 1983' the proJect was expanded to 'include additional areds in the Tetl in' Nowitpa, vutcon rlats, innoko, Kanuti, and Kgyukuk NWRs^in the Western und Int.t'ior- regiclns, as wel I as Togiak and Selawi k NWRs. Surveys are conducled in the second and third weeks of July; duck broods were counted whi le observers were e'ither paoiiing or walking lake perimeters (ir'io.)' 3. yukgrr-Kuskokw'im O,ilfg__!!Iyg. Field studies on nestittg geese' Pacific ge€se' -emperor white-fronted geese, and Pacific black brant have been conducted on ifre YKD each yea r si nce the I ate 1960' s .

~~119 ^|r) @ Ol~~

~~(n o o 'b a ! o =o o g o - o b o ro co o +Jg o o (o B .a- t c) a (o It P E ! o +) Y th o L o:5 o +) fo~~

~~o o o a o 2 c o o .E (u g a (u o r- c o -o (t Eb a o tFo= o Cl L c CJ o' o +J t rd 3 = aa U1 J =lJ- u') =~~

~~o rd =~~

L20 Studies have focused ori aspects of breeding biology qnd ecology of all species of geese and estimates of population scatui- and prodtictivity of brant. Efforts to expand. thg database on iopul ati on status and product'ivi ty were i n'iti ated rn 1981 and continue through the present (Stehn et al. 1985). In summer 1985, aerial surveys were developed to provide an index to the annual number of pairs of cackling Canada' .rpuro., and white-fronted geese in the YKD (Butler 1985a). Develcipment of a suitable nranagement survey for the coastal zone of the YKD is expected to take three to four years (ibid.). F. Statewide Abundance The waterfowl breeding population survey showeo that all s_pecies of dabblers declined sig'nificantly in 1985, with pintails and mallards well below average (see table 1). Total ducks were dowrt ZS% in 1984 from the long-term average. Although the survey was deSigned for ducks, geese are- al So recorded; goose numbers declined in 1985. BredOing population survey data are currerrtly being computerized, and soon it will be possjble to.compare yearly and iong-term data for each survey stratum and species.

I I. YUKON-KUSKOKWIIVi DELTA A. Present Abundance In general, goose production on the YKD in 1985 remained depressed (Stehn et al. 1985). Up to 50% of the world populati_on of Pacific black brant breed on thecoisialfringeoftlre'YKD(DauandHogan1985) YKD was 16 maximum estimated n1rmber of brant nesti ng on the '267 when aerial survey results were addeo ro estjmated populations for the three main nisting colonies at Kokechik Bay, Tutakoke R'iver' ond Kigigak Island (Glrrert and l^lege 1985). lh.u 1984 population was ooin-5I% f ron the 1981 estirrtate (see taole 2)' About g0% of the world population of emper'or geese nests orr the yKD (peterson 1985). Although popularion levels of enrperor geese have never been high (150,00-0 jn the mid 1960's), recent surveys have shown a cont'in-uous decline of about 10% per year to a spring population of 7I,200 in 1984 (jbid.). geese in Cal ifr.,rnia at Tule Lake and Fat t counts of wh'ite-fronted 'ind'icate Klamath-iiiin (uiros wh'ich viitually a1l nest c.rrr t,he YKD) rhat the populition has

~~LZI !,~~

(u C', a LE u (ootrtl (ocD\o p; til- Lg l.O r{ d CT, C\ @qr@(f)(a(o or|(Jr+< cf) tf C\r + c\J + c\J (o . l-J -c oq) r\ ai F- (\r (\t tJ-) r-{ r+ d N lt st (u Fl< -^i' +)5 t{ F{(O dJ c) HCD Fl =a +) ct .o +J o=|F (frN r\ |.c) lr) O sl'cf) c\l =.+,€ r\ O .Y NJ r-oiooq)sr lJ', ttl F{ ,-rc)oc\.1 cc}o<'d'{ O.{\OOicf)tO|l) NJOlf'OCDOtO o)(g t\ lCF ;3 I c{oc\Jr\sj-o@cO(Y) oO!?(Y)qg!9O !9o9oor(Ntr' osr a.]---rrlto-ii@ [email protected]@+gr o o crlor o sz J c"i; eco6 (o ct Fl r{ (\ld -ro J 69 ! >- Or'|.i da\ at^c(o loI ro .,v, cr, rA.e= L; !t roL J C (u J Utp 5 u:@ u' c, O--- (J 0J rtle O 9 LeJ (oo -ro<1. - qJ (o >(u q q 3- > (u ro (J c o_ O o o 'o -v y1- O6+t> ot- ..8€-qtqr(US-+r O-O 9Cr'.Cl'?cro(l)c(uO'o591- L)(lJ !1 a--.i+rrrb.-O atnvr COIf IJ a l-o-vro:B -c€€..o|t,qcqr-{J q, .c) .1) - . . vt+r-o rns > 5 -O--q!q>(o+) o o)OF A; Q t .== -'c c'u.-t+-9)!t(l-- 5(uEo eqoE L 5 (o ;- 6€ .'=t'.t5i€ qr Q-'- av', P (u (o (J .. -o tu; 6 E-a-. -' or,o O !: (5o =v, tro ul ad.z'9 u r.. (ulr (u r, E i co 6 <

~~122 Tab'le 2. Esrimated Numbers of Pac'ific Black Brant Nesting on the Yukon Delta Nt,lR, 1981-84~~

~~Total Brant Nesti rtq dt Total Brant l'lestirrg,.on j yea r Th ree tnla j or Col on esd the Yu kon De I ta NWR"~~

~~1gg1 45,301c 67 ,783c LgBz 24 ,oosd (-47De 44 ,7oof ( -34%) 1963 22,so8g (-06%) 33,ooo (-26%) 1984 8,736h (-6i%) 16,267 (-5r%)~~

Source: Garrett and llege 1985. a The rhree major brant nesting colonies are located at Kokechik Bay, Tutakoke River, and Kigigak Island. The total number of birds estimated for these three colonies was determined by ground surveys. b The total number of brant nesting on the Yukon Delta NWR is the sum of ground surveys at the three major nesting colonies and the sum of aerjal surveys for the remaining colonies. c Aldrich et al. 1981. d Byrd et al . L982. e Percentage declirre from previous year. f Calculated estimate: the sum of brant nesting at, the three major colonies (1982) plus the number of brant nesting elsewhere on the YKD as based upon the 1981 census of brant nesting areas.

~~g Masteller et al . 1983, Wege and Garrett 1983, and l^Jest et al. i983. h Scanlon and Jarvis 1984, Jan'ik and Jarvjs 1984, attd Sedinger 1984.~~

~~t23 C. Habi'tat and Elhancement P'roiects A yKD goose recovery plarr is cur"rently be:ing developed and should be avaitatte from the USF,WS before this account is finalized.~~

~~III. INNOKO A. Present Abundance Duck producticln sutrveys r{ere'in;itia:ted in 1'983 (se-e-_table 3) attd ir. pianned to continue yearly (HodgeS and Conant 1985).~~

~~Iable 3. Duck Production Su'rveys, Inno'ko' 1983-84~~

~~Broods Water Bodi es Broods ,per Average Brood Year Found Su'rveyed Water'Bodii'es Size~~

~~1983 r?,8 57 2.2 4.3 1984 465 32'6 L.4 4.5~~

~~Source: Hodges and Conant i98'5..~~

~~B. H'i stori c Abundance No information wa:s fotrfid.~~

IV. KOYUKUK A. Present Abundance Duck proriuction surveys wene irritiatect in 1983 (see^-table 4) and are piunu"O to corrtinle yea,rly (,Hodges and Conant 1985). B. Historic Abundance No infornration was found.

~~Table 4. Duck Producti.on Surveys' Koyukuk' 1983-84~~

~~Broods water Bodies B:roods per Average Broocl Year Found Su,l"veyed Water Bod'ies Size~~

~~1983 229 243 .9 7.0 1984 407 ?37 1.8 5.0~~

~~Source: Hodges atd Conant i9B5-~~

L24 V. TANANA-KUSK0KWIM (includ'ing the Minto flats) A. Present Abundance Duck producrion surveys were initiatecl in 1983 (se-e__table 5) and are pianned to continue yearly (Hodges ano Cortant i985). Shepherd arro Matrhews (1985) estimate that duck production on the flats is about 75,000-150,000 ducks.

~~Table 5. Duck Productiorr surveys, Tanana-Kuskokwim, 1983-84~~

~~B roods l,later Bodies Broods per Average Brood Yea r Fourid Su rveyed Water Bodies Size~~

~~1983 560 r67 3.4 6.0 1984 229 131 t.7 5.6~~

~~Source: Hodges and Conant 1985.~~

B. Historic Abundance Waterfowl proctuctivity for the Minto fIats area was studied frorn tg61 throrjEn 1965 (Shephero L967). Br-rth L962 and 1964 were extremely iate spri ngs , and 1965 v\,as moderateiy I ate; I osses of greatly throughout young wdre high,' and brood size t,,/as -reduced much of the siudy. Total production for the flats was estimated dt 75,000-150,000 ducks.

VI. YUKON FLATS A. Present Abundance Data on duck production for 34 lakes has been collected for the past l5 years by the USFWS Waterfow'l Investigations team (see table 6).- Beginning in 1984, the Yukon Flats NWR staft conducted additional waterfowi production surveys (Mclean i985). Conant.'s (ig34j trend data inoicate a decline'in duck production on the itats, Out two years of data from the additional areas surveyed by the refuge sraf? indicate the opposite trend (Mclean, pefs.conrm.). Habitat differences ancl d'ifferent patterns of human use itl the two areas may explain part of the discrepancy (ibid')' B. Historic Abundance In 1964, the USFWS estinrated that the Yukon Flats produced a fall flight 6t f.5 million ducks "even in years when drought eliminates many other waterfowl breeding .areas and scatters the waterfowl whilh might have nested there" (usfws 1964).

~~t25 i o>oo c< FOaQFO +FF F OON 3E NNF'NN OFN d FAN I +~~

~~oa oo c? oaooFN ona doF9F+ o@ hOF66N 66n n 6NNttsF €E | +++++ | | | t~~

*o NN6@@@ @N9 FOnddts FO€ o OO+FQN NN6 @ oN0ots€ Ns@ FF@ FTNFFO FOt n Not

~~6+d666 @0@ @ NON@FO s 6d6 N -to~~

~~@oootso {€(p +to+Fo FNNFO FO9 @ €oo~~

~~@ FO 5t4 +@o9do €6€~~

~~n€FFdO NO@ 6 'o 6~~

~~@ o N€ 9€O @~~

~~aod o N rdo oFg o66Foo:bN--dh a+o ts ooqo6o o N~~

~~oN@ NO €-N .3 oxo-OO ooo F O6o o FF@ O NON r 'NFFO N c N9@oOa NN- !9 6F- N PFts o ;; @ FNa 6 ts9F o~~

~~oF6od@ nao N mfi9 6i -rN eO N ooN oN o~~

~~o eN64NA FQ - g:3'p3 8Hg L -9@ tn F N :b8F d3 OF6~~

~~O @6o t cQ+ dOmFFm 9FN o@4FoF F@o o FoO NO FFN J:oiero- o o-o o d N dFh~~

ts 6@FFFt FNO N9 0€O N FNNOtts 9FN t @ FN bo FoN n -Q- o o o -oa;aN N iFt-o- o .a g 60 o99 | @O oo9 o9 @ o@l g -9fr:9; 396 5 Htg o NNO oo ng | N oo@o90 oNo 6 00N o dts@ ao F FN- I N 6 OF FO FFN ,3 o !9 oo E g | 6 m+Ndrts @ @6aa ro o N@O 4F a-rN49 P o a rl c0 OF g OON I F- *i33g8 glF .;i I NNN I F@ I s N o- o '-: oa o PO 60 0 5@oFoF oNo >oa o o FO F N o o>E g !!FCo@o o ++NNOF t+O olc!to 6ts+ Fr FFN 6.FO Fo-C 900! c9F0 o! COro -€ii ocE I F=* . 9O o r lti E=* I It! !** go9ooo o ro! r!o ;39 ee.b o Lot ioi: riEn,iE ; t.OLQ o ":.iI8;3 - ":.iii:5 E ;;5 oE>oooo9 o 9= .,;oEE i|^e € :; :;'2e i7-.6 ; i:: L< 93-.: ; 2-2E;;E 93 j ! orltl !3€;t[ 3 :5 5i5o 6tN* F E- E =:

L26 VI I. TETLIN.NORTHWAY A. Present Abundance Eighteen years of comparab'le data exist orr duck production from four large lakes near Tetlin (see table 6). B. Historic Abundance McKnight (1962) estinated the iune 1961 waterfowl population of his 700 mi2 study area at 55,077 birds. In 1977, Spind'ler and Kessel (t977) estimated the wetland bird population on their 730 mi2 study area to be 101,251 (66,357-136,145; 95% confidence). Spindler and Kessel's (I977 ) estimate for the same gelleral,area was hi gher than McKni ght' s probably because they i ncl uded shorebirds as well as the ducks, geese, loons, arid grebes counted by McKnight; they included an additional 30 miz of upland habitat; and 1977 was an j nvasi on year, whereas 1961 was not. Praj rie-pothole nesting waterf'owl often invade subarctic and arctic regions during periods of drought in the pra'irie region (McKnight L962, Hansen and McKnight L964, Derksen and .Eldridge iggO), and 1977 was such a drought-induced invas'ion year (Spincller and Kessel 1977 ). Therefore , waterfowl cleris'i ti es reported by Spindler and Kessel (L977 ) are higher than the long-terrn average for the region. Although population densities were higher tlqn average, pr-oduction was lower than expected because clf abnonrral lJ' high water levels that flooded rnany nests (ibid.).

VIII. I'IANAGEMENT IIISTORY The USFWS is responsible for management of Alaskan waterfowl and enforcement of the laws and agreements regarding thenr. Alaskan waterfowl have basically been managed ljke those of the Lower 48 excepr for the lack of enforcement of the prohibition agatrist spring hunting and egging of the 1916 Migratory Bird Protection Treaty between the United-states ancl Canada. A steady decline in the populatjons of four species of geese (U1ack brant, greater white-fronted goose, emperor goose, and cackling Canada goose) that nest on the YKD and winter a'long ifre Pacific Flyway has prompted sport hunting grcups to file a suit preventing USFWS frbm allowing subs'istence harvest of the four species during the spring and summer closed season (Chanoler 1985). Rather than blind enforcement of the hunting laws, the USFWS has chosen to try to find a betrer way to manage YKD geese by cooperating wjth the Association of Village Council Presidents, sport hunting groups' !!9 Califgrn'ia Departmeni of Fish and Game, and the ADF&G itt the 1984 Hooper Bay Agreement and the 1985 Yukon-Kuskokwinr Goose ltlanagement Plan. The former requi res local resjdents to stop hunting cackl irig Canada geese and restrict their liarvest of white-fronted geese qld brant to the periods before egg laying and after falI ffight. The larter calls for a cooperarive monjtoring and law errforcement program in the local YKD communities and a total closure of cackling goose hunting in Cal ifornja for at least the 1984-1985 season ('ibrO. ) For the lclng rerm, the USFWS js requesting the U.S. Senate to ratify a Protocol on Subsistence Hunting of lligratory Birds, an afiendment to the' 1916 Migratory Bird Treaty with Canada, which would legal ize

I?7 subsistence hunt'ing dnd give the secretary of the interior authority ro regulate Native Anierican hunting, thus prtlviding a legal basis for cooperative agreements (ibid.). Canada signed the protocol in 1979, but United States ratification has been delayed because sport hunting and environmental groups object to the vague wording of the document. The USFWS is currently working with the Canadian t/'ilol ife Service to resolve the problem ( ibjd. ).

REFERENCES ADF&G. I9B3. |,^laterfowl. Pages 19-2I in ADNR, AOF&G, and U.S. Soil Cr.rnservaticlri Servjce, Fish and wildh-fe element of the Tanana Basin Area Plan. Butler, W. 1985a. Preliminary progress r:eport on coastal zone for the July Pacific Flyway Study Committee meetings. Memo to USFWS m'igratory bird specialist, Anchorage, AK.4 PP. . 1985b. The cackling Canada goose. Pages 428-432 in A.S. Eno and Disilvestro, eds. Auclubon wildl ife report 1985. National Audubon --TT.Society, N.Y. 671 pp. Byrd,- G.V. 19E3. Molrirrg and stag'ing areas for waterfowl and shorebirds on Yukon Delta Nat'ional Wildlife Refuge. Unpubl. rept., Yukon Delta liational t,Ji I dl r fe Refuge, Bethel , AK. 27 pp. Chanoler, tll.J. 1985. Migratory bird protection and management. Pages 27 -70 i n A. S. Ettu and R. L. Di Si I vestro, eds. Auctubon wi I dl i fe report 1985. -N-ational Audubon Society, N.Y. 671 pp. Conant, B. 1984. Alaska duck production survey - July 1984. Unpubl. rept.' USFWS, juneau, AK. 4 PP.

Corrant, 8., anC ,1. I. Hodges. 1984. Alaska-Yukon waterfowl breeding P!ir survey, May i5 to June 12,1984. Unpubl. rept., USFWS, Juneau, AK- 2r pp. . 1985. Alaska-Yukon waterfowl breeding pair survey, May 15 to 21, 1985. Unpubl . rept., USFWS, Juneau, AK. 22 pp- Cona1f,, 8., and J.G. King. 1982. Alaska duck production survey-July 1982. -JuneUnpubl. rept, USFWS, Juneau, AK. 4 PP. Dau, C.P., and M.E. Hogan. 1985. The black brant. Pages 443'447 j-[ A.S. Eno and R.L. DjSilvestro, eds. Audubon wildlife report i985. National Audubon Socjety, N.Y. 671 pp. Dau, C.P. and S.A. K'istch'insk'i,. I977 . Seasonal movements and distribution of the spectacled eicter. Wildfowl 28265-75

L?8 Dau,' C.p., and P.G. l"lickelson. 1979. Relation of weather to !pritrg migrat'ion and rresting of cackl irrg geese on the Yukon-Kuskokwirn Delta, AlIska. Pages 94-104 in Management and biolooy. of Pac'ific Flyway geese: a sympos'ium. 0SU-Eook Stores, Inc. Corvall is. Derksen, D.V., and W.D. Eldridge. 1980. Drought displacemenl of pintails to the arctic coastal p'lain, Alaska. J. t^lildl . lrlarrage. 44:224'229. Garretto R.1., and M.L. Wege. 1985. An evaluation of goose productivity on rhe Yukon Delta llWR, Alaska -- a summary report, i964. Unpubl. rept., Yukon Delta NWR, Bethel, AK. 9 pp. + tables. McKnight. Emigration of drought-displaced Hansen, ll.R., and D.E. i964. juneau, Oucks to rhe arctjc. USDI, Bureau of Sptrrt Fjsh. and h|ildl.' AK.

Hodges , J. I . , and B. Conant. 1985. A'laska duck prorluct,i on surveys 1984. Unpubl. rept., USFWS, Juneau, AK. 20 pp. l-{ooper, D.G. 1954. lnlaterfowl bandirig, Innoko and Iditarod rivers, Alaska, ' tgS+. Unpubl. rept., Clarence [hoOes National tlilCl ife RefuEe, Cold Bay, AK. 12 pp. K.ing, J.G. Lg72. Takslesluk Lake Alaska, a cosmopof it.an .duck molting resgrt. Unpubl . rept., USDI, Bureau of Sport F'ish. arid Wildl .' Juneau, AK. 22 pp. K.ing, R. 1986. Personal communicdt'ion. i,Jaterfowl Biologist, USFliS, ' tlJjldlife Ass'istance, Waterfowl Investigatigns, Fair'banks, AK. Lensink, C.H. 1969. The Oistribution of recoveries from whjte-fronted geese j (Anser al bi f rons f r:qlglj-l) banoeo il, North Amer ca . Unpubl ' rept ' ' 05D-LBureau-Sport-Tisfi-nd lrJi ldl . , Bethel , AK. 63 pp' goose-. 448-45-z'^^!n Lensink, C.J. 1985. The Pacific white-fronteo -.P^ages A.S. Eno and R.L. DiS'ilvestrr.r, eds. Auduborr w'ildl ife report 1985- National Auclubon Society, N.Y. 671 pp. McKnighr, D.E. 1962. A populatiorr stuoy_ of waterfowl on the Tetl in- Norrhway area of interioi lttaska. MS Thesis, tlashington State Univ., Pul lman. 89 PP. tvicLean, L.S. 1985. Personal communication. Asst. Refuge Manager, Yukon Flats l,lational l'l'ildlife Refuge, Fairbarrks, AK. . 1985. Waterfclwl product'ion survey on the Ytrkon Flats llational --lTl-dl ife Refuge. YFNI^JR, Fal rbanks, AK. 7 pp.

~~r29 Mickelsr,in, P.G. 1975. Breeding biology of cackling geese and associated species on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska. l,li'ldl. Monogr. 45. 35 pp.~~

Motschenbacher, M. 1984. Dulbi River goose survey. Unpub'1. rept. Koyukuk Natl . hlildi. ltefuge, Galena, AK. 7 pp. Newton, i. 1977. Tinring and success uf breeding in tundra-nesting geese. Pages Ii3-126 in B. Stc;nehouse and C. Perrins, eds. Evolutionary ecology. Baltimore, l4D: University Park Press. Peterson, M.R. 1985. The emperor goose. Pages 453-457 in A.S. Eno and R.L. DiSilvestro eds. Audubon wildlife report 1985. National Audubon Society, N.Y. 671 PP. Rowinski, L.J. 1958. A review of waterfowl investigations and a comparison of aerial arrd ground censusing of waterfowl at Minto flats, Alaska' Unpubl . rept., Univ. Alaska, Fa'irbanks. 112 pp. Shepherd, P.E.K. 1967. (nc, t'itle) Unpubl . rept., ADF&G, Juneau, AK. 130 pp.

Shepherd, P.E.K., and M.P. Matthews. 1985. Impacts of resource development and use on the Athabaskan people of Minto flats, Alaska. Unpub'|. rept. for Tanana Chiefs Conference, Inc., Fairbanks, AK. 157 pp. Spirrdler,' 14.A., and B. Kessel . I977. b'letland bird populations irl the-upper Tanana River va'i'ley, A'laska , 1977. Unpubl . rept. to Northwest Alaskan Pipeline Company. 71 PP. Stehn, R. , A. Lorartger, M. Peterson, J. Sedinger, C. Ely, and K. Kertel l. 1985- Nesting sucess of geese irr the coastal tundra regicln,of the Yukon-Kusktlkwim Delca. Unpubl. rept., USFWS, Anchorage, AK. 10 pp.

Timm, D.E., and C.P. Dau. I979. Proouctivity, morta)ity, distribution, and population status of Pacific Flyr,ray white-fronted geese. Pages 280-29^8 in'Managenretir and biology of Pacifjc F'lyway geese: a symposium. 0SU Book Stores, Inc., Corvall'is. tjSF[^/S. 1964. A report on fish and wildlife resources affected by Rampart Canyon Dam and reservoir project, Yukon Rjver, Alaska. Unpubl. repi. USDI, USFWS, juneau, AK. I22 PP.

~~i30 Frestnrate r I Anadromous Fish~~

~~Arctic Char/Do11y Varden D'istribution and Relative Abundance Western and Interior Regions~~

I. REGION!\|IDE INFORMATiON in this report, distribution and relative abur,dance information for char will ne prbsented by sport fish postai survey areas, shown on map f. information on the l6vei of char iport harvest is contailred in the Freshwater ano Anadromous Fish Sport Use narrat'ive founcl elsewhere in this volume. A. Regional Di stribution Anadromous char are found south of the Kuskokwim River mouth.irt Kuskokwinr Bay drairrages such as the Goodnews, Arolik, and Kanekrok rivers (ADF&G 1978,-Alt I977). Dwarf stream residerrt char ancl lake resident char ire also found in Kuskokwim Bay orainages (Alt tgill. Stream resioent char are found 'in tributaries of the Yukon main stem of these and kuskokwim pivers, but they rarely enter the 'in rivers (Alt 1980, I977). Anadromous char are not found the Yukon or Kuskokwinr rivers (ib'id. ). Lower Kuskokwim tributaries supporting fairly large popula-tions of resident srream char include the Aniak, Kisaralik, Kwithluk' and Tuluksak livers (ADF&G I978, Al t 1977). In the Yukon River drainage, char are present as resident species'in streams flowing 'into tie- Yukon Ri vdr, f rom the Andreaf sky R'i ver upslream to the l4elozitna River. The ]'lelozitna R'iveris the furthest upstreanl where large-size resioent char have been fourtd, but dwarf-size res'ident char are present i n smal I tributary st-re-ams -f^{!!f'*t up the Yukon urio in thb Upper Tanana drainage (A1t 1981a, 1980). B. Regional Distribution MaPs A series of freshwater fish d'istribution maps at 1:250'000 sca'le have been produced for th'is report. The categories of nlapped 'informati0n dre as follows: o General di stributiorr " Documented presence in stream or lake o Documented sPawning areas o Documented overui ntering dreas " Docuniented rearing areas C. Factors Affect'ing Distribution I eve'ls atro Water qual i ty- plrameters, such as di ssol ved oxygen [emperaf,ure, arid rhe physical characteristics of streams ancl lakbs, such as depth, vel-ocity, and substrate type, ull 'influence char O.istribut jon. More det.a'il s of char habitat requi rements carl be found in the L'ife History ancl Habitat Requirements narrat'ive found in volume 1 of this publication. D. Movements Between Areas The gerreral pattern of char nrovement i s clj scussecl 'in the Li fe l{.istdry anct Habitat Requirements portion of th'is accounr' found in vol ume 1.

~~133 ---7-1 5 t! (u L )i r., t$ Jo= J rr) tn \ 5 :Z ) I oE ( J t L l (u \ \a )o=~~

c, (u \-l L 6 G' ) 0,, \--,\ t- ) G' ,c (u at L I a \ th ta'l' ! & a a 1: aa a l{- i Ol i atl It PC r: odL€ i.a o. t vl tn a .v .nogo OL 'F co q,(utr'l L o,. o Ov1 L-c O+, +J=go ! |g> g|! _--l||- (uLl-c, 3 +)< an 7oc,.. J . rtt r<-O l- Qte tEro =l!

134 Anaoromous char out-mjgrate shortly after spring breakup and_feed at sea for four to eiglit weeks (ADF&G 1978). Char return to fresh water from July to September (ibid. ). Anadromous char from Kuskokwim Bay dia'inages that wi I I spawn jn the current year beg'in entering the rivers in. late June and early July to Spawn iAlt L977). Spec'ific'inforrnation on norrspawning anadromous char is not avaiiable, but Alt (1977) notes that they may enter Kuskokwim Bay drainages later in the fall. Village residents in the Kuskokwim area have reported large numbers of char moving upstream with rhe coho salmon in August, ancl September (ibid.). Most srream resident (nonanadromous) char are found in headwaters clr in clearwater tributaries of nrajor rivers (Armstrong and Morrolv 1980). Srream residents probably overwinter in deep pools or move downstream to deep wdter near the mouth of tributary _streams. Srream resiclent char jn Kuskokwim River tributaries rarely enter the mairr Kuskokwinr (Alr 1977). Irr t''linook Creek, a small tributarl' of the Yukon R'iver near Rampart, the char leave smal ler tributaries, such as Little Minook Creek and Ruby Creek, in late fal I arro early winter, apparelrtiy spending the winter in the lower redches of Mi nook Cred[ 'i tseif (Armstrong and Morrow 1980) . During rhe summer, streatn residents in the Kuskokwim artd Yukon river drainages congregate in areos where s.almon spawn to feed on the salmon egEs (A1a 1980, 1977; ADF&G 1978). E. Populaiion Size Estimation Thb relative abundance of char irr the Western and Interior regiorrs has nor been systematically assessed. Estinrates of po-pulation size are based on rough measures of catch-per-unit-effort .gathered during lake and siream surveys corrclucted with hook-and-line and gi 1 1 nets. F. Regional Abundance Veiy little informat'ion on char abundance is available, and the infbrmation that has been col'lected appf ies only to specifjc lakes and streams. As a resul t, estimates of abundance cannot be appropriately made at the regional level . Abunciance informat'ion is containeO in the discussions of the posta'l survey areas urh'ich fol I ow.

I I. LOWER YUKON.KUSKOKI^JIM AREA DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCF The Lower Yukol-Kuskokwim Sport Fish Postal Survey Area includes all southern drainages of the Yukon River from its confluence wjth the Tanana River, ndar Tanana, west to Ka'ltag; all drairrages of the Yukon R'iver south of Kaltag to rhe Bering Sea; the Kuskokwinr River watershed; al I waters flowing into Kuskokwim Bay; and adjacerrt salt water attd jslands. This area does not include the Pasto'itk River dra'inage and waters flowing into Norton Sound northeast of the Pastolik River' nor any portion of the Tanana R'iver watershed (ADF&G 19s5). Anidromous char are found in Kuskokwim Bay drairrages south of the Kuskokwim River. Alt in 1977 described the char population as abundant in the Goodnews River system, the Kanektok River system, and the Aro'lik River system. Dwarf stream resident char are also found irt these three

135 rivers upstream of areas where anadromous char are found. Itt Kuskokw.int Bay orainages, these nonanadromous dwarf char are mature at 130 to 160 mnr fork leng[h. Char make up a large percentage of rhe fish found in lakes in the Kgskokwim Bay clra'inages. These lake-dwel l ing char are general ly more abundant in lakes of the Goodrrews system than of the Kanektok system, but the char in Kanekrok systenr Iakes itre 1arger than those in the Goodnews lakes (Alt 1977). The largest catch per net night from gi'11 ners set in Kuskokwim Bay drainage lakes was taken from Asriguat Lake in the Goodnews River system, with 18 char per net night (ibid). In [he Kuskokwjm River drainage, stream resident char are abundant in the Aniak, Tuluksak, Kisaral'ik, Kasiga'luk, Kwethluk, and Eek rivers (ib'id. ). Al t (i981b) took two char in a gi'll net set about 37 mi up the Holitrra River. Char have also been found in Aniak Lake and in two lakes in the headwaters of the Kisaralik River, though their abundance was low in Aniak Lake (ibid.). In the lower Yukon River drainage,'large stream resident char have been found in a number of relatively swift-flowing tributaries entering the Yukon River from the north (Alt 1980, 1981a). The limit of the'ir

III. SOUTH SLOPE tsROOKS RANGE AREA DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE The South S1i-lpe Brcoks Range Posta'l Survey Area inclutles al l drainages sr.ruth of the Brooks Range, west of and including the Koyukuk and Alatna river drainages, and north of the Yukon River, including al1 northern tributaries of the Yukon River from Ka'ltag to the Canadian border (ADF&G 1985). Lar^Ee-size streanr resident char are found in a few

136 relatively swift-flowing tributaries entering the Yukon River from the north , i nil udi ng the Nul ato ancl trlel ozi tna ri vers. In the Nul ato Ri ver, char are ctisrributed from the nputh upstream and are the most inportant species for sport fishermen jn the area (Alt 1980). Local resiclents have indjcated that char abundance'in the Nulato'increases upstream from the mouch. The Melozitna js the upper limit of distribution of large char in the Yukon River drainage. Char abundance in the be considered quite low (Alt 1984). They have been Mel6zirna could 'in captured in the Melozitna system only rapi_d.-runoff .mounta'inous type tributary stredms such as Fox Creek and Grayling Creek or in aojacent areas ol the Melozitna main stern ( rbid. ). Dwarf stream resident char, which are se'ldclm over 300 ffilll, have been taken from the Tozitna River and from small tributary streams further up the Yukon River (A'lt 1980, 1981a, 1984). Alt (1984) noted that the abundance of char in the Tozitna River is very 1ciw. Craig and tlelIs (igZS) reported a population oi moderate-size char (genErally 'in the'300-io-350-mm range) from Redfish Lake about 13 km northeast of Arctic Village. ADF&G lake and stream surveys of--the South Slope Area have not Oiscovered char itl any o!!9l.South Slope lakes (Robuskl and Spetz 1968, Kramer I976, Pearse 1928) Craig al,l Wells spedulated that the short distance beiween Redfish Lake and the continental div'ide suggests that the char in Redfish Lake may be q cd.se of headwater-capture]- in which geologic changes have caused the headwaters of a'north-flowing drainage containing char xo beconre part of the headwaters of an adjolning soutn-tlowing drainage that did not originaliy support a popuiation of char. Netich (igZS),'the HatlOeig (1975), and Pearse (1977), during streanr ir.u.yr along' route- of the. Trans-Alaska Pipel ine., re.ported smal I inor iless tian 285 mm long) from many streants alo-ng .tt. Udd'le Fork of the Koyukuk R'iver and the Dietrich R'iver, jncluding Marion Creek, 0rgano-Creek, Slate Creek, Porc.upine Creek, Rosie Creek, and several smil t unnamed streams. Pearse (1.977 ) noted that the number of cha|in these streams appears to be low compared urjth other fish species.

IV. FAIRBANKS AREA DISTRIBUTION ANI] ABUNDANCE The Fairbanks Sport Fjsh Postal Survey Area irrcludes all southerll drainages of the Yukon River from its confluence with the Tanana River', near Tinana, east to the Canadian border and including the Alaskan portion of ihe Fortynrile and Sixtymile river orainages as well as the Lntire Tanana Rivei watershed. fnis area also inc'ludes the Alaskan portion of the White River drainage (ADF&G 1985). Dwarf stream-resident char populitions have been documented in a few tributaries that enter the Yukon River from the south, in the Nenana R'iver drainaqe, in a tributary of the Delta River, and in the Upper Tanana Rivei drainage (Alt 1980, Armstrong ancl I'lorrow i980' Morrow 1980, Peckham i976, Pearse I976). Llpper Yukon R'iver tributarjes knowrt ro contain Owarf char include Mirrt'ok'breek (Armstrong arrtl l4orrow 1980) and the Charley-niver River (Morrow l9B0). Irr the Nenana driinage, char d'istribution is known to include the Nenana River main stem, Riley Creek, which enters the Nenana at Denali

t37 llarional Park, and Revine Creek, a tributary of the Yanert River (ibid.). Pearse (i976) noted that char in the upper Tanana River drainage, are probab)y found in the Little Gerstle River and the Johnson River. Lake and stream surveys documented the presence of char in Sears Creek, Tok Overflow, which flows into the Tok River, and in the Little Tok R,iver (Pearse i976). Char have also been reported from the upper sections of Berry Creek (Pearse I976) and Dry Creek (Morrow 1980) in rhe upper Tanana drainage. In mid surmer, Va'ldez (1976) found char in upstream tributaries of the Johnson and Robertson rivers and throughout Berry, Bear, and Yerrick creeks. Van Hyning (1978) found char ovenvintering in upstream portions of Dry, Berry, and Bear creeks and the Tok 0verflow. Van Hyning (1978) noted that char were generally the only fish uther than scu'lpin found in upstream areas of these streams in the winter. Char are also found in Phelan Creek, which enters the Delia River above Fjeldlng Lake (Peckham 1976).

REFERENCES ADF&G. I978. Alaska's fisheries atlas. Vol. 2 [R.F. Mclean and K.J. Delaney, comps.]. 43 pP. + 153 maPs. . 1985. Sport f i sh survey. D'iv. Sport Fish. Booklet. 43 pp. Alt, K.T. 1977. Inventory arrd cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters of [,lescern Alaska. ADI'&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Completion rept. Vol. 18. Proi. F-9-9, Job G-I-P. i980. inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters of Western Al aska. ADF&G, Fed. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest. Arrn. performance rept. Vol. 2I. Proj. F-9-I2, Job G-I-P.

1981a. Inventory and caraloging of sport fish and sport fish wafers of tJestern Al a ska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 22, Proj. F-9-13, Job G-I-P. . 1981b. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Fed. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 22. Proi . --TD'F&G,F-9-13, Jobs R-II-A and R-II-8.

~~1983. Inventory and cataloging of sporrt fish and sport fish waters of [,les te rn Al a s ka . ADF&G, Fed. Aid i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 24. Proj. F-9-15, Job G-I-P-8.~~

. 1984. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish ano sport fish waters of Western A'laska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. pe rfo rma nce rept . Vc.,l . 25 . Proj . F-9-16 , Job G-I -P-8. Armstrong, R.H., and J.E. Morrow. 1980. The Dolly Varden charr, Salvelinus malma. Pages 99-140 in E.K. tsalon, Bd. Charrs: salmonid fishes of

138 the genus Sal vel inus. The Hauge, the Netherlands: Dr. ld. Junk bv Publ i shers. 928 pp. Baxter, R. L978. Kuskokwim stream catalog. Unpubl. rept. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish, Bethel. Cra'ig,-River P.C., and J. Wells. 1975. Fjsheries investigations_in the Chandalar region, northeast Alaska. Chapter I in P.C. Craig, -€d. Fisheries irrvestigations in a coastal region of the Beaufort Sea. Canadian Arctic Gas Study Co. Biological Rept. Ser., Vo1- 34.

~~Hal i berg, J. 1975. Second interjnt report of the sport fish technical evaluation stucty. Joint State/Federal Fish and },lildlife Advisory Team Special Rept. 7.~~

Kramer, M.i. L976. Inventory and cataloging of interior Alaska waters, Chandal ar River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 17. Proi. F-9-8, Job G-I-N. f,,lorrow, J.E. 1980. Ana'lysis of the Do11y Varden charr, Salvelinus malma, of northwestern Amei'ica and northeastern Siberia. Pages 323-338 in E.K. Balon, €d. Charrs: salnpn'id fishes of the genus Salvelinus. The Hauge, the Netherlands: Dr. [,l. Junk bv Publishers. 928 pp. Nersch, N.F. I975. Fishery resources of waters alorrg the route of the Tians-Alaska Pipel ine between Yukon River drrd Atigun Pass 1n north central Alaska. Resource Publ. L24. USDI, USFWS. Pearse, G.A. L976. Inventory and cataloging of the sport fish and sport fish warers of interior Alaska, Tarrana Rjver drainage between Tok ancl Little Delta rivers. ADF&G, Fed. A'id irr Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 17. Proj. F-9-8, Job G-I-1. . 1977. Inventory and caraloging of arctic area waters. ADF&G, A'id i n F j sh Rest. Ann. perf ormance rept. Vol . 18. Proi . F-9-9 , -TeA.Job G-I-I. . 1978. Inventory and cataloging of interior uraters with emphasis ----Frhe upper Yukon anO Haul Road area. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 19. Proi. F-9-10, Job G-I-N.

Peckhanr, R.D. I976. Inventory and cataloging of the sport fish and spqrt fish waters in Interior Alaska, Delta River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid jn Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol. 17. Proi. F-9-8, Job G- I -M. Roguski," E.A., and C.E. Spetz. 196U. Irrventory and catalogil_S_ of the spgft fiih anO sporr fish waters in the interior of Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in Fish Reit. Ann. progress rept. Vol. 9. Proj. F-5-R-9, Job 15-A.

139 Valdez, R.A. 1976. Fisheries survey 9f !!e Tanana River tributaries along the Alcan Gas Pipel'Interstate ine rout. Bio/Hest, Inc. Logan, Utah' Rept' pt.pured for Gulf Engineering, Inc. Anchorage, AK' 53 pp' + appendices' van Hyn.ing, i.M. 197S. Fal I and w'inter fish studies on the upper Tanana River Orainage. Aquabionics, Inc. Fairbanks, 4K. Rept' prepared for Northwest Aliskan Pipeline Co. Anchorage, AK' 70 pp'

~~140 Arctic Grayling Distribution and Relative Abundance Western and Interior Regions~~

I. REGION[4,IDE INFORMATION In this report, d'istribution and relative abundance informatjon for grayling will be preserrted by sport fish postal survey areas, shown on map 1. Informarion on the level of grayling sport harvest is contained i n the Freshvrater and Anadromous Fi sh Sport Use na rrati ve found el sewhere 'in this volume. A. Regional Distribution Arctic grayling are found in rrearly a1l freshwater habitats of the Western and Interior regions, including Nunivak Islarrd, wirh the exception of the Yukon-Kuskokwim del ta plain (ADF&G 1978). Grayling are present irr both lakes and streams of the Western and Interior regions but dre usually more abundant tn streams (ibjd.). B. Regional Distribution Maps A series of freshwater fish distribution maps at 1:250,000 scale have been produced for this report. The categories of mapped information are as follows: o General distribution o Documented presence in streanr or lake " Documented spawning areas o Documented oven,lintering areas " Documented rearing areas C. Factors Affecting Distributjon Water quaiity parameters, such as oissolvec oxygen levels ofld temperature, and the physica'l characterist'ics of streams arrd lakes, such as depth, velclcity, and substrate tJ'pe, all'influence grayl ing distribution. More detai ls of grayl ing hab'itat requi rements can be f ound 'in the L'i fe Hi story and Hab j tat Requirements narrative found in volume I of rhis pubf ication. D. ltlovements Betvleen Areas The general pattern of grayling movement is discussed in the Life H'istory anC llab'itat Requi rements porti on of thi s account fc.rund i n volume 1. The seasonal pattern of grayling movenrcrrts withjn a system is affected by each river or strearn's source of water (Tack 1980) ancl therefore varies from system to system. Tack (1980) and Arnrstrong (L982) provide detailed descriptions of grayling movements in each of four differenr streant types found irr Interjor Alaska. Inforrnation conta'ined in Tack (1980) and Armstrong (L9BZ) is based largely on studies of grayling movements in the Tanana River drainage. l4ore ctetariled inforntation on recerrt studies of nrigration patterns of Tanana River clrainage grayl ing populatiorrs is available in the Federal Aid in Fish Restoration report series, Jobs R-I and G-III-G. The reader in need of more extensive

~~141 --a7-1 5 G' (u L~~

~~r., 3 J x,o th F\ \ >Z= J I ) c o ( J ).'t = L f, (lJ \ o= -J~~

~~|t' (u !-~~

~~ln .E (u L \---,\ |E o \\ a t- o =Vt a'l' ta /\ I E .aI t it a \\ th t rtso .' f'l t +,gL.! od o. vl tt .Y vrogo OL 'F co (t,o91 Lo. o OV, L-c O+, +r=go E (t>-9.. g,o 3 (uLlo +r~~

r42 information on grayl ing movements than js contained in th'is summary should see those reports. Alt (1978a) stated that graylirrg in the Aniak River, tributary to the Kuskokwim River, evident,ly overwinter iti the Kuskokwim R'iver and the lower sect'ion of the Aniak. The fish ntove upstream after breakup dnd cl'istribute themselves throughout the river. By July and August, grayling are seldom found in the lower reaches of Kuskokw'im Rjver tributaries or Kuskokwint Bay streams but are disrributed in the mid-to-upper reaches of the swjfter-flowing sections of the streams (jbid.). The Chena Rj ver near Fai rbanks i s an exampl e of an unsi I ted rapid-runoff stream. Grayling overwinter throughout the main stent of the Chena River from the mouth to 157 knr upstream (Tack 1980). Chena River grayling beg'in an upstream spawning migration in iate April to early May. This spawrring migrat'ion occurs throughout the main stem and large tributaries, and spawning occurs throughout the main stem from 10 to about 240 km upstream (ibid.). After spawning, adults move primarily upstream to headwater tributaries where they spend the summer feeding (ibid.). Summer distribution remains fairly stable once the spring migration is completed. It is theorized that younger grayling concentrate irr the lower 50 mi of the Cherra Ri ver and then move upstream i n the'i r second and third years of life (Ha11berg 1981). The Delta Clearwaier and Richardson Clearurater rivers' both tributaries of the Tanana River south of Fairbanks, are spring-fed river systems. There is ljttle grayling spawning or rearing in these systems. Del ta Clearwater and Richardson Clearuater grayl ing spawn in nearby Tanana tributaries. Evictence from returns of tagged grayling suggests that the Volkmar River, a bog-fed stream, is the major spawning area for Delta Clearwater grayling (Ridder 1983). Tributaries in the Shaw Creek drainage, also a bog-fed system, are maior spawning areas for gray'ling that later migiate to the Richardson Clearwater (Ridder 1984). These tributaries tnclude Caribou Creek and Rapids Creek (Ridder 1983, 1984). The Goodpaster River, a large rapid-runoff system, is also a source of grayling fclr the Delta Clearwater and Richardson Clearwater rivers (Ridder 1983). These spawning streams also possess summer and vrinter populations that do not out-migrate after spawning (Peckham 1976a). Grayling enter the Delta Clearwater and Richardson Cleanilater af ter spawni ng i n ihe spri ng and rema j n 'irt these streams to feed during the summer months. Grayling begin arriving in April, with the inmigration lasting into Jurre (RiOOer i984). Juvenile and subadult grayling generally arrive directly from overwintering dreas in the Tanana River and precede the adults and subadults who arrive from spawning streams (ibid.). 0ut-m'igration begins in 'late August or early September and is esentially complete by late November (ibid. ). Delta C'learwater and Richardson Clearwater grayling probably overwinter in the Tanana Rjver (Ridder i981).

143 Grayling jn some lake systems in the Tanana drainage have been fouird to spawn in irrlet streams or in the lake outlet (Tack 1980). Grayling spaurn in the outlet of Mineral Lake, a bog lake in the upper Tanana drainage, where the water is warmed by outfall from the shallow lake (ibid.). Most grayling that spawn in the outlet then migrate upstream through the lake and into Station Creek, t,he main rapid-runoff inlet; however, Some migrate a short distance downstream, then up the Little lok River or Tra'il Creek (ibid.). These migraticrns occur from late May to nrid June. The grayling that feect'in Station Creek during the suruner all return downstream through Mineral Lake in the fall to over'winter somewhere below t'linerIl Lake, possibly as far away as the Tanana River (ibid. ). Grayling in deep lakes in the fangle Lakes systent and in Fielding Lake are known to spavln in several rapid-runoff and bog-stream inlets (ibid.). It is known that no spawning occurs in the outlet 9f Fielding Lake; however, the relatively inaccessible outlet of Tangle Lakes has not been surveyed at spawning time (ibid.)1 In the Tarrgle Lakes system, grayling move out of the shallow lakes anO river sections upstream to deeper holes of the lakes in August (Schal Iock 1966a). E. Methods of Population Sjze Estimation In most of the Western arrd Interior regions, estimates of grayling abundance are based on rough measures of catch-per-unit-effort that are gathered during lake and stream Surveys conducted with hook-anO-line and gi11 nets. In the Fairbanks Area, however, grayl ing stocks are subiect to relative'ly heavy sportfishi!9 [ressure, and population abundance in some Systems is nrore closely monitoreO. In the Fairbanks Area, grayling abundance is generally monitored by using mark-and-recapture techniques or through index counts. Mark and recapture estimates are usually made by using either the Schnabel multiple-census mark-and-recapture method or the Petersen s'ing1e-census method, though several other estimators have also Ueen used. In the Petersen and Schnabel methods, grayling are caprured by electrofishing, marked, and released in the same river sebtion in which they were marked. In the following days, at least one more pass 'is made on the river with the electrofishing boat, and the percentdge of marked fish from the catch is noted. From this, an est'imate of the populaticln size at the time of marking can be derived. The Schnabel method, which is used annually on rhe Chena River, requires that at least two recapture runs be made (Rjcker L975). The Petersen estimate requires only one recapture run (itrro.). Several sources of bias are associated wi th mark-recapture estimates, espec'ia1'ly those conducted in areas that are not strictly closed systems (Begon 1979, Holmes 1983). Confidence intervals around these estimates are quite wide and so should be evaluated orrly as general jndicators of population trends (Holmes 1983, Hal I berg 1981 ) .

r44 In the Delta Clearwater and R'ichardson C'learwater rivers, index courrts of numbers of grayling captured during electrofishing in each of several river sectiorrs have been recorded sirtce the mid 1970's. Irr this method, a single pass of the river is made with the electrofishing boat, and all stunned grayiing are dipnetted from ther rtver and counted. The grayling are then released withjn the secrir.rn irr which they were captured. Index counIs from tlifferent rivers or even from cl'ifferent sect'iLrrrs of the same river are not comparable because the efficiency clf the method varies wirh clifferent river conditjons. Water clarity, river morphcllogy, vegetati on, depth , and weather condi ti clns a I I affect the efficiency of elecrroshocking (Holmes 1983, Rjdder 1984). Index counts do provide relat'ive nteasures of populatiorr abundartce in the same river sect'ion from year to year. These counts dre more comparable from year to yearif water depth, veloc'ity., and turbidity dre simjlar during the capture period each year (Tack 1972, Holmes 1984, Ridder 1984). Visual estimates of grayf ing rrumbers are al so occasional 1y made (Ridder 1983, I9g4) ' These are general'ly ctone by two observers cclurrti ng f rom the deck of a boat as it travels downriver. F. Regional Abundance Grayl i ng abundance i rrformati on that has been col I ected appl i es only to specific lakes and streanrs. As a result, estimates of abundance cannot be appropriately made at the regional level. Abundance information is contained in the d'iscussions of ihe postai survey areas that follow.

II. LOI,JER YUKON.KUSKOKWIM AREA DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE The Lower Yukon-Kuskokw'im Sport Fi sh Postal Survey Area (map 1 ) includes a'll southern drainages of the Yukon R'iver frorn its confluence with the Tanana River, near Tanana, west to Ka'ltag; all drainages of Rjver the Yukorr River sourh of'lowing Kaitag to the Bering Sea; the Kuskokwim watershed; al I waters f into Kuskokwirn Bay; and adjacerrt salt water and 'islands. This drea does not include the Pastol ik River cirainage and waters flowing into Norton Sound riortheast of the Pastolik River nor any portion of the Tanana Rjver watershed (ADF&G i985a). Duri ng surveys of the I ower Kuskokwint Ri ver and Kuskokwim liay drainages, Alt (I977 ) found grayling in alI streams surveyed in the area. Grayling were abundant 'in tributaries of the Kuskokwim River, inclucling the Aniak, Tuluksak, Kisaralik, Kasigluk, Kwethluk, and Eek river systems (jbid.). Grayling from Aniak River overwinter irr the Kuskokwim River (ibid.). These grayling move up che Aniak River in the spring to distribute themse'lves along the rjver and rnost of its tributaries. Gray'ling were taken iri late May 60 mi up the Aniak River and in the Salmon River (ibjd.). Rearing grayling in Kuskokwim River tributaries were found in the main stem streant ds well as in small gravel side streams ('ib'id.). Grayling have also been reported from the Holirrra River drainage, Big River, and Highpower Creek in the Kuskokwim drainage (A}t 1972, 1981a; Baxter 1978).

145 Grayl ing abundance appeared to be lowerin Kuskokwim Bay drainages south of rhe Kuskokwim River (Alt 1977). Alt (1977) estimated that only several hurrdred large grayling inhabited the Aroljk River when it was surveyed irt ntici July, thougn other grayl ing may have been up tributary streams ( ibid. ). In the Kuskokwim Bay streams, rearittg grayl ing were f<.rund only in the Goodnews River" (ibid. ). GraylinE were also abundant in lakes jn the Kuskokwim River drainage, including Aniok, Kisaral ik, and K'isaral ik Lake #2 (ibid. ). Alt (L977) noueo that grayling urere more abundant in Aniak Lake than in any other lake in the area. Crayling are apparently absent, however, from ntosE lakes jn Kuskokwim Bay drarnages south of the Kuskokwim River (ibjd.). In the lower Yukon River clrainage, grayling have beerl reported in the Andreafsky, Anvik, and upper Innoko rivers (Alt 1980, L982,1983). Grayling were nor taken during surveys of the tsonasila and Khotol rivers, but Alt (1980) stateo thot they may have been present in freadwater areas. In the Andreafsky River, Alt (19Elb) found grayling widely distributed fronr 57 mi upstream to w'ithin 10 mi of the mouth. They are also reportedly very abundant farther up the main Andreafsky and throughout the East Fork Andreafsky River (ibid.). They are also present in tributary srrearns (ibid. ). In the Anvik River, grayl ing were t'irst captured in shallow water 11 mi upstream from the mouth (Alt 19B0). The area of best grayfing habitat, with the heaviest concentration observed jn sloughs and side channe'ls, was betweem miles 70 anci 95 of the Anvik R1ver (ibid.). In the Innoko River, grayling are found nrainly in upstream mountain tributaries such as Folger Creek, Beaver Creek, and Tolstoi Creek, which is a r,ributary of the Dishna River (Alt 1983). The largest concentrati on of gray'l i ng observed was i n Beaver Creek and 'in rhe Inrroko River jmmediately downstream of Beaver Creek (ibid.). iII. SOUTH SLOPE BROOKS RANGE AREA DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE The South S'lope Brooks Range Posta'l Survey Area (map 1) includes al l drainages south of the Brooks Range, wesE of and'including the Koyukuk apo Alatna river drainaEes, and north of the Yukorr River, including a'li northern triburaries of the Yukon River from Kaltag to the Canadiart border (ADF&G 1985a). Grayling dre found throughout the m'iddle and upper Yukon 11r'ainages in AlastG (ADF&G 1978, Griffiths et al. I974). In the Melozirna River, grayfing 'ire generally most abundant in the rributarjes and in rhe main Meloz'itna near mouths of tributary strearns (Alt 1983). They are especially abundant in Hot Springs Creek (ibid.) In the l'ozitna River, grayling dre djstributed throughout the river, but in 1982 surveys they appeared more abundant above Dagislakhna Creek (ibid.). Largest nunrbers observed were in the pool areas near mouths of upriver tributary streams (ibid.). In tne Koyukrrk River system, Netsch (1975) and Hallberg (i9i5) found grayl irrg in streams along the route of the Trans-Alaska Pipel ine. l'letsch (19i5) noted that Bonanza Creek, Fish Creek, Jim River, and Prospect Creek were productive grayiing streams along the route of the pipeline in the South S'lope Area. Netsch (ibid.) estimated by the

146 Perersen mark-and-recapture method that the number of grayling 20C nm long or longer iri Jim River I mi upstream t,o 1 mi downstream of Prospect Camp was 3,496 in June ano increased to 15,043 in October. Populat'ion estimates of grayling in the lower 1 mi of Prospect Creek were I,572 in July and I,2I0 in August (ioio.). No confidence limits were gi ven for these estimates. Netsch stated that the gray'l i ng population rose in Jim Creek in autumn because of grayling nroving out of small tributary streams to overwinter in Jim Creek ('ibid.). Chihuly et al. (1980) found grayling in many tributaries tr: the Middle Fork of the Koyukuk R'iver, including the Dretrich River. Grayling are also found in lakes of the Koyukuk River drainage, including Bjg (Bob Johnson) Lake and South Twin Lake at the headwaters of the South Fork of the Koyukuk, Wild Lake in the l,Jild River dra'inage, and llelpmeJack and Iniakuk lakes in the Alatna R'iver drainage (Roguski and Spetz 1968, Kramer I976, Pearse 1978). In the Chandalar River region, Craig and Wel I s (1975) found grayl ing t<.r be the most widely distributed and abundant fish species. They were found throughout the Chanoalar River drainage. In the Chandalar River drainage, nost streanrs used for grayling spawning were located in the region between Arctic Vi 1 lage and Vettetrin Lake ( ibid. ). During aerial surveys of this area, an estimated 300 to 800 grayling were sighted in several small streams only 3-5 km in iength (ibid.). The Chandalar Rivelitself may also be used by grayl ing for spawning (ibid. ). Craig and Wel I s noteO a general upstreanr ntovement of gray'ling past the Arctic Village area in May and speculated that the majcr grayling overwintering areas irr the Chandalar drainage are downstream of Arct'ic Vi1'lage (ibid.). Lakes'in the Chandalar River drainage that have been surveyed by the ADF&G arrd found to contain grayl ing 'incluCe Chandalar Lake, Squaw Lake, and Ackerman Lake (Roguski and Spetz 1968, Kramer 1976, Pearse 1978). Grayling have also been taken in areas throughout the Porcupine River arrd its tributaries. In the Sheen3ek River drainage, grayling have been found in 010 Woman Creek, Monument Creek, Koness River, and 0ld John Lake (Craig ancl l.lells I975, Pearse 1978). Irr the Coleen River drairrage, they have been found in Strangle tlonran Creek, irr Pass Creek (Craig and Wells I975), and in the Coleen River main stenr (Alt L974). Durirrg sheefish jnvestjgations, Alt noted graylirrg throughout the Porcupine River main stem (Alt I97I, I972, I974), ond in the Salrron Fork of the Black River (Alt 1978b). In the upper Yukon, Alt has noted grayling in the Kandik R'iver from 1 to 95 mi upstream (Alt 1971) ano af, the mouths of the Natiorr cnd Tatonduk rivers (Al t 1979). iV, FAIRBANKS AREA A. D'i stri buti cin l'he Fairbanks Sport Fish Postal Survey Area irrc'ludes all southern drainages of the Yukon River frclnr its ctinfluence with the Tanarra River, near Tanana, east to the Canadian br.rrder and including the Alaskan portion of the Fortymile and Sixtym'i1e river drainages as well as the entire Tanana River watershed. This area also

r47 includes the Alaskan portjon r-rf the tlhite River drainage (ADF&G 1985a ) . Grayl ing are di stributed throughout the Fai rbanks Area arro are tlte most intensely harvested sport fish in the area. f'lany extensive studies have been cottductecl on Fairbanks Area grayl ing popuiations, beginning in the early 1950's attd continuing-to the present (Armsirong i982). The results of the majority of these studies are contained in Federal Aid in Fish Restoration quarterly and dnnudl progress reports. They have also been suwndrized by Arrnstrong (i9S2). These neports contaitt much more detaiI about specific populations of gray'ling than can be. included here. The (such rea

148 the lower 5C mi of the Chena River ano move upstream during their second and th'ird years (Tack I97I, 1972). The four major headwater tributaries of the Chena River, the East, Norrh, South, and West forks, harbor mostly adult grayling, at least during the summer months (Hal lberg 1978). Young-of-the-year grayling (YOY) call, however, be found in lesser concentratibns thioughout the system. Tack (I972) found YOY grayling in quiet backwaters throughtlut the East Fork of the Chena Ri ver from Van"lberg Curl er's Bar to i ts corrf I uence wi th the North Fork. Ha'l ( 1978) found Y0Y grayling in the lower 5 mi of the East Fork. Mature graylinE are aounOant in the upper East Fork during summer (Tack 1972, Hallberg 7978, Grabacki 1981, Holmes 1984). In the South Fork of the Chena. Tack found YOY grayling tct be dbundant fronr Beaver Creek to the confluence with t,he main Chena, but relatively few adults were seen during his July sut'vey. Hallberg (1978) observed grayling of all age groups itr the South Fork from Beaver Creek to the Chena Hot Springs Road in August. YOY were alsc found in the North Fork as far as the mouth of Monument Creek, and in the tlest Fork (Tack 1972). In the summer, grayling Inove into Colorado Creek and Angel Creek, tributarjes of the North Fork, to feed (Tack 1973). Hallberg (l9iS) observed iuverrile and adult graylirrg in the North Fclrk from 1 mi above Boulder Creell io the Chena Hot Spri ngs Road and i tr Frozenfoot arrd 01ympi a creeks , twc tributaries of the liest Fork. in the Little Chena River, Tack (1972) found grayling from Sorrels Creek to the Chena ffotsprings Road bridge (Tack L97?). in Badger Slough, grayling were found thrclughout the main river as welI as its two main headwater brariches in early May dnd were observed spawning on riffles frorn the Peede Road crossing upstream for 8 km (Tack 1976). Grayl i ng probably al so spawn i n both headwater branches of Badger Slough (ibid.). Grayling enter Badger Slough beginning in early April and begin moving back irito the Chena River in May, continuing that movenrcnt in June (ibid.). 4. Salcha River. In the Salcha River, grayl ing have been Gpttrreo as far as I20 mi upstredm from the mouth (Hoinies 1984). As in the Chena River, larger gray'lirrg were found in the upstream sect'ions (ibid.). 5. Goodpaster River. In a 1973 study of the Goodpast'er River @1ing were found throughtrut the entire reach surveyecl, ds far as 185 km ( itS nri ) upstream. Larger grayl i ng were general ly found 'in upslrealn reaches. Spawni ng grayling are found throughout the majn stem of the Goodpaster (Tack 1980). Tack (I974) observed prespawning grayl irtg moving upstream past 53 km in late April and early t'lay. Grav j d grayl i ng move 'into both the l'lorth and South forks of the Goodpaster prior to spawning, but the extent of their upstream migration js not known (ibid.). Age two and three

r49 grayl ing were found in smal I headwater streams of rhe Goc.rdpaster, but larger grayling v'rere not found until tlre stream was at least 2 m wide (ibid.). In the North Fork of the Goodpaster, adult graylirrg were predominant upstream from Central Creek to nearly the source. Subooults were dominant between 0 and 45 km on the North Fork and juveniles in the 53 km of the main stem (Tack 1980). In the South Fork of the Goodpaster, adults were dominant except in the uppermost 5 km, where only subadults were found (ibid.). Grayling that spawn in the Goodpaster may move out of the Goodpaster and into the Delta Clearwater and Richardson Clearwater rivers to feed during the summer months. Other grayling may renrain in the Goodpaster through the summer. Grayling leave the upper 1'r.rrks of the Goodpaster before winter to avoid heavy icing (Tack i980); however, some grayling probably ovenvinter lower in the Goodpaster (R'idder 1983). 6. De'lta Clearwater River. Grayling enter ihe 0elta Clearwat.er @gh June. Irmature grayling remain iri the lower reaches of the river, but larger, mature graylirrg nti grate oi rect'ly to prine feedi ng habi tat i n headwatev' tributaries ano upper rr:aches of the river (Schallock 1965, Pearse I974, Tack 1980). Grayling do not spawn or rear in che Delta Clearwater, and they migrate out of the river in the t'all. Pearse (1974) observed a few grayling stil1 in the lower 1 mi of the Delta Clearwater in mid December, but all grayl ing were absent by l,larch. The Vol kmar River and the Goodpaster River are inrportant spawning streams I'or grayling rhat feed in the Delta Clearuater during the summer (Ridder 1e83 ) . 7. Richardson Clearuater River. Grayl ing al so enter the ring the summer to feed, but, as jr' the Del ta Clearwater, they do not spawn or overv'/inter there. Caribou Creek and Rapids Creek, tributaries of Shaw Creek, are major spawning areds for grayling that are found in the Richardson Clearwater during the summer (Ridder 1984). B. 0ther upper and middle Tanana River tributarjes. Graylitrg s (Peckham I976b, Carlton 1976). They occur in many smaller tributaries of the m'iddle Tanana River, including Bear and McDonald creeks (Hallberg 1980), the Little Salcha River (Tack 1980), Clear Creek, which enters the Tanana River above the Richarson Cleanvater (Ridder 1981), Kiana Creek (Ridder 1984), the Fivemile Clearwater (Hallberg i980), and another Clear Creek (also known as l,le'lson Cleanvater) that drains into Salchaket Siough (ib'id. ). 9. Fielding and Tangle lakes. Fielding Lake and the Tangle Lakes 'irr the Del ta Ri ver system contai n grayl i ng popul ati ons that are subject to an active sport fishery and have been extens i ve'ly studi ed. Grayl i ng i n Fi e1 di ng Lake spawn i n small jnlets to the lake, migrate back downstream to the lake

150 'in j after Spawning,-Grayling and stay tl're lake or its outlet al sunmer (ract 1980). Oo not spawn 'in the_outlet of Fielding iake (jbid.). I; the Tang'le Lakes complex, grayling have been found during lake and stream surveys in Upper Tatrgle, Rourrd Tang'le, Lorr-g Tangle, dnd Lower Ta1Sle lakes, and'in the Tarrgle Riirer-(Heckarr tg6S, Peckham 1976b). Tagging studies have ind'icated that during the summer some grayling renrain in the deep lakes of the Tangle Lakes complex, while others move 'into shallow portions durlng June and July (Schallock 1966a, Peckham 1976b'). Grayling move from the shallow areas back jnto the deep lakes in August (Schal lock 1966a).- The. strearn section between Long Tangle and Lower TaqSle lakes is apparently an important fee.di ng gfea lol qto.y]llp f rom much of'tne Ta-ng1e Lakes system (Roguski,and Tack 1970)' i0. Upper Tana-na R'iver Oia'inage. Grayl ing are also abundant in drainage' though this area. has general 1y not beerr as extensively studied as the midOle Tattana. Grayling have been studied jn Mineral Lake and its outlet, Station treek, a tlibutary to the Tok River (Tack Lg72, Lg73, 1980). Grayling spawn in the warm waters of the lnlineral Lake outlet str"eam ind' summerin Station Creek (the prjrnarv irtlet to Minera I Lake) and the upper Li tlle Tok River ifact iggO). These- grayling overwintel soniewhere downstream of Mineral' faf

15i miles 46-49) oirectly upstream of the flood control structure ond'is studied to monitor any changes in the population structure as it relates to the flood control project. Section 10b is undeveloped, relatively inaccessible, with minimal angler util'izaticln. Section l0b serves as a control area. Section 12 has been monitoreo only since 1983 and is portitln river. located irr the heavily fished'lower of the 0rayiing abundance in the river section (2b) increased during the early i970's (taote 1), possib'ly due to a recovery f run the ef fects of the 1967 Fai rbarrks f lood or because of enrichrnent r:f the lower river through the introduction of sewdge and other wastes from the city of Fairbanks (Tack 1971). Population levels in the lower river oropped alter 1972 and have never regained their former high numbers. This nray be the result of the reduction of nutrients in the lower river beginning in 1976 when the City of Fairbanks and Fort p1.ant Wai rrwrigltt were changed to a new sewage di sposal _ that empties into the TanJna River rather than the Chena (Ha1lberg 1979). This theory, however, has never been verified, and it 'is note|'rorthy that the population in the Danr Site sect jon, which was never aftected by the nutrjent enrichment, has also dropped sirrce I973 (Ha11berg 1982). The decrease in numbers in the lower river, wh'ich contains mostly small fish' has not beerr reflected jn catch-per-unit-effort of anglers catchittg larger fish in the upper river. Because of the apparent coniir'ued good levels of recruitment, it is felt that the population of small fjsh in the Chena R'iver system,may not have actually declined overall but that the small fish m9y have reci stiibuted themsel ves more even'ly throughout the system (ibid.). A very weak age 3 (nata1 year i979) year class in 198? contributeo to, but does not completely explain, the clecl ine in section 2b 'in that yqqr (Holnes 1983). High water leve'ls in early summer of I979 may.have resuited in poor survival of the L979 year class (ibid.).-An except'ional ly strong age 3 year class 'in 1983 accounts for the llear doubling of rhe section 2b estimare in that year (Holmes 1984). Population estimates consistently jndicate a greater abundance of grayl ing in sectiolr 10b than in the other sectjons studied (table 1). There are three possible reasons {'or this: 1) less accessibil ity to anglers , 2) no development occurrittg in or along the river in this sectjon, c.,r 3) concentration of the gray'ling in this area to feed on eggs of chjnook and chum salmon that spawn in the area (Hattoerg 1982). In 1983, efforts were made to assess the abundance of grayfing smaller than 150 mm fork length in the lower Chena by usilg mark-and-recapture population estimates and catch-per-unit-effort indexes for ages I and 2 grayling captured during e'lectrofishing and catch-per-unit-effort front seirre hauls for age 0 fish (Holmes 1984). It is hoped that

~~t5? Table l. Population Estimates fclr Arctic Grayling Greater Than 150 mma Fork Length in Index Sections of the Chena R'iver, 1968-83~~

~~Schnabei 95% River Est imate Confi dence Sect i on Yea r Da te (9rlnri ) Interval~~

2b 1968 767 i969 I,323 ::: 1970 lufV Z-fO 7,479 1,111-2,445 1977 Aug. 3O-Sept. 2,095 I,571-3,492 1972 June 22-26 978 799-1,339 1973 July 3-10 679 197 4 July 25-28 64? " r976 July 2?-24 596 r977 July 11-14 479 ,-i" t978 July 25-28 254 1979 July 26-30 316 1980 July 1-4 463 1981 Aug. 7 -I0 419 357 -628 1982 July 16-20 185 127 -283 1983 July 13-i5 346 268-424 1984 July 16-18 338 267 -429

~~8a 1979 Aug. 20-23 269 1980 July 14-i7 284 1981 Aug. 3-6 359 262-494 1982 July i3-15 139 96-?LI 1983 july 5-7 190 r30-872 1984 July 3-6 223 152-344~~

Danr 5i te 1972 June ?7-29 1,306 977 ,2,555 1973 July iB-19 800 610-1,298 197 4 ,tu1y 9-11 416 197 6 Aug.4-6 464 t977 Ju ly 26 -3{) 437 1978 Aug. 8-11 495 r979 July 17 -20 261 :-: 1980 July 29-Aug. 339 198 r Aug.11-i4 483 279-904 1982 July 23-27 371 r80-927 1983 July 8-12 334 238-485 1984 July 9-11 287 198-436

~~( con t i rrued )~~

~~153 Table I (conrinued).~~

~~Schnabe l 9s% River Est i ma te Conf i dence Sec t i orr Yea r' Da te (grlrni ) Interva l~~

~~10b 1970 June 7-Ju ly 7 1,873 1980 Aug. l2-L5 1 ,163 198i July 2I-24 1 ,391 tqsli,eqs 1982 Ju ly 28-30 1,400 847 -2,50A 19B3 July 19-21 t'1330 1,035-2,141 1 9B4 july 19-20 440-1,605~~

~~T2 1983 july 19-21 333 221-531 19B4 July 31-Aug. 3 ?,L09 719-I0,547 sources: Holmes 1983, 1984, 1985; Hallberg rgBZ; Tack 197r, rg7z, rgl3, r974.~~

--- means no data were available. a Prior to !972, population estimates were based on all sizes of grayfing captureo. To correct for this, the percentage of fish less than 150 irm ii the samp'le useci tn the estimates was cdlculated and the or"igirral estinrates reduced by that percentage to produce the numbers shown irr this table (Ha1 I berg 1979). b Petersen estimate.

L54 the estimates frclm one of rhese methods wiII prove to be correlated urith the strength of year classes as rhey enter the fishery. If sma1l year classes can be recognizeo before they recruit to the sport fishery, it may be possible to enhance year cl ass strength through a stocking progrdm (jbid.). ?. !g_lta Clearwater River. Abundance of grayling-r'ivdrs in the Delta ffirdson Clearwatei has been mon'itored since 1973. These populaticlns ar,e monitored by using index counts of the rrumber of grayling captured in a single run wirh an electrofishing boat over sections of the rjver. These index counts are not comparable between different sections of the rivers because electrofishing efficiency varies between sections. For the Delta Clearwater River, the index rates from the upper secr,ion are felt to be the nrost 'indicative of grayl ing abundance in the system because this section offers the best physica'l conditions for electrr.rfishing (many riffle areas and narrow stream w'idth) and is the least affected by weather conditions (R'idder 1980, 1e82 ) . Index counts of grayling in the lower section (miles 4-7\ of the Delta Clearwater increased from 1977 through 1979 (taOle 2). This increase is probably Cue to the enhancement program that began in I975. Irr this program, pond-reared finger'ling gray'l ing were transplanted into four spring areas located within the lower sectir.,rr of the Delta Clearwater. Fifty-iwo percent of the grayling captured in this section in 1979 had scale patrerns characterjstic of pond-reared fjsh (RioOer 1980). Similarly, fry plants totalirrg 100,000 fish made in the left fork of the Delta Clearwater in 1974 ancl i975 planrs r.if approximately 15 ,000 f i sh made ar m'i I e 15 of the upper sectiorr ffid3l have contributed in part to rhe large increase in the I979 rate over previous years (ibid.). The reason for the low count of grayling irr t,h€ upper section in 197ti js not known, but the lack ot grayf ing in th'is secrion in i978 was conf i nned by vi sual observations and f ronr arrgl er i rrterviews thrclughout the sedson (ibid.). The lack cf' rrew stocked fish in i98i probably affected the lower river's caprure rate jn that year. However, weather conditions dno especially rhe unsedsonably loyr water levels in the lower'3 mi of the river macle grayling difficult to capture that year and are felt to have had a greater effecr (Ridder 1982). The low counts in the lower two sections of the river in 1981 are not felt to be accurate indicators clf the population s'ize. The low index counts'in 1982, however, were supported by a sharp drop in the catch rate of anglers fishing for grayling on the river (Ridder 1983). Index counts dropped even more in 1983, though two more index runs over 3 mi of the lower section tifter the firsr index run gave capture rates of i0 and 7 grayling, levels close ro prestocking courrts from I973-L976

~~i55 Table 2. Numbet's of Grayl ing Captured During Index Sampling on Sections of the Delta Clearwaf,er R'iver, I973, 1975-83~~

~~Mi I e Sections~~

Tota I Yea r Da te 4-7 8- 13 t4-r7 .5 Ca ptu red r973 June t7 7 20 66 93 r97 5 Ju 1y 2 13 I 43 64 1976 J une 30 11 27 4T 79 1 r977 Ju 1y 26 25 49 100 1978 Ju ly 10 39 2B 9 76 r979 Ju ly I7 51 24 74 t49 ?c 45 98 r82 1980 Ju ly 1s ^ 1 "6u 198 1 Ju 1y 27 40 73" r982 Ju 1y 1tr 27 1B 18 63 1983 Ju ly L( 3 E 45 53

~~Sources: Ridder 1983, 1984. a Weather conditions and unseasonably low water ]evels 'in the lower river made capture of grayling difficult and resulted in an unreliable cclunt for 1981.~~

156 (Ridder 1984). It is probable that at leasr part of ttte Oecl i ne i n the Del ta Cl ea rwater stems from the norma I mortality of ind'ividuals from the four year classes cf grayling-stocked betweerr 1975 and 1978 (ibid.). 3. [ic-trarOion Clearwater River. Inclex counts from the ra11Y higher than those front the Delta Clear'water. The greater frequency of riffle areas and a more confined channel in the Richardson Clearwater rrakes e'lectrof i shi ng more ef fect'ive on th'is stream and results in larger irrdex counts (Peckham 1978a). In I973' L977, and 1978 index counts on the Richardson Clearwater were conductetl in August, when grayling were more concentrated in the lower section of the river. Beginning in 1979, counts were made in Ju1y, when the grayling are nlore dispersed. This resulted in i drop 'in the number of grayling_ captured (taOte 3) (Ridder 1980). The I979 count is felt to be inaccurate because the morpho.logy of the river at the start of the shocking run precluded eTfective capture of grayling (RiOOur 1981).- The iow count in 198i may be the result of irayling d.ispersing jnro the slough _at the mouth of the [ic-trarOion Ciearwaier below the sample area in that year (Ridder L9B2). In July of I9B2, a Petersen mark-and-recapLure '8'topopulatjon estimate Was calculated fgr grayling froni mile a point 4.75 rni downstream in the f,i."nurOion Clear'water. Results indicated a population of L,582 grayl ing/m'i , with 0.95 conf iderrce jnterval of 935-2,857 (niOOei A visual population estintate was also made by i'ggS). j two observerS counti ng-eslimate grayl i ng f r<.rm a boat between r ver miIes 8 and 6. The from this method was 1'175 js estimate because grayl- rng/mi, which felt tr.r be a minimunr 6f Oiti'icuities c;,bserving grayf ing in riff les and turbulent runs (ibid. ). 4. Goodpisrer R'iver. Population estimates of grayling in th9 ffi River have been calculateo for several years. ihese dre usual ly Petersen _- s'ingle_-census irrark-and-recapture eStimates, thougfr in i?7.i several other nethods were'also used (Tack I974). Grayling ape captur'ed for these estimates by using electrofishing gear. One day is al lowed for random mixirrg bf marked f ish in the populat'ion prior to a final electrofishing run to exanine for recaptures ( Peckham 1983). ih. 1ow population est'imate for Goodpa_ster River grayl ing in tgia iiubib +l may liave been the result of low water levels 'in the Goodpaster that -(Peckha-myear that resulted'in a reduced amount oi giuvi i n'S habi tat 1977 ). I n L977 , a hi th popul"ation 6stimate 1'as calculated for piver miles 3 to 6; 'however, high water levels at the time of the recapture.run large grayl.ing into nuo-uppirenity resulted in an influx of 'in the urbu n cauiing a high percentage of unmarked f ish the i.iuptr.d sample and i niaseO population estintate (Peckhanr

~~15t Table 3. Numbers of Grayling Captured During Index Sampling on Sections of the Richardson Clearwater River, 1973, 1977 -83~~

~~Mi le Section~~

~~Tota I Yea r Da te t-7 7 -8.5 Ca ptu red~~

~~1973 Aug. 1 754 r977 Aug. 3t) 104 t97B Aug. 31 1l1u r979 July 17 OJ i 980 July i7 73 97 170 1981 July 9 58 109 t67 198'2 .Ju ly 20 165 159 324 i 983 July 19 156 64 220~~

Sou rces : R'i dder 1983 , 1964. --- nleans no odta were available. a Only the lower 4 nrj were indexed 'irr i973 (Pearse 1974). b The morphology clf the river at the start of the shocking run precluded ef fective capture of gray'ling and resul ted in an unreliable index count for 1979 (Ridder 1981).

~~158 Table 4. Population Estimates for Grayling Larger Than 150 mrn in the Lower Goodpaster River, 1973-82~~

~~Distance Population 95% Method of Su rveyed Estimate Confi dencq Yea r Estimate (mi ) ( grlmi ) Interval"~~

r973 Schnabe I 33b 774 758-807 r97 4 Petersen 33. 323c 248-42A 1975 Petersen 60 760 597 -964 197 6 Petersen 6 563 392-839 1977 Petersen 6 604 478-763 1978 Petersen 6 749 587 -983 i980 Petersen 6 819 579-1,053 r982 Petersen 6 28r 197-s51 sources: Tack 1974, 1975; Peckham 1976, rg7l, rg7}, lg7g, 1981, 1993. a Confidence limits far 7974-82 calculated by this author using data from the origina1 reports and Pearson's formula for confidence Ijmiti of R (rrumber of recaptures) (Ricker l97S). lr Area from Goodpaster River mouth to the confluence of the North and South forks. c Based on recdptures of fish marked in 1973, with an assumed constant rat,e o1'rnortality for both nrarked and urrmarked fish of 0.46. Th'is should be regarded as d rough estimate (Tack 1975). d Area from river miles 3 to 6 and river miles 15 to 1g.

159 19/Bb). The 1980 estjmate was rhe highest ever recorded for rhe Goodpaster. Record high population'index counts vrer€ also observed in the Delta Clearwater River that year. The Goodpaster River's grayling population level dropped to a very iow level in 1982, as did the Delta Clearwater's. Reasons for this appdrent reduction in abundance are not known 5. Other streams. Population estimates of grayling in rhe mmnTmnA-salcha rivers tvere calculated in-1972 by using the Schnabel mark-and-recapture estimator (Tack 1973). For the Chatanika River from 2 nri above to 1mi be'low the Elliot Highway Bridge the population estimate was 488 gr/mi. For the i nri of the Salcha River below the Redmond Creek confl uence the estinrate was 805 gr/mi. In both cases, however, very few recapr,ures were made, and these estimates should be regarded with caution (ibid. ). The srze of the Chatanika River gray'ling population was also estimated in 1982 and 1984 (llolmes 1983" 19S5). The area surveyed was the 2 rni below the Elliot llighway bridge. The Schnabel estimate for grayling over 150 mm-(fork lengrh) yras in 1982 was 27I gray'ling/nli , with a 95% conf idence interval of ?I2 to 346 grayl i rrglrni (Holmes 1983 ) . The 1984 est jrnate was 388 grayling/mi, wjth a 95% confidence inrerval of 276 to 564 grayl ing/mi. (Holnres 1985). An attempt was made to conduct another population estimate on grayling in the Salcha River jn 1981; however, fio recaptures were made, so an esrimate could not be calculateo (Hallberg 1982). C. Enha ncement Grayl ing have been stocked jn many Fairbanks Area lakes to increase sportfishing opportunities (table 5). Grayl ing have also been stocked rn the Delta River and in rhe Chena River. Many of the gray'ling stocked in these rivers are transported from the hatchery to rearing ponds such as Hest Pond and Left 0P Lake to feed drrd grow for approximately three monrhs before they are stocked in the streams in the fall.

~~160 Table 5^ Water Bodies in the Fairbanks Area Stocked hlith Arctic Graylitrg, 196B-84q~~

~~Water Body Commurrr ry Years Stocked~~

15 Mile Pond Nena na 1968 17 l4ile Pond Ne na na 1968 29.6 Steese Hwy. Lake Chatani ka 1977 ,78,84 30.6 Steese Hwy. Lake Chatani ka 1975,78,84 31 Mile Pit Aurora Lodge 1967,69,7 3,7 5,78,83,84 31.6 Steese Hwy. Lake Chatarri ka 1977 ,78,83,84 33.0 Steese Hwy. Lake Chatani ka 1977 ,78,84 33.5 Steese Hwy. Lake Chatani ka Lg77 ,78,83,84 34.tj Steese Hwy. Lake Chatani ka 1975,78,83,84 35.8 Steese Hwy. Lake Chatani ka 1975,83,84 3ti.5 Steese Hwy. Lake Chatani ka 1977 ,78,83,84 81 Mile Pit Shaw Creek 1973,77 ,81,83,85 Anderson Pi t ( rectan. ) Anderson r977 Anderson Pir (round) Anderson r977 ARR #3 Fai rbanks 1968 ARR #4 Fa i rbanks 1968 Bailey Poncl Chena Hot Springs 1968,69 Bathing Beauty Pond Moose Creek L975,78,83,84 Bear Lake Eiel son AFB 1970 Big lake Ft. Greely 1967,70,7?,73,77,78,83,84 B'irch Lake Pi t Bi rch Lake 1975 Bol io Lake Ft. Greely 1981 ,83,84 Chena Hot Spgs #30 Fa'irbartks 1983,84 Chena Hot Spgs #30.9 Fai rbanks 1gB3,84 Chena Hot Spgs #32.9 Fai rbanks 1984 Chena Hot Spgs #33.3 Fairbanks 1984 Chena tlot Spgs #3E.8 Fai rbanks 1984 Chena Hot Spgs #42.8 Fa i rbanks 1983,84 : , Chena Hot Spgs #45.5 Fai rbanks 1983,84 ,, , Chena Hot Spgs 1i45.6 Fai rbanks 1984 Chena t{ot Spgs #47 .9 Fai rbanks 1983,84 Chena Lake Fa i rbanks 1984 Chena River Fai rbanks 1 984 Chet Lake Ft. Greely 1976 ,85 Clear Pond Clear t970 Clearwater Lake Delta Junction 197 4 Coal Mine #3 Del ta Junct'ion 1978,85 Craig #1 Lake Johnson River L967 ,72 Craig Lake Johnson R'i ve r 1967 Delta Clearwater R. Delta Junction Lg7 4 ,75 ,76 ,77 ,78 ,79,83 ,84 Donnel ly Creek Pond Donnel'ly 1973

~~( cont i nued )~~

~~161 Table 5 (continued).~~

~~Water Body Comniun i ty Years Stocked~~

Dot Lake Dot Lake 1967 Uune Lake Ne na rra 1976,81 ,83,84 East Poncl Ft. Greely 1968,75 ,76 Eielsun Pond #1 Eiel son AFts i968 Eielson Pond #2'l Eiel son AFB 1968 Engi neers l{i 1 Lake Eiel son AFB 196g ,7A ,72 ,73 ,77 ,8r Ft. Greely #1 Ft. Greely t977 Ft. Greely Lake Ft. Greely 1983 Grayl rrrg Lake Eiel sori AFB r975,78,83,84 Hidoen Lake Ei el son AFll 1975,78,83,84 Islanci Lake Del ta Junction 1984 .J La ke Ft. Greely 1976,85 Johnson Rd. Pit #1 Aurora Loclge 1976,78,84 Johnson Rd. Pit #2 Aurora Lodge t975,76,78,84 Left 0.P. L.rke Ft. Greely 1967 ,79 ,75 ,76 ,77 ,78,94,85 Lost Lake Bi rch Lake 1968 ,70 ,7 6 ,83 'l Itir I e rs Pond Fai rbanks 1967 Nenarra Pond Nena na 1970 Nickel Lake Ft. Greely 1976,83,85 0l nes Pontl Chatan'ika r973 Otto Lake Healy L967,68,69,7 0,7 2,7 3,7 5 Phantom Pond Delta Junction 1983 Sergearrt's Porrd Ft. Wainwright 1967 ,68,70 Spade Lake Ft. Greely 1983 lar Kettle Lake Eiel son AFB 1975 Ten l,l'ile Lake Ne na na 1 968 Texas #2 Lake Ft. Greely i980 Liest Pond Ft. Greely 1968,75,76,77,78,80,83,84,85

~~Sources: ADF&G 1984, 1985b; Kramer 7978, 1979:' Peckham 1978; Peckham and Ridder 19791 Ridder 1980, 1983. a Some 1985 stocking is included in this list; however, it is not a complere record for 1985.~~

162 REFIRENCES ADF&G. 1978. Alaska's fisheries atlas. Vol . 2 [R.F. l'lclean and K.J. Delaney, comps.]. 43 PP. + 153 maps. . 1984. Fish release records for regions 01, 02, and 03. Div. unpubl . computer runs. 209 pp. -TRE0.. 1985a. Sport fish survey. Div. Sport Fish booklet. 43 pp. . 1985b. Fish release records for region 03, 1984 and 1985. Div. unpubl . conrputer runs . 15 pp. -TREO.Alt, K.T. L97I. A ljfe history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. A'id in Fish Rest. Ann. progress rept. Vtrl . 12. Proi. F-9-3, Study R-l I.

. L97?. A life h'istory study of sheefish uncJ whitefish in Alaska. ----FD'F&G, Fed. Aid in Fjsh Rest. Ann. progress rept. Vol . 13. Proi. F-9-4, Study R-II. 'in . I974. A I i fe h'i story study of sheef i sh ano wh'itef i sh Al aska . ----TF&G, Feo. Aid in Fish Rest. At'n. performace rept. Vol . 15. Proj. F-9-6, Srudy R-II. . 7977. Inventory and cata.loging of sport fish and sport fish --waters of Western Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Completion rept. Proj. F-9-9, Job G-I-P. . 1978a. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish ano sport fish ----JvaTers of Western Al aska . ADF&G, Fed. Ai ci i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 19. Proi. F-9-10, Job G-l-P. . 1978b. A life history of sheefjsh ancl whjtefish in Alaska. -----ffiF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance r'ept. Vol . 19. Proi. F-9-10, Study R-l I . . 1979. A I ife history study r.rf sheefish and v,h'itef ish 'in Alaska. -----E-F&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. perfgrmance rept. Vol . 20. Prr.ri. F-9-11, Study R-II. . 1980. Inventory and caraioging of sport fish al,c sport fish ---GTers of Western Al aska. ADF&G, Fed. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 2I. Proi. F-9-I2, Job G-I-P. . 1981a. Life history study of sheefish irr Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. ---Tlt'in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 22. Proj. F-9-13, Jobs R-lI-A and R-II-8.

~~163 1981b. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish braf,ers of l,lestern A'laska. ADF&G, Fed. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest. Ann . performance rept. Vol . 24. Proj. F-9-15, Job G-I-P-8.~~

L982. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters of liestern Al aska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fjsh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 23. Proj. F-9-14, Job G-I-P-8. . 1983. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters of l,lestern Al aska. ADF&G, Fed. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. perfcrrmance rept. Vol . 24. Proj. F-9-15, Job G-I-P-8. l\rmstrong, R.H. 1982. A review of arct'ic Arayl ing stuclies in Alaska. Contrib. 6, Alaska Coop. Fish. Res. Unit, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks. 60 pp. Baxter, R. I978. .Kuskokwim stream catalog. Unpubl. rept. ADF&G, D'iv. Commer. Fish, Bethel

Begon, 14. I979. Investigating animal abundance. Bal timore, MD: Univers'iry Park Press. Carlron, M. I976. Delta River - Tangle Lakes fisheries inventory. BLM, Anchorage D'istrict office. 39 pp. Chihuly, M., R. McPijllan, R. Morrison, T.0lson, A. Sekerak, R. Neterer, and J. Burro. 1980. Fisheries resources along the Alaskan gas pipeline route (Prudhoe Bay to the Yukon Territory) proposed by the Northwest Alaskan Pipeline Company. Surunary rept. Vols. I and 2. LGL Ecological Research Associates, Inc., Fairbanks, AK. Craig, P.C., and J. l,lells. 1975. Fisheries investiEations in the Chandalar River region, Northeast Alaska. Chapter 1 in P.C. Craig, Bd. Fisheries- investigations jn a coastal region rjT- tfre Eeaufort Sea. Canadiari Arctic Gas Study Ltd./Alaskan Arctic GaS Study Co. Biol. Rept. Ser. Vol. 34. Grabacki, S. 1981. Effects of exploitation on the population dynamics of arctic gray'ling in the Chena River, Alaska. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks. 118 pp. Grjffiths, td., A. Sekerak, and M. Jones. I974. 0istribution of fish species along alternarive gas pipeline corridors in Alaska, the Yukorr Terrirory and Northwest Territories. Chapter 2 in P.J. McCart, €d. Classificatiorr of streams in Beaufort Sea drainage-and distributiofr of fish in arctic and subarctic dra'inages. Canadian Arctic Gas Study Ltd./Aiaskan Arctic Gas StuOy Co., Biol. Rept. Ser. Vol. 17.

164 Ha11berg, J.E. tg75. Second interim report of the spor! fish technical evaluat'ion study. Joint State/Feoeral Fish and l.lildlife Advisory Team. Specia'l rePt. 7. . Ig7B. Arctic grayl-Anir. ing in the Tanarra River drainage._ ADF&G, Fed. i n Fi sh Rest. p-erformance rept. vol . 19. Proi . F-9-10 ' --Tl?Stuoy R-I. . 1979. Population structure, migratory patterns and habi tat F'i Rest. requirements of the arctic groyling- 4Df&9: Fed. Ai d i n sh Anri. performance rept. Vol . 20. Proi. F-9-11' Job R-I-A. . 1980. Population structure, migratory patterns ano habitat requ'irements of the arcti_c g_ray1ing. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 2I. Proi. F-9-12, iob R-l-A. . 1981. Population structure, migratoty patterns and habi tat EQ'uirements of the arctic grayl ing. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 22- Proi. F-9-13, Job R-I-A.

~~. Lg82. Pgpul atiort structure, migratory patterns and hab'i tat requirements of the arctic grayling.- Aorag, Fed. A'id in Fish Resc. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 23. Proi. F-9-14, Job R-l-A.~~

Heckart, L. 1965. Inventory and catalog'ing-ADF&G, of the spolt fi-sh and !Port f.ish waters in the inteiior of Alaska. Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Job completion rept. Vol. 6. Proi. F-5-R-6, Job 15-A' Holmes, R. 1983. Popu'lation structure, migratory patterns. and habitat Rest. requirements of the arctic gfgylilg.. {DF}G, Fed. Aid in Fish Anri. performance rept. Vol .-?4- Proi. F-9-15, Job R-I-A' . i984. pt-,pulation structure and dynamics of' the arctic grayl ing, __-l^fi-tn Ai 'in Fi sh Rest. enrphas i s on heavi 1y-Vol f i shed stocks. ADF&G, Fed. d Ann. performance rept. . 25. Proi. F-9-16, Job R-i-A' . 1985. Population structure and dynarnics of the arctic grayling wlTh emphasis on heav'i1y fished stocks. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in F'ish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 26. Proi. F-9-17, Job R-l-A' Kramer, M.J. L976. Inventory ancl cataloging of Interior Alaska v'/aters' Chanclalar River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. nicj irl Fish Rest' Ann' performance rept. Vol . 17. Proi. F-9-8, Job G-I-N' . 'LglB. Evaluarion of Inter"icrr yraters and sport fish with emphasis on-manlgeo lakes - Fairbanks District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. peifo.ma,'ce rept. Vol. 19. Proi. F-9-10, Job G-III-H' Interior Alaska waters and sport fish wjth . Ig7g. Evaluation of j emphasis on managed waters - Fa'i rbanks D'istrict. ADF&G, Fed. A d i n

165 Fish Rest. Arrrt. performance rept. Vol. 20' Proj. F-9-11, Job G.III-H. Netsch, N.F. 1975. Fishery resources of waters along the- route of the Trans-Alaska Pipel ine betweerr Yukon River and Atigun Pass in northcentral /rlaika. USFl{S, Resource Publ . 124' Pearse, G.A. Ig74. A study of a typical spring-fed'Ann. stream of Interior Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. niO in Fish' Rest. performance rept. Vol. 15. Prc'i. F-9-6, Job G-III-G. Ig75. inventory and catalogirrg of the sP-o-lt fish and sport f ish -of Fish waf,ers Interior Aiaska - Tok'Oi!trict. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Rest. Ann. performance rcpt. Vol- 16, Proi. F-9-7, Job G-I-J' . r978. Inventory and cataloging of Interior waters with enrphasis on the the ,pp"i Yuk-on and the t]aut Road areas. ADF&G, Fed' Aid in F'ish Rest. $h . performance rept . Vol . 19. Proi . F-9-10 , Job G- l -N ' peckham, R.D. I976a. Evaluation of Interior Alaska and sport fish with emfhasis on managed water, Delta District. ADF&G, Fed' Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. perfoimance rept. Vol . 17. Proi. F-9-8' Job G-III-I. fish . 1976b. InventorY and cataloging-nivir of the sport !i1f anq spor-t. wE-ters in Interior Alaska, Delta drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in G-I-M. Fish Rest. Ann. Performance rept. Vol. 17. Proi. F-9-8, Job . Lg7l. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with emp;utii on martaged waters, Delt-a Di-stpict. ADF&G, Fed' Aid in Fjsh - Rest. Anrr. perfo-rmance repi. vol . 18. Proi. F-9-9, Job G-III-I. . 1978a. A study of a tYPical spring-fed stream of Interior ----TTaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest' Ann. performance rept. Vol. i9. Proj . F-9-10 , Job G- I I I -*g . . 1978b. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport tish with Ai i Fi sh err,p;ur ii' on managed waters , Del ta Di stri_ct. ADF&G, Fect. d n Rest. Ann. perfcr-rmance repi. Vol . 19. Proi. F-9-10, Job G-III-I ' . Iglg. EvaIuation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with rur,ugud waters - Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish "mp;utii'onRest. Anrr. perfdrnrance rept. Vol . ?0. Proi. F-9-11, Job G-lII-I'

1981. Evaluatign of Interjor Alaska waters and sport fish with Fish emphasis on nralaged waf,ers - Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Rest. Ann. fertdrmance rept. Vol . 22. Proi. F-9-13, Jctb G-III-I' I983. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and spori fish with . Fjsh ernphasis orl managed warers - Delta D'istrict. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in -- Rest. Ann. perfcirrnance rept. Vol .24. Proi. F-9-15, Job G-III-I'

166 Peckhanr, R.D., and t^,.P. Ridder. rg7g. A study of a typical spring-feo-Ann. stream of Interior Alaska. ADF&Gn Fed. Aio in Fish Rest. performance rept. Vol. 19. Proj. F-g-l?, Job G-III-G. Ricker, W.E. 1975. Computation and rnterpretatiorr of biological statistics of fish populations. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada. Bull. 191: 3g1 pp. R'idder, W.P. 1980. A study of a typical spring-fed stream of Interior Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann.- performance rept. vol. 27, Proj. F-9-12, Job G-III-G.

~~. 1981. A study of a typical spring-fed stream of Interior Alaska. , Fed. Ai d i n ii sh Reir'. Ann . peiformance rept. Vol . zz. prog' . -lDFaGF-9-I2, Job G-III-G. .1~~

----TD'F&G,. Lg82. A study of a typical spring-fed stream of Interior A'laska. Fed. Aid in Fish Reid. Ann. peiformance rept. vol . zg. proj. F-9-14, Job G-III-G. ----rraGn. 1983. A study of a typical spring-fed srream of Interior Al aska. Fed. Aid in lish Reid. Ann. peitormance rept. vol . 24. Proj. F-9-i5, Job G-III-G.

. 1984. lhe life history and population dynamics of expl oi ted stocks of arctic grayling associated with the Delta and Ri cha rdson clearwater rjvers. ADF&G, Fed. Aicl jn Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 25. Proj. F,9-i6, Job G-III-G. Roguski, E.A., and C.I. Spetz. 1968. Inventory and caialoging of the sport fish and sport fish waters in the Interior of Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Ajd in Fish Rest. Ann. progress rept. Vol. 9. Proj. F-5-R-9, Job 15-A.

Roguski, 8.A., and S.L. Tack. 1970. Irrvestigations of the Tanana River and Iql_gle Lakes- grayling fisheries: migratory and popularjon study. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Arrn. repr. progress. vol. r1. proj. F-9-2, Job 16-B. Schal lock, E.l.l. 1965. Investigations of the Tanana River grayling fisheries, migratory study. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Resl. Joo comp'leti on rept. Vol . 6 . Proj . F-5-R-6 , Job l6-8.

. 1966a. Investigations of the Tanana River and Tangle Lakes migratory ind population study. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish -Tisrreries:Resr. Ann. rept. progress. Vol. Z. proj. F-5-R-2, Job 16-9. . 1966b. Grayl-Chatinika ing I ife history related to a hydroelectric --Eelopment on the River in Interior Alaska. l,f .S. Thesis, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks. li3 pp.

167 Tack, S.L. I9TL Distribution, abundance and natural history of the arctic grayling in the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Anr,. progress rept. Vol. 12. Proi. F-9-3, Study R-I. . L972. Distributiori, abundance and natural history of the arctic grayling in the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. progress rept. Vol. 13. Proj. F-9-4, Study R-I. 1973. tristribution, abundance, and natural history of the arctic grayl i ng i n the Tanana Ri ver clra i rrage . ADF&G , Fed. Ai d in Fish Rest. Ann. progress rept. Vol. 14. Proj. F-9-5, Study R-I. I974. Distribution, abundance, and natural history of the arctic grayling in the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vt'l . 15. Pro.j. F-9-6, Study R-I. L975. Distribution, abundance, and natural history of the arctic grayling in the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 16. Proi. F-9-7, Study R-I. . L976. Djstribution, abundance, and natural history of arctic giayling in the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 17, Proj. F-9-8, Study R-I. . 1980. Distribution, abundance, and natural history of the arctic ffiyling in the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Research project completion rept. Vol. 2I. Proj. F-9-I2, Job R-I. USFWS. 1985. Tetlin National [,Jildlife Refuge draft comprehensive conservarion plan, wilderness review and environmental impact statement. USFWS, Region 7, Anchorage, Ak. 227 pp.

168 "'il.fl::"il::f.?;:'i;:'l;3:.i:l ffilff i.. i. REGIONtdIDE INFORMATION In this report, distribution and abundance information of broad whitefish will be-present_ed by ADF&G, Division of sport Fish, postai survey areas (map 1). Informat'ion on the level of whitefish harvesr as a group is contained in the Sport Fish Harvest narrative founo elsewhere in this volume. A. Regiona.l Distribution Broad whitefish are found in most of the major drainages entering the Bering, Chukchi , and Beaufort seas (Baxter 1973, l'16rrow 1980). The majority,of broad whitefish in the arctic coasial plain occur in the colvill-e,_-sagjivanirktok,-Bendock _Topagoruk, Ikpikpuk, and canning tiyqfs (Iogt 197I, L97t,'BenOock anO Burr- i985, USFl,lS !982). They are found in most major drainages from rhe Kuskokwim River, where they are cormon, to the canioian border (ibid.). They occur in the Yukon River system from the mouth ro rhe headwaters in British columbia (Morrow l9B0), including the fgyyl.rt , Porcupine, and Tanana river drainages in Alaski (Alt 1e71). B. Areas Used Seasonally and for Life Functions A series of freshwater fish distribution maps ar 1:250,000 scale have been prorJ_uced for this report. The categories of mapped oinformatiorr include the fo1 lowing: o General distribution Documented presence in stream or lake " Documented spawning areas " Documented overwintering areas o Documented rearing areas C. Facrors Affecting Distribution ['Jater_ qual ity parameters, such as sa1 rnity, temperature, and dissolved oxygen levels, and physical charaiteristics of iakes, such as depth, velocity, and substrate type, all influence the distribution of broacl whitefish. For detailed information, see the broad whi tefr sh Li fe Hi story and Habi tat Requi rements narratrve in volume 1 of this series. D. Movements Between Areas l. Anadromous. 0n the North s'lope, broad whitefrsh have been o6'5en/eA migrating out of larg'er'rivers such as the Col v'il le and saga_v_anirktok during spring breakup in early June and into shallow bays and lagoons of the Beaufort Sea-for summer feeding (Bendock 1977). Fish that had been feeoing in coasta'l areas enter the Sagavanirktok River in late Auguit tr-i migrare to the spawning_areas (ibid.). A sizeable spawning run moves up lhe colville River in Augusr (Bendock lgTg)-. Alr and Kogl (1973) found that the corviile'run is spread over several months and peaks in late Ju1y.

~~169 7_-J 7^-J ft \ jc f;z \ tJ1 fo \- (t, L ao I (u l L ( a,r, I -co ) rF +) t- c o \ tt1 t( ag~~

~~3i (t, a a s- tD t- ?3a a a s- (u {J~~

~~p g rd c L o o- {J oUI =x = (J H P L) z L~~

~~o ro =~~

1:70 After spawni ng, broad whi tefi sh move downstream duri ng freeze-up to overwinter under the ice in cleeper freshwater' pools, which are fed by sprirrgs or the interstitial flow of the major rivers. 2. Nonanaclromous: d. Stream residents. In the lower Kuskokwim River, the ffih overwinters in the main stem of the river, migrates upstream during spring breakup in late May or early iurre f,o the summer feeding areas of the tuhdra lakes, ponds, and sloughs (Baxter 1973). A sinrjlar migration occurs in the Minto Flats area. tsroad whitefish move in June from the Tanana, Tolovana, and Chatanika rivers to feed in the lakes and sloughs of the flats (Kepler 1973). Baxter (1973) noted that, in the Kuskokwim River area, the ripening females move downstream out of the tundra lakes, ponds, and streams in August and September and begin a slow migration up the Kuskokwim River. They are followed by the sexually developing males in September and 0ctober ( ioio. ). Apparently, in several stocks, there is a postspawning downstream migration of adults to overwintering areas in deep sections of rivers or in brackish water areas or lakes ( ibid. ). b. Lake resictents. L'ittle js known aboui the life history otTETffiilent broad whitefish. Bendock and Burr (19S5) reported f inding broad whitef i sh in several t,ttaw and deflation lakes located within the central arct'ic coastal p'lain. tsaxter (1973) reported that broad whitefish occur in lakes throughout the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta. An jsolated populat'ion of broad whitefish occurs in Lake Minchumina, northwest of Denal'i Nationa'l l4onument (ibid. ). E. Population Size Estimation Populations of broad whitefish have not been wel I studied in Alaska, anci population size has not been estimated. F. Regional Abundance 0n1y limited information on broad whit,efish is available. Except for a few isolated cases, which only compare the abundance of broad whirefish relative to the abundance of other fish spec"ies, abundance has not beerr estimated.

I I. WESTERN AND INTERIOR REGIONS A. Fairbanks Area The boundaries of the Fairbanks Area (Sport Fish Postal Survey Area U) are described in the Sportfishing Harvest ttarrat'ive in this vol ume. 1. 'Distribution. Broad whitefish are widespread jn the l''ijnto FTaTI regTon of the Tanana River drainage (Alt 1972). They have been documented in the Tanana River 14 km upstream from the mourh of the chena River ('ibrd. ). (For additional information on distributjon, see table 1).

~~17I Table 1. collection Locations of Broact whitefish (Coregonus Nasus) Within Sport Fish Postal Survey Area U~~

~~Drai nage/Waterbody Lat. N Long. l.l~~

~~Yukon Ri ver~~

~~Tanana Ri ver 650 10' 151059' Minto flats 64043', 148"49' Tolovana River 64"51' 149050' Chatanika River 65"06' I47"26', Tatal ina River 65"04' L49"r7' Lake Minchumina 63053', 1520 19 '~~

~~Source: Alt 1972, pers. comm.; Baxrer L973.~~

B. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area The boundaries of rhe Lower Yukon-Kuskokwinr Area (sport Fish Postal survey Area v) are described in the Sportfishirig Harvest narrative in this volume. 1. Distributiorr. Broad whitefish are distributed throughout the T6ffik'fFand Kuskokwim rivers (Baxter Lg73). witnin the lower Yukon River, Alt (1983) reported rhat broad whitefish are very abundant in the Innoko River system. They are taken up the North Fork of the Innoko and below Dikeman (LZ4 ni up rhe lctitarod River) (ibid.). Al r (r972 ) reported rhat broad whitefish are distributed throughout the Kuskokwim River drainage. They were taken in the Big River, the south and East forks of the Kuskokwim River, and on spawning grounds in Highpower Creek (1,350 km up the Kuskokwim River) (ibid.). (Fof additional information on distribution, see table 2.) c. South Slripe Brooks Range Area The bcundaries of the South slope Brooks Range Area (sport Fish Postal survey Area Y) are described in the S-portfistrihb Harvesr narrat'ive in this volume. 1. [5tq1!utio11. Broad whitef ish are widely distributed in the lTRon-TiFano irs tributaries, including the porcupine and Koyukuk rrvers (Alt rg72). (For additional informdtion on di stribution, see tab'le 3. )

~~t72 Table 2. Collection Locations of Broad l.Jhitefish (Coregonus Nasus) h|ithin Sport Fish Postal Survey Area V~~

~~Drai nage/hlaterbocly Lat. N Long. W~~

Yukon River --T]aGnuF- 62"40', 164036' 033 Kotl i k 63002' 163 ' 039 Nanvaranak Lake 62 ', 163'37' 'l Fi sh Vi l age a rea 62"20' 163'50' 003 Andreafsky 62 ', 163010' l4arshal I 61o53' 162'05 ' 0hogami ut 61034' 16ro52'

Ka kamu t 610 38 ' 16 1'40 ', Innoko River 62"00' 159"38' Hather Creek 63"35' 158'18' Yentna River 630 10' 158016', Iditarod River 63002', 158"46' Dishna River 63"36' L57"17', Nr"rrth Fork of Innoko R. 63'49 ' 156 "37 Kuskokwim River --lftrsko-mimEy of f Qu i nha ga k 59o45' 162'00' Kwegooyuk, mile 30 Kusko. R. 60024' L62" 76' Kialik River, mile 42 Kusko. R. 60"25' 162'25' Kutukhun Slough 60036' 162"35' Kinak River, mile 38 Kusko. R. 60"24'. 162050', Eenayarak River 60" 19' 161'25' Johnson River, mile 66 Kusko. R. 60038' 162'06 ' Kasigluk, mile 33 60052' 162032' Nunapitchuk, mile 32 600 53 ' 162029' Atmauthl uk, nti 1e 29 Bethel, mile 86 Kusko. R. 60"48' 161'45' Kwethluk, mile 104 Kusko. R. 60049' 161'26' Akiachuk, mile LtZ Kusko. R. 60"54', 16r"26', Lower Kalskag, mile 184 Kusko. R. 61031' 160"22' Aniak, mile 224 Kusko. R. 61035' 159'32' Chuathpaluk, niile 236 Kusko. R. 610 34 ' 159"34' Crooked Creek, mile 295 Kusko. R. 61052' 158006' Holitna River, mile 341 Kusko. R. 61041' 157'51'

Stony River Village, mile 369 6r" 47 '. 156'35' McGrath, mile 511 Kusko. R. 62058' 155'38 ' Medfra, mile 582 Kusko. R. 63006' 154'43' l,likolai, Mile 626 Kusko. R. 62"58' 154" 10', Telida, Fish Creek Lake, mile 741 Kusko. R. 63023', 153'16 ' Irlorth Fork of Kusko. R. 63007' 154"34' South Fork of Kusko. R. 63005' 154039' ( cont i nued )

~~173 l'able 2 (continued).~~

~~Dra i nage/Waterbody Lat. N Long. t,J~~

~~Easr Fork of Kusko. R. 63007' 154'35', Highpower Creek 63"25' 153"07' Big River 62058' 154"53' Yukorr - Kuskokwim Del ta 032 ffi 61 ' 164000' Kgun Lake 61" 34 ' 163"45'~~

~~Tunga'luk Sl ough 61" 14 ', 165020' Kashunuk Ri ver 61o24', 165"11' Chakaktol i k 62"47', 163038' Bl ack R'iver Nunavakanuk Lake 62"02', 164037'~~

~~Source: Alt 1972, 1982; Baxter 1973.~~

~~Table 3. Col lection Locations of Broad l,Jhitefish (Coregonus Nasus) t,Jithin Sport Fish Postal Survey Area Y~~

~~Dra i nage/Wa terbody Lat. N Long. W~~

~~Yukon River --ForcuFTne River 66"52', I43"42', Dal t River 66000' 149"15' Nu I ato 64"34' 159"06', Koyukuk River 65"41' 156"24',~~

~~Source: Alt 1972, Baxter 1973.~~

L74 Iii. ARCTIC REGION A. Seward Peninsula-Norton Sound Area The boundaries of the Sewaro Peninsula-Norton Sound Area (Sport Fish Postal Survey Area t,{) are described in the Sportfishing Harvest narrative in this volume. i. Distribution. Broad whitefish are known to be present in lm-uTfBasln proper as well as in the lclwer reaches of rhe three major rivers flowing into the basin: the Agiapuk, Kuzitrin, and Pilgrim rivers (Alt I972). (For additional information on distribution, see table 4.)

~~Table 4. Collect'ion Locations of Broad Whitefish (Coregonus Nasus) t^lithin Sport Fish Postal Survey Area W~~

~~Drai nage/haterbody Lat. N Long. lrl~~

Norton Sound ffii?fiae'l 63"29' 162"A2' Koyuk River, nrile 5 64"55' 161008' Port Clarence -Tmw"uffi-in 65007', 165 "45 ' Agiapuk River, mile 3,7 65"10' 165041' Kuzitrin River 650 10' 165"25' Pilgrim River 65"09', 165'13'

~~Source: Al t, L972, Baxt,er L973.~~

B. Northwest Alaska Area The boundaries of the Northwest Alaska A.rea (Sport Fish Postal Survey Area X) are described'in the Sportfishing Harvest narrat'ive in this volume. 1. Distribution. Webb (1980) col lected broad vrhitefish in TilTftsrgriek-Lake and other unnamed lakes in the lioatak River drainage. They have also been observed jn the Kobuk River drainage (Alt I979). (For aclditional information orl distribution, see table 5.) C. North Slope Brooks Range Area The boundaries of the North Slope Brooks Ronge Area (Sport Fish Postal Survey Area Z) are described in the Sportfishing Harvest narrative in this volume. 1. Distribution. Broacl whitefish were captured along the arctic coasT-E'Afueen the Topagoruk River and the eastern margin of Foggy Bay (Bendock 1977, Bendock and Burr 1985). They were

~~t75 Table 5. Collection Locations of Broad Whitefish (Cor,egonus Nasus) I'lithin Sporr Fish Postal Survey Area X~~

~~Dra i nage/Wa terbody Lat. N Long. H~~

~~Kotzebue Sound Kobuk River 66054' 160"39' Noatak River drainage A'l i ktongnak Lake 67"24' 762." 4l' Unnamed Lake 67"29' 16?"42' Unnamed Lake 67"27' 162033'~~

~~Source: Baxter 1973, Webb 1980.~~

found at stream ard lake sites on the arctic coastal plain lgar Teshekp_uk Lake (Habletr rg7g, Bendock and Burr 1bg5). They were also captured throughout the sunilner in the main reaches of the sagavanirktok ano colville rivers, and a larqe spawn-ing ruq h.as been observed in the colville at umiat (ATt qnd Kogl 1973). Broad whitefish have been reported in rhe lower canning.River and may posslbly use other iystems to the east, al tho_ugh^ none were taken cturing a wide-siale sanrpl ing program in 1970 off the coast of the Arctic National t.,|iliti16 Refuge (usFWS 1972). (For addirional information on distribution, see table 6.)

~~176 Table 6. Col lection Locations of Broad t'Jhitefish (-Cgrei-onus. Nasus) l.lithin Sport Fish Postal Survey Area Z~~

~~D ra i nage/!'la te rbody Lat. N Long. I^J~~

Arctic Coast -TTffiFTTver 70"27', 154'54'. Teshekpuk Lake 70"35' 153"35' Colville River, 70010' 150055' Kalubik Creek 70"26' 150'06', Kupigruak Channel 70030' 153"23' Itk'illik River 70009' 150'56' Nechel i k Channel 70"27', 151'04', Tamayayak Channel 70"27' 151'02' Nanuk Lake 70" 19' 151'0i' Chandler River 69o27', 15 1'30 ' Kachemach Ri ver 70"2L' 150'40' Umi at 69"22' 152'03 ' Fossi I Creek 69018', r55'22' Seabee Creek 69"22', 752"06', Canni ng 70"04' 145'30' Kiilik 69"01', 153"55' I'li I uveach 70"23', 150'03' Awuna River 69003' 155"28', Kikiakrovak River 69059' 151036', Kogosukruk River 69"56' 151'35' Anaktuvuk River 69"34', 151028' Sagavani rktok River 700 18' r47"5?' Barter Island 70"07' 143 "40 ' Inaru R'iver 70"54' 155"59' Topagoruk River 70"11' 155'57' Ikpikpuk River 70"49', 154" 19' 0umal i k Creek 70004' 155025' Chipp River 7 0" 44', 155'25' Interlake Creek 70"20' 155" 16 ' Lake Betty 68"29', 156'30' Sungovoak Lake 71"05' 156"30' Pi ttal ukruak Lake 70050' 155'23' Meade R'iver 70"52', 155"55' 0kp'iksak Ri ver 7 0" 4r' 156'37',

Fish Creek 70"22' 151'13 ', Inigok Creek 70" 10' 152"35' Judy Creek 700 15 ' 151"45' Kuparuk River 70025' 148052' Migual iak River 70"39' 154006' Price River 69053' 154"42', Ka1 i kpi k Ri ver 70"27' 151'56' Aknrolik Lake 68025', 154'04' Imiakni kpak Lake 68'29'. 154"C3', ( cont i nued )

~~177 Table 6 (continued).~~

~~Dra'i nage/hlarerbody Lat. N Long. lll~~

Unnamed lake 74"32, 155015' Unnamed lake 70"07, 153"02' Unnanrcd I ake 70"02' 153003 , Unnamed lake 70"01' 153 039' Unnameo lake 70009, 153055' Unnameo lake 70003' 153030, Unnamed lake 70"34' 1540 1g , Unnamed lake 70" 1g , 153004' Unnamed lake 70001, 1.53"08' Unnamed lake 70"22' 154"40' Unnamed lake 70"04, 155"37' Unnamed lake 70"39, 1550 12' Unnamed lake 70"32' 155'o25 , Unnamed lake 70"26' 155"43' Unnamed lake 70"20, 155025 , Unnamed lake 70009' 155047' Unnonied I ake 70"06, 15:5"00' Unnamed lake 69o51' L5.2"24' Unnamed lake 70003, 145043' Unnamed lake 70001' 145037' Unnamed lake 700 18' 150030' Unnamed lake 70"L2' 150041, Unnamed lake 70"L7' 150052' Unnamed lake 70"24' 150"47' Unnamed lake 70"26' 150045' Unnamed lake 700 1g' tsL"27' iJnnamed I ake 70"24' 151030, Unnamed Jake 70"25' 151041' Unnamed lake 70"06' t5?"37' Unnamed lake 70'19' 152056, Unnamed lake 70"25' I52"40' Unnamed lake 70"26' I52"22' Unnamed lake 70"40, I52"40' Unnamed lake 700 19 , 151001' Unnamed lake 69"57' 1530 15' Unnamed lake 69053' 154"20' Unnamed lake 69"59' 154" 16 ', Unnameci lake 70" 1g ' 156" 18", Unnamed lake 70" 49' 155021' Unnamed lake 70"42', 154059'

~~Source: Al t L972; A1t and Kogl 1973; Baxter L973; Bendock I977. 7979; Bendock and Burr 1985a ,b; Hab'lett 1979.~~

178 REFERENCES Al t, K.T. I971. Distribution, movements, d9e, and growth, and taxonomic sf,atus of whitefish (Coregonus ;p. ) in the Tanana-Yukon drainage and North 51ope. ADF&G, FilTTmn-Fish Rest. Anrr. prog. rept. Vol. 12. Proj . F-9-3, Stuoy R-l1, Job R-l1-F. L972. Distribution, movements, dgg and growth, and taxononiic starus of whitefish (Coregonus 59.) in the Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim area. ADF&G, Fed. Ai d i n FTITr R-est. Ann. prog. rept. Vol . 13. Proj. F-9-4, Job R-11-9. 1979. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters in liestern Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Ajo in Fish Rest. Ann. pro9. rept. Vol. 20. Proi. F-9-11, Job G-I-P. . 1983. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish water of Western Al aska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 24. Proj. F-9-15, Job G-l-P-8. . 1985. Persona'l communication. Area Mgt. Biologist' ADF&G, Div. ---Tport Fi sh , Fai rbanks. Alr, K.T., and D.R. Kogl. 1973. Notes on the whitefrsh of the Colvjlie River, Alaska. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 30(4).

Baxter, R. 1973. Coregonus nasus ( Pal I as ) . ADF&G , Di v Conuner. Fish., Bethel . Bendock, T.N. I977. Beaufort Sea estuarine fishery study. Final rept. OCS Contract No. 03-5-022'69. ADF&G, Fairbanks. . 1979. Inventory and cataloging of arctic waters. ADF&G, Fed. 'in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 20. Proi. F-9-11, Job -T1?-G- I.I . Bendock, T.N., arro J.M. Burr. 1985a. Cataloging of llorth Slope lake and stream surveys. ADF&G, Div. Sport Fish, Fairbanks. . 1985b. Freshwater fish distribution in the central arct'ic coastal p1ain. ADF&G, Div. Sport Fish, Fairbanks.

Hablett, T. R. L979. Fish inventories conducted within the National Peiroleum Reserve on the North Slope of Alaska, 1.977-78. Pages 337'406 in National Petroleum Reserve irr Alaska [.lork Group 3. Studies of iElecteO wildlife and fish and their use of hab'itats on and adjacent tu the Natjonal Petroleum Reserve in Alaska 105(c) Land Use Study' Anchorage. 423 pp.

~~179 Hale,.S.S. 1981. Freshwater habitat relationships: broad whitefish {Coregonus ndsus IPa'llus]). ADF&G, Div. Habitat, Resourle Assessment [iranch.~~

Kogl D.R. 1971.. ' ^llonitoring dnd evaluation of arctic waters with emphasis on the North Slope orainages: Colville River srudy. ADF&G, Fed. Aio in Fish Resr. Ann. prog. rept. vo'l . Lz. proj. F-g:3, Job g-lll-R.

Morrow, .J.E. 1980. The freshwater fishes of Alaska. Anchorage: Alaska Northwesr Publishing Co. 248 pp. usFl{s, L982. Initial report baseline study of the fish, wildlife, and their habitats. USFWS, Sectir.in 1002c. Anchorage" 507 pp.

~~Webb' J. 1980. El t River and Noatak fisheries inventory. D0I; BLlt, Fairbanks. 7 pp.~~

~~i80 Burbot Distribution and Relative Abundance l^lestern and interior Regions~~

I REG IONt^lIDE The distribution ano abundance of burbot will be discussed by ADF&G, Division of Sport Fish, postal survey areas in this report (nrap 1). The hestern and Interior regions irrclude the Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area (Area V), the South Slope Brooks Range Area (Area Y), and the Fairbanks Area (Area U). Sport harvest information is presented in the Sport Use of Freshwater and Anadromous Fish rrarrative in this volume. A. Regional Dj stribution Burbot are distributed throughout the fresh waters of Alaska and have a nearly un'iversal djstribution in the Western and Interior regions (ADF&G 1978, l'lorrow 1980). Burbot are abundant irr the Yukon, Kuskokwim, Tanana, and Koyukuk rivers and occur in many lovr-'lying lakes and interconnecting waterways (ADF&G 1978). B. Areas Used Seasonally and for Life Functiorrs A series of freshwater distribution maps at 1:250,000 scale has been produced for thi s r"eport. The categories of mapped irrformation are 1) general distribution,2) documented presence in stream or lake, 3) documented spawning aneas, 4) documented overwintering areas, and 5) documented rearing areas. C. Factors Affectjng Distribution Burbot'is the only freshwater species of the cod family (Gadidae) and general'ly avoids brackish waters. Salin'ity may l'imit irs distribution, as it is absent from most'islands with'in its range (Scott ano Crossman 1973, ADF&G I978). Temperature limits the developnrent of burbot eggs and larvae. At water temperatures below 4oC, egg mortal ity ittcreases, and larvae oo not start feeding at temperatures below 8oC (Jager et al. 1979). More detai I ed 'i nformation regardi ng factors that affect di stribution appears 'i n the burbot Lj fe History anci habi tat Requi rements narrative in volume 1. D. l'lovemerrts Between Areas During rrrost of thei r l'ife h'istory, burbot dre rather sedentary; however, tliere appear to be defintte movements tovlard spawtling areas. Burbot move to spawning areas rrrdividual'ly, rather than itt schools, and may move to a feeding area after spawning (Morrow 1980). Populations of burbot in the lower Kuskokvrini drainage have extensive upstream migrations to spawning grounds, dnC other burbot in the Western and Interior regions may have similar rnigrations (ADF&G 1978). Four burbot were radio-tagged in the lower Chena ond Tanana rivers in the fall to monitor their fall ancl winter movements (Ha'llberg 1984). All four fish showed some movement both upstream and downstream, moving from as fat'as 18 mi downstream to 7 nt'i u ps tream.

~~181 --a7-1 |t' (u ^\/ l- t t .v= xo Y= ,\ I o ( J 5 L ,.\ (u o- Y\t.. \1 J~~

~~\ .o nL -l (l, tl L~~

\ q o|lt r\l L 't\ tE (l) 't:1r j-t N*'l}-^i :t- 'o' ! o It .'t 4 I an ) rF Ot 1 *.'$\ q) .jrt\ +rc L€ od .noe .no..Y CO OL 'F co cn o(uLo, o O.t1 t--C (u+, +r5go ! rE> gdt q,L 3 +r<'-o an 3t,o.. -v .r! Fa-O L Orr rE r! =u-

182 E. Population Size Estimation Burbot have been sampled in many drainages of the Western and Interior regions; however, few abundance estiniates are available. Sampling gear has included gill nets, seines, hook and 1ine, fyke nets, and electrofishing. Catch rates of burbot from electrofishing are reported for some streanrs in the Fairbanks Area. Tack (1971) noted that burbot were nor trften encountered in electrofishing in the Tanarra drainage but that they were probably represented fairly in the catch. F. Regional Abundance Burbot have been sampled most extensively in the Fairbanks Area, and caich rates from electrofishing are available for some areas. In the Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area, know'ledge about burbot distribution is limited, arrd in the South Slope Brooks Range Area, distribution information js on'ly available for a few lakes and streams.

I I. LOl,lER YUKON-KUSKOKWIM AREA The Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area includes al] southern drainages of the Yukc;ri Ri ver f rom j ts conf I uence uli th the Tarrana Ri ver, near Tanana , west to Kaltag; all drainages of the Yukon River south of Kaltag to the Bering Sea; the Kuskokwim River watershed; al I water flowing intc; Kuskokwim Bay; and adjacent salt water and islands (map i). This area does not inclucje the Pastol ik R'iver drairrage and waters f lowing into Norton Sound northeast of the Pastolik River nor any portion of the Tanana River watershed (ADF&G l9B5). Burbot are present irr the lower Kuskokwim River drainage in the lower reaches of strearns (Alt 1977). They are abundant in the lowlanct dreas of the lower Kuskokwim drainage where they are used as a subsistence food. Burbot are present in low abundance in Kagati Lake, a cleep'lake at the head of the Kanektok River, vlhich drairrs into Kuskokw'im Bay ( ibid. ) . Alt (1980) reports that burbot are present'in the lower Yukon drainage. High numbers of burbot were fourrd jn the lower Innoko River drainage, a tributary of the lower Yukon River (Alt 1983).

I I I. SOUTH SLOPE BROOKS RANGE AREA THE South Slope Brooks Range Area includes all cirainages south of the Brooks Range, west of and incluoing the Koyukuk and Alat,rra river drainages, and north of the Yukori River", incl uding al I northern tributaries of the Yukon River from Kaltag to the Canadian border (map 1) (ADF&G 1985). Burbot are found in several tributaries and lakes of the upper Koyukuk River drainage. Burbot occur in the Kanuti River in the spring ano iri the Jim R'iver in the summer (Chihuly et a1 . 1980, Netsch 1975). l'!ary Angel and l'linnie creeks, tributaries of the Mjddle Fork Koyukuk, provide summer rearing habitat (Chihuly et a1. 1980). Burbot are found irr Dietrich River, another tributary of the ltl'ioole Fort Koyukt,tll (ibid.). 0vervintering Creek, a spring-fed tributary to the Dietrich River, provides year-round habitat (ibid.). l'letsch (1975) found burbot

183 in Big Lake, in the Middle Fork Koyukuk drainage. Roguski and Spetz (1968) found no burbot in the'ir test-netting of lakes on the south slope of the Brclclks Range, but the stomach of a pike sampled in tJi ld La ke con ta i rred a bu rbot . Burbot have beerr found in other tritrutaries of the Yukon River. Burbot are present in the Ray River'(Netsch 1975), and the North. Fork Ray River: is used as a sumn€r rearing area (Chihuly et al. 1980). In the Chandalar River, burbot are present but not abundant (Craig and Wells 1975), and a few burbot have been sampled in Ackerlnan, Squaw, and Chandalar lakes of the Chandalar Rjver drainage (Pearse 1978). Craig and Wells (1975) also found burbot'in a few lakes of the Sheenjik River drairrage, a tributary of the Porcupine River. iV. FAIRBANKS AREA The Fajrbanks Area includes all southern drainages of the Yukon River from its conl'luence with the Tanana River, near Tanana, east to the Canadian border and including the Alaskan portion of the Fortymile and Sixtymile river drainages, dS wel I as the entire Tanana River watershect. This area also includes the Alaska portion of the White River drairrage (map 1) (ADF&G 1985). Burbor are wloely distributed in the Tanana drainage in. larger glag!9.| rivers arrd near the confluences of many tributaries (Peckham 1981). Lakes at elevat'ions above 600 m genera'l1y have burbot pop.ulations (ibid. ). Burbot are reported in Ge-orge Lake (M'il I s 1979-1985) and in Fielding antJ Tangle lakes (Peckhanr L977).. One burbot was taken in deep water i n Lake tvti nchumi na (Krarner 1975 ) . Burbot are the thi rd most abundant species irr Harding Lake; they are presenl during the sumlner and spawn in the lake in wittter (Hallberg 1979). Burboi are spring, sunm€r, and fall residents of the Chatanika River' a Tanana triburary- (Chihu'ly et al. 1980) and were found in the Tatalina River, a trjbuiaiy to ifre Chatanika in the suffrner. Kep'ler (1973) reporls finding few burbor in the Minto flats area'in the surnmer. Burbot are present jn low abundance irr the lower Chena River from mid May to early Ocrober (l,iecum 1984) and were found in the Chena River neir the coirtluence with the Tanana in lower siclechannel, groin, and main channel border areas (ibid.). Burbot were rare in clearer slough and rributary nouth habitais and absent from shallow main channel sarrdbar arrd sidechannel habitats, except during high river stages (ibid.). Tack (1975) found burbot at the mouth of the Chena in low abundance, fronr two to frve fish per hour sanp'led by electrofishing. Burbot occur throughour the lower reaches of the Salcha River in summer anct winter and spain in the Salcha during winter (Chihuly et al. 1980). Kramer (1975) found burbot in low abundance in the Salcha River, and Tack (1972) sampled one burbot per hour by electrofishing in the lower Salcha in Ju1y. Burbot also crccur in Redmond Creek, a tributary to the Sal cha, in the summer (Ch jhuly et a] . 1980). Further upstream irr the Tanana drainage, burbot are found at Mile One Slough on the Delta Clearwater (Rioder 1983). They overwinter in Shaw Cree[, a tribritary to the Tanana near Delta Junction (Chihuly et al. 1980). Burbot have been sampled by electroshocking 'in the Goodpaster

184 River. Peckham (197S) found less than two frsh per hou.r, and Peckham (1981) ano Tack'(L973) found three fjsh per hour in the Good Paster Rive,'. Near Tok, the Tanana River provides spring, fall, and winter habi tat f or burbot (Chi huly et a'l . 1980) . Burbot are found in the Chisana and Nabesna river drainages' at the headwaters of the Tanana River. They occur jn cleepwater habitats of the Chisana and Nabesna rivers but use shallow wat,er in January and Feorua.y for spawnirrg (USFWS 1985). Chihuly et a1. (1980) found burbor. in Scottie Creek, a tributary of the Chisana River.

RIFERENCES ADF&G. 1978. Alaska's fisheries arlas. Vol. 2; Fisheries IR.F. Mclean and K.J. Delaney, comps.]. Juneau. 43 pp. + maps. . 1985. Sport fish survey. Dlv. Sport Fish bookler. 43 pp' Ali, K.T. 1977. Inventory and cataloging 9f sport {it! and s-port fish waters of Westerrr Al aika. ADF&G, Fed. Aid i n F'ish Rest . Ann. rept. Vol. 18. Job G-l-P. 1980. Inventory and cataloging of sporr fish and s-port fish . -Fed. j ffiers of Western Al aika . ADF&G, A d i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. rept. Vol. 21. Proi. F-9'I2, Job G-l-P. i983. Inventory and cataloging of sport fis! and sport fish Ann. rept. v'ra f,e r's of t^Jestern Alaika. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in F'ish Rest. Vol. 24. Study G-I-P-8. Chihuly, M., R. McMillan, R. Morrison, T.0lson, A. Sekeak, R. Neterer, and J. Burro. 1980. Fisheries resources along the Alaska gas pipel ine route (pruohoe Bay- to the Yukon Terrjtgry) p_roposed by. the Northwest nliska ' pipe'l ine Company. LGL Ecological Research Associates, Fai rbanks, AK. Craig,- p.C., and J. Wells. 1975. Fisheries investigations in.the Chandalar "niver iegion, northeast Alaska. Chapter 1 in Fisheries investigations in a coastal region of the Beaufort Sea. A-rctic Gas Biol. Rept. Ser. 34. Hal1berg, J.E. Ig7g. Evaluation of manageme-nt p.rac-t]ces-in. four selected lales of Interior Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann' rept' Vol . 20. Proi. F-9-11, Job G-III-"'1. . 1984. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fjsh w'ith --Ernphas is on rnanaged waters - Fa i rbanks Di stri ct. ADF&G , Fed. Ai d i rr Fish Rest. Ann. rept. Vol .25. Proi. F-9-16, .-lofr G-III-H. Jager,- T., hl. Nellen, W. Schofer, artd, F. Shodiai. I979. Influence of iatinity and temperature on early iife stages of Coregurrus albula, C.

185 lavaretus, R. rutilus, and L. lota. Pages 345-348 in R. Lasker and K. Sherrnan, eds. The early life history of fish, recenf, studies. ICES Symposium, Woctis Hole, l'la. 2 April 1979. Kepler, P. 1973. Population studies of norrhern p'ike and whitefish in ihe Mirrto flats complex with emphasis on the Chacanika R1ver. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in Fjsh Rest. Ann. rept. Vol . 14. Proj. F-9-5, Job G-III-J. Kramer', Pl.J. 1975. Inventory arrd cataloging of Interior Alaska waters Fairbariks District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. rept. Vol. 16. Proj. F-9-7, Job G-I-C. Mecum, R.D. 1984. Habitat utilization by fishes in the Tarrana River near Fairbanks, Alaska. Master's Thesis, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks. l'fills, M.J. 1979 through 1985. Statewide Harvest Study - 1977 through 1984 IJara . Fed. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest. and Anadromous Fi sh Studi es. Vo'l s . 20-26, Study Sl^l-l-A. ADF&G, Div. Sport Fish, Juneau. Morrow, J.E. 1980. The freshwater fishes of Alaska. Anchorage, AK: Alaska Ncrrthwest Publ j shi ng Co. 248 pt:. Iiersch, N.F. 1975. Fishery resources of waters along the route of the trans-Alaska prpeline betweerr Yukon River and Atigun Pass in nort,h centra'l Alaska. USFl.lS Res. Pub'l . I24,

Pearse, G.A . 1978. Irrventory arrd cataloging of interior waters w'ith enrphasis on the upper Yukon and Haul Road areas. ADF&G, Fed. A'id in Fish Rest. Ann. rept. Vol. i9. Proi. F-9-10, Job G-I-N. Peckham, R.D. 1977. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish wirh emphasis on managed waters - Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fjsh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 18. Job G-III-I. . 1981. Evaluat'ion of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with ---E[hasis on managed waters - Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 22. Proi. F-9-13, iob G-III-I. Ridder, t^l.P. 1983. A study of a typical spring-fed stream of Interior Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 24. Proj. F-9-15, Job G-IIi-G. Roguski, E.A., and C.E. Spetz. 1968. Inventory and cataloging of the sport fish and sport f'lsh waters in the interior of Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in Fi sh Rest. Ann. rept. Vol . 9. Proj . F-5-R-9 , Job 15-A. Scott, W.8., and E.J. Crossman. I973. Freshwater fishes cf Canada. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. Bull. 184. 166 pp.

i86 Tack, S.L. 197I. Distribution, abundance, and natural history of the arctic grayling'in the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Ajd in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. L2. Proi. F-9-3, Job R-I. . I972. Distribution, abundance, and natural h'istory of the arctic grayl ing in the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Resr. Ann. prog. rept. Vol . 13. Proi . F-9-4, Job R-1. . 1973. Distribution, abundance, and natural history of the arctic grayl ing in the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. prog. rept. Vol. 14. Proi. F-9-5, Job R-I. . I975. Distribution, abundance, and natural history of the arctic grayling rn the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 16, Job R-I. USFI,/S. 1985. Tetl in National I'lildl ife Refuge draft comprehens'ive conservation p1an, wilderness review and environmental impacr statenient. USDI, Anchorage, AK. 227 pp.

~~lB7~~

~~Humpback l'lhrtefish Distribution and Relative Abundance Western and Interior Regions~~

I. REGIONWIDE INFORMATION The Cistribution and abundance of humpback whitefish will be Oiscusseci by ADF&G, Division of Sport Fish, postal survey dreas jn this report (map 1 ). The Western and Interior regions i ncl ude the Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area (Area V) , the South Sl ope Brooks Range Area (Area Y), ano the Fairbanks Area (Area U). Sport harvest irtformatiorr is presented in the Sport Use of Freshwater and Anadromous F'ish narrat'ive in this volume. A. Regional Distribution Humpback whitefish are found in most of the Alaskan rivers that empty i nto the Beri ng , Chukchi , dnd Bear.rfort seas (Morrow 1980) . Huinp-Oack wh'irefish re-ach their greatest a.bundance statewide in the Yukbn and Kuskokwim drainages (A1t 1979a). They are found in all major tributaries of the Tanana drainage. Both anadromous and nonanadromous popul ations occurin Al aska. lllhitef i sh are year'- round residents of large, deep lakes, such as Lake Minchumina, and are summer residents of sntaller lakes (ibid.). B. Areas Used Seasonally and for Life Functiotts A series of freshwater d'istribution maps af, 1:250'000 scale has been produced for this report. The categories of mapped informa- t'ion are 1) general distribution,2) docuniented presence in streani or lake,3) documented spawning areas,4) documentecl overwintering areas, and 5) documented rearing areas. C. Factors Affecting Distribution Little information is available on PH, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, salinity, or temperature tolerances of lrumpback whitefish. OvLrwinteririg areas may be determined !y presence of sufficient levels of diisolveo oxygen (Bendock 1977). Humpback whitefish can tol erate bracki sh watii, drrd some popul atiorrs nray wi nter i n the sea near river mouths (Morrtw 1980, McPhail and Lindsey 19i0). I'tore deta i I ed i nformati on rega rdi ng factors that affect distriburiori appears in the humpback whitefish Life History and Habitat Requirements narrative in volume 1 of this publicatjon. D. Movenrents Between Areas Humpback rvhitefish migrate upstream to feeding areas in the early summer and move further upstream to spawn'ing Erounds in the fall (Alt I979a). In the Kuskokwim River system, the fish move from ihe mair' river into tributaries, such as the Arriak Rjver, 'in late l4ay for sunmer feeding (Alt I977). Catches in August indicate movements eirher back Jnto the Kuskokwim River or further up the tributaries into feeding or spavlning areas. Tagging studies by Baxter (citeo in Alt 1971) indicate that hurnpack whitefish rlay travel over 600 km up the Kuskokwim River to spawning grounds.

~~189 --7--7 ro (tJ ^\/ L I t .to= -vtn >z= gI o J~~

~~FI L o o3 Ay^l J~~

~~G' (u )i L '' .h /,... .go €L~~

~~(u L ht = $ gr0,, +rg .jnt! \$lj'* L'r' oos oth J srogo .FOL g)co o(u '-o_o Ov1 L-c(uP +)=go ! 9.. rE> E€ L0', 3 +r~~

190 In the Innoko Rjver, a tributary of the lower Yukon River. wh'itefish move from the Yukon into the lower Innoko during late May arrd early June (Al t 1983 ) . llumpback whi tef i sh were observed feeding in the slow-moving water of the ma'in Innoko River in mid June (ibid.). After summer feeding, whitefish cont'inue up the Innoko to spawning grounds and are abundant in the upper river and tributaries in September. l'lovement downstream to overuinterirrg areas occurs in 0ctober and November (ibid.). Migration patrerns of humpback whitefish in the lower and mjddle Yukon River are not ful1y known, but both rjver-resident and anadromous populations probably exist (Alt 1980a). The anadromous populations overwinter in the lower Yukorr River. After breakup there is an upstream migration in the main Yukon and tributary rivers. By late June, most whitefish have moved upstrean irr the tributaries to summer feeding areas in lakes arrd sloughs (ibid.). E. Popu'lation Size Estjmation Humpback whirefish have been sampled irr nrany drainages of the Western arrd Interior regions; however, fevr abundance estimates are available. Sampling gear has included gi11 nets, seines, hook and line, dip nets, fyke nets, and electrofishing. In solne areas' sampling has been standard'ized to obtain estimates of fish caughr per net hour, ner day, or net rright. Generally, sampling has not been slandardized between years or between areas, so that only the relative abundance in an area carr be assessed. Population estimates of humpback whirefish lvere made for four years over a 22-mi section of the upper Chatanika River. In the firsi f,wo years, 1972 and 1973, estimates were made usirtg the Schnabel mark-recapture method (Kepler 1973, llramer 1974). The Schnabel estimate is a multiple census method, which requ'ires that at least two capture runs be made and that the population be constant, with no recruitment or mortaiity 'in the sample area during the censuses (Ricker 1975). Kepler (1973) notecl that movement of fish between pools during the sampling period may have biased the results. In 1973, the Schnabel popu'lation estimates yJere correlated with v'isual counts rnade from a platform mounted on rhe bow of a flat-bottonr boat (Kramer I974). The visual counts agreed closely with the Schnabel estintates, anl in 1974 and I977 only visual counts were made (Kramer 1975, 19i8). F. Regional Abundance Estimates of relative abundance of humpback wlr'itef j sh wi I I be oiscussed where applicable in the fol I owi ng secti ons .

II. LOWER YUKON.KUSKOKWIM AREA The Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area includes all southern drainages of the Yukorr River from its confluence with the Tanana River, near Tanana, west to Kaltag; all drainages of the Yukon River south of Kaltag to the Bering Sea; the Kuskokwint River watershed; all waters flowing 'into Kuskokwim Bay; and adjacent salt water and islanos (map i). This area does not include the Pastolik River drainage and waters flowing intc,

191 Norron Sound northeast of the Pastolik River nor any portion of the Tanana River watershed (ADF&G 1985). Humpback whitefish are widespread in_ the .lower Kuskokwim drainage.and are found in the lor^ler reaches of all Kuskokwim River tributaries (A1t 1977'1. They are nct found in Kuskokwim Bay, however,. and are absent from the OiV dra'inages, such as the Goodnews, Arolik, lnd Kanektok livers (ibid.). Humpback whrrefish are abundant in the Eek River at the moui,h of the Kuskokw'im River and in the Kwethluk, Kasigluk' a!d lowre Aniak rivers. They are present in lesser numbers in the K.isarilik R'iver ('ibid.). Humpback whitefish have also been found farther.upstream in the Kuskokwim in tributaries such as the Hoholitna and Big rivers arro Highpr.rvrer Creek (A1t L972, 198ia-)' In the lower Yukon Riv6r ora'inage, humpback whit,efish have been found in many tributaries. A few wfritefish were captured 6 mi !p the Andreafsky River, a tributary of the lower Yukon River' All were prespawners , 'i ndi cati ng that the Andreafsky Ri ver may serve as a spawning stream (Alt i98lb). HumpOac[ whitefjsh feed irr the lakes and slo-ug.hs of the Innoko River' a nrajor tributary crf rhe lower Yukon (Alt 1980a). Large numbers of them enier Shageluli Lake irr the spring for summer feeding and leave in the fal l; the sanre pdrrern proOaOly holds fof lakes throughout the Innokr-t River drdinage (ntt tgabo). Humpback vrhitefish occur in the Iditarod and Dishna ri'vers, tgibutaries of the irirtoko River, and are one of the most abunOant species in the Inrioko drainage (Alt 1983)._ been 0ther yukon Flj ver tri bura ries where humpback whi tefi sh have reported irrclude the Anvik, l,lularo, Yuki', and Nowit-na rivers (Alt igbga, 1978). Humpback whjtefish spa.wn in the Sulukna River, a tributary of the Nowitna River (Alt 197S).

III. SOUTH SLOPE BROOKS RANGE AREA The South Slope Brooks Range Area includes all drainages.south of the i nc1 udi ng Koyukuk and Al atna ri ver Brooks Range"anO , west of anl !h. drainages, norrh of the Yukon- Rivern including all northern tributlries ot rhe Yukon River from Kaltag to the Canadian border (map 1) (ADF&G 1eB5). HumbOait wtriref ish occur throughout_.the 1_o.wer f,oyytcu|1^3i.u.t draitrage and jn tributaries such as the Glissa River (Alt 19i8) to as. far upstream as the Jim River (Netsch 1975). Lakes in the Koyukuk draittage where humpback whjtefish have been reported jnclude Sithylemenkat (P.u..u 1978) and Iniakuk (Roguski-and Spetz 1968)' iumpUack whiiefish occur in tie Melozitnb and lower Tozitna- rivers (Alt lgg[j,-noitn.rn rributaries of the Yukon upstream of the Koyukuk River' and in rhe Ray and Dall rivers and Hess Creek (Alt 1974), tributaries near Rampart. HumpOack'whirefish are found 'in the Chandalar River, a major tributary of rhe yukorr River (Alt I974), and they-(Pearse are one of the most nunlerous species in Squaw dnd ChanOaiir lakes 1978). They--are-^also fountt rhroughout the Porcupine River and its tributaries (Alt \97-4), (Alt 1978), and Coleen including tie Sheeniek (Pearse 1978), Black 'in riu"ri (it r lgz+). i'hey' a.e one of the most numerous species 0l d

19? John Lake and also occur in Big Fish Lake cf the Sheeniek drai rtage ( Pea rse 1978 , Cra i g and Wel I s i975 ) . In the upper Yukon Ri ver, humpback whitefish have been found at the mouths of the Kandik and Tatondik rivers (Alt 1979b). iV. FAIRBANKS AREA The Fairbanks Area includes all southern dra'inages of the Yukon River from its confluence with the Tanana River, near Tanana, east to the Canadian border and including the Alaskan portion of the Fortymjle and Sixtym'i1e river dra'inages, dS wel I as the ent'ire Tanarra River warershed. This area aTso jncludes the Alaska portion of the White River drainage (nrap 1) (ADF&G 1985). Humpback whitefish are present 1n both the Yukon and Tanana river drainages of the Fairbanks Area. Lakes at elevations below 600 m that connect to a river system generally contain populations of humpback whitefish (Peckham 19ti1). In Beaver Creek, a Yukorr R'!ver tributary 'it] the Yukon Flats area, humpback whitefish are found irt the lower 2 nti (Hal I berg 1982 ). Aumpback- wh'iref ish are found throughout the Tanana drainage f ryq the lower river (Alt 1980b) to trjbutaries as far upstream as rhe Ch'isana River at the Yukon Territory border (usFl,ls 1985, Alt 1979a). Humpback wh'itefish were among the most abundant species caught il the Tanana River near Fairbankl from nrjd May to early 0ctober (Mecum 1984). Spawning, feeding, and rearing areas have been noted in the river systenr. Sha'llow-backwaters of the Tanana drainage provide a critical niOitat for young-of-the-year whitefish because few predators occur in these areas ( ibid. ). A humpback whjtefish population is present in Lake l'lirrchumina' a large, deep'1ake of the Kanti'shna River drainage, a Tanana River tributary. They are found ar al'l depths of the lake and are year-round residents (Kramer 1975, Alt 1979a). In the Chena River, humpback whitefish are rarely encountered and only occurred in the lower thena River in June and July (Tack 1971). In spring (April) and winter (December through March), they are abundant ai the mouth bt tfre Chena River, possibly migrating to and from other systems (Tack 1975). Farther upstream on ihe Tanana River, humpback whitefish are present 1 n the Delti Clearwater River, a spring-fed tributary of the Tanana (Ridder 1983). Peckham (1976) found them to be present. in low numbers jn the Goodposter River, with less than one fish per hour sanrpl ed by electroshocking. In the upper r-eaches of the Tanana River, humpback r,rhitefjsh are found irr the Nibesna and Chisana river drainages (USfWS 1985). They are preSent 'in creeks, Such aS Mo

193 Humpback rvhrrefish have been studied more extensive'ly on.thg..Chatanika Rivbr, a tributary of the lower Tanana. Whitefish frorn the Mjnto flats area ipawn in thi Charanika River (A1t 1971). Population-estimates have been made for four years for the area of the river from 12 mi obove the Elliott H'ighway bridge and the area from 10 mi below the orioge (taole 1). Thi p6pulatjbn estimates of humpba^ck- w-h.itefish in te |Z-ii secrign c.rf the'Chatan'ika River ranged from 8,000 f ish in L972 to 4,500 in 1974.

~~Table 1. Humpback Whitefish Population Estimates for the Chatanika River~~

~~Ei I i ott Hwy. Bridge Elljott Hwy. Bridge Total Number Yea r 12 Ni Above Bridge 10 Mi Below Bridge of Fish ig72a'b 5,000 3,000 8,000~~

~~1973a'b 5,000 2,000 7,000 rg7 4b 2,800 1,700 4,500~~

~~Lg]7b 2,500 2,500~~

~~Source: Kramer I978.~~

~~--- means no data were available. a Estimated by Schnabel mark-recaPture method. b Est i rna ied by vi sual counts.~~

REFERENCES ADF&G. 1985. Sport fish summary. Div. sport Fish. Booklet. 43 pp. Alt, K.T. lgit. A l'ife history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Reit. Arin. prog. rept. vol. L2. Proi. F-9-3' Job R-II. . lg71. A ljfe hisrory study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. -----fae , Feo. Aid 'in Fish Resi. Anir. prog. rept. Vol . 13. Proi. F-9'4, Job R-iI.

194 . 1974. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Fed. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest . Ann. performance rept. Vol . 15 . Proj . --.ADF-ag,F-9-6, Job R-II. 1977. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters of western Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish. Rest. Completion rept. Vol. 18. Proj. F-9-9, Job G-I-P. . 1978. A life history study of sheefish ano whitefish in Alaska. F-9-10, Job R-I I. -49gg6,Fed.AidinFishRest.Ahn.perftrrmancerept"Vol.19.Proj.. I979a. Contributions to the I ife history of the humpback - wnrtefish in Alaska. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 108(2): i56-160. . 1979b. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish jn Alaska. Proj. F-9-11, Job R-II. -4pp36,Fed.AidinFjshRest.Ann.progresSrept.Vol.20.. 1980a. Inventory and cataloging of sport r'rsh and sport fish -----GTers of Western Alaska. ADF&G, Feo. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. r"ept. Vol. 2I. Proj. F-9-I2, Job G-l-P. . 1980b. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Fed. A'id in Fish Rest. Ann. prog. rept. Vol . 21. ---IAD-F&G,Proj. F-9-12, Job R-II. . 1981a. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Fed. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. prog. repr. Vol . 22. Proj . F-9-13, Job R-II. -4ppg6,. 1981b. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish --rv-aters of Western Alaska. ADF&G, Fed- Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. rept. Vol. 22. Proj. F-9-13, Job G-I-P.

~~1983. Inventory and cataloging ttf sport f ish and sport f i sh waters of Western Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. rept. Vol. 24, Study G-I-P-8.~~

. 1984. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish ano sport fish waters of Western Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 25. Proj. F-9-16, Job G-I-P-8. Baxter, R. N.d. Unpubl. MS. ADF&G. Cited in Alt 1977. Bendock, T.N, I977. Beaufort Sea estuarilre fishery study. Pages 320-365 in Environmental assessment of the Alaskan continental shelf. Ann. repts. Vol.8. N0AA, USDI, BLM.

195 Chihu'ly, M., R. McMillan, R. Morrison, T. 01son, A. Sekeak, R. Neterer, and J. Burro. 1980. Fisheries resources along the Alaska gas pipeline route (Prudhoe Bay to the Yukon Territory) proposed by the Northwest Al aska Pi pei i ne Company. LGL Ecol ogi ca1 Research Associ ates o Fai rbanks, AK.

Craig, P.C., and J. lJel ls . I975. Fisheries jnvestigations in the Chandalar River region, rrorthwest Alaska. Chapter I in Fisheries investigations in a coaltal region of the Beaufort'Sea. Arctic Gas Biol. Rept. Ser. Vol. 34. Hallberg, J. 1982. Distribution, abundance, and natural history of_ the arctic ar.ayling in the Tanana drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 23. Proi. F-9-14, Job R-I-A. Kepler, P. 1973. Population studies of northern pike and whitefish in the Minto Flats complex with emphasis on the Chatanika River. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. prog. rept. Vol . L4. Proi. F-9-5, Job G-I-J. Kramer, M.J. I974. Inventory and cataloging of the sport fish and sport fjsh warers in jnterior Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 15. Proi. F-9-6, Job G-I-G. . 1975. Inventory and cataloging of interior Alaska waters ---TTrbanks tJistrict. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. rept. Vol. 16. Proj. F-9-7, Job G-I-G. . 1978. Evaluation of interior Alaska waters and sport fish with emphasis on managed waters, Fairbanks District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fi sh Rest. Arirr. performance rept. Vtll. 19. Proj. F-9-10, Job G-III-H. l,lcPhail, J.D., and C.C. Lindsey. 7970. Freshwater fishes of northwestern Canacia and Alaska. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. Bull. 173. 0t,tawa. 381 pp. l4ecum, R.D. 1984. Habitat utilization by fishes in the Tanana River near Fairbanks, Alaska. M.S. Thesis, Un'iv. Alaska, Fairbanks Mgrrow, J.E. 1980. The freshwater fishes of Alaska. Anchorage, AK: Alaska Northwest Publishing Co. 248 PP. lietsch, N.F. I975. Fishery resources of waters a'long the route of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline between Yukon River and Atigun Pass in north central Alaska. USFWS. Res. Publ . 724. Pearse, G.A. 1978. Inventory and cataloging of Interior waters wjth emphasis on the upper Yukon and Haul Road areas. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. rept. Vol. 19. Proi. F-9-10, Job G-I-N.

196 peckham, R.D. 1976. Evaluation of interior Alaska waters and_sport.li:n wiin emphasis on mafraged waters, Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. perfolmance rept. Vol. L7. Proi. F-9'8, Job G-III-1. . 1981. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with on managed waters - Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid'in F'ish -6p-hasisneit. Ann. perfoirmance repr. Vgl . 22. Proi. F-9-13, iob G-lII-I. Ricker, W.E. L975. Computation and interpretation of biological statistics oi fish populations. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. Bull. 191. 0ttawa. 382 pp. Ridder, W.P. 1983. A study of a typical spring-fecl stream of Interior Aiaska. ADF&G, Fed. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 24. Proi. F-9-15, Job G-III-G. Roguski, E.A., and C.E. Spetz. 1968. Inventory and catalogilS_of the sport fiih anO sport fish waters in the Interior of Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Reit. Ann. rept. Vol. 9. Proi. F-5-R-9, Job 15-A' Tack, S.L. Lg7L. Distribution, abundance, and natural history 9f Aid -!h9Fish arciic grayl ing in the Tanana Rjver drainage.. iDJqG' -Fgd. in Rest. Ann. peFformance rept. Vol . 12. Proi. F-9-3, Job R-I. . I975. Distrjbution, abundance, and natural history of the arctic Fed' Aid in Fish Rest. graytlng in the Tanana River drainage. -ADF&G, Ann. peiformance rept. Vol. 16. Job R-l-A. USFt^lS.-tion 1985. Tetlin National l^lildlife Refuge draft comprehensive conserva- p'lan, wilderness review and environmental impact statement. USDI, Anchorage, AK. 227 PP.

~~197 'r' Lake Trout Distribution and Relative Abundance l,lestern and Interior Regions~~

I. REGIONl'lIDE INFORI'IATION In this report, distribution and relative abundance information for postal survey area, shown on lake trout will be presentecl by sport fish'lake map 1. Information on the leve'l of trout sport harvest is contained in the Freshwater and Andadromous Fish Sport Use narrative found elsewhere in this volume. A. Regional Distribution La[e trout are distributed throughout many ]akes and a number of rivers in the Yukon and Kuskokwim drainages (ADF&G 1978). They are commonly associated with deep, oligotrophic lakes located in the Brooks,- Kuskokwim, and Alaska mountain ranges (ibid.). Lake trout are generally not found at lower elevations of the Yukon or Kuskokwim basins (Redick 1967, Morrow 1980). B. Regional Distribution Maps A ieries of freshwater iish distribution maps at 1:250,000 scale have been produced for this report. The categories of mapped i rrformat i on a re a s fol I ows : o General distribution " Documented presence in stream or lake o Documented overuintering areas " Documented rearing areas These maps are avallable for review in ADF&G offices of the region or may be purchased from the contract vendor responsible for their reproducti on. C. Factors Affecting Distribution In most casesr lake trout inhabit waters with a temperature range of about 6 t6 13o C (Martin and 0lver 1980). The presence of clean rubble or gravel for spawning is al so an imp_ortant determinant for I alie trout d'i stribution. More detai I s of I ake trout habitat requirements can be found in the lake trout Life History and Habidat Requirements narrative in volume 1 of this publ ication. D. Movements Between Areas lrlhole populations of lake trout do not undertake movements in definide' directions; however, individual 'lake trout travel extensively in their lake or stream environment. Lake trout generally ?eed near the water surface in the spring and then move into oeeper areas as water temperatures rise in the summer. Alt (1977) nbueO that lake trout in Kuskowim Bay drainage lakes were generally most abundant near inlet and outlet streams in July' probably because of coo]er water temperatures and greater abundance of food in these areas. In the fall, lake trout move to shallow, rocky areas to spawn, and they then disperse throughout the lake during the winter months.

~~199 lfiTrr -- ---7-1 |d (u ^\/ L~~

~~x3 o .Y ln \ 5 >z ) cI o ( -g 5 L ,\ o o- \ \1~~

~~\ G' (l, rl I L o \ .l' ) (l) \_ t- ) |r' (u 'at ,'c a L a .tl a-l' \ a Ia ti a a .= lt .ot a tn th i 9og) .t r'l t I +rE t_ L|! -.4 od 3 o a otn ,^oJ EO OL 'Fdtt'r o(uLo. o o.n ,--c til O+, +r:'go~~

~~!, 9.. :il rg> g|U Lq, +)~~

200 E. Population Size Estimation The relative abundance of lake trout in the l^lestern and Interior regions' lakes and streams has generally not been systematically assessed. Estimates of popul ation size are based on rough measures of catch-per-unit-effort gathered during lake ancl stream surveys conclucted with gi11 nets and hook and line. F. Reg'iona1 Abundance Very little information on lake trout abundance is available, and the information that has beerr collected applies only to specific lakes and streams. As a result, estimates of abundance cannot be apppropriately made at the regional level. Abundance information, where available, is contained in the discussions of the postal survey areas that follow.

II. LOWER YUKON.KUSKOKWIM AREA DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE The Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Sport Fish Postal Survey Area includes all southern drainages of the Yukon River from its confluence with the Tanana River, near Tanana, west to Kaltag; all drainages of the Yukon River south of Kaltag to the Bering Sea; the Kuskokvlinr River watershed; all warers flowing into Kuskokwim Bay; and adjacent salt water and islands. This area does not include the Pastolik River drainage and waters flowing into Norron Sound northeast of the Pastolik River nor any portion of the Tanana River watershecl (ADF&G 1985). Alt (L977) founO Iake trout'in Iakes near the headvraters ot streams fl owi ng into Kuskokwim Bay and j n I akes dt the headwaters of tributaries of rhe lower Kuskokwim River. Based on gi11 net catches, lake trout were the most abundant species found in the study area lakes during Alt's 1975 and 1976 surveys (Alt L977). No l_qku trout were found-in Eek Lake, which is at a low elevation,'is sha11ow, and has a mud bortom (ibid.). They are probably also not founo in other foothill lakes similar to Eek Lake (ibid.). In most cases, lake trout were confined solely to lakes and the reaches of streams nearest the lakes (ibid.). In the Goodnews River, however, both imniature and prespawning lake trout were found in deep poo1s, swift rjffles, and along undercut banks a'long the entire length of the river to within 10 mi of the ocean (ibid.). In Goodnews River drainage lakes, lake trout were abundant in North l'liddle Fork, South Middla Fork, Goodnews, and Canyon lakes (ibid. ). They were also present in Kukaktlim and Asriguat lakes (ibid.). In the Arolik River drainage, lake trout were abundant in Arolik Lake and were founct in the Arolik River in the area 2 mi downstream from the lake (ibid.). in the Kanektok River, lake trouf, are abundant in Kagati tlfq (ntt L977, Dlugokenski et al. 1983) and in K1ak, Kanuktik, and 0hnlik I akes (Al t 1977). In the Kuskokwim River drainage, lake trout were abundant in Aniak Lake, ar rhe heactwarers of the Aniak Rjver, and in K'isaral ik Lake artd K'isaralik Lake #2 at the headwaters of the Kisaral'ik River (ibid.). Baxter (1978) reports lake trout in l./hitefish Lake at the headwaters of ihe Hoholitna River, tributary to the Holitrra River in the Kuskokwint dra i nage.

20r Lake trour have not been found in tributaries of the lower Yukon River from the Andreafsky River upstream to the ltlelozitna River (Alt 1980, 1981, 1983, 1984). Lakes in this area, however, have not been extenstvely surveyed.

III. SOUTH SLOPI tsROOKS RANGE AREA DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE The South Slope Brooks Range Postal Survey Area includes all drainages south of the Brooks Range, west of and including the Koyukuk and Alatna river drainages, and north of the Yukon River, including all northern tributaries of the Yukon River from Kaltag to the Canadian border (ADF&G 1985). In the South Slope Brooks Range Area, lake trout have been found iri lakes of the upper Koyukuk, Chandalar, and Sheeniek rjvers. hlithin the Koyukuk drainage, they have been found during ADF&G surveys in Helpmejack and Iniakuk lakes in the Alatna River drainage (Roguski and Spetz 1968, Pearse 1978), in Wild Lake at the headwaters of the l^lild River (Roguski and Spetz 1968, Pearse 1978), and in B!g (Bob Johnson) and South Twjn lakes in the Bettles River drainage (- Kramer 1976, Pearse 1978). In the Chandalar R'iver drainage, lake trout have been reported from Chandalar Lake and Squaw Lake on the l{orth Fork (Kramer I976, Pearse 1978), from Ackerman Lake on the Middle Fork (Kramer I976, Pearse 1978), and from Blackfjsh Lake on the East Fork (Ward and Craig 1974). In the Sheenjek River drainage, they have been found in 0ld ir;hn Lake, which is drained by Vaniticlese Creek, tributary ro the Koness River (Craig and Wells I975, Pearse 1978). Lake trout have not been reported from Porcupine River drainages above the Sheenjek River or frr.rm northern tributaries of the Yukon River in Alaska above the Porcupine Riveri howevern lakes in these areas have not been extensively studied.

IV. FAIRBANKS AREA DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCI The Fairbanks Sport Fjsh Postal Survey Area includes all southerrt drainages of the Yukon River from'its confluence with rhe Tanana River, near Tanana, east ro the Canadian border and including the Alaskan portion of the Fortymile and S'ixtymile river drainaggs as well as the entire Tanana River watershed. This area also includes the Alaskan porrion of the wh jte R'iver drainage (ADF&G 1985). Lake rrour are found in lakes at the headwaters of the Delta River. They are the predominant species in Landmark GaP Lake, which drains rhr-ough an outlet stream into Round Tang'le Lake (Peckham 1972, 1976). They are also found in Glacier Lake, which drairrs through Rock Creek into Upper Tangle Lake (Peckham L976); arrd in 16.8 Mile Lake, east of Rotinct Tangle Lake (ibid.). In the Tangle Lakes system, lake trout have been founO in Landlocked Tangle, Upper Tangle, and Round Tangle lakes (Heckart 1965, 1966, Peckham 1976). Based on 1964 lake survey g'i11 net catches, the besr population of lake trout in the Tang'le Lakes system is probably found irr Landlocked Tarrgle Lake ai the southern end of this system (Heckart 1965, Peckham 1976). Lake trout are a popular target of sport fishernren in Fielding Lake, which cirains through Phelan Creek into the Delta River. Gray'ling are rhe predominant species'in this lake, but fishing for lake trout also

?02 yie'lds excellent results (Peckham 1976). Lake trout are also found'in Two Bit and Boulder lakes, both close to Fielding Lake, and 'in Sevenmile Lake, south of Fielding Lake near the Denali llighway (ibid.). Two Bit ano Boulder lakes were the source of lake trout sttrcked irtto Hardjng Lake, which is located near the mouth of the Salcha River, in 1963 (Heckart i964). Some lake trout are still found in Harding Lake, and there is some evidence that this small population is naturally reproduc'ing (Doxey 1984). Elsewhere in the Tanana drainage, lake trout have been reported only from Monte Lake in the Robertson River drainage (Heckart 1966, Peckhanr 1983) and 'in Jatahmund Lake near the Nabesna River (USFI'JS 1985). Monte Lake was the source of lake trout stocked into Harding Lake jn 1965 (Heckart 1966). Lake trout are also found in several Alaskan lakes in the hjhite River drainage. The White River flows into the Yukon R'iver in Canada. These lakes include Rock Lake and Ptarmigan Lake, which flow into Beaver Creek via Ptarmigan Creek (Pearse 1975), and Beaver Lake at the headwaters of Beaver Creek (Namtvedt 1970, Pearse 1975).

V. ENHANCEMENT Lake rrout were introduced into Harding Lake in 1939,1963, and 1965 as adults and, 'in 1967 , as f ingerl ings (Doxey 1984). In. 1965, Hord'ing Lake was also stocked with 88,000 eyed lake trout eggs (Heckart 196tt). The lake trout were stocked here because they are a desjrable species for sport fishermen, and it was hoped they would be capab'le 9f competing w'ith rhe northern pike population in the lake (Heckart 1964). Until 1981, there was no evidence of reproduction among the stocked lake trclut. Since 1981, however, six lake trout have been taken during test netting that are too young to have been stocked in 1967, indicating that some naturai reproduction must be taking place (Doxey i984). The contribution of this stocking prograrn to the sport fishery has, however, so far been negligible (ibid.).

REFERENCES ADF&G. L978. Alaska's fisheries atlas. Vol . 2 !-n.f . Mclean and K.J. Delaney, conrps.]. 43 pp. + 153 maps. . 1985. Sport fish survey. Div. Sport Fish. Booklet. 43 pp. Alt, K.T. 1977. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters of l,lestern Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Completion rept. Vol. 18. Proj. F-9-9, Job G-I-P. . 1980. Inventory and cataloging of spc)rt fish and sport fish whters of Western Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. pe rforma nce rept. Vol. 27. Proj. F-9-I2, Job G-l-P.

~~203 . 1981. Inventory and cataIoging of sport fish and sport fish waters csf Western Al aska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance repf,. Vol. 22. Proj. F-9-13, Job G-I-P.~~

. 1983. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sPort fi sh waters of [,/estern Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 24. Proj. F-9-15, Job G-I-P-8. . 1984. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sporE f ish waters of Western Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Ajd in Fish Rest. Ann. perforrnance rept. Vol. 25. Proi. F-9-16, Job G-I-P-8. Baxter, R. 1978. Kuskokwim stream catalog. Unpubl. rept. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish, Bethel. Craig,'River p.C., and J. t,lells. L975. Fisheries investigations_in the Chandalar region, l'{qrtheast Alaska. Chapter 1 in P.C. Craig, -€d. Fisheries lnvestigations in a coasta'l region of t[e- Beaufort Sea. Canad'iarr Arctic Gas Study Co. B'iol . Rept. Ser., Vol. 34. Dlugr.rkenski,- C., T. Wagner, and R. Weide. 1983. Kanektok River fishery invesrigations, 1963. USFWS, King Salmon Fisheries Resource Station' King Salmon, AK. Doxey,-iakes M. 1984. Population studies of game fish and evaluation of managed in the Saicha District with enrphasis on Birch Lake. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 25. Proj. F-9-16, Job G-III.K. Heckart, L. 1964. Inventory ano cataloging of the_ sport fi.sh and !port fiih warers'in the'inteiior of Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Job completlon rept. Vol . 5. Proi. F-5-R-5, Job 13-A. . 1965. Irrventory and cataloging of the sport fish_and lPort fish ----Jffiers in the interior of Alaska- ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Job completion rept. Vol. 6. Proi. F-5-R-6, Job 15-A. . i966. inventory and cataloging of the sport fish and sport fish ---luaTers in the interioi of Alaska.- ADF&G, Fed. Aid in F'ish Rest. Ann. rept. progress. Vol. 7. Proi. F-5-R-7, Job 15-A. Kramer, M.J, L976. Inventory and cataloging of Interior Alaska waters' ChantJalar River drainage. ADF&G, Fecl. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann' performance rept. Vol . 17. Proi. F-9-8, Job G-i-N. Martin, N.V., and C.H.0lver. 1980. The lake charr, Salvelinus namaycush. piges ZC)S-Zll in E.K. Balon, od. Charrs: Salmonio fishes of the ge!!: Sa'lvelinus. The Hauge, l,letherlands: Dr. t,l. Junk bv Publishers. 9?5 pp.

204 Morrow, J.E. 1980. The freshwater fishes of Alaska. Anchorage, AK: Alaska Northwest Publ ishing Comparry. 248 pp. Namtvedt, T.B. 1970. Inventory and cataloging of the sport fish ano sport fish waters in Interior Aiaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid'in Fish Rest. Ann. rept. progress. Vol. 11. Proi. F-9-2, Job 15-A. pearse, G.A. 1975. Invenrory and cataloging of the sport fish and sport fish waters of Interior Alaska - Tok District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 16. Proi. F-9-7, Job G-I-J. 1978. Inventory and cataloging of interior waf,ers with emphas'is on the upper.Yukon ariO the Haul Roao areas. ADF&G' Fed. A'id in Fish Rest. Ari;. performance rept. Vol. 19. Proi. F-9-10, Job G-I-N' peckham, R.D. 1972. Inventory and cataloging of the sport fish and sprot fish waters 'in Interior Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest- Ann. progress rept. Vo'l . 13. Proi. F-9-4, Job G-I-G. . 1976. Evaluation of Interior Alaska ano Spgrt fish with emphasis on managed water, Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann' performance rept. Vol. L7. Proi. F-9-8, Job G-liI-I. . 1983. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with s on mandged waters - Del ta Di stri ct. ADF&G, Fed. Aid i n Fi sh --EphasiRelt. Ann. performance rept. vol . 24. Proi. F-9-15, Job G-III-I. Re6ick, R.R. 1967. A review of f iterature on lake trout Iife history-with notes on Alaskan management. ADF&G Informational Leaflet 111. 19 pp. Roguski,- E.A., and C.E. Spetz. 1968. Inventory ano catalr.rgin-g- of the spglt fiih anO sport fish waters in the interjor of Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aio in Fish Re!t. Ann. prog. rept. Vgl. 9. Proj. F-5-R-9, Job 15-4. USFl^lS. 1985. Tetl in National Wi lcll ife Refuge

~~205~~

~~Least Cisco Distribution and Abundance Arctic, Westernn and interior Regions~~

I. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION Both anadromous and freshwater forms of the least c'isccl are present atid genera'l 'ly abundant rhroughout the i nl anct areas of the Western and Inrerior regions and in the nearshore coastal marine zone of the Western Region. The species is present in most streams and lakes north of the Al aska Range (Morrow 1980 ). They ascend the Yukon Ri ver upstream at least Js far as Circle (McPhail and Lindsey 1970). Alt (pers. comm.) found them within 20 mi of the Canadiarr border.

II. AREAS USED SEASONALLY AND FOR LIFE FUNCTiONS Anadromous forms of least cisco generally spend the summer tnonths feeding in the nearshore coastal marine zone and migrate'into the lower reaches of coastal rivers and river deltas in the fall to spawn atld overvinter. it is presumed that they cannot wjthstand the subzero ternperatures and 'increased salinitjes present in this nearshore environment in wjnter. However, high productivity and abundance of food in the nearshore marine environment during summer allows greater growth rates and fosters the greater maxjmum age attained by the anadrontous fornrs of Ieast cisco (McPhaiI and Lindsey 1970, Scott and Crossntan 1e73 ) . A nrigratory freshwater form of least cisco alscl exists. In the Innoko River, a major tributary to the lower Yukon River, mature least cisco begin dn upstream migration in late spring, or soon after ice-out. They move'into lakes an

~~207 " Documented rearing areas o Documented spawning and/or rearing in an unspecified portion of stream or lake o Species known to be in the sYstem~~

III. FACTORS AFFECTING DISTRIBUTIOI'I Varjous forms of least cjsco are present and abundant throughout the Western and Interior regions. The species, dS is typical. of Coregonicts, shows a high olgree of both_morphological ang behavioral diffirences between loCal populations. Some populations became landlocked arrd have evolved separately, whereas other populations of least cisco have recently invaObd prevtous'ly glaciated watersheds (Lindsey 1981). Interspecific competition, predation, migration patterns, and the physical anO chemical'characteristics of a system are some factors affelting least cisco distribution. (For more details, see the least cisco Life Hisrory and Habitat Requirements narrative in volume 1 of chis report. )

IV. MOVEI,IENTS BETWEEN AREAS In the Wesrern and Interior regions, nrigratory and nonmigratory populations of leasi c'isco are general ly abundant. Nonmjgratory poP!lat'ions are typica'l'ly found in the numerous lakes of both .regions. Migratory and/oi'ana,lr-omous forms of least cisco occupy the Yukon a.nd Kuskokwim livers and mdny of their tributary lakes and streams. Mature least c.isco begil nrigrating-spring-, upstreanr iri che Yukon, Innoko, and Chaianjka rivers in lare or soon after ice-out (Alt 1983, Kepler 1973). They gove into numer-ous lakes and sloughs to feeo during summer. In to lare summer (August), they continue their upstream -migration. spawning areas (Hlt i983, Kepler 1?Z?). -At some tine after spawning' they nro-ve downstream agairr (Al t 1983). Anadromous least cisco have a sim-ilar patterrr of movement, but they spend the summer months fee!!!9 and mi grati ng al ong the Oracki sh, nea-rshore coastal ztrrre (Barton 1979). In Aug-ust ariq September, they begin a return migration- to the river Oelrai and coastal streams to spawn. Spawning occurs in iate S_eptember and Qctober, after which the aoults remain in freshwater deltas and river channels over winter. Larval least cisco hatch in late May or early June. In the Innoko pi ver, young-of-the-yea r soon after hatchi ng begi n a downstreatn mrgraiio-n to-deeper, s'lower waters in the lower Yukon River, where they rear (Alt 1983). Kepler (1973) reported a s'imilar downstream movement of young-of-the-year from the upper Chatanika River.

V. POPULATION SIZE ESTIMATION In the upper Chatarrika River, near Fairbanks, Kepler (i923) estimated that 16,500 least cisco spawned irr the area between t2 km above and 16 km Oilow the El I iott higfrway-visu-al bridge. This est'imate of spawning abundance was derjved from counts in the I972 season (Kepler lg73). in 1983, placer'rurbidity rnining in the headwaters of the Chatanika River caused excess'ive in tne defined spawning area. Attempts to

208 determine the abundance of spawning least ciscc were precluded because of turbidity (Hallberg 1984). Barton (1979) sampled nearshore coastal areas (0 to 6 m depth) of Norton Sound, Port Clarence, arrd the Yukon River delta from iune through 0ctober in 1976 and 1977. Leasi cisco were presertt at all sample locations and were arnong the 10 most frequently encountered species in all areas. Abundance was indicated by catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) data collected with beach sejnes and gill rrets. Beach seine CPUE of least cisco was highest in the Imuruk Basin and in the Golov'irr Bay area. The Imuruk Basin was sanrpled only cluring two periods in 1977 (7-2L July and 22 August-6 September), and CPUE of least cisco was very high at both tinies. In the Golovin Bay area, CPUE of least cisco was highest between late July and early September. Beach seines tended to capture smaller and/or younger least cisco, whereas gi11 nets captured larger and/or older fish (Bartorr 1979). Gill net CPUE data indicated that high abundances of least cisco were present in Golovin Bay and inner Norton Sound (Cape Denbigh to Cape Stebbins) and in the Imuruk Basin and Port Clarence areas (ibid.). In'Golovin Bay, gi11 net CPUE inclicated relatively high least cisco abundance from early July through early 0ctober. In inner Norton Sound, least c'isco were abundant, as irrdicated by gill net CPUE data, between late July and mid August. In Port Clarence,'least cisco were abunclant in gi11 net CPUE samples in July and early August but were sigrrificantly less abundant froni August to 0crober. Catches in the Imuruk Basin indicated very high relative abundance when sampled in late August and late September. Gill net sampling was not conducted during other periods jn Imuruk Bas'in (Barton reTs). No population or abundance estjnrates are available for other areas in uhe Western and Interior regions.

REFERENCTS Alt, K.T. 1983. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish arro sport fish water of Western Alaska. ADF&G, Div. Sport Fish, Fed. Aid in Fjsh Rest. and Anad. Fish Studies. Study G-I-P-8. 38 pp. . 1985. Personal communicat'icln. ADF&G, Div. Sport F'ish, ---E:frbanks. Bartorr, L.H. I979. Finfish resource surveys in Norton Sound and Kotzebue Sound. Pages 75 to 313 in Environmental assessment, of the Alaskan continental shelf. Final reports of principal investigators. Vol. 4: Biological studies. BLM, NOAA, 0CSEAP. 238 pp. Ha11berg, J. 1984. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with emphasis on managed waters - Fa'irbanks District. ADF&G, Div. Sport Fish, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. and Anad. Fish Studies. Study G-III-H, Vol . 25:50-84.

?09 Kepler,' P. 1973. Population studies of northern pi!e a1! whitefish in the Mintg Flats conrplex with emphasis on the Chatanika River. ADF&G, Div. Sport Fish, Fed. A'id in Fish Rest. Study F-9-5, G-II-J, Vol. 14:59-81.

Lrldsey, C.C. 198i. Stocks are chameleons: plasticity ]n 9_i_11 rakers of F'ish. Aquat. 38 2L,497'I cbregonid f ishes. Can. J. Sci., '506. McPhail, J.D., and C.C. Lindsey. 1970. Freshwater fishes of northern Canada and Alaska. Fish. Res. Bci. Can., Bull. 173. 381 pp. l'4orrow, J.E. i980. The f reshwater f i shes of Al aska. Anchorage , Ak. : Alaska I'lorthwest Publ ishing Co. 248 pp. Scott, hl.8., and E.J. Crossman. L973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fish. Res. Bd. Can., Bull.184. 966 PP.

~~210 Northern Pike Distribution and Abundance Western and Interior Regions~~

I. REGIONt.lIDE INFORMATION The ctistribut'ion and abundance of northern pike will be discussed by ADF&G, Division of Sport Fish, postal survey areiis (map 1) in this report. The l^lestern drrd Interior regions include the Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area (Area V), the South Slope Brooks Range Area (Area Y), and the Fairbanks Area (Area U). Sport harvest informat'ion is preienteO in rhe Sport Use of Freshwater artd Anadromous Fish narrative in this volume. A. Regional Distribution ot"tghs i nterconnected Pi ke are found i n sl ow-movi ng waters'large of sl , lakes, and the lower reaches of rivers. Pike distribut'ion includes the lowland areas of the Yukon' Kuskokwim, and Tanana river ctra'inages. The largest populations of pike are. found'in meanoering river-s'lough areas such ds the Yukon and Minto flats (ADF&G 1978). B. Areas Used Seasonal'ly and for Life Functions A series of freshwaier fish djstribution ntaps at 1:250,000 scale have been produced for this report. Th.u categories of mapped informaiion are 1) general distribution, 2) documented.presence in stream or lake,' i) documented spawning areaS, 4) documented overvtintering areas, and 5) documented rearing at'eas. C. Factors Affect'ing Dlstribution Pi ke sufimer di srribution has been correl ated w'i th habi tat characterized by shal low depths, proximity to _.shore,. aquat'ic vegetation, and a mud bottoni (Diana et- al. 1977). Pjke are a fr6shwater fish and can toleraie slight]y brackish water (Scott and Crossman 1973). Pike occur in alkaline waters (McCarraher Le62). lljintir distribution of pike may be determined b1 ciissolved oxygen concentration; that is, durirrg the winter pike congregate irt dreas with deep, swift-moving water where dissolved oxygen.concentra- iions are higher (Hallnerg 1984). l,lore detailed information regarding fact-ors that affect distribution dppears irl the northern pike Life History and Habitat Requirements narrative. D. Movements Between Areas summer in As indicated above, 'pike generally spawn and spend the 'lowi quiet, shal I ow areis and overvi nter i n areas wi th deeper, f ng dater. In the Fairbanks area, Minto flats pike nrove up the rivers in spring before the ice melts. They spawn in shallow areas, then dispbrse-for the summer. Adult pike usual'ly moYe downstream irr the'fall before the waters freeze, and mature pike winter in the lower Tglovana or Tanana rivers. Some pike overuinter in areas of Minto flats such as Grassy Slough or the Chatanika River, which maintain good water flows throughout the winter (ibid.). Immature

~~?IL 7F--7-1 .o c, (rn.tJ !~~

~~3 nws Jo J tn >z= I oE -v =~~

~~'-(lJ o= J~~

~~(o (u L~~

th IE q) l- '.\ to I t. o 't- L a tf' o a- t a .t4 v, rts o, .jr lt PC: Lct qod th tn -v, thogo OL .r CO Ol (lJo Lo. o OtJl l--c Iil O+r +J=go E c.. :I |E> gr! q)lLo 3 P< vl 7vro.. J .(E 11D ! Orr .E ,rt =u-

212 pike remairr longer in the main rivers of the flats before moving downstream (Cheney I972). Little is known about seasonal movements of pike in the Kuskokwinr drainage, but they probably move out of the tributaries and into rhe main river in late fall and w'inter (Alt 1977). In ear'ly May before breakup, pike have been caught at the mouths of tributaries. These fish were probably moving upstream. Pike movements in the Innoko River of the lower Yukon drainage are similar to those in the Kuskokwim. Pike overwinter in the main river and move into spawning areas lclcated in tributaries during in May and June (Alt 1983). The pike then return to the main river and lower reaches of sloughs for feeding during the summer. E. Population Size Estimation Nclrthern pi ke have been sanrp"l ed i n many dra i nages of the Western and Interior regiclrrs; however, few abundance estimates are available. Sampling gear has included gili rrets, seines, hook ancl line, dip nets, fyke nets, and electrofishing. In some areas, samp'ling has been standardized to obtain estimates of fish caught per net hour, net day, or net night. Generally, sampling has not been standardized between years or between areas, so that only the relative abundance in an area can be assessed. F. Regional Abundance The largest populations of p'ike in the l^Jestern and Interior regions are found in meandering river-slough areas such as the Yukon Flats area in the upper Yukon River drainage and the Minto flats area in the Tanana River drainage (ADF&G 1978). Estimates of relative abundance will be discussed when available in the fol lowing sections.

II. LOl^'lER YUKON.KUSKOKWIM AREA The Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area includes all southern drainages of the Yukon River from its confluence with the Tanarra River, near Tanana, west to Kaltag; all drainages of the Yukon River south of Kaltag to the Bering Seai the Kuskokwim River watershed; all waters flowing into Kuskokwim Bay; and adjacent salt water and islands (map 1). This area does not 'incl ude the Pastol i k Ri ver drai nage and uiaters f l owi ng i nto Norton Sound northeast of the Pastolik River nor any portiort of the Tanana River watershed (ADF&G 1985). Norchern pi ke distribution includes the lowland dreas of the Yukon and Kuskokwim rjvers (ADF&G 1e78 ) . Pike occur in many Kuskokwim River tributaries but are rare'in the Kuskokwim Bay drainage, which includes the Goodnews, Kanektok, and Arolik rivens, which flow directly into Kuskokwinr Bay (Alt 1977). No pike were found'in the deeper Kuskokwim River lakes, but in shal'lr.rw Eek Lake, northern pike were the only fish sampled (ibid.). Pike also occur at least 70 mi up the Eek River, which is slower movirrg than some of the other sf,reams of the area. Pike have been sampled 16 mi up the Aniak River; above this point the current becomes quite swift and provides poor habitat for pike (jbid. ). Pike occurin tributaries of the lower Kuskokwim, including the Aniak, Tuluksak, Kisaralik,

213 Kasigluk, and Kwethluk rivers (ibid. ). Farther upstream on the Kuskokwim, pike occur in the Holitna River and in tributaries of the Hohol i ina Ri ver (A'lt 1981) . Pike are distributed throughout most of the lower Yukon River and its lakes, sloughs, arrd slower-moving tributaries (Alt 1980). Pike are abundant'in the lower reaches of the Andreafsky River, a tributary near the mouth of the Yukon River with slow-moving water and many sloughs (Alt 1981). Pike are present in many other tributaries of the lower Yukon R'iver, such as the Nulato and Anvik rivers, which are swift- moving rivers with pike in upstream lake and slough areas (Alt 1980). The Khotol, Bonasila, and Innoko rivers are slower-moving streams in which pike are more abundant (ibid.). Everr 'in these ilower-moving streams, lakes and sloughs are the main pike habitat. No pike were captured in the main Innoko River, but they were numerous in side channels, lakes, and sloughs and were the most widely distributed fish in the Inncko drainage (Alt 1983). Pike have also been taken in the Yuki and Nowitna rivers, tributaries farther upstream on the Yukon River (Alt 1978).

III. SOUTH SLOPE BRCOKS RANGE AREA The South Slope Brooks Range Area includes all drainages south of the Brooks Range, west of and incl uding the Koyukuk and Alatna river drainages, and north of the Yukon River, including all northern triburaries of rhe Yukon River fronr Kaltag to the Canadian border (map 1) (ADF&G 1e65). Pike occur in rnany tributaries of the upper Yukon River and in lakes on the south slope of the Brooks Range. Pike are abundant in the slow- nroving upper reaches of the Meloz'itna River (Alt 1981). Pike occur in the Chandalar Rrver (Craig and Wells I975), the Porcup'ine River (Alt 1974), and the Kandik, Nation, and Tatonduk rivers (Alt 1979). P'ike have been found irr lakes of the Koyukuk River drainage, including Norutak, Helpmejack, Iniakuk, Big, l.lild, and Sithy'lemenkat lakes (Pearse 1978, Roguski and Spetz 1968e, Kramer 7976,\. In the Chandalar drairrage, pike are present in Squaw, Chandalar, and Vunittsieh lakes (Pearse L978, Kramer L976).

IV. FAIRBANKS AREA The Fairbanks Area includes all southern drainages of the Yukon River from its confluence with the Tanana River, near Tanana, east to the Canad'ian border and including the Alaskan portion of the Fortymile and Sixtymile rjver drainages, dS wel I as the entire Tanana River watershed. This area also includes the Alaska portion of the lllhite River drainage (nrap 1) (ADF&G 1985). Pike are oisrributed throughout the waters of the Tanana River drainage, from headwater Stp€drrrS such as the Chisana River to Fish Lake near the mouth and in many other lakes (Cheney 1972). Lakes at elevations lower charr 2,000 ft that connect to a river system generally contain native populat'ions of northern pike, whereas landlocked lakes are usually biirren (Peckham 1983).

214 Many of the largdr lakes contain populatiorrs of pike. Lake George, on rhe upper Tanana River supports a'large sport harvest of northern pike ( ibid. ). In Haroing Lake, pike were the rrost abundant species (Hattberg 1979). Pike are also present in Healy, Tetlin, and l.lansfield lakes alorrg the upper Tanarra Rjver (Cheney 1972). Pike are present in many tributaries of the Tanana River. Pike have been captured in the Goodpaster and Chena rivers but are not very abundant relative to the populat'ions of grayl ing arrd rouno whitefish (Tack I973,1975). Large populatiorrs of pike are present iri the Mjnto flats (ADF&G I97B); pike are more abundant in the northwestern and southeastern sections of the flats (Cheney 1971). The northwestern sectitrn consists of the middle section of the Tolovana River, Montana Creek, Windy Lake, Uncle Sam Creek, and many connecLing sloughs. The southeastern section consists of the lower Chatanika River, Goldstream Creek, ftlinto Lakes, and interconnecting sloughs. The other sections of the Minto flats are characterized by confined stream channels, few sloughs, and isolatecJ lakes and ponds that are unsuitable pike habitar. The Yukon Flats, a broad flood plain with numerous shallow lakes in the upper Yukon drainage, a'lso supports'large populations of northern p'ike (ADF&G 1978). in a survey of the lakes in the flats west of Circle City to the Dalron Highway bridge, pike occurred in the larger lakes with inlets and outlets (Hallberg 1983). Pike occur in many lakes of the Beaver and Birch Creek drainages (Kramer and Hallberg 1982). Pike have been taken 35 mi upstream in the Charley River, a tributary of the upper Yukon River (Holmes 1983).

REFIRENCES ADF&G. 1978. Alaska's fisheries atlas. Yo1. 2 !-R.F. Mclean and K.J. Delaney, comps.]. Juneau. 43 pp. + nraps. 1985. Sport fish survey. Div. Sport Fish. Booklet. 43 pp. Alt, K.T. 1974. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish. Rest. Ann. perfornrance rept. Vol. 15. Proj. F-9-6, Job R-II-C.

1977. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport r'i sh waters of [.Jestern Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fjsh Rest. Compl et i orr repE. Vol. 18. Proj. F-9-9, Job G-I-P. . 1978. A ljfe history study of sheefish and whrtefish 1rr Alaska. -----ffiF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Reit. Alrri. performance rept. Vol. 19. Proj. F-9-10, Job R-I I. . 1979. Inventory and cataloging of sporr fish and sport t'ish waters of Western Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aiq in F'ish Rest. Ann. perfonmance rept. Vol. 20. Proj. F-9-11, Job G-I-P.

~~2r5 . 1980. I rrventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters of Western Al aska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performancc rept. Vol. 21. Proj. F-9-).2, Job G-I-P.~~

. 1981. Inventory and catalclging of sport fish and sport fish lvaters of Western Al aska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 22. Proj . F-9-13, Job G-I-P. . 1983. Irrventory and cataloging of sport fi sh and sport fi sh water of Western Al aska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Resr. Ann. performance rept. Vol . ?4. Proj. F-9-i5, Study G-I-P-8. Cheney, W.L. L97L. Life history investigations of northern pike in the Tanana River drdinage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. prog. rept. Vr.rl. L2. Proj. F-9-3, Study R-lII. . L972. Life hjstory investigations of northern pike in the Tanana ---Rlver drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. prog. rept. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. prog. rept. Vol. 13. Proi. F-9-4' srudy R-iII.

Craig,-River P.C., and i. Wells, 1975. Fisheries investigations in the Chandalar region, northeast Alaska. Chapter 1 i.n P.C. Craig, €d. Fisheries investigitions in the coastal region of [h-e Beaufort Sea. Canadian Arcttc Gas Study Co., Biol. Rept. Ser., Vol. 34. Djana, J.S., W.C. Mackay, and M. Ehrman. t977. Movements and habitat preference of northern pike Esox lucius in Lake St. Anne, Alberta, banada. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc.-T06'(6) :55G555. llallberg, J. L979. Evaluation of malragement practices in four selected lakes of Interior Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 20. Proi. F-9-11, Job G-III-J. . 1983. Evaluation of Irrterior Alaska waters and sport fish with ernpnasis on managed waters - Fairbanks District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in - Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept . Vol . 24 . Proi . F-9-15 , Job G- I i I.H.

. 1984. Evaluation of Inier:ior Alaska waters and sport fish with emphasis on rnanaged waters - Fairbanks District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 25. Proi . F-9-16 , Job G- I I I.H. Holmes, R. 1983. Population structure, migratory patterns, and habitat requirenrents of the arctic grayling. ADF&G, Fecl. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performarrce rept. Vol . 24. Proj. F-9-15, Job R-I-A.

216 Kramer, M.J. I976. Inventory and cataloging of Interior Alaska waters' ChanOalar River drainagi. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fjsh. Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 17, Proi. F-9-8, Job G-I-N. Al aska waters Kramer, M. J. , and J. Hal l berg . 198'1. Eva'luati on of Interi or and sporr fish w'ith emihasis on rnanaged waters - Fairbanks D'istrict. ADF&G, feO. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 23. Proi' F-9-14, Job G-III-H. McCarraher, D.B. 1962. Northern pike, Esox lucius in alkaline lakes of Nebraska. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 9I:326-329. pearse, G.A. 1978. Inventory and cataloging of inte.rjor waters with emphasis on the upper Yukdn and Haul Road areas. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 19. Proi. F-9-10, Job G-l-N' peckhanr, R. 1983. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with empnas'is on managed waters - Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Ajd in Fish Reit. Ann. perfolrmance rept. Vol . 24. Proi. F-9-15, Job G-III-I. Roguski,- E.A., and C.E. Spetz. 1968. Inventory ano catalclgin_g_of the spolt fish and sport fish waters in the Interior of Alaska. ADF&G, Fe9.-Aid irr Fjsh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 9. Proi. F-5-R-9' Job 15-A. Scott, W.8., and E.J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. F'ish. Res. Bd. Can. Bull. 184. Ottawa. 966 pp.

Tack, S.L. Ig73. Distribution, dbundance, and natural history 9f -!h9 A.DF&G, Ai d i n Fi sh arcrl. gruyl i ng i n the Tanana Ri ver drai nag-e._ -Fed. Rest. Ann. prog. rept. Vol. 14. Proi. F-9-5, Job R-I' . L975. Distribution, abundance' and natura'l history clf the arctic Tanana River F3o-' in Fish Rest. grayl ing in the -drainage. -APF&$'. iid Ann. peiformance rept. Vol 16. Proi. F-9'7, Job R-I-A'

~~217~~

~~liainbow Trout Distribution and Relative Abundance tlestern and Interior Regions~~

I. REGIONAL DiSTRIBUTION AND RELATIVE ABUNDANCE Rainbow trout have a I imited distribution in the [,Jestern and Interior itglons. The Kuskokwim River represents lhe most westerl_y distribution of natural populations of rainbow trout in the world (Alt 1977)- The Aniak River'mirks the farthest upstream location in the Kuskokwim River of a natura'l]y reproducing population of rainbows (ibid. ). Rainbow trouf ari founo iri itt major streams in the Kuskokwim River drainage except the Tuluksak anO Eek rivers. They are not pres.ertf,. itr the tributary streams that enter the Kuskokwim from tfre north (ibid.). Rajnbow trout have been captured at the iunction of the Hol'irna and Kuskokwinr r.ivers, 125 mi upitream from Aniak, but they do not enter the slow-moving water of the Holjtna (ibid.). Rainbow trout in the Kuskokwim irea are associated with swift-running streams, from the headwaters to near the mouths, and are seldom present in slower-moving srreams or lakes (ibid.). in the Kuskokwim Bay oiainages, rainbow trout are present in Goodnews -the and they lut., which forms headwaters of Goodnews River, 'lhey. 9re abundant in the Goodnews River (Alt !977 , USF|,lS l9B5). . are..also pi.iint in Arolik Lake and abundant in Arolik R'iver (ibid.). Maior concentrations occur jn the Kanektok River, and they are.present in fagiri Lake and in Kanuktik and Klak creeks, tributaries to the Kaiektok River (Alt 1977; USFWS 1983, 1985). Kuskokwim River drainage, rajnbow trout are abundant iri the In the (A1t Kwethluk ano- iaiigluk rivers, f.inutaries of the lower Kuskokwim tgll). They are ibundant in the Kisaralik and Aniak rivers bur absent from Kisaraj'ik and Aniak'lakes (ibid.). A number of lakes jn the Tanani River va1ley near Fairbanks and Delta Junction are stocked with hatchery-reared rainbow trout to improve fish'ing opportunities for local residents (taute 1)' iI. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION MAPS A series ot freshwater fish distribut'ion nraps at 1:250,000 scale trave been produced for this report. The categories of ryapped information i.. fi ge;eraf distributioh, 2). documented presence in stream or lake' :l-ooiu,i"nr.d spu*ning areai, +) clocumented overw'irrtering dreas, and 5) documented rearing areas.

III. FACTORS AFFECTING DISTRIBUTION 0rre of the l imit'ing factors of rainbow trout d jstribution in the area is water level fluituations. Stranded juvenile trout have been found in pocfcets of water on gravel bars isoliteO from the nlain river (USFWS igg!I. nt t Og77) fouid juveniles in slow-nroving water of the main rivers, under'tangied rooti of downed trees, and at rhe edge of gravel bars in shallow water and in side streams.

~~?19 lable 1. Water Bocies Stocked bJith Rainbow Trout in the Fairbanks Area, I 96 7 -850~~

~~Water Body Communi ty Year(s) Stocke~~

8I l'li 1e P'it Shaw Creek 1966-68-71 Berry Pond Dot Lake T97L Bi rch Lake Bi rch Lake 1966-72 ,74 ,76-84 Black Rapids Lake Donnel 1y 1968-75 Bluff Cabin Lake Delta Junction 1980,83 ,85 Chena Lake Fairbanks 1982-84 Clear Lake Clear r972 Clear Pond Clear 1966 ,68,73 Cool Lake Fai rbanks 1984 Craig #1 Johnson River 1969,71 Craig Lake Johnson River 1966,68 ,7r,74 Crystal Lake Paxson r97 4 Donna Lake Gerstle River 1966 ,68-74 ,80 ,83 ,85 Dune Lake Nenana 1984 E'ielson Sewage Lagoon Ei e'lson AFB 1966 Four l4ile Lake Tetl i n 1984 Ft. Greely #2 Ft. Greely 1974,82 Ft. Greely #7 Ft. Greely 1973,83 Ft. Greely #B Ft. Greely 1973,83 Ft. Greely #9 Ft. Greely 1973,83 Geskakmina Lake Nenana 1983,84 Hrdden Lake Eiel son AFB 1982 Jan Lake Dot Lake 1966,69 ,71,73,76 Kettle Rock Lake Nabesna 1984 Koole Lake Bi rch Lake r97 4 ,78,80 ,82 ,83 ,85 Li sa Lake Johnson River 1966,69,7 r,73,76,80,84 Little Oonna Lake Gerstle River 1966 ,68-7 4 ,79 ,83 ,85 Little Harding Lake Aurora Lodge 1981 Lrtrle Lisa Lake Johnson Ri ver 1971 Itlark Lake Ft. Greely 1966,68,69,7r-73,80,82,83 North Twin Lake Ft. Greely 1966,75,82,83 l97r-77,79,80,82-85 Quartz Lake Big De'lta Rainbow Lake Big Delta r97l ,7 4,79 ,83 ,85 Rapios Lake Delta Junction 1980,84 Sansi ng Lake Clear 1967 Slate Lake Hea'ly 1984 Sourh Twin Lake Ft. Greely 1966,82 Spencer Lake Fairbanks 1967

~~Sources: ADF&G 1984, 1985. js 'it a a Some i985 sttlck'ing i s i ncl ucled in th I ist; however, is not conrpiete record for 1985.~~

~~?20 The djstribution of adult rainbow trout appears to be related to the tlistribution of salmon. The trout feed on salmott fry and follow spawning salmon to fee~~

IV. MOVEMENTS BETWEEN AREAS Rainbow trout populations in the Kuskokwim area are stream dwellers and seldom enter lakes. No anadromous populations exist in the area (ibid.). In the Aniak, Kisaralik, Kasjgluk, and Kwethluk rivers, trout congregate in deep holes in the rivers during wjnter 9ld are usual'ly disiriSuteo farther downstream rhan in the summer (ibjd. ). After breakup, the trout disperse and begin an upstream movement (ibid.). DurinE ihe summer, rainbow trout are scattered and difficult to sanrple. Irr fa]l, after the coho salmon migration has slowed and water levels drop, trout become more concentrated. In Kuskokwim lSay streams, residents report capturing rainbow trout closer to the mouth of the rivers ouring the winter and early spring than during the summer (ibid.).

REFERENC ES ADF&G. 1984. Fish release records for Regions 01, 02 and 03. Div. FRED. 07 Aug. 1984. Unpubl. computer runs. 209 pp. . 1985. Fish release records for Region 03, 1984 and 1985. Div. 19 Sept. 1985. Unpubl . computer runs . 15 pp. -TRE0.Alt, K.T. I977. Invetttory and cataloging of sport 'l'ish and sport fi sh waters of Western Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Ajd in Fish Rest. Complet'ion rept. Vol. 18. Proi. F-9-9, Job G-I-P. usFl.ls. 1983. Kanekrok River fishery investigations. King Salmon Fisheries Resource Station, King Salmon, AK. 26 pp.

~~1985. Tog'iak National |l/ildlife Refuge draft contpreherrsive . 'impact conservati on plan, wilderness review and errvironmental statement. Region 7, Anchorage, AK. 296 PP.~~

~~??T~~

~~Salmon Distribution and Abundance Western and Interior Regions~~

I. REGIONh|IDE I NFORMATION The five species of Pacjfic salmon indigenous to North America are found in tfre marine and fresh waters of the Western and Interior regions. The discussion of individual species' distrjbution and abindance wjll be presented by ADF&G commercial fisheries management area. There are two such management areas within the region: the Kuskokwim and Yukon areas. Each area is divided into districts that'in turn may be separated into subdistricts for fishery management purposes, such as'regulating seasons and weekly fishing periods. l'laps touirO in the Western-and Inlerior Regions Reference Map Atlas show the boundary I ines of the management areas. In addition, deta'i led descripiions of the boundaries and maps dep'ict'ing the_ distrjcts are contaihed in the salmon cornmerc'ial harvest narrat'ive located in the salmon Human Use portion of this volume. A. Regi ona'l Di stri buti on Salmon, in one life stage or another, are found with'in the Western and Interior regions'- freshwater system year-round. Their presence is most noticeable, though, during t!. timg that adults return to spawn. Information pertaining to the timing of salmon runs is proviOed in the management area narratives (sections II. and III.'be1ow). It shoulci be noted, however, that within each management area selected salmon species are managed to.ach.ieve and ma'in[ain populations at a level of maximum susta'ined yie1d. Therefore,' ttre distribution, tim'ing, and abundance information needed to manage a given species may be well documented in one area, but little data may be available for the same species in another area. B. Areas Used Seasonally and for Life Functions To supplement the distribution 'information presented in text, a series'of 1:250,000-scale reference maps have been produced 'uhat depict documented anadromous fish streams and anadromous fjsh sti^eam watersheds within the |lJestern and Interior regions. The anadromous stream maps show the following: o species present and documented upstream migrat'ion. po'ints o Unsurveybd areas, where jt is not known if anadromous fislt are found in the sYstem ' o Documented nonpresence of anadromous fish (e.9.' in glacier fields or in the areas above barriers to migration, such as waterfalis or raPids) The reference maps have been reduced and comb'ined and are included in the 1:1,000,d00-scale color maps contained in the trjestern and Interior Regjilns Index Map Atlas that accompanies this publ i cati on .

223 C. Factors Affecting -Distribution qual i quanti ty, ung the waterbod'ies' 1 . Fresh water] wit.t ty, substrate affect salmon ai-ttle adults migrate to spawning areasrasspawningoccurs'asthe.eggs--incubate'as-thefry the rear' and as .r.ig" r.or'iii.'.'{.u*t, is iuven'ites quality-the smolt migrate to ihe sea. Maior lomponents.oxyg-en, of water include terle.atu.e, pH, dislolved turbi9ity, and 'ttater quanti i rigt udes the factors of chemi cal .onipotl li on . -tV unO"O.ptft. Substrate is important in that it must velocity salmon Ue comp|sed of the proper size materjal to allow adult redds. It must also allow intragravel. water to construct eggs movement rJ-tnui-Alssotved oxygen, may be transported to and alevin and, in turn, meiiuotjc-wastes may be removed. salmon ( For more detai I s of the factors that affect distribution in the freshwater environment' see the -Ljfe History unJ fftUitii Requirements narratives for each of the satmon ,p".i.iln volume 1 of this pub'lic.ation. ) -Li .is tfre factors that contri bute 2Lliffi.di;tributioninthemarineenvironment.Water . Sal t water. ttt. known of -and temperature the depth_of thermocline, sal'inity, currents' and the uuuiluUiiitV dr location of food organisms probably I 'in estuari es and the a'l I i nf I uence where salmon move whi e h.igh ruur.'--Sp.ii.t-tpec.ific information concern'ing these -f. - Habi tat f actors may torn.i i n the Li fe Hi-story -and Requi..t.nli narrati ves found i n vol ume 1 of thi s publ i cati on. D. Movements Between Areas intormai'ion has been documented that addresses iuvenile V;;t iiiie routes salmon movements,-anO only general data of smolt migration inJ putil"nt in marjne waters appgg! i.n. the literature. These data are jnlcuded in each speciei'tite history found in volume 1 thi s publ i cati on . of routes and Some information fis been documented that indicates the iiring o1 uaurt -salmon return to fresh water. Where appropriate' these data urL pt.iented 'in the management area narratives (sections II. u-nO'iii. Uuion). Additional miqration information is also included jn each speciut ii?. nistoty f-ound in volume 1 of this publ ication. Size Enumeratjon E. Population poss.ib'le by Salmon abundance, or run strength,.'is derived where .orUining catch numbers (comtercial, s-ubs.istence, and sport niru.itj"anO eslap.r.nt figures (numbei -of .fish entering spawning Escapement estimates are derived by on9 or a i.uuij.' -using ground combination of several measurement techniques. Aerial and - hydroacousti c survey counts , wei r counts , tower counts , and (ii.iltl the used to enumerate escapement' iounts'are-umong .methods as The resuttant pipil;i;;; estimates, however, should be treated in-upp.o*imation'0. estimate of run size because many- factors, can influence tn. nu.u.rii.g jnO .t.upement enumeration of fish' Such factors as weather, current,;;d'type or size of gear can affect

224 jght the catch. Turbidity and/or glacial si I t, weather' I condi ti ons , stream fl ow, and the experi ence of the persons counting the fish can affect ground, tower, and weir counts as well as-aerjal surveys. In add"itjon, single survey estimates fail to account for fish arriv'ing at the spawning area before and after the date of the survey (guktis, pers. comm.). The vast expanse of-the Yukon and Kuskokwim drainages makes it extremely difficult to obtajn escapement estimates from all areas where silmon spawn. Therefore, where feasible, hydroacoustic techniques have'been 'implemented and towers and weirs constructed. Most of the abundance ind'ices obtained are from aerial surveys. Attempts are made to fly key stream surveys annually to obtain a somewhat comparable database by wh'ich abundance can be assessed. Salmon abundance estimates (total run strength) for an individual derived, where possible, by comb'ining. catch stream system" are numbers (commercial, subiistence, and sport harvests) unl escapemenL numbers. In many cases , however, rYn strength calcillations for an individual stream system are difficult to arrjve at because the fisheries are harvest'ing mixed stocks of fish. It is therefore difficult to define what proportion of the catch should be allocated to which stream system unless stock-identification techniques are implemented in the fishery (e.g., tagging, scale pattern analysis). Therefore,.most of the abundance-inf-ormation presented in this narrative is estimated escapement in numbers' of fish that have passed through the commercial fishery and have been enumerated 'in escapement systems. In the narratjvej and tables that follow, care has been taken to document the location, if known, and methods used to gather escapement data, so that the approx_imate level of accuralY may.he dedui:ed (e.g., aerial surveys are less, precise and complete than weir counts).- The data are taken in'large part from the annual finfi sh reports prepared by ADF&G area commerci al fi shery b'io'logists, who stress that in most cases run-strength assessments are estimates that should not be treated as absolute, total run fi gures.

II. KUSKOKh|IM MANAGEMENT AREA The Kuskokwim Area consists of all waters of Alaska between the southernmost tip of Cape Newenham and the westernmost point of the Naskonat Peninsula, including the waters surrounding Nunivak and St. Matthew islands and those waters draining into the Berjng Sea. .The area contains five cormercial fishing districts. D'istricts i (the Lower Kuskokwim River District), 2 (the Middle Kuskokwim R'iver Oiitri.t), and 3 (the Upper Kuskokwim River District) are located within tire conf ines of the'main stem Kuskokwim R'iver; Djstricts 4 and 5 (tne Quinhagak and Goodnews districts) are located in coastal waters near the m6uths of the Kanektok and Goodnews rivers, respectively. Detai I ed descri pti ons of the boundari es and maps depi cti ng lh' districts are contained in the salmon commercial harvest narrat'ive located in the Human Use port'ion of thjs volume.

225 The Kuskokwim River drainage is the domjnant system within the Kuskokwim Area. The Kuskokwim River, second in Alaska only to the yukon River jn size and'length, orjginates in central Interior Alaska near Medfra and flows southwest approximately 850 mi through the Kuskokwim Mountains and empt'ies into Kuskokwim Bay on the Bering Sea. The river is heavily laden with silt throughout most of its length. The drainage area extends from the central Alaska Range in.the.east to the coastai Yukon-Kuskokwim lowland in the west. The Kuskokwim River va11ey js a wide, f'lat basin wjth numerous small ponds a!9 lakes. Edgin-g the Kuskokwim P.i ver va11ey to thq west are the Kuskokwim Nointiins. The Holitna lowland occupies the central portion of the basjn between the Alaska Range and the Kuskokwim Mountains, with the Tay'lor Mountains-Nushagak HiIls on the south. The lowlands of the upiler Kuskokwim Area are an extension of the Tanana lowlands. Th Kanektok River is the maior salmon-produc'ing system emptying into the Quinhagak District. The river js a clearwater stream draini!9 the Ahklun Mouitains. It is some 80 mi in length from its Kuskokwim Bay mouth to its source in Lake Kagati. The area drained varies from mountains of apparently volcanic origin at the headwaters to tundra for the lower one-third 6t the river's length. The whole dra'inage is treeless, with scrub willow and alder being the largest forms of vegetati on. foTlowing a general discussion (in section.s A. and B. below) of salmon clistribulion-and abundance wjthin the Kuskokwim Area as a whole, are species-specif'The ic sections deal ing with theqg .same top'ics in .greater Obtai t . species narratives are subdivided and organized by commercial fishing district. A. Areawi de D'i stri buti on j I . Al I spec'ies surmary. W thi n Kuskokwim Area waters are found ffi Pacific salmon native to North America. The presenie of adult salmon has thus far been documented jn 14 first-order ma'inland streams (those whose mouths are at salt water), which empty into Kuskokwim Bay and the Bering sea (ADF&G 1984a). Chum salmon exhibit the widest djstribution, having thus far been documented in 13 of these Kuskokwjm Area firsf-order streams (ibid.). Chinook and p'ink salmon have each been observed in 11 such streams; sockeye and coho salmon have each been documented in 7 (ibid.). In add'i ti on , sa'lmon have been observed i n a number of Nuni vak Island first-order streams as well. Adult chum, coho, pink, and sockeye salmon have thus far been documented'in 19' 13' 8, and 1 Nunivak Island first-order streams, respectively (iUia.). It is suspected that each species may occur jn iOditionat Kuskokwjm Area streams, although their presence is as yet undocumented. Z. Run tim'ing. In terqs of general run timing, adu_lt salmon are presentin Kuskokwim Area bays and estuaries from late May through-mid mid September and are found spawning in.f_resh waters from July through mid to 'late 0ctober (ADF&G I977). Specific salmon run timing within the Kuskokwim Area varjes

226 by species, river system, and season. Throughout the area, chinook salmon general'ly exhibit the earliest run timing, and coho salmon demonstrate the latest. Run-t'iming information for each species is summarjzed for the Kuskokwim R'iver as well as for the Quinhagak and Goodnews djstricts of the Kuskokwim Area in tables I and 2 and is presented in greater detail in discussions of the salmon species that follow 'in sections C.1., C.2., C.3.0 C.4., and C.5. Studies concerned with the emergence and out-migrat'ion of juveni'le salmon in the Kuskokwjm Area are lacking. Thus, specific out-migration timing of Kuskokwim Area salmon species has not been documented. B. Areawide Abundance 1. All-species summary. , The three major river systems, within ffi (ilre Kuskokwim, Kanektok, and Goodnews river systems) all support major annual runs of chinook, chum, and coho salmon (Huttenen 1984a). In addition, the Kanektok and Goodnews rivers support significant annual runs of sockeye salmon and even-year runs of pink salmon (ibid.). The Kuskokwim River also occasionally supports significant runs of sockeye salmon, although catches of this species are largely incidental (ib'id. ). In terms of general relative salmon abundance within the Kuskokwim Area as a whole, chum salmon are most abundant, followed in descending order by coho, chinook, sockeye, and pink salmon (ADF&G L977). The cons'iderable number of spawn'ing streams scattered throughout the immense Kuskokwim Bay and R'iver drainage has always precluded a complete collection of escapement data. No attempt has been made to estimate total dra'inage escapements from the I jmj ted available spawner counts nor to allocate catches to streams of origin. Therefore, most of the abundance information contained in this narrative'is estimated escapement index counts in numbers of fish that have passed through the commercial fishery and have been enumerated in freshwater spawning systems. 2. Enumerat'ion methods and locations. Escapement estimates en performed us'ing a variety of methods. These include peak abundance aerjal survey assessment, hydroacoust'ic sensing by side-scanning sorrar, visual observations from both towers and wejrs, and most recently drift gi 1 1 net test fishing. The estimated escapements obtained via these methods for the years L973 through 1983 are contained jn tables 3,.4,5,6, and 7. Again it should emphasized that these estimates are only rough indices of abundance and because of I imitations 'inherent to the surveying techniques are not necessarily indicative of total numbers of spawners (see section I.E. above). 0n1y index counts obtained under survey conditions

227 rated aS good or fair are presented, and care has been taken to documeit ttre methods used to obtain escapement data. a. Aer.ial survey. The majority of escapement estimates Area streams have been devised from maOeffiustofwim j aeri al surveys . Al though i t i s not current'ly feas bl e to survey it t the spawning tributaries within the KuskokwipArea, an attehpt it made to census all of the known maior spawn'ing' concentrations to - provide escapement- indices for those systems..,. Aerial surveys are flown- annual'ly on the Kwethluk, Kisaral ik, An'iak' Sutton (Aniak), (ipchuk, Chukowan, Kogrukluk, Salmon (Fiitu fork),'kanektok, and Goodnews rivers to obtain escapement inOex counti of chinook, chum, and sockeye salmon in these systems. In addition to aerjal surveys flown on these 'ikey" streams, peak counts of salmOn spec.ies in many adoit'ional area streams have been made over the yeari. It should be noted that escapement counts madL from aerial surveys are only rough indices of abundance and because of limitations inherent to the survey technique are not necessarily i_ndicatjve of the total numneri of tpunn.rs (see section I'E' above)' b. Sonar. In addition to aerial surveys' sonar has been usel-with vary'ing degrees of success as a method to gauge .r.up"rJnt." lri tne Kuskokwim Area, the use of sonar was first attempted in 1978 on the Kwethluk River. However, large amounts of debris jn the river resulted i; significa-nt- numbers of false counts by, _the sonar unjt. Because of the large proportion of false counts and the impoisibility of-interpretation-,- the Kwethluk R.iver sonar data were iudged total 1y unrel iable (schneiderhan 1979). The Kwethluk Rjver sonar project was di scontj nued, and in 1979 the sonar uni t bras deployed to another lower Kuskokwim River tributary, the fa'sigiut River. During the L979 season, the sonar y.ielied escapement estiriates of 11,301 chum salmon and ggg chinook salmon (schneideran 1980). Largely bec-ause the side-scan sonar is relatively jnefficient when fewer than 20,000-30,000 fjsh are counted, it was decided to relocate the sonar unit on the Aniak River the fo11owjng season, where aerial surveys indicated chum salmon runs large enough to make full use of the sonar's capability (ib'id.). The Aniak River sonar project, located approximately 12 m'i upstream from the river's confluence wjth the Kuskokwih River, has been operated successfu'l1y since its inception in 1980. in its in'itial year of operation, the sonar was operated. into september to allow escapement est'imates to be made for coho salmon as well as fbr earlier-running chinook and chum salmon. Sin.e 198i, however, the proiect has been term'inated

228 around the fj rst week of August, wi th escapement estimates made only for chinook or chum salmon. Gill net test fishing js used in conjunction with the sonar in order to apportion escapement counts to species. Total escapement past the sonar sjte has been estimated by expanding the cumulative adiusted dai 1y total to compensate for salmon that passed beyond the counting range of the side-scanning sonar (Schnejderhan 1984a). Sonar has also been used to estimate escapement into the Kanektok River, the major salmon-producing system withjn the Quinhagak District (District 4) of the Kuskokw'im Area. A side-scanning sonar unit was initially tested in the lower Kanektok River during late August of 1981. Since 7982, the Kanektok sonar has been operated at a site on the river about 5 mj upstream from the village of Quinhagak. All five species of salmon are counted at the sonar site, with sonar counts apporiioned by species based upon Quinhagak District commercial catch composjtion (Schultz and Carey l9B2). However, because of the uncertainty'involved in assigning sonar echoes to particular spec'ies in this manner, the escapement estimates derived are considered preliminary. Further, the project normally terminates in early August, which js too early to allow a complete escapement estimate to be made on late-running coho salmon. c. Counting tower. In addition to aerial surveys and sonar, counting towers have also been used to obtain Kuskokwim Area escapement data. The first counting tower in the Kuskokwim Area was established in 1960 on the Kanektok River about 6 nri upstream from its mouth. The fo1 lowing year the tower was relocated further upstream at a site near the outlet of Lake Kagati, where the project was operated during the 1961 and 1962 sea sons . A counting tower has also been operated on the Kogrukluk River, a tributary of the Holitna River in the upper Kuskokwim River area, at a site about 467 river miles upstream from the mouth of the Kuskokwjm River. The tower was operated each season from 1969 through 1978, except in 197I. Annual escapement estimates for chinook, chum, sockeye, and pink salmon were obtained at this site, with the project normally terminated prior to the arrjval of migrating coho salmon. In 1974, however, the tower was operated into September, and a portion of the coho salmon run (873 fish) was also counted (Kuhlman L974). During the one season the tower was not operated (1971), a weir count was attempted to gauge escapement on the Kogrukluk River. However, high water and debris damaged the weir and I imi ted the resul ts (Yanagawa L972b). The Kogrukluk weir project was discontinued,

229 and the counting tower was reestablished the fo]lowing sea son . An additjonal counting tower has been operated on the s i te Mi ddl e Fork of the Goodnews R'iver si nce 1981 at a ioiit.a about 12 m'i upriver from Goodnews Vi11age. All fiv; ipecies of salmon are counted as they migrate past the tower site. However, the proiect is terminated too earl y i n the season to estimate total coho salmon escalement (Schultz 1983). d. Weiri. Weirs represent another escapement-monitoring ffij= ru..essf ul ly' employed in the Kuskokwim Area. In Ig76, the Ignatfi weir-was established on the Hol'itna niu.i approx'imately 139 mi upstream from its confluence w.ith tft Kuskokwim River. From 1976 through 1980, .orntr were made on'ly long enough into the season to obtain escapement couirts for chinook, chum, and sockeye iui*on. (gnt' smal I numbers of p'ink salmon m1grate past the weir'sjte and, being small enough to pass between in. *.lr pickets, ire not- fully counted.) From 1981 on' non.u.r, 'the we'ir has been operated i nto september and OiloU.., allowing coho salmon escapeqelt counts as well. -been as an indicator ine pioje.t has iudged -successful oi .icui"ments 'in the-yeirs 1976, 1978, 1979,-and 1981 inO-oniv partially suciessfu'l in 1977, 1980, 1982, and 1983 (Sihneiderhan 1984b) A weir was operated on another uppqr.Kuskokwim River iribuiary, th; Salmon River (Pitka Fork), in 1981 and LggZ. lne weir was operated primarily to monitor chinook salmon escapement and to assess the accuracy of aerial surveys floiln on this tr.ibutary of the upper Kuskokwim RjvLr (Schneiderhan 1982). e. Test fishjng. A final escapement estimation technique ffioy6ffin-the-net Kuskokwim Area has been the use of drift giil test fishing. n.t :ites.appr-oximate'ly 4. mi iprivei from Bethel aiong Uot! banks of the Kuskokw'im nlu.r, drift gill net test fishing has. recently been ut.ilized in an attempt to estimate Kuskokwim River coho salmon escapement (Huttunen 1984b) inaimucn ai Kuskdkwim Area salmon distribution and abunoance in general terms and the escapement-monitoring i"inriqr"s emiployed in the area have been discussed' inJividuat sa'lmon species distribution and abundance will now be Presented. C. Species Distribution and Abundance 1. Chum salmon: icts 1, 2, and 3)' Although no sPawnl ain river itself' the Kus-kokwim Rjver serves as a mtgration corridor for all fi;;-species-along of Pacific salmon- bound for spawning tributaries jts course. Although the timing of

230 migration and spawning varies by species, the spawning of- individual species seems to take place more or less simultaneously in Kuskokwim River tributaries throughout the system (Schneiderhan 1979). The majority of the chum salmon retu.rning to the Kuskokwim Ri ver are four-year-01 d fj sh (ADF&G 1984c ) . Adult chum salmon spawn in tributaries widely distributed throughout the Kuskokwim River drainage. The fish have been documented in tributaries ranging from the Eek River, which is the first salmon system upstream of the mouth of the Kuskokwjm River, upstream to the North, East, and South Forks of the Kuskokwim Rjver, near the headwaters of the system (ADF&G 1984a' 1984b ) . In terms of general run timing, chum salmon typically begin passing through the Lower Kuskokwim River Djstrict in-ear1y June and continue to run through m'id August, with the peak of the run normally occurring from late June to ear]y July (ADF&G 1977). Most of the chum salmon run has normal'ly passed through the Lower Kuskokwim River District's cornmercial fishery by mid July (ADF&G 1984d). Chum salmon run-timjng_though the Niddle Kuskokwim River D'istrict coincjdes closely w'ith that of the Lower Kuskokw'im River District' though the fish appear slightly later (ADF&G 1977) Chum s'almon spawning normally takes place in Kuskokwim River tributaries fiom mid Ju'ly to mjd August (ibid. ). Whi 1e conducting a survey of the Eek River, Baxter (1977a) found peak chum salmon spawning occurring during the third week of July. Simi lar timing has been observed in an important spawning tributary of the upper Kuskokwim River, the Kogrukluk River. Peak migration of chum salmon past the Kogrukluk counting tower in the vjcinity of important spawning grounds has been observed to occur from mid to late July (Yanagawa I97?a). Important chum salmon spawning streams are widely distributed throughout the Kuskokwjm River drainage. Important spawning streams withjn the drainage include, but are not l'imited to, the Eek, Kwethluk, Kjsaralik' Kas'ig'luk, Aniak, Salmon (Aniak), Kipchuk, Tuluksak, Chukowan , Kogrukl uk, Hol i tna, Hohol i tna , Ho1 okuk ' George, 0skawalik, Salmon (Pitka Forth), Ta_tlawiksuk, and Cheeneetnuk rivers and Can Creek. Available chum salmon escapement est'imates for the years I973 through 1983 for these streams and add'itional streams as well are presented i n tabl e 3 , wi th streams grouped by di stri ct. b. Quinhagak Distrjct. Within the Quinhagak District, runs ffiear about the third week of June and extend through late July (ADF&G 1977). Spawning usually

23r extends from mid July until mid August (ibid.). Maior producing systems foi wh'ich escapements a.re enumerated ire the kaniftof and Arolik rivers. The Kanektok River has exh.ibited the largest run of chum salmon in the district, with counts ranging from 6,197 fish in 1976 to 2?9,290 ihum salmon in 1978 (table 3). c. gooinews Oistrict. The chum salmon run. typical ly ffioodnews Bay fishery around the third peaks duri ng the f i rst l'0 week of June, 'through {q.yt- -of -qgl{' and continuei the end of July (ADF&G 1977.). Peak migration of chum salmon past the Goodnews counting tower, iocated about 14 mj upriver from the Goodnews Bay to iiif,ing district, has been observed to occur from'in- m1d laie iuly (Schuitz 1982, 1983). Sp-awning. . tl' Goodnews R'iver system typically occurs from mid July to mid August (ADF&G 1977). 2. Coho salmon: River (oistricts t' Z' an . Although ;: Kuskokwim in river itself'-no tire Kus-kokwim Ri ver serves as a mi grati on corri dor for all five species of Pacific salmon bound for spawning tributari es along i ts course. Al though timing of migration and spiwning varies by species, spawning- of ind.iv.idual species se-ems to take place.more or less simultaneously in Kuskokwim River tributalies throughout (Schneiderhan 1979). the system - The mijority of spawning coho salmon return to Kuskokw'im River lribuia.ies as f6ur-year-o1d fish (ADF&G 1984c). The fi sh spawn i n wi dely di stri buted tri butaries throughout tne Kuskokwim diver drainage.. Li ke chum salmoi, coho salmon have been documented in tributaries .unging trom the Eek River upstream to the North' south, and East Forks of the Kuskokwim River (ADF&G 1984a' 1e84b ) . coho salmon exhib'it the latest run and spawning timing of any salmon species in the Kuskokwim River system. The f ish do not typical ly begin migrating th_ro_ugh thq lower Kuskokwjm niver untit mid-to-late July _and continue to run unti I early 0ctober (ADF&G 197_7) . Spawning normally takes place irom mid September to late 0ctober (ibid.). The late run lim1ng of the species has- contributed to the relative scaici ty of hi storical coho salmon escapement data. Fiel d projec.ts concerned wj th escapement monitoring have in the - past often been i.t*inated prior to coho salmon spawning activit.v' A recent altempt has been made to estimate the total coho salmon return to the Kuskokwim River. using drift generate abundance gi 1 1 net test-fi shing -catches to ind.ices, Huttunen ( 1984b) estimated the total coho

232 salmon returtl to the Kuskokwim River in 1983 to approach 336,000 fish. Approxjmately 197,000 of these fish were conrmercially-estimate harvested, yielding 9 rough total escapement of 139,000 coho .salmon to Kuskokwim Rivei^ tributaries in 1983 ('ibid.). Available coho salmon escapement est'inrates for the Kuskokwim Ri ver tributaries'for the years L973 through 1983 appear in table 4, with streams grouped by district. b. 0uinhaqik District. Oi tfre salmon species, coho salmon ffi run timing, typ'ica11y passing through the commercial fishery from early August through 1ale September (ADF&G 1977). Spawning . o.ccurs from mjd Seftember through rnuch of 0ctober (jbid.). Although escapement estimates (taUte 4) appear . minimal, the abundance of coho salmon 'in the djstrict has been large enough to sustai n an average comnrerc'ial annual harvest of 250,000 fish for the period 1978 through 1982 (ADF&G 1983a ) . c. Goodnews District. coho salmon exhibit the latest run ffimon species and normally begin running through Goodnews Bay in early Augus.t. ,They continue-to run uitil mid september (ADF&G 1977). Spawning-norma11y occurs within the Goodnews River drainage from mid September through much of 0ctober (ibid.). Rviitable escapement estimates made on Goodnews District streams and ldt

233 Important chi nook salmon sp_awni ng. streams wi th'in the Kuskokwim River drainage include, but arq not limited i;; the Eek, KwethlIk, Kisaralik, Kasigluk' Al]u!t' iiitnon inniuli, Kipchuk, Tuluksak, Chukowan, .Kogrukluk' Hol'itna, H;h;iitnh, Hbtorut, Salmon (Pitka Fork), e.o'g., 0skawalik, Iatalawiksuk, Cheeneetnuk, Big Salmon -t'li Creek. Forkl xon fork, and Gagaryah-escapement ri vers and Bear Avaiiable chinook salmon data for the years 1974 through 1983 are presented in table 5, with streams grouPed bY district. b. 6u.inhaqak Di stri ct. Chi nook salmon are usual'ly tf,. in the coastal waters of the ffiarrive the Qu.inhagak D.istrict. The fish normally appear in iisfreri the second week of June and continue to run beginning Julv (ADF&G 1977-), until the of |q3rylilgj normal 'ly takes pl ace from mi d to I ate Ju 1y ( P'!d' ) : Rivers irittin th; district that are surveyed for chinook salmon i ncl ude the Kanektok, Kanukti k, and Arol i k rivers. fscifement indices indicate a peak count of 19,180 chinook salmon in 1978, with -a fluctuating downward trend to 8,890 fish in 1983 (taUte 5)' c. Goodnews D'istpict. In terms of general, run tjming' ffiua'l'ly appear in Goodnews Bay during-the second week of June and tbntinue to run until early July (nOFAe ;377). Peak chinook m'igration past the count'ing io*.., located some 14 mi upriver from-the cornmercial fishing district, hqs occurred from ear'ly to mid July (Scnuf [z I1BZ, 19B3). Spawn'ing. in the Goodnews River occurs'from fiid to late July (ADF&G drainage normilly piver Igill." Escapemdnt estimates for the Goodnews surveyed peated n 1983 when system streams normal ly . ,.i ' 6",OZi fish were counted from the Middle Fork tower (taute 5). 4. Sockeye salmon: il "rusiot

234 for the years 1974 through 1983 are presented 'in table 6. b. Quinhagak Distrjct. Runs of sockeye salmon normally ffihagak District about the third week of .f Lire and extend ihrough late July (ADF&G 1977) - Spawning typically occurs from m'id August to late ( salmon-produci ng systems of Sbptember i bi d. ) . Sockeye - tnb Quinhagak District include the Kanektok and Arol'ik rivers. Whereas the escapement indicies of sockeye salmon in the Kuskokwim River dra'inage are mjnjmal , except for the Kogrukfik River, significant returns of the ipecies to the Quinhagak and Goodnews d1stricts are evideirt (taUte 6). Escapement estimates on the Kanektok River reached a nign of 113,931 fish in 1980 (tab1e 6). c. Goodnews Distpict. Sockeye salmon are usually available ffiistrict fishery from mid June through Ju'ly, peaking around the f i rst 10 days of July (ADF&G lgli). peak passage of sockeye salmon past the Goodnews tower some 14 mi upriver from the fishing district has been observed to occur in mid July (Schultz' pers. comm.). This species demonstrates greater abundance in even years than odd and typ'ica11y spawns throughou! !!9 Goodnews River drainage tlirough ihe month of July (ADF&G re77). 5. Pi nk salmon: a. Kuskokwim Brver (Districts 1, 2 . Pink salmon ar t the most limited distributjon of any salmon species found in the Kuskokwjm River drainage. Pink salmon have thus far been documented jn tributarjes along the river's course from the Eek River upstream to the Holjtna River and'its tributaries (ADF&G 1984a, 1984b). In terms of genera'l run timing, pink salmon have been observed migrating through the lower Kuskokwim River in late June and earTy July (Baxter 19i0). The fish appear to spawn in Kuskokwim River tributaries through late July (ADF&G 1977). Kuskokwim River commercial harvests of the species reflect greater abundance of the fish 'in even years than in odd years. Pink salmon escapement estimates made on Kuskokwim River tributaries are extremely I jmited. Available pink salmon escapement estjmates for the years 1973 through 1983 are presented in table 7, wjth streams grouped by district. b. duinhaqak District. The pink salmon run jnto the @ normally commences about_ the third week of June and extends through late July (ibid.). Spawning occurs throughout the month of July (ib'id.). The K'an6ktok River is the major producing system of the

235 district, with escapement estimates. of up to 596r990 pink salmon recorded jn 1980 (tab'le 7). c. boodnews District. Run tim'ing and spawning of pilk ffiGoodnews District is believed to be general]y the same as for pink salmon jn the Quinhagak 6istrict. Ava'ilable escapement data for the district indjcate returns of lesser magnitude than those found in the Quinhagak District (table 7).

III. YUKON MANAGEMENT AREA The yukon nlver is the largest river jn Alaska, draining approximately American 35% of the state, and is t6e fifth largest river on the North continent. Ttre i'iu.. originates in gi'itisn Columb'ia, Canada, within 4A f* (30 mit of the gutf of Alaska and extends over 3'700 km ii,lOO to tne Bering.Sga. The river systenr drains an area of about (Barton ssi,ooo'i'ij Lft, (330,000 mi2) 1984). _ Yukon River supports' five species of Pacific. salmon (0lc=ofhynghYs The ln sp.). Chum salmon are the sp.ecies. of greatest abundance, followed oi^Oe" of *uqnitud. by chinodk, coho, and limjted numbers of sockeye iuiron (ADF&t rgz6l. p'ink salmon may have been the species second in abundance after chum salmon during rlcent even-numbered years. Their numbers as represented by harvest- figures, however'. are very limited because of the lack of commercjal marlets and a subs'istence preference chinook and chum salmon (Buklis, pers' conrm')' for of The s jze of the Yukon Rivlr draina'ge prohib'its the feasibjl ity obta.ining complete salmon escapement data for the entjre drainage. In past years, escapement estjmates of as many spawning.areas as pos-sib'le have been uii.*iituO withjn the constraints of available fiscal and manpower resourcbs and in accordance with favorable weather conditions (gai:ton 1984). Estimates have been obtained by aeria.l and ground SUrveys, counting tOwerS, Weirs, and, mgre recently, Side-Scan Sonar' A spuii;l efiort"has been-djrected toward ensuring that representative, or-',,index," streams or spawning areas have been surveyed annual1y to determine trends jn abundance. More comprehensive enumerat'ion projects are primar.iiy I jmited to the Andreafiky, Anvik, Sheeniek, Fishing Branch, Sdicia, inO Delta rivers and the Whitehorse Fishway. . A iorpr.n.nsive ilmmary of historical escapement data is sunrnarized by j ng Yukon gi;[on ( 1984j . A co'mpt ete bi b1 iography .of I terature regardi River salmon fisherjes has been compiled by Buklis (igas). A. Chum Salmon 1. Distribution. Two distinct runs of chum salmon return to the summer and fall chum salmon. Summer ffito spawn, 'in chum salmon general'ly utilize spawning areas the lower and riOOfe portion of- the Yukon River watershed and some triUuiaries to the Koyukuk and Tanana rjvers. Fall-run chum salmon primarily spawn in spring-fed upwell.ing areas in upper river streams and sloughs of the watershed (Barton 1984' Buklis and l^lilcock 1985). Major producing systems for summer chunr salmon are the Andieafsky, Airvik, Rodo, Nulato, Koyukuk, Tozitna, Chena, and Salcha rivers. Fall chum salmon have

236 been primari1y documented in the Porcup'ine and Tanana river systeils in Alaska. Fall chum salmon are also present 'in the yukon Territory of Canada (Bergstrom, pers. comm.). 2. Abundance. Chum salmon are the most abundant species in the Yfon R-iver drainage and are a very important component of the commercial and subsistence fisheries. 'is a. Summer chum salmon. The summer run of chum salmon ffiae than the fall run. Surmer chum salmon are characteri zed by ear'ly run t'inri ng f rom the end of May until mid July, rapid maturation in fresh water, and small body size-(2.7 to 3.2 kg, or 6 to 7 lb) than fall chum salmon (Buklis and Barton 1984' Barton 1984). Adults range in age frorn three to six years, although more tnan 90% of the fish are usually four- and five-yiar-o1d salrnon (YTC 1985). Spawning activity jnvolving surnmer chum salmon usually peaks from early to mid July in the lower Yukon River and from early to mid August in the Middle Yukon tributaries (ADF&G 1978). Sunrmer chum salmon spawn primari1y in streams tpibutary to the lower Yukon, the Koyukuk, and the Tanana rivers in Alaska. The Anvi k River supports the largest spawning population, and other important tributaries i ncl ude the Andreafsky, Nul ato , Me'l ozi tna , Hogatza Gisasa, and Salcha rivers. Spawning is usually' completed by early August. Escapements for most major stocks appear strong. in recent years , exceedi ng escapement objecti ves ( YTC 1985). Escapement estimates for the Anvik River have ranged from 262,854 summer chum salmon counted in 1977 ( comb'i ned tower and aeri a I counts ) to a peak cou.nt of about 1.5 million salmon jn 1981 (sonar count) (table 9). Estimates of summer chum salmon in the East Fork of the Andreafsky River have ranged from 66,471 fish in 1979 to 223,485 fish in 1975 (taUte 9). Estimates of total run were obtained by tag recapture studies in 1970 and L97I. The total run estimates for these two years were 3.6 and 1.6 million fish' respectively. Minimum estimates of total run s'ize determined from harvest levels and observed escapement indices ranged from I.? to 5.6 million fish, annua11y, during the period 1975-1981 (YTC 1985). Yukon River chum salmon (both fall and summer runs) spend one winterincubating in the gravel . The -fry migrate to the Bering Sea shortly after emergence from the gravel in the spring (ibid.). Summer chum salmon fry from the Anvik River have been present over two months after breakup of river ice. It is believeci that chum salmon fry outmigration in the Anvjk River probably peaks around early June (Buklis 1983).

237 b. Fall chum salmon. Fall chum salmon are distingu'ished by ffig, usually extending from mid July to early September, robust body shape, and brighter s'ilver coloiation than sumner-run chums (Barton 1984). As w'ith surruner chum salmon, the maiority (90%) of the adult fish are usually four- and five-year-o1d salmon (YTC 1985)- Although there is consjderable overlap in both physical characieristics and timing of entry into the Yukon River, by 15 July the rnaiority of chum salmon entering the Yuko; River ire considered fall chum salmon (Buklis and Barton 1984). Fall chum salmon exhibit a pulse type entry pattern into the Yukon River delta area. This is characlerized by a large number of fish passing through the area during a short period of time, followed by a period of a few days wi th very few f i-sh m'igrati ng lhrough the area. The mid point of the fall chum salmon run is usual'ly during the first week of August (Bergstrom, pers. conrm. ) . There is further evidence that fall chum salmon bound for the Porcupine River system and Yukon Territory streams are the earl'ier-run fall chum salmon, occurring from late Ju'ly to early August. The later run of fal I chum salmon, taking p'lace from mid August to early September, are destined for the Tanana Rjver drainage (ADF&G 1984e). Tagging studies have shown that Porcupine 9nd Upper Yu[on River fall chum sa]mon are also distinguished from Tanana River fall chum salmon by their orientation a'long the north bank of the Yukon Rjver near Galena, ds opposed to the south bank orientation of Tanana River fai t chum salmon (YTC 1985). A comprehensive description of the biology and stock status of fall chum salmon in the Yukon R'iver drainage is summarized by Buklis and Barton (1984). Escapement indices begun in I973 for fall chum salmon show a serious recent decline, during the 1980's for the major spawning areas, inc'luding the Sheeniek' Fishing Brinch, and totctat rivers. Escapement obiectives have not been achieved in recent years for these spawning areas, and there iS reaSOn fOr COncern Over cOnServation of these stocks. Average aeria'l survey escapement indices decreased by 28, 54, and 78% in the Sheeniek, Fishing Branch, and Toklat rjvers, respgg!ive1y,, betlvegn the pe?iod lgi6-I979 and the period 1980 to 1983 (YTc 1985). The Sheeniek River sonar count of 25'000 chum salmon'in 1984 vlas the lowest since sonar enumeration was 'initiated in 1981 (table 10). The aerial survey count of 5,600 fish in the Fishing Branch River in Canada during the same year was the lowest since the early 1970's. A peak aerial survey estimate of 15'900

238 fish in the Toklat River in 1984 was below escapement object'ives and continues the recent trend of poor escapements to that system. Escapements to the Delta R'iver (Tanana Rjver system) has been relat'ive1y more stable than in other major spawn'ing areas. The 1984 aerial escapement survey estimate of 12,300 chum salmon for the Delta Rjver exceeded the escapement obiective (YTC 1e85). Yukon River chum salmon (both fall and summer runs) spend one winter incubating in the gravel. The fry migrate to the Bering Sea shortly after emergence in the spring. Fall chum salmon fry leave the Delta River for downstream migration 'in the Tanana and Yukon rivers from April to mjd May (Buklis and Barton 1984). B. Chinook Salmon 1. Distribution. Chinook salmon spawn in tributary streams Tiffiuglout both the Al askan and Canadi an sect'ions of the Yukon Ri ver dra'inage and are the most w'ide1y di stributed of the five salmon species withjn the drainage. Spawning ltas been documented in more than 100 streams throughout tlte drainage, ranging from 137 km (85 mi) from the mouth of the drainage to 3,046 km (1,892 mi) from the river mouth. Maior produci ng systems i ncl ude the Andreafsky, Anvi k, Nul ato , Chena, and Salcha rivers in Alaska and the Big Salmon, Little Salmon, Teslin, and Nisutljn rivers and the main stem Yukon Rivelin Canada (Barton 1984). 2. Abundance. Chinook salmon are the salmon species second in aEindance to chum salmon in the Yukon River drainage. This speci es i s important to both subsj stence and commerci al fi shermen. Estimates of total run size using tag and recovery methods between 1966 and 1970 ranged between i61,000 and 600,000 chinook salmon (YTC 1985). Table 11 presents escapement estimates of selected 'index areas for the years 1975 through 1984. Estimates of run magnitude within the Canad'ian portion of the drainage were 29,000 fish in i973, 11,000 to 37,000 fish in L974, increasing to 37,000 and 48,000 chinook salmon in 1982 and 1983 , respecti vely ( i bi d. ) . Most escapement estimates for chjnook salmon have been obtajned by aerial and boat survey. The fishway located at Whitehorse, however, has provided the longest, most continuous record of chinook salmon escapements since i959 (YTC 1985) , al though othelindex areas have been surveyed consi stent'ly si nce the 1960' s. Low escapement levels of the mjd 1970's for ch'inook salmon 'improved in most areas from lgTU through 1984. Record escapements were documented in most index streams surveyed during 1980 and 1981 (taOle 11). The improved harvest and escapement levels in recent years have been attributed to

239 time and gear restrictions p'laced upon the Alaska commercial fishery, ieduced interception of chinook salmon in higll l99s fisheries, and favorab'ie environmental conditions (ADF&G 1984e, YTC 1985). Aeriai survey data suggest that the Tanana River drainage (pr.imari ly tfie Sal cha i-nd Chena rivers) i s consi stently the ihrgest producer of Yukon River chinook salmon (McBride and hli I cock 1983 ) . ranges Age at maturity for Yukon R'iver chinook salmon -from four to seven years. Most fish spend two years jn fresh water and two 6 five years in the marine environment. Age differences are apparent by sex. Female chinook Salrnon return to the Yukon River primarily at ages 6 and 7, whereas in males mature at ages-apparent 4, 5,'and 6. Consistent differences age and sex are between spawning populations .in different sect'ions'df the river. The proportion of older chinook salmon increases in spawn'ing populat'ions, mov'ing piogr.rt'ive'ly upriver. This trend also translates into an increase in ine proportion of females in spawning populations moving progressiveiy upriver. Most fish that spend three have been found 'in Canadian spawning iears"in-popul fiesh water ati ons (YTC 1985 ) . bcit e pattein ana'lysi s has been used to estimate the contribution of stocl groupings (lower, middle, and upper) of Yukorr River runs to tlie commercial harvest taken within the river. In 1982 and 1983, the composition of the cornmercial catch was derived for the entire Yukon River harvest. The Alaskan stock contrjbution to the Alaskan harvest (commercial and subs'istence) was estimated at 42 and 53%, with the Canadian contribution estimated at 58 and 47%, for each Velr' ieipectively. Stock composition estimates for the ent'ire dra.i nage hirvest i n tggZ and 1983 were 38 and 49%, r.tp..ilve1y, Alaskan origin fish. The Canadian contribut'ion was estimated at 62 and 51%, respectively (ibid')' Ch'inook salmon enter the Yukon River soon afterice breakup during June and early July (Barton 1984)- About 60 days are iequiied for chinooli salmbn. to qg,r_a_t-e. from the river mouth to'upper rjver trjbutaries (ADF&G 1978). Reports ol.earlier tjmei that chinook salmon have reached upriver locatjons are as follows: Galena'in mid June; Rampart in late June; Eagle in earty July; Tanana Rjver drainage-.and N_enana River in late June and ear"ly Ju1y, respective'ly;- chena Rjver jn late July; and the salchi Rivdr in iate Julv (ADF&G 19i8) Peak of spawning occurs in the lower and middle river tributaries' from late Ju'ly to mid August, and in.the !PPer river tributaries from mid to late August (taUte g) (Bukljs' pers. conrn). C. Coho Salmon i: Ojstributjon. !r|ithin the Yukon R'iver dra'inage, coho. salmon n-.*-S... aocumented to spawn i n wi dely scattered areas

240 throughout the Yukon River system. Tributaries in which coho salmon have been documented are the Andreafsky, Chuilnak' Delta Clearwater, Innoko, Bonanza, Anvik, Tanana, Hodzana, Porcup'ine, Kand'ik, and Totonduk pivers and Birch and Beaver slough/creeks. At this time, maior coho salmon spawning areas appear to be located jn the trjbutaries of the upper Tanana'tiiver drainage and the Porcupine R'iver watershed (McBride et al. I9B2. Barton 1984; ADF&G 1985i Buklis' pers. comm. ). 2. Abundance. Escapement data for coho salmon jn the Yukon Rlver are very ljmited. Comparative historical escapement data are available only from the Tanana River dra'inage in Alaska. Escapement levels appear to have been stable there from L973 through 1984 (YTC 1985). A record high of 11,000 coho salmon werl observed in the Delta Clearwater R'iver (a tributary of the Tanana River) jn 1984 (ibid.). Additional coho salmon escapement information is presented in table 12. Yukon River as four-year- Coho salmon usually return to the'lower old fish. They usually enter the Yukon R'iver about one week I ater thin fal I --run chum salmon, i n I ate Ju'ly (ADF&G 1985, 1978). The coho salmon run in the lower rjver usually peaks about mid August. In the upper Yukon Area, coho salmon ire present f rom m1d August unti I I ate September or ear'ly October (ADF&G 1985). 'late spawn.ing occurs in the Tanana River drainage from Sbptember through November (Barton 1984). Total run estimates of coho salmon are not available. In fact, the magnitude of the coho salmon resource is unknown. The coho salmon return has been strong enough to support subsistence and commercial fisheries in Alaska and Canada, with combined catches for the period L975 through 1984 ranging from 2,546 fish'in 1975 to 131,376 fish in 1984 and aveiaging 44,130 coho salmon, annual 1y (ADF&G 1984e, YTC 1e8s). D. Pi nk Sal mon 1. D'istribution. Pink salmon have been caught in the main stem otT6mlon R'iver as far upstream as Ruby (ADF&G 1984e); species spawns primapily in the lower_portion however, thjs 'dra 'l of the Yu kon i nage , downstream f rom the v i 1 age of Grayl i ng. 2. Abundance. Yukon Rjver pink salmon exhjbit even-year run sTrenffi(VfC 1985). Pink salmon enter the Yukon River from late June through mid July (Barton 1984). Pink salmon escapements are not targeted for enumeration. Avajlable data have'been obtained incidental'ly to surveys of other salmon species. L'imited escapement data indicate that the Andreafsky Ri ver system supports the 1 argest spawni ng population of pink salmon withjn the Yukorr R'iver drainage. Aerial surveys have accounted for an index count of about 139,000 pink salmon jn the Andreafsky R'iver in 1980

?41 be (taute i3). The magnitude of the Anvik run -ap_pears t9 ionsiderably less, wjth survey index counts of 500 or fewer ii;h (Barto-n 1984). Run timing of pink salmon in the Anvik and Andreafsky rivers is similar, occurring coincidental'ly wi th the mi d--June-to-'late-July escapement of sunmer chum iuiron fBuklis 1983). The size of the total run of pink salmon into the Yukon River drainage in unknown' E. Sockeye Salmon i. birt.ibution and abq4[q1gs. Sockeye sa]mon are rare'ly found have been rePorted in catches in the main Yukon River upstream to Rampart (ADF&G t991g). spawning areas have not been documented by , the ADF&G; n6weve"l local residents have reporte^d. sockeye salmon ipiwnln6 in the Innoko Rjver (Barton 1984). There _are.no estimates of sockeye salmon abundance or run sjze for the Yukon River drainage.

~~?42 Table 1. General Salmon Run Timing in the Kuskokwim River, by Speciesa~~

~~Emergence Smolt Timing of Migration Through from 0ut- Spec i es Lower Kuskokwim R. District Spawni ng Gravel mi grati on~~

~~Chi nook Late May - late June Mid July - |ate July~~

~~Chum Early June - mid Aug. Mid July - mid Aug.~~

~~Sockeye Early June - mid July Late July - mid Aug.~~

~~Pi nk Late Juneb -? Through July~~

~~Coho Mid July - early Oct. Mid Sept. - late 0ct.~~

~~Source: a ADF&C 1977, unless otherwise noted; b Baxter 1970; c Baxter 1977a, 1977b.~~

~~--- means no data were available.~~

~~Note: Early = 1st to 10th of month, mid = llth to 20th of monttr; late = 21st to 30th/31st of month.~~

~~243 the Kuskokwim Area Table 2. General Salmon Run Timing in the Quinhagak and Goodnows Districts of by Species~~

~~Emergence Smol t Adul ts Present i n from ng Gravel Out-migration Spec i es Bays and Estuaries Spawni~~

~~Chinook Early June - early July Mid July - late JuIy~~

~~Chum Mid June - late July Mid July - mid Aug' Sockeye Mid June - late July Mid Aug' - lata Sept'~~

~~Pink Mid June - late July Through July Coho Early Aug. - late Sept. Mid Sept' - late Oct'~~

~~Source: ADF&C 1977.~~

~~--- means no data were available. to 30th/31st of month' Note: Early = 1st to lgth of month, mid = 11th to 2oth of monthl late = 21st~~

~~244 6r 0ro L.ro> c,~~

~~! jO a c J or og ON6N p oo r.Dtsom@ c ! :> rr+oorotrto o t.F rl .t^tr. o lllnNNttoll o -EJ F t^~~

J- o J J 5s o €c, rnrrlrnrlrc, llr o> €ONrrrlOrrl Y +C:C.r oistttNrtl o x ! o^ o = C L: NOTAO|^OlnN ooo NlNmlFOF6 E )- OrDrroor(DOF6 N .tt. -aoc< E o €N o g o |nrn fio JL NO N('ror o0 lc)orl rrNoro r..tl tl c', rN@rl trtso <,8 oro

o o o oooor00'oN + J! ONNN r oo NMNN o rttt r {, lFl @c) oE go P 4l 6 I OOgtnO-O 5s m(odororrrro o F(, (ot(D(nOorrrn o ct> -tttt.rr'|tcN L OE ru o E Y I E J o E I !cl t l) OFJ g J >t' L )< o o.- tr o J uc=r Y ! g o t 3 ECD o .oL cc msN J to rrc)rll OINN o> llOlF rnro o rt.l o

~~I o J o I o ooo o{, eO osrD o L> llNlF ruto d rrcrl. t. o oaE lt-tN tFo I x o U~~

~~o a \9ottr.9N FO lltsNNAr(ro !>'L | | ro ro llt.t. N ts | s I I OG FOro+rn(o Y!~~

~~CJ g o NtsNhNF€€CO@+tn(orOOrOFNm o o OrOrO('rOrOrOOr(lrOr F~~

~~245 J .cl Fs +)J O 0) to1 rlll (,LB> t\ottll o o o.- rFltll -LJat o E o o) c) ! drlosrcoorry P ld i\dt@oEa c F|l) ,i\6rt)rr!nlOr0 o o> t. ll.l () tNollNls{ o(x=.F Jo~~

~~ol tol r{) rc!l OLoo tl LL'~~

~~o oL -c: otll) tol L +)LL> rOl c, L O O.- tNl zool! {raE E.~~

~~a J .o €o o OL o) I or rD rl(\allllllt o s> rt.ltlllll o.F ttlllllll IDE v (.f g o,o CL~~

~~ctl : r N (O O l N |'l l ln f ro)fL ii-F-5rroord1 o o> iio-anr@rrottl 1Jo o(!. NorF,l L +,o o cg r\sl(ncqa 9() tioroldllll(Dto i;olFrrrFo l.^l.lll OE e+('}.ngr f lnNe~~

~~|Ex 3 FL rrrocoor(JDr-ulaoe lo rt+€O1 tOFCtlFql f> ttOrvtOd\F-$NO L.F drar OOr'-F1F(Ot\ -+ F _? rr1 .f :<~~

~~|o I 5s CN FO t6@torl(3lll J> tNF-orlolll 2'e rordltolllnlll LE .vl (n octl :l~~

~~9 t! Q) (oLc or a BO rO(olNll tol o> ttnolrFll t@l P ia.F IlntolFll tel c ad, o (J rro c) L $!nr9r\cOO\OFcfCl -o o ..ilNNF-F(D@@cl, |o o br bt or (n or or or cr or ol F~~

~~246 o cDo-o.+o L I L3J eON o o op L Itorrt€l16 c>to tt.ttt.ll I E'- Or lltllF o oea '6~~

! I 3EE o o ao FtsO lo N{OJ oFl aoFn o c! L tttttl o o Ett o ttrrrrloul o O.- r rrrtttN Q- n o ! o I o @. L o"A% or .^ i5 gq +, l! 66at+Fo o{, r066rro.hltsl o c> l..l.l coo> !t 'F lFrDrnlor(hl o> ooa L !t o ! c> ol! a NO o. JL 6+ !E lllFlllOll 'rO ttr.lll.ll h8g o.- lrrolrll|oll :oo L at, r> +J o ;oL !o 7;@Z .-Eoo D LC o !os J o!o 6) o NtsoOotoQ !6> .-o 9L 66dr|^cNg CL lo, FFNIA@@6 o> rr.l 'L o CF rrrONOrlrnrD@Or !go oos OG mNNlo C'' Y N 99 o'.q 3 D!P9 J) € EEF JL FO 14>oc l> =oL FE,o'F xLlo=>ll)o t o 6 ;e_9 F gr3 4t .o c oLo o FE >!I'JJ I D oF' o.tt 0) 6eo-r o o c OO iE o o a ar9 o o JJ o ot I +,L ttrNllllll !t o FO tll-rlllll GT ttttnllllll oP, e :o P I !o J D co o OF J ot oo ('g t\O rltctolllll 5 g> tttoNlltll L x O.- lllFlllll C'E Qo oL (,@ ct ,o e 6t !=96 rJ! cJo ItrOolllllF oc> rtolllllF p {r!e r160lllllN (oC'iitE I (JO3 0E g: b L to I (Jn uo€oE oog rooN 31 roF('t o co troFNllll oo, ttlllll ^!o os Ite$lllll C) oEl mox 6 6Lg F oi 3 p (JOQ,9 o o or €!e E EC fo.6L .-- O I co or eEon:': o ocgo F ;5; o.-'to'F o :..9 0 P c L p .. o =o :9 ! @ o fu 0, lc o c c o q E L +(nrJ)tsO(hOFNd ,59 3 3 9 @ NNrtstsN@@€@ tto 3o o orotodiooo\oroot otL F 6 | OO ! O I

~~247 pso o .-o ttrllro g> tllll tE trrll LE'a €q, :t~~

: +, .Eo, ol L -l {) rrrtgllllql o (l, iiirt6llllr\ o f> ttlltlllan JE F o E (n @ 3 1 J g o I J a! Ctr r o !(l' trrllolll! or ) o> iirrrolr! v .-ECL '- irtttc.llll +J Q) >< () 9 1t 1J o = c g.: ot o'r (t oct|E lrrrle{ll! 6l E >.F ;airrnlFll(vr C lllll$ll .P -.e.oe,< @ o tt't E |! L +J L o tt]J Jg ctr o (o il) rlorOlrnllrn tD i;iSi.nrrrD'' L C.e i a i I O I I F <.8 --

J= -c J oro JL ttttt(olll o() rrtllrtllll >< rtlll.lll trlllllll o) lll 'a irtllllll E o g 0) E C) J E FE o +r3 FL(o{, rrrrll\9 o OJ L> irrrtlo (, .Fo €.F tltrllif LJ oe, t! po o2 v .- :a o g {) J U''! o= :'s rgr J Fc) rO o .c> r@ ()o ooa :<=

~~L .o -o {, *PPFRRS6iEin in or or or or gr~~

248 o o ctl o o B L IDJ |'rln |l' lD Or L tral(olFl c >! o llll@lc'll € tlal6ll (, €.r!th N +J !n|9 o E..e .o CO o= P () L .-3ot6 o L(' +JC OE o .Fo f.. +) ttlt\olll oo =LrD 0) rtllillr a) c> ttll(nlll !.Foal N o o o (J L q) o g +J Q) (o !no a : NO o L pol OL l olo +, Q) tttlllanlF. L o ,eE J> rrllll.lil () LC o.F aarrllorlorl (l, E' ]J.F oa lg .c) '-o :< t € o C) o Ol Ja o o 6 JL ltll .p o .F C) rltv)ll ! tlll It, tU.p=> o +) -8,+) .p |E |o L F c o ('> +J c L tEL torl tc {rttn' O IDJ s r@l oo ccarl o E>+)O tl fo@ c ooor tn'!GO- o. OF .1, >€ Lo(, c 'oq) +J O>.l' o oo LC oro=L|! 0) Fah L trJ troll 30) tlll o o OL O.F 90)E xo ttll c= .F lr- OL E, z, o E .P J= 3 o |!L oo J >r 0) Qto o L> tlolll t! .e ttlll LF Y Erd rllll o5 L o- ID .Lh cl E'o> cl oEo +)c> cao:f,s IJL al 6 fn oc>cJc, o{) +, O *r'r 6C o .c oE o (J {' L+)L3t! L o!a) +)o .cOO +)ooE c|o +)o +)L -o oaL .F il) lllltlf"llS ooF ItllllNlll 0) s,EO.a tttttllll C-P f o, .j 3LO^o c rv) o cc)J .o ) J -.q-. !() q) t oroo.p () FL F!!!t oo +JL.0) -Yt> {) a\rr.}llllllNl/lF | | | | | | a') (o N C>\ar .p colrlllltnln(r.l "5 C, orDcorc) CrtU, nn lLOg q,LOLo>tB o o ln@ oco sJO.Ft o :< JY) 60 o-f,+Jo L.p ..oc c+J L+r€o+-' s fDOt occo oEO ooooro L $rn.or\@oroqql|? L(J *co(hL o NF-F..-t\F.@@e99 tl ll, btorororororoororol cl g F F t./)r.o o.ooloc)

249 .|'L o>o0 g ! o a o E J o9 60 grD c J> rroFarlnlt|o I tc ttmiOlAllm o FC, rrFtelgll t g o E 6 t E JL O atl 30 'F - 0> psFi J A'- iiEiiH ce, J - Ya o ltIt ooo€ LJ E >.- thHr'?sriERs - -*cae< 6frrF.6N tJt N I I g o JL ro(Drrlloi{NF'(,('| oa) fNNrrtrqN. tr,e lrlltPNd I i(c o $ r a) Or to a '-to "ol.| "arD J! rrrragogr oo rltl

~~A CJ bo CL>\ ll, oE E() {, o L !~~

o ll o a L L 9L 3 e, to Fll6C)Flllt (tr > rr666lll rralll E e oe, 3 o J x J I J o x J I tt, I OF: g N v trrF.oo >! o L e+L I I - o I ) EO(o@ o tDo o 3sJO tFOC Itsr d6 ! o> rtodts I l!F e P c o o J o oa) 6FCilg o L> ffNlFlrti@F U rr€ld'llti, ogl trl.ll N E * o e tn J t 5t FtrNNc FO OO]NN6F ffOOtsaO.Otaj 0 E> ttlal oe rrlNl 3 -;

~~g r6i9FOOrc)FNilr o [email protected] oo o aoororatrordr0rgrot F~~

~~250 3L E IIO rNl q, ot> rNl +jl.l @F ! F! oc~~

~~J 3 F! rtor +rJoL3> o c) 0 O oq tl -UJE~~

~~I a oo ;> JG~~

~~! oor L tl) t6rl o> r(nl (,8O.F~~

~~:a o JJ oo .FUct~~

~~3 J 3 J J ltl JO'L rNroolulFINO Y o> i'--6rc6rta oe lFtFl eo~~

~~oo OLgo rNtsrmlllNlo D ii:ioriviltrFa o D> i@6rNrll' L FC, P o 4F o~~

~~o c @^ %%%Fo-orN O gJJ rrtm€er^NF E o+, I ii;atoroctsn |'r I tl =OFLr vre-~~

a J 99999999 N6NnN|^t4a JO rrbcim-FFoe )> ii6-;|no6e OE 600(orDr'|6 Yo o ,-o : ONNO FO 60c{ J>'L r6rnll6rl ),e t-..ltlll oLtl rellll -o o (, og alo NN\OM lc) rioNrc)rllNl o> rtoFl.llll I rlFllll o n o iil-i\NNOo(Do$n|oFCOgiQNO b,borootorgidtorgr F

~~25r ! AJ o ttotltttl .FO>o rtlttttl trttttl PA o o,5 c OJ c oo 0 EO o 6a)ot~~

~~gl xoOL 2~~

~~E o aro f c> AEo- D c o I o !I ooc{t c (JL I E !B J g o P x QJ 3e) L Ja) o(JOL c!~~

~~c D O! rt(ootttrrl oE s tr$ortttrl +P o rrdtltrll @ oL I @~~

~~!J o LO rrNrtsttttsl oo rr6tNtttNl OL lrFlNlllFl~~

~~OL >ro ooo L> trroorotrrtlrrmtsarrrrl cD oa rttoo4|rtttl~~

~~J CD o g Fts@ 9L rrN€NttttFooio0 l)>o{, rrtttl C.t tttttl oco I o !n o cnrSr@oroNa NNNtstsF'OOO@ @ cn6lrOrOlOrOronoi(h(,r F~~

?52 o. cc) ooJ>r .oL 9> a oct c, L-c J rlrflrrtc)rl o>ot 6 c of L trtrtllltr+ !cE o !>50 tttttFtl €OOL O.- OL p{, (,oeq €> >lt.LO.g.F =o o OE o . !o EL c) EEE o o9 0 0 L o @ (ornF L CC r> o ocl 6o|N o {, 90 ! ! tFJ rlrrrD60 3 Oo F> . q {, Qr! s ttrl otu !L +, o c >! o rrrroF(o o FL gt c E.-.F r t Bo. oo t c ln o03- oLooo o oo > o c (J I EL >\3 I I .F to o L E O >E a' o L o gr qt g ! Lo li 6 ! (t)oor|€oo trl Q o,e (rctI O O o oo}L rN6rDtoNt6nc) o oo F J c> l0Or(oNtotio ob tt t..t.l o rg o 3 og'F NN o to (,o CI .E r oo O >rO t' OCD c> ! . : LO Jg ots o f o Fe) ttrtltrtctrr rtrtstttarr (otr!m!o o.- ttt.tlt.tl O C FO gE N + OD J O FO a .aoo(, M o ocL O OO ll < 6 EO J 9 0.F ) o g9 p0, F O E 9.F J> oi ! 5.- !o o @ tr go Y oot O O>r I I (h ! c eO>f oo I o JL O o t orFoNoNo o o ot o FO(otsOJOr .t p oo so llONFlFdtF(o rOO.'.L J> tl OEI>\9.; O'F rrO6Orr(Or,loo < oo o c o coa o !! > t I @ g oc L o Y otto 0609 c 9€ L ! t. o c0, P @ o fD 0, )c o c c o E O'F Q O o s6(or @(troNo L OO E @ .a o rtststs NtsOOO@ trp o or c'i cr or Or 0r Or g! Or Ol OrD th r oo ! o $

~~253 g rro gt o rOrUl ro gc) t6tC t00 OJ t(ttro >o >J N q, ! Ita c o J # 6 o o0 o !> JEO.F~~

a) D J rrte JO rlrtn o> rtl E OE J] J a pocr x rtsNlltl 60 tomrlll N oa, oe roitrlll o N I {, o o s J ooooo{roo N NNTDNON' 0l P FO OFInoOON@ 9 J>'L tro-ro+NFtsg a, tl LC I I N F N i F o I vo L P oJ JO roSr?rrorrl t> tgOFll€lll ('rE rQ@tlolll o J @ - J

~~@ €L o>!o rFr o )c, o L I @ o a (, (, e^ L EO I E> rrtot o'F tttoa -E EC ttar 3 ,E Ov J @ o a J 9loo t .FJ v o !f lg oy oo r6 oo IN Nr'| <.eC+ !~~

~~D .o o E-x r(h !ts IN JE O O.F r o U- o E o o p3 ! o: oo tlNrtlFlhl U .Fo J> ItolrllNlFl LJ O.r rrNlllolFl uoa oa E .-- o L o rt, o 3 J J o oo rrrtotrlll !> ltrlNllall ! ttttlrt I OEa'F Y~~

~~(o o ! tn(ots€ooNo o tsFtsFFNOO@(o o 0) OT('|CTOTOTor'iOTOTO!~~

254 oo!-()ntiO olo 660n o F3O rrNttftNllo I ECJ tt.tt..l !30 Fttts|ill+ L ,- 0J o ! =o o o ooo-o690 6 3 NOON a gJoe, rterJ|tr€ll €o rrll.lls (, OJ rterollnll I s o ! o c A J3 ! o o! t\J L E ooo o t)= I o o ! ! o o o o ! -oOJ g o {, a) soPJ !t o L o. ) t p n o c, o ! po EE PO tlmtlll oo L :t tl.llll 3 O>l I oo ttNllll o oo JJ o a xt +) ot !os $99 q $o o N lrl rO o> 3 !, I or| o> OF s tttllllFN@ L cE ttlllll' SE !!r o rirrrt,:HR oo EO o' OL o- N o. 99 o >E .rtr oa) !o P OOC'r a'o oq o 6-oFF(Daa LC o@ 13L di'Fomroln I N I F C oo r i.a 6 N O Eo!q c, c> l'l' o(l, €.F i6ncrOl(no c+J' OG fi ooL tc, co 6J o PE o9 !oo oz c,- olo D ogo J oo 'a) oPcrC gJo€ oot cl 6. !oo o0, €0 J .rtL c= 6 .o2 o m3.O o po oorL OJ OrCF OJoo oo Y ()9L o9 o .t.ooq) uooo 3 eo!E J (oo 900 P 6 o9L o FO lll3lllFll DE09 0> rtl.lll.ll L rtlNlrr6tl >o 6P tt.l o! rtNrOjlOOinN !ooc P ccO'F .'$6 oo! o>1, 6 c>o !so OL C).Fo x o>6 o09 co9 69s ..@E oPeo o otD) LOCa oE..O +n€N6OTOFNO L09 O-F NNhNNNO(DO@ atp o o o itororororooigrorot oro F thrZO o!os

~~255 o9~~

3 L.C: rrolllN o o9 L lll' tl c>30 irlll9 @ !.- OL oE6 o a o 9o ! t-'-Q o P o 30sFJ N o cO o! g 8,,5H o ! >! o l. NI t, o,-.Fu iiNrrFo L (JoG- n o L I o g to 9c I :s ,o o ! oo o E> s,rR8 I ll .F rl.ll' og rrJlrFt I o o ! 6 ltt 6 Jg .F0 otl o J Oll Rll tt c,r o.F o G 9E D o I o ..o2 c a o t I OL I !o ,,*,3,t'E! rlt L J> iiF-iEiqi-.i6NtoF o.FCE ;NCrrg-- o o 6 t,t I x o J L a rtol tll 0 oo rl tlN tll g l.> llFl rtl L !c E o ') o = o e tt @ ot J r f rrRlttl o ol :1,'L ftalllr ! o> tt.llll a J tl o OG 6 P : o I v +,c L g .t ! o oo o cl a €g !:\ to tl tflr o> rl tl c t.Fte oO a. P o @ o t!g3 L o9 P o oP o arc cs rrO o 90 !EO o rrn coo g op OE so3 - >o cL ooE>o9 J= rlgFO J J o oL6 L os rrmll oo t oo ,o tt.lll 9Ea) :a t> rlNlllr o9 !.F 5+ oos trG Pg, Ct' f as -E F !60O ..B €i e a NJ cc>a o aag! , 91 >J o6 JL rol E^oo .,= o0, rFl otL r- C,F-Z\ Ca tNl ooa o a5 roll ttl >o9 UJ .F fdrlal oP9 I 0rg E ccco N oo?L U OE 0 bslr(J0 3 €ttJ9-oPE e eO 60cot o t J ;Doore 6 ,L 604 g5 Fl) tll d€rr! J ,?Y E> tll c L liocrL>9- {r oa ac>o!e Y; -t- e6POoro6- 60toL-.c9 F 6E.roOr o a-oQ@6 €L {PPRRRgS$E tt9 o 0t 6ilitinito\ocrcisr SiioEo F ;;F

~~256 >F p o >aot o tJllr = ! L | 'cl o.g | | o I F 9E I I | !o o .! ! P r o! o 2 o o!~~

C L o I ! oo o o> L@o= tro r\llll L r>-rlll ,Fl OE e) !o J ULEO oo o, U !Y {, >P .o ct!o =L o fa)l e | o> | | F EO E 90 o ! +2 A= -E-J o F c .-oOL P> L ax, CD !! O' 'ct O. -- o0elt 9! to .o c .o I r O.F- at o(, ) oo | | o F! ! o I L.F € @ 9 E @ EC fiE t- -: F =-

~~o A' A' ta 5a o JJ L o! ot o oo I oCn I tl P gt I g3 | t.l a e !o r !o I tl o I oE!L 0€ o 3 o! o+, L o o~~

~~oo 5 o>CG ol gt (t o L ll OE tl o EO o UL J u I o :t 6 )\ LO ov .t gl ct f{) <9 o 'ELO olc o OJ CB >F ll =oo EA grorll JP ol.|Jrlt F Cll o r> >F J o L o >o o = -U~~

~~o I E o >+)€c! IJO o=ertr F o> JOt/) OE -tn!t >- !>E L9 e!=L o -@ao€lEL@= c > o t> | I I J O I JF >\ ll, > ot F c o o - F o- a , 9fLa- 4E EC o - oo o F D E OE ! P C.FOoo O U=-JJ o~~

~~co LE =toO O >\ o o.- oi o o EO EC P c O J t FO Eo .c, c o o oo -- a 3 o .F o t/) @ 6[c)(Jo-th~~

257 L o>c '''ii E . t P :! ti c - F FF 3 I h -e 6 (! o = , H r 5t is ; L E JI ;oo.;iF ctl a 3 i g$ E I 233ECr>r ! 3E i o Et rt n, e E F ! ! i:rt! ;; lS L9 :'! 'e OO f ' '1 EE eg lE : E: Ep E o0 , 9> co cc o or rrOo !:AE:L E:€a f; o o(J rrJJ -F ! -c o I rr:t =E c gE :t r ts 3g ; 3 a ug 00 L !9 F; €sf3 i; .9$ L t ooo = LOqr> o : .-E>.F EE ia i3*i'- !s c o eci s 5! og 6LL ii :ti!l E: {ro oc o rOC 0.o c3 E: EsgE;;F i .Fo go Sioo =F EE .-o EEE gE o 99 ET, iEi&3 ! - z=c Eo o tr! L po cc lE;ls:i;:: i I )a o 6> >bo OE L 99 Ei ; e g i: € ! : :: : 0 o99 -L e.7 9O,o 22 E: ; : :E E 3 : oc! ^P,o 3 o _:lD 1= EEi;;:Es Ei i; o ocD ! 93 l'o EC E< .,o i?i: E;i!-$#;E F J - x.-s3!31:5;i P 'i .E .'$ b b :t o E g; g!; t =E t E ; ; ,!r JO @ sE O o> ,i co o5 o{l s: E E! eiH E ,,{ o E()o.- EC COJJ E FO EO Lo'g 90 ooo-o ; !H F tAo 6s ;[ i " .; "g'g =

~~258 t--o t- o~~

~~Ol iqg.qiooo iii i iii i3t N6O O Nm €~~

.E .co N ooo '8,,"r, s.Eig.a: roa qii q iqaiN c€6 o@o o i diJ- N FFN ol 3" S gr @9'o6 ei FOE,O EPL oPo o oc ! 3tr-- o> o 90Fc ? @ o9g'F ! e =E E E Eb 6 Bgs*gH E:3 N Bo€o o 4{l 4i iii-1-o:'oq} o 0) oooo ol Nts | s | | r r I S - >>! 6 tg L LOot r o cL!9o> o otac o 600

~~o OG'F'- 6N @ n@ € 8t 6rr6a tttttntn .l I @ or d L FllOtl t€l i iil i OF g "i~~

I ! e o-ooe -nngS'*S8;;DiFnoB n=3 B? 3 o o .D. ! @o i :;; d JJoi i "d--.qlOftN N Tg dFn O o9 o c?3; o {,P6P Ol Eqs. q 8. N A Aaq i?.i i i c! € s383ig-53-o:o -t o N ' rE O@ i?o. O g g nFFo.q"l s e-. fflE"R :Hg R "b o r FFC "l ts rN{'.:.i 3]; I ; N6€O n- F +Fn ] "t o LL o aBo9 8..co r qqiFsE o F F,As.{ L ('r {q$.E:. oj N roto !O :e{ s: 3=3 cP 3soE !! 3 iE .,Ea3 z r o iii:i [13i 3i5F€3 +o 9eq o9l 33RIB3-3NFNFFN + ogi- o?_ FO C.- EE o ! oo t6o9 !>LG 3P3g EgqIFT o oQ 6 Bf,gBg q*-"1 uI d)e, og, ;^t.. q ":"11 1 : 3 L PO or "l -:S6Nts 5683 $- P* NNS*dgg* 6 o !o o oo 6Po o -.J o o ' o€.a P0'FoE E;E : s LO c>9> E - ..-l-, . biE ; U o "E iti - i55- !;g:- i !: e ..O 6golP o ife3i2't::EE;::I;ec OEo0 oocoo o L ,33333 o :l !;r3;:€EEiEts;tiHfidi :: e-2@ .2 R" d.E E ol iiE2oiFo@ 6l o-oo!0)

~~259 ; 1'~~

L o E o'g DA6g LO OF A oFEs at pO OE a2 r9 P'' d @l 9. a6 @ @l r"IE"EFe l.AE iA N o!t or a '- n 'f g g d'/i g OE ^ic' o gO o9 2 o!6.0 o E 6 ! !o or 0 oFe F.qE o b @ (tl rae":.4? a EF o L! l!o I r,l 'i i:- co I 5 39 3 o o.lD I a>iDta g 't,.o OL o >otL (, Qrnal-!Lo6op orl P-tL-o o ol Ee ?:i Or i? iqi e. e CD : gE o ri a F g ?rtr i c !iEtr't?Fd3 3 o - R- oa;ooo t lgcatro 6 a 9ELI -xJ L oLo60e!6tsJ9 o clr oF "st F E!:EctS (o Crl sE$ q gr n eX 3a 3 Ero t* an o x sJd H 3 E9R o a o !t ! o o a L (, o ct E"E CD o @ aaiEsq Bia i 'ct o o E:-"i ii"ii i ag pRg No (t e o tt a ac !o I t oL 'oc E o ot gr u't a :R rB ts fi u'l FE"Eo.o-to- Atl f,-. 38 R o or \-. c e ro6 .rog.-: 5gB , o or iD € o c aa ct o toQ g z a o '-- oorn !- O ,i a, ao ol F ol qe- qA! F. \. 6.t 6. io o E Cl o ) rn t t c -onn*fr:3R s o .oE a o a o a, F "g: Eq o o F E*FEeg E eee o oi j, jJri.ij-: .'o 5 tr N f R$fi go E a J- I o! o !. c .J ) >-o PO |D (,o c6a ts h'R oo o o Eg J 3 HE-ai[{ E EEe o rsao E g"i g j9S a, oo>- zl "ii"iid A >to; o>o !. !. ELL t6 (oo-oC d .iot -s 64l. ao ''' b%-s eaO 0, "-{- :8 3- E}i5.q Hi 6 -!o o ts s iB-s i i ts eeg o\ l; 'J ',i d B pn 'D ooo !EF dgd F L' +J QO ezezaSoE!E 600 UJ 'b! jg L9 3 E 3 " E o!c3L36L'.5 O o! oE €? G>Fo;o E ?- OrOP .q-9 o b b -t;E: .i:l i, ao El.. o 'F,: :3E.;* o! @ ": :: E r!!EB {P tE:5 oo 't rog 35 A ! Qct E lt:'€g lrt o i-s er.i!*E :; :;EIf; ::::;E " g6; t. HtitE;i;E- ""t---s€ Ii:=.,5 oogCl ;6t-=pt4o € 3 i. :!Es -ie !, . e E.e- ..EG o = t -'n o0rl) ==12-OgoJ o ! ! EigiI EIE oE6 o g ;: LU 5ii53e&3 0 tl E t se::= a i ! ifri3s:sBi ?9eu"s 31. t.oo!"eos ts c 5-3S

~~260 ?,-arrrrrr-'=!{9t}i*it6 :? rrr | |~~

~~ooao-o-o-aroorDN6oq o-onn FrF i^ F 6 n I rD Nrts it -6o6cO 6 A n o N o .l 3fi8t o NNN~~

6Fln m c m o E or lrr o F.aac.i | | | | N r,t,\,! ts I ltl N F (tl itb';iiirtor^'FNGrrttr N d N s @ 5-Clt It A 4|- lt O- 6 '!O-F-ts -N t FF | | -Q -E t! 9 gr Or r o ;;a; b roror | | O o o !: E @ m 6 o ;iri;6 6 rtsF r i 6 N N N N N o a L It o-o- 3 o o o tdio F F N r' e N q|!| o 6 60111 a 6idi.i an an a rr1 N or iD la ol Oru.)t o 6-j'iorai-t-NNtn6oi. e e FN NtO o t otc € g :s9E Ol 6oF 6 g : E E g"8 o ts a 8:56_b44.-a..roo E'E ;6 or -Fm oo ?FN {, oO ro :3;E=t i)a ,ot c NNO C aBNo -rn a ro o I c ll t Nvr o ao iDid$ - 6aao. a 6 n or o qr q o q, F ;5rb a &eo - F - - a |,t a F -'.'e or tfo J RFa o LEA o eeoSbE t ? ;6.5al (J a lFLG- o6tsrgFF6aa$CarD4t ts F 6CEEFooP F 66ib i- 66b ri e io o trr ts o F F F 6itrl in NNt N - 6 o = R Et o N?m 5gtg 9L>.$a-.cro !9OF0,3?.E aoaJ-oEoa g 6LltoP o EDT!^4I R ungi.' rO @oF -t N N N I 19 Ja'o! F 6 xis&-NO 6 J .! { ul | € Yr N )E o 6Ga-€F\Dmtn€rF=:iio -o26ruo-E!B z, C\: O 8 E gJEE 8 E E o 9€ ' e ,! ; ; I arl L>r.6 o o I m o o c*ClO0ro{ E rn mFrt O dFs rn N rO {r 6 rralD ts o|O6r .{ NOO @ O 14 F r?.6m Ol graN F N 6 F 6 9 i:E! E { EH E u @13.?o'-eeooo-6598

o L isEE : E.:l 3 E a) 1' B.!et"ororq L -D6!o!9aeoOO.E.oo09so @ o e 9".-E n; E LJ c.Faro 3tioce>o>9PF!o'. ; A L a:::'r 3 E eE!.Jrlol-gt oc>o -tx L olL {, > L €' go ;cc,a)EO rrE o > o o > o > ooo ioo- t .-rr- .hEcs 3d'iS E 4-.3 e . E e c 0 =:H::fi'?33.!le:..H$F::I;b';E.Et brub oPeo o c a ? oo3 ooooooQcc6so g C;ii; r .f LJF o D o t 3 oE3:tt€332;i!€ q, .. C o -ar!O!.FP a6o oOO o 9 !Ooa ,l o P-- Z .2 5 -E ; t JCo=t tc 3f"Ee!oeoEe'-r F ii2o;t-rarF =-,r,

~~26r I *oi-,N{'-o@ ;{6di@(9'oN iD66roofi5 dNO $ o tc E~~

tor o o o @ o -,to n CO o Ol Plt 3 q E N o L o *. oN '3 o or ii'H i H o I rs | + O P a @ o L n :i ('rN o L 3 *,t- 6 @ (tr e a, rt, ii; o '-to 6 6 ol i!;6 6 - 6 s 6 - E FN€ o o I oc ! o o o ooE o d r-6 N F rO n I 6tO dr O + re L 6 i ;6 fi 6 o rt o or o J I 0 {, o o o! N+Ond o ilii € , ro i.ii i o N o o d FN@F o L a o o oo! s o R o o F 3i8 3 I t n U o 6ro S @ F ! o o o t o r 9o!- F r P o F :i9 b 5 3 ts ol ntoeOrr = L FNJ o 0 E :; z o oo_r o! o F N O o r Omr a @ €arcla o 69 6FO: o -crlo9- j g a o C.-C o p>geoo0: o OE o go U r @ooo g or jr r n o o 1> 3.,3cjEi ! or I cr @ F n .bt H 'd E I e6 @.->+iEr-E o g i 6 i soo a B;. o ooe.lf € 6 sE o :E tb a .i a : o { U .t-f-; .: g -:e ! jr r. lt L '' L a o di69= a ! ..3 5 E o- I .3 =-alot9Jo- o 6o > o > o € o o .::3Ec 3 'oe oo o I t-o-egAS€"? tt €!! ..Ei-.;t!>!rLLc oo opoop-ct 6o.o ! 99> gf g 3 E 5 t b 3 oc t E o CiD0oa6o o> :E -e:iE i - |ijo o L v, a G 4 - 0 E-363 9;= 5; E.,- frE 3 I ! o ! o e o -c F e 23t5&. =e "t

~~?62 tl tl~~

~~ll @ tl ol tl~~

~~@ tl Ol tl~~

~~ol FI o o gl o o~~

~~@ L |n I gl o 6 tol~~

~~o o ! r(n ol c o~~

~~L o o oti L ts o6 o gr (tl N zf r OF F tsul ol oo (, N~~

~~(o Og! F o o Nt/r o o Po 0 o o o F tl I or orl .o L +o n o o ctr c o FO E o ooC- U L QO q, aoo g o P @ oo ol oc o L- t E> o g F F 60~~

263 REFERENCES ADF&G. 1977. A fjsh and w'ildlife resource inventory of Western and Arctic Alaska. Alaska Coastal Management Program. Volume 2: Fisheries. Anchorage. 340 pp. . Alaska's fisheries atlas. Vol. 2 [R.J. McLean and K. Delaney, ---eai.I. 48 pp. + maps. Anchorage. . 1983a. Annua'l management report - 1983 - Kuskokw'im Area. Di v. ---- Commer. Fish., Bethel. . 1983b. Kuskokwim stream surveys, 1954-1983. Unpubl. document. ---T'it. Commer. Fish., Anchorage. 171 pp. . 1984a. An atlas to the catalog of waters important for spawning, rearing, or migration of anadromous fishes. lrlestern Region. Resource Management Region IV. Div. Habitat, Anchorage. 5 pp. + maps. . 1984b. An atlas to the catalog of waters important for spawning, rearing, or migration of anadromous fishes. Interior Region. Resource Management Region IV. Div. Hab'itat, Anchorage. 5 pp. + maps. . 1984c. Kuskokwim Area Comrnercial and Subsi stence Salmon 1984 Management Plan. Div. Commer. Fish., Bethel . 20 pp. -TiTtreries . 1984d. Kuskokwim Area salmon report to the Alaska Board of Div. Commer. Fish., Bethel. 16 pp. -ffiheries.. 1984e. Annual management report - 1984 - Yukon Area. Div. -*Gmer. Fish., Anchorage. 133 pp. . 1985. Yukon Area commercial and subsistence salmon fisheries Management Plan. Djv. Commer. Fish., Anchorage. 17 pp. -I98.SBaxter, R. 1970. Kuskokwinr test fishing studies, 1966-L970. A-Y-K Region' Kuskokwim Salmon Test Fishing Rept. No. 1. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish.' Bethel. 18 pp. . I977a. Eek River reconnaissance survey, 1976. A-Y-K Region' ----- fuslokwim Resource Rept. No. 2. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Bethel. 30 pp. I977b. Hoholitna River reconnaissance survey ' L977. A-Y-K Regi on , Kuskokwim Resource Rept. No. 3. ADF&G, Div. Cornner. Fish., Bethel . 22 pp.

~~Barton, L.H. 1984. A catalog of Yukon River salmon spawning escapement Fish. surveys. Tech. Data Rept. No. I2l. ADF&G, Div. Cornmer. ' Juneau. 472 pp.~~

264 Bergstrom, D.J. 1986. Personal communication. Fishery Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Bethel. Buklis, L.S. 1983. Anvik and Andreafsky rivers salmon studies,198?. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Anchorage. 6i pp. . 1985. The salmon fisheries of the Yukon River: a bibliography of published by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Tech. -TfieratureData Rept. No. I44. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Juneau. 26 pp. . 1986. Personal communjcation. Yukon Research Bjolog'ist, ADF&G, ------D:iv. Commer. Fish., Anchorage. Buklis, 1.S., and L.H. Barton. 1984. Yukon River fall chum salmon biology and stock status. Informational Leaflet No. 239. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Juneau. 67 pp. Buklis,1.S., and J.A. Wilcock. 1985. Age, sex, and size of Yukon River salmon catch and escapement, 1984. Tech. Data Rept. No. I52. ADF&G, Div. Cornmer. Fish., Juneau. 93 pp. Huttunen, D.C. 1984a. Abundance, dge, sex, and size of salmon (Oncorhynchus sp.) catches and escapements in the Kuskokwim Area, 1982. Te-[ Tata RCpt. No. 111. ADF&G, lj'iv. Commer. Fjsh., Juneau. 76 pp. . 1984b. 1982-1983 Kuskokwim River test fish'ing projects. A-Y-K ----E!ion, Kuskokwim Salmon Test Fish'ing Rept. No. 13. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Bethel. 92 pp. Kuhlman, F.W. 1974. Kogrukluk River counting tower proiect. A-Y-K Region, Kuskokwim Escapement Rept. No. 8. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Bethel. McBride, D.N., H. Hamner, and L.S. Buklis. 1983. Age, sex, and size of Yukon River salmon catch and escapement, 1982. Tech. Data Rept. No. 90. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Juneau. 141 pp. McBride, D.N., and J.A. t^Jilcock. 1983. Alaska chinook salrnon (0ncorh nchus tshawytscha h{albaum) catch and escapement,1961-1980, with d9€, size, with sex composition estimates. Informational L.eaflet No. 2I2. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Juneau. 181 pp. Schneiderhan, D.J. I979. L978 Kuskokwim River sonar stud'ies. A-Y-K Region, Kuskokwim Escapement Rept. No. 16. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fi sh. , Anchorage. 27 pp. . 1980. 1979 Kuskokw'im River sonar studies. A-Y-K Region, --jlslokwim Escapement Rept. No. 18. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Anchorage, 12 pp.

265 . LggZ, I}BZ Salmon River weir studies. A-Y-K Region, Kuskokwim 17 pp' --Esc;p.t.ni Rept. No. 24. ADF&G, Di v. Conrner. Fi sh. , Anchorage ' . 19g4a. 1983 Aniak River sonar study. A-Y-K Region, Kuskokwjm ----E;p"t.nt-C.pt. No. 32. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Anchorage' 44 pp' . 1984b. i983 ignatti weir study. A-Y-K Region, Kuskokwim ----ffi;p.tn.ni nept. no. 31: ADF&G, Div. Cormer. Fish., Anchorage. 47 pp' Schultz, K. lg8?. Goodnews River tower study, -1981. 4:Y-K Region' Kuskokwim Escapement Rept. No. 29. ADF&G, Div. Cormer. Fish., Bethel. 54 pp. . 1983. Goodnews River tower study, !982. A-Y-K Region, Kuskokwim ----TsEapement Rept. No. 24. ADF&G, Div. Cormer. Fish., Bethel . 68 pp. . 1986. Personal corununication. Asst. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, -----D'i v . Commer. Fi sh. , Bethel . Schultz, K., and P. carey. 1982. Kanektok River sonar enumeratiglt-PIoi99t' 1982. A-Y-K Region, Kuskokwim Escapement Rept. No. 27. ADF&G, Div' Commer. Fish., Bethel. 22 PP. j salmon- (0,nco[hynch=us W lcock, J.A. 1985. 0rigins of chinook .ts[9w.vt;9!a l^laibaum) in Yukon River fishepies, 1984. Tech. Data Rept. N0. L5t. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Juneau. 29 pp. . 1986. Personal communication. Fishery Biologist, ADF&G, Div. ----Fmmer. Fish., Stock Biology Group, Anchorage' pr_oject, 1969-L970. yanagawa,-A-y:K c.M. L972a. Kogrukluk River counting tOwer Region, Kuskokwim Escapement Rept. No. 4. ADF&G, Div. Commer. F'ish. , Anchorage. 18 PP. proiect, l_9.7L. A-Y-K Region' . lg72b. Kogrukluk River weir - ---miiofwim Escapem-ent Rept. No, 5. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish. ' Anchorage. 9 PP. yukon Technical Committee (YTC). 1985. Briefing report on the status of River. salmon stocks, fisheries and management programs in -ttre Yukon Avai I abl e f rom ADF&G, D'iv . corrner. Fi sh. , Anchorage. 65 pp.

~~266 Sheefish Distribution and Relative Abundance Western and Interior Regions~~

I. REGIONWIDE INFORMATION A. Regionai Distributiorr In the Western and Interior regions, sheefish are found in the Kuskokwim and Yukon river drainages. These sheefish can be separated i nto three groups: the I'linto fl ars and upper Yukon river nonanadromous populations, the lower and middle Yukon River anadromous population, and the Kuskokwim River anadrornous population. Sheefish have also been stocked in several Interior Region lakes. The range of each of these populatiorrs will be described 'in t,he fol lowing narrative. B. Regional Distribution Maps A series of freshwater fish distrjbution maps at 1:250,000 scale have been produced for this report. The categories of mapped i nfornration are as fol I ows: o General distribution o" Documented presence in stream or lake Documented overwi nteri ng a reas o Documented rearing areas These maps are available for review in ADF&G offjces of the region 0r may be purchased fronr the contract vendor respr.,ns'ibl e for thei r reproduction. C. Factors Affecting Distribution Alt (1973) discusses factors that may be responsible for the very limited distribution of sheefish in Alaska. Sheefish have such stringent spawn'ing ground requirements that only a few spawning bars are available 'in all of Alaska's rivers (ibid.). Another factor may be the lack clf delta areas for rearing. Interconnected lakes ancl sloughs and slow-nroving deep-water areas of lower rivers are biologically rich and apparently quite important for growth and survival of young sheefish (ibid.). Velocity barriers may also limit the distribution of sheefish. Sheefish will not ascend streams with rapid current or even the slightest falls (ib'id.). Sheefish are not generally found in salt water, and saltwater barrjers may limit their range exparrsion into the Seward Penninsula area and from Kotzebue Sound into northwestern Alaska (ibid.). D. Movemenrs Between Areas Arradromous sheefish migrare upstre'am in early spring. Sheefish feed in tributaries and at mouths r.rf clearwater streams ouring the summer. Spawners rhen complete thei r migration to upstreanl spawning areas in the fal I (August rhrough early October). Downstream migration takes place under the ice, with spenr fish probably reaching brackish water overwintering areas in micl winter. Fry leave spawning areas during the spring floocts and

267 rear in interconnected sloughs and lakes of rhe lower rivers (Alt 1977 , i981 ). Movements of nortanadromous sheefish are not as well understood. It'is known that the I'tinto flats sheefish population ovenvinters in the lower Tolovana and Tanana rivers, enters the Minto flats area to feed in late May afrer breakup, and spawns in rhe Chatanika River (A1t 1977). The Nowitna River sheefish population ovenvinters in [he main Yukon River near the mouth of the Nowitna (Alt lgi5) and feeds in the Nowitna River as far as 115 knr upstream (ibid.). This population spawns in the Sulukna River,29C krn up f rorn the Nowitna River nrouth (Alt 1978). Immature sheefish from the Nowitna population rear in the numerous sloughs and interconnected lakes of the lower Nowitna as we'll as in the slow-moving waters of the mairr river (Alt 1979). Nonanadromous sheefish in the Porcupine River probably overwinter either in the lower Porcupine River or in the Yukon River near the Porcupine Riven mouth (Alt 1972). The Porcupine River popu'lation migrates upstream to spawn 1n the upper Porcupine River in Alaska and Canada (Alt 1972, I974, 1975). E. Populat'ion Size Estimation The relative abundance of sheefish in Western and Interior region streams has rtot been systematica'l'ly assessed. Estimates of population sjze are general ly based on rough measures of cacch-per-unit-effort gathered during stream surveys conducted wi th gi I I nets and hook and I i ne. The status of sheefi sh populations in stocked lakes is also evaluated using gi'11 nets and hook and line. F. Regi onal Aburrdance Very I i ttl e i rrformation on sheef i sh abundance 'is avai I abl e, and the information that has beerr collected applies only f,o specific lakes and streanrs. As a result, estimates of abundance cannot be appropriateiy nrade at the regional level. Abundance information, where available, is containecl in the descriptions of each group that fol low.

II. KUSKOKWIM RIVER POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE Alt (1981) summarizes the movements and distribution of sheefish in the Kuskokwim River. In April and May, sheefish migrate up the Kuskokw'im River from overw'intering areas in brackish water ond lakes and sloughs jn the lower reaches of the Kuskokwinr. Feeding areas in the Kuskowim River include lakes and sloughs of the lower Kuskokwim, the area around the mouths of the Aniak and George rivers, and sections of the Holitna and Tatlawiksuk rivers {ibid.). The Hol'itna River system is a major feeding area. Sheefish arrive there in early June, with smaller fish arriving first. Cutbank,20 ni up the Holitna River, is the major sheefish feeding area (jbid.). The najority of sheefish arrive at Cutbank jn late June and Ju'ly to feeo orr chutn salmon smolt when the chum salmon out-migration is at its peak. Sheef ish irr th'is ared are mainly inmatures and adults that wi I I nof, spawn in the current year (norrspawners). Sheefish nclrmally leave this

26E area by late July. If water levels are high or if rhe chum salmon out-migration is of short duration, the sheefish niay be found here for only a short time or not at all (ibid.). Other Hoiitna River feecting areas include the area around the Hol itna River mouth rvhe16 prespav'/ners, nonspawners, and a few immature fish are found jn late June and July. Immature sheefish are found irr various areas above the islands 1 Ii up from the mouth from early June to early July (ibid.). Immature sheefish also feed on chum salmon snrolt at riirer mile si>: i,f the Holitna in mid June to early July (rt,id.). A few sheefish are found at mile 40 of the Holitna in July, feeding on salmon and lampreys (ibid.). Titnuk creek,55 mi up the Hiriitna, g6nera'l1y has a few small immature sheefish feeding on lampreys and whitetisn in the deep ho'le at its mourh in July (ibid.). In the Hoholitna River, a tributaiy of the Holitna, there are generally a few sheefish at tfre fifth bend about 6 mi upstream frorn the mouth in July and Augusr (ibid.). A few immature and nonspawning sheefish were taken near the mouth of Townsite Creek, tributary ro the Hoholitna, in mid september (ibid.). It.is nor knowrr hclw long sheefish are found in that area. sheefish do not spawn in the Holitria River (A1t lg7r, rglz,19g1). In July and August, feeding prespawners move our of the Ho'litna to rhe Kuskokwim River and migrate toward upstream spawning' areas. Nonspawners and immatu re sheefi sh I eave the Hol i rna Ri vei oy I ate August a.no ea11y. September to migrate downstream to overwinrering grounds (Alt 1981). A few feeding-fish are srill up the Holitna and Hoholitna rivers as late as ear'ly 0ctober. It is pcssible that a few sheefish overwinter irr deep holes of the upper ano rniddle Kuskokwim River (ibid.). The tw.o.knowrr spawning. areas for Kuskokwim River sheefish are Big River and Highpower creek (Alt 1981, rglz). It appears rhat consjierably more sheefish spawn at Big River than at Highpower creek (Alt 19s1): Sheefish spawn over a 2 mi stretch of Big River aproximately 40 to 42 1ti_ upstream from the mouth. The best spawning arlea is pro'bably 2 tcr 2.5 mi above the last large meandering bend of the rivbr. Slieefish enter Big River from late July through early September and probably llriv_9 at rhe spawning grounds from early Augu-st rhrough early bcrober. sheefish that spawn in Highpower creek are bn the spawning !rounos in .1q.. september (ibid. ). These sheefish spawn rrr the low6r- 20c n! of !'ighpower creek, mainly in the vicinity of one grave1 bar (A1t 1g7z). The postspawnitg m'igration to overwintering areai rakes place under the ice, with sheefish present in the vicinity of Bethel by November (ibid.). early Though formal population estimates dre nof, ava'ilable, the Kuskokwim River sheefish populdrion is probably quite snrall (Alt i9g1). There has been concern in recent years that commercial and subsistence salmon gili nets on the lower Kuskokwim River have croppeo niany of the large prespawning sheefish females from the population beforL they migraie upstream to spawning grounds (ibjd. ). Area r.esidents hive -als

269 tennle sheefish are able ro reach the spawning grounds at Big River despite fish'ing pressure. However, the skewed sex ratio (6 females to 27 males in a sample of sheefish taken in gi'11 nets at the Bjg River' spawning grounds) may indicate that fishing is taking an inordinate number of femaies from the population (ibid.). Males in this sample of mature fish'included seven age classes, ranging from ages 4 to 12. The s'ix females incluc.led only four age classes, f rom ages 8 to 12. The early age at maturity and large number of age classes of males is a healthy sjgn; but the small number of age classes of females and rhe late age at maturity in this sample may indicate that the population is in jeopardy (jbid.). Alt (1981) founo no evidence of a s'ign'ificant change in the number of sheefish feeding in the Hol'itna River in 1978-1980 from the numbers he observed in 7967-I97L.

~~I I I. LOWER AND 1'liLJDLE YUKON RIVER ANADROI'4OUS SHEEFISH DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE The ntajority of the sheefjsh rn the Yukon River in Alaska be1~~

270 past Allakaket (A'lt 1969). Rearing sheefish have not been found in the Koyukuk R'iver, indicating that rearing and ovenvintering both take place in the lower Yukon River (Alt i979). In 1969, an attempt was made to conduct an aerial survey count of the number of sheefish on rhe Koyukuk and Alatna river spawning grounds (Alr 19i0). A total of 2,615 sheefish were counted; but the count was urrrel iable, an

IV. NONANADROMOUS SHEEFISH DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE Several popu'lations of nonanadromous sheefish dre found in the middle and upper Yukon River drainage. In manJ areds, these sheefish probably intermingle with anadromous sheefish that spawn irr the Yukon River drainage somewhere above the Dalton Hjghway bridge. The Nowitna River supports a nonarradromous population of sheefish that spawn 'in the Sulukna R'iver, tributary to the Nowitna (Alt 19iB). Sheefish are not found irr the Nowit,na River above the Su'lukna River mouth (ib'id.). These fish feed in the lower reaches of the llowitna and probably overwinter in the main Yukon River not far from the mouth of the Nowitna (Al t 1975). Sheefish rear in numerous s'loughs and interconnected lakes of the lower Nowjtna as well as in slow-moving waters of the main river (Alt 1979).

27r Nonanaoromous sheefish are also found in the Minto flats area. Sheefish probably do not overwinrer in Minto flats because Minto flats waters become ..,xygen deficient in the winter (Alt 1977, Cheney L972). Sheefish enter Minto flats after breakup in May and feed in the area during the summer (Alt 1969, I977). The spawnin_g- pop_u-1-atio1 b.eSins migrai'ing up the Chatanika River jn late June (Alt 1968, I977) and reaches ihe vjcinity of the Elliott Highway bridge in late August and September' (Alt 1968; I977). Spawning occ.urs in the qqPer_Chatanika River in lace September and early 0ctober (Alt 1968, 1977). These fish then migrate downstrearn to overwinter in the lower Tolovana or Tanana rivers lntt i968, L977). Tag returns inclicate that not all l'lirrto flats'sheefish ipawn above ifre Ell'i9tt Highway bridge (Alt 1969). trlost of rhe population probably spawns farther down the Chatanika {Alt 1969). Log jambs and shal'low water make spawning in the Tolovana River unl ikely (Alt 1970). Sheefis-h are also found jn the upper Tanana River. These fish may ejther be part of the Minto flats spawning population or may constitute separate local popu'lations (Alt I979, 1980). Sheefish have been found in the lower Tanana in micl May at the mouths of the Cosrra, Tolovana, and Chitanana rivers and Baker Creek (Alt 1979) and 'in June in the Nelson Clearwater River (tttagata 1967). They are also regularly found in the lower Chena River (Alt 1973, 1977), and in L972 one sheefish was taken froni a'ianana River slough between Delta and Tok (Alt 1973). Some sheefrsh are found at the mouths of Ray and Dall rivers and Hess Creek immed'iately after breakup (Alt I975). These tish are probably rnenrbers of a lclCal rionanadromous popu'lation. During the sumnner, they npve jnto the lower reaches of these tributaries to feed, but they are absent frorn these areas by early October (Alt 19i5). The spawning portion of these frsh probinty.lebves the tributary mouttrs and travels taken irp the Yukon Ri ver to spawn ('ibid. ). .Sheef ish have al so been fi^crnr Birch Creek and the Hoclzana River (A1t 1972). Sheefish have been found in uppet'Birch Creek near the Steese Highway in the. fall and probably sp'awn there (ibid.). immature sheefjsh hove been takerr in the 'lower q kni of the Chanoalar River (Alt 1978), and mature and immature sheefish have been taken from the main Yukorr River and s'loughs of the yukon River rrear Beaver (ibjd.). It is not known whether these are part of the Yukon River anadroff,ous population or local nonanadromous stocks. 0ne sheefish tagged at the mouth of lless Creek in 1974 was iapturecr in L977 in the BIick River (triUutaty to the Porcupine-River), 'i1cticating that some of rhe sheefish found at the mouths of middle Yukon tributarjes during the summer may be of Black River origin (Alt 1ei8). Nonanadromous sheefish are known to spavln in the upper Porcupine R'iver and 'in the Salmorr Fork of rhe Black River (Alt I974, 1978). Sheef ish also rear and overwjrtter in the Porcupine River (Alt 19i5), but !hey have rrot been found in the Sheenjek River or the Coleen River (Alt Ig74). The Black River populatiorr'Black of Porcupine'Kevinjik River sheefjsh spawns in the Sa lmon Fork of the Rtver near Creek (Alt 1978). prespawners have been observed in the v'icinity tlf the spawning grounds as early as late August. Low catches in gi'11 nets inoicate that this

272 'is not a large population (ibid.). 0verwintering areas for these fish are probably iri cieeper holes of the slow-moving tslack River (ioio.). Mature and immatur"e sheefish are taken by residents of Chalkytsik (125 km up the Black River) immediately after breakup in May (ibid.). In the upper Yukon, sheefish ore found at least jn the niouths of all tributary rivers (Alt 19i3). The spawn'ing grounds of these sheefish have not been located, but age 0 and age i sheefish have been taken in the delta areas at the mouths of the Charley, Kandik, l{ation, Tatonduk, and Seventymile rivers, indicating that spawnirrg probably occurs in the lower reaches of these five rivers (Alt I97I, 1979'i. These sheefish probably overwinter in the upper Yukon vicinity (Alt I97I). Linrited Survey information'indicates that the spawning population of these upper Yukon sheefish is quite small (ibid.).

V. ENHANCEMENT Sheefish have been stocked in many lakes in rhe Fairbanks area in an effort to provide diverse fishing opportunities for drea residents (rab1e 1). The stocking program has been hanrpered by the difficulties jnvolved in obtaining r'ipe eggs from a species tlrat spawns in rernote areas of Alaska while 'ice is forming on the rivers. Hatching and rearing sheefish to finger'ling size have also met with limitecj success until recent years (Alt 1980). Sheefish srockecl in lakes that do not contain populations of forage fish grow well during the first years 01'life, but after three to 1'our years their growth slows (ib'id.). Sheefish stocked jn lakes containing rainbow trout, grayling, or coho salmotr, however, also m.ay nof, grow well because of competition for food (Alr 1978, 1979, 1980). Sheefish have SurviVed and grown for several years jn SOme lakes, and in Four M'ile Lake near Tok a naturally reproducing population has been estab- I i shed (Al t 1980, 1984) .

~~273 Table 1. Water Bod'ies in the Interior Region Stocked [,lith Sheefish' 1968-84~~

Water Body Cormuni ty Years Stocked iii rch Lakea Bi rch Lake r97 4 Bul lwi nkl e Lake Delta iunction 1984 Chatanika River Chatani ka 1985 Clear Pond Clear 1970,72,73,77 Craig Lake Johnscin Ri ve r 1981,84 oonnll 1y Dome Pondb Del ta Junction 1977 Earthmover Pit Clear 1984 Eielson Cooling Pond Eiel son AFB 1977 ,78,79,81 Engineer Hill Lake Ei el son AFB t970 Fc;ur l'lile Lake Tetl i n 1968,69,84 Ft. l,ll,l Cooling PonrJ Ft. hlainwright 1977 ,81 Grayf ing Lake Eiel son AFB 1984 Gul I Lake Ft. Gree'ly 1981 l'la rd i ng La ke Aurora Lodge L982,84 Island Lake Del ta Junction 1979 Lakeview Pond Fa i rbanks 1981 Lost Lake Big De1 ta 1973,84 l4anchu Lake Ft. lrlainwright 1978 ,8 I t4ile 1239 Lake lio rthway 1969 Mile 1242 Lake Northway 1969 Nenana Pond Nenana 1984 North Pono Ft. Greely 1977 Sarrs ing Lake Cl ea r L977 Siver Fox Pit Aurora Lodge 1969,81 ,84 South Pond Ft. Greely 1977 Texas #2 La(e Ft. Greely 1981 Wa I den Portd- Chena Hot Springs 1978,79 |,jeigh Statjorr Pond Fai rbanks 198i,84 !'ih'ite Alice #1 Lake Anderson 1981 tlhite Al ice #Z Lake Ande rson 1981

~~Sources: ADF&G 1984, 1985; Alt 1971, 1973, 1975, 1978' 1979. a Seventeen fingerlings transferred from Lost Lake. b Transferred trom Eielson Cooling Pond.~~

274 REFIRENCES ADF&G. 1984, Fish release records for regions 01, 02, and 03. Div. FRED. Unpub'l . computer runs. 209 pp. . 1985. Fish release records for region 03, 1984 anC 1985. Div. Unpubl . computer runs. 15 pp. -TilfD. Alt, K.T. 1968. Sheefish and pike investigaiions of the upper Yukon and Kuskokwim drainages with ernphasis on Minto flats drainages. ADF&G. Fed. Aid in Fjsh Rest. 1967-1968 pro9. repr. Vol. 9. Proj. F-5-R-9, Job 17-8.

. 1969. Sheefish and pike investigations of the upper Yukon and drainages with emphasis on Minto flats drainages. ADF&G, --GkokwimFed. Aid irr Fish Rest. 1968-1969 prog. rept. \'ol. 10. Proj. F-9-1, Job 17-8.

. 1970. Sheefish and pike investigations of the upper Yukon and ----TGkokwim drainages with emphasis on . friinto f lats clrainages. ADF&G, Fed. Aid jn Fish Rest. Ann. prog. rept. Vol. 11. Proj. F-9-2, Job T7 -8. . 1971. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. prog. rept. Vol. 12. Proj. F-9-3, ---TDF&G,Study R-I I. . 1972. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Fed. Aid in Fjsh Rest. Ann. prog.rept. Vol.13. Proj. F-9-4, Srudy R-Ii. -DF&G, . L973. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Arin. prog. rept. Vol. 14. proi. F-9-5, ---TDFaG,Study R-II. . 1974. A 1ife history study of sheefish anc v'hitefish in Alaska. Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 15. Proj. F-9-6, Study R-ti. -49pgG,. t975. A life history stucly of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. ----TFF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol.16. Proj. F-9-7, Study R-iI. . 1977. Inconnu, Stenodus Jeucichthys, migration studies in Alaska ---TFl-tq. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Can. 34:729-123. . L978. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish 'in Alaska. , Fed. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest. Ann . performarrce rept. Vol . 19. Proj . --TD'F&GF-9-10, Study R-II.

275 . 1979. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Fed. Aid tn Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 20, Proi. -:mF&G,F-9-11, Study R-II. . 1980. Life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. Fect. Ai d i n Fi sh Rest . Ann. performance rept. Vol . 2L, Proi. --IADF-&G,R-II, Jobs R-II-A and R-II-8. . 1981. Ljfe history study of sheefish in Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'tn Fish Rest. and Anadromous Fish Studies. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 22, Proj. F-9-13, Jobs R-II-A and R-II-8. . 1982. Inventory and catal og'ing of sport fish and sport fish waters of Western Alaska. Part B: innoko Ri ver and sheefi sh adaptabi I i ty studies. ADF&0, Fed. Aid in Fjsh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 23. Proj. F-9-14, Job G-I-P-8. . 1983. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters of ['jestern Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 24. Proj. F-9-15, Job G-I-P-8. . 1984. Inventory and cataloging of sport fish and sport fish waters3rs of l,'iesl,'iestern tern AlAlaska. aska . Part B: Fisheries resource investigations and sheefish aoaptability studies. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 25. Proi. F-9-16, Job G-I-P-8. Cheriey, W.L. I972. Life history investigations of northern pike in the Tanana River orainages. ADF&G, Fecl. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. progress rept. Vol. 13. Proi. F-9-4, Job R-III-E. Nagata, T. 1967. Sheefish investigations in the Minto Lake drainages. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. rept. prog. Vol. 8. Proi. F-5-R-8, Job i7-8.

~~276 Marine Fish~~

~~Pacific Halibut Distribution and Abundance Western Region~~

I. REGIONI,JIDE INFORMATION Relative to the southern Bering Sea and northern Pacific 0cean, the eastern Bering Sea has had a history of limitecl distriburion and abundance of hal ibut. The hal ibut popu'lation 'in the eastern Bering Sea was drastically reduced by overharvest in 1962 and 1963 (NPFMC 1984). Since the mid 1960's, the halibut stocks have recovered to some exteni, but the Western Region has not supported a substanrial commercial fishery. (See the Halibut Commercial Harvest narrative in this volume for a description of management area boundaries and more informarion on the fishery in the region. )

I I. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION Pacific halibut are found throughout the marine waters of the Western Region. Their distribution is seasonal and is direcrly related tcr bottom temperatures (St.-Pierre 1984), as d'iscussed be'low.

IiI. AREAS USED SEASONALLY AND FOR LIFE FUNCTIONS Hal ibut typical ly occupy water of 3 to 8oC, and their seasclnal distributions are influenced by changing water temperarures (Thompson and Van Cleve 1936). In the sha11ow, shelf area of the Bering Sea, water temperatures drop to OoC or lower during winter, while the surface is covered with ice. At this time, both young and adult hal'ibut concentrate in the deeper, warmer waters along the outer edge of the continental shelf (up to 1,100 m) (Sr.-Pierre 1984). Adults are knowtt to spawn between 0ctober and March in these areas in depths ranging from 220 io 450 m (St.-Pierre 1984, Terry et al. 1980). During the spring and early summer, however, the bottonr temperatures rise in the shallow shelf zone, and halibut move into this area (50 to 150 m depths) (Gusey L979). The shallow coastal zone prov'ides a suitable nursery environment for young halibut and feeding grouncis for the larger juveniles and adults (Best 1981). Adults are founct as far north as St. Lawrence Island in a sparse distribution during the sumnrer and early fal'1, while young halibut (2 to 4 years) are abundant further south in the Bering Sea (Gusey 1979, Dunlop et al. 1964). Most of the fish have been located at depths from 25 to 150 m (Bestr p€FS. conm.) during this f,ime, but some ind'iv'idual s occupy depths from 90 to 400 n" (Pereyra et al . 1977). A series of halibut distributions maps at 1:1,000,000 scale has been proouced for this report and is found in the Reference Map Atlas for the Western and Interior regions. The categories c.rf nrapped information are as follows: " Winter distribution - December rhrough April ' Spring distribution - May anct June o Summer/fall distribution - July through September

279 IV. FACTORS AFFECTiNG DISTRIBUTION Water temperature is an important factor determining hal ibut distribution. The cooling of bottom temperatures irr winter on the shallow contirrental shelf causes halibut to concentrate in the deeper, warmer waters aiong the edge of the shelf. Halibut are known to spawn throughour the winter in these areas. The surmer movement into shallower water is associated with rising temperatures and increased feeding (St.-Pierre 1984). (For more details refer to the Pacific halibut Life History and Habitat Requirements narrative in volume 1 o1' this report).

V. MOVEI'IENTS BETWEEN AREAS Al l I ife histr.rry stages of the hal ibut are associated with movements between the deep waf,ers (300 to 1,100 m) off rhe edge of the contitrental shelf, ano the shallow shelf waters. Populations tend to concentrate irr the deeper, warmer waters (approx'inrately 3-4oC) (Rigby, pers.'larvae, comm.) Ouring winter and for the duration of spawning. Eggs, ano postlarvae are pelagic at depths down to 686 m anci are carried by wescward ocean curre,lts for great distances (Gusey 1979). In spring arid summer, popujations of young and adult halibut migrate and disperse 'into the shallower coastal waters. Extensive tagging studies have been conducted by the IPHC in an effort to define halibut movements. Results documerrt that a high proportion of adults are tagged irr the Bering Sea and recovered in the Gulf of Alaska, bur no recoveries of adults released in the Gulf of Alaska have been made in the Bering Sea (Bell 1981). Ocean currents and the halibut'life cyc'le suggest that some of the young in the shallolv areas of the Bering Sea dr^e probably produced fronr spawning south of the Alaska Peninsula (Dun'lop et al. 1964). The pe'lagic eggs and larvae produced by eastern Berirrg Sea spawners probably remain in the Bering Sea and may be carried to the Asian Coast (Best 1981).

VI. POPULATION SIZI ESTIMATION In the past, hal'ibut stock assessment methods rel ied heavi'ly on trends in catch, effort, and catch per urrit effort (CPUE) Aata. Also data from age composition, tagging studies and juvenile surveys have been examined. However, changes in gear and methods of fishing since 1981 made it more difficul t to compute a standard'ized CPUE for stock assessment. Catchability has varied, probably in relation to these gear changes as well as other factors, in recent years (IPHC 1984a). Alternatively, jn 1976, the IPHC began using cohort analysis in halibut stock assessment, providing estimates independent of CPUE and effort data ( iPHC 1977). In 1983, popuiation estimates, in the form of biomass and annua I surplus production estimates, were made for inclividual hal ibut regulatory areas (map 1) (ibid. ). The l'Jestern Region is encompassed by regulatory area sections 4C,4D and 4E, but popu'lation estimates are avai lable only for the combined area 4. Sections 4C, 4D, and 4E comprise only a small proportion of the major hal ibut populat'iorrs present in al I of area 4. Biornass estimates were also determined in i983, using a migratory catch-age analysis, irr an

~~?80 c o G|~~

~~0 ro q'~~

~~^rr) Ol tl 0 c) |o o-- 6| o t|o r- o) ,o -c o a o (1-~~

~~+J -o 0 o o o l' 0 (J (+- c ro ro rg~~

~~(u -c o P o ro lo o 5- o l+- a ao (u I c (d |o t\ L o +J |o (o~~

~~(u d.~~

28t effort to reduce the negative effect of CPUE on estimates. Anrrual surplus production, the sum of catch and change of biomass in each regu'ldrory area, is calculatecj for each regulatory area (ibid.). Sensitivity artalyses of this method of population estimation indicate it is nor as re1iable as a total population estimare for all regulatory d reas ( ibid. ) .

VII. REGIONAL ABUI'IIJANCE [stimared halibut biomass for area 4 during the period 1967-1983 has averaged about 15 millron pounds. Estimated rota'l surplus productiorr, rncluding inc'idental losses, irr 1983 was 3.4 million pcunds in Area 4 (IPHC 1984a). Bjomoss estimates fcrr the years 1980 - 1983 indicate a very gradual population increase is now occurring'in Area 4 (ibicl.).

REFERENCES l]ell, F.H. 1981. The Pacific halibut resource and the fishery. Anchorage, AK: Alaska Northwest Publishing Company. 267 pp. Best, E.A. 1985. Personal communicarion. Senior Biologist, IPHC, Seattle, t,/A.

~~. 1981. Hal'ibut ecology. Pages 495 - 508 in, D.}'l. Hood and ----JT. Cal oer, eds. The eastern Beii rrg Sea Shel f IOceanography and resources. Volume 1. USDC: N0AA,OMPA. 1981.~~

Dunlop, H.A. , F.H. Be1 1 , R.J. lvlyhre, W.H. Hardnun, and G.M. Southward. 1964, Investigation, utilization, and regulation of the halibut 'in southeastern Berjng Sea. IPHC, Rept. No. 35. 72 pp. Gusey, W.F. I979. The fish and wildlife resources of the southern Berittg Sea region. Environmental Affairs, Shell 0il Company, Houston, TX. 352 PP. IPHC. 1977. Ann. rept. , 1976. Seattle, WA. 40 pp. . i984a. Annual meeting documents. Proceedings of the 60th annual nreet j rrg , Anchorage, /\K. 42 pp.

-TPFc . 1984b. Pac'if ic hal ibut f ishery regu'lations, 1984. Seattle, WA. ---Tnp. . 1985. Pacific hal ibut fishery regulations 1985. Seattle, [lJA. --Tpp tlorth Pac'ific Fishery l"lanagemerrt Council. 1964. Draft environmental dssessment of possible regulation promoting a qevelopmental hal'ibut fishery'in the Bering Sea. Anchorage, AK. 12 pp.

282 Pereyra, W.T., R.J. Wolotira, T.M. Sample, and M. l'lorin. 1977. Basel jrre studies of fish and shellfish resources of Norton Sound and the southeastern Chukchi Sea. Pages 288-216 jn Environmental assessment of the Al askan conti nenta'l shel f. Annual reports of pri nci pa1 investigators. Vol. B. Receptors - Fish, L'ittoral, Beurhos, BLM, N0AA, OCSEAP. 28 pp.

Rigby, P. 1985. Personal comnrunication. Groundfish Coordinator, ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Juneau. St.-Pierre, G. 1984. Spawning locations and season for Pacific hal'ibut. Sci. Rept. No. 70. IPHC, Seattle, t^lA. 46 pp. Terry, J.M,, H.H. Gorham, D.M. Larson, B.C. Paust, R.G. Scoles, R.S. Johnston, F.J. Smit,h, F.L. 0rth, and P.W. Rogers. 1980. Northern and wesrern Gulf of Alaska petroleum development scenarios: Commercial fishing indusrry analysis. Pages A54 - 460 in Alaskan OCS socioeconomic studies program. Tech. Rept. No. 30,-Appendix A. BLM, OCS Office. 7 pp. Thompson, W.F., and R. Van Cleve. 1936. Life history of the Pacific Halibut (2) ojstribution and early life history. International Fisheries Cornmissionn Rept. No.9: 184 pp.

~~283~~

Pacific Herring Distrjbution and Abundance Western Region i. REGIONWIDE INFORMATION Pacific herring are found throughout the Western Region. The Western Region is divided into fjve districts for management of the commercial herring fishery: Cape Romanzof, Nunivak Island, Nelson Island, Goodnews Bay, and Security Cove. The boundaries of these ciistricts are mapped jn rhe herring Human Use narrative in this volume. The boundaries have changed in response to iniproved knowledge of the srocks and development of the fishery (Franc'isco, pers. comm.). Distribution and abundance i nformati on speci fi c to the di stri cts i s presented fo1 1 owi ng the regionaf infornration. A. Regional Distribution The greatest abundance of spawnirrg herring in the eastern Bering Sea occurs irr the Bristol Bay area. Smaller concentrat'ions occur to the north in the Western Region (llespestad and Barton 198!.). Genera'11y, sexual maturity is attained at an earlier age in the southern Bering Sea than in northern areas (Barton and Steinhoff 1980). The mean length for each age class progressive'ly decreases northward from Togiak to Norton Sound (Lebjda et al. 1985). Herring spawn on many different substrates within the region but were usually observed spawning intertidally 'in areas with rocky outcroppings along cliffs or bluffs on Fucus (Barton et al. 1977). Herring spawn in shallow mud or sand bays on eelgrass, ryegrass, or sedge ( ibid. ). Under dense spawning conditions, herring spawning was also seen on Laminaria, bare rocks' gill nets, and subtidaily to depths of 5 m. B. Areas Used Seasonally and fclr Life Funct'ions A series of herring distributiclrr mdps has been produced for the Western Regional guide. The categories mapped are I ) known spawning areas at 1:250,000 sca'1e,2) known summer concentratiorrs at 1:1,000,000 scale,3) krrown fall concentratjons at 1:1,000,000 scale, and 4) known overwintering areas at 1:1,000,000 sca1e. C. Factors Affecting Distribution In the tsering Sea, temperature may have the greatest influence on the seasonal distribution of herring (l^lespestad and Barton i981). Herring are found in a wide range of depths and salinities. More detailed infornration appears jn the herring Life History and Habitat Requirements narrat'ive in volume 1 of this report. D. Movements Between Areas Herring schools usually appear in nearshore areas early in the spring, almost immediately following ice breakup, and migration and spawning proceed in a northward direction along the coast (Barton et al . 1977). Herring apparently remajn in coastal waters after spawning. Concentrat'ions begin reappearing in offshore waf,ers around Nunivak Island in August (Wespestad and Barton

285 1981). The distribution of herring betweerr rhe time they leave the spawning grounos and the time they reappear in offshore warers is unknowrr. Concentration on the winter grounds begins in October ancl contiriues into winter. A major herring wintering area occurs northwest of the Pribilcf is'lanos, in deep water along the continental shelf break (ibid.). f'larure fish arrive at the wintering area before inmature fish. In mild winters, herring concentrate farther north and west, and in severe winters they move south and east (ibid.). Dense schools dre found durirrg the day near the bottom at depths from 105 to i37 m and at water tempenatures of from 2 to 3.5oC. Diurnal migrations occur in early winter, and as the season progresses nrovements oiminish and herring remain on the bottom during the day and slighrly off bottom at njght ('ibid.). E. Population Size Estimation Herring biomass is estimatecl through aerial survey observations and then adjusted for the presence of nonherring pelagic fish species (Lebida et ai. 1984). Test fishing with variable-mesh gill nets is used to estimate age compclsition and the occurrence and relarive abundance of other schooling fishes. Surface areas of herring schor.rls are calculated by aerial surveys and then are mult'ipfied by a tonnage conversion factor to estimate the total biomass. The. ADF&G uses a relative abundance index (RAI) as the standard'ized unit of surface area of herring schoo'ls. One RAI unir is rhe equivalent of a fish school with a surface area of 50 m2. Conversion factors are used for different depths of water ro converr schoo'l surface areas to bionrass (ibid. ). These convers'ron factors are obtairred trom capturing school s of known area and depth and dre adjusted as more data are obtained each year (Fr.rnsisco, pers. comm. ). The results of estimates from aerial surveys can be biased by visibility and the presence of other spec'ies of schooling fish, such as capelin, smelt, and sand I ance. F. Regional Abundance The i984 spawning biomass of herring in the eastern Bering Sea was estimateo to b'e 155,100 metric tons (Lebida et al. 1984). 0f this total biomass,6T% occurred in the Togiak District of the South- west Region and 14% occurred in the Norton Sound District of the Arctic Region. The remainder of the biomass hrils distributed as follows: 3% in the Security Cove District,2% in the Goodnews Bay D'istrict, 6% in the Nelson Island area, 4% in the Nunivak Island area, and 4% in the Cape Romanzof District (ibid.). More detajled informatjon on herring biomass follows in the management area secti ons .

~~II. GOODNEI,JS tsAY AND SECURITY COVE DISTRICTS A map~~

286 A. Di stributi on The arrival of herring in rhe Security Cove and_ Goodnews B?y di stricts usual 1y occu-rs f rom ear'ly to mid May (ADF&G i965a) . Spawning herring are usually present until June. Most of the hbrring spawn sirOtidal ly 'in-areas f rom the north shore of Cape NewenhJm tu Cf,uguan Bay and i n port'ions of Goodnews ?ay ( i bi d. ): The Oom'inant spiwning iubstrate is eelgrass 'in s.hal low subtidal areas (Barton bnO St-einhotf 1980). Ice-scouring has occurred in Goodnews Bay, with the abrasive action of winter sea ice destroying eelgrass beds. B. Abundance In both-ihu S".rrity Cove and Goodnews Bay districts, ages.O ut]9^Z herring represented over 7A% of the spawning biomass in 1984 (ieOiOi et'al. 1984). Age 4 her-ring comprised about L% of the ioputatjon. Biomass estihates of spawning hglring fronr aerial suru.yi are available from Ig78 through- 1984- !!lote 1). In Security Cove, the herring biomass rglggd f r_om 19,5.00 metric tons in Lg75 to i,100 nretriC tons in 1980. Irr Goodnews Bay, the j hi ghest estinrates occurred 'in 1979 , w th 6 ,700 metri c tons , ond the lowest in 1980, with 1'100 metric tons.

IIi. NUNIVAK ISLAND AND NELSON ISLAND DISTRICTS A map of this area and a description of the boundaries are provicled in the herring Human Use narrattve in this volume. A. Di stribution The arrival of herring in the Nunivak and Nelson jslands drea occurs from early May io early June, depending on ice and weather corrditions (ADF&! 1985b). Peak spawning probab'ly occurs one to two weeks after thar of the Togiak District ancl is sinrilar to that of the iip. Rorunrof District (iOiO. ). Spawn'ing grounds are st'il I being identified at Nunivak Island but appear to be widespread (Fraicisco, pers. conrm.). Fucus is the dominant vegetation in the intert jdal zone at Nel son-TdTarrd. Heaviest herring spawn on Nelson Island occurs north of Cape Vancouver on Chin'ii Point, where the Fucus js most abundant (Barion and Steinhoff i980). However, heTFTil-g spav,,n i s found about equa'l 1y di stri buted over Fucus and bare rocks in the ared. B. Frn-dance The ADF&G has not conducred test fishing in the Nunivak Island area. Test fishing with'in the Nelson Island area was conducted during 1978, 1980,- and 1981 (ADF&G 1985b). in .ihe Nelson and Nunivak islanOs area, ages 6 and 7 herring comprisect 78% of the subsistence catch 'in 1984 (Lebida et al. 1984). Biomass estinrates from I97B of spawning herring from aerial surveys at'e -ava_ilable througn lgd+ tor Nilson Islano and for several of those_y_ears for Nun.ivak Island (taOte 1). Herring biomass at Nelsorr Island has ranged from 3,6b0 metric tons in-1981 to 10,000 metric tons in 1984. The spiwning biomass at Nurrivak Island was estimaled at over 6,000 metric tons in 1983 and 1984.

~~28r- Table i. Biomass Estimates of Herring from the Western Region~~

~~Biomass (metric tons)a~~

~~Secu ri ty Goodnews Nel son Nuni vak Cape Romanzof Yea r Cove Bay Island Island~~

1978 1,200 5,400h 2,700^ r979 19,500 5,400; i:1 2,700: 2,700"^ 1980 i ,100 r:?[lr 5,400" t7 4,400: 1981 7 ,soj 3,900h 3,600h I9B2 4,600 2,400" 3,600" 4,400' 1983 5,800 2,900 6,600 6ril; 5,0oo 5,500 1 9E4 4,600 3,700 l0,000 6,074

~~Source: Lebida et ai. 1984.~~

means no data were available. a Biomass est.irnates were calculated from aerial surveys and analysis.of data fronr test fishing and were adiustecl for the presence of nonherring pelagic species. b Incomplete data

288 IV. CAPE ROMANZOF DISTRICT A map of this area and a description of the boundaries are provided ilr ihe herri ng Human Use narrati ve i n thi s vo1unte. A. Di stribution A spawning population of herring occurs at Cape Romanzof, and spawning may occur from mid May to late iune (Geigerr p€FS. comm.). Fucus is the dom'inant intertidal vegetation, and spring storms ma/-flToot beds of f1tqul, destroying spavrrring habitat. In addi tion to the I oss of ffii-ng spawn f rom the destruct jon of substrate, intertidal egg loss was observed from the desiccation of eggs and Fucus (Barton and Steinhoff 1980). l4ortality of spawn in the area has also been attributed to melting snowbanks, whjch create an influx of cold, fresh water orrto intertidal spawn. Spawning is primarily intertidal, and coastal observations have shown that spawn survival 'in this region is low (jbid.). B. Abundance in the Cape Romanzof area, ages 6 and 7 herring comprised over 60%, and age 4 herring comprised less than 1%

REFERENCES ADF&G. 1985a. Herring fishery management plan - Security Cove and Goodnews Bay districts, March 1985. Div. of Commer. Fish., Anchorage. B pp. . 1985b. Herri ng f ishery marragement p'lan - I'lel scrn isl and and ---Tn'ivak Island districts, March 1985. Div. of Commer. Fish. , Anchorage. 10 pp. Barton, 1., I. Warner, and P. Shafford. L977. Herring spawning surveys southern Bering Sea. Pages I-L72 in Environnrental assessment of the Alaskan continental shelf. Ann. rept. Vol. 7. OCSEAP, N0AA, BLM. Bartcrn, 1., and D. Steinhoff. 1980. Assessment of spawning herring (Clupea harengus pal lasi ) stocks at selectecl coastal areas in the eastern BErTngTea. TnTormational Leaflet No. L87, ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Juneau. 60 pp.

~~289 Francisco, R.K. Persorral corrnunicaticln. 1985. Kuskokwim Area Management Eiologist, ADF&G, Div. Comner. Fish., Bethel.~~

~~Geiger, 14.F. Personal communicarion. 1985. Yukon Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Anchorage.~~

Lebida, R., C. Whicmore, and G. Sandone. 1984. Pacific herring stocks and iisheries in the eastern Bering Sea, Alaska, 1984. Bristol Bay Data Rept. No. 84-14. ADF&G, Div. Comner. Fish., Anchorage. ZZ pp.

1985. _Age, sex, and size composition of pacific herring, Cl upea pal lasi from eastern Bering Sea farengus , coastal spawning'Connpr-. slTEs, AE3m98f-Ti[ch. Data Rept. No. 13-8" ADF&G, Div. Fish., Anchorage. 49 pp. t'Jespestad , V. , and L. Bartnrr. 1981. Distribution, migration and status of Pacific herring. Pages 509-525 in D.W. Hood and J. Calder, eds. The eastern Bering Sea shel f : oc6E'irography and resources. Vol . 1. USDC:N0AA, OPIPA.

~~Whi tnore, C. 1983. Cape Romanzof spawn deposition studies. rl-lemo to R. Regnart dared Oct. 10, 1983.1 ADF&G, Div. Cormer. Fish., Anchorage. 6 pp.~~

~~290 Saffron Cod Distribution and Abundance Arctic and l,lestern Regioris~~

i. REGIONl^lIDE INFORMATION Saffron cod (ElFginus graciljs Tilesius) occur throughout -and- the Arctrc and Western regions aEklown to be local ly abundint in Norton and Kotzebue sounds . and adjacent sections of t[e northern Bering ino southeastern Chukchi seas_ (l^lolotira et al. 1979). In these jreas, saffron cod are utiljzed for subsistence needs bi local resjdenrs of rhe nearby coastal villages. There is basically io commercial harvest of saffron cod; thus management areas arrd plairs are nonexistent for fi:-sp-eci9:. ,In 1989, one local fisherman'from Nome caught and soio 2,548 lb 11,948. fish) of saffron cod. During 1980, one fisherman harvestecl 89 ]b (98 fish) of saffron cod and soid them to residenrs in Nome. These f-ish, along with other' subsistence harvests, are typically-ff,i used for do-g food, crab bait, and human consumption (ADF&G 19g3). potentia'l for a saffron cod commercial fishery exidts iri the Nortorr Sound drea, Put _present marketing conditions are undetermined, and interest by loc_ar residents appears low (ibid. wolotira (ige5i reviewed ). and analyzed _r-esource iniormation frorn trawl surveys conducted in 1976,1979, and 1982 and discussed the commercial poteitial of the resou rce .

I I. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION Saffron cod are distributed throughout the nearshore coastal zone of the Arctic and l^/estern regions (Andriyashev 1954, Craig and Haldorson 1981, l*lorrow 1980). The iorthein aer-ing Sea is the center of distribution for the saffron cod; specifically, Norton and Kotzebue sounds are the primary areas of abundance (hloloiira et al, rgTg). iIi. AREAS USED SEASONALLY AND FOR LIFE FUNCTIONS A saffron cod distribution map has been produced for thjs report. The category mapped is general ctistribution at 1:1,000,000 sca1e.'

IV. FACTORS AFFECTING DISTRIBUTION Physical factors such as temperature, sa'linity,-saftron and the availability of habitat probab]y affect distribution of cod. fcotogicit factors such.as compet'ition for food and space may also affect distribution. (For more details, see rhe safiron coi Life Hisrory and Habirat Requirements narrative in volume 1 of this publication.)

V. MOVEMENTS BETI,JEEN AREAS Saffron cod are thought to make seasonal ntovements in relation to depth and distance offshore. Information that is preserrtly availabie, however, indicates.varyin-g jme degqe_es of this movement, uy sairple location arrd t of sampl ing. Genera'lly, saff ron cod res jd6 in the coastal zone' coming close to shore to spawn under the ice'in fall and winter

29t irr river mouths, bays, and inlets; then.adults move into deeper water (30-60 m) in spiing-anO sumner to feed (Morrow 1980' Svetovidov 1948' AnOriyashev tgSq).- In the Beri ng ang Chukchi seas, bottom trawl sampl-es oetected large concenrrations of saffron cod in the nearshore .onb (0-30 m) from September rhrough 0ctober and fai led to find significant numbers of saffron cod in the deeper wa,ters (greater than 1983 (For 30-m) at that time (tllol oti ra et al . t979 , Lowry .et .a'l . ) . more details on movements of saffron cod, see the Life History and Habitat Requirements narrative in volume 1 clf this report.)

Vi. POPULATION SIZE ESTII'IATION Demersal trawl srudies have been conducted in the eastern Bering Sea' Norton Sound, and the southedsEern Chukchi Sea by the National Marine Fisheries Sei.vice (NMFS) in !976, L979, and L982 to determine the d.istribution, abundance, and population characteristics of saffron cod have (hloloti ra 19-85 ) . To date, these are the only studies known to iccompfished oi, intensive evaluation of the saffron cod resource in t.Jestern and Arctic Alaska. The assumptions made for demersal trawl surveys. point to the limita- ti ons of data i nrerpretation. It 'is assumeo that trawl samp'les 9le representatjve of the density_ and composition of the animals in the sainple area ancl tfrat the trafl equipment performs cons'istently between stations. Alsg, it is assumed dtrat populations remain static: i.e., that no shifrs in abundance occur within the survey area and that no animals move in and out of the survey area (tloloiira et al.1979), However, it is known that trawls, like most fishing gear, are selective in relaiion to mesh size and dimensions of the net. A]so trawling is l.imited to sampling of smooth substrates, and animals encountered over rough and/oi rock/ bottoms are not adequately sampled (ibid.). _ Thus trail samples r6present an "apparent" distribution and relative abundarrce rhjr are a function of dtie vulnerability and accessibility of a species to the gear. In most cases, the vulnerability and accessibility are unknown (ibid.).

VII. REGIONAL ABUNDANCE Large concentrations of saffron cod were documented from trawl survey dati collected in 1976 and 1979 by the NMFS in the northeastern Bering Sea from Norton Sound to Cape N-ewenham and west to the 50 m depth contour. From the 1976 survey results, the llorton Sound resource was estjmated at 750 million fish, with an associated biomass of 16'500 metric tons (table 1) (Wolotira 1985). From L979 survey- -data,-.the Norton Sound doputation appeared to have decreaseo to 630 million fish, tons a1 though the' apparent bibmass had i ncreased to 50,000 metric (ioiO.). The Bdring Sea, f rom Norton Sound sou_th !g-!ape J'lewenham, was ilso surveyect in tilg, and an estintate of 1.5 billion fis.h,. with an associateo'Oiomass of 6O,OOO metric tons, was made (taUle t) (|r'lolotira 1e85 ) . The difference in population size and biomass in Norton Sound observed in the 1976 and Ig79 data are apparently related to the size and age compositiol of rhe stock. In !976_, approximately 66% of all saffron cod collected in Norton Sound were less'than 12 cm in length. In 1979, less than 5% of the estimated population in Norton Sound was smaller

~~292 Table 1. Estimated B'iomass and Population Size-of the Saffron Cod Resourcc In Norron Sound and the Northeastern Bering Seao~~

~~Estimated Biomass Estinrated Area (95% Conf i clence Population Size Year of Regi on Surveyed Interval (95% Confidepce Survey(s) Su rveyed (fm.; (Metric Tons) Interval x 10")~~

~~1976 Norton Sound 4L,444 16 ,570 757.7t (12 ,393-20 ,7 47 ) (578.el-e36.51)~~

~~r979 Norton Sound 57,47I 50 ,62 1 632.99 (35,825-65,4r7) ( 507 . e4-75S.03 )~~

~~r979 Nearshore from 168 ,575 58,291 1 ,460.30 Kuskokwim Del ta ( 38,378-78,204 ) ( i53 . 58-2 ,167 . 08 ) to Norton Sound~~

~~Source: Wolotira 1985.~~

~~a Information derived from 1976 and 1979 trawl surveys of the NMFS.~~

than 13 cm (ibid.). Wolot'ira (1985) irrterpreted that data from rhe two surveys indicate a strong variat'ion in year-class strengths. He noted that the 1976 year class was numerical'ly dominant, and bt 1979'it still comprised a large portion of the population (five times more abundant than three-year-olds in the 1976 populatiorr).

REFERENCES ADF&G. 1983. Annual management report, 1983. Norton Sound-Port Clarence- Kotzebue. Div. Commer. Fish., Nome. 156 pp. Andriyashev, A.P. 1954. Fishes of the rrorthern Soviet Seas. (Transl. Israel Prog. Sci. Transl., Jerusalem 1964. ) 617 pp. Craig, P_.C., 9nd L. Haldorson. 1981. Beaufort Sea barrier island-lagoon ecological process studies: fina'l report, Simpson Lagoon. Pages 384:678 ln Environmental assessment of the Alaskan continental shelf. Vol.7o @rt 4: Fish. Final reports of principal investigators. BLM, NOAA; 0CSEAP . 294 pp.

Lowryr 1.F., K.J. Frost, and J.J. Burns. 1983. Trophic relationships anlong ice-inhtrbiting phocid seals and functional ly related marine nrarirmals in the Chukchi Sea. Pages 179-229 in Environmental assessmenr of the

293 Alaskan contirrental shelf. F'inal reports of principal investigators. Vol. 19. BLM, N0AA, 0CSEAP. 50 Pp. I'iorrow, J.E. 1980. The freshwater fishes of Al aska. Anchorage: Al aska Northvrest Publishing Company. 248 pp, Sverovidov, A.N. i948. Fishes. Gadifornps. Fauna of the USSR. (lransl. Israel Prog. Sci. Trans1., Jerusalem 1962). 304 pp. hiolotira, R.J. 1985. Saffron cod (Elegjnus graci'l is) in western Alaska: the resource and its potent'ial. N0AA Tech. Memo., NMFS F/NWC.79. USDC: NOAA, NMFS. i19 pp. Wolgtjra, R.J., T.M. Sample, and M. Morin, Jr. L979. Baseline studies of fish and shellfish resources of Norton Sound and the southeastern Chukchi Sea. Pages 258-572 in Environmental assessment of the Alaskan continental shel f. Firral- reports of principal investigators. Vol . 6: Biological studies. BLM, N0AA' OCSEAP. 314 pp.

~~294 Yellowfin Sole Distribution and Abundance Western Region~~

I. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION Yellowfin sole occur throughout the Western Region along the continental shelf and slope waters from depths of 5 to 360 m (Bakkala 1981). In the summer, yellclwfin sole are distributed in waters of less than 100 m from the Alaska Peninsula to as far north as Norton Sound (Bakka'la et al. 1982). Main concentrations of yellowfin sole in the Western Region are limited to waters south of Nunivak Island durjng the surmer (ibid.). Spawning of yel iowfin sole occurs from July through Septeniber. Densities of eggs indicate that a major spawning area is located south ancl southeast of Nunivak Island in depths from 15 to 75 nr (ibid.). Kashkina (1965) noted a concentration of eggs between Nunivak Island and St. Lawrence Island at depths of 20 to 45 m.

II. AREAS USED STASONALLY AND FOR LIFE FUNCTIONS A yellowfin sole distribution map at 1:1,000,000 scale has been produced for the l,lestern Regional guide. The categories mapped are 1) known summer djstribution, 2) known summer concentration areas, and 3) known spawning concentration areas. iII. FACTORS AFFECTING DISTRIBUTION Water temperaEures may influence the seasonal movements and clistribu- tion of yel'lowfin sole. Offshore movements in fall and winter may be a response to the colder bottom water temperatures in nearshore areds. Summer distributions from year to year may differ wirh the changing lernperatures of the bottom water (Bakkala 1981). The extent of jce cover may influence the inshore migration, inasmuch as yellowfin sole follow the receding ice edge (ibid. ). More decailed informat'ion appears irr ihe yellowfin sole Life History and'Habitat Requirenrents narrative in volume 1 of this report.

IV. MOVEMENTS BETWEEN AREAS Yellowfin sole migrate from waters of the outer shelf of the eastern Bering Sea, which they occupy during wjnter ancl early spring, to central and inner shelf regions in summer (Bakkala et al. 1982). The migrations to deeper water in winter may be a response to low bottom water temperatures and to the advance of i ce that covers i arge shallower portions of the eastern Berirrg Sea jn winter and spring (Bakkala 1981, Bakkala et al. 1982). During winter, ice covers much of the waters of the Western Regiorr, and yellowfin sole are found in deeper water to the south and wesr. Yellowfin sole form two large northern and southern vrintering concentrations in the eastern Bering Sea, and these two concentrations have different migration routes. The largest concerrtration winters near

295 Unimak Island and summers in the Southwest Region. The second largest 'is located west of St. Paul Island (Bakkala 1981) and probably migrates irrshore between St. Paul and St. Matthew islands, forming surmer concentrations rrear Nunivak Island (ibid.). The independent movements of these two wintering concentrations have led to speculation about the existence of two separate spawning stocks. Research indicates that the biochernical genetic variations in yellowfin sole from the northern and southern areas are not significant'ly different (Grant et al. 1981), and the population is assumed to consist of a single stock.

V. POPULATION SIZT ESTIMATION The National l'larine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has estinrated the population size of yellowfin sole. The two sources of information used by the NMFS to analyze trends in relative abundance are pair-trawl data from the Japanese commercial fishery and bottom-trawl survey data from the Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center resource assessment surveys (Bakkala ano l.jespestad 1984). The catch-per-unit-effort data obtained from the bcrttom-trawl surveys may be biased by the gear type and size and how well the gear maintains bottom contact. Biomass estimates were derived using the area swept method, where fish encountered in the area sampled are assumed to be representative of the entire area.

VI. REGIONAL ABUNDANCT The biomass of yellowfin sole from the entire eastern Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands area, which includes the t'lestern Region' was estinuted r0 be 3.95 million metric tons'in 1983 (ibid.). An area around Nunivak Island, which includes the nearshore waters of the hlestern Region shallower rhan 40 m, accounted for approximately 500,000 metric tons of yellowfirr sole in 1982 (Bakkala et al. 1985). Bakkala et al. (1985) report biomass estimates for ye'llowfin sole for several subareas of the I^Iesrern Region (map 1). Biomass is lower in the area between Nunivak and St. Lawrerrce islands and declines in offshore areas deeper rhan 110 m. Intense foreign fishing lowered the abundattce of yellowfin sole from 1959 rhrough 1962,'and the population remained at a low leve'l until the early 1970's (Bakkala et al. 1982). Since the 1970's, the biomass of the stock has increased. The primary reason for this increase has been the recruitment to the population of a series of strong age classes originating in 1966 rhrough 1970 (ibid.). A new series of strong year classes, from 1973 through L976, has also entered the population (ibid.). in add'ition to biomass estimates, estimates of maximum sustainable yield (MSY) and equilibrium yield (EY), used in managing !he population, may be he'lpful in understanding the status of the ye'llowfin sole stock. The MSY is the largesr average catch that can be taken from a stock over a period of years. The concept of MSY is applicable to a long-1ived species such as yellowfin sole, in which variations in biomass are buffered by the presence of many year classes in the fishery (npfUC 1979). The EY is the maximum annual or seasonal harvest that wil I maintain the stock at the same level of abundance in

~~296 o c o a c c t c o o 3 ! o a o o 6 ro~~

~~(o3 L +)~~

~~+.) Po -o~~

~~s, co Ool~~

~~o 5- $- (o o L (E -o5 t!1~~

~~o! o-:o~~

~~a o P~~

~~!- +J o~~

~~c'F o t\ ;i ? :'i (o~~

~~]J UI (lJ a (oloul^ Eco ool .- F{~~

~~3_fd Or FO a (,+, o .rc (F- ,6 3ro OJ _(6- -SZ (uco~~

~~F{QJ o-!(6= =a~~

297 succeeding years. The EY oiffers from the MSY because the sustainable level of abundance is usually less than the maximum. The MSY for the Bering Sea and Aleutjarr Islands area is estimated to be 150,000-175,000 metric f,ons (NPFMC 1984). The Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands yellowfin sole population is considered to be in good condition, and the EY is estinrated ro be 310,000 metric tons (ibid.). Water ternperatures in the eastern Bering Sea may affect the year-class strength of yellowfin sole (Bakkala i981). Year classes originating in the years when .;une bottom water temperatures ranged from 2 to 4.5"C were stronger thon those originating in years when bott

REFERENCES Bakkala, R.G. 1981. Populati0n characteristics and ecology of ye1 lowfin sole. Pages 553-574 in D.l,l. Hood and J.A. Calder, eds. The eastern Bering Sea shelf: oceliography and resources. Vol. 2. 0MPA, N0AA, 1,339 pp. Bakkala, R.G., and V.G. Wespestad. 1984. Yellowfin sole. Pages 37-50 jn R.G. Bakkala and L. Low, eds. Conclition of groundfish resources of the eastern Berirrg Sea and Aleutian Islands region in 1983. USDC: NWAFS, NMFS, N0AA, Tech. Memo. No. 53. 189 pp. Bakkala, R.G., J.J. Traynor, K. Teshima, A.M. Shimada, H. Yamaguchi. 1985. Resu'lts of cooperative United States-Japan groundfish investigations jn rhe eastern Bering Sea during June-November 1982. NOAA, Tech. llento. NMFS/NWC-87. Sept. 1985. 448 pp. Bakkaia, R.G., V.G. l,lespestad, and L. Low. 1982. The ye'l'lowfin sole resource of the eastern Bering Sea - its current and future potential for commercial fisherjes. N0AA, Tech. Memo. NI4FS/NWC-33. August 1982. 43 pp. Grant, S.l'l., R.G. Bakkala, F.M. Utter, and D.J. Teal. 1981. Biochemical genetic population structure of yellowfin sole (Limanda aspera) of the eastern Berirrg Sea and Gulf of Alaska. Unpubl. MS., 39 pp. NWAFC, NtulFS, Seattle. Cited in Bakkala et al. 1984. Kashkina, A.A. 1965. Reproduction of ye'l'lowfin sole (Liminda aspera- Pallas) and changes in its spawning stocks in the eastern Bering Sea. Pages 182-1Sr0 in P.A. Moiseev, €d. Soviet fisheries investigations in rhe northeast Tacific, Part IV. (Trans1. Israel Prog. Sci. Transl., Jerusalem, 1968). NPFMC, 1979. Fishery management plan and final environmental impact statement for the groundfish fishery in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Island area. Final plan, lviarch ?3, L979. 196 pp.

~~298 1984. Summary of Bering Sea/Aleutian Is I ands Groundfj sh Manage- ment Plan (through Amendment 8). Revised 18 January 1984. 23 PP.~~

~~299~~

~~Shellfish~~

~~King Crab Distribution and Abundance Arctic and l,Jestern Reqions~~

I. REGIONhJIDE INFORMATION King crabs are found throughout the l^lesrern Region and in the Arctic Regiorr as far north as Kotzebue Sound. The Northern District of the Bering Sea Statisttcal Area (Area a)'includes wdrers of both the Arctic and l,lestern regions for management of the species. Irr 1984, the Northern Di stri ct was di vi ded i nto three secticlris : Norton Sound Section, St. Marthew Island Secuion, and St. Lawrence Island Section. Prior to 1984, the St. Matthew Island and St. Lawrence Island sections were combined in the General Section. The boundaries of these management areas are mapped'in the king crab Human Use narrative irr this volume. Distriburion and abundance infc;rmat'ion in this report will be presented for two areas: the Norton Sound Section, and the combined St. llatthew-St. Lawrence islands sections. A. Regional Di stribution Two species of king crab dre commonly found in the Western and Arctic regions, with red king crab (_laralithodes camtschatica) being the niost common. The distriuution offiTing-cra5 covers much of the eastern Bering Sea and is generaily associated wirh the continental land mass. A concerrtration of red king crabs occurs in Norton Sound (0tto 1981). tslue king crab (!. plaiypus) tends to be associated with the offshore areas near St. Lawrence and St. Matthew islands (ibid.). The Norton Sound red king crabs are considered to be a separate stock from those in the southeastern Bering Sea, and the blue king crabs of the Pribilof and St. Matthew jslands are also separate stocks (ibjd.). Brown king crabs (L'ithodes aequi"spina) are found in the eastern Bering Sea along the continental shelf break in deeper waters (iuio. ). National Marine F'isheries Service (lillt-S) trawl surveys have not sampled this species in waters shallower than 128 m. llo estimates of brown king crab abundance dre avajlable; therefore, brown king crab will not be discussed in this report. ts. Areas Used Seasona'l1y and for Life Funct'ions A series of marine distribution maps at 1:1,000,000 scale have been produced for this report. The categories of mapped information for king crab are as follows: " General distribution " Krrown concentrations of females o Known concentrations of males C. Facrors Affecting Distributton Many factors affect the distribution of k'irrg crabs, including temperature, salinity, and substrate. In NMFS surveys, red king crabs were not found in the Bering arrd Chukchi seas, where deeper and colder waters occurred. The distributiorr of blue king crabs irr the same area bras associated with depths over 25 m and bottom temperatures less than 4"C (Wolotira et al. 1977). (See the k'ing

303 crab Life History and Habitat Requirements narrative for more detai 1 s. ) D. Movements [Jerween Areas General irrl'ormation on king crab migration is discussed in the Life History and Habitat Requirements narrative. The ADF&G has conducted tagging studies of male red king crabs in Norton Sound during the summer commercial fishing season. Tagged crabs released south of None were found to move southwesterly as the season progressed (Powe11 et al. 1983). Sub'lega1 males free for one year were recaptured 19 to 37 km south or west from their pcrint of release. Legal size males free for one year showed more random movernent, and most were recaptured within 28 km. l.linter tagg'ing studies conducted in nearshore waters south of Nome indicate that crabs found in nearshore waters during the wjnter and spring migrate offshore during the summer (ADF&G 1983a). E. Populat'ion S'ize Estimation The NMFS has conducted otter trawl surveys to estimate the population size and biomass of king crabs in the Western and Arctic regions. Catches from standardized rrawls are used to calculate population size, using the area-swept technique, which assumes that the trawl obtained samples that represented the density and diversity of species in the sanrpled area and that the trawl's performance was constant from station to station (Wolotjra et al. 1977). The ADF&G has also conducted research pot fishing in this area. Catches from pot fishing have been analyzed in conjunction wtth tag and recovery data utilizing the Peterson mark-recapture formula to obtain estimates of population size (Powell et al. 1983). F. Regional Abundance Detailed abundance information for king crab follows in the Norron Sound arrd St. Matthew-St. Lawrence islands sections.

II. NORTON SOUND SECTION A nrap of this area and a description of boundaries are provided in the kirrg crab Human Use narrat'ive. A. Di stribution Blue king crabs are only rarely found in Norton Sound or Kotzebue Sound, and trace amounts have been samp'led in the southeastern Chukch i Sea (Wo1 oti ra et al . 1977; Schwarz, pers. comm. ). Red king crabs are concentrated in Norton Sound, with the highest carch rdtes'irr 'low trawl surveys occurrirrg in outer Norton Sound and catches in inner Norton Sc;und. 0n1y trace amounts of red king crab were sampled farther north in Kotzebue Sound (ibid.). The Norton Sound red king crabs are the northernmost stocks fished commercial 1y. Exploratory commercial fishing north of Norton Sound, near the Dionrede Islands, Kotzebue Sound, and off Point Hope found few red king crabs (Powell et al. 1983). hlithin l'lorton Sound, postrecruit male crabs were distributed over a large drea southeast of Sieoge Island, whereas smaller males were found northeast of this area, with internring'ling occurring alorrg the borders (ibid. ). Female crabs were usual 1y found

304 northeast of the schools of mdles. Concentrations of fenrales in Norton Sound have been found south of Cape Nome, off the northern coast east of Ncrme, i n the nrouth of Norton Bay , west of Stuart Island, and in the shallow 18 nr Egavik trench (ibid.). Knowledge of king crab distribution in Norton Sound has come from research and corunercial fishing, which usually occurs from late June through ear'ly 0ctober. The distribution of crabs during the resr crf the year is poorly understood. B. Abundance Six different research surveys, conducced jn Norton Sound in l97ti, 1979,1980, 1981, and'lega'l-size 1982, provided data fronr which estimates oi the _population of male red king crabs brere made. Sampling was done by the NtvlFS with trawls in 1g76, 1979, and 198A and by the ADF&G with pots in 1980, 1981, and 1982. Estimates of popu]ation L977 in and L97B were made using- the 1976 and IgTg trawl data, the size of crabs in the 1977 and 1978 commercial catches, ald assumptions about molting, growth, recruitment, and mortality (Powell et al. 1983). The initial trawl estimate for 1979 was increased by the amount of the commercial harvest, because the lylyey occurred after the comnrercial harvest (ibid.): The initial 1980 estimate was also changed when it was diicovered that inaccurate catch statistics had been reported (ibid.). The current best estimates of the legal male red king-L982 crab population for Norton Sound during the period L976 through-.4 havi ranged from 3.7 mi I I ion crabs in L977 and 1978 to nri I I ion in tieZ (raole 1). In 1976, when monitoring of the Nortorr Sourrd king crab popu'latiorr first began't.h,e population was nrainly coniposed of sutilegal and recruit_crabs (ADF&G 1983b). The 1ega1 male population peakeo in 1978. Recruitment was low after 1978, and the popu'larion declined to a record low in L982. Beginning in 1981, the numbers of sublegai crabs began to increase, and by 1983 recruitment into the 1egal male population also began to ir'Crease (ibid.). Winter pot surveys conclucted near Nome in 1983 found that nearshore abundarrce of crabs was greater than in the past several years (ADF&G 1983a).

III. SAINT MATTHEW-SAINT LAWRENCE ISLANDS SECTIONS Prior to 1984, the St. Matthew Island and the St. Lawrence Island sections were combined and called the General Section. A nrap of this area and a description of boundaries are provided in the king crab Human Use narrative. A. Di stribution Red king crab stocks outside the Norton Sound section are widely and sparsely distributed (ADF&G 1983c). Snral I red king crab commercial catches have been reported south clf Cape Romanzof, around Nunivak Island, and west of Cape Newenharr (ADF&G 1980). Blue king crabs have localized distributions, occurring in concentrations around the St. Matthew and St. Lawrence isiands areas. The St. Lawrence Island crabs occur in concerrrratiorrs southwest of Port Clarence and south of the Bering Strait (t,lolotira et al.

~~305 Table 1. Population Estimates of the Legal Size Male Red King Crab Pclpu'lation in Norton Sou li~~

~~Number of Crabs Pounds of Craba Yea r (Millions) (Millions)~~

~~1976 3.1 8.1 i977 3.7 10.0 r978, 3.7 11.0 h r979 3.0 9.0 (5.4)" {r.s1f ^ 1980 1.9 (3.9)' 6.6 (tS.+1' 1981 t.io r982 1'7^o 1 983 i.i' rz.ilr~~

~~Source: Powell et a1. 1983. Prior to conunercial harvest.~~

~~Initial trawl survey estimate made after commercial harvest. Iniuial estimates based on inaccurate catch statistics.~~

~~Postseason estirrrate (ADF&G 1983a ) . e ADF&G pot survey estrnrare (ADF&G 1983b).~~

~~+ I NMFS trawl survey estinrate (ADF&G 1983b).~~

1977). Small research and commercial catches of blue king crabs have been reported around St. Lawrence Island and al) the way to the USA-USSR convention I ine toward the'likely Chukotsk Peninsula (t{olotira er al. 1977, ADF&G 1980). It is that the stocks extend westward across the convention line, but the extent of this westward distribution is unknown (Wolotira et al. 1977). Concentrations of blue king crabs occur around the St. l,latthew islancl area (0tto et al. 1984a). Overal I clistributions with'in this dreo do not vary much from year to year. Most crabs were sampled at depths of 35 to 110 m at bottom temperatures from -1.0 to 3.0"C ('ibid.). Legal-size males and prerecruits have been sampled south and west of the islano, mainly at depths from 55 to 75 m (O'cto et al . 1984b). B. Abundance Reliable estimates of the St. Lawrence Island blue king crab stocks are not ava'ilable. Irrformation f rom NI4FS traw'l surveys and

306 commercial fishing- indicates that the stocks are stable, with a wide disrribution in sparse concentrations lAbrae- igg1l. Population esrimates of blue king crab in the st. tnlatihew Isla'q area have been made from NMFS trawl surveys. The total numoer-ot cfg9: during _the period rgt} through 1964 has ranged from 13.7 million in 1982 to 4.3 miilion in t954 (tao1 e z). rfe pojutition, y9l9 highggt in 1982 and have been declining since From 1983 then. to 1984 the populaiions declined by over" 50%,-et ano iontinueo oecl'ines in recruitment are expected in igas (0tro at . 19g4ti.

~~iable 2. Annual Abundance Estimates in I'lillions of Crabs for St. Irlarthew lsland Blue King Crabs from NMFS Surveys~~

~~Males Fema I es Tota l Number of Less Thqn Greater fhan Less Than Greater Jhan Males arid 1i9 mmo mm' 119 80 mmd B0 rnmo Fema I es~~

~~r978 8.0 1.8 0.8 0.4 11.0 r979 7.? 2.2 r.7 0.9 r2.0 1980 5.6 ?.5 0.8 2.2 i1.1 1961 3.0 3.1 0.0 0.5 6.8 r982 5.8 6.8 0.4 0.i 13.7 1983 3.4 3.5 0.2 2.4 9.6 1984 2.0 1.6 0.2 0.5 4.3~~

~~Sotrrce: 0tto et al. 1984a. a Carapace lengthi.categories reflect srnal'l average size of blue king crabs in ihe area;80 nrm is the median size at maturity ior females.~~

RTFERENCES ADF&G. 1980- Bgling- Sea Area shellfish report to the Alaska Board of Fisheries. Div. Cornmer. Fish. 1981. ----Boar"d. . Berirrg S_ea Area shellfish management report to the Alaska of Fisheries." oiu..corr"r. Fish., Dutch Harbor.

~~. 1983a' Nearshore win_tgq king crab study, Nortorr Sound (January- ---Iip-Fil 1993). Div. Commer. Fish., N"onre. 1-9 pp.~~

307 1983b. Norton Sound-Port Clarence-Kotzebue annual management report. Div. Commer. Fish., llome. . 1983c. Bering Sea Area shellfish reports to the Alaska Board of tliv. Cornmer. Fish. -TiTneries. Qtto, R. 198i. Eastern Bering Sea crab fisheries. Pages 1,037-1,066 in D. Hgod ano.j. Calder, eds. The eastern Bering Sea shelf: oceanography and research. Vol. 2. N0AA; USDI: BLM. 0ttt-r, R. , R. Maclntosh, K. Stahl -Johnson, and S. l,l'il son. 1984a. Uni ted States crab research in the eastern Bering Sea during 1984. lDocument submitted to the annual meeting of the International North Pacific F'isheries Commission, Vancouvei, British Columbia, 0ctober 1984.] NWAFC, NMFS, Seattle, Wa. 57 PP. . 1984b. lieport to i nctustry on the 1984 Eastern Beri ng Sea crab survey. NWAFC Processed Rept. 84-17, NMFS' Kodiak, AK. Powell, G., R. Peterson, and L. Schwarz. 1983. The red king crdb, Par.rli'chocles calntschatica (Tilesius) in Norton Sound, Alaska: history [F6i-ol@l rese,arcn and resource utilization through 1982. Informa- tional Leaflet No. ?22. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Kodiak. 104 pp. Schwarz, L.i. 1985. Personal commurrication. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Nome. Wololira, R.S., T.M. Sample, and l'1. Morin. L977. Dernersal fish and shell- f i sh resources of I'lorton Sound, the southeastern Chukchi Sea , and adjacenr waters 'in the basel ine yea r 1976. USDC: NOM, NplFS, Seattle, !lA. 29? pp.

~~308 Shrimp Regiorral 0verview Western Region~~

I. I NTRODUCTION Pink shrimp (Pandalus borealis) and hurnpy shrimp (!. goniurus) are the nrure abundant-EhTiEp- specTes i nhabi ting Beri ng Sea wateFi wi thi rr the Western Region. Japanese and Soviet fishing fleets exploited these shrimp popul ati ons cluri ng the 1960 ' s and early 1970' s. Conti nuecl depressed stock condition, however, has prevented a d'irected commercial fishery by either domestic or foreign fishermen in recent years.

II DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE A. Distribution Surveys performed by the NMFS have found pink shrimp (PandalYs boreal is) to occur northwest of the Pribilof Islands and in BTTstoT-Aay. Pjnk shrimp appear to be disperseO over much of the conrinental shelf at mid depths (USDC I979). l"his species appears to require relative'ly warmer water temperacure than other shrimp species and has been found near the continental shelf edge, where there are intrusions of warmer water. Humpy shrimp (!. gonjurus) also occurs in the Bering Sea (and lllestern Region) and has comprised a large share of the shrimp catch from the Gulf of AnaOyr and along the Koryan coast of the western Berirrg Sea. Humpy shrimp tolerare sustained low temperatures and therefore have been found in shallower shelf waters, where a residual water' covering depresses water temperatures (Morris L981, Balsiger I979). Coonstripe shrimp (f. hypsinotus) and sidestripe shrimp (Pandalopsis dispar) are -also -Tound in the Bering Sea. DocrJrnenffion oT-Jh-e distribution of coonstripe shrimp has been mostly restricted to Herendeen Bay on the north side of the Alaska Peninsula ancl llorton Sound. Sidestripe shrimp clistribut,ion overlaps with the distribution of p'ink shrimp. Sidestripe shr!mp are found along the shelf edge, primarily following the 100-m i sobath (Anderson, pers. comm. ) . B. Abundance Currently, shrimp stocks in the eastern Bering Sea are very depressed fronr hjstoric abundance levels, even though significant commercjal exp'lnitat'ion of shrimp in the Bering Sea has not occurred since the mid 1960's (Morris i98i, Balsiger 1979).

III. MANAGEMENT HISTORY AND REPORTED UST A. Boundaries The ADF&G shrimp Statistical Area J, or the Westward Registration Area, 'includes all Pacific 0cean waters south of the latitude of Cape Douglas (58"52'N), west of the longitude of Cape Fairfield (148"50'W), east of !72"E, trrd seaward to the 300-fathom (549-ni) depth contour, and al I Bering Sea waters east of 172" east

309 longitude (ADF&G 1985). Within tsering Sea waters of Statistical Area J are found the North Peninsula and Aleutian districts (map 1). The l,lescern Region addressed in this narrative shares borders with botn of these districts; however,'because distribution of shr"imp extends beyorrd the br.rundaries of the Western Region, the following discussion reflects fishing activity involving shrimp in the Bering Sea north of Cape Sarichef. (For information regarcling shrimp harvest south of Cape Sarichef and the south side of the Al aska Peni nsul a , see vol ume 2 of the Al aska Habi tat I'ianagement Gu jcle for the Southwest Region. ) B. Harvest Sunmary Based on conrmercial harvest activity, the presence of pink shrimp has been documented in waters northwest of the Pribilof Islands and wi ch'irr the Bristol Bay area. The Bering Sea supports good shrimp habi tat, shal I ow water, and substrate conducive to rrawling. D'irected fishing pressure upon both pink and humpy shr"imp irr the eastern Bering Sea was by foreign fleets and was short-lived (USDC 1979). Japanese fishermen began the exp'loitat'ion of shrimp in the eastern Bering Sea during the 1960 season incidental ly to a fishery directed upon yellowfin sole. Effort grew from 16 trawlers and one factoryship in 1961 to 38 trawlers and three factoryships in 1963. Peak harvest of 29,536 metric tons occurred cluring the 1963 season (taole 1). Mosc of the harvest was taken from waters rtear the Pribilof Islands. The Japanese catch dec'l ined rapidly, final)y ending by the 1977 season (iOio.). During the I ate 1960's, Japanese shrinrping operations gradual'ly moved north into Soviet waters. The fishery was centered in the Gul f of Arradyr and achieved catches up to alntost 13,000 metric tons. By L972, catches had dropped considerably. The fleet then moved to Cape liavarin and into the'line northcentral Bering Sea alorrg the Un'ited States-USSR conventiorr of 1867 and eastward along che Bering Sea shelf (ibid.). The L975 and 1976 seasons marked the end of the Bering Sea shrimp trawl fishery, with the exception of 613 metric tons that were harvested by japan in the months of Jarruary and February of I977 prior to initiatiorr of the FCMA (ibid. ). Participation in the eastern Bering Sea shrimp fishery by the Soviet Unjon was mirrimal. Six factoryships arrived on the grounds in 1963 and operated for one month. The Soviet fleet moved their operation from the Bering Sea to the Gulf of Alaska near Kocliak Island the fo1 lowing year. Information regarding the Soviet fishery is unavailable (ibid.). The fishery continued through L973, with actjvity primarily focusing on the Kodjak and Shumagin islands area (ibid. ). t^Jith the exception of crne deliveny of 20.5 metric tons taken from the Prjbilof Island area in 1978, there has been no directed fishing pressure upon pink shrimp by domestic fishing fleets ('ibid.).

~~310 LC' Ol 1="' (5 oA l!o c ca a It rO t-~~

~~P a +) (o +) .ct~~

~~(o OJ V,~~

~~L co (u +) (+- o a +) (J 5- +) ttl 'o I I an _l r+- ?3 g t-\ 16 I (J !! a I L c o I E :: E !6 -o E.-5: a! eoC' l-\. gE; .-C I ! a I a ?2 l: :o I s- t: 2 \t o d .to c !i A =~~

~~311 Table i. Comnrercial Harvest of Shrimp irr Metric Tons by Foreign Fishermen in the tastern Bering Sea, 1960-77~~

~~Catch~~

~~Yea r Japan USSR~~

1960 680 0 1961 14,TI7 0 t962 18,387 0 1963 29,536 1964 20,880 0 1 965 9,765 0 1966 2,935 0 r967 3,302 0 i968 r2,736 0 1969 9,506 0 1970 6,156 t97 I 2,855 1972 222 1973 155 -0- r97 4 103 1975 3 ,557 0 1976 2,203 0 r977 613 0

~~Source: USDC t979. --- means no data were availatrle.~~

IV. MANAGEI4ENT OBJECTIVES AND CONSIDERATIONS Usually, marine fisheries occurring within-3 mi of shore are managed by the Sfate of Alaska and from 3 fo 200 mi by the U.S. Departrnent of Commerce, llati onal Mari ne Fisheries Service. Currently, shrimp occurring wjthin the 200-mi limit in the Bering Sea ar_e manag_ed under provisiois of the Prel iminary Fishery Mana.gement Plan. The_ plan ilrohibirs toreign fishing but allows domestic harvest uncier established gu i de1 i nes (Anderson , pers. comm. ) . A oirected'fishery for shrimp in the eastern Bering Sea has not occurred since 1gi7 . During the late 1960's and early 1970's, sorle shrinrp stocks were explo'iteo in the Gulf of Anadyr ofj. oj the Soviet coast and in rhe nortfrcentral area of the Bering Sea. Shrinrp fisheries in the eastern Bering Sea were not regulateo until 1977. lrlith implementation of che Fisheries Conservation and Management Act '

3L? prohibitions were placed on retention of shrimp by any nation other than the United States within the United States jurisdictional waters in the Bering Sea. Currently, shrimp populations in the Bering Sea are low in abundance. There is no di rected commercial or domestic explo'itat'ion upon these populations af, rhis t'ime (Morris 1981). Incidental catches of sidestripe and pink shrimp, however, are sometimes found in the Japanese pol lock fishery. The catch is not documented dno the nragnitude of this inciderrtal harvest is unknown (Anderson, pers. comm. ).

V. PERIOD OF USE AND HARVEST METHODS A directed fishery for shrimp in rhe Bering Sea has not occurred sjnce the 1970's. No specific quotds or fishing seasons have been established for the domestic shrimp fishery jn the Bering Sea (USDC 1s7e).

~~REFERENCES ADF&G. 1985. Regulations of the Alaska Board of Fisheries for commercial fishirrg in Alaska - shellfish. Div. Conrner. Fish., Juneau. 129 pp.~~

Anderson, P. 1985. Personal communication. Shrimp B'iologist, NI4FS, Kodiak, AK. Balsiger, J.[,1. 1979. A review of pandalid shrimp fisheries in the northern hemisphere. Pages 7-38 in T. Frady, €d. Proceedings of the international pandalid shrirnp symposium, 19181. Sea Grant Rept.81-3. l,lorris, B.I. 1981. An assessment of the living marine resources uf the coastal Beri ng Sea and potentia'l resource use conf I'icts between commercial fisherjes and petroleum development in the Navdrin Basin, proposed Sale No. 83. Tech. Menio. F/ARR-2. USDC: N0AA, NMFS. 23 pp.

~~USDC. I979. Pre'lintinary fishery management plan for shrimp of the eastern Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska. NOAA/NMFS, Northwest Fisheries Center, Seattl e.~~

~~313~~

~~Tanner Crab Regional 0verview Arctic and Western Regions~~

I. INTRODUCT ION Stat'istical Area J, or the l,lestward Reg'istratiorr area, includes al'l Pacific 0cean waters south of the latitude of Cape Douglas (58"52'N), west of the longitude of Cape Fa'irfield (148"50'l'l), east of 172" east longitude, and shoreward of the 400-fathom (732-m) depth contour, anci all Bering Sea waters east of I72" east longitude. Area J is divided into the Kodiak, South Peninsula, Eastern Aleutians, Western Aleutians, Bering Sea, and Chign'ik districts (ADF&G 1984). liith the exception of the Northern Subclistrict of the Bering Sea District, information regard'ing Tanner crab fisheries in Statistical Area J has beerr presented in volume 2 of the Alaska Habitat l.lanagement Guide for the Southwest Region. The Bering Sea District consists of all Bering Sea waters of Statis- tical Area J north of 54"36' north lat'itude. The Southeasterrr, Pribilof, and Northern subdistrjcts are contained within the Bering Sea District (map 1). 0n1y the Northern Subdistrict occurs wjthin the boundaries of the Arctic and Western resource rnanagement regions adclressed in this volume. The filorton Sound Section of the Northern Suboi stri ct i ncl udes al I waters of the Bering Sea east of 168" west longitude and north of the laritude of Cape Romanzof. The General Section consists of all waters of the Norrhern Subdistrict not'included in the Norton Sound Sectiorr (ibid. ). Information presented in the fo1'lowing narrative will encompass the marine area covereo by the Northern Subdistrict, whjch corresponds to that area represented by the combined Arctic and Western regi ons .

II. DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE Two species of Tanner crab are commercialiy harvested in the Bering Sea. Distribution of Chionoecetes bairdi, the larger of the two species, is strongly assoTTETEd-rw-TlE- the coast of the Alaska Peninsula, continental slope areas, and the Pribilof Islands (0tto 1981). Recent trawl surveys have located C. bajrdi in a broad band extending front inner Bristol Bay westward along Th'e outer continental shelf edge to L7B" west lorrgitude (0tto et al. 1984b). The second Tanner crab species, C. opilio, occurs from the Bering Strajt south to Unimak Island, wilh tfiE-6-xception of the northern or eastern shores of Bristol Bay and ininrediately sourh of Nunivak Island (0tto 1981, 0tto et al. 1984b). A hybrid of these two species is also present, occurring within the zone of C. bairdi and C. opilio (0tto et al. 1984b). Trawl surveys for T-aniffiab in tne-EeFing Sea are performed by the NMFS to obtain abundance estimates and 'irrformation regarding reproductive condition, size, and distribution of male and female crabs.

~~315 -) (o o !-~~

~~(o 1=""" o +J vl P 4"""' (o +, o a,/') -o~~

316 Nor only is the distribution of C. opilio in the Berrng Sea extensive, oy! popuiation size is immense,-exGi'i-ng that of C. bairdi. 1^1ithin this area, there ale_ geographic cl ines in average siie ariilTli-.ep.oouc- tive parameters. Clines are gradual and conti-nuous and rherefore are not indicative of separate stocks. The entire Bering Sea popularion oi 9- gp]4,i. managed as one s_tock (0tto et al. ige+0,'0tto 1981). )Recifically, _in the Northern Subdisrrict total populalion estimates (ma le ancl female combined) peaked in 1979 at 22,832.4 nri I I ion crabs and dropped g_radua'l1y to 1,910.7 million crabs (tan'le l) during the l9g4 survey (Otto et al. 1984b). The total population estimate for C. bairdi in the t{orchern Subdjstrict has ranjed from a high abundance trr ffiTmillion crabs in 1982 to a low of 29.b mi'ltion .ru6i (l;bi; ii in 1984 (ibid.).

Iii. IIANAGEMENT HISTORY AND REPORTED USE Foreign and domestic crab fleets were originally attracted to ihe southeastern Bering Sea by the availabil'ity of ine larqer and more valuable red king crab (Paralithodes camtsciatica). With" oevelopmenu of markets and processing Teeh'niques,Thner crab became a tarqeted species (Somerton 1981). - Between 1953 and 1964, Japanese and Soviet fleets caught Tanner crabs !!u9lly as an irrcidental catch of the king crab ancj iroundfish trawl fisheries. Available data, though limiieo, ind'icaie that annual production, at least.Uy !h9 Japanese mothership fleer, during this tinte was-probabiy fewer-thgn 1,000,000 Tanner crabs per.year (ott6 1991). In 1964, when the Soviet and Japanese king crab'fisheriei were at their P9l!, negotiations -began between the untteo states, Japan, and the USSR. These negotiations restricted foreign harvest qubtai of k.ing crab and encouraged exploitation of Tanner crab as a substitute species. The 'initial fishery targeted exclusively on C. baircti because of its larger size. In 1965, appro_xinrately_ 1.7 mi I I ion Tanner crabs were taken by Soviet and Japarrese fleets. The fishell expanded rapidly during tfre iollowing years' and in 1968 the United States entered the Tannei crab fisheryl gi!f,grgtt fishing remained incidental to king crabbing until tglq- rctii 1eB1 ). By 1969' the direct harvest of C. bairdi increased to the level where foreign fishing quotas appeareo neceEilf. As a result of restrictions imposed by the United States, foreign-a1. vessels began ctirecting their effort toward opi I (Armstrong !. io -f et n.d.). As total landi-ngs-Tf-I-anner crab rom the eastern Bering Sea i ncreased (from 12 to 24 million crabs from 1967 to lgzo), id alo American interest in the fishery. Consequently, through a'series of b.ilateral agreements ancl United States harvest quotas, foreign participation in the eastern Bering Sea Tanner crab fishery-was grioudity reduced and forced to fish areas to the north and west (ioiA.). Fo"reign catches declined in I97I and again in 1972, when the USSR left tfie fishery (0tto 1981 ) . In 7974, a directecl United States Tanner crab fishery began, with the target species C. bairdi (ADF&G 1982). The fishery wis, ino continues

~~317 Table 1. Annual Abundance Estimates (Millions of Crabs) for Tanner Crabs in the Northern Di stri ct, f rom NMFS Sur.veys~~

~~C. bai r9i~~

~~Males Fema I es~~

~~Less Creater Less Creater Crand Si zea Than 85 85-129 Than 129 Tota I Than 85 Than 84 Total Total~~

1978 56.0 7.5 0.6 74,1 121.2 ?e 7.8 129.0 203.1 1979 26.7 0.1 30.6 48 .0 3.5 51.5 82.1 1 980 44 .0 0.3 0.1 54 .4 100.3 9.3 109.6 164.1 1 981 23.3 24.4 0.4 48.1 51 .1 3.9 55.0 103.1 1982 12.6 39.4 a.o 54.5 288.4 15.4 303.8 358.3 1 983 17 ,3 15 .7 0.8 33.8 53.0 2.2 55.1 89.0 1 984 6.7 8.0 0.3 15.0 1 3.0 1.0 14.0 29.0

~~C. opi I io~~

~~Mal es Femal es~~

~~Les s Greater Less Greater Grand 5i zea Than 110 Than 109 Total Than 55 Than 64 Total Tota I~~

1978. 1,344.6 10.6 1 ,355. 2 1 r464.4 29.7 1 ,494.2 2,849.3 197gD 1 0,21 3.0 6.5 I 0r 21 9.5 1 2,563 .0 49.9 12,612.9 22 1832.4 1 980 1,ggg.4 4.2 1,993.6 2,966.5 46.0 3,012.5 5,006.0 1 981 934.4 5.5 940.9 1 ,137 .4 46.9 1r184.4 2,125.3 1982 1 ,292.2 10.9 1 ,303.1 11036,2 96.9 1,133.1 2,436.2 1 983 1 ,274.0 9.2 1 ,283.2 1r161 .6 15.3 1r176.9 2,460,0 1 984 1 ,030. 1 20.0 1,050.0 854.8 5.9 860.7 1 ,910.7

~~C. bairdi - C. opilio~~

~~Mal es Fema l es~~

~~Less a Creater Less Greater Grand Jt ze Than 110 Than 109 Tota I Thon 65 Than 64 Tota I Tota I~~

1978 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.3 0.7 1.0 1.7 't979 a1 0.4 1.5 2.0 1.6 3.6 5.1 1 980 1.3 0.7 2.0 4.6 r 0.9 15.6 17 .6 1981c 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1982 1.3 0.1 1.4 12.0 50. r 62.1 63.6 1 983 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.8 3.7 4.5 4.9 1 984 4.3 0.0 4.3 7.4 0.4 7.8 12 .1

Source: Otto et al. 1984. a Carapace width (mm). b Survey estimates of the smallest size groups in 1979 are not cornparable to other years because of large differences in area coverage. c All estimates less than 0.05 in 198i.

318 to b€, conducted north of the A]aska Peninsula anc near the Pribilof Islands (0tto 1981). After the cijrecteci United States fishery began, C. bairdi catches grew from 2,300 metric tons in 1974 to 10,100 metric Tons Tn tg76 and peaked at 30,030 metric tons in 1978 (ibid.). Wirh a declirie in C. bairdi abundance, United States vessels nroved north and began catch-ing-e-ggil'[g (Somerton 1981). Landirrgs of !..opilio exceeded thtise of C. bairdi by alnrost three million pounds during the period 1980 througT IBT-a'lthough C. opilio cont'inues to command a considerably lower ex-vessel price (Armstrong et al. n.d.). In 198i, because of increased United States participation 'in the !. op'ilio fishery, foreign fishing r,'/as el'inrinated (Somer'ton i981). Tbdayl aTI Tanner crab fr shi ng i n the southeasrern Beri ng Sea (except for incidenral catch) js conductecl aboard Anrerican vessels and is directed at both C. baird'i and C. opil'io (Armstrong et a1. n.d.). Prior to-th-e-TgB-2-1983- fisTEry, commercial expl oitat'ion of Tanner crab occurred primarily in the Southeastern and Pribilof subdistricts o'f rhe Bering Sea. The fishery harvested about 26.I m'illion pounds of C. opilio during the 1982-1983 fishery, increasing to 26.8 million pounds durirrg the 1983-1984 fishery. During the 1982-1983 fishery, 1.4 ntillion pounds of the total ! opilio harvest was taken in the Northerrr District. The Northern Districr catch increaseo to 3.1 m'ill'ion pounds during the 1983-1984 fishery (Griffin, pers. comm. ). The harvest of C. bairdi in the Northern District was incidental tcr that of C. opillo,E?fiing.048 million pounds during the 1982-1983 season (A'DF&G-T985). Decl ining catches of C. bai rdi in the South- eastern and Pribilof subdistricts of the Berr-nq-Sea l'ras resulted in effort directed roward C. opil io (Otto et al-. 1984a). The total harvest of Tanner crab (Cl UaTFdT-ancl C. opi I io) in the Bering Sea for the 1982-1983 and t9g3-JgSFseasons averaged +.0 million pounds per year. 0f this average, about 89% of the harvest was q. opil io (Griffin, pers. comm.). !.. opilio from the Northern suoO'iEtTict accounted for about 8.5% of the total Berinq Sea C. opilio harvest during the 1982-1983 and 1983-1984 seasons (ADF&G 1985).

IV. MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES AND CONSIDERATIONS - The Tanner crab fishery within 3 nri of the shoreline is managed by the State of Alaska and the 3 to 200-mi area by the NMFS. Management is directed by a policy jointly developed by the Alaska Board of Fisheries dnd the North Pac'ific Management Council. Because Tanner crab disirj- bution is not restricted by state/federal jurisdictional boundaries, prob'lems can arise when state and federal po1 icies confl ict. Regulations, though nonexistent during the first rwo years of t.he Tanner crab fishery, have since evolved to acconrplish the following obj ect i ves : 1. To maximize yield from harvestable surpluses. This is to be acconrpl ished by season and gear restrictions to increase meat yield per individual crab and reduce mortal'ity on sublegal crabs. 2. To maximize the reproductive potenrial of the Tanrrer crab stocks. r restricrion, size, and sex limits, and harvest levels to protect

3i9 crabs during the reproductive period; b) minimizing mortality on female crabs due to handling or harvest; and c) assuring full female fertilization by providing adequate numbers of nnture males for breecli ng. 3. To seek economi c stabi I ily i n the Tannel gg!-j!ggstty.. Thi s i s on level s of population abundance that may not be sustained over time by a) regulating annual harvest to discourage too rapid expansion of harvesting and processing capability until resource potential can be better evaluated and b) by stabi'lizing harvest levels within the range of natural recruitment f'luctuation, if not precluded by excessive natura'l mortality beyond the first year of maturity (NPFMC 1eB1 ). Currently, forecasting'long-term abundance and harvest levels for different fisheries is difficult. Better knowledge of the biology, age classification, and refinement of population assessment are needed to forecast abundance and harvest levels for the fishery and to ensure compatible management po1 icies. To prevent overexploitation of given Tanner crab populations,_super- exciusive and nonexclusive registration areas have been established. Vessels or gear registered for fishing in a superexclusive area may not be used to take Tanner crab in any other registration area during that registration year. A vessel or gear may register for one or more of the nonexclusive registration areas; however, a vessel or gear so registerecl may not be used to take Tanner crab in a superexclusive registratiorr area during that registration year. The registration year extends from August 1 through July 31. The Bering Sea District is one of four nonexclusive registiation areas (ADF&G 1984). Bering Sea Tanner crab stocks are managed by two agerrcies. The Oomesiic fishery is marraged by the State of Alaska. The NMFS is responsible for regulating the foreign fishery (NPFMC 1981). Manage- ment is under the joint po'licy established by the Alaska Board of Fisheries and the NPFMC. As with other Tanner crab fisheries' regulations governing the fishery involve sex, gear type, season, and siie. Guideline harvest leve'ls are determined annually by the state. The harvest levels are based on population estimates and biological data provided from trawl surveys performed by the NMFS (ADF&G 1989). gpl'lio crabs difficu'lt, I

V. PERIOD OF USE AND HARVEST METHODS Harvest seasons for Tanner crab have been designed to prevent fishing during soft-shel led and reproductive stages of the species' I ife cycles. In rhe Bering Sea District, which includes the Northern Subd'istrict, male Tanner crabs could be harvested from 12:00 noon January 15 through 12:00 noon June 15, except male Tanner crabs other

320 than C. bryi may-be taken qr possessed from 12:00 noon January 15 throufh 1Fd0-ioon August 1. The Norton Sound section of the Northern Subdistrict is closed to thq taking of Tanner crab (ADF&G 19g4). Tanner crab may be harvested with poti and ring nets (ibid.). Regulations stipulate that only male crabs ma! Ue possessed. Sex and size_stipulations ensure that male Tanner crabs rema'in in the breeding PgPqlation at least one season before they are harvested. Until Jun6 1982, a size limit had not been imposed on !.. opilio, as most of the cltg! was greater than 4.3 inches. A minimurn-slFTimit as measured by shell width was established for the 1983 season at 3.1 inches (78 mm) in-carapace width. For C. bairdi, the minimum size lim'it is 5.5'inchei (r4U mm) in carapace width.

~~REFERENCES ADF&G. 1982. Westward Region shellfish report to the Alaska Board of Fisheries. Div. Corrner. Fish., Kodiak. 355 pp.~~

~~. 1984. Regu'lations of the Alaska Board of Fisheries for commer- -- clal fishing in-Alaska - Shellfish. Div. Commer. Fish.,-Juneau. 115 pp.~~

~~. 1985. Westward Region shellfish report to the Alaska Board of ---fneri es . Di v. Commer. Ft str. , Kodi ak. f 4O pp~~

Armstrong, D.A.r. L.s. Incze, and J.L. Armstrong, D.L. wencher, and B.R. Dumbould. N.d. Distribution and abundance of decapod crusiacean larvae in the southeastern Bering Sea with emphasis'RAC uion commercial species. Annual rept. to 0CSEAP-OMPA, NA81 00059. Fisheries Research Institute, Univ. Washjngton, Seatile, l'lA. Griffin, K. 1985. Personal cormunication. Shellfish Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Comner. Fish., Dutch Harbor.

~~NPFMC. 1981. Fishery management plan for the commercial Tanner crab fishery off the coast of Alaska. Anchorage. 115 pp.~~

Otto, R.S. 1981. Eastern Bering Sea crab fisheries. pages 1,037-1,066 in D.lr|. Hood and J.A. Calder, ed. The eastern Bering-seattle, Sea shelf: oceanography and resources. vol. 2. USDC: NOAA, 0MpA. wA.

0tto, R.s., R.A. Maclntosh, K.L. stahl-Johnson, and s.J. wilson. l9g4a. Report to industry or the 1984 eastern Bering Sea crab survey. NWAFC Processed Rept. B4-I7. NMFS, Seattle. 66 pp. Otto, R.s., B.G. stevens, R.A. Maclntosh, K.L. stahl-Johnson,-Bering and S.J. lrlilson. 1984b. United States crab research in the eastern !"9 dur,ing 19q1. [Document submitted to the annuat meeting of th; International North Pacific Fisheries Commission, Vancouver,- British columbia, 0ctober 19841. NwAFc, NMFS, NOAA, seattie, wA. 36'pp.

327 Somerton, D. 1981. Life history and population dynamics of two species of Tanner crab Chionoecetes bqj$i and C. opilio in the eastern_Bering sea with impl icatlonffi Tfiffianagemenffi the commercial harvest. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Washington, Seattle, WA. 211 pp.

~~322 Human Use of Brown Bear Western and Interior Regions~~

I. P0PULATI0N I'IANAGEI,IENT H IST0RY A. Introduction Human uSe daia in the follOwing sections are presentecl by game management units (GMU) and subunits (GMS) (see map- 1). Data are presented for cal endar years 1979 through 1984 and i rrcl ude reported resident and nonresident hunter harvest, reported.defense of' 'life and property kills (DLPs), and total reported harvest. Reported harvest data are obtairred from sealing certificates. All pebple who harvest a brown bear are required to have the hide and 'sluit sealed by an authorized representative from the ADF&G. The data gbtained iorm these certificates represent successful hunters only. No information is ava'ilable concerning those hunters who hunieo' brown bear but were ncit successful. B. Regional Summary of Hunting 1.- Reoional summary of- human use inforrnation. l,lith'in the Western and Interior ed of Gl'lUs 12, 18, 19, 20, 2L,24, arro 25, brown bear harvest has ranged f rom 55 i n 1961 to I87 'i rr 1981 . The average dnnua I ha rvest from 1961 to 1984 has been about 120 brbwn bears (ADF&G 1eB5 ) . 'in 2. Manaqerial authori ty. Wi I dl 'ife managelnent Al aska was Alaska fr-@in 1g25 when Congress created -th-e Game Co'nunission. Prior to 1925, protection of wildlife had been undertaken by the Departments of Treasury, Commerce, and Agriculture and by the terrirorial governor. After statehood .i; 1959, the Staie of Alaska assumed administrat'ion of its wil

II. GMU i2 A. Bounoaries Gt'lU 12 basicai 1y encompasses the upper Tanana and }lhite rivers. (See map 1 and fne tatest GMU boundary descriptions. ) 8. Management Obiectives The Yukon-Tan-ana Brown Bear Management Plan pertains to GMU 12, The management objecti ve i s to provi de tlie grea-test- susta'ined opportun1iy to pariicipate in hunting brown bear {ADF&G 1977, Bos ieso). C. Managetnent Considerations bear populatign in GMU Popu- Littie is known about the brown 12.'in latign estimates are based upon studies conducted elsewhere the Alaska Range. Brown bears appear to be relat'ively_ -abundant and wel I di striluted rhroughout the uni r (Ke1 l eyhouse 1984a ) .

~~323 a' I I lo rol (\l 6|I I o |o I (\l t'~~

~~I , -t~~

~~\\ ttt..., ::S 9 c|\ 'i-l--- )-'---rl )ti I -,' \'*uo tNi ' \ \F t^ o= :,1 (t) (u ri( L oL t- Po = E E G' EL o ! vl I c, = a (u t r o an = =(5~~

~~q G' =~~

324 D. Period of Use The hunting season dates have fluctuated consiclerably over the past 24 years. During the 1960's, the spring and fall seasons ran for a total of 154 days; the season dropped, however, to a total of 2l days by I97I. Since then, they have gradually increased unti I the 1984 and 1985 seasons, when season dates ran fr

~~Table 1. Reported Brown Bear Harvest Data for Gl'lU 12, 1979-84~~

~~Harvest by Harvest by Tota l Yea r Res i dents* Nonresidents DLP Ha rves t~~

~~L979 10 I2 0 22 1980 B 9 0 t7 1981 1? 9 0 22 1982 10 9 0 19 1983 10 ? 0 13 1984 20 16 I 37~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

* Residents are hunters whose 1egal residence is Alaska and who have been resident in Alaska for at least 12 morrths.

The reported harvest of brown bears in GMU 12 has remained rela- t'ively consistent unti I 1984. Since the 1982-1983 regulatory year, brown bears taken in Gl'lU 12 do not count against the bag I imit irr other units of one bear in Alaska every four reguiatory years, thus allowing hunters the possibility of taking more bears. During 1984, the resident brown bear tag was rtot required in GMU 12. These two regu'latory relaxations are probably part'ia1ly responsible for the increased harvest during 1984. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas The brown bear harvest in GMU 12 is generally well distributeo throughout the mountainous portiorr of the unit (Kelleyhouse 1982, i984b ) .

325 III. GMU 1B A. Boundarres GMU 1B jncludes the Yukon-l..uskokwim del ta. (See map 1 and the latest Gl4U boundary descriptions. ) B. lvlo nagement Objecti ves The Yukon-Kuskokwim Brciwn Bear Managentent Plan pertains to GMU 18. The management objective is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity io participate in hunting brown bear (ADF&G 1977, Bos 1e80 ) . r' l"ranagenrent Cons'i derat i ons The number of brown bears kjlled in defense of life and property and for subsistence use is unknown. Local residents are reluctarrt to repr.,r't such killsg however, it is believed the unreported kill rs 1ow during nornral years (l4achida 1964). During April and May of 1985, however, the spring thaw was unusualiy 1ate, and hunters using srrowmobiles harvested a record number of bears in the lower Kuskokvlinr and Kilbuck mountairrs (Machjda, pers. conrm. ). Little is known about the brown bear population in GMU 18. Although current harvest. is 1ow, a future 'increase is 1ike1y. Open terrain characterizing the urrit makes the bears extremely vulnerable, especially to hunters us'ing aircraft (ibid.). U.h Period of Use Brown bear hunting season lengths ranged in length from a total of i54 days during the 1960's to 47 days from the mio 1970's through 1984. The current 1985-1986 hunt'ing season runs from September 10 through 0ctober 10 and from April 10 through May 25 for a total of 77 days. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for the current season arirl 1 imi ts. ) E. Human Use Data Table 2 presents reported harvest data for the years 1979 through 1984. These data represent only successful hunters. Urtsuccessful hunters of brown bear are not requ'ired to report.

~~Table 2. Reported Brown Bear Harvest Data for GMU 18, 1979'84~~

~~Harvest by lla rvest by Tota I Yea r Resi derits* Nonres i dents DLP Harvest~~

~~1979 8 1 I2 1960 1 13 0 I4 1981 ? 21 0 24 1987 1 13 0 1,4 1983 4 T2 0 16 1984 1 10 2 1?~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

* Residents are hunters whose legal residence is Alaska and who have been res'idents of Al aska for at least 12 nronths.

326 Mosc of the reported brown bear harvest in GMU 18 is by guided nonresident hunters. Prior to L979, little or no harvest of brown bears was reported in GMU 18. The increase, beginning in I979, appears to be related to guides moving into the area and offering bear hun[s (Nelson 1980, Dinneford 1981). F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Brown bears are primarily restricted to two population centers in GMU 18: the Andreafsky and Chuilnak mountains and the Kilbuck Mountains. Most of the reported harvest comes from these two drcas (Machioa 1984).

IV. GMU 19 A. Boundaries GllU 19 includes the middle and upper Kuskokwinr River drainages. (See map 1 and the latest GMU boundary descriptions.) B . l*lanagement Objecti ves Three brown bear managenrent plans pertain to GMU 19: The Yukon- Kuskokwim, Farewell, and South Kuskokwim brown bear management p'lans (ADF&G I977, Bos 1980). The management obiective of the Yukcln-Kuskokwim plan is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting brown bear. The Farewell plan's objective is to provide sustained opportunities to hunt brown bear under aesthetica'l1y p'leasing condjtions. The South Kuskokwim plan's primary pbjective is to provide sustained opportunities to be selecrive in hunting brown bear; 'its secondary objective is to provide sustained opportunities to hunt brown bear under aesthetically pleasing conditions (Bos i980). C. Management Considerations The-brown bear population in GMS 198 appeared to have decljtted during the late 1970's and early 1980's as d result of overharvest (Pegau 1982). Beginning in the fall of 1981, a drawing pennit sysiem was implemented for GllS 198 that has effectively reduced the harvest, and the population appears to be rebounding (Pegau i984a). Beginning in 1974, the brown bear harvest in GMUs 17 and 19 has Oeen'inf'luenced by the alternate-year closure of GMU 9 brown bear seasons. When the GMU 9 season is closedo the harvest markedly increases in GMUs 17 ano 19 (Pegau 1982). Most of the brown bbar harvest in GMU i9 is assoc'iated w'ith gu'iding activ'it'ies (ibid.). D. Period of Use Brown bear seasons have ranged in length from 154 days during the early to mid 1960's to 47 days since L974. The current brown bear season in GMU 19 runs frorn September 10 through 0ctober 10 and f roni May 10 through l'lay 25. (See the I atest Al aska Gane Regulatibns for the current season and limits.) E. Human Use Data Table 3 presents reported harvesr data for the years 1979 through 1984. These data represent orily successful hunters. Unsuccessful hunters of brown bear are not required to report.

~~3?7 l'able 3. Reported Brown Bear Harvest Data for GMU 19, 1979-84~~

~~Harvest by Harvest by Tota I Yea r Res i dents* Nonresidents DLP Ha rvest~~

~~1979 I2 55 0 67 1980 J 53 1 57 1981 5 32 0 38 r982 Z 16 i 19 1983 4 30 I 35 1984 6 13 0 19~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

* Residents are hunters whose 1ega1 resiclence is Alaska and who have been residents of Alaska for at least 12 months.

The decrease rn harvest that occurred after the 1980 huntirtg season wds the result of implementation of a permit drawing systenl in GMS 198 thtit limited the number of hunters able to hunt in the subunit. The decline frorn rhe 1981 to the 1982 season was due to fewer guides with fewer cl ients operating in the Gl'lU. Many guides who operared in GMU 19 attributed the decline in clients to the overail poor worldwide economy during 1982 (Pegau 1984b). F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Until the drawing permit system was initiated in GMS 198, most of the brown bear harvest during the 1970's and early 1980's in GMU 19 was in the Nushagak Hills in GMS 198 (Pegau 1982). Up until I97I, mosr of the harvest had come from Subunit 19C, and since 1981 this subunit has accounted for most of the brown bear harvest in the GMU (Pegau 1982, 1984a, 1984b).

V. GMU 20 A. Boundaries GMU 20 basical 1y consisrs of the central Tanana-upper Yukon va'l1ey. (See map 1 and the latest GMU boundary descriptions.) B. Management Objectives Two broln tlear management plans pertain to GMU 20: the Yukon-Tanarra and the Central Alaska Range brown bear management plans (ADF&G 1977, Bos 1980). The Central Alaska Range plan has a primary management objective to provide sustained opportunities to hunt brown bear under aesthetically pleasing conditions. The sectlndary objective in the Central Alaska Range plan and the primary objective in the Yukon-Tanana plan is to provide the

328 greatest susta'ined opportunities to participate in hunting browri bear (Bos 1980). C. Management Consi derat'i ons In much of GMU 20, brown bear management may'involve temporarily reducing bear numbers in order to enhance ungulate survival and population recovery (Jennings 1984). D. Perioo'length of Use The of brown bear hunting seasons has ranged from a combined total of 154 days during the early 1960's to a low of 21 days in L97I. With the exception of GMS 20E, the current hunting season in GMU 20 runs from September 1 through November 30 and April 1 through l4ay 31. The season in GMS 20E runs from September 1 through June 10. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for the current season and linrits.) E. Human Use Data Table 4 presents reported harvest data for the years 1979 thrcugh 1984. These daia represent only successful hunters. Unsuccessful hunters of brown beans are not required to report.

~~Table 4. Reported Brown Bear Harvest Data for GMU 20, 1979-84~~

~~Harvest by Harvest by Tota I Year Residents* Nonres i dents DLP Ha rvest~~

~~1979 32 7 0 39 1980 34 15 1 50 1981 35 26 6 66 r982 36 15 ? 53 1983 47 I2 5 64 1984 55 15 (. 72~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

* Residents are hunters whose legal residence is Alaska and who have been residents of Alaska for at least i2 months.

The general trend has been an increas'ing harvest in GMU 20, prinrari'ly in GMS 20E. Liberal hunting seasons and bag I imits (bears taken in GMS 20E do not count against the bag limit in other units of one bear every four regu'latory years) appear to be the reason for the increasing trend in har"vest.

~~3?9 F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Most of the harvest of brown bears occurs along rivers and near other access points (Jennings 1981).~~

VI. GMU 21 A. Boundaries GMU 2I basically consists of the middle Yukon River va'lley from Tanana to Paimiut. (See map 1 and near the latest GMU boundary descriptiorrs. ) B. Management Obiectives The Yukorr-Kuskokwin Brown Bear l'lanagement Plan pertains to GMU 21. The management objectrve js to provide the greatest sustained opportuniry to participate in hunting brown bear (ADF&G 1.977, Bos 1e8o). C. Management Considerations Presently, irrterest in brown bear hunting in GMU 21 is low. The annual harvest of bears in the unit has had an insignificant impact upon ihe bear population. Nuisance bears are a problem around fi sh camps, smokehouses, and trapping camps, primari ly alorrg the Yukon and Koyukuk rivers (0sborne 1984). D. Period of Use Season lengths have varied form the current 177-day season to 47 days during the mid 1970's and early 1980's. Currently, the brovrn bear seasons in GMSs zLB, D, and E are from September 1 through December 31 and from April i through May 25. In GMSs 21A and C the seasons are fronr September 10 through 0ctober 10 and from May 10 through May 25. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for the current season and limits.) E. Human Use Data Table 5 presents reported harvest data for the years 1979 through i984. These data represent on'ly successful hunters. Unsuccessful hunters of brown bear are not required to report.

~~Table 5. Reported Brown Bear Harvest Data for GMU 2I, 1979-84~~

~~Harvest by lla rves t by Tota I Yea r Res i dents* Nonresidents DLP Ha rves t~~

~~F 1979 2 2 1 1980 11 0 1 t2 1981 3 7 2 I2 1982 5 5 3 13 1983 2 4 I 7 i984 J I1 0 4~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

* Residents are hunters whose 1egal residence is Alaska and who have been residents of Alaska for at least 12 months.

330 Harvest of brown bears irr OFlu 2r is re'latively insignificont compared to the size of the GMU and the bear population. since 1961, the average annua I take has been betweerr three and four bea rs . F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Within GMU 2I, the Nulato Hills is a major hunting area.

VII. GMU 24 A. Bounda ri es Glvlu 24 consists of the Koyukuk River drainage norrh of and including Dulbi slough. (see map 1 and the latest GMU map ancl boundary descri ptions. ) B. Management Objecrives Two brown bear management plans pertain to GMU 24: the Brooks Range and upper Yukon-Porcupine brown bear marragement p1ans. The management objective of the Brooks Range plan is to provide the greatest sustained opportuni ty to hunt brown bear under aesthetically pleasing conditions. The objective of the upper Yukon-Porcupine plan is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate 'in hunting brown bear (ADF&G t977, Bos 1e80). c. Management Considerations Because of the low reproductive capacity of brown bears in the Brooks Range only 2 to 4% of the population should be harvested annually (Reynolds 1984a, 1984b). A permir system established by the Board of Ganre in the Brooks Range has effectively prevenreo overharvest of the brown bear population (ibid.). D. Period'length of Use The of brown bear hunting seasons has ranged from a combineo rotal of 180 days in the mid 1960's to no 0pen hunring season in I971. Currently, GMU 24 has rhree sets of hunting seasorls rhat app'ly to indiviOual portions of the GMU: a September I through 0ctober 3i and May l0 through 31 registrarion permit hunt, a year-round registration permit hunt, and a September 1 through December 31 and May 10 through 25 hunting season. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for the current season and 1 imi ts. ) E. Human Use Data Table 6 presents reported harvest data for rhe years 1979 through 1984. These data represent only successful hunters. Unsuccessful hunters of brown bear are not. required to report. The registration permit system for portions of Gt4U 24 has effectively limited brown bear harvesr in those areas. A large portion of the GMU'is within Gates of the Arcric National Park, where hunt'ing is limited by registration permit, and only local residents are allowed to hunt in the park. hunting pressure in the remainder of the GMU is low. Harvest appears to be within sustainable levels throughout the GMU (Reynolds 1984b).

~~331 Table 6. Reported Brown Bear Harvest Data for GMU 24, 19i9-84~~

~~Harvest by Harvest by Tota I Year Residents* Non res i dents DLP Ha rvest~~

~~t979 0 7 0 7 1980 7 13 0 20 1981 5 6 z 13 1 1982 I l. 1 4 1983 8 4 I 13 1 984 4 3 0 7~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

* Residents are hunters whose legal residence is Alaska and who have been residents of Alaska for at least 12 months.

~~F. Significance of Particular Use Areas No'information was available about areas where brown bear harvest was relatively more sign'ificant.~~

VI I i. GMU 25 A. Bounda ri es GMU 25 inc'ludes the Yukon Flats, the Chandalar, Porcupine, and Black river drainages, and Bjrch and Beaver creeks. (See map 1 and the latest GMU boundary descriptions.) B. Management Objectives Three brown bear management plans pertain to GMU 25: the Brooks Range, Upper Yukon-Porcupi ne , and Upper Bi rch-Preacher-Beaver Creek brown bear management p1ans. The management objectives of the BrooLs Range and Upper Birch-Preacher-Beaver Creek plans are to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to hunt brown bear under aesthetically pleasing conditions. The objective of the Upper Yukon-Porcupine plan is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity ro part'icipate in hunting brown bear (ADF&G 1977, Bos 1eBO ) . c. Management Considerations Because of the low reproductive capacity of brown bears in the Brooks Range only 2 to 4% of the population should be harvested annually (Reynolds 1984a, 1984b). A permit system established by the Board of Game in the Brooks Range has effectively prevented overharvest of the populati<.rn (ibid.). D. Period of Use The length of brown bear hunting seasons has ranged from a combined rotal of 180 days in the mid 1960's to no open hunting

332 season in I97I. Currently, GMU 25 has three sets of spring/fa11 hunting seasons that apply to individual portions of the GMU: September 1 through 0ctober 31/May 10 through 31; September 1 through 0ctober 10/May 10 through 25; and September 1 through November 3O/April I through May 31. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for the current season and limits.) E. Human Use Data Table 7 presents reported harvest data for the years 1979 through 1984. These data represent only successful hunters. Unsuccessful hunters of brown bear are not required to report.

~~Table 7. Reported Brown Bear Harvest Data for GMU 25, I979-84~~

~~Harvest by Harvest by Tota'l Yea r Res'i dents* Non res i dents DLP Ha rves t~~

~~1979 13 11 1 25 1980 4 11 0 15 1981 13 8 t 22 7982 9 10 0 19 1983 5 I4 0 19 1 1984 11 4 I 16~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

* Residents are hunters whose lega1 residence is Alaska and who have been residents of Alaska for at least 12 months.

Since I978, the harvest of brown bears has increased because of additional guides establ ishjng exclusive dreas rn the GMU, but the harvest has not been excessive and has remairred relative'ly stable for the past six years (Reynolds 1984a, 1984b). F. Significance of Particular Use Areas As in GMU 24, no information was available about areas where brown bear harvest wds relatively more s'ignificant.

~~REFERENCES AUF&G. 1977. The status of wildljfe in Alaska. Jurreau. 628 pp. . 1985. Brown bear harvest computer print out. Anchorage.~~

333 Bos, G.N. 1980. IMemo to R.J. Somervi i ie, Di rector, Div. Game, ADF&G, Juneau . ] Dinneford, |rJ.B. 1981. Unit 18 brown bear survey-inver,tory progress report. Pages 79-80 irr R.A. Hinman, €d. Annual report of survey-irlventory acuiv'ities. Part I: Black bears and brown bears. Vr-rl. 11. ADF&G, Fecl. Aid in t^li ldl . Rest. prog. rept. Projs hJ-19-1 and 2, Jobs 17.0, 4.0, and 22.0. Jerrnings, 1.8. 1984. Unit 20 brown bear survey-irrventory progress report. Pages 43-44 in A. Seward, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activit'ies. Part V: Browrr bear. Vol 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. prog. r'ept . Proj s . W-22:2 and 3 , Job 4 .0. . 1981. Unit 20 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. ----Tdges 83-84 in R.A. Hinman, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part I: Black bears and brown bears. Vol. 12. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in W'ildl. Rest. prog rept. Projs. t,l-19-1 and 2, Jobs 17.0, 4.0 ancl 22.0. Kelleyhouse, D.G. L982. Unjt 12 brown bear survey-inventory progrcss report. Pages 63-64 in R.A. Hinman, ed. Annual report of survey- irrventory act jvit'ies. Part I: Black bears and brown bears. Vol . 13. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in Wildl. Rest. prog. rept. Projs. W-I9-2 and W-22-I, Jobs i7.0 and 4.0. . 1984a. Unit 12 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. ----Eg'es 30-3f in A. Seward, ed. Annual report of survey-inventony activities. Part V: Brown bear. Vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid irr !,jildl. Rest. prog. rept. Projs. W-22-2 and 3, Job 4.0. . 1984b. Unit 12 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. ---Fafs 65-66 in J.A. Barnett, od. Annua'l report of survey-inventory activities. ?Ert I: Black bears and brown bears. Vol L4. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in Wildl. Rest. prog. rept. Prois W-22-l and 2, Jobs 17.0 and 4.0. l'lachida, S. 1984. Unit 18 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. Pages 37 -40 'in A. Seward, ed. Annual report of survey-'inventory activities. Part V: Brown bear. Vol 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in tli ldl , Rest. prog. rept. Prois. W-22-2 and 3, Job 4.0. Itlelson, R. 1980. Unit 18 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. Pages BI-BZ in R.A. Hinman, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Ert I: Black bears and brown bears. Vot. 11. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in hlildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proi. W-L7-I2, Jobs 17.0,4.0, and 22.0. Osborne, T.0. 1984. Unit 21 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. Page 46 l_! A. Seward, €d. A.nnual report of survey-i nventorJ/

334 dctiv'ities. Part V: Brown bear. Vol 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t,l'ildl . Rest. prog. rept. Prois. W-2?.'2 and 3, Job 4.0. Pegau, R.E. t982. Unit 19 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. Pages 76-78 in R.A. Hinman, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Tart I: Black bears and brown bears. Vol. 13. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in tr{'ildl. Rest. prog. rept. Prois. tll-19-2 and W-22-1, Jgbs 17.0 and 4.0. . i984a. Unit 19 brown bear survey-inventory progness report. ---?ages 4L-42 in A. Seward, €d. Annutrl report of survey-inventory activities. Part V: Brown bear. Vol 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in tlildl. Rest. prog. rept. Prois. W-22'2 and 3, Job 4.0. . 1984b. Unir 19 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. --fr[es 78-79 in J.A. Barnert, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory aciivities. Fart i: Black bears and brown bears. Vol 14. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in lrlildl. Rest. prog. rept. Projs. W-22-I and 2, "lobs 17.0 and 4.0. Reyno'lds, H.V. 1984a. Units 24,25, and 26 brown bear survey-inventorl' progress report. Pages 55-56 in A. Seward, €d. Annual report_ of survey-invenrory activities. Parr V: Brown bear. Vol i5. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 1n Wildl. Rest. prog. rept. Prois. Vl-22-2 and 3, Job 4.0. . 1984b. Units 24, 25, and 26 brown bear survey-inventory progress report. Pages 94-96 in J.A. Ba rnett , e d . Annua'l report of su r- vey-'inventory activitiee Part I: Brown bear. Vol 14. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in lrJildl. Rest. prog. r'ept. Projs. W-22-I and ?, Jobs 17.4 and 4.0.

~~335~~

~~Human Use of Caribou Western and Interior Regions~~

I. POPULATION MANAGEMENT HISTORY A. Introduction The fo'llowing herds are found in the Western and interior regions: Chisana, Denali, Kilbuck-Kuskokwjm mountains, Andreafsky, De1ta, Macomb, Yanert, Forty-mile, Beaver ltlountains, Sunsh'ine Mountain, Big River, Rainy Pass, Tonzana, Porcupine, and [,lestern Arctic. (See the Di stribution and Abundance section fcir more informat jon on these herds.) Human use information for caribou in the Western and Interior regions will be discussed in detai'l on'ly fr.rr the Delta (DCH)' Foitymile (FH), Chisana (CH), and Macomb (MH) caribou herds. Reported harvest data wi I I be presented by regulatory year (i ,luty-90 June) for each herd. Harvest data for the remaining herds are of questionable value because of a widespread lack of reporting, particularly in rural areas. Because the unreported harvest of these heros often exceeds the reported harvest, f,he harvest cannot be discussed in any detail. Harvest data are re'lati ve'ly more accurate for those herds f or whi ch a hunti ng permit is required (i.e., the Delra and Macomb herds) or where a iarger percentage of rhe hunters are from more urban areas (i.e., the Delta, Chisana, and Fortymile herds). B. Regional Summary of Hunting 1. Brief reqional summar.y of human use informaticln. Human use f Alaska has oscillated widely because of fluctuations in caribou population numbers and their distributional patterns, whjch, along with weather conditions and access, determine the availabil ity of caribou to hunters. The reported harvest of caribou from these regions underestimates the aciual number taken , because of the wi despread I ack of comp'l i ance i n returning harvest report cards. Thus it is difficult to compare caribou human use data from these regions with those from the other regions or from the state as a who'le. Many caribou herds in the Interior Region have never expgr- ienced intensive sport hunting. The Chisana, Derrali, Porcupine, and most of t,he herds in the upper Kuskokwim va'l1ey have not been subjected to heavy human use by nonlocal residents because of their relative inaccess'ibil'ity and the abi 1 i ty of other more access i bl e herds i n ihe state to satisfy this demand. In the Western Region, caribou have also not been exposed to heavy sport hunting because of the relatively small size of the local human population and the limited access to the area. Subs'istence use of caribou has been 1oca11y important, but'in a sporadic fashjon, to those

337 vi 1 1 ages that take advantage of the variabl e movement patterns of caribou that occasionally do bring them with'in reach of a village. The reported combined harvest of carjbou for the Delta and Fortymile herds has ranged from 114 animals in 1980-1981 to 894 animals in 1983-1984. In addition, the reported harvest for the remaining herds within the Western arrd Interior regions amounted to 143 caribou during the 1983-1984 regu'latory year (Hi nman 1985 ) . 2. Managerial authority. In 7925, the Alaska Game Corrnission waffi an act of Congress "to protect game animals, land furbearing animals, and birds in Alaska, and for other purposes." This was the beginning of formal wildlife management in Alaska. Concurrent with statehood irt 1959, under authority of Article VIII of the State Constitution, the legislature established the Department of Fish and Game. The Division of Game and the Board of Fish jurisdiction and Game were given over caribou.'legislative In 1975, separate boards of game and fish were created by act. Caribou hunting is cclntrolled under the Alaska Game Regulations. ir. DELTA CARIBOU HERD (GMS 20A) A. Boundaries The Delta Caribou Herd is primarily hunted in GMS 20A. See map I and the current Alaska Game Management Unit map, which prov'ides a geographical description and delineates the boundaries of the areas listed in the Alaska Gafie Regulations. B. Management 0biectives Most of the present range of the Delta Caribou Herd (DCH) lies in GMS 20A and is located within the geographical area of the Delta Caribou Management Plan (ADF&G 1984a). The primary obiective is "to protect, maintain, and enhance the caribou population in concert with other components of the ecosystem and thereby assure perpetuation of the population and its capability of providing: 1. sustained high opportunities to participate in hunting ca ri bou , t. sustained opportunities to be selective in hunting large male ca ri bou , 3. continued opportunities for viewing, photographing' and enjoying caribou, and 4. continued opportunities for scientific and educational study of caribou." See the Caribou Management Policies (ADF&G 1980), which reflect current Division of Game and Board of Game philosophy on caribou managemerrt 'in Al aska . Management guidelines include the following: o Mainta'in a minimum preca'lving population of 5,000-6,000 caribou in the DCH. o Adjust seasons, bag limits, and methods ano means of hunting tcl meet management obiectives.

~~338 _-=|- -.-.~~

~~o *|o , i"') , \ 1,-'l to |o N G| o t tO ?\ I (\| t~~

~~I , .l~~

~~i'f\I \\3 ; 'a E I o I _t a) .'t (l, ,.$. L L , o t L (u Pg E (t' E L (u ! tn l (u t> i. = o (u I t +, q- o ta =(5~~

~~a ro =~~

339 o Protect and prevent I oss of habi tat by enteri ng i nto cooperative management programs with publ ic and private I andowners. o Maintain public involvement in caribou management issues. o Consjder the ecological relationships of caribou and the human benefirs derived from caribou and other wildlife in the forntul ation and 'imp'lementation of management programs for cari bou . See the Delta Caribou Marragement Plan (ADF&G 1984a) for a more detailed description of these guidelines. C. Managemerrt-Mineral Considerations 1. development potential. Numerous mining claims, coal vel dePosits exist within the known winter range of the DCH. Future development of these materials could result in habitat loss or deterioration and a reduced aesthetic quality of the area. 2. Land ownership. Mil it_ary _ownership and use of restrictecl areas TfTmranges, low-level iet a'iruays) located within the range of the DCH may reduce the aesthetic appeal of the area. One of these restricted areas includes almost the entire traditional calving area of the DCH. These restricted areas are sites of regular bombing, strafing, and artillery firing. Low-flying mi'litary aircraft use the area almost daily; and grouncl training exercises occur intermittently (Davis et al. 1985). 3. t.lilcttires. Davis et al. (19.85) noted that few fires covering more tFan 40 ha (100 acres ) have occurred w'ithi n the DCH' s range in the past 30 years. However, thunderstorms do occur often during summer in the Alaska Range. In. June I97I, lightning strikes caused a 7,082 ha (17,500 acres)_burn about 10-20 km (6-12 mi) northwest of the traditional calving area. Davis et al. (1985) ctescribed two recent fires caused by artillery bombing. A 46,450 ha (115,000 acres) fire burned to rhe northern edge of the traditional core calving area producing smoke throughout the calving and postcalving perrods in 1979. In 1983, a 20,235 ha (50,000 acres) fire, which began on 9 l'lay 1983 and lasted unti I August, burned a major por'tion of the traditional eastern core calving area, produci ng smoke throughout the cal vi ng and post-ca1 vi ng periods. The presence of heavy smoke in 1979 and 1983 had no apparent adverse effects on productivity or surviva'l (Davis et al . 1985). 4. Predation. Davis et al. (1983) and Davis and Preston (1980) poTnffi out that wolf predation had a negative effect on the bCH during the 1970's. There have been two effective wolf control programs within the range of the DCH. The herd glgt, rapidly ouring both of these periods, 1954-1963 and I976- 1981. The data from the latter period support the observed correlat'ion between lower wolf numbers beginning in 1976 and increasecl survival of calves. Gasaway et al. (tggf) pointed

340 out that, under simi lar weather conditions and hunting pressure, the Macomb and Denali herds remained stable while the Delta Herd increased following wolf reduction within the range of the Del ta Hero. Cal f survi va I rates 'i ncreased significantly in the area with wolf control and increased less dramatica'lly in the ranges of the two adjacent herds wi thout wol f control ( i b'i d. ) . D. Period of Use Table L summarizes season'lengths and bag linrits fronr 1968 to the present. Liberal hunting seasons (August 10-March 31) and bag limits (three caribou) resulted in intensive hunting pressure and harvest until I973, when the limit was reduced to one caribou. The 1973-1974 season was closed by emergency order on 20 September in an attempt to slow the clecline in the DCH. Sport hunting remained closed until the fall of 1980, when hunting was jnitiated again under a drawing permit system. In fall of 1983, a general hunting season (no permits requireo) was held for the DCH. The hunt wis closed by emergency order on 28 0ctciber after available information indicated the allowable harvest had been attained. The 1984 hunt was managed on a permit basis with split seasons. t. Human Use Data Table 2 summarizes data describing the harvest of DCH caribclu under harvest regulations. During the 1983-1984 and 1984-1985 huntirrg seasons, most hunters (88 and 93%) of the DCH were Alaskan resideirs and, in particular, lived in the Fa'irbanks area (55 and 63%), the Anchorage-Matanuska Valley area (11 and 1'3%), and tle clear area (11 and 8%) (ADF&G 1984b, 1985). In 1983-1984, three-fourths of the harvest was obtained by the end of September, with successful hunters and all hunters as a group averaging about four days afield (ADF&G 1984b). Almost half (48%) of all successful hunters used ai rcraft, with another thi rd of the successful hunters using ORVs (ibid. ). Hunters transported by airplane showed an 8I% success rate, w'ith 0RV hunters at 65%. More than 85% of all caribou bagged were males. This type of hunting, where many hunters use aircraft to reach areas that they then hunt on foot, frequently provides a high level of enjoyment per animal harvested. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas The more important use areas are summarized in table 3, which accounts for about 95% of al I hunting activity on the DCH. Hunters in the Little Delta River drainage had the highest success rare of the four major areas, but expended the most effort to kill their caribou. Successful hunters in the I'lenana River area expended the least amount of effort but had the lowest'success rate.

~~III. F0RTYMILE CARIBOU HERD (GMU 12 and GMSs 20E, 208, 20D, 25C) A. Boundaries The Fontymi 1e Ca ri bou Herd i s hunted i n GMU I'l and 'i n GtvlSs 208 , 20C, 20D, and 20E.~~

~~341 Table 1. Hunting seasons and Bag Limits for the Delta Caribou Herda, 1968-85~~

~~Year Season Bag Limit~~

~~1 968-69 Aug.10-Mar.31 Three caribou 1969-70 Aug.10-Mar.31 Three caribou~~

~~1970-71 Aug. 10-Mar. 31 Three caribou~~

~~1971-72 Aug. 1O-Mar. 31 Three caribou~~

~~1972-73 Aug.10-Mar.31 Three caribou~~

~~1973-74b Aug.10-Dec.31 0ne caribou~~

~~197 4 -75c Aug. 10-Sept. 20 One caribou 1975-76 through 1979'80 No open season i 980-81 Sept. 1-Sept. 30 One male by drawing permiti 200 permits issued.~~

1 981 -82 Aug. 1O-Sept. 30 One caribou by drawing permit Nov. 15-Dec. 31 Aug. 1O-Sept. 30; 150 permits issued, up to 25 issued to nonresidents Antlered caribou could be taken Nov. 15-Dec. 31 by registration permit. A total of 400 caribou could be taken.

'l 1 982 -83 Aug. 0-Sept. 30 One caribou by drawlng permit Dec. 1-Mar. 31 Aug. 10-5ept 30; 175 permits issued, up to 30 issued to nonresidents. Antlered caribou could be taken Dec. 1-Mar. 31 by registration permit. A total of 500 caribou could be taken.

~~1 983 -84d Aug.10-Mar.31 0ne cari bou~~

1 984-85 Aug. 20-5ept. 20 One caribou by registration permit Feb. l-Mar. 31 only;600 caribou could be taken. The Aug. 20-Sept. 20 season was closed when 300 caribou were taken;, the Feb. 1-Mar. 31 season was closed when the total harvest reached 600 caribou. #Ift* Source: Davis and Valkenburg 1984. a Subunit 20A and part of 20C. b Amended by emergency announcement to close 20 Sept. c Amended by emergency announcement to No Open Season. d Amended by emergency announcement to close Oct. 28.

~~342 able 2. Reported Human Use Data for the Delta caribou Herdr 1980-84~~

~~1980-81a 1981-82a 1981-82b 1982-83a 1 982 -83b 1983-84c 1984-85b~~

~~No. permi t appl i cants 640 938 880 1r011 1 ,538 1 ,500 No. permits issued 204 150 880 175 1 ,538 1 ,500 No. successful hunters 110 87 179 104 169 692 4't 4 Total hunters 125 108 460 122 1 ,029~~

Transportation mode of ji successful hunters: 48 32 Ai rcraft 77 56 49 30 0 5 2 Hor se 11 15 52 Motorbike (3-wheeler) 2 2 1 0 5 33 I ORV 10 e Highway vehicle 0 12 2 2 45 1 0 Snowmach i ne 0 68 0 0 0 Dog team 0 0 I 5 1 Unknown 3 Boat --: --: 1 Total resident hunters (t) 84 88 93 Successful resident hunters (S) --- 72 86 93

~~memos. ources: ADF&G 1984b, 1985; Jennings 1981' 1983, 1984; Sexton 1982, 1985 or~~

~~--- means no data were available. a Drawing permit hunt. b Registration Permit hunt. c Ceneral harvest.~~

~~343 Table 3. significant Harvest Areas for the Delta caribou Herd, 1983~~

~~No. of No. of No. of No. of Hunter- Successful Successful Loca t i on Huntersd Days Huntersd Hunter-Days~~

~~Wood River 182 707 137 524~~

~~Little Delta River 722 658 10s 564~~

~~Tanana Flats-Dry Creek 54 210 4I 169~~

~~Tatlanika Creek 38 145 37 139~~

~~Totatlanika River 164 632 127 464~~

~~Del ta Creek 2t 94 16 78~~

~~Nenana River 380 r,464 182 594~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984b. a Includes only those hunters who reported days hunted.~~

344 See map 1 and the current Alaska gante mangement unit frdp, which provide a geographical description and clelineate the boundaries of the areas listed in the Alaska Ganre Regulations. B. Management Objectives According to the Fortymile Caribou Managemen'l Plan, the primary management objective is to provide the greatest opportunity to participate in hunting caribou (ADF&G 1977). Under this objective, maximization of participation in hunting does not mean maximization of the opportunity to kill caribou. Caribou management will consider participation more desirable than success. Opportunities to hunt may have to be limited to maintain harvests within the sustainable yield of a caribou'limits, herd. Harvest restricttons will usually involve altering bag methods and means of taking caribou, and lengths and timing of seasons before limiting numbers of hunters. Time allowed for a hunt will be limited befclre limiting numbers of hunters. A secondary objective is to provide an opportunity to view, photograph, and enjoy caribou. The Taylor Highway and the Steese Highway pass through the general distribution of the Fortymi'le Herd (FH), offering access to "nonconsumptive" users as well as hunters. Revised management guidelines'include the following: " Allow for limited harvests until the popu'lation increases to a minimum of 50,000 caribou, aff,er which harvests may be increased to a level that will provide for further hero growth. o Maintain a minimum population of 15,000 caribou. o Maintain a minimum posthunting season populatiotr sex ratio of 35 bulls per 100 cows. Encourage publ ic viewing and photography of caribou, and enhance viewing facil ities. Discourage land use pract'ices that adversely affect caribou o habitat. Encourage fire management policies that will provide for a near-natural fire regime. c. Management Considerations 1. Predation. Caribou predation by wolves, brown bears, and freir goTden eagles is bel ieved to be the greatest source of mortality in the FH (Kelleyhouse 1985). The cessation of wol f control efforts during winter i983-1984 contributed greatly to a decrease in caribou survival rates (ibid.). 'life 2. !|ineral development. Mining within seasonally important ffitne greatest potenrial threat to the Fh (Kel leyhouse 1983). l,lining projects in the Glacier Mountain-North Peak-Mt. tldridge area within the FH calving grounds on the south side of the Seventymile R'iver and the traditional posEcalving area in the Mt. Harper area could cause negative impacts on the herd (ibid.). Development of an asbestos mine in the Slate Creek area just south of a calving area could be a source of considerable d'isturbance to the FH (ibid.). A proposed company town of 1,500-2,000

345 people with the development of road access for ore products wou'ld increase hunting pressure and disrupt a historical fall migration route. A proposed extension of the Alaska Railroad through the Ladue River valley would increase caribou mortal ity due t,o train-caribou col I isions, especial 1y in winters with deep snowcover (Kelleyhouse 1984). D. Period of Use Table 4 summarizes season lengths. and bag limits for the FH from 1975 to 1985. The FH has been hunted regularly since gold rush days and may have been altered in numbers and composition by human ut'ilization (LeResche 1975). From the early 1950's to the present this herd has been an important resource. In the early 1950's, a trend toward longer seasons and increasing bag limits was initiated as the herd'increased to about 50,000 animals (Davis et al. i978). In 1955, the bag limit was increased to two caribou from 20 Aug. to 30 Nov. and in 1957 was raised to three caribou from 20 Aug. to 31 Dec. In 1963 , the season was l engthened to 10 Aug. -31 l'la r. , where it remained through 197?. The season length and bag limit were reduced in 1973 from almost an eight-month season to a two-mo1th season and from three Car"ibOu to one caribou. In 1977, the Season length was shortened even further beCause of poor recruitment rates. By 1981, the FH had shown strong indications of a turnaround, and a longer Season v,/as instituted by adding a second split season during the winter. In the followilg year, the bag limit was increased to two bulls. Because of the lack of wolf control, the bag limit may have to be reduced in the near future. E. Human Use Data Table 4 presents information on total reported harvest and estimated harvest. For the 1983-1984 regulatory year, most hunters (over 90%) of the FH were Alaskan residents (ADF&G 1984b). Almost 40% of all Alaskan resident hunters were successful. Eighty-six percent of all successful hunters were residents. Approximately half of the harvest hras taken by the end of September, with the remainder spread through the winter season. About 93% of all aircraft hunters ana 5-8% of all snowmachine hunters shot at least one bull. Hunters using highway vehicles and/or hunters on foot were not as successful, and only 27% managed to bag a caribou. 0f those hunters reporting.ai transport means, 38% used highway vehi,cleffoot' 267" used rcrait, and 20% used 0RVs. From a total tif 378 reporting hunters, 58% did not shoot a caribou,24% shot one bu11' and 17% shot two bulls. About one-third of those hunters reporting their city of origin came from the Fairbanks area' almost Z2y" from Tok, and 16% from the Anchorage-Matanuska va'lley area. Boih successful hunters and all hunters as a group spent almost five days in the field, which was above the 1983-1984 statewide average of slightly more than four days.

~~346 Table 4. Hunting Seasons, Bag Limits, and Harvest for Fortynrile Caribou Herd. 1975-86~~

~~Tota l Reported Estimated Yea r Season Length Bag Limit Harvest Harvest t97s-76 Aug. 10-Sept. 20 One caribou 34~~

~~1976-77 Aug. 10-Sept. 20 One caribou JJ~~

~~1977 -78 Sept. i-Sept. 15 One caribou 60~~

~~1978-79 Sept.1-Sept.15 One caribou 16 32~~

~~1979-80 Sept. l-Sept.15 One caribou 9 24-29~~

~~1980-81 Sept. 1-Sept. 15 One bul I 1C 30-60~~

~~1981 -82 Aug. 10-Sept. 20 One bul I 45 100 Dec. 1-Feb. 28~~

~~1982-83 Aug. l0-Sept. 20 Two bul I s 110 165 Dec. 1-Feb. 28~~

~~1983-84 Aug. 10-Sept. 20 Two bul 1 s 200 250-300 Dec. 1-Feb. 28~~

~~1984-85 Aug. lO-Sept. 20 Two bul'ls; however, only anteriess Nov. 20-Feb. 28 bulls may be taken Dec. 10-Feb. 28~~

~~1985-86 Aug. lO-Sept. 20 Two bulls (same as 1984-85) Nov. 20-Feb. 28~~

~~Sources: ADF&G 1975-86. --- means no data were available.~~

~~347 F. Significance of Particular Use Areas The more important use areas during the 1983-1984 hunting season are summarized in table 5.~~

IV. CHISANA HERD A. Boundaries The Chisana Herd (CH) is hunted in GMU 12. See map 1 and the current Alaska game management unit map, which provides geographical'listed descriptjon and delineates the boundaries of the areas in the Alaska Game Regulations. B. Management 0bjectives According to the Chisana Caribou Management Plan, which app'lies to that porrion of GMU 12 lying east of the Nabesna Glacier and river arrd south of the Alaska Highway, the primary management goal is to provide the greatest opportunity to participate in hunting caribou (ADF&G re76). Managemerrt guidelines include the following: o I'laintain limited harvests to allow for an increase in the caribou population. o Encourage fire suppression on caribou calving grounds arrd selected wintering areas. o Discour'dge land use practices that adversely affeci carjbou habi tat. C. Management Considerations 1. Predation. Preclatiorr by wolves, brown bears, and other smalTilpredators such as golclen eagles, coyotes, and lynx is thought to be the primary factor affecting the CH (Ke1 leyhouse 1984). 1. Lack of basic management data. Very I ittle information nO herd distribution. A rigorous census of the CH has never been undertaken. Lack of these data makes management of the herd more difficu'lt. This information is necessary to more effectively determine allowable harvests as well as impacts of competing land uses. 3. lultql nlaclivit!e:. In cal ving areas, mining activi ries coul d cause serious impacts, such as calf abandonment or actual loss of habitat. 4, Access. Poor accessibility for hunters has been one factor TFat Fas traditionally limited the harvest of CH caribou. D. Period of Use Prior to rhe L978-L979 regulatory year, the season was Sept. 1-15, with a bag limit of one caribou. Because of low calf production and survival, the bag limit was restricted to one bu'll, with the same season length. In 1983, the season was lengthened by five days to last from Sept. 1 to Sept. 20 to allow for a sljghtly higher harvest and to align season closing dates for all ungulates in GMU 12, thus simplifying the regulations. t. Human Use Data Table 6 summarizes available human use data from 1980 to 1984. In most years, from one-half to two-thirds of all hunters are Alaskan

~~348 Table 5. Significant Harvest Areas for the Fortymile Caribou Herd, 1983-84~~

~~No. of No. of No. of- No. of Successfql Successful Loca t i on Huntersd Hunter Days Hunterso Hunter Days~~

~~GMS 2OB~~

~~Chena River 10 37 Salcha R.-Birch Ck. 11 67 Tolovana River 5 57~~

~~Gl'ts 20D~~

~~GtlS 20E~~

Yukon R. 19 64 4 10 Fortymile R. I4 66 ? t4 South Fork-Fortymile R. L4 61 6 28 Dennison Fork and l,lest Fork of Fortymile R. 54 242 23 90 Mosquito Fork of the Fortymi 'l e R. 49 2t5 33 154 West Fork of Fortymi'le R. 7 76 6 64 Pliddle Fork of Fortymile R. 43 21r 40 199 GMU 20E-Unknown 70 293 T4 74

~~GMS 25C~~

~~Bi rch Ck. 27 70 16 Crooked Ck. 13 7l 2~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984b. --- means no data were available. a Includes only those hunters who repclrt days hunted.~~

~~349 tn^ (uvu, b-q (,(u (f)F{OfFl@f\ (J+) cr) rJ:) C\I r.c, sf F{ u)=(o e.~~

~~(F Ot, t- L O,' o+) @ ctr Nt ot cD cr, ocE= =t crt (o r.o o Gl OOF{ OL €F{(\rd C\J Fl . dddF{dHd vril~~

350 residents. Nonresidents hunters, however, because thgy area accompanied bt a guide, have a higher success rate (usual ly greatbr than 9b%) in Oagging a caribou than resident hunters. The 6veral I success rate ha.s ianged f rom 57% to approxinrately -95%' Generally more than half of all successful hunters use aircraft as the priilary means of transportation' *i!h the remainder using horses. These proportions can vary annua]ly_but do illustrate the remoteness of ttre' CH range and ttre mi nimal amount of avai I abl e access for hunters. in 1983, successful hunters and all hunters as a group sp.nf itigntty more than five clays in.the field (ADF&G igg+ui. ittost reside-nt hunters come from the Fairbanks vicinity' the loca'l area (Tok, Glennallen, Northway, etc.), and southeast Al aska. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Noit caribou dre harvested out of the Chisana and White river drainages, with some caribou ki'lled in the Beaver Creek drainage (Kel leyhouse, pers. comm. ).

V. l'lAC0MB HERD A. Boundaries The Macomb Herd is hunted in GMS 20A. wh'ich see map 1 and the current Alaska game .managemelrt ur.rl, Tup, prov.iOis a gJogiapnlcal description and delineates the boundaries bt tfre areas I isted in the A'laska Game Regulat'ions. B. Management Objectives The Macomb Ciribou Herd is also included in the Delta Caribou Management Plan (ADF&G 1984a). (see section II.B. for a O.i.iiption of management objectives and guidelines that also apply to the Macomb Hero. ) C. Management Considerations 1. Predation. An increase in calf and yearl ing survival in J$fi--fh-a first year after wolf control was initiated, indiiates that woli predation on young caribou could be an important mortality factor (Johnson_1985). Brown bears are reiative]y abundani on the Macomb Plateau and may also be responsio-1. to. the high summer morta'lity rate (50% in sone years / . Z. Accesi. Institution of the Macomb Plateau Controlled Use Ir-regul ati on restri cts access to nonmotori zed means (excepr-iioit planes on Fish Lake) ouring the caribou hunting season. The miin access routes to the Macomb Plateau are two horse trails from the Alaska Highway and one lake for float plarres. Aciess outs'ide the contiol l-eO use area 'includes bush landing strlps and ATV, horse, and foot trails. Differences in acc6ssibliity can result in a poorly distributed ttarvest. For example. in L982, 83% of the harvest canle from the .ontrotlia uie ur.a (Johnson 1984) as a result of relative]y easy access. MH caribou receive light hunting pressure in other Portions of their range.

351 D. Period of Use A summary of season lengths and bag limits from 1977 to 1984 may be found in table 6. In fall 1977, an excessive caribou harvest caused the season to be closed early by emergency order. It was apparent that the annual harvest was exceecling the annual increment. A permit drawing hunt rras instituted the following yea r. E. Human Use Data Table 6 shows drawing permit hunt data and reported harvests from 1977 rhrough 1983. Most hunters of the MH have been Alaskan residents. in 1983, only 32% of the uotal nunber of hunters were GMS 20D residents, with 45% of the successful hunters being local residents of 200 (Johnson 1985). Almost 58% of the permits issued annually from 1978 to 1983 have been used, ancl approximately 38% of those who did hunt bagged a caribou. Irr 1983, all hunters spent slight'ly less than three days in the field, with successful hunters averaging just over two days afield. More than half the hunters (5I%) walked into their hunting areas' and 30% used horses as a transportation means. Almost two-thirds of the successful hunters (64%) used horses. Most (73%) of the harvest was taken before the end of August. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas The Macomb Plateau area is probably the most heavily used area for hunting Macomb caribou (J

RTFTRENCES ADF&G. 1975-1986. Annual reports of survey-inventory activities. Fed. Aid i n Wi I dl . Rest. Projects. Juneau, AK. . I976. Chisana Caribou Management Plan. Page 82 in Alaska wTTolife management plans-Interior Alaska. Draft proposal. Juneau. . 1980. Alaska wildlife nnnagement p'lans - species management pol-icies. Fed. Aid in hlildl. Rest. Proj. W-20-2. Juneau. . 1984a. Delta Carjbou Managernent Plan - draft. May, 1984. AK. --E'irbanks, . 1984b. ADF&G caribou harvest and permit report (combined). -----T[a'tewide harvest statistics printed on 6-7-84 by Game Statistics Section. Anchorage.

~~. 1985. ADF&G caribou permit report. Statewide harvest statistics on permit hunts only printed on 6/6/85 by Game Statistics Section. Anchorage.~~

35? Davis, J.1., R.T. Shideler, and R.E. LeResche. L978. Fortymile Caribou Herd studies. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in hlildl . Rest. F'inal rept. Projs. W-17-6 and 7, Jobs 3.13R, 3.15R, and 3.16R. Juneau. 151 pp. Davis, J.1., and D.J. Preston. 1980. Calf morta'lity in t,he Delta Caribou Herd. ADF&G, Fed. Aid irr hlildl. Rest. Proj. lrl-17-11, Job 3.26R. Juneau. 29 pp. Davis, J.1., P. Valkenburg, R.D. Eoertje. 1983. Demography of the Delta Caribou Herd, 1954-198i. Acta Zool. Fenn. 175:135-137. . 1985. Disturbance and the Delta Caribou Herd. Pages 2-6 in -.-.T'. Martell and D.E. Russell, eds. Caribou and human- activity. Proceedings of the first North American caribou workshop, [,lhitehorse, Yukon,28-29 Sept. 1983. Canad. t,lildl. Serv. Spec. Publ.,0ttawa. Davis, J.1., and P. Valkenburg. i984. Demography of the Delta Caribou Herd under varying rates of natural mortality and harvest by humans. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t.Jildl. Rest. Prog. rept. Proj. W-2?-2, Job 3.27R, 55 pp. Gasaway, W.C., R.0. Stephenson, J.L. Davis, P.E.K. Shepherd, and 0.E. Burris. 1983. Interrelationships of wolves, pr€y, and man in Interior Alaska. hlilol. Monogr. 84. 50 pp. Hinman, R.A. 1985. Statewide harvest and population status. Page iii in A. Seward, Bd. Caribou survey-inventory progress report. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Vol. 15. Juneau. Jennings, L.B. i981. Caribou survey-inventory progress report, 1980-81. Pages 4L-42 in R.A. Hinman, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory acrivities. fDfag, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Vol. 12. Juneau.

~~. 1983. Caribou survey-inventory progress report, 1981-82. Pages activit-ies. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wil~~

~~. Personal communication. Area Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, ---TETta Junction.~~

3s3 Kelleyhouse, D.G. 1983. Caribou survey-inventory progress report, 1981-82. Pages 37-40 in J.A. Barnett, ed. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in Wi ldl. Rest. Vol. 13. Juneau.

. 1984. Caribou survey-inventory progress report, 1982-83. Pages --:f-38 in J.A. Barnett, €d. nniuit report of survey-invent6ry activit-ies. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Resr. Vol . 14. Juneau. ---8-40 1985. Caribou sur'vey-'inventory progress report, 1983-84. Pages in A. Seward, €d. Caribou iurvey-lnventi:ry- progress reporr. ADF&G,Eo. Aid in t,lildl. Rest. Vol. 15. Juneau.

~~. 1985. Personal communication. Area Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Tok.~~

LeResche, R.E. L975. The international herds: presenr knowledge of the -eanre,Fortyntile and Porcupine caribou herds. Pages L27-139 in J.R. Luick, P.C. Lerrt, D.R. Klein, and R.G. tchite, eds. First-international reindeer and caribou symposium proceedings. Fairbanks, A'laska.

~~Sexton, J. 1982. Menro to L. Glenn, Survey and Inventory Coordinaror, ADF&G, Div. Game, Permits Results - Spring,1982.~~

~~. 1985. Memo to L. Glenn, Survey and Inventory Coordinator, ADF&G, ----Dlv. Game, Permits Results - Fall, 1985.~~

~~354 Human Use of Dall Sheep !'Iestern and Interior Regions~~

I. POPULATION MANAGEMENT HISTORY A. Introduction In the Western and Interior regions, Da1 1 sheep inhabit mountajnous terrain with'in Game Management Units (Gt'lus) 12,20, and 24 and Game Management Subunits (GMSs) 198, 19C,24, and 25A and C. These GMUs and GMSs encompass the Tanana-Yukon uplands and portions of the Alaska Range. GMS 168, located with"in the Southcentral Region, also includes portions of the Alaska Range and will be addressed in this narrative. Harvest information discussed here will be presented on a GMU basis or, where data are available, on a GMS or management area basis (map 1). Reference maps depict'ing sheep hunting areas are available at 1:250,000 scale in ADF&G offices and at 1:1,000,000 sca'le in the Atlas to the guide for the Western and Interior regions. B. Regional Surnmary of Hunting The Interior Region, whjch includes the Alaska Range and northern Wrangell Mounta'ins, is well known for the opportunities it offers to hunt Dall sheep. The Alaska Range is continuous alpine country and is considered to contain classic Dall sheep habitat (Heimer 1984). Its sheep population supports about 700 hunters annua11y, with a harvest of about 300 rams. The Tanana/Yukon uplands area, which is also w'ithin the Interior Region, is characterized by relatively low rolling hills, with alpine habitat separated by broad timbered val1eys. This area supports about 40 hunters annually, with a harvest averaging about 16 rams per year (ibid.). The Western Region, which includes portions of the Alaska Range, al so provi des good sheep hunti ng opportuni ties. The sheep population in thi s area supports approximately 200'larger hunters annually, with a harvest of about 100 7/A curl or rams (ibid.). Lake Clark National Park/Preserve has withdrawn some sheep habitat in the park area from hunters; however, the preserve areas are still available to sheep hunters. From 1980 to 1984, the total harvest in the Western and Interior regions has ranged from 338 jn 1980 to 548'in 1982, with total effort (expressed in hunter-days) ranging from 4,727 days in 1981 to 6,513 days in 1983 (ADF&G 1980-1984). C. Managerial Authority Dall sheep jn Alaska have been managed by the ADF&G as a b1g game animal since 1960. Most state or federal lands not designated as parks, preserves, or closed areas have open hunting seasons, with harvest regulations established by the Board of Game. Some areas are managed for specific objectives, such as aesthetic hunt'ing conditions or trophy class animals. The Tok Management

~~355 .-.~~

~~o |o (\l a ,' I I \l tol o|, R\i I o: rO N I I o 0 .-T (\| t\ l-tt'... 3 ri.E:irS \ o (\|\ l'.'-t?tl l-l)-\-' rrrl I\\-o L---- tNi , \ \F ; ..) , o , o) (u ri{ ri.,-A L L I o t L o, g~~

~~Eg IE g L o ! an o -a i. =o ,3 ! .s o th =ct~~

~~o -gz~~

3s6 Area, for example, is managed for trophy class Dall sheep. For specific inforriation on open areas, seasons, and restrictions' see the most recent edition of the Alaska Game Regulations. In 1980,'large areas of Alaska were p'laced in new national parks and national park/preserves. Management of g_ame resources on national park lands' is subject to congressional .mandate and the National irark Service's (NPS) policy. Some national park lands remain open' for subsistence hunting by l-ocal residents o!ly. National park/preserve lands are currently managed to allow consumptivb use'of game resources under regu'lations established by the Board of Game.

I I. TOK MANAGEMENT AREA A. Boundaries The Tok Management Area (TMA) encompasses port'ions of the Alaska Range within-GMU I? and GMSs 13C and_2oD (m9!- 2). !.. the most recent Alaska Game Regulations or the latest GMU map for the exact legal boundarY descrjPtion. B. Management 0biectives The ADF&G hai developed the Tok Dall Sheep Management Plan for this area. The primary objective of this plan is to provide sustained opportunities to be selective'in hunting sheep; tfe secondary objectjve is to allow sheep hunting under aesthetic conditions (ADF&G 1980). hunters 'is I 'imi ted To accompl' i ih these objecti ves , the number of to 120 by permit drawing, with harvest for these permits restricted to full curl rams. Current regulat'ions appear to be meeting management objectives, and the population is re'latively stable ( Kel leyhouse 1984). Beginning jn 1974, a lottery permit ewe hunt was established for this arei by the Board of Game. In 1977, the hunt was changed !q a reg"istration hunt. It was felt that sheep in this area could withjtand additional harvest if it was directed at portions of the population other than mature full curl rams. In June 1985, the Board of Game elim'inated this hunt. C. Management Considerations Current hunter distribution within the TMA js acceptable, and no areas of excessive ram harvest have been noted. Type of access is not restricted, and hunters utilize all methods to gain access to remote areas of the TMA. Initial participat'ion in the registration ewe hunt was high, and harvest was concentrated in the Sheep Creek and Dry Tok drainages. This may have contributed to localized short-term declines in sheep p6pulations in the Dry Tok dra'i.nage. Ewe h,a_rvests'in the Ory tof drainage are currentiy closed (Kelteyhouse 1981). D. Period of Use The hunting season for full cur'l rams in the TMA is from 10 August through 20-september. The hunting season for the qegistration ewe hunt is from'25 September through 30 October. (See the latest

357 edition of the Alaska Game Regulations for current seasons and restri cti ons . ) E. Human Use Data Hunters who recejve a permit for the TMA must return the completed permit to the ADF&G regardless of their success. Human use information reported heri is obtained from ADF&G statistical reports derived from returned hunter permits-. tabte 1 presents Dall ram harvest information for the TMA from tgig- through 1984. Data are presented by year and indicate total harvest ani number of hunters. Effort, expressed in hunter-days, is not avai lable for most years. Ewe hunt information is presented in table 2. itr. largest reported harvest in the TMA during -this period occurred in 1981, with 49 sheep taken by 83 hunters for a success rate of 59%. Hunter participation was similar jn 1982 and 1983' although the harvest declined about 20% to 38 and 39 rams' ..ip.iilve1y. Reported harvest and participation declined again in '1984 to-30 rahs and 55 hunters, respectively. Poor weather conditions during most of the 1984 hunt'ing season are probably responsible for this decline. As inentioned, all access methods are permitted in the TMA. Many nunters use hjghway vehicles to arrive at access point-s on the perimeter of tn! fUR. Another maior access is by light plane.

~~Table 1. Dall Sheep Harvest information, TMA Ram Hunt' r979-84~~

~~No. of No. of Year Harvest Hunters Hunter-Days~~

~~1979 35 86 1980 44 100 1981 49 83 1982 38 81 1983 81 1984 30 56 325~~

~~Source: Kelleyhouse 1981, !982, 1983, 1984a' 1984b; ADF&G 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~358 Table 2. Dal I Sheep Harvest Information, TMA Ewe Hunt, 1979-84~~

~~No. of No. of Year Harvest Hun ters Hunter-Days~~

~~t979 29 95 1980 11 66 1981 5 1982* 0 0 1983 q _:- 1984 7 25~~

~~Source: Kelleyhouse 1981, 1982,1983, 1984a' 1984b, 1985. --- means no data were available. * Hunt cancelled due to excessive winter mortality.~~

F. Sign'ificance of Particular Use Areas Beginning'in 1983, the ADF&G introduced a new system for coding the hunter's harvest, the Uniform Coding System (UCS1, designed to 'identify specific areas where harvest occurs. The system is hierarchical and identifies blocks of land in a progressively smaller subdrainage format. Hunters record the specific hunting I ocati ons on thei r harvest report, wh'i ch i s changed 'into a l2-character identify'ing code and entered jnto the computer. Information from the computer can be compared to permanent 1:250,000-scale maps identjfying each UCS minor tributary. Information presented in table 3 indicates that in the TMA most human use occurred in area 06, the Tok River drainage. A total of L44 days were spent by 25 hunters to harvest 13 sheep. This represents 44% of the effort , 45% of the hunters, and 43% of the harvest. The high use of thi s area can be attributed to relatively easy access from several points along the Glenn and Alaska highways, including a foot trail along the Tok R'iver and several light airplane access points. Table 3 presents ram harvest information on1y. Ewe hunt information is not availab'le in this format; however, ewe harvest is localized in Clearwater and Sheep creeks north of the Tok Rjver (Heimer, pers. connn.). These areas are readily accessible from the Glenn and Alaska highways.

~~359 Table 3. Sheep Ram Harvest and Hunter Data for TMA, 1984~~

~~No. of No. of No. of Successful Un'it Subunit Mi nor Hunter-Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~IzZ 06 144 25 13 TzZ 04 56 10 5 12Z 03 11 2 12Z 02 5 1 Subunit total 2r6 38 18~~

~~13C 05 13 ? 1 1 Subunit total t3 2 1~~

~~20D 15 66 11 8 20D 13 30 5 3 Subunit total 96 16 11~~

~~Area total 325 56 30~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85. * Area recejving most use by hunters.~~

III. DELTA CONTROLLED USE AREA - PORTIONS OF GMSs 2OA,zOD, AND 138 A. Boundaries The Delta Controlled Use Area (DCUA) includes portions of the Alaska Range within GMSs 138,20A, and 200 (map 2). See the most recent Alaska Game Regulatjons or the latest GMU map for the exact lega1 boundary descriptions. B. Management 0bjectives The ADF&G has developed the Delta Sheep Management Plan for this area. The objective of this plan is to provide sustained opportunities to hunt sheep under aesthetically pleasing conditions (ADF&G 1977). To provide for this objective, hunting is by permit, and only 150 permits are offered. Seventy-five permits are jssued for the first portion of the season, which allows foot access only, and an additional 75 are issued for the second portion, which allows access of a'11 types. Legal animals are rams with full curl horns or larger. C. Management Considerations Most of this area is accessible from the Richardson and/or Alaska highways. The split season permit hunt, however, has maintained harvest anci hunting pressure at desired levels and prevented

~~360 a< I !o 9AryI C!aa --T---A;;sKA ------t--- !E ^5' -! c !5.() zO ol I. o (9 t= c o6 o IIo Ft a- -'-'-'-. o= 16 Nffi '- ao = (u t^\\\\\ \ \\\\\\ o r- +) g o~~

~~ro P oc) -c P -c) 6 ro c) ! a +) a c 3 (u c oa a L ro = -)ao F E q) o 3 P a l+ Jt o o U) Ia P aoo J~~

~~C\J~~

~~rd =~~

361 overcrowded hunting conditions and overharvest in areas adjacent to these access Points. D. Period of Use The current use period is from i0 Augus.t through 20 september. As mentionea, 75 permits are issued foi the period 10 August thrgug! zs nrgrtt, and un uooitional 75 are issued for the--period^26 lrgrtf iniougft 20 September. (Se.e the mos.t recent A] aska Game ii.6riutions io," current seasons and restrictions.) E. Human Use Data Hunters receiv'ing a permit for the DCUA must return the completed p.itnlt form to t-tre dOfAg regardless of their success' Human use information reporteO here is obtained from ADF&G statist1cal reports derjved from returned hunter permits'. presents Oii'l sheep harvest information for the DCUA from Table 4 total igSO-thrbugh 1984. Data are presented'The by ye-ar. and indicate harvest and toiui lrunters. numbei of hunter-days is not available for all Years.

~~Table 4. Dall sheep Harvest information, Delta controlled Use Area, 1980-84~~

~~No. of No. of Year Harvest Hunters Hunter-DaYs~~

~~1980 30 7B 1981 30 80 1982 41 85 1983 30 78 1984 19 65 242~~

~~Source: Johnson 1982, 1983, 1984a, 1984b; ADF&G 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

The largest reported harvest occurred in 1982, when 41 rams were nirvestdO by dS nunt.rt, for a success rate of 48%. Reported and participation are for 1980, 1981' harvest -remarkably .similar rams and l9B3 , wi th . #fi". Zg or 80 hunteri harvest'ing 30 99th year. in 1984, only 19 rams u,ere harVeSted by 65 hunters, which and 54% ";;;;r.;; t' u"'itu-IgBz.- decrease in the harvest f rbm 1983 a ;;;;;;;-i.o* Poor weather conditions in the Alaska Range orring tn. hunting season are the probable cause for the low hunter success.

362 F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Beginning in 1983, the ADF&G introduced a new system for cod'ing the hunter's harvest, the Uniform Coding System (UCS), designed to identify specific areas where harvest occurs. The system is hierarchical and identifjes blocks of land in a progressively smaller subdrainage format. Hunters record the spec'ific hunting locations on their harvest report, which is changed into a 1Z-character i denti fyi ng code and entered into the computer. Information from the computer can be compared to permanent L:250,000-sca1e maps identifying each UCS minor tributary. Table 5 presents harvest and hunter data for the DCUA for 1984. Area 09, the Delta River drainage within GMS 20D, received the most use by hunters during the period. Thirty-one of 65 hunters Ge%) hunted in thjs area; they spent LIz of 242 days of effort (46%) harvesting 7 of 19 sheep (37%). This area has good access for foot hunters from points a'long the Richardson Highway and also provides access for hunters using ATVs and airplanes.

~~IV. GMU 12 - EXCLUDING TMA AND DCUA A. Boundaries GMU 12 encompasses the area drained by the upper Tanana River and its tributaries from the Robertson River to the Canadian border.~~

~~Table 5. Sheep Harvest and Hunter Data for DCUA, 1984~~

~~No. of Mi nor No. of No. of Successful Unit Subunit Tributary Hunter-Days Hu nters Hu nters~~

~~204 08 32 8 ? Subunit total 32 8 3~~

~~20D 09* TTz 31 7 20D 11 25 6 4 20D 10 22 7 1 20D 12 19 5 1 Subunit total 210 57 16~~

~~Area total 242 65 19~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85. * Area rece'iving most use by hunters.~~

363 This area includes the eastern portion of the Alaska Range and the North Wrange11, Mentasta, and Nutzotin mountains. (See the most recent Alaska Game Regulations or the I atest GMU map for the exact boundary description. ) B. Management Obiectives In 1-980, portions of GMU 12 were placed in the new Wrangg]1:!t. Elias National Park/Preserve and the Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge. The NPS and USFWS are mandated by federal law to manage game resources ut'il jzing p'lans developed by the ADF&G unless those plans are incompatible wjth NPS or USFWS policy. The management plans for Wrangell-St. Elias Park/Preserve and the Tetlin NWR are in preparation by the NPS and USFWS, and final decisions concerning management policy wil'l be determined at a future date. The ApF&G has developed the Wrangell-Mentasta Mountains Sheep Management P'lan for this area. The obiective of this plan is to provide the greatest opportunity to participate in hunting sheep (jbid.). c. Management Consi derati ons Expanded min'ing activity in the Chisana area could result in diiturbance to sheep and possible population decline. Limitations on resource developments in areas critical to sheep, through mutual agreements with land-managing agencies, ffidY I imit the impacts of land development on sheep. The nature of the NPS's policy regarding future hunting opportunities wjthjn the park and preserve is undetermined. Until now, the NPS has allowed residents of the defined subsistence zone to hunt within the park and others to hunt within the preserve. The cont'inuation of this policy should allow amp'le hunting opportun- tunities for hunters in this area. D. Period of Use The hunting season for Dall sheep in GMU 12 begins on 10 August and extends through 20 September. Beginning in 1984, minimum horn size for 1ega1 rams was full curl. (See the most recent Alaska Game Regulatlons for current seasons and restrictions.) E. Human Use Data Beginning in L962, hunters were required to return harvest reports specifying the GMU and GMS they hunted; in 1967, they were required to report the specific area they hunted. Human use information reported here is obtained from ADF&G statistical reports derived from returned hunter reports. Table 6 presents Dal'l sheep harvest informatjon for GMU 12 from 1979 through 1984. Data are presented by year and indicate total harvest, total hunters, and number of hunter-days. The number of hunters 'in thjs area has increased annual'ly' except for 1980 and 1984, and reached a high in 1983 with 440 part'ici- pants. In 1980, confusion about federal land withdrawals and iubsequent public access to huntjng areas probably contributed to the smaller number of hunters. In 1984, inclement weather conditions during the sheep hunt'ing season appears to have limited participation, effort, and success.

~~364 Table 6. Dal I Sheep Harvest Information, GMU 12 (excluding TMA and DCUA), L979-84~~

~~No. of No. of Year Harvest Hun te rs Hunter-Days~~

~~r979 193 350 1980 212 324 1981 228 399 1982 227 43i 1983 200 440 z-,iis 1984 r37 361 r,962~~

~~Source: Kel'leyhouse 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984a, 1984b; ADF&G 1979-85.~~

~~--- means no data were available.~~

The 1984 harvest I37 rams is the lowest recorded during this period. The largest reported harvest occurred in 1981, with ??8 rams harvested by 399 hunters, for a success rate of 57%. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Beginning in 1983, the ADF&G introduced a new system for coding the hunter's harvest, the Uniform Coding System (UCS), designed to identify specific areas where harvest occurs. The system j s hierarchical and identifies blocks of land in a progressively smaller subdrainage format. Hunters record the specific hunting locations on thei r harvest report, whi ch i s changed into a 12-character identi fying code and entered i nto the computer. Information from the computer can be compared to permanent 1:250,000-scale maps identifying each UCS minor tributary. Information presented in table 7 'indicates that area 08, the Nabesna River drainage, received the most use by hunters during 1984. A total of 1,055 days (54%) were spent by 208 hunters (58%) to harvest 67 sheep (a9%). Thi s area has 1 ong been recogni zed for i ts sheep hunti ng opportunities and in addition provides good access from the Nabesna road and numerous a'irplane access points. This area is now included within the Wrangell-St. Elias Preserve, which allows general harvest activities.

~~365 Table 7. Sheep Harvest and Hunter Data for GMU 122, Excluding TMA and DCUA, 1984~~

~~No. of Mi nor No. of No. of Successful Tri butary Hu nter-Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~08* 1 ,055 208 67 10 360 58 30 09 275 44 26 06 74 18 8 00 i36 26 3 04 13 J 1 07 49 4 2 Subun'it total r,96? 361 L37~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85 * Area receiving most use by hunters.~~

V. GMS 168 A. Boundaries GMS 168 covers the southern slope of the Alaska Range from the southwestern corner of the Denali National Park (including the preserve area) to the Lake Clark National Park boundary. See the most recent Alaska Game Regulations or the latest GMU map for the 1egal boundarY descriPtions. B. Management-nainy Obiectives The Pais Sheep Management Plan, deve'lop_ed by the ADF&G applies io thjs area. The obiective of this p.lan. is__to provide silstained opportunities to hunt sheep under aesthetically pleasing cond'i ti ons (ADF&G 1977 ) . C. Management Considerations Hunter access, and therefore harvest pressure, is restricted in this area to relatively few landing areas and lakes. Distribution of harvest pressure is therefore limited and directed at sltgep populations adjacent to these acc-ess.poi.nts. Decreasi.ng eugli!y of the hunt'ing-experience in localized situations could result if these conditions continue. D. Period of Use See sect'ion X. D.

366 E. Human Use Data Beginning in L962, hunters were required to return harvest reports spicifying the GMU and GMS they hunted; jl 1967 they were required to report the specific area they hunted.' Human use information reported here is obtained from ADF&G statistical reports derived from returned hunter reports. * Table 8 presents Dall sheep harvest information for GMS 168 for 1983 and 1984. Human use information prior to th'is period is not available on a subunit basis. Data are presented by year and indicate total harvest, total hunters, and number of hunter-days.

~~Table 8. Dal'l Sheep Harvest Information, GMS 168, 1983-84~~

~~No. of No. of Year Harvest Hunters Hunter-Days~~

~~1983 11 22 168 1984 L4 29 230~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85.~~

Effort, expressed in hunter-days, increased 27% in 1984. Harvest and number of hunters also increased 'in 1984 by 2l and 24%' respecti ve1y. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Beginning'in 1983, the ADF&G jntroduced a new system fo1 coding th6 hunter's harvest, the Uniform Coding System (UCS), designed to identify specific areas where harvest occurs. The system is hierarchica'l and identifies blocks of land in a progressively smaller subdrainage format. Hunters record the specific hunting locations on their harvest report, which is changed into a l2-character identifying code and entered jnto the computer. Information from the computer can be compared to permanent 1:250,000-sca1e maps identifying each UCS m'inor tributary. Table 9 presents sheep harvest anci hunter data for GMS 168 for 1984. These data indicate that area 06, the Skwentna River drainage, received most hunter use during th'is period. A total of 14 of-29 hunters (48%) expended 127 ot 230 total days (55%), harvesting 7 of 14 sheep (50%).

~~VI. GMS 198 A. Boundari es This GMS encompasses portions of the southwestern Alaska Range near Telaquana Lake and also portions of the Lake Clark Preserve~~

~~367 Table 9. Sheep Harvest and Hunter Data for GMS 168' 1984~~

~~No. of Mi of No. of Successfu I a nor No. Tri buta ry Hunter-Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~06* L?7 L4 7 11 43 5 I 09 20 4 3 00 t2 2 ? 08 10 1 1 168 I 0 t27 I 0 t73 I 0 Subun'it total 230 29 L4~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85.~~

* Area recejving most use by hunters.

~~--- means no data were avai I abl e.~~

area, created in 1980. See the most recent Alaska Game Reguiations or the latest GMU map for the legal boundary descri pti ons . B. Management Obiectives See section X.B. C. Management Consi derations In 1980, most of the available sheep habitat in this area was included within the boundaries of the Lake Clark National Park/Preserve. Hunter activity and harvest declined in this area from 1977 through L982 (t,latson and Heimer 1984) but now appear to have stablized (Pegau 1984). Approximately 250 sheep are available to hunters in the preserve portion; yet only two to seven hunters have reported hunting in the preserve in each of the last five years (ibid.). D. Period of Use See section X.D. E. Human Use Data Beginning in L962, hunters were required to return harvest reports specifying the GMU and GMS they hunted; i! 1967, they were required to report the specific area they hunted. Human use information reported here js obtained from ADF&G statistical reports derived from returned hunter repo_rts. tabte 10 presents Dall sheep harvest information for GMS 198 for 1980-1984. Ouring this period, harvest activity in GMS l9B peaked

~~368 Table 10. Dal I Sheep Harvest Information, GMS 198, 1980-84~~

~~No. of No. of Year Harvest Hun ters Hunter-Days~~

~~1980 4 6 37* 1981 6 9 45* 1982 10 34 163* 1983 5 11 66 1984 8 15 64~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85; Pegau, pers. comm. * Total hunter-days were determined by multiplying mean days hunted for the entire Alaska Range by the number of hunters for GMS 198.~~

in 1982 and then declined slightly thereafter. Ten rams were killed in 1982 by 34 hunters, over twice as many hunters than during any other year. Reasons for this large increase in activity are not apparent at this time. Effort, expressed 'in hunter-days, is not directly comparable between years; however, there is an apparent peak of activity during 1982, with 163 hunter-days expended. Harvest activity has remained relatively constant in this area, with slight increases in total harvest and number of hunters in 1984 as compared with 1983. F. Si gni f i cance of Part'icul ar Use Areas Beginning in 1983, the ADF&G jntroduced a new system for coding thi hunter's harvest, the Uniform Coding System (UCS), designed to identify specific areas where harvest occurs. The system js hierarchical and jdentifies blocks of land in a progressively smaller subdrainage format. Hunters record the specific hunt'ing locations on their harvest report, which is changed into a 12-character identifying code and entered into the computer. Information from the computer can be compared to permanent 1:250,000-scale maps indentifying each UCS minor tributary. Table 11 indicates that reported human use'in this GMS during 1984 was evenly distributed between two areas: the Telequana River drainage and the Stony River drainage. Each area had a harvest of four iheep, and the Telequana drainage had one more reported hunter and six more days of effort.

~~369 Table 11. Sheep Harvest and Hunter Data for GMS 198, 1984~~

~~Successful Mi nor No. of No. of Tri butary Hunter-DaYs Hunters Hunters~~

~~4 13 35 8 4 14 29 7 Subun'i t total 64 15~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85.~~

VII. GMS 19C A. Boundaries the Denali National This GMU encompasses the Alaska Range west of preserve portion created in 1980. See the Park, including the the most recent Alaska Game Regulations or the latest GMU maP for 'lega1 boundarY descri Pt'ions ' 0biectives B. Management app'lies The Farewett lneep Management Plan developed by the. ADF&G to porti ons of itri s aiea . The obiecti.ve of thi s pl an i s to proviOe susiained- opportunities to hrint sheep under aesthetical'ly bteasing conditions (ADF&G 1977)' C. Management Cons'iderati ons Hunter activiiv-ind harvest declined. in th1s area from L979 through LgB? (Watson and ieimer 1984) but now appear to have 'long-teim (Pegau 1984) Thi.s decl i ne stabi I i zed near the iue.ag. ' - probably due in par-t the eiactment of the Alaska Native was -to withdrawal cla.ims settlement Act of rgig-ino tne subsequent land Heimer 1984) (Watson and ' probably Much of this area is highly mineralized and witl- expe.i.n.. inlreased m1ning iltivity and associated development in - areas could be the future. f*pt.ti.i iu*ning ind wintering 'loss ng i n di spl ac6ment and/or actua'l of sheep destroyed , ..rrl t important (ADF&g Ig77')-.-- naOillonat .ituOy il needed to identify sheep haUitJt thai may be impacled by developmental activities' Use D. Period of 20 The hunting-i.uton in this area has been from 10 August through present'- legal rams September iince statehood' From 1979 to the must have 7/8 curl horn or.|arger; prior to that, 3/4 curl horn rams were 1egal. E. Human Use Data reports Beginning in 1962, hunters were required to return harvest 1967 theY were specifYing the GMU and GMS they hunted; in '

370 required. to report .the specific area they hunted. Human use informati.on. re.ported here is obtained fr-om ADF&G stjiii*iaf reports derived from returned hunter reports. Il!1.-12-pre-sents Dal'l sheep harvest information for GMS 19c for 1980-1984. Data are present'ed by year and indicate total harvest, total hunters, and number of huniei-days

~~Table 12. Dall Sheep Harvest Informat.ion, GMS 19C, 1980-84~~

~~No. of Year Harvest Hunters Hunter-Days~~

~~1980 56 100 610* 1981 61 92 460* 1982 61 106 509* 1983 63 r27 651 L9B4 84 131 67A~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85; pegau, pers. comn. * Total hunter-days for 1980-gZ were determined by multipiying mean days hunted for the .nfi..-nraska Range West by the number of hunters for GMS 19C.~~

sheep harvest'in GMS 19c has remained relativery stable 1984, except for when it ll!t.l:gg by ?5%. The number-of hunters remained stable during. 1980-1982 uirt increased in 1983 by aoout then remained li;I'ana stable in 1994. Total eriori iigurei ur.- not directly.comparable, but there appears to have been an increase-u.en in effort durino the 19g3-r.,.*.u.., season. Harvest acti v.ity r,aJ- decl ining in inir ur*; these increaies appear to have reversed that trend. F. !ignificance of particular Use Areas Beginning in 1983, the ADF&G introduced a new system the hunter' s harvest, for coding the uni form codi ng svsl.n adcs ) ; ol"s'i gili'to identify. specific area where harvesf ot.r.t.' Th; ,yri.r- i, hierarchical and identifies blocks of ranJ in a progressively smaller subdrainagg format. Hunters record the specific hunting locations on their harvest report, which 12-character is ihangeo i;i; a identifvins code ind'eni.reJ into the computer. Information from the lomputer ca!.r . !9 compa.ed a; p."fiin.nt- - 1:250,000-scale maps identiiying each ucs minoi tributary:-

371 Table 13 provides harvest data for GMS 19C for the 1984 season. Area 05, Windy Fork of the Kuskokwim River, received the most human use during this period. This area accounted for 208 of 670 days of effort (ltl"), 43 of 131 total hunters (33%), and 28 of 84 sheep harvested (33%).

~~Table 13. Sheep Harvest and Hunter Data for GMS 19C' 1984~~

~~No. of Mi nor No. of No. of Successful Tri butary Hunter-Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~05* 208 43 28 14 B5 20 13 08 78 I2 8 06 64 10 6 00 57 T2 6 07 48 8 8 09 42 8 5 03 29 4 1 1t ?6 5 2 04 2? 6 6 T2 10 1 0 13 1 I 0 10 1 I Subuni t total 670 131 84~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85. * Area rece'iving the most use by hunters.~~

VIII. GMS 2OA A. Boundari es Th'is area encompasses the central portion of the Alaska Range east of Denalj National Park. (See the most recent Alaska Game Regula- tions, or the latest GMU map for legal boundary descriptions.) B. Management Obiectives The ADF&G has developed the Central Alaska Range Sheep Management Plan for this area. The obiective of this plan is to prov'ide the greatest susta'ined opportunity to part'icipate in hunting sheep (ADF&G re77).

37? c. Management Cons i derati ons Mining and pnospecting activity is increasing in this area' and subsequent development of some cla'ims is expected. Mineral licks are extremely important habitat for sheep and are often assocjated with minerai claims of potential commercial value. Al'l sheep mineral licks have not yet been documented. Development of any mining claims in the area should take place only after research has been conducted to determine the relationsh'ip between sheep and the mineralized area. D. Period of Use The hunt'i ng peri od for sheep 'in thi s area i s 10 August to 20 Septembei, unchanged since statehood (jb'id. ). Legal !0ry s'ize has ihcreased from 374 curl to 7/B curl in 1979 and to full curl in 1984 (ADF&G 1984). (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for current seasons and restrictions.) E. Human Use Data Beginning in 1962, hunters were required to return harvest reports specifying the GMU they hunted; in 1967, they were required to report the specific area they hunted. Human use information refrorteC here is obtained from ADF&G reports derjved from returned hunter reports. Table 14 presents Dall sheep harvest information for GMS 20A for 1983 and igAq. Human use informat'ion prior to this period 'is not available by subunit. Data are presented by year and ind'icate total harvest, total hunters, and number of hunter-days.

~~Table 14. Dall Sheep Harvest Information, GMS 20A~~

~~No. of No. of Year Harvest Hunters Hunter-Days~~

~~1983 103 ?IO r,204 1984 108 300 1 ,514~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85.~~

Harvests'in this GMU remained s'im'ilar from 1983 to 1984, while the number of hunters and total effort increased considerably. In 1984, total hunters increased by 33% whjle effort 'increased by 20%. Reasons for this increase are not d'irectly attrjbutable to any one factor; however, the human population of Fa'irbanks has increased rapidly, and additjonal'ly, access to thjs GMS is good

373 and readily available. GMS 20A is considered to be classic 0all sheep habitat, and further jncreases in human use can be.expected. Few roads or irails enter into GMS 20A, and access is primarily 9y t lgnt aircraft. Registered guides operate within the GMS' providing access by horses in some areas. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Belinning in 1983, the ADF&G introduced a new sy-stem.fol coding th6 hunt6r's harvest, the Un'iform Coding System (UCS), designed to identify specific areas where harvest occurs. The system is hierarc-hica'l and jdentifies blocks of land in a progressive'ly smaller subdrainage format. Hunters record the specific hunt'ing I ocati ons on the-i r harvest report , wh'ich i s changed i nto a 1Z-character identify'ing code and entered into the computer' Information from the computer can be compared to permanent 1:250,000-scale maps identifying each ucs minor tributary Information in tdUte 15 iirdiiates that two areas in GMS 204 received most of the 1984 sheep hunting pressure: 1) the Wood River drainage (04) and 2) the Nenana River drainage wi.thin Gt'lS 20A. The Wooi niver area had the largest harvest (49) and the gieatest number of days hunted (436)_._ Thil rearesents 40% of the lotal harvest and 32%- of the total effort for GMS 20A. The Nenana River drainage recejved the second highest effort in total day! nuniea (478)" and had the greatest number of hunters for all reported areas (116). This represents an addjtional 32% of the effort and 39% of all hunters.

~~Table 15. sheep Harvest and Hunter Data for GMS 20A' 1984 No. ot Mi nor No. of No. of Successful Tri butary Hunter-Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~04* 486 85 43 01* 478 116 27 06 190 29 14 07 i13 16 8 02 66 14 2 08 55 11 J 05 48 11 6 03 47 10 5 00 31 8 Subuni t total 1 ,514 300 108~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85. * Areas receiving most use by hunters.~~

374 IX. GMS ZOC A. Boundaries GMS 20C encompasses the area jmmediately north and northwest of Denal i National Park. ( See the most recent Alaska Game Regulations or the latest GMU map for 1ega1 boundary descri pt'ions. ) B. Management Obiectives The Central Alaska Range Sheep Management Plan developed by the ADF&G applies to the eastern portion of the GMU. The primary objective of this plan is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting sheep (ADF&G 1977). C. Management Considerations Expanded development of coal deposits in the Usibellj/Healy area could cause disp'lacement of sheep or damage to habitat in that area. In 1980, the boundaries of Denali National Park/Preserve were expanded. This action w'ithdrew most of the available sheep hunting areas north and west of the old boundary by placing them in park status. Relat'ive1y I imited sheep harvest activity occurred in this area, and the actual loss to hunters was m'in'imal. D. Period of Use The hunting period for sheep in this area is 10 August to 20 September, unchanged since statehood (ibid.). Legal horn s'ize has increased from 3/4 curl to 7/B curl in 1979 and to full curl in 1984 (ADF&G 1984). (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for current seasons and restrictions.) E. Human Use Data Beginning in L962, hunters were required to return harvest reports specifying the GMU and GMS they hunted; jn 1967, they were required to report the specific area they hunted. Human use information reported here i s obtained from ADF&G stati st'ical reports derived from returned hunter reports. Table 16 presents Dall sheep harvest jnformation for GMS 20C for 1983 and 1984. Human use information prior to this period is not available on a subunit basis. Data are presented by year and indicate total harvest, total hunters, and total hunter-days'

~~Tab'le 16. Dall Sheep Harvest Information, GMS 20C, 1983-84~~

~~No. of No. of Year Harvest Hunters Hunter-Days~~

~~1983 2I 88 367 1984 0 8 ?T~~

~~Source: ADF&G i979-85.~~

375 Harvest, effort, and total hunters decreased dramatical'ly in this GMU from 1983 to i984. There was no reported harvest in 1984' eiiort declined over 94%, and total hunters declined over 90%. This decrease in effort and harvest is a result of a GMU boundary .hung. for the i984 season. The GMS 20A boundary w-as .exten-ded the inclusion of a westiard to the Parks Highway, resu:lting in jn portion of GMS 20C. Harvest from that area is now included the bmS 20A harvest figures, w'ith the subsequent decline in GMS 20C use. F. Significance of Particular Use Area aelinning in 1983, the ADF&G introduced a new system .fol coding th6 huntir's harveit, the Uniform Cod'ing System (UCS), designed to iOenilfy specific areas where harvest occurs. The system js hierarc-hica'l and identifies blocks of land in a progress'ive1y smaller subdrainage format. Hunters record the specific 'hunting locatjons on ther'r harvest report, which is changed into a 12-characteridentifying code and entered into the computer' Information from the iomputer can be compared to pennanent 1:250,000-scale maps'identifying each ucs mjnor tributary. _ Tabl e 17 i ndicate! that area b6 , the Nenana Ri ver i n GMS 20C , received the most hunter use during 1984. This area is near Denali National Park and the Parks Highway and allows relat'ively easy access for hunters.

~~Table 17. Sheep Harvest and Hunter Data for GMS 20C, 1984~~

~~No. of Mi nor No. of No. of Successful Tri butary Hunter-Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~06* 16 6 0 00 3 1 0 05 2 1 0 Subunit total 2L 8 0~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85. * Area rece'iving the most use by hunters.~~

X. GMS 20E - GLACIER M0UNTAIN CoNTRoLLED USE AREA (GMCUA) A. Boundaries The Glacier Mountain Controlled Use Area (GMCUA) is located in the northeastern corner of GMS 20E. (See the most recent Alaska Game

376 Regulat'ions or the latest GMU map for 1ega1 boundary descriptions.) B. Management Objectives The Tanana Hills Sheep Management Plan has been developed by tlle ADF&G for sheep populations in this area. The obiective of this plan is to prbviae sustained opportunities to hunt sheep under iesthetica'l1y p'leasing conditions (ibid. ). C. Management Considerations Rela[ive1y easy access to portions of this area resulted in establ i shirent of regul ati ons desi gned to mai ntaj n aestheti c hunti ng condi ti ons I n tfre GMCUA. Use of motori zed veh'icl es for transportation of hunters is prohibited. Two proposed transportat'ion corri dors through- tfri s area and develbpmbnt of a nedrby asbestos deposit-could lead to increased use of'the area and impact the sheep population. Proper placement and construction of the roads may minimize impacts to sheep in the area (ibid. ). D. Period of Use The hunti ng season i n the GMCUA i s from 10 August through Z0 September. Beginning in 1984, Dall rams w'ith full curl or 'l arger horns were I ega I . Consistent with the management obiectives for thi s area, no motori zed vehi cl es are al I owed to transport hunters, gear' or game within the GMCUA from 5 August through 21 September. E. Human Use Data Beginning in 1962, hunters were required to return harvest reports sp6cifying the GMU and GMS they hunted; 'in 1967, they were rbquirLO 1o report the specific area they hunted. Human use information reported here is obtained from ADF&G reports derived from returned hunter rePorts. in 1984, only four hunters reported hunting in GMCUA. All four were suicessful and expended a total of 25 hunter'days of effort. Participation and harvest may be higher than reported, as some hunters do not return the required harvest reports. xr. GMs zOE - (EXCEPT GMCUA) AND THAT PoRTI0N 0F GMS 20D NORTH 0F THE ALASKA HIGHbIAY A. Boundaries See the most recent Alaska Game Regulations or the latest GMU map for 'legal boundary descri pti ons. B. Management Obiectives The Tanana Hitts Sheep'also. Management Plan developed by _the ADF&G applies to this area The obiective of this pl?n jt _!o pi^bvi de sustai ned opportun'iti es to hunt sheep under .aestheti ca11y ileasing conditjons"(ADF&G L977). To meet this objective, !!q board rif Game in 1983 placed the remaining area of GMS 20E (exclusive of the GMCUA) and that portion of Gt'lS 20D north of the Alaska Highway in a permit hunt classification for the 1984 hunting sdasoir. To further distribute harvest pr,essure, four permiti are issued for each of three areas for a total of 12.

377 c. Management Cons j derati ons H;;i;; use of this area has been increasing. in recent years' Therefore, to mainta'in management obiective: 919 protect the sheep populatjon, permit hunt regulations were established' D. Period of Use area beg'ins--10 Aygust and extends The hunring season in thjs greater through 20-September. Dall rams with full curl horns or or with both nn.ni-broken are 1egal. (!e-e. !!..latest Alaska Game n.grfulions for curient restlicti'ons and Iimitations.) E. Human Use Data Hunters who receive-1,. a permit for this area must return the .orii"l.o pLrm1i-to ADF&G regardless .of .their success' Human use.informatjon ilported here is obtained from ADF&G reports derived from returhed permit information. Table 18 presents harvest data for 1984.

~~Table 18. SheeP Harvest Informat'ion, GMSs 20E and 20D North of Alaska HighwaY' i984~~

~~No. of No. of Hunter-DaYs GMU Harvest Hunters~~

~~1 10 20D I I 18 20E U 4 Total 28~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85.~~

pressure,. it.was Because this area has received intensive harvest- designated a permii nunt area by the Boar.d,of- Game for the 1984 season. it is p.oUuUf.- that this area will remain under perm'it il;i regulations'. iherefore, human use information is presented onfy fni 1984 to allow for future comparisons' F. S'igiri f icance of Parti cul ar Use Areas g"6inni;g ADF&G_introduced a new system coding i; ig3i, the .fol to the hunter's harvett, in. Uniform Coding System (UCS], designed ia.niiiv specitiC- areas where harvest occurs. The system is hierarchicat una- iJ"niiti.t blocks of land in a progressively smaller subdrai*g.-ioit.t. Hunters record the specific hunting locations on the-jr harvest report, which is changed into a i|-inaracter iOentifying code ind entered into the computer' Informaticn from th; iomputer can be compared to permanent i iZSO',Ooo-scal. rapyidenti ?y'ing each UCS mi nor tri butary '

378 Table 19 presents sheep harvest and hunter data for GMSs 20E and 20D north of the Alaska Highway for 1984. 0n1y three areas within this region had reported hunting activ'itjes. Effort and partici' pat'ion iere divided almost equally between the three, and only one sheep was reported harvested.

~~Table 19. Sheep Harvest and Hunter Data for GMSs 20E and 200 North of the Alaska HighwaY, 1984~~

~~No. of Mi nor No. of No. of Succes s fu I Subuni t Tributary Hunter-Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~003 10 1 1 1 Subunit total 10 I 1~~

~~E02 8 2 0 E08 10 2 0 Subunit total 18 4 0 Area total 28 5 I~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85.~~

XI I. GMU 24 A. Boundari es GMU 24 encompasses the Koyukuk River drainage and its tributaries upstream froin but not in-luding the Dulbi Rjver drainage. -This area includes the mounta'inous regions on the south slope of the middle portion of the Brooks Range. (See the most recent edit'ion of the Alaska Game Regulations or the latest GMU map for the exact 1ega1 boundary description. ) B. Management Obiectives The Southern Brooks Range Management Plan, which appl'ies to th'is area, has a primary objective to provide the -greatest sustained opportunity tb hunt sheep under aesthetically pleasing. conditions. A'iecondary objective 'is to provide an opportunity to be selective in hunting sheep (Bos 1980). C. Management Considerations ln tdAO, the Gates of the'legislat'ion. Arctic National Park and Preserve (GAAR) was created by ANILCA The majority of al I sheep habitat within emU 24 is lncluded w'ithin the boundaries of this park/preserve. The only sheep habitat rema'ining avajlable to benerit hunters is a nariow band located east of the trans-Alaska

379 p'ipeline corridor and an area near tr{ild Lake on the southern border of the Park/Preserve.'L982: eeginning jn the Alaska Board of Game established that Aliska r6sidents whose permanent residence is within Gates of the nr.li. National Park and Preserve were al lowed a spec'ia1 retisi"ation hunt to take sheep. In 1983, the game board comp'lied niif, provjsjons of ANILCA'and expanded subsistence hunting opportunitjes to all residents of the subsistence zone associated *itn gnnn. This zone, as defined by ANILCA, inc'ludes residents of Afuini, Allakaket, Ambler, Anaktuvuk, Bettles, Hughes, Kobuk, Nuiqsut, Shungnak, and |'l'iseman.. The'limit foi this hunt is three sheep of either sex' with a 50-sheep quota. The 'season i s f rom 1 August t-o 39 Apri I , wi th most of the harvest occurring in late winter. Airplanes are not all'owed for transportation of hunters or meat' if'..p-populatjon fluctuat'ions could occur as a result of increased fo.ai it.b hunting from residents. The late-season hunt that allows hunters to"take three sheep of either sex js considered a higher rj sk to sheep Pgpu'lations than the general ear'ly . season haivest- of mature rams'(Hejmer 1984). Areas of localized harvest Ouring ift. late season should be identified, therefore, and popuiitlons in these areas surveyed annually (ibid')' D. Period of Use the generat hunting season since 1960 has been from 10 August tnroign 20 Septemb6r. Dall rams with 7/8 curl or larger-horns ftuu.-"U..n tegit s'ince t979. Prior to that, 3/4 curl or larger fro.nt were 1iga1. As mentioned previous'1y,. in L982 a special extended season for residents living within the GAAR was prov'ided i.;-tt the Alaska Board of Game.- Thjs season runs 1 August through 30 APri'l . E. Human Use Data A;ginning in !962, hunters were required.to. return harvest reports i 1967 $'ere ipeci fyi ng the eMU i n whi ch they nyl.tgO;. . n , they rbquireO to report the specific area within the GMU they hunted' In'1980, the maior-National portion of Gl'lU 24 was placed within the Gates of the Arct'ic Park and Preserve. Local subsistence hunters are the only persons allowed to lega'lly hunt within the national park. Table 20 presents Dall sheep harvest data for GMU 24 from 1980 thiougn tgg+. As can be seen in table 20, the number of hunters 'increised 38% from 1980 to 1981 (possibly.as a result of land status changes 'in other parts of Alaska) and then remained relaii vely ionstant throufh 1984. The effort expressed in hunter-days was also relati'vely high in.1981. Harvest increased over 44%- front 1980 to 1981 ind ihen declined to a relatively constant rate through 1984. F. S'i gn'if i cance of Parti cul ar Use Areas aelinning in 1983, the ADF&G jntroduced a new system.fol coding th6 hunters' harvelt, the Uniform Coding System (UCS), designed to

~~380 Table 20. Reported Dall Sheep Harvest information in GMU 24, 1980-84~~

~~No. of No. of Year Harvest Hunters Hunter-Days~~

~~1980 15 34 1981 27 55 297 1982 19 51 239 1983 1B 46 253 1984 I4 56 235~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

identify specific areas where harvest occurs. The system is hjerarch'ical and identifies blocks of land'in a progressively smaller subdrainage format. Hunters record the specific hunting locations on their harvest report, which is changed into a 1Z-character identifying code and entered 'into the computer. Information from the computer can be compared to permanent 1:250,000-sca1e maps identifying each UCS mjnor tributary. Data presented jn table ?L indicate that one particular area in GMU 24, the Middle Fork of the Koyukuk River (15), received most of the hunting pressure during 1983 (ADF&G 19S4). The Middle Fork of the Koyukuk River had 160 of 2s3 (63%) total hunter-days, 28 of 46 (6I%) hunters, and 9 of 18 (50%) sheep harvested.

XIII. GMS 25A A. Boundari es GMs 25A encompasses the mountainous regions of the south s'lope of the eastern Brooks Range from the Canadian border west to near the upper drainages of the Koyukuk River. (See the latest Alaska Game 'legal Regulations . or the latest GMU map for the exact description. ) B. Management Objectives In 1980, portions of GMS 25A were included within the Arctic National I,Jildlife Refuge. The USFWS is cooperat'ing with the ADF&G in the development of a management plan for the refuge, and finar decisions regarding management policy will be determjned at a later date.

~~381 Table 21. Reported Da11 Sheep Harvest and Permit Harvest and Hunter Data in GMU 24, 1983-84~~

~~Mi nor No. of No. of Tri butary Hunter-Days Hunters Harvest~~

~~15* 160 28 9 L2 55 10 7 00 24 4 0 14 6 I 0 1i 5 i 0 09 L 1 1 13 1 1 1 Unit total 253 46 18~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85. * Area of particular s'ignificance.~~

The ADF&G has developed the Southern Brooks Range Sheep Management P1an, whjch applies to this area. The Southern Brooks Range Sheep Management P'lan has a primary obiective to provide llte greatest sustained opportunity to hunt sheep under aesthet'ically pleasing conditions. A secondary obiective is to provide an opportunity to be select'ive in hunting sheep (Bos 1980). c. Management Cons i derati ons Locai overharvest of sheep by res'idents of Arctic Village could prove to be a problem jn the future. As Y€t,_ sheep pgqqlations ippear to be abie to withstand current harvest levels. Additjonal iiriormation is needed on the population and harvest levels. D. Period of Use The general hunting season has been from 10 August through 20 September. Dall sheep rams with 7/8 curl or larger,_horns. have bebn 1ega1 since L979. Hunting in portions of GMSs 25A and 26C' the former Arctic National |rJildlife Refuge' was conducted on a I ottery permi t basi s in 1980 and 1981. The hunts ran in conjunlt'ibn wi th the genera'l hunti ng season and were el jmi nated after 1981. Beginning in 1981, a registration permit hunt was established by th6 Boari of Game from i October through 30 April for portions of GMSs 26C and 25A. The limit is three sheep, with a total allowed harvest of 50. E. Human Use Data Beginning in L962, hunters were required to return harvest_reports specifying the GMU in wh'ich they hunted. Starting in 1967, they

38? were required to report the specific area within the GMU they hunted. As seen'in table 2?, harvest in GMS 25A increased considerably from 1980 to 1981 and then remained relativeiy stable during 1981-1984. The total number of hunters increased from 1980 to 1981 and increased again-Hunter-days by 24% fron 1981 to 1982, then declined jn 1983 and 1984. are not available for 1980 and 198i. The total effort increased from 1982 to 1983 by 22% and then dropped by 46% in 1984. The reason for this decline is not Harvest figures presented here do not j nc'l ude sheep clear. 'lotterY harvested by Permit. Table 23 presents 1980 and 1981 Dall sheep harvest informat'ion for lottery permit areas in GMS 25A. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Beginning in 1983, the ADF&G introduced a new system for coding th6 huntdrs' harvest, the Uniform Coding System (UCS), des'igned to identify specific areas where harvest occurs. The system is hierarchica'l and identifjes blocks of land in a progressively sma'ller subdrainage format. Hunters record the specific hunting locations on thejr harvest report, which is changed into a 12-character identifying code and entered jnto the computer. Information from the computer can be compared to permanent 1:250,000-scale maps'identifying each UCS minor tributary. Table 24 presents the reported 1983-1984 sheep harvest infonnation from GMS' 25A. As seeh jn table 24, three areas in GMS 25A received the most use during 1983-1984. These areas were the East Fork of the Chandalar River (05), the Middle Fork of the Chandalar River (03), and the upper sheeniek River (13). The East Fork of the Chandalar River had the greatest total effort, 175 of 587 (30%) of the hunter-days, whereas the Middle Fork of the Chandalar Ri vei had the greatest number of hunters , 19 of 65 (.29%).. The upper Sheeniek River had the largest harvest, 10 of 32 (31%).

XiV. GMS 25C A. Boundaries This area jncludes portions of the trJhite Mor"rntains region of the Tanana-Yukon uplands. (See the most recent Alaska Gante Regulat'ions or the latest GMU map for lega1 boundary descriptions. ) B. Management Obiectives tne ilnite Mountains Sheep Management Plan developed by the ADF&G applies to portions of this area. The obiective of this plan'is tb' prov.ide sustained opportunities to hunt sheep under aesthetically pleasing conditions (ADF&G L977). C. Management Cons'iderati ons Sheef distrjbution is limited to areas of scattered alpine habitat within this area. Sheep density is low; however, hunting pressure and harvest are increasing (Jennings 1984). The most serious threat to sheep in this area'is djsplacement and habitat loss associated with mining act'ivity and other development

~~383 fable ?2. Reported Dal1 Sheep Harvest Information in GMS 25A' 1981-84~~

~~No. of Year Harves t No. of Hunters Hunter-Days~~

~~1980 19 35~~

~~1981 32 56~~

~~1982 38 74 457~~

~~1983 32 65 587 i984 32 56 314~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85.~~

~~--- means no data were available.~~

~~Table 23. Reported Dall Sheep Harvest Information for Drawing Permits 'i n GMS 25A, 1980, 1981~~

~~No. of Year Harvest No. of Hunters Hunter-Days~~

~~1980 7 23~~

~~1981 16 27~~

~~Source: Heimer L982, Watson 1983.~~

~~384 Table 24. Reported Da1'l SheeP Harvest and Perm'it Harvest and Hunter Data in GMS 25A,1983-84~~

~~M'inor No . of No. of Tri butary Hunter-DaYs Hunters Harvest~~

~~05* t75 10 7 03* 152 19 9 13* 125 18 10 04 56 3 07 36 4 1 ? 00 T7 0 08 15 2 0 15 11 2 2 Subuni t total 587 65 32~~

~~Source: ADF&G L979-85. * Areas of particular significance.~~

(ibid.). Because of the limited habitat avajlable, any range loss would seriously affect the sheep population. D. Period of Use Since 1955, the hunting season 'in thi s area has been from 10 August through 20 Seplember (ADF&G 1977).__Dall rams with 7/e curl horns or larger have been lega1 since L979. E. Human Use Data Beg'inn'ing in 1962, hunters were required to return harvest reports specifying the GMU they hunted; in 1967, they were req-u'ired to rbport- tlie spec'ific area they hunted. Human use information reborted here'is obtained from ADF&G statistical reports derived from returned hunter rePorts. Tab'le 25 presents'1984. Dall.sheep harvest information for GMS 25C for 1983 and Data are presented by year and indicate total harvest, total hunters, and number of hunter-days The number of hunters and total effort increased in this area during 1984 by 41 and 25%, respectively. This irea is-relatively close to Fairbanks and probably receives most of its use from that city. However, sheep populat'ions are of low density in this GMS and will not support continuing increases in use. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Be!inning in 1983, the ADF&G introduced a new system for coding th6 hunter's harvest, the Unjform Coding System (UCS), designed to

~~385 Table 25. Dal I Sheep Harvest Information, Gf'lS 25C~~

~~No. of No. of Year Harvest Hunters Hunter-Days~~

~~1983 10 62 1984 T7 83~~

Source: ADF&G 1979-85. identify specific areas where harvest occurs. The system is hierarc-hica'l and identifies blocks of land in a progressively smaller subdra'inage format. Hunters record the specific hunting I ocations on thei r harvest report, whi ch i s changed into a lZ-character ident'ifying code and entered into the computer. Information from the computer can be compared to permanent 1:250,000-scale maps identifying each ucS minor tributary.- Information presented in tabie 26 demonstrates that area 02-(Upper Beaver Creek') received the most hunter-use during 1984. A'lthough no sheep were reported harvested from this area of GMS 25C, it had 12 of 17 total hunters (70%), who spent 53 of 83 (64%) total days in the field.

~~Table 26. Sheep Harvest and Hunter Data for GMS 25C, 1984~~

~~No. of Mi nor No. of No. of Successful Tri butary Hunter-Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~02* 53 L2 0i 30 5 Subunit total 83 T7~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1979-85. * Area rece'iving most use by hunters.~~

386 REFERENCES in ADF&G. Lg77. Alaska wildlife management p'lans - interior. Fed' A'icl t^lildl. Rest. Proj. l,J-17-R. 291 pp. . IgT9-1985. Unpubljshed statist'ical reports, I979 through 1985. --Tiv. Game, Anchorage. . 1980. Tok Dall Sheep Management Plan. unpubl. revised plan --- suEm'itted to Board of Game, Dec. 1980. 6 pp' .1984.Alaskagameregu1ations.No.25.Juneau,AK. Game, ADF&G' Bos, G.ll. 1-980. [Memo to R.J. Somerville, Director, D'iv. Juneau. I pl ogres-s report' GMUs 23-26' Heimer,' -Annual w.E . Ig82. Sheep survey-inventory. - ."porf of iurv'ey-inveitory acti.vit-ies. Part III: Bison, deer, .fi, *rrko*"n, sheep. Vol. I2: Fed. Aid in 14ildl. Rest. Prois' t{-i0-1 and trl-Lg-l,.loUs g -0, 2.0, 13'0, 16'0, and 6'0' . 1984. popu'lation status and management of Dall sheep in Alaska, unpubl . rept., ADF&G, Fairbanks. 2L pp' . 1985. personal communicatjon. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game' -tggq.----TaTrbanks. Jennings, L.B. 1984. Tanana Hills and t'lhite Mountain sheep' Ann' rept' of sirvey-inu.nlory u.iiuities. Part II: Sheep. Vol. 15. Fed. Aid in t'lildl. Rest. Proi. Vl-?2-3, Job 6.0- Johnson, D.M. Ig82. Delta controlled use Area sheep. Annual report of iuivey-inu.nto.y activities. Part III: Bison, deerr 9lk-, muskoxen, and rr'..p". voi.-rf. Feo. Aid in wildl . Rest. Proi. 1^1-19-1, W-19-2' Jobs 9.0,.2.0, 13.0, 16.0, and 6.0. . 1gg3. Delta controlled use Area sheep.'991t^ Annua-l report of survey- act'ivities. Part IV: Mountain and, lhgtp' Vol ' 13' -,f.v;nd;t-Fed. Aid-in wildl. Rest. Proi. w-2?-1, Jobs 12.0 anci 6.0. . 1984a. Delta controlled use Area sheep. Annual report of sur;"V-lnu.nlo"V activities. Part II: Mounta'in goqt and sheep' Vol. 14. r.o. Lid in Wildl. Rest. Proi. w-22-2, Jobs 12.0 and 6'0' . 1984b. Del ta control led Use Area sheep. Annual r.epo-rt. of sur;.V-lnu.ntory act'ivi ties. Part I I : Sheep. Vol . 15' Fed' Ai d i n }Jildl. Rest. Proj. W-22-3, Job 6.0. Annual report of Ke'l l eyhouse , D. G. 1981. Tok Managemen-t- A19a sheep... - -iu.uey-inveniory activities. pa-rt IiI: Bison, caribou, mountain goat'

387 muskoxen, and sheep. Vol. 11. Fed. Aid in |r|ildl ' Rest' Proi ' Ul-I7-2, iobs 9.0, 3.0, L2.0,6.0, 16'0' and 22'0 . 1982. Tok Management Area sheep. Annual report of survey- ;ntory ictiv'ities. Fart iII: Bison, deer, elk, muskoxen' and sheep. ---T;,Vot. t?. F;;: nio in tlildl . Rest. Projs. t'l-19-1 and W-19-2, Jobs 9'0' 2.0, 13.0, 16.0, and 6.0. . 1983. Tok Management Area Sheep. Annual report of survey- activities. Part IV: Mountain g91t^and. sheep' Vo'l' 13' --InventoryFed. Aid-in l'|ildl. Rest. Proi. w-22-L, Jobs 12.0 and 6.0. . 19g4a. Tok Management-Vol. Area sheep.. Annual reaort of survey- ----i*;nt;t ict'ivities. 14. Fed. Aid in 1aildl. Rest' Proi ' W-22-2, Jobs 12.0 and 6.0. Ann. of surYey- . 1984b. Tok Management Area sheep, _rept. j1ildl activities. Pirt II: Sheep. Vol . 15. Fed. Aid in ' --lnv;nto.V-Rest. Proi. W'22-3, Job 6.0. . 19gS. Tok Management Area sheep. Draft annual report of survey- --fiventorY activities. 4 PP.

pegau, R.E. 1984. Alaska Range blest sheep. _Ann. ryp!. 9f_qyrvev-inventory activ.ities. Part II: Sheep. vol . 15. Fed. Aid in l'{ildl . Rest. Proj ' W-22-3, Job 6.0- . 1985. personal communication. Area l4gt. Biologist' ADF&G, Div. ----Gme, McGrath. Watson,- S.M. 1983. Sheep survey-inventory..progres-s rep-q1t,. GMUs 23'26' Rnnrut .eport- ot lurv'ey-inventory qglltities. Part IV: Mountain 99a! and sheep.- vol. 13. rio. nid in 1n.1ildl. Rest. Proi. w-?7-I, Jobs 12'0 and 6.0.

Watson, S.M., and W.E. Heimer. 1984. Alaska Range West sheep' Ann' rept' Part I'lountail and sheep' of survey-inventory"in actjv'ities. II: S-o3t Vol . 14. feO.- nla tJildl. Rest. Proj. Vt-22-2, Jobs 12.0 and 6.0'

~~388~~

~~Human Use of l,loose Western and Interior Regions~~

I. POPULATION MANAGEMENT HISTORY A. Introduction Human use data in the fo1'lowing sections are presented by game management subunjt (GMS), with the exception of Game Management Uniti (GMUs) 12 and 18, which have no subunits (see map 1). The data are presented for the regulatory years 1979-1980 through 1984-1985 and include the reported number of hunters and harvest and, where available, the esiimated harvest. Beginning with the 1983-1984 hunting season, the Division of Game has used the Uniform Code System (UCS) to record harvest ticket and permit hunt data. The UCS is hierarchical and identifies blocks of land in a progressively smaller subdrainage format. A 12-character code identifies the GMU and subunit; the maior river drainages' ocean drainage, or archipelago; drainages or islands shared by adjacent GMUs or subunits; the drainage of a minor tributary or island group; and the specific harvest unit (Uniform Code Unit l.UqUl) witnin the minor tributary. Harvest and hunter data by minor tributary are displayecl on 1:1,000,000-scale maps jn the Atlas to the guide for the [rJestern and Interior regions and on i:250,000-scale reference maps in ADF&G offices. Minor tributary data will be presented for regulatory years 1983-1984 and 1984-i985'in the Significance of Particular Use Areas sections. The data are coded to minor trjbutaries because accuracy js currently greatly diminished at the UCU level. Although _ this information is mbre detailed than GMU or GMS data, it should be irrterpreted cautiously. When reported data are appfied-_to large geographic areas, odd or erroneous data are son€what buffered and may-ngt significantly affect the data summaries. When applied to smal ler geographic areaS, however, unusual informaticln can drastical 1y influence data sumrnanies. Frequently, those minor tributary units that receive the highest use are near populatjon centers and/or are associated with maior access points. The UCS data present,ed'in the S'ignificance of Particular Use Areas sections should be used in conjunct'ion w'ith the human use maps and access lnaps. B. Regional Summary of Hunting Qn-a regionwide basis (Wesiern and Interior regions combined)' the repr.rrted number of hunters and harvest has increased since 1979. During the 1984-1985 regulatory year, a total of 7,953 hunters reporied hunt'ing for 47,287 days and harvested ?,606 moose (ADF&G 1985). Substantial fluctuations in the reported harvest and the number of hunters afield have occurred prior to 1979 and both prior to and after 1979 on a GMU and/or GMS bas'is. There are numerous reasons for these fl uctuati ons , i nc1 udi ng moose

~~391 .-.~~

~~UJo G|~~

~~tO (\| iR\ ..\ t, ()' l\N \i..~~

~~i\ 'tt,\ \. o'\ o- \:\--.. o{,F\ \ I 'l,otl)-.---rt ?Y t' ---./'\l al t l \'il- or) \. / ./ g; 7a I o I 9) (u \i/ rl'$ L L , o \Lr,----..f^.1 t L (l, g~~

~~Eg G' E oL P ! orll = a o t 3 s o tn (5=~~

~~CL IE =~~

392 population increases and declines, regulatory restrictions and relaxations, weather conditions during the hunting seasons, error or inadequacies in reporting, and others. Although improving, harvest ticket reporting remains less than adequate in much of the Western and Interior regions. Check sEations have been set up in several locatjons in the Interior Region and general 1y resul t i n much greater compl iance wi th harvest ticket and registration permit reporting. These improvments, however, are generally restricted to a particular GMS or portion of a GMS. In all cases, the reported number of hunters and harvest should be considered a minimum. Wildlife management in Alaska was formally established in 1925, when Congress created the Alaska Game Commission. Prior to 1925' protection of wildlife had been undertaken by the Departments of Treasury, Cornmerce, and Agriculture, and by the territorial governor. After statehood jn 1959, the State of Alaska assumed adminjstration of its wildlife and established the Department of Fish and Game.

I I. GMU 12 A. Boundaries GMU 12 primarily consists of the Upper Tanana attd White rivers. See the latest GMU maps and boundary descriptions. B. Management Obiect'ives One moose management plan pertains to GMU I?: the Yukon-Tanana Moose f4anagement Plan (ADF&G L977). Its primary management objective'is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting moose; its secorrdary obiective is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose (State of Alaska 1984a). C. Management Considerations Predation appears to be the primary factor influencing the moose population jn GMU 12. Studies conducted 'in adiacent areas indicate that the high rate of early calf mortality is caused by black and brown beais and wolves (Kelleyhouse 1985a). Browse studies conducted in the GMU indicate that, with the exception of the Tok, Little Tok, and upper Tetlin river drainages during years of deep snow, winter ranges are used only ntoderately or are grossly understocked (Kel leyhouse 1984a, i985a). During March 1983 , approximately 350 acres of o1 d-age , ri pa ri an fel t-l eaf willow (Salix alaxensis) were crushed. Production was.expected to increase-five-TbTffiTlhin two years after crushing (Kel leyhouse 'imp'lemenced 1985a ) . The Fortymi I e Fi re Management Pl an was i n May 1984 ano is expected to result in the restoration of a near- natural fire regime over 60 to 80% of the unit. This restoration should eventually result in a habitat mosaic with a higher percentage of brush land and deciduous forest, condit'ions favorable to moose (ibid.).

393 D. Period of Use Hunting seasons generally have been during the month of September and range i n l ength f rom 10 to 30 days , dependi ng up-on where i n the unit hunting takes place. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for the current hunting seasons and bag limits.) E. Human Use Data Table 1 presents hunter and harvest data in GMU 12 for regulatory years 1979-i980 through 1984-1985. ihe apparent increase in the number of hunters reporting from the 1979-I980 season compared to the 1980-1981 season may no,t be a real increase, because rem'inder letters were not Sent for the 1979-1980 hunting season, and it is likely that a number of hunters failed to return their permits. No explanations were found concerning subsequent increases and decreases in the number of hunters hunt'ing and in harvest. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas TaOles 2 and 3 list the number of hunters, hunter-days' and har.vest by mjnor tributary for regulatory years 1983-1984 and 1984-1985. Note that mjnor tributary designat'ion ''00|| represents hunters who reported hunting jn GMU I? but who did not supply sufficient informat'ion on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor tributary. (See the moose human !sg map_s. itt the 1:250,000-sca'le- Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices, and the 1:t,000,000-scale Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Managemenf, Guide for the Western and Interior regions.) iII. GMU 18 A. Bounda ri es GMU 18 consists prinrarily of the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta. See the latest GMU maps and boundary descriptions. B. Management Obiectives One froose manigement plan pertains to GMU 18: the Yukon-Kuskokwim Moose Management Plan (ADF&G 1977). It! -primary management objective is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose, and 'its secondary obiective is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity tcl participate in hunting moose (State of Alaska 1984b). c. Management Cons'i derati ons Durlig mgst years, the out of season harvest of moose during wintei and sp-ring'is'The one of the most serious management problems in GMU 18. problem is aggravated by a lack of alternative game resources, a poorly develope_cl cash.gcolqmy' 9!d_an unusua'l1y nlgr, dens'iry of people ano village^s (Machida 1985). {lthough t'iitte is known a6out predat'ion in GMU 18, it is probably not a significant source of moose mortal ity. Wolves are rare to noiexistent throughout most of the unit and, although brown bears are conunon in t6e Andreafsky and KiIbuck mountains, there is little evidence that bears are major predators of moose in the unit (Machida 1984). Low densities of moose make aerial surveys of limited value in most areas of the unit (l{achida 1985).

394 Because of heavy hunting pressure throughout the year, occupation of many areas by moose appears to be quite transitory, and seasonal movements may be very different from those in other areas of the state (Machida 1984, 1985). D. Period of Use Recent moose hunting seasons in most of GMU i8 have been during the month of September and from mid November through December. In the northwestern portion of the unit, the season has been restricted to the first 20 days of September. (See the latest Alaska Gane Regulat'ions for the current hunt'ing season and bag l imi ts. ) E. Human Use Data Table 4 presents moose harvest and hunter data'in GMU 18 for regulatory years I979-1980 through 1984-1985. The apparent increase in harvest and hunters from the 1979-i980 hunting season to the 1980-1981 hunting season was primarily-due to the circumstance that no reminder letters had been sent after the 1979-1980 hunting season and that harvest ticket reporting had been poor. AlSo, GMU 18 was wirhout an area biologist during most of that regu'latory year (Machida 1981). The increase in harvest and hunters reporting from the 1980-1981 season to the 1981-1982 hunting season 'is believed to be related f,o several factors. For one, lqcal resiclents reported seeing more moose than they had previously, but because fal I composition survey _data were available for only one year, this observation could not be substantiated. Probably the most significant factor was an apparent increase in compliance with harvest ticket reporting_' as a consequence of a concerted effort by department personnel to increase the public's awareness of their reporting responsi- b'il ities (Machida 1983). The decrease in harvest from the 1981-1982 hunting season to the 1982-1983 season was likely the result of poor hunting conditions due to high water during September (Machida 1984). The reported harvest Ouring the 1983-1984 hunting season was similar to that of the 1982-198t season but still lower than that reported for the 1981-1982 season. Hunting conditions were good during the.fall but extremely poor during November and December (Machida 1985). Reports concLrning the 1984-1985 harvest are not available at this time. Most of the reported harvest of moose is by local residents and generally accounts for over 80% of the harvest. Because much of ffre harvest by loca'l residents'local is urrleported' the actual percentage of moose harvested by residents probably exceeds 90% (Machida, pers. comm.). Access is primarily by boat. Most of the successful hunters reporting aircraft as a means of transport tend to be nonlocal residents and generally ranges from 5 to 14% of the tgtal Successful hunters. As jndjcated earlier, compliance with harvest-ticket reporting is poor but improving (jbid.). F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables 5 and 6 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvest by minor tributary for regulatory years 1983-1984 and

395 1984-1985. Note that minor tributary designation I'o0rr represents hunters who reported hunting in GMU 18 but who did not supply sufficjent information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor tributary. (See the moose human use maps in the 1":250,000-scale Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offfces, and the 1:1,000,000-scale Atlas to the Alaska Habitat l4anagement Guide for the Western and Interior regions.)

IV. GI'IU 19 A. Boundaries GMU 19 consists of the middle and upper Kuskokwim drainage. See the latesr GMU maps and boundary descriptions. B. Management Objectives Two moose nnnagement p]ans pertain to GMU 19: the Yukon-Kuskokwim and the Farewell moose management plans (ADF&G L977). The primary objective of the Yukon-Kuskokwim plan is to provide for the greatest sustained opportunity for subsistence use of moose, and the secondary objective is to provide for the greatest sustained opportuniry to hunt moose. The primary management objective in the Farewell plan is to provide sustained opportunities to be se'lective in hunting moose, and the secondary objective is to provide sustained opportunit'ies to hunt moose under aesthetically pleasing condirions (State of Alaska 1984c). C. Managemeni Considerarions Unreported harvest in GMU 19 is large; estimated harvests are usually double the reported harvest figures. The Bear Creek burn near Farewell is becoming excellent moose habitat. An ongoing study of moose movements will provide information on the movement patterns and use by moose of the Bear Creek burn (Pegau 1984). D. Period of Use Moose hunting seasons general ly run through the month of September. Subunits 19A and portions of 190 also have ear'ly winter hunts, which, depending on the subunit or portion of a subunit, occur during November, December, January, and February. (See the lat,est Alaska Game Regulations for the current hunting season and bag I imi ts. ) E. Human Use Data Tables 7 through 11 present moose harvest and hunter data for Gl'lU 19 in its entirety and for Subunits 19A through D for regulatory years 1979-1980 through 1984-1985. The increases noted in all subuniis from the 1979-1980 to the 1980-1981 hunting seasons are largely explained by the facr that reminder letters were not sent out after the 1979-1980 hunting season. The overall decline from the 1981-L982 hunting season to the 1982-1983 season was due in part to legislation enacted prior to the hunting season requi ring al I al ien hunters to be accompanied by a guide (Pegau 1984). The overall increase from the 1982-1983 season to the 1983-1984 season was particularly apparent in Subunits 19A ancl D. Much of the increase was t,he result of GMU 18 residents traveling to GMU 19 to hunt moose. The

396 number of alien hunters increased in 1984 to levels recorded prior _ to L982, particularly in Subunit 198 (Pegau 1985). F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables rz through 19 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and !qlyest by minor tributary for regulatory years 1993-lig4 and 1984-1985. Note that minor tributary designation rr00rr represenrs hunters who reported hunting in a subunit of GMU i9 but who did not supply sufficient information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor tnibutary. Table 20 lists the number of hunters who reported hunting in Gl'{U 19 but who did not indicate in which subunit they - hunted. (See the moose human use maps in rhe 1:250,000-scale Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices, and the 1:1,000'000-scale Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the Wesrern and Interior regions. )

V. GMU 2OA A. Boundaries GMS 20A is composed of the Tanana flats and Central Alaska Range. See the latest GMU maps and boundary descriptions. B. Management Objectives Two moose management plans pertain to GMS 20A: the Central Alaska Range qnd the Yukon-Tanana moose management plans (ADF&G rgir). Both plans share a primary managenrcnt objective to provioe the greatest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting moose. The secondary management objectives in the Central Alaska Range plan are to provide for sustained opportunities to hunt moose under aesthetically pleasing conditions and to be selectjve in hunting moose. The secondary objective in rhe Yukon-Tanana plan is to provide sustained opportunities for subsisrence use of moose (Bos 1980, State of Alaska 1984c). C. Management Consjderations The number of moose has been increasing in GMS z0A in recent years; however, the rate of increase may be declining. Increased predation because of a higher density of wolves is suspected to be responsible for reducecl recruitment (Jennings 1985a). In the foothills portion of the subunit, the rate of jrrcrease is much lower, probably because of predation by both brown bears and wolves (ibid. ). Because of plant succession and the lack of wildfires, especially in the Tanana flats, carrying capacity is generally declining in GMS 20A. In a number of locations within the subunit, preferred browse species .rre overmature or are being rep'laced by spruce or other nonbrowse species. u1t'imate1y, habitat limitations will d'ictate the upper population limits attainable by moose in the subunit (Jennings 1984a). D. Period of Use Moose hunting seasons general 1y occur during the month of september and range in lengrh from 20 to 30 days, depending upon tlte portion of the subunit in whjch hunting is occurring.- (see the latesi Alaska Game Regulations for the Current hunting season and bag I imi ts. )

397 E. Human Use Data Table 2L presents moose harvest and hunter data in GMS 208 for regulatory years 1979-1980 through 1984-1985. The increase in the number of hunters and harvest from the 1979-1980 hunting season to the 1980-1981 season is partially explained by the increased response to reminder letters. In aObition, the 1980-1981 season was six days longer in the portion of the subunit between the Wood and Little Delta rivers than in Che rema'inder of the subunit. Ana'lysis of harvest ticket data suggests that the longer season did not result in a large increase 'in-the number of hunters. It does appear' however, that hunters took advanrage of the longer season to hunt later, when greater success was tikety (Jennings 1981). The 1981-1982 hunting season was 10 Oays longer in the Wood and Little Delta rivers area than in rhe remaindei of the subuntt and accounted for one-third of the harvest. It did not, however, appear to attract a large increase ip lhe number of hunters (Jennings 1983a). The increase in hunters and harvest cluri ng the 1982-1983 season i s partial 1y explained by the addjtion of a November SeaSon, the first since I974. ()verall, the moose harvest in Subunit 20A has increased yearly since tSilg, as has the moose population.(Jennings.1985a). patterns have been during recent benerally,- transporration similar years. Hunters' using aj rcraft harvested more moose and had of greater Success than hunters using _ any other mode lransportation. Boat and off-road vehicle are the second and rhi rd most frequently reported means of dccess respectively (ibid.). ' F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Ta6les ?2 and 23 list the number of hunters, hunter-days' and years 1983-1984 and harvest by minor tributary for regu'latory rr00r' 1984-1985. ttlote that mi ntlr tributary desi gnat'ion represents hunters who reported hunting in GMS 20A but who did not supply information on their harvest reports to be coded to a sufficient 'i mi nor tri buta ry . (See the moose human uSe map-s_ - n the 1:250,000-scale- Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices, and rhe 1:t,000,000-sca1e Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the Western and Interior regions-)

VI. GMS 208 A. Boundari es GMS 208 cotts'ists of the Fairbanks vicinity and portions of the central Tanana va1 1eY. See the latest GMU maps and boundary desc ri pt i ons . B. Management Obiectives The iukorr-Tanina Moose Management Plan applies to GMS 208 (ADF&G IgTl). its primary objectiv-e is to provide the greatesi sustained opportunity to 'prov'ideparticipate in huntirrg moose. Its secondary objective is ro sustajned opportunities for subsistence use of moose (Bos'1980, State of Alaska 1984c).

398 C. Management Considerations Moose densities are low throughout nrost of GMS 208; however, they appear to be increasing in areas where wolf control has neen effective (Crain and Haggstronr 1985a ). Browse util ization is l'ight in the subunit, and habjtat is presently not limiting the growth of the moose population. Unless enhancement of iging- habitats occurs, however, browse species will decline ii abundance; and productivity and high moose tlensities, such as have occurred in the past, w'ill no longer be possible. A wildfire management plan has b-ee1 imp'lemented to improve habitat by restoring_a near-natural fire regime jn portioris of the subunit. Changing land ownership and continued development wi11, however, the use of wildfire for habitat improvement'in 9lec1ude(ibid.). many areas D. Period of Use lrlithin GMS 208 are the Fairbanks and Minto flats management areas. In the Fairbanks Management Arean hunting for moose is oy bow and arrow on]y, and recent hunting seasons have been during ihe month of September and the fourth week of Novenrber'. In the Minto Flats Management Area, moose hunting is by permit only, and recent seasons have been during September and from niiC January through February. The remainder of GMS 208 general ly has had a SeptemO6r 1 ihrough 20 season. (See the latest Alaska- Game Regulations for the current hunting season and bag limits.) E. Human Use Data Table 24 presents moose harvest and hunter data in GMS 208 for rygul atory years 1979-1980 ihrough 1984-1985 . The increase jn hunters and in harvest from the 1980-1981 hunting season to the 1981-1982 season can in part be attributed to the expansion of GMS 208 to incluoe the Salcha and Tolovana river drainages (Crain and Haggstrom 1983b). The continued increases throughout the six-year period likely reflect the increasing human popu'lation in the Fairbanks area. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables 25 and 26 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvest by minor tributary for regulatory years 1983-1i84 and 1984-1985. Note that minor tributary designation ,'00'r represents hunters who- reported hunting in GMS 208 but who did not supply sufficient information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor (See the moose humin use maps in the 1:250,000-scale-_tribut_ary: Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices,-Guide and the 1:1,000,000-sca1e Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management for the Western and Interior regions.)

~~VI I. GMS 2OC A. Boundaries GMS 20C consists of the Kantishna, Cosna, and Nenana river drainages. See the latesr Gl'lU maps and boundary descr.iptions.~~

399 B. Management Objectives One moose managenrenr p'lan appl ies to GMS 20c: the yukon-Tanana Moose Management Plan (ADF&G 7977, Bos 1980). The p'lan's primary objective is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting moose. Its secondary objective is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose (State of Alaska 1984c). c. Management Considerations The moose population in the Totatlanika and Nenana river drainages in eastern subunit 20c has responded favorably to reductions of wolf density. Brown bears appear to be responsible for the mqjgr]ty o'f summer moose calf morta'lity (Crain and Haggstrom 1984b). Moose densities are below carryi-ng capacity in GMS 20C. The human demand for moose is high, primarily because access is good. controlling predation and human take are necessary in order to increase the moose pclpulation (ibid.). Yearling recruitment has been chronical 1y poor in Denal i Nat'ional Park, and high natural morta'lity among bulls has produced a low bull:cow ratio. Because of this, the moose popu'lation is like'ly to continue to decline iri the park (ibid.). D. Period of Use I'loose hunting seasons generally occur during the fjrst 20 days of September. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for rhe current hunt'ing season and bag I imi ts. ) -F Human Use Data Table 27 presents moose harvest and hunter data in GMS 20C for regulatory years 1979-1980 through 1984-1985. The decline jn harvest and hunters from the 1980-198i hunting season to the 1981-1982 season was the result of boundary changes, which reduced the s'ize of GMS 20C (Crain and Haggstrom 1983b). No jnformation was founcl explaining the decl ine 'in hunters and harvest during the 1982-1983 hunting season. The increase in harvest and hunters during the 1983-1984 hunting season is exp'lained, in part, by an increased use of 3-wheelers within the subunit (Crairi and Haggstrom 1985b). No information is available at this time to explain the subsequent decrease during the 1984-1985 hunting season. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables 28 and 29 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvest by minor tributary for regu'latory years 1983-1984 and 1984-1985. llote that mi nor tributary designation rr00rr represents hunters who reported hunting in GMS 20C but who did not supply sufficient information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor tributary. (See the moose human use maps in the 1:250,000-sca'le Reference l'laps, available in ADF&G offices, and the 1:1,000,000-sca1e Atlas to the 41aska Habitat Management Guide for the l,lesrern and Interior regions. )

400 VIiI. GMS 200 A. Bounda ri es GMS 20D consists of the southcentral Tanana va11ey. See the latest GMU maps and boundary descriptions. B. Management Objectives Two moose management plans pertain to GMS 20D: the Yukon-Tanana and the Donelly-Cleanilater moose management plans (ADF&G 1977, Bos 1980). The primary management objective of the Yukon-Tanana plan is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting moose. Its secondary objective is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose (State of Alaska 1984c). The primary objective of the Donelly-Clearwater plan is to provide sustained opportunities to view and photograph moose; its secondary objective is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting moose (Bos 1980). C. Management Cons'i derati ons Currently, browse does not appear to be 1 imiting the moose popu'lation in GMS 20D. The Jarvis Creek and Gerstle burns, however, appear to be past their best browse production. Habitat manipulation in the southern portion of the subunit may become necessary if the moose population continues to expand (Johnson 1985). There appears to be a relatively high loss of moose to both road kills and out of season harvest. It is likely that this mortal i ty factor wi I I become more important as the moose population expands (Johnson 1984). Data suggest that predation by wolves is keeping year'ling recruitment low. Both black and brown bears almost certainly affect the moose cal f survival rate ( ibid. ). D. Period of Use Moose hunting seasons generally occur during September and range in length from 15 to 20 days, depending upon what portion of the subunit is being hunted. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for current hunting season and bag limits.) E. Human Use Data Table 30 presents moose harvest and hunter data in GMS 20D for regulatory years 1979-1980 through 1984-1985. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables 31 and 32 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvest by minor tributary for regulatory years i983-1984 and 1984-1985. Note that minor tributary designation rr00,, represents hunters who reported hunting in GMS 200 but who did not supply sufficient information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor tributary. (See the moose human use maps in the l:250,000-scale Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices, and the 1:1,000,000-scale Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the Western and Interior regions.)

401 IX. GMS zOE A. Boundaries GMS 20E is composed of the Forty mile, Charley, and Ladue river drainages. See the latest GMU maps and boundary descriptions. B. Management 0bjectives Two moose management plans apply to GMS 20E: the Yukon-Tanana and Charley River moose management p]ans (ADF&G 1977, Bos 1980). The primary management objective of the Yukon-Tanana plan is to provioe the greatest sustai ned opportuni ty to parti ci pate i n hunting moose, and the second objective is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose. The Charley River plan has a primary management objective to provide sustained opportunities to hunt moose under aesthetically pleasing conditions (State of Alaska 1984d). C. Management Considerations It appears rhat most moose mortality is the result of predation by black and brown bears and wolves (Kelieyhouse l984b). Research conducted within GMS 20E indicates that brown bears are a major predator of neonate moose. Because of this predation, the moose population continues to be composed of o'ld, unproductive animals that exist at low densjties (Kelleyhouse 1985b). An inspection of browse plants in the subunit indicated that there is less than 10% use by moose. Browse is therefore not a limiting factor affecting populat'ion growth. Implementation of the Fortymile Fire Management Plan will ensure a near-natural fire regime in much of the area and thus will result in a more heterogeneous habitat mosaic than current'ly exists (ibid. ). D. Period of Use GMS 20E was partitioned off from GMS 20C prior to the the 1978-1979 regulatory year. There was no legal moose hunting season in the subunit until the 1982-1983 regulatory year, when a short 10-day season was established during September. A September 1-10 season has been helo in the subunit until the 1985-1986 regulatory year, when September 5-25 and September I-I4 seasons were establisheo in separate portions of the subunit. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for current hunting season and bag I imi ts. ) E. Human Use Data Table 33 presents moose harvest and hunter data in GMS 20E for regulatory years 1982-1983 through 1984-1985. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables 34 and 35 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvesr by minor tributary for regulatory years 1983-1984 and 1984-1985. Note that minor tributary designation r'00'' represents hunters who reported hunting in GMS 20E but who did not supp'ly sufficierrt information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor tributary. (See the moose human use maps i n the 1:250,000-sca1e Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices, and the l:1,000,000-sca1e Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the Western and Interior regions. )

402 X. GMS zOF A. Boundaries GMS 20F consists of the central Yukon, Hess Creek, and Tozitna river drainage. See the latest GMU maps and boundary descri ptions . B. Management 0bjectives One moose management plan perta'ins to GMS 20F: the Yukon-Tanana Moose Management Plan (ADF&G 1977 , Bos 1980). The primary management objective j s to provide the greatest sustaj ned opportunity to participate in hunting moose, and the secondary objective is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose. C. Management Considerations Little is known about the moose population in GMS 20F. Habitat generally appears poor throughout the subunit but is probably nor limiting population growth at the present time. Predation by wolves and brown bears may be limiting recruitment, but data are sparse (Jennings 1985b). Out of season harvest in Subunit ?0F is believed to be substantial but as yet is unquantified (Jennings 1984b). D. Period of Use GMS 20F was partitioned off from GMS ?0C prior to the 1981-1982 regulatory year. Since then, September i-15 and November 1-i0 seasons have been held in the subunit. (See the larest Alaska Game Regulations for current hunting season anci bag limits.) E. Human Use Data Table 36 presents moose harvest and hunter data in GMS 20F for regulatory years 1981-82 through 1984-85. Virtually a1l of the hunting in Subunit 20F is by state residents (Jennings 1985b). F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables 37 and 38 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvest by m'inor tributary for regulatory years 1983-1984 and 1984-1985. Note that minor tributary designation 'r00', represents hunters who reported hunting in GMS 20F but who did not supply sufficient information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor tributary. (See the moose human use maps in the 1:250,000-sca1e Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices, and the 1:1,000,000-scale Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the Western and Interior regions. )

XI. GMS 214 A. Boundaries GMS 21A consists of the upper Nowitna, Iditaroct, and upper Innoko drainage. See the latest GMU maps and boundary descriptions. B. Management 0bjectives One moose management plan perta'ins to Subunit 21(A): the Yukon-Kuskokwim Moose llanagement Plan (ADF&G 1977, Bos 1980). The primary management objectjve is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose; the secondary objective is provioe

403 the grearest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting moose (Bos 1980). C. Management Considerations PreOation by wolves'is the largest source of adult moose mortality in Subunit ziA. In the upper Innoko and upper Nowitna, wolves may alsg be responsible for the poor yearling recruitment (0sborne and Pegau 1985). D. Period of Use The recent nrcose hunting seasons have been September 5-30 and llovember 1-30. (See the latest Alaska Game Regu'lations for current hunting season and bag ljnrits.) E. Human Use Data Table 39 presents moose harvest and hunter daia in GMS ?LA for regul atory years 1980-1981 through 1984-1985. GMU 2I was partitioned into GMSs prior to the 1980-1981 regu'latory year. Ai rcrafr and boat are the fi rst and second most frequently reported means of transportation by hunters. Most of the reported harvest form Subunit 21A occurs in the Innoko drainage. Most of the huntirrg occurs along the main river, whe.re boat and aircraft access is easiest (Haggslrom and 0sborne 1982). F. Significance of Particular Use Areas TaOles 40 and 4I list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvest by minor tributary for regulatory years.,-1-983-1984 and 1984-1985. Note that minor tributary designation ''00'r represents hunters who reported hunting in GMS 2IA but who did not supply suf f i c'ient i nformati on on thei r ha rvest reports to be coded tcl a minor rributary. (See the moose human use map-s_ in thq l:250,000-scale Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices, and the 1:1,000,000,sca.|e Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the l,Jestern and Interior regions. )

XII. GMS 218 A. Boundaries GMS 2lB consists of the lower Nowitna River and the Yukon River between the lr'lelozitna and Tozitna rivers. See the latest Gl'lU maps and boundarY descriPtions. B. Management Obiectives gne moose nanagement p'l an pertai ns to subuni t ?LB: the Yukon-Kuskokwjm Moose Management Plan (ADF&G 1977, Bos 1980). The primary managemenr objective is to provide sustained opportunities for suOsistence use of moose; the secondary objective is f,o provide the greatest .sustained opportunity to participate in hunting moose (Bos 1980). C. Management Consjderations prioi t0 1980, avai'lab1e information indicated a declirring moose population. In 1980, however, a survey using a stratified random iample technique produced an estimate two-to-three times above whal was previously thought. A comparison of the estimated (both hunting and -predati6n)yearling recruitment with estimated mortal.ity suggested a stable population (Haggstrom and 0sborrre

404 i981b). Fall surveys conducted during 1983 in0icated that 'in the Nowitna-sulatana confluence, d Slight decline in moose density had occu rred. Along the Yukon River, an increase was observed, and elsewhere in the subunit the population appeared stable (Osborne 1985a). Most hunting occurs from boats or float-equipped aircraft. Harvest is therefore concentrated near water courses, and most of the subunit is unhunted (Osborne 1984b). D. Period of Use Recent hunting seasons were September 5-30 in GMS 2i8. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for the current hunting season and bag 1 imi ts. ) E. Human Use Data Table 42 presents moose harvest and hunter data derived from check station and registration perrnit reports primarily related to the Nowitna drainage. These data do not represent GMS ?LB 'in its entirety, buf, they do reflect most of the use and are the most comparalrle data f

XIIi. GMS 21C A. Bounda ri es GMS zic consists of the upper Dulbi River and the Melozitna River drainage above Gray'ling Creek. See the latest GMU maps and boundary descri ptions. B. Management 0bjectives One moose management p1 an pertai ns to Subuni I 2lC: the Yukon-Kuskokwjm Moose Management Plan (ADF&G 1977, Bos 1980). The

405 primary management objective is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose; the secondary objective is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting nroose (Bos 1980). C. Management Considerations Lirtle is known about the moose population in Subunit ZIC; trend areas have only recent)y been established. The moose population in the subun'it is low, and natural nrortal ity is keeping it stable (0sborne 1985b). D. Period of Use Recent rnoose hunting seasons in GMS 21C have run from September 5 to September 25. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for the current hunting season and bag limits. ) E. Human Use Data Table 45 presents harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1980-1981. rhrough 1984-1985 Nearly all moose hunters in GMS ?IC use a'ircraft as a means of transport. During the 1982-i983 and i9B3-1984 hunting seasons, Fish arrd Wildlife Protection conducted extensive patrols in the area, enforcing the same-day-ai rborne regulation. Because of ihis, the harvest declined cluring those seasons (0sborne 1984c, 1985b). F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables 46 and 47 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvest by minor tributary for regulatory years 1983-1984 arrd 1984-1985. Note that minor tributary designation r'00r' represents hunters who reported hunting in GMS zIC but who did not supp'ly sufficient information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor" tributary. (See the moose human use maps in the 1:250,000-scale Reference l4aps, available in ADF&G offices, and the 1:1,000,000-sca1e Atlas to the Alaska Habjtat Management Guide for the l,Jestern and Interior regions. )

XIV. GMS 21D A. Boundaries GMS 21D consists of the middle Yukon River, from Eagle Island to Ruby, and the Koyukuk Rrver below Dulbi Slough. See the latest GMU maps and boundary descript'lons. B. Managemeni 0bjectives One moose management plan pertains to Subuni t ?LD: the Yukon-Kuskokwim Moose Management Plan (ADF&G 1977, Bos 1980). The primary mdnagement objective is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose; the secondary objective is to provide the greartest sustained opportunity to participate in hunt'ing moose (Bos 1980) . C. Management Consjderations Natural mortality of moose within Subunit zID is thought to be high. Good populations of brown bear exist in the uplands, black bea rs d re abundant i n the I owl ands , and wol ves a re found throughout the subunit (0sborne 1984d).

406 D. Period of Use Recent hunting seasons in GMS zID have been fronr September 5 through 25 and from February 1 through 10. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for current hunting season and bag limits). E. Human Use Data Table 48 presents harvest and hunter dara for regulatory years i9B0-1981 through 1984-1985. The increase in harvest from the 1980-1981 hunting season ro the 1981-1982 season was in part related to a late season held in March and also apparently because qf better compl iance with harvest ticket reporting (0sborne 1983c). Subsequent increases in hunters and harvest appears to be related substantial 1y to increased compl jance w'i th harvest ticket reporting (0sborne 1985c ) . F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables 49 and 50 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, ancl harvest by minor tributary for regulatory years 1983-1984 and 1984-1985. Note that mirior tributary designation '.00., represents hunters who reported hunting in GMS zlD but who did not supply sufficient information on their harvest reports to be codeo to a minor tributary. (See the moose human use maps in the 1:250,000-sca1e Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices, and the 1:i,000,000-sca1e Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the Hestern and Interior regions.)

XV. GMS 21E A. Boundaries GMS zIE i ncl udes the Yukon Ri ver drai nage between the Pa'imiut-Kalskag Portage and Blackburn Creek and including the lower Innoko River downstream from the confluence of the Iditarod and Innoko rivers. See the latest GMU maps and boundary desc ri pt i ons . B. l{anagement 0bjecti ves One moose management plan pertains to Subunit ZLE: the Yukon-Kuskokwim Moose Management Plan (ADF&G L977, Bos 1980). The primary management objective is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose; the secorrdary objective is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting moose (Bos 1980). C. Management Considerations No data were available. D. Period of Use Recent hunting seasons in GMS ?lE havg been from September 5 through 25 ano from February 1 through 1d. (Previously season was November 1 through 30). (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for current hunting season and bag 'limits.) E. Human Use Data Table 51 presents harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1980-1981 through 1984-1985.

407 Unreported harvest appears to be substantial (four to five times the reported harvest) in Suburrit zLE (Osborne 1984e, 1985d). Fluctuations in harvest and hunters may in part be related to compliance with harvesf, ticket requirements. F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables 5'Z and 53 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvest by minor tributary for regulatory years 1983-1984 arrd 1984-1985. l'lote that mi nor tributary designation 'r00rr represents hunters who reported hunting in GMS 27E but who did not supply sufficient information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor tributary. (See the moose human use maps in the I:250,000-scale Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices, and the 1:1,000,000-sca1e Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management Guide for the Western and Interior regions.)

XVI. GMU 24 A. Bounda ri es GMU 24 consisrs of the Koyukuk River drainage north of and including Dulbi Slough. See the latest GMU maps and boundary descriptions. B. Managenrent Objecti ves Two moose management p'lans pertain to Unit 24: the Dietrich and Yukon-Tanana moose management plans (ADF&G 1977, Bos 1980). The primary management objective jn the Dietrich plan is to provide sustained opportunities to hunt moose under aesthetical'ly pleasing conditions; the secondary objective is to provide sustainecl opporturrities to view and photograph moose (State of Alaska 1984e). The prirnary management objective for the Yukon-Tanana plan is provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate 'in hunting moose; the secorrdary objective'is to provide sustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose (Bos 1980). c. Management Corrsi derations Since the Dalton Highway was opened for public use, harvest of moose along the highway has increased substantial 1y (0sborne 1984f, 1985c). Moose trend count areas have only recently been established in much of Unit 24 and should aid in future management efforts (Osborne 1984f, i985e). D. Period cf Use There are four d'ifferent sets of hunting seasons that currentiy apply to GMU 24. In one portion of the unit, there are September 5 through September 25, December 1 through 10, and a March 1 through 10 seasons. Another area has an August 25 through December 31 season, another an August 25 through September 25 and March 1 through'10 season, and a fourth area has an August 25 through September 25 season. (See the latest Alaska Gane Regulations for current hunting seasons, bag limits, and area descri pti ons . ) E. Human Use Data Table 54 presents harvest and hunter data for regulatory years 1980-1981 through 1984-i985.

408 Much of the fluctuations in harvest and hunter numbers can be attributed to variabi I ity 'in compl iance with harvesr tjcket reporting_ lgquirements. Estimated harvests range from an additional 35 moose to more than double the reporteo harvest (0sborne 1983d, 1984f, 1985e). F. Sign'ificance of Particular Use Areas Tables 55 and 56 list the number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvest by minor tributary for regulatory years 1983-1084 and 1984-1985. Note that minor tributary designation r'00r' represents hunters who reported hunting in GMU 24 out who did noi supply sufficient information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor _-tribut-ary, (see the moose humin use maps in the 1:250,000-sca1e Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices,-Guide and the 1:1,000,000-sca1e Atlas to the Alaska Habitat Management for the Western and Interior regions.)

XVII. GMU 25 Although GMU 25 is divided into four subunits (A through D), survey and inventory reports are for GMU 25. Subunit distinctio-ns will be iroted where information is available. A. Boundaries GMU 25 consists of rhe Yukon Flats; chanda'lar, porcupine, and 'latestBlack river orainages; and Birch and Beaver creeks.' See the GMU maps and boundary descriptions. B. Management Objectives Two moose management plans pertain to unit 25: the Dietrjch and Yukon-Tanana moose management p]ans (ADF&G Lgl7, BOs l9g0). The primary management in the Dietrich plan is to provide sustained opportunities to hunr moose under aesthetical 1y pleasing conditions; the secondary objective is to provide sustained opportunities to view and phorograph moose (State of Alaska 1984e). The primary management objective for the yukon-Tanana plan is to provide the greatest sustained opportunity to participate .in hunting moose; the secondary objective is to provide s.ustained opportunities for subsistence use of moose (Bos 1980). C. Management Consi derations In western Subunit 250, moose densities are critically low arrd will require significant management actions in order to 'increase the population (Nowlin 1985). Out of season harvest appears to be substantial throughout most of unit 25 and is thought to be more than the total reported harvest (ibid.). predation by wolves in pgftions of the unit is high. During one year in western subun'it. 25D, wolves may have kil led a minimum of IZ0 moose, oF approximately 15% of the fall population. Most predation appears to occur during. winter and consists prinrarily of calves and yearlings (ioio.). Movements of radio-collared moose in western subunir 25D indicate that rwo distinct populatjons exist in the drea (ibid. ). (see the moose DisLri'but'ion and Abundance narrative for further information of these rwcl populations).

409 D. Period of Use currently, qM!__25A hul a september 5 through 2s moose hunting season. GMs 258 is divided into two areas, one of which has a September 20 through 30 season and the other a september 5 through 25 and a December 1 through 15 season. GMS 25c has a september 5 through 15 season. GMS 25D is also divided into two areas, one of which has seasons of september 10 through 30, December 1 through 10, and Februaly 18 through 28 by tier II permit only (formerly a drawing permit). The other portion of GMS z5A has seasons-of September 10 through 20 and December I through 10. (See the latest Alaska Game Regulations for current hunting seasons, bag limits, and area descriptions.) E. Human Use Data Tables 57 through 61 present harvesr anct hunter data for subunit 25 (A through D) and for Unit 25 in its enrirety for regulatory years i980-1981 through 1984-1985. Much of the harvest in GMU 25 is not reported; estimated harvest is at least twice that of the reported harvest (Nowlin lgBS). Year-to-year fluctuations may in part be due to changes in compl iance with harvest ricket reporting. For instance, the increase in harvest and hunters from the 1982-1983 season to the 1983-1984 season was largely due to improvect reporting in western Subunit 25D, where rhe hunt was changed to registration perm'it for the i983-1983 season (ibid.). F. Significance of Particular Use Areas Tables 62 through 68 list ihe number of hunters, hunter-days, and harvest by minor tributary for GMSs 25 (A through D) for regulatory years 1983-1984 and 1984-1985. Note that minor tributary designation "00" represents hunters who reported hunting in a particular subunit irr GMU 25 but who did not supp'ly sufficient information on their harvest reports to be coded to a minor tributary. Table 69 I ists the number of hunters who reported hunting in GMU 25 but who did not specify the subunit in which they hunted for regulatory years 1983-1984 and 1984-1985. (See the moose huntan use maps in the I:250,000-scale Reference Maps, available in ADF&G offices, and the 1:1,000,000-scale Atlas to the Alaska Hatljtat Management Guide for the Western and Interior regions. )

~~410 Table 1. GMU 12 Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Dara for Regulatory years 1979-80 through 1984-85~~

~~Regul arory Number of Reporteo Estimated Yea r Hu nte rs Ha rves t Ha rvest~~

~~1979-80 203 g1* i980-81 110 285 g6** 115 198 1 -82 354 102*** 725 1982 -83 408 91**** 125 1983-84 340 7g**** 1984-85 4t7 B4 19:~~

Source: Kelleyhouse 1980a, 19gla, 19g3a, l9g4a, 19g5a. --- means no data were available. * Includes three road-killed moose, three poacheo, and six moose taken funeral potlaches. for ** Includes two road-killed moose and three poached moose. *** Includes eight road-killed moose and three aninrals taken for funeral pot'laches.

**** Includes five road-killed moose.

~~Table 2. GMU I2 Minor Tribut-ar_y Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Itli nor Hunter- Number of Su cces sfu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~06 670 98 26 04 626 86 9 08 519 B5 I4 07 ?19 21 7 00 173 24 3 09 148 25 9 10 90 13 5~~

~~Subunit total 2,445 352 73~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~4TL Table 3. GMU 12 Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regui arory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunte r- Number of Success fu I Tri bura ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~06 786 119 30 00 66s 65 08 580 87 9 04 446 73 13 09 243 31 9 07 174 22 11 i0 83 16 5 05 11 2 0 01 2 2 0~~

~~Subunit total 2,990 417 84~~

~~Source: ADF&G i985.~~

~~lable 4. GMU 18 Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years i979-80 ihrough 1984-85~~

~~Regu 1 atory Number of Reported Esti mated Yea r Hunters Ha rvest Ha rvest~~

~~1979-80* 33 12 24-36 1980-81 145 48 1981 -82 22L 82** 150+ 1982-83 220 58*** 100-1s0 1983-84 236 63 125 1984-85 250 75~~

Source: Dinneford 1980i Machida 1981, 1983, i984, 1985; ADF&G 1985. --- means no data were available. * Reminder letters were not sent out to nonreporting hunters for the 1979-80 hunting season, and GMU 18 was without an area biologist during most of the year. rk* Includes four known poached moose.

*** Includes three known poached moose.

~~4L2 Table 5. GMU 18 Mirror Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regularory Year 1983-g4~~

~~Number of Number of l,li nor Hunter- Number of Succes s fu I Tri buta ry Days Hunte rs Hu nters~~

~~02 55i 91 30 03 206 32 9 I4 178 18 3 16 169 25 8 L2 111 l9 5 15 102 19 2 01 60 7 J 00 38 6 0 06 1 38 6 I 05 23 3 0 13 16 4 ? 'l 1 I7 I 0 11 3 1 0 18 3 1 0 04 2 2 0~~

~~Subunit rotal 1,507 235 63~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~4i3 Table 6. GMU 18 Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hu rrte r- Number of Su ccess fu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hu nters~~

~~02 688 98 48 t2 393 56 4 LB7 23 4 14 r52 I4 0 03 127 22 6 00 86 9 3 16 66 13 4 04 26 3 2 13 19 4 2 01 18 4 I 05 10 1 0 06 t0 1 1 07 6 2 0~~

~~Subunit total 1,788 250 75~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~Table 7. GMS 19A Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regu'latory Years 1979-80 through 1984-85~~

~~Regul atory Number of Reported Yea r Hunters Ha rvest~~

~~1980-81** 134 75 1981-82 199 78 1982-83 208 77 1983-84 281 r02 1984-85 338 184~~

~~Source: Shepherd 1980; Burris 1981; Pegau 1983, 1984, 1985; ADF&G 1985. * Reminder letters were not sent to nonreporting harvest-ticket holders.~~

** Hdrvest is based on boundary of GMS since 1981.

~~4r4 Table 8. GMS 198 Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1979-80 through 1984-85~~

~~Regu I atory Number of Reported Yea r Hunters Ha rvest~~

~~1980-81** 189 103 1981-82 170 78 1982-83 r42 7L 1983-84 200 i10 1984-85 278 154~~

~~Source: Shepherd 1980; Burris 1981; Pegau 1983, 1984, 1985; ADF&G 1985. * Reminder letters were not sent to nonreporting harvest-ticket holders.~~

** Harvest is based on boundary of GMS since 1981.

~~Table 9. GMS 19C Reportecl Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1979-80 through 1984-85~~

~~Regu 1 atory Number of Reported Yea r Hunters Ha rvest~~

~~i980-81** 148 78 1981-82 r47 B6 I 982 -83 729 BO 1983-84 r37 102 1984-85 168 95~~

~~Source: Shepherd 1980; Burris 1981; Pegau i983, 1984, 1985; ADF&G 1985. * Reminder letters were not sent to nonreporting harvest-ticket holders.~~

** l-larvest is based on boundary of GMS since 1981.

~~415 Table 10. GMS l9D Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regu'latory Years 1979-80 through 1984-85~~

~~Regu'latory Number of Reported Yea r Hu nte rs Ha rvest~~

~~1980-81** 145 82 1981-82 185 104 1 982 -83 t76 106 1983-84 215 t20 i984-85 229 133~~

~~source: shepherd i980; Burris 1981; pegau 1993, 1984, l9g5; ADF&G i985. * Reminder letters were not sent to nonreporting harvest-tjcket holders. ** Harvest is based on boundary of GMS since 1981.~~

~~Table 11. GMU 19 lupqt!e9 Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regu'larory Years 1979-80 rhrough 1984-85~~

~~Regularory Number of Reported Est i ma ted Yea r Hu nte rs* Ha rvest* Ha rves t~~

1979-80** 431 283 480-530 1980-81 689 369 550 1981-82 753 369 1982-83 687 335 600-700 1983-84 849 438 9-25_-975 1984-85 L,026 571 source: Shepherd 1980; Burris 1981; pegau 1983, 19g4, 19g5; ADF&G 1995. means no data ulere avai lable. * Includes hunters and harvest of those who reported hunting in GMU 19 but did not specify which subunit rhey hunted.

** Reminder letters were not sent to nonreporting harvest-ticket holders.

~~4r6 Table 12. GMS 19A Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su ccessfu I Tri buta ry Days Hu nte rs Hunters~~

~~01 363 47 T2 03 357 54 10 09 ?62 4L IJ 04 191 36 13 I4 178 23 10 00 133 20 6 t2 97 L4 13 78 t4 I 02 40 6 0 08 19 6 J 10 T4 4 4 11 I2 3 I 06 10 i 0 15 8 4 ? 05 3 I 1~~

~~Subunit total L,765 274 102~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~4t7 Table 13. GMS 19A Minor Tributary Human Use Data Ordered by Number 9f Hunter-Days, Regul.rtory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hu nte r- Number of Su ccess fu I Tri bura ry Days Hu nters Hunters~~

~~01 4?7 52 23 03 353 48 13 00 331 44 18 09 313 45 ?9 04 303 53 34 t2 159 23 19 14 i45 16 8 06 96 9 6 i3 96 T2 7 11 67 9 B 02 45 8 5 1 10 37 5 15 36 5 4 05 9 2 n 07 6 1 I 08 5 4 4~~

~~Subunit total 2,429 338 184~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~418 Table 14. GMS 198 Minor Tributary_Human Use Data Ordered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of 14i nor Hunter- Number of Successful Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~i1 385 53 28 14 ?85 40 18 00 213 33 15 13 155 2L 9 I2 t29 15 I2 03 TT2 8 04 60 7 2 02 44 8 8 10 34 6 5 05 32 3 3 06 15 i 1 07 7 1 1 09 6 2 2 08 5 2 2~~

~~ri Subun t rota I 1,492 200 113~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~419 Table 15. GMS 198 Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su cces sfu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~1i 476 65 28 I4 421 58 34 13 355 45 18 00 200 33 2T 12 lB0 20 13 0i 66 8 5 07 40 5 5 04 38 9 6 UI 32 6 5 OB 32 3 2 06 25 2 2 03 L7 4 4 05 15 4 4 I 1 09 10 I~~

~~10 10 2 ?.~~

~~Subunit total r,9r7 265 150~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~420 Table 16. GMS 19C Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rctered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su cces s fu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hu nters~~

~~05 239 37 25 03 70 i1 9 11 69 T2 i0 i3 68 10 7 14 64 9 6 06 61 11 8 10 42 9 8 02 41 6 6 OB 34 5 ( 01 31 4 2 00 30 E 4 12 28 5 5 04 2I 4 4 09 20 3 0 07 11 3 3 16 10 I~~

~~Subunit total 839 135 101~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~421 Table 17. CMS 19C Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of fiunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Successfu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunte rs~~

~~05 259 42 30 00 150 ?3 7 11 143 23 I2 I4 113 I2 7 UJ 86 13 7 01 61 10 5 06 49 6 4 13 34 7 3 a2 31 4 J 09 31 4 0 04 28 6 tr 07 27 6 4 l2 26 5 J 08 10 3 I 10 B 2 2 16 5 2 2~~

~~Subunit total 1 ,061 168 95~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~422 Table 18. GMS 19D Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su ccessfu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~05 7lL 99 48 10 155 26 10 11 148 14 7 2T 133 17 14 01 96 11 8 02 84 6 E 00 58 11 7 22 53 5 2 04 49 5 5 07 44 2 2 06 35 4 3 16 30 2 I T2 25 4 20 17 2 1 03 8 2 2 L7 3 1 i 1 18 3 1 I~~

~~Subunit total 1,652 212 t17~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~423 Table 19. GMS 19D Minor Tributary Hunran Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regu'latclry Year 1984-85~~

~~Number trf Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su cces sfu I Tri buta ry Days Hunte rs Hunters~~

~~05 721 100 52 10 234 35 23 2I 141 2I 18 01 140 1B 10 11 131 18 9 q I2 85 9 02 50 B 3 04 43 5 3 16 37 10 B 00 22 3 2 22 20 1 LI I4 1 Subunit total i,638 229 133~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~Table 20. Hunters Who Reported Hunting in GMU 19 but Did Not Specify Subunit, Regulatory Years i983-84 and 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Regu I atory Hunter- Number of Successfu I Yea r Days Hunte rs Hunters~~

~~1983-84 145 24 1984-85 207 26~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984, 1985.~~

~~424 Table 21. Gl'lU 20A Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regu'latorY Years 1979-80 through 1984-85~~

~~Regu I atory Number of Reported Yea r Hunters Ha rvest~~

~~1979-80* 136 88 1980-81 423 138 i98 1 -82 706 200 1982-83 810 238 1983-84 1,087 282 i984-85 1,208 391~~

~~Source: Jennings 1980, 1981, 1983a, 1984a' 1985a; ADF&G 1985. * Reminder letters were not sent to nonreporting harvest-ticket hol ders.~~

~~Table 22. GMS 20A Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su cces sfu I Tri bu ta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~05 3,207 591 r42 04 1 ,151 198 43 00 634 99 11 06 550 74 34 02 163 23 11 08 153 29 16 03 88 16 9 07 76 2I T? 01 66 i6 4 Subunit total 6,088 r,067 282~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~425 Table 23. GlqS 20A Minor Tributary Human Use Data Ordered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of M'inor Hunter- Number of Successful Tri butary Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~05 2,635 453 r28 01 r,582 244 82 02 886 r42 48 04 847 153 67 06 369 53 23 00 366 57 7? OB 25L 48 19 03 229 38 5 07 122 ?0 7~~

~~Subunir total 7 ,287 1,208 391~~

~~Source: ADF&G i985.~~

~~Table 24. GMS 208 Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1979-80 through 1984-85~~

~~Regul at0ry Number of Reported Yea r Hu nte rs Ha rvest~~

~~1979-80* 356 6q 1980-81 66s 86 1981-82 1,050 154 L9B2-83 r,4?0 158 i 983-84 2,067 329 1984-85 2,25.8 332~~

~~Source: Haggstrom 1980a; Crdin and Haggstrom 1981a, 1983a, 1984a, 1985ai ADF&G 1985.~~

* Reminder letters were not sent to nonreporting harvest-ticket holders.

~~426 Table 25. GMS 208 Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regu'latory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su ccessfu I Tri buta ry Days Hu nte rs Hunters~~

~~04 4,716 885 r26 02 2,6L5 515 100 06 1,604 295 68 05 788 154 2 00 474 106 16 01 364 67 20 03 249 44 3~~

~~Subunit rotal 10,810 2,066 335~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~Table 26. GMS 208 Minor Tributary Human Use Data Ordered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regul atory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Successfu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~04 5,740 919 I12 02 2,922 593 116 06 I ,958 317 58 05 1,048 177 18 00 47s 106 4 01 389 75 72 03 338 7t I2~~

~~Subunit total 12,870 2,259 332~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~427 Table 27. GMS 20C Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1979-80 through 1984-85~~

~~Regulatory Number of Reported Yea r Hu nte rs Ha rvest~~

~~1979-80* 334 143 I 980-8 1 947 247 1981-82 800 174 1982-83 53i 108 1 983-84 655 217 1984-85 300 110 lgytq.r-_Haggstrom 1980b; crain and Haggstrom 1981b, 1983b, 1984b, 19gsb; ADF&G 1985.~~

* Reminder letters were not sent to nonreporting harvest-ticket holders.

~~Table 28. GMS 20C l'linor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-[Jays, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of l,1i nor Hunter- Number of Successful Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~06 L,757 301 100 08 888 r62 48 05 487 88 43 00 248 50 5 01 98 19 9 07 84 l7 6 03 66 10 1 04 27 8 5 0't 8 2 0~~

~~Subunit total 3,663 657 217~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~428 Table 29. GMS 20C Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0roered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of I'li nor Hunter- Number of Successful Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~06 698 12T 42 05 602 110 53 00 161 27 2 01 140 26 9 04 46 9 ?~~

~~03 37 7 I~~

~~Subunir total 1,684 300 110~~

~~Source: April 1985.~~

~~Table 30. GMS 20D Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1979-80 through 1984-85~~

~~Regul atory Number of Reported Yea r Hunters Ha rvest~~

~~1979-80* 19 1980-81 ?!u_ 37 1981-82 102 1982-83 120 1983-84 542 i05 1984-85 635 104~~

~~Source: Larson 1980; Johnson 1981, 1983, 1984, 1985; ADF&G 1985.~~

~~means no data were available. * Reminder letters were not sent to nonreporting harvest-ticket holders.~~

~~429 Table 31. GMS 20D Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regularory Year 1983-84~~

~~Nurnber of Number of lqi nor Hunter- Number of Successfu l Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~03 773 111 18 09 469 115 15 0i 359 93 2L 02 23? 46 5 11 148 40 8 05 I17 18 7 10 i15 38 10 I4 110 24 9 00 101 ?3 1 I2 50 t3 2 04 31 6 1 08 31 5 2 13 23 6 2 15 20 4 2 06 18 5 3 07 15 1 1~~

~~Subunit total ?,612 548 107~~

~~Source: ADF&G i984.~~

~~430 {h-.-.* Table 32. GMS 200 Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hu nte r- Number of Su ccess fu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~03 882 IT7 23 09 534 129 T7 01 490 108 10 02 275 57 6 14 261 42 9 l0 244 65 74 05 108 16 3 00 99 20 1 11 B9 30 4 04 73 l4 2 06 45 11 6 08 45 8 3 i2 44 L2 5 13 30 3 0 n 07 16 I U 15 8 2 1~~

~~Subunit total 3,243 635 104~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~Table 33. GMS 20E Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1982-83 through 1984-85~~

~~Regul atory Number of Reported Yea r Hunters Ha rvest~~

~~1982-83 1i3 19 1983-84 166 ?1 1984-85 154 z9~~

~~Source: Kelleyhouse 1984b, 1985b; ADF&G 19S5.~~

~~431 Table 34. GMS 20E Mjnor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Itii nor Hunter- Number of Su cces sfu I Tri buta ry Days Hu nre rs Hunters~~

~~07 383 57 L4 02 216 36 4 04 127 16 1 00 98 15 0 06 78 i3 3 1 01 58 9 I 09 35 5 3 11 3? 5 4 'l 05 28 6 l. 08 21 3 0 1 03 I 1 n~~

~~Subunit total r,077 166 31~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~lable 35. GMS 20E Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nclr Hunter- Number of Successful Tributary Days Hunters Hu nters~~

~~07 289 52 8 02 108 18 I 04 105 16 4 09 92 16 3 06 89 18 6 00 84 13 0 11 42 6 4 08 34 7 I 03 20 2 0 01 18 3 I 05 13 3 I~~

~~Subunit rotal 894 154 29~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~432 Table 36. GMS 20F Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1979-80 through 1984-85~~

~~Regul atory Number of Reported Yea r Hunters Ha rvest~~

~~1981-82 109 27 1982-83 76 1983-84 17 111 25 1984-85 100 15~~

~~Source: Jennings 1983b, 19g4b, 1995b; ADF&G 19g5.~~

~~Table 37. GMS 20F Minor Tributary fiuman Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory year l9g3-g4~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su cces s fu I Tri bura ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~03 285 38 5 02 226 40 d 06 70 19 6 00 34 6 1 01 1B 7 4 05 5 1 I~~

~~Subunir rotal 638 r11 25~~

~~Source: ADF&G i984.~~

~~433 Table 38. Gt'{S 21A Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days , Regu'latory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of lvli nor Hunter- Number of Successfu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~03 2r4 43 5 02 707 20 0 06 96 2T 6 01 38 5 3 00 26 8 1 C5 24 2 0 Uq 2, 1 0~~

~~Subunit total 507 100 15~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~Table 39. GMS 21A Reported Moose l-iarvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1979-80 through 1984-85 xegul atory Number of Reported Yea r l'lu nte rs Ha rvest~~

~~1980-81 83 198 1 -82 104 i982-83 r02 1983-84 I;; 130 i9B4-85 190 136~~

~~Source: Haggstrom and Osborrre 198la; Osborne 1983a, 1984a; ADF&G 1984, i985.~~

~~means no data were ava'ilable.~~

~~434 Tab'le 40. GMS 21A Minor Tributary-Hunran Use Dara Ordered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory year 1983-g4~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Successful Tri bura ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~06 267 42 27 02 246 39 28 08 IB7 24 15 00 r67 26 23 01 110 18 15 09 62 7 4 05 34 6 4 07 34 7 7 04 28 4 4 11 4 8 2 L 10 7 1 0 13 5 1 i Suburrir total 1 ,149 176 130~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~435 Table 41. GMS 21A Minor Tributary Human Use Data Ordered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su ccess fu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~00 ?04 34 25 01 173 29 26 06 156 29 T4 02 148 30 25 08 100 77 16 10 91 7 ? 05 87 I4 6 07 68 11 ., 9 04 56 7 l2 52 7 1 09 I4 1 0 11 13 2 2 13 7 1 1 03 5 1 I~~

~~Subunit total 1,184 190 136~~

~~Source: ADF&G i985.~~

~~Table 42. Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for the Nowitna drainage in GMS 278 for Regulatory Years 1979-80 through 1984,85~~

~~Regul atory Number of Reported GMS 218 Yea r Hunters Ha rvest Ha rvest~~

~~1979-80 201 61 1980-81 81 4T ::: 1981-82 55 73 1982-83 :: 36 7T 1983-84 45 77 1984-85 96~~

~~!9!f..:_ Haggstronr and Osborne 1981b; 0sborne 1983b, 1984b, 1985a; ADF&G 19B4,1985.~~

~~means no dara b/ere avai I abl e.~~

~~436 Table 43. GMS 218 Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of l'li nor Hunter- Number of Successfu I Tri butary Days Hunters Hunte rs~~

~~04 536 59 44 01 151 33 16 05 L02 16 l2 00 68 11 1 03 15 4 2 07 13 2 2 02 6 1 0~~

~~Subunit total 891 r26 77~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~Table 44. GMS 218 Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunrer-Days, Regulatory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su cces sfu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunte rs~~

~~04 584 7T 45 01 180 37 24 05 136 20 i3 00 LL7 11 J 09 100 L7 6 07 47 4 0 03 38 4 J 02 14 3 2~~

~~Subunir rotal L,2L6 r67 96~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~437 Table 45. Gt'4S ZlC Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1980-81 rhrough 1984-85~~

~~Regul atory Number of Reported Yea r Hu nte rs Ha rvest~~

~~1980-8i 21 1981-82 32 23 1 982 -83 25 17 1983-84 32 15 1 984-Bs 30 18~~

~~Source: Osborne 1981a; ADF&G 1981, 7982, 1983, 1984, 1985. means no data were available.~~

~~Table 46. GMS 21C Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of 14i nor Hunter- Number of Successful Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~0i 114 23 T2 00 28 3 0 02 28 6 3~~

~~Subunir total 170 32 15~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~438 Table 47. GMS 21C Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of l'1i nor Hunter- Number of Successfu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hu nters~~

~~01 116 26 77 00 25 2 0 02 T7 2 I~~

~~Subunir total 158 30 18~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~Table 48. GMS 21D Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1980-81 through 1984-85~~

~~Regul atory Number of Reported Yea r Hu nte rs Ha rvesi~~

~~1980-81 r07 i98 1 -82 ;i t74 1982-83 229 181 1983-84 287 186 i984-85 354 242~~

~~Source: Osborne 1981b; ADF&G L982,1983, 1984, 1985.~~

~~means no data were available.~~

~~439 Table 49. GMS 21D Minor Tributary Human Use Data Ordered by Nunrber of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Numben of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Successfu l Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~03 309 86 53 08 190 55 49 I2 t12 I2 11 01 100 33 20 06 91 26 1B i1 88 19 T7 00 68 3? 0 04 23 I4 L2 05 23 5 4 07 9 3 0 i0 1 1 02 -_1 I 1~~

~~Subunit total 1,014 ?87 186~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984. --- means no data were available.~~

~~440 Table 50. Gl'lS 21D Minor Tributary Human Use Data Ordered by Number of Hunter-llays, Regulatory Year l9B4-85~~

~~Number of Number of I'ii nor Hunter- Number clf Su cces s fu I Tri buta ry Days Hunte rs Hunters~~

~~08 513 r07 99 03 307 64 48 06 156 29 16 01 115 29 20 11 110 24 13 i2 88 l6 T4 00 7L 52 i 04 62 I4 T2 05 L7 4 4 i3 13 13 02 2 2~~

~~Subunit total 1 ,451 354 242~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~--- means no data were available.~~

~~Table 51. GMS 21E Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1980-8i through 1984-85~~

~~Regu'f atory Number of Reported Yea r Hu nte rs Ha rvest~~

~~1980-81 95 1981 -82 102 76 1 982 -83 r02 67 i983-84 7?5 95 1984-85 160 i33~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1981, L982, 1983, 1984, 1985. means no data were available.~~

~~44r Table 52. Gl,lS ?lE Minor Tributary Human Use Data Ordered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regul atory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Successfu I Tri buia ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~02 272 65 51 05 188 30 2I 03 5? 10 7 00 35 9 I 08 15 5 3 04 i3 3 1 09 t0 3 ?~~

~~Subunit total 585 125 95~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~Table 53. GMS ziE Minor Tributary Human Use Data Ordered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regul aEory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Successful Tri bu ta ry Days Hunters Hunte rs~~

~~02 323 63 57 05 190 51 47 09 68 11 8 00 55 11 5 03 55 15 10 08 25 5 J 04 1l 2 i 07 3 1 I 1 06 2 I I~~

~~Subunit total 732 160 133~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~442 Table 54. GMU 24 Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1980-81 through 1984-85~~

~~Regu 1 atory Number of Reported Year Hunters Ha rvest~~

~~1980-81 158 105 198 1 -82 180 110 1982-83 792 105 1983 -84 199 LL2 1984-85 23? r22~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1981, L982, 1983, 1984, 1985.~~

~~Table 55. GMU 24 Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regu'l atory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Successful Tri buta ry Days Hunte rs Hunters~~

~~11 309 37 18 i5 222 33 T4 07 131 19 9 09 125 19 15 01 105 26 22 08 104 24 10 T2 74 I4 7 00 42 8 0 05 20 4 4 03 13 3 3 02 11 4 4 1 10 9 1 I 13 9 3 2 06 7 1 0 04 2 2 2 T4 2 1 1~~

~~Subunit total 1 ,185 199 LI2~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~443 Table 56. GMU 24 Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regul atory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Succes s fu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunte rs~~

~~11 361 52 29 15 203 35 I7 01 143 40 2B I2 134 18 7,, 07 t2r 23 6 08 l0? 18 1i 00 100 T2 3 q 13 86 13 09 38 9 I 05 ?8 J J 03 18 4 4 I4 9 ? 1 06 7 1 0 02 3 1 0~~

~~Subunit total 1 ,353 232 r22~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~Table 57. GMS 25A Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1980-81 through 1984-85~~

~~Regul atory Number of Reported Year Hu nters Harvest~~

~~1980-81 4I 16 198 1 -82 53 24 1982-83 26 10 1983-84 5J 33 1984-85 51 34~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985.~~

~~444 Table 58. GMS 258 Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1980-81 through 1984-85~~

~~Regu i aiory Number of Reported Yea r Hunters Ha rvest~~

~~1980-81 19 9 i981 -82 73 ?o 1982-83 39 25 i983-84 76 34 r984-85 87 39~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985.~~

~~Table 59. GMS 25C Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1980-81 through 1984-85~~

~~Regu ) ato ry Number of Reported Yea r Hu nters Ha rvest~~

~~1980-81 47 35 i98 1 -82 63 a+ 1982-83 t27 23 1983-84 I28 26 1984-85 100 25~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985.~~

~~Table 60. GMS 25D Reported Moose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regulatory Years 1980-81 through 1984-85~~

~~Regu I aro ry Number of Reported Yea r Hu nte rs Ha rves t~~

~~1 980-8 1 9 4 1981 -82 53 19 1982-83 50 16 1983-84 Izl 40 i 984-85 134 4T~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985.~~

~~445 Table 61. GMU 25 Reportect lrloose Harvest and Hunter Data for Regu'latory Years 1980-81 through 1984-85~~

Regu i at0ry Number of Reported Yea r Hunters* Ha rves t*

~~i 980-8 1 r47 74 i981 -82 301 114 I 982 -83 319 118 1 983 -84 389 137 1984-85 377 140~~

~~99!f..: Haggstrom and Nowlin 1981; Nowlin 1983; Nowlin 1984; ADF&G 1994, 1985. * Includes hunters and harvest who reported hunting in GMU 25 but who did riot specify which subunit they hunted.~~

~~Table 62. GMS 25A Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regularory Year 1983-84~~

~~Numtrer of Number of l,li nur Hunter- Number of Succes s fu I Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~I4 148 22 l1 00 r22 3 2 07 99 2 1 10 96 8 13 74 8 7 04 33 4 2 03 20 4 4 06 5 I 1 I 11 4 1 0~~

~~Subunir rotal 601 53 33~~

~~Source: ADF&G i984.~~

~~446 Table 63. GMS 25A Minor Tributary Human Use Data Ordered by Number uf Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Successfu I Tri buta ry Days Hun ce rs Hun ters~~

~~T4 108 13 6 13 7T 9 8 00 60 8 5 03 32 5 J 10 30 6 6 04 24 6 4 ()2 l2 t1 0 0i 5 1 r1 tq 3 I 2~~

~~Subunir total 345 51 34~~

~~Source: ADF&G i985.~~

~~Table 64. GMS 258 Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regu'latory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of liumber of fvl'inor Hunter- l{umber of Su cces sfu I Tri buta ry Days Hu nte rs Hunters~~

~~07 201 28 13 00 TT2 19 2 08 36 7 5 02 29 7 01 19 ? 2 04 18 3 1 05 i0 5 4 06 9 2 0 03 6 2 2~~

~~Subunit Eotal 440 76 34~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~417 Table 65. GMS Z5B Minor Tributary Hunran Use Data Ordered by Nunrber of Hunter-Days, Regul atory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su ccessfu I Tri bura ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~00 230 25 5 07 t94 z3 13 08 39 7 t1 02 37 10 1 Ui 28 6 3 06 2I 4 ? 05 L4 J 0 a4 13 6 5 03 tz 3 2~~

~~Subuni t total 588 87 39~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~Table 66. GMS 25C Minor Tributary Human Use Data Ordered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Successf u'l Tri buta ry Days Hunters Hunters~~

~~04 302 44 t2 05 175 27 2 02 141 32 7 1 01 83 5 I 00 64 72 I 06 37 6 i 03 5 2 2~~

~~Subuni t total 807 r28 26~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984.~~

~~448 Table 67. GMS 25C Minor Tributary Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunrer-Days, Regul atory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Su cce s sfu I Tri buta ry Days Hunte rs Hu nte rs~~

~~04 141 31 10 02 140 29 T2 05 88 23 1 o 00 32 2 01 27 4 n 06 15 J 0 03 5 2 n~~

~~Suburrit total 448 100 25~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~Table 68. GMS 25D Minor Tributary Hunran Use Data Ordered by Number of Hunter-Days, Regulatory Year 1983-84~~

~~Number of Number of Mi nor Hunter- Number of Successful Tri buta ry Days Hu nte rs Hu nters~~

~~00 359 44 4 01 160 25 11 11 98 19 16 61 10 6 09 46 B 4 15 32 7 4 06 20 J 3 I4 t? 2 n 04 10 1 02 2 1 1~~

~~Subunir total 800 127 40~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~449 Table 69. GMS 25D Minor Tri but,a ry Human Use Data 0rdered by Number of Hunter'Days, Regul atory Year 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of 'lril'l'i no r Hunter- Number of Successfu I buta ry Days Hunters Hu nters~~

~~01 32i 54 16 09 116 22 7 i1 76 15 7 i5 52 L2 ,| 06 37 3 00 34 7 i I4 I7 6 2 07 I4 5 1 16 13 2 0 02 9 J ,| 10 9 3 1 1 08 4 l. 0 a T2 J 1 I~~

~~Subunit rotal 705 134 +t~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1985.~~

~~Table 70. Hunters Who Reported Hunting in GMU 25 but Who Did Not Specify the Subunir, Regulatory Years i983-84 and 1984-85~~

~~Number of Number of Regulatory Hunter- Number of Su cces s fu I Yea r Days Hu nte rs Hunters~~

~~1983-84 49 11 1984-85 38 5~~

~~Source: ADF&G 1984, 1985.~~

~~450 REFERENCES ADF&G. 1977. The status of wildlife in Alaska. Reprinted from the draft Alaska wildlife management p1ans. Juneau. 628 pp.~~

~~. 1981. Statewide big game harvest data - computer output. lvloose harvest-ticket reports.~~

~~1982. Statewide big game harvest data - computer output. Moose harvest-ticket reports.~~

~~. 1983.. Statewide big game harvest data - computer outprit. Moose ---na rvest-ti cker reports.~~

*--liarvest-ticket. 1984.. Statewide big-reports. game harvest data - computer output. Moose arrd permi t

~~. 1985. Statewide big game harvesr data - computer output. lrloose and permit reporrs. --Tarvest-ticket Bos, G. 1980. [Flemo ro R.J. somerville, Director, Djv. Game, ADF&G, Juneau. ]~~

Burris, 0.E. 1981. Unit 19 moose survey-invenrory progress report. Pages 124-126 in R. A. Hinman, €d. Annual report bf survey-inventory activities. Part II: caribou, moose and mountain goats. vol. l?-, ADF&G, Fed. Aid in l.lildl. Rest. pro9. rept. projs. h'/:19-1 and w-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, and L2.0.

Crain, E.B., and D.A. Haggstrom. 1961a. Unit 20(B) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages 132-136 in R. A. Hinman, ed. Annua'l report of survey-inventory activities. pa7t II: Caribou, moose anci mounta'in gogrs. vol. r2. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in hjildl. Rest. prog. rept. projs. W-19-1 and W-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, and 12.0.

. 1981b. Unit 20(C) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in R. A. l-tinman, ed. Annual report 6t survey-invent6ry activities. Part II: Caribou, moose and mountain goats. Vol. I2-. -m-141ADF&G, Fed. Aid in wildl. Rest. prog. rept. projs. w:19-1 and w-19-2, Jobs 3.0 , 1.0 , and 12.0 . . 1913a. unit 20(B) moose survey-inventory progress report. ---Fges 94'97 in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual report ot'suivey-inventory activities. l[art III: Moose. vo]. 13. aorag, Fed. Aio in wi ldl: Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-1, Job 1.0.

. 1983b. _ Vnit _20(C) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages --3'8:100 in J,A. Barnett, €d. Annual report ,it survby-invent6ry acriviri6-. Part III: t'ioose. vol . 13. Aorae, Fed. Aid in t.lild'|. Rest. prog . rept. Proj . W-22-L, .lob 1 .0.

~~451 . 1984a._ -Unit 20(B) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages~~

activitr-es. Part IV: Moose. vol . 14. norae , Fed. Aid' in t,{i ldl . Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0. -88-91inJ.A.Barnett,ed.Anrrua1report.irsurvby-invent6ry . 1984b. Unit 20(C) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages -----T95 in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual repdrd ,ir survby-invent6ry activitr-es. Parr IV: Moose. vol. 14. Aorag, Fed. Aio in l,'|i ldl: Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

. i985a. Unit 20(B) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ----fg0 in A. Seward, €d.- Annual report of survey-iiventory activities. Part vTiI: l'loose. vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid- in l'/j ldl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-3, Job 1.0.

. 1985b. Unit 20(C) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ----fg3 in A. Seward, ed. Annual repclrt of survey-iivenrory activities. Part VTII: lloose. vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid- in wjldl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-?2-3, Job 1.0. Dinrreford, B. 1960. Unit 18 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages 73-75 jn R. A. Hinnran, Bd. Annual report of survey-inventory activjties. Tart II: Deer, el k, and moose. Vol. 11. AOfag, Fed. Aid in l.lildl. Resr. prog. rept. Proj W-17-12, Jobs 2.0,13.0,1.0, and 22.0.

Haggstrom, D. 1980a. Unit 20(B) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages 84-86 in R. A. Hinman, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activiries. TErt II: Deer, e1k, and moose. Vol. 11. AOfAg, Fed. Ajd in Wildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj W-17-12, Jobs 2.0, 13.0,1.0, and 22.0. -----3F49. 1980b. Unit 20(C) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in R. A. Hinman, €d. Annual rep6ri' dr survby-invenr;ry activitlEs. Part II: Deer, elk, and moose. Vol. 11. ADF&-G, Fed. 41d in l./ildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj W-L7-L2, Jobs 2.0, 13.0, 1.0, and 22.0.

Haggstrom, D.A., and T.0. 0sborne. 1981a. Unit 2I(A) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages 146-149 in R. A. Hinman, Bd. Annual report of survey-inventory actjvities. ParT-II: Caribou, moose and mountain goats. Vol .12. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in hl'ildl . Rest. prog. rept. Projs. W-19-1 and W-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, and 12.0.

. 1981b. Unit 21(B) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in R. A. Hinman, Bd. Annual repbrt or survey-invenr6ry activities. Part II: Caribou, moose and mountain goats. Vol. L2-, -T50-tsrADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. prog.rept. Projs. l'/-19-1 and W-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, and 12.A.

452 Haggstrom, D.4., and R.A. Nowlin. i981. Unit 25 nroose survey-inventory progress report. Pages 773-178 in R. A. Hinman, Bd. Annual report oi survey-inventory activities. part II: Caribou, n'ic.lose and mountain goats. vol. L2. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in wildl. Rest. prog. rept. projs. W-19-1 and W-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, and L2.0. Jennings, L.B. 1980. Unjt 20(A) nroose survey-inventory progress report. Pages 80-83 in R. A. Hinman, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Ert II: Deer, elk, and moose. vol . 11. Aorag, Feo-. Aid in Wildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj W-17-12, Jobs 2.0,13.0,1.0, and 22.0.

. 1981. Unit 20(A) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in R. A. ilinman, €d. Annual re[ort or survey-invent6ry activitief Part II: Caribou, moose and mountain goats. Vol. 12-. -ffi'-tgtADF&G, Fed. Aid in wildl. Rest. pro9. rept. projs. I.l:19-i and t.J-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, and 12.0.

.1983a. Unit 20(A) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ----90:g3 in J.A. Barnett, od. Annual repbrt I't survey-invent5ry activitiEs. Part III: Moose. Vol . 13. Aorae, Fed. Aio in hli ldl: Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-I, Job 1.0.

. 1983b. Unit ?0(F) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual report or survey-invent6ry acrivities. Part IIi: l'loose. vol. 13. Aorao, Fed. Aid in t,li ldl . -Tl-o-tttRest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-I, ic,,b 1.0.

. 1984a. Unit 20(A) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ---EFg7 in J.A. Barneit, €d. Annual repdrd tir survby-invent6ry acrivitTes. Part iv: Moose. vol. 14. Aorae, Fed. Aid- in t.lildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

. 1984b. Unit lO(F) moose survey-inventory progress repcrrt. Pages in_ J.A. Barnitt, ed. Annual rep-ort or survey-invent6ry activirieil Part IV: Moose. Vol . 14. nbfag, Fed. Aid in !\i.ildl: -105-tooRest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

. 1985a. Unit 20(A) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages --885 in A. Seward, Bd.. Annual report of suriey-iiventory activ'ities. Part vTiI: Moose. vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in l^Ji ldl . Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-3, Job 1.0.

. 1985b. Unit 20(F) nroose survey-'inventory progress report. Pages in A. sewirit, €d. Annual repcrt''ADF&G, c,i survby-invent5ry activities. Part vIII: Moose. Vol. 15. Fed. Aid- in wildl-. -102-togRest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-3, Job 1.0. Johnson, D.M. 1981. Unit 20(D) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages I42-L43 in R. A. Hinman, €d. Annual report of survey-irrventory

~~453 activjties. Part II: Caribou, moose and mountain goats. Vol . I2. ADF&G, Fed. Ajd in wildl. Resr. prog.rept. projs. hJ-19-i and t.l-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, and L2.0.~~

. 1983. Vntt 2_0(D) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages i4 J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual refort i,r survey-invent6ry act'ivit'ies. Part iII: Moose. vol . 13. Aorae , Fed. Aid in hJildl-. -IOT-to0Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-I, Job 1.0.

. 1984. lrnit 20(D) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ----9'FtOo in .J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual repbrt 6r survey-invenr5ry activities. Part IV: Moose. vol . 14. Rbrag, Fed. Aid- in t,lildl: Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

. 1985. Unit 20(D) nroose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ----T?.47 in A. Seward, ed. Annual repbrt of survey-iirventory actjviti6s. Part VTTI: Moose. vol. i5. ADF&G, Fed. Aid-in t,Jjldl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-3, Job 1.0. Kelleyhouse, D.G. 1980a. Un'it 12 moose survey-irrventory progress report. Pages 48-50 in R. A. Hinman, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory dctivities. Tart II: Deer, e1k, and moose. Vol. 11. AOfae , Fed-. Aid jn |rJildl. Resr. prog. rept. Proj W-17-I2, Jobs 2.0,13.0,1.0, and 22.0.

. 1981a. Unit 12 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ----fg6 tn R. A. Hinman, €d. Annual reiort or survey-invent6ry act'ivjtJEs. Part II: Caribou, moose and mountain goats. Vo'l . I2'. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Resr. prog.rept. Projs. t,i-i9-1 and W-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, ano 12.0.

. 1983a. Unit 12 ntoose survey-irrventory progress report. Pages --f+8 in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual reior^t c,r survey-invent6ry activiti-es. Part III: Moose. Vol. 13. AOfae, Fed. Aio in l,Jildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-1, Job 1.0.

. 1984a. Unit 12 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ---T9:43 in J.A. Barnett, ed. Annual re[ort or survey-invent6ry acrivitTes. Parr IV: Moose. Vol. 14. AOfaO, Fed. Aid- in l^/.ildl: Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

. 1984b. Urrjt 20(E) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages --mT-104 in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual repbri or survby-i nvent6ry activities. Part IV: Moose. Vol. 14. AbF&G, Fed. Aid- in t,Jildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

. 1985a. Unit 12 nloose survey-inventory progress report. Pages --4t46 lIt A. Seward, €d. Annual report of su-rvey-inventory activit'ies. Part VTII: Moose. Vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid-in hrildl . Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-3, Job 1.0.

454 . 1985b. Unit 20(E) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ------98:t01 in A. Seward, ed. Annual rep-ort of survey-iiventory activiti6s. Part VITi: Moose. Vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t,li ldl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-3, Job 1.0. Larson, R.W. 1980. Unit 20(D) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages 90-91 in R. A. Hinman, ed. Annua'l report of survey-inventory acrivities. Ert iI: Deer, elk, and moose. Vol. 11. AOfAg, Fed-. Aid in Wildl. Resr. prog. rept. Proj W-I7-12, Jobs 2.0,13.0,1.0, and 22.0.

Machida, S. 1985. Personal conrnunjcation. Area Mgt. Biologist. ADF&0, Div. Game, St. Marys. . 1981. Unit 18 moose survey-inventory-Annual progress-of report. Pages ----tTt-tZS in R. A. Hinman, €d. ripo'rt survey-invent6ry activitieTl Part II: Caribou, moose and mountain goats. Vol. 12-. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. prog. rept. Projs. td-i9-1 and W-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, and I2.0.

. 1983. Unit 18 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory acti vi ties. Part III: Moose. Vol. 13. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in hlildl. -Ti=ffiRest. prog. rept. Proj . W-22-I, Jr.rb 1.0.

. 1984. Unit 18 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages --W:76 in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual relort of survey-invent6ry acrivitiEs. Part IV: Moose. Vol . 14. AOfae , Fed. Aid in h/i'ldl . Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

. 1985. Unit 18 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in A. Seward, €d. Annual report, of surviy-invenrory activiti6s. Part VTII: Moose. Vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. prog. -7T17rept. Proj. W-22-3, Job 1.0.

Nowlin, R.A. 1983. Unit 25 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages i41-146 in- J.A. Barnett, Bd. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part Iii: Moose. Vol. 13. ADF&G, Fed. AiO in l'lildl. Rest. prog . rept. Proj . W-?.7-I, Job I .0 . . 1984. Unit 25 moose survey-inventory report. Pages 139-143 in Barnett, €d. Annual report of surveylinvenrory activitjes. Part ---m.V: Moose. Vol . L4. ADF&G, Fed. Ajd in l'/ild'|. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

. 1985. Unit 25 moose survey-inventory progness report. Pages in A. Seward, ed. Annual re[ort'ADF&G, or survey-invent5ry activities. Part VIII: Moose. Vol. i5. Fed. Aid in hli ldl . -T39"-tq:Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-3, Job 1.0.

455 Osborne' T.0. 1981a. Unit ZI(C) nroose survey-inventory progress report. Page 154 in R. A. Hinman, ed. Annual report of survey-invenrory activitiesl- Part Ii: Caribou, moose and mountain goats. Vol . t2. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in wildl. Resr. prog. rept. Projs. l./-19-1 and w-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, and I2.0.

. 1981b. Unit 21(D) moose survey-irrventory progress report. Pages i4 R. A. Hinnnn, ed. Annual repbrt ,rr survey-invent6ry activities. Part II: Caribclu, moose and mountain goats. Vol. I2-. -155-ts0ADF&G, Fed. Aid in wrldl. Rest. prog.rept. Projs. l.l-19-l and t.l-19-2, Jobs 3.0, 1.0, and 12.0.

. 1983a. Unit 21(A) moose survey-inventory progre,ss report. Pages in J.A. Barnett, ed. Annual repbrt or survey-invent6ry acrivities. Part III: trloose. vol. 13. Anrae , Fed. Aio in t,Jildl. -Ti-z-tt+Resr. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-1, Job 1.0.

. 1983b. Uni t 2I(Bi n,oose survey-irrventory progress report. Pages in J.A. Barnert, €d. Annuat repbrt c,r survby-invent6ry acrivities. Part iII: Moose. vol. 13. Aorag, Fed. Aio in t,Jildl. -T15-ttzRest. prog. repr. Proj. W-22-7, Job 1.0.

. 1983c. Litrit 21 (D) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual repbri or survey-invent6ry activ'itreil Part III: Moose. Vol. 13. ROfae , Fed. AiO in t^i ildl: -T19-tz:Rest. prog. repr. Proj. W-22-I, Job 1.0.

. 1983d. Unit 24 moose survey-inventory progress report. Page 140 ---]n-;.n. Barnett, Bd. Annual report of iurvey--inventory acrivities. E-rt III: Moose. Vo1 . 13. ADF&G, Fed. Aid- in l{ildl . Rest. prog. rept. Proj. Vl-22-I, Job 1.0.

. 1984a. Unit 21(A) moose survey-inventory progress report. Page ----W in J.A. Barnett, ed. Annual report.Fed. of surriey-in-ventory'activitiei. PartJV: Moose. Vol . L4. ADF&G, Aid jn Wi'lot. Rest. prog. repr. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

. 1984b. Unit ?L(B) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual rep-ort or survby-invent6ry activities. Part IV: Moose. Vol. 14. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in l^lildl. -108--ttzResr. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

. 1984c. Unit 2l(C) moose survey-inventory progress report. Page jn J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual report.Fed. of survey-in-ventory'activjtiei. --n3Parr-TV: Moose. Vol . 14. ADF&G, Aid in WilOt. Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.

~~. 19840. Urtit 2l (D) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in i.A. Barnettn €d. Airnual rep-ori or survby-invonr6.y -Tilf-ttz~~

456 activities. Part IV: Moose. Vol . 14. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t,rji ldl . Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W'22'2, Job 1.0. . 1984e. Unit 21(E) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in J.A. Barnett, ed. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part IV: Moose. Vol. 14. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in tl/ildl. -T]$-1ZORest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22'2, Job 1.0. . 1984f. Unit 24 moose survey-irrventory progress report. Pages in J.A. Barnett, Bd. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part iV: Moose. Vol. 14. ADF&G, Fed. Aid jn tlJildl. -T36.-t:gResr. prog. rept. Proi. W-22-2, Job 1.0. . 1985a. Unit 2I(B) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages tOg i n A. Sewa rd , €d . Annua I report of su rvey-i nventory --106'-activities. Part VIII: Moose. Vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in |,rlildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proi. W'22-3, Job 1.0. . 1985b. Unit 2I (C) moose survey-inventory progress report. ----F-ages 109-110'in A. Seward, €d. Annual report of survey-!nventory aclivities. Part VIII: Moose. Vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wi ldl . Rest. prog. rept. Proi. W-22-3, Job 1.0. . 1985c. LlniL 2I (D) moose survey-inventory progress report. -----m!es 111-113 in A. Seward, ed. Annual report of survey-inventory aciivities. Part VIII: l'loose. Vol . 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t,lildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proi. W'22-3, Job 1.0. . 1985d. Unit 27 (E) moose survey-inventory progress report. 114-115 in A. Sewarcl, €d. Annual report of survey-invg1!o!J --Egesaciivities. Part VIII: Moose. Vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in W'ildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proi. W'?2-3, Job 1.0. . i985e. ltnit 24 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in A. Seward, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory -.-T36'-tgaactivities. Part VIII: lvloose. Vol. 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t,lildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proi. W-?2-3, Job 1.0. 0sburne, T.0. and R. E. Pegau. 1985. Unit 21 (A) moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages 104-105 in A. Seward, Bd. Annua'l report_ of survey-irrventory activities. Part-llll: Moose. Vol . 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proi. W-22-3, Job 1.0. Pegau, R.E. i983. Unit 19 nroose survey-inventory progress report. Pages 84-89 i n J.A. tsarnett , Bd. Annual report of survey-i nventory activit-ies. Part III: Moose. Vol . 13. ADF&G, Fed. Aid irr hji ldl . Rest. prog. rept. Proi. W'?Z-I, Job 1.0. . 1984. Unit 19 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages ----77:Ai in J.A. Barnett, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory

~~457 activities. Part IV: Moose. Vol . 14. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in Wildl . Rest. prog. rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 1.0.~~

. 1985. Unit 19 moose survey-inventory progress report. Pages in A. Seward, €d. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part VTII: Moose. Vol . 15. ADF&G, Fed. Aid 'in l^Ji ldl . Rest. prog. -7j-+2rept. Proj. W-22-3, Job 1.0. Shepherd, P.E.K. i980. Unit 19 nroose survey-inventory progress report. Pages 76-79 in R. A. H'inman, Bd. Annual rep<.rrt of survey-inventory activ'ities. Tlrt II: Deer, elk, and moose. Vol. 11. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in l,lildl. Rest. prog. rept. Proj W-i7-I2, Jobs 2.0,13.0,1.0, and 22.0. State of Alaska. 1984a. Resource management recommendariorrs for Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve and surrounding area. 26 pp. . 1984b. Resource management recommendatjons for Yukon Delta --TaElonal Wildl ife Refuge and surrounding area. 18 pp. . 1984c. Resource management recommendat'ions for Denali National --mk and Preserve and surrounding area. 20 pp. . 1984d. Resource management recommendations for Yukon-Charley ---RJ-ver National Preserve and surrounding area. 16 pp. . 1984e. Resource management recorrnendations for Gates of the ---Ttjc Nat'iorral Park and Preserve antl surrounding area. 16 pp.

~~4s8 Human Use of Furbearers Western and Interior Regions~~

I. POPULATION MANAGEMENT HISTORY A. Introduction Furbearers were an important factor i n the expl orati on ancl settlemerrt of Alaska, and they continue to be an important resource used by the people of the state. The value of Alaska's 1983-1984 furbearer harvest was estimated at $+. t mi I I ion (Me'lchior 1985a ). In add'irion to being an important source of income to trappers frorn the sale of pelts, the trappirrg industry also generates income in cclmmunities from the purchases oi snowmachines, gaso'line, traps, and so forth; is an .important source of recreation in winter, when other seasona'l jobs and activities dre Iimited; and is a highly valued "way of Iife', for some people. Moreover, nontrappers enjoy observing furbearers ond thei r tracks. Seventeen species of furbearers commonly occur in the Interior Region of Alaska. Beaver (castor canadensis), land ctter (Lutra c?ladFlsil), qlnk (laustelq Tsorf, ano muskrat (Ondonra .zlDqEnlcaJ arq the mos.t prominent species in riparian and aquatic habitats. Wolverine. (Gulo gulo), wolf (!gqrs lupus), lynx (Lynx candelsis)., coyote (q.EFs) ,. red r* &|TFF*wioe-ilariety vuties),'.nd weasel-s (M. erminea,- I.@) occur in a of habitats. - ltaEen [M. -ameT]-Gnal , red squirrers (Tamiasciuris hudsonicus ), and fly-ingEJ rrel s (Glaucomys sabri ;rusfi nEe6lT forested areas. Woodchucks (Marmota monaxfoccil.Ti-To'ess soi I s along river val leys and in ory TowTan6, and hoary nrarmots (M. cal igatg) I ive ar the bases of talus slopes. hrctic ground squirrels, or "parka" squ'ir,rels (Spermophilus parr.yii ), innaoit prima ri ly a l pi ne and suba I pi ne nani tar ITD'ffiT9iGl:- In the Western Region of Alaska, the same four aquatic furbearers listed for the Interior Region are abundant irr the flat, marshy expanses of the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta and are also present irr riparian habitats throughou_t_ the region. Arctic fox (Alopex lagopjs) is present and locally abundanr along rhe coast, an?-T6d- fox is common in both upland and lowland habitats. l4arten, weasel, lynx, red and ground squirrels, and wolverine are common gnly i.n I ocal upl and areas , and wol f and coyote are uncomrnon ( ibid. ) . l.lith increasing demands on the resource, we will need to know more about these furbearer populations and the effects of harvest on them. This report describes the human use of furbearers in the Interior and lrlestern regions of Alaska, focusing on the regulatory years from i974'1975 through 1984-1985. Information is piesented by game management unit (GMU) and subunit (GMS) (map 1).

~~459 _=.- -=-I.~~

xAoa A --- IJJ o o lO or a a\ ol +t o q ,\ t -o I Z l-". = I o +) , |o ,o li: c |o I ol rf\ (u I n I E o| , Je' h:l g o o I c"3 , I rO l; .P 9 o o,l C a rd I lo' t I or o a = J,ii o e OJ I o| c c I t (o , C a '. ,11 o {. o a o o o G ] fO ,\Yr.(i r. o 1 ot (o -:z I tt,

t l+ t\t o tt'.., _l\ or. o- 3 ..',o ro a v1 (\t \ c E \ | '-.f I o o o (u l-l ot L DNi \F ' o L I Zrl , a _l L r?l .- t C (u -n +Jg , t -o (o c \\\\\\\\-.\s.\\\ ! \\\\\\\\ (u \\\\\\\ +) \\\\\\\ \\\\\\\ vl \\\\\\\ CJ FStr\\\\\ \\\\\ = \\\\tsi\ (u +J NK\\\\S\\\-R q- \\\\\\\\\\{(N.\).\\\\\\\\\\\l\\)A\\\\\ o .\\\\\!\\\\\\\\\\\\ U1 \\\\\\\-\>r$\\\) (u 5- tlJ c o co

~~rt o- I'u =~~

~~460 B. Regional Summary of Hunting and Trapping 1. Regi~~

461 b. wester!-,Region. Although the wesrern Region covers oniy about 6% of the area of the state, it ii among the nrosi important areas for harvest of aquatic furbdarers and arctic and red foxes. For the past 8 to 1l years, from 13 to 3l% of beaver and land otter pelts sealed in Alaska were from this region; rhe average was ZO%. The annual number r.rf beaver pelts sealed has ranged from 981 to 2,502. Because many beaver pel ts are used domestically, particularly when pelt prices are low as they have been for the past few years, the actual harvest is probably at least 30% high-er than the rrunrber sealed (Machida, pers. comm. ) . For I and otter, the range has been 222 ro 686 pel ts. As many as Z5g trappers have submitted beaver pelts for sealing .in one year. f'link and muskrat pelts are not sealed, bul annual exports of pelrs from the wesrern Region from 1977-rg7g through 1983-1984 ranged from 637 to 10,013 for mink and from 533 to 31,391 for muskrat, averaging about 35% of the total statewide exports of these splcies. During the same time span, exports of pelts of the two othei furbearer species for whi ch the Western Region contributes a disproportionately large share of -the statewide haryest, arctic and red fox, r.anged from 47 tct 922 and from 28L to 2,740, respectively. 0n the average, this was about 24% of the total statewide exports of fox pe1ts. Red fox, mink, and land otter pel ts from the Wesrern Region are known for thei r c_onsistently high quality and value compared to rhose from other regions of the state. Harvest of each of the other furbearers in the ll/estern Region contributes no more than 3% t<.r sratewi de sea I i ng or export'locil f i gu res . However, some furbearers are highly valued for use qnd rydy be harvested but not seal ed or exported. Examples of these are wcll verine (for parka ruffs) , beaver (for hats), and muskrat (for eating). a. Itanagpfial authority. l^lildlife management in Alaska was formally established in 1925 when Congress creaf,ed the Alaska Game Conmrssion "to protect game animals, land furbearing animals, and birds in Alaska, and for other pulposes" (ADF&G 1976b). Prior to I9ZS, protection of wi I dl i fe had been undertaken by rhe Deparrmerrts of Treasury, Comrnerce, and Agriculture, and by the territorial governor. l,lith the attainmenr of statehood in 1959, the Alaska Legislature established by statute a Department of Fish and Game, provided for a commissioner as the principal executive officer of the departinent, and credted a Board of Fish and Game. Since sratehood, the legislature has variously added to, amended, oF repealed portions of the original state fish and game

462 statutes, reflecting the increased complexities of resource managenrent (ibid. ). In 1975, the Board of Frsheries and Game wds restruc- tured irrto two seven-member boards, one for fisheries and one for game: , . the Legi s1 ature ' has de1 egated broao regulatory authority to the Board of Game rhe Legislature has the authority to affect that delegation at any time.'ly For examp'le, seasons ano bag I imi ts , no rma 1 set by the Boa rd , cou I d legally be established by the Leg.islature The primary functions of the Board of Game in conserving and developing the game resources of rhe staf,e are the promulgation of regulations affeci.ing use of wildlife and the establishnrent and conduct of advisory comniittees In addition, the Board of Game may adopt regu'lations upon the reconmendation of the Departnrent, by the majority vote of offected local advisory committees, or by written petition by inrerested residents of an area as regards the establishment of subsistence hunting areas, the control of transportatjon nrethods and means within subsistence hunting areas, and the establishment of open and c'losed seasons and areas to protect subsistence hunting ACvisory cclmmittees have the authority to declare emergency cl osures duri ng establ i shed seasons under procedures establisheo by rhe Board (ibid.). Although the ADF&G has managerial authority over most game resources throughout the state, other agenc.ies (e.g., the I'latjonal Park Service) rnay restr.ict [ne use of resources on their land. They may not, however, implement less restrict'ive regulations than those set up by the Board of Game.

II. INTERiOR REGION (GMUS 72, 19,20,2r,24, AND 25) A. Boundaries The ared discussed here as the Interior Region includes Gl'{Us 12 and 20 (Tanana River drainage and that area drained by the Yukon Rjver upstream from and'including the Tozitna Rive.rr Crainage to and including the Hamlin Creek drainage, dnd by the tribuiaries draining into the south bank of the Yulion River upstream from and including the Charley Rjver drainage to the Alaska-Canada boundary., a1d by the drainage of Ladue and Fortymile rivers); GMU 19 (Kuskokwim River drainage upstream from a straight line between Lower Kalskag and Painriut); and GMUs 21 and 25 (Yukon River draitiage upstream from a straight line betvreen Lower Kalsaq and Paimiut, except that portion inclucted in GMU z0) (map 1): A'lthough part of GMU 19 is within the western Rbgion, rr,. furbearer data for all of GMU 19 are discussed with th; Inierior

463 Region because mtist harvest data are available by GMU and most of GMU 19 is in the Interior Regiorr. (See section III. for dara regarding the humari use of furbearers in the rest of the western Reg'ion. ) The total area of the Inrerior Region includes approximately 38% of Alaska. Ttre regional boundary has nor changed during the last 10 years; however, there was one change in the GMU bounoaries that affects the annual harvest attributed to GMUs z0 and 25. In July 1981, a boundary change between GMU 20 and 25 resul ted 'iir approximately 6,700 miz shifting fron GMU 20 to GMU 25. prior to this change, GMU 20 included the entire area draining into the south bank of the Yukon River upstream fronr and including the Tozitna River drainage. B. l4anagement Objecti ves According to the Alaska wildlife Management Plans Draft proposal (ADF&G 1976a), rhe ADF&G's primary objective for managing furbearers is to provide a sustained opportunity for commeriiai use of furbearers. secr-rndary objectives are f,o provide 1) the greatest sustained opportunity to participate in hunting and 'frapping, 2) a sustainecl opportunity for subsistence uie of furbearers, and .3) the opportunity to vjew ancl photograph furLrearers (ibid.). Policies for sr,atewide furbearer management are described jn the Alaska l'lildlife Management Plans - species l'lanagement Pol icy (ADF&G 1980). These plans present statewide furbearer nianagement policies and do not address specific regions of the state;1oca1 managemerrt problems are addressed by input to the Game Boaro via public comment, advisory committees, ano agency personnel. The following summary of the 1980 policy statement is applicable to furbearer management throughout Alaska. 1. lpecies and habitat management policies. These policies for epartment program to increase knowledge of the populat'ion status and rhe biological and ecological requi rements of furbearers, inc'luding cooperating with and making recommendations for furbearer research conducted by other biologists in Alaska; to designate and protect critical habitat areas and advocate land management policies that recognize the role of wildfire in maintaining habirat diversity; to general 1y oppose transplants of furbearers but to consider approving transplants if substantial resource or public benefit can be shown; and to implement control of furbearers only after an investigation by department personne'l has determined that a val i d need exi sts. For wc.rlves, two additional management policies exist: i) to maintajn suirable habitat for ungulates as dn adequate prey base for wolves and to manage ungulate harvests by nian by consrdering rhe requirements of both wolf and ungulate populatiorrs affected by human harvests to ensure the continued well-being of both, and 2) to manage wo'lf ano prey populations drrd to regulate human harvest when the use of

464 prey by wolves and by hunrans exceeds the capabilities of the prey population to sustar'n those uses. The wolf populations rnay lre reduced when the department and the Board of Game deternrine it to be necessary. ?. Species use rnanagement pol icies. These pol icies for manage furbearers on the Sustained yie'ld principle for the benefit of the resource and the people of the state while also considering national and international interests; to manage furbearers in most areas of the state for the optimum susrained yield of economic benefits; to provide maximunr opportunities for consumptive and nonconsumptive recreational use of furbearers; tcr encourage recreational observaition and photography of furbearers through public information and education and to issue permits for capturing, holding, importing, and exporting furbearers only if suitable habitat or holding factlities are available to the permittee and if substained benefits consistent with the department's goals and policies can be clenronstrated. The species use management policy for wolves was be'ing revised at the time of this report and was not available. Check vrith ADF&G representatives for current i nformati on. C. Management Considerati ons Issues related to the management and human use of furbearers are idenrified in the Alaska tl'ild'life Management P'lans - Species Management Policies (ibid.). Polic'ies for responding to many of these i ssues are di scussed i n the mariagement p1 arrs . The land-related problems addressed in the Species Management Policies and pertainirrg to furbearer management in the Interior Region include the loss of habitat due to fire suppressiorr, resource and human development, mining act'ivjties, and urbanization; the underharvesting of furbearer populations that have a significant economic potential not being real ized; the overharvesting of beaver and wolverjne and the potential overharvest of other furbearers; the loss of public trapping opportunity on private lands or fecleral lands with limited use status under terms of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA); the increased conflicts between trappers resulting from competition for areas (which also may result'in higher trapping intensity on these areas); high market values for some furbearers (the average pe'lt value for lynx in 1983-1984 was $312), which may increase trapping intensity; accidental trapping of dogs near populated areas, which increases publ ic antitrapping sentiment; potential transnri ssion of diseases such as rabies and Ecinococcus from furbearers to humans; damage to property and watef-TToit-iiF-to beaver activ'ity; and the damage done ro human property by red squirrels. In addjt'ion to these problems addressed in the Spec'ies Management Pol icies, concern has also been expressed about changes in habitat due to agricultural development arrd lano oisposals.

465 0ther issues to be considered with respect to human use of furbearers i ncl ude 1 ) pub'lic attitudes, 2) changes in furbearer populations, and 3) changes in furbearer harvbst and harvest i ntens i ty: 1) Differing_ pub'lic attitudes regarding furoearer management have resulted in conflicts such as those between trappeis and anritrappers (some trdppers have reported traps sdolen or intentional ly tripped gy people who oppose rrapping in general or that area) and those between people'who 'loca1il 'the want beaver 1y prorected because they varue viewing opporrunity and people who want beaver removed because oi clamage to trees or property. public artitudes toward che ADF&G's wolf predation control program also differ wide]y. 2) Furbearer popularions fluctuare in response to changes in their envirorrment, includ'ing such factors as habitat, wlather dnd snoh, conditions, availabi'lity of shelter, and availability of food. For example, lynx populations cycle at g ro 11-year intervals, parrly because lynx reproducrlon declines wheri the abundance of their primary pr€y, snowshoe hares (l-gorl americanug), declines (d'conndr igaa). understunoing this rype of relationship cdn help biologists evaluate the potential irrfluence of human use of lynx during different periods in the cyc1e. 3) Harvest levels and harvesr intens'ity fluctuate'in response ro changes in pelt prices, conditions for trapping, numbers of trappers, and the size of the furbearer population. These factors are discussed in section II.E.3. and should a'lso be considered when assessing the human use of furbearers. D. Period of Use and Bag Limits Alaska furbearer trapping seasons and bag limits have remained relatively unchanged since sratehood in i959 (ibid. ). Generally, trapping seasons are open from November rhrough-prime. February or March, coinciding wirh the months when pelts are seasons for trappi ng be_aver, muskrat , and I ancl otter extend i nto Apri 1 , May, or iune. Although the open season for harvesting muskrats extends from september or November irrto Ju.ne, most are taken during the last six weeks of the season (ibid.). There are no closed suisons for trapp'ing squirrels (red, flying, ground, or parka) or marmots in the Interior Region. There are no bag rimits'for trapping any Interior furbearer lpecies except beaver. Beaver, bag limits iange from 15 to 40 animals. A trapping license permits t6e licensee to trap or shoc,t furbearers. In addition to trapping seasons, rhere are also open hunting seasons for coyote, red fox, 1ynx, raccoon, red squirrel, wolf, and wolverjne. Hunting seasons for coyote, wolf, and wolverine are longer than the trapping seasons. 0n)y one wolverine and two coyotes, red foxes, and lynx may be taken per year with a hunting license; tliere are no bag limits for hunting- worves. wolf and wolverine are classified as both big game and furbearers; therefore, the Alaska hunting regu'lations apply if they are taken

466 ylde.r a hunting l'icense, and the Alaska trapping regulations apply if they are taken under a trapping license. The seasons or types of use can vary with land status. Four national parks and/or preserves exist within the Interior Region: the Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve in the norihern quarter of GMU 24, Denal i National Park and Preserve in the southeastern tenth of GMU 20 and in a small portion of rrorth- easf,ern GMU 19, Wrangell-Saint Elias Natiorral Park and Preserve'irr the southern half of GMU 12, and the Yukon charley Rivers National Preserve in small portions of northeastern Gl''lU 20 and southeastern GMU 25 (see map 2), Sport hunting and commercial trapping are prohibited in nat'ional parks or monument lands; however, subsistence hunting and trapping has been allowed in rhese areas since December 1980. Al I hunting and trapping have been prohibited within the olo boundaries of former l4t. McKinley National Park since its creation. One major change in furbearer seasons has occurred in the last 10 years. The 1985-1986 trapping seasons for lynx were reduced in some Interior units (GMUs 12,20,25) from a four-to-four-and-one-half-month season (November 1 through l4arch 15) to a two-or three-month season. This change was made to reduce the harvest during the low phase of the lynx population cycl e. E. Human Use Data 1. fypgs of uses. Commercial and domesric utilization are the most important uses of furbearers in much of Alaska. Most furs are sold, but some are reta'ined for domestic use in parkas, hats, mukl uks, or ds tr"im for garments. Wol f , wolverine, martelt, muskrat, and beaver are the species most used in the domestic manufacture of garments, but almost all species are used to some extent (ADF&G 1980). Most furs are senf, to commercial tanneries for processing, even furs kept for domestic use. Beaver, muskrat, grouno squirrel, and to a Itmiteo extent, lynx and red squirrel are also used as hunran or dog food. In adclition, other parts <.,f furbearers, such as beaver castor and fox urine, ar.e used for scent lures, drrrl many furbearer carcasses are used for trapping bait. The few furbearers taken by hunters are usual ly taken on an opportunistic basis jn conjunct'ion with hunts for orher species. Wolves and wolverines are generally considered trophies by hunters (jbid.). Fur trapping can be d very important source of income for nany people who need to supplement their incorne from other seasonal jobs because frequently there are very few jobs available in winter irr r.ural areas. Recreational trapping and nonconsumptive use of furbearers occur also, usually near urban areas and along roads, trails, or rivers. Viewing and photography are usua'l1y limited to those furbearers whose habits provide opportunities for observation, such as beaver, muskrat, red squirrel, arctic

467 : --, :o C: .3a :ol: ura!3 ;o. --- o f: a rO 2 ?.r "t-t * obJ CACra ,,, \ 1.-'l Hir a_ I o i|o o !-a rO - (\| tlN ffut5 g lt. o :a" :i./ OJ \ a d. l(\t'.'oz\ o a a t'-a (\l ! I co o o3 , I L =o(ra -Oaa (u ba -o +)c oc :. =o.a. (u a +J -tOL o a c 3o. I -c t\t P a: ttt-.. o'\ 3 va S \ \ z \:".4 Ul (\|\ (lJ )-\"r,rl ! o [ ['i a -,' OJ lo'i r-

~~I :rl I ! r?{ rl.-) L' a -:z , 5- t (O I o-~~

~~+) (o z c) +J (F o tn (u L~~

~~G' =~~

468 ground squirrel , and occasional ly fox or marmots. Many peclple enjoy observing furbearer tracks in the snow, even though the furbearer jtself js not often seen. 2. Estimates of harvest. Furbearer harvest data are available @s, export reports, and fur acquisitiorr reports. Sea) ing documents provide the most accurate estimate of harvest; however, the pelts of only five species of furbearers (beaver, land otter, lynx, wolf, and wolverine) are required by law to be sealed. The pelts of muskrat, marten, mink, red fox, arctic fox, squirrel, and weasel are not required to be sealed. Export records plus fur acquisition reports give the best estimates of harvest data for these I atter species. Furbearer export data from 1977-I978 through 1983-1984 were examined; however, fur acqu'isition data are not included in this report. The qua'lifications and I imitations of usirrg seal ing and export records to estimate harvest are discussed in sect'ion II.E.3. a. Beaver. Since L974-1975, 35 to 54% of the statewjde of beaver has been from the Interior Region; this region has sealed fron 2,265 to 6,762 beaver pelts -narvestannually (tan1e i). Seventy-four to 93% of the annual interior beaver harvest was from GMUs 19, 20, and 27 combined, even though only 61 to 63% of the Interior Region is in these three GMUs (taole 2). During the last 10 years, two sharp peaks in the number of Interior beaver pelts sealed have occurred, one in L976-1977 and one in 1979-1980. b. Land otter. The nutnbers of Irrterior land otf,er pelts sG-TM'TTiice 1977-i978 have not fluctuated as widely as thr.lse c.rf beaver, rangi ng only f rom 146 to 288 pel ts annual ly and accounti ng for 9 to 73"/, of the aIrruol sratewide land otter harvest (taUle 3). As with lhe beaver harvest, the Interior of,ter harvest was highest i n GMUs 19 , 20, and 2I, w'ith these three GMUs contributing 70 to 88% of the Interior''s otter harvest. The GMU ?4 tttter harvest was also relatively high during sorte years and accourrted for 19 to 20% of the Interior otter harvest in 1978-i979, 1980-1981, and 1981-1982. c. Lynx. Since L977-1978, 54 to 78% of the annual lynx harvest in Alaska has been from the Irrterior Region; the numbers of pelts sealed have ranged from 1,088 to 3,914 (taole 4). Peaks in harvest occurred 'in i981-1982 and 1982-1983. GMU 25 has consistently contributed more to the Interior lynx harvest than any other GMU; 30 tct 50% of the annual nuniber of lynx sealed in the Interior were f rom th'is GMU alone. During a peak in i982-1983, 1,564 lynx pelts fronr GMU 25 were sealed. GMUs 20 and 24 also contributed signifrcantly to the Interior lynx harvest. d. Wolf. The number of Interior wolf pelts sealed has rangeO from 319 to 626 since L974-I975 and has comprised

469 44 to 54% of the annual statewide wol f harvest (tanle 5). The h'ighest harvests occurred prior ro 1977-1978. lrr all years except 1984-1985, most of the Interior wolf pelts sealed were from GMU 20. The number of wolf pelts sealed in the other five GMUs has remajrred relative'ly consistent; the variability 'in annual Interjor harvest was due primarily f,o changes jn the GMU 20 harvest. e. hlolverine. The annual number of Interior wolverine pelsealed has ranged from 258 to 474 since L974-I975 and represents 36 to 5I% of the statewide harvest (taote6). VariabiIity in the dnnual numbers of Interior wolverine pe1 ts sealed was usual ly due prinrarily to changes in the Gl4U 20 harvest; the annual numbers of wolverine pelts sealed jn the other five GMUs were rel ati vely constant. Peak Interi or wol verj ne harvest occurred in 1976-1977 and 1982-1983. t. Other furbearers. [xport records were examined to ffivest of furbearers not required to be sealed. The numbers of muskrat and marten pelts exported from the Interior have far exceeded the numbers of exported pe1 rs from any other furbearer species (taOte 7). A dramatjc peak in muskrat pe1 t exports (rnore tharr 35,000) occurred in 1977-1978, but since then exports have ranged from 3,230 to 15,469 pelts annually. Arrnual marten pe'lt exporrs ranged f rom 8,756 to 16,029 pe1ts. Exports of mink and red fox pelts were less numerous, and their numbers also varied widely from year to year, ranging from 1,134 to 4,096 and froni 858 to 2,375, respectively. A peak in the mink, red fox, and lyrrx exports occurred i n 1981-1982. Less than 800 arctjc fox, squirrel, land otter, and weasel pelts have been exported annual ly fronr Interior Alaska sittce 1977 -1978. J. Considerations when evaluating har . Estinrates of arvest data used. Seal ing records provide the most rel iable estimates of harvest because al I pei ts from the designateci furbearers (beaver, land otter, 1ynx, wolf, and wolverine) are required to be sealed. However, several factors can influence the accuracy of estimates cf harvest based on sealing documettts, inclucling variability in adherence to seal'ing requirements in different areas, pelts not being sealed the sdtne year they were harvested, human errors in data entry, codirrg to the wrong area, and generalized statements about where the animal was harvested (e.g. , Yukorr River). Since i9B4-1985, area biologists have been respclnsible for cod'ing the cert'ificates for their dreas, and the number of nriscodings should decl'itre. Export data unoerestinrate the furbearer harvest because not al I pel ts harvested are exported, furs are not always

470 exported during the-sanre year they are harvested, and export reports are not a'lways used when they shoul d be. uhti t recently, the enforcement of this reguiation has been lax. tstimating harvest for specific areas ironr export data can be misleading because until lg84-1985 on]y the address of the trapper/shipper was recorded on the export tdg, not the location of the harvest. Fur dearers ino tra[[ers often obtain furs from areas far from their resident address. As with seal ing.in records, data entry errors can also cause inaccuracies reports of expori data. Because of these underestimations, the best estjmate of harvest for those furbearer species whose pelrs are not required to be sea'led is made by conibining information from export reports with fur deal er acgui si tion reports. T'he degree to which export data underestimate the harvest can be evaluateo by examining the proportion of sealed pelrs thar were exporred; however, only beaver, 'lynx, and iand otter have both sealing and export data ava'ilaole. For these three species, between 33 and 99% of the nurrber of pelts sealed were exported (taole g). The harvest of the furbearers not required to be sealed has been estimateo by some biologists by multiplying their export nunrbers by a correction fictor based on percentages such as those in table g. However, because the percentages of sealed pelts exported varieo among year.s and among species, these percentages can best be useo to hglp provide a range of possible- harvest levels for unsealed species, rather than to estimate what the actual harvest was. Annual and species variability in the relaticlnship between number of pelts sealecl versus exported is partly due to fluctuating market values, the incidence of domestic use for t]ngt species, and the number of trappers that adhered to sealing and export reporting requiremer,ts. variability in the number of furbearers haivestbo per GMU is expected p_aru1y. because of the wide-ranging sized of these Gf'{us (taol9 2). For instance, GMU 12 6ncompasses on]y approxinrately 4% crf the Interior Region; thus, thb proporrio-n of the Irrrerior harvest from GMU 12 is expected to be much lower rhan from the larger GMUs. Relative to the proportion of the Interior rhat each GMU represents, GItu 12'ha'd high 1ynx, wolf, and wolverine harvests; Gl4u i9 had high beavei., otter, and wolverine harvests; GMU z0 frad high beaver and ryq]r fqrvests; GMU 21 had high beaver and otter harvests; and GFius 24 and 25 had high lyni harvests. llowever, the amount of land open to trapping should also be coniidered when evaluaring these harvest statjstics. For instance, since the Alaska National Interest Lands conservation Act (Au[cR) was passed in 1980, approximately 25% of Gplu 24 has been ciosed to commercial trapping. J. i: important to remember rhat changes- in furbearer harvest levels do not necessari'ly paralle'l changes in population

471 size. Fluctuations in harvest levels may also result from changes in the dccul'acy of reporting data, changes in pelt prices, or changes in trapping conditions (i.e., weather, ice thickness, etc.). Biologists evaluating furbearer populatiorr levels must examine other information irr add'itiorr to harvest data. One source of data on furbearer popu'lation trencs is the ADF&G trapper questionnaire, which has been sent annually to selected Inrerior trappers since 1965. 4. Estinrate of number of users. The human uses of turbe.rrers e use (viewi ng , phtltograPhY) and consumptive use (hunting or trapping). Because of the generoily secretive nature of most furbearers, nonconsumptive use of furbearers is less common than tltat of other more vjsible an'ima'ls such as moose (Alces alces) and is very difficult to quantify. No estimates are available for the numbers clf nonconsumpt'ive users of the furbearer resource. The numbers of consumptive users of furbearer resource are also difficult to quantify. Data on the numbers of furbearer I seal ing documeflts trappers are avai lable from icense sales, ' and export reports. 0ver 30,000 people were licensed to trap in 1984, double the number licensed to trap in I973 (taOle 9). Trapp'ing license sales, however, frdY not accurately portray the number of people actualiy trapping in a given winter. Overestimates of trapp'ing pressure rnay occur jf IrcenSe sales are used because purchaSe of a liCense reflects the intent to trap, not the actual trapping activi ty. Because of the low ccst of trapping licenses ($f prior to 1985, $tO since 1985), Inany people bought licenses in case they hao the opportunity to harvest a furbearer. Arrnual trappi ng I i cerrse sal es can al so underestimate trappi ng_ pressure because a trapping license is valjd from the date of purchase through Septenrber of the fo1 lowing year. For example, the number of people licensed to trap during the 1983-1984 season would be the sum of licenses sold frcnl January 1983 through September 1984. In aciciit'ion, no I jcense is required of residents over 60 years of age or under 16 years of age. Ejght furbearers can also be harVested with a hunting license (see section II.D.), bttt the number of people usi ng the resource 'in thi s way i s unknown. Reg'ional informatiorr ott numbers of licensed trdppers is difficult to assess because a licensee is allowed to trap or hunt statewide. Regional information is available only by examining the seal ing records for a speci fic region and countlpg the number of trappers responsible for thar harvest. Thjs type of data-sorting by computer should be available in the neal future. Even this regiorral information, however, measures only the number of successfui trappers, not the actual number of traPPers. 5. Types of access. Snowmachines are ihe ntost commonly used ffifr--F-TFffiport for trapping or hurrting furbeal'ers '

472 although aircraft are also used extensively. Snowmachines are the standard means of w'irrter transportation in al I bush communities and provicle rapid and efficient coverage of large areas surrounding settlemellts. Snowntachines are used to mainta'in trapping lines as well as to pursue and shoot furbearers, especially red fox, wolf, and wolverirre. A'ircraft are useful for trapping in areas far from human habitation and are also used as an aid in locating and ground-shoot'ing fox, wolf, and wolverine (A0FAg 1980) 6asec on 66 relponses to a 1982-1983 ADF&G trapper questionnaire, the percentages of the distribution of trapping effort by transportation mode within the Tanana basirr were estimated as follows (ADNR 198a): Airplane/walkittg 1.5 Airplane/dog team 3.0 /ri rp1 ane/ snownrach i ne 4.5 Vehjcle/walking 6.1 Vehicle/dog team 1.5 Veh i cl e/ snowmach i ne 53 .0 Snowmach'ine only 27 .C Dt,g team only 1.5 Wal king only 1.5 The Tanana basin encompdsses about 14% of'ly the Interior Region and 'incl udes Che most popul ated ano easi access ibl e areas ; thus the proportion r.rf' trappers us'irrg vehicles would f ikely drop Oramat,jcal 1y if questionnai res were examined fronl trappers from the entire Interjor Region. Most of the Interior Region that is not included in TBAP js not accessjble bt vehjcle and i3--probably trapped primarily by snowmachine and airPlane. F. Particular Use Areas Throughout Alaska, the areas useo most jntensively fo_r furbearer harveit are areas closest to human settlements, dlong easily accessible travel routeS such as roadS, traiis, Or riverS, and wi th hi gh furbearer PoPul ations. i. GMU 12. Nearly'a11 of GMU 12 js heavily trapped, especialll' areas near rhe road systent jn the western portion of the unit (Grangaard, pers. conrm. ) . Vi rtuai 1y al I drai nages, 9re trappeO, partjcularly in the vicinity of the Northway-Tetlin flati (rcet teyhouse, pers. comm. ) l4uskrat popylations in these flats were high in 1985 and were heavily trapped. Beaver densit'ies are moderate-to-low throughout most of the unit, with areas of high densities in the eastern portion-of the Northway-Tetlin flats. Land otter populations are low and are trJpped incidentally to trapping other furbearers. llost trappens' lrap primarily for marten and lynx;_most.of the lynx harvested in'Un'it 12 are caught irr the low elevations of tire Tanana valley. L'ittle is known about wolverine

473 populations 'in the unit,, but the harvest js well distributed. Aluhough trappers set traps for foxes and wolves, very few are harvested (Grangaard, pers. comm.). Most wolves that are harvested are takerr in the southern and eastern portions of the un'it. 2. GMU 19. In GMU 19, the ntost important areas of furbearer IIiinIi-use are within 20 mi of the villages and withirr rhe drainages of the Hol itna and Hohol itna rivers (Pegau, pers. comm.). The latter drainages support productive furbearer populations and intensive trapping and yield a good harvest of many species of furbearers. Recl fox and ottet' dre relatively abundant in these areds. Other important furbearer dreds in GMU 19 include the Aniak River and the Kilbuck l4r.runtains, the south and north forks of the Kuskokwlnt R'iver, and the Takotna River,'includjng the Nixon Fork. Marten are the principal fur species tor trappers in GMU 19 ancl prov'icled more than 50% of the erttire unit's fur income in 1982-1983 (Pegau 1984). Most marten trapping occurs near ilie vi1 1ages. The upper Kuskokw'im normol 1y has 15-20 irappers who harvest more tharr 200 marten each per year. Beaver sign i s abundant i n most of the urri t; houses and dams a re especi a1 1y common i rr GMSs 19A and 19D. A1 though beaver populat'ions appear to be increasing throughout the unit, the number of beaver trappers rema'ins low (ADF&G in press). Red fox are relative'ly abundant in GMU 19, especial 1y in the flats near Nikolai and in the lower t{ol itna and Hohol itna rivers (Pegau 1984). Land otter sign i s abundant and widespread in the unit, particularly in the flats near Nrkulai and the lower Hol'itna and Aniak rivers; however, otter trapping is mostly incidental to beaver trapping. Areas of highest lynx nunrbers continue to be the upper south fork of the Kuskokwin't near the Alaska Range and the Aniak River tributaries that drain the Kilbuck I'iountains- The wol veri ne harvest i s fai r1y wel I di stritruted throughout GMU 19, but most wolverine trapping eff

474 chena Hot springs Road, spur roads and trails, the Tanana and Yukon rivers, Tanana and Minto flats, and within approximately a 20-mi radius frorn the communities. Delta Junctiorr is known for a high fox population, 'increase which may be due to the in rodent populations in agricu'rturar dreas (Melchior, pers. comnr. ). 3. GMUs 21 a[d 24. The Yukon and Koyukuk river lowrands are rhe mo;t-TmFoFFnT furbearer areas in GMUs ZI ana 24, in terms of both the most important trapping area and where the most people live (0sborner pBFS. comm. ). The Galena area of GMU 2l i s known as exceptional 1y- good marten country (Stephenson 1984). t,jirhin GMU 2l Ouiing 1983-1994, nrosi Qeavers were harvested in Gl'ls 21D, and 50% of these were from the extensive wetland drea of the Kaiyuh flats (ADF&G in press ) . Land otter i s trapped i ncidental ly tb beaver trapping in both units. Norma11y, S0% of the GMU Zl otter harvest i s f rom GMs 21E (0sborne 1984) . l"li nk are of m'inor interest to irappers in GMU 21, dnd nruskrat populations and harvest are low in most of the unit. coyotes are usually rare in rhis unit but have been r'elatively abundant cturirrg !hg_last few years. The wolf harvest in GFt0 21 is apparentl! infl uenced more by Ma rch weather condj tions than bt population size or fur prices because lS% of the wolves harvested are taken by landing and shooting when the weather is good (ADF&G in press). Lynx are abundant in the northeastern portion of GtqU ?4, but the areas of highest harvest fluctuate from the western section of the Biooks Range to the eastern section (0sborne 1984). Red fox are primarily trapped along rhe major rivers, and there continues to be.a high fox density in the southern portion of GMU 24 (ibid.). 4. lIU 25. Further upstream on the Yukon River, the porcupine RTFdrainage (esiecial ly the Black River) and, to a lesser degree, the mouth of the Christian River are among the most productive furbearer areas 'in GMU 25 (Nowlin, pers. comm.). The lynx harvest in GMU 25 is the highest of any unit jn Alaska, wirh the highest density of )ynx in the Litile B'lack River and Po.rcupine River drainages and the eastern portion of GMS 25D (ADF&G in press). In 1982-1983 and 1983-1984, more than 87% of the GMU 25 lynx harvest was from GMSs z5B and 25D. In the Yukcln Flats, marten popularions appear to be nnderate and are one of the primary furbearers trapped, and fox populations gppgar to be abundant but are not harvested very intensively (Golden, pers. comm.). Land orrer and worverinL densities are low in most of rhe unit, although in GMS ZSD 9tt9r density is probably moderate because of higher-qualiry habitat in the extensive v;etlands of the yukon- Flars. In 1983-1984, five of the seven otters harvested within GMU 25 were from GMS 258, probably because of higher trapping

475 pressure in that subunit. Most of the beaver harvested in GMU 25 are frorn GMSs 258 and 25D. wolves are abundant in most of the unit, except in the western portion of GMS 25D, where wolf densities are low. Most wolves harvested during the last few years were from GMSs 25A and 258 and the eastern portion of GMS 25D (ibid.). rrr. WESTERN REcrON (GMU 18) A. Boundaries The area discussed here as the Western Region includes GMU 18: the Yukcln and Kuskokwim rivers downstream from a straighr line between Paimiut atrci Lower Kalsag and into all streams flowing into the Bering Sea from Cape Newenham north to and including th1 Pastolik River ctrainage., also Nunivak, st. Matthew, and other adjacent islands (map 1). No nationa'l parks and/or preserves are located in GMLI 18n but the area includes the Yukon Delra National t,Jildlife Refuge (Nt./R) and a portion of the Tog'iak NWR. The total area of GMU 18 is approximately 6% of Alaska. B. Management Objectives The current Alaska t^lildlife Management Plans - Species Management Policies (ADF&G 1980) include one statewide plan for wolvds and one for all other furbearers. Because regional p'lans are not included, species arrd habjtat management policies and species use management policies for the Western Region are ident'ical to those for the Interior Region discussed in section II.B. of this narrati ve. C. Management Considerations Management considerations discussed for wolves ancl other furbearers on a statewide basis in the Alaska lrlildlife Managemenr PIans - Species Marragement Policies (ibid.) and summarizeo in section Il.C. of this narrative are applicable to the hlestern Region as well. In additicln, there are other considerations of par[icular importance in the Western Region, many of which are concerned with beavers. i. Expansion of beaver range. Since the L978-I979 season, the exffiies downriver and into tundra areas, in some cases where they have not been seen for generations, has resul ted in damming of streams from which blackfish (spp, ) are traditional 1y harvested (Jonrowe 1980, Machida 1983 ) . I I 1 egal summer and fal I shooti ng and netti ng of beaver is occurring in response to this impact of beavers on blackfish harvest. In 1981-1982 and 1982-1983, a special spring hunting season bras opened but was not used because of limjte0 access and 'interference with the spring waterfowl hunt and cormercial fishing; fall shooting of beaver continues (Machida 1983, 1984). south of the-yukon River, the beaver season trapping has been extended from November through early June and the harvest I inrit removed in an attempt to solve this problem.

476 2. Local overharvest of beavers. Whole colonies of beavers are ges, while more distant areas are not rrapped at all (Machida 1983, 1984). 3. Fur sealing. Compliance with sealing requiremenrs for pe'lts of furbearers is low, especially for those used 1oca11y, including t,,rolf, beaver, wolverine, and to a lesser degree land otter. The wolverine harvest, for example, is thought to be at least double the number sealed. Establishing fur sealers in villages without one, encouraging local fur buyers to comply with reportirrg requirements, and publicizing the importance of accurate harvest data for management purposes may improve the database on furbearer harvest (Machida 1983, 1e84 ) . 4. I'llegal aerial hunting. Reports are occasional'ly received regarding the i1'lega1 hunting of wolves and foxes from aircraft. !,lolves are uncommon in the Westerrr Region and are rarely sought by air (Machida 1985), but the aerial hunting of foxes may be an important problem (Machida 1984). 5. lrck of futlggIel_pgLqlq! jorr data. Except for beaver, which ver caches, little 'ii known aboui furbearer population status in the Western Region. If trapping intensity increases, population data may be needed for more jntensjve management. Land otter could be cencused by aircraft through observation of their distinctive tracks (Machida 1983, 1984). 6. |.lidespread natural mortal ity. Aquatic and riparian furbearers are subject to widespread, severe mortal i ty frorn events such as flooding, glaciering, and freeze-down of lakes (ADF&G i980). Trapping pressure on decirnated populations usually decreases, thus facilitating recovery. 7. Introduction of furbearers to islands. Introduction of of fur farming or trapping has had disastrous effects on indigenous wildlife (e.g., nesting birds) (ibid.). D. Period of Use and Bag Limits Trapping seasons and bag linrits have not changed substantial'ly for most furbearer species since statehood irr 1959 (ibid.). Open seasons coincide with the months when pelts are prime, generaily from November rhrough March. There are no bag limits for any furbearer other than beaver. Muskrats are usually taken riqht after breakup, in May and ear'ly June (Jonrowe 1980); the open season extends through June 10. Mink are usually trapped in November and ear'ly December, when the ice is rhick enough for travel but not too thick for trapping (Jonrowe 1980, Dinneford 1982); the mink season closes in January. As beavers have become increasingly abundant in the [^Iestern Region, bdg limits have been rai sed from 10 i n I976-1977 and have been rernoved enti rely throughout GMU 18 for 1985-1986. Beaver open seasons 'in i985-1986 run from I November through iune 10. There'is no closed season for squi rrel trapp'ing. Arcri c and red foxes , tynx , squi rre'l s ,

477 coyotes, wolves, and wolverines may be taken under general hunting regulations as wel I as under trapping regu'lations.-to Huntin! seasons general'ly begin a month or two prior trapping seasons and end at the same time. 0n1y one wolverine, two arctic or red foxes, _ two lynx , two coyotes , and fou r wol ves may be 1 aken annually with a hunting license. E. Human Use Data 1. Types o-f use. The most important use of furbearers in the western Region js commercial and domestic harvest for pelts and, for some species, meat. Mink is the most important comnrercial furbearer, consistenriy commanding high prices because of ,l_arge sile, high qual ity, and uniformity of color (Machida 1984). Al though niost iurs are sol d, many are retained for domestic use'in parkas, mukluks, or as girment trim, including pelts of specres with very high rocar varue (e.g., wolverine), pelts not in prime maikera6le condition, qnd pelrs of species for which market values are very low (e.9., arctic fox in t98Z-1983 [ioio.J;. Wolf, wolvdrine, muskrat, red and grouno squirrels, and small beaver pelts are u.sual ly used in domestic manufacture crf garments in the l,lestern Region (shepherd r974, 1976; Jonrowe 1980; r4achida 1983, 1985). In many vi11ages, pelts kept for domestic use are tanried locally (Machida, pers. comm.). Beavers are often harvested for meat as well as for pelts. Unlike in the Interior, where rrappers normal ly attempt to catch only larger, more valuable beavers, the vast majority clf beaver trappers in the wesrern Region use snares rather than making sets and attempt to take as many beavers as possible (Machida 1983' 1984). Mink and orter are used as human food in gMu tg (l'lelchior, pers. comm. ). l'luskrat, red and ground squirre'ls, and lynx are also utilized as human or dog food (ADF&G 1980). Some furbearers (e.g., wolverine, wolf, and land otter) are not irrtentionally trapped bur are usually taken incidentally to other hunting or trapping activities (Jonrowe 1980, Machida 1984). In the wesrern Region, nonconsumptive use of furbearers for viewing or phcltography is minimal. F'ishermen ancl hurrters may opportunistically observe beavers and red squi rrel s (ADF&G 1976b ) . 2. Estimates of_frqwlst. sea I i ng certi f i cates , export reporrs , ffireports itt provide data on harvest of furbearers. since 1982, the GMU 18 trapper questionnaire has also prov'ided sonre harvest information. seal ing provides rhe most accurate data, because all pelts taken are required by law to be sealed, regardless of use, but the only species whose pe'lts are sealed are beaver, land otter, lynx, wolf, and wolveri_ne. Export reports and fur acquisition reports are availab'le for the'lynx, other furbearers as well as for beaver, land otter, and but these reports do not include information from pe1 ts used domestjcal 1y. Other

478 qualifications of these estimates of harvest are discussed in sections II.E.3. and III.E.3. Harvests of furbearers from the western Region vary greatly from year to year, depending on factors both witrrin an"ct external to the region. Prices being paid for pelts in the European market influence relative trapping effort on each furbearer species as well as use of the'pelti for domestic or commercia'l purposes (shephero l9l7). The availabil ity of alternative sources of income is important, as are weaiher, snow' ancl i ce condi ti ons. The I atter determine th; difficulty of travel to ano along traplines.The and the abiliry to locate and catch furbeareis. availability o? furbearers is critical, because effort wiil not be spent on trapping unless a suffic'ient take is expected. Aquatic furbearers in particular are subject to periodic, regionwide die-offs fronr extreme weather condirions. wiiespreao flooding in rhe gprirrg of r971, for example, drastitally reduced mink populations and harvest (shepherd Lgl4), an-o lack of snow combined with unusually cold weather froz'e out and killed almost all muskrats in the late winter of 1983 (Machida 1984), drasrically decreasing harvesr. a. Eeaver. Since 1974-1975, 14 tc:-24% (averaging Z0%) of ThETtatewioe harvest of beaver has been [ak6' in the western Region. This is substarrtially greater than the area of thg state (G%) that the hlestern Region comprises. Frclm 981 to 2,502 pelts have been sealeO annual'ly (table 10). Harvest levels increased dramaticaily as pelt prices rose from LglZ-i973 to a peak j n I976-1977, accompanied by overharvest of furbearers in accessible drainages {shepherd I974, I976, I977; Ernest 1978). Then harvest levels declined ai prices dropped and the difficulty- of trapping-peak beaver i ncreased (Jonrowe IgTg , i980 ) . A secoriO i n harvest occurred in 1980-1981, coincidentally,'as was the I976-1977 peak, with maximum harvesti in the Inrerior Region. b. Land otter. The number of land otter 'pelts from the ffirn-R-egion sealed annual ly since tgil-nlg has varied threefold and accounted for 13 to 32% of the statewide harvest (taote 11). The harvest of 6g6 pe'lts in 7978-1979 is particularly noteworthy, as is tnit of 1983-1984. The pelrs dre difficult to handle but are worth the effort when pelt prices are high (Shepherd L975). Current prices (1985-1986) are low (Nachioa, perl. comm_. ) . Because I and otters a re norma I iy tr.apped incidental 1y during the fal I mink and spring beiver seasons, harvest fluctuates with the effort expended on the latter two species. c. Lynx. Ha r_vest of lynx i n the l^lestern Regi on has been consistently low since 1977-lg7B, averaging 1.8% of rhe

479 rrumber sealed stareb/ide and never exceeding 3.3% (79 pelrs in I978-1979) (taOte 12). Most pelts are sold because of high price, so the sealing records are quite accurate (Machida 1984). Lynx are intensively and easily trapped wherever concentrations occur, but in the Western Region lynx are only locally common. d. h|o1 f and wol veri ne. The numbers of wol f (tabl e 13 ) and @ t+) pelts sealed from the Western Region since I974-1975 have contributed an average of orrly 0.2 and 1.2%, respecrively, of the statewide sealing totals for those species. A maximum annual harvest of 5 wolves and 29 wolverines has been reported; typical numbers are I or 2 and 6 to 10, respectively. There has been no obvious pattern of changes in harvest over the years. Both of these species are highly valued for local use, and actual harvests are believed to be substantia'l 1y greater than seai ing records indicate (Machida 1984, 1985). e. 0ther furbearers. Harvest data for the seven furbearers ffiare not sealed are available only from export records and fur acquisitiorr reports. Data for the tlestern Region from 1977-1978 through 1983-1984 are presented in table 15. The numeric importance of m'ink and muskrat pelts to average statewide export totals, as wel I as to total numbers of pel ts of al I furbearer species exported from the Llestern Region, is obvious: 36% of statewide totals (range 9-53%) for mjnk and 32% for muskrat (range 5-55%). Peak export of mink pelts was 10,013 irr 1981-1982, the highest number since 1959-1960. An i rrcrease of $tO per pel t and ideal trapping weather were probably responsible (Dinneford L982). Muskrat exports peaked at 31,391 in 1980-1981, prior to the regiclnwide freezing-relared dieoff in 1982-1983. Exports of arctic fox and red fclx from the Western Region have contributed an average of 25 and 22%, respectively, to statewide exports, but peak numbers of pelts of arcric and red fox pelts exp<-rrted (922 in 1980-1981 and 2,71,2 in 1978-1979 for arctic and red fox, respectively) have been much lower than for mink and muskrat. lrJith the increasing market for long-haired furs, the deep red pelts characteristic of red foxes in the Western Region are highly prized in European markers and are commanding high prices, and hence high trapping effort is being devoted to these foxes. Average exports of weasel and marten are only ? to 3% of statewide e.rports and never exceedecl i,000 pel ts annual 1y for marten and 100 for weasel . No squi rrel pe1 ts have been exported from the Western Region since 1977 -1979.

480 Section II.E.3. discusses the underestimation of harvest due to the use of export rather than sealing data on a statewide basis. Comparative data for individual regions are unavailable. 3. Estimate of numbers of users. Two estimates of the number of rers in the Western Region are available. The number of trappers residing in the Wesrern Region who subnritred beaver pelts for sealing is listed for 1974-1975 through 1983-1984 in table 10. Numbers range from 258 in I976-L977 to 111 irr 1983-1984 and have declined noticeab'ly since 1980-1981. The second esrimate is that of the xotal number of trappers listerl on dealer purchase and pelt export forms who resided in the Western Region. Beaver is included in the lisr of pelts reported, but wolf and wolverine are not. Dinneford (1981) compiled the figures for the 1979-1980 season and reported 8I2 rrappers in 38 vi11ages. The number of nonconsunrptive users of furbearers in the Western Region is unknown but 1ike1y ro be very low (see section III.E.1.). For a general ctiscussion oi the limited availability of regional data on numbers of users of furbearers and for statewide estimates, see section II.E.3. and II.E.4. 4. Types of access. Snowmachines dre the primary means cf transport for trapping or hunting furbearers in the Western Region of Alaska. They are used to reach beaver colonies during winter (Shepherd 1975) and to pursue and take fox and wolverine (Shepherd 7977, 7978; Jonrowe 1980). More foxes and wolverines are taken in this way than by any other method (Shepherd 1977). Snowmachines ar-e al so useO to maintain trapl ines for other furbearer species. Exceptions are muskrat, taken by shooting from boats just after breakup, and beaver, taken during the extended open-water spring season south of the Yukon River. As in other areas of the state without road systems, oircraft are also useful for long- distance transport and for locating foxes and wulverines for ground shooting (ADF&G 1980). Very few trappers use aircraft, however. Trapper questionnaires for the Western Region have not included means of access. 5. !i stori ca1 I evel s of use. Al though rrunreri c data on nsumptive use of furbearers in the Western Region do not exist, general trends'in human use can be described. Despite increased furbearer harvests from I978-1979 through 1982-1983, the take is still substantia'l1y less than the level of 20-30 years ago. 0vertrapping is not a factorn because the only significant effects of current trapping intensity on furbearer density are in areas inrnediately adjacent to villoges (Machida 1984). Changes in the social structure of villages and decreased dependence orr trapping income are involved in the decrease in mink harvests. The peak harvest of 10,000 niink pelts during the

481 10-year period examined was far below the historic hiqh of 40,000 for the t,'lestern Region in 1953-1954 (Dinneford 1-9gi). simi lar changes are aisociated with decreased beaver harvests. Historical ly, beavers were trapped commercial 1y during winter, f,herr hunted in May and June for pelts for I oca'l use and for meat, i n sunilner f or meat , and i n. the fal I before freeze-up again for pe]ts for local use and for meat. During the last 15 years or So, the development of the conmercial fishing industry has provided cash income and occupied vi'l 1 age residents duri ng the open-water season (Burris, pers. conrn.). A resurgence of interest in trapping beavers occurred from 1973-r974 through 1976-1977, apparent)y to reinforce the concepr of a subsistence lifestyle and to reestabl'ish subsisrence use patterns (Shepherd i975), but has since decreased. As a result, beavers are abundant and are expanding their range 'inro areas where they have not been observed for generations (Jonrowe 1979). 6. considerations when evaluating harvest data. Limitations on are discussed jn section II.E.6. Two addjtional considerations apply ro rhe Western Region. First, some trappers count only larger beavers toward their limit and do not submit smaller beavers for sealing (Machida 1983). Second, when the land otter sealing program was begun, many trappers thought that an unstated limit was also'involved and did not submit all of their pelts for sealing (Jonrowe I979). Harvest data are bel'ieved to be fairly accurate for lynx and mink pe'lts jn the Western Region, where most of the pelts harvested are sold (Machida 1984). For wolf, wolverine, and beaver pe1ts, however, local use and minimal compliance with sealing and fur trade reporting regulations 'i s responsible for substant'ial underestimates of harvest (lvlachida 1984, 1995). For example, reports show that 10 wolf pelts were bought in 1979-1980, but none were sealed (Dinneford 1981). F. Particular Use Areas Throughout the Western Region, the majority of trappers utilize only the dreas immediately adjacent to vi11ages. Much of che furbearer habitat receives I ittle or no trapping pressure. Trapping of lynx is the only exception. Lynx are intensively trappeo wherever local high-density populations exist (Machida 1984). Trapping of many furbearer species occurs only in limited areas of the western Region, where the derrsity of the animals is sufficiently high. Land otrers are usually harvested from coastal drainages with high-density popu'lations, such as the Kashunuk, Black, and Johnson rivers, along Baird Inlet, and in the big lake country northwest and southwest of Nunapitchuk (Dinneford 1981, Machida 1984). Locol high-density lynx populations exjsr aiong the Kuskokwim River from Akiak upriver and along the Bogus, Tuluksak, Kweth'luk, and Kisaralik rivers (Mach'ida lg84). Beavers are trapped heavily near vi11ages. A large but relative)y

482 low-density beaver population along the Johnson River supports a lr.guy harvesr from_vi11ages on the Kuskokwim River (Machida' 1994). wolves_are general]y taken in the eastern porrion of the region, ano wolverines are harvested along the northeast, southeastl and east boundaries of the region, including the Andreafski and Ki lbuck mountains, with occasionar animal s taken on the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta. (ibid. ). Mink are harvested throughout the region, but trapping is concentrated in the same areas as for land otter. Likewise, muskrats are harvested throughout the region, Ii!h the highest take in the low-1ying-Aritic delta area between the Yukon and Kuskokwim rivers (ibid.). foxes are limited ro the coastal fringes north of the Kuskokwim River and are commonly trapped on Nunivak and Nelson islands, cape Romanzof, and rh! Yukon River delta (ibid.). Red foxes are widespread, yriih most of the harvest occurring on Nunjvak Island and iniand from 60 to 100 mi of the coast (Jonrowe r97g). Marten are taken usually where spruce stands occur, in the Kilbuck Mountains south and east of Bethel and on the north side of the yukon River above st. Mary's (Dinneford 1982). some are raken in nrink traps'(Shepherd on the tunira along lhe lower Yukon and Kuskokwim rivers rgzel: Squfrre'ls are taken.only south of the Kuskokwim'Rivdr, primariiy in the lower Kanektok River basin (Jonrowe r97g) and in itre uppe. Kwethluk drainage (Pattenr p€rs. comm.). weasels are harvestec i ncidenta'l1y thioughout the iegion (AoFa'e 19t6;i.

~~483 a ro a) 5 I sr c @ Ol O O+,.c @ \OOtr)()Or{c\.rsfrr)o I rj)stroo)cDor(orodo c O) F-{\oot€\osfr\|f) c) N o5 Or Hd(oc\t L - P |r) o\ Ol I t'-~~

~~ctl qJ & L € f-. L()O3r"{~~

484 (l) .n ct (U o L rr) ? .ul @ .o 1-) E (otrr L' (u E Ec\! Gt () a u', 5= LEg o= E r{ O- (l) .FF cqt .F .tt +) 3 .O c., (uo, (u (u !- p (.|-+)ro qr+) o -c-c ! o oo o(^ lro L F+J O. (U =si cv or o ,{ st ur E* S' = F (5 r-{ C\t NJ C! N, b-S (n l/', ,lJ'e O

~~485 Table 2. Estimated Areas of Game Management Unirs (GMU) |r{ith'in rhe Interior Region of Alaska~~

~~Estimated % ctf Interior GMU Area (mi.1a Reg i on~~

~~T2D 10,040 4~~

~~19b 38,000 t7~~

~~20b 53,8g6c 24~~

~~?I 45,200 20~~

~~24b 27 ,940 I2~~

~~25 53,61gc 23 Interior total 228,685~~

State of Alaska 59i ,004d a Areas were estimated by counting townships and fractions of townships on L:250,000-scale maps. b Portions of these GMUs are within national park or tilonument lands, which have been closed to sport hunting dnd commercial trapping but open to subsistence hunting and trapping since Dec. 1980. All hunting and trapping have been prohibited within the old boundaries of former Mt. McKinley National Park since its creation. c Prior to July 1981, GMU 20 was estimated to be 60,600 miz, and GMU 25 was estimated to be 46,905 mi2. d U.S. Census Bureau (1983).

486 o tir lr) ro @ (\t r.O C) O (lr F{ oJ or c! I (OC\JF\dd @ot It sf r{ ol co ,o Ctr Fl .o (u rf) L @ ro I N sf sr |r, o co sl c\I r\ c.) co N ,t c\t (Jr C\l Or I \ostoc!ror-r(c, €cf) r-t (\l Ol Ol C5 (t) d - oJ q, L P +J (f) tr) @ N I r.o ('r co N, co cY') (o@(o (u I ('J (o c\r (f) H r+ c\j tn r\ (D riN ro N ol (u Ol r-l d L F{ |r)C.(J @ ro Ol -Y r{c o .o (o (o (u C\J @ @ 5 I st (O cr) K) F{ O OrOOI \F F{ @ CD lf) F{ r-l io o F{ rtt L-c o\l (ot-, J E (o z. (u Elf, o tt', >.F (u L=E 4(u co O- (lJ 'F- .n .-rlJl+)3rO (u cro (u Q) LP (El (t,+) o .co L (L) O {+_t) +) O L FL o- o P|- rop *- C\|O|OF{<{-Ir)CtJ o(/.l o(uf(J F C9 d r{ i\l Nl C\J (\ be U',

487 tr) .(l- C' (o @ .r\o I NCVN(rTC\Ii\cc)cocc| ! s CO cq r\ C\l (O F{ CD N tc| 9) co (\j r{ F-{ (O c\,l (o Or L H ^r{ (o (u L r+ sf Itt @ L I Otf)OIF{glC1 1-\O@ tt) lF cf, tr)L.)\OC\Ir7)O|Hf\sf c\l @ FlCf)dsfoc\lF{ c rr) ch G' @ r-'{ C! (Y, stI = #t (u th Ol P r{ cf) +) L @ a I sfF.-r{cDoosfcoNtO o- (t, C\J (\J sf cf, (o ctr (o Nt (o co (u 5 € cJ -{ @ cf, (o |J.) co ro o Ol (lJ L H F{CDlr) tn C' t- P q) o L .P rd .(J NJ tr)c (u I 9 € |.\ I (F E |dF) c'F L z.: E E 'rP l|r (u V) J'F Q q E(u o oro E L'FE oo L $ oF 3 th .Fct (u 3.o (u o (d 0)c=0) qJ (u Lp p (u+, () S O L (l)o .r-lo +ro L F L 'F!F lJ-- O- o +J+r tP .ttlr 5C).rl G' E \lCtrC)r{<+|.()Ctn+) o(u(u F (, r{ H C\J C\t C\J (\J o-Q tt, (,r) rolJ a6 ()

~~488 O~~

~~I t\Or Ol d~~

~~Ol r-. I |l) Fr !o r.o o l-- sf cD rcl t\€ cDO=f@C>ce@toO Or Fl F{ Sf Ol d~~

~~(1' t tn O (o @ F\ sl-cD|r,t\€tr) (\.tr.oN I cf)tr)oc)i+t.r)<+ (\J S'- F{ |*\ H st- Or rF t\ Ol o g) (u~~

~~L N r.o f\ I Ch Or l*. C) € \t F\ c\,1 t.c) L (o cf) r.O ort C\l tl) rD co tI) r{ a) F\ F{ r-l F{ U) +) Or r{ d~~

~~(u +) oE (o L |*\ C\l '+- I lJ) (]sttr)st~~

~~(+- o = (u (, rf) rr) (l)@ F\ H u)1 I~~

489 CJ v, i6L lr) 1',O oo rf, L+) a . (.,i1 c rif O(>c\llr)CO(')t+@'{ r.c) c (u @ il H O sf, sl (O (') .€ o-L P E roto c E EC\J .F C c (u (J E (n=grO 5= qE (u c= o rr LIE o(5 L Lo c)r (l) 'rtO +J (u (u(u o)+)=o (u Ltr lIt =fOqJF) (J .C-C 'eL oJc ++) +)o L F+) U- O o +) +J O ,Jt lo t-, ro E= NlOtOHr+LcrC+) o=,u=o- F (t F{ d a\l C\J C! C\J a-q

~~490 tr) I~~

~~L o i\ rf) L F\ (u I r.o sf cf, c\I c\l (+ o ol +) \o oor\ocorf,€t\rr)ca N t--{ Or Ol =f F{ (u g +, e L (+-~~

~~l, F) ror\ (u I t 6- rr) (Y) C\l~~

~~= o (u (o Lf) (U t.\ (n I~~

~~E 5 z. (u ro s-3o (u to O- C) 'r(O +r x) (uoL tJ q-P.o po=.oq,+, Pp ou) (o+) z-= cvolc)F{'$111c,, F (, '-r .{ C\J \J N C\ ba U1~~

~~491 fo q, LE (J ioo L €lr) o rr) (F I C\! sr olt O Cr) f\ Or Nl O~~

~~49? 'cb(u .FP r\c)+lJ)ro@*{-cx)@ol @@cf)t-\L().{@cDc)O F{Cq\OOr@@cr)OCDr{ Cn sf C) t.o Ctl (O r-r i\ @ @ =scJo~~

(lJ L (u .l-) P L(/t o (u+) qtlrr@q+orr\@cvcoo r-\ co ro (o < Lx f\| (uA a) ,.o| (uO E c) !)tF(.. T\ +JHJ N (u OttJ+rX1Jort+)+rXq, o- r-t L Gt c o c) c- L ,{ L (c c o u cF L (u tt) (u L Ot .r'.1- 0) L (U L 0J .F'+- (l) !- !. >-Y!+'It.P (./'X.F L >J-sZrJE'#J (,/lX.F o r€ ;ttC(/rLg(-!lCrOCS O tE=A LC(J('ctC5 ro (U (U'r 5 r! O L (U (U >)O (I) O'r f rO,O !- (l) C) >Ct F

~~493 e(u 'F +) o or sf c\J to Q ()r sf o'r cf) r.o NJ r.o~~

~~O) st Ol <+ r\ Or (.o r\ F{ (g~~

~~(u tn = q Ft) roL OcOOsfOtfrLr)OOO NJ r{ F{ C\! d c'l (l) C) -{ (3 Ft Ct) sl' (\I C\| .-. oxoq Ll! (u L 6- o~~

~~c, +J Lt',) (uP~~

L 3.' |oP lr) @ (', ctr @'.o co rr) c\j o c)Ntf)or.o.+Gtsfo@ c., l- r+tJ)NtCAi'-t+(\Frd CO sl' -{ lf) N (\J r{ cto r\ r\ lft CO CO CV) O+O<-F'-. Or O o- aaa LX C') CD T\ lJ C\J O r-{ 5 lrJ r{-l e.l u- p (tJ J

+J ad vl @@ (J (u qrr (l)o!-x u oI (uoLx p (J F\ P${ @ *rq-(J t\ (u o){JIJX(uotiJlJx(u o- H L € C O Ll Ol- L F{ L O - C L) Oe L a,/', iu L .F(| (u t- L .F(r- (u s- o L >JJ+rE'+Jol .tt)<- L >J-stuE,+)cJ or utx.- u rE -,ot:r^Lc(J'tc{og5 ct (oc(nLc(Jltroc5 (o C., (u:i=rq.UL(l)(u>or U cJi-Jq€L(u(u>o: F.

~~494 (u EO F{C\lN.{O@Or@sfCf) Fl\Oct)OOt(OOOOO': (OC\JSfLf)NF\O@@.{ coootN\o<+(nsfNto =t-(l)o Or Ot r-r C\l~~

+) c a(u c) =o(u+) .pL(oo (o to cfj (o o st c) ot cf) co lr)(trC!OOr\sf(trNrr) PO- (v Ft (tt r\ ot @ cD rr ot sf, @rr)C\Jt+(\JNl@r\@lr) ./1 X cD cv cD lr, c\t cf) r(l. cr) Cr) (f) t.c, tr) Fl F{ \, St C.) (F trl o ba

~~rf)(o<+qtcD+roocf)ro cr, sf C) t'-~~

~~o ]h~~

~~tt7 F+) (oL Cn.{O\gCDrf)~~

L (U eO to+) (O t.f, lf, l\ L^o ltr r{ O lf) C\l € <+ qr Or cr, F\ ('.| \O u) (uL @ C\j tO <+ f'- c! sl' i_{ r_a rc,=f cf) cf, F{ co r\ o/) oo (\J\.oOCD "{ i+ co c\ or o cf, tc' o- na6a t-x FICY)(OO .{ H c\ 1\l tf) JUJ Lr-

1l' f g +) c (\l cf) v', @@ (J u I Lx | !x F-t 3)o o c\J oo \f, (J € +r $-() @ .u q-o t-\ (u ctt+)+)x(ucnFrrrx(u o- F{ L {o c o o o!- L F{ L ,o q o o oF L qJ o 1- o) .rq- (u L (u L ot .Fq- (u L L >-Yy+rp fJ Ut X-r f- >-Y-!z pO p tr'r X.- o Gt .tJC.A LCc,'u,O:5 (!l rOc:(r!Cc,E',ttC5 (t' (lJ (u'E J.o .o L_q-(u (u .U:t (u (tJ F >q =.O'O ! >Cr

~~495 (u E C\l!+(O~~

~~q) IJ =o(u{-t PL(50 @otorstoo@lr)oro +)a O) l\ ft- sf OO r-' @ u.) r\ sf lJ', x (\.| CD F\ tO r{ C\J r{ Cf) l.c, q- !J~~

E-e (u+, (ooq)j L+) -c sf \O F{ r.4; 6r) O O (O o.r r'- (JL @ o .{ q+ rr, (o sf |'r) co c\J c) co- .P l\<(f NNF{ € NFI o s- F CDN@ q, +r rt'EJ (tE O_ .u o (u .qJ v, oE-c (uP a .F (5+JE -+,.oL Ost(Y)LC)F{r\g ol F >- ao===J

~~496 Table 8. The Percentage of Sealed Beaver, Lynx, and Land 0tter Pelrs Exported from Alaska, 1977-78 to 1983-84~~

~~Yea r Beaver Lynx Land 0tter~~

~~1977 -78 69% 86% 79% r978-79 69% 99% 73%~~

~~1979-80 80% 67% 64%~~

~~1980-81 6t% 75% s9% i98 1 -82 7I% 76% 80%~~

~~1 982 -83 47% 57% 50%~~

~~1983-84 33% 6r% 46%~~

497 \t o- qJ ro t- FU) (uFLL o q vl FLI (uc (J co J o()=(u 'e -c S.F +, c) 9- (ugl c/) r-c (t) g o t.} u) Ct'r LFI to.F o- (u cr, NJ IJ- q- o_ o (g sf Cf) r\ sl @ qi C\l O \O o(l' e> +)+) tr)OOO(O@Cf)Ot\O@<+r.--{ L (uoJ C\lOC\jsf€o/)t+tOCOlf)Fl ]h +) +, -o (u= 6G6 L o_E c- (O lf) lf, tf) \O CO Or O Fl (\l CD (oo (u(u (no_ dddd uz, at, l) (u|u o)oo E.' c) g F r.o u .F -c o Ll- of E (u .F ro=o) >5 FL o I o5 v'> |) (u c+) +rL +- +, tn (uc c O) Q) lC:' u.n -l a sflOr\C\lNCDd(c)O(Or\ 9'e lJ >, (r\ C\l NJ ff) rr) lO r.() (O @ F\ tC l- (u oq =t (,(u -c ftt sf o Eto (uJ 9r5 IL LC 5E I J (u oct sr o rt'> L-) |.\ (F z. .v(u Cfl o 6e. +rE H o c L FIF r-l L a F (O o C{|l)(OF{dC')Ch\OOrN(O t- O 'rJ T) to 1t- \o l\ ol (tl 01 c ol o'{ cD co (uo- -9EL (u.\ ddr-lH s- 0,, Oro 1J 1A IP L (u PC (u(tJ(o qJLo () c= ctt-{cocf)t\c)c|or+(od (,-c (l) LC .(t\(u- O @ Nl '.O st |.-- l'* Fr cD C\l C) g1-)>) Gto J F{ Fl fi) O Or t-t Ct, lJ) lf) |-\ CD Q', .e tf. (J >r.o tn rJl l/t tO F{ d Fl C\t (\t C\.1 C\l C\t C! C\J 'F-od (uE Q,' L '-r ttt C dF ol- cfo o (u c:'Eo)(u c, ()+, .F ?^ C, L'o o-vr Fo, F I O-'F = p P st(ou,' 9)'r (F c OOrC)('rOrr)(gcDO .a F>. ddddrlr{r-lF{dHd f0J =<. s(u .E' att o tt(F +r -c F L) lJ', (t .F () c oP

498 ! 3) tll o p L (u 5 J (u o z. o- P CL 3 st (f) (O (O r-{ N \o sf Cf) \f '(t .o (u q,L +) CON@@r\F\@@@CO L (o o)F (g o- G' f-t LL v1 L @ (u(u (u F{ >Q- +) @ o- (J r\t.c)(gtr)NOt(.ostu)@ =(5 +) .o Nl\COOTOCF.OOA€ ()o (-) = r-a Fl F{ d ro =(5 'o J a /t' fo (l, E ttl 3- qlOCDststlf)@lt\'OtO J l| (u(o CDr\@"{@@oDcf<+ o +)(oo t) €NC\rOtN(^ocf)Or@@ +rF Hr{ oL LI an V' O'e (ut .P LO >co (u rtt Ol c) .lf (u (lJd o- (t- 'F !c c.' co ()3 Lr)OTOtr)Fltrr@cD@F\ L o'l .tt c a (u J l,l- o) o, +) €CY)or{(\r(ooF{\ocrrol IJ- O (l,5 (o F{ C\l C\l C\J \! H (\J C\l F{ Ft F{ rO C' be +) roL (u tJ, (us aJ', v1 +t PO (U.F q- ro oo Or O o'r ll) cq t\ c\J i+ tl) Fr rO C, r-) o F.\ H €lfrOO)C\J(OOOr@COO -c(J ro I CO o.) C\.| (o (\J (f lr, r\ r{ Ot rr) vtU P t$ U' ro (l)r\ =s r{ C\J r-{ (\| (\.l 'lJ 0l (.' F-l '{ r-{ -oE-l L(, 5 roo z. E'F tn ElJ rl L u)'-=tn .(J P oo- ,1' .. to F{ o- rt(Of.-€OrOr-tc\J(r,+u) vtP (o L f\f\F\@@@@O@ QU) o c., L ro ttlltttlttl (.) L (u stto\O@O)OFIC\rCDSr LE o- l.-NNr\i\r\@@@coco 5c (orF 0r o) or ot ot ot or or ct| o) ol oL F() Flr-ar-{F{F{F{F{dd# a+-

~~499 Table 11. Number of Sealed Land Otter pelts from the Western Region of Alaska (GMU 18), 1977-78 through 1984-85~~

~~%of Sta tewi de Yea r GMU i8 Statewi de Tota I~~

~~i977 -78 506 22.3 2,265 r978-79 686 3r.2 2,rgg r979-80 343 15.3 2,243 i980-81 645 26.9 2,397 1981 -82 385 20.8 1,949 I 962 -83 222 12.9 7,726 1983-84 618 31.4 1 ,969 i984-B5a 431 ?1.6 1,993~~

~~Source: Sunmary sheet irt Furbearer Program files at ADF&G, Fairbanks. a Prel iminary data.~~

~~500 Table 12. Number of Sealed Lynx Pelts from the Western Region of Alaska (GMU 18), 1977-78 through 1984-85~~

~~%of Statewi de Yea r GMU 18 Statewi de Tota I~~

~~1977 -78 56 2.8 2,0L4 1978-79 79 3.3 2,416 i979-80 66 2.4 2,737 1980-81 55 r.7 3,301 L98I-82 55 1.0 5,243 1982-83 67 1.2 5,689 1983-84 23 0.7 3,L44 1984-85 23 1.4 L,687~~

~~Strurce: Surnmary sheet dated 11/L8/85 in Furbearer Program f i les at ADF&G, Fa i rbanks . a Preliminary data.~~

~~501 Table 13. Number of Sealed Wolf Pelts from the Western Region of Alaska (Gl'fU 18) , L974-75 through 1984-85~~

~~%of Statewi de Yea r GMU 18 Statewi de Tota I~~

7974-75 4 0.3 I,232 1975-76 3 0.2 L,246 r976-77 2 0.2 1 ,115 1977 -78 2 0.2 917 r978-79 I 0.1 906 i979-80 0 0 679 i980-Bt 1 0.1 754 1981-82 1 0.1 684 1982-83 5 0.6 824 1983-84 0 0 73t 1984-85 3 0.3 1,028

~~Source: Summary sheet dated Il/I8/85 in Furbearer Program files at ADF&G, Fai rbanks.~~

~~502 Western Region of Table 14. Number of Sealed l,Jolverine Pelts fronr the Alaska (GMU 18)' L974-75 through 1984-85~~

~~%of Statewi de de Total Yea r GMU i6 Sratewi~~

805 T974-75 5 0.6 29 2.9 984 t975-76 939 6-77 1 0.1 197 909 1977 -78 10 1.1 807 r97 8-7 9 8 1.0 i5 2.0 7t6 1979-80 r.7 574 1980-8 1 10 6 1.0 631 1981-82 774 1982 -83 1i L.4 3 0.5 603 1983-84 639 1984-85d 7 1.1

~~files at Source: SummarY sheet dated LI/18/85 in Furbearer Program AtlF&G , Fa i rbanks . o Prel imi narY data.~~

~~503 Table 15. Number r.rf Raw Pel ts Exported f rom the Western Region of Alaska (GMU 18), 1977-78 rhrough 1983-84~~

~~Year 1977 -78 Western~~

~~Fur Pe rsr.rna I %of Dealer Trapper Use Statew'ide Statewi dq Species Exports Exports Exports Tota I Exporto Exporto~~

Bea ve r 993 i06 0 1,099 20.3 5,4i7 n Mi nk 4,613 49 4,662 42.3 1 1 ,030 Muskrot 6,679 229 0 6 ,908 14. 5 47 ,564 Iila rten 793 6 0 799 3.2 24,995 Land otter 429 14 0 443 24.8 L,786 Arccic fox 477 4 1 482 34.7 1,388 Red fox" 1,793 60 I 1,854 29.3 6,334 Wea se I 95 3 U 98 10.8 908 Lynx 2T 0 0 2I 1.2 I ,738 Squirrel' 0 0 C U 0 317

~~Year 1978-79~~

Bea ve r I,032 10 0 r,042 27 .r 3,838 M'ink 3 ,584 37 0 3,62r 35 .0 10 ,348 Muskrat B,4BO 353 0 8,833 26.9 32,603 Ma rtelr 756 27 0 783 (.t ?9,467 Land otter 48s 15 0 500 32.4 i,545 Arctic (ox 487 6 0 493 16. 5 2,66r Recl fox" 2,635 77 0 2,712 27 .r l0,018 Weasel 9 0 0 J 1.3 673 Lynx r 106 4 0 110 4.6 ?,383 Squ'i rre I ' 0 0 0 0 0 780

~~( cont i nued )~~

~~504 Table 15 (continued).~~

~~Yea r' 1979-80 Westerrr~~

~~Fur Pe rsona I %of Dealer Trapper Use Statewide Statewide )pec r es Expo rts Exports Exports Tota I Exporto Exportd~~

Beaver I,549 6 0 I,555 15.4 10,070 t'ii nk 561 76 0 637 8.5 7 ,459 f,iuskrat 20,797 285 0 2L,082 50.4 41,814 Ma rtelr 444 0 0 444 r.7 26,042 L.ort0 otter 2r8, 0 ??T 15.4 1,436 Arctic fox 159 28 0 r87 19.3 970 Red tox" 2,364 i06 0 2,470 26.4 9,499 hea se I 4 0 0 4 0.8 474 0 39 Lynx f. 38 I 2.1 I ,8?.4 Squi rre1" 0 0 0 0 0 1,023

~~Year 1980-61~~

Eeaver 1,556 180 n L,736 23.6 7 ,366 Mi nk 4 ,872 59 8 4,939 33.3 14,852 l4uskrat 29,597 I,794 0 3i,391 54.5 57 ,546 Ma rteri 32I 145 0 466 1.9 24,284 Lancl otter 37I 15 0 386 ?7 .l 7,4?5 A,rctic fox 871 51 0 922 47 .6 1 ,936 Red fox" 2,585 82 2 2,679 33.5 8 ,002 l'Jea se I 6 0 0 6 2.6 228 Lyrrr. . 68 6 0 74 3. C 2 ,483 Squi rrel " 0 0 0 0 0 619

~~( conti nued )~~

~~505 Table 15 (contjnued).~~

~~Year 198i-82 l"/estern~~

~~Fur Pe rs ona I %of Dealet' Trapper Use Statewi de Statew'ide Spec i es Exports Exports Exports Tota I Exporto Export"~~

~~Beave r 7,872 8 0 1,880 31 .5 5,961 l"li nk 9,892 L2I 0 10,013 5?.9 18,922 Muskrat 7 ,864 335 0 8,200 45.2 18,r47 Ma r cen 948 2 0 950 3.8 25,?5r n Lan~~

~~Year 1982-83~~

Beaver 601 66 2 669 20.1 3,331 Mi nk ?,852 155 0 3,007 39.0 7 ,706 lvluskrat r,642 151 0 r,793 29.0 6 ,193 Ma rten 392 0 0 392 2.4 16,370 Lano otter 99 4 0 103 1i .9 869 J 76 11.8 646 Arctic flox 65 8 Red fox- 326 13 0 339 10. 5 3 ,238 '240 lJeasel 0 0 0 0 0 Lynx 27 0 0 27 0.8 3,220 Squi rrel " 0 0 0 0 0 20r

~~(cont,i nued )~~

~~506 Table 15 (continued).~~

~~Year 1983-84 Western~~

~~Fur Pe rsorra'l %of Deal er Trapper Use Statewide Statewide Speci es Exports Exports Exports Tota I Expcrrto Export"~~

Beaver 332 z 0 334 14.1 2,362 Mi nk 3,430 48 0 3,478 38.5 9,024 Muskrat 397 136 0 533 5.4 9 ,936 Ma rten 34 0 0 34 0.3 13,594 Land otter 207 L7 0 224 24.7 907 Arctic fox 33 L4 0 47 8.2 574 Red foxD 189 92 0 28L 9.4 2,980 Wea se I 0 0 0 0 0 232 Lvnxra 2 0 0 2 0.1 r,925 Squ i rrel " 0 0 0 0 0 i98

Source: Computer printouts from Statistics Section, ADF&G, Div. Game, Anchorage. a Statewide total from on'ly the exports with GMU data avai lable for them. b Includes the cross, b'lack, and silver color phase. c lnclucles red, flying, parka, and ground squirrels.

~~507 Table 16. Estirnated Prices Paid for Raw Pelts in the Western Region, 7977-78~~

~~Price Paid Spec i es Pelt Size to Trappers~~

~~Beover La rge $20-25~~

~~Land otter La rge 45 -55~~

~~Lynx 200-?75 l'li nk La rge 35-45~~

~~Muskrat La rge 2-2.50~~

~~Arctic fox 25-45~~

~~Red fox 80- 12s~~

~~I'ia rten 25-35~~

~~Source: Jonrowe I979. --- means no data were available.~~

508 REFERENCES ADF&G. 1976a. A'laska wild'life management plans draf t proposal : Interior Alaska. Funded 'in part by Fed. Aid in Wildl . Rest., Proj. t.l-17-R. Juneau. 200 pp. . L976b. Alaska wildlife management plans drafr prciposal:'Proj. t,'lestern ---fTaska. Funded in par"t by Fed. Aio 'in hJildl. Rest., t.J-17-R. Juneau. 150 pp.

L978. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part 1V: beaver, furbearer, wolf , wolverine, seai , wal rus. Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Vol. 7. Proj. W-I7-9, Jobs 7,8, 9, L4,15, and 22. -EEon,Juneau. 194 pp. . L979. Annual report of survey-inventor^y activities. Part II: wolf, wolverine, small game. Fed. Aio in b,ildl . Rest. -T-urbearers,Vol. 9. Proj. W-17-10, Jobs 7, 14, 15, and ?2. Juneau. 192 pp. In press. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Fed. Aid in [,{ildl. Rest. Proj. Juneau. ADNR. 1984. Tanana Basin Area Plan - pub'lic review draft. Fairbanks.

ADR (Alaska Department of Revenue). 1974-1984. Gross sport fish and game license receipts, fish and game licensing. Juneau. Burris,0.E. 1985. Personal communication. Regional Mgt. Coordinatorn ADF&G, Div. Game, Fairbanks. D'inneford, l^l.B. 1981. Furbearers survey-inventory progress report, 1979-1980. Pages 56-62 in R.A. Hinmarr, €d., comp. Annual report of survey-irrventclry activities. Part IV: hlolf, furbearers, wolverine, small game, and walrus. ADF&G, Fed. A'id in Wilol. Rest. Vol . 11. Proj. W-I7-I2, Jobs 14.0, 7.0, 15.0, 10.0, and 22.0. Juneau. 115 pp. . 1982. Furbearers survey-inventory progress report, 1980-198i. -Tges 57-62 in R.A. Hinman, ed. , comp.' Annual report of survey- inventory actJTities. Part IV: Furbearers, small game, walrus, and wolverines. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wi ldl " Rest. Vr.rl. L2. Projs. t,l-19-1 and W-19-2, Jobs 7.0, 11.0, 15.0, and 14.0. Juneau. 143 pp. Ernest, J.R. 1978. Beaver survey-inventory progress report, 7976-L977. Pages 15-21 in R.A. Hinman, €d., comp. Annual reporr of survey- irrventory act-J-vities. Part IV: Bison, beaver, furbearers, wclf, wolverine, seal, and walrus. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Vol. 8. Proj. W-I7-90 Jobs 7, 8, 9, L4, 15, and 22. Juneau. 194 pp. FNSB. 1986. 1985 Population Estimate, FNSB Community'Research Center, Fai rbanks.

~~509 Golderr, H. 1985. Personal communication. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Ganre , Fa i rba nks .~~

Grangaard, D. 1985. Personal communication. Game Technician, ADF&G, Div. Game, Tok. jonrowe, D. I979. Furbearers and wolverine survey-inventory progress repcirts, 1977-1978. Pages 60-63 and 169 in R.A. Hinman, €d., iomp. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part II: Furbearers, wolf, wolverine, and small game. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in l.lildl. Rest. Vol . 9. Proj . W-17-10, Jobs 7 .0 , 14.0 , 15.0, and ZZ.0 . Juneau. 192 pp.

. 1980. Furbearers, urolf, and wolverine survey-inventory progress reports, 1978-1979, Pages 32-35, 83, and I07 in R.A. Hinman, €d., comp. Annual repot of survey-inventory act-ivities. part IV: Furbearers, upland game, wolf, and wolverine. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Vol. 10. Proj. t^J-17-11, Jobs 7.0,10.0, 14.0, 1S.0, and 22.0. II2 pp.

Kelleyhouse, D. 1985. Personal connrunicarion. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Tok. fvlachida, S. 1983. Beaver and wolf survey-inventory progress reports, 1981-1982. Pages 5-11 and 94-95 in J.A. Barnert, €d., comp. Annual report of survey-irrventory activitTes. Part VII: Beaver, furbearers, 1ynx, wolf, and wolverine. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in l.'Jild. Rest. Vol. 13. Proj. W-22-7, Jobs 7.0, L4.0, anC 15.0. Juneau. 126 pp.

. 1984. Beaver, furbearer, and wolf survey-inventory progress reports, 1982-1983. Pages 5-10, 38-41f and 104-105 in A. Seward, €d,, comp. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. -?art VII: Beaver, furbearers, lynx, wolf, and wolverine. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in t^,|ildl. Rest. Vcrl . 14. Proj . W-2?-2, Jobs 7.0 , 14. 0 , and 15.0. Juneau. i40 pp.

. 1985a. l^/olf survey-inventory progress report, 1983-1984. Pages in B. Townsend, eo., comp. Rnnual repo'ri df survey-invent6ry --fZ6activifTes. Part XV: Wolf. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Vol. l5: Proj. W-22-3, Job 14.0. Juneau. 47 pp.

~~. 1985b. Personal communication. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, St. --ffiy,s. Melchior, H. 1984. Alaska tracks. The Alaska Trapper (Jan,):2I-23.~~

~~----T'Trbanks.. 1984. Personal commurlication. Game Biolog'isr, ADF&G, Div. Game,~~

~~1985. Alaska tracks. The Alaska Trapper (March):20-22.~~

~~510 Melchior, H. I985a. Alaska tracks. The Alaska Trapper (March). 20-22 pp.~~

~~. 1985b. Personal communication. Game Biologist, ADF&G, D'iv. ----Gme, Fai rbanks.~~

Nowl in, R. 1985. Personal communication. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Fort Yukon. 0'Connor, R.M. 1984. Population trends, 0gB structure, and reproductive characteristics of female lynx irr Alaska, 1961-1973. tvl.S. Thesis, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks. 111 pp. 0sbr.,urne, T.0. 1984. Furbearer survey 'inventory progress report, 1983-1984. Pages 49-51 ancl 67-68 in A. Seward, Bd., comp. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part 7. Beaver, furbearers, lynx, wolf, and wolverine. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in hlildl. Rest. Vol. 14. Proj. W-22-2, Jobs 7, L4, and 15. Juneau. 140 pp.

~~. i985. Personal communication. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. ------ffie, Galena.~~

Pegau, R. E. 1984. Furbearer survey and inventory progress report, 1982-1983. Pages 42-46 in A. Sewarcl, €d., comp. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part 7. Beaver, furbearers, 1ynx, wolf, and wolverine. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in W'ildl . Rest. Vol . L4. Proj. W-22-2, Jobs 7, 14, and 15. Juneau. 140 pp.

. 1985. Personal communication. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. anre , McGra th . Preston, D.J. 1983. The impacts of agriculture on wi'lolife. Fed. Ajd irr -e hli ldl . Rest. Final rept. Projs. W-27-2 and W-?z-I, Job 18.6R. Juneau. Shepherd, P.E.K. I974. l^lo'lf, wolverine, and furbearer survey-inventory progress reports , t972-I973. Pages 50, 96, and 158-i59 in D.E. McKnight, €d., comp. Annual report of survey-invenrof activities. Part 3. Furbearers, smal I game and raptors, wo1f, wo'lverine, and black bear. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wild. Rest. Vol. 4. Proj. W-17-5, Jobs 7, 10, 14, 15, 1,7, and 22. Juneau. 171 pp. . 1975. Furbearers survey-inventory progress report, I973-I974. 60-61 jn D.E. McKnight, €d., comp. Annual report of survey- -mgesinventory actTities. Part- IV: Furbearers, small game, and wolverine. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in l.lildl . Rest. Vol . 5. Proj. t"i-17-6, Jobs 7, 10, 15, and 22. Juneau. 106 pp. ---- . I976. Furbearers and wolverine survey-irrventory-Hinmari, progress report, q-L975. Pages LI-I? and I27 in R.A. el. , c-omp. Annual report of survey-inventory activjties. Part 4. Furbearers, small

511 game, v{olf, and wolverine. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Vol. 6. Proj. W-17-7, Jobs 7, I0, 14, and i5. Juneau. 138 pp. 1977. Furbearers and wolverine survey-inventory progress reports, L975-I976. Pages 23-24 and I23 l! R.A. Hinman, €d., comp. Annual report of survey-inventory activities. Part 4. Bison, beaver, furbearers, wal rus, wolf, and wolverine. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in llli ldl . Rest. Vol. 7. Proj. W-17-8, Jobs 7,8, 9, L4,15, and 22. Juneau. 133 pp.

. 1978. Furbearers survey-inventory progress report, I976-1977. s 65-66 in R.A. Hinman, ed., comp. Annual reirort of survey- inventory acfi-vities. Part 4. Bison, beaver, furbearers, wo1i, wolverine, sea'l , arrC wal rus. ADF&G, Fed. Ajd in hlildl . Rest. Vol . B. Proj. W-I7-9, Jobs 7,8,9, 14, 15, and 22. Juneau. 194 pp. Stephenson, R.0. i984. The relationship of fire history to furbearer populations and harvest. Fed. Aid in Wildl. Rest. Final rept. Proj. W-22-2, Job 7.13 R. Juneau. 86 pp.

~~. 1985. Unpubljshed furbearer data. ADF&G, Div. Game, Fairbanks.~~

~~512 Comrnercial Harvest of Pacific Halibut Western Region~~

I. POPULATION MANAGEMENT HISTORY A. Introduction The fishery for hal ibut conducted by Canadian and United States fishermen is regulated by the International Pacific Hal ibut Commission (IPHC). Regulation is by regulatory area estab'lished a l ong the eastern Paci f ic coastl i ne extendi ng f rom Ca'l 'iforni a to the Bering Sea. The halibut regulatory area corresponding to the Western Region falls within Area 4E in the Bering Sea. Del ineation of the regulatory areas for the Pacific 0cean including the Bering Sea are as follows (IPHC 1985): Area 2A includes all waters off the coasts of the states of California, 0regon, and Washington; Subarea 2A-1 includes all waters off the coast of Washington that are north of latitude 48"02'15"N, east of 'longitude I25"44'00", and west of l ongi tucle 123o42' 30"t,l. Area 28 includes al I waters off the coast of British Columbia. Area 2C includes all waters off the coast of Alaska that are east of a line running northwest one-quarter west (312") from Cape Spencer Light (latitude 58o11'57"N, longiiude i36'38'18"!'l), and south and east of a line running south one-quarter east (L77" ) from said light. Area 3A includes all waters between Area 2C and a line extending from the most northerly point on Cape Aklek (latitude 57"41'15"N, longitude 155"35'00"W) to Cape Ikolik (latitude 57"17'17"N, longitude !54'47 '18"[^l), then southeast by east one-quarter east (121"); Area 38 includes all waters between Area 3A and a line extending southeast (135") from Cape Lutke (latitude 54"29'00"N, longitude 164'20'00"W). Area 4A includes all waters in the Gulf of A'laska west of Area 38 and in the Bering Sea west of the closed area defined below and east of longitude 172"00'00"|,l and south of latitude 56'20'00"N. The closed area in which halibut fishing may not occur includes all waters in the Bering Sea that are east of a l'ine from Cape Sarichef Light (latitude 54'36'00"N, longitude 164"55'42uW) to a point at latitude 56'20'00"N, longitude 168'30'00"W and south of a line from the latter point to Cape Newenham (1at'itude 58o39'00"N, longitude 162"10'25"t^,). Area 48 includes all waters in the Bering Sea and the Gulf of Alaska west of Area 4A and south of latitude 56'20'00"N. Area 4C includes all waters in the Bering Sea north of Area 4A and north of the closed area defined'in Area 44 above that

513 are east of a line extending true northwest (315") from a point at latitude 56"20'00"N, longitude 170"00'00"t,rl, and west of Iongitude 168o00'00". " Area 4D includes all waters in the Bering Sea north of Areas 4A and 48 and west of Area 4C. " Area 4E includes all waters in the Bering Sea north of the closed area defined in Area 4A above, east of longitude 168'00'00"W, and south of Iatitude 65o34'00"N. For the 1983 fishery, Regu'latory Area 4 (Bering Sea) (map 1) was divided into four smaller sections of 4A, 48,4C, and 4D (map 2). Another regulatory area was added for the 1984 fishery when Area 4C was divided into two new sections, consisting of a smaller Area 4C and a new Area 4E (nrap 3). The following narrative will provide a general overview of the entire halibut fishery and will emphasize recent developments in the Bering Sea and Area 4E. B. Management History and Reported Use 1. Managerial authority. The International Pacific Hal ibut Conunission ( IPHC), original ly cal led the International Fisheries Conrnission, was established in 7923 by a convention between Canada and the United States ( IPHC 1978b). The Halibut Cormission has jurisdiction over the Canadian and United States haljbut fisheries (Uottr sport and commercial) but has no jurisdiction over foreign fisheries and cannot regulate domestic or foreign trawl fisheries to reduce the inc'idental catch ctf halibut (Skud I976, IPHC 1978b). The Halibut Cormission does have the authority to monitor catch and effort, establish open and closed seasons, limit the size and quantity of fish taken, regu'late the retention of the incidental catch of halibut in other domestic fisheries, restrict gear type, and close hal ibut nursery areas to hal ibut fishing ( ibid. ). Prior to 1977, restrictions on foreign fishing for halibut were achieved through separate agreements between the United States, Canada, and other foreign nations involved. Since the passage in I976 of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (effective March 1, L977), halibut has been a prohibited species that must be avoided by United States and foreign groundfi sh fl eets wi thi n the 200-mi fi shery conservation zone (NPFMC 1983). The North Pacific Fishery Managemerrt Council (NPFMC) has included in their Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea/Aleutians groundfish management plans, time-area closures designed to minimize the incidental catch of haljbut to allow halibut grounds to remain undisturbed for a short time before the beginning of the halibut season (ibid.). Foreign groundfish trawling in the Gulf of Alaska through 1985 has also been restricted to pelagic trawls during late winter and early spring by the NPFMC, in order to minimize the inc'iclental catch of hal ibut.

~~514 o o 6|~~

~~C\J |o o O) rl (.) -~~

~~C\l o @ ro 6l - lo l? ! (u o a (' q- P~~

~~|o ro (O ! |o (J (|-- 0 (J o tlJ o r~~

~~CJ P o o |o ! lo o o o rF t^ (o (u ! o (o |o !~~

~~o +J o rO~~

~~(lJ d~~

~~6 =~~

~~515 0 o 6a~~

~~o Cr) I O) Gi, d (-) -~~

~~o co |o Ol c| o I t L (l) o an |o C, (| .u o o o ro rt ro ro () q- o (J roo (o o) -c+) o o ! o ro o 3 o (+- a (u ! 0 fo to F os- P 0 |o~~

~~Ero~~

~~516 0 |o (\.~~

~~-o o sl' n @ a O) F{ (-) o-- o sr to Ol (\l d o t|o ! (u o -c o tt G' l+- p -o o lo o t? r0 fo ro~~

~~+- o o o ro o o- (u +) o o r- ro o o o o Its tt1 .o CJr- I (o |o L~~

~~0 p o fI,~~

~~(IJ d~~

~~to =~~

517 2. Harvest summary: ;. North Paiific anO Bering, Sea harvests. The commercial ic 0cean began in 1888 when three sailing ships from New England fished off Cape F)attery, Waihington. -The fishery expanded across'the Gulf oi nlaska and as far west as Unimak Pass Bering llpff'lC 1984). Fishing for hal ibut in the _Se9 ' honeuet, dia not occui until 1930. Develgpme.nt of tl. Bering sea fishery was slow because of the area's distaice from home ports, poor weather conditions, and the small size of the halibut stocks. In addition' fishing in the Gulf of Alaska was profitable, giving little reason for the fleet to consider maj91 exl911!9n of their operation into the Bering sea-area (tsest 19uI). A few boatl fished the Bering Sea from 1930 through 1934. Fishing did not again occur until 1952. Catches averaged auoui 100 metrii tons annualtv (ibid')' To attract fishermen to the Bering sea, the opening date of the season was scheduled one month earlier than for the Gulf of Alaska ('ibid.). Harvest levels responded to tfris regulation change'. reaching L'121 metric tons (oresseo-*.;;hii i; ie6t'(Best 1e8i, Mvhle et al ' re77)' Catches to tfiis'date, in the Bering Sea had been divided iooui-.quitiV oetween United Statei and Canadian vessels (Mth;. ia ui. Ig77). Because the International North pacific Fiihery- C6nun'ission (INPfC) detennined that hal ibut in th6 Bering Sea no longer qual-ified fg. abstention, Japan was illowed to enter the fishery_in 196i-fBest 19'81). During the s_alne..year, thg INPFC establ j shed J tni'..-natiori catch I imi t of 5,000 metlic which^ was i;;; (3,300'above metric -the tons dressed weight), gr.itfV maximum- sustained yield of 2'268 metri. tons- if,qg6 metric tons dressed weight) calculated b, the'IPHC for the same area consisting of waters oetwien Unimak Pass and the Pribilof Is'lands) (iuio.l. The harvest during.the 196.3 season.peaked at - (dressed ioout 3,690 metric tons -weight). . .Japan withdrew from the fishery after 1964. Canad'ian interest in the gering Sea fishery declined with the g_rovth.of their domesii-c herring fishery. .Canadian participation in the Bering Sea ceased in 1979 (ibid')' oespiie thei6 changes-regulations i1 fishing patterns. and imposition of time unO- ui"u bn the fishery., catches continued to decline, mainly because of, large incidentat catches of halibut in the foreign traw'l fisheries and a subsequent reduction in the number of yo-ung. halibut recruited into the fishery (IPHC 1978b).- Catches from 1965throughlgT4averagedabout196metriclons iOressed weight) annually, consiclerably less than the

518 annual average catch of 1,549 metric tons harvested front 1955 through-1964 (Myhre et al . 1977)- There has been some recovery of halibut stocks in the eastern Bering-have sea s'ince the 1960's. Catches from 1975 through 1984 continued to show a slight increase over the prev'ious decade' s ha rvest and have averaged about 375 iretric tons (dressed weight) of halibut caught annual ly (taole i ). The eeiing Sea catch comprised about 3% of the total North pacittc hal ibut catch from 7975 through 1984. During the same time period, the total halibut catch in the North Pacific 0cean averaged about 12,4L9 metric tons annually (taote 1). About 70 to 75% of the total harvest of halibut has been taken from the Gu'lf of Alaska (Morris et al. 1983). b. SmalI coastal Berinq Sea commercial fishgrU!. Local ave caught halibut primarily for subsistence purposes' Participation in the commercia'l fishery was limited by few interested participating vessels, limited available gear, and limited access to commerc'ial markets. Since ifre 1981 season, villagers from St. George Island, St. Paul Island, and Nelson Island have entered the commerc.ia'l f ishery for hal ibut. Because the smal I villages have no hirbor faciliries, these fishermen have used small vessels (less than five net tons)' Tf.'' fishery is a day fishery, ryith actlyi!V ocl:urring w'ithin 12 mi bf the commun'ities (NPFMC 1984). Pnior to entry of this local effort into the fishery, a maximum of six vessels had fished the area designated as 4C -(as oeiineated prior to the 1984 change bf OounAaries lmgp 2)) (ibid.). These vessels were owned by fishermen who w6ie' not residing in local Bering Sea communities ( 'ibid. ) . in 1981, the St. Paul Island fishery for halibut began as a demonstration project. About 9 metric tons By 1983' the (dressed weight)-expandect of halibut were landed: iishery had considerably, with 40 fishermen participating and about 27 netric tons (dressed weight) harvested ( ibid. ). The fishery-when in the vicinity of st. George_ Island began in L982, 20 fishermen harvested 7 metric tons (dressed weight). The harvest increased to 44 metric tons (Oressed weight) taken by 32 fishermen during the 1983 season (ibid.). The Nelson islanO.halibut fishery is the only small local fishery found within the boundaries of the western Region coveied by this publication. The 1982 season maikeO the fi rst commercial hal ibut harvest for the vi 1 lages of Tununak and Toksook on Nel son Island'

519 c + ol {)'! o OF@o'll o ol In+F.OrN o JNlns N o q, g o o dl @roc)f*r(o E @ NNrf(Dl(c) $ c ol FNFI r ) .P g o) z, N (D N L @ t-@@ror @ r/) o o 01 \OOdr I 3 I J +) m @ e E c o E L L Ol eOre@tN F- c co NONF-Il' ro (tl Q) Ol NFI J L € q) q a I +J o @ o F\.+d)O) | @ o) Ol F- _J- tt) | Ol J a I o 6 ot () L o It) (fl o F c @ o Ol (tl o Or L o F. FF-ONlm N o u IE Or r)c'r@l-i. N o E o NI tJ', o o N o () c') @ {J (t) C - LO ! @ 00 o'F o F\ oJ-to I Ol F- o .lJ Ol No)(nrn I N Or lr FI @ () €) Ol Ol E.F L OFL.o FA o F. (tt ol o- t- otrN@o)l o t. (, o (tl NrlFl (tl or I F I 30 O) L0)o o OE L @ o" P F* E+, o io tr|\OOF-l @ Ot or o F\ F@Nrl @ olJ r9 =c Ol I N -' N F. o^o r... c$ Ot O -c) o oo)o +JS (, gF o@ |/r eeO(Ol @ (O (J .ov Ol F. NN(NI N r-o lE ln O) I N rr O-o oa) .|r F- .o-.o ool N o(L CtF L-.t) F\ oo N.! oo o J.F o UJ c) oL! U) g -o -? L Tr -f o o L qtOr|DO oq) LOL O!L cco-c+r OE oL.u .Fg+)O L I o! o LL<l

520 During the first year,35 fishermen harvested about 3 metric tons (dressed weight). The 1983 season produced a sl ightly better catch of 7 metric tons (dressed weight) harvested by 42 fishermen (ibid.). 3. Gear types. The comnerc'ial fishery for ha_libut is restricted To--Ioo-k ano line gear (IPHC 1985). in the Bering Sea (Regulatory Area 4), harvest has primari 1y been taken by long'line (IPHC 1984c). Many local vi'l1agers, however, have traditionally caught halibut by iigging with the line dropped from a wooderr spool (Cuttenberg 1984). 4. Period of use. In 1977, the IPHC adopted the split season wnerein-TE'e Fishing period was divided into a succession of openi ng and cl osures. The purpose of thi s management strategy was to regulate the length of the fishing period and to spieao fishing mortal ity through time ( IPHC 1978b). Fishing periods for Area 4 in the Bering Sea have usual'ly occurred between the first of April to mid September (IPHC 1981, i983a). Significance of particular use areas. Traditional commercjal the BEring Sea have been along the 200 m shelf edge and north of Unimak arro Unalaska islands (Bakkala et al. I976). A series of reference maps has been prepared for use with this report and may tle found in the Map Atlas that accompanies this publication. The categories of mapped information include the commercial hal ibut harvest areas.

I I. MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES The nnnagement goal of the IPHC is to maintain the stocks of halibut at levels that produce the optimum yield (IPHC l97Bb). Until recent'ly, however, stock abundance has been 1ow, and the commission's efforts have been directed toward rebuilcling the resource (Skud L976). The IPHC is responsible for biological management and negotiation as an internatiorral treaty organization. The North Pacific Fisheries Management Council regulates harvest leve'ls by a'l locations defined within IPHC harvest l'imits for Alaskan waters (Rigby, pers. comm.). The NPFMC's objectives for halibut management (NPFMC 1983) are to o ensure survival of the North Pacific halibut resource; o distribute the halibut fishery in tjme and place to ensure the harvest of the available surplus of all components of the halibut population over all areas of the North Pacific 0cean, including the Bering Sea; o continue to limit the harvesting of haljbut to hook and line as the best means of utilizing and maintaining the resource at iis highest sustainable level of abundance; o retain the iPHC as the primary managerial authority over the coastwide range of the halibut population; o provide high-quality fresh, frozett, or preserved halibut to the consumer throughout the year; and

~~52r o strive to reduce jncidental halibut mortality caused by gear thar is not lega1 for a directed halibut fishery.~~

III. I'IANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS A. Stock Assessment Catch-per-unit-effort data obtained from the halibut fishery is the bas'is by which stock condition and abundance is assessed. Changes in the fishery in recent years have al tered the relationship between catch and effort. Therefore, there is corrcern that data obtained in recent years is not comparable to the historical informatjon, resulting in an inaccurate picture of stock status. Conditions affecting the catch-per-unit-effort data include the increasing use of more efficient snap-on gear by sma11 vessels rather than the traditional fixed-hook or fixed-gangion gear, conversion to more efficient circle hooks, and the apparent

5't? The plan, however, was not approved by the federal 0ffice of Management and Budget and was dropped (Anonymous 1983c). D. Nonlocal Participation Participation in the Bering Sea haljbut fishery by residents of coastal villages is recent. Local fishermen usually use snral ler bclats with less efficient gear than traditional nonlocal halibut operations. Since developmerrt of the local fisheries, larger boats have moved into the area and have taken most of the quota within a short period of t'ime. The northwestern Bering Sea was made into a distinct regulatory area for the 1983 season to prevent th'is problem. In 1984, a new Area 4E was established, and since then catches have been taken entirely by local fishermen. l'lcrwever, the threat of potential limited entry and the need for a longer season in a hal'ibut fishery resulted in an influx of 'larger vesse'ls, regardless of the change (Cullenberg 1984, Anonymous 1983d). The potential for expansion of these fisheries wi I I largely be influenced by the success of the NPFMC's efforts to discourage participation by larger, nonlocal boats.

~~REFERENCES Anonymous. 1983a. Halibut. Pacifjc Fishing,1983 Yearbook: 110-113.~~

. 1983b. Council adopts "dual " hal ibut moratorium. Pacific 4(7):16. --FlTnins . 1983c. Bureaucrats bury halibut moratorium for 1983 season. Fishing ap) :12. --TaEific 1983d. Pribilof, Nelson Island halibut fishery shutout by big boats. Beri ng Sea Fi shermen 4 (4 ) : 1 . Bakkala, R.G., D.t.l. Kessler, and R.A. McIntosh. 1976. History of commercial exploitation of demersal fish and shellfish in the eastern Bering Sea. Pages 13-35 in l,J.T. Pereyra, J.E. Reeves, and R.G. Bakkala, Demersal fish and shellfish resources of the eastern Bering Sea in the baselirre year 1975. USDC: NOAA, NMFS. Seattle, WA. Best, t.A. 1981. Halibut ecology. Pages 495-508 in D.l'l. Hood and J.A. Calder, eds. The eastern Bering Sea shelf: ocearrcgraphy and resources. Vol. i. USDC: NOAA, 0MPA. 625 pp. Cullenberg, P. 1984. Small boat halibut. Pacific Fishing 5(2):28-31. IPHC. I977. Annual report. Seattle. Pp. 32-33. . 1978a. Annual report. Seattle. Pp. 32-33.

~~. 1978b. The Pacific haljbut: biology, fishery, and management. Tech. Rept. 16 (revision of No. 6). s,l pp. -TP-HC~~

~~523 I979. Annual report. Seattle. Pp. 36-37. 1980. Annual report. Seattle. Pp.42-43. 1981. Annual rep~~

~~---_--._-. 1982b. Pacjfic halibut fishery regulations 1982. Seattle, WA. I pp.~~

~~. 1983a. Annual report. Seattle. 60 pp.~~

. 1983b. Pacifjc halibut fishery regulations 1983. Seattle, WA. ----8-Fp. . 1984b. Pacific halibut fishery regulation, 1984. Seattle, l'lA. I pp. -_ . 1984c. 1984 Annual meeting documents. Seattle, t,JA. 42 pp.

~~. i985. Pacific hal ibut fishing regulations 1985. Seattle, WA. ----TFp.~~

McCauEhran, D. 1981. The effect of trawling on ha'libut stocks in the Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska. Pages 52-6L in M.A. l'lil ler, €d. First Al aski grounclf i sh trawl er conferedce. 0ctoFr 22-23. NOAA Western Regiorral Center. Seattle, WA. . 1983. Halibut fishing in areas 2A, 4A, 48, and 4D close. IPHC --I[6s Release, 4 Aug. i983. 1 pp. Morris, 8.F., M.S. Alton, and H.W. Braham. 1983. Living marine resources of the Gulf of Alaska: resource assessnrent for the Gulf of Alaska/Cook inlet proposed oil and gas lease Sale No.88. NMFS Tech. Memo. 232 pp. Myhre, R.J., G.J. Peltonen, G. St.-Pierre, B.E. Skud, and R.E. lrJalden. 1977. The Pacific halibut fishery: catch, effort, and CPUE, 1929-1975, Supplement to IPHC Tech. Rept. 14. Natural Resources Consultants. 1982. Fisheries of Alaska 1981. Prepared for Alaska F'isheries Development Foundation. Anchorage, AK. 46 pp.

NPFMC. 1983. Summary of Gulf of Alaska Groundfish Management Plan (through amendment 12). Revised 13 May 1983. 2L pp. 1984. Draft environmental assessment of possible regulatI ation promotingns a developrnental halibut fishery in the Bering Sea. 12 pp.

~~524 Quinrr, T.J. 1985. Personal communication. Professor, University of Alaska, Juneau.~~

Rigby, P. 1985. Personal communication. Groundfish Coordinator, ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Juneau. Skud, B.E. I976. Jurisdictional and administrative limitations affeciing management of the halibut fishery. IPHC Sci. Rept. 59. 24 pp.

~~525~~

Commercial and Subsistence Use of Pacific Herring Western Region i. POPULATION MANAGEMENT HISTORY A. Introduction Through the 1984 fishing season, the Western Region encompassed Herring Statistical Area h (map 1). This area, which is known as either the Kuskokwim Area or the Security Cove, Etolin Strait Area, has as its southern boundary a line extending west from Cape Newenham and as its northern boundary a lirre extending west from Dal'l Point. The western boundary for Statistical Area W is the International Datel ine in the Bering Sea. The area is divided into the Security Cove, Goodnews, Nelson Islarrd, and Nunjvak districts (ADF&G 1985e). For the 1985 season, this Statistical Area !,l was changed to i ncl ude only the Goodnews Bay Area. Security Cove became Statistical Area S, and Nelson-Nunivak became Area N (Francisco, pers. comm.). The Western Region also includes a portion of Statistical Area Q' or the Bering Sea, Kotzebue Area (map i). Statistical Area Q has as its southern boundary a firre extending west from Dall Point and as its northern boundary a l'ine extending west from Point Hope. The western boundary of Siatistical Area Q is the International Dateljne in the Bering and Chukchi seas (ADF&G 1985e). The narratives that follow present information on the Security Cove, Gooclnews, Nelson Island, and Nunivak Island djstricts in Statistical Area W and the Cape Romanzof District in Statistical Area Q. B. Sununary of the Regional Fishery 1. Subsistence harvest summary. Human uti'lization of herri!g l! to have occurred at least 2,000 years ago (Hemming et al. 1978). Currently, villages located on the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta exhibit the greatest dependence upon herring for subsistence purposes in the State of Alaska ( ibid. ). Surveys performed since I975 have provided estinrates of subsistence harvest levels.'ies These estimates, though mi ninral because not al I fami I are surveyed o indicate a peak subsistence harvest of up to 102.5 metric tons taken during the 1979 fishery by 160 families (table 1). 2. Corrnercial harvest summary. The conrnercial herring fisheries ern Region are rel ativelY new' commencing in the late 1970's in the Security Cove and Goodnews Bay di stricts and i n the 1980's i n the other districts. Development of these fisheries, as with the other herring fisheries in the eastern Bering Sea, has been in response to the increased demand for sac roe by orienta'l markets. The herring fisheries established 'in the tlestern Region are smal'ler than the other Bering Sea fisheries.

~~527 o o o o o o~~

~~o a. C'~~

~~^o rr, @ O)~~

~~e5 lJ-~~

~~tJ1 (u l- (o c o~~

~~(o OJl- (6~~

~~ro ; o o P at1 ab ri +) a ao !: :! +J =Eac --! 0 ot o :: qo 7 .a E E! ! .t L :.sO s- o! i; 3Ea o t :? €:: - ig 3:i 'FN E16~~

~~528 sr @ orl Ol .! Or(.ol s-~~

~~co c) cv) cf) @ O'l ro cD €r'\cr)O~~

~~(t) (u &. H O (\ c\l @ Or @ cf) c!lr)oco L .-a r.r) ol r-{ sf 1'\ Cr) (u d +)a (u = o O Ol cf) (\ q) tn oc -c (o Or @o H()OO +) (u d f'. C\l @ F{ rr) v) @ C', tn -c Ol o |f)|f) tn f\ F Ol rr)~~

~~t- r- O dH (u N Or +O C') or r.\ ol - H f.- Or cD C\l (J l'\ rF~~

(o (\ r\\o r.C) l-\ ('i dc! CDOrsf,d r (o sl r{ <+ l\ ol (u o o P ao a (l) rf) @ tr)co S'F |t.\ @.o L ch Ool C\J st cr) cf) Ol @o cf) co rz (o (u a- .J1= u c.F ,o c>t+J> (u(l) +J (u O L q- E C- L q- E L th (JE o tt1 (6 (tt O (u (I' rO -(o (o -.tt.F L o F- .$ jZE= .r+ +)g +)S fl = ro (uofooo ol F zz. al

529 catches since 1978 have ranged from 259 metric tons taken durrng the 1978 season to a record harvest of 4,212 metric tons harvested in the 1985 fishery (taOte Z). During the 1985 season, western Region fisheries accounted for aooul 14% of the conunercial harvest of sac roe herring in fisheries extencl'ing from Togiak northward to Norton Sound (ADF&G i985d; [,Jhitmore, pers. comm. ). 3. Gear types. In the Western Region, herring may be harvested commercially only with gill nets, usually of 2 I/Z- to z 3/4-inch mesh size. Maximum lnesh size by regulation is 3 inches. Trawls also may be used during seasons established by emergency order (ADF&G i985e). 4. Period of use. The period of harvest in all of the Western Region-heffig fisheries may vary from year to year and is dependent upon the time of arriva1 and the abundance of the fish that move into the respective fishing districts. By regulation, however, herring may be taken in periods estab'lished by emergency order from May I through June 30 (ADF&G 1985e). 5. Managerial authorit.y and manaqement considerations. Lornmercta I f tsnertes tor herr'tng tn coasta I waters are managed by the State of Alaska. The management objective for comrnrcial herring fisheries in Alaska is to maintain the resource at levels that will maintain maximum sustainable yie1d. The statewjde management strategy is to harvest 0 to 20% of the herring biomass, with the upper end of the exploitation range applied to stocks in good condition. The lower end of the exploitation rate is appl ied to stocks exhibiting a trend toward decreasing abundance and poor recrujtment (ADF&G 1985c). In al1 areas, difficulties arise in determining harvest levels when poor visibility, inclement weather, and a high incidence of other pelagic species jnhibit aerial surveys, thus increasing rhe error in assessing abundance or biomass. The level of exploitation is different for each fishing districr in the l.lestern Region and is dependent upon the stock condition of the herring population in each area. Fluctuations in herring abundance are not well understood, causing difficulty in forecast'ing abundance and harvest levels. In addition, the relationship of these eastern Bering Sea herring populations and their migrational parterns to those of other spawning and overuintering concentrations of herring in the Bering Sea has not been fu1'ly defined. Herring from Togiak, Security Cove, Goodnews Bay, and to a lesser degree, Nelson Island are intercepted in a food/bait fishery fn the Unalaska Island Area (Walker and Schnepf 1982, Rogers et al. 1983, Rogers and Schnepf 1985). The extenr cf interception must be evaluated to minimize the double harvest ano overexploitation of Bering Sea spawning stocks.

530 qJ -c +J ro lJ) cf) c\t o ctr (c) d rr) Nj co tr) c\l L @ cD c\t o r.o @ cD cv co c\l f\ N (F Ot cod @ €}.{ co =l *. d) Ol tf) r{ (\ r{ OO o<) c)o (u o- -o N @tO @sf \o (t) Or cf) st q- IJ r{ (u (5 P croU)P sl )'r O.| LL @ (tr I OO ()c) O! r{ €+r r\ tol rf) Ol NJI $J -v, d rO (5 (t nJ .F >, IJ (J-o (u |, L ard (u ao it' 'lf EOEL (I)ocFo oc O.F o G' (-) (t, P O ct ro N Ctrlj (u c (u ct(J (J CO q, C e)tn J d. +) +r (r_p H+, (o+J L C,' .r 5- >)0(,1p shtn+) H(rt-) (^P g (/r+J c\r c .c+, P(uL SCrL OL !(uL c)(L)L L otn .r>o qJ>o c>c (o>O {I>C -Lro(|J (u oJ(u L Lr+- c Lq- o Lq- > Lq- L+- rr-c (J I F+) LLO ro$- p (t'9 r/r,rt$ .F ro+- (u (oq- o L a- D.n (J-UJ= C-LrJ F-trj (o(l) (uO(u5.d C-LrJ O:ELlJ F o5 F= ../', (5 Z. z. (-J v1

531 Spawning activity for Bering Sea herring occurs earliest in the more southerly coastal areas and becomes progressively later with an increase in latitude. This staggered run timing makes it feas'ible for fishermen, particularly those with larger, more efficient boats, to harvest fish in more than one fishing district. Therefore, both to prevent overharvest of the smaller herring stocks and to protect the interest of the less effjcient local fishermen, exclusive registrat'ion regulations were fi rst imposed for the 1982 sea son . Prior to the 1985 season, Cape Romanzof and Norton Sound were the only herring fisheries classified as exclusive use areas. Uncler this regulation, fishermen who commercially fished in an exclusive drea could not fish irr a nonexclusive or exclusive area from February 1 through June 30 (ADF&G 1984). For the 1985 herring season, the Norton Sound District, Cape Ronranzof District, the combined Nelson Island and Nunivak Island districts, and the Goodnews District are designated superexclusive registration areas, which dictates the fol 1 owi ng: Any person participating in the corrnercial taking of herring as a Commercial Fisheries Entry Conmission (CFEC) perm'it holcier in a superexclusive use area at any time from February 1 through June 30 may not participate or have participated in the comnercial taking of herring, either as a CFEC permit holder or as a creb, member aboard a vessel used to take herring in another superexclusive or nonexclusive use area at qny time from February 1 through June 30 of the same year (ADF&G 1985e). Any person participating in the commercial taking of herring ds a crew member aboard a vessel used to take herring in a superexclusive use area at any time from February 1 through June 30 may not partic'ipate or have participated in any comnrercial raking of herring as a CFEC permit ho"lder in another superexclusive or nonexclusive use area at any time from February 1 through June 30 of that year (ibid.). Any vessel used in the taking of herring in a superexclusive use area at any rime from February 1 through June 30 may not be used or have been used in the taking of herring in anorher superexclusive or nonexclusive use area at any t'ime from February I rhrough June 30 of that year (ibid.). Notwithstanding the provisions listed above, dny person who participates in the taking of herring and any vessel used ro take herring fn the Goodnews Bay Di sirict may al so part icipate in the taking of herring or be used to take herring in the Security Cove District (ibid.).

532 II. SECURITY COVE AND GOODNEWS BAY DISTRICTS A. Boundaries The Security Cove and Goodnews Bay districts are contajned within Statistical Area l.l. The Security Cove Djstrict encompasses all waters between the latitude of Cape Newenhanr and the latitude of the Salmon River (58"52'N) (nrap 2). The Goodnews District consists of the portion of Goodnews Bay jnside a line between ADF&G markers placed nedr the bay entrance and a line between ADF&G markers placed near the mouth of the Ufigag River and on the opposite shore near the mouth of the Tunulik River (ADF&G 1985e) (map 2). B. Fishery Description and Reported Harvest 1. Subsistence harvgst _lqrnrna-ry.. The subsistence harvest of erefore is not monitored in the Security Cove and Goodnews Bay districts. 2. Comrnercial harvest suffnery: a. Security Cove District. The Security Cove District'is one of two herring fishing districts in Kuskokwim Bay. Fi rst 1 andi ngs i n the Securi ty Cove fi shery were reported in 1978, with a harvest of about 259 metric tons. The peak harvest of 1,064 nretric tons was taken during the 1981 fishery by 113 fishermen. Thirty-eight fishermen, the lowest recorded number of participants, fished the 1984 sedson and took ?95 metric tons, the smallest herring catch since 1978. A record effort of 175 permit holders harvested 632 metric tons during the 1980 season (taot e 2). The 1985 season produced a harvest of 833 metric tons taken by 122 permit holders. During the 1984 arrd 1985 seasons, the Security Cove fishery contributed about 15 and 19%, respectively, to the entire Western Region herning harvest. b. Goodnews Bay Djstrict. Interest irr fishing the Goodnews Bay District did not occur until I979, when 82 metric tons were harvested by 41 fishermen. Catches have 'increased gradual ly, reaching a record harvest of 800 metric tons taken by 69 fishermen during the 1985 fishery. The Goodnews Bay harvest accounted for 47 and 19% of the Western Region herring harvest during the respective years of 1984 and 1985 (tan1 e 2). 3. Harvest methods. By regulation, herring in the Security Cove and Goodnews Bay districts may be taken for commercial purposes only by gi 1 1 net. Trawl s are 1ega1 in seasons establ ished by emergency order (ADF&G 1985e). No trawl seasons have been establ'ished (Francisco, pers. comm.). 4. Period of use. The arrival of herring in the Security Cove and Goodnews Bay d'istricts usually occurs from early to mid May. Herring may be harvested commercial ly in periods established by emergeny order (ADF&G 1985c, 1985e).

~~533 Map 2. Security Cove and Goodnews Bay herring commercial fish'ing districts (ADF&G 1985c, 1985e).~~

534 C. Management Objectives and Consideration Consistent with the Statewide Manag.ement'herring Strategy for herring f isheries, thg exploitation rate of in tltt eooonewi dai and Security Cove districts has been based 6n estimated abundance ancl recruftment each season (ADF&G 1985c). srrouro lniiemeni weather and water conditions prohibit sat_isfactory aerlal as i a;il;t;; s often the case i n the Goodnews Bay oi st"r.i ii , then stock abundance and condition will be assessed by using a-iomuination of data from test and commercial catches, indluding- percentage iutir, rates, 1,. of roe rec_overy, the ratios oi pr"spa*ners to postspawners' and the relat'ive age class compositibn. Additional information to assess stock ibundance would deposition lncluoe ,t;;; observations _axd projections from tfre prio. season's escapement estimates. If aerial survey biomass ilstimates achieved were for the Security Cove District but not for the Gooonewi Bay Djstrict, abundance trends from Security Cove would be used in management of the Goodnews Bay herring fishlry (ibid.). D. Sigrrificance of particular UsL Areas " A series of reference maps has been prepared for use with this report ald may be found in t!" Map pub'lication. Attas that accompanies this The category of mappeo information includes the commercial herring harvest areas.

III. NELSON ISLAND AND NUNIVAK ISLAND DISTRICTS A. Boundaries within herring-statistical Area l^l, the Nunivak Island District consists of all water extending 3 mi seaward along -sides of mean low water the northern and eastern of Nunivak fsjano from Cape 41ggryyjl .(-0_o_'tp'33"N,. 166o55' 30"w) to Twin Mountaini too;oi;il1 165.43't,J) (ADF&G 1984e) (map 3). The Nelson Islancl District'consists of all waters north of the latitude of Chinigyak Cape (6A"27'N), south of the latitude southernmost of rhe tip of Kigiyak Island (OO'SO'N), anJ-uuii of 165o30,W (ibid.) (map 3). B. Fishery Description anct Reported Harvest 1. Subsistence harvest .summary...is About 75% of the annual ly su taken from the Nelson Island af9a. vi I lages of Tununak Toksook Bay, umkumui (Nightmute) -(Lebida , ano t et al . rgeq).- For areai'srrveyed between 1975 through 1984, the subsistence harvest has averagect about 76 metric tons annua'lly. The largest harvest of 88]9 metric tons was taken by 70 families ouiing the 1980 season (iuoi. 1).. The greateit number of famiriis r.ti;piiing in the fishery was documented in 1975, with 109 fanrilies trirvesti;g 80.8 metric tons of herring (table l). inough-subsistence surveys are believed to reflect harvest treios, one must remember that documented catches represent minimum figurei because all fishermen cannot be contacted. 2. Corrnercial harvest summqry.- The herring resource in the ur.u'-tui- hist'ori;;iiy supported

~~535 (u ro @ Ol r{ (t oa l-L O~~

~~o P (J L P ttl !~~

~~-ca (F~~

~~(o (J ! o c o(J (t) c l- r- OJ~~

~~E E .6 V'~~

~~E oa z(u c (o ! c (o tn~~

~~-v(o g z.:~~

~~(oo =~~

536 important subsistence herring fisherfes (Hemmi!9 et al. 1978' ADF&G 1985b). tlith development of comrrercial fisheries in neighboring areas in 1978, the Nelson and Nunivak islands area was closed by emergency order. The Alaska Board of Fjsheries closed the area by regulat'ign the following year to protect the subsi stence fi shery occurri ng on stocks of unknown size. Increased knowledge regarding the herring resource in the area, assessmeni of the subsistence use, and growing public interest in a commercial fishery resulted in a provision of the Alaska Board of Fisheries to open the area to commercial fishing 'in 1985 (ADF&G 1985b). a. Nun'ivak Island Di strici. The commercial harvest of k Island District totaled 325 metric tons in 1985 (taOle 2). 0f th'is total, about 97% of the catch was sold for sac roe extraction, with the rema'ining 3% processed for food and bait. Thirty-two permit holders participated 'in the fishery. It is estjmated that 80% of the harvest was taken by local f i shermen ( Franci sco 1985b ) . The Nuni vak isl and catch 'in 1985 contributed about B% of the entire Western Region commercial herring catch. b. Nei son Isl and Di stri ct. About 886 metri c tons of the Nelson Island commercial fishery in 1985, of which 99% of the total was sold for sac roe (Francisco 1985). Peak effort in the fishery permit holders (taote 2). The fleet was totaled 131 'loca1 dominated by boats and accounted for about 60% of the total harvest (Francisco 1985). The Nelson island fishery contributed about 2I% of the total Western Region herring harvest during the 1985 season. 3. Harvest methods. Herring in the Nunivak Island and Nelson ffi may be taken for commercia'l purposes only by g111 net. Traw'ls may be used in seasons established by emergency order, though no such seasons have been established (ADF&G 19B5d). 4. Period of use. The arrival of herring jn the Nelson Island alld Turffi[_Tsland d'istricts occurs from early May to early June, depending on ice conditions (ADF&G 1985b). Herring may be taken in periods establ'ished by emergency order from May I through June 30 (ADF&G 1985e). C. Management 0biectives and Consideration In accordance with the Alaska Board of Fisheries policy statement in management of the Nelson Island District herring fishery,.the rate of exploitation establjshed for the Nelson Island and Nunivak Island districts'is a range of 0 to I0% of the estimated biomass for each district (ADF&G 1985b). The exploitat'ion rate is lower than the 0-20% rate of exploitatjon establ'ished for the rest of the State of Alaska, to protect subsistence utilization. Aerial surveys conducted to assess b'iomass levels are f requerrt'ly hampered by weather, the presence of ice, and turbid water. Therefore, if

537 it is not possible to determine herring abundance by aerial survey, stock abundance and condit'ion may be assessed by using additional information, such as age class composition, commercial catch rate, percentage roe recovery, rates of pre-to-postspawners from test and commercial catches, spawn deposition observation, and the preseason projection (Francisco 1985b, ADF&G 1985b). Before a season within a district is opened, a minimum of 1,000 to 1,500 metric tons or significant spawning activity must be observed. The commercial fishery must be nranaged so that there is min'imal confl'ict with the subsistence harvest of herring. This goal is achieved through delayed openings, periodig closures in-season, and special area closures during the season (Francisco, pers. comm. ) . The pol i cy statement of the management of ihe Nel son I s I arrd District fishery establishes the priority of subsistence use during the development of the commercial herring fishery in this area. Regulations necessary for the orderly development of the commercial herring fishery in the Nelson Island District do not irr any way restrict the taking of herring or other fish for' subsistence purposes. In addition, Section 5 AAC 01.020 of the commercial and subsistence fishing regulations provides that commercial fishermen may retain fish for their subsistence use or for the subsistence use of other persons. To provide additional protection of the Nelson Island District subsistence herring fishery, the following guidelines are provideo (ADF&G i985e): 1. The commercial fishery will be allowed to take up to l0% of the available herping biomass, compared to up to 20% for nost other fisheries having stocks of similar size and condition. 2. The commercial fishing season will be opened when a biomass of 1,000-1,500 metric tons or spawning activity is documented. 3. Periodic closures of the commercial fishery will be schecluled, during which time subsistence f ishing wi 1'l be the only activity allowed. 4. Sevbral inrportant subsistence use areas occur throughoul the district, including waters north of Cape Vancouver, and specific areas may be closed to commercial fishing to ensure the adequacy of subsistence harvests. 5. The Alast

538 IV. CAPE ROMANZOF DISTRICT A. Boundaries In the eastern Bering Sea, Statistical Area Q has as its southern boundary a line extending vrest from Dall Point, as its northern boundary a line extending west from Point Hope, and as its western boundary thS International Date Line in the Bering and Chukchi seas (map 1). The Kotzebue, Fort Clarence, Norton S6und, and Cape Romanzof districts for the commercial harvest of herring are within Statistical Area a. 0nly the Cape Romanzof District is within the Western Region; it consists of all watens of Alaska between the latitude of Dall Point and 62oN (ADF&G 1985e) (map a). B. Fishery Description and Reported Harvest 1. Sltbsistence harvest summary. 0n the Yukon-Kuskokwim de1ta, Chevak, and Scammon Bay have ; long tradition of subsistence use of herring and herring roe-on-kelp (Hemming et a1. 1978). These villages have beei surveyed annual'ly since 1975. The results of the subsistence surveys are believed to accurate]y reflect harvest trends and reported catches represent minimum figures because al I fishermen cannot be contacted (Lebida et a'1. 1984). Results for areas surveyed through the 1984 season indicate that an average of 11.4 metric tons have been harvested annually (taOte 1). A peak harvest of 2L.5 metric tons was taken by 64 families in L982. A maximum number of 106 families documented in the subsistence surveys harvested 17.5 metric tons of herring during the 1979 fishery (tanle 1). 2. tonrnercial harves!_pgnungr.y. The Cape Romanzof f i shery i s one eloped hbrring sac roe fisheries a'long the eastern Bering Sea coast. First landings were reported in 1980, when 69 permit holders harvested about 554 metric tons (taOt e 2). Catches have since increased steadily, reaching a record harvest of I,4Zg metric tons taken by 75 permit holders during the 1985 season (taute 2). The fishery supported 111 fishermen during the 1980 season. Up to four buyers have purchased herring on the Cape Romanzof ground (Geiger 1985). Participation in this fishery has been dominated by residents from the local communities of Hooper bay, Chevak, and Scammon Bay (Lebida et al. 1984, Geiger 1985). Implementation of exclusive and superexclusive registration policies, beginning in 1982, has increased the success of these local fiihermen in the f ishery. During the 1980 season, local res'idents accounted for about 40% of the Cape Romanzof herring harvest (Regnart and Kingsbury 1980), and during the 1984-fishery, this percentage increased to 99.8% (Lebida et al. 1984). Approximately 94.L% of the herring caught during the 1985 fishery was taken by 1oca1 fishermen (Geiger 1985). Harvest levels in the Cape Romanzof fishery during the 1984 and 1985 seasons exceeded catches of other Western Region herring catches (tanl e 2). Cape Romanzof fishermen have

~~539 Map 4. Cape Romanzof commercjal herring fishing distrjct (ADF&G 1985e).~~

540 contributed 54% and 33% of the Western Region herring harvest during 1984 and 1985, respectively (table 2). 3. Harveit methods. 0n1y gill nets are 1ega1 for the commercial I'ffi-oTTerring 'in the Cape Romanzof D'istrict. 4. Period of use. Though somewhat variable from year to year, Effinj usuany appear on the fishing grounds and spawn f rom mid May to micl June (ADF&G 1985a). By regulation, the duration of the fishing season extends from May 1 through June 30. Si nce 1982, hc.,wever, commercial periods have been established by emergency order. The management policy for the Cape Romanzof fishery states that the fishery will open after test fish catches and observations regarding spawn deposition determine that harvestable quantities of herring are present (teoida et al. 1984, ADF&G 1985a). C. Management Objectives and Consideration TurOio water conditions in the Cape Romanzof area prevent reliable estimation of herring abundance by aerial survey. Therefore, for purposes r.rf stock assessment several types of data are used. These j ncl ude the extent of spav',n depos i ti on , catch rate , age Class composition, percentage roe recovery, and ratios of pre-ro-postspawning herring taken in both test and commerc'ial catch samples (ADF&G 1985a). Spawning occurs in the intertidal zone. Most of the intertjdal spawning areas are located along the north shore of Kokechik Bay and, to a lesser extent, on the south shore of Scammon Bay. Unless a greater proportion of spawning actjvity occurs in Scanrnon Bay, fishing activity is restricted to Kokechik Bay (ADF&G 1985a). The Cape Romanzof D'istrjct is small, and, with the jncrease in fishing efforr and gear efficiency, the allowable harvest can be taken w'itfrin a short period of time. Iherefore, to provide for management control, the season is regulated by emergency_order. Prioi to 1985, a 350 metric ton guidel ine harvest level was established by the Alaska Board of Fisheries. Howevern since the inception of the fishery, this guideline harvest level has been exceeded each year. Bec-ause the published guideline harvest level did not adequately represent preseason harvest estimates, th'is published fi!ure was repealecl for the 1985 season (ADF&G 1984, 1985a,e).

REFERENC ES ADF&G. 1984. Regulations of the Alaska Board of Fisheries for commerc'ial fishing in Alaska - herring. Djv. Commer. Fish., Juneau. 48 pp. . 1985a. 19S5 Herring Fishery Management Plan, Cape Romanzof ct. Di v . Commer. Fi sh . , Anchorage. 7 pp . -Tl-stri. 1985b. 1985 Herring Fishery l,lanagement Plan, Nelson Island and ----Tn-ivak Island districts. Div. Cornrner. Fish., Bethel . 10 pp.

541 . 1985c. 1985 Herring Fishery Management Plan, Security Cove and Bay d'istri cts. Di v. Conuner. Fi sh. , Bethel . B pp. -To-odnews . 1985e. Regul ations of the Al aska Boa rd of Fisheri es for -- commercial fishing in Alaska - herring. Div. Comner. Fish., Juneau. 52 pp. Frarrcisco, K. 1985a. Pers

~~s42 Conrnercial ancl Subsistence Harvest ot Salmon Western and Interior Regions~~

I. POPULATION MANAGEMENT HISTORY A. Introduction Two areas in the Western and Interjor regions have been delineated for the marragement of commercial salmon fisheries, the Yukon and Kuskokwim management areas. Collectively, these management areas encompass the ent'r re freshwater drainages of the yukon and Kuskokwim rivers and coastal waters extending from the latitude of Cape Newenham north to the latitude of Canal Point Light. The two management areas are div jded furtherinto districts to facil itate salmon management. Inforrnation presented in sections II and III of this narrative is organized by management area. B. Summary of' Regional Fisheries 1. lq4vest summary. Five species of pacific salmon are harvested in the western and Interior regions. Though all species may be present in commercial and subsistence catches, chunr salmon 0rrcorhynchus keta), chinclok salmon (0ngorhynchus r h a w{ s h ( : ! g a ) ffi i) n c o f hy n c h u s k i s u t c h)_aom*1TE1 e the f isheries. The Yukon affis chinook salmon, the Kuskokwim R'iver coho salmon, arrd the yukon R'iver fal I and summer chum salmorr are hi gh'ly prized species tha t are sold in a growing export marker (pope 1981). A significant portion of rhe salmon harvested in these management areas is for persondl consumption, more than irr uny other area of l,lesrern or Arctic Alaska. combined reporteb commercial and subsistence harvest of salmon between 1975 and 1984 has ranged from 1.9 nrillion fish taken in 1976 to 3.3 million fish harvested in 1984 and averaged 2.7 nillion fish annually. About 23% of the 1984 catch was oy ihe subsistence f i shery. 2. Manageria'l authority. The u. s. Fish and tnli rdr ife service ffiaska's fisherres from the late 1g00's through 1959. After statehood was granted in 1959, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) managed the salnion llshery. The Alaska salmon f ishery became a l'inrited entry fishery in L974 after the conrnercial Fisheries tntry comm'ission was establ ished. Management of fisheries in waters vrithin three nautical miles of shore is the responsibility of the state of Alaska. The Tuglq:gn Fishery Conservation and Management Act, imp'lemented in r977 and amended in 1980, provided for conservation arrd exclusive united states management of alr fisheries within 200 nautical miles of the shore, creating the Fishery conservation Zone (FCZ) from 3 to zc} nautical miles froir shore. The North Pacific Fishery Management council 'is

543 responsible for managing fisheries in the FCZ and proposes nlandgenlent plans that become federal law. The International North Pocific Fisherres Conunission, comprised of Calada, Japotr, and the Uniteo States, recommends rndnagement procedures and prepares cclnservation measures outside the United States and Canadian 200-nautical-mile zones. Ihe ADF&G manages the salmon fishery in the Yukon and Kuskokwim managenent dreas under policy establishecl by the Alaska Board of Fi sheries. 3. Gear. rypes. Primarily set and drift gill net gear are used 6_Turvest salmon jn the Western ino Interrior regions' subsistence and comrnercial fisheries. Fish wheels are al so used to harvest salmon in the commercial and subsistence fisheries of the upper yukon River (ADF&G 1985b). 4. Period of use. Timing of the commercial fishery depends upon TImfig-of-m sa Inon iuns into the management areas. Fishing seasons and periods are establ ished for each species by district with'in each of the management area. 5. Economic value. Information concerning the value of salmon wiJfi'inJfi'fGtern and interior regioni is presented in the lconornic 0verview of Fish and hjildl ife volume.

I ]. KUSKOKWIM MANAGEMENT AREA A. Boundaries l'he Kuskokwim Area cclrtsists of all Alaskan waters between the latitude of the westernntost point of the Naskonat Pen'insula and the latitude of the soutlrernmost tip of Cape Newenham, including the waters of Alaska surround'ing Nunivak ancl St. Matthew islandi (ADF&G 1e85b). The Kuskokwinr Management Area i s di vided i nto fi ve fi shi ng djstrjcts (nrap 1). Three of these districts are located within the ma'irr stem of the Kuskokwim Rjver. The remaining two d'istrjcts are located'in marine wat.ers at the mouths of the Kanektok and Goodnews rivers. Districr descriptions are as fol lows: 1. Di!trict 1. District 1 consjsts of that portion of the RGtrilffi-River upstream of a I ine f rom Apokak Slough (60'08'N, 162'12'W) to the southernmost tip of' Eek IslanO [o Popukarniut (60"04'N, 162"28,W) to a line between ADF&G regulatorj,markers aI the upstream edge of the lrorth mouth o1' l{i shev i k Sl ough. 2. D'istrict 2. District 2 consists of the Kuskokwirn River rtraJlEe Trom an ADF&G regul atory marker pl aced at the upstream edge of the north mouth of ttlishevik S'lough upstream to the downstream edge of the mouth of rhe Kolmakoff River. 3. !.j-:lf&l_l. District 3 consists of the Kuskokwim River upstreanl of the upp€ir boundary of District 2. Though subsistence fishing for salmon occurs in District 3, the commerc'ial salmon fishery has been closecl in the area since 1966.

~~544 fo sr Ol (.' oo ou-~~

~~(6 (u !~~

~~(uoc3 oa= (d(u CL (6rO E ro EO I -:z=ro O+J JC vto Y(ua= o(o +)t! E r+-~~

~~a+J +)~~

~~PP .-3lt '- o)(u CP fo -c()tAo 9- a o ao ._ P c)~~

~~EC (J(J~~

~~oEro (o4J Lno z.~~

~~o+).r'0 =z~~

545 4. District 4. District 4 consists of Kuskokwim Bay between ADmd requlato^ry. markers placed at the westernmost edge of the .niouth of Oyak creek and at the southermost edge oi the mouth of the Arolik River. 5. District 5. District 5 consists of that portion'riarkers of Goodnews Eay-lns]"a I i ne between a ADF&G regui otb.y--ADF&G pl acect nedr the _bay entrance and a line between reguiatory markers placed near the mouth of the ufigag River and on the oppcsite shore near the mouth of the r-unutit River (ADF&G 1985b). R Fi shery [:escri pri orr and Reported Use Salmon in the Kuskokw'iln Area are harvested for both subsistence and commercial use. combined catches of all species reached a peok of 1.7 milli.on fish curjng the l9g4 season'(tables i inc-z) Durirrg the past decade, the conrnercial fishery accounted for 76% of rhe rotal harvest of salmon, with the suosistence fishery contributing the remaining 24%. 1 . Al 1 -spec i es ha rvesr: a. conmercial haqvest sumnsrJ. Five species of salmon are comnrercffithe Kuskoliwim l4anag.r.ni nr.u . The fishery is dominated by chum salmon filloweo, in order of nragni.tu{e,. b.y c-oho, chi nook, sockeye, and pi nk salmon. The Kuskokwim Area commercial risheiy is'the oldest. salmon fishery in the conrbined Arctic,-l,lesterrr, and Interior regions, with catches reporteo ai early as 1913. For nldny years, smalr commerciar miro--cure operations were conducted in or near the Kuskokwim Bay whi le the fishery in the Kuskokwim River remained undeveloped (ADF&G igTga ). A commercial fi shery did develop in the 1930's near the McGrath area for th6 sale of dnied salmorr for dog food. This particular fishery, however, declined 'in as t[e use of oog teams also oeclinlo the Kuskokwinr Area (ibid. ).' Overal'l , the commercf a'l f5!qw pflgr to 1961 was smal I and poorly OocumenteO (ADF&G l97s). In the Bay a.ea, rhe commeriiar harvest of salmon began in 1968. The fishery has been somewhat sporadic because of inconsistent processing jnclement capability and weather (ADF&G 19g4a). Thd rnarket and resultant harvest leve'ls, however, have stabilized during the pasr few years (ibid.). From 1960 through 1965, commercial salnion catches in the Kuskokwim^Aqe.a .averaged sz,0l4 fjsh annual ly, increasing to 219,970 fish per year from 1965 through 1975 (ADF&G 1979). During the past 10 years, the cornmircial harvesr increased_gradually from 394,196 fish in 1975 to a peak harvest of alnrost 1.5 nrillion salmon in 1994, averaging about 818,829 sarmon annua'ily (taote 1). buring "rhe this period, 74% of the total comnrercial salmon h#vesr has been taken from District 1, the lower Kuskokwim River. Districts 4, 5, and 2, respectively, accounted

~~s46 g @ I tn ol f'\ON N ro -t :t Ot lo N (DN N {t @ Ot rr) rf@ Ol L o +|n Ol .o -+ o~~

~~N F-O @ (t) .E @ lo _+ r|(o ('| @ C, N-+ o @ O) to f4 N NO .u r)-+ rn N~~

~~L $r/lo (o o rvl N @(n .\l o!n (o o @ ulN O) orn \o (t) @ >l NO (o @ N o~~

(t) L o@ Ot u)N + t\ (oo n4 0l co E @ @o Ol O! t.o 3 o +N @rnc)o I r\ o\ J o @61 @ J (o@ N Orn :< o co @ c @ OOI c, o (tl ln o co c{ P IE r or F- () N o L t/, o c'l @ Ol t\ lno r N E (') Or @ o Ol rn @o o F- + t\ (n c{ u- Ol <) ao LL o :fOI o NOr @ o U1 or o L g or c) N o (o N @ @ @ t\ @ Oc{ o, z. Ol o@ ro c{ co rn {t(o (o @ ! O) \0O(0 -+ F- g o N Gl rn p q) F. ln o\tn -+ ol N (tt o.r o C' o1 mF. @ q) N \o of ol rn t.- Na4 u) 'o c O) F. O) N Nc' @F,l ro @ N -+r)0 F. o o\oo\ rl u) ol@F\ o o ol o6-+ E c{ -+ r o or U'' o foo +o o,o o r/) o\ool F. L N F- i\ ON F\ p (o Ol E o Or .q @()-+ E {) @ (r)c)(D o o o L o N T ol c

o r)o p (, NP c q) L t'FE Olo o, ! L L E (J o +o:=Ja^ ..'L o p o-xoa t! ,o o +l,-Y,cooq)6sp q g .f :< .o f o o o p F:.(Nm:<-+orrr-n E () o oo6 g o !-Lr:Eo cJo q) o EEocrJo) ()L ! .o o,FcLJOa F lo J=l-o=.Ero_oa u)e

EA'f for 16, B, and 29% of the harvest during the same tinre period (tarrte 1). Al though urost clf the commercial harvest is taken by cirift gill nets, set gi'll nets are also used. Drift gill nets are fished in areas of the river that are relatively free of snags. Commercial set gitl nets are fished in small eddies along the bank of the Kuskokwim Rfver and larger eodies out in the main river (ADF&G 1983). Most of the salmon catch from the Kuskokwinr Management Area is gutted, iced, and exported to be nrarketed as a fresh or frozen product. Current'ly, there are no operating canneries in the area (ADF&G 1984a). b. Qoffnercial fis[]r'g__gllgr!. Participation in the com- as grown significantly since statehood as fishermen have been making the transition fronr subsistence to a cash economy (ibid.). The use of highly mobile nylon drift gilI nets has improved the efficiency of the fleet. Improvement of processing and tendering facilities in the Kuskokwim area has also contributed to expansion of the fishery (ibid.). In recent years, fishermen participation levels have risen in the'lower Kuskokwinr River (tristrict 1) and Quinhagak (District 4), which have become the centers for most Kuskokr,i'inr Area fishermen. This is due to the close proximity to population centers and the liberal harvest goals associated with these fisheries. The District 2 (middle Kuskokwim Rjver) and District 5 (Goodnews Bay) fisheries have remained fairly stable in terms of the number of fishernen working in these areas because of the relat.ive remoteness and smal ler al lowab'le harvest levels associated with these fisheries (ADF&G 1984a). Recent increases irr fishing effort may appear to be somewhat of a contradiction, considering that the Linrited Entry Commission issued 83i permits in I976 to fishermen, based on points earned forpast participation in the fishery. llo other permits have been available since that time. Some fanlilies were eligible for more than one permi t , and many el derly fi shermen u/ere e1 igible. Many of these fishermen, after having received a permi t, did not inrmed'iately partic'ipate 'in the fishery. These inactive permits have since been transferred and/or sold to more aggressive fishermen. Irr 1984, 813 Kuskokvrim area pernits were renewed, dnd 774 permits wene fr shed (Schul tz, pers. comm. ) . Ni nety- eight percent c,f all Kuskokwim entry permit holders are residents of the area (ADF&G i984a). c. Subsi stence harvs$_:ulUlq_ry. There are approximately 33 rea, some of wfrich are among the largest and some among the smallest in the state

548 (Haynes, pers. comm. ) . Most of the residents are Eskimos wi th varyi ng clependency on fi sh and game resources for the'ir livelihood. The Kuskokwim River fishery is also important to Athabaskan residents in the upper river area and to other rural residents. living oLtside established communities and in McGrath (ibid.). Further discussion of the subsistence use of Kuskokwim River salmon is found in the final section of this volume. The subsistence salmon fishery is one of the nrost important in the state (ADF&G 1984a, 1985a) and based on reported harvest is second in size only to the Yukon Area fishery (taules 2 and 16). The first record of any subsistence catches was in 1922; these were based on brief visits or on reports from local residents (Pennoyer et al. 1965). The annual survey of the Kuskokwim River subsistence fishery was initiated in 1960. In the early years, "smokehouse counts" were used to determine total uti I ization of subs'i stence-caught fi sh. Subsi stence-catch cal endars were distrjbuted to fishermen prior to the fishing season in order to determine timing and run magnitude (ADF&G 1984a ). Traditional fishing methods and materials limited the size and scope of the early fishing. Spears, dip nets, fish traps, and willow- or caribou-strip gi11 nets were slowly supplanted by more efficient linen gil'l nets and then by nylon gill nets (ADF&G 1984a). The majority of the subsistence salmon catch is comprised of chum salmon. Since statehood, however, improvements in fishing gear, notably the introductjon of nylon gill net webbing, have probably increased the harvest and importance of chinook salmon. Estimated peak subsi stence salmon harvest level s urere reached during the 1930's cojncidentally with the peak activity of the quasi-commercial McGrath fishery, but records indjcate a continuing decline of this fishery into the 1940s. Few catch data are available for the 20-year period prior to statehood (ADF&G 1984a). Today the value of the subsistence fishery to local people remains as great as money realized from the commerc'ial fishery ( ibid. ) Reported subs'istence harvest levels s'ince 1975 have ranged from 175,698 salmon in 1978 to 301,488 salmon in 1982 (taute 2). Catches between 1975 and 1984 averaged 255,994 fish annually. About 63% of the harvest during the same period was taken from District I ('lower Kuskokwim Area). Districts 2, 3, 4, and 5 accounted for 22, 10, 3, and I%, respectively, of the total subsistence harvest (taote ?). In order of magnitude, the primary species harvested are chum, chinook, and coho

~~549 L |D q,~~

~~orf @ Nroot NO +J Ol r| ln arr @ odl o (q N l'\ ri o@ L O('rtn c.t t- .P r an o -? N o 1o r.ootr| Or rO o @ (0 -+Oo) @o! Or c) -+ or (') rn aY) ro c) lr) Or F- (n N r.O L o n F-~~

+J |D o N ln fno@ N@ @ o -++ @@ E (tr N ro1r)$ (o-t ('r anNV] (o .o (f rn ff o o = E lo (o@@ orN ('r l'\ F- OF\ 3 (oOI N|n J o rl o .+ 60 ro J rn rtl N tJl o N :< q, o tn \0 rn or @ @ N .o(o {J c O) o ON @N o 6 10 {tNOl ..o @ o @ .+m N q, N ; u) o c') (n L tr o -t @J \o O) f-. @oo rt F. N No(n r.o|n 6 (tl o N -+o-+ s L .f -t iD o N Or L

~~E F.N@ @ N 6 rooro O) @ z. @ Orlr\ (o (t F. Or F\ \o(n() rn o ON N @ Ol o Noo N6 o (o\O@ N t\ N (no('l (oln o F\ @ o ( Ot otl (o \o Ol .l') ro (oN F\ N~~

F. o +lnN or rn crl lo @ -t@-+ N@(oJ rro F. o@ E ('l (o @r.oo @ r0N Ol @ o N NO (n orp : tn.f ot o o1 a.)oo Itt F- q, ltl Nrno (! F\L +J N Ol v, c!OF- il) Or \o-tN c, N L (l)L F.a Oro () E o () E r|L^o L {) r9 .p E^ Ol o E'FE ! q) C) L o =.F oE o aJ3^ cac J -!o!oJo€o o Oo- 0) P JO.Xdl+JoaoJo :t:1) o L g N (n:< -+ cT) !n o.l -i' P -= qrlooo = ..'r' 6 @ o LFL-CC|lt c, +r crl OT'IDCT'L LOoo o 31rO.FO< J z -!o-O F- O.-o-fO o oor J=f,o(, tJ) €

550 salmon. Subsistence catches of sockeye'ly and pink salmon have been very sma I I and have usua I been i ncl uded i n the chum salmon harvest figures. 2. Chum sqlmon harvest. Chum salmon are the most abundant ffihe Kuskokwim Management Area. This species has comprised 48% of the combined subsisrerrce and commercial salnron catch (all species) over the past 10 years. About 75% of the harvest for both fisheries combined is taken from the Kuskokwim River drainage (taoles 3,5). a. C_onunelcial hqrvest sqmmary. The commerc jal f ishery tor chum sa lmon prior tc; I97I was very smal I . Catches primarily were incidental to the harvest of chinook and coho salmon (ADF&G 1994b). A directed commercial harvest for chum salnton was established in I97I. This wds done because of an apparent reducrion in subsistence use of this species, because of assurances that the spavrning populations cf chum salmon in the Kuskokwim River were of sufficient size ro support the fishery, and because the biological data regarding length, d9€, sex, run timing, ,and run size obtained f rom sanrpl ing commercial chum salmon catches would be beneficral in future managenrent of the run (ADF&G lgBZ). Commercial salmon catches have increased steadily since expansion of the fishery'trr I97I. From 1975 through 1984, chum salmon catches have ranged from 225,156 fish in 1975 to a record catch of 542,531 fish in 1982 and have averaged 348,410 salmon annually. About 488,715 chum salmon were harvested during the 1984 season. Fishing districts within the Kuskokwinr River accounted for 86% of the harvest. About 83% of the catch came from District 1. Districts 4 and 5 accounted for 11 and 3% of the catch, respectively. Data conrpiled from the I98? and 1983 commercjal fisheries indicate that chuni salnron are available on Kuskokw'im River Districts i and 2 when rhe fishery opens during mid June. Carch levels peaked the last week of June or first week of July and diminished by rnid August to the first of September (taole 4). Timi ng of the chum sa'lmon migration through the Kuskokwim Bay commercjal fisheries is s1 ightly later than the Kuskokwim River run. Chum silmon returning to Districrs 4 and 5 for both years were present when the fi shery opened in mid June. Harvest levels peaked rhe second week of July, with the catch diminishing by the second week of August (taote 4). Chum salmon caught throughout the

~~551 if I In F\ + o (v)@t')mNorn c4 !n \orr| $F\ q @ o Or (or\O co OlNrn @~~

(o r|o| (fJ NOO F- Ji r.O Or o NO ro rn ('l F*. @(n (o (.) N pL Ol N NO\O o (! lo (n @ co (.J Om Ol o.+ Or Orm ul r| m N o N N N r|oq) (o o tt) rn m @ m\o c't o @m r) ID rn @ or -f + o c -+ FrO-+ 2 @ cc (o (o E ctr or rn o rO ur t lE (o N J o 6 J o @ @ ro @Orl O) Ot v rn ol NN (n ol Ot^(o r 6 -c. Ol @ fr1 !n r L ln N Ol N N ol o Ol -c Ol NOco In N (n c'l -t @ +F- @ F.- @o O) ('t N N J N co N o +J L Ot (, c) ooF\ rlOl L ! @ $o E rf\ (o ON \o ol 2. o Ot N rom @ Or g Ol N : rn N t\ F-O('r mr L N mrl q, \o N !o o@ o F- 6 Ol m o f- $ + E N N Ot (-) avt o (orno Nrr|(o @ @@ o rn (>^u1 F* N(n $(D N o) r ^a N .+ rt! E @ MN E N o L (o a t- a- Or

~~r).o aJ o N+) g E^ oro {) q) E.FE 9 L 3.- L JOt3rt^ (, J oJO.oF ooL o (J ! lox(D€ LO o o=6-y+) oc o L rll .?:~~

~~552 @ I N @~~

~~.P po L .oL +, FO o\o o)@ o@ @@ o o- anNm I o{J r{JlJ*J o CtlOlo|)CnqrOO-O c't rD |l) a)ftJ(l)tD{) c +r> |oL E oo o t!~~

~~.cl o to~~

~~P o 0, () .p L L .po .0 oo. OrOdr-F\FmOl I roo (.)NN e&, .P o o+) Ot CD ('r CD ('r cL Or Ol PO :'f)=loff o |o rt) L o>g E lo E I (J~~

~~q, o J @@ o+J @ONtgl cct a)6 Nf4 1'|CfF.NFt\ o- c) orrD>o a, q,L cc-c, L +J|o t:'fJ)af: OI -) o -) -) -) -) -) -) ') Pc q, E C)~~

~~o = ol €'tv)l\ril)F\mNo .Y= C,L OOTDOO{rOO P{J cccccccc J oc JJJt53)a O lr, -)-)-)-)'1-t-f- :< o, o) E, c +J c c o oCL~~

~~E L clraN,4NmNm o o @@ @@ @@ @@ (J @ il) oro(horotoro)or L .E q) t !nE ) coo E OrO s o coc)JO cc'l~~

~~F o etF JCI F I ctJ 3J :o> poQJio o.Yo fJ E tJ Ji,^(D o v)a! fcD g eYN$Orr}B':<@6 I tuou ..L 6 LFCC tDo qEUa o! -oo L o.-JO ut, |o J=O(J f F v)o~~

~~553 (o 4 N~~

~~L rt (o oo or ol a u)''l o $ Ol r)CO Nrf @ O) N co |r|'.o tJ1~~

~~c o(o @ o o ct) InN r| ('l lnN f) @ Ot rf 6 N : @ € N~~

c r| anlo(() + r.o o 5 Nr.o@ rr.t F- N @ NO) F- Ol @ Ol N OINN N+ o N av) N Or C) L \oN@ p ON(')l'- c co $l/l@(t N(o (o(oo .N q) .o\ ql Or('tNN rn|'| o C .f)(l'm .o o !Oc|rN \o-i. E @Nc)Or co 6o\ 3 c'r clr rO N j o <>crN \o 0) ll .n g J c') Ol Y @ N-+O ON$ E o rNri mOO .+ rt' Or F. o (n € LL (o ('r Ot tumd -t \o t: N o orom N @ @$ rn ol N MJN o (oo\-() .f N NN N @ Ol rn mN(o to l\ N (o NCO In o) f N +N @(n z Ot co (! (YIN+ clr C N r|N o'n N crr F. o l'- F- O @o or tO c4Orm N rtl a N N u)(hOt a (tl {t- o @-frn {t !nN @ ) N FO -c crr {J o @$NC) o) -o o -'.om-s N N.', rt| u1F-o F-L ]J N -t ol C'l o+@_:f o c) NM @ ID L \o^> L o N) I Oo q.) F o o C tr}rog o F- .aJ I p E^ Oro 6 E.FE B.- !T' 3J3^ c) JOt od!.Cc.f f oJOlo t!ig>O U) ! JOJCOO o=ox+) OctDo :t:

554 Kuskokwim Management Area during l98Z ancl 1983 were primarily ages 4 and 5 fish (ltuitenum 1984,1995). b. !qbs'istence harvest surygrJ. Estimated peak f chum salmon were attained during the 1930's, when they were used as food for dog teams used for freight haul ing. Catches declined during the 1940's, and little daia exist for the 20 years prior to stdtehood (ADF&G 1985a ) . Since 1975, subsistence catches of chum salmon have ranged from the I25,052 recorded for the I?TB season to 231,150 taken during the lg76 fishery. Most of the harvesr has consistenrly been frbm District I (table 5). Since tgt5, Diitrict t has accounted for 60% of the subsistence harvest. Districts 2, 3, 4, and 5 have accounted for the remaining 26r 11, 2, and I% of the harvest, respectively (table 5). 3. Colg salmon harvest. Coho salmon has comprised abcut ffirvest of salnron (all s'pu.i"i)-iron' 1975 through 1984. Combined commercial and subsistence harvest of coho salmon has ranged from 1II,763 fish in 1975 to a record harvest of 84-S,30; fish iaken during the 1984 sedson (taotes 6 ano 8). a. Commercial =,|q1'vest summaff. About 40% of the the Kuskokwim Manage- ment Area has been compri secJ of coho salmon. Areawide, commercial catches in the last decade have showrr a steady increase. Harvest levels have ranged from 111,763 fish in I975 to a record harvest of 830,931 salmon taken during the 1984 season (raOle 6). Catches have averaged 329,673 coho salmon, annual'ly. About 76% of the coho salmon harvest has been taken from District i in the Kuskokwim River. Districts 2, 4, and 5, respectively, contributed about 1, 13, ano 9% of the coho salmon harvest between Ig74 and 1984 (taute 6). The commercial harvest of coho salmon frorn the Kuskokwim River has ranged fronr a low of 5,000 fish in 1971 to a peak catch of 623,000 fish in 1984. The number of vessels participating in the fishery in the river has increased fronr 83 in lgTI to 651 during the 1984 fishery (ADF&G i9e4b). Data from the 1982 and 1983 fisheries indicate that entry of coho salmon into the fishing areas is somewhat later than for other salmon species. Coho salmon have entered the Kuskokwim River fishery in District I as ear'ly as July 8, peaking in mid August and continuing through the final harvest

~~555 o I |rl o o ooto o o)o Nto -? -t @NOt @ ao :f o) Itt a(t !no C) 40 (o mF\an o @~~

1f, (o oo c!o@ c o .+ \O rfl @ co -r(oo ! tn NOrOI Or aO :t L N !o F\ oc o N (orn @l,1 @ (Yl t\ (O 1.O Or -t fl m ro F. N -i In'o a L @ afi o t: Or r.- (o @@ -:f @ @ otn F- |'r q) or t'\ ,nN Oro E O $ F\ tt N N .J

~~o CDoo r.o @ o F. ro r|0 = @ @10 NOr E o ol o O) qN (tN i o (o J c{ -tN o q, o I .+ a (tr @ f ooln of4 O! v (f)N Or@ Or + \0trl C) \O o o r| MN N@ q lr- g +F\ @ N 'o Ol~~

E rnoJ { N Ol (oF- @ t- (o F- Gl tL F. Or Ol o Nc' (nN N s N N @ +i L Or () o Or!OO(D lni\ L r|Oc! MN F- |oF-o (nN o 1)o 3 F.. @ Ol F- 14 crr cll 1.c) o c N rOl o Ot g (.c| m@oN Nc) Q) m(oN 4.n .c. O)r)F- @ q Ol F\ rn orN @ @ F. or (J o o o(o Nd) |.\ L In N Ol q) F. -f(o N +J Or ul r\ O) o r\. -E O) @ L r{} o r.- o, i O! c

o Ino +, N+J c go Fa OrO |l) E.:E g o a.- ! E 3rl:^ ! E roJ at J oJolo c6L o +) Jo-y.aD|o 1!lD oa)c,j<+) oc o L F5N(n>a_tcDt/lB.pf:<-o3ooo E (o +J l1,oa) o o LFL!Ctg o|l, L o g)!trDcErt OL o o.-o_r6a5Eo6a Lo- F o J==oc) o u)o -o

~~556 (t .F' @ o I q) o\o or6 0@ co@ N mN6 @ tsL! Or ooo -j.j CD(,T(,OT<'TO_CLO_'i OL f:rf:lf,ruo0) +, +j tl, +) ooL o oo J L +Jo~~

D o o ! l! L T-O+J Or0OrFO@{.ocO O oocLo dlNd ooa > .PPP +)L Ctl ('l € o+)lo 3:fJ:ttcrrDoCD cD cD O- o- cL o t,E (o o J +Jo c) g o f ol F+JOo c{FOtrNN € otNc{ ilro>-y 0) ..j +JC,L cD cn o! cn cD (tl g ioo- |o o) o_ o OT JfJ'JIDf,f E oE (-) c o

~~.p o o s +J! .-o(D NCO OrF- t! () .u @F(lr-FN ,0 >L () IDLO L +rloo. FCDqrol tlI oE C, ffffJJ:tJ tJ -< c) E CD c) oCtl~~

~~@ = P E @ q) B J 5g +mNl.oN..rmt- olDrt J EO o lD .F cro(roooo0) ) +J+)L cccccccc |D.,{, ftJJt:t)) - L& -) -) --) --) o o '-) ') -) -t (! +) c~~

~~o F L lo Ndl N(ONONM 6', @@ @o @@ @co (nOr o) Or O'r Or Or Or In @ crl +~~

~~CD Ol~~

~~E E E E'F F c) I.y = q) iao>\ p f oJo &. .J Jo^(D +J () q=J I J:~~

qL,l period. Upriver in District Z, first carches have been reported in mid August, with peak harvest occurring the second and third weeks of August (table 7). Coho salmon entered District 4 Ouiing the secono and third weeks of Ju'ly, with peaI catches occurring the second and third weeks of August. District 5 coho appeared the third and fourth weeks of July. Until recent'ly, commercial f ishing effort decl ined after miO August, when fishermen focused thei r energy towarcl hunting game. The coho salmon fishery, however, because of the increased value received for the fish, has sustained a high level of fishing activity throughout the later portion of the season in recent years (ADF&G 1994b). Since 1979, the commercial coho salmon harvest has been more valuable than that of any other species (ibid. ). b. Sgbsistence harvest summary. Traditional ly, few e subsistence ifshery because subsistence needs were usual'ly met by the harvest of earlier migrating salmon species. Also, the wet weather occurri ng 'irr I ater summer months when coho salmon have been available to the fishery makes it diffrcult to dry the fish for preservat.ion ( ibid. ). l4ore fami I ies, however, have been acquiring freezers for food storage. Implemer.i- tation of thi s addi ti orra I storage method for subsistence-caught coho salmon has been partially responsible for the increased subsistence harvest of coho salmon in the Kuskokwint area in recent years. Catches reported from 1977 through 1984 indicate that about 8% of the subsistence salmon harvest has been comprised of coho salmorr. About glil of the reported catch over the same period has occurred in the Kuskokwim River districts (tante g). Districts 4 and 5 accounted for 8 and 4% of the harvest. respectively (tab1e 8). Subsi stence catches are often underestimated because fishermen are still harvesting fish after the subsistence surveys are conducted. Between 1977 and 1984, reported catches ranged from 7,589 fish irr 1983 to a peak harvest of 47,335 salnon harvested in 1980. About 15,116 coho salmon were reportecl taken in the 1984 season (table 8). 4. ![i1ook salmc.rn harvest. The chinook salmon harvest ffi ttre total renpval of salmon in the Kuskokwim area subsistence and commercial fisheries. Comb'ineo catches from both user groups ranged from

~~558 + @ ulI N ol o rlo-oD.o _t ..o(l'<)o-*r.o L @ q{-foo\r| ao Or q) o!Ndt_+ Ord)r|~~

tc (, fa $d)ONtOOl ! @ @rnF-r-O Ol u1Nr| pL .+NN o () N otolcJN @ NN(O(trN Ol l'.OO@to a o)nroNU.) N_t 0) L (, +J c'i tYl Ot N @ (\ -+ () ot @ or.o(oN-fF.-Nln E <> (nf)F- oED N o o o -f f- Or J t/l = @ (Y,) Cr F. r .yl E c 01 rn @ (1 lr) dl 3 @ s +r)-tF\ J o N {t' c) J (r't o _+ t'l :< c Ol Or 4(n ,+ \o o) o FT r.o cl !ANN 6 o) Nt/l(o NN ro g l! or -+ N @ N O)

o c{ @ NOTO1N G r'. Nr.()otol F\ @ or r.oo+ Ol I + @N c{ o L @ q) Or € o F. f.NNNfA c) z. F\ (o@co@@o (D Ol ulor(\N Ol f\NN c or E () N ro Ol o N U> O) o N6 (Jo O! +) o (J ^@ lr) ro lJ r f_- L Ot co L -o o \OL ottuoNPf o LEE C) no.o q) rlq-oL P E^ ('r|oNC1Jq- CIFE !1t -r3^ 3.F +)o oa(DLcOc>\! +Or(oJO6 qoo u7 P J6xcolE () 6aay+) ooco. -?:

559 79'018 fish in 1975 to 165,600 satryon !n 1983, averaging about r2l,l75 chinook salmon annually (tables s ano it)l About 134,958 chinook salmon were harvested during tr'e 1984 season. a. Commercial harvest sgrmary. Conmercial n the Kuskokwinr {glqgement Area has occurred only since statehood (ADF&G 1984a). The size of the iommercial harvest has been more a function of predetermined harvest goals than of run magnitude (McBride and hlilcock 1983). Annua I catches have gradual'ly increased since 1975, reaching a peak harvest of-93,626 fish in 1983. Ca.tches during the past i0 years averaged about 62,740 fish annually. About 14,AI4 chinook salmon were harvested commercially during the 1gB4 season (taote 9). Most of the chinook salmon harvest raken during the past decade has occurred in Districts I ( lower Kuskokwim) and 4 (Quinhagak), accounting for 55 and 32% of the catch, respectively. Catches in Districts 2 and 5 have been small, contributing about 4 and 9%, respectively, to the chinook salnioi harvest. Fishing activity in Districts 1 and z occurs within the Kuskokwim River whereas fishing act'ivity in Districts 4 and 5 is restricted to marine waters (ADF&G 1985a). The timing of the chinook sa'lmon run is variable 9!9_ cependent upon weather conditions (ADF&G 1985a). Harvest data for the 1982 and 19g3 fishing seasons indicate the availability of chinook salmon to the District 1 fisfrery when the season opened the second week of June (tante 10). Dates on wnich peak harvest occurred in District 1 were the third week of June in 1983 and in lgBZ during the first fishing period (tat'te 10). Final cltches for District 2 tn 1982 were reported August 19, the date of the last fishing period. In i933, however, final catches of chinook salmon in Distr.ict 2 wet"e reported June 27, primarily because of new gear restrictions that were'implemented to curb harvest crf chinook salmon during d'irected harvest for other spec i es . Chinook salmon durirrg the same two seasons have appeared in ttistrict 4 commercjal catches June 17 and June 13, with the opening of the salmon fishery. Peak catches in this fiihery occurred the third week of June, yet chinook salmon were still present in the fishery the last week of August and first week of September.

~~560 + @ I tn l\ O)~~

~~L lo.ooo € F-(OOOTN:i o + -f (tt !n @ (t) F\ (O t.o O Or Orm@.+ NMN~~

~~o .p (f) O ln F- tO () @ f.- @ @ (o to L O) aJ o N \o (n o 901 -+~~

~~Ol l/'t o \o ro ('o N .+ @ ON @ + N .+(o ctr o (n N NO|OI 1l) if NN L~~

P N o jfoa\ E N NOri\ rt) @ N ttt f) cD ol lo N |n jtNol o + Nl" E E $ NC r- .+ Gl o @N{t I @ ({) (no)N J o O) o o if J (o OF@ q) m s tn :< : ('l c) @ E mar1c)-+$_f Ol +r o1 14) .+ o o t\ o(n o O'r a L (oN(n(n ro E m!n @ o Ol u- a?@o!n@+ N 9- @ rn @ c.t or @ T\ ltl () (n c\| o) Ol o mslN!nd) g +ro m () .u @o E Ol L z. Ooorolo P N |/l t\ o|) frt rn 6o c F. (0 <) dt sl CN o SO)an@ (ncoo mu1 c E CN U) rL @F-OONN Or Q, (o ro E J F. sa4+N o or l) F-na.++Or n9 c N$ @ F- (JE, Oro (ooro-+o@ q, o rn Or_tN N()^L t\ @,nO\ F.E ! O) orE q, omN@ o NN o L (oo o F-C I or € In.pc^o+) L E^ NOQ' () E.-E Or!L 3r=^ 3'- L E Jol (JLC) o o-yo€ ..o o +) .:.6.y,co(g oao..Y+J rc.o f:<-otooo o L eXNan:

~~561 N Ol~~

~~{J o +L !o o |!L FO' Or.o('r@ oco @q) (L (n c$ (r1 c o+) ..p{J{J o o) c') ot g) crrCLO_O oo loo(, 9> <, u't v> u OL u) c) rg~~

~~po a p~~

~~L .|t o o +, po L oO- O(oOrr.- F-lnO@ Fu.oo ONFN NM 'q) .+r,aJl tD +j crrc'totc Ctl O- Ctr O- PO f:f)) |!q) g o~~

~~I 'ou F6+(njt(ot\ o-ooo NFNNNNtJ1N o, o (, o o o >,o OL cccccc-c +)|r' JJffJ:Jf OI -) ") '1 -) -) -) --) -)~~

~~ol -+roF-(0t-ot\(f) OL o.!orDtDtDlDo 9+' cccccccc :fffrfftl O r.! -.) -1 --) -') -) -) '-) -)~~

~~co) c o) E € L NmNmN(ON.a )< o @@ @co @@ co@ o c) Or Or O) Or Or Ol 0lr Ot L c .E Q' E @ou)E or (J s, -'.o^cl (tt@o~~

~~E E F E.- JQ.' 3 cu g !J lD lo f lO>r +)! &. o-Yo p .J Jo^cl o o:J-l fol J: J=O(, F u)o~~

56? The timing of chinook salmon in District 5 was similar tc other chinook salmon runs in the Kuskokwin Area for the lgBZ and 1983 seasons. Chinook salmon were present in the fishery when the season opened the third and second weeks of June, peaked July 5 and June 27, respectively, and were present in the fishery rhrough the first week of September (taote 10) b. Subs i stence_ h_a rvest summa ry . The subs.i stence = narvests of chrnook salmon in the Kuskokwim Manage_ ment Area have been at I east equa I i n nragni tude ancj in some years have exceede

~~563 L o q) oooo.o o =q)rnotor-1. @ drOul;~~

~~<) qorr)N(o N .?14NOmJ o @ q) (tl \-of)N+Nari L t/)OtNN $'o~~

~~Q' o \()NNOIC) E'l N(n\o(oo5 c @ c()(oyt-t(o o Ot {(oF-ONm~~

~~J= o c C) O(o\o:fO (ooNOr€o : @ NoNcfi+ol : o or Nc, Y 0) {(O U'' o 1l) @ cCD Ol () N.+NO@(o c .?r|||/)Nfnco N r} ltl + {r. (6 c.l Ol o r:@rlr s _+ @ f, rO O)~~

o OlOtm@ N @ NI.\NN or @ F\ NtOJm o Ot Ol N o (ONN N @ f @ z. Ol ONNc{$U1 t\ r +OrOrOr|ot\9oF-rj o Or @ Ot(nNFr Ot my) o Ol rJ) N .Y o O1 o NNcoNr) N rnl')coNNoryo@oti ol lt \9(trNO @ $\O No O orP J u)o*+ ^o ]J fi .'(ooro o F- tl, N N@OrN :i F-L o Ol N Or f- L F- an o cc, rt) ro I.oL.o N+JJ o Of/oo E o LE q) flor+-L oo o N+JC9 ??? oo.F E,FE T'E l) 3Jt^ =.- (J {Jo +or oaLOC p oJOo t!o.F.o {o.Y.coo626.ytJ ocoo_ L e)lNm\<*tCDtn=+r-?:

~~564 -o.o-o-o L OOrN lo $ (n.+o o @ OrNNor or N\O+m N o ! o (n p o@ Ot co to F. or N (n L +J o N rO@mot @ -1. m N !r) Ol fr@(oN o $@ Q.) L~~

~~]J N OOm ID @ (o r.o E Ol N J Ctl o o = o ONm E @ Nmc) o (t) (o@rn 3 o x o o o Fr O) J .n NN J q) :< q, -c o! @ c) rl + E o F. f'- ol O t. I Or N Nln l! @ Ol~~

otfflo(nm@ .+ u- @ Nmor.o r @O @ Ol lnNOr o +(o L N {J o a 4 E L J t\ oNot_f I z, N o ONrn o o) N N {D c ol o c c Ot E N L o ID U) N ONcn@ O) o J t/1 ol -t$('l I @ @ (tl F- TL mrn Ol o a L 1r} F- {J N oo@d) F\ E o $(o cll lu rn _? ol c L o I € (o+) rlD ,o o.L .90 JJ qo i\ lD c) () :E1E'FE E L o 3ll^ ='- c>, {oro.yoo (JOL o roxcoo .do otos{J LLoc -l:

565 @ +J Ot o o J.p c)T.c)OTO@@ OE (Y)N (n N l|(DO o>.- .o.lJ+).o LL ('r gl O) lDoo Ct tt, O- o. +JIO- :rf5(l)o I I L +) o +) OE o(I)f-m o+ro (oNtttNr| Jap Og >o . .o o>o CD +)LCL c'r crr cI) ol) q ooq) oI(t

~~a o Ol~~

I J or@ + o FO ! ID .IJ o o-o ru 3f J o> --) -) 1 a {JLoo o L E tn o O roNo @d '-)) FNf) NN Or q,L O O >a-O qro >! -O o o +J .p cc ! L o ot! -)--) ))--) -)= o -) () q, () L g o @ = E x o J s> c) F-Fm t\ oL! c Y () roo.- oo o! o q) (uo q, p! - ccc c -1 --) c, !p - --) -) -) 6 o go(L c tL o c E o (! E o o J c J L NmNmc{(oNm c o coco@@@@@@ r| CL ()- o Or clr clt c|r olt O) o|) Ol @ .P o.p @ >o Ot scl E o> o E'P J D-C Q) BJ = q) 9-O lo>r p LO OJa Lo^CO P oaL c!L f:<.00 LC)oo I FYN-+('lr)B Ooq) c) LF-Cc q) 0) L OEClO BEO L o o o.-fo € J=O(.) :t a

565 taken on]V through thg fi rst week of August (taole 13). During the 1982 season, pink salmon appeared jn District 5 commercial catches during the second week of Ju1y, with peak catches recordect between {uly 14.through.July 19 and diminishing by August 13 (tab1e 13). Pink salmon are purchased as a bonus by area processors for very I ow pri ces. As a result , t,he catch does not reflect the true size of the run. Pink salmon in the commercial catch are often discarded when more valuable species are available (Francisco, pers. comm. ). b. Sulsistence haryest surunarI. Few pink salmon are fishery, and recorded catches have been combined with chum salmon harvest total s. 6. Sockeye sa'lmon harvest: a. Commercial harvest summary. The connnercial harvest ses 6.4% of the total commercial salmon harvest for the Kuskokwim Manage- ment Area. From 1975 through 1984, District I has accounted for 40% of the area's sockeye salmon harvest, followed in order of significance by District 5 (34%), District 4 (25%), ino Distrjct 2 (m) . Recorded catches ranged irom 13 ,734 f i sh during the 1978 season to 105,940 fish taken during the 1981 fishery (taute t4). Sockeye salmon is the target species for fishermen in District 5 during the month of July (ADF&G 1985a). Catches have ranged from a low of 3,712 fish during the 7977 season to a peak harvest of 40,273 sockeye salmon harvested during the 1981 fi shery. During the 1982 and 1983 seasons, sockeye salmon were available to the fishery when the season opened in mid June. Peak catches were reported at the end of June. In 1982, final catches were reported August 6, and in 1983, sockeye salmon were still present in the fishery during the final corunercial opening (taOle 15). Harvest levels in District 4 during the 1982 and 1983 seasons peaked the first and second weeks of July, yet sockeye salmcln were available to the fishery through the end of August and fi r.st week of September (table 15). Within the Kuskokwim River (Districts 1 and Z), sockeye salmon have been harvested incidentally in fisheries targeting on other species. Histori- ca'lly, fishermen have not accurately ident jf ied

~~567 @ N @ Ol +-?oF-.+o) L F-OOrN$ o €o rnoN~~

~~ro p m(o-+ @ F.-+o (oo,l L @ ro NN@ p o) q N oo (o O)~~

~~o ftN\o N N @F- @ N or (o@l- ro o) q) rr|@F- Nator~~

~~c o r.oorO Nd)o o) .$ 6t Ot F- .+ cD @ N NNO' .o Or @ NOr| .+o~~

o c{ a4 J c NdIIA ol Nio@ J o o o@ f N.if Y t) o-t () Or s, Ot c F- o.+oot{n |! Ol (OOrN@(o + r +(n@rn+ @ E Ol o @OrOl d L N o o) N m OrN-t L1 O! cO (f) L N !n.+N o Nroao co .u Ol (, z. L +J F- oto(J o) d) o o N r.D NN @ Ol tn f- \O Ot o Ol rnfo@ F (tl o F L Ol o c) (o ooan(o N r Ot F.- m o o (tl Ol <>gl(o o J @ N to|Jl_t N o Ol (, r.- L tn OOrd)(o F. q) +t N ro(od c Ol o)oo E o) c o @or: (o o o o f.- I o :I Ol o o.g rrt 9.o +J N caJ L E-- O! o c, o E'FE E L 3.- +J g E aJ=^ (J C>l t o JOL c{' OL o (J oJolg lr- .g .J yoxco.o oc o o oJoLJJ 5: o

~~568 @ I aN Ot € o L .P ! o .po loL gl e(D O(0 Oi@ O@ @r + o- rv) c.l f4 o+) .+ru+J c. o cD cD dr cD cD cL o. o- o .u>{ro ff:,)fcrrD{, L |9L o|E t)~~

~~po lo~~

~~o q) L E o o {Jt +JO o oo._ (o |.rt@ rE () F(\tt)FSl(o o Foc. L o o+j Ctl Ctl F O) C't O- t') CL E 1)O )3))Jqrf,o E .o () 6 o> C) L lo~~

~~E oc) o~~

~~|o J c) |t'+, OOI'\OF- L Oo N(N1rlNNEfON (L lt, Ct >r >ttl, h>r O C, € OL c-Fccc c +JO >J)=aJ)) 0, .E :E --) -) -) -) -) -) -) -) oE o, c|D~~

-l= o $(')F-(ON(n l.- (4 J .o qt o c IDL orDtDOtDO oo :< +J +) c roc ):'r5f5 q) q) ouJ -) -) -) '-) -) -) --) o. E -) o {J cctt Eo E s .o .n g Gtc,lNan c!(nNm o q) |o @o co@ @co @@ o q) or or or ol or or or or L 0) FF o L .E o r)E o @o (n oro I 6o +lo o) @o c Ot E o F C'F r|l) =E I cp c BJ oo JO>r +) 1t (ts oLo JJ +t .xo^co t ctr o l,'J t:Ztoo rn L e!(NriO)r)- p +,o LF.cc o.o() () orocE o.polo o O.eJO Lrn -oo ':oo 3 J=O(J u)o

569 sockeye and chum salmon in thei r conmercial catches. Therefore, the true magnitude of the sockeye and chum salmon harvests have not been accurately reported. The l9B1 catch was the first year in which a significant sockeye salmon run was documented (ADF&G 1985a). Because the ex-vessel value of sockeye salmon is greater than that of chum salmon, distinguishing between species is beneficial to the fisherman (ibid.). b. sqbs_istelcg ha rvest surmnary. Fishermen have not d1 St't ngul shed between chum and sockeye salmon catches in the subsistence fishery. Ther-efore, the magnitude of the subsistertce harvest of soikeye salmon in the Kuskokwim Area is unknown (ibid.). c. Harvest Methods 1. conrnercial f ishe.ry. set ang drift gi I I nets are the only ffi commercial harvest of sa'lmon in Dislricts 1, 2,4, and 5 (ADF&G 1985b). Though no mesh size restrictions are imposed upon the fishery it Districts 1 and 2 prior to June 25, most nets are of 8*-inch stretched-mesh weubing. Afrer June 25, a six-inch stretched-mesh size limitation is in effect, and most nets consist of 5t-5*-inch stretched mesh. The gill net mesh size restriction minimizes the capture of chinook salmon,. particularly the larger more fecund females (ADF&G 1984a). set girl nets are frimarily used for subsistence fishing, whereas commercial ?ishermen general ly use . drift gi I I nets. General ly speaking, boats used in the Kuskokwim River salmon fishery'are long and narrow, with a hiEh bow. Boars range from 16 to sz 7t in length. In recent years, more sophisticated vessels have entered the fishery, including jet boats and larger diesel powered vessels that are used to fish for herrTng along rhe coast (ibid.). 2. Subsistlnceljilgr{. Spears, dip ners, fish traps, and ffitrip'gill nets'were trioitional giar useo for subsistence harvest of salmon. These methods haie s'lowly been rep-1_aced by linen gi 11 nets and even more recently by nylon gill nets. since statehood, the introduction of nytoir gill net webbing has increased the importance and harvesi of chinook salmon particularly (ADF&G 1993). Gear currently 1ega1 for the subsistence harvest of sarmon in the Kuskokwjm area -are -gi1l nets, beach seines, and fish wheels. Spears are 1egal for subsistence harvest in the Hol itna iliver drainage (ADF&G 1985b). D. Period of Use 1. Kuskokwim Bryq. unti I June 26, cormercial f ishing periods @emergencyorder.Thisa]lowsicneiufing-or the chinook salmon harvest throughout a greater portion of the run. This is necessary because of the intensive nature of the king sa'lmon fishery inorae 1984a). The fisr'..y Cioi.t

570 by regulatjon in Districts 1 and 2 on September 1 (ADF&G 1985a ) . Commercial fishing periods are most often limited to two s'ix-hour periods each week during the June 26 to Ju'ly 31 "chum salmon season." Thjs helps offset the increased effort and efficiency of the fleet and distributes the allowable harvests over a greater portion of the salmon run. Commercial fishing in District I is allowed only below Bethel (the lower 86 mi of the river) during the "chum salmon season." 0nly gi'l1 nets of six-inch stretch mesh or Iess can be used during this tjme. Restricting fishing to the lower portion of the district enhances fish quality, helps prevent excessive harvest and wastage, and allows subsistence demands to be met. The gill net mesh restriction minimizes'larger' the capture of chinook salmon, particularly the more fecund females. Regulatory changes jn 1985 limit mesh sjzes to six inches or less at all times and allow for fishing in the entire length of District 1. Subsistence fishing'is prohibited for 24 hours before, during, and for 6 hours after each commercial fishing period in District I prior to June 25 and from August 1 to August 31. During the "chum salmon season" (June 26' Ju]y 3l), on]y District 1, below Bethel , is open to commercial fishing, and the subsistence fishing prohibition in conjunction with cormercial periods is l'imited to this area during this time. This regulation reduces the illegal sale of subsistence salmon and provides for a more even escapement distribution. It also reduces fish wastage because subsistence fishermen are required to check their gear at regu'lar intervals throughout the commercial fishing season. After July 31, commercial fishing periods are again regulated by emergency order. This allows fishing effort to be feg- ulated according to the magnitude of the variable coho salmon run (ADF&G 1984a). 2. Kuskokwim Bay. Conrnercial fishing periods in Districts 4 an[s- oflffikokwim Bay are usual ly 12-hour periods and are regulated by emergency order. The fishery is opened when a haivestable surplus of salmon has reached the fishing grounds. The fishery in Djstricts 4 and 5 closes by regulation on September 8. E. Management Objectives The main objective for management of Kuskokwim Area salmon fisheries is to manage the fisheries on a sustained yield bas'is 'in accordance with po'l icies set forth by the Alaska Board of Fi sheries ( ibid. ). 1. Cormercial fishery. The area's commercial fishery has shown @sion during the past 10 years as a result of increased participation by individual fishermen, improvements jn fishing gear, and better tendering and processing capability. Harvest guidelines and gedr restrict'ions have

577 been establ ished to ensure maintenance of both adeouate subsistence harvest levers and spawning .scupemeni ?.. -been fioiol)l-- fllriilglg: IltfErf. .su.o;istence has iJsienated by the reglstarure as having highest priority among beneficial'uses of the fish and. game resources. ExcepC" in areas where intensive connercial fisheries occur,-in the'subsistence fishery is subject to very few restrictions order-to give preier"- ence to subsistence users. 3. Chum salmon: a. Kuskqkwim River.- 0fficial guideline harvest levels have not been established for the conmercia'l chum salmon fishery in the Kuskokwim River fishing districts. His- torical data indicate that the conm6rcial harvest of chum salmon should fall within the range of zO0,bbo io 400,000 sa'lmon to ensure that both subs-istence requirements and spawning escapements are met. The comnercial harvest of chum salmon wiIr not exceed 400,000- i.iit unless test-fishing indices, comrnerciai citctr per effort, and escapement levels indicate a rarger tfiun average salmon run, and subsistence catches hive been adequate (ADF&G 1985a). should the magnitude of the run be below expectation, both commerciai ano subsistence fishing times wil l be restricted (ibid.). b. Kuskojwim,-Ba.y. In District 4, fishing times and catches are dependent upon run strength and escapement as determined by comparison of current harvest ievel to historical catches and--by in-season assessment of escapement counts and test-fishing indices (ibid.). 4. Coho salmon: a. l(qslokwim 8j_ver. The range of corrnercial harvest for ffihe Kuskokwi-m niuer ii-rsb,ooo to-uy 2bb,ooo fish. The guider ine harvest rever estaofistreo ilg;: lation for District z fron Augus.t 1 through"Thes6 Augusi si"is 2'000 to 4,000 coho sarmon- (ibid.). harvesi levels were established to provide foi adequate spawning escapements and to ensure subsistence utilfzation. b. Kuskokwim Bgy. The coho salmon fishery in District 4 is reguETea-Ifschectuled fishing perioos", rnl.r, in-season assessment of run strength indicates the run is above or 9gtgry expectatiorrs. Fishing time or duration of the f!s!ing period is manipulated by emergency order ( ibid. ). 5. Chinook salmon: a. Kuslokwim qiJer. The Alaska Board of Fisheries estab- nshE-gufii-eTTne harvest leveii ;i rs,rioo tt Jo,ooo chinook salmon for District 1 and harvest levels of 2,000 to 4,000 chinook salmon for District Z. The fishery Tay be terminated before or after guideline harvest levels have been achieved, depending- on i;: season assessment of run strength. t,lhen tesl-fishing

572 indices and subsistence catch levels indicate a sustained run .is in progress and when the upriver distribution of chinook salmon has reached Aniai<, the fishing season in Districts 1 and 2 is opened to commerciaT fishing ( ibid. ). b. Kuskokwim !Ey.. The commercial fishing season for DTsTFTctFEno s opens in mid June,- dep"ending on the entry pattern of chinook salmon into the Kanektok and Goodnews rivers. Respective guideline harvest levels for Districts 4 and 5 are 15,000 and 5,000 chinook salmon ( ibid. ) , unless assessment of in-season run strength thlgugh escapement enumeration or test-fishing indices indicate that the run .i s strong enough t; support larger harvest'levels (ibid). 6. Sockeye salmon: a. Kuskokwim River. A specific management strategy has not 6eEn--l?enTTfT-ed for sockeye salmon in the Kuskokwim Ri ver. b. IyslofwiIl_FJ. Sockeye salmon are the target- species in District 5 ouring_ the month of Ju1y. The fishery operates on scheduled fishing periods unless changed by emergency.order because of a change in anticipated run strength (ADF&G 1984a, 1985a ). F. Management Consioerati ons 1. subsistence_. The subsistence fishery for sa'lmon in the R[sm'kw]niTanagement Area is one of tie largest of its kind in the state of Alaska. },lithin al I commercial fishing districts of the Kuskokwim Area, the majority of the fishermen usually take salmon for bgth conmeicial and subsistence purposes. Short subsistenceTiThing closures each week are used in Districts 1, 4, and 5 to discourage illegal comrercial fishing under the guise of subsistenc6 fishiilg and to provide fol adequate- spawning escapements. substintial'ly more subsi stence _f_ishing time i s al I owed compared to commercial fishing in all areas. 2. Ln-season Tanagement. conrnercial fishing time is adjusted 1n-season in response to the magnitude of the run of the !alTolt. species on which harvest effort is being directed. Guidel ine harvest level s have been establ ishei in many instances to ensure achievement of both required subsistence harvest and spawning escapements. Although escapement levels have been estab'l ished for serected itreams within the Kuskokwim Area, in,many instances, the spawning streams are located considerable distances from tha fish-ing grounds. Attaining timely escapement estimates, therefore-, io mite ln-season management decisions is difficult. The use of test-fishing indices and migration timing information, however, has been helpful in overcoming this oifficu]ty. 3.- Species .identification. Historical l!,'ilre separating ' iockeye salmon frofr-TE'um-TaTmon catches 'in Kuskokilim River

573 fishery has not been of concern. The result is that the true magnitude of the sockeye salmon run is unknown. Since 1981, fishermen, processors, and the ADF&G have worked together to identify sockeye and chum salmon in the commercial harvest (ADF&G 1985a). Sockeye salmon have comprised 10 to 20% of the combined chum-sockeye salmon harvest since 1981. Prior to the 1981 season, the reported sockeye salmon harvest was less than ?% of the chum-sockeye salmon harvest (ibid.). The resulr of the effort to distinguish between the two species in the comnercial harvest has caused the reported commercial sockeye salmon harvest to increase from 7% of the total commercjal salmon harvest prior to 1981 to about 11% of the commercial harvest after 1981 (ibid.). 4. Intercqptir.rn of l.lestern Alaska fish in other fisheries. Due to their extensive ocean travels, salmon of Western Alaska origin are intercepted in domestic and foreign fisheries operating in the waters of the North Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea. a. Domesiic fisheries. Record chum salmon catches made in ffi commercial fishery totaled 1,015,000 in i982 and 756,000 in 1983. In 1984, the catch dropped to 338,000 chum salmon, after the Board of Fisheries reduced the June fishing time allowed in this fishery. The chum sa'lmon catch in this fishery is incidental. to the harvesting of sockeye salmon bound primarily for Bristol Bay. Based on past tag recovery data and recent scale pattern studies, a large proportion of the chum salmon taken in thjs fishery are fish bound for other Western Alaska Areas, ranging from the northern Alaska Peninsula to Kotzebue, including the Kuskokwim and Yukon River drainages. The increasing chum salmon catch has created a major harvest allocation controversy arnong domestic fishermen (ADF&G 1985a). b. Foreign fisheries. A recent study (Rogers et al. 1984) indicated that an average of 141,00C chinook salmon of hlestern Al aska ori gi n ( i nc1 udi ng unknown numbers of Kuskokwim and Yukon area fish) have been intercepted yearly by the Japanese mothership and land-based gi11 net fisheries during the period 1975-1983. This study confirmed that substantial numbers of tlestern Alaska chinook salmon are intercepted in the Japanese land- based fishery located in the North Pacific Ocean waters. in 1980, a total of 438,000 Western Alaska chinook salmon were estimated to have been taken in these fisheries, which exceeded the domest'ic commercial catch in l,Jestern Alaska that year. High seas fisheries have captured an average of 26% of the estimated Western Alaska return during the I965-L977 time frame and 14% s i nce I97B . 41 though reported forei gn catches have decreased 'in recent years, it is believed that high seas

574 fishing mortality in the form of gi11 net dropouts from the Japanese land-based gill net fishery (estimated to be 30% of the reported catch in one study) and under- reporting resul t 'in continued substantial losses of Western Alaska fish. The expanding domestic and ioint-venture trawl fleets in the North Pacific 0cean and Bering Sea waters are also known to take chinook and chum salmon and represent an additional potential threat to these same stocks. There is some question whether accurate monitoring .of incidental saimon catches is occurring (ADF&G 1985a).

III. YUKON MANAGEMENT AREA A. Boundaries The Yukon Management Area includes all waters of the Yukon River and its tributary streams in Alaska and all coastal waters between the latitude of Canal Point light southward to the latitude of the wesrernmost tip of the Naskonat Peninsula (map 2). The river originates in British Columbia and flows over 2,300 mi to the Bering Sea (ADF&G 1984c). Within Alaska, the river is divided into six fishing districts. The districts are defined as follows: 1. Djstrjct 1. District I consists of that port'ion of the Yukon Rffi-T'rGinage from its terminus upstream to the northern edge of the mouth of the Anuk River and all waters of the Blick River, including waters within one nautical mile of its termi nus. 2. District 2.-inage District 2 consists of that portion of the Yukon TTIrc from the northern edge of the mouth of the Anuk River upstream to an ADF&G regulatory marker located at Toklik and includes the Anuk River drainage. 3. District 3. District 3 consists of the Yukon River from an md regulatory marker located at Tokl ik upstream to an ADF&G regulatory marker at the mouth of an unnamed slough three-forths of a mjle downstream from 0ld Paradise Village. 4. District 4. District 4 consists of the Yukon River from an mm6 regul atory marker at the mouth of an unnamed !]gugh three-fourths of a mile oownstream from 0ld Paradise Village upstream to the western edge of the mouth of Illinois Creek at Kallands. 5. District 5. District 5 consists of that portion of the Yukon IIveF-?'Fa'inage (exc'luding the Tanana River drainage) from the western edge of the mouth of Illinois Creek to the United States-Canada border and includes the Illinois Creek drainage; 6. District 6. District 6 consists of the Tanana River drainage To-iFconfluence with the Yukon River. B. Fishery Description and Reported Use Subsistence and c<.rmmercial fisheries for salmon occur along the length of the Yukon River. Primary species of interest are chinook, chum, and coho salmon, alhough limited numbers of sockeye

~~5/5 L) $ Ol d~~

~~oo lL o~~

~~(o (u L~~

~~+Jc E (u ro E o -vc:3~~

~~CJ U1 I q- rd ao ro +JL C)(6 L+) u1 (u E -o Cf)~~

~~VE (Jq) a+J {-)~~

~~+) +J = o)(uc+J rt' .no q- v') ro +J l-c oo c o erv (o{J ao z.~~

~~C\I roo =2.~~

576 and pink salmon are present. Although commercial and subsistence fishing activity extends across the border into Canada, most of the harvest is taken in the Alaskan por.tion of the drainage. combined reported subsistence and commerc'ial a1'l-species catches from r975 through 1984 for both countries combined have ranged from 1.2 million fish taken in 1977 to about 2.r m'illion fish harvested during the 1981 season, averaging 1.6 million fish annual ly (taO'les 16 and l7 ) . 1. All-species harvest. Conrnercial fisheries for salmon in the Yukon River drainage occur both in Alaska and'in the Yukon Territory. Since 1975, the Alaska and Canada combined commercial harvest of al I species ranged from l. I mil I ion fish taken in 1976 to 2.0 million salmon taken in 1981. Catches during this same time period averaged about 1.6 million salmon annua'lly (table 17). a. Alaskan commercial harvest sunmary. The first com- ska portion of the Yukon River was reported in 1918 when Carlisle Packing Company operated a floating cannery at Andreafsky (St. Mary's). Re'latively large catches of chinook-, coho, and chum salmon were harvested during the first four years of the fishery (ADF&G i984c). The emphasis upon the large upriver subsistence fishery resulted in closure of the commercial fishery occurring at the mouth of the river from 1925 through 1931 (ibid. ). The commercial fishery targeting on chinook salmon resumed with less effort irr 1932. Chinook salmon were the only species harvested on a susta'ined bas'is prior to 1959 (ibid. ). Major interest in the commercial fishery on the Yukon River has deveioped since 1961. Until recently, virtually all commercially harvested salmon were taken from the delia region of the Yukon River. In recent years, upper river commercial fishing has increased, and as it has grown it has been necessary to restrict the catch in the lower river in order to allow enough salmon upriver for fi shery and spawni ng needs ( Pope 1981 ) . Thi s relatively recent development arrd expansion of the conunercial salnrcln fisheries in Alaska has enabled many a rea res'idents to obta'i n cash i ncome when other empl oy- ment has been internrittent or nonexistent. Most of the commercial fishermen fishing in Alaska and the processing plant workers are res'ident Eskimo and Athabaskan Indians. During the early years of the fishery, salmon were marketed as either a canned or salted product. Currently, most of the catch is processed as a fresh/ frozen product (YTC i985). Cornrnercial fishing activity is dispersed widely over I ,200 r'i ver mi I es j n the ma i n stenrs of the upper Yukon and I ower Tanana ri vers. The major comnrercial

~~577 o .O@-+Ln$$-Or-t|/. or -1- (ONrn-fmNrnO!n$ Ol o(oNo(o-+n(cln.S Ol O) coN-t+-tN-troN @ tn(O(O @ Ol -flnr m-+ r)o L o~~

~~(j)(OIONO$cONrfUl o \O-tFNONmt.o@N oor mOrN(nOrF-*i-o|ln F\ cl) \OcO-+OTNONOOI Ol o -+rnr@rnNdl u| P -+r|~~

o [email protected] or o N \OCJOOraO(nON-f fl rrnN@N(noOr@O Ol mONrnF-.nNm(n (o tnrnrmO+NOl o o NFm-f ln a) L p () oomfnulecoNrnN N E F--tNOmf\Nd)iOat) o C) @ (oocor)\ocoom@F (o \ONN\O@r)NN@(o t/) Ode@tornrn@(o @ o NM = L (,

c)(!N ol N(oco (o r| Ol OTOINOmOOC@(rr\O -? c (Orotn(Ou)r|e-tOf., r| Or J <)OTOONr)NN@N tt) mmF@NON-:}c!N r| NF-+rn r) E I L Or<)(ONOIN(ONlnO rn q,'r' o) F-Nf.-NTFNO(o<) (o e$rOm$Nrn@ON N Ol F:f cc) !n J c|r@c|(O-t (O 0 F\ r 3';i Or m+@ cO Ol

~~L Ne(J@m@roF-!n(0 rifNF-+N|'\OlF. (o J N q)FmNtnoor\O@ Ot z. Ot @@\O (q IOu1N ji F- Ol ro C (nNNN@rn\o.Yl s N(n m~~

~~6 o o e rt) @m@Or(nornN\O F.. E CL F\ O)N@0O-+6N(tr o N Ndlni.-eOr(O@tnN @ Ol t'l@Orfflrn(oNN o NOeNO\OSOI o NN L e, CL~~

E L qJ o eOdr+OteNN(Otn cn tr) \o |.--+N@rt@orOrN N N erONrOrmNm@N ro o O) (, mN\ONFNN(]0q)UI -+ mOF-m-tNON 6 u NN N rr @ (.) ot o ln@+F-FC)N@l/)Ot/l F q) ul r|oror-tc)F-NOt+OJ o l'- F-N(O N (Ofrto Or t'- @ Ol ()' o No(f)o$rnNoro .+ to p FattF (() (n\Om (') Ot N N @{J o NNM Oro o FO (J J c GOL U7 o |!O {J ccl o Or OF o 0) JOyoo-cot E L :taJf,]JrOCO Fq F FNm>O-tln\O>-O

578 J ro F\ a @ orn(oorfQN r o) I -+ N(')F-{+OIF.(Om (o co !n @ r^+-Nto(n(n-f + |.\ Or lnNF.+Ocolnit @N Ot NGOF|.-eNCON o).o +(n@ Ctl o L .o q) t-. ar! $ -t |tl e lt- m F- F- -+ (t) @NNaoln-tNN o N .o @ [email protected]@ NO f.. Ol 6Ot@(nrFrrnS @(n N Nt'\N@e:frON Orn -+ l! (o(no N N

g +, 6 n(ot\@(nN@rn N N ro(no) ol $FF. (o rnt^ o nNrnd)rOOeO -+ o) (n Ol \oNN @o)r'- ql (o ot ro rrrrO-@etn(o q ro $ror\ @ 6 o o L p F-O(o(nF\oNJ F\ (n o o NOrrnF-.frqm @rr) g E @ loc.lOTOIFNN o@ Or O) c'l NOrlna4r+rOl tr|(n @ o @(ONNF-OtlON rtl N F\ F.' !n -i N (o (o o

=g c, NOTFNOT@O\ OrO ol Or-+-+cO@eOCO (oo (o @ NNrf)oOe$\O F-rl N O) mrn(f)Nr-F-@N -i@ J o'r.+(o()F--ffl@ @ o J rn-+N (n -f o o P L o c € d)@coOr('(0olc9 Nol (o oor iric.rco (n F-lrlm to oto (o NNoror-+-fN N o o Or t'|eO N OOrIO \O $tn Ol rOFF-JNrllno @ Ol lL rnoi ol N m N N o ]J !, o o L o {) Or(n.+(oN@.+-+ (Ylo (n ro @ ('rlnor'lrcoFr (a E F. FChN(o@OrF'r) o) N Or NNNTTA@e\O m(o o z O1F

o q) InrfroLn(o@N\9 o J q) r -frrONOr.O@1rl @ crl o, N 6sf-rn|'|FNOr :f F- v) Ol rfo)mF\91l')O @(D F- 6 COF-N@@c4Nif N L d'FtON Or Ot o J c oo E F-@o >.o -v-c o-c ()p +J +J u) (o p o<) .-o L-o -t r-o r€Ir co+J oo o) OJ oFo oo oLo Lc) cL@ !< o -yt)+) a -o o o J o =o o o U'ro F J =

579 fisheries, however, occur within the lower 150,river miles. The lower Yukon River Districts 1, Z, and 3 when combined have accounted for 78% of the total cormercial salmon harvest from 1975 through 1984. About 4g% of the total catch is taken in Distriit I alone (taU'te lZ). b. Alaskan coqr_nerc=ia f i _ I !hi ng .ef fort. conrnerciar f ishi ng errorr 'tn tne tower river increased sharply during the period 196i through L975, when rhe amount of set gill'The net gear doub'led and drift gill net gear tripled. number of fish wheels has also increased in recent years ryi!! devel-opment of the upper. yukon cormercial fiihery (ADF&G 1984c). In 1926; the satmon fishery becamL limited entry to stabilize the amount of fishin! gear in the river. Cunrently, about 700 gill net permiis-(orift and set combined) dre issued annually for the lower Yukon area (ibid.). In. the upper yukon, about 75 gill let (set gitt nets only) and 170 fish wheel permits are issued annually (YTC 1985). c. Canadjan commercial harvest sumnlglf,. Commercial fishing on River occurred as early as the late 1800's in association with the activity stimulated by the gold rush era at the turn of the century (ibid.). A fishery inspector was appointed in 1900 to monitor the fishery and issue licenses. By 1903, 17 conrnercial I icenses had been sold, and 40 people were engaged in the fishing industry. Most of the effort took place near Dawson City. Commercia'l fishi!9 activity declined after the 1920'i, remaining at a relatively low level unti I a recent increased interest. The opening of a processing plant in Dawson in 1982 provided an additional marketing and has outlet 'level been a major intpetus for increased harvest s. Currently, commercial fishing is permitted in the main stem of the Yukon Rivef from the United States/Canada border to the confluence of Tarchun Creek, about Z0 mi downstream from the vi 1 lage of Carmacks (with the exception of a closed area in the Dawsorr vicinity) and in the lclwer sections of the Stewart and pe1'ly 'lrivers ( i bi d. ) . Most of the ha rvest i s taken Oy set gi 1 net. The harvest is marketed both for local consumption by residents and tourists and through the new'ly bui I t processing plant. Fish sold to the plant are frozen and trucked to southern distributors ('iOid.). The Canadian conmercial fishery has shown a steady increase in harvest level s during the past 10 years. Catches have ranged from 4,500 salmon in 1976 increasing to 39,017 salnron during the 1983 season. About 32,Bl1 salmon were harvested in 1984. From 1975 through i984, the Canadian harvest has contributed about I% of the

580 total salmon commercial catch for the entire Yukon River drainage (tao'te 17). 0. Algskan subsjstence harvest summary. Chinook and chum salmon are the most important species taken for subsistence purposes. Based on the reported catch (taOles z and 16), the subsistence salmon fishery occurring in the Alaskan'largest portion of the Yukon River drainage is the f ishery of its kind in Alaska. About 10,000 to 15,000 Native and fewer non-Native peop'le reside in 45 smal'l remote communities scattered throughout the drainage. Most of these people are dependent to varying degrees upon the fishery resource for their livelihood. Chinook salmon are almost exclusively used for human consumption whereas chum salmon are also fed to sled doss (ibid. ). A household survey is performed annually to document subsistence catches. The survey jnvolves either personal interviews of fishing famil ies or catch questionnaires mailed to fishermen at the close of the season. During the 1984 season, one or more members of 1:064 fishing families operated about 790 gill net and 170 tish wheel units for subsistence harvest of salmon. Often, the same fishermen take salmon for both commercial and subsistence purposes while using the same units of gear (ibid.). A decrease in the total subsistence harvest from the mid 1960's through the early 1980's has been attributed to replacement of dog teams by more mechanized means of travel (i.e., snow vehicles and a'irplanes). Because chinook salmon are primarily for human consumption, this decrease is primarily a reflection in chum salmon uti I ization. Reported salmon catches in the subs'istence fishery have averaged 410,200 fish annually between 1975 and 1984 and have ranged from 278,896 salmon taken in 1976 to 530,584 salmon harvested in 1983 (taOte 16). Between I97S and 1984, 76% of the tptal Yukon drainage subsistence harvest was taken in the upper river districts (Districts 4,5, and 6). Districts 4 and 5 alone accounted for 60% of the harvest. The lower river contributed above 20% of the harvest during the same time period (table 16). e. Cana{ian subsi stence harvest sgmmg-ry. Both an Indi an tence fishery for salmon occur in the Canadian portion of the Yukon River drainage. Indian residents have traditionally relied heavily upon the harvest of Yukon River chinook and chum salmon for food. The food fishery on the Yukon River is the largest of its kind in the Yukon Territory and northern British Columbia, potentiaily supplying salmon

581 to over 6,000 Native residents in the area for l? different Indian bands. Fishing sites al I scattered throughout _the Canadian portion of the drainage, with primary effort focused around the communilies of Burwash, Carmacks, Dawson, Johnsons' Crossing, Mayo, Minto, 0ld Crow, Pe1ly Crossing, Ross River, and' Teslin. Most of the Indian food catch is dr.ied, frozen, oF served fresh for home consumption with small amounts, pgr!icu'lar1y of chum salmon, dried for dog food (yTC 1e85 ) . Provisions for a smal I non-Native or domestic subsistence f rshery have been made spc.rradica'l1y since 1g99. Domestic licenses were eliminated in 1961 and reestablished in I974. A rural frontier-type'lifestyle char- acterizes participants in the fishery. Domestic fishing is permitted in the areas open to conrnercial fishing (i.e., downstream of Tatchun Creek and in the lowei portion of the Pelly and Stewart rivers.) Fishing gear used in this fishery is similar to commercial- gear fished in the area, primarily consisting of gill nets and , i nfrequently, fi sh wheel s ( ibi d. ) . The documented harvest of subsistence-caught salmon has fluctuated considerably between 1975 and 1984. Catches have ranged from 5,725 fish taken 'in 1976 to 21,764 fish 'ly harvested i n 1980 , averagi ng 16 ,210 f i sh annual (taote l6). 2. lhury salmon harvest. Chum salmon are found rhroughout the @. Two distinct runs of chum sal-mon enter the river. Sunmer chum salmon are the more abundant group,- entering . the river f rom ear'ly June through mid Juiy (tatrle 19). The less abunoanr fall chum salmon exhibit latei^ run_timing, from mid July through-and early September (taOte' Z0) (ADF&G 1984c ) . Commercial iubsi'stence fi sheri ei targeting on chum salmon occur both in the Alaskan and rhe canadian portions of the Yukon River. combined catches for both the commercial and subsistence fisheries from both countries between 1974 and 1985 have ranged from I,023,574 chum salmon harvestdd in 1977 to 1.8 million salmon taken'in 1981 and have averaged 1.3 million fish annually (taOles 18, 2r). a. {]g.1langonrmgfqjat harvest__surrngg. The chum salmon ince statehood was achieved in 1959. Prior to the mid 1960,s, summer chum salmon were used prinrari'ly for sled dog food. |.lj th increased use of snow machines, the need for sled dogs declined, and, subsequently, the subs'istence harvest of summer chum sa'lmon dropped. Therefore, in 1967 restrict'ions regarding commercial harvest of summer chum salmon were relaxed, as subsistence needs declined. The commercial harvest of summer

~~582 N(oorN (o @ 6Ol N O) t{) c{ Or OrN r.. @~~

~~g1F.@ o $t.r)ao \ F.O r.. dl rYlrn-Oltnd)Ol@ F.- ol (o @ ttrF-(O O eOrn fi -+ ot $ Ol rnnl-+tV)e$@m l"\ |n ftr N.nNar|eJ4 JN r.- rn fo 01 o o~~

~~orne(oeF-Frrn N ro N ONON$~~

~~L o Ot o c.te~~

~~(.)~~

+J o(o(n\oc:forn o F. FF-(O.+rnOOI (o ol rn F\ -+(ON(n|')OOtr) @ol Or clF-Or Or (4FsN O NM (o @t/)etn@NNm Or o rn F ,rn N N e |u tn E t/)NN Or Orero u.l .+o -+ J (o Inornoif(o(of\ @o @ () I\ O-tOr/)O-rr)F- NO N O) oro.*.6m\o$m r @ NNFNJ rn r| OFroNN N F- rn +J o or c) (J g F .o \orl0 oor-+ -+o .f fl ooo\ o NOI'- oo o |.\ !n @ r) Ol rN-t or) @ o Or O r.o o to N @Orn N rnN r (, F- rn N$,n .n 6 @ L r)e F- N Or c'l c, F (-) E 06 lL c q) +J OF or JO io c0r @ ]P oclv L >o >-o .y-Co.Cc- +J FNm p if rn (o +J o<)'-()'F€ c) o q, :f ot -.t,{JE!co+)r0- o o o L O L .o o -6 oa fJ

583 +) a I (nN@ \o @(oJ ro N ootr o OeNFFNF L {) rtl lllllO)lFllt +, 9> NFN In-+Or (Ofl(r) | rt t @ | l.-Orro o o ooLro OrelrtFFF\ o It, I .- +)L .j...; .;..-; i.-;..; gl |o9(l, or c') o'l cD q) ('r o or or o or o- or e o- cL o. o. o oo Jtt t J J :' J :t C' J rD f rU C' |l.l tD 0) o o J L o

o |l) F-ln(o N@ \O o $@@ Gl p NFFNc\lOr |o $L{J | | | t I to | (o I or(n | | | @F I o OOo tn.+N l{f I F | | anlON I lO oq) [email protected]$.lNrD@e +J oo> a +)04 s c) oro o c'l ctl ol dl o) O{JI )J)J:tflJ=ffJ:5ttJJ g o -) -) '-'t --) -) -) ') ') € o - I J o a L c Jro o or fn t +$N Frt) 6 O-)ac1Ne-)OeNrF.rc{ C) llrllNNqllllFlllifSl SP rOln ldrl I lO FO)l c4NO lOlm c oo €O o N rf Cr,l e r F: N e N @ F c\,1 F N Gl N o .YQ' oo> >\O lD >\O >r >r>rtD >rO C, .tt pcrL e tr C F C F C C C qlF F r.r) (, .oo- - - - @ o 'o '-)=)):'ffJa)J:taJ=JJJ -) -) -) ') -) ') -) -') --) < ') -') o -) -) -) -) -) dt J o o c, o g o

+, r)orNaoForF-orNNNean - C) .u eOeFFNNFNc{FN-O c 6A leltllllllllllln e(o@ c ID L+)C) rf | (O tOslO @(O@ OlnO OIF I ttl lq c'l ,F o+) edreFFNNrNctFNOO(Y) or$€ o l!OL>o crorDooiDrD{)croorD o ql o Q'LO. cccccccccccc c +)|!tt)|!-e J''J3'ffJJJ]''J -) '-) -r -') -) ') JJ' -') -xJ c = -) -) -) -) -) -) - -) -) ') -) (D q) o o o- J + @ Ol () o J L o o o e o E +, o o o lnOtNanrOrNOt NNF-(Oe.l Or f- E o FOFFFNNTN NFN(!F NF - +J (F> lFlllllll tttrl +ll p o oL! +t@(oNo@ro@ orlrnu.!$rn lF\rn c L U) oo eOteFFNNFN NFFNNC NslF |E tDI.- I e +)g oqroorQrlDoroq) rD ru (, ru rD c) >t ll, ll, o 5 lg+, o ccccccccc cccccc rt E o (a(L aJSttJffJ Jf,f3ff -ccJ)J L -) -r-'1 J D C) -)'1 -) --1 1 -)-1 ---) -) -) -) a L L o E E ot @ ,o v, Or ! () or g slc/|$ Gl(').f Nanrf Gl (o rf 6l rn il Nn4$ o l, |o co@@qr@@@@@ 6@@O@@ @o@ c) Or O) Or (n O) (h Or Or O) o\o)orooror or d) or +) o E ID F q) o ! .|-, ro a L T' CE +, (, ol o z (tr L +t F€. +J L @ o o) o (rl o P L .J) FN.cr@ o ) r9 ('1 U'

584 +, (nNr\ (o @(O+\ONNOTON o OCNNFNF o ttl I tttetF-llrll s> sle(D |n+Or tOUt(f | -+ t @@ F-Or(o o .ooL! @Fln +) 0rI.- JJL . p+)Ji .!]J .}).tJ.u €+jo) ctr ol cD o) or cD ur cD or cL o. cL or o cL o- o- o. L O OTL ttJ at=otD0rfoolDcro) 4) |o =at o J o (tl

o .trN|\\ (o @(ON (o InN OrO|.- 1J OCFNFNF r rO Nrr.olllllllrl-ttlrflll u1-+o) (orn(n l.+ | rf @ I r'-or(o IFL+) 6FNeFN -o OOo o0r>o{) . iJ..j .-;..;i .j.j.j o .tJE L o ot o) ('! d) or or o o. o- o e o- o q o p .Do o)5-5>5:5r:orDoorDoooo ot o o+r-o |! J ]Jo 0) q o - dt F- rO (o OF- N OrF-Lr) N mF o ro)rl Ntm (rlttlJ-+lrl Gl I (O tJ) it rrnl l@ltlOllF-(Or.. 9- +) cl@r rlleGl FNFTNOI o oo o) JC) E oo> +JaJ+)p.p+)+) F poL urr cn ol ol olr c'r cll o-cDor o-o-o. oo-o ln ocL o -Jaaa23 JJ) rDf,fo(roooc) @ o O:E ') < -') (/) < < an u) u, u, tt) u't or c I o o o () qC) +J .p |o o- o" 6 F-O!F-Or- @F_(O o o rnjf|,) - FN NFFO .n u) .|) ttttl lN(nll t'.)ttlll Pc (,E tnco(o @o@ lorrrn-fl roo-+fo-+ o L+)o FNF NFNe-@ $fr1o o E .eO+) q) LOL >o +) +J +i .p ('l o oLo Forc'ro)orc't o-('roroo-o, c aJtoo a==JJr 2)42)= oJ:foqro) J lo oId 11'1 -1 -)-) -1 << (/)<<@.ntn E o lO oq) c .o J @Or.u o c, JL o rt) OE {J OE o ar o o lr|OrF.dlFOlNOr NF- F.- r.O (O o|r Fr c (, eOeFrGlN-N NF NcINNF = $> lFllltllt tl lrt-+ll !@ oLo [email protected]@r.o@ o(orn rn5$tF\ttl CL |uo eOteFFNNFN NrF NNNNS,IF O.F o-.- I U' +JL ooooororDoq) rDOO) o iD rD >rO O.} o+Jq) ccccccccc cCc-CC qt E o oo- Jffa))3:t:J L -1-)1--'-)'-)-)- -1 -) -) 'f--)-)-)-)=)))J) J{) -c co5J C) 1! o (n q) @p € olo L a, q- o 'a) (tl N(nJNdl+ NOi' Nm$N.nJN(v.)S o @@@ @@@ o@@ @@co@co@@@@ (.) or or or or c'l ol or or or Or Or O) Or Ol Ol Ol Or Ol {Jo E or .r oo) ts .lt r) o f, TE {J ool (J =c o L N+ .tJ co o oo Ol C' +J FN L(') tr@oo) FF tno

~~585 orroor -f (n tno d)tnor or @(ntn-l.rnsr F- (o (oo + .+-t@ (q rn (n@ N or$(n c. rqlnor @ (of'-O tn :f (oo -++ o.r rf rn ln (o -t\O 6$ $~~

~~r-orOr tn OIDO t0 O fr! OOc.) O OOtr O o co N r-. qr !n6.4 a'- NJ@ rl 6 (O(n@ @ $FN @ N mo o^$ @ Na4(0 (o lr| .(0 (o -* +~~

~~E ON$ (O tOF- r $ O o)OI -f N (o@F- dtrt+ -+ \O a'. (n @ @ @er <) NO.+ l'- l'- t-- ln I ot ln or@@ {0 (fi!nr| m o! $.+ t. r4(o @ NOm -? N ar1 Ol Nm{t g~~

~~L o or.+N rn N F-- @ FNF In 1/)|/lO-+@o Or J Nro @ (OF-an (o O\@+ N Or Ool o Ol OO|O @ FO(o o) N F-+ E fnN (o \o$-t + N c N() m .g I o~~

p ,qNm m OeOt O c) @ o o FFrl @ eNOt (q o @ NO|(O F- (|'(or + N N+ o Ot lnorl N!nu) m trl an@ c{(n \0 rnco\o o \o F. -o N$-+ s o |l) L L u o irlo(>F -f u.lttlF @ o@ OOI Fl..O cO O)(O@ -t N ocl (, FO-t In @N rn F r.l o ar) E O! q, lno)lJf Ol rtrlN Ol Ot n4N c'l (n (') F- (o dt (o ltl (n t'r lo (q .+ ro

=L ID ; orot6 (o or(or.o @ .aJ NF-O) O +Om cO Ol oo 6 E, t- €.!1e (\ @l'- c' tc| Ft NO 0) Ol N(nN @ OmF. Or \o t.o g (')N (n NF--+ .+ Ol o € J N(! m L@ q) It) P (oor(p Or.n+ (o l\ or|n ELC F\ oretD @ NF@ c\,t o @or EO N ln(n(o tn ooo o |o -'O OLE Or ()o c{NF. N rnore \o @ @ t'- ,o N(f) r.o o)u)jf ot rn r0 .06 N N OE LC.:a ooc tJ) O.c, (J O- E g IDEO s (O$(v| m +NF F- O oo orcc (J (o Fl'\rn -+ @Orr\ $ rC (v)N \o N.tN oi (o ro ooo N N rttrD>go !, @>LO(t)LlD* a) .0.C.O L E, U' o (JL.o 7 FLC'=L @ (n f) (! (r) (t! .+ or o o! () |n |naro-t O rnCD-+ Or f'. O r.' N c\tor@ O) IOO|N (D O O) E,OE Or or!ca {) N@O rt -fN.+ tO @ + +rc FN In f4(O(n an @ O @otcL o NN(') OtilJtF O!]Oe C>rL€ o (j)cooE -o c oS:<(Lv) u't O-. r |J c c J r',Q) oootto OF OF o O c ll) J .o J o O 1t'- ('l E9E! L J+) O f {J C :t O. |t' J3:'J N +) > o o o > o <-c o€_:t c_ .p o ._ o o o ,F .o rDooo9 o Fc\tm L-O+) $rn(o L! E+JCL C€+) occcc o o, o , -+J o a t\' r0.r o o L o g- .o , o o-o +r (J c O-CL J'O+, |! oo.oot o F J=F(J vro-oo!

586 chum salmon has increased sharply as a result of regu- I ation changes , i ncreased fi shi ng effort, i ncreaied availabil ity of tendering and processing facil ities, higher prices paid to the fisherman, development of Japanese markets, and increased run strength in recent years (ADF&G 1984c). The corunercial fishery for fall chum salmon in the yukon River is also recent, beginning in the early 1960,s, with considerable expansion since 1969 in terms of harvest levels and corresponding increases in fishing effort and availability of processing facilities. Fall chum salmon are in demand because of their gooci quality, bright s.ilvery appearance, large size, and high oil content (ib'id.). Therefore, the fa11 run of chum-salmon is the target species of the commercial fishery for Districts 5 and 6, whereas the summer run is of primary importance to District 4. The Alaskan harvest of chum salmcln in the Yukon River accounts for 99% of the entire drainage harvest. About 47% of the harvest since 1975 was caught in D'istrict 1. The combined lower river (Districts 1, Z, and 3) accounted for 77% of the total harvest during the same t'ime period, with the upper river (Districts 4, 5, and 6) accounting for 22% of the total catch (taOte i8). Chum salmon comprise about 87% of the entire corrnercial harvest from the Yukon River. The Alaskan harvest since 1975 has ranged from 757,?84 salmon in 1976 to almost 1.5 million chum salmon taken in 1981. During this 10-year period, carches have averaged about 939,184 fish annually (tanle 18). b. Canadian commercia'l harvest summary. The commercial ian portion of the Yukon River drainage has increased steadily since Ig7S. Catches have ranged from 1,000 salmon in 1976 to ZS,9g0 'in 1984 (taOte 18). Chum salmon comprise about 58% of the total Canadian commercial salmon harvest (taOles 17 and 18). c. Alaskan subsistence harvest summary. Chum salmon ence harvest for all salmon species. Subsistence catches of chum salmon seemed to decline from an average annual harvest of 399,001 fish taken from 1961 through 1965 to an average of 191,009 fi sh harvested between 1966 through I973 (ADF&G 1984c ) . However, duri ng the past 10 years , catches have jncreased considerably, averaging 366,999 fish annual ly (table 21). Because chum salmon have characteristically been used for dog food, the decline in subsistence use was attributed to rep'lacement of sled dogs by snow machi nes. However, the more recent fncrease is exp'lained by above average size runs,

587 particularly for summer chum salmon, subsistence roe sales, and increasing numbers of recreational sled dog teams (ADF&G i984c ) . About 79% of the subsi stence harvest is taken in the upper river (Districts 4, 5, and 6). The Alaskan fishery accounts for 76% of the total subsistence harvest of chum salmon in the Yukon River drainage. d. Canadian subsistence harvest surrunary. The subsistence the Yukon River drainage occurs primarily in the main stem of the Yukon Rrver from Dawson to Carmacks. The Pe1ly, Stewart, and Porcupine (0ld Crow) river drainages also support s!b- sistence fisheries for chum salmon. The Canadian harvest is djfficult to monitor and may be substantia'l1y greater than reportecl (Buk'lis and Barton 1984). The Canadian chum salmon harvest for subsistence purposes comprises about 60% tlf the entire Canadian subsistence catch for all salmon species and, based on the recent 10-year average, approximately L% of the entire chum salmon subsistence harvest for the United States ancl Canada portions of the Yukon drainage, combined (taOle ?r). 3. Chinook salmon harvest. Chinook salmon are taken in both the ffitence fisheries in the Yukon River clrainage. Combined catches for the harvest in the United States and Canada have ranged from 82,883 chinook salmon taken in 1975 to 2L9,255 fish harvested in 1980. Catches have averaged 160,806 chinook salmon annually (tanles 22, 24). a. Alaskan commercial harvest summary. In the commercial onlY chinook salmon were harvested on a sustained basis (ADF&G 1984c). Between 1918 and 1959, the commercial harvest averaged 30,000 fish annually (ADF&G 1984c). Under new regu- lai.ions established by the ADF&G in 1961, the annual chinook salmon harvest averaged 104,371 fish from 196i through 1970, decreasing to 75,989 fish annually from 1970 rhrough 1984. The lowest recorded harvest since 1960 of 63,838 fish occurred in 1975, even though effort had increased substantial'ly (ibid. ). Restrictions placed on the commercial fishing during the I970's have resulted in improved run strength, thereby increasing conrnercia'l harvest levels. Run-timing information 'is presented in table 23. The record harvest of i58,018 chinook salmon was taken in 1981. Catches between 1975 and 1984 averaged II7,867 salmon annually (tante 22). Most of the harvest occurs in a directed gi1 1 net fishery in the lower 200 mi of the river (mcAriOe and Wilcock 1983). Ab.out 85% of the harvest was taken from the lower river (Districts I,2, and 3),

~~588 -rln ol eF-oiF\EOrF-t- c)co @ rf 3 or@ F- co 5sB 3 EBs Or ot Ot stodl -+ ra ln or N i\fA :~~

~~t. N6\ONF(oF@ oN N (n aY) iniio or 9o- ('rO Ol @ +e-F-r.C)t.oo) Or (q o |'lF1 -+ (\ (n rt F- \o cn-f s -f~~

.f $o { @ oNorf:!o-f1 !n $s o I oli 6li6 or 9Q@@ (o \o N @ *^ 6^ o' e^ rn { ':. .'"}, N F\ Ol r.o Fln f" (o@ (n Or lfo\c.lr\. (n N g = o @(o (Derf) O \.+l- oC9 -o 5€obi {F'@ o1rl to @ \ ctl 4\" "l "l'').o' co @'@ o C orn+ a F(o ln \o o ('|$s pL o tnO r.r'l N-+OlJ)eeF-q| u-1 @o @ o tri6; n !o$ (o Or f) @ 'i-^;6& \o In@or ol ooln!nFsF@ (o ol ro -o or r/t g rr o gIt)

~~.p c L (fltrl @ (o (n OIO)N I tl) F-co@ o@tt In NT + E o ctl b6= i.i (o @ o Q) q q"L* ':. c't Or 1qq F- \O o ri-rtle(n\O N (f) c t-if,N o = (o L c q) o c] q) !t) E. ig~~

ru .p E IE ro t. o ;-:ii6nNu|NrnN@i{) o ao\og rn rt) N t- t- i-No.rtOOt-O F-N E c FT o o Ol o'qi' .o o '$ F (o \gs L tOeOl c't o L rJ) I J o r.o o (o o- O(OCo -+ Q-N F-O F\ lJ) e0$ .?rno I F-r) N I (J N $tie{Fr o q) l'\ ra .L N\o-+mmes @ Ot tO- @ rt Q, 6! p CNE

ll) (-) g Fq) r! @ !OrnF.- F- ONO t: rv) O (n l ln ;d--i- r.. @r-o 9 @ r.. 6rtl-O(n@rnN @o cro o 6r ;^ (r) (n ,o -+c ;f,e$ONm rO @ C) $e(O Ol oL (, E oL E "d3ot! cD c d) +) O- 5- (, -!|! .o c E N f+) :S v-c o-c ce ..() N L >o ;b'n6to'-o'ro o+, eN(f +, .+rft(o oo o L.O r-i:rOp:OtJc:O{i L q L(J 0rf o= o- o o 6 o a A6r]

~~589 +) ()~~

L *J mN@ (o@\o-t (oNOrOf.- +J o O-NTFNF q o ttl tttl lNlFlll r+. (O o g.lt> NeN u| -t Ol $ .n t $ I CO I F.O)(I) €o @-r'lFFOl (') o-.- +)L .o lJ+Ju.aJupaJ+j o{Jo CD Ctr c') c') O) CD olco) o oo- JJJJ=A o_o-o_('rcLoo_o_o_ 6 .D ooofooooc, J -t-< u)u)tn <.oar, (n0u) l! !

I ro mNr (OF(ON.o-+ c) 6-NNNd I ttl lllNrrttN@F-@ ]J 9L+' Ne(O roif jf o or or.+ | tr) N or | | | | OOo () Ne(ONNNTNf)(o(lrc, c) rDo>o- .oo. L gt +JoaL cD o) c]r cn crt c c (') oF ot c'r or u) E o oro 421 :rJlff,JJfJJff f o+)Io lD J o L L o N E E (Jo L cJ N .$O.n Otr f)rn +E eO o) oTONNNNNcJe-)N-r lellllllmllm(Dttttr CD o |}- +) rlF f')OIif COO I Fmt tNO OrCOI |1) oo NOINNeNNNNF-eeFeOr (J 10 !(, 7) oo> (I)ooo0ogo>, o +)(rL c c c c c c c c- tn o |o(L o f3:JfSJJf,fllJ:tSfJfJ --) -) --) '-) --) -) --) -) - -) '-) --) --) -) --) *) --) -) @ o o J L () p o {) E .n(Df:(Ae orNcrr unF-(o I-(o-J ol c) p eOeeFcJ NFNNFNNN-1 N = Ctl o! lFllll trttttttt-+t6 c IE L+J(D -+r@(oNo co(o@fornS!r)$erNl o c ,eOP FOTFTFN NTNNFNNNNNNF. @ hrDL >o oorDooo q, O O lD lD O O O O >\O >, q, = IDLCT c c c c c c c c c c- L po0) :t5Jftf, JIJ)JaAAa)J) - oIOa -) -) --) --) --) '-) -') --) --) -) --) --) -) --) -) --) -) J -) (D q) o- o .+ @ J oro . (., JL o OEoo lJ OE +) o rr Or F...V)r (trNor NFs N,.o; OrrO Ot! eOeFFNNFNNTNN-NF = rJ 9> lFllllllllllll-d.tl !)o oL! cs tEO TOIFFFNNFNNTFNNNNNe E tD E'- o.- .IJ L o o o o rD o o o o rt rD o o o o >rrD o o e o +J (.) cccccccccccccccrcc u) o o(L llfS:tf,a)af:rJJtfaJ) o L --) -) --) -) '-) -) -) '-) --) -) -) -) --) -) --) -) 'f .p J - -tf o lL Os oa {, co +J oo -(t rr- o tc, E Ctt L c!'\:1rf N.n-t Nm-+ c..tforf Nc4+ Nrn-t of € .@@@ @@@ o€o@ @@o o@@ c)co@ Q' or or or o or or or or or ('| ot or or o) or or or o! po iD .- F iD(! <, +r o LD E, +) oo) EC fa L Nrf @ Ol oo F C,l o LU) -o@|oo) Fe

~~590 .+Gtl')00rol @oro O! + N|.\r)t')lnOO! rn@ Or @ t.oer4 tOOrlO N(n(o O) (tr .+ (o ^aa (.| 1.oc!(o @ f-- rf f.. J N{i +~~

~~(f}rno@-toroo@rn o \Oll)e (n rn@O -+ lt- N o @ NOOTNt=Nl'..c!+\O or \OOr-+ Or(oN o) o) lr) rn OGIN+ r|~~

@ I eOrOrOtF-Or(nOr@@ ro ul N rO(tF-F.rnjfr'-l')(o N F- @ (Y)F./)F-OCO-ffON -+ (t) Or NslftF-tnNNO@cO (0 NN L lo o l) NOe.nNOr|F-OrO ro @@o .foco N ol o GlrnoO+ro<)@(oN Or T' ('ro o cl(f)-+ o) $o4N Or Or Ot @ N frl ]J

~~L Po or-f (f) ..o @-+r0 @ -t r.o o (OF-@(\@@NOIN-? It- @ ro(oF-o.ocornF--o FS Ol .na^$GIFNFON(n tr) o mrt f) g{,~~

~~.u q, L o Or@(nO]rtF-mrtr|O tn o) oor F.-(O(O rootm Or O O o) @NN-fNor(nr|oN N o O! N-+d) O F-ee O -:l lr| € NM m~~

~~=g q)~~

..o-f N N ot6r U1 F- (O @ -+(OO .+O(o @ Or O o r NOtOrrnrfNNOl N J Or rn(n(y|(nlnOFF-ON (o (t) (, E.p c C)@OrF-O('reJF- @ F C F\ lr)rDln F- ONf'- O @ O @ f.. F-torn Or OrFrn \O ttl @ E Ol o FNJ:irOeNF-N o N o U) L c) J CL

q Q, E lnlooroorrn(0l') o) c) ro U1\ON{tF-(ON\OON F (r)@@o$oNF.@ln s 01 (, o FNNF\9rlrON or 0, ln-o {io @o o Ol L L o lt) o (,) F-tnoNorN@+\oo \o F€'a q) fl \o o orF.orr0$t-No(oo (:) C) r [email protected]!(iN@O @ L CA ooc c) e$toav)eltN.tl f) -f=.F +) @o. o Orof po €L C o6 0- tn o ILO p ct OCo o OF o.-oo JO -toool 6p g f+r JJJCO N P >o -+ rn (o >o<-co-cc- ..|o 6 -Nm {J +J(J,-O'e|o oo() o LrO L-OefJlr+)CO+J oEc rDf o:tooo|ooLo L- cLa+Joco-vat+) fl o o=o oooS Or F )F(J at, I i0

591 wi th 60% accounted for speci fi cal ly by Di stri ct i . Since L975, the chinook salmon catches comprised 11% of the entire commercial harvest. River morphology and regu'lations dictate exclusive use of set and drift gill nets in the lower Yukon Area (ibid.). Chinook salmon are of less importance to the cormercial fisheries in the three upper river districts. The most intensive chinook salmon commercial fishery in the upper river had developed in the lower portion of District 5. b. Canadian cormercial harvest surmary. Historical infor- mercial harvest of chinook salmon is limited. Catches, however, since 1975 have shown a substantial increase from 2,975 fish harvested during the 1978 season to a record harvest of 13,027 chinook salmon taken during the 1983 season. The 1984 harvest was slight'ly less at 9,885 fish (table 22). During the past 10 years, the fishery has averaged 7,000 fish per year and accounted for 4% of the Canadian conmercial harvest of alI species. This fishery contributed 6% of the Yukon drainage chinook salmon commercial harvest through the same period. c. 4laslan subsistence harvest sunnnglJ. Early subsistence imarily- chum salmon. Whereas chum salmon have primarily been utilized as dog food, chinook salmon have mostly been harvested for human consumption (YTC 1985). Catches in the subsistence fishery have increased, particularly in the past five years, as a result of increased run strengths. Reported catches since 1975 have ranged from 12,866 fish harvested in 1975 to 49,478 fish harvested in 1983. About 42,389 chinook salmon were taken during the 1984 fishery (taute 24). During the same period, about 64% of the chinook salmon harvest was taken in the upper Yukon districts. District 5 alone accounted for 36,% of this total catch. The subsistence harvest of chinook salmon accounts for 7% of the total subsistence harvest (all species) from the entire Yukon River drainage. d. lqlqdian subsistence harvest sunilnary. Chinook salmon food and domestic subsistence fisheries in the Canadian Yukon area. Little information is available regarding carch .lnd effort levels in the domestic fishery before 1961. Chinook salmon catches in recent years have shown a steady increase, which resulted in a licensing require- ment beginning in 1982. Little information is also available regarding the early chinook salmon harvest in the Indian food fishery. How- ever, catches have recently irrcreased over levels expe- riencecl duri ng the mi d 1960' s ( ibid. ) . The I argest chinook catches are taken in the main stem Yukon R'iver

59? near Carmacks and in the Pe11y, Stewart, and Teslin rivers (ibid.). The combined chinook salmon subsistence harvest taken in Canada has ranged from 1,525 fish harvested in 1976 to 13'046 salmon harvested during the 1980 season and has , averaged 5 ,720 fish annual 1y (tao1 e 24). 4. coho salmon harvest. coho salmon are harvested 'theprimarily in ffi subsistence fisheries in Alaskan portion of the Yukon River drainage. The total coho salmon harvest is only 3% of the entiie salmon harvest of arl species. combined catches for all coho salmon fisheries (for years when harvest was reported for both subsistence and commercial fisheries) have ranged from 26,9s9 coho salmon in L979 to 131,376 coho salmon-in 1984. catches from rg77 through 1984 averaged 54,380 fi sh annual 1y (taO1 es 25 and 27). a. Alas,(an Sofmerqi,al harvest summary. Coho salmon returns to the Yukon River are of lesser magnitude than fall chum salmon runs and are taken incidental ly to the connercial fishery for fall chum salmon (ADF&G l9g4c). coho salmon run-timing information in the commercial fishery is presented in table 26. Commercial catches since 1975 have shown a substantial increase in magnitude. Harvest levels have ranged from 2,546 coho salmon harvested in 1975 to 81,940 coho salmon taken in 1984 (taUte 25). Catches averaged 25,477 fish annually during the same period. Coho salmon comprise about Zi'l of the tota'l Alaskan comrnercial harvest. About SZ% of the coho salmon catch during this time period was taken from District 1. The lower river districts (1, Z, and 3) combined accounted for 8G% of the commerciai citch, with the upper Yukon area comprising 14% of the harvest. b. Qanadiar:r.co,mmercial Lrarvqst summary. There is no documented harvest of coho salmon in the Canadian section of the Yukon River draina.ge. c. 4las(an subsistencq harvesl sunmg-f1. Reported catches o sal'mon have been available since only 1977. Most of the catch has been reported in the upper river districts. Catches have ranged from 7,787 fish taken in 1978 to 48,936 coho salmon harvested 'in 1984 and have averaged 23,500 salmon annual ly ( taul e 27) . d. 9anadi?n sgbsis.tefrce harvest summary. The reported narvest of subsi stence-caught coho salmon in the Canadian portion of the Yukon River has been minimal. Records show catches of 1,500, 500, and 5CI0 fish, lgspectively, documented for 1980, 1981, and 1984 (taOle 27). 5. 0!hef. salmo!. species hqryest. Sockeye salmon are uncommon in es of only a few fish reported

~~593 N{-4.-!.)O@fn s F-IONlnOr@@ oo o @ -to(o c) \g F\ Ot s Ol Ol or(na/|N@ N$F- cct @~~

~~r|NO N OC)@ @ oo Otlntn\O\O N o @ rlrn N O) an sNN(Or.() m~~

~~rnorNrlc)otrl (oo (o e.l FN(D@@or r\ F. -+ @ mF\i\ o Ol I l/) $ ('| ltt F- t\ N F\ F. N (n {r| Ol~~

~~g € c) Orrfor(oc)CJ$J oo N$eOr@@ @ o @ ro -@J(nNN (o o f4f.-NN m E N N c! .o P~~

~~L OT9OOTOO(o(o lno |n o Gt(o@mN|') $ .+ o @\o-tNN N O) r o JNF- @~~

~~-c) ,o L L o O|OO Or rnOe (o rJt lr) .u oor (orn l^ 0\ .$ (o o (o E t!4 @ c{ t'\ O) (, Ol E FN+NN t\ F. q)c, (o o~~

~~=g q) 9rttco.nNerOOl NO N @ (O(nu) rn m r{l Or tn N -+col\OOO |n E, (tt rO|Jl ra tYt (o (o (0 N N N J~~

() c. P [email protected]\O ,Y|o F. NFd) N @ @ (o (o c F. F.trrln|.rtNN @ @ Or FUlF\ odl @ co E lD vl o -c I.oF-c)OO(')m ro :fe@OO $o {t (-) N oo @ Ol 5+ !n |n r| {Jo @ (, Ot L rE F @oo @ oul (o @ roo !o rrl OO @ !n dl + + r\- N(\jf ln rn o 01 o NN N c) N -+ L @ () Ol F E (')o oo c L- +) OF Or (1, (, !i! :oor tri f+) f{Joco cl L >o >Oll.co.ccF +J FNm p -?rl\O PqQ.rO.Fo i; o L-O F !u c o{J o of (rJor€orooLo 'o+r L 4t o ,o o.o+J<(Jco:!p a o o oo'r') o F J f,F(J lJ',

594 1I) q) if orOF. 6 d)Nc| o q) llllltF- ttl 9> NeF\ ttl+Ol l'. ao I I F- Or \g L:o @ln o r00 P rDI.F o +J+)+) +rg +JO{J ooo ao-o o.pn) cn or cD or Or ctl ol Ol cL + croo L o o(L -Jaj):'tJoll, u) tn u't TJ J19

oNNro@-+@ Or$F. 'o sl t! q) ttttlllJ ttl (o .P c.J r tO tt) O) F (o (g I t'- (Yl -? NN SL+Jooo -o cLo oo <)oo oo> .rJ +r+rp +r(r L orcDcD cnolcD (tr o) q q oo-cl p ooc) oo ::r)=))afq) u> .h U', o+)-o 6 o ]J J c, L o o)gr\ mN-+ro@+@ N(n lo tttlllll ttl Ned) !n-f Or n'. (n (o Ot F- (n (O o 9+) NN g oo o) iq, oo ooo .p+){J E .tjogoo> qro)(')cDcDo)cnul9q co-o. ln E IDOID @ o(L.o a)=a==t5)=, u> u't tJ', Ol ! o o o q, o o coFF-(o+co OF\ u) -+ In FNTNF N = o tttlll F-ll ttl ott NO\Orn(nF- t@rn -+(v1+ c g (, (o o .FO+isp TNeNFF o ooc> 6. LOL o .P c'l P >o +J c oLo. Fcorc'l or 0t or 'J c q) poc) aJ=a=42 )af ooo I l!-E '-) -) --) ") < u't u) .t tc ()E -) coo €c't .o os

= I o JL J oo ()EOE () Q) rn or |.\d)F o! o) N Ol F- ({F = .P ool eOeFFGINNN €'tt t|o 9> lrlllllll It\!n c oLp st@(oNo@@o(n NNF G.F |oo eOreeeclNNc{ I OI.- ooo >ro o 6 +JL|E+rc) caacccccccooo.rooooooooQ q) F o rr(L )J)f:tfaJ)) tJf E, L -1 1 -1 -1 -.) '-) '-) '-) --l --) -) -') '-) J! o6 r dl 5 (rt .c @p o (Jo or€ o .d, g N(n$ NCn{i Nro+ c!ta{ c{(tif N|t)q o+, ctl o cdbct@ cobco (ococD cooqq cooco €co!9 o 6 or or or or or ot ot ot or (t! ol or or o or o 01 .aJ O E 0, ct F E'J L! Ef co {J ool o Ec ,o L +, N-t o crl! (, I op rN I aJ', !@ J oo) ato

~~595 tnr0\9 F\ F.r.'in o) r|o I rO Oi\06 IOT.oCO o O (n 6 OOIO @ @.+F Or rO rt ttl @ Ol \Ol- rv) NF.+ (n.+J~~

~~oNF- o|r ro@N (o |.rl | tr) fn .}rF.- F- J.f N o) | Ot @ |^00r rn Or$Ol c4 @ | @ Ot (n(O O (f)N\O (n (n dl c{N~~

~~srortr) \o N@@ @ -+ r.+ N (DNl- Or lnNF Or Or rch @ @ eN'O O Orrf $ F- @ r@ Ol |n FO N NmF- rn rn r| N NM Ol~~

~~L o 6troo ln or(nfo m@o@ tor6r onF(O NON @ NNTN O C{NN NNtnt'- (O(v1 NrO! m @ NN~~

{J g p @re c) $-ro @ coo@ o ooo o (nro.o r| lno|rt @ @@ F- l'.u'l- $ tn r.o o O) r$ \O l\ rn o : NN lE c.) L L P o ifNN @ InroN (o N t-? OOI @{vtF N o)Ot- lO (n tor Q) (o Ntn\o $ f'- IN E Ol Q) mF $ -+ tn Ol Or ctl .o c d = E N(Dc4 (o ltlool if F- IN o @ .+OrN (o -+F-O N @ r@ d, r\ rt-oN Ol eOtF: @ r tr O! -?rnr N L o q, J L c) qtoo. +J P Nrom.+ccloNmlan QO F. rnm(o fi ulo'rca @ o I dl C'() I d1 F\ Jmo (nNO m L Or N-+ F .+ -J. or ro (o oo .+ -c @oto o L rn o (o @L o ttllllll (o ttttllll .o L F- ttllllll ..u o, SiDu@r0 NOQ)1t I @-oo>c o OI.o>Lo LO-C. q, o-c() -o-c L >LI' o @oLoc tlllllll o)o>o (, lrl tllltlll o> a F Ittlllll L.rE,O Ol .0ro.c c, oBl{ +J coofo o OroLJl+rof,o o oc o (JOcoo 3 "5 :< (L tn E ILO +) ccJ ocooq () OF OF a Q) to -go o o oE-o10 N g f,.lJ .o t.lJ C O C:JJJ N p t o o o >- o <.c o c- ..o F N.N P Sln\O JJ O '--C 'F O ooooc) o Ll) LJO .-+J Tt O C O{i oEccc O- O J O o o+) O L O g- ?o cLo Jro co J'Irp 5l |E 6 o- o oo f Ot ts Jf,F() u)rolo

,596 each year. Sockeye salnrcn have been reported taken in the main lukon River upstream to Rampart (ibid.). Pink salmon spawn in the lower portion of the Yukon River drainage, below the village of Grayling. Reported catches jn the commercial and subsistence fisheries are sma'll. Pink salmon have been caught in the main stenr Yukon River upstream as far as Ruby (ibid.). C. Ha rvest ttlethods Both drift and set gill net are legal gear for the commercial harvest of salmon in Districts 1, 2, and 3 (1ower river), except that after July 19, on'ly set gill nets may be used at specified locations in District 1. In Districts 4, 5, and 6 (upper river), only set gi'll nets and fish wheels may be used for the commercial harvest of salmon. Subsistence harvest of salmon in Alaska may be taken by set or drift gill net, beach seine, or fish wheels (ADF&G 1985b). Most flshermen operate small (16-20 ft) outboard powered skiffs. Net rollers and powered reels of any type are rarely used (YTC 1e85 ) . In Canada, both set and drifr gill nets and fish wheels are 1ega1 gear for commercial fishing (ibid.). D. Period of Use 1. Conunercial seasons. Commercial fishing seasons are Specific ffi and, frequently, to subdistricts, ds described below: a . Di stri cts 1 , 2 , and 3. In these di stri cts , the early season@ergency order between June 5 and June 15 and will close by emergency order berween July 19 and July 25. The late season will open by emergency order between July 26 and August 1 and will close by emergency order August 31. b. Districts 4, 5, and 6. In these djstricts' the season ffih September 30. The early season js closed by emergency order, and subsequent seasons are opened and closed by emergency order. Subdistrict 4-A closes August 1. The commercial salmon fishing season is cl osed 'in Subdistrjct 6-C during closures of the subs i stence salmon fishing season in Subdistrict 6-F. Subdistrict 4-A, downstream from the mouth of Stink Creek, is open for commercial salmon fishing from June 15 through August 1. Subdistrict 4-A, upstream from the mouth of Stink Creek, is open from June 24 through August 1 (ADF&G 1985b). 2. Subsistence seasons. t,{ith the exceptions described below, @n only during the open weekly fishing periods of the commercial salmon fishing season and may not be taken for 24 hours before the opening and 24 hours after the closure of the commercial salmon fishing season.

59't a. Districts 1, 2, and 3. The above regulations apply tcr these districts efcept that in Districts 1 and 2 through Ju'ly 19 subsistence fishing periods will be established by emergency order every other weekend during comrnercial salmon fishing closures. In District 1, except for the set-net-on'ly locations described in 5 AAC 05.330(a)(1)--(8) and in District 2 after July 19, a Z4-hour subsistence fishing period will be established by emergency order each weekend during the open commercial salmon fishing season. b. District 4, excluding the Koyukuk and Innoko river

district, except that in Subdistrict 4-A from June 15 thr.ough August l salmon may be taken from 6:00 p.m. Sunday unti I 6:00 p.m. Tuesday and from 6:00 p.m. Wednesday until 6:00 p.m. Friday. In Subd'istricts 4-B and 4-C from June 15 through September 30 salmon may be taken from 6:00 p.m. Sunday until 6:00 p.m. Tuesday and from 6:00 p.m. Wednesday until 6:00 p.m. Friday. c. District 5, excluding the Tozitna River drainage and e,rcJfr.rnTi d. District 6, excluding the Kantishna River drainage and_

that in Subdistrict 6-8, from the downstreant end of Crescent Island to 3 mi upstream of the mouth of the Totchaket Slough, salmon may be taken from 6:00 p.m. Friday until 6:00 p.m. [,lednesday. During any conunercial salmon fishing seasori closure greater than five days in duration, salmon may not be taken during the following periods in the followjng districts: " In District 4, excluding the Koyukuk and Innoko River drainages, salmon may not be taken from 6:00 p.m. Friday until 6:00 p.m. Sunclay. o In District 5, excluding the Tozitna River drainage and Subdistrict 5-B, salmolt may not be taken from 6:00 p.m. Sunday until 6:00 p.m. Tuesday. o In Subdistricts 6-A and 6-8, excluding the Kantishna River drainage and that portion of the Tanana River drainage upstream of the mouth of the Salcha R'iver, salmon may not be taken from 6:00 p.m. Wednesday unt'il 6:00 p.m. Friday. o In Subdistrict 6-C and that portion of the Tanana River dra'inage upstream to the mouth of the Salcha River, salmon may not be taken following the closure of the cormercial salmon fishing season from 6:00 p.m. Monday unti'l 6:00 p.m. Friday.

598 Except as provided in 5 AAC 0L.zz5 and except as may be provided by the terms of a subsistence fishing permit, there is n6 closed season on fish other than salmon (ADF&G 1995b). E. Management Objectives Ilq fqllgrying management obiectives sumnnry is taken verbatim from YTc (1985) and has only been reformatted ior presentation in this narrative. 1. 4-l€!a. The ADF&G, Division of corrnercial Fisheries, is the n-dn,est management authority responsible for regutiiing in. Yukon River subsistence and commercial salmon fisheries in Alaska. The overall objective of the yukon Area research and management program is to manage the various salmon runs for optimum sustained yie1d. The conrnercial fishery is regulated on the assumption that a harvestable salmon surpius is available after providing for spawning and subsistence uti I ization requi rements. The various fisheries in Alaska are scattered over 1,400 river miles. As a result, allocation issues exist between various user groups. In order to satisfy both user group' harvest al locations and conservation iequirements, the commercial fishing area is divided into six districts and 10 subdistricts. Regulations may vary between districts and subdistricts. To i'llustrate the comptexity of the regulations, there are 11 different weekry fishing schedules ino 11 guideline harvest ranges in effect throughout the area. As a result of the difficulty in obtaining the necessary biological information, the mixed-stock ana mixed-species fisheries, the increased effort and efficiency oi the commercial fishery, the allocation issues, and tlie need ro provide for subsistence, management of the yukon River salmon runs must take a consenvative approach. comrercial fis.hing time has been grearly restricted by regulation during the past 20-25 yeais for the purposes oi conservation. The hours available for fishing in the lower Yukon (Districts I and 2 combined) during the June-ear]y Ju'iy chinook salmon lishely have decreased from an average of ltt lglfr-9!fing 1961-1970 to an average of only 210 hou-rs during 1981-1984. Fishing time in the lower yukon-fall chum fishery during the last two years has been reduced by an even greater rate. 0ther regu'lations and strategies necessary for conservation have also been implemented, iuch as delayLd season openings (to afford additional protection for eairy run stocks th;t are subj.ect to intensive fishing effort) , sp1 it fishing periods (to spread out the harvest over a greater portion of the run and to afford additionar protection tb smal ler stocks), and mesh size restrictions (to allow optimal harvests of mixed species). 0ther restrictions imposed in recent years include conservative guideline harvest ranges or quotas and in-season fishing

599 time reductions and season closures. Approximately 20 emergency orders are issued annua'l1y for in-seasons regulatory changes. In-season management relies heavily on the analysis of the comparative commercial and test fish catch data. 2. Canada. Management of anadromous Pacific salmon stocks in Canada is a federal responsibility of the Department of Fisheries and 0ceans (DFO). Next to conservation concenrs, the Indian Food Fishery receives the highest management priority by DFO. This fishery has relatively few restrictions, with little regulation of fishing time, effort, and location. Although "status" Indians and elders are e'ligib'le for "Indian food fish permits," the annual issuance of these pennits has been inconsistent and slow to evolve. Permit distribution i s not wi despread. Therefore, one must be extrenrely cautious in associating total effort levels with numbers of permi ts i ssued. Catch stati stics have been collected util'izing a variety of methods, including catch calendars, irrterviews, and counts of f ish dr^ying racks. In 1984, a comprehensive monitoring program was conducted in conjunction wi th several Indian bands. Seasonal staff members were hired in most of the major fishing villages to collect catch information on a regular basis. Management of the commercjal fishery has been re'latively low-key, with effort I imitation constituting the maior management tool. The maximum number of commercial licenses issued annually has been restricted to 45 since 1982 because of concerns regarding overexploitation. Prior to that time, significant growth had occurred and jnterest had escalated primari ly because of the devel opment of processi ng and marketing fac'il'ities in the early 1980's. A "Yukon Rjver salmon I icense" is issued to Canadian citizens or landed immigrants, providing they possess a "personal commercial fishing license" and have previously fished in one of the previous three years. Each I icense is restricted to a maximum of four nets, the aggregate length of which cannot exceed 90 m. In most years, the commercial fishery has ope rated s'ix days per week , a 1 though i n recent yea rs recluction in fishing time has been implemented in response to poor fish abundance. Now, fishing time in the Dawson area (tne most concentrated fishing area) is open five days per week. Weekly f i shery openi ng are moni tored c'losely by a fishery officer and/or patrolman, who reside in the area during the fishing season. Management practices for the domestic fishery have been similar to those employed with the conrnercial fjshery. License limitation was initiated in 1982, with the maximum number of licenses ava'ilable set at 26. Elig'ibility requirenrents include possession of a "Yukon River salmon Iicense" and a "domestic fishing license" as well as participation in

600 the fishery in one of the previous three years. Domestic fishermen arg c-urrenr)y restricted to one net, which cannot exceed 90 m i.n'length (oown'are from the 550 nr permitted prio, to Fishing areas restricted 1950-). by" the same boundar.ies in force for rhe commercial fishery. citcrr informatir.rn is col lected - through interview _ by a fishery officer and/or patrolmarr and rhrough the voluritary return-of monthlv-laicn di a ri es. F. Management Considerations If:^Igl low'ing management c<;nsiderations summary is taken f rom yrc (1eu5J and has olly been reformatred and stylistically,ooiriuo for presentation in this narrative. 1. Habitat issues: placer .rn a. Placer minirig. mining occurs stream beds anc Danks _throughout the yukon River drainage in Alaska, Yukon Territory, and British columbia. Reient .rpuniion in the industry has resurted in water quality-ploni.r, and degradation of salmon habitat in a numbei of yukon River tributaries. In A'laska, this includes tne-rcoyu[ut-in. and ranana rivers. In canadian portions of" drainage, placer nrining occurs on triburaries to ir,* main slem Vukon, Stewa.i, fnit., p.ilV, Teslin, and Big Salmorr .riv-ers. Major concentrarions- bf placer u.tiu- ities in canada occur" in the Dawson ano Mayo ir"ar. There are currently g00 placer-nrining opeiationi-in the Yukon River watershed.'ver Placer m'ining impacts fisheries by discharging sediment and heavy I meta s i nto streams ano by a t rlri"ng itr.u, banks wirh.heavy equipment. Irr the n6rrnat operition-ot removirg pracer dep'sits throu.gh excavatiori by heavy-i.u equipment, the natural conditi'ons of the ,t"iu, altered by the stripping of vegetarion and overburden adjacent ro the stream, creation of stream diversiorrs, and altering braided and rneander.ing stream channels. High levels. of suspentred and settleab-le solids and heavy nretals in the w_ate1 nray be carried many mires oownsiieam from the_ actuar pracer operation. Iri addit.ion, ,rnoir from tailings piles and iettling p.nds may coniinue to d'ischarge sediment into the strelnr long afferuining-r.ri, cea sed. The effects 'f pracer mining can be rong-1asting, blocking fish m.igration a.nd destroying or degrading spawning and rearing habitat. Exieniive sci6ntific I i teratu re and severa I ongoi ng stuoies i n the yukon R'iver drainag_e indicate tmt iuspendeo and sertleable solids from placer minirg juvenile can cause crirect mortality to fish and eggs rh.ough suffocation, iuoiounit ty fish of affecteo hatr-itats, ind loss produc._ of aquatic ' tivity because of ress r ight penerrat ion of turbid water.s.

601 Highly turbid water (high levels of suspended sedinrent) discharged by placer mining has hindered the ADF&G's ability to assess some salmon escapements. Since 1982, the ADF&G has cancelled 14 aerial surveys on the Chena, Chatanika, Hogatza, and Bearpaw drainages because of the turbid water resultrng from placer rnining (YTC 1985). b. HJdroelectric projects. Hydroelectric projects in the Yukon River drainage are currently nonexistent in Alaska ancl occur on a very smal I scale 'in Canada. However, future power demands in the area are difficult to project. A 1983 inventory of the potentia'l hydroelectric development in the Yukon River drainage in Yukon Territory identified about 100 potential projects. Fisheries impacts from hydroelectric projects carl i ncl ude I oss of rj veri ne or I ake habi tat through flooding or the creation of a reservoir, blockage of fish migration, and flow alterations or changes'in channel morphology. As a result, entire fish populations can be altered or elinrinated. A'lthough there are no hydroelectric projects in the Alaska portion of the drainage, there is a flood control dam on the Chena River near Fairbanks that does not affect salmon migratiorr. An existing hydroelectric dam in Canada on the lower Mayo River prohibits chinook salmon access to upstream spawning grounds. A hydroelectric dam constructed on the main Yukon River at Whitehorse in 1957 provides adult salmon passage to upstream spawning areas by way of a f i shway. Hc.rwever, studi es by Canadi an f i sheri es personnel have shown that substantial numbers of chinook salmon snrolts are killed or injured as they pass clown- stream through the

602 created water quality standards that establish leve'ls of discharge of pollutants designed to protect various uses on the streams. In general, enforcement efforts have not adequately curtailed water pollution problems caused by placer mining. The Division of Habitat of the ADF&G has authority to regulate human activities that impair spawning, rearing, ancl migration of anadromous fish by diverting, obstructing, polluting, and changing the natural flow of water in a stream. The regulations require specific identification of anadromous waters as listed in rhe Catalog of Waters Important to the Spawning, Rearing or Migration of Anadromous Fish; therefore many unsurveyed streams that may contain anadromous fish are not protected. No reclamation of mined areas is currently required of the placer mining industry in Alaska. In Canada, a new set of placer-mining guidelines has been drafted jointly by the Federal Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, DFO, and Environment Canada. The guidel ines classify streams into five categories as evaluateci by habitat qual ity, bio'logical sensitivity, fisheries resource values, and past mining activities. The distinction between categories is based primarily on fish spawning behavior and the requirements for spawning and egg incubation. Water po1 lution effluent standards and placer-mining techno'logy requirements are in the process of being established for each level of sensitivity. Requirements for development plans, stream diversions, and reclamation requirements are also being considered. Alaska statutes provide for the creation of fish and game critical habrtat areas, which are managed for maintenance of habitat elements crucial to the species in question. Uses of adjacent uplands and waters can be controlled to prevent or minimize habitat alteration. the ADF&G has nominated an area within the Toklat River (Tanana River system) that contains an important spawning population of fall chum salmon. l4ost Yukon River fall chum salnron spawn in only five or six known areas having the highest quality water and spawning gravel. 0ther important fal I chum salmon spawning habitats should be identified for spec'ial recognition and contro'1. 2. Marine harvest r.rf Yukon River salmon. This section River salmon in marine fisheries outside of the Yukon River fishery. Although exact numbers are unknown, Yukon River salmon are harvested in the fo1 lowing fisheries: Japanese mothership and land-based high seas salmon gi I 1 net fisheries. The Japanese mothership fishery operates

603 primari_ly in the Bering Sea, both within and outside the u. s. Fisheries conservation Zone. The JapJnese land- blse$ fishery operates in the North pacific'0cean south of the mothership fleet area of operation The combined harvest of all salmon species by these two f leets historical ly $,as in the 40-60 rifl.ion catch fangq prior to renegotiation of the International North Pacific Fisheries convention and harvest limit reductions i n rhe Japarr/USSR sa lmon agreenrent. The recent renegotiation of the Internatibnal North pacific Fisheries convention between Canada, Japan, and the united states in 1978 resulted in time and'area restrictions. The J,apanese mothership fishery had to pull nait 10 de_grees of longitude to the west and incurred additional time and area restrictions. The lancr-based li:l,.ty Iikewise puIIed back 10 degrees to the west-(a; 175" E). These restrictions have resul ted in a substantial reduction in interceptions of North American salmon, especially sockeye salmon of Bristol Bay origin. Inter- ceptions of chinook, coho, and chum ialmoi were also reduced. These two gill net fisheries now catch z0-?5 million salmon annually, the majority of which are of Apial origin (mosily USSR). The Japjnese pay a fee to the soviet union t' fish Asian salmon on tlie-high seas, but the soviets do not allow them to fish within theii fisheries conservation zone. Althou-gh the- renegotiation did reduce interceptions of some North American salmon stocks, it was unoerstood that I'lestern Alaska chinook salmon continued to be very vulnerable to harvest in the mothership fishery. Aftei discussions with fishennen from western Rlaika, the Japanese undertook voluntary measures to limit their chinook harvest in the motheiship f]eet to 110,000 fish per yea r f rom 19-81 t.f,"qqg! 1983 and 100 ,000 f i sh per year from 1984 -through 1986. This was oone to prevent pgak catches of the size that occurred in 1990, when 704'000 chinook were taken, of which over half were of western A'laskan and canadian yukon origin. There were problems with en_sur_'ing that the agre6ment was being enforced, particularly in regards to discard of chinool from catcher boats fi shi ng outside of the U. S. Fisheries conservation Zone. Discarded fish would still be lost to inshore harvest but would not count against the Japanese quota. "Dropouts" from high seas giIT nets (estimated to be 30% rtf the reported catch in oie stuoy) constitute another factor that may result in catches substantially larger than reported. Also, these fish are being taken as immatures weighing an average of

604 about 6 lb, compared to an inshore average weight as adults of 20 lb or more. Information frclm a study recently contracted by the ADF&G to the Fisheries Research Instirure (fnt), Universrry of Washington, showed that substantial rrumbers of chinook salmon in both the land-baseo and mothership fleets were of Alaska origin and, sur- prisingll, that a large proportion were from central Alaska, as well as from Western Alaska (including the Canadian Yukon). The origin of chinook salmon in the land-based fishery was large'ly unknown prior to the study. This new information indicates that an average of 188,000 and 149,000 Western Alaska chinook (including the Canadian Yukon) have beer, annually harvested dur.ing 1964-7977 and 1978-1983, respectively. Since 198i (excluding 1984, when this study was ierminated), the estimated annual harvest of Western Alaska chinook has been between 75,000 and 86,000 fish. The study did not attempt to estimate the numbers of chinook salmon intercepted from each major stock (yukon, Kuskokwim, Bristoi Bay), but it did indicate that yukon River chinook salmon were the "overwhelmingly predominant Western Alaska stock" in the Bering Sea carches. The United States and Canada have consistently maintained that d'irected high seas salmon fisheries should be eliminated fur a variety of reasons: stocks are fu11y ut'i I ized i n coastal oreas; stocks are broadly m'ixed on the high seas, making mandgement for conservation difficult; and significant wasrage occurs in high seas salmon fisheries because of the harvest, of imrnature fish and the dropour from high seas gi I 1 nets (yTC 1e85 ) . b. Fore!grrr. .ioilt-venLure _ and Urri.te.d Srates groundf i sh trawl fisheries. F<.rreign and joint-venture fisheTjes operaTT[--in tne Bering Sea-Aieuriarrs area captured 23,000 to 12?,000 salmon annual ly during lg77-i984. These fisheries operating in the Gulf of Alaska captured 7,000 to 36,000 salnron annually during 1977-1984. lhese clata are based on reports f rclnr Un i ted States observers placed upon foreigrr trawlers and processing ships. The joint venfures represent United States trawlers se11.ing catches at sea ro foreign processors. For al1 foreign and joint-venture trawl fisheries, United States federal regulations designate salmon a prohibited species, and any sa-lmon caught must be returned ro sea. The nrajority of salmon taken have been chinook salmon, but the percentage of chum salmon has increased in recent years' catches. Some Un'i ted States trawl ers del iver thei r catches to Un'ited States processors, but there is little information on the nurnbers or species composition of

605 these catches. studies by the FRI on stock origins of chinook salmon taken in the foreign groundfisn iishery indicate that Western Alaska sloc[ (inc'luding th; Canadian.Yukon) was taken predominantly (iUiO.). c. Other fitherie!. stock ident'ification studies have @sence of yukon River sarmon in at leasi two nearshore salmon net fisheries operating in Alaska waters. These are the Unimak-shumagin isTands purse lgile and.gi'll net fishery in June and set gili net fisheries irr southern Norton Sound. The June unimak-shumagin islands fishery harvests sockeye sa.lmon primari ly of Bristol Bay origin and al so incidental'ly takes chum salmon bound ior several terminal fisheries, including those in western Alaska. The numbers of chum salmon taken in the fishery are par- tiarlly dependent on management of the more abundant sockeye sa lmon runs. Recent stock identification studies have shown that the cclntribution of western Alaska (including the canadian yukon) chum salmon in the unimak-S-humagin islands fishery during 1983 rangect from 39 to 99% in the various time/area sirata. go[h yukon River summer and fall chum salmon are taken, but the exact numbers harvested annually are not known. Annual chum salmon catches in this fishery averaged 277,000 during 1970-L979. Catches began increasing sharply after 1979, with record catches of 1,015,000 in tg8e ind 756 ,000 i n 1983. The catch i n 1984 was 33g ,000. coincidentally with poorer-than-anticipated chum silmon returns to some western Alaska fisheries in I9gZ, several proposals to reduce the chum salmon harvest i; this fishery were made to the Alaska Board of Fisheries. These proposals were rejected, in part because of the lack of accuraf,e stock composition information. Previous tag and recovery studies indicate that some Yukon River chinook and chum salmon are intercepted in conunercial salmon fisheries operating in southern' Nortorr Sound, located about 150 mi northwesi of the yukon River mouth. Exact numbers taken are unknown but are probably smal I because the commercial harvests where known interceptions occurred averaged only 5,500 chinook and 95,000 chum salnron during the last five years. There is no irrformation to indicate thar yukon River salmon occur in waters open to trolling. Trolling is prohibited.in the Northern Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea (ibid. ). 3. Rivef manapqmen"t and mixed st@. Gen- eral ly, ancl/or species compl icate fisheries management and usual ly result in a reduced ability to optimize ihe yield of alj components of the fishery. The cause for conservation

606 concern generally'increases irt relation to the degree of mixture i n the fi shery. The Yukon Ri ver fi iheries harvest mixed stocks usual ly several weeks and hundreds of miles from their spawning grounds. Salmon entering the mouth may be exposed to harvest for up to 50 days in the main stem Yukorr River. As a result, some tributary populations may be under- or overharvested jn relation to their actuaJ abundance. It is current'ly not possible to manage most stocks in the lower river fisheries separately, and there is concern that small spawning populations may be reduced to very low levels. Management of chinook and summer chum salmon runs is comp'licated because both species exh'ibit similar run timing. The harvest of the more abundant summer chum salmon in the lower river is grearly dependent on the regulations and management stiaregies einployeO toward the more intensively managed chinook salmoh fishery. During the ear'ly pr.rrtion of the season, fishermen may use unrestricted mesh size gi I I nets; hr.rwever, the majority of. the gear operated consists of 'large-mesh gil 1 nets (8* in), which are selective for ihinook sa.lmon. Later in the season the use of only 6-inch or smaller mesh gill nets, as announced by emergency order, redirects the fishery towards the summer chum salmon run while providing increased protection of large chinook salmon, especially fecund females. Management of the lower Yukon fall chum salmon fishery is also complicated by the concurrent run timing of coh-o salmon. In most years, the commercial fishery is closed by mid August for conservation of fall chum salmon, which precludes optim'izing the harvest of coho salmon. 4. Fal I chum sa'lmon clepressed stocks. In recent years sistence fal'l -chum salmon catches have increased sharply while escapements have substantial 1y decl ined. Because of increased effort and efficiency of the fishery and problems in accurately assessing run strength in-season, there is a likelihood for overharvest. A conservative management strategy is required to allow for greater escapements and to reduce the rjsk of overharvesting anticipated weaker returns. Commerc'ial harvests should at least be held to the lower half of the guideline harvest range unless a large return is apparent and a harvestabie surplus of fish'is known to exist. In arrticipation of a very weak returrr of fall chum salmon from poor escapements of the 1982 brood year, more stringent harvest restrictions will be required irr 1986 (yTC 1985).

~~607 REFERENCES ADF&G. I975. Annual Management Report - Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim. Div. Conrner. Fish., Anchorage.~~

~~1978a. Alaska fisheries atlas. vol. 2 [R.F. McLean and K. J. ---oe'laney, comps.]. 43 pp. + maps.~~

. 1978b. Annual management report - yukon-Area - rgl}. Div. ---Enrmdr. Fi sh . , Anchorage. . 1979. Annual management report - t979 - Kuskokwim District. ----lDlv. Comner. F'ish., Bethel .- 60 pp. . 1980. Annual management report - yukon Area - 1990. Div. Fish., Anchorage. -Enfr6r. . 1981. Annual management report - yukon Area - 1991. Div. --ffir. Fi sh. , Anchorage. , L982. Arrnual management-ee report - 1981 - Kuskokwim Area. Div. Fish., Anchorage. pp. --6uriffir. . 1983. Annual management report - 1983 - Yukon Area. D'iv. Fish., Anchorage. t-SZ pp. --ffir. . 1984a. Annual management report - i983 - Kuskokwim Area. Uiv. ffir. Fish., Anchorage. gg pp. . 1984b. Kuskokwim area salmon report to the Alaska Board of Div. Cormer. Fish., Bethel . 72 pp. -TGfrEries. --ffir. . 1984c. Annual management report - 1984 - yukon Area. Div. Fish., Anchorage. tjs pp

~~_reries1985managementp1an.Div.Corurer.Fish.,Bethel.18pp.. 1985a. Kuskokwim area connercial and subsistence salmon~~

~~. 1985b. Regulations of the Alaska Board of Fisheries for commercial and subst.stence fish'ing in the Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim Ar"ea region. Div. Commer. Fish., Juneau. 64 pp.~~

~~Bukl is, L. S. , and L. H. Barton. 1984. yukon River fal I chum salmon biology and stock status. ADF&G, Infonnational Leaflet No. Z3g. 67 pp.~~

~~Buklis,_1. S., and J. l,l. hlilcock. 1984. Age,- sex, and size of yukon River salmon catch arrd escapement, 1983. ADF&G, Tech. Data Rept. 119. Juneau. 91 pp.~~

608 . 1985. Age, sex, and size of Yukon River salmon catch and GE-p'ement 1984. ADF&G, Tech. Data Rept. I52. Juneau. 93 pp. Francisco, K. 1986. Personal communication. Kuskokwim Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fjsh., Bethel. Geiger, M. 1986. Personal communication. Yukon Mgt. Biologist' ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Anchorage. Haynes, T. 1986. Personal communication. Regional Supervisor, ADF&G' Div. Subsi stence, Fai rbanks. Huttenun, D. C. 1984. Abundance, age, Sex, and size of salmon (0ncorhynchus spp.) catches and escapements in the Kuskokwim Area. ADFEFTech. Data Rept. iil. Div. Cornmer. Fish., Bethe'l . 76 pp. . 1985. Abundance, d9€, sex, and size of salmon (0ncorhynchus spp.I catches and escapements in the Kuskokwim Area. ADF&G, Tech. Data - Rept. 133. 94 pp. McBride, D. N., H. H. Hammer, and L. S. Bukl'is. 1983. Age, sex, and size of Yukon River salmon catch and escapement, L982. ADF&G, Tech. Data Rept. 90. 141 pp. McBride, D. N., and J. A. Wilcock. 1983. Alaska chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Walbaum) catch and escapement, 1961-1980, w compos'ition estimates. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish. 181 pp. Pennoyer, S., K. Middlef,on, and M. E. Morris, Jr. 1965. Arctic-Yukon- kuskokwim Area salmon fishing history. ADF&G, Informational Leaflet No. 70. Juneau. 51 pp. Pope, D. 1981. Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim fisheries. Management and development of the fisheries jn Western and Arctic Alaska. Vol. I. Report to the 12th Legislature. 137 pp. Rogers, D. E., K. lll. Myers, C. K. Harris, C. M. Knudsen, R. V. Walker, and N. 0. Davis. 1984. 0rigins of chinook sa'lmon in the area of the Japanese mothershi p salmon fi shery. Univ. Washi ngton School of Fjsheries. Final rept. FRI-Ul,l 8408. 215 pp. Schultz, K. 1986. Personal communjcation. Asst. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Bethel.

YTC (Yukon Technical Conrmittee). 1985. Briefing report on the status of salmon stocks, fisheries and management programs'in the Yukon River. Prepared by the scientific working group for the delegations from the United States and Canada concerning Yukon River salmon. Ava'ilable from ADF&G, Anchorage. 65 pp.

~~609~~

~~Commercial Harvest of King Crab Arctic and Western Regions~~

I. POPULATION I'IANAGEMENT IIISTORY A. Introduction The-Bering Sea Statistical Area (Statistical Area Q) for king crab includes waters of the Bering and chukchi seas north of cape Sarichef (54"36'N) a!'rd east of tne United States-Russian convention I ine (se9 mlp .ofpoint .1867 1). Its northern oornoarv is the latitude of Hope (68'21'N). The area is separii.o"into two pribi fishing districts: the lof and Northern districts. The Northern District contains the waters of Stat'istical Area Q north of the latitude of Cape Newenham (38'39'N) and is divided into rhe St. Matthew Island, St. Lawrence island, ino Norton Sounci sectigns (ADF&G 1984a). The Norton Sound and Sf. Lawrence Island sections are located within rhe Arctic Region. The st. Matthew Island Section occurs in the Western Region. In this narrative,- information will be presented for the Norton Sound Section and combined for the st. Matthew and st. Lawrence islands sections. B. Sunrnary of Fishery 1. Harvesr summary. currently, three species-.ruo of king'ip;.;iiihoa;; crabs are of--commercEr interest. Red king camtshqjlice) has. been the more abundant a1ffispeciesintheBristolBayRegistrationarea.ano fr@ Blue king crab has been the most abundint and widely distributed species in the Pribilof and Northern districti (Griffin, pe.rs_. c-gmm. ). Red king crab has been targeteo by the commercial fishery. hlith oecl ines in red ki-ng cra6 pgputations, interest and harvest effort for blue king crab and brown kins crab (!i!!ges u.qrliplnij r,uu. i!!: ntensified llglyp,lt) The commercial harvest of king crab jn the eastern Bering Sea was initiared by the Japanese in 1930. During the first year, app_roxinrately one million red king crabs were caught with tangle nets in the area north of the Alaska Peninsula by a fleet of rz smalI catcher boats (Bakkala et al. igia)". Fishing did not occur in 193i, but each year from lg3z through 1939 one or two Japanese factory ships operared in the area. During this eight-year period, some 7'.6 million crabs were taken from the Bering sea (Miyahara 1954). The Japanese discontinued fishing after the 19i9 season. The Unired states conduited exploratory processing fishing and studies on the king crab resouice in 1940 and 1941. Ignorance of Japanese cinning techniques, an imporr- domjnared market, and a healthy sJlmon riirrery that left I ittle incentive for winter. rishing (Gray et al. rgo!i nu.r"

~~61i 4-'"'-'~~

~~rf, Ol Fl~~

~~oo oLJ-~~

~~q tE (u l-~~

~~(J +)a +) alJ (l-~~

~~a.f,~~

, +) I vlOJ -f '(' , (, tJ1 I +) o I F +J (n o 'o € T -c T ;3 o, o l 3; q- :EE -o .!!e ; tt;!6 (o >! ; !- 6!!3 ,ta2 (J !; ! E r.> i r 3E ,t Ct) :-i ! E E:53 lt oo o 3t d-bO r{ >Z T! E b oroa-;o d iti E

612 factclrs partly responsible for the late entry of Anrerican fishermen and processors irrto the king crab fishery. In March of 1948, the factory ship- pacific Ex[rorer ]eft seatrle with a fleet of 10 fishing vessels to fish for both groundfish and king crab; king crab was the target spec'ies. This fleet used otter trawls and tangle nets to citch a tc,tal of 387'250 crabs. The success of rhese exploratory fishing ventures resultecl in development of a snall United statei trawl fi9lery for king crab jn the Bering Sea (NPFMC 19g0). Between 1949 and 1952, commercial operatiorrs by united stires fishermen in the eastern Bering Sea yieloed 4,250 metric tcns of crab (Otto 1981). Domesric trawlers continued to fish for crabs until after the 1957 season, when oevelopment of a successful pot fishery for king crab south of the Alaska Peninsula attracred domestic crab fishermen from the edsrern Bering Sea.. In 1959, no domestic catch was reported from rhe Bering Sea (NpFMc 1980). Jgpqn reentered the eastern Bering Sea king crab fishery in 1953 with a catch of 1.3 nrillion crabs weigh-ing approximaiely 5,100 metric tons. Japanese landings, Iowever, vldre less than 4'500 metric tons through the remainder of the 1950's (0tto 1981 ). The ussR entered the fishery in 1959 with a catch of 620,000 crabs weighing about 1,000 metric tons (ibrd.). The comb'ined catch of these two countries peaked in 1964 when about 9 million crabs were harvested (Bakkala et al. 1916). Domestic fishermen increased their effort for king crab jn the Berjng sea in 1970 as stocks in the Gurf of Araika became heavily exploited. In the late 1960's and early 1970's, the domestic harvest of red king crab increased, but the total catch by all countries declined to less than one-harf the peak- years of L962-r961. The reduced foreign catch was partly a result of declining stocks and partly a result of agreements that I imited harvest size and fishing gear (ibid.). In L97I, the Soviets ceased fishing for kiig irao in the area, qnd by I975, afrer four yeais of veiy- low catches , the Japanese ceased operati orr. The ki ng crab fishery of the eastern Bering Sea has beerr a domestic effort since the mid 1970's. The Berirrg sea fishery for king crab has traditionally taken the harvest fronr Bering sea and Bristol Bay waters along the Alaska Peninsula from cape sarichef to port Heiden. In i973, however, fishing for blue king crab began in the pribilof District- By r977, explc.'ratory fisheries develclped for red king crab in the Norton sound District and for brrie king crab near rhe st. Lawrence arro st. Matthew islands (ADF&G 196i). current'ly, al I three species of king crabs are harvested in the Northern District. combined Catches s'ince rg77 have ranged from about 2.3 nrillion pounds harvested the first year of the f ishery to 10.1 nri'll ion pounds taken during the iggl

613 season. Abour 4.2 rnr I I ion pounds were ha rvested i n 1994 (taules I ano 3). During the i9g4 sedson, about 48% of the entire king crab harvest in Bering sea waters (statistical Area.Q) was taken in the Northerrr Districr (see rnip ii inorac 1e85 ) . 2- @rit.v. Prior to statehood, Alaskan king crab r't snerles were managed by the uni tect states Bureau 0f Fisheries. In 1959, management was transferred to the State uf Alaska. By 1960, the king crab fleet had expandect into offshore areas beyond rhe state's 3-mi jurisdict.ional !9u1$ary. l,lith enactment of rhe Fishery conservation Zone (Fcz) from 3 to 200 rrautical nrires from ihore and 6y prnoing memorandum of agreemenr between the state of Alaska ino tne federal governmenc, the management of the Bristol Bay, Adak, Dutch Harb-or, Bering sea, and Aleutian Isrands kin-g crab staristical -areas is by a joint statement of priiciples between the Alaska Board of- Fisheries and the National Marine Fisheries Service. 3. Harve.st nrelho{s and_period of use, Hurvest seasons for king craD nave hrstorrcaIty been used in the king crab fishery to protect crab-s during the mating, molting, and growilrg perioo of their life _cycle, which usually occurs fro-rn mid-Jinuary through mid July in most areas of the state of Alaska. Bi 1aw, the fis-hing season may therefore occur from August through mid -January. seasons differ by management arei as environmental and biolog'ica1 concerns may be considered (e.g:, recovery rate,- migrationa'l patterns, weather conditiorrs, etc.). To maximize the reproductive potential of the crab resoLrrce, harvesr is restricted to male crabs. size limits are established to ensure rhat sufficient numbers of male crabs are available to meet reproductive needs and to maxinrize total yield from each year class. Fishing gear is r:estricted to pots and ring nets to protect nonlegal crabs because high morta'lity rates can occur with other gelr rypes (e.g., tangie nets, trawls). c. Managemerrt Objectives and Considerations The resource is managed ro achieve optimum yielo of king crab stocks in the FCZ and ro promote full utilizafion of the re-source by the donrestic f_ishery (NPFMC 1990). The currenr management framework has evolved through a complex system of regulatory measures involving size, sex, season, area, 9€dr restricti6n, ared registration, and a fl exible quota system. These reguiatory measures 1).relate to maximizing the repioductive potentiaT of thL resource,2) consirle.r the competitive advancages among vessels of differenr sizes, 3) attempt to prevent confl icts with other fisherigl, 4) promote even distribution of the fishing f1eet, and 5j rnonitor catch and catch rate in particular areas ( ibid. ). Management objectives are sinrilar in all king crab statist.icil areas, and guidel ine harvest level s are set at a specif.ied

614 _f O) rf -+ L € q) o @ O@N@N Ol Or Or p ! d6 q (tl zo L (, :t ln (Yl o. P + @ O(n r4 or (n.aaF-NINN o) q) 3 +J o @ c) L tJ) N OF(DrO mFfn (t) NN J o L U) (l.) oo o p @ O.n o o o or -+ rf z, I c) L o -c)o +J L c (o (o L o E q) o @ OOrrOeO Or o(oo N.N L () ^o o N t! Or o+ ! o -o o F- O(nO Ol ol ol ! NN CD

:< +J L @ O@r'.N1.. f o F. ONo1N E Ol 6 NN +)p L c o) oo € T- ! €+) trJ cc N <)F- O O oo T' F.- NN q) D! Ol rn(^ o CC {) oo c L C)o ) c) +Jp .c o oo p plJoq) o o o LL o o L c (, po o € q o-oo PP t/) po{Jp o O(o @co o$ ooooo Or Cr c@ #F+)9C) 1l) FI o o9.\'sL N OtrJ O|rI o CN .F g f CD E!+J ul oo c) OrDc @ +) E LLO or C'N o o oo LL{) r'. @ >c) r oool c Or Ol LUO Epo o o o Ecc rl) € Lg 3.Fo -o) u>-= J .o i o og T' OE .F c L o) ocoC.) ococ) L oo q N o6 EEoc) L o'- E, -oo o o >s ()>l EE ErJ T' .IJ L c 99 oo (J9 o -co oo €o c, o 'J -C +) lJ U) at) LL o o.) OF oc) FO <'l c !-o p q)L c o EE LL p J3 'F o) oo F+, L 2.2 to o o ) -E z l FO LL lJ', ()o !o)

615 percentage dependent upon the estimated abundance of recruit and postrecruit overal I popylatjcln levels. Size I imits northerrr areas in these are smal ler because of slower growtt, rut.r uno (ADF&G -negutations smaller crabs 19g3a; 0tto, p€r"s. comm.). used to address these objectives in staie waters oirte. 6v 1980). ii.u iruFFllc A major problem in determining harvestable 'o.t*"unpopulation levels of king crab. js t,he length of tirie (7-9 yearil egg hatchi;g and recruitment of crabs on the fishing grounds. This p.rof'.r, coupled with the inability to age crabs, has resulteo 'in-porri undersranoing of the causes and rates mortality growth of during tf,is period. Therefore long-term projections of stock status based on fishery performance arone is not possibre. To prevent overexploitation of given crab populations, exclusive, super- and nonexciusive regis'tration areas have been -exclusive, established. A vessel or gear regiitereo for a superexclusive registration area may not be used 1o rake king crab in any other registrattorr drea during that registration gedr vuu'r. A vessel or registered for an exclusive re-gistration irea may not be used to take k_ing crab in any superexclusive registration area any cither exclusive registration or year. area during ifrat registration .A vessel or gear registered for one or both of the norr- exclusive areds may also be registered for one excluiiu. rogit- tration qreq but may not be useo to take king cran in more ihun one exclusive registration area or in iny superexclus.ive registration area during that reg'istration year (n-fjfag f g85o j. statistical Area Q is a nonexclusiie registrat-ion u."u.

II. NORTON SOUND SECTION A. Boundaries The 'longitudeNorton Sound Section is comprised of waters east of 16go west and north of the latitude of Cape norinioi-(bt.qg,N);;; south of the latitude of cape prince br t^tales (ob":o'N)'(;;; map 1) (ADF&G 1984a). B. Fishery Description and Reported Harvest 1. Harv-est su{nqa.I.v. The only shellfish fishery in Norrgn Sound ts .for red king crab (Paral ithodes camtshaiicq). Blue king .11! (!.- pJ,,a-Ivpus) ano Tannef-re6-(ehTonoeffii 9pu9l ;i;; occur i n the, region but are sel oom-EilElr=if-by-cofrnrercial or subsisterice f ishermen (ADF&G 1983a). Th; corimercial harvest of kirrg crab in l{orton Sound is relatively new. Two separate fisheries actua'l ly occur in the area. The summer fishery was first conducted as an exploraf,ory fishery, as designated by the A'laska Board of Fisheries in lgii (powell et al. iggs). catches have ranged from 230,000 lb take_n by 11 vessels during the 1982 seaso"n to a peak harvesr of 2:9. nriIIion pounds taken in lglg by peak participation 34 vessels. of 36 vessels was evident during rhe 19g1 fishery (taote 1). Though catches have fluciuate'0, the crab catch per pot has declined from a high of 64 in iglg to O .in

616 1982 as a result of ciecl ining crab abundarrce (ADF&G 19g3a). However, by 1983 recruirment into the lega'l rir. popriition began to increase. The 1994 harvest of Joout 390;000 lb of crabs was below the season's guidel ine harvest level of 400,000 1b (Schwarz and Lean 1985). The second fishery for king-This cr'ao irr Norton sound occurs during the winter months. fishery is small unc is conducted primari 1y by residents of llonre using potr, .ing nets, and hand I ines ser through hcrles or leaoi (0tto peak in tlre ice 1981). effort of sl fishermen and harvest- of 27 ,000 I b occurrect dur.ing lg7g, the f i rsr V.u. oi rne catches dramaticat ty decreased thereaiter. 2,400li!l,gw. About lb rye-re by eigit f ishermen during rhe 1gg4 fishery (taote -.takeni). The subsistence fishery for king crab in Norton sound has also traditional ly c.rccurred Ouiing the winter, wiin the nearshore ice packs serving as a convenient platt'oim for gaining access to the fishing grounds and operating fishing gear. Most of the effort has occurred in thb Nome irea from sledge Island to cape Nome, concentraring-area within 2 to 3 nri of shore. Access_ to .the grounds irr this is by foot or snowmachirre. participants are borh Native and non-wuiiu. fishermen of varying _incomes and lifestytei fn.gni.t' igie). The fishery occurs from December to Miv. Harivest levels recorded since the rg77-lg7g season show catches, based on pernrits issued and returned, that exceed those of the winrer commercial producing ^ha.rvest, up to 35,000 lb (during the 1977-1978 lishelv) and avera!irig 14,500 rb p.. v.ir"i"s,zoo crabs) (raole Z). 1. comnercial ggar-type and size limits. In the Norton sound Xiat gear for harvesting king crab is pots. The niinimum size l"imif is tne smallest .in the state for red_ king crab. The size linrir is 4 3/4 inches cardpace w.i-{tJr (cl,l), .and for blue king crabs it is 5 r/z inches Ct./ (ADF&G 1984a). 2. Period of use. Harvest in the Norron Scund summer commercjal Tlshery mm-occur in trre summer prior to sea ice formation. As a result, most of the commercial harvest has occurred-male irr July ano Augusr (powe1 1 et al. lgg3). By regulation, king led crab and blue king crab may-LZ oe iaken- or porr*ri.o fron 12:00 noo.r'r, August 1, through ae noon, September 3 (summer season), and- from ianuary "i th-rough Aprir-5b-iwiut.r" season ) (ADF&G 1984a ) . c. Management Objectives and Considerations Norton sound crab production is relatively small compared to rhe rest of the eastern Bering Sea. The snrallir crabs of Nortorr souno frequerrtly ma.y be m_ore 'lower.costly tc, harvest fnuri in oilrer Berinq sea-et areas and brinq a price per pound to frshermen (powel-l gl. 1983). Thi fishery ii tne riewest and northernmost Alaskarr rec king crab fishery. The nearest orrshore procesJing faciliiiei a.e

~~617 Jc'r o L L +) o (o rn FS @ @ {r N Ol Ol m E L L E~~

~~E @ Eo) o Or rn q) rq o@ .c t! o N +, Ol '! Ol c N L q) 0)~~

~~z, o L o o L N (o-+ o @ c) rn L Ot UJ L E 0) o ]J I'~~

~~f dJ v) = o q) (, (Dm oCD +) @ OoI L L O) o o z. o o -c o L~~

c'r N :< o (o cN @ q) ol aJ CL {.) q) o J c ro ! a o *J !n o O) l\@ @ E N NaO Or Q) Ol (o L p L L o 6 lo o E o o. Q.t o Q) f J L L z o c o € N L o g 0) o o o L. \o ol 3 L @ Fq E l lo F. Oe o c s O) .J, U. q) () L () .Il IJ o if -o C) @ .p E u (t) f 6 o o (J o o g t .at o tn tr- L o o o tl L q a! ! o+t {.) Ot C) o rJ >c g l! L 4t@ L r+_ OOI o9 o Fe f [rJ tn o

618 located in Dutch Harbor anct Akutan in the Aleutian catch (from Islands. The the summe.r. fishery) is.crr"enfly processed entire.ly by floating processor ships and-'catcher/pro.&*r" vessels operating during the season ' 'souno in the Norron u..u--ilulo. i.' The significance of the Norton sou.rrd fishery js the'necesiity to ensure the development of a "new" commerc.iil fishery impacr - tnat wl'ti not the long-estobrisheo.!9.u1 subsistence fishery. The emotional impact of the populace upon seeing commercial utilizati

III. ST. MATTHEWS AND ST. LAWRENCE ISLATID SECTIONS A. Bounda ri es The St. Matthew Islarrd seccion of the Northern District consists of all waters north of the latitude of cape ttewennam-ise;gg;tii'uno south tif the latitude. of cape Ronranzof (oi.+g;r,r) (rup'ij.--rn6 st. Lawrence Island Section corrs jsts of al I remainirig- watbrs oi 1'. Northern Di stri ct, exc_]udr'ng the Norton sound section (ADF&G 1985)- Because most of the filhing u.tiuitv occurring in this portion of the Be.ring sea is wjthi-n the Noiton Sound District, information for these twc, fishing secrioni is comb.ined the fol lowing narrative. in B. F.ishery Description arrd Reporred Harvest bi lue., brown, and red king crabs have been harvested Northerrr in the District. smal I suosistence f isheries fo. olue king' cran occur around sr. Lawrence, Little Diomede, and Nunivak isTanos. The commercia'l fishery iri this offshore drea the gering began of s.u in 1977, concentrating upon blue king ciaf, near St. lvlatthew Island. Thc fis.hery prooucio i._z nririion fiornJr during the iir.st season, increasing about 2.0 mi to _ I I ion pounds durin-g the 19zg catches decreased lilngw. the fol lowing i"i y..urc to less- than 22a,000 lb because of low par'ricipatioi in ine risrrerv (norac

619 1!B3a). Both catch and effc'rt increased steadily beginning .in 1981 drrd reached a peak harvest of almost 9.5 mi I I ion po-unos during tfe 1983 season taken by the peak effort of aoodt 164 vessels (taole 2). Both catch and efiort decreased during the 19ti4 _fishe_ry, with about 3.8 nrillion pounds harvested by 90 vessels. The decreased harvest resulted from an apparent oeiline in stock abundance and the resultant decreased guideline harvest level from 9.5 million pounds during the 1983 seaion to 2.0 to 4.0 million pounds for the 1984 fishery (ADF&G 1985). Although rhe blue king crab fishery has primarily taken place near st. l'latthew Island, about 13 fishermen also reported harvest. of about 52,000 lb in the St. Lawrence Island secr'ion durirrg the 19g3 season (taole 3). It is beljeved, however, that 16,000 To or tnis harvest were raken from the st. Matthew section (Griffirr, pers. cgmm:):- Although the st. Lawrence Islarrd section was open dirring the 1984 season and two or three vessels were present, no landings were reported (ADF&G 1985). Re0 kirrg crab stocks outside the Norton sound section are wide'ly and sparsely d'istributed. As a result, the red king crab fishery outside the Norton Sound Sect'ion has hi storical'ly been incidental to the blue king crab fishery at st. Matrhew Is'land (ib.id. ). catches have remained below 130,000 lb (taoles 1 and 3). No red k'ing crab harvest was reported during rhe 1984 fishery-the (taote 3). The only reported harvest of brown king crab in Northern District occurred during rhe 1983 season, when 22 vessels took 193,500 lb. A'lthough the fishery was also opened the following year 'landingsand is presently open year-round by permit, no effort nor have s'ince been reported (ADF&G 1985; Griffin,-surveys pers. comm.). This species has not been encounrered in trawl performed by NMFS in the Berirrg sea at ctepths less than 12g mm. Although apparently not consistJntly sought by domestic fishernren, brown ki!g crabs af'e the most frequently occurring king-sovjet crab incidental )y caught in edsrern Bering sel Japarrese- and trawl fisherres (0tto 198l). 1. Gear type. King crab in the st. Lawrence and Sr. Matthew islands areas may be taken only by puts for commercial purposes. King crabs taken by means other than pots must be immediately returned ro the fishery (ibid.). ?. Period of use and size limits. In the st. Matthew Isranct 4 inches and male blue king cnabs 5 r/2 inches or greater in shell width may be taken or possessed from 12:00 noon September 1 through september zZ (ADF&G 1984a). I'iale brown king crabs s r/z iriches or grearer in w'idth of shell may be taken or possessed from January 1 through December 31 under conditions of a permit issued by the commissioner ( ibid. ). In the St. Lawrence Island Section, male king crabs 4 J/4 inches and nrale blue king crabs 5 L/z inches or greater in width of shell may be taken or possessed from tZ:OO noon Augusr I rhrough September 3 (ibid.). Male brown king crabs

620 o p \o(o..3 ,o L rJ) {tO-+OO OOC)l + co \o (o c'r \o F- Or F- F\ € o o o 3 o +J ]J o o .a(oortn(o o F1 .-O +) = @ .+N(O+mF1c{Fl N () O) !nrn()rOeOrN o () o p -+ t/l r N at) u', {Jo Or Or O) c o o a tt p o .n I = o @@ r rl c N . r.O .p o C) +o+r.,oc> @ I aJ o (tl $+Ol $ L o @co @ z. = o) @@ q) .P rt) I o) @@ @ p -oo ..o ? ) o L @ t-oF.Fo {-l {) o crl NN(N (o O) € (o\o ro I o g) ID +J v, -+$ $ l! Or o x N Ot -o L L @@ rl o @ . .-O \ (', |! Ol oi<>o)No (nl o) l/l N NN tn o C) L J o o c) N J N s ot ol N or O) . .It F\ ooocoo $l |n L or N rt) NN N e L L e (n I o z, o {) o L (om or N .pC) p . ...O L @ -+o-tc{o F. l N o rDO N @€oN o or (.) 9-t g) Or Ot ol 6P tF@ rDO UI N >o F- tn o c) ]C F\ Lr EB Or- Q>r 6Eoo cDc +) N ..! o.p co F. NOc{OO r| EO Or OO- $ lo p+Jp+J @ oo qc th u) th tt ot:L co :YO oo E /F oo FO o .8, s ,_oo c @':^i +) ua o or Y-t OE L@ iD Q) rD 1t PO >.p e? oc) LL E6 o [email protected] g oF oo OF 66 .uaJ€+)Oa) L!r.c EO ()o C,-L-CL-Cgll, It) (J .F oooooooEo QIL C) {J.|Jr+-+J'+-usOO-C oo 6 oro OO'i_€Fo$CO OL 14()'0) ccL ()FUJ(Jt!Ol'rJ'eE*r '.>c |Do c -oco OL{J o+J oq) :< clEoo cIOo€ o.o Fg otBto :t@ co c) -o=.oo flolElo sl ol ool FJ cot-l (Dt (El u'roF -o9

62), 5 I/2 inches or greater jn width of shell may be taken or possessed from January 1 through December 31 under corrditions of a permit issued by the commissioner (ibid.). C. I'ianagement Objectives attd Considerations Three stocks of blue king crab have been identified in the Bering Sea: llerendeen Bay, the Pribilrrf Island, and the northern Bering Sea blue king crab. The northern Bering Sea blue king crab refers primarily to the population in the St. l.latthew Island area. Fach stock i s managed indepenoently of the other. Trawl surveys performed by the NMFS occur annual 1y to obtain popu'lation escimates and other biologicai data for king crab stocks in the Bering Sea. Guideline harvest levels are developeo from this i11'ornration. The ADF&G recommends regulatory changes, monitors the fishery, and issues closure anrtouncemertts commensurate with the overalI obiectives for managing king crab. The occurrerrce of red king crab'in the St. Matthew/St. Lawrence islands sections is comparatively sparse. Although seasons and size limits have been established, the harvest'is incidental to the blue king crab harvest. Abundance estimates and guide'line harvest level s have not been Set, as the harvest i s total'ly dependenr on the pardrneters established for the blue king crab fishery. Catchei for the brown krng crab fishery have been reportecl for only orre yea r. Season and si ze I 'imi ts have been establ i shed for th'is fishery. Research surveys are not perfornted on this specles in this area. Therefore, distributjon, abundance, and basjc biological infornration is not available.

REFERENCES AUF&G. 1981. tJestward Region shelIfish report io the Alaska Board of Fisheries. Ltiv. Commer. F'ish., Kodiok. . 1983a. Annual managemerlt report-1983, Norton Sound-Port ---TTarence-Kotzebue. Div. Comnrer. Fish., Nome. Il2 pp. . 1983b. Regulation of the Alaska Board of Fisheries for ffimercjal fishing in Alaska-shellfish regulations. Di v. Comnrer. Fi sh . , Juneau. 111 pp. . 1984a. Regulations of the Alaska Board of Fi sheri es tor ffimercial fishing jn Alaska-shellfish regulations. Di v . Conmer. Fish., Juneau. 115 pp. . 1984b. Annual management report-i984. Norton Sound-Port Div. Commer. Fish., Nonte. 156 pp. --TTarence-Kotzebue. . 1985. Westward Region shellfish report to the Alaska Boaro of Div. Commer. Fish., Kudiak. 346 pp. -TiTheries.

62',l 6akkala, R.G., D.t,'l. Kessler, and R.F. l'laclntosh. 1g76. History of cormtercial exploitation of demersal fish and shellfish pereyra, in the eaitern B-9rlng Sea. --tl. {.r. J. E. Reeves, ano R.G. Bakkala, Demersal fish and shel'lfish resources of the easterh Bering Sea in the baseline year 1975, 7967. USDC, processed rept.

Gray, G.w. , R.s., Roys, and R.J. simon. 1965. Developmenr of the king crab fishery off Kodiak Island. .In NPFMC, |.lestern king crjo oraft fishery management p1an. 1980. Anchorage, Ak. Griffin, K. 1984. Personal communication. Bering-Dutch Sea Shellfish Area Management Biologist, ADF&G, Div. commer. Fish., Hiroor. Itliyahara, J. 1954. The 1953 Japanese- king crab factory ship expedition Comm. Fish Rev. 16:I-IZ. Cited in Otro tgAt

~~NPFI'IC. 1980. Western Alaska king crab draft fishery management p1an. Anchorage, Ak. 115 pp.~~

~~0tto' R.S. 1981. Eastern Bering sea crab fisheries. pages 1,037-1,066 in D.w. Hood and J.A. calder, eds. The eastern B-ering' sea-'i11.ln oceanography and resources. vol . 2. 1991. usDC: NOAA, tiNpn.~~

~~. i984. Personal cormunication. Faci 1 ity Di rector, NMFS, Kodiak Laboratory, Kodiak, Ak.~~

Regnart, R. 1978. Nome winter king crab fishery. ADF&G, Div. commer. Fish. Rept. to Alaska Board of Fisheries. Anihorage. i pp. Powel 1 , G.c. , R. Petersen, a.nd L. schwarz. 1993. The red king crab, 39fililhoges camtsha!,ica (Tilesius) in Norton Sound, A]aska: hijtory of Dlologlca I research and resource util ization through tbgZ. Informational Leafler No. zzz. ADF&G, Div. commer. Fish., Juieau. 105 pp.

~~Schwarz, L., and C. Lean. 1985. Norton Sound Area shelIfish r.eport. Rept. to rhe Alaska Board of Fjsher.ies. Div. Commer. Fish., Nome. LZ pp.'~~

~~623~~

~~sport use of Freshwater Resident and Anadromous Fish species hlestern and Interior Regions~~

I. MANAGEMENT HISTORY A. Management Agency Jurisdiction The Territory of A1aska establ ishect a sport f ish managemenr j program n 1951. Progranr activi ties were concentrated on inventory studies, lake rehabil itation, and trout stocking on lakes and streams_^lea-l_!.opuration centers and bordering the !!glruy sy!tgm (ADF&G 1957). t"Jith the granting of statehood in 1959, the ADF&G, Division of sport Fish, assumed full control of the sport fish resources. Primary regulatory- authority is vested in the Alaska Board of Fisheries. Fol lowing statihood, the Division of Sport Fish began receiving federai funds from the Dingel I -Johnson (D-J) Bi I I and was au'le to initiate several f9!9qrch projects in addition to extending its management program (ADF&G 195e). B. Management 0bjectives During the early. years of resource management, sportfishing was viewed as a minor factor in context of the'managemeni of commercially harvested species (Mills 1985). The sport-fisheries of the state were not intense enough to damage'stocks. The management objective was simply to accumulate basic survey information on the fishery resources. hlith rapid populatioir expansion and industrial development came many more user groups, including an ever-increasing recreationally oriented popuTatibn.'stocks Gradually, management objectives began to focus on and areas having potential for overharvest. As natural fish stocks around cities and towns began to decrease and easi'ly accessible sport fisheries began to get crowded, new fisheries were lgveloped. In response to public demand for quality recreational fishing opportunities, standard fishery management practices that had been aime.d primarily at maximizing numbers of iisn available for harvest (yie_ld) were refined to meet the aesthetic, socia'l , and psychological needs of people. A multi-user group philosophy qld. a quality fishing concept were incorporated into htistca sport fish management in the 1960's Recreational fisheries have grown tremendously since statehood and 19ry_plaf a significant role jn total fisherfes management (yi11s 1985). Alaska statewide sportfishing regulations'now address access to and development near recreational fisheries. Bag limits and legal gear have become restrictive to prevent overhariest and distribute the available larger fish among more anglers,-taking rhus affording the .optimum possibli opportuni!y F.. angler- fon lurgq, or trophy size, fish (Andrbws n.o.). Artificial (stocked) urban fisheries also continue to be created adjacent to population centers and are enthusiastically used.

625 II. ALASKA STATEWIDE SPORTFISHING HARVEST MONITORING A. Program History In the ear'ly years of statehood, when qual i ty uncrowded sportfishing was read'ily available,'large sport fisheiies were few ano easily monitored. 0n-site creel census surveys of the more intensively fished waters, rather than the compuisory sratewide reporting required of the commercial fishing industry, provided the information needed for proper managemenl of the-sport fish popuiations. Detailed stat'istics were not kept on the sport harvest of fish in Alaska prior to 1977, except where a knowledge of the effort and catch was -required for protective in-season management or to ensure compliance with regulatory and management polities, quotaso and guidelines (Mills 1983). Annual sporl harvest estimates for ADF&G management dreas were based on area sport fish biologists' owrl knowledge and observations, in addition to creel census data. These "historical" annual management area harvest estimates are therefore subjective, I imited in total scope, and should be considered minimum harvest estimates. The annual sport harvest estintates of salmon caught in Alaska as reported to the Technical Committee of the INPFC and published in their annual Sratistical Yearbook-are examples of such historical data (Mills, pers. conm.) Essential for regulation and management of Alaska's spori fisheries and for regulation, management, and allocation'of multiple use fisherjes is a statewide database of information on where sportfishing occurs, the extent of participati

626 It is also important to understand that sport harvest estimates from the statewide posta'l survey for fisheries that attract relatively few anglers may not be as precise as estimates for those that attract a large number of anglers. This is true for many fisheries within the Interior and Wesrern regions that may be important within the region but attract only a smill percentag! of total statewide sportfishing effort.

III. REGIONAL HARVEST SUMMARY A. Harvest Methods sportfishing for salmon, char, rake trout, rainbow trour, and sheefish in streams and lakes in the Interior and Western regions is permit_ted-by hook and line on'ly. Northern pike may be tak6n by spear. In lakes, northern pike, burbot, and whitetish may b:l taken by_ spear by persons who are completely submerged. tn tfre Tanana_ - _ River drainage (excluding waters between Paxson and Cantwell south of the Denali Highway) spears may be used to take P!ke and burbot during specified months' of the-fall and winter. Also in the Tanana oriinage, sp.ari-unO oon and arrow may be used to take whitefish during- specified months of the fall inO early winter (ADF&G 1985a ). R.eaoers shoul ct refer to the I atesi lPollfishing reg_ulations summary or 5 AAC 75.001 through 5 AAC 75.995 for details of gear restrlctions. B. Angler Effort In 1984,. sport_ ang'lers spent approxinrately 165,500 angler-clays fishlng in the Interior and Western regions. This was g.iZ of t-he total statewide sportfishing effort i;1984 (Milts tges) ano ii consistent with the percentage c.rf effort expended in the Interior and western regions in prior years. From 1977 through 1994, an annual average of 9.5% of the total angler-days fished in Aliska were expended in the Interior and Western regions (ibid.). Most of the fishing effort in the Interior and-Western regjions is concentrated in the Fairbanks Area. Harvest C. Data 'landlocked Arctic grayl ing, salmon, rainbow trout, and northern pike provicle the largest sporr fish harvests in the Interior and western regions, with the harvest of grayl ing far surpassing harvest of orhe-r species. In lg77 through 19b4, annual' spori harvest o,f i1^S -g.ul-f in the Interior and t^le!tern regions averaged approximately 89,100 fish. Landlocked salmon are 6arvested fiom stocked lakes in the Fairbanks Area and contribute the second largest average catch in the Interior and Western regions. Annual sport harvest of 'largelandlocked salmon averaged 31,900 iish from 1977 through 1984. A harvest of rainbovr trout is also taken from the Interior and Western regions. From 1977 through Ig7g, this harvest averaged only 6,200 fish, but with increasei stocking in the Fairbanks Area the harvest increased to an annual averag6 of 26,200 fish from 1980 through 1984. Northern Pike, whiteiish, char, lake trout, burbot, sheefish, and al I five species oi Pacific salmon are also harvested by sport ang'lers in the Interior

627 gnq liestern regions. In the following sections, sport harvest information for all species w'ill be presented for eaih sport fish postal survey area in the Interior and western regions (m'ap 1). D. Harvest Survey Areas 1. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area: a. Boundaries. The Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim sport Fish postal suT'velTrea includes al I southern drainages of the yukon River from its confluence with the Tanana River, near Tanana, west to Kaltag; all drainages of the yukon River south of Kalrag to the Bering Sea; rhe Kukokwim River warershed; all waters flowing into Kukokwim Bay; and adjacent salt water and islands. This area does not include the Pastolik River crrainage and waters flowing into Norton sound northeast of the pastolik River nor any portion of the Tanana River watershed (ADF&G 1985b). b. t'taigl watersheds an@ries. Local the world participate in sport fisheries in the Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area. Sport fishermen in this area harvest al I five species of Pacific salmon, arctic grayl ing, northern pike, char, rainbow trout, whitefish, burbot, sheefish, and lake trout (tables 1-13). Rainbow trout is probab'ly the most important sport fish in the Kuskokwim Bay area, and many anglers fishing in Kuskokwim Bay rivers come specifically for rainbow trout (Alt L977). Many anglers fishing for rainbow trout in the Kanektok and

628 unguided fly-in groups visited the river in 19g4, primarily residents of Bethel who fished in the lowei stretch of the_r.!ve1 near Quinhagak (ibid.) Qanirtuug, Inc., the local Nati.ve corporatidn, owns tlie r'ano aroi! the lower Kanektok River and charges a fee t; recreational users of the area (snellgiove l9g5). In i?84' 12 principal guides were aiso us-ing the Kanektok River, and there were five established iamps used by guides on the river (usFl.ls 19g5a). The numbei^ of guioei float groups and guided fly-in groups using the river increased from B and 6, respectively, in 1gg-0 to 37 and 2,2 in 1983 (ibid.). The average guioeo float group size in 1984 was eight _ peoplg: The- average fly--in 'g.orp size was five people. ADF&G estimates ior ingl.rloivi spent on the Kanektok increased from 1,517 in tggg io 6'q81 in 1984 (taote 14). Att (1977) noteo that the best rainbow trour fishing in the Kanektok River was in the area from river mile lz to river mile 33. In 1994, the harvest of rainbow trout from the Kanektok was estimated to be 3rz fish, but many more than this were probably caught and released. The chinook sarmon in the kanektoi< !!ver are among ihe largest in the state and 30 to 40 lb fish are common (ibid.). chinook salmon harvest from the Kanektok River in 1984 was estimated to be 9zz fish, down from the estimated 1983 harvest of 1,511 (table 3). Lake trout fishing. i! good in the lakes of the upper Kanektok drainage (ibid.). Kagati Lake is an importhnt sportfis!i!9 lake mainly becauie of its close prbximity to Bethe-l (ibid.). The ouilet of the lake is i popula-r sportfishi.ng site for f1y-in fishermen, as well ai being !!" starting point for fishermen floatinq the KanektoI River (Dlugokenski et al. 1983) Recreational use on the three forks of the Goodnews River has also increased. In 1984, USFWS estimated that 31 guided fishing. groups and 53 unguided groups used the Goodnews River (usFWS l9g5a). eiuioeo irotorboat use, with an average group size of IZ people, was the predominant use of the river (ibid.).' in iggq, five p.incipal guides were using the three forks of the Goodnews_River, ancr there weie three guide camps on the river. The USFWS describes use levei-s on the Goodnews River as high on the main fork and moderate on the middle_ fork (ibid.). The Goodnews River supports a good run of. large sockeye salmon, with many fish'over 10'lb. sport harvest of sockeye salmon from the Goodnews River, however, is low, with an estimate of only 14 fish harvested in 1983 (table 1). In 19g4, too fei responses were received from fishermen on the Goodnews Rivir for 9ny use or harvest estimates to be generated by the Statewide Postal Harvest Survey.

629 In 1977 , Al t noted that none of the lakes of the Goodnews River system received heavy sportflsrring pressure' though a small number of f'loit piane piloti from Bethel and.Diliingham fished on canyon'and Goodnews lakes (Alt 1977). sport-fishing use of the Arolik River is low at this time but is increasing (ibid.). Alt (1977) noted that the Arol ik did not support large po'pulations of rainbow trout_or grayling and that most effort came from local Bethel and Di I I i ngham residents. some sportfishing also takes place on tributaries of the Kuskokwirn River. -Large numbers of pike are caught i; the main Kuskokwim by residents or lower Kus-kokwir:r villages (Alt 1977). -A sport fishery for pike occurs in the area near Bethel ( ibid. ). pike are taken both through the ice in the winter and on hook and line during the open water season (ibid.). Because of their small size and lack_of fight, pike generally rank below rainbow trout, gray'ling, salmon, and char as desirable sport species ( ibid. ). Sportfishing pressure on the Eek River is low and comes mainly from residents of the vi1lage of Eek (iOio.i. The Kwethluk River recieves the- heaviest'risrring pressure of the lower Kuskokwim streams. Rainbow trou[ is-the main _sport species, but char, grayling, and coho salnron are also. sought by sport fisherhen (ib-ia.). The.Kasigluk River receives sportfishing pressure from residents of Be.thel, Kwethluk, and posiinly Akiak and Akiachak (ibid.). Rainbow trout, which are found above river m!le 30, a.re generally the target species for sport fishennen in the Kasigluk, though anglers also harvest grayling, northern pike, char, lnd c-otro salmon ( ibid. ) . The Kisaralik River is an important sportfishing stream, attracting fishermen main]y f rom Bether and vi'llagei upstream. The most important sport species in lrre Kisaralik River are rainbow trout, grayl'ing, char, and col'ro salmon (ibid. ). Most f ishing- on tid Kisaral ik !gk.! place between river miles 20 ano 40 (ib.id. ). The Tuluksak River receives light sportfishing pressure, mainly by residents of the village'of Tuluksit'(ibid.): Northern pike, grayling, and arCtic char are the ,oit important sport species (ibid.). Local residents fish with rod and reer for non-salmon fish species and for salmon in the 0skawalik and Aniak rivers (charnley LgBz). chuathbaluk and sleetmute residents fish with rod and reel for sheefish, rainb

630 the use of rod and reel during open water months places this harvest under sportfishing iegulat.ions. The Hol itna River and other tributaries between sleetmute and McGrath are sites of a sheefish and chinook salmon sport harvest. This harvest is participated in by anglers with local guides, anglers with guides fronr the Bristol Bay area] and area anct nonarea fishernren (Alt 1gg4). Guioeo fishermen account for the bulk of the harvest (Alt 19gla). The sheefish harvest takes gllce during late June and early.luly.' Feeding sheefish 'lastsleave the Holitna River uy lati July; thus the fishery on'ly about one month- (Alt rg8qj. In 1983, Alt (1984) estimaied the sheefish sport harvest 9!!ing the week following July 4 to be aOout 100 fish Effort directed toward sheefiih has recerrtly declined as :pgftfishing preference is now for chinook- salmon (Alt 1981a ) . Residents of the village of Stony River harvest grayling with rod and reel during the summer at the mouths o-t small streams (Kari 1985). Farther up the Kuskokwim River, resioents of Nikolai and McGrath use rod ancr reel to harvest chinook salmon from the Pitka Fork of the Kuskokwim River (stokes rggz). Harvest is conducted with rod and reel because it is the most effective legal means to harvest salmon in clear'water areas (ibid. ). Most chinook salmon harvest takes place at the confluence of the north and south forks of the salmon River, near the confluence of the Salmon River wirh the Pitka Fork, and in the vicinity of the mouth of the Middle Fork (ibid.). In 1gg2, the Salmon River harvest was appioximately sz7 chinook salmon, though some of these vrere taken with set nets rather than rod and reel (ibid.). use of the Salmon River fishery by McGrath-based fishermen has occured since the late 1970's and is concentrated around the Fourth of July weekend (ibid.). In the south Fork of the Kuskokwim River, residents clf Nikolai use rod and reel to catch chinook salmon at the mouth of the Litrle Tonzona River (ibid.). In lggl, approximately 281 chinook were taken by loial residents from the south Fork of the Kuskokwim. ihe major part of this catch was taken from the Litile Tonz-ona'River, priryarily with rod and reel (ibid.). Residents of Telida, on the swift Fork of the Kuskowim, take some coho salmon with rod and reel along with theii set net harvest near the confluence of Higlipower creek and the swift Fork (ibid.). lol. sportfish'ing occurs on tributaries of the lower Yukon River, usually by residents of the area.

631 The Andreafsky River, near the mouth of the yukon River, i s an important. sportf i shi ng stream (Al t i9g1b ) . 6;i of the effort is confined 1o the lower zs mi' of the river because boat travel in the sunmer is limiteo by low water conditions (ibid.). In 19g0, Alt noted that an.air taxi-operator maintained a camp ir river mile 42 and flew a few angrers into this camp'each year (iuio.). I few groups are arso frown into graver dars near the headwaters of the to floJt ilre river Char, .Andreafsky tloio. i. grayling, pike, anO Chinook, chum,- pink, and coho salmon are the important species on the Andreafsky ( ibid. ). The Innoko River is used by a smal r number of recreational fishermen who haivest salmon, sheefish, pi northern ke, and grayl i ng (Al t 19g3 ) . s-heef i sh are avai I abl e to sport fi sheimen i n areas upstream of shageluk vi'llage to the Iditarod River (Alt igge). rne sport harvesr of sheefish by Holy cross, Shageluk, uno 93ytiqq residents, however, is-very low (iriiO.). t; 1981, Alt noted that anglers from MLGrath occasibnalli catch sheefish on hook and line near" Folger creek on th! lpper Innoko River (ibid.). guide-operaring. 4 a lodge at cripple Landing-pike on the Innoko features sheefish fishing aiong with and grayling (Alt 1983). some recreJtionar- fishermen float the Innoko between_ Ophir and Cripple (.ibid.). Chinook, chum, and coho salmon have spawhing migrations up th; Innoko, and a few Innoko River salmon ard taken by sporr fishennen in the Folger-(lgg3) Creek, Beaver Creek, ani Ointr areas (ibid.). Att eitimateo the Innoko River lport harvest of salmon to be less than 50 per year. The Bonasila River receives light sportfishing pressure, mainly from local residents. Local residents-sport fish in the I ower 10 mi of the Anvi k Ri ver fbr pi ke, sheefish, and salmon (Alt 19S0). In lg7g, Alt noted a small guiding operation on the Anvik 'luenceRivei in the area 4.5 mi above the Yel I ow Ri ver conf ( ibi d. ) . Th; Khotol River, which enters the yukon River oelow kaltag, contains numerous pike that provide a light recreationii harvest for Ka'ltag residents (ibid. ). c. Manag,emgnt qons.iderations. In the iower Kuskokwim River and Kuskokwim Bay area, rainbow trout are probably the most sought after sport fish. population leveis of lgilPow trout, however, are proOably not high (Alt 1977), Rainbow trout in this area have a late age at maturity, and the spawning population is made up ofonly three or four age cllsses (ibid.). These trodt may b; caught in. the sport fishery threb or four y"ais before lhey reach spawning age (ibid.). In streams that flow into Kuskokwinr Bay, all segments of the rainbow trout

632 population are vulnerable to fishing pressure during the summer months (ibid. ). These fish- are also vulneiable during winter months because of their concentrations in holes in lower reaches of the streams (ibid.). Lake trout in lakes at the headwaters of Kuskokwim Bay streanrs may also be vulnerable to overharvest. ThesL h!. trout popul ations contain few young f ish under 380 mm, with most fish belonging t-o ade classes 9 through 13 (ibid.). An increased harvest or these older fish might disrupt population structure (ibid.). Some guides and recreational users in the area have expressed concern that increased use of the Kanektok River mgl lead to a decline in the fish populations and the_quality of the sportfishing experience bn that river (Dulugokenski et al. 1993, USfWS 1995a). New carch limits were recently adopted by the Alaska Board clf Fisheries for sport harvest of rainbow trout and chinook salmon in the Bristol Bay Area, which includes the Kanektok, Arolik, and Goodhews drainages. The rainbow trout catch limit was reduced'in 19gi to two fish per day and and two fjsh in possession (ADF&G 19g5a). ffre chinook salmon catch limit was reduced to five per day, five in possession (ibid.). The recent increase in nonlocal recreationar use of the Kanektok Ri ver has I ead to a perception by I ocal subsistence users that recreational users may compete with their use of the river (USFWS 1985;). 'The increased use of fish and game by nonlocal users is percei.ved as a threat to the local villager's way of I ife (ibid. ). One prob'lem al ready identified by iocal residents is the trespass of refuge vistors on lands owned by the local Native corporation ( ibid. ). The Ngtivg.corporarion holds title to lands above mean high tide line on the lower Kanektok River. The USFWS in their draft rogiak National hlirdrife Refuge comprehensive conservation pl an Envi ronmentar tmpalt Statement and Wi lderness Review has proposed to eliminate the use of motors on recreational'boats in the Kanektok River wilderness area (ibid.). As a further step to protect wilderness values of the Kanektok and Goodnews rivers the UsFWS proposed to freeze the number of sportfishing guides on each river at 1994 levels (ibid.). In order to distribute users along the rivers, reduce conflicts with local users, reduce impacts to fish and wildlife habitat, and ensure opportunities for more than one group to camp at desireO liots, rhe USFWS also propo_sed to I imit the length of iime river recreational users can stay at on-e location (ibid.). These man_agem€nt proposals will not be adopted until affected local, stare, and federal government agencies,

633 industry, local interests, conservation groups, other and interested parties and individuari tuu.;;ha;;;- -- to review and comment on the_proposed plun fiold.l. Tl'," potential for an additiona'i managemeni problem yukon-Kuskokwim - in rhe Lower Area exiiii because ,unv subsistence resource users harvest fish for fooo r;i;; hook and line. The use of hook and line, except in th6 form of jigg.ing g-e_dr operated through hoi.s in the i.., is not technicg-l ly defined as a legal subsistenie harvest method (ADF&G l9g5c), but in s6r. areas it is rhe most efficient way for iocal users to harveit iisrr _ for food (Srokes 1982). 2. South Slope Brooks Range Area: a. Boundaries. The South posta'l , s-tppl B.rooks Range survey ffiGrp 1) includes ail drainages ilih of the Brooks Range, west of and including ine Koyukuk and Al;i;; river drainages, and north of the yukon River, inctuoing all northern tributaries of the yukon River from raitag to the Canadian (ADF&G b. border 19g5b). Igig_l,yut.lsheds and siqnifj-g.gn!_ljlheries. Smat I sport , burbotr and sheefish are taken from the 3outh slope'Brooki Ru;g; Area (tables l.5-19). Grayl ing and-' nortnein tii; contribute the..largest harvests in this area (taot.l 2o and 2l)-, wi th most gray'r i ng ta ken f roni st.eami accessible from the Haul Road (Dalton Highway)- ano moii pike taken f rom streams ar,Jay f rom ihe Haut Road corridor- 9rv]jng harvest incieased from 1 ,o3z fisn in 1977 to 6,072 fish in 1929 ano has averaged 5,479 fish anually from 1979 through 1994. pike har'vest increased from an averagg of 465 fish annually from rgTl ilrroJgh 1983 to 2,570 fish in 1984. Effort in the .south slope Brooks Range Area has averaged 1:150 angler-davs- anual ry from 1977 through LgSz [t.oiJ 22). In 1984, -5,12r angier-days of efforf were expended in the south S]ope Brooks Range Area, which was 3'.Lii, of the total effort expended in the western and Interior regions that year. Most sp.ortf i shi ng ef f ort i n the south s'lope area takes place in lakes and streams accessible from the Haul Road, near the mouths of yukon River tributaries, and at remote lakes and streams that are accessible by boat or smal I plane. The Nulato River, a yukon River tributary ctownstream from the KoyuJ

~~634 ---7-1 (o (u ^\/ L I I J= o .Y Fr \ an J ><= ) I c o ( J l L o \ 3 \. \ \ r\ € (u ,l \_ I~~

\ t/1 >\ G' (u \_ '/ L !\ ru \ '.(rIt o at N ..-4 it i) \' L a :/ '\ as. Ia )\ arl= a !u\ a I \r .J ai -- . ll I tf dt lL ol ^t I +)cEt t Lfi' r:i. od I o a vI ta ooJ EO o! 'F CO (u(u9) LO- L-o Ovj L-c +):O+) ts(t1so E Gt> C|! Lo (l,L J- +)< vl (l,l.a =th.Y . c Fr-o.t, L Orr to€ =tr

635 The Melozitna River receives a moderate amount of sportfishing.effort from residents of Fairbanks, Ruby, and Galena (Alt 1981a). Sheefish is the main spoi.i species in the Melozitna, though a few chdr, gray'ling, northern pike, and chum salmon are also harveiteo (Ait 198la, USDI 1982). Sheefish harvest generally occurs from late June through mid July (Alt 1979). Most fishing takes place in the lower I mi of the river, though 'lodge there is also some sportfishing pressure at a qn Hotsprings Creek, and a few people float the river (Alt 1984, USDI 1982). Grayling are the most important species for sport anglers in the Melozi Hot Springs area, and a few are al so taken from the Melozitna River mouth upstream to Gray'ling Creek (Alt 1984i. Anglers also fish for char in the Giayling Creek area, but difficult access keeps this effort low (ibid.). In the fa1l, moose hunters probably harvest a few pike in the upper Melozitna (USDI 1982). Sheefish are harvested by sport fishermen in the Nowitna River (Alt 1973, 1979). Sheefish can be taken from the Nowitna in July through mid September (Alt 1973). The Nowitna is fished by many moose hunters in August (ibid.). Some sportfishing also occurs in the lowdr 1 mi of the Tozitna River, with most effort on this yukon River tributary di rected toward northern pi ke and sheefish (Alt 1'984). Some sport harvest also occurs at the mouths of Hess Creek and the Dall River, Yukon River tributaries upstream from Rampart (Alt 1979). Residents of Bettles, Evansville, Alatna, and Allakaket f!st for grayling with hook and line along the Koyukuk River. Most grayling harvest takes place where small tributary streams enter the Koyukuk River and a'long the Koyukuk itself as it flows by the commun'ities (Mariotte and Haynes 1985). in 1981 and 1982, Evansvi I le and Bettles residents harvested grayling with hook and line in the John River from its mouth to above its confluence with Timber Creek, from the Koyukuk River around Betiles and Evansvi I le, and from the mouth of Jane Creek (ibid. ). Bettles and Evansvil le residents also harvested "trout" (species not identified, but probably I ake trout) wi th hook and I i ne from Iniakuk Lake ('ibid.). Residents of Allakaket and Alatna harvested grayling with hciok and line from the lower half of Henshaw Creek (ibid. ). Residents of upper Yukon and Porcupine river communities also use hook and line to harvest grayling during the sumner and fall. Residents of Arctic Village on the East Fork of the Chandalar River harvest grayling and lake trout with hook and line in the Chandallr-River and on adjacent creeks anci lakes during the summer

636 (caulfield 1983). Residents of chalkyitsik on the Black River sometimes take grayl ing wi th- hook and I ine in conjunction with hunting activity along the Black River and its tributaries (ibid.). Reiioentiof Fort yukon on the Yukon River near its confluence with the poiCupine River also harvest grayling with hook and line (iolb.). Harvests of fi.sh using hobk and I ine by resid'ents or small south s]ope area communities is often part of thei r subsi stence-based food-gatheri ng activi ties; however the use of hook and line placei this harvesi under sportfishing regulations. Road access to the s_outh Slope area is provided by the Hls-!ryar (Haul Pullgn. _ Road). The Dattbn Highwaj unas built in 1974 by the Alyeska pipeline service iompiny to serve contruction of the Trans-Alaska pipeline. 'In-May of 7974, the ADF&G closed to sportfishing a strip withiir 5 mi of each side of ilie Trans-Araska bipe'rine alignment. This closure was enacted because of the unknown impacts of construction camps and the lack of biological^^information on affected fish populations (tsendock 1980). In 1979, this closure was risiinded by the Alaska Board of Fisheries, opening the Dalton H'ighway corridor to sportfishing for'all ipecies except sheefish and salmon (ibid.). until 1991, access ro the Dalton Highway was I imited to permitted commercial users ' whi ch I imi ted sportfi shi ng opportuni ties primarily to truckers and employees of the Alyeska Pipeline Service _company and the-Araska Departmerrt of Transportation. In June of 1981, the highway was opened to the general pub'lic from the yukon River to Disaster creek, approximately 150 mi north of the yukon River (Bendock 1982). Between the Yukon River and Atigun pass, the DaJton Highway crosses many streams and smal I tiioutaries of the Koyukuk River. The Koyukuk R'iver supports a diverse community of fish, includeing salmon, sheefish, and northern pike, but the slreams arro tributaries dccessiblg by foot from the Dalton Highway are limited in sportf itlng porentiar principar ly to aictic arayl ing (Bendock 1980). Lakes on the south sioe of the Biooki Tg.lgq along, the Dalton Highway also contain grayling ( ibid. ). These I akes, such as 0l sons and erayt in! lakes' are warm' shallow,.and highly- productive o-urin! the gpen water season (ibid. ): The most popu.lai sportfiting locations south of Atigun pass are pi^ospect Creek, Jim River, and Grayling La[e (Bendock and Burr 1e84). A I imited creel census in r97g based on l3 ang'ler interviews obtained a'long the Daltorr Highway-or from June through August found a catch per effort i.0 fish pei

637 hour in South Slope streams and 5.3 fish per hour in South S1<.rpe lakes (ibid. ). Grayling were the orr'ly species harvested. These data, however, are biased because many unsuccessful trips were not reported (ibid. ). Despite excel lent sportfishing opportunities, effort along the Dalton Highway remains 1ight. Some of the factors contributing to low fishing activity on the Dalton Highway may be 1) poor weather conditions, 2) rough road conditions 3) poorly situated and infrequent camping facilities, 4) placer-mining activities creating turbid water throughout the summer, and 5) the long distance and travel time required from the nearest towns and villages (Bendock 1982). Lakes outside the Haul Road corridor that are accessible by hiking or by air and receive some sportfishing effort include Sithylenrenkat Lake in the Kanuri River drainage, Iniakuk and He'lpmejack lakes in the Alatna River drainage, [.lild Lake at the headwaters of the Wi'ld River, tributary to the Middle Fork of the Koyukuk River, Big (Bob Johnson) and Twin lakes in the Bettles River drainage, Chandalar and Squaw lakes on the North Fork of the Chanda'lar River, and 0ld John Lake in the Sheenjek River drainage (Pearse 1978, Kramer 1976). c. Management considerations. Access to the South Slope ed, and sportfishing effort in the area is 1 ight. Access is probably the most important factor affecring sportfishing in the South Slope area. Few people have the means neccessary tcr reach sportfi shi ng areas. Sportfi shi ng effort i s , therefore, probably not heavy enough at this time to seriously impact fish populations. 3. Fairbanks Area: a. Eoundaries. The Fairbanks Sport Fish Postal Survey Area IliETufa'tt southern drainages of the Yukon River from its confluence with the Tanana River, near Tanana, east to the Canadian border and including the Alaskan port'ion of the Fortymile and Sixtymile river drainages as well as the entire Tanana River watershed. This area also includes the Alaskan portion of the White River drainage (ADF&G 1985b). b. Uaiof watershe-ds and signif icant f isheries_. Grayl ing, tribute the largest harvests in the Fairbanks Area (tables 23,24, and 25). The grayling harvest has contributed an annual average of 53% of the total sport harvest of fish from the Fairbanks Area from 1977 through 1984, and the Fairbanks Area grayling harvest is the largest, in the state (Mills 1985). Large sport harvests (over 1,000 fish annua'lly) of northern pike, whitefish, burbot, and lake trout are also taken from the Fairbanks Area each

638 year, with lesser harvests of char, sheefish' and ifrinoot<, chum, and coho salmon (tables 26-34). Effort in the Fairbanks Area has averaged 125,764 (tante angler-days annual ly from 1977 through 1984 35) ' wiih an increase from 99,919 angler-days in 1977 to a peak of 150,530 angler days in 1982. In 1984' iportfishing effort jn the Fairbanks Area contributed Abf of the 1ota1 sportfishing effort in the Western and Interior regions and 8% of the total statewide sportfishing effort (Mills 1985). Ih the following narrative, major sport harvests from the Fairbanks Area will be described, working roughly from west to east up the Tanana River drainage. Many locatjons that receive only a smal I amount of sportfishing effort each year wil I not be discussed here. These locations, however, ffidY be important to a local community or may offer a unique or valuable fishing experience for those who do use the site. More oetailed information on sportfish'ing at specific s'ites in the Fairbanks Area can be found in the annual Federal Aid in Fish Restoration reports, Jobs G-lII-G' G-III-H' G-III-1, G-lII-K, and R-l-4. The Minto flats area in the Tolovana and Chatanika river drainages is an excellent sportfishing area for northern pike. -Access to Minto flats is by boat, float p1ane, or bV road. in !970, a road was constructed that linked t-he village of New Minto to Fairbanks,. providing increased access to the area (Cheney i9i1). Guided fishing trips are available in the area. In egfly summer (.lunti), best fishing is in sloughs 9!9 shallow backwater areas (Kramer and Ha1 1 berg 1982). In mid-to-late summer, the best fishing is at the confluences of the main rivers and in the lakes (jbid.). An excellent f1y-in pike fishery is available at Minto Lakes. A creei census in l97I found that the Minto Lakes area atrracted the greatest amount of effort, especially later in the sumrner (7/.I7-8/17),_when fishing prbssure ieclined in other areas (Cheney- 1972). Fishing success in the Minto flats area is affected by water level. During periods of low water, the pike. are concentrated in Oeep ho1es at the confluences of rivers and sloughs and are more vulnerable to harvest. when waters are high, the pike are more dispersed' ald harvest oecl i-nei (Cheney !97I, Ha1 lberg 1983) . Estimates from the statewide harvest study show that the harvest of pike from M'into flats has declined from a peak of 3,61'5 f i sh i n 1977 to 1,960 in 1984 ,(taul e 26) ' The Chatanika River, which flows through Minto flats, also supports fisheries for whjtefish and grayling. t,lhitefish are captured in a spear fishery that was

639 initiared in the Tanana drainage- in 1970. t.Jhitefish are lgken .at light in the fal I as they travei up inu chatanika R'iver ro spawn. The whiterish harvest is centered around rhe area of the Eliott Highway bridge. species taken in this fishery are least ciico,- humpoici whitefish, and round whitefish. From lgTz-rg74 and 1976-1980, least cisco contributed an average of 56% of ggch year's harvest, humpb_ack whitefish ari average of 37%, and round whitefish l%. In rg7g, some fishirnren reported that they were select'ive1y harvesting humpback whitefish (Kramer 1979). water levels affect the efficiency of the spear-fishing harvest. Low watei makes boat trivel difficult and ma! !99p. the fish from migrating upstream (Kramer Ig77-, 1978); however, low water may-also concenlrate the fish and make them more vulnerable to wading spear fishermen (Kramer L979). Since 1979, muddy water caused by placer mining.upstream has made speairish'ing very oifricult untrl the water clears in late septemder ((ramer 19g0, 1981; Hal lb-erg 1984). In 1981, the river neveI c]eared, and whitefish harvesr was negl igible (Krlmer and Ha'l I be rg 1982) Grayling are also harvested from the chatanika River. This fishery occurs a'lorrg the steese Highway f ronr 31 mi to about 80 mi on the road. There are- num-erous access po'ints, but .the most important is the state campgrouno at mile 40 (Kramer lgls). A survey in rgl4 found that anglers on the Chatanika releasecj 55% of the grayling they caught. Local residents made up s7% of the-angleri contacted; 19% were military personnel; and 24% were rourists (ibid.). The Chena River, ilvhich enrers the Tanana River just lglg* the ciry of Fairbanks, supports the largest sport !ishey in the interior and Western regions (iable 35). The chena Hot springs Road, which paiallels the chena River from mile 26 to its terminus at mile 60, crosses the upper Chena River seven times, providing-upper eaiy access for fishermen. The availabiljty of the Chena River for one-day road access tr{ps from Fairbanks is a major reason for the high use of the area (Holmes 1981). Recent campsire construction in the uppei chenaf River gleg by the Alaska Department of t'tatlral Resources, Division of Parks, has increasec.l access to the river and furthered recreatiorral use (Holmes 1985). The upper chena River provides varied fishing experiences 'for angler.s. Many anglers fish near the oriojes that cross the river, but for those anglers seeking more privacy there are many_less crowded areas that can oe reabheo ny side roads (Holmes 198i). short hikes up or downsrreair from the bridges will give an angler more solitude and

640 often provide better fishing as well. It is also possible for anglers to float between the bridges with rafts or canoes to find better fishing (ibid.). The Chena River contains many species of fish, but grayl ing i s the princi pa1 species of recreational importance. The Chena Ri ver supports the 1 argest grayling fishery in the state (Mills 1985). The upper Chena River grayling fishery takes place throughout the summer, f ron breakup in May unt'il cclld weather arrives in Septenrber. Higher catch rates tend to occur early and late in the season, reflecting gray'ling migrations through the fishery (Holmes 1984); however, weather strongly affects angler effort and rate of harvest. Poor weather and high water due to rain often reduce catch rates, and in 1983, silty water due to placer mining on the East Fork recluced catch rates in parts of July and August (ibid.). Angler effort and harvest in the month of May (tne t'ime of the maior upstream migration of grayling) is enhanced in years with low water levels. In favorable years the highest use of the Chena River all summer may occur on Memorial Day weekend (Holmes 1981). The May grayl ing harvest tends to include a larger proportion

64r Lake for the first time in 1982. The corps of Engineers closed access to the project untfr al'l constiuction activities were completed'large in spring-rainbow 1994 (Hal lberg 1984). In 1984, a harvest' of trout and landlocked salmon was taken from chena Lake, and it rec'ieved 11 ,000 angl er-days of ef fort ( ta6l e 35 ) . Fffq.t expended on the upper Chena River declined in 1984, possibly because chena Lake relieved some of the fj.r!ing p_re_ssure usual ly exerted on the upper Chena (Holmes 1985). The salcha River, which enters the Tanana River upstream from the Chena River, a1 so provides a harvbst of grayling, along with a small harvest of chinook and chum salmon. The chinook salmon harvest takes place from late June rhrough late July. Annual harvest of chinook salmon from the salcha River in lg77 through 1gg4 averaged 520 fish, along with 215 chum sa'lmon (tioles 32 and 33). Angler efforc in this fishery is concentrated from the Richardson Highway brige to the salcha River's confluence with the Tanana River (Doxey l9g4). A boat charrer service operates in lhe lower- river", and many anglers use their own boats (ibid.). Jacks-(precoioui males) comprise a large portion of'the harvest in this fishery (ibid. ). Harding Lake is located 4s mi southeast of Fairbanks along the Richardson Highway. The lake's fish communiry includes indigenous northern pike, burbot, and leasi cisco. tlarding Lake also contains a small naturally reproducing population of lake trout that were stockei in the lake in 1939,1963, and 1965 as adults and in 1967 as fingerlings. Landlocked coho salmon have also been stocked in Harding Lake intermitently from 196g to 1981, and in 1982 and 1984 the lake wai stocked with sheefish. The 'lake,contribution of stocking-been to the harvest from this however, has thus far negl igible. The natural popularions of pike and burbot relmain the basis -of a light intensity sport fishery on the lake. Ih. fishery for burbot begins immediately after freeze-up. Burbot apparently move into shoal ireas of the lake and are harvested readily on set lines in these areas until m'id December, when fishing slows down (Doxey i981). Small numbers of burbot continue to be taken throughout the rest of the year. A suruner set I ine fishery_for burbot in Harding Lake takes place from late May to late June (Doxey 1984). Bi rch Lake, 56 mi southeast of Fai rbanks on the Richardson Highway, has been stocked with both rainbow trout and landlocked salmon over the years. Harvest of these stocked fish takes place during sumner and via an ice fishery in the winter. The u.s. Air Force maintains

64? a recreation camp on tsirch Lake, and heavy surmer use of this.camp contributes significantly to ingter pressure on the lake. About half the shoreline -is pi^tvately owned' but there is a state parking and boat-launchin-g area on the eastern shoreline and a turnout and parkin! area on the south end of the lake. In the winterl fishermen can generally drive an automobile onto Birch !gkg'.starting in December. Fishermen then may either fish in.the 9pgl, using their cars for shelter, or may use an ice-fishing shanty (Doxey 1991). shanties musi be registered with the ADF&G, and in the winter of i982-1983' 30 shanties were in use on Birch Lake (Doxey 1984). Harvest of rainbow trout from Birch Lake hai averaged_f7'600 fish annua'l1y from l9g0 through l9g4 (lunlq 25), and landlocked salmon harvest has aleraged 3-9,150 fish (taOl e 24). Harvest of these species f'luctuates a_ -great deal in Bi rch Lake, dependinj upon the availability of fish for stocking. Quartz Lake is a 1,500-acre lake located near the Richardson Highway approximately l6 mi north of Delta .lunction. This Jake is siocked regularly with landlocked coho salmon and rainbow trout. Quartz Lake has recieved an average of 12,400 ancler-days of effort annually from 1977 through 1984 (taoIe 35).- Harvest of rainbow trout and landlocked salmon varies, depending upgn the availability of fish for stocking. tanblockei salmon provide most of the harvest (taOl e-24); however, gglg.anglers fish selectively for rainbow troiri (peckham L979). Rainbow trout harvest increased in 19g1 and 19g2 as a result of 1979 and 1980 plants of swanson River strain rainbow trout (peckham l9g3). During the summer, anglers at Birch Lake fish both from shore ino in boats; however, shore anglers account for only a very smali percentage of the effort and harvest (peckham- lggl). 0n-site creel censuses are conducted on Quartz Lake in both summer and winter. Resul ts of these creel censuses' which contain information on harvest rate and timing' can be found in Federal Aid in Fish Restoration reports for Job G-III-I. I gopular sport fishery for grayling is supported by the Delta clearwater River. The-Deita clea'watbr is po-putai with fishermen and recreationisrs because of its'road access, state campground, aesthetics, and good fishing for grayling (Ridder 1984). public access is availabl6 at the state of Alaska clearwater campground at mi g of lhe river, which includes a boat-launching ramp. Downstream acces-s is also proviclecr via clearwat6r Lake, where the U.S. Army has a'launching facitity. The two access points.provide a popu'lar float trip for canoists and kayakers (Ridder' 1982). The middle section of the

643 Delta Clearwater.is readily accessible to shore anglers,-Delta but in 1983 67% of anglers interviewed on the Clear"water were fishing from boats (Ridder i984). The majori{.of anglers, whether they use a boat or go on foot, fish within 3 mi of the main access points at mi g of the river (Ridder 1981). In 1983, inierviewed boat anglers had a catch rate of 0.81 grayling caught and kept per hour, and interviewed shore angleri haO I catch rate of 0.46 grayling per hour (Ridder 1984). The Delta Cleanrarer was stocked with grayling in I974, L975, L976, 1983, and 1984. Stdckeo !rayl ing- make ; significant contribution to the harvest. In 1980, stocked gray'ling from four age classes, L9TS through 1978, were responsible for 3L% of the gray'ling examined during the on-site creel census (Ridder 1981). In 19g1 and L982, these pond-reared grayl ing made up approximately .23 and 24% of the creel sampl' e , respective'ly (Ridder L982, 1983). However, the percentage contribution of pond-reared grayling dropped by about one-half in 1983. The reasons for this sudden decline are not known but may be related to difficulties in identifying pond-reared fish as they grow older, different'ial mortality of pond-reared and wild grayling,- increased straying of pond-reared fish frdm their stocking site, or additional recruitment of wild fish (Ridder 1984). The Delta Cleanrater a'lso supports a growing fishery for fal I -run coho salmon (Ridder 1981 ). In 1984, the harvest of coho salmon from the Delta Clearuater was estimated to be 571 fish (table 34). Also in this area, the Goodpaster River, the Richardson Cleanvater River, and Shaw Creek provide additional grayling fishing. The Richardson Cleanrater is accessible only by bbat or float plane, and angling is predominant'ly by area residents, although use by anglers from outside the immediate area increased in L982 (Ridder 1983, 1984). The Shaw Creek fishery takes place in the spring and focuses predomi nantly on prespawni ng gray'l i ng that concentrate at the mouth of the creek prior to breakup (Ridder 1982). Highway construction in Lg76 rerouted t,he mouth of the creek, and the fishery was curtailed unti'l 1981, when late breakup of Shaw Creek and changing river channels again allowed grayling to concentrate at the mouth (ibid.). This is a roadside fishery, with a 1983 angler composition of 55% residents, 33% mi'litary personnel and dependents, and 12% of unknown c'lassification (Ridder 1984). The Delta River flows from the Tangle Lakes ro the Tanana River near Delta Junction. The river offers a high quality recreational experience, where f'loating (by

644 canoe, kayak, or rafts) in combination with excellent grayling fishing._ cdn be enjoyed in an area o.f high scenic appeal (Peckham 1984). The Alaska Nationil Interest Lands cirnservation Act of 19g0 established the upper Delta River, Tangle Lakes, and Tangle River as a component of the National h|ild and scenic River system, to be administ-ered by the Bureau of Land Managemeni (ibid.). The Tangle Lakes and Tangle River portion of the system is classified as "scenic,,'and the Z0-mi stretch between the lakes and the Richardson Highway is clesignated "wi I d"_ (ibid. ). Recreationa'l users generit ty float the river f rom Tangle Lakes campgrouno ai t'ti 1e 2i on the Denali Highway to just below phelan creek at Mile zLZ on the Richarctson Highway, a distance of lpproximate'ly 28 mi (Peckham 19B4, USDI n.d. ). The Tangl e Lakes campground has a boat I aunch as i.rel I as campi!9 facilities. Air boats and boats with jet units are also used for upstream access. The BLlvl estlmated in 1?82_that nearly .2,200 user-

645 !gt:.Lodge arso transported angrers to the lake (ibid.). Fishing pressure is heaviest oi-Geo-rge Lake from'uieiiup around the first of June untir mio Jury. In 19gj,-; limited summer creel census resulted in"an estimate of 0-38-pike caught and kept per hour, with a mean tengin of 546 mm. In the ypper Tanana River drainage, most fishing is done by local residents. Four Mile L]ake, near rot,-nai oeen stocked with sheefish and rainbow trout. sheefish in this lake ale natura'l ly reproducing but have not supported a large sport fishery. Four Mile Lake is primari ry .ls^qd by angrers f rom the vicinity of rok (Peckham 1983). In the Tetlin National l,Jildlife Refuge, fishing takes p]acg primarily in road-accessible lakis-and streams or f1y-in lakes _(usF[,lS 1995b). Fishing guide service is available in Tok, but demand for the'se-services is low ( ibid. ). c. ManageFent_ considerations. Fairbanks area fisheries reeds of a ripioly g;;"i;; population. Although the Fairbanks Area is tu.d., il,6 network of roads in the area is limited and provioes access to on.lv a fraction of potential fishinj sites. Because of this, fishing pressure tends to concentrate on a few readily accessible and productive fisheries. These popu'lar fisheries must be careful]y monitored to ensure that quality fishing opportunities continue to be available to.the public ano that the integrity of fiih pgputations is maintained. Grayling harvest from the chena River is particular]y serisiti-ve because harvest relies on on'ly two age classes of fish. Two successive years of- poor recruitment coulo seriously reduce the harvest in this fishery. {9 the population grows and recreat'ional demands for fishing opportunities increase, so do other demands and stresses on the resource. placer mining activities in Fai the rbanks Area have caused si I taiion of some cleanrater streams and reduced fishing opportunities. The chatanika River spear fishery for w-hiteiish and the grayling fishery on the East F6rk of the chena River have both been affected by placer mining siltation (Kramer 1980, 198_l_, Hallberg'1994, Holmes fgdql: i;'ih; Delta area, runoff from recent agricultural d6velopn,eni qgy be affecting the water qual itv of the bel ta clearuater River (Ridder 1993).' Land- allocations and leyelopment-may also reduce rishing opportunities in the Fai rbanks Area by bl ocking access to exi sting or potential fisheries.

~~646 Table 1. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area Sockeye Salmon Sport Harvest, lgll-g4~~

~~Location r977 1978 1979 I 980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Salt water Kanektok 0 R. 0 143 Goodnews R. T4 0ther streams 206 156 La kes 4L 0 Tota I 69 85 126 I12 Lt7 430 261 299~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~Table 2. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area Coho Salmon Sport Harvest, tg77-g4~~

~~Loca t on i r977 r978 r979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Salt water 0 Kanektok R. 367 1,995 Goodnews R. 168 0ther streams 7,427 I,729 Lakes 0 0 Tota I 430 566 537 2,014 583 2,923 L,962 3,623~~

~~Source: Mi I ls 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~647 Table 3. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwinr Area Chinook Salmon Sport Harvest, 1977-84~~

~~Locati on 1977 1978 r979 1980 1981 r982 1983 i984~~

~~Salt water 26 Kanektok R. 1,511 922 Goodnews R. 3i Other streams 420 273 La kes 00 Tota l t77 629 400 978 1,o2o L,r2r L,962 r,221~~

~~Source: Mills i979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~Table 4. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area Pink Salmon Sport Harvest, 1977-84~~

~~Locati on L977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Sal t water 0 Kanektok R. 2r0 195 Goodnews R. 168 Other streams 42 156 La kes 0 0 Tota I 114 929 r12 l7 47? 420 35i~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~648 Table 5. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area Chum Salmon Sport Harvest, 1977-84~~

~~Locati on 1977 1978 r979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Sal r water 0 Kanektok R. 315 376 Goodnews R. 10 0ther streams 922 520 La kes 0 0 Tota I ?.4I 1,034 482 603 1,113 2,096 r,247 896~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~Table 6. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area Rainbow Trout Sport liarvest, 1977-84~~

~~Loca t i on 7977 1978 r979 1980 I981 198? 1983 1984~~

~~Sal t water 0 Kanektok R. 640 3L2 Goodnews R. 52 Other streams 934 1 ,104 La kes r57 26 Tota'l 223 3U.t 401 835 982 796 1,783 r,442~~

~~Source: l'lills 1979-85.~~

~~--- nreans no clata were avai I abl e.~~

~~649 Table 7. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area char sport Harvest, rglT-g4~~

~~Locati on t977 t978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Salt water 0 Kanektok R. L,406 1 ,116 Goodnews R. 147 0ther streams 3,041 702 Lakes 725 6s Tota l 1 ,689 1,944 1,954 1,300 1,66g 3,375 4,719 1,883~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~Table 8. Lower Yr.rkon-Kuskokwinr Area Lake Trout Sport Harvest , lg77-g4~~

~~Loca t i on 1977 i978 1979 1980 1981 r982 1983 1984~~

~~Salt water 0 Kanektok R. 0 tL7 Gooclnews R. 0 Other streams 0 78 La kes 419 467 Tota I 124 t72 218 267 11,7 503 419 662~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~650 Table 9. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area Arctic Grayling Sport Harvest, lg77-84~~

~~Loca t i on r977 t978 r979 1980 198i 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Sal t water n Kanektok R. 231, 169 Goodnews R. 178 0rher streams 8,550 2,0r3 Lakes 136 52 Tota I 4,090 5,053 7 ,466 9,727 6,553 g,4gg 9,095 2,234~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~Table 10. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area Northern Pike Sport Harvest, lglT-84~~

~~Loca t i on 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Salt water 0 Kanektok R. 0 0 Goodnews R. 0 0ther streams 5,769 r,442 Lakes 6s0 78 Tot,a I I,652 2,667 2,900 4,339 3,433 6,257 6,4Lg L,520~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- neans no data were available.~~

~~651 Iable yukon_Kuskokwim 11. Lower Area hlh i tef i sh Sport Harvest, Ig77-94~~

~~Loca t i cln 7977 1978 r979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 Salt water Kanektok R. 0 Goodnews R. 0 13 Other streams 0 La kes 2,349 65 Tota I 881 0 ?21 772 419 284 367 1,394 3,230 78~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-g5. --- means no data were available.~~

~~Table 12. Lower yukon-Kuskokwinr Area Eurbot Sport Harvest , Ig77_g4~~

~~Loca t i on 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Sal t water Kanektok R. 0 Goodnews R. 0 0ther streams 0 .-: La kes 472 0 Tota I 0 0 226 362 91 646 554 7 ,77 L 47? 0~~

~~Sou rce : Mi I ls 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~652 Table 13. Lower Yukon-Kuskokwim Area Sheefish Sport Harvest, IgTl-g4~~

~~Loca i t on 1977 t978 7979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Salt water Kanektok U R. 0 0 Goodnews R. 0 Other streams 838 481 Lakes 63 0 Tota I ?94 479 427 568 559 765 901 481~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~653 aF 4@N I c;i i d;ai !g -r+6 U o- o o o FArN@615, P3h E 2 @9{ I J Jo NO600 x 6€O@o oo J o NN€6O I F+NON oNNO6 o t z Ffr@ o~~

~~o o aN o a @ I~~

~~o o o o o o o o o O I o zo 3 o o 0 o o O o o o o o o 9 o ) o o6 o E 0 o o z o~~

oI o 0 o o o o o N o a o ! z0 O o 0 A ! U o I t, t qo I o U olRI o -l I go ld a O G I2 @ f o o q o o s 0 o a c N o N .o o E o o N Il o>-o o o o@ J - F! N o9 YJ >o .L o 60o I i oo I€ 0 F90 a c OG o oE! E FOo o r-c Lq€ o o o - 6U 9 o CL o o i35!c oo 9 OD ooo LUoEe € Fco €IF tl oao Ol oY9 6to

~~654 Table 15. South Slope Brooks Range Area Chum Salmon Sport Harvest, lgTT-g4~~

~~Locati on 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Haul Roqd streamsa St reamso 297 0 La kes 00 Tota'l 700011212970~~

~~Source: Mills i979-85. --- means no data were available. a Haul Road streams were not reported separately from all other streams in L9l7 through 1983.~~

~~Table 16. South slope Brooks Range Area char sport Harvest, lg77-g4~~

~~Locat i on 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Haul Ro4d streamsa Streamso 594 143 La kes 00 Tota I 11 0 45 60 162 L78 594 143~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. a Haul Road streams were not reported separately from al I other streams in I97l through 1983.~~

~~655 Table 17. South Slope Brooks Range Area Lake Trout Sport Harvest , LglT-g4~~

~~Loca t i on 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 Ig82 1983 1984~~

~~Haul Roqd streamsa Streamso Lakes 00 Tota l i;; ;;; 1;; .;; ;;; ;;; ll3 33~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. Haul Road stredms a were not reported separately from al I other stneams 1977 through 1983. in~~

~~Table 18. South Slope Brooks Range Area Burbot sport Harvest , Lg77-g4~~

~~Loca t i on 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 tg82 1983 1984~~

~~Haul Roqd streamsa St reamsq 052 Lakes 00 Tota I 00009731052~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. a Haul Road streams were not reported separately from al I other streams in I9l7 through 1983.~~

~~656 Table 19. South Slope Brooks Range Area Sheefish Sport Harvest, IglT-84~~

~~Locati on r977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Haul Roqd streamsa 0 Streamso 186 78 Lakes 0 0 Tota I 139 72 127 34 324 167 186 78~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. a Haul Road streams were not reported separately from all other streams in I97l through 1983.~~

~~Table 20. South S'lope Brooks Range Area Arctic Grayling Sport Harvest, lgTl-g4~~

~~Locati on r977 t97B t979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

~~Haul Road streamsa 3,295 St reamsd 6,070 1,688 La kes 111 766 Tota I 1,032 2,106 6 ,072 6,079 3,9g5 4,92! 6,181 5,739~~

~~Source: l'lills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. a Haul Road streams were not reported separately from al I other streams in I97l rhrough 1983.~~

~~657 Table 21. South Slope Brooks Range Area Northern Pike Sport Harvest, tgTl-g4~~

~~Loca t i on t977 T97B 1979 1980 1981 7982 1983 1984~~

~~Haul Roqd streamsa 143 St reamso 0 2,3gg La kes 130 39 Tota I 2r5 470 227 715 983 514 130 2,570~~

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no clata were available. Haul Road streams a were not reported separately from a'l'l other streams 1977 through 1983. in~~

~~658 toNo 69tso o o+FO ot o o e o 638: z~~

~~a@o @do @FO oa o ooo@6N o 49~~

~~o @~~

~~@ z o o;~~

~~o F o o c o o +@ o + f o o~~

o o o o o ! o 0. o c o J. @ qoOa o o 6P I z oo .Foct o 6E .F, O o N o €Nco qOF o 6c o QA !E o N o €o oo o z 9, o4 cl U Oo 90 L o LO o o o q- r >o o .Ec oN o I ggOL N t>o l- N o 00.! ._ocl oo o o o oo o o N OL N eo o G I E -6L o>oo! o z o rc-EO g iogo9 o o S eI3 oooRsEH E F9OL o o4! o oPoa FOot o .FC -O o NO J oo Eteo- o CE o Egt; €o-E -oO F :ur 'LI Or -qJ otoa

~~659 Table 23. Fairbanks Area Arctic Grayling sport Harvest, Lg77-g4~~

~~Loca t i on 1977 1978 L979 1980 1981 r982 1983 1984~~

e Chena R., Badggr st.- ?I,723 33,330 Upper Chena R.i 1 I ,664 16,588 13,735 I?,907 10,835 L2,630 Lower ::: ::: Chena R^" 1 1 ,290 18,520 10,914 Ll ,lL7 7 ,Bg4 13,850 Badger Slough" 5,023 6,717 2,999 5 ,294 3,L37 3,920 Chatani ka R. 6,737 9,294 6,I21 5 ,143 3,809 6 ,445 9,766 4 ,180 Salcha R. 6,397 9,067 5,gg0 5 ,351 3 ,993 6 ,943 9,640 13,305 Delta Clear.water R. 6 ,119 7 ,657 6,492 5,680 7 ,362 4,779 6,546 4,193 Richardson Clearwater R. 7,562 1,729 2,822 Goodpaster R. 3,02I 1 ,194 Piledriver Slough 5,822 3 ,751 Shaw Creek 2,570 Tanana R. L,0L2 Oiher streams 20,744 12,647 Bi rch L. 00 00 000 0 Qua rtz L. 00 00 000 0 George L. 027 917 600 65 Vol kmar L. 000 Fielding L. 1,913 3,044 2,035 935 Minto Flats 243 189 145 104 76 t70 262 299 Tang'le Lakes 5,796 3,466 5,522 6 ,958 g,590 7 ,794 4,829 Chena L. 0 Harding L 0 0ther lakes 2,045 4,246 0thers 16,585 17,935 20,053 16,509 22,L72 19,935 Tota I 57 ,793 93,275 70,243 90,150 75,289 91,753 92,363 83,626

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~a All Chena River locations were reported together in 1977-78.~~

b The Chena River and tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 Mile on the road. c The Chena River and tributaries from the mouth upstream to 25 Mile Chena Hot Springs Road. d Al1 parts of Badger Slough (sometimes called chena srough).

~~660 Table 24. Fairbanks Area Land Locked Salmon sport Harvest, lg77-g4~~

~~Locati on r977 1978 r979 1980 i981 1982 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Badggr Sl.a 0 0 Upper Chena R.i 0 0 0 0 59 Lower 0 Chena R^' 0 0 0 0 0 Badger Slough" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chatanika R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Salcha R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Delta Clearwater R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Richardson 0 0 Clearwater R 0 0 0 Goodpaster R. 0 0 Piledriver Slough 0 0 Shaw Creek 0 Tanana R. 0 0ther streams 262 0 Birch L. 5,697 6,354 r32 0 2,549 6 ,275 9,696 6,049 L. Quartz 0 L4,gg2 34,797 23,376 50,965 35,390 24,042 17 George L. ,069 0000 000 0 Volkmar L. 0 0 0 Fielding L. 0 Minto 0 0 0 Flats 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tangle Lakes 0 0 0 2t 0 Chena L. 5,036 Harding L. 65 0ther lakes 1 ,185 r,026 0thers 1,454 1,166 1,154 2,417 3,790 I,7Lg Tota l 7,IsL 22,4r2 36,073 25,733 57,294 43,374 34,255 29,245

Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. a All Chena River locations were reported together in 1977-78. The b Chena River and tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 Mile on the road. c The Chena River and tributaries from the mouth upstream to ZS Mile Chena Hot Springs Road. d Al I parts of Badger Slough (sometimes called Chena Slough).

~~661 Table 25. Fairbanks Area Rainbow Trout sport Harvest, Lg77-g4~~

~~Loca t i on t977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Bactgpr SI.a Upper Chena R.i 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lower Chena Rr' 0 0 0 0 0 0 Badger Slough' 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chatanika R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Salcha R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Delta Clearwater R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Richardson Clearwater R. 0 8 0 Gooclpaster R. 0 0 Pi ledriver Slough 0 0 Shaw Creek 0 Tanana R. 0 0ther streams 4L 0 Birch L. 1,850 5,126 4,190 18,727 2L,622 18,395 16,963 L2,123 Quartz L. 2,634 5r2 273 t29 1,969 5,003 7,574 5,491 George L. 0 0 0 0 Volkmar L. _-: _-: __: __: 0 0 0 Fielding L. 0 0 0 0 Minto Flats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tangle Lakes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chena L 12,032 Harding L. 0 Other lakes 2,096 4,376 0thers 1,508 768 723 728 1,080 2,790 Tota I 5 ,992 6 ,406 5 ,196 19 ,584 24 ,571 26,186 20,664 34,022

~~Source: llills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

a All Chena River locations were reported together in L977-78. b The Chena River and tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 Mile on the road. c The Chena River and tributaries from the mouth upstream to 25 Mi I e Chena Hot Springs Road. d Al I parts of Badger Slough (sometimes called Chena Slough).

~~662 Table 26. Fairbanks Area Northern pike sport Harvest, rg77-g4~~

~~Location 1977 1978 t979 1980 1981 r982 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Badggr Sl.a 871. 452 Upper Chena R.i 0 0 00 0 286 Lower Chena Rr' 437 458 277 314 392 Badger Slough' 415 0 0 56 63 388 363 Chatanika R. I2I 407 7L 458 28 305 713 389 Salcha R. 00 0 0 00 0 234 Delta Clearwater R. 00 0 0 Richardson 00 0 0 Clearwaier R. 00 0 Goodpaster R. 0 65 Pi I edri ver S'lough 31 52 Shaw Creek 0 Tanana R. 65 0ther streams I,037 I,597 Birch L. 000 0000 0 Quartz L. 000 00052 George L. 0 7,227 7,392 2,019 1,395 2,236 1 ,635 L,322 1 ,700 Vol kmar L 648 777 430 Fielding L 0 00 0 Minto Flats 3,615 3,300 3,209 3,909 2,009 1,g96 !,925 1,960 Tangle Lakes 0 Chena L. ::: __: _-: __: __: Harding --g --: 0 L. 766 0ther lakes 4 ,035 1,715 0thers 3,511 2,297 2,240 3,232 4,697 4,942 Tota I 9,345 7,939 7 ,975 g ,452 9,941 9,922 70,225 9,607

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

a All chena River locations were reported together in 1977-lg. The Chena b River and tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 l4ile on the rsad. The c Chena River and tributaries from the mouth upstream to ?5 Mile Chena Hot Springs Road. d All parts of Badger slough (sometimes called chena slough).

~~663 Tab'le 27. Fairbanks Area lrlhitefish Sport Harvest, lg77-g4~~

~~Locati on r977 1978 7979 1980 198 I 1982 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Badgpr Sl.a 538 187 Upper Chena R.i 40 54 729 2L Lower 202 260 Chena R^' 309 882 345 210 Eadger 422 519 Slough" 273 96 209 231 Chatanika 440 104 R. I ,635 6,013 3,021 3,340 3,185 6,640 5,895 9,269 Salcha R. 45 t37 44 17 56 94 94 177 Delta Cleanvater R. 280 530 203 94 Richardson 262 325 Clearwater R. 22 31 84 Goodpaster R. 0 65 Pi ledriver Slouqh - 10 350 Shaw Creek t82 Tanana R. 52 Other streams 566 182 Birch L. 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 L. Quartz 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 George L. T2 0 9 0 00 0 65 Volkmar L 02r 2T Fi e1 di ng L. 11 31 0 0 Minto Fla tS 31 62 91 138 010 0 13 Tangle La kes 137 31 574 97 73 315 78 Chena L. 0 Harding L 0 lakes 0ther 78 0thers 1,099 37 1,289 857 616 1,187 Tota I 3,379 6,573 5 ,159 5,958 4,973 9,643 8,311 11,559

Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. a All Chena River locations were reported together in 1977-78. The b Chena River and tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 Mile on the road. The c Chena River and tributaries from the mouth upstream to 25 Mile Chena Hot Springs Road. d Al I parts of Badger s]ough (sometimes ca'lled chena s]ough).

~~664 Table 28. Fairbanks Area Burbot Sport Harvest, lg77-94~~

~~Locati on t977 1978 1979 1980 1981 198? 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Badggr Sl.a Upper Chena R.i 2!? ::: 00 00 0 532 Lower Chena R^" 807 L,127 1,189 I,436 1,034 597 Badger Slough" 00 t29 2t 2I 104 Chatani ka R. 34 18 950 542 2I 13 Salcha R. 00 00 00 0 0 Delta Clearwater R. 00 0?9 00 0 13 Richardson Clearwater R 00 0 Gooopaster R. 0 227 Piledriver Slough 84 0 Shaw Creek 415 Tanana R. L,921 0ther streams 3,146 935 Birch L. 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 Quartz L. 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 George L. 5 064 0 6B 31 105 143 Vol kmar L. 0 0 0 Fielding L. 249 365 367 0 Minto Flats 37 72 459 32 2I 0 39 Tangle Lakes 72 88 229 194 105 84 39 Chena L. 0 Harding L. 428 0ther lakes 178 156 0thers 829 832 966 1,285 2,257 1 ,966 Tota I L,547 1,393 r,g7g 2,729 4,L22 3,997 5,040 5,556

Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. a All Chena River locations were reported together in 1977-78. b The Chena River and tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 Mile on rhe road. c The Chena River and tributaries from the mouth upsrream to 25 Mile Chena Hot Springs Road. d All parts of Badger slough (sometimes calred chena s]ough).

~~665 Table 29. Fairbanks Area Lake Trout Sport Harvest, Lg77-94~~

~~Loca t i on r977 t978 1979 1980 1981 1982 I 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Badgpr Sl.a Upper Chena R.l 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lower Chena R," 0 0 0 0 0 0 Badger Slough' 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chatanika R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Salcha R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Delia Clearwater R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Richardson Cleanvater R. 0 0 0 Goodpaster R. 0 0 Piledriver Slough 0 0 Shaw Creek 0 Tanana R. 0 Other streams 188 546 Birch L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Quartz L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 George L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vol kmar L. 0 0 0 Fieldinb L. 295 346 294 169 Minto Flats 0 00 0 0 0 0 Tang'le Lakes _-9 4L6 428 603 864 7,079 2,088 636 Chena. L. 0 Harding L. 0 Other lakes 367 753 0thers t,471 t87 518 661 562 7,679 Tota I 1,471 603 946 I,264 1,727 3 ,104 2,937 2,104

Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. a All Chena River locations were reported together in I977-78. b The Chena River and tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 l'lile on the road.

~~al c The Chena River and tributaries from the mouth upstream to 25 Mile Chena Hot Spri ngs Road. d All parts of Badger S'lough (sometimes called Chena Slough).~~

~~666 Table 30. Fairbanks Area Char Sport Harvest, 1977-84~~

~~Locati on r977 1978 1979 1980 1981 I9B2 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Badggr Sl.a Upper Chena R.i 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lower Chena R^" 0 0 0 0 0 0 Badger Slough' 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chatani ka R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sal cha R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Delta Clearvater R. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Richardson C'learwater R. 0 0 0 Goodpaster R. 0 0 Piledriver Slough 0 0 Shaw Creek 0 Tanana R. 0 0ther streams 293 350 Bi rch L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Quartz L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 George L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vol kmar L. 0 0 0 Fiel di ng L. 0 0 0 0 Minto Flats 0 0 0 0 0 Tangle Lakes 0 0 0 0 Chena L. 0 Harding L. 0 0ther lakes 0 0thers 877 524 364 524 572 4B? Tota I 877 524 364 524 57? 482 293 350

Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data wene available. a All Chena River locations were reported together in 1977-78. b The Chena River and t,ributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 Mile on the road. c The Chena River and tributaries from the mouth upstream to 25 Mi I e Chena Hot Springs Road. d All parts of Badger Slough (sometimes called Chena Slough).

~~667 Table 31. Fairbanks Area Sheefish Sport Harvest, 1977-84~~

~~Locat i on 1977 1978 t979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Badgpr Sl.a 37 t8 Upper Chena R.l 00 00 0 13 Lower Chena R^" 26 2t 50 10 0 lL7 Badger Slough" 00 00 0 26 Chatanika R. L4 54 ?6 25 0 31 94 143 Salcha R. 00 00 00 0 0 Delta Clearwater R. 00 00 00 0 0 Richardson Cleanr,rater R. 00 0 Goodpaster R. 0 0 Piledriver Slough 0 0 Shaw Creek 0 Tanana R. 13 0ther streams 0 13 Birch L. 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 Qua rtz 1.. 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 George L. 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 Vol kmar L. 00 0 Fielding L. 00 0 0 Minto Flats 68 90 L82 25 11 10 63 0 Tangle Lakes 0 0 0 00 0 0 Chena L. 0 Harding L. 0 0ther lakes 13 0thers 39 72 45 25 32 76 Tota I 158 234 279 96 93 t27 L57 338

Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. a All Chena River locations were reported together in 1977-78. b The Chena River and tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 Mile on the road. c The Chena River and rributaries from the mouth upstream to 25 Mile Chena Hot Springs Road. d Al1 parts of Badger Slough (sometimes called Chena Stough).

~~668 Table 32. Fairbanks Area chinook Salmon sport Harvest, lg77-94~~

~~Locat ion 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Badgpr Sl.a 29 23 Upper Chena R.i 10 0 0 0 0 0 Lower Chena R^" 0 0 39 31 31 0 Badger Slough" 0 0 0 0 ,0 0 Chatanika R. 935 29 37 5 136 147 78 Sal cha R. 62 105 476 904 719 817 808 260 Delta Clearwater R. 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 Richardson Clearwater R. 0 0 0 Goodpaster R. 0 0 Piledriver Slough 0 0 Shaw Creek 0 Tanana River 0 Other streams 10 0 Birch L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Quartz L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 George L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vol kmar L. 0 0 0 Fielding L. 0 0 0 0 Minto Flats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tang'le Lakes 0 0 0 0 0 52 0 Chena L 0 Harding L. 0 0ther lakes 0 0thers 00 0 0 0 Tota I 100 163 515 94r 763 984 1,049 338

~~Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available.~~

~~a All Chena River locations were reported together in 1977 -78.~~

b The Chena River anct tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 l4ile on the road. c The Chena River and tributaries from the mouth upstream to 25 Mile Chena Hot Springs Road. d Al1 parts clf Badger slough (sometimes called chena slough).

~~669 Table 33. Fairbanks Area chum salmon Sport Harvest, Lg77-94~~

~~Locati on 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 t982 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Badgqr Sl.a 43 20 Upper Chena R.i 00 0 0 0 39 Lower Chena R^" 921 0 0 10 0 Badger Slough' 00 0 0 0 0 Chatanika R. 34 20 0 104 0 68 136 78 Salcha R. 27 59 146 196 368 44L 273 208 Delta Clearuater R. 19 59 025 0 2I 63 182 Richardson Clearvtater R. 0 0 0 Goodpaster R. 0 0 Pi'ledri ver Sl ough L57 0 Shaw Creek 0 Tanana R. 0 Other streams 10 78 Birch L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Quartz L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 George L. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vol kmar L. 0 0 0 Fielding L. 0 0 0 0 Minto Flats 0 055 0 0 0 0 0 Tangle Lakes 00 0 0 0 0 0 Chena L. 0 Harding L 0 0ther laklakes 0 0thers 177 0 9 L37 227 168 Tota I 300 158 ?19 483 595 698 649 585

Source: llills 1979-85. --- means no data were avai'lable. a All chena River locations h,ere reported together in 1977-78. b The Chena River and tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 l4ile on the road. c The Chena River and tributaries from the nputh upstream to 25 Mile Chena Hot Springs Road. d A11 parts of Badger slough (sometimes callect chena slough).

~~670 Table 34. Fairbanks Area Coho Sa'lmon Sport Harvest, L977'84~~

~~Locati on L977 1978 t979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984~~

Chena R., Badggr S1.a 00 Upper Chena R.i 00 0 0 0 0 Lower Chena R^- 00 0 0 0 0 Badger Slough- 00 0 0 0 0 Chatani ka R. 0 0 00 0 0 0 13 Salcha R. 0 0 00 0 0 0 z6 Delta Clearwater R. 31 I?6 025 45 2I 63 57t Richardson Clearwater R. 0 0 0 Goodpaster R. 0 0 P'i I edriver Sl ough 0 0 Shaw Creek 0 Tanana R. 26 Other streams 0 26 Birch L. 0000 0 0 0 0 Quartz L. 0000 0 0 0 0 George L. 0000 0 0 0 0 Vol kmar L. 0 0 0 F'iel di ng L. 0 0 0 0 Minto Flats 0 0 0 0 0 0 Tangle Lakes 0 0 0 0 0 Chena L. 0 Harding L. 0 0ther lakes 84 169 0thers 63 13 25 42031 Total 94 139 25 67 45 52 L47 831

Source: Mills 1979-85. --- means no data were available. a All Chena River locations were reported together in 1977-78. b The Chena River and tributaries accessed from the Chena Hot Springs Road beyond 25 l4ile on the road. c The Chena River and tributaries from the mouth upstream to 25 Mjle Chena Hot Springs Road. d A11 parts of Badger Slough (sometimes called Chena Slough).

~~671 :ilo:qq . nNnnnoo6 |,aA€No o o.hnno ; d;JJjo;do'i dJ..;jjc; -;d;i d Ia o i Ps.Eq{iE{ ;$.43.qs. q 2 'otsoG6iligil. -.i*31:-' i J;.i_6;'u; i~~

~~6FOtFO Oao -ONONN6O FO FNtAAt O-N aOOgOFO6 €ro o ro 0 o c o |flo\o9tsooFaNROOFFa o9 qqs.q$.8 9€FONFNG ! eai 5i3 - FF. c\6t FFn (h6 o ::o3:6 -~~

J o F6tnaO O FFFaONA c;"j;q;ai.j d i , OO":9 i::ooF-lo I' o NO 6 o o TCOFFOF 4 9-6FNaO tsaOOaFN ao FQ6tFN o iDstfiRRc 2 60roo-t €o NFO oo o ;l Eo oNNFOFO FC o o(:6aFa ,1?.:1.:11 L o i::-or{ RCt o no 6 c o a o o *.933;8r e s8;3833 OO! o ^. ":9. q o_ o N66?d66 oo 2 OFttOt tOF Fn6 f o a 5 0 6Q ! o N6€NtsN o96 ao "t ddJid; i ooo N€ Fl Rt tn?6 t. I0 o 90! ItF N€ oog tsoo66-s3Rp33 c o o60 rt O - o6060- NO goF:6 o ;p:aL o EE.* F9€OOn o ooo N€| Nc) e>! dd;J;d i EOO NOO N€ 3'ar o FI o!o ots r35 ooNoao € FiO6OA ro6 F' a o o40 gE o- .PJ :5 6 z 9r@oN6 o-o FO @o-tto NO o NOoo t'!: o 6J'p -o9t9NO0 FFO o6 oo o 6@€ 5J.-eE- ! Rt g o a :I ! ! o 5.5!q 0 660 9-rr3! oL t 6-Fl o{F Oe a- OFNI 60N @N O6 U o o6ts OOF ii:;; a6 L dg! ! i ErlE 3 o oNo a":q o ,Q66 o oo€ | @oo 1q dono :bErt E Ettt; et66t o .oooU oNt ic ,osL N9O I ol aa € e 2o OFOI Foo Ol N6 a -faa o 6@io o9 60 €E:;g o F'r ! 0 ;.e::: a .f,oPo o OL EtEEb J o3ra o c CgLs-!-..4 Eo oro c9 o 3 o €.3936 's c o .o o ,g - a o !r g E. 3a c 9CEGO a o. I c E FO ,acaa @ e ae o ,c a oo et o .o 'ECCo o o o' oo o oo aa JI - ooaL 6 !( qle--a.o >o c a ,,scct J B, 9 €! Jg co OJ Eeeuo' o a .E.e o r9 n xoa o cra oa oo c o q9e a! a oa A E ! o- a 9l A o 0 ! 3- Br a o € !o C €aoo g

~~67? ADF&G. rss7. Annual report t.' l5ftl'*85ir. n. Juneau, AK. rz4 pp. . 1959. Annual report for 1959. Rept. 11. Juneau, Ak. 116 pp.~~

~~. 1985a. Alaska sportfishing regulations summary. Juneau, 32 pp. AK.~~

1985b. Sport fish survey. Div. sport Fish. Booklet. 43 pp. . 1985c. Regulations of the Alaska Board of Fisheries for and s-uosistence fishing i; the Arctic-yukon-Kuskokwinr -com-mercialRegion. 64 pp. Alt, K.T. 1973. A life history study of sheefish and whitefish in Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Ai d i n Fi Arin sh Reit. . prog. rept. Vol . L4. Proj . F-9-5 , Study R-II.

~~L977 Inventory. -. and -91!qlog_ing of sport fish and sport fish waters of western Alaska. _ ADF&G, Fed-. Aid in Fish Rest. comp'letion rept. Proj. F-9-9, Job G-I-p.~~

~~1979. A life history study of sheefish and whitefigh in Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 20. proj . F-9-11, Study R-I I.~~

~~-i 198-0... Invento-ry and cat_a_1-tr,ging of sport fish and sport ff sh waters of l.lestern Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aio in Fish Reit. Ann. performance rept. Vol. ZL. proj. F-}-IZ, Job G_I_p.~~

~~--lTa--. . 1981a.^ Life history study of sheefish in Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. in Fish Rest. and Anadromoui risrr studies. Ann. performance rept. Vo1.22. Proj. F-9-13, Jobs R-Ii-A and R-II-8.~~

1981b.. Inventory .and cg!l]9sins of sport fish and sport fish waters of l.lestern Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Redt. Ann. performance rept. Vol . ZZ. proj. F-g-13, Job G_I-p. 1982., Inventory and cataloging of sport parC fish and sport fish waters of l.lestern Alaska. B-: Innoko River and sheefish adaptability studies. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 23. Proj. F-9-14, Job G-I-p-8. 198j.. Invento_ry and cataloging-reo. of sport fish and sport fish waters of western Alaska. ADF&G. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 24. proj. F-9-15, Job G-I-p. 1994,., Inventory and _cata logi ry of sport f i sh and sport f i sh waters ot wesf,ern Alaska. Part B: Fisheries resource investigatic.rns

673 and sheefish adaptabi-'lity^ stu_dis. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish- Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 2q. proj. F_9_16, Job G-I-p_B. Andrews, R. n.d.^ Quality fishing management. One-leaf pamphlet. ADF&G, Junebun AK. Bendock, T.N. 1980. Inventory and cataloging of arctic area waters. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Res1. Ann. perf6rmance rept. vol.-zt. -p.oJ. F-9-L2, Job G-I-I. and ^!98?. -.Inventory cata_loging of arctic area waters.-pro]. ADF&G, Fecr. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. perfoimarice rept. vol. 23. F-t-i4; Job G-I-I. --. Bendock, T.N., and J. Burr. 1984._.Inventory and cataloging of arctic area waters ADF&G, Fed. Ai . d i n Fi sh REst.- Ann. perf#ma'nce rept. vol . 25. proj. F-9-16, Job G-I-I. Carlton, M. 1976. Delta River-Tangle Lakes fisheries inventory. BLM, Anchorage District Office. 39 pp-. Caulfield, R.A. 1983. Subisistence land use in Upper yukon-porcupine communities, Alaska. ADF&G, Div. subsistence. Tech. nap. to. ziI'pp-. Charnely, S. 1982. Resource use areas in the Aniak and 0skawalik river drainages. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence. Tech. pap. 50, +g tp. --eiruathbaluk. 1984. Human ecology of two central Kuskokwim communities: and Sleetmute.-- ADF&G, otv.- subsistence. iech. pap. g1. 391 pp. cheney, }l,.L, 1971. Life history investigations of northern pike in the Tanana River drainagg. ADF&G, Fed. Aii in Fish Rest. Ann. prog. rept. Vol. L2. Proj. F-9-3, Job R-III-8.

~~L972. Life history-Fed. investigations of northern pike in the Tanana --T:iver drainage. ADF&G, Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. prog. rept. Vol. 13. Proj. F-9-4, Job R-III-8.~~

Dlugokenski, c.,, T. wgg1.qt, and R. t^leide. 19g3. Kanektok River fishery investigations. USFWS. King Salmon Fisheries nesourie Station. kin"g Salmon, AK. Doxey, M. 1981. Population studies of game fish and evaluation of managed lakes in the Salcha District- with eriphasis on Birch -F;j.Lake. ADF&G; Fil. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol. zz. F-9-13, G.III-K. Job

~~. 1984- loPr.lation stuclie:.gf game fish and evaluation of managed in the Saicha niitiict with eilpiiisis on Birch Lake. ADF&G, Fed. -Efes~~

~~674 Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol. 24. proj. F-9-16, Job G-I I I -K.~~

Hallberg' J. 7978. Distribution, abundance and natural history of the arctic Arayling in the Tanana River drainage. ADF&G, Fed. Aia in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol. 19. prbj. F-9-10, sluoy n-r. L982. fopylation structure, migratory patterns and habitat requirements of the arctic arayling. Aorae,-Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 29. pr-oj. F-9-14, Job R_I_A. 1983. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with emphasis on managed waters - Fairbanks District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol. 24. proj. F-9-15, Joo G-III-H.

~~gmphasis on _managed waters - Fairbanks District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 25. proj. F_9_16, Job G_II_H.~~

Holmes, R.A. 1981.- Angler effo.rt,. exp.loitation, and values on the upper chena River, Alaska. M.s. Thesis,'univ. Alaska, Fairuinis. 11g-pt:'- 1983. fop1,lation structure, migratory patterns and habitat requirements of the arctic Arayling. nbfAe,-Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol .2q. prbj. F-9-15, Job R-I-A.

~~. 1984.. Population structure and dynamics of the arctic-in Arayling, emphasis on heavily fished stocks.' ADF&G, Fed. Aid Fish Rest. --I'riThAnn. performance rept. Vol. ZS. proj. F-9-16, Job R-I_A.~~

. 1985.. Population structure and dynamics of the arctic arayling triTh emphasis on heavily fished stocks.- ADF&G, Fed. nio tn Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 26. proj. F-g-Ll, Job R-I_4. _-.TFaG,Div.Subisistence.Tech.P,'.i08..igspp. 1985. lllild resource use and economy of Stony River village.

Kramer, M.J. 1_915. Inventory and cataloging of Interior Alaska waters Fairbanks District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid-in-Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Proj. F-9-7, Job G-I-G. - L976.. Invento-ry and _c_lta-toging" of Interior Alaska waters, River orainige. ADF&G, Fei. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. -Tfi'andalarperformance rept. proj. F-9-8, Job G-I-N. , L977. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with emphasis on managed lakes, Fairbanks Oiiirtct. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol. 1g. proj. F-g-9,'Joo g-ttt-H.

675 . 1978. Eva'luation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with emphasis on managed lakes, Fairbanks oiiiricf.'liett', rJo. nid in Fish - Rest. Ann. performance repr. vol. 19. proj. F-9-10, .loo G-III-H.

emphasis on managed lakes, Fairbanks District. ADF&G, FeO. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. vor. zo. proj. F-9-1t, ,loo G-III-H. . 1980. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters- and sport fish with -- emphasis on managed lakes, Fairbanks oiitiici. ndrat', r#. nio in Fish Rest. Ann. perfonmance rept. vol. zl. proj. F-g-lz, ,loo G-III-H. . 1981. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with emphasis on managed lakes-, Fairbanks oiiirict. noraO, rJo'. nio in Fish performance proj - Rest. Ann. rept. vor . zz. . F-9-13 , ._roo G-I I I-H. . 1986. Personal cormunication. Mgt. Coordinator, ADF&G, Div. Fish, Fai -*TF-drt rbanks. Kramerr M.J., and J. Hal1berg. 1982. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters ryith_emphasis on-managed waters - Fairbanks District. ADF&G, Fed. Ai; i n Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol . ?3 . proj . r -g-u, Jou G-I I I.H.

~~Marcotte' J.R., an9 T.L.. Haynes. 1985. Contemporary resource patterns j use n the- uppg!"_ Koyukuk region, Al aska. ADF&G, Dii/. Subi si stence. tecfr. Pap. 93. 122 pp.~~

Mills' M. L979, Statewide harvest study. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol . 20. pr6j. F-9-11, Job SW-I_A. ----Tnn. 1980. Statewide harvest study. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. performance rept. Vol . Zl. pr6j. f -g-LZ', Job SW-I-A.

~~1981a. Statewide harvest study - L979 data. ADF&G, Fed. TnRest.andAnadromousFishStudr1es.Ann.perrormanierept.Vol.Aid in 22. Proj. F-9-13, Job SW-I-A.~~

1981b. Statewide harvest study - 1980 data. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in sn Rest. and Anadromous Fi sh Studfes. Ann. performance rept. Vol. -Ti 22. Proj. F-9-13, Job Sh|-I-A. L982. Statewide harvest stucly - 1981 data. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Rest. and Anadromous Fi sh StuJies. Ann. p."rorrnunii rept. Vol . -TiTh23. Proj. F-9-14, Job Sl,l-I-A. 1983. Statewide harvest study - -rgg2 data. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Rest. and Anadrotori Fish Studies. Ann. performance rept. Vol. -Tish24. Proj. F-9-15, Job St,l-I-A.

676 . 1984. Statewide harvest study 1983 data. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Rest. and Anadromous Fi sh Studi es . Ann. performance rept. Vol. -TTsn25. Proj. F-9-16, Job Stll-I-A. ----Efr . 1985. Statewide harvesr study 1984 data. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Rest. and Anadromous Fish Stuiies. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 26. Proj. F-9-I7, Job SW-I-A.

Pearse, G.A. 1978. Inventory and cataloging of Interior waters with emph_asis on the upper Yukon and the Haui Road areas. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol. 19. proj. F-9-10, Job G-I-N.

Peckham, R.D. L979. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with emphasis on managed waters - Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fi sh Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol . z0 . proj . F-9-1 1 Job G-II,I-I. ,

. 1981. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with emphasis on managgd waters - Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol . 22. Proj. F-9-13, Job G-III-I. 1983. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with emphasis on managed waters - Delta District. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fjsh Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol 24. Proj. F-9-15, Job G-III-I. . 1984. Evaluation of Interior Alaska waters and sport fish with ernpnasis on managed waters - Delta Djstrict. ADF&G, Fed. Aid. in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. vol . zs. proj. F-9-16, Job G-III-I. R'idder, W.P. 1981. A study of a typical spring-fed stream of Interior Alaska. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann.- performance rept. vol. 22. Proj. F-9-13, Job c-III-G.

~~----FDF&G,. L982. A study of a typical spring-fed stream of Interior Alaska. Fed. Aio in Fish Reid. Ann. peitormance rept. vol .23. proj. F-9-14, Job G-III-G.~~

1983. A study-Fish of a typical spring-fed stream of Interior Alaska. ---4rf&_G! Fed. Aid in Reid. Ann. peitormance rept. vot . 24. proj. F-9-15, Job G-III-G. . 1984. The life history and population dynamics of exploited stocks of arctic gray'ling associated with the Delta and Richardson Clearwater ri_vers. ADF&G, Fed. Aid in Fish Rest. Ann. performance rept. Vol. 25. Proj. F-9-16, Job G-III-G.

~~Snell9I9y9, J. 1985. Kanektok River sport fishery creel census 1984. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish. Bethel, Ak. 9 pp.~~

677 Stokes, J. 7982. Subsistence salmon fishing in the upper Kuskokwim River system, 1981 and L982. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence. Tech. pap. 23. 29 pp. usDI.,n.d. Delta River draft river management plan. BLM, Anchorage D'istrict 0ffice. 40 pp. + maps.

~~. L975-1982. Delta River use estimates. Unpubl. rept. BLM, ---Gi?nnal I en Resource Area , Gl ennal I en, AK.~~

L982. Melozitna River final wild and scenic river study. USDI, ---l[ffional Park Service, Anchorage, Ak. 33 pp. USFWS. 1985a. Togiak National Wi'ldlife Refuge draft comprehensive conservation plan, wilderness review and environmental impact statement. USFWS, Region 7, Anchorage, AK.

~~. 1985b. Tetl in National l^Ji ldl ife Refuge draft comprehensive conservation pl an , wi I dernes5 review and envi ronmental impact statement. USFWS, Region 7, Anchorage, AK. 227 pp.~~

~~678 Subsistence and 0ther Local Uses of Resources in Western Alaska~~

This narrative presents data on the subs'istence use of fish and wildlife by residents of the Western Region (map 1). Most of the region's population is located in the 47 conmunities recognized in the 1980 census (taUte 1). A small number of people also reside at the Sparrevohn Air Force Station near Lime Village and in the currently unincorporated cormunitjes of Andreafsky and Georgetown. A'lthough virtually all of the area's population lives in these named places, a small number of people live at camps, homesteads and remote parcels, mines, and other locations throughout the genera'l use area. Data are drawn primari'ly from I'imi ted ethnographic I i terature avai lable for Yup'ik people in Western Alaska; Division of Subsistence files and technical reports; interviews with area Division of Subsistence staff and other experts; planning documents and reports produced by local, state, and federa'l government agencies; and reports by the Association of Village Council Pres'idents, the region's main Native nonprofit corporation, and by Nunam Kitlutsisti, the regional Native organ'ization most concerned with land use. The reader should consult references listed for this narrative for more detailed information on subsjstence uses of fish and game in this region.

Contemporary base'line research on subsistence harvest and use has yet to be completed jn all areas and communities of the Western Region (see Haynes and Andrews 1985 for a listing of Division of Subsistence research and reports). Particular data gaps exist for longitudinal estimates of the quantities of fish and wildlife used in each community in the region, distribution and exchange of fish and wildlife products, and subsistence-cash relationships. In addition, subsistence systems are known to change through time with changes in the distribution and abundance of harvested species, harvesting technology, food needs, and other factors. For all of these reasons, thia narrative shoul d be regu'l arly updated to i ncl ude the most current i nformation avai labl e.

~~I. LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENT A. Major Geographic Features~~

The region comprises the broad delta formed by the Kuskokwim and Yukon rivers and the surrounding mountain drainages. It includes the I and and water area defi ned by the Ca I i sta Corporati on regional boundarjes and other adjacent areas beyond these boundaries regularly used by area residents (map 1). These boundaries largely coincide with the area north of Cape Newenham, in which Yup'ik Eskimos are the predominant cultural group. In 'l addi ti on to and , ri vers , and mounta i n dra i nages , the regi-the on includes the marine waters and sea ice of Kuskokwim Bay, central Bering Sea, and Norton- Sound within about 100 mi of land

679 a G ! ,/t C I o o' c -tf o J a Io 3 o L Y ! oa g t g o a ! c 3to, .= $uN :I a o e a c o I ro a a a ! @ t t a ! Ol c a 3 t H I a a t a a a v) t a a C' ] a t o t a t a o =(u t 3 o a: E I ! Vrlol t a t g a a o o g a c a 2 t ! z o g a |r r3 (o a o B ;o a o ! a4 o a 3 t t.ri cb (u a t D a b t) lt t :e c C ta a o a t :t CO - : 3!s t EA 6r ( o - ;o .'(a b o ! !:- t i. o b E9E !o UI a l c -o >;'. t c a o bt J o E!' o +) oo aa; e "il c a t J ; g b .'t e c 3 o G J 3 3 tl ! C a ll. b a .- (o c C o a o "l: tn C a c c z I (, o .b a o t D c c C t a a (u c C 3 t ; I a (, c L C t a -o C a C a I| o .l a D o o a a t ro a a a .:Z o I a a a o c a L (U +) aa.S tt o OO2rog =

~~E(o~~

680 from Cape Newenham to just south of Unalakleet. Hunting for sea mammals cormonly takes place on theice itself, from the edge of shore-fast ice, in leads that open in pack ice, and in open ocean waters of the Bering Sea. The Kuskokwim and Yukon rivers are the largest river systems in the region. The main subsistence use of the riverine environments formed by these rivers takes place downstream of the junction of the Swift River with the Kuskokw'im River. The extensive delta areas at the mouths of these rivers and the flat tundra lake areas between these rivers and surrounding thejr lower tributaries form the dominant topographic characteristic of the region. In addition to these rivers and their tributaries, the Goodnews, Kanektok, Nuvavulnuk, and other rivers support salmon runs that are important parts of area subsistence systems. The waterways of the region are used extensively for traditional subsistence harvests and for transportation. In many parts of the region, interconnected lakes and small rivers permit safe water transportation between communities that are not connected by riverine transportat'ion routes. After freeze-up, the flat tundra and tundra lake terrain present few topographic obstacles to intercornmun'ity travel by snowmachine or dog sled.

The Akhlun and Kilbuck mountains in the south, the Kuskokwim Mountains in the east, and the Andreafsky Mountains and the Nulato Hills in the north comprise most of the high ground in the region and are areas regularly hunted or traversed for subsistence harvesting by region residents. Nun'ivak and Nelson islands, located in the central Bering Sea, are the largest islands in the region and support subsistence communities focused on marine resources.

B. Management Units Most of the land area intens'ive1y used for subsistence harvest of fish and game lies wjthjn Game Management Unit (eUU1 18 and Game Management Subunits (GMSs) 19A and 22A. Customary and traditional subsistence use of fish and game by residents of the region is a1so known to occur in portions of GMSs 17A,178,198,19C,19D, 21A, and 21E, and may occur in other as yet undocumented areas as well.

A'lthough some regionwide subsistence use area mapping has been done (Patterson 1974), comprehensive mapping of subsistence use areas in al'l of the communitjes of the region has yet to be undertaken. Subsistence resource use mapping has been accomp- lished by the Divjsion of Subsistence, using standard mapping methodologies, in Chuathbaluk, Hooper Bay, Kipnuk, Kwigillingok, Nunap'itchuk, Russian Mission, S'leetmute, Stony River, Tununak, and Tuluksak (see the accompanying subsistence use area maps and the

~~681 discussion below). More limited mapped data are available for Lime Village (Karj 1983), for lower Yukon connunities (Wo1fe Lg7g, 1981), and for other comnunjties (Calista 1985).~~

~~C. Cljmate and Vegetatjon~~

1. Climate. The reg'ion lies within a subarctic climat'ic zone Eh-tFEETerjzed by- cold winters, cool sumners, and Iittle precip'itation. Temperatures normal'ly range between -3oF and 6?"F, with extremes of around -44"F and 80"F. Precipitation averages about 20 inches per year and includes about 50 inches of snow (Burch 1984b). The temperature of coastal areas'lage is moderated by the Bering Sea. The climate of Lime Vi 1 and conrnuni t jes further up the Kuskokwim resembles that of Interior Alaska.

Because subsistence harvest activities usually depend on some form of transport, freeze-up and breakup mark the most important seasonal climat'ic changes with the region. Rivers and lakes generally are'ice-free for from five to six months of the year. Major land or water travel does not take place during breakup and freeze-up because of unsafe ice and water condi ti ons. The sea i s general 1y i ce-free from May to September, although some sea jce may persist in Norton Sound. The extent of pack ice south of Kuskokwim Bay is variable from year to year. Residents of coastal and 'island communities regularly hunt seals from shore-fast ice and in leads; walruses are hunted along the retreating edge of pack ice in late spring.

Climatic variabi1ity exerts a strong influence on subsistence activities. The timing of breakup and freeze-up, the presence or absence of leads in sea ice accessible from shore, variable snow conditions, dS wel I as periods of extreme cold winds and severe weather, determine what subsistence activities can be undertaken. These climatic conditions are not the same from year to year; the seasonal round of subsistence harvest activities (figs. 1-20) reflect this variability (see Truett et al. 1983; Truett and Raynolds 1983).

2. Vegetation. Most of the region is treeless tundra with a ground cover that includes lichens, mosses, short grasses and sedges, and dwarf shrubs. Numerous spec'ies of berries and other edible plants are harvested from this vegetative zone (see tables 6-12 for a listing of species known to be used.)

A1 though shrub wi 1 1 ows, cottonwoods, and alders are found along rivers and creeks in the lower Kuskokwim drainage, spruce forest extends downriver only about as far as Tuluksak. Upriver from Ka 1 s kag , the forest area w'idens .

682 Aniak and other upriver communities are located in comparatively dense forests of primarily black spruce, w'ith some birch. A similar sjtuat'ion exists in the Yukon drainage, where true forest extends only about at far as Russian Mission. In the lower river areas, people have traditiona'l1y depended on driftwood and fallen trees carried downriver from foiested areas during breakup as a source of wood for fue1, construction, and crafts.

~~II. HISTORY AND PATTERNS OF HUMAN ACTIVITY A. Origina'l Habitation of the Region~~

Dumond (1984a, 1984b) summarjzes the prehistory and archaeological record of human habitation in the area now inhab'ited by Yup'ik Eskimos. The area was probably 'inhabited from at least 10,000 years ago to about 7,000 years ago by people of the Paleo-Arctjc Tradition. From about 7,000 years ago to about 4,000 years ago people of the Northern Archajc Tradition lived in the area. This tradition was followed by the Arctic Small Tool Trad'ition, 4'000 to 3,000 years dgo, and by the Norton Tradition, from 3'000 to 1,000 years ago. The Thule Tradition began in about A.D. 1000 and continued untiI contact w1th European and American explorers and traders occurred in the 1800's. The earliest occupation sites in the archaeological record are found sf ightly outside the region: to the north at Cape Denbigh in Norton Sound, to the southeast in the Naknek River drainage, and to the south at Ugashik on the Alaska Peninsula. Norton Traditional sites are found on Nunivak Island, and Thule Tradition sites have been documented on Nunjvak Island and near Hooper Bay. The archaeological record documents the lengthy human habitat.ion of the area and, more importantly, the cultural roots of the region's contemporary Yup'ik inhabitants. The cultural ancestors of present-day Western Region Yup'ik Eskimos were living in and utilizing the subs'istence resources of the region since about A.D. 1000.

The earliest modern records and reports concerning the peop'le of the Western Region were wri tten by explorers, traders, and missionaries post'1840. Zagoskin's account (1967), based on data gathered jn 1842-1844, and Nel son's account ( 1983) based on 1877-1881 data, present some of the best data available' for the early contact period. Nelson's book describes the materjal cultirre collections he obtajned while living jn the region from L877 to 1881. Table 3 presents a listing of early ethnographic documents concerning Yup' ik peoples. The written record of the early historjc period jn the Western Region is very thin when compared to published reports of ear'ly

683 contact with many other Alaska Natives. Although Russian fur trad'ing produced many early records for Kodiak istand uno for southeast Alaska, and commercial whal ing produced records for northwest Alaska peoples, no comparable atlention was paid to the central -Yup'fk area. This lack of early information on the area,s population, social organization, ani subsistence particularly rvsl*' i, problematic because_ major changes in the area may have occurred following the smal'lpox epidemic of 1g37 to 1g39. Burch (_1984b) feel s that mg!.y imp!rtand features of the general cultural context were significantly changed as a result of the social.disruption and decl'ine in population attendant upon tnts epidemic. Intersocial warfare ceaiei abrupily at this iime,-ano changes in the or_g_anization of the area ihto societies may have taken p]ace as well. social organization of the yup'ik iu"tturat area before the ep'idemi c may have resembl ed that ilescr.ibed for northwest Alaska in the early nineteenth century (Burch lgzg).

Because significant changes occurred in the yup,ik cultural area before- good description was undertaken, pi-oblems arise in determining the number and location of trailtional societies. several researchers have _attempted to reconstruct the precontact distrjbution from the I imited historical record and through interview data (Dall 1970b, 1977; Fienup-Riordan'and 19g4; pratt rgg4; shinkwin and Pete 1984a). shinkwin pete (19s4) eiamineo historical sources and interviewed elders from io*rnities.Jata throughout the region regarding societal groupings. _ 'innib.itingrrr'eir and analysis tent_atiyely. r ist 23. named grolps whaf is now the western Region (taute 4). Theie named groups "reprlient the 19 historical and extant yup'ik Eskimo regional g"oupJ o, societies of the western Region. The named soc-ieties ino'fneir approximate geographical location are presented in map 2.

Pre-1840, each s-o-ciety was genera'l1y endogamous and represented a unit in war. Al.tho.ugh a-lliances,.- trading, and teasting might occur between societies, these bonds were rioi nearly as st-rong'as those within a given society (snintwin and pete" rg-aqo).- "rne societal .groupings were also'important with respect to social organization and subsistence. Intrasocietal kinship and social relationships generally were stronger than jntersocietal ones. To some extent members of a society followed similar subsistence strategies within relativery distinct eco'logical n.iches and utilized common territories for subsistence harvests.

~~B. Ear'ly Contact Period~~

Local trade, in which fish and game-Eskiiro products were traded between societies in the region or with and Indian groupi oriiia. thg region appears to have been a regular feature "of inaigenors subsistence systems in the yukon-Kuikokwim del ta area. "-Nor. long-distance trade began to take place in the last half of in. eighteenth century subsequent to hussian movement into eastern

684 S'iberia. Trade flowed from the Siberian Chukchee area to the main Yup'ik area through King Island, Stuart Island, and other middlemen. This trade 'involved the exchange of Alaskan furs, which, after passing through many middlemen, often were destined to reach the Chinese or European market in exchange for Siberian reindeer skins, iron, tobacco, tea, and limited manufactured items. This trade probably increased in magnitude during the early Russian period (Black 1984, Wolfe 1979). The Yup''ik cultural area, including the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta, began to be expl ored by Russi ans 'in the ear'ly 1800' s . Korsakovskiy sighted the mouth of the Kuskokwim in 1819 and established a small post, called Aleksandrovskiy, in Bristol Bay in that same year. Vasil'ij Khromchenko and Adolph K. Etolin led a Russian-America Company expedition to survey the coast between Cape Newenham and Norton Bay beg'inning'in L82I and contacted Eskimo subsistence all along this coast. Ivan Ya. Vasilev and Fedor Kolomakov explored parts of the interior of the area between 1829 and 1832, and Kolomakov established a post at Kolomakov Redoubt in iB32 in the middle Kuskokwim. These explorations and the establishment of posts served to involve the Kuskokwim area in Russian fur trading.

Mikhailovskiy Redoubt, later known as St. Mjchael, was establ'ished in 1833 opposite Stuart Island in Norton Sound. This opened the way for Russian penetration of the Yukon the following year. The Yukon River drainage and much of the Kuskokwim and Koyukuk drainages were later explored by Lt. Lavrentii Zagoskin from 1842 to 1844 (VanStone 1984a, Zagoskin i967). Trade expanded during the years of active Russian presence in the area from 1833 to 1867. It is important to note, however, that the changes in Yup'i k material cul ture due to trade were re'latively minor. Except for the'introduction of some firearms after 1850, some metal implements, and caribou skins for clothing, little change took place. Subsistence patterns also were not changed significantly, possibly because the returns from trapping were not that substantial under the Russian system. Most trapping during this time period was integrated into existing seasona'l rounds of harvest activity, and trapping effort di d not i ncrease markedly. In parti cu1 ar, aggressive winter trapp'ing for beaver, land otter, and other furbearers was not common (Wo1fe 1979).

After the purchase of Alaska in 1867, the fur trade changed dramatical'ly. Fur prices increased significant'ly, and the introduction of steamship freight service brought many more goods into the region at a reduced cost. These and other factors may have influenced peop'le of the Yukon-Kuskokwim del ta area to incorporate a winter trapping season 'into the seasonal round, j changi ng a s I ack season nto a season of acti ve harvesti ng .

685 Abrupt change, at least in cornrnerce, took place on the Yukon River with the discovery of gold nearby on the Forty Mile River jn 1886 and with the Klondike strike in 1897, At one time, over 100 rjver steamers were plying Yukon waters (hJolfe 1979).

III. POPULATION Estjmates for the population of the reg'ion at the time of contact are f ragmentary because they are based on I'imi ted contact wi th peop'le 'living a'long the coast or explorat'ion routes (0swalt 1967, 1980). The earliest estimates for many groups were made jn 1880 census work, after numerous epidemics and severe social disruption had drastical'ly lowered population size. After closely examining the data available for the Yukon River Yup'ik population, l,lolfe (I979) estimates that the society's population was about i,781 at the time of contact with the Russian subsistence in 1833, about 7,449 in 1880, about 2,096 in 1960, and about 2,722 in 1972. These estimates are roughly in line with population fluctuat'ions documented for other Alaskan Esk'imo groups (see Burch 1978).

Eskimo groups usually suffered severe declines in population following contact with Russian subsistence and Euro-Americans because of the introduction of European diseases into virgin populations and because of social disorganization. The severity of one of these epidemics is described by Nelson (1983); hlolfe (ig8Za) analyzes the effect of measles and influenza epidemics 'in western Alaska in 1900. Tubercu- los'is was a major area health problem through the 1950's. The area popul at j on only recently has begun to recover from the popu'lat'ion decline experienced over the past 150 years. As a very rough estimate, the current reg'iona1 population is probably about what it was at the time of contact (Haynes and Andrews 1985, pers. comm.; Wolfe i985). The centralization of the regiona'l popu'lation into permanent year-round communities has been a major demographic change in the reg'ion. This change was progressive during the 1850-to-1950 period. At the time of contact, Native societies occupied distinct territories, but extended fam'i1y group units moved between multip'le camps and vi1'lages wjthin the societal territory. The success'ion of camps followed the seasonal round of subsistence harvest activities. Some camps, spring fishing and muskrat trapping camps, for example, m'ight consist of single harvesting units. Sunrner fishing camps might include a small number of rel ated extended fami I i es . trli nter I ocati ons usua 1 1y had 1 arger concentrations of people with more permanent dwellings and men's community houses. Some permanent conrmunities were established around early trading posts and administrative centers, wh'ich themselves were often located at important Native settlement sites. The establishment of churches and schools further encouraged population concentration. Table 5 presents recent populatjon data for Western Reg'ion communities based on United States decennial censuses. The region's population has 'increased almost 70% over the 1960-to-1980 t'ime period and, because the

686 population is very young, is 1ike1y to experience a similar rate of growth in coming years. Very little of this growth has been the result of migration into the region. The excepti-on is Bethel, which has become an important regional center and tripled in size over this time period, primarily by immigration of persons coming from wjthin and outside the Wes.tern fleg_ion. Bethel was a much smal l-er community, with a 1950 popu'lation of 651 and a 1939 population of 376, on]y si ighily lqtgqt than other important Western Regfon cormunities in t-hose years (Ro11.ins 1978). In most communities, almost all of th; permanintty resident population_ consists predominantly of yup'ik Eskimos. Non- Natives present include school teachers and spousei of persons born in the area. Bethel and Aniak, which functions as a reg'i6na1 center for central Kuskokwjm communities, contain the only large ioncentrations of non-Natives in thjs part of the region. Mbuntaln village and st. Mary's, located on the Yukon River, have significant non-Native popula- t'ions as well.

A number of the region's communjties have grown quite large for subsistence-based communities. Eight communjties, excluding- Bethel , had populations approaching 500 persons in the 19gb census. The region's population h'istory has great relevance to the subsistence harvest and use of natural resources. Although the region's population 'is presently increasing, the overall quantit=ies of fish and witOtite resources used for subsistence and the pressure put on these resources may continue to be less than that of the precontact period. As discussed above, the present area population is 'foodprobably close to thg -population at time of contact. biven equal ieeds from subsistence harvests, about the same overall iluantity of fish and wildlife need to be harvested now as in 1g0d to ieed the human popul ati on.

Ih. re-ce1! replacement of working dog teams with snowmachines has dramatica'l1y reduced the need to harveit and process large quantities of salmon, sea1, and other wild resources foi dog food.- Ih- studies done in Kivalina, a northwest Alaska community, th; overall amount and composition of subsistence harvest required to maintain dog teams were estimated to be about the same as that needecl to maintain the human population in 1965 to 1966 (Burch 1985).

Good transportat_ion systems and the availability of alternate food resources are related factors relevant to subsistence demand. In the precontact era, a localized food shortage ' potentially- meant famine and starvation (0swa_'l t_ 1907, Nel son. 1983) . Given thi s potentiaily fatal outcome' successful subsistence .harvesting strategies'called for, among other things, the maintenance of a buffer-stock oi subsistence f6ods ai insurance against possible harvest failure. This buffer stock was essential to survival but_might not be consumed either as human or Oog food in a.typica] year. Good transportation systems mean that subsistence foods can more easily move from areas oi abundance to areas of scarcity, and alternate food resources have elimjnated the possibility

~~687 of famine. These factors may act to reduce the magnitude of subsistence harvests by 'lessening the need to keep a sizable stock of insurance food on hand.~~

IV. REGIONAL ECONOMY The comrnunities of the region have been found to have mixed, subsistence-based economies. The economies of t,'|estern Region comnunities include a "mix" of subsistence harvest and use of fish and game with cash-generating economic act'ivities. In approximate order of importance, the cash-generating economjc activities within the region include employment by local, state, and federal government agencies, related employment in social service occupations, commercial fishing for salmon in the Yukon and Kuskokwim rivers and for herring and halibut in coastal areas, and employment in sales and services. Trapping provides income to some area residents, although prices for most.furs are currently depressed (tlolfe 1984b). There i s very I imited emp'loyment generated by a private business sector, which is essentially nonexistent in most vi1lages.

Employment outside the region accounts for an important share of earned income for certain villages, whose residents periodically leave the area for work jn urban Alaska. Some of this labor migration is on a temporary or seasonal basjs; some regional res'idents work on fire- fighting crews in sunmer months. Some residents of Kuskokwim Bay and thg lower Kuskokwim River communities participate in the Bristol Bay commercial salmon fishery. 0ther area residents spend Iong periods of time away from the Western Region and may return when they have achieved enough financial security to allow them to come back to home communities. Most typica'l'ly, however, area residents 'living outside the region return periodical'ly during the year to participate in local seasonal subsistence harvests. Table 2 presents income data for Western Region conmunities for 1978, 1981, and 1982 based on federal jncome tax returns. Although the general economic condition of these conrnunities has improved in the past decade, income levels remain exceedingly low. _The_average taxable income per return for Chuathbaluk in 1982 was only 24% that of the Alaska average; the average taxable jncome for most of the reg'ion's communjties was less than 50% that of Anchorage in 1982-

Cash-generating activities are very limited in the region, and the cost of living is extremely high. Food-basket data for Bethel indicate that costs of purchased food are about L65% that of Anchorage prices (Stetson 1981-1985). Food prices in village stores are significantly higher than in Bethel and probably run about ?00% of Anchorage prices foi the limjted stock available. Gasoline costs as much as $3.00 per gallon in 1985 in outlying commun'ities (Pete, pers. conrm. ). Some of itre Oiscrepancy between the cash needs of reg'ional residents and earned income is compensated for by subsidies and grants administered through

~~688 state and federal programs, such as energy and rent assistance; often these are administered by the Association of Village Council Presj- dents, the reg'ion's largest nonprofit corporation.~~

The economies of Western Region communities continue to be subsistence-based in that subsistence harvest and use of fish and wildljfe are the most consistent economic activities that take place during the year and because regional residents continue to rely on local fish and wildlife resources for most of the protein and fat they consume (Durrenberger 1984). Divisjon of Subsistence research throughout the state has identified eight characteristics of mixed, subsistence-based economies (hlolfe et al. 1984). Intensive research has described some aspects of the mixed subsistence-based economies in several Western Region communities (Andrews and Peterson 1983; Charnley 1983; Fienup-Riordan 1983a, 1983b; Stickney 1985; Wolfe 1979, 1981; Wolfe et al. 1984). These characterist'ics, which apply to Western Region communities, are as follows (t,'lo1fe et al. 1984): 1. Conrnunity-wide seasonal round of fishing and hunting activities for subsistence use: subsistence harvest and use varies seasonally with the biological distribution and abundance of fish and game species (fi9s. 1-20) (Mauss and Beuchat 1979). 2. Large diet breadth relative to fish and wildljfe species available: a large proportion of avajlable food species is utilized (fiss. 1-20).

3. High overall harvest and use level: resources harvested make a significant contribution to the support of individual households and of the community as a whole. Fish and wildlife supply most of the meat, fish, and fow'l used on a household and community basis. 4. Noncommercial distribution and exchange networks: harvested fish and wi I dl i fe are di stri buted between househol ds and between commun i ti es .

5. Traditional systems of land tenure and use rights: customary 1aw defines access to resource harvest areas and si tes, such as traplines, fish camp sites, set net sites, and community hunting areas, and regulates the resource harvest activjties by members of the local social group. 6. Time allocation: a significant amount of time is spent harvesting and processing subsistence fish and wjldlife. 7. Complementary cash and subsistence activjties: cash income is used to purchase suppl ies needed for subsi stence hunting and fish'ing; cornmercial fishing boats and gear may be used for subs'istence. Subsi stence harvest and use commonly compensate for uncertain cash income and difficult logistics for imported food.

689 B. Domestic mode of product'ion: the organization of subsistence pfoduction is primarily around extended kinship groups and alliances, which differs markedly from the organization of production for a market (Sahlins 1972). l/ TRANSPORTATION

~~A. Transportation to and from the Region~~

The major means of personal travel to and from the region are by air. Aniak, Bethel, and sometimes St. Mary's have been connected by regularly scheduled jet flights to Anchorage in most recent years. Both scheduled and charter bush flights serving other communities in the region operate from these regional f1 ight centers.

Frequent travel by snowmachine across the regional boundaries to neighboring vi 1 lages takes place during months when there is adequate snow cover, partjcu'larly in March and April, when days are long and weather general'ly less severe.

Most fuel, building material, vehicles, food staples, and other items are transported into the region in the surnmer months, when barge service to coastal conmunities and to communities in the Yukon-Kuskokwim drainages is possible. Ice is genera'l1y present in the Bering Sea well into May, and freeze-up of sea routes can occur as early as the end of September. The Kuskokwim and Yukon rivers are generally ice-free from mid May through mid 0ctober. This means that there is a relatively t'ight window when barge shipments can reach distribution points in the Western Region.

Many of the region's cormunities, particu'lar1y the delta and upper Kuskokwir,'r communities, cannot be reached by ocean-going vessels or barges. Freight shipments for these communities need to be broken down after arriving in the region and sent on smaller vessels. This extra handling of shipments adds to the already high cost of freight entering the region.

During other months of the year, any goods coming into the region must arrive by air freight. This includes all fresh foodstuffs and parts, equipment, and supplies that are not stocked in Bethel or the smal ler regiona'l centers.

~~B. Transportatjon within the Region~~

Surface travel between communities in the region is by snowmachine from freeze-up to breakup when there is snow cover and by skiff or boat in months when there is open water. A m'inimally equipped household needs to have at least'least one snowmach'ine and sled for use during frozen months and at one skiff or boat with an

690 outboard motor for water trave'|. More adequately equipped or larger families usually have more than one operating snowmach'ine and more than one outboard motor. Because these pieces of equipment recejve heavy use, frequent repait'and replacement are necessary. Purchase and maintenance costs of these essential vehicles are major components 'in household budgets.

Dog teams continue to be mainta'ined by some regional residents who use them for racing and for local transportation. Prior to the introduction of snowmachines jn the mid 1960's, virtually all households maintained work'ing dog teams for wjnter travel and transport. Scheduled small-p1ane flights and air taxi charters have become jncreasingly common means of intercommunity personal travel within the region. Given the high cost of fuel and maintenance of persona'l vehicles, air travel may be the most eco- nomical mode of travel between many communities. Large quantitjes of goods, fuel oil and gaso'line, foodstuffs, and equipment are transported w'ithin the reg'ion by sma11 barge during the open-water months and by air during most of the year. Small barges or small freighters are able to make summer deliveries to all of the region's communjties. Air freight and the postal service are used during winter months. Snowmachines, skiffs, and boats are used by regiona'l resjdents to transport personal goods from Bethel and the smaller regional centers to home communities and to transport supplies to camps and other subsistence harvest or process'ing sites.

~~VI. USE OF FISH AND GAME AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES~~

A. Historic Patterns of Resource Use Descriptions of patterns of subsistence use jn the Western Reg'ion for the early part of the nineteenth century are based on recon- structions from historical records and reports and on the oral tradition of contemporary subsistence harvesters. Burch (1984b) has I i sted most of the important early hi stori cal accounts (taU'te 3). Based on Divjsion of Subsistence research in the area, we know that contemporary subsistence patterns vary greatly within the Western Region; consequently, it would be des'irable to have good descriptions for each of the 18 or so societies that were present at time of contact (see map 2). Unfortunately, this research has been done for only a limited number of areas within the region.

Lantis (1946, 1984), 0swalt (1963b, 1966, 1967), and VanStone (1984b, 1984c) present limited descriptions of early subsistence patterns for Nun'ivak Island, the lower Kuskokwim River, and the general Central Yup'ik cultural areas, respectively. hlolfe (1979) provides the most comprehensive reconstructiorr of ear'ly contact

~~691 d~~

~~".*f KUIOLUARMIUT~~

~~OIP'NOAYARMIUT / I MARAYARMTUT,'t b.~~

~~NAPARYAARilIUT-5 'rouuu'u,~~

~~u$luI etuoi~~

~~utUtt KusouovAautur~~

~~NAl I~~

~~50 50 Mlles~~

~~Map 2. Contemporary (1983) central Yup''ik Eskirno Societjes (Shinkwin and Pete 1984b).~~

692 subsi stence patterns for the Iqugmiut and Pastul'i rimiut, two Yup'ik societies living on the lower Yukon River (see map 2). The descrjption below is drawn from Wolfe's work and is representative of two types of subsistence systems on the lower Yukon Rjver. It should be noted, however, that these are only two examp'les. Although members of all soc'ieties'in the reg'ion depended totally on subsistence harvest of fish and game at the time of contact, the seasonal round of act'ivit'ies, species harvested, and movement from camp to camp varied sign'ificantly from society to society. 1. Iqugmiut subs'istence. The Iqugmiut I ived inland, w'ith winter vi1'lages sjtuated along the Yukon River. The present community of Russian Missjon'is located in the heart of the territory used by Iqugnriut (see map 1). In the ear'ly 1800's, the Iqugmiut used four main camps during the year as bases for subsistence harvests (see table 5). Iqugmiut relied most heavily on fish for subsistence. Fjsh was eaten dipped in seal or belukha oil obtajned through trade or oil rendered from burbot and lamprey livers. 0ther spec'ies harvested included beavero migratory birds, caribou, land otter, mink and other furbearers, ptarmigan and other small game, and the occasional seal or belukha that came up the Yukon R'iver. In summer, Iqugmiut established fish camps along channels of the Yukon River. Camps were set up at good fishing locations and were probably composed of extended fami'ly units. Shee- fish, whitefish, and smelt were the first species harvested at fish camps. Sheefjsh and whitefjsh were taken with drift nets made of willow fiber or sinew. Smelt were taken with dip nets. Chinook salmon were harvested during the major run in ear'ly to rniddle June and were taken with drift nets made from seal skin, dip nets, and somet'imes w'ith leisters and leister-type arrows. When water cond'itions permi tteci, f i sh traps were used for chinook and other salmon species. Successive large runs of chum and coho sa'lmon were fished from late June to September. These species, which probably constituted the bulk of the summer fjsh catch, were taken with fish traps set 'into weirs. Basket traps constructed of spruce spfints and fish fences were employed. in deeper water where traps could not be used, set nets made from willow or seal skin were placed in river eddies. The bulk of the summer salmon harvest was dried for later consumption and trade. Using smoke as part of the preservation process was possibly borrowed from the Russian subsistence in the late 1800's. Dried fish were traded, usually 'in fall, with coastal people for seal and belukha meat and o'i1, carjbou and reindqer skins, and other fish and wi'ldl ife products not available 1oca11y.

693 In September and 0ctober and, depending on the timing of freeze-up, sometimes into November, Iqugmiut families lived at trail camps along the tundra rivers to the south of the Yukon River. Here they set basket traps and small-mesh nets to intercept the migration of small whitefish and blackfish. These fish were frozen or air dried for later use. Some caribou were taken at thjs time of year, usually with snares and less frequently with spears and arrows. A variety of bai ted and tossi ng snares were used for hares , ground squirrel, muskrat, wo1f, wolverine, and, less frequently, for lynx and fox. Mink and land otter were taken in modified blackfish traps, shot with arrows, or run down and clubbed. From about November to about mid March Iqugmiut returned to their winter villages along the Yukon River. This season was one of relative leisure and the time of year when group ceremonies frequently took p1ace. In early November in some years, thousands of lampreys were caught in fish traps. In early winter, fish traps were also used for burbot, pike, and whitefish. Nets set under the ice for migrating sheefish were also employed. Beavers $rere sometimes caught with nets set near their dams or hunted. Ptarmigan and hare were also hunted in mid winter. Fish traps were sometimes set in the ice again in late February when food supplies were low. In March or April, Iqugmiut families left the winter village for spring camps on the tundra, where they remained unt'il 'late May or the beginning of June. Caribou hunting and the use of traps in streams for blackfish, whitefjsh, muskrat, and land otter were important spring harvesting activit'ies. Migratory waterfowl were harvested, often in great numbers, using b'ird spears, bows and arrows, and bolas. Molting birds were taken in community drives us'ing fishing nets for capture. At spring camp, men dried wj I low thread and prepared fish nets for the coming salmon season. 2. Pastulirim'iut subsistence. The Pastulirimiut lived around ukon River in the area where the Yukon enters Pastol Bay. The present community of Pastolik i s I ocated in the heart of the terri tory used by Pastulirimiut (see map 1). In the early 1800's, the Pastulirimiut used five main camps during the year as bases for subsistence harvests (see table 5). Similar'ly to the Iqugmiut, the Pastulirimiut moved to fish camps in early June to be closer to salmon harvesting sites. The main Pastul irimiut fish camps stretched along the seacoast near the mouth of the Pastolik River. Smelt were the first fish to appear and were harvested with dip nets. Chinook salmon fishing took place in early June, followed by fishing for successive runs of chum and coho salmon. Most salmon were caught with short set nets in shallow Pastol Bay.

694 Nets were p'icked using kayaks. As with the Iqugmiut, the smaller salmon species comprised the bulk of the fish harvest, most of whjch was dried for winter use. Ringed and bearded seals were taken in early surnmer vrith large-mesh nets in Pastol Bay. In mid July or early August, the Pastulirimiut moved to the winter village to drive belukha whales with kayaks in the shal I ows at the mouth of the Pastol 'i k Ri ver. Harvested whales were butchered at the winter vi1'lage and the fat boiled into oil for domestic consumption and for trade. Bird eggs were collected in early summer from nesting areas near winter communities, and, later or, molting birds were harvested by driving them into enclosures with boats or hand-held nets. During September and 0ctober, prior to freeze-up, ringed, spotted, and bearded seals were hunted from kayaks a'long the coast or in the Yukon River estuaries. Seals were also taken with nets in Pastol Bay. In September, small-mesh nets and fish traps were set in streams near the winter vi1'lages for blackfish, burbot, and whjtefish. Burbot were also seined during this season. Caribou were taken wjth snares or hunted with bow and arrow. Fall camps were establ'ished for only a few weeks during late August or September in berry-picking areas around the smaller rivers. Several moves were made as local berry patches were exhausted. Net fishing for blackfjsh and whitefish and trap fishing for burbot also took place at this time. As with the Iqugmiut, migratory b'irds were harvested with bows and arrows, bjrd spears, and bolas and stored for winter use. Before freeze-up, some men traveled upriver to trade seal and caribou skins and sea mammal oil. Most Pastulirimiut returned to their winter villages by late 0ctober and remained there untjl late Apri'1. Gill nets for whitefish and traps for burbot and blackfish were set under the i ce of streams , near wi nter v'i 1 1ages. In ear'ly wi nter, jigging for burbot, saffron cod, northern pike, sheefish, and whitefish was productive. Fish nets and traps were tended until mid December. Late winter was not a very productive subsistence season. Some hare and ptarmigan were snared around the winter vi11ages, and beaver, caribou, wolverine, and wolf were occasiona'l'ly taken during this time. Bearded and ringed seals were hunted from kayaks and at the edge of sea 'ice 'intermi ttently f rom February to early May, i f supplies of seal meat and oil became low. During May, many Pastul irimiut fami I'ies establ ished spring camps along Apoon Pass.near the present community of Hamilton. The Pastulirimjut called these "muskrat camps" because spring muskrat were taken jn traps or hunted on the

695 tundra rjvers and lakes. Hunting migratory waterfowl , beginning 'in late April, was another primary purpose of spring camps, which were located near flyways. Some seals were also taken at this time. 3. Inqugmiut and Pastuljnimi\rt sub:_istelcg harveqt levels. Aftnough no measurement of actual subsistence harvest of either society took p'lace 'in the early 1800's, rough estimates of total harvest can be made. Based on what is known about contemporary subsistence harvests (see below), Iqugmiut and Pastul j rjmiut probably harvested somewhere between 1,000 and 1,500 1b food weight of subsistence foods per cap'ita per year for human consumption. The amount of subsistence harvest needed to support working dog teams was probably about the same as that needed for human consumption.

~~B. Contemporary Patterns of Resource Use~~

Numerous studjes including data relevant to subsistence use of fish and game by the Central Yup'ik of the Western Reg'ion have been conducted in the last 40 years. Burch (1984b) has listed most of the important social science research that has been comp'leted (table 6). These sources should be consulted to gain an 'in-depth understanding of the Central Yup'ik area. Much of the earlier ethnographic work done in the Western Region has come from an academjc tradition and has not been a'imed directly at policy questions. Lantis (1947), 0swalt (1963a, 1966, !967), and VanStone (1967) are examples of this orientation. Studies by Fienup-Riordan (1982, 1983a) and Wolfe (1981) were done as.and part of research on potential sociocultural impacts from oil gas exploration and development that may take place within the region or in the adjacent continental shelf. Most of the recent research most relevant to subsistence has been done by the Division of Subsistence over the past five years. Coverage of subsistence use in t,Jestern Region communities is not complete, however, despite the work comp'leted in recent years. Comprehensive studies of subsistence have been completed for the 'connnunities (Charnley 12 of Chuathbaluk and Sleetmute 1984) ' Hooper Bay and Kwigi'llingok (stickney 1985), Lime Village (Kari 1983), Stony River (Kari 1985) , Alakanuk, Emmonak, Kotl ik' Mountain Viilage, and Sheldon Po'int (Wolfe L979, 1981), and Alakanuk, Sheldbn Point, and Scammon Bay (Fienup-Riordan 1983a). Research is nearing completion for the communities of Nunapitchuk and Russi an Mi ssion and i s underway at Ki pnuk and Tununak (Andrews, pers. conrn. ). No thorough subsistence research has taken p'lace in the other 35 communities in the Western Region, although short-term studies have been conducted in Goodnews Bay and Quinhagak (Wolfe et al. 1984). Some limited data for other conununities are available. in planning documents as well (Haynes and Andrews i9B5) and under preparation by the Yukon Del ta

~~696 Nationa'l Wildlife Refuge planning team. In addjtjon, a land use mapping project.is scheduled for Aniak, crooked creek, and Red Oevit in'the spring of 1986 (Haynes, pers. comm.).~~

Comprehens'ive baseline mapped data depicting the territory used for'subsiStence harvest by indjvidual blestern Region communities are available for the following 11 communjties: Chuathbaluk' Hooper Bay, Kipnuk, Kw'ig'il l'inok, Nunapitchuk, Plat'inum, Russian Mission, Sleetmut, Stony R'iver, Tuluksak, and Tununak. These mapped data depict the extens'iveness of contemporary sybgistence hai.vest areas by species harvested. The Reference Map Atlas that accompanies thi-s volume contains standard reference maps us.'ing these'data. Comprehensive subsjstence mapp'ing has not been done in the other 36 commun'it'ies in the region. Limited mapped data are available for Alakanuk, Emmonak, Kotl'ik, Mountain Village' Scammon Bay, Sheldon Pojnt, and Stebbins (Fienup-Rio_rdan 1:982, 1983a, 1983b, 1984; Wolfe I979,1981) and for Lime Village (Kari 1983); other mapped data for Western Region communities are 0n file with Calista, the regional corporation formed under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. 1. Species harvested and used. All known resource harvest is however, discussion of harvest that i s current'ly not permi tted by regul ation does not constitute endorsement of such harvest by the Department of Fish and Game. The range of species harvested by individual communities appears to include virtually all the edjble species present within the territory used by that community. The following tables are presented to provide an indication of the range of species that have been used for food, clothing, shelter, and craft matepia'l w'ith'in the regjon in the contemporary period. Table 7 presents a listing of the fish and wildlife resources most commonly harvested for subsistence 'in the Western Reg'ion, based on cont'inuing Div'ision of Subsistence research (Haynes and Andrews 1985). Tables 8 and 9 present lists of selected fish and wildlife species used by Hooper Bay ald Kwigillingok residents based oh Stickney's research (1985); table 10 presents lists of species used by residents of Stebbins and the Yukon delta area based on Wolfe's research (1979, 1981). Tables 11 and 12 present data on use of plant species for Hooper Bay.and Kwigillinogok, again based on stickney's research in those conrfrunitiei (1985). All five of these tables include Yup'ik terms for the common'ly harvested species. Although the species most commonly used for subsistence are listed in these tables, there are doubtlessly other species for which use exists but for which neither species presence nor use has been documented. These would include additional bird species, primarily Asian and Pacific migratory birds

~~697 that occasionally appear jn western Alaska, and also additional fish and intertidal species (wolfe, pers. comm.)~~

2. Seasona I round of resource use. Figures 1 through 20 present seaional ffiunities in the Western Region and for the lower Yukon area. A'lthough seasonal round data are not avai I abl e for other comrnuni ti es i n the regi on , seasonal rounds for these comrnunities are bel'ieved to be simi I ar to those of nearbY communities. Seasonal round data for Alakanuk, Sheldon Point, Scammon Bay (fig.1 ), for Kotlik (fig.8), and fg. lower Yukon River (tig. l2)-are representative of coastal, tundra, and lower .iu6.ine subsistence adaptations in the lower Yukon subregion (see map 1). The seasonal rounds for these communjtjes focus in use'of'four species of salmon, several nonsalmon fish species, bearded, ringed, ang spotted seal, belukha, walrus, alra tunira and iiverine furbearers. Waterfowl hunting has trad'it'iona1'ly been an 'important spping harvest jng. acti-vity. In general, large land mammals do not figure prominently in the-seasonal harvesting activitjes of these commun'ities. Data for Marshall (fig. 13) and Russian Mission ,(tig. 17) depict seasonal rounds of two riverine communit'ies further up thb yulon River in the lower Yukon subregion (see map 1). In these communjt.ies, salmon, whitefish, pike, blackfish, and other lake and river fish species comprise an important part of the subsistence seasonal round. Fall and early winter moose harvest, late winter caribou harvest, and lengthy opportunistic harvest periods for black and brown bear affjrm tirb importance of large mammals in these subsistence systems. Tundra, riverine, and upland furbearer species are harvested. Sea mammal produtts are obtained more by customary. trade and exchange wjth members of coastal conrmunities than by harvest by communi ty members. (fig. 3) seasonal round data by Atmautlauk (fig. 2), .Bethel ' Nunapitchuk (fig. 15), and Tuluksak (fig. 19.) are representative of tundra'and riverine subsistence adaptations in the lower Kuskokwim subregion (see map 1). Cornnunities in this subregion show greatest dependence on fi sh resources. iirveit ot five sfecies of salmon, blackfish, burbot, -pike' iheet'ish, and whitefjsh account for the maior fishing- effort. Waterfowl harvest is an important activity especia'l1y in lpiing ind in late summer and early fa1^1 months. Members of tirese-conrnunities incorporate huntlng for seal,s and belukha in Kuskokwim Bay and for caribou' moose, ald black and brown bear at upriveilocations in their seasonal round of harvest i.iiuit'iei. These conmunities are located at some distance i.dt productive harvest sites for both sea and land mammals, howevir, and harvest effort and success are not as high as

~~698 for communities more proximate to concentrations of these wi I dl i fe resources.~~

Data for Chuathbaluk and Sleetmute (fig. 4), Lime Vi'l1age (fig. 10), Lower Kalskag (fig. 11), and Stony River (fig. 16) depict seasonal rounds for central Kuskokwim River subregion conrmun'ities (see map i). Relative to communities 'in oiher areas of the Western Region, these commun'ities show greater seasonal use of carjbou, moose, and black and brown bear. Fish species continue to be important to these upriver communities, although salmonid runs are smaller and fish quality not as good as at downriver interception points. Upland and forest furbearers and small game species predominate. Sea oil and some other marine mammal products reach these communitjes through traditional trading networks.

Seasonal round data for Hooper Bay (fig. 6), Goodnews Bay (fjg. 5), Kipnuk (f ig. 7), Kwigil'lingok (fig. 9) Newtok (fig. 14), Quinhagak (fig. 16), and Tununak (fig. 20) are representative of coastal communities in the central Bering Sea subregion (see map I). The data for these conrnunities show sea manmal harvesting activity in all months except December and January, when short days and cold temperatures limit harvesting activity, and in mid summer, when subsistence fishing for salmon and other species takes place. Subsistence harvest of herring, which occurs during the May and June herri ng runs , i s a foca 1 acti vi ty for many communities in this subregion, part'icu1a11y for Nelson Island communities. Coastal and tundra furbearers are trapped in months when fur js 'in prime condition. Residents of Mekoryuk and of Nelson Island cornmunities also harvest small numbers of muskox for subsistence use. Because most of these communities are distant from other large game populat'ions, harvest of large 'land mammals is limited. Unlike other communities in this grouping, Goodnews tsay and Quinhagak incorporate freshwater fishing for char and trout species and hunting for brown bear and other b'ig game species and for squirrels and other small game species in their seasonal rounds.

3. Subsi stence harvest I evel s and reported use . Avai I abl e hensive data covering most, if not al l , species used in study cornmun'ities and data collected to monitor harvest of particular species or species groups. Wolfe's study of siy. Yukon River delta communit'ies (1979,1981) and his work in Quinhagak (t,{olfe et al. 1984), Fienup-Riordan's study (1983a) of three similar communities, Andrews community study of Nunapitchuk (pers. comm. ) , and Pete' s ongoi ng basel 'i ne work i n Tununak' and Russian Mission (pers. comm. ) have been major research efforts and provide the most comprehensive and rel iable harvest data for the region. Additional harvest level data

699 covering all resources harvested in Western Region communities was collected by Nunam Kitlutsisti in 1976 (1983) as part of land use planning. 0ther harvest level data will become available as Division of Subsistence studies in Kipnuk, Tuluksak, Tununak, and other cormunities are compl eted. Pennoyer's et al. summary (1965) of available information presents subsistence salmon harvest data for the Yukon and Kuskokwim rivers during the 1918 to 1961 time period. Data for subsequent years are found in annual management reports for the Yukon and Kuskokwim areas. Pete ( 1984) reports subsistence herring harvest levels for Nelson Island communjties based on her field research in 1984. In recent years, annual subsistence salmon harvest levels have been monitored through use of subsistence calendars, which are filied out by harvesting households 'in each conrnunity (Jonrowe 1980; Stickney 1980, 1981). Conmercial and subsistence salmon and herring harvest figures are discussed in the species narrati ves el sewhere 'in thi s vol ume.

Data on harvest levels of caribou, moose, muskox, and other game based on license and harvest ticket reporting and of furbearers, black bear, and brown bear based on tagging are presented in other sectjons of this guide. Data from these sources measures minjmum subsistence levels on'ly, however, because of limited historic participation in licensing and reporting by Western Region residents. Limited data concerning the harvest of migratory birds by the Yukon Kuskokwim delta area communities were collected by Klejn for April 1964 through February 1965 (1966). More extensive estimat'ion of this harvest has been done by Copp and Smith (1981) for the years 1980 and 1981. More accurate data can be expected from studies currently in progress for the wildlife refuge area (Haynes, pers. comm.; also see Kelso et al. 1985 and Wolfe 1984a on management concerns). Comprehensive data recording harvest level by species are available for seven Western Region communities. Table 13 presents data for the cormunities of Alakanuk, Emmonak, Kotlik, Mountain Vi'l1age, Sheldon Point, and Stebbins for the 1980-1981 harvesting cyc1e. Table 14 presents similar data for Al akanuk, Scammon Bay, and Shel don Poi nt for the 1981-1982 harvesting cyc1e. Differences in overal'l harvest levels and harvest composition between the two tables are probably due to a combination of yearly variation in actual subsistence harvests and different survey methods employed by researchers. Harvest levels of marine marnmals and of king salmon are much lowerin table 14 than in table 13 for Alakanuk and Sheldon Point.

700 Per capita harvest in these communities ranges from about 500 1b per person to about 1,400 lb per person. Numerous species contribute to the total subsistence harvests in all cornnunities. A'lthough fish species account for most of the total harvest in each of these communities, species composition of harvest varies significant'ly. 0f fish species, chum and coho salmon are harvested in largest quantities .in all communities. Alakanuk and sheldon Point show high harvest levels of blackfish. Sheefish and herring account for a large portion of fish harvested jn She'ldon point and Stebbins, respective'ly. Table 15 presents harvest level data by resource category for the communities of Aniak, Chevak, Ernmonak, Goodnews Bay, Kotlik, Kwethluk, Mountain Vil1age, Napaskiak, and Tununak for 1976; note that the data in this table were not collected according to standard D'iv'isjon of subsistence methodologies. Table 16 presents recent data from Divjsion of subsjsience studies for Quinhagak, Nunapitchuk, and Russian Mission. The table 15 data show particularly high harvest levels for fish for all communities except Aniak, with IZ,ZLg lb of fish reported for Mountain vi11age. Reported household subsistence harvest levels of all species range from 3,157 lb to 14,391 lb in Aniak; per capita data are not available for these communities. As with data presented jn tables 13 and 14, harvest levels of land mammals and sea mammals tend to be complementary. That is, conrnunities that harvest large quantit'ies of marine mammals usually do not harvest simi'larly large quantities of land mammals. The table 16 data, based on continuing Division of subsis- !.lqq -research, records household harvests ranging from 3,654 lb in Russian Mission to 4,600 lb in Nunapifchut. As in other western Region communities, fish account for most of the subsistence harvest by weight, although game species account for a'large portion of harvest.in Quinhagak and Russian Mission.

4. Subsistence har@. Table 17 presents harvest egory for the Western Region communities of Alakanuk, Emmonak, Kotlik, Mountain Villige, sheldon Point, and stebbins for the 1980-1981 harvesting cyc1e. Table 18 presents s'inri lar data for Aniak, Chevakl Emmonak, Goodne_ws, Kot'lik, Kwethluk, Mountain Village, Napaskiak, and Tununak for I976, In all of these commuii- ties, fish accounts for most of the reported subsistence hai^vest by weight, ranging from about 58% of total harvest for Kotlik'in 1980-1981 to almost 85% of total harvest for Mountai n vi 1 1 age i n r976. Even communi ti es I ocated far inland show high dependency on fish resources as opposed to game resources.

701 The subsistence harvest proportion of land marmals varies from a low of less than 2% in Chevak in 1976 and Stebb'ins in 1980-1981 to a high of over L5% jn Mountain Vi'l'lage in i980-1981 and in Aniak in 1976. The proportion of sea mammals in the total harvest was above L5% for Alakanuk, Emmonak, Kotlik, and Sheldon Point for 1980-1981; in Stebbins in that harvesting year, almost 3L% of the total harvest consisted made up of sea marnmals. The inland communitjes of Aniak, Kwethluk, Napaskiak, and Mountain Village had sea marmal subsistence harvest proportions of less than 3% in both data sets. Birds account for a relative'ly smaller proportion of total subsistence harvest, with a range of 2.2% for Mountain Vi'l1age 'in 1980-1981 to 9.5% for Aniak in 1976 data. Composition of subsistence harvests varies significantly throughout the t,lestern Region. Communjty location and access to fish and game populations are important determinants of subsistence harvest composition'in the region. Figures 21 to 30 graphical 1y present harvest composi tion data for the communities of Alakanuk, Emmonak, Kotlik, Mountain Village, Nunapitchuk, Quinhagak, Russian Mission, Scammon Bay, Sheldon Po'int, and Stebbins. These figures are based on selected harvest data presented i n tables 13 through 16. Those commun'ities represented are ones where data were collected using standard D'ivision of Subsistence methodologies.

5. Parti ci pation i n harvest. Table 19 presents househol d hefveat parTicjpation data for the communities of Alakanuk, Emmonak, Kotlik, Mountajn Vi11age, Sheldon Point, and Stebbins for the 1980-1981 harvest cyc'le. In this context, participation in harvest measures the proportion of households in each community that actually harvested each species listed. High rates of participation in harvest obtain for many of the species listed, particularly for salmon in almost all cormunities, for bjrds jn all communities, and for seals in coastal communities. Low rates of participation'in harvest are indicative of two different situations. Low rates occur for species that are infrequently harvested in a given comnunity -- for instance, blackfish in Mountain Vil'lage or whitefish in Stebbins. Low rates also occur for specialized hunting and trapping activities. Successful belukha hunting, for example, is an activity pursued by a few expert hunters, who share the harvest within the community. With current fur prices and a lessened need for fur for c'lothing and handicraft, trapping for beaver and mink has become a more specialized activity. A much higher rate of participation jn muskrat harvesting occurs because muskrat hunting and trapping continues to be a common spring activity for adolescent boys.

702 Low participation jn harvest, however, does not necessarily mean that few households in a community use the resource. Because of extensive distribution and exchange of subsistence fish and game resources both within a given conrmunity and between communi ties , househol ds common]y use si gni fi cant quantit'ies of resources that have been harvested by others (Wolfe 1981, Wolfe et al. 1984). Intracommunity dist-ribution ald exchange general ly functions to distribute 'local'ly obtained resources to all community members, including thosb who are unable to fish or hunt for themselves, particular'ly to the e1der1y, the infirm, and to households with incomplete work forces. Moose and salmon distribution and exchange patterns have been extensively described for middle Kuskokw'im communitjes (Charnley 1983, 1984). Intercommunity distribution and exchange patterns serve to distribute spec.ific subsistence products from places where they are abundant to p'laces where they are scarce. Seal oil, for example, is traded and exchanged from coastal conrmunities to inland communitjes along both the Yukon and Kuskokwim rivers (wolfe 1981). l'lhitefish and moose are distributed from harvesting comrnunities to coastal communities (Hensel, pers. comm.).

~~703 Table 1. l{estern Region Population, 1960-80~~

~~Communi ty 1 960 1970 r 980~~

Aki achuk 229 312 480 Aki ak 187 187 184 A l akanuk 278 414 522 Ani ak 308 205 341 Atmautl auk 44 98 219 Bethel 1 ,259 2 r416 3,576 Chefornak 133 146 230 Chevak 387 466 Chuathbal uka :1: 100 105 Crooked Creek 92 59 108 Eek 200 186 228 Errnonak 3s8 439 567 Goodnews Bay 154 218 168 Hooper Bay I 460 490 627 Kasigluk iAklomiut)D 346 526 541 Ki pnuk 325 375 Kongi gi ganak '_?',_ 190 239 Kotl i k 57 228 293 Kwethl uk 32s 408 454 Lime Vi I Iage 32 25 48 Kwigillingok 334 148 354 Lower Ka1 skag 122 183 246 Marshall (Fortuna Ledge) 156 176 262 Mekoryuk 242 249 160 Mountain Village 300 419 583 Napaki ak 190 259 262 Napaski ak 154 188 244 Newtok 129 114 131 Nightmute \ 237 t-?l Nunao i tchuk" 327 1i? Oscarvi I I e 51 41 56 Pi lot Station 219 290 325 Pitkars Point 28 70 88 Pl ati ni um 43 57 55 Qui nhagak 228 340 412 Red Devi l '152 81 39 Russian Mission 102 147 169 Scamrnon 8ay 115 166 250 Sheldon Point 110 125 103 S I eetmute ,-1? 109 107 Stony River 26 5t. Maryr s./Andreaf sky 225 384 382 Toksook Bay 178 257 333 Tul uksak 137 195 236 Tuntutul i ak 144 158 216 Tununak 183 274 298 Upper Kalskag 147 122 129 Total population 9,382 I 2,038 1 5,456

Source: ADL 1984, Haynes and Andrews 1985. --- means no data were available. a No one was living in Chuathbaluk in 1960. b In 1970 and 1980, Kasigluk and Nunapitchuk were combined under the name of their joint municipality, Akolmiut.

~~704 Table 2. Western Region Average Taxable Income, 1978, 1981, 1982~~

~~Percentage of Al I Average Taxable Income ($) Alaska Taxable Income (%)~~

~~Corrnuni ty 1978 1 981 1982 1978 1 981 1982~~

Aki achuk $4,01 6 $8 ,253 $8,782 2seb 39S 41$ Aki ak 4,224 7,787 7,606 26 37 35 Al akanuk 7 ,725 1O 1277 12,',t95 47 49 s6 Ani ak 5 r488 1 8,31 7 1 6r1 69 34 87 75 Atmaut'l auk 6,698 9,881 7,1gg 41 47 33 Bethel 14,250 18,225 19 1796 88 86 92 Chefornak 5,025 6,732 6r596 31 32 3l Chevak 5 1707 7 ,715 7 ,746 35 37 35 Chuathbal uk 6,211 7 ,349 5r1 09 38 35 24 Crooked Creek 5r988 9r361 1 4,450 37 44 67 Eek 4 r999 9,413 8,979 31 45 42 Ermonak 7,870 1 2,350 12,975 48 58 60 Goodnews Bay 4 ,351 8r043 7 ,531 27 38 3s Hooper Bay 5,307 7 ,179 8,856 33 34 41 Kasigluk (Aklomiut) 4,91 0 101969 8,958 30 52 41 Ki pnuk 4,746 7 1262 5,917 29 34 27 Kongi gi ganak 6,333 9,025 9r009 39 43 42 Kotl i k 5 1604 9r159 1 0 ,035 34 43 46 Kwethl uk u:9?t t:9?' 29 29 33 Lime Village' 'r_!!' Kwigillingok 4,592 7 ,117 8,040 28 34 37 Lower Ka'l skag 4,470 8,081 10,290 27 38 48 Marshall (Fortuna Ledge) 8r91 1 9 1126 1 0,405 55 43 48 Mekoryuk 6,396 8,51 5 9,800 39 40 45 Mountain Village 9 1532 11,624 1 3,362 59 55 62 Napaki ak 5r529 6 1175 81892 34 29 41 Napaski ak 4r239 8,523 9,822 26 40 45 Newtok 4,',|78 6,600 6,097 26 31 28 Ni ghtmute 4,387 6,908 7 1564 27 33 35 Nunapi tchuk 5,055 8,137 ?,103 31 39 33 0scarvi I I e" Pi lot Station, 4,871 7 ,396 8 ,233 30 35 38 Pi tkat s Poi nto 6,616 7 ,774 41 37 Pl ati ni um 91143 1 0,894 11,626 56 52 54 Qui nhagak, 5r040 5,490 7,626 31 26 35 Red Devil" 1 3,41 1 1 0 r020 82 47 Russian Mission 4r696 1O,269 13,2't7 29 49 61 Scamnon Bay 4,774 1 0 ,004 9,827 29 47 45 Sheldon Point 6r26',1 12,955 1 5,032 38 61 70 Sl eetmute 5,500 11 ,323 9r918 34 54 46 Stony River 3,700 7 ,376 91389 23 35 43 5t. Maryts/Andreafsky 7 1951 10 r716 11 ,973 49 51 5) Toksook Bay 6r541 1 1 ,070 8r019 40 52 37 Tul uksak 5,058 8 ,534 8,612 31 40 40 Tuntutu l i ak 5rl 19 6 r'l 38 8r433 31 29 39 Tununak 4r575 8r01 8 6 1942 28 38 32 Upper Kalskag 5,715 8,024 6r934 35 38 32 Mean i ncome 6,009 9 r'116 9,366 37 43 43 Anchorage 1 8r255 23,043 23,590 112 109 109 Fai rbanks 1 7,901 23,476 24,178 110 111 1',12 Juneau 17 ,446 22,725 22 1968 107 108 106 Al aska 16,274 21 ,127 21,624

~~Source: ADR 1985. --- means no data were available.~~

Note: lncome data based on federal tax returns sorted by mailing addresses. a lncluded with Bethel, all years. b Included with Marshallr 1982 only. c lncluded with Sleetmute. d Included with Sleetmute, 1982 only.

~~705 Table 3. Chronological Summary of Early Ethnographic Research in the Central Yuprik Area~~

~~Principal Field Experi ence Name Regi on Publ ication Dates~~

1842-44 Lavrentiv Zagoskin Norton Sound, Lower Yukon (soe Michael, ed. 1957) 1 866-68 l{m. Healy Dall Norton Sound, Lower Yukon 1 870a , 1 870b, 1 877 , 1 884 1 866-68 Fredenick Whymper Norton Sound, Lower Yukon 1868a, 1868b, 1889 1877 -81 E.V{. Nelson Norton Sound, Loruer Yukon 1 899 1 880 lvan Petroff Southwest Al aska. general ly 1 884 1 881 -83 J.A. Jacobsen Norton Sound, Loner Yukon 1 884 1 890 W.C. Greenfield Lower Yukon, Kuskokwim and 1 893 Nushagak 1905, 1907 G.B. Gordon Nunivak lsland, Norton Sd., 1906-07, 1917 Kuskokwi m 1911-12 E.l{. Hawkes Norton Sound 1913,1914 1926 Ales Hrdlicka Norton Sound 1 930 1927 Edward S. Curtis Nunivak lsland 1 930 1936-37 Hans Hinmelheber Nunivak lsland, Lower 1938,1951 Kuskokwim River I 930r s Clark M. Carber West Alaska generalIy 1934, 1935, 1947 1 935-49 George A. Dale West Alaska generalIy 1 953

~~Source: Burch 1984b.~~

~~706 Table 4. Tentative List of Some Groupings of Modern Central Yuprik Villages~~

~~Reg i ona I Source of Croup Location of Croup I denti fi cati on~~

Kuskokwim River Areas rrUpriver Qaugkumi ut Peoplerr - Tuluksak upriver lt 2 lrKuskokwim Kusquqvagmi t River peoplert, Napakiak to Tuluksak It 2 Kusquqvagmi ut All Kuskokwim River Yup'iks 4-6 Unegkumi ut rrDownriver Peopleil - Tuntutuliak to Napakiak 1t2 Aku I mi ut lrPeople inthe Middler' - Nunapitchuk, Kasigluk, Atmautluak 't -6 rrLower Cani nermi ut Coast Peoplert - Eek, Quinhagak 11 2 Cani nermi ut Kongiganak, Kwigil I ingok, Kipnuk, Chefornakrnt 3, 4 Cenarmi ut [Coastal Peoplerr - Eek Quinhagak 31 4 Cenarmi ut Kongiganak, Kwigi I 1 ingok, Kipnuk, Chefornak** 11 2

~~West Coast Areas~~

Nuni vaarmi ut Peopl e of Nunivak lsland 1-6 Qal uyaarmi ut Peopl e of Nelson lsland (including Kavalivigmiut) 1-6 NaPa ryaarmi ut?t*it Peopl e of Hooper Bay 1-6 Qi ss,5n61ilri ut#r:t Peopl e of Qi ssunaq-Chevak 1-6 Maravarmi ut Peopl e of Scammon Bay 415 Qi ptngayarmi ut Peopl e of Black River area 415

~~Yukon River Areas and Norton Sound~~

Kui gpagmi ut People of the Yukon River 1-4 Kui gpagmi ut Lower Yukon River populations rrPeople 516 I qugmi ut of the Endt' - Middle Yukon River populations 516 Kui gl uarmi ut trSouth Mouthrt Yukon River populations ItMiddle 5 0erauranermi ut Mouthrr Yukon River populations 5 Pastul i rmi ut People of the Pastol River area (Kotlik) 4-6 Taprarmi ut People of Tapraq (Stebbins) 4-6 Una'l i rmi ut Norton Sound Yuprik populations (derivation unclear; 6 may be altered Inupiaq term)

~~Source: Shinkwin and Pete 1984b. * Exclusive of Bristol Bay, Nashagak River, Lake lliamna areas. ** Most respondents placed Chefornak here, but the classification requires more research.~~

*** Some west coast respondents view these two large groups as one because marriage ties them together;.earlier they were distinct groups (Woodbury 1984), and members today view them as separate (Shinkwin and Pete 1984a).

*{it1 People from 1) Kuskokwim River villagesr 2) Akulmiutr 3) Eek,4) West Coast (Hooper Bay, Nuni vak I s l and, Nel son I sl and ) , 6) Norton Sound.

~~707 Table 5. lqugmiut and Pastulirmiut Seasonal Subsistence Moves and Residence Locations, ca.1833~~

~~Honths I qugmi ut Pastul i rmi ut~~

January Ili nter vi I I age lfli nter vi I I age l{i nter vi I I age l{i nter vi I I age Feb rua ry lli nter vi I I age Winter village l{i nter vi I I age lli nter vi I I age March l{i nter vi I I age lli ntcr vi I I agc Spri ng camp Hinter village Apri I Spring camp Tinter village Spring camp Spri ng camp May Spring camp Spring camp Spring camp/sumner camp Spri ng camp June Surrler camp Sununer camp Summer camp Sumner camp Jul y Sunmer camp Sumnor camp/winter village Surmer camp Itli nter vi I I age August Summer camp lli nter vl I I age Sunmer camp Hinter village/fall canp September l'{inter village Fal I camp,/wi nter vi I I age hli ntor vi I I age I{i nter vi I I age 0ctober Winter vlllage lii nter vi I I age Winter village Ili nter vi I I age Novembor Winter village Winter village Winter village lli nter vi I I age December Tinter villago Winter village lli ntor vi I I age Wi nter vi I I age

~~Source: l{olfc 1979.~~

~~708 Table 6. Surmary of Recent Ethnographic and Linguistic Research in the Central yuprik Area~~

~~Main Subject Authors Publication Dates~~

Art Ray (1980, 1981 ) Community study Correll (19721, Oswalt.(1963b), Oswalt and VanStone (.1963), VanStone and 0swalt (1960) Culture change Collier (1973) Dance Ager (1975-76), Johnson (1978a) Ethnobotany Ager and Ager (1980), Oswalt (1957) Ethnoar"chaeol ogy Oswalt and VanStone (1967), VanStone (1970a, lrg7}br 1972) Ethnohi story OswaIt-(1963a, 1980), Oswalt, ed. (1960), piatt (1984), Sarafian and VanStone^(19721, Rav, ed. (1966), VanSt6ne (j959, 1967, 1968, 1971, 1973) Forkl ore Ager (1979-80)r.Sonne (1978, 1980), Tennant and Bitar, eds. (1991), Woodbury (1984) Cames Ager (1976) General works Meyer (1977), Oswalt (1965, 1966), Wotfe (1981) Health, medicine Fortuine. (1?991, Lantis (1959), Mason (1972, 1974, 1975), wolfe (19s2) Lanugage Hammerich (1955), Jacobson (1984), Miyoka (i980),-Mivaoki and Mather (19791, Reed et al. (1972) Learni ng Harri son ( 1981 ) Material culture Oswalt (19721 Pol i ti cs Lantis (1972) Regional studies Fienup-Rior!9n (1982), Kresge et al. (1974), Tussing and Arnold (1973) Rel i gi on VanStone (1980) Social organization Fienup-Riordan (1983b), Lantis (1946) Subs i stence Charnley. ( t 1?qt), Fienup-Riordan !9g11), Kl ei n ( 1966), Maddox (197s), Nowak (1982),.1984), Stickney (1985), Itolfe (1979'),-tiolfe and Ellanna (1983), Wolfe and pete (19S4i, Wolfe et ai. (19g4)

~~Source: Burch 1984.~~

~~709 Table 7. Major Categories of Fish, Wildlife, and Marine Manmals Used by Cornnunities in Western Alaska~~

Fi sh and Shel I fi sh Smal I Mamrnal s Arctic char Arctic white fox Bering cisco Beaver Bl ackfi sh Hare Burbot Land otter Capel i n Lynx Chinook salmon Marmot Chum salmon Mi nk Cl ams Muskrat Coho salmon Porcupi ne Do1 ly Varden Red fox Fl ounder Squi rrel Grayl i ng t.Jol f Lamprey l'lol veri ne Mussel Ninespine stickleback Large marrnals Northern pi ke Black bear Pacific cod Brown bear Pacific halibut Cari bou Pacific herring Moose Pink salmon Musk ox Saffron cod Scul pi n Marine Marmals Sheefi sh Bearded seal Smel t Belukha whale Sockeye salmon Grey whale Sol e Ringed seal Sucker Sea I ion Trout Spotten sea'l Whitefish Wal rus

~~8i rds Sandhil I crane Duc ks Geese Grouse Ptarmi gan Snowy owl Swan~~

~~Source: Haynes and Andrews 1985.~~

~~7L0 Table 8. Fish and t,Jildlife Resources Used by Hooper Baya Residents~~

~~Common Engl ish Name Scientific Name Local Name~~

Herri ng CI harengus pal lasi Iqal I uarpaq Chinook salmon cor @ Taryaqvaq Chum salmon chus keta Qavl unaq Pink salmon nchus gorbuscha Cuqpeq Coho salmon nchus kisutch Uqurl iq Starry flounder ati Thvs steTiatus Uuraruq Tomcod us proxlmux TqdT-tuaq or Ci tegtaq Smelt 0smerus eperlanus Naqecuat Scul pi n -:r-Megalocottus platycephalus Kayurl ugaq I all ceps Bering cisco Coregonus laurettae Naptaq Least ci sco Coregonus sardinella Qassayagaq or Neq'yagaq Humpback whitefish Coreqonus pidschian Qaurtuq Pi ke Esox lucius Cu kvak Bl ackfi s h eantgTi q punqitius Ninespine stickleback Punqitius 4 Quarruuk Sheefi sh Stenodus leucichthys nelma Ci iq Burbot (lush) trf-T-ota Maniq'naq Soft-shelled clam Mya arenaria Uiluq Cockl e Cl inocardium nuttal I i Taavtaaq Bearded seal EiignaThus 5ai6e[us Maklak Makl aqa k GuEeA[Tt) Ri nged sea'l Phoca hispida Spotted seal Phoca vitulina largha Wal rus O?ioEndus rosmaius

Sea I ion Eumetopias jabatus Bel ukha DtiEFiTaDleFas TE[cas Mf nk Mustela vision Land otter futra canatEnsis Lr nKaq Red fox vu I pes vu I pes Kav 1 aq Arctic fox Alopex lagopus Mus krat 0ndatra zibethicus Beaver Gstor canailensTs Snowshoe hare Lepus amer] canus Tundra hare Lepus othus Yel low-bi I led loon Gavia adamsi i

~~( conti nued)~~

~~7rt Table 8 (continued).~~

~~Cormon Engl i sh Name Scientific Name Local Name~~

Arctic loon Gavi a arct'ica Tunuci I I ek Red-throated loon ffiil steTiTTa AaqffiIF Red-necked grebe ffii]?e6TrdFllEqena mravilIT Sooty shearwater PUTTI nUS gr] SeUS Ukuik Doubl e-crested cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus Uvalek or -- Uyal egi ak Tundra swan Cygnu.s col-ombi anus Qugyuk Canada goose Branta canadensis Na4gi'lagjq 0r Tuutangayak Bnant Branta Neql ernaq ta--- bernicla Emperor goose Lnen canag'r ca Nacaul I ek Greater white-fronted goose Anser albifrons Snow goose effi-Tffilffins Mal I ard Airas plaTvrtr-ffis P'intai I Anas acuta Green-winged teal Airas fficca Blue-winged teal Anas dlscors Northern shoveler Affi cTvoeafa Greater scaup Aythua mari I a 0l dsquaw Clangula hyemalis Common eider Somateria mollissima

King eider Somateria spectabilis Spectacled eider Sornaffi Ti scherl- Black scoter Fianfm@t- Red-breasted merganser Merqus serrator Peregrine falcon Fa peregr'r nus -t:-- lco l./i I I ow ptarmi gan Lagopus lagopus Rock ptarmigan Lqgopus mutu.s Sandhil crane Grus canadensis I :_.i---_-.-= Semi-pa'lmated plover Charadrius semipalmatus Black-bellied plover Pluvialis squatarola Bar-tai led godwit Limosa lapponica Greater ye1 lowlegs Trinqa melanoleuca Biack turnstone mfia nnlanocSglgJ-l Red-necked phalarope Fffi-Tlropui-To5a tus- ETffiaaraq Red phalarope Phalaropus fulicaria Augtuaraq Common snipe GaTl-l naso stlll naso Ku ku kuaq Western sandpiper Calidris mauri I iyuraaraq

~~( conti nued )~~

~~7r2 Table 8 (continued).~~

~~Cormon Engl ish Name Scientific Name Local Name~~

Dunl i n Calidris alpina Curemraq Parasitic jaeger Stercorari us parasi ticus Cungarrl ugaq G'laucous gul l Larus hyperboreus Na ruyaq Gl aucous-winged gu'l'l Larus glaucescens Naruyaq Sabine's gu11 Larus philadelphia Nacal lngaraq Arctic tern Sterna paradisaea Teq iyaraq Thick-bi I led murre Uria lomvia Al paq Snowy owl Nyctea scandiaca An i paq Short-eared owl Asio flammeus An i pausugaq Downy woodpecker ffiiGfT'uEEscens Pugugtuyul i

~~Source: Stickney 1985. a This table is based on parti a1 data; both additional species and additional names for species may be used by Hooper Bay residents.~~

~~713 Table g. Selected Fish and t.lilcllife Resources Used by Kwigillingoka Res i dents~~

~~Common Engl ish Name Scientific Name Local Name~~

Herri ng Clupea Harengus pa]lasi I qal I uarpak Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tsawytscha Taryaqvak Chum salmon 0ncorh.ynchus keta Kang i tneq Sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka Sayak Coho salmon 0ncorhynchus kisutch Qaki iyaq Tomcod Mjcrogadus proximus Ceturrnaq Boreal smelt 0smerus eperlanus Qusuuq Sculpin Meqal ocottus Nertul i i q platycephalus laticeps Bering cisco Coregonus 'laurettae Imarppi nraq Yel low-fin sole Limanda aspera Naternaq Ni nespi ne st'ickl eback Pungitius pungitius Quarruu k Bl ackfi sh Dal I ia pectoral is et'i'silT Soft-shel I ed cl am Mye arenari a Uiluq Cockl e Cl inocard'ium nuttal I i Ta av taaq Bearded seal ErIqnaTfius FaF6atus Maklassuk MaffiFTTarqe male) Amirkaq (subadul t) Ringed seal Phoca hispida Nayi q Spotted seal Phoca vitulina largha Issuriq Wal rus OiioFniils ToSmarus Asveq Belukha DEiplTnapterus Teucas Cetuaq l'li n k Mustela vision Imarmi utaq Land otter Iutra canadensis Cuigni lnguq Red fox mp.t@- Kavi aq Arctic fox Alopex lagopus Uliiq Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus Kanaqlak or Tevyu I i q Beaver Castor canadensis Pa I uqtaq Snowshoe hare t.p-rt-.*rt * Maqaruaq Arct'ic hare Lepus othus Qayuqeggl i Yel low-bi I led loon Gavia adamsii Tuul I ek Arctic loon ffil a arcTlca TunffiTt et Red-throated loon mvTa steTTa Ea A.q.q- Red-necked grebe PoiilTepil7isegena Qal eqcuuk Horned grebe Podiceps auritus Tusai rnaq Doubl e'crested cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus Whi stl i ng swan 0Tffi6lenuF-

~~( conti nued )~~

~~714 Table 9 (continued).~~

~~Cormon Engl ish Name Scientific Name Local Name~~

Canada goose Branta canadensis Tu tangayak Brant _-_-.--_BranT-uernlETa - Neq I ernaq Emperor goose Lnena cangrca Nacaul lek Whjte-fronted goose Anser albifrons [.qT.q'- Snow goose ehEfr'-caerilTescens Kanguq Mal lard An'as platvrhvnEfos Curcurpaq Pintai I Anas acuta Uqsuqaq Green-winged teal An'as crecca Tengesqar Blue-winged tea'l Anas d-Tscors Qatgel 1 i Northern shoveler Anas dilFeafa Suggerpak Canvasback Aythya valisineria Kepal ek Greater scaup Ay-Th-r @- Kepa I ek 0l dsqaw Clanqula hyemalis Aarraangi i k Stel ler's eider FoIIGTTEIiTTETTeTi Anarni sakaq Common eider Somateria mol I issima Metraq King eider $mateFie specta6ifis Qengal I ek Spectac'led eider Somateria fisheri Kaureq Surf scoter MeEnTffi @Ltgt. Ekacakayak or Ci ngayak Black scoter Melanitta nigra Ku kumiya r Red-breasted merganser Merqus serrator 'leucocephal Paiyiiq Bald Eagle Hal i aeetus us Metervi k Wi I I ow ptarmi gan iagoputTegopus Aansqlj q- Sandhi I I crane Grus canadensis Quci I I gaq Semipalmated plover eh-arad}ll s-lEm ipa I ma t u s Uyarr'uyaq Black-bel 1 ied plover PTwlaTis squafr-roTa Tuuyi i k (winter plumage) Long-bi I I ed dowi tcher L i mnodrqmlls scol i.pacag! Puqtatnquarta I ek Marbled godwit L l mosa tappon't ca ffi Civikaq Wh i mbrel Nufenius phaeopus Tevatevaat Greater ye1 lowlegs Trinqa melanoleuca TuniGmq Black turnstone Arenaria mel anocephal a Qi urracetaaq Red-necked phalarope PhaI a ro pu s-To6atu s Imaqcaar Red pha'larope Phileropus TuTicarius Ayungnaar Common snipe - :=---t'-Ga]T'aso seilEgg Ku ku kaq Pectoral sandpiper Latl0rls metanotos I i suayaar t,lestern sandpiper ddTifiFis rnurT- I suayaa Dunl in eaTtffiiT il pTna Ceremraq Parasitic jaeger SercorariE paras i cus Yungaq 'l ti Long-ta i ed j aeger Stercorari us I ongisgudus Enacal I ngar

~~( conti nued )~~

~~715 Table 9 (continued).~~

~~Common Engl ish Name Scientific Name Local Name~~

Glaucous gull Larus hyperboreus Na rusva k Arctic tern Sterna paradisaea TeqTitar Thick-bi I led murre Uria lomvia Al paq Pigeon guillernot Gppnus coTumba Eci guraq Snowy owl Nyctea scandiaca An i paq Short-eared owl AsftTlanrnreus Keneqpa ta k Downy woodpecker Flcoides pffiscens FuusluyuTT Tree swallow TFi?oprocie Sicoior +Cunqa kcuarnao Common raven 6-rvus corax- Tu I ukaruk Black-capped chickadee Fa'Fils-atrlcapillus eEIpIIi'iTr American robin ffiilsrnr- qraE;l us ffisayulT- l,.Iater pipit Effius spfiolEITa Cetaa r Yel low warbler Dendroica petechia E-_i- elilE[cuarnaq Rusty blackbird EUpnagus caro t rnus Cuqcul i Common redpo'll Carduel is flannnea Uqvi i cartaq Snow bunting mecE-pEenax 'longspur _---__ nlvalis Kanguruaq Lap'land La lcar] us lapponl cus Te kc i taq

~~Source: Stickney 1985. a This table is based on partial data; both additional species and additional names for species may be used by Kwi gi I I inok residents.~~

~~716 Table 10. Selegted Fish and t.lildljfe Resources Used by Stebbins and Yukon Delta Residents"~~

~~Common Eng'l i sh Name Scientific Name Local Name~~

Arctic Aray'ling Thymal lus arcticus Chulukbowuk Timper-- Arctjc lamprey Lampetra japonica Ngumugiyuq Ngumugazug Alaska whitefish Coregonus nel soni Chinekliq Lake whitefish Coregonus cl upeaformis N-ulE-Gmal I ones ) NuqIi q Belukha (white whale) Del phinapterus I eucas St'oaq (or Istoaq) Munduq - belukha epi dermi s Bering cisco Coregonus laurettae Imuqbinruq ( smal -wF'iffih) I Bl ackfi sh Dallia pectoralis Ima' ngaq Chun'geq Broad whitefish Coregonus nasus Kau rtuq Nuqil/af (small) Kaurkiachalqu

Burbot Lota lota Manjginuk ( lush) Do1 1y Varden $-lveTinus malma _rSggl_ugbiaj Duck (generic) 0otga Least cisco Coreqonus sardinel la Etul eaq Northern pike Esox lucius Qusul i k Chuqfuk K'shuliq Pacjfic herring Clupea harengus Eqauthl uk ' bi o -iri!+Eqauthl oauk'buq GuTtuI-TfiErrTfr'q eggs on kelp)- Round whitefish Prosopi um g[!ndraceum Kassiaq

~~Saffron cod Eleginusgraci I is Egauthl uk Egauthl oaug Chum (dog) salmon 0ncorhynchus keta Kanyetnuq Kam'iknuk Numlq Oqoqm (fall chum) ORonTq (fal I chum)~~

~~( cont'inued)~~

~~717 Table 10 (continued).~~

~~Common Engl ish Name Scientific Name Local Name~~

Coho (silver) salmon 0ncorhynchus kisutch Kauki uq 0qokl i q Kugge'yuk Chinook (king) salmon 0ncorhynchus tshawytscha Dog i uqfug Chi uktuk Chaqi I ukfuk Pink (humpback) salmon 0ncorhynchus gorbuscha eEuTEEuq - Juqbuq Humpi es Salmon, salmon €g9S, Iml auq fermented Salmon, color turned Da I jyuk or hook nosed Salmon, easy drying Sandhi I I crane Grus canadensis Sculpin Sl imy sculpin Cotta coqnatus K'iyokobauo Coastrange sculpin Cottus aleuticus Ranem[R- Prickly scu'lpin LOf,tUS aSper BuTTh-eads Devil fish -- Irish lords Seal Bearded seal Erignathus barbatus Mukluk - generic term Alemequk - adults Oogertr- adul ts G6'uins) Muklasuq - small mukl uk Ammfrtaq - less than a year old Anqivoktio - -.-J ado I escent Ring seal Pusa hispida Niyiq Spotted seal Phoca vitul ina Ezo' ri q Sheefi sh Stenodus TeuETchthys Chel i q Cheuq Smel t Pond smelt Hypomesus ol idus Kozout Rainbow smelt Osmerur s moFdaTllen tex efiliaut i r Kotioq effio-kol iq

~~( conti nued)~~

~~7t8 Table 10 (continued).~~

~~Common Eng'l i sh Name Scientific Name Local Name~~

Snowshoe hare Lupus americanus Ma kaquq Starry flounder Platichthys stel latus Nauta kanu k mTrFoil"itr- Swan (generic) NEusuyuq Threespine sti ckl eback Gasterosteus aculeatus Koahulq Needl efi sh Trout (generic) Salmo sp. emi uqpa{rq Egauthl ukbuq hli I low ptarmigan Lagopus lagopus Akazereaq

~~Source: Wolfe 1981; Pete, pers. comm. a This table js based on partial data; both additional species and additional names for species may be used by residents of Stebbins on Yukon delta cornmunities.~~

719 Crt{l) L+) CL oo .POo.- o o -co ar- c rt- C E..PB o LE -c ol 3 0-rr o .- Lr- ro Oc .uc c +) r! {ro 0) {, ,F '-': o o.F o o OQ' ID O tDJ OEL..Fo ltC, N4' N O ! op o rD t o.L CL o cro O(Jd'{, LOtL O 6 aS 0) Qtr', (DO J -o+, Or LO I of O I O O tJ+J ||-C L c, rEF -C O tD.O to .- o o * L +, ..BLN O ..': L qr.p It) oc,c+) qro!t :E +,OF o+) .- ro o o 33 tD c! .t'o E +J F C F(F O E O .g+' g (o o, 'D oc ID U> O.,E O.r!.a (o |o o.c-t c o o-.F orF > C CL .FO 5 oeE O tle r O-lt, O O oo.{, 0r+)o lD {) .. ,r L lr.e .ae O cL J O-g o pLOLOgTDCL t, o! P OO o e.)LoocL.Po+, o 'o C, Oos E.C O tl.)F L c) F rEF Qr.- {rsF tD g N O+J ] Q) O F.F O O) () E+)O EO-o c .i€ O>rll l! O-L O ooo O4f g {, o.o.o c u) u7 z. tll th o 42-LO =oroE € ; p b H...Pg.l fEE t- 5t Ee 6 : F e: tf;*l E:f gg E o EEt g gfFFe 'u ! o obSo n; s :.-igf Erg i; 31"flF FgHl;^ g;l gE o E'En t=Ei ;s-eE 3 Oi OrD !p J ol :Eb: *l! b ;le ll' 5E [fE*; 8:il o ';51F s*l 'E i3.F 1s E.E;3 = a-: Es cr'..ool oo * FSoE +,ooL 3ri" .9f .Pl E" ErE E: :E g3; Es*E Ef{:--Ao '. 'r-c eerD lgEilj t:.: ;E E3t5F ;.:8E -:- r.9 9 o, ar -o-o.: o->'ol o,l 3333 (D!* €. E ! =

~~o o o o o 1t o 0) () {J o) o o o E E c c o o o lg +) o o L ol o .y, (, o c E- J o TL f E L g Oo |9 o L PP o'! +) .u o L tn tn J .n .n m o~~

6 o +J +' g.F +,e tt {J oCe*O->o+) g f (l)- E Eo) rba .EPE or-c o -c l oo g q€ 3 .p L I f J cD(, 1t cL .p o+)|oo | c O .tt:roo= t(ts|| I oooc Tt o -)oo L-IDorN pl:E,eo E'ID CO L IE L rtt F .FJ .C, .o o O o odttD EOC, C) o- .F=@o L C^ s^ -)' € g L +, o E-c I l.e-P.P L O.r c, O L o pl!g lPe f L.F+' >r O.-O Q, (o L O.-C Ortt .cl O r) o9r, t! CD.e c) o <(.lrLC vl O +, OEL 3t L 5 5 )rr 10 o ooo o F 6 o o rD otBJ Q' - 1 r.r >1 t! o rD CtrE cL OF I J >+, tooa, o L +rv cr+ ! c'r r 5 9? E f (o ruf J 39t e;8.t 3 +r-o o.- f J-)= .o-co |D L JFJ J

~~o P ;~~

L! FI i 3l". ?r 6l o) .tl p Flo-lf 'Fl ol Gr5 o olL 61 3l q) (Lto 3l 3 D rtot q) il - ol+t Fl!l tl, +)l El8 5l ='' 3l tn Jta -lg :t. JI+) ql L > ol>, or FLO 3J .f 8L o13 .EloloolJl '-lt- -sh F slcl|! or'r3 .3lE "18 Llor El I; il; srSlo :l:EtE ..ol"l E?5 € .;loto.ior-l€ 3 o EI:F3t|oto gEt! Jtoat o- .:lEl EEls -o iEE fl38 ;k"19 ;: i (') ru >F' 5p"-Elt aEE=" " tlElE.S F El" ;f !f !f st a €r3 iF -

720 .pc('l .oF+) I O ).- 0) POO .eJC o_-c E oJJ {) {'.p clo o O.- tlJ .a .r JC o) lO c Lloo o-o.L g 2.ac L il, o L o O-.e |o.r =+)J .nc o oO)- -OL 4 (,)LO c.- .D !r L O .F|l) q) !, c c o-c c o e O +r! NO O Ctl .F O N+J .Fll ! q) o$ c) o o-o |o CLlD.r J co t!oL L .p oB po o )a o ItsL>l tc) o ,cL tlD +J -o o rD o+t c P O-.FIF O o O-F |g s, N! (,, O-O L .n a tl, -O E t, oc) P '.O L O'F .. (!o, ooo t! v)e o L o L r {t-c L L O.O c o NO+)LL N+' qro || ooE o o o})rF tE Q, rD'- Lp co P lJ.F N ooo-o-o o3 O 6 E.eJJ Ooo o gL L {J|E o L L|! o v) (J & L

cctl o 03 L :t L (, () E O op +) t'r c o. =(a o+J c, o c c, Ltt oLtql E ! ('1r t.- tD+) O'r O +t q,L:t O o +).+r|..! O I O f9lrD 6 o |! o o +r .n-c o5.r o o t flL o +rEl .. t! ql>ot!^- -o .o .L oo.yllooo= >o'r )t ..Y OF.EI O {J C e =rJEO qlL o > lolo)t+) o ttl JIL oE rJlF o L'- f o ..olo E-E -a -L Jf|DE!9..e +) JO O o tLt,)+)Et tDrDCOotD>O ! (oOJ q, 'vtooo,Ep o JfE oo qo>+) c.o oocDsl {Jgrto+) g-o FE ctr o+)st tEfo...oc E L|o ,-+) (,) Orllo 6e c+rOLe .-t o +)o: .i (|) Cl.r o .. lD O O E tD rElC tD.lJ.e t |o C, E o c o.. co>\ (rO O/,.ca oO cO E e-CO Ooeo .;L D ,F',C,6+) .F.Et 1..F.F +iECrc lo-O .FO.CO-CO O.pFrDG+,.-5 oi, +)o o E!31 O.-.a Ec'+).PE '-!.pOEO E O.r t- rE E O l, tE |U !+)+) rg c C.r! io3Oo. OOo'nE.oO O.FoL -ttD.- -! O.r o-O-OElsoaO >rO o.- O'e E !+) o oooo.06 O4r(F.elo OO z. :f=:)oco-

~~.Pt Eo +)^ e E {) |l) -g l+) +J th o :f oc, o-+, o Itsu, o vcJ o+r +t tE .r o L L L E- o- E 4) oo +, o L L rD o-(' o o (,L o o- ID o +r+Jo o cct rn tn cE o E~~

o L L= oID o>\o E OF g I' q) PL g c) o +J o|o lo a oc, 'o L lt) ll I tl +) I q) tn L- L L gL LL o- I o.- c) o, oo o() +) IIL a .o a.o +, o Eo- EL E EO EO o cr< cro rD L O+) (, +) o Ctl rJ .p -o +JrD po E .po ) cL il) CLE o"-o o-o I cLo ! o.P o() rDO C) o o an .o tJ7 > (t p (rE o tt, 9 f C) o o.- +, T' roo :o CD € 9Z E !E J = = == =

3 =0 o Elo ! El ! :rl o rt o .Fl(D o '-l.o o gl FIL s Ft9 sL olo o olo 0) el 6 slL |,, Il. .91" .Flo :t .FI,o J ! I tL ltD +rlar o .pt o c) (,)lt,) t .3lb slF ',torlo E Jl+r:E 5l 3t3l qlL = oto |DlF clo s {J o ;l€ ;[:=, 60 o E +'.clL> -sL trJlEloo5El" '(1rl! El/, '!lL o o ^ tlo 4r o z, LIL C 5roei+, c ].:rgE:glFlHlE OlC'r C) .Flo 0, EE; .=[I -clto c Blilt€ d.:13 El€ hlt - * Blglrlg olo o qlolS 0 5 ol+r o oFlo o. l+, E tlrlg E o olglo-.- o gto.tn o itHE I ;l? ElIg *iL8tglgl |E[IJlo o ol|llF o ;pr =l€EgEBF- glgoro- #[F {r f- EP o gf FI F gl- El- r|

721 th |l) lv L OP L o .Fo 0) g L o, -o L It, oc' c t! o o .o o ol :to f o .ro c c ctr (,) lE +J L OC J o +, CL +J o tn OE L .(t +, tr'o o c L o o EO {De it +) N'e o. g oe L.F o || o Lan co z. o PJ o CO o $-o I co sl c) +t O O O q C O o- CL ol O O Q) o O+r (DF ocl O>!!rDL.tr eOttr.CtlO +) Jl .o!9E92 Eo .icODE'l] +)l c c .tJ rD O:t o ', ru o E.- 6 >ol rD o, l! {f X-o .-o,'o +) sl .e-.rro I F lEl +j lJ JO Lv |o > |o |! .. O+, rD {rF +)l O C C LF |o Op tl) $-rD:Eroc.E {, 5l tf .pJ.eoo F6 lD o oorD o+J E.P Jl ct o .pJ !t, !t +, ctr oc.pE On trtEJ OI OLO oQ) Eo co c o 1J'e 3 L tD O.C O to.F O a tE Oll O a .F O |o.F tI' o O'rO O .F! tt lg C r.e O.e |E olt E lJ.p C)LoE tD 9r0C '- O.rL-t! g Ero tt = opp(,?.i*)g oEo oEL()s! c= oE rl) F q C.F O-C.1 lD -x E ! .- rD.- rD C {)o !E .- E o.lt o+) O.e ,D rD C o-O Cllt tu P 6 O.r 9.Foo =! tD.rO o(L=O lrl O- CO rl) o

~~o E (, o c o o |E IE () q) +) Q) :o E ru c o |o o- 6 o o +) o o c) o L L LL E |! gL E (l) c) L o .o ID +, o- +J {t oc, c, (, +J tJ> @@ J J tt) o~~

I oc g g O.F O >\ q) c) o.o L o ! L o o= c+) o{, ID E Lt +) o q) rDo o>\ .E +) .o L O- !o. O-) L CL OrrL o E (, (, OE LO o+, +r! g .n 62 (l)(l, )c cr- (1, I rDc .ol o .lJ CL L +) +, EF +r+) o cro .aJ tn o +J P O.a co J EP rt)'E o o ) vo +) s rE.r Ctl Bc I Ol C^ CL O- FE :t t>\ L ) .P +J o o< o. .lto tE .o o o orlro tn (rl oo +) 2 JLL O OE, JC = o

+r oL ct oo c o'F=c Llo c olElc ^ cD+, o p +rl 5l >\ t E ::l 9G;g il .Ul cl- O o E o .ul olc E o 5l L |l, ot Jto +rl t .E Ff 6P.J, a o .Fl |!l a ^+,olo 5l o 'Fo 'El lrl c clc .o -ct +J I . -Looll.- >P o> -y rl, ol a) sg, ol o-! t'! L EIg o .ol3 EI> ,E .Ff ela o ,-to tlo ->l {Jlr', f,ls :l E Ll tlt < Eto 'E .IJ -ooOE .yl .FlL slolo !, I c,tc tn +) qIo lrl Ols O) ! .2 6 .:13 :lilb slol o{ E o E Flr,'lidlE -lt ol0, olol ololc ('lxE +r +) |l'l f l! .. o! -lctlL cl >ls ol-F L'E olol}- o '=0, c) oto gl3lg Llslq, Jlol- c lo C Ll.rl.e o{L) n$E tFF :lo-lt.- c OIJI g tr: ! CP rrP crf.- cnv = ao € C,|Ct )= oq) F 3l :r rr ol

722 Ltt n(D O () ! ! :o+r.p(D.Jo CO 'P c q cs t'- O O.C Or too Lol!todL!.1 P c- o o Loo- J O, -O-s J:{ O LO.. EO 9 p o o () g ! c (' o+J olop-o o q) fOL .oo.a O >!,qoEt{J o6|r'--.; Lo-rDO.9gg=rts -9 o -n^cqOLO OO tD.l .no-EB o q o) .^L OO-C LtF..LauL {J J lo o{rc, !a{J= O +)L +)..Ooc+) c L *t b 8-3.: g E o io [ ;* [; ; 9','E:3;l .c+) acDo q +J o 6 o ^o o c o. U) o a -ccn- o.F c9-o.p ,3-'a 9 ..$ C O.F-C' C O...F {D tDg N.1 q o< gL vO c, (, o .- g gE q '- tD 3 O'i N Nalt oe5 'B+)trE+)LLo €!cq) 0, o rD o(o- l4aoL l4o'-??(9Lc3+r'-! |l, E e O'no ovL o O O+r O-o-o$'Fv L o6soo L ZzTL!o -vl tEl-c ol c |o o-o -Gq, -+J- o.- coloo --9L-ctL-'F |! o-6 dSoto .-o -oo!rP!lD-c+) orJ 'Elgr=l+ro-'= o cg .;^ .-o ErD !4O-oo9oa.J c'- rt) lDtlt-'l' !-COc 'lt€Q|Cl! c Oc 'e!o- = !o+r+)+) o.c rEp=S r!i-ru oF€6- O 5c-csooLgto !9= rF FLo?coc-O'ra 9cr9|o -Y O.; =4.;o-! =a|ostDrE6Eot, -v'r'oe.eoStooo .io.o-o'Fe|oo-rtsEo- lD-oog ooSre +)-.P-ooo (J tt.nocllf

~~o 6 q) o .o +) q) o E ID lC o o |E o o o +) .p l.v o ID L o E |uo o |o L E .p+, It) tn an u) U' J~~

o= r 0 C LEt.e O .o g c-C O 0r.r E O E I t!+)oBE c- o (L o o I :'o cD t eSF..L -) t, L +, F O O(F^O rt) o .a L CL.O L >\ O) o o gttsC:OOElD o o.v.F LF O.cl -LL O +, L o ct) .o >rLits > cL+) (D (l, o rDrEoo(rcro r-o o) q) I 3 +r= E.oouro >\= c c :< .o |Ev f J o J=-) -) L = rF

~~o .P -oo~~

.P trl it5l ol P a €t'El- ut 5l ?r o) (, l; gl- ;1" ?l q) E :lt 5ll FrEl tt, € 3l {, OlC, ol FIP'ro il z. olF OJ tol LIJolo o xllt N H ilE :18 Ehf :li ol arlL rllrro rlcrl€ q:lg €lg .elEl:' q) '6r'oro ol:rl o .-1.<13SlgF 3l6F qJlq.arp ollElo F- .-f-'-. oF-'o{tnl3 clolo aPJ o -F- er ts -lElela ol

723 !t E cco |u 'Foto-l !OF @ ocN o |o L.F (D O ooo +J +rF L o. o oe c c) {) L.F o ol ..LL x |l' +r|E{, +ro o) L (,'3+J OO o o rF (l)3 t, +, o-s.o ia o q) tn o€ g .. Q, o c CJ.a C s +J c Eo {, o o+, c, o o 0) C'N N N|!C N+' N o o o6) oo {J o Lg g Lg L 6l! l! Ll! z l! >\ .. oo r -ctor Gt o rl, 0, o) o +J.F c | +) o. €tOl,)oC:O -l0 .nlD L+JLOC!C C o-cr-C.- O ol E O L L Cr o !O C ll) |E o.+) o+r o E (rlo L tD L Ct OrE -C O O O tD 0, ..C, O {r.F +, o.n +rlo o eE .ct('L *)+r I!...FCC >\g|'O--C slo E ()..o-O tD JI(' +) c O tE Ct1 t.r! ) +, O O O O fDJ o.- E OJ Xl,e o o 6 o.c-c ru o L ot-o c -rD o o +) .a |!*) .E L o lElL o L |E > E+r Ol O Ar+rl P>\EC' O-.^c gEfPlDOe{D O.rlD s Fvqt L^ L'-= gl .c 3l>rlr- lo- O'r t lD'- ! o c$ o o o L >EE .o L|o(a OLOI +)llLO-O .Feo It OC O O o O'F J-C L.p 0 (,ol|orQ, L+rl OoILE 1t|o EC v)OC) q) ..PgF Ol+r, |o€ltrF(/,L rol O O tl O - tl, C..O tE a:O CD O OC C 'n E.-O 5 O -c ]Jfocp c-oJl Eoao o EoEs c'!(o o ott* I ! s rJ flF.F'F O c .ol +tl |o c E.F tE+) Cngl E ql o c O 'lC 'e.eEO-0r- O L O.. .--tfo, +J F O lo.. !, .- l/,'n C tll c ol .F-COCr!dro I OO+rCt Srolr-Ec tEErD 'FBE+JE o -y.a+rl !O..+)l Ov?O.pOt9.rC .cEtr',C L C tD eJ talD L C O L (, L tl O+J a Jl .F O.F L oe O'P ! .}) O @.F ErcO.FJ !O|r' SO|ooO O(,O.FO.JI J.o.o-Yl ! 5 c)-O O rt' O+J O.O o.-.oe(7 O(,E (r+)o.5e +to!|o.(,ol oogol ooE+)E ottooo = ==fu.lc) a L 0) oB ! I o o :f .o o +) o o L E g L LL L +, o {) g L LL L o .u c) o oc) o an co co co cn co &.

L s'E L P {J c, cr= o o o .ct! tl J 5 E O>\ o CD Ol O +rr gF +) o t +) oL OL o Q|! lto oo g rDrC, o(, I ll) E ttrLl +rl L I Oe OF q, E E +) D.e cr.F -ct +J o I I O EL IL E o 5 0ro. go- C) |l.) CD CD {J< qr< +, a a JCI .o o. g -) -) EO o |E I tn$ O+) >i .n |l) o q, o'o +)tD.o c +) +) +) lta o.F t t |! € €.e q) = -) J J J= (n =

! oo E El o sl 3lo !t.. €] olrF .Fl o .pl> .F| q) 1J J ttL 6l .pl o c) ol L El olL ol= a ol o :tl 'Fl o ol >to E Lt +)t-o FIE .-l o ?r 3l .el +J FI o ol !!E x .Pl r'rl- = E 'al cl |ol Ol.- lo PI :l r o{> 'olE, E Ll EIL rl c) |olL elSlEle 'Flo)(,lto o ol Jtttl tt-c tl {JIL |Ef Llft, .c,l!t c ol Q, 3til9t; N rrgli o oJ+rLO Ctle|J O t'lolLl+) slolc qlf 31 3l c'lFlrEl0) tolo Jl(,l|E3lf clJl o q) -l.})lFo| g l+, Ltt 3t€l e SlEn . L o|

724 L c !+)rD 0) |l) .Fc OEN +j3 LL ) r+- o o o- c) I q, or q) oro lo L+J 'oo .o L c,o 4lto -E tt L .tJ !o CE tt, B; .-c oco.F cc) a LOE o +) NO .p.p LC Q) c oo o.o c o .cLL q, +, o () FEO >< U' z. o (/, ct) . E.3 .iC(F ..L L.Et o ol (F (D L.- O lE L >O oo .c, o =(, OF! O L =t/r- +, L O +) tt E| o+J 9 O C C!+J O rct.r O O c r{-tcrt .po ! E o o rD o.o c 0, tr's o o E J-c.F a '-O L O 6 L O 9' O. .e o O L O'F O O o J 1C-O v)lJ..O.- C lErF € .tt f L'l' o|| o .o.F L !!s o orp^p'! q) o.o(l)L o Q, -oar tD |D O.. o !E o|to o_c {J 60 -cttDLrDoo oooo ol) J ID.F+)E !t L O J.-.cE .o > 5.. .1, IDO-C t (' O 5+J (l) lD :t O'O*)(,)O t!.r oO +JC OF 'o OO>rtg.lJ +) lD Ou,O JoOr o o.ct -o-c L o o.F.F q) q, ! E > |l' tr+- o t,) cL io E tU+J to o I O.(D-O- 1J otD OBJ !.r)J crl O= O E o (,..,F O O= +J |! E F L t C C L.e ) O lo C o O |E o A c e 6l L r, +r ..o o o o.^O o Ot+-.- E E ql> lE.r E o t L OJ.- C tl' o[.J J L lD O O t, O) L Co OIC trc c, tD +)F-c ooo. +Jeo ol.-+ro lrF-C l.O+rlo OOo o-CfDIE*J.P>\tltD(r)- oEO |l) o op oo+ilcoo=l oE +)+)rD+ttoloJlr).- +)+)-co !pc >\-C O O O -Y O.F CLrlFJiF O I E o ooooOU,U, orDEtElo'| oO+r+) rD,r.- O+)lo-oE O(,l.o-|D|olo c o.Fo Ee.3 FOZ.(L'coo

L o L L CL lt rt) q) a E -o so I |l, rl, o >rO E +J lJ -o 1J FN CL () oo LO r1) o +)o oo L o I ol O.)L |!1t c) L OL IF E o- o rc) Lv E o .p -o q) otL .u E E OE -OL p .rro o I c) :'() oo € o-cl o ]J o)+) po JE to- OE o rt) L 2 o oc) o J+) o -) tn t, +)

E ^ioo o) lf ,F|p P FL o (Jr FcD +)0 o .tJ I o+- EO ol f;l E o l( c) L+' ^+,cc olo Ll fil a P 0) oo a O= .-lo .9l o cL5 Oco Lllt ol ;l =gl3l,r o cl ol c olo |oE EI '61;l +J q) L. -c, tc o J CLO Cl E |o o cEo ol.^ -o >lo c |o tl tl I o J Oe !16 oO () z. .E L o q, lold ^o.l! dlo .r :l cn5 Ol ooo OL .FlL c tDl Ilslfli rolL o g f $l(,'ll o. ol Llor o +) l+r I N Jto JFe tD O |ol:tlE') 4t :l oloa, loll-c # olo -c E clEl p PloJo ! :l:lEl.3 otfo lflo. +J olO {J sl>rlo pl.Elo flOJt, tlLl o o El .PPFFto |oICL O = LFIE ototo cF-lO.-- o{ot . c -lOlO F- o - lU, cs OltlJl> o|to-to ol-lo t slf,; o{cJ lo I J .o FP Or= +jP|| cP.o lo -a< trJ ol ol lol ol F €l=t: zl Fl ()l FI 3l 3l

725 .:a o c 6,- +) CE |!q, ctl ec OL Y3 c) oo c'l c, |E +) '' o L c!: +) clF o tn -co +)c 33 tD !ocrDLl! o .Foo o C C + zoz,oLo o o o o{) tr+)c o.F0) E] +)=+r .)lol |o .o> o>\ o OF ooo E OIF -?lalol o !+) o !+) '!l fl .p ctl c'u o c(o o|El o rE.r (F O |U'e +, ol 't, o ! |oo ! c !t 3

L (o-oh0) (to p =o +) o o o = g tsl g o L(|'LIU It) (L .orlttorDoc 3 +) EFE-) +) o lD L.- C, o Q) 9Q.'L +) oll cL cL g tD O< rU -O lo !E (/)+, 0 0 +) T oo -cl C' |! lop 'lt o c tt t!.FL -) ==(L |9 +, L io CL c g.i o 3,ai c'r^ O olol oo(, L(oo It b= B .io sl3l 6l P ?r-rtlp '- F Po |ol rl E|{r >- clc )- or 4t .' 1t ol !l Jlc rEl.E - .. q) 'EJ t 3l t|.3: ' ;fa-8 ' o '-o = .el. El Epi e :l::.3 co Q) El: .€ . lo E 'Fl -lo 5, E o o i! oler ol+) EIF L o Elq L E .o|E->\ z. .rJ oE 5 tt) .lJ +,raE|Dloltu ('l.-lF 313 FILAl;* L o5 ol.c3E* L o o N ololg olol o.lo o L o{L o L Llolo :'1610 .Elc)..> o t .. oE o ':a) d:lo.: o c) 'ffils EEF -l-.'.o El$tt fl$leLlvotc :.t olPtJc hs ao =! -oo -l=-c) oc) 51 3l el €l IJ) loL

~~7?6 Table 13. Subsistence Harvest Levels iq Pounds per Household, Six Western Region Corrnunities, June 1980 through May 1981"~~

~~Mounta i n Shel don Resource Al akanuk Kotlik Village Point Stebbins~~

Fi sh Eering ci sco 164 147 171 38 r03 63 Bl ackfi sh 998 21s 142 347 1 1386 0 Eurbot 56 47 19 88 200 Cod, saffron 6836410 181 247 Herri ng 0000 0 1,113 Northern pike 67 82 7 367 240 0 Salmon, chinook 480 359 301 385 1 1543 1,272 Salmon, chum and coho 824 659 667 982 31159 1 1190 Sheefi sh 353 321 460 395 943 19 Smel t 230300 60 l{hi tef i sh, broad 122 66 145 834 489 Other fi sh 00063 41

~~Sea mammal s Bel ukha 233 233 150 0 350 700 Sea I ion 13 0 0 000 Seal, bearded 280 54 339 70 490 420 Sea1, ringed 188 85 134 7 335 296 Seal, spotted 107 53 79 46 289 56 Wal rus 33 0 0 00550~~

Land mamma l s Bear, black 0 0 0 13 0 0 Beaver 28 6 27 26 20 0 Caribou 0 0 290 67 0 Hare, arctic and snowshoe 108 51 108 82 46 45 Land otter t+ 0 54 10 0 Mi nk 17 I 304 27 0 Moose 273 179 204 402 238 60 Muskrat 35 19 74 170 37 4 Bi rds Cranes:k 38 11 377 32 70 Ducks* 42 35 33 18 40 74 Geese* 145 67 144 30 111 152 Ptarmi gan* 51 1'l 27 28 29 11 Swans:t 72 21 26 14 30 13

~~Total fish 3r155 1,932 1 ,983 3,499 7,633 3r914 Total sea mammals 854 425 702 123 'l ,464 2,032 Total land mammals 465 257 477 701 445 109 Total bi rds 348 145 267 97 242 320~~

~~Total harvest 41922 2 1759 3 1429 4 1420 9 1784 6r375 Harvest per capita 733 612 510 822 1,397 1 1006~~

~~Source: Wol fe 1981 .~~

a Harvest is expressed in pounds of dressed weight. Data are based on 88 sampled households. Subsistence harvest quantity and composition vary from year to year. Additional species may be harvested by cormunity residents. * Species not identified.

~~727 Table 14. Subsistence Harvest Levels in Pognds per Household, Alakanuk, Sheldon Point, and Scammon Bay, June 1981 through May 1982'~~

~~Resource Al akanuk Scanmon Bay Sheldon Point~~

Fi sh Bering cisco 118 219 142 8l ackfi sh 209 364 1,161 Burbot 90 281 56 Cod, saffron 87 250 258 Herri ng 0 162 0 Northern pi ke 48 157 192 Salmon, chinook 87 572 790 Salmon, chum and coho 502 1 ,530 21332 Sheefi sh 461 0 791 Smel t* 6 11 11 Whitefish, broad 7 66 5

~~Sea marmal s Bel ukha 0 289 150 Seal, bearded 28 57 20 Seal, ringed 28 198 46 Seal, spotted 18 110 4~~

~~Land marmals Beaver 7 31 19 Hare, arctic 22 41 41 Hare, snowshoe 65 91 88 Land otter 9 '13 5 Mi nk 18 36 37 Moose 153 0 204 Muskrat 23 40 28~~

~~Bi rds Cranes:t 38 65 80 Ducks* 28 55 45 Ceese* 55 119 102 Ptarmi gan:k 30 38 46 Swans* 28~~

~~Pl ants Berri es 24 32 41 Creens 49 73 83~~

~~Total fi sh 1 ,724 3 1909 5 1823 Total sea manmals 74 654 220 Total land mammals 297 252 422 Total bi rds 179 349 365 Total pl ants 73 105 12t+~~

~~Total harvest 2 1347 5 1269 6r954 Harvest per capita 499 781 1 ,093~~

Source: Fienup-Riordan 1983a. a Because of numerous inconsistencies in the originally published data, some questions exist concerning the validity and relability of the data presented in this table. Data have been included because harvest level studies have been limited in the Western Region, and better data for these corrnunities and years do not exist. * Signifies that species is not specified. Notes: Harvest is expressed in pounds of dressed weight. Subsistence harvest quantity and composition vary from year to year. Additional species may be harvested by corununity residents.

~~728 Table 15. Subsistence Harvest Levels in Pounds per Household, Nine Western Region Communities, L976~~

~~Land Sea Area/conununi ty Fi sh Mammal s Marrnal s Bi rds Vegetati on Total~~

~~Yukon River Emmonak 8,013 504 1,089 552 78I 10 ,939 Kotl i k 10,810 440 922 562 737 13,471 Mt. Village 12,2I9 1,156 52 s67 397 14 ,39 1~~

~~Kuskokwim River Aniak 2 ,065 759 0 301 32 3,157 Kwethl uk 5,660 846 0 580 3t2 7,398 Napaskiak 5 ,988 688 24 560 458 7 ,718~~

~~Middle Bering Sea Chevak 9,536 168 i ,107 695 471 r0,977 Goodnews 7,532 556 796 540 485 9 ,909 Tununak 7,537 L92 1,016 630 423 9,798~~

~~Source: Nunam Kitlutsisti 1983.~~

~~Note: This table presents one year's data on1y. Subsistence harvest level may vary from year to year.~~

~~729 Table 16. Subsistence Harvest Levels in Pounds per Household and per Capita, Three Western Regio Corrnunities, ca.1985~~

~~Harvest Composition (Lb per Capita): Total Total Households Households Harvest Marine Harvest Harvest per Conmunity Surveyed Size Fish Game Manmals 0ther Per Capita Household~~

~~Qui nhagak 12 4.8 491 r 1 3 128 24 7s6 3,629~~

~~Nunapitchuk 15 6.6 562 41 1 I 82 697 4,600~~

~~Russian Mission 22 6.1 503 9G 0 0 599 31654~~

~~Source: Unpubl. data; Andrews, pers. comm.; pete, pers. comm; lriolfe 1995.~~

~~Notes: Harvest is expressed in pounds of dressed weight. Subsistence harvest quantity and composition vary from year to year.~~

~~730 Table 17. Subsistence Harvest Composition, Six Western Region Cormunities, June 1980 through May 1981~~

~~Mountain Sheldon Al akanuk Emmonak Kotl i k Vi I 1 age Poi nt Stebbi ns~~

~~Total fi sh 65.0t 70.0$ 57.8t 79.2% 78.0t 61 .4t~~

~~Total sea mammals 17.6 15.4 20.5 Z,B l5.O 31.9~~

~~Total I and manrnal s 9.6 9.3 13.9 15.9 4.5 1 .7~~

~~Total birds 7.2 5.3 7.8 2.2 2.5 5.0~~

~~Total harvest* 99.4 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1OO.O~~

~~Source: Wolfe 1981.~~

~~Notes: Data are based on 88 sampled households. Subsistence composition may vary from year to year.~~

* Due to rounding figures, totals are not always 100t.

~~731 Table 18. Subsistence Harvest Conpositions, Nine l{estern Region Cqrmunities, 19Z6~~

~~Land Sea Area/communi ty Fi sh Harmal s Marrncls Birds Vegetation Total~~

~~Yukon River~~

~~Errnonak 73 .3t 4.61 10.0$ 5.0t 7 .1\ 1 00.0t Kotl i k 80. 2 3.3 6.8 4.2 5.5 100.0 Mt. Village 84.9 8.0 0.4 3.9 2.8 100.0~~

~~Kuskokwim River Ani ak 65.4 24.0 0.0 9.5 1.0 100.0 Kwethl uk 76.5 11 .4 0.0 7.8 4.2 1 00.0 Napa ski ak 77 .5 8.9 0.3 7.3 5.9 't00.0~~

~~Middle Bering Sea Chevak 77 .8 1.5 10.1 6.3 4.3 100.0 Coodnews 7 6.0 5.6 8.0 5.4 4.9 100.0 Tununak 76.9 2.0 10.4 6.4 4.3 100.0~~

~~Source: Nunam Kitlutsisti 1983.~~

~~Note: This table presents one year's data only. Subsistence composition may vary from year to year.~~

~~732 Table 1g. Household participation in subsistonce Harvesting of selected species, six l{estern Region Cormunlties, June 1980 through t'lay 1981~~

~~Mountain Sheldon Al akanuk Enmonak Kotl ik Vi I lage Point Stebbins~~

Fi sh Bering ci sco 86$ 83$ 1 00t 31S 57t 75$ B1 ackfi sh 71 56 43 63 83 0 Burbot 52 28 50 69 50 0 Cod, saffron 43 28 43 0 67 92 Herri ng 0 0 0 0 0 83 Lamprcy* 0 0 0 69.2 0 0 Northern pi kc 43 56 36 94 83 0 Sal mon* 100 72 86 94 100 75 Sheefi sh 62 61 79 69 83 33 Smel t* 43 0 14 0 33 0 Whitefish, broad* 53 44 50 81 67 8 Sea Mamal s Belukha whale 24 22 14 0 33 42 Sea lion 10 0 0 0 0 0 Seal* 71 50 100 56 100 100 slal rus 6 0 0 0 0 42 Land mammal s Beaver 29 22 29 38 17 0 Cari bou 0 0 7 0 17 0 Hare, arctic and snowshoe 86 78 93 75 100 50 Land otter 33 11 29 25 33 0 Mi nk 67 22 36 38 50 0 Moose 29 17 21 50 33 8 l.luskrat 71 51 71 69 100 42 Bi rds Cranes* 71 44 86 31 67 83 Ducks* 86 89 86 81 100 83 Geese* 86 89 93 88 83 92 Ptarmi gan* 81 56 93 81 83 58 Swans* 67 28 50 38 83 33

~~Source: l{ol fe 1981 .~~

* lndicates that species is not specified.

Notes: Numbers indicate pcrcentagc of households successfully harvesting each species. Data are based on 88 sempled households. Households and conrnunity participation in a particular harvest vary from year to year.

~~733 Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov.~~

~~Chinook salmon Coho salmon Pink salmon Chum salmon Sheefish Broad whitelish Bering cisco Burbot~~

~~Northern Pike Alaska blackfish Saffron cod/tom cod Pacific herring -Smelt~~

~~' . Needlefish Shellfish Moose~~

~~Bearded seal ilil1 il illl Ringed seal ililll ililll Spotted seal illl il llll Belukha whale Ptarmigan Hare Beaver Muskrat Mink Marten Land otter~~

~~Fox~~

~~Eggs~~

~~of round of subsistence harvest activities bY resjdents Fi gure 1. Annual 1983a) (continued) Alakanuk, Sheldon Point, and Scammon BaY, 1983 iFienup-niorian~~

~~734 Blackberries Cranberries Salmonberries Greens~~

"local common name - species not known Figure I (continued). Solid line indicates tine when harvest usually takes place. Broken I ine indicates occasional harvest effort. Note: Thjs figure is based on partial data; additiona'l species and harvest periods may be used by Alakanuk, Sheldon Point, and Scammon Bay residents.

~~735 Apr. May July Aug. Sept. Oct.~~

~~Sheefish 'whitefish Northern pike Alaska blackfish ' 'Smelt~~

~~Moose 'Bears 'Seals~~

~~Ducks~~

~~Geese~~

~~Cranes Swans Waterfowl eggs Ptarmigan Snowy owl Hare Beaver Muskrat Mink Land otter 'Ftlx~~

~~Berries Plants~~

~~sl)+?cies nor identilied~~

Figure 2. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by res'idents of Atilautluak, 1983 (Nunam Kitlutsisti 1983). Note: Thjs figure is based on partial data; additional spec'ies and harvest periods may be used by Atmautluak residents.

~~736 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.~~

~~Sockeye salmon Chinook salmon Coho salmon Pink salmon Chum salmon Dolly Varden Sheefish 'Whitefish 'Trout Burbot Northern pike Alaska blackfish 'Smelt~~

~~Moose Caribou Musk ox Brown bear Black bear * Seals Waterfowl Ptarmigan Hare Porcupine~~

~~Beaver Muskrat Mink Marten Land otter~~

~~Fox~~

~~Fiqure 3. Annual round of subsjstence harvest activities by residents of Bethel, 1985 (Pete, pers. comm. ) (contjnued).~~

~~737 Lynx Eggs Berries Other plants Firewood~~

~~Figure 3 (continued).~~

~~738 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.~~

~~Salmon Arctic char Sheefish 'Whitefish Least cisco Rainbow trout Grayling Burbot Northern pike Longnose sucker Alaska blackfish 'Lamprey 'Smelt~~

~~Moose Caribou ililtl iltl Black/brown bear ililtl Waterfowl Ptarmigan Grouse~~

~~Snowshoe hare Porcupine Beaver Muskrat Mink Marten Land otter~~

~~Red fox Wolf Wolverine~~

~~Figure 4. Annual round of su bs'i stence harvest activities by res'idents of Chuathbaluk and Sleetnute, June 1982 - l{a.y 1983 ( Charnl ey 1984) (contjnued)~~

~~739 species not identified~~

~~Figure 4 (continued). Sol id line indicates time when harvest usually takes place. Broken I ine indicates occasional harvest effort.~~

~~740 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov.~~

Sockeye ialmon Chinook salmon Chum salmon Coho salmon 'Pink salmon Arctic char/Dolly Varden Round whiteffsh Lake trout Rainbow trout/steelhead Arctic grayling Alaska blackftsh Saffron cod/tom cod 'Flounder 'Smelt Roe-on-kelp Clams, mussels 'Crabs

~~Brown bear Bearded seal Ringed seal Spotted seal Sea lion Ducks, geese Cranes~~

~~Duck, gull, murre eggs Willow ptarmigan Hare Squirrel Beaver~~

~~Fiqure 5. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Goodnews Bay,1983 (!io1fe et al . 1984) (continued).~~

~~741 Muskrat Red fox Lynx Blackberries Blueberries Cranberries Salmonberries Basketgrasses Firerpood~~

~~Figure 5 (continued). Note: This figure is based on partial data; additional species and harvest periods may be used by Goodnews Bay residents.~~

~~742 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Mav June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov.~~

~~Chinook salmon Pink salmon Chum salmon Bering cisco Least cisco Burbot Northern pike Alaska blackfish Saffron cod/tom cod Starry flounder Pacific herring ' 'Needlefish ililt illill ilil1 ' 'SculPin~~

~~Bearded seal Ringed seal Spotted seal Belukha whale ililil1 Walrus ililtl Rock ptarmigan~~

~~Willow ptarmigan I lll Hare ml Mink River otter ililll Arctic fox~~

~~Red fox Crowberries Lingonberries ilil| Salmonberries Basketgrasses~~

~~Fioure 6. Annual round of subsi stence harvest activities by residents of Ho6per Bay (Stickney 1985) (continued).~~

743 Mousefoods Driftwoods ' ;local common nam€ - species not known usually takes F'iqure 6 (continued) . Sol id line indicates time when harvest place. Broken I ine indicates occasional harvest effort.

~~744 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.~~

~~Sockeye salmon Chinook salmon Chum salmon Coho salmon -'Whitefish~~

~~Alaska blackfish Saffron cod./tom cod Yellowfin sole Pacific herring 'Smelt - 'Needlefish ' 'Sculpin 'Clams~~

~~Moose 'Seals Belukha whale Gray whale Walrus Ptarmigan Hare Mink Land otter~~

~~Fox Berries Grasses Other plants Firewood~~

~~"local common name - species not known~~

~~Figure 7. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities bv residents of Kjpnuk, 1985 (Pete, pers. corrTTt. ) .~~

~~745 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.~~

~~Chinook salmon Chum salmon Coho salmon Sheefish Broad whitefish Bering cisco Burbot Alaska blacklish 'Smelt~~

~~Moose Bearded seal~~

~~Ringed seal Spotted seal Belukha whale Waterfowl Ptarmigan Hare Beaver Muskrat Mink Land otter~~

~~Fox species not identified~~

Fi gure 8. Annual round of subsi stence harvest acti vit'ies b.y residents of Kotl i k, 1976 to t977 (Wolfe 1985). Note: This figure is based on partial data; additional species and harvest periods may be used by Kotlik residents.

~~746 Jan Feb Mar, Apr May June July Aug. Sept Oct Nov Dec.~~

Sockeye salmon Chinook salmon ill Chum salmon Coho salmon Bering cisco , , ,,,,1,, ,,1l', ftI !il1 Alaska blackftsh niltl il iltl ill I Saffron codrltom cod iltI ill I Illl Yellowfin sole ililtTililrl rltl Pacific herring Boreal smelt ililil1 ilil1 [ilrl illill ' 'Needlefish ilfftl ilil tl ilil1 ililil ililtl "'Sculpin rf ilr{ililil1 Illl Clams ililt[|ililr1 ililt l iltl Bearded seal ill tl ill lll illI Itl iltl Ringed seal ilt tl lii'l iltl iltI ril iltl Spotted seal ilt tl mrl il illll ilrl Irl iltl Walrus ill I illl lllil tl Irl Willow ptarmigan filill ilf Hare illlll lt I ililtl ilil ll Mink r River otter fiil1 ililil]ililil Itl Arctic fox ill Red fox ill Crowberries ill Lingonberries ilillililtl Irl Salmonberries ill Basket grasses ill ilI ' 'Mousefoods ilI Driftwood ililfl iltl ililil1ilil11 ilil1 Iill ilrI 'local comrrron name - species tot knorln Figure 9. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Kwigil"lingok (Stickney 1935). Solid line jndicates time when harvest usuall,v takes place. Broken line indicates occasional harvest effort.

747 "Salmon tf iltl ililfl 'Whitefish iltl ililtl Northern pike ilil1 ilil| Moose ililtl ililtl il iltl ilil1 ililtl ililtl Caribou ililtl ililtl ililtl ililtl ililtl Black bear ililrl ililrl ililtl ililt ililtl ililtl lilill llil tf l Waterfowl lilill Ptarmigan Grouse ililtl il iltl ililtl Hare Porcupine Beaver ililtlililtl ililtl ililtl ililtl ililtl ililtl Muskrat ililtl Marten

Fox Berries 'sDecies not identified F'igure 10. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Lime Village, 1976 to 1983 (Kari 1983). Solid line indicates time when harvest usual 1y takes p'lace. Broken line indicates occasional harvest effort.

~~Note: This figure js based on partial data; additional species and harvest periods may be used by Lime Vi 1 1 age resi dents .~~

~~748 Apr. May July Aug. Sept.~~

~~'Salmon Sheefish 'Whitefish~~

~~Grayling " Burbot Northern pike Alaska blackfish 'Smelt~~

~~Moose Caribou~~

~~" Bears Ducks~~

~~Geese Waterfowl eggs Ptarmigan~~

~~Grouse Hare Porcupine Beaver Muskrat Mink Marten Weasel Land otter 'Fox~~

~~tVolf fVolverine Lvnx Berries Plants spe< ies not identified~~

Figure 11. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Lower Kalskag, 1983 (Nunam Kjtlutsisti 1983). Note: This figure is based on partial data; additional species and harvest periods may be used by Lower Kalskag residents.

~~749 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov.~~

~~Chinook salmon Chum salmon Coho salmon Pink salmon Sheefish Broad whitefish Bering cisco Burbot Northern pike Alaska blackfish Saffron cod,'tom cod 'Smelt~~

~~Moose Caribou Bearded seal Ringed seal Spotted seal Belukha whale Waterfowl Ptarmigan Hare Beaver Muskrat Mink Marten Land otter~~

~~Arctic fox~~

~~Red fox~~

'species not identified Figure 12. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Lower Yukon River (Wo1fe and Pete 1984). Note: This fjgure is based on partial data; additional species and harvest periods may be used by residents of Lower Yukon River communities.

~~, 750 \ Apr. May July Aug. Sept. Oct.~~

~~Sheefish 'whitefish Burbot Northern pike Alaska blackfish 'Lamprey ' 'Eels~~

~~Moose Caribou Bearded seal 'Seals Ducks~~

~~Geese Cranes Swans Waterfowl eggs Ptarmigan Hare Beaver Muskrat Land otter 'Fox~~

~~Lynx Berries Plants~~

:pr,t'ies not identified lrlcal corrrrrron ndnlc - snecies not known Figure 13. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Marshall, 1983 (Nunam Kitlutsisti 1983). Note: This figure js based on partial data; additional species and harvest periods may be used by Marshall residents.

~~75r Jan. Feb. Apr. May July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.~~

Chinook salmon Chum salmon Pink salmon Arctic chari Dolly Varden Sheefish . whitefish Northern pike Alaska blackfish Saffron.,tom cod . Flounder Halibut Pacific herring Herring eggs 'Smelt ' 'Needlefish ' 'Bullheads

~~" Clams Bearded seal . Seals Pacific walrus Ducks~~

~~Geese Cranes Swans~~

~~Waterlou l eggs Ptarmigan Snowy owl 'Hare~~

~~Porcupine~~

~~Figure 14. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Newtok, 1983 (Nunam Kitlutsisti 1983) (continued)~~

~~752 Beaver Muskrat Mink Land otter~~

- Fox *Small mammals Berries Plants 'species not identified ' 'local common name - species not knou,n Figure 14 (continued). Note: This figure is based on partial data; additional species and harvest periods may be used by Newtok residents.

~~753 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.~~

~~Sockeye salmon Chirtook salmon Chum salmon Coho salmon Pink salmon Sheefish 'whitefish Burbot Northern pike Alaska blackfish Moose Black bear 'Seals~~

~~Ducks~~

~~Geese~~

~~Cranes Ptarmigan Hare Beaver Muskrat Mink Otter Eggs Blackberries Blueberries Cranberries Salmonberries Firewood~~

~~'species not identified~~

~~Fiqure 15. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Nunapitchuk, 1983 (Andrews, pers. corm. ).~~

~~754 Jan. Feb. Mar. Ap.. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.~~

Sockeye salmon Chinook salmon Chum salmon Coho salmon Pink salmon Arctic char/Dolly Varden ililtl ilf ill Round whitefish Lake trout Rainbow trout lililtl ililtl Arctic grayling Alaska blackfish Saffron cod/tom cod 'Flounder

Yellowfin sole .Smelt "Sculpin ilil1 ililtl Roe-on-kelp Clams, mussels ililrl ilil tl 'Crabs Moose Caribou Brown bear Bearded seal Ribbon seal lilill Ringed seal Spotted seal Belukha whale Pacific walrus Sea lion

~~Figure 16. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Quinhagak, 1983 (Wolfe 1984) (continued).~~

~~755 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Dec.~~

~~Ducks, geese Cranes~~

Duck, gull eggs Rock ptarmigan Willow ptarmigan Hare Porcupine ililtl ililrl ilil tl il iltl ilil1 ilil1 ililil Squirrel Beaver Muskrat ililtl Mink Marmot Weasel ilil1 l ililt ililtl ilil1 ililil1 Land otter Red fox Wolf ilil1 ilil1 ililtl lilill ililil1 Wolverine ilil1 ililt l ililtl ililrl ililil1 Lynx ilil1 ililtl ililtl ililtl ililil1 Blackberries Blueberries Cranberries Salmonberries Basketgrasses Firewood

~~"local common name - species not known Figure l6 (continued). Solid line jndicates time when harvest usual'ly takes place. Broken line indicates occasional harvest effort.~~

~~756 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.~~

~~Sockeye salmon Chinook salmon Chum salmon Coho salmon Pink salmon Dolly Varden Sheefish ,Whitefish~~

~~'Trout Grayling Burbot Northern pike Alaska blackfish 'Lamprey~~

~~Moose Caribou Brown bear Black bear Waterfowl Ptarmigan Spruce grouse Hare Porcupine Beaver Muskrat Mink Marten Land otter~~

~~Fox~~

~~Figure 17. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Russian Mission, 1984 (Pete, pers. comm. ) (continued).~~

~~757 Wolf Wolverine Lynx Eggs Blackberries Blueberries Cranberries Raspberries Salmonberries Rosehips Other plants Firewood~~

~~Figure 17 (continued).~~

~~i58 Apr. May July Aug Sept Dec.~~

'Salmon illlt rill ililtl 'Whitefish illll ilil1 ililrl ililtl Burbot ililtl ililtl ililtl I Illl Moose tfiltl Illl ililtl ililtl I Illl ' Caribou ililil1 ililtl ililt l Black Bear ilil1 ililil I ililtl tffiltl 'Waterfowl I I ililtl ill Grouse, ptarmigan illlll 'Hare ililtl Porcupine ililtl il iltl I ililtl ililtl ililil1 'Furbearers lill I Berries, plants ililt l ililrl II Illl species not idenr tilled

Fi qu re 18. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Stony Ri ver, 1980-1984 (Kari 1985). Solid line indicates time when harvest usually takes pl ace. Broken line indicates occasional harvest effort.

~~Note: Thi s figure is based on partial data; additional species and harvest periods ma.y be used by Stony River residents.~~

~~759 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.~~

~~Sockeye salmon Chinook salmon Chum salmon Coho salmon Pink salmon Dolly Varden ililtl ilil| Sheefish "Whitefish Burbot Northern pike Alaska blackfish -Smelt~~

~~Moose Black bear Ducks~~

~~Geese Cranes Rock ptarmigan Willow ptarmigan Spruce grouse ililil| ilil1 Hare Porcupine Squirrel Beaver Muskrat Mink Land otter~~

~~Red fox Eggs~~

~~F'igure 19. Annual round of subsi stence harvest activities by residents of Tuluksak, 1980-1983 (Andrews and Peterson 1983) (continued).~~

~~760 Blackberries Blueberries Cranberries Salmonberries Driftwood Firewood~~

~~Figure 19 (continued). Sol id line indicates time when harvest usually takes Dlace. Broken line indicates occasional harvest effort.~~

~~76L Feb. Mar. Apr. May July Aug. Sept. Oct. Dec.~~

~~Sockeye salmon Chinook salmon Chum salmon Coho salmon Pink salmon Dolly Varden 'Whitefish Burbot Northern pike Alaska blackfish~~

~~Saffron codltom cod 'Cod Starry flounder Halibut Paciffc herring Capelin -Smelt~~

~~' 'Needlefish "Sculpin Herring roe-on-kelp Clams/mussels~~

~~Crabs Other invertebrates~~

~~Musk ox 'Seals Belukha whale Walrus Sea lion Waterfowl/seabirds~~

~~Fiqure 20. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Tununak, 1985 (Pete, pers. comm.) (continued).~~

~~762 Ptarmigan Hare Beaver Mink Land otter~~

~~Fox~~

~~Eggs Berries Grasses Other plants Firewood 'species not identified ''local common name - species not known Figure 20 (continued).~~

~~763 a too E E :t o cl ga 400 o t= o o l! 200~~

~~Por Cepltr F irh €rnr lhrlnr Othor H.rvc!t Mtmmtl.. Resource Category Figure 21. Composit'ion of per capita subsistence harvest for Alakanuk (l''o1fe i9B4b).~~

~~800~~

~~600 tt6 tC o E 400 CI o 3 € o o l! 200~~

~~Prr Ceglte Flrh O:ttr|o llrrlno Othor HarYert Manxnrlr Reeource Gategory~~

~~Figure 22. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Ernmonak (l.lolfe 1984b).~~

~~764 a a ! ta Yo a- Ia 3 oo o IL~~

~~Prr Crrllr Fl.h Orm Isler Hlrvaat laraala Rorourcl Cdrepry Fiqure 23. Conrposition of oer capita subsjstence harvest for Kotlik (Wo1fe 1e84b).~~

~~765 822~~

~~o E c = o E Io It 'o o lt~~

~~Por Cepitr Flrh Ornr larlna Othe r Hervcrt Mammrla Regource Gategory Figure 24. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Mt. Village (Wo1fe le84b).~~

~~o €g t o IE o 3 tt o lro~~

~~Pcr Cepltr Fl rh Grmo llrrlno Othor Hervest Mtm|nrla Relource Cetcgory~~

~~Figure 25. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Nunapitchuk (Andrews, pers. comm. ) .~~

~~766 tta C 5 o Go 400 o t,= o lro~~

~~Per Gapltr Fl rh Grmr ller Inc Othcr Herve8t Mrmmal! Regource Gategory~~

~~Fi gu re 26. Composi ti on of per cap'ita subsistence harvest for Quinhaqak (llolfe et al. 1e84).~~

~~599~~

~~t,o C 5 o 400~~

~~Eo o 3 200 tt o o l!~~

~~Por Ceplt! Fl !h Gemo Marinc Othcr Har ve! I Memmelr Resource Category Figure 27. Composition of per capita subs'istence harvest for Russian Mission ( Pete, pers. comm. ) .~~

~~767 oa ct o a Io 3 E o lro~~

~~Prr Ceplle Flrh €rno lrrlno Olhrr HrrYaat Irnnelr Reaourcc Getrgory~~

~~Figure 28. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Scammon Bay ( Fienup-Riordan 1983a) .~~

~~768 a ^! tE co Go a 3 E 0 o ll,~~

~~Prr Cepltr It Otno Mrrlno Olhrr Hrrvrrt Urnmrlr Resourcc Cetegory Figure 29. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Sheldon Point (l^lol fe 1984b) .~~

~~769 I €c 3 o Eo o tt= o o TL~~

~~Pcr Crgltr Flrh Oeno ltrlno Othrr Hrrvaal lrnmrlr Rccourcc Crlogory Figure 30. Composition of per capita subsistence harvest for Stebbins (l{o1fe 1e84b).~~

~~770 RE FERENC ES Ager, L.P. I975-L976. Eskimo dance and cultural values in Alaska village. Dance Research Journal 8(1).~~

~~1976. The r"eflection of cultural values in Eskimo children's games. In D.F.. Lancy and B.A. Tindall, eds. The anthropological study of p1ay. New York: Leisure press.~~

~~1979-1980. I I I ustrated oral I i terature from southwestern Alaska: storyknifing, storyknives and knifestories. Arts and Culture of the North 4( 1).~~

~~Ager, T,A., and L.P. Ager. 1980. Ethnobotany of the Eskimos of Nelson Island, Alaska. Arctic Anthropology, Vol. XVII.~~

~~ADL. 1984. Alaska population overview: 1983. Juneau.~~

~~ADR. 1985. Federal income taxpayer profile 1979, 19g1, Lggz by Alaska cormunity and income level and filing status. Juneau.~~

~~Andrews, E. 1985. Personal communication. Subsistence Resource Special i sr III, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fairbanks.~~

~~Andrews, E., and R. Peterson. 1983. t,{ild resource use of the Tuluksak Rjver drainage by residents of Tuluksak, 1980-1983. Tech. Rept. 87, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau.~~

~~Black, L.T. 1984. .The_.Yup'ik of Western Alaska and Russian impact. In E.S. Burch, €d. The central Yupik Eskimos. Etudes/In'iut/StuAiei. Supplementary issue. Quebec: Universite Laval~~

~~Burch, E.S. I978. Traditional Eskimos societies in northwest Alaska. In Y- Kotani and t^I.B. Workman, eds. Alaska Native culture and history. Osaka : Nati onal Museum of Ethno'logy.~~

Burch' E.S. 1984. The central Yupik Eskimos: an introduction. In E.S. Burch, €d. The central Yupi k Eskimo. Etudes/Inuit/Studies. Supp'lementary issue. Quebec: Universite Laval --TiT1age.. 1985- Aspects of the subsistence economy of a northwest Alaskan Tech.'Rept . LzB, ADF&G, D'iv. Subsistdnce, Juneau. calista. 1985. subsistence land use maps on file in Anchorage.

~~77r Charnley' S. 1983. Moose hunting in two central Kuskokwim conmunities: Chuathbaluk and Sleetmute. Tech. Rept. 76, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau.~~

. 1984. Human ecology-- of two central Kuskokwim connunities: and Sleetmute. Tech. Rept. 81, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau. -CEuathbaluk co1'lier, J., Jr. 1973. Alaskan Eskimos education, a film analysis of cultural confrontation'in the schools. New York: Holt, RinelLart and l,Ji nston .

Copp, J,.' and J,F. Sntith. 1981. A preliminary analysis of the spring take of migratory waterfowl by Yupik Eskimos on the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta, Alaska. USFl'lS, Bethel, AK. Corre'l'l , T.C. I972. Ungalaql irrgmiut: a study in language and society. Unpub'1. Ph.D. Dissert. in anthropology, Univ. Minnesota. Curtis, E.S. 1930. The North American Indian, being a series of volumes, picturing and describing the Indians of the United States, the Dominion of Canada, and Alaska. Vol. 20, private'ly printed, reprinted by Johnson Reprint Corp., 1970.

~~Dale, G.A. 1953. Northwest A'laska and the Bering sea coast. In I.T. sanders, €d., Societies around the world. vol. 1. New york: The Dryden Press.~~

~~Dall, W.H. 1870a. Alaska and its resources. Boston: Lee and Shepard. . 1870b. 0n the distribution of the Native tribes of Alaska.~~

. 1877. 0n the distribution and nomenclature of the Native tribes ----of- Alaska and the adjacent territory. In Contributions to North American ethnology, Vol. I, Part I: tribes of the extreme northwest. U.S. Geographical and Geological Survey of the Rocky Mountains. Washington, D.C. : Government Printing 0ffice.

. 1B84. 0n masks, labrets, and certain aborigina'l customs, with an ---Tnquiry into the bearing of thejr geographical diitribution. Bureau of American Ethnology, third ann. rept., 1881-1882. Washington, D.C. Dumond, D.E. 1984a. Prehistory: summary. In D. Damas, €d. Handbook of North American Indians, Vo'1. 5, Arctic. I'lashington, D.C.: Smithsonian Insti tuti on .

~~. 1984b. Prehistory of the Bering Sea region. In D. Damas, €d. of North Ameriian Indians, vol. 5, Aritic. washington, b.c. t -llanobookSmithsonian Institution.~~

~~772 Durrenberger, E. P. , ed. 1984. chayanov, peasants, and economic anthropology. New York: Academjc Press.~~

~~Fienup-Riordan, A. 1982. Navarin Basin sociocultural systems basel ine analysis. OCSEAP, OMPA, Tech. Rept. No. 70. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.~~

. 1983a. The effects of renewable resource d'isruption on the socioeconomic and sociocu1tural systems of the Yukon aetta. nepori prepared for The Alaska Council on Science and Techno'logy. *--dTitribution.1983b. The Nelson Island Eskimo: social structure and ritual Anchorage: Alaska pacific Univ. press.

~~. 1984. Regional groups on the Yukon-Kuskokwim delta. In E.S. --BIiFch, ed. T[e ceniral' Yupik Eskimos. Etudes/Inuit/Studies. Supplementary issue. Quebeck: Unjversite Laval.~~

~~Fortuine, R. 1966. Health conditions among the Eskimos of the Yukon- Kuskokwim delta, Alaska. Polar Notes 6:7-ZZ.~~

~~Garber, C.M. 1934. Some mortuary customs of the western Alaska Eskimo. Sci. Mon. 39(3):203-220.~~

1935. Marriage and sex customs of the western Eskimo. Sci. Mon. ---T1T3 ):zr5-227 1947 . Eskimos infanticide. Sci . Mon. 64( Z):98-L02. Gordon, G.B. 1906-1907. Notes on the western Eskimo. Univ. Pennsylvania, Trans. Free Museum of Sci. and Art 2:69-101.

~~. L9I7. In the Alaskan wilderness. Philadelphia: The John C. ----ilTnston Co.~~

Greenfie'ld, lll.c. 1893. The sixth, or yukon District. In R. porter, €d. Report on the population and resources of Alaska at the eleventh census: 1890. Washinton, D.C.: Government printing 0ffice.

~~Hammerich, I.L. 1955. The dialect of Nunivak. proc.30th Int. cong. Americani sts : 632-639.~~

~~Harrison, B.G. 1981. Informal learning among Yup'ik Eskimos: an ethnographic -study of one Alaskan vi1 1age. unpubl. ph.D. Dissert. in anthropo'logy, Univ. of Oregon.~~

~~Hawkes, E.|rJ. 1913. The inviting-in feast of the Alaskan Eskjmo. Canada Geological sunvey, Memoir 45, Anthropological series No. 3, Ottawa.~~

~~773 . 1914. The dance festivals of the Alaskan Eskimo. Univ. Pennsy'l- vania,Anthropo.|ogicalPublicationsVol.VI,No.2,3~~

~~Haynes, T.L. 1985. Personal communication. }'lestern and Interior Regional Supervisor, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fairbanks.~~

Haynesr T.1., and E. Andrews. 1985. Regional research catalog. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fairbanks. Hensel, C. 1985. Personal corununication. Bilingual Education Specialist, Lower Kuskokwim School District, Bethel, AK.

~~Himmelheber, H. 1938. Eskimokunstler, teilergebnis einer ethnographischen expedition in Alaska von Juni 1936 bis April L937. Stuttgari: Strecker und Schroder.~~

. 1951. Der geforene pfad, voldsdichtung der Eskimo, mythen and legenden lrnd ahmenlescnichten. Eisenich: Ericf noth'Veriag. --fr'Iarchen, Hrd'licka, A. 1930. Anthropological survey in Alaska. Bureau of American Ethnology, 46th ann. rept. , lgz$-Lgzg. washington, D.c.: Government Printing 0ffice.

~~Hummerich, L.L. 1958. The western Eskimo dialects. proc. 32nd international congress of Americanists: 632-639.~~

Jacobsen, J.A. 1894. Captain Jacobsen reise an der nordwestkuste Amerikas, 1881-1883. A. l,'|oldt, €d. Leipzig: m. Spohr. Transl. Erna Gunther and republ ished 1977 . Alaskan voyage, lg8l-1993, an expedition to the northwest coast of America, from the German text of Adrian l.loldt. Chicago: Un'iv. Chicago Press.

~~Jacobsen, S.A. 1991. . Yup_'it Eskjmo dictionary. Alaska Native Language Center, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks.~~

~~Johnson, T.F. 1978. Humor, drama and play in Alaska Eskimo mimetic dance. The Western Can. J. Anthropol. 8(1).~~

Jonrowe, D.D. 1980. Middle Kuskokwjm food survey, December, Ig7g. Tech. Rept.51, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau. Kari, P.R. 1983. Land use and economy of Lime village. Tech. Rept. g0, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau. . 1985. l^lild resource use and economy of Stony River village. Rept. 108, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau. -TFh.Kelso, D.D., R.J. l.'|o1fe, and tl.L. Pamplin, Jr. 1985. cooperative efforts to-halt population declines in four species of arctic nesting geese: a po'l i cy perspecti ve. ADF&G, Juneau .

774 Klein, D.R. 1966. Waterfowl in the economy of the Eskimos on the yukon- Kuskokwim delta, Alaska. Arctic Vol. 10, No. 4, Dec. 1966, Kresge, D.T., s.R. Firson, and A.F. Gasbarro. r974. Bristol Bay: a socioeconomic study. Rept. No. 41. Institute of Social and Ecoiomic Research, Fairbanks.

~~Lantis, M. 1946. The social culture of the Nunivak Eskimos. Trans. Am. Philo. Soci. n.s. 35(3):153-323. phitadelphia.~~

. 1959. Folk medicine and hygiene, lower Kuskokwim and Nunivak- ---ETson islands area. Anthropol . p;"p., Univ. Alaska. . L972. Factionalism a!9 .leadership: a case study of Nunivak Arctic Anilrropof ogy gif ).---- -TsTand. . 1984. Nunivak Eskimo. In D. Damas, ed. Handbook of North ---Tnrerican Indians, Vol , S, Rrctic. Smithsonian Institution, t,lashington, D. C.

~~Mason, L.D. 1972. Disabled fishermen: disease and I ivelihood among the Kuskowagamiut Eskimos of lower Ka'lsag, Alaska. Unpubl. ph.D. Dissert. in Anthropology, Univ. California, Lol- Angeles.~~

~~, I974, . Epidemiology and acculturation: ecological and economic to'disease ifrong the ruskowlgamiut Eskimos of Alaska. 14. -_TI'JustmentsCan. J. Anthropol. 4(3).~~

~~. 1975. Hard times along the Kuskokwim. Natural History 84(7).~~

~~Mauss, M., and H. Beuchat. Iglg(1950). Seasonal variations of the Eskimos, a study in social morphology. Transl. J.J. Fox. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.~~

~~Meyer, c. L977. Eskimos, growing up in a changing worrd. New York: Atheneum.~~

Michael, H.N., ed. L961. Arctic Institute of North America, anthropology of the north: translations from Russian sources, No. 7. Toronto: Univ. Toronto Press. Miyoka' 0. 1980. Alaksa Native languages in transition. In K. yoshinobu and |ll.8. W-orkman, eds. Alaska- t'tative culture and histo.y. Senri !tfno]ogical Studies No. 4. Suita, 0saka, Japan: National museum of Ethnol ogy.

~~Miyoka, .0._, and E. Mather. Lglg.__ yup'ik Eskimo orthography. Rev. ed. Bethel: Kuskokwim community college, yup'ik Languag. c.n[.i,.~~

775 Nelson, E.Il. 1983(1899). The Eskimo about Bering Strait. tlashington, D.C. : Smithsonian Institution Press. Nowak, M. 1982. Subsistence economics revisited: a case study in differential inflation. Unpubl. MS. . 1984. Mobility and subsistence access. Paper presented at ---TTaskan anthropological meetings, Anchorage. NunamKitluts'isti. 1983. Updated wildlife harvests for selected communities. Unpubl. document. Bethel. 0swalt, }'l.H. 1957. A western Eskimo ethnobotany. Anthropol. Pap., Univ. Alaska 6(1). 0swalt, trJ.H., ed. 1960. Eskimos and Indians of Western Alaska, 1861-1868, extracts from the diary of Father Illarion. Anthropol' Pap., Univ. Alaska 8(2).

0swal t, ['l.H. 1963a. lvlission of change in Alaska, Eskimos and Moravians no the Kuskokwim. San Marino, CA: The Huntington Press. . 1963b. Napaskiak: an an Alaskan Eskimo corununity. Tuscon: Univ. ----Tizona Press. . 1965. The Kuskokwim River drainage, Alaska: an annotated --*--6'TEliography. Anthropol. Pap., Univ. Alaska 13(1). . 1966. This land was theirs: a study of the North American ---Td'ian. New York: John W'i1ey and Sons, Inc.

. L967. Alaskan Eskimos. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co. . 1972. The Eskimos (yuk) of hlestern Alaska. In }l. Oswalt, ed. Alaskan Native material culture. Fairbanks: Univ. Alaska --ffillernMuseum. . 1980. Historjc settlements along the Kuskokwim River, Alaska. --lTaska Div. State Libraries and Museums, Juneau. 0swalt, H.H., and J.W. VanStone. 1963. Partially acculturated conrnunities: Canadian Athabask'ans and the west Alaskan Eskimos. Anthropologica 5( 1) . . 1967. The ethnoarchaeology of Crow Village, Alaska. Smithsonian tuti on , Bureau of Ameri can Ethnol ogy, Bul I . 199. Washi ngton , -InstiD.C.: Government Printing Office.

776 Patterson, A. 7974. Subsistence harvests in five Native regions. Prepared for the Joint Federal-State Land Use Planning Commission for Alaska. Anchorage: Resource Planning Team. Pennoyer, s., K.R. Mjddleton, and M.E. Morris, Jr. 196s. Arctic-yukon- Kuskokwim area salmon fishing history. Informational Leaflet 70. ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Juneau.

Pete, M. 1984. Subsistence use of herring'in the Nelson Island region of Alaska. Tech. Rept. No. 113, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau. 1985. Personal connunication. Subsistence Resource Specialist ----Jll O'iv. Subsistence, Bethel .

~~Petroff, I. 1884. Report on the population, industries, and resources of Alaska. Tenth census of the United States, special report. Vol. 8. Washington, D.C. : Government Printing 0ffice.~~

Pratt, K.L. 1984. Classifjcation of Eskimo groupings in the Yukon- Kuskokwim region: a critical analysis. In E.S. Burch, €d. The central Yupik Eskimos. Etudes/Inuit/Studies. Supplementary issue. Quebec: Universite Laval.

~~Ray, D.J., ed. 1966. The Eskimo of St. Michael and vicinity, as related by H.M.t,l. Edmonds. Anthropol. Pap., Univ. Alaska 13(Z).~~

. 1980. Native arts and artifacts as reflected in Alaskan exploration before 1867. In A. Shalkrop, €d. Exploration in Alaska, !ap!a!n_ Cook commemorative lectures June-November 1978. Anchorage: Cook Inlet Historical Society.

1981. Aleut and Eskimo art: tradition and innovation in south ---Tlaska. Seattle: Univ. Washington press. Reed,_I., 0. Miyaoka, s. Jacobsen, P. Afcan, and M. Krauss. L977. yup,ik Eskimo grammar. Univ. Alaska, Alaska Natjve Language Center and Yuil'ik Language Workshop, Fairbanks. Ro1 I ins, S.M. L978. Census Alaska, number of inhabitants . IgTZ-Ig70. Univ. Alaska, Anchorage Library.

Sahlins, M. 1972. stone age economics. New york: Ald.ine publ. co. Sarafian, W.1., and J.W. VanStone. I972. The records of the Russian- American Company as a source for the ethnohfstory of the Nushagak Rjver region, Alaska. Anthropo'l . pap., Univ. Alaska 1-5(2). shinkwifl, A., and M. Pete. 1984a. Field notes. ADF&G, Div. subsistence.

777 . 1984b. Yup'ik Esk'imo societies: a case study. In E.S. Burch, The central Yupik Eskimos. Etudes/Inuit/Studies. Supplerrentary --Ea.'issue. Quebec: Universite Laval. Sonne, B. 1978. Ritual bonds between the living and the dead in Yukon Eskimo history. Temenos 14: I?7-183. . 1980. The happy family, myths, ritual and society on Nunivak. ---6penhagen: Kobenhavns Universitet, Institut for Rel igionssociologi. Stetson, J. 1981-1985. Costs of food at home for a week. Quarterly data. Cooperative Extension Unit, USDA, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks. Stickney, A. 1980. Middle Kuskokwim food survey - II. Tech. Rept. 53, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau.

. 1981. Middle Kuskokwim food survey - II. Tech. Rept. 53, ADF&G, -T. Subsistence, Juneau. . 1985. Coastal ecology and wild resource use in the central ---BeFing Sea area: Hooper Bay and Kwigillingok. Draft Tech. Rept.85, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau. Tennant, E.A., and J.N. Bitar, eds. 1981. Yup'ik lore, oral traditions of an Eskimo people. Bethel, AK.: Lower Kuskokwim School District.

Truett, J.C., P.C. Craig, D.R. Herter, M.K. Rayno'lds, and T.L. Kozo. 1983. Draft report. 0CSEAP, OMPA, N0AA, Juneau. Truett, J.C., and M.K. Raynolds. 1983. Ecological characterization of the Yukon Rjver delta: annotated bibiography. Draft report. 0CSEAP, 0MPA, N0AA, Juneau. Tussing, A., and R.D. Arnold. 1973. Eskimo population and economy in transition: Southwest Alaska. In J. Malaurie, ed. Le peuple Esquimau aujourd'hui et damain. Paris and the Hague: Mouton. VanStone, J.W. 1959. Russian exp'loration in Interior Alaska: an extract from the journal of Andrei Glazunov. Pac. Northwest Q. 50(2). . 1967. Eskimos of the Nushagak River, an ethnographic history. -Gttle: Univ. Washington Press. . 1968. An annotated ethnohistorical bib'liography of the Nushagak -----TT[er region, Alaska. Fieldiana Anthropol., Vo1. 54, Pt. 2. . 1970a. Akulivikchuk: a nineteenth century Eskimo village on the ----Nusnagak River, Alaska. Fieldiana Anthropol., Vol. 60.

778 . 1970b. Ethnohistorical research in southwestern Alaska: a milhodologica'l perspective. In M. Lant'is, ed. Ethnohistory'in Alaska and the southern Yukon. Lexington, KY: Univ. Kentucky press. . I97I. H'istorical settlement patterns in the Nushagak River reglon, Alaska. Fieldiana Anthropol. ,' Vol. 61.

Alaska. Fieldjana Anthropol., Vol . 62. . I973. V.S. Khromchenko's coastal explorat'ions in southwestern --TTE-ska. Fieldiana Anthropol., Vol . G4. . 1980. Alaska Natives and the white man's religion: a cultural --Jnterface in historical perspective. In A. Shql krop,- ed. Exp'loration in Alaska, Captain Cook Commemorative Lectures, June-November 1978. Anchorage: Cook Inlet Historical Society.

~~. 1984a. Exploration and contact history of Western Alaska. In ----DlDamas , ed. Hindbook of North Ameri can fndi ans , Vol . 5: Arcti c. lrlashington, D.C. : Smithsonian Institution.~~

~~1984b. Mainland southwest Alaska Eskimos. In D. Damas, €d. ----tian'obook of North American Indians, vol. 5: Arctic. washington, D.c.: Smithsonian Insti tution.~~

~~. 1984c. Southwest Alaska Eskimo: Introduction. In D. Damas, €d. Handbook of North American Indians. Vol. 5: Arctic. Washington, D.C.: Smi thson i an I nsti tuti on.~~

~~vanStone, J.l.l., and l,l.H. 0swalt. 1960. Three Eskimo communities. Anthropol . Pap. , Univ. Al aska 9( l0) .~~

~~Whymper, F. 1868a. A journey from Norton Sound Bering Sea to Fort Youkon. J. Royal Geog. Soc. 38:219-237.~~

~~. 1868b. Travel and adventure in the territory of Alaska. London: ----lioh'n Murray.~~

. 1889. Russian-Ameria, or "Alaska": the Nat'ives of the Youkon and adiacent territory. Trans. Ethnologica'l Society of London -TTVer7 :1,67 -183. Wolfe, R.J, lg7g. Food production in a western Eskimo popu'lation. Unpubl. Ph.D. Dissert. in Anthropology, Univ. California, Los'Angeles. . 1981. Norton Sound/Yukon delta sociocultural systems baseline analysis. Tech. Rept. 59, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau.

779 ------: 1982- Alaska's gre_at sic_kness, 1900: an influenza - epidemic of measles and in a virgin sbi'l population. p"o.. Am.' soc. rzotzl. 1984a. Affidavit of Dr. Robert J. }iolfe concerning Civil Case No. J84-013. Fourth Judicial District-, Juneau. 1984b' Commercial fishing in the hunting-gathering Yukon yup'ik economy of a River society. in E.s. gurcn,- e'd. The 'centrar yup.ik Eskimos. Etudes/rnuit/Sdudies. suppiementary issue. Universite Laval Quebec:

1985. Personal cormunication. Research Director, ADF&G, Div. Subs'istence, Juneau. --=-'. !{olfe, R'J" and L.J. Ellanna' cg1ps. 1983. Resource systems: use and socioeconomic case studies of fiihing and hunting in nruiti corununities. Tech. Rept.6l, ADF&G, Div. Subsiit.nc., irn.uu. Wolfe, R.J., J.J_. Gross, S.J. Langdon, J.M. Wright, G.K. Sherrod, L.J. E'l1anna, v. sumida, and P.J. usier.' 19s4-. Subsistence-based jn coastal cormunities economies of Southwest-niaira. recrr.-n.pi: 89, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau. ldolfe, R.J., and M. pete. 1994. Use of caribou ad reindeer Andreafsky gg, in the Mountains. Tech. Rept. Aordg, Div. suusili.n.., Juneau. woodbury, A. 1984. cev'armiut .qanemc-l'it qulirait-llu, Eskimo narratives and tales from Chevak, Alaska. Alaska'natiu" iunguuti.'c.nt.", Alaska, Fairbanks Univ. Zagoskin, L.A. 1967. Lieutenant Zagostin's 1842'1844. travels in Russian-llorilr America, In H.N. Michael , ed.- nrciii institute of America, anthropology of the north: iranslations from Russian sou.ces, Toronto: Univ. Toronto press. No. 7.

~~780 Subsistence and 0ther Local Uses of Resources in Interior Alaska~~

~~i. LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENT~~

The vast Interior Region of Alaska comprises some 200r000 m'ia bounded !.y the Brooks.Range in the north, the'Alaska Range 'in ttre south, the Alaska-Canada border in the east, and the Nulato Hills in the west. Tltiq legion forms the major Alaskan portion of the Yukon River watershed from the community of Holy Cr6ss to the Alaska-Canada border. Prominent Yukon River tributaries, such as the Innoko,-Regi6n Koyukuk, Porcupine, and Tanana rivers, also lie within the Interior anO constitute maior river systems in their own right. The upper Kuskokwim river drains the southwest portion of the rejion. More"than 40 communities are located in the Interior Regiori, ranging in s.ize from villages of less than 100 residents to Fa-irbanks, ihe-second largest city in the state. Map I illustrates the boundaries and conununitiei of the Interior Region.

Interior Alaska represents the westernmost extension of subarctic North America. Vegetation in the Yukon Va'l1ey is typical of the mixed conifer-hardwood borea'l forest and consiits larjely of white sp"ri. (!igea and (Be,tIJa pup.niit.iii- 'interspersed with0penstandsofblacksp',.e@andtree]essbogsinglaqca) t9p_er.birch tiunat lgw-lving areas and low and tall shnlETanffinii-a variety of tundra in the foothil'ls and at higher elevations. Balsam pop'lal (Populus Pal s=gmi{efa) and black cottonwood (populus ll"lchocgrpa) are conTnon fn-flooTFlain areas along meanaeitng'stirearns (Viereck and Little lgl?). \ The climate of Interior Alaska is classified as continental, characterized by a wide variation in_annual temperature extremes, witn precipitation generall.t, tess than l5 inches annually. Surmer temperatures frequently reach 90oF, and winter temperatures oi -50" to -60"F a.e-noi uncommon. There is a frost-free period of about 100 days from late May through August. Boat travel on navigable rivers is irecluded UV lii, for seven months of the year. Snow-cover duration exceeds 200 OaVs per year' and the maximum snow depth averages 20 to 30 inches over most of the region (Gardner 1981, Selkregg 1976).

Game Managemg3t.u1^ltsJWs) .lz,.zo,.zl ,24, and 25 and Game Management Subunit (GMS) 19D fall within the-Interior Region. 1n. diverse habitats of !lit'large area of Alaska host a viriety of wildlife species as both residents and seasonal migrants. fable I lists fish and wildlife resources commonly utilized by-residents of communities in

~~787 I - -'--f -~~

o a t o E 6 o .a dt o 0 6s o ,z E E (, o go g qt I E I (, .9 o o (, o to co '6 ul a o G o ao a o o Y o o b o o .E o =a E 5 oo oo I o C i o 8.9 a tr a og a G a : -X A (t\c /> lto (, I \.. 6e B G fr TE = ut is F eo a o .E E = t 3 sC' : o o aa o a t g J o :'8 E (u {l o lo I .t UJ 6 'a L It a J o J f, t .a/ { ! a to o o o 4o o P x F E c 3 t o o 6 .1 a I (lJ F 0 O 5 t G c F o o. =

782 Interior Alf:1.1- tgduy. Moose,. caribou, severar furbearer species, migratory waterfowl, salmon,, whitefish, and northern pike are-'cu"Tuou Dar- ticularly _'important from a human-use standpoint (Hat;ei rbasj. from the Porcupine, Fortymile, and Delta'caribou herds--several account for a Taiofity . of the caribou harvested in the region. smal I , localized herds provide more limited hunting o"pportuniiies at other Interior Alaska locations. Wildlife resources are not evenly dis- tt"ibuted throughout the_region but occur in areas of preferreo hjuitai, often in local, seasonal, or cyclic concentrations.

II. HISTORY AND PATTERNS OF HUMAN ACTIVITY I chronology of human activity and cultural changes in the interior Region is useful in understanding the past and piesent socioeconomic role of wild resources. This secfion nelins with a brief discussion of !|9 . or.iginal habitation of the Int6rior and the [rotohistoric Athabaskan settlement and subsistence. pattern that was intrinsica'l1y tied to wild resource use. The historic p.iioi in in. Interior generally encompasses the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. This time lPan has been variously divided into .rut Uy'- ..r.urchers, depending upon the orientation-of their work. l,lithin the context of this narrative, three historic periods will be contact, aii.usi.a: l-) tne fur trade, and mission period, lg30-lgg5;2) tnJgord rush and territorfat period,.|885-1950; ahd:) ihe perioo iinie tgsd.

A. 0riginal Habitation The archaeo-log'ica1 record suggests that ancestors Native pgpulation of Alaska's arrived via ihe.|0,000 Bering land briog. p;io. to the end of the ice-age :ome yeirs ago. It is theorized that some ^last -Al of the_se ear'ly i nhabi tants oicupied aska 's coast, wi th subsequent populations, the ancestors br present-day Esliimos, spreading east across the arctic coast of North Americi. Another group entered Al as ka ' s i nteri or, thei descendants yukon r spreadi ng eastward through the Terri tory and Bri ti sh cbt umuial reaching what is now Washington State aiound 6500 B.C.-rgzoj. These were the ancestors of the Athabaskan Indians (selrregg Rela_ tively I itt'le known -h-unters' is about these ancient - of the interior. Their nomadic r ifestyle and the tenalncy over the mfllennia for habitation sites td ue eroded by riveri"or-'covered with forest has made archaeologicai discoveries from this chapter in Alaska,s-growth prehistory rare (itilA.l. Linguistic evidence qoints -to the emergen-ce of three major groups of Athabaskans around 3,000.ye.ars ago. One of these grorpr, the northern Ath.abaskans,- occupi-ed inte-rior and southcent"rai'Ataska and the interior of western canada. (vanston - e 1g7al. Among Northern Athabaskans, further diversificat'ion resul ted in the

783 .|400 formation of additional subgroups by about A.D. Nine linguistic subgroups of northern Athabaskans are recognized in Interior Alaska today. These are the Han, Holikachuk, Ingalik, Koyukon, Kutchin, Tanacross, Tanana, upper Kuskokwim, and-uppei Tanana (Krauss 1982). Map 2 shows tne liographic distribution of these subgroups.

~~B. Protohistoric settlement and subsistence patterns, to lg00~~

The protohistoric subsistence pattern of interior Athabaskans typically invo.lved .a dependence on summer fishing and gathering activities gnd spring and fall caribou hunting iHostei tgeto)] This genera'l pattern was various]y artered to producL a subsistence strategy that could best exploit local resources. In the areas of the interior where salmon were predictably abundant seasona'11y, salmon played a more pronounced role in the annual cycle, thereby allowing subs'istence activities to be carried out from a centralized location for perhaps half the year. Among qfogqs i nhab'i ti ng headwater areas of the i nteri or ana a'long th; divide between the Pacific and arctic drainages, big game suih as caribou, moose, b'lack and brown bear, and Dail sheep iended to be more important. This greater dependence on big game demanded a more nomadic existence (VanStone 1974).

The population density of interior Athabaskans tended to be lower than that of coastal Eskimo populations, with Athabaskans livinq _i1-_generallJ smaller and more widely dispersed groups (Hoslei 1981a). The,primary economic unit wjs the family-or'household. several families combined to form the local group, and several I oca I . groups consti tuted a band. Among hi ghly- nonia-ai c groups i n pursuit.|00 of big game, band size usually was restricted to'fewer than individuals. Among bands relying heavily on salmon, the local abundance of that resource allowed band size to reach perhaps 200 (v_a_nStone 1974). Each family, 1oca1 group, and band exploited a well-defined territory that encompassed seasonal camps for hunting, fishing-, gn4 gathering. where'group participatibn was required or beneficial, such as in caribou hun'ting and salmon fishing and processing, the activities frequently becaire a cooperative effort among various local groups or bands. The combined territories of linguistically-related bands defined the extent of the language groups depicted in map z. Dialect differences occurred within groups, Along the Tanana River, for example, where four language groups are shown, language actually varied s'lightly between each band over a continuum lrom the irpper to lower reaches of the river (McKennan lg8l).

Dwel'lings generally reflected the degree of band mobility. The more sedentary salmon fishers, such as the Ingalik,-framework buili semi- subterranean structures consisting of a pole erected over a shallow excavation and covered with earth and sod (VanStone

784 I lt \ \ \ \ l oc I o= E, / (t -- 6\ --l o - o (\ ltJ (5 l a a 3 .s 5 € ro \ NrE L o o fz tI = \' Y J g o \ z d. I Y \ ! o ! t'" \- (|J o o +) s l----'-\ E o I F { +) \ s\-- o t( e t\ Y a '. o 9 E t (u FUJ l{ z 1.' [*]:s)f --. "\g (g :a rd I \\EI9O (o I +J --*-. \-.---- c!

~~(d =~~

785 '1974). The more nomadic game hunters, such as the upper Tanana, built dwelli.ngs that weie necessariiy i"ri permanent. Their winter dwellings generaily consisted of a pole'trame*0.[ covered with skins to form a dome-shaped rodge. As'rlnv might as 20 moos"-hides be needed to cover one struclure. summer dwellinqs were simple lean-to structures covered with bark unJ,orJ'fitll.i" ' The seasonal round of fish and wildlife harvesting by interior Athabaskans varied. subsistence strategies differed" groups, uftrg"uinor, local _and even famiries as memders sought-cormon tlre mJit-.tri- cient nreans of exp'loiting local resources. themes in the annual cycles most of interior Athabaskans included ttre-movement-ier to s-pring,' summer, far 1 and- winte_r . , camps.'g"orp These .urp, r within the defined territory of the local or band ind favorably situated to harveit locally avaitiure resources at ""r.that season. winter subsistence activities commonly inctuoea smal I g3qre lynting and fishing through the ice on lakei ano strea*i"to, whitefish, burbot, and brackiish. rox, norf, ;;ir;;i;;,- ana marten were harvested for the'ir. fur by uiing a variety oi-sna.., and deadfalIs (Osgood r910). Most gi.*is, howeverl were"ilaae from the hides or furs of an'imals ttrit couid'also be used-ai iooa guch as moose, caribou,. bear, trare, -nauua. (VanStone -she_ep, -inj lynx, inO 1974, Cautiietd 1983b). lloor" isotated bands of caribou were tracked and harvested in dq.p snow, and bears, primari ly bl ack bears , were hunted i n dens (Nir son r'gzij . lliit.,^ was also a time for visiting, trade, and'ceremonies (selkregg r976).

Lli:l !9 lleakun' a movement to spring camp took p1ace. In areas wnere carlDou were common, spring camps were situated to harvest ca.ibou d.uring tleir spr.inj migratibn noithward. As lrearup progressed, waterfowl., muskrat, and beaver were groups_heavily harvested. nrong dependent on salmon, the move to sumrner fish camps took place shorily after breakup. l'|eirs, basket traps, dip nets, and set nets were used to harvest the vaiious summer salnon runs. lnnf! hunting trips and. most gathe_rin-g ictivities atso tool pii." in the vicinity..of fi_s!r campi. In I'ate suo,r.r, diminished, as salmon runs nunting_efro.li'io" moose, caribou, and Dall sheep increased (Ctark l9-81, Snow lggl , VanSt,inJlg/+). Among groups whose territory did n_ot include good salmon streams, sumner camps were more conmonly located in upland areas, where moose, caribou' _Da'l-l sheep, ani bear were hi'r.vesteo. prior to freeze-up' some famiIies mbved to falt camps'ul.ong rivers to- fish for whitefish and salmon. Among most interior nifrauasr

786 The above description highlights major subsistence resources associated with local subsistence strategies. It is important to real ize that as hunters and gatherers in a relativ'e1y harsh climate, survival commonly depended upon their ability to know and utilize alternative.|981a, plant and animal resources when conditions warranted (Hosley s'lobodin l98l). Trade was also important. Trade networks that linked neighboring bands extended to Eskimo gloups. in siberia and east to Indian groups in canada (Hosley 1981a). Trade served to al'leviate loiar shortages of specific conmodities and to promote the spread of new idels and technology ( ibid. ).

~~.|830-1885 C. The Contact, Fur Trade, and Mission period,~~

Interior Athabaskans were among the last Native peoples of North America to have direct contact with Europeans. western goods, however, such as tobacco, tea, utensils, and manufactured cl6thing found thei r way i nto the 'i nterior wer r 'i n advance of di reci contact through neighboring Indian and Eskimo intermediaries. separated by distance and geography from the late-eighteenth and nineteenth century Russian presence and European Lxplorations a'long Alaska's coast and from the Hudson Bay company traders converging from qroups the east, some interior Athabaskan '1975).did not experience direct contact until the 1gg0's (Helm et ll. The Yukon River provided the avenue for trade and exp'loration that broqght initial contact and the permanent presence bf non-Natives to Interior Alaska. During the late 1830's, Russian explorers based out of the newly established settlement of St. Michael ascended the lower Yukon River and founded trading posts at Russian Mission in 1837 and at Nulato in rg3g. ay tne early 1840's, Russian traders had also ascended the Kuskokwim River and established a regular trade relationship with Upper Kuskokwim Athabaskans in the vicinity of vinasale'below tha present-day community of McGrath (Hosley 1981c).

From the east, Hudson Bay Company traders reached the Yukon Rjver via the MacKenzie, Peel, and porcupine rivers during the lg40s, establishing.|863, their farthest-west outpost at Fort Yulion in 1841: In a trader navigated the Yukon River between Nulato and fqt!. Yukon, linking the yukon posts for the first time (Loyens 1e66).

l^lhereas the trade goods reaching the interior prior to contact represented conveniences and occasional'ly served to elevate the status of individuals as local leaders, they did not s'ignificantly alter Athabaskan socf al or economic systemi (Hosley l9llb). The establishment of resident, non-Native representatives of the fur trade at the Nulato and Fort Yukon posts sparked the development

~~787 of a new dual economy. with increased and direct access to western_ goods, flour, tea, sugar, tobacco, and western clothing gradually became regarded as necessities among Athabair~~

Along with a slight'ly altered seasonal round to accommodate a greater trapping effort, this period brought other changes in resource harvest. F'irearms.|850 became increisingly available to interior Athabaskans after through the roif yukon post and trade with Kotzebue sound Eskimos (Clark lggl ). Firearms had become cornmon between Nulato and__For! yukon uy liloz and prevltent.|900). throughout the Yukon v_a.'l1ey by 18_83 (whymper 1869, schwatka The increased use of firearms allowed caribou nunting patterns to be more individual istic compared with the cooperaii've caribou

788 drives of the lo.c91. group or band used traditionally (Hosley l98lb). Moose, which had been difficult to harvest uiing traditional methods such as bow and arrow, were more easi]y-taken with firearms and thus became.|869). an increasingly importait food resource (Hosley 1981a, Whymper

An,improvement in winter transportation deve'loped in association w!tl the growing emphasis on trapping. The ude of dogs to pu11 sleds was borrowed from neighboring Eskimo cultures and increas- llgly adopted by interior Athabaskans after 't860 (Hosley tgglb). This did not represent a major cultural modification since basket- and toboggan-type sleds were traditional items of Athabaskan material culture,_qlq.|936, dogs .|940). had been used for huntjng and as pack animals (Osgood The use of smail di,g teams for winter'lation transportation led to a gradual increase in tlie dog popu- of the interior. Bales of orieo fish entered the Ecbnomy as a standard of trade, as longer, more intense periods of summer salmon. fi_shing w_e.re required to supply the growing demand for dog food (Hosley l98lb, McKennan '198.|). .|830 .|885 In summary, changes occurring between and included a developing dependence on items of nonrocar manufacture, such as western clothing, foodstuffs, firearms, and armunitjon. The annual round was slightly altered to 'ofplace a greater emphasis on wi nter trappi ng, and the growi ng use dog tlams resui ted i n a more intense summer sa'lmon fishing effort. The introduction of firearms.promoted a more individualistic hunting pattern and an increased utilization of moose.

It should be noted that these changes were gradual and not exclusive of other cultural patterns. Despite tlie possession of firearms and steel traps, for example, dead-fal1 traps were preferred among Athabaskans,.|900 and the bow and amow remaiired in rise unti I well after (vanStone 1974, Hosley l98lb). whereas western clothing wqs quick]y adopted as preferred sundner attire, traditional hide and fur garments were reta'ined for winter use (ibid.). And although.|885 taites were acquired for flour, sugar, and tea, subsistence in was still attained through a ieasonal round of activity that remained general'ly unchanged from earlier times.

.|885-.|950 D. The Gold Rush and Territorial period, Mineral exploration in Alaska increased under united states terri- tori.al policies that encouraged resource extraction. In lgg6, gold was discov-ered along a-tributary of the Fortymile Rivero focusing mineral exploration in areai along the Alaska-canadi border. A go]d strike on Birch creek in r893 red to the establishment of circle city and rapid in-m'igration, setilement, and development of the circle mining distriCt. ciicle remained the

789 ggntqf.of upper Yukon River setilement and mining Klondike until the famed gold disco_very in 1ggl . The stampeoe [rrat fol'lowed and the boom town development of Dawson and the .|900,Klondike had..o."_ cussions throughout the whole interior. By n.* iornr'nua been established.|00 and ord setilements giveir renewed importance. More than steamships were operatiig along the yulion Riu.r" (Cantwel I 1904). For interior Athabaskans, the late nineteenth and early-untire twentieth centuries was a time of accelerated cultural change. tne fur trade and .missionary period, which was charicterized by a relatiyely scattered presence of non-Natiuei uno--tn.--uJiiu. pal!icipation of Athabaskans in a mercantile fur e.onory,-'tn. goldrush and terrilofal periocr 'introduced mineiit -aevei'Jpment, which caused a shift toward nonrenewable, capital_jntbnsive resource extraction that did not_ require the participation Alaska '1974). of Natives .(vanstone The slow change'in maderiat ana social culture beg.un.during the fur trade was ripidly ici.ierated as introduced epidemic diseases and alcohol deciinatei tradiiionat wage labor joined .groups-.. trapping-to as another form of employment.-:on Many Athabaskans were attracted mining settl.r.nij uy lpportuni tjes, where . they worked as wood cutters, giid"s, freighters, and market hunters ( ibid. ). Materiaf irt ir". underwent a transformation, such as the abandonment of traditional 9T"]tings_for log cabins and canvas tents and the adoption-fh5-.iiili.n.y or-tn. fish wheel, introduced around t9t0 (clark t98t). of the fish whee1., coupled_with an extraordinarily nlgh demana-ro. dog food by_ in-migrants, placed new emphasis on iatmdn fiining u, a source of income fof many Athabaskins. Due to these fories, traditional patterns of seasonal moves and settl.r.ni u.lun-iJ u. replaced by a more,,sedenta-ry- dual pattern of winter vliiigei-ano suruner fish camps (Hosley lggla).

The shock of the go'ld rush.|9.|0, was short-lived, though its effects were. more permanent. By mineral exploration in interior Alaska was in decline, Jnd uy ist5 the golh rusn had enaeo. tn its wake were dozens of smari conmunitiei connected bv a neiwort< of sled trails and roadhouses. Territorial status wai granted to Alaska in 1912. with this new status came new powers 6f government anq plans fqr developmen_t. school sysiems, roadi, and municipa.'l governments were eitabljshed..|930,s. Fur iarmjng and trjpping wgrg major enterprise into the Following-woria-.uiii mining returned r, as .a significant industry-new to the"interior,-wiffr large minin_9. companies uiing dredges and mecfranii.a.|92] .qripment to rework old cla'r]s. in many mining-districts. In , u'.oii.g" was built near Fairbanks. tn igz3, the Alaska Railroad was completed from Seward to Nenana and Fairbanks, providing a new transportation route to the interior. Rvfat'ior, ua'seo in Fairbanks, was quick'ty. rep'tacing the dog team f;i ;;it , ?-riigr,t, and .pas_senger service to remote-cornmunifies. Fairbanks' coniiiueo to develop as a regional center for the interior during tne ie+os,

~~790 when World War II spurred construction of military bases, air- ports, and the Alaska H'ighway and ushered in the modern era (Sel kregg 1976) .~~

.|950 E. The Period Since The post t,lorld War II era is marked by lega'l and political mile- stones, economic growth, capi tal improvements, and resource development. In the context of this narrative, several of these events need to be highlighted as ones that have helped shape contemporary lifestyles in Interior Alaska. .|959. Alaska gained statehood in State selection of lands as provided for under the Statehood.|968 Act and the major oil discovery on Alaska's North.|971, Slope in accelerated the Native land claims process. In the Alaska Nat'ive Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) was passed to address the land claims issue. Through the creation of Regional Native Corporations such as Doyon Ltd. i n the interior, Alaska Natives emerged from ANCSA as a new political force and major land owner in Alaska. Development of the Prudhoe Bay oil field and construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline in the 1970's focused national attention on Alaska's resources, initiated a new era of scientific study on the arctic and subarctic environment, and provided a major source of revenues to the state. Fairbanks was favorably situated to become the major staging area for the unprecedented level of construction activity associated with the p'ipeline project and for air shipments to Prudhoe Bay. The pipef ine boom d'iminished with the completion of the project jn 1977, Economic and demograph'ic spin-offs from the pipe'line era and the petroleum industry are still be'ing felt. Employment created by the state spending of oi1 revenues on capital improvement in urban and rural areas'is now the major economic base in the state. The development of support industries and a growing state-federal infrastructure in urban centers such as Fairbanks caused rapid population growth through in-migration from the continental United States (Dixon 1978). In smaller communities, the subsistence way of life responded to the developments described above with increasing ties to the cash economy. Snowmachines,.l960's. for examp'le, were introduced in Alaska in the early Despite their relatively high cost, the accep- tance of the snowmachine as a replacement for dog teams was swift. Incorporation of thi s technological innovation increased the capitalization costs of hunting and trapping but decreased labor (Frances .|969). costs Time spent at wage emp'loyment in order'largely to afford a snowmachine and gasoline to run it could be offset by the increased mobility it afforded and the liberation from the year-round care and feeding of a dog team. The decline in dog teams in turn affected salmon fishing effort, as less fish

791 were needed for dog food. During the early 1970's, this fishing effort was, in some cases, rediiected toward involvement in the cornmercial salmon f ishery that was then developing along the Yukon River and provided another source of seasonal income for iocal res i dents .

~~I I I. POPULATION~~

Although estimates are difficult, aborigina'l population levels have been reconstructed from historic source d'ateriais, cultural-.Jf ogiiui influence, lld archeologica'l evidence. Hosley (l98lb) estimates that between 4,000 and 6,000.|850). Natives occupied the tnterior Region at the time of contact. (c.a. The Natjve population 'in the Contact era, however, already had undergone substantial decline from the diseases preceded^and.accompanied tfat contact. The.|750, aboriginal population of the Kutchin (Canadian and Alqskal) circa foi examfiie, is estimated at around 5,400 (Krech lgi8). Following successive epidemics of disease over the next century, that populati6n'groups was reduced to around 900 by 186? (jbid. ). Other Athabaskah probab'ly wlre similarly rydlggd by fami ne and di sease. A smil I pox epi demi'c , whi ch ki'l I ed 25-50% of the Native population in southwesl and'southcentral Alaska in 1830's .|839. the reached Nulato in .|863, Scarlet fever devastated the upper Yukon River p9p!lation around annihitating entire Native settlements (Michael 1967, Helm et al. 1975, Tanana C-h'iets Conieience 1983). Based on comb'ined estimates from VanStone (1974) and Krech ftgTAj;-ih; late nineteenth c-entury Na!iyg population of tne Inter-ior'negi6n wJs probably between 4,500 and 5,000. .|890 The decades of the gold rush era between and l9l0 were a time of large demographic _change.s in interior Alaska. Unfortunately, question- ab'le census data from that period do not accuratelV po"t"iy-the tne population. The 1890 census.|978).. reports 3,912 inhabita-nti in ,'yuicon di stri ( Rol ct" l.i.ns _Ihir _ f i gure seems parti cul ar'ly I ow ao;- sidering the. estimate of 4,500-5,000 -offered above and considering-yukon that the boundaries of that district included the Eskimo-ociupied River delta a,nd a portion of Norton Sound. The 1900 census', taken at !h. height of the. gold rush gla, was probably ..utonubly-accurate in terms of total numbers of inhabitants, but the-huge influi transjent prospectors of anq tlg rapid establishment and abandonment of m.ining settlements made the listing _of village and corrnunity populationi difficult. Ar.9 resu.lt,--populat'ion fi!ures for on,ty 2l ,,selected', settlements north of the Alaska Range ar6 offered in ine-t900 census, and no distinction is made between-Eskimo (ibid.). and Athabasiin populationi .|890 Whereas the total population of Alaska doubled between and .|900 (ib'id.-),- the Alaska Native.|975). population continued to decl ine between lgg0 and l9l0 (Helm et al. Epidemics of influenza and measles concentrated .|900 in western Alaska in reached the middle yukon River to a

79? point above Rampart, killing many Nativ.es (wolre pneumonia, 'rrritiu.1gg2). Tubercu-los.is,' and influenza iemained maio. n.-uttf, pri'Uf ers in Alaska throuqhout the first half tfre (Havnei 'in. of twenitettr ..ntu.y'ui- tut. as 1969- . 197_91.-.|910,. witn . avaitabil ity of improved medicat facjlities after however, the popuiatioi of Alaskan Athabaskans began to rise, increasing zs% between'tito and r930 (H.]n, census data .t'Ji'. r975). in l910 show the establishmeni of many contemporary com_ mun'ities and the eme-rgence of Fairbanki ir u-majoi prpriiii.n-center. Table gives p-oPu-lation .2. information for selected Interior Alaska communities from 1890 to 1990.

The Fairbanks North Star Borough comprises the re_gion,s lation concentration largest popu- of^ popuration ani the second-)s,ooo rirgest ;;b;;-area in nll:fu. one-thirb of the uorouln's within ..Rough1y inhabitants tive the citv .of. Fairbanks, with th; remainder r;;;ei.g in the road-connected iuburban ut.ir-lni iu.-u:nolrg- communities North (Fairbanks star Eorough.19.85b). In contrast to th; rural Interior Region, which predominantly Native Athabaskin areas (table,r.en]a-ins . outside road-connectecl 2),,.th-e. populaiion of the ralruinrs North star Borough 94% non-Native (ibid.).' is .|990.Tabre a gives Joprii'iion figures for borough communities from 1960 to

~~IV. REGIONAL ECONOMY~~

Readers are referred to the Economic 0verview of Fish and wildlife volume of this series for details Region' on the economy of the Interior An overview of some general economic characteristics of Interior Region conmunties j s 6irl..a discussion h... as background to the of contemporary subsistence and..other local use of wildl.ife resources presented in section VII.

The economy of the Fairbanks North Star Borough should perhaps examined be ap_art from the rest of the region. I; rgg4, an estimated 26,900 people. were.engaged in, nonagricuifurat nug. und'rulury ment in the borough (rairnants ttoith emproy_ the itir aoroulrr lgesi. Reftecting role of Fairbanks as a regional ..ni.. for govirnr"nt'and services, 33% jobs ,lg% of these were in gov.ernment, zl% in trade , in services, 10% in transportg!ign, comm-unicationi, ini construction (ibid.) utilities and l0% were in l,{ithin this reiativety iurg.-rruin area, har_ vesting game "rport-i.fivities fish and are-popu1u...... itionai uno but do not represent a central'component of the househotd -lnujo.itv''Fairbankl.ionow or of the domestic.l983b, economy dt lhe ;;"'i.;;[un'i, famiIies (caulfield wolte lg8i, h|olfe and riait". r9g5). The high level, of participation in wage employment the borough-and .year-round within nearby road-connected communities stands in contrast to the role wa.ge. of emp-'loyment in tne remiinaer of the interior Region. communities outside thd boroush ino eipefiulry-th;;; system 6rtiio. the road are general ly character-ized as rriving i mjxed .iono*v involving

793 varying level s of wage employment combined with.|985, resource harvest activjties (Qautfield 1983a, Marcotte and Haynes Martin '1983). In these sma'l'l , often remote comrnunities, wage opportunities typical'ly are few, and avai lable jobs are general ly seasonal or pait-time. Household incomes conmonly are correspondingly lower or'less secure. Average taxable income levels for Interior Alaska cormunities are presented in table 4.

The economies of many Interior Region conrnunities exhib'it the characteristics of mixed, subsistence-based economies. These characteristics include l) a mixed economy composed of mutually supportive market and subsistence sectors; 2) a domestic mode of production, where capital, 1and, and labor are controlled by kinship-based production units;3) an established seasonal round of production activitiesi 4) networks of sharing, distribution, and exchange of food and materials; 5) traditional systems of land use and occupancy; and 6) complex systems of beliefs, knowledge, and values associated with wild resource uses passed between generations as the cultural and oral traditions of a social group (Wolfe .|983).

V. TRANSPORTATION The Tanana valley portion of the Interior has a varied transportation network, including roads, rai I roads, air carrier routes, and river barge lines. t,lithin the Tanana va11ey, the Elljott, Parks, Richardson, Steese, and Taylor highways provide a relatively extensive road system. The Steese and Taylor highways terminate at the Yukon River corununities of circle and Eagle, respectively. The Dalton Highway to prudhoe Bay ioins the Elliott Highway at Livengood and provides the only bridge- crossing of the Yukon River in Alaska. The Richardson Highway joins (Alcan) the Alaska-canada Highway at Delta Junct.ion..l984, .|37,864 The Alcan is a major overland access route into Alaska. In vehicles entered .|985a).Alaska via the Alcan border crossing (Fairbanks North Star Borough Fajrbanks and Nenana serve as transportation hubs 'in the Interior Region, being connected by highway to the continental United States and by both rail and highway to tidewater ports in South- central Alaska.

Fairbanks is the major air terminal in Interior Alaska. Fairbanks International Airport recorded almost 16,000 aircraft landings in 1984 (ibid.). The upper Kuskokwim River area receives the majority of its freight and passenger servicg by air.|985). from Anchorage. River barges from Bethel also serve McGrath (Stokes 0utside the road-connected area of the Interior Region, most villages are served by river barge service from Nenana and corrnuter air'lines from Fairbanks. Interior residents utilize a wide variety of individual transportation methods to access hunting and fishing areas. Cormon modes include shal low-draft river boats, snowmachines, four-wheel drive and al l -

~~794 terrain vehicles, and single-englne aircraft equipped with wheels, skis, or floats. Some areas are also accessed by horseback and on foot.~~

~~VI. LAND STATUS~~

Current land status in the Interior.|980 Region has been shaped by passage of ANCSA'in l97l and by the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA). Most of the region is div'ided between federal, state, and Native corporation holdings. A small portion is in private ownership. Actual acreages are difficult to determine as many itate and Native selections have yet to be conveyed by the federal government.

The federal government emerged from ANILCA as the largest land holder in the Interior Region, with 12 new or expanded conservation units fa'l1ing within the boundaries of the Interior. These conservatjon units are shown on map 3. 0ther federal'lands include'large holdings by the Bureau of Land Management and over 2 million acres of.military riserve.|976). land concentrated near Delta Junction and Fairbanks (Selkregg State lands are concentrated within and south of the North Star Borough, with additjonal large tracts located south of Ruby and along the sbuthern foothills of the Brooks Range. State lands also include submerged lands beneath navigab'le waters (ibid.). Native land selections are concentrated in the vicinity of vi11ages, with notably large tracts near Eagle, Tetljn, and Venetie ('ibid.). 0ther private land holdings are concentrated in and near corrnunities along the road system but extend into remote areas'in the form of homesteads, mining claims, and Native allotments.

VII. CONTEMPORARY SUBSISTENCE USE OF hlILD RESOURCES This section summarjzes subs'istence hunting, fishing, trapping, and gathering activities in the Interior Region. For each of these ictivities, available harvest data by conmunity are combined with genera'l ized descriptions of harvest techniques, gear types, transportation methods, resource util'ization, preservation and preparation, ind distribution and exchange systems. Figures depicting the seasonal round of subsistence activit'ies in selected Interior Region communities are presented in appendix 1. The bulk of this information is derived from the ADF&G, Division of Subsistence, technical paper series. Readers are referred to references c'ited throughout this section for details on subsistence activities in specific conrmunities and are encouraged to contact the Division of Subsistence for new and updated data prbduced as part of its ongoing research program. Readers are also directed to the reference map series accompanying this volume,

795 ! g!GG i< z i !I *t{ . .j 7f #E -i#t-- ;{ - i (/-,! '-tJ ?€ o :t tl aa3t (, a o a ;2 g +J! 3 tr) 3 r ul r-t ca ( o V' ,t\i u- = h-f.\ )' \ 'J: v) E ld\ 'r o #i o &. JE!\ ! r"\ '.(u ) !hr-'rL\ +Jc o P c

~~PiT:^-L\ U1 +J i = g o ol"(r ,'-,;i-= P t L (|J o~~

~~.o NlJ) I (u o lL~~

~~(Y)~~

796 where subsistence land use maps for l8 Interior Region communities are presented. The fol'lowing discussion generalizes about subsistence activities'in the predominant'ly rural areas of the Interior 'lying outside the Fairbanks North Star Borough. Resource use patterns within the urban and suburban areas of the greater Fairbanks area are considered in a separate section at the end of thjs narrative. Discussions of harvest act'ivi ties that are not current'ly permi tted under present regu'lations do not constitute endorsement of such activ'itjes by the Department of Fish and Game.

~~A. Hunting~~

l. Moose. Throughout the Interjor Region, moose is regarded as one of the most important sources-of wild meat. Community studies show that a high percentage of households participate regularly in moose hunting. Among the upper Tanana River cornmunities of Tanacross, Tetl in, Northway, and Tok, for example, between 73 and 95% of surveyed households .|983-.|984reported hunting for moose during a l2-month period in (Haynes et al. 1984). in Nenana,95% of surveyed households reported participating in moose hunting during a '1Z-month period in l98l -1982, a higher participation rate than for any other resource.|984). harvest activity in that community (Shinkwin and Case 0n the upper Koyukuk River, 77% of surveyed Allakaket-Alatna households and 79% of surveyed Hughes households reported hunting for moose in 1984 (Marcotte and Haynes r985).

Moose hunting takes place primarily 'in September but may continue through fall and winter into March 'in some locations. Boats are cornnonly used for fall moose hunts along major,|985). rivers, sloughs, and nearby lakes (Sunlida and Alexander Boats are generally l6 to ?0 ft'in length, made of wood or aluminum, and powered by outboard motors of lB to 75 hp (Sumida and Alexander 1985, Marcotte and Haynes 1985). Hunting parties typically consist of two to four related individuals. The amount of hunting effort is high'ly variable among parties. In Stevens Vil1age, for example, hunters jn'1984-1985 spent a total of from I to 2l.|65 days hunting moose and used .|985).between l5 and ga1'lons of gas (Sumida and Alexander Most moose hunters from communities on the upper Koyukuk River traveled a one-way distance of between 20 and 60 mi to hunt moose (Marcotte and Haynes 1985).

In the winter, snowmachines are commonly used to access moose hunting areas, and the stalking and tracking of moose is done on foot with snowshoes. Moose are also taken opportunis- tical 1y in conjunction with winter trapping activities

~~797 (Sum'ida and Alexander 1985). Dog teams and airplanes occasionally are used by residents of some Interior communities to access moose hunting areas (Marcotte and Haynes 1e85).~~

General harvest levels for select cormunities are presented in table 5. Limited moose populations in some areas of the Interior have resulted in establishment of controlled use areas, relatively restricted seasons, or permit hunts. Con- trolled use areas on the upper Kuskokwim and middle Koyukuk rivers, for example, currently prohibit the use of aircraft for hunting moose or transporting hunters. Moose hunting and harvests in two registration permit areas have been very closely monitored. Permit and moose harvest data for the Minto Flats Management Area and the western Game Management Subunit 25D near Beaver, Birch Creek, and Stevens Village are presented in tables 6 and 7.

Harvested moose are general ly very thoroughly uti I ized. Moose neat is eaten'locations, fresh or is frozen or canned for future use. In some moose meat is also preserved by drying (Caulfield 1983a, Stokes 1985). Hunters report eating head the heart, liver, meat, lower lip, nose, chin, brains,.|983, intestine, .|983a).tongue, kidneys, stomach, and lungs (Martin Caulfield l'loose hides occasional'ly are tanned and used for making clothing or handicrafts. Moose meat is cormonly shared between hunting partners and members of extended families and often distributed widely throughout an entire community (Caulfield 1983a).

2. Caribou. Caribou have historically been regarded-Interior. as an econornic mainstay for many inhabitants of the As such, carjbou occupy a special place in the culture of many Interior Athabaskans. Continuing oral traditions and customary laws regarding hunting behavior and the care and distribution of caribou meat reflect the cultural importance of caribou, particu'lar1y among Kutchin Athabaskans (ibid.). The role of caribou as a major food source, however, has diminished over much of the Interior during the last several decades.

Declining caribou populat'ions and shifting migration patterns among some herds have resul ted in reduced access or restricted hunting seasons, making it difficult for residents.|983). in many cornmunities to obtain caribou meat (Martin Only 5 of 74 households in four upper Koyukuk river communities reported participating in carjbou hunting in 198? (Marcotte and Haynes 1985). Residents of Shageluk and Holy Cross report that although there is a continuing interest in caribou hunting, caribou are infrequently harvested because of the long distances involved in traveling to good caribou

798 .|984). hunt.ing areas (Stokes No surveyed Nenana households reported hunting caribou during.|984). a IZ-month period in I981- 1982 (Shinkw'in and Case Nenana hunters cited the expense of transportation, nonlocal competition, and hunting seasons that conflict with moose hunting and salmon fishing as reasons for recent low participation in caribou hunting (ibid. ). Significant numbers of caribou have not been harvested in the vicinity.|940's of Stevens Vi11age, Beaver, or Birch Creek.|985). since the (Caulfield 1983a, Sumida and Alexander Caribou are more reliably hunted in portions of the eastern Interior along the upper Tanana and upper Yukon rivers. In the upper Yukon over the past several decades, caribou from the Porcupine Caribou Herd have been most accessible.|983a). to hunters in Arct'ic Vi 1 lage and Venetie (Caulfjeld Some Fort Yukon residents travel by boat long distances up the Porcupine River to harvest caribou in the fall. Caribou often are available in the vicinity of Arctic V'i1'lage and Venetie throughout the winter and spring, and snowmachines are commonly used to access caribou hunting areas. In l98l-82, movements of the Porcupine Caribou Herd made them accessible to hunters in communit'ies such as Eag'le and Chalkyitsik. The harvest of Porcupine caribou by resjdents of upper Yukon communities during the period Ju'ly l98l to June 198? is summarized in table 8.

Among the upper Tanana Ri ver commun i ti es of Tanacross , Tetlin, Northway, and Tok, between l0 and 56% of surveyed households.|983-84 reported hunting.|984). caribou during a l2-month period in (Haynes'et al. Caribou hunting efforts for those communities were concentrated along the Taylor Highway during the fall and winter (ibid. ). Caribou from the Nelchina and Mentasta herds have occasionally wintered near Tetl in and Northway in recent years, after having been relatively inaccessible to these communities since the I 940's . A I imi ted number of hunti ng permi ts for these caribou were issued to Northway residents in early .|985. Some Dot Lake residents hunt caribou by permit in the vicinity of the Macomb Plateau, accessing hunting areas on foot in the fall or by snowmachine in the winter (Martin re83).

Harvested caribou, like moose, are thoroughly utilized. The meat is prepared fresh, frozen, or dried. Caribou head meat, internal organs, hooves, and bone marrow.|983a, are used in a variety of traditional dishes (Caulfield Martin .|983). Caribou hides are used as sleeping pads and for making clothing and handicrafts (ibid.). Caribou meat is commonly shared among families and communities. Caulfield (.|983a) notes that Arctic Village commonly provides caribou meat for

799 other upper Yukon River area comnunities and that residents of other commu.nities may provide annnunition and gas for Arctic vil'lage hunters in return for shares of caribo-u meat. carjbou meat .frequently. is provided to erderly people unable to hunt for themse'lves (Caulfield l9g3a, Martin ige:). 3. B_ear. Brown bears are not a major food resource in Interior ATasla. Nuisance brown bears that threaten life or property may be shot and the meat and hide utirized, but brown bears are only occasionally pursued by hunters for food. Elaborate cultural traditions surrounding the perceived spiritua'l power of bears govern the ki'lling, treatment, and consumption of both.|982). black and brown bears by some Athabskans (t'telson et al. This aspect is discuised in more detail below. negu- lations permit the harvest of onry one brown bear every f6ur years. In many areas of the Interior, encounters with brown bears are relatively rare.

Bl ack bears are more widely uti r ized than brown bears throughout the Interior. Black bears are typically hunted in conjunction with other hunting, fishing, oi'gatheiing activities, when they pose a threat.|928, to property, or when other meat is.|983) not.available (Bishop Stokes l9g5). caulfield (1977, reported that black bears are harvested in all upper Yukon River corrnunities except Arctfc vi'l1age, where they rarely occur.

0n th.e _upper Koyukuk River, between 25 and s3% of surveyed households in Bettles, Evansvil'le, Alatna, Allakaket, ind fl.ughes reporte.d parti cip,a.ti ng i n br ack bear hunti ng i n l9g2 (Marcotte and Haynes 1985). In Nenana , 9% of surveyid households reported harvesting black bears, which was the only large game animal harvested besides moose during the lz-month study period (Shinkwin and case 1984). Between 13 and 31% of surveyed households in four upper Tanana River cornnunities lgpgrted.|983-1984 harvesting black bear during a lz-month period in (Haynes et al. 1984)

Black bears are harvested in May at or near den sites and more commonly in late suruner or early fall in conjunction with moose hunting, fishing, or berry picking (Marcotte and Haynes t985, stokes l9B4). some winter den hunting is also qgported_ in.|983a, the upper Yukon.|983). and upper Koyukuk River area (caulfield Nelson Bear'meat is eaten fresh or preserved for laler use by freezing, smoking, or curing in a brine.|984).. solution (caulfield 1983a, Martin rg8g, shinkwin and case Black bear meat is cornnonly served at cornmunity feasts and potlatches. Fat .|983a).black beais are preferred for human consumption (caulfield Bear fat is sometimes rendered into oil, but the'1983). entrails of black bears are not general'ly eaten (Martin The hides of black bears are

800 tanned for local use and sale. Spring bear hide is considered best for mittens, boots, and moccasins (ibid.). Among traditional Athabaskans, black and brown bears.|983, are regarded as.|983a). spiritually powerful an'imals (Nelson Caulfield In discussing contemporary bear hunting practices among Koyukon Athabaskans, Nelson et a'1. (.|982) noted that "when carri ed out by cul tural 1y prescri bed methods, the kill'ing, treatment, and consumption of a bear is 1 iteral 1y a rel igious act. " Cul tural prescriptions surrounding the eating of bear meat by women .|983,exist in some cornmunities today (Caulfield '1983a, Nelson Stickney l98l). 0n the upper Koyukuk River, the harvest of a blac-k bear is frequently marked by the observance of a bear party, or Iitlakka, which involves a ritual sharing of the animai. At .|983least three bear parties occurred in Allakaket and Hughes in (Marlotte and Haynes '1985).

Amolg Koyukuk Rive.r communities,.l983 40 black bears were taken by Huslia residents in (Marcotte, in preparation). Five black bears and one brown.|983 bear were reported harvested in Bettles-Evansvil le in (Marcotte and Haynes l9B5). Allakaket-Alatna residents harvested 2l black bears in 1ggz, and Hughes residents took l5 ('ibid. ). 4. 9all sleep. The relative inaccessibility of Dall sheep, increasingly restrictive harvest regulations, and the amount of effort required to harvest a relatively small quantity of meat are associated w'ith reduced local harvests of Dal'l sheep today. , Nevertheless, sheep meat remains a preferred or culturally important wjld food in some Interior communities, and sheep hunting is included in the contemporary seasonal round of subsistence activities in near-mountain comrnunities of the upper Koyukuk, Kuskokwim, Tanana, and yukon rivers. Among ypper Yukon River area cormunities, sheep hunting is carried out most frequently by-Eag'le Arctjc Vi 1'lage hunlers (Caulfield 1983a). Residents of and the ylkon River between Eag]e_ and circle also occasionally harvest sheep in the nearby Glacier Peak and charley River areas (caurfierd 1_977). Arctic Village hunters acceis sheep huntjng areas on foot in late August and early September or by snowmachine.|00 in November, when hunters may.|983a). travel more than mi for a single sheep (Caulfield Considerable prest.ige is associated with a successful sheep hunt. Sheep meat js particu'lar'ly prized by Arctic Village elders and is often served at christmas potlatches. In recent years, the annual harvest of sheep.by Arctic village hunters has averaged fewer than l0 animals (ibid.).

801 In the upper Koyukuk area, hunters from Allakaket/Alatna.|30 and Bettles/Evansvi I le reported travel ing from to 200 mi (one-way) by riverboat to harvest Dall sheep in the fall (Marcotte and Haynes 1985). In 1982, two sheep were harvested by one household in Bettles/Evansvjlle, and five sheep were harvested by four households in Al lakaket/Alatna (ibid.). In the upper Tanana River area, some Dot Lake residents reportedly participate in fall sheep hunting, accessing nearly all sheep hunting areas on foot (Martin 1983). Sheep are also taken by Tok residents in the fall using aircraft, boats, and all-terrain vehicles to reach hunting areas. In the upper Kuskokwim communities of Nikolai and Telida, sheep are occasionally taken in conjunction with trapping activities in the Alaska Range foothills, but most sheep meat entering those communities .|985).is meat from nonlocal hunters left with local gu'ides (stokes Some McGrath residents use aircraft to access sheep hunting areas 'in the fall (jbid.).

5. Waterfowl an{ otl,rel small_ggrns. The contr j bution that smal I iet and economy of Interior households should not be underestimated. A variety of ducks, geese, several species of grouse, and snowshoe hare are generally available throughout the Interior and are a widely used and highly valued source of wild food. Ptarmigan, porcupine, and arctic around squirrel are less universally used but important 'in some locations and to some households. Small game hunting is often carried out in conjunction with other hunting, fishing, and gathering activities or conducted in areas within walking distance of communit'ies. Whereas big game hunting is typically an adult male activity, small game is pursued by young and old hunters alike and by both men and women. For these reasons, 'levels of participation in small game hunting, particularly for waterfowl and hare, frequently are high. For example, 82% of surveyed Nenana households harvested hare, 73% harvested grouse or ptarmigan, and 77% harvested.|984). waterfowl during a recent study year (Shinkwin and Case Sjmilarly high household participation rates jn small game hunting are reported in upper Tanana River communities. Eighty percent of surveyed households in Tanacross, for example, reported hunting hare, and 85% of survey.|985). households in Tetlin reported hunting ducks (Haynes et al. Table 9 gives harvest levels and household participation rates for small game hunt'ing jn upper Koyukuk River communities. These data show a mean harvest of nearly 27 ducks and 12 geese per household in Hughes, indicating that small game can make significant contributions to food suppl ies.

802 The waterfowl species most often harvested jn the Interior include the Canada and whjte-fronted goose, mal1ard, p'intail, oldsquaw, common goldeneye, American wigeon, green-winged tea'l , scaup, and white-winged.|985). scoter (Cau'lf ield 1983a, Marcotte and Haynes Stokes (.l985) reports that some hunters consciously avojd hunting some 'lecti species of waterfowl known col vely as " f i sh ducks . "

Waterfowl hunting occurs jn some areas in May, when ducks and geese are highly valued as a source of fresh meat and variety to the local diet. Peak waterfowl harvesting usual'ly occurs in September, frequently in conjunction with fall moose hunting or on trips to lake and wetland areas specifically for waterfowl. Shotguns are universally used in waterfowl hunting. Natural or constructed blinds are sometimes used at tradit'ional ly productive hunting locations. Fol lowing freeze-up of lakes in the late fal1, waterfowl hunting is concentrated along rivers and sloughs. Waterfowl are often eaten fresh, particularly in the spring, and are prepared by roasting or used in soup. Larger fa'l'l harvests of birds may be frozen whole. The heads, hearts, livers, gizzards, and intestines of waterfowl.|985, are also somet'imes.|984). eaten roasted or 'in soup (Stokes Shinkw'in and Case

Snowshow hares are shot or snared throughout the year but are less commonly harvested during the summer months. Snare lines are commonly set for hares within walking distance of communities and checked dai 1y in the fal I and winter. "Rabbjt drives,r'whereby a hunter walks through a willow thicket driving hares towards fellow hunters, take place in August and September in some locations (Caulfield .|983a, Stokes I 985) . Hares are prepared fresh or preserved by freez'ing. Hares are also used as trap bait or dog food, and their fur is occasionally used for boot and mitten liners (ibid.).

Ruffed, spruce, and sharp-tailed grouse and willow and rock ptarmigan are variously distributed across the Interjor. These birds frequently are harvested when encountered. Grouse are particularly sought in the late fall and ear'ly winter. Ptarmigan are locally abundant near Arctic Village, where they consti tute an 'important spri ng food resource ( Caul fiel d I 983a ) .

Porcupines are highly prized by some hunters for thejr meat and fat. Quills are sometimes used in making handicrafts. Porcupines occasionally are shot but more frequent'ly clubbed. They are commonly regarded as an emergency food source that can be easi'ly obtained wjthout the use of firearms. Har- vested porcupines are frequently eaten in the fjeld or at community pot'latch celebrations. A'lthough porcupines

~~803 reportedly are used in many Interior conrnunities, harvest figures are rarely given. Stokes (.|985) estimates that 20-40 porcupines are harvested annually by one upper Kuskokwim River community.~~

Arctic Around squirrels are an additional small game resource utilized by residents of Arctic Village and Venetie and to a lesser extent in Fort Yukon, Birch Creek, and Chalkyitsik (Caulfield 1983a). Ground squirrels are shot, snared, or trapped in late April or May. Thejr meat is especially valued by older people for its perceived medicinal value (ibid.).

~~B. Fishing~~

l. Salmon. For most Interior Region communities, salmon are an important food source. A high percentage of households participate in salmon fishing activitjes. Salmon also represent a significant income source for some lnterior households through connercial fishing activities on the Yukon and Tanana rivers. Commercial and subsistence harvest figures are d'iscussed in the species narrative elsewhere in this volume. Chinook, chum, and coho salmon are the primary species available to Interior Region communities along the Yukon, Koyukuk, Tanana, and Kuskokwim rivers. Salmon do not ascend the upper Tanana Riverin harvestable quantities. Residents of upper Tanana River comrnunities traditional'ly obtain salmon from the Copper River, where, in addition to the above-mentioned species, sockeye and pink salmon are also harvested (Haynes et al. 1984). Salmon runs vary in size, timing, and location across the Interior. Chinook salmon are the first to arrive 'in mid to late June or early July, followed by "summer" chums in late July and August and "fall" chums and cohos from August until freeze-up. Fishers frequently make no distinction between fall chum and coho, referring to the fall run as simp'ly "silvers" or "fall" chums. Set gill nets and fish wheels are most conmonly used to harvest sa'lmon. A drift gill net season has also been established for a portion of the Yukon River.|982). near Nulato and Kaltag (Huntington 1981, Marcotte Due to clear water conditions on some upper Kuskokwim River area salmon streams, rod and reel are the most effective and most widely used means of .|982).harvesting chinook salmon in those locations (Stokes Fish wheels are rarely used on the Koyukuk Rjver, where water conditions and local traditions favor the use of set nets

804 (Marcotte, pers. conun.). This is in contrast to the Copper River salmon fishery participated in by some Tanana upper River residents, where, for subs'istence.l984). purposes, fish wheels predominate (Haynes et al. Salmon fishing and processing is usual ly a group activity performed by related individuals. Past use generally establishes a family's claim to a particular fish camp, net, or wheel site. l,lhere salmon fishing is productive at or near the conmunity, fishing sites are genera'l1y located close to the community. In Nenana, for example, salmon fishing locations were concentrated within seven river mjles of the cormunity (Shinkwin and Case 1984). Among those cornmunities where salmon fishing is relative'ly local, the use of f ish camps has diminished recently jn favor of staying in town, checking nets or wheels during short day trips, and bringing harvested fish home for process'ing (Marcotte and Haynes 1985).

Individual household salmon harvests may vary from year to year, depending on wage employment opportunities, water level , strength of salmon runs, and weather conditions for drying fish. The extent of reliance on salmon is largely a function of proximity to salmon runs and local traditions and preferences. Some communities in headwater locations such as Arct jc Vil'lage, Bett'les, and Telida are notably less involved in salmon fishing than communities more favorably situated for harvesting salmon. Even where salmon are not 'local1y abundant, however, some salmon is genera'l ly obtained either through trade or long trips to reach salmon fish.ing .|60locations. Some Nikolai residents, for examp'le, travel mi by boat to reach chinook salmon fishing locations, where they may stay for up to a month (Stokes I 982 ) . Some res i dents of Cha'l kyi ts i k and Venet.i e relocate to Fort Yukon during the salmon season to participate.|983a). 'in the more pr'oduct'ive fishery there (Caulfield Some Dot Lake residents travel up to 250 mi by road to fish for salmon with relatives jn the Copper River basin (Martin 1983). Recent subsistence salmon harvest data for Interior Region conmunjties located on the Yukon River and its tributaries are presented in tables l0 through 12. In addition to these harvests, harvest of salmon occurs in Bettles/Evansville, where, for examp1e,9 chinook and 532 summer.|985). chum were harvested in 1982 (Marcotte and Haynes Annual subsistence salmon harvest data for the upper Kuskokwjm communities of McGrath, Takotna, Ni kol ai , and Tel i da for the years I 979-1 984 are

805 .|3. presented in table Most of the sa'lmon harvested by residents of upper Tanana River communities are taken iir the Copper River basin. Six of l5 surveyed households in Tanacross fished for salmon, harvesting a total of 270_ Copper Riv,er salmon in 1984. Three.|05 of ZO surveyed Tetlin households harvested a total of Copper River salmon in I 983. In Northway, 5 of I 5 hbusehol ds surveyed reported fishing foi salmon in the Copper R_iver, taking a total of 397 salmon. In 1984, 77%'of al I Tok residents holding Copper River subsistence salmon.fishing permits.|984). reported a harvest of Z,Ol7 salmon (Haynes et al.

Chinook salmon are favored for human consumption. Depending upon the area, chinook are prepared as imoked strips, filets, and canned products. Some residents also can chinook salmon. Heads of chinook salmon are often dried and used in soup. Chum and coho salmon are used both for human consumption and for dog food, depending on the quality of harvested fish, individual preference, and the condition of fish after processing. Chum and coho salmon are usually gutted, split, filels scored with diagonal cuts, and hung to air dry on'large outdoor racks. Household and commun.ity freezers are also used to preserve fish at some locations. Salmon !99s are often dried for human consumption of dog food. Fi sh entrai .|983a,I s are used as dog food or ferli I izer (Cau]field Martin 1983, Marcotte and Haynes 1e85).

Harvested salmon are frequent'ly shared and exchanged among households and conrnunities. Twenty-three percent of Allakaket households and 47% of Hughes households harvesting chinook salmon in 19BZ gave some of .|985).their harvest to other ho.useholds (Marcotte and Haynes Haynes et al. (1984) found that among surveyei Tanacrois households harvesting salmon, between l0 and 40% of the household catch was distributed to other residents in the corrnunity. In Tetlin, although only lS% of surveyed households fished for salmon, 70% of surveyed households reported receiving salmon (ibid.). In the upper yukon and Porcupine River areas, Fort Yukon serves as the supplier of salmon to neighboring communities.|983a). that have poorer access to salmon runs (Caulfield Some households in Arctic Vi1 lage, for example, exchange caribou meat for salmon with re'latives or friends in Fort Yukon (ibid.) The importance of salmon as a wild food source is reflected in its almost un'iversal use throughout the region, the extent to which salmon are shared through

806 kinship, community, and intracommunity distribution exchange and networks, and the amount of effort some residents expend to obtain it. 2. IgSalm?n _Ii-sh. Apart from sa'tmon, a variety of other r1 sn species are harvested by interior-pi[e, resid;;l;. Arcti c grayl i ng burbot, , _ norfheqn iheefi sh , suckers, and whitefish are utilized tniougriout most of the Interior. Alaska blackfisrr,- ootty--v;-rd.., rake trout' anq lamprey are harvested in ror." rociiionr. 0f the-nonsalmon. species, the harvest of whitefish- is the most substantiar in most communities and detai wiil be led separately berow. smail.r qruntl'ile, of the other s-pecies are taken and viewed as a wercome but often minor addition to the diet. a. l'|h'itefish. Arthough several species of whitefish ila-Tirco are harvlsted in the Interior, genera 'ry there is 1 no di sti ncti on mqde between in., among f i shers , alq t!.y are cot t ecti v;it r#f rreo to simp'ly as whi tef i sh. },|hi tef i sh are [aten dy a wi de variety of methods. They are- frequ.ntfi caught incidentally to summer saimon fishing- uC[ivities, a'lthough in some rocations the number dentally of inci- caught whitefish may-period exceed the number of ,s,3lTo1. gaus!! j,l a fishins (stor

807 and eyes are sometimes cooked and eaten (jbid.). Although whitefish are primarily caught for human consumption, some are also used as dog food. b. 0ther fish. Although salmon and whitefish are the rnajor target species, fishing activities also produce sheefi sh , burbot, northern pi ke, arcti c grayling, and sucker. Whereas large catches of the target species are typically preserved for later use, small catches of the incidental species are generally eaten fresh.

In the summer and fa1'1, arctic grayling, northern pike, and sheefish are caught in lakes and sloughs by rod and reel. During the wjnter, arctic grayling and burbot are commonly "jigged" through holes in river or lake ice. Wood and wire basket traps are set under the river ice for burbot in some locations and yield incidental catches.|985). of whitefish and longnose sucker (Stokes In some areas, longnose suckers are valued as dog food and are occas'ionally harvested for that purpose by use of small-mesh nets or traps in the late spring (ibid.). In some locations, set hooks are used under lake and river.|983a). ice for burbot, pike, and lake trout (Caulfield 0n the lower Middle Yukon River near Ho'ly Cross, a fall lamprey run is harvested jn November through.|984). holes in the ice by use of d'ip nets (Stokes The harvest of Alaska blackfish 'in basket traps set under the ice was more common historically than today, although blackfi I jn some communities sh are sti I trapped 'large (ibid. ). Sheef j sh are harvested in fairly numbers by residents of the Koyukuk River using beach seines. In Huslia in 1982, for example, the per househol d harvest of sheefi sh ( pounds ) was greater than for any other fish species besides salmon (taute 15).

Harvest data by commun'i ty for fi sh other than salmon are genera'l'ly unavailable. Several recent subsistence studies have reported fish harvests by species, and these data are presented in tables l4-16. Table l4 ind'icates community participation in fishing and harvest data for nonsalmon species in Bettles/Evansvi.|982. I le and Al lakaket/Alatna and Hughes during Table 15 details.|983a. the harvest of nonsalmon fish resources in Husl'ia Table '16 indjcates the percentage of surveyed households 'in Tanacross , Tetl i n, Northway, and Tok that participated in fishing for listed species.

808 c. Trappi ng Trapping i s addressed in a separate narrative section found elsewhere in this volume. As an important part of the seasonal round of harvest activjties, however, a brief discussion of trapping is warranted here. Readers are referred to the trapping section for further discussion of trapping activities and furbearer harvest figures. The Yukon River drainage harbors some of the most productive furbearer habitat jn Alaska. Historically and today, trapping has been and remains a primary.|985) winter activity for many Interior residents. Stokes (.|984, reports that at least one member of most households in communities along the upper Kuskokwim River and lower-middle Yukon River participates in trapping. Similar'ly, high participation rates are reported for other corrnunities throughout the Interior Region.

Trapping activities cornmence jn November and continue into April for some species.'lynx, Conrmonly harvested furbearers include beaver, red fox, marten, mink, muskrat, land otter, wo1f, and wolverine. Marten is perhaps the most commonly trapped species across the region. Target species vary from area to area, froni year to year, and among individual trappers. Marten, beaver, 1ynx, and red fox were found to be the .|982-1983most commonly trapped species .|985).by upper Koyukuk River trappers in (Marcotte and Haynes A survey of M'iddle Yukon River trappers using the innoko National t,lildlife Refuge (northern portion) indicated that marten, beaver, and mink comprised.|984). 96% of the furbearer harvest for that area in l98l-.l982 (Robert Steel traps and snares are universally used to harvest most furbearers. hlolf, wolverine, and muskrat are often shot rather than trapped.

Traplines vary in length from less.|983a, than a mile to lines that.|985). are 75 or 80 mi long (Caulfield Robert 1984, Stokes Among 40 trappers using the northern Innoko National Wildljfe Refuge during the 1982-1983 season, the average trapline length was 20 mi (Robert 1984). As wjth fishing sites, there are customary rules regarding the use or ownership of traplines. Trapping areas general 1y are recognized as be'longing to an individual, based on consistent use of an area over time, and trapping rights to an area are often passed between family members (ibjd.). Snowmachines are commonly used to check traplines. A few trappers use dog teams; others fly into their trapping areas and work their line on foot, using skis or snowshoes. Incomes from trapping are highly variable, depending upon effort, targeted species, and fluctuating fur prices. One trapper from Allakaket commented in 1983 that by working hard a trapper might gross $4,000 and net $2,000 in a season (Marcotte and Haynes 1985). Costs associated wjth trapping include depreciation and

809 upkeep on snowmachjnes and camping gear, fuel, and the cost of new traps and snares. Robert (.|984) found that among trappers using the northern Innoko Refuge, the cost of snowmach'ine fuel ranged from $200 to $.|,100 per trapper during the l98l-1982 season. Although furbearers are harvested primarily for the cash value of their pelts, some pelts are often retained for local use'in making hats, mitts, parka ruffs, and handjcrafts. In addition, the meat from beaver, lynx, and muskrat is prized as high-quality food for both humans and dogs. Beaver carcasses are often sold or traded as dog food and sometimes corrnand a higher price than the pelt. Aside from providing a source of income, food, and furs for local use, the traditional land use skills associated with trapping make it a valued cultural activity for many Interior residents.

~~D. Gathering~~

Plant resources provide an important source of food, fue1, and raw materjals to Interior residents. Table l7 indicates the wood, plant, and berry resources cornmonly gathered in the Interior Region and how they are utilized.

Wood is a major source of fuel for home heating across much of the Interior, and firewood cutting is an activity that proceeds year-round. l.lhite spruce is the preferred firewood in most locations. l{hite spruce is also used in log cabin construction and making lumber. Small spruce po'les are used in the construction of fish.|985). wheels, tent frames, and fish racks (Caulfield 1983a, Stokes Bjrch is occasionally used as firewood and is the preferred wood for making snowshoes and sleds. Cottonwood, poplar, and alder are used to smoke meat and fjsh. Berries generally represent the most significant harvest of wild edible plant products. Berries are picked throughout the summer and fal1, usually in areas close to vi1'lages or fish camps. Some househol ds report travel i ng 30.|983, to 50 mi to.|985). reach especia'l 1y productive berry areas (Martin Stokes Berry trips are typically day or half-day trips, and women and children are frequently the most active berry pickers (ibid.). Berrjes are eaten fresh, frozen whole, cooked into a variety of products, or variously mixed w'ith 1ard, sugar, and fish to make Indian jce cream.

~~Harvest data for wood and berry resources.|8. in several upper Koyukuk River communities is presented in table~~

810 E. Local Use of l,'lild Resources in the Fairbanks Area Re'latively abundant employment opportunities and greater participation in the dom'inant cash economy within the urban and suburban areas surrounding Fairbanks influence the resource use patterns of area residents. The jndustrial-capita'l economic system operating there has, for the most part, relegated fish and game harvests to a level where they can no longer be considered central to the local economy. Although participation in some harvest activities may be high and frdy, for many residents, represent cherished spare-time pursu'its, they are typically scheduled as a temporary break from wage emp'loyment and are therefore d'i stinguished from subsistence activities as being primarily recreational in nature.

Particular subgroups wi thin the Fai rbanks area undoubtedly exh'ib'it patterns of resource use that differ from the predominant recreational pattern. A small segment of the Fairbanks area populatjon, for example, engages in fish'ing and huntjng for cornmercial purposes as commercial fishers or corunercial gu'ides. A small number also participate in subsistence salmon fisheries near the Yukon River bridge and.|984, the Tanana River near Fairbanks (Sub- district Y-6C). In 308 permits were issued for the Y-6C fishery, and salmon harvests totaled 8,632 fish (71 permittees did not fish or fished unsuccessfully,.|980 and 25 did not report) (ADF&G 1984b). A survey of the participants in this fishery revealed that virtual'ly a'll were residents of the Fairbanks North Star Borough and that the large majority were significantly involved in the wage economy and had moderate-to-high income levels (Caulfield l98l). Furthermore, almost 60% of the respondents indicated that half or more of the'ir household's meat and fish was obtained through subsistence activities (ibid. ). Although this sample can not be considered representative of all Fairbanks area residents, it does serve to demonstrate that there are subpopulations and enclaves within the urban population for which fish and game resources represent significant economic val ue.

As another example, some portion of the 3,000 or so Alaska Natives residing in the Fairbanks North Star Borough (2,987 according to 1980 census) continue to place specia'l values on wild resources, returning regularly to "home" commun'ities to hunt and fish. It is also known that traditional food products commonly are sent by relatives and friends in rural villages to relatives and friends in Fairbanks to satisfy personal and cultural needs. The precise characteristics of this rural-to-urban flow of wild resources has yet to be studied. And fina'11y, the Western "outdoorsman" traditions of certairr Fairbanks area residents, traced as persona'l fam'ily history from the continental Un'ited States, undoubtedly contain specia'l vlaues placed on wild resources and their use. These trad'itions are

811 commonly passed on between members of outdoor and sportsmen clubs and other vo]untary associations within the urban setting. At this t'ime. resource use surveys that have been administered in rural comrnunit'ies to gather subsistence information have not been applied to the state's urban areas. The above discussion points out that it would be a mistake to view resource use patterns jn the greater Fairbanks area as a simple homogeneous pattern of recreationa'l use. Characteristics of the various resource use patterns of urban subgroups hopefully will be examjned in future research. Readers are directed to additional narratives on sport and commercjal fishing and the Human Use sections of individual species found elsewhere in this volume'for more information regarding some of those use patterns.

APPENDIX l. Seasonal Round of Harvest Activities Figures 1-7 depict the annual round of subsistence activitjes in several Interior cormunities and areas. Seasonal round data have not been collected for alI Interior Region conrnunities. Whereas smal'l djfferences in the timing of activities and the relative'importance of certain species can be found among most comrnunities, these seasonal round figures present a genera'l view of harvest activities that probably can be extrapolated to include neighboring communities. Marcotte and Haynes (1985), for example, found the seasonal rounds of five upper Koyukuk River communities to be very similar. Figure 6 upper Koyukuk River presents a generalized seasonal round for the area. Seasonal round information for upper Tanana River several communities has been similarly combined in figure 7.

8t2 ,Fish ililil ilil1 Moose ililtl ililtl ililil lliltl 1ililil Caribou Dall sheep il lll ililtl ililil1 ' 'Waterfowl llilr|lil|ill ililtl Hare ilil rl il llll Ground squirrel ilil1 'Furbearers 1il1ililililt || | r ||fl | || iltlililillililtItltilil| 'lncludes whitefish'. lake trout, arctic grayling. burbot. northern pike. and longnose sucker.

~~2lncludes beaver, mrrskral, lirx. wolf. and wolverine.~~

~~'species not identified~~

Figure l. Annual round of subsjstence harvest activities by residents of Arctic Vi1lage, circa 1970-I9EZ (Caulfield 1983). Solid line 'indicates time when harvest usually takes place. Broken line 'indicates occasional harvest effort.

813 ,Fish ilil1 ilil1 ililtl ilil tl ililtl ilil tl lltfl ililil Moose Caribou Dallsheep Black bear 'Waterfowl ilil1 ililil1 Grouse.'ptarmigan ililt l Hare ililtl ilil il1 Porcupine ffil f ilil1 ilililt 'Furbearers ililililt1 Plants

rHarr"'ested fish include land-locked coho salmon. Dolly Varden. whitefish', lake trour. arctic grayling, burbot. northern pike, and longnose sucker. Sockeye. chinook. chum, coho. and pink salmon are also harvested from areas outside the tnterior Region. 2Harvested furbearers include beaver, nruskrat. mink, marten. weasel. land otter. red fox. wolf. wolverine. and lynx.

~~' specit,s not identified~~

Figure 2. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Dot Lake, 1980-1982 (Mart'in 1983). Soljd line indicates t'ime when harvest usually takes place. Broken line indicates occasional harvest effort.

814 'Fish ililil| ililtl il iltl Moose lilill ilil tl ililtl il lllll Caribou ilil1 ililtl ililtl Black bear ililtl 'Waterfowl ilililililil1 Hare ilil1 ililtl ililtl 'Furbearers il ilillilililr]il1 Berries Wood |||ilIil|I|||il|||IIIlt||||||lI||||il||||||

~~rlncludes chinook. chum, and coho salmon harvested fronr July to mid October: and whitefish', arctic grayling, northern pike. and longnose sucker harvested under the ice in the spring and fall.~~

~~2Muskrat is harvested frorn April to early June. Other species include beaver. mink, marten. ft-rx, wrrlf, wolverine, and lvnx.~~

~~^ species not identified~~

Fiqure 3. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by residents of Fort Yukon, circa 1970-1982 (Caulfield 1983). Solid line indicates time when harvest usually takes p1ace. Broken line indicates occasional harvest effort.

~~815 Jan Feb. Mar. APr, May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov. Dec~~

Chinook salmon tl II t Chum salmon ll II tilill ll Coho salmon illI Iill ill Sheefish ililil1 illill ililt l ilil|l I 'Whileffsh ililil| ililil1 ililtl tltl ililll Arctic grayling ililtl ilil|l riltl ililil1 ililil1 I Northern pike iltl ilttl filill il ilil1 ililil| fiilll ililtfl Moose ill ill ililll iltl I I r Caribou lilill ililtl Dall sheep r Brown bear ilil1 tl ililtl tl Black bear iltl ililtl ililtl ililll ilI I 'Waterfowl ill ililtl iltl ll 'Grouse ilil1 lllfllr tl 'Hare ililil ililil1 ilil1 ilil1 ililtl ililil1 Porcupine il illl ililtl ililtl lililtl il Beaver llll ililil1 ilr Muskrat ill ililtl Mink ililil ililil1 I ililrl Marten ilr 'Otter ililtl ililtl ililtl 'Fox tfr t il llll Wolf lllill ililtl ililtl tl ililll Lynx ililil ililtl ilil1 ililtl Berries ilil1 r ilil1 Plants ililil ililtl ililil1 ilI rtl Fireuood ilil tl ililtl ftffl l ilill ililtl ililil1 lllill ililil1 ilillll

~~sp€cres not idenl ified~~

Fiqure 4. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities by res'idents of ff.eruif', fg83 (itokes 1985). Solid line indicates time when harvest usually takes piuce. Broken line indicates occasional harvest effort.

~~816 Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug Sept. Oct Nov. Dec~~

Chinook salmon ililtl rrl tl Chum salmon illlll ,,,tlII ililil1 Coho salmon I rrrl ltilll ililtl I ililil1 illllll ililtl . Sheefish I 'Whiteffsh I il il llll fiillll ililill I il ilrl tl I Arctic grayling Illl ililllll llllllll ililili ililtl ill i ili ililil1 ililil Northern Pike rlll ililtl ilililr1 ililllll ilil i blackfish llll ilillll Alaska - I I ilil1 Moose illll illlll il llil ililil1 ilillll ililtl fiilil1 ilililil ilI t ilillll ti Caribou llllll ililil1 Dall sheep lllll llll r Brown bear I I Black bear tl I lilllrl ililil| ililil1 ilillll Illl illllr ilillll 'Waterfowl I ililil1 ilililr lililtl rrl I 'Grouse ililil1 lllllll il il111 II I llll 'Hare ililll ilil1 lll illlll Porcupine lll ililll ililll ililil1 illill illll l ilil1 Beaver illl ililll ill ililll ililll ililll il ilil| fi illl ilil1 Muskrat ililll Hilll Mink ililll il llll illlr ilil tl Marten I lr , Otter il llll ililll ilil1 ill lililrl 'Fox ililll llllil ilil1 lnttn I rrnn Wolf ililll il illl il lll ilil tl l Lynx ilil ll ililrl ilil1 ililll il llll Berries llll F I ll Plants ililll ill lililrl II 1,'"" rrrrrrt Firewood llllll :ililil1 lilllrl ililtl il llll ililll lllllll ililll I - I lilrr 'species not ider rtified I

b.y resi dents of Fi qure 5 . Annual round of subs'istence harvest acti vi ties ttiil;iii,-rg8i (itot"i i985). sotid t'ine indjcates t'ime rvhen harvest usuallv takes place. Broken line indicates occasional harvest effort.

~~817 Apr. May July Aug. Sept.~~

~~Chinook salmon "Summer" chum salmon "Fall" chum/ coho salmon Sheeffsh 'Whitefish 'Trout Arctic grayling Burbot Northern pike ililil1 Longnose sucker Moose~~

~~Dall sheep Black bear 'Waterfowl Ptarmigan~~

~~" Grouse Hare ilil1 ilililt Beaver Muskrat Marten 'Oiler 'Fox~~

~~Wolf Wolverine Lynx species not identified~~

Fiqure 6. Annual round of subsistence harvest actjvit'ies b.y residents of the Upper Koyukuk River communitjes of Bettles/Evansville, Alatna, Allakaket, and Huqhes, 1982-1983 (l4arcotte and Haynes 1985). Solid line indicates t'ime when harvest usual ly takes p'lace. Broken l'ine jndicates occasional harvest effort. Note: Harvest of carjbou and brown bear during thjs t'irne period vJas insufficjent to depict pattern.

~~818 APr. May July Aug. Sept.~~

Salmon ililll ililtl ilil ll ililll ilillll 'Whitefish ililll ililt l ilililf Arctic grayling lil ill il iltl Burbot Northern pike ililt ililtl ililll ililil1 Longnose sucker ililtl ililtl Moose ililtl ililll ililrl ililtl il ilil1 Caribou ilill l Dall sheep illll Black bear ilil1 ililll ililll Ducks ililtl il lll il llll ililrl ililll Geese il lll ililll ililtl ililtl Ptarmigan illll il llll il llll il illl ililtl ilil ll 'Grouse ililt il llll ililil ililll ililil ililtl 'Hare ililtl ililil1 il illl illlll PorcuPine ililll ililtl Beaver ilil1 ililil1 Muskrat ilil1 illllll il illl illlll ililtl il llll Mink Marten ililtl 'Otter ilil1 ililll 'Fox ilil ll Coyote il llll Wolf ililtl Wolverine ililll Lynx ililil - Berries illill illll Plants il||l illlll illlll Wood liltl ililtl ililtl 'species not identified

Fiqure 7. Annual round of subsistence harvest activities b.y residents of the Upper Tanana River communities of Northway, Tanacross, Tetljn, and Tok, 1983- 1984 (Case, in press; Haynes et al. 1984). Solid line indicates time when harvest usually takes place. Broken line indicates occasional harvest effort. Note: Based on a sample of residents in each community. Not all resources were harvested in all communjties durinq the study year.

~~819 Table 1. Major Fish and bii l dl i fe Resources Utilized by Residents of Communities in Interior Alaska~~

~~Big Game hli I dfowl~~

Black bear (Ursus americanus) Ducks (various) Brown bear (ffi arcto;)-- Geese (various) Cari bou ( RanqlTer Tarano-us ) Grouse (various) Dal I sheep (0vis dal I i ) Ptarmigan (Lagopus sp. ) Moose (nt.*@tI---

Smal I Game and Furbearers Fi sh Arctic ground squirre'l Alaska blackfish (Dallia pectoralis) (Citellus undulatus) Arct'ic char (SalvaTinus alEinus) geaver 1G'stor c-anadensi s ) Broad whitefi@) Ermine(il'usfla€rinjnea)_ Burbot (tota l_otar- Lvnx (Lvnx c'anadensTtf Chinook sa'lmon ( Marten (Martes americana) .44'0ncorhynchus tshawvtscha ) Mink (MusteTa vlsonT- Chum salmon (0ncorhynchus keta) Mus krat-lOndontra zebethi ca ) Coho salmon (0ncorhynchus kisutch) Porcuping@) Dolly Varden @ Red fox (VrTPesT-frl*f- Arctic graylin@) Ri ver otter Gltffi'naclensi s ) Humpback whitefish Snowshoe hareGpus anrerTcanus ) (Coregonus pidschian) Wolf (Canis lupusJ- Lake Trout (Sa'lval inus namaycush) wol verT ne (gu] o-Tuscus ) Least cisco 1@ saralneTTt) Longnose sucker Northerffile@)( Catostomus catostomus ) Round tihitefish ( Prosopium cyl indraceum) Sheefish (Stenodus leucichth * Sockeye sa@ herka )

~~Source: Adapted from Haynes 1985, Nelson et al. 1982. * 0btained from outs'ide the Interior Region.~~

820 8l UI orl (u (Url q)l +, 1€(uEl +,>Ol be g E.e.el 9e ba be b.e -=.e o\q bs (.obs b.s b-s be bs be be d-s i.e bs b.s bs be be be J (uP+)l \\cOQOO€qror Or t \ | | cor-rO r r-ro+; t 6Cjcrrr\Lo\oo I r (Jct(ol €@or NJ I ot r or I =fr\ ro(.) | +r-(o i60roroiord a i o (r,=l!-2,-l c) o- ol ,O .v. tn (5 :l O t9 $ q) (\J tO O lr) lf) t\ lr) l.r) (Y)r (fr@ (n (O9?r-!O 6Jrn | (o

~~tn (u L Or 5 El ct)~~

~~LL I E~~

+) (o I I (tJ(u- vt>Tc>-.pF iyo>s::-,o - Ja t.;d (u I9. I 16>.(o.r (_)r,(Og)==(tl pqJ LJ.r (J- CO-c !-y-)lF (oi (u qJ5- E- bb qr.F ftoy E t9 (U.r*r )&) ru 9€- t.r cr.1J L1r CJ -o rd-E > tJ rd+r > (t)L- c ct.r L-+, otgr.; be'-'bi-i.5 = O 6 q q L qJ (I,UJ'f .f g (o (o LJ (o fo'oq, trtr_.r-! 5 t-'o EI -- -ql-g-E.- _qr Gr O a o) O = 5 16 O'Gt.r

821 o @ Or (u ro(ucctl P>O i.a b-e be b-q ba bs bs bs ba be B.s (ctcllba be be b.e bs (uP+,C'e'e Oto I C\l(Oqrsf I Oe O (o (6 r!.nr -O (u (l, L € -E(5>Z g g gJ !e E.o,I' (uJ g E Le +r-y.r c rn 5 ct o .o I ()l- (u (u.F O 5.O t-Cp (o (o (o.rt (u (lJ c) (n o'.F o F (J z. z, z, z. d, d, tt v| F- F- F F F F F D > IJ' ======

~~82? .|960-80 Table 3. Population Data for Fairbanks North Star Borough Cornmunities~~

I 960 r 970 I 980 I 985*

~~Fairbanks North Star Borough 45,864 53 ,983 75,079~~

~~Big Horn 360~~

~~Col lege I,755 3,434 4 ,043 Eielson AFB 6,.|49 5,23?~~

~~Ester 8l 264 149~~

~~Fairbanks (city) l3,31 I 14,771 22,645 27,099~~

~~Fox 123~~

~~Harding Lake 38~~

~~Moose Creek .- 510~~

~~Murphy Dome 72~~

~~North Pole (city) 358 265 760 I 1640~~

~~Sal cha 319~~

~~Two Rivers 359~~

~~Source: USDC 198.|, Fairbanks North Star Borough I 985b. * 1985 data are listed by fire service district, with the exception of Fairbanks and North Pole.~~

~~--- means no data were available.~~

823 Table 4. Average Taxable Income for Interior Region Cormunities , 1978-82*

Average Taxable Income (Dollars) Corrnun i ty I 978 t98t 1982 Al lakaket $ 3,883 $ 6,626 $ 6,008 Anvi k 5,488 7 ,703 9,490 Arctjc Vi'llage 2,935 6,470 ' 6,658 Beaver 4,225 6,753 7,956 Bettles/Evansvi I le l2,g5g I 7,103 17 ,7 42 Centra I 9,.| 58 I I ,915 ll,656 Chal kyitsic 7 ,562 4,655 7,253 Ch'i cken 15,237 I 9,469 l4,6l g Ci rcl e 12,507 9,40.| l6,876 Co'l l ege 16,229 2l ,ll5 2l ,613 Delta Junction I 6,880 l9 ,91 I 20,673 Dot Lake l l ,135 9,894 12,444 '| Eagl e 5,327 7 ,988 0 ,576 Eiel son AFB 9,612 I I ,743 l2,g0l Ester 17,174 22,497 22,698 Fa i rban ks l7,g0l 23,476 24,179 Fort Yukon l l ,l49 12,260 14,152 Fort l,{a i nwri ght 8,402 I 0,676 12,262 .l Ga I ena 1 4 ,643 8,533 21,467 Gray'l i ng 9,641 8,449 9,787 Hea 1y ?1,847 29,243 ?9,907 Ho'ly Cross 9,432 9 I0,953 ,655,l Hughes 6,012 5,31 5 ,687 Huslia 10,221 6,l gg 7,356 Ka1 tag 9,.|54 7 ,306 8,070 Koyu ku k 5,405 4,375 5,694 Lake Minchumina I3,075 1 3 ,528 Manl ey I,389 14,270 14,076 McGrath I2,3.|5 I 8,049 16,927 McKinley Park I 0,975 I 6,408 1 6 ,538 Mi nto 6,562 6,566 7 ,415 Nenana 15,225 19,201 19,5.| 7 Nikolai 6,164 5,870 6,9'|5 North Pole 17,026 21,560 22,197 Northway l 0,7gl I 0,549 I 3,304 Nul ato 6,820 9 ,563 12,270 Rampart 6 ,007 l0,816 7,620 Ruby 6,868 I 0,880 I 6,397 Shageluk 5,376 4,984 13,241 Stevens Vi 1 lage 4,938 5,736 6 ,555 Tanacross 4,335 6,5.| 9 6,ggg Tanana I I ,924 l3,4.|3 I 3,943 Tok 13,482 l6,095 1 8 ,334 Us'ibel I i 3l,065 46,4'|8 5l ,493 Veneti e 4,700 4,569 5 ,387

~~Source: ADR 1985. --- means no data were avai lable.~~

* Based on federal income tax returns sorted by mai I ing address.

~~824 Table 5. Moose Harvest Estimates for Selected Interior Region Locations~~

~~Estimated No. of Time Cormunity or Area Moose Harvested Peri od Source~~

~~.|977 Eagl e, Eagle Vi I'lage, 26-32 1 976 Caulfield and Yukon River residents between Eagle and Circle~~

~~Arctic Vjl'lage, Beaver, 300-500 1976 ISER I97B Birch Creek, Chalkyitsik, 200-250 6/81-s/82 Caulfield 1983a Circle, Fort Yukon, Stevens Village, Venetie~~

~~Bettles-Evansville l0 1982 Marcotte/Haynes I 985~~

~~Al I akaket-Al atna 28 1982 Marcotte/Haynes I 985~~

~~Hughes 33 I 982 Marcotte/Haynes I 985~~

~~825 g o= -v =~~

ul (u &. o = +,tn€ |r) (uc co ooo I (tt(uLE t\Or Ol -= r('(uo +'+) (u C\J O C\l C\l r-- (O F otn a=O.F'-E o (u = & L tn lFo J -olJ- L (o F 5 (o ./) g (o orotr)lr,rrro +) c c\J c\t G, c\l tn (u o = L LE (o (uoo I -o 5P d Etl'c lr) € otoNtcDst L@ -o ctl F\@@@cO@ 5

~~826 Table 7. Moose Harvest Summary of the GMS 250 Permit Hunt, 1983-84 and 1984-85~~

~~Number of Reported Number of Total communi ty Permi ts Harvest* permi ts Harvest** 1983-84 1983-84 1984-85 1984-85~~

~~Birch Creek l0 2 t0 3~~

~~Beaver 257 25 12~~

~~Stevens Vi'l l age 25 4 25 t0~~

~~Total s 60 t3 60 25~~

~~Source: Sumida and Alexander 1985.~~

* Based on returned permit reports on1y. ** Based on postseason interviews.

~~827 Table 8. Estimated Harvest of Porcupine Caribou by Residents of Upper Yukon Communities, July 1981 to June 1982~~

~~Communi ty Estimated Harvest of Porcupine Caribou~~

~~Arctic Vi 1'lage 300-400~~

~~Chal kyitsi k 60-70 Eagle 200-300 Fort Yukon 15-20 Venetie 50-75~~

~~Source: Caulfield .|983a.~~

~~828 Tab'le 9. Partjcipation in Samll Game Hunting and Harvest Levels of Small Game Among Surveyed Households in Corununities on the Upper Koyukuk River, 1982~~

~~Bettles/Evansville Al I akaket/Al atna Hughes~~

% Mean % Mean % Mean Hsld. Hsld. Total Hsl d. Hsld. Total Hsld. Hsld. Total Resource Part. Hvst. Hvst.* Part. Hvst. Hvst.* Part. Hvst. Hvst.*

~~Hare 35 il.6 231 80 23.4 8.|8 89 16.7 3tB~~

~~Duc ks t5 1.8 36 BO 24.5 858 79 26.6 505~~

~~Geese t0 .6 12 77 il.3 395 74 12.0 228~~

~~Grouse t0 .4 7 37 2.3 8l 68 6.3 120 .|.0 Ptarmi gan 25 20 46 4.4 154 53 4.2 79~~

~~Source: Marcotte and Haynes I 985. * Total harvest of surveyed households.~~

~~829 Tabl e 10. Subsi stence Harvests of Chinook Salmon by Interior Region Communities Located on the Yukon River and Yukon River Tributaries, L977-84~~

~~1977 I 978 1979 I 980 I 98.| 1982 I 983 I 984~~

~~Yukon River~~

Holy Cross I,920 2,404 1 ,787 3,.| 23 2,312 I,73] 2,276 2,456 Anvi k 67 r80 261 t6l t9t 354 744 576 Grayl i ng 149 292 391 3,664 222 294 951 879 Ka1 tag 216 127 435 694 179 344 652 487 Nu I ato I,53.| I,354 1 ,245 2,297 I ,l l7 8t'l I ,l 35 966 Koyukuk 752 5tB 495 699 541 493 966 I,099 Gal ena I ,.|55 945 I,5gl I,205 570 735 1 ,477 1 ,226 Ruby 735 I,539 2,221 I,736 964 I,.|68 2,346 I ,.l 07 Tanana 858 I,85.| I,604 5,7.l.| 2,517 2,230 5,547 - . 2,682 Rampa rt I,.l94 987 I ,820 I,.|69 488 887 I,070 876 S tevens Village 775 I ,845 1,295 2,612 1 ,292 I ,8.|0 2 ,531 2,177 Fbks. Camp* 467 I,333 899 I ,350 I ,095 I,935 2 ,672 2,499 Beaver ?99 558 394 506 552 250 220 553 Fort Yukon I,06.l ? ,642 1 ,922 ?,527 2,794 I,894 I ,887 3,608 Veneti e 14 160 52 20 2?. 5t Ci rcl e 304 212 I ,.l75 769 7?8 969 648 545 Eag'le I ,l7l 963 2 ,888 2 ,880 3,782 2,864 2,183 I ,998 Tanana River

~~Man 1 ey 752 298 269 4r0 367 386 990 282 Minto 354 344 4ll ?75 440 Nenana 742 807 800 771 974 I ,.l95 966 2,556 Fa'irbanks B1 126 264 291 400 451 475 3?1 Koyukuk River~~

~~Husl ia 50 132 146 154 6l 125 459 I 69 Hu ghes 72 216 180 226 402 479 3tB 856 'l Al atna I 7 2 20 .l850 6 62 Al I akaket 172 239 236 197 ?68 700 373~~

.l980, .l982, .l983, .|984b. Sou rce : ADF&G 1977, 1978, 1979, lgSl, Note: See indiv'idual annual management reports for qualifications. * Fajrbanks fishers operating in the Yukon River bridge area. --- Means no data were avai'lable.

~~830 Table 11. Subsistence Harvest of Summer Chum Salmon by Interior Region Communities Located on the Yukon River and Yukon River Tributaries 1977-84 i~~

~~1977 I 978 1979 1 980 I 98t 1 982 I 983 I 984~~

~~Yukon River~~

Holy Cross . 5 ,04.| 850 2 ,033 2,614 2,30.| 4,421 3 ,033 5,124 Anvi k 23,394 l5 ,883 12,714 28,05.| 26 ;588 27 ,087 20,592 22,433 Grayl i ng 16,275 .|8,.ll8,365 l8,4'|8 29,894 I 5,836 47,006 22,958 28,060 Ka'ltag I 5,043 27 22,929 53,470 28,121 37 ,125 ?,7 ,67 4 I ,800 Nul ato 9,444 8,589 6,054 29,657 7 ,534 19 ,7 40 ll,.|30 232 Koyuku k 2,752 4,957 5 ,570 l4,4.l6.|3,.l02 I I ,788 lB,l49 I 4 ,440 5,2.l5 Gal ena 3,226 8 ,930 4,218 l5,089 20,434 5 ,789 I 9 ,480 Ruby ?,204 I I ,568 8,305 I 5 ,094 5,54? 7 ,539 8,804 4,282 Tanana 8,9.|5 9,297 5 ,964 5,.l09 7 ,873 3,214 5 ,552 l0,620 Rampart 6,327 I,.|35 I 5,300 109 1 ,946 0 3,698 7,650 Stevens Village 7,257 I,766 t6 520 2,576 666 5 ,05.l 5,952 Fbks. Camp I,568 6,055 1,202 1,?27 4 ,50.| ?,056 2,194 4,065 Beaver 694 102 34 263 146 534 100 167 Fort Yukon 6 ,390 2,471 749 I ,291 8,.l49 I ,434 7 ,142 3,032 Veneti e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 Ci rcl e I 39 433 48 2,009 0 73 0 '|33 Eagl e 888 163 180 27 108 I ,887 49

~~Tanana Ri ver~~

Man 1 ey 3,6.l5 3 ,60.| I,939 564 2,972 971 7,245 1,260 Mi nto 450 367 908 7 ,414 5,042 Nenana ?,716 5 ,440 I ,880 4,945 4,369 3,972 6,779 13,962 Fai rbanks I l8 2,729 2,384 3,749 3,239 2,708 2,276 3,177 Koyukuk River

.| .| .| .|2,550 Huslia 8,556 9,805 5 2 6,809 2,949 .|.| .| ,063 ,550 l8,5gg.| Hughes 4,08] 6,387 ,664 0,545 6,.|96 8 ,409 ,905 14 ,7 44 Al atna 210 672 58 300 293 410 325 205 Al I akaket 3,540 8,.| 25 7 ,421 9,.l34 7 ,534 7 ,277 3,840 3,964

.|978, .l980, .|98], .l983, .I984b. Source: ADF&G 1977, 1979, 1982, Note: See individual annual management reports for qualifications. * Fairbanks fishers operating in the Yukon R'iver Bridge area. --- means no data were available.

~~831 Table I2. Subs'istence Harvests of Fal I Chum and Coho Salmon by Communities Located on the Yukon River and Yukon River Tributaries, t977 -84~~

~~1977 I 978 1979 r 980 I 981 I 982 I 983 I 984~~

~~Yukon River~~

Holy Cross 363 89 I 2,159 2,45? I,548 2,467 't38 ,44.| I ,373 Anv'ik 453 2,236 3 ,375 2,552 4,146 I,.|52 760 Grayl i ng 827 459 2,212 2,414 1,062 3 ,986 5,122 2,047 Kal tag I,545 I ,.|64 8,496 3,869 2,431 874 2,833 I,330 Nulato 2,621 477 5,282 I,405 761 293 3,.| 59 I,675 Koyu ku k I,l94 4il 4,563 3,029 842 1,542 I 1,760 .| ,.l60 Ga I ena 2 ,30.| 3,0.|5 2,597 3,597 3,475 2,5.| 5,0.|8 7 .l .|0,.l,722 Ruby 2,145 3 ,.|4.| 8,426 5,933 8,730 7 ,529 3 ,44.I 36 Ta na na I 0,875 I 3 ,386 33,254 33 ,.l 52 32, 193 34,730 43,942 59,588 Rampart 3,729 I ,636 9,7.l0 5,992 5 ,539 5,495 5,674 4,5.|5 Stevens Village I 4,959 4,125 3,4.l 4 8,45.l 7 3,502 5,077 ,.|02 ,415 .l Fbks. Camp* 999 3 7 6,524 7 9,292 1?,943 3,.| 74 'l ,680 ,070 ,533 Beaver 22 ,6.1 5 1,792 195 735 I ,878 6 ,004 0 Fort Yukon 7 ,240 I9,.|09 21 ,517 6 ,537 16,213 2,05.| 3 ,978 7 ,558 Venet i e I,660 2,606 3 ,943 2,730 6,400 850 7 ,800 4,345 Ci rcl e 202 820 3,.l08 1 5,219 290 3,687 3,.l07 ,737 .| Eagl e 6,544 4,864 26 ,868 16 ,7 40 30 ,997 I 3 ,255 20,021 8 ,536 Tanana River t'lan I ey 12,576 I I ,893 ?0,27 4 9,.l 07 13 ,142 5 ,28.| 12,750 3,762 Mi nto 9,680 3,449 5 6,489 4,825 .| ,068 Nenana 21,451 22,185 3.|,645 32,604 3 ,532 1?,11? I 6,037 23,790 Fa i rbanks 607 I,.l88 4,459 4,.|00 5,770 4,521 3,830 5,.l34

~~Koyukuk Ri ver~~

~~Husl ia 804 I 00 I ,950 1 ,737 ?.65 il9 4,003 6 ,3.l8 Hu ghes 775 175 I ,20.l 2,910 653 I ,23.| 3?7 I,680 Al atna 09 .I,08446 70 il 28 lll _?5 Al I akaket 146 I,708 3,070 I ,430 I ,0.|2 I ,829 556~~

.|978, .|979, .|980, .|983, .l984b. Source: ADF&G 1977, l98l, 1982, Note: See individual annual management reports for qualifications. * Fajrbanks area fishers operating in the Yukon River Bridge area. --- means no data were available.

832 EO o OO 5-C lr) oo .co z (J L (u a EO OO o- :t.c roo -co(J NNI q-= L) o/) o @ O) th .Y +J o g o o (u O -C' tr) tn (J a) &. E() -ct -so=-c (,ll (J L) +t O v, o (u or .r. tf)'qi L o cD-o (o o rd - o'r g aru o (J v(tJo o G' {-) (u v1 EO Or vr! 5-C @ (u (u

~~833 t- (u~~

I P J 5 -V)(d(u (ol\FGlsf(ao(oo(',toro -Y +r> CD C\J C' E OL F(o cv :Z - ! (lJ o- v, (\,l sf @ r.o r+ q o, EP+J .O D aOF (, (Y' sgl C\I C\I c\J rF Q)tn> t\ "O o 5 =-- rovr Ect (ostrf<+co l/',= O!- 66 F(d C\l r+ o (o +) ah G' (l) (J L EEP r\@|r)0N6 +) .15 F Ut o= (u (Uvr> (0o(a()@ UI -Y slFNF1rO (I, (o =-E d. lz G' -c (n 1J9 tJ- vtP Or CDC\IOO OL Or l.o o +, (u

~~834 Table 15. Harvest of Nonsalmon Fish Resources by Residents of Huslia, 1983~~

~~Total Tota I Per/Househol d Per/Capi ta Number Harvest Harvest (n=56) Harvest (n=I68) Resource Harvested (l b) (lb) (lb)~~

Sheefi sh 873 6,lll 109. I 32.3 Whi tefi sh* 4,650 4,185 74.7 22.1 Northern pike 1,947 5r452 97.4 28.8 Arcti c grayl i ng 17 12 .2 .l Longnose sucker 272 286 5.1 1.5 Burbot 205 492 8.8 2.6 Al as ka bl ackfi sh 600 10.7 3.2

~~Source: Marcotte in preparation. --- means no data were available. * Species not identified.~~

~~.|6. Iable Percent of Surveyed Households in Upper Tanana River Comunities who Participated in Fishing for Listed Species during a l2-month Period~~

~~Tanacross Tetl i n Northway Tok N=l 5 N=20 N=l 5 N=64~~

~~Time Period 9/83-8/84 6/83-s/84 6/83-5/84 10/83-9/84~~

~~Whi tefi sh* 80% 85% 87% ?0% Arctic arayl ing l3 65 67 63 Burbot 7 70 67 29 Northern pi ke 47 85 80 33 Longnose sucker 33 40 40 3 Trout 0 0 7 l9~~

~~Source: Haynes et al. 1984. * Species not identified.~~

~~835 Table 17. Plant Resources cormonly Utilized by Interior Residents~~

~~Common Name Scientific Name Use~~

~~Wood:~~

l,lhi te spruce Picea glauca Firewood, logs, lumber, tent frames, fish wheels, fish racks Bi rch Betula papyrifera Firewood, snowshoes, sleds, bark for baskets, sap for syrup Pop'lar Populus tremuloides Al der @-s@-- Wood for smoking meat/fish Diamond willow Sal ix bebbiana Crafts

~~Plants:~~

Indian potato Hedysarum alpinum Eaten cooked or raw tJi I d rhubarb m]ysanum E-Tffinum Used in salads or cooked Lambsquarter Chenopodium album Cooked like spinach Strawberry spi nach Chenopodium capjtatum Cooked like spinach Fi reweed E TTo5:inln spF:-- Used in salads and for medicinal purposes Labrador tCa Ledum gpp. Tea Chamomi I e Tripleurospermum gp. Tea Bi rch fungus ffiae Ashes mixed with snuff or tobacco Mu s hrooms Ej s-hT speclF- Fresh or cooked

~~Berri es :~~

B I ueberry Vaccinium ul iginosum Lowbush cranbemy Vaccinium vitis idaea Berries are eaten fresh, Highbush frozen whole, used in cranberry V'iburnum edule je1 I ies, jams, pies, Raspberry FuEFI?aeus sauces, relishes, and B1 ackberry Erwetrffi-lffirum syrups, or used in Bearberry Arctostaphylos alpina Indian icecream C1 oudberry KUDUS Cnamaemorus Roseh i ps ffifaETdlTarTf

~~.|983, Sources: Caulfield 1983a, Martin Stokes 1985.~~

~~836 Table 18. Berry and Firewood Harvests for Surveyed Households in Upper Koyukuk River Communities, 1981~~

Mean % of Households Household Tota'l Participating Harvest Harvest*

~~Bettl es/Evansvi I 'le:~~

~~Berri es 80 4.7 gallons 92.4 gallons Fi rewood 55 4.5 cords 89 cords~~

~~Al I akaket/Al atna :~~

~~Berri es 77 7.2 gallons 251.5 ga'l1ons Fi rewood 97 7.8 cords 274 cords~~

~~Hughes:~~

~~Berri es 84 6.1 ga1 lons .|07.51 I 5 gal lons Fi rewood 79 5.7 cords cords~~

~~Source: Marcotte and Haynes 1985.~~

* Total harvest for surveyed households.

~~837 RE FERENCES ADF&G. 1977. Annual management report , 1977, Yukon area. Div. Comrner. Fish., Fairbanks.~~

~~. 1978. Annual management report, 1978, Yukon area. Div. Cormer. ----Ti;h., Fairbanks~~

~~1979. Annual management report, L979, Yukon area. Div. Cormer. ----TTfh. , Fai rbanks~~

~~1980. Annual management report, 1980, Yukon area. Div. Conrner. Fish., Fairbanks.~~

~~1981. Annual management report, 1981, Yukon area. Div. Corsner. , Fai rbanks --FJTh. . 1982. Annual management report, IggZ, yukon area. Div. Commer. ---FTsn., Fairbanks~~

~~. 1983. Annual management report, 1983, Yukon area. Div. Commer. -----ffih., Fairbanks~~

~~. 1984a. Annual management report, 1984, Kuskokwim area. ADF&G, --*-D'iv. Commer. Fish., Fairbairks~~

~~. 1984b. Annual management report, 1984, Yukon area. Div. Commer. ----TTIh., Fairbanks~~

~~ADR. 1985. Federal income taxpaper profi'le 1978, 1981, Lggz by Alaska community and jncome level and filing status. Juneau.~~

Allen, H.T. 1887. Report of an expedition to the cooper,. Tanana, and Koyukuk rivers, in the territory of Alaska, in the year lgg5. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government printing 0ffices. Andrews, E.F., and R.K. Napoleon. 1985. Moose hunting-ADF&G, in the Minto Flats Management Area by Minto permit holders, 1984-85. Div. Subsis- tence, Fairbanks.

~~Bishop, R.H. L978. Subsistence resource use in the proposed north addition to Mt. McKinley National Park. Cooperative Park Studies Unit, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks.~~

Cantwell, J.C. 1904. Report of the operations of the U.S. revenue steamer Nunivak on the Yukon River Sta-tjon, Alaska, 1899-1901. l,lashington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. case,_M. _In preparation. t'lild resource use in Northway, Alaska. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fajrbanks. caulfie'ld, R.A. L977. subsistence use in and around the proposed Yukon-charley nationa'l rivers. Nps Alaska 0ffice, Anchorage.

~~838 . 1981. Final report of the survey of permitholders in the Tanana~~

~~Fa i rban ks .~~

-Riversubsistencesa1monpermitfishery1981'.ADF&G,Div.Subsistence,. 1983a. Subsistence land use in upper Yukon-Porcupine Effinunities, Alaska. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fairbanks. . 1983b. Tanana River salmon fishery: resource use near a 'large city. Pages 10-28 in R.J. Wotte and L.J. El lanna, edi. Resource use and socioeconomic-systems: case studies of f ishing and -TnTeriorhunting in Alaska cormunities. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau. Clark, A.M. 1981. Koyukon pages 582-601 in J. Helm, ed. Handbook of North American Indians, Vo'1. 6: Subardlic. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Dixon' M.H. 1978. What happened to Fairbanks? The effects of the Trans-Alaska 0il Pipe'line on the corrnunity of Fairbanks, Alaska. Social Impact Assessment Series, No. 1, C.P. Wolfe, €d. Boulder, Co: Westview Press. Fairbanks North Star Borough. 1985a. Conununity Research Quarterly 8(1). FNSB, Cornmunity Research Center, Fairbanks.

. 1985b. 1985 population estimate, Fairbanks North Star Borough. --FffiB, Community Rese'arch Center, Fairbanks. Francis, K.E. 1969. Decline of the dogs'led in villages of arctic Alaska: 9 pfetiminary discussion. Assoc. of Pacific Coast Geographers Yearbook (31):69-78.

~~Gardner, J.S. 1981. General environment. Pages 5-14 in J. Helm, ed. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol . -6: Subarctic. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.~~

~~Gruening, E. 1954. The Sta.te of Alaska. New York: Random House.~~

~~Haynes' T.L. 1970. Alaskan Native health: an historical overview and needs assessment for interior Athapaskan communities. Unpubl., on File at ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fairbanks.~~

~~. 1985. Regional research catalog: Interior Alaska. Unpub., -*--TDFaG, Div. Subsiitence, Fairbanks~~

Haynes, T.1., M. Case, J.A. Fa11, L. Halpin, and M. Robert. 1984. The use of Copper River salmon and other wild resources by upper Tanana cornnunities, 1983-84. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fairbanks. He1m, J., T. Alliband, T. Birk, v. Lawsen, S. Reisner, c. sturvevant, and s. Witkowski. I975. The contact history of the subarctic Athabaskans: an overview. Pages 302-334 in A.M. clark, 8d. Proceedings: North American Athapaskan conference, tgZt. National Museum of Ma-n Mercury Series, Canadian Ethnology Service, 0ttawa.

~~839 Hosleyr E,H. 198la. Environment and culture in the Alaska plateau. pages 533-545 in J. He1m, ed. Handbook of North American Iidians, Vol.-6: SubarctiF Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.~~

. 198fb. Intercultural relations and cultural change in the Alaska ----ffiteau. Pages 546-555 in J. Helm, ed. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 6: Subarctiil Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. . 1981c. Kolchan. Pages 618-6?2 in J. Helm, ed. Handbook of -----North American Indians, Voi : 6: SubarcEc, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

~~Hunting!9n, C.C. 1981. Issue paper on subsistence king salmon drift gillnetting. Yukon Area Subdistrict 4-A (Proposal #463), ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Galena.~~

~~ISER (Institute of Social and Economic Research). 1978. Yukon-porcupine regional planning study. USDA: Forest Service, and University of Alaska, Fairbanks.~~

Krauss, M.E. 7982. Native peoples and languages of Alaska. Alaska Native Language Center, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks. Krech, S., III. L978. 0n the aboriginal population of the Kutchin. Arctic Anthropology 15( 1) :89-103.

~~Loyens, t.J.J. 1966. The changing culture of the Nulato Koyukan Indians. Ph.D. Dissert., Unjv. l{'isconsin, Madison.~~

~~Marcotte, J.R. 1982. The king salmon drift net fishing on the middle Yukon: an overview and study of the Lggz season. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fairbanks.~~

~~. 1985. Personal communication. Subsistence Resource Specialist, --T-F&G, Div. subsistence, Galena.~~

. In preparation. Husl ia report. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, --E-irbanks. Marcotte, J.R., and T.L. Haynes. 1985. Contemporary resource use patterns in. .th". upper Koyukuk region, Alaska. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fai rbanks.

~~Martin, G. 1983. Use of natural resources by the residents of Dot Lake, Alaska. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fairbanks.~~

~~McKennan, R.A. 1981. Tanana. _Pages s\z-sl6 jn J. He'lm, ed. Handbook of North Americ_an Indians, Vol. 6: Subarctiil Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.~~

~~Michael, H.N., ed. 7967. Lieutenant Zagoskin's travels in Russian America 1842-1844. Toronto: Univ. Toronto press.~~

~~840 Nelson, R.K. rg73- Hunters of the northern forest. Chicago: Press. Univ. Chicago~~

~~1983. Make prayers _--. to the raven: A Koyukon view of the nor"thern forest. Chicago: Univ. Chicago press.~~

Nelson, R.K., K.H. Mautner, and G.R. Bane. 1982. Tracks portrayal in the wildland: A of Koyukon and Nunamiut subsistence. Cooperative park Studies Unit, Univ. Alaska, Fairbanks. 0sgood, C' 1936. Contributions to the ethnography of the Kutchin. yale univ. Pub. in Anthroporogy 14, New Huu.n,'connecticut.

1-940. ----.' ^^ Ingalik material culture. yare univ. pubr. in Anthropology ?2, New Haven, Connecficut. Robert, M' 1984. Trapping patterns in the vicini!y or the Kaiyuh flats, west centrar Araska. ADF&G, Dfv. subsistence, Fairbanks. Ro11ins, A.M. 1978. census Alaska: numbers of inhabitants l7g2-1g70. Univ. Alaska, Anchorage. , Schwatka, F. 1900. A reconnaissance of the..y.ukon valley, Igg3. pages 285-362 in u:.s. congress, Senate compilation committee on uiiitary Affairs. of nartalives' or- .rftorifions in Alaska. Government Printing 0ffice, Washington, D.C. Selkregg, L.L. 1976. Alaska regionar profi'les: yukon Region. Araska Environmental rnformation and duiu c.ni;;; i,;;;. Aj;si<.,'=dn.no"ug.. Shinkwin, A., qnd M. case. 19g1. Modern foragers: wild resource use in Nenana vi11age, Araska. ADF&G, Div. srurlrtence, Fairbanks. siobodin, R. 1991. Kutchin. fage_s- 514-532 in J. Helm, ed. Handbook of North American Indians, vol. 6: suuarcfic. smithsonian Washington, D.C. Institution, snow, J.H. 198.1. I_ngar pa-ges ik. 6oz-6fl in J. He1m, ed. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol-. 6: subarcn+c. Smithionian Washington, D.C. Institution, stickney, A. 1981. subsistence resource utilization, Nikolai and Telida. Interim Rept, II. ADF&G, Div. SrUsiit.*., Bethel. stokes, J' 1982. subsistence salmon fishing system, in the upper Kuskokwim River 1981 and rggz. ADF&G, Div. sJuiistence, Fairbanks. 1984' Memo to T. Haynes. regard-i-ng research communities. findings in lower f:l:];rJJl" lJnpub.6n ]iit. ADF&G, oiv. Subsistence,

~~841 . 1985. Natural resource util jzation of four upper Kuskokwim communities. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau.~~

Sumida, V.A., and C. Alexander. 1985. Moose hunting by residents of Beaver, Birch Creek, Fort Yukon, and Stevens Village in the Western GMU 25(d) Permit Moose Hunt Area, 1984-1985. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fa i rban ks .

Tanana Chiefs Conference. 1983. Interior cormunities. Tanana Chiefs Conference Planning and Informatjon 0ffice, Fairbanks. USDC. 1981. 1980 census of populati'on; general population characteristics, Alaska. Bureau of the Census, Washington, D.C.

USFl.lS. 1985. Subsistence management and use: implementation of Title VIII of ANILCA. USDI, USFWS, Anchorage. VanStone, J.t,l. I974. Athabaskan adaptations: hunters and fishermen of the subarctic forests. Chicago: Aldine.

~~Viereck, 1.A., and E.L. Little, Jr. 1972. Alaska trees and shrubs. USDA: Forest Service, Washington, D.C.~~

~~Webb, M. 1985. The last frontier: a history of the Yukon basin of Canada and Alaska. Albuquerque: Univ. New Mexico Press.~~

~~Whymper, F. 1869. A journey from Norton Sound, Bering Sea, to Fort Yukon. Royal Geog. Soc. 38:2L9-237.~~

~~[{olfe, R.J. 1982. Alaska's great sickness, 1900: an epidemic of measles and influenza in a v'irgin soil population. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 126(2) :91-121.~~

. 1983. Understanding resource uses in Alaska socioeconomic Pages 248-274 in n.;. Wolfe and L.J. Ellanna, eds. Resource -$tems.use and socjoeconomic systems: case studies of fishing and hunting in Alaskan communities. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau. Wolfe, R.J., and R.J. Walker. 1985. Subsistence economies in Alaska: Product'ivi ty, geography, and development impact. ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Juneau.

~~842 Appendices~~

~~A. Directory of Resierers and Contributors~~

Al t, K.T, Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Sport Fish, Fairbanks Amstrup, S. Polar Bear Biologist, USFWS, Denver l.lildlife Research Center, Anchorage Anderson, P.J. Shrimp Biologist, USDC: NOM, NMFS, Kodiak, AK Andrews, E.F. Subsistence Resource Specialist, ADF&G, Div. Subsi stence, Fai rbanks Bergstrom, D.J. Fishery Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Comner. Fish., Bethel Best, E. Senior Biologist, IPHC, Seattle, WA Buklis, L.S. Yukon Research Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Conrer. Fish., Anchorage Burris, 0. Region III Mgt. Coordinator, ADF&G, Div. Game, Fairbanks Case, M. Fjsh and Game Technician iII, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fai rbanks Coffing, M. Subsistence Resource Specialist, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Bethel Crain, E. Fish and Game Technician, ADF&G, Div. Game, Fairbanks Davis, J. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Fairbanks Fay, F.H. Professor, Univ. Alaska, Institute of Marine Science, Fai rbanks Francisco, R. K. Kuskokwim Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Cormer. Fish., Bethel Frost, K. Marine Marmal B'iologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Fairbanks Gei ger, M. F. Yukon Mgt. Bi ol ogi st , ADF&G, Di v. Cornrner. Fi sh. , Anchorage Griffen, K.L. Bering Sea Area Shellfish Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Commer. Fish., Dutch Harbor Haynes, T. L. Regional Supervisor, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fairbanks Heimer, hl. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Fairbanks Johnson, D. Area Mgr. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Bi9 Delta Kel leyhouse, D. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Tok Kessler, D.l^l. Shellfish Biologist, USDC: N0AA, NMFS, NIJAFC, Kodjak, AK King, R. Waterfowl Biologist, USFWS, l,Jildlife Assistance, Waterfowl Investigations, Fairbanks Kramer, M.J. Mgt. Coordinator, ADF&G, Div. Sport Fish, Fairbanks Lowry, L. Marine Mammal Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Fairbanks Machida, S. Asst. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, St. Marys Marcotte, J. Subsistence Resource Specialist, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Galena Melchior, H. Furbearer Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Fairbanks 0sborne, T. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Galena Patten, S. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, Bethel Pegau, R. Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Game, McGrath Pete, M. Subsistence Resource Specialist, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Bethel

845 T. Quinn, Assoc. Professor, Univ. Alaska, School of Fisheries and Science, Juneau Rigby, P.td. Fishery Bio'logist, ADF&G, Div. Cormer. Fish., Juneau Rothe, T. Coordinator, l,laterfol]-Igt:, ADF&G, Div. Game, nninorage Seanan, G. Habitat BioJ.ogis_t, ADF&G, piv. Habitat, Anchoiage Schul tz, K.C. ltr!.-Area Mgt. Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Conuner. Fish., Bethel Sonni chsen , S. lgrgurch Analyst,. ADF&G, D!y. Sport Fish, Anchorage Stokes, J. Fish and Game Technician, ADF&G', Div. Subsistence, Nikolai Sumida, V. Subsistence Resource Specialist, ADF&G, Div. Subsistence, Fai rbanks Valkenburg, P. Game Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Garp, Fairbanks [.lhirmore, D.C. Herring Research Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Conrner. Fish., Anchorage [,J'i I cock, J.A. Fishery Biologist, ADF&G, Div. Conuner. Fish., Stock Biology Group, Anchorage Wo'l f e, R. J. Research Director, ADF&G, Div. Subs i.stence Juneau Woloti ra, R.J. , Supervisory Fishery Biologist, USDC: NOI\A, NMFS, NWAFC , Seatcle, l'lA

~~846 B. Abbreriations~~

ACMP Alaska Coasta'l Management Program ADCED Alaska Department of Conmerce and Economic Development ADCRA Alaska Department of Community ancl Regional Affa'irs ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental conservation ADF&G Alaska Department of Fish and Game ADL Alaska DePartment of Labor ADNR Alaska Department of Natural Resources ADR Alaska Department of Revenue AEIDC Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center AOU American 0rnithological Union BBCMP Bristol Bay Cooperative Management Plan BLM Bureau of Lano Management CFEC Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission CIRPT Cook In'let Regional Planning Team EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPS Environmental Protection Servjce (Canada) ERL Environmental Research Laboratory FAg Food and Agriculture 0rganization of the United Nations GMS Game l4anagement Subunit GMU Game Management Unit IMS Institute of Marine Science INPFC International North Pac'ific Fisheries Cormission IPHC international Pacific Halibut Commiss'ion IUCN International Union of Conservation of Nature and Natural Resou rces ISEGR Institute of Social, Economic and Government Research LCI Lower Cook inlet MMS Mineral Management Service NEG0A Northeast Gulf of Alaska NMFS National lrlarine Fisheries Serv'ice N0AA National 0ceanic and Atmospherjc Administration

847 NPFMC North Pacific Fishery Management Council NPS National Park Service NWAFC Northwest and Alaska Fisheries Center N[.JR National Wildlife Refuge QCSEAP 0uter Continental Shelf Environmental Assessment Program OMPA 0ffice of Marine Pollution Assessment PhJS Prince t/i I I iam Sound PWSRPT Prince l^Jilliam Sound Regional Fisheries Planning Team UCI Upper Cook Inlet USDC United States Department of Corrnerce USDA United States Department of Agriculture USDI United States Department of Interior USDL Uniteo States Department of Labor USFS United States Forest Service 'ldl USFWS Uni ted States Fi sh and !{i i fe Servi ce

~~IrtS C. Wildlife Managgment Croals and Objectires~~

The following are the goals and subgoals that form the basis for wildlife management by the A'laska Department of Fish and Game. The first goal applies to all species managed by the department. App'lication of the second goal and the selection of one or more of its subgoals varies by species ancl/or area managed.

Outline: l.llLDLIFE MANAGEMENT GOALS*

I. TO PROTECT, MAINTAIN AND ENHANCE I^IILDLIFE POPULATIONS AND THEIR HABITATS FOR THEIR INTRINSIC AND ECOLOGICAL VALUES SO ESSENTIAL TO THE MAINTENANCE OF A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT AND THE [,JELFARE OF MAN.

II. TO PROVIDE FOR OPTIMUM BENEFICIAL USE OF WILDLIFE BY MAN. A. To provide for subsistence use of wildlife by Alaskan residents dependent on wildlife for sustenance. B. To provide for diversified recreational uses of wildlife. C. To provide for scientific and educational use of wildlife. D. To provide for commercia'l use of wildlife.

* Source: 1980 ADF&G !,lildlife Managemenr Goals.

~~849 t^llLDLIFE MANAGEMENT GOALS~~

I. TO PROTECT, IIIAINTAIN AND ENHANCE t,lILDLIFE POPULATIONS AND THEIR HABITATS FOR THEIR INTRINSIC AND ECOLOGICAL VALUES SO ESSENTIAL TO THE MAINTENANCE OF A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT AND THE I.JELFARE OF MAN.

Wildlife and man are interdependent constituents of an environment shared with all other' living things. Recognition of this fundamental relationship is reason enough ro preserve wildlife and to maintain its natural role in ihe environment. In addition, there is great value in assuring for man's benefit and enjoyment the continuance of an environment as biologically rich and diverse in the future as in the present. For the peop'le of the State and the Nation Alaska's wildlife is an invaluabje source of inspiration, sustenance, and recreatjonal and economic benefits. It is capab'le of providing benefits to man in perpetuity if its welfare is safeguarded. Because wildlife is especia'l1y vulnerable to human activities, it requires the most careful stewardship man can provide. The foremost consideration in protecting and maintaining indigenous wildlife populati<.rns is providing habitat in the amount, kind and quality necessary to rneet the requirements of wildlife species. Wildlife populations cannot survive without adequate habitat, and efforts to protect animals directly without also protecting their habitat or correcting habitat deficiencies often prove to be ineffectual. Alteration of habitat is one primary way man affects wildlife populations. Although some spec'ies can inadvertent'ly benefit from certain habitat alterations resul ting from man's activities, many others can be adversely affected. Long-term habitat degradation usually results in reduced numbers and fewer species of w'ildlife. Even where habitat are purposely modified to benefit populations of particular species, reductions in populations of oiher species may be unavoidable. Protection, maintenance, and manipulation of wildlife habitat are important management activities of the Department. Important wildlife habitats will be identified and protective legislation, classification or designation of such habitats wi'll be sought. Larrd management agencies, organizations, and individuals will be encouraged to protect wildlife habitats from degradation or to minimize adverse impacts of development or other land uses on land under their control. Where appropriate, habitat may be restored or improved to enhance selected wi ldl ife populatjons. Wildlife as well as its habitat must be protected from the detrimental influences of man. Disrurbances injurious tcl wildlife must be minimized. Competition and confl'icts with domest'ic animals must also be minimized arrd the introduction of undesirable exotic animals avoided. The introduction of diseases carried by domestic animals, transplanted wild animals, or animals kept as pets nrust be prevented. Use of wildlife must be regulated to ensure that allowable use tolerances are not exceeded. Illegal and wasteful uses

B5C must be controlled to assure protection of the resource and to maximize human benefits from its use. Greater public appreciation for and awareness of wildlife and its requirements are necessary for public support for effective programs to protect and benefit wildlife. Successful, progressive wildlife management requires obiective decisions based on the best biological information that can be gathered by competent professionals.

II. TO PROVIDE FOR OPTIMUM BENEFICIAL USE OF WILDLIFE BY MAN Optimum beneficial use of wildlife is that use which 1) does not adversely affect the w'ildlife populatiorrs,2) results in desirable products of use, and 3) is based on desirable allocations of such products amonE users. Such use, in the aggregate, serves to maxinrize benefits to be people of Alaska and the Nation. Depending on the objectives of management, there are many levels and kinds of use which can be considered "optimum". l^lildlife can support a variety of uses on a continual basis so long as its capability to sustairr such use is not impaired. Because values placed upon wildlife vary, management must provide opportunities for an array of different uses if benefits are to be realized by all concerned. Also, because there are finite limits to wildlife populations and the uses they can support, management must provide for simultaneous uses wherever possible if benefits are to be optimized. Although different uses are generally compatible, some conflicts do occur, and sometimes provision for some uses may require the exclusion of others. Regulatory separation of incompatible uses in time and space can reduce conflicts and facilitate an optimum level and mix of beneficial uses. Attainment of the fo'llowing subgoals should ensure that the people obtain oprimum beneficial use from Alaskan wildlife.

SUBG0AL A. To provide for Subsi stence Use of [^Jildlife by Alaskan Residents ndent on dl ife for stenance. Direct domestic utilization of wildlife is important to many residents for sustenance and to many other citizens as a valuable food supplement. Beyond directly satisfying food requirements, domestic utilization of wildlife helps preserve Alaskan cultures and traditions and gives gratification to the strong desire of many Alaskans to harvest their obrn food. These -attributes of subsistence use are considered genuinely important to the physical and psychologica'l wel l -being of a 'large number of Alaskans. Accordingly, subsistence receives priority anpng the various beneficial human uses. l'lithin legal constraints and the limits of resource capabilities, wildlife will be allocated to subsistence users on the basis of need. Needs of individuals, families, or cultural groups differ in type and degree and it is recognized that subjective judgement will be an unavoidable necessity in establishing actual need. Elements considered in establishing the level of

851 need include cultures and customs, economic status, alternative resources (including availability of social services), place of residence, and voluntary choice of life style. Limitations on the productivity of wildlife stocks may limit continued increases in the number of subsistence users. In some circumstances subsistence users also may be participants in recreational or cormercial harvesting. Where subsistence users can satisfy their needs by recreational or cormercial methods, special regulations for subsistence priority should be achieved by existing regulatory techniques, such as open and closed seasons, bag limits, control of methods and means of take, and controlled use areas. Even when special regu'lations are necessary, commercial and recreational uses might not need to be prohibited entirely prior to any restrictions on subsistence uses. But, in any case, traditional and customary subsistence users would continue to receive a priority harvest opportunity in regulatory systems.

Management of wildlife popu'lations for subsistence use may involve manipulation of the numbers and/or sex and age structure of the population. Where possible, differential use or sex or age segments of wildlife populations will be used to accommodate subsistence or other use demands. l,lildlife popu'lations general'ly will be managed to optimize sustained productivity. Recreational and commercial uses will be permitted where and to the extent that they do not interfere with or preclude subsistence resource use.

SUBG0AL B. To Provide for Diversified Recreational Uses of Wildlife In many areas of the state, recreation, in its various forms, is the dominant use of wildl ife. In addition to sport hunting and trapping' recreational uses include observation and photography, both incidental to other activities and as the primary objectives, and wilderness experience, including the aesthetic rewards of being aware of or observing animals in natural interactions wi th thei r envi ronment. The Department has the responsibiliuy to provide for these diverse, yet generally compatible uses.

The emphasis of management for recreational use will be to provide opportunities for varied recreational experiences rather than to maximize the yie'ld of animals, even though success in observing or taking animals is recognized as an important element in user satisfaction. Varied experiences are often provided through de facto differences in biological, pltysical r drd demographic characteristics of various areas and through regu'lated factors such as participation rates, methods and means of use, timing of use, and bag 1 imi ts. Quality of experience is an important concern to many recreational users. Although aesthetics are a matter of individual preference, elements of quality most commonly identified include low user densities, controlled methods of transport, undisturbed wilderness character, minimal intrusions by other users, and a reasonab'le expectation of success. The opportunity to observe or be select'ive for large animals is another aesthetic consideration which may add significantly to the recreational experience.

85? At the other end of the recreational use spectrum are those uses allowing unrestricted opportunities for user participation. Beyond limiting use to optimum sustained yield levels, management for maximized opportunity provides for unlimited participation and traditional freedom of choice of access methods.

SUBGOAL C. To Provide for Scientific and Educational Use of Wildlife. The Alaskan environment, including its wildlife, is a unique natural laboratory for the scientific stuoy of ecosystems and wildlife biology, and for the educational enrichment of the peop'le. Such studies are necessary to achieve a scientific basis for identifying and evaluating management options. Scientific stucty and education have taken place in many areas of Alaska, reflecting the general compatibility of such use with other uses of wildlife. 0ccasionally, undisturbed or closely controlled conditions are necessary stucly requirements and justify the designation of areas primarily for scientific ancl educational purposes. Requirements for such actions specify the extent to which other uses, both consumptive and nonconsumptive, would be encouraged or restricted. In some cases, intensive population or habitat manipulation may be necessary to achieve study obiectives.

SUBG0AL D. To Provide for Commercial Use of Wildlife. Commercial use of wildlife includes the direct consumptive and non-consumptive use of animals where sale of the products or by-products of animals is the primary objective. Indirect commercial use includes services which support recreational or other noncorrnercial users, and marketing systems utilized for wildlife products. Direct comercial use of wildlife in Alaska today is limited primarily to furbearers and marine mammals which have traditiona'l ly supported such use. Principal service industries include guiding, taxidermy, meat processing, photography, and wildl ife-related tourist services. Corrnercial uses of furbearer and marine mammal resources, responsible for much of the ear'ly exploration and settlement of Alaska, still support important industries in rural areas of the state and provide needed supple- mental income to many bush residents. However, changing economic and socia1 values and the increasing importance of recreational uses generally are reducing the relative economic importance of direct commercial uses of wildlife. 0n the other hand, industries serving the continually growing recreational uses of wildlife are becoming more important.

Management will provide for commercial use of wildlife only when it does not threaten the welfare of any wildlife resource, when it is in the economic interest of the people of Alaska, and when it is compatible with other uses. Where commercial use conflicts with other uses it will usually be restricted or elinrinated in favor of other uses. Cormercial activities which depend on recreational users will usually be restricted or eliminated in favor of orher uses. Domestication of wildlife for corunercial purposes usually will be opposed, but where allowed it will be strictly regulated to prevent abuse to the resource or inhumane treatment of individual animals.

853 hJILDLIFE MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES*

Based on these wildlife management goals and subgoals, objectives for the strategic management plans of individual species are selected from the fo1 I owi ng: To protect, maintain, and enhance the (species) population in concert with the components of the ecosystems and to assure its capability of providing sustained opportunities to 1) view and photograph wilolife; 2) subsistence use of wildl ife; 3) participate in hunting wildlife; 4) hunt wildlife under aesthetically pleasing conditions; 5) be selective in hunting wildlife; 6) scientific and educational study of wildlife; 7) commercial use of wildlife; B) protect human life and property in human-wildlife i nteract'ions.

Management objectives vary not only according to the concerned species, but also, in many cases, according to the areas'involved and the clemands made upon the wildlife resource. Because these demands can change with the passage of time, particular management objectives may need to be revised.

Exarnples of management guidelines are presented in the individual strateg'ic management p1ans. These guiclelines are used to qualify or quantify in a more specific way the recommended management under a specific set of objectives for any particular area. The guidelines are statements about the fo1 1 owi ng:

1. The wildlife popu'lation: its size, sex, age structure, and prcducti v i ty. 2. Use: season length and timing, bag limits, number or distribution of hunters or other users, access, transport, viewing, and aesthetic enjoyment. 3. Habitat: alteration or protection.

* Departmental memo, ADF&G, Division of Game, June 14, 1980.

~~854~~