HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA4012....
.....
.....
PRELIMINARY DRAFT
IMPACT ASSESSMENT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
INSTREAM TEMPERATURE
Prepared By:
Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center
University of Alaska-Fairbanks
707 "A"Street
Anchorage,Alaska 99501
Submitted to:
Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture
711 "H"Street
Anchorage,Alaska 99501
April 30,1985
~
-rK
1'-1~5:
.S~
'A 0).3
no .l.fo t:l
-
33RD3!002
ARLIS
Alaska Resources
Library &Information Services
l\_~\'n,·",(P A lq~Jr::l
.-
.....
,....
...-
0)
M
l'"..q
..q
0
0
0
I!')
I.!'ll.....r--.
M
('1')
.....
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Purpose
Scope
Statement of the Problem e
Methods and Procedures
The Information Base
Fish Resource
Impoundment Zone
Devil Canyon to Lower River
Lower River
Synopsis of Salmon Life History with Respect to Temperature
Adult Inmigration
Adult Spawning
Embryo Development
Alevins
Rearing
Smoltification
Fry/Smolt Outmigration
Water Temperature
Overview
Temperature Models
DYRESM e
Calibration
Reliability
Synopsis of Results
SNTEMP
Calibration
Reliabili ty
Synopsis of Results
Summer
Winter
Analysis
~Anticipated Negative Effects
Anadromous Species
Chinook Salmon
Chum Salmon
Pink Salmon
Coho and Sockeye Salmon
Eulachon and Bering Cisco
Resident Species
Burbot
Whitefish
Rainbow Trout
Arctic Grayling
Lake Trout
Potential With-Project Beneficial Effects
Mitigation
Page
-I-
I
3
5
9
11
12
16
29
32
33
34
34
36
36
e 37
38
40
40
44
44
44
45
46
49
51
51
51
54
54
56
56
57
57
63
64
65
66
66
66
69
70
71
71
72
f .--,
74Summary
33RD3/002 i
eARLIS
Alaska Resource~.
Library &Information Services
LIS-T /)-Lit
,il£iSIlII_,.
-
-
..-
<(
__jllLvf 1 h;e S'~~A-1~a{O-<AI-~Y-
p\_c£L.Jv-Vc:,.~i-l;Vv~
L I
ILf
LIS:T of
J,Cc..)'V""-l,V-V""'-o.,v-eQ .)u..e.,,~'AJ~,CJ"&t,-
5"/~.~(,(/~.~-~F~~~tb~r --.j?
.
d-I J ~--;t;,._-~,~S:::2~~.f-d-.c~e~~k~.
/1rl -IctfL.{.,.......-- -~-}Cj
.-.
-
.-
3,
b.
7<
.
S U-4<.-A;"e<-4~.J!~_k F~'~71 -
P-ee-k s..Q~,'V",-~7~~~A0-y.--e TJk.1-,~r S,~~;{t---'7 I~.Jh.t~~f)---
r~..gL~~1~Ct~,~
~~}c--1.}~''-4'--
C1~,,-j)J'1-"-t-~£~~_pr-e_J 1ft/\.~Tk
~-v+/~£'?£~-z411-f S-Rc1-lJ/'-'l"»-~~/!-fl'l %1;5
/qtf-S3,.
;tl(;~1 ~~k-.-rurk~/o.(j~il4-(,,/'"cJJ-~
j C-I./l--e +0 f.epk'h_?z.e~I 1iO/ICf t I;I '?fL ........__
20
;23
....21
f·ntu'Vvtk/,s~ht~~¥er-C0h.~I L{Jct.b/~d~
:5 UA--t..+0 s:.ej4kt<-...kr !'1%U/litl/19fz..'.~'~..~.__lj;;"
---'-~~--:"-<,..
,-_..__._-......_-_.~----------_._-_..---_._-_..,.._----
....
-
-.-__._~__-_0_-__.._._.
5 r urf<-~c'~·S (f«;L4(f C<-""cM,",,~
(("w-eJ~;?36 -5-2)'r-e:.xe-~eJ.e~r'UJ-r.-~..__.._... .
ACM.~y--:J (c),.._.-...-...LJ._t..._
....I;)·,
...r~~;~~'-/~-V_~-:-e--r I C(3'2-(L-(.A-'~
.~-<-£~~..Gv~..t~~.3/-:0 2
J-(L/1rt /30,.._'-.~..-.._$""3_.
J 3,
...
..~Y"~~Ju~/f'~~r~
Fi,,-J ,-k?~J...-<-=~c~
....~cC:-e ..J-~Ji?.-'-
...----~--_.-.----.---..-..-.-.__.._._____--~-------o-~~--_.-..-----~~---._,
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
This document is a comprehensive assessment of instream temperature
issues relative to the proposed upper Susitna River basin hydroelectric
development.Impoundment of the upper Susitna River will cause a change in
the natural instream temperature.River temperatures are generally expected
species present in the Susitna River drainage are dependent,to a certain
degree,on the natural instream temperature regime,studies were initiated (in
the beginning phases of Susitna environmental investigations)to address the
potential adverse or beneficial effects of the expected alteration of river
temperatures on fish .
This report is one in a series on various aquatic impact issues
--
.....
to be cooler in the open water season and warmer in winter.Since fish
associated with the Susitna Hydroelectric Project.These issues--instream
temperature,water quality,turbidity,instream ice,and bedload--will be
examined in each of five technical memoranda.These synopses of impacts will
ultimately form the foundation for a compre~ensive impact assessment report.
After each of the five documents has been adequately reviewed,we will
integrate them into a draft impact assessment report.The Alaska Power
Authority and Harza-Ebasco intend to utilize the impact assessment technical
memoranda to discuss issues with agencies and intervenors in the Susitna
licensing process.
Impact issues were defined in the course of the Susitna licensing
process.After the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)reviewed the
original license application and the Alaska Power Authority corrected
deficiencies and provided supplemental information,the license application
33RD3/002 - 1 -
was found acceptable.FERC then proceeded with the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).The decision to prepare an EIS set in
motion a chain of events in accordance with Council on Environmental Quality
mandates (Vide 40 CFR 1500).Scoping meetings were held by FERC staff to
....
determine the significant issues to be analyzed in depth in the environmental
impact statement and to identify and eliminate from detailed study issues
which were not significant or which were covered by prior environmental
review •
Issues deemed important for assessment in the EIS included twelve fishery
issues.One of these,Issue No.F-2,identified salmon and resident fish
habitats and populations downstream of the dams as topics to be addressed.
Sub-issue F-2.5 is the significance of changes in water temperature on salmon
and resident fish habitats and populations downstream of the dams.
Environmental field investigations and analyses of existing published and
unpublished information have been conducted in order to provide accurate and
quantitative statements of expected impact of the Susitna project on instream
temperature and fish resources.The data base and the statements of
anticipated effects have been scrutinized by agency and intervenor
representatives in a series of workshops and discussions.Suggested
refinements to the data base and/or the impact statements have been obtained
from these discussions.Ultimately,the Alaska Power Authority intends to
"settle"each issue with the agencies and intervenors;that is,agreement will
be sought on the adequacy of the information base,the impact statements,and
the proposed mitigation for undesirable impacts.This agreement or settlement
would provide the basis for license articles or stipulations authorizing
construction and operation of the Susitna project.
33RD3/002 - 2 -
This document,therefore,summarizes work accomplished to date on the
instream temperature issue.It is intended to serve as a discussion document,
for it contains a presentation of the instream temperature issue,a brief
synopsis of the relevant information base,the ramifications of altered water
temperatures to aquatic habitats and fish,and the projected effects on fish
due to various modes of Susitna project operation.
Finally,this document is intended to be a working a
....
-
.....
decision-making aid.Other reports containing voluminous data and analyses of
instream temperature and effects on fish are heavily referenced.We have not
repeated detailed information presented elsewhere unless required for clarity.
Presented are statements of effect or no effect and the confidence with which
we make those statements.
SCOPE
This document describes the process of impact assessment;that is,it
illustrates how the impact assessment for the instream temperature issue was
conducted.Considerable information exists with which to assess the effects
of the Susitna project on instream temperature regimes "and fish resources •
Meteorologic and hydrologic data as well as instream temperature measurements
have been collected for nearly five years.With this information and other
data,computer models of streamflow runoff,groundwater dynamics,and instream
temperature were constructed to forecast future with-project conditions.The
mechanisms of impact,or how changes in instream temperature adversely or
beneficially affect fish,are presented.This is done so that reviewers can
scrutinize the methods and techniques employed in deriving impact statements
from the existing information base and review assumptions used when making
predictions of unmeasured events .
33RD3/002 - 3 -
Also presented are analyses of the degree of control the project will
have over instream temperature regimes.In the case of instream temperature,
some control over outflow temperatures could be afforded by installing
multiple level intake gates in the outlet works.The degree to which
-I
I
-
undesirable water temperatures would be mitigated through these multi-level
outlet works is discussed.
This report does not delve into flow-related,hydraulic impacts;these
are addressed in the Instream Flow Relationships Report Series (E.Woody
Trihey and Assoc.and Woodward-Clyde Consultants Inc.1985).However,since
instream temperature is affected to a certain degree by river discharge level,
an evaluation of the effects of various flow regimes on instream temperatures
is presented here.Included is an assessment of the adequacy of the existing
information base for addressing the issue and,where warranted,suggestions
for improving the analysis.The analytical tools available for conducting
this impact assessment are discussed,including a presentation of the
strengths,weaknesses,and limitations of the models employed for simulating
unobserved conditions.Suggestions for mitigating undesirable with-proj ect
instream temperature effects are also provided.However,this is not a
.....
....
I
mitigation report;substantial information in this vein can be examined in
other documents,most notably work accomplished by Woodward-Clyde Consultants
(1985).
The significance of the issue and associated impacts,both adverse and
beneficial,are discussed.The magnitude of the fish resource to be impacted
is quantified to the extent feasible and to the extent that the existing
information base would reasonably permit.Since most of the impacts expected
from operation of the Susitna project are in the middle river reach,the size
.....33RD3/002 - 4 -
of the fish populations there is presented relative to the population size of
Susitna River drainage fish stocks as a whole.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The proposed project is sited in the upper Susitna River drainage basin
and consists of two dams to be constructed over a period of about 15 years.
The first dam,known as the Watana Dam,would be completed near RM 184 at a
site three miles upstream from Tsusena Creek.It would include an underground
powerhouse and an 885 ft.high earthfill dam and a reservoir approximately 50
miles in length.The reservoir would have a surface area of 38,000 acres and
a usable storage capacity of 3.7 million acre-feet (ma£).The second dam,
named Devil Canyon,would be built near RM 152 at a site 33 miles downstream
26-mile-long reservoir having a surface area of 7,800 acres and a usable
storage capacity of 0.36 maf (Acres American,1983).
Construction and subsequent operation of the two Susitna hydroelectric
dams is expected to alter the normal thermal regime of the river.With both
dams on-line,the area between Devil Canyon (RM 152)and the Oshentna River
(RM 235)would be converted from a lotic to a lentic system.After
impoundment,these reservoirs would exhibit thermal characteristics similar to
those naturally occurring in deep glacial lakes (ACRES 1983).Such lakes
commonly stratify (however,stratification is often weak)during both winter
and summer.With-project,mainstem water temperatures downstream from the
dams would be cooler in the open water season and warmer in the winter.A
change in the ice regime downstream from the project is also expected due to
altered temperatures and increased winter flows.
-
-
of the Watana dam site.
33RD3/002
It would be 645 ft.high and would impound a
- 5 -
Operation of either a single-or two-dam hydroelectric proj ect would
reduce the natural variation in river temperatures.Mean summer river
temperatures under a Watana-only scheme would be approximately 1.0 C cooler
than natural at river miles (RM)150 and 130 and 0.6 C cooler at RM 100.
Addition of the Devil Canyon dam,33 miles downstream from Watana,would
increase this mean seasonal temperature deviation at RM 150, 130,and 100 to
approximately 2.0,1.7,and 1.2 C cooler,respectively (AEIDC 1984).Under
either project configuration,downstream temperatures would peak later in the
summer than at present,with the greatest deviation from natural conditions
occurring in September and October.Winter reservoir releases would range
.-
-
-.
.....
-
from 0.4 to 6.4 C in waters normally at 0 C from approximately October to
April (AEIDC 1984).Consequently,river ice formation would be delayed and,
in some cases,would not reach as far upstream as under natural conditions.
Inflows from tributaries below the dam will buffer the effect of the
project,with larger tributaries having a greater effect.The Chulitna and
Talkeetna rivers,which join the Susitna River within two miles of each other
near RM 98,add a combined flow that is greater than that of the middle
Susitna River alone (on an annual basis).Thus,these two rivers have a
considerable buffering effect on Susitna water temperatures below their
confluences.There is a fairly large temperature difference within a
cross-sectional transect below the juncture of these three rivers.This
apparently results from delayed mixing of the plumes of each of the three
rivers for a distance of nearly 25 miles downstream.Downstream of this
mixing area,little change in the natural regime would be expected from
with-project releases.
Fish are ectothermic,meaning that their body temperature is dependent on
the environment and closely approximates it.Therefore,a fish inhabiting a
33RD3/002 - 6 -
-
stream where the temperature is 10 C has a body temperature close to 10 C.As
temperatures cool in winter,fish become increasingly lethargic,and depending
on the species,they may cease feeding and growing altogether.As
temperatures rise in spring,fish metabolism correspondingly increases.Water
temperature regulates fish metabolism and,hence,behavior by influencing
intracellular chemical reaction rates.Hoar (1976)argues persuasively that
circadian rhythms and other short-term behavioral phenomena clearly indicate
that hormone production and utilization are tied to daily and seasonal changes
in the environment,especially temperature.Thus,temperature does not induce
behavioral and physiological effects directly through neurological pathways,
but indirectly through the endocrine system.In short,hormones are the
chemical links between fish and the environment,and fish behavioral states
are temperature-moderated.Temperature effects on fish vary by species,
.....
.....
-
....
population,life-stage,and duration of exposure.Each region of the earth is
under a relatively unique thermal regime to which indigenous fish have
adapted.Generally,fish in more southerly latitudes are adapted to warmer
conditions and wider variation in annual temperature cycles than those in
northern latitudes like Alaska .
The most critical temperature-influenced behavior is the timing of fry
emergence (Miller and Brannon 1982).Fry emergence is precisely synchronized
with maximum food availability in the nursery system (Miller and Brannon 1982;
Godin 1982;Stearns 1976,1977).Thus,premature or delayed emergence could
influence cohort mortality rates due to inadequate or improper food supply
(Miller and Brannon 1982).Early emergence could also lower fitness because
fry would experience colder than normal temperatures reducing their growth
rates;late emergence might not allow enough time for growth to optimal smolt
size the following spring (Miller and Brannon 1982;Godin 1982).
33RD3/002 - 7 -
Another concern with the with-project temperature regime rests on the
role that stability plays in evolution.Environmental stability and
....predictability are generally considered to be the major factors influencing
evolution of life history traits (Stearns 1976.1977).For example.the
....
.....
Pacific salmon spawning migration from feeding areas at sea to natal streams
is precisely timed to coincide with historical temperature regimes of
incubation environments (Brannon 1982).Miller and Brannon (1982)state •
"Since the incubation period is dictated by temperature.the time at
which eggs should be deposited is predetermined for each habitat.
In essence.a time-window exists for egg deposition in a spec~fic
site.Optimal incubation and emergence depend on how closely adults
are able to gain access to that time-space dimension;individuals
from other populations ••.are likely to miss by a factor determined
by their own preprogrammed pattern."
.....
Other fish species exhibit similarly linked temperature-behavior
,...
-
patterns.For example.salmonid fry migratory behaviors as a whole appear to
be influenced to varying degrees by water temperature (Zaugg 1982;Miller and
Brannon 1982;Thomas 1975;Solomon 1982;Northcote 1969;Thorpe 1982).Water
temperature also plays an influential role in fish embryo incubation timing.
alevin intragravel movement patterns.fry behavior.smoltification.and growth
(Solomon 1982;Hoar 1976;Folmar et ala 1982;Clarke et ala 1978;Groot 1982).
all of which ultimately influence overall mortality rates.
33RD3/002 - 8 -
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
To assess the effects of with-project instream and in-reservoir
temperatures on fish.AEIDC first reviewed available information on how fish
respond to different thermal conditions.Ideally,information used in an
-
-
--
effects analysis should be specific to the water body in question and to its
particular community of organisms.Little specific information exists on the
effects of temperature changes on Susitna River fish necessitating the use of
information from other areas and latitudes.Professional judgement was used
to ascertain the applicability of each piece of information to the area of
concern.Generally.information proximal to the Susitna River was judged to
be more pertinent than data from other areas of Alaska.which in turn was
usually more useful than information from more southerly latitudes.Once the
information was assembled.it was synthesized to evolve a number of thermal
criteria.These criteria included temperature ranges believed to be capable
of supporting adult spawning migrations.spawning.incubation.rearing.and
smolt migrations.This process is described in detail in a 1984 AEIDC report.
A number of terms used in this analysis need definition.The term
.....
"selected"or "preferred"temperature is defined as that range of temperatures
in which fish naturally congregate (or spend the most time).given a free
choice situation (Reynolds 1977;Alabaster and Lloyd 1982).Each life stage
of every fish species has a characteristic temperature tolerance range as a
consequence of acclimatization--the physical adaptation to environmental
conditions.The tolerance range of fish changes as they become acclimatized
to warmer or cooler waters.The acclimation process is moderated by temporal
and thermal factors;fish require relatively more time to acclimatize to large
shifts in temperature than to small ones.Thus.this process spans a period
....33RD3/002 - 9 -
I""'"
I
of hours or days depending on the magnitude of the temperature shift.It
involves a "biophysical and biochemical restructuring of many cellular and
tissue components for operation under the new thermal regime imposed on the
organismll (Fry and Hochachka 1970).Once a new rate of metabolism has been
established,the fish is considered acclimatized.Temperatures beyond the
tolerance range are referred to as incipient lethal temperatures,upper and
lower thresholds where temperature begins to have a lethal effect.Above or
below incipient lethal temperatures,survival depends on the duration of
exposure with mortality occurring more rapidly with greater deviation from the
threshold.An upper boundary above which survival is virtually zero is often
referred to as the critical thermal maximum (CTM).No critical thermal
minimum short of freezing has been established for salmon.
Thermal tolerance and preference ranges were established during the
course of this study for the five Pacific salmon species found in the Susitna
Drainage (AEIDC 1984).These limits were based on the literature,laboratory
studies,field studies,and observed Susitna Drainage temperatures.Tolerance
zones were established for each life phase activity excluding incubation (see
below for our method of addressing incubation).Within this range fish can
expect to live and function free from the lethal effects of temperature.
Insufficient information exists to adequately describe the tolerance and
preference ranges of the other species found in the study basin.Susitna
River fish are acclimatized to a temperature range between 0 and approximately
18 C.The preferred temperature within this range for most salmonid life
phases is between 6 and 12 C.The upper and lower incipient lethal
temperatures for the salmon life phases,excluding incubation,fall between 13
and 18 C and 1 to 7 C,respectively.
33RD3/002 -10 -
Embryo incubation rates rise with increasing intragravel water
temperature.Accumulated temperature units,or degree-days to hatching and
emergence,were determined and used as criteria for incubation.Development
times were computed and plotted from Susitna-specific incubation data (ADF&G
,0
1983i-;Wangaard and Burger 1983).A regression analysis was performed;it
-
....
showed that a linear relationship existed between mean incubation temperature
and development rate (the inverse of the time to emergence)for chum and
sockeye.A nomograph capable of predicting the date of emergence was then
developed,given the date of spawning and the average temperature (AEIDC
1984).
The analysis was performed by comparing predicted wi th-proj ect
temperatures to the tolerance ranges identified for the various fish life
stages considered.In cases where the tolerance range was not fully
determined (e.g.Arctic grayling,burbot,etc.)existing knowledge was
compared to predicted with-project temperatures.Because information on
resident fish is incomplete,assessment of with-project effects on them is
less rigorous than that for anadromous species.
FISH RESOURCE
Judged against criteria for EIS preparation (40 CFR 1500),existing
information on Susitna River fish resources is generally adequate for an
....assessment of wi th-proj ect effects •(An EIS is an accounting tool used by
F""
I
decision makers;its chief purpose is to ensure that all elements deemed
significant in the scoping process are considered in decision making.)
Available information on open water season salmon-life stage activities
(distribution,abundance,spawning timing,spawning location,rearing,and
migration)is quite complete;the overwinter salmon data base is much less so.
33RD3/002 -11 -
Information on salmon incubation environments is also relatively well known,
but data on winter rearing environments and winter juvenile fish behaviors are
incomplete.Some of the gaps in the salmon winter data base may be filled by
information gathered during the winter of 1984-1985.As with salmon,
information on resident species is much more complete for the open water
season than it is for winter.Unlike salmon,however,it is heavily weighted
toward selected species.Information on the open water season distribution,
habits,and habitats of rainbow trout,burbot,and Arctic grayling is more
complete than for other residents.With the exception of limited winter
radio-tagging data for rainbow trout and burbot,little is known of the life
histories of resident fish at this season.
resource information follows.
IMPOUNDMENT ZONE
A synopsis of available fish
.....The principal source of information on fish distribution,abundance,
habitat use,and life histories in the impoundment zone is ADF&G 1981~.and
1983:Impoundment study area investigations were conducted in 1981 and 1982
by ADF&G Su-Hydro during the open water field season (May-October).These
studies concentrated on Arctic grayling,making data on this species the most
complete.Data on overwintering activities in this area is particularly
scarce for all species.The major objectives of this study were to:
1)determine the seasonal distribution and abundance of fish populations in
the proposed impoundment area;2)identify spawning and rearing areas;and
3)determine the physical and chemical characteristics of these habitats
(A_
(ADF&G 1981,
.,.,
1983).More specific tasks dealt with determining the
distribution,abundance and migratory habits of AfctiC grayling;determining
\
the distribution and relative abundance of selected resident fish species;
33RD3/002 -12 -
.....
determining the abundance of lake trout and Arctic grayling in Sally Lake;
recording biological information on selected resident fish populations to
provide information on survival and growth;and identifying Arctic grayling
spawning and rearing locations within and adjacent to the with-project
•.-.1
impoundment areas (ADF&G 1983).
Prior to initiation of the 1981 ADF&G Su-Hydro studies.fish resource
data for this area were collected by the U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service (1952,
1954.1957,1959a,1959b,1960,1965)and ADF&G (1978).These studies were
preliminary Susitna environmental assessments and primarily defined species
composition.They also highlighted selected habitat locations of particular
interest.Additional information on the fish resource in this area is found
in the transmission corridor studies of Schmidt et al.1984.
The natural environment between Devil Canyon and the upstream end of the
proposed Watana Reservoir provides habitats for nine fish species (ADF&G
198~b);eight are year-round residents and one (chinook salmon)is anadromous
(Figure 1).Within Devil Canyon,Cheechako Creek (RM 152.5)and Chinook Creek
(RM 156.8)mark the upstream limit of salmon in the mainstem Susitna River.
Devil Canyon's constricted river channel apparently creates a velocity barrier
to upstream salmon migrants.In total,fewer than 100 salmon utilize these
two tributary habitats for reproductive purposes (Barrett,Thompson &Wick
1985).
Arctic grayling are the most widely distributed and abundant species
utilizing habitats above the canyon.The total 1982 Arctic grayling
population in the impoundment zone was estimated to be over 16,000 (ADF&G
t
198~b).Mainstem impoundment areas above the canyon provide essential
overwintering habitat for Arctic grayling,which move into its tributaries to
spawn following breakup in late Mayor early June (ADF&G 198~b).Arctic
33RD3/002 -13 -
J I 1 ]"I 1 i 1 j 1 1 J 1 }J
-~
r\C-~L.
~'~
~--'~~~~~'<"'O-'-"'-c~~~
'"~~.('..<.t I.....(\~~-:')"'-~~~'~~rt-
~'::>........
~
-e-(..-::>-·l.."
Impoundment Zone:(9)Arc~c graying.burbo~Dolly Varden,humpback whitefish,lake lrou~
long nose sucker,round whitefish,slimy sc:ulpin,and chinook salmon.
lAddie Alver:(16)Arc~c graying.Arctic lamprey,burbo~chinook salmon,chum salmon,
coho salmon.Dolly Yard en,humpback whitensh.lake trou~long nose
sucker,pink salmon,rainbow trout,round whlleflsh,51lmy sculpin,sockeye
salmon,and three.pine stickleback.
Lower Ai.er.(19)Arc~c graying,Arctic lamprey.Bering cisco.burbo~chinook salmon,
chum salmon,coho salmon,Dolly Yarden,eulachon,humpback whilelish,
lake tJoul 'ongnose sucker,northern pike,pink salmon,rainbow trout
round whItefISh.,&llmy sculpin.sockeye salmon,and Zhreespine
sbcklaback.
Fish Species Present
SUSITNA RIVER DRAINAGE BASINFIGURE:
grayling migrate out of natal tributaries in September as water levels begin
to drop.They overwinter in mainstem environments which become less turbid
following freeze-up (ADF&G 1983b).
Except for documentation of their presence,little is known of the life
histories or relative abundance of other species resident in the impoundment
zone.Based on limited capture data,it seems that both burbot and longnose
.~\
sucker are relatively abundant there (ADF&G 1983b).Elsewhere in the mainstem
Susitna River,burbot spawn under the ice from January to February over gravel
near tributary stream mouths (R.Sundet,pers.comm.).During the rest of the
year,they apparently distribute themselves throughout the deeper portions of
aquatic environments.Susitna River longnose sucker are spring spawners which
move from overwinter habitats in the mainstem to tributary natal areas from
late May to early June (ADF&G 1983).Small numbers of round and humpback
whitefish have been captured (at two locations)within the impoundment areas,
but there are no estimates of their relative abundances (ADF&G 1983).If they
behave similarly to lower river and middle river whitefish,they overwinter in
mainstem environments.Although available information is scant,it appears
that this species spawns in early October in clearwater tributary streams.
Although not present in mainstem impoundment areas,some lake trout and
"'"
rainbow trout might gain access to them as a result of the project.Sally
-
Lake,which supports a lake trout population of undetermined size,would be
inundated by the Watana Reservoir (ADF&G 1983b).Lake trout generally spawn
from August through December and require stable lake shore gravel substrates
for reproduction.High lake (located immediately north of Devil Canyon)is a
tributary system to Devil Creek which has a resident population of rainbow
trout.Although this lake is outside of the original study area,should the
project be completed,we believe that some rainbows might outmigrate down
33RD3/002 -IS -
.....
I
Devil Creek to the Devil Canyon Reservoir.Elsewhere in the basin,rainbow
trout typically overwinter in lakes and mainstem habitats,returning in the
spring following breakup to spawn in tributary streams.Most rainbow trout
spawn in moderate velocity clearwater streams,which are paved with relatively
.....
small cobbles (ADF&G 1983c).
DEVIL CANYON TO LOWER RIVER
Fish and aquatic habitat investigations have been conducted on the
Susitna River since the 1950's to evaluate the proposed hydroelectric project
[u.s.Fish and Wildlife Service 1952,1954,1957,1959a,1959b,1960,1965;
Barrett (1974);ADF&G (1976,1978),1981a, 1983a,1983b,1983d',1985;Barrett,
I
Thompson,and Wick (1984,1985);Riis (1977);Schmidt et aL (1984a,1984b);
and Wangaard and Burger (1983)].In 1980,the Susitna Hydroelectric Aquatic
Studies Program was initiated to collect data on the fish and aquatic habitat
resources of the basin.
Extant Susitna River basin data on fish distribution,abundance and
habitat use focuses on salmon and are temporarily and spatially limited.The
studies,and therefore the information available,is more complete for the
open water season and for the area upstream of the Chulitna River influence.
A complete summary of ADF&G's Su-Hydro studies of the fish resources
downstream of Devil Canyon is available in a report by Woodward Clyde
Consultants and Entrix (1985).ADF&G's Su-Hydro studies have:documented
.-
migration timing of salmon runs in the Susitna River;estimated the population
size and relative abundance of salmon in various sub-basins of the Susitna
River;estimated the total salmon escapements into sloughs and tributaries
upstream of RM 98.6;quantified selected biological characteristics of Susitna
River salmon stocks (e.g.,sex ratio,fecundity,length at age);identified
33RD3/002 -16 -
-
,...,
important spawning areas for some resident species;documented timing and
estimated the relative utilization of macrohabitat types by juvenile and adult
salmon and some resident species;developed habitat suitability criteria for
adult and juvenile salmon,eulachon,Bering cisco,and some resident species;
estimated population size and survival for juvenile chum and sockeye;
documented outmigration timing of juvenile salmon;collected baseline physical
and chemical water quality data in identified macrohabitat types;developed
understanding of site-specific habitat responses to various mainstem
discharges;evaluated the capability of adult salmon to pass into selected
sloughs;and confirmed the importance of ground water upwelling for spawning
salmon in sloughs.
At least nineteen species of fish are known to inhabit the Susitna
Drainage (Table 1),all of which are dependent to some extent on mainstem
environments to fulfill aspects of their respective life histories.Seven of
these species are anadromous;they include five species of Pacific salmon,
eulachon,and Bering cisco.
The Susitna River drainage is the largest watershed in Upper Cook Inlet
and is the inlet's largest salmon-producing system (CIRPT 1981).The basin
provides reproductive and rearing habitat for millions of salmon (Table 2),
more than 99%of which spawn in its tributaries.Salmon utilize mainstem
-
river environments for migration,rearing,overwintering,and to a lesser
extent spawning (Woodward Clyde Consultants &Entrix 1985).Adult migration
timing varies by species,but in general the peak inmigration time is from
mid-June to the end of September (Table 3).
Above the Chulitna River confluence (RM 98.5)salmon spawn in a variety
of tributaries,sloughs,and a few mainstem sites.In this river reach,coho
and chinook have only been found to spawn in tributary stream environments,
33RD3/002 -17 -
-
Table 1.Common and Scientific Names of Fish Species Recorded in the Susitna
River Basin.
r
I
Arctic lamprey
Eulachon (hooligan)
Arctic grayling
Bering cisco
Round whitefish
Humpback whitefish
Rainbow trout
Lake trout
Dolly Varden
Pink (humpback)salmon
Sockeye (red)salmon
Chinook (king)salmon
Coho (silver)salmon
Chum (dog)salmon
Northern pike
Longnose sucker
Threespine stickleback
Burbot
Slimy sculpin
33RCI/007g
Lampetra japonica (Martens)
Thaleichthys pacificus (Richardson)
Thymallus arcticus (Pallas)
Coregonus laurettae Bean
Prosopium cylindraceum (Pallas)
Coregonus pidschian (Gmelin)
Salmo gairdneri Richardson
Salvelinus namaycush (Walbaum)
Salvelinus malma (Walbaum)
Oncorhynchus gorbuscha (Walbaum)
Oncorhynchus nerka (Walbaum)
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (Walbaum)
Oncorhynchus kisutch (Walbaum)
Oncorhynchus keta (Walbaum)
Esox lucius Linnaeus
Catostomus catostomus (Forster)
Gasterosteus aculeatus Linnaeus
Lota Iota (Linnaeus)
Cottus cognatus Richardson
-18 -
.....
-
Table 2.Susitna River Salmon Escapement Estimates,1981-1984.
1 Chum Coho 2YearChinookSockeyePinkTotal
1981 272,500 85,600 282,700 36,800 677,600
1982 265,200 890,500 458,200 79,800 1,693,700
1983 176,200 101,300 276,800 24,100 578,400
1984 250,000 605,800 3,629,900 812,700 190,100 5,488,500
1 Second run sockeye only.
2 Total 1984 drainage escapement estimate.Escapement counts for 1981 through
1983 do not include chinooks or any escapements into tributaries downstream
of RM 77,with the exception of those into the Yentna River.
Source:ADF&G 1983a;Barrett,Thompson &Wick 1984 and 1985.
33RC1/007i -19 -
1 1 I ]-1 1 J J ]--j 1 I )j 1 1
Table 3.Susitna River Salmon Phenology.
DATE
HABITAT RANGE PEAK
CHINOOK (KING)SALMON
Adult Inmigration Cook Inlet -Talkeetna May 25 -Aug 18 Jun 18 -Jun 30
Talkeetna -D.C.Jun 07 -Aug 20 Jun 24 -Jul 04
Middle River Tributaries luI 01 -Aug 06
Juvenile Migration Middle River May 18 -Oct 03 1&3
Spawning Middle River Tributaries Jul 01 -Aug 26 Jul 20 -Jul 27
Lower River Tributaries Jul 07 -Aug 20 Jul 20 -Jul 27
COHO (SILVER)SALMON
Adult Inmigration Cook Inlet -Talkeetna Jul 07 -Sep 28 Jul 27 -Aug 20
N Talkeetna -D.C.Jul 18 -Sep 19 Aug 12 -Aug 260
I Middle River Tributaries Aug 08 -Sep 27
Juvenile Migration Middle River 1&3 May 28 -Aug 21May18-Oct 12
Spawning Middle River Tributaries Sep 01 -Oct 08 Sep 05 -Sep 24
Lower River Tributaries Aug 08 -Oct 01
CHUM (DOG)SALMON
Adult Inmigration Cook Inlet -Talkeetna Jun 24 -Sep 28 Jul 27 -Aug 02
Talkeetna -D.C.JuliO -Sep 15 Aug 01 -Aug 17
Middle River Tributaries Jul 27 -Sep 06
Middle River Sloughs Aug 06 -Sep 05
Juvenile Migration Middle River 3 May 28 -Jul 17May18-Aug 20
33RC1/007h
])1 )····1 J -J J J j 1 I j I )
Table 3.Susitna River Salmon Phenology.
(cont'd)
DATE
HABITAT RANGE PEAK
Spawning Middle River Tributaries Jul 27 -Oct 01 Aug 05 -Sep 10
Middle River Sloughs Aug 05 -Oct 11 Aug 20 -Sep 25
Middle River Mainstem Sep 02 -Sep 19
Lower River Tributaries Jul 27 -Sep 09 Aug 06 -Aug 14
SOCKEYE (RED)SALMON 2
Adult Inmigration Cook Inlet -Talkeetna Jul 04 -Aug 08 Jul 18 -Jul 27
Talkeetna -D.C.Jul 16 -Sep 18 Jul 31 -Aug 05
Juvenile Migration Middle River 1&3 Jun 22 -Jul 17May18-Oct 11
Spawning Middle River Sloughs Aug 05 -Oct 11 Aug 25 -Sep 25
N PINK (HUMPBACK)SALMON......
I
Adult Inmigration Cook Inlet -Talkeetna Jun 28 -Sep 10 Jul 26 -Aug 03
Talkeetna -D.C.JulIO -Aug 30 Aug 01 -Aug 08
Middle River Tributaries Jul 27 -Aug 23
Middle River Sloughs Aug 04 -Aug 17
Juvenile Migration Middle River 3 May 29 -Jun 08May18-Jul 24
Spawning Middle River Tributaries Jul 27 -Aug 30 Aug 10 -Aug 25
Middle River Sloughs Aug 04 -Aug 30 Aug 15 -Aug 30
Lower River Tributaries Jul 27 -Sep 09 Aug 06 -Aug 09
~All migration includes migration to and between habitat,not just outmigration.
3 Second run sockeye only.
No data available for pre-ice movement;earlier date of range refers to initiation of outmigrant trap
operation.
Source:Barrett,Thompson and Wick 1984,1985;Schmidt et al.1984;ADF&G 1983a,c.
33RCl/007h
"'..
-.
-
-
pink salmon primarily in tributary streams (with a small number utilizing
slough habitats),chum salmon in tributary,slough,and mainstem
environments,and sockeye almost exclusively in sloughs (Barrett,Thompson &
Wick 1985).Over 90%of salmon spawning in this reach occurs in tributaries
(Barrett,Thompson &Wick 1985).
At least eighteen tributary streams in the middle river provide salmon
spawning habitats (Table 4).Over 96%of the total chinook escapement above
the Chulitna confluence spawn in two streams;Portage Creek (RM 148.9)and
Indian River (RM 138.6)(Table 4).In 1984,these two streams had a combined
escapement of over 13,000 fish which represented a little over 5%of the
basin's total chinook resource (Barrett,Thompson &Wick 1985).Only about
10%of Susitna River coho salmon spawn above the Chulitna confluence;they
apparently spawn only in tributaries in this reach.(Barrett,Thompson &Wick
1985).Indian River (RM 138.6)is the most important tributary for them,
providing a little over 30%of the reproductive habitat available here
(Table 4).Portage and 4th of July (RM 131.1)creeks and Indian River provide
reproductive habitats for over 80%of middle river pink salmon;this
represents about 1%of the total Susitna escapement for pink salmon (Barrett,
Thompson &Wick 1985).The same three streams provide over 98%of tributary
spawning habitat for chum salmon (Barrett,Thompson &Wick 1985).In 1984,
these tributaries accounted for about 1%of the total Susitna chum salmon
escapement.
Based on escapement counts for 1984,34 middle river sloughs collectively
provided habitat for approximately 5.5%of all salmon migrating above
Talkeetna station (Barrett,Thompson &Wick 1985).These sloughs are of
particular importance to chum and sockeye salmon.About 50%of the chum and
almost all of the sockeye spawning above the Chulitna confluence occurs in
33RD3/002 -22 -
)i I I J ~)I
)i I 1 I j
1 ]i 1 I
L Table 4.Peak Salmon Survey Counts Above Talkeetna for Susitua River Iributary Streams.
SURVEY
STREAJoI DISTANCE COho Chinook
1974 1976 1981 1982 1983 19B4 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 19B1 1982 1983 1984
hlliskers 0.25 27 70 176 115 301 22 8 3 67
Creek (RN 101.4)
Chase 0.25 40 80 36 12 239 15
Cree.k (RH 106.9)
Slash 0.75 6 2 5
Creel<(RN 111.2)
Gash 1.0 141 74 19 234
Creel<(RH 111.6)
Lane 0.5 3 5 2 21,40 47 12 23
Creek (m!113.6)
Lower 1.5 56 133 18 24
f!cKenzie (RN 116.2)
JoIcKenzie 0.25
Creek (RN 116.7)
t.J
V.l Li ttle 0.25
Portage (RN 117.7)
Fifth 0.25 3 17
of July (RN 123.7)
Skull 0.25
Creek (Re'!124.7)
Sherman 0.25
Creel<(RM 130.8)
Fourth 0.25 26 17 1 4 3 8 1 14 56 6 92
of July (RN 131.0)
Gold 0.25 1 Zl 23 23
Creek (RN 136.7)
Indian 15.0 64 30 85 101 53 465 10 537 393 114 285 422 1,053 1,193 1,456
River (RN138.6)
Jack 0.25 1 1 6 2 6
Long (RN 144.5)
Portage 15.0 150 100 22 8B 15 128 29 702 374 140 140 659 1,253 3,140 5,446
Creek (ml 148.9)
Cheechako 3.0 16 25 29
Creek (RH 152.5)
Chinook 2.0 4 8 15
Creek (RH 156.8)
---
TOTAL 307 147 458 633 240 1,434 62 1,261 767 254 425 1,121 2,473 4,416 7,178
))I )I 1 ]1 1 J j I I j j
~
Table 4.Peak S"lmon Survey Counts Above Talkeetna for Susitna River Tributary Streams.
(COl1t I d)
SURVEY
SI/(EAM DISTANCE Chum Sockeye
1974 1975 1976 J.977 J.98]J.982 1983 1984 1974 1975 1976 1977 1981 1982 1983 1984----
\,'hiskers 0.25 1
Creek (RH 101.1,)
C1ltlSC 0.25 1 1
Creek (RM 106.9)
Slash 0.75
Creek (RM 111.2)
Gash 1.0
Creek (RH 111.6)
Lane 0.5 3 2 76 11 31
Creek (RH 113.6)
Lower 1.5 14 1 23 1
McKenzie (RM 116.2)
V ~kKenzie 0.25 1,6
-C..Creek (HM 116.7)
LitUe 0.25 31 18
Portage (RM 117.7)
Fifth 0.25
of July (HN 123.7)
Skull 0.25 10 1 4
Creek (RM J.24.7)
Shennan 0.25
Creek (RM 130.8)
Fourth 0.25 594 78 11 90 191 148 193 1
of July (RM 131.0)
Cold 0.25
Creek (RM 136.7)
Indian 15.0 531 70 134 776 40 1,346 811 2,247 1 2 1
1 1
River (RM 138.6)
Jack 0.25 3 2 4
Long (RM 144.5)
Portage 15.0 276 300 153 526 1,285 12
Creek (RM 148.9)
Checchako 3.0
Creek (RM 152.5)
Chfnook 2.0
Creek (RH 156.8)
----
TOTAL 1,401 73 512 789 241 1,736 1,494 3,814 48 2 1 1 1 13
sloughs.This represents about 2%of all chum and less than 0.5%of all
sockeye spawning in the Susitna Drainage (Barrett,Thompson &Wick 1985).
Spawning habitat quality apparently varies greatly between sloughs as,in
the last four years,the majority of chum salmon spawners counted were in 10
of the 34 (Tables 5 and 6).Three of the 10 most used sloughs (8A,11,21)
have added significance in that they also accommodated over 90%of all sockeye
spawning in the middle river (Table 5).
Relatively few salmon spawn in mainstem non-slough habitats;of those
which do,chum salmon predominate.Generally,spawning habitats within the
l"-
I
.....
mainstem proper are small areally and widely distributed.In 1984,ADF&G made
a concerted effort to identify mainstem middle river spawning habitats;they
identified 36 spawning sites.Numbers of spawning fish counted at each of
these sites varied from one to 131 with an average of 35 (Barrett,Thompson,&
Wick 1985).The estimated total mainstem escapement was approximately 3,000
chum salmon (Barrett,Thompson &Wick 1985).This is less than 0.5%of the
total Susitna escapement.
Four of the five salmon species use middle river waters for rearing
purposes (Schmidt et al.1984a).At this time insufficient information exists
to characterize the relative importance of individual mains tern rearing
habitats.From May to September juvenile chinook rear in tributary and side
channel environments,coho mostly rear in tributary and upland sloughs,and
sockeye are evenly distributed between upland and side sloughs.From May to
July rearing churn juveniles are distributed throughout side slough and
tributary stream environments (Dugan et al.1984).
Of the five salmon species present,only two have been captured in winter
in the middle river (ADF&G 1983c).Preliminary studies indicate that
.....
I
significant numbers (perhaps 25 to 50%)of chinook and coho juveniles reared
33RD3/002 -26 -
----------~---_.._---~
I ))J I I 1 j I J 1 1 1
L
Table 5.Peak Slough Escapement Counts Above Talkeetna.
CHUM SOCKEYE PINK
RIVER
SLOUGH NO.MILE 1974 1975 12Z.§..!212 1981 ~1983 12.!l:!.!22i 1975 1976 1977 1981 ~.!2!ll ~1976 1977 .!2!!l ~!2!rr ~
1 99.6 6 12 10
2 100.4 27 49 129 7 2
38 101.4 50 3 56 15 7 5 20 1 28
3A 101.9 17 1 11 56
Talkeetna St.103.0
4 105.2
5 107.2 2 1 1 4
6 108.2 1
6A 112.3 11 2 1 35
7 113.2
8 113.7 302 65 ?25 1
I Bushrod 117.8 90 10
R.J Curry St.120.0
I-+J 80 121.8 23 1,9
8C 121.9 48 4 121 2 1
8B 122.2 1 80 104 400 2 5 1 68
Moose 123.5 167 23 68 76 8 22 8 8 25
A'124.6 140 77 111 24
A 124.7 34 2 2
8A 125.1 51 620 336 37 917 70 177 68 66 128 28 134
B 126.3 58 7 108 8 2 9 32
9 128.3 511 181 36 260 300 169 350 8 6 10 5 2 6 12 1
9B 129.2 90 5 73 81 1 7
9A 133.3 182 118 105 303 2 1 1
10 133.8 2 2 1 36 1
11 135.3 33 66 116 411 459 238 1,586 79 84 78 214 893 456 248 564 1 131 121
12 135.4
13 135.7 1 4 4 13
14 135.9 2 1
15 137.2 1 1 1 100 1 1 132 1 500
16 137.3 2 12 4 3 15 13
17 138.9 24 38 21 90 66 6 6 16 1
18 139.1 11
19 139.7 4 3 3 45 3 32 8 23 5 11 1 1
20 ]40.0 107 2 28 14 30 63 280 20 2 64 7 85
21 141.1 668 250 30 304 274 736 319 2,354 13 75 23 38 53 197 122
64 8
ZlA 145.5 10
22 141••5 8 114 151
TOTAL 1,352 495 98 541 2,596 2,244 1,458 7,547 103 194 134 300 1,241 607 555 926 1 13 28 507 9 1,069
Source:Barrett 1974;Barrett,Thompson and Wick 1984,1985;R11a,1977;ADF&G 1976,1978, 1981,1983a.
Table 6.Chum Salmon Escapement for the Ten Most Productive Sloughs Above
RM 98.6,1981-83.
Percent
River 3-Year of Total
Slough Mile 1981 1982 1983 Average Escapement
~
8 113.7 695 0 0 232 5.6
8B 122.2 0 99 261 120 2.9
Moose 123.5 222 59 86 122 2.9
Al 124.6 200 0 155 118 2.8
8A 125.1 480 1,062 112 551 13.2
9 128.3 368 603 430 .467 11.2
9A 133.8 140 86 231 '.;152 3.6
11 135.3 1,119 1,078 674 .'~'95 7 23.0
17 138.9 135 23 166 .<108 .2.6
21 141.1 657 1,737 481 ~958 23.0
<.
Source:Barrett,Thompson and Wick 1984.
..-
33RC1/007c -28 -
-
in this zone overwinter in side slough and tributary stream environments
(ADF&G 1985a).Perhaps significantly,preliminary evidence indicates that few
juvenile salmon utilize the mainstem proper for overwintering purposes (ADF&G
1985a).
Two studies to determine the timing of emergence and yolk absorption for
Susitna chum and sockeye salmon have been conducted.Wangaard &Burger (1983)
incubated Susitna chum and sockeye eggs in a laboratory experiment under four
separate temperature regimes until complete yolk absorption.In a related
r
!
study,ADF&G (l983c)determined the timing to 50 percent emergence for chum
and sockeye salmon under natural conditions.A study was also carried out by
ADF&G in 1984 to evaluate the incubation life-phase of chum salmon in the
middle Susitna River.Upwelling was found to be the most significant factor
required for successful development and survival of salmon embryos in sloughs
and mainstem habitats in the middle Susitna River (ADF&G 1985).Dewatering
and freezing of redds was identified as the major factor contributing to
embryo mortality (ADF&G 1985).
LOWER RIVER
At least 17 tributary streams and six sloughs provide salmon reproductive
habitats downstream of the Chulitna confluence.Tributary systems in this
reach support more than 99%of all salmon spawning.To date,no chinook,
sockeye,or pink salmon have been observed spawning in lower river mainstem
waters;all apparently use tributary streams exclusively for this purpose
(Barrett,Thompson &Wick 1985).Small numbers of chum and coho salmon have
been seen spawning in 13 separate mainstem sites and six side sloughs;most
members of these two species also spawn in tributary environments.ADF&G
estimates that,in aggregate,the number of chum salmon spawning within
33RD3/002 -29 -
mainstem environments in this reach represents roughly 0.3%of 1984 escapement
environments,being present in five of the six sloughs used.
represents roughly 0.2%of the
1985).Chum salmon were the
to the basin.The estimated number of spawning coho
1984 escapement (Barrett,
principal users of side
in the mainstem
Thompson &Wick
slough spawning
Their estimated
,~
.-
-
numbers represent roughly 0.1%of the total 1984 escapement.Only six coho
were~seen spawning in sloughs in 1984;all were in one of the six sloughs
(Barrett,Thompson &Wick 1985).This indicates that lower river sloughs are
less important than middle river sloughs for spawning purposes.
Less is known of salmon rearing and overwintering habitats in lower river
mainstem environments than in the middle river.Given their respective life
history requirements and the natural hydrologic conditions occurring in
winter,it is possible that some chinook,coho,and sockeye salmon overwinter
in the mainstem and that some chum,chinook,and coho rear there.A few coho
and chinook have been captured during winter in mains tern environments in this
river reach (ADF&G 1983c).
Several million eulachon spawn in late May to early June in the lower 50
miles of the mainstem Susitna River.Most of these fish spawn below RM 29 in
main channel habitats near cut banks over loose sand and gravel substrates
(Barrett,Thompson &Wick 1984).Bering cisco return to the Susitna River in
lat,e August and spawning takes place from September through October.In 1981
and 1982,spawning activity peaked in the second week of October.Bering
ciseo are known to spawn only in main channel environments;the majority of
spmroing apparently takes place between RM 75 and RM 85 (Barrett,Thompson &
Wick 1984).
Of the 12 resident Susitna Drainage fish species (Figure 1),capture data
indicate that only rainbow trout,Arctic grayling,burbot,round whitefish,
.-33RD3/002 -30 -
......
longnose sucker,and slimy sculpin are common in the middle river (ADF&G
~:J
1983c).Dolly Varden,humpback whitefish,threespine stickleback,and Arctic
lamprey also occur,but all appear to be more abundant downstream of the
Chulitna confluence (Schmidt,et al.1984).Lake trout are found only in
surrounding area lakes,none of which would be influenced by the proj ect.
Northern pike occur in the lower river but are not common (Schmidt,et al.
Little is known of either the numbers or the life histories (especially
duriLng the winter)of any fish species residing year-round in the Susitna
RivE~r .Given the naturally reduced flow regimes of tributary streams in
winter,it is probable that the majority of these resident fish-(with the
....exception of lake trout)overwinter somewhere in the mainstem.It is
generally believed,however,that most resident fish overwinter in the lower
river (ADF&G 1983c).A forthcoming ADF&G report (due to be released in late
April),reportedly will contain a synopsis of available information on
resident species.Rainbow trout,Arctic grayling,and Dolly Varden probably
spend most of the open water season in tributaries,using the mainstem
principally for migration and overwintering (ADF&G 1983c).Rainbow trout and
Arctic grayling move into tributaries to spawn in the spring after breakup.
Whiskers,Lane,and 4th of July creeks are the primary tributaries above the
.::>
Chulitna confluence used by spawning rainbows (Schmidt,et ale 1984).Burbot,
whitefish,longnose sucker,sculpin,stickleback,and Arctic lamprey are found
whitefish are believed to spawn in October at either mainstem,tributary....
in both the mainstem and tributaries during the open water season.Round
mouth,or tributary locations (Schmidt,et ale 1984).Burbot spawning
....
generally occurs between January and March under the ice in areas influenced
by the mainstem or in tributary mouths like the Deshka •
33RD3!002 -31 -
Based on ongoing radio-telemetry studies,it appears that favored
mainstem overwinter habitats for adult rainbow trout and burbot differ
principally by depth and location.Tagged rainbows are most frequently
....
-
-
--
.-
relocated in mainstem side channels near tributaries in waters generally less
than five feet (Rich Sundet,pers.comm.).They are often found close to open
leads.Tagged burbot are most frequently located in winter in pools greater
than six feet deep along river bends (Rich Sundet,pers.comm.).Both species
seem to favor low velocity environments.Only one Arctic grayling has been
successfully radio-tagged;it was frequently relocated in close association
with rainbow trout (Rich Sundet,pers.comm.).No other resident species have
been radio-tagged.It may be that other resident salmonids with habits like
rainbow trout also frequent relatively shallow low velocity environments in
winter;the same type of relationship may exist between burbot and other
bottom feeders such as longnose sucker.
SYNOPSIS OF SALMON LIFE HISTORY WITH RESPECT TO TEMPERATURE
As an aid to defining the extent of possible effects on fish from
with-project temperature changes,the literature 'ioTaS searched for pertinent
information on the influence of temperature on migration spawning,alevin and
juvenile behaviors and on incubation success and the smoltification process •
Interpretation and subsequent application of the very large body of
information on Pacific salmon to this analysis is confounded by the fact that
it is specific to a vast number of drainages stretching over nearly 20 degrees
of latitude.Timing of major physiological and behavioral characteristics are
shaped by genetic selection and are specific to individual drainages (and,
often,portions of given drainages)somewhat constraining the applicability of
33RD3/002 -32 -
....
this information to the Susitna Drainage.
follows •
ADULT INMIGRATION
A synopsis of this information
Upstream migration of salmon is closely related to the temperature regime
characteristic of each spawning stream (Sheridan 1962).The reported
.....
.....
temperatures at which natural migration occurs vary between species and
location but appear to be influenced by latitude.In general,average annual
freshwater temperatures are progressively cooler with increasing latitude
(Wetzel 1975).At latitudes above 55°N,inmigrating chinook,coho,sockeye,
and chum salmon have been observed in streams having water temperatures of 4 C
or colder (Bell 1983).
Temperatures above the upper tolerance range have been reported to stop
fish migration (Bell 1980).The upper tolerance range for Pacific salmon is
reported to be between 20 to 24 C (Bell 1980;Reiser and Bjornn 1979)•
~'to.l
/ro '"r
Temperatures between 6 and 6.5 C reported by stopped pink salmon inmigration
to 1~he Main Bay Hatchery in Prince William Sound (Krasnowski 1984).At these
temperatures,pink salmon were seen milling in seawater which ":'as at a
;..
temperature between 10 and 12 C (Krasnowski 1984).When the hatcheries
.....,
....
racl~way water temperature was artificially raised to 8.5 C,the salmon quickly
entered the holding pond (Krasnowski 1984).
Adult salmon throughout the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon reach experience
natural water temperatures ranging from approximately 2.5 to 16 C during the
chinook inmigration,4 to 15 C during the coho inmigration,and 5 to 16 C
during the pink,chum,and sockeye inmigration (AEIDC 1984).
33RD3/002 -33 -
ADULT SPAWNING
Spawning of adult Pacific salmon has been reported to occur in water
temperatures ranging from approximately 4 to 18 C,although the preferred
temperature range for all five North American species is reported by McNeil
and Bailey (1975)to be between 7 to 13 C.Chum salmon have been observed
spa~~ing in upper Susitna mainstem habitats at temperatures as cold as 3.3 C
(ADF&G 1983b).
Burbot and round whitefish are the most numerous species using mainstem
habitats for spawning.Burbot is one of the few species of freshwater fish to
spa~m in winter.Elsewhere,burbot spawning has been observed to take place
in ,.;rater between 0.5 to 1.5 C (Scott and Crossman 1973;Alabaster and Lloyd
1982).Temperatures between 0 and 0.7 C were observed in Susitna River
mainstem burbot spawning areas in 1983 (ADF&G 1983c).Round whitefish
spawning has been observed at temperatures between 0 and 4.5 C (Scott and
Crossman 1973;Bryan and Kato 1975).This species is believed to spawn in the
Susitna River during October while water temperatures are dropping rapidly.
EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT
Compared to other life history phases,embryo development is perhaps the
most influenced by water temperature.Temperature ranges that cause no
increased embryo mortality are much narrower than those for adults (Alabaster
and Lloyd 1982).In the freshwater species for which data on embryonic
devi~lopment are available,the preferred range of temperatures is 3.5 to
11.1 C (Alabaster and Lloyd 1982).Generally,the lower and upper temperature
limits for successful initial incubation of salmon embryos are 4.5 and 14.5 C,
respectively (Reiser and Bjornn 1979).In laboratory studies conducted in
Washington (Combs 1965)and from a literature review conducted by Bams (1967),
33RD3/002 -34 -
salmon embryos are reportedly most vulnerable to temperature stress before
closure of the blastopore,which occurs at about 140 accumulated Celsius
temperature units.(A temperature unit is one degree above freezing
experienced by developing fish embryos per day.)After the period of initial
sensitivity to low temperatures has passed (approximately 30 days at 4.5 C),
embryos and alevins can tolerate temperatures near 0 C (McNeil and Bailey
1975).
From his work on Sashin Creek in southeast Alaska,Merrell (1962)
suggested that pink salmon embryo survival may be related to water
temperatures during spawning.McNeil (1969)further examined Sashin Creek
.....
data and discussed the relationship between initial incubation temperature and
survival.These two investigations determined that embryos exposed to cooler
spawning temperature experienced greater incubation mortality than embryos
which began incubation at warmer temperatures.Abnormal embryonic development
could occur if,during initial stages of development,embryos are exposed to
temperatures below 6 C (Bailey 1983).Bailey and Evans (1971)reported an
increase in pink salmon embryo mortalities when initial incubation water
temperatures were held below 2 C during this initial incubation period.
Of the species found in the Susitna River,the most sensitive embryos to
te~?erature change are those of burbot with a tolerance range of only 0 to 3 C
and a preferred range of 0.5 to 1.0 C (Alabaster and Lloyd 1982).The next
mos·t sensitive would be the coregonids followed by the salmonids,of which the
most sensitive appear to be pink salmon.The most tolerant species would be
those spawning in quite shallow waters experi .ncing diurnal fluctuations of
temperature (Alabaster and Lloyd 1982).
-33RD3/002 -35 -
....
ALEVINS
Alevin intragravel movement rates are known to be influenced by
environmental temperatures.Early in their development,alevins move downward
in their natal redds where they remain until shortly before emerging (Dill
196i')•Both the descending and a~"~ending rates of movement are primarily
,"
influenced by temperature (Barns 1969);size of gravel interstices,dissolved
gasE~s,gravel size,and sedimentation also effect movement rates (Bams 1967;
Hausle and Coble 1976;Witzel and MacCrimmon 1981;Fast et a1.1982),but
temperature is the chief determinant (Bams 1967).
REARING
Water temperature affects immature fish metabolism,growth,food capture,
swirrnning performance,and disease resistance.Juvenile salmonids can usually
....
,toll~rate a wider range of water temperatures than embryos.They can also
.....survive short exposure to temperatures which would be ultimately lethal,and
can live for longer periods at temperatures at which they abstain from feeding
(Alabaster and Lloyd 1982).
Juvenile salmon activity slows at water temperatures lower than 4 C;at
these temperatures,fish tend to be less active and spend more time resting in
....secluded,covered habitats (Chapman and Bj ornn 1969).In Carnation Creek,
British Columbia.Bustard and Narver (1975)reported that at water
te~peratures below 7 C,fish stopped feeding and moved into deeper water or
closer to objects providing cover.In Grant Creek near Seward.Alaska.
juvenile salmonids were inactive at water temperatures of 1.0 to 4.5 C
inhabiting cover afforded by streambed cobbles and other large gravels (AEIDC
1982).
33RD3/002 -36 -
Generally,the tolerable temperature range for rearing salmonids is
between 4 and 16 C.However,rearing juvenile salmonids have been observed in
sidE~sloughs in the upper Susitna River where,from June through September,
water temperatures were between 2.4 and 15.5 C (ADF&G 1983d),a slightly wider
range.Juvenile coho and chinook salmon have been successfully reared in
Alaska hatcheries at temperatures between 2 and 4 C (Pratt 1984).In an
expE~riment at the U.S.National Marine Fisheries Service Auke Bay Laboratory,
coho salmon grew temperatures of 0.2,2 and 4 C.No mortality was seen in
unfed fish held at these temperatures except for those at 4 C (Koski 19.84).
This suggests that at temperatures at and above 4 C,coho are sufficiently
active to require food,whereas below this temperatures they are inactive and
do not require food.
SMOLTIFICATION
Salmon fry are physiologically adapted to life in fresh water
environments,and before they can successfully undertake life at sea (and,
hence,mature)they must undergo a complex physiological and morphological
transformation.This process is termed smoltification.The overall
controlling force is endogenous and has the characteristics of a circannual
rhythm (Hoar 1976;Wedemeyer et al.1980).Timing of transformation is
depi~ndent on numerous environmental factors which influence metabolism and
whieh act as behavioral releasers (Schreck 1982).
Photoperiod is the major environmental factor influencing smolt
transformation in Atlantic salmon,steelhead trout,and coho and sockeye
......
salmon (Wagner 1974;Wedemeyer et al.1980).Photoperiod is apparently
subordinate to other as yet unidentified environmental factors in chinook
salmon (Clarke et al.1981).In species where photoperiod is controlling,its
33RD3!002 -37 -
-
-
chief influence appears to be that of synchronizing endogenous rhythm with
natural seasonal change (Groot 1982).Temperature affects the smoltification
proc:ess by regulating physiological response to photoperiod;it causes effects
to occur sooner the higher the temperature or later the lower the temperature
(Clarke et al.1981).In short,temperature exerts influence on the smolting
process by controlling growth,and it regulates both the magnitude and
duration of the smolting process (Clarke et al.1978;Grau 1982;cf.Groot
1982).
transformation process and is believed to be an indicator of physiological-
+ +Na K ATPase gill activity has been associated with the smolt
readiness for life at sea (Wedemeyer et al.1980).This activity can be
-~
.-
r
correlated with smolt size,but,large smolts do not necessarily display the
highest level of activity (Wedemeyer et al.1980).However,there does appear
to be a minimum threshold size necessary for initiating the gill ATPase cycle
(e.g.80 to 90mm in spring run chinook and 90mm in coho)(Wedemeyer et al.
1980).
FRY/SMOLT OUTMIGRATION
Dispersal (migratory)movements of salmon fry may be categorized into one
of three types:dispersal within their natal reproductive habitat,dispersal
to nursery lakes,or dispersal to an estuary (Godin 1982).Natural incident
'light intensity appears to be the most important environmental variable
influencing daily onset and termination of salmonid migratory movements (Godin
1982),but water temperature has at times been correlated with peak migration
rates (Sano 1966;Coburn and McHart 1967;Thomas 1975).Presumably,this is
due to increased fry mobility at higher temperatures (Godin 1982).
33RD3/002 -38 -
Northcote (1962,1969)has shown experimentally that temperature
-.
-
-
.....
determines the direction of rainbow trout fry movements and Raymond (1979)has
correlated juvenile chinook outmigrations from the Salmon River with sudden
rises in water temperature.Temperature may interact with genetic factors to
dete~rmine sockeye salmon (Raleigh 1971)and cutthroat trout (Raleigh and
Chapman 1971)upstream movement rates.Temperatures at or below 6 C seem to
slo~r instream migrations of coho,cutthroat,and steelhead fry (Cederholm and
Scarlett 1982);temperatures above 7 C stimulate chinook salmon to migrate
(Raymond 1979).
Godin (1982)hypothesizes that the annual timing of gravel emergence and
subsequent dispersal of salmonid fry to initial feeding habitats is determined
genetically as a result of natural selection determined by predictable annual
(1982)further argues that annual timing of dispersal is ".•.op timized-changes in environmental variables which include water temperature.Godin
-
evolutionarily by natural selection to maximize the fitness of individual
fish."Solomon (1982)suggests that the role of increasing water temperatures
in the ice-free season is in enhancing the physiological readiness of the fish
for migration through stimulation of the endocrine system.
In the Susitna River,salmon smolt outmigration generally occurs from
mid·-May through August (Schmidt et al.1984).River ice breakup generally
precedes a large part of the initial chum and pink salmon fry outmigration
period.There are few data available on pink salmon outmigration,but this
activi ty is believed to occur between mid-May and mid-June,peaking in early
Junia.Outmigrating chum fry occur in the river mainstem from mid-May to
mid·-August,peaking in June.Coho,chinook,and sockeye juveniles outmigrate
from mid-May to early October,with peaks occurring from June through August.
33RD3/002 -39 -
-
In addition to salmon smolt outmigration,there is also a migration
betw"een habitats as both resident and juvenile anadromous fish redistribute
themselves into slough,side channel and mainstem habitats for overwintering.
These emigrations generally peak in August for chinook and coho salmon
(Scb~idt et al.1984).Rainbow trout and Arctic grayling generally move out
of tributaries to overwintering areas in late August through September (Sundet
and Wenger 1984).
Timing of smolt entrance to the sea is believed to influence survival
......
rates.Several hatchery studies (Bilton 1978;Washington 1982)found that
optimal size varied with time of release;e.g.,maximum return of adult salmon
in one study resulted when smolts weighing about 20g.a piece were released
just prior to the summer solstice (Bilton 1978).Bilton (1978)found very
-
large male smolts did not migrate at all,becoming jacks.
WATER TEMPERATURE
OVERVIEW
Temperature data for waters in the Susitna Basin have been collected by
thn~e different groups:the U.S.Geological Survey (USGS),Alaska Department•
of Fish and Game (ADF&G),and R&M Consultants.Prior to the 1980 field
season,the only continuous temperature recorders were at three mainstem
Susitna sites operated by the USGS since the mid-1970s.Of the new sites
added specifically for the Susitna hydroelectric proj ect,the maj ority are
concentrated in the Watana-to-Sunshine reach of the river.Temperature data
collection below the Parks Highway bridge (RM 83.5)was increased during the
1984 field season by ADF&G on request from AEIDC to provide additional data in
the event that lower river temperature simulations were undertaken.Table 7,
showing the available temperature data used for initial monthly stream
33RD3/002 -40 -
..-I;
Table 7.Monthly stream temperatures)available data June to September 1980)19~i,1982.(From AEIDC 1983).
r-Mainstem/Tributary Number of Days
River Mile River Name/Description 1980 1981 1982
J J A S J J A S J J A S
-10.1/0.5 Alexander Cr.25 31 31 30
10.1 Susitna above Alexander Cr.25 31 31 1
25.8 Susitna R.,Su Station 30 31 31 30 10
28.0/2.0 Yentna R.26 31 31 14
28.0/4.0 Yentna R.23 31 31 27
29.5 Susitna R.above Yentna R.20 31 31 30
32.3 Susitna R.above Yentna R.25 31 31 12
40.6/1.2 Deshka R.21.31 31 30
49.8/4.9 **Deception Cr.near Willow 5 8 8
49.8/11.6 **Willow Cr.near Willow 5 18 22
50.5/1.0 Little Willow Cr.7 31 31 30
50.5 Susitna R.above Little Willow Cr.7 31 31 24
61.2 Susitna R.above Kashwitna R.2 27-77.2/0.0 Montana Creek 19 24 1
77 .5 Susitna R.above 1<lon tana Cr.19 3 2 30
83.8 Susitna R.,east shore--Parks Hwy.20 14 30
~83.9 Susitna R.,west shore--Parks Hwy.23 9 10 30
97.0 Susitna R.--LRX1 17
97.2/5.0 **Talkeetna R.near Talkeetna 1
97.0/1.0 Talkeetna R.10 31 31 30
97.2/1.5 Talkeetna R.17 1 31 30
98.5/18.0 **Chulitna R.near Talkeetna 1 1 1 27 30 3 20
98.6/0.5 Chulitna R.11 17 20
98.6/0.6 Chulitna R.17 10 25
103.0 Susitna R.--TKA fishwheel 11 10 19 22 7 28 31 25
113.0 Susitna R.--LRX 18 25 31 30
120.7 Susitna R.--Curry 25 31 30
126.0 Susitna R.--Slough 8A 4 31 30
126.1 Susitna R.--LRX 29 22 31 30
129.2 Susitna R.--Slough 9 4 31 24
130.8 Susitna R.--LRX 35 23 4 17
131.3 Susitna R.above 4th of July Cr.15 31 30 26
136.5 **Susitna R.near Gold Cr.30 31 31 30 8 25 29 12 30
136.8/0.0 Gold Creek 11 7 3
138.6/1.0 Indian R.23 31 4 28
138.6/0.1 Indian R.10 25 14
138.7 Susitna R.above Indian R.n 29 16
140.0 Susitna R.--Slough 19 5 13
140.1 Susitna R.--LRX 53 23
142.0 Susitna R.--Slough 21 4 .29 4 31 30
148.8 Susitna R.above Portage Cr.13 31 29
148.8/0.1 Portage Cr.13 26 28
181.3/0.0 Tsusena Cr.12 7 31 30
184.4 *Susitna R.at Watana dam site 30 31 30
194.1/0.0 Watana Cr.n 31 15 16
206.8/0.0 Kosina Cr.4 31 17 12
223.7 **Susitna R.near Cantwell 27 31 31 22.-231.3/0.0 Goose Creek 31 31 30
233.4/0.0 Oshetna Creek 31 31 30-*R&M gages
**USGS gage s .
All others are ADF&G gages
(WIISlIJ
33RC1/002c -41 -
-_.._-
""'"
.)
:.."\..\1~·~~/;t.:'::"-:i'~"
Table ,7'.Monthly stream temperatures,~ilab~~data June to September 1980,1982,1982.(From AEIDC 1983).
Mainstem/Tributary Number of Days
River Mile River Name/Description 1980 1981 1982
J J A S J J A S J J A S
10.1/0.5 Alexander Cr.18 31 31 26
10.1 Susitna above Alexander Cr.18 31 27
25.8 Susitna R.,Su Station 30 31 31 30-28.0/2.0 Yentna R.20 31 31
28.0/4.0 Yentna R.14 31 31 24
29.5 Susitna R.above Yentna R.10 31 31 30
32.3 Susitna R.above Yentna R.18 31 29 6
40.6/1.2 Deshka R.10 31 31 30
49.8/4.9 **Deception Cr.near Willow 2
49.8/11.6 **Wi 11 ow Cr.near Willow 13 4
50.5/1.0 Little Willow Cr.31 31 28
50.5 Susitna R.above Little Willow Cr.31 31 10
61.2 Susitna R.above Kashwitna R.22
77.2/0.0 Montana Creek 6 17
77.5 Susitna R.above Montana Cr.8 30
83.8 Susitna R.,east shore--Parks Hwy.8 30
83.9 Susitna R.,west shore--Parks Hwy.14 30
97.0 Susitna R.--LRX 1 14
97.2/5.0 **Talkeetna R.near Talkeetna
97.0/1.0 Talkeetna R.31 31 30
97.2/1.5 Talkeetna R.14 31 30
98.5/18.0 **Chulitna R.near Talkeetna 24 30 10
98.6/0.5 Chulitna R.3 12
98.6/0.6 Chulitna R.14 18~
103.0 Susitna R.--TKA fishwheel 17 13 21 31 16
113.0 Susitna R.--LRX 18 17 31 30
120.7 Susitna R.--Curry 17 31 30
126.0 Susitna R.--Slough 8A 29 30
126.1 Susitna R.--LRX 29 13 31 30
129.2 Susitna R.--Slough 9 3l 20
130.8 Susitna R.--LRX 35 6
131.3 Susitna R.above 4th of July Cr.3l 26 22
1.36.5 **Susitna R.above Gold Cr.30 3l 3l 30 24 24 30
136.8/0.0 Gold Creek-138.6/1.0 Indian R.16 3l
138.6/0.l Indian R.l7 8
138.7 Susitna R.above Indian R.2l 10
~l40.0 Susitna R.--Slough 19
l40.1 Susitna R.--LRX 53 23
l42.0 Susitna R.--Slough 2l 28 3l 30
~l48.8 Susitna R.above Portage Cr.31 28
l48.8/0.l Portage Cr.1.5 25
l81.3/0.0 Tsusena Cr.3l 31 30
1.84.4 *Susitna R.at Watana dam site 30 31 30
194.1/0.0 Watana Cr.31 6
206.8/0.0 Kosina Cr.3l 3
223.7 **Susitna R.near Cantwell 24 3l 3l 1.5
231.3/0.0 Goose Creek 31 3l 30
233.4/0.0 Oshetna Creek 1.5 31 24
,-*R&M gages
**USGS gages
All others are ADF&G gages
~
33RCl/OO2c -42 -
._----_.._------------
.-
temperature simulations (summers 1980 to 1982),illustrates the density and
temporal consistency of these data.
There are a number of problems in the available water temperature data
set with regard to its usefulness for temperature modeling.These primarily
lie with the short period of record available and in the reliability of some
of these data.These problems·are discussed below.
Short length·of record -Collection of most of the data needed for
temperature modeling began in 1980.In order to predict instream temperatures
covering a large range of meteorologic conditions,representative years were
selected for simulation,some preceding 1980.For these early years,
temperature data were synthesized using regression techniques (AEIDC 1983,
198L~)•
Discontinuous records -Most of the temperature recorders used for the
Susitna project are self-contained units,Omnidata Datapods and Ryan
Thermographs.These instruments are designed for infrequent service,and thus
are infrequently visited once they are in service.When these units
malfunction,data may be lost for periods of two weeks or more.Throughout
the study there were instances of data gaps resulting both from instrument
failure and from tampering by people and wildlife.
Inaccurate data There are a number of errors inherent in the data
itself.The first is associated with the instrument.The accuracy of
Data-pods and Thermographs is ±0.1 and ±0.6 C respectively,provided the
instruments are properly calibrated.Improper recorder placement may also
F""
!
lead to error.The USGS mainstem Susitna temperature recorder at Gold Creek
was initially located in the plume of Gold Creek,inaccurately recording
mainstem temperatures.The probe was later moved.
33RD3/002 -43 -
Further problems result from the fact that the recorders must be anchored
to the shore.Thus,they lie close to shore possibly in the plume of a
tributary or in a quiescent area unrepresentative of true mainstem
temperatures.Even under the best conditions,when a recorder is properly
calibrated and not located in a quiescent area or in a tributary plume,it is
only recording the temperature at a single location.Temperatures across a
river transect often show large variation;Schmidt (1984)found differences as
high as 2.8 C across transects below the Talkeetna River confluence (RM 92.7),
while the USGS (Bigelow,pers.comm.)reports deferences as high as 3.3 C
across a transect at Sunshine (RN 83.5).
TEMPERATURE MODELS
DYRESM
The reservoir temperature simulation model,DYRESH,is used to predict
the thermal stratification of both reservoirs under various meteorologic and
power load demand conditions.The original model (Imberger and Patterson
"""1981)has been modified with the inclusion of an ice cover subroutine
developed for Canadian lakes (Harza-Ebasco 1984).Results from DYRESM,
.....
coupled with those from the reservoir operations model,provide predictions of
reservoir release volumes and temperatures at the downstream-most dam.These
values serve as upstream boundary conditions for the stream temperature model.
Calibration.
The DYRESM model was calibrated for Alaska climatic conditions using
Eklutna Lake data for the period June through December 1982 (Harza-Ebasco
,J,
198-4).Eklutna is a glacial lake tapped for hydroelectric power.The main
differences between it and the proposed reservoirs are the design of the
intake structures,bathymetric 'shape near the intakes,and local meteoro!ogy.
33RD3/002 -44 -
Results from the Eklutna Lake study (Harza-Ebasco 1984)show accurate
prediction of both summer and winter outflow temperatures to ±1 C.Some
instances of temporal differences of approximately 2 C were seen during
periods of high summer winds.These differences were attributed to difficulty
in modeling wind-induced mixing and internal wave motion near the intake
structure using a one-dimensional model (Harza-Ebasco 1984).
Rel:i.ability.
DYRESM is a one-dimensional model.predicting only a vertical temperature
distribution.This assumption is most seriously taxed during periods of high
wind which induce mixing in the epilimion.It is treated in the model by
--
corrections which.affect deeper surface mixing (APA-1984).This problem is of
som.~concern with both reservoir simulations,as wind speed predictions at the
proposed reservoir surface level are somewhat speculative.
In order to maintain the ability for selected reservoir temperature
releases,it is essential that the reservoirs'thermal stratification remain
intact in the face of both wind-induced surface mixing and hydraulic mixing
near the intake structures.The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
(1984)predicted a weak thermal stratification of the Watana reservoir and
questioned the ability of the intake structure to allow selective temperature
withdrawal.FERC noted the same concern with the Devil Canyon reservoir,
estimating cooler summer temperatures than those predicted by DYRESM.APA
(1984)acknowledges that the stratification of both reservoirs would be weak
relative to those in temperate climes.but maintains that the stratification
....should be strong enough around the intake structures to maintain
stratification except during spring and fall turnover periods.
33RD3/002 -45 -
In the event that the thermal stratification could not be maintained.the
ability to release the warmest available summer and coldest winter waters
(i.e .•those in the uppermost thermal strata)would be lost.Release
.....
temperatures throughout the year would be closer to the mean annual reservoir
temperature.approximately 4 C.limiting its effectiveness as a mitigation
measure.
Synopsis of Results.
DYRESM has been run for both a one-and two-dam configuration for myriad
combinations of power demand,flow requirements,meteorology,intake operating
rules and intake design.Consequently,generalizing these results is
difficult and possibly misleading.Results from these DYRESM simulations are
available in AEIDC (1984)for Case C simulations under the "inflow matching lT
operating rule.Results under Case E-VI flow requirements have not been
-
~
I
-
-
....
published;however.river water temperatures immediately below the proposed
Devil Canyon dam face (RM 150)are available in AEIDC (1985).
The ranges of outflow temperatures under the various combinations are
shmoffi for summer (here defined as water weeks 36-52,June 3 -September 30)
and winter (weeks 5-30,October 29 -April 28)in Tables.8 and 9.Note that
weeks during the spring and fall transitional periods are not represented in
these tables.The number of simulations run for each of the categories vary.
As few as one and as many as five seasons of meteorologic data have been run
for some categories;different intake structure designs are represented in the
table as well.Consequently,making direct comparisons between runs is not
recommended •
33RJD3/002 -46 -
....
Q
1
Table c8-;--Synopsis of simulated summer (weeks 36-52)release temperature
ranges (C).
Case C
.....
Intake
Operation
Warmest
Water
Watana
1996 2001
2.1 -12.6
Devil Canyon
2002
4.6 -10.0
2020
....
.....
Inflow
Matching 2.4 -11.2 2.4 -11.1
Case E-VI
3.2 -10.2 3.0 -11.2
.....
-
Intake
Operation
Warmest
Water
Inflow
Matehing
33RCl/002d
Watana
1996 2001
6.1 -12.1
5.4 -11.5
-47 -
Devil Canyon
2002
4.3 -8.8
4.3 -8.6
2020
.....
i i\~~/
Table ,9:Synopsis of simulated winter (weeks 5-30)release temperature ranges
(C)•
Case C
Intake
Operation
Warmest
Water
Watana
1996
1.0 -3.5
2001
0.7 -4.2
Devil Canyon
2002
2.7 -5.8
2020
Inflow
Matching 0.3 -4.2 0.3 -4.3 0.5 -5.6 0.6 -2.2
Case E-VI (winter of 1981-82 only)
Watana Devil Canyon
-
Intake
Operation
Warmest
Water
Inflow
Matching
33RC1/002e
1996 2001
2.8 -4.1
2.3 -4.1
-48 -
2002
2.7 -5.5
2.2 -5.5
2020
In general terms,simulated summer release temperatures are cooler from
the Devil Canyon reservoir than from the Watana reservoir.In later demand
years under two-dam operation (represented by the year 2020);however.cone
valves are used less frequently and warmer summer release temperatures result.
During winter,the reverse occurs with warmer release temperatures resulting
from two-dam operation.
SNTEMP
The SNTEMP instream temperature model has been used to simulate mainstem
Susitna River temperatures in the Watana-to-Sunshine reach.Discussions of
the model and its application to this project are available in Theurer et al.
(1983)and AEIDC (1983.1984).
As with all simulation models.SNTEMP is governed by a large set of
assumptions (AEIDC 1983,1984).Three of these are especially important when
considering the applicability of model results.
1.One-dimensionality.The temperature at any given cross-section is
represented by a single value.presumed to be the mean temperature along
that cross-section.As mentioned previously.thermal variation across a
transect may be greater than 2 C.
....2.Instantaneous mixing of tributaries.The mass and associated heat
.-
content of influent tributaries are instantaneously mixed by the model at
the tributary confluences.There is no accounting for the temperature
plumes from influent tributaries found in the river system .
33RD3!002 -49 -
3.No ice cover.SNT~W simulates openwater conditions throughout the year.
This is of concern in the spring when simulated water temperatures rise
in response to increased solar radiation and warmer air temperatures.
Under an ice cover,water temperatures would warm much slower.Thus,
....
.-
simulated temperatures during this period are warmer than realistic until
after breakup occurs.
Additional note should be made of the estimation methods employed for
influent tributary temperatures.A temperature regression function for middle
river tributaries was developed using data from three tributary sites (AEIDC
198Lf).Likewise,regression functions are used to predict water temperatures
of the large tributaries (the Talkeetna and Chulitna rivers)when data are not
mainstem Susitna,predicted temperatures below the three-river confluence must
be given careful scrutiny.
The influence of mainstem river temperatures on the temperature of
groundwater influent to adjacent sloughs has not been fully resolved at this
time.Mean river temperatures are believed to drive nearby groundwater
temperatures;thus,changes in mean annual mainstem temperatures (expected to
be slight)may also be felt in sloughs.Of special concern is whether the
timing of mainstem temperature changes would be felt in sloughs during key
fish use periods,notably egg incubation.Hydrology studies on these sloughs
notle the variation in response between different sloughs;variation in
-
.....
available.As these two.rivers contribute large volumes of flow to the
temperature changes would likewise be expected.
topic is presently being done by Harza-Ebasco.
Additional study on this
.....33RD3/002 -50 -
Ca1i.bration.
SNTEMP was calibrated for the period of June through September 1981.and
1982 (AEIDC 1983).Calibration during the winter period is moot,as natural
watE~r temperatures are uniformly 0 C.Model validation was done on a monthly
(AEIDC 1983)and weekly basis (AEIDC 1984).The 90%confidence interval
....
(using the Z -statistic)for weekly water temperatures for water years
1981-1983 is -1.0 to 0.8 C.
Reliability.
To predict mainstem water temperatures,SNTEMP relies on upstream
boundary conditions predicted by another simulation model (DYRESM)-,influent
tributary temperatures estimated using regression techniques on short records
of data,and meteorologic data extrapolated from the record at Talkeetna.The
modl~l has been calibrated using published data which is representative,but
not infallible.Consequently,the resultant temperature predictions include
the possibility of a variety of combined errors.
While the ability of SNTEMP to predict absolute temperatures is
unc1ertain,much greater reliance may be placed on the relative temperature
.-.differences resulting between different simulation scenarios.Thus,the
ability to assess the temperature changes resulting from operation of the
project remains good.
Synopsis of Results.
SNTEMP results are summarized for Case C simulations ("inflow matching"
intake operation only)in AEIDC (1984)and for Case E-VI and Case C ("warmest
water"intake operation)in AEIDC (1985).These results are presented at
three mainstem locations (RM 150, 130,and 100)in tabular and graphical form,
33RD3/002 -51 -
-
comparing methods of powerhouse intake operation and power load demands.The
reader is referred to these sources in lieu of extensive discussion here.A
brief summary of simulation results and a table of mean summer temperatures
I
(Table 1.0),both at a representative middle river location (RM 130)are
included here.As these results are included to show relative differences
betlo1een methods of operation,a single summer season (1982)is used,which
represents normal air temperatures and hydrologic conditions.
Two general observations should first be noted concerning river
temperatures under with-project conditions relative to natural conditions.
First,the magnitude of variation between winter and summer temperatures would
be lessened;winter temperatures would be warmer than natural-and summer
temperatures cooler.Second,there would be a general delay of the normal
temperature variation pattern;cooling would occur later than normal in the
fall,and warming would occur later in the spring /summer.
summer and winter simulation results follow.
A synopsis of
As noted previously,no temperature simulation has been done downstream
of the Parks Highway bridge.This is largely due to the impracticality of
modeling the lower river with the limited available data and the limitation of
a one-dimensional model in a region of river with very distinct temperature
plumes resulting from the inflowing Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers.
Under natural conditions,flows from the three rivers remain relatively
distinct,mixing slowly until approximately RM 75.0 (Schmidt 1987).The
effect of lower with-proj ect flows on the rate of mixing is uncertain;
however,slightly cooler summer temperatures from the Susitna will probably
not substantially alter the mainstem temperatures below RM 75.0.
33RD3/002 -52 -
-
-
~~II
Table )O~'Simulated mean summer 1982 river temperatures for water weeks
31-52 at RM 130.
....
....
Dam
Configuration
Watana
Only
\vatana/
Devil Canyon
Natural
Case C Case E-VI
Load Inflow Warmest Inflow Warrant
Demand Matching Water Matching Water
1996 7.8 NR NR NR
2001 7.7 8.3 7.7 8.3
2002 7.0 6.9 6.6 6.7
2020 7.2 NR NR NR
==========================================================
8.8
--
~
!
-
NR .-not run for this case
33RD3/002 -53 -
temperatures under all project configurations,flow requirements,and methods-
Summer.Simulated summer temperatures are cooler the'n natural
of intake operations.Simulated river temperatures under two-dam operation
are cooler than under Watana only.This is a result of two conditions:
generally cooler reservoir release temperatures,and 30 miles less river
available for reservoir releases to warm through normal heat-transfer
processes.
Simulated mean summer river temperatures tend to be cooler under
increased load demands.This trend,however,is contradicted under the Devil
Canyon operation scenario for 2020,as the higher power demand results in
fewer cold-water non-power releases through the cone valve structures.There
is an additional tendency with increasing load demands for delaying both
summer warming and fall cooling.Differences in mean summer temperatures
between Case C and Case E-VI simulations are negligible under a Watana-only
configuration and only slightly cooler (less than 0.5 C for any set of
conditions at Rl1 130)for Case E-VI under the two-dam project.
Winter.The simulated selection of water from the thermally stratified
reservoirs during the winter is based in part on meeting desired ice
conditions downriver.While releasing near 0 C water during the winter may be
an option in some cases,resulting ice conditions with the ten-fold increased
flow may be devastating.In such cases,releasing the warmest available water
in order to suppress ice formation may be desirable.Thus,the gauge of
judging with-project summer temperatures,deviation from natural temperatures,
is not applicable during the winter.For a complete discussion of river
-:':J
temperature/ice simulations,the reader is referred to Harza-Ebasco (1984,
1985a,1985b).
33RD3/002 -54 -
In most general terms,reservoir releases during the winter (water weeks
5 through 30)range from 0.3 C to 5.8 C.Release waters begin cooling
-
-
-
immediately once exposed to the cold air temperatures.With increased load
demands in later years of operation,larger amounts of water would be released
requiring longer distances to cool to 0 C.Under a single-dam configuration,
30 additional miles of river are available for this cooling process to occur.
33RD3/002 -55 -
--
,...,
ANALYSIS
ANTICIPATED NEGATIVE EFFECTS
As noted earlier,available information for this analysis ranges from
sufficient to scant to altogether lacking.Consequently,only 13 of the
drainage's nineteen species are addressed.These are all five salmon species,
eulachon,Bering cisco,burbot,round and humpback whitefish,rainbow trout,
Arctic grayling,and lake trout.Based on temperature model runs and current
knowledge of fish response to ambient temperature change,no direct
te~perature-induced mortality is anticipated to occur with-project.
Tables 11"and /12 summarize anticipated with-project-negative
temperature-related effects on anadromous and resident fish.They provide an
overview of anticipated negative effects by species,life stage,location,and
time of year for both the Watana Dam and ~""atana and Devil Canyon dams
together.Anticipated negative effects are indicated by a dimensionless
ordinal scale,which identifies the relative severity of anticipated effects.
Its values range from:
o -given predictions of with-project temperatures and available
knowledge of a species life stage,no negative effects are likely.
1 -available information indicates that with-project temperatures could
negatively effect a species life stage,but the effects should be
relatively minor.
2 -available information indicates that with-project temperatures could
chronically affect a life stage,thereby reducing productivity.
33RD3/002 -56 -
..-
3 -available information indicates that predicted with-project
-
.....
.....
"...
.....
temperatures may negatively affect a species life stage.but more
data is needed to so state with certainty.
ANADROMOUS SPECIES
The following discussion addresses the anticipated with-project negative
temperature effects on anadromous fish.which are summarized in Table 11.
Chinook Salmon
With-project water temperatures could negatively affect four of five
chinook salmon life stages;the two-dam option would negatively affect more
life stages than the Watana Dam alone.Given present understanding of how
temperature moderates adult chinook migration behavior.predicted June water
temperatures above Talkeetna under the two-dam scenario could slightly retard
the migration front.This would be a chronic problem.recurring on a yearly
basis.Modeling results indicate that this cold temperature problem would be
most severe near RM 150.The only chinook spawning habitat known to occur in
this area is found in Portage Creek (RM 148.9);average chinook salmon
escapement to this stream for the years 1981 to 1984 was over 2600 fish
(Barrett.Thompson &Wick 1984).Depending on meteorological conditions.the
duration of cold temperatures sufficient to interfere with migration would be
bet'W'een one and two weeks.Taken by itself.a delay in spawning of this
.....
.....
duration might be sufficient to noticeably depress reproductive success by
ultimately delaying fry emergence.Since emergence timing is keyed to maximal
food availability (Godin 1982;Miller and Brannon 1982)•.it is expected that
late emerging fry would encounter less than optimal growth conditions •
33RD3/002 -57 -
Table ~I~Anticipated relative negative with-project temperature effects on anadromous species.
Watana Operation Devil Canyon Operation
Fi.sh Species
Effects Effects 22212ScaleLocationDateScaleLocationDate
.....
Chinook Salmon
Adult Inrnigration 0 1 Near RM 150 Jun
Spawning 0 1 Above RM 130 Jul
Incubation 0 0
F Rearing/Smolting 2 Devil Canyon Jun-Sep 2 Devil Canyon Jun-Sep
to Mixing Zone to Mixing Zone
Outmigration 0 1 Near RM 150 May-Jun
Churn Salmon
Adult Inmigration 0 0
Spawning 0 0
Incubation 0 0
Rearing/Smolting 1 Devil Canyon Jun-Jul 1 Devil Canyon Jun-Jul
to Mixing Zone to Mixing Zone
Outmigration 0 0
F""
Pink Salmon
Adult Inmigration 0 2 Above RM 130 Jul
Spawning 0 1 Above RM 130 Jul
Incubation 0 0
Rearing/Smo lting 0 0
Outmigration 0 1 Near RM 150 Nay-Jun
33RCI/002a -58 -
.'~.
j
Table 11.Anticipated relative negative with-project temperature effects on anadromous species.
(cont'd)
Watana Operation Devil Canyon Operation
Fish Species
Effecis Effects
2 2 1 2 2ScaleLocationDateScaleLocationDate
Coho Salmon
Adult Inmigration 0 0
Spawning 0 0
Incubation 0 0
Rearing/Smolting 1 Devil Canyon Jun-Sep 1 Devil Canyon Jun-Sep
to Mixing Zone to Mixing Zone
Outmigration 0 0-
Sockeye Salmon
Adult Inmigration 0 0
.....Spawning 0 0
Incubation 0 •0
Rearing/Smolting 1 Devil Canyon Jun-Sep 1 Devil Canyon Jun-Sep
to Mixing Zone to Mixing Zone
Outmigration 0 0
Eulachon
Adult Inmigration 0 0
'"""
Spawning 0 0
~Incubation 0 0
Rearing/Smolting 0 0
.-
Outmigration 0 0
.-33RC1/002a -59 -
Table'll:Anticipated relative negative with-project temperature effects on anadromous species.
(cont'd)
Watana Operation Devil Canyon Operation
Fish Species
Effecp Effects
2 2 1 2 2ScaleLocationDateScaleLocationDate
Bering Cisco
~Adult Inmigration 0 0
Spawning 3 Near RM 75 Oct 3 Near RM 75 Oct
Incubation 0 0
Rearing/Smolting 0 0
Outmigration 0 0
1 o
1
2
3
No concern
Low
Moderate
Possible
,...
,....
2
See text for a complete description of the effects scale.
Location and date of anticipated effects comes from temperature modeling results (AEIDC
1984)•
-33RC1/002a -60 -
--
-
However,it is possible that chinook inmigration to Portage Creek would
not be noticeably affected by with-project temperatures.Importantly,the
potential temperature block would occur early in the spawning migrational
peri.od and it would end before peak inmigration.Also,the potential
temperature barrier would (according to model results)be proximal to natal
habi.tats in Portage Creek;the biological imperative of reproduction might
alone be sufficient to overcome it.Lastly,inflow from Portage Creek should
breach the cold temperature zone,providing an avenue of access.
Predicted July mainstem water temperatures for the two-dam scenario above
RM 130 fall below established spawning tolerance criteria for chinook salmon.
This is not believed to be significant since no chinook have yet~een found
spallming in the mainstem.Given the level of effort researchers have spent
identifying spawning areas,if any do spawn in mainstem environments,their
numbers are probably very low.
Predicted with-project temperatures for both the one and two-dam options
would negatively affect rearing juvenile chinook grow"th rates and
smoltification.Modeling indicates that,depending on climate and the
temperature of reservoir-released waters,growth rates of juveniles rearing in
affected mainstem areas (above RM 130)could be reduced by 8 to 29%(AEIDC
1984).These growth-reduction rate estimates are based in part on the
assumption that effected juvenile fish would eat to satiation.Since this
probably does not happen in the wild,these estimates should be viewed as the
worst case possible.
Reduced growth rates could affect productivity in terms of smolt ocean
.-
survival rates and outmigration patterns.Ocean survival rates of chinook
smolts might be reduced because size is an indirect indicator of physiological
readiness for life at sea (Wedemeyer 1980).Since the minimum threshold size
--33RD3/002 -61 -
------------------------------~._---_._"_._~-------~~--~~~-
I~
necessary for successful smoltification of Susitna River chinook is unknown,
it is impossible to gauge the magnitude of effects of predicted growth
reduction on ocean survival.Based on capture data (Schmidt et al.1984),
approximately 20%of all chinook juveniles rearing in mainstem environments
above the Chulitna confluence would be affected.Under a worst case scenario
where unfit smolts outmigrated.all could conceivably perish.Average
escapement data for the last four years indicates that this represents a
potential loss of around 1,500 returning adult fish (assuming that fry reared
in existing natural environments all have the same probability of survival).
This estimate is based on peak escapement counts which represent less than
52 percent of a spawning population (Barrett,Thompson and Wick 198~)
Alternatively,affected smolts might not outmigrate for an additional
year.This should be of less concern than if unfit smolts outmigrated,since
smoltification is a reversible process (Wedemeyer 1980;Groot 1982;Clarke
-et ale 1978).Thus.affected smolts might successfully outmigrate after an
additional year in freshwater.If this occurred,productivity would
""'"I
expectedly be slightly reduced due to an extra year of naturally-induced
freshwater mortality.
Finally,affected smolts might outmigrate later in the year than normal.
This could result in high mortality since outmigration of individual Pacific
salmon stocks is known to be keyed to maximum ocean food productivity (Groot
1982;Godin 1982).As with the first concern discussed above (outmigration of
unfit smolts).mortality rates of chinook rearing in colder with-project
mainstem water would be significant.
The last with-project temperature issue concerning chinook salmon is that-of potential delay of fry and smolt outmigration near RM 150.Under the
coldest two-dam scenarios modeled,unfavorable temperatures for outmigration
33RD3/002 -62 -
.....
.....
would occur for one to two weeks from late May to early June.The affected
habitat would be near Portage Creek.This issue is not as potentially serious
as some of the others because,according to model results,it would not be a
chronic problem (i.e.,it occurs infrequently)and the delay would be of
rela.tively short duration.Also,it would occur early in the outmigration
cycle so there would probably be sufficient time available for successful
outmigration.Given the problems short duration,its expected frequency,and
the natural wide variation in chinook survival rates,it is doubtful that any
difference in productivity could be detected from this circumstance.
Chum Salmon
With-project June to July temperatures for both the one-dam and the
two··dam scenarios would reduce chum fry and smolt growth rates.This is not
as important an issue with chum salmon as with chinook,because they generally
....spend little time rearing in freshwater following emergence.Some stocks
outmigrate immediately after emergence,providing indirect evidence that the
freshwater growth stage is not as crucial for chum salmon as it is for some
othl~r species.
The small amount of chum rearing that takes place upstream of the
Chulitna confluence (the primary affected area)occurs primarily in sloughs
(:;
(Schmidt et a1.1984).The sloughs'mean annual temperatures mimic mean
annual mainstem temperatures;however,mainstem temperatures fluctuate more
than those in the sloughs.With-project mean annual river temperatures are
not predicted to vary significantly from those occurring naturally.Given the
above,the effect of with-project temperatures on chum salmon productivity
would be minimal.This conclusion is severely constrained by inherent
limitations of the model used;at present,it is impossible to accurately
33RD3/002 -63 -
,....
predict with-project slough temperatures in narrow time frames such as those
defining the duration of chum salmon rearing.Ongoing analysis by
Harza-Ebasco may shed new light on this question.
Pink Salmon
Based on model runs to date,there would be no temperature-related
problems confronting pink salmon if only the Watana Dam was constructed.With
both dams operating;however,three pink salmon life stages would be
negatively affected to some extent.Temperature-related problems,though
.-
,.,..
chronic,would be most manifest in even-numbered years when pink escapement is
highest.The chief concern is a potential delay of inmigration timing (by one
to three weeks depending on meteorology)above RM 130.Principal spawning
areas above RM 130 are in Indian River (RM 138.6)and Portage Creek;in 1984
these two streams supported approximately 65%of all pink salmon spawning
above Talkeetna (about 12,000 fish).
Potential with-project temperature effects on pink salmon inmigration
timing are greater than those on chinook salmon inmigration timing for three
reasons.First,the potential temperature block could preclude access to a
greater amount of habitat.Second,predicted timing of the event would occur
slightly later and nearer the peak of inmigration,so more fish would be
involved.Finally,the period of exposure to temperatures below the thermal
tolerance level would be of longer duration.
As with chinook salmon,several factors could lessen potential effects.
Spawning habitats.(especially Indian River)are relatively close to the
problem area,so it is conceivable that fish,being physiologically ready to
spawn,might be compelled to surmount the obstacle.Also,at least for Indian
33RD3/002 -64 -
....
River,tributary inflow might create an avenue of access for upstream
migrants.
With present knowledge it is impossible to quantify the overall influence
with-project temperatures would have on pink salmon inmigration timing.It is
important to note that even under a worst case scenario,model results
indicate that the temperature block would disappear slightly before peak
inmigration occurred (last week of July to first two weeks of August).Thus,
the maj ority of f ish would continue to reach their natal beds in synchrony
with endogenous biological clocks.
Predicted with-project July water temperatures above RM 130 fall below
thermal tolerance criteria for successful pink salmon spawning (see AEIDC
1981f).However,no pink salmon have been found spawning in mainstem areas
above RM 130,lessening the significance of potential negative effects.
With both dams operating and only under the coldest scenarios modeled,
late May to early June mainstem water temperatures near RM 150 are predicted
to be below pink salmon outmigration thermal tolerance criteria.However,
this should not seriously affect long-term productivity,since the predicted
low temperatures occur early in the outmigration period.Considering the
rapidity with which pink salmon outmigrate,the anticipated delay should not
impede their timely access to the estuary.
Coho and Sockeye Salmon
Predicted June to September with-project mains tern temperatures for both
the one and two-dam options would negatively effect coho and sockeye salmon
juvenile growth and smoltification rates.Judged against thermal tolerance
criteria,anticipated effects would be significantly more troublesome with the
two-dam option.The anticipated reduction in growth rate is identical to that
33RD3/002 -65 -
....
reported for chinook salmon (see above).However,to date relatively few coho
or sockeye salmon (4%and 8%respectively of all rearing salmon captured)
~.,
(Schmidt et a1.1984)have been found rearing in waters which would be
influenced by with-project temperatures.
Eulachon and Bering Cisco
It appears that all eulachon spawning activity takes place far below the
area likely to be influenced by temperature change.The maximum upstream
limit of eulachon spawning occurs around RM 30.Since tributary inflow and
,....
....
....
....
climatic influence should dampen with-project temperatures considerably
upstream of RM 30,with-project temperatures should exert no effect on
eulachon.Bering cisco spawning grounds roughly coincide with the downstream
limit of the temperature effects zone (at RM 75).Too little is known of how
temperature affects Bering cisco life history stages to allow a prediction of
their fate to be made.Further,temperature modeling has not been done for
the subject area.
RESIDENT SPECIES
The following discussion addresses the anticipated with-project negative
temperature effects on resident fish,which are summarized in Table Ii.
Burbot
Depending on whether one or two dams were operating and also on climatic
factors,an open water area would occur with-project during winter from Devil
Canyon downstream between RM 140 and 120 (Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture
1984).Susitna River burbot reportedly spawn under the ice at temperatures
colder than 3 C.Winter with-project temperatures could negatively affect
33RD3/002 -66 -
~,"/,
Table 12.Anticipated relative negative with-project temperature effects on resident species •
.I
Watana Operation Devil Canyon Operation
Fish Species
Effects Effects1221 2 2ScaleLocationDateScaleLocationDate
Burbot
Adult Migration 0 0
Spawning 3 Upstream of Jan-Mar 3 Upstream of Jan-I<Jar
the Ice Front the Ice Front
(RM 120-140)(RM 120-140)
Incubation 0 0
~
Rearing 0 0
3Whitefish
Adult Migration 0 0
Spawning 1 Upstream of Oct 1 Upstream of Oct
RM 100 RM 100
Incubation 1 Upstream of Oct-Apr 1 Upstream of Oct-Apr
RM 100 RM 100
Rearing 0 0
Rainbow Trout-Adult Migration 0 3 Upstream of May-Jun
RM 100
Spawning 0 0
Incubation 0 0
Rearing 0 0
-
33RC1/002b -67 -
,
Table~.Anticipated relative negative with-project temperature effects on resident species.
(cont'd)
Watana Operation Devil Canyon Operation
Fish Species
Arctic Grayling
Effects
1Scale 2Location 2Date
Effects
1Scale 2Location 2Date
,-
Adult Migration
Spawning
Incubation
Rearing
3
o
o
o
Impoundment May-Jun 3
o
o
o
Impoundment &May-Jun
Upstream of
RM 100
Lake Trout
....
Adult Migration 0 0
Spawning 0 0-Incubation 0 0
,....Rearing 0 0
....
.....
1 0 No concern
1 Low
2 Moderate
3 Possible
See text for a complete description of the effects scale •
2 Location and date of anticipated effects comes from temperature modeling results (AEIDC
1984).
3 This table is applicable to both broad and humpback whitefish.
33RC1/002b -68 -
burbot spawning in the ice-free zone cause they are predicted to be warmer,,
than natural there.This means that with-project conditions (no ice cover and
warmer than normal water)would be less than optimal for spawning.However,a
number of uncertainties constrain this conclusion.First,although all
....observations of burbot spawning have been made under an ice mantle,it is
unclear whether ice cover isa requisite for this behavior.Second,winter
water temperatures in the ice-free zone are predicted to decline in a linear
fashion downstream from the reservoir until reaching the a C isotherm
proximal to the ice front.Depending on climate and dam operational scenario,
the predicted range of water temperatures in this zone varies and,therefore,
the amount of potential affected habitat varies.Third,to date no burbot
.....
have been found spawning in the area of the predicted ice-free zone.Because
of these points,it is difficult to predict the influence of with-proj ect
temperatures on burbot spawning with any certainty.It does appear,however,
that few fish are involved.
Whitefish
Both species of whitefish naturally spawn in October under conditions of
rapidly decreasing water temperatures.Under the Watana Dam-only scenario,
predicted October temperatures between RM 100 and RM 150 would be 2.1 to 4.1 C
warmer than normal.Under the two-dam scenario,they would be 3.1 to 6.2 C
warmer (AEIDC 1984).These warmer temperatures would expectedly accelerate
whitefish embryo development rates,resulting in earlier than normal emerging
fry.Early emerging fry survival rates would expectedly be less than natural;
fry would encounter a colder and more hostile environment,with an inadequate
number of seasonal food items.Alternately,predicted warmer October
temperatures could delay whitefish spawning until temperatures dropped in
33RD3/002 -69 -
November.Although effects of this delay cannot be quantified,resulting fry
would emerge later than normal.Given that salmonid emergence times are
correlated with maximal food availability (Groot 1982),fry would experience
less than optimal rearing conditions.
A number of factors complicate the conclusions reached concerning
whitefish.Spawning locations and number of spawners in the area to be
effected with-project are unknown.Therefore,it is impossible to predict the
magnitude of with-project temperature effects on Susitna River whitefish
stocks as a whole.
Rainbow Trout
Susitna River rainbow trout occupy the northernmost limit of their
natural range;and thus,may be more susceptible to temperature deviation than
any other resident fish.Rainbow trout naturally spawn on the ascending phase
of the yearly temperature cycle.Very few rainbow trout have been captured in
mainstem,or slough environments in spring •..'--With-project water temperatures
und,er the two-dam scenario may be too cold to stimulate migration from
mainstem overwintering habitats to tributaries,thereby negatively affecting
Several factors make this conclusion tentative.
<apparently spend the ice-free seasons in tributaries.
Most
First,capture data,
---~--------_..-
productivity.
although preliminary,indicate that outmigrants from lakes may significantly
contribute to the population (M.Stratton pers.corom.)Second,the location
of overwintering mainstem habitats is not completely known and this has
consequence to the analysis.If overwintering habitats are proximal to
tributary mouths (and,thus under the influence of tributary inflow),
with-project mainstem water temperatures would not affect migration behavior.
If,however,overwintering habitats are removed from tributary inflow
33RD3/002 -70 -
.-
-
.....
.....
,
influence,the concern is relevant;colder than normal temperature could
impede upstream movement.Present knowledge is clearly insufficient to allow
accurate predictions,but it does appear that relatively few adult rainbow
trout could be affected.
Arctic Grayling
With-project May to June temperatures could negatively affect the timing
of Arctic grayling spawning migrations.This would be a problem under either
the one or two-dam scenario.With the Watana Dam alone,the concern focuses
solely on the impoundment;with both dams on-line,concerns focus on the
Watana reservoir and the area upstream of RM 100 to Devil Canyon.Arctic
grayling spawning migrations are keyed to ascending water temperatures (like
rainbow trout).Since the with-project environment would be colder than
normal,it is possible that a delay in migration may occur.If so,it could
negatively affect productivity by delaying spawning.However,insufficient
information exists on the influence of cold temperatures on Arctic grayling
migratory behavior to state this with certainty.Perhaps significantly,
-
predicted with-project temperatures are within the range naturally experienced
by the species in Alaska as a whole.
Lake Trout
Lake trout naturally inhabit waters whose temperatures are within the
range of those predicted with-proj ect.
negative effects are anticipated.
Therefore,no temperature-related
33RD3/002 -71 -
-
Potential With-Project Beneficial Effects
As reported earlier.with-project released water temperatures for both
the one and two-dam scenario are predicted to be warmer than natural in winter
and cooler than natural in summer.This effect is predicted to be more
pronounced with the two-dam option and would be manifest only from the Devil
Canyon Dam face to,at most.RM 120 (the area of open water).Given that
predicted released water temperatures are in the range of those supporting
successful salmon spawning and incubation activities in the Susitna basin,it
is conceivable that the subject area could afford additional reproductive
habitat provided that suitable substrates occur there.Predicted winter water
temperatures in the open area are also within the range of those seen in
natural slough overwintering habitats.Provided that cover was available,it
is conceivable that the subject reach could provide ten to thirty miles
(depending on reservoir operational scenarios)of additional overwintering
habitat.Given existing information,it is impossible to accurately gauge the
;/-'-<<<_:/~cope of potential beneficial with-project effects.
,'../i s--~.;~,').,.:;,~;-.-L '--'._-'"~
::>':"';~-;--~~Effe'ct{ve mitigation for anticipated minor negative effects (l's in
Tables ,-and~)is difficult to propose because the numbers of fish
involved are relatively small compared with Susitna stocks as a whole.
Monitoring of these species is not feasible since,given present census
capabilities.it is doubtful that a change in population numbec could be
attributed to with-project effects.It is equally difficult to propose
...,~,-,---~._---.-...._'.~~
mitigation forCa"tegory 3 species in Tables ,c'·and Far too little is
"'""known of these species life histories.their numbers,or their response to
altered thermal regimes to accurately state whether they would or would not be
affected by with-project conditions.All that can be said is that some
potential for negative change in their respective populations is possible.
33RD3/002 -72 -
Thus,it is premature to suggest mitigation for species in this category.For
species
;
in Category 2
/
(Tables :....and _'.._),anticipated population effects
....
""'"!
could be monitored by current techniques and,if warranted,these should be
mitigated.As indicated earlier in this report,the model used to predict
chinook salmon growth rates tends to over estimate with-proj ect negative
effects.The model could be modified to more accurately predict with-project
conditions.This could be done by either incorporating unpublished data on
chinook growth rates purported to be kept in the files of J.R.Brett,Canadian
Fisheries biologist with the Nanaimo Pacific Biological Station or by
conducting in situ growth studies of Susitna chinook salmon .
33RD3/002 -73 -
--
SUMMARY
In summary,this report presents the results of an analysis of existing
information of with-project temperature effects on Susitna River fish.It is
based on a comparison of available predictions from simulation models of
reservoir and instream temperatures with either fish thermal tolerance
criteria or (in their absence)information on fish response to thermal
gradients.Together,several factors complicated this analysis.First,the
temperature data base as a whole is temporarily limited and its accuracy
varies between stations.Because of this,model calibrations were in part
performed with synthesized data,adding an unknown level of imprecision to
results.Second,both temperature models used (DYRESM and SNTEMP)are one
dimensional,so they cannot account for all of the variables influencing water
temperature.Generally~model runs are better predictors of temperature
ranges (between with-project and natural conditions)then they are of specific
with-project temperatures.Third,available fish thermal tolerance
information,while of sufficient scope for use in gauging effects on
salmonids,is biased to lower latitudes necessitating professional
i
.....
interpretation.Fourth,little relevant thermal tolerance information exists
for the other species present.'Fifth~the model used to estimate temperature
effects on salmon growth rates incorporates several assumptions which
collectively make conclusions reached more representative of worst case
situations •
Based on existing data~model runs,thermal tolerance criteria,life
history information,and professional judgement,no direct mortality on fish
is anticipated to occur from with-project temperatures.Indirect mortality to
some fish species may occur,however,and depending on operational scenario,
33RD3/002 -74 -
these effects may be significant.Although unquantifiable,effects on rearing
chinook salmon (in the mainstem from Devil Canyon to about the Chulitna
confluence)are predicted to be the most severe of all.Regardless of
operating scenario,juvenile chinook salmon growth rates would be retarded;
effects would be more acute with both reservoirs than with one.This would
result in smaller than normal smolts and/or a delay in outmigration,both of
which are known to result in reduced survivorship.Based on four years of
-
escapement data,this could maximally result in the loss of about 1,500 adult
chinook salmon.Next in severity,with-project water temperatures (for the
two-dam scenario only)could delay adult pink and chinook salmon inmigration
(and hence,spawning)above RM 130.This would offset the normal timing of
incubation,emergence,and outmigration.This,too,has been shown to reduce
survivorship.Given the wide natural variation in pink salmon escapements,it
is difficult to estimate the number of fish which would be effected.In 1984,
this would have been approximately 12,000 fish.Of lesser concern,
....
with-project water temperatures (for the two-dam coldest climate scenarios
only)could delay pink and chinook salmon outmigration near RM 150.A fairly
wide range of other relatively minor negative effects are predicted to occur
from with-project temperatures.These vary from reductions in chum,coho,and
sockeye salmon juvenile growth rates,to possible interruption of spawning
behaviors by Bering cisco,whitefish,and burbot,to delay of inmigration of
adult rainbow and Arctic grayling to spawning habitats.
Potential beneficial effects of the altered with-proj ect temperature
regime on fish are limited to the creation of some overwintering and
incubation habitats.These would occur in the 10-to 30-mile stretch of open
water which would annually occur each winter immediately below the Devil
l"-
I 33RD3/002 -75 -
-
Canyon dam face.Given present knowledge,it is impossible to gauge the scope
of these effects with-project.
33RD3!002 -76 -
~~~~-------------------------------,--"--------------------------
-
,...
REFERENCES
Acres American.Inc.1983.Application for license for major project.Susitna
Hydroelectric Project.before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Vol.5A.Exhibit E.Chaps.1 and 2.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna
Hydroelectric Project.1 vol.
ADF&G.see Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.
AEIDC.see University of Alaska-Fairbanks,Arctic Environmental Information &
Da.ta Center.
Alabaster.J.S ••and R.Lloyd.1982.Water quality criteria for freshwater
fish.2nd ed.Butterworth Scientific,Boston,MA.361 pp.
Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.1976.Fish and wildlife studies related to the
Corps of Engineers Devil Canyon.Watana Reservoir Hydroelectric Project.
Anchorage,AK.Report for U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service.1 vol.
1978.Preliminary environmental assessment of hydroelectric
development on the Susitna River.Anchorage,AK.Report for U.S.Fish &
Wildlife Service.1 vol.
1981a.Resident fish investigation on the upper Susitna River.
Final Draft Report.Anchorage.AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro
Aquatic Studies.Report for Acres American,Inc.1 vol.
1981b.Resident fish investigation on the lower Susitna River.
Final Draft Report.Anchorage.AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro
Aquatic Studies.Report for Acres American.Inc.1 vol.
1983a.Susitna hydro aquatic studies.phase 2 final data report.
Vol.2.Adult anadromous fish studies.1982.Final Report.Anchorage,
AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report for
Acres American.Inc.2 vols.
1983b.Susitna hydro aquatic studies,phase 2 basic data report.
Vol.3.Resident and juvenile anadromous fish studies on the Susitna River
below Devil Canyon,1982.Final Report.Anchorage.AK.Alaska Power
Authority.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report for Acres American.Inc.
2 vols.
1983c.Susitna hydro aquatic studies,phase 2 baseline data
report.Vol.4.Aquatic habitat and instream flow studies.1982.Final
Report.Anchorage.AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro Studies.
Report for Acres American,Inc.3 vols.
1983d.Susitna hydro aquatic studies.phase 2 basic data report.
Vol.5.Upper Susitna River impoundment studies.1982.Final Report.
Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.
Report for Acres American,Inc.150 pp.
33RD2-007z -.1 -
References
Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game.1983e.Susitna hydro aquatic studies,
data report.Winter aquatic studies (October 1982 -May 1983).
report.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydro
Studies.Report for Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.137 pp.
phase 2
Final
Aquatic
....1985a.Proposed Task Statement for FY86 Su-Hydro Scope of Work •
1985b.An evaluation of the incubation life phase of chum salmon
in the middle Susitna River.Draft.Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic
Studies Winter Aquatic Investigations,September 1983 -May 1984.1985
Report 5.Vol.1.Report for Alaska Power Authority.157 pp.
Alaska Power Authority.1984.Alaska Power Authority comments on the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission draft environmental impact statement of May
1984.Vol.2B.Technical comments -aquatic resources.Anchorage,AK.
Susitna Hydroelectric Project.APA Document 1772.1 vol.
[1985].Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Position paper,fisheries
issue F-2.5.1 vol.
Bailey,J.1983.Personnel communication in U.S.Army Corps of Engineers.
Draft interim feasibility report and evironmental impact statement.
Hydroelectric power for Sitka,Petersburg/Wrangell,and Ketchikan,Alaska.
U.S.Army Engineer District,Anchorage,AK.
,~
Bailey,J.D.,and D.R.Evans.1971.
salmon eggs in relation to a
Fisheries Bulletin.69(3):587-593.
The low-temperature threshold for pink
proposed hydroelectric installation.
-
-
Bams,R.A.1967.A review of the literature on the effects of changes in
temperature regime of developing sockeye salmon eggs and alevins.Journal
of Fisheries Research Board of Canada.Manuscript 949:14-22.
Barrett,B.M.1974.An assessment of the anadromous fish populations in the
upper Susitna River watershed between Devil Canyon and the Chulitna River.
Alaska Div.of Commercial Fisheries,Anchorage,AK.56 pp.
Barrett,B.M.,F.M.Thompson,and S.N.Wick.1984.Adult anadrornous fish
investigations:May October 1983.Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,
Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report 1.Report for
Alaska Power Authority.1 vol.
1985.Adult anadrornous fish investigations (May -October 1984).
Draft report.Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro
Aquatic Studies.Report 1.Report for Alaska Power Authority.1 vol.
Bell,M.C.1980.Fisheries handbook of engineering requirements and biological
criteria.Revised.Prepared for Fisheries Engineering Research Program,
U.S.Army,Corps of Engineers,Portland,OR.
1983.
river systems.
33RD2-007z
Lower temperatures at which species of salmon move within
Memorandum to L.Moulton.January 8,1983.
- 2 -
References
Bilton,H.T.
time at
Technical
1978.Returns of adult coho salmon in relation to mean size and
release of juveniles.Canadian Fisheries Marine Services.
Report 832.73 p.
.....
-
-
Brannon,E.L.1982.Orientation mechanisms of homing salmonids.Pages 219-227
in E.L.Brannon and E.O.Salo,eds.Proceedings of the Salmon and Trout
Migratory Behavior Symposium,1st,Seattle,WN.309 pp.
Bryan,J.E.,and D.A.Kato.1975.Spawning of lake whitefish,Coregonus
clupeaformis,and round whitefish,Prosopium cylindraceum,in Aishihik Lake
and East Aishihik River,Yukon Territory.Journal of the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada.32(2):283-288.
Bustard,D.R.,and D.W.Narver.1975.Aspects of water ecology of juvenile
coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch)and steelhead trout (Salmo gairdneri).
Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.32(5):667-680.
Cederholm,C.J.,and W.J.Scarlett.1982.Seasonal immigrations of juvenile
salmonids into four small tributaries of the Clearwater River,Washington
of the Salmon and Trout Migratory Behavior Symposium.School of Fisheries,
Univ.of Washington,Seattle,WA.
Chapman,D.W.,and T.C.Bjornn.1969.Distribution of salmonids in streams
with special reference to food and feeding.Pages 153-176 in
T.G.Northcote,ed.Symposium on Salmon and Trout in Streams.University
of British Columbia,Vancouver,B.C.H.R.MacMillan Lectures in Fisheries.
Clarke,W.C.,et al.1978.Growth and adaptation to sea water in
llunderyearling"sockeye (Oncorhynchus nerka)and coho (0.kisutch)salmon
subjected to regimes of constant or changing temperature and day length.
Canadian Journal of Zoology.56:2413-2422.
1981.Effect of artifical photoperiod cycles,temperature,and
salinity on growth and smolting in underyearling coho,chinook,and sockeye
salmon.Aquaculture.22:105-116.
Coburn,A.,and P.McCart.1967.A hatchery release tank for pink salmon fry
with notes on behavior of the fry in the tank and after release.Journal
of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.24:77-85.
Combs.B.D.1965.Effects of temperature on the development of salmon eggs.
Progressive Fish-Culturist.27:134-37.
Cook Inlet Regional Planning
enhancement plan 1981-2000.
Team.1981.Cook
Final Draft Report.
Inlet regional salmon
Soldotna,AK.72 pp.
,~
Dill,L.M.1969.The sub-gravel behavior of Pacific salmon larvae.Pages
89-99 in T.G.Northcote,ed.Symposium on salmon and trout in streams.
University of British Columbia,Vancouver,B.C.
33RD2-007z - 3 -
.....
.....
-
.....
.....
References
Dugan,L.,D.Sterritt,and M.Stratton.1984.The distribution and relative
abundance of juvenile salmon in the Susitna River drainage above the
Chulitna River confluence.Draft report.Part 2 of D.C.Schmidt,S.S.
Hale,and D.L.Crawford,eds.Resident and juvenile anadromous fish
investigations (May -October 1983).Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,
Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report 2.1 vol •
E.Woody Trihey &Associates,and Woodward-Clyde Consultants.1985.Instream
flow relationships report.Vol.1.Settlement process.Working draft.
Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for
Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.1 vol.
Fast,D.E.,et al.1982.Survival and movement of chinook and coho salmon
alevins in hypoxic environments.Pages 51-60 in E.L.Brannon and E.O.
Salo,eds.Proceedings of the Salmon and Trout Migratory Behavior
Symposium,1st,Seattle,WN.309 pp.
Folmar,L.C.,et al.1982.Stunting and parr-reversion during smoltification
of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch).Aquaculture.28:91-104.
Fry,F.G.,and P.W.Hochachka.1970.Fish.Pages 79-134 in G.C.Whittow,ed.
Comparative physiology of thermoregulation.Vol.1.Invertebrates and
nonmammalian vertebrates.Academic Press,Inc.,New York,NY.
Gray,E.G.1982.Is the lunar cycle a factor timing the onset of salmon
migration?Pages 184-189 in E.L.Brannon and E.O.Salo,eds.Proceedings
of the Salmon and Trout Migratory Behavior Symposium,1st,Seattle,WN.
309 pp.
Godin,J.G.J.1982.Migrations of salmonid fishes during early life history
phases:daily and annual timing.Pages 22-50 in E.L.Brannon and E.O.
Salo,eds.Proceedings of the salmon and trout migratory behavior
symposium,1st,University of Washington,Seattle,June 3-5 •
Groot,C.1982.Modification on a theme - a perspective on migratory behavior
of Pacific salmon.Pages 1-21 in E.L.Brannon and E.O.Salo,eds.
Proceedings of the salmon and trout migratory behavior symposium,1st,
University of Washington,Seattle,June 3-5.
Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.1984a.Eklutna Lake temperature and ice
study,with six months simulation for Watana Reservoir.Final report.
Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.APA Document 1123.
1 vol.
1984b.Instream ice simulation study.Final report.Alaska Power
Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.1 vol.
(li"
1985.[Case E-VI alternative flow regime].Vol.6.Appendix H.
Reservoir/river temperatures and ice simulations for Watana and Devil
Canyon operating in 2002.Final report.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna
Hydroelectric Project.1 vol.
33RD2-007z -4-
-
References
~~-':J
Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.1985.[Case E-VI alternative flow regime].
VoL 7.Appendix 1.Refinements to reservoir and river temperature and
ice simulations for October 1976 to May 1977 meteorologic and hydrologic
data.Final report.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric
Project.1 vol.
Hausle,D.A.,and D.W.Cobble.1976.Influence of sand in redds on survival
and emergence of brook trout (Salvelinus frontinalis).Transactions of the
American Fisheries Society.105:57-63.
Hoar,W.S.1976.Smolt transformation:evolution,behavior,and physiology.
Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.33:1234-1252.
Imberger,J.,and J.C.Patterson.1981.A dynamic reservoir simulation
model -DYRESM:5.Chapter 9 in Transport Models for Inland and Coastal
Waters.Academic Press.
McNeil,W.J.1969.Survival of pink and chum salmon eggs and alevins.
Pages 101-117 in T.G.Northcote,ed.Symposium on Salmon and Trout in
Streams.Univ.of British Columbia,Vancouver,B.C.H.R.MacMillan
Lectures in Fisheries.
..-
McNeil,W.J.,R.A.Wells,and D.C.
salmon eggs and larvae from
Fish &Wildlife Service.
13 pp.
Brickell.1964.Disappearance of dead pink
Sashin Creek,Baranof Island,Alaska.U.S.
Special Scientific Report -Fisheries 485.
:~
-
Merrell,T.R.1962.Freshwater survival of pink salmon at Sashin Creek.
Pages 59-72 in N.J.Wilimovsky,ed.Symposium on Pink Salmon.University
of British Columbia,Vancouver,B.C.,1960.H.R.MacMillan Lectures in
Fisheries.
Miller,R.J.,and E.L.Brannon.1982.The orlgln and development of life
history patterns in Pacific salmonids.Pages 296 to 309 in E.L.Brannon
and E.G.Salo,eds.Proceedings of the Salmon and Trout Migratory Behavior
Symposium,1st,Seattle,WN.309 pp.
Northcote,T.G.1962.Migratory behavior of juvenile rainbow trout,Salmo
gairdneri,in outlet and inlet streams of Loon Lake,British Columbia.
Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.19:201-270.
1969.Patterns and mechanisms in the lakeward migratory behavior
of juvenile trout.Pages 183-203 in T.G.Northcote,ed.Symposium of
Salmon and Trout in Streams,University of British Columbia,Vancouver,
B.C.
Raleigh,R.F.1971.Innate control of migration of salmon and trout fry from
natal gravels to rearing areas.Ecology.52:291-297.
Raleigh,R.F.,and D.W.Chapman.1971.Genetic control in lakeward megrations
of cutthroat trout fry.Transactions of the American Fisheries Society.
100:33-40.
33RD2-007z - 5 -
References
Raymond,H.L.1979.
chinook salmon
Transactions of
Effects of dams and impoundments on migrations of juvenile
and steelhead from the Snake River,1966 to 1975.
the American Fish Society.108(6):505-529.
Reiser.D.W.,and T.C.Bjornn.1979.Habitat requirements of anadromous
salmonids.No.1 in Influence of forest and rangeland management on
anadromous fish habitat in the western United States and Canada.U.S.
Forest Service,Portland,OR.Genera.l Technical Report PNW-96.54 pp.
-Reynolds,W.W.
behavior.
1977.Temperature as a proximate factor in
Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada.
orientation
34:734-739.
Riis,J.C.1977.Pre-authorization assessment of the proposed Susitna River
f"""Hydroelectric Projects:Preliminary investigations of water quality and
aquatic species composition.Alaska Div.of Sport Fish,Anchorage,AK.
91 pp.
\~
Sano.S.1966.Salmon of the North
life history of North Pacific
Pages 41-57 in International
Bulletin 18.
Pacific Ocean Part III.A review of the
salmon.Chum salmon in the Far East.
North Pacific Fisheries Commission
Schmidt,D.1984.Stratification of surface water in the lower Susitna River.
Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.
Memorandum.2 pp.
Schmidt,D.C.,et al.,eds.1984a.Resident and juvenile anadromous fish
investigations (May -October 1983).Parts 1-7.Alaska Dept.of Fish &
Game,Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report 2.Report for
Alaska Power Authority.1 vol.
1984b.Resident and juvenile anadromous fish investigations
(May -October 1983).July 1984.Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,Anchorage,
AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report 2.Report for Alaska Power
Authority.Document 1784.1 vol.
1984c.Access and transmission corridor
(July -October 1983).Parts 1 and 2.Alaska
Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.
Alaska Power Authority.1 vol.
aquatic investigations
Dept.of Fish &Game,
Report 4.Report for
Schreck,C.B.1982.Parr-smolt transformation and behavior.
E.L.Brannon and E.O.Sale,eds.Proceedings of the
Migratory Behavior Symposium,1st,Seattle,WN.309 pp.
Pages 164-172 in
Salmon and Trout
Scott,W.B.,and E.J.Crossman.1973.Freshwater fishes of Canada.
Research Board of Canada,Ottawa,Ontario,Canada.Bulletin 184.
Fisheries
966 pp.
..-
Sheridan,W.L.1962.Relation of stream temperatures to timing of pink salmon
escapements in southeast Alaska.Pages 87-102 in N.J.Wi 1 imov sky ,ed.
Symposium on Pink Salmon.University of British Columbia,Vancouver,B.C.,
1960.H.R.MacMillan Lectures in Fisheries.
......
33RD2-007z - 6 -
-
References
Solomon,D.J.1982.Smolt migration in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)and
sea trout (Salmo trutta L.).Pages 196-203 in E.L.Brannon and E.~Salo,
eds.Proceedings of the Salmon and Trout Migratory Behavior Symposium)
1st,Seattle,WN.309 pp.
Stearns,S.C.1976.Life history tactics:a review of the ideas.Quarterly
Review of Biology.51:3-47.
1977.The evolution of life history traits:a critique of the
theory and a review of the data.Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics.
8:145-171.
5undet,R.,and M.Wenger.1984.Resident fish distribution and population
dynamics in the Susitna River below Devil Canyon.Draft report.Part 5 of
D.C.Schmidt,5.S.Hale,and D.L.Crawford,eds.Resident and juvenile
anadromous fish investigations (May -October 1983).Alaska Dept.of Fish
&Game,Anchorage,AK.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report 2.1 vol.
Theurer,F.,K.Voos,and W.Miller.1983.Instream water temperature model.
Draft report.Instream Flow and Aquatic Systems Group,U.S.Fish &
Wildlife Service,Fort Collins,CO.Instream Flow Information Paper
No.16.263 pp.
Thomas)A.E.1975.Migration of chinook salmon fry from simulated incubation
channels in relation to water temperature,flow,and turbidity.
Progressive Fish Culturist.37:219-223.
Thorpe,J.E.1982.Migration in salmonids,with special reference to juvenile
movements in freshwater.Pages 86-97 in E.L.Brannon and E.O.Salol eds.
Proceedings of the Salmon and Trout Migratory Behavior Symposium,1st)
Seattle,WN.309 pp.
U.S.Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.1984.Susitna Hydroelectric
Project.FERC No.7114.Draft environmental impact statement.Vol 1.
Main text.Office of Electric Power Regulation,U.S.Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission,Washington)DC.FERC/DEIS-0038.1 vol.
U.S.Fish &Wildlife Service.1952.A preliminary statement of fish and
wildlife resources of the Susitna Basin in relation to water development
projects.
1954.
River Basin.
A progress report on the fishery resources of the Susitna
Juneau,AK.
1957.Progress report,1956 field investigations Devil Canyon
Damsite,Susitna River Basin.Juneau)AK.
1959a.Progress report,1957 field investigations Devil Canyon
Damsite and reservoir area,Susitna River Basin.Juneau,AK.
1959b.1958 field investigations Denali and Vee Canyon Damsites
and reservoir areas,Susitna River Basin.Juneau,AK.
33RD2-007z -,,7 -
~References
u.s.Fish &Wildlife Service.1960.
resources affected by the Devil
Fisheries,Juneau,AK.
A detailed report on fish and wildlife
Canyon Project,Bureau of Commercial
1965.A detailed report on fish and wildlife resources affected by
Vee Project,Susitna River,Alaska.Juneau,AK.16 pp.
University of Alaska-Fairbanks,Arctic Environmental Information &Data Center.
1982.Summary of environmental knowledge of the proposed Grant Lake
hydroelectric project area.Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,AK Report
for Ebasco Services.212 pp.
1983.Stream flow and temperature modeling in the Susitna Basin,
Alaska.Final report.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna
Hydroelectric Project.Report for Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.APA
Document 862.60 pp.and appendices.-
-
-
1984a.Assessment of the effects of the proposed Susitna
Hydroelectric Project on instream temperature and fishery resources in the
Watana to Talkeetna reach.Final report.Vol.1.Main text.Alaska
Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Harza-Ebasco
Susitna Joint Venture.130 pp.
1984b.Assessment of the effects of the proposed Susitna
Hydroelectric Project on instream temperature and fishery resources in the
Watana to Talkeetna reach.Final report.Vol.2.Appendices A-H.Alaska
Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Harza-Ebasco
Susitna Joint Venture.1 vol.
1985.Assessment of the effects of the proposed Susitna
Hydroelectric Project on instream temperature and fishery resources in the
Watana to Talkeetna reach.Supplemental report.Case E-VI operating
regime.Draft report.Anchorage,AK.Alaska Power Authority.Susitna
Hydroelectric Project.Report for Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.
Wagner,H.H.1974.
steelhead trout
52:219-234.
Photoperiod and temperature regulation of smolting in
(Salmo gairdneri).Canadian Journal of Zoology.
Wangaard,D.B.,and C.V.Burger.1983.Effects of various water temperature
regimes on the egg and alevin incubation of Susitna River chum and sockeye
salmon.Final report.National Fishery Research Center,U.S.Fish &
Wildlife Service,Anchorage,AK.43 pp.
Washington,P.M.1982.The influence of
seaward migration and survival.
E.o.Salo,eds.Proceedings of the
Symposium,1st,Seattle,WN.309 pp.
the size of juvenile coho salmon on
Pages 146-152 in E.L.Brannon and
Salmon and Trout Migratory Behavior
Wedemeyer,G.A.,et al.
and early marine
Review.June:1-14.
33RD2-007z
1982.Environmental factors affecting smoltification
survival of anadromous salmonids.Marine Fisheries
-/8 -
r-References
Wetzel,R.G.1975.Limnology.W.B.Saunders Co.,Philadelphia,PA.743 pp.
-
-
Witzel,L.D.,and H.R.MacCrimmon.1981.Role of gravel substrate on ova
survival and alevin emergence of rainbow trout,Salmo gairdneri.Canadian
Journal of Zoology.59:629-636.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants.1984.Fish mitigation plan.Alaska Power
Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Report for Harza-Ebasco Susitna
Joint Venture.1 vol.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants,and Entrix,Inc.1985.Fish resources and-habitats
in the middle Susitna River.Draft final report.Anchorage,AK.Alaska
Power Authority.Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Instream Flow
Relationships Report Series.Technical Report 1.Report for Harza-Ebasco
Susitna Joint Venture.159 pp.
Zaugg,W.G.1982.Relationships between smolt indices and migration in
controlled and natural environments.Pages 173 to 183 in E.L.Brannon and
E.O.Salo,eds.Proceedings of the Salmon and Trout Migratory Behavior
Symposium,1st,Seattle,h~.309 pp.
33RD2-007z -·9 -
.....
....
-
References
)PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS
Bigelow,B.B.1984.Correspondence.U.S.Geological Survey,Anchorage,AK.
Koski,K.1984.Interview,May 4,1984.Auke Bay Laboratory,U.S.National
Marine Fisheries Service,Auke Bay,AK.
Krasnowski,P.1984.Telephone conversation,April 10,1984.Alaska Dept.of
Fish &Game,Anchorage,AK.
Pratt,K.1984.Telephone conversation,May 7,1984.Alaska Dept.of Fish &
Game,Anchorage,AK.
~det.R.1985.Telephone conversation,March 6.Alaska Dept.of Fish &
\,Game.Anchorage.Ale
~.s+rt<.ttDtJ}ttl,110-5',~"-''v~1 fcf/ytcCtri )L(I S /.v-Lft,*t-D {-aU?Lree(c
t~IA-~'
33RD2-007z -10 -{'
<,",I
{b
";<;'."'.