TOGIAK NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE Dillingham, Alaska
ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT Calendar Year 1985
U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife service NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM REVIE~l AND APPROVALS
TOGIAK NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
Dillingham, Alaska
ANNUAL NARRATIVE REPORT
Calendar Year 1985
Jadtk Refuge Manager
Date TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION i - v
A. HIGHLIGHTS 1
B. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS 1 C. LAND ACQUISITION
1. Fee Title ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 4 2. Easements ••••••• 5 3. Other • .•.••••••• 5 D. PLANNING
1. Master Plan ••••••• 9 2. Management Plan ••• • ••• 12 3. Public Participation •••• • ••• 12 4. Compliance with Environmental and Cultural Resource Mandates ••• NTR 5. Research and Investigations •••••••••••••••• . .••.•••••••..•.•• 12 6. Other • •.•...•••••..•.•••••••...••••• • •• Nothing to Report E. ADMINISTRATION
1. Personnel •••••••• ...... 37 2. Youth Programs ••• •••••••••• Nothing to Report 3. Other Manpower Programs ••• •••• Nothing to Report 4. Volunteer Programs ••••• • •• 39 5. Funding ...... 43 6. Safety ...... 44 7. Technical Assistance •••• • ••• Nothing to Report 8. Other ...... •••••..•....••.....•.....• 45 F. HABITAT MANAGEMENT
1. General •••• ..... 47 2. Wetlands ••• ..... 49 3. Forests •••• • ••• Nothing to Report 4. Croplands •• • ••• Nothing to Report 5. Grasslands ••••• ..Nothing to Report 6. Other Habitats •• ...... 49 7. Grazing ••••••••••• ..Nothing to Report 8. Haying ...... • ••• Nothing to Report 9. Fire Management •• ...... 50 10. Pest Control •• • ••• Nothing to Report 11. Water Rights •• . ... 50 12. Wilderness and Special Areas ••• . ... 50 13. WPA Easement Monitoring ••••••••• • •• Nothing to Report G. WILDIFE 1. Wildlife Diversity •••••••••••••••••••••••••• •••• 52 2. Endangered and/or Threatened Species •••••••• • • 52 3. Waterfowl ...... 53 4. Marsh and Water Birds ••••••• .58 5. Shorebirds, Gulls, Terns and Allied Species •••• .59 6. Raptors . •.•....••••.....• ...... 62 7. Other Migratory Birds •••• .64 8. Game Mammals •••••••• .64 9. Marine Mammals •••••••••••• .66 10. Other Resident Wildlife. • 70 11. Fisheries Resources ••••••••••••••••• ...... 71 12. Wildlife Propagation and Stocking •• . •••• Nothing to Report 13. Surplus Animal Disposal •••• ..Nothing to Report 14. Scientific Collections •••• ..Nothing to Report 15. Animal Control ••••••• ..Nothing to Report 16. Marking and Banding •• .Nothing to Report 17. Disease Prevention and Control •••• .Nothing to Report H. PUBLIC USE
1. General ...... 82 2. Outdoor Classrooms--Students •••••• .Nothing to Report 3. Outdoor Classrooms--Teachers •••••• •• Nothing to Report 4. Interpretive Foot Trails •••••• •• Nothing to Report 5. Interpretive Tour Routes •••••• .Nothing to Report 6. Interpretive Exhibits/Demonstrations •••••••• •• Nothing to Report 7. Other Interpretive Programs •••• • 84 8. Hunting ••• • • 84 9. Fishing •••• . .. 85 10. Trapping ••• .90 11. Wildlife Observation ••••••••••••••••••• • • 92 12. Other Wildlife Oriented Recreation ••••• ...... 92 13. Camping ...... •.. • •• 92 14. Picnicking •••••••••••• ..Nothing to Report 15. Off-Road Vehicling •••• ...... 93 16. Other Non-Wildlife Oriented Recreation ••• .Nothing to Report 17. Law Enforcement •••••••••••• ...... 93 18. Coooperating Associations •• ..Nothing to Report 19. Concessions •••••••••••••••• .Nothing to Report
I. EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES
1. New Construction ••• ..Nothing to Report 2. Rehabilitation •••••• ...... 95 3- Major Maintenance ••• .. 95 4. Equipment Utilization and Replacement •• • • 96 5. Communications Systems ••• • • 97 6. Computer Systems ••••• • •• 97 7. Energy Conservation ••• ...•...... 9 8 8. Other ...... Nothing to Report J. OTHER ITEMS 1. Cooperative Programs...... 99 2. Other Economic Uses •• • •• Nothing to Report 3. Items of Interest •• • .1 00 4. Credits ...... • • 101 K. FEEDBACK 104 LEGEND
k?t~:J Wilderness Area
L~l Native Conveyed Lands
YUKON DELTA NWR
.---1 t-Il I "01g, 3:1 I
~ ~ co. ~ AWALRUS IS. 0 ~State Game Sanct8ary Nonvok Boy
CAPE CONSTANTINE
1 r>- '{ N e 0 \... s f B R " .,...... ··~-- Total acreage within refuge: 4.3 million acres TOGIAK 0 20 40 Milu NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE
" USFWS DIVISION OF REALTY ANCHORAGE, AK. INTRODUCTION Located in Southwestern Alaska, between Kuskokwim Bay on the west and Bristol Bay on the south and east, Togiak National Wildlife Refuge is approximately 400 miles southwest of Anchorage. The refuge is bordered on the north by the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge, and on the east by vlood-Tikchik State Park.
Togiak NWR absorbed the former Cape Newenham mlR, and now comprises 4,282,000 acres. In the northern half of the refuge, 2,270,000 acres have been designated as wilderness area.
The refuge is roadless. Eighty percent of it is located in the Ahklun Mountains, where large expanses of tundra uplands are cut by several broad glacial valleys opening onto a coastal plain. Archeological evidence indicates that the Cape Newenham/Togiak region of southwestern Alaska has been continuously occupied by aborginal people for at least 2,000 years. One site, at Security Cove near Cape Newenham, shows evidence of possible human occupancy dating 4,000 to 5,000 years ago.
Aborginal people within this area were of two different groups: the Kuskwogmiut Eskimos, who occupied the area from Chagvan Bay north to the Kuskwogmiut River; and the Togiagamiut Eskimos, who lived in the area south of Chagvan Bay east to Togiak Bay. The people on Nanvak and Osviak Bays were known as Chingigmiut, or Cape People, and were considered a branch of the Togigamiut.
At the time of the 1880 census, over 2,300 Eskimos lived within what is now Togiak NWR. Elliott (1866) stated that the Togiak River was remarkable with respect to the density of the people along its banks. At that time, 1,926 people lived in seven villages along the river between Togiak Lake and Togiak Bay. This population reflected the great abundance of fish and wildlife, which the people relied upon for their sole source of food and clothing.
The Togiagamiuts, unlike most coastal Eskimos, did not entirely depend upon the fish and wildlife resources of the sea for their subsistence. Sea mammals were hunted, but more effort was expended in pursuit of moose, caribou, and brown bear which roamed the interior mountains and valleys. From their \ Of the various industries created in the area during the 1800's, only the salmon fishery retains its original importance. In 1885, Alaska Packing Company of Astoria established the "Scandinavian" cannery on the west side of Nushagak Bay. With a capacity of 2,000 cases per day, it operated until the end of World War II. Bristol Bay Canning Company, then called the Bradford Cannery, went into production a few miles from the Scandinavian in 1886, at a site that later became Dillingham. By 1897, the fishing industry had invested $867,000 in the Bay. By 1908, the number of canneries operating at Nushagak numbered ten. Interest in goldmining and trapping declined during World War I, and reindeer herding practically became extinct by the mid-1940's. This was due to the near-total extermination of reindeer by a series of hard winters. Most of the goldmines closed at the outbreak of \-lorld War II, but platinum mining, which started in 1926, continues to this day. This discovery, near the present village Platinum, produced what was probably Alaska's last big stampede. Miners from all over Alaska and the "Lower 48" came to the mining camps along the tributaries of the Salmon 11 River, which is heralded as the "Dawson of 1937 • The platinum stampede was unlike any of the Klondike era: airplanes brought stampeders into Platinum several times a week; few resorted to dog sleds or the long overland treks which were characteristic of "The Trail of '98". Also, power drills and tractors replaced single jacks and horsedrawn wagons. Since 1926, more than 640,000 ounces of this precious metal have been mined from the platinum placers in the Goodnews Bay district. The Goodnews Bay platinum placer mine on the Salmon River, adjacent to the refuge, is the only major mining operation now active in the region. By 1934, one company, the Goodnews Bay Mining Company, had nearly acquired all of the claims in existence. Now called Hanson Enterprises, after changing ownership several years ago, it is the only company in the United States primarily producing platinum. Most of the platinum claims owned by Hanson iii Enterprises are located on lands selected by native villages. Trapping also continues, with fur prices dictating the degree of effort spent in running trap lines. Historical and archeological features of the refuge consist, primarily, of former Eskimo villages. The area that became Togiak National Wildlife Refuge was, prior to 1969, part of the public domain under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management. On January 20, 1969, the Secretary of the Interior issued Public Land Order 4583, withdrawing 265,000 acres of the area and designating it the Cape Newenham National Wildlife Refuge. With this Order, the Fish and Wildlife Service assumed its first refuge management responsibilities in the area: To protect and preserve the "outstanding wilderness values" of Cape Newenham. The majority of lands that were to become Togiak mTR were withdrawn in 1971, under Section 17(d)(2) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, (ANCSA). The withdrawls covered all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including selection under the Alaska Statehood Act and the mining and mineral leasing laws. ANCSA directed the Secretary of the Interior to study all (d)(2) "national interest land" withdrawls as possible additions to the National Wildlife Refuge, Park, Wilderness, and wild and Scenic River systems. The Secretary withdrew additional parts of what was to become Togiak National Wildlife Refuge, under Section 17(d)(l) of ANCSA. All of these "public interest lands" were also withdrawn from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws with the exception of metalliferous locations. Congress failed to take action before the five-year deadline expired for the (d)(2) lands being considered for additions in the National Park, Refuge, Forest, and Wild and Scenic River systems. So on November 16, 1978, the Secretary of the Interior invoked his emergency withdraw! powers, under Section 204(e) of the Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLPMA), and withdrew approximately 110 million acres throughout Alaska to protect these lands. Most of the present Togiak NWR was covered by this Order, including the (d)(l), (d)(2) lands, and lands available to the Natives, but not yet selected. Fifteen months later, on February 11, 1980, the Secretary issued Public Land Order 5703, under section 204(c) of FLPMA, establishing the Togiak National Wildlife Refuge. The Order withdrew all lands subject to existing rights (for up to 20 years), from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws. As a refuge, Togiak became subject to all of the laws and policies of the Fish and Wildlife Service, used to govern the administration of the National Wildlife Refuge System. In December 1980, Congress enacted the Alaska National Interest Conservation Act (ANILCA). This act, among other things, rescinded Public Land Order 5073, and designated all of the withdrawn land as refuge. In addition, the Act redesignated Cape Newenham National Wildlife Refuge as a unit of Togiak NWR. The first refuge manager subsequently reported for duty in October, 1981. iv ANILCA is the primary statute affecting the planning and management of Togiak NWR. The Act established Togiak as a national wildlife refuge, identified its purposes, and required it to be administered subject to existing rights, in accordance with the laws governing the Refuge System. Section 303 (6)(B), of ANILCA, stated four purposes of Togiak NVIR. The Fish and Wildlife Service has set additional goals for the refuge. All of the following goals and purposes form the major guidance for managing Togiak NWR. They are also the criteria for developing and evaluating management alternatives for the refuge. These purposes are: 1. To conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity: preserve a natural diveristy and abundance of fauna and flora on refuge lands; conserve salmon populations and their habitat; conserve marine bird populations and their habitat; conserve marine mammal populations and their habitat; * conserve and restore to historic levels large mammal populations, including brown/grizzly bear populations, and their habitat; and preserve, restore, and enhance in their natural ecosystems (when practicable), all species of animals and plants that are endangered or threatened with becoming endangered. 2. To fulfill the international treaty obligations of the United States, with respect to fish and wildlife and their habitat: to perpetuate the migratory bird resource. 3. To provide, in a manner consistent with the purposes set forth in (1) and (2), the opportunity for continued subsistence use by local residents. 4. To ensure to the maximum extent practicable, and in a manner consistent with the purposes set forth in (1), water quantity and water quality within the refuge. 5. To assure preservation and availability of wild and scenic waterways, lakes, historic and archeological sites, trails, and other cultural features, geological and paleontological areas, and other scientific and educational values. 6. To provide an understanding and appreciation of fish and wildlife ecology and man's role in his environment, and to provide refuge visitors with high quality, safe, wholesome, and enjoyable recreational experiences oriented toward wildlife to the extent that these activities are compatible with the purpose for which the refuge was established. v TABLE 1 Historic Events in the Togiak Refuge Area up to the Turn of the Century YEAR EVENTS 1778 Captain James Cook Expedition 1818 Aleksandrovski Redoubt established at Nushagak; Russian traders from the Redoubt explored the Togiak area. 1821-1822 Survey of Hagemeister Island and Straits, and Cape Newenham by A.K. Etolin and Vasli Khromchenko. During this period, trade was established with Eskimos at the mouth of the Togiak River. 1867 Sale of Alaska to the United States 1880-1890 The Nushagak Trading Post maintained a station at the mouth of the Togiak River, and the first census was taken ( 1880) • 1884-1886 First salmon canneries were established in Bristol Bay. The salmon fishery rapidly replaced the fur industry as the most important industry in the area. 1885 Alaska Packing Company established a salmon saltery in the area. 1898 The first geological exploration of the area was made by J.E. Spurr, who traveled up the Kanektok River to Kagati Lake, portaged to Togiak Lake, and then descended the Togiak River to it's mouth. 1899 The first Moravian Chapel was established at Togiak. Togiak was first visited by Moravian Missionaries in 1884 and it has been an out-station since establishment of a church at Nushagak in 1886. 1900 Gold was discovered in the vicinity of Goodnews Bay and resulted in a stampede of miners from Nome in 1900-01. 1904-1905 Reindeer were brought to Bristol Bay, eventually leading to the establishment of herds at Togiak, Nushagak, Goodnews, and Quinhagak. 1908 Ten fishing canneries were firmly established and operating at Nushagak. A. HIGHLIGHTS Togiak ~lR's draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan, as mandated by ANILCA, was released in mid-May for public review. Ken Harper, Fisheries Biologist from Vernal, Utah was selected for the refuge fisheries biologist position. Ken and family arrived in Dillingham on September 16, 1985. Walrus activity at Cape Peirce increased for the third year in a row. An estimated peak haulout of 12,548 animals was recorded on July 27, 1985. Mark Lisac was hired in February as a BioTech (Fisheries). Mark was a seasonal employee for the refuge during the summer of 1984. Shelley Farler replaced Karen Brandt as our Clerk Typist in July. By the end of the year, Realty was in the process of completing an option on 4.24 acres for an administrative site on Wind Mill Hill. Waterfowl production on the Nushagak Peninsula showed a significant decline for 1985 in comparison to 1984. B. CLIMATIC CONDITIONS As the old saying goes on the Coast of Alaska --"What? you don't like the weather? -stick around, it will change". The refuge is located in a climatic transition zone. The primary influence is maritime; however, the Arctic climate of interior Alaska also affects the refuge and the Bristol Bay coastal region. Temperatures range from an average minimum of 7.5 degrees Fin December, to an average maximum of 64.3 degrees F in July (Table 2). The average frost-free period is approximately 120 days. Ponds and small lakes usually freeze in October and thaw in May. Prevailing winds are from the north and northeast during October through March, and from the south and west during April through September. Winds blow almost constantly along the coast, frequently reaching gale force velocities in the Cape Newenham area. Dillingham, Alaska has recorded temperatures from -41 degrees F to 92 degrees F, with an average of 26 inches of rain and 71 inches of snow. By comparison, Cape Newenham has recorded temperatures of -28 degrees F to 75 degrees F, with an average of 37 inches of rain and 81 inches of snow. Fall is the wettest season, while the least precipitation occurs in the spring. Topography on the refuge varies, creating microclimates which affect local temperatures, types of precipitation, and wind conditions. TABLE 2 Long Term Average (1922 to 1979) Climatic Conditions Preci:Qitation Maximum Minimum Mean Rain Snowfall Degrees F Degrees F Degrees F Inches Inches January 23.2 9.4 16.2 1.88 12.4 February 25.5 10.5 18.0 1.42 10.4 March 29.1 10.9 20.0 1.59 14.0 April 38.7 22.9 30.8 1.26 5.8 May 51.2 33.2 42.2 1.69 0.4 June 61.0 41.1 51.1 1.70 July 64.3 45.4 54.9 2.68 August 62.6 45.5 54.1 3-89 Sept 55.8 39.1 47.5 3-39 Oct 42.4 27.2 34.8 2.57 2.7 Nov 30.6 16.5 23.6 1.76 9.7 Dec 20.;3 7.5 14.3 1.72 15.4 Annual 41.8 26.1 34.1 25.55 71.1 Januar:y:-March The high of 40 degrees F for the quarter occurred during January and the low of -15 degrees F during February (Table 3). The average temperature for the quarter was 20.9 degrees F, slightly above the long term average of 18.1 degrees F, but well above the 1984 average of 9.3 degrees F. Fifty one days of precipatation came in the form of 2.25 inches of rain (4.89 inches for long term average) and 47.5 inches of snow (36.8 inches for long term average). Most of the snow fell during March, when 32 inches were recorded. Wind chills during February were calculated at -40 to -60 degrees F for several days in a row. April-June The average temperature for the quarter (34.1 degrees F) was 7.3 degrees F below the long term average (41.4 degrees F). A low of -17 degrees F was registered in April and a high of 65 degrees F in June. These readings were extreme when compared with the long term average which has a temperature range for the quarter of 22.9 degrees to 61.0 degrees F. Precipitation levels during the quarter were down from long term averages of rain (4.65 inches) and snow (6.2 inches) to rain (1.28 inches) and snow (2.0 inches). July-September The average temperature for the quarter was 51.0 degrees F, slightly below the long term average of 52.5 degrees F. July and August both hit high temperatures of 69 degrees F, although average temperatures for both months were in the low 50's. A low of 30 degrees F, reached during September, was below the long term average low for the quarter (also in September) of 39 degrees F. Rainfall in the Dillingham area, 3.84 inches, was well below the long term average of 9.96 inches. Field crews, measuring rainfall at their camps at Kagati and Togiak Lakes, reported 4.68 and 7.08 inches of rain respectively. All and all, 52 days of precipitation occurred in the Dillingham area during the quarter. October-December It's general knowledge that freeze up commences on or about October 20th. This year was no exception with the mercury dipping below 20 degrees F on the 19th and remaining there until November 5th. Overall temperatures were above the long term average for the quarter, of 24.2 degrees F compared to an average for the three months in 1985 of 29.2 degrees F. A high of 51 degrees F (October) and a low of -1.0 degrees F (November) were recorded for the quarter. Forty seven (47) days of precipitation dropped an above average rainfall of 8.9 inches and a below average snowfall of 20.7 inches. Twenty one days of precipitation occurred in December and washed all traces of snow away, leaving the streets of Dillingham a muddy quagmire. TABLE 3 1985 Climatic Conditions Tem}2erature Preci}2itation Maximum Minimum Mean # Days Rain Snow Degrees F Degrees F Degrees F Inches Inches January 40 9 30.6 23 1.0 8.5 February 37 -15 11.4 8 1.0 7.0 March 37 -10 20.6 20 .25 32.0 April 40 -17 17 .o gauge broken May 62 25 37.7 22 1.0 2.0 June 65 32 47.6 19 .28 July 69 38 53.6 16 .54 August 69 37 52.1 19 1.57 September 62 30 47.2 17 1.73 October 51 0 29.4 13 5.1 0.4 November 40 -1.0 26.0 13 2.37 14.5 December 42 7 ;32.2 21 • 72 5.8 Annual 49.3 11.8 33.9 191+ 15.56 70.2 Overall temperatures in 1985 fell within range of the long term averages (Table 3). The major difference being the overall 1985 minimum temperature average of 11.8 degrees F, which is well below the long term average of 26.1 degrees F. 1985 yearly mean temperature of 33.9 degrees F is essentially equal to the long term average of 34.1 degrees F. Snowfall for the year was 70.2 inches, compared to a long term average of 71.1 inches. Snow pack melt down throughout May and June put all the refuge rivers at or above flood stage. Rainfall fell short of the long term average of 25.6 inches with only 15.56 being recorded, however, this contributed to keeping water levels high. For 1985, there were 191 plus days of precipitation recorded. The long term average is not known. The most positive statement that can be derived is that sometime during the year, there were somewhere around 160 days without any rain or snow, which had some form of sunshine. Ice out on the bays and esturaries occurred throughout mid to late May with Chagvan and Nanvak Bay reported to be 90% ice free on May 28. Not until mid June did the ice break its grip on the inland lakes and waterways. C. LAND ACQUISITION 1 Fee Title Funds for construction of a bunkhouse were approved in FY 1984. During 1985, these funds were still on hold as the search for an administrative site continued. Following is a brief rundown on the various sites: A. Willow Tree Area: This property is located across from the Willow Tree (night club) and consists of 2.2 acres, about 1-1/2 miles from downtown Dillingham. Appraisal work was conducted by Realty, however they had trouble getting a clear title and the seven owners did not seem to be very anxious to sell. B. Manokotak Natives Ltd: This parcel of 4 acres is located on the north side of the highway between Wind Mill Hill and the Willow Tree. It appears to be a suitable site should the purchase of the following preferred site falter. C. Wind Mill Hill Site: Located about one mile from town on the south side of the highway at Wind Mill Hill. This site consists of 4.24 acres overlooking Dillingham and Nushagak Bay. By the end of the year Realty had completed appraisals and was obtaining an option to buy from the owners. In order to complete the purchase, Realty has requested reprogramming of funds through the Washington office. 2. Easements Section 17(b) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act directs the Secretary of the Interior to reserve easements for public use, as determined reasonable on lands to be conveyed to village or regional corporations. The first step of this easement identification process is to request easement recommendations from various public agencies and organizations. The responsibility of requesting these recommendations and collecting easement proposals was delegated to the district office of the Bureau of Land Management. In general, only public easements which are reasonably necessary to guarantee access to publicly owned lands or major waterways shall be reserved. Site easements which are related to transportation may be reserved for aircraft landing or vehicle parking (i.e. aircraft, boats, ATV's and cars), temporary camping and loading or unloading at a trail head. In many instances, easement sites were indentifed prior to establishment of the refuge. As BLM conveys land to native corporations, we have been asked to review previous site easements and recommend new ones. During 1985, two new easement sites were recommended on the Goodnews Rivers. These would provide floaters a spot to temporarily camp (overnight) before being picked by air charter operators. 3. Other The land status of the refuge is constantly changing because refuge lands selected by natives and native corporations are in the process of being relinquished, rejected or interim conveyed. Refuge acreage figures in Table 4 differ from the approximations stated in ANILCA and in other reports because of more current accurate measurements and projections. v TABLE 4 Land Status of Togiak NWR as of 10/85 Ownership Acres % of Refuge Federal 4,011,000 85 Native Village Corp/Group - selections 151,000 3 - conveyances 480,000 10 Regional Corporation -14(h)(l) selections 12,000 <1 -14(h)(l) conveyances 0 0 -14(h)(8) selections 5,000 <1 -14(h)(8) conveyances 0 Native Allotment -applications 11,000 <1 -conveyances 33,000 <1 Private Party -selections 0 0 -conveyances 600 ~ Total 4,704,000 100 Of the 4,704,000 acres of land within the refuge boundary, approximately 4,011,000 acres or 85% of the area is under federal jurisdiction. About 480,000 acres or 10% of the lands within the refuge boundary have been patented or conveyed to eight Native village corporations (Dillingham, Clark's Point, Ekuk, Manokotak, Quinhagak, Togiak, Twin Hills and Platinum), a Native group (Olsonville), individual Natives, and private parties. About 150,000 acres in the refuge have been selected, but are still under federal jurisdiction; these lands may or may not be interim conveyed. Platinum has been interim conveyed the surface rights to 7,600 acres and has selected an additional 20,300 acres. These lands are part of the former Cape Newenham Refuge. Under Section 22(g) of ANCSA, the subsurface estate remains under the jurisdiction of the federal government. Both the Bristol Bay Regional Corporation and the Calista Regional Corporation have selected lands under Section 14(h) of ANCSA. Specifically, the two corporations have applied for a total of about 12,000 acres of cemetary/historical sites under Section 14(h)(l). About 400 Natives in the Bristol Bay Region and 21 Natives in the Calista Region have applied for allotments totaling 44,000 acres. Of this total, approximately 33,000 acres have been patented or approved, and 11,000 acres are in the process of being approved or rejected. There are about 630 acres of private patented inholdings within the refuge boundary. This includes one homestead site (12 acres), three homesites (totaling 14 acres), five Soldiers Additional Homesteads (totalling 77 acres) and five mission sites (totaling 530 acres). Subsurface selections are not included in Table 4. The Calista Regional Corporation has selected nine sections in Township 7 South, Range 72 West and Tolmship 13 South, Range 72 West, Seward Meridian, totaling 5,700 acres of "mineral lieu" (subsurface) selections. The following summary (Table 5) shows Native village corporation and group entitlements in the refuge. These acreage figures do not include navigable waterbodies. The first set of numbers under each of the villages listed below shows the total land entitlement of the village both within and outside of the refuge and the status of those lands. The second set of numbers shows the status of lands within the refuge boundary. TABLE 5 Village Corporation and Group Entitlements in Togiak NWR 1. Clarks Point Village Total entitlement 109,440 -Interim conveyed (IC'd) & Patented 105,700 -Total remaining entitlement 3,700 Total land IC'd within refuge 25,400 Remaining land selected within the refuge 3,800 2. Dillingham Village Total entitlement 161,280 -Interim conveyed (IC'd) & patented 153,600 -Total remaining entitlement 7,680 Total land IC'd within refuge 15,900 Remaining land selected within the refuge 10,200 3. Ekuk Village Total entitlement 76,800 -Interim conveyed (IC'd) & Patented 70,300 -Total remaining entitlement 6,500 Total land IC'd within refuge 23,900 Remaining land selected within the refuge 13,300 4. Manokotak Village Total entitlement 122,549 -Interim conveyed (IC'd) & patented 108,680 -Total remaining entitlement 14,000 v Total land IC'd within refuge 108,600 Remaining land selected within the refuge 26,000 5. Olsonville Group Selection Total entitlement 7,680 -Interim conveyed (IC'd) & patented 6,800 -Total remaining entitlement 900 Total land IC'd within refuge 6,800 Remaining land selected within the refuge 2,800 6. Platinum Village Total entitlement 72,108 -Interim conveyed (IC'd) & patented 60,600 -Total remaining entitlement 11,500 Total land IC'd within refuge 7,600 Remaining land selected within the refuge 21,100 7. Quinhagak Village Total entitlement 130,407 -Interim conveyed (IC'd) & patented 103,400 -Total remaining entitlement 27,000 Total land IC'd within refuge 76,200 Remaining land selected within the refuge 42,500 8. Togiak Village Total entitlement 151,215 -Interim conveyed (IC'd) & patented 149,400 -Total remaining entitlement 1,800 Total land IC'd within refuge 149,400 Remaining land selected within the refuge 15,000 9. Twin Hills Village Total entitlement 69,120 -Interim conveyed (IC'd) & patented 65,900 -Total remaining entitlement 3,200 Total land IC'd within refuge 65,900 Remaining land selected within the refuge 15,400 D. PLANNING 1. Master Plan A draft of the Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (RCCP) and Wilderness Review was sent out for public review on May 24, 1985. The draft included five alternative strategies for long-term management of the refuge and reviewed several options which propose to add acreages of non-wilderness refuge land to the Wilderness Preservation System. In addition, the plan identified special values of the refuge, these being: wilderness area; Cape Newenham and Cape Peirce; Kanektok, Goodnews and Togiak River drainages and special fishery values. Eleven potential problems facing the refuge were identified in the plan: maintaining opportunities for subsistence use; conflicts between user group; subsistence, commercial and sport harvests of salmon; overfishing of resident fish; overharvesting and illegal harvesting of wildlife; reindeer grazing; loss of wilderness values; oil and gas development; development and use of adjacent state and private lands; use of refuge inholdings; and lack of resource data. All of the alternatives are consistent with the purposes of the refuge and comply with existing laws, regulations and Service policies. Certain management directions must be implemented in all of the management alternatives for the refuge. These management directions include: -Studying several possible land exchanges and cooperative agreements that would ensure consistent management and protect fish and wildlife habitats. -Coordinating management with other resource management agencies, and cooperating with owners of refuge inholdings and adjacent lands; -Working with the Platinum village corporation to reach an agreement on the use and development of Section 22(g) lands that have been interim conveyed or selected in Togiak Refuge; -Working with the state to ensure that all Service actions taken under this plan are consistent with the state approved coastal zone management plan; -Collecting data on rainbow trout, big game species, public use, and other topics that are of high management concern; -Ensuring that fish and wildlife populations and ecolocigal relationships necessary to conserve natural diversity are maintained; manipulation and enhancement of fish and wildlife habitats would be minimized; -Working with ADF&G to restore big game populations, particularly moose and caribou, to their historic levels; in cooperation with the state, the Service will study the feasibility of reintroducing caribou onto the refuge; IV -Ensuring that subsistence opportunities are maintained by assessing potential impacts of proposed uses or activities, conducting research, enforcing regulations, and monitoring fish and wildlife populations and uses; -Maintaining opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, trapping, and other wildlife oriented activities on the refuge; -Providing visitors and inholders with opportunities for access onto the refuge, subject to the provisions of Section 1110 of ANILCA; -Permitting the use of snowmachines (during periods of adequate snow cover), motorboats, airplanes, and non-motorized surface transportation methods for traditional activities in the Togiak Wilderness and other refuge lands, and for travel to and from villages and homesites, subject to reasonable regulations; -Managing the Togiak Wilderness to preserve its natural diversity and fish and wildlife values; -Managing guided sport fishing/river use to maintain a high quality wilderness experience; this may necessitate the introduction of a river concession program; -Requiring all commercial air taxi operators using the refuge to have special use permits; -Prohibiting grazing of reindeer on refuge lands; and -Completing as soon as possible river management plans for the Kanektok, Goodnews, and Togiak River drainages. The following five paragraphs briefly describe the alternatives: Alternative A the "no action" alternative, would maintain the status quo on Togiak Refuge. In this alternative, the Service would maintain the refuge's fish and wildlife values and natural diversity by designating most of the refuge's non-wilderness lands for minimal management. Disturbances to fish and wildlife habitats and populations would be minimized. Special attention would be devoted to protecting the wildlife values in the Cape Peirce/Cape Newenham area. No wilderness proposals would be recommended under this alternative. Oil and gas exploration and development would be prohibited. Public use would continue to be managed as it has in the past. Alternative B emphasizes protection of fish and wildlife populations and habitats and wilderness values. Opportunities for hunting, fishing and other recreational uses would be provided. The Service would manage river recreational use in the Togiak Wilderness to maintain a high quality wilderness experience. Special attention would be devoted to protecting the wildlife values in the Cape Peirce/Cape Newenham area by designating it as a cooperative management area. All of the other non-wilderness lands would be I I designated as minimal management areas. Oil and gas exploration and development would be prohibited. Alternative C is the Service's preferred alternative for managing Togiak Refuge. Alternative C also emphasizes protection of fish and wildlife populations and habitats and wilderness values. Opportunities for hunting, fishing and other recreational uses would be provided. Special attention would be devoted to protecting the wildlife values in the Cape Peirce/Cape Newenham area. The Service would balance both guided use levels and opportunities for motorized and commercialized boat use in the Togiak Wilderness. Oil and gas exploration and development would not be permitted in the refuge. Alternative D would emphasize maintenance of fish and wildlife population and habitats. Special attention would be devoted to protecting the wildlife values in the Cape Peirce/Cape Newenham area. This area would be proposed by the Service for wilderness designation. The Service would manage guided sport fishing/river use in the Togiak Wilderness to maintain a high quality wilderness experience. Most of the refuge's non-wilderness lands would be designated as minimal management areas. Opportunities for hunting, fishing and other recreational uses would be provided. Limited oil and gas exploration would be permitted in designated areas on the Nushagak Peninsula. Alternative E would maintain key fish and wildlife and populations and habitats, while providing opportunities for oil and gas exploration and development in designated areas. About 9% of the refuge would be designated as an intensive management area. All of the refuge lands with moderate potential for oil and gas could be leased in this alternative. Opportunities for hunting, fishing and other recreational uses would be increased. The Service would manage guided sport fishing/river use in the Togiak Wilderness to maintain a high quality recreational experience. Special attention would be devoted to protecting wildlife values in the Cape Peirce/Cape Newenham area. No areas would be proposed for wilderness designation under this alternative. In summary, Alternative B would cause the least number of impacts on fish and wildlife and related habitats while Alternative E would cause the largest number of impacts over the entire refuge. The primary difference between Alternative B and Alternatives A, C, D and E is the effect on recreation and wilderness values. Alternatives A, C, D and E would result in more people using the refuge and thus create higher impacts in the wilderness area. Of all the alternatives considered, Alternative B would have the fewest risks to; refuge resources, river users .seeking a primitive recreational experience and subsistence users. This alternative would best meet refuge objectives and fulfill ANILCA purposes relating to conservation of fish and wildlife. It would also be the alternative most likely to maintain the high quality recreational and wilderness experience sought by most refuge visitors. It is the alternative favored by the refuge staff. 2. Management Plan Following adoption of the RCCP, the Service will as necessary undertake detailed management planning to guide implementation of the plan. The management plans will address specific resource and public use activities such as river management, wilderness, habitat and public use. 3. Public Participation Public meetings concerning the RCCP were held in the following villages; Quinhagak, Togiak/Twin Hills, Igushik fish camp, Goodnews Bay and Platinum. Meetings were also held in Anchorage and Dillingham. A 90 day comment period was extended thirty days to provide additional time for the public to review the plan. The Service received 165 written responses from state and federal agencies, industry, conservation groups, Native and local groups and concerned individuals. Following are the major issues identified by the public: -Subsistence and Quality of Life -River Management -Regulation of Use and Law Enforcement -Access -Oil and Gas -Mining -Refuge Boundary Changes By the end of the year, the planning team was in the process of modifying the draft RCCP. Several sections will be changed in response to comments (increased emphasis on subsistence ) or to better fulfill planning requirements. 5. Research and Investigations "Long Term Changes in Abundance of Pacific Walruses, (Odobenus rosmarus divergens), at Round Island and Cape Peirce" This study was conducted by Spencer James Taggart and Cynthia J. Zabel, both from the Institute of Marine Science, University of California, Santa Cruz, California. The purpose of the study was to compile available census data from Round Island and Cape Peirce, discuss the utility of census data for monitoring population trends on land locations and to discuss management implications at Round Island and Cape Peirce. Taggart and Zabel have conducted walrus census studies at Round Island (Walrus Islands, State Game Sanctuary) from 1977 to 1984. This was done by either walking around the perimeter of the island and estimating the number of animals from the cliffs overlooking the beaches or by slowly circling the island in a zodiac rubber raft. Cape Peirce data in 1981, 82 and 83 was done by refuge personnel via aerial surveys. In 1984 and 1985, refuge personnel were placed at Cape Peirce (Nanvak Bay) and conducted routine census of hauled out walrus from several observation points on the Cape. In 1980, Taggart and Zabel conducted detailed haul out patterns of walrus IJ by attaching transmitters to 17 animals and monitoring their activities (i.e. time at the haul out site and time at sea). During 1984, visual tags were attached at Round Island and Cape Peirce. A small amount of information on walrus exchange between Round Island and Cape Peirce has been obtained from tagged walruses. Two walruses were observed at Cape Peirce in 1984, which had been instrumented at Round Island in 1980 or 1981. This clearly demonstrates that there is some exchange. Also by comparing numbers of hauled out walrus with specific dates for both areas indicates that a peak in hauled out animals at Cape Peirce coincides with a decrease in hauled animals at Round Island. Likewise, census data collected at Cape Peirce in 1984 was characterized by nine peaks during a three month period. This coincides with resting and feeding cycles quite similar to those at Round Island. This work by Taggart and Zabel raises a number of questions that have management implications, plus point out the need for additional information: 1. What is the exchange rate between the two locations? 2. What are the year to year trends in total numbers of walrus using Bristol Bay, Round Island and Cape Peirce? 3. What are the effects of disturbances? 4. Does the food depletion hypothesis explain the temporary shift from Round Island to Cape Peirce? Public Use Survey Camps Begun in 1984, with a pilot study at Kagati Lake, we have found staffing a camp at the headwaters of a major tributary a very feasible means of acquiring public use information. A crew of two volunteers, each, were placed at Kagati, Goodnews and Togiak Lakes. They were provided with an 8xl0 weatherport cook tent, a sleeping tent, an inflatable boat and motor, a HF single side band radio, and other necessary field equipment. Their primary goal was to document and make contact with all visitors that landed at the lake. The purpose of these contacts was to ascertain whether the party was guided or unguided; name of guide; name of air taxi; number of people; length and purpose of trip and the number of use days. The volunteers also disseminated information on the refuge, wilderness ethics and catch and release fishing techniques. They also supplied needy floaters with needle nose pliers and with mail-in angler creel census. All lakes were staffed and surveys begun as soon as ice out occurred on each lake. The length of the interview period for each lake was: 14 Kagati Lake- June 26 to September 16, 1985 Goodnews Lake- June 18 to September 10, 1985 Togiak Lake- June 21 to September 8, 1985 ( Mama Jo (Joann Krammer) and Lady Di (Diane Campbell); a duo of Illinois' volunteers enjoying their public use survey work. June, 1985/JS. ~ Kagati Lake and the Kanektok River by far received the highest amount of river rafter/float use, with 403 people logging 3,167 use days. Of these, 2,150 (or 67.9%) were guided use days. This is comparable with survey data from 1984 which showed 433 people interviewed for 3,361 use days with 75.4% (2,535 use days) attributed to the guides and their clients. A late spring and below average temperatures caused several early float trips to be canceiled with the first guided float beginning on June 30. ) 15 A partly sunny day at Kagati Lake. The volunteer base camp sits in the peninsula saddle at mid photo. July, 1985/SF Togiak River ranks second for float trip use. Volunteers at Togiak Lake interviewed 151 people for 958 use days of which 643 (67.7%) were guided use days. This is comparable to 836 river rafter use days as estimated by our aerial surveys of the Togiak River (see Togiak River Sportfish Study - this section). Goodnews Lake and the North Fork of the Goodnews River did not receive the amount of float use that had been alloted or expected. Volunteers interviewed 123 rafters who spent 896 use days on the system. Only 86 (9.6%) of the use days were guided. Overall, our confidence in the information collected at each of the lakes is very high - as it should be. There were a few glitches that did not surface in the 1984 pilot study. The correction and minor deficiencies in ) recording the necessary information and cross referencing each guide staging at the lake with his appropriate party will help facilitate data IU analysis. By comparing our interview data with the amount of use reported by float fishing guides on each system, we find quite a descrepency. Guides tended to report more use than our volunteers documented. At Kagati, the difference was an additional 40 clients, 323 use days or 6-8 float trips. At Togiak, guides reported an additional 822 use days. Only one additional float trip was reported on the Goodnews River. A restructuring of the guides reporting requirements will be attempted in 1986 in order to increase the accuracy of their reports. Each assistant guide or guide/pilot will be requested to report their number of clients, areas fished and number of fish caught and/or killed on a daily basis. One success story we have from the public use survey network is the accuracy in reporting we received from the nine air taxi operators trip reports, when compared to our survey data. Some air taxis had each party leader complete the form while others filled out the information. For 1985, being the first year in requiring these operators/pilots to possess a permit and report each trip into the refuge, we had good cooperation from all nine. By working with the air taxis, we will be able to monitor the use by general (unguided) public as they participate in activities away from areas of use concentration. By having the survey data and air taxi reports as a means of cross-checking,, we did uncover one operator that had falsified their entire report. Once it becomes known that their reports will be looked at closely, we hope that all operators will give us information that is useful. While stationed in the field the volunteers participated in assigned projects as well as undertaking several personal achievements. Climatological Data Gathering Each camp recorded maximum and minimum temperatures, daily precipitation, cloud covers, wind speed and direction and water levels and temperatures. This information was used during the season to report weather conditions at each camp to aid ARM/Pilot Hotchkiss in flight planning and reporting to FAA Dillingham. Daily trends could also be observed which increase flight safety. Overall climatological data will give us a better understanding of micro climates at the camps throughout the refuge. In 1986, we will attempt to more exactly measure lake levels and correlate the fluctuations with precipitation amounts. 1'( Wildlife Observations Volunteers documented all sightings of wildlife. This will give us an information base by which to project wildlife populations, occurrances, activity timing (migration, breeding, etc.) and to aid in development of study proposals. Kagati Lake Drainage Fish Mapping Volunteer Scott Farling produced a series of maps of Kagati Lake and associated drainages which showed areas of eagle nest and fish occurance. He also mapped locations of major sockeye and coho salmon spawning beds and areas where lake trout could be found during early and late summer. Lake Trout Sampling Volunteers at Kagati and Goodnews Lake collected otolith (middle ear) samples and lengths from lake trout. The samples were collected from those lake trout that the volunteers or other lake visitors planned to eat. It was hoped that we could begin to acquire some age length frequency data from the lake trout populations in the two lakes. Sample size was small, 5 from each lake. The average total length was 494 mm (19.5 inches) from Goodnews Lake and 515mm (20.3 inches) at Kagati Lake. The largest was a 560mm (22 inches) caught at Kagati Lake. The smallest was a 448mm (17.6 inch) laker out of Goodnews Lake. Otolith samples were inappopriately stored in a highly concentrated formaldyhyde solution and never made it. We will address this problem by using an alcohol wash in 1986. Arctic Tern Nesting Study Volunteer Jill Strauss conducted a survey of an arctic tern nesting colony on an island near the Togiak Lake camp. Jill established a main transect line through a major portion of the nesting colony and censused an area approximately 600' x 100' parallel to the lake shore. The area contained 36 adults, 11 nests, with an eventual production of 3 fledglings from 11 eggs observed. Only six of the nests were found to contain eggs. She also noted that all 36 adult members of the colony would join in mobbing an intruder of any nest in the colony. Also that a separate colony existed only 600 feet away from the study colony and that these birds did not interact in mobbing activity with the study colony. Refuge Plant Collection Volunteer Becky Joyce collected and cataloged 40 different plant and wildflower species from the Togiak Lake area, 24 species from the 18 Goodnews Lake area, and 13 species from the Cape Peirce/Nanvak Bay area. Becky's work has made it possible to produce a non-woody vegetation species account for the refuge. We hope to find more volunteers interested in expanding our knowledge of the plant diversity on the refuge and build upon this initial collection. Chagvan Bay Goose Migration and Subsistence Hunt Monitoring Chagvan Bay, located on the southwestern coastline of the refuge, eight miles north of Cape Newenham, is one of several primary staging areas for waterfowl during spring and fall migrations. The Bay and adjacent areas contain eelgrass beds, tidal flats, upland grasses, sedges, and berries, that provide necessary nourishment as well as a resting area for migrating waterfowl. ) Tidal mud flats which support eelgrass and geese along the refuge's west coast. June, 1985/WSM. This concentration of waterfowl is also of interest to native populations in the villages of Goodnews Bay and Platinum. They come to Chagvan Bay between spring break-up and the beginning of the commercial herring fishing season to hunt waterfowl. Due to the increased concern over the continued decline of cackling Canada, Pacific white-fronted, Pacific (black) brant, and emperor goose populations and the recent controversy over the spring subsistence take of waterfowl, the refuge staff initiated a study of hunting activity in Chagvan Bay. ) Beginning in 1984, the refuge established a field camp at Chagvan Bay to monitor waterfowl migration phenology with emphasis on the four pacific 19 flyway goose species, and the effort and effect imposed by local subsistence hunters on the bay's staging populations of the geese. ) Refuge Bio Techs and volunteers staffed the camp and have maintained a low profile using observation and casual interviews as their primary study tools. Due to a prolonged spring break up, we were unable to get BT Lisac and volunteers Scott Farling and Steve Martin into Chagvan Bay until May 22. From an aerial survey flown on May 20, the bay still had 40-50% ice cover, a camp of 4 hunters, and approximately 26,000 brant, 8,000 Canada geese, 5,500 Emperor geese, 50 White-fronted geese, 3,000 mallards and 2,000 Eiders. Chartered single engine Dehavilland Otter, the largest single engine cargo plane still in use today. It enabled us to set up the Chagvan Bay camp in one trip, versus six Cessna 185 loads in 1984. May, 1985/DAF. ~ A base camp was again set up on the south shore of the bay channel. This site provides good boat and plane access, offers a good vantage point, and prevents disturbance to bird activity. Several vantage points were used throughout the bay to make daily observations of hunters and birds and to estimate staging populations. It should be noted that in 1985, the study was conducted from May 22 to June 4, whereas in 1984, on grounds observations were made from May 3 to June 1. 20 ) . ) (L-R Steve Martin, Mark Lisac and Scott Farling: The Chagvan Bay crew at camp blind (Obs. pt. Hl) with Chagvan Hill (Obs. pt. #2) in the background covered with a June 1st snow. June, 1985/MJL. Pacific Brant -first observed on arrival at bay on May 23 (approximately 10,800). -Flocks arrived May 23 to 26* -Peak estimate of 25,500 brant on May 26 (peak of 33,000 observed May 20, 1984). -Significant flocks seen departing bay on May 24 and 30*. -Approximately 3,000 brant remained in bay upon crew departure June 4. .> *Brant entered and departed the bay throughout the study period, therefore, the total number of birds using the bay is greater than those present during peak abundance. Emperor Geese -First observed on arrival May 22 (only 4 emperors documented). -No significant flocks observed throughout study period. ) I 21 -Peak of 110 emperors seen on May 29 (1984 estimate of 6-8000 emperor second week of May). 1985 aerial surveys of the bay on May 20 reported 5,500 emperors, and 100 emperors on May 28. -Eight (8) were seen in the bay upon the crews departure. Canada Geese -Canada geese observed are thought to be lessers. -First observed upon crew arrival May 22 (8 birds sighted). -No concrete observations of cacklers were made (1 pair in 1984). -Peak of 100 birds estimated on May 29. -Aerial surveys on May 20 and 28 estimated 8,000 and 5,000 canada respectively, with the major concentrations found on the uplands. -Last seen by field crew on June 2 (6 birds). White-Fronted Geese -First observation made on May 29 (5 birds : 2 adults, 3 immatures). -Peak of 13 on June 4 observed by field crew. -Aerial surveys on May 20 and 28 estimated 50 and 150 respectively. Major concentrations along the uplands. Other observations include: snow geese (5) on May 24; harlequin ducks (400) on June 1; Stellers eiders (5,000) and common eiders (3,000) on May 25. Brant staging at Chagvan Bay were observed to be very wary and flighty. Their daily movements and flight paths can be very predictable, however. At high tide, they are generally in protected roosting areas and begin to concentate on the emerging gravel bars and eelgrass beds as the tide recedes. These two periods of concentration are the best times for censusing. Hunters are also aware of their predictable flight paths. There has been a camp located on the north spit since long before the refuge was established. This is the narrowest portion of the spit and is used almost exclusively as a crossing point for birds entering the bay. Birds departing, however, primarily fly over the north bay and up the coast. 22 .. 0 ) Stellers eiders are common migrants in Chagvan Bay.May, 1985. MJL. Subsistence hunters were also monitored during the study period. Nine (9) different parties comprised of 18 total hunters were observed to have spent 31 hunter use days hunting waterfowl in the bay from May 20 to May 24. The average hunting day ranged from 6 to ten hours with 4 parties only spending one day hunting. Transportation was related to the parties origin. The parties and known origin were as follows: ( Transportation Number of Hunters Village Origin 3-wheelers 8 Platinum 4-wheelers 1 Platinum Skiff/Boat 9 in 4 Boats Goodnews Bay(2) .> Platinum (2) Harvest information was obtained through casual interview and by observation from a vantage point behind the hunter's camp. An interview of 3 hunters who were camped at the bay for 3 days revealed a harvest of 3 brant and 2 northern shovelers for 10 hours of hunting on May 22. From two days of observations (May 23 and 24) of the hunters camped on the north spit the following was recorded: ) May 23 8 Hunters 35 Minutes 15 Shots Fired 1 Emperor Goose 23 1 Stellers Eider May 24 4 hunters 4 Hours 43 Shots Fired 7 Brant 40 Minutes + 3 brant taken earlier in the day After two years of conducting this project and having our presence known to the local users we are going to undertake a bolder approach and census hunters on a daily basis in 1986. The crews have generally received friendly exchanges of information and now that the precedent is set we hope to obtain more reliable harvest information. The Goodnews Bay Subsistence Information Gathering Study conducted in 1984, was continued in 1985, but under the guidance of the Yukon Delta Goose t~agement Subsistence Survey. No results have been released to this office as yet. Nushagak Peninsula Waterfowl Brood Surveys In 1983, the refuge began to survey and investigate the Nushagak Peninsula for waterfowl production areas. In 1984, ten brood survey plots were established in two separate areas of the peninsula. These areas are described as: 1. An area of low wetlands on the west coast of the peninsula surrounding Kikertalik Lake and extending northward, about six miles along the shore (6 plots). 2. The extreme southwest tip of the peninsula containing tundra ponds, coastline, and a tidal slough (4 plots). In 1985, BT Lisac and five (5) volunteers spent three days (July 20 to 23) surveying nine of the ten waterfowl brood survey plots. A base camp was established on the west shore of Kikertalik Lake near the west coast of the Peninsula. Three groups of two observers each were designated to a plot and spent 6.5 to 8 hours trudging across the tundra and surveying the shore of each waterbody. Camp was moved to Scoter Lake (waterbody 181) the next day and the procedures repeated, to Washing Machine Lake (WB 120) for the night of July 22 and three plots surveyed on the 23. Eighteen (18) mandays were expended using this approach as opposed to approximately 34 mandays in 1984 using a crew of two. The results of the two surveys and further discussion are presented in Table III in the Waterfowl section. Briefly, the waterfowl breeding numbers appeared to be depressed in 1985 on the Nushagak Peninsula. When compared with our efforts in 1984, the 1985 results indicate a percent change in brood numbers to be dabblers (-74%), divers (-64%) and for swans (+130%). Other related efforts throughout Alaska and the Canadian prairies indicates similar declines in numbers of nesting birds and production. 24 Recolonization of the Cape Peirce Terresterial Haulout by Pacific Walrus. ) Because of the importance Cape Peirce plays in walrus activity, the refuge has established a seasonal camp at the Cape. Volunteers Seven Mazzone and Brian Higgins were enlisted to staff the camp on June 5. An ADF&G survey reported 150 walruses present at the Cape on June 1st. The population increased to a high of 12,548 by July 27. Activity in August and September was very consistent with averages of 2,950 animals per day. Two tagging methods were experimented with to determine whether the same animals were observed daily. Highway paint was used as a marking effort during the earlier part of the season. Paint on the tusk was observed to be worn off on the frontal edge, suggesting local feeding. . ) .' Volunteer W. Seven Mazzone (Gunnison, Co.) displaying a ) sea lion skull collected at Cape Peirce from lead poisoning (head shot) beach washed animal. July, 1985/BH. 1 25 z ) . ) Volunteer Brian Higgins (Guelph, Canada) displaying a whale rib washed ashore at Cape Peirce. July, 1985/SM. Cattle tags were affixed to walrus tusks using surgical tubing, epoxy glue and a specially designed tool to put the tags in place. Eleven walrus were ) tagged during the later part of the season using this method. Information gathered on tagged walrus included length of stay, periods of absence, and verified they returned after brief (foraging) absences. Peaks would occur about every 7-10 days with stay over time of 36-48 hours, which increased to 96 hours later in the season. .' ) 26 . ) The Boys Club at Cape Peirce drew in a peak of 12,584 walruses and a total 37 human visitors. July, 1985/WSM. There was a total of 37 visitors to the Cape Peirce area this season. The largest groups were natives from the Goodnews and Togiak areas: These were fishermen staying over in Nanvak Bay due to high seas and poor weather conditions. A group of four from the Sierra Club arrived in a twin engine Grummen Widgeon. These people were ill-prepared for the bad weather, and spent three miserable August days at the Cape. The refuge also provided the FAA Flight Service Station in Dillingham with a brief description of the refuge boundary and requested that pilots respect the Cape Peirce area by maintaining a 2,000 foot AGL altitude within one mile of Cape Peirce. Also, only those air taxis that have Special Use Permits are allowed to fly into Nanvak Bay and then only with prior permission. These measures will hopefully aid in keeping traffic ~ near the Cape at a minimum. The most common type of disturbance at the Cape was low flying aircraft usually .buzzing the hauling grounds two or three times or on a landing approach into Nanvak Bay. Generally, this caused 50-100% of the walruses to leave the beach. The second most noted disturbance was caused by boat traffic being in close proximity to the beach areas. Helicopters in the area also caused several disturbances. ) Boat traffic, especially the barges, which maintained courses out b~yond Cape Peirce to Caple Newenham, had no visible effect on the walrus. 27 Seabird Colony Censusing at Cape Peirce This study was a continuation of the work contracted to LGL-Ecological Research Associates in Anchorage during 1984. Their study Population Estimates, Productivity and Food Habits of Nesting Seabirds at Cape Peirce and the Pribilof Islands indicated that there may have been a significant decline for most species of seabirds specifically the black legged kittiwake. Volunteer Brian Higgins assumed responsibility for the project and worked closely with LGL-Biologist Dale Herter. Dale spent 10 days at the Cape instructing Brian in the techniques he had used for the 1984 study. The Cape Peirce colonies have been censused intermittently since 1976. This historical data, coupled with standardized observation points (actual steel rod marking each), and photographs of the individual areas of each colony to be surveyed provide the means to accurately assess the status of and fluctuations in seabird populations and productivity. Nesting phenology of the seabirds at Cape Peirce in 1985 was the latest on record. No kittiwake or murre eggs observed had hatched by July 16 and only a few pelagic cormorants nests contained young at this time. Preliminary estimates from Brian's census data indicated breeding populations of common murre (20,300), black-legged kittiwakes (10,000), horned and tuffed puffins (100) and pelagic cormorant (600). Further information is presented in the Seabirds, Gulls, Terns and Allied Species section. 28 . ) Black-legged kittiwakes nesting on the sea cliffs. July, 1985/BH. Kanektok River Sportfishery Investigation The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service King Salmon Fishery Station and Togiak National Wildlife Refuge worked cooperatively on the Kanektok River in 1985. The goal of the project was to develop a model for predicting population responses of rainbow trout in western Alaska to sportfishing in order to assess management options for conserving this resource. Objectives of the study included a) derive a population estimate using mark-recapture methods; b) determine fish distribution in stream sections; c) gather age-weight-length (AWL) information to plot baseline population information concerning age class composition, and d) collect creel census data and determine angler harvest. a. Derive a Population Estimate Using Mark Recapture: .' The study plan called for the tagging of a minimum of 2,000 fish throughout the mainstream of the river in 1985. Fish were to be marked using floy tags during successive sampling trips. The ambitious plans were dashed when weather conditions caused the river to remain near flood stage for the major portion of the summer. The reduced catch rate caused by the murky waters (visibilities 1-2 feet) resulted in only 293 fish being tagged and 7 recaptures occurring during the 4 sampling trips undertaken in the summer. ) Using this low number of recaptures, the population was estimated at 29 17,159 fish, three years and older, available to the sport fishery. The 95% confidence limits were so large (374-33,944), however, that the point estimate is not adequate for immediate management decisions. If management decisions are made, they will be on the conservative side to protect the diversity of this population. b. Determine Fish Distribution in Stream Sections The mark recapture data indicates a concentration of fish in areas 1 and 2, (Table 6). This is also evident from where the guides take their clients for rainbow trout fishing. The catch data also indicated that fish smaller than 334mm (13 inches) were not entering the creel in the main channel of the river. ) Dick Marshall of the Regional Office (FR) marks rainbow trout for recapture estimates. August, 1985/DAF. .> 30 Rainbow trout with numbered tag released in the Kanektok River. July, 1985/DAF. TABLE 6 Summary of' Rainbow Trout Tagged in the Kanektok River, 19'85 SamQle Period Total Angler Seasonal 'J Area July Aug Aug* Aug Sept Fish Days (AD) Catch/AD 8-13 5-9 13-17 22-28 5-12 5 10 18 0 0 1 29 40 . 72 4 03 07 0 1 9 20 32 .62 3 01 05 0 0 0 6 26 .23 > 2 35 37 33 47 51 203 77 2.64 ' 1 10 08 0 05 12 35 29 1.20 TOTAL 59 75 33 53 73 293 204 1.44 *Observer stationed with sport fishing guide to record data. o. Gather Age-Weight-Length (AWL) Information to Plot Baseline Population Information Concerning Age Class Composition J Scales and otoliths, along with fish lengths, were sent to the Seattle National Fishery Research Center for analysis. Fish ages 'W ere estimated from scales collected from 222 rainbow trout from the 31 Kanektok River during July-September of 1985. Only 130 fish had at least one readable (nonregenerated and undamaged) scale. 1 I Otoliths were collected from 4 of the fish in the sample. Ages estimated from otoliths were the same as those of scales for 3 of the 4 fish. A mark near the scale margin of the fish with the conflicting estimates was originally regarded as an annulus. The Seattle lab, after examining the otoliths, concluded that the mark was not an annulus and subsequently reduced the ages by one year for fish with similar marks. There was a close agreement between scale and otolith age estimates which suggests that scales provided a reliable age estimate for Kanektok rainbow trout up to at least age 7. There was, however, strong evidence that age estimates obtained from scales for 3 fish in the sample, estimated at 5-7 years, were too low. These fish were much larger than expected for fish in the assigned ages and for two, several indistinguishable annuli were present near the scale margin. . ) These fish were not used in calculating mean length at each age. The estimated ages ranged from 3-8 years with mean lengths ranging from 335 mm for 3 year old fish to 547 mm for 8 year old fish (Table 7). Age 6 fish predominated, composing about 33% of the fish in the sample. The scales may not adequately represent ages of older fish. Otoliths from older or larger fish should be examined to determine the maximum ages of the fish in the population. ) .> ) All rainbow trout were weighed, measured and scale samples taken to determine age, weight and length statistics. August, 1985/DAF. TABLE 7 Mean Length with samples size (n) and standard deviation (S.D.) at each age tor 126 rainbow trout collected in the Kanektok River, Alaska, during July-September 1985. From Scott Corley, 1985 Seattle National Fishery Research Center Age n Mean Length (mm) S.D. 3 2 334.5 23.3 4 23 341.9 31.1 5 27 391.5 34.6 6 41 447.5 33.2 7 23 493.7 35.9 8 10 547.0 38.3 d. Collect Creel Census Data and Determine Angler Harvest In cooperation with the Alaska Department of Fish & Game, refuge volunteers at Kagati Lake handed out creel census forms to fishermen. Of the approximately 300 forms handed out, only 17 were returned. Preliminary data from the state indicate that only 319 rainbow trout were caught and none were kept, and only 28 rainbows were captured between the state's sonar site and the village of Quinhagak (from ADF&G independent creel check on the lower river). The rainbow trout fishing success (based on guide reports and field sampling) steadily increased from a monthly low in June of .25 fish/angler day to a high of 7.54 fish per angler day in September. The coho salmon sport fishery peaked in August with 823 fish caught for a success rate of 5.63 fish/angler day. The dolly varden catch also peaked in August. Their catch rate was low in July, but remained above 5.4 fish/angler day for both August and September. The king fishing is relatively low at .25 fish/hour, however, the majority of the creel information is from the upper sections of the river. The king fishery by contrast takes place near the village of Quinhagak, so the actual catch rate for kings in the system is probably higher. Goodnews River Reconnaissance Study - ADF&G The Alaska Department of Fish and Game conducted a float trip on the Middle Fork of the Goodnews River August 27 to September 5. The purpose of the trip was to sample fish populations. One State Biologist, Fred Decicco and one State volunteer, Bill Remer, were flown to Kukaktlim Lake in the refuge's Cessna. Their findings included confirming the presence of artie char in Kukaktlim Lake. These fish had gill raker counts of x=25.3 and high pyloric caecal counts x=55.3 as opposed to counts of dolly varden from the same area of the stream with gill raker counts of x=22 and pyloric caeca counts of x=28.5. From quide reports and collection of fish, there is probably a substantial overwintering of dolly varden in the lower portion of the river. Salmon species noted during the trip were sockeye spawning in the lake. Chums, and kings were in low numbers, as the trip was conducted after the ::s::s main runs of these species. Coho salmon were distributed throughout the river. Grayling were also found throughout the river, however no large concentrations were found. The largest grayling weighed 1475 grams (3.2 lbs) and was 527mm (20.8 inches) in total length. Rainbow trout were present the entire length of the river and generally were found associated with cut-banks, rocks and main channel gravel areas. All rainbow captured were weighed and measured (Table 8). TABLE 8 Rainbow trout age-length data for the Goodnews River, 1985. Fork length in mm. Fairbanks Length Range (FL) AGE N. LENGTH RANGE MEAN LENGTH (FL) S.D. 3 3 322-393 356 35.64 4 8 348-426 392 31.27 5 9 425-502 460 24.68 6 17 440-512 469 20.26 7 21 472-528 510 13.30 8 18 491-585 546 22.55 9 5 552-595 571 16.23 10 1 602 602 Other S~ortfish Studies The ADF&G office in Bethel conducted several projects on the Kanektok and Goodnews Rivers. Although these were not cooperative efforts with USFWS, they do concern refuge waters and supply some pertinent information needed in formulating river management plans. A. Kuskokwim Bay Commercial Fisheries Catch Monitor: An ADF&G fisheries technician was stationed in Quinhagak from June 2, until September 6. She was responsible for: monitoring commercial, subsistence, and sport fishing catches; collecting age, sex, length, and scale samples from catches; dissemination of fisheries information to the public; assisting F&W Protection in enforcing regulations; compiling historical data on the fishery; and providing logistical support for the ADF&G field camp projects (Kanektok Sonar and Goodnews Tower). B. Kanektok River Escapement Survey: Two ADF&G fishery technicians conducted this study from Kagati Lake to Quinhagak. In seven days of floating (August 5-13), they sampled 583 chinook, 16 sockeye, and 300 chum salmon carcasses that had washed up on gravel bars. Thirty coho were sampled (via hook and line capture). In addition, sample counts were made at the ADF&G Kanektok side scan sonar site. C. Kanektok River Sportfish Creel Census The ADF&G fisheries technician stationed in Quinhagak also helped conduct the study. ADF&G personnel interviewed users twice a day between 8 AM and 8 PM from June 14 to July 15 in the lower 20 miles of the river. Preliminary data estimated that 5212 angler hours (756 angler days) were expended in the survey section. Numbers of fish caught/kept are 3,132/667 chinook and 2,121/323 chum salmon, 302/26 rainbows, 292/42 dolly varden, /2 sockeye, /6 pink. Of all the anglers interviewed, 81% were from out of state, 14% were area residents from Bethel or Anchorage and 5% were from Quinhagak. Of the out of state anglers, 86% were guided. D. Side Scan Sonar: ADF&G operated a Bendix side scan sonar salmon counter on the Kanektok River approximately five miles upriver from the village of Quinhagak. The system is still in the research stage, but should be fully operational in the future. The equipment is only employed during the king, red, chum and pink salmon runs, and is not operated during the coho run. The site will be relocated for the 1986 season as their previous location is now a cut off oxbow. E. Salmon Counting Tower: ADF&G has operated a salmon counting tower 12 miles upriver, on the middle fork of the Goodnews River for five seasons. Tower counts are used to assist in making in-season management decisions related to salmon stocks. They are also used to assess the accuracy of aerial surveys, by comparing survey results with tower counts. Making in-season management decisions for red and chum salmon is possible because of the short lag time between the fishing district and the tower; approximately 5 and 7 days, respectively. Tower counts become more useful in-season indicators of the king salmon run as the season progresses. The termination date of the project is too early to adequately assess the coho and pink salmon escapement. F. Goodnews River Escapement Survey: ADF&G technicians conducted this study from Goodnews Lake to Goodnews Bay between August 5-13. High water levels were responsible for the small samples: 26 chinook, 22 sockeye and 76 chum, which were far below the sample objectives. Togiak River Sportfish Study Through a cooperative effort between the refuge staff and Alaska Department of Fish and Game Research Biologist, Mac Minard, a sportfishing creel census and angler effort estimate was begun in 1984. In 1985, the refuge staff accepted responsibility for continuing this study. This study was conducted in two parts: 1. Aerial surveys were flown by refuge staff to estimate total use on the river and to apply this estimate by expanding angler catches to seasonal totals. 2 Voluntary creel catch surveys were distributed to professional river guides by refuge staff and to float parties (both guided and non-guided) by refuge volunteers stationed at Togiak Lake. A pre-addressed, stamped envelope was also provided. 3 Creel censuses were conducted to gather angler information and convince the guides of the necessity of their accurate reporting. Seventeen aerial surveys of the Togiak River were flown from June through September. A total 382 fisherman were observed, a total sport fishing effort was estimated to be 2,908 use days (100 more use days than estimated in 1984). Peak months of use were August (1,059 use days) and September (990 use days). If we include local native subsistence users into the total river use estimate from the aerial surveys, we get 3,489 use days. Each user group accounts for roughly: Natives (19%), motorboat anglers (30%), fly-in anglers (27%) and river rafters (24%). Angler interviews and mail in angler surveys provide census data for 252 angler days, 8.6% of the total 2,908. All of the interview results were obtained during July and August so no seasonal estimates of catch and harvest by species is calculated. Professionally guided operators accounted for 79% of the interviewed effort during the two months. The catch per unit effort (CPUE - expressed in number of fish per unit effort) was calculated for the 252 angler days interviewed. The species with the highest CPUE in July were king salmon (1.7), chum salmon (.98), and char (.87). The monthly CPUE in July was 3.8 fish caught and .96 fish kept per angler day. In August, CPUE's dropped for the previously mentioned salmon, but rose for char (2.9), coho (1.80) and rainbow (.12). The monthly CPUE for August was 5.7 fish caught and .73 fish kept per angler day. CPUE for arctic grayling remained the same for both months at .05 fish per angler day. 36 This male char (arctic char/dolly varden), dressed in full spawning colors, is a typical specimen from the refuge rivers during the fall. August, 1985/SF . . ) I 37 E. ADMINISTRATION 1. Personnel . ) Togiak Refuge Staff (L-R) M. Lisac, K. Harper, S. Farler, D. Fisher, L. Hotchkiss. January, 1986/MB. Permanent: ) 1. David A. Fisher Refuge manager GS-12 EOD 10/22/81 2. Lee A. Hotchkiss Asst. RM/Pilot GS-12 EOD 1/24/82 3. Ken C. Harper Fisheries Biologist GS-11 EOD 9/1/85 4. Shelley A. Farler Secretary GS-5 EOD 7I 15/85 (Local Hire) 5. Mark J. Lisac Bio Tech/Fisheries GS-5 EOD 2/14/85 (Local Hire) 6. Karen S. Brandt Clerk Typist GS-4 EOD 9/6/84 (not pictured) TERM 7I 20/ 85 (Local Hire) Temporary: (not pictured) 1. Jack l-1. Stewart Bio Tech/Wildlife GS-4 EOD 5/7/85 TERM 10/15/85 (Local Hire) ) I 38 Volunteers: (not pictured) EOD TERH l. Vern Burandt 6/4/85 8/28/85 2. Diane Campbell 6/6/85 8/28/85 3. Scott Farling 5/6/85 9/11/85 4. Brian Higgins 6/1/85 9/10/85 5. Becky Joyce 6/13/85 9/10/85 6. Joan Kramer 6/6/85 9/11/85 7. Steve Hartin 4/17 I 85 6/25/85 8. Seven Mazzone 6/1/85 10/10/85 9. Don Redfearn 7/14/85 8/10/85 10. Jill Strauss 6/7/85 9/3/85 11. Susan Richards 8/1/85 8/14/85 During 1985, the refuge staff increased from three permanent employees to five (Table g). Hark Lisac was hired on 2/14/85 as a Biological Technician (Fisheries) local hire. Mark had worked for the refuge in 1984. In 1985 Mark helped with the collection of spring waterfowl subsistence hunting data at Chagvan Bay; assisted the King Salmon fisheries research station with rainbow tagging efforts on the Kanektok River; helped set up and take down field camps; conducted creel census studies on the Togiak River. Mark brings an energetic addition to the staff and did a very good job for us in 1985. Karen Brandt, our clerk typist for nineteen months, resigned on 7/20/85 and moved back to Montana with her family. We were very fortunate in being able to replace Karen with Shelley Farler. Shelley was our first clerk (EOD 10/31/82) so this made the transition go very smooth. Ken Harper was selected in June as the refuge Fisheries Biologist but was picked up on the payroll September 1. Ken and family moved to Dillingham from Vernal, Utah where Ken was the project leader for the Utah Fishery Assistance office. This is an essential addition to our staff and should prove to be a very interesting job. Jack M. Stewart Jr., a native from the Village of Goodnews Bay, worked as a temporary Bio Tech. He worked in the village collecting subsistence waterfowl use data. TABLE 9 Staffing Pattern (FY) Permanent Temporar:y Full Time* Part Time Total FTE FY1986 5 4 FY1985 3 1 3 FY1984 3 4 2 FY1983 2 3 2 FY1982 2 1 2 FY1981 1 1 *PFT local hire is excluded from FTE ceiling. 4. Volunteer Program Lessons learned from last year's volunteer program served the Refuge staff well in avoiding pitfalls encountered during 1984. The 1985 volunteer season proceeded smoothly with a minimum of problems and was highly productive. Eleven volunteers ranging in age from 19 years old to 69 years old spent a total of 903 man days, or 10,024 man hours, in volunteer work on the Refuge . One volunteer stayed two weeks, one stayed 4 weeks, a third stayed 7 weeks and the remaining 8 volunteers stayed for at least 12 weeks each. As usual, the Refuge provided all field gear and equipment (except sleeping bags), food, and air transportation from Dillingham back to Anchorage at the end of the season. . ) ) The long and short of it; (above) 69 year old Vernon Burandt, a retired game warden from Lone Pine, California, and (next page) 19 year old Scott Farling from Harrisburg, PA. June, 1985/JS & September, 1985, MJL. ) f ~ 40 This year each volunteer and the Refuge volunteer coordinator came to a firm agreement on the dates they started and ended the season. This was done a long time before they arrived at Dillingham so there were no misunderstandings. Nearly all the volunteers arrived in early June and remained in Dillingham until ice out in the lakes. While in Dillingham waiting to begin the field season, the volunteers kept busy preparing field equipment, sorting and packing field supplies and participating in a week long in-house training program. The training session consisted of reviewing all the field data forms, discussing Refuge history, goals, policies, and regulations; firearms care, cleaning, safety; appropriate refuge visitor interview techniques; aircraft survival gear and ELT use; procedures and use of the Refuge H-F radio system; solar panel and 12 volt battery care and maintenance; bird identification; do's and don't's when dealing with Native residents; field equipment maintenance and use; boat and motor maintenance, handling and safety. The training session culminated in a one day field exercise at Aleknagik Lake where RM Fisher and ARM Hotchkiss role played itinerant .> fishermen on the Refuge so that the volunteers could practice their interview techniques. Each team of 2 volunteers practiced their interviews with three different scenarios and received verbal critiques from the Refuge staff at the completion of each scenario. At the end of the role playing sessions, each volunteer received training on techniques for releasing fish unharmed so they could demonstrate the techniques to visiting fishermen. Traveling 20 miles up the lake to the training area by inflatable boat and motor from the boat launch site allowed each volunteer ample time in learning safe boat operating procedures. ) f 41 . ) Volunteer Jill Strauss from New Rochelle, New York demonstrating catch and release techniques. August, 1985/DAF. A brief description of volunteer projects are as follows: -conducted spring waterfowl migration and staging surveys at Chagvan Bay -monitored spring waterfowl subsistence hunting at Chagvan Bay -marine mammal monitoring at haul out sites on Cape Peirce/Nanvak Bay -public use surveys at Togiak Lake, Goodnews Lake and Kagati Lake -public use surveys and fish sampling/tagging on Kanektok River, Goodnews River and Togiak River -waterfowl brood surveys on Nushagak Peninsula .• -seabird surveys on Cape Peirce and Shiak Island -raptor surveys at all field locations -continued to compile Refuge bird list data -started a Refuge herbarium collection -located and censused arctic tern colony at Togiak Lake -fall waterfowl migration/staging data collection at Nanvak Bay 42 Problems encountered this year were nearly as varied as the volunteers themselves and, with one exception, were all minor in nature and easily corrected: -Despite careful screening of volunteer applications coupled with over the phone interviews a potential problem still exists when you bring new individuals from the city into the realities of wilderness field camps. Extensive training sessions just don't seem to instill the virtue of common sense to members of a team who's actions affect others. A few instances occurred during the 1985 field season when common sense by an individual was not used. Fortunately this did not result in any injuries. Stress to field partners did occur which imported stress up the chain of command. -Another problem encountered was that a few volunteers really did not understand what cool, damp, frequently windy weather conditions meant, which resulted in them bringing inadequate cool weather clothing and sleeping bags for Southwest Alaska weather conditions. -The last problem worthy of note is inter-personal strife in remote camp situations. This problem resulted in re-organizing the team members at each camp frequently during the latter portion of the season. These situations are most likely unavoidable, but do cause extra work loads on the Refuge staff. None the less, given these minor problems, the summer's results more than made up for the headaches and extra staff work load. The Refuge staff had the opportunity to work with many talented people who had a great deal of enthusiasm for working with the general public and wildlife. We received a great deal of field data as a result of these volunteer efforts that would have otherwise been impossible to obtain. Additionally, we feel we were able to view some potential FWS employees; indeed, some that were well above average in both talent and integrity. It was also felt that volunteers were able to benefit from us as well by having an opportunity to actually see how the USFWS does business. Unlike the general public, volunteers were given a unique close-up of some of our programs, projects and problems; thus receiving a clearer picture of what the service is trying to accomplish. 43 Volunteer Becky Joyce from Pittsburg, PA is typical of our 1985 volunteers - upbeat, enthuastic, energetic and ) just plain good people. July, 1985/JS. 5. Funding TABLE 10 Funding Histor:y: for Togiak NWR .> FY 1210 1220 1260* 1360 Totals 1981 10,000 20,000 30,000 1982 130,000 66,000 196,000 1983 130 ,ooo 60,000 190,000 1984 250,000 10,000 260,000 1985 280,000 30,000 310,00 1986 322,000 60,000 382 ,ooo *Includes ARMM funds. I 44 Funding for FY86 consists of an increase of 72K over FY85 (Table 10). The increase will allow the refuge to get started with a fisheries program and basically continue with the volunteer program. Fisheries funds will just pay salaries for the biologist and the bio-tech. Equipment, travel and other related items essential to support fisheries work will be funded by 1260. Any reduction would be a severe set back, especially when we are just beginning to get our feet on the ground. Early rumors are that cuts in FY87 could be drastic. 6. Safety Another accident-free year has passed, leaving the station safety record unblemished with no lost time accidents occuring since the Refuge was established on December 2, 1980. Regular monthly safety meetings were held, with topics ranging from home fire prevention to aircraft accident survival techniques and equipment. An extensive safety program was presented to the Refuge volunteers during their week long refuge orientation and training session. Subjects covered included hands on training in the safe use of all types of field equipment, boat and motor operations, water safety, fire arms safety, fuel handling, bear safety and aircraft emergency procedures for passengers. One incident occurred that could easily have ended up as a serious accident or possibly even a fatality to one of our volunteers. This volunteer, a lady from Illinois, slipped on loose scree at Cape Peirce while conducting nest checks on a seabird colony. She slid down a slope for 25-50 feet before stopping on a narrow ledge directly above a 200 foot plus sheer drop to the rocky beach at the base of the Cape. Not being experienced with this kind of terrain, she elected to remain in place until help could arrive. Unfortunately, thick sea fog moved in along with darkness before her partner, who was in camp, became alarmed at her absence, notified our office by radio, then began looking for her. Her partner finally found her at about 2:00 A.M. and notified us on the radio that she was ok, but was stuck on the steep slope. Fog prevented the Refuge plane from going out at first light, but a Dillingham based ARCO helicopter, doing surficial geological survey work on the refuge was available and volunteered to fly two paramedics out to the Cape. The paramedics were experienced mountain climbers and were able to rescue her from the cliff. The volunteer returned to Dillingham where she underwent a medical exam to assure that no injuries had occurred. She was pronounced fit and returned to duty that day, none the worse for her 26 hour ordeal on the cliff. She had kept her head, and realized that she was in a situation where she could easily turn an incident into a major accident due to inexperience. No injuries to Refuge visitors were reported this year. However, three (3) aircraft accidents did occur within the Refuge boundaries. One accident, involved a Bethel based air taxi operation, resulted in four (4) fatalities and three (3) injured when a Piper Cherokee crashed 4 miles northeast of Quinhagak. The pilot was making a VFR (Visual Flight Rules) night f~ight under marginal weather, i.e. low ceilings and limited visibility when the 45 incident occurred. He was not instrument rated and legally could not conduct the flight, which resulted in such a tragic ending. This accident occurred on lands within the Refuge boundary that were conveyed to the Village of Quinhagak. Another Piper Cherokee, from a Dillingham based air taxi company, was conducting a VFR flight between the village of Togiak and Dillingham when it crashed on a mountain side 5 miles northwest of Kulukak Bay. This aircraft was also flying in marginal weather conditions, which consisted of low ceilings (500 ft.) and visibilities less than 1 mile in rain and fog. Three people on board received injuries - the most severe of which was the pilot who had a broken back. I Yute Air Piper Cherokee crash site on mountain side 5 miles northwest of Kulukak Bay. July, 1985/MJL. A third accident occurred when a fishing lodge owned and operated Dehavilland Beaver on floats crashed while landing on the Ungalikthluk River. Apparently the aircraft encountered a low level wind shear just , • prior to touch-down, causing the pilot to lose control. The aircraft received substantial damage but the pilot, who was the only person on board, was not injured. 8. Other Thirty nine (39) Special Use Permits (SUP's) were written this year, of which thirty five (35) were actually issued ·(Table 11). Because of Alaska Department of Fish & Game's spring emergency bear season closure in Unit 18, which encompasses the northwestern one-half of the Refuge, two (2) hunting guides elected to pass on validating their SUPs. Two sportfishing 46 guides failed to return SUPs for validation after requesting a permit. Air taxi/charter companies who had a past history of use on the Refuge were issued SUP's for the first time this year. All air taxi companies in the Refuge vicinity that might possibly have a Refuge use history were contacted and informed of the SUP requirement. Those air taxi/charter companies who only overfly the Refuge en route to village airports were exempt. However, those that made off-airport landings within the Refuge boundary were required to obtain SUP's. Air taxi/charter SUP's were included in the moritorium that was put in effect during 1984, which means that only those air taxi/charter companies that could prove use in the Refuge during the period of 1980 through 1984 were eligible to receive SUPs. 0 ) Dehavilland Beaver owned and operated by Yute Air on lower portion of Goodnews River. August, 1985/DAF. All sport fishing guides and air taxi operators were checked in the field for compliance with SUP special use conditions. TABLE 11 PERMIT NUMBER PERMITTEE PERMIT PURPOSE SUP FEE T-01-85 Alaska River Safaris Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-02-85 N.E. Hautanen Big Game Guide $100 T-03-85 ADF&G Biological Research T-04-85 Kanektok River Outfitters/Sport Fishing Guide $100 Western Alaska Guide Svcs/Big Game Guide . * T-05-85 f T-06-85 Beyond Boundaries Exped/Sport Fishing Guide $100 47 T-07-85 Riverbound Float Trips Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-08-85 Charles Vandergaw Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-09-85 Alaska Fishing Adventures/Sport Fishing Guide $100 * T-10-85 Denali Wilderness Lodge Sport Fishing Guide T-11-85 Ramgo Enterprises Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-12-85 Andy's Alaska Fishing Safaris/Sport Fishi~~ $100 T-13-85 Arctic Sport Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-14-85 Hugh Glass Backbacking Sport Fishing Guide $100 * T-15-85 Trapper Don's Sport Fishing Guide T-16-85 Wood River Lodge Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-17-85 Bristol Bay Lodge Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-18-85 Fish Alaska, Inc. Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-19-85 Golden Horn Lodge Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-20-85 Tikchik Narrows, Inc. Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-21-85 Gone Fishing Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-22-85 Dave Duncan & Sons Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-23-85 B&B Fishing Adventures Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-24-85 Alaska West Sportfishing Sport Fishing Guide $100 T-25-85 Alaska River & Ski Tours/Sport Fishing Guide $100 * T-26-85 Northwest Outfitters Big Game Guide T-27-85 Alaska Cargo Service Air Charter Company $100 T-28-85 Hermen's Air, Inc. Air Charter Company $100 T-29-85 Manokotak Airways, Inc. Air Charter Company $100 T-30-85 Yute Air Alaska Air Charter Company $100 T-31-85 Delaire Charter Service Air Charter Company $100 T-32-85 Armstrong Air Service Air Charter Company $100 T-33-85 NOAA Air Photo Survey Markers T-34-85 Bush Air, Inc. Air Charter Company $100 T-35-85 BL~f Casdastral Survey T-36-85 ARCO Surficial Geological Studies $100 T-37-85 Alaska Army National Guard/Training Exercises $100 T-38-85 Peninsula Air Air Charter Company $100 T-39-85 BIA Historical Site Surveys TOTAL SUP'S ISSUED: 35 TOTAL FEE'S COLLECTED: $3,000.00 *A permit was never returned, therefore not validated Accurate reporting of use (numbers of clients and client use days) remains our main problem with the sport fishing guides. We are fairly certain that many fishing guides are consistantly falsifyir~ their reports to reflect a higher use figure than what is actually occurring. Efforts to confirm this practice and put a stop to it will be intensified during the 1986 season. F. HABITAT MANAGEMENT 1. General The refuge includes a variety of landforms; including mountains, U-shaped valleys with sheer walls, beaches, sea cliffs, glacial lakes, and 48 moraines. Most of the refuge interior is dissected mountainous uplands, stretching from the Ahklun Mountains in the west to the Wood River Mountains in the east. The Wood River Mountains rise in elevation from 1,000 feet in places around Kulukak Bay, to more than 5,000 feet in the northeastern corner of the refuge. The highest peak is 5,045 foot Mt. Waskey. Elevations also rise above 4,000 feet in the northeastern Ahklun Mountains, but summits in the southwest are more widely separated, and taper down to lower smoother hills. Drainages trend southwest, parallel to the grain of the mountains. The wide Togiak River Valley below Togiak Lake, makes an otherwise indistinguishable separation of the Ahklun and Wood River mountains. Many of the broad U-shaped glacial valleys that separate the mountains, contain large deep glacial lakes and snow-melt streams. . ) Goodnews Lake is typical of the many deep glacial lakes found on the refuge. August, 1985/JK. The refuge coastline includes precipitous cliffs, sand and gravel bars, lagoons, beaches, estuaries, littoral and pelagic waters. The most notable lowland areas are adjacent to Jacksmith, Chagvan, Osviak, and Nanvak Bays, ~ plus the Nushagak Peninsula (i.e., the Nushagak-Bristol Bay lowlands). These lowlands rise from sea level to a maximum of 560 feet near the mountains. Plateaus and benches found on these lowlands contain many small lakes and sloughs. Local relief of the lowlands varies from 50 to 260 feet. Vegetation on the refuge includes plants common to both arctic and subarctic regions. Tundra occurs on nearly all of the refuge and is classified into three general types: , Moist tundra is found on approximately 50% of the refuge and usually 49 forms a complete ground cover. This is the most productive of the tundra habitats. It is comprised of cotton grass, sedges, mosses, grass tussocks; and shrubs which include willow, Labrador tea, mountain cranberry, and bog blueberry. Alpine tundra, found on the higher mountains and ridges, is the second most common type found on the refuge. It consists of low growing mats of lichens, and herbaceous and shrubby plants, interspersed with patches of barren shelf or broken rock. Plant species found here will primarily include dwarf willow, crow berry, Labrador tea, mountain cranberry, and bear berry. Wet tundra comprises only about 2% of the area. Being the least common type of tundra on the refuge, it is mostly found in low coastal zones and drainages with shallow lakes and extensive marsh areas of standing water. Vegetation is made up of a mat of lichens, mosses, and sedges, and may include a few woody species such as bog cranberry and bog rosemary. On drier portions of this type of tundra, dwarf birch and dwarf willow may occur. 2. Wetlands Most of the coastal areas, and to some extent low lying interior valleys, are pristine wetlands. They range from coastal brackish and fresh water lakes, ponds,and marshes with both stabilized and active dunes; to large inland areas of wide shallow valleys studded with shallow lakes, ponds, marshes and wet meadows interspersed with dry uplands on small buttes, hills, and plateaus. 6. Other Habitats Willow and alder thickets occur along creek drainages up to elevations of 1,900 feet m.s.l. Scattered stands of cottonwood, plus a few well scattered black spruce and white spruce trees are found along the Togiak River drainage. Cottonwood, willow, birch, and alder thickets occur along the Goodnews and Kanektok River drainages. The eastern portion of the refuge between the Togiak River drainage and Dillingham, has several relatively large stands of black spruce, birch, and white spruce. These stands are islands of trees representing areas free of permafrost, surrounded by moist or wet tundra plains. 50 Low lying wetlands such as these surrounding the Village of Twin Hills located at the lower end of the Togiak River Valley contain many small shallow ponds, river sloughs and low wet tundra type vegetation. June, 1985/DAF. 9. Fire Management . ) A very late spring, cool wet summer and few thunder storms combined to considerably reduce wildfire potential. One fire siting was reported to ARM Hotchkiss at 10:00 p.m. on July 31 by an air taxi pilot flying through the Togiak Valley. The pilot reported a lightning strike and subsequent smoke and flames covering a 100 foot diameter area 10 miles northwest of Togiak. Loss of daylight and weather conditions (fog, wind, rain and 100 ft. ceilings) prevented inspection of the reported fire until 11:00 a.m. the next day. At that time, no fire could be found nor could the fire location be determined. Another flight conducted August 2, with the refuge aircraft, failed to pinpoint the fire location. The fire was declared out August 3 at 6:00 p.m. even though it was never found after the initial report. RM Fisher continued to serve on the Interagency Fire Planning Team during the year. That portion of the Fire Management Plan that covers the Togiak NWR was reviewed during 1985. No changes to the plan were necessary. ) 11. Water Rights Flow measurements were collected from several streams on the refuge during the period of 1980-1984. However, no water rights have been filed. Future developments on the various drainages for mining, allotments and for possible hydroelectric projects will require planning for water supplies, ~ instream flow needs for fish, water quality, recreation, and other activities. However, since the majority of the rivers and streams originate on the refuge and no water diversions have been planned for any of the streams or rivers, the expensive process of determining flows at low, medium and high stages and filing for water rights has been delayed. Anticipated uses will govern future data collection programs and allow for the allocation of limited monetary resources to accomplish the high priority needs. 12. Wilderness and Special Areas .f 51 Approximately one-half or 2,270,000 acres of the refuge was designated as ) wilderness area by ANILCA . This wilderness area consists of pristine rivers, high mountain deep water lakes, sharply sloped mountains and is located in the northern half of the refuge. . ) Kagati Lake, headwaters of the Kanektok River, is located deep in the refuge designated wilderness area. August, 1985/VB. Wilderness additions proposed in the service's preferred alternative of the Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan would add approximately 357,000 ) acres to the refuge's 2,270,000 acres of designated wilderness area. The proposed area includes the old Cape Newenham NWR area plus lands surrounding the headwaters of the south fork of the Goodnews River. This proposal would bring the remainder of the Goodnews River drainages found within the refuge boundary under the extra management protection afforded through wilderness designation. It would also provide that same protection to the watershed areas of Cape Newenham and Cape Peirce. The added protection could become extremely important in the near future in protecting a segment of the ecosystem that helps support walrus, sea lion and seal haul out areas and extensive seabird nesting colonies found at Cape Peirce and Cape Newenham . The natural diversity protected by wilderness designation will serve as an invaluable source of data for scientific investigations and for future fish and wildlife needs. I 52 ) South side of Cape Peirce demonstrates the rugged sea cliffs and sheltered coves required for sea mammal haulout areas and seabird nesting colonies. July, 1985/MJL. G. WILDLIFE 1. Wildlife Diversity Togiak NWR supports an abundant variety of wildlife. The area is a cross roads for waterfowl and shorebirds coming from wintering areas as far away ) as Russia, Japan, Mexico, South America, New Zealand, and a number of the South Pacific Islands. The Bristol Bay area, bordered on the north by Togiak NWR, has been described as the southern terminus of the "Arctic Bird Migration Route". Birds from the "Asiatic route", the "mid-Pacific route", and the North American Pacific Flyway funnel through the area. ~ Thirty-one species of land mammals, 169 species of birds, and seventeen species of marine mammals occur on or adjacent to the refuge. Five species of salmon, and eight species of fresh water sport fish inhabit refuge waters. At least nine additional species of fish occur in the refuge's streams and lakes. Even though these fish have no commercial or sport value, many are used for subsistence purposes and are important links in the food chain. 2. Endangered and/or Threatened Species An endangered peregrine falcon nest that had been reported by bioloSists and sport fishing guides since the summer of 1980 was investigated by Endangered Species Biologist Mike Amarel this year. The nest site, located on the Kanektok River (T5S, R68W, Section 29) had never been confirmed by refuge staff. Mr. Amaral and his field assistant located the nest site, but reported it not being used this year. He described it as a "probable" peregrine falcon eyre. Peregrine falcons were observed on several different occasions 30 miles upstream at Kagati Lake during August and September by volunteers stationed there during the field season. Grey whales are regularly found feeding in the coastal waters between Kulukuk Bay and Cape Newenham on the refuge's southern boundary, from April to September. The animals are most frequently observed in groups of 200-300, during April, May and June in the vicinity of Walrus Islands and Hagameister Strait. Later in the summer, small pods of 10-20 whales are usually observed in the Cape Peirce, Cape Newenham, and Security Cove areas. 3. Waterfowl Nesting of most species of dabbler, diver, sea ducks, and some scattered nesting by white fronted and canada geese does occur on the refuge. However, the major attribute of the refuge to waterfowl is the offering of staging and feeding areas during the spring and fall migrations. The refuge serves as the apex of a funnel for waterfowl of the pacific flyway corridor heading to or from the nesting grounds of the arctic coast, and the Yukon-Kuskokwin River Delta. Large eelgrass beds in the saltwater lagoons of Osviak Slough, Nanvak Bay, and Chagvan Bay provide important staging and feeding areas. Nanvak and Chagvan Bays are the two most important spring and fall staging areas on the refuge; the latter contains an estimated five square miles of eelgrass beds. Generally throughout the winter months, January through March, waterfowl numbers and diversity are low. Common eiders (1-6,000) are found in open water among the shore fast ice along the Bristol Bay coast - the refuge southern boundary. Mallards (2-400) and common goldeneye (1-300) overwinter in any open water available at lake inlets, outlets, or along ice free portions of rivers and streams. Mean temperatures in April (17 degrees F) and May (38 degrees F) delayed spring break up. By mid April, however, waterfowl began to appear in the Dillingham area, and on the refuge. White fronted geese and tundra swans were first reported April 17 and 27 respectively. Waterfowl migrants found open water to be scarce and congregated on available waterbodies, which consisted primarily of overflow on lakes, and tidal pools along the coast. Spring subsistence hunting for waterfowl was facilitated by this concentration on the coastal areas. With the nesting grounds still frozen, it looked like a devestating season for waterfowl in general. Spring waterfowl aerial surveys were flown on May 20 and 28. Ice cover of Chagvan and Nanvak Bays for both survey dates was 40-50% (May 20) and 10% (May 28). Species observed were predominantly: black brant, canada goose, .rr emperor goose, mallard, pintail and stellars eiders (Table 12). TABLE 12 Waterfowl Staging Estimates WATERFOWL MAY 20 MAY 28 Canada Geese 16,400 8,100 Emperor Geese 6,610 1,600 White-fronted Geese 90 650 Black Brant 35,830 23,250 Snow Geese 940 -0- Mallard 6,525 100 Pintail 4,100 225 Green-wing Teal 500 -0- Greater Scaup 780 1,400 Oldsquaw -0- 150 Stellars Eider 4,000 3,100 Common Eider 2,300 450 White winged Sooter -0- 920 Black Sooter 25 1,650 Tundra Swan 58 -0- Sandhill Crane 34 -0- Unidentified Ducks 9,000 2,100 The documentation of the 940 snow geese on May 20 is a rare observation on the Togiak Refuge. There has never been more than 50 snows documented by aerial or ground surveys since records have been kept on the refuge. Snow geese usually use the interior flyway. This deviation could be just a fluke or be an indication of the availability of open water and snow free ground along the coast. A field camp was established at Chagvan Bay and manned by BT Lisac and two volunteers from May 22 to June 4. They observed and documented the native subsistence harvest of waterfowl and the relative abundance of waterfowl in the bay, chronology of peak activity and migration timings. Estimates of peak staging reflect relative abundance of primary species at points in time and do not reflect the total number of birds that used the bay during the spring migration (Table 13). Pacific brant were the most prominent species using the bay, with a peak of activity occurring during a week long period from May 23 to 30. An average of approximately 20,000 brant with a peak estimate of 25,500 on May 26, was found, and compares to an estimated peak of 33,000 in 1984. Emperor and Canada geese numbers were disappointing for the crew, with a peak of approximately 100 birds each sighted on May 29. This was down drastically from numbers of emperor and Canadas, estimated in 1984. Overall spring waterfowl staging numbers were down in 1985 compared to similar estimates in 1984. Several species, old squaw, pintail, scoter, shoveler and merganser, of noteworthy concentrations in 1984 were all but missing in 1985. This was possibly due to the prolonged spring thaw which :.F..J had similarily spread the migration out and prevented our setting up camp until later. Aerial survey estimates indicate a drop in the numbers of each species from May 20 to May 28, both for the overall refuge total and for Chagvan Bay. TABLE 13 On grounds estimates of Waterfowl Staging at Chagvan Bay May 22-June 4 , 1985 WHITE BLACK EMPEROR CANADA FRONT STELLERS COMMON SNOW BRANT GEESE GEESE GEESE EIDER EIDER HARLEQUIN GEESE May 23 10,800 4 8 60 30 23 9,800(+) 25 31 215 30 8 24 20 ,000(+/-) 14 24 3,000(:) 5 25 22,500(:) 12 5,000(:) 2,000(:) 5 26 25,500(:) 29 300 16 27 5,000(:) 41 300 10 28 21,000(:) 46 08 200 35 29 20,000(:) 110 100 05 135 114 150 30 14,000(-/:) 04 05 05 250 100 150 31 6,900(:) 02 02 01 140 70 120 June 01 4,650(:) 20 1,000(:) 400 02 6,000(=) 20 06 240 120 03 5,000(:) 04 3,000(:) 08 13 80 40 (+) Large numbers entering (-) Large Numbers Observed Departing (:) Estimation of' Total Bay From Vantage Point (*) All Other Counts Compilization of' Ground Observations Throughout the summer months, small breeding populations of old squaw, red breasted mergansers, black scoters, pintais, mallards and harlequin ducks nest and raise their broods along the freshwater streams and lake shores and backwater oxbows. Coastal breeding populations occur in sufficient concentrations to census and use as an indication of' yearly production. The Nushagak Peninsula consisting of many small lakes, ponds, and streams scattered throughout low lying tundra and surrounded by tidal coastal slough, lends itself well to waterfowl nesting, molting and censusing. Aerial survey methods, used since the early 1970's, indicated waterfowl nesting densities on the Nushagak Peninsula to be 32 ducks (16 pairs), and 1.2 swans (0.6 pair), per square mile. In 1983 aerial surveys conducted by the refuge staff' estimated 13.8 pair of ducks, 1.4 pair of' swan and 2.26 pair of' geese per square mile on the Nushagak Peninsula. In 1985, BT Lisac and five (5) dedicated volunteers spent 3 days (July 20-23) surveying nine (9) of the ten (10) plots established on the Nushagak Peninsula (Table 14). Overall, survey counts in number of broods were down :;u for all species except tundra swans (up from 3 to six broods), white winged scoters and canvas back (each of the latter having one brood documented in 1985). Breeding populations were at a low throughout the state and the pacific flyway. The figures presented are nothing more than an indicator of the Nushagak Peninsula coastal waterfowl breeding grounds and should not be used to project production across the refuge. In 1986, we hope to expand our efforts and cover more diverse habitat types and locations. TABLE 14 Comparative Brood Counts from the Nushagak Peninsula Survey Plots 1984 (N:lO) and 1985 (N=9) 1985 Approximate Number Square Miles 30 26 Number of Waterbodies Surveyed 129 105 # Broods Proportion # Broods Proportion Dabblers Mallard 03 .03 Pintail 18 .19 01 .03 Am. Widgeon 04 .04 01 .03 G.W. Teal 30 .31 11 .35 N. Shovelor 01 .01 Gadwall 01 .01 Divers Black Sooter 02 .02 05 .16 W.W. Sooter 01 .03 Old Squaw 24 .25 04 .13 Gr. Scaup 07 .07 Canvasback 01 .03 Unknown 01 .03 Canada Goose 04 .04 Tundra Swan .Q.3_ .03 06 .19 TOTAL 97 31 Broods Per Square Mile 1984 1985 % Change Dabbler 1.9 0.5 -74 Divers 1.1 0.4 -64 Geese .13 -100 Swans .10 .23 +130 Aerial brood surveys were not conducted in 1985 due to the extremely short season and increased demand on the refuge aircraft. ;Jf Towards the end of August, we surveyed staging areas once a week. Five complete surveys were flown from August 26 to September 23, 1985. Black brant, northern pintail, canada geese (lessers) and mallards dominated the staging populations in Nanvak Bay, Chagvan Bay and Osviak Slough (Table 15). Brant were first spotted on August 31 and were generally migrants that did not seem to spend much time in Chagvan Bay. Brant were the most abundant, with total sightings of 16,500 throughout the season and a peak observation of 6,500 birds documented on September 3. The later arriving emperor geese were first spotted on September 2 and steadily aggregated to a peak of 3,300 on September 6. TABLE 15 Fall Aerial Surveys of Waterfowl Staging Areas, Togiak NWR, 1985 DATE OF SURVEY August September 26 30 08 19 23 Species Canada Geese 1,200 1,135 10,400 225 448 Emperor Geese 10 1,125 31 W. Fronted 550 1,600 175 15 Black Brant 7,170 2,450 16,525 1,880 840 Mallard 4,500 7,220 4,300 480 920 Pintail 16,700 16,230 12,600 2,450 5,769 Scaup 1,825 500 85 WW Sooter 2,800 1,125 2,150 2,025 685 Black Sooter 100 500 10 Other species of noteworthy abundance recorded the fall of 1985 in Nanvak Bay were red breasted mergansers (1,500), pelagic cormorants (500), harlequin ducks (150), common eiders (150) and sandhill cranes (120). A significant molt migration of primarily adult male scoters of all three species (white-winged, surf, and black scoters) westward past Cape Peirce was documented in summer 1984. To determine the regularity of this migration and refine estimates of scoter passage, observations of the migration were conducted from July 5-15, 1985 at the Cape Peirce watch site. A total of 36 hours of watches were completed in this time period, and a total of 6732 scoters of all three species were counted moving westward. A summary of observations are presented in Table 16, along with comparative figures for 1984 during the same 11-day time span. JV TABLE 16 Year White-Winged Surf Black All Scoters ~~ 23,902 1038 656 15,620* (1/hr) (232) (17) (11) (261) ~~ 4,782 1149 801 6,732 (1/hr) (133) (32) (22) (187) * includes 34 unidentified scoters As revealed by the above results, rates of passage of scoters appeared to be lower in 1985. Whether these differences represent a real change is uncertain, due to several possible modifying factors. Differences in phenology may be partly responsible for the different rates, because delays in nesting by females may alter departure times of adult males from the breeding grounds, thereby delaying molt migration. Cold spring weather in 1985 over much of Alaska may have delayed the scoters. A more likely explanation, however, were the weather conditions during the July counts. Light and favorable winds prevailed in summer 1984, however in 1985, strong northwest winds were the rule, pushing westward migrating scoters farther offshore. Peak migration date (approximately 11 July) was comparable between years, but fewer scoters were counted in 1985, probably due to wind condition. The results confirm that the migration is indeed an annual event, consisting of all three scoter species, with white-winged scoters by far in greatest abundance. 4. Marsh and Waterbirds Species of this category that use the refuge as a migration stopover, feeding or nesting grounds include: Red necked and horned grebes; common, arctic, red throated and yellow billed loons; double crested, pelagic and red faced cormorants; and lesser sand hill crane. The most common of these species are the cranes, pelagic cormorants and red throated loons. Three commorant species and two species of loons (red throated and yellow billed) are found predominantly using the coastal and tidal areas, whereas the other species are scattered throughout the refuge fresh water and wet tundra habitat. During the spring and fall, sandhill cranes are frequently found in groups of 10 to 30 in the moist tundra habitat and along water bodies. Mazzone and Higgins counted 120 sandhills congregated around Nanvak Bay throughout September. During the nesting season, these birds dispersed, establishing their breeding territories. 5. Shorebirds, Gulls, Terns and Allied Species Of the 22 species of shorebirds known to pass through the refuge, the following have been observed on the refuge during the nesting season, either accompanied by broods or exhibiting nesting behavior: black-bellied plover, lesser golden plover, semi-palmated plover, bar-tailed godwit, whimbrel, black turnstone, ruddy turnstone, greater yellowlegs, red-necked phalarope, common snipe, short-billed dowitcher, western sandpiper, least sandpiper, pectoral sandpiper, and dunlin. In addition, groups of bristle-thighed curlews have been observed feeding in the tidal mudflats above the refuge coastline. Many shorebird species using the refuge are migrants, stopping in to feed and rest for short periods before continuing their migration. Some of these species come from wintering grounds in New Zealand, Japan and the South Pacific Islands. Most peeps (shorebirds) begin arr~v~ng upon spring break-up (late April/early May) and have headed south again by mid October. During two aerial surveys (September 19 and 23) of waterfowl staging areas, a casual estimate of peep numbers dropped from 8,550 on September 19 to 900 peeps on September 23. Steep sea cliffs along the coast of Cape Peirce north around Cape Newenham to Chagvan Bay provide valuable nesting habitat for numerous seabird colonies one of the most outstanding wildlife features on the refuge. Population estimates made in the late 1970's range from one to two million birds using the sea cliffs during nesting season. Common murres and black-legged kittiwakes are the most abundant of the cliff nesting seabirds. Other seabirds known to nest on these cliffs are: horned and tufted puffins; parakeet auklets; double-crested, pelagic, and red-faced cormorants; marbled murrelets, and pigeon guillemots. All species were present on June 6 when refuge volunteers established a field camp at Cape Peirce near Nanvak Bay. 60 A portion of the Cape Peirce sea cliffs which support nesting seabirds. Black-legged kittiwakes and common murres are evident in this photo. June, 1985/BH. In 1985 refuge volunteers instructed by Dale R. Herter (LGL, Research Associate) estimated nesting populations of common murres (20,300), black-legged kittiwakes (10,000), horned and tufted puffins (100) and pelagic cormorants (600), for a total of 31,000 birds nesting along the sea cliffs of Cape Peirce from Nanvak Bay to Shiak Island. .> These estimates were considerably lower than similar estimates made in the 1970's but comparable to sample plot estimates made in 1984. Due to recent concerns over an evident downward trend of several seabird populations in the Bering Sea, and the relatively long history of population and productivity census data from Cape Peirce; it will be very valuable to continue to monitor these populations in a consistent manner. Common murres exhibited courtship and mating behavior in early June. They spent most of the daylight hours rafted in groups of hundreds of birds. Nesting and egg laying began by June 16. The first young hatched on August 61 1 and primary wing feathers began to show as early as August 9th. All murres had vacated their colony cliffs and swam out to sea by August 29. Black legged kittiwakes began gathering nest material on June 10 and continued for 13 days. The birds used well defined flight paths as they carried their bounty from inland ponds to the cliffs. Mating was first observed on June 17 and young were first observed on July 28, with primary feathers appearing on August 3. By August 29 nearly all adult kittiwakes had left their nests only returning to roost at night from the mudflats of Nanvak Bay where they spent the day feeding and conversing. Kittiwake production at the Cape Peirce rookery was virtually zero in 1985 as in 1984. Only one immature bird was seen in both years. Volunteer Brian Higgins noted that many nests with eggs were abandoned on the cliffs in 1985. Other factors included egg-roll off and possibly a correlation with the depletion (increased harvesting effort) of Bristol Bay herring stock. Red-legged kittiwakes have also been observed during the spring and fall as migrants, but have not been found to nest on the refuge. Horned and tuffed puffins are both eloquent and awkward residents of the Cape. The largest concentrations of puffins were located on the east side of Cape Peirce. This is the same area (with the exception of Shaiak Island) in which kittiwake and murre numbers have declined. Horned puffins outnumbered tufted puffins by a ratio of 3:1. Puffins roosted in the uppermost regions of the cliffs, leaving the other seabirds in the lower portions. No information was obtained on productivity because of the puffins' habit of nesting in deep rock crevasse. Raven predation was probably lower on puffins than on other species because of this behavior. Pelagic cormorants, the largest in size of the seabirds on Cape Peirce, nested in the lowest regions of the cliffs. Nest building was complete when refuge personnel arrived on June 6. Cormorant young were the first of the seabirds to hatch. Eggs were first seen on June 18, as were many broken shells as a result of raven predation. On July 10, the first young were less than one week old. By July 31, primary, secondary, upperwing coverts and tail feathers had appeared on the largest chicks. 62 River. This proposal would bring the remainder of the· Goodnews River drainages, found within the refuge boundary, under the extra management protection afforded through wilderness designation. It would also provide that same protection to the watershed areas of Cape Newenham and Cape Peirce. This could become extremely important in the near future in protecting the segment of the ecosystem which helps support walrus, sea lions, and seal haul out areas, as well as extensive seabird nesting colonies found at both Cape Newenham and Cape Peirce. ) Sand sculptures at Cape Peirce : Part of the proposed wilderness area. lli 5/89 The existing wilderness area provides opportunities for local residents to engage in traditional subsistence activities such as hunting, fishing, berry picking, wood gathering, and trapping. The unique clear water rivers with diverse and abundant fisheries results in ever increasing demands for recreational sport fishing opportunities . Over the past five years many conflicts between refuge users have developed, often, these .> conflicts have occurred as a result of differing perspectives on appropriate wilderness management. Service policy within Region 7 is just beginning to address these issues, however there is still much work to be completed. I 63 not known to nest on the area. Twenty three (23) bald eagle nest sites have been located on the refuge to date. Initial nest location surveys are conducted during the winter, when deciduous trees are bare and the snow covered ground provides a good background for seeing the nests from an aircraft. A "Loran C" navigation radio is used to pinpoint the latitude and longitude of the nest location. That location is stored in the radio's memory for relocating the nest during the nesting season. Fifteen of the twenty three nests were relocated during the summer to determine if they were being used and if so, how many eaglets they contained. Nine nests were occupied and 6 were either unoccupied or abandoned. All but one of the occupied nests had two eaglets per nest, the one exception contained only a single eaglet. Bald eagle on nest in May. Dark nest structure against snow covered background aids observer in initial nest site location. May, 1985/MJL. Volunteers stationed at Kagati Lake discovered a golden eagle nest June 15 ~ in a rock cliff at the north end of the lake. Two eaglets were in the nest at the time of discovery and were banded on July 10 by Wildlife Biologist Mike Amaral from the Regional Office, Endangered Species Section. They fledged on or about August 6. This is the first confirmed golden eagle nest on the refuge. f 64 . ) Golden eagle fledglings on nest at Kagati Lake. July, 1985/SF. 7. Other Migratory Birds Passerine birds are abundant migrants from spring to fall. Species known to breed on the refuge include sparrows, juncos, lapland longspurs, common raven, snow buntings, magpies, gray jays, swallows, black capped and boreal chickadee, dipper, five species of thrushes (varied, gray-cheeked, swainson's, hermit and american robin), arctic warbler, ruby kinglet, yellow, white wagtails, water pipit, bohemian wax wings, several warbler species, rusty blackbird, common and hoary redpolls, finches, and white winged crossbills. Winter time residents include the redpolls, chickadees, crossbills, pine grosbeaks, gray jays, magpies and ravens. . Woodpeckers include the downy, hairy, three-toed and the common flicker • Belted kingfisher are also present and rely heavily on the abundance of fish on the refuge. 8 • Game Mammals Moose, caribou, brown and black bear, wolves and a variety of small game including snowshoe hare and tundra hare are found on the refuge. Wolves are rare visitors and black bear are not at all common on refuge lands. ) Caribou are known to utilize the northern and northeastern portions of the refuge as part of their normal range. Guides normally report a few moose on the Goodnews and Kanektok River drainages during the summer season each year. However, 1985 proved to be an exception with no moose or moose track sightings having been observed. No moose were reported to have been taken by non-native sport hunters in the refuge during 1985. Moose surveys flown during late April before break up only located 13 moose remaining from an estimated 27 on the refuge in early January. Later, 6 of those 13 were reported taken before break up prevented snow machine access to the interior. Moose are normally found in or near willow and alder lined streams and the cottonwood/balsam birch stands that are found adjacent to streams as well as on the dwarf willow and dwarf alder brush patches on hillsides above the river drainages. All moose observed this year were found in the Togiak River, Ongivinuk River, Trail Creek, Kulukak River and Weary River drainages. Brown bear are the most abundant big game animal found throughout refuge lands, and range from coastal beaches inland to high mountain ridges. Bear sightings by refuge staff during 1985 were higher than any season since the refuge was staffed in 1981. As was done during 1984, numerous attempts to conduct brown bear surveys on selected refuge streams were made during late June, July and early August. Once again, all attempts failed to produce a reliable repeatable population survey. Flights were conducted at daylight, late in the evening near dusk, and mid-day. More bears were located during the 1985 surveys than during 1984, however very few surveys could relocate those bears previously observed. Most of the observations occurred while over-flying the refuge conducting other missions. A total of 48 bears were observed during the spring and summer that the staff could be sure were not recounted either because of family size, colors, markings or location on the refuge. Family groups and ages of bears are as follows: Groups Observed Group Make Up Total 1 Sow+ 1 Cub 2 5 Sow + 2 Cubs 15 1 Sow + 3 Cubs 4 3 Sow + 2 Yrlgs 9 2 2 Year Old Prs 4 14 Singles 14 One black bear was observed late in June on the Nayorurun River drainage. No bear incidents were reported by our field camps or by refuge visitors this year. 66 9. Marine Mammals Coastal The marine estuaries of Bristol and Kuskokwim Bays that border the refuge, constitute one of the most productive marine systems in the world. Nutrient laden waters from the Pacific Ocean, marine upwellings and ground water runoff from the major river systems contribute to the high productivity of the bays and the Bering Sea. Rich in plankton and forage benthos, the bays support an intricate food chain of which marine mammals are the apex predator. The rich waters of the Bristol Bay coast, north of Cape Peirce near the mouth of Nanvak Bay. June, 1985/BH. Bristol Bay is a migration corridor for most of Alaska's marine mammals. Northern fur seals primarily migrate through the bay to feed. Walrus haul out on several islands in the bay and at Cape Peirce year-round. Four species of seal also winter in Bristol Bay along the ice edge. Of these, only the harbor and spotted seal inhabit the refuge coast all year. Steller's sea lions may be found year-round throughout the bay. The endangered gray whale migrates through Unimak Pass in the spring and hugs the Bristol Bay shoreline on its way north. An aerial survey of the Bristol Bay coastline in June estimated 130 gray whales from Kulukuk Bay to Cape Peirce. Refuge volunteers stationed at Cape Peirce noted that gray whales were sighted daily moving north along the coast from June 9-18. Group sizes range from singles to six whales with several groups containing calves. These later groups would generally hold over in the coastal waters feeding and resting before continuing up the coast. An apparent mishap was observed when a gray whale found itself amongst a group of walrus. When the water cleared, one walrus was fatally injured by the incident. Other whales that pass through Bristol Bay on their way to the Bering Sea are the minke and the endangered fin and humpback whales. Baird's beaked whale occasionally is found in the western third of the bay. The bowhead whale, another endangered species, remains on the loose edge of the ice pack, which extends south into Bristol Bay in winter. Belugas, killer whales, and harbor and Dall porpoise are common in the bay all year. Two groups of 3 and 4 killer whales were observed off of Cape Peirce on July 11 and 18. One of these groups did attack and harrass a walrus for 18 minutes with no verifiable results documented for either side. There are no estimates made of the population of killer whales using Bristol Bay. Beluga whales are one of the most abundant cetaceans in the North Pacific and are commonly found in areas of fish concentrations such as the mouths of rivers and in bays with high tidal fluctuations. When herring and capelin hit the beaches to spawn, or salmon smelt make their annual out migration or adult salmon begin to migrate to near shore water and river mouths-the belugas are not far behind. Herds up to 100 individuals, including calves, can be seen migrating along the coast. An estimate of over 200 belugas was made on a flight from Dillingham along Nushagak Bay to the Nushagak Peninsula on July 20. Large numbers of belugas have been known to calf in the shallows from the Igushik River to the Snake River in June and July. Steller sea lions are gregarious, highly mobile pinnipeds. They are the largest and most widely distributed otariid (eared seals adopted well for terrestrial locomotion) in the North Pacific. Sea lions are polygynous and gather annually at traditional rookeries to pup and breed. The adjacent Walrus Islands State Game Santuary is essentially the only remaining breeding ground supporting a population of 4-5,000 adults. The fish populations supported by the undeveloped refuge coast and rivers provides highly valuable feeding grounds for this population. The only documented haul out (a terrestrial resting area not used for breeding and calving) on the refuge exists at the western most tip of Cape Newenham. Refuge aerial surveys of this area have estimated a peak range of 200 to 275 adults using this haul out from 1981 to 1984 during April to September, usually peaking in May. Weather did not permit scheduled surveys in 1985. Sea lions usually begin using the haul out area in April and are seen feeding along the coast and in the bay channels with ice out and the shoreward migration of herring which occurs in May. Field camp personnel have observed sea lions and seals feeding heavily on herring in Chagvan Bay 68 during May and early June of 1984 and 1985. ) On a low tide on the night of June 2, 45 sea lions were hauled out on a I gravel bar adjacent to the main channel in Chagvan Bay. Activity of sea lions had been high leading up to this observation, with approximately 15 individuals using the bay each of the previous 5 days. On June 3, the day following the observation of the major haul out, all of the sea lions were dispersed from the bay by an onslaught of local hunters which sought to kill the animals. Since sea lions are not considered to be very edible, the hunters efforts were apparently for target practice. No kills or retrievals were observed, although several animals, sea lions and seal both, were seen with wounds and blood trails. Sea lions are rarely seen near the Cape Peirce walrus haul out at Nanvak Bay. Other pinnepeds include the following ice-associated species: ringed, bearded, spotted, harbor, and ribbon seals. These species occur from the northern Chukchi Sea to the Bering Sea. In the winter, all of these species occur along the ice edge in the northern portion of Bristol Bay. . ) During the summer months, as the ice pack recedes, only the spotted and harbor seals do not follow it northward. Much of the refuge coastline is utilized by these two similar species as they follow the concentrations of spawning herring, capelin or smelt. Spotted seals generally maintain a more northern range with Bristol Bay being the overlap of the two species. .' A harbor seal pup hauled out on a sand bar at low tide in Nanvak Bay. July, 1985/WSM. 69 Several areas are used as haul out sites. The only major haul out site in northern Bristol Bay for harbor and spotted seal is in Nanvak Bay. Harbor seals comprise 90% of the total. Some seal pups are born in Nanvak in June and July. This is considered to be the northern most pupping colony of harbor seals. Population numbers during this time were estimated to be 250 with approximately 90 new pups being born in 1985. The population generally peaks during the molt in August and September when it is believed that the seals need to go aground. Peak population estimates at the Nanvak Bay haul out have declined in recent years from a high in 1981 of 3,000; 1,500 in 1982; 600 in 1983; 698 in 1984 and 450 individuals estimated in 1985. During this same time period, walrus haul out numbers in the Cape Peirce area has increased. There has been no documented interaction between the walrus herd and the seals and it's believed that other factors are at work. There is a possibility that other areas are receiving increased use as seal haul outs and the overall population has not declined. Only minor incidental seal haulouts are known at this time. These exist at Tvativak Bay, Kulukak Bay, Cape Constantine, Hagemeister Island, the Walrus Islands, Cape Newenham, Security Cove, Chagvan Bay, and the offshore sand bars near Quinhagak and Jacksmith Bay. Generally all these haul outs coincide with and are adjacent to areas of herring and capelin spawning. On May 28, thirty (30) harbor seals were feeding in the channel of Chagvan Bay on an incoming tide. Herring spawning activity was also high at this time. ADF&G surveys estimated a peak of herring spawning biomass occurring on May 26. It is unknown where the harbor seals that haul out in Nanvak and Kuskokwim Bay during the summer go in the winter when the ocean freezes. It is possible that they move to the major hauling grounds on the Alaska Peninsula. If this is true, it would represent the longest known regular season movement by harbor seals. The Pacific Walrus population is characterized by extensive seasonal migrations. Female walruses (and some of the males) maintain an association with the pack ice by migrating between the Chukchi Sea and the Bering Sea as the pack ice advances in the autumn and recedes in the spring. However, after the breeding season (December to March), a portion of the male walruses remain in ice free portions of the Bering and Chukchi Seas. Rather than resting on ice, these males utilize traditional terrestrial locations. Every year since 1978, walruses have been reported hauled out on the refuge in the region between Cape Peirce and Security Cove. Most sightings have been on the north side of Cape Newenham. Most of this haul out activity seemed to occur in April to June and usually involves from a few up to 500 animals. An unusually large sighting of 2,500 hauled out at Cape Peirce (south of Cape Newenham) was first reported in November 1981. Since that time, Cape Peirce has become re-established as a major walrus haul out. Its importance has begun to rival the Walrus Islands, Alaska State Game Santuary, set aside to protect a resting place for the walrus. 70 Members of the walrus bachelor party on the beach at Cape Peirce. September, 1985/\olSM. During the summers of 1983, 84 and 85, the Bristol Bay walrus populations were characterized by major distribution changes. The peak number of walruses hauled out at Round Island declined from estimates of past years. From 1975 to 1982, peak haul outs were approximately 10,000 to 12,000 walruses at Round Island. During 1983, maximum haul out numbers fell to approximately 6,000 animals, 7,500 (1984) and 5,650 (1985). Simultaneously, large numbers of walruses were observed at Cape Peirce (Togiak NWR) throughout the summer months of 1983, 84 and 85. These three (3) years revealed extensive use of the haul out by walruses in numbers of approximately 6,000 (1983), 9,000 (1984), and 12,500 (1985) • .• The peak of 12,548 animals hauled out at Cape Peirce occurred on July 27, 1985. The corresponding counts for this date at Round Island was 2,460 animals. The peak at Round Island of 5,650 occurred on June 29. There were only 370 animals hauled out at Cape Peirce on this date. 10. Other Resident Wildlife Willow ptarmigan are common on the refuge. Flocks of several thousand birds are commonly observed in the dwarf willow and alder thickets on mountain sides, as well as in the alder thickets along interior rivers and 71 lakes. A hoary marmot dressed in top hat and gloves, posing for a photo at Caple Peirce. July, 1985/BH. Furbearers, such as beaver, river otter, weasel, mink, red fox, and wolverine are often observed on the refuge. Wolf and lynx, although uncommon, are occasionally seen on refuge lands. Other rare occurrences of southwest Alaska resident species such as tundra hare and arctic fox, usually take place north of the Cape Newenham area on the refuge. Other mammals include parka squirrels, hoary marmots, porcupine, and snowshoe hare. 11. Fishery Resources The refuge, located on the northern side of Bristol Bay, contributes . significantly to the salmon stocks in this world renowned salmon producing . region. Refuge streams and rivers support anadromous runs of all 5 species of pacific salmon; chinook Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (Walbaum); chum, Q. keta (Walbaum); sockeye, Q nerka (Walbaum); pinks, Q. gorbusoha (Walbaum) and coho, Q kisutch (Walbaum). In addition, anadromous runs of dolly varden, Salvelinus malma (Walbaum) and resident populations of rainbow trout, Salmo gairdneri (Richardson); lake trout Salvelinus namaycush (Walbaum); grayling, Thymallus arcticus (Pallas); artie char, Salvelinus alpinus (Linneaus); pike, Esoc Lucus (Linneaus); burbot Lota lota (Linneaus) and whitefish, Coregonus Sp. contribute to both subsistence and sport harvests from the refuge waters. I~ Populations of numerous other species exist in the 1000's of unnamed sloughs, ponds, lakes, tundra streams, and rivers. However little or no information is known about their numbers or distribution. Subsistence fishing is significant within the refuge in terms of fish utilized, especially by watershed residents who fish for personal consumption as well as for dog food. This would include native and non-native Alaskan residents who live within or adjacent to the refuge, and harvest both the salmon species during escapement, and native species of resident fish. The effort required to obtain a subsistance catch of salmon has decreased proportionally with the exchange of traditional fishing methods for the more efficient nylon gillnet, outboard motor, and skiff. There are many fish camps that dot the refuge rivers where signs of the old and the new can be readily observed. Under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), the creation of refuges and parks was not to change in anyway this life-style. The Act specifically addresses this issue in Section 804 ••. "the taking on public lands of fish and wildlife for nonwasteful subsistence uses shall be accorded priority over the takiP~ on such lands of fish and wildlife for other purposes." Therefore in the event that it is necessary to restrict the taking of populations of fish and wildife on refuge lands, the subsistence users will be afforded the priority of use of any surplus not needed to maintain viable healthy populations. Subsistence fishermen generally have specific periods of the year when harvests occur. These generally coincide with the availability of the salmon, as they enter the rivers. Resident freshwater species are generally sought for fresh protein during the winter or in some cases when they are concentrated such as on spawning grounds during the spring. Most subsistence fishermen in the Village of Togiak, Goodnews, Twin Hills and Manokotak obtain the required subsistence permit from the ADF&G Subsistence Division or agents in each village. On the permit, they generally indicate what they need of each species, and then at the end of the year, return the forms stating actual harvest. Subsistence personnel from the ADF&G also travel to the villages to collect the unreturned permits and interview those not responding. Kuskokwim Bay villages (Goodnews Bay, Quinhagak and Platinum) by contrast are not required to have subsistence permits and are surveyed during the season (Table 17). This information is very important in the over all management of refuge fishery resource, since subsistence uses are given priority. Since the late 1800's, commercial fishing has been the mainstay of the economy in communities adjacent to the refuge. In recent years, this economy has spread to all villages located within the refuge boundaries and also accounts for the primary source of income for their residents. Salmon stocks bound for refuge waters are currently managed by two Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) commercial fisheries offices. The Bethel office, located north of the refuge, is responsible for the stocks bound for the western portion of the refuge or the Kuskokwim Bay which contains two fishing districts. District 4, Quinhagak, centers on the Kanektok River and runs from the Arolic River to the Oyak River District 5, encompasses all of Goodnews Bay. The Dillingham office manages fish stocks bound for the Togiak and Nushagak districts on the refuge. The Togiak district, encompassed fully on the refuge, and two sections of the Nushagak district target fish bound for refuge rivers. TABLE 17 Togiak/Kuskokwim Bay Subsistence Salmon Fishery Harvest (Preliminary Estimates) Families Permits Harvest per Species (Extrapolated) Village Surveyed Returned King Red Coho Pink Chum Total Quinhagak 47 2341 106 67* 1 901 3416 Goodnews Bay 13 426 704 221* 2 348 1701 Platinum 3 27 142 11 9 189 Togiak 32 570 3434 1464 83 983 6534 Twin Hills (prelim. Est) 1 100 480 205 12 110 907 Manokotak 25 409 3123 52 17 3601 Totals 115 58 3873 7989 2020 98 2368 16348 * Surveyed prior to major run. These two Kuskokwim districts are relatively new and commercial harvest records do not extend prior to 1968. At that time, the fishery was opened by emergency order due to public pressure and the determination of a harvestable salmon surplus by ADF&G surveys. Commercial catches from these districts have been sporadic due to inclement weather and inconsistent processing capabilities. Depressed salmon stocks during the 1960's and early 1970's also impacted these fisheries. During 1985, commercial fishing opened in Districts 4 and 5 on June 20 with a 12 hour period. The schedule remained on two 12 hour periods per week during the chinook run. On the 15th of July, both districts were closed due to poor sockeye and chum escapement. The fisheries reopened again on August 1st and three 12 hour periods per week were allowed for the coho run starting August 12th. Both districts closed by regulation on September 6. The harvest for these districts was generally lower than the previous 5 year average (Tables 18 and 19). These rivers do not have large sockeye runs that are prevelant in the Bristol Bay districts where large lake systems support the majority of the sockeye spawning. The Kanektok River, however, does support a fairly large coho run, but total escapement numbers are not enumerated by the sonar or tower counts of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game as with the other salmon species. Aerial surveys are normally used to estimate coho escapements, however, during 1985 weather did not allow for aerial surveys. ,.. TABLE 18 Commercial and Subsistence Salmon Catch and Escapement Data for District 4 - Quinhagak 1985 Species Red ~ Pink Total Comm'l Harvest 7,876 30,401 29,992 20,418 28 5-Yr Average Harvest 1980- 1984 16 '744 27,411 70,326 45,230 10,017 Subsistence Harvest/1 106 2,341 67 901 1 Escapement 6,259 35,755 1,876* 15,325 2 Total Run 14,241 68,497 --- * 36,644 29 Ex Vessel Value $32,885 $377,049 $127,862 $37,238 $575,038 * Coho escapement and subsistence is preliminary - sonar unit pulled before the major runs/aerial surveys not flown. Encompases the Oyak Creek, Kanektok River and Arolic River. /1 Preliminary figures, subsistence survey conducted prior to coho run. /2 Pink run occurs on even years to these rivers. (? TABLE 19 Commercial and Subsistence Salmon Catch and Escapement Data for District 5 - Goodnews Bay 1985 Species Red King Coho Chum Pink Total Comm' Harvest 6,998 5,793 16,498 4,784 8 5-Yr. Average Harvest 19 80- 1984 26,994 8,345 40,105 12,065 3,445 Subsistence Harvest/! 704 426 221 348 2 Escapement 50,481 7,979 1* 25,025 Total Run 57,883 14,198 * 30,157 Ex Vessel Value $27,483 $89,194 $79,457 $ 8,830 $ 3 $204,967 Coho escapement and total run not calculated, counting tower * personnel removed prior to coho run. 1/ Preliminary figures subsistence harvest survey conducted prior to major coho run. Commercial catch and escapement figures for the Togiak District and the Igushik section of the Nushagak district indicate fairly large runs to these rivers (Tables 20 and 21). These districts both have large lake systems which support larger sockeye runs. The Igushik section also supports runs of other species, however, they are minimal in comparison to the sockeye run and are not enumerated by ADF&G. The total sockeye harvest in Bristol Bay for 1985 was 23,619,000 down from 1984's harvest of 24,684,053. The total Bristol Bay sockeye runs for 84 and 85 were 41 million and 37.7 million (preliminary) respectively. The Togiak District, Igushik and Snake sections of the Nushagak district contributed approximately 1.6% of the total Bristol Bay harvest, which, however, was approximately 25% of the sockeye harvest for the westside of Bristol Bay in 1985. I u TABLE 20 Commercial and Subsistence Salmon Catch and Escapement Data for Togiak District, 1985 (Preliminary Figures) (ADF&G) Species Reds ~ Coho Chums Pink Total Harvest 210,470 37,535 39,176 206,370 341 493 '712 Escapement 136,542 14 ,290 61,300 212,000 + Goal 150,000 15,000 Subsistence 4,000 1,000 2,000 1,000 200 Total Run 351,012 52,825 102,471 419,370 541+ Ex Vessel Value $1,108,124 $717,293 $229,767 $495,288 $491 $2,550,963 * Includes Togiak, Kulukak, Quigmy, Matogak, and Osviak Rivers TABLE 21 Commercial and Subsistence Salmon Catch and Escapement Data for the Igushik Section, 1985 (Preliminary Figures ADF&G) Species Reds ~ Coho Chums Pink Total Harvest-comm's 179,000 Escapement 212,454 + + + + Sub. Harvest 3 '123 409 52 17 3,601 Total Run 394,527 Ex. Vessel Value 942,435 The Togiak district is very important to Bristol Bay's coho fishery. Beginning in approximately 1977, late season markets became available and fishermen started targeting coho. From 1977 to 1985, coho catches almost tripled those for early year (1893-1922) peak level periods. During this period, the Togiak District produced approximately 28% of the total coho harvest in Bristol Bay (ADF&G). Average Coho Harvest 1977-1985 Naknek-Kvichak 5,000 (2%) Egegik 30,000 (10%) Ugashik 29,000 (10%) Nushagak 146,000 (50%) Togiak 82,000 (28%) Total Bristol Bay 296,000 r r The Togiak district is also distinct in that it generally produces a larger average sized coho, sockeye, chum, and pink salmon than the other Bristol Bay districts. King salmon average weight, however, has been generally smaller than most other Bristol Bay districts. Herring Pacific herring are known to spawn in the various coves and bays along the entire refuge coastline. They have long been utilized for subsistence purposes, and have more recently been exploited commercially. Herring are also an important link in the entire food chain of Bristol Bay. There are three major areas of herring spawning activity, and an associated commercial fishery that lie within the refuge coastline. The three areas are Togiak Bay, Goodnews Bay, and Security Cove. The southern coast of the refuge, the Togiak Bay area, is the only commercial herring fishery in Bristol Bay. It was started in 1967, and maintained a low profile, averaging only 1-3 processors, 24 gillnet operators, and an occasional purse seiner through 1975. Due to a decline in world herring stocks, subsequent reduction in offshore foreign trawling, elimination of the Alaska coastal near-shore Japanese gillnet fishing, and the increasing markets for herring, the interest in harvesting Alaska herring stocks increased significantly in 1977. As a result of this increased interest, the Togiak District experienced such an increase in effort that the Alaska Board of Fisheries responded by creating the present commercial fishing districts at Security Cove and Goodnews Bay, on the west coast of the refuge. Herring started spawning on the Togiak grounds on May 20, several weeks later than in 1984. Aerial surveys by ADF&G biologists revealed a total of 44 linear miles of milt was observed in 141 spawn sightings in the Togiak District during 1985. The commercial fishery opened on May 23, several days later than 1984 and two weeks later than in 1983. It consisted of only two commercial openings, a total of 11 hours for gillnetters and 3 hours for purse seiners. Although purse seiners fished less time, they accounted for 21,168 short tons (2,000 pounds/st.), nearly 83% of the total harvest (Table 22). Gillnetters brought in 4,448 short tons for a total harvest of 25,616 tons in 1985. This was the second largest harvest in the 17-year Togiak history, even though effort was down for purse seiners. Total efforts in Togiak District included: 155 purse seiners, 302 gillnetters, and 23 buyers. 78 Seiner in Togiak District stirring up bottom muds during a set. May, 1985/MJL. :- -- .• The Togiak herring fishery in the Bristol Bay area creates the 7th largest city in Alaska. During 1985, over 4,200 people participated in the mass confusion. May, 1985/MJL. I I ;I TABLE 22 Estimated Biomass and Commercial Harvest of Pacific Herring in the Togiak District 1978-1985 (ADF&G) % Harvest/Gear BioMass Harvest Waste Total Gill Purse $xl000 Expl. Year Est (st) Catch (st) (st) Nets Seines Roe% Value Rate 1978 190,300 7,734 7,734 08 92 8.2 2,300 4.1 1979 239,000 11,558 11,558 40 60 8.6 6,700 4.7 1980 68 '700 18,886 5,700 24,586 16 84 9.2 3,205 35.8 1981 158,600 12,542 30 12,572 18 82 9.1 3,988 7.9 1982 97,900 21,489 380 21,869 31 69 8.8 6,174 22.3 1983 141,800 26,287 600 26,887 19 81 8.8 10,517 19.0 1984 114,900 19,300 170 19,470 25 75 9.8 7,178 16.9 1985 131,400 25,616 250 25,866 17 83 9.6 13,841 19.7 St = Short Ton = 2,000 pounds) The roe-on-kelp (rockweed) harvest consists of hand-gathering and hand-raking kelp that is covered with herring roe deposits. Beginning in 1968, coupled with the herring fishery, this harvest has grown into a productive and valuable harvest in Alaska (see Table 23). The 1985 herring roe-on-kelp season was planned, however, samples indicated egg coverage was less than optimal. Buyers grading the samples indicated they would only purchase a small amount of top quality product. Subsequent samples indicated a silt contamination on the eggs due to a storm and the season was cancelled to prevent wastage. uv TABLE 23 Commercial Harvest of Roe-on-Kelp in the Togiak District (ADF&G) Harvest In Numbers of Metric Tons Year Processors Fishermen Deliveries Pounds (2205 lb/ton) 1968 1 1 6 54,600 25 1969 1 3 20 10,125 5 1970 1 5 23 38,885 18 1971 1 12 43 51,795 23 1972 1 12 32 64,165 29 1973 1 10 11 11,596 5 1974 3 26 49 125,646 57 1975 2 44 98 111,087 50 1976 5 49 118 295,780 134 1977 5 75 226 275,774 125 1978 11 160 349 329,858 150 1979 16 100 228 414,727 188 1980 21 78 186 189,662 86 1981 7 108 277 378,207 172 1982 8 214 167 234,924 107 1983 4 125 257 270,866 123 1984 6 330 412 407,587 184 1985 Cancelled 17 Yr. Total 94 1,352 2,542 3,264,254 1,481 17 Yr. Avg. 6 80 150 192,015 87 (Excludes 1985) The 1985 season for the Togiak District produced a record economic return for herring fishermen, almost doubling the return of 1984 (Table 24). VI TABLE 24 Ex-Vessel Value of the 1985 Togiak Herring Fishery (ADF&G) Weight Per Short Ton Produce (2000 lb/ton) Cost per Ton Total Sac Roe Herring 25,338 $546.40* $13,834,548 Food/Bait Herring 278 149.00 41,422 Capelin Small fish size not acceptable fishery did not materialize Roe-On-Kelp Cancelled Estimated Total Value $13,875,970 *Based on estimated average roe content of 9.6%, on sliding scale value to fishermen from all companies. Capelin, a member of the smelt family, just may be as abundant as herring, and is an important food source. It is becoming increasingly popular as a commercially harvestable species in the Togiak District. This year, three companies expressed a serious intent to harvest a quantity of capelin, but for a variety of reasons, none of the fishing ventures proved successful. One company took several catch samples, and the number of individual capeline was 75 compared to 45 fish per unit in 1984. The small size was not marketable and the fishery ceased. On the west coast of the refuge the commercial herring fishery is contained within two districts--Goodnews Bay and Security Cove. Since 1978, after the first season, the use of purse seiners has been prohibited. No roe-on-kelp harvest is allowed, and the herring harvest guidelines have been increased from 350 to 750 metric tons in Goodnews Bay. The fishery has been relatively unrestricted in that fishermen are allowed to transfer from the Bristol Bay Togiak District fishery to the Kuskokwim Bay fishery; however, this is not the case for the Goodnews Bay fishery (district), which is established for exclusive use by local resident commercial fishermen from Goodnews Bay, Platinum, and Quinhagak. The herring season in Goodnews opened on May 26, and ran until May 31, with a total of 130 fishing hours. Of the 724 metric tons of herring harvested by 78 fishermen, the average roe content was 8.7% (Table 25). There were five processor/buyers in the area, and all of them imposed an 8% minimum roe content restriction on the herring they bought. The commercial herring season in the Security Cove District opened on May 26, running until June 1, with a total of 3 fishing periods totaling 125 vc... hours. Participation consisted of 33 fishermen harvesting 703 short tons of herring which had an average 10.1% roe recovery (Table 25). TABLE 25 Estimated Biomass and Commercial Harvest of Pacific Herring in the Goodnews and Security Districts 1978-1986 (All Gillnets) Est. Est. Biomass Harvest Value Exp. Rate Yr. Dist. (st) Catch Waste Total Roe% (~xlOOO) (~) 78 GN 400 sc 1300 286 286 8.8 78 22.0 79 GN 7400 90 90 4.7 39 1.2 sc 21500 424 424 8.5 327 2.0 80 GN 1200 448 448 9.5 97 37-3 sc 2100 697 697 8.2 151 58.1 81 GN 4300 657 657 7.7 196 15.3 sc 8300 1173 1173 8.1 347 14.1 82 GN 2600 486 486 9.5 188 18.7 sc 5100 813 813 9.3 271 15.9 83 GN 3200 435 435 9.4 185 13.6 sc 6400 1073 1073 9.4 443 16.8 84 GN 4100 667 50 717 10.1 168 17.5 sc 5100 325 10 335 11.8 110 6.6 85 GN 4300 724 724 8.7 309 16.8 sc 4900 703 30 733 10.1 355 15.0 GN = Goodnews sc = Security Cove H. PUBLIC USE 1. General Seven villages are located within the refuge boundary or adjacent to the refuge. Quinhagak, Goodnews Bay, and Platinum border on Kuskokwim Bay; Togiak, Twin Hills, Dillingham, and Manokotak border on Bristol Bay. These seven villages contain an estimated 3,788 residents, an increase of 116 people over 1984 according to the 1985 population census (Table 26). TABLE 26 VILLAGE POPULATION GROWTH Goodnews Twin Year Quinhagak Bay Platinum Togiak Hills Manokotak Dillingham 1930 71 1939 224 45 278 1940 10 1950 194 100 72 108 120 577 1960 228 154 43 220 149 424 1965 20 1970 340 218 55 383 67 214 914 1980 412 168 55 470 70 294 1,563 1981 448 173 58 513 75 300 1,656 1982 427 173 57 507 75 299 1, 791 1983 477 215 59 545 76 299 1,896 1984 424 234 59 554 76 299 2,026 1985 451 234 59 556 79 309 2,100 Residents of these villages (except Dillingham) exhibit a high degree of subsistence utilization and dependence, although precise harvest data is unavailable. The Kuskokwim Bay villages concentrate their commercial fishing and subsistence activities north of Cape Newenham, generally utilizing Bethel as their transportation, service, social, and political center. The western Bristol Bay communities focus their commercial fishing and subsistence activities east of Cape Newenham to the Nushagak River, and utilize Dillingham as a center for transportation, service, social, and political needs. Marine mammal hunting for several species of seal and an occasional walrus is a significant component of subsistence activities in the Togiak NWR coastal villages. This is due in part to the traditional maritime orientation, as well as the relative scarcity of moose and caribou in the vicinity of these villages. Residents of Dillingham make less use of subsistence products due to a combination of factors, including a relatively high cash income per capita (by regional standards). Dillingham is a rapidly growing community which serves as the regional center, and the focal point for transportation on a year around basis, and for all other services during the summer fishing season. A small portion (approximately 36%) of refuge recreational use is generated by residents of the remaining six villages as they pursue their subsistence lifestyles. Large tracts of land selected and conveyed to village corporations or individuals around village sites, fish camps, and hunting camps, provide a respectable buffer zone between village and refuge lands for subsistence purposes. Villagers will travel beyond their conveyed lands to refuge lands during the winter, when snow and ice conditions permit travel by snow machine or, to a lesser extent, by boat up the rivers near each village. The amount of travel by boat appears to be dictated by commercial fishing season closures more than any other factor. The majority of non-rural resident public use on refuge lands during May through September consists of sport fishing, river rafting, and big game hunting, guided and/or unguided. A few visitors utilize coastal portions of the refuge for photography, wildlife observation, and waterfowl hunting. 1· Other Interpretive Programs Several small information workshops were held in the Dillingham area by refuge staff. RM Fisher and volunteer Scott Farling held a mini course for the Dillingham Outdoor Education class on fly casting techniques and equipment needs. There were approximately 20, 9-12th grade students in attendance. Volunteer Farling and BT Lisac held a community fly tying session in the spring. Ten residents pulled their vices out of the closet to meet and learn to tie popular patterns such as the egg fly, polar shrimp and the muddler. The local Cub Scout pack and the Dillingham gun club were involved in RM Fisher's waterfowl identification workshop and a presentation of the two fish and wildlife produced videos entitled "Lead Poisoning of Waterfowl" and "Status of Ducks 1985". Probably the number one refuge interpretive program that took place after the 1985 season did not occur on the refuge or even in Alaska. It seems that as soon as our volunteers returned home they were flooded with requests from university classes, local clubs and primary school class rooms to give slide shows and presentations on Alaska and the Togiak Refuge. Most all of the 1985 volunteers keep in touch on a regular basis and keep us informed on their activities. To date, approximately 12 different presentations have been given by some of the 10, 1985 volunteers. One of the major benefits we have realized from this is the outstanding recruitment job this accomplishes. Quite a few volunteer inquires have come with referrals and recommendations. 8. Hunting Local rural residents engage in waterfowl and small game hunting, as well as a limited amount of big game hunting for moose, bear, and caribou on refuge lands. Aerial surveys of spring waterfowl subsistence hunting camps indicate hunting between Kulukuk Bay and Asigyukpak Spit remained the same in 1985 as 1984 - which was 21 hunting camps. Chagvan Bay had three (3) camps during the spring hunt. Approximately nine (9) parties or 18 hunters traveled via boat or all terrain vehicles (ATV) down the beach from Platinum, to participate in short waterfowl hunts. These hunters spent a total of 31 use days on the hunt at Chagvan Bay. Fall waterfowl hunting pressure on the refuge was light again this year, as most of the migrating birds moved rapidly through the area. Mallards and pintails were the predominant species in the hunters' bags. Very few non-resident hunters (those people not living in the immediate vicinity of refuge lands) travel to the refuge for waterfowl, upland game birds, or 0:;.1 small game hunting. One big game guide reported guiding a total of 6 hunters on refuge lands during the 1985 spring and fall hunting seasons. Sixty (60) hunter use days were invested, to bring in a total of three (3) brown bear, all of which came from the Kulukak River drainage. Residents of each of the six refuge associated villages harvest marine mammals throughout the year. This activity is primarily directed towards harbor or spotted seals that are concentrated near coastal fish spawning grounds. It is nearly impossible to obtain big game harvest information from local rural resident hunters (village hunters). Reports are usually obtained during the course of general conversation with non-native village residents or information gleaned from casual conversations with village residents. The village residents are very reluctant to reveal their big game harvest data because much of the harvest usually occurs during closed season or in units on the refuge closed by state regulation. Never-the-less, unconfirmed reports of big game taken by village residents are as follows: LOCAL RURAL RESIDENT BIG GAME HARVEST (UNCONFIRMED) Big Game SQecies/Year Village Moose Brown Bear Caribou 19 82/19 83/ 19 84 I 19 85 1982/1983/1984/1985 1982/1983/1984/1985 Goodnews u 5 2 2 u u u 19 u u u 20 Manokotak u u u 7 3 u u 4 u u u u Platinum u u u u u u u u u u u u Togiak 8 6 8 13 u u u 7 u u u 44 Twin Hills u u u u u u u u u u u u Quinhagak 3 9 4 2 5 9 3 2 u u u 60 U = Unknown No reports were available on how many bear, moose or caribou were taken by Platinum or Twin Hills. 9. Fishing Sportfishing for resident and anadromous fish in rivers and lakes on Togiak NWR is considered excellent and supports the major visitor use. Fishing opportunities include all 5 species of pacific salmon, rainbow trout, burbot, whitefish, pike, grayling, lake trout, Dolly Varden, char, cod, flounder and others. These fish are generally sought at different times of the year with the majority of the use occuring during the summer. Subsistence users from the local villages using fishing methods such as jigging through the ice (for trout, Dolly Varden, cod and flounder) and fishing with rod/reel and gill nets (for trout, pike, salmon) during the ice free season, account for the majority of the fish taken from the streams and lakes. 86 . \ Subsistence fishermen harvesting spawned out sockeye salmon from Togiak Lake. Refuge File Slide. Due to the wilderness nature and/or status of the majority of the refuge, access is primarily by boat or plane. Approximately 21 guides offer sportfishing packages of various types to guests from all over the world. These sportfishing packages range from $1200-3400 for 6-10 day fishing excursions into the wilds. Fishing trips include float trips; tent base camps on the rivers and full lodge accommodations located off the refuge, with daily fly-in fishing to the various rivers and lakes. .' I 87 . ) Deluxe tent base camp on the Togiak River. Guides use motor boats to access various river segments from these camps. July, 1985/MJL. Operating under the Special Use Permit system, the guides are required to report use at the end of the season. Twelve guides operated on the Kanektok River system and reported accommodating 611 clients for a total of 4,121 client use days. Nine (9) guides operated on the Goodnews system and reported accommodating 327 clients for a total of 1,762 client use days. The Togiak River system was also used by 9 guides who reported 2,269 ) clients, for a total of 5,141 client use days. Total guided fishermen use days on the refuge was 11,024 for all river systems. Unguided use accounted for approximately 17-20% more use, bringing the refuge total to approximately 13,300 use days. The Kanektok River supports a large sportfishery for salmon in the lower river and a rainbow, Dolly Varden, and grayling fishery throughout the river. Approximately half of the use on the river is by float trip users. p\ / 88 King salmon are one of the premier species in the refuge Rivers. August, 1985/DAF. Two fishermen trying their luck on the Goodnews River. August, 1985/DAF. ) / f 89 The Goodnews River system (south, middle forks and main river) is the least used of the major river systems. This river, however, has an excellent ) population of rainbow trout and grayling and has good runs of kings, cohos, chums, sockeye, pinks and dolly varden, making it an excellent stream to fish. Several guides operate on this system, offering deluxe tent camps with jet boats for river trips or fly-in clients to the lakes to start float-trips. . ) Jet boats are used to run fishermen up and down the Goodnews River. July, 1985/DAF. A large portion of this river falls outside of the refuge, and use on this ) area is not monitored by the refuge. Only a small amount of creel information was gathered from the fishermen using this river system. The Togiak River also supports a large sportfishery with fly in groups constituting the majority of the use. Coho salmon runs into the Togiak River are generally later than other Bristol Bay drainages. For this reason, guides target the other rivers for kings and cohos and then when the coho run into the Togiak River, they bring their clients primarily to this river. A creel census on a portion of the users of the Togiak River was gathered through voluntary creel forms issued to guides and their clients and some unguided floaters. These survey forms were either mailed back to the refuge at the end of the season or were picked up from the guides. In addition, two float trips were conducted on the river gathering creel information from the various anglers encountered. f 90 . ) Floaters and fly-in day fishermen often meet, sometimes spoiling the wilderness experience of the floaters. July, 1985/MJL. The value of the sportfishery on the Togiak River, based on the guides reported level of use, was estimated at approximately $1,623,270 for 1985. The refuge, however, is having trouble verifying the guides reported use. This value, and the reported use figures, should be taken as preliminary figures only until such time that their use can be accurately measured. 10. Trapping Trapping on refuge lands that adjoin village corporation lands is common when winter snow and ice conditions permit snowmachines or three wheeler ATV travel. The interior portions of the refuge receive relatively light trapping pressure and should be characterized as small mammal hunting or small game hunting by snowmachine and rifle, rather than trapping. Special Use Permits for trapping are not yet required on Togiak NWR. During the past several years, the amount of aerial hunting for fur bearers appears to be increasing. As a result of this activity the wolverine population on the refuge appears to be declining steadily based on the numbers of wolverine observed per hour flying time over interior refuge lands. However, solid quantative data is not available. The wolverine seems to be the principal animal pursued by this type of activity, but a few land otter, fox and wolf are porbably taken incidental to the hunt. ) State regulation requires that the hunter/trapper land before attemptiqg to shoot any furbearers. 91 ) Red fox gathering herring carcasses off the beach at Chagvan Bay. Besides beaver, this is the most commonly sought after furbearer. May, 1985/MJL. It is estimated that the villages of Quinhagak, Goodnews Bay, Platinum, Togiak, Twin Hills, and Manokotak field approximately 85 trappers each year. ADF&G estimates show refuge streams to have an average of 1.0 beaver caches per mile of stream surveyed, well below the 1984 survey average of 1.5 beaver caches per mile of stream surveyed. Refuge Furbearer Inventory ) Plans call for beaver cache stream surveys, when manpower and funds permit. These will be conducted in cooperation with ADF&G. No beaver cache surveys were conducted this year by refuge staff. Generally speaking, refuge furbearer population levels are unknown and total harvest data is unavailable. Many furbearers harvested by subsistence users are not tagged or reported to ADF&G unless the trappers intend to sell the pelts. Beaver, weasel, river otter, mink, and fox are the most commonly trapped animals on refuge lands, although a few wolverine and an occasional lynx are taken each year. ADF&G tagged or otherwise recorded furbearer harvests of 598 beaver, 7 lynx, 90 land otter and 6 wolverine taken in the Togiak River drainage and all drainagegs on the refuge lying east of the Togiak River. The Goodnews River and Kanektok River drainages yielded 14 beaver and 31 land otter hides that were tagged by the ADF&G office in Bethel. Fur buyers reported that fur quality was down considerably this year. 92 probably due to the unusually mild winter weather that southwest Alaska experienced. 11. Wildlife Observation In the past, wildlife observation was incidental to other activities usually associated with river float trips and sport fishing or hunting. The walrus haulout at Cape Peirce is capturing the attention of would be refuge visitors who are making inquiries about travel to the Cape with increasing frequency. Travel to the Cape is difficult at best because of inclement weather and its remote location. In addition, it is very expensive to charter aircraft to the Cape. Private aircraft overflying the Cape continue to cause a disturbance problem with the walrus haul out. Recent contact with the local FAA Flight Service stations should help alleviate this problem. Approximately 860 visits to the refuge and 1720 activity hours were estimated for wildlife observation during 1985. 12. Other Wildlife Oriented Recreation Photography is usually done in conjunction with hunting, fishing, and wildlife observation. We estimated 50 visits and 260 activity hours in 1985. Subsistence food gathering consists mostly of berry and greens picking. An estimated 600 visits and 2,400 activity hours on refuge lands occurred during 1985, which is up considerably from 1984. The increased use is probably due to an excellent tundra berry crop production this year. 13. Camping Nearly all non-rural resident use on the refuge involves camping, with the majority of camping activity directly related to sport fishing and hunting. Camping on the refuge is entirely back-country related and no improved camp facilities are offered to refuge visitors. Three sport fish guides maintain semi-permanent camps on two of the three major river drainages within the designated wilderness area. Two of the camps are located on the Kanektok River and one on the Goodnews River. All three guide operations are currently permitted to leave one or two tent structures in place for off season storage of camp materials, equipment and supplies. In addition, they are also permitted to leave the tent frames and/or tent floors in place over the winter. An effort to gradually phase out this type of use in the designated wilderness area is being made through the Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan and subsequent step down plans such as a River Management Plan or Public Use Plan. 93 Alaska River Safaris' semi-permanent camp located in DESIGNATED WILDERNESS area on the North Fork of the Goodnews River. Contains (4) 6'x8' photovoltaic solar panels with freon rotators, electric lights, freezer, boardwalks, well point and pressurized water system. All the creature comforts! June, 1985/DAF. 15. Off Road Vehicling The only off road surface traveling vehicles authorized on refuge lands are snow machines. Snow machines serve the residents of the rural villages in much the same manner as cars and trucks serve residents of villages and cities connected by a road system. Three wheel and 4 wheel ATV's are also very common in the rural villages, but because of wet, tussok tundra and the generally rough terrain found over most of the refuge, they are most often used only on beaches and/or conveyed village corporation lands within and immediately adjacent to the villages. 17. Law Enforcement > • Law enforcement efforts continued to occupy considerable staff time throughout the year. Many hours were spent investigating apparent violations, gathering evidence and writing case reports only to have no action taken because the perpetrators were rural residents. The case involving a sportfish guide who's camp was set up on the Togiak River within the refuge wilderness area and who was operating motorized equipment in violation of his SUP and Wilderness Act regulations, finally came to trial last April. Two verbal warnings instructing the guide to remove the equipment from the wilderness area were issued over a two1week period. On the third visit to the camp, 21 days after the initial contact, RM Fisher and ARM Hotchkiss seized the equipment, and wrote a field violation report. The equipment seized was a Honda 2200 watt generator, a Homelite chainsaw, and a gasoline-driven water pump. The judge found the guide guilty on both counts and ordered a $250.00 fine and forfeiture of the Honda generator. The chain saw and water pump were returned to the guide per the court's instructions. The guide then wrote the refuge office requesting a SUP for the 1986 season. His request was denied by the Refuge Manager. Denial of the SUP was based upon the conviction of Wilderness Act Regulations and SUP Special Condition violations. The guide appealed the denial to the Regional Director, who promptly reversed the RM's decision and instructed the RM to issue a SUP for 1986. This case cost the refuge approximately $4,212.00 in staff wages, aircraft time and travel costs, not to mention USF&WS Division of Law Enforcement costs and court costs incurred. If refuge offices are required to enforce refuge regulations with similar results, we will be broke and our credibility with the rest of the commercial guide industry will be non-existent. Refuge staff assisted the local Alaska Department of Public Safety Fish & Wildlife Protection Officer and ADF&G Wildlife Biologist in investigating illegal moose kills in the Togiak Valley, Ongivinuck River Valley and Kulukak River Valley. The moose were taken in Game Management Unit 17A, an area closed to the take of moose since 1978 because of very low moose populations. Approximately 15 hours of refuge aircraft time and 10 man days were spent between March 27 and April 12 assisting in this investigation. During this time, 13 known kill sites were documented. The investigation resulted in the seizure of two moose from a home in Togiak. All sno1~achine trails from kill sites that could be followed led to the village of Togiak. A very spirited village meeting was called by the village following the seizure. Two Fish and Wildlife Protection Officers, one State Trooper, the State Prosecuting Attorney, RM Fisher and ARM Hotchkiss attended the meeting along with approximately 100 nervous villagers. The case was filed by the State Prosecuting Attorney, but has not yet come to trial. One wildlife harrasment case against a Dillingham rural resident was investigated by SA Parker and RM Fisher. This individual flew his private aircraft out to Cape Peirce and repeatedly "buzzed" the walrus herd hauled out there. The resulting stampede left two walrus dead on the beach. Necropsy indicated the animals had apparently died from internal hemorrhaging. This case, as usual, is held pending approval from the central office before it can be submitted for prosecution. The entire incident was observed by refuge personnel at the Cape. A second investigation involved an air taxi operator from the Bethel area who operated on the refuge without SUP. The air taxi company was aware of the requirement through correspondence with the refuge, but went ahead and conducted business without a valid SUP. A Notice of Violation was issued from the Anchorage SA office. The operator has requested a jury trial, but no court date has been set to date. RM Fisher and ARM Hotchkiss contacted more than 30 fishermen in the field to check catch limits and fishing licenses. Even though a few of these checks were a complete surprise to fishermen (as most had never been asked to show their fishing licenses in Alaska) all were properly licensed and no violations were found. I. EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES 2. Rehabilitation This consisted primarily of work on the two mobile homes: a. Leveling and reblocking of the mobile homes - both quarters. b. Repair and replacement of insulation under the mobile homes. c. Replaced front and rear exterior door and jams. d. Construction of rear arctic entries. e. Removed, sealed and replaced all windows. f. Electric dryers were vented to the outside. g. Oil furnaces were serviced. 3. Major Maintenance The two mobile homes used for refuge quarters require a constant barage of maintenance (see Rehabilitation). Quarters #1 has been the most active,being used for our volunteer bunkhouse and then as quarters to temporarily house FB Harper and family. It was necessary to call in professional cleaners before each occupancy. The high summer traffic in both 1984 and 1985 coupled with the extremely high rate of dust accumulation make it impossible to keep up with daily cleaning. Tune ups, oil changes and other repairs were performed on the Chevrolet 3/4 ton Suburban, and the Dodge 3/4 ton Pickup. Mileage on each vehicle for the year was 3,296 and 3,242 respectively. All other refuge equipment receives regular maintenance in accordance with the established equipment maintenance schedule. All outboard motors are winterized after the season's use and before storage. Hard use during the summer field season, plus an aircraft engine that was nearing TBO (Time Before Overhaul) caused the refuge aircraft (N748) to receive a greater than normal amount of maintenance attention from ARM/Pilot Hotchkiss and OAS in Anchorage. OAS performed an annual inspection of the aircraft on April 23 and 100-hour inspections on July 9, August 31 and September 29. During the September inspection, the landing gear configuration was changed from floats to wheel/skiis and a factory re-manufactured engine was installed in place of the engine that faithfully reached TBO with less than the normal amount of mechanical failures. The propeller hub was overhauled and new blades installed along with the new powerplant. Other maintenance during the year included field repairs to the left float by patching a 2-1/2 inch diameter hole in the bottom of the main compartment. Exhaust system leaks and an oil leak in the oil pressure indicator line were also repaired. The aircraft was changed from 9b wheel/skiis to floats on May 14, 1985. 4. Equipment Utilization and Replacement Equipment purchases during the calendar year and with EOY funds include the following: -Miscellaneous camping equipment for field camps. -Two (2) transworld HF-SSB programable transcievers. -3/4T 4x4 pickup with 8 foot bed. -PK 3500 floats for N748. -Canon model 155 photocopier. -Zodiac Mark II GT inflatable raft. -CR92006 tractor feed for computer letter quality printer. -Two (2) Johnson 25 HP short shaft outboard motors. -Nikon F-3 camera and associated camera equipment. -Two (2) 8xl0 Hanson weatherports. -Two (2) 10x12 Hanson weatherports. -Acculight slide storage and viewing system. -Three (3) pair Bausch and Lomb binoculars. -One (1) bushnell Discoverer spotting scope. -Avon Adventurer MK5 river boat. -Solar panel M63SL. -Two (2) model XFT Katadyn water purification pumps. -Three (3) model TRK-B4 drip water purification filters. -21 cubic foot chest freezer. Both vehicles, a Chevrolet 4x4 Surburban and Dodge 4x4 Pickup, were heavily utilized during the field season. Many times during the summer, a third vehicle was needed, but unavailable, so privately owned vehicles were used for transporting people and supplies. The new 4x4 pickup truck will be pressed into service once it is received, but we suspect the summer season will once again prove more than a match for our small motor pool. N748, the refuge Cessna 185, was also heavily utilized during the field season and moderately utilized during the winter. Reduced winter flying was mainly due to unflyable weather conditions rather than lack of field work needing to be accomplished. Slightly more than 300 hours were put on the aircraft during the year. Effective trip planning and no empty backhauls allowed us to serve 5 field camps during the year, instead of 3 field camps operated during 1984 with only a slight increase in total aircraft hours. While repairing the floats late this summer, OAS discovered that the 1938 vintage floats that had served us so faithfully had severe corrison problems and needed new bottoms. Instead of spending 12-14 thousand dollars repairing the old floats, it was decided to purchase new floats, fortunately with Regional Office EOY funds. A Canon Model 155 photocopier was ordered with EOY funds to replace the Xerox 2600 copier that has been in use since the station was staffed in 1981. The Xerox machine was barely adequate for our needs during 1981 and 1982. Since 1983, the annual maintenance and service costs, plus down time, began costing more than a new machine. The quality of the copies was steadily going down hill until we ceased using the machine in November. We 91 are still waiting for the new photocopier at the time this report is being written. Our neighboring office workers are beginning to flinch each time we walk in with a fist full of photocopy work we need done. We are rapidly becoming unpopular with our neighbors. 5 Communication Systems Five HF-SSB Motorola Micom S radios were used on the refuge during the field season. In addition, the refuge aircraft has an ASB 500 HF-SSB radio installed and one SGC-715 portable HF-SSB transceiver was used on float trips. The five Motorola Micom radios, used with either a Bassett helium antenna or a Barker Williams dipole antenna, were set up at four field camps and the refuge office, which acted as the base station. Motorola Micom S radios, coupled with Barker Williams dipole antennas, were located at Cape Peirce, Togiak Lake and Goodnews Lake camps. One Motorola Micom radio, coupled with a Bassett helium antenna, was located at the Kagati Lake camp, which acted as a relay to the other camps throughout most of the field season. According to the HF radio communications theory, at least as we understand it, the Kagati Lake radio should have never been able to communicate with our base in Dillingham. However, as luck would have it, the Kagati Lake camp was nearly always able to establish two way communication between all other field camps and the base station in Dillingham. Conversly, the HF radio installed in the refuge aircraft which should be the most reliable means of radio communications, was a dismal failure. We are relatively certain that something is wrong with the transmitter. It will be replaced or repaired this winter in an attempt to remedy this situation. The SGC-715-HF-SSB portable transceiver intended to serve as a radio communications link between mobile field camps and float trip crews worked about as well as the aircraft radio. We think that a lack of adequate antenna is part, if not all, of our problem with this radio, since it should have been able to reach at least one of the field camps. Overall, we were pleased with the improvement over 1984's radio communications fiasco. There is a great deal of room for improvement in the reliability of the system which is potentially one of the greatest factors that could escalate a relatively minor field incident or problem into a life threatening situation. Perhaps it will take a major incident, to draw attention and the funding it deserves to upgrade the statewide radio communications system for Alaskan refuges. We have been very fortunate considering the inadequency of the current system. 6. Computer System In April, IRM personnel visited the refuge office to install our recently bestowed Data General lOSP desk top data generation system. The complete system cost the refuge $16,500.00 and was to include everything we would need to establish a comprehensive word processor, accounting system, maintenance schedule and statistical data analysis. The emotional electricity was high around the office, as the weeks of anticipation and visions of greatness came down to the moment of truth when the switch would be turned on and the instruction would begin. By the time the first day was over, the emotional aura had done a flip flop and all but the clerk had begun to lose interest. All of BT Lisac's questions on capabilities, software and simple formating were answered with "No, you can't do that with this machine". "That will take more software that hasn't been developed yet." To date, we now own a glorified word processor and a ton of manuals which are either inaccurate, out of date, or provide an incomplete flow through guide. The old computer adage of "the day after you buy it - it'll be out of date" does not apply to our Data General - it seems to have not yet come of age? The software packages are not yet available to really make this a versatile system. The ones that are on the market are either as expensive as a personal computer, not time tested and debugged or operate on a faulty MSDOS operating language. What we do have are: DG lOSP with AOS, CEO, Proman $ 13,170.80 (wow) DG Letter Quality Printer 1,620.00 Okidata Dot Matrix Printer 435.00 Document Tractor Feed 200.00 Diskettes, Files, Labels 265.95 Maintenance Contract/per year 852.00 Power Conditioner 650.00 $ 17,193-75 To end on an optimistic note - the CEO word processor is a handy item, as long as the system doesn't crash. 7. Energy Conservation Information for this section is available from 1983 through 1985; with 1983 considered as the "base year", representing the absolute minimum energy required to operate the refuge with a minimum staff. Energy consumption increases shown in Table 27, in most catagories, occurred as a result of increased field activity and increased staffing, volunteers, one BioTech and a Fisheries Biologist, during 1985. Vehicle fuel consumption was reduced by moving the refuge aircraft from Aleknagik Lake, 23 miles from the Refuge office, to Shannon's Pond, which is only 4 miles from the refuge office, thereby reducing overall use slightly in spite of more people using the vehicle more often for shorter trips. TABLE 27 Energy Conservation Comparison Unit of Consumption % Change Energy Source Measure CY83 CY84 CY85 1985 Electricity KWH 25,087 21.106 24,410 +15 Propane Gallon 189 142 108 -24 Vehicle Gas Gallon 495 821 772 - 6 Aviation Gas Gallon 1,930 3,205 3,873 +18 Heating Fuel Gallon 958 1,188 1,008 -16 Misc. Fuel(s)* Gallon 0 252 500 +98 *Kerosene, blazo and outboard motor fuel used in field camps. The propane and fuel oil reduction was accomplished by using one trailer only as a bunkhouse for volunteers instead of both being occupied by PFT employees year around. Increased hours on the refuge aircraft by nearly one-third or 100 hours, accounted for increased aviation fuel usage. Four (4) field camps staffed full time during the field season caused a dramatic increase in consumption of outboard motor fuel, blazo and kerosene. J. OTHER ITEMS 1. Cooperative Programs ARM Hotchkiss assisted Wildlife Biologist V. Byrd, Wildlife Biologist, Alaska Maritime NWR, with the annual reindeer survey on Hageimeister Island February 6. Approximately 4 hours were accumulated on the refuge aircraft conducting the survey. Coordinated law enforcement patrols and investigation of illegal moose kills were carried out between March 27 and April 12. Approximately 15 hours of refuge aircraft time and 10 man days were involved in this cooperative effort between the Alaska Department of Safety Fish and Wildlife Protection Officer, Alaska Department of Fish & Game Regional Wildlife Biologist and refuge staff. During late May, we provided logistical support and manpower to conduct annual smolt out-migration studies on Togiak Lake and Amanka Lake outlets. Logistical support was provided to ADF&G Sport Fishery Biologists, IUU Fairbanks, by transporting them and their gear from Dillingham to the headwaters of the middle fork of the Goodnews River. Approximately 3 hours aircraft time were used for this support. ARM Hotchkiss provided air logistics and assisted the State Fish and Wildlife Protection Officer investigating a bear taken in defense of life and property at the Wood River Lodge on Lake Nerka on September 25. ARM Hotchkiss provided an aerial tour of all the known mining areas on or near the Togiak NWR for the ADF&G Habitat Biologist on September 16. Approximately 4 aircraft hours were accumulated during this flight. Refuge personnel continued to assist the USF&WS, King Salmon Fisheries Research Station and the ADF&G Commercial Fisheries Station at Dillingham with their work on the Togiak Refuge by providing equipment, manpower for data collection and logistical support for transporting supplies, equipment and people between field locations and Dillingham. Approximately 10 aircraft hours were expended throughout the year in these cooperative ventures. 3. Items of Interest RM Fisher and ARM Hotchkiss attended Law Enforcement Refresher Training in Anchorage in February. Regional Office Engineers visited the refuge in January to conduct soil tests at the mission property site. Findings indicated a super saturated, fine silt/clay mix down to 30 feet. The water table appeared to be within 10 feet of the surface - poor drainage conditions for a septic system. RM Fisher presented a program on the RCCP to the Contemporary Native Issues class at Togiak High School in January. RM Fisher attended a meeting of the Alaska Professional Sportfishing Guides Association to discuss refuge special use permit conditions. Bio-Tech Lisac participated as a judge in the 1985 Dillingham School Science Fair. RM Fisher attended the Advance Refuge Manager Training session in Washington D.C. in March. Rudy Berus, Regional Office Engineer, came to Dillingham in April to inspect three potential administrative sites. RM and ARM met with village leaders in Quinhagak to discuss refuge special use permits, guide camps, sport fish regulations, and refuge public use. Bio Tech Lisac attended the Bristol Bay Regional Planning team meeting in Dillingham in May. RM Fisher was subpeoned to give a deposition for the illegal trespass suit against two sport fishing guides using the Kanektok River. The suit was filed by the Village Corporation of Quinhagak. IV I RM, ARM and Bio Tech Stewart met with Yukon Delta NWR personnel to discuss subsistence survey techniques. RM and ARM met with regional office staff in May to discuss a letter the Secretary of Interior received from SUP holder Ron Hyde (Alaska River Safaris). Mr. Hyde's letter implied mistreatment by refuge field personnel. RM, ARM and Regional Office personnel met in July with Ron Hyde and his lawyer to discuss his letter to Secretary Hodel concerning: treatment by refuge management, his use of an airboat in refuge wilderness area, his use of motorized equipment in W.A., storage of camp equipment in W.A., long term SUP, etc. Sierra Club representatives from Anchorage visited refuge headquarters and Cape Peirce during August. Primary purpose of the visit was to look at the proposed new wilderness addition at Cape Peirce/Cape Newenham. Realty personnel visited Dillingham in October to appraise several properties for a proposed administrative site. FB Harper attended the R.O. fisheries programmatic meeting in October. FB Harper and BT Lisac attended the American Fisheries Society technical writing workshop at the R.O. in October. Secretary Farler traveled to Anchorage in October for medical assistance resulting in back surgery and 4-5 weeks or recouperation. 4. Credits The 1985 Narrative Report was written by: RM Fisher: Introduction, Sections A, C, D (1,2,3, 5), E (1,5), J (3 ,4), K. ARM Hotchkiss: Sections E (4,6,8), F (1,2,3,6,12), G (1,2,6,8,10), H (1,8,10,11,12,13,15,16,17), I (3,4,5,7), J (1). Fishery Biologist Harper: Sections d (5), lF (11), G (11), H (9). K. Bio Tech Lisac: Sections B, D (5), G (3,4,5,7,9), H (7), I (2,3,6),1 K. The report was typed and assembled by Secretary Farler and edited by the staff. Much of the information for this report was available due to the quality of \-lOrk performed by our summer volunteers, Volunteer Coordinator ARt-1 Hotchkiss and Bio-Tech Lisac. Special thanks should be given to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game in Dillingham and Bethel for the fisheries information they provided and for their cooperation with refuge field projects and programs. Special thanks should also be given to the King Salmon Fisheries Station for all the help and support they have given the refuge throughout the year. Photo Credits DAF David A. Fisher MJL Mark J. Lisac WSM or SM Wayne 7. Mazzone BH Brian Higgins SF Scott Farling JS Jill Straus JK Joann Kramer MB Mike Black K. FEEDBACK Visions of a totally automated accounting, word processing and data analysis system eluded the office in 1985. The Data General lOSP desk top generator that was bestowed upon us as the result of someone's endeavor to strive for excellence and consistency throughout Region 7 has yet to pan out. There was evidently a great sales job done by someone to purchase regionwide DG's. It is always nice to have the forthought to purchase something to grow into something that won't be obsolete or needed to be upgraded within a year. There is also the other side of the coin in that you would want to purchase something that you could use and not put aside until the system has grown to meet your needs. Our office and operations are at a critical step when you look for a data management system. Our information gathering is still in its infancy with a flexible enough recording method to be adapted to a standarized format. At this point we need a reliable standard format in which to record, manipulate and catalog data from 6 or 7 field camps, from aerial surveys, from on ground surveys, from information shared with ADF&G and information received from SUP holders' (guides and air taxis) end of the year reports. Now that we have a FTE Fisheries Biologist on staff, our data handling will increase to a point that an efficient and accessible means of handling data is necessary. Maybe our level of understanding is not such that we can grasp the potential of the DG-lOSP. We have twice sent members of the staff into the RO for training. BT Lisac attended "Making it Count" (2 days) and Clerk Farler attended the System Managers Seminar (1 week) provided by Van Amberg and Associates. Both sessions turned out to be a disappointment, not to mention a waste of station funds. Both sessions received critical written review from the staff attending, as well as suggestions for required training. "Making it Countn, an introduction to computers and their applications, was more like a history of computers and consisted of no practical applications 103 to any system, let alone the DG-10SP. The Systems Managers session also provided virtually no insight into the step by step operation of the DG lOSP, AOS or MSDOS operating systems or the operation, capabilities or problem solving of the CEO word processor. This was something that the outline eluded to. All this wouldn't be so bad if the DG manuals weren't so cumbersome, incomplete and just plain wrong on several key points. Take the section exlaining merging of two documents. If you follow the step by step procedure for setting up the two documents (say a letter and mailing list), you cannot get the documents to print out. The prompts that the books say you will get, never materialize. After spending a week trying to accomplish this, a call to IRM told us that the manuals were already outdated Would have saved some time if we would have been informed of this. The ~~DOS operating language is also incomplete in both instructions and in actual functioning. This as well as the manuals have undergone revisions as someone has tried to use the system and failed. The CEO word processor program also has some major faults and has undergone revision by DG. We became aware of this through a phone conversation with IRM and received no notification from DG or IRM. Support, guidance and software have all been lacking for the DG-lOSP. For $16,500, all we've seemed to accomplish is outfit our office with a glorified word processor (that is even questionable at times) and standardized our headaches with those of other stations. As a final note on the subject, let's address the cost of the DG software. Barring the original $16,500 cost of the machine there is still the added cost of maintenance and software and additional terminals to make other than word processing possible. Although it is even questionable that the system can be useful for multiple users. For this additional cost we could purchase a system that has been developed and proven beyond our needs. We could still use the DG as a word processor and hope that one day the MSDOS operating system will allow us to transfer data in a compatible format. What this station really needs is an IMB PC and Lotus software to handle the data cataloging, statistical analysis and aid in report writing, and some practical training from IRM that applies to the operation of the system we have.