Travel time between Cape Kumlik and Chignik 

 Lagoon. — Starting in 1960 some purse seine boats in the 

 Chignik management area began catching significant 

 numbers of sockeye salmon in Aniakchak Bay and its 

 western terminus, Cape Kumlik, which is 72 km (45 mi) 

 east of Chignik Lagoon. Since that time tagging studies 

 have shown that almost 95% of the sockeye salmon in 

 this area are bound for Chignik Lagoon (Lechner"*). In 

 order to assign these fish to the catch of a given day in 

 Chignik Lagoon, one must know the migration time from 

 Cape Kumlik to Chignik Lagoon. Travel time can be 

 estimated from the interval between the release of fish 

 tagged at Aniakchak Bay and the recovery of the same 

 fish in Chignik Lagoon. Fish were tagged in Aniakchak 

 Bay by Richardson'' on 7 July 1963 during a closed 

 fishing period. The commercial fishery in the district re- 

 sumed operations on 8 July at 0600 h and continued oper- 

 ations from 0600 to 1800 h each day through 12 July. The 

 recovery of tagged fish in Chignik Lagoon reached a peak 

 2 days after release (Fig. 8). Hartt (1966) has shown that 

 tagging delays the migration of mature sockeye salmon 

 on the high seas about 1 day. It appears from Figure 8 

 that many sockeye salmon can travel from Cape Kumlik 

 to Chignik Lagoon in 1 day, allowing 1 day for tagging 

 delay. This is a rate of travel of about 72 km (45 mi) per 

 day; Hartt (1966) has shown that the rate of travel for 



'^Lechner. J. 1969. Identification of red salmon stocks taken in the 

 Cape Kumlik - Aniakchak Bay fishery, Chignik area, 1967. Alaska Dep. 

 Fish Game Inf Lead. 1,33, 32 p. 



"Richardson, T. H. 1963. Aniakchak tagging program. Alaska 

 Dep. Fish Game, -Juneau, 2 p. 



20 r 



DAYS FROM RELEASE 



Figure 8.— Numbers of tagged sockeye salmon re- 

 covered in Chignik Lagoon from day 1 to 5 after 

 release of fish lagged at Aniakchak Bay in July 1963 

 (data from Richardson, see text footnote 17). 



returns to Bristol Bay is as much as 56 km (35 mi) per 

 day, becoming faster as the fish near the coast. 



lYavel time between Chignik Lagoon and Chignik 

 weir. — The commercial catch in Chignik Lagoon on a 

 given day is not taken from the same group of fish that 

 are counted through the weir on the same day; the mi- 

 gration time between the fishing area and the weir must 

 be considered. Normally, sockeye salmon move up- 

 stream from the lagoon on each high tide and pass im- 

 mediately through the weir; few fish loiter in the river 

 downstream from the weir. In tagging experiments to de- 

 termine time of entry of the stocks, fish tagged and re- 

 leased in Chignik Lagoon during closed fishing periods 

 were later counted as they passed through the weir. In 

 addition, other fish were tagged and released immedi- 

 ately downstream from the weir and these tagged fish 

 also were counted as they passed through the weir. Since 

 the same sampling gear (seine), type of tags (25 mm 

 diameter disks), and tagging crew were used in both tag- 

 ging operations, the difference between migration times 

 through the weir for the two groups of fish should reflect 

 the migration time between the lagoon and weir (Figs. 9, 

 10; Table 5). 



Two results are apparent from the tagging data: 1) 

 Tagging delayed migration approximately 1 day, i.e., 

 fish tagged immediately downstream from the weir did 

 not pass through until about 1 day later as shown from 

 the mode in Figure 9; and 2) assuming a delay in mi- 

 gration of 1 day due to tagging, the migration time from 

 Chignik Lagoon to the weir was about 2 days. Since catch 

 and escapement are recorded by 1-day intervals, a 2-day 

 lag between the catch and escapement was used as the 



DAYS FROM RELEASE 



Figure 9. — Numbers of days between release and passage through 

 the Chignik River weir for sockeye salmon tagged and released 

 immediately below the weir, 1962-66 (Uahlbcrg 1968). 



