{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019335855401429174, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011139134089953762, 'mean_word_length': 5.196614583333333, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Historical and contemporary trapping in the western Susitna Basin

Patterns of wild resource harvest and utilization, and the economics of trapping, are described for the western Susitna Basin from Alexander Creek in the south to Youngstown Bend in the North. Area residents are predominantly white settlers who have moved into the area since the turn of the century. Interviews were conducted with people who moved to the area as early as 1925. Approximately 64 households currently reside permanently in the area. Data were collected from 44 area households between January and May 1985. An additional sample of six trapper households was interviewed in the Trapper Creek area. The cash economy of the area was closely tied to the harvest of wild resources, indirectly through the operation of commercial lodges and guiding operations for fishermen and hunters, and directly by commercial trapping. Area residents also participated in a variety of other types of cash jobs locally and non-locally. Resources taken for personal consumptive uses were a vital part of this mixed economy. The study found high levels of participation in hunting and fishing activities by area residents. Over 50 percent of the households attempted to harvest salmon, trout, moose, and berries. Between onethird and one-half the households participated in the harvest of furbearers, spruce grouse, burbot, hooligan, and grayling. Moose and salmon contributed over three-quarters of the total edible resource harvest. A decrease of 30 percent occurred in the 1984 average harvest compared to the 1982 harvest. Demographic characteristics which appeared to increase household harvests were many years of residency, large-sized households, heads of households between 35 and 49 years of age, and the presence of a hunting or fishing guide or trapper in the household. Trapper households harvested an average of 312 pounds more edible resources than did non-trapper households. They also took twice as many different resources as non-trappers. Trappers were categorized into three groups: commercial-subsistence, commercial-subsistence-recreational, and receational. The first two groups harvested more pounds edible resources and produced more cash earnings than did the recreational group. The commercial-subsistence group produced nearly three times as much earnings as the commercial-subsistence-recreational group. Trapping in the western Susitna Basin study area was valued using six cost accounting methods. Net potential earnings from trapping averaged $833 for 15 trappers. The seven commercial-subsistence trappers averaged $2,258 in potential earnings, almost one-fifth the 1982 average total annual income per return for Skwentna. Trapping was a seasonal income source which occurred in winter months when cash sources were scarce. Several non-monetary values associated with trapping were the maintenance of good mental and physical health, and teaching young people to accept responsibilities. The role of trapping in the local economy was that of being a long-term, relatively stable income source among several sources. Residents maintained the capacity to earn cash from a range of income sources, any one of which might diminish from year to year. A variety of wild resources were also utilized since the abundance of any one may fluctuate annually. An estimated 39 resident and non-resident trappers used the study area in 1984. Trapper numbers and levels of activity may fluctuate from year to year depending on fur prices, weather and other environmental conditions, and an individual trapper's commitments to alternate cash sources. Marten, beaver, mink, and fox were the major furbearer species harvested and those which produced the most amounts of cash income. Marten were trapped in the largest numbers of any fur and produced the greatest amount of gross income. Beaver yielded the second largest amount of gross income to trappers. Many beaver carcasses were used for dogfood and a few were used for human consumption. Acquisition of traplines was done historically through cash purchases and settling untrapped areas. Today, most trappers are given areas by former trappers or settle on untrapped areas. Recreational trappers, who were not present historically, commonly utilized portions of commercial trappers' areas. The most productive commercial trappers utilized areas averaging 198 square miles in size. Most commercial trappers who utilized areas which had been trapped historically, extended the boundaries of these areas with the use of snowmachines and often consolidated portions of adjoining areas. Expansion of these areas was necessary in order to maintain production and to reach areas unaffected by settlement and recreational trappers.