[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
A Transplant of Arctic Grayling to a Flooded Gravel Mine Site in the Kuparuk River Oilfield by Jack F. Winters Technical Report No. 90-4 U. C r FFr T!FrI OF COMMERCE NOAA C,( i' " "' :T ,, :" '? NT1ER ' "'V - , VENUE *,-:.i..,t)t . $ 29405-2413 Frank Rue Director Habitat Division Alaska Department of Fish and Game P.O. Box 3-2000 Juneau, Alaska 99802 August 1990 0 t_ r lroperty of CSC Library _N Table of Contents Page List of Tables ....................................... iii List of Figures .......................................iv Acknowledgements .................................... v Executive Summary ................................... vi Introduction .........................................1 Arctic Grayling Transplant ................................2 Introduction .................................... 2 Methods ...................................... 3 Results ....................................... 5 Discussion .....................................5 Kuparuk River Arctic Grayling Disease Screening ................. 13 Introduction ................................... 13 Methods ......................................13 Results ...................................... 13 Discussion .................................... 13 References .........................................15 Appendix I: Length and estimated ages of arctic grayling captured within the Sagavanirktok River drainage and later transplanted to Kuparuk Mine Site B, June 1989 ...............16 Appendix II: Lengths of fish caught and released in Sagavanirktok River drainage streams, 21-25 June 1989 ............. 21 Appendix III: Lengths of fish caught in fyke nets in the Kuparuk River and Smith Creek downstream of the Spine Road crossing, 20-21 July 1989 ........................25 List of Tables Page Table 1. Size category, number, and origin of arctic grayling transplanted to Kuparuk Mine Site B, June 1989, from the Sagavanirktok River drainage ......................6 Table 2. Estimated growth rates of individual arctic grayling transplanted to Kuparuk Mine Site B, summer 1989 ....................... 7 Table 3. Age-length relationships for arctic grayling captured within the Sagavanirktok River drainage and later transplanted to Kuparuk Mine Site B, June 1989 .................... 8 List of Figures Page Figure 1. Capture locations and sampling techniques used to capture arctic grayling, June 1989 ...............4 Figure 2. Kuparuk Mine Site B, depicting the locations of the inlet and interconnecting channels excavated in May 1989 ................... 10 -iv- Acknowledgements Matt Robus and Carl Hemming assisted with the capture and transplanting of the arctic grayling. Roger Post, Phyllis Weber-Scannell, and Carl Hemming assisted with fish sampling in the Kuparuk River. Financial assistance for field work and this report was provided by the Kuparuk River Unit owners and the Prudhoe Bay Unit owners through a grant to the ADF&G Habitat Division. Steve Taylor (BP) and Mike Joyce (ARCO) helped in supporting efforts to obtain the grant. Financial assistance was also provided by the Alaska Coastal Management Program through the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, and administered by the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. -v-V Executive Summary Arctic grayling were captured at seven locations within the Sagavanirktok River drainage near Happy Valley Creek 21-25 June 1989. Two hundred ten arctic grayling, ranging in length from 176 to 399 mm, were transplanted to Kuparuk Mine Site B on 26-27 June 1989. Additional sampling is planned for 1990 and subsequent years to assess the success of this experimental fish transplant. ARCO Alaska, Inc. completed a habitat enhancement project in May 1989 at Kuparuk Mine Site B that contained features that ADF&G believed would increase the long-term success of the arctic grayling transplant. A description of these features, their importance to the long-term success of the transplant, and their benefits to other fish and wildlife at the site is presented. Sampling in the Kuparuk River downstream of the Spine Road crossing indicated that limited numbers of large arctic grayling use this area in mid July. Numbers of large arctic grayling were insufficient to conduct disease screening of arctic grayling in the Kuparuk River at this time. -vi- INTRODUCTION Since 1986, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has conducted limnological and fish sampling in selected flooded gravel mine sites in the Prudhoe Bay - Kuparuk oilfields to determine if these sites would provide suitable habitat for fish and wildlife. Sampling in 1986 and 1987 concentrated on the chemical and physical features of the sites (Hemming 1988). Sampling in 1988 focused on limnological sampling directed at identifying features of each site that could influence algal productivity and zooplankton densities. This sampling provided additional chemical and physical information, indications of productivity of the sites, and estimates of densities and species of zooplankton that could be used by fish for food (Hemming et al. 1989). With the results of these studies, ADF&G determined that Kuparuk Mine Site B, a flooded gravel mine site with limited potential for colonization by most freshwater fish, contained sufficient habitat to support a population of arctic grayling. As a result of these studies, ADF&G transplanted arctic grayling to this site in 1989. There are two components to this technical report. The first component describes the capture and transplanting of Sagavanirktok River drainage arctic grayling to Kuparuk Mine Site B in June 1989. This section also describes site rehabilitation efforts conducted by the oil industry at Kuparuk Mine Site B and the potential benefits of these efforts to fish and wildlife at this site. The second component describes fish sampling in the Kuparuk River to obtain arctic grayling for disease screening so that this river system could be used as a source of arctic grayling for future transplants to mine sites within the oilfields. -1- ARCTIC GRAYLING TRANSPLANT Introduction Within the Prudhoe Bay-Kuparuk oilfields are several tundra streams that discharge directly to the Beaufort Sea, have limited populations of fish, and have limited potential for colonization by freshwater fish from distant streams. Brackish or marine conditions that exist in the nearshore Beaufort Sea usually provide a barrier to movements of freshwater fish, such as arctic grayling, beyond the mouths of streams and thereby limit colonization of distant streams by these salt-intolerant fish. These tundra streams also contain limited habitat suitable to fish for overwintering, as the streams are shallow and generally freeze to the bottom in winter. Two of these streams now connect with deep flooded gravel mine sites that provide conditions required to overwinter fish. Such conditions in these two stream systems provide an opportunity to determine if a common arctic freshwater fish, arctic grayling, that does not occur in these stream systems, can be introduced, survive, and reproduce in a mine site/stream system. With this opportunity, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game in June 1989 conducted an experimental introduction of arctic grayling into one tundra stream/mine site system, East Creek/Kuparuk Mine Site B. The objective of the transplant was to establish a reproducing population of arctic grayling in East Creek/Kuparuk Mine Site B. Our goal was to obtain 200-500 large arctic grayling from the Sagavanirktok River drainage that could be transplanted to the mine site. Arctic grayling from the Sagavanirktok River drainage were screened for diseases, and approved for transplanting in Kuparuk Mine Site B in 1988 (Hemming et al. 1989). Hemming et al. (1989) collected arctic grayling for disease screening in the lower Sagavanirktok River drainage during mid-to-late summer and found too few for transplanting. The Happy Valley Creek area, about 130 km upstream in the Sagavanirktok River drainage, contains several streams with abundant large arctic grayling in early summer. Thus, we collected all fish from this area for transplanting to Kuparuk Mine Site B. The following component describes the results of the arctic grayling capture and transplant and some initial observations on the success of the transplant. This component also describes the modifications made to the Kuparuk Mine Site B/East Creek system to enhance its ability to support fish and that may directly contribute to the success of the experimental transplant. -2- Methods We attempted to capture arctic grayling at 10 locations near Happy Valley Creek 21-25 June 1989 (Figure 1). We captured arctic grayling at seven locations with several types of sampling equipment: fyke nets, seines, angling, and dip net. Limited sampling with a backpack electroshocker did not yield fish. Fyke nets were most effective at the mouths of tundra streams where stream velocities were low, and stream depth and width allowed adequate placement of the nets. One fyke net was also set in one pond of Goose Green Gulch, a former gravel mine site. We checked fyke nets daily for fish, and measured and released captured fish other than arctic grayling, and arctic grayling less than 176 mm. We placed captured arctic grayling suitable for transplant in an insulated cooler and transported them from the capture site to a holding pen in lower Happy Valley Creek. When necessary, supplemental oxygen delivered through aquarium airstones kept the water in the cooler well oxygenated. Before placing the arctic grayling in the holding pen, we anesthesized the fish with MS 222 (tricane methane sulfonate), measured them to the nearest millimeter (fork length), and removed scales for age estimation. We also tagged the fish at the base of their dorsal fin with numbered yellow floy tags, that will allow monitoring of the growth of the fish. A 1.2 x 2.4 x 1.2 m covered net pen held the arctic grayling for up to 5 days before transport to Kuparuk Mine Site B. We transported approximately 100 arctic grayling to Kuparuk Mine Site B on both 26 and 27 June 1989. Two 114 L plastic garbage containers lined with a large plastic bag containing about 95 L of water and a similarly lined 64 L insulated cooler containing about 50 L of water held the fish during transport. Plastic bags were tied to prevent loss of water and fish. Supplemental oxygen delivered through aquarium airstones during loading of the fish into the transport containers and the subsequent 3 hr drive to Kuparuk Mine Site B reduced the possibility of suffocation. We released the arctic grayling at the northeast section of Kuparuk Mine Site B upon arrival at the site. We placed two fyke nets within Kuparuk Mine Site B on 23 and 24 August in part to determine if arctic grayling were still present in the site. On 5 October we again sampled for arctic grayling, on this occasion by angling. -3- / /t Mark Creek / 0 |Happy Valley Creek ! - \ & ! Dan Creek Lori Creek O4 , ' l Q Grader Slough _ Goose Green Gulch � Fyke Net A Electroshocking � Seine 0 Angling S ~Gustafson Gulch 4 Dip Net f HPo lygon Creek / Poison Pipe Creek 0 Oksrukuyik Creek kilometers UrooearenGuc June 1989. -4-Figure 1. Capture locations and sampling techniques used to capture arctic grayling, -4- Results We placed 210 arctic grayling, ranging in length from 176 to 399 mm, in Kuparuk Mine Site B on 26 and 27 June 1989 (Appendix 1). The average size of the transplanted arctic grayling was 283 + 52 mm (Table 1). All arctic grayling appeared healthy when released and several began feeding at the surface within minutes of their release. One arctic grayling swam out of Kuparuk Mine Site B and into East Creek immediately upstream of the Spine Road culverts within 15 min of its release. Oil industry personnel caught and kept at least two arctic grayling (an unknown number were also caught and released) within the first few weeks after stocking (S. Bishop, Wildlife Biologist, ADF&G, Fairbanks, pers. comm.). Although the site was not closed to sport fishing following the transplant, ADF&G staff requested anglers to release all tagged arctic grayling that they caught. In August, ARCO Alaska, Inc. placed a sign describing the transplant project and requesting release of tagged arctic grayling at Kuparuk Mine Site B. We caught two arctic grayling in fyke nets set in Kuparuk Mine Site B on 23 and 24 August. One arctic grayling did not have a numbered floy tag but had a wound at the base of its dorsal fin, suggesting this fish had lost its tag and was a transplanted fish. The other arctic grayling grew at an average rate of 0.23 mm/day over the 61 days between its initial and subsequent capture (Table 2). ADF&G staff captured and released three arctic grayling in Kuparuk Mine Site B by angling on 5 October, including one previously captured in a fyke net on 23 August. Average rates of growth for these arctic grayling over a 102-105 day period ranged from 0.24 to 0.34 mm/day (Table 2). Based on scale annuli, we estimated the ages of transplanted arctic grayling to range from 3 to 11 yrs (Table 3). The age-length relationship is highly correlated: age = 0.0383 (length [mm]) - 4.62; r2 = 0.84. Estimated ages of the transplanted arctic grayling were similar to those estimated for arctic grayling obtained from the lower Sagavanirktok River in 1988 (Hemming et al. 1989). Discussion Before the introduction of arctic grayling into Kuparuk Mine Site B, ARCO Alaska, Inc. completed a habitat enhancement project that contained features ADF&G believed would -5- Table 1. Size category, number, and origin of arctic grayling transplanted to Kuparuk Mine Site B, June 1989, from the Sagavanirktok River drainage. Number of Arctic Gravlin~ Mean Length Capture Site (Capture Method) Total <300 mm >300 mm (mm) + s.d. Happy Valley Creek (fyke net) 52 26 26 281 + 55 Dan Creek (dip net) 1 0 1 330 Mark Creek (2 fyke nets) 39 15 24 294 + 60 Oksrukuyik Creek (fyke net) 12 6 6 283 + 51 Grader Slough (angling) 7 5 2 258 + 49 Gustafson Gulch (seine) 13 12 1 243 + 45 Goose Green Gulch (fyke net) 86 44 42 288 +� 45 All Sites 210 283 +� 52 Table 2. Estimated growth rates of individual arctic grayling transplanted to Kuparuk Mine Site B, summer 1989. Estimated Estimated Length (mm) Growth Days in Growth Rate At Capture At Recapture (mm) Mine Site (mm/day) 310* 324 14 61 0.23 310* 335 25 104 0.24 299 324 25 105 0.24 335 370 35 102 0.34 * same fish -7- Table 3. Age-length relationships for arctic grayling captured within the Sagavanirktok River drainage and later transplanted to Kuparuk Mine Site B, June 1989. Ages estimated from scale annuli; n = number of fish in sample; sd = standard deviation. Fork Length (mm) Age n Mean Range sd 3 28 200.8 176-246 16.2 4 29 228.8 180-292 25.2 5 21 262.7 225-298 18.3 6 28 291.0 254-324 18.9 7 23 315.9 281-334 14.1 8 30 321.3 287-353 14.5 9 18 334.8 299-376 20.4 10 4 344.2 316-368 21.7 11 6 365.8 356-399 16.4 TOTAL 187 -8- increase the long-term success of the arctic grayling transplant. The ADF&G had two objectives for the enhancement project: to connect the two separate basins with two channels to form one contiguous lake with an island; and to connect the mine site and East Creek with a permanent channel. ARCO Alaska, Inc. completed this enhancement project in May 1989. In addition, ARCO Alaska, Inc. previously removed fill and culverts from East Creek upstream of Kuparuk Mine Site B in late summer 1988. ARCO Alaska, Inc. excavated three channels during the enhancement project (Figure 2). Two channels, approximately 15 m wide, 15 m long, and I m deep, cut through the ground separating the two basins of the mine site, create an island approximately 30 m x 15 m. A third channel, excavated between East Creek and the southwest corner of the southernmost basin is approximately 20 m wide, 25 m long, and 2 m deep. The excavated material was stockpiled next to existing overburden on the east side of the site, and on an existing overburden stockpile on the south side of the site. The connections between the two basins and between the site and East Creek were deep enough to contain adequate amounts of water throughout the summer. Previously, the connection between East Creek and Kuparuk Mine Site B was marginal during periods of low flow. The new connection provided an adequate channel between the site and the creek, yet flow continued through the original stream channel that bordered the western edge of the site. There was some concern during the planning of this enhancement project that by constructing a deep connection between East Creek and Kuparuk Mine Site B, the creek would flow through the mine site, and exit at the site's northwest corner, thereby eliminating flow through a portion of the original stream channel. During our site visits, some of which were during periods of low stream flow, water continued to flow through the original channel. The permanent connection of Kuparuk Mine Site B with East Creek provides several benefits to the site's fish and wildlife. The connection may now divert a significant portion of the spring runoff of East Creek through the site, promoting more rapid ice melt within Kuparuk Mine Site B. Rapid ice melt should provide areas of open water that may be used by surface feeding fish and by waterfowl. The tundra stream water also should be warmer at times during spring and summer than mine site water, and may serve to warm the lake. Water from East Creek also should bring additional nutrients to mine site waters, enhancing the productivity of the system. The permanent connection will enable arctic grayling to move freely out of the mine site to areas in the creek that may be suitable for feeding or spawning, and then into the mine site when the creek freezes. -9- A fyke net locations meters Figure 2. Kuparuk Mine Site B, depicting the locations of the inlet and interconnecting channels excavated in May 1989. Map drawn from July 1989 aerial photograph. -10- We selected several sites for capture of arctic grayling in the Happy Valley Creek area for three reasons: to collect the desired number of fish rapidly; to obtain fish from a variety of locations after they had spawned; and to minimize the potential of removing a significant portion of the adult population of a particular stream. Netting at the mouths of streams in late June increased the chances that some arctic grayling captured at a particular stream had spawned, or that the arctic grayling were from other systems and were using the stream mouths as feeding areas or as intermediate stops between other areas. McCart et al. (1972) reported that arctic grayling from Happy Valley Creek disperse to the Sagavanirktok River and other mountain streams after spawning. Craig and Poulin (1975) also noted similar patterns of movement by arctic grayling in Weir Creek in the Kavik River system (approximately 80 km northeast of Happy Valley). These studies also suggested that by mid-June, most arctic grayling have spawned in their tundra streams and have begun downstream movements. During our capture of arctic grayling, we noted no evidence of sex products from the fish we handled. Thus, the arctic grayling we removed from these systems probably spawned before their capture. Forty-one percent (86) of the 210 transplanted arctic grayling were from Goose Green Gulch, a site that contains about 1.5 ha of ponds connected to the Sagavanirktok River. These fish were likely transients from another stream system as conditions in this site did not appear favorable for spawning by arctic grayling. Arctic grayling use several tundra streams that drain into the Sagavanirktok River and that are within several kilometers of Goose Green Gulch. Although possible, it is unlikely that all arctic grayling caught at Goose Green Gulch were from any particular one of these streams. It is more likely that these and other streams contributed individuals to this catch and that the removal of these 86 individuals did not affect any particular arctic grayling population severely. We do not know the extent to which the transplanted arctic grayling used East Creek. At least one arctic grayling moved into the creek shortly after its release into Kuparuk Mine Site B. Water levels and wind produced conditions that made arctic grayling difficult to see in East Creek during our visits throughout the summer. Sampling with fyke nets in late August in Kuparuk Mine Site B yielded only two arctic grayling, suggesting that some arctic grayling may have been in the creek at this time. Conversely, arctic grayling may not have been captured at these net sites because only two nets fished for two days, or because arctic grayling may not have intercepted the nets. The presence of arctic grayling in Kuparuk Mine Site B in early October suggests that some arctic grayling would overwinter within the mine site. We do not know whether -11- these fish spent the entire summer in Kuparuk Mine Site B or ventured into East Creek and returned after some undetermined period. Sampling in late winter or spring, preferably before the arctic grayling leave the site for the creek, will be required to assess overwinter survival of these fish. Large numbers of ninespine stickleback in the Kuparuk Mine Site B/East Creek system may affect the success of the transplant of arctic grayling, through competition with fry and juvenile arctic grayling, should successful spawning by arctic grayling occur in this system. Our sampling in late August in Kuparuk Mine Site B produced overnight catches of an estimated 23,000-24,000 ninespine stickleback. Skaugstad (1989) noted poor growth of stocked arctic grayling fingerlings and little or no apparent survival of sac fry in interior Alaska ponds containing threespine stickleback. Whether competition occurs between ninespine stickleback and arctic grayling will depend upon the relative densities of each species, the microhabitats used by each species and their degree of overlap, the degree to which prey species overlap, and the availability of alternative prey. Potential predation by adult ninespine stickleback on arctic grayling sac fry also may adversely affect survival of arctic grayling fry. A complete assessment of the success of the arctic grayling transplant experiment will require several years of continued sampling within the Kuparuk Mine Site B/East Creek system. Since arctic grayling within and near the Sagavanirktok River drainage mature between ages 4 and 8 (Craig and Poulin 1975, McCart et al. 1972), eight years may be required to determine if any progeny of the transplanted adults successfully spawns and continues to perpetuate arctic grayling within the Kuparuk Mine Site B/East Creek system. Sampling will be needed to detect the presence of fry and thus successful spawning by the stocked adults. Further sampling will be required to determine if any arctic grayling fry survive beyond initial hatching and contribute to the juvenile component of the population. Sampling also should reveal the relative survival of any progeny of the transplanted adults. -12- KUPARUK RIVER ARCTIC GRAYLING DISEASE SCREENING Introduction To comply with our Fish Transport Permit, we attempted to obtain 60 arctic grayling from the Kuparuk River for disease screening. Approval to use Kuparuk River arctic grayling would provide two benefits: an additional source of fish other than the Sagavanirktok River system, and a source of fish minutes from potential stocking locations as opposed to hours for some Sagavanirktok River sites. Methods During the period 19-21 July, we fished one fyke net in each of three locations in slack water channels of the Kuparuk River: 1.6, 2.4, and 4.8 km downstream of the Spine Road crossing. We fished one additional net at the mouth of Smith Creek, about 3.2 km downstream of the Spine Road crossing. We checked the nets daily and kept all arctic grayling greater than 170 mm in a 1.2 x 2.4 x 1.2 m net holding pen in Kuparuk Deadarm Reservoir 5. Each day we released all arctic grayling less than 170 mm and all other fish after measuring them to the nearest millimeter (fork length). After two days we ended sampling and returned all of the arctic grayling held in the holding pen at Kuparuk Deadarm Reservoir 5 to Smith Creek (all of the penned arctic grayling were from Smith Creek). Results Fyke nets set in slack water channels of the lower Kuparuk River captured 52 arctic grayling, 2 slimy sculpin, and 12 ninespine stickleback. These 66 fish were small, less than 130 mm in length (Appendix 3). The fyke net set at the mouth of Smith Creek for 2 days captured 4 ninespine stickleback, a 465 mm broad whitefish, and 26 arctic grayling from 79 to 434 mm long (Appendix 3). Discussion Catch rates of large arctic grayling in the lower Kuparuk River in late July precluded obtaining an adequate sample of arctic grayling for disease screening. At least 7 to 10 days would have been required to capture the 60 arctic grayling needed for disease screening. As Smith Creek was the only site that produced any arctic grayling suitable for screening, it is likely that all arctic grayling used for disease screening would have to -13- come from Smith Creek or other small tributaries to the Kuparuk River. The number of streams tributary to the Kuparuk River in the vicinity of the Spine Road crossing is small and removal of the number of arctic grayling necessary for disease screening or a transplant could have adverse effects on the populations of arctic grayling in these streams. Our sampling indicates that there are insufficient large arctic grayling at catchable locations in the Kuparuk River in mid July to successfully conduct a transplant operation should this arctic grayling stock be approved for transplanting. Arctic grayling may be more numerous in the lower Kuparuk River in late August if this segment of the river is used by arctic grayling as an overwintering area. Additional sampling in late August may indicate that sufficient numbers of large arctic grayling are available for disease screening and transplanting immediately before freeze-up. -14- References Craig, P.C., and V.A. Poulin. 1975. Movements and growth of arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus) and juvenile arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus) in a small arctic stream, Alaska. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 32(5):689-697. Hemming, C.R. 1988. Aquatic habitat evaluation of flooded North Slope gravel mine sites (1986-1987). Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Division Tech. Rept. No. 88-1. Juneau. 69 pp. Hemming, C.R., P.K. Weber, and J.F. Winters. 1989. Limnological and fisheries investigations of flooded North Slope gravel mine sites, 1988. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Division Tech. Rept. No. 89-1. Juneau. 60 pp. McCart, P., P. Craig, and H. Bain. 1972. Report on fisheries investigations in the Sagavanirktok River and neighboring drainages. Prepared for Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. 143 pp. Skaugstad, C. 1989. Evaluation of arctic grayling enhancement: a cost per survivor estimate. Alaska Department of Fish and Game Fishery Data Series No. 96. Div. of Sport Fish, Juneau. 68 pp. Appendix 1. Length and estimated ages of arctic grayling captured within the Sagavanirktok River drainage and later transplanted to Kuparuk Mine Site B, June 1989. Creek (Date of capture) Length Age Tag # (mm) (yr) Dan Creek (6/22/89) 330 9 002039 Goose Green Gulch (6/25/89) 183 3 002167 189 3 002164 193 3 002165 194 4 002151 198 3 002160 203 3 002206 206 3 002149 212 3 002208 215 3 002132 216 3 002144 219 4 002139 227 4 002174 229 4 002183 230 4 002202 235 4 002136 246 3 002148 246 4 002200 251 4 002135 253 5 002166 259 4 002169 260 5 002182 262 4 002181 264 5 002157 265 5 002201 269 6 002172 271 5 002145 273 - 002187 276 5 002130 277 5 002177 277 3 002193 281 5 002186 282 6 002190 283 5 002134 284 6 002191 286 6 002155 289 6 002168 289 5 002161 290 6 002210 290 6 002211 292 4 002196 295 7 002129 295 - 002147 296 8 002173 -16- Appendix 1 continued. Creek (Date of capture) Length Age Tag # (ram) (yr) Goose Green Gulch (6/25/89) 296 6 002204 298 5 002128 301 6 002158 301 6 002162 303 6 002171 306 7 002207 306 8 002209 307 - 002203 309 - 002137 311 - 002143 312 6 002152 312 7 002175 312 7 002176 314 7 002199 315 8 002146 315 7 002192 317 6 002126 320 - 002178 321 8 002154 322 7 002197 323 7 002159 323 - 002170 323 - 002188 324 6 002127 324 6 002184 324 7 002195 326 8 002131 328 8 002205 329 8 002138 329 - 002156 329 - 002179 330 7 002153 331 7 002163 332 7 002141 335 - 002194 335 8 002198 337 8 002150 341 8 002185 347 9 002125 350 - 002180 351 10 002133 352 - 002140 353 8 002142 360 - 002189 Grader Slough (6/24/89) 216 3 002122 227 4 002120 229 - 002118 -17- Appendix 1 continued. Creek (Date of capture) Length Age Tag # (mm) (yr) Grader Slough (6/24/89) 285 6 002124 291 7 002119 313 8 002121 342 10 002123 Gustafson Gulch (6/21/89) 176 3 002002 225 4 002003 232 4 002001 274 - 002004 313 - 002006 (6/23/89) 177 3 002088 201 3 002090 210 3 002096 241 5 002089 241 4 002098 254 6 002087 267 5 002091 297 6 002097 Happy Valley Creek (6/22/89) 193 4 002002 199 4 002029 218 4 002012 226 4 002017 227 4 002008 232 5 002022 237 - 002033 250 5 002016 276 6 002038 292 6 002027 297 - 002023 299 9 002032 304 6 002018 307 8 002014 307 - 002024 307 8 002037 308 8 002015 311 6 002009 311 8 002034 316 10 002019 320 9 002007 321 7 002010 321 7 002013 324 8 002028 326 - 002036 328 7 002021 329 7 002020 330 8 002039 336 9 002030 356 11 002031 -18- Appendix i continued. Creek (Date of capture) Length Age Tag # (nun) (yr) Happy Valley Creek (6/22/89) 358 11 002035 359 11 002025 368 10 002011 (6/23/89) 191 3 002081 201 3 002080 203 3 002075 206 3 002082 218 4 002079 238 - 002085 238 4 002088 265 6 002076 281 7 002077 287 8 002072 310 9 002073 314 9 002074 315 8 002078 315 8 002086 317 7 002083 399 11 002084 (6/24/89) 185 3 002099 188 3 002102 194 3 002101 257 5 002100 Mark Creek (6/23/89) 180 3 002048 180 4 002051 187 4 002058 209 3 002056 214 4 002043 214 3 002054 217 4 002052 221 3 002065 239 4 002050 256 6 002044 266 5 002060 301 - 002045 312 9 002069 316 7 002046 316 8 002070 317 8 002063 318 9 002064 325 - 002068 329 8 002061 331 8 002062 332 8 002071 334 7 002066 337 8 002059 343 9 002049 -19- Appendix 1 continued. Creek (Date of capture) Length Age Tag # (mm) (yr) Mark Creek (6/23/89) 347 9 002055 348 9 002057 349 9 002067 362 11 002053 376 9 002047 (6/24/89) 212 3 002109 232 4 002104 260 5 002103 266 6 002110 329 8 002107 330 9 002108 330 9 002112 355 9 002111 362 - 002105 363 9 002106 Oksrukuyik Creek (6/22/89) 225 5 002042 296 7 002040 310 6 002041 (6/23/89) 258 5 002093 286 6 002092 307 8 002094 361 11 002095 (6/24/89) 176 3 002113 244 5 002116 278 6 002114 315 7 002117 338 8 002115 -20- Appendix 2. Lengths of fish caught and released in Sagavanirktok River drainage streams, 21-25 June 1989. Length of Fish in Millimeters Happy Goose Mark Valley Gustafson Oksrukuyik Green Species Creek Creek Gulch Creek Gulch Arctic Grayling 54 59 115 65 66 61 64 138 68 66 64 64 148 71 68 68 67 151 76 69 68 68 - 146 70 72 68 - 155 71 72 69 - 72 73 70 - 72 77 71 - 73 78 73 - 75 79 73 - 75 86 75 - 76* 90 77 - 78 91 77 - - 79 92 77 - 104 95 78 - 109 101 78 - - 110 103 79 - - 113 104 81* - - 115 106 85 - - 115 110 106 - - 128 110 108 - - 139 112 110 - - 144 113 111 - - 157 115 112 - - 158 116 113 - - 162 119 113 - - 163 120 113 - - 164 122 115 - - 165 124 116 - - 169 128 117 - - 176 147 117 150 118 151 121 155 124 - - 155 124 - - - 155 124 - - 155 125 - - 157 125 - - 160 125 - - 163 126 -21- Appendix 2 continued. Length of Fish in Millimeters Happy Goose Mark Valley Gustafson Oksrukuyik Green Species Creek Creek Gulch Creek Gulch Arctic Grayling 164 127 167 132 171 139 182 141 183 146 191 152 192 153 193 153 209 154 218 155 302 155 - 156 156 157 159 159 - 162 163 166 166 - 167 170 - 172 300 324* 328 347 Round Whitefish 153 268 -328 332 249 275 - 333 335 249 284 - 345 265 309 - 348 272 312 288 312 293 329 306 336 306 345 307 349 314 319 320 324 334 342 347 -22- Appendix 2 continued. Lenath of Fish in Millimeters Happy Goose Mark Valley Gustafson Oksrukuyik Green Species Creek Creek Gulch Creek Gulch Round Whitefish 368 378 - - 378 - - - - Burbot 500 - - 415 - 550 - - 430 - - - - 455 - - - - 455 - - - - 462 - - - - 484 - - - - 486 - - - - 493 - - - - 495 - - - - 500 - - - - 501 - - - - 502 - - - - 505 - - - - 510 - - - - 510 - - - - 510 - - - - 520 - - - - 520 - - - 520 - - - 520 - - - - 520 - - - - 525 - - - - 530 - - - - 540 - - - - 600 - - - - 600 - - - - 600 - Dolly Varden - 68 - 85 - 70 - 118 72 - - 75 - - 76 - - 77 - - 77 - - 96 - - 101 - - 102 - - 103 - - 105 - - 107 - - -23- Appendix 2 continued. Length of Fish in Millimeters Happy Goose Mark Valley Gustafson Oksrukuyik Green Species Creek Creek Gulch Creek Gulch Dolly Varden - 193 - Ninespine Stickleback - - - 72 * mortality Mark Creek: netted 23-25 June Happy Valley Creek: netted 22-25 June Gustafson Gulch: netted 21, 23 June Oksrukyik Creek: netted 22-25 June Goose Green Gulch: netted 25 June -24- Appendix 3. Lengths of fish caught in fyke nets in the Kuparuk River and Smith Creek downstream of the Spine Road crossing, 20-21 July 1989. Length of Fish in Millimeters Species Net 1 Net 2 Net 3 Net 4 Arctic Grayling 34 77 79* 40 35 78 79 66 35 80 82* 71 37 82 85 72 38 83 87 73 79 86 88* 73 79 87 116 74 83 110 125 75 84 119 127 76 86 144 135 77 87 - 137 77 92 - 181 77 113 - 183 78 253 79 262 80 284 81 287 81 291 82 292 82 306 83 309 84 309 84 338 85 354 86 373 87 434 91 102 120 125 Ninespine Stickleback 54 72 54* 43 * - - 66 47 67 53 72* 54 - - - 58 - - 61 - - - 63 - - - 66 - - - 67 - - - 68 -25- Appendix 3 continued. Length of Fish in Millimeters Species Net 1 Net 2 Net 3 Net 4 Slimy Sculpin 76 - - 56 Broad Whitefish - - 465 - * fyke net mortality Locations of nets: Net 1 - 1.6 km downstream of the Spine Road crossing Net 2 - 2.4 km downstream of the Spine Road crossing Net 3 - mouth of Smith Creek, 3.2 km downstream of the Spine Road crossing Net4 - 4.8 km downstream of the Spine Road crossing -26-