Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA3281r L SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Preliminary Final Plan of Study Fish and Wildlife Studies proposed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game November 1979 ----------------"------"------------_/ ;K Ilf;Zs ,.sg I,(00 .. ,-<.,' OC1:ober 31,1979 Mr.Eri c Vou ld,Oi rector Al aska Power Authority 333 W.4th Avenue Anchorage.Al aska 99510 Dear /1ft'.You Id: I /JA r S.fiAMMONO.GOVERNOR / / / J:r1 RASPBERRY .'WAD ANCRORA;;;1S!ii12 , I - ihe Alaska Department of Fish and Game ;s providing the enclosed Phase r 25 month porti on of the 5-year fi sheri as and ','fi 1dl i fa st:Jdy proposed to be conducted.as part of the Susitna Hydroelectric feasibility investigations. ine proposals wer~df!veloped foilawing discussions I;'/ith Acr-es ..Arnerican and the;r environmental stUdies subcontractor,Terrestrial E.!1vi ronmenta 1 Specialfsts.'He have also met with represantatives of the U.S.Fish andwndlifaServ;csand the A1aska.Department of Natura 1 Resources td obtain their suggestions and advice relative to portions of our proposals and the development OT a final re"ised pian of study.r must indicate, hQw~"er,that it should not be inferr~<i that USPIlS and ADNR have formally endorsed these proposals in thei rent;rsty .The;r forma 1 pas iti cns l"egard.ing the-9nti're revised 13 1an oT study wil1undoubi:edly come duri ng the next,a genc:y and publ i C rev i E'H stage. tTl his 1ettar tome on October 4 t Robert (\4ann of your staff di sC:.Jssad a !1umcer of issues and subject areas trlhi en requi t"e~our input on tne development o,f the revised pian-of stUdy.The information provided herein should satisfy part rJT those requirements outlined by the API~, but speei fi C l""Efinements addrsssing our concerns out I ined in .ou·r at~ache~ proposal anct comments of other agencies tHill be needed durin,g the period ,~res or the Corps of Engineers is revising the PQS next month • .~~~.. Tn QlTl.as 'til.Tr"snt Reg;ana 1 Sup.erv i SOl" Hac;tat Protact ion Secti on cc:Representative R.Halford ~epresentative 3.Rodgers CJmmi ssi oner R.'0.,Skoog -,:l.DF&G C '.'...,..II \A 1'1r"1"'r.omnnSS1oner c.r,.;'IUS ler -I-\UJ:... Ccrmnissioner R.:.LeResche -AONR J.Lawr~nce -Acres J.Sa'rt1es -rES R.80wker -USP~S a~~etrie -ADNR ARLIS Alaska Resources Library &'Information Services Anchorage.Alaska ' 'i \\. i I ! .-r , ) !' .... •...;.' '.. SUSITNA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Preliminary Final Plan of Study Fish and Wildlife Studies proposed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game November 1979 ARLIS Alaska Resources Library &Information Services Anchorage.Alaska .",..'~ -- - TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES PROGRAM JUSTIFICATION .. Federal/State Laws State Laws .0 0 0 ISSUES,PROBLEMS CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE SUSTINA HYDRO PLAN OF STUDY 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 _0 0 0 0 Project Review &Interagency Coordinaton . Phase I Studies Initiation.0 0 0 0 0 0 Phase II Studies .0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 • 0 Socioeconomic Considerations 0 0 • 0 0 0 Administrative Overhead &Time Delays Monitoriing &Surveillance. Estuarine Studies AQUATIC STUDIES ii iii 1 1 3 6 6 7 8 8 10 10 11 12 Introduction 12 Study Proposa 15 .0 • 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 •13 Stock Assessment of Adult Anadromous Fish Populations 15 Stock Assessment of Adult Resi dent Fi sh &Juvenile Resi dent &Anadromous Fi sh Populations.0 0 0 0 •'0 23 Seasonal &Spatial Habitat Studies 0 34 REFERENCES . . .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BUDGETS-SUSITNA HYDRO FISHERIES STUDLES 0 Administration &Support 0 0 • 0 0 Anadromous Adult-Stock Assessment.0 Resident &Juvenile Anadromous Fishery Study Spatial &Seasonal Habitat Studies 0 WILDLIFE STUDIES 0 • 0 • 0 0 • 0 • 40 43 43 45 52 57 61 Introduction ...0 0 0 0 • 0 • 0 • 0 0 •61 Moose Distribution,Movements,&Habitat Use 0 62 Wolf Distribution,Abundance,Habitat Use &Prey Se 1ecti on 0 •00 0 0 • • 0 0 • 0 •o.•68 Wolverine Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Patterns, &Habitat Use .0 0 0 0 ••~0 • 0 0 0 •••0 0 ••0 70 Bear Distribution,Movements,Abundance &Habitat Use 0 0 72 Caribou Herd Identity,Migration Patterns &Habitat Use 0 74 Di stri buti on &Abundance of Da 11 Sheep 0 • 0 0 • • • • 0 77 APPENDIX Attachment I,Letter to Eric Yould,APA,from Theodore Smith, ADNR,October 26,1979. i LIST OF FIGURES 1.General Sampl ing Schedule . 2.Aquatic &Wildlife Studies Organization Chart. 3.Aquatic Studies Organization Chart 4.Wildlife Studies Organization Chart. i i •39-A 80 81 82 ARLIS Alaska Resources Library &Information Services Anchorage.Alaska LIST OF TABLES l.Big Game Studies Phase I Budget . .. ... ... .. .. ...78 F'" 2.Budget Summary-Aquatic &Wildlife Studies &Support (Phase I). . .. .. .. ..... ... ... ..79 - ,..... I I I iii .... """ - PROGRAM JUSTIFICATION The programs proposed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) are the first phase of a five year study program,necessary in the opinion of this Department,to meet the provisions of numerous federal and state laws and regulations providing for the consideration of fish and wildlife values in pre-project planning and evaluation of impact assessment,project possibility determination,mitigation of probable impacts should the project be constructed,and survei llance and monitoring during and after project construction.The biological objectives and justification are explained in the task work plans;the statutory and regulatory mandates for conducting these proposed work plans are outlined hereafter: Federal/State Laws Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act,draft uniform procedures for compliance,May 1979 further standardizes procedures and interagency relationships to insure,Ilthat wildlife conservation is fully considered and weighed equally with other project features in agency decision making processes by integrating such considerations into project planning, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)compliance procedures,financial and economic analyses,authorization documents,and project implementation.II As stated in the Federal Register (Vol 44,No.98)this Act applies not only in the project area,but wherever project impacts may occur. Subpart B FWCA Compliance Procedures Sec.410.21 Equal consideration Equal consideration of wildlife resource values in project planning and approval is the essence of the FWCA compliance process.It requires action agencies (the Alaska Power Authority~APA)to involve wildlife agencies (the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,USFWS)throughout their planning, approval,and implementation process for a project and highlights the need to utili 4e a systematic approach to analyzing and establishing planning objectives for wildlife resource needs and problems and developing and evaluating alternative plans. Sec.410.22 Consultation (a)Initiation.The FWCA compliance process may be initiated by a potential applicant,an action agency,or a wildlife agency. (b)Potential Applicants.Implementing procedures of action agencies shall provide that applicants for those non-federal project approvals which require a water-dependent power project approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)(also applies to preliminary FERC permit)contain written evidence that they initiated the FWCA compliance process with both Regional Directors and the head of the State wildlife agency exercising administration over the fish and wildlife resources of the state(s)wherein the project is to be constructed and early site review (NRC)applicants. -1- The intent of this paragraph (a)(l)of this section is to assist applicants in designing environmentally sound projects without waste of their planning resources and to minimize the potential for delay in the processing of applications.Action agency implementing procedures shall advise that consultation should be Jnitiated by the applicant at the earliest stages of its project planning,and that its submissions to wildlife agencies shall indicate the general work or activity being considered,its purpose(s),and the general area in which it is contemplated. Nationa 1 Envi ronmental Pol icy Act (NEPA) The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ),Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR,Parts 1500-1508,July 30,1979)specifies provisions requiring the integration of the NEPA process process into early planning,the integration of NEPA reqirements with other environmental review and consultation requirements,and the use of the scoping process. Clean Water Act Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977 and regulations for implementation of the permit program of the Corps of Engineers (33 CFR,Parts 320-329, July 19~1977)requires that a Department of the Army permit(s)be obtained for certain structures or work in or affecting waters of the United States.The application(s)for such a permit(s)will be subject to review by wildlife agencies. Executive Order 11990 (Wetlands) This order was issued "in order to avoid to the extent possible the long-term and short-term adverse impacts associ ated wi th the destructi on or modification of wetlands and to avoid direct or indirect support of new construction in wetlands wherever there is a practicable altenative," and Executive Order 11988 (Floodplains)was issued lito avoid to the extent possible the long-term and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a practicable alternative.It All federal agencies are responsible to comply with these EO's in the planning and decision-making process. Endangered Species Act Section 7(c)of the Endangered Species Act,87 Stat.884,as amended, requires the APA to ask the Secretary of the Interior,acting through the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,whether any listed or proposed endangered or threatened species may be present in the area of the Susitna Hydroelectric Power Project.If the Fish and Wildlife Service advises that such species may be present in the area of the project, the APA is required by Section 7(c)to conduct a Biological Assessment -2- to identify any listed or proposed endangered or threatened species which are likely to be affected by the construction project.The assessment is to be completed within 180 days,unless a time extension is mutually agreed upon.No contract for physical construction may be entered into and no physical construction may begin until the Biological Assessment is completed.In the event the conclusions drawn from the Biological Assessment are that listed endangered or threatened species are likely ...,.to be affected by the construction project,the APA is required by Section 7(a)to initiate the consultation process. Water Resources Council,Principles and Standards The princi pl es and standards for Pl anning Water and Rel ated Land Resources (18 CFR,Part 704,April 1,1978)were established for planning the use of the water and related land resources of the United States to achieve objectives,determined cooperatively,through the coordinated actions of the Federal,State,and local governments;private enterprise and organi- ~zations;and individuals.These principles include providing the basis for planning ~f federal and federally assisted water and land resources programs and projects and federal licensing activities as listed in the Standards.The President in his June 6,1978 statement further defined federal water policies. State Laws Ti tl e 16 Title 16,independently of Federal laws,mandates the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to manage,protect,maintain,enhance,and extend the fish and game,and aquatic plant resources and the habitat that sustains them including assisting the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service in the enforcement of federal laws and regulations pertaining to fish and wil d1 i fe. Sec.16.05.870 also states that: (b)If a person or governmental agency desires to construct a hydraulic project,or use,divert,obstruct,pollute,or change the natural flow or bed of a specified river,lake or stream,or to use wheeled,tracked, or excavating equipment or log-dragging equipment in the bed of a specified river,lake,or stream,the person or governmental agency shall notify the commissioner of this intention before the beginning of the construction or use. (c)....If the commissioner determines to do so,he shall,in the letter of acknowledgement,require the person or governmental agency to submit to him full plans and spectfications of the proposed construction or work,complete plans and specifications for the proper protection of fish and game in connection with the construction or work,or in connection with the use,and the approximate date the construction,work,or use will begin,and shall require the person or governmental agency to obtain written approval from him as to the sufficiency of the plans or specifications before the proposed construction or use is begun. -3- Purpose.The purpose of this section is to protect and conserve fish and game and other natural resources.1964. Att1y Gen.,No.10 Alaska Coastal Management Program The recently approved Alaska Coastal Management Program (ACMP)mandates that all State,Federal and Local government agencies must coordinate all planning and development activities in the State's coastal zone to ensure adequate consideration and protection of Alaska1s coastal waters and resources.As the proposed Susitna Hydropower project will occur within Alaska's coastal zone and certainly will directly influence coastal waters all planning and development plans must be consistent with the Coastal Standards and the Mat-Su Borough1s District Coastal Plan once it is completed and approved.The Coastal Standards are presently in effect and all State and Federal actions must be consistent with them.Section 6AA C 80.130 states that: (a)habitats in the coastal area which are subject to the Alaska Coastal Management Program include: (1)offshore (2)estuaries (3)wetlands and tidal flats (4)rocky islands and sea cliffs (5)barrier islands and lagoons (6)exposed high energy coasts (7)rivers,streams and lakes (8)important upland habitat These habitats which are specifically defined in the Standards must be identified within the Susitna Hydro Study area during the feasibility studies.In addition,Section (b)states that habitats contained in (a) of this section shall be managed so as to maintain or enhance the biological, physical and chemical characteristics of the habitat which contributes to their capacity to support living resources.Specific guidelines are also provided for each coastal habitat.The Coastal Zone Management consistancy requirements are manadated in both the Alaskan and Federal CZM Acts and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.The Question of consistancy with CZM standards goes well beyond the FERC licensing requirements and should be treated as a separate step in determining the feasibility of Hydro Power alternatives. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has a strong mandate under these laws to insure that adequate planning study and evaluation of the fish and wildlife resources in the Susitna Hydro Project area are completed· and become a part of the decision making information used to determine project feasibility.If the project is constructed these studies will be the basis for mitigation plans or the formulation of mitigation studies to offset project impacts.Mitigation as defined in Section 1508.20 of the National Environmental Policy Act Implementation Regulations includes: -4- .... (a)Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. (b)Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation. (c)Rectifying the impact by repairing,rehabilitating,or restoring the affected envi ronment.' (d)Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action. (e)Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments . -5- -, ISSUES,PROBLEMS,CONCERNS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE SUSITNA HYDRO PLAN OF STUDY Project Review and Interagency Coordination Because of the magnitude of the Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Study, continuous coordination in accord with the Uniform Procedures for compliance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act will be best accomplished through formation of a Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee.The function of this committee would be to provide coordinated exchanges of information between the Alaska Power Authority and interested resource management agencies.Through this exchange,the concerns of all agencies involved would be identified early and hopefully prevent unnecessary delays in the progress of the feasibility study. We propose that the Steering Committee be composed of representatives of resource agencies with responsibilities pertaining to the Susitna Hydroelectric Feasibility Studies (ADF&G,ADEC,ADNR,USFWS,USGS,and NMFS).This committee would provide for interagency coordination through joint review of project related materials and for development,through convening the committee,of more informed and uniform positions representing all resource interests to be transmitted to the applicant.This we believe provides that applicant with a more efficient process for information exchange. The objectives of this committee are to: 1.develop plans of study which are based upon full agency participation thro~ghout each phase of the planning process; 2.select the resource specialists who will undertake the required studies and investigations; 3.insure that the biological and related environmental studies, their timing,and technical adequacy are planned,implemented, and conducted to provide the quantitative and qualitative data necessary to:a)assess the potential impacts to fish and wildlife resources;b)provide the basis for mitigation and compensati on of resource 1osse~.whi ch wi 11 resul t from the project at the time of submiss ion of a FERC license application; and c)select the favored miti ation and/or compensation alternative from the product generated by lIbll; 4.provide the forum for continued project review to jointly develop all aspects of the studies and to provide for a timely exchange of information and for redirection of studies should the accomplishment of specific objectives be in jeopardy; -6- - 5.assure that the studies are conducted in compliance with all state and federal laws,regulations,Executives Orders,and mandates as they apply to fish and wildlife resources;and 6.provide unified agency comments from the committee to the appl icant. The Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee should convene on a regular basis as dictated by planning and review.requirements.However,it seems appropriate to meet at a minimum on a monthly basis to exchange reports and to be advised of progress toward objectives by the Alaska Power Authority and principle investigators.A record of agreements reached,recommendations and corrments provided,and responsibilities assigned in meetings should be distributed to all parties involved. Progress reports should be submitted to members of the committee quarterly. Comments from the committee to APA would then be submitted at a pre- established time thereafter.Comments provided to the Alaska Power Authority should be appropriately addressed and incorporated into project documents. The participating members of the committee must have free access to all data collected during the study.In addition,principal project personnel should be accessible to members of the committee in case clarification of any aspect of the field studies is required. Phase I Studies Initiation The programs outlined in the work plans are scoped into a 24 month time frame for Phase I field work and one additional month covering Phase I annual report development during January 1982.The completion of several of these studies between January 1989 and.Jan.uary 1982 is not considered feasible. A large amount of materials,equipment and scientific gear will be requ i red for these studi es.Many of these i terns wi 11 requi re orderi ng well in advance of the date on which they would be employed in the field.For example,major sonar and radio-telemetry development is anticipated for anadromous adult stock assessment and migrational work. The Bendix Corporation,the supplier of the sonar equipment the Department uses,has indicated a minimum of 18 months from order to delivery of sonar equipment.Also,members of the USFWS who have utilized radio- telemetry in the State have indicated an up to one year delay in the fielding of that equipment until radio frequencies are approved by the FCC. New State personnel regulations may also affect this Department1s timely implementation of studies unless an expedited procedure for employing staff dedicated to these studies is developed.If funds are released on January 1,1980,several months wi 11 be required to obtain the staff needed to begin field work in 1980.These staff are crucial to the continued progress of specific planning and organizational work which -7- must necessarily begin as close to January as possible or further study de 1ay wi 11 be encountered. Allowance must be made for the impacts of equipment and personnel constraints on the ability of this Department to conduct the proposed fish and wildlife studies.These are realities which must be dealt with and are fundamental determinants of the adequacy of the work we have proposed to do. Phase II Studies A major position of the Department for the past several years is that many of the biological studies must be conducted through a five year period to provide the basic cyclical,environmental information needed to evaluate project impacts and the mitigation requirements or alternatives that are available.In the time availed us,we have not been able to provide a specific budget or work plan proposal for the studies that may be required in the years succeeding Phase I into Phase II,and it may not be reasonable to do so at this stage. An acceptable Plan of Study must insure that studies are continued into Phase II.It is the position of this Department that study continuation and redirection should be based on the outcome of Phase I information. The proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Steering Committee,which has been proposed herein,is an important group,in our opinion,to insure scoping and budgeting of Phase II studies are executed in a consistent and systematic fashion. Socioeconomic Considerations Of primary importance to this Department is Objective 4:to dete~line the economic~recreational,social,and aesthetic values of the existing resident and anadromous fish stocks and habitat. This objective will enable the Susitna Hydro environmental studies to assess the socioecon\omic impacts on commercial ~recreational,and subsistence users and industries supporting them.Over half of Alaska's growing population resides in the proximity of the impact area.Not only this population,but commercial fishe~en,recreationists,and businesses from throughout the nation and other countries may be affected by the hydroelectric project.The popularity of Denali State Park and nearby Mt.McKinley National Park further attests to the high socia'~recreational, and aesthetic qualities of the area. The basic problem in regard to the Susitna Hydro POS is to define and conduct the studies which will adequately evaluate the socioeconomic (monetary and nonmonetary)and cultural values of fish and wildlife and -8- - the habitat that supportsthern \'1hen comparing them with other (more tangible)monetary resource values and uses associated with hydropower development. It must be emphasized that to ultimately select the best uses of the natural resources of the Susitna Basin from which society will receive the most long term benefit~the net benefits (total benefit minus total costs)must be adequately evaluated.Consequent1y~values must be assigned to each potential resource use.When monetary terms are in- -appropriate~agencies will need to devise nonmonetary means of evaluating impacts to fish and wild1 ife resources.Existing regulations require agencies such as the Corps of Engineers (CDE)or the Alaska Power Authority (APA)to search out~develop and follow procedures reasonably calculated to bring environmental factors to peer status with dollars and technology in their decision-making.NEPA directs action agencies to lithe fullest extent possible": identify and develop methods and procedures which will insure that presently unquantified environmental amenities and values may be given appropriate consideration in decisionmaking along with economic and technical considerations (42 U.S.C.54332 (a)(B). These methods should quantify habitat values which are equivalent to the extent and type of habitat affected by the planned project and estimate the quantity and quality of habitat needed to be acquired and/or improved to mitigate loss.It can then be determined if the socio-economic- impacts of the project can be mitigated and at what cost.Furthermore~ the Water Resources Council directs action agencies to devise nonmonetary means of evaluating fish and wildlife impacts: When effects cannot or should not be expressed in monetary terms,they will be set forth~insofar as is reasonably possible,in appropriate quantitative and qualitative physical~biological or other measures reflecting the en- hancement or improvement of the characteristics relevant to the type of effect under consideration (38 F.R.24797). As a result,the often-cited excuse that the evaluation of supposedly IItntangible ll habitat values is difficult or impossible is no longer valid (Horvath 1978;Dwyer 1977;Copeland 1976;Morrow 1979). Specific data to analyze both the nonmonetary and monetary socioeconomic recreational ~social,and cu1 tural val ues of the Susitna River Basin are lacking.It should also be stressed that an adequate assessment of monetary val ues by traditional methods must be based on commercial ~ -9- - recreational,and subsistence use data which are not currently available and not being collected.Designs for this data collection and the data collection itself would best be done by the Department of Fish and Game, the traditional collector of data on these users.Therefore,this Department would like to actively participate in planning those portions pertaining to socioeconomics,recreational,cultural and aesthetic values of the Susitna River Basin. Administrative Overhead and Time Delays Overhead costs have not been included in the attached budget.The Alaska Departmment ofFish and Game (ADF&G)normally charges overhead to cover costs incurred by its Division of Administration.On most outside contracts,this amounts to approximately 10 percent of all costs except equipment.However,overhead is usually not charged on reimbursable service agreements (RSA)between State agencies.SusitnaHydroelectric Project studies will place an additional burden on the Division of Administration particularly during the first year when major equipment purchases and personnel hiring will occur.However,this additional work load is not likely to cost 10 percent of the proposed budget (approximately $600,000 during 19S0 and 19s1).Surplus money would presumably revert to the General Fund without accomplishing any purpose. A more reasonable approach would be for the Division of Administration of the ADF&G,the Alaska Department of Administration,and the Alaska Power Authority to design a realistic program for administering the funds and to have APA reimbu rse the appropri ate agenci es for actual costs.These costs should be added to the overall budget. The time normally required to process purchase requisitions and contracts is likely to create problems with APA's time table.A similar problem developed when the Legislature appropriated Bristol Bay disaster relief funds during 1974 after a failure in the salmon run.The problem was solved by funding a position in the Anchorage office of the Department of Administration to expedite purchasing.This allowed the rapid purchase of items without violating purchasing procedures and without excessively burdening the State I s regular administrative staff.A similar approach would be benefi ci alto the Susitna Program.It is recommended that APA and Administration consider it as an option. Monitoring &Surveillance Moni tori ng and survei 11 ance of Phase I and II proj ect act i viti es to minimize the impact of these activities on fish and wildlife and their habitats will be necessary. The Susitna Hydro Coordinator will be responsible for assuring thattheDepartmen"t reviews and comments upon the host of State ana Federal permit actions which may be required each year for land and water use. -10- ..... He will be specifically responsible for ADF&G Title 16 permit applications review and development stipulations to protect fish and game. Estuarine Studies The Department of Fish and Game has not attempted to detail possible estuarine studies for the preliminary final POS.These studies can be delayed pending the outcome of Phase I studies. If demonstrable hydrologic and water quality changes near the mouth of the Susitna River are shown or projected (based on the analysis of 1980 or 1981 data),estuarine studies should be initiated to identify the potential for project impacts on that environment . -11- -- AQUATIC STUDIES Introduction The Susitna River drainage~located north of Cook Inlet,encompasses an area of 19,400 square miles.The free-flowing Susitna River is approximately .-275 miles long from its source in"the Alaska Mountain Range to its point of discharge into Cook Inlet.The mainstem river and its major tributaries originate in glaciers and carry a heavy silt load during the ice-free months,but there"are also many smaller tributaries which are perennially si It-free. The constructi on of pow.er dams on the Sus itna River will adverse lyaffect portions":of the fi sh and wi 1dl i fe resources of the Sus i tna Ri ver Bas in. The two dam system proposed by the Corps of Engineers (CaE)would inundate in excess of 50,500 acres of the Susitna River Basin aquatic and terrestrial habitat upstream of Devil Canyon.Regulation of the mainstemri ver will substantially alter the natural flow regime downstream.The transmission line corridor,substations,road corridor,and construction pad sites may also impact aquatic and terrestrial communities and their habitat. Historically,the long-and-short-term environmental impacts of hydroelectric dams have adversely altered the extremely delicate balance of ecosystems (Keller 1976;Hagan et al 1973). Background knowledge of the Susitna River Basin is limited.The proposed hydroelectric development necessitates gaining a thorough knowledge of its natural characteristics and populations prior to final dam design approval and construction authorization in order to protect the aquatic . and terrestrial populations from unnecessary losses.All engi neering, hydrological,biological,and other project feasibility study activities conducted by the various governmental and private agencies will also have to be monitored and regulated to prevent ecological disturbances. A survey of the fishery resources should cover complete life history cycles.A 30 month program prior to license application (Phase I), a1though supplying essential information about the fishery,is inadequate and should be continued.through supplemental studies in Phase II.The proposed studies should be conducted for a minimum period of 5 years. Five species of Pacific salmon (chinook,coho,chum,pink,and sockeye) inhabit the Susitna River drainage during their freshwater life history stages.The majority of chinook,coho,chum,and pink salmon production in Cook Inlet occurs within this drainage.An anadromous smelt,the eul achon,also uti 1i zes the lower reaches of the river. Cook Inlet is one of the major anadromous fish producing areas in the State of Alaska.The commercial catch of salmon reported for Cook Inlet during the five year period from 1971 to 1975 averaged over a million fish per year,and represented an average of 7.4 percent of the total catch for the State of Alaska.In addition to the commercial catch of -12- .- salmon,the recreational fisherery took about 90,000 salmon a year and the personal-use fishery,an additi ona 1 10,000 salmon per year.Sockeye, pink,and chum salmon are by far the most important commercial species in·the area,making up over 90 per cent of the total catch from Cook Inlet;coho and chinook salmon make up the remainder.Chinook and coho salmon also are the species most favored by the recreational fishermen. Grayl ing,rainbow trout,Dolly Varden,burbot,lake trout,and whitefish are some of the important resident fish species common to this system. Approximately 50 percent of the statewide sport fishing effort occurs within the Cook Inlet area.The recreational marine fishery is,however, very limited with the exception of a popular fishery at the vicinity of Deep Creek on Cook Inlet.The majority of the anadromous sport fish harvest occurs as the fish approach their spawning areas.Most,anglers within the Cook Inlet area show a preference for salmon rather than resident game ftshwhen both types of fisheries are available.Resident \populations are fished more heaVily during fall and spring months during the absence of salmon runs. Therefore,the proposed Susitna River hydroelectric project will have various impacts on both the indigenous organisms and the natural conditions within the aquatic environment.Potential impacts to fish populations are the most obvious source of concern due to their socioeconomic and recreational importance to the people of Alaska and the Nation. STUDY PROPOSALS Individual study proposals are designed to provide the necessary background information to enable proper evaluation of impacts.Six general objectives have been outlined: 1.Determine the relative abundance and distribution of adult anadromous fish populations within the drainage. 2.Determine the distribution and abundance of selected resident and juvenile anadromous fish populations. 3.Determine the spatial and seasonal habitat requirements of anadromous and resident fish species during each stage of ' their life histories. 4.Determine the economic,recreational,social,and aesthetic values of the existing resident and anadromous fish stocks and habi tat. The Department has not developed a specific work plan for this objective but strongly believes the Acres-American POS must be strengthened to cover fish and wildlife concerns during Phase 1. -13- 5.Determine the impact the Devil Canyon project will have on the aquatic ecosystems and any required mitigation prior to construction approval decision.This is the primary objective of both Phase I and II studi es.Thi s wi 11 be di scussed in detail in the Phase II work when it is w~itten. 6.Determine a long-term plan of study,if the project is authoriz'ed, to man;tor the impacts duri ng and after project completion. Th is is also an obj ecti ve of Phase I!. Yentna River to the Talkeetna River confluence Cook Inlet to the Yentna River confluence Talkeetna River confluence to the Devils Canyon dam site Devil Canyon dam site to the Tyone River confluence Proposed transmission line corridor(s),access roads,and construction pad sites The study areas are generally categorized within the following 1dcations: Cook Inlet areaA. B. r C. !D. E. F. Scal ing of the proposed studies with respect to timing,geographic locations,and intensity has been done with consideration of the resource knowledge available for each of the geographic locations identified above. - - -14- I I. ,.- ! Title Stock Assessment of Adult Anadromous Fish Populations Objectives To determine the relative abundance and distribution of the anadromous fish populations within the Susitna River drainage. Bp,ckground The Susitna River salmon stocks are major contributors to the Cook Inlet area recreational and commercial fisheries.Determining total escapement into this system is complicated by the glacial conditions of the major streams and the enormity of the area.Management of the northern Cook Inlet salmon stocks has been difficult due to the mixed stock commercial fishery in Cook Inlet and the lack of adequate tools to provide accurate in-season escapement estimates for the drainage. The major hydroelectric project impacts on the anadromous fish species are expected to be due to changes in habitat.Alteration of the normal flow regimes and the physical and chemical water characteristics will probably be the most critical impacts.It is difficult at this time to determine the distance downstream from the proposed dams that changes will occur.Studies conducted by Townsend (1975)in the Peace River demonstrate that effects were obserYed 730 miles downstream from the Bennett Dam. Basel ine fisheries inventories were conducted by the Alaska Department of Fish and G.ame in the upper Susitna River during the 1974-1977 field seasons.Emphasis has been on the inventory of adult and juvenile sal!J1on stocks and habitat assessment.Ongoing Alaska Department of Fish and Game research investigations have concentrated on determining salmon escapement into the Susitna River and the distribution of these escapements. Emphasis has,however,been primarily on sockeye salmon.Successful tag and recovery projects were operated in the lower river during 1975 and 1977 and the feasibility of sonar operation was tested in the mainstem Susitna River approximately 25 miles upstream from Cook Inlet during 1976.Side-scan sonar counters have been utilized to determine escapements into the river since 1977 and are considered the state...of-the-art equipment for determining escapements in glacial river systems in Alaska. Only through total stock assessment will it be possible to determine what portion of the Susitna River salmon stocks will be affected by the project and determine the level of mitigative measures which will ultimately be required.It is essential to know what portion the affected stocks contribute to the total Susitna River salmon escapement in order to determine potential changes in fish populations and numbers.An evaluation of the contribution of the Susitna River salmon runs to the Cook Inlet fisheries is essential to establishing the importance of the Susitna River salmon to the economy of the Cook Inlet area as a whole. -15- Ideally,since the Pacific salmon are cyclic in years of return,these studies should continue through at least one complete cycle.Differences do occur between the different year classes.The results obtained prior to license application may show,at least,the degree of variation that might be expected from year-to-year but with wide limits of confidence. The real danger is,of course,the unpredictable conditions or events that might occur in any one year.For example,anyone year could be completely abnormal with respect to weather or other envi ronmenta 1 conditions which influence fish productions and would make interpretation .-of t,he results very di fficult.The studies outl ined should therefore continue through Phase II (post-license application).A minimum of five years would be required to complete the studies. Study Approach Adult anadromous fisheries studies will be divided into five major geog.raphical areas.All studies,however,will be interrelated.The following outlines baseline studies required for each area and general work plans. 1.Cook Inlet Area.Contribution of the SusitnaRiver salmon stocks to the Cook Inlet fisheries -Quantitative separation of stocks Objectives The objectives of this study are to: 1.Identify the proportion of the Susitna River salmon stocks harvested by the commerci al and recreati ona 1 fisheri-es;and 2.Determine quantitatively that portion of the total catch produced in the Susitna River drainage. Background The major area of salmon resource competition is within the Upper Cook Inlet area,i.e.,that area north of the latitUde of Anchor Point.The Susitna Ri ver salmon stocks are intermixed with other large salmon stocks produced from the Kenai Peninsula and west side of Cook Inlet. All five species of Pacific salmon are harvested in Upper Cook Inlet The majority of these salmon pass through the area at the same time, thus creating a mixed species and mixed stock fishery.Any feasibility study of the Susitna River project will require an assessment of the contribution of the Susitna River salmon populations to the commercial and recreational fisheries. - Work Plan Commercial catch data is available through the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Final statistical runs are available through 1976 and prel,iminary -16- - .- I - - - data is available through the current years harvest. Identification and separation of the various stocks of salmon will be by scale pattern analysis and/or electrophoresis.Differences in scale patterns have already been found to exist in sockeye and coho salmon populations in Cook Inlet and theSusitna River stocks have been statistically separated from the other major Cook Inlet stocks.Data is,however, only available for one age class.Chum and pink salmon stocks have not successfully been separated on .the basis of scale pattern analysis in other areas,due to the absence of freshwater growth.Electrophoretic techniques would be employed for stock identification of these species. An analysis of length-weight relationships may provide sufficient data for these two species. The program requires the regular collection of scales and tissue samples from the commercial catch and from the major salmon producing areas (i.e.,known escapement samples).Expansion of the on-going Alaska Department of Fish and Game Stock Separation Program would provide the necessary data base for stock assessment of sockeye,coho,and chinook salmon.Cost estimates and design of this program are based on incorporating these studies with ADF&G programs.If a separate program is desi gned, additional funding would be required for sampling crews and laboratory equipment and analysis. Sampl ing design would be divided into two major components:collection of scales and laboratory and computer analysis of scale patterns. A minimum of 250 scales per species and age class will be obtained during each fishing period.Known escapement samples would be obtained from existing research and management programs.Three additional - cannery sampling crews (2 people each)will be required to obtain scale samples.Staff time will be required to design a program for chinook salmon.Existing crews should,however,be adequate to conduct sampling .. The ADF&G scale laboratory would be used to process samples.A supervisor and a second shift would be added to the staff to maximize the use of existing equipment.A digitizing station would have to be added to the existing microcomputer.Additional computer time would be required. The feasibility of separating pink and chum salmon stocks by electro- phoretic techniques probably could be determined after one sampling season.If this technique is unsuccessful it would be discontinued and other methods would be evaluated.Analysis could best be done by the University of A1 aska.A minimum of 1,000 fish samples per fishery should be obtained for each species.Known escapement samples will also have to be collected.Three samp1 ing crews would be requi red. 2.Cook Inlet/Susitna river confluence to the Yentna River confluence. Stock assessment of the adult salmon populations Objecti ves The objectives of these studies are to provide: 1.escapement data,by salmon species,into the lower Sus'itna River; -17- - 2.pifferentiation of the Susitna and Yentna river stock contribution; 3.timing of the salmon migrations; 4.movements as related to stream flow and water quality;and 5.utilization of the mainstem river for spawning. Background Total escapernentinformation for the Susitna River drainage is generally 1acking.Various methods have been uti lized by the Al aska Department of Fish and Game since 1974.Recent developments in side-scan sonar have provided the most valuable tool,to date,for evaluating in-season escapement by species.Emphasis has,however,been on sockeye salmon. Work Plan Commercial Fisheries Division of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game currently operates an escapement project in the vicinity of Susitna Station as a part of their on-going sockeye salmon research program. Expansion of this program would provide the necessary escapement data required for the Susitna Hydro-Project baseline studies.Sonar counters and fishwheelswould be operated from May through mid-October to deter- mine escapement by species.This would require funding of the existing project beyond its normal operating dates.Data from this program would be correlated to the Stock Separation program within Cook Inlet and additional escapement studies in the upper Susitna River.· A sonar escapement enumeration program would be required in the lower Yentna River to differentiate between Yentna and Susitna river produc- tion.Comparative analysis of the Yentna River escapement data and the mainstem Susitna River sonar data would be made to determine stock contribution of each system.Two side-scan sonar counters and two fishwheels (for species apportionment)would be deployed on the Yentna Ri ver. Migrational timing data would be obtained from fishwheel catch data at the sonar site. Scale samples will be obtained from the fishwheel catch to provide a known data base for Cook Inlet stock separation studies.A minimum of 40 samples per day will be required for each species. Radiotelemetry will be used to locate criti ca 1 salmon habitat and define major migrational corridors of adult salmon in the Susitna River. This technique has been used successfully in other glacial river systems within Alaska,but the feasibility of this technique will have to be further evaluated for the Susitna River.Conductivity data wi II have to be compiled from various locations within the drainage,both within the mainstem river and clearwater tributaries. -18- Migrational characteristics may vary greatly for each salmon species and must therefore be determined for each separately.Data obtained from these studies may also be useful in the final selection of·proposed sonar projects and deployment of gear. Federal law requires obtaining an FCC license for transmitting.License application approval may require up to one year. Feasibility studies will include testing of equipment and tags from major companies.Various companies will be contacted regarding the possibility of leasing equipment.If radiotelementry is a successful technique in the Susitna River,equipment will be purchased for the second field season and the program will be expanded.Emphasis will be on one species during the testing period.Chinook salmon are suggested as the first year target species. Fish will be tagged at the Susitna Station of the "Deshka"site and tracking will be conducted daily by boat and bi-weekly by aircraft.A F statistically valid sample size probably will not be attained during the first year of feasibility studies,but evaluations of equipment will be made.If deemed feasible,a maximum of 50 fish a season wi 11 be tagged in subsequent years. Coordination with and assistance from USF&WS Research Section will be required throughout the project. Eulachon,an anadromous smelt,utilize the lower mainstem Susitna and Yentna rivers for spawning.The extent of utilization of the mainstem river will be documented and evaluation of the populations will be made. 3.Yentna River confluence to Ta"1 keetna.Stock Assessment of adult salmon populations Objectives The objectives of these stock assessment studies are to determine the: 1.numbers of adult salmon utilizing this area for migration and spawning; 2.migrational timing of the adult salmon; 3.recreational utilization of these stocks;and 4.movement of salmon as related to stream flow and water quality. Background Many of the important recreational use areas occur within this area of the river.These areas have road access on the east side of the river -19- '"'" and receive high use via aircraft transportation on the west side.All five species of adult salmon utilize this area for spawning and migration. Due to the braided nature of the Susitna River in this area many impacts are expected to be seen due to alterations of stream flow. Work Plan Two side-scan sonar projects will be established within this area of the ri ver.Seasona 1 apportioned counts by species will be compared to the lower Susitna and Yentna river sonar projects to determine importance of this area to the entire drainage.Fishwhee1s and possibly other sampling gear will be used to apporti on sonar counts. ~ One sonar project will be located between the Yentna River confluence and the Deshka River and a second sonar project will be located in the vicinity of Sunshine.These programs will provide information on:1) the importance of this area of the river for spawning;2)the extent to which this area is used for migration to spawning areas upstream of Talkeetna;and 3)the contribution of these salmon stocks to the total Susitna River drainage.A total of 4 side-scan sonar counters and 6 fishwheels will be required. All salmon captured in the fishwheels at the IIS uns hine site ll will be marked with a color-and number-coded Peterson disc tag.Marked fish will be recaptured upstream to provide an assessment of stocks utilizing this area. Migrational timing will be determined by fishwheel catches at the sonar projects and survey crews. Recreational utilization of these salmon stocks will be determined partially by on-going ADF&G creel census programs.Expansion of these programs will be required to adequately monitor all species.The creel-census programs will also provide data on migrational timing and tag recoveries. Movement of salmon through this geographic area will be monitored by remote sensing devices for radio tagged fish.Sonar counters may also -provide horizontal distribution data for that particular area. Alaska Department of Fish and Game survey data will be used to determine chinook salmon escapements into major tributaries.These surveys may have to be expanded to assure adequate coverage of major tributaries. 4.Ta lkeetna to Dev"j 1 Canyon Dam Si teo Stock assessment of adul t salmon populations Objectives The objectives within this study area are to determine the: 1.abundance of adult salmon; -20- -~ 2.stock assessment of the Susitna-Chu1itna-Ta1keetna stocks; 3.migrational timing of the salmon stocks; 4.recreational utilization; 5.movement of salmon stocks through this area as related to stream flow and water quality . .Background Population estimates of salmon species utilizing the Susitna River above the Chulitna River confluence were estimated during the 1974, 1975,and 1977 field seasons based on tagging and subsequent recovery of fish. These studies indicate a portion of the salmon tagged are not destined to spawn above the tagging site,but rather below it.The importance and extent of this milling behavior in the upper river areas requires definition.The alterations in flow and water quality in the mainstem river after project completion could significantly affect this behavior and consequently spawning success. Observations of spawning areas between the Chulitna and Susitna river confluence upstream to Portage Creek during fall surveys indicate that a reduction in flow to proposed post-construction levels would prevent access to many important spawning areas. Work Plan Sa lmon escapement estimates wi 11 be determined by a tag and recovery program in this area.Fish marked at the "S uns hinesite"will be recovered by ground survey crews upstream from the Chulitna River confluence. Surveys of major spawning areas between Talkeetna and the Devil Canyon dam site will be conducted in conjunction with juvenile studies to determine distribution. Escapement estimates wi 11 be compared to sonar project located in the lower river,primarily the lISunshine site,"and will provide information on importance of the upper river for spawning and also contribution of the Talkeetna and Chulitna river salmon stocks to the entire drainage. Migrational timing of salmon stocks utilizing this area will be determined by stream surveys. Recreational use within this area will be determined by a creel-census program. Movement of salmon stocks through this area will be determined by the radio tagging program.Radio tags may be implanted in adults at the Sunshine site and movements monitored upstream.Data will be used to -21- determine areas where habitat utilization studies should concentrate (i.e.,stream flow and water quality monitoring). 5.Devil Canyon dam site to the Tyone River confluence.Stock Assessment of adult salmon populations ,,,,,,,,Objective To determine if salmon utilize that area of the Susitna River above Devil Canyon. Background Studies conducted during the late 1950's indicate that Cook Inlet salmon stocks are unable to ascend the Susitna River beyond Devil Canyon,' the latter being a natural water velocity barrier to migration (U.S. ""'"Department of the Interior,1957).Reports from local residents of salmon observations above Devil Canyon indicate that this should be investigated further. Work Plan Surveys and escapement sampling will be conducted in the proposed impoundment areas between the Denali Highway and Devil Canyon during periods of peak adult salmon abundance.Initial observations will be conducted by aerial surveys to document the presence or absence of adult salmon.Surveys will be done in conjunction with resident fish "investigations. Data obtained wi 11 be util ized to determine necessary mi ti gation measures. ,- -22- c--, Title Stock Assessment of Adult Resident Fish and Juvenile Resident and Anadromous Fish Populations Object~ To determine the relative abundance and distribution of adult and juvenile resident fish and juvenile anadromous fish populations. Background Some resident game fish species make major migrations from lake and tributary systems into the mainstem Susitna for purposes of overwintering. The importance of this intra-system migration and the role of the mainstem Susitna River is not fully understood at this time.Surveys conducted between 1974 and 1977 document that a high quality sport fishery is provided by the Susitna River,its tributaries,and nearby lakes.These intra-system movements and periods of seasonal availability must also be better understood in terms of dependence upon mainstem hydrologic conditions. Previous studies have defined important clearwater streams and spring fed sloughs within the Susitna River drainage which support juvenile anadromous fish species.Investigations have,however,concentrated primarily on summer rearing areas.Surveys indicate these populations are not static,but vary in abundance and distribution.Studies previously conducted indicate juvenile anadromous species also utilize the mainstem Susitna Rivet during the critical winter period. Data collected since 1974 provide only baseline information.Generaliza- tions may be made,but sufficient information is not available to determine specific impacts of dam construction and operation on incubating and rearing anadromous species. Study Approach Adult and juvenile resident fisheries studies will be divided into three major geographical areas.All studies,however ,wi 11 be interrelated. The following outlines baselines studies required for each area and general work plans. 1.Cook Inlet/Susitna River confluence to the Talkeetna River confluence.Stock assessment of the resident and juvenile anadromous fish populations. Objectives The objective of these studies are to: 1.Determine specific occurence and species composition of resident and juvenile anadromous stocks throughout the year -23- within the Susitna River mainstem and within the reaches of tributary streams regularly influenced by the Susitna River. of particular importance to this study are the Alexander Creek, Flat Horn Lake,Deshka River,Willow Creek,Iron Creek,and Rabideux Creek tributary systems; 2.Define any apparent seasonal changes in occurrence and relative abundance of resident and juvenile anadromous species at the confluence of tributary systems and the Sus itna mai nstem; Define and describe habitat type utilization by resident and juvenile anadromous species throughout the year and at varying hydrologic conditions; Determine migratory directions and timing of fish species at Iron Creek; 3.Develop suitable sampling techniques for the collection and determination of relative abundance of resident and Juvenile anadromous species in the Susitna mainstem throughout the year;.- 4 ~ 5. ,~ 6.Survey other tributary systems,particularly Rabideux Creek, for the purpose of establishing a weir. - Background This reach of the Susitna River encompasses many important fish producing and recreational fishing tributaries and is an area of critical environmental concern because of the possible seasonal use and migration between clearwater tributaries and the Susitna River.Studies of these seasonal migrations and the distribution of resident and juvenile anadromous fish in and to habitats in the Susitna River are essential. The studies would be initiated for selected streams and for a prescribed distance:upstream throughout the year.Expansion or retirement of these studies would depend on confirmation for migration and habitat use by resident and juvenile anadromous fish in the Susitna River.If confi rmati on of these movements and distribution to the Susitna is positive,the basic inventory will,in conjunction with the study task on habitat evaluation, identify specific year to year study locations for ongoing programs required to determine fishery impacts on the fish popUlations. While the time frame allotted for accomplishment of these six objectives is 30 months we feel that these same objectives should remain ongoing through the termination of the project with appropriate adjustment and redirection being made as resultant data are analyzed. Also we see that it is imperative to incorporate the hydrologic studies as an intregal component in achieving our stated study goals. -24- .- - Work ,Pl an The initial year of this study,1980 will be comprised of essentially three field operations,a summer and winter program on the Susitna River and a weir established on Iron Creek. A crew of three biologists,ut'i1izing a riverboat as their primary means of transportation,will operate in the Susitna mainstem and tributary systems during the ice free months,May through October.Their responsibilities will include: 1.Sampling using established techniques and their adaptations including gill nets,minnow traps,adult traps,angling, seines,and e1ectrofishing. 2.Developing suitable techniques for sampling the Susitna mainstem. Particular emphasis will be placed on the design of an effective stationary fish trap. 3.Classifying in terms of depth,velocity,turbidity,and substrate types in conjunction with the sampling of resident populations. It is essential that close cooperation is maintained between hydrologic and fisheries research. 4.Tag adult resident fish and note species,size,date and location of capture. A crew of four biologists will carry out fisheries research during the winter months.This facit of the field operations will be based on road aCCess until such time as the mainstem Susitna ice condition has stablized sufficiently to provide safe transportation via snowmachine.This crew wi 11 : 1.Survey in the proximity of areas surveyed during the previous summer using estab1 ished sampl ing techniques such as gi 11 nets and minnow traps.As ice conditions improve and data is analyzed this effort will be expanded to include as much of the study area as possible. 2.Design an effective resident species adult trap for use in this study area as established sampling techniques meet with limited success when applied under a cover of ice in the river environment. 3.Classify habitat in terms of ice cover,depth,velocity turbidity, and substrate in conjunction with sampling of resident populations. A weir will be installed on Iron Creek as early in the spring as is feasible and will operate throughout the ice free months (May-October). This facility will be operated by a crew of three biologists,who will be responsible for: -25- 1.Operation of the Iron Creek weir.The Iron Creek weir will be designed to capture both adults and juveniles and both immigrants and emigrants. 2.Conducting a tagging study utilizing adults captured in the weir.A reward will be offered to encourage the return of tags and data from the sport fishermen. 3.Utilizing minnow traps,gill nets,seines,and electro shocking devices,in addition to the weir to sample the resident population and recovering tagged fish in Iron Creek. 4.Conducting surveys on Rabideux Creek to determine the advis- ability of installing a weir in there in 1981. A project leader position assisted by a Tech III is included in this segment.Responsibilities will include: 1.Organizational functions and oversight of entire Susitna Basin study. 2.Analysis of data and report preparation. FollOWing the first season's determination of resident and juvenile anadromous fish occurrence,areas of greatest availability and suitable methods of capture,the 1981 program will be directed to largely the same areas and intensified with respect to relative abundance and preferred habitat utilization.The 1981 study plan will again consist of three segments,summer field operations,winter field operations,and a crew operating the Iron Creek weir and possibly an additional weir facility located at Rabideux Creek. A crew of three biologists utilizing a riverboat as their primary means of transportation will operate in the Susitna mainstem and tributary systems during the ice free months to: Confirm previous seasons database with regard to occurrence and species composition. Determine relative abundance of resident stocks in predeter- mined locations by seasonal period and further establish patterns of intrasystem migration. Further define preferred habitat parameters. Continue to tag adult resident fish and note any recaptures from previous year. A crew of four biologists will carryon the initial year's study from January through April.This four man crew wi 11 begin the second field season in December of 1981 and following the first season's determina- tions the program will: l. ~. 2. ""'" 3. 4. -26- ..- 1.\be expanded to include additional areas; 2.be intensified at one or two predetermined locations;and 3.continue to determine habitat requirements. The weir facility at Iron Creek will be reinstalled and operated by a crew of two biologists from May through October.Second year activities will include: 1.Continuation of first year activities. 2.Recovery of tagged fi sh. 3.Description of Iron Creek habitat util ized by seasonally present resident fish. Closely associated with the Iron Creek weir will be a more temporary weir to be constructed in spring 1981 on Rabideux Creek pending results of the first years study.This weir and associated tributarial sampling will be carried out by a crew of two biologists who will be responsible for: 1.Construction and operation of a temporary weir on Rabideux Creek. 2.Sampling Rabiduex Creek and that portion of the Susitna mainstem adjacent to Rabideux Creek,on a regular basis using established sampling techniques. 3.Conducting a tagging program on resident fish . A project leader position assisted by a Fishery Tech III will continue through 1981.Responsibilities will include: 1.Coordination of field activities. 2.Data analysis and report writing. 2.Talkeetna River confluence to Devil Canyon.Stock assessment of the resident and juvenile anadromous fish populations. Objectives The objectives of programs within this study area are to: 1.Determine specific 'occurance and species composition of resident and anadromous stocks utilizing the mainstem Susitna River and it's major tributaries; -27- -- ,~ - 2.refine seasonal changes in occurrence and abundance of resident and anadromous specis within the mainstem Susitna River and it's tributaries; 3.Define habitat types utilized by resident anadromous fish species~ seasonally throughout this year,at varying hydrologic conditions, both within themainstem Susitna River and the major tributaries;and 4.Establish the impacts of flow regulation upon the habitat which currently meets seasonal requirements of resident and anadromous fish stocks within the study area. Background This study area includes the mainstem Susitna River and a number of important clearwater tributaries which have indigenous populations of resident game fish and provide spawning and rearing habitat for anadromous species.Several of the more important lateral tributaries are Portage Creek,Indian River,Gold Creek~and Fourth of July Creek.All are located in the upper reaches of the study area and in the general vicinity of the railroad crossing at Gold Creek. Five species of Pacific salmon~chinook,coho,sockeye,pink and chum are native to this portion of the study area.The most important resident fish species within this area are Arctic grayling and rainbow trout; however,burbot,whitefish~Dolly Varden,and various other species are also present. While a higher degree of reliability in knowledge of possible flow, water quality,and stream morphology changes exists in this reach because of previously collected baseline data,baseline studies on resident and juvenile anadromous fish must be initiated to better detail specific occurrence,distribution,and seasonal migration and habitat use of the Susitna River as well as document the population sizes of res i dent fi sh. Work Plan Due to limited access to much of the Susitna River upstream of Talkeetna, and related high cost of transportation~work proposed for 1980 is limited to the Indian River -Portage Creek -Gold Creek area.This area is accessible by railroad and can be investigated by a single field crew located in the Gold Creek area.These investigations will be extended downstream into other areas in the second and third years of study. A four man crew will be located in the Gold Creek or Indian River area housed in a local cabin or tent camp,and provided with a river boat and Zodiac type raft to conduct the following activities: 1.Establish the occurrence and species composition of resident and anadromous fish stocks util izing the mainstem Susitna River during the period May through October of 1980.This -28- ""'" .... .- work will entail intensive netting~electro-shocking~trapping~ or use of set lines or other suitable collection methods within the mainstem reach from Fourth-of-July Creek upstream to Portage Creek.Some of these collection devices are expected to require modification and/or development as the season progresses. 2.Perform similar sampling by net,electro-shock,trap or angling withi..n the Indian River,Portage Creek,Gold Creek, and Fourth-of-July Creek tributaries.A program of fish tagging will be implemented to define intra-system movement. 3.)Creel census anglers utilizing these four streams to determine harvest of resident fish by:a)species,b)age class,c) size,d)seasonal period,and e)area of availability.The creel census will also help with recovery of tagged fish. 4.Conduct the adult anadromou5 studies in this area in cooperation with the anadromous program. Following the first seasons determinations of resident and anadromous fish occurrence,areas of greates~availability,and suitable methods of capture,the 1981 program will be directed to largely the same areas and intensified to include population estimations and preferred habitat util ization. A similar two man crew will be located in the Indian River or Gold Creek area,depending upon which seems more appropriate as a result of the first year study.The same equipment will be utilized.Study objectives for 1981 will be as follows: 1.Determine relative abundance of resident and anadromous fish stocks in Indian River and Portage Creek,at predetermined locations,by seasonal period,and further define intra-system movements and migrations.These studies will necessitate an intensified tag and recovery program to provide instantaneous population estimates at specific seasonal periods and also numerous aerial surveys.While the methods with which to accomplish this work may be more apparent after the first years efforts,it is at this time considered likely that trapping devices or a statistically designed angling scheme may be most appropriate. 2.Conduct similar studies in appropriate sections of the mainstem river and side channels during spring,summer,and fall. Techniques for this work segment will be similar to objective No.l. 3.Define habitat utilization of resident and anadromous species both within the mainstem and the Gold Creek,Fourth-of-Ju1y -29- 4. Creek,Indian River,and Portage Creek tributaries as related to hydrologic conditions. Areas of resident and anadromous fish preference will be surveyed in terns of flow,substrate,turbidity,depth,etc. to determine if these parameters are responsible for instream movements and distribution.These data will be correlated with historical climatological data and mainstem flows. Particular emphasis will be placed upon this facet during peri ods when ma i nstem flows approach the ·proposed regu 1ated flow. Determine mid-winter occurrence and distribution of resident and juvenile anadromous fish species both in Indian River and themainstem Susitna River. .... As Indian River is the only major accessible upper tributary stream during mid-w"inter,these studies wi,11 be limited to it. The mainstem river is characterized as being extremely dangerous to work in mid-winter due to poor ice conditions.As deemed possible,netting,trapping,and set lines will be utilized to determine occurrence and distribution of resident species during the winter months and to recapture fish tagged earlier oj n the year. Winter sampling of both the tributary and mainstem will be conducted during November and December on a field trip basis, on a monthly schedule.No permanent camp is contemplated. It is expected that by the end oft the 1981 field season estimates of the magnitude of intra-system migrations will be possible,by time;as will be population estimates of resident fish available at the mouths of the two tributaries throughout the seasonal period when sport angling occurs.Population estimates will also be formulated for the two years runs of salmon.It is further expected that habitat requirements or needs dictating spring/fall migrations of resident and juvenile anadromous fish will be definable,as will t,he role played by the mainstem Susitna Ri ver. 3.Devil Canyon to the Tyone River confluence.Stock assessment of resident and anadromous fish Populations Objectives The objectives in this study area are to: 1.Determine specific occurrence and species composition of fish stocks utilizing the mainstem Susitna River and it's major tributaries; -30- 2.Define seasonal changes in occurrence and abundance of fish species within the mainstem Susitna River and tributaries; 3•.Define habitat types uti1izedby fish species,seasonally throughout the year,at varying hydrologic conditions;both within the mainstem Susitna River and major tributaries; 4.Establish the impacts of inundation upon the aquatic habitat of the clearwater tributaries,necessary to sustain the indigenous fish species;and 5.Conduct complete hydrological surveys at the tributary mouths and at predetermined locations on each tributary. Background This area of study includes the more than fifty miles of the mainstem Susitna River and tributary streams,which will be either totally or partially inundated by construction of the Devil/Watana Hydroelectric Complex. This portion of the Susitna River drainage lies in a truly wilderness setting,is roadless,is inaccessable except by boat or light aircraft, and is only moderately utilized by recreational anglers at this time. Angl ing in thi s reach of the Susitna River system can be termed a Il qua lityexperience." This area has obvious identifiable habitat and biological impacts due to eventual inundation of segments of the clearwater tributaries feeding the impoundment.Critical habitat needs,as well as recreational fishing ",c'-opportunities,are provided primarily at the mouths of these respective tributaries. --Workplan A three man crew will work in the proposed impoundment area during the ice free months,utilizing helicopter and light aircraft for transportation throughout the study area.The study crew will be housed in a temporary!portable field camp.Investigations will be directed to: -, - ~.- 1.Conduct extensive on-the-ground surveys of Goose,Jay,Kosina, Watana,Deadman,Tsusena,and Fog creeks,and the Oshetna River.These investigations will include hydrological surveys and will determine the types of aquatic habitat currently available to resident species. 2.Determine the types,magnitude of,and location of aquatic habitats which will be lost upon inundation,by respective stream.Geographical features blocking upstream migration will be noted.Conversely,stream areas which will benefit in terms of improved access to fish stocks,upon impoundment, will be recorded. -31- - - ,~ 3.Extensive netting~trapping~and fish collection will be conducted to determine the specific occurrence~and composition of resident species occupying these eight tributarial waters. As possible~efforts will be directed to determine the extent of seasonal intra-seasonal migrations. 4.To tag any and all adult fish captured for determination of intra-system movement and migrations. Upon completion of the first year's (CY-8l)assessment of aquatic habitats~ and biological distribution of fish species within the impoundment area tributaries~investigations will be directed to the upland lake areas and the mainstem Susitna proper. A two man field crew will again operate with a transportable field camp~ utilizing helicopter and light aircraft for transportation.Investiga- tions will begin as soon as tlice-out"occurs in the spring and continue unt i1 freeze up in the fall. Studies in CY-19Sl will be directed to: 1.Surveys of fish utilizing selected tributarial stream mouths throughout the season to determine intra-system movements of resident fish,and their reliance upon the mainstem river during the critical winter months.Tentative stream selections are Kosina,Jay~and Watana creeks. A semi ..permanent camp will be located in the vicinity of these stream mouths,and the individual streams sampled for fish occurrence on an established sampling schedule throughout the season. 2.Conduct surveys of upland lakes associated with mainstem Susitna River tributary streams for fish population and related biological data.Habitat information will also be collected from inlet and outlet streams,and be used later in determining the impacts to seasonal migrations and biological requirements of resident fish as a result of impoundment~road construction, and transmission corridor placement. 3.To determine resident fish occurrence and distribution within the mainstem Susitna River throughout the spring-summer-fall periods.This work will be accomplished by the same field crew utilizing a chartered boat for transportation on a pre- determined sampling schedule.Nets,trot lines,traps,etc. wi 11 be used to determi ne fi sh presence. 4.To continue to collect complete hydrological data. It is anticipated the single two man crew will be capable of performing all the above tasks.Determination of mainstem fish occurrence and -32- ~I - - distribution (#3)will be accomplished by two or three scheduled week long trips through the impoundment area •. The upland lake surveys will be accomplished during "non-sample"periods at the tributary mouths.Close coordination will be necessary~as will helicopter support at frequent intervals. -33- Title Seasonal and Spatial Habitat Study Objectives Determine the spatial and seasonal habitat requirements of anadromous and resident fish species during each stage of their life histories. Background The proposed Susitna River hydroelectric project will have various impacts on the aquatic environment.Habitat studies will not be limited to the fishery resource alone due to the complex interrelationships between all biological components of s and within s the aquatic community and the associated habitat.The majority of the impacts on fish species will likely result from changes in the natural regimes of the river rather than direct impacts.on the fish in the vicinity.Primary areas of concern are modification of seasonal instream flows,increased turbidity levels during winter months,and variation of thermal and chemical paramaters.Preliminary studies indicate that alterations of the habitat may adversely affect the existing fish populations and render portions of the drainage either nonproductive or unavailable in future years (ADF&G 1978;1979). Continuously moving water,or currents is the distinguishing physical habitat feature of the Susitna River and its tributaries.The Susitna River and the major rivers entering Knik Arm represent approximately 70- 80%of the total freshwater entering Cook Inlet (Rosenberg 1967).The flow of water which appears in the Susitna River channel at a given time constitutes the "instream flow".This flow is closely related to,but different from,the underflow moving through permeable deposits immediately underlying the stream channel.The instream flows of the Susitna and .-its tributaries erode,transport,and deposit sediments and other materials and can,have profound effects on the surrounding environment as far downstream as the Cook Inlet Estuary. A variety of physical parameters interact to create particular aquatic environnlents in the Susitna River Basin.The most important of these physical parameters are:flow regime (volume,velocity,and temporal variation of flows),channel morphology (size,shape,gradient,and geologic material of channel),water quality (temperature,turbidity, dissolved gases,etc.),and stream load (bed load,suspended solids,and other materials,such as watershed inputs,in transport). The Susitna River and its tributary system are continually working to establish equilibrium among these parameters.Induced change in anyone of these factors may initiate readjustment in others.For example (during the winter months),the controlled flow regimes of the dams may increase erosion and consequently increase the amount of sediment entering the downstream river system.The river system becomes overloaded (unable -34- ,'"'" - - to transport all of the material entering the channel),and begins to deposit sediments.Over time,this deposition process leads to changes in channel slope and hence stream velocity.Eventually channel slope will increase until the velocity of stream flow produces just enough energy to transport the amount pf material entering the stream,and an equilibrium will be achieved. Ana1.ogous chains of events follow any alterations of instream flow.The altered stream will attempt to establish equilibrium conditions;and this dynamic process may lead to substantial changes in flow regime, channel shape,wetted area,substrate characteristics,water quality, etc.Moreover,these changes will most likely be felt as far downstream from the dams as Cook Inlet (Bishop 1975).Channel geometry and discharge patterns in the lower reaches and mouths of tributaries to the Susitna River will also be altered by the flow regimes of the dams.The Susitna impoundments wi 11 a1 so resul t in upstream readjustments.The Susi tna dam reservoirs may,for example,reduce the stability of underlying and adjacent geologic materials by increasing hydrostatic pore pressure and lubricating joints and fractures,therefore,initiating tremendous readjustments in the physical environment (Keller 1976).MouthS and lower reaches of tributaries in the impoundment area will be inundated. It is important to remember that the complexity of the physical inter- actions outlined above is compounded by the fact that natural flows fluctuate with seasonal and climatic variations.As a 'result,impacts produced by the dams will stem not only from the amount of flow modifi- cation but also from the timing of the modification in relationship to normal seasonal flow fluctuations.Certain periodic high flows (e.g. bankfull discharge)for example are responsible for maintaining channel morphology by flushing sediments,transporting bed load,etc.Reduction, elimination,or rescheduling of these naturally recurring high flows can have serious consequences on channel characteristics.An increase in flow can also induce profound changes in the 10tic environment during naturally occurr'ing 1owfJows .. The physical conditions and interactions within the Susitna River Basin discussed above,provide essential habitats for aquatic,riparian,and other organisms.As a result,any alteration in the physical environment also affects the associated biological populations.Although our emphasis is on fisheries,it should be apparent that instream flows exert similar profound effects on other aquatic organisms,as well as on riparian and terrestrial wildlife,navigation and other instream flow related uses (Erickson 1977;Elser et al 1977;Hinz 1977;Newell 1977;Martin 1977; Klarich et al 1977;Fraser 1975;Judy et a1 1978;American Fisheries Society et al 1976 a,b);Townsend 1975). There are three major physical components of the Susitna River system related to instream flows which determine the productivity of the associated fisheries (Stalnaker 1979): 1.water quality (e.g.temperatures,dissolved solids,dissolved gases,sediments,particulate organic matter and nutrients, etc.); -35- 2.flow regime (i.e.volume,wetted perimeter,stage,velocity, and timing of flows);and 3.physical habitat structure (channel form,substrate character- istics,and riparian vegetation). Each of these components is intimately related to instream flows. Instream flow may,therefore,be considered one of the most essential r-detenni nants of aquati c habi tat and hence fi sheri es producti vi ty. I I Modifications of naturally occurring seasonal instream flows will produce a variety of changes in critical habitat areas such as spawning,incubation, rearing,overwintering,and passage habitats.Decreased flows in the spring and summer may for example lead to silt deposition,oxygen reduction in gravel redds,dewatering of sloughs,and may,result in suffocation of incubating eggs and pre-emergent fry.Increased flows in the winter may wash away spawning substrate or destroy sheltering areas.Decreases and increases in flows which alter stream productivity will modify food avai 1abil ity in rearing and overwintering habitats. In addition to modifying essential habitats,alterations to the Susitna flow regimes may affect the seasonal behavior of fish species.Hynes (1970)presents the following examples of the important interrelationships between seasonal flow regimes,fish movement,and human alterations of 10tic environment. Most fish are stimulated to move by rising water,and when the movement is to be upstream this enables them to pass over riffles with greater safety,because the increased width at such points spreads out the discharge and provides zones of slower water which are nevertheless deep enough to swim through. Descending fish,such as smolts •..,are also stimulated to move by rising water •••Under normal circumstances,descending fish readily overcome obstacles,and the cushioning of the water prevents damage at falls,or at any rate at falls which are small enough for them or their parents to have ascended.But descending fishes follow the bottom contour.,not the surface! The complex interrelationship between instream flows and seasonal behavior of fish species is compounded by the fact that seasonal variations in flows required by particular species may have to be quite large. Returning salmon species for example may need 30 -50 percent of the mean annual flow to ascend the lower and middle reaches of a river system,and even more flow to ascend the headwaters (Hynes 1970).As a result,the protection of fisheries resources requires not only that certain volumes of instream flow be maintained,but also that specific flows be available at particular times of the year.Tennant (1975) discusses average percentages of seasonal stream flows required to maintain particular levels of aquatic resources.The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Instream Flow Group (Bovee 1978;Cooperative Instream Service Group 1979)has developed sophisticated e1ectivity curves defining -36- ,... - the relationships between instream flows and life history stages of selected fish species.These curves are continually refined as new data become available.Recognizing the physical differences between and individual habitat requirements of various stocks of the same fish species,the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and Alaska Department of Natural Resources initiated a pilot instream flow study in 1979 using field and computer analysis techniques developed by the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Instream Flow Group,John F.Orsborn (1974;,1979),and the U.S.Geological Survey.. In summary,seasonal fluctuations in the physiochemical composition of the aquatic habitat are apparently the major factors influencing distribu- tion of fish within the drainage.Any alterations resulting from the hydroelectric related project activities which restrict or reduce quality or quantity of required habitat will also reduce fish populations and associated members of the aquatic community. Study ApproaCh Spatial and seasonal habitat studies will be divided into three major geographical areas.Sampling upstream of the Susitna-Talkeetna river confluence will be conducted primarily by fisheries study groups. Design of sampling programs will be done by the habitat studies supervisor. These studies will be performed in addition to work proposed by DNR,but will be done in close cooperation and coordination with that agency and other tasks performed by consultants as a part of the overall Susitna Hydro-feasibility study.If the DNR instream flow study (see Attachment I) is not funded~ADF&G wi 11 need to increase its budget in the amount that DNR requested in order to perform the required work.It is anticipated that other agencies such as the USGS and USFWS will also provide support for these instream flow studies. The follOWing outlines baseline studies required for each study area: 1.Cook Inlet to the Talkeetna-Susitna river confluence.*Spatial and seasonal habitat requirements of fish populations. Objectives The objectives within this study area are to: 1.define essential seasonal habitat requirements for incubation, rearing,spawning,and passage of anadromous and resident fish populations; 2.define the seasonal relationships between flow regimes and essential physical and biological habitat characteristics; *Habitat study plans for the estuarine area will be based upon the fiddings of Phase I studies and initiated in the Phase II biological studies. -37- - 3.define the relationships between the tributary and slough physiochemical and biological habitats with the mainstem Susitna River at various flow regimes; 4.develop state-of-the-art capabilities to evaluate habitat characteristics in this difficult reach of river;and 5.generate data essential for evaluating the effects of various flow regimes on terrestrial and reparian habitat. Background This reach of the Susitna River provides important habitat for rearing~ incubating,spawning,and migrating resident and anadromous fish species. Unfortunately,its physical characteristics also make it one of the most difficult to evaluate.Studies of seasonal habitat characteristics will be coordinated on an annual basis with the life history and distribution fish studies (both anadromous and resident). Expansion or termination of these studies will depend upon determination and confirmation of: 1.The seasonal habitat requirements between various life history stages of the resident and anadromous fish. 2.The relationship of seasonal habitat to various discharges. If positive confirmation is provided by the habitat study in conjunction with other biological studies~specific year to year study locations should be identified for ongoing programs to determine the effects of the project on the fish and wildlife resources in this portion of the basin. Work Plan The initial year of this study will be comprised of essentially three field operations: .1.mainstem seasonal instream flow measurements; ~,2.tributary seasonal instream flow measurements;and 3.collection of other physiochemical and biological habitat data. A crew of two biologists utilizing a customized riverboat as their primary means of transportation will operate in the mainstem and selected tributary systems during the ice-free months May through October to: 1.Procure equipment. 2.Establish and refine large river instream flow measurement techniques. -38- .... -- -,...,.~---- 3.Co 11 ect i nst ream flow data in terms of depth,ve 1oc ity,wetted. perimeter,and substrate. 4.Collect water quality data as related to discharge. It is essential that items 2 and.3 be coordinated with other fishery related and hydrological studies. The Alaska Department of Natural Resources has submitted an instream flow proposal which will generate other required essential data.If their proposal is rejected the ADF&G will need to increase its budget requirements by $187,861 the first year and $110,000 each year after that to collect the data DNR was not funded to collect. 2.Talkeetna River confluence upstream to Devil canyon.Spatial and seasional Habiat requirements of fish populations Ice Resident Fish Study Proposal. \ 3.Devil Canyon damsite upstream to the Tyone River confluence.Spatial and Seasonal habitarequirements of fish populations . .Ice Resident Fish Study Proposal. -39- 1 J 1 I -])i ] GENERAL SAMPLING SCHfpulElI J J 1 ~J Species --O-January f February I ~arCh r;~;r(May I June ~y ;August ~September ;~ctober-;Novemb~DeCemIJ: -~-_.I I ,I ---+-----+---r--P I I ]--/----- So~e~e Mi gra tion Spawning Incubation Rearing Pink --------~----------~~------~------ ------~--------~--------~ ---~----~---~-------~---------~----------~---~----- ------.---'---~--------~------~----+---------+----------~--------- ----+-I I I I I I I I c-I--I I I W 1O )::- I Migration Spawning Incubation Rearing Chum Migration Spawning Incubation Rear"ing --------1-----_-I-----+----....---1------J-....-_....-.....+0----_.......------_-....- - -----...-----.....-..........---_....-----...------"-__ --------I~----------~-------~------~-----~-------r----~-*--------~---_-------+------+----------~---_ --~-------r-~---~-- _Cot:!Q. Migra!ion l "l l ~J t-----j--------J-----------I--------Spawnlng ....-------------------------------- Incubation -----------~----~------------------.----------------------------------Rearing ---------------------------------------------------------------------I E _ .~j I I I I I I I I I I Chinook. ----------t---..jMigration.______ Spawning I -----------------------------.----~~~-~~-~~-~-1---------Incub at"ion f'----------------------------------------L~---------~I --JRearing_rn-n--T-n--~--;-__ni,."1,•4 1/I ina",r'ah...a"'ont mont-hI:th;tt o::amnl ino will hp.r.ondlJct~d. REFERENCES Alaska Department of Fish and Game.1978.Preliminary environmental assessment of hydroelectric development on the Susitna River. Anchorage.172 pp. .1979.Susitna hydro biological investigations.March.Anchorage. ---:;:::'\21 pp. American Fisheries Society and American Society of Civil Engineers.1976a. Instream flow needs.Volume I.(Edited by J.F.Orsborn and C.H. Allman).America Fisheries Society.Bethesda,Maryland.551 pp. ~, .1976b.Instream flow needs.Volume II. ----.,...C.H.Allman).American Fisheries Society. (Edited by J.F.Opsborn and Bethesda,Maryland.657 pp. Bishop,D.M.1975.A hydrologic reconnaissance of the Susitna River below Devils Canyon.A report prepared for Nat.Marine Fish.Servo of NOAA, Contract no.03-4-208-302.Environaid,Juneau,Alaska.54 pp. Bovee,K.D.1978.Probability of use criteria for the family salmonidae. Instream flow information paper no.4.Cooperative Instream Flow Service Group.FWS/OBS-78/07.Ft.Collins,Colorado.80 pp. Cooperative Instream Flow Service Group.1979.Incremental Methodology. (pamphlet).Office of Biological Services.np. Copeland,M.D.,R.L.Stroup,and R.R.Rucker.1976.Problems in estimating the fish,wildlife,and recreational value of the Yellowstone River. Montana State Univ.Bozeman.42 pp. Dailey,I.E.1976.Research on recreational and management aspects of sport fishing:an annotated bibliography.Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station.Seattle.56 pp. Dwyer,J.F.,J.R.Kelly,and M.D.Bowes.1977.Improved procedures for ¥aluation of the contribution of recreation to national economic develop- ment.Univ.of Ill.Water Resources Center Research Report.(128):1-218. Elser,A.A.,R.C.McFarland,and Dennis Schwehr.1977.The effect of altered stream flow on the fish of the Yellowstone and Tongue rivers,Montana. Technical report no.8.Yellowstone Impact Study.Montana Dept.of Natural Resources and Conservation.Helena.180 pp. Erickson,M.L.1977.The effect of altered stream flow on water based recreation in the Yellowstone River Basin,Montana Yellowstone Impact Study.Technical Report no.10.Montana Dept.of Natural Resources and Conservation.Helena.125 pp. Fraser,J.C.197~.Determining Discharges for Fluvial Resources.California Dept.of Fish and Game.FAD Fisheries Technical Paper No.143.102 pp. Freudenburg,W.R.1976.Memorandum to ISPS mapping project on energy and the social sciences.Social science perspectives on the energy boomtown. Yale University.July 7.51 pp. -40- 1978.Toward ending the inattention:a report on the social impacts and policy implications of energy boomtown developments.Prepared for the 144th national meeting of the American Assoc.for the Advancement of Science. Washington State Univ.Pullman.Feb.13.39 pp. Gottschalk,J.A.1977.Wildlife habitat -the lI pr ice1ess"resource base. Trans.42nd.N.Amer.Wi1d1.and Nat.Res.Conf.Wildlife Management Inst.Washington,D.C.pp.237-245. Hagan,R.M.,and E.B.'Roberts.1973.Ecological impacts of water storage and diversion projects.Environmental quality and water development. (Edited by Goldman,C.R.,McEvoy III,Games,Richerson,and Peter G.). W.H.Freeman Co.San Francisco,Cal. Hinz,T.1977.The effect of altered stream flow on migratory birds of the Yellowstone River Basin,Montana.Yellowstone Impact Study.Technical Report no.7.Montana Dept.of Natural Resources and Conservation. Helena.107 pp. Horvath,J.C.1974.Economic survey of southeastern wildlife and wildlife oriented recreation.Trans.39th N.Amer.Wi1d1.and Nat.Res.Conf. Wi 1d1 ife Management Inst.March 3-April 3.Washington D.C. Hynes,H.B.N.1970.The ecology of running waters.University of Toronto Press,Toronto,Canada.555 pp. Judy,R.D.and J.A.Gore.nd.A predictive model of benthic invertebrate densities for use in instream flow studies.Cooperative Instream Flow Service Group.Ft.Collins,Colorado.np. Keller,E.A.1976. Columbus,Ohio. Environmental Geology. 488 pp. Charles E.Merrill Publishing Co. Klarich,D.A.and J.Thomas.1977.The effect of altered stream flow on the water qual ity of the Yellowstone River Bas in,Montana.Yellowstone Impact Study.Technical Report no.3.Montana Dept.of Natural Resources and I-Conservation.Helena.393 pp. Krutilla,J.V.1967.Conservation reconsidered.American Economic Review. Espt.pp.777-786. Long,Bill.1978.How much is it worth?Down to Earth.Environmental Information Center.Helena.March.pp.20,21,30. Martin,P.R.1977.The effect of altered stream flow on furbearing mammals of the Yellowstone River Basin,Montana.Yell owstone Impact Study. Technical Report no.6.Montana Dept.of Natural Resources and Conservation. Helena.79 pp. Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation.1977.The economics of altered stream flow in the Yellowstone River Basin,Montana.Yellowstone Impact Study.Technical Report no.11.Montana Dept.of Natural Resources and Conservation.Bl pp. Morrow,J.E.1979.Personal communication.Georgia S~ate Univ.Atlanta.11 pp . .... -41- National Park Service (NPS).1949.The economics of publ ic regul ation:an economic study of the monetary evaluation of recreation in the national parks.NPS.Washington,D.C.np. Newell,R.L.1977.Aquatic invertebrates of the Yellowstone River Basin, Montana.Yellowstone Impact Study.Technical Report no.5.MontanarDept.of Natural Resources and Conservation.Helena.109 pp. Orsborn,J.F.1974.Determining stream flows from geomorphic parameters. Journal of the Irrigation and Drainage Division.ASCE.Vol.100. no.IR4.Proc paper 10986.Dec.1974.pp.455-475. ______,and F.D.Deane.1976.Investigation into methods for developing a physical analysis for evaluating instream flow needs.OWRT project no. A-084-WASH.OWRT Agreement no.14-31-0001-6050.Allotment period July 1,1975-June 30,1976.Washington State Univ.Pullman.112 pp. ____,and F.1.Watts.1979.Manual for a short course on hydraul ics and hydrology for fishery biologists.U.S.Dept.of Interior.np. Rosenberg,D.H q S.C.Burrell,K.V.Matarajan,and D.W.Hook.1967. Oceanography of Cook Inlet with special reference to the effluent from the Collier Carbon and Chemical Plant.Institute of Marine Science.University of Alaska,Fairbanks.Report No.R67-S.80 pp. Stalnaker,C.B.1979.Instream flow methodologies and water management uncertainty.Idaho's Water 6(2):1-3. Tennant"Donald L.1975.Instream flow Regimes for Fish,Wildl ife,Recreation and Related Environmental Resources.U.S.Fish and Wildl ife Service,711 Central Avenue,Billings,Montana.59102.30 pp. Townsend,G.H.1975.Impact of the Bennett Dam on the Peace.,.Athabasca Delta.J.Fish.Res.Board.Canada.32:171-176 pp. Utah State University..1976.Methodologies for determination of stream resource flow requirements:an assessment.(Edited by C.B.Stalnaker and J.L.Arnette).Prepared for U.S.Fish and Wildife Service.Logan,Utah. 199 pp. White House.1978.~Remarks of the President on water policy.June 6. Washington,D.C.np. -42- r BUDGETS -SUSITNA HYDRO FISHERIES STUDIES Administration and SupPQrt Line 100 -Persona 1 Servi ces FB IV at C step 12 mm @ 3,873/mo1/ Biometrician III 12 mm @ 4,053/mo Biometrician II 24 mm @ 3,536/mo Admin Asst.I 12 mm @ 2,181 /mo Publications Spec II 12 mm @ 2,841/mo Clerk Typist III 12 rom @ 1,726/mo Clerk Typist II 36 mm @ 1,636/mo f>1aintenance Mechanic II 12mm @ 2,730/mo Cartographer II @2,187 /mo Total line 200 -Travel Travel and Per Diem Total Line 300 -Contractual Servie:es Office space for 12 mo 3,000 sq ft @ 1 .25 sq ft/mo Warehouse for 12 mo 1,000 sq ft @ .75 sq ft/mo Maintenance shop for 12 mo 1,000 sq ft @ .75 sq ft/mo Storage yard for 12 mo 20,000 sq ft @ .50 sq ft/mo Communications for 12 mo @ 400/mo Professional services for 12 mo @ 400/mo Equipment repair for 12 rna @ 100/mo Freight and transportation for 12 mo @ 200/mo Air charter Fi xed wi ng 30 hrs @ l50/hr Office equipment leases 4 mag card Ills· and xerox for 12 rna @ 1,500/mo Vehicle rental 3 vehicles @ 7S0/mo Total line 400 -Commodities Institutional supplies;clothing Structural materials and supplies Equipment parts and supplies Professional and scientific supplies Office and library supplies @ 500/mo Other operating supplies @ 100/mo Total -43- CY 80· 46,476.00 48,636.00 42,432.00 26,172.00 34,092.00 20,712.00 58,896.00 32,766.00 310,182.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 45,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 120,000.00 4,800.00 4,800.00 1,200.00 2,400.00 4,500.00 18,000.00 9,000.00 227,700.00 500.00 2,000.00 5,000.00 3,000.00 6,000.00 1,200.00 17,700.00 CY 81 46,476.00 48,636.00 42,432.00 26,172.00 34,092.00 20,712.00 58,896.00 32,766.00 13 2123.00 323,305.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 45,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 120,000.00 4,800.00 4,800.00 1,200.00 2,400.00 4,500.00 18,000.00 9,000.00 227,700.00 500.00 2,000.00 5,000.00 3,000.00 6,000.00 1,200.00 17,700.00 Jan.82 3,873.00 4,053.00 3,536.00 2,181.00 2,844.00 1,726.00 1,636.00 2,187.00 22,033.00 850.00 850.00 3,750.00 400.00 400.00 200.00 1 ,500.00 750.00 7,000.00 750.00 500.00 100.00 1,350.00 Administration-and Support (cont.) Line 500 -Equipment Desks,chairs,file cabinets,21 office units @ approximately 750 each 15,250.00 Optical and photographic Twelve 35 rom cameras @ l50/each 1,800.00 Shop plant and industrial equipment 5,000.00 Replacement,lost,damaged or stolen equipment to cover all project segments Total 22,050.00 2,000.00 36,000.00 38,000.00 GRAND TOTAL +10%CY SlY +20%CY 82Y $587,632.00 $616,705.00 $31,233.00 $678,375.00 $37,480.00 .... Jj This position is the Susitna Hydro Fisheries Study Coordinator 2/Percentage increases cover possible state employee wage increases under new contracts,merit increases,and inflation of costs of other i terns and services • -44- Anadromous Adult -Stock Assessment Task #1.Cook Inlet Stock Assessment r~ Scale Pattern Analysis Line 100 -Personal Services 10.5 mm FT II @ 1,826 21.0 mm FT III @ 2,056 10.5 rrun FB I @ 2,471 Total Line 200 -Travel Travel/per diem Total Line 300 -Contractual Services Contractual services (computer time) Aircraft charter (10 hrs C185 @ 150/hr) Vehicle rental (3 @ 250/mo and 3,000 miles) Total Line 400 -Commodities Scientific supplies (500/field crew) Food (312 days @ 40/day) Gi 11 nets . Housing (650/mo) Clothing (200/person) Total CY 80 19,173.00 43,176.00 25,946.00 88,295.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 5,000.00 1,500.00 2,040.00 8,540.00 1,500.00 3,120.00 :1,000.00 1,300.00 1,200.00 8,120.00 CY 81 19,173.00 43,176.00 25,946.00 88.295.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 5,000.00 1,500.00 2,040.00 8,540.00 1,500.00 3,120.00 1,300.00 1,200.00 7,120.00 Jan 82 U ne 500 -Eguipment Digitizer (Omega computer) Total Total for Scale Pattern Analysis .8,200.00 8,200.00 $114,155.00 $104,955.00 0.00 0.00 Task #1.Cook Inlet Stock Separation Electrophoresis Line 100-Personal Services -8 mm FT II @ 1,826 Total -45- 14,608.00 14,608.00 14·,608.00 14,608.00 ,Anadromous Adul t--Stock Assessment (cant.) Electrophoresis (cant.)CY 80 CY 81 Jan 82 Line 200 ..Travel Travel/per diem 1,000.00 1 ,000 .•00 Total 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 Line 300 ..Contractual Services Contractual services (graduate student) ,.,..includes all analysis of samples 15,000.00 Aircraft charter (10 hrs C185 @ 150/hr)1,500.00 1,500.00 Vehicle rental (2 @ 250/mo and 2,000 miles)1,360.00 1,360.00 Total 17 ,860.00 2,860.00 0.00,... Line 400 ".Commodities Scientific supplies 1,000.00 1,000.00 Food (208 days @ 10/day)2,080.00 2,080.00 Housing (650/mo)1,300.00 1,300.00 Clothing 800.00 800.00 Total 5,180.00 5,180.00 0.00 ""'" Line 500 -Eguipment 0.00 0.00 0.00 ~ Total for Electrophoresis 38,648.00 23,648.00 0.00 .... -46- Anadromous Adult -Stock Assessment Task #2.Susitna River Mouth to Yentna River - Susitna Station (May 15 -October 15) Line 100 -Personal Services 10 mm FB I @ 2,471 Total Line 200 -Travel Travel/per diem Total Line 300 -Contractual Services Aircraft charter (18 hrs C185 @ 150) Freight (barge charter)~ Repairs of maintenance Total Line 400 -Commodities Food (552 days @ 10/day) Sci~ntific supplies Gas and O/B oil (15 barrel s @ 75) Camp supplies Clothing Total CY 80 24,710.00 24,710.00 200.00 200.00 2,700.00 500.00 1,200.00 4,400.00 5,520.00 300.00 1,125.00 500.00 400.00 7,845.00 CY 81 24,710.00 24,710.00 200.00 200.00 2,700.00 500.00 1,200.00 4,400.00 5,520.00 300.00 1,125.00 300.00 400.00 7,645.00 Jan 82 Line 500 -Equipment 2 side scan sonar counters 2 recorders Oscilloscope Total Total for Susitna Station Yentna Sonar Line 100 -Personal Services 78,000.00 600.00 900.00 79,500.00 0.00 $116,655.00 $36,955.00 0.00 0.00 10 mm FB I @ 2,471 10 mm FT II @ 1,826 600 hrs overtime @ 18.25/hr Total -47- 24,710.00 18,260.00 10,950.00 53,920.00 24,710.00 18,260.00 10,950.00 53,920.00 Anadromous ~dult -Stock Assessment Yentna Sonar (cant.) Line 200 -Travel Line 300 -Contractual Services Frei ght (ba rge cha rter) Aircraft charter (35 hrs @ 150/hr) Repairs and maintenance Total Line 400 -Commodities Food (616 days @ 10/day) Camp supplies Parts Tools Gas and O/B oil (45 barrels @ 75) Scientific supplies Fishwheels (2 -parts and labor) Clothing Total CY 80 0.00 600.00 5,250.00 1,500.00 7,350.00 6,160.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 500.00 3,375.00 300.00 2,400.00 800.00 16,535.00 CY 81 0.00 600.00 5,250.00 1,500.00 7,350.00 6,160.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 300.00 3,375.00 300.00 500.00 800.00 13,935.00 Jan 82 0.00 Line 500 -Equipment 2 boats Four 25 hp outboards 2 side scan sonar counters Generator Compressor 2 tape recorders (sonar) Osci 11oscope (sonar) 2 shotguns (bear protection) SSB radio Total Total for Yentna Sonar Radi otelemetry Line 100 -Personal Services 4,000.00 2,976.00 78,000.00 350.00 350.00 600.00 900.00 400.00 1,600.00 89,176.00 $166,981.00 $75,205.00 0.00 0.00 I 5 mm FB I @ 2,471 2.5 mm FT II @ 1,826 9 mm FB I @ 2,471 Total -48- 12,355.00 4,565.00 16,920 12,355.00 4,565.00 22,239.00 39,159.00 $45,502.00 $102,711.00* Anadromous Adult -Stock Assessment Radiotelemetry (cont.) .....Line 200 -Travel Travel/per diem Total !"'"'Line 300 -Contractual Services Aircraft charter (75/hrs C185 @ 150/hr) Equipment repair and maintenance Equipment rental (radio gear) Total Line 400 -Commodities Food (228 days @ 10/day) Gas and O/B oil (20 barrels @ 75) Scientific supplies Miscellaneous equipment camp equipment Radio tags Clothing Total Line 500 ~Equipment Boat Motors (2 -35 hp) Radio Shotgun Radiotelemetry equipment Total Total for Radiotelemetry *If technique is feasible. -49- ,.,.. CY 80 1,000.00 1,000.00 11 ,250.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 14,250.00 2,280.00 1,500.00 300.00 500.00 800.00 1,500.00 800.00 7,680.00·· 2,500.00 1,752.00 1,200.00 200.00 5,652.00 CY 81 1,500.00 1,500.00 11,250.00 1,500.00 12,750.00 5,050.00 3,000.00 300.00 500.00 1,200.00 5,000.00 1,000.00 16,050.00 2,500.00 1,752.00 29,000.00 33,252.00 Jan 82 0.00 0.00 :Anadromous Adult -...Stock Assessment Task #3.Yentfla River to Talkeetna - .... Deshka Sona r Site Same as Yentna Sonar Total Sunshine Sonar Site line 100 -Personal Services 10 mm FB I @ 2,471 20 mm FT II @ 1,826 Overtime 1,200 hrs @ 18.25 Total line 200-Travel line 300 -Contractual Services Vehicle rental (250/mo and 2,500 miles) Repairs and maintenance Total Line 400 -Commodities Food (924 days @ 10/day) Camp supplies Parts Tools Gas and 0/8 oil (45 barrels @ 75) Scientific supplies Fishwhee1s (4 -parts and labor) Fish tags (10,000) Clothing Total CV 80 166,981.00 24,710.00 36,520.00 21,900.00 83,130.00 0.00 1,700.00 1,500.00 3,200.00 9,240.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 500.00 3,375.00 300.00 4,800.00 7,000.00 1,200.00 29,415.00 CY 81 36,955.00 24,710.00 36,520.00 21,900.00 83,130.00 0.00 1,700.00 1,500.00 3,200.00 9,240.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 300.00 3,375.00 300.00 500.00 7,000.00 1,200.00 24,415.00 Jan 82 0.00 line 500 ...Equipment 2 boats 4 outboards 2 si de scan sonar counters Generator Compressor 2 tape recorders Oscilloscope 2 shotguns SSB radio 2 boat trailers Total Total for Sunshine Sonar Site -50- 4,000.00 2,976.00 78,000.00 350.00 350.00 600.00 900.00 400.00 1,600.00 3,400.00 92,576.00 $208,321.00 $110,745.00 0.00 0.00 Anadromous Adult -Stock Assessment Creel Census Line 100 -Personal Services CY 80 CY 81 Jan 82 9 nm FT II @ 1,826 Overtime 450 hrs @ 18.25 Total Line 200 -Travel 16,434.00 16,434.00 8,213.00 8,213.00 24,647.00 24,647.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Line 300 ..Contractual Services Vehicles (2 @ 2S0/mo and 2,000 miles) Total Line 400 -Commodities 860.00 860.00 860.00 860.00 Food (276 days @ 10/day) Housing (500/mo) Gas and o/a oil Total Line 500 -Equipment Total for Creel Census 2,760.00 2,760.00 750.00 750.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 4,510.00 4,510.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $30,017.00 $30.017.00 0.00 Task #4.Budget is included in juvenile studies. Task #5.Budget included in resident fisheries studies. Program Supervisors Sonar Project Leader FB II @ 2,841/mo 34,092.00 34,092.00 Radiotelemetry Project Leader FB II @ 2,841/mo 34,092.00 34,092.00 Anadromous Fisheries Studies Supervisor @ 3,246/mo 38,952.00 38,952.00 Total 107,136.00 107,136.00 Grand Total CY 81 +10%1/ CY 82 +20%- 994,396.00 666,300.00 732,900.00 2,841.00 2,841.00 3,246.00 8,928.00 8,928.00 10,700.00 11 See explanation under Administration and Support -51- !pm, Res;dent.and.Juveni 1e:Anadromous",Fi shery Study Dev;1 Canyon to [;tone:River'Imooundment Line-100 -Personal Services 3.Fa r's,@ 2.,.411 x 6'mos: Total Line-200'-rr·ave1 Transpcrtati on (train) Private.;venicle-mile4ge @ .25Im;le· Per-diem-15 days @ 55 Total Li "e-300-Contractua 1 Ser'!;cas Coarnunications-: Professional Services; Repairs Frei ght and transportati on Air'charter-' Fhed..wing:@ 150/hr . He-liccpter-@ 3S0lhr ~vatercraft charterc @ 300/day Vehicle 1ease@ 200/ma Miscellaneous Total Li os 400 _.Commodi ti as Clo1:hing Subs;stance @ IS/day (4,300 days) Otrtboard..fue Ts !~1.10lga1 camp materia:1 5',.suppl i as,.tents,. stoves,heater'S,.etc. Trap and net matarials Mi see llaneous T01:al " Line 500 -Eouioment Inflatabl e boat 0 (15'·\iut...oar'\,·rtPl Radio -52- CY 80 44,.478.00 44,478.00 750.00 125.00 825.00 1,.700.00' 200.Oa- 300 ..00 500.00sao.00 3,.000.00 28,.000.00. 1 ,000.00 1,000.00 500.00 35,000.00 7S0.00 4,500.00 55.00 700.00 1 1400.00 500.00 7,9D5.00 2,000.00 1 ,000.00 1 ,500.00 CY 81 44,478.00 44,4-78.00 750~oa 150.00 825.00 1,725.00 200.00 200.00 SOO.OO 200.00 6,000.00 14,.000.00 6,000.00 1 ,000.00 500.00 28,500.00 750.00 4,500.00 ZOO.OO SOO.OO 1,200.00 1,.000.00 8,150.00 Jan.82, .- Res.i dent and.Juveni 1a~1~,nadM)ltIOus~Fi shery Study Dev'i1 canyon to Tyans>River'Imooundment (cont·.)CY 80 C'f 81 Jan-82 El ectros'hoc!<er- Guns.(2) Thermo'graphs-@ 300:each' 00 meter- Conduct;\Iity meter- pH.meter Total Total for'Devi 1 canY~Jn-to,Tyona:River- Talkeetna'River 1:0 Devils Canyon' Line 100 -Per~onai Ser"'ti cas 1 ,ZOO.00 500.00. 3.,600.00 600.00. 6QO.OO 200.00' 11 ,200 .00,a.00· $lQa~2S3.0a $82,953.00 0.00 ~. 3 Fa'['S'@ 2,471 x 5 mas 1 Fa II @ 2,841 x 1Z mas Total U ne·200 -,fravel Transportation (tra'in) Pro;va tao veh;c1e-mi 1eagec P~r di em @.55/day Total Line 300 -Contractual Services Cormnunications Profess;ana 1 sarli css RepaiM' Freight ana transportation (train) Air cnarter Fixed wing @ 150/hr He i i coote r @ 3S0/hr Watercrartcha rter Cabin rental @ iSO/me 1\1;sea llaneous Total Line 4.00 -Commodities Clothing (boots,',vaders ,etc.) Gill nets @ 150 each Seines 2"9 150 each for CY 80 CY 81 includes minnow traps -53- 44,478.00 34,092.00 78,570.00 1,600.00 300.00 1,100.00 3,000.00 250.00 150.00 750.00 1.,000.00 1 ,350.00 2,800.00 500.00 750.00 SOO.OO 8,OSO.00 1 ,000.00 1,200.00· 300.00 44,478.00 34,092.00 78,570.00 2:,000.00 500.00 1,100.00 3,500".00· 100.00 150.00 1 ,oeo.00 1,100.00 900.00 2,iOO.OO 97S.00 500.00 7,025.00 1 ,200 .00 1,200.00 650.00 - Resident and Juvenile Anadromous Fishery Study Talkeetna River to Devils Canyon (cant.) Subsistence food @ 15/day Outboard fuel @ 1.10/ga1 Marine oi1s~lubes~etc. Building materials Trap materials,net frames,bouys~etc. Mi sce 11 aneous Camp gear,stove,lantern~etc. Total Line 500 -.Equipment Riverboat Thermographs @ 300 each DO meter Conductivity n~ter pH meter Outboard motors @ 2,750 each Jet units @600 each Rubber raft Outboard 25 hp Radio Snowshoes @ 25 each Guns 2 @ 250 Snowmachines 2 @ 1,600 Snowmachine sleds (2) Ice auger Electroshocker Total CY 80 6,000.00 2,200.00 200.00 500.00 500.00 600.00 300.00 12,800.00 2,500.00 6,000.00 600.00 600.00 200.00 5~500.00 1,200.00 3,500.00 1,400.00 1,200.00 300.00 500.00 300.00 1,200.00 25,000.00 CY 81 6,000.00 2,400.00 250.00 500.00 500.00 600.00 13,300.00 1,200.00 3,200.00 150.00 Jan 82 Total for Talkeetna River to Devils Canyon Cook Inlet to Talkeetna -Line 100 -Personal Services 0.00 7 FB I I sfor 43/mos for CY 80 8 FB II.s for 65/mos for CY 81 1 FB III for 12 mas 1 FT III for 4 mas Total Line 200 -Travel 110 days per diem @ 55/day for CY 80 220 days per diem @ 55/day for CY 81 Miscellaneous (picKup mileage) Total -54- 106,253.00 38~952.00 8,224.00 153,429.00 6,050.00 600.00 6,650.00 160,615.00 38,952.00 8,224.00 207,791.00 12,100.00 1,000.00 13,100.00 Resident and Juvenile Anadromous Fishery Study Cook Inlet to Talkeetna Line 300 -Contractual Services Air charter @ 150/hr Vehicle @ 250/mo Engine repair Equipment rental COlTUllunications Total Line 400 -Commodities CY 80 9,600.00 5,250.00 700.00 700.00 ~-=70-:=-0..00 16,950.00 CY 81 12,000.00 10,250.00 2,600.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 26,850.00 Jan 82 - Food @ 15/day Clothing Building materials Camp gear Net gear Fuel Oil Marine supp1 ies Snowmachine supplies Miscellaneous Total 11,850.00 2,000.00 3,800.00 600.00 4,300.00 4,700.00 650.00 500.00 500.00 3,400.00 32,300.00 19,500.00 2,000.00 2,900.00 4,000.00 7,540.00 1,000.00 500.00 400.00 1,900.00 39,740.00 .....Li ne 500 -Egui pment Riverboat 75 hp outboard 25 hp outboard Jet unit Trailer boat Radio Rifle 4 snowmachines 2 trai lers (SM) 2 ice augers 2 chainsaws Canoe Backback shocker Total Total for Cook Inlet to Talkeetna Grand Total CV 81 +10% -55- 1,600.00 2,700.00 1,200.00 600.00 500.00 1,000.00 300.00 6,400.00 1,000.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 1,200.00 18,300.00 $227,629.00 $287,481.00 $455,332.00 $477,479.00 $525,226.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Resident and Juvenil e,Anadrontous,Fishery Study j , CY Januacr 1982 Une,100-P~rsonal Serv;cas .... 1 Bi 0'II for'1 mo: 1 Si 0 II I for 1 me 2.8;0'r I s:for 1 me Total Line-ZOO -Travel Travel and,per diem:(1 ,000 each) Total Li "e·300 -Contractua 1 Sar'!;cas Conmuni cat;ons' Printing and professional serl;ces Equi pment renta 1 Vehicle lease.@.2S0/ma Total L i ne400 -Cammodi ti as Office,supplies :1iscel1anenus. Total Line sao -Equioment', Total for'CY Janua~J 1982 -56- 2,84-1.ao' 3,246.00 4,942.00 11 ,029.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 250.00 750.00 250.00 2S0.00 1,500.00 500.00 250.00 750.00 O.00' $15,279.00 - ..., Spatial and Seasonal Habitat Studies The Alaska Department of Natural Resources has submitted an instream flow proposal which is.coordinated with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game's.sp'atialand seasonal habitat instream flow studies and .-designed to generate other essential depth and velocity data we require. If their proposal 1"5 rejected we will need~to increase our budget requirements by $187,8S1 the first year'and 110,000 each year after that to collect the data they were not funded to collect. ,.,.. .- 'It should be noted that the-scope of these studies is based upon the assumption that other essential hydrological data will be generated and be avai1able on a timely basis.A final detennination as to the adequacy of the other proposed hydrological and habitat related studies p.repared by Acres cannot and will not be made until the U.S.Geological Survey and other resource agencies.also evaluate the entire revised draft proposa 1 Acres or the Cor?s of Engineers is selected to prepare in November,1979. - .... Cook In let to.Porta.ge.Creek line iOO-Personal $€rvices 1 FB IiI Step B @ 3.,359.00 for 12 me 1 Hydrologist III Step B @ 3~359 for 12 ma 2 FB "I/lIl s @ 2,841 for 12 mo 3 FB 1'$@ 2,471 (9 mo for CY 80) Total Line 200 -Travel 240 days per diem @ 55/day 2 trips to Ft.Collins @ 800 x 2 people Miscellaneous Total -57- CY 80 40,308.00 40,308.60 68,184.00 66~717.00 215,517.00 13,200.00 3,200.00 16,400.00 CY 81 40,308.00 40,308.00 68,184.00 .88,956.00 237,756.00 13 ,200.00 3,200.00 16,400.00 Jan 82 3,359.00 3,359.00 4,562.00 7,413.00 18,693.00 800.00 800.00 ,~ -. Spatial and Seasonal Habitat Studies Cook'In 1et to Portage·Creek.(cont".) L.ine 300 -Contractual Services, Ai r charter' 15 hrslmo for 7 ma @lSO/hr Vehicle 12.me @ 2S0/mo Engine;repair-and maintenance Equipment rental Comnunications USGS,Instream Flow Group consultation and analysis Boeing computer analysis Miscellaneous Total Line 400 _.Commodities Food:CY 80 700 days @ 15/day CY 81 &82 980 days @ 15/day Clothing;boots,life jackets,tents, sleeping bags,etc. Fuel;20 wks 200gallwK @ 1.25/9a 1 Oi 1,1ube,etc•. Marine supplies Mi see 11 aneous Snowmachine supplies Total Line 500 ..EqUipment ~.,.evel 1ietz B-2@1,600each 3 tripods (dome)@ 150 each urvey stakes . 2 measuring tapes and ho.l<Jers 300 I @ 150 each Two 35 mm $l.R cameras,(macro lens and polarized filter)@ 350aach~ectronic surveying equipment":angle measurements,range measurements, fi e1d cOll\puter" ,:cjf~s.@ 250 each 5 current meters (AA)@ 350 each .3 current meters (pygmy)@ 400 each 3 Marsh MeB;rney flow meters, digital readout @ 1,600 each 11 top setting wading rods @ 200 each Suspended flow support system 2 boat mounted flow metering systems @ li600 each -58- CY 80 15,750.00 3,000.00 1 ,000.00 300.00 3,600.00 12,000.00 10,000.00 500.00 46,150.00 10,500 ..00 4,500.00 5,000.00 700.00 1,500.00 1,800.00 200.00 24,200.00 4,800.00 450.00 300.00 300.00 700.00 20,500.00 500.00 1,750.00 1,200.00 4,800.00 2,200.00 400.00 CY 81 15,750.00 3,000.00 1,000.00 300.00 3,600.00 18,000.00 25.,000.00 500.00 67,150.00 14,700.00 1 ,000.00 5,000.00 700.00 1,500.00 1,800.00 200.00 24,900.00 Jan 82-- 350.00 2,000.00 1 ,000.00 3,300.00 600.00 600.00 Spatial and Seasonal Habitat Studies Cook Inlet to Portage Creek (cont.) ..Sonar narrow beam system A"i headsets @ 50 each"~1wo Z-way radio wal kie ta 1ki e @ 1 ,000 each ,2 compasses @ 50 each Rebar eJ:'leveling rods @ 150 each 4 cable tagliners 300'@ 150 Tool s for repair 20'Wooldridge boat {capable,of perf'onnarn:e in Portage area} 13 I Avon riverboat 85 hp (jet foot) 25 hp (kicker) 25 hp (fo~·Avon) Boat'trai1er ..~..~J field calcu1ato~each Desk calculator Office equipment '5 DO meters @ 600 each 5 conductivity meters @ 600 each 5 pH meters @ 200 each. 15 thermometers@ 25 each 40 thermographs @ 350-each 400 Leu po 1d s,taff gages @ ".00 Total CY 80 3,000.00 400.00 2,000.00 100.00 100 •.00 600.00 600.00 175.00 4,000.00 1,800.00 3,800.00 1,200.00 1,ZOO.00 2,000.00 Z10.00 100.00 1,300.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 1,000.00 375.00 14,000.00 4,400.00 90,060.00 CY 81 Jan 82 ,~ r Total for Cook Inlet to Portage Creek $392,327.00 $346,206.00 $23,393.00 -59- ", .' Spatia]and Seasonal Habitat Studies Portage Creek.to .Tyone River- Line 100 -Personal Services See res;dent".studies line 200 -Travel See resident:stud;es' Line 300 -Contractual Services Air charter 6 .hrs/mo for"6 mos @ lSO/hr" HeJ icopter-5/hrs~.for-4·mes @3S0/hr- Total Li ne 400 -Commodi ti es See res;dent stud;es CY 80 5,400.00 7,000.00 12,400.00 CY 81 5,400.00 7,000.00 12,000.00 Jan 82 - .... -- • Line 500 -Eguipment DO meter Conductivity meter pH meter 3 thermometers @ 25 each Marsh MeB;rney meter AA meter Pygmy meter 2 measuring tapes 300'@ 150 each 2 topsetting wading rods @ 200 each 2 headsets@ 50 each 35 mm camera,(macro lens and polarized fiTter)@ 3S0 25 Leupold staff gages @ 11.00 ,Total Grand Total CY 81 +10% CY 82 +20% -60- 600.00 600.00 200.00 75.00 1,600.00 350.00 400.00 300.00 400.00 100.00 350.00 275.00 5,250.00 $409,977.00 $358,206.00 $23,393.00 35,821.00 4,679.00 $394,027.00 $28,072.00 ,..... .- WILDLIFE STUDIES Introduction The Susttria River drainage contains a diverse array of terrestrial habitat types which support major concentrations of wildlife.The variety of species inhabiting this area is probably equal to any other northern terrestrial system in the world.Much of the area is only sparsely developed but is relatively accessible to Alaska's major human population c,enters.As a result this area is among the most popular wil dl ife use areas providing opportunities for both consumptive and non- consumptive users.Whi 1e wi ldli fe uses in the area are primarily recreati ona 1, subsistence and commercial uses are also important. Development of the Susitna River's hydroelectric potential is likely to affect many wildlife species.A number of mechanisms of impact are possible,some direct and obvious and others indirect and subtle.The primary mechanisms that have been identified _include total loss of habitat in impoundments,alteration of habitat downstream through vegetation changes,restriction of movement patterns leading to altered habitat use patterns,changes in interspecific relationships such as changes in prey availability to predator populations,and increased accidental mortality from hazards such as ice shelves and mud flats. Probable impacts vary from species to species and area to area.In some cases enough information is presently available to predict that adverse impacts will occur.An example is the inundation of moose winter range. In such cases studies are needed to quantify predictions and identify secondary impacts.In other cases such as those involving alteration of vegetation downstream,a possibility of significant impacts can be perceived but too little is known to predict with certainty whether actual impacts will occur.In these cases it is necessary to both identify impact mechanisms and quantify them. Assessment of impacts on wildlife requires more than information on wildlife populations.Strong supporting data on wildlife habitat and environmental conditions are needed.Therefore a coordinated multi- disciplinary approach is required from the outset.The Alaska Department of Fish and Game will be conducting studies directed at certain large mammal species.These studies are only pieces of the terrestrial impact assessment puzzle.Other pieces such as studies of other wildlife, vegetation,climatology,hydrology socio-economics,etc.,will be produced by other agencies or firrns.It is essential that a broad study approach be laid out before studies begin to ensure that the pieces fit together to form a satisfactory impact assessment . -61- -- Title Moose distribution,movements and habitat use in the vicinity of proposed impoundments. Objectives To identify moose subpopulations using habitat that will be inundated by proposed impoundments. To determine the seasonal.distribution,movement patterns,size andel' trends of those subpopulations. To determine the timing and degree of dependency of those subpopulations on habitat to be impacted by the Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Backgrol.tt1d Preliminary studies indicated that several looselyde£ined subpopulations of moose inhabit proposed i.IIlpoundment areas for all or part of the year.Most moose studied exhibited altitudinal migration patterns, spending summers at higher elevations often outside of the proposed impoundment areas and winters at lower elevations often within or adjacent:to impoundment areas.Therefore the most severe impacts of the Susitna Hydropower project on moose upstream from Devils Canyon are expected to result from inundation of and blockage of migrati.ons to critical winte);'range.Since some moose mgrate to summer range up to 60 miles from their rinter range,reductions in the capacity of winter range may result in reduced densities of moose over a vast area. The basic approach of this study is to identify the subpopul.ations of moose using potential impoundment areas and to quantify their dependence on those areas.For example,wi.nter range of each subpopulation wil.l be delineated and the proportion of available TMinter range that rill be last will be estimated •.Factors such as browse production,quality and availability under varying environmental conditions will be considered.Since environmental conditions influencing these factors vary from year to year it will be necessary to continue these studies for several years. Both the short ta-~impact on the present moose population and the longer term loss of potential population size will be estimated by determing the size and trends of the existing population and assessing its status in relation to the present capacity and trends of the range. The relationship between moose habitat and moose populations is comple~.It is difficult to quan~ify this relationship and impractical to attempt to measure all aspects over the entire impact area. Therefore it will be necessary to conduct intensive studies in only -62- portions of the area to estimate the relative capacity of certain habitat types under certain environmental conditions.These estimates will then be extrapolated to the entire impact area on the basis of more extensive moosepop~ation studies and habitat maps. Data derived directly froDl the moose will be collected tmder this subtask while data derived from the lIlOose's habitat will be collected under Other sUbtasks~particularly 7.12 Plant Ecology. It is anticipated that by the end of Phase I the basic distribution and lDOvement patterns·of the 1Da,j or moose subpopulacions will be known.The present number of moose using the study area will be es.t:Lmaced.A rough es tilData of the percentage of winter habitat used during the winter of 1980..~l that n1l be lost should be possible.In other words il:should be possible to estimate the overall scope and a range of magnitude of potential impacts. Studies must be continued through Phase II to determine impacts under a wider variety of environmental conditions and to test and refine the estimates made at the end of Phase I. Procedures 1. 2. Approximately 60 moose will be radio-collared during the first year of study.Most of these will be collared in March 1980 when moose are on winter range and most likely to be in or near proposed impounciInenc areas.Subsequent col1ar1ng operations will be conduc.ted as needed to replace collars.and to f111 data gaps.Moose will be collared from Devils Canyon to the confluence of the Maclaren·and Susitna Rivers,however it is anticipated that most nll be collared in the vicinity of the prop~sed Watana impoundment which is expected to impact more moose than the Devils Canyon iJIlpoundment.Radio- collared moose will be relocated at least twice a month to delineate seasonal ranges.More intensive monitoring will be conducted as needed to determine migration patterns and calving areas and to delineate critical winter range.Tne specific location,habitat type,activity,and association with other moose will be recorded for each relocation.Habitat type w:ill be classified according to the system that will be used in habitat mapping under subtask 7.12. Periodic systematic aerial surveys will be made during winter to further delineate winter ranges and quantify the relative use of specific areas and habitat types in and OU"t of proposed impoundment areas.To the extent possible moose will be classified by sex and age class as an aid in identifying segregation patterns and determining population trends. 3.Moose numbers will be estimated through quadrat sampling techniques during late w:inter. -63- F"" ! .... ..... 4.rae long and short term nutritional status of moose captured for collaring will be assessed through established techniques using morphometr~c measur~ents~condition c~assification,blood chemistry and hair mineral element levels. Relationship to Other Sub tasks Procedures for recording and handling data will be coordinated with those of other wildlife studies to ensure effici.ency in later impact ana~ysis. Personnel and logistics will be coordi.nated among ~l big game studies.In particular wolf and 'N'Olverine tagging will be coordinated wi th lDOose tagging and when feasible several species wi~l be radio- tracked on the same flight. Moose stud:Les will·be clo.sely coordinated with plant ecology studies. Moose distribution data collected between January and March 1980 will be used to delineate areas for detailed habitat mapping and for selection of intensive "tegetation study areas.These habitat ups will be used in the analysis of moose distribution data.It is anticipated that continual coordination between investigators of both subtasks will be IDaintained to ensure efficiency of study design and compatability of data. Snow conditions strongly influence moose movements and browse availability.Requirements for .snow data will be determined on the basis of final project design and selection of detailed·vegetation study areas.If possible these needs will be coordinated with those of the hydrologic field data collection program.It may be necessary to establish additional stations solely on the basis of moose study needs • -64- - - Title Moose distribution,tnO"ements and habitat use downstream from Devi.ls canyon. Objectives To identi.fy moose subpopulations using habi tat that will be altered by changes in stream flow below Devils Canyon. To de-cerIllina the seasonal distribution,movement patterns,size a.nd trends of those subpopulations. To determine the timing and degree of dependency of those subpopulaeions on habitat to be impacted by altered flow regjmes of the Susitna River. Background Islands and bars in the Susitna Riv.er are hea~ly used by moose during winter,part.icularly in years of dee.p snow.A major factor making these areas attractive to moose appears to'be the maintenance of vegetation in a subcl1max stage by the existing flow regime of the river.The mechanism.setting back plant succession in not known.Periodic flooding may be the dominant factor but other factors such as siltation,normal channel errosion,ice scouring and soil moisture may also be important. Alteration of the Sustina River'flow regime by the Susitna Hydroelectric Project will probably result in changes in vegetation downstream. The nature and magnit.ude of these changes are unknown but could be significant to moose and other species of wildlife.It is possible that even minor changes in flow such as dampening of extreme flood levels by a few inches could alter many acres of critical moose win;er range.Such alterations could influence moose abundance over a large area. Because of the many unknowns,assessment of the impact.of the Susitna Hydroelectric Proj ect on moose populations in the lower Susitna River drainage will require synthesis of information from several disciplines including hydrology,geomorphology,plant ecology and wildli.fe ecology.Under ideal circUIllStances a systematic progression of studies starting with hydrolo~J and ending with wildlife ecology should be followed.However,the scheduled time frame for developing the Sustina Hydroelectric Project is incompatible with this approach.Therefore it will be necessary ttl conduct a number of studies s~ultaneously. The basic approach will be to,identify m.echanisms of impact and roughly estimate the potential magnitude of impact during Phase I. If significant impacts are identified the studies will be redesigned -65- ..... ,.... to produce a more reliable estimate of impact and to provide an initial assessment of mitigation possibilities. Studies of the effects of water conditions on moose habitat will be conducted under Subtask 7.12 Plant Ecology.It is anticipated that. by the end ofl'hase I these studies will indicate if substantial changes nll be caused by the predicted post-construction flow regime.A habitat map,which lNill also be prepared under Subtask 7.12 during Phase I~will provide a basis for preliminary estimates of acreages that might be altered.IF significant vegetation changes are indicated by the Phase I studies these estimates will be refined during Phase II. The dependenc.yof moose on habitat subject to alteration will be assessed under this sub task.During Phase I moose wintering areas on and adjacent to the river will be delineated and the relative use of various habitat types,pax"ticularly those subj ect to periodic flooding,will be determine:d.This will provide the basis for a preliminary estimate of the proportion of winter range that may be altered~however,this estimate will be valid only for the environmental conditions existing during the winters of 1979-80 and 1980-81. Charac.teri~tics of moose use of habitat subject to flooding will be determined by more intensive study of moose using on.e or more limited study areas.These study areas will include areas selected for intensive vegetation studies.Movements of indiVidual moose ':t7ill be monitored to determine·whether habitat subject to flooding is used transiently by large numbers of moose or more regularly by smaller numbers.Moose use of specific plots being studied ~der Subtask 7.12 will be assessed through direct observation and pellet group coun'ts. Seasonal ranges of moose wintering on the intensive study area will be sllperficially delineated to indicate the approximate geographic scope of any impacts that are identified. If Phase I studies indicate that the Susitna Hydroelectric Project will cause significant alteration of habitat downstream and that alteration of this habitat is likely to result in significant .changes in moose distribution and numbers,Phase IIstud.:i.es will be designed to delinea'te moose subpopulations using the entire area of potential habitat alteration and to predict the impact on each subpopula tion. Procedures The following procedures are for Phase I studies only: ..... - 1.Existing data on moose distribution and movements adjacent to the lower Susitna River will be compiled.Sources will include historic fall sex and age composition counts,records of road and railroad kills,and incompletely analyzed data on a major winter die-off that occurred along the river in 1970-71 . -66- -- - -I 2.Periodic systematic aerial surveys will be made during tNinter to delineate winter ranges and quantify the relative use of specific areas and habitat types adjacent to the Susitna River.To the extent possible moose w.ill be classified by sex and age class as an aid in identifying segregation patterns and determining population trends. A limited number of moose (up to 20 during 1980)will be radio- collared in areas selected for intensive vegetation study (see subtask 7.12).These moose will be relocated approximately ~eekly while they are in the Vicinity of the river to determine the pattern of use of specific habitats.They will be relocated approximately montblyat other times of year to roughly delineate other seasonal ranges and ensure continued contact with each attimal. Pellet group counts will be conducted within the intensive study areas to provide a quantitative comparison of moose use of specific habitats that will also be studied under subtask 7.12. Relationship to Other Subtasks Procedures for recording and handling data will be coordinated with those of other wildlife studies to ensure efficiency in later impact analysis. Moose studies will be closely coordinated with plant ecology studies. Moose distribution data collected between January and March 1980 will be used to delineate areas fer detailed habitat mapping and for selection of intensive vegetation study areas.These habitat maps will be used in the analysis of moose distribution data.It is anticipated that continual coordination between investigators of both subtasks will be maintained to ensure efficiency of study design and compatability of data. Sno~conditions strongly influence:moose movements and browse aVailability.Requirements for snow data trill be determined on the basis of final project design and selection of detailed vegetation study areas.If possible these needs will be coordinated with those of the hydrologic field data collection program.It may be necessary to establish additional 5ratio11s solely on the basis of moose study needs. -67- -Title Wolf distribution,abundance,habitat use and prey selection. Objectives ""'"! To identify wolf packs occupying areas that will be impacted by the Susitna Hydroelectric Project. To delineate the territories of each pack and identify den sites, rendezvous sites and maj or feeding areas. To determine the numbers of rNOlves and rates of t'U%'no'Ver for each pack.. To determine the food habits of each pack. Back.ground Recent studies indicate that the Nelchina Basin supports moderate densities of wolves·.Wolves may be affected by the Susitna Hydroelectric project if critical portions of a pack's territory are inundated or if the abundance or condition of prey is altered. Limited available data indicate that portions of the territories of, several packs may be inundat.ed.Since aU parts of a pack's territory may o.ot be equally important to the maintenance of the pack,the effect of this loss of territory may vary from pack to pack. Therefore it is necessary to delineate the territories of each pack and determine the degree anduature of use of areas within proposed impoundments. A major factor influencing wolf numbers and distribution is prey availability.Recent studies in other parts of the'Ne1china Basin indicate that large ungulates,particularly moose,are the most important prey of most packs of wolves.Since moose and caribou tend to be migratory it is possible that the Project will result in reduced prey availability in the territories of wolf packs many miles from the i.Inpoundments. An assessment of the impact of the Project on wolves requires a knowledge of prey populations.Therefore wolf studies will be closely coordinated with studies of potential prey species. Initially studies will be concentrated on wolf packs that are likely to be directly impacted through loss of territory.If studies of prey species indicate that prey densities are likely to be altered in other areas,the wolf study will be expanded to delineate packs in those areas. -68- Procedures r ! 1.SeveJ:'al members of each wolf pack rill be radio-collared.Each radio-collared wolf will be relocated at least twice a month.More frequent relocations will be made when necessary to provide specific information such as location of dens and rendezvous sites.TeJ:'ritories will be delineated by plotting relocations on maps.Numbers of wolves in each pack rill.be monitored continuously by direct observation of radio-collared wolves and other wolves accompanying them. 2. ,.,., 3. - 4. Habitat selection will be determ:ined by recording the habitat type and activity of the wolves fo'!'each sighting made. Standardized track count censuses will.be conducted after fresh snowfalls to proVide additional information on wolf distribution and num.bers and identify packs not radio-collared. Food habits will be determined by observation of kills located during radio-tracking flights and analysis of scats collected at detlS.When possible the age~sex and condition of prey will be determined. ,- Relationship to Other Subtasks Procedures fo'!'recording and hand.ling data will be coordinated with those of other wildlife studies to ensure efficiency in later impact analysi.s. Personnel and logistics will be coordinated among all big game studies.In particular wolf and T.Jolverine tagging W'ill be coordinated with moose tagging and when feasible several species will be radio- tracked on the same flight. Data from studies of prey~particularly moose and.coribou rill be used in modification of design ofwol£studies.Studies of both predators and prey will be closely coordinated so that interactions bet"'~een species which might influence impacts of the Sustina Hydroelectric Project can be identified. -69- r ..... Title Wolverine distribution,abundance,movement patterns and habitat use. Objectives To determine the distribution and abundance of wolverines in the vicinity of proposed iMpoundments. To determine movement patterns and home range size of wolverines. Background Li ttle is known about Qo1.veriI1e moVeJD.ent patterns and habitat requirements.A basic understanding of these questions is necessary before iJn'pacts of the Susitna Hydroelectric Project can be addressed. For example if wolverines have well defined home ranges and strict habitat requ:i.rement.s impacts might be quite different than if they have large and loosely defined home ranges and are able to exploit a Qide vari.ety of habitat types. Observations made in the vicinity of the study area indicate that techniques that Will be employed in the wolf study could be adapted to provide the necessary basic information on wolverines. Since very little is known of wolverines at the present time it is anticipated that only rough est:iJnates of the mechanisms and potential magnitude of impacts Qill be possible at the end of Phase I.At that time it may be necessar/to redesign studies to provide a more reliable basis for assessment of impact. Procedures 1.The distribution and abundance of wolverines will be assessed through track counts and direct observations made during wolf census surveys. 2. 3. Wolverine (up to 10 in 1980)will be radio-collared and relocated approximately twice per month to determine movement patterns and home range. Habitat selection will be determined by recording habitat type and activity for each sighting made. I""" ! .... Relationship to Other Subtasks Procedures for recording and handling data will be coordinated ~th those of other wildlife studies to ensure efficiency in later impact a!lB.lysis. -70- - Personnel and logistics will be coordinated among all big game studies.In particular wolf and wolverine tagging will be coordinated. with moose taggug and when feasible several species will be radio- tracked on the same flight. Personnel f1."01l1 the University of Alaska are expected to have opportunities to collect additional infonIation on wolverines in the course of studies directed at other furbearers.All aspects o.f both studies will be coordinated to maximize data collection with a mini.mum of dupl1cation of effort. -71- ~ ! Title Bear distribution9 movements 9 ·abundance and habitat use. Obj ectives. To determine the distribution and abundance of black and brown/grizzly bears in the Vicinity of proposed impoundment areas. To determine seasonal ra.nges,including denning areas,and movement patterns of bears. To determine seasonal habitat use of black and brown/grizzly bears. Much of the Nelchina Basin is known to support high densities of brown/grizzly bears.Black bears are bel~eved to be less abundant and less widely distributed.The main mechanism of impact affecting bears is likely to be direct loss of habitat particularly seasonally important feeding areas or denning areas.Some bears may be indirectly affected through reduction in ungulate densities in areas outside of proposed impolmdments as moose and perhaps caribou constitute a major portion of bears'diet during summer in adjacent areas. Shorter term impacts will result from bear-human conflicts which are likely to occur when field facilities are established for the Susitna study program and subsequent dam construction if the project is approved. Studies in other parts of Alaska indicate that bears have specific habitat and food preferences •.These preferences often vary seasonally in a manner that suggests very specific seasonal habitat requirements. While both species of·bear sometimes occur in close proximity, their habitat requirements are probably different.Therefore the impact of inundation of bear habitat may not be in direct proportion to the n~ber of acres lost and the impact on one species of bear may be quite different from that on the other. Procedures 1.Adult bears will be radio-collared in and adjacent to the proposed impoundment areas.ApproxiJuately 35 bears rill be collared the first year.Incidentally caught bears too small to be radio- collared will be marked with visual.tags.Black bears and brown/grizzly bears will be marked in the apprOximate proportion of their occurrence in the area.At this time it is not known if significant members of black bears will be found. 2.Radio-collared bears will be relocated periodically throughout their act~ve period to delineate seasonal ranges and determine movement patterns.The den location for each radio-collared bear will be recorded each year. -72- 4.Information on seasonal food habits rill be gathered through observations of bear feeding and to the extent possible through scat analysis. ..... 3.All observat~ons of both marked and unmarked bears will be recorded. For each sighting the location,habitat type,activity and associat~on with other animals will be recorded • .- Relationship to Otb.er Subtas!ts Procedures for recording and handling data will be coordinated with those of other wildlife studies to ensure efficiency in later impact analysis. Personnel and logis ticswiU be coordinated among all big game studies.When feasible several sllecies will be radio-tracked on the same flight • -73- ..... I ..... i Title Caribou herd identity,migration pat~erns and habitat use. Objectives To delineate calving areas. To determine the numbers and sex and age composition of caribou occupying habitats on bo-ch sides of proposed impoundments at different seasons. To determine mi.gration routes and r:he timing of major movements in the vicintty of proposed impoundments. Background The distribut.ion and movement patterns of the Nelchina caribou herd were extensively studied during the 1950'sand 1960's.At that tae large num.bers of caribou regularly crossed proposed impo'UI1dment areas during migrations between seasonal ranges,particularly on their migration from calVing areas south of the Susitna River to summer range north of the river and subsequent fall migrations to the eas t.Early assessments of the impact of various Susi t02 hydroelectric proposals suggested that impoundments could block migrations and isolate caribou from portions of their traditional range. A number of major changes have occurred during the last decade which limit the value of data collected prior to 1970.The herd suffered a major decline in the early 1970's dropping from an estimated peak of over 70,000 to less than 10,000.The herd is currently increasing andestiXDatedto number 20,000.Current management plans call for stabilizing the herd at the present level.Movement patterns appear to have become quite variable from year to year.While movements across proposed impoundment areas still occur it is not clear whether they are as significant to the population as they were thought to be in past years. Location of calving areas is believed to be the most consistent characteristic of caribou distribution and movement patterns.The traditional concept of a herd assumes a well defined common calving area.Tne Nelchina herd still uses its traditional calving area south of the Susitna River,however,in the last few years there have been indications of significant numbers of caribou north of the river during the calving period.These caribou may represent a subherd with all sex and age classes represented or they may be segments of the main herd that are not inVolved in calving. If a new subherd exists the "needl1 to migrate across the proposed impoundment areas may be reduced.But if different sex and age classes are on opposite sides of the river at that time of year the need to migrate would be great. -74- .- F- I .- It is not likely that caribou W'otJld be com~letely excluded from any part of their range other than those areas that are inundated. However~even a partial barrier to movements could result in reduced use of portions 0·£the present range and increased use of other portions •.If the desire to migrate along routes blocked by impoundments is strong,caribou may attempt to cross impoundments.Potential hazards such as ice shelves and mud flats could increase mortality rates among caribou attempting to cross. Unfortunately there is no way to predict with confidence the reaction of caribou to impoundments.The caribou :impact assessment will necessarily be illore subj ective than those for other big game species. The .approach of this study is to describe the e.~isting patterns of cariboudistribution~movements and habitat use.This should prOVide a basis for estimating the importance of specific migration routes to the present population and for determining the availability of alternative migration routes. Procedures 1.Aerial surveys will be made to delineate distribution of caribou on both sides of proposed impoundments and to determine if calving is occurring north of the Susitna River. -I 2.Post-calving concentrations on both sides of the river will be censused by commonly used photo extrapolation techniques to determine the proportion of the herd occupying habitat north of the river. 3.Sex and age composition counts will be made in spring and fa.ll as part of the census procedure.These counts will also indicate if the Sexes and ages caribou using habitat on one side of the river are different ~rom those using habitat on the other side. 4.Caribou (up to 40 in 1980)on both sides of the river will be radio-collared.Collars will be placed on animals in different groups of caribou scattered throughout the herd.The frequency of relocation of radio-collared caribou ~ill vary depending on the location and activity of the caribou.Relatively loW'levels of monitoring 'Will be maintained when caribou are away.from the iJ:npoundment areas or are sedentary to provide basic information.on seasonal ranges and habitat use and to ensure continued contact with collared individuals.The frequency of monitoring will be increased when caribou are close to impoundment areas,particularly during migrations. 5.Habitat type will be recorded for all caribou signtings. RelationshiD to Other Subt:;asks Procedures ror recording and handling data will be coordinated 'With those of other wildlife studies to ensure efficiency in later impact analysis. -75- Personnel and logistics rill be coordinated aJIlOng all big game studies.In particular individuals working on other species will record caribou observatons and periociically sca.n radio frequencies in the vicinity of impoundments to assist in identifying periods when intensive caribou lIlOnitoring is needeed. -76- I""", - Title Distribution and abundance of Dall sheep. Objectives To determine the distribution and abundance of Dall sheep adjacent to proposed impoundments. Backsround Relati1fely isolated groups of Dall sheep inhabit mountainous areas on bOth sides of the proposed W'atana im:poundl:nent ~At the present time it is not be.lieved that sheep regularly use habitat that rill be inundated or that they regularly migrate through areas which will be inundated.It is possible that the tV'ataua.impoundment might further isolate ~oupsnorth of the ri.ver from larger adjacent populations south of the river reducing possibility of repopulation should these groups decline in the future. The main concern is the effect of disturbance during construction of hydroelectric generation and transm:i.ssion facilities.It may be possible to zone construction activities in both time and space to minimize this disturbance.The purpose of this study is to provide a basis for decisions on such zoning. Procedures Aerial surveys will be made to delineate seasonal rang~s including rutting and lambing areas. Relationshio to Other Subtasks Since the scope of this study is limited,only minor coordination of personnel and logistics will be necessary. -77- J J 1 I ~=_);GL.JSTU~~...~-~.JSE ~J (all costa in 1000 ~1980 dollars) J ]]j J _.1., Adminstration and Support 100 Salaries and Benefits Job Class ,Rate/month '" 1980 Man MOiiths/Cost 1981 Man Months/Cost 1982 Man Months/Cost Game Biologist IV Biometrician II Programmer III Administrative A8sist~nt t Cle!-"ltIYEis t III _ Total: 200 Travel 300 Contractual Services Total:(rounded to nearest $1000) 4442 3475 3035 2386 1726 6 26.7 6 26.7 6 20.9 6 20.9 3 ,9.1 6 18.2 2 4.8 2 4.8 9 15.5 12 20.7 77.f)91.3 4.0 4.0 6.0 6.0 87.0 101.0 1 1 4.4 1.7 6.1 6.0 I "'-lco I Dig Game Studies 100 Salaries and Benefits 1980 1981 1982 Job Class 'Rate/month *Man Mont'hs/Cost Man Montl"ls/Cost '.Man Monti;ls/Cost Game Biologist ill 3773 40 150.9 40 150.9,4 15.1 Game Biologist I 2841 24 68.2 20 56.8 Fish and Game Technician III 2163,16 34.6 10 21.6 1'0 tal:253.7 229.3 16.8 *Rates are averaged where several positions with different merit step levels or area diferentials are involved. 200 Travel lOO Contractual 400 Commodities 500 Eq~!p~en~. Total:(rounded to nearest $1000) Combined Administrative and Support and Big Game Studies TOTAL: 21 14 254 222 62 29 14 2-605 496 17 692 597 23 ,I r'~ BUDGET SUMMARY AQUATIC AND WILDLIFE STUDIES AND SUPPORT .PHASE I (All costs in 1980 dollars) 605.0 496.0 Study Task 1.Administration and Support Aquatic Studies 11.Anadromous Adul t Fi shery Stud i es III.Resident and Juvenile Anadromous Fishery Studies IV.Spatial and Seasonal Habitat Studies V.Administration &Support Wildlife Studies VI.Wildlife Studies 80 588.0 994.0 455.0 410.0 87.0 Year 81 617.0 666.0 477.0 358.0 101.0 Jan.82 31.0 9.0 15.0 23.0 6.0 17.0 VII.Susitna Hydro Coordinator (including support) TOTAL:Rounded to the nearest $1,000 -79- 75.0 75.0 3,214.0 2,790.0 6.0 107.0 i j j J J 1 ]1 1 ]]1 j 1 ]) " 1 AOF&G Fisheries Divisions AOF&G Game .Dlvision ,",''''~~, R••t"'r Offl,. Sus Hila Hydropower fisheries and Wiidlffe St.udy Team AUF&G lIahttat Protection Section IIp.yional Of(1cp. I ----1 ' Icoo J r-- AnadrOlJl0lJS /\dult stock IIssessment P,'oject leader fO III IInadromous Studies Staff IIquatlc Studies Coordinator FO IV Resident and Juvenile IInadromous Studies Starr Resident and duvenlle Anadromolis Study rro.lcct le'lder Fp III Wildlife Studies Coordinator GO IV I Spatial and Seasonal Habitat Studies Staff I Spath-I and Seasonal Habftat Project Leader FO III "roject leader Upstreanl hloose,wol f,wolverine GOI I -1 1',"oJer.t loader IMwns tream hloose 00 III I Susitna I'ydro Cuordlnator liD IV-r- lI~blt.1t ProtecUon -Supt'ort Stllff Project le.lder Bear Gil III Project le4der Carillou and shcl!p GO IU UpSt.reani ,,'oose study slart Illlwnstrllaill Illoose study staff Dear study staff I J 1 J J /llli toli f 15hl!r'll!~II Iv,5 lOlls 'j 11,'11 OJ '~J I ~(IUiJt It:S~IlJles '-ciJder' fO IV 1 1 j j tledcat .ud 1 __.__.._.__•I\'hul.,1 ~tr'i1t I VI! SIINII)r~ Tedlllical 5111'I'Ul·t I Millin.As~~.I I n PI t I'ub.St'lle.II 1 c:r " I 0 IOOltltdd all "I 2 Ulolllotdclau It I Malntonilnce ;lI!ch." 1 Cnto\Wclphllr II ..........~.-...._.-.~~._._-_.----.._----_......._-_._-_.._._--_..._-_._-_._~._--_._------...._----_..-_.......-_._-_._.__.-------:.--.-.-.--"-_.'----_._-------~.__.---_.._-') r-----·--·-----------:-- I 00 --' /I"adl'lUtlllU5 /I<I'Jll 1"'UjtIL I.I (Jailor'..f11 111 .cook lulet 1.0 lalkeelna 6 '.Ii I (1.980)7 fO I (l91H) Res Ident illld Juvlln I 11: AnadrolllollS PruJect I.eaderfnIII --Fr fll hlkcetoll to Uevlh l:dnyun :1 fB • "1 Oevlh Canyon to 'yune IlIvlJr :1 ro I SI1iltiat alld SeaWllili lIabltal I'rllJllcl 1.llader ID II J _.lIyllr.,log.lsl III ----------\------- ,,,1,'...1,,,,n ..",-",~",,,--~l 10 I liraduille Slude"t Sl.lle"Assess,"ellt I llil.llotelelQlltry roll, 2 fit • I n II (111'1<.Inlet ",~Cullec lion I'll I, Ii F'"5 f1111 61'1'11 r--''''---'-'-·'------'---1 SOIlar'•fclU9'nli l:re!!l CensU$ fO JI r"--'--~----'---I 2 fit IIII )HI I r:(I0~Inlel lo Yimlna ~Fo I 'I n II Yl!lltna to talkeetna .,18 I 12 fT II J )1 J j )~---, WildUfe Studie$Coordinator G8 IV I CXl N I E Prpject leader Upstream moose,wQlf,wolverine GO III ~-.---'f:-Pnljeet leader Oownstream moose. GO III ~. AdminIstratIon and -----"'------1.Support Staff Projel;t leader Bear GO III ,..- fiiT",..-.-/l~lIIr""'" Biometrician In.ProgranJiler J11 Admi",.Asst.} .Clerk TYVist II.} ~----- +L_.gProjectleMler caribOu.and.SheeP.G8 1lI---_.._------ /' .-/ /~ Attachment I JAr .t IIAMIIOIIII,IIWlIIIO'I'I / /. j LAND AND W4 TER MANAGEMENT ;313 £4TH AVENUE -AllCHIJU«." ((=0 r? Ij I!UI:J~ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURf;ES October 26,1979 Mr.Eric Yould Executive Director Alaska Power Author1.ty 333 W.Fourth Avenue Anchorage,Alaska 99501 Dear Mr.Yould: Enclosed is a proposal for evaluation.of stream flow manipulation effects downstream of the Devil's Canyon dam site as part of the.Susitna Dam feasibility studies.During preparation of this proposal our staff coordinated closely with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game so.that this proposal and their .proposal for spatial and seasonaVhabitat studies would maximize joint use of field personnel,equipment,and transportation to eliminate any duplication and redundancy. < The Alaska Department of Natural Resources has major management and regulatory responsibilities under,AS 46.15 (the Alaska Water:Use Act) and AS 38.05 (Alaska Land Use Act)•The Department will have to process applications for water rights and construction permits prior.to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission licensing process~In the process of acting upon such applications the Department is directed by AS 46.15.080, to consider the following relevant items:. L the benefit to theypplicant resulting from the proposed appropriation Z•.the effect of economic activity resu1tingfromthe-proposed appropriation 3.the effect on fish and game resources and public recreational opportunities 4.the effect of loss of alternate uses of water that might be made within a reasonable time if not precluded or hindered by the proposed appropriation 5.the effect upon access to navigable or public waters The commissioner is authorized by AS 46.15.100 to issue a permit subject to'terms,conditions,restrictions or limitations necessary to protect the rights of others and the public interest. In addition to the statutory directives listed above,my division is charged with conducting the state land disposal program.We presently have 117,399 acres of land west of the Susitna River and south of 1o.J4l..H """ - .... Trapper's Creek classified 'for disposal.During this fiscal year alone We will be selling 31,375 net acres.With the price of gold rising,we also expect additional activity in the area,particularly in the Kahiltna drainage.The only means of access is by aircraft,snowmachine,or riverboat via the lower Susitna River with major access points from Talkeetna and from Willow via the Little Susitna River. We understand that the preliminary plan of study submitted by Acres American suggests terminating the downstream study boundary at Tal- keetna.Examination of existing hydrological records and project show that approximately 43%of the average flow in the Susitnanaain stem near Talkeetna will be subject to.manipulation by the power.project.Given this situation we cannot adequately address concerns that will arise over navigation and fisheries downstream from Talkeetna to salt water without studies being conducted on this reach of the river.By including these essential issues in the scope of APA funded investigations,management agencies·and the public will have the necessary information to objectively consider tradeoffs between downstream resource uses and'optimum operation of the dam and reservoir for power generation. We would prefer the opportunity to review Acres revised plan of study in comparision to the Corps of Engineers year old plan of study prior to APA's final selection decision.Given the timeframefor APA's decision process it appears this will not be possible.Therefore by copy of this letter I am fo~rding the attached'proposal to Acres for their con- sideration for inclusion into their POSe Should Acres and APA desire to use the Department of Natural Re'sources or Fish and Game as a subcontractor in this effort I suggest that any authorization of funds to DNR be executed by a Reimbursable Service Agreement (RSA)with payments subject to approval by Acres as the study manager.The reason for this is to avoid delays in aecepting and receiving authorization to expend funds from non-state sources which requires conduct of the Revised Program (RP)process.Work under an RSA between state agencies could connnence.wfthin amonthwhereas·the RP process could take up to three months. While we feel that state agencies could adequately conduct elements of the feasibility study in a compatible time frame forFERC licensing submission,the basic concern is that work be done which enables appro- priate management .agencies to execute their responsibilities in a timely manner for all concerned.Should a private subcontractor be selected for all elements of the study,I suggest that APA consider retention of certain scientific and durable equipment (flow recorders,meters, boatst etc.)that may be purchased for the project.Your agency will undoubtably be conducting such studies across the state for a number of years,whereas outside contractors mayor may not be working in the state in future years.Such an arrangement could reduce outlays for future studies by prOViding a pool of certain necessary equipment instate. ,'--.-;.; "',,, I hope this information is helpful.Please do not hesitate to contact me or my staff if you have any questions.We look forward to continued involvement in this project... ,. .,---',--" ....::. ..,.,.,...... ... '::'. ..;,'-'. "'.--!•<j,•• ;...-" John Lawrence,Acres American . Jeff Haynes~Deputy Commissioner,DNa Tom Trent,ADF&G Charles Bahlke,Chairman,Alaska Power Authority , Brent Petrie,~. Bill Lem.g,DGGS '. Sincerely, ..~....~. .. cc: ·Theodore G.Smith,Director Division of Forest,Land and Water Management ,.:',c.~• ~. ~ i .- ~.._'-- .-Ii""'-_-__...--...---.__-..._. Ii5,,'..)407 : --~.-..,...._-. _Iio.~.;.:..._.:.)._~.._."'-...."•.;..·.4.··:.......·· TASK:Assessment of Instream Flow Requirements for the Susitr (In cooperation with ADF&G Spatial and Seasonal Habitat. BACKGROUND: Increased water demands and significant changes in flow regimes sometim~ result in conflicts over water use.A major concern of many resource agencies is the conflict between out-of-streamuses of water or flow regime changes and the needs of fish and wildlife,navigation,recreation and other instream flow uses.DNR,in conjunction with ADF&G,USFWS, USGS,ADEC,ADOTPF,and the U.S.Water Resources Council,is presently pursuing an instream flow program for the State of Alaska.The program is patterned after the procedures developed by the Cooperative Instream Flow Service Group,Department of the Interior,U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,located at Fort Collins,Colorado. Work has initially begun during this past summer by ADF&G,DNR,and other interested agencies to obtain field data from Willow and Deception Creeks in the Susitna Basin and analysis of this data is currently underway.Additional funding for ADF&G and DNR to pursue the Willow and Deception Creeks study has recently been authorized by the U.S. Water Resources Council.Data produced as a result of this federal grant will augment the instream flow work performed as part of the Susitna Dam feasibility study. PARTICIPATION: This study will be performed in addition to work proposed by ADF&G, but will be done in close cooperation and coordination with that agency and other tasks performed by consultants as part of the overall Susitna Dam feasibility study.If the ADF&G instream flow study as part of their Spatial and Seasonal Habitat Studies is not funded,DNR will need to increase this budget in the amount that ADF&G was not budgeted,in order to perform the necessary work.It is anticipated that other agencies such as USFWS and USGS will participate in these instream flow studies,particularly the USFWS during data processing and analysis. TASK OBJECTIVES: This study will extend the field methods in use in the Willow and Deception Creek basins to serve as a tool to assess the effects of different flow regimes on aquatic and riparian habitat in the Susitna River.The study will provide data to the Alaska Power Authority (APA)on which decisions may be made regarding dam location, design,and operation through the following objectives. A.The study will provide data to allow the APA to make decisions regarding the magnitude and timing of flow releases from the proposed dams. B.The study will allow the APA to evaluate the effects of altered flow regimes on fisheries in the Susitna River along with other instream uses of the Susitna River such as boating and navigation. 2 C.Data generated from this study will aid the APA in evaluating dam design and operation to optimize power production. D.Data generated from this study can be utilized by the APA for planning and evaluating necessary mitigation measures for downstream resources. E.Results of this study will provide necessary data to regulatory and management agencies,such as DNR,ADF&G,DEC,USFWS,NMFS and FERC,such that these agencies can adequately perform their permitting and management responsibilities. LIST OF SUBTASKS: The above stated objectives will be accQmplished through the folloWing subtasks.Cooperating agencies and/or firms are also indicated. A)Consultation with state and federal agencies and consulting firms to coordinate the plan of study (DNR,APA,Acres,R&M,TES, ADF&G,USGS,USFWS). B)Order equipment and arrange logistical support (DNR,ADF&G,USGS, CIRI/H&N). C)Training in field techniques and data interpretation for project personnel (DNR,ADF&G,USFWS,USGS). D)Conversion of software to an accessible computer and training of computer personnel (ADF&G,USFWS,ACRES,DNR). E)Development and refining of preliminary probability of use curves CADF&G,DNR,USFWS,USGS). F)Collection of data to refine and validate probability of use curves (ADF&G,DNR,USFWS,USGS). G)Collection of hydrologic~l (stream flow)data (DNR,ADF&G,USGS, USFWS). H)Data processing and analysis (ADF&G,USFWS,USGS,and DNR). I)Utilizing this data and analysis,provide information to licensing and management agencies CAPA,FERC,DNR,ADF&G,DEC). STUDY LOCATION: Selection of study reaches in the Susitna River System will be required to provide the necessary flow information for this study.Sites will be required on the main stem of the Susitna River downstream from the proposed dam sites to salt water with additional sites located on major tributaries in the proposed study area.A wide variety of representative selections will be required to delineate the probability of use curves for the aquatic environment.Lo~ation of the transects will require close coordination with state and federal wildlife agencies, 3 the USGS and involved consultants to satisfy hydrologic and hydraulic considerations for determining channel morphology and aquatic habitat parameters for defining preferred habitat in these areas. SCHEDULE: This study will require three years of data collection and analysis as outlined below. A.First Year: L 2. 3. 4. fW~ 5. -6. Coordination of plan of study,personnel,equipment,and site selection of transects. Order equipment and arrange logistical support. Project staffing. Conversion of software to an accessible computer in Alaska. Development and refinement of preliminary probability of use curves. Initial collection of stream flow data. 7.Initial data processing and analysis. B.Second Year: L Continue data collection. 2..Continue data processing and analysis. 3.Refine and validate probability of use curves. C.Third Year: 1.Complete data collection. 2.Complete data processing and analysis. 3.Complete probability of use curves. 4. BUDGET: Report writing and submission of data to APA for utilization in FERC licensing and permitting processes. - The total budget for DNR involvement in this study will be $407,861.00 over the three year duration of the study.This is broken out per year below,with a detailed budget for the first year attached. 4 A.First Year: - Personal Services Travel Commodities Contractual Equipment· Total First Year Budget B~Second Year: $92,706.00 14,400.00 2,100.00 21,000.00 57,655.00 $187,861.00 -- ..... r- I I Little extra equipment will be needed.This year's budget will be comprised primarily of Personal Services,Travel and Commodities as shown above totaling approximately $110,000.00. C.Third Year: This year's budget will approximate the second year,totaling $110,000.00. PROPOSED BUDGET SUSITNA INSTREAM FLOW PROJECT Personal Services (1)Hydrologist III l8A 12 months =34,178.64 (1)Ecologist I l6A 12 months =29,750.76 (2)Temp.Land Management Tech II 14A 6 months =21,563.40 Overtime for LMT II =$7214.00 Total $92 2 706.00 Travel 2 positions 2 positions 800.00 per month x 8 months =6,400 800.00 per month x 6 months =4,800 ,... - (Training)2 positions (out-oi-state)800.00 each =1,600 x 2 trips =$3,200.00 Total $14,400.00 Commodities $250!year x 2.5 positions =$625.00 Gas,oil,motor $1,500.00 (2 ea.)Hard hats,hip boots and chest waders =$475.00 Total $2,100.00 Contractual A.Consult instreatn flow group.3 of them will fly to Alaska from Ft.Collins,Colorado and return.1 person from Alaska to fly to Ft.Collins and return.$3200.00. B.Repairs of boat,motor and other equipment $1000.00. C.Phone 200.00 per month per phone x 2 x 12 mo.~$4,800.00.This includes long distance calls. D.Plane charter to fly over sites $2,000.00. E.Computer analysis of field data $10,000.00. Totals $21,000.00 Equipment Office equipment 1.2 desks,2 chairs,1 bookcase,1 file cabinet =$1,300.00 2.1 calculator 300.00 3.(Special)paper,rite in rain,forms,and printing =$700.00 !~, .? F:i.eld equi.pment ...2 .--'~ -~- t--"'.. 1 'I _ ,--- t IL___ 1- 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.- •14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Level,Lietz B-2 (32x) Tripod (dome) Survey st:akes Measuring tape &holder (300 ft.) 35 n=camera and lens,film and development: Elect:ronic surveying equipment,angle measurements,range measurements,field computer Current meters,pygmy and AA meter Marsh-McBimy flow meter,digital readout (2)topsetting wading rods Suspended system (flow metering system) Boat mounted (flow metering system) Sonar'"narrow beam. Headset and battery 2 way radio,walkie talkie (2 sets) Compass (2)portable ultrasonic level and flow recorder. (2 ea.)First Aid Kit Bank anchors ~t'x 48 n rebar (2)leveling rod .(Philade1phia) (1)Cable tag1ine 300+feet Too'ls for repairs $1,600.00 250.00 150.00 150.00 900.00 20,500.00 500.00 1,600.00 400.00 400.00 1,600.00 3,000.00 50.00 2,000.00 100.00 6,800.00 200.00 20 ..00 300.00 150.00 175.00 (~ I :I - ; I t "' .- I I - i.__ 1 I \-- t i,_.' \~.... Boat .equipment 20 foot nverboat 13 foot.Avon riverboat 85 hp (jet boat) 25 hp (Kicker)jet foot 10 hp for Avon (jet foot) 25 gallon gas tank (2)10 gallon gas tanks (4)life vests Boat trailer (service contract) Oars (2 sets) (2)Anchor,anchor rope Ca.:mping equipment Tents,stoves,lanterns,personal sleeping bags, cooking equipment Total all equipment; Total Personal,travel,contractual,commodities: Total budget: $4,000.00 1,800.00 3,000.00 1,200.00 700 ..00 350.00 60.00 150.00 2,000.00 150.00 100.00 $57,655.00 $130,206.00 $187,861.00 Budget for additional years would be less because little ext:ra equipment would be needed.Estimated cost for additional years $110,000.00 per year.