HomeMy WebLinkAboutBradley Lake Salmon Monitoring Plan 1986•RECORD COPY •
RElURN TO BRADLEY O&M FlU:
~~
Alaska Power :Authority '
SALMON MONITORING PLAN
BRADLEY LAKE
HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
PROJECT NO. P-8221-000
PREPARED BY
STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION
ANCHORAGE , ALASKA
June 1986
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SALMON MONITORING PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Section Title Page No.
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 PURPOSE 1-1
1.2 FERC LICENSE COMPLIANCE 1-1
1.3 RESOURCE AGENCY CONSULTATION 1-2
2.0 MITIGATION PLAN 2-1
2.1 EXCERPTS FROM MITIGATION PLAN;
SECTIONS 8.2 AND 8.3 2-1
8.2 LOWER BRADLEY RIVER SALMON OUT-MIGRATION
AND ESCAPEMENT 2-1
8.2.1 Fisheries Monitoring 2-1
8.2.2 Program Objectives and Approach 2-2
8.2.3 Program Schedule 2-3
8.3 POWERHOUSE TAILRACE 2-3
2.2 SCOPE OF WORK REFINEMENTS 2-4
3.0 SALMON MONITORING PLAN 3-1
3. 1 GENERAL 3-1
3.2 SALMON ESCAPEMENT SURVEY SCOPE OF WORK 3-2
3. 2. 1 Introduction 3-2
3.2.2 Location of Sampling 3-3
3.2.3 Methods and Materials 3-4
3.2.3.1 Hoop Net Sampling 3-4
3.2.3.2 Beach Seining 3-5
3.2.3.3 Electroshocking 3-6
3.2.3.4 Carcass Count Survey 3-6
3.2.3.5 Other Methods 3-7
3.2.4 Sampling Duration and Effort 3-8
3.2.5 Current Data Collection 3-8
3.2.6 Reporting 3-8
3·3 TAILRACE ATTRACTION STUDY SCOPE OF WORK 3-8
3.3.1 Introduction 3-8
3.3.2 Study Methodology 3-9
3.3.2.1 Attraction to Tailrace Area 3-9
3.3.2.2 Dispersion from the Tailrace to other
Streams 3-11
3.3.3 Duration and Effort 3-12
3.3.4 Concurrent Data Collection 3-13
3.3.5 Reporting 3-13
4.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 4-1
5.0 AGENCY CONSULTATION 5-1
2-755-JJ
SECTION 1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of the Salmon Monitoring Plan is to document the
development of studies which will provide a yearly index to abundance
of salmon populations in the lower Bradley River and monitor attraction
of salmon to the powerhouse tailrace. The Salmon Monitoring Plan also
presents implementation schedules for pre-and post-operational
studies, and documents consultation with resource agencies.
1.2 FERC LICENSE COMPLIANCE
The Salmon Monitoring Plan is designed to comply with Article 34 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order Issuing License to
the Alaska Power Authority for the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project,
Project No. 8221-000.
Article 34 states that the "Licensee, after consultation with the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
and the National Marine Fisheries Service, shall prepare plans and
implementation schedules for pre-and post-operational studies to
monitor fish populations in the lower Bradley River. Within 6 months
fran the date of issuance of this license, Licensee shall file the
study plan with the Commission, with copies to the agencies consulted.
The Commission reserves the right to require modifications to the study
plan. Licensee shall conduct the monitoring studies and submit
progress reports annually to the Commission and agencies consulted.
Within 6 months after completing the post-operational studies, Licensee
shall file a final report on the studies, and shall file for Commission
approval, with copies to the agencies consulted, Licensee's recommenda-
tions for changes in project operations or facilities that are
necessary to protect and maintain the fish resources of the lower
Bradley River. Documentation of agency consultation on the
recommendations shall be included in the filing."
2-755-JJ 1-1
1.3 RESOURCE AGENCY CONSULTATION
The Alaska Power Authority has developed the present design of the
Salmon Monitoring Plan in conjuction with resource agencies. Specific
methods proposed in this study plan were designed using input from
fishery experts, results from previous studies on the Bradley River,
and agency consultation. Resource agencies consulted were the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National
Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and
Alaska Department of Natural Resources. Correspondence documenting
resource agency consultation and chronological development of study
designs is presented in Section 5.0.
2-755-JJ 1-2
SECTION 2.0
MITIGATION PLAN
2.0 MITIGATION PLAN
The Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project Mitigation Plan (Alaska Power
Authority 1985) filed with FERC in November 1985 outlined objectives
and the general approach of a program to monitor salmon populations in
the lower Bradley River and salmon attaction to the powerhouse
tailrace. The original objectives of the monitoring program proposed
in the Mitigation Plan included enumeration of salmon fry out-migra-
tion, emergence timing and duration of use of the lower Bradley River,
and baseline escapement in high and low years both before and after
construction of the project. The original objective of the post-opera-
tional monitoring of salmon attraction to the powerhouse tailrace as
outlined in the Mitigation Plan was to determine potential impact on
populations of the lower Bradley River and other nearby streams.
2.1 EXCERPTS FROM MITIGATION PLAN; SECTIONS 8.2 AND 8.3
Sections 8.2 and 8.3 of the Mitigation Plan outlined and discussed the
original objectives and methods to be used for the lower Bradley River
salmon monitoring and powerhouse tailrace studies, respect! vely. For
ease of reference, these sections are provided below as quoted
excerpts.
8.2 LOWER BRADLEY RIVER SALMON OUT-MIGRATION AND ESCAPEMENT
8.2.1 Fisheries Monitoring
The lower Bradley River salmon fisheries will be enumerated in
order to evaluate Project impacts. Mitigation measures will
include monitoring during construction and post-construction. The
monitoring program will be designed to meet the following
object! ves:
o Establish baseline salmon fry out-migration.
o Establish emergence timing and duration of use of the lower
Bradley River by salmon fry.
2-755-JJ 2-1
o Establish baseline salmon escapement for returns in high and
low years.
o Establish salmon escapement under Project operation in order
to determine if mitigation goals are achieved.
o Determine impact of Project on emergence timing and duration
of use of lower Bradley River.
Since pink salmon have a two-year life cycle, the returns on even
and odd years are two genetically distinct populations. Typical-
ly, these populations have unequal returns with one year having
higher returns for Kachemak Bay pink salmon; odd year returns have
been daninant historically.
8.2.2 Program Objectives and Approach
The study consists of a multi-year sampling program to enumerate
out-migrating fry and returning adult pink salmon in the Bradley
River. During each year of the program, field data will be
collected during the pink salmon spawning run in the Bradley River
mainstem. A combination of tagging and recapture techniques will
be used to estimate yearly pink salmon escapement in the river.
During each year of the study, field data will be collected during
the pink salmon out-migration and spawning run in the Bradley
River. Previous studies suggest this likely occurs in April/May
and in August, respectively. Under pre-project conditions, the
natural river characteristics (i.e., high flows, turbid waters,
and tidal influence) limit the effective use of many standard
methods used to enumerate out-migrating and returning salmon in
the Bradley River mainstem (i.e., visual surveys, fence or weir
counts, fish wheels, etc.). Furthermore, to achieve sampling
continuity, the methods employed must be effective under the
reduced project flows. For these reasons, a tagging and recapture
method was used to accomplish the study objectives in studies on
salmon escapement employed to date.
2-755-JJ 2-2
The Alaska Power Authority is investigating alternative methods to
obtain escapement and out-migration estimates for future study
years. The possibility of using a fyke net, slant net or tempo-
rary weir to block the mainstem, permitting a direct count of
returning adult salmon and a reliable estimate of out-migrating
fry, is being evaluated. The methods selected will be applicable
under both pre-Project and Project conditions. Should the methods
selected be modifica tiona to past programs, a period of overlap
(i.e., one season in which both original and revised methods are
used concurrently) would provide analytical continuity. The 1986
and future programs will be designed to improve the information
being developed during salmon studies in the lower Bradley River
and to ensure the reliability of salmon productivity enhancement
predictions.
8.2.3 Program Schedule
The Alaska Power Authority is presently developing the details for
the 1986 and future programs. Fry out-migration study parameters
will be added to the salmon fisheries study being re-evaluated.
The resource a~ncies will be consulted during the development of
the studies.
Field work will be conducted during April/May and August/early
September. Field data collection would be conducted for a period
of eight consecutive years depending on the construction schedule:
three years to establish baseline conditions, one year during
construction and four years to identify escapement under Project
operation. This program was initiated during 1985.
8.3 POWERHOUSE TAILRACE
Post-construction studies are proposed for tailrace monitoring at
Bradley Lake because of limited specific information on salmon
attraction to waters dischar~d from power plants in Alaska. The
purpose of the Bradley Lake study would be to estimate the number
2-755-JJ 2-3
and species of salmon attracted to the tailrace compared to the
number that enter nearby habitats. Duration of holding within the
tailrace area and effect on spawning would be evaluated. This
would entail a tagging-recapture program.
Limited monitoring may be required after the first two years. The
specific study programs will be evaluated by the monitoring team
prior to implementation. Report requirements will be subject to
approval by the resource agencies.
2.2 SCOPE OF WORK REFINEMENTS
The scopes of work for the lower Bradley River salmon monitoring and
tailrace attraction studies have been refined, and in some cases
substantially changed since the filing of the Mitigation Plan with
FERC. Refinements have come about largely through incorporation of
results of summer 1985 studies and resource agency consultation.
A~ncies have been consulted through a series of agency review meetings
and by agency participation in development and review of scopes of
work. Through this process, all agencies have indicated their
concurrence (see Section 5.0) with the refined scopes of work. Refined
scopes of work are presented in Section 3.0
2-755-JJ 2-4
SECTION 3.0
SALMON MONITORING PLAN
3.0 SALMON MONITORING PLAN
3.1 GENERAL
The Alaska Power Authority will perform baseline and post-operational
data collection for the purposes of monitoring fish populations through
two integrated studies. The first study is designed to produce an
annual index of adult escapement to the lower Bradley River. Agency
concerns over the possibility of attraction of returning adults to the
powerhouse tailrace will be addressed through a second study designed
to: 1) determine if salmon are attracted; and 2) if attracted, the
extent and duration of attraction, evidence of spawning in the
tailrace, and movement to nearby streams. Scopes of work for these two
studies incorporate the most recent agency comments as of the date of
this filing (see Section 5.0).
Subsequent to filing of the Mitigation Plan, results of the 1985 salmon
escapement survey of the lower Bradley River (NORTEC 1985) and resource
agency consultation suggested that modification of the objectives of
the proposed salmon studies as originally proposed was necessary.
Methods to be employed in conducting the two studies have also been
modified accordingly.
Though five species of Pacific salmon utilize the lower Bradley River
to some extent, results of the 1985 salmon escapement survey and
previous studies (Woodward-Clyde Consultants 1984) indicated that pink
saloon are much more abundant than other species. Therefore, pink
salmon were selected as the target species for the monitoring studies.
The salmon escapement study was originally proposed as a multi-year
sampling program to include enumeration of out-migrating fry from the
lower Bradley River. However, based on previous studies and agency
consultation it was agreed that monitoring of juvenile salmon
outmigrants would be deleted from the study objectives because the
effort in time, manpower, and money required to conduct this aspect of
the study would exceed the expected benefits to the fishery resource.
2-755-JJ 3-1
In addition, sampling methodology would result in negative impacts to
the fry population that would exceed benefits gained from collection of
the data.
There has also been agreement to ascertain and monitor population
changes of adult pink salmon using an index of abundance rather than
the greater sampling effort required to statistically estimate
population size. The index of abundance is a good compromise to use to
reduce potential impacts to the relatively small fishery resource while
still allowing evaluations of trends in population size. A cpmbination
of methods including hoop nets, beach seining, electroshocking, carcass
counts and/or other methods will be used to develop a repeatable index
of escapement of adult pink salmon.
Objectives of the tailrace attraction study now include a determination
of: 1) number and species of salmon attracted to the tailrace; 2)
duration of the attraction period; 3) length of time spent by
individual salmon in the tailrace area; and 4) whether any salmon are
spawning in the tailrace. The tailrace attraction study will also
determine extent of movement of salmon originally caught in the
tailrace to other streams, the proportion of Bradley River salmon that
are initially attracted to the tailrace, and whether some salmon caught
in the tailrace eventually move to streams other than the Bradley
River.
Scopes of work for the Salmon Escapement Survey and Tailrace Attraction
Studies reflecting all recent resource agency comment and concerns are
shown in Sections 3.1 and 3.2, respectively.
3.2 SALMON ESCAPEMENT SURVEY SCOPE OF WORK
3.2.1 Introduction
This scope of work has been prepared in response to Article 34 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission License for the Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project which requires that a plan be prepared for pre-
and post~perational studies to monitor fish populations in the lower
Bradley River.
2-755-JJ 3-2
In August 1985, a field effort was undertaken to enumerate pink salmon
returning to spawn in the Bradley River. A tag, release and recapture
method using hoop nets and electrofishing gear to collect specimens was
attempted. The numbers of captured and tagged individuals, however,
was insufficient to provide adequate estimates of spawning pink salmon
(NORTEC 1985). A problem with the 1985 program was that capture
methods used did not capture a sufficient proportion of the relatively
small Bradley River population. Therefore, either considerably more
intensive sampling effort or more effective sampling methods would be
needed to ensure that salmon are captured in great enough numbers to
precisely estimate the adult populations.
After discussion with the fishery resource agencies, it was agreed that
it would be more reasonable to develop an annual index of abundance of
adult escapement to the Bradley River. The methods outlined below will
produce an index of abundance over the season which can be compared
fran year to year. These methods should also produce the low level of
sampling mortality desired for this study. In years of greater
abundance these methods may recapture enough tagged specimens to
produce an estimate of population size. In addition, the program
outlined below will provide a portion of the sampling required for the
tailrace studies after project operation begins (see scope of work for
tailrace attraction monitoring program, Section 3.3).
3.2.2 Location of Sampling
Previous studies of pink salmon fry emergence (Woodward-Clyde
Consultants 1984) show that pink salmon fry occurred upstream of Eagle
Pool (RM 4.6) only. Greatest numbers of fry were confined to the area
above Riffle Reach (RM 4.7). Spawning pink salmon had been observed in
suitable spawning areas downstream of this location but no fry or
embryos were observed. Based on these observations, locations for
sampling of adults should be confined to the area above Eagle Pool
Reach. Sampling in this zone will restrict the indices of abundance to
those fish which are most likely contributing to the sustained
populations of salmn in the Bradley River. This should reduce the
potential for counting strays from other systems.
2-755-JJ 3-3
3.2.3 Methods and Materials
This section describes proposed methods to estimate the relative
numbers of adult salmon returning to the Bradley River to spawn. These
methods are, in part, based on the results of the 1985 field survey
(NORTEC 1985), comments provided by the fishery resource agencies and
comments provided by other investigators who have worked on the Bradley
River. The methods used in the pre-operation period must be repeatable
in the post-operational period to ensure that consistent data will be
available to demonstrate the effectiveness of the salmon mitigation
program; therefore, the 1986 study will emphasize the development of
standard methodology that is practical and can be reasonably repeated
from year to year. Monitoring in subsequent years will employ the
standard methodology established in 1986.
It will be the intent to try a variety of approaches and ultimately
choose the best of those methods as a means of, at a minimum, indexing
abundance and also estimating populations if possible. Abundance
sampling will also provide information regarding time of occurrence and
species composition. Sampling tools available to the study will
include hoop nets, beach seines, boat-mounted electroshocker, backpack
electroshocker, angling, and visual observations of live and dead fish.
Emphasis during the early weeks of the study will be to develop a
detailed sampling schedule for each gear type based on the physical
characteristics of the river and other pragmatic considerations.
3.2.3.1 Hoop Net Sampling
During the middle of each calendar week within the sampling period, 10
hoop nets will be set in both the upper portion of Riffle Reach and in
Tree-Bar Reach. The location of the 10 nets in each area will be
chosen in the beginning of the first year of study based on judgement
of catch expectation, and anchoring conditions both in 1986 and after
operation of the Bradley River Hydroelectric Project. These sampling
stations will become the standards for post-operational monitoring.
The hoop nets to be used will be 16 feet long with the first opening 6
feet square and subsequent hoops 6 feet in diameter. All gear will be
2-755-JJ 3-4
of uniform design for all years of study. Each will be equipped with a
25 feet lead. The first and second throat openings will be 18 and 12
inches in diameter, respectively. The net will be properly oriented
and anchored to ensure effective sampling and net recovery.
The nets will be deployed during low tide on Tuesday afternoon or
Wednesday morning and allowed to fish through two successive high
tides. Each net will be checked at each low tide while they are set.
Nets will be checked and pulled at the low tide following the second
high tide after being set. Fish collected will be identified to
species weighed, measured, sexed and observed for condition, evidence
of spawning and presence of an existing tag. Each pink salmon
collected will be tagged with a numbered Floy tag.
With each week of effort standardized, the number collected in each
week will represent a catch per unit of effort index of abundance. The
seasonal trends and peaks in index of abundance can be compared from
year to year and provide a relative measure of the population of pink
salmn in the Bradley River.
3.2.3.2 Beach Seining
During initial site reconnaissance at least four beach seine sites will
be identified within the study area. A 120 feet bag seine with 3/8
inch mesh will be deployed at each site at least twice during the
:intensive mid-week sampling period. The actual method of deployment
will depend on the characteristics of each site but will be
standardized for each site after initial trials establish the most
workable methodology. Deadman may be established on the stream bank to
provide anchor points if appropriate and the use of winches for pulling
the siene will also be considered.
Fish collected in seine samples will be treated in the same manner as
those caught in the hoop nets.
2-755-JJ 3-5
3.2.3.3 Electroshocking
Because of turbidity and changing water conditions, electrofishing with
either a boat-mounted or backpack electroshocker is not considered to
be a good method for indexing abundance. Prior studies, however, have
indicated that it may be useful for recapturing fish that were caught
by other methods and, thus, establish a basis for population estimates.
Therefore, two 30-minute electrofishing samples will be collected in
both Riffle and Tree-Bar Reaches immediately following the mid-week net
sampling. Each fish collected will be identified to species, sexed,
and observed for condition, evidence of spawning and presence of an
existing tag. Each pink salmon collected will be tagged with a
numbered Floy tag of the same color used in the trap net portion of the
study.
3.2.3.4 Carcass Count Survey
carcass counts have been used to estimate the escapement of Pacific
salmn in other river systems. This methodology typically
underestimates total numbers of spawners because fish go uncounted due
to predation, scavenging, and decomposition. However, as an index this
method can provide a relative measure of change in abundance from year
to year.
Carcass counts have been used to quantify man induced and natural
dieoffs of fish. One of the primary difficulties in conducting such a
study is subsampling large numbers of dead fish. This should not be a
problem for the Bradley River populations. Since the expected
populations are small, and the expected daily standing crop of
carcasses is small, no subsampling should be required.
Another consideration in conducting a carcass count is multiple
counting of the same carcass. This occurs because a carcass count is a
measure of the standing crop at a point in time. If carcasses are
surveyed more frequently than their rate of removal by scavenging or
decomposition, then total numbers observed over both time periods could
represent fish counted more than once. This potential source of bias
can be eliminated by removal, marking or tagging each fish as it is
2-755-JJ 3-6
counted. For this study each counted carcass will be Floy tagged
midway between the pectoral and dorsal fins to ensure tag retention.
The color of these Floy tags will be different trom that used to tag
live salmon collected by net or electrofishing. During future tailrace
attraction studies a third unique tag color will be required. If
carcasses are identifiable to species but are not tagable due to
advanced decomposition, the carcass will be removed from the water and
discarded well away from the shoreline.
The water surface and shoreline will be surveyed every Monday,
Wednesday and Friday during the sampling period. The river will be
surveyed from the furthest extent of upstream fish passage to the sharp
bend in the river below Riffle Reach (RM 4.5).
Both riverbanks and associated backwater areas will be surveyed on
foot. Also, where the river is wide (e.g., at Riffle and parts of
Tree-Bar Reach), the channel will be surveyed by boat. Undoubtedly
many carcasses which settle on the river bottom will go unnoticed below
the surface of the glacially fed waters. Only carcasses identifiable
by field techniques as pink salmon will be counted and tagged. Other
species identified will be noted and recorded.
Since the carcass survey effort is standardized among years, the total
ntmber of carcasses observed should produce a useful index of the
relative abundance of pink salmon in the Bradley River. The carcass
survey provides another method to account for fish tagged during
netting and electrotishing and during future tailrace attraction
studies.
3.2.3.5 Other Methods
During the initial study year, other methods of sampling or
modifications of the procedures just described may become appropriate
as the study team becomes familiar with the limitations imposed by
conditions in the area. It will be the intent to retain sufficient
flexibility so that a workable approach to monitoring adult fish in the
Bradley River will be established during 1986 and repeated in
subsequent years.
2-755-JJ 3-7
3.2.4 Sampling Duration and Effort
Adult salmon abundance sampling and carcass survey will begin by July
15 and terminate no sooner than September 15 during the first year of
study. The duration of sampling may be modified in subsequent years of
study to more closely match the stream life of pink salmon in the
Bradley River. To ensure safety and effectiveness of sampling, a
sampling crew of two to three persons will be required during the
intensive mid-week sampling. The Monday, Wednesday and Friday carcass
counts can be collected by a single individual. The carcass count
daily effort should be paced to provide eight hours of visual survey of
the river each Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
3.2.5 Current Data Collection
Water temperature, river stage and general meterological conditions
will be recorded each day. At each electrofishing transect, a
mid-depth sample of conductivity will be collected.
3 .2.6 Reporting
Annual reports will document methodology, procedures, variances from
the scope of work, standard locations of sampling for each net, weekly
pink salmon population indices, and catch records (sex, condition,
species) of all sample efforts. Annual reports will be issued in
December of each of eight years, beginning in December 1986 and ending
in December 1992.
Annual progress reports and agency consultation correspondence will be
filed with FERC the following January, beginning in January 1987 and
ending in January 1993.
3.3 TAILRACE ATTRACTION STUDY SCOPE OF WORK
3.3.1 Introduction
This scope of work has been prepared in response to Article 34 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Camnission License for the Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project which requires that a plan be prepared to monitor
post-operational fish populations in the lower Bradley River.
2-755-JJ 3-8
Attraction or salmon bound for the Bradley River tailrace is a
potential project impact and may affect the fish population or the
lower Bradley River. This study is intended to monitor the extent or
tailrace attraction and to determine the impact of attraction, if it
occurs, on the Bradley Hi ver and other nearby streams. The tailrace
attraction study will be integrated with the Bradley River salmon
escapement monitoring study to determine effects on the Bradley River
salm:>n populations. The combined studies will determine the need, if
any, for mitigation measures.
The potential for tailrace attraction was evaluated in detail by
Woodward-Clyde Consultants ( 1985). It was suggested that pink salmon
be selected as the primary evaluation species because of its dominance
in the fish populations of the Bradley River and other streams in the
area.
3.3.2 Study Methodology
3.3.2.1 Attraction to Tailrace Area
To determine the extent, duration and timing of attraction of salmon to
the tailrace area, fish will be sampled at the tailrace and immediately
downstream if appropriate.
Sampling will be initiated during the summer of the first year or
project operation (1990) when the Bradley River fish monitoring studies
indicate that pink salmon are present or at an appropriate date to be
established by the 2-3 years of seasonal use data that will have been
collected in the lower Bradley River prior to project startup (see
Section 3. 2) •
Sampling methods will depend in part on the final configuration or the
raceway lilich, as or this writing, had not reached the final design
stage. However, preliminary information suggests the tailrace will be
a trapezoidal basin about 120 feet wide at the top and about 11 feet
deep (below mud flat level). The sides of the channel will be
riprapped. Water depth in the channel, even at low tide, will be deep,
2-755-JJ 3-9
probably on the order of 8-10 feet. This depth will limit sampling
opportunity to some extent. The geometric configuration of the channel
suggests that a custom-made seine or trawl pulled lengthwise up the
channel might be an effective type of sampling gear. It might be
possible to establish permanent winches on the powerhouse walkway that
spans the top of the tailrace to be used in pulling the net.
Another sampling option would be trap nets built to match the tailrace
depth. Various lead configurations could direct the fish into the
nets. Either of these options could also be used as a method of
capturing fish for relocation to the Bradley River if required for
mitigation purposes.
Initial sampling frequency during the salmon run in the first operating
season will be at least three times per week, but may be increased if
significant numbers of fish are attracted. Frequency can be adjusted
in the first and subsequent years depending on the extent of attraction
and the length of time that individual fish spend in the tailrace.
Trap nets, if used, will be fished through 2-3 high tides per sampling
period and checked at each low tide. It may be feasible to schedule
sampling to coincide with temporary plant shutdowns, which would make
fish in the raceway basin more vulnerable to capture.
All fish captured will be weighed, measured, sexed, assessed for
spawning condition and tagged with numbered, color-coded Floy tags, or,
if already tagged, the tag color and number will be recorded.
Different color tags will be used for subsequent sampling periods to
easily determine the length of residence of individual fish within the
tailrace. Tag color will also be different from colors used to tag
fish in the lower Bradley River monitoring program so that fish that
have moved from the tailrace to the river, or vice versa, can be easily
distinguished.
2-755-JJ 3-10
sampling at the tailrace area will provide the following kinds or
information:
o Number and species or fish attracted to the tailrace.
o Duration of the attraction period.
o Length or time spent by individual fish in the tailrace area.
o Indication whether any fish are spawning in the tailrace.
3.3.2.2 Dispersion from the Tailrace to other Streams
The Bradley River salmon escapement monitoring program will be
conducted concurrent with the tailrace monitoring and will detect the
presence or fish tagged at the tailrace that move to the Bradley River.
In addition, there is a possibility that fish attracted to the tailrace
may disperse to other streams in the immediate area. Fox Farm Creek, a
tributary to the Lower Bradley River is a likely candidate for pink
salmon as are some or the Bradley River sloughs. Sheep Creek and some
or its sloughs may also serve as the final destination for pink salmon.
If sookeye salmon are attracted in significant numbers, then the Martin
River may be the parent stream.
Surveys or potential dispersion streams will be conducted to determine
the presence or fish that were tagged in the tailrace. The specific
stream reaches to be surveyed will be determined at a later date and
will be dependent on the extent or tailrace attraction, species
attracted, and the practicality or obtaining useful information.
Survey techniques will include electroshock1ng, seining and visual
observations.
The tagged fish dispersion studies both within the Bradley River and in
other streams will provide the following kinds or information:
2-755-JJ 3-11
o Extent of movement of fish originally caught in the tailrace
to other streams.
o Proportion of Bradley River salmon that are initially
attracted to the tailrace.
o Whether some tailrace fish end up in streams other than the
Bradley River.
Integration of the Bradley River and the tailrace attraction studies
will provide insight into the impact of the tailrace on Bradley River
salmon populations and will suggest whether mitigating measures will be
necessary.
3.3.3 Duration and Effort
During the initial year of operation, tailrace sampling will begin
about mid-July or concurrent with the start of the pink salmon run and
will continue until salmon activity in the Bradley River has ceased,
perhaps in mid-September. The stream dispersion portion of the study
will begin after a sufficient number of salmon have been tagged in the
tailrace (probably about at the peak of the pink salmon run) and
continue until the necessary streams have been surveyed. Return trips
to some streams may be justified depending on the results of the
initial survey.
It is anticipated that the study effort will initially require a
two-man crew working about three days per week during the July 15 to
September 15 period. Manpower for the study could be integrated with
that of the Bradley River salmon escapement studies to maximize
efficiency.
DepeiXling on results in the initial year, it may be appropriate to
reduce study effort in subsequent years.
2-755-JJ 3-12
3.3.4 Concurrent Data Collection
Tailrace water temperature, flow and general meterological conditions
will be recorded each day or obtained from the powerhouse staff.
3.3.5 Reporting
Annual reports will document methodology, procedures, variances from
the scope of work, and catch records (sex, condition, species) of all
sample efforts. The report will also discuss extent of tailrace
attraction, recanmnd study procedures for future years, and suggest
mitigation measures (if appropriate). Annual progress reports will be
issued in December of each of two years, beginning in December 1990 and
ending in December 1991.
Annual reports and agency consultation correspondence will be filed
with FERC the following January, beginning in January 1991 and ending
in January 1992.
2-755-JJ 3-13
SECTION 4.0
BIBLIOGRAPHY
4.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alaska Power Authority. 1985. Mitigation Plan. Prepared by Stone &
Webster Engineering Corporation for the Alaska Power Authority,
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. November.
Corps of Engineers. 1982. Final Environmental
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, Alaska.
Army, Alaska District Corps of Engineers,
August. 184 pp. plus appendices.
Impact Statement,
Department of the
Anchorage, Alaska.
Corps of Engineers. 1985. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement, Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, Alaska. Department
of the Army, Alaska District Corps of Engineers, Anchorage,
Alaska. September. 158 pp. plus appendices.
Northern Technical Services, Inc. (NORTEC). 1985. 1985 Salmon
Escapement Survey Report. Prepared for the Alaska Power
Authority, Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. December. 17 pp.
plus appendices.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants. 1983. Bradley River Instream Flow
Studies. Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority, Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project. 77 pp. plus appendices.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants. 1984. Report on Salmon Fry Sampling in
the Bradley River. Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority,
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. 6 pp. plus tables and
figures.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants. 1985. Evaluation of Tailrace Attraction
for the Proposed Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. Appendix A,
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project, FERC. Prepared for the Alaska Power
Authority.
2-755-JJ 4-1
SECTION 5.0
AGENCY CONSULTATION
5.0 AGENCY CONSULTATION
CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF CORRESPONDENCE
Date Source of Correspondence
January 22, 1986 Agency Review Meeting Notes of Conference, Stone &
Webster Engineering Corporation
January 24, 1986 Agency Review Meeting Notes of Conference, Stone &
Webster Engineering Corporation
January 27, 1986 Alaska Power Authority
February 11, 1986 U.S. Department of the Interior
February 19, 1986 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of
Commercial Fisheries
March 19, 1986 Alaska Power Authority
March 25, 1986 Notes of Telephone Conversation, Stone & Webster
Engineering Corporation
March 26, 19 86 Agency Review Meeting Notes of Conference, Stone &
Webster Engineering Corporation
March 26, 1986 Notes of Telephone Conversation, Stone & Webster
Engineering Corporation
April 15, 1986 Agency Review Meeting Notes of Conference, Stone &
Webster Engineering Corporation
May 1, 1986
May 19, 1986
May 23, 1986
May 28, 1986
June 6, 1986
June 9, 1986
June 11, 1986
June 11, 1986
2-755-JJ
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of
Habitat
Agency Coordination Meeting Notes of Conference,
Dames & Moore
U.S. Department of the Interior
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of
Habitat
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Department of the Interior
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division
of Habitat
National Marine Fisheries Service
5-1
(
(
NOTES OF CONFERENCE
DISCUSSION OF FISH STUDIES
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA PQWER AUTHORITY
Held at SWEC Conference Room
Anchorage, AK
January 22, 1986
Present for:
J.O. No. 15500.12
WP 98D-6
Alaska Power Authority (APA)
Tom Arminski
Dave Trudgen
Agencies:
Ken Florey
ADF&G/Comm. Fish.
Rich Cannon
ADF&G/Comm. Fish.
Hank Hosking, USF&WS
Don McKay
ADF&G/Habitat
Mike Granata, DNR
Brad Smith, NMFS
Stone & Webster Engineering
Corporation (SWEC)
Norm Bishop
Myrl Fisk
Dave Trudgen: The meeting is to discuss the future fisheries studies,
their form and substance. ADF&G personnel performed a site
reconnissance and evaluated the site yesterday and have their opinion
on the effort required for studies and suggestions for study plans.
ADF&G personnel on the site visit were Chuck Meachan, Ken Florey, Rich
Cannon, and George Cunningham. George Cunningham is the FRED Engineer
that designs weirs.
Ken Florey:
Adult Enumeration
Prior to visiting the site a weir was believed to be the most feasible
method to enumerate fish. Due to tidal flooding even a weir would miss
fish as the lower banks get covered by water. The only possible
location above the tidal flooding would be on the spawning grounds in
the upper 2/3 of the spawning area (about Tree Bar Reach). A weir
would cost about $200,000 to install, the only feasible models are the
Japanese Weirs (see attached hand-out) and the materials alone cost
about $100,000. A weir in the spawning grounds presents problems.
Pink salmon are known to stray and snoop around systems other than
2-199-JJ 1
(
(
(
their own. A weir could block pink strays upstream in a short system
like this. The strays would find it more convenient to spawn rather
than bother to get over the weir. Additionally, the weir could act as
a stream block; the native salmon could encounter it and find it too
much of a block to get over and simply spawn below it. Pinks in these
short streams do not have much of a fresh water life and tend to spawn
quickly if they see a favorable site or face on obstacle.
Tag and recapture methods are difficult on a stream with a small
population. It is labor intensive and the information obtained for
population estimates is marginal because the confidence limits are so
broad. The population could change by 200 or 300 percent before you
statistically can measure the difference. Additionally, you are
handling the fish more and stressing them. The fish may look fine as
it swims away but the more you handle the fish the more it affects
them. Especially, if you are trying to sample the entire population
with tag and recapture, you are now causing more change to the run than
any effects the project might cause by stressing the fish through
handling them.
Electroshocking fish on the spawning gravels is a stress on the
females, the eggs can have the sac ruptured. If you work the spawning
grounds over the entire run to get statistically valid numbers of fish
you could wipe out the run.
A fish wheel is an option in a river where the fish orient with the
bank. A fish wheel is labor intensive and again you are handling the
fish. The fish in the tidal system are not necessarily bank oriented
and the data obtained would be questionable.
The biostatisians will find any data collected to be statistically
inadequate for making any reasonable estimate of population numbers.
You will not be able to see variations in returns in this river. The
population ranges from, as a guess, several hundred fish to maybe 8,000
in a big run year. But 1000-2000 fish as an average are too small of a
population to access changes caused by the project.
Fry Outmigration
Assuming 2000 spawning fish and an average egg deposit of 2000 eggs per
female we have about 2.1 million eggs deposited. Over winter survival
is about 10% and these fry emerge over 6 weeks. These numbers of fry
are quite small and you could easily misguess numbers of fish during
this period. Natural emergence variation is up to one month and the
peak emergence takes 6-8 days. We are dealing with the coldest area in
Kachemak Bay and delays of emergence for these fry might be beneficial.
We have found that emergence timing is very dependent on air
temperatures. Estuary conditions determine fry survival far more then
instream conditions. Warm fall temperatures can cause early emergence
into poor late winter estuary conditions and kill many fry.
Fingerlings could be captured and counted but it would be very
expensive and valid samples to estimate the population would not be
2-199-JJ 2
(
(
collected. Again, you could try to collect all the fish. An emergence
trap could be set up in the stream. But you could wipe out the natural
run just collecting the data to estimate these small numbers.
The spawning gravel in this system is very poor, there is a high silt
content. You can kick the gravels and get large silt clouds moving
downstream. The gravels appear to be shallow.
The main recanmendation is that fry counting is a waste of time. If
there are any effects of this project it is delayed emergence and it
would be good for this stream. The natural variation in emergence is
greater than what the temperature changes in the river will cause.
Tailrace
The real problem in this project is the tailrace attraction. You will
get salmon milling around. It is in the pink salmon's nature to
explore other systems. Coho and Chums will also be attracted.
Shutting off the tailrace for 8 hours should discourage the fish. The
only way to measure the effectiveness of this measure would be by color
tagging the salmon in the tailrace. Change the tag color every couple
days when you collect fish and visually check if the same fish (color
of tag) are present after shutting off the water or otherwise
collecting the fish. The prediction is that the salmon will move out
of the area as there is no place to spawn. Another study would be to
do a count of the numbers of fish tagged in the tailrace that are found
in the Bradley, Fox Farm Creek, Hartin River, etc. This gives you an
idea of where the tagged fish end up.
Fish Escapement
A somewhat feasible scheme, for less money, to index Bradley River is
to do a post-spawning carcass count. A biometrician should be part of
the sampling staff. Most carcesses will not be retrieved, there are
alot of pools that can trap them and the tide washes the carcesses out.
The carcess count would not give population estimates but would
indicate the presence of fish. In general there is no reasonable way
evaluate the project effects on the fish.
APA Proposal: We should consider off-site mitigation for 1000 adult
pink salmon. We could renegotiate the Bradley River flows to benefit
power production.
Don McKay: ADF&G is. involved with millions of fish and the Bradley
River's low numbers are not important from a commercial point of view.
I personally would like to see water in the Bradley River for fish and
wildlife.
In general, agencies agreed that annual observations of spawning
escapement (i.e., present or not present) may be a better objective
than enumeration. They would suggest that the fry work be dropped.
They consider the tailrace "time retention and tagging" as a worthwhile
study objective and that the tailrace tagged fish should be recovered
from other rivers.
2-199-JJ 3
(
(
/ \ ... ~
ACTION REQUIRED:
A draft study plan should be developed soon for agency evaluation. APA
can set up a Reimbursable Service Agreement (RSA) with ADF&G to have
them in charge of the fishery monitoring program.
MFisk/JJ
Attachment
2-199-JJ
APA Letters to Agencies 2-7-86
w/enc. Meeting Notes, Fish Studies:
Mr. Ken Florey
Alaska Department of Fish & Game
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99502
Hr. Rich Cannon
Alaska Department of Fish & Game
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99502
Hr. Hank Hosking
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
WAES
411 E. Fourth Avneue, Suite 2B
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Hr. Don McKay
Alaska Department of Fish & Game
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99502
Hr. Michael Granata
Alaska Department of Natural Resources
3601 "C" Street, Frontier Building
Pouch 7-005
Anchorage, Alaska 99510
Hr. Brad Smith
National Marine Fisheries Service
Department of Commerce
701 "C" Street, Box 43
Anchorage, Alaska 99513
2-223-JJ
(
NOTES OF CONFERENCE
AGENCY DESIGN REVIEW MEETING
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
Held at Stone & Webster
Engineering Corporation (SWEC)
Conference Room
800 "A" Street
Anchorage, Alaska
January 24, 1986 at 9:00 AM
PURPOSE
/.~
J.hk.. tofqg~/~
J.O. 15800.12
WP 98D-6
Present for:
Alaska Power Authority (APA)
Tom Arminski
Dave Trudgen
Agencies:
Hank Hosking, USF & WS
Lenny Corin, USF & WS
Scott Hansen, COE
Brad Smith, NMFS
Patty Bielawski, DGC
Mike Granata, DNR
Robert Cutler, DNR
Dan Wilkerson, ADEC
Paul Horwath, ADEC
Robert Sener, LGL
Don McKay, ADF&G/HABITAT
Stone & Webster Engineering
Corporation (SWEC)
Norm Bishop
Myrl Fisk
Elaine Puch
The meeting was held to discuss ( 1 ) Barge Dock Design Improvements,
(2) Reservoir Area Clearing, (3) Erosion Control ·Measures,
(4) Permanent Camp, (5) Powerhouse Substation, (6) Project Design
Status, and Conceptual Plans for 1986 through 1989 Fish Study Program.
Attachment 1 is the agenda. Attachment 2 is the sign-in attendance
sheet.
DIScuSSION
1. Design Improvements of the Barge Dock:
The bridge which connects the barge dock to the access road at
Sheep Point has been eliminated. A new slough channel will be
formed to bypass the slough flow around the dock. Scott Hansen,
COE, felt this was a minor modification to the original plan
submitted as part of the Section 10/Section 404 Application.
Hansen indicated that all proposed changes are within the scope of
the pending application. No amendment is required. A letter
explaining the changes is to be submitted. The other agencies
were in concurrence with the design improvements of the barge
dock.
2-251-JJ 1
l
(
\
Notes of Conference January 24, 1986
Agency Design Review Meeting
2. Clearing of the Reservoir Area:
The site preparation contract will be awarded 5/1/86 which
includes roads in the powerhouse area. The general construction
contract will be awarded 5/1/87. Reservoir clearing is included
in this contract. Methods and disposal of the slash and limbs
include chipping, burying or burning. If burning is performed,
the contractor must comply with ADNR and ADEC permit requirements
concerning safety, air quality constraints and time frame. The
agencies were in agreement with the proposed reservoir clearing
plan.
Erosion Control Measures:
During Phase I rip rap will be used on the windward aide of the
airport road. In Phase II the runway will be widened with tunnel
cuttings and the leeward side will get riprapped.
The roads from the airport to the lower concrete batch plant will
be riprapped on the windward and leeward sides on tidal flats. On
the access roads erosion will occur primarily from tides and
storms, therefore annual maintenance will be required on the
windward side. The leeward aide will be protected with smaller
rocks. All rip rap will be placed in beds that have filter zones
to minimize erosion.
The Martin River road will have a light riprap to prevent wash
out. This road will be rehabilitated at the end of construction.
The Martin River borrow area will be mined for aggregate from 3
separate pits. The existing trees and brush will have to be
removed. Afterwards new trees may be brought in for revegetation.
A dike with riprapped sides will be constructed between the borrow
site and river channels. It will be designed for the 50 year
storm. There will be screening and washing areas with flow into a
settling pond. The outflow from the settling pond will flow into
the second pond through the soil by percolation. The material dug
out of the pits will go through a grizzly wash plant. The
contractor may use a classifier to obtain a finer mesh. For
rehabilitation the pits will become a fish habitat. They will be
connected to the river system on the downstream end and all three
will be interconnected at the end of construction. Revisions are
still being made to this plan.
The access road in the Battle Creek area will have a concrete box
culvert over the unnamed tributary upstream of the construction
camp. Rip rap will be added to the access road adjacent to Battle
Creek for toe and slope protection.
The access road from the construction camp to the dam is designed
to balance cut and fills. Side cast will be prohibited. Disposal
areas for over-burden will be located at designated areas along
2-251-JJ 2
/
(
Notes of Conference January 24, 1986
Agency Design Review Meeting
the road. The road above the construction camp will be 18 feet
wide with turnouts, whereas the road along the tidal flats will be
28 feet wide to allow for two way traffic.
The quarry will be located adjacent to the access road. It will
be used for mining stone to be used as rip rap. Dacite, which
exists within the quarry, is the preferred rock for rip rap.
Argillite, also exists within the quarry and will be used for rip
rap or general road fill depending on its characteristics. The
quarry boundary may be modified if the dacite dikes trend outside
the actual boundary. A settling pond located near the quarry will
collect runoff and waste water from washing the mined rock. The
overflow water will drain to the road ditch system.
The lower batch plant will have a settling pond. The yard
drainage will allow the contractor to wash the truck anywhere in
the truck wash area yet drainage will be routed into the settling
pond. The upper batch plant will have ditches around it to keep
out storm water. Waste water from the plant will settle in
sedimentation ponds and then overflow via culverts into streams
that drain into Bradley Lake. No chemical coagulants will be
added for settling. Retention time in the ponds will provide
adequate sediment removal. The culverts will have end sections
with metal skirts to diffuse the water to avoid downstream
erosion.
Further drainage and erosion protection measures include using
rocks as energy dissipaters to decrease the velocity of the water.
Some seeding will be used, but in most areas natural vegetation
will prevail. A jute matte will be used on erosive slopes.
Hank Hosking, OSF&WS, suggested that we scarify, fertilize and
walk away. No other agency concerns were stated. The agencies
were in concurrence with the proposed erosion control measures.
4. Permanent Camp:
Attachment 3 to these notes discusses the permanent camp
alternatives. The camp will house a maximum of 20 people (4
operators and their families) and will be relocated adjacent to
the powerhouse site. Attachment 4 shows the powerhouse and
permanent camp plans. The temporary construction camp (1987-1990)
near Battle Creek can then be totally rehabilitated. The new
permanent camp location is in an upland area while the previous
was located in a wetland area. Construction for the camps and
staging area will be at least 100 feet from the wells.
Scott Hansen, COE, indicated this was a favorable development.
The other agencies were in concurrence with the new permanent camp
location.
2-251-JJ 3
(
Notes of Conference January 24, 1986
Agency Design Review Meeting
5. Design Improvements of the Powerhouse Transmission Yard:
A compact gas insulated substation, enclosing the buswork area,
and circuit breakers, will be used thus reducing the size of the
substation. Sulfur hexafluoride {SF6 } will be the insulating gas.
There were no adverse agency comments. The agencies concurred
with the design improvements of the powerhouse transmission yard.
6. Status of Project Designs:
R & H drawings submitted are 60% complete. They are scheduled to
submit 90% complete.
1. Conceptual Plans tor 1986 Through 1989 Fish Study Program:
Attachment 5 discusses the future fisheries studies.
8. Attachment 6 is the Trip Report to Bradley Lake Project Site tor
January 10, 1986. Attachment 7 is a set of halt size design
drawings.
ACTION REOUIREP:
A letter describing the modifications to the barge dock and permanent
camp location should be submitted as soon as possible to the COE.
EPuch:JJ
Attachments
2-251-JJ 4
January 27, 1986
Mr. Ken Florey
Regional Supervisor
Commercial Fisheries Division
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Dear Mr. Florey:
As indicated in the meeting of January 16, 1986, the Alaska Power
Authority would like the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to
prepare a proposal to conduct the fisheries monitoring studies
associated with the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. To achieve
this goal, we first need you to provide the following information
1.) Based on your field reconnaissance of January 21, 1986 and our
meeting January 22, 1986, a scope of work defining what study
activities Fish and Game will conduct and the timing of those
activities, and
2.) The estimated annual cost of conducting these studies. Cost
should be depicted by RSA line item category.
If you have any questions, please call fflYSelf or Dave Trudgen at
561-7877.
Thank you for your input and interest.
Sincerely,
2657/538
, .
United States Department of the Interior R f ( f IV f D
Western Alaska Ecological Services FEB 2 l lSBfi
Sunshine Plaza. Suite 28
411 W. 4th Ave. RtCfiYr:-.
Anchorage. Alaska 99501.ASKA Powr~Ot. ~.Y_ _ SWEC-ANCHORAGE ~ · · '·' T1_u_P.!iY
IN REPLY REFER TO:
WAES
Mr. David R. Eberle, Manager
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project
Alaska Power Authority
P.O. Box 190869
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869
•Dear Mr. Eberle:
"&; FEB l4 p 1 :02
FEB I I 1986
Re: Agency Meeting
Bradley Lake Project
The U.S. :Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has received the notes Gf
eonf-e:renc-e prepared for the 24 January 1986 meeting on Agency Design Review
and •the meetl·ng minutes on Project Fish Studies held 22 .January 1986. The
followl·ng·comments are offered for your consideration and represent ,the ~S -
posl·tions on ·these items:
l. Clearing of the reservoir area.
The FWS has no objection to the proposed reservoir clearing plan. We
support the proposal to limit clearing to elevation 1140' at the head
end as the shrub vegetation in this area may provide seasonal (spring,
early summer) browse for moose.
2. Erosion control measures.
The FWS commends the design efforts in the locating and sizing of water
passage and control structures. We understand that the drawings are
preliminary and that modifications may be necessary to "field fit"
existing construction conditions.
The notes state the dike at the Martin River borrow area" ••• will be
designed for the 50-year storm." This is in conflict with the Project
Mitigation Plan, Section 5.10.2, Design and Construction of the Borrow
Area, as it states: (a) "A dike, designed to withstand a flood with a
100 year recurrence interval, will be constructed ••• ·· and (b) "The
design includes setting the elevation ••• to withstand the 100 year
flood." Drawing #551093-MP-2, Martin River Dike Details, does not
specify the flood event for which the dike was designed. Please provide
assurance that the 100 year flood event will be addressed in the Martin
River dike design.
Section 3.1.3.3, Upland Sites, of-the Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Best Management Practices Manual states that "Excavated;~aces of rock
quarries may be left vertical, but no face should be more than 30 feet
high without an intermediate bench 10 feet wide." These benching
dimensions should be included in the Notes and in Section 2-2 of Drawing
1551093-MP-3, Riprap Quarry Mining Plan.
\
3. Permanent camp.
We concur with the re-locating of the permanent facilities to a site
adjacent to the powerhouse. Impacts to habitat which produce moose
browse will be minimized as a result of the relocation.
4. Design improvements of the barge dock.
The FWS has no objection to the modifications proposed for the barge
dock and access thereto. Blocking the existing slough and excavating an
alternate channel to -a• should provide for adequate tidal flow and
rearing fish movement.
We suggest that the Corps of Engineers permit not be modified to reflect
the proposed changes in the barge landing facility and the additional
slough excavation. It is reasonable to expect any construction
contractor to develop a temporary storage capacity in the barge
unloading area. We understand the excavated spoil will be utilized in
the construction of islands within the waterfowl mitigation area.
5. Design improvements of the powerhouse substation.
We support the design change as it will result in less habitat
destruction.
6. Status .of project design.
~ .. :. -=-.::::.::.::-~The~·changes in project design from-the original Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) license application support the resource
agency request to update the terrestrial Impact Assessment Report to
reflect as-built conditions. We concur with the Alaska Power
Authority's proposal to conduct this assessment after project operations
start.
7. Conceptual plans for 1986 through 1989 fish study program.
We understand the APA is developing a fishery proposal for agency review
and concurrence.
These agency update meetings are a worthwhile endeavor. Thank you for the
opportunity to participate.
Sincerely, ~~
Field Supervisor
cc: NMFS, ADF&G, ADNR, ADEC, EPA -Anc.
FERC -WDC.
FERC -Portland, OR
><c ~ swe:c.
~~sJGI
l'fl-fJ D {, {:;W .
\
DEPARTJIENT OF FISH:·AND GAJIE ... -..,
DIVISICN CF COl-1P-1ERCIAin.fiSH~ES ,, :-. ~ 1
W.J • \...-L..... ~ \"' ·! J
February 19, 1986
Mr. Dave Trudgen
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project
Alaska Power Authority
P.O. Box 190869
701 East Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99519
Dear Mr. Trudgen,
RECORD GOP"
BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR
333 RASPBERRY ROAD
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99518-1599
02-86-13.06
Enclosed is a final copy of our proposal to monitor the abundance of pink
salmon in the Bradley River. It includes a scope of work which defines the
study activities, the timing of the activities, and an estimated annual cost
of conducting these studies.
If you have any questions, please call me at 267-2113.
Sincerely,
'-\ 1Jv
Ken Fl~rey
Regional Supervisor
Commercial Fisheries
attadment
cc: R. Cannon
\
Task: Bradley River Pink Salmon Abundance Monitoring
Rationale:
Salmon resources in the lower Bradley River may be impacted by the proposed
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. In order to insure that there is no net
loss in fish productivity due to the development of this project, the
abundance of selected salmon species will be monitored prior to the con-
struction phase to establish the variability in natural production.
All five species of Pacific salmon utilize the lower Bradley River to some
extent, however the natural fish production of all salmon species in this
river are quite low compared to other tributaries in the Kachemak Bay area
(Schroeder pers. comm.). Current estimates indicate that pink salmon (Oncor-
hynchus gorbuscha) are much more abundant than other salmon species in the
Bradley River, therefore pink salmon have been selected as the target species
for this study. Woodward-Clyde Consultants (1983) estimated that 1,000 pink
salmon spawned in the mainstem of the Bradley River in 1983. Mark-recapture
studies conducted in 1985 estimated that the population of pink salmon
spawners in the lower Bradley River ranged from 1,600 to 2,300 fish (Alaska
Power Authority 1985).
A comparison of adult pink salmon abundance during the pre-project, con-
struction, and post-project phase of development will be used to assess any
related impacts to the resource from the project. Should any negative impacts
to the resource be detected, these data will be used to determine the level of
mitigation required to achieve the mitigation goal of no net loss to the
fishery.
Objectives:
1. Establish a baseline index of abundance for pink salmon which return to
Bradley River to spawn.
(
2. Evaluate the index through construction (3 years) and operation {4 years)
of the proposed hydroelectric project to determine if mitigation measures
are warranted.
Description:
This study was originally proposed as a multi-year sampling program to enumer-
ate out-migrating fry and returning adult pink salmon in the Bradley River.
However, based on discussions between Alaska Department of Fish and Game
biologists and the Alaska Power Authority staff it was agreed that monitoring
of juvenile salmon outmigrants would be deleted because the effort (i.e.,
time, money, and manpower) required to conduct this aspect of the study
exceeded the expected benefits to the fishery resource and the state. Another
agreement which was reached at this time was that the use of a fixed weir to
monitor the small spawning population of pink salmon in Bradley River was cosf
prohibitive and impractical (Eberle 1986).
The preferred alternative is to conduct ground surveys during each year of the
program to collect field data in the primary spawning reach in Bradley River
between Eagle Pool [river mile {RM) 4.5] and Bear Island Slough {RM 5.2) when
adult pink salmon are present. Based on previous inventory work, pink salmon
milling is thought to be most predominate below this reach, although fish
which will ultimately spawn in adjacent systems will undoubtedly move into the
study reach. While Bradley River spawners cannot be precisely segregated from
fish which are milling in the Bradley River but destined for other systems,
the effect of milling on establishing an index may be minimized by confining
sampling to this reach. A replication of electrofishing and/or beach seining
would be used in conjunction with a mark-and-recapture methodology during each
year of the program to produce a population index which could be compared from
year to year. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game's primary objective in
this study will be to develop a catch per unit effort (CPUE) index using a
repeatable sampling strategy each year that will allow a comparison of the
trend between years. A secondary objective will be to attempt to develop a
population estimate of the pink salmon population that utilizes the Bradley
River mainstem for spawning using an open population model developed by
Darroch (1961) and discussed further in Seber {1982).
In order to generate this index, field work will be conducted during low tide
in 2-day sessions and repeated every 6-10 days between July 15 and Sep-
tember 15. Ouring the 1986 sampling season the stream life of pink salmon in
Bradley River will be evaluated and the frequency of sampling during sub-
sequent years of the program wi 11 be set according to an estimate of the
stream life we hope to establish this year. All pink salmon that are captured
by electrofishing and/or beach seining in the sampling reach will be tagged
with a colored plastic "spaghetti 11 tag with a unique 4-digit number. A
different color tag will be used for each sampling trip during the 8-week
study. During subsequent sampling trips, the crew will sample the same reach
with electrofishing and beach seining and tally the catch by marked and
unmarked pink salmon and gear type. All captured salmon will be identified by
species, sexed if possible, and its relative spawning maturity determined.
Data Availability I Data Needs:
Previous studies have estimated the relative abundance of pink salmon in the
mainstem of the Bradley River at 1,000 fish in 1983 and 1,600 to 2,300 fish in
1985. The proposed monitoring program will strengthen the data base necessary
to determine pre-project abundance trends and provide the information to
assess construction and post-project impacts and mitigation requirements.
Deliverables:
A technical report documenting the activities and results associated with the
Bradley River pink salmon abundance monitoring program.
Schedule:
Draft Report: February 15, 1986
Final Report: March 30,1986
(
Literature Cited:
Alaska Power Authority (APA). 1985. Mitigation plan, November 1985. Bradley
Lake Hydroelectric Project. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project
No. P-8221-000. Anchorage, Alaska.
Darroch, J.N. 1961. The two-sample capture-recapture census when tagging and
sampling are stratified. Biometrika 48:241-260.
Eberle, D. 1986. Correspondance from David Eberle, Project Manager for
Bradley Lake and Small Hydro, to Ken Florey, Regional Supervisor in the
Commercial Fisheries Division of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game,
on January 27, 1986. Alaska Power Authority, File No. 2657/538.
Schroeder, T. Pers. comm. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Commercial
Fisheries Division. Homer, Alaska.
Seber, G.A.F. 1982. The estimation of animal abundance, and related para-
meters. MacMillan Publishing Company Incorporated, New York.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants. 1983. Bradley River instream flow studies.
Anchorage, Alaska.
(
Alaska Power Authority
March 19, 1986
Mr. Robert Bowker
Field Supervisor
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
WAES
411 West 4th Avenue, Suite 2B
Anchorage, AK 99501
COMMENTS ON JANUARY 22, 1986
NOTES OF CONFERENCE
S:ote Of AIOSKO
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
Enclosed are the Alaska Power Authority's responses to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service February 11, 1986 letter containing comments on
the January 22, 1986 Notes of Conference.
Should you have any questions please contact Mr. T.J. Arminski.
David R. Eberle
Project Manager
DRE/NAB/JJ
Enclosure
2-395-JJ
(
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTERN ALASKA ECOLOGICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
U.S. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR
FEBRUARY 11, 1986 LETTER FROM MR. ROBERT BOWKER
JANUARY 22, 1986 NOTES OF CONFERENCE
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROEJCT
USFWS-1 Clearing of the Reservoir Area
USF&WS -WAES Comment
The FWS has no objection to the proposed reservoir clearing plan. We
support the proposal to limit clearing to elevation 1140' at the head
end as the shrub vegetation in this area may provide seasonal (spring,
early summer) browse for moose.
Alaska Power Authority Response:
The Alaska Power Authority believes that during the late winter some
browse may be exposed within the reservoir inundation area. The
Mitigation Plan identifies that moose monitoring will occur during
reservoir filling. This monitoring will confirm the browse opportunity
maintained within the reservoir innundation area.
2-357-JJ
i
\
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTERN ALASKA ECOLOGICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
U.S. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR
FEBRUARY 11, 1986 LETTER FROM MR. ROBERT BOWKER
JANUARY 22, 1986 NOTES OF CONFERENCE
BRAPLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROEJCT
USFWS-2 Erosion Control Measures
USF&WS -WAES Comment
The FWS commends the design efforts in the locating and sizing of water
passage and control structures. We understand that the drawings are
preliminary and that modifications may be necessary to "field fit"
existing construction conditions.
The notes state the dike at the Martin River borrow area "· • • will be
designed for the 50-year storm." This is in conflict with the Project
Mitigation Plan, Section 5.10.2, Design and Construction of the Borrow
Area, as it states: (a) "A dike, designed to withstand a flood with a
100 year recurrence interval 9 will be constructed •.• " and (b) "The
design includes setting the elevation • • • to withstand the 100 year
flood. " Drawing 1551 093-MP-2, Martin River Dike Details, does not
specify the flood event for which the dike was designed. Please
provide assurance that the 100 year flood event will be addressed in
the Martin River dike design.
Section 3.1.3.3, Upland Sites, of the Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Best Management Practices Manual states that "Excavated faces of rock
quarries may be left vertical, but no face should be more than 30 feet
high without an intermediate bench 10 feet wide. These benching
dimensions should be included in the Notes and in Section 2-2 of
Drawing #551093-MP-3, Riprap Quarry Mining Plan.
Alaska Power Authority Response:
1. The Alaska Power Authority has implemented the following wording
in its specifications for the Site Preparation Contract:
2-357-JJ
"The Contractor shall monitor all construction work and
prevent environmental degradation. Each Contractor employee
shall be trained concerning environmental and construction
safety requirements and regulations. The training program
will include a worker orientation program to be conducted by
the Construction Manager, and monitoring of the actual
construction work by the Contractor and the Construction
Manager.
2
(
(
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTERN ALASKA ECOLOGICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
U.S. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR
FEBRUARY 11, 1986 LETTER FROM MR. ROBERT BOWKER
JANUARY 22, 1986 NOTES OF CONFERENCE
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROEJCT
USFWS-2 Erosion Control Measures (Continued)
Alaska Power Authority Response (Continued):
2.
Should construction methods or practices be noted as the work
progresses which result in detrimental environmental effects,
the Contractor shall change its methods and take any
necessary corrective action as approved by the Construction
Manager."
and
"The Construction Manager will monitor that the Contractor is
in compliance with environmental related plans and specifi-
cations, permit conditions, and project specific mitigation
practices defined in the contract documents."
The Hartin River Dike has been designed for a 100 year flood
event.
3. The Alaska Power Authority has revised the Engineer's drawing for
the riprap quarry to show a 5 ft wide bench every 30 ft in height
for the excavated rock faces. Having 10 ft wide benches would
require the disturbance of nearly an additional acre of
vegetation. The 10 ft wide benches may also result in additional
freeze/thaw rock falls within the quarry.
2-357-JJ 3
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTERN ALASKA ECOLOGICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
U.S. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR
FEBRUARY 11, 1986 LETTER FROM MR. ROBERT BOWKER
JANUARY 22, 1986 NOTES OF CONFERENCE
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROEJCT
USFWS-3 Permanent Camp
USF&WS -WAES Comment
We concur with the re-locating of the permanent facilities to a .site
adjacent to the powerhouse. Impacts to habitat which produce moose
browse will be minimized as a result of the relocation.
Alaska Power Authority Response:
Thank you for your concurrence.
2-357-JJ
(
(
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTERN ALASKA ECOLOGICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
U.S. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR
FEBRUARY 11, 1986 LETTER FROM MR. ROBERT BOWKER
JANUARY 22, 1986 NOTES OF CONFERENCE
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROEJCT
USFWS-~ Design Improvements of the Barge Dock
USF&WS -WAES Comment
The FWS has no objection to the modifications proposed for the barge
dock and access thereto. Blocking the existing slough and excavating
an alternate channel to -8' should provide for adequate tidal flow and
rearing fish movement.
We suggest that the Corps of Engineers permit not be modified to
reflect the proposed changes in the barge landing facility and the
additional slough excavation. It is reasonable to expect any
construction contractor to develop a temporary storage capacity in the
barge unloading area. We understand the excavated spoil will be
utilized in the construction of islands within the waterfowl mitigation
area.
Alaska Power Authority Response:
The Alaska Power Authority concurs with these comments.
2-357-JJ
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTERN ALASKA ECOLOGICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
U.S. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR
FEBRUARY 11, 1986 LETTER FROM MR. ROBERT BOWKER
JANUARY 22, 1986 NOTES OF CONFERENCE
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROEJCT
USFWS-5 Design Improvements of the Powerhouse Substation
USF&WS -WAES Comment
We support the design change as it will result in less habitat
destruction.
Alaska Power Authority Response:
Thank you for your concurrence.
2-357-JJ 6
(
I
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTERN ALASKA ECOLOGICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
U.S. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR
FEBRUARY 11, 1986 LETTER FROM MR. ROBERT BOWKER
JANUARY 22, 1986 NOTES OF CONFERENCE
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROEJCT
USFWS-6 Status of Project Design
USF&WS -WAES Comment
The changes in project design from the original Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) license application support the resource
agency request to update the Terrestrial Impact Assessment Report to
reflect as-built conditions. We concur with the Alaska Power
Authority's proposal to conduct this assessment after project
operations start.
Alaska Power Authority Response:
Thank you for your concurrence.
2-357-JJ 7
(
\
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
WESTEflN ALASKA ECOLOGICAL SERVICES COMMENTS
U.S. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR
FEBRUAflY 11, 1986 LETTER FflOH MR. ROBERT BOWKER
JANUARY 22, 1986 NOTES OF CONFERENCE
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROEJCT
USFWS-7 Conceptual Plans for 1986 through 1989 Fish Study Program
USF&WS -WAES Comment
We understand the APA is developing a fishery proposal for agency
review and concurrence.
Alaska Power Authority Response:
This work is in progress and should be available for review in March.
2-357-JJ
J'
(
)
NOTES OF CONFERENCE
PINK SALMON ABUNDANCE MONITORING
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
Held at the offices of
National Marine Fisheries Service
Federal Building
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
March 26, 1986
PURPOSE
J .0. 15800.78
WP 98D-6
Present for:
National
Service
Marine
Mr. Brad Smith
Fisheries
Stone & Webster Engineering
Corporation CSWEC)
Mr. John Downing
To discuss the proposal developed by Ken Florey to monitor pink salmon
abundance in the Bradley River. Also to discuss modifications
necessary to conduct this work by contractors other than Alaska
Department of Fish and Game.
SUMMARY
Mr. Smith had not previously received a copy of Ken Florey's proposal.
Although the impact of concern for the National Marine Fisheries
Service is changes in outmigration timing due to temperature
modifications, Mr. Smith agrees that the costs of measuring these
changes are too great to justify. These costs include not only the
direct expense of a sampling program but also impacts to the
population associated with sampling mortality from the use of any fry
sampling method. Mr. Smith agrees that if the proposed adult sampling
program is carried out for four years after operation, the overall
impact of operation would be monitorable.
Mr. Smith was also in agreement with the concept of using an index to
monitor population changes of adults during pre-and post-operational
periods. He also understands that data collected for the index would
not always be useful to provide an estimate of population size. Mr.
Smith recognizes that the index is a good compromise statistic to use
to reduce potentf al impacts to the fishery resource associated with
the greater sampling effort required to estimate population size.
Mr. Smith safd he would defer judgement on appropriateness of gear to
Mr. McKay. Mr. McKay has more experience with the conditions on the
Bradley River. Mr. Downing suggested that ten hoopnets could be
deployed in both the Tree Bar and Riffle Reach areas for about 36
1-188-JW 1
( )
\
) ,
hours per week. These nets would be checked about every 12 hours.
Mr. Down1 ng also suggested that a carcass count be conducted in. the
spawning areas, three days per week to provide another index of
abundance which could be monitored from year to year. This index is
suggested because signs of dead pinks in the Bradley River provide
good evidence that these fish have spawned in the Bradley and don't
represent stray fish from other river systems. Mr. Smith agreed with
the general 1 evel of effort proposed and 1 1 ked the idea of a carcass
count.
Mr. Smith is looking forward to reviewing a revised scope of work.
J. Downing
JO/JW
1-188-JW 2
(
J. 0. No. 15 500 NOTES OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Sheet l of _L_ -Alaska Power Authority
;s!Joo. 12... ')e D &'· G.
File No • ..::l..::S::..SO::..:O:::...·::___:<~---...:..) _________ _
SUBJECT .6'.tf?OL£Y li/(Je/(
INSTRUCTIONS: Summarize your phone
discussion, noting participants,
date & time of call. Indicate
desired distribution at right. Call
reporter must insert File Numbe~
and Subject(s) in file box above.
Clerk takes care of Chrono file copy
and distribution.
DISTRIBUTION:
JJMPlante/DLMatchett DOC GF ~
JJGarrity/Chron Files ===~<=-/'--Qf ~"~h,J p
T Critikos JBK TK WP --,o~
DPRyan
JMMissel
NABishop
LCDuncan
CLClark
JHron
GEEng
MMiddaugh
WCSherman
JSYale
R.Krohn
JNowak
Tl.4 --
--
e. ruc..H-
Call Date 30 5" jg' Time ...:;;)::.__~_a_c; __ ;P_-n__ Incoming -----
v
Outgoing_.;;.~ __ ,_
Between -.:/o'#.<J :lJot.-VI'JJA.l (f-" SWEC & ------------------~APA
-----------__..:SWEC & ----------------(
lf?c61 L/;VAJO/J" 4~-rt_;
Originated by: "\./0/-t./ :zb..uA..).N"JcC
DISCUSSION: We: .2J;Scu::;sco ..;./;19'/?&: -
& _________________ (
)
)
A/./£/ O~C//tl::::"S. _L 7 w#:S. ..oc;..,f/£;££) '#'.£'/· ,/ivY Pa.£'o.:_,c.Ji't:nJ e-:::7>/>f,(I/E
/'fE;1?/vO S'fi'i::/J:...£) ;P;?c'J/)t.x:c. ,f'e:,-t/JJJV£ /-'.il};c.;::-:5 o;: 413'-'.V()/!J.:<-: .+'/..J(} ,"-1//JJ:l/;2c-
5,.tP7//L/.rVC... /YJt/.17.?<-; rY
ACTION REQUIRED:N;f U;JIJO,U tfc:,:;:,;ut;i51Ep /.#/2F /J C:.'j.t?r.:-:--/ ce."/ 0:::
-)-[ ~· .1/..;" /..
pp 6-6-0
ATTACHMENT A
Page l of l
December 19, 1985
(
J.O. No. l5500 NOTES OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
/5 [.O.J /.;.. ~''F-,f)
Alaska Power Authority
&
File No . ..:.1.::..5.:::..5.::..00=-·:__;('-----...:._----._....,__-----
Sheet l of 3_
SUBJECT 25/f~OLr <;:.L~/.-:"P';v . .J..6'P#L9.1/./&:-
DISTRIBUTION: INSTRUCTIONS: Summarize your phone
discussion, noting participants,
date & time of call. Indicate
desired distribution at right. Call
reporter must insert File Numbe~
and Subject(s) in file box above.
Clerk takes care of Chrono file copy
and distribution.
JJMPlante/DLMatchett DOC
JJGarrity/Chron Files
T Critikos JBK TK WP
DPRyan
GF -:5-~qg~
JMHissel
NAB is hop
LCDuncan
CLClark
JHron
GEEng
MM.iddaugh
WCSherman
JSYale
RK.rohn
JNowak
Tl.4 --
Call Date 3;? tbb' Time <)': 3 Cl
£.Puc.p
Incoming ----Outgoing
Between--E# ;() .:z:bw#/1ll? SWEC & ____________ __;APA
__________ _;SWEC & ____________ (
t)C';U /1 t:; ;{:, Y & AD F+ &-<
Originated by: ~#.<../ "ZJ~AJ6-'
)
)
DISCUSSION: U/_c ?};;:)C..O:)SGI} rf1;:.V f"(...Qf'GY-'.5 :;JV..fo/'t'.S..Rt. ~.:'? ;tj6,d/To~
//./3t/p/JAJC..6 a" P;,VJ( $,4L(V)tJA/. & !fc;f;qy .&(£.-1'&60
c;_f:" 4&:r' F/5# C/JPTLI,fe_ ;PC:t.-Oh:,{/ #.0 ,4(£-fliC£) · ;7v/l/ 7/f.-4/lP&T!J/J<f=
Sg'C-VL.O /36 ~Lt;T/Vb /Al 5?/Jt o~ t-1'7$T %/}/{5 6Xfb>'f/e;AJt:.E.
ACTION REQUIRED: ________________________ _
BL-D-99:md
pp 6-6-0
ATTACHMENT A
· P~ 1 of 1
December 19, 1985
(
(
J.O. No. 15500 NOTES OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
BRADLEY LAKF. HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Alaska Power Authority
J'j[C'~'· 7}._ c,xt,'() &
File No. 15500. ( )
SUBJECT E '/ i C: Y :/jvc-.-( ~k ~'--A'vJ
DISTRIBUTION:
Sheet)-of _J__
INSTRUCTIONS: Summarize your phone
discussion, noting participants,
date & time of call. Indicate
desired distribution at right. Call
reporter must insert File Number<ST
JJMPlante/DLMatchett DOC GF
·and Subject(s) in file box above.
Clerk takes care of Chrono file copy
and distribution.
Call Date 3./.)c./rt: Time ..;._9_:...;;;3_o ___ _
Between ...:::z;; ,41 .1{/ U.<~ .. U.JiA.Jk SWEC &
SWEC &
&
Originated by:
----JJGarrity/Chron Files
T Critikos JBK TK WP ~
DPRyan
JMHissel
NAB is hop
LCDuncan
CLClark
JHron
GEEng
MMiddaugh
WCSherman
JSYale
RKrohn
JNmtak
Tl.4 --
e": • ..PC:J C.h'
Incoming
~();::--+?
------
i7
Outgoing v
APA
( )
( )
DISCUSSION: We ZJ/5Co5$E£1 ?,Poj4:;SE0 fft:/,tlj;?C.P'//ON5 /P ;fE.v ho;ft;f:"S
P:£<7/'tP5fi'L-. g A~cfCELJ "WT /.P"c uuct. o/ 7ZfPr:' /./&7 5/P'.c.-/.ur-'/-~~0
::.;.e;&.MG£1 &56P./JdLc~ r.::1_.f czoP/T({-'/f'/P? .4.NO /"f/u/!p!2/Ptr" .::_4n;t/t.;~&
no1'J21LJ!Y '/v 7(16 :;:;br:'o.t../llo~ /:/{ ~Y ;ptLJ ...u<?/ #?'.N&
C4~</.):5:S CC< .. hVTS (AJC}UJ....£) 8C: ,4 6a::Jt) 4./,1) y rc; /"ft.C'A:IJ/0/( /)/6 Po/'?~v//c.-U
5/..uc-6 so /"'Jt?MY < .o,lf</J:S:5eS /..VOUL/) Gt? v,v-..>66.U, _z-ex/i.N-uG.O Tv /i}:
/1?tif :tk""r LU,M::: 7JA'oi'<:J::5JM6-T/!15 ,45 .4# /ltJLJ;r;oAJ.4L ;,.u/J6.,; -4#.0 /o
AC/ A .s ,4A.I ,4L-tt/f~,dJ?o6 • t:'5t!5"A ~ Fe!( /!I£C/1/7ll;f/P~ ;::;:;}.! P?GEL:> wif/ .. //?J'S5/(,I[ ,..a,uf.
ACTION REQUIRED·
BL-D-99:md
PP 6-6-0
ATTACHMENT A
_ Pa"'"-1 of 1
December 19, 1985
/
\
J .0. No. 15500
/ 'j -.,-(/(7, 7).
NOTES OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
. BRADLEY LAKF. HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
Alaska Power Authority
Sheet J of
File No. ..::..l.::.S.::.5G.:..G:;_;;_. _(:.___ ___ --'):....__ ________ _
SUBJECT /?;tAX
DISTRIBUTION:
JJMPlante/DLMatchett DOC GF
INSTRUCTIONS: Summarize your phone
discussion, noting participants,
date & time of call. Indicate
desired distribution at right. Call
reporter must insert File Number(s)
----
·and Subject(s) in file box above.
Clerk takes care of Chrono file copy
and distribution.
/J/?4
A/A
JJGarrity/Chron Files
T Critikos JBK TK WP
DPRyan
JMHissel
NAB is hop
LCDuncan
CLClark
JHron
GEEng
MMiddaugh
WCSherman
JSYale
RKrohn
JNowak
Tl.4 --
--
Call Date w~/g~ Time ?'; 5 .tf
Between ~~ 2Jc.IA.Ip'pt/f-
<0:. /v.-:-p
Incoming · ----
j/""
Outgoing --=.._---
SWEC & -------------------APA
SWEC & ( ----------------------------------------
Zh,v d~y & fl'o;::-+? <
Originated by: -:z;;i;u#' UC">t/p//J C--•
DISCUSSION: 4 /"'!elf/, y<:s ;::-/;tJ/JL Cd."?/'7Efi// W.P:S J;(Y.!'/ A./0
M/-'/Z:66( W/v~/ ?,foc.t5ov/(~;;:5 /J /lc; 9L.P/J/./EL) .. .:-..,_..k! u5E
ACTION REQUIRED: /"1.1(. dc,li'z' t-0L-L 6~ pf'FG:??/vt-/
A./64./ sco_,..?[' FP/' /?~u!CW.
BL-D-99:md
pp 6-6-0
ATTACHMENT A
-Paee-1 of 1
December 19, 1985
)
)
)
)
NOTES OF CONFERENCE
AGENCY DESIGN REVIEW
BRADLEY LAKE HDYROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
Held at Stone & Webster Engineering
Corporation (SWEC) Conference Room
800 "A" Street, Anchorage, Alaska
April 15, 1986 at 9:00 AM
PURPOSE
Present for:
J.O. No. 15800.12
WP 98A
Alaska Power Authority
(APA)
Tom Arminski
Dave Trudgen
Dames & Moore
Jim Hemming
John Morsell
Dryden & LaRue, Inc.
Del LaRue
Agencies
Hank Hosking, USF&WS
Robert Cutler, DNR
Deborah Heebner, DNR
Bill MacClarence, ADEC
Mike Lewis, ADEC
Dan Wilkerson, ADEC
Tim Rumfelt, ADEC
Don McKay, ADF&G/Habitat
Stone & Webster Engineering
Corporation (SWEC)
Norm Bishop
Ron Krohn
Elaine Puch
The meeting was held to discuss (1) Project Status, (2) Transmission
Line Alignment, (3) Site Preparation Contract Bid Documents, (4)
Proposed Salmon Escapement Survey Methods, (5) Vegetation Clearing
Plan, ( 6) Erosion Control Plan, and ( 7) Visual Resources Mitigation
Plan. Attachment 1 is the agenda. Attachment 2 is the sign-in
attendance sheet. Attachment 3 is a draft of the Assessment of
Transmission Line Alternatives. Attachment 4 is a draft of the Salmon
Escapement Survey Scope of Work.
2-533-JJ
DISCUSSION
1. Project Status:
The Phase I Site Preparation Contract Bid Documents have gone out to
bidders and responses are due April 29th. Three addendums have been
writ ten and Addendum No. 4 is to go out Friday, April 18. There has
been a large response by potential bidders. Ground breaking is
expected to be in May. The main Civil Construction Contract Bid
Documents will cover the underground work, dam, and tunnel. These bid
documents will be out at the end of 1986. Sixty percent status in
design will be achieved by July or August. With regards to the
transmission line bid documents, the contracts will be awarded in
1987/1988. There will be a fabrication contract for the transmission
line towers and also a construction contract. A survey/land appraisal
will be done this June and a centerline survey will be done in July.
Overall the work is on schedule. The FERC license was obtained last
year. The Corp of Engineers Section 10/404 permit is to be issued this
month. The EPA NPDES is pending but expected to be issued shortly.
Hank Hosking requested that the spruce bark beetle cleanup be
discussed. This item was added to the end of the agenda.
2. Site Preparation Bid Documents
The bid documents have specifications addressing permit articles
obtained from the regulatory agencies. The contractor will be required
to implement the specifications, such as preparing a Spill Prevention
Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan and necessary spill control
measures. Hank Hosking commented that adequate environmental
guidelines were included in the Bid Documents.
Dames & Moore, Inc. will be responsible for many of the environmental
tasks conducted by the Construction Management, Bechtel, Inc. Mr. Jim
Hemming of Dames & Moore, Inc. explained their responsibilities which
include environmental review of the design and bid documents,
Rreparatioo of a permit tracking plan, compliance monitoring and
preparation of an Environmental Briefing Manual and Program. The Dames
& Moore role in the field has not been strictly defined at this time.
Hank Hosking asked that USF&WS be made aware of Dames & Moore's role
when finalized. Hank Hosking also expressed concern regarding the
extent of monitoring during construction. Norm Bishop stated that a
draft plan has been developed and the agencies will be able to review
it. This should be available before the agency meeting in May.
Mr. Hosking also suggested that during site preparation a person in
addition to the Environmental Field Officer be on site in a monitoring
capacity. Mr. Bishop stated that this item will be decided upon after
the contractor is on board.
The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation ( ADEC) noted that
they had written comments on the bid documents. Bill MacClarence was
concerned about open burning. He noted that the total acreage and type
2-533-JJ 2
)
of timber to be burned was not stated. The ADEC calculated close to
2700 acres to be burned. Mr. MacClarence was also concerned about the
control strategy for smoke. ADEC is concerned that this would have the
potential to be another Point MacKenzie. Mr. Bishop explained that the
total clearing in Phase I is less than 77 acres. The powerhouse
clearing is complete, the roads will be run along the tidal flats where
possible. Clearing will be done in the camp site area and the Martin
River. Some of the timber to be cut is cottonwood. Timber classified
as commercial will have the bark removed. Timber to be used for house
logs will not have the bark removed. Mr. Calvin Kerr, Forester,
determined there would be enough logs to construct approximately 1 to 2
houses. No reservoir clearing or transmission line clearing will take
place under Phase I site work. The ADNR is concerned about use of the
timber if merchantable. Merchantability will be determined through
on-project utilization or timber sale. It is expected that the
contractor will bury slash and debris from road clearing due to the
narrow road width. Spoil locations have been identified and a permit
submitted. It is made clear to the contractor in the bid documents
that he will need to obtain a ADEC permit to burn slash and debris.
The ADEC asked that the opacity standards be explained for
incinerators. Mr. Bishop responded that the incinerator specification
is complete and that the incinerator is sized so that a permit is not
required for its operation. Mr. Dan Wilkerson requested a few points
of clarification be made to the bid documents. Solid Waste permits
must be obtained as well as food service permits and a plan review for
potable water. The contractor will be the operator for the temporary
facilities. Mr. Bishop responded that the wastewater from the
permanent camp leach field will have zero discharge. The water rights
are being obtained for the permanent camp well. The bid documents
include information to flag permits that have been obtained or are
needed. Dames & Moore will be responsible for permit tracking for
compliance.
3. Transmission Line Alignment
Del LaRue of Dryden & LaRue, Inc. discussed the work completed to date
on the transmission line design and the alignment. The current plan is
to do a centerline survey this summer and a fabrication contract in
1987/88 followed by a construction contract. The line will consist of
two individual tower 115 kV circuits. The types of structures being
considered are the wooden H frame and the steel X tower. The steel X
tower is simple, stronger and fewer towers per mile are required,
therefore, the spans can be increased. On an economic basis there is
no significant cost differential. Mr. Hosking asked if foundations had
to be built for the towers. Driven steel H-pile foundations are
proposed. No concrete foundations are anticipated. The foundations in
the Fox River Valley will have riprap armament. The Corps of Engineers
route has been modified and the line terminates at the Homer Electric
line. The line runs parallel to section lines and avoids swamps and
private property where possible. Exceptions are where the line crosses
the SE corner of the Swanson property and the western edge of the
Hilmer-Olsen fox farm. Coming out of the Fox River Valley near the
2-533-JJ 3
Swanson property, the transition from plateau to valley is made in one
span thus eliminating towers on the hillside. The Fox River Flats
emergency airstrip is avoided. The towers will be of varying height
depending on the topography (approximately 80 to 85 ft). A windthrow
problem may exist on the steep spruce covered slopes north of the
powerhouse. These trees have weak root support systems. If a
right-of-way is cut through this vegetation some additional trees may
blow down. Therefore, the line has been moved down from the hillside
to span knob to knob. Right of way clearing has been greatly reduced.
Windthrow consultation with Mr. Bob Burke of the U.S. Forest Service in
Petersburg, Alaska has been on-going. Mr. Burke has worked on
wind throw problems in logging operations in Alaska and has been asked
to investigate the severity of the problem and to min~m1ze this
problem. Mr. Ron Krohn (SWEC) will be meeting with Mr. Burke on
Thursday and Friday, April 17 and 18. Mr. Don McKay requested the
notes from Mr. Krohn's meeting with Mr. Burke. With regards to
aesthetics, the lines will alter the visual quality of the area and be
in contrast with the existing natural character.
Mr. Norm Bishop summarized the attempts being made to address
environmental concerns. All streams and the Bradley River will be
crossed perpendicularly, minimal crossing of wetlands will be done,
clearing will be minimized, the Fox Farm buildings will not be
disturbed, no towers will be located in the flats. A question Has
raised as to what type of access is needed to put up the lines and
towers. Del LaRue responded that in certain areas it may be done by
helicopter. Some sections could be erected with ATV's. It was noted
that Don McKay had not seen the alignment before today. Mr. McKay will
send comments in a few weeks.
Hank Hoskings asked if a higher wire span would be used in the pond
area near the Olsen Fox Farm to accommodate the flight path of the
water fowl. Mr. LaRue said the towers could be heightened to
accomplish this. All that changes is the economics of the tower design
and the limitations of space on the knobs for the foundations.
Attachment 3, the Draft Assessment of Transmission Line Alternatives
was distributed at the meeting. Written comments were requested by the
end of April.
4. Salmon Escapement Survey
Attachment 4, the Draft Salmon Escapement Survey, was distributed. Mr.
Bishop indicated that this document was a working copy and comments
were requested. Comments are to be submitted by the end of April to
Mr. Tom Arminski, APA. A request was made that Brad Smith, N'MFS (who
was not in attendance) be sent a copy of this survey.
5. Vegetation Clearing Plan
ADEC voiced a concern that the contractor clearly understands the
requirements and permits needed for burning as a method of disposing of
2-533-JJ 4
)
material resulting from clearing. Meterological data may be required
in order to determine burn days. No long-term monitoring will be
required. Homer airport data may be useful. Mr. Bishop stated that
the contractor must have a plan of operation and acquire all necessary
permits. Burning spruce should be clean and complete.
Mr. Bob Cutler, ADNR, said the Division of Forestry had comments which
should be in by the end of the week. These comments will be
transmitted to APA and SWEC next week. Mr. Cutler questioned who would
be responsible for bark beetle control problem. Mr. Arminski stated
that the Power Authority would be responsible for control and
eradication of bark beetles with respect to timber taken at the project
site.
Comments on this plan were requested by the end of April.
6. Erosion Control Plan
The intent of this plan is to build into the design erosion control
features. The contractor will be using these measures to prevent
erosion.
The ADEC made several comments:
0 To make cuts at maximum slope/steepness encourages erosion
and sloughing of banks. Buffer strips can and should be
provided adjacent to streams, critical areas and borrow
sites.
Mr. Bishop stated that the reference to steep slopes
pertained to cuts in rock which is vertically bedded. The
steep rock slopes will minimize erosion. Buffer strips are
provided for on the design drawings. Natural revegetation
will also be encouraged. Mr. Bishop referenced several
design drawings in the Site Preparation Contract Bid
Documents. The ADEC representatives were satisfied.
o Excess excavation material should not be indiscriminately
deposited at access road turnouts along the haul road; this
practice would add to erosion/siltation problems; as silt
would tend to plug an embankment and cause retention of
moisture, it is a poor choice for embankment material.
2-533-JJ
Mr. Bishop explained that road embankments have been
designed. No side casting will be allowed during road
clearing. Each culvert is designed. Shot rock will be used
as riprap and, therefore, very little unraveling should
occur. Designated disposal areas have been designed and a
permit application submitted. The access roads are narrow
single lanes therefore turnouts are needed, however, the
turnouts are not to be used as disposal areas.
5
\
o Rock lining of ditches also enhance settling of sediment from
the water column. The size and design of the batch plant
settling pond must also accommodate truck washout in addition
to batch plant water flows. Muddy wash water from aggregate
wash water needs to be recycled to minimize potential for
flow into the Martin River.
Mr. Bishop explained that the Martin River Borrow site has no
outlet into the Martin River during the period when materials
would be ex cava ted, washed or processed; therefore, no wash
water will enter Martin River. A dike will be built between
the Martin River and the ponds where washing occurs. The
dike will be constructed during the initial borrow
development. Silts will be discharged into and settle on the
bottom of the ponds within the Martin River Borrow area.
In other areas sedimentation basins will collect runoff. All
detention, retention or sedimentation basins will have
sorbent booms. At the concrete batching areas and at the
temporary construction camp there will be detention basins
where there will be sufficient retention time prior to
discharge.
The ADEC asked for the width of the sediment traps and questioned what
the difference is between a sediment trap and a sediment basin.
Mr. Bishop was referred to the Site Preparation Contract Bid drawing
551095-AR-42 which contains the formula used in the basin design.
The ADEC asked that silt fences if used be buried at the bottom and
hooked at the sides. Mr. Bishop indicated that this would be done.
1. Visual Resources Mitigation Plan
Ms. Elaine Puch summarized the visual resources plan. The purpose of
this plan is to comply with the FERC Article 39 which states the
Licensee shall develop a plan to avoid or minimize any disturbance to
the quality of existing visual resources of the Project area caused by
eonstructicn operation and maintenance of Project works.
No significant impacts are expected to occur due to individual
facilities or groups of facilities. Construction impacts, individually
and additively are short term. Martin River Access Roads will be
rehabilitated after construction and natural revegetation allowed to
occur. Access roads will be located behind tree buffers where
possible. The barge dock construction activity will be short term.
Occasional small boats will not attract attention compared to the scale
of landscape. The dock will be minimally evident. The Martin River
Borrow Pit will be rehabilitated to create a fish habitat. The lower
construction camp and the upper camp will be removed and the area
restored. The permanent facilities color and materials were selected
to complement the natural landscape. A tree buffer will be maintained
to reduce cutting of trees and to minimize the visual impact from
Kachemak Bay. The powerhouse is a low structure, partly underground
2-533-JJ 6
' l
)
and will be less visible from a distance, compared to the mountains.
The dam intake will be located underwater and the tunnel will be
underground. Construction activities will contrast with natural
features attracting attention for a short time. The visual condition
will change, but due to the scale of the landscape features, project
features will be subordinate and not significant.
Comments on this plan are requested by the end of April.
Additional Item: Spruce Bark Beetle Burn
Mr. Dave Trudgen, APA, summarized the spruce bark beetle cleanup.
Geotechnical clearing done in 1984 near the powerhouse, and the
helicopter pad near the North Fork of the Bradley River contained
felled timber infested with beetles. Therefore, the timber needed to
be sawn into lumber and bark burned before the beetles started to fly.
Equipment, including a portable saw mill, was barged in at high tide
and then brought to the powerhouse site via an ice road along Sheep
Point. Approximately 60,00 to 70,000 board feet of lumber was sawn and
left at the powerhouse site. Safety measures were taken and catch
basins were set up under each gas machines' tank. Upon completion of
the burning and cutting of the timber, the site was left neat and
clean.
Hank Hosking asked about the Bald Eagles near the site.
Mr. Bishop stated that a Bald Eagle Protection Act Scientific Study
permit application will be submit ted shortly. Measures will be taken
to minimize eagle disturbance. Plans are now being finalized for the
on-site study.
Dave was at the project site last Tuesday. He saw a pair of eagles at
the mouth of the Bradley River. There were no birds at the temporary
construction camp area. The pair of birds in the Martin River area
were not near the nest. There was no sign of nesting activity or eggs.
No birds were in the Battle Creek area.
Hank asked-that U.S. Fish & Wildlife personnel ~rom Soldotna be invited
to fly over the area with Dave next time.
Mr. Bishop stated that a Bald Eagle Protection Act Scientific Study
permit application will be submit ted shortly. Measures will be taken
to minimize eagle disturbance. Plans are now being finalized for the
on-site study.
A meeting with a ADNH Parks Division will be scheduled to discuss the
recreation facilities for the site. This is to occur late April or May.
Another Agency Design Review Meeting is to be scheduled for May.
EP/JJ
Attachments
2-533-JJ 1
APRIL 15, 1986
AGENCY MEETING
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
AGENDA
Attachment l
Held at 9:00 AM at the office of Stone & Webster Engineer ~orporati~n,
800 "A" Street, Anchorage, Alaska.
1. PROJECT STATUS
2. TRANSMISSION LINE ALIGNMENT
3. SITE PREPARATION CONTRACT BID DOCUMENTS
4. SALMON ESCAPEMENT SURVEY
5. VEGETATION CLEARING PLAN
6. EROSION CONTROL PLAN
7. VISUAL RESOURCES MITIGATION PLAN
2-506-JJ
~iME"
/ loRu Dlc5/-KJ~
i fJJ-v-, jl £_)h J /1.-' ·sl·_ i
~ Ne.. /0d ~e "'-
!IA/v k. ;lo5 J:~,J r;
Go£ Cu f/er
)
ATTENDANcE
Ac:DetJ C.'y M E E. II N ~
A'YRlL 15 1 1'l9Co
A~E.Ncy_
~}Je ~ W8e:61t=;IZ-
A t-j?o ~J {?_ rz_ A LA-ft._
fi-{Jft
r-v.J s
A/A
~NK..
J)~~/'(116~ • o~ f 11Av-ct/'e_
~ltbe.vf~a&er ):_,ve.-
~wLc_
Sw£c__,
Af)6c
/-1 ilF C
)/D&C----
!1() {_.::: c_
~\:)\=--~c. / t-~---t,,\--~
Attachment 2
Pt-toNe -=tt:-
277 ~?.. 4'-1
q~ i -18?1
56~-787 7
7£2-.2-). 7 7'-
1&: )_-)_)._ 7-tf
~~l.. -3J '~ _r, (_ -Jl~fo
.Scf-9-~653
Z?l~Z-t--tLl
277-2.407
2 ?f: -z ')-5 _:)
2 71-ZS'_??
;/-'7cf--;( _:) 3 5
ATTACHMENT 4
SALMON ESCAPEMENT SURVEY
SCOPE OF WORK
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In August 1985 a field effort was undertaken to enumerate pink salmon
returning to spawn in the Bradley River. A tag, release and recapture
method using hoop nets and electrofishing gear to collect specimens was
attempted. The numbers of captured and tagged individuals, however,
were insufficient to provide adequate estimates of spawning pink salmon
(Northern Technical Services, 1985). During the 1985 program, con-
ventional gear methods did capture sufficient numbers to estimate the
size of the relatively small Bradley :River population. Therefore,
either considerably more intensive sampling effort or more exotic
( sampling gear would be needed to ensure that salmon are captured in
great enough numbers to precisely estimate the adult populations.
After a thorough review of available methods, a weir or fyke net census
appeared to be the most cost effective manner to estimate the Bradley
River population of pink salmon. The cost of implementing this census
program was not considered reasonable by either the Alaska Power
Authority or fisheries management agencies with respect to the value of
the fishery resource. After discussion with the fishery resource
agencies, it was agreed that it would be more reasonable to develop an
annual index of abundance of adult escapement to the Bradley River.
The methods outlin~d below will produce an index of abundance over the
season which can be compared from year to year. These methods should
2-482-JJ
l
\
)
\ also produce the low level of sampling mortality desired for this
study. In years of great abundance these methods may recapture enough
tagged specimens to produce a crude estimate of population size. In
addition the program outlined below will provide a portion of the
sampling required for the tailrace studies after Project operation
begins.
2.0 LOCATION OF SAMPLING
Previous studies of pink salmon fry emergence (Woodward-Clyde
Consultants, 1984) shows that pink salmon fry occurred upstream of
Eagle Pool (RM 4.6) only. Greatest numbers of fry were confined to the
area above Riffle Reach (RM 4.7). Spawning pink salmon had been
observed in suitable spawning areas downstream of this location but no
fry or embryos were observed. Based on these observations, locations
for sampling of adults should be confined to the area above Eagle Pool
Reach. Sampling in this zone will restrict the indices of abundance to
those fish which are most likely contributing to the sustained
populations of salmon in the Bradley River. This should greatly reduce
the potential for counting strays from other systems.
3.0 METHODS AND MATERIALS
This section describes two methods to index the numbers of adult salmon
returning to the Bradley River to spawn. These methods are suggested,
in part, based on the results of the 1985 Field Survey and comments
2-482-JJ 2
)
)
\ provided by the fishery resource agencies. In addition, the methods
used in the pre-operation period must be repeatable in the
post-operational period to ensure that consistent data will be
available to demonstrate the effectiveness of the salmon mitigation
program.
3.1 LIVE ABUNDANCE ESTIMATES
Abundance sampling will provide an index of time of occurrence, species
composition, and abundance of adult salmon in the Bradley River. On
each Wednesday morning during the sampling period, ten hoop nets will
be set in both the upper portion of Riffle Reach and in Tree-Bar Reach.
The location of the 10 nets in each area will be chosen in the
beginning of the first year of study based on judgement of catch
expectation, and anchoring conditions both in 1986 and after operation
of the Bradley River Hydroelectric Project. These sampling stations
will become the standards for post-operational monitoring.
The hoop nets to be used will be six feet in diameter and at least
sixteen feet long. Al terna ti vely, the first opening can be six foot
square with subsequent hoops being six feet in diameter. All gear
should be of uniform design for all years of the study. Each will be
equipped with a 25 foot lead. The first and second throat openings
will be 18 and 12 inches in diameter, respectively. The net will be
constructed of 3 inch stretched mesh. Nets will be properly oriented
and anchored to ensure effective sampling and net recovery.
2-482-JJ 3
' I
)
)
The nets will be deployed on Wednesday morning. Actual fishing will
occur on the balance of the day on Wednesday and on Thursday morning.
Each net will be checked Wednesday afternoon and Thursday morning.
Nets will be checked and pulled Thursday afternoon. Each fish
collected will be identified to species, sexed, and observed for
condition, evidence of spawning and presence of an existing tag. Each
pink salmon collected will be tagged with a numbered Floy tag.
On Thursdays, between the morning check and the afternoon pull of the
nets, two 30 minute electrofishing samples will be collected in both
Riffle and Tree-Bar Reaches. Each fish collected will be identified to
species, sexed, and observed for condition, evidence of spawning and
presence of an existing tag. Each pink salmon collected will be tagged
with a numbered Floy tag of the same color used in the trap net portion
of the study.
With each week of effort standardized, the number collected in each
week will represent a catch per unit of effort index of abundance. The
seasonal trends and peaks in index of abundance can be compared from
year to year and provide a relative measure of the population of Pink
salmon in the Bradley River.
3.2 CARCASS COUNT SURVEY
Carcass counts have been used to estimate the escapement of Pacific
salmon to other river systems. This methodology typically under-
estimates total numbers of spawners because fish go uncounted due
2-482-JJ 4
') to predation, scavenging, and decomposition. However, as an index this
method can provide a relative measure of change in abundance from year
to year.
Carcass counts have been used to quantify man induced and natural
dieoffs of fish. One of the primary difficulties in conducting such a
study is subsampling large numbers of dead fish. This should not be a
problem for the Bradley River populations. Since the expected
populations are small, and the expected daily standing crop of
carcasses is small, no subsampling should be required.
)
Another consideration in conducting a carcass count is multiple
counting of the same carcass. This occurs because a carcass count is a
measure of the standing crop at a point in time. If carcasses are
surveyed more frequently than their rate of removal by scavenging or
decomposition, then total numbers observed over both time periods could
represent fish counted more than once. This potential source of bias
can be eliminated by removal, marking or tagging each fish as it is
)
counted. For this study each counted carcass will be Floy tagged
midway between the pectoral and dorsal fins to ensure tag retention.
The color of these Floy tags should be different from that used to tag
live salmon collected by net or electrofishing. During future tailrace
attraction studies a third unique-tag color will be required. If
carcasses are identifiable to species but are not tagable due to
advanced decomposition, the carcass should be removed from the water
and discarded well away from the shoreline.
2-482-JJ 5
I
I
)
The water surface and shoreline should be surveyed every Monday,
Wednesday and Friday during the sampling period. The river should be
surveyed from the furthest extent of upstream fish passage to the sharp
bend in the river below Riffle Reach {River Mile 4.5). Both riverbanks
and associated backwater areas will be surveyed on foot. Also where
the river is wide (at Riffle and parts of Tree-Bar Reach) the channel
should be surveyed by boat. Undoubtedly many carcasses which settle on
the river bottom will go unnoticed below the surface of the glacially
fed waters. Only carcasses identifiable by field techniques as pink
salmon will be counted and tagged. Other species identified will be
noted and recorded.
Since in each year the carcass survey effort is standardized, the total
number of carcasses observed each year should produce a useful index of
the relative abundance of pink salmon in the Bradley River. The
carcass survey provides another method to collect fish tagged during
netting and electrofishing and during future tailrace attraction
studies.
4.0 SAMPLING DURATION AND EFFORT
Adult salmon abundance sampling and carcass survey should begin by
July 15 and terminate no sooner than September 15 of each year. The
duration of sampling may be modified in subsequent years of study to
more closely match the stream life of pink salmon in the Bradley River.
2-482-JJ 6
\
)
To ensure safety and effectiveness of sampling, a sampling crew of
three persons will be required on every Thursday. The Monday,
Wednesday and Friday carcass counts can be collected by a single
individual. The Wednesday net set and checking can be conducted by two
persons. The carcass count daily effort should be paced to provide
eight hours of visual survey of the river each Monday, Wednesday and
Friday.
5.0 CONCURRENT DATA COLLECTION
Water temperature, river flow and general meterological conditions will
be recorded each day. At each electrofishing transect, a mid-depth
sample of conductivity will be collected.
6.0 REPORTING
A draft report documenting methodology, procedures and any variances
from the prescribed scope of work will be provided to the Alaska Power
Authority by October 15, 1986. The report should both summarize all
weekly index results, and provide the catch record (sex, condition,
species) of all sample efforts. The report will also document the
standard locations of sampling for each net both by charting and
photograph. After a one month review the final report will be
presented to the Alaska Power Authority by December 15, 1986 for
distribution to the Resource Agencies for consultation. The final
report will be submitted to FERC with any agency consultation
correpsondence in late January, 1987.
2-482-JJ 7
. '
J -
aH.i.Wt\l
MP...'f 0 6 \SSG
aWEG·f\NC\\OAAGE. ----BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
May 1, 1986
Mr. Tom Arminski
Alaska Power Authority
P.O. Box 190869
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869
Dear Mr. Arminski:
RECEI't7 ·J PY
ALAS:{;. , .
...... v. ~.
333 RASPBERRY ROAD
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99518-1599
...... . ....... '.-
) ·-' ... \ .... .
-f:..G LON: !
JJ,c_, ~ff s )r; '·-.1 .s: w £. (_.
"86 HAY -5 AlO :57 ·-~ L_pt:c..~-ti<!L ..
, _______ l.itzl/r:?_(,~--
1
1 ______ ! Sm-FP...,"-D
I
Re: Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project -Salmon Escapement Survey Scope
of Work
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the Salmon
Escapement Survey Scope of Work for the Bradley River. Although the
department endorses the Salmon Escapement Survey for the Bradley River as a
means of estimating an index of yearly abundance of pink salmon, the
department has several concerns with respect to the methodology outlined in
the scope of work.
The scope of work as presented calls for a series of hoop nets to be
deployed in Riffle Reach and Tree-Bar Reach on a weekly basis to sample pink
salmon abundance. An August 1985 Bradley River salmon escapement survey was
based on hoop nets and electroshocker techniques. During the August 1985
survey, only 26 pink salmon and 6 chum salmon were captured using hoop nets.
Further, the efficiency of hoop nets was affected by clogging with debris
and detritus, reversing currents at the lower survey station, and large
tidal fluctuations. The department therefore makes the recommendation that
a combination of beach seining and electroshocker techniques be utilized for
the Bradley River salmon escapement survey in addition to the use of passive
gear such as hoop nets. Beach seines used in such an operation should be of
a design that would prevent gilling of the captured salmon and have a net
holding area of sufficient dimensions and capacity to minimize crowding
stress and mortality to salmon when captured.
The scope of work is unclear as to the timing of the weekly deployment of
the hoop nets in the Bradley River. The first paragraph of Section 3.1
states that the hoop nets will be deployed every Wednesday morning, while
the third paragraph states that the hoop net will be deployed on Tuesday.
The timing of sampling using any means and specifically the deployment and
checking of nets should be done in relation to the tidal cycle. Hoop nets
should be deployed prior to a high tide so that the gear can be used through
the high tide portion _of the tidal cycle because fish typically migrate into
the stream on the high tide. The scope of work also calls for hoop nets to
(
Mr. Tom Arminski -2-5/1/86
be constructed of 3-inch stretched mesh. This size of mesh may gill some
fish. We therefore recommend that a smaller mesh size be considered for the
hoop nets.
The Salmon Escapement Survey Scope of Work also calls for a carcass count
survey to provide a relative measure of change in abundance from year to
year. The scope of work discusses the limitations associated with a carcass
count survey in other river systems (e.g. predation, scavenging, and
decomposition). Although a carcass count survey may provide a useful
measure of the change in salmon abundance from year to year, the turbid
nature of the Bradley River, the presence of deep pools that would obscure
carcasses, and the tidal influence which would help flush the system of
carcasses are all additional limitations that will affect the utility for
carcass count survey in the Bradley River.
The extent of sampling duration (July 15 to September 15) and the effort
involved in sampling appear appropriate for surveying salmon escapement on
the Bradley River. The department is willing to assist the Alaska Power
Authority (APA) in finalizing the Salmon Escapement Survey Scope of Work for
the Bradley River. We recommend that the scope of work contain reference to
sufficient alternative techniques to consider in case primary techniques are
not successful. Should you have any questions regarding our recommendations
or comments, contact either myself or Don McKay of the Habitat Division
(267-2283). Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the
Salmon Escapement Survey Scope of Work.
Sincerely,
Carl M. Van wa
Regional S ervisor
Habitat Division
267-2283
cc: K. Florey, AOF&G
R. Cannon, AOF&G
T. Schroeder, AOF&G
N. Dudiak, AOF&G
B. Smith, NMFS
H. Hosking, USFWS/WAES
AGENCY COORD!NATION MEETING
BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT
ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
MINUTES
MAY 19, 1986
The meeting was held at the offices of Dames & Moore at 9:00 a.m. Groups
represented at the meeting included the Environmental Protection Agency, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, National Marine Fisheries Service, Alaska
Power Authority, Bechtel and Dames & Moore (see attached attendance list).
John Smith provided an overview of the Bechtel Environmental Inspection
Program for the project and provided a chart showing the lines of field com-
munications for the project. EPA wanted to know if the SPCC Plan would be
obtained by the Construction Manager or the Contractor. Mr. Smith replied that
the SPCC Plan Development is the Contractor's responsibility but Bechtel would
be available to help them in that effort, if required. David Trudgen of the
Alaska Power Authority offered an overview of the environmental monitoring
program for the project. He passed out copies of the environmental monitoring
manual and a copy of the field form that will be used to record deviations, non-
camp 1 i ances or stop work orders. The agencies wondered whether copies of the
noncompliance documents would be given to the agencies. Mr. Trudgen replied
that all noncompliances would be provided to the agencies but not the
de vi at ions. Nat ion a 1 Marine Fisheries Service requested that copies of a 11
compliance actions including deviations, noncompliance and stop work orders be
brought to each of the regular agency meetings or be provided as attachments to
monthly surveillance reports distributed to the regulatory agencies.
The agencies agreed to provide co1m1ents on the draft construction phase
environmental monitoring program manual by May 26. 1986. Additional discussion
included the approach that will be used to implementing the environmental
checklist of the monitoring manual and what actions will occur once the non-
compliance has been corrected.
John Morsell of Dames & Moore provided an overview of the worker orien-
tation program developed by Dames & Moore and provided an outline of key items.
He announced that the worker orientation slide show would be presented at
Dames & Moore on Wednesday, May 28. ··1986, at 10:00 a.m. for any interested
agency representatives that wish to attend. He pointed out that two 1 eve 1 s of
briefings would be provided. One for the work force at large and another more
de~ailed presentation for supervisory personnel.
A question was raised about public access to the site and John Smith
clarified that public access will be controlled on the site subject to advance
coordination and approval by the Alaska Power Authority. Mr. Morsell then cir-
culated the Table of Contents from the Bradley Lake Project Environmental
Handbook which provides an introduction to the Bradley Lake area and rules for
environmental protection.
Mr. Morsell also distributed an implementation plan for the Bradley River
fish monitoring study program as requested at the April 24, 1986, agency coor-
dination meeting.
Dames & Moore estimates that copies of the handbook will be available from
the printer by May 28, 1986, in ample time for use of the initial worker
briefings.
Tom Arminski provided an update of the project status. The Nuka Agreement
is expected to be completed within the next few days. A bald eagle permit has
been received from the Fish and Wildlife Service for the experimental nesting
study. He pointed out that this study was needed as a mitigation measure
because nest trees in the project area are being washed-out through natural ero-
sion process.
Meeting was adjourned at 11:00 a.m.
JEH/pjr
cc: Tom Oxman -Bechtel
Harvey Elwin -Bechtel
David Eberle -APA
Tom Arminksi -APA
Jim Hemming -O&M
John Morsell -O&M
Name Affiliation Telephone
H'ank Hosking FWS 271-4575
Dan Robison EPA 271-5083
Dave Erikson Dames & Moore 235-8316
Mike McGuiness Fish & Game 267-2278
Don McKay Fish & Game 267-2283
Q. Carl Yenagawa Fish & Game 267-2283
Dave Trudgen APA 561-7877
Brad K. Smith NMFS 271-5006
John E. Smith Bechtel 235-6009
Jim Henmi ng Dames & Moore 562-3366
John Morse 11 Dames & Moore 562-3366
Tom Arminski APA 561-7877
Dan Wilkerson APA 274-2533
United States Department of the Interior
IN REPLY REFER TO:
WAES
Mr. David Eberle, Manager
Western Alaska Ecological Services
Sunshine Plaza, Suite 28
411 W. 4th Ave.
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
::t,...,....,...,, ·-!""<, ~ \/ ALA')~.~·: . . • MAY 2 .j 936
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Projast MAY 28 A 9 :19
Alaska Power Authority
P.O. Box 190869
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869
ttH.H'Jf.D
MA'i 2 q 1986
SW£C-~NCHOAAGE
Re: Fish Study Implementation Plan
Bradley Lake Project
Dear Mr. Eberle:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has no objection to the Bradley River Fish
Study Implementation Plan as submitted at the resource agency meeting on
19 May 1986. We understand the study will be conducted for a period of eight
years commencing in 1986.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
~~
Field Supervisor
cc: ADF&G, ADEC, ADNR, DGC, NMFS, EPA -Anc.
FERC -Portland
RECEIVED
BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR JUN 0 2 1986
SWEC-ANCHORAGE
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
May 28, 1986
Tom Arminski
Alaska Power Authority
701 E. Tudor Road
P. 0. Box 190869
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869
Dear Nr. Arminski:
333 RASPBERRY ROAD
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99518-1599
·as HAY 30 A10 :o 9
Re: Bradley River Salmon Escapement Monitoring Implementation Plan
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) Habitat Division has reviewed
the Bradley River Salmon Escapement Monitoring Implementation Plan. We
support the implementation plan as presented and find that it provides the
necessary flexibility in sampling methodology (e.g. electroshocker, beach
seines, hoop nets, angling, and visual observations) to develop an index of
pink salmon abundance in the Bradley River. The coordination of the
deployment of hoop nets with tide stage should help to increase the
effectiveness of this sampling gear. The findings of the salmon escapement
monitoring implementation plan shoula provide the Alaska Power Authority and
state and federal fishery agencies with insight into the effects of a
modified flow regime as a result of the construction of the Bradley Lake
Hydroelectric Project on fishery resources.
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Bradley River Salmon Escapement
Monitoring Implementation Plan. . _______________ --·-
' 1_..._.:(;::~ -··~;'.' ... :·:. -~~:.~ :-·,.-.. ~
Sincerely,
{Le J4fct;#~~--
Carl M. Ya~a U
Regional Supervisor
Habitat Division
Anchorage
Telephone 267-2283
cc: K. Florey, ADF&G
P. Krasnowski, ADF&G
T. Schroeder, ADF&G
D. Daisy, ADF&G
I ______ j ________ -
N. Dudiak, ADF&G
R. Bowker, USFWS
t4. Hayes, ADNR
----"-------------
D. Wilkerson, ADEC
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REPLY TO
A 7TN OF ~vs 443
REGION 10
1200 SIXTH AVENUE
SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98101
J . , ... Ill , " ·" .... f, ., "' ,.'(ltl
David Eberle, Project ~anager
Bradley lake Hydroelectric Project
Alaska Power Authority
701 East Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869 '86 .)~: i 0 AlO .34
Subject: Review of Draft Fisheries Monitoring Plans
Dear Mr. Eberle:
Thank you for sending us copies of the draft scopes of work for the
moni taring of .potential tail race. attraction and salmon escapement in the 1 ower
Bradley River. The scopes of work appear to be thorough and well-planned. We
look forward to reviewing the reports as they are completed.
There is only one modification we would suggest at this time. You may
wish to consider allowing for a flexible sampling schedule during the first
season of tailrace attraction monitoring. Sampling three times weekly seems
appropriate as a base frequency; if significant numbers of fish are attracted
to the tailrace, however, daily sampling may become necessary for a period of
time. Of course, some flexibility in your contracting system would be
necessary in order for this to be possible.
Thank you for the opportunity to review the scopes of work. If you have
any questions, please contact Brian Ross at (206) 442-8516.
cc: FERC
Sincerely,
ry'\( r (j_ , I v ,J._f .A-(__ v :.)_ ,____
~'-Marcia G. lagerloef, Chief
\ Environmental Evaluation Branch
. ---.. -_ .... ----··
............ --_..,..,_. --·
... ---·~---~.
.. i ...... --.. ---·
United States Department of the Interior
IN REPLY REFER TO:
WAES
Mr. David Eberle, Manager
Western Alaska Ecological Services
Sunshine Plaza, Suite 28
411 W. 4th Ave.
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project
P.O. Box 190869
701 East Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869
Re: .86 ./1/fl 1 (1_ Review o~nt~tAMl~ries Study Plans
Dear Mr. Eberle:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has reviewed the Scopes of Work prepared in
response to Article 34 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license for
the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. We have no comment on the Salmon
Escapement Survey as proposed.
With reaard to the Tailrace Attraction Study, we offer the following for your
consideration:
Section 2.1 Attraction to Tailrace Area
Under operational flows, it is evident that a major problem will be the
capturing of adult salmon attracted to the tailrace. The approved project
Mitigation Plan, Section 5.5.5.2 Avoidance and/or Minimization Measures, (1)
Operation Interruptions, discusses plant shutdowns as a technique to reduce
impacts associated with tailrace attraction of adult salmon. We sugaest that
a acbedulina of t .. porary shutdowns be considered as a samplina option.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Field Supervisor
cc: ADF&G, ADEC, ADNR, DGC, EPA, NMFS -Anc.
FERC -WDC and Portland, OR
.. --·-
---·~
....._._. __ __
.... _. __
,. ----"' ····----·--··
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
June 11 , 1986
David Eberle
Alaska Power Authority
P. 0. Box 190869
701 East Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869
Dear Mr. Eberle:
. --.. ,.
AL.
'2.5 s.~< 12 A 9 :37
BILL SHEFFIELD. GOVERNOR
333 RASPBERRY ROAD
ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99518·1599
Re: Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project -Salmon Escapement Survey and
Tailrace Attraction Study Scopes of Work
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game {ADF&G) has reviewed the Salmon
Escapement Survey and Tailrace Attraction Study Scopes of Work prepared to
monitor pre-and post-operational fish populations in the lower Bradley
River. The department endorses the Salmon Escapen1ent Survey and Tailrace
Attraction Study Scopes of Work as presented. We are pleased to see that
the concerns presented in the department's comments on the initial Salmon
Escapement Survey Draft Scope of Work (sf:!e letter to Thomas Arminski dated
May 1, 1986, enclosed) have been adequately addressed and considered.
Results from the Salmon Escapement Survey and the TailracE:! Attraction Study
will help determine whether future mitigation measures will be required to
offset project impacts on Bradley River pink salmon populations.
Thank you for the opportunity to conment on the Salmon Escapement Survey and
Tailrace Attraction Study Scopes of Work. Should you have any questions
regarding our comments, please contact either myself or Don McKay at
267-2283.
Sincerely,
(:;fy~:-01~
Regional Sup~sor
Habitat Division·
Telephone 267-2283
Enclosure
.~·-
r •· ...
;
,"··-,···.-..;~ ..
---.
""---...... ,. ..
"'··---...._.._, ...
~--
. '·Utt Uat~:~· l.. . . .
June 11, 1986
David Eberle
Project Manager
Alaska Power Authority
P.O. Box 190869
701 East Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869
Dear Mr. Eberle:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NationaL .~ine Fisheries Service
P.O. Box 1668
Juneau, ALaska 99802
RECEIVED
JUN ~;.. 1986
SWEC-ANCHORAGE
R~c:-r-.·=-~ 1Y
ALAS~·. .
"86 JJN 16 p 1 :42
We have reviewed the draft scopes of work for the lower Bradley
River salmon escapement monitoring program and the tailrace
monitoring of potential fish attraction. Both study outlines
seem to address our major concerns and reflect recent discus-
sions between the resource agencies and the Power Authority. We
concur with these approaches, therefore, and have no specific
comment to offer at this time.
It should be noted, however, that the results of these studies
may necessitate additional work. For example, should adult
returns decline after project start-up, it may be desirable to
study the timing of emergence and outmigration, or if signifi-
cant numbers of adults are impacted by the tailrace, temporary
shut-downs may be scheduled to evaluate possible mitigative
measures.
Sincerely,
~MV91-~ c ey
Alaska Region
. -
. ·-··· .... · .. I
-, .. , .
............. -..~·.1_~~-~~;.::·. B_ILL SHEFFIELD. GOVERNOR
!!.'!!~~~ v.·--• ··•-•·· ·•
Mr·. Tom Arminski
Alaska Power Authority
P.O. Box 190869
Anchorage, Alaska 99519-0869
Dear Mr. Arminski:
.... _ -·--··-..
·.! "':"" ·.· .
i 333 RASPBERRY ROAO
ANCHORAGE. ALASKA 99518-1599
Re: Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project -Salmon Escapement Survey Scope
of Work
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the Salmon
Escapement Survey Scope of Work for the Bradley River. Although the
department endorses the Salmon Escapement Survey for the Bradley River as a
means of estimating an index of yearly abundance of pink salmon, the
department has several concerns with respect to the methodology outlined in
the scope of work.
The scope of work as presented calls for a series of hoop nets to be
deployed in Riffle Reach and Tree-Bar Reach on a weekly basis to sample pink
salmon abundance. An August 1985 Bradley River salmon escapement survey was
based on hoop nets and electroshocker techniques. During the August 1985
survey, only 26 pink salmon anq 6 chum salmon·were captured using hoop nets.
Further, the efficiency of hoop nets was· affected by clogging with debris
and detritus, reversing currents at the lower survey station, and large
tidal fluctuations. The department therefore makes the recommendation that
a combination of beach seining and electroshocker techniques be utilized for
the Bradley River salmon escapement survey in addition to the use of passive
gear such as hoop nets. Beach seines used in such an operation should be of
a design that would prevent gilling of the captured salmon and have a net
holding are~ of sufficient dimensions and capacity to minimize crowding
stress and mortality to salmon when captured.
The scope of war~ is unclear as to the timing of the weekly deployment of
the hoop nets in the Bradley River. The first paragraph of Section 3.1
states that the hoop nets will be deployed every Wednesday morning, while
the third paragraph states that the hoop net will be deployed on Tuesday.
The timing of sampling using any means and specifically the deployment and
checking of nets should be done in relation to the tidal cycle. Hoop nets
should be deployed prior to a high tide so that the gear can be used through
the high tide portion of the tidal cycle because fish typically migrate into
the stream on the high tide. The scope of work also calls for hoop nets to
~~~~;;~~Siiiifiaiim~=~~·~~-=·;<:.";;of'!"'·;,~<--·
. ,.. .. -Sal Survey .. Scope-o .a so calls~for-:ac ca~rcass count
:-·.:-:~..,.::~-.E:.::r:.sur:_v~y.ltofprovide~a7_relat1ve measure of change in abundance from year to
... ::-------~-year .-::::The-:-scope=of:work:·discusses the 1 imitations associated with a carcass
count survey in other river systems (e.g. predation, scavenging, and
decomposition)&·· Although a carcass count survey may provide a useful
measure of the change in salmon abundance from year to year, the turbid
nature of the Bradley River, the presence of deep pools that would obscure
carcasses, and the tidal influence which would help flush the system of
· carcasses are all additional limitations that will affect the utility for
-·--.... ,....... carcass count survey in the Bradley River. ~-·.. ... .. .. ·-·
The extent of sampling duration (July 15 to September 15) and the effort
involved in sampling appear appropriate for surveying salmon escapement on
the Bradley River. The department is willing to assist the Alaska Power
Authority (APA) in finalizing the Salmon Escapement Survey Scope of Work for
the Bradley River. We recommend that the scope of work contain reference to
sufficient alternative techniques to consider in case primary techniques are
not successful. Should you have any questions regarding our recommendations
or conments, contact either myself or Don McKay of the Habitat Division
(267-2283). Thank. you for the opportunity to review and comment on the
Salmon Escapement Survey Scope of Work..
Sincerely,
(}J/6~~
Carl M. Yan/:Zw~-,t}
Regional S~ervisor
Habitat Division ·
267-2283 .
cc: K. Florey, AOF&G
R. Cannon, ADF&G
T. Schroeder, AOF&G
N. Dudiak, ADF&G
B. Smith, NMFS
H. Hosking, USFWS/WAES