The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAPA2330ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ON INS~'l~~~TEMPERATURE AND FISHERY RESOURCES IN THE WATANA TO TALKEETNA REACH n< I Ll~S ,So Fl\l-'l. f\{J-~33D ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ON INSTREAM TEMPERATURE AND FISHERY RESOURCES IN THE WATANA TO TALKEETNA REACH I.MAIN TEXT Prepared by: Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center University of Alaska 707 A Street Anchorage.Alaska 99501 Submitted to: Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture 711 H Street Anchorage.Alaska 99501 For: The Alaska Power Authority 324 W.5th Avenue.Second Floor Anchorage.Alaska 99501 OCTOBER 1984 ARLIS Alaska Resources Library &Infonnation Services Anchorage,Alaska Report prepared by: Paul R.Meyer Michael D.Kelly Kenneth A.Voos William J.Wilson TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. LIST OF FIGURES..............................................................................................i LIST OF TABLES iii LIST OF APPENDICES..............................................................................................v S~y .. ........ .. ........ .. .... .. .. .. ........ .. ...... ........ .. .... .. ............ .. ...... .. .. ...... ...... ...... .. .. .. .. ..1 INTRODUCTION...... .. ........ .. .. .... .. .... ...... .... .. .......... .. ............ ........ .... .... .... .......... .. .. ......3 PURPOS E A}J'D SCOPE III .. .... .... ....3 Purpose.... .. .. ...... .... .... ............ .... .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .... ........ .. ...... .... .. .... .... .. ..3 Scope...................................................................................................8 BACKGROUND.... ...... .. .. .. ...... ...... ...... ............ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ............ ...... .......... ...... ..10 METHODS..............••••••••••••• •••••14 INSTREAM TEMPERATURE MODELING ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Description of Model,Assumptions and Limitations •••••• Model Linkages to SNTEMP ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Application of SNTEMP to Susitna River ••••••••••••••••• Stream Structure Data ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Hydro logic Da ta.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Meteorologic Data................. . Model Validation....................... . 14 14 18 18 18 21 28 30 YEARS SELECTED FOR SIMULATION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••31 ................ 0') I!) ~ ~ ooo I!) I!') ....... M M INSTREAM FISHERY RESOURCE ANALySIS •••••••••••••••••••••••••• Thermal Relations and Terminology •••••••••••••••••• Susitna River Fishery Resource ••••••••••••••••••••• Salmon Resource . Resident Species . Temperature Tolerance/Preference Criteria Development •• Adult Inmigration e ••••••••••••••••• Adul t Spawning . Emb ryo Incubation........................ . Juvenile Rearing.......................... . Fry/Smolt Outmigration ••••••~••••••••••••••••••••• Effects Analysis . RESULTS AND DISCUSSION •••••••••••••••••••••••••• PROJECT EFFECTS ON INSTREAM TEMPERATURE ••••• Natural Condition Simulations •••••••••• Watana Only -1996 and 2001 Demands ••••••••••• Watana/Devil Canyon -2002 and 2020 Demands •••••••••••• Watana Filling . TOLERANCE AND PREFERENCE CRITERIA FOR FISH •• 35 35 38 41 53 54 55 59 60 62 63 65 66 66 68 68 73 74 83 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) PAGE NO. Salmon •.•.""."".••.."."•••"""•.""."".•.."."."•."••• EFFECTS OF PROJECT-RELATED TEMPERATURES ON FISHERY RESOURCES •••••••••••••••••••91 105 105 107 108 110 119 120 "" "" " """" " " Inmigration ..•.•••••••••••••.Adult Adul t Spawning.""..•..".".".••".".".•.......•..... Embryo Incubation.".""".•."."".""."••"•.".""""•... Juvenile Rearing".•.."""".•.."...."..".....""..".. Fry/Smolt Outmigration •.••••.••.•.•..•.••....•••.. Resident Species".•""."."".""""""""".""".".".""..""""." REFERENC ES """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""• """"""""""""""""""""" 122 APPENDICES"""""""""""• """""""• """"""". """""• """• """. """"""~"" "" ""Volume II LIST OF FIGURES Figure No.Page No. 1.Components of the instream temperature study ••••••••••••••4 2.Susitna environmental studies program and settlement process......7 3.Temperature simulations discussed in this report ••••••••••9 4.Map of the Susitna basin study region.....................11 5.Flow balance sub-basins,Cantwell gage to Sunshine gage...19 6.Tributary temperature regression function •••••••••••••••••25 7.Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers temperature regression functions 26 8.Watana dam site water temperature regression function •••••27 9.Watana dam site water temperature regression function using adjusted Watana data ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••32 10.Diagram showing temperature relations of salmon ••••••.••••39 11.Susitna River map showing important habitats and geographic features between RM 100 and 153 ••••••••••••••••45 12.Comparison of weekly river temperature ranges (C)at RM 150 for four summer simulations,natural and Watana 1996 demand results ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••72 13.Comparison of weekly river temperature ranges (C)at RM 150 for four summer simulations,natural and Watana/Devil Canyon 2002 demand results •••••••••••••••••••75 14.Simulated weekly river temperatures (C)at RM 150 for summer 1971,natural and Watana 1992 demand filling results..... .... ............. . .79 15.Simulated weekly river temperatures (C)at RM 150 for summer 1981,natural and Watana 1992 demand filling results...................................................80 16.Simulated weekly river temperatures (C)at RM 150 for summer 1982,natural and Watana 1991 demand filling results 82 17.Development time to emergence versus mean incubation temperature for chum salmon ...•..•••••...•.••.•....•.....•86 i LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure No. 18.Development time to 50%hatch versus mean incubation temperature for chum salmon ••.••.•••••••••..•••••••••.••.•• 19.Development time to emergence versus mean incubation temperature for sockeye salmon •••••••••••••••••• 20.Development time to 50%hatch versus mean incubation temperature for sockeye salmon •••••••••••••••••• 21.Chum salmon spawning time versus mean incubation temperature nomograph ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 22.Estimated juvenile salmon growth ranges under simulated natural and with-project conditions •••••••••••••••••••••••• ii Page No. 87 88 89 90 117 LIST OF TABLES Table No. 1.Water weeks for water year n ••....•••.......•.......•.•.•• 2.Weekly values of Susitna and Chulitna solar altitude angles . 3.Weekly values of meteorologic constants ••••••••••••••••••• 4.Susitna stream temperature simulation statistics •••••••••• 5.Summer (May through September)air temperature and flow rankings . 6.Winter (September through April)air temperature and flow r ankings . 7.Classification of seasons simulated ••••••••••••••••••••••• Page No. 17 20 29 33 34 34 36 8.List of fish species found to date in the Susitna River between River Mile 100 and Devil Canyon •••••••••••••••••••40 9.Susitna River escapements by species and sampling location.1981-1983.......................................42 10.Susitna River salmon phenology............................43 11.Peak salmon survey counts above Talkeetna for Susitna River tributary streams...................................49 12.Peak slough escapement counts above Talkeetna.............52 13.Observed temperature ranges for various life stages of Pacific salmon.........................................56 14.Mean summer (water weeks 31-52)water temperatures (C) under various load demands for three mainstem locations...70 15.Simulated summer peak temperature ranges (C)at selected locations........................................71 16.Historic hydrologic/meteorologic conditions used for Watana filling simulations................................77 17.Mean summer temperatures (C)for Watana filling,1992 demand,at selected locations.............................78 18.Mean summer temperatures (C)for Watana filling,1991 demand,at selected locations.............................81 iii LIST OF TABLES (continued) Table No.Page No. 19.Preliminary salmon tolerance criteria for Susitna River drainage.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84 20.1971 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitng River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine for natural conditions and project related scenarios ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 21.1974 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine for natural conditions and project related scenarios ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 22.1981 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine for natural conditions and project related scenarios ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 23.1982 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine for natural conditions and project related scenarios .....••••.•••.••.•..•.•...•.• 92 95 98 101 24.Susitna River temperature ranges (C)under four meteorological scenarios for the period September through April.............................................104 25.Temperature and cumulative growth for juvenile salmon under pre-and with-project conditions at RM 130,1971, 1974,1981,1982 simulations..............................112 26.Simulated monthly mean temperatures (C)for the mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Talkeetna..................118 iv 1"""'.. APPENDICES -VOLUME II A.Simulated weekly water temperatures at selected middle Susitna River locations. B.Isotherm plots of temperature simulation results. C.Susitna t Chulitna and Talkeetna stream width functions. D.Observed versus predicted air temperatures for water years 1981-1983. E.Observed vertical air temperature profiles. F.Basin weekly wind speeds. G.Residual errors as functions of air temperature t humiditYt possible sunshine and wind speed. H.Temperature histories at selected locations in relation to the five Pacific salmon life phase activities for all scenarios. v SUMMARY This report presents the results of weekly instream temperature simulations for the Susitna River comparing Watana-only and Watana/Devil Canyon project configurations with natural condition temperature simulations. These simulations were run using historic hydrologic/meteorologic data covering four summers and five winters to bracket the expected range of resultant downriver temperatures.The effect of these temperatures on anadromous fish species is assessed by comparison with life stage-specific temperature tolerance criteria established from the literature,field studies and laboratory studies. Operation of either a single-or two-dam hydroelectric project would dampen the natural variation in river temperatures.Mean summer river temperatures under a Watana-only scheme would be approximately 1.a C cooler than natural at river miles (RM)150 and 130,and 0.6 C cooler at RM 100. Addition of the Devil Canyon dam,33 miles downstream from Watana,would increase this mean seasonal temperature deviation to approximately 2.0,1.7 and 1.2 C cooler at RM 150,130 and 100,respectively.Under either project configuration,downstream temperatures would peak later in the summer than at present,with the greatest deviation from natural temperature occurring in September -October. Winter reservoir releases would range from 0.4 to 6.4 C in waters normally at 0 C from approximately October to April.Consequently.ice formation on the river would be delayed and,in some cases,may not reach as far upstream as under natural conditions. Based on temperature tolerance limits for salmon established from the literature,the cooler summer temperatures should not significantly impact 1 salmon inmigration or spawning.An exception is the possible delay in chinook i~ inmigration to upper river tributaries such as Portage Creek during June under the two dam scenario due to cold water temperatures.Mainstem winter water temperatures,which under natural conditions may be limiting for salmon incubation,could be improved under project operation.Some reduction of juvenile growth may occur due to cooler summer temperatures.even though these simulated operational temperatures are within the established range of tolerance temperatures. Outmigrants from tributaries and sloughs upstream from Sherman (RM 131) during late May and early June will encounter mainstem temperatures cooler than natural.It is unknown whether this change is sufficient to alter the timing of salmon outmigration. Burbot and whitefish are the only resident species above the Chulitna confluence expected to be adversely affected by project operation.The~' expected warmer fall and winter river temperatures could alter both burbot and whitefish spawning and incubation timing to such a degree as to preclude their successful reproduction in the middle river. 2 .~.. INTRODUCTION PURPOSE AND SCOPE PURPOSE This report summarizes efforts to describe the changes in downstream thermal properties of the Susitna River mains tern resulting from various operational scenarios for the proposed Susitna hydroelectric project.Also examined are potential effects of these temperature changes on instream fishery resources.The approach to conducting an assessment of effects of the proposed Susitna project on fishery resources of the Susitna basin was origi- nally described in Alaska,Univ.,AEIDC (1983a)and a report describing streamflow and temperature modeling was provided in Alaska,Univ.,AEIDC (l983b).An initial description of expected changes in downstream tempera- tures and consequences to instream fishery resources were described in Alaska, Univ.,AEIDC (1984a,1984b).This report is a more refined analysis from that presented in the previous AEIDC reports.As additional reservoir operations and consequent downstream temperature regimes are examined in the future,this report will be updated and refined. The temperature assessment program provides information necessary for describing the effects of the Susitna project on instream fishery resources. These investigations are part of a larger instream temperature and ice assess- ment program (Figure 1)which involves various elements of the environmental study program sponsored by the Alaska Power Authority.Reservoir operations and reservoir temperature simulation models.operated by Harza-Ebasco,are used to predict reservoir outflow discharge and temperature conditions associ- ated with various power load demands and either the one-or two-dam configur- ations.These forecasts are then used by AEIDC as input data to an instream 3 Figure 1.Components of the instream temperature study. INSTREAM TEMPERATURE SIMULATIONS RESOPS t DYRESM t SNTEMP SUSITNA IN STREAM TEMPERATURE AND ICE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM BIOLOGICAL CRITERIA Susitna Lit eroture Field Studies Review Laboratory Studies Instream Temperature Effects on Susitna Fishery Resources Mainstem vs.Side Slough Flow and Temperature Relationships O°C.. ICECAL•Pre-and With-Project Ice Conditions Physical/Mechanical Overtopping Anchor Ice (Thermal) I Natural Ice Dynamics Predicted Pre-and With-Project Instream Temperature under Cold-Avg.-Warm Meteorology and Low-Avg.-High Flow Conditions ----.::---.,•I I I .p.. Instream Ice Physical Effects on Susitna Fishery Resources )) temperature simulation model,SNTEMP.The SNTEMP model predicts either natural or with-project instream temperature conditions.Currently,tempera- ture simulations are run using average weekly time steps.Various combina- tions of meteorological and flow conditions are imposed on the reservoir operations,reservoir temperature,and instream temperature models in order to examine diverse climatic conditions and their effects on instream tempera- ture. In order to evaluate effects of altered temperature conditions on fish, AEIDC has combined the results of field studies conducted in the Susitna basin with available literature and laboratory investigations to develop temperature criteria.These criteria are used in combination with the instream tempera- ture predictions to prepare descriptions of project effects on Susitna fishery resources. Since a significant portion of the instream salmonid resource in the Susitna basin utilizes side sloughs for spawning and egg incubation as well as extensive rearing,the relationship between mainstem and side slough flow and temperature conditions has been examined by Harza-Ebasco (APA 1984).A future report by AEIDC will examine the consequences of downstream thermal change on side slough habitats and their fishery populations. An additional element of the instream temperature program is the prediction of downstream ice conditions resulting from various project opera- tions.SNTEMP predicts the downstream location of the instream 0 C isotherm. These predictions are transferred to Harza-Ebasco for use as input to the instream ice simulation model,ICECAL,which predicts natural and with-project ice conditions under the same meteorologic and hydrologic conditions utilized for the reservoir and instream temperature simulations.The calibration of ICECAL was accomplished from information developed by R&M Consultants on the 5 natural ice dynamics of the Susitna River (Harza-Ebasco 1984a).Again,in future reports,AEIDC will utilize the predictions from the ICECAL model to generate descriptions of the effects of various project operating scenarios on instream ice conditions and on fishery resources. A series of reports are scheduled for the Susitna instream temperature and ice assessment program.In November 1984 a report will be prepared which discusses the implications of various operating scenarios and resultant temperature regimes on instream ice conditions.Additional thermal and ice analyses will be conducted and a final assessment of all reservoir operation scenarios will be compiled into a March 1985 final report.This report is intended to be an element of the Instream Flow Relationships Report Series (IFRS). Instream temperature and ice assessments will be required during various phases of the overall Susitna environmental studies program and settlement process (Figure 2).Currently,these studies are part of the IFRS.The temperature and ice assessment results will be used in the Alaska Power Authority's comparisons process to examine the effects of selected flow regimes on power production and downstream fishery resources.Various flow regimes will be examined based upon their discharge-related consequences,then later examined in terms of effects on temperature and ice conditions.The Alaska Power Authority intends to develop a recommended flow regime,the effects of which will be described in a future report.This report would be used as a basis for a negotiations phase with state and federal agencies in order to arrive at a settlement on the operating regime for the Susitna project.During negotiations,various additional alternative flow regimes may be discussed,the temperature and ice consequences of which can be determined 6 Figure 2.Susitna environmental studies program and settlement process. INSTREAM FLOW 'RELATIONSHIPS REPORT SERIES COMPARISONS PROCESS FINAL SETTLEHENT FISHERY RESOURCES WATERSHED PROCESSES RESERVOIR AND INSTREAM TEHPERATURE W'"._,,m"~ r FINAL MITIGATION PLAN TEHPERATURE IcE SEDIMENT WATER QUALITY DOCUMENTATION OF EFFECTS OF CONSENSUS FLOW REGIME SETTLEMENT ON -t> OPERATING REGIME TEMPERATURE ICE SEDIMENT WATER QUALITY ""'''T'''"'"" OPTIMIZATION r COMPARISONS RECOMMENDED REPORT FLOW REGIMES TEMPERATURE REPORT ICE SEDIMENT WATER QUALITY ==:> COMPOSITE=:>F1.0W RELATIONSHIPS HYDROGRAPHS INSTREAM ICE AQUATIC HABITAT WATER QUAL ITY-....J from AEIDC's temperature and ice assessment reports.Finally,temperature and .~. ice assessments will be required to describe the environmental effects of the final consensus flow regime in order to quantify the effect in terms of needed mitigation facilities. SCOPE This report describes the expected temperature changes and associated effects on fishery resources from operation of the Susitna hydroelectric project in the Watana-to-Talkeetna mainstem reach of the Susitna River. Although temperature predictions for the Susitna River will be provided downstream to the Parks Highway bridge at Sunshine,fishery assessments are only provided to River Mile 100 above the Chulitna confluence due to the lack of Susitna-specific habitat information below the confluence of the Talkeetna and Chulitna rivers,and the lack of confidence in river temperature predictions in this extensively braided zone.Until quantitative flow and temperature relationships between mainstem and side slough habitats become available,effects of the project in terms of temperature change in side slough habitats cannot be provided. Examined in this report are 50 temperature simulation cases,nine natural and 41 with-project,considering various meteorologic/hydrologic conditions as well as reservoir filling and one-and two-dam scenarious (Figure 3).For simulation purposes,the year has been divided into two segments,winter and summer.The winter period extends from September through April,while the summer period includes the months of May through September.Note that the month of September is included in both summer and winter simulations.AEIDC examined four summer and five winter seasons comparing natural temperature 8 ).", J Figure 3.Temperature simulations discussed in this report Watana/Devil Watana/Devil Natural Watana Only Watana Only Canyon Canyon Watana Conditions 1996 Demand 2001 Demand 2002 Demand 2020 Demand Filling Summer Season: 1971 X X X X X X 1974 X X X X X 1981 X X X X X X 1982 X X X X X X I..D Winter Season: 1971-72 X X X X X X 1974-75 X X X X X 1976-77 X X X X 1981-82 X X X X X X 1982-83 X X X X X X X denotes that scheme has been simulated. conditions with single-and two-dam scenarios.Three summer and three winter seasons under Watana-filling conditions were also examined. This report also describes the process of developing temperature assess- ment criteria.Field investigations of fishery resources of the Susitna River basin by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)have been ongoing since the 1970s t although their most extensive work commenced in 1981.Also t in 1982 the Alaska Power Authority contracted with the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)to conduct laboratory investigations of the effects of different temperature regimes on Susitna sockeye and chum salmon fertilized egg development.The results of the USFWS laboratory and ADF&G field investigations have been combined with literature references to prepare criteria used to judge the nature of effects of each with-project simulation. This report presents the results of these efforts conducted to date. BACKGROUND The Susitna River drains an area of 19,600 sq mit the sixth largest river basin in Alaska.The Susitna flows 320 mi from its origin at Susitna Glacier to the Cook Inlet estuary.Its basin is bordered by the Alaska Range to the north t the Chulitna and Talkeetna mountains to the west and south t and the northern Talkeetna plateau and Gulkana uplands to the east.This area is largely within the coastal trough of Southcentral Alaska.a belt of lowlands extending the length of the Pacific mountain system and interrupted by the Talkeetna,Clearwater.and Wrangell mountains. Major Susitna tributaries include the Talkeetna,Chulitna t and Yentna rivers (Figure 4).The Yentna River enters the Susitna at RM 28 (river mile numbering begins at the river confluence with Cook Inlet;river miles are indexed in R&M 1981).The Chulitna River rises in the glaciers on the south 10 ) Figure 4.Map of the Susitna basin study region. ) t-' t-' INLET f 10 Rive,mile Incr,ments Scale'I'"16milea !7 <.Ulf ANCHORAGE slope of Mount McKinley and flows south,entering the Susitna near Talkeetna (RM 99).The Talkeetna River rises in the Talkeetna Mountains,flows west, and joins the Susitna near Talkeetna (RM 97). Many tributaries in northern portions of the Susitna basin originate in the glaciers of the eastern Alaska Range.The east and west forks of the Susitna and the McClaren rivers join the mainstem Susitna River above RM 260. Below the glaciers the braided channel traverses a high plateau and continues south to the Oshetna River confluence near RH 233.There it takes a sharp turn west and flows through a steeply cut canyon which contains the Watana (RM 184.4)and Devil Canyon (RM 151.6)dam sites.In this predominantly reach the gradient is quitesingle (Acres channel American,1983).The reach of river steep,approximately 10 ft/mi in the Devil Canyon reach (RM 160-150)has a slope of approximately 40 ft/mi.Below Gold Creek (RM 137)the river alternates between single and multiple channels until the confluence with the Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers (RM 97),below which the Susitna broadens into widely braided channels for 97 miles to Cook Inlet. The proposed project consists of two dams to be constructed over a period of about 15 years.The Watana dam would be completed in 1994 at a site 3 miles upstream from Tsusena Creek.This development would include an under- ground powerhouse and 885 ft high earthfill dam,which would impound a reser- voir 48 miles long with a surface area of 38,000 acres and a usable storage capacity of 3.7 million acre-feet (maf).Installed generating capacity would be 1020 megawatts (Mw),with an estimated average annual energy output of 3460 gigawatt hours (gwh). The concrete arch Devil Canyon dam would be completed by 2002 at a site 33 miles downstream of the Watana dam site.It would be 645 ft high and would impound a 26 mile-long reservoir with 7,800 surface acres and a usable storage 12 capacity of 0.36 maf (Acres American,1983).Installed generating capacity would be 600 Mw,with an average annual energy output of 3450 gwh.The Watana reservoir would be drawn down during the high energy demand winter months and filled during the summer months when energy requirements are lowest.Devil Canyon reservoir would be operated with less fluctuation in water surface elevation,and would essentially pass through Watana releases. Seven anadromous and twelve resident fish species are known to inhabit the Susitna drainage.From the Watana Dam site to the Parks Highway bridge, six anadromous and ten resident species are found. Construction and subsequent operation of the Susitna dams are expected to affect the aquatic resources in the basin by altering the normal thermal regime of the river.Mainstem water temperatures downstream from the dams will be cooler in the summer and warmer'in the winter than those currently found.A change in the ice regime downstream from the project is also t""""'\,' expected due to altered temperatures and increased winter flows. 13 METHODS INSTREAM TEMPERATURE MODELING DESCRIPTION OF MODEL,ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS A computer version of the Instream Water Temperature model developed by the Instream Flow and Aquatic Systems Group (IFG),U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (Theurer et al.1983)has been used to analyze the downstream temperature changes associated with the Susitna hydroelectric project. Estimates of the Watana or Devil Canyon dam release temperatures and flows were used to initiate the stream temperature model. The instream water temperature model (SNTEMP)predicts longitudinal, cross-section averaged,mean daily temperatures throughout a stream network. SNTEMP consists of several submodels: 1.A solar model which predicts solar radiation based on the latitude of the stream basin,time of year,basin topography,and prevailing meteorologic conditions; 2.A meteorologic correction model accounting for changes in air temperature,relative humidity,and atmospheric pressure with elevation; 3.A heat flux model accounting for all significant heat sources and sinks; 4.A heat transport model to move the water and its associated heat content downstream;and 5.A flow mixing model for merging tributary flows and associated heat content with those of the mainstem. A complete description of each of these components is provided in the model description/documentation available from the U.S.Fish and Wildlife 14 Service (Theurer et al.1983).Application of this model to the Susitna basin has been previously discussed in Alaska,Univ.,AEIDC (1983b,1984b).A brief description of the heat transport model will be provided since it is this component,more than any other,which determines the model's limitations.The heat transport model used in SNTEMP is based on the following dynamic temperature-steady flow equation: (A/Q:(aT/at)+aT/ax =(qd/Q)(T d -T)+(BEH)/(QPC p ) 1<--dynam1c term-->/<------steady state equation---------->I !<------dynamic temperature -steady flow equation-------->I where: A flow area,L2 Q 3flow,L /t T =temperature,T t =time,t x =distance,L qd =distributed inflow,L2It Td =distributed inflow temperature,T B =stream top width,L 2~H =net heat flux,(E/L )/t P =density of water,M/L 3 c =specific heat of water,(E/M)/Tp and dimensions are: 15 M -mass T -temperature L length t time E energy The net heat flux is the sum of atmospheric,topographic,and vegetative radiation;solar radiation;evaporation;free and forced convection;stream friction;stream bed conduction;and back radiation from the stream surface. Three sets of data are required as input to the model:(1)meteorologic, (2)hydrologic,and (3)stream geometry.Meteorologic data consists of solar radiation coefficients (atmospheric dust and ground reflectivity),air temperature,relative humidity,possible sunshine,and wind speed.Hydrologic data consists of discharge data throughout the stream system,initial temperatures of the mainstem and significant tributaries,and estimates of the temperature of distributed inflows (groundwater or overland).Stream geometry consists of a definition of the stream system network (latitudes,elevations, and distances),stream widths,and stream shading. Stream temperatures in this report were simulated using average weekly hydrologic and meteorologic data.The temperature predictions,therefore, represent the 24-hour average stream temperature which would be expected to occur on the average day of the week. Water weeks are used as the averaging time period.The first water week begins on October 1.All water weeks are seven days long except the fifty-second week which is eight days long;February 29 is not considered when it occurs.Table 1 is useful for converting between water weeks and calendar days. 16 Table 1.Water weeks for water year n. WEEK WEEK NUMBER FROM TO NUMBER FROM TO day month year day month year day month year day month year 1 1 Oct.n-l 7 Oct.n-l 27 1 Apr.n 7 Apr.n 2 8 Oct.n-l 14 Oct.n-l 28 8 Apr.n 14 Apr.n 3 15 Oct.n-l 21 Oct.n-l 29 15 Apr.n 21 Apr.n 4 22 Oct.n-l 28 Oct.n-l 30 22 Apr.n 28 Apr.n 5 29 Oct.n-l 4 Nov.n-l 31 29 Apr.n 5 May n 6 5 Nov.n-l 11 Nov.n-l 32 6 May n 12 May n 7 12 Nov.n-l 18 Nov.n-l 33 13 May n 19 May n 8 19 Nov.n-l 25 Nov.n-l 34 20 May n 26 May n 9 26 Nov.n-l 2 Dec.n-l 35 27 May n 2 June n 10 3 Dec.n-l 9 Dec.n-l 36 3 June n 9 June n 11 10 Dec.n-l 16 Dec.n-l 37 10 June n 16 June n 12 17 Dec.n-l 23 Dec.n-l 38 17 June n 23 June n 13 24 Dec.n-l 30 Dec.n-l 39 24 June n 30 June n 14 31 Dec.n-l 6 Jan.n 40 1 July n 7 July n 15 7 Jan.n 13 Jan.n 41 8 July n 14 July n 16 11+Jan.n 20 Jan.n 42 15 July n 21 July n r-17 21 Jan.n 27 Jan.n 43 22 July n 28 July n 18 28 Jan.n 3 Feb.n 44 29 July n 4 Aug.n 19 4 Feb.n 10 Feb.n 45 5 Aug.n 11 Aug.n 20 11 Feb.n,17 Feb.n 46 12 Aug.n 18 Aug.n 21 18 Feb.n 24 Feb.n 47 19 Aug.n 25 Aug.n 22 25 Feb.n 3 Mar.n 48 26 Aug.n 1 Sep.n 23 4 Mar.n 10 Mar.n 49 2 Sep.n 8 Sep.n 24 11 Mar.n 17 Mar.n 50 9 Sep.n 15 Sep.n 25 18 Mar.n 24 Mar.n 51 16 Sep.n 22 Sep.n 26 25 Mar.n 31 Mar.n 52 23 Sep.n 30 Sep.n 17 Seasonal simulations are of two types:1)winter period (week 49,water .~ year n-l to week 30,water year n),and 2)summer period (week 31 to week 52). MODEL LINKAGES TO SNTEMP With-project stream temperature simulations require the flow and tempera- ture of reservoir releases as input.Harza-Ebasco models the reservoir(s) ople-Tation to determine release flows and temperatures,and transmits the results to AEIDC.These results include daily flows and associated tempera- tures from powerhouse,cone valve and spillway releases.However,no spillway releases have occurred in simulations run to date. The daily results are processed by AEIDC to obtain single mean weekly flows and temperatures which incorporate releases from all three outflow structures.These results are then used as upstream boundary conditions for the SNTEMP model. APPLICATION OF SNTEMP TO THE SUSITNA RIVER Stream Structure Data The stream network is defined for the mainstem Susitna from the Watana dam site (RM 184.4)to the Parks Highway bridge (RM 83.8).For simulation of the Watana/Devil Canyon configuration,the upstream end of the study reach is the Devil Canyon dam site (RM 151.6).Major tributaries between Watana and Parks Highway bridge were included in the Susitna stream network (Figure 5). The mains tern network from the Watana dam site to Sunshine was segmented into 10 reaches to account for differences in topographic shading resulting from stream orientation and local topography.The monthly sunrise/sunset altitude angles (Alaska,Univ.,AEIDC,1983b)were interpolated into weekly values (Table 2). 18 Figure 5.Flow balance sub-basins,Cantwell gage to Sunshine gage. .... \0 ~USGS GOQe/NOde locotion o USGS Gage S'Olloll ..Node locot ionoSub-Bos-in IdenllfJcmlotl ""\...Sub-Bo:lln Boundary I Oem $il. ~'v ("1> FLOW BALANCE SUB-BASINS, Cantwell Gage to Sunshine Gage ..... \,~,,'"" -----·1 --_.._-_.._._.j Table 2.Weekly values of Susitna and Chulitna solar altitude angles (radians). Mainstem Rivermile Range 184.5-179.5-175.5-166.0-163.0-146.5-142.5-124.0-115.0-WEEK 179.5 175.5 166.0 163.0 146.5 142.5 124.0 115.0 99.5 CHULITNA 1 0.31 0.118 0.265 0.269 0.405 0.077 0.080 0.143 0.00 0.07820.49 0.112 0.265 0.240 0.405 0.093 0.103 0.140 0.00 0.07530.65 0.105 0.265 0.210 0.405 0.108 0.127 0.138 0.00 0.07140.78 0.098 0.265 0.189 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.129 0.00 0.06550.78 0.082 0.265 0.161 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.113 0.00 0.05760.78 0.069 0.265 0.135 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.099 0.00 0.05070.78 0.055 0.265 0.110 0.405 0.114 O~138 0.083 0.00 0.04280.78 0.043 0.265 0.086 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.068 0.00 0.03590.78 0.046 0.265 0.071 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.068 0.00 0.030100.78 0.048 0.265 0.057 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.068 0.00 0.026 11 0.78 0.051 0.265 0.043 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.068 0.00 0.021120.78 0.053 0.265 0.029 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.068 0.00 0.018 13 0.78 0.052 0.265 0.036 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.068 0.00 0.020 14 0.78 0.050 0.265 0.050 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.068 0.00 0.024 15 0.78 0.048 0.265 0.063 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.068 0.00 0.028160.78 0.046 0.265 0.076 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.068 0.00 0.031170.78 0.048 0.265 0.094 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.068 0.00 0.037180.78 0.060 0.265 0.120 0.405 0.114 O~138 0.090 0.00 0.044 19 0.78 0.075 0.265 0.146 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.105 0.00 0.052 20 0.78 0.088 0.265 0.173 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.121 0.00 0.060 21 0.78 0.102 0.265 0.200 0.405 0.114 0.138 0.138 0.00 0.068 22 0.62 0.109 0.265 0.229 0.405 0.099 0.114 0.140 0.00 0.073 23 0.44 0.115 0.350 0.257 0.405 0.071 0.088 0.141 0.00 0.077 24 0.26 0.122 0.210 0.286 0.405 0.063 0.060 0.144 0.00 0.081 25 0.069 0.130 0.068 0.315 0.405 0.045 0.035 0.148 0.00 0.088 26 0.065 0.135 0.058 0.341 0.446 0.043 0.035 0.143 0.00 0.088 27 0.062 0.142 0.049 0.368 0.490 0.041 0.035 0.138 0.00 0.088 28 0.059 0.148 0.039 0.395 0.530 0.038 0.035 0.132 0.00 0.088 29 0.055 0.154 0.030 0.422 0.575 0.036 0.035 0.128 0.00 0.088 30 0.050 0.150 0.032 0.441 0.551 0.041 0.035 0.126 0.00 0.083 31 0.047 0.133 0.040 0~453 0.465 0.053 0.035 0.127 0.00 0.075 32 0.043 0.117 0.054 0.464 0.385 0.065 0.035 0.129 0.00 0.068 33 0.039 0.100 0.080 0.476 0.300 0.076 0.035 0.130 0.00 0.060 34 0.035 0.086 0.095 0.488 0.226 0.087 0.035 0.131 0.00 0.054 35 0.048 0.086 0.102 0.483 0.235 0.092 0.037 0.133 0.00 0.051 36 0.060 0.086 0.109 0.477 0.244 0.097 0.039 0.135 0.00 0.049 37 0.072 0.086 0.115 0.470 0.251 0.100 0.041 0.137 0.00 0.046 38 0.088 0.086 0.121 0.465 0.259 0.103 0.042 0.139 0.00 0.044 39 0.079 0.086 0.118 0.467 0.257 0.103 0.041 0.138 0.00 0.045 40 0.065 0.086 0.111 0.472 0.248 0.099 0.039 0.136 0.00 0.048410.052 0.086 0.105 0.478 0.238 0.093 0.037 0.134 0.00 0.050 42 0.040 0.086 0.099 0.484 0.230 0.089 0.035 0.132 0.00 0.051 43 0.037 0.095 0.088 0.480 0.275 0.080 0.035 0.131 0.00 0.058440.041 0.110 0.073 0.469 0.354 0.070 0.035 0.129 0.00 0.064450.045 0.126 0.057 0.458 0.435 0.059 0.035 0.128 0.00 0.073460.049 0.141 0.041 0.447 0.515 0.048 0.035 0.125 0.00 0.079 47 0.053 0.156 0.025 0.435 0.595 0.035 0.035 0.123 0.00 0.088 48 0.057 0.150 0.034 0.409 0.555 0.037 0.035 0.127 0.00 0.088 49 0.060 0.144 0.044 0.371 0.510 0.040 0.035 0.133 0.00 0.088 50 0.063 0.139 0.053 0.355 0.468 0.041 0.035 0.139 0.00 0.088510.066 0.132 0.062 0.327 0.424 0.044 0.035 0.145 0.00 0.088 52 0.15 0.125 0.135 0.297 0.405 0.062 0.055 0.145 0.00 0.083 20 .~. Stream widths are simulated as a function of flow.These width functions were determined from Susitna River cross-section plots prepared by R&M Consultants (1982a.1982b)and.in the lower river,interpolated from USGS maps (Harza-Ebasco 1984b). Stream 'width functions for the Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers were developed from stream width data collected by the USGS (1980,1981).The stream width functions for the Susitna,Chulitna,and Talkeetna rivers are presented in Appendix C. Hydrologic Data Estimates of significant tributary flow contributions are necessary for simulating mainstem temperatures.Since few tributaries in the basin have gaged flow records,flow contributions from most of these sub-basins must be estimated.To assure consistency among the various project engineering programs,flow to the mainstem from tributary sub-basins are estimated as proportional to the sub-basin area. The present modeling effort considers the basin between the Watana dam site and the Parks Highway bridge at Sunshine.Chulitna and Talkeetna river flows are incorporated into this system at the USGS gage station on each river near the town of Talkeetna.This basin is further divided into thirteen sub-basins.These sub-basins are defined by drainage divides and are centered around the larger tributaries.Flow from each sub-basin is added to the mainstem Susitna as point inflow at a model node location generally near the major tributary mouth.Figure 5 (discussed previously)provides a map of the basin under consideration.the sub-basins,and the node locations where sub-basin inflows are assigned. 21 A water balance program,H20BAL (Alaska,Univ.,AEIDC 1983b),is used to provide SNTEMP with flows at each node for each simulated timestep.H20BAL requires a time .series of input flows at four locations:the Susitna River at the Watana dam site,the Susitna River at the Gold Creek USGS gage,and the Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers at the USGS gage stations on each.For simulating the operation of the Devil Canyon dam,Devil Canyon release flows are used in place of the Watana data. Simulations discussed in this report consider seasons within water years 1971 through 1983.Continuous flow data for this period are available from USGS records at Gold Creek and Talkeetna.Flows at Watana and Chulitna are not available for all periods,and are determined as follows: Watana.Although R&M Consultants has been collecting flow data at this location during the open water season since July 1980,an equal area contribution relationship is used for all periods.When flow data are available at the Susitna River USGS gage near Cantwell (Station #15291500),the following relationship is used: QW =0.515 (QGC -QCA)+QCA where Q is the mean flow for a given period and subscripts W,CA and GC refer to Watana,Cantwell and Gold Creek respectively.The factor 0.515 is the drainage area ratio between the Cantwell-to-Watana and Cantwell- to-Gold Creek basins.When flow data are not available at the Cantwell gage,the following relationship is used: QW =0.841 QGC where 0.841 is the drainage area ratio of the entire basin at Watana to that defined at Gold Creek. 22 Chulitna.Streamflow data at the Chulitna River USGS gage were not collected from October 1972 until May 1980.Simulations of this period used thla weekly flow formula: QWJK.,CH =QM,CH x QWK,GC QM,GC where subscripts WK and M denote weekly and monthly periods of flow,and CH refers to the Chulitna gage location.This relationship is based on the assumption that the Chulitna basin responds similarly within a month to the Susitna basin defined at Gold Creek.The Chulitna monthly flow data were synthesized using the Texas Water Development Board's FILLIN program (Acres American 1983). Flow data are also required at Sunshine,the downstream end of the present region of temperature simulation.The USGS began collecting flow data at that site in May 1981.However,on occasion,recorded flows at Sunshine were less than the sum of recorded flows upbasin at the Gold Creek,Chulitna and Talkeetna gages.In order to avoid negative tributary contributions,as well as to rely on the longer periods of records at the upstream gages,we decided to use a simple basin area relationship to estimate flows at Sunshine. This relationship is: where subscripts Sand T refer to the Sunshine and Talkeetna gage sites,and the factor 1.070 is the ratio of the drainage area defined at Sunshine to the combined area of the Gold Creek,Chulitna and Talkeetna drainage basins. 23 Estimates of tributary inflow temperatures are necessary for all natural and with-project simulations.Additionally,pre-project stream temperatures are required at the Watana dam site for natural stream temperature simulations. ADF&G tributary temperature observations at Tsusena Creek,Portage Creek, and Indian River (ADF&G 1983a;Quane 1984)were used to develop a tributary temperature regression function (Figure 6).This function is used to estimate weekly temperatures of all the middle river tributaries between the Watana dam site and the Chulitna confluence for all pre-and with-proj ect simulations (observed Tsusena Creek,Portage Creek,and Indian River temperatures were used when available for water year 1981,1982 and 1983 simulations). Observed temperatures on the Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers (ADF&G 1983a; Quane 1984)were used to develop equilibrium temperature regression models (Alaska,Univ.,AEIDC 1983b).The equilibrium temperature refers to the water temperature that the river is asymptotically approaching.These regression models (Figure 7)were used to synthesize Chulitna and Talkeetna river temperatures for all simulations for which observed data were not available. Actual or estimated pre-project Watana dam site temperatures are required for natural condition simulations.These natural condition simulations are used for base line comparisons and for model validation simulations.An equilibrium temperature regression model was developed for the Watana site using data collected during water year 1981 (R&M Consultants 1982g)(Figure 8). The regression analysis was limited to observed temperatures greater than 0 C. 24 Figure 6.Tributary temperature regression function. MIDDLE SUSITNA RIVER TRIBUTARY TEMPERATURES N U1 15 -o- lJJ 0:::10:;) ~ 0: lJJa.. :IE lJJ .-5 •INDIAN RIVER •PORTAGE CREEK •TSUSENA CREEK ---SIMULATED TEMPERATURE •-t I ",-.••-.-------:----t;..--r..••.._&. t_• ••~'~~t~-..•''-.~..,~ /..'.~..~/&•,~..,/ ./ ./ 42'342434445464748 49 50 51 52 WATER WEEK o '-> • 35 '36 37 38 39 40 4/ Figure 7.Chulitna and Talkeetna Rivers temperature regression functions. CHULITNA AND TALKEETNA STREAM TEMPERATURES 10 •0 CHULITNA OBSERVED 0 9 I 0 TALKEETNA OBSERVED CHULITNA PREDICTED 0 -8 TALKEETNA PREDICTED 0 00-0 0 ~0 co 0 0 --7 0 --::)0 --~..---0a:6 0 ..-0-N LLI ..- 0\Q...--:E _0- W 5 -0 I--0 4 -..--1LI ->-.--a::-1LI 3 -.....-en 0..--I:D -0 -a 2 /817/5 16121314II9./08765432 o ,-'_ o EQUILIBRIUM TEMPER ATURE (C) J ') Figure 8.Watana dam site water temperature regression function. WATANA DAM SITE STREAM TEMPERATURES 15 .•OBSERVED 1981 I -PREDICTED -0-10 l1J Ia::• :::)/..t- N « -...J a::Il1J • a..5::E lJJt- o l1J ••>a:: l1J O'/. Cf) CO 0 -5 L..'--_--------------------- -5 0 5 10 15 20 EQUILIBRIUM TEMPERATURE (C) Meteorologic Data The SNTEMP model is designed for climatic data input from only one representative meteorologic data station.The only long-term meteorologic data station within the middle river Susitna basin is the U.S.National Weather Service station located in Talkeetna.This station has daily air temperature.wind speed.relative humidity.and percent cloud cover data for the period covered in this report,1971 to 1983.This period of record allows stream temperature simulations under extreme and normal meteorologic condi- tions once these data are adjusted to represent conditions throughout the Susitna basin. Previously defined monthly values of the dust and reflectivity coefficients (Alaska,Univ.,AEIDC,1983b)were distributed on a weekly basis (Table 3).Air temperature and moisture radiosonde data collected above Anchorage and Fairbanks (U.S.National Weather Service 1968,1969,1970,1980; World Meteorological Organization 1981,1982)were used to determine elevation lapse functions.These lapse functions are used to convert Talkeetna air temperature and humidity data to locations within the Susitna basin.Weekly values of the lapse rate coefficients are also presented in Table 3. The air temperatures predicted with these lapse rate functions and Talkeetna air temperatures were compared with observed air temperatures at the Watana and Devil Canyon dam sites and at a meteorological station at Sherman (R&M 1982d,1982e,1982f,1984).These plots (Appendix D)indicate that the lapse rate functions are more reliable at temperatures above 0 C (i.e.,summer conditions);the temperature lapse rate functions tend to overpredict air temperatures when the actual air temperatures are less than 0 C. Figures contained within Appendix E illustrate the departure of weekly temperatures measured at stations within the basin from weekly temperatures at 28 Table 3.Weekly values of meteorological constants. ~~.... DUST REHECTIVITY Yo Y1 ZT ~o Sl ZR, WEEK (m-1)(m-1)NUMBER COEFFICIENT COEFFICIENT (C/m)(C/m)(m)(m) 1 0.3363 0.45 -6.56E-3 -6.40E-5 2 0.3363 0.45 -6.56E-3 -6.40E-5 3 0.3363 0.45 -6.56E-3 -6.40E-5 4 0.3363 0.45 -6.56E-3 -6.40E-5 5 0.1291 0.67 -6.56E-3 -4.96E-5 6 0.1291 0.67 -6.56E-3 -4.96E-5 7 0.1291 0.67 -6.56E-3 -4.96E-5 8 0.1291 0.67 -6.56E-3 -4.96E-5 9 0.1291 0.67 -6.56E-3 -4.96E-5 10 0.2343 0.65 -6.56E-3 -8.79E-5 11 0.2343 0.65 -6.56E-3 -8.79E-5 12 0.2343 0.65 -6.56E-3 -8.79E-5 13 0.2343 0.65 -6.56E-3 -8.79E-5 14 0.0938 0.62 -6.56E-3 -7.77E-5 15 0.0938 0.62 -6.56E-3 -7.77E-5 16 0.0938 0.62 -6.56E-3 -7.77E-5 17 0.0938 0.62 -6.56E-3 -7.77E-5 18 0.0938 0.62 -6.56E-3 -7.77E-5 19 0.2912 0.59 -6.56E-3 -6.21E-5 20 0.2912 0.59 -6.56E-3 -6.21E-5 21 0.2912 0.59 -6.56E-3 -6.21E-5 22 0.2912 0.59 -6.56E-3 -6.21E-5 23 0.2372 0.58 -6.56E-3 -2.12E-5 24 0.2372 0.58 -6.56E-3 -2.12E-5 25 0.2372 0.58 -6.56E-3 -2.12E-5 26 0.2372 0.58 -6.56E-3 -2.12E-5 27 0.2760 0.48 -5.93E-3 -1.04E-4 1.13E-5 450 28 0.2760 0.48 -5.93E-3 -1.04E-4 1.13E-5 450 29 0.2760 0.48 -5.93E-3 -1.04E-4 1.13E-5 450 30 0.2760 0.48 -5.93E-3 -1.04E-4 1.13E-5 450 31 0.3085 0.30 -5.95E-3 -1.93E-4 3.18E-5 525 32 0.3085 0.30 -5.95E-3 -1.93E-4 3.18E-5 525 33 0.3085 0.30 -5.95E-3 -1.93E-4 3.18E-5 525 34 0.3085 0.30 -5.95E-3 -1.93E-4 3.18E-5 525 35 0.3085 0.30 -5.95E-3 -1.93E-4 3.18E-5 525 36 0.3156 0.24 -6.09E-3 -1.42E-4 3.45E-3 550 37 0.3156 0.24 -6.09E-3 -1.42E-4 3.45E-3 550 38 0.3156 0.24 -6.09E-3 -1.42E-4 3.45E-3 550 39 0.3156 0.24 -6.09E-3 -1.42E-4 3.45E-3 550 40 0.3078 0.22 -5.64E-3 -1.87E-4 2.92E-5 550 41 0.3078 0.22 -5.64E-3 -1.87E-4 2.92E-5 550 42 0.3078 0.22 -5.64E-3 -1.87E-4 2.92E-5 550 43 0.3078 0.22 -5.64E-3 -1.87E-4 2.92E-5 550 44 0.3296 0.23 -5.63E-3 -3.29E-4 1.26E-5 500 45 0.3296 0.23 -5.63E-3 -3.29E-4 1.26E-5 500 46 0.3296 0.23 -5.63E-3 -3.29E-4 1.26E-5 500 47 0.3296 0.23 -5.63E-3 -3.29E-4 1.26E-5 500 48 0.3296 0.23 -5.63E-e -3.29E-4 1.26E-5 500 49 0.2924 0.24 -5.27E-3 -3.12E-4 2.90E-6 500 50 0.2924 0.24 -5.27E-3 -3.12E-4 2.90E-6 500 51 0.2924 0.24 -5.27E-3 -3.12E-4 2.90E-6 500 52 0.2924 0.24 -5.27E-3 -3.12E-4 2.90E-6 500 The air temperature at Elevation Z is calculated by: Tair =T +Yo (Z -ZTalkeetn~)(Z)Talkeetna For a complete discussion.see Alaska,Univ.,AEIDC (l983b)• \.fr ,,-.., 29 Talkeetna.Inspection of these figures will indicate the difficulty of trying ~ to fit a predictive air temperature lapse rate to the measured lapse rate, particularly in winter.During winter,inversions mayor may not be present. The inversions may occur aloft or may dissipate and recur from week to week, following no set pattern in different years.Three periods have particularly unstable atmospheric conditions:late October,November,and January -all winter climate regimes.The remaining nine predictive profiles fall well within the observed range of temperature change with elevation and generate acceptable air temperature values for input to the stream temperature model. Weekly averaged wind speed data collected at the·R&M sites at Watana, Devil Canyon,and Sherman were compared to the wind speeds observed at Talkeetna (Appendix F).The Talkeetna data appear to represent the average winds occurring in the middle Susitna basin. MODEL VALIDATION Mainstem Susitna River temperatures collected between the Watana dam site and the Parks Highway bridge (ADF&G 1983a)were used to validate the stream temperature simulations.These data were only available for water weeks 37 to 52 for water years 1981 and 1982,and weeks 1 to 4 and 34 to 52 for water year 1983. The residual errors (predicted temperature minus observed temperature) were plotted as a function of the meteorological variables (air temperature, humidity,possible sunshine and wind speed),distance,and time period (Appendix G).No systematic errors were observed although this analysis helped identify observed stream temperatures which were not representative of mainstem conditions.Some of these data were removed from the validation set after discussions with ADF&G (Quane 1984). 30 The stream temperature model was calibrated by adjusting the water year 1982 and 1983 Watana dam site temperatures to obtain a better fit to downstream temperatures.These adjusted Watana dam site temperatures were used with the water year 1981 observed temperatures to develop a new regres- sion model (Figure 9).This regression plot demonstrates that the adjusted temperatures follow a similar relationship to the observed data (compare with Figure 8).This new regression model provides more representative Watana dam site temperatures useful for pre-proj ect simulations.The post-calibration statistics are presented in Table 4. The 90%confidence interval (using the Z statistic)for the water year 1981 to 1983 data is -1.0 C to 0.8 C;90%of all predicted stream temperatures from the Watana dam site to Parks Highway bridge will fall within -1.0 C to 0.8 C of the recorded data values. YEARS SELECTED FOR SIMULATION Water years 1968 through 1983 were examined for seasonal variations in meteorologic and hydrologic conditions.Hydrologic rankings were determined by the mean summer flow measured at the Gold Creek gage.Winter seasons' hydrologic rankings were determined from the preceding summer flows,as the summer season controls the amount of water available in the reservoir for winter release.Meteorologic conditions,represented by mean monthly air temperatures at Talkeetna,were ranked by seasonal means.The air temperature and available water rankings for the summer and winter seasons are presented in Tables 5 and 6. From these sixteen years,four summers and five winters were selected to represent normal and extreme conditions.In this way,the range of available 31 Figure 9.Watana dam site water temperature regression function using adjusted Watana data. WATANA DAM SITE STREAM TEMPERATURES 15 -u 10- 1LIa:::::» ~a:::51LIa.. ::::Ew UJN... 0 UJ>0a:: UJenm 0 •OBSERVED o ADJUSTED •ADJUSTED •ADJUSTED PREDICTED 1981 1981 1982 1983 ... ... 2015/05o -5 'L-_ -5 EQUILIBRIUM TEMPERATURE (C) J -) Table 4.Susitna stream temperature simulation statistics. Water year 1981 1982 1983 1981-1983 Number of data points 49 67 ·124 240 Average error (C)-0.2 0.0 0.0 -0.1 Standard error (C)0.8 0.5 0.5 0.5 Maximum over prediction (C)1.7 1.3 1.9 1.9 Maximum under prediction (C)2.0 1.1 0.9 2.0 33 Table 5.Summer (May through September)air temperature and flow rankings. Air Temperature Flow at Gold Summer at Talkeetna (C)Ranking Creek Cds)Ranking 1968 11.2 7 20030 7 1969 11.1 8 11320 15 1970 9.9 15 16350 12 1971 10.0 14 21400 5 1972 10.4 12 22160 2 1973 10.1 13 16730 10 1974 11.7 3 16260 13 1975 10.7 10 21960 3 1976 11.2 5 16520 11 1977 11.7 2 21080 6 1978 11.4 4 15400 14 1979 12.0 1 19730 8 1980 10.8 9 21610 4 1981 11.2 6 24290 1 1982 10.6 11 19330 9 34 natural conditions could be examined under project operation using a minimum number of simulations.The nine seasons selected for initial simulations are classified with respect to available water and seasonal air temperature in Table 7. Summer seasons are easy to categorize.The cold,wet summer of 1971 was expected to result in the coldest downstream temperature,while the warm,dry summer of 1974 was expected to result in the warmest down river temperatures. Winters are less straightforward.Initial winter season selections were based on the premises that a cold winter with low reservoir storage (due to a preceding dry summer)would be expected to result in downstream temperatures most similar to natural conditions,while a warm,wet winter would be expected to give the warmest downriver temperatures,delaying formation of an ice cover.A cold winter with high reservoir storage (1971-72)would be expected to result in the greatest degree of ice formation.River ice conditions simulations run to date (Harza-Ebasco 1984b)indicate that winter air temperatures rather than initial winter reservoir levels have the major influence on downstream ice formation. INSTREAM FISHERY RESOURCE ANALYSIS THERMAL RELATIONS AND TERMINOLOGY An approach to the determination of water temperatures which harm or enhance aquatic life involves the development of thermal criteria for the species or communities involved.Criteria permit judgment of the nature of effects by examining the degree of departure from either preferred or tolerated environmental conditions.AEIDC conducted a review of literature dealing with the development and use of thermal criteria for fish.Some basic thermal responses of aquatic organisms are defined and briefly reviewed here. 35 Table 7.Classification of seasons simulated. Air Available Summer Temperature Runoff 1971 Cold Wet 1974 Warm Dry 1981 Average Wet 1982 Average Average Air Available Winter Temperature Runoff 1971-1972 Cold Wet 19 74-1975 Average Dry 1976-1977 Warm Dry 1981-1982 Average Wet 1982-1983 Average Average 36 The naturally occurring temperatures of surface waters of the earth IS temperate zone vary from 0 to over 40 C as a function of latitude,altitude, season,time of day,flow,depth,and other variables (Brungs and Jones 1977). Natural environmental variations create conditions that are optimum at times, but can also be above or below optimum for particular physiological and behavioral functions of the species present.Temperatures which are preferentially selected by fish generally represent temperatures at which they are physiologically most efficient.The actual temperatures selected by fish vary widely. Aquatic organisms have upper and lower thermal tolerance limits,optimum temperatures for growth,preferred temperatures in thermal gradients,and temperature limitations for migration,spawning,and egg incubation.The term "selected"or "preferredll temperature is defined as the range of temperatures in which animals congregate or spend the most time in a free choice situation, whereas "optimum"generally just refers to a temperature range associated with the highest growth and feeding rates (Reynolds 1977;Alabaster and Lloyd 1982)•Optimum temperatures may change under certain conditions.During a laboratory experiment with unlimited food supply,juvenile sockeye salmon sustained optimum growth at 15 C,but when food was limited optimum growth occurred at progressively lower temperatures (Brett 1971). Each life stage of every fish species has a characteristic tolerance range of temperature as a consequence of acclimation,a physical adaptation to acclimation to warmer water and downward to cooler water. environmental conditions.The tolerance range can be adjusted upward by Much of the thermal acclimation process in fish occurs over a period of hours or days,and involves a 11'biophysical and biochemical restructuring of many cellular and tissue components for operation under the new thermal regime imposed on the 37 ·organism"(Fry and Hochachka 1970).Once a new rate of metabolism has been /~ established,the fish is considered acclimated. Temperatures beyond the tolerance range are referred to as incipient lethal temperatures,upper and lower thresholds where temperature begins to have a lethal effect.At temperatures above or below the incipient lethal temperatures,survival depends on the duration of exposure with mortality occurring more rapidly with greater temperature deviation from the threshold. The upper boundary of the resistance zone above which survival is virtually zero is referred to as the critical thermal maximum (CTM).No critical thermal minimum has been established primarily because most research has concentrated on the environmental effects on aquatic life from heated effluent and most cold-adapted fish can tolerate temperatures approaching 0 C for varying periods of time.It is also likely that fish are behaviorally more flexible to temperature changes at colder temperatures (Cherry and Cairns 1982). Jobling (1981)developed a diagram showing the relationship between acclimation temperature and fish response based on a literature review.This diagram has been modified to show temperature responses in salmon (Figure 10). Optimum temperatures are not necessary at all times to maintain populations, and moderate temperature fluctuations can generally be tolerated as long as the upper limit is not exceeded for long periods. SUSITNA RIVER FISHERY RESOURCE Any applied temperature criteria should be closely related to the water body in question and to its particular community of organisms.At least nineteen species of fish are known to inhabit the Susitna drainage,sixteen of which have been captured in the Susitna River between Devil Canyon and Talkeetna (Table 8).Six of these are anadromous and 10 are resident species. 38 --- 2520 UILT-- 15 ---- 10 -- 5 CTM 5 15 20 25 10 Q)... ::s-co... Q) Co E Q) I- Q) f/) co Co f/) Q) ex: Acclimation Temperature Zone of Preference O·..Tolerance Zone CTM UILT LILT LE Critical Thermal Maximum Upper Incipient Lethal Temperature Llower Incipient Lethal Temperature Line of Equality Figure 10.Diagram showing temperature relations of salmon. (Adapted from Jobling 1981) 39 Table 8.List of fish species found to date in the Susitna River between River Mile 100 and Devil Canyon. Common Name Arctic lamprey Bering cisco Round whitefish Humpback whitefish Arctic grayling Rainbow trout Dolly Varden Pink (humpback)salmon Sockeye (red)salmon Chinook (king)salmon Coho (silver)salmon Chum (dog)salmon Longnose sucker Threespine stickleback Burbot Slimy sculpin Scientific Name Lampetra japonica (Martens) Coregonus laurettae Bean Prosopium cylindraceum (Pallas) Coregonus pidschian (Gmelin) Thymallus arcticus (Pallas) Salmo gairdneri (Richardson) Salvelinus malma (Walbaum) Oncorhynchus gorbuscha (Walbaum) Oncorhynchus nerka (Walbaum) Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (Walbaum) Oncorhynchus kisutch (Walbaum) Oncorhynchus keta (Walbaum) Catostomus catostomus (Forster) Gasterosteus aculeatus Linnaeus ~Iota (Linnaeus) Cottus cognatus Richardson 40 Salmon Resource The Susitna River drainage is the largest watershed in Upper Cook Inlet and is considered to be the inlet's largest salmon-producing system.Anadro- mous species form the basis of commercial and sport fishing in Upper Cook Inlet.Five species of salmon (chinook,coho,chum,sockeye,and pink)are harvested as they migrate to their streams of origin. Since 1981,the Alaska Department of Fish and Game has attempted to determine the escapement of Pacific salmon into the Susitna River using side scan sonar and tag/recapture population estimates (Table 9).These estimates should be considered conservative as they do not account for escapements into systems downstream of RM 80. Fishwheels,downstream migrant traps,and stream survey data have been used to determine the timing patterns of salmon into and through the mainstem as well as into the various sloughs and tributaries.This timing varies among species,but in general the peak inmigration and spawning time for salmon above Talkeetna is between late June and September (Table 10).Juvenile outmigration occurs throughout the open water season for sockeye,chinook,and coho salmon.Pink salmon are believed to outmigrate immediately after emer- gence and chum salmon have mostly outmigrated by mid-July (Schmidt et aL 1984). Between the Chulitna River confluence (RM 98.5)and Chinook Creek (RM 156.8)in Devil Canyon are at least 18 tributaries and 34 sloughs that provide potential spawning habitat (Figure 11).The largest number of salmon use the tributaries for spawning.Next in importance are the sloughs,with only a small number of fish using mainstem habitats for spawning. Escapement survey counts in the tributary streams do not reflect the total number of spawning salmon,only the relative population density by 41 +:- N Table 9.Susitna River salmon escapement bYlsampl1ng location derived from ADF&G data,1981-1983 • SAMPLING RIVER CIlINOOK 2 SDCKEYE 5 PINKS CHUM COHO TOTAL 3 LOCATION MILE 1981 1982 1983 1981 1982 1983 1981 1982 1983 1981 1982 1983 1981 1982 1983 1981 1982 1983 Yentna 04 ------139,400 113,800 104,400 36,100 447,300 60,700 19,800 27,800 10,800 17,000 34,100 8,900 212,300 623,000 184,800 Station Stmshine 80 --52,900 91,200 133,500 151,500 71,700 49,500 443,200 40,600 262,900 430,400 266,000 19,800 45,700 15,200 465,700 1,123,700 480,800 Station Talkeetna 103 --10,900 14,500 4,800 3,100 4,200 2,300 73,000 9,500 20,800 49,100 50,400 3,300 5,100 2,400 31,200 141,200 78,300 Station Curry 120 --11,300 10,000 2,800 1,300 1,900 1,000 58,800 5,500 13,100 29,400 21,100 1,100 2,400 800 18,000 103,200 38,800 Station Tota14 --------272,500 265,200 176,200 85,600 890,500 101,300 282,700 458,200 276,800 36,800 79,800 24,100 677,600 1,693,700 578,400 lEscapement numbers were derived from tag/recapture population estimates with the exception of the Yentnll Station escapements which are represented by Sonar counts. 2Stations were not operating during entire chinook migration and total escapements are not available. 3Total escapement minus chinook counts. 4Susitna River drainage escapement (Yentna Station and Sunshine Station)minus chinook counts and escapement into other tributaries downatream of RM 77. 5Second run sockeye only. Source:ADF&G 1983b;Barrett,Thompson and Wick 1984 )J Table 10.Susitna River salmon phenology. DATE HABITAT RANGE PEAK CHINOOK (KING)SALMON Adult inmigration Cook Inlet-Talk.May 25-Aug 18 Jun 18-Jun 30 Talkeetna-D.C.Jun 7-Aug 20 Jun 24-Jul 4 Middle river tributaries Jul I-Aug 6 Juvenile migration Middle river May 18-0ct 3 1 ,3 Jun 19-Aug 30 Spawning Middle river tributaries Jul I-Aug 26 Jul 20-Jul 27 COHO (SILVER)SALMON Adult inmigration Cook Inlet-Talk.Jul 7-Sep 28 Jul 27-Aug 20 Talkeetna-D.C.Jul 18-Sep 19 Aug 12-Aug 26 Middle river tributaries Aug 8-Sep 27 Juvenile migration Middle river May 18-0ct 12 1 •3 May 28-Aug 21 ('-Spawning Middle river tributaries Sep I-Oct 8 Sep 5-Sep 24 CHUM (DOG)SALMON Adult inmigration Cook Inlet-Talk.Jun 24-Sept 28 Jul 27-Aug 2 Talkeetna-D.C.Jul 10-Sep 15 Aug I-Aug 17 Middle river tributaries Jul 27-Sep 6 Middle river sloughs Aug 6-Sep 5 Juvenile migration }fiddle river May 3 20 May 28-Jul18-Aug 17 Spawning Middle river tributaries Jul 27-0ct 1 Aug 5-Sep 10 Middle river sloughs Aug 5-0ct 11 Aug 20-Sep 25 Middle river mainstem Sep 2-Sep 19 SOCKEYE (RED)SALMON 2 Adult inmigration Cook Inlet-Talk.Jul 4-Aug 8 Jul 18-Jul 27 Talkeetna-D.C.Jul 16-Sep 18 Jul 31-Aug 5 Juvenile migration Middle river May 18-0ct 11 1 ,3 Jun 22-Jul 17 Spawning Middle river sloughs Aug 5-0ct 11 Aug 25-Sep 25 43 Table 10 (Continued).Susitna River salmon phenology. DATE HABITAT RANGE PEAK PINK (HUMPBACK)SALMON Adult inmigration Cook Inlet-Talk.Jun 28-Sep 10 Jul 26-Aug 3 Talkeetna-D.C.Jul 10-Aug 30 Aug l-Aug 8 Middle river tributaries Jul 27-Aug 23 Middle river sloughs Aug 4-Aug 17 Juvenile migration Middle river 3 24 May 29-Jun 8May18-Jul Spawning Middle river tributaries Jul 27-Aug 30 Aug 10-Aug 2S Middle river sloughs Aug 4-Aug 30 Aug lS-Aug 30 lA11 migration includes migration to and between habitat t not just outmigration 2 Second run sockeye only. 3No data available for pre-ice movement;earlier date of range refers to initiation of outmigrant trap operation. Source:Barrett Thompson and Wick 1984;Schmidt et al.1984;ADF&G 1983b t e 44 )/) Figure 11.Susitna River map showing important habitats and geographic features between ID1 100 and 153. ,~c~ '6r''~ ~~L-- "".."""-"'/,. 115.0 CS c:::'-~") ....C"~Bf .............-------...."v _ 1/ '-- ~ '. " <".~~ J-----\~'--' Creek /- \..--' Slash ~ () \l -ADFBG STATION ~-RIVER MILEPOST o -SLOUGH MAINSTREAM SPAWNING LOCATIONS Cottld Boa Indicote.19B3 ObnrvOliont SQlld BOil:Inditotu 19B2 ObUnQllo/lS Doshtd Bo.IndICOlt119BI Obut'l'QllQns .j:'- lJl Figure 11 (continued).Susitna River map showing important habitats and geographic features between RM 100 and 153. ~ ------------..., ~~ ~o<:::>0 Cl "'-~ o C'h.4' D~QdI)O'!t! 17o o o \J -ADFBG STATION ~-RIVER MILEPOST o -SLOUGH MAINSTREAM SPAWNING LOCATIONS DOlfed BOl 1"IHcolr~1983 ObHr~Qln:m. Solid ROl l"dicotnl';le20burvQUOnl D(\~t~lJ 80.IndIca'"1981 Ob~rrYQlIon, 100.1 +--River Milepost RS,PS,CS,SS{---RS-Sockeye Solmon --- -_...J PS-Pink Solmon CS -Chum Salmon 55-Coho Solmon .I:- CJ\ ~) Figure 11 (continued).Susitna River map showing important Rl1 100 and 153. habitats and geographic features between (~~J~'C4-\1 ..."'0-\1 \\~~\, (}<).. ,:+c,/··~ o ,'"..«~) u"<'/ ~ v -ADFaG STATION ~-RIVER MILEPOST o -SLOUGH MAINSTREAM SPAWNING LOCATIONS Dolled 801 l"dicatu tga~OburwQlion. Salid eOlllndicaIIl19B20bunQlion, Oa,ht'd 80.I"dica''''1981 Oburvalion. ;100./_!__River Milepost 1 RS,PS,CS,ssf--RS-Sockeye Solman L .J PS-Pink Salmoo C5-Chum Solman 5S-Coho Solman 21A ~. ) '-~. ~ <:l~';< '- species within the surveyed index areas.These index areas range in length from 0.25 to 15 miles.Of the Susitna tributaries between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon,Indian River (RM 138.6),Portage Creek (RM 148.9),Whiskers Creek (RM 101.4).Lane Creek (RM 113.6).and Fourth of July Creek (RM 131.0)contain the majority of the tributary escapement for chinook,coho,pink.and churn salmon (Table 11). Chum and sockeye salmon are the principal species utilizing slough habitats for spawning,and over seventy-three percent of the peak slough escapement counts for chum and sockeye during 1981-1983 occurred in just four of these 34 sloughs:8A,9,11,and 21 (Table 12).Ninety-two percent of the sockeye and sixty-six percent of the slough-spawning chum salmon were counted in these four sloughs (ADF&G 1981;1983b;Barrett et ale 1984).Almost all sockeye spawning above Talkeetna takes place in sloughs.A small number of pink salmon use the sloughs for spawning (Table 12).Coho and chinook salmon are known to spawn only in tributaries. The ADF&G conducted mainstem spawning surveys in 1981 and 1982 using portable and boat-mounted electroshockers,examining 317 and 1,211 sites with each gear type,respectively (ADF&G 1983b).In 1983.no specific mainstem spawning surveys were conducted.However,six spawning areas were found during stream and slough surveys (Barrett et ale 1983).In 1981,12 mainstem spawning sites were observed between RM 68.3 and 135.2.six of which were above the Chulitna River confluence.Fourteen chum salmon were observed at four sites and seven coho at two sites.In 1982,10 mainstem spawning sites were observed between RM 114 and 148.2.Five hundred fifty chum salmon were observed at nine sites,one sockeye at one site,20 pinks at one site,and six coho at three sites.In 1983,six mainstem spawning sites were documented 48 ) Table 11.Peak salmon survey counts above Talkeetna for Susitna River tributary streams. STREAM SURVEY -Coho Chinook DISTANCE YlcAR 74 76 81 82 83 75 76 77 78 79 81 82 83 - Whiskers 0.25 27 70 176 115 22 8 3 Creek (RM 101.4) Chase 0.25 40 80 36 12 15 Creek (RM 106.9) Slash 0.75 6 2 Creek (RM lll.2) Gash 1.0 141 74 19 Creek (RM 111.6) Lane 0.5 3 5 2 40 47 12 Creek (RM 113.6) Lower 1.5 56 133 18 McKenzie (RM 116.2) McKenzie 0.25 Creek (RM 116.7) Little 0.25 8 Portage (RM 117.7) Fifth 0.25 3 of July (RM 123.7) +:-Skull 0.25 \,Q Creek (RM 124.7) Sherman 0.25 3 Creek (RM 130.8) Fourth 0.25 26 17 1 4 3 1 14 56 6 of July (RM 131.0) Gold 0.25 1 21 23 Creek (RM 136.7) Indian 15.0 64 30 85 101 53 10 537 393 ll4 285 422 1053 1193 River (RM 138.6) Jack 0.25 1 1 2 6 Long (RM 144.5) porta~e 15.0 150 100 22 88 15 29 702 374 140 140 659 1253 3140 Cree (RM 148.9) Cheechako 3.0 16 25 Creek (RM 152.5) Chinook 2.0 4 8 Creek (RM 156.8) TOTAL 307 147 458 633 260 62 1261 767 254 425 1121 2473 4416 Table 11 (continued).Peak salmon survey counts above Talkeetna for Suaitna River tributary streams. STREAM SURVEY Chum SockeyeDISTANCE- YEAR 74 75 76 77 81 82 83 74 75 76 77 81 82 83 Whiskers 0.25 Creek (RM 101.4) Chase 0.25 Creek (RM 106.9) Slash 0.75 Cree k (RM 111.2) Gash 1.0 Creek (RM 111.6) Lane 0.5 3 2 76 11 Creek (RM 113.6) Lower 1.5 14 1 McKenzie (RM 116.2) McKenzie 0.25 46 Creek (RM 116.7) Little 0.25 31 Portage (RM 117.7) Fifth 0.25 6ofJuly(RM 123.7) \JI Skull 0.250 10 Creek (RM 124.7) Sherman 0.25 9 Creek (RM 130.8) Fourth 0.25 594 78 11 90 191 148 1 of July (RM 131.0) Gold 0.25 Creek (RM136.7) Indian 15.0 531 70 134 776 40 1346 811 1 2 River (RN 138.6) Jack 0.25 3 2 Long (RM 144.5) Porta~e 15.0 276 300 153 526 Cree (RM 148.9) Cheechako 3.0 Creek (RM 152.5) Chinook 2.0 Creek (RM 156.8) TOTAL 1401 73 512 789 241 1736 1494 1 48 2 ))J Table 11 (continued).Peak aa1mon survey counts above Talkeetna for Susitna River tributary streams. STREAM SURVEY Pink DISTANCE -- YEAR 74 75 76 77 81 82 83 Whisker's 0.25 75 1 138 Creek (RM 101.4) Chase 0.25 50 38 107 6 Creek (RM 106.9) Slash 0.75 Creek (RM 111.2) Gash 1.0 Creek (RM 111.6) Lane 0.5 82 106 1103 291 640 28 Creek (RM 113.6) Lower 1.5 23 17 McKenzie (RM 116.2) McKenzie 0.25 17 Creek (RM 116.7) Little 0.25 140 7 Portage (RM 117.7) Fifth 0.25 2 113 9 of July (RM 123.7) VI Skull 0.25 8 12 >-'Creek (RM 124.7) Sherman 0.25 6 24 Creek (RM 130.8) Fourth 0.25 159 148 4000 612 29 702 78 of July (RM 131.0) Gold 0.25 32 11 7 Creek (RM 136.7) Indian 15.0 577 321 5000 1611 2 738 886 River (RM 138.6) Jack 0.25 1 5 Long (RM 144.5) porta~e 15.0 218 3000 169 285 Cree (RM 148.9) Cheechako 3.0 21 Creek (RM 152.5) Chinook 2.0 Creek (RM 156.8) ---- TOTAL 1036 575 12157 3326 378 2855 1329 Source:Barrett 1974:Barrett,Thompson and Wick 1984:Riis 1977;ADF&G 1976, 1978,1981,1983b between RM 115.0 and 138.9.Two hundred eighty-six chum salmon were observed at these sites,11 sockeye at RM 138.6,and two coho salmon at RM 131.1. With the exception of pink salmon,substantial freshwater rearing occurs in the reach of the Susitna River between the Chulitna confluence and Devil Canyon.Juvenile salmon are unequally distributed among four macrohabitat types:tributary,upland slough,side slough,and side channel. Juvenile chinook salmon are distributed mostly in tributaries and side channels throughout the entire May-to-October rearing season.Coho are mostly rearing in tributaries and upland sloughs during this time.Sockeye are found evenly distributed between upland and side sloughs from May through early September.Chum are mainly distributed between side sloughs and tributaries from May through July (Dugan et al.1984). Resident Species Of the ten resident fish species found between Talkeetna and Devil Canyon,only rainbow trout,Arctic grayling,burbot,round whitefish,longnose suckers,and slimy sculpins are abundant in the area.Dolly Varden,humpback whitefish,threespine stickleback,and Arctic lamprey occur throughout the river below Devil Canyon but appear to be more abundant below the Chulitna River confluence (Sundet and Wenger 1984).Rainbow trout and Arctic grayling provide significant sport fishing,especially near tributary mouths. Rainbow trout and Arctic grayling spend most of the open water season in tributaries,using the mainstem more as a migration and overwintering area. Burbot generally occupy the turbid mainstem waters throughout the year,while whitefish and longnose suckers can be found in both mainstem and tributaries during the open water season. 53 Rainbow trout and Arctic grayling move into tributaries to spawn in the~\ spring after breakup.Whiskers,Lane,and Fourth of July creeks are the primary tributaries used for rainbow spawning (Sundet and Wenger 1984).Round whitefish are believed to spawn in October at either mainstem or tributary mouth locations (Sundet and Wenger 1984).Burbot spawning generally occurs between January and March under the ice in mainstem-influenced areas. TEMPERATURE TOLERANCE/PREFERENCE CRITERIA DEVELOPMENT Significant changes in water temperature may affect the composition of the aquatic community.Altered thermal characteristics of an ecosystem can be either detrimental or beneficiaL An assessment of the effects of water temperature change on fish is enhanced by establishing temperature criteria. Criteria are ranges of water temperature determined to be biologically accept- able to fish for satisfactory physiological and behavioral activity.However, application of temperature criteria in an environmental assessment of a specific water body must be as closely related to the specific water body and to its particular community of organisms as possible.This is accomplished by modifying general temperature criteria gathered from the literature by specific criteria observed in the water body of interest. Limits of temperature tolerance or allowable temperature variations change throughout development,and,particularly at the most sensitive life stages,differ among species.The sequence of events relating to gonad maturation,spawning migration,release of gametes,development of the egg and embryo,and commencement of feeding represents one of the more complex phenomena in nature.These events are generally the most thermally sensitive of all life stages (Brungs and Jones 1977). ~\ 54 Anadromous salmonids are highly mobile species that depend on temperature synchrony among different environments for various phases of their life cycle. There is the danger of dissynchrony if temperature in one area is altered and not in another (Brungs and Jones 1977).Successful early fry production and emigration can be followed by unsuccessful,premature feeding activity in a cold and still unproductive environment. Examination of the literature shows that variations in spawning dates and temperatures are common.These variations suggest that fish demonstrate a biological plasticity and that their tolerance range can vary by species, lifestage,and geographic setting.Overall tolerance and preference ranges for Pacific salmon vary between 0 and 24 C and 7 and 14 C,respectively. Temperature tolerance data exist over a wide area and many years of natural history observation.Since those published data (Table 13)are not all specific to the Susitna drainage,they are used as an aid in developing preliminary temperature tolerance ranges.Life phases potentially affected by temperature changes are adult inmigration,spawning,embryo incubation, juvenile rearing,and fry/smolt outmigration.Literature discussing general life functions of each species and life history phase was reviewed,and data were compiled on the acceptable as well as the preferred temperature ranges for each activity.These preliminary literature-based criteria were then narrowed or widened as appropriate,based on Susitna-specific observations. Adult Inmigration Adult Pacific salmon have been reported to migrate into freshwater systems in water temperatures which range from 1.5 to over 19 C.Adult fish can usually tolerate a wider range of temperature than embryos (Alabaster and 55 Table 13.Observed temperature ranges for various life stages of Pacific Salmon. TEMPERATURE RANGE C SPECIES OF FISH LIFE STAGE SOURCE LOCATION MIGRATION SPAWNING INCUBATION REARING Chum Adult Bell 1973 8.3-21.0 7.2-12.8 Bell 1983 1.5 ADF&G 1980 Kuskokwim 5.0-12.8 Tributaries Mattson &Hobart 1962 Southeast AK 4.4-19.4 McNeil &Bailey 1975 Southeast AK 7.0-13.0 Wilson 1981 Kodiak Island 6.5-12.5 Neave 1966 B.C.4.0-16.0 Rukhlov 1969 Sakhalin,USSR 1.8-8.2 Merritt &Raymond 1983 Noatak R,AK 2.5 P-.DF&G 1984 Susitna R,AK 5.6-15.5 4.5-12.3 Juvenile Trasky 1974 Salcha R,AK 5.0-7.0 Sano 1966 Bolshaia R,6.0-10.0 USSR Bell 1973 6.7-13.5 11.2-15.7 McNeil &Bailey 1975 Southeast,AK 4.4-15.7 Wilson 1979 Kodiak Island 5.0-7.0 Raymond 1981 Delta R,AK 3.0-5.5 Merritt &Raymond 1983 Noatak R,AK 5.0-12.0 ADF&G 1984 Susitna R,AK 4.2-14.5 1.3-16.2 Egg!Bell 1973 4.4-13.3 Alevin McN eil 1969 Southeast AK 0-15.0 Merritt &Raymond 1983 Noatak R,AK 0.2-9.0 Sano 1966 Japan 4 McNeil &Bailey 1975 Southeast AK 4.4 Kogl 1965 Chena R,AK 0.5-4.5 Francisco 1977 Delta R,AK 0.4-6.7 Raymond 1981 Clear,AK 2.0-4.5 ADF&G 1983 Susitna R,AK 0-7.4 Waangard &Burger 1983 Lab.0.5-8.05ADF&G 1984 Susitna R,AK 2.0-4.3 .~. 56 Table 13 (Continued).Observed temperature ranges for various life stages of Pacific Salmon. TEMPERATURE RANGE C SPECIES OF FISH LIFE STAGE SOURCE LOCATION MIGRATION SPAWNING INCUBATION REARING Coho Adult Bell 1973 7.2-15.6 4.4-9.5 Bell 1983 4 McNeil &Bailey 1975 Southeast AK 7.0-13.03 3McMahon19835-19 5-n 2-17,5-13, 4 WalJlis 1983 Anchor R,AK 2-15,7-14 ADF&G 1984 Susitna R,AK 5.8-15.5 Juvenile Cederholm &Scarlet 1982 Washington St.6 Bustard &Narver 1975 Vancouver Is.,BC 7 BelJl 1973 7.0-16.5 11.8-14.6 McNeil &Bailey 1975 Southeast AK 4.4-15.7 33McMahon19834-16 6-12 4-21,7-15, 4 Wallis 1983 Anchor R,AK 2-15,7-14 Whitmore 1979 Caribou L,AK n-15.5 Seldovia L,AK 3.0-5.7 ADF&G 1984 Susitna R,AI{4.2-14.5 Eggi Bell 1973 4.4-13.3 3 Alevin McMahon 1983 4-14,4-10 Dong 1981 Washington St.1.3-12.4,4-6.53 Pink Adult Bell 1973 7.2-15.6 7.2-12.8 Bell 1983 USSR 5 McNeil &Bailey 1975 Southeast AK 7.0-13 Sheridan 1962 Southeast AK 7.2-18.4 McNeil et al.1964 Southeast AK 10.0-13.0 ADF&G 1984 Susitna R,AK 7.8-15.5 8.0-n.O Juvenile Bell 1973 5.6-14.6 McNeil &Bailey 1975 Southeast AK 4.4-15.7 Wilson 1979 Kodiak Island 5.0-7.0 Wickett 1958 British Columbia 4.0-5.0 ADF&G 1984 Susitna R,AK 4.2-14.5 Eggi Bell 1973 4.4-13.3 Alevin Bailey &Evans 1971 Southeast AK 4.5 Combs &Burrows 1957 Lab.0.5-5.5 McNeil et al.1964 Southeast AK 1.0-8.0 Godin 1980 Lab.3.4-15.0 57 ---_.,--_._-_._-----~----~--------- Table 13 (Continued).Observed temperature ranges for various life stages of Pacific Salmon.,~ TEMPERATURE RANGE C SPECIES OF FISH LIFE STAGE SOURCE LOCATION MIGRATION SPAWNING INCUBATION REARING Sockeye Adult Juvenile Bell 1973 Bell 1983 McNeil &Bailey 1975 Nelson 1983 ADF&G 1984 McCart 1967 Raleigh 1971 Bell 1973 McNeil &Bailey 1975 Fried &Laner 1981 Bucher 1981 Hartman et al.1967 Flagg 1983 ADF&G 1984 7.2-15.6 10.6-12.2 2.5 Southeast AK 7.0-13.0 Southeast AK 8.3-14.3 Susitna R,AK 5.8-15.5 4.9-10.5 British Columbia 5.0-17.0 Lab.4.5 11.2-14.6 Southeast AK 4.4-15.7 Bristol Bay,AK 4.0-7.0 Bristol Bay,AK 4.4-17.8 Alaska-wide 4.5-10.0 Kasilof R,AK 6.7-14.4 Susitna R,AK 4.2-14.0 Egg/ Alevin Bell 1973 Combs 1965 Lab. ADF & G 1983 Susitna R,AK Waangard &Burger 1983 Lab. ADF & G 1984 Susitna R,AK 4.4-13.3 2 4.5-14.3,1.5 2.9-7.4 2.0-6.\ 2.0-4.3 7.0-13.042-14,5-10 6.6-15.6 7.8-13.6 Chinook Adult Bell 1973 Bell 1983 McN al &Bailey 1975 Wallis 1983 ADF&G 1984 Southeast AK Anchor R,AK Susitna R,AK 3.3-13.9 4 5.6-13.9 Juvenile Raymond 1979 Bell 1973 McNeil &Bailey 1975 AEIDC 1982 Wallis 1983 ADF&G 1984 Columbia R Southeast AK Southcent.AK Anchor R,AK Susitna R,AK 7 4.5 4 6-16,8-16 4.2-14.5 7.3-14.6 4.4-15.7 Egg/ Alevin Bell 1973 Combs 1965 ·Lab. Alderdice &Velsen 1978 5.0 214.4 1.5 2.5-16.0 ~Single temperature values are lower observed thresholds 3Aft~r eggs had developed to the 128-cell or early blastula stage at 5.5 0 C Optl.mum range 4 p k'.5 ea ml.gratl.on range Mean temperature 58 Lloyd 1982).Upstream migration of salmon is closely related to the temperature regime characteristic of each spawning stream (Sheridan 1962). The reported temperatures at which natural migration occurs vary between species and location,but appear to be influenced by latitude.In general, average annual freshwater temperatures are progressively cooler with in- creasing latitude (Wetzel 1975).At latitudes above 55°N,inmigrating chinook,coho,sockeye,and chum salmon have been observed at temperatures as low as 4 C or colder (Bell 1983). Reiser and Bjornn (1979)report that deviations from natural stream temperatures can also lead to other factors,such as disease outbreaks in migrating fish,which can alter migration timing.Disease infection rates in anadromous salmonids increase markedly above 13 C (Fryer and Pilcher 1974; Groberg et al.1978).Temperatures above the upper tolerance range have been reported to stop fish migration (Bell 1980).Low temperatures have been reported by ADF&G biologists to stop pink salmon inmigration and increase milling activity near the Main Bay hatchery site in Prince William Sound (Krasnowski 1984).While the holding pond raceway water varied between 6 and 6.5 C,the pink salmon would not enter and continued to mill in the seawater which was at a temperature between 10 and 12 C.When the raceway water temperature was raised to 8.5 C,the salmon then entered the holding pond. Adult salmon throughout the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach experience natural water temperatures ranging from approximately 2.5 to 16 C during the chinook inmigration,4 to 15 C during the coho inmigration,and 5 to 16 C during the pink,chum,and sockeye inmigration. Adult Spawni~ ~ Thermal requirements for eggs,larvae,and/or juvenile emergence may 59 differ from those of adults.The genetic contributions to successive genera-.~. tions are of more importance than the longevity of the individual organism, making the thermal preference of the adults subordinate during spawning to that of the eggs and larvae (Reynolds 1977). Spawning of adult Pacific salmon has been reported to occur in water temperatures which range from approximately 4 to 18 C,although the preferred temperature range for all five species is reported by McNeil and Bailey (1975) as 7 to 13 C.Chum salmon have been observed spawning in upper Susitna mainstem habitats at temperatures as cold as 3.3 C (ADF&G 1983b). Burbot and round whitefish are the most numerous species using mainstem habitats for spawning.Burbot is one of the few freshwater fish that spawns in winter.The spawning activity usually takes place in water which is 0.5 to 1.5 C (Scott and Crossman 1973;Alabaster and Lloyd 1982).Temperatures between 0 and 0.7 C were observed in Susitna mainstem burbot spawning areas in 1983 (ADF&G 1983c)•Round whitefish spawning has been observed at temperatures between 0 and 4.5 C (Scott and Crossman 1973;and Bryan and Kato 1975).They are believed to spawn in the Susitna during October while water temperatures are dropping rapidly.An increase in water temperatures at the time of reproduction could affect the spawning of whitefish and burbot (Alabaster and Lloyd 1982). Embryo Incubation Compared with the other life phases,embryo development is perhaps most directly influenced by water temperature.Temperature ranges that cause no increased mortality of embryos are much narrower than those for adults (Alabaster and Lloyd 1982).In the freshwater species for which data on 60 embryonic development are available,the preferred range of temperatures is 3.5 to 11.1 C (Alabaster and Lloyd 1982). Generally,the lower and upper temperature limits for successful initial incubation of salmon eggs are 4.5 and 14.5 C,respectively (Reiser and Bjornn 1979).In laboratory studies conducted in Washington (Combs 1965)and from a literature review conducted by Barns (1967),salmon eggs are reportedly vulner- able to temperature stress before closure of the blastopore,which occurs at about 140 accumulated Celsius temperature units.A temperature unit is one degree above freezing experienced by developing fish embryos per day.After the period of initial sensitivity to low temperatures has passed (approximate- ly 30 days at 4.5 C),embryos and alevins can tolerate temperatures near 0 C (McNeil and Bailey 1975). From his work on Sashin Creek in southeast Alaska,Merrell (1962)sugges- ted that pink salmon egg survival may be related to water temperatures during spawning.McNeil (1969)further examined Sashin Creek data and discussed the relationship between initial incubation temperature and survival.They determined that eggs exposed to cooler spawning temperature experienced greater incubation mortality than eggs which began incubation at warmer temperatures.Abnormal embryonic development could occur if,during initial stages of development,embryos are exposed to temperatures below 6 C (Bailey 1983).Bailey and Evans (1971)reported an increase in mortality for pink salmon when initial incubation water temperatures were held below 2 C during this initial incubation period. Mean intragravel water temperatures for the four primary spawning Susitna sloughs range from 2.0 to 4.3 C (ADF&G 1983c).Slough 8A was overtopped by cold mainstem water from an ice jam occurring in late November 1982.This cold mainstem water (near 0 C)depressed the intragravel water temperature and 61 delayed salmon development and emergence in this slough.Large numbers of dead embryos at this site suggest that increased mortality may have occurred (ADF&G 1983c).Slight increases in embryo mortalities and alevin abnormali- ties were shown to occur when average temperatures were maintained at a level less than 3.4 C during experimental laboratory tests of developing Susitna chum and sockeye salmon embryos (Wangaard and Burger 1983).It appears that a complete loss of all incubating salmon eggs would not occur if the reduced water temperatures occur after closure of the embryonic blastopore. The most sensitive eggs to temperature are those of burbot with a toler- ance range of only 0 to 3 C and a preferred range of 0.5 to 1.0 C (Alabaster and Lloyd 1982).The next most sensitive would be the coregonids followed by the salmonids,of which the most sensitive appear to be pink salmon.The most tolerant species would be those spawning in quite shallow waters which are exposed to diurnal fluctuations of temperature (Alabaster and Lloyd 1982). Juvenile Rearing Water temperature affects immature fish metabolism,growth,food capture, swimming performance,and disease resistance.Juvenile salmonids can usually tolerate a wider range of water temperatures than embryos.They can also survive short exposure to temperatures which would be ultimately lethal,and can live for longer periods at temperatures at which they abstain from feeding (Alabaster and Lloyd 1982). According to literature reviewed to date,juvenile salmon activity slows at water temperatures lower than 4 C.At these lower water temperatures,fish tend to be less active and spend more time resting in secluded,covered habitats (Chapman and Bjornn 1969).In Carnation Creek,British Columbia, Bustard and Narver (1975)reported that at water temperatures below 7 C,fish 62 -----------~--.----_.-_.. .~. stopped feeding and moved into deeper water or closer to objects providing cover.In Grant Creek near Seward,Alaska,juvenile salmonids were inactive and inhabited the cover afforded by streambed cobble and large gravel sub- strates at 1 ..0 to 4.5 C water temperatures (Alaska,Univ.,AEIDC,1982). Generally,the tolerable temperature range for rearing is between 4 and 16 C.However,rearing juvenile salmonids have been observed in side sloughs in the upper Susitna River where,from June through September,water tempera- tures were between 2.4 and 15.5 C (ADF&G 1983d),a slightly wider range. Juvenile coho and chinook salmon have also been successfully reared in Alaska hatcheries at temperatures between 2 and 4 C (Pratt 1984).In an experiment at the U.S.National Marine Fisheries Service Auke Bay Laboratory.coho salmon grew at temperatures of 0.2,2 and 4 C.No mortality was seen in unfed fish held at these temperatures except for those at 4 C (Koski 1984).This sug- gests that at temperatures around 4 C and higher,the coho's metabolism is sufficiently active to require food whereas below these temperatures the fish can remain inactive enough to not require feeding. Fry/Smolt Outmigration Water temperature change may serve as a stimulus for smolt outmigration (Sano 1966).Juvenile chinook salmon outmigrations from the Salmon River, Idaho have been shown to be related to sudden rises in water temperature (Raymond 1979).The critical temperature triggering this movement appeared to be 7 C and outmigrations were slowed when water temperatures dropped below 7 C.Low temperatures seemed to slow the rate of outmigrations for coho salmon in th,~Clearwater River,Washington,and only minor movement was noted below 6 C (Cederholm and Scarlet 1982).Juvenile chinook and coho salmon have been observed to stop outmigrating when water temperature falls below 7 C 63 ---..._----------------------- (Raymond 1979;Cederholm and Scarlet 1982;Bustard and Narver 1975).Out- migration for sockeye salmon begins as temperature rises during the spring to 4.4 to 5.0 C (Foerster 1968).To insure optimum conditions for smoltifica- tion,timing of migration,and survival of salmon smolts,Wedemeyer et aL (1980)stated that water temperature should follow the natural seasonal cycle as closely as possible. In the Susitna River,salmon smolt outmigration generally occurs from mid-May through August (Dugan et al.1984).River ice breakup generally pre- cedes a large part of the initial chum and pink salmon fry outmigration period.There are few data available on pink salmon outmigration,but this activity is believed to occur between mid-May and mid-July,peaking in early June.Outmigrating chum fry occur in the river mainstem from mid-May to mid-August,peaking in June.Coho,chinook,and sockeye juveniles outmigrate from mid-May to early October,with peaks occurring from June through August. In addition to salmon smolt outmigration,there is also a migration be- tween habitats as both resident and juvenile anadromous fish redistribute themselves into slough,side channel and mainstem habitats for overwintering. These emigrations generally peak in August for chinook and coho salmon (Dugan et al.1984).Rainbow trout and Arctic grayling generally move out of tributaries to overwintering areas in late August through September (Sundet and Wenger 1984). During May,Susitna river temperatures generally range from just above freezing to 7 C.June water temperatures normally range from 2.5 to 9.0 C. July water temperatures range from 5.0 to 16 C,while during August mainstem water temperatures are warmest,ranging from 8 to 15 C.In September 4.0 to 10.0 C is the normal range for mainstem water temperatures from Devil Canyon to Talkeetna. 64 EFFECTS ANALYSIS Temperature regimes in the Devil Canyon to Talkeetna reach are evaluated with respect to the various life stage temperature tolerances.In order to facilitate this evaluation,temperature tolerances are graphically represented over a one-year time frame by fish life stage for the five species of Pacific salmon.These figures (Appendix H)are then overlaid with the temperature profiles from river miles 100,130,and 150 for the years 1971-72,1974-75, 1981-82,and 1982-83.Three scenarios are examined:(1)natural versus Watana dam operation;(2)natural versus combined operation of the Watana and Devil Canyon dams;and (3)natural versus Watana reservoir filling. Only in cases where the simulated temperature regimes fall outside the life phase temperature tolerances is an obvious adverse impact established. In cases where project conditions do not exceed tolerances but are substantially different from natural,a discussion follows. 65 1. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION PROJECT EFFECTS ON INSTREAM TEMPERATURE .·Instream temperatures were simulated under two Watana-only and two Watana/Devil Canyon load demands as well as under natural conditions for five winter and four summer seasons.Resultant temperatures are available for each week at over 80 mainstem locations from the Watana dam downstream to Sunshine. These results are condensed in this section,and discussed in terms of change in the downstream temperature regime resulting from project operation.These temperature changes are discussed more fully in a later section with specific reference to the effect on fish. The downstream temperatures predicted from simulations are presented in three forms. Weekly temperatures are presented in Appendix A for locations at river miles 83.8,98.6,130.1 and 150.2 for all scenarios,and at river mile 184.4 (Watana dam face)for natural and Watana-only scenarios.These tables provide comparisons between natural and with-project results for specific weeks. 2.Isotherm plots for the river reach between the downstream-most dam face showing lines of and Sunshine are presented in Appendix B for each figures synopsize an entire simulation on one graph, scenario.These equal temperatures plotted as functions of river location and time.A horizontal line drawn across the plot at any river mile will show a tem- perature time series at that location,while a vertical drawn at any week provides a time-constant temperature profile. 3.Seasonal temperature history plots for three river locations (approxi- mately river miles 100.130 and 150)comparing natural and with-project 66 b. scenarios are provided with corresponding fish preference criteria in Appendix H.These graphics are useful for comparing the seasonal varia- tions between the with-project and natural temperature regimes. A number of points should be kept in mind when considering the tempera- ture simulation results. 1.Reduced'to simplest terms ~operation of the proposed reservoirs will affect downstream temperature in two ways. a.The temperature of dam release water will usually differ from temperatures which would naturally occur at that time in that reach of river.Reservoirs tend to dampen the variation that naturally occurs in a river system~with cooler-than-normal water released during the summer~and warmer-than-normal water released during the winter. By altering the amount of water normally in the mainstem~dam operations alter the rate of cooling or warming of the downstream river.Basically ~larger flows take longer to approach ambient temperature. 2.Tributaries entering the mainstem river below the dam will buffer the effect of the project~larger tributaries having a greater effect.The Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers,which join the Susitna within two miles of each other~add a combined flow that is approximately 130%of the Susitna River flow (on an annual basis)at the point before the rivers converge. Thus these two rivers have a considerable buffering effect on the Susitna water tE~mperature below their confluences. 3.The strE:am temperature model assumes instantaneous flow mixing at tribu- tary confluences.In reality ~tributary flows tend to hug the bank on 67 the side of the mainstem river after converging,maintaining a plume ,~ distinct from the mainstem water for a considerable distance downstream. 4.The temperature model does not simulate an ice cover,but rather assumes an open water surface throughout the year.Consequently,simulated temperatures rise quickly in spring in response to increased solar input and warmer air temperatures,whereas the actual presence of either a full ice cover or residual channel ice serves to temper these rises.Thus predicted temperatures during this period should be regarded cautiously. NATURAL CONDITION SIMULATIONS The study reach of river normally cools from the upstream end down, approaching 0 C sometime during October.The river remains at 0 C until breakup,which occurs in early-to-mid May.There is often a January thaw in the basin that would raise the water temperature if not for the insulating lce and snow cover. After breakup,water temperatures rise rapidly,reaching 11 to 13 C. During the four summers simulated,peak temperatures all occurred within water weeks 38 through 41 (June 17 -July 14).These summer peaks ranged from 10.9 to 13.0 C at river mile 150,10.9 to 12.9 C at river mile 130,and 11.8 to 13.1 C at river mile 100. Cooling begins sometime between mid-August and early September,once again reaching 0 C sometime in October. WATANA ONLY,1996 AND 2001 DEMANDS Two power load demands were used in the single-dam simulations,that of an early year of Watana operation,1996,and that of the year before Devil Canyon becomes operational,2001.There were very slight differences between 68 downriver temperatures simulated under these two demands.Mean summer temperatures (Table 14)show no differences greater than 0.1 C at any of the three locations examined (RM 150,130 and 100)for the summers simulated.On a weekly basis,temperatures are generally within a few tenths of a degree between the 1996 and 2001 simulations. Mean sunmer temperatures are approximately 1.0 C cooler than natural at both river miles 150 and 130 under both load demands.By river mile lOa,84 miles downstream of Watana dam,this difference in summer means is reduced to less than 0.6 C. Operation of the project has the effect of delaying summer temperature rises as well as reducing temperatures.With-project temperatures are consis- tently cooler than natural prior to water week 48 (August 26 -September 1). After this period,with-project temperatures are warmer than natural.Summer peak temperatures are also reduced up to 2 C and generally occur later in the summer than under natural conditions (Table 15). Figure 12 provides a comparison of weekly summer temperature ranges at river mile 150 for natural and 1996 demand simulations,graphically synop- sizing the observations discussed above.The average variation within each week is noticeably lower under with-project conditions--2.1 C as compared with 2.7 C under natural conditions.Graphically,these values correspond to the average length of the vertical temperature range lines.This suggests that the reservoir has a stabilizing effect on summer instream temperature varia- tion. Simulated natural river temperatures are a C at the Watana dam site from mid-to-Iate October at least through the end of March (weeks 4 through 26). 69 Table 14.Mean summer (water weeks 31-52)water temperatures (C)under various load demands for three mainstem locations. River Mile 150 Demand 1971 1Year 1974 1981 1982 Mean Natural 7.3 8.6 8.9 8.7 8.4 1996 6.7 7.3 7.9 7.7 7.4 2001 6.7 7.3 7.9 7.7 7.4 2002 5.8 6.7 6.4 6.5 6.4 2020 5.8 6.9 7.0 6.8 6.6 River Mile 130 Demand Year 1971 1974 1981 1982 Mean Natural 7.8 8.7 8.6 8.8 8.5 1996 6.8 7.5 7.9 7.8 7.5 ~~, 2001 6.8 7.5 7.9 7.7 7.5 2002 6.2 7.2 6.8 7.0 6.8 2020 6.2 7.4 7.3 7.2 7.0 River Mile 100 Demand Year 1971 1974 1981 1982 Mean Natural 8.3 9.4 9.1 9.4 9.0 1996 7.6 8.7 8.8 8.7 8.5 2001 7.6 8.7 8.8 8.7 8.4 2002 7.1 8.4 7.9 8.0 7.9 2020 7.2 8.7 8.4 8.4 8.2 1 to historic hydrologic/meteorologic conditions used inDatesrefer temperature simulations (see Table 7). 70 Table 15.Simulated summer peak temperature ranges (C)at selected locations. River mile 150 Demand Water weeks when Year Temperature Range (C)peaks occurred Natural 10.9 -13.0 38 -41 1996 9.4 -11.1 40 -46 2001 9.4 -11.1 38 -46 2002 8.3 -10.2 41 -51 2020 8.5 -11.2 44 -48 River mile 130 Demand Water weeks when Year Temperature Range (C)peaks occurred Natural 10.9 -12.9 38 -41 t"""'"'.1996 9.7 -10.7 40 -46, 2001 9.7 10.7 41 46 2002 8.6 -10.2 41 -48 2020 8.6 -10.8 River mile 100 Demand Water weeks when Year Temperature Range (C)peaks occurred Natural 1l.8 -13.1 38 -41 1996 11.2 -12.1 38 -46 2001 11.2 -12.3 38 -46 2002 10.6 -1l.5 38 -41 2020 10.9 -11.6 41 -44 71 ---_._.__..~_._--------_._..............._....,....,,-,---------------------- Figure 12.Comparison of weekly river temperature ranges (C)at river mile 150 for four summer simulations,natural and Watana 1996 demand results. 14 . 0--0 Natural Range ••With-Project Range I y I 12 I .~I I 10 -1 0 !I I II II Iz I II --.J ~!I..8N=..- r I~~--..~~u 1 1 !~s-I 1~6~- II II 1 1 4 1 II nOI 2 ~1 I 0 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 \',)er Weeks ) Simulated Watana reservoir releases during this period range from 0.6 to 4.7 C.Consequently,river temperatures immediately downstream from the dam face would be warmer than under natural conditions. The location of the 0 C point and consequent ice front location down- stream from the dam varies as a function of flow,reservoir release tempera- ture and meteorology.As mentioned previously,SNTEMP assumes an open water river surface during all seasons,and thus may not be reliable after an ice cover forms or during breakup.During these periods,Harza-Ebasco's ICECAL model results (Harza-Ebasco 1984c)should be considered in place of the SNTEMP results.The ICECAL-simulated ice front locations are shown on the isotherm plots in App,endix B.It should be noted that under natural condition and l·- Watana·filling scenarios,ICECAL results do not extend upstream of RM 139. Under with-project conditions,results are considered accurate upstream to RM 150 (Gemperline 1984). WATANA/DEVIL CANYON 2002 and 2020 DEMANDS The two-dam configuration was simulated under two load demands,2002,the first year Devil Canyon comes on line,and 2020,a typical year at full operational capacity.Addition of the second dam moves the release facility further downstream,eliminating a 33-mile reach where,under a single-dam scheme,water temperatures begin equilibration to ambient temperatures.The thermal consequences of this second dam are more severe deviations from natural conditions than under the single-dam case.Summer temperatures are cooler and winter temperatures warmer than under both the natural and the Watana-only scenarios. Just as in the case of the single dam,temperatures increase slowly throughout the summer,remaining cooler than natural until early September 73 (water week 49,September 2-8),and then staying warmer than natural through ~ the fall and winter (natural winter temperatures being 0 C).Summer peak temperatures are reduced by as much as 3.0 C (Table 15),and generally occur later in the season than under the natural regime. Summer simulations under the 2002 demand result in colder water tempera- tures than those simulated under the 2020 demand.This is due to the less frequent use of cone valves with the increased load demand of year 2020.Mean seasonal temperatures,averaged for the four 2002 summers simulated,are approximately 2.0.1.7 and 1.2 C colder than natural at river miles 150,130 and 100,respectively (see Table 14).By comparison,mean summer temperature differences from natural conditions for river miles 150.130 and 100 under the 2020 demand are 1.8.1.4 and 0.9 C.respectively.It should be noted that these means are lower than natural.in part because of the season definition, April 30 through September 30.With-proj ect temperatures are considerably warmer than natural through the fall;thus these differences in summer means would decrease if the season were defined to run into October.Figure 13 provides the weekly temperature ranges at river mile 150 for the four summer simulations under natural and the 2002 load demand conditions. WATANA FILLING Filling the Watana reservoir is scheduled to begin in May,1991.Filling would continue through three summers,and would be completed sometime in late summer,1993 (Acres American 1983).Winter discharges would be released at natural flow levels during these years. Reservoir operations/temperature simulations and subsequent downriver temperature simulations were done covering the winter 1991-92 through ...~ 74 )) Figure 13.Comparison of weekly river temperature ranges (C)at river mile 150 for four summer simulations,natural and Watana/Devil Canyon 2002 demand results. 14 1 0----0 Natural Range -..,J \Jl Q,}...=...-Q,}c.":_-...c.":Q,}U ~e- Q,} ~ 12 10 8 6 4 2 [ 1 I I I I 1 I ••With.Project Range I o 32 34 36 38 40 42 Water Weeks 44 46 48 50 52 summer 1993 period.The historic hydrology/meteorology used for these simula- tions are listed in Table 16.The first summer of filling,1991,was not simulated,as release temperatures are expected to be similar to natural temperatures (Acres American 1983). Summer release temperatures were slightly colder under 1992 filling conditions than under the 1991 conditions.The two historic summer periods used for simulating the 1992 conditions differed greatly,the 1971 summer being the coldest of those years considered.For both summer 1992 simula- tions,release temperatures were no greater than 4.2 C through the first part of the summer (week 44 -July 29 to August 4 for 1981;week 46 -August 12 to 18 for 1971),followed by warmer than natural releases.Even with the warm releases late in the summer,mean seasonal temperatures at river mile 150 were 1.3 and 2.5 C colder than natural for the 1971 and 1981 simulations,respec- tively.For the early-to-mid part of the summer (water weeks 31-46),this difference is greater,2.9 and 2.8 C colder for 1971 and 1981 simulations, respectively.These results are synopsized for river miles ISO,130 and 100 in Table 17.Figures 14 and 15 compare temperature time series at river mile 150 for these two summer simulations with corresponding natural condition simulations. The preceding year of filling,1991,was simulated with historic hydro- logy/meteorology from 1982.The mean temperature figures (Table 18)are very similar to those of the 1992/1981-condition simulation discussed previously. The major difference is that release temperatures in the 1991 case warmed earlier in the summer,reaching 5 C by week 30 (June 17-23).Late summer release temperatures were not as high as in the 1992 simulations,keeping the season mean temperature low.Temperature time series at river mile ISO, comparing this case with natural 1982 summer simulations,appear in Figure 16. 76 Table 16.Historic hydrologic/meteorologic conditions used for Watana filling simulations. Hydrologic/meteorologic conditions used in Season Forecast years simulations Winter 1991-1992 1982-1983 Summer 1992 1971 1 1981 Winter 1992-1993 1971-1972 1 1981-1982 Summer 1993 1982 1Two simulations have been run for this forecast season under different hydrologic/meteorologic conditions. 77 Table 17.Mean summer temperatures (C)for Watana filling,1992 demand,at selected locations. River Mile 150 Demand Year Water weeks 31-52 1971 1981 Water weeks 31-46 1971 1981 Natural 1992 River Mile 130 7.3 5.9 8.9 7.1 8.1 5.3 9.1 6.3 Demand Year Water weeks 31-52 1971 1981 Water weeks 31-46 1971 1981 Natural 1992 River Mile 100 7.8 6.2 8.6 7.4 8.1 5.7 9.1 6.8 Demand Year Water weeks 31-52 1971 1981 Water weeks 31-46 1971 1981 Natural 1992 8.3 7.1 78 9.1 8.4 8.7 6.8 9.7 8.2 ) Figure 14.Simulated weekly river temperatures (C)at river mile 150 for summer 1971, natural and Watana 1992 demand filling results. 14 1 0-0-0 Natural 5250 With-Project Filling 484644424038363432 8 2 6 4 o 10 12 ~;" &.0"... ~C'S_ ...&.0C'S~u~e- ~ E-4 -.J \0 Water Weeks 14 Figure 15.Simulated weekly river temperatures (C)at river mile 150 for summer 1981,natural and Watana 1992 demand filling results. 0--0-0 Natural ~ 12 10 OJ ~ 0 ""8::I........ ~~-.....""~~u~e-- ~6~ 4 2 With-Project Filling o 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 ,,>ter Weeks 46 48 50 52 ) Table 18.Mean summer temperatures (C)for Watana filling,1991 demand,at selected locations. River Mile 150 Demand Water weeks 31-52 Water weeks 31-46 Year 1982 1982 Natural 8.7 9.2 1991 7.0 6.5 River Mile 130 .Demand Water weeks 31-52 Water weeks 31-46 Year 1982 1982 Natural 8.8 9.1 1991 7.2 6.8 ~River Mile 100 IT Demand Water weeks 31-52 Water weeks 31-46 Year 1982 1982 Natural 9.4 9.8 1991 8.1 8.0 81 00 ~N .......8 ~~~...~~U~c._ S ~ ~ 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Figure 16.Simulated weekly river temperatures (C)at river mile 150 for summer 1982,natural and Watana 1991 demand filling results. 0--0--0 Natural •• •With-Project Filling o 32 34 36 38 40 42 \\,,Jer Weeks 44 46 48 50 52 ) The two winter simulation periods were selected to bound downstream ice formation during the Watana filling period.The average 1982-83 conditions used to simulate the first winter of filling (1991-92),coupled with the relatively warm (approximately 4 C)release water from the low level outlet, were expected to result in the furthest downstream extent of ice-free water. The second 'winter of filling (1992-93)was simulated using the cold 1981-82 conditions with the colder near-surface reservoir releases expected through use of the cone valves.Under this scheme,much more extensive ice formation was expectE~d.Results from these ice simulations are available in Harza-Ebasco (1984c). TOLERANCE AND PREFERENCE CRITERIA FOR FISH Preliminary tolerance and preference ranges for thermal impact assessment have been established for the five Pacific salmon species found in the Susitna drainage.These limits are based on literature,laboratory studies,field studies and observed Susitna drainage temperatures (Table 19).The tolerance zones have been established for each life phase activity excluding incubation. Within this range fish can expect to live and function free from the lethal effects of temperature.Susitna River fish are acclimated to a temperature range between 0 and approximately 18 C.Within this range,the preferred temperature range for most salmonid life phases is between 6 and 12 C.The upper and lower incipient lethal temperatures for the salmon life phases excluding incubation would range between 13 and 18 C and 1 to 7 C,respec- tively. Embryo incubation rates increase with increase in intragravel water temperature.Accumulated temperature units,or days to hatching and emer- gence,can be determined as criteria for incubation.Wangaard and Burger 83 Table 19.Preliminary salmon tolerance criteria for Susitna River drainage.~!. TEMPERATURE RANGE (C) SPECIES LIFE PHASE TOLERANCE PREFERRED Chum Adult Migration 1.5-18.0 6.0-13.0 Spawning 1 1.0-14.0 6.0-13.0 Incubation 0-12.0 2.0-8.0 Rearing 1.5-16.0 5.0-15.0 Smolt Migration 3.0-13.0 5.0-12.0 Sockeye Adult Migration 2.5-16.0 6.0-12.0 Spawning 1 4.0-14.0 6.0-12.0 Incubation 0-14.0 4.5-8.0 Rearing 2.0-16.0 7.0-14.0 Smolt Nigration 4.0-18.0 5.0-12.0 Pink Adult Migration 5.0-18.0 7.0-13.0 Spawning 1 7.0-18.0 8.0-13.0 Incubation 0-13.0 4.0-10.0 Smolt Migration 4.0-13.0 5.0-12.0 Chinook Adult Migration 2.0-16.0 7.0-13.0 Spawning 1 5.0-14.0 7.0-12.0 Incubation 0-16.0 4.0-12.0 Rearing 2.0-16.0 7.0-14.0 Smolt Migration 4.0-16.0 7.0-14.0 Coho Adult Migration 2.0-18.0 6.0-11.0 Spawnig 1 2.0-17.0 6.0-13.0 Incubation 0-14.0 4.0-10.0 Rearing 2.0-18.0 7.0-15.0 Smolt Migration 2.0-16.0 6.0-12.0 lEmbryo incubation or development rate increases as temperature rises. Accumulated temperature units or days to emergence should be determined for each species for incubation. 84 (1983)incubated Susitna chum and sockeye eggs in a laboratory experiment under four separate temperature regimes until complete yolk absorption.In a related study,ADF&G (1983c)determined the timing to fifty percent,~emergence for chum and sockeye salmon under natural conditions.Development times were computed and plotted for data from these studies and from data available in the literature.The resulting regression gave a linear relationship between mean incubation temperature and development rate (the inverse of the time to emergence)for chum and sockeye between approximately 2 and 10 C (Figures 17-20).Variation in incubation time of at least 10%of the mean can occur within a species and further variation may be caused by fluctuating tempera- tures during incubation (Crisp 1981).The calculated regression can give only an approximate estimate of development time. A simplified way of estimating emergence time is to develop a nomograph (Figure 21)from the incubation temperature versus development rate figures. By rearranging the regression equation,a formula can be developed to predict the time to emergence given the average incubation temperature: 1000 Days = 0.574 T +2.342 This formula is used to develop a nomograph capable of predicting the date of emergence given the date of spawning and the average temperature.The left axis of the nomograph becomes the known range of spawning dates (July 20 -October 10)and the right axis contains the emergence dates.By solving the equation for any temperature of interest,the number of Julian days to emergence for that average incubating temperature can be determined. 85 a 829 ADF&G 1983 )OO()C a 218 (Xl 0\ VANGAARD 1983 0000 RAYMOND 1981 .... ADF&G 1981 ++++ rQ.'!l .lope=R.ml aB16 aB14 aB12 aB18 aeoo a 006 a 004 a 002 aooa Figure 17.Development time to emergence versus mean incubation temperature for chum salmon. CHUM SALMON EMERGENCE DEVELOPMENT (llDAYS ) 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 18 11 12 MEAN "rA TIOO TEMP ( C) ))) Figure 18.Development time to 50%hatch versus mean incubation temperature for chum salmon. CHUM SALMON S0%HATOf DEVEUFMENT (llDAYS ) ADf&G 1983 )000(It iU 8 00 -...j VANGMRD 1983 0000 RAYMlHl 1981 *... r=.99 81ope=lt 0159 It 028 lt016 It fl14 It fl12 It fl10 ltOO8 ltOO6 ltau lttm2 ltD 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 MEAN 1NCWATlOO TEMP ( C) Figure 19.Development time to emergence versus mean incubation temperature for sockeye salmon. SOCKEYE SALMON EMERGENCE DEVROPMENT (1IDAYS ) 0.020 MlF&G 1983 )()()()(0.018 0.016 VANGAARD 1983 ססoo 0.014 co 0.012co DONG 1981 fI**0.010 0.008 MlF&G 1981 ++++0.006 0.004 r=.93 0.002alope=9.0052 o.eoo "1 2 3 4 5 6 1 8 9 1"11 12 )MEAN r~~ATION TEMP ( C) ,".iiJ7 ) Figure 20.Development time to 50%hatch versus mean incubation temperature for sockeye salmon. SOCKEYE SALMON sm HATm DEVR£PMENT (IIDAYS ) a,82B ADF&G 1983 )O()()C ,uua 1E16 VANGMRlJ 1983 ססoo 1814 00 19121.0 VELSON 198IiJ **H a.818 a.eaa OLSEN 1968 ++++amm amw r=.99 a 002elope=18146 ao "1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 19 11 12 MEAN INW3ATIOO TfJIl ( C) Figure 21.Chum salmon spawning time versus mean incubation temperature nomograph. T(C) Emergence Date June 10 June I 1.0 Spawning Date l5 May20 July 20 May 10 2.0 Mayl Augl .2.5 Aug 10 April 20 3.0 Aug 20 3.5 April 10 .~.. 4.0 April I Sept I 4.5 / I Sept \0 /e;.o March 20 5.5 Sept20 6.0 March 10 6.5 7.0 March I Oct I Feb 20 Oct 10 FeblO Febl .Jan 2.0 Jan 10 90 Jan I EFFECTS OF PROJECT-RELATED TEMPERATURES ON FISHERY RESOURCES In this section,natural and with-project temperature regimes in the Devil Canyon to Chulitna confluence reach are evaluated with respect to the various life stage temperature tolerances established for the five species of Pacific salmon.Appendix H contains temperature history plots for river miles 150,130,and 100 in relation to the five Pacific salmon life phase activities for three scenarios:(1)natural versus Watana dam operation;(2)natural versus combined operation of the Watana and Devil Canyon dams;and (3)natural versus Watana reservoir filling. The life phase activities of migration,spawning,and rearing generally take place in the open water season of May through October.Tables 20-23 show the weekly temperature ranges for May through October at representative locations between Devil Canyon and Sunshine for natural conditions and with-project related scenarios. Embryo incubation generally takes place over the winter time period of September through April.The expected differences between natural and with-project water temperatures are shown in Table 24. The most apparent project-related change in Susitna River water temper- ature upstream of Talkeetna will occur in the mains tern and side channels since these habitat:s will be directly affected by change in river discharge.These habitats are primarily used by adult salmon and juveniles as migration corri- dors;however,chinook salmon juveniles have been found to be extensively using side channels for rearing.Resident species are also primarily using the mainstem and side channel habitat for migration,with the exception of burbot,which use the mainstem throughout the year. 91 Table 20.1971 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine, for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),May LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 0.6-4.5 3.3 1.5-2.7 2.3 2.4-3.1 2.9 2.4-3.1 2.9 2.2-2.5 2.3 2.0-2.4 2.2 (148.9) Sherman 0.9-4.6 3.5 1.5-3.1 2.6 2.3-3.5 3.1 2.4-3.5 3.1 2.2-3.0 2.7 2.1-2.9 2.6 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 1.3-5.4 4.1 1.7-4.2 3.3 2.4-4.1 3.5 2.4-4.4 3.7 2.2-4.0 3.3 2.1-3.6 3.3 (101.4) Sunshine,2.0-5.2 4.1 2.1-4.8 3.8 2.4-4.8 4.0 2.4-4.8 4.0 2.3-4.7 3.8 2.3-4.6 3.8 ID (83.8) N Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),June LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Nile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 7.8-11.3 9.7 4.7-8.4 6.2 4.5-7.6 5.7 4.5-7.6 5.7 3.2-6.3 4.4 3.0-6.5 4.4 (148.9) Sherman 7.7-11.2 9.6 5.1-8.1 6.3 4.9-7.8 6.1 4.9-7.8 6.1 4.2-7.0 5.3 4.2-7.2 5.4 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 8.0-11.7 10.0 6.0-9.9 7.9 5.4-8.9 7.1 5.7-9.5 7.6 5.4-9.0 6.9 5.4-9.3 7.1 (101.4) Sunshine,7.7-10.6 9.3 7.1-9.6 8.4 7.0-9.6 8.4 7.0-9.6 8.4 7.0-9.5 8.3 7.0-9.6 8.3 (83.8) -~))) )) Table 20 (continued).1971 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine, for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),July LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILL ING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 8.7-13.0 10.6 6.3-8.1 7.1 7.9-9.4 8.7 7.9-9.5 8.6 6.5-8.1 7.6 6.6-8.1 7.6 (148.9) Sherman 8.8-13.0 10.6 6.9-8.8 7.6 8.0-9.7 8.7 8.1-9.7 8.6 7.1-8.5 8.0 7.2-8.5 8.0 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 9.2-13.6 11.1 7.9-11.1 9.1 8.9-11.0 9.6 9.2-11.79.9 8.6-10.6 9.4 8.9-10.9 9.5 (101.4) Sunshine,8.1-11.5 9.7 7.5-10.3 8.7 7.7-10.4 8.9 7.7-10.4 8.8 7.6-10.3 8.8 7.6-10.3 8.7 '"(83.8) V-l Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),August LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 9.0-10.9 10.1 6.0-9.3 7.1 8.7-8.9 8.8 8.7-9.2 8.9 6.3-8.4 7.4 6.4-8.5 7.4 (148.9) Sherman 9.0-10.9 10.1 6.8-9.2 7.6 8.9 8.9 8.9-9.3 9.0 6.8-8.6 7.7 7.0-8.6 7.8 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 9.5-11.3 10.6 8.1-9.7 8.6 9.2-9.5 9.3 9.4-10.6 9.7 7.9-9.1 8.6 8.0-9.6 8.8 (101.4) Sunshine,8.5-10.4 9.6 8.2-9.5 8.8 8.5-9.7 9.1 8.5-9.2 9.1 8.3-9.4 8.8 8.2-9.4 8.8 (83.8) Table 20 (continued).1971 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine, for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),September LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 3.1-6.7 5.3 6.1-8.5 7.6 6.5-8.4 7.6 6.5-8.4 7.6 7.3-8.4 7.9 7.3-8.4 7.9 (148.9) Sherman 3.3-6.9 5.5 5.6-8.2 7.3 6.2-8.3 7.4 6.2-8.3 7.4 7.0-8.4 7.8 7.0-8.3 7.8 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 3.5-7.1 5.8 5.3-8.3 7.3 6.1-8.4 7.5 6.0-8.5 7.5 6.7-8.5 7.8 6.7-8.5 7.8 (101.4) Sunshine,3.6-6.6 5.5 4.3-6.8 5.9 4.8-7.2 6.2 4.8-7.2 6.2 5.2-7.2 6.4 5.2-7.2 6.4 (83.8) '-0 ~ Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),October LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 0-1.5 0.5 0-2.5 1.1 2.3-5.1 3.9 2.2-5.1 3.9 3.1-6.4 4.9 3.1-6.4 4.9 (148.9) Sherman 0-1.7 0.6 0-2.4 1.0 1.5-4.8 3.4 1.4-4.8 3.4 2.0-5.9 4.2 2.4-6.0 4.4 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 0-1.8 0.6 0-2.2 0.8 0-4.5 2.7 0-4.5 2.7 0.3-5.4 3.2 1.1-5.6 3.7 (101.4) Sunshine,0-2.4 1.2 0-2.7 1.5 0-3.7 2.1 0-3.7 2.1 0-3.9 2.2 0.2-4.2 2.5 (83.8) -J ))- \.,~, Table 21. ) 1974 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine, for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),May ) LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 5.2-9.6 7.2 2.7-4.6 3.2 2.5-4.7 3.1 1.5-3.4 2.2 1.8-3.3 2.2 (148.9) Sherman 5.6-9.4 7.2 3.2-5.2 3.8 3.1-5.2 3.7 2.4-4.6 3.2 2.7-4.6 .3.3 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 6.1-9.9 7.6 4.0-6.5 4.7 4.3-7.1 5.2 3.8-6.7 4.8 4.0-6.9 5.0 (101.4) Sunshine,5.7-9.2 7.2 5-8.3 6.3 4.9-8.3 6.3 4.7-8.2 6.1 4.7-8.3 '6.2 \D (83.8) L11 Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),June LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 8.3-10.9 9.7 5.2-8.9 7 5.3-8.8 7.0 3.9-7.2 5.5 3.8-7.2 5.4 (148.9) Sherman 8.3-10.9 9.7 5.7-9.2 7.5 5.7-9.2 7.5 4.9-8.2 6.5 4.9-8.2 6.5 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 8.7-11.6 10.3 6.7-10.5 8.7 7.2-11.1 9.2 6.5-10.3 8.4 6.7-10.5 8.6 (101.4) Sunshine,8.0-10.1 9.1 7.3-9.3 8.4 7.3-9.3 8.4 7.2-9.1 8.2 7.3-9.1 8.2 (83.8) Table 21 (continued).1974 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine, for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),July LOCATION (River Mile) Portage Creek (148.9) Sherman (130.8) Whiskers Creek (101.4) NATURAL Range Mean 10.3-10.8 10.6 10.3-10.8 10.6 10.7-11.4 11.1 WATANA FILLING Range Mean WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean 8.2-9.5 9.0 8.3-9.5 9.1 7.3-8.8 8.1 7.4-8.9 8.2 8.5-9.5 9.2 8.5-9.5 9.2 7.8-9.1 8.6 7.9-9.2 8.6 9.4-10.5 10.1 9.8-11.0 10.6 9.4-10.5 10.2 9.6-10.7 10.4 1.0 C1' Sunshine, (83.8) 9.4-9.8 9.6 8.7-9.1 9.0 8.7-9.1 9.0 8.6-9.0 8.9 8.6-9.0 8.9 Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),August 9.1-11.0 10.2 9.4-11.2 10.5 9.5-11.1 10.1 10.2-11.2 10.7 WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 7.7-10.6 9.7 (148.9) Sherman 7.9-10.7 9.8 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 8.2-11.2 10.2 (101.4) Sunshine,7.4-9.8 9.0 (83.8) -) 8.8-10.4 9.6 8.8-10.4 9.7 7.6-9.4 8-.9 9.0-10.5 9.7 9.0-10 •4 9.7 7.6-9.4 8.9 8.2-9.6 9.0 9.5-10.2 9.9 8.6-9.9 9.2 9.5-10.3 10.0 7.6-9.2 8.7 7.9-9.3 8.9 ) .)) Table 21 (continued).1974 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine, for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),September LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 .Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 3.9-8.5 6.2 6.3-9.8 8.1 6.4-9.8 8.3 8.8-9.4 9.2 8.4-10.0 9.3 (148.9) Sherman 4.1-8.6 6.4 5.8-9.6 7.9 5.8-9.6 8.0 8.0-9.4 8.9 7.5-9.9 9.0 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 4.2-8.9 6.7 5.7-9.9 8.0 5.8-10.0 8.2 7.5-9.9 9.0 7.1-10.3 9.0 (101.4) Sunshine,4.4-8.1 6.3 4.7-8.2 6.7 4.7-8.2 6.7 5.3-8.1 7.0 5.0-8.3 6.9 \0 (83.8) -....l Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),October LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 0-0.1 0 3.6-4.5 4.1 3.6-4.6 4.1 4.1-7.3 5.7 3.7-6.8 5.3 (148.9) Sherman 0-0.2 0.1 3.1-3.7 3.4 3.1-3.7 3.4 3.7-6.1 5.0 3.2-5.4 4.4 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 0-0.1 0 2.2-2.9 2.5 2.4-2.9 2.5 3.0-4.5 3.9 2.5-3.8 3.2 (101.4) Sunshine,0.7-1.3 1.0 1.5-2.2 1.9 1.5-2.2 1.9 2.2-2.9 2.5 1.8-2.5 2.1 (83.8) Table 22.1981 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine, for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),May LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 5.0-9.3 7.7 3.8-5.7 4.5 3.6-7.1 4.9 3.6-7.2 5.0 2.5-4.9 3.8 2.6-5.1 3.9 (148.9) Sherman 5.1-9.4 7.7 4.2-6.3 5.0 3.9-7.2 5.3 3.9-7.3 5.3 3.0-6.0 4.6 3.1-6.2 4.8 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 5.7-10.1 8.3 5.0-8.4 6.6 4.7-9.2 6.8 4.7-9.2 6.8 4.0-8.1 6.2 4.0-8.5 6.5 (101.4) Sunshine,5.2-9.4 7.7 4.9-8.4 6.8 4.8-8.5 6.9 4.8-8.5 6.9 4.5-8.3 6.7 4.5-8.4 6.8 \.D (83.8) 00 Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),June LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 8.9-12.4 10.5 5.4-7.0 6.5 7.1-10.6 8.8 7.4-11.1 9.1 6.1-7.9 7.2 6.1-8.8 7.5 (148.9) Sherman 8.8-12.3 10.4 5.8-7.9 7.1 6.9-10.3 8.7 7.1-10.7 8.9 6.5-8.7 7.8 6.5-9.4 8.0 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 9.3-13.1 11.1 7.2-10.1 8.9 8.1-12.1 10.2 8.3-12.3 10.3 7.7-10.8 9.4 7.8-11.3 9.7 (101.4) Sunshine,8.0-10.7 9.4 7.1-9.3 8.4 7.2-9.6 8.6 7.2-9.6 8.6 7.2-9.4 8.5 7.2-9.5 8.5 (83.8) -))) ) Table 22 (continued).1981 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine, for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),July LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Ran~e Mean Portage Creek 8.9-10.2 9.6 6.2-7.4 6.8 8.0-11.1 9.4 8.2-11.0 9.5 4.5-7.0 5.8 6.4-10.7 8.2 (148.9) Sherman 9.0-10.3 9.7 6.9-7.7 7.4 8.2-10.7 9.3 8.2-10.7 9.3 5.1-7.6 6.4 6.9-10.4 8.4 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 9.7-10.9 10.2 7.9-9.0 8.6 9.1-11.5 10.2 9.1-11.4 10.2 6.1-9.0 7.5 8.3-11.4 9.7 (101.4) Sunshine,9.1-9.9 9.4 8.4-8.9 8.6 8.5-9.5 9.0 8.5-9.5 9.0 7.8-8.6 8.3 8.3-9.3 8.8 (83.8) \.Cl \.Cl Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),August LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 7.5-10.1 9.1 6.3-10.6 9.3 7.7-10.3 8.7 8.0-10.5 8.8 7.1-7.6 7.4 5.1-11.2 7.5 (148.9) Sherman 7.6-10.1 9.2 7.0-10.4 9.3 7.9-10.1 8.8 7.8-10.3 8.8 7.5-7.9 7.7 5.5-10.8 7.7 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 8.0-10.7 9.7 8.1-11.0 9.9 8.4-10.9 9.4 8•3-11.0 9.4 8.0-8.6 8.3 6.0-11.6 8.4 (101.4) Sunshine,7.7-9.8 9.0 8.4-9.4 9.0 7.9-9.6 8.8 7.8-9.6 8.8 7.6-8.9 8.4 6.9-9.5 8.3 (83.8) Table 22 (continued).1981 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine, for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),September LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 2.0-7.7 5.8 6.2-10.4 8.6 6.5-9.1 8.0 6.4-9.0 7.9 8.0-8.5 8.2 8.4-8.6 8.5 (148.9) Sherman 2.2-7.9 6.0 5.5-10.2 8.2 6.1-9.1 7.9 6.0-9.0 7.8 7.6-8.2 8.1 7.8-8.5 8.3 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 2.2-8.4 6.3 4.8-10.5 8.2 5.7-9.5 7.9 5.5-9.4 7.8 6.9-8.6 8.1 7.1-9.0 8.3 (101.4) Sunshine,2.3-7.8 5.8 3.2-8.5 6.5 4.0-8.2 6.6 3.9-8.2 6.6 4.5-8.1 6.7 4.6-8.0 6.8 I-'(83.8) 0 0 Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),October LOCATION (River Mile) Portage Creek (148.9) Sherman (130.8) Whiskers Creek (101.4) Sunshine, (83.8) NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean 0.5-1.3 0.8 0-1.6 0.8 3.9-5.6 4.8 3.8-5.6 4.7 6.3-7.6 7.0 6.3-7.6 7.0 0.5-1.4 1.0 0.1-1.6 0.9 3.5-5.2 4.4 3.4-5.1 4.3 5.4-6.8 6.2 5.7-7.0 6.5 0.5-1.4 1.0 0-1.5 0.8 3.2-4.7 4.1 3.1-4.6 4.0 4.5-5.8 5.3 5.0-6.2 5.8 1.1-1.9 1.6 1.3-2.3 1.9 2.5-3.6 3.3 2.4-3.4 2.9 3.0-4.0 3.7 3.5-4.6 4.2 "-})) Table 23.1982 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine" for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),May LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 4.7-8.6 6.5 2.8-4.5 3.5 3.3-4.7 3.8 3.4-4.7 3.9 3.7-4.5 4.1 3.6-4.6 4.1 (148.9) Sherman 4.7-8.4 6.4 3.2-4.9 3.9 3.5-5.0 4.1 3.6-5.0 4.2 4.2-5.2 4.6 4.1-5.3 4.6 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 5.3-9.0 7.1 4.1-6.5 5.3 4.4-6.6 5.3 4.4-6.6 5.4 4.9-6.7 5.7 4.9-7.0 5.8 (101.4) Sunshine,5.2-8.4 6.7 4.6-7.3 5.9 4.7-7.3 5.8 4.7-7.3 5.8 if.9-7.3 6.0 4.9-7.4 6.0 ......(83.8) a...... Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),June LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 8.1-11.9 9.7 5.0-7.0 6.0 5.7-8.9 7.1 5.7-8.2 6.9 4.7-6.9 5.8 4.7-6.8 5.6 (148.9) Sherman 8.0-11.8 9.6 5.3-7.6 6.4 5.8-9.0 7.1 5.8-8.5 7.0 5.3-7.8 6.4 5.3-7.8 6.3 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 8.5-12.5 10.1 6.5-9.0 7.5 7.1-10.8 8.5 7.1-10.4 8.4 6.7-9.9 8.0 6.8-10.1 8.1 (101.4) Sunshine,7.6-11.0 9.1 6.7-9.6 7.9 6.9-9.9 8.1 6.9-9.8 8.1 6.8-9.7 8.0 6.7-9.7 8.0 (83.8) Table 23 (continued).1982 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine, for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),July LOCATION (River Mile) NATURAL Range Mean WATANA FILLING Range Mean WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 048.9) Sherman 030.8) 10.1-11.1 10.7 10.0-11.2 10.7 7.0-9.6 8.5 9.4-10.9 10.2 9~3-10.7 10.1 5.1-10.2 7.3 7.3-8.9 8.2 7.3-.9.9 8.8 9.3-10.5 10.1 9.2-10.3 10.0 5.6-10.2 7.8 8.2-9.4 8.7 Whiskers Creek 001.4) 10.6-12.0 11.4 8.8-10.9 9.8 10.1-11.7 11.2 10.1-11.6 11.2 6.7-11.5 9.2 10.1-11.3 10.5 t-'o N Sunshine, (83.8) 9.3-10.5 9.9 8.8-9.9 9.2 8.8-9.7 9.3 8.9-9.7 9.3 8.0-9.1 8.8 8.6-9.5 9.0 LOCATION (River Mile) Portage Creek 048.9) Sherman 030.8) Whiskers Creek 001.4) Sunshine, (83.8) )..~ Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),August NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Nean Range Mean Range Mean 9.4-11.1 10.7 9.2-9.8 9.5 9.0-10.2 9.7 8.9-10.3 9.6 5.5-8.5 7.4 7.3-10.2 8.1 9.5-11.2 10.7 9.5-10.1 9.7 9.1-10.4 9.9 9.0-10.5 9.8 6.2-9.0 7.9 7.8-10.3 8.5 10.1-12.0 11.4 10.1-11.110.6 9.8-11.3 10.8 9.8-11.4 10.8 7.4-10.0 9.0 8.7-11.1 9.7 8.5-10.2 9.7 8.4-9.8 9.4 8.3-9.7 9.3 8.3-9.7 9.3 8.2-9.3 8.8 7.9-9.4 9.0 ) Table 23 (continued). ) 1982 weekly temperature ranges for mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Sunshine. for natural conditions and project-related scenarios. Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),September LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 4.3-7.9 6.3 5.4-9.2 7.5 7.5-9.0 8.3 7.6-9.0 8.3 8.4-8.6 8.5 7.2-9.1 8.4 (148.9) Sherman 4.4-8.0 6.4 5.0-9.0 7.2 7.2-8.9 8.0 7.2-8.9 8.1 8.0-8.6 8.4 6.9-9.0 8.1 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 4.6-8.4 6.7 5.0-9.3 7.4 7.1-9.2 8.2 7.1-9.2 8.2 7.7-8.9 8.4 6.7-9.3 8.2 (101.4) Sunshine,4.5-7.6 6.1 4.5-7.9 6.2 5.5-7.8 6.6 5.5-7.8 6.6 5.6-7.8 6.7 5.1-7.8 6.4 ......(83.8) 0w Simulated Weekly Temperatures (C),October LOCATION NATURAL WATANA FILLING WATANA OPERATION DEVIL CANYON OPERATION (River Mile)Range Mean Range Mean 1996 2001 2002 2020 Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Portage Creek 0-2.2 0.6 0.2.2 0.8 2.2-6.5 4.6 2.3-6.7 4.8 6.3-8.3 7.5 4.6-7.7 6.4 (148.9) Sherman 0-2.3 0.7 0-2.4 0.8 1.1-6.0 3.9 1.2-6.2 4.0 4.3-7.6 6.2 3.4-7.2 5.6 (130.8) Whiskers Creek 0-2.3 0.6 0-2.2 0.6 0-5.7 3.1 0-5.8 3.2 1.5-6.9 4.5 1.4-6.6 4.4 (101.4) Sunshine.0-2.6 0.9 0.3-1.8 1.1 0-4.1 2.1 0-3.6 2.1 0.8-3.8 2.6 0.7-3.7 2.6 (83.8) Table 24:Susitna River temperature ranges (C) under four meteorological scenarios for the period September through April. 1971 -72 Watana Operational Devil Canyon Operational Natural 1996 2001 2002 2020 RM Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean 150 0-6.8 0.7 0-8.4 1.9 0-8.4 1.7 0.7-8.4 2.3 0.6-B.4 2.6 130 0-6.9 O.B 0-8.3 1.5 0-8.3 1.5 0-8.4 1.6 0-8.3 2.0 100 0-7.1 0.8 0-8.5 1.4 0-8.5 1.3 0-8.5 1.4 0-8.5 1.6 1974 -75 Watana Operational Devil Canyon Operational Natural 1996 2001 2002 2020 RM Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean 150 0-8.5 0.9 0-9.8 2.0 0-9.8 2.2 1.2-9.4 3.0 0.5-10.0 3.0 130 0-8.6 1.0 0-9.6 1.7 0-9.6 1.8 0-9.4 2.3 0-9.9 2.3 100 0-9.1 1.1 0-10.0 1.5 0-10.0 1.6 0-9.9 1.9 0-10.3 1.9 ..~ 1981 -82 Watana Operational Devil Canyon Operational Natural 1996 2001 2002 2020 RM Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean 150 0-7.7 1.1 0-9.1 2.B 0.4-9.0 3.0 1.8-8.3 4.0 0.8-8.6 3.9 130 0-7.9 1.1 0-9.1 2.4 0-9.0 2.5 0.7-8.2 3.2 0-8.5 3.4 100 0-8.4 1.3 0-9.5 2.1 0-9.4 2.1 0-8.6 2.4 0-9.0 2.7 1982 -83 Watana Operational Devil Canyon Operational Natural 1996 2001 2002 2020 RM Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Mean 150 0-7.9 1.1 0.1-9.0 2.7 0-9.0 2.9 0.9-8.6 3.5 0.6-9.1 3.2 130 0-8.0 1.2 0-8.9 2.3 0-8.8 2.4 0-8.6 2.8 0-9.0 2.7 100 0-8.4 1.3 0-9.2 2.0 0-9.1 2.1 O-B.9 2.2 0-9.3 2.1 104 SALMON Adult Inmigraltion The peak inmigration period for adult salmon entering the Susitna River upstream of Talkeetna is from late June through early September (see Table 10).Natural June temperatures range from approximately 8.0 to 13.1 C up- stream of the Chulitna confluence and 7.8 to 12.4 C near Portage Creek. During Watana filling,June water temperatures would be approximately 2.2 C cooler just upstream of the confluence and 3.7 C cooler at Portage Creek. Watana-only operational water temperatures would range from 1.6 to 2.9 C cooler upstream of the confluence and 0.9 to 4.0 C cooler at Portage Creek. Devil Canyon operational temperatures would range from 1.7 to 3.1 C cooler upstream of the confluence and 3.3 to 5.2 C cooler at Portage Creek.The only salmon entering the middle Susitna during June are chinook,the majority of which pass Talkeetna during the last week in June and first three weeks in July. Natural July Susitna River temperatures range from approximately 9 to 13.5 C just upstream of the Chulitna confluence and 8.5 to 13 C near Portage Creek.During Watana filling,water temperatures would be approximately 1.6 to 2.0 C cooler upstream of the confluence and 2.5 -3.5 C cooler near Portage Creek.Watana-only operational water temperatures would range from 0 to 1.5 C cooler upstream of the confluence and 0.2 to 2.0 C cooler at Portage Creek. Devil Canyon operational temperatures would range from 0.9 to 2.7 C cooler upstream of the confluence and 2.0 to 3.8 C cooler near Portage Creek.All five species of Pacific salmon can be found migrating in the middle river in July. Natural August Susitna River temperatures range from approximately 8 to 12 C just above the Chulitna confluence to 7.5 to 11 C near Portage Creek. 105 During Watana filling,water temperatures would be approximately 0 to 2.0 C cooler upstream of the confluence and 0 to 3.0 C cooler at Portage Creek. Watana-only operational temperatures would range from 0 to 1.3 cooler upstream of the confluence and 0 to 1.3 C cooler near Portage Creek.Devil Canyon operational temperatures would range from 0.1 to 2.4 C cooler upstream of the confluence and 0.7 to 3.3 C cooler at Portage Creek.Chinook salmon will have nearly completed their spawning inmigration by August,but the other four salmon species will be at their peak abundance in the mainstem while moving toward spawning grounds. Natural September Susitna River temperatures range from approximately 2.2 to 8.5 C near Portage Creek.During Watana filling,water temperatures would be approximately 0.7 to 1.9 C warmer upstream of the confluence and 1.2 to 2.8 ~.I -.-.• C warmer at Portage Creek.Watana-only operational temperatures would be approximately 1.6 C warmer upstream of the confluence and 2.2 C warmer near Portage Creek.Devil Canyon operational temperatures would range from 1.7 to 2.3 C warmer upstream of the confluence and 2.2 to 3.1 C warmer at Portage Creek.Except for coho salmon,mainstem adult migration is almost completed by September. The simulated temperature regimes from Devil Canyon to the Chulitna confluence for filling and the one-and two-dam operational scenarios are cooler than natural for June,July,and August and warmer than natural for September.For the adult inmigrating salmon during June through September comparing the four meteorological data sets for reservoir outlet temperature simulations,there would be reduced water temperatures from Devil Canyon to the Chulitna confluence during June through August and increased water temperatures in this reach during September for filling and both one-and two-dam scenarios. 106 .~ I These cooler conditions are most extreme during the two-dam scenario where water temperatures can be as much as 3 C cooler just above the Chulitna confluence and 5 C cooler near Portage Creek during June.July and August two-dam water temperatures could be as much as 2.7 and 2.4 C cooler above the confluence and 3.8 and 3.3 C cooler near Portage Creek,respectively. It is possible that there will be a brief delay of migration by chinook spawners to tributaries in the upriver portion of the Devil Canyon to Talkeetna reach,principally to Portage Creek,due to cold mainstem conditions in June under the two dam scenario.The delay may be of short duration until mainstem water warms in July (see Tables 20-23).We recognize,however,that little information is available quantifying the relationship between adult chinook migratory behavior and stream temperature. Although summer temperatures during salmon inmigration are cooler than natural,they are within the established temperature tolerances for Susitna adult salmon migrating to spawning habitats (Table 19 and Appendix H).These cooler June through August with-proj ect temperatures are also comparable to the currently existing natural temperatures found in the Chulitna River where salmon naturally migrate to spawning habitats.The warmer wi th-proj ect September temperatures are also well within the temperature tolerances for migrating adult coho salmon (Table 19 and Appendix H).From the temperature simulation runs to date,there is no evidence of any with-project temperatures falling outside of the adult migration tolerance zones for salmon entering the middle Susitna River (Appendix H). Adul t Spawnina Salmon spawn in the Susitna drainage above the Chulitna confluence from 107 July through September (Table 10).In three years of observation,only 18 mainstem sites above the confluence have been identified as spawning loca- tions.Chum salmon are the only species to have utilized mainstem spawning habitat to any extent and this limited spawning is believed to take place only in areas influenced by ground water upwelling. The few chum salmon spawning observations in the mainstem were made during the first two weeks of September (Table 10).Chum salmon spawning in the mains tern during September would experience the same slightly warmer temperatures identified for adult inmigration and shown in Tables 20-23. These simulated with-project temperatures for September are well within the spawning tolerances for chum salmon (Table 19).From the temperature simula- tion runs to date,there is no evidence of any with-project temperatures falling outside of the spawning tolerance zones for adult salmon (Appendix H). There is a possibility of improved spawning habitat from a temperature stand- point that is discussed in the next section on incubation. Embryo Incubation As described in the methods section and previously noted in the adult spawning discussion,only a small number of salmon spawn in the mainstem Susitna River.The largest number of salmon observed in three years of surveys by ADF&G has been 550 chum salmon at 9 different mainstem sites. These sites,however,were all believed to be influenced by temperatures from groundwater inflow.Chum salmon spawn in mainstem areas in September and the eggs incubate in the gravel through April. Referring to the chum salmon nomograph (Figure 21)and using a spawning date of September 1 with an incubation temperature of 1 C,(an average incuba- tion temperature for natural conditions in the mainstem),fry would emerge 108 after June 10.This is much later than the natural date of emergence in side sloughs and indicates thermal influence on the incubation rate.As noted earlier,chum salmon have been observed to be spawning in mainstem areas influenced by groundwater.This groundwater upwelling most likely immerses the incubating embryo in warmer water which speeds up development rate, enabling the fry to emerge at a time to ensure a viable population.The late emergence dates that would occur under the natural incubation temperature range of 0.7 to 1.3 C also suggest that temperature could be one limiting factor for successful reproduction in the mainstem in areas not influenced by groundwater upwelling. With-project water temperatures are expected to be warmer during the incubation period of September through April.Simulated natural mainstem average water temperatures for the Septe~ber to April period range from 0.8 to 1.3 C just above the Chulitna confluence and 0.7 to 1.1 C near Portage Creek (Table 24).During Watana filling,winter water temperatures will essentially mimic natural conditions downstream of Devil Canyon (Appendix B).Watana-only operational average water temperatures would range from 0.4 to 0.8 C warmer just above the Chulitna confluence and 1.2 to 1.9 C warmer near Portage Creek. Devil Canyon operational temperatures would range from 0.8 to 1.4 C warmer just above the confluence and 1.9 to 2.9 C warmer at Portage Creek. Average September-to-April mainstem temperatures under the Watana-only scenario range from 1.3 to 2.1 C just above the Chulitna confluence and 1.7 to 3.0 C near Portage Creek (Table 24).These temperatures are approaching the \ range which has been observed in successful slough incubation areas (2.9 to 7.4 with an average of 3.3 C;ADF&G 1983c).Fish spawned on September 1 at an average incubation temperature greater than 2.0 C should emerge in time to produce viable fry (Figure 21). 109 Average September-to-April mainstem temperatures below the Devil Canyon ~ dam will range from 1.4 to 2.7 just upstream of the Chulitna confluence and 2.3 to 4.0 C near Portage Creek (Table 24).Mainstem temperatures above RM· 130 in all but the coldest year simulated average above 2.0 C for the incuba- tion period and any eggs deposited under these temperatures should produce viable fry.A better mainstem incubating habitat should exist under with-project scenarios due to the warmer.mainstem water temperatures during the winter incubation period. Juvenile Rearing Rearing takes place during the open water period of May through October. Rearing fish would experience the same thermal changes previously described for adult inmigration;i.e.,with-project water temperatures would be cooler June through August and warmer in September for filling and operational scenarios (Tables 20-23).In addition to the June through September scenar- ios,rearing fish will be subjected to cooler water temperatures in May and warmer temperatures in October. Natural May temperatures range from 1.3 to 10.1 C immediately upstream of the Chulitna confluence and 0.6 to 9.6 C near Portage Creek.For Watana filling,May temperatures would be 0.8 to 1.8 C cooler just above the Chulitna confluence and 1.0 to 3.2 C cooler at Portage Creek.Watana-only operational temperatures would be 0.6 to 2.9 C cooler above the confluence and 0.4 to 4.1 C cooler near Portage Creek.Devil Canyon operational temperatures would range from 0.8 to 2.8 C cooler above the confluence and 1.1 to 5.0 C cooler near Portage Creek. Natural October temperatures range from 0 to 2.3 C just above the conflu- ence and 0 to 2.2 C at Portage Creek.During Watana filling,October water 110 temperatures would be essentially the same as natural.Watana-only operation- al temperatures would be 2.1 to 3.1 C warmer just above the confluence and 3.4 to 4.2 C warmer near Portage Creek.Devil Canyon operational temperatures would range from 3.1 to 4.8 C warmer just above the confluence and 4.4 to 6.9 C warmer near Portage Creek. In the Susitna River,the comparative distribution of juvenile salmon densities found in mains tern or side channel habitats during the open water rearing season was 23%for chinook,4%for coho,4.1%for chum,and 8.6%for sockeye (Schmidt et ale 1984).Other than chinook salmon,the majority of the juvenile salmon rear in sloughs or tributary habitats where the potential for temperature impacts on growth would be small. All of the May through October with-proj ect water temperatures fall within the temperature tolerances established for juvenile rearing (Table 19 and Appendix H).According to this criteria,there would be no lethal effects from temperature on juvenile salmon rearing.However,since fish growth is temperature dependent,the May through August cooler-than-natural conditions may retard juvenile salmon growth rates. Estimates of seasonal fish growth were determined with a function of predicted water temperature and current body weight of the fish (Table 25). This growth function was determined by Brett (1974)from observations on sockeye salmon.In order to use this analysis,several assumptions have to be made:(1)growth starts at a body weight of 0.3g,(2)increase in weight occurs at temperatures from 3 to 18 C,(3)all salmon species would exhibit a similar growth pattern as that of sockeye salmon,and (4)fish feed to satia- tion. Simulated temperatures near river mile 130 were used in predicting cumulative weight gains during the growing season (Table 25).River mile 130 111 Table 25.Temperature and cumulative growth for /~ juvenile salmon under pre and with-protect conditions at RM 130,1971 simulations. WATANA DEVIL CANYON NATURAL 1996 Demand 2002 Demand Cum.Cum.Cum. Month Week Temp (C)Wt.(g)Temp (C)Wt.(g)Temp (C)Wt.(g) May 31 0.9 .30 2.3 .30 2.2 .30 32 2.9 .30 3.0 .33 2.5 .30 33 4.5 .34 3.4 .36 2.8 .30 34 4.6 .39 3.5 .40 2.9 .30 June 35 4.4 .42 3.3 .44 3.0 .33 36 9.2 .55 5.1 .49 4.2 .36 37 7.7 .67 4.9 .54 4.4 .40 38 10.3 .87 6.7 .64 5.4 .45 39 11.2 1.11 7.8 .77 7.0 .54 July 40 10.5 1.40 8.0 .91 7.1 .63 41 12.5 1.40 9.7 1.14 8.3 .76 42 9.9 1.74 8.3 1.34 8.0 .91 43 8.8 2.08 8.4 1.57 8.1 1.07 August 44 11.1 2.56 9.3 1.88 8.5 1.28 45 10.8 3.13 8.9 2.21 7.0 1.43 46 10.9 3.69 8.9 2.58 6.8 1.61 47 9.7 4.28 8.9 3.00 8.5 1.93 48 9.0 4.78 8.9 3.41 8.6 2.27 September 49 6.9 5.14 8.3 3.81 8.4 2.59 50 6.4 5.42 7.9 4.24 8.1 2.95 51 5.4 5.64 7.2 4.57 7.6 3.31 52 3.3 5.80 6.2 4.84 7.0 3.60 October 1 1.7 5.80 4.8 5.04 5.9 3.84 2 0.5 5.80 4.2 5.19 4.9 4.03 3 0.0 5.80 3.2 5.35 4.0 4.16 4 0.0 5.80 1.5 5.35 2.0 4.16 Cumulative weight gain 5.50 5.04 3.86 Reduction from pre-project growth(%)8 28 1Growth calculations based on specific growth rate data from Brett (1974)• 112 Table 25 (continued).Temperature and cumulative growth for juvenile salmon under pre and with-proiect conditions at RM 130,1974 simulations • WATANA DEVIL CANYON NATURAL 1996 Demand 2002 Demand Cum.Cum.Cum. Month Week Temp (C)Wt.(g)Temp (C)Wt.(g)Temp (C)Wt.(g) May 31 5.6 .35 3.4 .33 2.6 .30 32 5.7 .42 3.2 .36 2.4 .30 33 6.1 .48 3.2 .40 2.8 .30 34 9.1 .62 3.9 .44 3.5 .33 June 35 9.4 .78 5.2 .49 4.6 .37 36 8.3 .92 5.7 .56 4.9 .42 37 9.7 1.15 7.1 .65 6.0 .49 38 9.8 1.44 7.8 .79 6.9 .58 39 10.9 1.82 9.2 .96 8.2 .71 July 40 10.8 2.26 9.8 1.20 8.7 .87 41 10.3 2.72 8.1 1.41 7.8 1.02 42 10.8 3.29 9.3 1.69 8.7 1.23 43 10.5 3.89 9.5 2.09 9.1 1.47 August 44 10.7 4.52 10.0 2.52 9.9 1.83 45 10.6 5.21 10.2 3.04 8.6 2.16 46 10.4 5.90 10.4 3.54 9.3 2.52 47 7.9 6.43 8.8 4.01 9.0 2.93 48 9.4 7.09 8.9 4.48 9.1 3.35 September 49 8.6 7.76 9.6 5.14 9.4 3.80 50 7.0 8.20 8.7 5.70 9.2 4.27 51 5.8 8.55 7.4 6.09 9.0 4.77 52 4.1 8.76 5.8 6.39 8.0 5.24 October 1 0.1 8.76 3.6 6.57 6.1 5.52 2 0.0 8.76 3.7 6.75 5.6 5.83 3 0.2 8.76 3.1 6.93 4.5 6.05 4 0.1 8.76 3.1 7.12 3.7 6.22 Cumulative weight gain 8.56 6.82 5.92 Reduction from pre-project growth(%)19 29 1Growth calculations based on specific growth rate data from Br,ett (1974)• 113 Table 25 (Continued).Temperature and cumulative growth for ~ juvenile salmon under pre and with-pro1ect conditions at RM 130,1981 simulations. WATANA DEVIL CANYON NATURAL 1996 Demand 2002 Demand Cum.Cum.Cum. Month Week Temp (C)Wt.(g)Temp (C)Wt.(g)Temp (C)Wt.(g) May 31 5.1 .34 3.9 .33 3.0 .33 32 7.5 .44 4.4 .36 4.0 .36 33 8.2 .55 4.8 .41 4.7 .41 34 8.1 .67 6.0 .48 5.4 .46 June 35 9.4 .84 7.2 .57 6.0 .53 36 8.8 1.02 6.9 .66 6.5 .62 37 11.5 1.32 8.9 .82 8.0 .75 38 12.3 1.72 10.3 1.04 8.7 .92 39 9.1 2.05 8.5 1.24 7.8 1.08 July 40 9.0 2.39 8.3 1.46 7.6 1.27 41 9.4 2.78 8.2 1.71 6.7 1.43 42 9.9 3.29 9.8 2.11 5.1 1.53 43 10.3 3.83 10.7 2.60 6.0 1.69 August 44 10.0 4.42 10.1 3.11 7.6 1.98 45 10.0 5.08 9.1 3.53 7.8 2.27 46 7.6 5.56 8.1 3.94 7.6 2.59 47 8.1 6.08 7.9 4.36 7.5 2.95 ~, 48 10.1 6.84 8.9 4.87 7.9 3.31 1~ September 49 7.9 7.40 9.1 5.41 8.2 3.70 50 7.3 7.83 8.0 5.92 8.2 4.12 51 6.5 8.27 8.2 6.45 8.2 4.54 52 2.2 8.27 6.1 6.76 7.6 5.00 October 1 1.0 8.27 5.2 7.00 6.8 5.35 2 0.9 8.27 4.7 7.24 6.8 5.72 3 1.4 8.27 4.2 7.43 6.1 6.03 4 0.5 8.27 3.5 7.63 5.4 6.25 Cumulative weight gain 7.97 7.33 5.95 Reduction from pre-project growth(%)8 24 1Growth calculations based on specific growth rate data from Brett (1974)• 114 ,-,Table 25 (Continued).Temperature and cumulative growth for juvenile salmon under pre and with-prolect conditions at RM 130 t 1982 simulations • WATANA DEVIL CANYON NATURAL 1996 Demand 2002 Demand Cum.Cum.Cum. Month Week Temp (C)Wt.(g)Temp (C)Wt.(g)Temp (C)Wt.(g) May 31 5.5 .35 4.1 .33 4.6 .34 32 4.7 .40 3.5 .36 4.4 .37 33 6.7 .48 3.9 .40 5.0 .42 34 6.6 .57 4.0 .44 5.2 .47 June 35 8.4 .70 5.0 .49 5.8 .54 36 8.9 .86 5.8 .56 5.8 .62 37 8.0 1.02 6.4 .63 6.1 .69 38 9.6 1.27 7.3 .74 7.4 .80 39 1l.8 1.65 9.0 .91 8.6 .98 July 40 10.6 2.07 10.5 1.15 9.1 1.17 41 11.1 2.55 10.2 1.43 10.6 1.48 42 11.2 3.12 10.2 1.79 7.4 1.67 43 10.0 3.63 9.3 2.12 6.0 1.84 August 44 11.0 4.26 9.8 2.56 6.6 2.06 45 11.2 4.93 10.1 3.07 7.4 2.29 46 11.0 5.63 10.0 3.57 8.3 2.61 47 11.0 6.41 10.4 4.15 9.0 3.04 48 9.5 7.20 9.1 4.64 8.7 3.44 September 49 8.0 7.77 8.9 5.18 8.6 3.90 50 6.7 8.21 8.5 5.75 8.5 4.38 51 6.6 8.67 7.5 6.27 8.3 4.83 52 4.4 8.88 7.2 6.67 8.0 5.30 October 1 2.3 8.88 6.0 6.99 7.6 5.80 2 0.3 8.88 5.0 7.23 6.9 6.19 3 0.0 8.88 3.6 7.43 5.9 6.49 4 0.0 8.88 1.2 7.43 4.3 6.66 Cumulative weight gain 8.58 7.13 6.36 Reduction from pre-project growth(%)16 25 1Growth calculations based on specific growth rate data from Brett (1974)• 115 was chosen as a representative site because it is near the center of the ~ middle Susitna and is close to many salmon natal areas.Natural growth in this area of the river would range between 5.5 and 8.5 g per fish per growing season,depending on which temperature simulation is used.Growth would range between 5.0 and 7.3 g for the Watana-only scenario and 3.9 to 6.4 g during Devil Canyon operation.Estimated reduction in fish growth near RM 130 ranges from 8 to 19%for Watana operational and 24 to 29%for Devil Canyon operations.Figure 22 shows the extreme ranges of growth estimated for natural and with-project scenarios,using the simplifying assumptions. Potential growth reductions would be more evident upstream of RM 130 where temperature differences between with-project and natural conditions are greater (Tables 20-23 and 26).Downstream from RM 130,potential growth reductions would decrease with smaller temperature differences between with-project and natural scenarios (Tables 20-23 and 26).Further downstream, more rearing occurs as more fish enter the system from adjacent slough and tributary habitats. Growth can be limited by food supply in addition to the controlling effects of temperature.In nature,salmon and trout growth rates are food-supply limited (Brett,et al.1969).Changes in temperature result in smaller changes in growth at reduced rations compared to satiation feeding. Small drops in temperature during July and August from 10 -IloC to 8 -goC would result in smaller changes in growth rates for fish feeding at reduced ration than those at maximum ration.Since Susitna River fish are likely feeding on a ration less than satiation level,the expected changes in growth due to temperature reductions would likely be smaller than those predicted in Table 25.Growth reductions,however,could be higher than predicted for fish such as those chum salmon that are actively feeding in the affected area until mid-July and not able to take advantage of the warmer fall temperatures. 116 FigU1~22.Estimated juvenile salmon growth ranges under)simulated natural and with-project conditions. JUVENILE SALMON GROWTH RM 130 10 WEIGHT (9) NATURAL 9 1982 8 ,1982 NOV -- OCTSEP ~ ~1982 /~/-- ,.,.1971// ,1971 AUGJULJUN ,.,." ,,~----?,;::;/',//,_~1__ /~----- / ",.,./~ ;"/~ /',,/"~,,.e:----;::///,~.,~ .~,,~"..--------~~~~~~"..------ --=:::-:-:::::::-- --------- WATANA 7 ---_. 6 I-'DEVIL CANYONI-' -....I 5 -----_. 4 3 2 1 a MAY MONTH Table 26.Simulated monthly mean temperatures (C) for the mainstem Susitna River,Devil Canyon to Talkeetna. Watana DC Watana Location Month Natural Opere Dif.Oper.Dif.Filling Dif. Portage Creek May 6.2 3.7 -2.5 3.1 -3.1 3.4 -2.8 (148.9)June 9.9 7.2 -2.7 5.7 -4.2 6.2 -3.7 July 10.4 9.3 -1.1 7.6 -2.8 7.5 -2.9 Aug 9.9 9.2 -0.7 8.0 -1.9 8.6 -1.3 Sept 5.9 8.0 +2.1 8.5 +2.6 7.9 +2.0 Oct 0.6 4.4 +3.8 6.1 +5.5 0.9 +0.3 Sherman May 6.2 4.1 -2.1 3.8 -2.4 3.8 -2.4 (130.8)June 9.8 7.4 -2.4 6.5 -3.3 6.6 -3.2 July 10.4 9.3 -1.1 8.1 -2.3 7.9 -2.5 Aug 10.0 9.3 -0.7 8.3 -1.7 8.9 -1.1 Sept 6.2 7.8 +1.6 8.3 +2.1 7.6 +1.4 Oct 0.6 3.8 +3.2 5.3 +4.7 0.9 +0.3 Whiskers Creek May 6.8 5.2 -1.6 5.1 -1.7 5.1 -1.7 (101.4)June 10.4 8.8 -1.6 8.3 -2.1 8.1 -2.3 July 11.0 10.4 -0.6 9.6 -1.4 9.2 -1.8 Aug 10.5 10.0 -0.5 9.2 -1.3 9.7 -0.8 ~ Sept 6.4 7.9 +1.5 8.3 +1.9 7.6 +1.2 Oct 0.6 3.1 +2.5 4.3 +3.7 0.7 +0.1 U8 Fry/Smolt Outmigration Outmigrating smolts would experience the same thermal changes previously described for adult inmigration and rearing;i.e.,with-project water tempera- tures would be cooler May through August and warmer in September for filling and operational scenarios (Tables 20-23).Peak juvenile outmigration occurs from June through September and varies by species (Table 10). The majority of the with-project .related temperatures during salmon outmigrating periods fall near or within the established temperature toler- ances (Table 19 and Appendix H).According to these criteria,there would be no lethal effects from temperature on juvenile outmigration.However,near Portage Creek,early June temperatures for the Devil Canyon operational scenario using 1971 meteorology are predicted to fall slightly outside the established tolerances (Table 19,Appendices B and H).Thus outmigrants from tributaries or sloughs near Portage Creek subj ected to cold Devil Canyon outflows would confront mainstem temperatures cooler than the lower tolerance level for sockeye,pink and chinook salmon (Table 19 and Appendix H).These temperatures.which are below 4 C,are also considerably cooler than the lower migration threshold for chinook and coho described by Raymond (1979), Cederholm and Scarlett (1982),and Bustard and Narver (1975).During cold scenarios,early June outmigrating salmon could avoid the mainstem and delay outmigration until temperatures warm in late June.As this delay would be two weeks or less in duration and occur only during the coldest scenarios,it should not noticeably affect outmigration timing.Temperature is also not the only factor affecting migration timing.Photoperiod,water current,magnetic fields,and lunar phases are all believed to influence migration (Groot 1982 and Godin 1980). 119 Resident Species Many resident species using habitats in the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach of the Susitna River are found throughout most of their life history in tributaries and sloughs.Utilization of the habitats influenced by mainstem water is usually limited to migration or overwintering.For the resident species,temperature tolerances have only been presented for burbot and round whitefish.Those resident fish species that spend most of their active feeding and reproduction life phases in areas not directly influenced by mainstem water should not experience any adverse temperature effects from project operation.The warmer water temperatures above RM 130 expected during both the one-and two-dam operational scenarios (Table 24 and Appendix B) should provide a good overwintering environment for resident species such as rainbow trout and Arctic grayling outmigrating from Portage Creek and Indian River into the mainstem. Burbot and whitefish are the only resident species found in sufficient numbers utilizing habitats influenced by mainstem water temperatures that would be affected by project operation.Both burbot and whitefish spawning and incubation could be altered due to warmer fall and winter temperatures • ., Burbot spawn in winter under the ice at water temperatures usually less than 3 C.In the Susitna drainage,this normally takes place in January and February.Under the one-and two-dam project operational scenarios,these conditions may not exist.The ice front will be located between RM 120 and 140 (Appendix B),depending on meteorology.Under similar meteorologic conditions,the ice front is farther downstream under the two-dam scenario than for Watana-only.The lack of an ice cover and the warmer winter water temperatures could preclude burbot spa,vning in the area upstream of the ice 120 front.The extent of this preclusion would vary between RM 120 and 140 depending on meteorology and dam operation. Whitefish spawn in October under conditions of rapidly decreasing water temperatures.Under the one-dam project scenario,October temperatures would be 2.1 to 4.1 C warmer between Whiskers and Portage creeks and 3.1 to 6.2 C warmer under the two-dam scenario (Tables 20-23).These warmer temperatures could result in a change in the incubation timing for whitefish in this section of the river.The warmer water temperatures would accelerate the development rates of the incubating embryos resulting in early emerging fry. The whitefish fry would emerge sometime before normal and could have reduced survival due to their encounter with a colder,more hostile environment with inadequate seasonal food development.These warmer October temperatures could also delay the whitefish spawning until the temperatures drop in November instead of changing the incubation time.The effect of this delay cannot be quantified. 121 Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.1983d. baseline data report.Vol.4. studies,1982.Final Report. Susitna Hydro Studies.Report REFERENCES Acres American,Inc.1983.Application for license for major project, Susitna Hydroelectric Project,before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.Vol.SA.Exhibit E,Chaps.1 and 2.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.1 vol. Alabaster,J.S.,and R.Lloyd.1982.Water quality criteria for freshwater fish.2nd ed.Butterworth Scientific,Boston,MA.361 pp. Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.1976.Fish and wildlife studies related to the Corps of Engineers Devil Canyon,Watana Reservoir Hydroelectric Project. Anchorage,AK.Report for U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service.1 vol. Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.1978.Preliminary environmental assessment of hydroelectric development on the Susitna River.Anchorage,AK.Report for U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service.1 vol. Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.1981.Adult anadromous fisheries project. Final Draft Report.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro Aqu.atic Studies.Report for Acres American,Inc.1 vol. Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.1983a.Susitna hydro aquatic studies,phase 2 basic data report.Vol.4.Aquatic habitat and instream flow studies, .~,1982.Preliminary Draft Report.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority. Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report for Acres American,Inc.7 vols. Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.1983b.Susitna hydro aquatic studies,phase 2 final data report.Vol.2.Adult anadromous fish studies,1982.Final Report.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report for Acres American,Inc.2 vols. Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.1983c.Susitna hydro aquatic studies,phase 2 data report.Winter aquatic studies (October 1982-May 1983).Final Report.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report for Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.137 pp. Susitna hydro aquatic studies,phase 2 Aquatic habitat and instream flow Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority. for Acres American,Inc.3 vols. Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.1983e.Susitna hydro aquatic studies,phase 2 basic dat q report.Vol.3.Resident and juvenile anadromous fish studies on the Susitna River below Devil Canyon,1982.Final Report. Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies. Report for Acres American,Inc.2 vols. 122 References Page 2 Alaska Power Authority.1984.Alaska Power Authority comments on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission draft environmental impact statement of May 1984.Vol.8.Appendix VI.River ice simulations,Susitna River, Watana Dam to confluence of Susitna and Chulitna Rivers.Anchorage,AK. Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Alaska Power Authority.Document 1779. 1 vol. Alaska,Univ.,Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center.1982. Summary of environmental knowledge of the proposed Grant Lake hydroelectric project area.Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,AK. Report for Ebasco Services.212 pp. Alaska,Univ.,Arctic Environmental Information &Data Center.1983a. Methodological approach to quantitative impact assessment for the proposed Susitna hydroelectric project.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Anchorage,AK.Report for Harza/Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.71 pp. Alaska,Univ.,Arctic Environmental Information &Data Center.1983b.Stream flow and temperature modeling in the Susitna River,Alaska.Final Report.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Harza-Ebasco Joint Venture.APA Document 862.60 pp.with appendices. Alaska,Univ.,Arctic Environmental Information &Data Center.1984a. Susitna Hydroelectric Project aquatic impact assessment;effects of project-related changes in temperature,turbidity,and stream discharge on upper Susitna salmon resources during June through September. Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Report for Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.1 vol. Alaska,Univ.,Arctic Environmental Information &Data Center.1984b. Examination of Susitna River discharge and temperature changes due to the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Final Report.Anchorage,AK. Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Harza-Ebasco Joint Venture.APA Document 861.31 pp. Alderdice,D.F.,and F.P.J.Velsen.1978.Relation between temperature and incubation time for eggs of chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.35(1):69-75. Bailey,J.1983 Personnel communication in U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. Draft interim feasibility report and environmental impact statement. Hydroelectric power for Sitka,Petersburg/Wrangell,and Ketchikan, Alaska.U.S.Army Engineer District,Anchorage,AK. Bailey,J.E.,and n.R.Evans.1971.The low-temperature threshold for pink salmon eggs in relation toa proposed hydroelectric installation. Fisheries Bulletin.69(3):587-593. Barns,R.A.1967.A review of the literature on the temperature regime of developing sockeye salmon Journal of Fisheries Research Board of Canada. 123 effects of changes in eggs and alevins. Manuscript 949:14-22. References Page 3 Barrett,B.M.1974.An assessment of the anadromous fish populations in the upper Susitna River watershed between Devil Canyon and the Chulitna River.Alaska Div.of Commercial Fisheries,Anchorage,AK.56 pp. Barrett,B.M~,F.M.Thompson,and S.N.Wick.1983.Susitna River hydro aquatic studies,phase 2 adult anadromous investigations.First Draft Report.Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report for Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.2 vols. Barrett,B.M.,F.M.Thompson,and S.N.Wick.1984.Adult anadromous fish investigations:May -October 1983.Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game, Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report 1.Report for Alaska Power Authority.1 vol. Bell,M.C.1980.Fisheries handbook of engineering requirements and biological criteria.Revised.Prepared for Fisheries Engineering Research Program,U.S.Army,Corps of Engineers,Portland,OR. Bell,M.C.1983.Lower temperatures at which species of salmon move within river systems.Memorandum to L.Moulton.January 8,1983. Brett,J.R.1971.Energetic responses of salmon to temperature.A study of some thermal relations in the physiology and freshwater ecology of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka).American Zoologist.11:99-113. Brett,J.R.1974.Tank experiments on the culture of pan-size sockeye (Oncorhynchus nerka and pink salmon (0.gorbuscha)using environmental control.Aquaculture.4:341-352 Brett,J.R.,J.E.Shelbourn,and C.T.Shoop.1969.Growth rate and body composition of fingerling sockeye salmon,Oncorhynchus nerka,in relation to temperature and ration size.Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.26:2363-2394. Brungs,W.A.,and B.R.Jones.1977.Temperature criteria for freshwater fish:protocol and procedures.Environmental Research Laboratory, Duluth,U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Duluth,MN.136 pp. Bryan,J.E.,and D.A.Kato.1975.Spawning of lake whitefish,Coregonus clupeaformis,and round whitefish,Prosopium cylindraceum,in Aishihik Lake and East Aishihik River,Yukon Territory.Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.32(2):283-288. Bucher,W.1981.1980 Wood River sockeye salmon smolt studies.Pages 28-34 in C.P.Meacham,ed.1980 Bristol Bay sockeye studies.Div.of Commercial Fisheries,Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,Anchorage,AK. Bustard,D.R.,and D.W.Narver.1975.Aspects of water ecology of juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch)and steelhead trout (Salmo gairdneri). Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.32(5):667-680. 124 References Page 4 Cederholm,C.J.,and W.J.Scarlett.1982.Seasonal immigrations of juvenile salmonids into four small tributaries of the Clearwater River,Washington 1977-1981.Pages 98-100 in E.L.Brannon and E.O.Salo,eds.Proceedings of the Salmon and Trout Migratory Behavior Symposium.School of Fisheries,Univ.of Washington,Seattle,WA. Chapman,D.W.,andT.C.Bjornn.1969.Distribution of salmonids in streams with special reference to food and feeding.Pages 153-176 in T.G. Northcote,ed.Symposium on Salmon and Trout in Streams.University of British Columbia,Vancouver,B.C.H.R.MacMillan Lectures in Fisheries. Cherry,D.S.,and J.Cairns,Jr.1982. Preference and avoidance studies. Biological monitoring.Part 5 - Water Research.16:263-301. Combs,B.D.1965.Effects of temperature on the development of salmon eggs. Progressive Fish-Culturist.27:134-37. Combs,B.D.,and R.E.Burrows.1957.Threshold temperatures for the normal development of chinook salmon eggs.Progressive Fish-Culturist. 19 (1):3-6. Crisp,D.T.1981 A desk study of the relationship between temperature and hatching time for eggs of five species of salmonid fishes.Freshwater Biology.11:361-368. Dugan,L.,D.Sterritt.and M.Stratton.1984.The distribution and relative ~, abundance of juvenile salmon in the Susitna River drainage above the Chulitna River confluence.Draft Report.Part 2 of D.C.Schmidt,5.5. Hale.and D.L.Crawford,eds.Resident and juvenile anadromous fish investigations (May-October 1983).Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game. Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report 2.1 vol. Flagg,L.B.1983.Sockeye salmon smolt studies Kasilof River,Alaska 1981. FRED Div ••Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.Juneau.AK.Technical Data Report 11.31 pp. Foerster,R.E.1968.The sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka.Bulletin of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 162. Francisco.K.1977.Second interim report of the Commercial Fish-Technical Evaluation Study.Joint State/Federal Fish and Wildlife Advisory Team. Anchorage.AK.Special Report 9.46 pp. Fried.S.M ••and J.J.Laner.1981.1980 Snake River sockeye salmon smolt studies.Pages 34-45 in C.P.Meacham.ed.1980 Bristol Bay sockeye studies.Div.of Commercial Fisheries,Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game, Anchorage,AK. Fry,F.G.,and P.W.Hochachka.1970.Fish.Pages 79-134 in G.C.Whittow. ed.Comparative physiology of thermoregulation.Vol.T.Invertebrates and nonmammalian vertebrates~Academic Press,Inc.,New York,NY. 125 References Page 5 _.-\Fryer,J.L.,and K.S.Pilcher.1974.Effects of temperature on diseases of salmonid fishes.Ecological Research Services,U.S.Environmental Protection Agency.EPA-66013-73-020. Gemperline,E.J..1984.Comments on Assessment of the effects of the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project on instream temperature and fishery resources in the Watana to Talkeetna reach,draft report by Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center.Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture,Anchorage,AK.6 pp. Godin,J.-G.1980.Temporal aspects of juvenile pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha)emergence from a simulated gravel redd.Canadian Journal of Zoology.58(5):735-744. Groberg,W.J.,et al.1978.Relation of water temperature to infections of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch),chinook salmon (0.tshawytscha),and steelhead trout (Salmo gairdneri)with Aeromonas salmonicida and A. hydrophita.Journal of Fisheries Research Board of Canada.35:1~7. Groot,C.1982.Modification on a theme - a perspective on migratory behavior of Pacific salmon.Pages 1-21 in E.L.Brannon and E.G.Salo, eds.Proceedings of the salmon and trout migratory behavior symposium, 1st,University of Washington,Seattle,June 3-5. Hartman,W.L.,W.R.Heard,and B.Drucker.1967.Migratory behavior of sockeye salmon fry and smolt.Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.24(10):2069-2099. Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.1984a.Instream ice calibration of computer model.Final Report.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.APA Document 1122.1 vol.. Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture. develop water surface profiles. photocopied plots. Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture. Draft Report (September 1984). Susitna Hydroelectric Project. 1984b.River cross-sections used to Draft unpublished report.20 1984c.Instream ice simulation study. Report for Alaska Power Authority. Jobling,M.1981.Temperature tolerance and the final perferendum--rapid methods for the assessment of optimum growth temperatures.Journal of Fisheries Biology.19:439-455. Kogel,D.R.1965.Springs and groundwater as factors affecting survival of chum salmon spawn in a sub-arctic stream.M.S.Thesis.Univ.of Alaska, Fairbanks,AK.59 pp. Koski,K.1984.Interview,May 4,1984.Auke Bay Laboratory,U.S.National Marine Fisheries Service,Auke Bay,AK. I~Krasnowski,P.1984.Telephone conversation,April 10,1984.Alaska Dept. of Fish &Game,Anchorage,AK. 126 ~I ,'" References McCart,P. River. Page 6 1967.Behavior and ecology of sockeye salmon fry in the Babine Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.24:375-428. McMahon,T.E.1983.Habitat suitability index models:coho salmon.U.S. Fish &Wildlife Service.FWS/OBS-82/10.49.29 pp. McNeil,W.J.1969.Survival of pink and chum salmon eggs and alevins.Pages 101-117 in T.G.Northcote,ed.Symposium on Salmon and Trout in Streams. Univ.of British Columbia,Vancouver,B.C.H.R.MacMillan Lectures in Fisheries. McNeil,W.J.,and J.E.Bailey.1975.Salmon rancher's manual.U.S.National Marine Fisheries Service,Auke Bay,AK.95 pp. McNeil,W.J.,R.A.Wells,and D.C.Brickell.1964.Disappearance of dead pink salmon eggs and larvae from Sashin Creek,Baranof Island,Alaska. U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service.Special Scientific Report -Fisheries 485. 13 pp. Mattson,C.R.,and R.A.Hobart.1962.Chum salmon studies in southeastern Alaska,1961.Bureau of Commercial Fisheries,U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service,Auke Bay,AK.Manuscript Report 62-5.32 pp. Merrell,T.R.1962.Freshwater survival of pink salmon at Pages 59-72 in N.J.Wilimovsky,ed.Symposium on Pink University of British Columbia,Vancouver,B.C.,1960. Lectures in Fisheries. Sashin Creek. Salmon. H.R.MacMillan Merritt,M.F.,and J.A.Raymond.1983.Early life history of chum salmon in the Noatak River and Kotzebue Sound.FRED Division,Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,Juneau,AK.Technical Bulletin 1.56 pp. Neave,F.1966.Salmon of the North Pacific Ocean -Part III.A review of the life history of North Pacific salmon.6.Chum salmon in British Columbia.International North Pacific Fisheries Commission Bulletin 18. Vancouver,B.C. Nelson,D.C.1983.Russian River sockeye salmon.Sport Fish Div.,Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,Juneau,AK.Federal Aid in Fish Restoration.Vol. 24.Project AFS-44.Annual Report.50 pp. Pratt,K.1984.Telephone conversation,May 7,1984.Alaska Dept.of Fish & Game,Anchorage,AK. Quane,T.1984.Telephone conversation,March 1984.Alaska Dept.of Fish & Game,Anchorage,AK. R&M Consultants,Inc.1980.Field data index.Alaska Power Authority. Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Acres American,Inc.49 pp. R&M Consultants,Inc.1981.Susitna River mile index:Mouth to Susitna Glacier.Attachment D to Hydrographic surveys.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Acres American,Inc.1 vol. 127 References Page 7 R&M Consultants,Inc.1982a.Hydraulic and ice studies.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Acres American,Inc.1 vol. R&M Consultants,Inc.1982b.1982 Hydrographic surveys.Anchorage,AK. Alaska Power Authority,Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Acres American,Inc.1 vol. R&M Consultants,Inc.1982c.Field data index. Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Inc.1 vol. Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Report for Acres American, R&M Consultants,Inc.1982d.Field data collection and processing. Supplement 1.1982 Field data.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Buffalo,NY.Report for Acres American,Inc. 215 pp. R&M Consultants,Inc.1982e.Processed climatic data. Station.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority. Project.Report for Acres American,Inc.1 vol. R&M Consultants,Inc.1982f.Processed climatic data. Station.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority. Project.Report for Acres American,Inc.1 vol. Vol.6.Devil Canyon Susitna Hydroelectric Vol.5.Watana Susitna Hydroelectric R&M Consultants,Inc.1982g.Field data collection and data processing.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Acres American,Inc.3 vols. R&M Consultants,Inc.1984.Processed climatic data:October 1982 - September 1983.Vol.6.Sherman Station (No.0665).Final Report. Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.APA Document 1093.1 vol. Raleigh,R.F.1971.Innate control of migration of salmon and trout fry from natal gravels to rearing areas.Ecology.52:291-297 Raymond,H.L.1979.Effects of dams and impoundments on migrations of juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead from the Snake River,1966 to 1975. Transactions of the American Fish Society.108(6):505-529. Raymond,J.A.1981.Incubation of fall chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta)at Clear Air Force Station,Alaska.FRED Div.,Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game, Juneau,AK.25 pp. Reiser,D.W.,and T.C.Bjornn.1979.Habitat requirements of anadromous salmonids.No.1 in Influence of forest and rangeland management on anadromous fish habitat in the western United States and Canada.U.S. Forest Service,Portland,OR.General Technical Report PNW-96.54 pp. Reynolds,W.W.1977.Temperature as a proximate factor in orientation behavior.Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. 34:734-739. 128 References Page 8 Ricker W.E.1979.Growth rates and models.Pages 678-744 in W.S.Hoar,D.J.~~ Randall,and J.R.Brett,eds.Fish physiology.Vol.8 Bioenergetics and growth.Academic Press,New York,NY. Riis,J.C.1977.Pre-authorization assessment of the proposed Susitna River Hydroelectric Project:Preliminary investigations of water quality and aquatic species composition.Alaska Div.of Sport Fish,Anchorage,AK. 91 pp. Rukh1ov,F.N.1969.The natural reproduction of the autumn chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta)on Sakahlin.Problems of Ichthyology.9(2):217-223. Sano,S.1966.Salmon of the North Pacific Ocean -Part III.A review of the life history of North Pacific salmon.Chum salmon in the Far East. Pages 41-57 in International North Pacific Fisheries Commission Bulletin 18. Schmidt,D.C.,et a1.,eds.1984.Resident and juvenile anadromous fish investigations (May-October 1983).July 1984.Alaska Dept.of Fish & Game,Anchorage,AK.Susitna hydro aquatic studies.Report 2.Report for the Alaska Power Authority.Document 1784.1 vol. Scott,W.B.,and E.J.Crossman.1973.Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada,Ottawa,Ontario,Canada.Bulletin 184.966 pp. Sheridan,W.L.1962.Relation of stream temperatures to timing of pink salmon escapements in southeast Alaska.Pages 87-102 in N.J.Wilimovsky, ed.Symposium on Pink Salmon.University of British Columbia, Vancouver,B.C.,1960.H.R.MacMillan Lectures in Fisheries. Sundet,R.,and M.Wenger.1984.Resident fish distribution and population dynamics in the Susitna River below Devil Canyon.Draft Report.Part 5 of D.C.Schmidt,S.S.Hale,and D.L.Crawford,eds.Resident and juvenile anadromous fish investigations (May-October 1983).Alaska Dept. ofFish &Game,Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report 2. 1 vol. Theurer,F.,K.Voos,and W.Miller.1983.Instream water temperature model. Draft report.Instream Flow and Aquatic Systems Group,U.S.Fish & Wildlife Service,Fort Collins,CO.Instream Flow Information Paper No.16.263 pp. Trasky,L.L.1974.Yukon River anadromous fish investigations,July 1973-June 1974.Div.of Commercial Fisheries,Alaska Dept.of Fish & Game,Anchorage,AK. U.S.Geological Survey.1981.Water resources data for Alaska.Anchorage, AK.Water-Data Report AK-81-1.395 pp. 1980.Water resources data for Alaska.Anchorage,AK.Water-Data Report AK-80-1.373 pp. 129 References Page 9 U.S.National Weather Service.1980.Climatological data national summary, Vol.30,No.9.Washington,DC. 1970.Climatological data national summary,Vol.20,No.8. Washington,DC. 1969.Climatological data national summary,Vol.19,No.7. Washington,DC. 1969.Climatological data national summary,Vol.18,No.6. Washington,DC. Wallis,J.,and D.T.Balland.1983.Anchor River steelhead investigations. Sport Fish Div.,Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,Juneau,AK.Federal Aid in Fish Restoration.Vol.24.Project AFS-48.Annual Report.44 pp. Wangaard,D.B.,and C.V.Burger.1983.Effects of various water temperature regimes on the egg and alevin incubation of Susitna River chum and sockeye salmon.Final Report.National Fishery Research Center,U.S. Fish &Wildlife Service,Anchorage,AK.43 pp. Wedemeyer,G.A.,R.L.Sanders,and W.C.Clarke.1980.Environmental factors affecting smoltification and early marine survival of anadromous salmonids.Marine Fisheries Review.42:1-4. Wetzel,R.G.1975.Limnology.W.B.Saunders Co.,Philadelphia,PA.743 pp. Whitmore,D.C.,N.C.Dudiak,and J.W.Testor.1979.Coho enhancement on the Kenai Peninsula.FRED Div.,Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,Juneau,AK. Completion Report AFS-45-1.54 pp. Wickett,W.P.1958.Review of certain environmental factors affecting the production of pink and chum salmon.Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.15:1103-1123. Wilson,W.J.,et ale 1979.An assessment of environmental effects of construction and operation of the proposed Terror Lake Hydroelectric Facility,Kodiak,AK.Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center, University of Alaska,Anchorage,AK.Report for Kodiak Electric Association.334 pp. Wilson,W.J.,et ale 1981.An assessment of environmental effects of construction and operation of the proposed Terror Lake hydroelectric facility,Kodiak Island,Alaska.Instream flow studies.Final Report. Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center,University of Alaska, Anchorage,AK.Prepared for Kodiak Electric Association.419 pp. World Meteorological Organization.1982.Monthly climatic data for the world,Vol.35,No.1.National Climatic Center,Asheville,NC. 1981.Monthly climatic data for the world,Vol.34,No.1.,National Climatic Center,Asheville,NC. 130