HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA4025....
...
.-
SUSITNA HATCHERY
SITING STUDY
Prepared for
THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
AND
ACRES AMERiCA INCORPORATED
November 1982
"...
&..
SUSITNA HATCHERY
SITING STUDY
Prepared for
THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY
AND
ACRES AMERICA INCORPORATED
November 1982
701 Sesame Street
Anchorage,Alaska 99503
(907)276-2335
December 3,1982
Mr.Bill Wilson
University of Alaska
AEIDC
707 "A"Street
Anchorage,AK 99501
Dear Bill:
Woodward-Clyde Consultants
Enclosed is a draft copy of the Kramer,Chin and Mayo,Inc.Susitna
Hatchery Siting Study for your information.Comments are not
requested at this time.
Sincerely,
~~
Lawrence L.Moulton
Project Manager
LLM/jj
cc:R.Fleming,APA
J.Hayden,Acres
T.Trent,ADF&G
Consulting Engineers,Geologists
and Environmental Scientists
Offices in Other Principal Cities
.....
-
,~
-
-
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
Introduction
Background
Objective
Methodology
Compensatory Hatchery Concept
The Production Program
Facility Components
Adult Capture and Holding
Egg-Take/Spawning
Incubation
Rearing
Water Supply System
Support Functions
Siting
Physical Consideration
Accessibility to Roadways
Accessibility to Power
Type of Water Supply
Other Factors
Site Analyses
Overview
Lake Water Source
Stream/Spring Water Source
Well Water Source
Facility Expansion
Sites
Byers Lake
Larson Lake
Fish Lake
Caswell Lake
Red Shirt Lake
Montana Lake
Goose Creek
Willow Creek
Talkeetna Airport
Page No.
1-1
1-1
1-2
1-3
2-1
2-1
2-4
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
2-11
2-12
2-13
2-14
2-14
2-16
3-1
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-3
3-3
3-4
3-4
3-6
3-8
3-9
3-11
3-12
3-14
3-15
3-16
JK
Ill~S
,s8
A-23
11\0 f qfh}~
I
•
q-
cococo
~
§
LO
LO
ן""'-
M
M
Cost Estimates/Schedule
Physical Facility
Cost Estimates
Development Schedule
Summary
ARLIS
Alaska Resources
Library &Information Services
Anchorage,Alaska
4-1
4-1
4-2
4-2
INTRODUCTION
-Background
The Susitna River extends approximately 275 miles from the glaciated peaks
of the Clearwater Moun~ains,90 miles south of Fairbanks,to Cook Inlet 25
miles west of Anchorage.Its drainage is approximately 19,400 square
miles.Native populations of chum,coho,Chinook,pink,SOCkeye(~t:eI_:)
head,and non-anadromous species occupy the mainstem and its tributaries up
to the rapids at Devils Canyon.
-,
Recent observations of Chinook and chum
1lI-.
>-\
suggest the possibility that salmonids are located throughout the basin.//i
The river has three major tributaries and a number of smaller ones.Both
the mainstem and its tributaries vary in characteristics from well defined,
plunging channels to braided streams.Salmon spawning occurs both in the
smaller tributaries and in the many sloughs which are present in both the
mainstem and the large tributaries.Ice cover persists throughout the
river system for approximately six months each year.
The Parks Highway provides vicinity access to the central portion of the
Susitna Basin and portions of the Chulitna River,one of the major
tributaries.Several small access roads have been constructed to the river
itself,primarily to provide recreational access.The ~ransmission cor-
ridor for the proposed hydroelectric projects may provide additional access
as would the relocation of the Capital to.the j'li11ow area.These develop---
ments similarly would increase the availabili~y of power in the basin which
is generally limited to the Parks Highway south of Talkeetna.
ARLIS
Alaska Resources
Library &Information Services
Anchorage,Alaska
1-1
z
_____~,__w -......-~--,__-------.----------
•....The proposed hydroelectric dams at Watana and subsequently Devils Canyon
could impact anadromous species in terms of access to spawning grounds and
unusual temperature regimes as far as 50 miles downstream of the dams.A
va;riety of options for mitigating and compensating for these potential
impacts is being considered.As part of this package,this report sum-
lnarizes the findings of a reconnaissance siting study for a compensatory
hatching and early rearing facility for Chum salmon.
Objective
This report summarizes a four-month study.Its focus was:
o establish biological and physical criteria for the facility
o identify the existence of suitable sites
o
o
conceptualize a state-of-the-art facility
provide budgetary guidelines in terms of both capital and operation
and maintenance costs
-
"""
Because of the short performance period of this study and the alterationS
in the Susitna Basin which may occur prior to hatchery construction,it is
not an objective of this study to select the flbest lt or lfoptimallf site.
Rather,the objective is to determine the availability of a feasible site
or sites.The commitment to a compensatory hatchery and its exact location
must be based on a range of considerations beyond the scope of this study.
The qUidelines for the production capacity of the facility have been estab-
lished at 30,000 adult chum returning to the proximity of the hatchery.It
has also been established that the runs produced by the facility should not
create additional fishery problems in the river system and Cook Inlet in
1-2
_____..._<......w _
•.-
I....
-
-
terms of harvest management,genetics,disease,and competition with native
stocks.
Methodology
The method utilized for the identification and subsequent evaluation of
potential sites consisted of both review of written descriptions and
discussions with individuals familiar with the sites.An initial identifi-
cation of sites in the Susitna Basin and upper Cook Inlet was conducted by
the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)in 1979.This study,con-
ducted over a two-year period,identified 24 sites within the region.Of
these,15 were within the Susitha system drainage basin.After review of
the background documents on sites,eight appeared generally feasible for a
chum program.One additional site affording groundwater potential was also
identified.All nine sites were inspected by an engineer and biologist.
Sites were inspected from the ground and via aerial surveillance.Because
a single visit during even the most clement of weather provided insuffi-
cient information which to base detailed design decisions,the site evalua-
tio~team considered previous experience in constructing and operating
hatcheries in similar environments.The information available from ADF&G
on water chemistry and indiginous fish population and conversations with
staff members was of great assistance during the evaluation process.
The sites were analyzed in relation to a set of physical and biological
criteria developed in the initial phase of the study.The criteria,con-
tained in Chapter 2 of this report,are consistent with current fish cul-
ture practices in Alaska for salmonid hatcheries.
1-3
Discussions were held with State staff in regards to pathology,genetics,
and harvest management to ensure that recommendations developed in the
study are reflective of the State's management and operational guidelines.
-
",..
-
1-4
-------------------------....,....,....-------,1---.,F"""'---..,....------------
.,
COMPENSATORY HATCHERY CONCEPT
The Production Program
The primary objective of this compensatory facility is to ensure the con-
tinued return of no less than 30,000 adult chum salmon to the Susitna River
without adversely impacting natural stocks.The prodgeny from this number
of adults,under normal conditions of natural spawning in the river would
yield approximately 190,000 adults assuming a typical escapement of 33
percent and an ocean survival of 1 percent.At present,the harvest pres-
sure in upper Cook Inlet is targeted at 67 percent.Thus at this level
of fishing,30,000 adults will return annually to the river system to
maintain the run.
If,however,.a hatchery is utilized for the production of juveniles,the
survival which can be anticipated from egg to release greatly exceeds that
realized under average natural conditions.Therefore,only a portion of
the annual return of 30,000 adults is necessary to maintain the run.The
following table compares the survival rates at various critical stages in
both hatchery bred and naturally spawned fish.
As shown in Table 1,utiliZing the hatchery concept,approximately 27,000
fish would be available annually for target fisheries,surplus sales at the
hatchery,or to prOVide donor eggs for enhancement projects elsewhere .
2-1
Table 1
Chum Salmon Survival Criteria
'.-
Hatchery
Stage Production
-----------
Returning Adults 30,000
Females Spawned 3,000
Eggs Obtained 6,600,000
Eggs Eyed 5,940,000 (90%)
Eggsack Fry 5,643,000 (95%)
Buttoned Fry 5,361,000 (95%)
Smolts 5,093,000 (95%)
Marine Survival 102,000 (2%)
Commercial Harvest 68,340 (67%)
Spawner Escapement 33,660 (33%.)
Surplus 27,000
Natural
Production
30,000
15,000
30,000,CJOO
f e-..r-.~YJ.-
10,890,000 (33%)6+-'k,r,.~J/~'"
108,900 0%)9'1 "'/~
,/I-,a..J72,963 (67%)J./
35,937 (33%).e...;<-~4~
5,937 /z.~0,1'%
--
~
!
Eggs taken in the late summer and early fall will be placed in incubator
units for eyeing and hatching.Dependent upon temperature,hatching will
occur during the later weeks of winter.Upon hatching,fry will be trans-
ferred to rearing units.Releases will be made directly from the hatchery,
if possible.To increase the survival of the smolts released,juveniles
will remain in the hatchery environment several months after hatching until
reaching the size of about 600 per pound.Timing of the release will
coincide with ice breakup on the river and the outmigration of wild stocks
in the river.
2-2
1-
The release of juveniles will occur in late spring and the peak return of
adults will be in the late summer and early fall.Thus operation of the
facility will essentially be year-round.Figure 1 illustrates a typical
annual operating schedule for a chum hatchery in the Susitna Basin.
Figure 1
Production/Facility Program
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
~
Activity SPAWN INCUBATE-Eye Hatch
Facility RACEWAYS ZENGER TYPE-INCUBATORS
15,000 cf 15 trays 36 trays
Water (gpm)*1200-2400 240 240
,....
*Based on ambient water temperature.
REAR RELEASE
RACEWAYS
15,000 cf
1200-2400
-
As previously mentioned,there is a potential for a surplus adult return to
the hatchery based upon the increased survival of hatchery reared fish.A
plan for disposing of these either through a fishery,or egg transfers and
carcass sales will have to be developed.
2-3
•
FACILITY COMPONENTS
In order to meet the production program outlined in the foregoing para-
graphs,there are certain basic components required for any hatchery
facility.These are:
o Adult Capture and Holding
o Egg-Take/Spawning
o Incubation
o Rearing
o Water Supply System
o Various Support Functions
Adult Capture and Holding
To develop and maintain a broodstock,it is necessary to capture adult fish
returning to the hatchery and hold them until they are suitable for spawn-
ing.Generally,capture and holding requires a fish weir or diversion
fence in the stream near the hatchery,a fishway to the holding area,and
some tanks or ponds for holding.
Where the stream also supports native stocks,the fish weir must be
designed carefully to avoid adverse impacts to those stocks..Most commonly
a removable weir is installed for only that time that the hatchery stocks
are returning.ADF&G has developed a typical weir that is fabricated with
aluminum or wood tripods that support a fence comprised of aluminum frames
and conduit or tubing.With chum salmon in Alaska,one-inch tubing on two-
to three-inch centers has been found to be suitable for diversion of
adults.
2-4
-
-
Various types of fishways have been used in the past few years.Tradi-
tional experience in the Pacific Northwest has been that chum salmon will
not pass through Denil-type or "steep-pass"fishways.At various chum
hatcheries around Alaska,this has not been found to be true.KCMhas
successfully used Denil-type fishways with a 1:6.5 gradient at a chum
facility,and it is likely that a similar fishway would be suitable for a
hatchery in the Susitna study area.
The holding ponds are usually most economically used for both adult holding
during spawning and fry rearing during the spring.Consequently,adults
are often held in raceways that are designed for rearing with modifications
for holding.Common modifications include:
o An.u.pwel1 ing water supply during holding to minimize attempts by
adults to "migratel',further upstream.
o Provision for or installation of a crowding system in the raceways.
o
o
Piping for sorting and distribution of fish by sex and ripeness.
Alternative outlet configurations to allow adults to be directed into
raceways.
II .
...
ESg-Take/Spawning
Early in the broodstock development period,the egg-take and spawning
operation generally begins with little or no specialized facilities.Tem-
porary bleeding racks and tables are constructed and the eggs and milt are
taken in plastic buckets.The eggs are then fertilized,water hardened,
treated chemically,and placed into incubators for eyeing.
2-5
-
The basic requirements for the spawning/egg-take operation are a water
supply and drain system,sinks or tables for the process,and an enclosed
space out of direct sunlight and other weather conditions.
Incubation
There are presently several methods of salmon incubation utilized in the
state of Alaska,all of which have proponents and detractors.The concepts
common to most incubators are:
o An upwelling water flow that should be as uniformly distributed as
possible.
o Some type of real or synthetic substrate (gravel,PVC saddles,etc.).
o Modular sizing of units,usually having capacities from 100,000 to
500,000 eggs per unit.
Incubation is usually a two-step process consisting of initial eyeing with-
out substrate followed by hatchery incubation with substrate.The eggs are
usually s-orted and counted between eyeing and hatching although with some
incubators some hatchery operators are attempting to eliminate this step.
The three most common types of incuba~ors used in Alaska today are:
o Heath trays
-
o "Zenger Boxes ll
o Cylindrical fiberglass units
Heath trays are rela~ively small compared to the latter two and not used as
commonly for chum salmon as Zenger Boxes and cylindrical units such as
2-6
----------'\
,~
R-30s and R-48s.There are many differences of opinion on the use and
cost-effectiveness of different types of incubators,and it is probably-best to involve operating personnel in decisions regarding incubator selec-
tion.Generally,if the people using the incubators are involved in the
selection and have confidence in the incubators,they will be more success-
ful than if the operating personnel feel that an incubation system was
forced upon them.
For preliminary facility sizing,an incubation room capable of holding
eight five-tray stacks of Zenger Boxes or eight R-48s will be used.A
water requirement of 240 gpm will be used.
The incubation system may be the most important part of the facility.It
is the process during which most egg mortality occurs and the process that
can require the most manual labor if the system is not operating properly.
Many hours have been spent at some hatcheries cleaning substrate andremov-
ing eggs from incubators that were improperly designed and/or operated.
Since the eggs are in the incubators for the longest time of any process,a
smooth running incubation system can be the difference between a successful
facility and a less-than-successful one.
Rearing
The length of rearing time required will vary with water temperature.Most
chum salmon hatcheries in the state that do not have the capability to
control water temperatures have fry emerging from the incubators earlier
than desirable.This is usually the result of 10-to 12-degree C water
temperatures in the.early fall which expedite the incubation process suffi-
ciently that fry begin to emerge as early as January and February.Since
2-7
-------------------~---.,..-.........--------,------,--------------
•
I
1
the receiving waters usually have inadequate food for the smolts until
April or May and may be ice covered,the fish must be held in rearing
facilities and fed for several months.
Clearly,the earlier the fry emerge,more rearing volume and operational
costs are required.For purposes of this preliminary study,it is assumed
that the fry will be reared to about 600 fish per pound.This many vary
slightly with water temperatures and release timing,but it is probably a
reasonable assumption for most of the alternative sites considered.
Using the criterion,a rearing volume of 5,000 cubic feet and a peak flow
of 1,200 gpm has been determined.ADF&G commonly use higher densities and
higher flows than this,so to provide for some flexibility during design
and some contingencies for each site,a volume of 5,000 cubic feet with a
flow of 2,400gpm will be used.Various configurations of rearing tanks
have"been used with square "Swedish ponds"and rectangular raceways the
most common.
Water'Supply System
Based on the preceding discussions,the water supply should meet the follow-
ing requirements:
o 240 gpm during incubation
o 2,400-gpm peak during rearing
o Variable tempera~ure desirable
In addition to the above,the water quality parameters listed in Table 2
should be met.
2-8
_~~~~_=r"1""'"__"'l_w__~_----r--..,..--------------
Obviously,the water system will require components to regulate flows
during the various operations.If a pumped water supply system is used,
various size pumps with standby capacity should be used.Also,a headbox
system is necessary to distribute flow to the incubators and inside
raceways without affecting flow to other components.
Support Functions
The following support functions are roost commonly required at a chum salmon
hatchery:
o Shop and garage space
o Laboratory
o Office
o Employee restrooros
o Employee lunch room (kitchen)
o Storage
o Freezer space (portable vans are often used)
o Bunkhouse and/or apartment
o Permanent residences at remote sites
2-9
____,·~___..-_...4""'---...-------r_--o--...,_-------------
Table 2
ADF&G Water Quality Standards for Fish Health
,';';;
-
,-~
~'.
Alkalinity
Aluminum
Ammonia
Arsenic
G::admium
Chromium
Carbon Dioxide
Copper
D.O.
Fluoride
Hydrogen Sulfide
Iron
Iron Bacteria
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nitrogen
pH
Silver
Sulfur
Temperature
TDS
TSS
Zinc
No petroleum or petroleum derivatives
Nitrate
Nitrite
Ni
HGN
K
Background radiation count (info only)
Sa
Na
Salinity
Sulfide (-2)
U
V
Ba
Zr
at least 20 ppm as CaCo(3)
0.01 mgjl
0.02 ppm
0.05 mgjl
0.0005 ppm (100 ppm alkalinity)
0.005 ppm (100 ppm alkalinity)
0.03 ppm fish and other aquatic life
0.1 mgj1
0.006 ppm (100 ppm alkalinity)
0.03 ppm (100 ppm alkalinity)
8.0 ppm
0.5 mgj 1
0.003 ppm
0.1 mgj1
(includes Sphaerotilus sp.)-
prefer water with a lack of enough
nutrients to inhibit growth.
0.02 ppm
15 mgj1
O.01 mgj1
0.2 mgj1
110%total gas pressure
(103%nitrogen gas)
6.5 -8.0
0.003 mgj1 (fresh water)
0.003 mgj1 (salt water)
LO mgjl
a -15 degrees C
400.0 mgj1
80.0 ppm (25 JTV's)
0.005 mgj1
1.0 mgj1
0.1 mgjl
0.01 mgj1
0.005 mgj1
5.0 mgj1
0.01 mgj 1
75.0 mgj1
5.0 ppt
50.a mgj 1
0.1 -0.00 mgjl
0.1 mgj 1
5.0 mgjl
0.1 mgj1
2-10
-
_.
..
Siting
Biological Considerations:
Chum salmon presently comprise approximately percent of the total
annual number of returning salmonids.Their catch contribution,is
primarily to the Cook Inlet commercial fishery.Only a small fraction is
taken by the in-river sports fishery.Dependent upon the goals of the
compensation program,it may be desirable to locate the hatchery outside of
the Susitna basin in order to allow target fisheries on the stocks and thus
reduce the surplus to the hatchery.If the hatchery stock is mixed with
wild stocks the harvest pressure must equal that needed to protect other
'stocks and the surplus cannot be avoided.One of the foremost decisions in
siting the hatchery from a biological standpoint is the decision On whether
the objective of the program is to maintain river runs of Chum salmon at
present levels,or whether.the goal is to maintain the current level of
contribution to the commercial fishery.
Biological considerations pose the greatest uncertainty in the siting of a
successful hatchery facility.Not only does the location have to have a
water supply of high quality,the conditions between time and release and
subsequent adult returns must be supportive of at least average rates of
survival.
The latter conditions are at best difficult to predict in areas where there
are historical data on hatchery operations within the locale.Such history
is unavailable for Susitna.Compounding it is the fact that within Alaska
there is little historical information on which to predict the success of
upriver hatcheries.
2-11
__......_",.....,.._'-r--_..,I~F _,_----""'""1--------------
.....
'I
~,
1
"""
One obvious siting potential is that of locating the compensation hatchery
at the dam site where access,power,community services,etc would be
readily available.However,the upstream dam construction will preceed
tbe Devil's Canyon Dam by several years this delaying the opportunity for
hatchery operation until the second phase of hydroelectric plant develop-
ment.
The intent and requirement of this compensating facility is to avoid
adverse impacts on wild stocks.This includes not only chum salmon but
other indigenous stocks of salmonids.Some of the impacts'that must be
minimized are:
,....o Improper smolt release timing,i.e.hatchery smolts outcompeting wild
smolts for available food.
o Introduction of disease from donor stocks to wild stocks.
o Over-harvest of wild stocks in commercial fishery including incidental
catch of coho and Chinook.
.....
Physical Considerations
Within the Upper Cook Inlet Region,there are numerous sites that,from the
standpoint of engineering feasibility,could support the construction of a
salmon incubation and/or rearing facility.However,there are various
types of sites that appear much more practical or cost-effective than
others.In order to describe the available sites in an organized manner,
the following constraints or parameters will be used:
2-12
__......_.II"~~_N_"_'__""_.....-------'"'"""I'j--..._---------,-----r--------------
Accessibility to Roadways
Roadway access can be an extremely important factor in determining the
feasibility of a site.Over the past several years,numerous hatcheries-have been constructed throughout the state and mere data on operational
experience 'is being gathered each year.One simplified way to categorize
hatc.heries is remote or nonremote;with a nonremote hatchery being one that
can be reached by ground transportation throughout the year.
Nonremote hatcheries have several obvious advantages as well as some not-
..
"""
"""
-
so-obvious ones.Clearly,construction costs and direct operational costs
are lower at sites that have vehicular acc.ess.Delivery of materials and
equipment by boat or airplane is costly and,in some cases,limited by
weather conditions.Both during construction and operation,logistics
become major factors in the feasibility of the project.A not-so-obvious
problem with remote sites is morale and employee turnover.Because the
staff at a hatchery is relatively small most of the year,it is not pos-
sible to provide all community-type activities at remote sites.Employees
with families and school age children are usually not able to accept
assignments at remote sites.Those people that do work at remote sites
often find extended assignments difficult or unacceptable.ADF&G does not
have sufficient duration of experience for statistically valid comparisons
of turnover,but anecdotal evaluation would probably support the conclusion
2-13
----,--------------------.,....-,.,---,.-----,..------...-------------
•
J
""""
1
,~
.,
""""
.....
that employees do not stay at remote facilities as long as at nonremote
facilities.Of course,retraining costs and the possibility of operational
problems or failures increase with employee turnover.
Accessibility to Power
Even if a site is located on an existing roadway,if it is not near an
existing electrical power system,construction and operational costs
increase substantially.Though the major energy requirement at a hatchery
is usually pumping process water,even hatcheries with gravity flow
throughout the process water system have significant energy requirements
for lighting,heating,and ventilation.
~<;'~~t~,..
Independent generation of power,either-wi~h diesel engines or hydroelec-
tric plants,is utilized at several remotely located hatcheries in the
state.Clearly,diesel generation has a high continuing cost associated
with it and presents an opportunity for serious problems if fuel deliveries
.are delayed or equipment breakdowns occur.Experience with small hydro
plants is limited,but mechanical problems have occurred at some hatchery
projects.
Type of Water Supply
laere are three basic types of water supplies available:lakes,streams,
or groundwater.Lake and stream supplies can be gravity flow or pumped and
groundwater,of course,is usually pumped.Any of the three types are
feasible and have been used successfully at hatcheries.Each does present
different advantages and disadvantages .
2-14
---------,-----~r_'----..".--------.------------
..
•
Lake supplies are probably the most versatile and reliable .Intakes can be
installed at different depths to obtain different temperatures,and varia-
tions in turbidity is usually not as great a problem as on streams.The
1-
,
"""
J..
.1."
~
I
I
-
entire intake system can be installed at sufficient depth to avoid freezing
problems.One possible biological problem with lake supplies is that lakes
often support numerous native stocks and disease transmission to the
hatchery can occur.
Stream intakes may have less pipe length than lake intakes,but they
usually have numerous disadvantages.The possibility of freezing and
flooding are the greatest disadvantages.Surface intakes are usually
difficult and costly to design,construct,and operate.Where a
well-defined channel exists such as in bedrock canyons,diversion struc-
i:ures can usually be installed successfully.However,they may require
heating or other maintenance to assure continuous .year-round flow·.Where
well-defined channels do not exist,such as the gravel bottom,braided
channels common in the study area,installation of a suitable surface
intake can be extremely costly and possibly not practical.It should be
noted that sub-surface intakes along streams,such as infiltration gal-
leries,are technically feasible but require near ideal gradations of the
existing gravel deposits to function.
Well water usually offers many of the advantages of lake supplies,(low
turbidity,minimal freezing problems)but does have the disadvantages of
pumping costs and little opportunity to vary temperature.Before any site
is selected that relies on groundwater for a supply,detailed testing is
required to ensure the quantity and quality of the water.
2-15
_......_......::;a,__~~.------------..,.,.,.--~--...,...,-----,------'!"'F"----.------------
A.",
.II'
~
!
....
Other Factors
There are several other physical factors that can determine the feasibility
of a specific site.Most salient among these are probably soil conditions,
and land ownership;but economic and social constraint can also be impor-
tanto For example,there may be local opposition to a hatchery at a
specific site or the land may have uses with higher local priorities.
These items have not been investigated in detail in this evaluation but
they should be considered for any recommended site(s).
Poor soil conditions can add substantially to construction costs.Flood-
plain or muskeg areas may require large amounts of fill or other foundation
improvements before construction.No subsurface investigations were per-
formed in this study,but surficial observations were made at sites
visited .
Land ownership mayor may not cause problems with the sites evaluated.
Most ownership in the area is state or private with some native corporation
land and state or federal park land.Specific site ownership is stated .
2-16
~""""~~Illl~_M_-----------"""'r"'-""'1""·--·"'I------r------------------
INTAKE STRUCTUfl:E
WITH WATER LEVEL
CONTROL
~~
AOULT fISH WEIR/~.~_._-
>"HW~•
_
/OVTSlD<<r---n "ADVLT.'.A.,NG'/~"HOLDING __'""'-.....~INTAKE~_HATCHER'"........../PIPELINE
BUILDING ..........
,.,,;c::c---------'...."~-----'.
'?<"""~----------
l ..tI;E
-----------~E)~-------c----------~~INTAKE PlpEUNF:
I HATCHERY
BUILDINO
..outT FISH WEIR
FISHWAV·
\SVS"NA "'"
)o.."0',","u1."
~U
~(J;
I J J J )J I j J J )J 1 -J )J I J »
'---'-~.•~._""~--
r r
LAKE SOURCE -GRAVITY FLOW STREAM SOURCE -GRAVITY FLOW
(TYPICAL •LARSON LAKE)(TYPICAL •WILLOW CREEK)
~~"
-~\:~
INTAKE
STRUCTURE-'.
OUT5IDE REARING /
""OUL T HOlbING--
,/
~.
s"s"~Q ...~P
ADULT
PIPELINE
~~~--="/1""<'
flSHWAY
OUTSIDE REA'HHG I
ADULT HOLDING
"DULT FISH WEIR
'/;
/It,~.....,.¢/.r$'':';~~
~~~;q.,,(f
i{O~~+'r:S
0'"
LAKE SOURCE PUMPED FLOW STREAM SOURCE PUMPED FLOW
(TYPICAL -BYERS LAKE,FISH LAKE,
REDSHIRT LAKE)
(TYPICAL -MONTANA CREEK ,GOOSE CREEK)
0--[][]_".,k,••"'-__--:TYPICAL SITE PLANS ~.:;-~
ApP.II...,d by
~·;Rn",b1
D.....nby
Chtrchd byBB
l.
5001.
-\./
...;1
D B -1 ~j 1 )J ]J 1 j I ~.~
~
INTAKE
STRE .....OR lAIi,E WATER
SOURCE
~....SCREENED
",,',"
WATER SUPPL"f PUMPS
SUPPbRT
AREAS
",,"
"
",,,.,....
,J\'"
",,'
"(0 :
~oi
I ':rv'r'''-'·
I
OUTSIDE REARING I
APULT HOLOING
~
l-·~-"--'·"·
I
SPAWNING I !.GG TAKE OPERATIONS
SCHEMATIC
LEGEND
SCREENED
INTAKE
--~
~-"Cii
""-----~_._.-'"rl
.----------------_.-/J.-----..-._-----------_w_w -.-.------
WATlR
SUPPLY
PUMPS
HATCHERY 8lJllbiNG
--.-.-------...------Q---l
,'~...:
",':,.
,/!l-----I
cIl.'OS'D'••'.'0.:
!:..'-.-~~STREAM
INCUBATOR AND RACEWAY
EFFLUfNT .
FRY TRANSFER I REUSf
INCUI'IATOR AND RACEWAY
WATER SUPPLY
PROFILE
NOTE'
INTAKE IN LAKE
SHOULD ElE VARIABLE
levEl fOR TEMPERATURE
CONTROL.
D".il!n~d by
Shef!l Num~r
of
----~(}TaWing NumberTYPICALHYDRAULICSCHEMAIC&
PROFILE (PUMPED WATER SUPPLY)
HATCHERY
STUDY
SUSITNA
SITING
Revisions
Dr.wIlby
Ch~o;k~d hy
•AppUl~..d by0',
...,.
-"\../
"l
~'
-
.1-
-
-
:I.
SITE ANALYSES
Overview
More than a dozen sites were inspected during this study within the Susitna
Basin in adjacent area in upper Cook Inlet.The bases of site identifica-
tion included previous hatchery siting efforts by ADF&G staff,existing
hatcheries,and sample sites in areas currently accessible by road.Of the
sites visited,nine generally met siting criteria.The locations of each
of these is indicated in Figure 1.
It should be pointed out that these are nat necessarily the optimal or best
sites in the watershed.They are generally feasible sites that are typical
-<~(~
of the different types of water supplies,remoteness conditions,etc.,
available within the basin.It is possible that comparable sites with
similar characteristics are available,but these sites are the most
prominent considered within the time frame of this study.
No sites were considered in the western half of the Susitna watershed or on
river systems other than the Susitna.The former was due to remoteness
considerations as most of the sites west of the river would require exten-
siva road or power extensions or be planned on an entirely self-sufficient
basis.
lne potential of expanding an existing facility was also considered.No
hatching or rearing stations presently exist on the Susitna itself or its
tributaries.However,there are facilities within the upper Cook Inlet
region which were considered.
3-1
J ]J i 1 }1 1 ~)1 J J )j
LEGEND
(~
----STATE HfGHWAYS
-_MAJOf;!f;!1V'ERS l
if
;'.j
I","~
-?-r-
1\
~-\
",.'
:-"~-~§--"."::~,lr ~--,.-~-
)<.r
<~~~~1~~Y"
...;,-",,,:''''-
,....
"!::.:-
T"'LkI:I:TNA AIRPORT
-,-
CA5W'ElL LA~E
,REb SHIRT LAKE
POTENTIAL STREAM 9Itts"~"
EXISTING FACiLITIES
LARISON L.AKE
B'VER LAkE
POTENTIAL LAKE SITES
GOOSE CREEK
WILLOW CREE-II
MONTANA CREEK
FISli LAKE
SJ:tIP CREE"foIATCliEAY
'AUi'".ii..;::a
POTENTIAL WElL SITE
FORT RU::HARDBON
MATCHER"«"Of &.a)
tuQ LAkE HATCliERY
.'ADF &01
EJC.LUTNA HATCHERY
(CI"A)
tRRO 5 1~.20
8(".1.1:500000 ~_MII.'
o
[j]
[3]
@
iii
o
<D
®
®
@
®
6.
&.
&.
&
o
0)
01
Sheel Number
Dnwlns NumberRevisions1f------
SUSITNA HATCHERV []
'-I SITING STUDY SITE LOCATION MAP \,
OI!~IR ..",d By __
Dnw ..Df ~
Chn....d f1 y __
App.n..",d By __
EI
l:J
ilI'
-
I.
-
•
l
...
I
&
If sites outside of the Susitna watershed are considered that are several
stream sites such as the Little Susitna River and Bodenburg Creek that
ADF&G have already investigated as potential sites.In addition,there
is a 20 million egg chum hatchery now under construction at Eklutna.This
is a private non-profit hatchery owned by the Cook Inlet Aquaculture
Association.If a site outside the watershed is considered for a compen-
satory facility,expansion of the Eklutna hatchery would be a possibility.
Most of the sites can be considered remote in terms of immediate access to
community services,utilities,schools,etc.Some have no road access.
For security,provisions will have to be made at the facility for staff
housing,and in sites where no road access is available,additional storage
'lIlill have to be provided.
The sites can be divided into three broad categories by water source:
lake,stream/spring,and well.Dependent upon site conditions,general
facility concepts can be defined for each site type.Following is a brief'
description of the sites reviewed.All maps are at a scale of 1 inch
=1 mile,and site locations are schematic only.
LAKE WATER SOURCE
Five potential lake shore sites were identified:Byers Lake,Larson Lake,
Fish Lake,Lake Caswell,and Redshirt Lake.Of these,only Larson Lake
affords the possibility of a gravity water supply system.The others would
require pumping .
3-2
IOU
,.
-
STREAM/SPRING WATER SOURCE
~rhree sites were identified with the po~ential for developing a water
source from either a creek,stream,or spring.Only those sites which
afforded reasonable safety from flooding and iceflow conditions were con-
sidered practical.Water supply intake locations in both confined channels
iind braided stream beds were considered.The sites are Montana Creek,
Goose Creek,and Willow Creek.
WELL WATER SOURCE
One site was identified with the potential of groundwater development.
This site,within the community of Talkeetna,was selected primarily for
its proximity to transportation networks and utilities.Because of its
l:emoteness.from the Sus.itna anciits tributaries,a.release,recapture
facility.
FACILITY EXPANSION
1~ere are four salmon hatcheries in the Susitna vicinity.Three State
f.acili~ies are a~Big Lake,Ship Creek,and Fort Richardson.A private,
nonprofit chum hatchery is under construction at Eklu~na.The Big Lake
Station is presently near capacity in terms of both water and rearing
volume and has a history of disease problems.The Eklutna facility affords
<~onsiderable opportunities for expansion.Non of these sites .would result
in any salmon directly into the Susitna River.
3-3
./----------------------------.......-.
I
•
[,,------,]
~I. ;I
"'~--',.'!
o '\I
~.','.,--,-,-=,'1~i
((i. . I)~'\.~
/
'~i.--..,;S,..I"'i.1
. ..----i
)-,.--.\J
J''~.J
----'),/'
)
/
C-'
/
1
LAKE-BYER'S
I
I
I
--------------------------~
i
II!ie.,.~\~
I
i!----
i
L-----r---.,--.--_
I
r-"-1','-
,,Jr-',-../
'I',"'/
-i (.'1
,:J.
1.-
-....,.......-----------,.---".."1--....-.,.]"-----------
.-
i
SITES
Byers Lake
Byers Lake is a 325-acre lake within the boundaries of Denali State Park.
1ne 40-square-mile drainage area of the lake is forested with a few recrea-
tional cabins located on privately owned land.The lake outlet is Byers
Creek which flow approximately five miles to the Chulitna River.The
Chulitna River joins the Susitna in the vicinity of the community of
Talkeetna.
Byers Lake has been the focus of several hatchery siting investigations
by ADF&G,primarily for sockeye enhancement.Detailed stock assessments
of sockeye are currently being conducted.Past salmon population surveys
have r.ecorded the presence of pink,chum,sockeye,coho and Chinook salmon
i.n the area as well as resident populations of trout,sucker,whitefish,
and burbot.There is insufficient information on the availability of chum
i.n numbers required for brood stock for a hatchery project.
1ne average lake depth is approximately 70 feet.Ice forms during winter
months.Historical limnological information collected by ADF&G suggest
the lake is well mixed during most of the year.Temperatures range from
o degrees C at the surface and 3 degrees C mid-depth to bottom during
winter months.Late spring and summer temperatures average 6 degrees C.
Temperatures as high as 17 degrees C have been recorded at the surface
during summer months.Byers Creek temperatures appear ~o be closely corre-
lated with air ~emperatures.It has been observed to have ice cover as
early as November.
3-4
-
•
The discharge from Byers Lake has been measured at 4.5 cfs in early spring
to 250 cfs in June.The pH is approximately 7.5 with Secchi disk readings
ranging from 3 to 11 meters.
Early studies by ADF&G failed to detect any significant presence of
pathogenic organisms of concern to fish culturists.In general,they found
~o/ater quality satisfactory for a hatching and rearing operation.
There are several sites on the lake shore and Byers Creek which are
suitable for hatchery construction.Site HA",as shown on the preceeding
map is located close to the Park's Highway.ADF&G has considered this as
a potential hatchery site in the past.Water development at this site
~vould either have to be a well,pumped,or gravity flow from the creek.
There is no groundwater data on which to evaluate well cost or water
quality.During winter months,low water temperatures in Byers Creek and
ice formation may make operation of a creek supply troublesome.A supply
to this site from the lake would permit gravity operation,but a pipeline
of approximately four miles would be required.
Near the lake outlet,area "B li
,there are several locations which would
permit construction.Road access is close by.An intake could be placed
at a depth in the lake which would provide a suitable temperature regime.
There ~s a potential for utilizing pens for rearing in place of raceways.
The most significant negative aspects of sites in this area include the
lack of power and the potential for the establishment of major sockeye
populations in the lake at a future date.The nearest power is 26 miles
away at Hurricane.
3-5
___'lIl"lllIIl:l~~'-------'----------'"I"i----...,-r---'-----,-----.....-------------
·/---_.--------'------------------------------............
".
:SITE ®-LARSON LAKE Il'-~)
i
I
~
r
l'--------
,
Ii 6 mi.to li"",,--\!alkeetna /..
I
i
\...
,..
•approx.4 mi.t
Ii nearest road..
_______________.._1:-jF"""--....-..,..-----,------------'-:a=.--------
""
Larson Lake.,
Larson Lake is located seven miles east of Talkeetna in the Talkeetna
watershed.The area is presently remote affording no road or boat access.
However,their plans for a residential development in the area which could
make available both access and power in the future.The land sales for
this develc)pment will transfer some of the land in the Larson Lake vicinity
to private ownership.
l
j
-
..,.
I
I
The Lake is approximately 450 acres with a maximum depth of 148 feet.The
watershed is forested.The Lake drains via a creek which flows about 1.5
miles into the Talkeetna River.A discharge a 15 cfs was estimated.The
creek is ui:ilized by sockeye,pink,coho and chum salmon.Sockeye spawning
along the Lake shoreline was observed during the study.There are few
suitable areas for spawning in the system,thus limiting the production
potential of the lake and creek for wild salmon.There are resident
populations of trout and other species.
Like Byers Lake,ADF&G is interested in enhancing the sockeye population
through a hatchery program.They have conducted some water quality inves-
tigations and have found conditions "favorable.if Water temperatures during
early September range between 15 degrees Cat surface to 4.5 degrees C at
50 feet.The pH averages 7.
Two potential hatchery sites have been identified.The area "A"is
adjacent to the lake near the outlet.It would require a submerged intake
in the lake and a pumped supply.Alternatively,there may be a possibility
to develop a groundwater supply.Both of these alternatives would require
power which would have to be generated onsite,given current conditions,or
3-6
____......._....(IlF ~----'---------I~.......,....,,----
.~.
--
,.,..
...
....
a power line would have to be extended from Talkeetna.Power is
approximately six miles away.Road access to the south end of the lake is
approximately four miles away.
Site "B"is located along the lake discharge creek.A site in this
vicinity would offer the potential of a gravity water supply if a pipeline
is extended from the lake to the site.Such a supply concept could provide
more temperate water to the station than would be available from the creek
itself.The amount of discharge in the creek and water temperatures during
the winter months are unknown.
The Talkeetna River has a chum population which could be used in developing
a brood stock for the hatchery .
3-7
-'\
\
~-
I
1
.~~
[Kramer.Chin &'\·(avo.Inc.
I-,,;nsultln~J-:il~mt:!~Nl.:-\.rchitec!;..-\ppHed Sclentlsts
L~~\\'~t Fifth ~treet.luneau ..\.IElska !*l801
Phone 1'4n7l '1~I)
[,,-_5_1T_E_@__-_F_IS_H__L_A_K_E J
]
------,-.,------.,....,,---.---,'-----------.-----------
"...,
-
....
Fish Lake
Fish Lake is approximately two miles from the Susitna River in the vicinity
of Talkeetna.It is approximately 154 acres,averaging 35 feet in depth.
Discharge from the lake was estimated at 10 cfs in early fall.The lake is
bordered by both State-and privately owned property.The Parks Highway
passes across the lake outlet and power is available.Access roads are
located around the lake for the residential developments.
Use of the Lake and its discharge and supply streams by coho,sockeye,and
pink salmon has been documented by ADF&G.
Water quality measurements taken by ADF&G suggest the lake is poorly buf-
fered.The significant water quality parameters appear to be within the
criteria established for hatcheries.However,more detailed measurements
would have to be taken throughout the year to confirm this generalization
given the development which has occurred along the lake shore and its
watershed.
The best location for a hatchery would be near the lake outlet.However,
security femcing would be a necessity given the facility 1 s accessibility.
A submerged intake in the lake would be required to provide a pumped water
supply.Water temperature information during the winter months is not
available .
3-8
,,,...
-~-------_._----'-------------------------'\
\
\
and
[
~.
..
A.
Caswell La ke
Caswell Lake is located just off ~he Parks Highway,approximately 90 miles
north of An.chorage.There are several smaller lakes in the vicinity.The
154-acre Caswell Lake drains via Caswell Creek into the Susitna River.The
area has been subdivided and considerable development has occurred within
the lake's watershed.Access is readily available around most of the
lakeshore.
Discharge from the lake has been recorded to range between 40 and 140 cfs.
One hundred cfs appears to be a representative average annual discharge.
Because of the development which has occurred in the lake vicinity,early
reports by ADF&G of satisfactory water quality conditions must be verified.
The system reportedly supports sockeye and coho salmon~Resident fresh-
water species are also present.Observations during this study indicate
that there is a possibility that blockage of the Caswell Creek may occur
periodically due to debris and beaver dams.Caswell Creek is essentially a
meadow creek which meanders for approximately eight miles through muskeg.
Blockages occurring during migration periods could jeopardize the success
of a hatchery facility.
The site which appears most desirable is located along the creek,approxi-
mately 1/4 mile downstream from the lake.An access road crosses the creek
at ~his point.Wa~er could be withdrawn directly from the creek or from
the lake.
3-9
I~
.i.
1
•
•
•
•
Although there is a gaging s~a~ion on the creek,temperature data are
unavailabll~for the winter months.Tempera~ures and flow conditions during
the winter months must be reviewed prior to recommending this site .
3-10
"T
-
I
,
i
~
•
,-------_._------------------------.,.
"
-'"'-..,
(--------------------------------~)
I SITE @ -RED SHIRT LAKE i
"
(
I
!
l'-----
-,
1
-
-
Red Shirt Lake
Red Shirt Lake is a large,shallow lake within the Nancy Lake State Recrea-
tion Area.This lake is supplied by a series of smaller lakes and ponds
within the system.The lake is 20 feet in average depth and is
approximately 1,200 acres in surface area.The outlet,Fish Creek,enters
the Susitna at approximately river mile 12.It is a meandering stream with
many beaver dams.The creek channel appears well defined.Fish Creek is
approximately 12 miles in length.
Road access is available to within 1-1/4 miles of the upper end of the
lake.Sev,eral cabins are located along the lake shore.No power is avail-
able.
The lake and stream presently support sP<:keye'~;',S(JhQan~GhinoQk.salilllJ.Ii~,
There are also resident trout populatiqns·'.E~~d.en;c;~;af;be:'av;e:r.r;;l!!etf:'ld.c~:
within Fish Creek may have a negative impact orr salmon usage a:f the;system.
Water temperature in September ranged from 24 degrees C at surface to 10
degrees C at 30 feet.No information on winter conditions is available.
The discharge during September was estimated at 20 cfs.
The State Hatchery at Big Lake is within 10 air miles of the Red Shirt Lake
site.Wint:er 'Cemperature conditions can be predicted to be similar.No
investigation of pathogens within the system has been reported.
A site near the lake discharge would provide the best opportunity for a
hatchery operation.Caswell Lake water could be extracted from a wet well
or from the creek directly.A submerged intake in the lake is also a
possibility.
3-11
"'...-----------------------------------------------------'"
/\
!
[SITE
",J96 mi.to4,I Anchorage
.&.-MONTANA CREEK
I
]
,."
/~[1)1 Kramer,Chin &Mayo,Inc~
1"Y':l~.'.1,nnswtlnl(cnl.!:.meers.Arcrutet::ts.;;pplled Sci~ntists
i ~.........;,....!-t"':'-I w.."t Fifth ~freet.!uneau.,"'JaslUl ~n'~Phone r!!II;,iAfl.1WJ)
-
•
•
&,
•
•
Montana Creek
Montana Creek is a tributary to the Susitna River,entering approximately
15 miles south of Talkeetna."Creek"is somewhat of a misnomer as the mean
discharge as recorded by the gaging station is over 1,200 cfs.However,
the discharge varies greatly during the year.The watershed of rlontana
Creek drains the 160-square-mile area southeast of Larson Lake.
Montana Creek forks into three tributaries eight miles above its confluence
with the Susitna.Little development has occurred above the forking.Road
access is available at several location in the lower portion of the creek.
Some State-'owned land is available in this vicinity.Much of the upper
portion of the creek is in private or borough ownership.
The clear ~raters of the creek support chum salmon as well as pink,coho,
and Chinook.Trout and grayling are also present.There is insufficient
information on chum populations to verify a sufficient brood stock for a
hatchery.
Sites "A"and "B"on the preceding page are typical of potential locations
within the lower reaches of the creek.Both have road access.
Detailed wi.nter temperatures and information on icing and flooding is not
available.However,observations during this study indicate that any
construction within the floodplain,including a water intake structure,
would be in.jeopardy during winter months and operational problems could
be incurred.
3-12
__________"_~---_._----,-----------_---_I-~-----,--.....;.---------------------
~-
-
•
Water quality investigations by ADF&G during autumn months indicated the
creek is generally satisfactory for a hatchery operation.Similar measure-
ments would have to be taken after ice breakup to confirm conditions,
particularly in regard to turbidity and solids.
3-13
..............,
/,-----------------------------------------------"\
,~
I
I .
•
[SITE &.-GOOSE CREEK
I
~...f
i~..
[
•
]
]
----_...'*""'"---------;~"'~,-----------,..""",.-----,,_.------..,....-------------------
Goose Creek
Goose Creek basically parallels Montana Creek,entering the Susitna approxi-
mately four miles below the discharge of Montana Creek.Similarly,its
headwaters are located in the Talkeetna Mountains but the drainage area of
Goose Creek is only 15 square miles.A major portion of the present flow
in the creek is from Sheep Creek,to the south,which was rechanneled
during flo()ding in 1971.N.o discharge information after this rechanneliza-
tion has been recorded.
Power and access conditions to the creek are generally similar to the
Montana Creek situation,previously described.Flooding threats are very
evident making any development within reasonable distance to the creek
extremely vulnerable.
1
Salmon presently utilize the system.Chum are present as are populations
of Chinook,pink,and coho.
A potential hatchery site was identified by the study team as shown on the
preceeding map.Its selection was based primarily upon proximity to road
I.....
:1.....
.....
!
and power.Building evaluations would have to be carefully determined to
avoid flooding.
3-14
,--------------..------......----..'--"l"1------r'"!-.-'----r------------------
./------------------------------------------.........
~.
..
•
•
•
['gt.IJi Kra~er.Chin &~1ayo.Inc:.
~~j I .pn...uhmw ~mnnp.ers.,-\rdutet.ts..\ppilfMJ Sclent1~ts
~~..~~~.J-.i II l~-t \Vesl Fifth Stl'P.P.t.lunetlu.Alaska gqeln:~::gt~'J Ph'm~t407}:iHIi·ti-fo{ll
[_S_I_T_E_&__-_'_W_IL_L_O_W__C_R_E_E_K J
]
•
..-
i\I"lI!lfi1I..
•
•
•
Willow Creek
A few miles north of the community of Willow,\Villow Creek,and its
tributary,Peters Creek,flow towards the Susitna River.The creek passes
over varied terrain over much of its 40-mile length.One steep,narrow
canyon exists nea.r Willow.Immediately downstream of the canyon,there is
a potential hatchery site.It is shown on the vicinity map.This site
affords bot:h road access and a potential for a gravity water supply.Below
this point,the floodplain is quite large and annual channel changes are
evident .
Sig,p.if\icant.chum>p:opuIat.ions have been recorded in the system,suggesting
a,sufficiett:tb~ood s.aux:c.E!',;Pink,Chinook,and coho are also present in
TIf~·••~n~~st~~~~;)~~~~d~;~i~~j~~t[QIC&te~.·t6 Willow,alterations to the watershed
miy.a:ffes~a hatt:~ery loc..~ted along Willow Creek.The major potential
impac:t.wou'id be trte'use of \villow Creek as a water supply for the com-
mun;j;ty~S.ew,age,dis£.harge.is als a possibility.A major community develop-
ment would .a:ls:o;make security a necessity.However,a highly visible
project near the legislative center may have other benefits.
3-15
~------_._---------------------""
\
<.''if'"
"'.,,--..'i ;,;.-..._00 .'.·::"c ..•._....~~"".~~__~~lilliil
(
]
J
[
AIRPORT· [SITE CD -TALKEETNA
•
.-
,...,
Talkeetna Airport
Presently,ADF&G,F.R.E.D.Division,is evaluating the enhancement poten-
tial of thE~upper Susitna River should the hydroelectric projects not
proceed.As one alternative,an incubation facility downstream of Devil's.
-
..
•
II
Canyon,with remote fry plants upstream,is under consideration.A site
near the Talkeetna Airport has been iden"Cified because of its proximity to
air,rail,and road transportation systems.
Road and power are accessible although power ·eKtension would be required.
The Talkeetna River is appr9ximately 1/2 mile away,but the channel is
braided and it appears that a surface intake could be a difficult installa-
tion.ADF~~G is considering well water as a source.Further studies would
be required to verify the adequacy of groundwater supplies;disposal alter-
natives have not been investigated.Groundwater disposal may be feasible
for an incubation facility but a compensatory hatchery would require a
discharge to the Talkeetna River suitable for attracting and collecting
returning adult fish .
3-16
'-
,W
•
..
COST ESTIMATES/SCHEDULE
Physical Filcility
There are several components t:hat are common to a compensatory facility
located at any of the sites described.These include:
o Hatchery Building Incubation area (1,000 square feet)
Rearing area (3,600 square feet)
Support area (2,400 square feet)
o Inside Process (Mechanical)
o Outside Raceway Piping
o Fish Diversion Weir in Stream
o Fishway
In addition to the above components,there are additional items that mayor
may not be required at some sites or will vary in size with the site
selected.These include:
o Si1:ework
o Intake Structure Lake Stream
o Pump Station or Gravity Supply
o Access Road Length
o Power Extension or Onsite Generation
4-1
-----------'-----------'1"'1-........·--e--rlf-----r-------------------
~.
I
L
'1t
J
1
~.,
Cost Estimates
Table 3 summarizes preliminary cost estimates for components common to all
sites considered.It should be pointed out that these are 1982 construc-
tion cost estimates without contingencies,administration,design,or other
project overhead costs included.
Table 4 illustrates the total costs associated with construction at each
site.It should be emphasized that all cost estimates are preliminary in
nature and,as such,are only considered accurate within approximately
+30%.Consequently,these estimates should not be used as a basis for
comparison of individual sites,but rather to determine the magnitude of
the project as described herein.Clearly,some sites are more favorable
than others and should be investigated in more detail.
Another item that Table YY illustrates is the costs associated with remote-
ness relative to road and power access.Obviously,the costs of developing
sites such as Larson Lake and Red Shirt Lake could be reduced substantially
if they were now roaded or the costs of access roads were shared with other
development in the area.wnere the cost of power extensions appeared
excessive,onsite generation was used.As pointed out earlier,both roaded
development and onsite power generation would increase the operational
costs of the project.
Development Schedule
Figure 2 illustrates an estimated time frame for the development of the
project.This is a best estimate at this time,based on past experience of
hatchery projects.There are several unknowns which could either delay or
expedite t:he projec~,primarily the permit and public involvement process.
4-2
..
If a site is selected with little local opposition and consistent with
permit~ing agency plans,it is possible that some elements of the work
could be shortened.However,~his would be the exception rather than the
rule fer h;;ltchery projects in Alaska.
4-3
,JI{
Table 3
Estimates of Probable Construction Costs;
Components Common to Most Sites
COMPON"ENT QUAJ.\lTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST SUBTOTAL
Hatchery Building
Incubati.on 1,000 SF $75.00 $75,000
Rearing 3,600 SF 75.00 270,000
Support 2,400 SF 75.00 180,000
$525,000
Inside Process
Incubatclrs 8 ea.3,000.00 24,000
Raceways 5 ea.8,000.00 40,000
Piping Lump Sum 36,000.00 36,000
$100,000
Outside Rearing
Piping Lump Sum 20,000.00 20,000
Raceways;3 ea.20,000.00 60,000
$80,000
-
•
•
•
•
Fish Weir
Fishway
TOTAL
Lump Sum
Lump Sum
50,000,00
35,000.00
4-4
50,000
35,000
$50,000
$35,000
$790,000
Table 4
Summary of Construction Costs
J-
1
[
SYERS EYERS LARSG!i T..kRSOS FISH CAS~Hr.REDSHIRi XDNTAIU GODS:::JtLtC~!TAr.K::ET~U
::~?C:-~EX:r.AK!-~LAt:£-a UHo.\r.HE-a UK!r.AKE ~AK~elmK CR.EE!CREEX AI :;PQilT
------------------------------------------~-------------------------------~---------------------------------------------------
:Jl1:~C'~:11:1L::-:ES
•·...;:1 ~::790000 710000 79~OOO 790000 ;90Q~O i?caG~7~O~CO 790000 naGOG 790001 790000
_~__o.~_.~
:r.i.i ;"'lllJ.:t.f.
...~.:10 $i 15000 1S~~0 7~O~O 150 00 lS 0G0 :~coa 7S cao Z5 0aa 25000 zsooa ~~JO ~
R~~.\?.::ii -'='1"'P'MAREHY MARSHY STEEP nAT FLAT ;'\.\iiS;'iY ttl':Fr.AT :-j :-.'!"t"LA!t ...A.'10 ...1\.
:~~7.U:Z;S:r\'J::;:URt
~:'S7 t!::7~Qau 17scao li~coa ,;,seaD ~7500C 175000 l1~oon 350~OO HO,OOO 1-75IJa~loa~~o
:Y?E Cli::::?;LAX£~A!E:LAKE LAKE LAKE f..AK£R!VER :iIni!CREEK !JEL~.s
1~.rr)4X~::::::':;!!
·:~s:"(0:,':~OOQu lJ 00 0 a~ooa 400000 HuOO 160000 l1noo 30 a0J 40000 1Z0JOi1 ZOOV9~
:!;;G7E (FELT:·z~oo SuO 1000 SOOO 5uil 200G !50a :OOD 5'00 or;o 25 DC
:~~:rF S:A7~CN
;::s:!,$.':~:t~v rry :IOOOO ~~aa~a '~ilAV I i'i 110000 11u~J~t [Q 0aa 110000 11 aoo 0 GRAVITY ~JQuO
.;C::·EE3 F..0AI:
':~~7 ;:}l~OO(J lS(lQOO lJ5000Q 1050000 1S II 00 5000 i5:-0000 lOCOOO 75 000 7501]0 ~5 00 0
L:t':?ZC7!1 (r~E7;SOu ;j000 Z1000 21000 ~ca 100 31000 2000 1500 IS 00 SOD
:~"':,!;:"~EI7!~i5:DN'"""....~.
;:~=7 i ;:5\1:100 150av~l!uGOO nO,jOD J2 5[10 mooa 1500GO 50000 37500 37500 61.500
~':'....~...,.;.;(E~rr:ON-SZ!~all-Sin:ON-SI'rE ON-sm:SOD ;3a~0 ON-SiU lOOO :500 1S'j ~:SOO........4.101 ....JL 0 00 000 0 0 0 0 00 __
S::37a:.~:;365000 ,HDDeD Z430CJG 2640000 1177500 lHallOO ,910090 1S05000 :~7i500 14225Qn 125Z5JO
j :;E~·i~~Ar.':~~J:':L\CTa !i
"""C~1 ~'.1 ::~i :Gj;~D :23S~O .1645QO n~QJO 11~62S Z~SSOD 4,5500 ZZ57SD ZU66Z5 2~J37S 1,sn75
S"J~:-OTA~15ti?7:a :71350~17HSUO 39HOOQ ~3S4125 lS25S0ii H1SS00 1730750 :5~41ZS t63::SiS ~j ~n 75
1 J~51.~~t .~i:~:-LS TR ucr,-'.::.~r7:~~G '.:;ct:..,'~;Q;!~S1~OSO ,~2'J25~i!HOO 4a62~a ~4~S~J ln~~so 51 rzzs 4i~;J3 HO'4.l 432:13
-.._"~ca:i~7~UC::s·:.ZG40615 ~ZZ7:SU 3632550 ;?46800 176v3~3 ~3i7115jj 4~4015C :249175 2~S?h3.Z126~3B ~a724B8...1..'\..
:~C;:~i:r CVE£HEAD,
1 l"i'.1"''.~~Z;'J ~lQle~5St~iS 9'J.i213 986700 HOiHl 594~~J 111Q038 56Z4'l4 SHaH :3165,~~81:~.,Ud6 ••'
7::71:PR0J:::r !3S0SH Z7HnS 454!D&3 Hj3SDQ 22DC~B Z971313 :SSGl88 ,31:469 2~742~j 265B217 2340e..Q~
4-5
_____________------,-------r----..,.---'-------,.------------------
III )ill J •J ,.J •J •"1 Ifo
J •J •j J .J J J i 'I &..}li -JJ
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3
lT1
~~~-~-c~~~~c~m~->uc~~~~c~m~->oc~~~~c~m~->o
to CD CI:I ~IV::s"5::s Q)00 CD IV CD a ftJ::J'"5::J Q)00 Q)IV CD IV ~IV::s"5::J Q)u 0 ~~~~~~,~~00Z0~~~<~"<00Z0'~2<~"~00ZQ
Iii !Iii iii i I •i f iii i I Iii I i I I I I I I I I r
OPERATION OF FACILITY
fiNAL SITE SELECTION (INCl.
PUBLIC HEARINGS)
CONSTRUCTION
PREPARATION OF CONSTRUCTION
DOCUMENTS
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT ISSUANCE
EXPERIMENTAL EGG TAKES AND
INCUBATION
PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND
PROCESSING
'I..,
I;
-,',
",
.~l
PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE