HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA2956ItfA5
C('.'-)~
A?-':$
Case No.AK-0l7-9025 (2920)'f'ItL ?-0 9O
EAR No.EAR-010-9035
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RECORD
SUSITNA HYDROPOWER FEASIBILITY STUDY
ARLIS
Alaska Resources
Library &Information Services
Anchorage.Alaska
Applicant:Alaska Power Authority
February 1979
Denni·s Money
Project Leader
John Bosworth
Environmental Coordinator
Richard Tindall
District Manager
U.S.Department of the Interior,
Bureau of Land Management'
Anchorage District Office
4700 East 72nd Avenue
Anchorage,Alaska 99507
...--.--.--------------,-··-.........-rf·------
"
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
1.PROJ ECT DESCR I PTI ON
·1.1 PURPOSE
1.2 PROJECT AREA
1.3 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES
1.3.1 Support Facilities -Watana
1.3.1.1 Field Camp
1.3.1.2 Alternate 75-Man Field Camp
1.3.1.3 Interim Field Camp
1.3.1.4 Airstrip
1.3.1.5 Intrasite Trails
1.3.1.6 Borrow Source
1.3.1.7 Alternate Borrow Source
1.3.1.8 Haul Trail
1.3.2 Watana Site Access
1.3.2.1 Wi nter Tra i1
1.3.2.2 Pioneer Road
1.3.2.3 Erosion Control and Maintenance
1.3.3 Support Facilities -Devil Canyon
1.3.3.1 Field Camp
1.3.3.2 Alternate Field Camp
1.3.3.3 Roads and Trails
1.3.4 Survey
1.3.5 Hydrology
1.3.6 Environmental (Water Quality)
1.3.7 Recreation
1.3.8 Foundations and Materiais
1.3.8.1 Seismic Monitoring
1.3.8.2 Access Road Studies
1.3.8.3 Transmission Corridor Studies
1.3.8.4 Watana Site Geology
1.3.8.5 Watana Borrow Site E:xplor.ation and Testing
1.3.8.6 Watana Damsite Drilling
1.3.8.7 Watana Geophysical Investigation
1.3.8.8 Watana Features Design
1.3.8.9 Devil Canyon Geology
1.3.8.10 Devil Canyon Damsite Drilling
1.3.8.11 Devil Canyon Aggregate Studies
1..3.9 Des i gn
1.3.10 Real Estate
1.3.11 Cultural Resource Studies
1.3.12 Biological Resource Studies
i
PAGE
1-1
1- 1
1-1
1-1
1-2
1-2
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-7
1-7
1-8
1-10
1-11
1-11
1-12
1-14
1-14
1-14
1-15
1-15
1-16
1-17
1-20
1-20
1-20
1-21
1-21
1-23
1-24
1-24
1-27
1-28
1-29
1-29
1-29
1':'30
1-30
1-30
1-31
1-31
.------------~----~-F'"J~.~----_,--------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CON IT)
CHAPTER
2•Ex I STI NG ENv IRONMENTAL SETT I NG
2.1 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
2.1.1 Genera 1
2.1.2 Geology/Topography/Soils
2.1.3 Existing Landscape Character
2.1.4 Wilderness
2.1.5 Wetlands and Floodplains
2.1.6 Other
2.2 BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
2.2.1 Fish
2.2.2 MaTmi"a 1s
2.2.3 Birds
2.2.4 Vegetation
2.3 CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS
2.3.1 Access
2.3.2 Public Use
2.3.3 Historic Resources
2.3.4 Archeological Resources
2.3.5 Land Use/Status
2.3.6 Demography
2.3.7 Economics
3.PROBABLE ENvIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
3.1 ACTIVITY IMPACTS
3.1.1 Support Facilities -Watana
3.1.1.1 Field Camp
3.1.1.2 Alternate Field Camp
3.1.1.3 Interim Field Camp
3.1.1.4 Airstrip
3.1.1.5 Intrasite Trails
3.1.1.6 Borrow Source
3.1.1.7 Alternate Borrow Source
3.1.1.8 Haul Trails
3.1.2 Site Access -Watana
3.1.2.1 Winter Trail
3.1.2.2 Pioneer Road
3.1.2.3 Erosion Control and Maintenance
3.1.3 Support Facilities -Devil Canyon
3.1.3.1 Field Camp
3.1.3.2 Alternate Field Camp
3.1.3.3 Roads and Trails
3.1 .4 Survey
3.1.5 Hydrology
~3.1.6 Environmental Water Quality Monitoring
3.1.7 Recreation
ii
PAGE
2-1
2-1
2-1
2-3
2-3
2-4
2-6
2-6
2-7
2-7
2-7
2-12
2-13
2-14
2-14
2-15
2-18
2-20
2-21
2-24
2-25
3-1
3-1
3-1
3-1
3-2
3-2
3-3
3-5
3-5
3-6
3-7
3-8
3-8
3-9
3-9
3.:.10
3-10
3-10
3-11
3-11
3-11
3-12
3-12
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CON IT)
CHAPTER
3.1.8 Foundations and Materials
3.1.8.1 Seismic Monitoring
3.1.8.2 Access Road Studies
3.1.8.3 Transmission Corridor Studies
3.1.8.4 Watana Site Geology
3.1.8.5 Watana Borrow Site Exploration and Testing
3.1.8.6 Watana Damsite Drilling and Trenching
3.1.8.7 Watana Geophysical Investigation
3.1.8.8 Watana Features Design
3.1.8.9 Devil Canyon Geology
3.1.8.10 Devil Canyon Damsite Drilling
3.1.8.11 Devil Canyon Aggregate Studies
3.1.9 Design
3.1.10 Real Estate
3.1.11 Cultural Resource Studies
3.1.12 Biological Resource Studies
3.2 SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
3.2.1 Physical Impacts
3.2.1.1 Visual Resources Impacts
3.2.1.2 Wilderness Impacts
3.2.1.3 Air Quality
3.2.1.4 Water Quality
3.2.1.5 Noise
3.2.2 Biological Impacts
3.2.2.1 Fish
3.2.2.2 Mammals
3.2.2.3 Birds
3.2.2.4 Vegetation
3.2.2.5 Threatened or Endangered Species
3.2:3 Cultural Impacts
3.2.3.1 Access and Public Use
3.2.3.2 Historic Resources
3.2.3.3 Archeological Resources
3.2.3.4 Land Use/Status
3.2.3.5 Demography and Economics
4.RECOMMENDED MITIGATING I~EASURES
4.1 GENERAL MITIGATING MEASURES
4.1.1 Physical Resources
4.1.2 Biological Resources
4.1.3 Cultural Resources
4.2 SPECIFIC MITIGATING MEASURES
4.2.1 Support Facilities -Watana
4.2.1.1 Field Camp
•4.2.1.2 Alternate Field Camp
iii
PAGE
3-12
3-12
3-12
3-13
3-13
3-14
3-15
3-16
3-16
3-16
3-17
3-17
3-17
3-17
3-17
3-17
3-18
3-18
3-18
3-19
3-19
3-20
3-20
3-21
3-21
3-21
3-23
3-24
3-25
3-25
3-25
3-26
3-26
3-26
3-27
4-1
4-1
4-1
4-3
4-4
4-7
4-7
4-7
4-8
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CON'T)
CHAPTER
4.2.1.3 Interim Field Camp
4.2.1.4 Airstrip
4.2.1.5 Intrasite Trails
4.2.1.6 Borrow Source
4.2.1.7 Alternate Borrow Source
4.2.1.8 Haul Trail
4.2.2 Watana Site Access
4.2.2.1 Winter Access Trail
4.2.2.2 Pioneer Road
4.2.3 Support Facilities -Devil Canyon
4.2.3.1 Field Camp
4.2.3.2 Alternate Field Camp
4.2.3.3 Roads and Trails
4.2.4 Survey
4.2.5 Hydrology
4.2.6 Environmental Water Quality Monitoring
4.2.7 Recreation
4.2.8 Foundations and Materials
4.2.8.1 Seismic Monitoring
4.2.8.2 Access Road Studies
4.2.8.3 Transmission Corridor Studies
4.2.8.4 Watana Site Geology
4.2.8.5 Watana Borrow Site Exploration and Testing
4.2.8.6 Watana Damsite Drilling and Trenching
4.2.8.7 Watana Geophysical Investigations
4.2.8.8 Watana Features Design
4.2.8.9 Devil Canyon Geology
4.2.8.10 Devil Canyon Damsite Drilling
4.2.8.11 Devil Canyon Aggregate Studies
4.2.9 Design
4.2.10 Real Estate
4.2.11 Cultural Resource Studies
4.2.12 Biological Resource Studies
5.RESIDUAL IMPACTS
5.1 RESIDUAL IMPACTS BY ACTIVITY
5.1.1 Support Facilities -Watana
5.1.1.1 Field Camp
5.1.1.2 Alternate Field Camp
5.1.1.3 Interim Field Camp
5.1.1.4 Airstrip
5.1.1.5 Intrasite Trails
5.1.1.6 Borrow Source
5.1.1.7 Alternate Borrow Source
5.1.1.8 Haul Trails
iv
PAGE
4-9
4-9
4-9
4-9
4-9
4-9
4-9
4-9
4-10
4-11
4-11 ..
4-11
4-11
4-12
4-12
4-12
4-12
4-12
4-12
4-12
4-13
4-13
4-13
4-14
4-15
4-15
4-15
4-15
4-15
4-16
4-16
4-16
4-16
5-1
5-1
5-1
5-1
5-1
5-2 ..
5-2
5-2
5-2
5-3
5-3
"
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CON1T)
CHAPTER
5.1.2 Watana Site Access
5.1.2.1 Wi nter Tra i1
5.1.2.2 Pioneer Road
5.1.2.3 .Erosion Control and Maintenance
5.1.3 Support Facilities -Devil Canyon
5.1.3.1 Field Camp
5.1.3.2 Alternate Field Camp
5.1.3.3 Roads and Trails
5.1.4 Survey
5.1.5 Hydrology
5.1.6 Environmental (Water Quality)
5.1.7 .Recreation
5.1.8 Foundation and Material
5.1.8.1 Seismic Monitoring
5.1.8.2 Access Road Studies
5.1.8.3 Transmission Corridor
5.1.8.4 Watana Site Geology
5.1.8.5 Watana Borrow Site Exploration and Testing
5.1.8.6 Watana Damsite Drilling
5.1.8.7 Geophysical Investigations
5.1.8.8 Watana Feature Design
5.1.8.9 Devil Canyon Geology
5.1.8.10 Devil Canyon Damsite Drilling
5.1.8.11 Devil Canyon Aggregate Studies
5.1.9 Design
5.1.10 Real Estate
5.1.11 Cultural Resource Studies
5.1.12 Biological Resource Studies
PAGE
5-3
5-3
5-4
5-4
5-4
5-4
5-5
5-5
5-5
5-5
5-6
5-6
5-6
5-6
5-6
5-6
5-7
5-7
5-8
5-8
5-8
5-8
5-8
5-8
5-8
5-8
5-9
5-9
6.RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHoRT-TERM USE AND loNG-TERM 6-1
PRODOCTIVITY
7.IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE CoMvlITMENTS OF RESOURCES 7-1
8.CoNSULTATION AND CoORDINATION 8-1
8.1 PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT ANALYSIS 8-1
8.2 PARTICIPATING PUBLIC 8-7
9.PARTICIPATING STAFF
v
9-1
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Number
APPENDIXES
Scen ic Qua 1ity Inventory
Tabulation of Field Activities According to
Season and Year of Accomplishment
References
LIST OF I"'lAPS
1 Upper Susitna River Basin General Location Map
2 Watana Project Area
3.Devil Canyon Project Area
4 Climatology,Hydrology and Transmission Corridors
5 Proposed Access Route Study Corridor and Approximate Winter Trail
Route -Denali Highway to Watana Damsite
6 Proposed Access Route Study Corridor -Chulitna to Devil Canyon
Damsite to Watana Damsite
7 Land Status -Upper Susitna River Basin
vi
$1-I.PRQIECT DESCRIPTION
'''''UPL Y "[F[,,TO
U oited States Department of the Interior
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Anchorage District Office
4700 East 72nd Avenue
Anchorage.Alaska 99507 ~
March 7,1979
Dear Alaskan:
Thank you for submitting comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment
Record for the proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study.
Enclosed is a copy of the final assessment and accompanying maps.The
assessment describes the study activities proposed by the Alaska Power
Authority (APA),assesses potential impacts associated with the activities,
recommends .ways for mitigating impacts and identifies impacts which
could not be mitigated.
BLM has reviewed APA's application in light of the assessment,public
corrment,and the laws,regulations and pol icies under which the Bureau
of Land Management operates.Based on this review,a decision has been
made to permit portions of the study.
Section 603 of the Federal Land Policy and Nanagement Act of 1976
directs BLM to manage lands having wilderness characteristics in a
manner that would maintain the suitability of such areas for future
wilderness designation by Congress.The proposed project area has a
wilderness character.Consequently,only those activities which would
not result in long-tenn changes in the landscape may be authorized.
r~re specifically,activities which can be authorized include winter
trail access,temporary field camp placement,drilling operations,
seismic monitoring.limited test pit excavations.and hydrological,
geological and biological studies.
Construction of an airstrip.permanent roads,permanent structures and
other long-tenn site alterations will not be authorized.
A summary of the decision process and rationale for decisions rendered
are provided in a Lands Report addressing APA's application.Copies of
this document are available from the BLM Anchorage District Office.
I
t
Sincerely,
Richard W.Tindall
District Manager
Enclosure
-----------------~-----------
..
1.PRUJECT DESCRIPTION
1.1 PURPOSE
The Alaska Power Authority (APA)has filed an application with the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)for authorization to proceed with ac-
tivities associated with a hydroelectric feasibility analysis for the
upper Susitna River basin.
The project feasibility analysis will consist of engineering t
economic t social t and biological studies necessary to establish the
feasibility of developing the upper Susitna hydropower potential t if
authorized.
This environmental assessment is a systematic examination of the
environmental impacts and of ways to minimize and mitigate adverse
impacts of the proposed activities.
1.2 PROJECT AREA
Most of the exploration activities are proposed to occur within the
upper Susitna River basin (Map 1).Biological studies would be con-
ducted along the entire Susitna River extending downstream as far as the
estuarine area and possibly into the Cook Inlet.Transmission line
studies and related archeological surveys would be conducted within the
proposed transmission corridor t some portions of which extend beyond the
~pper Susitna River basin (Map 4).
1.3 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES
The Alaska Power Authority proposes to conduct engineering t eco-
nomic t social t and environmental studies beginning early in 1979 and
1-1
ending approximately 46 months later.These studies are described in
the IIPlan of Study (POS)for Susitna Hydropower Feasibility Analysis ll
prepared in June 1978.The following major categories,as described in
the POS,will entail field work:field camp (including site access),
survey,hydrology,environmental water quality,recreation,foundations
and materials,design,real estate,cultural resources,and biological
studies.A tabulation of the field activities according to season and
year of accomplishment is provided as Appendix C.
The support facilities proposed include a field camp and airstrip at
Watana and a field camp at Devil Canyon.Both the Watana and Devil
Canyon field camps are discussed under discrete headings that describe
the intended action.
1.3.1 Support Facilities -Watana
1.3.1.1 Field Camp.The proposed Watana field camp,to be constructed
at the Watana damsite (Map 2),will provide housing and support facili-
ties for about 75 people.The camp will be utilized year-round,but by
only a few workers during winters.
Delays due to funding,permits,and contract scheduling preclude
major mobilization of the camp during winter of 1979.Some equipment
may be mobilized by helicopter to support the first year's activities.
The existing camp facilities,consisting of one trailer and two plywood
structures,may be enlarged to provide interim housing during the first
summer,as discussed under IIInterim Field Camp.1I Major mobilization,
1-2
"
-including mobilization of the larger camp,is proposed for the winter of
1980.
Two alternate 75-man campsites are being studied.The proposed camp
lies within Section 22,T32N,R5E Seward Meridian,adjacent to the
proposed airstrip (see Map 2).It will be contained within an area of
approximately 10 acres (660 by 660 feet).The area of disturbance will
be considerably less,depending on the final configuration of the camp.
The camp will consist of up to 40 portable trailer-type modules which
will be transported and assembled on site.
An alternative housing scheme would consist of support modules and a
barracks and dining hall composite structure of prefabricated wood or
metal panels which would be transported and assembled on site.Tent
units may also be installed as a temporary interim measure.
A tent-type equipment maintenance enclosure will be provided with
either scheme.
Camp construction will require gravel pads to support buildings.As
presently envisioned,the configuration will consist of a main pad with
an area of something less than an acre.Smaller "sa tellite ll pads will
be provided for sewage disposal,fuel storage,equipment maintenance and
storage,etc.These pads will be interconnected with access trails (to
be discussed later).
Approximately 5,000 cubic yards of gravel will be required for pads.
The dimensions of the pads are unknown at this time;they will vary
1-3
depending on the final configuration.The pads will generally extend no
more than 5 feet past the building line.
Water will be supplied from a well to be drilled adjacent to the
camp.Well capacity will be about 5,000 gallons per day.Water treat
ment will consist of disinfection and,possibly,iron removal.
The majority of the solid wastes produced will be disposed of by
incineration,in compliance with all State and Federal air pollution •
regulations.Those materials which cannot be incinerated (glass and
metal)w111 be hauled to an existing approved disposal site (e.g.,
Ta"lkeetna)or buried in the borrow and waste disposal area onsite.
Empty fuel drums will be returned for reuse or salvage or,if damaged,
will be crushed and buried in the borrow and waste disposal area onsite.
Waste oil will be incinerated onsite or transported by air to an
approved disposal facility.
Sewage will be handled in a 5,000-gallon per day treatment plant
located in a module adjacent to the camp.The plant will discharge
into an adjacent lake or pond through a surface-laid outfall pipe.The
feasibility of this scheme is dependent upon the depth of the ponds and
the depth of freezing,which are not yet known.Effluent from the
treatment plant could also be discharged into the Susitna River.Efflu-
ent discharges will meet all applicable State and Federal standards.
Sludge from the treatment plant will be digested in the treatment
facility,then buried in the waste disposal area on site,as allowed by
1-4
the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation,or incinerated in
the camp incinerator.
An alternate means of sewage treatment would be a gray-black water
system.The black water (human waste)could be treated by incinerating
toilets.The gray water (shower,laundry,etc.)could be disinfected
and discharged to a gravel pad near the camp,or to a pond or river.
Other gray-black water systems are commercially available,some of
which require incineration (either on site or at an approved facility)
of the black water fraction.Dffsite incineration would require air
transport of the wastes.
Power will be supplied by diesel generators located within a module
adjacent to the camp.
Heating will be by fuel oil furnace.
Fuel for all onsite activities will be stored within impervious
diked areas adjacent to the camp.Fuel will be stored both in drums
and in bulk in bladder tanks.The amount of fuel stored on site will
not exceed 50,000 gallons.The area reserved for fuel storage will be
about 10,000 square feet.Earthen containment dikes will be about 4
feet high and about 15 feet wide at the base.A spill prevention con-
trol and countermeasure plan will be prepared and implemented for all
fuel storage and handling operations in accordance with applicable
regulations.
1.3.1.2 Alternate 75-Man Field Camp.An alternate 75-man field camp
site lies approximately 1,500 feet south of the proposed location.The
1-5
configuration would lie entirely within Native-selected lands.The
major differences between the proposed and alternate locations are:
1.The discharge of treated waste water through surface-laid
piping is less feasible for the alternate site due to the longer dis-
tance from a suitable lake.
2.The haul trail from the proposed borrow area would be approxi-
mately 1,500 feet shorter for the proposed site.
3.An archeological survey was conducted in the fall of 1978 for a
portion of the proposed location but not for the alternate location.
This survey resulted in "clearance"of the land required for the pro-
posed location in that no archeological or historic resources were
found.If the alternate site were selected,an archeological survey
would be conducted.
1.3.1.3 Interim Field Camp.An alternate interim measure may also be
implemented during the first summer.This would consist of an initial
35-man camp to be mobilized by helicopter during summer 1979.This camp
would be located in approximately the same place as the existing site
used in the 1978 studies.This area is not as flat or wet as the pro-
posed camp site.Gravel pads would not be constructed;rather,the
trailer-type modules would be placed on timber cribbing.The structure
would measure approximately 50 feet by 100 feet.Major walkways would
be wood planking.Water,sewage,incineration,heating,and power
generation would be similar to those of the 75-man camp,but on a small-
er'scale.Fuel for the camp would be stored in either double wall
1-6
tanks,or in drums within a lined wooden revetment.This entire camp
structure would be temporary in nature,and could be relocated to either
the proposed or alternate 75-man camp location.
1.3.1.4 Airstrip.An airstrip up to 5,000 feet long will be construc-
ted adjacent to either the proposed or alternate field camp.The air-
strip may serve Electra and Hercules C-130 aircraft depending on length.
The gravel embankment may vary in width from 60 to 150 feet.Depth of
embankment may vary from 2 to 5 feet.All obstruction within 150 feet
of centerline will be removed.A short access trail will connect the
camp and the strip.The total disturbed area will not exceed 40 acres.
Up to 250,000 cubic yards of material will be required.
1.3.1.5 Intrasite Trails.A low grade trail will be constructed from
the field camp area to Borrow Area D and to the right abutment to pro-
vide a buffer to the ground surface.This system will consist of a
nominal 12-inch gravel overlay approximately 3 miles long and 12 feet
wide.Total disturbed area will not exceed 5 acres.Approximately
10,000 cubic yards of gravel will be required.Vehicles will travel
from the field camp via the trail system to its terminus,then overland
to the main work areas.All types of equipment (to be discussed later)
will use this trail system.
1.3.1.6 Borrow Source.Construction of the proposed camp,airstrip,
and trails will require up to 265,000 cubic yards of gravel.The
proposed borrow area for gravel fill for these facilities is located in
the~east half of Section 16,T32N,R5E,Seward r~eridian (Borrow Area F).
1-7
The haul trail to the camp site and airstrip will be approximately 1.5
miles long.The area involved is a bluff based on a terrace adjacent to
Tsusena Creek.An archeological clearance of this borrow area and this
haul trail alinement was obtained in September 1978.
The borrow plan will involve removing material from the face of the
bluff,using a bulldozer and front loader,thereby moving the face of
the bluff eastward.
There is little timber and only a light covering of brush in the
borrow area and little overburden which will not be suitable for use as
borrow material.
The removal of the material will not significantly change the shape
or appearance of the terrain.The very small quantities of brush and
timber removed can be disposed of in one of several draws intersecting
the face of the bluff.All manmade debris will be removed at the com-
pletion of excavation.The resulting work face will be graded to match
existing contours.
The equipment required may include a large bulldozer,a front
loader,scrapers,a small bulldozer and four or five dump trucks.All
equipment will be transported to the site over a winter trail from the
Denali Highway.
1.3.1.7 Alternate Borrow Source.An alternate borrow area is located
in the northeast quadrant of the confluence of Tsusena Creek and the
Susitna River,approximately 3.5 miles southwest of the proposed camp.
1-8
This area is in the southwest quarter of Section 30 and the northwest
quarter of Section 31,T32N,R5E,Seward Meridian and the northeast
quarter of Section 36,T32N,R4E,Seward Meridian.
The area is at the foot of a ridge which separates the S,usitna River
and Tsusena Creek.Gravel will be taken from the alluvium at the
confluence and from the lower portions of the ridge.Both areas have
been explored and are known to contain acceptable material.An archeo-
logical clearance will be obtained prior to any clearing or excavation.
The borrow plan will involve removing material from an area at the
base of the ridge and progressing into the base of the ridge using bull-
dozers,front loaders,and trucks.
Clearing of timber and brush will be required as a first step in
the borrow operation.The heaviest timber,on a fringe of the described
area on the banks of both streams,will not be removed and will screen
the borrow area from the Susitna River.
Timber,brush,and overburden which are removed will be placed in
several of the numerous depressions in the area and graded to drain.
Topsoil will be stockpiled in one of the several open areas in the
alluvial flat adjacent to the borrow area.This topsoil,composed
mostly of silty sand,will be replaced on the resulting backslopes and
the floor of the borrow area as a step in the restoration of the area.
All resulting backslopes will be graded to 1 vertical on 2 horizontal
and terraced with 5-foot terraces every 30 feet to minimize erosion.
1-9
All excavated areas will be seeded.All manmade debris will be removed
at the completion of excavation and restoration.
The equipment required may include a large bulldozer,a front load-
er,scrapers,a small bulldozer,and four or five dump trucks.All the
equipment will be transported to the site over a winter trail from the
Denali Highway.
Advantages of the proposed source over the alternate source are
discussed under the "Haul Trail"section.The amount of suitable materi-
al available in the proposed area is unknown.This information is
required prior to selection of the borrow source.
1.3.1.8 Haul Trail.A l-mile haul trail will be constructed from the
proposed borrow source to the field camp area.This 20-foot-wide trail
will be one way with turnouts at selected locations.The depth of
embankment will be 1 to 2 feet,requiring approximately 10,000 cubic
yards of borrow material.Total disturbed area will not exceed 5 acres.
Should the alternate borrow source be selected,a 4-mile haul trail
(alternate A,Map 2)will be constructed from the borrow area to the
field camp area.Again,this will be a 20-foot-wide trail with turn-
outs.Total disturbed area will not exceed 50 acres.The alternate A
route would proceed along the north canyon wall of the Susitna River,
(within Native-selected lands)requiring massive cuts and fills and
scarring of the canyon wall.Should the dam be constructed,this will
be the contractor1s major haul road.It is assumed that sufficient
1-10
..
borrow will be selected from excavation for construction of the haul
trail.An alternate haul trail (alternate B)would be a 3-mile route
overland through BLM lands to the camp site,and would not be visible
from the Susitna River canyon.Approximately 15,000 cubic yards of
borrow would be required and,should the dam be constructed,the alter-
nate A alinement would also be constructed.The total disturbed area of
alternate B would not exceed 25 acres .
1.3.2 Watana Site Access
1.3.2.1 Winter Trail.Initial access to the Watana site will be by
winter trail from the Denali Highway near Butte Lake during the winter
of 1979,generally following the same route used during the winter of
1978 (Map 5).The winter trail will also be used in succeeding years.
Personnel may be housed in public facilities in Talkeetna or in local
lodges until a field camp is complete.
Winter trail usage in the first winter would then be limited to
bringing out a bulldozer,two sleds,three Nodwells,and two Nodwell
trailers from Watana to the Denali Highway.This equipment would be
loaded and taken back from the Denali Highway to Watana along with a
bulldozer and two more Nodwells equipped with drills.During the second
winter it is anticipated that the winter trail will be used extensively
to bring in equipment to construct the airstrip and 75-man camp.
Use during the second winter will include movement of scrapers,trucks,
front loaders,graders,bulldozers,and camp units.In addition,the
1-11
equipment utilized in the first winter will make one trip out and one
trip in.The third winter,trail use will include bringing the trucks,
loaders,and bulldozers,which were used to construct the airstrip,back
to the Denali Highway and will also include one trip out and one trip in
with drilling supplies.The camp will be demobilized as the last step
in the fourth year.
1.3.2.2 Pioneer Road.An alternative means of access would involve the
construction of a 41-mile pioneer trail from the Denali Highway near
Canyon Creek,generally following the winter trail.This pioneer trail
would serve 4-wheel drive vehicles and larger wheeled or tracked ve-
hicles.The trail would be 16 feet wide with turnouts spaced approxi-
mately 1 mile apart,constructed on a nominal 12-inch gravel overlay
using conventional earthmoving equipment.Total disturbed area (ex-
cluding borrow areas)would not exceed 200 acres.The trail would not
be utilized during spring breakup,but would provide access throughout
the remainder of the year.Construction would require approximately 16
stream crossings,either by installing culverts or fording;it would
require approximately 200,000 cubic yards of borrow material from sources
along the trail alinement.If project construction is authorized,the
pioneer trail could be upgraded to a permanent access road.
If the pioneer trail alternative were selected,a 2,000-foot air-
strip would be required at the Watana site rather than a 5,000-foot
airstrip,reducing borrow requirements to 25,000 cubic yards.
1-12
Advantages of the winter trail-pioneer trail-short airstrip combi-
nation are:
1.Mobilization,demobilization,and helicopter support costs would
be decreased.Experience during 1978 shows that supplies and personnel
movement by air maY,qe delayed by adverse weather for days,while.
operating costs andrental costs accumulate.Lack ofa trail would.,
necessitate leasing heavy equipment at higher costs from prebreakup
until after freezeup,although the actual time in use might be only a
few weeks.
2.Year-round access would result in more efficient operations and
more precise data since specialized equipment or drills could easily be
mobilized when required.The large volume of test samples could also be
transported from the site in a timely manner at lower cost.
3.Helicopter operations for 3 years under adverse weather condi-
tions could result in accidents and fatalities.A trail would insure
capability to evacuate injured personnel under all weather conditions,
a high priority for heavy equipment workers.
Construction of a pioneer trail is not now proposed because of
wilderness considerations.If land status changes,construction of a
pioneer trail will be considered.
Another alternative method of personnel and light freight access
would be by float plane,landing on the small lake in the eastern half
of Section 21,T32N,R5E.Access to the drill sites or camp from the
lak~would be by low ground pressure vehicles,foot,or helicopter.
1-13
1.3.2.3 Erosion Control and Maintenance.Erosion control measures will
depend greatly on the types of subgrade materials encountered.Gener-
ally,cuts in ice-rich soils will be vertical,and vegetative mats will
remain undisturbed to the maximum extent possible.Areas susceptible to
slides,excessive settlement and severe erosion will be avoided wherever
possible.Road grades will generally be limited to 6 percent except for
short stretches of canyon haul trail which may be as steep as 10 per-
cent.Streams will be crossed at right angles if .possible.Drain
swales,where constructed through streams,will be of coarse material
and will not impact fish movement.Slopes of ditches and culverts will
be designed to avoid excessive velocities.Cross drains and diversion
ditches will be provided where required.Roads will be crowned to
facilitate drainage.
Road and airfield maintenance will include inspections,cleaning of
drainage ways,grading,and reconstruction of subgrade failures.
Vehicular loads and movement during breakup will be restricted.
1.3.3 Support Facilities -Devil Canyon
1.3.3.1 Field Camp.The field camp w"ill use modules similar to those
at Watana.The camp will house up to 25 people for each of the 4 years.
The camp will be located on 1 acre near the existing airstrip (Map 3)on
exposed sand and gravel.The camp and existing airstrip will be cleared
of the minimal vegetation now present.
1-14
A water well will be constructed.
Approximately 1,000 gallons per day of sewage will be treated,using
a septic tank and leaching pit at least 200 feet from the well.
All solid wastes will be transported to Talkeetna or to the Watana
camp for disposal,except that burnables will be burned on site.
Fuel storage will be in barrels or bladders and will not exceed
10,000 gallons.Storage will be inside a bermed area 50 feet on a side.
Approximately 50 cubic yards of material required for berms will be
obtained through regrading of the area.
1.3.3.2 Alternate Field Camp.An alternate would be installation of a
combination office,work shop,and emergency shelter consisting of a
small house trailer and plywood structures.Personnel would travel
da"ily by helicopter from the Watana camp or private lodging.Only
portable or chemical-type toilets would be provided,with contents
disposed of as approved by the State of Alaska.
1.3.3.3 Roads and Trails.Initial mObilization will be by tracked
vehicle across the existing 4-wheel drive road from Gold Creek beginning
in the fi rs t summer..Personne 1 wi 11 be transported to the site by
helicopter.Carnp supplies and replacement drill equipment will be
transported by either helicopter or over the road.The road would be
used las is'except for removal of regrowth brush.Multiple tracked
vehicle trips will be made to support the camp and to remove aggregate
samples.
Road maintenance requirements are considered negligible,limited to
repair of damages attributed to this operation.There will be no new
1-15
roads or trails constructed on site at Devil Canyon.However,existing
tra il s may be cl eared for usage.
1.3.4 Survey
River channel cross sections will be obtained using conventional
survey and electronic sounding equipment during the winter months or
during late summer and early fall when discharges are low.
This first year activity will obtain river cross sections at the
following preliminary sites:Olson;Devil Canyon;High Devil Canyon
(Susitna I);Vee (Susitna III);and Watana.An estimated 70 river cross
sections will be surveyed from the Olson damsite downstream to highway
bridge #3 below Talkeetna.Potential reservoir sites will be surveyed
at Olson,Devil Canyon,High Devil Canyon,Watana,and Vee.
Summer/fall data will be obtained by using small boats,and winter
data will be obtained by working on the ice.Access to cross section
sites will be by helicopter.This activity will be conducted by two
crews of four men each during the summer,fall,and winter.Surface
disturbance will be limited to the clearing of brush for helicopter
access and survey line clearing of brush from a line of sight approx~
mately 2 feet wide.
Controlled aerial photo mapping will be accomplished along possible
access routes,transmission line corridors,and at the proposed Devil
Canyon and Watana damsites.Helicopters will be utilized for ground
access.
1-16
1.3.5 Hydrology
~drology activities involve the collection of field data for the
river basin and potential transmission corridors.
Three climatological stations will be established in upper Susitna
River basin (Map 4).Specific locations will be determined by field
reconnaissance;however,the sites will be located adjacent to lakes,
where possible,to enhance access by fixed-wing aircraft for winter
snow surveys and summer site inspection and maintenance.The stations
will be equipped with telemetry equipment,a transmitter,batteries,
antenna tower,solar panel,tipping bucket precipitation station,temp-
erature sensors,and a snow pillow.The 20-foot antenna tower will be
anchored to a 4-foot square prefabricated wooden base and will be verti-
cally supported by three guy lines.Batteries and telemetry equipment
will be housed in a wooden box approximately 4 feet wide by 6 feet long
by 2 feet deep.The precipitation gage and protective windshield will
be mounted on a 6-foot stand supported by a prefabricated wooden plat-
form.The snow pillow will be supported by a prefabricated wooden
frame.A snow survey course in the vicinity of the site will be marked
by colored stakes.
Installation of climatological stations began in late summer and
early fall of 1978 and will be completed in 1980.Each site can be
installed by two persons in 3 days,remaining at the site for the
duration of the installation period and living in small tent camps.
Site preparation will be limited to leveling areas suitable for each
1-17
piece of equipment!using hand tools.Prefabrication will be maximized
to keep disturbance at the site to a minimum.All refuse will be
removed from the site by helicopter when fabrication and installation
are complete.In addition to the installation of the three proposed
sites!seven existing sites will be upgraded by installing precipitation
equipment!telemetry equipment!and a snow pillow!similar to the new
stations.
Data collection at climatological sites is planned for the duration
of the proposed action.
Sixteen anemometers will be installed to evaluate wind velocities at
anticipated critical areas along the proposed transmission corridor (Map
4).Anemometer Sites 1 through 7 will be located along the Alaska
Railroad right-of-way!if possible.Where appropriate!they will be
placed on existing buildings or structures!accessible from the Parks
Highway or the Alaska Railroad right-of-way.Anemometer Sites 8 through
16 will be located at remote sites in areas of maximum exposure to high
velocity winds!established at maximum elevations along individual legs
of corridors!in uninhabited areas.Access to the sites for installa-
tion and maintenance will be by helicopter.
Each anemometer site will be equipped with a 20-or 30-foot metal
tower with an anemometer!antenna!and solar panel attached.The tower
will be anchored to a 4-foot square prefabricated wooden base and will
be vertically supported by three guy lines.Batteries and telemetry
1-18
"
..
equipment will be housed in a wooden box approximately 4 feet wide by 6
feet long by 2 feet deep.Several of the sites will also be equipped
with a small recording precipitation gage and protective windshield
mounted on a 6-foot stand.Site preparation and installation will be
similar to that for the climatological stations.Data collection at the
majority of anemometer stations will continue for the duration of the
study period.
Stream gaging sites will be established or upgraded (Map 4)to
obtain streamflow data.The new stream gaging sites will be established
at locations with stable river cross sections.The sites will have a
cableway for sampling suspended and bedload sediments,and collecting
flow data.The cableway will be anchored in bedrock or suspended from
an IA I frame adjacent to the stream.Anchors will be drilled in rock
where possible,otherwise deadmen will be buried.Where stream vel-
ocities permit,a boat requiring a small prefabricated storage shed will
be used in place of the cableway.A manometer-activated recorder will
be used to measure the river stage.Manometer cables will be buried to
prevent damage by ice or by animals.Each manometer will be equipped
with a 20-or 30-foot metal tower with an antenna,solar panel,radio
transmitter,and associated telemetry equipment similar to the clima-
tological stations.
Site preparation and installation will be limited to leveling small
areas by using hand tools.
1-19
Operation of the stream gaging stations will require a two-man crew
about once a month.Data collection will continue for the duration of
the study period.
1.3.6 Environmental (Water Quality)
Physical,chemical,and biological water quality data will be
collected at the following four gaging stations:(1)the confluence of
the Susitna and Tyone Rivers;(2)below the Watana damsite (within 1/2
mile);(3)below the Devil Canyon damsite (within 1/2 mile);and (4)the
confluence of the Susitna River and Gold Creek.The data collection
will occur on a monthly basis.In some instances,sampling may occur on
a more frequent basis.All sampling will be conducted with hand held
equipment.Data collection will coincide with stream gaging and bio-
logical activities using a two-man crew with access by helicopter.
1.3.7 Recreation
Visual inspections will be conducted by two individuals to develop
measures for enhancing environmental quality and esthetics during the
second summer.He 1i copter overf1 i ghts wi 11 be conducted,with some
landings.
1.3.8 Foundations and Materials
An extensive program of field reconnaissance,seismic monitoring,
drilling,and materials testing is planned for Watana,Devil Canyon,and
other possible sites.In addition,foundations and materials activities
will be conducted along the proposed access road and transmission corri-
dors.
1-20
«
"
Equipment required for the foundations and materials activities
includes:four to six helicopters;four bulldozers;one rough terrain
crane;one screening plant;two to five 4-wheel drive trucks;three
large rotary drills;six core drills;two auger drills;two tracked
personnel carriers;four support Nodwells with air compressors;one
grizzly;two wagon drills;four separate air compressors;four large
pumps;and four underground loaders.
1.3.8.1 Seismic Monitoring.A seismic monitoring system of eight
stations will be installed and monitored within the upper Susitna River
basin.The exact locations are as yet undetermined;however~they will
be within a 50-to 60-mile radius of the proposed damsites.Each sta-
tion will consist of a geophone covered by a 3-foot square box~a bat-
tery or solar cell~a transmitter,and a 20-or 30-foot-high antenna
supported by three guy lines.Site preparation will entail minimal
amounts of leveling.Each geophone will be buried approximately 6
inches deep.Installation of all sites will require approximately 4
weeks during the first summer.
Station maintenance will occur once every 3 months with access by
helicopter.All stations will be removed at the end of the study per-
iod~if the project is not approved.
1.3.8.2 Access Road Studies.Permanent access road studies will in-
clude:geological and soils studies and detailed foundations and ma-
terials exploration and testing.Corridors for studies,within which
1-21
the access roads will lie include:Parks Highway to Devil Canyon to
Watana,(Map 6)and the Denali Highway to Watana (Map 5).The corridors
are 2 miles wide and 64 and 40 miles in length respectively.
A field reconnaissance of the alternate access routes within the
study corridors,to be performed concurrently with geologic and soils
mapping,will involve a team of geologists,soils engineers,and design
personnel.Occasional hand samples and photographs will be taken.
Access will be by helicopter during the late spring and early summer.
Foundations and materials exploration and testing along the road
corridors will involve drilling to verify foundation conditions and
materials quality and quantity.Approximately 400 holes will be drilled
along the corridor between the Denali Highway and Watana damsite,and
700 holes along the route from the Parks Highway to Devil Canyon and
Watana damsites.Three augers,mounted on Nodwells or similar vehicles,
will be used to drill holes to a depth of 10 to 20 feet.In areas of
heavy vegetation,a brushed centerline would be needed.Heavily for-
ested areas would be avoided as drill sites,if possible,and if not
possible,drill sites would be selected so Nodwells could move to the
site with little or no clearing.Terrain which is surrounded by streams,
lakes or which is too steep for overland movement would require heli-
copter transport of the auger.Generally drill sites would be selected
which require little or no clearing to facilitate use of helicopters.
Occasionally a frost tube or piezometer will be set in a hole;it J
will consist of a 3/4-inch galvanized pipe capped on both ends extending
48 inches above ground.All augered holes will be backfilled.
1-22
Borrow soutce investigations will include reconnaissance of likely
areas and a limited number of auger holes,not to exceed a total of lOa
on each route,to determine possible quantities of borrow available.
The borrow source investigations will be confined to the corridors
outlined.The route investigations from the Parks Highway to Watana dam
by way of Devil Canyon dam wi II require approximately 120 days for the
\
centerline and 45 days for the borrow sources.The Denali Highway
to Watana investigations will require 90 days and 45 days respectively.
Daily access will be by helicopter.Some clearing of helicopter pads
may be required.All manmade debris will be removed by hel icopter.The
drilling work is not likely to begin until the second or third year,
although some reconnaissance activity will be undertaken during the
first summer to aid in prelim'inary route selection.
1.3.8.3 Transmission Corridor Studies.Field activity for transmission
corridor studies will be much the same as for the access road studies,
except that only limited drilling will be done.A thorough reconnais-
sance of the corridors will be made by geologists and soils engineers
operating from a small helicopter.Drilling will be accomplished using
a small helicopter-transportable auger at approximately 50 sites along
the transmission line corridors to check typical foundation conditions.
Drilling will generally be done in areas which require no clearing.
Holes will be less than 20 feet deep and will be backfilled.All trash
and debris will be removed from the site.Investigations will begin in
1-23
the first year and continue intermittently through the fourth year,and
will be confined to the summer months.
1.3.8.4 Watana Site Geology.The Watana site geology study will in-
vestigate geologic features in detail.This study will be conducted
during the first 2 years from March through September.Approximately
1,000 survey points will be marked with stakes and flagging.Rock and
soil samples will be collected us"ing hand tools.Access will be by
helicopter.
1.3.8.5 Watana Borrow Site Exploration and Testing.Borrow site ex-
ploration and testing will be conducted at Watana (Map 2)to verify
material sources and to determine material quality.In Quarry Site B,
work will consist of core drilling four holes to a depth of about 150
feet with a skid mounted core drill.In Quarry Site A,approximately 20
holes will be core drilled up to a depth of about 350 feet.To deter-"
mine techniques required to produce rock of the sizes required for dam
construction,an opening shot and at least two test shots w"ill be det-
onated in the third or fourth summer of the study.The opening shot
will consist of the detonation of approximately 1,000 pounds of low
explosive to open a hole about 200 feet long and less than 20 feet deep.
Two separate test shots,each of approximately 3,000 pounds of low
explosive will then be detonated,resulting in an actual hole approxi-
mately 200 feet long,40 feet into the cliff face and 30 feet deep.The
disturbed area will be about 300 feet long.The test shots will be made
alp~g the north flank of the area outlined as Quarry Source A.The face
1-24
•
which will result from the test shot will likely be developed from,and
represent an extension of one of several natural faces which are visible
from the north.The face will be parallel to the contours or perpen-
dicular to the slope.
A glacial till source will be evaluated in Borrow Area 0 for core
and semipervious materials.Approximately 20 drill holes,averaging
about 200 feet in depth,will be drilled to define the horizontal and
vertical extent of materials.This will be supplemented by about 80
auger holes,averaging 40 feet in depth,and 20 test pits 30 feet deep,
to obtain adequate amounts of representative materials for testing and
analysis.
Two sources of sands and grav,el for embankment material and concrete
aggregate have been identified.Borrow Area E will require approxi-
mately 20 test pits,averaging 30 feet deep,to define the limits of the
borrow area and to obtain samples for analysis.A small screening plant
will be set up for test processing of aggregate and filter materials.
The screening plant will be used to process materials from test pits in
both Borrow Areas E and D.It is anticipated that four small stockpiles
of materials will be produced in each area.These stockpiles will then
be sampled and the remainder of all material will be returned to the
test pits and all areas will be graded,raked,and seeded.The place-
ment af the screening plant will be such that clearing of trees is not
required,and stockpiles will be placed on ground which is covered with
1-25
plastic or cloth tarps so that all material w
natural ground surface.It is not anticipatec
and stockpiles will remain in place longer tha
screening plant will be confined to the 4th yei
elimination if the results of work up to that t
use.
a.
Test pits and drilling may be required in Bl fO
materials are not located in areas nearer the pr
Equipment required for borrow site activitie
on skids;two wagon drills on tracked vehicles;I e
on a tracked vehicle;one dragline or rough terre
on a tracked vehicle;and one bulldozer.
Test pits will be dug using a bulldozer to clear brush and over-
burden and a backhoe or dragline for excavation.Test pits will gener-
ally be located to avoid clearing of trees for either excavation or
access.Brush will be cleared from an area not to exceed 100 by 50 feet
for each test pit.All debris and material removed from the pit,with
the exception of several hundred pounds of samples,will be stockpiled
adjacent t~the test pit.The test pit will be 20 to 50 feet deep,
depending on equipment used.Samples will be taken at varying depths
and generally will not exceed 500 pounds per test pit.On completion of
excavation,the test pit will be backfilled with the stockpiled material
and the surface wi 11 be graded,raked,and seeded to bl end with the
~isting ground surface.All manmade trash and debris will be removed.
1-26
1.3.8 .6 Watana Damsite Drilling.Drilling at the damsite area will be
done with 1ight core drills.Holes will be located based on geologic
and project features and wi 11 average 200 feet in depth.It is anti-
cipated that approximately 50 drill holes will result from this effort.
Appurtenant structures will require from 50 to 100 additional core holes
with an average depth of 200 feet.At the higher elevations exploration
holes will be drilled to determine materials present and to obtain
samples for testing.A backhoe will excavate test pits and a dozer will
excavate trenches to expose inplace materials for examination and to
obtain test samples.Approximately 20 trenches will be opened on each
abutment in areas having no trees.Each trench will be backfilled and
graded.The trenches will be approximately 10 feet wide,50 feet long,
and 10 to 15 feet deep,and will be alined perpendicular to the slope.
A pneumatic drill will be used.to drill vertical shafts at selected
sites to study inplace permeabilities and soil temperatures.Equipment
required for this activity includes:four skid-mounted core drills;two
track-mounted rotary air drills;one track-mounted auger drill;one
track-mounted backhoe;and three bulldozers.
A typical core drilling operation will use a light diamond drillrig
weighing less than 4,500 pounds.Drill sites are generally located to
avoid unsuitable terrain,heavy standing timber,stream channels or
other features which would increase site preparation or cause excessive
environmental damage.The drills will be moved to upland sites on
traCKed vehicles or by skidding,using a winch on the drill,and will be
1-27
moved to steeper river abutments by helicopter.Clearing of some
timber will be necessary to allow helicopter placement but it will
se 1dom be necessary to cut more than three or four trees.If the sur-
face is not level~timber shoring will be used to construct a drilling
platform approximately 10 feet square.Timber cut durin~clearing
operations will usually be incorporated into the platform.During the
drilling operations,cuttings will be allowed to settle into low spots
in the adjacent ground surface~generally covering only 4 or 5 square
yards.Existing vegetation is usually not entirely covered or killed
and the cuttings are no longer visible in a few months.All core
samples will be removed from the sites.The core holes~3 inches in
diameter~will be grouted shut when drilling is completed.Upon com-
pletion of drilling,the drill will be removed,the pad dismantled,all
manmade debris removed~and the area raked and seeded.
1.3.8.7 Watana Geophysical Investigation.Geophysical investigations
will be conducted at Watana and Devil Canyon each summer to study pre-
sence,depth,and configuration of certain underground formations.
Ground level explosive charges~averaging 5 to 10 pounds (maximum 50
pounds)~will generate vibrations that strike formations of differing
densities and reflect back to ground level sensors (a refraction seismic
survey).Holes uncovered by the explosions will be small,averaging
about 5 feet in diameter and 3 feet deep.About 200,000 feet of seismic
line is planned.Approximately 70,000 feet of seismic line has already
been completed in the project area under previous authority.These
1-28
lines are not visible and cannot be located except by the people who
were actually involved in the work.Very little clearing of brush or
trees is required and the brush is not cut to the grqund but only pruned
to provide a line of sight.Generally wooded areas are avoided as are
areas heavily overgrown with brush.Access will be by helicopter.
1.3.8.8 Watana Features Design.Field activity for spillway,power-
house,and outlet work design will consist of reconnaissance by one-to
six-person teams of geologists and engineers.No equipment will be re-
quired,and access will be by helicopter.Reconnaissance trips will be
required throughout during the 4 years of the study.
1.3.8.9 Devil Canyon Geology.The Devil Canyon site geology study will
concentrate on the right abutment,left abutment,and the river channel.
Inspections by geologists will be conducted during the summer months,
and samples will be taken.
1.3.8.10 Devil Canyon Damsite Drilling.Drilling of the Devil Canyon
site will occur in the right abutment,left abutment,and the river
channel beginning in the first summer.Two core drill rigs,moved by
helicopter,will be used.Where possible,existing clearings will be
used.In the fourth year an adit consisting of a vertical shaft and
horizontal tunnel may be sunk in the left abutment to extend beneath the
river channel.The vertical 'shaft will be 7 feet square and lOa feet
deep and the horizontal adit will be 7 feet square and 150 feet long.
Rock rubble generated will be left close to the mouth of the shaft.The
1-29
'~...~------_.....------------,..-,---------------------------
shaft will be closed using a reinforced concrete lid doweled into the
rock.Equipment to be used includes four jackleg drills,four rubber
tired loaders,and two underground core drills.
The in situ rock conditions will be evaluated by lowering test
instruments into drilled holes.Activity at Devil Canyon wlll take
place during all 4 years.
1.3.8.11 Devil Canyon Aggregate Studies.The Cheechako Creek aggregate
source will be explored to deter'mine the quality of material available,
with removal of approximately 50 cubic yards of material.Aggregate
samples will be taken the first summer,generally from test pits ex-
cavated during an earlier study.The samples,to be removed from
the site over the 4-wheel drive trail,will be loaded on rail cars at
Gold Creek.Limited sampling may be undertaken in succeeding summers
depending on results of laboratory testing.
1.3.9 Design
The field work associated with this activity will be ground and
aerial visual inspections.Any activity which would have a direct
impact within the project area is discussed elsewhere.
1.3.10 Real Estate
Real estate field investigations will be conducted so that personnel
can be familiarized with physical characteristics affecting land value
in the project area.Inspections of the proposed transmission corridors
will be accomplished by overflight in a fixed-wing aircraft during the
summer months of the first 2 years.No onground access will be re-
quired.
1-30
1-31
area.Studies will be confined primarily to the mainstem river and its
clearwater tributaries and lakes.
The total number of persons required for field activities will vary
from 4 to 30.Activities are expected to be the most extensive from May
through October,although monitoring will be conducted on a year-round
basis.Individual field camps will range in size f~om two to six
persons,depending on the activity.
Access to remote field camps will be by helicopters and fixed-wing
aircraft.Trains and snow machines will be utilized in the lower
reaches of the river.
All field facilities for fisheries studies will be temporary.
Seasonal tent camps will be established for area-specific studies.
These will most likely be at Lake Louise,Gold Creek,and Susitna
station.The remainder of the field crews will be mobile throughout the
sampling season and will be responsible for various areas within the
drainage.Mobile crews will consist of two to four persons.Approxi-
mately seven crews are expected to operate within the study area.
Water for field camps will be obtained from clearwater streams.All
solid wastes will be transported to Talkeetna or Anchorage,depending'on
locations of camps.Pits will be dug for sewage since most camps will
be mobile and personnel will only be on site for 1 to 2 days.
Types of sampling equipment deployed may include weirs for counting
adult and juvenile fish,fish wheels,and sonar counters and associated
hardware.Weirs will be installed within the lower reaches of selected
1-32
clearwater tributaries.Exact locations will be dependent on the
stream characteristics of each creek.All structures will be temporary
and will consist of conduit inserted in 4 by 4 inch drill wooden string-
ers.Weirs will be supported upright by log tripod structures.Deter-
mining total escapement will require blocking the entire creek.Weirs
will be monitored 24 hours a day and fish will be allowed to pass
through the structures as they enter the creek.
The most recently developed sonar counters utilized in the Cook
Inlet area consist of a 60-foot-long cylindrical aluminum substrate
which is deployed along the river bottom perpendicular to the riverbank
and cabled to the shore.A single transducer is mounted on the inshore
end,and associated electronics are housed in a temporary 4-by 8-foot
shack located on the riverbank.A variation of this design may be
required for the Susitna River.Counters would not prevent boat navi-
gation in the vicinity,although it would be desirable to channel boat
traffic around the substrates.Locations of each substrate would be
well marked with buoys and signs.
Fish wheels may be utilized for tag and recovery programs to deter-
mine salmon abundance.Suitable sites will be selected prior to the
initial field season.A tag and recovery program would most likely
include a lower tagging camp with four to five fish wheels and one or
two recovery camps in the upper drainage.Fish wheels would be dis-
assembled at the end of each season and stored on site until the program
is discontinued.
1-33
Fisheries and related water quantity and quality monitoring equip-
ment will be portable and will be transported to sampling sites by field
crews working in each area.
Big game studies will be conducted almost exclusively from aircraft.
Aerial surveys and radio tracking flights will be flown over the im-
poundment areas,drainages flowing into the impoundments and along the
mainstem below the impoundments on an almost daily basis throughout the
study period.These flights will involve one to four single englne
fixed-wing aircraft and two to eight persons at any given time.Approx-
imately 200 big game animals (moose,caribou,bears,wolves,and wolver-
ines)will be captured and radio collared with the aid of a helicopter.
The majority of these animals will be captured during the first two
summers of the study period;however,smaller numbers will be captured
after that period as required.
Aircraft operation will be staged from existing airstrips.Landings
in the study area will be limited to the capture sites of animals,wolf
and bear den sites,and occasional other places where detailed inspec-
tion is necessary such as location of dead study animals.Time on th~
ground will be limited to a few minutes or few hours at anyone site.
Tagging operations will involve one helicopter,one to four fixed-wing
aircraft,and four to ten persons.
Occasionally it may be necessary to refuel aircraft in the study
area.Whenever poss-ible this will be done at existing airstrips or near
1-34
camps established for other activities.No camps or other temporary or
permanent on-the-ground facilities will be established for biological
activities related to large mammals,although facilities established for
other activities might be occasionally used.
Moose habitat and small animal studies will involve ground work
within the impoundment areas and along the mainstem Susitna below the
impoundments.Timing,specific locations,and amount of ground work
will depend on final biological study design;however,it is anticipated
that it wi 11 be 1i mited to sma 11 tempora ry camps with two to six per-
sons.Access will probably be by helicopter,fixed-wing aircraft,and
boat where possible.Disturbance to the area will be limited to that
which normally occurs during browse studies and small animal trapping.
Longterm effects will be minimal.
1-35
2 I Ex ISTI NG ENVI RONMENTAL SETTI NG
..
----'-a----~------...,.....--TI --_.--F"F---•.r=r=-------------------
2.ExISTING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
2.1 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
2.1.1 Genera 1
Three glaciers flow down the southern flanks of the Alaska Range
near 13,832-foot Mount Hayes to form the three forks of the upper
Susitna River.These forks join to flow southward for about 50 miles
through a network of channels over a wide gravel floodplain composed of
the coarse debris discharged by the retreating glaciers.The cold,
swift,silt-laden river then curves toward the west where it winds
through a single deep channel,some 130 miles through uninhabited
country,until it reaches the Alaska Railroad at the small settlement of
Gold Creek.
After the Susitna leaves the confinement of Devil Canyon,the
river1s gradient flattens.The river then turns south past Gold Creek,
where it flows for about 120 miles through a broad silt and gravel
filled valley into Cook Inlet near Anchorage,almost 300 miles from its
source.
The upper Susitna River is a scenic,free-flowing river with very
few signs of man1s presence.The extreme upper and lower reaches of the
Susitna occupy broad,glacially scoured valleys.However,the middle
section of the river,between the Denali Highway and Gold Creek,oc-
cupies a stream cut valley with extremely violent rapids in Devil
Canyon.The principal tributaries of the Susitna in the upper basin are
the silt-laden Maclaren,the less turbid Oshetna,and the clear-flowing
Tyone.Numerous other smaller tributaries generally run clear.
2-1
High summer discharges are caused by snowmelt,rainfall,and glacial
melt.The main streams carry a load of glacial silt during the high
runoff periods.During the winter when low temperatures retard water
flows,streams run relatively silt free.
Much of the upper Susitna River basin is underlain by discontinuous
permafrost.The area above and below the Maclaren River junction with
the Susitna is generally underlain by thin to moderately thick perma-
frost.Maximum depth to the base of permafrost in this area is about
600 feet.Generally around the larger water bodies,such as lakes,and
in some areas of the lower section of the upper Susitna basin,perma-
frost is not present.
Most of the Susitna basin above Devil Canyon is considered to be
potentially favorable for deposits of copper or molybdenum and for
contact or vein deposits of gold and silver,although much of the drain-
age basin has never been geologically mapped.The Alaska State Depart-
ment of Natural Resources states that there are "ac tive"and IInonactive"
mining claims in the upper Susitna River drainage area between Devil
Canyon and the Oshetna River.
The climate of the basin is characterized by severe winter tempera-
tures and warm summers.Temperature extremes are estimated at minus 54 0
and plus 89 0 F.Normally,the first freeze occurs early in September,
and the last freeze occurs in mid-May.Mean annual precipitation in
lower elevations of the basin are estimated to range between 18 and 22
inthes,while precipitation in higher elevations,because of orographic
2-2
effects.reaches 80 inches per year.Mean annual snowfall ranges from
60 inches in the lowlands to as much as 400 inches in the high moun-
tains.Freezeup in the highest reaches of the Susitna River starts in
early October,and by the end of November the lower regions of the river
are icebound.The river breakup begins in early May,and within 2 weeks
of breakup,the river tributaries are free of surface ice.
2.1.2 Geology/Topography/Soils
The geologic setting of the Susitna River basin includes unconsol-
idated sediments of late Wisconsin glaciation which cover most of the
area.These late Wisconsin glacial sediments consist of unconsolidated
tills,moraines,sand and gravel deposits,and eskers.The soil type
most common to the area is a glacial till composed of silty,sandy
gravel overlain by 0.5 to 2 feet of organic silts and vegetation.This
soil is considered to be easily erodable especially when found on steep
slopes and when underlain by permafrost.Discontinuous permafrost is
found throughout the area especially on north facing slopes.Bedrock
outcrops consist chiefly of tightly folded,metamorphosed and faulted
volcanic and sedimentary rock.The glacial sediments which exist
throughout the basin are fairly flat in areas adjacent to the Susitna
River.The river valley is a V-shaped valley formed by fairly recent
and continuing erosion of the Susitna River drainage system.
2.1.3 Existing Landscape Character
The proposed action would occur in three discrete physiographic
provinces.The Broad Pass Depression (Appendix A-l,A-4)extends along
2-3
the Denali Highway toward the headwaters of the Susitna River;at the
southern end,the trough opens to the Cook Inlet -Susitna lowland.
Rising to the southeast of the Broad Pass Depression is the Fog Lakes
Upland (Appendix A-l,A-3).This physiographic province cuts between
the Chulitna Mountains and the central Talkeetna Mountains and provides
a drainage for a large portion of the upper Susitna River.The Susitna
River corridor (Appendix A-l,A-2)cuts through the Fog Lakes Upland,
leaving steep timbered canyons incised by raging white water.
That portion of the project area contained within the upper Susitna
River basin is a pristine landscape of high visual resource value which
is almost devoid of signs of man's presence.Some minor cultural
modifications can be observed such as cabins and trails;however,these
are scarce.For the most part,this area could best be described as
wilderness.
The visual and recreational resource amenities of the upper Susitna
have long been realized.Using the Bureau of Land Management Visual
Resource Management System,this area has been evaluated as displaying
Class A scenic quality (Appendix A-l to 4)and qualifies for Visual
Resource Management Class II.
2.1.4 Wilderness Considerations
The Bureau of Land Management has been mandated by the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act of 1976 Section 603 to review all public land
roadless areas of 5,000 acres or more to determine their suitability for
wilderness designation.Presently,no wilderness inventory has been
2-4
~.
undertaken for the Susitna River valley;this fact,however,does not
preclude the potential for this area to be designated a Wilderness
Study Area.Recent policy direction has been stated in Interim Management
Policy and Guidelines for Wilderness Study Areas (Draft),U.S.Depart-
ment of Interior,Bureau of Land Management;January 12,1979.That
document states the following:
If the decision (with respect to the proposed activity)
has to be made before a special project inventory can
be completed,then the affected lands must be considered
a potential Wilderness Study Area (WSA)and the proposed
action must be evaluated as though the land were in a
WSA.
While the above policies provide necessary management direction,
it is also important to point out that without completing an intensive
inventory,it appears that the area being discussed displays wilderness
characteristics based on the criteria described in the Wilderness
Inventory Handbook;Policy,Direction,Procedures,and Guidance for
Conductive Wilderness Inventory on the Public Lands,September 27,
1978.In that document,the following list of critieria from Section
2(c)of the Wilderness Act of 1964 are cited:
1.Size -Roadless areas with over 5,000 acres of contiguous
public lands.State or private lands are not included in
making acreage calculations.
2-5
.-~,~-------_.__-..,--~-----,
2.Naturalness -Generally,the area appears to have been af-
fected primarily by the forces of nature with the imprint of
man's work substantially unnoticeable.
3.Solitude or a Primitive and Unconfined Type of Recreation -
Determine if the area has outstanding opportunities for
solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation.
2.1.5 Wetlands and Floodplains
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Executive Orders 11988 and
11990 require special consideration of wetlands and floodplains in
assessing the impacts of proposed activities which may alter or destroy
wetlands.Wetlands are present on the proposed project area,but
their extent and location are not fully known.At this point in time,
a wetlands determination and inventory has not been accomplished.
2.1.6 Other
The portion of the proposed project area within the upper Susitna
River basin is virtually unaffected by man.For this reason,water
and air quality are high and background noise levels are low.In
those portions of the proposed project area nearer man's activities
water and air quality may be lower and background noise levels may be
higher.
2-6
2.2 BIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
:2.2.1 Fish
Both anadromous and resident fish inhabit the proposed project area.
Baseline fisheries inventories were conducted by the Alaska Department
of Fish and Game (ADF&G)in the upper Susitna River during the 1974-1977
field seasons;however,little information is available for the remain-
der of the project area.
The Susitna River basin is recognized as important habitat for five
species of Pacific salmon (chinook,coho,chum,pink,and sockeye).
Although total escapements have not yet been derived,according to
ADF&G,a significant percentage of the Cook Inlet salmon run migrates
into the Susitna River basin.No fish have been documented to migrate
up through Devil Canyon.
Grayling,rainbow trout,Dolly Varden,burbot,lake trout,white-
fish,sucker,and sculpins are some of the more common and important
resident fish species present within the proposed project area.Past
studies have provided some preliminary fisheries data;however,detailed
population,distribution,and habitat data is not available.
Lakes in the area are small and shallow and generally devoid of
fish,although they do support other aquatic plant and animal species.
2.2.2 Mammals
Mammals and birds found within the proposed project area are rep-
resentative of wildlife species common to interior Alaska .
.One of the most significant wildlife resources of the area is the
Nelchina caribou herd.Segments of this herd range throughout much
2-7
of the upper Susitna River basin and along the northern transmission
corridors.The major calving area for the herd is on the northeast
slopes of the Talkeetna Mountains on the upper reaches of the Kosina
Creek,Oshetna River,and Little Nelchina River drainages.The north-
ernmost portion of this major calving area is approximately 5 to 10
miles south of the proposed Watana damsite.However,two other calving
areas have been identified within the project area (1)between Butte
Lake and Deadman La ke and,(2)an area two mi 1es southeast of Stephan
Lake.Calving areas constitute a sensitive and critical habitat area,
essential to the caribou population.Calving generally takes place
between mid-May and mid-June.A seasonal migration route (south to
north during July)generally occurs between Tsusena and Watana Creeks.
Caribou range throughout the project area in the summer in small bands.
Caribou depend upon climax range,especially for winter forage;alter-
ation of the vegetation,especially of sedges and lichens,has a detri-
mental impact upon their distribution and numbers.A trait of the
Nelchina herd is an almost constant change of winter ranges,a phe-
nomenon that has undoubtedly characterized Alaska's caribou populations
for centuries.Generally,caribou winter approximately 5 to 10 miles
north of the proposed Watana damsite.The Alaska Department of Fish and
Game considers the Nelchina herd to be one of the State's most important
caribou populations.Hunters from Anchorage and Fairbanks participate
in the annual hunting of this species,and nonhunting recreationists
view the migrations of caribou as they cross the State's major highways.
2-8
In addition,the herd provides sustenance to predators and scavengers
such as wolves,grizzly bears,black bears,wolverines,lynx,and vari-
ous species of birds.
Moose range throughout the proposed project area.Populations have
been declining since the early 1960's because of loss of productive
browse habitat,increasing predator populations and several severe
winters.ADF&G estimates that the Susitna basin resident moose popu-
lation consists of between 4,000 and 5,000 animals (1977).Winter areas
are critical habitat for moose populations.During the winter months,
moose will concentrate in these areas where forage is still available.
However,forage availability is generally limited and moose are gener-
ally in a negative energy balance and under stress.Exact locations of
wintering areas are unknown;however,in general these animals depend
heavily upon the river bottoms and adjacent areas for winter habitat and
calving areas.This is probably because the depth,density,and hard-
ness of snow in coniferous and deciduous tree communities,are more
favorable to moose movements.The lower,spruce-covered reaches of the
Watana Creek valley,upper Tsusena Creek near Tsusena Butte,and in and
around the junction of Fog Creek and the Susitna River,are suspected to
be critical habitat for the majority of moose inhabiting this area
during a severe winter.The Tsusena and Deadman Creek valleys are also
suspected to be important wi ntering areas.
Grizzly or brown bears are common throughout the proposed project
area and are fairly numerous in the upper Susitna basin.Alpine and
2-9
subalpine zones are the habitats most frequently used by grizzlies,
although the more timbered areas are seasonally important.Grizzlies
are adversely affected by contact with man and are sensitive to aircraft
noise.Denning areas are critical habitat for grizzly bears;however,
none have been identified to date in the project area.Any denning
sites that would be present,however,would generally be on the upper
alpine zones and away from the areas of primary disturbances.
Black bears are fairly common throughout the forested and semi-
forested portions of the proposed project area.River bottoms,lake
shores,and marshy lowlands are favored black bear,habitat.Black bears
are not as adversely affected by contact with man as are grizzlies.
Dall sheep are present in many areas of the Alaska Range,Talkeetna
Mountains,and in the higher elevations of the Susitna River basin.The
greatest concentrations of Dall sheep in the Susitna basin occur in the
southern portions of the Talkeetnas;herds become scattered on the
northern portion of the range,where parts of the mountains are unin-
habited by sheep.Dall sheep are also found in the Watana Hills.
Because of the relatively gentle nature of much of the Talkeetna Moun-
tains and Watana Hills,predation in this area has more effect on sheep
numbers than in more rugged habitats.Sheep have always furnished some
of the diet of wolves and other carnivores in this area.Hunting
pressure for rams is fairly heavy due to relatively good access from
hi~hways,by air,and by ATVls (all-terrain vehicles).Sheep popula-
tions are almost entirely controlled by natural factors such as habitat,
2-10
2-11
Almost all species of fur bearers common to Alaska occur in the
proposed project area.Beaver,otter,mink,and muskrat are the most
prominent species in riparian and aquatic habitats.Wolverine,lynx,
coyote,red fox,marten,weasels,squirrels,and marmots are common in
upland forest and alpine habitats.Population levels and trends of
carnivorous furbearers are closely tied to prey species.
2.2.3 Birds
The east-west stretch of the Susitna River between the Tyone River
and Gold Creek is a flyway for waterfowl.The majority of the waterfowl
nesting areas in the upper Susitna River basin are on the nearby lakes
of the Copper River lowland region,on the Tyone River and surrounding
drainage areas,and on the ponds and lakes of the wide flood plain in
the Denali area.The upper Susitna River basin has a moderate amount of
use by waterfowl when compared with the lower Susitna River basin.The
lower basin has a substantially greater amount of waterfowl habitat,and
a greater number and variety of waterfowl seasonally use the thousands
of lakes and ponds in this area to nest and to raise their young.Large
numbers of migrant birds also use the lower Susitna River basin for
feeding and resting during spring and fall flights to and from Alaska's
interior and north slope.
Raptors which occur within the proposed project area include the
bald and golden eagles.osprey,red-tailed,Harlan's,rough-legged and
Swainson's hawks,marsh hawk,goshawk,sharp-shinned hawk,gyrfalcon,
and the great-horned,great-gray,snowy,hawk,boreal and short-eared
2-12
owls.Peregrine falcons have occasionally been sighted within the area
,an along migration routes through the Broad Pass area of the upper
Chulitna River,although no nests have been found.Nests are critical
to raptor populations and sensitive to human disturbance.Nests are
susceptible to abandonment if the disturbance occurs during the nesting
period.
2.2.4 Vegetation
Within the proposed project area are found six of the major vegeta-
tion ecosystems of Alaska.The lowland-spruce hardwood forest type is
found along the upper Susitna River and along the southern portion of
the Nenana River.The bottomland spruce-popular forest type occurs
adjacent to the lower Susitna Rivel~,and along the northern portion of
the Nenana River.The low brush,muskeg-bog type is found in isolated
locations in the extreme northern portion of the transmission corridor
near Fairbanks and in the southern portion of the transmission corridor
near Big Lake.The moist and alpine tundra types are found in the upper
Susitna River basin.
The exact location or extent of wetlands within the Watana project
area is unknown;however,wetlands present are generally of the sedge
fen and dwarf shrub peatland type.An evaluation of wetlands (and
permit authority for the discharge of fill material into wetlands)under
Section 404(b)(l)of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended
will be conducted by the Alaska District,Corps of Engineers.
2-13
Threatened or Endangered Species
The ohly animal species classified as threatened or endangered which
may migrate through or reside in the project area are the two subspecies
of the peregrine falcon:Falco peregrines ana tum (American)and Falco
peregrines tundrius (arctic).No inventory for threatened or endangered
plants is known to have been done in the project area;consequently,no
threatened or endangered plants are listed for this area.
2.3 CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS
2.3.1 Access
The Alaska Railroad runs from Seward through Anchorage and up the
lower Susitna valley.It crosses the Susitna River near Gold Creek,and
then runs past Mount McKinley National Park and on to Fairbanks.
Paved roads in this region include the 358-mile Parks Highway be-
tween Anchorage and Fairbanks,the 328-mile Glenn Highway connecting
Anchorage with Tok Junction,and the 266-mile Richardson Highway that
runs from Valdez to Delta Junction,97 miles southeast of Fairbanks.
The only road access through the upper Susitna basin is the 135-mile
gravel Denali Highway between Paxson on the Richardson Highway and
Cantwell on the Parks Highway,and the 20-mile gravel road from the
Glenn Highway to Lake Louise.The Denali Highway is normally not open
for use during the winter months.
Several small,remote landing strips are scattered throughout the
basin,and float planes utilize many lakes and streams to ferry freight
and passengers to the remote backcountry areas.
2-14
ATV's and other types of off road vehicles provide transportation
into areas in the upper Susitna basin where there are no developed
roads.Several trails exist which are utilized by ATV's,trail bikes,
hikers,horseback riders,and winter travelers.Of special note are two
trails proposed for possible use in this action.One is the trail built
by the Bureau of Reclamation in the 1950's.Constructed to support an
exploration program at the Devil Canyon damsite,it extends from the
Alaska Railroad at Gold Creek to Devil Canyon.The trail is currently
used over its western two-thirds to support mining activity.There also
exists a less well developed ATV trail that begins at the Denali Highway
near Butte Lake and heads southwest for about 12 miles before it fans
out into several barely distinguishable branches.This trail was used
in March 1978 to transport equipment to the Watana site.Two cat trains
were passed over the trail with some minor impacts,such as vegetation
damage.The trail was reseeded and fertilized at the end of the field
activiti es.
Shallow draft river boats,air boats,small boats,canoes,rubber
rafts,and kayaks utilize sections of ·the upper Susitna River,as well
as a few tributary streams,mostly above the confluence of the Tyone
River.
2.3.2 Public Use
The greatest constraint to public use of the upper Susitna River
basin is the shortage of road access.As a result,float planes are
used to fly in hunters,fishermen,and other recreationists to various
2-15
areas within the basin,but,except for a few larger isolated lakes,
this form of access is relatively minor.All-terrain vehicles and
snowmobiles also provide off-road access to areas within the upper
Susitna basin.Boats are used to some extent to provide access on the
Tyone River drainage and to areas of the Susitna River between the
Denali Highway and Devil Canyon.Much of the upper Susitna River basin
has very little recreational activity at the present time.Great dis-
tances,rough or wet terrain,and lack of roads limit use of most of
this area to relatively few people.
Though limited,the major recreational use of the upper Susitna area
is big-game hunting and associated recreational activities.The great-
est hunting pressures are exerted from a few fly-in camps,and from
areas along the Denali Highway.Most wolves and bears harvested are
taken during caribou or moose hunts.The increased use of ATV·s to
provide access and to haul big game is a significant factor in improved
hunting success,even in the face of declining game populations.The
mechanized ATV can penetrate deeply into previously inaccessible coun-
try,leaving few areas that provide havens for the reduced numbers of
caribou and moose.The hunting of Dall sheep,mountain goats,and
waterfowl is minimal in the upper basin even in areas of road access
such as the Denali Highway.
Access is again the major factor in determining areas that are
utilized in fishing for grayling,rainbow trout,whitefish,and lake
trout.The Susitna and Maclaren Rivers are silt laden throughout
2-16
r lSI II ~•
their entire courses during the warmer months of the year.Sport
fishing is limited to lakes,clear water tributaries,and to areas in
the main Susitna near the mouths of these tributaries.Sport fishing
pressure in the upper Susitna basin is light.Many lakes and some areas
of the river afford landing sites for float equipped aircraft.A few
clreas along the main Susitna and some tributaries,su~h as the TVone
River and Lake Louise,have some pressure from boat fishermen.An
increasing number of hunters use AlVis to get into and out of the
backcountry,exerting incidental fishing pressure in some areas.
Salmon have not been documented to migrate into the upper Susitna River
above Devil Canyon,so they are not considered a factor in the sport
fi shery of thi s area.
A minor amount of recreational boating occurs in the waters of the
upper Susitna basin.Some lakes,such as Lake Louise,have a heavier
amount of boating activity,and some rivers,such as the Tyone and the
Susitna,have a lighter amount of boating activity.Some kayakers
util ize portions of the main Susitna River,but very few have braved the
difficult waters of the Susitna through Devil Canyon.
Most camping use in this area is incidental to other recreational
activities such as hunting,fishing,boating,and highway travel.Most
other recreational activities in the upper Susitna River basin exert
varying environmental impacts on the area.Many activities such as
hi*.ing,backpacking,and photography take place incidentally to other
recreational pursuits such as hunting,fishing,boating,camping,and
driving for pleasure.
2-17
At the present time,recreation is one of the major uses of the
upper Susitna River drainage area,but the overall utilization of this
area by humans remains comparatively light.
Public use of the remainder of the project area (those portions of
the proposed transmission corridors outside of the upper Susitna River
basin)is somewhat heavier because access is made easier by the presence
of roads and the Alaska Railroad.
2.3.3 Historic Resources
The current National Register of Historic Places lists no historic
properties that would be affected by the exploration and survey program.
A historical-archeological literature review completed for the Corps of
Engineers by the Alaska Division of Parks (Heritage Resources Along
the Upper Susitna River,August 1975)indicates 11 historic sites
within the study portion of the upper Susitna basin.These are all
essentially related to the discovery of gold.I~ost of the early mining
activity occurred on Valdez Creek,where the town of Denali was estab-
lished.Nine of the sites are located in that general area.Two sites,
both designated as cabins,are located on Kosina Creek,one near its
mouth,and one about 6 miles upstream.
The Alaska Heritage Resource Survey (AHRS)lists several known sites
in addition to those identified in the 1975 study.A historic inscription
site with 4 names and the date July 2,1897,was reported at the mouth
of Portage Creek in 1976.The exact location of the site has not been
determined,nor has the site been fully documented.One of the names is
W.A.Dickey,who named Mt.McKinley in 1897.
2-18
Other archeological sites (AHRS #TlM-007)were reported on Stephan
Lake in 1976.The area was only briefly examined,but evidenced a
number of occupation sites.A cabin shown on USGS Maps at the south end
of Stephan Lake may also be historical in age.An aboriginal occupation
site with housepits has also been reported on Clarence lake,east of
Kosina Creek.
The apparent lack of historical locations between Devil Canyon and
the Maclaren River is explained by the following excerpt from the Alaska
Division of Parks'report (in discussing the first mapping of the area
in 1912):"Except for a few prospects on the Oshetna River,the USGS
never received any reports of gold being found on the Susitna between
Devil Canyon and the Maclaren River in significant quantities.Though
the Tanaina and Ahtna Indians did a great deal of hunting and fishing on
the river in this area,the white man found little gold,an almost
unnavigable river,and no reason to settle anywhere near the IDevil IS
Canyon.III Tanaina informants have reported a historic village site on
Stephan Lake called Titik'n;Jtunt,meaning "an imal tra"il goes out lake."
Their name for Stephan Lake is similarly rendered as TitiklniJtun Bena.
In 1898 Lt.Learnard,attached to the Abercrombie-Glenn Army exploration
expedition,encountered a Native caribou-hunting camp on what was probably
Prairie Creek,near Daneka or Stephan Lakes.About 1 mile away was a
winter village.Prospectors were also camped at the mouth of Portage
Creek.
2-19
A 1978 archeological survey conducted by the Corps of Engineers
resulted in the finding of one historic site.A log crib of unknown
significance was discovered at the Watana site.Archeologist Glenn
Bacon in his report "Archeology in the Upper Susitna River Basin 1978,"
states,lIRecent historic utilization of the area appears to be very
1 imited and probably insignificant.II
2.3.4 Archeological Resources
Archeological surveys conducted by archeologist Glenn Bacon for the
Corps of Engineers during 1978 in the Watana and Devil Canyon areas
resulted in the discovery of several previously unknown archeological
sites.These prehistoric sites are generally located on tops of small
hills and knolls and are probably associated with hunting activity.The
sites discovered have not been fully evaluated for nomination to the
National Register.
Although the extent of information obtained at the sites discovered
does little to improve the local archeological data base,the sites do
indicate that prehistoric use of the area "appears to have been con-
siderable."Prehistoric use also appears to span a long time range in
this region,and a C-14 date from one of the sites tested on Stephan
Lake yielded a date of 6000 years before present.
The National Register was consulted for sites within the proposed
transmission corridors.One site,the Dry Creek archeological site,in
the vicinity of Lignite,is near the northern portion of the proposed
corridor.
2-20
2.3.5 Land Use/Status
Lands within the upper Susitna River basin (Map 7)are essentially
in large block ownership with the majority under the control of the
Department of the Interior,Bureau of Land Management (BLM).These
lands are generally in their natural state and undeveloped with improve-
ments or land access routes.Air transportation is the primary means of
access to and within the area.There are some scattered small parcels
of land in private ownership as home sites or mining claims.Many of
these private parcels have no developed overland access.For the most
part,development in the area is concentrated along the established
tl~ansportation routes such as the Parks Highway and the Alaska Railroad
on the west and the Denali Highway on the north.
Because of the absence of roads and other development in the basin,
the area has high wilderness value potential.The area includes ap-
proximately 5 million acres of lands that show little or no sign of
man's presence except for fringe areas along established transporation
routes and isolated mining or recreational development.The area is
geographically located north of the most highly developed and populated
portion of the State.The transporta~ion links between Anchorage and
Fairbanks are the Parks Highway and the Alaska Railroad to the west and
the Richardson and Glenn Highways to the east and south.The Alaska
Range is a natural barrier on the north and the Denali Highway parallels
the range connecting the Parks Highway and the Richardson Highway to
fl:1Y'm an access system on the northerly side of the subject area.These
2-21
--.,----.-,_.----r---~_'"........._,,--__._""..._~_
transportation systems surround the area and make it potentially one of
the accessible wilderness areas in the State.
The wilderness characteristics of the area also inhibit use because
of the lack of transportation facilities.Given man's dependence on
motorized transporation and the severity of the Alaskan climate,the
area is simply too large to attempt entry without mechanization of some
sort.Since there are relatively few people whc have access to 3ir
transportation or long-range ATV's,the area's use by man is extremely
limited,and then primarily restricted to the fringes.Transportation
by water,that might otherwise be provided by the Susitna River,is
limited because of the natural barrier created by the extremely rough
water through Devil Canyon.Another factor that tends to limit the use
of the area as a wilderness is the wilderness characteristic of the
State as a whole.Wilderness conditions can be encountered within a few
miles of almost any development in the State,including metropolitan
Anchorage.
Much of the public land in the basin has been selected by Native
corporations under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA),P.L.
92-203,18 December 1971.These selected lands remain under the juris-
diction of BLM pending final conveyance of fee simple title to the
various Native corporations.Any use of these lands prior to conveyance
of title is subject to specific permission from BLM and the selecting
Native corporations.
2-22
The gross land area required for containment of the proposed Devil
Canyon and Watana reservoirs is approximately 157,440 acres.Of this
land,some 67,200 acres are to be conveyed to the Cook Inlet Region,
Incorporated (CIRI)for later reconveyance to various village corporations.
This transfer of lands is directed by a 1976 amendment to ANCSA,P.L.
94-456 and will include both the surface and subsurface interests.This
transfer also includes lands within Power Site Classification No.443
which was established in 1958 for potential future development of the
Susitna River for hydroelectric power production.
In addition to the lands discussed above,as many as 53,760 acres
have been selected for conveyance to satisfy any deficiencies that may
E~X i st in total acreage entitl ements under ANCSA.These "defi ci ency"
selections in the area have a low selection priority and,in all pro-
bability,will not be conveyed to CIRI on behalf of the village corpora-
tions.These lands have,however,been overse1ected by CIRI for its own
benefit and could conceivably be conveyed to CIRI.All Native and State
selected areas are subject to the wilderness provisions (Section 603)of
P.L.94-579,the Federal Land Policy and Management Act.
A portion of these lands south of the Susitna River (24,686 acres)
has been made available for selection by the State of Alaska pursuant to
the agreement titled "Terms and Conditions for Land Consolidation and
Il1anagement in the Cook Inlet Area l1 (Cook Inlet Land Swap Agreement).A
recent PLO draft indicates that the land north of the Susitna is also
selectable by the State upon final settlement of the Native claims
withi n the area.
2-23
Lands remaining after conveyance (of selected lands)to the State
would revert to a study classification wherein BLM could apply
its normal procedures to study the alternatives available for use of
uncommitted public land under Federal management.
Pursuant to P.L.D.5654,November 17,1978,lands along the Susitna
River upstream from Gold Creek near the Alaska Railroad were withdrawn
from all forms of appropriation and entry for protection of potential
wild and scenic river values.This withdrawal included all lands
withi n 2 mil es of the ordinary high water mark on each bank of the
river.This withdrawal was made subject to valid,existing rights and
interests in land within the boundaries of the included area.Much of
the land along the river is selected by CIRI corporation;therefore,
there is a valid,existing right to CIRI.
The above discussion of land relates to the proposed reservoir area
and does not account for lands necessary for access roads and trans-
mission line corridors.There are various alternatives available for
the location of these facilities and a discussion of land use and status
must be of a general nature.Generally,the lands immediately surround-
ing the proposed reservoir are as discussed above,i.e.,to be conveyed
to Native corporations.Lands to the west of the proposed project are
predominantly State and privately owned and are not subject to Federal
land management regulations.
2.3.6 Demography
The southcentral rail belt area of Alaska contains the State's two
largest population centers,Anchorage and Fairbanks,and 73 percent of
2-24
the State's total population.Population figures for 1976 show that
413,289 people live in Alaska,with 301,250 of these living in the
rail belt area.The rapid population growth of the past in Alaska is
expected to continue,especially in the railbelt area.With the pos-
sible relocation of Alaska's capital from Juneau to Willow,an addi-
tional population impact will be exerted on this area of the State.At
the present time,only a few small settlements are located along the
Parks Highway between Anchorage and Fairbanks and along the Alaska
Railroad in the Susitna River valley.Talkeetna,with a population of
about 300,is located at the confluence of the Talkeetna and Susitna
Rivers,and is an important tourist and recreation center.Except for
the small settlement at Denali,there are few permanent full-time
residents in the upper Susitna River basin above Devil Canyon.
2.3.7 Economics
The southcentral region of Alaska includes the Kodiak-Shelikof area,
the Cook Inlet area,and the Copper River-Gulf of Alaska area.The
southcentral rail belt area is that portion of the southcentral and Yukon
subregions that is served by the Alaska Railroad.Both Anchorage and
Fairbanks are regional economic centers for the southcentral rail belt
area.Government,trade,and services comprise the major portion of the
area's total employment.Construction and transportation are also
important.Making relatively less significant contributions are the
financing,mining,and manufacturing industries,while agriculture,
forestry,and fisheries contribute less than 1 percent of the employment
dollar to the economy of the rail belt area.
2-25
3,PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
3.PROBABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
3.1 ACTIVITY IMPACTS
The impacts discussed belDw are organized by the activities that
will be impacting the resource.Under each activity are listed the
physical,biological,and cultural resources which could potentially be
'impacted.
3.1.1 Support Facilities -Watana
3.1.1.1 Field Camp
Physical Resources Impacts.Impacts would be made by gravel pads
contained within a lO-acre area causing local erosion and sedimentation
of pad debris,interruption of natural surface flow patterns,reduction
in soil productivity,impact on permafrost stability of pad and adjacent
areas,reduction in scenic quality,and change in natural soil infiltration
rate.The pad could fill in wetlands,causing loss of production,and
,~ould reduce the wilderness character of the landscape.
Field Camp solid waste incineration could cause air quality deg-
radation,and solid waste burial could cause ground water contamination.
The proposed 5000-gallon treatment plant could potentially cause
thermal and chemical surface water contamination,chemical subsurface
water contamination,and soil/waterbody nutrient level change.
The fuel storage pit would lower visual resource quality and could
potentially cause chemical surface and subsurface soil and water con-
tamination in the event of a spill.
Structures on the pad wou'l d have a negative short-term effect on
wilderness.
3-1
Power generation would adversely affect the wilderness solitude and
degrade the air quality during the period of operation.
The camp in general with all its associated activities,would have a
significant negative effect on wilderness quality.
Biological Resources Impacts.The gravel pads would destroy all the
vegetation beneath them,and would decrease wildlife habitat propor-
tionately.Small mammals and possibly some nesting birds would be
displaced.
Operation of the field camp would adversely affect some wildlife and
possibly increase hunting pressure on game species and fishing pressure
on fish populations.
Sewage discharge in local lakes or ponds could adversely affect
resident fish and amphibians if present.
Cultural Resources Impacts.
identified archeological sites.
Pad construction could destroy un-
Positive economic benefits would result in that money would be
infused into the economy of Talkeetna in the form of lodging receipts,
local labor wages,and other increased expenditures in the community
during camp construction.
3.1.1.2 Alternate Field Camp
This action would have all the impacts of the proposed field camp on
physical,biological,and cultural resources,but the degree of impact
might vary slightly depending on its precise siting ...
3.1.1.3 Interim Field Camp
Since this field camp would be an interim measure,the impacts
discussed under "Field Camp"{3.1.1.1.}would still occur,but only
3-2
during the second through fourth years.
Physical Resources Impacts.Soil surface disturbance leading to
soil temperature disruption and localized erosion and sedimentation
could result.Trailers and facilities would have a negative short-term
impact on the pristine scenic quality.
Wilderness impact should be minimal in the long-term,but would be
dependent on the extent of revegetation required.
Impacts caused by fuel storage,power generation,and sewage dis-
posal would be similar to,but of less extent,than that discussed under
the field camp section.
Biological Resources Impacts.Some loss of vegetation would result
from shoring,foot traffic and vehicle activity.Operating the field
camp would have the same general effects on wildlife as described in the
field camp section,but to a lesser extent.This site has better
drainage than the proposed field camp location and thus is less likely
to impact wetlands or permafrost.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Unidentified archeological resources
are less likely to be destroyed under the interim field camp than under
the proposed field camp.
A positive economic impact could affect Talkeetna if this camp were
serviced from there.
3.1.1.4 Airstrip
Impacts are essentially the same for either the 5000 foot or 2000
foot airstrip;however,the magnitude of impact varies greatly.
3-3
Physical Resources Impacts.Impacts would include increased dust
(decline of air quality),localized surface water flow alteration,
erosion and sedimentation,major topography alteration,and soil surface
impact leading to permafrost degradation.
Scenic quality would be reduced.
Wetlands may be filled in depending on extent of wetlands and exact
placement of airstrip.
Wilderness would be significantly impacted,and is incompatible with
this activity.
Fixed and rotary wing air traffic would cause an increase in noise.
Biological Resources Impacts.Vegetation would be destroyed where
covered by gravel;a corresponding loss of wildlife habitat and dis-
placement of wildlife would occur.
Fixed and rotary wing air traffic would disturb wildlife in the
area.
The development of this airstrip could increase access into these
areas and increase hunting pressure on game species.This could pro-
bably have a long term impact on wildlife.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Access to the surrounding area would be
enhanced by creation of the landing strip for light aircraft,causing a
beneficial impact to recreationists.This same enhanced access could
lead to a negative impact on the surrounding physical and biological
resources.
Unidentified archeological resources could be lost by construction
of the pad.
3-4
Land use coul d i nCI~ease because of enhanced acce~)s by aircraft.
A positive economic impact would occur at Talkeetna or other port of
departure for aircraft.
3.1.1.5 Intrasite Trails
Physical Resources Impacts.Impacts would be change in surface
runoff pattern,increase in sedimentation and erosion,modification of
topography,surface disturbance,and soil temperature change leading to
permafrost degradation.
Scenic quality would be impacted adversely.
Wetlands may be filled in,depending on their location and the exact
placement of trails.
Wilderness would be adversely impacted by permanent landscape scars
not consistent with wilderness characteristics.
A possible positive impact would be lessening of the impact of
vehicular traffic over the landscape.
Biological Resources Impacts.Vegetation would be destroyed,
resulting in loss of wildlife habitat and a subsequent displacement of
vdldl ife.
Vehicular traffic would harass wfldlife in the area.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Unidentified archeological resources
could be lost because of pad construction.
3.1.1.6 Borrow Source (Upper Tsusena Creek)
Physical Resources Impacts.Surface flow pattern would change,
localized sedimentation and erosion would occur and landslides might
3-5
possibly occur.There would be major modifications of topography,soil
removal,soil temperature change leading to permafrost degradation,and
soil nutrient change.
Borrow site operations would increase particulate air pollution and
noise levels.
Scenic quality would be significantly reduced.
Wetlands could possibly be drained in the surrounding area.
Wilderness values would be adversely impacted by surface scarring.
Biological Resources Impacts.Vegetation would be removed,with
subsequent loss of wildlife habitat and displacement of wildlife.
Increased erosion could negatively impact the fishery resource in
Tsusena Creek.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Unidentified archeological resources
could be destroyed.
3.1.1.7 Alternate Borrow Source (Lower Tsusena Creek)
Physical Resources Impacts.Surface impacts would be similar to
those di scu ssed under "Borrow Source"(3.1.1 .6).
Impacts on visual resources would be greater than at the "Borrow
Source"because of visibility from the Susitna River.
Floodplains could possibly be impacted,depending on extent and
location of gravel removal.
Impacts on wil derness woul d be the same as di scussed under IIBorrow
Source.II
3-6
Biological Resources Impacts.Impacts to vegetation and wildlife
~Ioul d genera l1y be the same as those di scussed under IIBorrow Source.II
There may be greater negative impacts to moose in the short term (5
years)at this site because of loss of winter range.This impact may
become positive in the long term as vegetation favored for moose browse
comes in.
Fish may be impacted to a lesser extent here than at the IIBorrow
Source"(3.1.1.6)because of the nature of the already silty Susitna.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Impact on archeological sites may be
more apt to occur here because of the greater chance of sites occurring
here than in the proposed "Borrow Source.II
3.1.1.8 Haul Trails
Physical Resources Impacts.Impacts would be similar in nature to
those discussed under IIIntrasite Trails ll (3.1.1.5).Each of the three
routes,however,would have its own unique impacts.Alternative A,up
the side of the Susitna Canyon,would have the greatest visual impact
from the Susitna River and probably the greatest susceptibility to
erosion.Alternative B would cause a greater impact at the "Alternative
Borrow Source ll (3.1.1.7)because of the need for gravel.The trail to
the proposed "Borrow Source l
!(3.1.1.6)would probably have the greatest
chance of impacting wetlands.
Essentially,all three trails would have the same impact on wilder-
ne~s,that of permanent scarring of the landscape.Again,alternative A
has probably the greatest potential for detrimental impact.
3-7
Biological Resources Impacts.Again the impacts are essentially the
same on all three trails and the same as those discussed under "Intra-
site Tra il s II (3.1.1 .5).
Cultural Resources Impact.Impacts would be the same as under
"Intrasite Trails ll (3.1.1.5).
3.1.2 SITE ACCESS -WATANA
3.1.2.1 Winter Trail
Physical Resources Impacts.Impacts may consist of a change in
surface runoff pattern,change in soil temperature,change in soil
infiltration and acceleration of erosion,especially at stream crossings.
A minor impact on wilderness would probably occur during the first
winter of use,based on observations of last winter's effects.In the
second and succeeding years,however,that impact would probably in-
crease.
Biological Resources Impacts.Possible loss of vegetation and
changes in species composition may result.
Possible stress on wildlife could be induced during mobilization.
Cultural Resources Impacts.A ne~trail would be identified.The
effect of this identification to the general public could be to increase
visitor use and open up the backcountry to recreationists.
Use of the winter trail would require roughly 50 miles of the
Denali Highway to be opened to vehicular traffic during the winter.
This could have a positive economic impact for the local lodge owner
between Cantwell and Butte Lake.
3-8
-~-----
"
3.1.2.2.Pioneer Road
Physical Resources Impacts.Impacts anticipated are erosion and
sedimentation,interruption of natural surface flow patterns,change in
soil productivity,permafrost degradation,and widespread diffusion of
dust.
Landscape quality would be significantly reduced.
Wetlands could possibly be filled,depending on their extent and the
placement of the road.
The landscape would receive permanent scarring not consistant with
wilderness characteristics.
Biological Resources Impacts.Impacts would be the same as des-
cribed under lIIntrasite Trails ll (1.3.1.5)but would be of much greater
I:!xtent.
The development of this road would increase access into these areas;
it would increase hunting pressure on game species and therefore pro-
bably have a long term impact on wildlife.
Positive impacts would result from the reduction of air traffic and
subsequent reduction of wildlife harassment from aircraft.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Access would be provided to the general
public.This would positively impact the recreation potential of the
area.Other positive impacts are identified under lIPioneer Road ll in the
lIProposed Action and Alternatives ll section (1.3).
3.1.2.3 Erosion Control and Maintenance
No impacts identified.
3..9
3.1.3 SUPPORT FACILITIES -DEVIL CANYON
3.1.3.1.Fie 1d Cam p
Physical Resources Impacts.Impacts would consist of modification
of the topography and soil removal,to a minor extent.
Scenic quality would be moderately changed,as at the Watana Field
Camp,but to a lesser extent.
Wilderness would be impacted here the same as at Watana but to a
lesser extent.Facilities and structures would have virtually the same
impact here as described under the "Watana Interim Field Campll
(3.1.1.3).
Biological Resources Impacts.Impacts would consist of vegetation
removal and disturbance,wildlife habitat alteration,and a subsequent
displacement of wildlife.
Camp operations would have the same impact as that discussed under
the "Watana Interim Camp.II
Cultural Resources Impacts.Unidentified archeological sites could
be destroyed.
3.1.3.2 Alternate Field Camp
Physical Resources Impacts.Impacts would generally be of the same
type as with the "Field Camp"(3.1.3.1.),but to a much lesser extent,
with physical surface disturbance being greatly reduced.
Biological Resources Impacts.Impacts would be the same as des-
cribed in IIField Camp,"but again greatly reduced.
The increase of air traffic would also increase disturbance to
wildl He.
3-10
•:0 •
.-
..
Cultural Resources Impacts.Positive economic impacts could affect
private lodge owners if they were used as the source of lodging.
3.1.3.3.Roads and Trails
Physical Resources Impacts.Sedimentation and erosion can be ex-
pected.
Scenic quality would be altered slightly.
Impacts to wilderness are unknown.
Impacts to wetlands are unknown.
Biological Resources Impacts.Some vegetation would be removed,
and therefore some degradation of wildlife habitat could occur.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Access to the site would be enhanced,
and recreation potential could be increased.
3.1.4 SURVEY
Physical Resources Impacts.Vegetation modification could cause
short-term impact on wilderness.Brushed survey lines could reduce
scenic quality by forming straight lines.
Biological Resources Impacts.Minor amounts of vegetation removal
and temporary localized displacement of wildlife would occur.
Cultural Resources Impacts.No impacts have been identified.
3.1.5 HYDROLOGY
Physical Resource Impacts.Installation and use of stream gaging
stations and anemometers would cause a slight impact on soils and
visual quality because of disturbance of vegetation.
A minor short-term impact of noise pollution would affect the wild-
erness character of the area.
3-11
Structures would have a minor impact on scenic quality.
Biological Resources Impacts.Construction and maintenance of
stations could disturb Dall sheep and caribou dropping and rearing
areas,with a consequent impact on wildlife.
Cultural Resources Impacts.No impacts have been identified.
3.1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL WATER QUALITY MONITORING
(See HYDROLOGY,3.1.5).
3.1.7.RECREATION
Physical Resources Impacts.Helicopter overflights and landings
would have a minimal short-term impact on wilderness.
Biological Resources Impacts.Air traffic could temporarily disturb
wildlife.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Recreationists could temporarily be
disturbed.
3.1.8 FOUNDATIONS AND MATERIALS
3.1.8.1.Seismic Monitoring
Physical Resources Impacts.Scenic quality would be impaired in the
short-term,as would wilderness.
Biological Resources Impacts.Bi·ological impacts would be as
discussed under "Hydrology"(3.1.5).
Cultural Resources Impacts.No impacts were identified.
3.1.8.2.Access Road Studies
Physical Resources Impacts.Localized soil removal would result
fcom drilling.Possible degradation of permafrost,and surface drainage
3-12
disruption may occur from Nodwell traffic destroying vegetation.
Erosion may occur at stream crossings.A slight alteration of scenic
quality would take place,depending on the amount of erosion and des-
truction of vegetation.
Wilderness impact would depend on visual impact.
Wetlands might be impacted,if it were not possible to travel
a r'ound them.
Biological Resources Impacts.Localized disturbance to wildlife
could occur temporarily.Some vegetation would be destroyed.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Public use by ATV operators could be
increased.
3.1.8.3 Transmission Corridor Studies
Physical Resources Impacts.Soil disturbance would result at
drilling locations.
Floodplains and wetlands could be impacted,depending on their
extent and the placement of drills.
Wilderness would be impacted for a short term,depending on visual
impact.
Biological Resources Impacts.Some vegetation would be destroyed.
Local wildlife could be harassed by helicopter traffic.
Cultural Resources Impacts.No impacts have been identified.
3.1.8.4 Watana Site Geology
Physical Resources Impacts.Soils wouldreceive a minor impact.
3-13
--"I'?'!'I~""-_-""'---"'------.~-_
Flagging would cause an adverse visual and wilderness impact for a
short term.
Biological Resources Impacts.Wildlife may be disturbed by ground
activity and helicopter traffic.
Cultural Resources Impacts.No cultural resource impacts were
identified.
3.1.8.5 Watana Borrow Site Exploration and Testing
Physical Resources Impacts.Quarry Site A would sustain limited
soil disturbance from blasting and drilling,and a significant altera-
tion of scenic quality would result.Impacts would probably be visible
from the river and might significantly affect wilderness characteristics.
Quarry Site B would have limited soil disturbance from drilling
operations.Accelerated soil erosion,gully formation,and possible
permafrost degradation may occur.Scenic quality and wilderness may be
impacted.
Borrow Site C impacts are unknown at this time as plans to work in
this area are not identified.
Borrow Site D would have limited soil disturbance,ground water
mixing,soil profile mixing and an alteration of scenic quality.
Borrow Site E would have impacts similar to those on Site D.
Equipment operation and movement on and between sites would probably
cause the greatest impact to the surface.
Blasting in Quarry Site A may leave the site in a condition incom-
p~,ible with wilderness.
3-14
Vehicular movement,drilling and test pit excavation may impact
wetlands,depending on their extent and site location.
Floodplains could possibly be impacted at Borrow Site E because of
its proximity to the Susitna River.Erosion is more likely in the case
of Borrow Site E because of terrain and access problems.
Biological Resources Impacts.These impacts would be virtually the
same for all sites.Localized vegetation removal would occur.Ground
and air operations would have a moderate harassing effect on wildlife.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Ground disturbance could cause un-
identified archeological sites to be lost.
3.1.8.6 Watana Damsite Drilling and Trenching
Physical Resources Impacts.Localized erosion and soil disturbance
would result from drilling,drill movement by skidding,test pit ex-
cavation,and trenching.
Scenic quality would be altered by vegetation removal and soil
disturbance.Scenic impact would be observable from the Susitna River.
Wilderness would be impacted by the same operations that affect
scenic quality.Trenching may have a significant adverse effect on
wilderness.
Wetlands and floodplains may be impacted,depending on their extent
and the precise location of surface-disturbing operations.
Biological Resources Impacts.Vegetation would be destroyed.
Placement of equipment by helicopter would increase the amount of
timber cut ....
3-15
____,~~_II'I";------..
Wildlife habitat would be modified.Timber cutting would possibly
benefit browse species.Wildlife populations would be displaced while
operations were occurring.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Unidentified archeological resources
could be lost.
3.1.8.7 Watana Geophysical Investigation
Physical Resources Impacts.Localized erosion and soil disturbance
would occur from explosives and vehicle movement.A minor impact would
occur to visual quality and wilderness character.Wetland may be
impacted to an unknown extent depending on exact placement of equipment
and charges and the extent of wetlands.
Biological Resources Impacts.Vegetation would be destroyed and
wildlife would be disturbed locally.
Explosions may impact fish if they occur close to fish-bearing
waters.
3.1.8.8 Watana Features Design
Physical Resources Impacts.No impacts have been identified.
Biological Resources Impacts.Helicopter traffic may disturb
wildlife.
Cultural Resources Impacts.No impacts have been identified.
3.1.8.9 Devil Canyon Geology
Impacts would be the same as those identified under IIWatana Damsite
Drilling and Trenching l'(3.l.8.6)except that impacts from trenches and
terst pits would not occur.Rock from the tunnel and shaft could impact
3-16
•
floodplains by being placed on them after excavation.Additionally,
~/etlands,if present,could be impacted by rock fill.
3.1.8.10 Devi 1 Canyon Dams ite Dri 11 i ng
(See "Watana Damsite Drilling and Trenching"(3.1.8.6)).
3.1.8.11 Devil Canyon Aggregate Studies
Impacts on resources will be similar to those described for "Watana
Borrow Site Exploration and Testing l'(3.1.8.5).Impacts will probably
be less severe in nature,however,because they will be in previously
disturbed areas.
3.1.9 Design
No impact is expected from this specific activity.
3.1.10 Real Estate
No impact is expected from this specific activitiy.
3.1.11 Cultural Resources Studies
Physical Resources Impacts.Some soil disturbance could occur.
Biological Resources Impacts.Some vegetation could be destroyed.
Cultural Resources Impacts.Archeological sites identified could be
saved or salvaged prior to any potential surface disturbance.
3.1.12 Biological Resources Studies·
Physical Resources Impacts.Camps could have some impact on soils.
Aircraft could impact wilderness quality for a short term.Temporary
structures will be built in floodplains.
Biological Resources Impacts.Wildlife would be disturbed by
aircraft and biologists.Some loss of game animals can be expected
during big game studies.
3-17
___,__,,--'10_---_
Cultural Resources Impacts.Hunters could possibly be disturbed if
studies were occurring during season.
3.2 SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
This section summarizes the potential impacts on each resource that
would be affected,and identifies the cumulative impacts of all proposed
activities on that resource.
3.2.1 Physical Characteristics Impacts ~
3.2.1.1 Visual Resources Impacts
One of the most significant impacts of the proposed activity will be
related to visual quality,in that the activities will degrade local
areas within the upper Susitna River basin which presently show little
sign of man's presence.Areas along the proposed transmission corridor
will be less impacted because of the more numerous signs of man's
presence.
The foundations and materials and the field camp activities will
result in both short-term and long-term visual imapcts.Many of these
impacts can be minimized by redesigning,recontouring and reseeding
disturbed areas;however,the impacts cannot be entirely rehabilitated.
Signs of man's presence will be reflected in the fragile tundra vege-
tation for many years to come.Activities of less scope,such as
hydrology and survey,will cause visual impacts of a local and temporary
nature.
3-18
Major long-term impacts would result from the following activities:
l.Pi oneer Tra il
2.Airstrips
3.Field camp gravel pads
4.Intrasite trails and haul trails
5.Borrow sources
6.Borrow site exploration -blasting
7.Damsite drilling -trenches
In most cases,these impacts probably cannot be rehabilititated to
meet VRM Class II objectives.With proper mitigation,some degree of
rehab"ilitation is possible (see page A5-l8).The remainder of the
activities proposed will generally be mitigated,provided careful
management techniques are used.
3.2.1.2 Wilderness Impacts
Those impacts identified above as major long-term impacts in the
"Visual Resource Impacts"(3.2.1.1)section are essentially the same
impacts that would prevent this area from meeting the wilderness char-
acter requirements outlined in the BLM Wilderness Manual.
3.2.1.3 Air Quality
Aircraft and ground vehicles will cause minor temporary degradation
of air quality in the immediate vicinity of the field camp and drilling
sites within the project area.In addition,there will be some local
degradation attributable to portable powerplants,petroleum fuels
ut~lized for camp heating and cooking purposes,and particulate matter.
3-19
,-_--,~_IiII-...-----__,..--__-........--1
Air pollutants are expected to be minor and localized and will cease
with termination of activities and withdrawal of camps and equipment.
3.2.1.4 Water Quality
Wintertime activities will have essentially no impact on water
quality while soils and water surfaces are frozen.Water pollution will
increase during the frost-free months,although care will be taken in
field camp,airstrip,and trail construction to minimize this poss-
ibility.Threats to water quality will be almost wholly attributable to
introduction of mineral or organic soil particles caused by construction
activities and disposal of human waste.No other organic pollution
should occur.Fuels and chemicals will be stored and handled in a
manner designed to prevent entry into water courses.Solid wastes will
be disposed of by burning and/or removal from the area.Domestic
liquid waste will'be disposed of in compliance with Federal and State
effluent discharge standards.
3.2.1.5 Noise
Unavoidable noise will be caused by aircraft and ground vehicles
required to move personnel and equipment to and from the field camp and
exploration sites.This will be a source of periodically recurring
noise as these particular activities are engaged in.A more constant
source of noise will be related to equipment utilized in daily explor-
atoryactivities.However,this will be very localized,occurring only
in the immediate vicinity of the dam and camp sites.Disturbance to
humans will be limited primarily to workers associated with the project.
3-20
Additional disturbance will occur to the relatively few people expected
to frequent the area for other purposes,such as hunting,fishing,or
white-water boating.Impacts may be substantially more disturb-ing to
wildlife in the area.This is more specifically addressed in the
Biological Section.
3.2.2 BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS
3.2.2.1 Fish
Some unavoidable minor introduction of mineral or organic soil
materials may occur to streams as a result of gravel borrow,drilling
activities,and other actions which displace vegetation or disturb soil
surface.However,the proposed borrow source on upper Tsusena Creek is
the primary identified potential source of erosion that could affect the
fishery resource.No other sources of pollution are likely to occur,
,~ith implementation of the provisions envisioned for waste disposal,
effluent discharge and accidental spillage contingencies.The fishing
pressure exerted by workers on their off hours could adversely affect
the limited fishery resource.
3.2.2.2 Mammals
Disturbances associated with construction and use of the winter
trail and field camp,and exploration activities will have adverse
'impacts on large mammals inhabiting the project area.These distur-
bances will result from increased human activity,the operation of heavy
equipment,and low-flying helicopters.The disturbances will be great-
est in the Watana damsite area but will also occur to a lesser extent at
3-21
---,-_._---------------........._._-""'---------------------
the Devil Canyon damsite,along the access road corridors and along the
transmission corridor.
Disturbances to wildlife will disrupt normal behavior patterns,will
generate increased physiological stress and will force some species to
vacate areas of activity.Studies have shown that disturbances during
and immediately following birth can result in decreases in survival of
the newborn young in moose,caribou,and mountain sheep.During winter
periods disturbances of large animals can cause increased mortality
because animals are forced to expend more energy than they can consume.
Direct disturbances as well as physical disruption of habitat may
result in the displacement of large mammals from the areas of concen-
trated activity.Animals displaced from existing habitat may not find
suitable new habitat to support them in surrounding areas.It can be
presumed that mammal populations in adjacent areas are in relative
balance with their food and other habitat requirements and that no
suitable unoccupied habitat exists to absorb displaced animals.If this
balance does exist,displaced animals would be expected to succumb to
natural mortality or to displace other resident animals.This would be
of particular importance for moose populations.
Di spl acement ofwo lves from traditional hunti ng areas woul d pl ace
increased pressure on other prey populations in adjacent areas.This
could have long-term impacts,but to what extent is unknown.Local
populations of large mammals will be most impacted.
3-22
The reestablishment of large mammal populations within activity
alreas following the activity will be dependent upon the level and type
of disturbances which will remain.It is expected that large mammals
will eventually reoccupy activity areas;however s depending on the rate
of revegetation s their use of the areas may be diminished.This dimin-
ished use is not expected to be significant,because of the small size
of the areas.
Because of the limited research that has been done to date on the
behavior of wild animals,the significance of the disruption of behavior
patterns on the well-being of wildlife cannot be fully evaluated.Many
of the potential impacts will be temporary and will affect individual
animals or small segments of the populations.Some of the impacts,
however,may be far more significant,affecting basin animal populations
over long-term periods.The exact nature and degree of long-term impact
is unknown.
Small mammals will also be adversely impacted by disturbances
produced by the proposed activity;however,these impacts are not
expected to be significant.
3.2.2.3 Birds
Impacts to birds are expected to be minor.Noise and human activi-
ties may temporarily displace local populations of resident birds such
as ptarmigan and grouse and some species of summer residents,mostly
song birds.On the basis of presently known raptor use and populations,
these species should be minimally affected since population densities
3-23
-----,------------,...----........---------------------
appear to be low within the river canyon area.Waterfowl,whose use of
the canyon area is essentially limited to a flyway between the upper and
lower Susitna basins,should not be impacted.Direct habitat loss to
any bird species will be minor.
3.2.2.4 Vegetation
Plant life potentially impacted by the proposed action is charac-
teristic of six of the major vegetative ecosystems of Alaska.
Vegetation along the proposed winter trail is generally moist or
alpine tundra.Depending on snow depth,utilization of the 41-mile
winter trail could potentially destroy or damage vegetation along it.
Moist or alpine tundra would also be destroyed or damaged as a result of
the field camp and foundations and materials activities at the Watana
damsite.Some spruce and brush will also be cleared in the Watana area
as well as at Devil Canyon.
In general,the majority of vegetation clearing required will be to
facilitate access via helicopters.The dimensions listed below are a
guide to clearing required;however,site specific requirements may
alter the amount of clearing needed.
Class
I (Bell 206B)
II (Bell 205Al)
III
Rotor Diameter
40 feet or less
41 feet to 55 feet
56 feet to 75 feet
Clearing Diameter
75 feet
90 feet
110 feet
Additional clearing may be required at some sites to provide approach
paths for helicopters sling-loading equipment.
3-24
Limited clearing of vegetation will be required along the proposed
transmission corridor.
After individual activities are completed or at least after the
cessation of the proposed activites,all disturbed areas will be re-
contoured,reseeded,and fertilized as needed.
3.2.2.5 Threatened or Endangered Species
Threatened or Endangered Species
The only presently known threatened or endangered animal species
which might be found in the area are the American and arctic subspecies
of the peregrine falcon.These birds have been observed migrating
through the basin,although no known nesting occurs within the proposed
hydropower project area.Unless nesting is discovered to occur within
areas of immediate impact of proposed activities,there should be no
adverse effect on these birds.Should nesting be found to occur,
extreme care should be exercised in avoiding these sites.There are no
known threatened or endangered plant species occurring within the
proj ect area.
3.2.3 CULTURAL IMPACTS
3.2.3.1 Access and Public Use
Existing access to the project area will not be significantly
affected by the proposed activities.Construction of an airstrip at
Watana may result in some increased attraction to aircraft.This might
create some increased use by hunters,fisherman,and boaters,although
~he effect on surrounding areas would be negligible due to lack of other
3-25
----..--------------r-----------
forms of transportation.The proposed activities will have no signi-
ficant impact on recreational use of the project area.
3.2.3.2 Historic Resources
On the basis of the historical record of man's recent activity in
the canyon area of the Susitna River,there is no evidence of existing
historic sites which would potentially be affected by the proposed
activity.
3.2.3.3 Archeological Resources
The proposed activities are not expected to significantly impact
archeological resources which may be found within the project area.
Archeological surveys will be conducted before any activity which may
potentially impact archeological resources is allowed to proceed.If
archeological sites are found,exploration activities will be conducted
so as to avoid the sites.
Some preliminary studies were conducted by the Corps of Engineers
during the fall of 1978 at the Watana damsite to clear areas which would
be required for the proposed field camp,airstrip,and borrow area.No
archeological resources were discovered.
3.2.3.4 Land Use/Status
Most of the proposed activities are temporary in nature and minimal
in scope with respect to land use and status;however,the airstrip and
pioneer road would improve access in the long term.There is anticipated
to be no impact on land status.The proposed activities will increase
th~presence of man in the work area with a corresponding degree of
3~6
temporary pollution associated with his presence.Similarly,the
proposed activities are considered to be neither an attractant nor a
deterrent to customary use of the area.
3.2.3.5 Demography and Economics
Positive economic benefits may result,in that money would be
infused into Talkeetna in the form of lodging receipts,local labor
wages,and other increased expenditures in the community.However,if a
large number of workers from outside the area operate from Talkeetna,
friction between them and the local population could develop.
3-27
-,_._.__.._----------,---.-r!'r-r----''f'"'"----~------------------
4,RECOM'VlENDED ~1ITIGATING MEASURES
4.RECOf'v1MENDED r~1lTI GATING f'1EASURES
These are measures not included in the description of the proposed
action but recommended to lessen the project's impact on the environ-
ment.These measures are aimed at mitigating the impact of the discrete
activities on the environment beyond that described in the proposed
action.
These mi ti gati ng measures are 1i sted under a headi ng of "Genera 1 11
(4.1)when they are applicable to several proposed activities.Specific
mitigating measures are listed under the heading "S pec ific"(4.2)and a
subheading naming that activity which contains the action to be miti-
gated.
4.1 GENERAL MITIGATING MEASURES
4.1.1 Physical Resources
(1)Compliance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Executive
Orders 11988 and 11990 will require a wetlands inventory for the
project area and public notice of intent in advance of activities
which may alter or impact wetlands.Compliance with these require-
ments will identify practicable alternatives,and specific miti-
gation measures,including means for rehabilitation of disturbed
wetlands.Prior to satisfying the above requirements,all activi-
ties having the potential of affecting wetlands should be confined
to periods when the ground is frozen and snow cover is adequate to
protect vegetation cover.
4-1
(2)In areas where fill is required,fill should be placed over ex-
isting vegetation and be sufficient in depth to insulate the perma-
frost layer from thawing.Rehabilitation should proceed -immedi-
ately upon completion of construction.
(3)All access roads,trails,and skidding paths should have water
management as an integral part of the engineering design.All
activities should be performed to minimize erosion.Water bars
could be utilized to prevent rill and gully erosion.Upgrading of
the water bars should occur each fall to prevent erosion caused by
water flowing beneath the snowpack.
(4)All access road drilling should be done during the winter.There
should exist a minimum of 12 inches of snow on the ground with the
ground frozen to a 6 inch depth.
(5)Cut banks and exposed soils should be rehabilitated as soon after
disturbance as possible to prevent soil erosion.Rehabilitation
should consist of grading to contour,seeding,fertilizing and
mulching where necessary.
(6)A soil surface description and permafrost core should be required
for each proposed acre impacted by housing,trail or the airstrip.
This data would be used by the contractor to ensure that insulation
pad construction design prevents permafrost degradation.Design
plans for pads,trails.and the airstrip should be approved by BLM.
(7)The BLM Landscape Architect should be consulted at the planning
stage for all surface and vegetation-disturbing activities so
4-2
specific visual resource mitigating measures described in "appendix
A"can be implemented.
4.1.2 Biological Resources
(1)Sites where vegetation will be destroyed should receive clearance
for Federally proposed threatened and endangered plant species.
This clearance should be made by a botanist who is qualified.
(2)Sites where vegetation is destroyed should be rehabilitated as soon
as possible after impact.This should include grading to natural
contours,and establishing a permanent native vegetative cover.
(3)Daily access to work sites from camp area should be made by foot or
helicopter.
(4)Aircraft should stay a minimum of 1000 feet above ground level when
traveling between sites,when practical.
(5)All raptor nests must be protected.
A.No vegetation should be disturbed within 660 feet of any
raptor nests.
B.No disturbance should take place within 1/4 mile of any nest
during the nesting season (May to June).This includes ground
and air activities.
(6)If Peregrine Falcon nests are discovered,all activities within one
mile of the nest should cease and BlM should be notified immedi-
ately.
(7)All camp sites should be kept clean of food and garbage to avoid
attracting bears.
4-3
4.1.3 Cultural Resources
To prevent impacts to cul tural resources from surface di sturbi ,1g
activities,the following procedure is recommended:
(1)The Alaska Power Authority (APA)should engage the services of a
qualified archeologist,acceptable to BLM.BLM should be provided
a copy of the APA scope of work for their review and comment.BLM
should provide a voting member to the preselection and selection
boards.
(2)Prior to undertaking exploration activities,except the proposed
explorations in the river channel,the archeologist should examine
all areas where surface-disturbing exploration activities are
planned,as far in advance of those activities as possible.Where
deemed necessary,the archeologist should also be present on site
to monitor surface-disturbing activities that may reveal cultural
materials.If any evidence is found of cultural resources of
prehistoric,historic,or contemporary nature that may be directly
or indirectly affected by operations,the APA should be notified
immediately and such discoveries should be left intact.All ac-
tivities in the vicinity of such discoveries should cease until
avoidance or mitigation procedures acceptable to the BLM Authorized
Officer are undertaken and notice is given to proceed.
(3)The grantee or any contractor may not injure,alter,destroy,or
collect any site,structure,object,or other value of historical,
archeological,paleontological,or other cultural importance,
4-4
excepting the limited testing and/or collecting required by the
qualified archeologist for evaluative purposes.
(4)Any personnel who discover any materials that may be of cultural
significance on these lands must report their discovery immediately
to the APA.The APA would insure that such areas will be protec-
ted,and notify the BLM Authorized Officer.All activities in the
vicinity of such discoveries should cease until avoidance or miti-
gation procedures acceptable to the BLM Authorized Officer are
undertaken and notice is given to proceed.
(5)If cultural resources which might be eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places are identified within the area of
potential environmental impact,notice to proceed would not be
given until compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act is assured,as outlined in 36 CFR 800.
(6)A preliminary archeological report should be submitted annually by
January 1 to the APA Contracting Officer and BLM Authorized Of-
ficer.After allowing 60 days for comments,an acceptable final
report should be submitted to the APA Contracting Officer and BLM
Authorized Officer within 30 days.An acceptable field report
contains,at a minimum the following items:
(a)Identification of the Federal Antiquities Permit under which
the work was performed.
(b)Description of data review and field inventory methods used,
intensity of field inventories,the names of individuals
4-5
employed in the work,and the commencement and terminatio1
dates of field inventory.
(c)Identification of the project,and the BLM serial casefile
number,for which the report is being written.
(d)A general background discussion of cultural resources of the
area,as well as a brief summary of prehistoric and historic
use of the area,including sources of information utilized.
(e)Description of what work was done,including sources consul-
ted,areas examined,locations tested,photographs and other
records made.
(f)Identification and description,including drawings and photo-
graphs,of findings and an evaluation of their signifcance;
and whether such sites might be eligible for placement in the
National Register of Historic Places with specific citation to
qualifying criteria under 36 CFR 800.10.
(9)Site inventory records (BLM Form 8110 or other acceptable
form)completed for each cultural property inventory with
appropriate sketch maps of the site and base maps indicating
the location of each site.
(h)Suitable maps that clearly show all areas surveyed and all
locations tested and the intensity of survey and relationship
of cultural resources identified to the project.Minimum
acceptable base maps would be USGS 15-minute series quadran-
4-6
gles or best available substitute.Project blue prints show-
ing the relationship of the cultural resources to the proposed
activities are desirable.
(i)Catalog and descriptions of all cultural resource objects
collected and indication of where they are stored including
catalog and accession numbers.
(j)Identification of the probability of finding additional sites
in the project area and their probable significance.
(k)Identification of the probable direct and indirect effects of
the project upon known and unknown cultural resources.
(1)Professional recommendations to realistically mitigate the
direct and indirect adverse effects upon cultural resources
which may result from the project.
4.2 SPECIFIC MITIGATING MEASURES
4.2.1 Support Facilities -Watana
4.2.1.1 Field Camps
(1)During the design phase,BLM should assist in minimizing visual
impact through facility siting.ADO Landscape Architect's approval
should be required previous to construction.Facility siting
includes location of camp,pad design and structure location.
(2)Solid waste incineration should be in a low,smoke-type inciner-
ator,and accomplished so as not to degrade permafrost.
(3)All non-burnables and residue from incineration should be removed
to a state-certified sanitary landfill or buried in a well-drained
4-7
--_.,...,,-----------------,...,----_......."'............,."--<.........
site with sufficient well-drained,fine-textured subsoils to allow
for complete decomposition of waste leachate before it enters the
ground water table.Such sites must meet State requirements for
sanitary landfills and be approved by BLM.Sanitary landfill
procedures must be followed.
(4)Secondary treatment should be required for all septic waste.Every
attempt should be made to locate camp facilities on a site suitable
for an underground leech field.The site for such a leech field
and septic system must meet applicable Federal and State require-
ments.Pertinent certification would have to be obtained within 60
days of operation commencement.
As an alternative,incineration of "black wastes"can be allowed.
Gray wastes should be deposited in a subsoil leech field.
(5)No direct discharge of waste water into open waters or onto the
soil surface for any permanent or semi-permanent camp should be
a 11 owed.
(6)Burial of incineration wastes must meet State and Federal require-
ments and the mitigating measurements listed above.
(7)Around the fuel storage areas a fire break should be maintained
consisting of a bare mineral strip (top of dike)for a width of
approximately 3 feet.Fire fighting equipment should be maintained
on site,and an organized fire control plan should be developed.
4.2.1.2 Alternate Field Camp
See Mitigating Measures under "Field Camp"(4.2.1.1).
4-8
4.2.1.3 Interim Field Camp
See Mitigating lV1easures under "Field Campll (4.2.1.1)in addition to
the following:
Interim Watana and Devil Canyon field camp trailer and module
facilities should be limited to well-drained,permafrost-free
sites.No heavy equipment use should be allowed during breakup.
4.2.1.4 Airstrip
See Measures in "General"section (4.1).
4.2.1.5 Intrasite Trails
See Measures in 'IGeneral"section (4.1).
4.2.1.6 Borrow Source
Contractor should be required to submit a mining plan of operation
as per CFR Title 43,Part 23 Surface Exploration,Mining and Reclamation
of Lands.Sections of this plan may be adapted from presented EAR with
detailed information as required and with approval from BLM prior to
disturbance on site.
4.2.1.7 Alternate Borrow Source
See Mitigating Measures under "Borrow Source 'l (4.2.1.6).
4.2.1.8 Haul Trail
See Mitigating Measures under "General "section (4.1).
4.2.2 Watana Site Access
4.2.2.1 Winter Access Trail
(1)Route selection should be such that it generally follows the nat-..
ural land contours and follows as close as possible to to 'Winter
'78 cat trail.
4-9
-----,-_.~------"-"---------'""""'"-~-"..'-----------
(2)Minimum snow depth requirement should be 12 inches of fresh ;now
over the vegetation.Passes over a single track should be restric-
ted when less than 4 inches of compacted snow protects the vege-
tation and soil surface.Route selection should attempt to avoid
shrubs and trees.Soil should be frozen to a 6 inch depth.
(3)The routes should be flagged at quarter mile intervals in such a
manner as to be visible from a helicopter making low flights the
following summer.Snow depth and relative density should be mea-
sured and recorded at each quarter mile (refer to U.S.D.A.Snow
Survey procedures).Flags should be numbered,and measurements of
snow depths shall be referenced to these numbers.Biodegradable
flagging will be required and must be removed after use.
(4)No wheeled vehicles or tractors with blades down should be allowed.
A maximum of 10 psi tread pressure will be allowed for access
vehicles.
(5)Vegetation impact;i.e.,tree removal and so forth,should be held
to a minimum.
(6)APA is required to follow all stipulations presented for Winter 78
cat train.
(7)Complete rehabilitation of any disturbed areas should be required.
4.2.2.2 Pioneer Road
(1)During design phase,BLM will assist in minimizing visual impacts
through trail siting.
(2)Design should include surface runoff/flow management design:
4-10
culverts,settling basins,and diversions should be placed as
required,subject to approval by APA.
(3)Gravel should be placed directly over vegetation cover in perma-
frost areas whenever possible.
(4)Site selection should utilize the most favorable,well-drained,
permafrost-free site available.A submission would be required to
AOFR of transportation routes and alternatives previous to AOFR
notice to proceed.
(5)Water bars are required adjacent to road construction to facilitate
drainage and retention.
(6)Dust free materials should be utilized to the maximum extent pos-
sible.
(7)BLM Hydrologist approval should be required for design and place-
ment of all water management structures.Minor channel crossing
should attempt to avoid any extensive impacts.Settling basins
should be required to prevent sedimentation and transport of ma-
terials.
(8)Routing should follow general contours of the natural landscape.
Cuts and fills should be held to a minimum.
4.2.3 Support Facilities -Devil Canyon
4.2.3.1 Field Camp
See Mitigating Measures under "Interim Field Camp"(4.2.1.3).
4.2.3.2 Alternate Field Camp
See Mitigating Measures under 'IInterim Field Camp"(4.2.1.3).
4.~.3.3 Roads and Trails
See Mitigating Measures under "General"section (4.2).
4-11
4.2.4 Survey
See Mitigating Measures under IIGeneral ll section (4.2).
4.2.5 ....Hydrology
See Mitigating Measures under IIGeneral ll section (4.2).
4.2.6 Environmental Water Quality Monitoring
See Mitigating Measures under IIGeneral ll section (4.1).
4.2.7 Recreation
See Mitigating Measures under I'General "section (4.1).
4.2.8 Foundations and Materials
4.2.8.1 Seismic Monitoring
All vegetation and soil removal should be held to a minimum.Time
spent on each site should be held to a minimum and there should be a
minimum amount of helicopter bypass over each site.Daily access
should be limited to helicopter and foot traffic only.
4.2.8.2 Access Road Studies
(1)The possibility of running access road studies only during winter
with a minimum of 12 inches of snow cover and ground frozen to a
depth of 6 inches should be examined.
(2)All activities should be carried out in such a way as to minimize
soil and vegetation impacts.
(3)No major river crossings should be allowed without approval by BLM.
(4)Traffic should be limited to a single direction and one pass only.
(5)A detailed plan of operation should be approved by BLM previous to
commencing operations.We should require the soil profile des-
4-12
criptions from their access road studies.In addition,all hcles
excavated should be backfilled.
(6)Vehicle ground pressure should be limited to 3;5 psi maximum for
summer operations.All vehicles that will be utilized in this
access study should be approved by BLM previous to operational
commencement.
4.2.8.3 Transmission Corridor Studies
See Mitigating Measures under "General"section (4.1).
4.2.8.4 Watana Site Geology
All flagging should be removed after operations are completed.
4.2.8.5 Watana Borrow Site Exploration and Testing
Quarry Site A
(1)Major explosive rip test sites may require rehabilitation if
unconsolidated debris is removed or exploded from site.If so,
unconsolidated material should be stabilized immediately after
opening to prevent soil transport,erosion,and sedimentation in
the adjacent areas.
(2)Mobilization of drill rigs should be accomplished by helicopter
with minimal disturbance to vegetation.If helicopters cannot be
used,there should be no skidding of equipment parallel to the
slope.This will reduce the possibilities of initiating rill and
gully erosion.
!~uarry Si te B
Refer to IIQuarry Site A"(4.2.8.5)...
L1-13
Bo rrow SHe C
It is the recommendation of the Resource Staff at this time that no
activities take place at Borrow Site C.If it becomes evident that
investigations must take place there in a future time,then a plan
should be developed by the contractor and submitted to the Bureau for
review previous to permission to commence operations.Included in the
plan of operations must be access route identification and information
pertaining to that access route.This information is now lacking from
the EAR.
Borrow Sites D and E
(1)All drilling operations except for the test pit should be done in
the winter time on a snow depth of 12 inches and on ground that is
frozen for a depth of 6 inches.Test pit operations should be
allowed in the summer but utilizing only vehicles designed for
over-tundra traffic.These vehicles should be approved by BLM
before operations.
(2)All surface soils from test pits should be removed and stockpiled
for replacement.Rehabilitation procedures should meet criteria
listed under "General"subheading.
4.2.8.6 Watana Damsite Drilling and Trenching
Design the operations so that minimum erosion occurs,especially
with drilling waste.Prevent drilling waste from entering into adjacent
waterways.All vehicle transport,especially to the south abutment,
should take place during periods of snow cover or by helicopter ...
4-14
Skidding of equipment should be held to a minimum,especially perpEn-
dicular to the slope.Any evident tracks,which may become water
gullies,should have water bars constructed immediately after transport.
Minimize soil and vegetation removal.Minimize surface transport of
equipment.Vegetation should not be cleared to the soil surface;brush-
ing will be allowed and should be held to a minimum.
4.2.8.7 Watana Geophysical Investigations
Rehabilitation for all explosive holes must include grading to
natural contour,fertilizing,and seeding.All operations should be
designed to minimize disruption of soil and vegetation.No linear
clearing should be allowed.There should be no vegetation clearing in
long lines leading to checkerboard pattern.
4.2.8.8 Watana Features Design
See r4it i gat i ng Measures under liGen era 1 11 sect i on (4.1).
4.2.8.9 Devil Canyon Geology
See Mitigating Measures under IIGeneral ll section (4.1).
4.2.8.10 Devil Canyon Damsite Dr"illing
See Mitigating Measures under "Watana Damsite Drilling and Trench-
ing"(4.2.8.6),
4.2.8.11 Devil Canyon Aggregate Studies
See Mitigating Measures under IIWatana Borrow Site Exploration and
Testing ll (4.2.8.5).
4-15
---------------------
4.2.9 Design
See r~itigating Measures under "General"section (4.1).
4.2.10 Real Estate
See Mitigating Measures unde-r "General"section (4.1).
4.2.11 Cultural Resources Studies
See Mitigating Measures under "General'l section (4.1).
4.2.12 Biological Resources Studies
See Mitigating Measures under "General"section (4.1).
4-16
...
5.RESIDUAL IMPACTS
5.RESIDUAL IMPACTS
Residual impacts are the impacts remaining after recommended miti-
gation measures are applied to probable environmental impacts.The
following descriptions assume full application of recommended mitigating
measures.
5.1 RESIDUAL IMPACTS BY ACTIVITY
5.1.1 Support Facilities -Watana
5.1.1.1 Field Camp
(1)Visual impacts could be only partially mitigated.The field camp
while in place,would be a discordant feature in sharp contrast
with the natural landscape.
(2)Some local erosion,sedimentation and interruption of natural flow
patterns would remain.
(3)Waste incineration and power generation would result in a minor and
short term reduction of air quality and noise pollution,respectively.
(4)The potential for fuel spills and subsequent soil and water con-
tamination remains.
(5)Th~negative effect of the presence of the field camp on the
wilderness character of the area could not be totally mitigated.
(6)Vegetative cover and wildlife habitat covered by gravel pads would
be lost while the pads remained in place.
(7)Disturbance of wildlife as a reSult of field camp operations could
not be totally mitigated.
5.1.1.2 Alternate Field Camp
Residual impacts would be the same as for "Field Camp"(5."'1.1).
5-1
5.1.1.3 Interim Field Camp
(1)See residual impacts 1,3;4,5 and 7 for "Field Camp"(5.1.1.1).
(2)Human and vehicular activity in the vicinity of the field camp
would cause minor soil compaction and trampling of vegetation.
5.1.1.4 Airstrip
(1)Residual impacts 1,2,5 and 6 for "Field Camp"(5.1.1.1)would
also apply to the airstrip but would be greater because of t~e
larger land area involved.
(2)Noise,dust and activity associated with airstrip operation re-
sulting in wildlife disturbance and a reduction in wilderness
qualities could not be mitigated.
5.1.1.5 Intrasite Trails
Residual impacts 1,2,5 and 6 for "Field Camp,II (5.1.1.1)are
applicable.
5.1.1.6 Borrow Source
(1)Prior to reclamation,vegetation removal and surface disturbance
would result in a contrasting and discordant feature on the land-
~cape,causing significant reductions in visual and wilderness
qual ities.
(2)Particulate air pollution associated with operations could not be
totally mitigated.
(3)Changes in surface flow patterns and topography,some localized
erosion,and possibly permafrost degradation would occur prior to
reclamation.
5-2
,...
(4)Increased erosion could negatively impact Tsusena Creek fisheries.
(5)Vegetation removal would result in loss of wildlife habitat and
displacement of wildlife.Displacement would continue until the
site was rehabilitated and native vegetation re-estab1ished.
(6)Noise and activity associated IMith operations would disturb wildlife.
5.1.1.7 Alternative Borrow Source
(l)Residual impacts 1,2,3,5 and 6 for "Borrow Source"(5.1.1.6)are
applicable.
(2)Because of location,visual impacts could be greater for the
alternate borrow source than for the borrow source.The possib1ity
of negative impacts to fishery resources would be reduced.
5.1.1.8 Haul Trails
(1)Residual impacts 1,2,3,5 and 6 for "Borrow Source"(5.1.1.6)are
applicable to the proposed haul trail and alternatives.
(2)The type of residual impacts \'lOu1d be essentially the same for the
proposed haul trail and alternative.Because of the lengths and
locations,however,the level of impacts would be lowest for the
proposed trail and greatest for alternative A.
5.1.2 Watana Site Access
5.1.2.1 Winter Trail
(1)Some crushing and compaction of vegetation will occur.
(2)To the extent that the trail is visible after snow melt,a minor
reduction in visual quality will occur.
(3)A visible trail,left after snow melt,could attract DRV use during
periods of the year when surface damage would be much more severe.
5-3
(4)Minor disturbance of wildlife may occur while the trail is in use.
(5)Snow compaction by vehicles may cause temporary changes in surface
runoff patterns,changes in soil infiltration rates and accelerated
erosion,especially at stream crossings.
5.1.2.2 Pioneer Road
(1)The types of residual impacts would be essentially the same as for
the IIHaul Trails ll (5.1.1.8).The level of impacts would be greatly
increased due to the length of the proposed pioneer road.
(2)If open to the public,the pioneer trail would provide access to
areas that are now essentially inaccessible.
(3)Positive residual impacts would result from a reduction in air
traffic and subsequent reduction in wildlife disturbance.
5.1.2.3 Erosion Control and Maintenance
(1)The general effect of this activity is mitigation of negative
impacts associated with other activities.
(2)Negative residual impacts would include some wildlife disturbance
and reductions in air and wilderness qualities associated with use
of construction and maintenance equipment.
5.1.3 Support Facilities -Devil Canyon
5.1.3.1 Field Camp
Residual impacts would be similar to those listed for the Watana
IIField Camp"(5.1.1.1)with these exceptions:
(1)Old,existing improvements (airstrip,road and other surface..
disturbance)on this site would greatly reduce the significance
of the proposed activities on visual and wilderness qualities.
5-4
•
..
(2)The nature of the ground surface (sand and gravel)would signi-
ficantly reduce the impacts,associated with camp activities,on
soils and vegetation.
(3)Clearing of vegetation from the existing airstrip would improve
access to the site.
5.1.3.2 Alternate Field Camp
(1)A minor reduction in visual and wilderness qualities would occur
while the camp was on site.
(2)Helicopter movement of personnel and camp activities would cause
some wildlife disturbance.
(3)The potential for fuel spills and subsequent soil and water con-
tamination would exist.
5.1.3.3 Roads and Trails
(1)Scenic qualities and wildlife habitat would be altered as a result
of brush removal from existing roads.
(2)Vehicle movement would result in higher noise levels,slight
reduction in air quality and some disturbances of wildlife.
5.1.4 Survey
(1)Vegetation modification would!cause short tenn residual impacts to
wilderness and scenic qualities.
(2)Helicopter movement would result in increased noise levels,some
wildlife disturbance and minor reductions in air quality.
5.1.5 Hydrology
(1)Structures would have a minor impact on scenic quality.
5-·5
•..
(2)Placement of structures would result in very minor ground surface
disturbance.
(3)Residual impacts associated with helicopter movement are the same
as 3 under "Survey"(5.1.4).
5.1.6 Environmental (Water Quality)
No residual impacts identified.
5.1.7 Recreation
Residual impact 3 for "Survey"(5.1.4)is applicable.
5.1.8 Foundation and Material
5.1.8.1 Seismic Monitoring
Residual impacts are essentially the same as those listed under
"Survey"(5.1.4).
5.1.8.2 Access Road Studies
(1)Helicopter and surface vehicle movement and drilling activities
would increase noise levels,cause slight reductions in air quality
and disturb wildlife.
(2)Localized soil removal from drilling,compaction of vegetation and
possible permafrost degradation from ground vehicle movement would
reduce wilderness and scenic qualities.
(3)Creation of visible trails could attract other ORV users.
5.1.8.3 Transmission Corridor Studies
Residual impacts are essentially the same as those listed under
l'Access Road Studies"(5.1.8.2)except ground vehicles would not be
used.
5-6
•
5-7
5.1.8.6 Watana Damsite Drilling
Residual impacts are essentially the same as IIProbable Environmental
Impacts ll identified for the IIWatana Damsite Drill ing ll (3.1.8.6).
5.1.8.7 Geophysical Investigations
(1)Prior to rehabilitation.blasted holes would cause a minor reduction
in scenic and wilderness qualities.
(2)Clearing of vegetation would slightly reduce scenic values.
(3)Blasting and helicopter movement would result in wildlife dis-
turbance and minor reductions in air quality.
5.1.8.8 Watana Features Design
Residual impacts would be limited primarily to those associated with
helicopter operation.
5.1.8.9 Devil Canyon Geology
No residual impacts are identified.
5.1.8.10 Devil Canyon Damsite Drilling
Residual impacts are essentially the same as IIProbable Environmental
Irnpacts ll for IIDevil Canyon Damsite Drilling l'(3.1.8.10).
5.1.8.11 Devil Canyon Aggregate Studies
Residual impacts would be similar"to those described for IIWatana
Borrow Site Exploration and Testing ll (3.1.8.5),except these studies
would be in previously disturbed areas.
5.1.9 Design
No residual impacts are anticipated.
5.J.10 Real Estate
No residual impacts are anticipated.
5-8
..
l Q I •...'
5.1.11 Cultural Resources Studies
Minor soil disturbance and vegetation removal would occur.
5.1.12 Biological Resources Studies
Residual impacts are essentially the same as those identified for
"Biological Studies"under IIProbable Environmental Impacts "(3.1.12).
5-9
,;;"...1 .....,.toO
6I RELAT IONSH IP BEThlEEN SHORT-TERM USE AND LDNG-TERM PRODUCTI VI TY
..
'~~www_,-----------'!""'"'""""'-.....,,-_iz_---------
6.RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USE ANn loNG-TERM PRODUCTIVIT'
For the purpose of this environmental assessment,the short-term is
defined as being that period of time in which the proposed activities
will occur.The long-term is that period of time in excess of the
short-term.
The potential for long-term environmental impacts as a result of
short-term activities does exist and is recognized.These long-term
impacts may reduce the biological productivity within the project area
over the long-term;however,the exact nature or extent of such reduc-
tions is unknown.For example,increased human activity and improved
access may disturb wildlife,particularly large mammals such as wolves,
caribou,and moose.It may be that these disturbances will cause short-
term changes in distribution;however,the relationship of these changes
to long-term productivity is unknown.
While the biological productivity of the area may be reduced over
the long-term as a result of short-term project activities,other types
of productivity may be increased.The proposed activities will increase
scientific knowledge of the area,which will aid in making future use
decisions about the area.Improved access to the area may increase the
recreational use of the area as well.
Additionally,this area has a high wilderness potential.Those
particular activities identified under "Wilderness Impacts"(3.2.1.2)
would adversely affect this potential in local activity areas.
6-1
7,IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRE-rRIEVABLE CoM~ITMENTS OF RESOURCES
'-~ir-4 -~,4 ----------------
7.IRREVERSIBLE AI~D IRRETRIEVABLE CoMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES
Perhaps the greatest potential irreversible or irretrievable com-
mitment of a natural resource is related to land use.If not conducted
in such a manner as to substantially reduce or minimize environmental
impacts,the proposed activity may commit the lands within the project
area to a use which may not have been in the public interest.For
example,construction of roads or gravel pads or other wilderness-
degrading activities may exclude the area from wilderness consideration.
If the Susitna Hydropower Project is considered unfeasible,the lands
within the project area will be returned to as near a natural state as
possible.
Those irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources which
would result from the proposed project include the expenditure of fossil
fuels and labor.
7-1
8.CONSULTATION AND CoORDINATION
8.CONSULTATION AND CoORDINATION
8.1 PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT ANALYSIS
To identify the level of interest in the proposed action and allow
public review of the draft Environmental Assessment of the proposed
action,public meetings were held in Talkeetna (January 17)and Anch-
orage (January 18).In addition to the public meetings,written com-
ments were solicited.
At the Talkeetna meeting,34 people registered,with 11 giving
verbal comment or asking questions.Some 50 people registered at the
Anchorage meeting,with 23 giving verbal comment or asking questions.
A total of 93 written responses to BLM's request for public comment
were received as of February 12,1979.
Fifty-one responses from individual citizens and twenty-five from
representatives of organizations or agencies favored the proposed ac-
tions as described.
Eighteen of the 93 written responses gave specific comments or
recommendations,or expressed concerns about the proposed actions and
Environmental Assessment document.Many of these comments deal with
similar or common concerns.The final Environmental Assessment has been
revised to address these comments.The following paragraphs summarize
the primary comments or concerns and indicate where they have been
discussed in the text .
..
8-1
Impacts
Several of the comments received identified additional impacts that
should be considered.It was also stated that the draft assessment fell
short in identifying impacts.
The section on impacts (section 3.)has been expanded to include the
additional impacts identified.Some of these are:increased aircraft
harassment of wildlife (section 3.2.2),and wildlife habitat alteration
(section 3.2.2).
Alternatives
A comnent made by several people was that a larger array of alter-
natives for carrying out the proposed actions should be identified.
Therefore,several additional alternatives have been identified (section
1.).These deal primarily with alternative locations for various sur-
face disturbing actions and alternative ways they can be carried out.
Formal Environmental Impact Statement
Eight responses specifically asked,for one reason or another,that
a Formal Environmental Impact Statement be prepared.Their reasons are:
the proposed action is a major Federal action;it will cause irreversi-
ble and irretr4evable impacts.The actions are a segment of the larger
Susitna Dam projects.
BLM Comments:
The decision to prepare or not to prepare a Formal Environmental
Statement is not addressed in this final Environmental Assessment docu-
ment.This document identifies impacts,alternatives,environmental
8-2
consequences,and mitigation measures.It will be used to help decide
on the final actions to be allowed and whether those actions require a
Formal Environmental Statement.At this time a decision has not been
made to prepare or not to prepare an Environmental Statement.The
comments received requesting that one be prepared will be considered
when that decision is made.
Inadequate Review Time
Severa 1 comments stated that they di d not recei ve the documerit in
time for adequate review.Their comments were received and considered
up to the final date of printing this final document.Is is believed
that by taking comments up to the last minute, those people who expres-
sed this concern were able to get comments in.
Anchorage District Office of BLM will go on taking comments or
consultations on a continuing basis.
Land Status
Several people expressed a concern over the legal authorities BLM
actually has to permit actions in the various complex land status situa-
tions occurring in the area of the proposed action.
BU4 Comments:
The land status is indeed complex,with many laws and land orders
affecting BLM's authorities in the area.These land status concerns are
discussed in an expanded section,"Land Status"(section 2.3.5)and
displayed on Map 7.The interpretations on the effect of this status on
3-3
BLM authorities was arrived at through consultation with the U.S.D T.
Soliciters Office and BLM's Washington Office.
For example,recent interpretations on the effect of Native selected
lands on BLMls wilderenss review responsibilities have stated that
wilderness regulations will apply to those lands until actually conveyed
to the Native interest.
This will significantly limit the types of surface-disturbing ac-
tions that BLM can permit.
Wild and Scenic River
The effect on the proposed action of the Public Land Order 5654
designating the Susitna River a Wild and Scenic Study River should be
clarified.
BLM Comment:
This is another land status question of concern to the public.A
discussion of this question is in the section on "Land Status"(section
2.3.5).
Wilderness
One comment stated that BLM's wilderness requirements must apply to
the area even though the lands have been identified for selections by
the Natives and/or the State of Alaska.
BLM Comment:
This is discussed in the section "Wilderness"(section 2.1.4).
8-4
·
Wetlands and Floodplains
Concern was expressed that the wetland and floodplain determinations
and necessary consultations required to carry out certain actions have
not been done.
BLM Comment:
An expanded discussion about these concerns is in the section on
"Existing Environment"(section 2.1.5),and the section on "Impacts"
(section 3.).
Cost Analysis
Several comments requested that a cost analysis be prepared for the
feasibility study and the larger dam projects themselves.
BLM Comments:
An analysis of the economic feasibility of the large Susitna Dam
project is not considered a part of BLM's responsibility.
APA has indicated that the information to be obtained during the
feasibility study will be used to perfect the existing economic feasi-
bility analysis of the project.
~uthority and Funding for Feasibility Study
Three comments stated that the authority between the Corps of En-
gineers and Alaska Power Administration and funding arrangements to
carry out the feasibility study should be clarified before BLM permits
any actions.
8-5
BLM Comments:
The legal arrangements between the COE and State of Alaska to carry
out the proposed feasibility s"tudy is not considered a decision criteria
of BLM's.Whether the COE acts as agent for the State of Alaska in
carrying out the proposed actions or whether a private contractor acts
as the agent,BLM will hold the State of Alaska (APA)responsible for
living up to the terms and stipulations of land permits.
8-6
A
8.2 ~ARTICIPATING PUBLIC
Follow-ing is a list of people who submitted pUblic comment.
John A.Abshire
219 East International Airport Rd.
Anchorage,AK 99502
Alaska Association of Realtors
1818 W.Northern Lights Blvd.
Sui te 104
Anchorage,AK 99503
Alaska Gas and Service Company
3000 Spenard Road
P.O.BOX 6288
Anchorage,AK 99502
Alaska Village Electric Co-op Inc.
4831 Eagle Street
Anchorage,AK 99503
Charles and Nancy Bale
Box 61
McKinley Park,AK 99755
Beau Bassett
S.R.A.Box 477-M
Anchorage,AK 99507
David D.Barce
3818 West 63rd
Anchorage,AK 99502
Copper Valley Electric Association
Glennallen,AK 99588
Blyth Eastman Dillon &Co.
555 California Street
San Francisco,CA 94104
Howard Breene
3317 Checkmate Dr.
Anchorage,AK 99504
8-7
William R.Carlson
5346 Wes t 73rd
Anchorage,AK 99502
Davi dE.Ch2ss,
President,Building Trades
510 L Street
Suite 105
Anchorage,AK 99501
Roger Crosby
S.R.A.Box 1745E
Anchorage,AK 99507
Debbie Daugherty
S.R.#5231
Wasilla,AK 99687
Dawes &Moore
Suite 310
510 L Street
Anchorage,AK 99501
Dean Witter Reynolds Inc.
45 Montgomery Street
San Francisco,CA 94104
Devil's Canyon Corp.
P.O.Box 283
Anchorage,AK 99510
Mike Easley
3337 Upland Drive
Anchorage,AK 99504
Rick Eiben
7040 Abbot Loop Road
Anchorage,AK 99507
Fairbanks North Star Borough
Box 1267
Fairbanks,AK 99707
James J.Fitzpatrick
1010 West 11th,#1
Anchorage,AK 99501
Keith Freeman
Cooper Landing,AK 99572
Fes R.Gentry
283 Muldoon Road,Box 2
Anchorage,AK 99504
Goldman,Sachs &Co.
55 Broad Street
New York,N.Y.10004
Ralph W.Gnad
4110 DeBarr Road,#9-F
Anchorage,AK 99504
Virigina Gnad
4110 DeBarr Road,#9-F
Anchorage,AK 99504
Golden Valley Electric Association Inc.
Box 1249
Fairbanks,AK 99707
Greater Fairbanks
Chamber of Commerce
550 First Avenue
Fa i rban ks,AK 99701
Arlene Haggstrom
5833 Denali
Anchorage,AK 99502
Karl E.Hansen
513 East 15th Ter,#4
Anchorage,AK 99501
David L.Harper
P.O.Box 4-895
Anchorage,AK 99509
Harza Engineering Co.
150 South Wacker Drive
Chicago,Ill.60606..
8-8
C.C.Hawley,Executive [irector
Alaska Miners Association
8740 Hartzell Rd.
Anchorage,AK 99507
Craig B.Hazen
SR3 Box 30585
Fairbanks,AK 99701
Patricia E.Huling
610 West 54th
Anchorage,AK 99502
\
Ed Kareen
SRA Box 1560-K
Anchorage,AK 99507
K1aa sA.Ka re1s
6003 Acheson Lane
Anchorage,Ak 99504
Ketchikan Public Utilities
P.O.Box 7300
Ketchikan,AK 99901
Hans Koski
SRA Box 1300-D
Anchorage,AK 99502
J.R.Lasater
P.O.Box 2125
Anchorage,AK
J.W.Lasater
Box 4-1923
Anchorage,AK 99509
James N.Malapanes
P.O.Box 579
Wasilla,Ak 99687
J.A.Marks
1281 West 82nd
Anchorage,AK 99502
Pete Martin
Denali Citizen Group
Michael E.Massin
3900 West 72nd Court
Anchorage,AK 99502
Chrisulla Mathis
Box 4-1737
Anchorage,AK 99509
Colleen Matthews
SR 5231
Wasilla,AK 99687
M,ark Matthews
Mile 6 1/2 Fairview Lp
Wasilla,AK 99687
William Matthews
5230 Fairview Loop Rd.
Wasilla,AK 99687
C.~1.Mayo
3808 Carolina Drive
Anchorage,AK 99503
lJ.D.Meyers
;~91O Willow St.
Anchorage,AK 99503
r4unicipa1 Utilities System
645 Fifth Avenue
P.O.Box 2215
Fairbanks,AK 99707
H.W.Ni c ho 1s
2200 Glacier Street,#106
Anchorage,AK 99504
Maryan Noble
P.O.Box 174
Wasilla,AK 99687
Northwest Public Power Association
131 0 Ma inS tree t
P.O.Box 1307
Vancouver,WA 98666
8-9
Marjorie Beth O'Brien
3202 Oregon Dri ve
Anchorage,AK 99503
Robert J.O'Brien
3202 Oregon Drive
Anchorage,AK 99503
Curt Pa 11 dorf
Box 10797 South Station
Anchorage,AK 99511
Richard M.Pittenger,
Executive Assistant
Alaska Chapter,A.G.C.
P.O.Box 4-2500
Anchorage,AK 99509
William E.Powers
General Delivery
Talkeetna,AK 99676
Wi 11 i am Prazo k
1003 Wes t 53rd
Anchorage,AK 99502
Bernard K.Queen
9499 Brayton Drive,#214
Anchorage,Ak 99507
Marvin R.Rader
SRA Box 73R
Anchorage,AK 99507
Resource Development Council
for Alaska,Inc.
Box 516
Anchorage,AK 99510
Sheila Rhine
6152 East 12th
Anchorage,AK 99504
Robert Ri s1ey
SRA Box 148-B
Palmer,AK 99645
Rural Alaska
Community Action Program,Inc.
P.O.Box 3-3908
Anchorage,AK 99501
Robert Rutherford Association
P.O.Bo x 6410
Anchorage,AK 99502
Richard Scruggs
P.O.Box 3054 D.T.
Anchorage,AK 99501
Roberta Sheldon
Talkeetna,AK 99676
John Simmons
P.O.Box 852
Anchorage,AK 99510
Sitka City and Borough
P.O.Box 79
Sitka,AK 99835
Smith Barney,Harris Upham &Co.
350 California Street
San Francisco,CA 94104
Thomas R.Stahr
6967 Laser Drive
Anchorage,Ak 99504
State of Alaska
Dept.of Commerce
&Economic Development
338 Denali Street
Anchorage,AK 99501
State of Alaska
Dept of Natural Resources
323 East 4th Avenue
Anchorage,AK 99501
State of Alaska
Department of Fish and Game
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage,Alaska 99503
8-10
State of Alaska
Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities
4111 Aviation Avenue
Anchorage,Alaska 99503
State of Alaska
Office of the Governor
Pouch AD
Juneau,AK 99811
Carl H.Steeby
9271 Campbell Terrace
Anchorage,AK 99502
Michael Stewart
1200 West Diamond Blvd,#1110
Anchorage,Ak 99502
R.John Strasenburgh
P.O.Box 171
Anchorage,Ak 99510
John Stuart
Box 1572-K SRA
Anchorage,AK 99507
Eugene Svetc
3244 LaTouche,Apt 1-15
Anchorage,AK 99504
Robert Swetnam
Roger ~~.Thiel
8516 Hortzell Road
Anchorage,AK 99507
Trustees for Alaska
835 0 Street #202
Anchorage,Ak 99501
U.S.Dept of Energy
Alaska Power Administration
P.O.Box 50
Juneau,AK 99802
.'
U.S.Dept.of the Interior
Fish &Wildlife Service
Anchorage,AK 99502
u.S.Dept.of the Interior
Heritage Conservation &
Recreation Service
1011 East Tudor
Anchorage,AK 99502
Donald P.Wagner
SRA Box 169
Anchorage,AK 99502
Wohlforth &F1int
645 G Street
Anchorage,AK 99501
8-11
9,PARTICIPATING STAFF
9.PARTICIPATING STAFF
The following people participated in the preparation of this
Environmental Assessment.
Bureau of Land Management
Anchorage District Office
..
Pat Beckley
John Bosworth
Jim Halloran
Mike Hinkes
Pete Jerome
Jane Mangus
Kevi n Meyer
Dennis Money
Andy Morris
Lou Wall er
Alaska State Office
Lou Carufel
John Hopkins
Gary Seitz
Corps of Engineers
Fred Anderson
Phil Brna
Dennis Hardy
Chuck Bickley
Al Wylie
Ch.,Branch Lands &Minerals
Environmental Planner
Geologist
Bio.Technician
Landscape Architect
Writer -Editor
Soils Scientist
Wildlife Biologist
Archeologist
Ch.,Branch Biological Sciences
Fishery Biologist
Economist
Environmental Coordinator
Civil Engineer
Environmental Resource Specialist
Civil Engineer
Structural Engineer
Civil Engineer
.----...---......-.._~--------------,.ru--·~-___r-_Fi,-,""~-.....-·-·------,II-------------
ApPENDIX A
ScENIC QUALITY RATING UNITS
----,.,,-------....-------r..,-"...-
__-------....Al;J.O.e.tllJ.l.j~----------..
..
I ..'V"
*",,,........
..
......~~."..,-.
,<it:"~\,,"..,~:"."'\',
:,~I ..:·.:"._.~.
!."";..,
..',..",...
..:"J.;"
r'
~...
\;"-
;'.~';:'..
,r
",~.....
',_''I '-~'.
QUALITY RATING UNITS
UPPER SUSITNA RIVER (Segments Shown)
BROAD PASS DEPFlESSION
FOG LAKES UPLAND
A-l
District Anchorage
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Date
1/30/i;)
SCENIC QUALITY FIELD INVENTORY Planning up,it l'Bl kuena1oc
Scenic quality rat ing unit
Upper Susitna River
1.Evaluators (names)
Jerome
r
2 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER (Feature)-
a.LANDFOR~,I/WATER b.VEGETATION c.STRUCTURE(G~emU
::E Steep canyon dissected by rlver;-Unfform blocks trom pro Tso1ated blOCKS from~
tx.lateralcanvon dissected bv creeks;strate sQec;es,vert;c~Jield camp during surnlTl~
laentle rollina hills on plateau~elements Tsprucer-alo~q of 1978.
canyon walls.
\i:l LE-'lilt-'ina linAS creatpd bv line of Meander lines between Very 1i mi tecrrfne of~
..J \"i VP\"£1 nn <;t.rpi'lms.soecies type.vehicle trails from
previous activities.
~Predominantly veqetative colorations High variable ranging Variable on tleld camp-
hinh rlpnr pp nf variation.from tan.brown to dark s 1 te._.....,,-
..J
0 lareen.u
\i:l Ic:::n1r\nth nn ClPD tl e slopes with sharD Lattice texture to Smooth~
:;l lirY'PntJbr hlnrkc:.'llnnn coarse texture.~><IlA/A 1 1 c:'hi n h -'--()f \I A r i .'l t i ()n\i:l
I-<
3.Narrahve
This river valley has extremely high scenic quality due to the unique rapids through
Devil IS Canyon.Presently,a two mile wide river corridor has been withdrawn under
Sec.204(e)of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act.The Talkeetna Mts.of
the Denali Planning Block have been classified "N 'Scenic Quality.The river
valley will qualify as both a "wilderness area ll and also an lI area of critical
environmental concern".Irreverisable modifications by development will impact
existing visual resources.
Form 8400-1 (Scptcmucr 1978)
U.S.Government Print;,,\(O££k.'·l !J7 H.77!J.:I()~11\\A-2
e cr IIC Quail!)Rallng (ninJa III 1JL.\t ,\lm/llal Src11011 8411
4.SCORE (Circle 1l!I/'ropriate Level)*
~}~~kiI~r~Kj{gW~ftt:tf;?f1tltjjfilfWfft HIGH MEDIUM LOW EXPLANATION OR RATIONALE
.
a.Landform (5 )3 1 Steep Canyon SCENIC QUALITY
b.VegetatlOn 5 (3 )1
CLASSIFICATION
c.Water (21 3 0 Class V raoids [ZZ]Class A -19-33d.Color 5 (3 )1
e:-litlluence ( 5)3 -
0
f.Scarcity (6 )2
Un i ml~---l'Jh ilil·JQte.LLi~[J Class 13 -12-18
1 One of the wilic.sLAl £1 <;k.'l
~tural Modification 2 (0 )---4 \~ili.er~[J Class C -11 or less
TOTALS 21 +6 t 0 =:27
.-..-
•Se S I )
Lakes
OjITanc
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF TilE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
SCENIC QUALITY FIELD INVENTORY
1.Evaluators (names)
Date 2/12/79
Distric
~_.--J..llll.<llDra.g.\:.._
Planni~uni(.81 k__u_ena 11 DC
Scenic quality rating unit
007-A65====,==~=L~=1=k=e~~t¥Jj_9
Jerome
2.LANDSCAPE CHARACTER (Feature)
a.LANDFORyl/WATER b.VEGETATION c.STRUCTURE (General)
~I.-i\-n-o-r~t-'-h-e-as-t~-~t-r-e-n~d~lng area of15road MeaV"1Vtlml)e-rea 1 n
~....olling summits 3,]00-4,500 feet in ~i:!..iQ~e_s_wit.~str_~!p None appare--'--.n--'--.t _
altitude which has a qlaciallv species in UPland areas
sculptured surface in t~h~e_s~o~u~t~h~w~e~s~te~~I~lr~'----------~--------__~
Dort'ion but unglaciated in the
l10rtheas tern QQ,--r-"..t'-,--,'o""n..!...!.'---+--l---__'-----_
Anqu'!ar.slopinq topoqraphic lines Irre~r,undulating
~horizontally alonq willbw
None apparent
"_r-+-+-:;e.::d~pointed,jagged
.lines from conifers.
5 Va ria b1e-pre dam ina nt1y ve 9e ta ti 0 n Hi.9 h1y va ria b1e'"-c-t,...a'-'.n;-',_--;--+-_--'N:...:..o::....:n..:..:e=----.:a::.J:lP:..r:11p:..:::a:..:..r-=e~n_t::_
'0 ro1o L,",-at-l.<.lu·o.LJ.n.L.-.__.~b--'--r-"'o-w'-'--'-'-n..L,_v'--'e=--l'--l'-'o......\v.-'·.L-::t'-"'o--::od-"'-a--'-r-'-'-k+-.__
U Green
~Smooth on gentle slope,course on
B sides of drainagesx
ClJ
I-
Mottled clusters in willow
patches,lattice to
course texture in spruce
forest areas.
None apparent
The Fog Lakes Upland represents a physiographic area within the Talkeetna
Mountains.The Upper Susitna River cuts through the center of this region.
Road access to and from both damsites (Watana and Devil Canyon)as well as
some development activities are proposed in this area.
SCENIC QUALITY
CLASSIFICATION
4.SCORE (Circle Ap!iToprilltc Lel'cl)*
fttJr:@}r@i::SM&1t{::i:t:titt:I::)HIGH ~lEDIU~l LOW EXPLANATION OR RATIONALE
a.Landform 5 (31 1
b.Vegetation 5 (3 ) 1
[]Class C -11 or less
[J Class B -12-18
A-3
c.Water'(5)3 0 Several small drainages in [!;29ClassA-19-33
d.Color 5 (.3)--1---+---area
e.Inf1u~nce 5 J.3T-+-------,,-o---t--------------1
f.Scarcity 6 ---r 2l 1
§.CUlturn}",\l()dificatio11_!=L.~J 0 ,,===-=4==,==='c~=c='=============1TOT~LS I_~+14 +a =21
===:===.~============~::========:.::.=====--=
•See Seerlic Quality Rattrl[:Crrl~rra I>l HL,11 ,Ij<lt",al SectIOn 8411 Form 8400-1 (September 1978)
U.S.Government Printin~Officl'-1978-779-309/l1'.
Febr~ary 12,1979
District
Date
Plannipg unit
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF LAND 1\1ANAGEMENT
SCENIC QUALITY FIELD INVENTORY
1.Evaluators (names)
Jerome
arent
c.STRUCTURE (General)
None apparent
tilCl:t'-'"'-"-'-I..l-U--'--'-V-I-J'-----------------t-'--L.>./Clll---""'-LL..>------"',L>lCll.!-~~'--'----'___"_"'__f_----------
;:ll-<t---------------------t--'"u.L...-'-l.J.!~~~.>...L'-'--+------------
~lSnlOCltil..-O +-J.+=-U..-t-C-~-U_4.Lc;:>_O__--l-J..L<.U-'ll"---l'-=--i_='_'
l-<
~o t-""-L-""""-'--'~
tt.f-LJJ""'-'-"'-1...LJ."'---'--~
a.
stream None apparent~1---;;---:--=-'-=~===:":'-=-'--'-"-,-,,----'----"--'--=":""----:;:~---=-"'::"":"""'::"":"""-'---+-'-=,--'-=---'----'--'-'--;--'7--T'---.~-'-'----,--+----...!.-.!..-------
...:l !-,-L!..'"""-"'~---E'=::J~:...L-X-'-----'--=-=..c"--"---"'--=~"'--=-'=----+___-----------
8 r-------------:---=-------=----t-;';--;-.:-.:~--::-~..=..r:;...:_;::_:;_=~~d_=_:;~+...:..:...:__;_:_-----_,_---a Jarent
3.N arrati ve to course texture in
spruce forest areas.
The Broad Pass Depression region will be traversed by the proposed Pioneer Road.
The proposed road will leave the Denali Highway north of Butte Lake and follow
the Deadman Creek drainage up to the Susitna River.
4.SCORE (Circle A/'/Jro(!riatc Lc!'el)*'
~!t:tn:rtgE::w:f:!:r::;:{:::@M;grJJt~_~C'!!._~IEDEJM LOW EXPLANATION OR RATIONALE
a.Landfor~5 3 1
b.Veg,etation 5 3 -;-1---+---------------1
c.Water 5 3 0
-:-----c-------~--__If_4~-<-----------------------ld.Color 5 3 1
.e.Influence _S@J.__0c:-__l _
,f.Scarcity 6 -L;.L _L I-_--------....--4
~Cull~tr[j~~lodifi5:a.!.ion~~J=0 __:4 __---------------
TOTALS __J 2 t l_~_1 0·---::==1=9=
SCENIC QUALITY
CLASSIFICATIO N
[Z]Class A -19-33
o Class B -12-18
o Class C -11 or less
•See Scr'nic Q"i/lity Rat"'~C"terw '"BL,II Mar"ud Section 8411
A-4
Form 8400-1 (September 1978)
U.S.GOI'ern]]}cn!Prln!ing OfficI"!~f71l.77lJ-3()~lil;
UNI I ".1 1 .'I f\.l t·,,)
DEI'i\I~T\lrrH Ul 'J Iff.INTERIOl(
mmEi\U OF Ll\I'\D MANAGEMENT
VISUAL CONTRAST RATING WORKSHEET
2/13/79
District
Anchorage
Plannin(!;unit -_.-~~---------
Dena 1i Blod
SECTION B.CHARACTERISTIC LMWSCAPE DESCRIPTION
--
l.Project name 2.Critical viewpoi:1t number 3.MFP Step III Vl~M class
Pioneer Trail Overhead N/A
4a.L()~~TIO~___b.LOCATION MAP
I
~-------~-_._------
TOWNSlIlP RANGE SECTION
119S ------1---RlW----··---.--------------------~
T20S R2W
T21S R3W N/A See proposed activity map in EAR
T22S R4W
13211I R5E
T66~'nl:'r"
Activity
_.===-=o==~_~~~=~5u~~i t~~_.F ~asj_~lJi_Y .S.t~.c:IX=[~
SECTION A PROJECT IN FORMA TION
See "S cen ic Quality Field Inventory,"page Al,A2,A3,A4
.OOi'-A62
.OOi'-A65
Broad Pass Depression
Fog Lakes Upland
Upper Susitna River
SECTION C.PROPOSED ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
(Refer to BLAt Manual Section 8131 lor proposed descriptions and requzrements)
~I Introduction of block form and steep angles by cut,fills,stream crossings,
~etc.on rolling landscape.
Introduction of straight line of road will contrast with pointed and curvilinear
lines of the landscape horizon.
0::t---+-------~-----------------.--------------------
tIl l<l
I-<z~::i
'--Cl r---ocr:~----------------------------------------
j ~I Interruption of color of natural rock faces
....--~-------------_._--_._-----------------------
'l<l
><p,:~~Introduction uniform gravel overlay on fine/smooth surfaces
~p,:~Rectangular interruption of irregular forms of vegetation clusters
..
z r--+
I
-------------------------------------------------------
S ~!Creates long stretches of straight lines in contrast with undulating edge
~:5 I lines of vegetation clusters
~~I ------------------
~~I Changes shades of green/yellow to shades of brown/tan
N -~+---------------------------------._
~E!Changes variable,tufted coarse patches to uniform gravel texture
1-0 1
I:;!
p,:1 Blocks created by areas of cut and fills~1
rn ~i-------·-----------------------------------------------------------
w,W I~!~:41 mile line generally following topography
1-<1
~1---~r-------------------------------~------------------------
~LS'Tan/brown
___~se.~r~-~-:-l-(;O~:~o~-~~~i:;~~~)-.---------
F'-----<-------------~
SECTION E.REDESIGN,STIPULATIONS,MITIGATING MEASURES
SECTION D.CONTF;:J\ST R/'ITING [J SHORT TC:F~M [X'I LONe,TERM--.-_.
FEt\TUf,ES 1<1.-~l<lxjmum clement cO;'itr~lst_._--_._--.",--_.'.-_._--_._....-.._-_._..._-~._..__..-
DEGREE LAND/\\'j\TER VEC;ETATlON STl~UCTURES
UOllY (2)(3)Assumed VRM Class II Moderate(I)
""l "~;nrJ r-.----_._----"._-~----_._----
OF
>(b.Maximum feature contrast';:(8-r-.8-
';:("r-.r-.
8 8 >("<J ::-1 s ~I OJ 1"-<S OJ ..-<S~MI~I'-'I "'cC '-'Assumed VRM Class II -12tJ1bIJ...
CONTRAST c:Q """"§~!~i Q)c:OJ -'<OJ
;;"0 ~I c:c:~"0 '"c:
0 0 &.0 .a I GJ I 0 0 OJ 0 2.Does project design meet visual resourcer;,:2'::::i z rn !';E !:::!Z (f)~::::z
..-I---management requirements?[JYes [XJ No
Form (4x)12 J~~.2 12(8)i 4 :0 12 (~4 °II rt "(or il rating~no,IS over maximum
f--..I---(~-~3t 0
e--..
Z Line (3x)9 6mO (~6 3 0 alloll'aMi')rC'dC'sigll project 171 sec t ion r:.,
~I I i
~:-r--+concentrating 071 leaturC'/clemC'nt of gr('atcst
W Color (2x)6 4 (2)I 0 6 1(4)!2 I °6 (4)2 0 contras t.II contrast acce/'lablC',t Xu s...l ISw..2-tiD-ro 3~f1TO (2)doC's not prelude additional mitigating meas-2exture (Ix)3 3 1 0
=t ___....l4 J ._~23 ures;propose as stipulations.[/nd list 171
TOTALS 23 section E._.
-----_._---
Because of the strong line that would be created by the proposed 41 mile Pioneer
Trail,realistic mitigation measures would not reduce visual contrast enough
to conform to VRM Class II objectives.
A-6
2/13/79)'F['.-\lU\\I·:\[['Iii::!i-:'1!-I~J(jI~
1l1l1~r:\U OF LJ\~;I·~.1i\Ni\GEMENT
VISUAL CONTRAST RATING WORKSHEET
District
____An ~b9rag~_
Plullning unit
Dena 1L 1iLO_CL.
Activity
_Sus itJELE~Ci~j.J~JJ1y StudY~,IAA.:::.::=:::=:::--.:...:.:.:...~_-=..-~---'=-----=-="':-_~---====-=------~----::":::::"--::'=----=:::;---::'_-====-====-~~~--=---~=
______________----=S::.:E~C_::.T"__'l:.::O:.:.N~A.:..,.rcF.-.:JROJ E CT INFO RMA T 1_'-2..!i.-~-------------------
1.Project name 2.Critical viewpoint number 3.MFP Step III VI~M cbss
Overhead
See proposed activity map in EAR
SECTION B.CHARACTERISTIC LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION
See "S cen ic Quality Field Inventory~"page Al~A2~A3
007-A65-Fog Lakes Upland
-Upper Susitna River
SECTION C.PROPOSED ACTIVITY DEseRI PTION
(R eler to B L·II Manua 1 Sectioll 8131 for proposed dC'scriptiolls and requi rC'rllC'nts)
Coverage of exposed rock outcrops with tan/brown gravel overlay
Sharp straight lines in opposition to undulating horizon lines
250~OOO cubic yds.of gravel fill to landscape creating flat
block with short~steep angled slopes.~Addition of
~rectangular
P:;i-----------------------------------------------------
W lU
I-<Z
<l;-~..l
C;f-~o<:~------------------------------------------
z 0
<l;..l
.-l 0
u
'w~~Coverage of smooth exposed rock outcrops with course gravel overlay
f-<f-<
:;:
~Rectangular interruption of irregular forms of vegetative clusters
tx.
shades of green/yellow to shades of brown/tan
-~--_._-----------------------------~---~-----------
variable~tufted coarse patches to uniform gravel texture..
~f--~--+l--c-r-e-a-t-e-s-s -ha-r-p-s -t-ra-,-'9-h-t-l-i-n-e--s-i ;~o~~~-s-t-·-w-i-t-h-u n-d-u~l-a--t-i-ri-g-e d-g-e-l-i-n-e-s-o-f-----
~~i vegetation clusters.
tIl 0<:'--------------------------------------
<..'J c I
W .J [
:x3~rChanges
~:J Changes
f-<I
i;:;:
~i 200Q'/5000 'X 150 1 rectangular block
Vl c---t-------------------------------------·---------------'--------------
l1.l!w !~I 3 :Straight with sharp right angles
f-<I :g ~tl:-t----------------------------------------------------------
c.:I 0 .~I ~I Tan/brownJ~--~------------------------------------------~-------
,~~coarse gravel
___...............f-<l--,___
SECTION D.CCNT,~U\ST r';:A TI NG
---,--------------_.....
SHORT TEF~M [XL ONG TERM
~l]1
(/J
OF
DEGREE
CONTRAST
---------,---------------------------~-,._--c-__:---~-----------------FE!lTur~l:s 13.MaxImum clemen;contrnst
~---------,,-------_._-------_...----------------
LAf"n/II'ATER VEGETATION STRUCT\H~ES
B~WY (2)(3)Ass umed VRM C1 ass II -Modera te
Z --illd.'1-"'J'fJ;;1 ~--b-:-M3-;;;;~um -f~~;j~~-c-;~t-r3;t---------~_-X ~~X ~~
III ..::;8 M OIX ><8 \lJ >.:8]::";:]I::~:~I ~':'As s umed VRM C1ass II - 12
:2 ~,~,.~.E!]i 1 z§E II ]I .~I z§2.Does project design meet vjsll~d rcs-;ur,~......~~(f)!oc:tl ......~r:.n ~~---<--
management requirements?lTes :)::X j\(I~IF~rm (4~_(12 ~~_~~_:~)I,~,0 (12)18 i 4 J~If "no,"(or if rating 15 O/'CT !Id!).1!!iiir'1
_~lLine (3x)9 (6)3 10 9 !~)..3 i 0 9 (6)3 0 all(Jluable)redesign projecl ITl secliu"r,
::;:~,--r--------:;------j-----r-::-conccntrating on fcatllrcle!clflC7lt [)/grnatcst~1~~(2x)6 4 1(2~6 I~)!2 ~~6 (4)2 0 contrast.If contrast IS acccpta/J!c,Ibis~ITexture (Ix)3 2 (1)i 0 3 1~)i 1 J 0 3 L~(1)I 0 docs not prf'lude additional mitigating ":('(1<;-
==ures;propose as stipulations,and /iSI in
___T_O_T_A_L_S_--,---C ~__?O _T 23 sC,,:,(.=·t..o.:ic,--)n~/;-=--.---:-:-:--_
SECTION E.REDESIGN,STIPULATIONS,MITIGATING MEASURES
Because of the strong form that would be cteated by the proposed airstrip~,realistic
mitigation measures would not reduce visual contrast enough to conform to VRM Class
II objectives.
nEl'!lln~ll::'\l'(11 ,ilF INTLl,;IOI,;
13U1,;E:\U OF L\N1I \;\NM;Fi\IENT
VISUAL CONTR!,ST RATING WORKSHEET
2;'13/79
District
_An~'!lOrage
PI<l1l11illg uni~
Denali Block---------
Activity
Susitna Feasibi '_ity Study EAR
--------------------...:::::---~~--==-=
-1.ProjC'ct name
SECTION A.PROJECT Jii.F0RM'~'2L~_~_
2.Critical viewpoint number 3.MFP Step III VEM class
Field Camp Gravel Pads Overhead N/A
b.LOCATION MAP4a.LOCATION--~~--------,---------~--
-T3::WN~"p--I-:::'~I ::'i:::~
I
!
See proposed activity map in EAR
SECTION B.CHARACTERISTIC LMWSCAPE DESCRIPTION
See "Scenic Quality Field Inventory".page AI.A2
.007 -A65 -Fog Lakes Upland
-Upper Susitna River
SECTION C.PROPOSED ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
(Re[er to B LA!Manua!Sertioll 8131 [Qr propo sed desrriptions and requi remen!s)-.
::;:IExact configuration is unknown.it is assumed that several rectangular blocks
~
0 ,will be situated on smooth.rolling site
l>.
0::
ttl w~~«Introduction of short straight lines on curvilinear topography
~..J,
Q~_tE (minor)~8 Interruption of color of rock out-crops
'w I~~IIn::roduction of uniform gravel overlay on fine/smooth surfaces
f-<f-<I
::;:!
Cl:Rectangular interruptions of irregular form of vegetation clusters0
l>.
Z
0 w Creates several short stretches of straight lines in contrast with natural edget::;z;
«J !lines of vegetation clusters.~
ttl t.:r.:J G iChangesttl•.J shades of green/yellow to shades of brown/tan:>0u INI-----t---------_._-------------------
I
'w I~~Changes variable.tufted coarse patches to uniform gravel overlay
f-<l-o'
I
::<,
Cl:i Se\Te4al rectilinear blocks created for construction pads0
l>.!
1----t---------------------------------------------------------
Ul ,
ttl w ;Short0::1::straight lines with right angles
:J .J !
IXI L.ONG TD~M
Assumed to be VRM Class II -12
Assumed to be VRM Cl.BS 3 II -Moderate------------_._------=-
b.Maximum feature contrast
l "j SHORT TERM
-:-;-;------;-------
(3)
~,.,
~~,.,
l<s 2 .....
~~
htl
C ill "'"0 -0 '".:::0 "tJ)2:is
SECTION D.CONTRi\ST RATING
l<
~~><~
C ill
,.,
rn ::
tl1 ...
C ill "'"i~-0 rn
0 ill ,
tJ)2:;;:;
OF
CONTRAST ill~1"-2:-.--:D;:::-o-e-s-p-ro-j:-c-c-:-t--=d-c-s7'ig-n-n-l-ee-'t-·-,-:,j-s-u-a7t-r-e-s-o-u-r-c-e'-
-l)management requirements?[J Yes U(J No
Form (4 )12 r 8 4:0 12 f"g I 4 0 12 "8)4 0
tJ)xl.':......If "no,"(or if rating IS over maximum
ELine (3x)9 6 '3''\1 0 9 i 6 ,01 0 9 :§)3 0 allowable)redesign project in section E,
~Color (2 ) 6 4 '2 I'0 6 ~)2 0 6 4-2 0 concentrating on fe'ature/':delnent of greatest
...:I x U _~.contrast.If contrast IS acceptable,tbis=~=,=IT=ex=t=u=r=e=(==lx==)==!==3~==2~~!!ool~IT~io=~'==3o=,l-'::~~~)!=l~=-O==!3 ~1 0 does not prelude additional mitigating meas-r-I ~===,!,!","::====='===t ures;pro/lOse as sti/Julatiolls.and list 111
____T_O_T_A_L_S__L 14 17 __-----1 20 ~:-:::-~~-:-'s=-=e':-'c:::':t.o.:io:.c.n===E-'-._-,--_
SECTION E.REDESIGN,STI PULATIONS,MITIGATING MEASU RES
----'---'-'--'-''------------
Because of the moderate amount of line and form that would be created by the ~roposed
gravel pads,it may be difficult to meet VRM Class II objectives.The following
stipulations may accomplish a high degiee of mitigation;
Management Objectives:
1.VRM Class II -Changes in any of the basic elements (form,line,color,texture)
c~used by the management activity should not be evident in the characteristic
landscape.A contrast may be seen but should not attract attention.
2.Reduction of form and line created by gravel pads.
a.break down sharp edge of pads to meet irregular lines of natural contours.
b.,feather edge of clearings surrounding pads to conform to natural vegetation
lines.
c.create natural seed bed by returning as much available overburden as
possible to site.
d.removal of certain pads that may display excessive visual intrusion.
e.submission of clearing plans for approval and feedback prior to site
disturbance.
f.coordinate implementation of clearing plans with BLM landscape
architect or designated representative.
A-10
DEPi\Jn~lFl\'T ()\1111:IN'j'El\I01~
Blll\E;\U llF Li\Nll ili!\Ni\C;EMENT
2/14/79
District
_Anchorage,
N/AOverhead
VISUAL CONTRAST RATING WORKSHEET
..-_.__._---._------_.=~=
Planning unit
Denali B1C'ck~'----
Activity
,===__._-~=~-----SUc§Ltn~f~~~jjJ_~1 i tY,Stl!9XE.8R
______________---:S:::;E::..<C:::.~..:..T::...:IC::..:)N~A"C...,P_.:...:.ROJ ECT INFO RMA TI 0 N
2.Critical viewpoint number 3.MFP Step III VRM class1.Project name
Intra Site Trails
Haul Trail - 1 mile and 4 mile
______._---,-4_a.LOCATION ..,.---+. ._
TOWNSHIP !-R-ANGE --SECTION
-------------;----_._------........_----------~
b.LOCATION MA=-P ---:-_
T32N R5E See proposed activity map in EAR
•
I
I )
SECTION B.CHARACTERISTIC LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION
See "Scenic Quality Field Inventory,"page Al,A2,A3
.007~A65 Fog Lakes Upland
Upper Susitna River
SECTION C.PROPOSED ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
(Refer 10 BLM ,\lanllnl Section 8131 for pr~posed descriptions and requirements)
Low amount of block form and sharp angles introduced,especially critical
on abutment cut and fills
Introduction of straight line of haul road in contrast to undulating horizon
lines of hills and vertical lines along river/stream bluffs
Interruption of color of natural rock faces
Introduction of uniform gravel overlay on fine/smooth surfaces
Rectangular interruption of irregular forms of vegetation clusters
._---_.__._----
zo t<lbz Creates stretches of straight lines in contrast with feathered edge lines
<:::l
b of vegetation clusters
t'5 -~
till :3 I'>0 I Changes shades of green/yellow to shades of brown/tan
u ,• I
N ~~I Cha~geS -:riab~~~~fte-~~oa;~e-~pa~~he~-~~---:-~-ifo~~-~raV~l texture
f-<f-<I
1
I
,~I BTocks created by areas of cuts and fills
.fi:!
rn ~-t-------------~--·-------------...-------------.----------.--..
~i §;1 mile or 4 miles of introduced line generally following topography
bl iU'.:::>1-[,:--:---------------------.------------------.-------------------.-------------
,0 I~I ~!tan/brown:~_e_~. _
._,~Ji.L Coarse gravel (10,000 -40,000 cUb~c ~~ards of bo_r_r_o_w_rn_a_t_e_r_ia_l_}_
SECTION D.corn R!\ST RATING ::..1 SHORT TERM r X'1 LONG TE!~M
1<J.f\13ximlllll eleluent contrast
Assumed VRM Class II -Moderate
---~--'----------."----
b.Maximum feature contrastOF
DEGREE
CONTRAST
FEATlll;:ES
-~-----_._---_.-._-------_...._-.--.------
LAND '\\ATEI<VEGETATION STRUCTU1~ES
I ;P~/t TI---~817.(2)_-~];3)
~l N ~NI ~N
::<1'-'"-I"""'"x '-'"--:<"'-'".........-....
""'I<li XI"""14)'X X""'OJ X X'-'"~::.1 S "'-'"mI ~~2-......m ~2-~~~<I 2'I ":~i III if "~III Assumed VRM Cl ass II -12
::-g ~g ::'-g I ~'g ::-g ~g 1-2-.-:::D-o-es-p-r-oj'--c-c-t~d'--e-s-:-ig-n-m-e-et-v-:-is-u-fl-;-l-r-es-'o-u-rc-e-
wll:.;b::!Z ~::;I~Z U)i~$;~
management requirements?[J Yes [xII No
rJ)Form (4x)12!8 (4):0 12:8 1(4):0 12 1(8)1 4 0 If "no,"(or if ratillf,zs over maximum
f-4 -'---r---,---+-l---+'-----=-j-+----i~Line (3x)9 6 :(3)i 0 9 {6):3 :0 9 (6)3 0 alloll'able)redesigll project lTI section E,
:.E concentrating on fcature/clem ent of greatest~Color (2x)6 4 1,('2':1'0 6 I:4 ;,,:(2 )\1,0 6 4 il(2)0 If I I I....11 t contrast.c01ltrrlsl IS accepta J c,1.'ls
W ~u-r-e--(I-x-)-t--3-+-2-1GTT 0 3 12 1(1)1 0 3 2 1(1)0 does 7101 prelude additional miligating meas-
C·l -~UTes;propose as stillUlations.and Iisl in
TOT ALS ~_"1a 1~_-.--L.-_l_7__~::-'-:-:-:-=-:-'::-,')e,:-,:c=-,1I:-,,·o.:..n._~E.:..:.;.-=-:-::-:-----------
SECTION E.REDESIGN.STIPULATIONS,MITIGATING MEASURES
As proposed,this action does not meet VRM Class II objectives.With proper
mitigation,however,it is l'ikely that these activities can achieve a
successful degree of rehabilitation.The following measures will offer
some degree of mitigation;
Management Objectives:
1.VRMClass II -Changes in any of the babic elements (form,line,color,
texture)caused by the management activity should not be evident in the
characteristic landscape.A contrast may be seen but should not attract
attention.
2.Reduction of strong line created by intra-site and haul trails.
a.Removal of visually intrusive sections of trails.
b.Round and warp slopes in areas of extensive cuts and fills.
c.Minimize amount of cut and fill.
d.Feather edge of right-of-way clearing during alignment process.
e.Scarify,reseed with native species,fertilize,and ~ulch areas which
have an existing nutrient regimen,otherwise,scarify and mulch areas
to create natural seed bed.
f.Submission of clearing and alignment plans for approval and feedback
prior to site disturbance.
g.Coordinate implementation of clearing and alignment with BLM landscape
architect or designated representative.
A-12
UNI'lTT <';'1 ATES
DEPAlHillENT CF THE INTLWOR
DUF'EAU OF LANIJ i\1:\Ni\GEMENT
VISUAL COIHRAST RATING WORKSHEET
/)ale
2/13/79
District
f-A--.:n::.c=..:h 0 rage
Plan-ning unit -------------
Denali Block
1-------
Activity
___2~~it~~_~~~~~1 ~~_i~y-S-tll9;!EAR
SECTION A.PROJECT INFORMATION
1.Project name
1.Proposed
Borrow Sources 2.Alternative
2.Critical viewpoint number
Overhead
3.MFP Slep III VI<M class
N/A
4a.LOCATION
TOWNS--H-IP--'Ir--RAN-~;----T--SEC~ION
L T32N-TRSE~-16
2.T32N '1 R5E 30,31
T32N R4E 36
b.LOCATION MAP--------.----------------------------
See proposed activity map in EAR
SECTION B.CHARACTERISTIC LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION
See "Scenic Quality Field Inventory,"page Al,A2
.007 -A65 Fog Lakes Upland
Upper Susitna River
;;;
I Introduction of smooth sharp cuts along creek and river by back slopes andjl:
0 terracing through removal of 265,000 cubic yards of gravel.I<.
0::
tI.1 ~Straight lines and sharp angles introduced into random lines of bluff1-<z area
-<J~
"-Q jl:Z-<0 Little change in color..l...:l 0u....-c---
'~Introduction of smooth bluff faces in contrast to random coarse texture of><:jl:
~::>I original bluffE-<E-<I
::;:
ll:Removal of vegetation blocks0some
I<.
z -----_._.-'"
0 W i
f::z !Removal of vegetation edge lines-<J i some
l-<I
W "
--------_.----
0
tI.1 0 i...l;>0 I Changes shades of green/yellow to brown/tanuI
N ---+-------------------------------------
I'w
>-:r>:IW:;,Changes variable,tufted coarse patches to uniform gravel texturef-<r-:
I
:<I
"I ..
0 it..
---;--------------------_.-------------~~------------
Vl I
I
SECTION C.PROPOSED ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
(Refer to BLIl Mal/ual "ection 8131 for propos('d descriptions and requirements)
WI W I0::'Z ,~!~~Not applicable to borrow sources
f-<I '
gl-i·-!----------~-·------------------._--------
0::0 I
f-<I ?I
-..........*_.-,~----------------
Fl,:!l.TUI~ES
SECTION D.CONi FV\ST f-.;ATING
OF
DEGI~EE
CONTRAST
i
'I
i
I
i
SHORT TERM [Xl LON::;TERM
---------,----------------------------------------
la.Maximulll clement conlrad
LANj)/\\'ATE1~VF(,l:TATlON STI~UCTUI~ES
BfS Y
(2)(3)Assumed VRM Class II -Modera'te~-~~~-~--·~r~-:1-=-;,-~~T-=-·-b-.--~-1a-x-·i-Ill-U-~feature cOl1tra~-t ---~~-~----
('1"')x ~...~I ~I""!"'.":~0"""-'OJ ......::::---Q)I-lo -~.::r--o~~~~I ~I ~bL '"~~Assumed VRM Class II -12~~!.Y ~~j~~11'(1)r.:~I[~CJ
o "tl I '"Ii"0 i "tl i '""0 ";;'"c:t----:=-----:----:-.,------,-----;------E;I ~;;z i:i ~!;i I Z ~~I ~Z 2.Does project design meet visual resource
management requirements?[J Yes [~]No
tfl Form (4x)[;8 14 I °12.8:6>:°12 8 4 (§)II "no,"(or il ratin[',IS ouer maximum~Line (3x)69 46 ~2il,-oo··-9
6
-"1K9~!1<FJ2 li-°0 69 46 I 3
2
@®allou'ablc)reCle'Sig n pro j ectinsectionE'
:;E ~~cOTlcelltrating on leature/element 01 ,greatest
~Color (2x)contrast.II contrast IS acceptable,tl)1s
:::~='=T=e=x=t==u=r=e=(=lx=.)==j-i=~=2 1 0-"3 ~11 i O~}2 1 (§)docs not prelude additional mitigating meas-
_________['18 ~13,_-J:::-:-::~-_.9-=---=-:-c-::-.L..,_~u~re~,s,-,;-",,-,p_r,-,:op-=--.o_s_e_as__s_tl_·P_u_1{/_t_i_O_I1_S_'_{/_n_d_l_i_s_t _1_11_TOTALS I ----l.section E.
_________---'S=.:E=-C=-=.T.:.IO=--:.:N....:E=-·o:...-:.R E0 ES IGN,S TIP U LA T ION S.MIT I GAT JN G ME AS U RES
The excavation of 265,000 cubic yards of gravel in either site will introduce a
high degree of modification of existing form.The alternative site siruated at the
confluence of Tsusena Creek and the Susitna River is critical because of visual
intrusion into the river corridor.In either case a high degree of mitigation
will be necessary in order to meet VRM Class II objectives.The following
stipulations will offer some degree of mitigation;
Managem~nt Objectives:
1.VRH Class II -Changes in any of the basic elements (form,line,color,
texture)caused by the management activity should not be evident in the "'l
characteristic landscape.A contrast may be seen but should not attract
attention.
2.Reduction of contrast in form created by excavation of borrow sources.
a.Clear vegetation in sections while excavations are occuring;100'
should be maximum area cleared.
b.Remove,stockpile,and backfill all overburden for use in rehabilitation.
c.Develop irregular,serrated terraces and headwalls to expedite re-
vegetation and maintain natural form.
d.Strategically revegetate areas along terraces and headwalls.Reseed
with native species,fertilize,and mulch areas that may have an
existing nutrient regimen;otherwise,mulch areas to create natural
seedbed.
e.Submission of mining and rehabilitation plans prior to excavation
activities.
f.Coordinate mining rehabilitation plans with BLH landscape architect
~or designated representative.
A-14
Assumed VRM Class II -12
Assumed VRM Class II -~Jderate
b.~ILlximum fculuw contrastOF
CONTHAST
DEGI~EE
Docs project dcsir,n meet visual resourcc'
m~nagement requircments?[J Yes lZKJ No~!Form (4x)~~(8)!~_~__12 (8)'~~~S 41(0)'I "no,"(UT if Talill/:IS OllrT maxmwm
~_Line (3x)9 l'(6)',3 !O.9 i,6 _'(3):,'0 9 16 3 I(0)allollabld Tcdrsir.TI pTo;cef 111 s(',fioTl E,
"". ,cOllerTltTotill!:Or!IrofuTr!c,lcIIII>nf 0/gTrtJfesl~Color (2x)6 I 4 !(2)i 0 6!4 :(2)i 0 6 4 2 (0)eOlltTast.1/eOTl(T~st IS acceptable,(";s
tU !----<----r---t-:---t---l---t---+---+:-,-j
_iTexture (~~~1)10 3!2 i (I)!0 3 2 1 (0)docs Ilot pTeludr additional mi/ll~atillf',metJs-----I -.;-,---~/lTe'S;propose'as stipulations,ami list In
TOT,\LS J~_]4 __--l-_O -=----'---....:.s:..:...;r,fion F.
SEeTIO=-:E.REDESIGN,STIPULATIONS,MITIGATING MEASURES
Because of the moderate amount of modification in the landform,this activity
will not meet VRM Class II objectives as proposed.The following measures
may accomplish a certain amount of mitigation;
Management Objectives:
1.VRM CJass II -Changes in any of the basic elements (form,line,color,
texture)caused by the management activity should not be evident in
the characteristic landscape.A contrast may be seen but should not
attract attention.
2.Reduction of contrast of form and line created by blasting activities.
a.Minimize area to be blasted.
b.Limit casting of material to within 50·of trench.
c.Leave overburden and pr6strate plant species in place during blasting
activities to expedite revegetation.
d.Use hand tools to smooth disturbed areas after exploration is completed.
Light earthwork equipment may be utilized if no further site disturbance
wi 11 occur.
e.Coordinate blastirig and rehabilitation activities with BLM landscape
architect or designated representative.
A-16
Ul\ITF!l.!\Tl':~;
DEPA\~T~IE~T (>!'l'Ili':NTEl':HW
13UJ~F!l.U OF L'\NJ)f\lMji\l;)o:l\lENT
2/111/79
})is\lict
Anchorage
VISUAL CONTRAST RATING WORKSHEET Pl,lIl1linl',unit
Denali Block -------------
Acti \'i t v
~=~=======~--==~===~_.._~~S i'_t~_l~~s i bi 1i ty Study EAR
SECTION A.~ROJECT INFO~~AT~~._
2.Critical viewpoint number 3.MFP Slep III VI~f\l c1<lsS
-----_..._-------------_._-------"---------_._-,.,-
1.Project name
Watana Borrow Site Exploration and
res t i ng -Qua rry Sit::,.::e:....:...:.A-l.:(B:...:l...::a~s~t '.:...:'n.:.;;u..)_+-o_v_e_r_h_ea_d ...-L
N_/_A _
4a.LOCATION b.LOCATION MAP~~~~'~~~;:~T'--:~~~G;'=-=S!5::r!~N_.._--------------.-------~------.------------
T32N R5E See proposed activity map in EAR
I
I
I
SECTION B.CHARACTERISTIC LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION
See "S cen ic Quality Field Inventory,"page Al,A2,A3
.007-A65 Fog Lakes Upland
Upper Susitna River
:E Ir.:Reduction of solid rock face to random,scattered blocks of irregular
0
l>.size and shape
~w ~straight 1 i nes smoothEo<~Introduction of numerous opposing,angular,on
<:
~...l rock face"-A --
Z t':
0<:...l Littl e change in color....1 0
u
~
'''l
XCi:Introduction of sharp,rough texture~:>
f-<f-<
:Er.:Removal0
l>.
Z I
.-
0 "l IE::z Removal<:::J i
Eo<I
W r.:!-
l?Itil0
...l Removal;:.0 i
U IN~-~----------_.---_._------~_.
'''l~fg.Relllova 1
!-o i
I
0<I
r.:i
0 I
l>.i -
,-----,.-_._------_.
lfl !
------._-+-----+.-+_._--~----~---~--
lLl "l
SECTION C.PROPOSED ACTIVITY DESCRI PTION
(Refer to ELM Alanual Section 8131 for proposed drscriptions and rrquircmcnls)
-il!!
•
Not applicable to Quarry Site A exploration
-----------------------~------------------------
U'I(C
District
Anchorage
1------
DEPll!~'l':\l;~NT u:iflF INTE!\I()]~
BUr.~FAU OF L\t\'D :,J'\NAGEr.1ENT
VISUAL COtHRt,ST RATING WORKSHEET Planning limt
Denali Block
Acti vity
==,,-==--==="'co--------------,===,=c=-=c~~c=~~~c'c_-~_u~_itniLFe<l~tbJ j ~y .Stl:!clY__~AR _
______________---'S=-=I:::~_C=--T::-I=-=O...:.N_'_'_'Ac:,.-.£f0)E CT _1_N 10-0 RM AT ION _
1.Projp-ct name 2.Critical viewpoint number 3.MFP Step III VW\1 class
Watana Damsite Drilling -trenches Over head N/A
TOWNSHIP
4a.LOCATION,-----------'1'------
1 RANGE SECTION
b.LOCATION MAP
----------------------~------------------
T32N R5E See proposed activity map in EAR
SECTION B.CHARACTERISTIC LANDSCAPE DESCRIPTION
See lIScenic Quality Field Inventoryll,page Al,A2,A3
.007-A65 Fog Lakes Upland
Upper Susitna River
SECTION C.PROPOSED ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
(Refer to J3LM ,\!(1nwzl Section 8131 for proposed descriptions and re(juirrn!('nts)
~Irntroduction of 20 trenches,10'x50'x15 1 deep,along each abutment;forming
~Irectangular blocks in opposition to natural bluff form.
~~IStraight 1ines and sharp angles introduced-into rand-o-m-l-in-e-s-o-f--b-l-Y-ff---
~•.J.
C;--+-z !:t:~.~ILittle change in color
.~.~~ILittle change in texture
!~IExtremely visible rectangular interruptions of irregular form of vegetation
~clusters
~I
P ~!Creates uniform rows of straight lines in contrast with natural edge lines~J lof vegetation clusters
ttl!:t:-------------
~~IChanges shades of green/yellow to shades of brown/tan
. u i
<'4 ------r------------------------------------------------------_
~~ICreates exposed coarse soil texture from tufted vegetation patches~~1
I
;!:!
I:>:I~I
---t----------·-----------_t:3 ~l I ------------
~I ~:Not applicable to Watana Damsite Drilling -trenchesE-<!,
~r-yt-
I
----------------------~----------------------------~---------
r<1 ,.J I:~-L----_----_---,-",JJl.L.___~.u...!A-J?,---------
----~-------_.-._-----_...._--_._-------.._._-------
SECTICJ:'i U.CONTr,i\ST Rf\TING-------,.----_._-----------_._-------
FI-:J\TUI<I-:S
-~~----~---.__.-..--~
:',I I(J!\II I I<H ~X:t .(me TE:I'<M
...------------_._-------
LI.~1;(}:JlllllllJ ('klllenl conlr;Jsl
Assumed VRM Class II -12
Assumed VRM Class II -Moderate
b.Maximum feature contr8st
2.Does project design meet visual resource
management requirements?[]Yes iiiJ No
I("no,"(or i(rating IS O1'cr maXlillUm
(ll!ou'able)redesigll project III s('e(ion E,
cOllcentrati1lg on (cature/clemell(o(grratest
contrast.II CD1Itras(IS acce/)(ab!c,tb,s
does not prelude additional mitigating mellS-
ures;pro/)OSC as sli/lIllations,alld list In
_._~__sectioll F.
SECTION E.REDESIGN,STIPULATIONS,MITIGATING MEASURES
DEGI:':EE LAND/\\'/\T E R VE(;ETATION STl~l T("'1'1 r).'I·;)
BOllY (2)(.1)'~~T~·1------';-1 -----
OF ;-':
~~I ',
x .........."'"'"'"'x ~:~~x'r<)ill :<I x ~(I "x ~.::,ill X..........~_I 0 :.::Co :.::8rn~,~'"~Lo 't:1 ~I ~Jj 0CONTRASTc"I .""c ,ill _,<:ill ..~<"0 "0 '"c :::i "0 ,'"<:~"0 '"C
~0 "!c u i '"0 0 ill 0
[f}~0<:;..';YJ ,;:;0<:;..';(j);:;~z
(I)Form (4x)12~)4 .0 (12).8 4 0 12 1 8 4 (0)
E'U~~--9 6 3);0 9-"(6\3;0 9 6 3 II(0)
~Color (2x)6 4 (2)1 0 (14)iiTo 6 4 II 2 (0)~l!_e~~~3 I 2 W10-3-t)tl-ro 3"1 2 1 (0)
--------~==="====='c======*"c=='=='==='=o=i,=='=~=='===l
___TOTALS :=1___14 J 24 .._~a
Because of the strong amount of form modification to vegetation patterns that
would be created by the proposed activity~it may be difficult to meet VRM
Class II objectives.The following actions may accomplish some degree of
mit'igations;
Management Objectives:
/
1.VRM Class II -Changes in any of the basic elements (form~line~color~
texture)caused by the management activity should not be evident in
the characteristic landscape.A contrast may be seen but should not
attract attention.
2.Reduction form and line created by trenches aligned perpendicular to
slope along abutments.
a.Backfill all trenches and re-contour to grade.
b.Reseed with native species,fertilize,and mulch areas that may
have an existing nutrient regimen;otherwise,mulch areas to
create natural seed bed.
c.Allow controlled drainage between ~renches to re-establish vertical
bluff lines.
d.Coordinate trenching activities with BLM landscape architect or
authorized representative before commencing activity.
..
A-18
~,
EXPLANATION OF GENERAL MITIGATION MEASURES
1.SLOPE ROUNDING
Slope rounding,although beneficial for revegetative purpose,is also
a definite and positive means of blending landform modifications with
existing landforms.It breaks the sharp unnatural edges formed by the
junction of a constant pitch cut slope with the natural rounded landform.
2.WARPING SLOPES
A further refinement of slope blending is to vary the pitch of cut and
full slopes.It involves slope rounding in both vertical and horizontal
form as a more natural extension of landform surface configurations.In
some cases,it has been improperly used in conjunction with constant
clearing widths in order to simplify staking.
3.SHAPING OF BORROW AREAS
Similar methods of blending landforms of cut and fill slopes can be
applied to borrow area excavations.Slopes can be improved by a combi-
nation of slope warping and rounding to simulate natural landform
configurations.
4.SPREADING TOPSOIL ON DISTURBED SOIL
Since most disturbed soils in mountainous areas are much lighter
colored than the undisturbed cover,there is a high potential for contrast
reduction if dark topsoils are spread over such cut and fill slopes.The
primary benefit of such action is improved revegetation potential.
5.MULCHING WITH LOW CONTRAST MATERIALS
Closely related to topsoil dressing of slopes is the use of mulching
material of colors that blend with undisturbed soil areas.Increased
revegetative potential is a by-product.
6.MULCHING &~D TOPSOILING
The mulching and topsoiling of cut and fill slopes will often have
a beneficial texture constrast-reduction effect.It has the added
advantage of reducing color contrast and improving revegetation.
7.SCARIFIED CUT SLOPES
Cut slopes which are highly manicured are seldom in harmony with the
natural land surface texture.Cut faces have in some cases been known
to shine for lack of texture or surface variation.Random pattern
scarification is most desirable.Again,a side benefit of scarification
is improved moisture retention and revegetation potential.
A-19
'--,·--..-------------............----.-9------------------------
8.BROKEN-FACE ROCK BLASTING
Strive for a broken-faced rock cut effect in areas where it would
blend in (exception -glacially polished areas).Encourage minimal
manicuring of rock cuts to allow for rough texture with interplay of
light and shadow.This will also provide planting pockets in the rocks
which will allow more rapid revegetation for additional texture and
color.
9.REVEGETATION
There are several actions that can be taken to reduce contrast in
revegetation activities.
Dispersion of new plantings into existing vegetative patterns.
---Ordinarly,from a purely erosion-control standpoint,revegetation is
limited to those areas within the clearing limits.Such limitations
tend to further accentuate contrast.
It would be more desirable to feather the revegetation edge as well
as the clearing edge.Again,this would allow a transitional band
rather than a sharp edge.Some modification of standard specifications
would be necessary to accomplish this effect.
Encouraging mixtures of plants.---Rather than utilize a single type
of plant in revegetation,it will often be desirable to utilize a mix
of grasses,wildflowers,shrubs and trees.
Greater variety of line,form,color,and texture thus achieved
will better blend with adjacent undisturbed areas.Chances of plant
establishment are also improved.Of course,this should be done with
discretion;planting or seeding of trees across meadow or grassland
cut or fill slopes would be entirely out of order.
Selection of plants with sizes,forms,colors,and textures which
blend with existing vegetation.---Normally,plants of a type native to
the area should be utilized to reduce contrasts.In cases where it is
necessary to utilize nonnative species,they should be selected on the
basis of their visual compatibility with the remaining native plants.
10.FEATHERING CLEARING EDGES FOR GRADUAL TRANSITION
In addition to undulating the clearing line,another key method of
reducing the line,form,color,and texture contrast is to feather the
edges.Successful feathering involves a reduction of vegetative density
in transitional degrees as well as a gradation of tall vegetation down
to low vegetation at the clearing edge.Thus,the contrast is faded
out into a wide transitional band and focalization on an artificial
line is decreased.
A-20
11.DEVELOPING PLANTING HOLES OR POCKETS IN ROCK OR STEEP SLOPES
A variation of serrations is individual planting pockets on steep
slops.Although the function is similar,this method would almost always
require handwork.In soft but pure granite rock,planting have been made
by punching holes in weak spots with a bar and inserting 2-inch potted
plants or by direct seeding.
On rock slopes which have been unevenly fractured,there are oppor-
tunities to create planting pockets by filling in natural pockets with
sailor by purposely developing them by additional blasting.The length
of time required to revegetate such sterile slopes can be significantly
decreased.
SOURCE:National Forest Landscape Management;I1Volume 2,ChapteJ.I..-
Roads l1
Forest Service,USDA
1\-21
F'-
ApPENDIX B
TABUu\TION OF FIELD ACTIVITIES ACCORDING To
SEASON ANn YEAR OF ACCOMPLISHMENT
APPENDIX B
TABULATION OF FIELD ACTIVITIES ACCORDING Tf)
SEASON AND YEAR OF ACCOMPLISHMENT
YEAR 1
i~onth
Jan Feb t1ar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
;;,
SURVEY
Survey River Cross Sections X X X X
Damsites,Reservoirs,Access
Roads,Transmission Corridors X X X
HYDROLOGY
Collect Climatic Data X X X X X X X
Collect Water Data X X X X X X X
Collect Wind Data X X X X X X X
ENVIRONMENTAL (WATER QUALITY)
Collect Physical,Chemical &
Biological Water Data X X X X X X X
RECREATION
Develop Plans for Public
Recreation &Resource Uses
FOUNDATIONS AND IVlATERIALS
Siesmic Monitoring X X X X X X X X X X
Access Road Studies X X X X X
Transmission Line Studies X X X X X
Watana Site Geology X X X X X X X
Watana Borrow Site Explora-
tion &Testing X X X X X X X
Watana Damsite Drilling X X X X X X X X X X
Watana Geophysical
Investigation X X X X
Watana Features Design X X X X X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Geology X X X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Damsite Drilling X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Aggregate
Studies X X X X X X
DESIGN
Site Inspections v X X X Xi\
REAL ESTATE
,""-Aerial Field Inspections X
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Archeological &Historical
~Site Recon X X X X
FIELD CAMP
Operate ~~eld Camp X X X X X X X X X X
BIOLOGICAL STUDIES
Anadromous &Resident
Fisheries Studies X X X X X X X XWildlifeStudiesXXX X X X X X
(NOTE:YEAR 1 activities wi 11 not beg"j n until March)
B-1
TABULATION OF FIELD ACTIVITIES ACCORDING TO
SEASON AND YEAR OF ACCOMPLISHMENT
YEAR 2
r"onth
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SURVEY
Survey River Cross Sections X X
Damsites,Reservoirs,Access
Roads,Transmission Corridors X X X X X X
HYDROLOGY
Collect Climatic Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
Collect Water Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
Collect Wind Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
ENVIRONMENTAL (WATER QUALITY)
Collect Physical,Chemical &
Biological Water Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
RECREATION
Develop Plans for Public
Recreation &Resource Uses X
FOUNDATIONS AND MATERIALS
Siesmic Monitoring X X X X X X X X X X X X
Access Road Studies X X X X X
Transmission Line Studies X X X X X
Watana Site Geology X X X X X X X
Watana Borrow Site Explora-
tion &Testing X X X X X X X X X X X X
Watana Damsite Drilling X X X X X X X X X X X X
Watana Geophysical
Investigation X X X X
Watana Features Design X X X X X X X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Geology X X X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Damsite Drilling X X X X X X X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Aggregate
Studies X X X X X
DESIGN
Site Inspections X X X X X
REAL ESTATE
Aerial Field Inspections X
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Archeological &Historical
Site Recon X X X X
FIELD CAMP
Operate Field Camp X X X X X X X X X X X XBIOLOGICALSTUDIES ~
Anadromous &Resident
Fisherie$Studies X X X X X X X X X X X XWildlifeStudiesXXXXXXXXX X X X
B-2
TABULATION OF FIELD ACTIVITIES ACCORDING TO
SEASON AND YEAR OF ACCOMPLISHMENT
YEAR 3
I~onth
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
0 SURVEY
Survey River Cross Sections
Damsites,Reservoirs,Access
Roads~Transmission Corridors X X X X X X
HYDROLOGY
Collect Climatic Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
Collect Water Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
Collect Wind Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
ENVIRONII1ENTAL (WATER QUALITY)
Collect Physical,Chemical &
Biological Water Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
RECREATION
Develop Plans for Public
Recreation &Resource Uses
FOUNDATIONS AND MATERIALS
Siesmic Monitoring X X X X X X X X X X X X
Access Road Studies X X X X X
Transmission Line Studies X X X X X
Watana Site Geology X X X X X X X
Watana Borrow Site Explora-
tion &Testing X X X X X X X X X X X X
Watana Damsite Drilling X X X X X X X X X X X X
Watana Geophysical
Investigation X X X X
Watana Features Design X X X X X X X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Geology X X X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Damsite Drilling X X X X X X X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Aggregate
Studies X X X X X
DESIGN
Site Inspections X X X X X
REAL ESTATE
Aerial Field Inspections
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Archeological &Historical
Site Recon X X X X
FIELD CAMP
Operate Field Camp X X X X X X X X X X X X
BIOLOGICJI:f:.STUDIES
Anadromous &Resident
Fisheries Studies X X X X X X X X X X X XWildlifeStudiesXX X X X X X X X X X X
B-3
TABULATION OF FIELD ACTIVITIES ACCORDING TO
SEASON AND YEAR OF ACCOMPLISHMENT
YEAR 4
Month
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SURVEY
Survey River Cross Sections
Damsites,Reservoirs,Access I··
Roads,Transmission Corridors X X X X X X
HYDROLOGY
Collect Climatic Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
~
Collect Water Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
Collect Wind Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
ENVIRONMENTAL (WATER QUALITY)
Collect Physical,Chemical &
Biological Water Data X X X X X X X X X X X X
RECREATION
Develop Plans for Public
Recreation &Resource Uses
FOUNDATIONS AND MATERIALS
Siesmic Monitoring X X X X X X X X X X X X
Access Road Studies X X X X X
Transmission Line Studies X X X X X
Watana Site Geology X X X X X X X
Watana Borrow Site Explora-
tion &Testing X X X X X X X X X X X X
Watana Damsite Drilling X X X X X X X X X X X X
Watana Geophysical
Investigation X X X X
Watana Features Design X X X X X X X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Geology X X X X X X X X
Devil Canyon Damsite Drilling X X X X X X X X X X X XDevilCanyonAggregate
Studies X X X X XDESIGN
Site Inspections X X X X XREALESTATE
Aerial Field Inspections
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Archeological &Historical
Site Recon X X X XFIELDCAMP
Operate Field Camp X X X X X X X X X X X XBIOLOGICAt.STUDIES ~
Anadromous &Resident
Fisheries Studies X X X X X X X X X X X XWildlifeStudiesX·X X X X X X X X X X X
B-4
ApPENDIX C
REFERENCES
APPENDIX C
REFERENCES
Bacon,Glenn.Archeology in the Upper Susitna River Basin 1978.
Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska District,1978.
Bacon,Glenn,ed.Heritage Resource~s Along the Upper Susitna River.
The Alaska Division of Parks (under U.S.Army Corps of Engineers
contract DACW85-75-C-0041),August 1975.
Riis,James C.and Nancy V.Friese.IIFisheries and Habitat investi-
gations of the Susitna River--A Preliminary Study of Potential
Impacts of the Devil Canyon and Watana Hydroelectric Projects,"
Preliminary Environmental Assessment of Hydroelectric Development
on the Susitna River.Alaska Department of Fish and Game for the
U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service.March 1978.
Taylor,Kenton P.and Warren B.Ballard."Moose Movements and Habitat
Use Along the Upper Susitna River--A Preliminary Study of Potential
Impact of the Devil Canyon Hydroelectric Project,1I Preliminary
Environmental Assessment of Hydroelectric Development on the Susitna
River.Alaska Department of Fish and Game for the U.S.Fish and
Wildlife Service,March 1978.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Alaska1s Wildlife and Habitat,
January 1973.
Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Alaska Wildlife Management Plans
(Southcentral and Interior Alaska),1976.
Cooperative Agreement Between Department of the Interior,Bureau
of Land Management and Department of the Army,Alaska District
Corps of Engineers,February 22,1978.
U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska D1strict.
Susitna Hydropower Feasibility Analysis.
of Alaska,June 1978.
Plan of Study for
Prepared for the State
U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska District.Southcentral Railbelt
Area,Alaska,Interim Feasibility Report,Hydroelectric Power and
Related Purposes for the Upper Susitna River Basin,December 12,
1975.
C-l