1------·------· Co~:E==~~~ O~ Work~Hop, Inr:E~A.L Ar-~-:.S;:::-A::.·:E ::E:;.O
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
:\.c.:c.:- e~: ~:::::.:c.::.::: f;t ff.) ~c~-:-e:=:-ee~ ?c:l~:~::.=c~~ Vc?e~::.s~=~ r"~se:::c::~~ :~~{ c~c:e:-e~ce o:- ~or~s~c? In.:e:-::2..1 a,:_;_ is;::-a ::.·:e :-e?o:-: Other (se~ :-e=.z:-Y.s) ) CI'IATION I 0 I I ;;;;;;;;;;;;;:;;,.., S t eve Ma r t in , ISF&WS Volunteer OB.Jr:CTIV c. 1) Collection of public us e data on the Kanektok River and Kaga ti Lk 2) Promote catch and re~ease fishing techniques, 3) Educate the public on the Refuge and Wilderness Area use . ~..c. J.. :S:OD OF S"iUDY First year of study . Two USF&WS Volunteers established a camp at Kagati Lake, h~ ~d~a ter s of t!!e Kanektok River, and made contact with nearly all the pc o~ l~ landing a ~ t~e lP.ke for whatever purpose. No officia forms were carrie1, all information was derived throug h personable conversa tion. Information on the refuge was disseminated casually and needlenose o fisherman to remote catch and release fishing. 433 people were contacted: 49 stayed at Kagati Lake; 384 float e the river in 56 parties. Gui ded use accounted for 53 . 5% (38 parties, 294 people), unguided use for 46.5% (33 parties and 90 people). A season total of 3,362 user days were recorded with 76 % of these being professional guided u se days. CONCLUS IONS The public use documented at Kagati Lake is an unkno wn proportion of the overall river use. Data is lacking for a complete comparison of the generally accepted sportfishing. increase. This is the first step to establishing a data base from whic risons of wi~derness and fishing qualities on the Kanektok t refuge management will be able to make educated decisions On Reserve • DI'!IOKAL !U-~ The total numbe r of use days recorded in no way reflects the t otal uie of the riv~r by sportfisherman . This is due to the use that origin a tes f rom the village of Quinhagak and from ·professional guide camps on the river. FWLB ~- <;UP!:R.SU>ES I.D. NO. R 0 8 7 5 )f ?U'BLICATION OR R.£?0Rl' CONT~CT U.S. Fish and Wildlife Togiak National Wildlife Refuge Box 10 20 1, Dillin~ham Ala s k~ 9957~ 1--------------------------·------· co~:e==~~~ o~ work~hop, Inr:e~a.l ar-~-:.s;:::-a::.·:e ::e:;.o::::. Other (see ::-e::..=.rks) PUBLIC USE ON THE KANEKTOK RIVER NO. A.UTEOR S) Steve Martin USF&HS Volunteer OB.JECTIV .t:. l) CoLlection of public use data on the Kanektok River and Kagati Lk ,1 2) Promote catch and re~ease fishing techniques, 3) Educate the public on the Refuge and Wilderness Area use. Ml:...!.!iOD OF s.~.uDY First year of study. Two USF&WS Volunteers established a camp at Kagati Lake, headwaters of the Kanektok River, and made contact with nearly all the pao~l2 landing at tbe lHke for whatever purpose. No officia forms were carried, all information was derived through personable convers2 tion. Information on the refuge was disseminated casually and needlenose o fisherman to romote catch and release fishing. 433 people were contacted: 49 stayed at Kagati Lake; 384 floatE the river in 56 parties. Guided use accounted for 53.5% (38 p~rties, 294 people), unguided use for 46.5% (33 parties and 90 people). A season total of 3,362 user days were recorded with 76% of these being professional guided use days. CONCLUSIONS The public use documented at Kagati Lake is an unknown proportion of the overall river use. Data is lacking for a complete comparison of the generally accepted sportfishing. increase. ; This is the first step to establishing a data base from which to make comparisons of wi~derness and fishing qualities on the Kanektok drainage so that refuge management will be able to make educated decisions. D IT IONAL ~..A.R.K.S The total number of use days recorded in no way reflects the total uie of the riv~r by sportfisherman. This is due to the use that _,, __riginates from the village of Quinhagak and from professional guide camps I h . co 11 t e r~ver. i ~ F!'..S OR SUPERSEDES I.D. NO. 8 s~~M~--------------------------------------------------~---- 0 ffi ICOPES OF ?Ul3LICA'!ION OR REPORT CONTACT ,...... U.S. Fish and Wildlife M Togiak National Wildlife Refuge M Bo~ 10201, Dillingham Alaska 9957f ptJL/3 0 '87 5 ~ .,., -Ul ,.I PUBLIC USE ON· THE KANEKTOK RIVER· SYSTEM. By Steve Martin USF&WS Volunteer Key Words: Kanektok River Kagati Lake, Kuskokwim Bay, Southwest Alaska Sportfishing Effort, Public Use, River Use. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Togiak National Wildlif~ Refuge P.O. Box 10201 Dillingham, Alaska June thru September 1985 RLIS 1\lii::;ka Resources U!vai)' Lnformation Services J\ nchorage, Alaska TABLE OF CONtENTS INTRODUCTION 1 OBSERVATIONS 3 CONCLUSIONS 7 RECOHHENDATIONS 7 BIOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 9 CHART OF COHMERCIAL GUIDE USE . 11 FIGURE 1 . .12 FIGURE 2 . .13 FIGURE 3 .14 QUOTATIONS FROH PEOPLE SURVEYED AT KAGATI LAKE . 15 BIRD LIST . 17 INTRODUCTION The Kanektok River is one of three principal rivers in the Togiak National Wildlife Refuge. It is approximately 93 miles long; a clear water river that originates at Kagati Lake in the Ahklun Mountains. It flows roughly west through the mountains, braiding its way through the coastal plain, to its terminus on the Kuskokwim Bay at the village of Quinhagak. The upper 73 miles (approximately) of the river lie within Togiak NWR, and have been designated wilderness area. It is a visually beautiful river; flowing through tundra, dense willow and alder thickets, and stands of cottonwood. It's a river system rich in wildlife~ especially birds, which include waterfowl, raptors, shorebirds, and passerines. It's shores are horne to many mammals as well, including brown bear, moose, red fox, and beaver. The Kanektok River system is also a very productive fishery. Host to annual runs of King, Red, Pink, Chum, and Silver salmon, it also supports a considerable population of native fish, such as: Dolly Varden, Arctic Char, Arctic Grayling, and Rainbow Trout. In fact, it is nearly the westernmost limit of the natural range of Rainbow Trout. It is a unique river. A wild river which is still virtually unspoiled . by modern man. The Kanektok is host to the subsistence efforts of the villagers of Quinhagak, as it has been for untold years. More recently, it has become host to a growing number of sports fishermen as well. The major reason Togiak m{R was established by act of Congress in 1980, was to ensure the protection of the area's wildlife resources; including the Kanektok River. Public use is one of the major problems to be dealt with in protecting these resources. In fact, it is one of the issues that must be dealt with in the long term comprehensive management plan of Togiak NWR. The plan is currently in preparation as mandated by Congress in the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA). Public use (guided and unguided) on the river over the past several years has greatly increased .. The refuge staff, aware of this, has become very concerned about the effect of increased human presence on the river, wilderness values, etc. Similar sentiments have been voiced by several concerned guides operating on the river .. As a result, a public use survey AltRLIS 1- .Pt!as!w Resources Libra": & Information Services ~. n<.:h.>rl:ige, Alaska was initiated for river use--primarily for floaters. Furthermore, effective management of any resource depends upon accurate data. This study is the first step towards more effective management of this unique river system. A field camp, staffed by refuge volunteers, was established at Kagati Lake--where the river starts. It is here, at the lake, that virtually all of the float trips on the river begin. The camp .was maintained throughout the entire summer season (June 21 through September 15, 1984). Using an inflatable rubber raft equipped with an outboard motor, the volunteers made it a point to contact every party arriving at Kagati Lake. There were three specific objectives of the camp: 1) To obtain public use data; 2) To promote Catch and Release sportfishing; and 3) To educate the general public in "wilderness ethics". Concerning the first objective--public use data--information was collected on the size of the party, its purpose (river float, day fishing, hunting, claim assessment, etc.), whether the group was guided or unguided, duration of· the trip, the group's origin, and any comments or suggestions the interviewed people might have; especially regarding future management of the river system. It was suggested prior to the start of the survey, that no forms or questionaires be carried as the presence of such fact-gathering materials might intimidate or inhibit the responses of the people encountered. This seems to be an accurate assessment of the situation. Several people commented on the lack of forms, saying they were less inclined to talk freely to a person with a questionaire in hand. Instead, attempts were made at conversation with each group, with pertinent ques.tions raised during the course of conversation. There are, however, certain limitations to this approach~ It's a more time consuming approach than a questionaire; though that may be more than offset by the occasional detailed responses received. Finally, it is very difficult to remember names, addresses, and responses of surveyed people without a form to take notes on. Another limitation of a survey, conducted at the start of a float trip, is that there is no way to gauge the impact of the river on the public after the float is completed.