HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA3091GB
1225
.A4
835
1982d
..., ..
.,....
E 1 D ( 707 A STREET. ANCHORAGE. ALASKA. 99501; 19071 279-4523
POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF TWO ALTERNATIVE
HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENTS ON THE
FISHERY RESOURCES OF THE LO WER
TAZIHINA RIVER, ALASKA
A Preliminary Instream Flow Assessrnent
Draft Final Report
ARCTIC ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION AND DATA CENTER
POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF TWO ALTERNATIVE
HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENTS ON THE
FISHERY RESOURCES OF THE LOWER
TAZIMINA RIVER, ALASKA
A Preliminary Instream Flow Assessment
Draft Final Report
ARLIS
Alaska Resources
Library & Information Services
Anch~Jr:tge. :~J.aska
Arctic Environmental Information
and Data Center
University of Alaska
707 A Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
in cooperation with
Dames and Moore
801 Cordova Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF TWO ALTERNATIVE
HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENTS ON THE
FISHERY RESOURCES OF THE LOWER
TAZIMINA RIVER, ALASKA
A Preliminary Instream Flow Assessment
Draft final report
Jean E. Baldrige
Fisheries Biologist
and
January 19&,l'O
(Revised July 198;0
I
ARLIS ;.,
ARLJfS AlaskAR~es Lih~ary & Inf'onnation Servi~
Lib!'8JY Bullui ng.,Suite 1 U
Alaska Resources
Library & Information Services
lUlchorage,Alaska
321 I Provic.Jenfie.t)rfye
Anchorage, AK f}l)~f4
ACKNOWLEDGEHENTS
The field program for this study was completed under contract to
Dames and Moore Consultant, Anchorage office as a part of the environ-
mental and sociocultural assessment for the proposed Tazimina River
hydroelectric project. The University of Alaska, Arctic Environmental
Information and Data Center contributed support for data analysis and
report production.
Special thanks go to the USGS for their outstanding cooperation in
providing hydrologic data for the Tazimina, Newhalen, and Kvichak rivers
and insights into the streamflow patterns of the area; also, to L.A.
Peterson and Associates, Fairbanks, Alaska for providing the water
quality data and analysis contained in this report.
The authors would like to thank the following individuals for their
review and constructive criticism of all or portions of this report:
Bill Wilson, AEIDC; Larry Leveen, USGS; John Isakson, Dames and Moore;
Steve Brenthaur, R & M Consultants; Pat Poe, Fisheries Research Insti-
tute, University of Washington; and Dick Russell and Tom Trent, ADF&G.
The authors also thank the individuals who provided background
information on the Tazimina River including Newhalen residents Bill
Sims, Earl Baluta, Ruth Kochtelash, and Ben Trefon, and especially Pat
Poe and Dick Russell for providing unpublished data from their files.
Special thanks are due to the AEIDC staff members who assisted us
in preparation of this report, especially Stuart Beard, Patti McMillan,
and our secretaries Deborah Topp and Gabrielle Collier.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Statement of Conclusion
II. Introduction
Scope and Purpose
Study Approach
Data Base
Site Description
III.Fishery resources of the lower Tazimina River
Sockeye salmon
Resident fish
IV. Physical characteristics of the lower Tazimina River
Streamflow
Water temperature
Water quality
Sediment transport
V. Relationships between morphologic and hydrologic
characteristics and sockeye salmon spawning and
incubation success
Substrate composition and spawner distriubtion
Hydraulic conditions and spawner distribution
Habitat utilization
Channel geometry and incubation success
Stream temperatures and incubation
iv
Page Number
1
5
5
6
7
7
11
12
16
19
19
21
27
33
35
35
39
42
42
45
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
VI. Relationships between morphologic and hydrologic
characteristics and resident fish
VII. Anticipated downstream effects of the run-of-river
hydroelectric development
Above the powerhouse
Physical characteristics
Fishery resources
Below the powerhouse
Summary
VIII. Anticipated downstream effects of the storage reservoir
hydroelectric development
Tazimina River Canyon
Physical characteristics
Fishery resources
Downstream of the powerhouse
Physical characteristics
Fishery resources
Summary
Appendices
Page Number
47
51
51
51
55
59
60
61
63
63
65
69
69
77
81
I. Suggested objectives and approaches for preliminary instream
flow assessment, August 1981 through Janaury 1982
II.
III.
IV.
Fishery resources of the lower Tazimina River
Methodology for estimating preproject streamflows in the
Tazimina River
References
v
[
[
"h
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
c
L
[
[
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
LIST OF FIGURES
Location of the project area.
Phenology chart for major fish species of the lower
Tazimina River.
Index survey results since 1974 for sockeye salmon
in the Tazimina River.
Distribution and abundance of sockeye salmon
spawners in the Tazimina River from aerial
survey on August 28, 1981.
Average monthly streamflows for the Tazimina River.
Comparison of 1-, 3-, 5-, and 7-day high flows in
the Tazimina River to the respective monthly and
long-term average monthly flows (cfs).
Reach gain measurements for the Tazimina River,
October 13, 1981.
Location of temperature stations in the 1981 field
season.
Mean daily stream temperatures (°C) at two locations
on the Tazimina River during July and August 1981.
Mean daily stream temperatures (°C) at four locations
on the Tazimina River during September and October
1981.
Maximum and minimum summer stream temperatures (°C)
at two locations on the Tazimina River.
Maximum and minimum fall stream temperatures (°C) at
two locations on the Tazimina River.
Summer temperature profiles of Sixmile Lake and
Tazimina Lakes.
Summer dissolved oxygen profiles of Sixmile Lake and
Tazimina Lakes.
vi
Page Number
8
13
14
15
20
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
15 0
16 0
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)
Page Number
Summary of basic water quality data from August 1981
sampling of the Tazimina River/Lake system. 31
Summer concentrations of dissolved physical/chemical,
nutrient, and metal parameters for the Tazimina River/Lake
system. 32
Comparison between 1981 AEIDC and 1962 Fisheries
Research Institute stream bottom composition surveys
for the lower Tazimina River. 37
Sockeye salmon spawner distribution with respect to
substrate type. 38
Stream channel patterns of the lower Tazimina River. 40
Sampling locations for characterization of sockeye
salmon spawning habitat. 43
Location of project facilities for run-of-river
scenario.
Pre-and postproject streamflows for run-of-river
development.
Anticipated effects of the proposed run-of-river
hydroelectric development on fishery resources
within the Tazimina River canyon RH 8.3 to 9.5.
Anticipated effects of the proposed run-of-river
hydroelectric development on fishery resources
downstream from the powerhouse RH 0.0 to 8.3.
Location of project facilities for storage scenario.
Pre-and postproject streamflows for the proposed
storage reservoir development.
Anticipated effect of the proposed storage reservoir
development on preproject streamflow in the Tazimina
River canyon.
Anticipated effects of the proposed storage reservoir
on fishery resources within the Tazimina River canyon
RH 8.3 to 9.5.
Anticipated effect of the proposed storage reservoir
development on preproject streamflow below the
powerhouse.
vii
52
53
58
62
63
65
68
70
71
[
[
[
[
c
[
c
[
[
[
c
f-;
C
L
[
[
30.
31.
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)
Page Number
Comparison of hydraulic parameters from discharge
measurements in a single channel segment of the
Tazimina River.
Anticipated effects of the proposed storage reservoir
hydroelectric development on fishery resources downstream
from the powerhouse (RM 0.0 to 8.3)
viii
71
80
STATEHENT OF CONCLUSION
The University of Alaska's Arctic Environmental Information and
Data Center (AEIDC) conducted a preliminary instream flow assessment
of the Tazimina River in cooperation with Dames and Hoore. Two
proposed hydroelectric development scenarios for the Tazimina River
were considered; a 1200 kilowatt run-of-river plant and a 16-megawatt
storage reservoir facility. A 90-foot waterfall at River Hile
(RH) 9. 5, which completely blocks upstream fish migrations~ would
provide much of the head for these proposed developments. This report
is limited to a preliminary discussion of the generic effects which
these proposed developments might have on existing fishery resources
in the lower 9.5 miles of the Tazimina River.
The run-of-river plant is not expected to alter naturally occur-
ring streamflows or stream temperatures in the lower 9 miles of the
Tazimina River. Thus no changes in the availability or quality of
fish habitat are expected to occur below the powerhouse (RH 9. 3) •
Habitat changes would be confined to the quarter-mile segment between
the falls (RH 9.5) and the powerhouse (RH 9.3). Due to the predomi-
nance of bedrock and undesirable velocities, this reach presently
contains extremely limited (if any) low quality spawning habitat.
Project-induced changes are not expected to adversely affect sockeye
salmon production in the lower Tazimina River.
Little is known about seasonal use of the Tazimina River canyon
by resident species. Therefore, a definitive statement cannot be made
regarding effects of the proposed run-of-river development on rainbow
trout, Arctic grayling, and Arctic char production in the river's
lower 9. 5 miles. The authors' experience and familiarity with the
lower Tazimina River lead to the collective judgement that the anti-
cipated changes in habitat conditions associated with the proposed
run-of-river plant would not significantly affect resident fish popu-
lations. Additional field study would be required to specifically
define the degree to which the river canyon is utilized by resident
species and project-induced changes in availability or quality of
canyon habitats.
1
Several questions remain regarding specific effects of the pro-
posed· storage reservoir development on existing fishery resources.
Additional studies would be required to refine monthly streamflow
estimates, particularly during low-flow years, and to develop specific
streamflow recommendations to meet seasonal fishery requirements. From
our review of the project proposal and our present understanding of the
fishery resources, we conclude that most adverse effects on downstream
fish habitats could be avoided or minimized by adopting a project
design which provides adequate downstream temperatures and an operating
schedule compatible with the seasonal streamflow requirements of the
fishery resources. Based upon our evaluation of the available data on
the fishery resources, estimated preproject streamflows, and the
proposed storage reservoir development, it appears that sufficient
water exists to both meet project needs and to provide adequate down-
stream flows which avoid or minimize adverse effects on fish habitat.
The specific findings and recommendations of this study which
pertain to the proposed storage reservoir development scenario are
summarized below:
Above the powerhouse
1. Naturally occurring streamflows and existing fish habitat
conditions in the river canyon (RM 9.3 to 9.5) would be dra-
2.
matically altered. However, the canyon contains only a
limited amount of low-quality spawning habitat compared to
that available in the lower 6 miles of the river and incu-
bation success in this reach is questionable. Therefore the
habitat losses in this • 25-mile reach is unlikely to ad-
versely affect sockeye salmon production in the Tazimina
River.
It is also unlikely that changes in habitat conditions within
this portion of the canyon would significanly affect resident
fish populations. However, additional data are needed to
ascertain the degree of resident species' use of this portion
of the canyon.
2
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r L
[
[
[
Belm..r the powerhouse
1. Streamflows of 650 and 2,000 cfs appear to define an accept-
able range of streamflow for sockeye salmon spawning in
existing habitats within the single-channel segments of the
mains tern Tazimina River. The lower 3 miles of mainstem
appear to provide the most important sockeye salmon
spawning areas. Additional study would be required to
quantitfy changes in spawning habitat associated with post-
project streamflows.
2. A determination has yet to be made of incubation success for
sockeye salmon in the various segments of the mainstem river
and associated side channels. The proposed storage reser-
voir project has the potential of altering the availability
of spawning habitat and decreasing the degree to which redds
are naturally dewatered. Therefore, preemergent studies are
recommended to determine whether productive spawning habi-
tats would be jeopardized by reduced summer flows or if
increased winter streamflows would likely result in greater
survival of incubating eggs.
3. Main-channel streamflows of 1, 000 cfs appear adequate to
maintain flow through side channels utilized by sockeye
spawners within the braided segments of the Tazimina River.
Additional study would be needed to determine seasonal use
of these side channels by resident species and to determine
the quantitative changes in spawning and rearing habitats of
resident species associated with postproject streamflows.
4. Rainbow and grayling spawning areas which may exist in the
braided river segments or along the stream margins in
single-channel segments could be dewatered or degraded by
the proposed reduction of streamflows in late May and June.
Additional streamflow could be provided during late Hay and
June to avoid or minimize adverse effects to resident fish
spawning below the powerhouse by modifying the proposed
3
5.
6.
annual reservoir filling schedule. The reservoir could be
filled at a slower rate during June, thereby extending the
filling period into August. This would result in smaller
spills but no loss to monthly power production. Additional
study would be required to determine the magnitude and timing
of the releases required to protect existing rainbow and
grayling spawning habitats.
Seasonal temperature gradients within the reservoir should be
forecast and the downstream temperature requirements of the
various life stages of resident and anadromous fish identi-
fied. This data could be used to determine if a special
intake structure would be required to prevent powerhouse
outflows from adversely affecting winter and spring stream
temperatures in the lower 8 miles of river.
The Tazimina River channel is relatively stable and anti-
cipated postproj ect flows would probably have a negligible
[
[
[
r
L-'
[
[
[
c '
c
----------------------~e=f~f==e=c~t~~o=n~~a=l~t~e~. r~i=ng stream channel geometr~ __ =o~r--~s~u~b~s~t~r~a~t=e---------------.=-
composition. Additional fieldwork could be undertaken to [
7.
provide a more substantive basis for determining the reser-
voir releases necessary to maintain the substrate composition
and channel geometry in the braided river segments.
It does not appear that adverse water quality conditions
would exist in the proposed reservoir. Additional study
should be undertaken to confirm or modify this hypothesis and
forecast seasonal limnologic characteristics of the impound-
ment.
4
c
[
[
c
[
L
r
L
[
l
':!
INTRODUCTION
This report represents only one element of the environmental
assessment being undertaken by Dames and Moore for Stone and Webster
Engineering Company and the Alaska Power Authority. Dames and Moore
is to identify the nature and magnitude of potential sociocultural and
environmental impacts attributable to several alternative energy de-
velopment scenarios for the Bristol Bay region of Alaska. The Univer-
sity of Alaska's Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center
(AEIDC) participated in the Dames and Moore study by providing techni-
cal assistance and by conducting a preliminary instream flow assess-
ment for the Tazimina River.
This report presents a preliminary discussion of the generic
effects which operation of a 1200 kilowatt run-of-river or a 16-mega-
watt storage reservoir facility might have on the fishery resources in
the lower 9.5 miles of the Tazimina River in the Bristol Bay region.
A 90-foot waterfall presently blocking upstream migration of anadro-
mous and resident fish at RM 9. 5 would provide much of the head for
these proposed developments.
SCOPE AND PURPOSE
Project effects are discussed in terms of four principal compo-
nents of riverine fish habitat: streamflow, stream temperature, chan-
nel morphology, and water quality (Bovee 1980). A very limited amount
of specific data and information are available on the biology, hydro-
logy, and morphology of the Tazimina River as well as for design
specifications of the two hydroelectric development concepts being
proposed. As a result, the discussions and concluding statement
pertaining to project effects are based on the professional judgment
of the authors, limited field data, and a preliminary understanding of
the river and its fishery resources.
This is not a report to assess impact, but rather to comment on
project feasibility from a fishery resources perspective. More spe-
cifically, it (1) identifies generic changes in existing fish habitat
5
likely to result
initial filling) ,
from project operation (excluding construction and
(2) discusses the possible effect these changes
may have on the fishery resource, (3) provides preliminary recom-
mendations regarding design or operational changes which could be
further investigated as methods to avoid or minimize adverse effects on
existing fish habitat, and (4) provide necessary background information
for planning additional studies which may be undertaken at a later date
to support preparation of an environmental impact statement and miti-
gation plan as required by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC).
STUDY APPROACH
Between July 20 and 23, 1981 AEIDC made several inquiries regard-
ing the availability of information on biologic, hydrologic, and mor-
phologic characteristics of the Tazmina River. AEIDC conducted an
aerial and foot reconnaissance July 24-26, 1981 to obtain a firsthand
impression of the project area and the instream uses or resources most
likely to be affected by the proposed hydroelectric developments.
On the basis of this field reconnaissance, AEIDC recommended that
the principal objective of the instream flow studies during the July
1981-January 1982 contract period be to obtain a qualitative appre-
ciation of seasonal streamflow patterns and the resultant availability
of various types of fisheries habitat in the lower 9.5 miles of river.
We proposed that this begin with a preliminary description of (1) the
comparative importance of mainstem and side channel sockeye salmon
spawning habitats, (2) utilization of available overwintering habitat
by resident species, (3) winter survival of incubating sockeye eggs,
(4) the annual and seasonal variability of streamflows and stream tem-
peratures, (5) background water chemistry conditions, and (6) stream
channel stability. Additional detail regarding the objectives and
recommended approaches for a preliminary assessment are contained in
Appendix I.
6
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
c
c
[
[
c
[
[
[
DATA BASE
The limited analysis presented in this report is based on infor-
mation and data obtained by AEIDC and Dames and Moore from periodic
field investigations during their August through October 1981 field
season as well as pertinent background information and data obtained
from the literature and agency contacts. The University of Washing-
ton's Fishery Research Institute (FRI) participated in an August 28
aerial spawning count and provided much of the background information
on sockeye salmon. FRI also provided results of its annual sockeye
salmon spawning index surveys for the Kvichak system of which the
Tazimina River is a part. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game
(ADF&G) provided background information on resident species and re-
sults of their sampling efforts in the Tazimina River. All published
streamflow data for the Newhalen River were provided by the U.S. Ge,o-
logical Survey (USGS). In addition, unpublished miscellaneous mill-
winter streamflow measurements, and a partial record of 1981 daily
streamflows for the Tazimina River were provided by the USGS in the
form of provisional data. The water quality sampling and analysis was
conducted by L.A. Peterson and Associates, Fairbanks, Alaska.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The Tazimina River is located in southwestern Alaska in the
Kvichak River drainage. The Kvichak basi-n is a broad, flat lowland
surrounded by high mountains on three sides and Bristol Bay to the
southwest. The Tazimina River enters the Newhalen River from the east
between Illiamna Lake and Lake Clark. Figure 1 presents a map of the
study area.
The Tazimina River is a nonglacial stream originating in the
Chigmit Mountains and flowing southwest approximately 45 miles, then
northwest for an additional 9 miles before entering Sixmile Lake di-
rectly opposite the village of Nondalton. Two relatively large lakes
7
N
SCALE
0 2 4;\liles
A USGS gaging station
~ Proposed damsite
~ Studyarea
r -: ,)
~ ...
~ .
Figure 1. Location map for the study area.
PROJECT AREA
\
·' t..,.Ctt
~ ....... ~~-
r-l c-J r-:J l,'"l c-:'J ~
,exist in the upper Tazimina basin. Their combined surface areas com-
prise nearly 3 percent of the total drainage area (350 sq mi). Above
River Mile (RM ) 41 the Tazimina River passes through a steep, narrow
valley before entering Upper Tazimina Lake. The river flows out of
the upper lake at RM 32 through 7 miles of a spruce-forested glacial
basin and into Lower Tazimina Lake at RM 25. Downstream from the
lower lake, the terrain flattens out to a broad forested plateau. The
river widens to form several small lakes between the lower lake outlet
(RM 18) and RM 11.5. The river passes over a 90-foot falls and into a
steep walled canyon near RM 9.5. Downstream from the canyon the river
flows through an 8-mile segment of relatively flat, tundra-covered
terrain with mixed forest and shrubs along the river channel.
9
FISHERY RESOURCES OF THE LOWER TAZIHINA RIVER
Hajor fishery resources of the lower Tazimina River include
sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri),
Arctic char/Dolly Varden (Savelinus alpinus/malma)1 , and Arctic
grayling (Thymallus arcticus). Other species occurring in the lower
river include round whitefish (Prosopium cylindraceum), chinook salmon
(Oncorhynhcus tshawytscha), longnosed sucker (Catostomus catostomus),
threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus), ninespine stickleback
(Pungitius pungitius), and slimy sculpin (Cottus cognatus). Only
sockeye salmon, rainbow trout, Arctic grayling, and Arctic char are
addressed in this report.
Because of its importance to the commercial and subsistance fish-
eries, sockeye salmon is the principal fishery resource of the Tazi-
mina River. Historically, the Tazimina River sockeye stocks contri-
bute up to 5 percent of the total Kvichak River run--the largest sock-
eye salmon fishery in the world. The Kvichak watershed, excluding
Lake Clark and its tributaries, is designated as a Wild Trout Area by
the ADF&G and is managed as a trophy sport fishery. Tazimina River
Arctic grayling and rainbow trout, in particular, are much sought
after by sportsmen and provide substantial business for commercial
guides and private lodges. Numbers of Arctic char in the lower
Tazimina River appear to be relatively small and, although occa-
sionally captured by anglers, they are not a dominant sport fish.
Little site-specific information exists which would allow
definition of the seasonal distribution, relative abundance, and life
history requirements of major fish species inhabiting the Tazimina
River. However, a general description of the fishery resources of the
1 Because of their close morphological resemblance, some confusion
exists concerning the taxonomy of Arctic char and Dolly Varden. Since
discrimination between the two species was not essential for the pur-
poses of this assessment, specific taxonomic identification was not
attempted. We refer to these fish as Arctic char.
11
Tazimina River can be assembled from information for the same species
inhabiting nearby drainages in the Iliamna area and from information
for the Naknek and Wood River systems. Figure 2 summarizes such in-
formation.
Most species appear to utilize the Tazimina River seasonally or
only during a particular life history stage. We used available data to
generate the following generalized phenology chart, which indicates the
species/life stages probably present in the lower Tazimina River at
various times of the year (Figure 2).
SOCKEYE SALMON
Though sockeye salmon inhabit the lower Tazimina River throughout
most of the year, various life stages are present only seasonally.
Much of their lives are spent in a lake or marine environment. Sockeye
depend on the Tazimina River habitat for reproduction. Spawners gen-
erally begin to enter the Tazimina River in early to mid-July. Returns
continue to increase throughout August. Peak spawning activity
generally occurs in late August or early September and by mid-September
few live sockeye remain in the river (Poe, pers. comm.). Fertilized
eggs incubate in the stream gravels and probably hatch from February to
mid-March depending on intergravel water temperatures. The alevins
generally remain in the gravels until emergence, which generally coin-
cides with breakup (late April to mid-June). After emergenece, fry
move immediately downstream to lake nursery areas. Young sockeye sal-
mon spend one or two years in fresh water before outmigrating to
Bristol Bay. Sockeye salmon return to the Tazimina River to spawn
after two or three years in the ocean.
The majority of sockeye salmon spawning occurs in the lower 6.5
miles of the Tazimina River--both in the main stem and in side chan-
nels. Main stem habitats in the lm.;er 3 miles are most heavily
utlized. In years of high abundance, sockeye salmon spawners are found
throughout the entire 9.5 miles of the river below the falls.
Escapement of sockeye spawners to the Tazimina River has been mon-
itored since 1920. Surveys indicate that historic index counts of the
12
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
c
[
[
c
[
L
[
[
[
Figure 2. Phenology chart for major fish species of the lower Tazimina River.
Life Stage Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec.
1-ll.S --Adults/
Spa1.n1exs RB -? ------ -
GR -?-1-----
.
-l-AC ? --
RB -----Adults! :
N onspawners --GR --1---:-:.
I AC**
RS 1----1-_B.S -----Incubation/
Alevins RB -------
__ G..!!:_
?--
AC ? AC
? -----
RS
Juvenile ----
(Rearing) RB
AC**?
GR?
RS --·---Juvenile
(Outmigrating)
LEGEND
?Timing data is limited and inconclusive ------May be present but not abundant
**Current data indicate these fishes do not extensively utilize the river Abundant
AC Arctic char
GR Arctic grayling
RS Sockeye salmon
RB Rainbow trout
13
Tazimina River have varied
years, the escapements to
from zero to
the Tazimina
almost 500,000. In recent
River have increased. The
increase is attributable to increased ocean survival and to better
management of the commercial harvest in Bristol Bay (Poe 1980, 1981).
Figure 3 presents index survey results for sockeye salmon spawners in
the Tazimina River for the last eight years. (Additional survey data
are presented in Figure II-1, Appendix II.) The Tazimina stocks are on
a five year cycle with two years of high escapements, a subdominate
year after or before the dominate year, and two or three years of
average or fairly low escapements. The next peak returns to Bristol
Bay are predicted for 1984 and 1985.
Sockeye salmon spawner distribution was determined by helicopter
survey on August 28, 1981 and recorded on a 1:15,840-scale drawing of
the lower river. Mr. Poe of FRI provided the numerical index, and
Mr. Isakson of Dames and Moore noted the distribution within the river
(Figure 4). Of the 21,900 spawners, 70 percent was in the lower
3 miles of the river, and 90 percent was counted downstream of RH 6.5.
Source:
Figure 3. Index survey results since 1974 for
sockeye salmon in the Tazimina River.
Year Number of fish Year Number of fish
1974 104,470 1978 146,900
1975 149,950 1979 495,750
1976 16,200 1980 128,500
1977 7,205 1981 28,215
Data from Poe and Mathisen (1982).
14
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
[
c
c
[
[
,,
1--L
[
[
)
Alexcy Lahe
Figure 4. Distribution and abundance of sockeye salmon spawners
in the Tazimina River from aerial survey on August 28, 1981.
LEGEND
(if' River mile marker
lnll'llSJLy of spawning
f1lj Ih•avy
[2] Light
D None
_z-~
( ) Number of fish
SCALE
1 : ·18,000
0 .5 1 ;..1i IL'
t I ··t:=---=1
(o)
't
RESIDENT FISH
Although referred to as resident fish, rainbow trout, Arctic gray-
ling and Arctic char are probably intrabasin migrants. These species
appear to be most abundant in the Tazimina River during the open-water
season. Little information exists regarding life histories of these
fish or their seasonal distribution in the Tazimina River. (Appendix I
summarizes the available data.)
Rainbow trout probably migrate from lake overwintering areas to
the Tazimina River in late March and April. In the Bristol Bay region,
rainbow trout usually spawn just after breakup (mid-April to mid-June).
Commencement of rainbow trout spawning activities may be closely
related to stream temperature. Spawning has been reported in stream
temperatures of 5° to 7.°C (Russell 1974, 1976).
Exact locations of spawning areas could not be identified because
the field season did not begin until late July when spawning activity
had terminated. Rainbow trout probably spawn in the side channels of
braided segments and in some single-channel mainstem areas. Side
channel habitats are very important spawning areas in other Iliamna
systems. Spawning activity has been reported in Hudson and Alexcy
Braids (Russell, pers. comm. and ADF&G 1974). Rainbow spawners have
also been found in the Tazimina River canyon at RM 8. 7 (Sims, pers.
comm.), and Dames and Moore personnel captured young-of-the-year trout
near RH 8. 8. Due to the apparent limited availability of suitable
substrate, spawning habitat present in the canyon probably does not
account for a significant portion of rainbow trout production in the
Tazir.1ina River.
Postspawn rainbow trout probably remain in the Tazimina River
until sockeye salmon spawning activity ends and trout move downstream
and into the lake. Rainbow trout were observed in Tazimina River
throughout the open-water season in 1981. During the summer, trout
eggs incubate in the gravels until mid-to late July when fry emerge.
Young-of-the-year trout may remain in the Tazimina River for the
winter.
16
r
L
c
[
[
[
.[
c
c
c
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
Numerous young rainbow trout were observed in the lower Tazimina
River during the 1981 field season. Although no systematic sampling
program was undertaken, juveniles were observed in slow, shallow water
along stream margins, in side channels, and in backwater areas.
Most of the good rearing habitat is located in the braided reaches and
side channels. Outside of these areas young fish appear to be
restricted to streambank margins.
Few data are available for Arctic grayling spawning activities in
the Tazimina River. Arctic grayling probably spawn in Six Mile and
Hudson braids (Russell, pers. comm.). In the Iliamna area, grayling
spawn in May and June, generally during spring breakup. The slightly
adhesive eggs sink to the stream bottom and become attached to sub-
strate. Spawning activity generally covers the eggs with a layer of
gravels. Embryo development is rapid, and eggs generally hatch in 13
to 32 days. As with other salmonids, development time is influenced
by water temperatures. Fry generally remain in their natal stream
during the summer. Young grayling occupy habitat similar to that.of
other young salmonids, selecting shallow, ·low-velocity areas with
cover. Only one young grayling was collected by Dames and Moore
personnel in the lower Tazimina River; however, side channels below
Alexcy Braid were not sampled.
Few observations of Arctic char were made during the 1981 field
season. Char reportedly move into the Tazimina River to feed on
salmon eggs and remain to spawn in late September through October.
Spawners were captured by sportsmen near RM 6. 2 in September. No
young Arctic char were found in the lower Tazimina River during the
1981 field season. The eggs incubate in the stream gravels until
hatching in March and April. Emergence probably occurs in May and
June. The young fish may move downstream to the lake to rear. No
juvenile arctic char were captured in the lower river during the 1981
field season.
17
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LOHER TAZIMINA RIVER
STREAMFLOH
The Tazimina River, a tributary to the Newhalen River, drains
approximately 10 percent of the Newhalen River basin. Although the
size of the river basins differ by a factor of 10, there are many
similarities between them. The same general climate influences both
river systems, they drain similar topography, and large lakes are a
part of both systems. Several large glaciers exist in the headwaters
of the Newhalen River, whereas glaciers have entirely receded from the
Tazimina River basin.
The USGS maintained a continuous recording station on the New-
halen River approximately 9 miles downstream from the mouth of the
Tazimina River from July 1951 through September 1967. In addition,
annual crest-stage data (annual flood peaks) were recorded from 1968
through 1977.
The USGS installed a continuous recording gage near RH 11. 6 on
the Tazimina River on June 19, 1981 and obtained several winter-
spring base flow measurements during the 1980, 1981, and 1982 water
years near RM 13.6. Additional streamflow data were periodically
obtained by AEIDC and Dames and Moore personnel in the low·er 8 miles
of the Tazimina River from late July through mid-October 1981.
On July 25, 1981 AEIDC installed a staff gage at RM 1.7 to sup-
plement the USGS recording station at RH 11.6. In addition, the USGS
gage on the Newhalen River, which was maintained from 1951 to 1967,
was visited, and AEIDC found the stilling well and staff gage to be
communicating with the river at gage heights above 5.4 ft. (At water
surface elevations below 5.4 ft, the stilling well was isolated from
the river.)
Throughout the late summer and fall of 1981, periodic obser-
vations were made of the staff gages at these three locations. USGS
and AEIDC personnel also measured streamflows to confirm the reli-
ability of the existing rating curve for the Newhalen River gage and
to develop preliminary rating curves for the two installations on the
19
Month
Januray
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Average Annual
*
Figure 5. Average monthly streamflows for
the Tazimina River
Estimated*
Long-term Average
255
200
180
180
565
1,680
1,995
2,090
1,260
770
600
340
843
Refer to Appendix II for methodology.
1981 USGS
Record
250
No Record
No Record
No Record
No Record
No Record
2,560
2,340
863
635
638
342
Tazimina River. These data provided the basis for estimating average
monthly streamflows for the Tazimina River (Figure 5).
The daily streamflow record obtained by the USGS for the Tazimina
River during 1981 was reviewed to determine the characteristic shape of
peak runoff events (Figure 6). Because of the two natural lakes in the
upper Tazimina River basin, rainstorm runoff events possess a broad flat
flood crest rather than a sharp pronounced peak. Thus, a considerable
degree of protection from streambed scouring and streambank erosion is
naturally provided to the lower river by the upper lake system.
20
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
[
[
r L
L
[
[
Figure 6. Comparison of 1-, 3-, 5-, and 7-day high flows
in the Tazimina River to the respective monthly and
long-term average monthly flows (cfs).
Estimated
Average Streamflow for Duration Indicated Average Long-term
Date 1-day 3-day 5-day 7-day Monthly Average
(cfs)
June 29
to
July 5 3,050 2,923 2,814 2,691 2,560 1,890
July 12
to
July 18 3,010 2,960 2,932 2,933 2,560 1,890
Aug 2
to
Aug 8 3,210 3,150 2,994 2,863 2,280 1,980
Aug 13
to
Aug 19 3,050 3,007 2,906 2,800 2,280 1,980
Oct 24
to
Oct 30 1,010 1,003 986 966 635 770
Insufficient data have been collected on the Tazimina River to
describe variations in monthly streamflows during wet and dry years.
It is known, however, that July and August 1981 streamflows were above
normal throughout the region. Newhalen River streamflows during late
July and early August were of such magnitude as to be considered be-
tween one-in-five-and one-in-ten-year high flows.
Field observations made on the Tazimina River during October 1981
indicated that groundwater inflmv provides a measurable contribution
to the Tazimina River streamflow between RM 4.8 and 5.8 (Figure 7).
Groundwater may be an important factor in maintaining winter stream-
flow.
WATER TEMPERATURE
As with the streamflow record, stream temperature and water chem-
istry data have only recently been obtained for the Tazimina River.
21
Location
USGS Gage
Figure 7. Reach gain measurements for the
Tazimina River, October 13, 1981.
River Mile
11.6
Streamflow
(cfs)
Mouth of Canyon 8.3
601.4
595.2
592.8
645.2
650.4
663.8
Above Alexcy Braid 5.8
Below Alexcy Braid 4.8
Above Hudson Braid 3.4
Below Hudson Braid 1.7
Reach Gain
(cfs)
-2
-1
52
4
7
Two Ryan model J-90 thermographs were installed July 26, 1981 near
RM 1. 7 and RM 8 • 3
model DP2321 dual
to record stream temperature data. Two Datapod
channel temperature recorders were installed Sep-
tember 22 at RM 18 and 11.6 to monitor air and stream temperatures.
Four additional Datapod recorders were installed in mid-October to
monitor air, stream, and intergravel temperatures (Figure 8).
Maximum, minimum, and average daily stream and air temperatures
are being obtained at two locations above the falls: approximately
0.3 miles below the outlet of Lower Tazimina Lake (RM 18.0) and at the
USGS stream gage (R.H 11. 6). The same information is being recorded at
the mouth of the river canyon near the proposed powerhouse site
(&'1 8. 3). In addition, the average four-hour stream and intergravel
water temperatures are being recorded at three locations in the lower
river where numerous sockeye salmon spawners were observed: Alexcy
Braid (RM 5.5), Hudson Braid (RM 2.3), and in a single-channel reach of
the mainstem below the Hudson Braid (RM 1.0 to 2.0). The Ryan thermo-
graphs which were installed July 26 at RM 1.7 and RN 8.3 were reinstal-
led in the mainstem of the Tazimina River upstream (RN 5. 7) and down-
stream (RM 4.8) of the Alexcy Braid to monitor anticipated groundwater
influence on winter stream temperatures.
An initial review of the available data indicates that mainstem
river temperatures were approximately 10 to 12°C from late July to
mid-September, then rapidly dropped to the 2 to 4 ° C range by early
October (Figures 9 and 10). Mean daily water temperatures during the
July through August period were approximately 0.5°C warmer at Rl1 1. 7
than at &'1 8.3. From mid-September through mid-October mean daily
22
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
r L
[
[
c
c
[
[
c
c
L
[
[
L
N w
Sial icm
~
3
·I
5
()
lnsl;dlc•d/l'ulled
7(2G·l0/l2
10/l;).
10/15 .
10/Hi ·
10/15.
10/15.
1• c
1-(I '
Temperature
Strc•am
Stream a'nd intragravcl
Stream and intrabrravcl
Stream
Stream and inlraljl'avel
Strram
Figure 8. Locations of temperature stations in 1981 field season.
. -~ I o· Ryan N __,__ tlwrmograph
Station lnslaiiPd/Pulkd T<'mp~raturc
7 7/:~fi. 10/ 1·1 Stn·am 6 Data pod
8 10/15. Str.·am and air thcnnogrnpll
9 10/]4. Slrram and air
10 !ln1 . 10112 SlrPam mH.I air Orh' ~Till ...
11 10/12. Sln•am anti air c_ .. c::=::. -····. =:::::~
12 !l/:22 ·10/12 ~ll'l':llll and air D.\llll'S & :'\tonn•
[
[
Figure 9. Mean daily stream temperatures (oC) at [ two locations on the Tazimina River during
July and August 1981.
July 1981 August 1981 [
Canyon River Canyon River [ Mouth Mouth Mouth Mouth
Date RM 8.3 RM 1. 7 RM 8.3 RM 1. 7
1 10.9 ll.5 [
2 10.6 11.4
3 10.7 11.4 c 4 11.1 12.1
5 11.7 12.4
6 ll. 5 12.2 [ 7 11.7 12.3
8 11.7 12.4
9 11.7 12.4
10 l1.5 12.2 [ ll 11.2 11.9
12 H.2 11.9
13 10.9 11.1 [ 14 10.5 11.0
15 10.0 10.5
16 10.2 10.7 c 17 10.0 10.4
18 10.0 10.4
19 10.1 10.5
20 9.6 10.0 c 21 9.7 10.7
22 10.0 10.5
23 10.1 10.5 [ 24 10.0 10.3
25 10.6 l1.5
26 12.2* 12.9* 11.3 11.9
27 11.9 12.6 11.2 ll.8 [ 28 11.7 12.3 11.2 12.0
29 11.4 11.9 11.1 ll.8
30 11.0 11.6 10.7 11.1 c 31 11.0 11.6 10.8 11.4
* [ Thermograph installed July 26, 1981.
,-,
I .
L
[
24 [
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
*
**
***
Figure 10. Mean daily stream temperatures (°C) at four
locations on the Tazimina River during September
and October 1981.
September 1981 October 1981
Lake USGS Canyon River Lake USGS Canyon River
Outlet Gage Houth Hauth Outlet Gage Houth Mouth
&'1 18 RM 11.6 RM 8.3 RM 1. 7 RM 18 RM 11.6 RM 8.3 RM 1. 7
10.9 11.7 7.0 4.5 ** 4.3
10.8 ll.5 7.0 4.0 4.2
10.6 11.1 7.0 5.0 5.0
10.7 11.2 7.0 3.5 3.6
10.8 ll.5 6.0 3.0 2.7
10.7 11.2 6.0 2.5 2.3
10.7 11.0 5.5 2.5 2.4
10.6 11.0 5.0 1.5 1.4
10.5 10.6 5.0 2.0 1.7
10.2 10.7 5.0 1.5 1.6
10.3 10.7 5.5 3.5 3.2***
10.3 10.4 5.5 4.0 ~~** 3.7
9.8 10.2
10.0 10.0
9.6 9.8
9.5 9.9
8.1 9.3
8.5 8.5
8.3 8.3
* 7.8** 8.0
* 7.5 7.2 7.1
9.0 7.5 6.9
9.0 7.5 7.4
9.0 7.5 6.8
8.5 7.0 6.2
8.5 6.0 6.0
8.5 6.5 6.3
8.0 6.0 5.6
7.5 5.0 5.1
7.5 4.0 4.5
Thermograph installed.
Chart stopped September 21, 1981; thermograph removed October 12, 1981.
Thermograph removed October 12, 1981.
25
Date
Aug.
stream temperatures are approximately 3 °C cooler at RH 1. 7 than the
outlet of Lower Tazimina Lake (RM 18).
Diurnal temperature variations during August ranged from 0 to
2.1°C at RH 8.3 and 0.2 to 3.3°C at RN 1.7 (Figure 11). A represen-
tative summer diurnal temperature change for the lower river would be
approximately 1 to 2°C. From late September through mid-October diur-
nal temperature variations ranged from 0 to 1. 0°C at the outlet of
Lower Tazimina Lake, from 1 to 4.5°C at RM 11.6, and 0.2 to 2.0 at
RM 1. 7 (Figure 12). Representative fall diurnal temperature changes
would be 0.5°C at the lake outlet and 1.5°C at RM 1.7.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lG
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2·1
25
2G
27
28
29
30
31
Figure 11. Maximum and mininum summer stream temperatures (°C)
at two locations on the Tazimina River.
Canyon Mouth River Mouth
River Mile 8.3 River lV1ile 1. 7
Ma.x Min b.T Max Min
11.0 10.6 0.4 11.7 11.3
10.8 10.5 0.3 12.0 11.0
11.3 10.1 1.2 12.3 10.4
12.0 10.5 1.5 13.0 11.2
12.2 11.2 1.0 13.2 ll.8
11.8 11.3 0.5 12.6 12.0
12.0 11.2 0.8 13.0 11.8
11.9 11.4 0.5 12.9 11.9
11.9 11.4 0.5 12.8 12.0
11.8 11.2 0.6 12.6 12.0
11.4 11.0 0.4 12.0 11.8
11.7 11.0 0.7 12.3 11.5
11.0 10.8 0.2 11.5 10.8
10.8 10.2 0.6 11.3 10.8
lOA 9.7 0.7 11.0 9.9
10.7 9.7 1.0 11.5 9.8
10.2 10.2 0.0 10.5 10.3
9.9 0.3 10.8 ·• 10.2 10.2 -
10.2 9.9 0.:3 10.7 10.0
10.0 9.3 0.7 10.3 9.5
10.3 9.1 1.2 -11.3 9.3
10.8 9.2 l.G 11.8 9.5
10.8 9.G 1.2 11.3 10.0
10.3 9.8 0.5 10.8 9.9
11.8 10.0 1.8 12.8 lOA
12.5 lOA 2.1 13.G 10.5
12.2 10.::> 1.7 13.1 10.8
12.2 10.3 1.9 13.8 10.5
12.0 10.5 1.5 13.0 11.0
11.2 10.1 1.1 12.0 10.2
11.2 10.5 0.7 12.0 11.0·
26
b.T
0.4
1.0
1.9
1.8
1.4
0.6
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.2
0.8
0.7
0.5
1.1
1.7
0.2
0.6
0.7
0.8
2.0
2.3
1.3
0.9
2.4
3.1
2.3
3.3
2.0
1.8
1.0
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
. .
Date
Figure 12. 1\laximum and minimum fall stream temperatures (°C) at
two locations on the Tazimina River .
Lake Outlet River Mouth
River Mile 18.0 River Mile 1. 7
Max Min D.T Max Min D.T
Sept. 21 8.0 6.3 1.7
Oct.
22 9.0 8.5 0.5 7.8 6.0 1.8
23 9.0 9.0 0.0 7.8 7.0 0.8
24 9.0 8.5 0.5 7.2 6.5 0.7
25 9.0 8.5 0.5 7.0 5.5 1.5
26 8.5 8.0 0.5 6.8 5.1 1.7
27 8.5 8.5 0.0 7.0 5.7 1.3
28 8.5 8.0 0.5 6.5 5.2 1.3
29 8.0 7.5 0.5 5.8 4.5 1.3
30 7.5 7.0 0.5 5.2 3.8 1.4
1 7.0 7.0 0.0 4.2 3.5 0.7
2 7.0 6.5 0.5 5.0 3.2 1.8
3 7.5 7.0 0.5 5.4 4.6 0.8
4 7.5 6.5 1.0 5.0 3.0 2.0
5 6.5 6.0 0.5 3.4 2.2 1.2
6 6.0 5.5 0.5 2.8 2.0 1.8
7 6.0 5.5 0.5 2.8 1.8 1.0
8 5.5 5.0 0.5 1.9 0.6 l.3
9 5.5 5.0 0.5 2.3 1.2 1.1
10 5.5 5.0 0.5 2.5 0.5 2.0
11 6.0 5.0 1.0 3.8 2.5 1.3
12 6.0 5.5 0.5 3.8 3.6 0.2
Lake temperature profiles were obtained in early August by
L.A. Peterson and Associates (Peterson 1981) at four locations: Six
Mile Lake, the outlet of Lower Tazimina Lake, the inlet to Lower Tazi-
mina Lake, and the outlet of Upper Tazimina Lake. August lake tempera-
ture profiles indicated that neither Upper nor Lower Tazimina Lake is
stratified, but the lower lake is slightly warmer than the upper lake
(Figure 13). Corresponding average daily stream temperatures were
11. 5o C at Rl-1 8 . 3 and 12. 1 ° C at RN 1 . 7 .
HATER QUALITY
Little historical water quality and limnological data exist for
Upper and Lower Tazimina lakes, Tazimina River, and Six Mile Lake near
the mouth of the Tazimina River. During August 4-5, 1981 L. A. Peter-
son & Associates sampled six locations for water quality data: the
outlet of Upper Tazimina Lake, inlet and outlet portions of Lower Tazi-
27
Figure 13. Summer temperature profiles of Sixmile Lake and Tazimina lakes.
Depth, feet
0 r-------------------------------------------~
Six Mile
Lake
Upper Tazimina
Lake, Outlet
--
Lower Tazimina
Lake, Inlet
-·--·
Lower Tazimina
Lake, Outlet
-----
10
20
30
40
50
7
Source: Peterson (1981).
8
28
I
I
I
I
I
;I I
I
I
I \
I
I
I
\ I
J
I .\
I ")
I I
I
\ I
I I
I
9 10 11 12
Temperature (OC)
[
c
[
[
[
c
c
c
[
c
c
[
[
c
[
[
mina Lake, upper Tazimina River above the USGS gaging station, lower
Tazimina River (approximately 1.7 miles above the mouth), and Six Mile
Lake (off the mouth of the Tazimina River). Parameters measured in the
field included dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, conductivity, settle-
able solids, and alkalinity. Reported field values are averages of
three separate measurements made at each sample site. Laboratory
samples were composited from at least three locations at each sample
site. River sample stations were divided so that samples were col-
lected near the right and left banks and from the center as three
depth-integrated samples and then composited. Lake sample stations
were treated in a similar manner because samples were collected at the
inlets or outlets.
Dissolved oxygen measurements obtained during August 1981 indi-
cated that the Tazimina River/Lake system was near saturation. Dis-
solved oxygen levels in both Lower Tazimina and Six Mile lakes were
11 mg/1, 95 to 98 percent saturation throughout the depth ranges sam-
pled (Figure 14). Dissolved oxygen measured at two locations on the
Tazimina River was also near saturation levels. Measurements obtained
near RM 11.6 and RM 1.7 were 10.7 and 10.1 mg/1. These measurements
represent dissolved oxygen levels of 97 and 94 percent saturation.
Measurements were not made in the river canyon below the falls; we
believe that dissolved gas levels are at present slightly supersatu-
rated.
The water chemistry data obtained throughout the Tazimina River
system and in Six Hile Lake during August 1981 ~vere similar (Figures 15
and 16). Because of this similarity, the following discussion provided
by Mr. Peterson generally does not differentiate between sample loca-
tions.
Alkalinity and hardness values were low, pH was slightly acidic,
and free carbon dioxide levels were low to moderate. Turbidity
and total suspended solids levels were low, indicative of a clear
water system. Settleable solids were less than the detection
limit, 0.1 ml/1, at all sample stations. These low levels of
solids and turbidity are particularly noteworthy since discharge,
measured at the USGS gaging station, was at its highest peak for
the period of record on the dates the water quality sampling was
conducted. Because solids levels and turbidity are directly
related to discharge, the values measured on August 4 and 5 are
likely to be among the highest levels occurring naturally in the
Tazimina system.
Figure 14. Summer dissolved oxygen profiles of Sixmile Lake and Tazimina lakes.
Six Mile
Lake
Upper Tazimina
Lake, Outlet
--
Lower Tazimina
Lake, Inlet
-·--
Lower Tazimina
Lake, Outlet
-----
Depth, feet
0 ~--------------------------------------------.
10
20
30
40
50
10.0 10.5
30
)
I
I f
lj
-~-
//
I
I
11.0
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1
11.5 12.0
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[J
[
c
c
[
[
c
[
[
[
[
Figure 15. Summary of basic water quality data from August 1981
Sampling of the Tazimina River/Lake system.
Parameters*
Dissolved Oxygen
Conductivity, mhos/em @25°C
pH, pH Units
Temperature, °C
Settleable Solids, ml/1
Alkalinity, as Caco 3
Hardness, Ca+Mg, as Caco 3
Carbon Dioxide
D.O.,% Saturation
Outlet
Upper
Tazimina
11.2
22.0
6.6
9.2
0.1
11.0
6.8
7.0
97.0
)~Values in mg/1 unless otherwise noted
Adapted from Peterson (1981).
Inlet Outlet RM 11.6 RM 1.7
Lower Lower Tazimina Tazimina
Tazimina Tazimina River River
Field Measurements
11.3 11.3 10.7 10.1
21.0 23.0 24.0 23.0
6.5 6.8 6.7 6.2
9.7 11.0 11.9 12.1
0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
12.0 12.0 13.0 13.0
Office Calculations
6.6 6.8 6.4 6.7
9.0 5.0 6.0 18.0
98.0 98.0 97.0 94.0
RM 0.0
Six Mile
Lake
11.1
45.0
6.2
9.0
0.1
27.0
20.0
40.0
95.0
[
Figure 16. Summer concentrations of dissolved physical/chemical, nutrient, [
· and metal parameters for the Tazimina River/Lake System.
Outlet Inlet Outlet [
Upper Lower Lower RM 11.6 RM1.7 RMO.O
Tazimina Tazimina Tazimina Tazimina Tazimina Six Mile [ Parameters* Lake Lake Lake River River Lake
Physical/ Chemical [
Turbidity 0.35 0.50 0.30 0.50 2.5 1.4
Total Dissolved Solids 24 28 30 23 23 34
Total Suspended Solids 0.4 1.0 0.2 0.5 2.0 1.2 [ Chloride 0.6 0.6 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.4
Sulfate 6.4 7.1 7.8 6.2 6.5 8.3
Dissolved Nutrients [
Total Phosphate, as P 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 [ Ortho-Phosphate, asP 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03
Total Nitrogen, as N <0.38 <0.23 <0.37 <0.20 <0.36 <0.16
Ammonia, as N . 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02
Nitrate, as N <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 [ Nitrate, as N 0.32 <0.10 0.31 0.14 0.30 <0.10
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, as N <0.05 0.12 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Silicon 1.68 1.64 1.86 1.79 1.76 1.63 [
Dissolved Metals
Arsenic 0.0009 0.0010 0.0006 0.0007 0.0008 0.0008 [ Barium 0.18 0.04 0.11 <0.01 0.08 0.04
Calcium 2.220 2.117 2.136 1.957 2.090 6.49
Cadmium <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 [ Chromium 0.006 <0.003 <0.003 0.010 <0.003 <0.003
Copper 0.003 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.007 0.003
Iron <0.005 0.014 <0.005 0.016 0.011 0.027 [ Mercury <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002 <0.0002
Potassium 6.2 1.8 3.0 1.8 4.3 3.2
Magnesium 0.316 0.309 0.347 0.360 0.358 0.92
Manganese <0.002 0.003 <0.002 <0.002 <0.006 0.003 [ Silver <0.002 0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.002 0.003
Sodium 2.3 5.5 5.7 2.3 2.4 6.6
Nickel <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 [ Lead 0.0003 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0002 <0.0001 0.0001
Selenium 0.0042 0.0033 0.0034 0.0047 0.0033 0.0035
Strontium 0.012 0.007 0.009 0.009 0.005 0.025
Zinc 0.006 0.004 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.009 L
*Values in mg/1 unless otherwise noted
Source: Data from Peterson (1981) r~
L
f'
'-
32 [
Concentrations of nutrients were low to moderate at a.~)_ sites.
Nitrite was not detected at any site and ammonia was low at all
sites~ Total Kjeldahl nitrogen, the sum of ammonia and organic
nitrogens was~only detected at the inlet of Lower Tazimina Lake.
Consequently, this site was the only onechaving a detectable con-
centration of organic nitrogen. Nitrate and ortho-phosphate
concentrations were sufficient to provide for biological uptake
at all sites except the inlet of Lower Tazimina Lake and Six
Mile Lake. These sample locations exhibited nitrate concentra-
tions less than the detection limit.
Hineralization, as measured by conductivity and total dissolved
~-solids, in the Tazimina system and Six Hile Lake was also low.
This is typical for freshwater systems in this part of Alaska.
However, these measurements were made during a period of high
discharge. Therefore mineralization in the system could have
been somewhat depressed because of the typical inverse relation-
ship between mineralization and discharge.
The major anion at all sites is biocarbonate. Sodium and calcium
are the major cations in Lower Tazimina Lake, Six Hile Lake, and
upper Tazimina River. Sodium, calcium, and potassium are roughly
equal in terms of milliequivalents per liter in Upper Tazimina
Lake and lower Tazimina River.
Cadmium, mercury, and nickel concentrations were less than their
respective detection limits. The remaining potentially toxic
trace elements, except copper, were below levels considered to be
safe for the growth and propagation of freshwater aquatic organ-
isms (ADEC 1979, EPA 1976, HcNeely et al. 1979, Sittig 1981, and
EPA 1980). Copper was 7 ug/1 at the lower Tazimina River site,
which exceeds the acceptable level of 5 ug/1 presented by HcNeely
et al. (1979). However, EPA (1976) presents information stating
that in most natural fresh waters in the United States copper
concentration below 25 ug/1 as copper evidently is not rapidly
fatal for most common fish species. The copper concentration
that would be fatal to fish in the lower Tazimina River must be
in excess of 7 ug/1 because this section of the river supports an
abundant fish population; or, this value was a laboratory error.
(Peterson 1981)
SEDIMENT TRANSPORT
A series of water samples ~vas collected throughout the Tazimina
River/Lake system coincident with the highest recorded streamflows for
1981 (3,130
Figure 16)
and 3,020 cfs). Analysis of these samples (refer to
as well as periodic field observations during the high
runoff period indicated that a very small amount of suspended sediment
was being transported by the Tazimina River. The low sediment trans-
port rate was further evidenced by the substrate composition of the
33
lower river, which grades from silty sands at the river mouth to
exposed bedrock anc l_arge boulders in the river canv0::.. ~.vith the
exception of a 0.3 :nile reach immediately upstream of the the river's
mouth and a 0.25 mile reach near RM 2, a very small percentage of fines
(silts and sands) is contained in the streambed.
The most apparent sources for sediment recruitment to the lower
river are localized streambank erosion (landslides) and temporary dis-
turbances of isolated sand deposits and gravel bars within the braided
river segments. Currently, the river channel is relatively stable and
natural streamflows probably could transport more fine sediments
through the system.
34
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
D
c
c
[
[
[
r
L
[
[
RELATIONSHIPS BET\-lEEN MORPHOLOGIC AND HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS
AND SOCKEYE SALHON SPAHNING AND INCUBATION SUCCESS
Classification of a river system into subreaches based upon
physical and biological considerations provides a basis for evalu-
ating different responses of a variety of habitat types to changes in
streamflow and related physical parameters. For example, more
spawning habitat would likely become de~vatered in a braided river
segment than in a single-channel reach for the same reduction in
streamflow. In addition, habitat responses to changes in physical
parameters at an established study site within a specific river
segment can be vie~ved as being applicable to all similar habitats
within that river segment. Thus, the general response of relatively
homogeneous river segments can be determined through the detailed
evaluation of habitat responses to changes in streamflow and related
physical parameters at one or two study sites in that segment.
The lower 9 .S-miles of the Tazimina River was subdivided into
relatively homogeneous segments based on biologic, morphologic, and
hydraulic considerations. Reach-specific substrate characteristics,
streambank stability, cross-sectional geometry, and the distribution
of sockeye salmon spawners were identified by helicopter survey and
recorded on a 1:15,840 scale map. Representative areas were
photographed, and the river segmentation ~vas confirmed by follow-up
helicopter and foot surveys. Four study sites were established on
the Tazimina River: three at side channels (one at the canyon mouth
and t~o1o within Alexcy Braid) and one single-channel site (RM 1. 7).
SUBSTRATE COMPOSITION AND SPAHNER DISTRIBUTION
The predominant streambed materials observed in the Tazimina
River graded from silty sands at the river mouth (RM 0.0) to bedrock
and large boulders in the canyon (RM 8. 3 to 9. 5) • Streambed and
streambank materials upstream from RH 6. 5 are of volcanic origin.
Available spawning substrates between RM 6. 5 and 9. 5 are primarily
sharp, angular, platelike particles of metamorphosed volcanic tuff.
Downstream of RM 6.5 the river flows through an extensive glacial
35
Spawning ground surveys were conducted on the Tazimina River by
FRI in 1961 and 1962 (FRI unpublished data). Due to differences in
classification methodologies and the inability to reliably determine
river mile indices for the FRI transects, a direct comparison cannot be
made between the earlier stream survey data and our 1981 observations.
However, it can be concluded from a review of these data that the
general gradation of streambed material sizes from silty-sands to
boulders has not changed appreciably in 20 years (Figure 17) • Both
surveys indicated that the most suitable sockeye salmon spawning areas
are found in the lower 3 miles of the river. The 1981 survey also
identified the braided reach between RH 5 and RH 6 as an important
sockeye salmon spawning area.
During the 1981 season, sockeye salmon were observed in signifi-
cant numbers within discrete river segments (Figure 18). Spawners were
well distributed in the three braided reaches. However, sockeye were
observed in significant numbers only in the single-channel river seg-
ment between RH 1.0 and 2.0 and in the sho-r:t transitory single-channel
segments immediately upstream of Hudson Braid (near RH 3.4) and Alexcy
Braid (near RM 6.1).
Spawners made scant use of the remaining 4.4 miles of single-chan-
nel habitat below the falls. Lack of suitable spawning substrates and
high velocities appear to be the principal reason for its limited use
by spawners. The adult sockeye observed in the single-channel segments
bet\veen RN 3. 6 and 4. 9 and from RM 6. 4 to 8. 3 occupied the few isolated
pockets of suitable spawning substrate available in these reaches. Poe
(FRI unpublished data) indicated that spawners use the river segment
from RM 3.6 to 4.9 more extensively than was observed in 1981 during
years of larger escapments.
Limited use is made of the canyon area (RM 8.3 to 9.5) by sockeye
spawners. Few fish were observed in the canyon during the 1981 field
season. No fish were observed here during the helicopter survey, as
high velocities and turbulence limits visibility in this reach. As
with the other single-channel segments of the river, spawning appears
to be limited by lack of suitable substrates. Canyon substrates are
dominated by large boulders and bedrock; however, small isolated
36
[
[
[
c
[
[
c
c
c
[
[
D
[
[
r~
I
L
[
[
River River
Segment Mile
1 0.0 -0.3
2 0.3 -1.15
3 1.15 -1.95
4 1.95-2.2
5 2.2 -3.25
6 3.25-3.6
7 3.6 -4.9
8 4.9 -5.8
9 5.8 -6.4
10 6.4 -7.9
11 7.9 -9.5
Figure 17. Comparison between 1981 AEIDC and 1962 Fisheries Research Institute
stream bottom composition surveys for the lower Tazimina River.
1981 AEIDC Survey 1962 Fisheries Research Institute Survey
Bottom Composition Transect Estimated Bottom Composition
Narrative Description Number River Mile < 1/8 in 1/8·3in 3 ·12 in
Silty sands through small gravels; few large 1 0.0 40% 30% 20%
cobbles and boulders in mainstem scour holes on
outside bends.
Predominately 1-to 2 1/2-in gravels; sand bars, 2 0.6 30% 30% 30%
and interstitial sand deposits with few large
cobbles and boulders.
80% of the gravels under 3 1/2 in; little sand in 3 1.2 30% 30% 30%
bars or gravels. 4 1.8 40% 20% 30%
50% sand and 50% 2 to 4 in.
Predominately 1 1/2-to 3 1/2-in with approxi-5 2.4 20% 30% 30%
mately 10% sand. Few large cobbles and boulders 6 3.0 20% 30% 30%
in deep pools.
2-to 3-in gravel armored with 6-in cobbles approxi-7 3.6 20% 20% 30%
mately 10% sand in streambed.
Predominately large cobbles and boulders; 70% 8 4.5 20% 20% 30%
streambed materials greater than 7 in.
Predominately 11/2-to 3 1/2-in particles in side
channels; approximately 30 to 40% of particles in
mainstem are 6 to 10 in.
3-to 6-in material.
60 to 70% 6-to 12-in material; volcanic origin. 9 6.5 20% 20% 20%
Sharp, angular, platelike particles 10 7.5 20% 20% 20%
Bedrock and boulders predominate, small isolated 11* 8.0 10% 10% 30%
deposits of 1-to 3-in angular particles exist in 12*
' "'--~ 9.0 10% 10% 30%
eddy areas.
*10% substrate material unknown size (assume bedrock).
> 12 in
10%
10%
10%
10%
20%
20%
30%
30%
40%
40%
40%
40%
)
)
Figure 18. Sockeye salmon spawner distribution with respect to substrate type.
Rn.-rr River
Sr1rn1ent Mile
A
D
E
F
0.0·0.3 Silty sands through small gravels; few large
cobbles and boulders in m.unstem scour holes on
outside bends.
0.3-1.15 Predominantly 1 to 2 1/2 In nnels: sand bars.
and intt-rstitial sand deposits with few large
cobbles and boulders.
2.2. 3.25 Predominantly 1 1/2 to 3 1/2 in with approi-
mately 1 0':0 sand. Few lan~e cobbles and
boulders in deep pools.
3.25. 3.6 2 to 3 in ~avel annored with 6 in cobbles
approximatt'ly 10'?0 sand in streambed,
3.6·4.9 Predominantly large cobbles and boulders: 70%
streambed materials greater than 7 in.
•. 9. 5.8 Predominantly 1 1/2 to 3 1/2 in particles in side
channels: approximately 30 to 40% of p.uticles
in mains tern are 6 tn 10 in.
7.9. 9.5 Bedrock and boulders predominate, smaU isqlat('d
deposits or 1 to 3 in """h"Uiar p.uticlcs exist in
eddy areas.
H
6,300
1.860
1,595
615
202
D
E
LEGEND
(if River mile marker
Intensity of spawning
f@j!f!J Heavy
(???I Light
D None
0
38
B
SCALE
1 ; 48,000
.5
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
I
L
[
with the other single-channel segments of the river, spawning appears
to be limited by lack of suitable substrates. Canyon substrates are
dominated by large boulders and bedrock; hmvever, small isolated
pockets of suitable spawning substrates are present and probably ac-
commodate some spawners.
HYDRAULIC CONDITIONS AND SPA\VNER DISTRIBUTION
The lower 9.5 miles of the Tazimina River consist of two basic
types of stream channel: very stable, rectangular single-channel
reaches (three reaches) of nearly uniform gradient and fairly stable,
braided segments (three reaches) possessing irregular streambed pro-
files and nonuniform cross sections (Figure 19). Within the single-
channel segments streamflmv velocities are relatively high and quite
uniform. Little variation exists in the velocity pattern due to the
uniform streambed gradient and cross-sectional shape. At moderate and
high flows, low-velocity areas are principally restricted to narrow,
sometimes discontinuous bands adjacent to the streambanks. Hydraulic
conditions within the braided reaches are not uniform. Depths and
velocities vary markedly throughout the reach due to irregular stream-
bed gradients and stream channel cross sections. At moderate and high
flows, low-velocity areas are quite abundant within the braided
reaches due to backwater effects near the numerous junctions of
merging side channels.
Velocities associated with high streamflows during the spawning
season may at times adversely affect sockeye salmon production in the
Tazimina River. In addition to providing a potential for scouring
streambed gravels, high velocities may deny spmmers access to suit-
able mainstem spawning areas. The high river stage also provides
access to overbank areas which then dewater as the river returns to
more "normal" seasonal levels.
During an August 17 overflight, adult sockeye observed in the
single-channel river segments were concentrated in narrow discontinu-
ous bands along the streambanks and immediately downstream of partial-
ly submerged debris jams. The distribution pattern was far more
coincident with the limited low-velocity areas in the river segment
39
)
.4/excy Lahe
Canyon Mouth
R:\18.3
Figure 19. Stream channel patterns of the lower Tazimina River.
Alexcy Braid
RM 4.9 to RM 6.4
LEGEND
fif River mile marker
40
[
Six Mile Braid f'
RM o to R1I l.U
c
[
[
[
[
0
[
r
L
ONE MILE [
Dames & Moore [
than with readily available spawning substrates. These fish may have
been seeking shelter from the high velocities in the mainstem river.
'This supposition was supported when, during the same overflight,
adult sockeye were dispersed and defending territories throughout the
braided segments of the lower river where velocities were lower. In
both Alexcy and Hudson braids adult sockeye were observed holding over
suitable spa~vning substrates in pairs and small groups. Observations
and fish captures during a follow-up foot survey confirmed that these
fish were still "green." Actual spawning was two to three w·eeks away.
On August 28 and 29, at a discharge of 1,600 cfs, adult sockeye
were well distributed over the suitable spawning substrates throughout
the lower river. In the single-channel segments, where a week earlier
adults had occupied stream margins and other low-velocity zones, they
were observed spread out across the width of the channel.
Streamflow measurements were made in this same single-channel
segment (RH 1. 7), where numerous sockeye were observed. Hean column
velocities between 3. 0 and 4. 0 fps were frequently recorded at a
streamflow of 1,582 cfs and betw·een 4.5 and 5.0 fps for a streamflow
of 2,415 cfs. Hean column velocities were not measured at this site
for the August 17 discharge of 3,130 cfs, but we estimated them to be
in the range of 5.5 to 6 fps.
Shallow depths associated with low flows during the spawning
season may deny adults access to desirable spawning areas in the
braided reaches. Even though low flows may not prevent adults from
entering some side channels, the accompanying shallow depths and low
velocities could deter spawners from using these areas. Fish may be
forced to use less suitable spmming substrates, such as those avail-
able in the mainstem bet~veen RH 3.6 to 4.9 and RH 6.4 to 9.5.
Hithin the single-channel segments and the main channel of the
braided segments, abnormally low streamflows probably concentrate
spawners in mid-channel areas. Although this may reduce the potential
for eggs to be dewatered during midwinter, some spawners may be forced
to use less suitable substrates, as low flows reduce the available
habitat in traditional spawning areas.
41
HABITAT UTILIZATION
Adult sockeye were located by helicopter survey, and characteris-
tic spawning areas were selected which encompassed the range of hy-
draulic and substrate conditions utilized by sockeye salmon in the
lower Tazimina River (Figure 20). Field measurements were made to
describe the characteristic range of specific habitat conditions
selected by spawning sockeye salmon using field techniques as described
in Appendix III of Wilson, et al. (1981).
Sockeye salmon spawners selected areas which possessed rather
specific hydraulic and substrate conditions. Spawners were observed in
areas with mean column velocities which ranged from 0.2 to 4.4 fps and
in depths which ranged from 0.6 to more than 4.5 ft. The majority of
fish was observed in water flowing at 0. 5 to 1. 5 fps and in depths
ranging from 1.0 to 2 ft. Dominant substrate particle size ranged from
0.25 to 4 in. Fish were observed over substrates with up to 40 percent
sand, but generally appeared to use areas with 1-to 3-in gravels and
less than 10 percent sand.
A literature review was conducted to determine the applicability
of published habitat criteria to evaluate sockeye salmon spawning habi-
tat in the Tazimina River. Results of this survey indicated that pub-
lished criteria are not transferable to the Tazimina River. Heasure-
ments collected in the Tazimina River indicate that Tazimina River
sockeye salmon use a broader range of habitat values than those expres-
sed in published sources (Burgner 1951; Chambers, Allen, and Pressey
1955; Bovee 1978; Hoopes 1962). Should application of the incremental
method of instream flow assessment be undertaken, field investigation
to develop habitat suitability criteria should be conducted as an inte-
gral part of the assessment.
CHANNEL GEOMETRY AND INCUBATION SUCCESS
A major factor influencing the survival of fertilized sockeye
salmon eggs is the potential of low winter streamflows to dewater
redds. Normal streamflows during the spawning season provide easy
42
[
[
[
[
J
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
c
[
[
c
[
f' I-
L
[
[
Figure 20. Sampling locations for characterization of sockeye salmon spawning habitat.
Alexcy Laile
7
SCALE
1 : 48,000
0 .5 1 l\lilc
@... River mile marker
43
access to spawning habitat along the stream margins and throughout the
braided river segments. Midwinter water surface elevations drop appre-
ciably below those present during the spawning season. As a result,
spawning areas along the stream margins and in the braided segments may
become dewatered. If not maintained by some subsurface source, inter-
gravel flow through these spawning areas would cease, and the incubation
success within these streambed gravels would be substantially reduced.
The differences in the cross-sectional shapes and st_reambed pro-
files of the braided and single-channel segments are important to re-
cognize when evaluating the effects of changes in river stage on
incubating eggs and alevins. The single-channel segments of the main-
stem possess a near uniform gradient and rectangular cross-sectional
shape. Only at a few river bends and isolated scour holes near debris
jams does the cross-sectional shape and streambed profile change.
Therefore, a substantial change in water surface elevation may result
in no appreciable loss of wetted perimeter.
Streambed gradients within the braided segments are nonuniform and
the cross-sectional shape of the channel quite irregular. Small
changes in water surface elevation can result in significant reductions
in wetted perimeter. Streambed elevations at the upstream ends of the
side channels within the braided segments are generally higher than
those of the main channel in the braid. Thus, as streamflows recede,
spawning areas in the head end of side channels are potentially the
first to become dewatered and theoretically the most vulnerable to
dessication and freezing.
During October 1981, mainstem Tazimina River streamflows \vere in
the range of 650 cfs. Few side channels observed were completely de-
watered, but many were no longer connected at their upper end to the
mainstem by surface flow. The upper reaches of these side channels
were dry or contained isolated pools of standing water with streamflows
reappearing in the lower reaches. This indicates that significant
intergravel flow enters these side channels from either a local aquifer
or the mainstem river. Some spawning areas were dewatered in the upper
portions of these side channels. Spawners had been observed here, but
no redds could be located by digging in the dewatered areas. Portions
of the side channels that held the largest number of adult
44
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
r~
L
[
[
[
spawners in August were still covered by flowing water under a dis-
charge of 650 cfs. Groundwater inflow is suspected of maintaining
intergravel flow at some of these locations even though the stream
channel may be dry during winter months. However, it is not known if
these flows are sufficient to support embryo development.
STREAM TEMPERATURE AND INCUBATION
Intergravel water temperatures directly influence embryo deve-
lopment, and in many areas of the Tazimina River intergravel tempera-
-tures appear to be directly related to stream temperatures. A data
collection program was initiated to determine the existing thermal
regime and the interrelationship between intergravel and stream tem-
peratures in the Tazimina River (refer to Figure 8).
Few data are presently available to describe this relationship
between stream temperatures and incubation success. Field data col-
lected during the 1981 field season indicated that when the eggs were
deposited in the gravels (late August), stream temperatures ranged
from 10 to 11 °C. Little diurnal fluctuation was observed in stream
temperatures. Temperatures remained relatively constant through
mid-September and then decreased rapidly. Eggs were not exposed to
temperatures below 4.5°C until 30 days after fertilization (Septem-
ber 30). Hence, under the existing thermal regime, it does not appear
that eggs would suffer from deformity or mortality associated with low
temperatures.
45
------------------------~
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN MOPRHOLOGIC AND HYDROLOGIC
CHARACTERISTICS AND RESIDENT FISH
Rainbow trout and Arctic grayling are present in the Tazimina
River in considerable numbers. Data on the seasonal distribution and
habitat use patterns of resident fish in the Tazimina River are
sparse. Relationships between the biologic requirements of resident
species which inhabit the lower Tazimina River and the river's geomor-
phologic and hydraulic characteristics can only be generally discus-
sed. Since our field studies were not initiated until late July,
spawning areas were not located. At present only generalizations
about streamflow and stream channel characteristics as they relate to
spawning habitat and incubation success can be provided for these
species. Little is known about the specific location of areas used by
immature fish within the lower 9.5 miles of the Tazimina River. Thus,
this report is limited to subjective statements about the availability
or quality of rearing habitat in relation to morphologic or hydraulic
characteristics of the various river segments.
Rainbmo1 trout probably spawn in suitable habitats which exist
throughout the lower Tazimina River. Few spawners were located in a
1974 ADF&G survey of the lower 5 miles of the river (ADF&G 1974).
However, Dames and Moore collected young-of-year trout in the canyon
(RH 8.8), near RM 5.5, and near RM 7.5 indicating spawning activity
had occurred in these vicinities.
Due to the large size of the rainbow trout which inhabit the
Tazimina River, Isakson (pers. comm.) suggested that the habitat suit-
ability criteria developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1 s
Cooperative Instream Flow Group (IFG) for Pacific Northwest steelhead
spawners might be used to evaluate rainbow spawning habitat in the
Tazimina River. Discussions with the ADF&G area biologist indicate
that the depth and velocity criteria curves developed by IFG generally
represent the range of habitat values utilized by rainbow trout
spawners in the Iliamna area (Russell, pers. comm., Bovee 1978). The
IFG substrate criteria were determined to be unsuitable for applica-
tion to the Tazimina River due to their lack of resolution.
If rainbow trout spawning habitat were to be assessed by the
incremental method of instream flow assessment, field investigations
47
~---~---~~~ ----------~--~---------~~-------~~~~
to verify the applicability of the depth and velocity ranges expressed
in th~ IFG curves and to determine the preferred range of depth and
velocity values for Tazimina River rainbow trout spawners would be
required. In addition, river specific habitat preferences with respect
to substrate curves should be developed.
Rearing areas for young trout can principally be divided into two
types: mainstem and side-channel habitats. Rearing habitats in the
mainstem are generally confined to low-velocity areas along the river
margins and scour holes with debris jams. These habitats appear to be
available over a fairly wide range of streamflows. As the stage drops,
low-velocity areas associated with the stream margins are still pre-
sent. In some cases they may be further away from the streambank. The
habitat associated with the scour holes is also relatively stable over
a wide range of flows.. These areas would become unsuitable for small
fish in high flows as the velocities would increase greatly.
Side-channel rearing habitat fluctuates in relationship to main-
stem discharges. At moderate and high flows, low-velocity areas are
quite abundant within the braided reaches due to the backwater effects
near the numerous junctions of merging side channels. As the stage in
the river recedes the size of these low-velocity areas is reduced. At
low flows during the open-water season, the upper portions of the side
channels dewater. Generally, flow reappears in the lower two-thirds to
one-half of the side channel. Velocities are generally low when the
head of the side channel is not connected to the mainstem river. Thus
it appears that rearing habitat is present over a wide range of flows.
Arctic grayling reportedly use the side channel areas of Six Mile
Braid and Hudson Braid for spawning. They tend to occupy areas with
small, sandy substrates (Russell, pers. comm.) Information regarding
the general relationships between various life history stages of Arctic
grayling and selected habitat variables \vere summarized by ADF&G
(Krueger, 1982). This summary provides valuable descriptive infor-
mation on the range of morphologic and hydraulic conditions which are
often utilized by various life stages of Arctic grayling. Unfortu-
nately, this information is not appropriate for development of habitat
48
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
suitability criteria since the data were collected for other purposes
qy several individuals using a variety of different field techniques.
Should habitat suitability criteria be desired for application to the
Tazimina River in the near future, a specific field study would be re-
quired to establish the relationship between spawning grayling and
relevant physical habitat variables.
49
ANTICIPATED DOHNSTREAM EFFECTS OF THE
RUN-OF-RIVER HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPHENT
This section of the report presents a conceptual discus-
sion of the generic effects which operation of a proposed
1200 kilowatt, run-of-river hydroelectric development may
have on the fishery resources in the lower 9. 5 miles of
the Tazimina River. It is based on the professional
judgement of the authors, very limited field data, and
only a preliminary understanding of the river and its
fishery resources. The discussion is not intended to
serve as an impact assessment. Its purpose is to identify
changes in fish habitat that are likely or unlikely to
occur as a result of project operation, present a plau-
sible description of ·these changes, and discuss their
possible effects on the fishery resources.
The proposed run-of-river project would withdraw water from be-
hind a small diversion dam near RH 9. 6 and discharge it through a
powerhouse at the base of the falls, RH 9. 3 (Figure 21) . Average
monthly generating flows would range between 58 and 111 cfs with di-
versions to meet peak monthly power demands ranging as high as
166 cfs. This development concept meets projected energy needs of
Iliamna, Newhalen, and Nondalton for the year 2000 (Critikos, pers.
comm.).
ABOVE THE POWERHOUSE
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Streamflow
Average monthly streamflows in the Tazimina River are estimated
to range between 500 and 2000 cfs during the open-~.;rater season and
approximately 200 cfs during the winter months (Figure 22). Stream-
flow diversions to meet generating requirements for the proposed run-
of-river project would reduce average monthly streamflows through a
0.25-mile river segment between the falls and the powerhouse at
RM 9.3. Under postproject conditions long-term average monthly
streamflows would be reduced from 3 to 7 percent during the period
51
\.Jl
N
N
SCALE
0 2 -Hliles
A uSGS gaging station
Surface conduit
II Proposed powerhouse
r--r-'1 l. . ' .J
PROJECT AREA
Tazimina Lahe
'
'
'
'
1
' '
3... ~r ~-J~, .;:~,
.:.,. .6 c!/' .. -~)' -~·, \
~ • (',~;: <n\j~\
. "'' ~~ ,., <~-.--.. ·' ~~ l'J['~t'li.,J: ~---••• .-.-p:t~"!, .. ;o ~. ,'j'.! ~-
"',/ I '•\,.
Figure 21. Location of project facilities for run-of-river scenario.
rlrl~c=Jc=Jc:JC""J~
Pre-
project
Month
January 255
February 200
March 180
April 180
V1 565 w Hay
June 1680
July 1995
August 2090
September 1260
October 770
November 600
December 340
Average
Annual 843
*Critikos, pers. comm.
Figure 22. Pre-and postproject streamflows (cfs)
for run-of-river development.
Generating Postproject Flow % Reduction pre-
Flow* above powerhouse to postproject
Avg. Peak Avg. Minimum Avg. Peak
105 139 150 105 41 59
111 139 89 61 55 70
89 132 91 48 49 73
83 111 97 69 46 62
74 111 491 454 13 20
65 69 1615 1611 4 4
58 76 1937 1919 3 4
72 138 1948 1952 7 7
87 125 1173 1135 7 10
94 139 676 631 12 18
105 145 495 455 17 24
105 166 235 174 31 L19
87 124 750 718 N/A N/A
Postproject
flow below
powerhouse
255
200
180
180
565
1680
1995
2090
1260
770
600
340
843
June through September, 13 percent in May, and 12 percent in November.
Due to the steep rapids and adjoining pools which exist in this portion
of the river canyon, reductions in streamflow of such magnitudes are
not anticipated to significantly change the range of depths and
velocities normally found in this reach during this period of the
year.
The most significant reduction in average monthly streamflows (31
to 55 percent reductions) would occur between early December and late
April. The effect of these decreases in winter streamflows on habitat
conditions in the upper river canyon is difficult to forecast due to
the synergistic effects of ice cover on depths and velocities. The
presence of ice in a river channel causes a backwater effect (staging)
which results in slower velocities and greater depths than would
otherwise be associated with a given streamflow. Although not obser-
ved, the formation of slush ice and anchor ice probably is an annual
occurrence in the Tazimina River canyon. This would result in a
greater depth of flow (perhaps notably greater) than would exist for a
similar discharge during the open-~..:rater season. Presently the magni-
tude of the increase in depth caused by ice under preproj ect condi-
tions is unknown.
Reduced postproj ect streamflows might increase the formation of
anchor and slush ice in the Tazimina River canyon. Since the magni-
tude of backwater effects associated with pre-and postproject icing
conditions is not known, it is impossible at this time to determine if
the postproject winter depths would increase or decrease.
Water Temperature
Since a storage reservoir would not be constructed as part of the
proposed run-of-river project, stream temperatures would not be influ-
enced by an upstream impoundment.
Stream temperature is mainly influenced by solar radiation, sur-
face area of the stream, and ambient air temperature. Reach velocity
would only become an important influence on stream temperature if very
large changes in streamflow are involved. The proposed powerhouse
diversions would have only a minor effect on the surface area and
reach velocity of the 0. 25 mile river segment during the period May
through September, so no changes in stream temperature in the river
canyon.
54
[
[
[
[
c
L
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
Although no data have been reviewed, present winter stream tem-
peratures in the canyon area are expected to be near zero. Thus the
proposed reductions in winter streamflow through the 0.25 mile reach of
canyon is not expected to result in substantially colder mid~·linter
stream temperatures. However, reduced streamflows during the period
October through December likely accelerate the cooling process, causing
stream temperatures in this portion of the canyon to reach 0°C and ice
to begin forming in the channel somewhat earlier in the year.
Water Quality
Proposed 58 to 139 cfs pmverhouse diversions during the open-water
season (when average monthly streamflows range between 500 and
2,000 cfs) are unlikely to so reduce stream velocities that existing
water quality conditions (toxicants or nutrients) would be affected.
To date, no dissolved gas measurements have been made in the river in
the canyon below the falls; hence, it is not known whether or not a gas
supersaturation problem presently exists. Nonetheless, powerhouse
diversions would result in such a small reduction in natural flow over
the falls that naturally occurring postproj ect dissolved gas levels
probably would not change.
Sediment Transport and Channel Geometry
The run-of-river project would probably have little effect on
reducing peak flows or increasing sediment input to the river. In
other words, it would not be expected to affect the naturally occurring
processes which determine the cross-sectional shape and substrate com-
position of the river channel.
FISHERY RESOURCES
Minor changes in habitat utilization may result from physical
changes which are likely to occur in this reach from project
operation, but they are not expected to significantly alter fish
production in the canyon (RH 8.3 to 9.5). Since the diversion would
alter streamfows by such a small percentage, little change is expected
in the availability or utilization of the habitat in the upper canyon
during the open-water season. Greater changes are anticipated in the
55
winter. Because of the seasonal habitat use patterns, the changes
would.probably cause only minor changes in utilization of this reach.
Sockeye Salmon
Sockeye salmon spawning habitat in this reach appears severly
limited by the lack of suitable substrates and few spawners were
observed during the 1981 field season in the canyon. During the
spawning season, depths and velocities are not expected to change
appreciably and water temperatures and dissolved gas levels should
remain unchanged from preproject conditions. Utilization by spawners
is not expected to change from preproject levels.
The effect of the project on incubation success is the canyon
cannot be predicted. In the fall, low flows naturally dewater the
stream margins probably exposing any eggs present to dessication and
freezing. Due to the large amount of exposed bedrock in the canyon
walls and river channel, it seems unlikely that intergravel flows
would be maintained by groundwater infiltration. Spawning which may
occur in deeper portions of the channel would probably be more suc-
cessful as these areas are not naturally dewatered and are unlikely to
dewater under postproj ect conditions. Because of the inability to
estimate the depth of flow in the river canyon when the river is
ice-covered (for both pre-and postproject), the effects of a 31 to 73
percent reduction in midwinter streamflow on incubation success cannot
be id.entified.
Postproj ect stream temperatures are not expected to differ much
for preproject temperatures during much of the year. Stream tempera-
tures are likely to cool to near 0°C earlier in the fall (October to
November), which may affect embryo development. Colder water tern-
peratures may slow the development process and delay hatching and
emergence. The consequences of these delays are unknown.
Emergence and outmigration generally occur in Hay and June.
Powerhouse withdrawals are expected to reduce naturally occuring
streamflows by only 4 to 14 percent. Thus, sufficeint streamflow is
anticipated for fry transport in this reach.
56
[
c
[
[
[
[
c
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
c
F LJ
r:l u
L
_)
u
Resident Fish
Field studies indicate that some rainbow trout spawning occurs in
the canyon. However, spawning habitat in this reach appears to be very
limited. Suitable spawning gravels are primarily restricted to a few
deep holes and small isolated deposits behind boulders. Project
development is not expected to significantly affect spring spawners
(Figure 23). Streamflow reductions anticipated from mid-May through
June are approximately 4 to 8 percent. These forecasted postproject
streamflows would not result in substantially different depths and
velocities over available spawning substrates. Neither stream tern-
perature nor dissolved gas concentrations are expected to be influenced
by the project during the period rainbow trout spawn. Thus habitat
conditions which are normally present during May and June are not
expected to be substantially the same under postproj ect conditions.
Therefore, the run-of-river project would probably not influence
rainbow spawning in the canyon.
Incubation occurs from the time of egg deposition (late May to
June) until August. The 3 to 7 percent reduction in streamflow fore-
cast for the period June through August is Hell within the range of
natural streamflow variations. Changes of this magnitude are not
·expected to effect preproject hydraulic, morphologic, or water quality
conditions. Thus, rainbow trout incubation is not expected to be
adversely affected by the proposed run-of river development.
Rearing habitat in the canyon area is confined to narrow discon-,
tinuous zones along the stream margins and to isolated low velocity
areas behind large boulders. The availability of rearing habitat in
the canyon is about the same all year. The proposed pmverhouse
diversions would be unlikely to have a detectable influence on the
availability or quality of rearing habitats during the period mid-Hay
through October as the forecasted changes in average monthly stream-
flows would be too small to cause notable changes in the amount of
shallow, low-velocity water along stream margins.
Under reduced winter flows, the availability of rearing habitat
could change. At this time, however, the magnitude or direction of
this change could not be predicted. Uncertainties regarding pre-and
57
-------------
Figure 23. Anticipated effects of the-proposed Run-of-River
Hydroelectric Development on fishery resources
above the powerhouse (RM 9.3 to 9.5).
Downstream Effects
Related to Changes in
stream channel
Species/Lifestage stream tempera-sub-morph-water
Affected flow ture strate a logy qua lty
SOCKEYE SALMON
Spawners 0 0 0 0 0
Incubation/alevins ? ? 0 0 0
Emergence/outmigration 0 0 0 0 0
RAINBOH
Spawners 0 0 0 0 0
Incubation 0 0 0 0 0
Emergence 0 0 0 0 0
Juveniles ? ? 0 0 0
Adults ? ? 0 0 0
ARCTIC GRAYLING
Spawners 0 0 0 0 0
Incubation/alevins ? ? 0 0 0
Juveniles ? ? 0 0 0
Adults ? ? 0 0 0
ARCTIC CHAR
Spawners 0 ? 0 0 0
Incubation/alevins ? ? 0 0 0
Emergence 0 0 0 0 0
Juveniles ? ? 0 0 0
Adults ? ? 0 0 0
X effect likely
0 effect unlikely
? insufficient data for determination
58
c
c
[j
D
0
0
c
c
c
[
c
[
[
L
postproj ect ice conditions in the river canyon and the overriding
effect of ice on depth would make it impossible to draw any valid
conclusions about >vhether the postproject river stage would be higher
or lower than present midwinter water surface levels. During winter
months immature rainbow trout probably spend a lot of time streambed
gravels (Everest and Chapman 1972; Edmundson, Everest, and Chapman
1968; Bustard and Narver 1975). A reduction in midwinter streamflows
could increase the amount of anchor and slush ice which forms in the
canyon area, and, ·in turn, also increase overall fish mortality as
more are frozen into the substrate and lost from the reproductive
cycle.
Grayling have been found in the river canyon, but little infor-
mation exists about their seasonal use of this area. If grayling
spawn in the canyon, spawners would be present between late April and
early May. The effect of decreased streamflows during this period on
the availability of grayling spawning habitat cannot be forecast
because of uncertainties about the location of such habitat and the
effects of postproj ect ice conditions on river stage in the river
canyon.
Field studies indicated that grayling may utilize the canyon only
during the open-water season. Adult grayling were captured by angling
in the canyon throughout the 1981 summer field season (none were
captured in October). Physical characteristics of the canyon during
the period May through November would not be expected to be markedly
different under postproject conditions. Therefore, postproject use of
the canyon by nonspawning adults probably would not differ signifi-
cantly from that which presently occurs.
BELOH THE POHERHOUSE
The proposed run-of-river development would not alter the natural
flow regime of the Tazimina River below RN 9. 3 (refer to Figure 22).
Consequently, it would not affect thermal characteristics, sediment
59
~~--~ --~--~-~--~-------
transport, or water quality
quality, stream temperatures,
below RN 9.3. If streamflow, water
and sediment transport characteristics
were to remain essentially unaltered below· the powerhouse, the run-
of-river project would not be expected to perceptibly alter the avail-
ability or quality of fish habitat downstream of the powerhouse.
SUMMARY
The run-of-river plant probably would not alter naturally occur-
ring streamflows or stream temperatures in the lower 9 miles of the
Tazimina River. Any changes in~ the availability or quality of fish
habitat in the lower 9.5 miles of the river could be expected to be
confined to a . 25 mile reach immediately below the falls (RM 9. 3 to
&.'1 9.5). This reach contains only a small amount (if any) of low
quality sockeye salmon spawning habitat. Thus, project-induced
changes in habitat conditions would not adversely affect sockeye
salmon production in the lower Tazimina River.
An extremely small data base exists regarding seasonal use of the
Tazimina River by resident species. Therefore, a definitive statement
cannot be provided regarding effects of the proposed run-of-river
development on rainbow trout, Arctic grayling, and Arctic char pro..;.
duction in the lower 9.5 miles of the Tazimina River. However, on the
basis of the authors' experience and familiarity with the lower river,
it does not appear that anticipated changes in habitat conditions
within the .25 miles of canyon would significantly affect resident
fish populations of the lower river. Additional ,.,ork would be re-
quired to ascertain the degree to which this reach within the river
canyon is utilized by resident species.
60
[
[
c
c
[
[
c
[
c
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
ANTICIPATED Dm.JNSTREAM EFFECTS OF THE
STORAGE RESERVOIR HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT
This section of the report presents a conceptual
discussion of the generic effects operation of a hydro-
electric development with a storage reservoir may have
on the fishery resources in the lower 9.5 miles of the
Tazimina River. It is based on the professional judge-
ment of the authors, very limited field data, and ·on
only a preliminary understanding of the river and its
fishery resources. The discussion is not intended to
serve as an impact assessment. Its purpose is to
identify potential changes that are likely or unlikely
to occur as a result of a proposed development, and
discuss their possible effects on the fishery resource.
A 60-ft high dam would be constructed at RM 13.1 to impound water
and provide regulation of streamflow from the upper two thirds of the
Tazimina River basin. Water would be withdrawn into a closed conduit at
the storage dam and pass through a powerhouse to be returned to t:,he
Tazimina River at approximate RM 8. 3 (Figure 24). This 16-megawatt
development would meet the projected energy demands of the Bristol Bay
region through the year 2000 (Critikos, pers. comm.).
The proposed reservoir would provide approximately 300,000 acre
feet of storage. During normal operation the reservoir is expected to
.fill by early August and remain at the full pool elevation of 690 ft
through October. Draw-down would begin in November and continue through
May. Streamflows in the 13 miles of river below the proposed dam would
be altered throughout the year (Figure 25). The most significant
change would occur in a 4. 8 mile section between the dam and the
powerhouse.
The impoundment would increase the surface area of Lower Tazimina
Lake from 4,100 acres to 8,200 acres by inundating three existing pond-
ages on the Tazimina River between the dam site and outlet to Lower
Tazimina Lake and inundating the river upstream from the lake. The
water surface elevation of Lower Tazimina Lake is expected to increase
by 45ft (from 645 to 690ft).
61
0\
N
N
0 411iles
A USGS gaging station
~ Proposed damsite
II Proposed powerhouse
Surface conduit
Proposed reservoir
Figure
PROJECT AREA ' ~ \
'-\
c--.~ \ '~ l ~ V0 :
..:..... b .:ij<";l~ .. \ ~. <;p~ '~:~:'?>~
,,' ~~~ ~1~\=-?~·-~4··: ~-... • ~ ...... ~-~~~_. c.:: vp v~~::~):~ ~-" ......
Location of project facilities for storage scenario.
Figure 25. Pre-and postproject streamflows (cfs) for
the proposed storage reservoir development.
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Average Annual
Preproject
Streamflow
255
200
180
180
565
1,680
1,995
2,090
1,260
770
600
340
843
Generating
Flow
663
669
570
597
639
806
884
710
592
594
649
726
675
Storage
Flow*
408
469
390
417
74
+ 874
+1,111
+ 208
0
0
49
386
0
*Approximate live storage 133,000 acre/ft.
TAZIHINA RIVER CANYON
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Streamflows
Streamflow
between
Dam and
Powerhouse
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 '172
668
176
0
0
168
Streamflow
below
Pow·erhouse
663
669
570
597
639
806
884
1,882
1,260
770
649
726
843
This development proposal would interrupt the natural streamflow
through the Tazimina River canyon during nine months of the year (Fig-
ure 26). Water needed for power generation would be diverted around
this river segment in a closed conduit to a powerhouse located near
63
the mouth of the canyon. The river canyon is not expected to become
completely dewatered, however. Several deep scour holes exist in the
river canyon which would retain relatively large volumes of water even
if streamflows were extremely small.
Surface runoff and groundwater inflow may also enter the river
channel below the dam. However, streamflow measurements made during
August and October 1981 indicate a negligible amount of flow accrues to
the river between the USGS gage at RM 11.6 and the mouth of the river
canyon at RM 8.3 (refer to Figure 7). Therefore, surface runoff is not
expected to be sufficient to provide any significant amount of flow
through the river canyon.
In addition, spills are expected from the reservoir during late
summer and fall (August to October) which could provide appreciable but
temporary flow in the. river canyon. However, it is unlikely these
spills would occur during low-runoff years.
Water Temperature
Since sfreamflows between the dam and the powerhouse would be
significantly reduced (Figure 27), stream temperatures within the river
canyon are likely to be affected.
The least amount of change in stream temperatures is expected to
occur during winter months. Although no data have been revie~ved, pre-
project winter stream temperatures in the canyon area are expected to
be near zero. The proposed reduction in winter streamflow through the
canyon is not expected to result in substantially colder midwinter
stream temperatures. However, reduced streamflmvs during the period
October through December are likely to accelerate the cooling process,
causing stream temperatures in the canyon to reach 0°C and ice to begin
forming in the channel somewhat earlier in the year.
The reduction of streamflows during Hay and June are likely to
result in the ice cover remaining in the river canyon longer because it
would have a greater tendency to melt off rather than being washed out
during breakup runoff. June water temperatures are likely to be warmer
because of the solar heating of a rather tranquil reach.
64
[
[
r
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
c
E
r~
L
L
L
Figure 26. Anticipated effect of the proposed storage
reservoir development on preproject streamflow
in the Tazimina River canyon.
Preproject Postproject
Flow Flow Percent
Month cfs cfs Reduction
January 255 0 100
February 200 0 100
March 180 0 100
April 180 0 100
Hay 565 0 100
June 1,680 0 100
July 1,995 0 100
August 2,090 1 '172 44
September 1,260 668 47
October 770 176 77
November 600 0 100
December 340 0 100
Average Annual 843 168 80
Spills expected during August would wash the \varmer water from
the canyon and probably provide stream temperatures which are not too
different from present August temperatures. Insufficient data have
been obtained to provide a more quantitative statement.
FISHERY RESOURCES
Sockeve Salmon
Lack of suitable spawning substrates is probably the major factor
limiting sockeye spawning in the canyon area. Spawning may occur in
65
the suitable substrates present along stream margins and in deep scour
holes, but few spawners were observed in the canyon during 1981 field
studies. During the period August through October, flowing water would
be present in the canyon and projected postproject flows would probably
be sufficient to provide habitat similar to present conditions.
Streamflow reductions during the period August through September would
not appreciably change depths and velocities over the available
spawning substrates in this river segment. Reduced streamflows may
dewater some lateral margins and lower velocities in some areas of high
velocity. Sockeye salmon spawners would have access to suitable spawn-
ing habitat in scour holes and most lateral areas along stream margins
similar to present conditions. During this period water temperatures
and dissolved gas levels could also be expected to remain unchanged
from preproject conditions. Thus habitat conditions for spawners are
not anticipated to change significantly.
Successful incubation of sockeye salmon eggs in the canyon under
postproject conditions appears unlikely. However, present incubation
sucess in this area is probably limited. Low flows during fall natu-
rally dewater the stream margins, probably exposing any eggs present to
dessication and freezing. Due to the large amount of exposed bedrock
in the canyon walls and river channel, it seems unlikely that inter-
gravel flow could be maintained by groundwater infiltration. Spawning
that might occur in deeper portions of the channel would probably be
more successful, as these areas are not dewatered under natural condi-
tions. During the period from November through July, the scour holes
are expected to become deep tranquil pools connected by only a trickle
of surface water or perhaps completely isolated from the lower river.
It is not known if the flow would be sufficient for incubation in the
scour holes. Most of the lateral spawning areas would be dewatered.
If some incubation were successful, outmigration of emergent fry
would likely be delayed until August spills provided access to the
lower Tazimina River. Outmigration generally occurs in May and June.
Small numbers of sockeye fry were seen in the river as late as July 28,
1981. The effects of delaying outmigration are not known. But the
loss of the canyon habitat is not expected to significantly reduce
sockeye salmon production in the Tazimina River due to the small amount
66
[
c
[
[
[
[
r t
c
c
r u
[
[
c
[
[
of spawning which naturally occurs in the canyon area and the limited
incubation success.
Resident Fish
Field studies indicated that some rainbow trout spawning occurs in
the canyon, although spawning habitat in this reach appears to be very
limited. Suitable spawning substrates are primarily restricted to a
few deep holes and small isolated deposits behind boulders. No evi-
dence of grayling spawning was discovered. Under postproject condi-
tions rainbow trout and grayling would not have access to the Tazimina
River canyon during their spawning season (May-June).
Suitable rearing and feeding areas may be present from November
through July in the deep tranquil pools likely to be in the canyon.
However, due to the seasonal movement patterns of rainbow and grayling,
little use is expected of these areas. In June and July, when resident
fish are migrating upstream to summer feeding areas, the canyon prob-
ably would not be accessible. Under the proposed operating scenario,
access to the canyon would likely exist only from August through
October. Resident fish accompanying the sockeye spawners could enter
the canyon and utilized rearing and feeding areas. Both rainbow trout
and grayling were observed in the canyon in summer 1981. Field obser-
vations during that fall indicated that resident fish appear to travel
downstream to overwintering areas. Few fish would be expected to
remain in the canyon. Thus, under postproj ect conditions, seasonal
movement patterns would preclude use of the rearing habitat which may
be present in the canyon from November through July.
In the limited field studies, no information has been collected to
indicate that Arctic char utilize canyon habitats. Due to similarites
in seasonal-use patterns Arctic char, if present, would be affected in
a somewhat similar manner as sockeye salmon for spawning and incubation
(see preceding section). The delay in outmigration would likely have a
minimal effect on young Arctic char which feed mainly on aquatic
insects.
Figure 27 summarizes anticipated effects of the proposed storage
reservoir development on the fishery resource of the Tazimina River
canyon.
67
Figure 27. Anticipated effects of the proposed storage reservoir
on fishery resources within the Tazimina River canyon
RM 8.3 to 9.5.
Downstream Effects
Related to Changes in
Species/Lifestage
Affected
stream
flow
stream
tempera-
ture
sub-
strate
channel
morph-
ology
water qual1ty
SOCKEYE SALMON
Spawners
Incubation/alevins
Emergence/outmigration
RAINBmv
Spawners
Incubation
Emergence
Juveniles
Adults
ARCTIC GRAYLING
Spawners
Incubation/alevins
Juveniles
Adults
ARCTIC CHAR
Spawners
Incubation/alevins
Emergence
Juveniles
Adults
0
X
X
X
?
?
X
?
?
0
X
X
?
?
X effect likely
0 effect unlikely
0
?
?
?
?
?
?
0
?
?
?
?
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
? insufficient data for determination
not applicable
68
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
?
?
?
?
?
?
0
?
?
?
?
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
DOWNSTREAM OF THE POHERHOUSE
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Streamflow
Although the long-term average annual streamflow in the lmver
8.3 miles of the Tazimina River would remain unchanged, the proposed
storage reservoir facility would have an appreciable effect on seasonal
streamflows (Figure 28). Streamflows below the powerhouse would be
reduced by more than 50 percent (from 1,800 to 850 cfs) during June and
July. Hidwin.ter streamflows would increase by 200 percent (from 200 to
600 cfs). Streamflows below the powe.rhouse from December through April
would be very close to actual generation flm.;rs, since very little
natural flow could be expected through the river canyon during winter.
Any daily peaking or weekly base loading that might occur wciuld be
directly evidenced as an immediate change in downstream flmv patterns.
Field investigations during October 1981 documented the inflow of
approximately 50 cfs of groundwater in the Alexcy Braid, ,.;rhich is prob-
ably important in maintaining 'vinter base flows in the lower river.
Postproj ect generation flows during winter months would negate the
importance of groundwater inflows for maintaining streamflow in the
single-channel segments. It is also quite likely that they would
result in increased subsurface inflow to the side channels in the
braided river segments.
Summer streamflows below the pmverhouse would be the sum of the
powerhouse outflows plus the streamflow at the mouth of the Tazimina
River canyon. Generally, powerhouse outflows would not be expected to
influence daily or weekly streamflow patterns during summer months to
the same degree as they might during winter months. The forecasted
reservoir spills during August and September would be large enough to
buffer effects of reasonable (±15 percent) changes in daily generating
flows. Surface runoff and groundwater inflow might also enter the
river channel below the dam site, though discharge measurements made
during August and October 1981 indicated that a negligible amount of
flow accrued to the river between the USGS gaging station at RH 11.6
and the mouth of the canyon at RN 8.3 (refer to Figure 7).
69
Figure 28. Effect of the proposed storage reservoir
development on preproject streamflow below
the river canyon (RM 0 to 8.3).
Preproject Postproject
Flow Flow Percent
Month cfs cfs Reduction
January 255 663 + 160
February 200 669 + 235
March 180 570 + 217
April 180 597 + 232
May 565 639 + 13
June 1,680 806 52
July 1,995 884 56
August 2,090 1,882 10
September 1,260 1,260 0
October 770 770 0
November 600 649 + 8
December 340 726 + 114
Average Annual 843 168 80
Because the single-channel sections of the Tazimina River are
relatively uniform in gradient and rectangular in cross section, large
changes in streamflow \vould have relatively little effect on the top
width or wetted area of the channel (Figure 29). The most apparent
changes would be associated with depth and velocity.
Hydraulic characteristics associated with flow in the side-
channel braids of the Tazimina River are influenced by changes in
mainstem streamflow. During the 1981 field season aerial surveys,
staff gage readings, and streamflow measurements were made for use in
70
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
[
Figure 29. Comparison o.f hydraulic parameters from
discharge measurements in a single channel
segment of the Tazimina River.
Average Average Flow Wetted
Date Streamflow Top width Velocity Depth Area Perimeter
1981 cfs ft fps ft sq ft ft
Aug
Aug
Oct
ll 2,415 223 4.3 2.5 557 228
29 1,582 217 3.7 2.0 429 221
13 664 214 2.3 1.3 284 216
determining the discharge required to maintain surface flow from the
mainstem into the side-channel braids.
Because of its apparent susceptibility to being dewatered, a
principal side channel within the Alexcy Braid was selected as a study
channel. Staff. gage readings and discharge measurements were periodi-
cally obtained to describe flmv conditions in this side channel at
corresponding levels of flow in the mainstem (Figure 30). As mainstem
flow receded in September this side channel was one of the first to be
cut off from the mainstem at its upstream end. Overflights during the
Figure 30. Comparison of Alexcy Braid side channel
flow to Tazimina River streamflows.
Side channel Side channel Tazimina
Date Gage Height Flow USGS Gage
1981 (ft) (cfs) (cfs)
July 26 1.25 118 2,400
August 11 1.24 105 2,380
August 12 1.28 2,460
August 17 1.40 2,840
August 19 1.34 2,470
August 28 0.44 8.9 1,500
August 29 0.35 1,450
September 21 Dewatered 718
September 25 Dewatered 654
October 13 Dewatered 493
October 19 Dewatered 556
71
October 13-19 field study indicated that numerous side channels in the
Alexcy and Hudson braids were either flowing or wetted by intragravel
seepage and ponded water but the study channel in the Alexcy braid was
substantially dewatered. On the basis of the field measurements and
observations made during 1981, it appears that mainstem streamflows of
1,000 cfs would provide streamflow throughout most of the existing side
channels in the braided segments of the Tazimina River. Mainstem
streamflows in excess of 600 cfs would provide backwater effects and
stimulate intragravel seepage sufficient to prevent most of the side
channels from being significantly dewatered.
No winter field investigations have been conducted, so the degree
to which side channels currently dewater during winter months is un-
known. However, field observations and streamflow measurements made
during October strongly suggest that groundwater inflows maintain base
flow in many of the side channels (refer to Figure 17).
Stream Temperature
Although very few temperature data are available for the Tazimina
River, winter stream temperatures are probably near zero, and intra-
gravel water temperatures are between 0 and 4 °C. Stream temperatures
recorded during summer 1981 ranged from 8 to 12°C (refer to Figure 11).
The proposed reservoir would be expected to narrow the overall range
between existing winter and summer stream temperatures.
The proposed dam would increase the surface area of Lower Tazimina
Lake from 4, 100 to 8, 200 acres and provide a live storage volume of
approximately 133,00~ acre/ft. The reservoir is expected to be at high
pool elevation from August through October and at low pool elevation in
May. Depending upon the previous year's snowfall and the amount of
carry-over in storage, this would represent a reservoir drawdown of
approximately 35 ft.
Solar radiation, wind action, and summer inflow to the reservoir
could be expected to provide sufficient mixing action in the upper 35
to 40 ft of the reservoir to maintain midsummer water temperatures
quite similar to present water temperatures in the upper 35 feet of
Lower Tazimina Lake. Lake temperature profiles obtained during August
1981 indicated that little change occurs in water temperature within
72
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r~
b
[
[
the upper 40 to 45 ft of Lower Tazimina Lake (refer to Figure 13).
rhus, stream temperatures below the proposed dam during midsummer and
early fall are expected to remain similar to preproj ect stream tem-
peratures (in the 8 to 12°C range).
The proposed operating schedule indicates that the reservoir
would remain nearly full through October. Based on information from
other studies, water temperatures during September and early October
at depths of 30 to 40 ft would probably not differ significantly from
August water temperatures at these same depths. Controlled spills
forecast for September and October are expected to principally drmv
water off the reservoir surface. These spills would flow through
4.8 miles of the natural river channel before mixing with water being
discharged from the powerhouse at R.M. 8.3. During September these
spills comprise a significant percentage of the total streamflow below
the powerhouse. Postproject stream temperatures in the lower 8 mil,es
of the river during September should remain similar to preproj ect
temperatures. The controlled spills are expected to decrease in
October. Therefore, a greater percentage of the streamflow below the
powerhouse would originate at a depth of 35 ft beneath the reservoir
surface. As a result, stream temperatures in the lower 8 miles of the
Tazimina River are expected to be slightly warmer during October.
No spills are expected after October and streamflow in the lower
8 miles of river would result from powerhouse outflow. During Novem-
ber reservoir temperatures could be expected to be in a state of flux
as surface water temperatures cool and the reservoir stratifies. Near
the reservoir outlet water temperatures would probably range between 4
and 6°C. Stream temperatures immediately below the pm.,rerhouse would
also be in this range, perhaps cooling to between 2 and 4°C near the
river mouth.
During winter lake temperatures cool and, theoretically, stratify
with surface water temperatures near zero and the underlying water at
4°C. However, some evidence exists in the literature which indicates
subarctic lakes are isothermal (near 2°C) to depths in excess of
100 ft during winter even though ice-covered (LaPerrier and Casper
1976, AEIDC 1980, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1978).
73
Hence, winter (January to April) stream temperatures immediately below
the power-
house would also be in the range of zoe, possibly cooling to 0°e near
the mouth of the river. By late April the reservoir would normally be
drawn down to a level at which the relatively thin layer of colder
surface immediately beneath the lak~ ice cover could enter the outlet.
If cold water temperatures occur they would most likely be present
during April and May when the reservoir would be at its lowest
elevation. Some degree of mixing would likely occur in the reservoir
near the outlet, thus, it is doubtful that the temperature of the
powerhouse outflows would suddenly drop from zoe to zero. During this
period the temperature of powerhouse outflows might be l 0 e with stream
temperatures near the mouth of the river possibly ranging between zero
and zoe.
A very limited data base is currently available to describe the
existing thermal regime of the Tazimina River or to discuss anticipated
postproject stream temperatures. Additional lake, stream, and intra-
gravel temperature data would be required. A thermodynamic analysis
of the reservoir and downstream temperatures could be undertaken to
confirm or modify the various hypotheses discussed above.
Hater Quality
Other than its effects on water temperature, the proposed storage
reservoir probably would not significantly alter downstream water
quality conditions (dissolved solids, gases, and nutrients).
Due to the flooding of forest soils within the impoundment zone,
seasonal dissolved solids concentrations in Lower Tazimina Lake could
be expected to increase from preproject concentrations after the
initial filling period, then (over time) return to approximate pre-
project concentrations.
ZO to 30 mg/1 (refer to
Dissolved solids concentrations presently are
Figure 16). A fiftyfold increase would be
74
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
,~
b
[
[
required before state water quality standards (1,500 mg/1) for salmon
streams were exceeded (Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation
1979).
Dissolved gas concentrations during midsummer have been measured
near saturation levels (10 to 11 mg/1) throughout the Tazimina River-
Lake system (refer to Figure 15). Although oxygen consumption during
summer months within the new reservoir would likely be greater than
current summer consumption levels within Lower Tazimina Lake, dissol-
ved oxygen levels would probably not fall below the state standard of
7 mg/1 (L.A. Peterson, pers. comm.). Presently, gas supersaturation
is suspected to periodically occur in the Tazimina River below the
falls, although no field measurements have been made to confirm this
hypothesis or document that its occurrence has an adverse effect on
fish within the river canyon. Construction of the proposed storage
reservoir would greatly reduce flow over the falls, thereby reducing
the potential for gas supersaturation problems to occur in the canyon.
Because of the large volume of organic material that would be
inundated by the proposed reservoir, dissolved nutrient concentrations
within the reservoir after filling are expected to be substantially
higher than current midsummer levels in Lower Tazimina Lake (L.A.
Peterson, pers. comm.). Analysis of water samples from Lower Tazmina
Lake indicated that August 1981 dissolved nutrient concentrations were
very low (refer to Figure 16). Severalfold increases in these concen-
trations would not be expected to be detrimental to aquatic habitat
(Peterson, pers. comm.).
Sediment Transport and Channel Geometry
In general, the impoundment of a river results in a reduction of
peak stream_flm.rs and disruption of the basin's sediment transport pro-
cess. If any significant amount of sediment is normally transported
by the river, disruption of the sediment transport regime by the im-
poundment usually results (over time) in a notable change in the
existing substrate composition or stream channel geometry. Depending
upon the nature and magnitude of the change, it can be viewed as being
either detrimental or beneficial to existing habitat conditions.
The stream channel geometry and substrate composition of the
lower Tazimina River are current products of an impounded river with a
75
very limited sediment source. Construction and operation of the pro-
posed·storage reservoir in itself is not expected to alter this situ-
ation.
Based on August 1981 measurements, Lower Tazimina Lake presently
traps approximately 80 percent of the suspended sediments entering from
the upper basin and a negligible concentration of fines exists in the
lower 2 miles of river during high flow events (refer to Figure 16).
Hence, there is little likelihood that the proposed reservoir would
significantly disrupt the sediment transport process or result in a
notable change in substrate composition within the lower 9.5 miles of
river.
The effects of annual fluctuations of the reservoir surface and
associated wave action on beach erosion are unknown. Incidental field
observations in the upper basin suggest that local soils are quite
shallow and overlie coarse glacial deposits. In such a case, it is un-
likely that shoreline erosion would be very extensive or that suspended
sediment concentrations in the outflow from the Lower Tazimina Lake
would be substantially increased from preproject concentrations. Fur-
ther investigation of soil conditions within the impoundment area is
warranted.
Peak daily streamflows of the lower Tazimina River are presently
muted by existing lakes and pondages in the Tazimina River basin (refer
to Figure 6). Hence, construction of the proposed reservoir would not
have as great a potential for reducing peak streamflows and protecting
against streambed scour and streambank erosion as would exist were the
natural lakes not present.
A potential would also exist for regulated streamflows to lead to
the eventual loss of riverine habitat due to gradual but persistent
changes in stream channel geometry. Generally, a reduction in stream-
flow results in a more narrow, shallow river channel. If the reduced
streamflow condition persists and at least seasonally does not appar-
ently increase, the overall character of the river channel is likely to
change as vegetation encroaches along the streambank and stabilizies
overflow channels and point bars.
The braided segments of the Tazimina River would be most suscep-
tible to this process if sufficient mainstem·flows were not provided to
76
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
f'
L
[
[
maintain periodic flushing flows through the side channels. Based on
field observations to date, it appears that short-term streamflows in
the range of 1, 600 to 1, 800 cf s would be necessary to preserve the
existing cross-sectional
ments. Additional field
characteristics of the braided river seg-
observations and data collection/ analysis
would be required to support a quantified statement.
FISHERY RESOURCES
Sockeye salmon
The majority of the sockeye salmon spawns in the lower 6.5 miles
of the Tazimina River. In 1981 Alexcy, Hudson, and Sixmile braids as
well as a single-channel reach of the mainstem from RM 1 to 2 were
heavily utilized by spawners. Similar distribution patterns have been
observed during earlier escapement surveys (Demory, Orrell, and Hei~le
1964).
Mainstem spawning habitats are less susceptible to degradation
from flow reduction than side-channel habitats. As observed during
the 1981 field season, a discharge of 650 cfs at RM 1. 7 appears to
provide nearly as suitable spawning conditions as does a discharge of
1,500 cfs (refer to Figure 30). Side-channel spawning habitats, how-
ever, could be adversely affected if flows dropped below 1,000 cfs
during spawning season. Depending on the channel geometry and loca-
tion of the most suitable spawning gravels, some mainstem areas may
also be adversely affected by reduced streamflows. For example,
spawning habitats along the gravel bars at RM 2.1, 5.5, and 5.8 would
likely be affected if streamflows were below 1,000 cfs in late August.
During 1981 field work sockeye salmon spawners were not observed
in depths less than 0. 6 ft, nor in velocities less than 0. 2 fps,
indicating that depths shallower than 0.6 ft or velocities less than
0.2 fps are undesirable for sockeye salmon spawning. If postproject
streamflm;s reduced depths or velocities at existing spawning areas
below these levels, it is quite likely that the value of these
spawning habitats would be considerably reduced.
77
High velocities also appear to limit use of othenvise suitable
spawning areas. For example, sockeye salmon spawners were not ob-
served in water flowing faster than 4. 4 fps. Host adult sockeye
observed in single-channel mainstem reaches on August 17 (discharge of
3,130 cfs) were concentrated in low-velocity areas adjacent to the
streambanks or downstream of debris jams. Hean column velocities
throughout much of the river in these areas were estimated to be from
5 to 6 fps. The proposed project would provide an opportunity to
limit the occurrence of such high flows during the spawning season
and, perhaps to provide access to suitable spmming substrates in some
areas which are presently limited by high velocity. Since many of the
areas currently affected by high velocities also have substrate too
large for good spawning habitat and since the existing substrate
composition is not expected to change, spmming habitat gains
resulting from reduction of peak streamflows is expected to be quite
small.
Lower flows during the spmming season might possibly benefit
spawners by preventing access to lateral areas subject to dewatering
under lower winter flows. As a result, fish would be encouraged to
utilize spmming habitat less vulnerable to dessication and freezing.
In years of high escapement, concentration of spawners by low flows
might cause some egg losses due to superimposition.
The long-term average monthly postproject flows during August and
September would not be expected to drop belm·l 1,880 and 1,260 cfs,
respectively (refer to Figure 28). It is ther.efore unlikely that
sockeye salmon spawning habitat would be significantly reduced. In
low-flow years, postproject flows might fall below 1,000 cfs during
late August or early September which could adversely affect some
sockeye spawning habitat. However, insufficient information exists to
quantify changes in availability or quality of sockeye salmon spawning
habitat resulting from project operation.
Postproj ect winter streamflows probably would be significantly
greater than naturally occurring winter flows. This might result in
streamflow remaining over some spawning areas which are presently sub-
ject to dewatering. Eggs and developing embryos in these areas would be
protected from dessication and freezing which might result in better
production.
78
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
c
[
r
6
[
[
Postproject winter stream temperatures in these areas might be as
warm as 2°C. If these winter water temperatures are greater than those
presently occurring, they could hasten hatching and emergence. Effects
of early emergence in the Tazimina River system have not been deter-
mined, but in other systems early emergence has been associated with
reduced survival due to prolonged exposure to cold stream temperatures
and reduced availability of food organisms (Bailey, Pella, and Taylor
1976). It is not yet known ~vhether intergravel water temperatures in
the Tazimina River are directly influenced by stream temperatures or
respond more to ambient groundwater temperatures. If the intergravel
temperatures are influenced most by groundwater, then embryo develop-
ment would be effected little by changes in surface water temperatures.
Since spring rainbow spawning may be correlated to rising stream
temperatures, cooler postproject temperatures during May could delay
resident spawning. Rainbow trout spawn in 5 to 7°C ~vater in Lower
Talarik Creek and Copper River (Russell 1974, 1976; Seidelman and
Engles 1972; Seidelman, Cunningham, and Russell 1973). Grayling
spawning has also been correlated with increasing spring water tem-
peratures. Tack (1980) reported grayling spawning behavior commenced
when water temperatures reached 4°C. The storage reservoir would
approach its maximum level of drawdown during late April and early May,
just prior to breakup. This would provide the greatest potential for
colder water (which has been above the more dense 2 °C water in the
reservoir all winter) to be discharged through the powerhouse. If cold
releases from the reservoir depress stream temperatures during April
and Hay below preproject levels, rainbow and grayling spawning might be
delayed.
Juvenile rearing habitat and summer feeding areas for adults have
not been inventoried. Nevertheless, due to the diverse hydraulic
condition which would be available in mainstem and side-channel areas
during the open-water season, these habitats probably would not be
adversely affected. Insufficient information exists to quantify
changes in the availability or quality of these habitats resulting from
project operation.
Figure 31 summarizes anticipated effects of the proposed storage
reservoir scenario on downstream fishery resources.
79
[
[
Figure 31. Anticipated effects of the proposed storage reservoir
Hydroelectric Development on fishery resources
downstream from the powerhouse RM 0.0 to 8.3.
[
Downstream Effects
Related to Changes in [
stream channel
Species/Lifestage stream tempera-sub-morph-water
Affected flow ture strate ology qua 1.ty [
SOCKEYE SALMON [
Spawners 0 0 0 0 0
Incubation/alevins X X 0 0 0 [
Emergence/outmigration X ? 0 0 0
RAINBOW
Spawners X ? 0 0 0 c
Incubation 0 ? 0 0 0
Emergence 0 0 0 0 0 c
Juveniles 0 ? 0 0 0
Adults 0 ? 0 0 0
ARCTIC GRAYLING
Spawners X ? 0 0 0 [
Incubation/alevins 0 ? 0 0 0
Juveniles 0 ? 0 0 0
Adults 0 ? 0 0 0
[
ARCTIC CHAR
Spawners 0 0 0 0 0 [
Incubation/alevins X X 0 0 0
Emergence X ? 0 0 0 [
Juveniles 0 ? 0 0 0
Adults 0 ? 0 0 0 c
X effect likely
0 effect unlikely E
? insufficient data for determination [
L
80 [
SlJMr.'IARY
Several questions remain regarding specific effects of the pro-
posed storage reservoir development on existing fishery resources.
Additional studies would be required to refine monthly streamflow
estimates, particularly during low-flow years, and to develop specific
streamflow recommendations to meet seasonal fishery requirements. From
our review of the project proposal and our present understanding of the
·fishery resources, we conclude that most adverse effects on downstream
fish habitats could be avoided or minimized by adopting a project
design which provides adequate downstream temperatures and an operating
schedule compatible with the seasonal streamflow requirements of the
fishery resources. Based upon our evaluation of the available data on
the fishery resources, estimated preproject streamflmvs, and the
proposed storage reservoir development, it appears that sufficient
water exists to both meet project needs and to provide adequate down-
stream flows which avoid or minimize adverse effects on fish habitat.
The specific findings and recommendations of this study which
pertain to the proposed storage reservoir development scenario are
summarized below:
Above the powerhouse
1. Naturally occurring streamflows and existing fish habitat
conditions in the river canyon (RM 9.3 to 9.5) would be dra-
matically altered. However, the canyon contains only a
limited amount of low-quality spawning habitat compared to
that available in the lower 6 miles of the river and incu-
bation success in this reach is questionable. Therefore the
habitat losses in this . 25 mile reach is unlikely to ad-
versely affect sockeye salmon production in the Tazimina
River.
2. It is also unlikely that changes in habitat conditions within
this portion of the canyon would significanly affect resident
fish populations. However, additional data are needed to
ascertain the degree of resident species' use of this portion
of the canyon.
81
Below the powerhouse
l. Streamflows of 650 and 2,000 cfs appear to define an accept-
able range of streamflow for sockeye salmon spmvning in
existing habitats within the single-channel segments of the
2.
3.
mainstem Tazimina River. The lower 3 miles of mainstem
appear to provide the most important sockeye salmon
spawning areas. Additional study would be required to
quantitfy changes in spawning habitat associated with post-
project streamflows.
A determination has yet to be made of incubation success for
sockeye salmon in the various segments of the mainstem river
and associated side channels. The proposed storage reser-
voir project has the potential of altering the availability
of spa~vning habitat and decreasing the degree to ~vhich redds
are naturally dewatered. Therefore, preemergent studies are
recommended to determine whether productive spmvning habi-
tats would be jeopardized by reduced summer flows or if
increased winter streamflows would likely result in greater
survival of incubating eggs.
Main-channel streamflows of l ,000 cfs appear adequate to
maintain flow through side channels utilized by sockeye
spawners within the braided segments of the Tazimina River.
Additional study would be needed to determine seasonal use
of these side channels by resident species and to determine
the quantitative changes in spawning and rearing habitats of
resident species associated with postproject streamflows.
4. Rainbow and grayling spawning areas which may exist in the
braided river segments or along tQe stream margins in
single-channel segments could be dewatered or degraded by
the proposed reduction of streamflows in late May and June.
Additional streamflow could be provided during late May and
June to avoid or minimize adverse effects to resident fish
spawning below the powerhouse by modifying the proposed
82
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
n L
[
c
[
[
c
[
r
L
[
[
annual reservoir filling schedule. The reservoir could be
filled at a slower rate during June, thereby extending the
filling period into August. This would result in smaller
spills but no loss to monthly power production. Additional
study would be required to determine the magnitude and timing
of the releases required to protect existing rainbow and
grayling spawning habitats.
5. Seasonal temperature gradients within the reservoir should be
forecast and the downstream temperature requirements of the
various life stages of resident and anadromous fish identi-
fied. This data could be used to determine if a special
intake structure would be required to prevent powerhouse
outflows from adversely affecting winter and spring stream
temperatures in the lower 8 miles of river.
6. The Tazimina River channel is relatively stable and anti-
cipated postproj ect flows would probably have a negligible
effect on altering stream channel geometry or substrate
composition. Additional fieldwork could be undertaken to
provide a more substantive basis for determining the reser~
voir releases necessary to maintain the substrate composition
and channel geometry in the braided river segments.
7. It does not appear
would exist in the
that adverse water quality conditions
proposed reservoir. Additional study
should be undertaken to confirm or modify this hypothesis and
forecast seasonal limnologic characteristics of the impound-
ment.
83
Suggested Objectives and Approaches
for a Preliminary Instream Flow Assessment
of the Tazimina River
August 1981 through January 1982
Appendix I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Fishery resources and habitat utilization in the lower
Tazimina River
Streamflows, water temperature, and morphologic character-
istics of the Lower Tazimina River
i
I-1
I-4
FISHERY RESOURCES AND HABITAT UTILIZATION
IN THE LOWER TAZU1INA RIVER
1. Identify relative importance of mainstem and side channel habitat
for spawning sockeye salmon.
Approach: Conduct aerial and foot surveys during spawning season,
and indicate the degree· of spawning activity on 1 inch to
quarter mile maps. Define the comparative degrees of
spawning activity in various subreaches of the lower mainstem
river and associated side channel and slough areas. Describe
general habitat characteristics of spawning areas in terms of
depth, velocity, substrate composition, and stream tempera-
ture.
2. Identify incubation success at selected sockeye salmon spawning
areas.
Approach: Undertake midwinter examination of selected sockeye
salmon spawning areas identified in Task 1 to determine the
degree to which redds are dewatered or frozen. If a decision
is made to continue the environmental studies beyond February
1982, conduct a preemergent study during Harch-April 1982.
3. Identify the degree to which resident fish depend upon the lower
Tazimina River for overwintering habitat.
Approach: Conduct periodic aerial and foot surveys through-
out the fall and early winter to detect movement into over-
wintering areas. Record locations of fish on 1 inch to
quarter mile maps and note their relative abundance in
different habitat types. Sample likely riverine overwin-
tering areas during midwinter. Describe general overwin-
tering habitat in terms of water depth, velocity, substrate,
stream temperature, and ice conditions.
I-1
4.
't
Identify the relative amount and degree of utilization of rearing
habitat in mainstem subreaches, side channels, and backwater
areas.
Approach: Sample potential rearing habitat with minnow traps,
seine, electrofishing unit, and by observation. Record
rearing areas on 1 inch to quarter mile scale maps. Note
relative importance of different habitat types to both juv-
enile residents and sockeye salmon. Describe general habitat
characteristics in terms of depth, velocity, substrate,
cover, and water temperature.
5. Identify habitats used by resident adult fish during the open
6.
water season.
Approach: Conduct aerial and foot surveys during the spawning and
summer feeding seasons. Note the relative abundance of
adults by species if possible for different habitat types,
making note of these locations on 1 inch to quarter mile
maps. Describe general habitat characteristics in terms of
depth, velocity, substrate, cover, and water temperature.
Emphasis on this particular study should be deferred until
Phase II due to the timing of spmming activities and the
manpmver requirements of undertaking a credible field study.
Identify areas of benthic production and determine their relative
productivity.
Approach: Sample bottom fauna periodically throughout the open
water season by surber sampler and/or Ekman dredge in various
reaches. Sample drift organiams periodically throughout the
open water season with drift nets. Describe general habitat
characteristics in terms of depth, velocity, and substrate.
I-2
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r,
6
[
[
FISHERY RESOURCES OF THE Lm.JER TAZIMINA RIVER
SUMMARY OF PERTINENT INFOR}~TION
Appendix II
Jean Baldrige
Fisheries Biologist
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Number
Introduction
Sockeye salmon
Resident fish
II-1
II-3
II-11
II-1.
II-2.
II-3.
II-4.
II-5.
II-6.
LIST OF FIGURES
Spawning ground surveys on the Tazimina River.
Percentage age distribution of Tazimina River spawners in
1965 and 1966.
Distribution and abundance of sockeye salmon spawners
in the Tazimina River from aerial survey on August 28,
1981.
Timing of peak spawning activity in the Tazimina
River.
Distribution and abundance of resident fish in the lower
Tazimina River from aerial survey on September 22, 1981.
Distribution and abundance of resident fish on the lower
Tazimina River from aerial survey on October 14, 1981.
i
II-4
II-6
II-7
II-8
II-13
II-14
INTRODUCTION
Major fishery resources of the lower Tazimina River include
sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri),
Arctic char/Dolly Varden (Savelinus alpinus/malma)1 , and Arctic
grayling (Thymallus arcticus). Other species occurring in the lower
river include round whitefish (Prosopium cylindraceum), chinook salmon
(Oncorhynhcus tshawytscha), longnosed sucker (Catostomus catostomus),
threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus), ninespine stickleback
(Pungitius pungitius), and slimy sculpin (Cottus cognatus).
Because of its importance to the commercial and subsistance fish-
eries, sockeye salmon is the principal fishery resource of the
Tazimina River. Historically, the Tazimina River sockeye stocks con-
tribute up to 5 percent of the total Kvichak River run--the largest
sockeye salmon fishery in the world. The Kvichak watershed, excluding
Lake Clark and its tributaries, is designated as a Wild Trout Area by
the ADF&G and is managed as a trophy sport fishery. Tazimina River
Arctic grayling and rainbow trout, in particular, are much sought
after by sportsmen and provide substantial business for commercial
guides and private lodges. Numbers of Arctic char in the lower
Tazimina River appear to be relatively small and, although oc-
casionally captured by anglers, they are not a dominant sport fish.
Two adult chinook salmon were observed and several fry were col-
lected in the lower Tazimina River during the 1981 field season.
Escapements generally number less than 10 individuals (Sims, pers.
comm.). Slimy sculpins and ninespine sticklebacks were captured by
Dames and Moore personnel during the 1981 field season. Round white-
fish, longnose suckers, and threespine sticklebacks have also been
1 Because of their close morphological resemblance, some confusion
exists concerning the taxonomy of Arctic char and Dolly Varden. Since
discrimination between the two species was not essential for the pur-
poses of this assessment, specific taxonomic identification was not
attempted. We refer to these fish as Arctic char.
Il-l
reported in the lower Tazimina River (Russell 1980). Only information
on sockeye salmon, rainbow trout, Arctic grayling, and Arctic char is
presented.
Little site-specific information exists which would allow
definition of the seasonal distribution, relative abundance, and life
history requirements of fish species inhabiting the Tazimina River.
However, a general description of the fishery resources of the Tazimina
can be assembled from information for the same species inhabiting
nearby drainages in the Iliamna area and from information for the
Naknek and Hood River systems. Because of their importance to the
commercial fisheries, most of the available information pertains to
sockeye salmon. Escapements to the Tazimina River have been monitored
since 1920, and general life history information has been collected by
the FRI for sockeye salmon throughout the Iliamna area. The National
Marine Fisheries Service has had an extensive research program on
sockeye salmon in the Naknek drainage, the results of which are sum-
marized in Buck et al. (1978).
Existing information pertaining to resident fish in the Tazimina
River is very limited. ADF&G conducted a survey in the Tazimina River
in conjunction with a fishery inventory of the Lake Clark area (Russell
1980) and a spawning survey for resident fish in 1974 (ADF&G 1974).
ADF&G also conducted life history investigations of rainbow trout in
several tributaries to Iliamna Lake, including Lower Talarik Creek and
the Copper River. Life history information for Arctic grayling and
Arctic char in Bristol Bay is absent from the literature. AEIDC and
Dames and Moore personnel collected some incidental information on the
seasonal distribution and relative abundance of resident fish in the
lower Tazimina River during the 1981 field season.
II-2
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
r~
b
[
[
SOCKEYE SAU10N
Though sockeye salmon inhabit the lower Tazimina River throughout
most of the year, various life stages are present only seasonally.
Much of their lives are spent in a lake or marine environment. Sockeye
depend on the Tazimina River habitat for reproduction. Summer spawners
deposit eggs in the streambed gravels. They incubate through the fall
and winter, hatching in late winter. Emergence occurs in spring, and
is immediately followed by outmigration from the river to lake nursery
areas. As much as a month may elapse between the end of the outmigra-
tion period and the first return of the spawners, but in some cases the
two events overlap.
Maturing adults move from ocean feeding areas to freshwater spaWn-
ing areas in early summer. Returning Tazimina River spawners are sub-
ject to commercial fishing in Bristol Bay. As they ascend the Kvichak
and Newhalen Rivers, they are harvested by the subsistence fisheries
located near the villages; a few fish are taken by sportfishermen.
Spawners generally begin to enter the Tazimina River in early to
mid-July. Returns continue to increase throughout August, and the peak
of spawning activity generally occurs in late August or early September.
By mid-September few live sockeye remain in the river (Poe, pers.
comm.).
Escapements of sockeye spa\vners to the Tazimina River have been
monitored since 1920 (Figure II-1). Periodic index surveys were con-
ducted prior to 1949. Since 1955 the University of Hashington FRI has
conducted index surveys annually as a part of the Kvichak River sockeye
salmon studies. These surveys report that historically index counts in
the Tazimina River have varied from zero to almost 500,000. In recent
years, the escapements to the Tazimina River have increased. The in-
crease has been attributed to better management of the commercial har-
vest in Bristol Bay in recent years (Poe 1980, 1981). The Tazimina
stocks are on a five-year cycle with two years of high escapements, a
subdominate year after or before the dominate year, and two or three
years of average or fairly low escapements. Peak returns are predicted
for 1984 and 1985 in Bristol Bay.
II-3
Figure II-1. Spawning ground index surveys on the Tazimina River.
RM Sockeye Salmon Spawners
Date Surveyed Live Dead Schooled
9-20 9.0
1921 9.0
8-17-24 5.0
8-21-40 9.0
1944 9.0
9-8-45 9.0
9-9-49 4.0 6,000 6,000
1950 9.0
1951 9.0
1952 9.0
1953 9.0
1954 9.0
9-13-55 9.0 50 0 50
9-9-56 7.0 27,300 5,000
9-6-57 9.0
8-28-58 9.0
9-16-59 6.0 150 0 0
8-28-60 9.0 55,000 0
8-30-61 9.0 30,000 0
9-10-62 9.0 3,600 400 0
9-1-63 9.0 0 0 0
8-29-64 5.0 150 0 0
9-5-65 5.0 27,500 21,600 b
8-27-66 5.0 4,800 80 0
8-14-67 6.0 1,560 0 1,400
9-12-68 5.0 135 115
8-11-69 9.0 22,610 0 22,110
8-25-70 9.0 85,450 0 42,150
9-2-71 9.0 12,870 55 0
9-27-72 9.0 0 20 0
9-28-73 4.0 0 12 0
9-5-74 9.0 73,920 30,550 1,325
8-10-75 9.0 149,950 0 149,950
8-23-76 9.0 16,200 0 1,070
8-1-77 9.0 6,950 255 625
8-23-78 9.0 143,475 3,425 34.275
9-7-79 9.0 269,450 226,300 65,450
9-6-80 9.0
9-6-81 9.0
FRI, unpublished data.
II-4
Total
50
50,000
40,000
14,250
550
7,500
12,000
7,500
4,000
17,000
17,000
3,400
50
32,300
28,750
600
150
55,000
30,000
4,000
0
150
49,100
48,800
1,560
250
22,610
85,450
12,925
20
12
104,470
149,950
16,200
7,205
146,900
495,750
128,500
28,215
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
c
c
[
[
[
[
c
[
r
L
[
[
Tazimina sockeye salmon generally return after spending two (or,
less frequently, three) years in the ocean (Figure II-2). In years of
peak escapements (1964, 1970), 2.2 fish 2 dominated the return.
Postpeak years (1966, 1981) had higher percentages of 2.3 fish
(2.3 fish predominated in 1966). However, in 1978 most spawners \vere
1.2 fish. In recent years, the prevelant mild weather conditions have
improved rearing conditions in the nursery lakes and a larger portion
of young sockeye are leaving as age I smelts.
During 1981 the first spawners arrived at the Tazimina River in
late July, and by the first week of September spawning activity had
peaked. Schools of spawners moved into the river and remained in pools
and scour holes located near spawning areas throughout mid-August. By
the last week of August most spawners were spread out and defending
territories withing the spawning areas.
Sockeye salmon spawner distribution was determined by helicopter
survey on August 28, 1981 and noted on a 1:15,840-scale drawing of the
lower river. Hr. Poe of FRI provided the numerical index, and Hr.
Isakson of Dames and Hoore noted the distribution within the river
(Figure II-3). The majority of the 21,900 spawners was found in the
lower 6. 5 miles of the river; 70 percent of these were in the lower
3 miles of river and 90 percent downstream of RH 6.5.
Although the spawning surveys conducted on the Tazimina River did
not record spmmer distribution, some field notes indicated that the
majority of the fish was observed in the lower 3 to 5 miles of the
river. Demory, Orrell, and Heinle (1964) also note that the majority of
sockeye spawning occurs in the lower 5 miles of the river; however, in
years of high abundance sockeye spawners are found throughout the
entire 9.5 miles below the falls (Russell, pers. comm.). Host spawning
activity appears to be restricted to a two or three week period in late
August to early September. Data indicated that peak spawning activity
generally occurred in a 16-day period from August 28 to September 13
(Figure II-4).
2 Ages are designated according to the European system--a 1.2 fish has
spent one year in freshwater and two in the ocean. It is in its fourth
year of life, having gone to sea in its second year.
II-5
Year Sex
1965 Nale
Female
1966 Hale
H Female H
I
0\
1970 Hale
Female
1978 Male
Female
1981 Male
Female
Source: Poe, pers.
Figure II-2. Percentage age distribution of Tazimina River
spawners in 1965, 1966, 1970, 1978, 1981.
Age Composition
4l':ear 5year 6l':ear
2.1 1.2 2.2 1.3 2.3
% tl % II % II % II %
100.0 46
100.0 47
1.0 1 22.0 22 1.0 1 76.0
15.2 15 84.8
100.0 50
100.0 50
8.0 8 89.0 89 2.0 2 1.0 1
95.0 95 1.0 1 3.0 3 1.0
6.1 4 59.1 39 19.7 13 15.1
5.6 4 60.0 43 23.6 17 11.1
cornm.
Total
II Number
46
47
76 100
84 99
50
50
100
1 100
10 100
8 72
Alexcy Lalw
Figure II-3. Distribution and abundance of sockeye salmon spawners
in the Tazimina River from aerial survey on August 28, 1981.
.0:.-i-'~-"'e (4,52~
_1,860) ·:-!::;;~:>,::=:!:~~~:::~:·~~::::>.·::;:;:;.;:;::;:;:;:···
. 4 ~r~'lili!fi~iiS~t~t~~t\·
LEGEND
fjJ" Rin'r mile marker
lntensit.y of spawning
WNJ rh'a\'y
l :) I Light
D Nonl'
( ) Numbt.'r of fish
_z-~
SC,\LE
1 : 4H,OOO
0 .5 1 :-.Ii It•
Figure II-4. Timing of peak spawning activity
in the Tazimina River.*
Date Date
8-29-64 9-02-73
8-31-65 9-01-74
8-28-66 9-03-75
8-30-67 9-01-76
9-01-68 9-02-77
9-04-69 9-07-78
9-05-70 9-06-79
9-13-71 9-02-80
9-06-72 9-01-81
*Source: FRI (1979) and Poe (pers. comm.)
This short spawning period may help reduce the problem of super-
imposition in years of large returns. Female spawners in the Brook
River, Naknek Drainage, reportedly defended redds for an average of
nine days after spawning (Hartman, Merrell, and Painter 1964) and for a
maximum of 16 days (Hoopes 1962). Thus, it appears that females would
probably be able to defend their redds from disruption by other spawn-
ers. Information collected by FRI in Six rlile Lake indicates that super-
imposition was not a serious problem in 1979 when Tazimina River index
surveys enumerated almost 500,000 fish. Poe (1981) reported that towing
results in Six Mile Lake indicated production from the large return was
very good. Some egg loss did occur, as Sims (pcrs. comm.) reported
many loose eggs in the river in 1979.
Average fecundity for female sockeye in the Naknek drainage was
found to be about 4,000 eggs (Merrell 1964). The eggs are buried in the
gravels at a depth of 9 to 12 inches (McAfee 1960). Redds located in
the Tazimina River by Dames and Moore were found in this depth range.
Fertilized eggs incubate in the stream gravels and hatch some time
in midwinter. Incubation rate and fry development are related to water
II-8
[
c
[
[
[
c
c
c
[
c
c
[
c
[
[
[
temperatures and level of dissolved oxygen present in the spawning
g~avels. Low temperatures and reduced levels of dissolved oxygen can
slow embryo development. No site-specific information is available on
the timing of incubation or fry emergence in the Tazimina River. A
study conducted in the Iliamna area provided some information on egg
development. Mathisen, Demory, and Orrell (1962) determined that
hatching generally occurred from late February to mid-March, from eggs
spawned in late August to September 20, with emergence occurring the
end of April through mid-May. Nelson (1964) reported that hatching
occurred in the Hood River drainage in February and that development
time in the Wood River closely parallels that of the Iliamna-Lake Clark
District.
The alevins remain in the gravels until emergence, generally
coinciding with breakup. Emergence in the Naknek Drainage spanned a
period from late April to mid-June. The timing of emergence is influ-
enced by intergravel temperatures during development.
Fry usually move immediately to nursery areas in downstream lakes
after emergence. AEIDC observed few sockeye fry in the Tazimina River
in late July. Most migration to nursery areas is conducted during
darkness (Hartman, Strickland, and Hoopes 1962); however, migrating fry
are subject to considerable predation by rainbow trout, Arctic char,
lake trout, northern pike, and various birds. After reaching the lake,
sockeye fry generally concentrate in the shallow shoreline areas but
disperse to deeper midlake waters in midsummer (Herrell 1964).
Young sockeye from the Tazimina River remain in fresh water for one
to two years before outmigrating to Bristol Bay (Anderson 1968; FRI,
unpublished data). After leaving the Tazimina River, fry probably re-
main in Six Nile Lake for a time, but exact length of residence in
Six Mile Lake and movements between lakes is unknown. Some evidence
from the Naknek drainage suggests that fry generally occupy rearing
areas downstream from their spawning areas and movement through the
system is a function of drainage pattern. Young fish tend to move in a
downstream direction even in a lake environment (Ellis 1974). Sockeye
smolts begin leaving the Kvichak system in May and continue to
outmigrate through June.
II-9
RESIDENT FISH
Several freshwater species including rainbow trout, Arctic gray-
ling, and Arctic char have been identified by the ADF&G as resident
populations of the lower Tazimina River. These species appear to be
most abundant during the open-water season. Little information exists
regarding the seasonal distribution and life histories of these fish.
Reconnaissance of the Tazimina River by ADF&G in 1974 (Russell, pers.
comm.), in 1979 (Russell 1980), and incidental observations of AEIDC
and Dames and Moore personnel in 1981 provided some insight into the
general life history and seasonal habitat use by these fish.
Tazimina River rainbow trout may become sexually mature at age five
or six. Russell (1980) examined 14 sexually mature fish from the
Tazimina River ranging in age from five to ten years. Life history
studies conducted on Lower Talarik Creek, tributary to Lake Iliamna,
indicated that trout matured at age four through seven (Russell 1974).
In the Bristol Bay region, rainbow trout usually spawn from late April
to early June. The 1981 field investigations commenced after the
completion of the rainbow trout spawning season. Rainbow trout spawning
activities may be closely related to stream temperatures. Russell
(1974) reported that peak spawning activites occurred on May 10, 1973
and June 6, 1972 in Lower Talarik Creek. Although seasonally these
dates are 27 days apart, increasing spring water temperatures reached
7°C on both of these respective dates.
Exact locations of rainbow trout spawning areas have not been iden-
tified in the Tazimina River. Rainbow trout probably spawn in the side
channels of the braided areas. In Lower Talarik Creek and the Copper
River, tributaries to Iliamna Lake, rainbow spawning activity occurs in
similar habitats (Russell, pers. comm.). Ne,.;rly emerged fry were found
at several locations in Alexcy Braid and near RH 7.5. In addition,
young-of-the-year rainbow trout were captured in the side channel near
the mouth of the canyon (P~1 8.3) and within the canyon itself. Rainbow
spawners have been reported in the canyon at RH 8.7 (Sims, pers.
comm.), and Dames and Hoore personnel captured young-of-the-year trout
near RN 8. 8. Due to the apparent limited availability of suitable
substrate in this area, spawning habitat present in the canyon probably
II-11
does not account for a significant portion of rainbow trout production
in th~ Tazimina River.
Russell (1974) reported that after spawning, rainbows left Lower
Talarik Creek and entered Iliamna Lake or Talarik Lakes. Postspawn
rainbows appear to remain in the Tazimina River. Local sport fishing
guides report that the Tazimina River has a good population of large
trout throughout the open-water season (Sims; Baluta, pers. comm.).
Before the arrival of sockeye spawners in July 1981, AEIDC personnel
observed numerous fish, presumably rainbow trout and grayling,
throughout the Tazimina River below RM 8. 3. Of the 33 rainbow trout
captured by angling from August 14 to October 16, 18 fish measured
between 400 and 650 mm (fork length). These larger fish may have
spawned the previous spring. Most fish appeared to leave the Tazimina
River in early fall. Postspawn rainbow trout are reported to remain in
the Copper River, tributary to Iliamna Lake for the summer period
(Siedelman, Cunningham, and Russell 1973).
During the 1981 field season the abundance of resident fish ap-
peared to increase as sockeye salmon spawning progressed. This increase
may have resulted from an influx of nonspawners and subadults moving
into the river to feed on salmon eggs. The increase may also be the
result of a change in habitat use patterns. Siedelman, Cunningham, and
Russell (1973) reported that rainbow trout moved from deeper water into
shallower runs where sockeye were spawning, making the trout more
visible. In the Tazimina River resident fish were frequently observed
in association with sockeye spawners and rainbow, and grayling were
captured by angling in sockeye spawning areas.
As fall progressed, resident fish in the Tazimina River moved down-
stream, many apparently leaving the system. Maps prepared from aerial
surveys conducted in September and October 1981 show a general down-
stream movement with 56 percent fewer fish observed in October (Fig-
ures II-5 and II-6).
Dames and Moore angling results supported the conclusion~ of the
aerial surveys. Fewer fish were captured in the upstream reaches as
the field season progressed. In October a large school of resident
-fish was observed in Six Mile Lake, just off the mouth of the Tazimina
---Ri:v.er..----T-he s e .. ob.s er:-va-t-ions-a:r:.e--c ons.i.s te-n-t-w.i.-t-h--t-he--r--esu-1-t-s--ef--t-Feu-t---------------
II-12
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
( o)
Figure II-5. Distribution and abundance of resident fish in the lower
Tazimina River from aerial survey on September 22, 1981.
0
SCALE
1 : 48,000
.5 1 Mile
@... River mile marker
II-1
( ) Number of fish
(o)
Figure II-6. Distribution and abundance of resident fish in the lower
Tazimina River from aerial survey on October 14, 1981.
-Z-~
SCALE
1 : 48,000
0 .5
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
[
[
c
[
r ~ .
L
@,. River mile marker [
II-14 ( ) Number of fish
investigations conducted in other drainages in the Iliamna area which
reported that most fish leave the streams in the fall and seek lake
environments for overwintering (Russell 1974; Siedelman, Cunningham,
and Russell 1973; Siedelman and Engle 1972).
Young rainbow trout were numerous in the lower Tazimina River.
Although no systematic sample program was undertaken, trout were ob-
served in slow, shallmv water along stream margins, in side channels,
and in backwater areas. A few young were captured in the canyon just
below the rapids, indicating that the entire length of the lower river
is utilized by juvenile rainbow trout. Most of the good rearing
habitat is located in the braided reaches and side channels. Outside
of these areas young fish appear to be restricted to stream margins.
No data are available for Arctic grayling spawning activities in
the Tazimina River. Most of the available data in the literature was
collected in interior and arctic streams. Krueger (in press) synthe-
sized available data on grayling life history and habitat requirements.
The following information is summarized from this report.
In interior Alaska, grayling generally spawn during breakup.
Grayling spmm in the Iliamna area in May and June (Russell, pers.
comm.). Upstream migration and spawning activity may be related to
water temperature. Tack (1980) reported that spawning activity com-
menced when stream temperatures reached 4°C. Males generally establish
and defend territories prior to the arrival of the females. Spawning
has been observed in a wide variety of habitats, including shallow
bachvater areas to lake margins and riffles and runs.
No redds are constructed. The slightly adhesive eggs sink to the
stream bottom and become attached to the substrate. Spawning activity
generally covers the eggs with a layer of substrate. Embryo develop-
ment is rapid and eggs generally hatch in 13 to 32 days. Development
time is influenced by water temperatures. Fry generally remain in
their natal stream during the summer. Young grayling occupy similar
habitat to that of young salmonids, selecting shallow, low·-velocity
areas with cover. Only one young grayling was collected by Dames and
Hoare in the lower Tazimina River. However, side-channel habitats
below Alexcy Braid were not sampled.
II-15
Few observations of Arctic char were made during the 1981 field
season. Char reportedly move into the Tazimina River to feed on salmon
eggs and remain to spawn in late September through October. Spawners
were captured by sportsmen near RM 6.2 in September. A school of fish
was observed in this location during the September aerial survey and an
even larger school was observed during the October aerial survey.
Since most resident fish appeared to be leaving the system, the October
increase would seem to indicate an influx of spawners to this river
segment; however, none of the fish was captured during October to
verify species or state of sexual maturity. No young Arctic char were
found in the Lower Tazimina River during the 1981 field season. The
eggs incubate in the stream gravels until hatching in March and April.
Emergence probably occurs in May and June. The young fish may move
downstream to the lake to rear. No juvenile arctic char were captured
in the lower river during the 1981 field season.
II-16
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
[
c
[
[
[
c
L
[
L
METHODOLOGY FOR ESTIMATING PREPROJECT
STREAMFLOWS IN THE TAZIMINA RIVER, ALASKA
Appendix III
E. Woody Trihey, P.E.
Hydraulic Engineer
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix III-A
Rating tables
USGS gage Newhalen River
USGS gage Tazimina River
Staff gage at RH 1. 7 Tazimina River
Honthly flow duration curves for Newhalen River.
USGS provisional record for Tazimina.
III-1.
III-2.
III-3.
III-4.
III-5.
III-6.
III-7.
III-8.
LIST OF FIGURES
1981 staff gage readings and corresponding stream-
flm-7s for the Ne\.Jhalen and Tazimina river.
Average monthly streamflows in the Newhalen River.
Comparison of 1981 daily streamflow observations at
the Newhalen River gage with the respective monthly
flow duration curve.
Estimated average monthly uncontrolled river flow
for the Tazimina River.
Comparison of available 1981 daily streamflows at
the USGS stream gaging stations on the Ne\.Jhalen and
Tazimina rivers.
Estimated average monthly streamflows for the
Tazimina River at the USGS gaging station RH 11.6.
USGS miscellaneous base flow measurements for the
Tazimina River during 1980 and 1981 at RH 11.6.
Comparison between various average monthly
streamflow estimates for the Tazimina River.
i
Page No.
III-12
III-13
III-14
III-15
III-16
III-17
III-18
III-2
III-3
III-5
III-6
III-8
III-9
III-10
III-11
Average monthly streamflows for the Tazimina River have been esti-
mated on the basis of a systematic review and extrapolation of the
Newhalen River streamflow record. In general, both river systems are
influenced by the same regional climatic conditions, drain similar
topography, and are influenced by relatively large lake systems. The
Tazimina River, a tributary to the Newhalen, drains approximately
10 percent of the Newhalen River basin.
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) maintained a continuous record-
ing station on the Newhalen River, approximately 9 miles downstream
from the mouth of the Tazimina River from July 1951 through September
1967. Annual crest-stage data (annual flood peaks) were recorded from
1968 through 1977.
The USGS installed a continuous recording gage near River Mile
(RM) 11.6 on the Tazimina River on June 19, 1981. The USGS also ob-
tained several winter-spring base flow measurements during the 1980,
1981, and 1982 water years near RM 13.6. Additional streamflow data
were periodically obtained by AEIDC and Dames and Moore personnel in
the lower eight miles of the Tazimina River from late July through
mid-October 1981.
On July 25, 1981 AEIDC installed a staff gage at RM 1.7 to supple-
ment the USGS recording station at RM 11.6. In addition, the USGS gage
on the Newhalen River, which was maintained from 1951 to 1967, was
visited and AEIDC found the stilling well and staff gage to be communi-
cating with the river at gage heights above 5.4 ft.
Throughout the late summer and fall of 1981, periodic observations
were made of the staff gages at these three locations (Figure III-1).
USGS and AEIDC personnel also measured streamflows to confirm the reli-
ability of the existing rating curve for the Newhalen River gage and to
develop preliminary rating curves for the two installations on the
Tazimina River. (The rating tables are presented in Appendix III-A.)
III-1
Figure III-1. 1981 staff gage readings and corresponding
streamflows for the Newhalen and Tazimina rivers.
Tazimina River Newhalen River
Date RM 1.7 RM 11.6 RM 11.95
G.H. Flow G. H. Flow G. H. Flow
July 24 Not installed 3.34 2380 7.08 25,260
July 25 2.89 2540 3.35 2390 7.14 25,570
July 25 2.91 2550 3.36 2400 7.15 25,600
Aug 4 4.05 ·4550 3.89 3190
Aug 11 2.82 2415* 3.34 2380
Aug 12 1.40 2460 7.49 27 '250
Aug 17 3.24 3130 3.66 2840 7.40 26,800
Aug 19 2.96 2670 3.42 2470 7.25 26,080
Aug 28 2.21 1600 0.66 1500 6.32 21,660
Aug 29 2.20 1582* 0.61 1450 6.29 21,520
Sept 21 1.54 860 1. 81 720 II
Sept 25 1.49 800 1.72 650 II
Oct 2 1.36 660 1.54 530
Oct 10 1.22 540 1.31 380
Oct 13 1.35 664* 1.49 601* 3.21** 8,630
G.H. Gage height.
*
II
**
No observations made.
Measured value as compared to other streamflows obtained from
rating curve.
The staff gage was read, but it was later determined that the
stilling well was not communicating with the river at gage heights
less than 5.4 feet.
Equivalent gage height determined by differential leveling.
III-2
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
c
c
[
[
c
[
[
[
[
r--.
I .
L
[
[
Honthly flow duration curves were plotted for the Newhalen River
based on the 16 years of daily streamflow record available for the
1951-67 period (Appendix III-A). The annual peak flows observed bet-
ween 1968 and 1977 were excluded from this analysis. Using 50 percent
exceedance as an index, average monthly streamflows 'tvere determined
from the monthly flow duration curves for the Newhalen River (Fi-
gure III-2). Monthly streamflow values obtained in this manner are
unlikely to agree with the monthly arithmetic averages for the 16 years
of record. There is greater certainty that the monthly streamflow
values derived from the 50 percent exceedance index will occur at least
half of the time; whereas the arithmetic average may not occur at this
frequency.
Honth
January
February
Harch
April
Hay
June
Figure III-2. Average monthly streamflow
in the Newhalen River.
Streamflow Honth
cfs
2,700 July
2' 100 August
1,900 September
1,900 October
4,700 November
14,000 December
Streamflow
cfs
21,000
22,000
18,000
11,000
6,300
3,600
Some question exists regarding the degree of accuracy of the flow
duration curves during the winter months. However, the low-flow data
available for the Newhalen River 'tvere judged sufficient for the purpose
of estimating the order of magnitude of midwinter streamflows in the
Tazimina River.
A comparison of 1981 daily streamflows (gage height observations)
at the Newhalen gage with their respective monthly flm.; duration curves
III-3
indicated that Newhalen River streamflows were abnormally high from
late.July to early August (Figure III-3). Rainstorms which influenced
runoff in the Newhalen River during the 1981 July-August field season
were persistent regionwide storms that also influenced Tazimina River
flows. Thus, it was concluded that the streamflows observed during
July and August in the Tazimina River would represent a higher-than-
average summer runoff. Local residents confirmed that the streamflows
in the Tazimina River in July and August were higher than normal (Sims;
Baluta, pers. comm.).
A U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service scientific report on spawning
ground conditions in the Kvichak River system refers to a 1,400 cfs
discharge (Sept;ember 10, 1962) in the Tazimina River as a "normal
summer flow" (Demory, Orrell, and Heinle 1964). The monthly stream-
flows recorded at the USGS gage on the Tazimina River during July and
August 1981 were 2,560 and 2,280 cfs (USGS provisional streamflow
record in Appendix III-A).
Long-term average monthly streamflow estimates provided by R.W.
Retherford and Associates (Gropp, Steeby, and Bettine 1980) for the
Tazimina River during July and August are 2,712 and 2,659 cfs, respect-
ively, (Figure III-4). A comparison between the Retherford streamflow
estimates and the 1981 USGS provisional streamflow data indicated that
the forecasted long-term average monthly preproject flows for July and
August are 6 and 17 percent greater than observed monthly streamflows
during a year recognized for its abnormally high summer runoff. Hence,
it was concluded that the estimated average monthly uncontrolled river
flows provided in the 1980 Retherford report should be revised.
Although several glaciers exist in the headwaters of the Newhalen
River, they have entirely receded from the Tazimina River basin.
During winter, glaciers store precipitation as snowfall that eventually
becomes incorporated into the glacier ice. Glaciers are likely to
carry over one winter's snowfall for several years before releasing it
as meltwater. When receding, a glacier's meltwater augments basin
input; when advancing the glacier retains precipitation. These phe-
nomena are cyclic and have a notable effect on annual basin outflow.
III-4
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
r
L
[
[
100,000
.!::?
0 50,000
.?:.·
0
I
I I
~7/26/81 -
1
25,600 cfs
I 7/24/81 -25,264 cfs
JULY
I
i
' '
I i I i
I ! i
I
I I I ...J u.
~
c( w a:
l-en
1--I -l I I
10,0000
100,000
.!::?
0 50,000
~
0
...J u.
~
c(
w a:
l-en
fJ)
0
~
0
...J u.
:::!
< w a:
1-en
~
10,COC
0
50,000
~
10,000
5,0000
I T I L5/81-25,572 cf'
. I I
10 20 30
I
I
! I
I I
I I
I 8/12/81 -27,250 cfs
··I I --I
I -1 :
I
8/19/81 -26,080 cfs
8/17/81 -26,800 cfs
I !
10 20 30
I I
·I I
I I
~I
40 50 60
PERCENT EXCEEDANCE
AUGUST
'
I
70
I 8129/81 -t1,524 cfsi
I I I
8/28/81 -21,664 cfs
I I
40 50 60 70
PERCENT EXCEEDANCE
OCTOBER
I
I
~
80 90 100
I
I I
I
I I
I
I 1
I
I ----I
80 90 100
I
r , I I 10/13/81 -8,626 cfs
:
I
i
10
II I
----
'
L
I
20 30 40 50 60
PERCENT EXCEEDANCE
70 80
Figure III-3. Comparison of 1981 daily streamflow observations at the
Newhalen River gage with the respective monthly flow duration curve.
III-5
-....._
90
..........
" 100
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
Figure III-4. Estimated average monthly uncontrolled
river flow for the Tazimina River.
Streamflow
(cfs)
280
406
554
1,253
1,917
2,456
Month
July
August
September
October
November
December
Streamflow
(cfs)
2,712
2,659
2,253
1,498
877
225
Source: Adapted from Gropp, Steeby, and Bettine 1980.
Glaciers also alter the seasonal streamflow patterns of their
watersheds. Meltwater flow from a glacier increases slowly as summer
advances, with little response to rainfall. In the fall, heat which has
been stored in the glacier during summer months maintains meltwater
flow, extending the high-flows period well past the normal runoff period
of nonglacial systems.
Generally, it is inadvisable to estimate basin yield or monthly
streamflows for nonglacial rivers using streamflow records from a
glacial system. However, the headwater conditions of the Newhalen and
Tazimina Rivers appeared to be similar enough to justify an attempt at
estimating average monthly streamflows for the Tazimina River from the
16 years of record on the Newhalen River.
The surface area of Lake Clark is approximately 960 square miles,
or 28 percent of the total drainage area for the Newhalen River system.
A lake this large probably mutes the influence of seasonal variations in
runoff of the relatively small glacial streams entering the lake on
Newhalen River strearnflows. The Tazirnina River headwaters in a 12-
square-mile lake system overlying exceptionally deep deposits of glacial
outuash contained by a volcanic intrusion (Abbott, pers. comm.). This
lake/groundwater system was thought to significantly dampen varia-
III-6
[
r L
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
[
tions in Tazimina River streamflows. Thus, enough similc:.rity ~•as
tqought to exist bet~veen Tazimina and Newhalen river streamflows to
warrant the investment in obtaining periodic streamflow data from both
rivers on corresponding dates for use in a correlation analysis.
The ratio between average daily streamflmvs at the Newhalen and
Tazimina River stream gages was computed for each day that correspond-
ing data were available (Figure III-5). This comparison indicated that
during late July through mid-August 1981 the Tazimina River provided
approximately 9.5 percent of the Newhalen River flow, and approximately
7 percent of the Ne~vhalen flow was supplied by the Tazimina River
during the period of late August through October.
The drainage area upstream from the USGS gage on the Tazimina
River is 327 square miles and that for the Newhalen River gage is 3,478
square miles. The drainc:.ge area ratio for the Tazinina/Ne~vhalen gage
sites is 0.094. This ratio compares favorably with the daily stream-
flow ratios presented in Figure III-5 for the July-August period. This
is to be expected for the 1981 dates since persistent regional rain-
storms had saturated the Ne~vhalen River drainage, and its sub-basins
were contributing to streanflow at ~he Newhalen gage in direct relation
to their size.
In general, base flmvs are more strongly influenced by the size
and geology of a basin than by other factors. Taken collectively, the
lakes and geologic structure of the upper Tazimina drainage were also
accepted as functioning somewhat sinilar to the large lakes which main-
tain base flow in the Newhalen River during winter months. In fact it
is quite likely that Tazimina River base flows are greater than those
for the Newhalen River on a square mile basis during January to April
due to the inability of cold winter temperatures to effect groundwater
outflow from the upper Tazimina basin to the same degree cold winter
temperatures retard outflow from the glaciers and Lake Clark. However,
for lack of data to indicate othenvise, it was assumed that Tazimina
River base flows would be proportional to Newhalen River winter flows.
Therefore, average monthly winter strearnflows at the USGS gaging
station on the Tazimina River have been csti~ated by nultiplying the
III-7
Figure III-5. Comparison of coincident
Date of
daily streamflows at the USGS gaging stations
on the Newhalen and Tazimina rivers.
Newhalen Tazimina
Observation Streamflow Streamflow
Ratio
QTZ/QNH
1981 cfs cfs
July 24 25,264 2,376
July 25 25,572 2,390
July 26 25,600 2,400
August 12 27,250 2,460
August 17 26,800 2,870
August 19 26,080 2,530
August 28 21,664 1,530/
October 13 8,626 601
January 18, 1982 2,320 247
0.094
0.093
0.094
0.090
0.107
0.097
0.070
0.070
0.106
Note: The drainage area above the USGS gage (RH 11. 6) on the
Tazimina River is 327 square miles, that for the Newhalen
River is 3,478 square miles; drainage area ratio is 0.094.
long-term average monthly winter flows for the Newhalen River by a
drainage area ratio of 0. 095. Snowmelt runoff in the Tazimina River
during May and June is anticipated to reflect a somewhat higher value
for runoff per square mile than would be indicated by average monthly
streamflows during the same period for the Ne~vhalen River. Hence, a
runoff ratio of 0.12 was used for estimating Tazimina River streamflows
during May and June (Figure III-6).
III-8
c
[
[
[
c
[
c
c
c
[
c
c
c
[
r
L
[
[
Figure III-6. Estimated average monthly streamflows
Month
January
February
March
April
Hay
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Average Annual
for the Tazimina River at the USGS gaging
station, RH 11.6.
Average }Ionthly Average Honthly
Streamflm.;r for Streamflow for
Newhalen River Ratio Tazimina River
(cfs) (cfs)
2,700 0.095 255
2,100 0.095 200
1,900 0.095 180
1,900 0.095 180
4,700 0.12 565
14,000 0.12 1,680
21,000 0.095 1,995
22,000 0.095 2,090
18,000 0.070 1,260
11,000 0.070 770
6,300 0.095 600
3,600 0.095 340
9,100 843
The USGS has made several miscellaneous discharge measurements for
the Tazimina River during the ~.;inters of 1980, 1981, and 1982 at a
location approximately 2 miles upstream from the gagehouse
(Figure III-7). A corresponding streamflow measurement for the
Ne~vhalen River Has only obtained in 1982. The streamflow ratio for the
January 1982 USGS measurements on the Tazimina and Ne,vhalen rivers is
0 .11.
The USGS base flow measurements are consistently 20 to 30 percent
higher than the estimated monthly winter streamfloHs presented for the
Tazimina River in Figure 5. These measurements are not vie~ved as con-
tradicting the general order of magnitude of the estimates. In fact,
they tend to confirm that winter loH floHs are approximately 200 cfs.
III-9
Figure III-7. Miscellaneous USGS winter base flow measurements
at RM 13.6 on the Tazimina River.
Date -Streamflow
(cfs)
January 11, 1981 290
January 7, 1982<'< 246
February 27, 1980 302
April 8, 1981 224
*Corresponding flow measured in Newhalen River = 2,320 cfs.
Average monthly streamflows for the Tazimina River have been
estimated on the basis of a systematic review of basin characteristics
and extrapolation of sixteen years of streamflow records for the
Newhalen River. The nearest weather station is located in Iliamna but
its low elevation and close proximity to Iliamna Lake are not repre-
sentative of physical conditions found in the Tazimina River basin.
The only strearaflow data which exits in the Newhalen Drainage for a
basin similar in size to the Tazimina ~-1as collected on the Tanalian
River. Runoff patterns for the Tanalian River are dominated by glacial
melt. No glaciers exist in the Tazimina River basin.
Tazimina River streamflows have also been estimated by various
engineering firms. Due to the absence of precipitation, climate, and
streamflow data for the Tazimina River basin, a variety of assumptions
have been made. The significance of these assumptions is reflected in
the variability among the various streamflow estimates presented in
Figure III-8.
III-10
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
[
[
[
[
[
L
Figure III-8. Comparison bet•-1een various average monthly
streamflow estimates for the Tazimina River.
Estimated Average Honthly Streamflows in cfs
USGS
Month 1 2 3 4 5 Record
January 280 130 240 255 197 250
February 406 130 190 200 115 N.R.
Harch 554 130 170 180 113 N.R.
April 1,253 130 170 180 110 N.R.
Hay 1,917 770 420 565 761 N. R.
June 2,456 2,050 1,260 1,680 2,889 2,560*
July 2,712 2,850 1,890 1,995 3,254 2,560
August 2,659 2,780 1,980 2,090 2,737 2,340
September 2,253 1,930 1,620 1,260 1,844 863
October 1,498 800 990 770 1,388 635
November 877 230 570 600 350 638
December 225 130 320 340 350 342
Average
Annual 1,424 1,005 8~0 843 1 '17 5 N.A.
1 Retherford projections (Gropp, Steeby, and Bet tine 1980)
2 Stone and Webster estimates (Critikos, pers. cornm. 1981)
3 Preliminary AEIDC estimates (Trihey 1982)
4 AEIDC Final estimates
5 Dames and Moore estimates (Dames and Hoare 1982)
6 USGS provisional record (USGS unpublished data)
* June 18-30, 1981
III-11
.. [
[
[
APPENDIX III-A C
[
[
[
[
[
[
c
[
c
[
c
L
r L
L
[
III-12
H
H
H
I
w
li·~IO
~~~\. 1,~:) UNITED STATES DEPMHMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GeOLOGICAL SURVEY (WATEf~ I~ESOURCES DIVISION) {
II'Hh:n 11on 30:-3()(0: 01)
File No. firiL .................. ..
Raltng laUe for .................................... : ... ~!~~!~~~~!: .. ~-~Y::.~· .. !:.C?!J:F .. Tl:-.~~!!l.l:~.~ ... A.~~-~~ ........................................................................... : ....................... .
~~·.·.:.:.:~==:················• from .. 9.~.~-~ .. J .......... , 19 ... ~J.: ... , lo .... $c;d. ... 3.'? ....... , 19 ~£ .. ,from .. #.:?f._./ ......... , 19 -~(q····• lo ..... ~············.·~·······• ~~~._-__······
li'\~C
~1C'I~~\ On~o Onr.o D Dlrler.
---1--__ , ____ ---------1---
Fttl
a nco
Cf• Ftrl Cf• C/1 Fttl CJ• CJ• CJ•
l:olght lllschoq;o hoiKht \>ehnrgo oloe<o
Dlllor·
cncc 1--------
Ftc! Cf• C{l C/1 Cf•
Diller·
a nee
Ftd
Ont•
h<l;;hl
Fttl
l>hr-, __ _
o ,0
, ·······--···· 2 .oo .••. !r..J.9.T ... ?.9.Q .. !1-.oo J.l,59.Q ... JJQO .. 6.oo .2Q .... :t9.Q .... IJ.G.o .. 8.oo .29..,.80.0. _500 _ .. lO.oo .. 1:9r-t9..9. ... r.6_0_
• 1o ..•.•••••••... .1o .•• 5J.g3~ .. '?IO... .1o JJ.,99.9 .... J!OO.. .1o .2Q.,.Q5Q .. ..ll6.0.. .1o .30.,300. _500 __ .1o .1..9-;.9..12.9.·.
Cf• Cf•
.00 ............ ..
.10 ______ , __ __
• ~ • :-o .... 5. .... 5.0( 2 eo . :o J.2.J39.0. ... !!.O.O.. . 20 .21,.,.no ... .IJ.Q.O.. . 20 .3o., Boo . .5.~Q... . 20 .1.tt£1J?..~
.3J [~~~~~~~~~: .JO .••• 5..t1~ ::~;;.:: .JO J.?.,.79.0 .... lf 1 0.. .Jo -~lJ_5.7.Q. __ _lq_o.. .30 .31.,32Q. .JO .41//.ft..O..
•• ~ .............. ,40 .... ~.~.Q~Q .. ~.Q.. .40 .:U-.~.?.0.9 .... !!:lQ.. ,lo .?.?_._Q~lQ. .•a .3l..,J3~JQ. ,40 4J..F.1.Q:
• 1Al
1
.............. .......... -~ .... R.,.350 .. ?9_0 __ .~ 13.,.6lO .... hlO.. .~ .22.t-51G. .~o .32.,360. .flO 131 J.Q.Q.
.~ . .2.,J.2G .. .l50... .co .... 67 6ttD .J0.0... -~ lh-.,02.0.. !120 .to 22)-91J0. .oo .32_,.8.130. ,60 :f.~'J.~ .. O .. £(.,!). __
• ~o .. ?.,.339 ... 160 .7o .... 6.,.9.!t0 .. 3J.C!... .•o .1..~.,.4-.l.t.O ... .!!~Q.. .10 .23tki0. ___ InS?.. .1o .33.,.!JQQ_ :;:?.;~~: .~o .1.~3.2_a:
• t-~ ?.J.9.9 ..... u.o... .so .... L~5.Q .J2.0... .ro .1)t,J3.6.o.. 1 ~30 .ro .<3.;9.2Q ... JJ.eo.. .sa .33 .. 820. 5.~LQ... .so ............. .
• 1>0 .. ?.J.9.1}.0 .... :US?... .oo .... 7.,.5.7P . .3.3_Q___ .QJ 15.)29.0 .. --~~3 Q__ .oo .2.~~~-~1.0.0.. .oo .3h,.~t6D. .......... .!>J ............ ..
1 .oo ..2.1.8.3.0 ... _;1;0 ... 3 .oo ... .7.-J-9.00 . .3.~.9 ... 5 .oo 15.,120 .. --~~3 Q __ 7 .oo 2.~t-G8o. .......... 9 .oo .35,.000. .......... .oo ............. .
• 10 -;·J.~;-~---J:!P... .10 ----~J-~;~ _35.o... .10 ~~~~5.~ .. --~~!~Q.. .10 ;-~-~~~-~--.10 -~~ .... ;~-.......... .10 ............. .
.:ll .... 1.. ....... _;l,::J.Q... .20 ...... L ..... _3 _Q.O... .20 .... ..L.9. ...... !l\LQ.. .20 ..... 1........ .20 ..... J........ .20 ............ ..
• 3-1 .3.,3.~-9 ... _gQQ... .JO .... 8.,:950 .3.9.0... .30 11.,030 .... ~t!i.Q.. .30 2..6.,32.0. .. .1JB0.. .JO .J.~.62.Q~ ,JO ............ ..
• 4o .J} 5CD .... ?.W... .4~ ... 9.,.3JQ _3_7.0... .4o J,1.>!HQ .. --~l5.Q.. . .4o 2..6.,.e!J.O .... SOD.. .~o .37j.L~.o.. .4o ......... __ __
.w .3.):r9.9 ... ggg___ .~o ... 9.,..9.~ .T{.Q... .~ .1.7./.i?.Q .. --~5.Q __ · .~o .2:7.,3.0.0.. .~ .J~7.ao.: .~ ......... _ ...
.~ ._I_I._,_QJ.Q ... ?3.0... .~ .J.Q,_Q5.0 .3.09... .oo 1.8.,310 .... !t5.Q.. ,M 2.7.,.20.0.. .M }.~1 ?_•f_q_·_ .co ............. .
,7o .}J-.).?_l.lf:!... .?~!Q... .•o . .:l-.9. ... ~39 _3_CQ___ .1o Jf?.,.n~.o ... N5.Q.. .1o ?.G.d.O.O.. .;o .l.~1.?.8.a; :=~~~=~ .1o ......... ___ _
. w . .l!.,!J.~-0 .... ?.!EL. .~,~ .. 10.,.010. _390___ _.so 19.,?.1.0 .... !t6.0 __ I .ro 2.8.1 .&0.0.. .so .3.1 13.2.Q. 1 .!<l ....... -....
.w .!:.,:r.~.o .... ?.s.o... -~ .J.l ... ~9.Q _39 ,0___ .w ?9.,13.0 .. __ !,_60 __ j .oo ZJ.J.1o.o.. ::~~~~ ~-3J.Jt..f_r;: :;~-11 .~ --···------
• 20 ......... __ __
,30 ............ ..
• 40 ............. .
• !<0 .................... ..
• 00 ............ .
.70 ............ ..
-~ ............ ..
-~ ....... -.....
.00 ....... _ .....
,10 ----------·--
.20 ........ -....
.•o -------.. --
-~ --------·-·--
,(,() ............ ..
. ;o ......................... .
-~ -------------
.?l ............ ..
"----·-----. ----
Thi3 tnblc h opplicoblc ror opcn·ch:~nncl conditions. It i~ bnscd on ... 53. .. di~chorgc mcn.surcrncnts 1nndc during .19.5.1 7 62 ................... -... .
.................................................................................... and is ........................ well clrlincd bet wren _g..;F;QQ .. : .• cr., nnd •• 3Q..)9.G.9 ... crs. C0111 p hy J~J:J. dn te.. ...... ,
,..., '' F\il! ••. 1')/(.,/(,?
H
H
H
I ,_.
p.
9·110
(Rev. 2-67) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (WATER RESOURCES DIVISION) Sta. No. 1.. ~ ~ 'll } .9 ~
Table Ho. Q. J..
RAting table for .... J'A1.).12'.Ll~\.L~---~-\~!~-~---·t:\.f_(j~----~\~.li_~f.L~1-~.tt-rf\_¥, _________________ .................................... Begin ~;:--M;:--o~ -H;:-
fronz.. ............. _____ to ·····--···--······-------------, , frollz ......................... to----------·----------···-----,. fro?n --·············---·····-to ................ : ________________ __ r=---·=·
G•gr Discharge height
Fut Cft
. 00 -----------
. 10 -----------
. 20 ----------
.30 -----------
.40 -------·--
. 60 -------
. 70 ......... ..
. 80 ---·-------
. 90 -----------
. 00 .......... .
.10 -----------
. 20 .......... .
.30 -----------
,40 -----------
• )0 -----------
.60 .......... ..
. 70 .......... .
.80 ......... ..
.90 .......... .
Differ·
cnce
Cft
------
Discharge
Fttt Cfs
. 00 .......... ..
.10 .......... ..
. 20 ........... .
. 30 --------·---
.40 ••••• ·------
.)0 ······------
.60 .......... ..
.70 .......... ..
.80 ........... .
. 90 ........... .
. 00 .......... ..
.10 -------·----
.20 ---········
.30 ··------·---
.40 ------------
.)0 .......... ..
.60 ------·--·--
.70 ........... .
.80 .......... ..
.90 ------------
Differ·
ence
Cft
Gage
height
Fur
O.oo
DitTer· Discharge ence
Cft
'\(o() .10 ........... ~ D
.20 __ \._Q_$_Q_ --~9-~.
.3o •• L\.?.9 ... LC?.<? ..
.40 --~~5.9 .. .\.<t.? ..
.)o .. L1~.9 .. J.UL
.60 .. t:.\.k9 .. U~~L
.7o .J.?..J-.9. __1_\.9 __
.8o •• t~R.9. _.\.~R.
1 e c c
.90 -------------~~9.. ..
.00 •• \.\~.9 . .1~.9 ...
.10 --~-?._~_\:)_ .\~.9 ..
-;), \ ~ D
.20 ----------J.:\.1:? .
.3o --~-1.~_9_ .L'i.9 ..
0.'\lcO
. 40 ------------J.:\.9.
.)0 .J~!R~.9. J.~Q ..
.60 --~J.£.9 ... \~_9 __
.7o .. ?.\~ .. !? ... L'i~.
'1cSo
.80 -----------.J.~.9.
.90 --~~-.\.C?.
Gage
height
Fut
d...oo
Discharge
Cft
• 10 -----------
.20 .......... ..
.30 .......... ..
.40 ----------
.)0 -----------
.60 ------------
-~0 ------------
.30 ------------
.40 --------··--
,)0 ---------·--
.60 -----------
.70 ·-----------
.80 --------·---
.90 ------------
DitTer-
ence
C/t
Gage
height
Fttt
Discharge
.00 .......... ..
• I 0 ........... .
. 20 ----------
.30 ------------
.40 ------------
.)0 ------------
.60 ------·-----
.70 ------------
.80 ----------
.90 ---··-------
.40 .......... ..
.)0 .......... ..
.60 -----------
.70 ·----------
.80 -----------
.90 ------------
DitTer·
ence
--------
Gage
height
Frtt
Discharge
Cfi
.oo ----------
.I 0 ......... ..
.20 ......... ..
.30 ---------
.40 ----------
. )0 -----------
.60 -----------
• 70 ---------
.80 -----------
.90 -----------
.00 ......... ..
.10 -----------
.20 • ----------
.30 -----------
.40 ---------
.60 ----------
• 70 -----------
.80 -----------
.90 -----------
This table is applicable for open-channel conditions. It is based on ~ discharge measurements made during •. \:\.~ .• \.-... ~~-'1. ... ___ _
................................... ·--·······------·----------------and is···----------------well defined between --~-~-Q2., __ cfs and --~-~~-Q .•••. cfs.
,.._ ______ ,...--~-----r__, ______ ~------~l · .. ----L"l-----·~-=--~~c~~~-t?) '·"'sj'"-----~-----,---., ..... .-....l , ----:------,·----~~ .. l .i L . J , I u l: .. J • _,,J,uJ _ . l .. ,-.J ""t -1 r~---~-l .. • l .... J ti. .... J _. ) l _,._ __) l _____ J
DitTer·
cnce
Cfi
Gage
height
Frtt
Di!Charge
C/i
.00 --------·-
.10 -----------
.20 -----------
.30 1-----------
.40 -----------
.)0 -----------
.60 1----------
.70 ----------
.80 ------·····
.90 -----------
.00 -·---------
.10 1-··---------
.20 -----------
.30 -----------
.40 ·----------
. )0 -----------
.60
.70 -----------
.80 -----------
.90 -----------
Differ·
rncr
C/J
Comp. by ~.Ldate.':\.:H:.~ \
__.Ckd. by ·c--r date..--,-·-;---,
L. . u I . J L ..... . J l. j
Rating table for staff gage at Tazi~ina River
above the mouth (~·1 1.7)
Stage (ft)
1.17
1.23
1.29
1.35
l. 41
1.47
1.52
1.57
1.62
l. 67
l. 72
l. 82
l. 91
2.00
2.08
2.16
2.24
2.32.
2.39
2.47
2.54
2.68
2.81
2.94
3.07
3.19
3.31
3.42
3.53
St~ge 0.036 q·56
Discharge (cfs)
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
lCCO
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
3600
IES
5
2
1£4
5 --
IE3
DISO~·~
!ES
5
2
lEt
I
5
r---......
2
IEJ
DISOP:l(I ..
IES
5
2
5
2
IE3
0
FLOW DURATION NEWHALEN RIVER
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
-
-
I I I I
30 70
III-16
'
j1__
I
I
~
["'-
100
[
[
[
r
.[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
b
[
[
[
FLOW DURATION NEWHALEN RIVER
APRIL
DISOI.l..'ltt
IES
5
2
m
5
~
2
IE3 -,
MAY
DISQI.'.RGE
!ES
5
2
!E4 ~ -5 -r---, __
~ 2
JE3
DISOL1.1GE
!ES -'
5
z ~
.--..==-i:l
ell
IE4
5
z
IEJ
0 30 70 100
ITT -1 7
DISOt•&
lES
s -2
IE4
s
2
lf3
DISOLI..~
IES
5
.........
2
IE4
5
2
IE3
IES
s -
1£4 -
s
2
IEJ
0
FLOW DURATION NEWHALEN RIVER
Jtl.Y
I I I I
I
\
I
I
-··
30 P£RC£UT 70
III-18
~I
---..
---:::--
100
[
[
[
C
.[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[,
c
b
r=
L
[
[
FLOW DURATION NEWHALEN RIVER
ocrm
IES
' ' I ' ' '
5 I
I
~ --~
2
IE4
' ' ' I ......-;;;; r 5
2 I
IE3
IES
' ! ' '
5 ; '
I I
T I
I I
---I I
2
IE4
. I ' i T --: 5
I I --I I
I I
2
IE3
IES
5
-
2
~ .......
5 r---I -
I 2
lfJ
0 30 70 100
IIT-19
UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
WATER RESOURCES DIVISION
'r-, ,yt:~, ~,:t'l.~ Nu \..lOt=., I...\-'> t..J [
\'\ '0 ~ w'( Station Number _____ )_~_?.-:i~~· •. C?.~------------------------------··
[
Used rating table dated-------------------------------
Gage heights used to half tenths betw~n ---and------fCf'-i
Gage Read to ........................ ~:~:e a Day by.................................. hundredths below and tenths above these limit&. I
=====.=:;:::::=====;;=======;;======;;=====:;:;=======jl;===;'il =:;=I ===;=co=;=L,o
Al'lt!L MAT Ju!'E JULY AuGusT SEPTEMBER ~ il .-,.---ll---~lf--;---l!--.---11---;------ll--,-------ll ~ •:
: Ga~:e G:u:e Gage D Gage n· h Gage n· h Ga~~:e n· I>< 0 I . heiiht Dischsrge height Discharge height ischarge height ISC arge height ISC arge height lscharge ~ ~ rr
11--'--!..--'--r'''
-. _ _ _______________________________________ ~3.'? ________ }Q~_Q_: (-·lQ __ ----~0.5..<2. __ ~j13. ______ [2.!3..Q__ 1 1 1 ;~
:::::::::: ::::::::::::=:: ::::_::::: : _______________ --------------------------~J:~ .. -----~~]_Q~-13.5.~--____ 2.~-~Q ... k3.~--_____ l2.~Q__ 2 f---7--'---'--'-:!
----------·-·-----------~--------------------------· ----------------·---------~-~~--____ 3~:.\~-~--3_,,i8 __ .... 3.L8.o .. l~3-~ _____ J_2,._QQ__ 3 ~ I n
------------------------------------------------------·----------------------· .3.~S ___ -----~~3-_CJ_~ [3-·5'5:' ______ 3..L9_Q __ E'~5:' _______ i2..D::2.. 411--'...--'--'--=-~
.. "\h 3.3le ";).'-\c<:h:;1,':\.8 3o?:?i2.'::3 J/PO 5 "' !I
~ ~
6 ; :; I " ' I . .....,. --' I I 0' g '
· __________ ----------------1·::~7,;::~: !S~;---:,~T'-~-=-~---------------------'~:1 .. -----A~:t~:. ~~~-~L. ·----~-~_;;:Q_if~l--~--____ ..Lcfio.__ 1 u ~ cr1
·--------------?'-0-c'~·:lj-~;~c~~ __ _)_~--------,--------------------------.:iJ~.L _____ 21.9.0 __ (,}_~ ____ .2_~_3_Q_ir!.t.~LI ____ _Lo..~_Q __ / 8 ~ I 1 [J.,
------------------~)\:\:-v~~:-----.----------------,1"-·-------:·---------------;.:~~-: -----~-~~\~ __ :!i~-:~;J"---~!~~-f;(:~-.-----L~~~-1 ~ : J r
··----1------·-·J! ........ J. ......... l----· -----------13·'" ~-+·--*ho · ;_,, H ... .?.:o122./'2.2J.l .... 'I.:ZJ __ ,,,, ~ I ! [\
__________________________ .!__ ________ ----------------~~----------________________
1
:3..].2. _______ )_9_g_~--I i~~tQ __ -----~-oz::.a./ . .2.Q_~,--------~2~ .. 11 12I ~ j i :(
--------------------------1!--------------------------·11
········· ················ 1!:~~--·-;~; ~~~!·~; ·· ;:~ /r~·QJ·····;~-;-'1 ;'1 +H+r
................... 11 ................. J
1
..................... , G::~· ... ·;~;·~:·~~;·;·~ .. ····a~;~~~ .. ;;·~;~ ...... G~i, .. 1~: _1_u_:r
__________ 1
1
. ________________ ·
1
ij __________ j ________________ j
1
1 ........ .' ··········-·· .n.L ..... :l.0 .0.2 .. Jb.zte .. l····.2.;;c;_aj1Lt; z, ...... .Z'-c,··l"l , i { [
---------r··------------!--------------------------,-~--~-;-:f ----;·--------~-·:~--------~;;~-:-,!·~-!;; -----;-;~-~-lr.L~:; --------:~;-~~'11 i ~ ~ ~r .. ·
··--------j·--------------·Jj··------------------------i::;-···.-1-----·~-7.~--~;·-~-~-------~-;-----,,~'_---.-------··;:£·~-~!"~--><-; --------~~~--~~1 sl = B B j1
=~ ............. li ................... ~ ;~ .. I .. -~~~-~ .. 1-~~~ ...... ;·:~:IG ~; .. ·--·;~;~ !:'; .. ;~ ,·----~~~ ~::I ! ~·
....... J ............. J! .......... ················/~·-'.L ..... J.:\1-.L 1 :EJ~J .... <-s:~ •. : !~ . .n. ..... .CLt:e..l/L~.'-........ 7.!.£.. 121 , (
------------------------..!.-------------------------3:_(r} ___ -----~~-4-0. .. J.3.!~t~--..... £-~l~ _ _()_: !}L<;"£, __ .... .2.9..~9.. L/...77. ________ 0__8_'] __ ,:22 [::. :-(
-------·-----------------1!--------------------------~·-~-~-------~~-!-:-~ ,,~,~~-------~-~-~~-: ~~:~~;------;-7.e;~--~·l·./( .. ~:-,'-------~~<-~~~' ~ r;J,
----------.----------------!:--------------------------l~·:-~-~--------;-~-;~--,;~~-~-------;·~~-~~-.-!!;·~~.; ··; i·~ ~n,lu/·~; nn··;,;~-,~; : i.r •
.. .... . I ........... ) ~ ..................... i3 '.to ......... i.1 ~:II•D.'e ....... ~\ ~~ .'. F·3 Q.. ..15.7.!i...,L2.Q ....... C:..<l ~ u 12fi " ~ l
:: ::1 : :: ·:: ·: II :::::: : " ::::: :::]G· ~; :: ·:~i~: !::!:~: : :~·~~ ~ 1;~·~:-:::~~:-~: t~~ i ::::::i~~::11 ~: l 1 ~ r
....... J _____________ j ________________________ __113.)'L .... .:?.:..~·.-? .. :3.,.\.l> .. -----~_\}~_:,~:.C2 .. ____ /.1.5".0 ___ ..!._{$. --------~K.1 2!l o-~ ~ {~
u ., .... uumuii :::: : . . .. ::-1·•> u .• e~ .. t::~·~: ~~~:J~~;· ::;~;~: 1.~2 uu•~~<;u~:~ I ::::· ;
!l-II II II I, .-~.,·;:-J L -------. ... ... .. . ... ····II··· .. ... .. . ·II· ......................... 1...... . .. :;: "'-:-"" I! ........ .2~-A '}.II __ . ':'-~:'oa-f,~ Gs\Q~~ ............. r·
l-l!JZ-a. (}{f!'\". Mx,-1~171) 1 ,
c:
0
Daily Gag-e Heig-ht. in Feel, and Discharge, in Cuhic Feet, per Second, oLM.2.'/0!.D.P.. ................................................ .
-:fear .. LJ!CU_f_UB.! .. :ID.!:..l _________________________________________________ for the Y car Ending September 30, 19 .. 22
-
Drainage .-\rea-----~~~-::.:·-----------Square Miles. Water-Stage Recorder------------------------------------------------Ratio-----~---: ___ (.. ____ _
MARCil : i il~--,·,;-::;o;;.;onEn • NovEMBER DEcEMBER JAxUARY FEBRUARY J.l
: : : u-·~---~------~~---,~----~~---.------~~----~-------lr----~------~~----~------~ ._:~ .. i r :.: jj', ~~tht Di"h"''" I h';iiht D~oLa;go ~~~~:,I Di,hs.go h~f.~;, Di,h=go h~~g\:, D"""'''' I h~fg\:, Di"""'''
~!i:.-_: ~::. _.;--~:::: .. ·, l ·~~~._<.._:a_ ----~5.,:,_3 ________________ &<>-<, _______________ 'l2oJ ____________ g;,_g __ l ______ -------------{-----___________ ___ _ ! j 2~-~~-~!--------:;:3-_________ --------~-a2. _----------_______ 4-_sQ __ Ir··--------------+-~---!----------_______________ J _________ --------------
1 • • l 3 ---"--.<--. _______ _._i;:;:._j__ ----------________ .__LO. ----------________ ::h1L1.p-------------------~------r··-----------------------~~------------------------
::: -; ~ ~~ 4
5 -~~;~--------;~:-------------~-----!~~ r·---------------~~:-Jl----------------;-~-~--r-----;--,----------------, ------------------------
00 . ·1 F -'F . -~-. I ~ ~ i . !, ' L:L+-----"~-:2~--------_____ 1:Q-------------~Q-11---------------"=--+-------1-----------11-------------------! :1 'i-::-~2 ~-------~44 -lr--------------'Z~o..r_____ -------~;~-~~-=----------------~1-------------------1,---------[_ ___________ .
---
c: c
.
I
I
' "'
' c c
'fJ ''· ~ ~ u u
i l 8 \. ---~B~ ________ t.f.B_I ___________________ '7_(C_~Ij" _________ ----------~---·]r·--------~----------;------~~-------------------------~~----------~~--------------
i l 9 \_;._-:;---------~0--j·---------________ .'Z~.o~Ji·-----------------=:;-j;-------------------------·r··----------------------:-----------------------
. ·110 .. J .·; 1... 7Zc,. . :':' ,. , I. , 1
1 l !
1 ~ ii-~~-~11 -------:~;-iF1 --------:Z~~JI---------. ----------+----~--------1--------,------lf--------1-------:-,--11-------1-----------\'-r;:-;;: ~-----~~':; T --------_______ hc.J --------------,-----~f--------r------T---~~-------T ------:-r-------r-----------
113 r·---·~·r··----;.~ -~ + -----------------~~~-r------------------:--·--r·-------~---------i·-----l·--------·----------------~~-----------------------.. I : : i I ~ -; ~T ------; ~ i i -------. -------~ ~; II----------'--------;;:;:;; 1r ---------n -----T---/~----------1-------------ii'------------------
!,, l! L~;,. I ______ ;;:,;.z\i _______________ $'! c 1 ____ __ ------3-" o!i __ ---1-________ J _____ I ____________ !L _______ . _ __ _ _ __
: 11 ~ 1!· L ~ ~--------~:-?-·li----------________ $ZQ_I __________ ----------~-----ll----------~------:;-~~; .. ::-------~--1-------------___1:----------------------· :.
!j!: ~ ~~-:~-;-;--------~;~ -~r---------________ _\I~,--~-~--------------------~-----r·-------______ ... .,:) __ : --·~-----------·----------------11""---------------------!if~ ii j ;,; :------;, :2 .. ~----------------~~~~---------i -------~~--!:---------.-----------'! ------1=------------1:--------------------f II' . , . 7 a .
1
__________ ~ c--1---___ ___ _ __ ____ 5 .?--__ j _________________ ~--_____ ,. _________ . _______________ , ________________________ ,, rr ---------r----_______ _
\1'22 iiJ._SP ________ 1.!.t; .. ----------_______ .51-.Q_i ____________________ _: _____ ~~----------________________ ! __________ -----~-~~~;~.:~f~------------------
\ 23 ij_./_._~_q_, ________ 72D.I .......... ------------------------------------------:----------~----------------~----------~--':-.:;;-~:: -------------------
ill:: !r;-~~ ~------~~: -----------------------------------:;-;;:;::1! ---------------------------:;']~-<: '------1! ----------------
l i2(j !I-~ /_::_l _____ jf'_~(i_ 'j--_________________ 1-----___________ 2-"P--j------~---------:: f<'·----------------'!----------_______ __
~j~27 !1.2./~. _____ _/._f?. I o. .. -------------------~----.. -----------------------..!. ---------.... .,.._;.;:.-::·;--'· :-~~-----------------------!.: ________ ------------t: ~~-~_;_~--.... ../;·~~-~---------........ S~a-1--------------------------)---------------~--s~,--'-~-!._ ________ ----------------~----------------------:II~J--~-~----_______ ]_~:7 ·r·--------________ :f_.oJ -------------------------1 -------------------------1'--------------------------r··-------------------J r·-·-·---,--------?-~-.-~-~----------~--------4-9:Q_,i __________ ----------------r------------------------11 !----------------------
.• :JJ ,o .......... l. ...... 8 .... ~ ' I 1 .......... • ..... 2£0. 1 .......... 1.. .............. •: ' .................... ..
__ _;jj Tont. II !I 1\ I/ I:_' __ _
_ ::::=: --:::J ::::;:.:::::--.~ ·---··~ . .3 5jj ____ --------~3s![--····-······.:::4.2.ii·· ____ ___ __ _ _ .. II____ _ _ _____ __li-____________ __ .
REFERENCES
Appendix IV
Bibliography
Personal Communications
TABLE OF CONTENTS
i
IV-1
IV-6
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center. 1980. Late winter
thermal profile of Terror Lake. Unpublished data. Univ. of
Alaska, Anchorage, AK.
Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation. 1979. Water quality stan-
dards. Juneau, AK. 34 pp.
Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game. 1974. Field notes from a survey on the
Tazimina River. Unpublished report. King Salmon, AK. 8 pp.
Anderson, J. W. 1968. Sockeye salmon spawning ground studies in the
Kvichak River system, Alaska, 1965, 1966, and 1967. Fisheries
Research Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Circu-
lar 68-12. 34 pp.
Bailey, J.E., J.J. Pella, and S.G. Taylor. 1976. Production of fry and
adults of the 1972 brood of pink salmon, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha,
from gravel incubators and natural spa•vning at Auke Creek, Alaska.
Fishery Bulletin. 74(4):961-970.
Bovee, K.D. 1978. Probability-of-use criteria for the family salmon-
idae. Cooperative Instream Flow Service Group, U.S. Fish and Wild-
life Service, Fort Collins, CO. Instream Flow Information Paper
No. 4. 80 pp.
Bovee, K. D., ed. In press. A user's guide to the IFG incremental
method. Cooperative Instream Flow Group, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Fort Collins, CO. Information Paper No. 12.
Buck, E.H., et al. 1978. Bibliography, synthesis, and modeling of
Naknek River aquatic system information. Arctic Environmental In-
formation and Data Center, University of Alaska, Anchorage, AK.
Report for the National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of Interior.
244 pp.
Burner, C.J. 1951. Characteristics of spawning nests of Columbia River
salmon. Fishery Bulletin 611:7-10.
Bustard, D.R., and D.\v. Narver. 1975. Aspects of the winter ecology of
juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and steelhead trout
(Salmo gairdneri). 32(5):667-680.
Chambers, J.S., G.H. Allen, and R.T. Pressey. 1955. Research relating
to study of spawning grounds in natural areas. Washington Dept. of
Fisheries, Olympia, WA. 175 pp.
Dames and Moore. 1982. Hydrology for the Tazimina River. Appendix F
in Stone and Webster Engineering Corp. Bristol Bay regional power
plan detailed feasibility analysis, Interium feasibility
assessment. Denver, Co. Report for the Alaska Power Authority.
IV-1
Demory, R.L., R.F. Orrell, and D.R. Heinle. 1964. Spawning ground
catalog of the Kvichak River system, Bristol Bay, Alaska. U.S.
Fish and Hildlife Service, Washington, DC. Special Scientific
Report--Fisheries 488. Fisheries Research Institute, University
of Washington, Seattle, WA. Contribution 168. 292 p
Edmundson, E., F.E. Everest, and D.W. Chapman. 1968. Permanence of
station in juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead trout. Journal
of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. 25(7):1453-1464.
Ellis, R. J. 197 4. Distribution, abundance, and growth of juvenile
sockeye salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka, and associated species in the
Naknek River system, 1961-64. U.S. National Marine Fisheries
Service, Special Scientific Report-Fisheries 678. 53 pp.
Everest, F.H., and D.W. Chapman. 1972. Habitat selection and spatial
interaction by juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead trout in two
Idaho streams. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.
29(1) :91-100.
Fisheries Research Institute. 1962. Spawning grounds survey.
Unpublished data. Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA.
1979. Index surveys of the Tazimina River sockeye salmon
escapements. Unpublished data. Univ. of Hashington, Seattle, WA.
Graybill, J.P., et al. 1979. Assessment of the reservoir-related
effects of the Skagit project on downstream fishery resources of
the Skagit River, Washington. Fisheries Research Institute,
University of Washington, Seattle, WA. 602 pp.
Gropp, D.L., C. H. Steeby,
study of the Lake Elva
the Dillingham area.
Engineers, Anchorage,
1 vol.
and F.J. Bettine. 1980. Reconnaissance
and other hydroelectric pmver potentials in
R.W. Retherford Associates Consulting
AK. Report for Alaska Power Authority.
Hartman, W.L., H.R. Heard, and B. Drucker. 1967.
of sockeye salmon fry and smolts. Journal
Research Board of Canada. 24(10):2069-2099.
Hartman, W.L., T.R. Merrell, and R. Painter. 1964.
havior of sockeye salmon in Brooks River,
1964(2):362-368.
Migratory behavior
of the Fisheries
Hass spawning be-
Alaska. Copeia.
Hartman, H.L., C.~.J. Strickland, and D.T. Hoopes. 1962. Survival and
behavior of sockeye salmon fry migrating into Brooks Lake, Alaska.
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. 92(2):133-139.
IV-2
c
[
n
[
[
[
0
c
[J
n
c
[
c
[
r L
[
[
Hoopes, D.T. 1962. Ecological distribution of spawning sockeye salmon
in three lateral streams, Brooks Lake, Alaska. Ph.D. Thesis. Iowa
State University, Ames, IA. ·. 235 pp.
Krueger, S.W. In press. Freshwater aquatic habitat model--Arctic gray-
ling Thymallus arcticus. Alaska Dept. ofrFish and Game, Anchorage,
AK. Report for U.S. Fish and.Wildlife Service.
LaPerriere, J.D., and L.a. Casper. 1976. Biogeochemistry of deep lakes
in the central Alaska Range. Institute of Water Resources, Univ.
of Alaska. Fairbanks, AK. 35 pp.
Mathisen, O.A, and P.H. Poe. 1969. Studies of Lake Clark and its sock-
eye salmon runs 1961-1968. Fisheries Research Institute, Univer-
sity of Washington, Seattle, WA. Circular 69-5. 21 pp.
Mathisen, O.A., R.F. Demory, and R.F. Orrell. 1962. Notes on the time
of hatching of red salmon fry in Iliamna District, Bristol Bay, AK.
Fisheries Research Institute, University of Washington, Seattle,
WA. Circular 1973. 12 pp.
McAfee, W.S. 1960. Redds of the red salmon, Oncorhynchus nerka, in
three streams of the Alaska Peninsula. M.S. Thesis. University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 39 pp.
McNeil, W.J., and J.E. Bailey. 1975. Salmon rancher's
National Harine Fisheries Service, U.S. NOAA, Auke Bay, AK.
manual.
95 pp.
Merrell, T. R. 1964. Ecological studies of sockeye salmon and related
limnological and climatological investigations, Brooks Lake,
Alaska, 1957. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Special Scientific
Report--Fisheries 456. 66 pp.
Nelson, M.L. 1964. Spawning
larvae in Bristol Bay 1963.
AK. Information Leaflet 40.
ground survey of red salmon eggs and
Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, Juneau,
7 pp.
Peterson, L.A. 1981.
electric project.
10 pp.
Water quality
Letter report.
and limnology, Tazimina hydra-
Report for Dames and Moore.
Poe, P.H. 1978. Kvichak sockeye salmon studies--1978 Kvichak spawning
ground surveys. Fisheries Research Institute, University of Wash-
ington, Seattle, WA. 12 pp.
1980. Newhalen River-Lake Clark studies. Paper for presenta-
tion at National Food Processors Association, University of Wash-
ington Sea Grant Seafood Processors Workshop and Technical Confer-
ence, Harch 11, Olympie Hotel, Seattle, WA. Unpublished. 3 pp.
IV-3
Poe, P.H., and O.A. Mathisen. 1981. Kvichak salmon studies.
Presentation for the Bristol Bay Interagency Meeting,
February 4-5. Anchorage, AK. Unpublished. 32 pp.
1982. Tazimina River sockeye salmon studies, evaluation of
spawning ground survey data. Fisheries Research Institute,
University of Washington. Report for Dames and Moore. 30 pp.
Reiser, D.W., and T.C. Bjornn. 1979. Habitat requirements of anadro-
mous salmonids. Report No. 1 in W.R. Meehan, ed. Influence of
forest and rangeland management of anadromous fish habitat in
western North America. U.S. Forest Service, Portland, OR.
General Technical Report PNW-96. 54 pp.
Reiser, D.W., and R.G. White. 1981. Influence of streamflow
reductions on salmonid embryo development and fry quality.
University of Idaho and Idaho Water and Energy Resources Research
Institute, Moscow, ID. Report for Office of Water Research and
Technology. 154 pp.
Russell, R.B. 1974. Rainbow trout life history studies in lower
Talarik Creek--Kvichak drainage. Sport Fish Div., Alaska Dept. of
Fish and Game, Juneau, AK. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration.
Vol. 15. Study G-11. 48 pp.
Russell, R.B. 1977. Rainbow trout life history studies in lower
Talarik Creek--Kvichak drainage. Completion Report. Sport Fish
Div., Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, Juneau, AK. Federal Aid in
Fish Restoration. Vol. 18. Rainbow trout studies, Lower Talarik
Creek-Kvichak. Study G-11-E. 47 pp.
1980. A fisheries inventory of
National Monument area. Alaska Dept.
National Park Service, Anchorage, AK.
waters in the Lake Clark
of Fish and Game and U.S.
197 pp.
Siedelman, D.L., P.B. Cunningham, and R.B. Russell. 1973. Life
history studies of rainbow trout in the Kvichak drainage of
Bristol Bay. Sport Fish Div., Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game,
Juneau, AK. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration. Vol. 14. Study
G-11. 50 pp.
Siedleman, D.L., and L.J. Engel. 1971. Studies of unique and trophy
game fish. Pages 65-78 in Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game. Federal
Aid in Fish Restoration. Vol. 12. Study G-11. Sport Fish Div.,
Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, Juneau, AK. Job G-11-E.
1972. Studies of trophy game fish in Kvichak and Alagnak
(Branch) drainage of Bristol Bay. Pages 41-66 in Alaska Dept. of
Fish and Came. Federal Aid in Fish Restoration. Vol. 13. Study
G-11. Sport Fish Div., Alaska Dept .. of Fish and Came, Juneau, AK.
Job G-11-E.
IV-4
Tack, S. 1972. Distribution, abundance, and natural history of the
Arctic grayling in the Tanana River drainage. Sport Fish Div.,
Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, Juneau, AK. Federal Aid in Fish
Restoration~ Vol. 13. Study G-11. 34 pp.
1980. Distribution, abundance, and natural history of the
Arctic grayling in the Tanana River drainage. Annual Report.
Sport Fish Div., Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game. Federal Aid in
Fish Restoration. Vol. 21. Study R-I. 32 pp.
Trihey, E.W. 1982. Methodology for estimating preproject streamflows
in the Tazimina River, Alaska. Draft. Arctic Environmental Infor-
mation and Data Center, University of Alaska, Anchorage, AK.
19 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Lake. Unpublished data.
1978. Winter thermal profile of Bradley
Anchorage, AK.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1958. Quantity and quality of surface watgrs
of Alaska, October 1950 to September 1953. U.S. Govt. Printi.ng
Off., \.Jashington, DC. Geological Survey \-later-Supply Paper 1466.
243 pp.
1958. Quantity and quality of surface waters of Alaska,
October 1953 to September 1956. U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Wash-
ington, DC. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1486. 229 pp.
1960. Quantity and quality of surface waters of Alaska, 1957.
U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Washington, DC. Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 1500. 100 pp.
1960. Quantity and quality of surface waters of Alaska, 1958.
U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Washington, DC. Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 1570. 120 pp.
1961. Quantity and quality of surface waters of Alaska, 1959.
U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Washington, DC. Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 1640. 114 pp.
1962. Quantity and quality of surface waters of Alaska, 1960.
U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Washington, DC. Geological Survey
Water-Supply Paper 1720. 122 pp.
1964. Compilation of records of surface waters of Alaska,
October 1950 to September 1960. U.S. Govt. Printing Off., Wash-
ington, DC. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1740. 86 pp.
IV-5
U.S. Geological Survey. 1976. Surface water supply of the United
States, 1966-70. Part 15. Alaska. U.S. Govt. Printing Off.,
Washington, DC. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2136.
428 pp.
\Hlson, W.J., et al. 1981. An assessment of environmental effects of
construction and operation of the proposed Terror Lake Hydro-
electric Facility, Kodiak, Alaska. Instream flow studies. Final
report. Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center,
University of Alaska. Prepared for Kodiak Electric Association,
Inc. 412 pp.
IV-6
[
n
c
c
[
c
[
c
[
[ -
[
[
[
PERSONAL COMHUNICATIONS
Abbott, R. Presentation at project meeting held
offices, Anchorage, AlL, November 17, 1981.
Fairbanks, AK.
in Dames and Moore
Shannon and Wilson,
Baluta, E. Interview, August 12 and August 27, 1981. Fishing guide, Non-
dalton, AK.
Critikos, T. Letter, December 17, 1981. Engineer, Stone and Webster
Engineering Corporation, Denver, CO. Letter to James Hemming, Dames
and Moore Consulting Engineers, Anchorage, AK.
Isakson, J. Interview, August 29, 1981. Fisheries biologist, Dames and
Moore Consulting Engineers, Seattle, WA.
Poe, P. Interviews, August 27 and December 1, 1981; telephone conversa-
tion, February 2, 1981; letter, February 8, 1982 to Jean Baldrige
(AEIDC, Anchorage, AK). Fisheries Research Institute, University
of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Peterson, L., Telephone conversation, January 23, 1982. L.A. Peterson
and Associates, Fairbanks, AK.
Russell, R. Hemorandum, January 23, 1980 to Russ Redick, Sport Fish
Division, Anchorage, AK; telephone conversation, February 2, 1981.
Commercial Fisheries Division, Alaska Dept. of Fish and Game, King
Salmon, AK.; Personal interview April 6, 1982.
Sims, H. Interviews, August 19 and September 22, 1981. Lodge owner,
Nondalton, AK.
IV-7