"ONE FISH, TWO FISH, RED FISH, BLUE FISH?"
In many ways Mount Rainier, as are many other national parks, is
viewed as an island of "natural" habitat surrounded by disturbed areas.
Yet our designated boundary does not necessarily reflect natural
boundaries; many resources in Mount Rainier are influenced by practices
outside our borders. A prime example is anadromous fish -- fish which
spend part of their lives in salt water and return to fresh water to
breed. Channelization, dam construction, etc., are factors which have a
great influence on the extent of upstream migration of these fish. Two
river systems originating in the park which might support anadromous
fish are the Carbon and White Rivers. Both systems carry glacial silt
during summer months; however, anadromous fish may enter the headwaters
prior to heavy glacial melt and successfully spawn in clearwater
tributaries off the main channel. For this reason, it is of interest to
know what anadromous fish might utilize tributaries of the Carbon and
White Rivers.
In hopes of learning what fish species (anadromous and
non-anadromous) are in Huckleberry Creek and non-glaciated tributaries
of the Carbon River, I surveyed these streams on August 9-10 with two
members of the Northwest Steelhead and Salmon Council (NWSSC) of Trout
Unlimited. The NWSSC, a sportsmans' association, functions to promote
sport fishing and fish habitat for anadromous fish in the northwest,
wading streams with an electroshocker powered by a 12-volt battery
(supplied by USFS, White River Ranger Station), we stunned fish swimming
between anode and cathode arms of the electroshocker. The charge
delivered by the shocker is sufficient only to temporarily immobilize
the fish, and only those fish (or careless fisherpersons) which come
between the anode and cathode. In addition, the charge is not constantly
emitted, but is sent through the water only when a switch on the anode
handle is activated. Thus the chances for fish to escape being shocked
(and hence counted) are great.
Fish may hide under logs or debris too low or dense for insertion of
the charge plates, or may simply escape upstream or downstream of the
shocker. A second problem we experienced was malfunctioning of the
equipment (Murphy's Law and I are buddies). Not only were the battery
terminal connections "touchy," even when these were properly connected,
the shocker failed to deliver the recommended voltage. Thus many fish
were not immobilized, but simply scared away at the first touch of the
anode switch. Nevertheless, we did have some success, with these
results:
DATE | LOCATION | FISH TYPE/# |
SIZE |
8/9/84 |
June Creek 8:30 a.m. |
Sculpin (bullhead)/2 Trout/3 |
3.5" Visual sighting, did not shock. |
Ranger Creek 9:30 a.m. |
Sculpin/10 Trout/3 |
2.0-3.5" Visual sighting, did not shock. |
Ipsut Creek 11:30 a.m. |
Sculpin/numerous Trout/1 |
2.0-3.0" 3.0": too small to identify. |
| Trout/2 |
Visual sighting, did not shock. |
Chenuis Creek (between falls and the river) |
Sculpin/numerous Trout/2 |
2.0-4.0" 1" fry: too small to identify |
2:00 p.m. |
Dolly Varden | 12" |
8/10/84 |
Huckleberry Ck.* 11:30 a.m. |
Sculpin/4 Cutthroat/1 Trout/2 |
2.0-3.0" 4.0" Visual sighting, did not shock. |
*NOTE: Some fishermen had caught about 15 cutthroat trout, 8-10" or
so in Huckleberry Creek on 8/10, another clue that the electroshocker
was ineffective on larger fish.
The survey will be repeated in the spring. Contact Cat Hawkins, ext.
250, if you'd like to help.
Cat Hawkins