Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReview Of South Central AK Hydro Power 2 of 2 1978Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 10 None. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 5 Distance -- undesirable due to distance from markets, and length/cost of transmission fac- ilities needed. Access -- maintenance roads, etc., would encourage new and excessive (usually motorized) access to remote areas, with attendant damage to wildlife and nonmotorized recreation values. Less problem than with #1, but potential inter- ference of lake and/or generating facilities with proposed Lake Clark National Park. Site No. 3 Group Rank 6 Name Beluga Lower Stream Beluga River Power Potential (kW) 15,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Tyonek rnmmRMmc . EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 5 CIRI land selection -- proposed road route -- existing power lines. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fisheries drainage; the Beluga River supports five species of salmon. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fishery -- spawning/rearing habitat; sport fishing area -- big game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments None Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comment 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. Reasonable Size -- size of project seems more in keeping with our general views that smaller, decentralized sources of energy are desirable. Site No. 4 Group Rank 6 Name Coffee Stream Beluga River Power Potential (kW) 37,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Tyonek COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State land -- proposed road route -- existing power lines. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fisheries drainage; the Beluga River supports five species of salmon. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fishery -- spawning/rearing habitat; sport fishing area -- big game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments None. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. Reasonable Size -- size of project seems more in keeping with our general views that smaller, decentralized sources of energy are desirable. Site No. 5 Group Rank 6 Name Beluga Upper Stream Beluga River Power Potential (kW) 48,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Tyonek COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 5 CIRI selected land -- proposed road route -- access to existing power lines. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fisheries drainage; the Beluga River supports five species of salmon. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fishery -- spawning/rearing habitat; sport fishing area -- big game habitat. U.S. Fish.& Wildlife Service Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments None. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. Reasonable Size -- size of project seems more in keeping with our general views that smaller, decentralized sources of energy are desirable. Site No. 6 Group Rank 1 Name Strandline Lake Stream Beluga River Power Potential (kW) 17,000 Transmission Access Moderate U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Tyonek COMMENTS: Development of Beluga Upper (5) would reduce by 12 x 103 kW. avnr.rrnmrrirrc - CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 5 Strandline Lake is state selected, Beluga Lake is CIRI selected -- proposed railroad route -- has access to existing power lines. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 10 Minimal fish and wildlife concerns; no known critical habitat involved. National Marine Fisheries Services:. Scale Comments 10 Minimal known fish and wildlife resources; no major impact foreseen. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments None. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 5 Distance -- undesirable due to distance from markets, and length/cost of transmission fac- ilities needed. Too Big -- sheer magnitude of project causes us to question its desirability. Access -- maintenance roads, etc., would encourage new and excessive (usually motorized) access to remote areas, with attendant damage to wildlife and nonmotorized recreation values. A Site No. 7 Group Rank 6 Name Lake Creek..Lower Stream Lake Creek Power Potential (kW) 22,000 Transmission Access Severe U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Talkeetna COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State lands -- existing trail. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Lake Creek is a major anadromous and resident fisheries stream. It supports trophy class rainbow and Arctic grayling and provides spawning and rearing habitat for five species of Pacific salmon. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Important anadromous fish drainage -- sport fishing area; big game habitat. Supports 5 species of salmon and several freshwater species. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments - None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Heavy recreational use, fisheries conflict. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Fish -- project would or might impact "obvious" fisheries resource (usually salmon). Recreation -- Adverse impact on present or po- tential recreation uses (tourism, floating rivers, rafting, canoing, kayaking, etc.). Site No. 9 Group Rank 6 Name Talachulitna River Stream Talachulitna River Power Potential (kW) 28,000 Transmission Access Severe U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Tyonek COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State lands -- proposed road and existing trail. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Drainage provides important wildlife habitat. The Talachulitna River is a trophy fish stream for rainbow and Arctic grayling and also, a major Cook Inlet salmon producing stream. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Anadromous river with important sport fishery. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Heavy recreational use; fisheries conflict. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Fish -- project would or might impact "obvious" fisheries resource (usually salmon). Recreation -- adverse impact on present or po- tential recreation uses (rafting, canoing, kayaking). Site No. 10 Group Rank 6 Name Hayes Stream Skwentna River Power Potential (kW) 89,000 Transmission Access Severe U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Tyonek COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State lands -- proposed road and existing trail. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Important big game and anadromous fish habitat involved. National Marine. Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous waterway -- game habitat losses. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Recreation use. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 5 Distance -- undesirable markets, and length/cost ilities needed. due to distance from of transmission fac- Access -- maintenance roads, etc., would encourage new and excessive (usually motorized) access to remote areas, with attendant damage to wildlife and nonmotorized recreation values. Site No. 11 Group Rank 3 Name Emerald Stream Skwentna River Power Potential (kW) 37,000 Transmission Access Severe U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Tyonek nnmmvmmo . EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL UtilizinqLand Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 5 State lands -- possible long access through Skwentna River to proposed road and existing trail. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 5 Some wildlife conflicts anticipated. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 5 Some loss of game habitat -- possible loss of fish habitat. TT C Scale Comments None Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Recreational use. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Distance -- undesirable due to distance from markets, and length/cost of transmission fac- ilities needed. Access -- maintenance roads, etc., would encourage new and excessive (usually motorized) access to remote areas, with attendant damage to wildlife and nonmotorized recreation values. Site No. 12 Group Rank 6 Name Yentna Stream Yentna River Power Potential (kW) 145,000 Transmission Access Moderate U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Tyonek nnwrtertc�Tmc . Assume operation with (13) and (14) as a system. EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State lands -- accessible by trail and to proposed road. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Critical anadromous fish and big game habitat involved. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Anadromous river with critical big game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Recreation use. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Commeints 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. Site No. 13 Group Rank 6 Name Talachulitna Stream Skwentna River Power Potential (kW) 75,000 Transmission Access Severe U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Tyonek COMMENTS: Assumes operation with (12) and (14) as a system. EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State lands -- proposed road and existing trail. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Major migrational corridor for anadromous fish. Important big and small game habitat area. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous waterway. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Heavy recreation use which will grow; fisheries conflict. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Fish -- project would.or might impact "obvious" fisheries resource (usually salmon). Recreation -- adverse impact on present or po- tential recreation uses (rafting, canoing, kayaking). r I Site No. 14 Group Rank 6 Name Skwentna Stream Skwentna River Power Potential (kW) 98,000 Transmission Access Severe U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Tyonek COMMENTS: Assumes operation with (12) and (13) as a system. EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State lands -- by proposed road route and existing trail. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Critical anadromous fisheries and wildlife habitat involved. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous waterway. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments - None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Heavy recreation use. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Distance -- undesirable markets, and length/cost ilities needed. due to distance from of transmission fac- Access -- maintenance roads, etc., would encourage new and excessive (usually motorized) access to remote areas, with attendant damage to wildlife and nonmotorized recreation values. Site No. 29 Group Rank 6 Name Palmer Stream Matanuska River Power Potential (kW) 16,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Anchorage COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: i Scale Comments 10 State lands by Palmer -- existing roads and railroad. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Significant anadromous and big game habitat involved. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Impact on anadromous fish and game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments S None. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. Minimal wildlife, access impacts? However, lifetime of facilities? (sed=* entation); other factors being equal preference decreases with distance from Palmer -- proximity. Site No. 30 Group Rank 6 Name Moose River Stream Matanuska 'River Power Potential (kW) 21,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Anchorage COMMENTS: Alternative to Palmer (29). EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL, Utilizinq Land Use Planning Commission 'Information: Scale Comments 10 State lands near Palmer -- existing roads and railroad. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments. 0 Significant anadromous and big game habitat involved. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments i 0 Impact on anadromous fish and game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments - None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Scenic drive, recreational use, commercial float trips. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. minimal wildlife, access impacts? However, lifetime of facilities? (sedimentation); other factors being equal, preference decreases with distance from Palmer -- proximity. Site No. 31 Group Rank 4 Name King Mountain Stream Matanuska River Power Potential (kW) 44,'0'A0 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Anchorage COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 5 Partially selected by CIRI -- existing roads. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 5 Some anadromous fisheries and big game habitat would be lost. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Impact on anadromous fish and game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Scenic drive, recreational use, commercial float trips. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. Minimal wildlife, access impacts? However, lifetime of facilities? (sedimentation); other factors being equal, preference decreases with distance from Palmer -- proximity. Site No. 32 Group Rank Name 3 Coal Creek Stream Matanuska River Power Potential (kW) 64',000 Transmission Access 'Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Anchorage COMMENTS: Alternative to King Mountain (31). EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 5 Partially selected by CIRI -- existing roads. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 5 Would effect several small anadromous fish streams and some winter big game range upstream of the impoundment. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 5 Some loss of fish and wildlife habitat. U.S. Fish..& Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Scenic drive, recreational use, commercial float trips. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. Minimal wildlife, access impacts? However, lifetime of facilities? (sedimentation); other factors being equal, preference decreases with distance from Palmer -- proximity. Site No. 33 Group Rank 3 Name Purinton Creek Stream Matanuska River Power Potential (kW) 67,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Anchorage COMMENTS: Alternative to Hicks (34). EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 5 Selected by village corporation -- existing roads. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 5 Would effect several small anadromous fish streams and some winter big game range upstream from the impoundment. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 5 Some loss of fish and wildlife habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments - None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Scenic drive, recreational use, commercial float trips. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. Minimal wildlife, access impacts? However, lifetime of facilities? (sedimentation); other factors being equal, preference decreases with distance from Palmer -- proximity. Site No. 34 Group Rank 2 Name Hicks Site Stream Matanuska River Power Potential (kW) 59,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Anchorage rnMMFNTc- EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State land -- existing road -- may affect down- stream native selections. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 5 No major fisheries problems anticipated; some big game habitat would be lost. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 5 Some loss of fish and wildlife habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Scenic drive, recreational use, commercial float trips. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. Minimal wildlife, access impacts? However, lifetime of facilities (sedimentation); other factors being equal, preference decreases with distance from Palmer -- proximity. Site No. Group Rank 35 P% Name Caribou Creek Stream Caribou Creek Power Potential (kW) 19,000 Transmission•Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Anchorage COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State lands -- access to existing road through narrow valley. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 5 No fisheries problems but some important big game habitats involved. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 5 Some fish and wildlife habitat losses. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Site No. 36 Group Rank 6 Name Kenai Lower Stream Kenai River Power Potential (kW) 55,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Kenai (B-3 rnMMT?.Nma . EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 In Kenai Moose Range (Federal). Close to local road and existing highway with power. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 The Kenai River is the leading anadromous fisheries stream in Cook Inlet. Important big game habitat involved. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fish drainage; important sport fishery -- valuable game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 High recreation use, fisheries conflict. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 5 Fish -- project would or might impact "obvious" fisheries resource (usually salmon). Recreation -- adverse impact on present or poten- tial recreation uses (tourism, floating rivers, etc.). Site No. 37 Group Rank 6 Name Moose Horn Stream Kenai River Power Potential (kW) 60,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Kenai (C-2 rnMMFNTc• EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 On state land. Close to local road and existing highway with power, and landing area. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 The Kenai River is the leading anadromous fisheries stream in Cook Inlet. Important big game habitat involved. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fish drainage -- important sport fishery -- valuable game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments �P •53TW 1 Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 High recreation use, fisheries conflict. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 5 Fish -- project would or might impact "obvious" fisheries resource (usually salmon). Recreation -- adverse impact on present or poten- tial recreation uses (tourism, floating rivers, etc.). Site No. 38 Group Rank 6 Name Killey River Stream Killey River Power Potential (kW) 21,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Kenai (B-2 COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 5 Kenai Moose Range. Close to trail -- access possible though distant. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 An important big game habitat area, particularly for moose and bear. Some anadromous fisheries habitat would be lost. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Important anadromous fish stream -- game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Proposed wilderness area. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale E Comments Distance -- undesirable due to distance from markets, and length/cost of transmission fac- ilities needed. Access -- maintenance roads, etc., would encourage new and excessive (usually motorized) access to remote areas, with attendant damage to wildlife and nonmotorized recreation values. Site No. 39 Group Rank 6 Name Stelters Ranch Stream Kenai River Power Potential (kW) 84,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Kenai (B-1) r(1MMR1,7MQ EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 Kenai Moose Range. Very accessible -- next to existing highway and power line. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Miles of critical anadromous fisheries habitat upstream of the site. Some big game habitat involved. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fish drainage -- important sport fishery -- valuable game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 High recreation use, fisheries conflict. aska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Recreation -- adverse impact on present or poten- tial recreation uses (tourism, floating rivers, etc.). Lake -- based on available information, dam would create lake of excessive size, given local con- ditions (settlement, wildlife habitat, etc.)(?) Site No. 40 Group Rank 6 Name Kenai Lake Stream Kenai River Power Potential (kW) 115,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Seward COMMENTS: Alternative to Stelters Ranch (39). EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State land -- good access to existing highway with power. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Would negatively impact anadromous fisheries production on a major system. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fish drainage -- important sport fishery -- valuable game habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 High recreation use, fisheries conflict. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Lake -- based on available information, dam would create lake of excessive size, given local con- ditions (settlement, wildlife habitat, etc.). Site No. 41 Group Rank 2 Name Snow Stream Snow River Power Potential (kW) 63,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Seward COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 Chugach Forest (Federal). Good access, good power -- existing. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 5 No major fisheries or wildlife problems anticipated. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 5 Some loss of fish and wildlife habitat. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 5 May be part of trail system through Ptarmigan Lake. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Too Big -- sheer magnitude of project causes us to question its desirability. Recreation -- adverse impact on present or poten- tial recreation uses (tourism, floating river, etc.). Wildlife. Site No. 42 Group Rank 6 Name Kasilof River Stream Kasilof River Power Potential (kW) 40,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Kenai (B-4 nnatr lme. EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 On state land (20% regional). Close to existing and proposed highway and power line. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fisheries and big game problems would occur. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Important anadromous fishery. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska; Scale Comments 5 Heavy recreation use. ➢I A Cara r,4-or Fr , +-I,e '@. 4 .-.......�...!- . Scale Comments 5 Fish -- project would or might impact "obvious" fisheries resource (usually salmon). Recreation -- adverse impact on present or poten- tial recreation uses (tourism, floating rivers, etc.). Site No. 4 Group Rank 1 Name Tustumena Stream Glacier Creek Power Potential (kW) 21,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Kenai (A-2) COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 5 Kenai Moose Range. Access difficult -- possible to proposed highway. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 10 No major fisheries or big game habitat involved. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 10 No major impacts -- provided drainage to Kasilof River is not affected. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Proposed wilderness area. Alaska Center for .the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Distance -- undesirable due to distance from markets, and length/cost of transmission fac- ilities needed_ Access -- maintenance roads, etc. would encourage new and excessive (usually motorized) access to remote areas, with attendant damage to wildlife and nonmotorized recreation values. Site No. 44 Group Rank 3 Name Sheep Creek Stream Sheep Creek Power Potential (kW) 20,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Seldovia COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 5 On line between D-1 and Kenai Moose Range. Accessible to proposed highway. (presently .quite distant). Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 5 No fisheries problems. Some important goat and sheep habitat would be lost. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 5 Some fish and game habitat losses. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments - None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Proposed wilderness area. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Distance -- undesirable due to distance from markets, and length/cost of transmission fac- ilities needed. Access -- maintenance roads, etc., would encourage new and excessive (usually motorized) access to remote areas, with attendant damage to wildlife and nonmotorized recreation values. Site No. 45 Group Rank 3 Name Resurrection River Stream Resurrection River Power Potential (kW) 18,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Seward M MAMOP Q EVALUATIONS- CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 0 On line between D-2 and Chugach Forest. On proposed railroad and highway. Possible access to existing road and power. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 10 Little fisheries or wildlife problems anticipated. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 5 Some fish habitat losses. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services: Scale Comments - None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Forest Service trail; access to Harding Ice Fields National Park; Park Service headquarters. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 10 Proximity -- project is apparently desirable because of closeness to markets for electricity or existing corridors. Site No. 46 Group Rank 6 Name Tazlina Stream Tazlina Ri Power Potential (kW) 104,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Gulkana COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL, Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State land. Accessible by road -- existing and proposed. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 0 Major anadromous fisheries system would be impacted. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 0 Anadromous fish losses. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Proposed wild and scenic river. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Distance -- undesirable due to distance from markets, and length/cost of transmission fac- ilities needed. Lake -- based on available information, dam would create lake of excessive size, given local con- ditions (settlement, wildlife habitat, etc.). Recreation -- adverse impact on present or poten- tial recreation uses (proposed wild and scenic river). Site No. 47 Group Rank 2 Name Nelchina River Stream Nelchina River Power Potential (kW) 45,000 Transmission Access Good U.S.G.S. Topographic Map (Scale 1:250,000) Gulkana COMMENTS: EVALUATIONS: CH2M HILL Utilizing Land Use Planning Commission Information: Scale Comments 10 State land -- accessible to existing highway. Alaska Department of Fish & Game: Scale Comments 5 Some fisheries and big game habitat problem anticipated. National Marine Fisheries Services: Scale Comments 5 Some fish and game habitat losses. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service: Scale Comments None. Trustees for Alaska: Scale Comments 0 Proposed wild and scenic river. Alaska Center for the Environment: Scale Comments 0 Distance -- undesirable due to distance from markets, and length/cost of transmission fac- ilities needed. Lake -- based on available information, dam would create lake of excessive size, given local con- ditions (settlement, wildlife habitat, etc.). Recreation -- adverse impact on present or poten- tial recreation uses (proposed wild and scenic river). APPENDIX E PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES LAND AND WATER M4N4GEMENT October 20, 1978 Mr. Ron Reiland CH2M Hill 310 "K" Street, Suite 602 Anchorage, AK 99501 Dear Mr. Reiland: JAYS HAMMOND, GOVERNOR 323 E ITN AVENUE -ANCHORAGE 9WI During the week of October 9, 1978, we received a ringbinder identifying 61 potential dam sites along with a request for input from the Division of Lands on a variety of issues including land classification, water rights, and socioeconomic impacts. We understand that this document is a first -cut at site evaluation. However, given the time deadline of October 20, it is impossible to divert our staff from other high priority ongoing projects on such short notice to provide any reasonable input. We are interested in providing information on these sites and could, in fact, do so if the timeframe is extended to December 15. Therefore we . reserve any judgment until sufficient review time and more specific site information is available. Additional site information should include: 1) type and major components (reservoirs, penstocks, powerhouses) of the hydroelectric projects anticipated at the various sites; 2) more specific site locations, preferably on USGS 1:63360 quad sheets, 3) power generation potential of the sites, 4) anticipated storage capacity of the impoundments, 5) and potential markets to be served by the projects (to help determine powerline and highway right-of-way needs). Again, we are interested in providing information to your project, but we require a more reasonable review time. Sincerely, Brent N. Petrie Acting Chief, Water Management cc: Steve Reeve Dave Hanson John Morris Planning and Classification Planning and Research SCDO 1044LH United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE NORTHERN ALASKA ECOLOGICAL SERVICES Room 266, Federal Building, Box 20 101 12th Avenue Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 October 20, 1978 Corby Howell CH2M Hill Anchorage Office 310 K Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Howell: Enclosed is our evaluation of 13 of the 61 dam sites proposed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. These dam sites, 49 through 61, are all that fall within our jurisdiction. The remaining 48 should be evaluated by our Western Alaska Ecological Services office in Anchorage. If you have any questions, please contact Jerry Stroebele or myself. Sincerely yours, Michae�W, I";4ZI Fish and Wildlife Biologist Save Energy and You Serve America! "WE ARE NOT HERE RE TO MAKE A LIFE." W.E.RUSSELL ALASKA CENTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT 913 WEST 6TH AVENUE ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 19071 274-3621 October 25, 1978 Ms. Corby Howell CHIM-Hill 310 K Street Anchorage, AK 99501 Dear Ms. Howell, This letter is part of our response to your Evaluation Package for 61 proposed alternative hydroelectric sites. Given the data available to us, our comments are necessarily very general. We have not attempted to address fish/wildlife impacts, except in obvious cases. Oiir primary concerns have been the impacts each proposal might have in terms of encouraging unnecessary access to remote areas and loss of significant habitat, scenic or recreation values, due to size or loeation of the dams/lakes. We will be preparing a more detailed response, based on proposed impoundment areas, better maps, etc., as soon as we can obtain these. Therefore, the enclosed comments should be regarded as very preliminary, as a starting point for further work, and subject to modification in the light of new information. The format for seeking comment is quite good partic- ularly given the time constraints involved. We appreciate the opportunity to comment, and to look forward to a continuing and active role in this process. T nk ou P.S. Please note the key to abbrevi- ations used in our Comments, on the title page for that section. Paul Lowe Executive Director RECYCLED PAPER