The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutYerrick Creek Hydro Assessment Grant Agree No. 2195345 Final Report 2009YERRICK CREEK HYDRO ASSESSMENT GRANT AGREEMENT NO. 2195345 FINAL REPORT FOR: ALASKA ENERGY AUTHORITY 813 W. NORTHERN LIGHTS BLVD. ANCHORAGE, AK 99503 PREPARED BY: ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY P.O. BOX 3222 PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368 AUGUST 2009 1oJ IE rrn P ~~· ·c I lhl AUG 1 ~ j ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY PO BOX 3222 -193 OTTO STREET August 17, 2009 Douglas Ott, Project Manager Alaska Energy Authority 813 W. Northern Lights Blvd Anchorage, AK 99503 Dear Douglas PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368 (360) 38> 1733-(800) 982-0136 FAJl(360)385-5177 Enclosed is a hard copy and CD ROM with an electronic version of the final Y errick Creek Hydroelectric potential report. AIDEA /AEA Every effort has been made to provide all necessary information. Please contact me if questions arise or if additional information is required Respectfully submitted, Karl B. Wood Senior Accmmtant Karl. w@aptalaska.com TABLE OF CONTENTS Topic Page Background .................................................................................... 1 Studies Conducted ............................................................................ 1 Summary ....................................................................................... 7 Grant Budget.................................................................................. 8 Project Outcomes ............................................................................ l 0 Problems Encountered ...................................................................... 10 Conclusions and Recommendations ......................•..•..••.....•.................. 10 Project Feasibility Assessment Timeline ................................................. 11 Attachments .................................................................................... 13 1. Correspondence 2. Wetland Delineation 3. TES Plant Survey 4. Water Quality and Hydrology Baseline Study 5. Fish Reports 6. Design Diagrams YERRlCK CREEK HYDRO ASSESSMENT GRANT AGREEMENT NO. 2195345 FINAL REPORT On January 13, 2009, a grant agreement from the Alaska Energy Authority was received in the amount of $100,000 to fund feasibility studies for the Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project, which is located approximately 20 miles west ofTok on the Alaska Highway. Background: AP&T proposes to construct the 2.0 MW Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (Project) located on Yerrick Creek. The Project would off-set diesel generation which presently supplies power to the communities of Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake, and Tok. The Project will consist of a small diversion structure, approximately 15,000 feet of penstock, powerhouse with a single generating unit, tailrace, small substation, and transmission line. The Project operation will be run-of-river; annual generation is expected to be approximately 4,900 MWh/yr (approximately 40% of the annual interconnected load). The Project will provide clean, renewable electricity, as well as rate stabilization. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation. AP&T's customers in Tetlin, Tok, Tanacross and Dot Lake presently pay between $0.47- $0.65 per kWh (excluding PCE; based on the fluctuating rates in 2008). Once the Project interties with the Tok grid, the cost per kWh could be reduced by approximately 20% to about $0.37-$0.52 per kWh (excluding PCE; based on 2008 rates). This hydroelectric project will reduce diesel fuel consumption by approximately 350,000 gallons per year, which at today's prices (2008 average=$3.577/gal.) is equivalent to $1,252,000 annually. The existing diesel plant in Tok, which supplies electricity to all four communities, would use fewer diesel generators to meet the remaining load, reducing labor and maintenance costs and the frequency of generator overhaul and replacement for a potential savings of $50,000 annually. Lower energy costs would help stimulate both residential and commercial development. The environmental impacts of AP&T's diesel generation, (e.g. air pollution, noise pollution, and potential for spills, etc.) will be significantly reduced by the Project. During part of the year it is expected that the entire load can be carried by the Project, and during the winter the use of diesel generation will supplement the Project. Studies Conducted: On June 19, 2008, and then again on July 22, 2008, AP&T submitted draft study plans to the resource agencies to see what studies would be necessary in order to permit this project. SHPO and ADF&G were the primary respondents with ADF&G handling all the environmental tssues. Copies of agency/ AP&T correspondence are enclosed in the Attachments. AEA Grant #2195345 Yerrick Creek Hydro Assessment AP&T proposed to conduct the following surveys as part of the assessment of this site as a potential hydroelectric project: 1. Stream gaging 2. Fish & Wildlife surveys 3. Wetland Delineation 4. Threatened, Endangered & Sensitive (TES) plant species 5. Water Quality Testing 6. Archaeological survey 7. Design 8. Topographic mapping 9. Permitting 1. Stream gaging: Gaging began in 2007 by AP&T personnel who installed a gage below the diversion location. Flow has shown that there is sufficient water there to operate a hydro project perhaps all twelve months of the year, depending on the fall rains and coldness of winter. 2. Fish & Wildlife surveys: After providing the resource agencies with the draft study plans, they determined that the available information was adequate regarding wildlife resources in the area. Fish surveys however were required to determine the extent of Dolly Varden and Arctic Grayling habitat because of their known or suspected use of the creek. The fish surveys began in September 2008 and were conducted by consultant Steve Grabacki of Graystar Pacific Seafood, Ltd. out of Anchorage. ADF&G wanted the following evaluated: I. Are there any fish in the creek. 2. Which species are present in the creek. 3. If indeed Spotted Dolly Varden and Arctic Gray ling were in the creek. 4. If one I both of these species wintered in the creek. 5. If either I both of these species migrate up in the spring I down in the fall. 6. If the hydroelectric project would have a significant impact on the fish habitat. In two September 2008 surveys a small number of Spotted Dolly Varden (DV) and Artie Grayling were found in Y errick Creek using various methods of fish entrapment including: rod & reel, electrofishing, nets, and minnow traps. The largest DV was only 176mm (approx. 6.92"), and the Grayling 150mm (5.9") in length. The DV remained upstream as ice was forming suggesting year round residency while the Grayling found in the creek mouth at the Tanana River suggests seasonal migration. The pools where they found the fish were marked for early spring study to verifY this theory. In May 2009, a meeting was held between AP&T and ADF&G in Fairbanks to discuss what was known and what if any additional information was needed to get a permit for construction by August l, 2009. While acknowledging that DV were probably resident in the upper Y errick Creek and would not be impacted by the project, ADF&G asked for information on whether DV AEA Grant #2195345 2 Yerrick Creek Hydro Assessment or Arctic Grayling were over-wintering in the bypass reach of the creek, if DV migrated up from the Tanana River each spring, and if the Arctic Grayling were spawning in the creek in the bypass reach. In response, AP&T went back out to Y errick Creek before thaw and videoed fish under the ice in the creek, which were identified as DV, no Arctic Grayling. This showed that DV over-wintered in the creek rather than coming up from the Tanana River in the spring. Surveys were also repeated in June to observe any spawning activity, particularly by Arctic Grayling, which were not found in any great numbers and were not observed in spawning activity. This information leads the biologist to believe the DV are resident and primarily use the area above the diversion site. Arctic Grayling are believed to possibly spawn below the projects discharge point in the lower part of the creek near its confluence with the Tanana River and otherwise use the creek opportunistically for feeding. The information that ADF&G provided us on Arctic Grayling use of the Tanana River basin indicates other streams provide better habitat and that Yerrick Creek may only be significantly utilized when there is an abundance of Arctic Grayling and they are looking for additional habitat. Sufficient surface flow was also found during the summer between the creek and the river to indicate that on a yearly basis there is access to the creek by fish, rather than having an isolated population. In a July 20, 2009, letter to AP&T, ADF&G said there was additional information they were still waiting for before they could issue a permit. AP&T responded on July 24 with the information below that addressed their previous requests: "ADF &G: Effects on fish habitat, particularly seasonal or over-wintering refugia, in the bypass. AP&T Response: Studies conducted have shown that the majority of Dolly Varden (DV) year-round habitat is above the diversion structure and it was acknowledged during the May 2009 meeting with you that D V would not be significantly impacted by this project. Also, there are little over-wintering refugia in the bypass portion of the creek so that their loss will have minimal impact to DV." "Arctic grayling (AG), which became a highlighted issue at the May 2009 meeting, were not found to spawn in Yerrick Creek and appear to only use it opportunistically. Grayling are also limited in getting up to the bypass reach due to the submergence of flow above the highway for significant portions of the year. The bypass reach that will be dewatered by the project diversion may also reduce the extent that AG are able to go up the creek at certain times of the year. However, given the natural barriers created during low flow periods, limited habitat quality in the bypass reach, and small fish numbers found in Yerrick Creek, we believe there will be little, ifany, impact to AG. Based on this analysis we've concluded that fish passage is not necessary to protect AG. We do not propose to employ any fish passage in the bypass reach except what nature provides in the way of flow over the diversion spillway when flow exceeds 60 cfs or when demand is less than the naturally occurring flow. For this reason, subsurface flow data is not needed because there is no fish passage issue. AEA Grant #2195345 3 Yerrick Creek Hydro Assessment "Information has been provided on fish movement between stream reaches, life stage, and time of year for DV and grayling. Fish survey reports that have previously been supplied are enclosed with this letter. "ADF &G: Fish passage through the bypass reach and past the diversion structure. AP&T Response: Because the studies have found limited use by either species of the bypass reach and that D V primarily use the creek above the diversion site and the few grayling that feed in the creek primarily use the lower part of the creek, there is no need to construct fish passage devices. "ADF &G: Existing surface and subsurface discharge characteristics in the bypass reach. AP&T Response: As stated above, only surface flow has been gaged because we believe the data on fish use supports the conclusion that little habitat is available in the bypass reach, therefore there is no need to collect additional hydrological information. "ADF &G: Life history and movements of D V in the project area. AP&T Response: AP&T'sfish studies indicate that most DVreside year-round in upper Yerrick Creek, from near the diversion site to well above the diversion site. D V do not appear to move through the project reach to any appreciable degree. "ADF & G: Hydrologic information on in stream flows necessary to preserve fish habitats and passage. AP&T Response: Over two years ago a stream gage station was installed near the diversion site to measure surface water flow. The suggestion to install a second stream gage downstream of the bypass reach was rejected because of the absence of surface flow in that reach during much of the year, and the expense of a second gage prior to a better understanding of the area 's fish distribution and habitat quality. As stated above, the fish habitat available in the bypass and corresponding low numbers of fish found in this reach does not warrant a more intensive investigation. "ADF &G: Basic water quality characteristics including water temperatures. AP&T Response: Basic water quality and hydrology data was collected by Travis/Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. in their report dated October 2008. We have enclosed it with this letter. As a result of our May 2009 meeting with you we also collected water temperature data in conjunction with our summer fish distribution and spawning field studies conducted in May, June, and July of this year. Temperature information is included in these fish survey reports. "We believe you have the information needed to determine that afishway passage device is not necessary for this project. AEA Grant #2195345 4 Yerrick Creek Hydro Assessment "It is our understanding that Alaska's Fishway Act (AS I 6. 05.841) requires the Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) to decide if afishway passage device is necessary to protect the fish resources that may be impacted by the proposed Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric project. State law does not authorize, or require you to make a decision based on an evaluation of "the potential project effects and benefits" as stated in your letter. To date, the information we have presented to ADF &G has been to support a reasoned and balanced evaluation of the proposed project's effects on Yerrick Creek's fish resources. If our reading of the Fishway Passage Act is incorrect, we are prepared to more fully describe the public economic and environmental benefits that can be reasonably expected from the project. We believe these public benefits far outweigh any adverse effects the project may have on Yerrick Creek's fish resource values. "Studies conducted over a number of years by Alaska Power and Telephone (APT), the ADF&G, and Northwest Alaskan Pipeline have adequately characterized the Yerrick Creek fish resources with respect to their numbers, distribution, and habitat availability. The collected information indicates that Dolly Varden reside throughout the year in the upper part of Yerrick Creek, primarily above the diversion site, and Arctic grayling use the creek in the summer months for opportunistic feeding, from the Tanana River to near the proposed diversion area. There is no evidence of Arctic grayling spawning in Yerrick Creek, or that Yerrick Creek makes any more than a very minor contribution to the Arctic grayling resources in the Upper Tanana River basin. ''The proposed project's diversion of water would reduce flow in 11,000 feet of Yerrick Creek and create a temporary barrier to a few 1 Arctic grayling when the Creek's natural flow is less than 60 cubic feet per second (eft). We believe it is reasonable to assume that Arctic grayling would continue to occupy the drainage below the diverted flow's re-entry to Yerrick Creek at the Alaska Highway crossing, and further upstream in the "bypass area" when flows exceed 60 cfs. The insignificant displacement of a few Arctic grayling during low water flow periods (less than 60 eft) does not appear to justify the construction of a fishway passage. The proposed project will also have little, if any, impact to the Dolly Varden population that resides above the proposed project diversion. "Over one year ago we provided ADF&G with our study plan for evaluating the fish resources of Yerrick Creek. Since that time we have adjusted our investigations to address the recommendations of your staff where appropriate and funded field studies to collect data relevant to a reasonable evaluation of the effect of the project on local fish resources. Your July 20, 2009, letter references a number of "information needs" that must be met for you to make a decision. As noted above, we believe we have provided the information and analysis to support a decision at this time. 1 The largest number of grayling found in the proposed Yerrick Creek diversion bypass area was 18 recorded on July 22 in 1975. AEA Grant #2195345 5 Yerrick Creek Hydro Assessment "Three months ago we provided you a draft memorandum of agreement based on our analysis and conclusion that a jishway passage is not necessary for the project to protect resident Dolly Varden or transitory Arctic grayling. We also requested your final decision by August to secure project funding and begin construction this season. At this late date it is unacceptable to put the project on hold to produce information we believe has already been provided or has little bearing on the decision to be made." (ADF&G subsequently issued a habitat permit for construction of this project on August 5, 2009) 3. Wetland Delineation: A wetland delineation was conducted by HDR Alaska out of Anchorage in August 2008. Their report defined where wetlands were in relation to the project features and will enable us to get a Corp of Engineer permit. Wetlands will be impacted by the Project, but to a lesser degree than thought primarily because of the glacial till providing drainage and the amount of uplands found on site. A copy of the HDR report is enclosed in the Attachments. 4. Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plant Species: A TES plant survey was conducted by HDR Alaska while they were conducting the wetland delineation. No TES plants were encountered or identified in the area surveyed. Most plant species observed in the project area are considered common and widespread in interior Alaska. A copy of the HDR report is enclosed in the Attachments. 5. Water Quality & Baseline Hydrology: Water quality sampling and a baseline hydrology survey were conducted by Travis/Peterson Environmental Consulting out of Fairbanks. Historical hydrologic data for Yerrick Creek indicates that every two years there is a peak flow event of 1102 cfs, and every five years a peak flow event of 1575 cfs. Hundred year events are estimated to be as high as 3093 cfs. These flows are probably related to summer rain events (when statistically the highest flow occurs) and are the reason the creekbed is cobbled with clean boulders throughout its width and most of its length. Water quality sampling found that Yerrick Creek is a clear, oligotrophic (low nutrient levels), and well oxygenated stream. The moderately high pH for surface water suggests contact with some kind of carbonate rock within the drainage. Laboratory results confirm that Yerrick Creek and has minimal levels of most dissolved substances and does not warrant further investigation for water quality. A copy of the Travis/Peterson report is enclosed in the Attachments. 6. Archaeological Survey: An archaeological survey was started in 2008 and will be finished this summer of 2009 by Northern Land Use Research out of Fairbanks. One site was found (TNX-074) that could be eligible for the National Register, but isn't listed at this time. The site can easily be avoided by the Project because of its small size. 7. Design: Project design was slowed in part because of negotiations with Tanacross Inc. who resisted granting access to their land along the highway. AP&T AEA Grant #2195345 6 Yerrick Creek Hydro Assessment eventually received approval to access their land which allowed seismic refraction surveys and environmental surveys to take place. We have looked at several different routes for the penstock and access road on both the east and west sides of the creek; examples are enclosed in the Attachments. We want to keep the road and penstock in the same corridor to minimize environmental impacts. The west side offers the most opportunities because of the terrain, but the best route needs further evaluation. Of considerable concern is the location of permafrost, because that would impact the design significantly. During May-July 2009, permitting with the agencies was carried out to drive an excavator up the creek in order to dig test pits in the diversion area in August 2009. This will determine how deep bedrock is and what the substrate is like in general. During August- September a final design is likely to be completed so that permitting can be finalized to start construction either this fall or winter. During permitting it was determined that burying the penstock along the road would be best to allow wildlife and hunters to continue to easily cross this corridor. 8. Topographic Mapping: Topographic mapping was conducted by Aero-Metric, Inc. in 2008. This gave us highly detailed photo images and topographic mapping of the project site with which to design the project. Evidence of this mapping is available in the enclosed project design drawings. 9. Permitting: AP&T started the permitting process when sending out the draft study plans to the resource agencies in June and July 2008. Environmental surveys began in August 2008. A meeting was held with ADF&G in Fairbanks in May 2009 to discuss receiving a habitat permit to begin construction by August 1, 2009, however, additional information was requested in order to get a permit. Also, because we want to drive an excavator up the creek bed in August 2009 to dig test pits near the diversion site during low flows, we applied for and received permits from the Corp of Engineers, ADF&G, DNR, and Tanacross, Inc. In addition, AP&T negotiated with ADF&G a fish habitat permit to start construction, which was issued on August 5, 2009. Additional permits to start construction will be from the COE and DNR. SHPO must also provide clearance to start construction, which won't be able to occur until the archaeological survey is completed in August 2009. Summary: In summary, AP&T has been able to complete the following due to the grant funding provided by the AEA: 1. Stream gaging and the historical record from USGS shows sufficient water is there year round to generate electricity. 2. Fish surveys were completed enabling ADF&G to complete their review and issue a habitat permit to begin construction. 3. For the wetland delineation, approximately 21.3% (147.1 acres), a conservative delineation, of the mapped acres were determined to meet the USACOE requirements for being classified as wetlands. Most of the mapped wetland areas AEA Grant #2195345 7 Yerrick Creek Hydro Assessment are not within the proposed project construction areas. The remainder of the mapped project area, approximately 78.7% (542.6 acres) of the mapped area, lacks one or more of the required three parameters to support classifYing an area as wetland (Table 5), and is not below the plane of Ordinary High Water (OHW) of Y errick Creek. 4. The TES plant survey found noTES plants in the surveyed area. 5. Water quality was found to be within normal ranges for a stream of its type. No additional water quality surveying was recommended. Hydrologic baseline data indicates that significant flow occurs in this creek. AP&T's hydrologic data indicates hydropower could be generated most or all months of the year. 6. The archaeological survey has yet to be completed, but from what has been surveyed to date, no impacts will occur from the construction and operation of this project to historical or cultural resources. Cost's for this area has exceeded funding sought due to the archaeologist having to go out twice to complete the survey. 7. The final design is still being worked on by the engineering staff of AP&T. 8. The topographic mapping has been very useful not only for the engineering studies and design but also the environmental surveys and archaeological survey. 9. Permitting accomplished during this grant funding period allowed AP&T to narrow down the studies to be conducted after consultation with the resource agencies and to complete most of the studies. The meeting with ADF&G drove costs up above what was anticipated in the Project Management & Permitting category as well as managing other activities associated with this project. We were able to permit driving an excavator up the creek bed for August 2009 to check the substrate out by digging test pits through the COE, DNR, and ADF&G. We also were able to get a permit to go ahead with construction from ADF&G. These were significant inroads into getting this project near the construction phase. Grant Budget: As can be seen in the Table below, cost to AP&T far exceeded the 25% that we were responsible for in this matching grant. Beyond the AEA's $100,000 grant and AP&T's matching of $25,000, an additional $240,224.90 was expended. AEA Grant #2195345 8 Y errick Creek Hydro Assessment Period: June 1, 2008 to June 30, 2009 e d ts u1ge ummary >Y as or 1 es one b T k M'l t Task or Milestone Number Total Grant Total Balance Budget Expenditures 1. Field Work in AK -Stream Gauging 3,750.00 65,514.51 (_61,764.51) 2. Fish & Wildlife Surveys 56,250.00 71,979.32 ( 15, 729.32) 3. Wetland Delineation/TES Survey 26,875.00 43,506.38 ( 16,631.38) 4. Water Quality Testing 6,250.00 12,478.34 (6,228.34) 5. Archaeological Survey 2,500.00 9,804.78 (7,304.78) 6. Conceptual Design 1,250.00 47,966.75 (46,716.75) 7. Topographic Mapping 18,750.00 67,779.02 (49,029.02) 8. Project Management & Permitting 5,000.00 45,786.60 (40,786.60) 9. Quarterly AEA Report 625.00 409.20 215.80 10. Complete Study and Submit Draft 1,875.00 -1,875.00 11. Final Report 1,875.00 -1,875.00 I. TOTAL Project Cost 125,000.00 365,224.90 (240,224.90) B d tS u1ge b F d S ummary >Y un ources Grant Funds 100,000.00 100,000 Grantee Match -Cash 25,000.00 167,261.03 (240,224.90) Grantee Match -In-kind Grantee Match -Other Funds (Source) Grantee -Federal Funds TOTAL 125,000.00 365,224.90 (240,224.90) Project Outcomes: Project outcomes were positive in that all environmental surveys were completed and some of the engineering design work completed, including determining that the project is feasible. The project is feasible because there is adequate water available most of the year to generate electricity. Also, getting the permits for the excavator to drive up the creekbed and getting ADF&G's habitat permit for construction were significant achievements toward completing this project. Problems Encountered: From an engineering standpoint, the difficulty of the substrate and terrain for determining the best route for a road and pipe to come into the project has been challenging. The creek channel itself is very dynamic, obvious by the clean boulders and cobble throughout the creek which indicates high flow. Placing the pipe in the creek bed or having a bridge across the creek that is so dynamic is a challenge. The uplands around the creek also has pockets of permafrost, which we would prefer to avoid incase thaw should occur. There are also wetlands and pockets of gravel and bedrock outcroppings to contend with. These are not unsolvable, but are none the less challenging. Problems from a permitting standpoint would have to do with the expectation by ADF&G that we would study the project site more than necessary by installing a second stream gage down by the powerhouse site, install a stream gage for subsurface flow, and conduct an analysis and design of a fish passage device/structure to allow fish past the diversion structure, none of which they eventually agreed was needed. Conclusions and Recommendations: To reach the level of permitting and study completion we have within a year is pretty efficient. We have no recommendations regarding this phase of the project. AEA Grant #2195345 10 Yerrick Creek Hydro Assessment Project Feasibility Assessment Timeline For Grant Fnnds: o Browne Research, Inc.: Report that no AHRS sites near proposed project o AP&T to Agencies: Draft Study Plan for review o GRA YST AR: Summary of site visit for fisheries baseline o ADF&G: Draft Study Plan Comments o ADF&G: Fish Resource Collection Permit o AP&T to DNR: Project Information o AP&T to Agencies: Draft Study Plan-Version 2 o DNR to AP&T: Initiation of Section 106 Consultation o ADF&G: Comments on Revised Draft Study Plan 06/05/08 06/13/08 06/30/08 07/01/08 07/01/08 07/09/08 07/22/08 08/15/08 09/03/08 o ADF&G: Comments on Draft Study Plan 09/19/08 o GRA YSTAR: Field Report, Baseline Study 10/01/08 o NORTHERN LAND USE RESEARCH: Cultural Resource Survey Report 10/07/08 o GRA YST AR: Fisheries Baseline Study 10/30/08 o USDA-RUS: Teleconference meeting summary between AP&T, Tanacross, Inc. and RUS 1l/13/08 o AEA to AP&T: Grant Agreement o HDR-Alaska: TES Plant Report o HDR-A1aska: Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination o GCI: Summary of meeting with Kerry Howard-ADF&G o AP&T to ADF&G: Fish Habitat Permit application o AP&T to DNR: State Land Use Permit application o AP&T to COE: Dept of Army Permit application o GCI to ADF&G: Agenda for meeting at ADF&G Fairbanks office o ADF &G: Scientific Fish Collection Permit expires 12/31109 o GCI to AP&T: Summary of Meeting with ADF&G in Fairbanks Ol/13/09 01/27/09 01/27//09 04/10/09 05/01/09 05/01/09 05101109 05117/09 05/20/09 05/21/09 AEA Grant #2195345 II Y errick Creek Hydro Assessment o COE: Permit issued, valid for two years o GRA YST AR: Report on two fish samplings o GRA YST AR: Conducted three fish samplings o AP&T to ADF&G: Request for Fish Habitat Permit for Construction o ADF&G: More info needed for permitting o AP&T to ADF&G: Response to additional info request and ultimatum o ADF&G: Fish Habitat Permit FH09-III-Ol82 issued for construction 05/21/09 06/02/09 06/10/09 06112/09 07/20/09 07/24/09 08/05/09 AEA Grant #2195345 12 Y errick Creek Hydro Assessment ATTACHMENTS 1. Correspondence 2. Wetland Delineation 3. TES Plant Survey 4. Water Quality and Hydrology Baseline Study 5. Fish Reports 6. Design Diagrams YERRICK CREEK HYDRO ASSESSMENT GRANT AGREEMENT NO. 2195345 FINAL REPORT -CORRESPONDENCE- DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES August 12, 2009 Glen D. Martin Project Manager NOTHERN REGION LANDS OFFICE Alaska Power & Telephone Company Corporate Headquarters P.O. Box 3222 Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-1733 x122 (360) 385-7538 fax Mr. Martin, SARAH PALIN, GOVERNOR 0 NORTHERN REGION 3700 AIRPORT WAY FAIRBANKS, ALASKA 99709~4699 PHON£: (907) 451-3014 FAX.· (907) 451-2751 dianna.leinberger@alaska.gov This letter is to inform you that the Land Use Permit, LAS #27271, for geotechnical exploration in the Yerrick Creek drainagne has been completed and is ready for signature. Please review the attached Memorandum of Decision (MOD) and the permit and listed stipulations. You will need to print out the permit, provide your information and signature where indicated, and then return only the signature page to me via email or by fax. I will then sign where indicated and issue the permit by sending you a scanned copy of the completed signature page. You will need to send me your original signed page by regular mail. I realize APT wants to send the excavator up Yerrick Creek soon and the only requirement remaining is the Performance Guaranty. The signed permit will be valid as soon as we receive proof of the bond. If you have questions about any of the enclosed information or stipulations, please feel free to contact me at (907) 451-2710 or at valerie.baxter@alaska.gov. Thank you. \Mrely, Valene a Natural Resource Specialist "Develop, Consetve, and Enhance Natural Resources for Present and Future Alaskans." STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF MINING, LAND AND WATER NORTHERN REGION Memorandum of Decision LAS 27271-Yerrick Creek Geotechnical Exploration Access Proposed Action Glen Martin, on behalf of Alaska Power and Telephone Company (APT), submitted a land use permit application to drive an excavator through the Yerrick Creek drainage in order to conduct geotechnical exploration at a proposed hydroelectric project site. APT is requesting four days to travel from the Alaska Highway to the project site, conduct testing, and return. The excavator is a Robox 130 LCM-3 and the proposed route across state land would involve travel in the dry creek beds of Yerrick Creek and would require crossing the active channels of Yerrick Creek up to 6 times. The geotechnical exporation would involve the digging of 6 test pits, up to 20ft deep, to characterize the substrate. The test pits would be located a minimum of 50ft from the active channel and would be refilled with the excavated material upon completion. The Department proposes to issue the permit as requested. Authority This permit is being adjudicated pursuant to Alaska Statute 38.05.850 (Permits). Administrative Record The administrative record for the proposed action consists of Alaska Administrative Code 11 AAC 96 {Miscellaneous Land Use); Tanana Basin Area Plan (TBAP, 1991 Update); LAS 27271, the current casefile, and this memorandum of decision. Location Geographic: The access point to Yerrick Creek is located at milepost 1333.6 of the Alaska Highway and is 88.4 miles east of Delta Junction. USGS Map Tanancross B-6 63K. See attachment A Legal Description: Copper River Meridian, Township 18 North, Range 9 East. Sections 11 and 14. Borough: This area is within the Tanacross Inc., region and 3 sections of corporation land must be crossed before reaching state land. Permission to access and cross Tanacross Inc., lands was obtained on June 10, 2009, and permits from ADF&G Habitat division (FH09-III-0128) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (POA-2009-445) have also been received. The project is within an unorganized Borough, though it is not within a coastal zone. Title The State received tentative approval for Sections 11 and 14 under General Grant GS895 on 12/20/1963. Classification This site is within the Tanana Basin Area Plan (TBAP, 1991 Update), Subregion 6, Upper Tanana, Management Unit 6C3, Buck Creek, and is classified wildlife habitat. This management unit has critical rated habitat for grizzly bear, moose, and sheep. The Tok River area of 6C3 has been identified in the TBAP as meriting legislative designation as a State Game Refuge because of outstanding wildlife and public values. Forestry and recreation are listed as secondary surface uses within this unit and the unit is closed to land disposals and remote cabins. 6C3 is open to mineral entry. There is nothing in the TBAP which prohibits the proposed use. Eligibility Alaska Power and Telephone Company is in good standing with the state of Alaska. Courtesy Agency Notice Courtesy agency notice was sent via electronic mail to the following agencies: Meg Hayes and Associates, Land Management Consultant for Tanancross, Inc. Jim Vohden, Hydrologist, Water Section, DMLW, DNR Robert Mclean, Regional Manager, Division of Habitat, AK Department of Fish & Game Alan Skinner, Regulatory Specialist, US Army Corp of Engineers, Anchorage, AK Three agency comments were received: one from AOF&G acknowledging that a fish habitat permit had been issued; one from the USAGE, acknowledging that a Nationwide Permit 6 authorization had been granted for this project; one from Tanacross, Inc., stating that they have granted permission to AP&T to access Tanacross lands for this project. No comments were received that objected to ADNR issuing this land use permit. A Public Notice was issued on 07/15/2009 and the comment deadline was 07/31/2009. No public comments were received. Background APT is pursuing a run~of~river hydroelectric project on Yerrick Creek and in 2007 they applied for a state land lease, ADL 418154. They are currently applying for a temporary land use permit to conduct substrate testing to determine permeability and the location of bedrock in order to choose the best placement of the hydroelectric diversion structure. The first sections of the proposed route cross Tanacross, Inc, land and APT has acquired their permission for access. A wetlands delineation and jurisdictional determination were conducted and APT was authorized to conduct testing under a US Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit No.6 (POA·2009·445). Fish surveys in Yerrick Creek were also performed and APT has received authorization for instream equipment crossing and geotechnical exploration from ADF&G Habitat Division (FH09-111~0128). No roads exist into the proposed testing area. Yerrick Creek is a cobble, gravel, and sand substrate creek which crosses the Alaska Highway at approximately milepost 1339. The project area is mostly undeveloped, with an open gravel waterway, old gravel side channels in various stages of succession, and forested banks. There is an existing ANCSA 17(b) easement trail that Memorandum of Decision 2 LAS 27271 runs roughly parallel to the creek, through the forest, on the west side. This trail's permitted uses, when adjacent to Tanacross lands, include only travel by foot, dogsleds. animals, snowmobiles, two-and three-wheeled vehicles, and small all-terrain vehicles. The trail is currently approximately 6 ft wide and is typically used by hunters to access the foothills to the south. Accessing the project site via this trail would involve vegetation clearing and disturbance of the vegetative mat and is not the least environmentally damaging alternative. Discussion According to LAS and the APMA waypoint file there are no other land authorizations in this area. In adjudicating a LUP permit, DNR seeks to facilitate development, conservation, and enhancement of state lands for present and future Alaskans, while minimizing disturbance to vegetative, hydrologic, and topographic characteristics of the area that may impair water quality and soil stability. This use will not adversely affect the State of Alaska's goals of conserving and enhancing natural resources for use by present and future Alaskans. Environmental Risk Equipment storage and fueling operations would not occur within 50' of Yerrick Creek, a drainage or wetland. In order to minimize potential impacts to resident fish, the proposed timing of travel for the excavator is during the low water period of August/September 2009. Performance Guarantee and Insurance As directed in 11 AAC 96.060 (Performance guaranty) the applicant shall furnish security acceptable to the department. Using the performance guarantee matrix. the recommended performance guaranty is $4500. Permit Fees As directed in 11 AAC 05.010(c)(5) there is no annual use fee for a land use permit that does not hinder other public use. Recommendation Based upon the information provided by the applicant, as well as review of relevant planning documents, statutes, and regulations related to this application, it is the decision of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining, Land and Water, to issue this land use permit on condition that all permit stipulations are followed as described in attached permit. The term of this permit is for the months of August 13, 2009 through September 30, 2009. During the period of the permit periodic inspections may be conducted at the discretion of DNR to en ure permit compliance. Adjuaicator Date ~ Memorandum of Decision 3 LAS 27271 Appeals A person affected by this decision may appeal it, in accordance with 11 AAC 02. Any appeal must be received by 09/15/2009, as defined in 11 AAC 02.040(c) and (d) and may be mailed or delivered to Tom Irwin, Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources, 550 W. 7th Avenue, Suite 1400, Anchorage, Alaska 99501; faxed to 1-907-269-8918, or sent by electronic mail to dnr.appeals@alaska.gov. This decision takes effect immediately. If no appeal is filed by the appeal deadline, this decision becomes a final administrative order and decision of the department on 09/30/2009. An eligible person must first appeal this decision in accordance with 11 AAC 02 before appealing this decision to Superior Court. A copy of 11 AAC 02 may be obtained from any regional information office of the Department of Natural Resources. Memorandum of Decision 4 LAS 27271 STATE OF ALASKA Department of Natural Resources Division of Mining, Land & Water LAND USE PERMIT Under AS 38.05.850 PERMIT # LAS 27271 Alaska Power and Telephone Company, herein known as the permittee, is issued this permit authorizing the use of state land located within: Copper River Meridian, Township 18 North, Range 9 East, Sections 11 and 14, as shown in Attachment A. This permit is effective beginning August 131h, 2009 and ending September 30th, 2009 unless sooner terminated at the State's discretion. This permit does not convey an interest in state land and as such is revocable with or without cause. This permit is issued for the purpose of authorizing: Travel of a Robox 130 LCM-3 excavator through the Yerrick Creek drainage. The proposed route across state land would involve travel in the dry creek beds of Yerrick Creek and would require crossing the active channels of Yerrick Creek up to 6 times. The geotechnical exploration would involve the digging of 6 test pits, up to 20ft deep, to characterize the substrate. All activities shall be conducted in accordance with the following Permit Stipulations. Permit Stipulations 1. Authorized Officer. The Authorized OffiCer for the Department of Natural Resources is the Regional Land Manager or his designee. The Authorized Officer may be contacted at 3700 Airport Way, Fairbanks, Alaska 99709 or (907) 451-2740. The Authorized Officer reserves the right to modify these stipulations or use additional stipulations as deemed necessary. 2. Compliance with Governmental Requirements and Recovery of Costs. Permittee shall, at its expense, comply with all applicable laws, regulations, rules and orders, and the requirements and stipulations included in this authorization. Permittee shall ensure compliance by its employees, agents. contractors, subcontractors, licensees, or invitees. This authorization is revocable immediately upon violation of any of its terms, conditions, and stipulations or upon failure to comply with any applicable laws, statutes and regulations (state and federal). 3. Performance Guaranty. The permittee shall provide a surety bond or other form of security acceptable to the Division in the amount of$ 4500.00 payable to the State of Alaska. Such performance guaranty shall remain in effect for the term of this authorization and shall secure performance of the permittee's obligations hereunder. The amount of the performance guaranty may be adjusted by the Authorized Officer upon approval of amendments to this authorization. changes in the development plan, upon any change in the activities conducted, or performance of operations conducted on the premises. If Permittee fails to perform the obligations under this permit within a reasonable amount of time, the State may perform Permittee's obligations at Permittee's expense. Permittee agrees to pay within 20 days following demand, all costs and expenses reasonably incurred by the State of Alaska as a result of the failure of the permittee to comply with the terms of this permit. The provisions of this permit shall not prejudice the State's right to obtain a remedy under any law or regulation. If the Authorized Officer determines that the permittee has satisfied the terms and conditions of this authorization the performance guaranty may be released. The performance guaranty may only be released in a writing signed by the Authorized Officer. Land Use Permit LAS 27271 Page 2 of 5 4. Other Authorizations. The issuance of this authorization does not alleviate the necessity of the permittee to obtain authorizations required by other agencies for this activity. 5. Tennination. This permit does not convey an interest in state land and as such is revocable immediately, with or without cause. 6. Public Access. The permittee shall not close landing areas or trails. The ability of all users to use or access state land or public water must not be restricted in any manner. 7. Public Trust Doctrine. The Public Trust Doctrine guarantees public access to. and the public right to use navigable and public waters and the land beneath them for navigation, commerce, fishing and other purposes. This authorization is issued subject to the principles of the Public Trust Doctrine regarding navigable or public waters. The Division of Mining, Land and Water (Division) reserves the right to grant other interests consistent with the Public Trust Doctrine. 8. Valid Existing Rights. This authorization is subject to all valid existing rights in and to the land covered under this authorization. The State of Alaska makes no representations or warranties, whatsoever, either expressed or implied, as to the existence, number or nature of such valid existing rights. 9. Reservation of Rights. The Division reserves the right to grant additional authorizations to third parties for compatible uses on or adjacent to the land covered under this authorization. Authorized concurrent users of state land, their agents, employees, contractors, subcontractors and licensees shall not interfere with the operation or maintenance activities of authorized users. 10. Preference Right. No preference right for long term use or conveyance of the land is granted or implied by the issuance of this authorization. 11. Assignment. This permit may not be transferred or assigned to another individual or corporation. 12. Site Maintenance. The area subject to this authorization shall be maintained in a neat, clean, and safe condition, free of any solid waste, debris, or litter. 13. Site Disturbance. (a) Site disturbance shall be kept to a minimum to protect local habitats. All activities at the site shall be conducted in a manner that will minimize the disturbance of soil and vegetation and changes in the character of natural drainage systems. 14. Site Restoration. (a) Upon expiration, completion. or termination of this authorization, the site shall be vacated and all improvements, personal property, and other chattels shall be removed or they will become the property of the state. (b) The site shall be left in a clean, safe condition acceptable to the Authorized Officer. All solid waste debris and any hazardous wastes that are used and stored on the site shall be removed and backhauled to an ADEC approved solid waste facility. 15. Fire Prevention, Protection and Liability. The permittee shall take all reasonable precautions to prevent and suppress forest, brush and grass fires, and shall assume full liability for any damage to state land resulting from negligent use of fire. The State of Alaska is not liable for damage to the permittee's personal property and is not responsible for forest fire protection of the permittee's activity. 16. Holes and Excavations. All holes shall be backfilled with sand, gravel, or native materials. 17. Destruction of Markers. All survey monuments, witness corners, reference monuments, mining claim posts, bearing trees, and unsurveyed lease corner posts shall be protected against damage, destruction, or obliteration. The permittee shall notify the Authorized Officer of any damaged, destroyed, or obliterated Form Date: 11/13102 Land Use Permit LAS 27271 Page 3 of 5 markers and shall reestablish the markers at the permittee's expense in accordance with accepted survey practices of the Division of Land. 18. Hazardous Substances. The use and/or storage of hazardous substances by the permittee must be done in accordance with existing federal, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances. Debris (such as soil) contaminated with used motor oil, solvents, or other chemicals may be classified as a hazardous substance and must be removed and disposed of in accordance with existing federal, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances. 19. Spill Notification. The permittee shall immediately notify the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) by telephone, and immediately afterwards send ADEC a written notice by facsimile, hand delivery, or first class mail, informing ADEC of: any unauthorized discharges of oil to water, any discharge of hazardous substances other than oil; and any discharge or cumulative discharge of oil greater than 55 gallons solely to land and outside an impermeable containment area. If a discharge, including a cumulative discharge, of oil is greater than 10 gallons but less than 55 gallons, or a discharge of oil greater than 55 gallons is made to an impermeable secondary containment area, the permittee shall report the discharge within 48 hours, and immediately afterwards send ADEC a written notice by facsimile, hand delivery, or first class mail. Any discharge of oil, including a cumulative discharge, solely to land greater than one gallon up to 10 gallons must be reported in writing on a monthly basis. The posting of information requirements of 18 AAC75.305 shall be met. Scope and Duration of Initial Response Actions {18 AAC 75.310) and reporting requirements of 18 AAC 75, Article 3 also apply. The permittee shall supply ADEC with all follow-up incident reports. Notification of a discharge must be made to the nearest DEC Area Response Team during working hours: Anchorage (907) 269-7500, fax {907) 269-7648; Fairbanks {907) 451-2121, fax (907) 451-2362; Juneau (907) 465-5340, fax (907) 465-2237. The DEC oil spill report number outside normal business hours is (800) 478-9300. 20. Operation of Vehicles. (a) Crossing waterway courses will be made using an existing low angle approach in order to not disrupt the naturally occurring stream or lake banks. (b) There shall be no bank modification. (c) Wherever possible, watercourses shall be crossed at shallow riffle areas from point bar to point bar. (d) During equipment maintenance operations and overnight storage, the site shall be protected from leaking or dripping hazardous substances or fuel. The permittee shall place drip pans or other surface liners designed to catch and hold fluids under the equipment or develop a maintenance area by using an impermeable liner or other suitable containment mechanism. 21 . Alaska Historic Preservation Act. The Alaska Historic Preservation Act (AS 41.35.200) prohibits the appropriation, excavation, removal, injury, or destruction of any state-owned historic, prehistoric (paleontological) or archaeological site without a permit from the commissioner. Should any sites be discovered during the course of field operations, activities that may damage the site will cease and the Office of History and Archaeology, Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation, (907) 269-8721, shall be notified immediately. 22. Inspections. Authorized representatives of the State of Alaska shall have reasonable access to the subject parcel for purposes of inspection. The permittee may be charged fees under 11 AAC 05.010(a)(7)(M) for routine inspections of the subject parcel, inspections concerning non-compliance, and a final closeout inspection. 23. Indemnification. Permittee assumes all responsibility, risk, and liability for its activities and those of its employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors, licensees, or invitees, directly or indirectly related to this permit, including environmental and hazardous substance risk and liability, whether accruing during or after the term of this permit. Permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the State of Alaska, its agents and employees, from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, losses, costs, penalties, and damages of whatever kind or nature, including all attorney's fees and litigation costs, arising out of, in connection with, or incident to any act or omission by Permittee, its employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors, Form Date: 11/13/02 Land Use Permit LAS 27271 Page 4 of5 licensees, or invitees, unless the proximate cause of the injury of damage is the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the State or a person acting on the State's behalf. Within 15 days, Permittee shall accept any such cause, action or proceeding upon tender by the State. This indemnification shall survive the termination of the permit. 24. Violations. This authorization is revocable immediately upon violation of any of its terms, conditions, stipulations, nonpayment of fees, or upon failure to comply with any other applicable laws, statutes and regulations (federal and state). Should any unlawful discharge, leakage, spillage, emission, or pollution of any type occur due to permittee's, or its employees', agents', contractors', subcontractors', licensees', or invitees' act or omission, permittee, at its expense shall be obligated to clean the area to the reasonable satisfaction of the State of Alaska. 25. Change of Address. Any change of address must be submitted in writing to the office of responsibility. 26. Permit Amendments. Permittee proposals requiring the amendment of this permit must be in submitted in writing. 27. Completion Report. A completion report shall be submitted within 30 days of the termination of the authorized activities. The report shall contain the following information: (a) A statement of restoration activities and methods of debris disposal. (b) Photographs of the permitted site taken before, during, and after the proposed activity to document permit compliance. Photos must consist of a series of aerial or ground level view photos that clearly depict compliance with site cleanup and restoration guidelines. Advisory Regarding Violations of the Permit Guidelines. Pursuant to 11 AAC 96.145, a person who violates a provision of a permit issued under this chapter (11 AAC 96) is subject to any action available to the department for enforcement and remedies, including revocation of the permit, civil action for forcible entry and detainer, ejectment, trespass, damages, and associated costs, or arrest and prosecution for criminal trespass in the second degree. The department may seek damages available under a civil action, including restoration damages, compensatory damages, and treble damages under AS 09.45.730 or 09.45.735 for violations involving injuring or removing trees or shrubs, gathering geotechnical data, or taking mineral resources. If a person responsible for an unremedied violation of 11 AAC 96 or a provision of a permit issued under this chapter (11 AAC 96) applies for a new authorization from the department under AS 38.05.035 or 38.05.850, the department may require the applicant to remedy the violation as a condition of the new authorization, or to begin remediation and provide security under 11 AAC 96.060 to complete the remediation before receiving the new authorization. If a person who applies for a new authorization under AS 38.05.035 or 38.05.850 has previously been responsible for a violation of this chapter or a provision of a permit issued under this chapter, whether remedied or unremedied, that resulted in substantial damage to the environment or to the public, the department will consider that violation in determining the amount of the security to be furnished under 11 AAC 96.060 and may require the applicant to furnish three times the security that would otherwise be required. The Authorized Officer reserves the right to modify these stipulations or use additional stipulations as deemed necessary. The permittee will be advised before any such modifications or additions are finalized. Any correspondence on this permit may be directed to the Department of Natural Resources, Division of Mining, Land and Water, Northern Region Office, 3700 Airport Way, Fairbanks, Alaska 99709-4699 telephone (907) 451-2740. I have read and understand all of the foregoing and attached stipulations. By signing this permit, 1 agree to Form Date: 11/13102 Land Use Pennit LAS 27271 Page 5 ors conduct lhe authorized activity in accordance with the terms and conditions of this permit. Perm\Pri~ j)-1-~ v Tille Data ~o 3t:>l( 3~~L.1 ~rt~ns#,,c.JA~3CC :!M>·:J€S-ll3J~:Iz.2-Gle-n.. Addres 1 Phone Contact Name Sign Date Focm Dale: 11113102 ·143• 45' ·143° 44' ·143 43' ·143° 4Z -143• 41' ·143• 40' -143 39' -143• 38' -143 37' -143• 36' ·143 35' -143• 34' ·143• 33' -143• 3Z 63° 23' 63 23' 63.22' 63 22' 63 21' ·143' 45' ·143 44' ·143 43' ·143' 42' ·143 41' ·143° 40' ·143 39' -143' 38' -143 37' ·143 36' -143 35' -143 34' ·143 33' -143 32' ,1183 ,..,., 0 % 1 2 3 o4 Miles =~ T H I I I l I I ""''-7 oN l<fj ~~~ v OE3~=cj5~·~r======1=0~.~~====~======~~~.~FHt ~-:,_~~= 8 o 8 8 1 2 1 3 1 SKik 1 Attachment A: APT Yerrick ~..,. TNio ... :!529'1'(450-l H H H E-3 E""3 E3 E3 Creek Access Map -BLANK PAGE- DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME DIVISION OF HABITAT FISH HABIT AT PERMIT FH09-III-0182 SEAN PARNELL, GOVERNOR 1300 COLLEGE ROAD FAIRBANKS, AK 99701-1551 PHONE: (907) 459-7289 FAX: (907) 459-7303 ISSUED: August 5, 2009 EXPIRES: December 31, 2012 Mr. Glen Martin Project Manager Alaska Power and Telephone Company P.O. Box 3222 Port Townsend, WA 98368 RE: Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Stream Diversion and Water Impoundment Pursuant to AS 16.05.841, the Alaska Department ofFish and Game (ADF&G), Division of Habitat has reviewed your proposal to construct an impoundment dam and bypass up to 60 cfs of water through a 48-inch diameter, 15,000 feet long penstock, with bypassed flows reentering Y errick Creek after passing through a hydro power house located near the Alaska Highway. Civil design for construction of the diversion or bypass of excess water around the diversion were not provided. Yerrik Creek support resident fish species (e.g., Arctic grayling, Dolly Varden) in the area of your proposed activity. The resident Dolly Varden population is located in the headwaters and middle bypass reach. Arctic grayling are predominately in the lower reach below the diversion reentry point, but also have been documented in the middle bypassed reach. Based upon our review of your plans, your proposed project may obstruct the efficient passage and movement offish. In accordance with AS 16.05.841, project approval is hereby given subject to the following stipulations: 1. Prior to construction, civil plans for construction of the impoundment dam and excess flow bypass shall be submitted to ADF&G for review and approval. Mr. Glen Martin FH09-III -0182 2 August 5, 2009 2. The excess flow bypass shall be constructed as a roughened channel (see enclosed example) that permits all flow in excess of 60 cfs to remain in the middle bypass reach and that provides fish passage, both upstream and downstream. 3. Prior to construction, plans shall be submitted to provide for fish exclusion at the penstock intake. These plans must provide for an effective screen opening that does not exceed Y4 inch. The permittee is responsible for the actions of contractors, agents, or other persons who perform work to accomplish the approved plan. For any activity that significantly deviates from the approved plan, the permittee shall notify the Division of Habitat and obtain written approval in the form of a permit amendment before beginning the activity. Any action taken by the permittee, or an agent of the permittee, that increases the project's overall scope or that negates, alters, or minimizes the intent or effectiveness of any stipulation contained in this permit will be deemed a significant deviation from the approved plan. The final determination as to the significance of any deviation and the need for a permit amendment is the responsibility of the Division of Habitat. Therefore, it is recommended that the Division of Habitat be consulted immediately when a deviation from the approved plan is being considered. This letter constitutes a permit issued under the authority of AS 16.05.841 and must be retained on site during the permitted activity. Please be advised that this approval does not relieve you of the responsibility of securing other permits, state, federal or local. This permit provides reasonable notice from the Commissioner that failure to meet its terms and conditions constitutes violation of AS 16.05.861; no separate notice under AS 16.05.861 is required before citation for violation of AS 16.05.841 can occur. In addition to the penalties provided by law, this permit may be terminated or revoked for failure to comply with its provisions or failure to comply with applicable statutes and regulations. The Division of Habitat reserves the right to require mitigation measures to correct disruption to fish and game created by the project and which was a direct result of the failure to comply with this permit or any applicable law. The recipient of this permit (permittee) shall indemnify, save harmless, and defend the Division of Habitat, its agents and its employees from any and all claims, actions or liabilities for injuries or damages sustained by any person or property arising directly or indirectly from permitted activities or the permittee's performance under this permit. However, this provision has no effect, if, and only if, the sole proximate cause of the injury is the Division of Habitat negligence. Please be advised that this determination applies only to activities regulated by the Division of Habitat; other departments and agencies also may have jurisdiction under their respective authorities. This determination does not relieve you of the responsibility for securing other permits, state, federal, or locaL You are still required to comply with all other applicable laws. Mr. Glen Martin FH09-III-0182 Sincerely, Denby S. Lloyd, Commissioner 3 BY: Robert F. "Mac" McLean, Regional Supervisor Division of Habitat ecc: Chris Milles, ADNR, Fairbanks Larry Bright, USFWS, Fairbanks NOAA Fisheries, Anchorage AI Ott, ADF&G, Fairbanks Fronty Parker, ADF&G, Delta Tom Taube, ADF&G, Fairbanks JeffGross, ADF&G, Tok RFM/mac August 5, 2009 ~ ·~· Roughened-Channel Design The most mportant aspects to cons1der 1n the design of roughened channels are: bed stab1l1ty, average velooty at nows up to the fish-passage design flow, ti.J"bulence, and bed poros1ty. Maximum average veloc1ty and turbulence are the basic criteria of the Hydraul1c Design Option. The bed materials tnside the culvert create resistance to flow. Their stabihty is fundamental to the permanence of that structure. The effect of turbulence on fish passage can be approximated by limiting the energy-dissipation factor (EDF). In order for low nows to remain on the surface of the culvert bed and not percolate through a course, permeable substrate, bed porosity must be minimized. (Each of these considerations are discussed 1n subsequent sections of th1s chapter.) The follow1ng is an outline of a suggested procedure for designing roughened channels. These steps are iterative; several tnals may have to be calculated to determine a final acceptable des1gn. (Additional details of these steps are provided in subsequent sections.) I . Asst..me a culvert span. Begin with a culvert bed Width equal to the stream width. Habitat considerations should be included at th1s phase tn the design process. In particular. debris and sediment transport and the passage of nontarget fish and wildlife should be considered, all of which benefit from 1ncreased structure w1dth. 2. Size the bed material for stability on the basis of un1t discharge for the I 00-year event (Q nXJl· as outl1ned 1n Step 3. 3. Check to see that the largest bed-part1cle s1ze, as determined by stab1lity, is less than one quarter the culvert span. If r:ot 1ncrea se the culvert width. which decreases the un1t d1scharge and. 1n tum, the particle size. 1. Create a bed-matcnal gradaton to control poros1ty (see Chapter 6). 5. Calculate the average veloc1ty and EDF at the fish-passage des1gn flow on the bas1s of culvert w1dth and the bed 0 84 from gradat1on 1n Step 4 above. If the veloaty or EDF exceed the criteria, increase the culvert span. l.)es1gn of Road Culverts for Ftsh Passage 77 6. Check the culvert capac1ty for extreme flood events. This step 1s not deta1led here. but 1t :s required. just as it is for any new culvert or retrofrt culvert des1gn that affects the culvert's capacity. The width of the culvert bed should be at least the width of the natural stream channei as defined in this gu1deline. When the width of the bed m roughened channel culverts is less than the bed w1dth of the stream, hydraulic cond1tions are more extreme and the channel 1nside the culvert 1s more likely to scour. As gradient and unit discharge increase, the best way to ach1eve stab1hty and passability 1s to increase the culvert width. Bed Stability In order for the roughened channel to be reliable as a fish-passage facility, it is essential tf-tat the bed material remain in the channel more or less as placed. It is expected that the bed material will shift slightly but not move any appreciable distance or leave the culvert Bed stability is essential because these channels are not alluvial. Smce they are often steeper and more confined than the naturai, upstream channel, recruitment of larger material cannot be expected. Any channel-bed elements lost wid not be replaced, and the entire channel wtll degrade. The I 00-year nood is suggested as a h1gh structural- design Oow. Bed-stability considerations, rather than fish-passage velocities. usually dominate the design of the bed- materal composition. It 1s, therefore, recommended that bed·stab~lity analysis be performed before calculating the fish-passage velooty. At th1s time, there are no procedures that can determine the specific size of bed matenal needed to meet the angle of slope and volume of discharge for steep, roughened channels. In the case of the stream-s•mulation destgn option we can use natural analogs or models of natural systems to reltably est1mate bed-matenal S1ze (see Chapter 6). Roughened channels, on the other hand, increase hydraulic forces due to constriction and 1ncreased slope. Unfortunately we oo not have a factor to relate the two and must resort to other methods. Four general methods are rev1ewed here: the U.S. Army Corps of Eng1neers steep slope nprap design, the cnt1cal-shear-stress method, the U.S. Army Corps of Eng1neers nood- control·channel method, and empirical methods. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Riprap Design U.S. Army Corps of Eng1neers reference. EM I I I 0-2- 1 60 I, Sect1on e., steep slope riprap des1gn. gives th1s equat1on (Equat1on I) for cases where slopes range from two to 20 percent and un1t dtscharge is low. Where: DJO = 1.95S0 m( 1.25q)211 Ill g Equation I s q g = = the dimension of the intermedtate iD<tS of the 30th percentile particle the bed slope the unit discharge acceleration due to gravity. The recommended value of 1.25 as a safety factor may be increased. The study from which this equation was derived cautions against using it for rock sizes greater that 6 inches.' The equation predicts sizes reasonably in hypothetical situations above this, but it has not been tested in real applications. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers recommends angular rock with a uniform gradation (D8sfD 15 = 2). This material is not preferred for use in a fish-passage structure (see the sect1on on bed porosity. below). An approximate factor to scale 0 30 of a uniform riprap gradatton for one that is appropriate for stream channels 1s 1.5. so that Where: Equation l 0 8 , = the dimension of the intermediate ax1s of the 84th percentile particle. Critical-Shear-Stress Method Critical shear stress is a ltme-honored method to esttmate the tntttal movement of particles. J. C Bathurse and D. S. Olsen, et al., 1 among others, have satd that mt1cal shear stress should not be applied to steep channel. although R. A. Mussetter,' and R. W1ttler and S. Abt5 and others have used tt. The Federal Highway Adm1n1stration. developed a channel-ltn1ng destgn method based on critical shear stress, wrth data from flume and field studies.6 The data ts largely from low-gradient situattons, but the design charts show slopes up to I 0 percent and parttcle sizes up to 1.9 feet whtch places it in the range of designed roughened channels. Des1gn of Road Culverts for F1sh Passage 78 The conditton of stability is defined as the point at wh1ch the critical shear stress, r,. equals the maximum shear stress, '!'om.,., expenenced by the channel. The crit1cal shear stress is the shear stress required to cause the movement of a particle of a gtven size and is equal to four ttmes 0 50 , where 0 50 is the SO'h percentile particle, in feet. This relationship impltes a cnt1cal, dimensionless shear stress of about 0.039. Mussetter1 and Wtttler and Abt5 used 0.047. J. M Buffington and D. R. Montgomery7 discuss the range of 't,. The maxtmum shear stress is 1.5 times yRS, where y is the un1t wetght of water, R the hydraulic radius and S the slope. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood-Controi-C hannel Method U.S. Army Corps of Engineers EM II l 0-2-160 I hydraulic design of flood-control channels manual uses a modifted shear-stress approach to riprap design. This method should not be applied to channels greater than two-percent gradient S. T. Maynord8 modif1ed this method for steep slopes: Where: D]() = c (ql1Jso.m)/(g'° Kl) Equation l C' = 5.3(S c c c )0 .7 85 ( _L) r v t , ~ _ ~ ' l Equation 4 Kl = Cosa ( 1-(y.)(y,-y .• ,))Tana/Tancp) Equation 5 a = the angle of the channel bottom from horizontal ~ is the angle of repose of the riprap. Other constants as descnbed tn the Corps manual. Note the similarity to Equation I above. Thts method should only be applied by those familtar wtth EM 1110-2-1601. I I I '-~ Empirical Methods There are a number of velocity methods based on empincal studtes: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR EM-25),9 U.S. Geological Survey,10 S. V.lsbash 11 and the American Society of Civil Engineers. 11 They have 1n common this basic equation (Equation 6), wrth some modifiCations, where a and K are constants derived from f1eld studies. 0 30 = V"/(K(y,-y)) Equation 6 These methods are questionable for the design of ro.JW1ened channel beds. Theoretically, the problem is that stream slope is not explicitly a factor in the analysis. and the velocity distribution is quite different at high bed slopes than it is in the low-gradient channels for which these methods were developed . Gravitational forces increase with slope, decreasing stabil~ of a g1ven rock size. Roughness increases with slope, 1 which reduces velocity, and. in tum the recommended rock s1ze. Flpre E·l compares various predictions of bed- material size as a function of slope. The sediment size is 0 14 for all the methods (except the Federal Htghway Administration method' and the lsbash method,11 wh1ch are riprap sizing techniques giving 0 50 of a uniform riprap gradation). The other siiJlifKant variable -dtscharge -is held constant at I 0 cfs/ft. This is a typica~ bed-forming flow Intensity for high- gradient channels. With increasing unit discharge, lsbash predicts smaller part1cle sizes at higher slopes relative to the other methods, and the Federal H1ghway Administration predicts much larger sizes. FtgtJr<" E-1 . Rt"':ttiVE> pf:>dornnnc€" ofvat·tou• slt'dtnll'nt •t~bd•ty equa11ons (Un•t dl\<h.u 8" = I O<fslft) i 1.so ~r====;-r----.--~~1 ) --USACOE /' I tOO -Bathurst H----t----:r-/-+--~ --FHWA -- --lsbash 1.50 • Nawral Channels /' I o.oo o+---o+.0-1 ---~0.04 ___ 0.,_0,---0+.01---0~., Vanous pred1ctions of bed-mate11ol s•ze os a funcuon of slope. DeSign of Road Culverts for F1sh Passage 79 Four natural streams are also shown 1n Fl1ure E·l for reference. These streams· bed-<hanging discharge is estimated to be, on average, 9.4 cfslft. D&-4 from the actual bed-material distribution rs shown here. Shear stress is directly proport1onal to slope so the Federal Hlpay Admrnistration method (cntical shear stress) shows a linear relationship wtth slope. Thrs is a trend not reflected in the other methods or the natural beds. Althollgt\ what is not accounted for in this stmple analysrs 1s that only a port1on of the total boundary shear stress is responsrble for sediment transport Momentum losses due to hydraulic rou~ss other tNn bed friction account for the rest 1 ~ In addition, velocity profiles of steep, rough channels are not the same as hydraulically SITlOOtt\ lower-waclient channels where shear-stress analysis was developed.15 HiW'l-gradient channels have velocity profiles that are nonloganthmic. unlike low-gradient channels. The lsbash method IS based solely on velocity, which 1s relatively 1nsensit1ve to slope. Velocity, rn this case, was developed from the]. T. Umerinos 16 roughness equation averaged wrth J. Costa's17 power law for veloc1ty, using the Bathurse estimate of bed material size. It is interesting to note that all the riprap-sizing techniques converge v.hen slope is rouWlly one percent. which is the slope considered the upper limit of shear stress and velocity-based analystS. Bathtrst IS consistent with natural streambed material that is expected to move at this flow intensity and is recommended for the design of stream simulation culverts. This should be the lower It mit of particle sizes for designing roughened channels. The safety factor, whtch separates Bathurst from the actual deSign requ1rement. should be based on the various des ign factors. As the w1dth of the roughened channel culvert decreases relative to the Width of the channel, flow 1ntensity increases, and inlet contract1on plays a role 1n stability. The bed-material deSign techntques account for increases 1n intens1ty, but they do not indude inlet contraction as a factor. Small increases 1n head loss at the rnlet can result in changes in velocrty large enough to sign1ficantly change bed-matenal size estimates. I lead loss of 0.1 foot represents an approximate 1.8 feet/sec veloc1ty rncrease (h = Kl/2/1g, K = 0.5) at the inlet. pOSSibly forcng supercritlcal flow (see next paragraph). If lsbash is used, a 50-percent rncr-ease 1n rock Size may be required Equtvalent flow 1ntensrt:y (the increase rn unit d1scharge requ1red to represent the head loss} increases dfamatlcaYy as 1nlet losses occur. The movement of bed material in natural. steep channels 1s thought to co1ncide with supercrit1cal flow.18 If. by decreas1ng the w1dth of a culvert the Froude number is caused to approach l .0 at flows be'ow those used to s1ze the part1cles, then 1t is l1kely that the bed may fail prematurely. Unfortunately, most of the roughness-factor models were specifically developed for subcntical flow, it is. as a result difficult to determine how flow velocity approaches supercntical now, K. J. Tinkler 19 used an approach that calculates a spec1fic Manning's n for the critical case, as a funct1on of slope and depth. The Limerinos equation 16 (sho'Ml below in the section on velocity) follows this closely when it is determ1ned that the bed roughness approximates a natural channel. In cases where inlet contraction is minimal and flow inside the culvert is not expected to go supercritical prematurely, 1t is recommended that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' equation for steep channels be used to size bed material for roughened channels. Th1s recommendation 1S made even though the equation was not considered applicable for particles over s1x .nches in diameter. It still gives results in line wrth what we might expect to f1nd in steep channels. In add1tion to the methods mentioned here, theoretical work has been done by a number of researchers on the 1nitJal movement and general bedload discharge in steep, rough natural channels. Citat1ons are shown in the references sect1on at the end of this append1x.1.2.l 8 2121 .2 1 It is not recommended that culverts with bed material inside be designed to operate in a pressurized condition under any predicted flow. The riprap design methods suggested here assume open channel flow. They were not deveioped for high veloCity and turbulence under pressure. Under most scenarios, it is assumed that m1n1mum width requirements and f1sh·passage velocity cnter1a will be the .limiting factors In des1gn, not high flow capac1ty. But there may be cases where an unusual combination of events creates a situation where headwater depth exceeds the crown of the culvert In such a case a conservative st.1.bllity analys1s would model the culvert us ng a complete culvert analys;s program and/or a backwater model. The hydraulic results could then used to esttmate shear stress condrttons and determtne a stab 1e rock SlZe. Desrgn of Road Culverts for Frsh P.1ssc1ge 80 Fish-Passage Velocity The pomt of roughening the channel 1s to create an average cross-sectional velocity Within the limtts of the f1sh-passage cntena and the Hydraulic Destgn Option. The average velocity of a roughened channel culvert is essentially a function of stream How, culvert bed wtdth. and bed roughness. The flow used to determine the fish-passage velocity is the f1sh-passage design flow as descnbed 1n the section, Hydrology in Chapter 5. Hydraulrc Design Option. As a design starting point. the width of the culvert bed should be at least the width of the natural stream-channel bed. Steep and rough cond1tions present a unique challenge for hydraulic modeling, Traditional approaches to modeling open-channel flow assume normal flow over a bed having low relative roughness. In roughened channels, the height of the larger bed materials are comparable with the flow depth and complex turbulence dominates the flow.1 1 A number of equations are ava1lable for an analysis of these conditions, but they are crude and generate widely varying results. Research to date has centered on estimating flow in natural, cobble/boulder streams and rs not intended for use in engineering artifiCial channels. Three researchers have used bed-material characterization and/or channel geometry to create empirical equations predicting roughness: Jarrett, 11 . L1merinos 16 and Mussetter.~ Generally, the conclus1on one can draw from these studies is that fiictJon factors in steep, rough channels are much larger than those found in lower-gradient streams. Th1s conclusion IS not surprising but it is notable just how high the roughness factors are. For 1nstance. 1n Mussetter's field data on steep channels, 75 percent of the Manning's n values exceed 0.075, the highest n featured in H. H. Barnes' Roughness ChamctetJstics of Natural Channel~;' wh1ch covers larger. lower-gradient streams. It remains unclear as to how natural channels compare to constructed, roughened channels. Culvert Case Studies> Janes Creek Case Studies Janes Creek Roughened Channel over Small Dam Case Study Contributors • Antonio Llanos, Michael Love & Associates • Michael Love, Michael Love & Associates location South Fork Janes Creek, Humboldt Bay Watershed, Nor1hern California, USA. MAP Project Type • Roughened Channel over Dam • Prefabricated Bridge Pre-project Conditions • 4ft (1.2 m) tall dam, historically used for water supply • Concrete box spillway with access road across dam crest • Stored sediment created marshy wetland habitat ideal for rearing coho salmon Pre-project Barrier • 4ft (1.2 m) drop over spillway plunging into shallow pool • Barrier to all coho salmon, steelhead and cutthroat trout Watershed Characteristics • Drainage Area: 0.74 mi2 (1.9 km2) • Peak Design Flow (100-yr): 290 cfs (8.2 ems) • Bankfull Flow (1.5-yr): 65 cfs (1.8 ems) • High Passage Flow for: • Salmon and steelhead (1% exceedance now): 15.9 cfs (0.45 ems) • Cutthroat trout (5% exceedance tlow): 6.3 cfs (0.18 ems) • Juvenile salmonids (10% exceedance flow): 3.7 cfs (0.10 ems) Ecological Value Provide upstream and downstream passage for all native aquatic organisms. Open access to 5,000 ft (1,524 m) of salmonid spawning and rearing habitat upstream of dam. including 2,360 ft (719 m) of !ow gradient marshy habitat for rearing coho salmon. Project Design http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/fishxing/case/Janes/index.html Pagel of4 8/5/2009 Culvert Case Studies> Janes Creek • Kougne11ea t;fltUlrtt:ll: IUU 11 \.JU.::> !II) <II :no slope with 10ft (3.0 m) long horizontal transition aprons at each end • Roughened channel bed material designed to be stable up to 1 00-year flow • Active channel base-width ;: 7 ft (2.1 m) • Bankfull width = 12ft (3. 7 m) • 9 channel spanning rock structures placed nush with finished grade • Installation of prefabricated bridge with 40 ft (12.2 m) span over roughened channel Challenges and Lessons Learned • Project to provide fish passage while preserving weUand formed by stored sediments behind dam • Lack of construction oversight resulted in a wider and steeper channel than designed • Donated rock too farge for constructed channel banks, leading to excessive voids Project Contributors • Humboldt Fish Action Council • Michael Love and Associates • Winzler & Kelly Consulting Engineers • Kernen Construction • Green Diamond Resource Company Project Funding California Dept. of Fish and Game Completion Date October 2005 Total Project Cost $77.442 Project Summary The 4 ft (1.2 m) high water diversion dam built in the 1950's blocked upstream movement for all fish. Over time. the reservoir filled with fine sediment, forming an impounded high- value wetland. The stream flowed over the dam's spillway, which consisted of a concrete box culvert. The spillway created a 4ft (1.2 m) drop into a shallow plunge pool. The project objective was to preserve the upstream impounded wetland for juvenile rearing habitat while providing fish passage over the dam. The preferred alternative involved removal of the concrete spillway and construction of a roughened rock channel designed to (1) maintain the existing upstream grade, (2) avoid release of stored sediments, and (3) provide upstream and downstream passage for all native fish and other aquatic organisms. The roughened channel is 100ft (30.5 m) long, with an average slope of 5%. The shape and features of the roughened channel are intended to create a hydraulic environment http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/fishxing/case/Janes/index.html Page 2 of4 8/5/2009 Culvert Case Studies >Janes Creek similar to a natural channel of similar slope. Since the upstream channel material is mostly fine grain sands and silts, the larger rock in a roughened channel will not be replenished if it is transported downstream. Therefore, the D84 sized rock used in the roughened channel was designed to be stable up to the 100-year design flow. Because the dam crest also serves as an access road, a 40ft (12.1 m) long prefabricated steel bridge was placed over the roughened channel at the location of the removed spillway. Channel Design Design of the roughened channel involved a bed stability analysis to determine the minimum rock size necessary to maintain a stable channel bed during the 1 00-year peak flow of 290 cfs (8.2 ems). The fish passage analysis examined water depth, velocity and turbulence during fish migration flows. By design, a roughened channel provides a wide distribution of water velocities, with many areas of slower water. This analysis required an iterative process involving the Interdependent variables of particle size, particle stability, channel roughness, and channel geometry. Two methods were used: the Unit-Discharge Bed Equation as defined by Bathurst (1978) for incipient motion of the D84 particle, (84% of the particles have a smaller diameter than the D84 ) and the US Army Corps of Engineers Steep Slope Riprap Design for the 0 30 particle (ACOE, 1994 in WDFW, 2003). A particle distribution was then developed following methods outlined in (WDFW. 2003) for the Engineered Streambed Material within the channel. IRockSize II 730mm II 290mm II 120mm II 36mm II <2mm !Percent Finer II 100 II 84 II so II 1& II 7 Using a maximum roughened channel slope of 5% as a Qrule-of-thumb", the final design converged on an active channel base width of 7ft (2.1 m), bankfull width of 12ft (3.7 m), and bankfull depth of about 2ft (0.6 m). To concentrate low flows, ensure adequate water depth for adult fish, and provide slower edge-water for smaller fish, the channel bottom includes a side slope of 10% towards the center. The banks were constructed of large rock to create a rigid and confined channel, characteristic of steep stream channels. A series of rock structures constructed of 2 layers of 1 ton rock were built across the channel and backfilled with the Engineered Streambed Material. Rock structures were designed as rigid bed controls and to create small drops and complex flow patterns. The top of the rock structures were placed flush with the finished channel grade and maximum spacing between structures was limited to 20ft (6 m). By design, higher streamflows were expected to move and sort the smaller rock, exposing the larger rock and create an intricate series of small steps, pools, and flow constrictions. This complex hydraulic environment creates suitable migration pathways for fish over a wide flow range, similar to those found in a naturally steep channel reach. Lessons Learned In general, construction of a roughened channel requires skilled equipment operators, a large quantity of imported rock and aggregate, and on-site construction guidance from persons familiar with this type of design. Due to a lack of thorough construction oversight, the upper section of the channel was built with a width far wider than designed. Additionally, the slope of the upper channel section was less than designed, requiring steepening the channel slope under the bridge to approximately 8%. These deviations from the design have the potential to create insufficient depth at lower migration flows, possibly hindering fish passage. http://www .stream. fs. fed. us/fishxinglcase/ 1 aneslindex.html Page 3 of4 8/5/2009 Culvert Case Studies> Janes Creek The rock used to construct the channel banks was donated to the project, and larger than called for in the design. This resulted in large voids within the bank rock that should have been chinked with smaller material to prevent water from flowing behind the rocks and scouring the native material. The horizontal transition apron constructed at the downstream end appears to be functioning well. The transition effectively dissipates energy and has prevented scour of the downstream natural channel. Two years after construction the channel appears to be stable and functioning properly. References Bathurst, J.C. 1978. Flow Resistance of Large-Scale Roughness. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, AM. Soc. Civil Engr., Vol. 104, No. HY12, pp. 1587-1603. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Environmental Engineering Division. 2003. Fish passage design at road culverts: a design manual for fish passage at road crossings. May 2003. httP.;l!.ll't'!Wlc.W.dfw"'wa .• gg_vt_t:!a.bi~.nQin~erl~ml. Published 04104107 http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/tishxinglcase/Janes/index.html Page 4 of4 8/5/2009 -BLANK PAGE- ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY P.O. BOX 3222 • 193 OTTO STREET July 24, 2009 Robert F. "Mac" McLean Regional Supervisor Division of Habitat PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368 (360) 385-1733. (800) 982-0136 FAX (360) 385-5177 Alaska Department of Fish & Game 1300 College Road Fairbanks, AK 99701-1551 Re: Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Response to July 20 Information Needs Dear Mr. McLean: In response to your July 20, 2009, below is a point by point explanation of how your information requests have been addressed: ADF&G: Effects on fish habitat, particularly seasonal or over-wintering refugia, in the bypass. AP&T Response: Studies conducted have shown that the majority of Dolly Varden (DV) year-round habitat is above the diversion structure and it was acknowledged during the May 2009 meeting with you that DV would not be significantly impacted by this project. Also, there are little over-wintering refugia in the bypass portion of the creek so that their loss will have minimal impact to DV. Arctic grayling (AG), which became a highlighted issue at the May 2009 meeting, were not found to spawn in Yerrick Creek and appear to only use it opportunistically. Grayling are also limited in getting up to the bypass reach due to the submergence of flow above the highway for significant portions of the year. The bypass reach that will be dewatered by the project diversion may reduce the extent that AG are able to go up the creek at certain times of the year. However, given the natural barriers created during low flow periods, limited habitat quality in the bypass reach, and small fish numbers found in Yerrick Creek, we believe there will be little, if any, impact to AG. Based on this analysis we've concluded that fish passage is not necessary to protect AG. We do not propose to employ any fish passage in the bypass reach except what nature provides in the way of flow over the diversion spillway when flow exceeds 60 cfs or when demand is less than the naturally occurring flow. For this reason, subsurface flow data is not needed because there is no fish passage issue. Robert "Mac" Mclean, ADF&G July 24, 2009 p.2 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Habitat Permit Information has been provided on fish movement between stream reaches, life stage, and time of year for DV and grayling. Fish survey reports that have previously been supplied are enclosed with this letter. ADF &G: Fish passage through the bypass reach and past the diversion structure. AP&T Response: Because the studies have found limited use by either species of the bypass reach and that DV primarily use the creek above the diversion site and the few grayling that feed in the creek primarily use the lower part of the creek, there is no need to construct fish passage devices. ADF &G: Existing surface and subsurface discharge characteristics in the bypass reach. AP&T Response: As stated above, only surface flow has been gaged because we believe the data on fish use supports the conclusion that little habitat is available in the bypass reach, therefore there is no need to collect additional hydrological information. ADF &G: Life history and movements of DV in the project area. AP&T Response: AP&T's fish studies indicate that most DV reside year-round in upper Yerrick Creek, from near the diversion site to well above the diversion site. DV do not appear to move through the project reach to any appreciable degree. ADF&G: Hydrologic information on instream flows necessary to preserve fish habitats and passage. AP&T Response: Over two years ago a stream gage station was installed near the diversion site to measure surface water flow. The suggestion to install a second stream gage downstream of the bypass reach was rejected because of the absence of surface flow in that reach during much ofthe year, and the expensive of a second gage prior to a better understanding of the area's fish distribution and habitat quality. As stated above, the fish habitat available in the bypass and corresponding low numbers of fish found in this reach does not warrant a more intensive investigation. ADF &G: Basic water quality characteristics including water temperatures. AP&T Response: Basic water quality and hydrology data was collected by Travis/Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. in their report dated October 2008. We have enclosed it with this letter. As a result of our May 2009 meeting with you we also collected water temperature data in conjunction with our summer fish distribution and spawning field studies conducted in May, June, and July of this year. Temperature information is included in these fish survey reports. We believe you have the information needed to determine that a fishway passage device is not necessary for this project. It is our understanding that Alaska's Fishway Act (AS 16.05.841) requires the Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) to decide if a fishway passage device is necessary to protect the fish resources that may be impacted by the proposed Y errick Creek Hydroelectric project. State law does not authorize, or require you to make a Robert "Mac" Mclean, ADF&G July 24, 2009 p. 3 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Habitat Permit decision based on an evaluation of "the potential project effects and benefits" as stated in your letter. To date, the information we have presented to ADF&G has been to support a reasoned and balanced evaluation of the proposed project's effects on Yerrick Creek's fish resources. If our reading of the Fishway Passage Act is incorrect, we are prepared to more fully describe the public economic and environmental benefits that can be reasonably expected from the project. We believe these public benefits far outweigh any adverse effects the project may have on Yerrick Creek's fish resource values. Studies conducted over a number of years by Alaska Power and Telephone (APT), the ADF&G, and Northwest Alaskan Pipeline have adequately characterized the Yerrick Creek fish resources with respect to their numbers, distribution, and habitat availability. The collected information indicates that Dolly Varden reside throughout the year in the upper part of Y errick Creek, primarily above the diversion site, and Arctic grayling use the creek in the summer months for opportunistic feeding, from the Tanana River to near the proposed diversion area. There is no evidence of Arctic grayling spawning in Y errick Creek, or that Y errick Creek makes any more than a very minor contribution to the Arctic grayling resources in the Upper Tanana River basin. The proposed project's diversion of water would reduce flow in 11,000 feet of Yerrick Creek and create a temporary barrier to a few 1 Arctic grayling when the Creek's natural flow is less than 60 cubic feet per second (cfs). We believe it is reasonable to assume that Arctic grayling would continue to occupy the drainage below the diverted flow's re- entry to Y errick Creek at the Alaska Highway crossing, and further upstream in the "bypass area" when flows exceed 60 cfs. The insignificant displacement of a few Arctic grayling during low water flow periods (less than 60 cfs) does not appear to justify the construction of a fishway passage. The proposed project will also have little, if any, impact to the Dolly Varden population that resides above the proposed project diversion. Over one year ago we provided ADF&G with our study plan for evaluating the fish resources of Yerrick Creek. Since that time we have adjusted our investigations to address the recommendations of your staff where appropriate and funded field studies to collect data relevant to a reasonable evaluation of the effect of the project on local fish resources. Your July 20, 2009, letter references a number of "information needs" that must be met for you to make a decision. As noted above, we believe we have provided the information and analysis to support a decision at this time. Three months ago we provided you a draft memorandum of agreement based on our analysis and conclusion that that a fishway passage is not necessary for the project to protect resident Dolly Varden or transitory Arctic grayling. We also requested your final decision by August to secure project funding and begin construction this season. At this late date it is unacceptable to put the project on hold to produce information we believe has already been provided or has little bearing on the decision to be made. 1 The largest number of grayling found in the proposed Yerrick Creek diversion bypass area was 18 recorded on July 22 in 1975. Robert "Mac" Mclean, ADF&G July 24, 2009 p.4 Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project Habitat Permit If we do not have a decision by you before July 31,2009, we will request a meeting with you and the appropriate Department Division Directors to clarify what AP&T must do to ensure the Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric project complies with Alaska's Fishway Act. Sincerely, Glen D. Martin Project Manager (360) 385-1733 x122 glen.m@aptalaska.com ENCLOSURES A. Fisheries Baseline Study for a Proposed Hydroelectric Development on Yerrick Creek, October 2008. B. Fisheries Study for Spawning A G and D V and their movement throughout the Creek during May and June 2009, June 2009. C. AP&T Temperature and Fish Presence Survey, (e-mail) June 24, 2009. D. Literature Review and Field Report: Hydrology Baseline Study (Including Water Quality Testing), October 2008. A. Fisheries Baseline Study for a Proposed Hydroelectric Development on Yerrick Creek, October 2008. REPORT GRAVSTAR FISHERIES BASELINE STUDY for a PROPOSED HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT on YERRICK CREEK near TOK,ALASKA prepared for- ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE Company Port Townsend, Washington by- Stephen T. Grabacki, FP-C GRA YST AR Pacific Seafood, Ltd. Anchorage, Alaska (907) 272-5600 graystar@alaska. net October 2008 1 --INTRODUCTION ALASKA POWER AND TELEPHONE COMPANY (AP&T) has proposed to install a hydroelectric project on Yerrick Creek, near Tok, Alaska. This document is the report of the first year of a fisheries baseline study, in support of that project. The study area included Yerrick Creek (YER) and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 (CR1). These streams are small tributaries of the upper Tanana River, in eastern interior Alaska. The fish and fisheries of the upper Tanana River drainage are studied and managed by the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADFG, or "the department"). Neither YER nor CR1 are listed in ADFG's Catalog of Waters Important for the Spawning, Rearing or Migration of Anadromous Fishes and its associated Atlas --http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/SARR/awc/ --although the Tanana River itself is listed. YER and CR1 lie within ADFG's Upper Tanana Management Area (UTMA), which is within ADFG's fishery management region III, also known as the Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim (A YK) region (Figure 1). The UTMA encompasses Delta Junction, Tok, and several smaller communities (Figure 2). Yukon Management Area Region Ill Lower Tanana Management Area - Figure 1 --Map of ADFG's Sport Fish Regions. and the Six Region III Management Areas source: Parker 2006 2 Figure 2--Map of the Upper Tanana Management Area within the Tanana River Drainage source: Parker 2006 Several fish species are found in the UTMA - Common Name chinook (king) salmon coho (silver) salmon chum (keta) salmon Arctic grayling burbot lake trout Dolly Varden round whitefish least cisco humpback whitefish northern pike 3 Scientific Name Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Oncorhynchus kisutch Oncorhynchus keta Thymallus arcticus Lota Iota Salvelinus namaycush Salvelinus malma Coregonus cylindraceum Coregonus sardinella Coregonus pidschian Esox lucius ADFG's Division of Sport Fish publishes an annual Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River Drainage. These reports focus on the more abundant sport- caught fishes: coho salmon, Arctic grayling, northern pike, lake trout, and burbot. Dolly Varden char are not explicitly studied. The most recent available such report (as of October 2008) is Parker 2006. ADFG has stocked rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Arctic char (Salve/inus a/pinus), coho salmon, Arctic grayling, and lake trout in selected waters of the Upper Tanana area (Parker 2006). In general, there is less sport fishing effort in the UTMA, as compared to the Lower Tanana Management Area (Parker 2006); for example, in 2005 -- * 33% of anglers in the Tanana River drainage fished in UTMA * 30% of fishing trips in the Tanana River drainage were in UTMA * 28% of fishing effort in the Tanana River drainage was in UTMA * 39% of fish harvest in the Tanana River drainage was in UTMA In 2005, Arctic grayling comprised over half of the sport fish catch, but less than one-third of the sport fish harvest (fish caught and retained) in UTMA (Parker 2006)- Species Catch % ofCatchd Harvest % ofHarveste %Harvested Salmon *chinook 25 0.03 25 0.15 100.0 * cohoa 2,830 2.97 267 1.61 9.4 * cohob 2,973 3.12 1,002 6.02 33.7 *chum 686 0.72 0 0.0 0.0 Non-Salmon * rainbow trout 17,355 18.20 6,336 38.10 36.5 *lake trout 3,651 3.83 569 3.42 15.6 * charc 1,453 1.52 463 2.78 31.8 * Arctic grayling 55,943 58.66 5,242 31.52 9.4 * northern pike 8,299 8.70 1,646 9.90 19.8 *whitefish 455 0.48 60 0.36 30.5 * burbot 1,370 1.44 1,021 6.14 74.8 * sheefish 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 * other fishes 321 0.34 0 0.0 0.0 TOTAL 95,361 16,631 17.4 a -anadromous salmon b -landlocked coho & Chinook salmon c includes Arctic char & Dolly Varden d -the species' percent ofUTMA total catch, calculated from Table 7 in Parker 2006 e the species' percent ofUTMA total harvest, calculated from Table 7 in Parker 2006 4 The preceding table shows that 1.52% of the catch, and 2. 78% of the harvest, were composed of "char", which includes both wild Dolly Varden and stocked Arctic char. Because of their wide distribution and comparatively high abundance, Arctic grayling are important to both sport and subsistence harvesters. As such, they have been extensively studied by ADFG scientists for decades. In the Tanana River drainage, grayling exhibit a wide range of age and size at maturity (Clark 1992). Similar studies have not been conducted for Dolly Varden in the upper Tanana drainage, but anecdotal observations indicate that Dolly Varden in that area may reach maturity and spawn at small sizes (< 200 mm fork length) (J.F. Parker, ADFG, personal communication, 2008), and even while exhibiting so-called "juvenile" characteristics such as parr marks (A.E. Rosenberger, University of Alaska Fairbanks, School of Fisheries & Ocean Sciences, personal communication, 2008). ADFG has conducted comprehensive fish surveys of the streams of the middle and lower Tanana River drainage, including clear, clear/glacial, glacial, humic/glacial, and humic creeks and rivers, and found no Dolly Varden in any of those habitats (Durst 2001, Hemming & Morris 1999). Arctic grayling conduct seasonal migrations among overwintering, spawning, and summer feeding habitats, and seasonal changes in water temperature are generally considered to be the triggers for those movements (Ridder 1995, Ridder 1994, and several previous studies cited in those reports. Similar studies have not been conducted for Dolly Varden in the upper Tanana drainage, but anecdotal reports indicate that there may be year-round resident populations of Dolly Varden in the upper reaches of Yerrick Creek (J.F. Parker, ADFG, personal communication, 2008). In 1988, 367 Tok households were surveyed to determine their subsistence use of fish, game, and plant resources. Most households used subsistence-caught salmon (79.4%) and freshwater fish (71.4%). In the freshwater fish category, the predominant subsistence species were grayling (55.7%), burbot (40.2%), rainbow trout (35.0%), large pike (27.2%), whitefish (25.9%), and lake trout (22.9%). Only 0.9% of Tok households reported using subsistence-caught Dolly Varden. The report does not identify where these various fish species were harvested, but because the Tok data set includes marine fish (27.5%), such as halibut, it appears that Tok residents harvest subsistence fisheries resources far from home, and not only in the local Tok area (McMillan & Cuccarese 1988). In conclusion, Arctic grayling are the most commonly sport-caught fish in the UTMA, and the second-most common sport-harvested species. Grayling are also taken by subsistence harvesters. Dolly Varden are comparatively uncommon in the UTMA, in both the sport and subsistence harvests, and were not reported by either of two ADFG scientific investigations. Finally, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the Alaska Department ofFish & Game's Division of Fisheries Rehabilitation, Enhancement, & Development (FRED) investigated possible sites for salmon hatcheries throughout Alaska. In a survey of Yerrick Creek in February 1980, Raymond ( 1980) reported~ 5 *the Upper Tanana River Valley has many ingredients for a good hatchery site: year-round highway access, high-gradient streams, and hardly any salmon * most of the creeks in this area dry up in winter * there was no evidence of running water at the highway bridge * there was evidence of running water at two sites: 1 mile and 2 miles upstream of the highway * water temperature was too low for a flow-through hatchery *there was plenty of hydropower available 2 --METHODS YER is characterized by steep gradient, cascading flows, and large boulder substrate. The channels appear to be dynamic, as judged by cleanliness of the substrate in and near the water: very little periphyton and almost no terrestrial vegetation. There are few pools in YER that appear capable of providing habitat for fishes. Those pools are small, in the range of 10-20 ft long. CRl is much smaller and steeper than YER. It is essentially one long, cascading run, with strong current and large boulder substrate. Small pools are apparent only at very low flows. For example, in June (lower flow than in September), a pool of roughly 10 ft wide x 20 ft long x 2 ft deep was observed at WP 037: 63°21.595'N 143°43.005'W elevation: 2,239 ft but this pool could not be located in early September, when flow was greater. Similarly, a few smaller pools were observed in June, but by early September, the dynamic channel appeared to have shifted so that they were no longer apparent. During sampling visits in summer 2008, the wetted perimeters of both streams were much smaller (narrower) than their respective dynamic channels (area of clean boulders). The fish sampling stations on YER and CRl were selected to bracket the area of interest to AP&T's proposed project (Figure 3) * Station UYC: upper Yerrick Creek, well above the hydropower impoundment site *Station UMY: middle/upper Yerrick Creek, above the impoundment site *Station YCI: Yerrick Creek, in the general vicinity of the proposed impoundment * Station MYC: middle Yerrick Creek, between the impoundment and the powerhouse * Station L YC: lower Yerrick Creek, downstream of the proposed powerhouse *Station CRl: Cathedral Rapids Creek #1, in the vicinity of the proposed impoundment The purpose of this study was to characterize the seasonal presence and distribution of fishes in the two streams. 6 NATlONAL GEOGRAPHIC Figure 3 --Sampling Sites for the 2008 Fisheries Baseline Study The two creeks were visited on foot and examined, but not sampled, 6-7 June 2008. Fish habitat was generally characterized, and the locations of possible fish-bearing pools were recorded. Sampling, supported by helicopter, was conducted - * 3-4 September 2008 (YER and CRl ); this sampling was originally scheduled for early August, in order to sample fish in their summer habitats, but because of unusually heavy and prolonged rains and flooding in the Tok area, the trip was postponed twice until early September; nevertheless, the weather and water were warm and summer-like, but the water flow was still noticeably higher than in June 7 * 29-30 September 2008 (YER only); this sampling was intended to sample fish immediately before freeze-up, in order to understand the species winter habitats; the water flows were lower than in early September Sampling methods included -- * electrofisher + bag seine (the electrofisher was used to herd the fish into the bag seine, rather than stunning them); it was difficult to maintain the seine in the current at some sites, and impossible at other sites; also, this was more effective in late September, because flow was less than in early September; where it was not possible to maintain the bag seine in strong current, electro fishing was performed as best as possible along the sides of the stream and in small backwater areas; in most cases, electrofishing was performed by two people: one bearing the backpack unit, and the other using a dipnet * minnow traps baited with commercially cured salmon eggs and left to soak overnight in pools, where pools could be found; fewer pools were visible during early September (higher flow) vs. in late September (lower flow), so that traps were not set at all sites in early September GPS coordinates, as displayed on a brand new Garmin GPS unit, do not appear to match the apparent location as displayed in Figure 3, which is drawn from a brand new version of the TOPO! mapping software. It is not clear if the error is within the GPS unit, the software, or in the interaction between the two. In this report, the GPS readings are listed in Appendix A, and the apparent location is shown in Figure 3. 3--RESULTS Fish sampling was conducted under ADFG Fish Resource Permit SF2008-172. A report ofthose activities was submitted to ADFG on 27 October 2008, and is attached to this report as Appendix A. Two species of fish were captured: Dolly Varden (DV) and Arctic grayling (AG). All fishes were measured and released alive, in apparent good condition. The results of the 2008 fish sampling were --- YERRICK CREEK-3-4 September 2008 Station UYC ** 1 minnow trap+ electrofish -40 yds of stream DV (5): 127, 122, 120, 127, 117 mm fork length (FL) 8 Station YCI * * 2 minnow traps + electro fish ~ 160 yds of stream DV (4): 135, 110, 102, 115 mm FL AG (3 possible males): 220, 235, 190 mm FL AG (1 possible female): 207 mm FL AG (7 undetermined sex): 165, 150, 148, 190, 148, 162, 148 mm FL StationMYC * not possible to set bag seine: current too strong, too wide in run, too deep & fast * not possible to set minnow trap: current too strong, no slow water * water still high & fast> 10 days after latest rain; thalweg depth 3.5-4.0 ft * attempted electro fishing along ~50 yards of shoreline: sighted 1 fish ~ 150mm, species unknown StationLYC * set of seine not very good; current very strong * electrofish ~ 3 5 yards downstream to seine: no fish observed * no other fish-able sites nearby or anywhere below old pipeline corridor * no minnow trap set here YERRICK CREEK-29-30 September 2008 Station UYC ** 1 minnow trap DV (3): 175, 126, 145 mm FL Station UMY ** 1 minnow trap+ electrofish ~ 25 yds of stream DV (4): 125, 147, 159, 142 mm FL + 1 DV sighted Station YCJ ** 2 minnow traps + electrofish ~40 yds of stream DV (14): 124, 131, 167, 133, 131, 137, 136, 128, 125, 123, 141, 105, 130, 80 mm FL DV (1 possible gravid female?): 149 mm FL 9 StationMYC * 1 minnow trap + electro fish ~ 100 yds of stream DV (2): 122, 98 mm FL DV ( 1 w/ white-edged fins, possible spawning male?): 164 mm FL AG (1): 162 rnrnFL +sighted 3 small fish, each <100m FL Station LYC * 1 minnow trap + electro fish ~ 100 yds of stream AG (l): 79 mm FL CATHEDRAL RAPIDS CREEK #1 -3-4 September 2008 Station CRI * electrofished -0.1 mile ofCR1, roughly near the approximate impound site no fish sighted or captured *no minnow trap set (no pools) 4 CONCLUSIONS Y errick Creek is used by Dolly Varden and Arctic grayling, in occasional small pools separated by long sections of cascading runs. Dolly Varden were captured in the middle and upper reaches of the creek (including the proposed impoundment area), while Arctic grayling were captured in the middle and lower sections. In this sampling, Arctic grayling were captured less often than were Dolly Varden. Dolly Varden were commonly encountered in both late summer and late fall (immediately before freeze-up), which suggests that they are year-round residents, including over winter. [Inferring the over-winter habitat of Dolly Varden based on pre-freeze-up surveys and sampling is used by ADFG biologists in other Alaska streams (Scanlon 2008).] The capture of a possibly gravid female and possibly spawning male suggests that Dolly Varden might spawn in the middle reaches of this stream. This apparent distribution is consistent with general anecdotal observations of these species in UTMA *dwarf Dolly Varden are thought to be year-round residents of upper Yerrick Creek * Arctic grayling migrate seasonally into and out of lower Yerrick Creek 10 No fish were captured or sighted in Cathedral Rapids Creek #1, and fish habitat appears to be very scarce. It is not clear to what extent, if any, this cascading stream is used by either fish species. 5 --RECOMMENDATIONS The 2008 fisheries sampling has provided useful characterizations of fish presence and distribution in Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1, in late summer, late fall, and by inference, over-winter. These data, when supplemented by a sampling in late spring or early summer of 2009, will yield a picture of yearly habitat use of these two streams. This future sampling should be performed at a very low water stage, to allow for thorough electrofishing at all stations. 6 -LITERATURE CITED Clark, R.A. 1992. Age and Size at Maturity of Arctic Grayling in Selected Waters of the Tanana Drainage. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Division of Sport Fish; Anchorage. Fishery Manuscript 92-5. Durst, J.D. 2001. Fish Habitats and Use in the Tanana Floodplain Near Big Delta, Alaska, 1999-2000. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Habitat & Restoration Division; Juneau. Technical Report 01-05. Hemming, C.R., & W.A. Morris. 1999. Fish Habitat Investigations in the Tanana River Watershed, 1997. Alaska Department ofFish & Game; Habitat & Restoration Division; Juneau. Technical Report 99-1. McMillan, P.O., & S.V. Cuccarese. 1988. Alaska Over-the-horizon Backscatter Radar System: Characteristics of Contemporary Subsistence Use Patterns in the Copper River Basin and Upper Tanana Area; Volume 1: Synthesis. Draft Report. Prepared for: Hart Crowser Inc. and Arctic Environmental Information & Data Center, in cooperation with Alaska Department of Fish & Game (Anchorage & Fairbanks) and U.S. National Park Service. Parker, J.F. 2007a. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River Drainage in 2002. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial Fisheries; Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 07-03. Parker, J.F. 2007b. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River Drainage in 2003. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial Fisheries; Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 07-05. 11 Parker, J.F. 2006. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River Drainage in 2005. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial Fisheries; Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 06-67. Raymond, J. 1980. AYK Hatchery Site Surveys, and Miscellaneous Chum Spawning Observations. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Division of Fisheries Rehabilitation, Enhancement, & Development; Fairbanks. Ridder, W.P. 1995. Movements of Radio-Tagged Arctic Grayling in the Tok River Drainage. Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Division of Sport Fish. Fishery Data Series 95-36. Ridder, W.P. 1994. Arctic Grayling Investigations in the Tok River Drainage During 1993. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Division of Sport Fish; Anchorage. Fishery Data Series 94-19. Scanlon, B. 2008. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Northwest I North Slope Management Area, 2006. Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 08-35. 12 APPENDIX A Report (or FRP SF2008-172 l3 Report of Activities and Collections 27 October 2008 Fish Resource Permit SF2008-172 Stephen T. Grabacki, FP-C; 907-272-5600; graystar@alaska.net Location: Yerrick Creek (YER) and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 (CR1) The two creeks were examined but not sampled 6-7 June 2008. Fish habitat was generally characterized, and the GPS locations of possible fish-bearing pools were recorded. Sampling was conducted 3-4 September 2008 (YER and CRl), and 29-30 September 2008 (YER only), with electrofisher +bag seine (the electrofisher was used to herd the fish into the bag seine, rather than stunning them), and minnow traps baited with commercially cured salmon eggs and left to soak overnight. GPS coordinates, as displayed on Grabacki's brand new Garmin GPS unit, do not appear to match the apparent location as displayed on the attached map. In this report, the GPS readings are listed in the text, and the apparent location is shown on the map. (1) RESULTS FROM 3-4 SEPTEMBER 2008 YERRICK CREEK (YER) Upper YER, above fork, western channel, well above impoundment, 04SEP08 63°l8.204'N 143°35.387'W elevation: 2,830 ft Minnow trap set 03SEP08@1915, retrieved 04SEP08@1030 ~ DV (1): 127 mmFL Electrofished 2 channels * single channel, -40 yards * Y -shaped channel, -80 yards DV (4): 122, 120, 127, 117 mmFL All fish in apparent good condition, released alive 14 Pool at/near impoundment site (above Mike's camp), 03SEP08 Waypoint 009, elevation: 2,284 ft 63°20.435'N 143°37.852'W Electrofished pool & run, ~30 yards- DV (1): 115 mmFL AG (3 possible males): 220, 235, 190 mmFL AG (1 possible female): 207 mmFL AG (5 undetermined sex): 150, 148, 190, 148, 162, 148 mmFL All fishes in apparent good condition, and released alive Minnow trap set 1430, retrieved 0955 (04SEP08)- DV (2): 110, 102 mmFL Fish in apparent good condition, released alive Pool below impoundment site, 03SEP08 Waypoint 008, elevation: 2,263 ft 63°20.589'N 143°37.684'W Electrofished 2 channels - * main channel, ~80 yards: no fish captured or sighted * side channel, ~50 yards: 1 fish sighted + 2 fish captured- Arctic grayling (AG) 165mm fork length (FL), apparent good condition, released alive Dolly Varden (DV) 135 mmFL, apparent good condition, released alive (D V bore parr marks) Minnow trap set 1300, retrieved 0930 (04SEP08): no catch Middle YER, near big cut in hill on west bank Waypoint 024 on Mike Warner's GPS: 63°21.411 'N 143°37.852'W elevation: 2,100 ft Not possible to set bag seine: current too strong, too wide in run, too deep & fast below pool Water still high> 10 days after latest rain; thalweg depth 3. 5-4.0 ft Attempted electro fishing along -50 yards of shoreline: sighted 1 fish ~ 150mm, species unknown Same conditions downstream -0.5 mile Might be able to work this site in lower flow Lower YER, below highway bridge 63°23.062'N 143°35.538'W elevation: 1,971 ft Set bag seine below a slight pool Set of seine not very good; current very strong; lead line not on bottom in some places My assistant was the anchor for one end of the seine Electrofished -35 yards downstream to seine: no fish observed No other fish-able sites nearby or anywhere below old pipeline corridor Observation: In June, flow at upper YER was greater than at lower YER. In September, there was stronger flow at mid-and lower YER sites. Judging by wet marks on the rocks, the water level was dropping. 15 Y errick Creek is characterized by steep gradient, cascading flows, and large boulder substrate. The channels appear to be dynamic, as judged by cleanliness of the substrate in and near the water: very little periphyton and almost no terrestrial vegetation. There are few pools in YER that appear capable of providing habitat for fishes. Those pools are small, in the range of 10 ft long. Besides the pools that we sampled, other small pools were observed (in June) at- * 63°22.308'N 143°37.007'W elevation: 1,847 ft * 63 °22.123 'N 143 °3 7.1 04'W elevation: not recorded * 63°21.572'N l43°37.608'W elevation: 2,050 ft (pool near spur of hill) * 63°2l.582'N l43°37.638'W elevation: 1,930 ft * 63°21.257'N l43°37.913'W elevation: 2,220 ft (pool near scree slope; l AG seen in June) CATHEDRAL RAPIDS CREEK #l (CRI) Station CRJ Electrofished -0.1 mile of CRI, roughly near the approximate impound site *from WP 012: 63°21.086'N 143°43.153'W elevation: 2,495 ft *to WP 011: 63°2l.175'N l43°43.163'W elevation: 2,442 ft No fish sighted or captured No minnow trap set (no pools) Note: this site was not really a pool or pools; it was a reach of the stream near the impound site, where we could reasonably set the bag seine and conduct electrofishing. CRI is much smaller and steeper than YER. It is essentially one long, cascading run, with strong current and large boulder substrate. In June (lower flow than in September), a pool of roughly 10ft wide x 20ft long x 2ft deep was observed at WP 037: 63°2l.595'N l43°43.005'W elevation: 2,239 ft but this pool could not be located in early September. Similarly, a few smaller pools were observed in June, but by early September, the dynamic channel appeared to have shifted so that they were no longer apparent. 16 (2) RESULTS FROM 29-30 SEPTEMBER 2008 YERRlCK CREEK (YER) Station UYC Upper YER Waypoint 026, elevation: 2,811 ft 63° 18.193'N 143°35.406'W Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1415; retrieved 30SEP08@1320 -- DV (3): 175, 126, 145 mmFL All fish in apparent good condition, released alive Station UMY Upper YER, below WP 026 Waypoint 029, elevation: 2,548 ft 63° 19.371'N 143°36.591'W Nice pool at big dead spruce and snag Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1440; retrieved 30SEP08@ 1235- DV (3): 147, 159, 142 nun FL All fish in apparent good condition, released alive. Electrofished 2 pools, ~25 linear yards of stream DV (1): 125 mm FL + 1 DV sighted Fish in apparent good condition, released alive Station YCI Pools near impoundment site Waypoint 030, elevation: 2,242 ft 63° 20.606'N 143°37.686'W 2 minnow traps set 29SEP08@1500, retrieved 30SEP08@1115 DV (12): 149*, 133, 131, 137, 136, 128, 125, 123, 141, 105, 130,80 nun FL * possible gravid female? All fish in apparent good condition, released alive. Electrofished pools near impoundment site, ~25 linear yards of stream no fish sighted or captured Electro fished pool at fork of 3 channels ~ 100 yards above impoundment site Waypoint 032, elevation: 2,204 ft 63° 20.521 'N 143° 37.773'W DV (3): 124, 131, 167 nun FL All fish in apparent good condition, released alive 17 Station MYC Middle YER, near big spur of hill ("razorback") on west bank Waypoint 031, elevation: 2,026 ft 63° 21.623'N 143° 37.565'W Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1550, retrieved 30SEP08@1400- DV (3): 164*, 122,98 mmFL * white-edged fins, possible spawning male? Electrofished ~ 100 linear yards of stream, in various small pools AG (1): 162 mmFL +sighted 3 small fish, each <100m FL Fish in apparent good condition, released alive Station LYC Lower YER, below highway bridge Waypoint 025, elevation: 1,717 ft 63° 22.878'N 143°36.438'W Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1350, retrieved 30SEP08@1000- *no catch Electro fished~ 1 OOyards of stream AG (1): 79 mm FL 18 B. Fisheries Study for Spawning AG and DV and their movement throughout the Creek during May and June 2009, June 2009. 10 June 2009 To: APT Glen Martin From: GRAYSTAR Steve Grabacki Subject: Report of Fisheries Fieldwork, Yerrick Creek, May-June 2009 I conducted three sampling sessions on Yerrick Creek--19-20 May 2009,27-29 May 2009, and 7 June 2009. For the first two sessions, the study area included lower Yerrick Creek, from roughly 'li-mile above the proposed powerhouse site downstream to the Tanana River. The main purpose of the sampling was to compare spawning aggregations of Arctic grayling above vs. below the proposed powerhouse site. Sampling methods included visual observation with polarized lenses, angling with spin and fly terminal tackle, underwater video, and 3 styles of fish traps (small wire-mesh minnow traps, medium collapsible minnow traps with larger throat, and larger collapsible traps) baited with commercially cured salmon roe. On the third sampling session, we focused on the creek downstream of the highway. The purpose of this sampling was to observe and capture Arctic grayling in lower Y errick Creek, and to compare grayling's use of the creek for spring spawning by adults vs. summer feeding by juveniles. Sampling methods included visual observation with polarized lenses, angling with spin and fly terminal tackle, and herding fish through pools into a bag seine. General Habitat Description For most of its length, Yerrick Creek is a cascading stream with fast flow and boulder substrate. The stream generally comprises 1-3 channels, within a wide dynamic (scoured) perimeter. Apparent fish habitat consists of widely spaced, very small (~10-foot long) pools behind large boulders or logjams. Roughly l mile before the creek joins the Tanana River, the habitat is significantly different. Flow is much slower, and the habitat is composed mostly of sand. In this "delta" area, there are 3 main channels, several smaller channels which leave and rejoin the larger channels, and at least one large area ("city block" in size) through which the creek flows more-or-less overland, in very shallow channels among dense spruce trees. In between these two reaches is a transition zone, where flow is intermediate in strength and substrate is small rocks & large gravel. This transition zone is only a few hundred yards long. Complicating this situation is the fact that the water flowing in the creek is not always continuous with the river. Because of the porous substrate, the water sometimes disappears from the surface, and flows underground. First Sampling Session During the field trip of 19-20 May 2009, Yerrick Creek did not flow into (connect to) the Tanana River. Water flow appeared strongest at the uppermost sampling station (above the powerhouse site), and water was flowing in only I channel under the highway bridge. On I9 May, the water disappeared approximately %-mile downstream of the bridge, within the rocky streambed. On 20 May, the water had reached about 0.9 miles farther downstream, but disappeared in the sandy substrate. In the sandy delta area, there were a few very small pools with very little flow, and mostly dry substrate. At the bridge, water temperature was 10.8°C at about I630 on 18 May 5.1°C at I030 on 19 May 1.7°C at 09I5 on 20 May --this range of daily temperature variation was observed on both sampling trips. (Arctic grayling are thought to spawn at 4°C). The 3 channels of Yerrick Creek drain into a backwater slough of the Tanana River. Although there was no surface water flow from the creek to the river, there was water in that slough. Water temperature was I0.5°C. We observed approximately I2 grayling in a tight school. The fish appeared to be roughly 250-300 mm in length. They were easily spooked, and did not respond to spinners or flies. We also observed 1 round whitefish, of approximately 300 mm in length, dozens of small (~20 mm) grayling, and hundreds of tiny (<10 mm) fish (species unknown). We captured no fish in the fish traps. Above the powerhouse site on 19-20 May, we captured 1 Dolly Varden (225 mm FL) in a trap, but observed no other fishes in this area. Second Sampling Session During the field trip of 27-29 May 2009, the flow in the creek was much greater, and the water appeared to be more turbid, than it had been a week earlier. At the bridge, the water was flowing in 2 channels (vs. one I channel, a week before), and was 5.I°C at IOlO on 27 May 4.1 oc at 0600 on 28 May, after a cool night 7.1°C at 1240 on 28 May 2.8°C at 0610 on 29 May, after a rainy night 3.5°C at 0925 on 29 May 5.3°C at 1455 on 29 May Y errick Creek was flowing into the Tanana River (the slough where we had earlier sampled) through its 3 main channels. Just above those confluences, the creek was braided through the forest, with several small channels and overland flows (among the trees). In these small channels, we observed 2 individual grayling (the fish were widely separated, not aggregated). We observed no fish in the lower creek (below the bridge), on either the rocky or sandy substrates, but we did capture 2 slimy sculpin in a trap. Water temperature in the lower creek was 6.8°C at 1145 on 28 May 4.5°C at 1135 on 29 May Above the powerhouse site, we captured 7 Dolly Varden in traps, but observed no other fishes, with any sampling method. Water temperature in this area was 7.5°C at 1325 on 28 May 3.7°C at 1330 on 29 May During this second field trip, we found some of the fish traps in different positions from where we had set them. They appeared to have been moved to the shore or (in one case) out of the water by an overnight flood event. To summarize the first two samplings~-For grayling to spawn in Yerrick Creek, 2 factors are necessary water temperature of 4-5°C, and continuity of water flow from the creek to the river. As expected, we observed a school of grayling in the Tanana River very near the mouth of Y errick Creek, before the creek had reached the river. Those fish were apparently waiting to enter the creek. After the creek had reached the river, we observed grayling in the sandy-bottom, slower-flowing "delta" channels of the creek, but no grayling in the rocky-bottom, faster-flowing cascading parts of the creek. Also, we did not observe aggregations of grayling anywhere in Y errick Creek. Third Sampling Session We sampled Y errick Creek on 7 June 2009. The weather was cool and rainy in the morning, but turned mostly sunny and warm in the afternoon. Water was clear, and 5.4C at 1100. The purpose of this sampling was to observe and capture Arctic grayling in lower Y errick Creek, and to compare grayling's use of the creek for spring spawning by adults vs. summer feeding by juveniles. Sampling methods included: visual observation with polarized lenses, angling with spin and fly gear, and herding fish downstream through pools into a bag seine, which was stretched across the creek. We observed no fishes in the fast flow I boulder substrate zone, or in the slow flow I sand substrate zone. In the transition zone, we captured 1 grayling, and observed 4 individual (not aggregated) grayling: 2 of these were roughly 200 mm long, and 2 fish were approximately tOO mm long. The captured grayling was 208 mm fork length, and did not appear to be in either a pre-spawning or post-spawning condition. I took scale samples from the captured grayling, and released it in apparent good condition. I drove to Delta, and met with ADFG's Fronty Parker. We discussed my findings, and we pressed and read the sample of scales that I took from the fish I caught on Sunday (6/7). That grayling was 2 or 3 years old, definitely juvenile, not a spawning adult. Based on my sampling in early September 2008, and on these three sampling sessions in May- June 2009, a picture of grayling use of Yerrick Creek seems to have emerged. Grayling appear to use parts of Yerrick Creek (below and within the bypass reach) for summer feeding, on an opportunistic basis. While I cannot prove that grayling do not spawn in Yerrick Creek, I have found no evidence to support it -- *The creek did not connect to the river at the expected time of grayling spawning. * I observed no aggregations of grayling anywhere in Yerrick Creek; all grayling observed in the creek in May-June 2009 appeared to be individual fish. * I observed no adult-size grayling, and the largest grayling observed in June 2009 (the 2-or 3~year~old) did not appear to be in either a pre-spawning or post-spawning condition. C. AP&T Temperature and Fish Presence Survey, (e-mail) June 24,2009. From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: All, Dolly Henton "Eric Hannan CErjcHannanl": grnystar@a!aska net "Glen Martin" Yerrick Creek Fishing Results Wed nesday, June 24, 2009 6:35:50 PM mike 012 80Qx600 jpq mike 013 BOOx600 !pg mike 014 80Qx600.jpg mike 015 80Qx600 jpg mike 016 80Qx600 ipg mike 011 8QQx600.!pg mike 018 80Qx600 jpg mike 019 80Qx600 jpg mike 020 80Qx600 jpq mike 021 BQQx600 !pg mike 022 8QQx600 ipg pbotg Key doc Mike Warner arriv ed at Yerrick Creek today at 7:30am. Water t emp was 4 .8 C. He did ca tch fish as follows: 1st Fish: 5 3/4" long 2nd Fish: 6 1/4" long 3rd Fish: 4" long All four fish were grayling & caught on a tan colored fly north of the bridge 4th Fish: 6 1/8" long 1st Fish: 4 3/4" long 2nd Fish: 5 1/2" long 3rd Fish: 6 1/4" long All three fish were grayling & caught on a tan colored fly near the power plant sight Phot os he took are attached. Thanks, Voff'lj :Jfentan 5\t{m in .Jlssist I {1.1.5. J\taslia Tower & Tefeylione (J\1'&'I) 1'.0. 'Box 207 Toli, AX 99780 (907)8 83-5208 • direct (907) 883·5101 . oenera{ (907) 8 83·5815 ·fax rfo[['lj.Fi@aytataslia.com Yerrick Creek Photo Key 28 May 09 -Steve, Ace, & Mike went to Yerrick Creek-These photos taken by Mike 1 . from Tanana River-in the sand bottom area 2. 3 . 4. Two skulpins 5 . bottom hole in the boulder field. Caught fish on line here first. 6. 7. photos-about 1 mile north of the bridge 8 . 9 . 1. blurry photo -deleted Photos #12-22 Taken 24 June 09-Mike went to the creek by himself 12. Biggest grayling caught: 6 1/8" long (on Mike's hand) 13. Same grayling as photo #12 14. Same grayling -note dorsal fine 15. location of his catch. Note water level has dropped off dramatically 16. Same area -note water flow dropped off. Approx Yz mile north of the bridge 17. Same location as #16 -looki ng downstream towards the Tanana 18. Downstream of the bridge 19. Approx ~ mile of the bridge. Photo to show depth, clarity of the water 20. Approximately 1 mile above bridge I at about the power plant site (above the pipeline corridor) 21. Water flow at about the pipeline corridor. Mike caught his 2"d grayling here. 22. Fishable pool -caught 3'd fish here. The fish are caught in the calm areas by the big rocks-let fly drift over the top of calm water. Mike's Photo 12 Mike's Photo 13 Mike's Photo 14 Mike's Photo 15 Mike's Photo 16 Mike's Photo 17 Mike's Photo 18 Mike's Photo 19 Mike's Photo 20 Mike's Photo 21 Mike's Photo 22 -BLANK PAGE- DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME DIVISION OF HABITAT July 20, 2009 Mr. Glen D. Martin, Project Manager Alaska Power and Telephone Company P.O. Box 3222 Port Townsend, WA 98368-0922 Dear Mr. Martin: SARAH PAUN, GOVERNOR 1300 COLLEGE ROAD FAIRBANKS, AK 99701·1551 PHONE: (907) 459-7289 FAX: (907) 459-7303 RE: Information Needs for Proposed Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Permitting As noted in your letter of June 12, 2009, I met with representatives of Alaska Power and Telephone Company (AP&T) on May 18,2009 regarding information needs to move forward with permit evaluation for the proposed Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project. As currently proposed, AP&T would construct a diversion structure across Yerrick Creek and divert up to 60 cfs through a penstock to a powerhouse near the Alaska Highway, after which the water would be returned to Yerrick Creek. At that meeting, I noted that the Alaska Department ofFish and Game (ADF&G) would need full and complete information on what resources were potentially affected by the proposed activity so a reasoned and balanced evaluation could be made of the potential project effects and benefits. At this time, AP&T has not fully met the information needs identified in my letters of April7, July l, and September 30,2008. ADF&G continues to wait for the requested information on fish distribution and habitat availability including stream flow data from above and below the proposed bypass reach. ADF&G staff also brought up the possibility of incorporating a natural bed bypass ramp into the diversion structure design as Jim Durst of my staff discussed with you some time ago. To date, we have not seen this being evaluated by AP&T. ADF&G will be unable to evaluate this permit application until all requested information is provided. If you have questions or need additional information, contact me or Jim Durst (459-7254). Sincerely, Robert F. "Mac" McLean, Regional Supervisor Division of Habitat Mr. Glen D. Martin Yerrick Cr. Hydro Permitting lnforrnation Needs ecc: Fred Bue, ADF&G CF, Fairbanks AI Ott, ADF&G HAB, Fairbanks Fronty Parker, ADF&G SF, Delta Junction Jim Ferguson, ADF&G SF, Anchorage Scott Maclean, ADF&G, Anchorage Jim Simon, ADF&G SUBS, Fairbanks Jeff Gross, ADF&G WC, Tok Torsten Bentzen, ADF&G WC, Tok Chris Milles, ADNR Lands, Fairbanks Gary Prokosch, ADNR Water, Anchorage RFM/jdd July 20, 2009 Page 2 of2 -BLANK PAGE- REPLY TO ATTENTION OF: Regulatory Division POA-2009-445 Mr. Glen D. Martin DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA REGULATORY DIVISION P.O. BOX 6998 ELMENDORF AFB, ALASKA 99506-0898 MAY 212009 Alaska Power and Telephone Company 193 Otto Street Post Office Box 3222 Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Dear Sir: This is in response to your May 1, 2009, application for a Department of the Army (DA) permit, to conduct sample test pits. It has been assigned file number POA-2009-445, Yerrick Creek, which should be referred to in all future correspondence with this office. The project site is located within Sections 1, 2, 11, & 14, T. 18 N., and Section 36, T. 19 N., Range 9 E, Cooper River Meridian; USGS Quad Map Tanacross B-6; Latitude 63.3826° N., Longitude 143.5989° W.; approximately 20 miles west of Tok, Alaska. DA permit authorization is necessary because your project may involve work in or placement of structures and dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. under our regulatory jurisdiction. Based upon the information and plans you provided, we hereby verify that the work described above, which would be performed in accordance with the enclosed plan (sheets 1-5), dated May 2009, is authorized by Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 6, Survey Activities. NWP No. 6 and its associated Regional and General Conditions can be accessed at our website at www.poa.usace.army.mil/reg. You must comply with all terms and conditions associated with NWP No. 6. Further, please note General Condition 26 requires that you submit a signed certification to us once any work and required mitigation are completed. Enclosed is the form for you to complete and return to us. This verification will be valid for two years from the date of this letter, unless the NWP authorization is modified, suspended, or revoked. Nothing in this letter excuses you from compliance with other Federal, State, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations. -2- You may contact me via email at allan.g.skinner®usace.army.mil, by mail at the address above, by phone at (907) 753-2797, or toll free from within Alaska at (800) 478-2712, if you have questions or to request paper copies of the jurisdictional determination, regional and/or general conditions. For additional information about our Regulatory Program, visit our web site at www.poa.usace.army.mil/reg. Enclosures Allan G. Skinner Regulatory Specialist US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska District Enclosure Permit Number: POA-2009-445 Name of Permittee: Alaska Power and Telephone Company Date of Issuance: May 22, 2009 Upon completion of the activity authorized by this permit and any mitigation required by the permit, sign this certification and return it to Mr. Allan G, Skinner at the following address: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alaska District Regulatory Division Post Office Box 6B9B Elmendorf AFB, Alaska 99506-0898 Please note that your permitted activity is subject to a compliance inspection by an U.S. Army Corps of Engineers representative. If you fail to comply with this permit you are subject to permit suspension, modification, or revocation. I hereby certify that the work authorized by the above-referenced permit has been completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said permit, and required mitigation was completed in accordance with the permit conditions. Signature of Permittee Date " • ... ~·-- PROJECT LOCATION T18N, R9E, Section 1, 2, 11, 14 T19N, R9E, Section 36, CRM USGS Tanacross (B-6) Mile Post 1333.5 Alaska Hwy Approximately 20 lies West of Tok LEGEND D TANACROSS, INC (VILLAGE CORPORATION OWNED LAND) . POA-2009-445 ·.: Sheet 1 of 4 May 2009 ~· ~ , ~~t/.2~~~~~Rx~~ R~~'J \\',~:.i~~~;;.;:;,.·f;'''l/..:..?·:..:.~ Site Development Diagram CROS5:1>!G · ... ;, .. 't'· . . ·. --·-. ... , .... '""" .. · . ... ; ... ~ .:· . . ~ ..... '\.. .. :. T18N, R9E, SEC. 1, 2, 11 , 14, CRM T19N, R9E, SEC. 36, CRM APJ ALJ\S~:t\ POWER & TEL::PHONE COMPt\.N Y EXCAVATOR ACCESS PATH YERRICK CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINI PERMIT APPLICATION PLAN VIEW NORTH .. POA-2009-445 Sheet 2 of 4 May2009 ----------------------------------------~--------------------- l .and l :~ l'l!nni1 Apphcanon Suf'Pil._n«.tl C.)uo.'Siioonaire f(lr: U..: ofl:plands or Non-Marim: Walo:!'l (ll)i04) Ro...:o.'ipl TY('Il Fl' (Non-GuidC)llr7A (Guido:) l'ag.:4u(-l Site Development J)iagram f'ARAI..Lr.L I CI-IOSSING · · CROSSING __j CROSSitJG -·· An excavator is needed at the proposed diversion site to dig some test pits to determine the permeability CROSSING · · of the area for placing the diversion structure. No road exist into this site, so this route would ha"e the least environmental impacts due to it occurring at seasonal low flow and half the route is in old, unused channels on the west side of the creek. Activity: an excavator would be driven up the west creek channel that is dry and unused and going through reforestation . This activity would also occur when flows are typically the lowest, during August and/or September 2009. The excavator would follow the easiest route up the old creek bed until it needs to cross the creek, as indicated on the map. The creek is composed of cobble, gravel and sand. The wetland JD that HDR conducted describes Yerrick Creek as follows: "The project area is located along Yerrfck Creek, a cobble-, gravel-. sand-substrate creek which crosses the Alaska Highway at approximately milepost 1339. Most of the project area is undeveloped, with an open gravel waterway. adjacent forests, abandoned gravel side channels in various states of revegetation. and heavily forested banks." Each crossing would not require any preparation, as is illustrated by the enclosed photographs the creek is mostly large cobble. The excavator would drive acrossed the narrowes~ shallowest portions of the active east channel, using operator judgement for the best location, crossing tne active creek 6 times to access the diversion site. It is proposed that it will take one day to drive in, two days will be spent on site, and one day to drive back out. Once the excavator crosses the aeek at ttle upper most point, near the diversion site, 6 test pits would be dug within 300-500 feet upstream and/or downstream of the last crossing. No excavation would occur closer than 50 feet to the active flow. Test pits would be refilled with the excavated material. Though the upper part of the creek is used by Dolly Varden and the lower part Is used by Arctic Grayling, tfle habitat in this part of tfle creel( is marginal', being heavily cobbled with only a few small pools (a copy of the 2008 survey results is included). The impact to fish habitat would be negligable and because activity would occur at the lowest flows, fish from below would not be able to access this portion of the creek because flows go subterrainian down near the highway. A wetland survey by H DR fs also enclosed. LAS# APlT ALASV..A POWER &: TEL£PHONE COMPANY l .:ond l ;,;o.-l'\:m1i1 ApflliC,tlion Stlf'l'll:mcnra l (}III.'Si iun!>"dil"l: l<•r: t;..: of Uplnn.J~ or "'"t-Marin.: W:rtcn; IOJ!U4) EXCAVATOR ACCESS PATH YERRICK CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT u.s. ARMY CORPS OF POA 2009 ENGINEERS • -445 PERMIT APP'LICATION Sheet 3 of 4 PLAN v1Ew May 2009 R,~iJll Ty~ I '~ (1\:llR·(iuidc) t~r 7/1. ((iuidc) ... dJ,'<:4t>f4 I I .I I : ! I c ; I I ... I I - • ccn., ::ro ~->. ~~\ "' • I ' I • I .. I _,...._ t-8'---1 - ~ ~~~~~ (:9-,...,~Q:·,,·'"'c'\~ .rf.)~ OCtl -~(,Y..,(.,'?tJ.)c~"P.fJ .. ·-~ ,. -~ . . ~·-· .. ~~ . ' ·--·----- 4 I I I I I"') I"\ I I I I I t I I I I r 8' _l H 31 Excavation will be approximately 8' x 3' to a maximum depth of approximately 20', or until impermeable substrate is encountered, whichever happens first. AAT .Jll.Ecl.A9,(A P0\1ER f:,' tr:NriON£ COUPnr-. -a I I. Ill I --------- 1 I I I I 6. Survey Activities. Survey activities, such as core sampling, seismic exploratory operations, plugging of seismic shot holes and other exploratory-type bore holes, exploratory trenching, soil surveys, sampling, and historic resources surveys. For the purposes ofthis NWP, the term "exploratory trenching" means mechanical land clearing of the upper soil profile to expose bedrock or substrate, for the purpose of mapping or sampling the exposed material. The area in which the exploratory trench is dug must be restored to its pre-construction elevation upon completion of the work. In wetlands, the top 6 to 12 inches of the trench should normally be backfilled with topsoil from the trench. This NWP authorizes the construction of temporary pads, provided the discharge does not exceed 25 cubic yards. Discharges and structures associated with the recovery of historic resources are not authorized by this NWP. Drilling and the discharge of excavated material from test wells for oil and gas exploration are not authorized by this NWP; the plugging of such wells is authorized. Fill placed for roads and other similar activities is not authorized by this NWP. The NWP does not authorize any permanent structures. The discharge of drilling mud and cuttings may require a permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. (Sections 10 and 404) -BLANK PAGE- DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME DIVISION OF HABITAT SARAH PALIN, GOVERNOR 1300 COLLEGE ROAD FAIRBANKS, AK 99701-1551 PHONE: (907} 459·7289 FAX: (907) 459·7303 FISH HABITAT PERMIT FH09-III .. 0128 Mr. Glen D. Martin, Project Manager Alaska Power and Telephone Company P.O. Box 3222 Port Townsend, AK 98368 Dear Mr. Martin: ISSUED: May 20, 2009 EXPIRES: December 31, 2009 RE: Proposed lnstream Equipment Crossings and Geotechnical Exploration Yerrick Creek Sec l, 2, 11, & 14, Tl8N, R9E, and Sec 36, Tl9N, R9E, C:RM; Tanacross B-6 Quad Pursuant to AS 16.05.841 (Fishway Act), the Alaska Department ofFish and Game (ADF&G), Division of Habitat has reviewed your proposal to cross Yerrick Creek with a tracked excavator at the referenced locations, and to conduct geotechnical exploration within the limits of ordinary high water. Your application dated May I, 2009 was supplemented with information provided at a meeting between ADF&G and company representatives on May 18 and by email from you on May 20, 2009. Your proposed operation includes walking a ROB EX 130 LCM-3 or similar tracked excavator from the Alaska Highway approximately 3 114 miles up the floodplain ofYerrick Creek to the proposed Yerrick Creek Hydro Project diversion site to perform exploratory trenching, and return. The work would be accomplished during the late summer or fall low water period, and would make use of dry channels whenever possible. Six crossings of the active chalUlel of Y errick Creek are proposed, as is travel within the floodplain. Approximate} y six geotechnical test pits would be dug to a depth of 20 feet. The pits would be located at least 50 feet from any active chaMels of Yerrick Creek and would be refilled after excavation. Some or all of the excavation areas would be within the limits of ordinary high water of Yerrick Creek. Yerrick Creek supports resident fish species (including Arctic grayling and Dolly Varden) in the area of your proposed activities. Based upon our review of your plans, your proposed project has the potential to obstruct the efficient passage and movement of fish. Mr. Glen D. Martin FH09-HJ-0128 2 Issued: May 20, 2009 Expires: December 31, 2009 ADF&G recommends that disturbance to vegetation within SO feet of, but outside the limits of, ordinary high water be avoided to the extent practicable, particularly adjacent to sheer or cut banks. Note that this is not intended to preclude travel across gravel bars vegetated with willow or alder. In accordance with AS 16.05.841, project approval is hereby given subject to your proposed scope of work and the following stipulations: ( l) Stream crossings shall be made from bank to bank in a direction substantially perpendicular to the direction of stream flow. (2) Stream crossings shall be made only at locations with gradually sloping banks. There shall be no crossings at locations with sheer or cut banks. (3) Stream banks and stream beds shall not be altered or disturbed in any way to facilitate crossings. If stream banks are inadvertently disturbed, they shall be immediately stabilized to prevent erosion. (4) Logjams and embedded large woody debris within the limits of ordinary high water shall not be moved or removed without specific authorization from ADF&G. (5) Any excavation within the limits of ordinary high water shall be reclaimed and stabilized in a manner that is not conducive to erosion and that cannot trap fish under fluctuating water levels. Photo documentation of each reclaimed pit within the limits of ordinary high water shall be forwarded to this office within 30 days of the activity. The permittee is responsible for the actions of contractors, agents, or other persons who perform work to accomplish the approved plan. For any activity that significantly deviates from the approved plan, the permittee shall notify the ADF&G and obtain written approval in the form of a permit amendment before beginning the activity. Any action taken by the permittee, or an agent of the permittee, that increases the project's overall scope or that negates, alters, or minimizes the intent or effectiveness of any stipulation contained in this permit will be deemed a significant deviation from the approved plan. The fmal determination as to the significance of any deviation and the need for a permit amendment is the responsibility of the ADF&G. Therefore, it is recommended that the ADF&G be consulted immediately when a deviation from the approved plan is being considered. This letter constitutes a permit issued under the authority of AS 16.05.841 and must be retained on site during the permitted activity. Please be advised that this approval does not relieve you of the responsibility of securing other permits, state, federal or local. This permit provides reasonable notice from the Commissioner that failure to meet its terms and conditions constitutes violation of AS 16.05.861; no separate notice under AS 16.05.861 is required before citation for violation of AS 16.05.841 can occur. In addition to the penalties provided by law, this permit may be terminated or revoked for failure to comply with its provisions or failure to comply with applicable statutes and regulations. The ADF&G reserves the right to require mitigation measures to correct disruption to fish and game Mr. Glen D. Martin FH09-lll-0128 3 Issued: May 20, 2009 Expires: December 31, 2009 created by the project and which was a direct result of the failure to comply with this permit or any applicable law. The recipient of this permit (permittee) shall indemnify, save harmless, and defend the ADF&G, its agents and its employees from any and all claims, actions or liabilities for injuries or damages sustained by any person or property arising directly or indirectly from permitted activities or the permittee's performance under this permit. However, this provision has no effect, if, and only if, the sole proximate cause of the injury is the ADF&G's negligence. Please be advised that this determination applies only to activities regulated by the ADF&G; other departments and agencies also may have jurisdiction under their respective authorities. This determination does not relieve you ofthe responsibility for securing other permits, state, federal, or local. You are still required to comply with all other applicable laws. Sincerely, Denby S. Lloyd, Commissioner BY: Robert F. "Mac" McLean, Regional Supervisor Division of Habitat ecc: Tim Pilon, ADEC, Fairbanks Bonnie Borba, ADF&G CF, Fairbanks AI Ott, ADF&G HAB, Fairbanks Fronty Parker, ADF&G SF, Delta Junction Jim Simon, ADF&G SUBS, Fairbanks Jeff Gross, ADF&G WC, Tok Chris Milles, ADNR DMLW, Fairbanks NOAA Fisheries, Anchorage Allan Skinner, USACE, Anchorage POA-2009-445 Larry Bright, USFWS, Fairbanks Meg Hayes, Tanacross Inc. Eric Hannan, AP&T, Tok RFM/jdd -BLANK PAGE- DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME DIVISION OF HABITAT September 3, 2008 Mr. Glen D. Martin, Project Manager Alaska Power and Telephone Company P.O. Box 3222 Port Townsend, W A 98368-0922 Dear Mr. Martin: SARAH PALIN, GOVERNOR 1300 COLLEGE ROAD FAIRBANKS, AK 99701-1551 PHONE: (907) 459-7289 FAX: (907) 459-7303 RE: Comments on Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Revised Draft Study Plan The Alaska Department ofFish and Game (ADF&G), Division of Habitat has reviewed your July 22,2008 Revised Draft Study Plan for the proposed Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project. During this review, we consulted with appropriate ADF&G biologists and have incorporated their comments into this document. The current comments are intended to augment, and be taken in context with, my letters of April 7 and July I, 2008, regarding the Y errick Creek Hydro Project. In addition, we recommend that Alaska Power and Telephone Company contact other appropriate state and federal agencies for any infonnation needs they may have regarding this proposed project; in particular, contact the Land Section and Water Section of the Alaska Department ofNatural Resources, Division of Mining, Land and Water. PROPOSED PROJECT From this revised draft, we understand that the proposed project capacity is 2-3 MW, although the maximum proposed water usage is not given. The penstock would be at least mostly buried, and it and the access road would be sited at least 66 feet from Yerrick Creek except at the impoWldment structure and powerhouse. The impoundment structure would likely be made of sheet pile, and designed to feed flow into the penstock rather than store water. Operations would be year-round run-of-river. FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES We noted and acknowledge the significant update you made to the Existing Resources portion of the document, and have no further comments on that portion at this time. PERMITTING INFORMATION NEEDS The table of stream gage data from near the impoundment site is helpful. Please indicate its location on Figure l for reference, and provide latitude and longitude coordinates. It appears that the temperature data presented are air temperature; water temperatures would be very useful Mr. Glen D. Martin Yerrick Cr. Hydro Revised Draft Study Plan Comments September 3, 2008 Page 2 of2 for helping refine timing ofDoliy Varden spawning and other life history events. We continue to note that a second gage downstream of the bypass reach will be needed to adequately characterize surface flows in that reach and to provide a basis for development of appropriate instream flow requirements for project operations. It is our position that surface flows through the bypass reach can be documented and examined independent of fish surveys. Rather, knowledge of hydrologic characteristics, and whether it is a gaining or losing reach, is expected to add to the abi1ity to delineate and evaluate fish habitat and passage in the area. We are concerned that it appears the summer residency fish sampling field work did not happen this year. At the present time, overnight temperatures in the project area are near or below freezing, so water temperatures may have dropped enough that fish have begun to move from their summer habitats to ones more suited to lower temperatures and lower flows. As such, fish distribution data for the summer residency period are still needed. We did not see methods described in the Study Plan that will provide data on the seasonal movement of fish between stream reaches and habitats as we have previously requested. Information on the life history of Dolly Varden in the project area is also needed. Based on our current understanding of wildlife resources and uses in the project area, we concur that most project effects on wildlife are likely to be indirect, associated primarily with changes to access, and relatively minor. Mitigation measures to minimize effects to the extent practicable will be developed as the project is refined. If you have questions or need additional information, contact me or Jim Durst (459-7254). Sincerely, Robert F. "Mac" McLean, Regional Supervisor Division of Habitat ecc: Fred Bue, ADF&G CF, Fairbanks Fronty Parker, ADF&G SF, Delta Junction Jim Ferguson, ADF&G SF, Anchorage Caroline Brown, ADF&G SUBS, Fairbanks Jeff Gross, ADF&G WC, Tok Torsten Bentzen, ADF&G WC, Tok Chris Milles, ADNR Lands, Fairbanks Jim Vohden, ADNR Water, Fairbanks RFM/jdd -BLANK PAGE- ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY July 22, 2008 To: All Agencies P.O. BOX 3222 • 193 OTTO STREET PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98388 (380) 385-1733 • (800) 982-Q138 FAX (380) 385-51n Regarding: Yerrick Creek Hydro Draft Study Plan -Version 2 Dear Agency Representatives: Enclosed is a revised draft study plan for your review for the Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project, located approximately 20 miles west of Tok on the Alaska Highway. A project description and map are included in the draft study plan. This plan incorporates ADF&G's comments and provides more detail on what studies are being conducted. Please provide your comments by August 29, 2008. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Glen D. Martin Project Manager glen.m@aptalaska.com (360) 385-1733 xl22 Enc. (as stated) Cc: Deborah Rocque, USF&WS Victor Ross, COE Krissy Plett, DNR-Water Jim Vohden, ADNR Water Chris Milles, DNR-Land Tim Wingerter, DEC Jim Ferguson, ADF&G Fronty Parker, ADF&G Jeff Gross, ADF&G Todd Nichols, ADF&G Mac McLean, ADF&G Jim Durst, ADF&G Caroline Brown, ADF&G Judith Bittner, SHPO YERRICK CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (REVISED) DRAFT STUDY PLAN 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION APC proposes to construct a run-of-river hydroelectric project that will interconnect with the grid supplying electricity to the communities of Tetlin, Tok, Dot Lake, and Tanacross. This grid is presently wholly reliant upon diesel generation. APC is the certified utility for this area along the Alaska Highway and is within the boundaries of APC's certificate from the Regulatory Commission of Alaska. This project is called the Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project. The project is located approximately 20 miles west of Tok on the Alaska Highway at Milepost 1339. Although APC's existing transmission infrastructure follows the highway right-of-way past the project site, this infrastructure (conductor) will need to be upgraded to handle the load from the project. Project capacity is expected to be 2-3 megawatts (MW). Project features would include a small diversion structure, an approximately 11,000 foot long penstock, powerhouse with a single impulse turbine (Pelton or Turgo) and generator, tailrace, small substation, and transmission line to and along the Alaska Highway, as shown in ,_CMIII ... _ Figure 1. The building season is short at this north latitude, so it will take two years to complete this project. This project not only will provide clean, renewable energy that will stabilize rates, but will provide a stable source of energy that can quickly come on line after power outages, which makes it one of the best renewable resources . The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation. The existing diesel generation plant in Tok will continue to supplement the grid as the hydro project is only expected to provide electricity for 100% of the load part of the year and down to approximately 10% of the load during low flow periods of the year, such as during the winter. This project will reduce the cost of electricity to the residents of Tetlin, Tok, Tanacross and Dot Lake who presently pay $0.36 per kWh. Once the hydroelectric project interties with the Tok grid, the cost per kWh will be reduced by approximately 20%. The environmental impacts, i.e. air pollution, noise pollution, spills, etc., of any self-generation will be significantly reduced by this intertie, as well as from generation at APC's powerplant in Tok. During part of the year it is estimated the entire load can be carried by the hydroelectric project, and during the winter the use of diesel generation will supplement the hydroelectric project. ND ' ' "':- ST"JU!:' OF ALA-9KA ' LAND OWNERSHIP This hydroelectric project will reduce fossil fuel consumption by approximately 509,800 gallons per year, which at 2007 prices is equivalent to $1,157,246 annually. The existing diesel plant in Tok, which supplies electricity to all four communities, would use fewer diesel generators to meet the remaining load, reducing labor and maintenance costs and the frequency of generator overhaul and replacement for a potential savings of $1,153,200 annually. At present usage levels, this hydroelectric project would save the residents of all four communities approximately $693,043 per year (2007). Lower energy costs would help stimulate development, both economically and home building. 2.0 Project Components The project facilities described herein are based on a preliminary evaluation of the site, and represent the maximum degree of resource development. The proposed project features are descri bed in more detail below: Impoundment The project design for this run-of-river hydroelectric project include construction of either a concrete, steel, or other material impoundment structure. The impoundment structure is likely to be made of sheet piling to create a barrier that will impound enough water for an intake to remove it and generate electricity at the powerhouse. Due to the depth of the cobble expected in Y errick Creek, it is not expected that the sheet pile will reach bedrock, Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p.2 Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project and therefore it is expected that some water will go subterranean under the impoundment structure and surface further down the creek. Penstock The penstock is estimated to be approximately 11,000 feet in length and would probably consist of a combination of HDPE and steel or iron pipe. The penstock is proposed to be buried along most if not all its length. The diameter of the penstock may be approximately 36-inches. The penstock would parallel the creek down to the powerhouse requiring some clearing along its right-of-way. Powerhouse The powerhouse would be a metal structure of approximately 30 x 40 feet with a height of approximately 25 feet. The powerhouse would contain the controls for the operation of the project, including switchgear, Pelton or Turgo impulse turbine, a generator rated at 2-3 MW, and controls for valves at the impoundment structure. After the water passes through the turbine it will fall into a tailrace that will discharge back into Yerrick Creek above the highway bridge that spans the creek. Access Road An access road would be constructed to the powerhouse from off the Alaska Highway. The road is expected to be less than a mile in length. Another access road would come down the west side of Y errick Creek from the impoundment structure, due to its more moderate elevation changes, to the powerhouse site. The one lane access road width would be approximately 14-feet wide with frequent pullouts. Substation A small pad-mount step-up transformer will be adjacent to the powerhouse to adjust the voltage for the transmission line to Tok. Transmission Line The transmission line will go from the powerhouse step-up transformer to intertie with the Tok grid along the Alaska Highway, approximately one mile away. Tbis would require approximately 20 vertical wood pole structures set about 300 feet apart. Land Ownership The enclosed Figure 1 is a project map showing property boundaries in relation to the project features. The project will be located on land managed by the State of Alaska and Tanacross, Inc., a Village Corporation. Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 3 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Environmental Impacts Previous man-made land disturbance (old gas pipeline corridor paralleling the highway, which was once cleared of vegetation) has left a footprint on the environment that will reduce this projects impact by utilizing the corridor for part of the access road and powerhouse site. Impacts to wetlands will occur as areas along the access route are in muskeg. The access route will parallel the creek on its west side. It is estimated that approximately 5-6 acres of land would be disturbed, with possibly %'s being in muskeg and the creek. To minimize impacts, an erosion and sedimentation control plan will be implemented to confine impacts during construction, of which silt fencing and straw or hay bales would play a significant part, and repair after construction where possible. Construction methods, i.e. minimize the construction footprint, will also keep impacts to a minimum. Threatened, Endangered, or Under Consideration Species No species listed on the ADF&G or USF&WS websites as Threatened or Endangered or under consideration (http://www.adfg.state.ak.us/special/esa/esa home.php ) will be impacted by this project as they either reside or prefer habitat outside of the project area. DRAFT STUDY PLAN Existing Resources Part of the information presented here is from the Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge (east of the project) website, and hence the mention of Refuge throughout this description. The Refuge's data is used because of its proximity to the project area and wealth of information available on indigenous species of the area, however, the Refuge's geography is different then that of Y errick Creek which is primarily a mountainous drainage whereas the Refuge is more lowlands. There was also a significant amount of information on the ADF&G website regarding hunting and trapping in Unit 12, which Yerrick Creek is within. Information from the ADF&G website is also incorporated into the description of resources in the Yerrick Creek area found below. Botanical Resources Boreal forest (taiga) and upland tundra are the dominant vegetation types in all of interior Alaska. In the alpine areas, dry, broad ridge tops are dominated by dryas dwarf scrub and ericaceous dwarf scrub tundra vegetation. Mesic to moist saddles, slopes, and snow-melt meadows support mesic graminoid herbaceous and open, low scrub vegetation. Rock- dominated sites support alpine herbs. Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p.4 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Aquatic Resources The Department of Natural Resources, Habitat Management Division, provided the following information in an April 7, 2008, letter to AP&T regarding the Yerrick Creek drainage. "Yerrick Creek provides habitat for a variety of non-anadromous fish species, including Arctic grayling, Dolly Varden, round whitefish, and slimy sculpin. Arctic grayling and round whitefish are fairly ubiquitous in Tanana River basin stream systems, but the presence of Dolly Varden in Yerrick Creek makes this stream somewhat unusual. "Fish presence and habitat near the mouth and in the lower reaches of Yerrick Creek (well downstream of the Alaska Highway) are poorly documented, although habitat for a variety of species including Arctic grayling, northern pike, burbot, round whitefish, lake chub, longnose sucker, and slimy sculpin occurs here. Stream flow in portions of Yerrick Creek in this reach are completely subsurface at times. If operated as run-of-river, the Yerrick Creek Hydropower project is unlikely to affect these downstream fish resources and habitats. "That portion of Yerrick Creek from downstream of the Alaska Highway to upstream of the Haines-Fairbanks Pipeline crossing has been the most surveyed for fish presence and use. Arctic grayling and Dolly Varden have been found present from the beginning of June through late August, and Arctic grayling through late November (under ice cover). Round whitefish were present in late summer. Even when this reach appears frozen, high quality water is typically flowing in at least one channel below the ice; adult aquatic invertebrates were hatching from a small channel under ice in the third week of March one year. Although Yerrick Creek flow apparently goes subsurface in various locations between the Alaska Highway and the Tanana River for much of most summers, the portion of the stream between the mountains and the subsurface flow appears to provide connected surface flow and habitat. "Adult and juvenile Arctic grayling and Dolly Varden have been captured upstream of the proposed diversion structure location up to where Yerrick Creek forks more than 6 miles above the Alaska Highway crossing. A small falls downstream of the fork is apparently not a fish barrier. Biologists suggested that this reach between the ridges may be used for grayling spawning and for grayling and Dolly Varden over-wintering habitats. Sheep hunters have reported seeing fish in stream portions in the upper part of the drainage that appeared to provide good habitat. " Wildlife Resources The Department of Natural Resources, Habitat Management Division, provided the following information in an April 7, 2008, letter to AP&T regarding the Yerrick Creek drainage. Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p.5 Yenick Creek Hydroelectric Project "The Yerrick Creek drainage is used by a variety of big game species including moose, caribou, and Dall sheep, and is part of the Tok Management Area for Dall sheep. A significant amount of sheep hunting occurs in this drainage. Some sheep hunters have reported being able to walk up the Yerrick Creek streambed to access sheep country since the stream in portions was mostly gravel and rocks with a relatively small channel of water meandering through." Yerrick Creek is located in Game Management Unit 12 (GMU-12). Information on the harvesting of these species was found on the ADF&G website. All these species benefit from a diverse plant community commonly created by forest fires. Wildlife agencies are now trying controlled burns and clear-cuts to improve habitat that not only benefits herbivores but also predators who feed on them. Dall Sheep ( Ovis da/11) The Dall sheep is a stocky sheep that utilize nearly inaccessible, steep mountain slopes, ridges and meadows for feeding and resting. They are generally high country animals but sometimes occur in rocky gorges below timberline in Alaska. They are mostly white and weigh between 125 and 200 pounds. Male Dall sheep are called rams and are distinguished by massive curling, yellowish horns. The females, ewes, have shorter, more slender, slightly curved .horns. Dall sheep are sometimes mistaken for mountain goats, however, the mountain goat has long fur and a beard, and small, slender, black horns that curve slightly backward. The management goals for the harvest of Dall sheep is being met, but will continue to be watched to make sure they are not over grazed. 1 In R Y02-R Y03 the number of permits issued was reduced because hunters complained of overcrowding. Since then there have been fewer complaints. Y errick Creek is one of the few drainages on the north side of the range that has provided historical access to Dall sheep hunting grounds (Cathedral Rapids Creeks and Sheep Creek being the others). For this reason, maintaining access to these hunting grounds without providing 'improved' access that could further stress the population would be the goal of project design. Gating any access road to the project would be the preferred method of maintaining access for hunters as exists today, although they would be able to hike up the road on foot to the projects impoundment site, but would not be able to drive up the drainage beyond what they presently can. This could be viewed as an impact by providing an easier hike into part of the drainage. Moose (Alces alces) Moose are the world's largest members of the deer family and are most abundant in recently burned areas that contain willow and birch shrubs, on timberline plateaus, and 1 Dall Sheep Management Report, 2005, ADF&G; www .wildlife .alaska .gov/index.cfm?adfg=oubs .mgt Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p.6 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project along the major rivers of Southcentral and Interior Alaska. During fall and winter, moose consume large quantities of willow, birch, and aspen twigs. In the spring, moose eat a variety of foods, particularly sedges, equisetum (horsetail), pond weeds, and grasses. During summer, moose feed on vegetation in shallow ponds, forbs, and the leaves of birch, willow, and aspen. Moose are long-legged and heavy bodied with a "bell" or dewlap under the chin; only the bulls have antlers. Their color ranges from golden brown to almost black, depending upon the season and the age of the animal. The hair of newborn calves is generally red- brown fading to a lighter rust color within a few weeks. Moose are common in this area and are also hunted in this and the adjoining drainages. Moose in this GMU have had lower harvest levels than desired by ADF&G so that wolf and bear harvesting quotas may be increased to reduce the moose's major predators. Y errick Creek is brushy habitat, providing food for Moose including the few small lakes and marshes approximately 0.5 miles west of the creek. Moose may be temporarily impacted by this project from construction activity, but should otherwise not be impacted. The penstock (pipe) will be primarily buried along its route and will not be a barrier to the moose's movement through the area. Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) All caribou and reindeer throughout the world are considered to be the same species, but there are 7 subspecies, two of which occur in Alaska: barren ground and woodland. Caribou have special adaptations that allow them to survive their harsh arctic environment. Long legs and broad, flat hooves allow them walk on snow, and a dense woolly undercoat overlain by stiff, hollow guard hairs helps keep them warm. Caribou are also the only member of the deer family in which both sexes grow antlers. Antlers of adult bulls are large and massive; those of adult cows are much shorter and are usually more slender. In late fall, caribou are clove-brown with a white neck, rump, and feet and often have a white flank stripe. Weights of adult bulls average 350 to 400 pounds and females average 175 to 225 pounds. The caribou present in the Yerrick Creek area, which is in GMU 12, are the Macomb caribou herd (MCH). Harvest of the MCH has remained below the harvest objective due to the small size of the herd and the slow increase in herd size with the present management plan. An increase in wolf take was approved in 1995 in an effort to reduce the MCH's main predatory species. The MCH also uses the lowlands of the Tanana River valley as winter range. 2 According to ADF&G, Caribou are known to pass through the Yerrick Creek drainage.3 Project construction should be the only factor to impact Caribou and this should be a temporary impact from noise and activity. 2 www.wildlife.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=pubs .mgt 3 Personal communication between AP&T and Jeff Gross, Tok ADF&G Office, May 2008 . Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 7 Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project Gray (Timber) Wolf (Canis lupus) Wolves are described as having the greatest natural range of any terrestrial mammal, excluding humans. Most wolves in Alaska weigh between 85 and 115 pounds with most females rarely reaching more than 110 pounds. Color varies greatly from pure black to almost white. Wolves in southern Alaska tend to be darker and slightly smaller than those in the Arctic. Wolves are skilled hunters and prey on a variety of species including moose, caribou, hares, beaver, fish, mice and other small mammals. Most wolves hunt and live in packs that range from two to thirty wolves; six or seven is the average. "Historically, the Unit 12 wolf population fluctuated dramatically in response to federal and state predator control programs, ungulate prey abundance, and harvest. The current wolf control program in Unit 12, projected to last 5 years, began in January 2005 in an 1190-mi2 area north ofthe Alaska Highway and west of the Taylor Highway. The area was expanded in 2006 to include all portions of Unit 12 north of the Alaska Highway. " "The Unit 12 wolf population increased by an estimated 22%from RY93-RY95 to RY96- RY98. A comparable estimate was not obtained for RY02-RY04, but results of surveys conducted in portions of Unit 12 and adjacent Unit 20£ indicate wolf numbers increased during RY99-RY04, likely as a result of increased survival and productivity associated with an increased prey base and harvest below sustainable rates. Harvest rates averaged 22% during RY96-RY98 and the same prey base, wolf numbers likely continued to increase during RY02-RY04. Annual harvest rates of>30% would likely be required to preclude wolf population growth in Unit 12. "Prior to 1998 and the arrival of wintering Nelchina and Mentasta caribou herds and the increase in the Unit 12 wolf population, the moose population in Unit 12 increased about 5% annually (Gardner 2002a). The Unit 12 moose population in Unit 12 stopped growing during the period of wolf population growth. Moose are the only ungulate prey available to much of the Unit 12 wolf population between April and mid October. Since 1998 however, northern Unit 12 packs have had access to large numbers of caribou during the winter. Packs in central Unit 12 can also access large numbers of caribou in October, March, and April, but since 1997 only a few caribou winter in the central portion of the unit. The southern unit packs rely primarily on moose year-round. "During the 1980's the Unit I 2 wolf population was lightly harvested. During the 1990's the annual wolf harvest in Unit 12 varied and in some years was the primary limiting factor to the wolf population. During RY99-RY01, harvest was light but caused area- specific declines in wolf numbers. During RY02-RY04 harvest was light and did not limit the wolf population. Harvest rates in the remote areas are dependent on fur price and weather conditions. Along the road system, trapping pressure is high especially around communities and wolves are regulated at lower numbers. Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p.8 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project "Most area residents desire some type of intensive management to benefit Unit 12 moose. Area residents support management that incorporates a combination of area-specific wolf reduction programs conducted by the public and habitat enhancement programs conducted by agencies. Modeling predicts this management regime could cause a low to moderate increase in the moose population. However, this level of management is not expected to attain a high-density moose population. This management is feasible because the areas most trapped for wolves are also the areas most hunted for moose. The primary challenge will be to design a habitat enhancement program that is economically feasible, and is supported by the department and the public."4 According to ADF&G, wolves are trapped in the Yerrick Creek basin. This project should only have a temporary impact related to the noise and activity of construction. Black Bear (Ursus americanus) The term "black" used to describe this species is not entirely accurate. Black bears come in a variety of colors from brown to gray and the occasional cream, although black with a brown muzzle is the most common. Brown colored black bears are often confused with brown bears but normally Brown bears are much larger. Black bears also have a smaller, more pointed head with a straight profile. Brown bears have a more rounded head and dished-shaped face along with a distinctive hump on their shoulders that is lacking in the black bear. Average male black bears weigh between 180 to 200 pounds depending on the season and stand over two feet tall at the shoulder. Females are usually around 120 to 150 pounds also depending upon the season. Black bears are omnivorous (eat both meat and plants), although vegetation makes up a substantial portion of their diet. Their diet varies from vegetation in the spring to fish in some areas during the summer. Otherwise, their diet consists mostly of berries and insects. "Historically, human use of black bears in Unit 12 was relatively low despite liberal hunting regulations and moderate bear population levels. Most black bear hunting occurred along the highway system and the Tanana River. There was no closed season for black bears in Unit 12, and the bag limit was 3 bears. " "In 1992 interest in black bear hunting increased, particularly at bait stations, and has remained relatively high. Most bears are taken by local residents in the spring and are an important meat source. Even before regulations were implemented requiring the salvage of black bear meat from I January to 31 May, meat was salvaged from over 90% of all black bears harvested by local residents. In the fall most black bears were harvested incidentally during hunts for other species." Black bear have been observed in and around the Yerrick Creek drainage. 4 www .wildlife .alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=oubs.mgt Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p.9 Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project Brown Bear (Ursus arctos) Brown bears tend to be larger than black bears. Brown bears are considered the largest living land carnivore. Though polar bears can be larger, they are not considered to be land dwelling. Brown bear sizes vary depending on location, time of year, age and gender. Most male brown bears range from 500 to 900 pounds. Color varies greatly from black with silver tipped hair to blonde. Males tend to be darker than females and cubs often sport a white collar during their first summer. Although the same species, Alaskans typically refer to coastal bears as "browns" and interior bears as "grizzlies". The grizzlies of the Tetlin Refuge are smaller and lighter in weight than those in southern and western Alaska. Grizzlies occur throughout the entire Refuge at a low density, but are more abundant along the foothills and mountains. Brown bears have a varied diet ranging from grasses in the spring, berries in the summer, and fish during the fall. Meat is not usually a major component of the bears' diet but they will eat whatever they can catch which includes marmots, porcupines, squirrels, mice, moose, and caribou. Brown bears are distributed throughout most of Unit 12. As with the black bear population, brown bears have liberal hunting management objectives to maintain or reduce their numbers in order to improve moose survival, the preferred game meat by residents. Hunting for brown bears has increased with the liberalization of the hunting season. Brown bears most likely utilize the Y errick Creek area. Small Furbearers Small furbearers present in the Yerrick Creek basin and historically or currently trapped include lynx, wolverine, marten, mink, coyote, and red fox. 5 "Marten and lynx are the most economically important furbearers in Units 12 and 20E. During population highs, muskrats are also economically and culturally important in Unit 12. Beavers are an important subsistence resource to Northway residents but are lightly trapped in most of the area. Little trapping effort is spent on coyotes, red foxes, mink, river otters, ermine, red squirrels, and wolverines because of low pelt values, low abundance, or difficulty and expense of trapping."6 Current management plans for Unit 12 to improve furbearer habitat is to conduct bums and clear-cuts to increase the diversity of habitat. Lynx (Lynx canadensis) The lynx is the only cat native to Alaska and is known to be in Unit 12. Lynx occur over most of northern North America (though their numbers in the northern continental United States have been greatly reduced) and throughout Alaska except the Aleutian islands, Kodiak archipelago, the islands of the Bering Sea and some islands of Prince William Sound and Southeast Alaska. Because they are shy and unobtrusive animals, people think 5 July I, 2008, letter from ADF&G. 6 www.wildlife .alaska .gov/index .cfm?adfg=oubs.mgt Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 10 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project that lynx are scarce. In Alaska, however, they are commonly seen during long periods of summer daylight, especially during years that they are abundant. "Link" is a common local name for lynx in Alaska and the Yukon. Lynx inhabit much of Alaska's forested terrain and use a variety of habitats, including spruce and hardwood forests, and both subalpine and successional communities. The primary prey of lynx in most areas is the snowshoe hare, which undergoes an 8-11 year cycle of abundance. This cycle appears to be caused by the interaction of hares with their food and predators. Lynx numbers fluctuate with those of hares and other small game, but lag one or two years behind. Although snowshoe hares are an important prey for lynx, when they are scarce lynx use other food sources more extensively during these periods. Other small prey such as grouse, ptarmigan, squirrels, and microtine rodents are regularly taken. Lynx are also known to prey on caribou, Dall sheep, and foxes, especially during periods of scarcity. Since the early 1970s, lynx pelts have increased in value and may bring from $200 to $500. Their high value has led to increased trapping pressure and concern among trappers that lynx harvest should be regulated more closely. However, lynx numbers and harvest began to increase in Unit 12 following the cyclic low in RY03. Lynx pelt prices increased and were adequate for most trappers. In combination with the upswing of the lynx cycle, increased lynx pelt prices could begin to influence trapper effort. Harvest of lynx is currently more relaxed in the management plan. 7 Marten (Martes americana) The long, beautiful, chocolate brown coat of marten lead to its nickname: American Sable. A streak of lighter fur usually runs from the throat onto the chest. They have a fox-like face with broad rounded ears and unlike other members of the weasel family, a long bushy tail. Male marten grow 10 to 25 inches long plus an 8-inch tail and weigh up to 3 pounds. Females are substantially smaller. Marten are mostly nocturnal and spend a great deal of their time in trees. They inhabit mature conifer forests and prey on red squirrels and other small mammals but will vary their diet with snowshoe hares, insects, birds, eggs, fruit and nuts. Historically in Unit 12 marten trapping contributed most of the income for area trappers and is considered the most sought after furbearer due to the increase in fur value. Trapper information indicates that marten declined to moderate-to-low numbers during RY03-RY05. However, no regulatory changes are planned for marten harvesting.8 7 www . wildlife .alaska .gov/index .cfm?adfg =pubs .mgt 8 www. wild! ife .alaska .gov /index .cfm? adfg=oubs .mgt Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 11 Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project Wolverine (Gulo gulo) Wolverines are among the least understood large carnivores in North America and the largest land-dwelling member of the weasel family. Most wolverines weigh 15 to 45 pounds and stand 15 to 18 inches at the shoulder. Females are smaller than males. Their coats are glossy dark brown with two pale lateral stripes converging at the base of the tail. Wolverine heads are gray with black muzzles, short ears, and dark eyes. They are described as having a low-slung body with powerful legs and large, curved claws. Wolverines are omnivorous (eat both meat and plants) and will eat anything from berries to moose. They also feed on small mammals such as voles, squirrels, and hares. Wolverines appear to occur at low density levels in the Upper Tanana Valley. They are primarily found in the foothills and mountainous areas where access is limited. Wolverine harvest was low in Unit 12, with the majority harvested by a few area trappers who selected for wolverine due to their high market value relative to other furbearer species. No change was recommended in their management plan.9 River (Land) Otter (Lontra canadensis) River otters have a powerful, low-slung, slender body and flattened heads. They have a tapered tail, short legs, and webbed feet. Large males can grow to almost five feet long and stand 9 to 10 inches high at the shoulder. Most river otters weigh between 15 and 35 pounds with females being about a quarter smaller than males. The fur is very dense and with shades of brown that are distinctively lighter on the underparts, chin, and throat. River otters eat mainly fish but also consume a variety of foods including shellfish, insects, frogs, birds, eggs, small mammals, and vegetation. They are mostly aquatic but will travel distances over land to reach another stream or lake. River otters are also social and tend to travel in pairs or larger groups. River otter populations in Unit 12 were low due to a lack of suitable habitat. Trappers seldom selected for river otters due to low fur prices and the difficulty of catching them.10 Fox (Vulpes vulpes) Red fox usually weigh between six and fifteen pounds, standing 16 to 18 inches high at the shoulder. The most common color is a rich red-gold, with black legs and feet. The chest and underparts are usually white with a long bushy tail also tipped in white. Other color variations include pure black and silver. Red fox are omnivorous. They appear to prefer mice and hares, but also feed upon birds, eggs, plants, berries, and insects. Red fox populations in Unit 12 show indications of 9 www. wildli fe.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=oubs .mgt 10 www.wildlife.alaska.gov/index .cfm?adfg=oubs .mgt Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 12 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project being stable at moderate-to-high levels.. Little trapping effort is spent on red foxes most likely due to low pelt prices and expense to trap. II Snowshoe Hare (Lepus americanus) Snowshoe hares average 18 to 20 inches in length and weigh three to four pounds. Their summer coats are yellowish to grayish brown with white underparts, and the tail is brown on top. During the winter, their coat is replaced by white fur, but the hair is dusky at the base with a gray underfur. Snowshoes' ears are dark at the tip. Hares are found in mixed spruce forests, wooded swamps, and brushy areas. They feed on a variety of vegetation including grasses, buds, twigs, leaves, needles, and bark. Snowshoe hares travel on well-established trails or runways at all times of the year. Hare populations in Unit 12 cycle every 8 to 11 years. Hare population fluctuations are closely related to predator populations. Avian Species The Refuge provides habitat for 143 breeding and 47 migrating bird species (Bird Checklist-pdf) and serves as a major migration corridor for many of the bird species that are entering or leaving interior Alaska. Compared to the rest of Alaska, the diversity of landbirds is high because the Refuge is located within a major migration corridor and a number of species reach their northern range limit here. However, extreme winter weather sends most birds traveling south, leaving only about 25 resident species year round. The Refuge was set aside primarily for its unique waterfowl values. It has one of Alaska's highest densities of nesting waterfowl and annually produces an estimated 35,000 to 65,000 ducklings. Spectacular migrations of lesser sandhill cranes, tundra and trumpeter swans occur each spring and fall. Up to 200,000 cranes, representing about one half of the world population, migrate through this corridor. The Refuge also provides habitat for an expanding population of trumpeter swans and for the largest concentration of nesting osprey in Alaska. Raptors such as bald eagles are common nesters along the major rivers and shorelines of larger lakes and nesting pairs have been observed along the Tanana River. Peregrine falcons can be seen once again as new pairs find local cliffs for nesting. Nine species of marsh and waterbirds, and 26 species of shorebirds occur on the refuge. Terrestrial Avian Species Tetlin Refuge has a comprehensive landbird monitoring program that is consistent with the International Partners in Flight Initiative. This includes maintaining migratory bird arrival dates, participating in the North American Migration Count, Breeding Bird II www. wildlife .alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=pubs.mgt Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 13 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Surveys, off-road point counts, and fall migration banding. In addition, a Christmas Bird Count is conducted each winter and an Upper Tanana Bird Festival is hosted by the Refuge in mid-May. Four Breeding Bird Surveys (BBS) routes in eastern interior Alaska are annually completed. Off-road point counts were established on the Refuge in 1994 as part of a pilot project for Boreal Partners in Flight. Seven routes are monitored each year. A fall migration banding station was established in 1993 seven miles east of Tok and has been operated daily in August and September each year. This long-term banding effort is part of a regionallandbird monitoring program and helps to monitor landbird populations not adequately monitored by the Breeding Bird Survey. The most common species captured are: slate-colored junco, swainson's thrush, Wilson's warbler, ruby-crowned kinglet, myrtle (yellow-rumped) warbler, and orange-crowned warbler. Relatively few species of birds are residents on the Refuge. Gray jay, black-billed magpie, common raven, black-capped chickadee, boreal chickadee, and redpolls are the most common species with lesser numbers of the non-migratory owls and woodpeckers. White-winged crossbills are abundant during productive cone crop years. Spruce grouse, ruffed grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, and willow ptarmigan are uncommon breeders on the Refuge. Rock ptarmigan are rarely seen but may breed in the upper Cheslina River drainage. Sharp-tailed grouse have increased, especially in the Tok and Tetlin Village areas following the Tok River Fire in 1990. Raptors Thirteen species of hawks are known to occur on Tetlin Refuge. Usually present in small numbers, bald eagle, osprey, northern harrier, sharp-shinned hawk, red-tailed hawk, and American kestrel are confirmed breeders. Less frequently observed northern goshawk, golden eagle, merlin, peregrine falcon, and gyrfalcon are rare breeders on the Refuge. Rough-legged hawks are uncommon migrants. Turkey vultures and Swainson's hawks are casual visitors. Six species of owls occur on the Refuge, the most common being the great homed owl. Northern hawk owls, great gray owls, and boreal owls can be fairly common some years. The short-eared owl is a migrant and casual summer breeder, while the snowy owl is a casual visitor in fall and winter. The American peregrine falcon is the only previously endangered species found on the Refuge. The population of this species/race has been increasing nation-wide and was de- listed in 1999. The first peregrine falcon nest on Tetlin Refuge was discovered in June 1994 along the Nabesna River nearly 100 river miles upstream from the closest known nest site. Recovering peregrine populations have increased their density within their nesting range in the Upper Tanana Valley in the last decade, doubling the number of territories in the last 4 years to 16 presently known above the Robertson River. Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 14 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Extensive raptor surveys have been completed annually since 1991. Most raptor nests are located along the rivers and wetlands. Waterfowl Green-winged teal, mallard, American wigeon, ring-necked duck, scaup (primarily lesser) and bufflehead are the most abundant ducks breeding on the Refuge. Smaller numbers of northern pintail, northern shoveler, Barrow's goldeneye, common goldeneye, white-winged seater, surf scoter, canvasback and blue-winged teal are known to breed here as well. Rarely sightings are made of common mergansers, redheads, ruddy ducks, gadwall and harlequin ducks which also breed in the area, or of long-tailed ducks which do not. An estimated 35,000 to 65,000 ducklings are produced on Tetlin Refuge each year. The Refuge lies along an important migration route for both Canada and greater white- fronted geese that migrate to and from the state. Occasionally snow geese and brant are seen during migration. Canada geese breed on the refuge in small numbers. The Refuge provides important habitat for migrating tundra and trumpeter swans during spring and fall. Over 200 trumpeter swans were banded and neck collared from 1983 to 1984 and from 1989 to 1995. Recoveries and sightings of banded trumpeter swans help identify their wintering habitat as being coastal wetlands and fields from the central coast of British Columbia to northern Puget Sound. Waterbirds Nine species of marsh and water birds occur on the Refuge with horned grebe, pacific loon, and red-necked grebe being the most common breeders. Common loons are rare breeders and red-throated loons are considered casual. A small number of sandhill cranes nest on the muskeg flats in the northern third of the refuge. During spring and fall migration, up to 200,000 sandhill cranes (one half of the entire world population) can pass through the Tanana River Valley. The numbers seen from year to year vary depending on weather conditions which affect their flight paths. The Upper Tanana Valley is one of the few places in Alaska where sora and American coot are found regularly. While some 26 species of shorebirds occur on the Refuge, most are migrants passing between wintering and breeding grounds. The most abundant breeding shorebird is the ubiquitous lesser yellowlegs. Common snipe are less abundant but widely distributed, while spotted sandpipers are common along watercourses. Red-necked phalaropes are often seen during fall migration. Mew and Bonaparte's gulls are common breeders. The American golden plover, upland sandpiper, and whimbrel breed in the alpine areas. Avian species of all types may pass through the Y errick Creek drainage because of its proximity to the Tanana River. There are also a few wetlands within or adjacent to the drainage that may attract waterfowl and predators alike during the summer months. Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 15 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Cultural -Historical Resources A review of the Alaska Heritage Resource Survey (AHRS) documents and related data sources at the Alaska Office of History and Archaeology (OHA) for records of known AHRS sites and previous cultural resource investigations in or near the Areas of Potential Effect (APE) was conducted by a certified archaeologist. One site was found on the west side of Yerrick Creek (TNX-074) that will be along the access road and penstock route. This site can be avoided by project alignment. SHPO is being consulted for clearance. STUDY PLAN Water Resources Water quality sampling by Travis/Peterson Environmental Consulting-Anchorage ts occurring over one year on a more or less quarterly basis. A stream gage was installed in Yerrick Creek in May 2007. A table showing the flow data over one year is enclosed. The gage will remain in place. An analysis of what the flow regime might be in the bypass reach during project operations has yet to be done. Botanical Resources A wetland delineation and threatened, endangered, and sensitive (TES) plant species survey of the project will be conducted in August 2008 by HDR out of Anchorage. Aguatic Resources Fish surveys by Steve Grabacki are being conducted this summer, fall, and next spring. Surveys are focused on Dolly Varden, Arctic grayling, and round whitefish. This will be a multiyear baseline fisheries survey going from the summer 2008 to late winter of 2008- 2009. Gear to be used are angling, electrofishing, minnow traps, hoop traps, fyke nets, gillnets, and dip nets, as appropriate to local conditions. All specimens will be released alive. Studies will occur above, at, and downstream of the possible impoundment site to the powerhouse site. The objective in this first year of surveying is to examine the habitat for use by all life stages of fishes, including summer residency, migratory pathway, over-wintering, spawning, rearing, etc. Four or five sampling trips are planned a reconnaissance level survey in early summer (angling only) was already accomplished, a full-scope sampling in late summer, another sampling shortly before freeze-up, and a spring sampling shortly after break-up. If appropriate, a late-winter examination of over-wintering habitat (in 2009) might be conducted. The first report will be submitted by the end of December 2008. Until fish habitat has been described in the bypass reach, an analysis of instream flows needed in the bypass reach cannot be conducted. Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 16 Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project Both Y errick Creek and the drainage just west of Y errick Creek, Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 will be surveyed. Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 will be surveyed for potential future consideration if more water is needed for electricity. This survey will give us a baseline on Cathedral Rapids Creek # 1 so we will have advanced knowledge to make any future determination of its use. However, at this point in time we propose to only develop Y errick Creek. Wildlife Resources Wildlife is not expected to be significantly impacted by this project, either by construction or operation. Species that use the Y errick Creek area are not considered threatened, endangered, or listed species of concern. A literature search conducted does not point to any TES using this basin, although some may occasionally pass through during migration. Of the many species that do use the Y errick Creek area, some are hunted for their meat (moose, caribou, Dall sheep, black and brown bear), and trapped for their pelts (lynx and marten). There will be a minimal loss of habitat types from project features such as the access road/penstock route, powerhouse site with staging area for materials, and the impoundment site. The staging area for materials at the powerhouse will be in or near the gas pipeline clearing near the highway, which should minimize vegetative clearing. The project will remain in close proximity to the west side of Y errick Creek as it parallels the creek between the impoundment and powerhouse. As desired in the ADF&G July 1, 2008, letter, the penstock and access road will remain a minimum of 66 feet from the creek accept when intersecting with the impoundment structure or powerhouse. The penstock (pipe) will be passable because it will be buried along most or all of its length, allowing mammals, including hunters, access to and through the project site, eliminating wildlife passage as an issue. We view this project as having limited impacts to wildlife in the area. The main concern would be whether this project will provide easier vehicular access into this basin for hunters and trappers, which could place more pressure on wildlife. We are interested in discussing methods to minimize this potential impact. Birdlife is not expected to be significantly impacted due to the limited nature of the clearing needed (15 feet wide access road I penstock route) although there could be some loss of habitat. Cultural - Historical Resources A review by an archaeologist has already been completed for the project site and the report was submitted to SHPO for their review and comments. Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 17 Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project RESOURCES ADF&G, Biological Information Needs, Letter, Robert F. McLean, April?, 2008 . ADF&G, Draft Study Plan Comments, Letter, Robert F. McLean, July 1, 2008. Browne, Patricia, Findings of AHRS Data Review and Evaluation of Cultural Resources Potentia/for Hydroelectric Project Development ... , June 5, 2008. Grabacki, Stephen, 2008-2009 Study Plan for Y errick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1. June 2008. Gross, Jeff, ADF&G, Personal communication in which wildlife species were discussed for the project area, and in particular info on Dall Sheep hunting in area. May 2008. http:/ I alaska. fws. gov /fisheries/ endangered/listing.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/ http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/black bear.htm http:/ /tetlin.fws. gov /wildlife/birds.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/brown bear.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/caribou.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/dall sheep.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/fox.htm http:/ /tetlin. fws. gov /wildlife/marten.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/moose.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/otter.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/snowshoe hare.htm http:/ /tetlin.fws. gov /wildlife/wo lf.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/wolverine.htm http://www.adfg.state.ak.us/pubs/notebook/furbear/lynx.php Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 18 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=pubs.mgt Revised Draft Study Plan July 16, 2008 p. 19 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project C/) LL. 0 ~ 0 ...J LL. "0 c:: ca C/) w :::E: 0 ~ w (!) ~ C/) YERRICK CREEK STREAM GAGE 140 _,...._.....,. _____ .,.... _ _,. ____ .....,. __ ~---..,..._~-----~--...,...--.,....---80.00 130 120 110 -----_, I I I I ' I 100 ' ------.1-------1 - I -----~-~----j 90 I I 80 I I -----.t-----, 70 60 50 40 30 20 ! _____ j ______ ~---- I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I --,------r------r-----,------,------,------r------r-----,----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ______ L ______ L-----~------~------J ______ L ______ L _____ J ___ _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ---L------L-----~------~------~------L------L---1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------~-----~------~------~------~------ 1 I I I I I I I I ---~-----~------4------4------~ I I _____ J ____ J_j___ I I I I -,------~-- 1 I ______ _J ____ _ I ---~------~-----~- 1 I I ------r------ 1 I I I --,------r----- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 60.00 40.00 LL. 0 20.00 ~ ::l s w 0.00 ~ -20.00 -40.00 w ~ 10 f ------:------~---- I I ,------r------r-----,------,------,------r----------,------r------ ' I I I I I I I I I I I ~ "'~ ~q, ~"' ~q, "'~ ~;_,_~;~~7-~~--:-+---:-+--~~-~--~---i---~_:_...L_J __ j_ __ j_6o.oo ~ ~ ~"' ~ ~"' ~ ~rS-" ~ ~"' ~ \~ ~~~\ ~q, ~"' ~q, <rS-" ~q, ~"' \~q, ~~\ ~q, ~"' DATE 1-RawStage --Adjusted Stage --Instantaneous Flow -Average Daily Flow --Tempe rat ure I Above Photo: Looking up Yerrick Creek from Alaska Highway bridge. Above Photo: Alaska Highway crossing over Yerrick Creek Above Photo: Yerrick Creek just above impoundment site Above Photo: Yerrick Creek at gaging site. Above Photo: Yerrick Creek near impoundment site Above Photo: Yerrick Creek below impoundment site -BLANK PAGE- DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME DIVISION OF HABITAT July 1, 2008 Mr. Glen D. Martin, Project Manager Alaska Power and Telephone Company P.O. Box 3222 Port Townsend, W A 98368-0922 Dear Mr. Martin: RE: Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project Draft Study Plan Comments SARAH PALIN, GOVERNOR 1300 COLLEGE ROAD FAIRBANKS, AK 99701-1551 PHONE: (907) 459-7289 FAX; (907) 459-7303 The Alaska Department ofFish and Game (ADF&G), Division of Habitat has reviewed your June 13, 2008 Draft Study Plan for the proposed Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project between the communities ofTok and Dot Lake. During this review, we also consulted with appropriate ADF&G biologists, and have incorporated their comments into this document. We found the document to be primarily a description of the proposed project and potentially affected environment, with very little detail on current or proposed studies. On April 7, 2008, I sent you a letter (under our previous letterhead as the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, Office of Habitat Management and Permitting) reviewing what is known about the fish and wildlife resources of the project area, what additional information would be needed for project permitting, and how the needed information might be acquired. We noted that you incorporated much of the information we provided on existing fish and wildlife resources in the project area, but the draft study plan does not address many of the information needs we identified. Note that neither the April 7 letter nor this review are intended to provide formal project scoping, and that ADF&G reserves the right to revise the identified concerns as project planning moves forward. PROPOSED PROJECT Several aspects of the project are unclear to us. Project capacity was given as 1.5 MW is the January 2007 FERC filing, but is listed as 2-3 MW in the current Project Description. Which is correct? How would this change the anticipated maximum water usage? Would the penstock be within the access road clearing? How wide would the access road clearing be, and would all such clearing be at least 66 feet from the ordinary high water of all channels ofYerrick Creek? Mr. Glen D. Martin Yerriek Creek Hydro Study Plan Comments July I, 2008 Page 2 of3 Would the penstock be on the surface as presented in the draft study plan's Project Components section, or buried as presented in the plan's Wildlife Resources section? FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES It is unclear to us how a sediment and erosion control plan would qualify as mitigation. Gating the access road would likely have minimal effect on restricting use of the route for hunters or anglers, since off-road vehicles can typically navigate around such devices. The road would be expected to increase hunter access to Dall sheep, moose, and bear populations in the Y errick Creek basin, and potentially also to caribou when they migrate through the area. The Yerrick Creek area (not necessarily the basin) is currently used by four trappers based on furbearer harvest reports. Furbearers present in the Y errick Creek basin and historically or currently trapped include lynx, wolverine, marten, mink, wolf, coyote, and red fox. Red squirrels and snowshoe hare are present in the basin, as are both black and brown bears. Based on reports and observations from biologists and trappers, the Yerrick Creek basin upstream of the Alaska Highway supports few if any beaver or river otter. We recommend that AP&T augment the infonnation in the Wildlife Resources portion of the plan with the publicly-available hunting and tmpping information for the basin. The penstock should be designed and constructed to avoid significant alteration of moose and other wildlife movement and migration patterns, or restrict or endanger human travel through the area. An 11,000 foot long, 36-inch diameter penstock elevated by 12-inch saddles has the potential to create a significant barrier to movement by wildlife and public users of the area. It would be preferable to bury the penstock in or beside the access road. If burial for the entire length is not pmcticable, then the penstock would need to have buried and/or elevated sections at regular intervals to allow for wildlife and human movements. At a minimum, above ground pipelines need to be elevated a minimum of I 0 feet, as measured from the ground to the bottom of the pipe, except where the pipeline intercepts a road, pad, or ramp installed to facilitate wildlife passage. Increased snow depth in the area should be considered in relation to pipe elevation to ensure adequate clearance for wildlife and mechanized tmvel. PER.\1ITTING INFORMATION NEEDS Since Mr. Grabacki's referenced study plan for sampling Yerrick Creek is not included, we are unable to provide comments directly on it. Based on the summary provided in the Aquatic Resources portion of the draft study plan, the baseline fish work appears to examine a 9-month period rather than the stated multi-year effort. In particular, no effort appears planned during the likely window for spring migrations. As noted in our letter of April 7, 2008, studies for at least a full year are necessary to fully describe fish use of the project area. The sampling area is also unclear in the review document, but needs to include the bypass reach as well as relevant portions of the stream upstream and downstream of the bypass reach. The goal is to fully describe the life histories and use patterns for all fishes using these stream reaches. Mr. Glen D. Martin Y errick Creek Hydro Study Plan Conunents July 1, 2008 Page3 of3 The draft study plan does not mention any hydrologic or water quality studies. As our April 7, 2008 letter noted, a full understanding of surface and subsurface hydrology in the project area will be necessary for permitting of the Yerrick Creek Hydro Project. We suggest that AP&T check proposed field activities against guidance in our April 7 letter to be sure that adequate information is being collected so project design and permitting can proceed smoothly. In summary, the major areas of concern for fish are ( 1) effects on fish habitat, particularly seasonal or overwintering refugia, in the bypass reach and (2) fish passage through the bypass reach and past the diversion structure. Information needed for permitting includes: • Existing surface and subsurface discharge characteristics in the bypass reach • Fish movements between stream reaches by species, life stage, and time of year • Life history and movements of Dolly Varden in the project area • Hydrologic information on instream flows necessary to preserve fish habitats and passage Methods of obtaining this information include: • Minnow trapping, electrofishing, or other effective survey methods from the Alaska Highway to upstream of the diversion site on a regular basis for at least a year may be effective (seining difficult because of substrate). • Determining fish movement between stream reaches through such techniques as plastic or radio tags, dyes, or a weir with video camera. • USGS (or equivalent) gages at the diversion and tailrace entrance sites to document existing surface flows; a water budget and assessment of subsurface flow may also be needed. • Mapping of available habitat by season, type, and flow, and measuring basic water quality characterizations over the seasons. If you have questions or need additional information, contact me or Jim Durst (459-7254). Sincerely, Robert F. "Mac" McLean, Regional Supervisor Division ofHabitat ecc: Fred Bue, ADF&G CF, Fairbanks Fronty Parker, ADF&G SF, Delta Junction Jim Ferguson, ADF&G SF, Anchorage Caroline Brown, ADF&G SUBS, Fairbanks Jeff Gross, ADF&G WC, Tok Chris Milles, ADNR Lands, Fairbanks Jim Vohden, ADNR Water, Fairbanks RFM/jdd -BLANK PAGE- ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY P.O. BOX 3222 -193 0110 STREET PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368 (360) 385-1733-(800) 982-0136 FAX (360) 385-5177 June 13, 2008 To: All Agencies Regarding: Yerrick Creek Hydro Draft Study Plan Dear Agency Representatives: Enclosed is a draft study plan for your review for the Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project, located approximately 20 miles west of Tok on the Alaska Highway. A project description and map are included in the draft study plan. Please provide your comments by July 14, 2008. Sincerely, ~c.1d Glen D. Martin Project Manager glen.m@aptalaska.com (360) 385-1733 x122 Enc. (as stated) Cc: Deborah Rocque, USF&WS Dave Meyer, USGS Steve Meyers, COE Denby Lloyd, ADF&G Krissy Plett, DNR-Water Chris Milles, DNR-Land Tim Wingerter, DEC Jim Ferguson, ADF&G Fronty Parker, ADF&G Jeff Gross, ADF&G Todd Nichols, ADF&G Mac McLean, DNR-Habitat Jim Durst, DNR-Habitat Caroline Brown, ADF&G Judith Bittner, SHPO YERRICK CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT DRAFT STUDY PLAN 1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION APC proposes to construct a run-of-river hydroelectric project that will interconnect with the grid supplying electricity to the communities of Tetlin, Tok, Dot Lake, and Tanacross. This grid is presently wholly reliant upon diesel generation. APC is the certified utility for this area along the Alaska Highway and is within the boundaries of APC's certificate from the Regulatory Commission of Alaska. This project is called the Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project. The project is located approximately 20 miles west of Tok on the Alaska Highway at Milepost 1339. Although APC's existing transmission infrastructure follows the highway right-of-way past the project site, this infrastructure (conductor) will need to be upgraded to handle the load from the project. Project capacity is expected to be 2-3 megawatts (MW). Project features would include a small diversion structure, an approximately 11,000 foot long penstock, powerhouse with a single impulse turbine (Pelton or Turgo) and generator, tailrace, small substation, and transmission line to and along the Alaska Highway, as shown in --,__ Figure 1. The building season is short at this north latitude, so it will take two years to complete this project. This project not only will provide clean, renewable energy that will stabilize rates, but will provide a stable source of energy that can quickly come on line after power outages, which makes it one of the best renewable resources. The cost to maintain a hydro project is also significantly lower than diesel generation. The existing diesel generation plant in Tok will continue to supplement the grid as the hydro project is only expected to provide electricity for 100% of the load part of the year and down to approximately 10% of the load during low flow periods of the year, such as during the winter. This project will reduce the cost of electricity to the residents of Tetlin, Tok, Tanacross and Dot Lake who presently pay $0.36 per kWh. Once the hydroelectric project interties with the Tok grid, the cost per kWh will be reduced by approximately 20%. The environmental impacts, i.e. air pollution, noise pollution, spills, etc ., of any self-generation will be significantly reduced by this intertie, as well as from generation at APC's powerplant in Tok. During part of the year it is estimated the entire load can be carried by the hydroelectric project, and during the winter the use of diesel generation will supplement the hydroelectric project. ND /I ~ .,_ STATe' of ALA1tKA~ LAJtiD OWNERSHIP . -I .. I ~ewE~OUSESfft~-=~~~~~~~~~-J~ ,...--s~ -----~ ~- i Ll ~ This hydroelectric project will reduce fossil fuel consumption by approximately 509,800 gallons per year, which at 2007 prices is equivalent to $1,157,246 annually. The existing diesel plant in Tok, which supplies electricity to all four communities, would use fewer diesel generators to meet the remaining load, reducing labor and maintenance costs and the frequency of generator overhaul and replacement for a potential savings of $1,15 3,200 annually. At present usage levels, this hydroelectric project would save the residents of all four communities approximately $693,043 per year (2007). Lower energy costs would help stimulate development, both economically and home building. 2.0 Project Components The project facilities described herein are based on a preliminary evaluation of the site, and represent the maximum degree of resource development. The proposed project features are described in more detail below : Impoundment The project design for this run-of-river hydroelectric project include construction of either a concrete, steel, or other material impoundment structure. The impoundment structure is likely to be made of sheet piling to create a barrier that will impound enough water for an intake to remove it and generate electricity at the powerhouse. Due to the depth of the cobble expected in Y errick Creek, it is not expected that the sheet pile will reach bedrock, and therefore it is expected that some water will go subterranean under the impoundment structure and surface further down the creek. Penstock The penstock is estimated to be approximately II ,000 feet in length and would probably consist of a combination of HDPE and steel or iron pipe. The penstock is proposed to be on the surface rather than buried to keep costs down. The diameter of the penstock may be approximately 36-inches. The penstock would parallel the creek down to the powerhouse requiring some clearing along its right-of-way. Powerhouse The powerhouse would be a metal structure of approximately 30 x 40 feet with a height of approximately 25 feet. The powerhouse would contain the controls for the operation of the project, including switchgear, Pelton or Turgo impulse turbine, a generator rated at 2-3 MW, and controls for valves at the impoundment structure. After the water passes through the turbine it will fall into a tailrace that will discharge back into Y errick Creek above the highway bridge that spans the creek. Access Road An access road would be constructed to the powerhouse from off the Alaska Highway. The road is expected to be less than a mile in length. Another access road would come down the west side of Y errick Creek from the impoundment structure, due to its more moderate elevation changes, to the powerhouse site. The one lane access road width would be approximately 14-feet wide with frequent pullouts. Substation A small pad-mount step-up transformer will be adjacent to the powerhouse to adjust the voltage for the transmission line to Tok. Transmission Line The transmission line will go from the powerhouse step-up transformer to intertie with the Tok grid along the Alaska Highway, approximately one mile away. This would require approximately 20 vertical wood pole structures set about 300 feet apart. Land Ownership The enclosed Figure 2 is a project map showing property boundaries in relation to the project features. The project will be located on land managed by the State of Alaska and Tanacross, Inc., a Village Corporation. Environmental Impacts Previous man-made land disturbance (old gas pipeline corridor paralleling the highway, which was once cleared of vegetation) has left a footprint on the environment that will reduce this projects impacts by utilizing the corridor for part of the access road and powerhouse site. Impacts to wetlands will occur as areas along the access route are in muskeg. The access route will parallel the creek on its west side. It is estimated that approximately 5-6 acres of land would be disturbed, with possibly o/.i's being in muskeg and the creek. To mitigate this, an erosion and sedimentation control plan will be implemented to confine impacts during construction, of which silt fencing and straw or hay bales would play a significant part, and repair after construction where possible. Construction methods, i.e. minimize the construction footprint, will also keep impacts to a minimum. DRAFT STUDY PLAN Existing Resources Much of the information presented here is from the Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge (east of the project) website, and hence the mention of Refuge throughout this description. The Refuge's data is used because of its proximity to the project area and wealth of information available on indigenous species of the area, however, the Refuge's geography is different then that of Y errick Creek which is primarily a mountainous drainage whereas the Refuge is more lowlands. With that caveat in mind, here is information on species that may be present. Botanical Resources Boreal forest (taiga) and upland tundra are the dominant vegetation types in all of interior Alaska. In the alpine areas, dry, broad ridge tops are dominated by dryas dwarf scrub and ericaceous dwarf scrub tundra vegetation. Mesic to moist saddles, slopes, and snow-melt meadows support mesic graminoid herbaceous and open, low scrub vegetation. Rock- dominated sites support alpine herbs. Aquatic Resources The Department of Natural Resources, Habitat Management Division, provided the following information in an April 7, 2008, letter to AP&T regarding the Yerrick Creek drainage. "Yerrick Creek provides habitat for a variety of non-anadromous fish species, including Arctic grayling, Dolly Varden, round whitefish, and slimy sculpin. Arctic grayling and round whitefish are fairly ubiquitous in Tanana River basin stream systems, but the presence of Dolly Varden in Yerrick Creek makes this stream somewhat unusual. "Fish presence and habitat near the mouth and in the lower reaches of Yerrick Creek (well downstream of the A Iaska Highway) are poorly documented, although habitat for a variety of species including Arctic grayling, northern pike, burbot, round whitefish, lake chub, longnose sucker, and slimy sculpin occurs here. Stream flow in portions of Yerrick Creek in this reach are completely subsurface at times. If operated as run-ofriver, the Yerrick Creek Hydropower project is unlikely to affect these downstream fish resources and habitats. "That portion of Yerrick Creek from downstream of the Alaska Highway to upstream of the Haines-Fairbanks Pipeline crossing has been the most surveyed for fish presence and use. Arctic grayling and Dolly Varden have been found present from the beginning of June through late August, and Arctic grayling through late November (under ice cover). Round whitefish were present in late summer. Even when this reach appears frozen, high quality water is typically flowing in at least one channel below the ice; adult aquatic invertebrates were hatching from a small channel under ice in the third week of March one year. Although Yerrick Creek flow apparently goes subsurface in various locations between the Alaska Highway and the Tanana River for much of most summers, the portion of the stream between the mountains and the subsurface flow appears to provide connected surface flow and habitat. "Adult and juvenile Arctic grayling and Dolly Varden have been captured upstream of the proposed diversion structure location up to where Yerrick Creek forks more than 6 miles above the Alaska Highway crossing. A small falls downstream of the fork is apparently not a fish barrier. Biologists suggested that this reach between the ridges may be used for grayling spawning and for grayling and Dolly Varden over-wintering habitats. Sheep hunters have reported seeing fish in stream portions in the upper part of the drainage that appeared to provide good habitat. " Wildlife Resources The Department of Natural Resources, Habitat Management Division, provided the following information in an April 7, 2008, letter to AP&T regarding the Yerrick Creek drainage. "The Yerrick Creek drainage is used by a variety of big game species including moose, caribou, and Da/1 sheep, and is part of the Tok Management Area for Dall sheep. A significant amount of sheep hunting occurs in this drainage. Some sheep hunters have reported being able to walk up the Yerrick Creek streambed to access sheep country since the stream in portions was mostly gravel and rocks with a relatively small channel of water meandering through." Dall Sheep ( Ovis dal/1) The Dall sheep is a stocky sheep that utilize nearly inaccessible, steep mountain slopes, ridges and meadows for feeding and resting. They are generally high country animals but sometimes occur in rocky gorges below timberline in Alaska. They are mostly white and weigh between 125 and 200 pounds. Male Dall sheep are called rams and are distinguished by massive curling, yellowish horns. The females, ewes, have shorter, more slender, slightly curved horns. Dall sheep are sometimes mistaken for mountain goats, however, the mountain goat has long fur and a beard, and small, slender, black horns that curve slightly backward. A single young lamb is born in late May or early June. Lambs begin feeding on vegetation within a week after birth and are usually weaned by October. Sheep have well- developed social systems. Adult rams live in bands which seldom associate with female groups except during the mating season in late November and early December. Y errick Creek is one of the few drainages on the north side of the range that has provided historical access to Dall sheep hunting grounds (Cathedral Rapids Creeks and Sheep Creek being the others). For this reason, maintaining access to these hunting grounds without providing 'improved' access that could further stress the population would be the goal of project design. Gating any access road to the project would be the preferred method of maintaining access for hunters as exists today, although they would be able to hike up the road on foot to the projects impoundment site, but would not be able to drive up the drainage beyond what they presently can. This could be viewed as an impact by providing an easier hike into part of the drainage. Moose (Aices alces) Moose are the world's largest members of the deer family and are most abundant in recently burned areas that contain willow and birch shrubs, on timberline plateaus, and along the major rivers of Southcentral and Interior Alaska. During fall and winter, moose consume large quantities of willow, birch, and aspen twigs. In the spring, moose eat a variety of foods, particularly sedges, equisetum (horsetail), pond weeds, and grasses. During summer, moose feed on vegetation in shallow ponds, forbs, and the leaves of birch, willow, and aspen. Moose are long-legged and heavy bodied with a "bell" or dewlap under the chin; only the bulls have antlers. Their color ranges from golden brown to almost black, depending upon the season and the age of the animal. The hair of newborn calves is generally red- brown fading to a lighter rust color within a few weeks. Calves are born any time from mid-May to early June after a gestation period of about 230 days; newborns weigh 28 to 35 pounds and within five months grow to over 300 pounds. Males can weigh from 1 ,200 to 1,600 pounds and females weigh 800 to 1,300 pounds. Moose are common in this area and are also hunted in this and the adjoining drainages. Y errick Creek is brushy habitat, providing food for Moose including the few small lakes and marshes approximately 0.5 miles west of the creek. Moose may be temporarily impacted by this project from construction activity, but should otherwise not be impacted. If the penstock (pipe) is kept on the surface (least expensive method of construction) and placed on saddles that elevate the penstock from 6-12 inches (and assuming the penstock will have a diameter of36-inches), it could be a barrier to young moose, but adults should be able to get over. The alternatives would be to partially bury, or place berms approximately every 300 feet on either side to allow mammals to get past the penstock. Due to variances in the terrain, if the penstock is on the surface it may be suspended over ravines or be partially buried through a rise, or be 6-12 inches above flat terrain. Caribou (Rangifer tarandus) All caribou and reindeer throughout the world are considered to be the same species, but there are 7 subspecies, two of which occur in Alaska: barren ground and woodland. Caribou have special adaptations that allow them to survive their harsh arctic environment. Long legs and broad, flat hooves allow them walk on snow, and a dense woolly undercoat overlain by stiff, hollow guard hairs helps keep them warm. Caribou are also the only member of the deer family in which both sexes grow antlers. Antlers of adult bulls are large and massive; those of adult cows are much shorter and are usually more slender. In late fall, caribou are clove-brown with a white neck, rump, and feet and often have a white flank stripe. Weights of adult bulls average 350 to 400 pounds and females average 175 to 225 pounds. Barren Ground Caribou (Rangifer tarandus granti) In the United States, Alaska is the only state that supports a healthy barren ground caribou population. Barren ground caribou are found in the arctic tundra, mountain tundra, and northern forests of North America, Russia, and Scandinavia. Calving occurs in late May to early June. After calving, barren ground caribou collect in large "postcalving aggregations". Migration then begins in the fall, where large herds often travel long distances (up to 400 miles) between summer and winter ranges. During the summer, barren ground caribou feed on the leaves of willows, sedges, flowering tundra plants, and mushrooms. They switch to lichens, dried sedges, and small shrubs during the fall. Portions of four different barren caribou herds winter on or near Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge. The Nelchina Herd(> 30,000 animals), makes up the majority of caribou that pass through or winter on the Refuge. The Fortymile Herd (> 40,000 animals) is generally found north of the Refuge during the winter, although occasional individuals are also on Refuge lands. The remaining two herds are much smaller(< 1,000 animals). The Mentasta Herd calves on the slopes ofMt. Sanford in the Wrangell Mountains with a few individuals lingering some years in the southwest portion of the Refuge. The Macomb Herd calves northwest of the Refuge on the Macomb Plateau, and rarely moves onto Refuge lands. According to ADF&G, Caribou are known to pass through the Yerrick Creek drainage.1 Gray (Timber) Wolf (Canis lupus) Wolves are described as having the greatest natural range of any terrestrial mammal, excluding humans. Most wolves in Alaska weigh between 85 and 115 pounds with most females rarely reaching more than 110 pounds. Color varies greatly from pure black to almost white. Wolves in southern Alaska tend to be darker and slightly smaller than those in the Arctic. Wolves are skilled hunters and prey on a variety of species including moose, caribou, hares, beaver, fish, mice and other small mammals. Most wolves hunt and live in packs that range from two to thirty wolves; six or seven is the average. Breeding occurs January through March and the pups are born in late May to early June. Litter size varies from two to thirteen but averages four to seven pups. Females usually will produce a litter every year. The packs usually include the parents and the current year's pups. The young are usually not able to kill large game for themselves until late winter when they have reached adult size. Wolves may pass through the Yerrick Creek drainage in pursuit of game. Snowshoe Hare (Lepus americanus) Snowshoe hares average 18 to 20 inches in length and weigh three to four pounds. Their summer coats are yellowish to grayish brown with white underparts, and the tail is brown on top. During the winter, their coat is replaced by white fur, but the hair is dusky at the base with a gray underfur. Snowshoes' ears are dark at the tip. Hares are found in mixed spruce forests, wooded swamps, and brushy areas. They feed on a variety of vegetation including grasses, buds, twigs, leaves, needles, and bark. Snowshoe hares travel on well-established trails or runways at all times of the year. Young are born April thru August with two to three litters per year. Litters average two to four leverets (young hares) and can range from one to seven. Leverets weigh about two ounces at birth and can walk as soon as their fur is dry. They are weaned after about a month, but will eat green vegetation at only two weeks old. Refuge staff monitor relative snowshoe hare population abundance with permanent mile- long transects. Hare populations on the Tetlin National Wildlife Refuge (east of the 1 Personal communication between AP&T and Jeff Gross, Tok ADF&G Office, May 2008. project) cycle every 8 to 11 years and appear to follow those in central Yukon by about a year. Snowshoe hares could use the Yerrick Creek drainage. Wolverine ( Gulo gulo) Wolverines are among the least understood large carnivores in North America and the largest land-dwelling member of the weasel family. Most wolverines weigh 15 to 45 pounds and stand 15 to 18 inches at the shoulder. Females are smaller than males. Their coats are glossy dark brown with two pale lateral stripes converging at the base of the tail. Wolverine heads are gray with black muzzles, short ears, and dark eyes. They are described as having a low-slung body with powerful legs and large, curved claws. Wolverines are omnivorous (eat both meat and plants) and will eat anything from berries to moose. They also feed on small mammals such as voles, squirrels, and hares. Although they are very strong for their size, their reputation for ferocious attacks on large carnivores has been exaggerated. They will vigorously defend their food, but do tend to avoid bears, wolves, and other large predators. Wolverines are solitary hunters and roam large areas in search of food. Breeding occurs May through July and the kits are born in January through April. Kits emerge from their dens, usually in snow caves, hollow stumps, or under rock piles, in early summer and remain with their mother until fall. Wolverines appear to occur at low density levels in the Upper Tanana Valley. They are primarily found in the foothills and mountainous areas where access is limited. It is possible that wolverines may use or pass through the Y errick Creek drainage. River (Land) Otter (Lontra canadensis) River otters have a powerful, low-slung, slender body and flattened heads. They have a tapered tail, short legs, and webbed feet. Large males can grow to almost five feet long and stand 9 to 10 inches high at the shoulder. Most river otters weigh between 15 and 35 pounds with females being about a quarter smaller than males. The fur is very dense and with shades of brown that are distinctively lighter on the underparts, chin, and throat. River otters eat mainly fish but also consume a variety of foods including shellfish, insects, frogs, birds, eggs, small mammals, and vegetation. They are mostly aquatic but will travel distances over land to reach another stream or lake. River otters are also social and tend to travel in pairs or larger groups. Breeding usually occurs May to July with young born in April or May. Litters average two pups and can range from one to five. Although not common, characteristic signs of this wetland furbearer can be found throughout the Refuge wherever there are beaver ponds or open water in winter. In summer, they are occasionally seen along fishing streams. River otters may also use or pass through the Y errick Creek drainage, though they may more likely be below the highway toward the Tanana River. There are no beaver dams on Yerrick Creek within the range of the projects impacts. Marten (Martes americana) The long, beautiful, chocolate brown coat of marten lead to its nickname: American Sable. A streak of lighter fur usually runs from the throat onto the chest. They have a fox-like face with broad rounded ears and unlike other members of the weasel family, a long bushy tail. Male marten grow I 0 to 25 inches long plus an 8-inch tail and weigh up to 3 pounds. Females are substantially smaller. Marten are mostly nocturnal and spend a great deal of their time in trees. They inhabit mature conifer forests and prey on red squirrels and other small mammals but will vary their diet with snowshoe hares, insects, birds, eggs, fruit and nuts. Breeding usually occurs July to August with young born in April. Litters average two to four and the newborns are six inches long, weighing only one ounce. They develop slowly and are about half of adult size by mid-July. By fall the young are independent and leave their mother to become solitary hunters. Marten could be present in the Y errick Creek drainage. Fox (Vulpes vulpes) Red fox usually weigh between six and fifteen pounds, standing 16 to 18 inches high at the shoulder. The most common color is a rich red-gold, with black legs and feet. The chest and underparts are usually white with a long bushy tail also tipped in white. Other color variations include pure black and silver. Red fox are omnivorous. They appear to prefer mice and hares, but also feed upon birds, eggs, plants, berries, and insects. Breeding occurs February thru March and the pups are born in April to May. Litter size averages four pups. Females usually will produce a litter every year. The pups remain in the den for the first three or four weeks and continue to hunt from it for the next three months. The family will break up in the fall and each individual will goes its own way. Foxes may use the Yerrick Creek drainage. Black Bear ( Ursus american us) The term "black" used to describe this species is not entirely accurate. Black bears come in a variety of colors from brown to gray and the occasional cream, although black with a brown muzzle is the most common. Brown colored black bears are often confused with brown bears but normally Brown bears are much larger. Black bears also have a smaller, more pointed head with a straight profile. Brown bears have a more rounded head and dished-shaped face along with a distinctive hump on their shoulders that is lacking in the black bear. Average male black bears weigh between 180 to 200 pounds depending on the season and stand over two feet tall at the shoulder. Females are usually around 120 to 150 pounds also depending upon the season. Black bears are omnivorous (eat both meat and plants), although vegetation makes up a substantial portion of their diet. Their diet varies from vegetation in the spring to fish in some areas during the summer. Otherwise, their diet consists mostly of berries and insects. Breeding occurs June through July and the cubs are born in January or February, weighing only 8 to lO ounces. Litter size varies from one to four, with twins being the most common. The cubs are weaned by September but will den with their mothers their second winter, after which they will be on their own. Females typically breed every year in good habitat Black bears are typically dormant during the winter months. Denning times can vary depending on location, snow levels, and temperature. Like brown bears, their metabolism and temperature are lowered and their need for food and water are eliminated. Bears in colder climates will remain in their dens longer and males typically emerge before females. Black bear have been observed in and around the Yerrick Creek drainage. Brown Bear (Ursus arctos) Brown bears tend to be larger than black bears. Brown bears are considered the largest living land carnivore. Though polar bears can be larger, they are not considered to be land dwelling. Brown bear sizes vary depending on location, time of year, age and gender. Most male brown bears range from 500 to 900 pounds. Color varies greatly from black with silver tipped hair to blonde. Males tend to be darker than females and cubs often sport a white collar during their first summer. Although the same species, Alaskans typically refer to coastal bears as "browns" and interior bears as "grizzlies". The grizzlies of the Tetlin Refuge are smaller and lighter in weight than those in southern and western Alaska. Grizzlies occur throughout the entire Refuge at a low density, but are more abundant along the foothills and mountains. Brown bears have a varied diet ranging from grasses in the spring, berries in the summer, and fish during the fall. Meat is not usually a major component of the bears' diet but they will eat whatever they can catch which includes marmots, porcupines, squirrels, mice, moose, and caribou. Breeding occurs May thru July and the cubs are born in January I February, weighing only 8 to 10 ounces. Litter size varies from one to four, with twins being the most common. Most females nurse their young for two summers, and then wean the cubs during the third. Brown bears typically "hibernate" in dens during the winter months. Denning times can vary depending on location, snow levels, and temperature. While denning, the bears' metabolism and temperature are lowered and their need for food and water are eliminated. Bears in colder climates remain in their dens longer and males typically emerge before females. It is possible Brown bears, or grizzlies, pass through Yerrick Creek in pursuit of forbs and game. Birds The Refuge provides habitat for 143 breeding and 47 migrating bird species (Bird Checklist-pdf) and serves as a major migration corridor for many of the bird species that are entering or leaving interior Alaska. Compared to the rest of Alaska, the diversity of landbirds is high because the Refuge is located within a major migration corridor and a number of species reach their northern range limit here. However, extreme winter weather sends most birds traveling south, leaving only about 25 resident species year round. The Refuge was set aside primarily for its unique waterfowl values. It has one of Alaska's highest densities of nesting waterfowl and annually produces an estimated 35,000 to 65,000 ducklings. Spectacular migrations of lesser sandhill cranes, tundra and trumpeter swans occur each spring and fall. Up to 200,000 cranes, representing about one half ofthe world population, migrate through this corridor. The Refuge also provides habitat for an expanding population of trumpeter swans and for the largest concentration of nesting osprey in Alaska. Raptors such as bald eagles are common nesters along the major rivers and shorelines of larger lakes. Peregrine falcons can be seen once again as new pairs find local cliffs for nesting. Nine species of marsh and waterbirds, and 26 species of shorebirds occur on the refuge. Landbirds Tetlin Refuge has a comprehensive landbird monitoring program that is consistent with the International Partners in Flight Initiative. This includes maintaining migratory bird arrival dates, participating in the North American Migration Count, Breeding Bird Surveys, off-road point counts, and fall migration banding. In addition, a Christmas Bird Count is conducted each winter and an Upper Tanana Bird Festival is hosted by the Refuge in mid-May. Four Breeding Bird Surveys (BBS) routes in eastern interior Alaska are annually completed. Off-road point counts were established on the Refuge in 1994 as part of a pilot project for Boreal Partners in Flight. Seven routes are monitored each year. A fall migration banding station was established in 1993 seven miles east ofTok and has been operated daily in August and September each year. This long-term banding effort is part of a regionallandbird monitoring program and helps to monitor landbird populations not adequately monitored by the Breeding Bird Survey. The most common species captured are: slate-colored junco, swainson's thrush, Wilson's warbler, ruby-crowned kinglet, myrtle (yellow-rumped) warbler, and orange-crowned warbler. Relatively few species of birds are residents on the Refuge. Gray jay, black-billed magpie, common raven, black-capped chickadee, boreal chickadee, and redpolls are the most common species with lesser numbers of the non-migratory owls and woodpeckers. White-winged crossbills are abundant during productive cone crop years. Spruce grouse, ruffed grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, and willow ptarmigan are uncommon breeders on the Refuge. Rock ptarmigan are rarely seen but may breed in the upper Cheslina River drainage. Sharp-tailed grouse have increased, especially in the Tok and Tetlin Village areas following the Tok River Fire in 1990. Raptors Thirteen species of hawks are known to occur on Tetlin Refuge. Usually present in small numbers, bald eagle, osprey, northern harrier, sharp-shinned hawk, red-tailed hawk, and American kestrel are confirmed breeders. Less frequently observed northern goshawk, golden eagle, merlin, peregrine falcon, and gyrfalcon are rare breeders on the Refuge. Rough-legged hawks are uncommon migrants. Turkey vultures and Swainson's hawks are casual visitors. Six species of owls occur on the Refuge, the most common being the great homed owl. Northern hawk owls, great gray owls, and boreal owls can be fairly common some years. The short-eared owl is a migrant and casual summer breeder, while the snowy owl is a casual visitor in fall and winter. The American peregrine falcon is the only previously endangered species found on the Refuge. The population of this species/race has been increasing nation-wide and was de- listed in 1999. The first peregrine falcon nest on Tetlin Refuge was discovered in June 1994 along the Nabesna River nearly 100 river miles upstream from the closest known nest site. Recovering peregrine populations have increased their density within their nesting range in the Upper Tanana Valley in the last decade, doubling the number of territories in the last 4 years to 16 presently known above the Robertson River. Extensive raptor surveys have been completed annually since 1991. Most raptor nests are located along the rivers and wetlands. Waterfowl Green-winged teal, mallard, American wigeon, ring-necked duck, scaup (primarily lesser) and bufflehead are the most abundant ducks breeding on the Refuge. Smaller numbers of northern pintail, northern shoveler, Barrow's goldeneye, common goldeneye, white-winged scoter, surf scoter, canvasback and blue-winged teal are known to breed here as well. Rarely sightings are made of common mergansers, redheads, ruddy ducks, gadwall and harlequin ducks which also breed in the area, or of long-tailed ducks which do not. An estimated 35,000 to 65,000 ducklings are produced on Tetlin Refuge each year. The Refuge lies along an important migration route for both Canada and greater white- fronted geese that migrate to and from the state. Occasionally snow geese and brant are seen during migration. Canada geese breed on the refuge in small numbers. The Refuge provides important habitat for migrating tundra and trumpeter swans during spring and fall. Over 200 trumpeter swans were banded and neck collared from 1983 to 1984 and from 1989 to 1995. Recoveries and sightings of banded trumpeter swans help identify their wintering habitat as being coastal wetlands and fields from the central coast of British Columbia to northern Puget Sound. Waterbirds Nine species of marsh and water birds occur on the Refuge with homed grebe, pacific loon, and red-necked grebe being the most common breeders. Common loons are rare breeders and red-throated loons are considered casual. A small number of sandhill cranes nest on the muskeg flats in the northern third of the refuge. During spring and fall migration, up to 200,000 sandhill cranes (one half of the entire world population) can pass through the Tanana River Valley. The numbers seen from year to year vary depending on weather conditions which affect their flight paths. The Upper Tanana Valley is one of the few places in Alaska where sora and American coot are found regularly. While some 26 species of shorebirds occur on the Refuge, most are migrants passing between wintering and breeding grounds. The most abundant breeding shorebird is the ubiquitous lesser yellowlegs. Common snipe are less abundant but widely distributed, while spotted sandpipers are common along watercourses. Red-necked phalaropes are often seen during fall migration. Mew and Bonaparte's gulls are common breeders. The American golden plover, upland sandpiper, and whimbrel breed in the alpine areas. Avian species of all types may pass through the Yerrick Creek drainage because of its proximity to the Tanana River. There are also a few wetlands within or adjacent to the drainage that may attract waterfowl and predators alike during the summer months. Cultural -Historical Resources A review of the Alaska Heritage Resource Survey (AHRS) documents and related data sources at the Alaska Office of History and Archaeology (OHA) for records of known AHRS sites and previous cultural resource investigations in or near the Areas of Potential Effect (APE) was conducted by a certified archaeologist. One site was found on the west side ofYerrick Creek (TNX-074) that will be along the access road and penstock route. This site can be avoided by project alignment. Study Plan Botanical Resources A wetland delineation of the project will be conducted. Aquatic Resources Fish surveys by Steve Grabacki are being conducted this summer and fall. Surveys are focused on Arctic Grayling, Dolly Varden, and Round Whitefish. This will be a multiyear baseline fisheries survey going from the summer 2008 to late winter of 2008- 2009. Gear to be used are minnow traps, hoop traps, fyke nets, gillnets, dip nets, spat collectors, etc. All specimens will be released alive. Studies will occur above, at, and downstream of the possible impoundment site. The objective in this first year of surveying is to examine for use by all life stages of fishes, including -summer residency, migratory pathway, over-wintering, spawning, rearing, etc. Three sampling trips are planned - a reconnaissance level survey in early summer (angling only), a full-scope sampling in late summer, and a late-winter examination of over-wintering habitat (in 2009). The first report will be submitted by the end of December 2008. Both Y errick Creek and the drainage just west of Y errick Creek, Cathedral Rapids Creek # 1 will be surveyed. Cathedral Rapids Creek #I will be surveyed for potential future consideration if more water is needed for electricity. This survey will give us a baseline on Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 so we will have advanced knowledge to make any future determination of its use. However, at this point in time we propose to only develop Y errick Creek. Wildlife Resources We request input and guidance from the resource agencies, however, it is expected that certain species of mammal may utilize the project corridor and therefore attempt to cross project features. The project will remain in close proximity to the west side of Yerrick Creek as it parallels the creek between the impoundment and powerhouse. The penstock (pipe) will be passable because it will be buried along most or all of its length, allowing mammals, including hunters, access to and through the project site. Therefore, wildlife passage should not be an issue. In addition, this project is in the lower part of this drainage (but above the highway) and for that reason is less likely to be in important habitat as may be the case for further up the valley. We view this project as having limited impacts to wildlife in the area. Cultural -Historical Resources A review by an archaeologist has already been completed and the report will be submitted to SHPO for their review and comments. RESOURCES ADF&G, Biological Information Needs, Letter, April7, 2008. Browne, Patricia, Findings of AHRS Data Review and Evaluation of Cultural Resources Potential for Hydroelectric Project Development ... , June 5, 2008. Grabacki, Stephen, 2008-2009 Study Plan for Y errick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1. June 2008. Gross, Jeff, ADF&G, Personal communication in which wildlife species were discussed for the project area, and in particular info on Dall Sheep hunting in area. May 2008. http://alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/endangered/listing.htm http:/ /tetlin.fws. gov/ http:/ /tetlin.fws. gov/wildlife/black bear.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/birds.htm http:/ /tetlin.fws. gov /wildlife/brown bear.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/caribou.htm http:/ /tetlin. fws. gov/wildlife/ dall sheep .htm http:/ /tetlin. fws. gov /wildl ife/fox.htm http:/ /tetlin. fws. gov /wildlife/marten.htm http:/ /tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/moose.htm http:/ /tetlin.fws. gov /wildlife/otter.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/snowshoe hare.htm http:/ /tetlin.fws. gov /wildlife/wolf.htm http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/wolverine .htm http:/ I alaska. fws. gov I fisheries/ endangered/listing.htm -BLANK PAGE- YERRICK CREEK HYDRO ASSESSMENT GRANT AGREEMENT NO. 2195345 FINAL REPORT -WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT- Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Tok, Alaska P reliminary Jurisdictional Determination February 2009 Prepared for: Alaska Power and Telephone Company PO Box 3222 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Prepared by: HDR Alaska, Inc. 2525 C Street, Suite 305 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE .............................................................................................................. 1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................................... 2 2. METHODS ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 FIELD INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................................................................... 3 MAPPING ........................................................................................................................................................... 5 3. PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION ....................................................................... 6 VEGETATION ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 HYDROLOGY ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 SOILS ............................................................................................................................................................... 11 4. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................. 12 ATTACHMENTS .............................................................................................................................................. 14 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................. 14 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................................... 15 APPENDIX A: WEATHER AND CLIMATE DATA ................................................................................................. 15 APPENDIX B: SUMMARY TABLE ...................................................................................................................... 18 APPENDIX C: PHOTOGRAPHS ........................................................................................................................... 19 APPENDIX D: FIELD DATA FORMS ................................................................................................................... 20 Figures FIGURE I: PROJECT VICINITY MAP ......................................................................................................................... 2 FIGURE 2: YERRICK CREEK PHOTOS ....................................................................................................................... 3 FIGURE 3: NWI MAPPING OF PROJECT AREA ......................................................................................................... 6 FIGURE 4: YERRICK CREEK WETLANDS MAP ......................................................................... ATTACHED MAP BOOK Tables TABLE 1: PROJECT AREA INFORMATION ................................................................................................................ 3 TABLE 2: VEGETATION AT WETLAND DATA FORM S!TES-DOMINANTSPECIES PER PLOT ..................................... 8 TABLE 3: INDICATORS AT WETLAND DATA FORM SITES WITH WETLAND HYDROLOGY ...................................... 11 TABLE4: S SOILS AT WETLAND DATA FORM SITES FOUND TO HAVE HYDRIC SOILS .......................................... 12 TABLE 5: MAPPED AREA SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 13 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination 1. Introduction and Purpose The purpose of this report is to identify and describe wetlands and other waters within an approximately 700-acre area along Yerrick Creek near Tok, Alaska (Figure 1). The area contains land owned by the State of Alaska and by Tanacross, Inc. This report describes locations within the project area that are subject to the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) under authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. By federal law (Clean Water Act) and associated policy, it is necessary to avoid project impacts to wetlands wherever practicable, minimize impact where impact is not avoidable, and in some cases compensate for the impact. The focus of this document is on delineation of wetlands. Wetlands, waters of the U.S., and uplands (non-wetlands), as referenced in this report, are defined as: Wetlands. "Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions" (33 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 328.3(b)). Wetlands are a subset of "waters of the U.S." Note that the "wetlands" definition does not include unvegetated areas such as streams and ponds. Waters of the U.S. Waters of the U.S. include other waterbodies regulated by the USACOE, such as lakes, ponds, and streams, in addition to wetlands. The ponds and streams mapped in the project area are "waters of the U.S." but not "wetlands". Uplands. Non-water and non-wetland areas are called uplands. As described in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual, wetlands must possess the following three characteristics: 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation: Vegetation community dominated by plant species that are typically adapted for life in saturated soils. 2. Wetland Hydrology: Inundation or saturation of the soil during the growing season. 3. Hydric Soils: Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions. 1 Figure 1: Project Vicinity Map 2 Project Location and Environment The project area is located along Yerrick Creek, a cobble-, gravel-and sand-substrate creek which crosses the Alaska Highway at approximately milepost 1339 (Figure 2). Most of the project area is undeveloped, with an open gravel waterway, adjacent forests, abandoned gravel side channels in various states of revegetation, and heavily forested banks (see images below). Specific legal and geographic descriptions for the property required for Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations are included in Table 1. Figure 2: Yerrick Creek Photos Table 1: Pro"ect Area Information 1. APPLICANT: Alaska Power and Telephone Company (AP&n 2. WATERWAY: YerrickCreek 3. LOCATION: A. Narrative: The project area is along Yerrick Creek near Tok, Alaska, approximately 20 miles west of Tok at milepost 1339 of the Alaska Highway. B. Legal Description: Sections: 36 and l, 2, 11, and 14 Township: 19N and l8N Range: 9E Meridian: Copper River Latitude/Longitude (WGS84 Datum): N55.0667159/ Wl32.1461172 4. SOURCE(S): USGS Maps: Tanacross 8-6 NWI Maps: Tanacross 8-6, digital interpretation Soil Maps: None Corns Wetland Maps: None Aerial Photographs: True Color Aerial Photography, 2008, provided by AP&T. Color Infrared High Altitude Aerial Photography, 1978, from the Alaska GeoData Center archives. Other: Reconnaissance-level field survey with wetland data forms, written site observations, and photographs from HDR Alaska, lnc. site visit dated August 21-25, 2008. 2. Methods Two steps were used to inventory wetlands and waterbodies in the project area. These two steps include: Field Investigation A five-day site visit was completed between August 21 and 25, 2008, to identify any wetlands and other waters potentially under the jurisdiction of the USACOE. USACOE guidance on Alaska's growing season references the .end of the growing season to generally 3 follow several continuous days below 28°F. Temperature and precipitation data for the three- month period prior to the field investigation (June 2008 through August 2008) was reviewed to determine the degree to which any recent climatic events may have influenced field hydrology and vegetation indicators. Weather and climate data are given in Appendix A, including monthly summaries of temperature and precipitation, recording period average, and stream gage output for part of2008 for Yerrick Creek. The general trend in the summer of 2008 was a colder, wetter season than normal. Over the three-month period preceding the field visit, the average maximum temperature in °F (64.87 for June, 63.9 for July, and 61.52 for August) was lower than the average maximum temperature for the recording period of 1954 to 2005 (71 for June, 73 for July, and 68 for August) (NOAA 2008). The average minimum temperature (48.39 for June, 48.55 for July, and 42.9 for August) was higher than the average minimum temperature for the recording period (40 for June, 43 for July, and 39 for August). Precipitation for June 2008 was 2.12 inches compared to an average of l.82 inches. July precipitation average for the period 1946 to 2008 is 2 inches, compared to the single year (2008) measurement of 6.68 inches. August average is 1.2 inches, compared to the 2008 measurement of 0.79 inches. The much higher than average precipitation in July led to higher than normal water levels in the creek, and unusual conditions at the study site during the field survey. Side channels that normally lack water experienced flow during July, according to AP&T personnel familiar with the project area. Observations of side channels by AP&T personnel and HDR scientists suggested that such channels had not experienced any flow in over 20 years. A stream gage on the main channel ofYerrick Creek was knocked out during an especially high storm at the end of July. Scientists collected detailed information on soil conditions, hydrology, and plant community composition. A summary table listing plot number, wetland status, wetland mapping code from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife's National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping program (USFWS 2006), and photo numbers is found in Appendix B. Photographs taken at each of the data collection locations are included in Appendix C. Locations were studied using the U.S. Corps of Engineers 1987 wetland delineation manual's (USACOE 1987) and 2007 Alaska Regional Supplement's (USACOE 2007) three-parameter method of determining an area's wetland status. Standard 2007 Alaska Regional Supplement Corps of Engineers data sheets were completed at these sites and are included in Appendix D. Each location visited during the field visit was logged into a handheld global positioning system (GPS) Archer Field PC unit. Representative photographs and observational data were collected at each plot. While in the field, wetland/upland boundaries were determined by completing standard wetland data forms near observable transition zones between wetter and drier areas. A wetland determination is completed in the area with questionable wetland status, then the boundary identified in the appropriate direction between that point and obvious wetlands or uplands. The wetland/upland boundary between the two data plots is then notated on paper aerial photography maps of the area for later guidance in Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping of wetland/upland boundaries. In addition, photo points were taken at more sites to document conditions at a wider range of locations. For these points, a data sheet was not completed, but photos were taken and conditions were notated in a field notebook. 4 Mapping Scientists analyzed aerial photography and NWI wetland mapping in a GIS map environment. GPS locations of field-visited sites and wetland/upland boundaries were overlaid on aerial photography and notes and photographs completed at each site were reviewed to identify any wetlands or waterbodies present within the project area. The process of delineating wetlands from aerial photography included using the following methods: Vegetation clues: On aerial photography, scientists looked for saturation-adapted vegetation communities, indicative canopy structure and height, and presence of hydrophytic plant species. A common example is dwarf spruce trees, which are indicative of a limitation to growth such as excessively wet soils. Evidence of soil saturation: Visible evidence of wetland hydrology was sought, including surface water and darker areas of photos indicating surface saturation. A site's proximity to streams, open water habitat, and marshes may be indicative of shallow subsurface water. Existing mapping: Wetland mapping from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife's National Wetland Inventory mapping program is available for the project area (USFWS 2006). This mapping is generally an effective tool for large-scale planning and analysis of wetlands but not suitable for smaller site-specific projects such as needed for this study. NWI mapping is primarily based on aerial photographic interpretation with limited ground truthing, and therefore wetland boundaries tend to be oversimplified with many smaller wetland complexes not included in the mapping. According to available NWI mapping for USGS quadrangle Tanacross B-6, wetlands occur in the project area (Figure 3). Four pond polygons and two evergreen shrub polygons were mapped at the fringe of the project area, in mostly forested areas to the west of the creek channel. The main creek channel is mapped as riverine waters, with seven shrub polygons mapped on channel islands or on the edge of the main channel. Areas with marginal evidence of wetland characteristics were mapped conservatively as wetlands. Preliminary JDs do not make legally binding determinations, therefore individual sites can be assessed at a later date if necessary (USACOE, June 2008). 5 Figure 3: NWI Mapping of Project Area e 0 1,000 2,~ 6 3. Results No detailed vegetation or soil mapping was available for the project area prior to the field study. Information presented below is summarized from data collected at 28 wetland data form locations over the five-day field investigation (Appendix D). Locations of each data collection location are displayed on Figure 4. Of the 28 wetland data form locations, 6 were determined to occur in wetlands and 3 in other waters of the U.S. Vegetation At wetland data form locations, 15 out of the 28 sites had hydrophytic vegetation (Table 2). Dominant plant species are shown by stratum for each plot. The most common trees in the project area include white spruce (Picea glauca), balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera), and some paper birch (Betula papyrifera). The most common shrub is alder (Alnus crispa). Saplings of white spruce and cottonwood are also common in the shrub layer. Common graminoids include bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis) and a variety of sedges (Carex spp.). Common forbs include timberberry (Geocaulon lividum) and dwarf fireweed (Chamerion latifolium). Mosses and lichens were found primarily in forested plots. 7 Table 2: V Wetl D -·-·-·-----· ------,..,.. __ _._ -·--..,._.,._ ~ .. r-·---....... r·--~ -..... - Tree Stratum Shrub Stratum J black felt-balsam white black diamond red ! leaved paper bog kalmia Labrador tea alder dwarf birch crowberry spruce willow poplar birch spruce spruce willow currant ! "---"-----"-------r------------~· ---1-------- Ribes 1 Pice a Salix Populus Betula Pice a Andromeda Ledum Picea Salix Alnus Betula Empetrum mariana alexensis balsamifera papyrifera glauca polifolia groenlandicum mariana pulchra crisp a glandulifera nigrum triste I Plot Number FACW FAC FACU FACU FACU OBL FACW FACW FACW FAC FAC FAC FAC I 101 1 1 1 103 1 1 104 1 105 1 106 1 107 1 1 1 1 108 1 109 1 1 110 1 1 116 1 1 1 118 1 119 120 121 1 1 1 122 1 1 1 124 1 125 1 1 1 126 1 1 128 1 130 1 1 132 1 1 1 133 1 134 1 1 1 135 1 136 1 137 1 1 138 1 1 139 1 8 Table 3, continued Shrub Stratum Herbaceous Stratum I bog lingonberry bunchberry white balsam prickly boreal bog NT sedge water marsh marsh Biglow's 1 blueberry dogwood spruce poplar rose sedge sedge five-finger horsetail sedge ------~ Vaccinium Vaccinium Comus Picea Populus Rosa Carex Carex Carex Comarium Equisetum Carex uliginosum vitis-idaea canadensis glauca balsamifera acicularis magellanica utriculata aquatilis pa/ustris pratense biglowii J Plot Number FAC FAC FACU FACU FACU FACU OBL OBL OBL OBL FACW FAC 101 1 1 103 1 1 104 105 106 107 108 109 1 110 116 1 118 1 1 119 1 1 120 1 1 121 122 1 124 1 125 126 128 1 1 130 1 132 1 133 134 135 1 136 1 137 138 1 139 1 -·-·-~----L---·--···-·---······-·~ ·---····-·~-·······--·······-·--~------~ . --~ 9 Table 4, continued Herbaceous Stratum bluejoint fireweed dwarf Menzies' common timberberry bluebells boreal glaucous field purple reedgrass fireweed campion horsetail sagebrush bluegrass locoweed reed grass Calamagrostis Chamerion Chamerion Silene Equisetum Geocaulon Mertensia Artemisia Poa Oxytropis Calamagrostis menzjesii ssp. canadensis angustifolium latifolium williamsii arvense lividum paniculata arctica glauca campestris purpurascens Plot Number FAC FAC FAC FAC FACU FACU FACU Nl Nl Nl Nl 101 103 1 104 1 1 I 105 1 106 1 107 1 1 ' 108 1 ' 109 1 1 110 1 116 1 118 1 119 1 120 121 1 1 122 1 124 1 125 1 126 1 1 128 130 1 132 1 133 1 1 134 1 1 135 1 1 1 136 1 1 1 1 137 1 138 1 1 1 139 1 -~-· -------'--~--~---···--· ········----------------------~- 10 Hydrology The project area is situated along the valley bottom and slopes of the Yerrick Creek drainage. Y errick Creek experiences a declining flow along the surveyed length due to subterranean flow. The unusually high precipitation and storm events in July filled channels that normally do not experience flow, and in some cases, likely did not experience any flow for over 20 years, according to observations of persons familiar with the study area. Hydrological indicators were carefully examined at plot data collection locations that occurred in side channels to ensure that data collected was not influenced by conditions deviating from normal. All efforts were made by wetland scientists to consider normal conditions despite the unusual weather conditions preceding the field data collection time. At wetland data form locations, 13 out of the 28 sites had wetland hydrology (Table 3). Commonly seen primary indicators included surface water, saturation, high water table, and drift deposits. Common secondary indicators included drainage patterns, geomorphic position, stunted or stressed plants, and F AC-neutral test. T bl 5 I d" t a e : n 1ca ors a tWtl dDt F e an a a orm S"t "th W tl d H d I es WI e an LV4 ro oev Field Observations Primary Wetland Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators Hydrology Indicators Plot fg_ N' N' c: "' s -c c: M' ~ 0:0 -!!!!. g.: iii -c Number '8. ..-~ M' o-Q) Q) g e. ~ e. '8. (.} el ~ M' @. .~ !!!!. Q)l"'-ro ::;) "' ·u; Q) .l!l -co Q) "' -c ~;::--"E (.} u; o_ Q) ..... ~ ..c--I c: 0 ..c "' .11 ·u; Q) Q)-:.2 Q) ~ Q) "' Cl'i7) .lB ro "' 0 ..... a:::-.:t -o a.. ~ 1-c: ~ 5:6' ~m ;g c.._ -Ql c: Q) ro 1-0 c.. ·u; _u (/) ~ .!:2N ::;) ~cs ~ ..c .c:: o.c:: :s: ..... -.;:::: ro Q) 0 c: E .!:::co ro o-..... "' .c:: Cl cr ~ <tl (.} :.;:::>0 ::2! Cl c.. o-1-C: I:!§. Q) ~ 1:2 Q) 0-.s-a.. Q) c: c: e--<( o~ :5 Q)" ~c-(.} 18 ~ c Cl 1"6<5 (/) Q) u e ~.!5! 0 :t c.. Q) (.} 18 ~ :s: Q) Ol c:-'Ea.. E ~ z ~ E ¢:! "'0 ·;;;:: .... <tl Q) 0 (/) ::;) .c:: (/) ·c: c: Q) $ c: "' ~ 0 'ffi u ~ (/) .!2'1 '6 Cl .E<( <tl -~ l.!! Q) .c:: (.} Lt. ::c Q) :s: a.. <9 (/) ~ (/) Cl 101 0-10 11 5 X X X X X X X 104 0-24 0 0 X X X X X X X X 105 X X X X X 108 0-24 0 0 X X X X X X X X X 109 X X X 118 12 0 0 X 119 X 120 2 0 0 X X X X X X 126 11 6 X X X X X 128 4 0 0 X X X X X X X 129 0 8 4 X X X 133 X X X 136 X Soils Both hydric and non-hydric soil conditions were observed in soil pits examined during the field visit. Soils were carefully assessed by wetland scientists to consider soils under normal conditions, despite the unusual rainfall of the season. Hydric soils were encountered at 6 of the 28 wetland data form sites (Table 4). Indicators of hydric soil included histosol, histic 11 I I I I I epipedons, and several other indicators that fell under problematic soil conditions. Analysis of conditions at all sites with problematic hydric soils that are listed in Table 4 concluded that the site did contain a hydric soil as per US ACE direction (US ACE 1987, 2007). Specific characteristics of the sampled mineral soils, including color and texture, are included on the wetland data forms (Appendix D). T bl 6 S "J W I d D F a e : ot sat et an at a orm s · F d H H d . S "I ttes oun to ave 1y1 nc 01 s Hydric Soil Indicators Plot Histosol or His tic Restrictive Restrictive Other Indicator of Hydric Soils or Epipedon Layer Depth Number Histel (A1) (A2) Layer Type (Inches) "Waters" Status 101 X Permafrost 16 104 Outwash , Entisol (Substrate too young and coarse to show redox features and with too little organic carbon to promote reduction} 108 Outwash, Entisol (Substrate too young and coarse to show redox features and with too little organic carbon to promote reduction) 118 No pit, emergent vegetation and 12" standing water present 120 Hydrophytic vegetation, primary hydrology indicator, concave landscape, positive alpha-alpha dipyridyl 126 X 128 X 130 X 4. Conclusion Wetland locations are based upon the dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydrologic indicators, and hydric soil indicators. Other waters of the U.S. are based on the investigators' judgement about the location of the ordinary high water mark of Y errick Creek. Based on the findings above, it has been determined that areas displayed as wetlands or waters on Figure 4 meet the USACOE criteria for being classified as wetland or fall below the plane of Ordinary High Water (OHW) of Yerrick Creek. Approximately 21.3% (147.1 acres), a conservative delineation, of the mapped acres were determined to meet the USACOE requirements for being classified as wetlands or other waters, and are listed and described in Table 5. The areas shown as wetlands and other waters on Figure 4 may be subject to jurisdiction under Section 404. For the purpose of this PJD, it is assumed that Yerrick Creek is a Relatively Permanent Tributary to Traditional Navigable Waters, and that the mapped wetlands are "adjacent" to Y errick Creek. Most of the mapped wetland areas are not within the proposed project construction areas. 12 The remainder ofthe mapped project area, approximately 78.7% (542.6 acres) ofthe mapped area, lacks one or more of the required three parameters to support classifying an area as wetland (Table 5), and is not below the plane of OHW of Y errick Creek. The areas would not be subject to jurisdiction under Section 404. As project plans are developed, if construction would affect wetlands or other waters, AP&T may wish to refine wetland boundaries by further field investigation and consideration of the jurisdictional status of any affected wetlands. Yerrick Creek and its adjacent active bars are waters of the US below the creek 's OHW mark. OHW is particularly difficult to define for a braided channel such as this one. There may be some areas within the river bars shown on Figure 4 that are not actually below OHW . T bl 7 M a e : appe dAr s ea ummary Wetland Type NWI Mapping Code Approximate Area (Acres) Seasonally flooded emergent persistent PEM1C 0.51 herbaceous wetland Semipermanently flooded emergent persistent PEM1F 3.89 herbaceous wetland Saturated needle-leafed evergreen forest/broad-PF04/SS3B 5.07 leafed scrub-shrub wetland Saturated needle-leafed evergreen forest wetland PF04B 0.68 Seasonally flooded broad-leafed scrub-shrub PSS1C 0.10 wetland Saturated broad-leafed evergreen/needle-leaved PSS3/4B 42.24 scrub-shrub wetland Seasonally flooded broad-leafed evergreen scrub-PSS3/EM1B 0.64 shrub/persistent herbaceous wetland Seasonally flooded broad-leafed evergreen scrub-PSS3B 0.37 shrub wetland Seasonally flooded broad-leafed evergreen/broad -PSS4/3B 5.92 leafed evergreen scrub-shrub wetland Saturated needle-leafed evergreen scrub-shrub PSS4B 14.33 wetland Permanently flooded unconsolidated bottom PUBH 3.35 palustrine wetland Temporarily flooded upper perenn ial unconsolidated floor/permanently flooded R3USA/UBH 69.96 unconsolidated bottom wetland Upland (non-wetland) u 542 .56 Total Mapped Area 689.63 Total Wetlands and Other Waters 147.1 acres (21.3%) Total Upland (non-wetland) 542.6 acres (78. 7%) 13 Determination Made By Elizabeth Bella, Chris Wrobel, and Irina Lapina Wetland Scientists HDR Alaska, Inc. Date: February 2008 Attachments Figure 4: Yerrick Creek Wetlands Map Book References National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2008 . National Weather Service, Alaska Regional Headquarters. Monthly and annual climate data summaries. Available online at http ://www .arh.noaa.gov/climate .php. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. June 26, 2008 . Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 08-02. Available online at: http ://www .saw. usace.army .mil/WETLANDS/Policies/RGL08-02.pdf . U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Laboratory (USACOEEL). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Vicksburg, MS. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Research and Development Center. 2007. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Alaska Region (Version 2.0). Vicksburg, MS. U.S. Federal Register. November 13, 1986 Part II. Rules and Regulations, Vol. 51, No. 219. U.S. Department of Defense. Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army. 33 CFR Parts 320-330, Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006 . National Wetland Inventory Mapping for USGS Quadrangle Tanacross B-6. Available online at: http ://enterorise.nwi .fws.gov /shapedata/alaska/. 14 Appendices Appendix A: Weather and Climate Data http ://www.arh.noaa.gov/climate.php NOAA National Weather Service Alaska Regional Headquarters Data Period of Record ·1946 to 2008 Observed (0 f) Observed Extreme Temperature (•f) Day 2008 Max Min Precipitation Highest Lowest Highest Temp: Temp: (Inches): Max: Max: Min: 1-Jun 63 47 0 87 1958 44 1947 57 1990 2-Jun 69 47 0 80 1958 44 1947 57 1979 3-Jun 67 49 T 85 1958 44 1974 57 1957 4-Jun 61 49 T 84 1957 40 2006 56 1985 5-Jun 61 49 0 85 1957 44 1963 60 1958 6-Jun 64 44 T 84 1951 49 1985 60 1986 7-Jun 66 49 0.01 84 1958 52 1983 57 1965 8-Jun 67 48 T 84 1946 51 1970 55 1969 9-Jun 56 45 0.09 83 1947 50 1983 56 2006 10-Jun 62 47 0.02 79 1971 52 1959 60 2006 11-Jun 63 44 T 80 1972 52 1955 56 2005 12-Jun 61 48 0.32 81 1992 52 1979 56 2005 13-Jun 68 44 0 85 1972 48 1952 59 1969 14-Jun 69 47 0 91 1969 45 1954 58 1972 15-Jun 71 48 0.36 91 1969 50 1985 60 1950 16-Jun 64 48 0.08 81 1948 52 1985 58 1968 17-Jun 59 50 T 88 1948 56 1982 58 1946 18-Jun 67 52 0.01 86 1967 52 1980 62 1948 19-Jun 69 55 0.09 82 1958 51 1949 58 1967 20-Jun 75 50 0 88 1958 53 2005 58 1958 21-Jun M M M 90 1991 47 1956 58 1969 22-Jun 72 55 T 82 1987 50 2006 60 1969 23-Jun 61 50 0.56 85 1971 50 1963 57 1983 24-Jun 57 48 0.28 90 1991 50 1964 58 1971 25-Jun M M M 86 1983 44 1949 60 1980 26-Jun M M M 83 1991 50 1949 63 1983 27-Jun M M M 85 1957 49 1949 65 1969 28-Jun M M M 81 1986 8 1971 68 1968 29-Jun M M M 85 1992 48 1949 70 1968 30-Jun M M M 87 1992 47 1971 64 1987 JUNE 2008 64.87 48.39 Total: 1.82 AVERAGE JUNE 71 40 2.12 NORMAL 1-Jul M M M 83 1991 47 1945 58 1985 2-Jul M M M 82 1990 55 1981 60 1958 3-Jul 80 48 T 85 1958 57 1969 62 1955 4-Jul 82 53 T 91 1958 57 1959 62 1990 15 Lowest Min: 31 1969 32 1947 32 1974 27 1961 26 2006 31 1963 36 1991 30 1992 32 1961 34 1991 35 1987 36 1960 36 1955 37 1971 32 1960 36 1960 40 1987 36 1982 35 1960 41 1951 33 1968 38 1993 33 1949 39 1961 35 1949 34 1949 36 1960 -11 1971 34 1949 35 1971 32 1971 34 1960 36 1961 37 1961 5-Jul 79 53 T 86 1990 55 1949 62 1968 44 1960 6-Jul 72 58 0.07 84 1986 57 1981 63 1980 41 1963 7-Jul 70 53 0.01 82 1982 54 1981 60 1986 42 1993 8-Jul 55 49 0.23 85 1951 54 1981 62 1968 43 1992 9-Jul 68 50 0.01 82 1946 54 1957 60 1968 38 1991 10-Jul 69 52 0.08 8L_ 1975 r· 54 1964 59 1989 36 1960 11-Jul 68 53 0.15 85 1975 48 1954 60 1980 35 1960 12-Jul 73 52 0.01 89 1960 55 1962 59 1980 38 1990 13-Jul 68 52 0.04 85 1960 55 1959 60 1975 36 1961 14-Jul 58 51 0.13 85 1967 53 1971 64 1989 38 1961 15-Jul 71 46 0.01 85 1993 57 1960 62 1954 42 1991 16-Jul 72 52 0 88 1951 53 1955 60 1993 38 1960 17-Jul 63 49 0.27 83 1993 47 2003 62 1947 38 2003 18-Jul 51 46 Q_:§3 ____ 79 ~93 51 2008157 1988 39 1961 ~-···-···- 1965159 19-Jul 58 45 T 84 1990 52 1978 41 1966 -·--·· 20-Jul 56 47 0.1 85 1990 51 1973 59 199~~ 21-Jul 64 45 0.27 81 1976 51 1956 60 2006 1959 22-Jul 55 42 0.16 83 1955 54 1959 61 1952 40 1968 23-Jul 58 44 T 86 1990 58 2008 60 1961 42 1971 24-Jul 67 43 T 86 1990 52 1965 62 1990 38 1988 25-Jul 62 49 T 90 1955 49 1969 60 1947 40 1991 26-Jul 68 50 0.54 85 1955 48 1957 59 1978 40 1961 27-Jul 55 49 0.41 86 1953 53 1963 63 1977 39 1957 28-Jul 51 44 2.27 83 1953 8 1971 62 1958 -11 1971 29-Jul 59 43 0.36 85 1977 59 2008 60 1962 38 1975 30-Jul 53 46 0.28 88 1977 53 2008 62 1947 42 1971 31-Jul 48 !44 0.75 85 1978 48 2008 58 1965 35 1968 JULY 2008 AVERAGE 63.9 48.55 Total: 6.68 JULY 73 43 2 NORMAL 1-Aug 60 45 0.1 87 1976 56 1982 64 1993 34 1968 2-Aug 70 44 0.3 79 1962 56 1971 64 1953 35 1948 3-Aug 54 44 0.13 82 1977 50 2003 59 1986 40 1964 4-Aug M M M 88 1977 49 1947 60 1986 36 1968 5-Aug M M M 80 1968 56 1962 62 1977 34 1946 6-Aug M M M 86 1968 54 1949 60 1981 33 1946 7-Aug M M M 85 1968 45 1969 58 1981 33 1969 8-Aug 49 41 0.03 79 1977 42 1969 61 1981 33 1969 9-Aug 53 37 0.01 82 1957 53 2008 62 1977 34 1969 -·· 10-Aug M M M 85 2005 43 1969 63 1979 29 1969 11-Aug 61 44 0.05 86 1980 50 1965 59 1945 33 1969 12-Aug 68 35 0 84 1980 46 1969 59 1958 33 1969 13-Aug 66 49 0 85 1990 48 1973 66 1975 29 1969 14-Aug 71 45 T 86 1990 45 1946 57 1991 26 1969 15-Aug 67 50 T 85 1990 50 1983 64 1979 27 1969 16-Aug 67 46 0.04 84 1957 42 1981 64 1979 36 1981 17-Aug 59 49 0.11 80 2007 48 1946 63 1990 28 1981 16 18-Aug M M M 81 1977 53 19-Aug 60 45 T 81 1950 51 20-Aug 59 42 0 81 1973 49 21-Aug 62 37 T 86 1977 42 22-Aug 64 49 0.02 84 1977 41 23-Aug M M M 79 1979 44 24-Aug 58 39 T 82 1979 45 25-Aug 60 43 0 80 1981 45 26-Aug 62 38 0 78 1981 38 27-Aug M M M 80 1981 40 28-Aug 62 41 T 82 1949 8 29-Aug M M M 82 1949 40 30-Aug 60 38 0 85 1974 40 31-Aug M M M 77 1974 42 AUGUST 2008 61.52 42.9 Total= 0.79 AVERAGE AUGUST 68 39 1.2 NORMAL http://www.wrcc .dri .edu/summary/Climsmak.htrnl Western Regional Climate Center, wrcc@dri.edu Monthly Climate Summary for Tok, AK Period of Record : 6/11/1954 to 12/31/2005 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul J\ug Average Max. -6.6 7.7 25 44 60.4 71 73 68 Temperature (0 f) Average Min. -25 -16 -6 16 29.5 40 ~3 39 Temperature (0 f) Average Total 0.35 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.7 2.1 2 1.2 Precipitation (inches) 17 1992 56 1977 32 1947 1987 57 2007 35 2005 1981 55 1950 33 1946 1946 56 1972 31 1974 1948 56 1963 30 1989 1948 57 1989 25 1986 1983 55 1963 22 1948 1983 57 1989 31 1993 1984 57 1989 27 1991 1984 61 1957 29 1991 1971 63 1989 -11 1971 1984 51 1951 28 1991 1948 56 1949 25 1955 1962 49 1993 23 1987 Sep Oct Nov Dec ~nnual 54 32 8.9 -3.5 36.2 29 13 -9 .9 -22 10.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.43 9.22 A d' B S ~ppen IX : ummar T bl a e Plot Number Plot Type JD Status NWICode Photo Numbers 101 JD w PSS3/4C 124-pit, 125-surface, 126-W, 127 -E, 128-S 102 PP-RW* w R4SBH 129-W, 130-E 103 JD u u 131-pit, 132-surface, 133-E, 134-W, 135-S 104 JD w R3UB1/2H 136-N, 137-E, 138-S, 139-W 105 JD u u 144-N, 145-S, 146-pit, 147-surface 106 JD u u 148-pit, 149-surface, 150-E, 151-SW, 152-N 107 JD u u 153-pit, 154-surface, 155-N, 156-S 108 JD w R3US1/2C 157-W, 158-N, 159-E, 160-S, 161-SW 109 JD u u 162-N, 163-SE, 164-SW, 165-NW, 166-pit, 167-surface 110 JD u u 168-pit, 169-surface, 170-SE, 171-S, 172-N 111 PP-RU u u 173-SW, 174-NW, 175-NE 112 PP-RW w R3UB2H 180-channel, 181-channel 113 PP-RU u u 182-NW, 183-SE, 184-SE-channel, 185-N 114 PP-RU w R3UBH 186-NW, 187-SE 115 PP-RW w R4SB2C 188-N, 189-S 116 JD u u 190-pit, 191-surface, 192-N, 193-S 117 PP-RW w R4UBF 194-NW, 195-SE 118 JD w PEM1 F (Center of polygon is 196-water, 197-E, 198-W, 199-pond PUBH) 119 JD u u 200-pit, 201-surface, 202-NE, 203-N, 204-hydro 120 JD w PEM1F 205-pit, 206-redox, 207-alpha-alpha, 208-E, 209-W 121 JD u u 210-N, 211-S, 212-pit, 213-surface 122 JD u u 216-N, 217-S, 218-pit, 219-surface 123 PP-RW w R3UB1/2H (Gravel Bar is 220-NE, 221-SW, 222-S R3US1/2C or A) 124 JD u u 226-NE, 227-SW, 228-SE, 229-pit, 230-surface 125 JD u u 233-N, 234-S, 235-windthrow, 236-pit, 237-surface 126 JD w PSS4B 238-N, 239-N, 241-pit, 242-surface 127 PP-RW u u 243-N, 244-S, 245-pit 128 JD w PEM1/SS3C (PEM1C 246-N, 247-S, 248-water adjacent) 129 PP-RW w PUBH (PEM1C on fringe) 249-NE, 250-W, 251-W 130 JD w PF04/SS38 252-NE, 253-SW, 254-pit, 255-surface 131 PP-RW w PF04/SS3B 256-N, 257-S, 260-pit, 261-surface 132 JD u u 262-NE, 263-SE, 264-S, 267-pit, 268-surface 133 JD u u 269-NE, 270-SE, 271-SW 134 JD u u 272-NE, 273-SW, 274-pit, 275-surface 135 JD u u 277-NE, 278-SE, 279-SW 136 JD u u 280-N, 281-SW (cliff), 282-SW, 283-pit, 284-surface 137 JD u u 292-NE, 293-SW, 294-pit, 295-surface 138 JD u u 297-N, 298-S, 299-pit, 300-surface 139 JD u u 305-N, 306-W, 307-S, 310-pit, 311-surface 140 PP-RU u u 312-NE, 313-SW *PP-RW or PP-RU: Photopomt Plot at a Representative Wetland or Waters (RW) or a Representative Upland (RU) site, where photos and basic infonnation are recorded instead of the entire field fonn, due to similarity in site conditions with previously surveyed plots. 18 Appendix C: Photographs Included as a Word document: AppendixC_photos_yerrick.doc 19 Appendix D: Field Data Forms Included as an Adobe document: AppendixD _plotfieldfonns_yerrick. pdf 20 -BLANK PAGE- YERRICK CREEK HYDRO ASSESSMENT GRANT AGREEMENT NO. 2195345 FINAL REPORT -TES PLANT SURVEY REPORT- Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Tok, Alaska Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) Plant Report February 2009 p..SKA PD\-Ver-. \.-"\"' ~APaT r -CLEPHON~ Prepared for: Alaska Power and Telephone Company POBox 3222 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Prepared by: HDR Alaska, Inc. 2525 C Street, Suite 305 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Table of Contents STUDY PURPOSE AND LOCATION .............................................................................................................. 1 METHODS ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 SAMPLING DESIGN ............................................................................................................................................. 2 FIELD METHODS ................................................................................................................................................ 3 COLLECTION AND VOUCHERS ............................................................................................................................ 3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................... 3 NOTABLE PLANTS ............................................................................................................................................ 4 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................... 5 DETERMINATION OF TES SPECIES MADE BY ........................................................................................ 5 ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................................................ 5 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................... 5 APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................................... 6 APPENDIX A: SURVEY INTENSITY AND RARITY RANK FOR SPECIES .................................................................. 6 APPENDIX 8: PLANTS RECORDED AT SAMPLE PLOTS ........................................................................................ 8 APPENDIX C: PROJECT AREA PLANT SPECIES LIST .......................................................................................... 13 APPENDIXD: PHOTOGRAPHS ........................................................................................................................... 16 APPENDIX E: FIELD DATA FORMS ................................................................................................................... 17 Figures FIGURE 1: TES SURVEY MAP ...................................................................................................... AS ATT ACHEMENT FIGURE 2: PHLOX SIBIRICA PHOTO ......................................................................................................................... 4 Tables TABLE 1: PRELIMINARY LIST OF POTENTIAL RARE PLANTS ..................................................................................... l Y errick Creek Hydroelectric Project Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) Plant Report Key Findings: No threatened, endangered, or sensitive plants were located within areas likely to be affected by project activities. The project, as described, is not expected to adversely affect any sensitive plants. Study Purpose and Location A threatened, endangered, and sensitive (TES) plant survey was conducted within the Y errick Creek Hydroelectric project area. The purpose of the study was to detennine if there were any individuals or populations of plant species of interest that may be affected by project activities. The survey was conducted at LevelS intensity (Appendix A). The project area is located near along Yerrick Creek, a cobble, gravel and sand substrate creek which crosses the Alaska Highway at approximately milepost 1339 (see Figure 1 in the Yerrick Creek Preliminary Jurisdictional Detennination Report for wetlands). Most of the project area is undeveloped with an open gravel waterway, islands of mixed hardwood and softwood trees, abandoned gravel side channels in various states of revegetation, and heavily forested banks. Specific legal and geographic descriptions for the property required for Preliminary Jurisdictional Detenninations are included in the Preliminary Jurisdiction report for wetlands in Table I. The main vegetation ofYerrick Creek study area is typically open paper birch-white spruce forest. Open balsam poplar-white spruce forest and open white spruce forest inhabit drier sites. Open black spruce forest and open dwarf black spruce forest occupy areas with poorly drained soils. Closed tall alder or willow scrub occupies the transitional areas between forested areas and creek channel. Narrow areas of gravel floodplain areas along Y errick Creek are inhabited by early seral graminoids and forbs. Bluejoint meadows and lowland sedge wet meadows occupy wet areas adjacent to ponds. Methods A five-day site visit was completed between August 21 51 and 25th, 2008, to identify any threatened, endangered, and sensitive plant species in the proposed project area. To target rare plants within the Y errick Creek project area, we composed a list of rare plant species likely to be encountered. The target species list was compiled based on the Alaska Natural Heritage Program's (AKNHP) Biotics database. The AKNHP database query did not show the occurrence of rare plants within the project area. This area has not been previously I I I I I I surveyed for rare plants. Rare plants known in the general vicinity of Tanacross B5 and B6 USGS Quad maps were located from two queries on 7/21/2008. One query was the AKNHP Biotics Database query, and the other was from the Arctos Database at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks (UAF), which lists all known herbarium records stored at the UAF Herbarium (code letters ALA). The compiled list was reviewed and edited by local botanist Rob Lipkin (pers. com.) Rarity was determined by the AKNHP's 2006 Vascular Plant Tracking list (Lipkin, 2008). Table 1: Preliminary list of potential rare plants for explanation of Rarity Rank see Appendix A). Global State Scientific Name Common Name Family Rarity Rarity Possible Habitat Rank Rank Open balsam poplar- Agrostis c/avata clavate bentgrass Poaceae G4G5 S1S2 white spruce forest. Bare soils, wet meadows Carex he/eonastes Hudson Bay sedge Cyperaceae G4G5 S2S3 Peat bogs, swamps Castilleja annua Scrophulariaceae G3G4Q S3S4 Waste places Ponds, lakes, and slow moving streams Ceratophyllum demersum coon's tail Ceratophyllaceae GS S1 and rivers. E~her anchored in the mud or floating freely near the surface. Draba paysonii Payson's draba Brassicaceae GS S1S2 Gravel cutbank in glacial cirque Lupinus kuschei Yukon lupine Fabaceae G3 S2 roadsides Mantia bostockii Bostock's minerslettuce Portulacaceae G3 S3 Wet places in the mountains Tall white spruce- aspen forest, coarse Phace/ia mol/is soft phacelia Hydrophyllaceae G2G3 S2S3 sand, dry sand beach, dry alpine tundra meadows. Poasecunda curty bluegrass Poaceae GS SNA Meadows, open woods high alpine scree Taraxacum cameocoloratum fleshy dandelion Asteraceae G3Q S3 slopes, extremely rare Sampling Design The goal was to visit all vegetation types in the study area and identify all plant species encountered during field work that was focused on wetland mapping. All species were identified in the field or collected for further identification. We reviewed aerial photography to identify vegetation types most likely to contain the taxa of interest. Habitats of greatest interest included the following: 2 • Openings in mixed birch spruce forest, • Edges of ponds and meadows, • Seeps and small creeks, • Gravel river banks along Y errick Creek. Daily work was planned to visit as many different habitat types as possible, including those most likely to include rare plants. Field Methods Teams traveled by foot while conducting the survey. As new vegetation communities were encountered, sampling points were established and the following data were collected: • Each plot was georeferenced using a Garmin GPS unit. Survey routes were also mapped. • Representative photos of the vegetation community were taken at each plot. • Vegetation type and dominant species by growth form (trees, shrubs, forbs, ferns/ non-vascular plants) were recorded at each site, using the vegetation classification system by Viereck ( 1992). • Additional data were gathered specific to the location, habitat, landform, notable plants, bare ground, or other parameters of interest. • Unidentified plants were collected for lab identification and noted on the field form. • A complete list of plant species encountered was compiled as the survey progressed. Collection and Vouchers Collections were made only if the population was large enough to support removal of individuals. The following data were recorded with each voucher specimen: date, latitude and longitude (Datum: NAD_l983_StatePlane_Alaska_2_FIPS_5002_Feet, in decimal degrees, taken from the Garmin GPS unit), associated species, vegetation type, substrate, notes on characteristics that may not preserve well (e.g., flower color), associated photo number, and other ecological observations. Each voucher specimen was referenced to a specific geographic locality. Results and Discussion The HDR project botanist surveyed most of the major vegetation types, and covered much of the geographic extent of the Yerrick Creek project area. The majority of collection locations were concentrated on gravel river bars and shrub areas adjacent to the Y errick Creek. More than 100 vouchers were collected. Specimens were given provisional names in the field and later sorted, examined and identified by the HDR botanist. Specimens of notable taxa will be sent to the UAF Herbarium (ALA) for review by the museum staff. Most of these species are widespread in interior Alaska. No non-native species were observed in the Y errick Creek study area. 3 In total, 145 species from 40 families were recorded at the area. The complete list of species encountered in Y errick Creek study area is found in Appendix C. Two lakes were visited. Aquatic plants were observed and recorded from the shore. The study area was not surveyed for aquatic plants specifically. Notable Plants Four notable plants were found in the project area. The AKNHP tracks populations of plants of interest. Notable plants are not considered rare, sensitive, or endangered but are considered to be of ecological interest by the AKNHP. Phlox sibirica (Siberian phlox) was not previously reported from the area. The closest records of this plant are approximately (UAF 2008): 1. 30 miles NW ofYerrick Creek in Fort Greely Military Reservation in 2004 (63.78°,- 145.79°) 2. 45 miles SE of Yerrick Creek at Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve (62.20266°, -142.123273°) Other notable plants, for which there are no nearby records, include: 1. Botrychium lunaria (common moonwort) 2. Platanthera obtusata (blunt-leaved orchid) 3. Astragalus robbinsii ssp. harringtonii (Harold's milkvetch) 4 Conclusion No globally or state ranked Rare or Sensitive species were encountered or identified during the survey. No Endangered species were encountered or identified during the survey. The only plant federally listed or proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Alaska is Polystichum aleuticum C. Christensen, which is endangered. It is only known from Adak Island and is not expected to occur in the project area. Most plant species observed in the Y errick Creek project area are considered common and widespread in interior Alaska. This TES plant survey is significant as a first floristic study in Y errick Creek area. Determination of TES Species Made By Irina Lapina Vegetation Ecologist HDR Alaska, Inc. Date: February 2008 Attachments Figure 1: TES Survey Map References Alaska Natural Heritage Program (AKNHP). 2008 . Botany Databases. http://aknhp.uaa.alaska.edu/botany/Botany Home.htm. Cody, W.J. 1996. Flora of the Yukon Territory. NRC Research Press, Canada. 668 p . Lipkin, R. 2008. Alaska Natural Heritage Program Rare Vascular Plant Tracking List. April. Alaska Natural Heritage Program, Anchorage, AK. http:/ /aknhp. uaa .alaska.edu/botany/pdfs/Rare%20PLant%20LisfO/o202008. pdf Hulten, E . 1968 . Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA. University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF). 2006. Arctos Database . http:/ /arctos.database.museurn/SpecimenResults.cfm. Viereck, L.A., C.T. Dymess, A.R. Batten, & K.J. Wenzlick. 1992. The Alaska vegetation classification. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-286. Portland. OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 278 p. 5 Appendices Appendix A: Survey Intensity and Rarity Rank for Species Survey intensity level for plants: LEVEL 1 "FIELD CHECK" The surveyor gives the area a quick "once-over" but does not walk completely through the project area. The entire project area has not been examined. LEVEL 2 ="CURSORY" The surveyor gives the area a "once-over" by walking through the project area. The entire project area has not been examined. LEVEL 3 ="LIMITED FOCUS" The surveyor closely examines one or more habitat-specific locations within the project area, but does not look at the rest of the area. LEVEL 4 "GENERAL" The surveyor gives the area a closer look by walking through the project area and walking around the perimeter of the area or by walking more than once through the area. Most of the project area is examined. LEVEL 5 = "INTUITIVE CONTROLLED" The surveyor has closer look by conducting a complete examination of specific areas of the project after walking through the project area and perimeter or by walking more than once through the area. LEVEL 6 = "COMPLETE" The surveyor has walked throughout the survey area until nearly all of the area has been examined. Rarity Rank for Species: The rarity rank is a value that best characterizes the relative rarity or endangerment of a native taxon within the specified geographic boundaries (i.e., range-wide for global, or within-state or province for subnational). In general, NatureServe Central Science staff assign global, U.S., and Canadian national Element ranks with guidance from local Heritage Programs/Conservation Data Centres, especially for endemic Elements, and from experts on particular taxonomic groups. Local installations assign subnational ranks for Elements in their respective jurisdictions. Only the following rank components should be entered in this Rank field: The appropriate geopolitical-level prefixes currently in use are: G =global S subnational Allowable values are: 1 = critically imperiled 2 = imperiled 3 = vulnerable 6 4 apparently secure 5 secure H =possibly extinct X = presumed extinct U = unrankable NR not ranked NA =not applicable (Element is not a suitable target for conservation) If applicable, an indicator of uncertainty about the rank, either in the form of a range rank or a "?" qualifier following a numeric basic rank. For national and subnational ranks, a suffix that describes the population of a migratory species, as follows: B = breeding population N = nonbreeding population M = transient population Ranks for one, two, or all three population segments can be entered, separated by commas (e.g., S 1 B,S2N,S3M). For global ranks, if applicable, an appended T -rank for an infraspecies. For global ranks, if applicable, a qualifier after the basic rank in the form of a Q indicating questionable taxonomy, or a C indicating captive or cultivated Species Ranks used by the Alaska Natural Heritage Program Species Global Rankings G 1: Critically imperiled globally ( 5 or fewer occurrences) G2: Imperiled globally (6-20 occurrences) G3: Rare or Uncommon globally (20-100 occurrences) G4: Apparently secure globally, but cause for long-term concern(> 100 occurrences) G5: Demonstrably secure globally G#G# Rank of species uncertain, best described as a range between two ranks G#Q Taxonomically questionable G#T# Global rank of species and global rank of the described variety or subspecies Species State Rankings S 1: Critically imperiled in state (5 or fewer occurrences) S2: Imperiled in state (6-20 occurrences) S3: Rare or Uncommon in state (20-100 occurrences) S4: Apparently secure in state, but cause for long-term concern(> 100 occurrences) S5: Demonstrably secure in state S#S# Rank of species uncertain, best described as a range between two ranks For further information concerning rare plant species for this area, please contact the Alaska Natural Heritage Program Botanist (907) 257-2785. 7 I Appendix B: Plants Recorded at Sample P~ots screnutrc Name Plot Latitude Longitude Elevation (ft) Habitat I Number Betula papyrifera 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Picea glauca 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest I Betula glandulosa 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Ledum groenlandicum 1 63.34361 -143 .63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest I Vaccinium vitis-idaea 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Vaccinium uliginosum 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Salix scouleriana 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Geocaulon lividum 1 63.34361 -143 .63515 2479 open paper birch -white spruce forest I Salix alaxensis 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Calamagrostis canadensis 1 63.34361 -143 .63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Lycopodium annotinum 1 63.34361 -143 .63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Polygonum alaskanum 1 63 .34361 -143 .63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Comus canadensis 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Carexsp. 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch -white spruce forest I feather moss 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest lichens 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Polytrichum sp. 1 63 .34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest Picea mariana 2 63.34405 -143 .63589 2407 . dwarf open black spruce forest Ledum groenlandicum 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Salix pulchra 2 63.34405 -143 .63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Betula glandulosa 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest I Vaccinium vitis-idaea 2 63 .34405 -143 .63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Empetrum nigrum 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Alnus viridis ssp . crispa 2 63 .34405 -143 .63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Andromeda polifolia 2 63 .34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Lycopodium annotinum 2 63.34405 -143 .63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Equisetum arvense 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Equisetum sylvaticum 2 63 .34405 -143 .63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Vaccinium oxycoccus 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Geocaulon lividum 2 63.34405 -143 .63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Carexsp . 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest feather mosses 2 63.34405 -143 .63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Sphagnum russowii 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Sphagnum sp. 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest I lichen 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest Betula glandulosa 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest Ledum groenlandicum 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest Vaccinium vitis-idaea 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest I Empetrum nigrum 3 63 .34571 -143 .63655 2378 open black spruce forest Vaccinium uliginosum 3 63.34571 -143 .63655 2378 open black spruce forest Salix glauca 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest I Carexsp . 3 63.34571 -143 .63655 2378 open black spruce forest Rubus chamaemorus 3 ·63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest Trientalis europaea 3 63 .34571 -143 .63655 2378 open black spruce forest 8 Screntlflc Name Plot Latitude l.ollgltUde Elevation (ft) Habitat Number Geocaulon lividum 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest I Petasites frigidus x 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest hyperboreoides Vaccinium oxycoccus 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest Polytrichum sp. 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest I Sphagnum sp. 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest Agrostis sp. 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Arabis lyrata 4 63.34128 -143 .63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Artemisia tilesii 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Calamagrostis inexpansa 4 63.34128 -143 .63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Epilobium latifolium 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Festuca rubra 4 63 .34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Poa alpina 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Poa arctica 4 63 .34128 -143 .63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Poa arctica ssp. lanata 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Poa palustris 4 63.34128 -143 .63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Poa pratensis 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Salix alaxensis 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated I Trisetum spicatum 4 63.34128 -143 .63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated Picea glauca -sapling 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 5 63.34141 -143 .63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub Salix alaxensis 5 63.34141 -143 .63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub I Populus balsamifera -sapling 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub Dryopteris fragrans 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub Calamagrostis canadensis 5 63.34141 -143 .63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub Artemisia tilesii 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub Poa glauca 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub Silene menziesii ssp. williamsii 5 63.34141 -143 .63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub Populus balsamifera 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Picea glauca 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 6 63.34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Salix alaxensis 6 63.34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Ribes triste 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Rosa acicularis 6 63.34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Spiraea beauverdiana 6 63 .34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Calamagrostis canadensis 6 63 .34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Artemisia tilesii 6 63.34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Stellaria sp .-no flowers 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest I Boschniakia rossica 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Pyrola sp. 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Poaglauca 6 63 .34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Aster sibiricus 6 63.34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Angelica Iucida 6 63.34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Aconitum delphinifolium 6 63.34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Geocaulon lividum 6 63.34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest I Mertensia paniculata 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Taraxacum sp. 6 63 .34259 -143 .63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest Anemone richardsonii 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest I 9 I I !etentlflc Name Plot LaOtllde Longitude Elevation (ft) Habitat Number Betula papyrifera 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest I Picea glauca 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Populus balsamifera 7 63.34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Geocaulon lividum 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest I Rosa acicularis 7 63.34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Salix barclayi 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Ribes triste 7 63 .34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest I Rubus idaeus 7 63 .34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Ledum groenlandicum 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Calamagrostis canadensis 7 63 .34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Equisetum pratense 7 63.34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest I Comus canadensis 7 63 .34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Vaccinium vitis-idaea 7 63 .34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Epilobium angustifolium 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest I Linnaea borealis 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Polygonum alaskanum 7 63 .34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Geocaulon lividum 7 63 .34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest I Pyrola secunda 7 63.34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Aconitum delphiniifolium 7 63 .34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Equisetum sp. 7 63 .34992 -143 .63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Hylocomium splendens 7 63 .34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest Salix barclayi 8 63 .35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water Chamaedaphne calyculata 8 63 .35283 -143 .63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water Carex aquatilis 8 63.35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water Eriophorum sp. 8 63 .35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water Calamagrostis canadensis 8 63 .35283 -143 .63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water Potentilla palustris 8 63 .35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water Equisetum fluviatile 8 63 .35283 -143 .63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water Populus tremuloides 9 63.35394 -143 .63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow lrissetosa 9 63.35394 -143 .63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow Calamagrostis canadensis 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow Carex lyngbyei 9 63 .35394 -143 .63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow Carexspp . 9 63 .35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow Callitriche vema 9 63 .35394 -143 .63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow Alopecurus aequalis 9 63 .35394 -143 .63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow Juncus filifonnis 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow Rorippa palustris 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow Ranunculus filifonnis 9 63 .35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow Agropyron sp . 14 63 .37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Alnus viridis ssp . crispa 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare I ground channel -sand Artemisia tilesii 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Aster sibiricus 14 63 .37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Boschniakia rossica 14 63 .37882 -1 43.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel-sand I 10 Sdentlffc Name Plot Latitude Longitude Etevation (ft) Number Habltll Calamagrostis canadensis 14 63.37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare I ground channel -sand Calamagrostis purpurascens 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Dryopteris fragrans 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare I ground channel -sand Epilobium angustifolium 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Geocaulon lividum 14 63.37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare I ground channel -sand Hylocomium splendens 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand I Leymus mollis 14 63 .37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel-sand Linnaea borealis 14 63.37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand I Lupinus nootkatensis 14 63 .37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Mertensia paniculata 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand I Moehringia lateriflora 14 63.37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Picea glauca 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Goodyera repens 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Lupinus nootkatensis 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Pi>a glauca 14 63.37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Poa pratensis 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Ribes triste 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Rosa acicularis 14 63.37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Saxifraga cespitosa 14 63.37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Shepherdia canadensis 14 63.37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Silene menziesii ssp. williamsi i 14 63.37882 -143 .60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare ground channel -sand Alnus viridis ssp . crispa 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow I Vaccinium uliginosum 15 63 .36281 -143 .63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow Betula glandulosa 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow Empetrum nigrum 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow I Ledum groenlandicum 15 63 .36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow Chamaedaphne calyculata 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow Carex aquatilis 15 63 .36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow Andromeda polifolia 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow Lycopodium annotinum 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow Carex sp. -peat fonning 15 63 .36281 -143 .63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow Rubu s chamaemorus 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow I 11 I Scientific Name Prot Latitude Longitude Elevation (ft) Habitat Number Geocaulon lividum 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow I Carex aquatilis 16 63.36144 -143.63693 2229 pond Nuphar lutea 16 63.36144 -143.63693 2229 pond Carex lyngbyei 16 63.36144 -143.63693 2229 pond Iris setosa 16 63.36144 -143.63693 2229 pond I Potamogeton zosteriformis 16 63 .36144 -143.63693 2229 pond Populus balsamifera 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Picea glauca 18 63.37563 -143 .61504 1843 open alder tall shrub I Alnus viridis ssp . crispa 18 63.37563 -143 .61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Rubus idaeus 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Populus balsamifera -sapling 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Shepherdia canadensis 18 63 .37563 -143 .61504 1843 open alder tall shrub· I Pyrola secunda 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Calamagrostis canadensis 18 63.37563 -143 .61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Calamagrostis purpurascens 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub I Artemisia tilesii 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Silene menziesii ssp. williamsii 18 63.37563 -143 .61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Aconitum delphiniifolium 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub I Poaglauca 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Mertensia paniculata 18 63.37563 -143 .61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Angelica Iucida 18 63 .37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Agropyron subsecundum 18 63.37563 -143 .61504 1843 open alder tall shrub lichen 18 63 .37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub feather moss 18 63.37563 -143 .61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Hylocomium splendens 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub Picea glauca 19 63.37489 -143 .61653 1894 open white spruce forest Rosa acicularis 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest Geocaulon lividum 19 63 .37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest Vaccinium vitis-idaea 19 63.37489 -143 .61653 1894 open white spruce forest Shepherdia canadensis 19 63.37489 -143 .61653 1894 open white spruce forest Alnus viridis ssp . crispa 19 63.37489 -143 .61653 1894 open white spruce forest Equisetum pratense 19 63 .37489 -143 .61653 1894 open white spruce forest Mertensia paniculata 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest Astragalus americanus 19 63 .37489 -143 .61653 1894 open white spruce forest Calamagrostis canadensis 19 63.37489 -143 .61653 1894 open white spruce forest Boschniakia rossica 19 63.37489 -143 .61653 1894 open white spruce forest CopUs trifolia 19 63.37489 -143 .61653 1894 open white spruce forest Goodyera repens 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest I Erigeron acris 19 63 .37489 -143 .61653 1894 open white spruce forest Epilobium angustifolium 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest Aster sibiricus 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest I Pyrola secunda 19 63 .37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest Hylocomium splendens 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest Silene menziesii ssp. williamzii 19 63 .37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest I 12 Appendix C: Project Area Plant Species List I # Sctentlftc Nane Family 1 Achillea millefolium Asteraceae I 2 Aconitum delphiniifolium Ranunculaceae 3 Agropyron sp. Poaceae 4 Agropyron subsecundum Poaceae 5 Agrostis scabra Poaceae 6 Agrostis sp. Poaceae 7 Alnus viridis ssp. crispa Betulaceae 8 Alopecurus aequalis Poaceae 9 Andromeda polifolia Ericaceae 10 Anemone parviflora Ranunculaceae 11 Anemone richardsonii Ranunculaceae 12 Angelica Iucida Apiaceae 13 Antennaria sp . Asteraceae 14 Arabis lyrata Brassicaceae 15 Arctagrostis latifolia Poaceae 16 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Ericaceae 17 Artemisia alaskana Asteraceae 18 Artemisia arctica Asteraceae I 19 Artemisia tilesii Asteraceae 20 Aster sibiricus Asteraceae 21 Astragalus alpin us Fabaceae 22 Astragalus americanus Fabaceae 23 Astragalus robbinsii ssp. harringtonii Fabaceae 24 Betula glandulosa Betulaceae 25 Betula papyrifera Betulaceae I 26 Boschniakia rossica Orobanchaceae 27 Botrychium lunaria Ophioglossaceae 28 Calamagrostis canadensis Poaceae 29 Calamagrostis inexpansa Poaceae 30 Calamagrostis lapponica Poaceae 31 Calamagrostis purpurascens Poaceae 32 Calamagrostis purpurascens ssp. purpurascens Poaceae 33 Callitriche vema Callitrichaceae 34 Campanula lasiocarpa Campanulaceae 35 Carex aquatilis Cyperaceae 36 Carex brunnescens Cyperaceae 37 Carex canescens Cyperaceae 38 Carex loliacea Cyperaceae 39 Carex magellanica Cyperaceae 40 Carex saxatilis Cyperaceae 41 Carex scirpoidea Cyperaceae 42 Carex tenuiflora Cyperaceae 43 Carex utriculata Cyperaceae 44 Cerastium sp. Caryophyllaceae 45 Chamaedaphne calyculata Ericaceae 46 Coptis trifolia Ranunculaceae 47 Comus canadensis Comaceae 48 Crepis elegans Asteraceae 13 # Scientific Name Family 49 Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda Rosaceae 50 Dryopteris fragrans Dryopteridaceae 51 Empetrum nigrum Ericaceae 52 Epilobium angustifolium Onagraceae 53 Epilobium latifolium Onagraceae 54 Equisetum arvense Equisetaceae 55 Equisetum fluviatile Equisetaceae 56 Equisetum pratense Equisetaceae 57 Equisetum scirpoides Equisetaceae I 58 Equisetum sylvaticum Equisetaceae 59 Erigeron acris Asteraceae 60 Erigeron acris ssp. polatus Asteraceae 61 Eriophorum brachyantherum Cyperaceae 62 Eriophorum vaginatum Cyperaceae 63 Festuca brachyanterum Poaceae 64 Festuca brachyphylla Poaceae 65 Festuca rubra Poaceae 66 Geocaulon lividum Santalaceae 67 Goodyera repens Orchidaceae I 68 Hedysarum mackenzii Fabaceae 69 Hierochloe alpina Poaceae 70 Hierochloe odorata Poaceae 71 lrissetosa lridaceae 72 Juncus castaneus Juncaceae 73 Juncus filiformis Juncaceae 74 Ledum groenlandicum Ericaceae 75 Leymus innovatus Poaceae 76 Linnaea borealis Caprifoliaceae 77 Lupinus arctica Fabaceae 78 Lupinus nootkatensis Fabaceae 79 Luzula parviflora Juncaceae 80 Lycopodium annotinum Lycopodiaceae 81 Lycopodium clavatum Lycopodiaceae 82 Lycopodium complanatum Lycopodiaceae 83 Mertensia paniculata Boraginaceae 84 Mertensia paniculata ssp . paniculata Boraginaceae I 85 Minuartia stricta Caryophyllaceae 86 Moehringia lateriflora Caryophyllaceae 87 Moneses uniflora Pyrolaceae I 88 Nuphar lutea Nymphaeaceae 89 Oxyria digyna Polygonaceae 90 Oxytropis campestris Fabaceae I 91 Oxytropis campestris ssp. gracilis Fabaceae 92 Oxytropis nigrescens Fabaceae 93 Pedicularis labradorica Scrophulariaceae 94 Petasites frigidus Asteraceae I 95 Petasites frigidus x hyperboreoides Asteraceae 96 Petasites hyperboreus Asteraceae 97 Phlox sibirica Polemoniaceae I 14 I # Scientific Name Family 98 Picea glauca Pinaceae 99 Picea mariana Pinaceae 100 Platanthera obtusata Orchidaceae 101 Poaalpina Poaceae 102 Poa arctica ssp. lanata Poaceae 103 Poaglauca Poaceae 104 Poa palustris Poaceae 105 Poa pratensis Poaceae 106 Polemonium acutiflorum Polemoniaceae 107 Potygonum alaskanum Polygonaceae 108 Polygonum bistorta Potygonaceae 109 Populus balsamifera Salicaceae 110 Populus tremuloides Salicaceae 111 Potamogeton zosteriformis Potamogetonaceae 112 Potentilla palustris Rosaceae 113 Pyrola asarifolia Pyrolaceae 114 Pyrola secunda Pyrolaceae 115 Ranunculus filiformis Ranunculaceae 116 Ranunculus lapponicus Ranunculaceae 117 Ribes triste Grossulariaceae 118 Rorippa palustris Brassicaceae 119 Rosa acicularis Rosaceae 120 Rubus chamaemorus Rosaceae 121 Rubus idaeus Rosaceae 122 Salix alaxensis Salicaceae 123 Salix alaxensis var. alaxensis Salicaceae 124 Salix arbusculoides Salicaceae 125 Salix barclayi Salicaceae 126 Salix bebbiana Salicaceae 127 Salix glauca Salicaceae 128 Salix pulchra Salicaceae 129 Salix scouleriana Salicaceae 130 Saxifraga cespitosa Saxifragaceae 131 Saxifraga tricuspidata Saxifragaceae 132 Sedum rosea Crassulaceae 133 Shepherdia canadensis Eleagnaceae I 134 Silene menziesii ssp . williamsii Caryophyllaceae 135 Spiraea beauverdiana Rosaceae 136 Stellaria crassifolia Caryophyllaceae I 137 Taraxacum sp. Asteraceae 138 Trientalis europaea Primulaceae 139 Trisetum spicatum Poaceae I 140 Trisetum spicatum ssp. spicatum Poaceae 141 Vaccinium oxycoccus Ericaceae 142 Vaccinium uliginosum Ericaceae 143 Vaccinium vitis-idaea Ericaceae 144 Viburnum edule Caprifoliaceae 15 Appendix D: Photographs Included as a Word file: AppendixD _plantphotos_yerrick.doc 16 Appendix E: Field Data Forms Included as an Adobe file: AppendixE_plantfieldforms_yerrick.pdf 17 -BLANK PAGE- YERRICK CREEK HYDRO ASSESSMENT GRANT AGREEMENT NO. 2195345 FINAL REPORT -WATER QUALITY & HYDROLOGY BASELINE REPORT- LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGY BASELINE STUDY YERRICK CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT, TOK, ALASKA Prepared for GRAYSTAR PACIFIC SEAFOOD, LTD. P.O Box 100506 Anchorage, AK 99510 and ALASKA POWER AND TELEPHONE CO. P .O. Box 3222 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Prepared by Trav i s/Peterson Environmental Consulting, Inc. 329 2nd Street Fa irbanks, Alaska 99701 3305 Arctic Blvd., Suite 102 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 October 2008 Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 Page ii LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 2.0 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MONITORING .............................................. 2 2.1 BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................... 2 2.2 SAMPLE LOCATIONS ........................................................................................ 13 2.3 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS ................................................................... 14 2.4 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................ 14 3.0 RESULTS .......................................................................................................................... 15 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 19 5.0 CLOSURE ......................................................................................................................... 19 6.0 LITERATURE CITED ...................................................................................................... 19 Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 2.3 Table 2.4 Table 2.5 Table 2.6 Table 2.7 Table 2.8 Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Figure 1.1 Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Figure 2.4 Figure 2.5 TABLES Yerrick Creek USGS water quality measurements .................................................. 2 Yerrick Creek USGS water quality sampling-alkalinity and hardness ................. 3 Yerrick Creek USGS water quality sampling-metals, filtered .............................. 3 Y errick Creek USGS water quality sampling -nutrients, ions, residuals .............. .4 Summary of water quality data from USGS 15476000 on the Tanana River ......... 7 Model input parameters ........................................................................................... 9 Peak flows and recurrence intervals for Y errick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 .......................................................................................................... 9 Surface water quality parameters ........................................................................... 14 Field measurements ............................................................................................... 17 Laboratory analyses ............................................................................................... 18 FIGURES Sample locations on Y errick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 ................. 1 Tanana River mean daily discharge, 1953 through 1990 ........................................ 5 Tanana River peak flow ........................................................................................... 6 Tanana River peak flow distribution ........................................................................ 6 Drainage areas for proposed impoundment sites ..................................................... 8 Surficial geologic map of the Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project area ............. .11 Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-0l October 7, 2008 Page iii LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Figure 2.6 Figure 2.7 Figure 3.1 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Key to geologic map .............................................................................................. 12 Bedrock and surficial geology ............................................................................... 13 Sample site locations .............................................................................................. 16 APPENDICES Sample Site Maps and Site Photos Analysis Methods and Laboratory Data Report Data Sheets and Field Notebook Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY 1.0 INTRODUCTION October 7, 2008 Page 1 The hydroelectric project proposed by Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) will include an impoundment in Y errick Creek just below the confluence of two tributaries with Y errick Creek (Y errick Creek Diversion Sample Site, Figure 1.1 ). A penstock will be constructed to carry water to a powerhouse to be constructed near the old pipeline corridor (Y errick Creek Discharge Sample Site). A separate diversion and powerhouse system may be constructed on Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 as well. The impoundment would be in the approximate location of Cathedral Rapids No. 1 Diversion Sample Site (Figure 1.1 ). Power generated from the hydroelectric project would power Tok and surrounding communities during summer months and possibly supply some portion of the power supply for a larger portion of the year. Figure 1.1. Sample locations on Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 (Google Earth, 2008). The purpose of the hydrology and water quality studies presented herein is to establish a preliminary baseline necessary for the permitting process. Additional baseline studies may be required (see Section 4.0 for recommended further action). Additional flow studies are being Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY October 7, 2008 Page 2 conducted by AP&T to determine the potential power output and feasibility of the hydroelectric project. 2.0 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MONITORING 2.1 BACKGROUND Hydroelectric project background The Yerrick Creek hydroelectric project, as described by AP&T is to include: ( 1) a small diversion structure with intake; (2) a 48-inch diameter, I 5,000-foot long penstock; (3) a powerhouse with the capacity of 2 to 3 MW; ( 4) a 0.5-mile long buried and 22-mile overhead transmission line to connect an existing power grid; and (5) appurtenant facilities. Hydrology background from nearby USGS stations Water quality data were collected from Yerrick Creek at USGS station 632257143353500, which is located in Yerrick Creek at the highway crossing (63°22'57" N; 143°35'35" W; NAD27). Data were collected between 1949 and 1956. No flow data are available, but a total of 28 physical and chemical parameters were recorded, most of which are summarized in tables below (Table 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4; USGS, 2008). Table 2.1. Yerrick Creek USGS water quality measurements (USGS, 2008). Temperature Specific pH Carbon Color Conductance Dioxide oc PtCo units, filtered 7/21/1949 7 6.6 14 6/22/1951 164 7 8.2 10 6/4/1952 109 6.8 9.6 25 2/17/1953 0 254 7.5 4.5 5 5/13/1953 0 130 7.1 5.6 25 5/18/1955 107 7 6.1 50 9/20/1955 161 7.8 1.5 5 511111956 105 7 6.4 Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 3 Table 2.2. Y errick Creek USGS water quality sampling -alkalinity and hardness (USGS, 2008). Acid neutralizing bicarbonate hardness non-carbonate capacity hardness mg/L as CaC03 mg/L mg/L as mg/L as CaC03 CaC03 7/21/1949 29 35 39 10 6/22/1951 42 51 65 23 6/4/1952 31 38 50 19 2/17/1953 72 88 120 49 5/13/1953 36 44 60 24 5/18/1955 31 38 46 15 9/2011955 50 61 68 18 5/1111956 33 40 45 12 Table 2.3. Yerrick Creek USGS water quality sampling metals, filtered (USGS, 2008). Calcium Sodium Potassium Iron mg/L, mg/L, mg/L, mg/L, Jlg/L, filtered filtered filtered filtered unfiltered 7/2111949 6/22/1951 21 3.1 20 6/4/1952 15 3.1 1.8 2.1 70 211711953 39 5.6 2.8 4.3 10 5/13/1953 19 3.1 1.2 2.3 40 5118/1955 15 2.2 1.2 2.4 170 9/20/1955 22 3.2 2.3 2.8 0 5/ll/1956 14 2.5 1.6 2 Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page4 Table 2.4. Yerrick Creek USGS water quality sampling -nutrients, ions, and residuals (USGS, 2008). Nitrate Sulfate Chloride Fluoride Silica Residue, sum Residue of constituents mg/L as mg/L, mg/L, mg/L, mg/L mg/L, filtered tons/acre- N, filtered filtered filtered filtered foot, filtered filtered 7/2111949 0.2 15 0.5 4.3 6/22/1951 0.2 27 0.5 0.2 7.3 88 0.12 6/4/1952 0.38 20 0.1 5.7 69 0.09 2/17/1953 0.34 58 0.5 0.1 8.4 164 0.22 5/13/1953 0.25 25 0.5 0.2 3.9 78 0.11 5/18/1955 0.47 20 0.5 0 4.4 66 0.09 9/2011955 0.16 26 0 0 11 98 0.13 5/11/1956 17 58 0.08 Data are also available from USGS station 15476000 on the Tanana River just downstream of the confluence of Cathedral Rapids Creek# 1 with the Tanana River. The drainage area sampled by this station is 8,550 square miles. Data were collected at this site from 1953 through 1990, including discharge, peak stream-flow, and water quality information. The record of daily mean discharge is shown in Figure 2.1. Peak flows are shown in Figure 2.2 and the distribution of peak flows among the summer months is shown in Figure 2.3 (USGS, 2008). Nine of the ten highest daily discharge measurements for USGS 154760000 occurred between July 19 1h and 2ih in 1988. Of the 50 highest daily discharge measurements, 27 occurred in July, 18 occurred in August, and 5 occurred in June, suggesting that summer rains cause the highest flows rather than snowmelt and breakup. If, however, the month of July 1988 is removed from the record, four of the top ten daily discharges occurred in August and three occurred in each June and July. Likewise, excepting July 1988, 29 of the 50 highest daily discharges occurred in August, 14 occurred in July, and 7 occurred in June. Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 Page5 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY ~ • tl i a ~ a c I :I Discharge USGS 15476000: Tanana River 50000 45000 40000 ' 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 ~w~~~~~~~~~,~~~~~L,~v~~U~~~~~,~L ~~~L~ 0 ~------------------------------------------------------~--~~ ~$'~$~~-#,J'~~~<f>~J-., ~"'--~-~' ~<~'./..~-'~" ~~~ .. <~''o,.,~~~~ff~.#'~~~~~~.i'~$""~$"' ~of'./,.~~--~.j'J-tf>~,_,_~.,'o~<f>~.#'i'~' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~#~~~~~~~~~~~#~~~~~~~~~~~ Figure 2.1. Tanana River mean daily discharge, 1953 through 1990 (USGS, 2008). Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Peak flow USGS 15476000: Tana na River October 7, 2008 Page6 ~ .----------------------------------------------------.-.-- e: 40000 • ..... • b • • • • ... .. • ._.. • • • • • • -30000 ~~~~·r+----~--~~~~--~~----~1-~~~~--~~~~ .. . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . ~ 20000 ~------------------------~-----------------------------i 10000 ~------------------------------------------------------- 0 ~----r-----~----~----+-----+-----+-----+-----~----~- 5/1/1955 4/30/1957 4/29/1961 4/28/1965 4/27/1969 4/26/197S 4/25/1977 4/24/1981 4/25/1985 4/22/1989 Figure 2.2. Tanana River peak flow (USGS, 2008). Distribution of Peak Flows USGS 15476000: Tanana River June •July 55" • August Figure 2.3. Tanana River peak flow distribution (USGS, 2008). Water quality data for USGS 15476000 on the Tanana River include 101 parameters. A portion of the data is presented below and the remainder is available from the USGS at http://alaska.usgs.gov/science/water/index.php. Data collected only once or several times were not included in the table below. Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 7 Table 2.5. Summary of water quality data from USGS 15476000 on the Tanana River (USGS, 2008). Parameter, units Maximum Minimum Count Mean Median Temperature, oc 16.5 0 105 6.3 6.5 Color, filtered, PtCo units 60 0 203 10.4 5 Specific Conductance, !J.Sicm 448 160 222 233.0 220 pH 8.4 6.6 212 7.7 7.7 Carbon Dioxide, mg/L 68 0.7 212 5.4 3.7 Acid neutralizing capacity, mg/L as CaC03 203 61 212 98.3 92 Bicarbonate, mg/L 247 74 212 119.7 112 Nitrate, mg/L as Nitrogen 0.77 0 206 0.17 0.14 Phosphate, mg/L 0.16 0 52 0.019 0.01 Hardness, mg/L as CaC03 230 72 207 110.4 100 Non-carbonate Hardness, mg/L as CaC03 30 0 207 12.2 12 Calcium, filtered, mg/L 62 20 207 32.8 31 Magnesium, filtered, mg/L 19 2.9 207 6.97 6.2 Sodium, filtered, mg/L 11 3.3 208 5.84 5.65 Potassium, filtered, mg/L 3.1 0.1 208 1.48 1.5 Chloride, filtered, mg!L 7 0.4 208 3.05 3 Sulfate, filtered, mg/L 45 11 208 21.2 20 Fluoride, filtered, mg/L 1.2 0 205 0.148 0.1 Silica, filtered, mg/L 44 7.2 208 11.8 11 Residue on evaporation, filtered, mg/L 205 108 28 132.6 128 Residue, sum of constituents, filtered, mg/L 310 95 207 143.1 136 Residue, dissolved, tons per day 10500 666 206 4769.2 4680 Residue, filtered, tons per acre foot 0.42 0.13 207 0.196 0.19 Orthophosphate, unfiltered, mg/L as 0.05 0 52 0.006 0 phosphorous Nitrate, filtered, mg!L 3.4 0 206 0.76 0.6 Manganese, unfiltered, Jlg/L 100 0 140 1.86 0 Iron, unfiltered, J..Lg/L 620 0 192 64.9 30 Suspended sediment, mg/L 3460 15 106 976.9 908 Suspended sediment, tons/day 326000 81 104 52024 28300 USGS station 15475997 is located on Cathedral Rapids Creek No. l, but no data are available from this station. This station is located on Cathedral Rapids Creek No. l approximately 0.4 miles above (south of) the highway crossing (63°22'45"N; 143°44'00"W; NAD27) and has a drainage area of 8.83 square miles (USGS, 2008). Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311 -01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY October 7, 2008 Page 8 Detectable levels of antimony, arsenic, nitrates/nitrites, barium, chromium, and fluoride have been found in public drinking water systems in the Tok basin (ADEC, 2008). The only inorganic contaminant exceedance of maximum contaminant levels for drinking water has been for nitrates (ADEC, 2008). Peak Flow Estimates Y errick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No . 1 are within region 6 as described by USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4188 (Curran et al., 2003). As such, the equations for peak stream-flow presented by Curran et al. (2003) include drainage area, area oflakes and ponds (storage), and area of forest. Drainage areas are shown in Figure 2.4. Model input parameters for each stream are shown in Table 2 .6. Peak flows are calculated for the proposed diversion points in each drainage. Peak flows for each recurrence interval are presented in Table 2.7. - -~· ~ ... --....... _--~.£ Figure 2.4. Drainage areas for proposed impoundment sites . Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Table 2.6. Model input parameters Drainage Area (square miles) Area of lakes and ponds {percent) Area of forest (percent) Y errick Creek Cathedral Rapids Creek No.1 30 6 0 0 0 0 October 7, 2008 Page9 Table 2.7. Peak flows and recurrence intervals for Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1. Recurrence Y errick Creek Peak Cathedral Rapids Creek # 1 Interval (yr) Streamflow (CF/S) Peak Streamflow (CF/S) 2 1102 262 5 1575 402 10 1916 508 25 2373 652 50 2728 767 100 3093 887 200 3468 1012 500 3985 1186 The model of Curran et al. (2003) was used to estimate peak flows in the upper and lower gage sites of Mack (1987, 1988) at Rhoads-Granite Creek, which is approximately 7 miles east of Donnelly Dome. Input values were a basin area of 32.2 square miles, zero percent storage (lakes and ponds), and 0.5 percent forest for the upper gage site and 81.2 square miles of drainage basin, 5.5 percent storage, and 42 percent forest for the gaging site at the road. Drainage area and percentage forested were extracted from Mack ( 1987, 1988) and percentage lakes and ponds was selected so as to minimize the difference from Mack's output (loss to groundwater and distributaries are complexities not accounted for in the model of Curran et al. 2003). Output was compared to the model output produced by Mack (1987, 1988) and the average absolute value of the percentage errors (assuming Mack's model output is the best estimate of actual) was approximately 25 percent for each gaging site. The data from Mack ( 1987, 1988) was not used to refine or calibrate the model of Curran et al. (2003) for the Yerrick Creek or Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 because Mack's output was model output based on limited data and a complex watershed. Since region 6, the region for which the Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY October 7, 2008 Page 10 model equations were designed, is quite large, more local data for refinement of the model to a smaller region would be desirable and the Mack studies may provide some significant considerations which may be applicable at Y errick and Cathedral Rapids Creeks. Some conditions from Rhoads-Granite Creek which may be found at Y errick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. l are: ( 1) significant loss to groundwater due to permeable glacial deposits; (2) abandoned channels which may serve as distributaries at high water; and (3) seasonal modeling complexity based on snowmelt and frost conditions. Local geology According to Carrara (2004), the map units that occur in the Yerrick Creek drainage include Qac, Qco, Ata, Qfa, Qty, Qto, Qrg, and Qls (Figures 2.5, 2.6). Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 drains an area that includes map units Qac, Qfc, Qto, Qfa, Qrg, and Qta. These map units include alluvial, colluvial, glacial, and periglacial deposits. Biotite gneiss and schist are among the rock types found in the surface geology of the area. Carrara (2004) notes that areas underlain by the Qac unit are subject to floods and debris flows. The Yerrick Creek bridge abutment was damaged by flooding in August 1997 (Carrara, 2004; Figure 2.6). With regards to map unit Qto, Carrara (2004) notes that in the Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 areas the unit forms hummocky end moraines extending out from the base of the Alaska Range. Bedrock and surficial geology units mapped by Holmes (1965) within the Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 drainages (Figure 2. 7) include Qc (colluvium mixtures of rubble, talus, alluvium, and loess), Qag (flood-plain gravelly alluvium), Qt (talus-angular boulders), Qdgl (moraine deposits from Donnelly glaciations), Qdm (moraine deposits from Delta glaciations), Qg (fan-apron and alluvial-fan deposits-mostly gravel; gravel from local sources), pCb (Birch Creek Schist schist, gneiss, quartzite, and amphibolites), Qdf (glacio- fluvial deposits), and Qts (stream-terrace deposits mostly silt and sand). The Birch Creek Schist is the predominant bedrock geologic form in the study area as mapped by Holmes (1965). The Precambrian or early Precambrian Birch Creek Schist is a thick group extensive in area resulting from one or more periods of high grade regional metamorphism (Holmes, 1965). Schist (gray quartz-mica; chloritic; and graphitic), gneiss (gray or light brown biotite; gray hornblende; and hornblende-biotite), quartzite (white to light brown or gray or greenish gray), and amphibolites (black) are the main rock types in the mapped area (Holmes, 1965). Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY ... -~.~ ......... ..._.,. ---~ .................... ................... _.... --· ..._ .......................... _.....,_, ___ ..,..__ ~==~· :;:::._-.. -~~ ~ ~..,...,.....,, .... , .. ~ --............ .._..~ .... ---~--- October 7, 2008 Page 11 ,..... ....... .,. .. c:-.. ... ... .......... .,.u ........ , ... ,~ ...... J ........ I!I_ .... ................... ..... ---==--=::..-.. -...................... ... o ... SURFICIAL GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE TANACROSS B-6 QUADRANGLE, EAST-CENTRAL ALASKA .., Paul E. Canan. Figure 2.5. Surficial geologic map of the Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project area (Carrara, 2004) Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT : HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY _ _. ....... ...,. ~ _,.._ .... _ .... __ ....,._., __ _ "-tto---......------ftow ........ ol ....,. --"""'-'-~!.>go~. Yomdl. and CoollodroiR.opdoC- Noo.llftd21 eo.-..-bor""""*SO-IOOcrn.,hofQIII<-.gol --ond"'"**lnond--.g-ol .. ~~~ IO.SOcmN:I< ~ ... ~--_..,...,dorlwd...,.tlw...,.. ..._.,....,._.,poo'lb,l-lloodoonddobrlo-;dwiooval<n..,... I mo...._. l4olrbltiojp~(IOVRE.t41wnd U...~ lonnoo..,.,.ol-ll«<.~booAdooar-I•"""" .. JOOm-Rdof ..._ .... ...,...2 ... Ana..-lorlmby--,.q,a.,_Mdlo<ldobrlo -In"'-1997, hNoy ,_., Alooloal!.lgo auod llocdng llong----.domogod t1w boldQo-""" V...nct< CNIIl. Mil dooodlht AlooU ~ Expoood -..-..2m.-no<cxpoood.---to .. ~ F• ..,_ .,-., ._ ,....._ ..t W.Pioiooo<ooof-..f-dopoollod _.,bv -.u _ _. __ llong_ --~ol AIMb 11or1oo u ... -~ol .. -oopooot,.~poc>r\lo:nodk> ""'-'"d. datl_...tcobtllypol!liloond ~<oltit!P"''-•polo· .._,(IOVRWll.-.wnd-~ ... rDMiti--'""-Aioo--ol-..wndoo--wndob<USao-. Ab>glruo oiAIBoallorlgo.-... ~"""-dod •• -poloWa ond-... h ·--"'-.. u.v--........ t .... ---IIMgo.cloob.,._oi_.,OO.........,_ond_ lnplo< .. ..,. <-b<Udnydobots .... ""--..I m ... la<4vlnddoo- 10collftd--U...to,.q,aoobcchlloodoonddobots- Expoood_..,...IO~n._.-_llong_oiA!nb r-:=-1 llorlgo30m ~ c--.._...,_...,.,..,..,-. R..p(lw.c-...t._ ............. ._ ..,..,.,_ciopoolwd""'""'by ~-ond- -..... -ol-llorlgo IJnl..,.,..ol ~ ....... odod .. _.,. -.,_..,_ .. ____ __,_~..-end~ -~ ..... -olgN-.-12.SVW411opo.._,(IOVR6/31.Giy ......... __ ~ ... _..... __ .... _.,.._ol _.,_ .. _.,..,.,..._. __ ·--"' -dw .. _.,. ....... I.,..,-.. In !*n ... l """"""boutlory __ .._..,...lm.._ Lx~ouorloonb\l .. -aoso"""'-· ~r.== =--6/~ ~ :::..,..,;:.~o::.ft!:""' Expoood--.. 6m; -......1.-.....lloc"'-30m Figure 2.6. Key to geologic map (Figure 2.5). eo..o.. ........ [!!] ~-.-....-......... -.........on~-ond...,.. -Alloko!Yngo .... ~.....-ol pooot,. .. .olftod. ,_.., ___ _ ....,.,.....,.~-pool.-.-oodrnoonlyb,-Cioots_.....,., _ _._..,..._ol __ ond_. ,.~ ... ...,..., .... --.......... rnoon~y • ....-IIOVRE.131wnd ln.,.._ ___ 'lldtlwbfl>w.._ob..alm high UNIIIrldrtonlllo...-ID<It-.tlobdo ..... ond_ dopooo• •""' • fon (Qflll, .... l<llo).-glociiiiQiy!. end ID<It.glocwr IOrg) cS.polllh 10o IINIIO thaw •I m.p ~ ~. tN. \d: a ~ to • Wide rangr ol ~-Nov""""• ~ .. ,...,..dopch. Exp:.eJ--., S n>. -od.....,...-20m In tlw V......T..,....Uplond . ..., .. """""apoood bul -"' _.., ,,._ ol """""-end,_.., wflllflod.loc.lv-·nchu.t*y..,.., wnd. end~-_,.,. ~•dtplhobtloo>SOcm --"''"'""'""""""'"'"".,.. -OOkiOm -T ..... .,._.-.,.ondlooo--~lllr1ll!l<d,poorlyo:nod. _., _,_ _"11 .. --pol!lilooiO lorgoboufoimclo~ .. -ol-llopaond<llll ........... ~,..,...lly-'-<1• ..... ob..a2 ..... ---.. .._ ____ pdr ... __ ..... do .... ~""'"'""_'II ___ In"""' ___ .,.olclopooo•--......-~floowogo tolor'!lboufolm Dftwrlocool..,._on_llchmc._,lrdcOIIngdwyhowboon-lot•-IM•-.1-Uppor-ol.-row•""f'ooiNpOM end,.,, ... .,.~-IJnl-loc.ly lndudt""""-end -..tocol UdllprorwiOroddol~--...,.. ~·- --20mon- -t....wldo..._fWo<_ ........ ~.---ondlow ._ ol-how,_.,., onoyollondiWc dopool> ~ oxk -..--.--orct--..otva,..,J97811Jn1 ~ol-.~-ol----lftd,_ ....... _ .............. ..._ .. -lt.r>gt-.. --'2m"'--· S...lftdlilbologyof-ond""""'drpend orttlwoorlooabodoxlllftd..-... _,_.,..._ la<4vn:btn __ ,.nd .... (Qio)..._. ~, __ ....,... __ bomlnoiadb,l--Tho --7 9-hquob "'-....., 3. 2002.11 -.. '---''""'"'" .. "'-··-~end """""'*'!' ..... !Horp end Ollwn, 200311ftd --._..s. -·----,,_,.,."' r ....... -on~~ PomJF~rW c,....,...,... S2 1cm ... of---. ... ronoc-11-4~ -....""""-.-r.dto ........ 30 .. Qly - .. October 7, 2008 Page 12 Clloclol..._ v._ .. ., Alo ... R..g. gloc--....,._ o....., --~ ...... -.-.-~.~-~·---•......,....... 6V 7131-q, '* ond .....s....,. ..,.-~~yg~o<..,. hooding .. ~ .. AlookoiiMgo .._ llorowiY glotlllllon Cloots-"'-~ ~·0----and-.ond-.......... ond -orcloc--.. ....... clool ........ lm .. -u ... ~oca~o owriu>b,l 10-20 anol--ollljp~IIOVRE./41'* ondtonlly ... ln----...... --~<nd .. high. 2S m • ._ pond end boiJ' In -c--. -ol- ~ . ...,...,,.,...~<nd...,_,...,~pondoondbogo. -...... 20 .. of local,..., Odwr g~oc~o .... -Roovo .. mop .... .._ llornoll{ glnctll>on-""' .,..,_....,.., 10-bryoc>d .... --._,r ..... -. ~, ........ ~--~~~or~goon~~ _ .... -ol 1<-..d ......... ~-IJnllocalo """""'--10«>1. lobiOio).ond ID<Itgloclor IOrglclopoobond- _., ....._..., Ago olllornoll{glnctll>on .. ~..,......... .. ""' .. :.=-=.;.~ru;:..,~;:~~.::c--ond Ololn .... -.R..g. ..__,_--Dolle....-..~ ... _,..,...., ..-od. _ _...,, pobbt,r coltitilf-' woh • polr.yrlow (SV 7/3110 lljp~ IIOVR E./41andv Mil end....,_.,. dopooMd llong ......., fNf9ln o1 ._, r ...... -. ~o, g~oc~o,...,. ""'""' -~·· -!Yngor1rrlngllolro~ O..""""'ol~ond ~~'-*·-~ond-lftd-pol!lilooorcl_ond __ t.::dclttr.;. dwl.wgn iS.bcM 1 m1nd&atrwur ~(Nf"*-b/•mucb•l•ol --oliojp...........,._IJOVRE.t41MIIand-.lo}MII l'blhol __ __.,norlholmop _____ -...s. ~-ln"""'-mmop-. -Gioc"'dopoooodo ..,.......,_...,....._.., __ 30mobouo.,..roflond wrloco ln_ .... roSI,.,C-.~Ro!*IC-Noo.lond2. ore! V<ni<&CNIIl...,. lotmo~<nd....--.lngOOifrao-ol .u.u ~!.>go l.oaoll;ln<ble-on~~-... (Ocol, end--.. ~!llrl n. ....... ~..-.. ... 10,_,.~- "-"" con.ltllon """'-..._.,. Ddoo-...-.y tlovtlond tc.-. 2003lll>oo.lghl "'-..,.., ... --..130 end 188 k y 11110 -ond01htro.l9871 ~~-"""30"'"''*" ,.,....,..,..._ Roell~-... ..,....IHolo<_ end .... --}-Poorly-pooot,. -'"'l.lorgo._..,ID<It,__llypoll!lfodol-ond~ .. ...,..~•-olcuquooonAiookaiiMgo ~ .. ,.,.,.,..,..,... ...... ==--~~~:= .. ~~=-oxk glocoon t..... OIH!I '"""-'llopa. • """"• 30m high......,..-~ • 1<9< ol ,._ n-'"""-! dot><•-lol>ooo,lndoo:_.._ .......,bv .-........,""'" ... ""..,.. ......... u-'""''*"' .... ,~groc~o -.. <p lob lOla) dopoolb u...r -~oca~o r.cw. .... 10111..._.. - ol-.._ ... ~-.ng ....... """ .,_..,._ ..... -.. -..~..,..oi.....,..,...._,_.Smdoop~auodlly nwb>gol ~"" In"'-2002. • coliopof pll., • rockglodor ,_ lwod ol 'Vmdc. C.... .., 4-7 mIn dt.n.t:cr ..:I conllilnld aii'NIII p:Jnd .wral nw11n boboo.orfl<o oiiD<Itgllaor. Tho pll--bv-............. 10 mboyondlbopo_lhtl_•-"lor9<f-ol-•. Ao_.... """""'ono Oldt ol t1w p1 c..-ol Z-3 mol,_..,_, pooot,.-• ...... ~--·~ ...... <ON ..... ~ ......... -.... pond. Somo clopoon. ""ood 30m., INc...._ Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Figure 2.7. Bedrock and surficial geology (Holmes, 1965). 2.2 SAMPLE LOCATIONS October 7, 2008 Page 13 The two streams directly impacted by the Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project are Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1. Yerrick Creek has the larger drainage basin, which includes approximately eight tributaries identifiable on the 1 :63,360 scale USGS map. Two small streams merge to form the headwaters of Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1. Both Cathedral Rapids Creek Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY October 7, 2008 Page 14 No. 1 and Y errick Creek drain to the north into the Tanana River. The proposed diversions, as of September 2008, would discharge into Yerrick Creek downstream (north) of the old pipeline corridor) and at a separate downstream location on Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1. 2.3 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS The water quality parameters measured are listed in Table 2.8. The physical and chemical parameters include alkalinity, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, hardness (calculated), pH, settleable solids, total dissolved solids, total suspended solids, temperature, and turbidity. Two other general parameters commonly measured are chloride and fluoride. Chloride is necessary for performing an ion balance. Fluoride is included because it is required by the ADEC. The nutrient parameters include nitrate, phosphate, and sulfate. The remaining parameters in Table 2.8 are metals and trace elements. Hardness is calculated from measured parameters. Analysis of all parameters will be on unfiltered samples, so the results are total, not dissolved concentrations Table 2.8. Surface water quality parameters. Laboratory Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Field Flow Alkalinity Chloride Chromium Copper Fluoride Iron pH Nitrate 2.4 METHODOLOGY Magnesium Manganese Mercury Potassium Selenium Silver Conductivity Color Sodium Sulfate Zinc Temperature Settleable Solids Total Dissolved Solids Total Suspended Solids Weak Acid Dissociable Cyanide Total Cyanide Turbidity Dissolved Oxygen Field and laboratory water quality parameters were measured in accordance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency manual Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes or Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. Open channel flow was measured using Modell205 Price type "mini" current meter. In-situ measurements of conductivity, temperature, pH and dissolved oxygen were accomplished with YSI 63 and YSI 95 meters. Color, turbidity, and alkalinity were measured in the field within 24 hours of sample collection using the Hach DR890 Colorimeter, Hach 2100P Turbidimeter, and Hach digital titrator. A table showing analytes and methods is included in Appendix B. Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-0 I LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY October 7, 2008 Page 15 SGS Environmental Services, Inc. was the analytical laboratory selected for the monitoring program. SGS Environmental Services, Inc. is an ADEC Certified Chemistry Lab. Duplicate samples were not collected as part of this sampling effort. Laboratory quality assurance and quality control measures and results are shown in the laboratory data report in Appendix B. 3.0 RESULTS Measurements and samples were taken at 3 locations. The sample sites, shown in Figure 3.1, are located at: • The approximate diversion site for Y errick Creek, which is also the transducer location as of September 2008; • The approximate diversion site for Cathedral Rapids Creek No. I; and • A downstream site near the old pipeline corridor's intersection with Yerrick Creek, which was intended to be at the discharge or re-entry site for water diverted from Y errick Creek. The discharge point will actually be downstream of the sample site. The Yerrick Creek diversion site is also the location where AP&T personnel have conducted flow studies and are presently recording stage data on a continuous basis with a permanently installed pressure transducer. The data collected by AP&T is not included in this report, but should be comparable based on location. The Yerrick Creek downstream site is also in immediate vicinity of field work conducted by Denali-The Alaska Gas Pipeline personnel. Data from their efforts, if made available, should be comparable based on location. Physical and chemical measurements made in the field are presented in Table 3 .1. Laboratory analysis results are shown in Table 3.2. Hardness (Table 3.2) was calculated from the calcium and magnesium concentrations. Iron, zinc, and manganese could have been included, but were all either not detected, or detected at levels below the practical quantitation limit and are therefore minor contributors to total hardness. Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 are clear, oligotrophic (low nutrient levels), and well oxygenated. The moderately high pH for surface water suggests contact with some kind of carbonate rock within the drainage. Laboratory results confirm that Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 have minimal levels of most dissolved substances. Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY October 7 , 2008 Page 16 Laboratory quality assurance and quality control information were reviewed. No problems were identified that would affect data quality. For additional details, see the case narrative on page 2 of the laboratory data report in Appendix B. NAnONAL GEOGRAPHIC Figure 3.1. Sample site locations. 0 .0 0.5 0 .0 0 .5 1.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 mles 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 km WGS64 143'3 1.0 00' W z 0 0 C> z 0 0 C> lNrr v 22Y,0 10/13/00 Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-0 1 October 7, 2008 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 17 Table 3.1. Field measurements. Parameter Y errick Creek Y errick Creek Cathedral Rapids Diversion Downstream Site Creek Diversion Latitude 63° 20.639' N 63° 22.442' 63° 21.090' N Longitude 143° 37.715' w 143° 36.769 143°43.151' w Elevation (feet) 2272 1856 2455 Width (feet) 44 51.5 18.5 Discharge (CF/S) 110 99 27 Temperature CC) 4.5 6.2 5.0 pH 8.01 8.14 8.18 Specific Conductance (J.tS) 260 277 384 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 16.02 18.51 1 12.39 Settleable Solids (mLIL) < 0.1 < 0.1 <0.1 Alkalinity (mg/L as CaC03) 57.6 64.0 80.4 Color (PtCo units) 4 6 0 Turbidity (NTU) 0.91 0.89 0.70 Nitrate-N (mg/L) 0.01 0.03 0.01 Nitrite-N (mg/L) 0.002 0.002 0.002 Orthophosphate (mg/L) 0.18 0.19 0.21 Whitewater~ supersaturated. A Iaska Power and Telephone, 1311-0 1 October 7, 2008 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 18 Table 3.2. Laboratory analyses. Parameter Units Y errick Creek Y errick Creek Cathedral Rapids Diversion Downstream Site Creek Diversion Sample ID AP&T 01 AP&T03 AP&T02 Sample Date/Time 9/03/08 12:27 9/03/08 17:50 9/03/08 15:05 Antimony ug/L 0.621 J 0.454 J <0.310 Arsenic ug/L < 1.50 < 1.50 < 1.50 Barium ug/L 32.2 31.8 44.1 Beryllium ug/L < 0.500 < 0.500 < 0.500 Cadmium ug/L < 0.600 < 0.600 < 0.600 Calcium ug/L 43500 42700 57600 Chromium ug/L < 1.20 < 1.20 < 1.20 Copper ug/L < 1.80 < 1.80 < 1.80 Iron ug/L <310 <310 < 310 Lead ug/L < 0.310 < 0.310 < 0.310 Magnesium ug/L 7880 7790 12900 Manganese ug/L 0.859 J 0.907 J 1.08 J Mercury ug/L < 0.0620 < 0.0620 < 0.0620 Potassium ug/L 3290 3330 3660 Selenium ug/L < 0.620 < 0.620 < 0.620 Silver ug/L < 0.620 < 0.620 < 0.620 Sodium ug/L 2400 2460 3250 Zinc ug/L < 7.80 <7.80 < 7.80 Chloride mg/L 0.0880 J < 0.0310 0.0800 J Fluoride mg/L 0.0750 J 0.0870 J 0.049 J Sulfate mg/L 81.8 81.0 119 Total Cyanide mg/L 0.0022 J < 0.0015 0.0017 J Weak Acid Dissociable Cyanide mg/L < 0.0015 < 0.0015 < 0.0015 Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 183 176 253 Total Suspended Solids mg/L 1.00 0.400 J 0.700 Hardness (calc.: Ca, Mg) mg/L* 141 139 197 *as CaC03 J == analyte was detected below the practical quantitation limit Analytes that were not detected are reported as < the minimum detection limit. Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-0 I LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONs· October 7, 2008 Page 19 As there are no chemical abnormalities that would warrant further investigation of the streams to be impacted by the hydroelectric project and flow data has been collected regularly by AP&T personnel, no additional hydrology field work should be required before permitting or construction. 5.0 CLOSURE TPECI holds all information acquired during this investigation in the strictest confidence with AP&T. We will not release any information to any party other than Graystar Pacific Seafoods unless AP&T has notified us of their approval to do so. 6.0 LITERATURE CITED Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC). 2008. Basin Fact Sheet for Tok. Accessed online at http://www.dec.state.ak.us/eh/docs/dw/DWP/Tok.pdf on 7-0ct-2008. Carrara, P.E. 2004. Surficial Geologic Map of the Tanacross B-6 Quadrangle, East-Central Alaska. Curran, J.H., Meyer, D.F., and Tasker, G.D. 2003. Estimating the magnitude and frequency of peak streamflows for ungaged sites and streams in Alaska and conterminous basins in Canada. USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4188. Holmes, G.W. 1965. Geologic reconnaissance along the Alaska Highway Delta River to Tok Junction, Alaska. Geological Survey Bulletin 1181-H. Mack, S.F. 1987. Peak flows at the Alaska Highway from the Rhoads-Granite Creek drainages, Mt. Hayes Quadrangle, Alaska. Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys. Public-data File 87-5. Mack, S.F. 1988. Peak flows from Rhoads-Granite Creek (1987), Mt. Hayes Quadrangle, Alaska. Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys. Public-data File 88- 10. United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2008. National Water Information System. Accessed at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis on 30-July-2008. Sites: 632257143353500, 15476000, and 15475997. APPENDIX A SAMPLE SITE MAPS SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Yerrick Creek Map NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC Cathedral Rapids Creek No.1 Map 0.0 0.5 LO rnles ~----~~--~~--~ 0.0 0.5 LO LS 1m z 0 0 q rl N 0 ('I") \() D NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC Y errick Creek Diversion Site Map 1 4 3°38.000' w WGS84 143°36.000' W z 0 0 q rl N 0 ('I") \() WGS84143°36 .000' W 0.1-o....,.......,..__.......,r--r ......... -Oo~-.S.....,....."r-........__~--o.~--'1.0 mHes TNr ~~ o.o 0.5 1.0 1.5 km V" 09/08 /08 Y errick Creek Diversion Site Photos Upper Left: aerial view Upper Right: site view Middle Left: upstream view Middle Right: downstream view Lower Left: sediment view z 0 0 ~ .... N 0 (Y) <.0 Cathedral Rapids Creek No.1 Diversion Site Map NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 WGS84 143°42.000' W WGS84 1 4 3 °42 .000' W 1.0 1.0 miles 1.5 l<m z 0 0 ~ .... N 0 (Y) <.0 TN r ~MN v 22V 09/08/08 Upper Left: aerial view Upper Right: site view Middle Left: upstream view Middle Right: downstream view Lower Left: sediment view z 0 0 0 (V) N 0 (V) \0 z 0 0 0 N N 0 (V) \0 • Yerrick Creek Downstream Site Map WGSB4 1 43°35 .000' W '0 I Yerri:k Creek Downstre~ I I l 63 22.442 N; 143 36.169 w I z 0 0 0 (V) N 0 (V) \0 z 0 0 0 N N 0 (V) \0 Map createdl wittf ©2006 ~tional Ge9gr aphic 143°38.000' W 143°37.000' W WGSB4143°35 .000' W D NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC 0.1-o...,..... ___ ,.........,~....___o.J.-.5~..,_..,...__,.--~....._.....,...___.1.0 m~ TN r ~~~ o.o 0 .5 1.0 1.5 km V' 10/13/0B Y errick Creek Downstream Site Photos Upper Left: aerial view Upper Right: site view Middle Left: upstream view Middle Right: downstream view Lower Left: sediment view APPENDIXB ANALYSIS METHODS LABORATORY DATA REPORT (SGS WO# 1084964) -BLANK PAGE- YERRICK CREEK HYDRO ASSESSMENT GRANT AGREEMENT NO. 2195345 FINAL REPORT -FISH REPORT- 10 June 2009 To: APT -Glen Martin From: GRA YST AR-Steve Grabacki Subject: Report of Fisheries Fieldwork, Yerrick Creek, May-June 2009 I conducted three sampling sessions on Yerrick Creek--19-20 May 2009, 27-29 May 2009, and 7 June 2009. For the first two sessions, the study area included lower Yerrick Creek, from roughly Y2-mile above the proposed powerhouse site downstream to the Tanana River. The main purpose of the sampling was to compare spawning aggregations of Arctic grayling above vs. below the proposed powerhouse site. Sampling methods included visual observation with polarized lenses, angling with spin and fly terminal tackle, underwater video, and 3 styles of fish traps (small wire-mesh minnow traps, medium collapsible minnow traps with larger throat, and larger collapsible traps) baited with commercially cured salmon roe. On the third sampling session, we focused on the creek downstream of the highway. The purpose of this sampling was to observe and capture Arctic grayling in lower Y errick Creek, and to compare grayling's use of the creek for spring spawning by adults vs. summer feeding by juveniles. Sampling methods included visual observation with polarized lenses, angling with spin and fly terminal tackle, and herding fish through pools into a bag seine. General Habitat Description For most of its length, Yerrick Creek is a cascading stream with fast flow and boulder substrate. The stream generally comprises 1-3 channels, within a wide dynamic (scoured) perimeter. Apparent fish habitat consists of widely spaced, very small ( ~ 10-foot long) pools behind large boulders or logjams. Roughly 1 mile before the creek joins the Tanana River, the habitat is significantly different. Flow is much slower, and the habitat is composed mostly of sand. In this "delta" area, there are 3 main channels, several smaller channels which leave and rejoin the larger channels, and at least one large area ("city block" in size) through which the creek flows more-or-less overland, in very shallow channels among dense spruce trees. In between these two reaches is a transition zone, where flow is intermediate in strength and substrate is small rocks & large gravel. This transition zone is only a few hundred yards long. Complicating this situation is the fact that the water flowing in the creek is not always continuous with the river. Because of the porous substrate, the water sometimes disappears from the surface, and flows underground. First Sampling Session During the field trip of 19-20 May 2009, Yerrick Creek did not flow into (connect to) the Tanana River. Water flow appeared strongest at the uppermost sampling station (above the powerhouse site), and water was flowing in only 1 channel under the highway bridge. On 19 May, the water disappeared approximately %-mile downstream of the bridge, within the rocky streambed. On 20 May, the water had reached about 0.9 miles farther downstream, but disappeared in the sandy substrate. In the sandy delta area, there were a few very small pools with very little flow, and mostly dry substrate. At the bridge, water temperature was 10.8°C at about 1630 on 18 May 5.1°Cat 1030on 19May 1.7°C at 0915 on 20 May this range of daily temperature variation was observed on both sampling trips. (Arctic grayling are thought to spawn at 4°C). The 3 channels of Y errick Creek drain into a backwater slough of the Tanana River. Although there was no surface water flow from the creek to the river, there was water in that slough. Water temperature was 10.5°C. We observed approximately 12 grayling in a tight school. The fish appeared to be roughly 250-300 mm in length. They were easily spooked, and did not respond to spinners or flies. We also observed 1 round whitefish, of approximately 300 mm in length, dozens of small (~20 mm) grayling, and hundreds of tiny (<10 mm) fish (species unknown). We captured no fish in the fish traps. Above the powerhouse site on 19-20 May, we captured 1 Dolly Varden (225 mm FL) in a trap, but observed no other fishes in this area. Second Sampling Session During the field trip of 27-29 May 2009, the flow in the creek was much greater, and the water appeared to be more turbid, than it had been a week earlier. At the bridge, the water was flowing in 2 channels (vs. one 1 channel, a week before), and was 5.1 oc at 1010 on 27 May 4.1 oc at 0600 on 28 May, after a cool night 7.1°C at 1240 on 28 May 2.8°C at 0610 on 29 May, after a rainy night 3.5°C at 0925 on 29 May 5.3°C at 1455 on 29 May Yerrick Creek was flowing into the Tanana River (the slough where we had earlier sampled) through its 3 main channels. Just above those confluences, the creek was braided through the forest, with several small channels and overland flows (among the trees). In these small channels, we observed 2 individual grayling (the fish were widely separated, not aggregated). We observed no fish in the lower creek (below the bridge), on either the rocky or sandy substrates, but we did capture 2 slimy sculpin in a trap. Water temperature in the lower creek was 6.8°C at 1145 on 28 May 4.5°C at 1135 on 29 May Above the powerhouse site, we captured 7 Dolly Varden in traps, but observed no other fishes, with any sampling method. Water temperature in this area was~ 7.5°C at 1325 on 28 May 3.7°C at 1330 on 29 May During this second field trip, we found some of the fish traps in different positions from where we had set them. They appeared to have been moved to the shore or (in one case) out of the water by an overnight flood event. To summarize the first two samplings --For grayling to spawn in Yerrick Creek, 2 factors are necessary-water temperature of 4-5°C, and continuity of water flow from the creek to the river. As expected, we observed a school of grayling in the Tanana River very near the mouth of Y errick Creek, before the creek had reached the river. Those fish were apparently waiting to enter the creek. After the creek had reached the river, we observed grayling in the sandy-bottom, slower-flowing "delta" channels of the creek, but no grayling in the rocky-bottom, faster-flowing cascading parts of the creek. Also, we did not observe aggregations of grayling anywhere in Y errick Creek. Third Sampling Session We sampled Yerrick Creek on 7 June 2009. The weather was cool and rainy in the morning, but turned mostly sunny and warm in the afternoon. Water was clear, and 5.4C at 1100. The purpose ofthis sampling was to observe and capture Arctic grayling in lower Yerrick Creek, and to compare grayling's use of the creek for spring spawning by adults vs. summer feeding by juveniles. Sampling methods included: visual observation with polarized lenses, angling with spin and fly gear, and herding fish downstream through pools into a bag seine, which was stretched across the creek. We observed no fishes in the fast flow I boulder substrate zone, or in the slow flow I sand substrate zone. In the transition zone, we captured 1 grayling, and observed 4 individual (not aggregated) grayling: 2 of these were roughly 200 rnm long, and 2 fish were approximately 100 rnm long. The captured grayling was 208 rnm fork length, and did not appear to be in either a pre-spawning or post-spawning condition. I took scale samples from the captured grayling, and released it in apparent good condition. I drove to Delta, and met with ADFG's Fronty Parker. We discussed my findings, and we pressed and read the sample of scales that I took from the fish I caught on Sunday (6/7). That grayling was 2 or 3 years old, definitely juvenile, not a spawning adult. Based on my sampling in early September 2008, and on these three sampling sessions in May- June 2009, a picture of grayling use of Y errick Creek seems to have emerged. Grayling appear to use parts of Yerrick Creek (below and within the bypass reach) for summer feeding, on an opportunistic basis. While I cannot prove that grayling do not spawn in Yerrick Creek, I have found no evidence to support it -- * The creek did not connect to the river at the expected time of grayling spawning. * I observed no aggregations of grayling anywhere in Yerrick Creek; all grayling observed in the creek in May-June 2009 appeared to be individual fish. * I observed no adult-size grayling, and the largest grayling observed in June 2009 (the 2-or 3-year-old) did not appear to be in either a pre-spawning or post-spawning condition. -BLANK PAGE- REPORT GRAVSTAR FISHERIES BASELINE STUDY for a PROPOSED HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT on YERRICK CREEK near TOK,ALASKA prepared for- ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE Company Port Townsend, Washington by - Stephen T. Grabacki, FP-C GRA YST AR Pacific Seafood, Ltd. Anchorage, Alaska (907) 272-5600 graystar@alaska.net October 2008 1 1 --INTRODUCTION ALASKA POWER AND TELEPHONE COMPANY (AP&T) has proposed to install a hydroelectric project on Y errick Creek, near Tok, Alaska. This document is the report of the first year of a fisheries baseline study, in support of that project. The study area included Yerrick Creek (YER) and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 (CR1). These streams are small tributaries of the upper Tanana River, in eastern interior Alaska. The fish and fisheries of the upper Tanana River drainage are studied and managed by the Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADFG, or "the department"). Neither YER nor CR1 are listed in ADFG's Catalog of Waters Important for the Spawning, Rearing or Migration of Anadromous Fishes and its associated Atlas --http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/SARR/awc/ --although the Tanana River itself is listed. YER and CR1 lie within ADFG's Upper Tanana Management Area (UTMA), which is within ADFG's fishery management region Ill, also known as the Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim (A YK) region (Figure 1). The UTMA encompasses Delta Junction, Tok, and several smaller communities (Figure 2). Northwestern/ Arctic Yukon Management Area Region Ill Lower Tanana Management Area Management Area ...... Figure 1 --Map of ADFG's Sport Fish Regions. and the Six Region III Management Areas source: Parker 2006 2 Figure 2 --Map of the Upper Tanana Management Area within the Tanana River Drainage source: Parker 2006 Several fish species are found in the UTMA - Common Name chinook (king) salmon coho (silver) salmon chum (keta) salmon Arctic grayling burbot lake trout Dolly Varden round whitefish least cisco humpback whitefish northern pike 3 Scientific Name Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Oncorhynchus kisutch Oncorhynchus keta Thymallus arcticus Lota Iota Salvelinus namaycush Salvelinus malma Coregonus cylindraceum Coregonus sardinella Coregonus pidschian Esox lucius ADFG's Division of Sport Fish publishes an annual Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River Drainage. These reports focus on the more abundant sport- caught fishes: coho salmon, Arctic grayling, northern pike, lake trout, and burbot. Dolly Varden char are not explicitly studied. The most recent available such report (as of October 2008) is Parker 2006. ADFG has stocked rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Arctic char (Salvelinus a/pinus), coho salmon, Arctic grayling, and lake trout in selected waters of the Upper Tanana area (Parker 2006). In general, there is less sport fishing effort in the UTMA, as compared to the Lower Tanana Management Area (Parker 2006); for example, in 2005 -- * 33% of anglers in the Tanana River drainage fished in UTMA * 30% of fishing trips in the Tanana River drainage were in UTMA * 28% of fishing effort in the Tanana River drainage was in UTMA * 39% of fish harvest in the Tanana River drainage was in UTMA In 2005, Arctic grayling comprised over half of the sport fish catch, but less than one-third of the sport fish harvest (fish caught and retained) in UTMA (Parker 2006) Species Catch % ofCatchd Harvest % of Harveste %Harvested Salmon *chinook 25 0.03 25 0.15 100.0 * cohoa 2,830 2.97 267 1.61 9.4 * cohob 2,973 3.12 1,002 6.02 33.7 *chum 686 0.72 0 0.0 0.0 Non-Salmon * rainbow trout 17,355 18.20 6,336 38.10 36.5 * lake trout 3,651 3.83 569 3.42 15.6 * charc 1,453 1.52 463 2.78 31.8 * Arctic grayling 55,943 58.66 5,242 31.52 9.4 * northern pike 8,299 8.70 1,646 9.90 19.8 *whitefish 455 0.48 60 0.36 30.5 * burbot 1,370 1.44 1,021 6.14 74.8 * sheefish 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 * other fishes 321 0.34 0 0.0 0.0 TOTAL 95,361 16,631 17.4 a anadromous salmon b landlocked coho & Chinook salmon c-includes Arctic char & Dolly Varden d-the species' percent of UTMA total catch, calculated from Table 7 in Parker 2006 e the species' percent ofUTMA total harvest, calculated from Table 7 in Parker 2006 4 The preceding table shows that 1.52% of the catch, and 2.78% of the harvest, were composed of "char", which includes both wild Dolly Varden and stocked Arctic char. Because of their wide distribution and comparatively high abundance, Arctic grayling are important to both sport and subsistence harvesters. As such, they have been extensively studied by ADFG scientists for decades. In the Tanana River drainage, grayling exhibit a wide range of age and size at maturity (Clark 1992). Similar studies have not been conducted for Dolly Varden in the upper Tanana drainage, but anecdotal observations indicate that Dolly Varden in that area may reach maturity and spawn at small sizes (< 200 mm fork length) (J.F. Parker, ADFG, personal communication, 2008), and even while exhibiting so-called "juvenile" characteristics such as parr marks (A.E. Rosenberger, University of Alaska Fairbanks, School of Fisheries & Ocean Sciences, personal communication, 2008). ADFG has conducted comprehensive fish surveys of the streams of the middle and lower Tanana River drainage, including clear, clear/glacial, glacial, humic/glacial, and humic creeks and rivers, and found no Dolly Varden in any of those habitats (Durst 2001, Hemming & Morris 1999). Arctic grayling conduct seasonal migrations among overwintering, spawning, and summer feeding habitats, and seasonal changes in water temperature are generally considered to be the triggers for those movements (Ridder 1995, Ridder 1994, and several previous studies cited in those reports. Similar studies have not been conducted for Dolly Varden in the upper Tanana drainage, but anecdotal reports indicate that there may be year-round resident populations of Dolly Varden in the upper reaches of Yerrick Creek (J.F. Parker, ADFG, personal communication, 2008). In 1988, 367 Tok households were surveyed to determine their subsistence use of fish, game, and plant resources. Most households used subsistence-caught salmon (79.4%) and freshwater fish (71.4%). In the freshwater fish category, the predominant subsistence species were grayling (55.7%), burbot (40.2%), rainbow trout (35.0%), large pike (27.2%), whitefish (25.9%), and lake trout (22.9%). Only 0.9% of Tok households reported using subsistence-caught Dolly Varden. The report does not identify where these various fish species were harvested, but because the Tok data set includes marine fish (27.5%), such as halibut, it appears that Tok residents harvest subsistence fisheries resources far from home, and not only in the local Tok area (McMillan & Cuccarese 1988). In conclusion, Arctic grayling are the most commonly sport-caught fish in the UTMA, and the second-most common sport-harvested species. Grayling are also taken by subsistence harvesters. Dolly Varden are comparatively uncommon in the UTMA, in both the sport and subsistence harvests, and were not reported by either of two ADFG scientific investigations. Finally, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the Alaska Department of Fish & Game's Division of Fisheries Rehabilitation, Enhancement, & Development (FRED) investigated possible sites for salmon hatcheries throughout Alaska. In a survey of Yerrick Creek in February 1980, Raymond ( 1980) reported- 5 *the Upper Tanana River Valley has many ingredients for a good hatchery site: year-round highway access, high-gradient streams, and hardly any salmon *most of the creeks in this area dry up in winter * there was no evidence of running water at the highway bridge * there was evidence of running water at two sites: 1 mile and 2 miles upstream of the highway * water temperature was too low for a flow-through hatchery * there was plenty of hydropower available 2 --METHODS YER is characterized by steep gradient, cascading flows, and large boulder substrate. The channels appear to be dynamic, as judged by cleanliness of the substrate in and near the water: very little periphyton and almost no terrestrial vegetation. There are few pools in YER that appear capable of providing habitat for fishes. Those pools are small, in the range of 10-20 ft long. CRl is much smaller and steeper than YER. It is essentially one long, cascading run, with strong current and large boulder substrate. Small pools are apparent only at very low flows. For example, in June (lower flow than in September), a pool of roughly 10ft wide x 20ft long x 2ft deep was observed at WP 037: 63°2l.595'N 143°43.005'W elevation: 2,239 ft but this pool could not be located in early September, when flow was greater. Similarly, a few smaller pools were observed in June, but by early September, the dynamic channel appeared to have shifted so that they were no longer apparent. During sampling visits in summer 2008, the wetted perimeters of both streams were much smaller (narrower) than their respective dynamic channels (area of clean boulders). The fish sampling stations on YER and CRl were selected to bracket the area of interest to AP&T's proposed project (Figure 3) * Station UYC: upper Yerrick Creek, well above the hydropower impoundment site * Station UMY: middle/upper Yerrick Creek, above the impoundment site *Station YCI: Yerrick Creek, in the general vicinity of the proposed impoundment *Station MYC: middle Yerrick Creek, between the impoundment and the powerhouse * Station L YC: lower Yerrick Creek, downstream of the proposed powerhouse *Station CRI: Cathedral Rapids Creek #1, in the vicinity of the proposed impoundment The purpose of this study was to characterize the seasonal presence and distribution of fishes in the two streams. 6 NATlONAL GEOGRAPHIC 0 I 2 I ·-~ol ~pk L ~ hkpLol ~ ~ Lp~ hi I ···~··· ... Figure 3 --Sampling Sites for the 2008 Fisheries Baseline Study The two creeks were visited on foot and examined, but not sampled, 6-7 June 2008. Fish habitat was generally characterized, and the locations of possible fish-bearing pools were recorded. Sampling, supported by helicopter, was conducted - * 3-4 September 2008 (YER and CRI ); this sampling was originally scheduled for early August, in order to sample fish in their summer habitats, but because of unusually heavy and prolonged rains and flooding in the Tok area, the trip was postponed twice until early September; nevertheless, the weather and water were warm and summer-like, but the water flow was still noticeably higher than in June 7 * 29-30 September 2008 (YER only); this sampling was intended to sample fish immediately before freeze-up, in order to understand the species winter habitats; the water flows were lower than in early September Sampling methods included -- * electrofisher + bag seine (the electrofisher was used to herd the fish into the bag seine, rather than stunning them); it was difficult to maintain the seine in the current at some sites, and impossible at other sites; also, this was more effective in late September, because flow was less than in early September; where it was not possible to maintain the bag seine in strong current, electrofishing was performed as best as possible along the sides of the stream and in small backwater areas; in most cases, electrofishing was performed by two people: one bearing the backpack unit, and the other using a dipnet * minnow traps baited with commercially cured salmon eggs and left to soak overnight in pools, where pools could be found; fewer pools were visible during early September (higher flow) vs. in Late September (lower flow), so that traps were not set at aLL sites in early September GPS coordinates, as displayed on a brand new Garmin GPS unit, do not appear to match the apparent location as displayed in Figure 3, which is drawn from a brand new version of the TOPO! mapping software. It is not clear if the error is within the GPS unit, the software, or in the interaction between the two. In this report, the GPS readings are listed in Appendix A, and the apparent location is shown in Figure 3. 3 --RESULTS Fish sampling was conducted under ADFG Fish Resource Permit SF2008-l72. A report of those activities was submitted to ADFG on 27 October 2008, and is attached to this report as Appendix A. Two species of fish were captured: Dolly Varden (DV) and Arctic grayling (AG). All fishes were measured and released alive, in apparent good condition. The results of the 2008 fish sampling were YERRICK CREEK-3-4 September 2008 Station UYC ** 1 minnow trap +electro fish -40 yds of stream DV (5): 127, 122, 120, 127, 117 mm fork length (FL) 8 Station YCI ** 2 minnow traps + electrofish ~ 160 yds of stream DV (4): 135, 110, 102, 115 mmFL AG (3 possible males): 220, 235, 190 mm FL AG (1 possible female): 207 mm FL AG (7 undetermined sex): 165, 150, 148, 190, 148, 162, 148 mm FL Station MYC * not possible to set bag seine: current too strong, too wide in run, too deep & fast *not possible to set minnow trap: current too strong, no slow water * water still high & fast> 10 days after latest rain; thalweg depth 3.5-4.0 ft * attempted electro fishing along ~50 yards of shoreline: sighted 1 fish ~ 150mm, species unknown StationLYC * set of seine not very good; current very strong * electrofish ~35 yards downstream to seine: no fish observed * no other fish-able sites nearby or anywhere below old pipeline corridor * no minnow trap set here YERRICK CREEK-29-30 September 2008 Station UYC ** 1 minnow trap DV (3): 175,126,145 mmFL Station UMY ** 1 minnow trap+ electrofish ~ 25 yds of stream DV (4): 125, 147, 159, 142 mm FL + 1 DV sighted Station YCI ** 2 minnow traps+ electrofish -40 yds of stream DV (14): 124, 131, 167, 133, 131, 137, 136, 128, 125, 123, 141, 105, 130, 80 mm FL DV (1 possible gravid female?): 149 mm FL 9 StationMYC * 1 minnow trap + electro fish -100 yds of stream DV (2): 122,98 mm FL DV (1 w/ white-edged fins, possible spawning male?): 164 mm FL AG (1): 162 mmFL + sighted 3 small fish, each <100m FL Station LYC * 1 minnow trap + electrofish -100 yds of stream AG (1): 79 mm FL CATHEDRAL RAPIDS CREEK #1 -3-4 September 2008 Station CRJ * electrofished -0. 1 mile of CRI, roughly near the approximate impound site no fish sighted or captured *no minnow trap set (no pools) 4 CONCLUSIONS Yerrick Creek is used by Dolly Varden and Arctic grayling, in occasional small pools separated by long sections of cascading runs. Dolly Varden were captured in the middle and upper reaches of the creek (including the proposed impoundment area), while Arctic grayling were captured in the middle and lower sections. In this sampling, Arctic grayling were captured less often than were Dolly Varden. Dolly Varden were commonly encountered in both late summer and late fall (immediately before freeze-up), which suggests that they are year-round residents, including over winter. [Inferring the over-winter habitat of Dolly Varden based on pre-freeze-up surveys and sampling is used by ADFG biologists in other Alaska streams (Scanlon 2008).] The capture of a possibly gravid female and possibly spawning male suggests that Dolly Varden might spawn in the middle reaches of this stream. This apparent distribution is consistent with general anecdotal observations of these species in UTMA- * dwarf Dolly Varden are thought to be year-round residents of upper Y errick Creek * Arctic grayling migrate seasonally into and out of lower Y errick Creek 10 No fish were captured or sighted in Cathedral Rapids Creek # 1, and fish habitat appears to be very scarce. It is not clear to what extent, if any, this cascading stream is used by either fish species. 5 --RECOMMENDATIONS The 2008 fisheries sampling has provided useful characterizations of fish presence and distribution in Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1, in late summer, late fall, and by inference, over-winter. These data, when supplemented by a sampling in late spring or early summer of 2009, will yield a picture of yearly habitat use of these two streams. This future sampling should be performed at a very low water stage, to allow for thorough electrofishing at all stations. 6 ···~ LITERATURE CITED Clark, R.A. 1992. Age and Size at Maturity of Arctic Grayling in Selected Waters of the Tanana Drainage. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Division of Sport Fish; Anchorage. Fishery Manuscript 92-5. Durst, J.D. 2001. Fish Habitats and Use in the Tanana Floodplain Near Big Delta, Alaska, 1999-2000. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Habitat & Restoration Division; Juneau. Technical Report 01-05. Hemming, C.R., & W.A. Morris. 1999. Fish Habitat Investigations in the Tanana River Watershed, 1997. Alaska Department ofFish & Game; Habitat & Restoration Division; Juneau. Technical Report 99-l. McMillan, P.O., & S.V. Cuccarese. 1988. Alaska Over-the-horizon Backscatter Radar System: Characteristics of Contemporary Subsistence Use Patterns in the Copper River Basin and Upper Tanana Area; Volume 1: Synthesis. Draft Report. Prepared for: Hart Crowser Inc. and Arctic Environmental Information & Data Center, in cooperation with Alaska Department of Fish & Game (Anchorage & Fairbanks) and U.S. National Park Service. Parker, J.F. 2007a. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River Drainage in 2002. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial Fisheries; Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 07-03. Parker, J.F. 2007b. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River Drainage in 2003. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial Fisheries; Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 07-05. 11 Parker, J.F. 2006. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River Drainage in 2005. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Divisions of Sport Fish and Commercial Fisheries; Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 06-67. Raymond, J. 1980. AYK Hatchery Site Surveys, and Miscellaneous Chum Spawning Observations. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Division of Fisheries Rehabilitation, Enhancement, & Development; Fairbanks. Ridder, W.P. 1995. Movements of Radio-Tagged Arctic Grayling in the Tok River Drainage. Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Division of Sport Fish. Fishery Data Series 95-36. Ridder, W.P. 1994. Arctic Grayling Investigations in the Tok River Drainage During 1993. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Division of Sport Fish; Anchorage. Fishery Data Series 94-19. Scanlon, B. 2008. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Northwest I North Slope Management Area, 2006. Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 08-35. 12 APPENDIX A Report (or FRP SF2008-172 13 Report of Activities and Collections 27 October 2008 Fish Resource Permit SF2008-172 Stephen T. Grabacki, FP-C; 907-272-5600; graystar@alaska.net Location: Yerrick Creek (YER) and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 (CRl) The two creeks were examined but not sampled 6-7 June 2008. Fish habitat was generally characterized, and the GPS locations of possible fish-bearing pools were recorded. Sampling was conducted 3-4 September 2008 (YER and CRl), and 29-30 September 2008 (YER only), with electrofisher +bag seine (the electrofisher was used to herd the fish into the bag seine, rather than stunning them), and minnow traps baited with commercially cured salmon eggs and left to soak overnight. GPS coordinates, as displayed on Grabacki's brand new Garmin GPS unit, do not appear to match the apparent location as displayed on the attached map. In this report, the GPS readings are listed in the text, and the apparent location is shown on the map. (1) RESULTS FROM 3-4 SEPTEMBER 2008 YERRlCK CREEK (YER) Upper YER, above fork, western channel, well above impoundment, 04SEP08 63°18.204'N 143°35.387'W elevation: 2,830 ft Minnow trap set 03SEP08@1915, retrieved 04SEP08@1030 DV (1): 127 mmFL Electrofished 2 channels * single channel, ~40 yards * Y -shaped channel, ~80 yards DV(4): 122,120,127, 117mmFL All fish in apparent good condition, released alive 14 Pool at/near impoundment site (above Mike's camp), 03SEP08 Waypoint 009, elevation: 2,284 ft 63°20.43S'N 143°37.8S2'W Electrofished pool & run, ~30 yards- DV (1): 11S mmFL AG (3 possible males): 220, 23S, 190 mmFL AG (1 possible female): 207 mmFL AG (S undetermined sex): ISO, 148, 190, 148, 162, 148 mmFL All fishes in apparent good condition, and released alive Minnow trap set 1430, retrieved 09SS (04SEP08) DV (2): 110, 102 mmFL Fish in apparent good condition, released alive Pool below impoundment site, 03SEP08 Waypoint 008, elevation: 2,263 ft 63°20.S89'N 143°37.684'W Electrofished 2 channels * main channel, ~80 yards: no fish captured or sighted * side channel, ~so yards: 1 fish sighted + 2 fish captured Arctic grayling (AG) 16Smm fork length (FL), apparent good condition, released alive Dolly Varden (DV) 13S mmFL, apparent good condition, released alive (DV bore parr marks) Minnow trap set 1300, retrieved 0930 (04SEP08): no catch Middle YER, near big cut in hill on west bank Waypoint 024 on Mike Warner's GPS: 63°21.411 'N 143°37.852'W elevation: 2,100 ft Not possible to set bag seine: current too strong, too wide in run, too deep & fast below pool Water still high> 10 days after latest rain; thalweg depth 3.5-4.0 ft Attempted electrofishing along ~so yards of shoreline: sighted 1 fish ~ lSOmm, species unknown Same conditions downstream -0.5 mile Might be able to work this site in lower flow Lower YER, below highway bridge 63°23.062'N 143°35.S38'W elevation: 1,971 ft Set bag seine below a slight pool Set of seine not very good; current very strong; lead line not on bottom in some places My assistant was the anchor for one end of the seine Electrofished -35 yards downstream to seine: no fish observed No other fish-able sites nearby or anywhere below old pipeline corridor Observation: In June, flow at upper YER was greater than at lower YER. In September, there was stronger flow at mid-and lower YER sites. Judging by wet marks on the rocks, the water level was dropping. 15 Y errick Creek is characterized by steep gradient, cascading flows, and large boulder substrate. The channels appear to be dynamic, as judged by cleanliness of the substrate in and near the water: very little periphyton and almost no terrestrial vegetation. There are few pools in YER that appear capable of providing habitat for fishes. Those pools are small, in the range of 10 ft long. Besides the pools that we sampled, other small pools were observed (in June) at * 63°22.308'N 143°37.007'W elevation: 1,847 ft * 63°22.123'N l43°37.104'W elevation: not recorded * 63°21.572'N 143°37.608'W elevation: 2,050 ft (pool near spur of hill) * 63°21.582'N 143°37.638'W elevation: 1,930 ft * 63°21.257'N 143o37.913'W elevation: 2,220 ft (pool near scree slope; 1 AG seen in June) CATHEDRAL RAPIDS CREEK #1 (CRt) Station CRJ Electro fished ~0.1 mile of CR 1, roughly near the approximate impound site *from WP 012: 63°21.086'N 143°43.153'W elevation: 2,495 ft *to WP 011: 63°21.175'N 143°43.163'W elevation: 2,442 ft No fish sighted or captured No minnow trap set (no pools) Note: this site was not really a pool or pools; it was a reach of the stream near the impound site, where we could reasonably set the bag seine and conduct electrofishing. CRI is much smaller and steeper than YER. It is essentially one long, cascading run, with strong current and large boulder substrate. In June (lower flow than in September), a pool of roughly 10ft wide x 20ft long x 2ft deep was observed at WP 037: 63°21.595'N 143°43.005'W elevation: 2,239 ft but this pool could not be located in early September. Similarly, a few smaller pools were observed in June, but by early September, the dynamic channel appeared to have shifted so that they were no longer apparent 16 (2) RESULTS FROM 29-30 SEPTEMBER 2008 YERRlCK CREEK (YER) Station UYC Upper YER Waypoint 026, elevation: 2,811 ft 63° 18.193'N 143°35.406'W Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1415; retrieved 30SEP08@1320 -- DV (3): 175, 126, 145 mmFL All fish in apparent good condition, released alive Station UMY Upper YER, below WP 026 Waypoint 029, elevation: 2,548 ft 63° 19.37l'N 143°36.591'W Nice pool at big dead spruce and snag Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1440; retrieved 30SEP08@ 1235 DV (3): 147, 159, 142 mrn FL All fish in apparent good condition, released alive. Electro fished 2 pools, ~25 linear yards of stream-- DV (1): 125 mrn FL + 1 DV sighted Fish in apparent good condition, released alive Station YCI Pools near impoundment site Waypoint 030, elevation: 2,242 ft 63° 20.606'N 143°37.686'W 2 minnow traps set 29SEP08@1500, retrieved 30SEP08@1115- DV (12): 149*, 133, 131, 137, 136, 128, 125, 123, 141, 105, 130, 80 mm FL * possible gravid female? All fish in apparent good condition, released alive. Electro fished pools near impoundment site, ~25 linear yards of stream - no fish sighted or captured Electro fished pool at fork of 3 channels -100 yards above impoundment site Waypoint 032, elevation: 2,204 ft 63° 20.521 'N 143° 37.773'W DV (3): 124, 131, 167 mm FL All fish in apparent good condition, released alive 17 Station MYC Middle YER, near big spur of hill ("razorback") on west bank Waypoint 031, elevation: 2,026 ft 63° 2l.623'N 143° 37.565'W Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1550, retrieved 30SEP08@1400 DV (3): 164*, 122,98 mmFL * white-edged fins, possible spawning male? Electro fished ~ 100 linear yards of stream, in various small pools AG (1): 162 mmFL +sighted 3 small fish, each <100m FL Fish in apparent good condition, released alive Station LYC Lower YER, below highway bridge Waypoint 025, elevation: 1,717 ft 63° 22.878'N 143°36.438'W Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1350, retrieved 30SEP08@1000- *no catch Electrofished ~I OOyards of stream AG (1): 79 mm FL 18 -BLANK PAGE- YERRICK CREEK HYDRO ASSESSMENT GRANT AGREEMENT NO. 2195345 FINAL REPORT -DESIGN DIAGRAMS- l i I ~ I ! t 1 I I I () ACCDI R<Wl AND ~PENSTOCK f ~ ""' .--· J r .• .,. JU . . • ., ;. ""'"' ,.__ _Aft_.. YERRICK CREEK ~ f ~LDC ..llr.ll U U d . I ,, " HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ~ r LDC AlASKA powER & ' -""' GENERAL PLAN ~ ,!L .,.,. _ ., .... .,... .......,. TELEPHONE COMPANY DEEP OJT ALTERNAnVE ~uli ~TE O£:!DIII'IDO l DIVERSION, -w.s. EL 221s ~ """'""'" ......... rr I 0« t NJPR · otfa(t ll: ,._. lDC 1DC 150' BRIDGE ACCESS ROAD AND BURIED PC::I>.STOCh. APPROX . LENGTH 16,200 F APJ ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY POWERHOUSE, TURB INE It_ EL 1710 1,500 KW CAPACITY u liJ d T 'TT 1 ... !§lXI' YERRICK CREEK HYDROELECTR IC PROJECT PENS'TOCI< AUGNMENT UPPER YAUEY OP110N SHEzr NU~ iii'-..,._,... WCAI.E: ,.-IDD' -· LDC -LDC If I o. 1..,.. · CtGIIID: APJ ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE COMPANY u u d .. T ''" '--GENERAL PLAN MOOSE CAMP AL lERNA liVE