HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUS10004TK
1425
.S8
S9
no.10004
SUS 10004
Fisheries and Habitat Investigations of the Susitna River
-- A Preliminary Study of Potential Impacts of the Devils
Canyon and Watana Hydroelectric Projects
James C. Riis and Nancy V. Friese
This work made available here constitutes Section I of the document Preliminary
Environmental Assessment of Hydroelectric Development on the Susitna River
(prepared for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service by the Alaska Department of
Fish and Game and assigned APA Document no. 1613, RTS no. 4, and SUS no. 35).
This volume contains the title page and table of contents of the full document and pages
I-1 to I-116 (which compose Section I).
The two sections (I and II) were not issued separately, but are listed in the Susitna
Aquatic Impact Assessment Project Bibliography under separate entries as parts within
SUS 35. Alaska Resources Library and Information Services (ARLIS) is making each
section available separately in print and electronically, as we are doing for each entry
assigned an individual APA or SUS number in the indexes.
Note: Do not confuse this final version with the version contained in a shorter version of
document no. 1613. That shorter version includes only 127 selected leaves of the full
report, I-1 to I-52 and I-97 to I-116 and II-1 to II-38 and II-76 to II-91. It is one of
several documents in a collection called "Alaska Power Authority Response to Agency
Comments on License Application," which is one of the 25 titles that accompanies
Document no. 2905 (listed in the Susitna Hydroelectric Project Document Index). That
shorter version is cataloged separately and called "Reference to comments(s): B. 8, I.
75"; it is numbered (by ARLIS) as APA 2905-75.
~....
PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
/OF HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT
/ON THE SUSITNA RIVERlJ
Prepared for the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
by the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
333 Raspberry Road
Anchorage,Alaska
1978
Il;)..$
YlO/7!)
Section I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Fisheries and Habitat Investigations of the Susitna River
Page
Summary •
Backgrmmd
Description of Area •
Procedures
Findings and Discussion •
Conclusion
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Literature Cited
1-7
1-9
1-10
1-11
1-17
1-47
1-48
I-50
I-51
Section II
\
Moose MOvements and Habitat Use Along the Upper Susitna
River
Summary •
Background
Description of Area •
Procedures
Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
Recommendations
Acknowledgements
Literature Cited
11-3
11-4
11-7
11-8
11-11
11-26
11-31
II-34
11-34
11-36
Fisheries and Habitat Investigations
of the Susitna River--A Preliminary Study of
Potential Impacts of the Devils
Canyon andWatana Hydroelectric Projects
by
James C.Riis
and
Nancy V.Friese
Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Divisions of Sport and Commercial Fish
March 1978
I-I
r-..TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures •
List of Tables
List of Appendix Tables .
Summary
Background
Description of Area
Procedures
Fisheries ••
Adults .
Juvenile salmon migration
Juvenile studies • .
Water Quantity
Water Quality . .
Findings and Discussion •
Fisheries .
Adults
Juvenile salmon migration
Juvenile studies • • . . . •
Aquatic insects and juvenile salmon gut contents
Impoundment area fisheries investigations
Water Quantity
Water Quality
Conclusion
Reconnnendations
Acknowledgements
Literature Cited
1-2
Page
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
13
13
13
14
16
17
17
17
17
23
28
30
37
40
43
47
48
50
51
Appendix I ••
Appendix II
Appendix III •
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
1-3
.,.
. .53
73
• • • • •96
Figure
1
2
3
4
LIST OF FIGURES
The Susitna River drainage,Devils Canyon Project,1977 ...
Upper Susitna River study area,Devils Canyon Project,1977 .
Locations of adult salmon tag recoveries occuring downstream
of the Susitna River fishwheel sites,Devils Canyon Project,
1977 (RS-sockeye salmon;PS-pink salmon;CS-chum salmon;
SS-coho salmon;KS-chinook salmon).•••..•••••
Susitna River discharge at Gold Creek,Devils Canyon Project,
1977 ... . ...... ....... .
1-4
12
15
22
41
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1 Relative magnitude of pink,chum,and sockeye salmon moving
past the fishwheel sites as determined by Peterson population
estimates,Devils Canyon Project,1974,1975,and 1977.~/...18
2 Peak chum,pink,and sockeye salmon ground escapement survey
counts within the upper Susitna River,Devils Canyon Project,
1977 ... . . . . ..... .. .. .. ........ .. ... . ... .... ........20
3 Peak chinook salmon counts within the Susitna River drainage,
1977 • • . . . . . • . • . . • . . • . • . . . . .21
4 Rabideux Creek salmon fry trapping,Devils Canyon Project,
1977 • •. . . . • • • . . • • . . .24
5 Montana Creek salmon fry trapping,Devils Canyon Project,1977 26
6 Willow Creek
Project,1977
chinook salmon fry trapping,Devils Canyon
27
7
8
9
10
11
Mean percent composition of gut contents per fish of chinook,
sockeye,and coho salmon juveniles in sloughs and clearwater
tributaries of the Susitna River,Devils Canyon~roject,1977.32
Limnological data from selected tributaries to the Susitna
River,Devils Canyon Project,1977 • • . .••.•..38
Susitna River impoundment area lake surveys,Devils Canyon
Project,1977 .•• . • . . • . • . • . . • . • • . . .39
Water flows of Montana,Rabideux,and Willow cr~eks from May
through November,Devils Canyon Project,1977.!/. . . .44
Thermograph set in Susitna River downstream of Parks Highway
bridge,daily maximum and minimum water temperature,Devils
Canyon Project,1978 • . . . . . • . . . . • • • . . . . . • .45
1-5
LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix I
Table
1 Percent age composition of chinook,sockeye,coho,and chum
salmon escapement samples,Devils Canyon Project,1974,1975,
and 1977 • .• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .-54
2 Age,length,and sex characteristics of chum,chinook,sockeye,
and coho salmon escapement samples,Devils Canyon Project,
1974,1975,and 1977 . . . .•.. .55
3 Analyses of age,length,weight,and condition factors of
juvenile sockeye salmon samples from Susitna River sloughs
and clearwater tributaries,Devils Canyon Project,1977 56-57
4 Analyses of age,length,weight,and condition factors of
juvenile coho salmon samples from Susitna River sloughs and
clearwater tributaries,Devils Canyon Project,1977 58-59
5 Analyses of age,length,weight,and condition factors of
juvenile chinook salmon samples from Susitna River sloughs
and clearwater tributaries,Devils Canyon Project,1977 60-64
6 Stomach content analysis of juvenile chinook,coho,and
sockeye salmon collected in sloughs and clearwater tributaries
of the Susitna River during summer and fall,Devils Canyon
Proj ect,1977 . . • . . . . . • . . . . . .... .<• • •••65-72
Appendix II
1 Susitna River discharge at Gold Creek (USGS provisional
data)1977 • • . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . •74
2 Water quality data and juvenile salmon surveys in sloughs and
clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River between the
Chulitna River and Portage Creek,Devils Canyon Project,1977.75-81
3 Thermograph set in Rabideux Creek,upper sub-area;daily
maximum and minimum water tempe=ature,Devils Canyon Project,
1977 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82
4 Thermograph set in Montana Creek,upper sub-area;daily
maximum and minimum water temperature,Devils Canyon Project,
1977 . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...83
5 Water chemistry data,Rabideux Creek,Devils Canyon Project,
1977 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...84
6 Water chemistry data,Montana Creek,Devils Canyon Project,
1977 . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85
7 United States Department of Interior,Geological Survey 86-95
T-fi
SUMMARY
Biological and water quality and quantity investigations were
conducted from May 1,1977 through March 7,1978 to obtain baseline data
on indigenous fish populations and the existing aquatic habitat of the
Susitna River drainage.These investigations conclude a four year·
series of environmental baseline inventories.They were designed to
generate sufficient biological information to enable the Alaska Department
of Fish and Game (ADF&G)to prepare a comprehensive biological study
plan in the event a final environmental impact study is initiated to
determine the feasibility of constructing the proposed Watana and Devils
Canyon hydroelectric dams on the Susitna River.
The relative abundance,distribution and migrational timing of
adult salmon (Oncorhynchus sp.)were determined within the Susitna River
drainage through tag and recovery programs during 1977.The salmon
escapement from June 29 through August 14 was estimated to be approximately
237,000 sockeye (0.nerka),50,000 coho (0.kisutch),and 105,000 chum
salmon (0.keta)(Friese,in prep.).An escapement estimate in excess
of 100,000 fish was determined for chinook salmon (0.tshawytscha)
through aerial surveys (Kub~k,1977;Watsjold,1977).Population
estimates of pink salmon utilizing the drainage in the area of the
Susitna and Chulitna river confluence were determined as a part of this
study.
Documentation of the outmigration of salmon fry from tributary rearing
areas into the mainstem Susitna River was accomplished by intensive
investigation of two clearwater tributaries~The objective of these
studies was to determine utilization of the mainstem river for rearing
during winter months.A total of 25,176 chinook salmon fry were marked
1-7
in Montana Creek between July 19 and August 4.A gradual downstream
i~fI,l~'l
movement of fry was noted from the latter part of August to February.A
drastic reduction in population density was found in February and was
attributed to low flows which prevailed at the time.Chinook fry were
documented overwintering in the Susitna River.No distinct movement of
fry was observed in Rabideux Creek.
The relative abundance,distribution,age,length,and weight
characteristics,and feeding habits of juvenile salmonids were monitored
in sloughs and tributaries of the Susitna River from Portage Creek
downstream to the Chulitna River confluence from July 1 through October
5,1977.The predominant rearing species were chinook and coho salmon.
Water quality and quantity determinations were made in conjunction with
all juvenile salmon surveys.
The Susitna River was floated from its intersection with the
Denali Highway to Devils Canyon during the first two weeks of July to
inventory fish species present and survey the aquatic habitat in the
areas to be inundated.Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus)were
abundant in all of the clearwater tributaries within the proposed
impoundment area.The headwaters of these tributaries and upland lakes
were also surveyed by separate crews.It is apparent that the Watana
reservoir,which is projected to have substantial seasonal fluctuations,
will alter the fisheries habitat.
Measurements of hydrological and limnological parameters associated
with the Susitna River and selected tributaries and sloughs were obtained
between the Denali Highway and Montana Creek.A cooperative agreement
between the United States Geological Survey (USGS)and the ADF&G was
initiated to determine discharge,sediment loads,and standard water
1-8
quality analysis of the mainstem Susitna River.This data,along with
the water quality and quantity data collected in conjunction with the
fisheries studies,will be extremely valuable for future comparisons.
Long term ecological changes to the drainage may be significant due
to dam construction.The level and flow patterns of the Susitna River
will be altered and will affect the fisheries resources.Extensive
research is necessary both upstream and downstream of the proposed dams
to adequately assess the potential effects of these impacts on fisheries
resources.
The effects of impoundments and construction activities which alter
natural flow regimes,water chemistry,mass transport of materials,and
quantity of wetted habitat areas are of primary concern.These changes
may disrupt the trophic structure and habitat composition and reduce or
eliminate terrestrial and aquatic populations.These populations and
vegetation in and around the free-flowing rivers have evolved to their
current levels due to natural flow variations.Some species may be
present only because this particular hydrologic regime exists.
BACKGROUND
Background knowledge of the Susitna River basin is limited.The
proposed hydroelectric development necessitates gaining a thorough
knowledg~of its natural char~cteristics and populations prior to final
./
dam design approval and construction authorization to enable protection
of the aquatic and terrestrial populations from unnecessary losses.
The Susitna River basin has long been recognized as an area of high
recreational and aesthetic appeal.It is also important habitat to a
wide variety of fish species,both resident and anadromous.Five species
of Pacific salmon (chinook,coho,chum,pink,and sockeye)utilize the
T n
Susitna River drainage for spawning and rearing.The majority of the
chinook,coho,chum,and pink salmon production in the Cook Inlet area
occurs within this drainage.Grayling,rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri),
Dolly Varden (Sa1velinus ma1ma),burbot (Lota lota),lake trout (Sa1velinus
namaycush),whitefish (Coregonus sp.),and scu1pins (Cottus sp.)are
some of the more common and important resident fish species.
Baseline environmental fisheries studies have been conducted by
ADF&G intermittently since 1974.The projects were financed with federal
funding averaging $29,000 per year for the first three years.An
allocation of $100,000 was received for this study.The National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS)and U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
contracted ADF&G to conduct a one-year assessment of salmon populations
utilizing the Susitna River in the vicinity of the proposed Devils
Canyon dam site during 1974.The objectives of these studies were to
determine the adult salmon distribution,relative abundance and migrational
timing and to determine juvenile rearing areas (Barrett,1974).Additional
funding was received in 1975,1976,and 1977 from USFWS to continue and
expand these studies and to monitor the physical and chemical parameters
associated with the mainstem Susitna (USFWS,1976 and Riis,1977).Additional
baseline studies will not be initiated during 1978 due to lack of funding.
The proposed hydroelectric project is discussed in Barrett (1974),
Friese (1975),USFWS (1976),and Riis (1977).The purpose of this data
report is to present the findings of the studies conducted from May 1977
through March 1978 and to make recommendations for future investigations
and a final environmental impact statement.
DESCRIPTION OF AREA
The Susitna River is approximately 275 miles long from its source
in the Alaska Mountain Range to its point of discharge into Cook Inlet
I-10
(Figure 1).The major tributaries of the Susitna originate in glaciers
and carry a heavy load of glacial silt during ice free months.There
are also many smaller tributaries which are perennially silt free.The
study area included the majority of the Susitna River between the Denali
Highway and Cook Inlet.The entire drainage from Devils Canyon downstream
was monitored for chinook salmon escapement.Studies of other anadromous
species were more restricted to the mainstem Susitna and adjacent areas
between Devils Canyon and Susitna Station.
Two clearwater tributaries,Rabideux and Montana creeks,were
selected for intensive juvenile salmon studies.These streams are
located downstream of the proposed dam site near the Parks Highway
Bridge.A total of 26 clearwater sloughs and eight tributaries were
surveyed between the Chulitna River confluence and Devils Canyon area.
These areas are described in USFWS (1976).Surveys of the Talkeetna
River were conducted,but results are not included within this report.
Resident fish were inventoried in the impoundment area upstream of
Devils Canyon.
Water quality and quantity sampling stations were monitored in the
Susitna River and tributaries.Twenty-six of these sites were clearwater
sloughs adjunct to the Susitna River.Three sites were in the mainstem
Susitna River and the ten remaining locations were clearwater creeks and -
rivers flowing into the Susitna River.Site selection was based on
proximity to the Devils Canyon dam area and previous Susitna River
studies document,ing fish usage (Barrett,1974;USFWS,1976).
PROCEDURES
A field camp was established at Gold Creek for studies downstream
of Devils Canyon due to its central location to the sample sites and the
1-11
•Palmer
40 km I
Figure 1.The Susitna River drainage,Devils Canyon Project,1977.
1-12
N
logistical advantages offered by the Alaska Railroad.Travel on the
Susitna River to the s~tes was accomplished by riverboats equipped with
jet outboard motors.Access to sloughs and tributaries downstream from
Gold Creek was accomplished with a Zodiac raft.A field camp was also
established along the Susitna River five miles upstream from Talkeetna
to install and operate fishwhee1s.Fishwheels were deployed commencing
July 5 and were operated through August 27.Methods of operation are
discussed by Friese (1975).A field station was located in the vicinity
of Talkeetna to conduct Rabideux and Montana creek studies.Avon rubber
rafts supported with helicopter and fixed wing aircraft were used for
the impoundment area studies.
FISHERIES
Adults
Adult salmon escapement was generally determined by tag and recovery
population estimates utilizing fishwhee1s and ground escapement surveys.
Methods are discussed in Friese (1975).The Peterson population estimate
used to determine salmon abundance is presented in Table 1.Chinook
salmon counts were conducted with a Be11-47 helicopter and fixed wing
aircraft.Variable mesh gi1lnets were used to determine species composition
in the impoundment area lakes.Electroshockers and angling were also
employed to collect adult fish for this study.Sloughs and tributaries
in the upper study area were surveyed on the ground according to methods
described in Friese (1975).
Juvenile salmon migration
Intensive fry trapping was undertaken in Rabideux Creek on June 16.
The creek was sectioned into three study areas:upper,middle,and
lower.Coho salmon yearlings were anesthetized with MS-222 and fin
1-13
clipped from June 16 through August 31.The following fin clip codes
were used:upper caudal lobe for upper sub-area,one-half dorsal for
mid sub-area,and lower caudal lobe for lower sub-area.After marking,
the salmon were allowed to recover and were released at the location of
capture.Recovery of these marked coho salmon was continued until mid-
November when extreme cold weather and icing conditions prevented further
intensive work.
Montana Creek was also sectioned into three study sub-areas:
upper,middle,and lower.The upper area was approximately eight stream
miles above its mouth,the middle about three stream miles,and the
lower was from the Parks Highway downstream to its junction with the
Susitna River.The upper and middle sections were seined from July 19
through August 4.All chinook salmon fry captured were marked with an
upper caudal fin clip for the upper area and a lower caudal fin clip for
the middle area.Minnow traps baited with salmon roe were utilized from
the latter part of August until the end of February to monitor fry
movements and population densities throughout the system.
Juvenile studies
Twenty-eight clearwater sloughs and nine tributary streams have
previously been identified as observed or potential rearing sites for
juvenile salmon in the upper Susitna River between Talkeetna and Devils
Canyon (Figure 2)(Barrett,1974;Friese,1975).Juvenile salmon were
collected from these locations during two different sampling periods
during this study.Each slough and tributary were also surveyed biweekly
for relative abundance of rearing fish and water quality data ..Methods
are discussed in Friese (1975).Fry samples for analysis of physical
characteristics and feeding habits were collected with dip net,minnow
traps,or seine and preserved in a 10 percent formalin solution (Brown,1971).
1-14
Portage Cr.
N
Cr.
Talkeetna R.
Cr.
Indien R.
~.8A
n0.88 nO.A
no.Se~no.8D
Clear Cr.
Fourth of JUly Cr.
i
Talkeetna
o.c--'"5
;,C
(,)
Figure 2.Upper Susitna River study area,Devils Canyon Project,1977.
1-15
Summer samples were netted Dy minnow seine between July 11 and
August 5.Juvenile salmon were collected by a combination of minnow
seine and minnow traps from September 20 to 24.Fork lengths and scale
smears were taken in the field for each individual fish.Specimens,
together with incidental catches of other resident fish species,were
preserved in 10 percent formalin.Species identification,verified by
pyloric caecae counts,and weight determinations were made in the Anchorage
laboratory.The gut was dissected from each fish and contents from both
hind-and foregut removed.All gut contents from one sampling location
were pooled by species for each sampling day to facilitate investigation.
Individual stomachs were not examined separately.Insects were identified
to order and larval and pupal forms of Diptera to family.Other organisms
present were identified to the most convenient taxon,usually order.
The major keys used were Pennack (1953),Usinger (1968),Ward and Whipple
(1959),and Jacques (1947).Volume percentages were estimated according
to four gross categories:Crustacea,immature Insecta,adult Insecta,
and other organisms.These estimates reflect the interpretations of the
investigator,but it is felt that they gave a close approximation of
actual volumes.
I-16
Water flows in Rabideux Creek were measured by recording the height
of the water passing through culverts at the Parks Highway,approximately
one-half mile above its confluence with the Susitna River.Recordings
were converted into cubic feet per second.The River Forecast Center of
the National Weather Service monitored water stage and computed flow in
Montana and Willow Creeks.
WATER QUALITY
Dissolved oxygen,temperature,pH,and specific conductance were
measured biweekly and on a random basis in clearwater sloughs and
tributaries with a Yellow Springs Instrument Model 57 oxygen and temperature
meter,Cole Parmer Digi sense pH meter,and Labline Lectro mho meter,
respectively.Alkalinity and hardness were determined with a Hach
chemical kit (model DR-EL/2 and model AL36B)using methods outlined by
the manufacturers.
Temperature data was continually recorded with Ryan thermographs,
MOdel D-30,at one site on the Susitna River and at three sites in both
Rabideux and Montana creeks.Analysis of water samples from the mainstem
Susitna were ana~yzed by the USGS laboratory.
Benthic invertebrates were collected with artificial substrates
(McCoy,1974)and Surber samplers for future analysis.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
FISHERIES
Adults
Adult salmon abundance above the Chulitna River confluence was
determined by tag and subsequent recovery programs during 1974, 1975,
and 1977 (Table 1).The relative magnitude of pink salmon moving past
1-17
Table 1.Relative magnitude of pink,chum,.and sockeye salmon
moving past the fishW'hee1 sites as determined by
Peterson population es1imates,Devils Canyon Project,
1974,1975,and 1977.~.
1974
Pink
Species
Chum Sockeye
M
R
C
N
Confidence
Interval
1975
M
R
C
N
Confidence
Interval
160 568 39
23 74 13
755 3,164 336
5,040 23,970 939
3,836-8,359 20,081-30,746 709-1,764
943 674 370
46 8 22
291 139 103
6,129 10,549 1,760
4,977-11,895 7,122-35,293 1,355-2,865
19772:/
M
R
C
N
Confidence
Interval
429
64
6,644
43,857
36,375-57,439
46
3
2,332
31
1
661
11 Calculated by the following formulas:
N M (C+1)
R+1
95%confidence interval around N Ric Ric +t
R (1~)
C C (N-C)
C N
l/Population estimates were not determined for chum and sockeye
salmon since number of tag recoveries were too low to place
confidence limits on estimates.
1-18
the fishwheel sites above Talkeetna during 1977 was approximately 44,000
fish.Tag recoveries of other salmon species were too low to determine
abundance.Abundance of all salmon species within sloughs and tributaries,
with the exception of chinook salmon,was determined by ground escapement
surveys.Peak survey counts by species from Portage Creek downstream to
the Chulitna River confluence was 1,330 chum,3,429 pink,and 301 sockeye
salmon (Table 2).These estimates are considered minimum escapements,
since counts were only conducted within index areas (USFWS,1976).
Migrational timing of coho salmon was too late to determine peak abundance.
The chinook salmon escapement within the drainage was about 100,000
fish (Table 3).The 1977 escapement appears to have a high reproduction
potential (Kubik,1977 and Watsjold,1977).Historic escapement and harvest
data indicate a minimum escapement level of at least 60,000 chinook salmon
would be required yearly to restore stocks to historic levels.
Numerous tag recoveries downstream of the tagging project were
obtained from the sport fish harvest during 1977 (Figure 3).This
"drop-out"phenomenon was also observed during 1974 and 1975.The total
magnitude of tagged fish moving downstream was not determined since
reporting of tag recoveries was on a voluntary basis.This should,
however,be thoroughly evaluated during future studies.If the Chulitna,
Susitna,and Talkeetna river confluence area serves as a milling area
for fish destined to spawning areas downstream,the project impact area
would be greatly expanded and numbers of fish affected increased
significantly.
Age,length,and sex composition characteristics were determined
from fishwheel catch samples for all species except pink salmon;Results
are presented in Appendix I,Tables 1 and 2.Data is comparable with
1-19
Table Z.Peak chum,pink and sockeye salmon ground escapement
survey counts within the upper Susitna River,Devils
Canyon Project,1977.
CHUM SALMON
Density
Area Date Live Dead Total
Slough 8A 9/22/77 34 17 51
Slough 9 8/19/77 34 2 36
Slough 10 9/9/77 0 2 2
Slough 11 9/22/77 79 37 116
Slough 16 8/28/77 0 4 4
Slough 20 8/16/77 27 1 28
Slough 21 9/20/77 187 117 304
Lane Creek 8/19/77 0 2 2
Fourth of July Creek 8/11/77 11 0 11
Indian River 8/18/77 514 262 776
TOTAL 886 444 1,330
PINK SALMON
Density
Area Date Live Dead Total
Slough 16 8/28/77 0 13 13
Lane Creek 8/11/77 1,190 3 1,193
Fourth of July Creek 8/11/77 611 1 612
Indian River 8/18/77 1,031 580 1,611
TOTAL 2,832 597 3,429
SOCKEYE SALMON
Density
Area Date Live Dead Total
Slough 8A 9/9/77 64 6 70
Slough 8B 9/9/77 2 0 2
Slough 9 9/9/77 6 0 6
Slough 11 9/8/77 181 33 214
Slough 19 9/7/77 7 1 8
Indian River 8/18/77 1 0 1
TOTAL 261 40 301
1-20
Table 3.Peak chinook salmon counts within the Susitna River drainage,1977.
Streams (West Side)Count Streams (East Side)Count
Deshka River 39,642 Wi 11 ow -Creek 1,065
Alexander Creek 13,385 Montana Creek 1,443
Ta1achu1itna River 1,856 Moose Creek 153
Lake Creek 7,391 Prairie Creek 5,790
Martin Creek 1,060 Chunilna Creek 769
Cache Creek 100 Kashwitna River (North Fork)336
Bear Creek 298 Little Willow Creek 598
Red Creek 1 ,511 Sheep Creek 630
Peters Creek 3,042 Indian River 393
Donkey Creek 159 Portage Creek 374
Fish Creek (Quits)131 Chulitna River (East Fork)168
Fish Creek (Kroto S.)132 Chulitna River (Middle Fork)1,782
Unnamed-Kichatna River 120 Chulitna River (Mainstem)229
Clearwater Creek 47 Goose Creek 133
Quartz Creek 8 Honolulu Creek 36
Canyon Creek 135 Byers Creek 69
Dickason Creek 4 Troublesome Creek 95
Unnamed-Hayes River 2 Bunco Creek 136
Rabideux Creek 99
Total Count 14,199
Total Count 69,122 Estimated Total Count 17,028
Estimated Total Count 93,411
Total Count 83,321
Estimated Total Count 109,439
1-21
,.-.
Tokosifna.
Rive r
Swan
lake
(R5)
Chulitna River
Trapp er Slo~gh
(55)
Rabi deux
(SS)
8 kilometer s
(C5)
N
Susitna
River
Chunilna (Clear)Cr.
(C5,P5,S5)
Ta I ke.e t n a Ri v e r
(55)
(PS,SS)
(55)
Cr.(CS,K5,P5,55)
She~p Cr.(P5)
Figure 3.Locations of adult salmon tag recoveries occurring downstream of
the Susitna River fishwheel sites,Devils Canyon Project,1977
(RS-sockeye salmon;PS-pink salmon;CS-chum salmon;SS-coho salmon;
KS-chinook salmon).
1-22
escapement aamples obtained from other areas within the drainage (Friese,
in prep.).Carcass data collected in the Deshka River and Alexander
Creek revealed a high percentage of five-and six-year-old chinook
salmon females (Kubik,1977).
Juvenile salmon migration
Intensive studies of juvenile chinook and coho salmon were conducted
in Rabideux and Montana creeks to define the life histories of these
species as related to the variable conditions of the drainage.The
authors believe that the overwintering period during the first year of
life is probably the most critical time for survival of these two species.
Rabideux and Montana creeks were selected for this study due to:
accessibility,their opposite physical characteristics,and the difference
in the ratio of rearing species.Willow Creek and Indian River were
also sampled periodically for comparative purposes.
Rabideux Creek was selected to obtain representative data on coho
salmon fry densities and yearling movements.A total of 1,041 yearling
cohos were marked.Of these,274 were marked in the upper sub-area,753
in the middle sub-area,and 14 in the lower sub~area.Catches of rearing
coho and chinook salmon captures and recaptures are presented in Table 4.
A total of 159 marked fish were recaptured in the original area of marking
and 32 in dispersed areas.An increase in catch per hour of coho salmon
fry occurred following August 1 because increased growth made them more
susceptible to capture in the 1/4"mesh minnow traps.Fourteen marked
yearlings moved downstream,five upstream,and thirteen migrated to
small lateral tributaries.No distinct pattern was exhibited,which
could be attributed to the fact that environmental conditions are more
stable throughout the year in this tributary during this particular year.
1-23
Other species inhabiting the system were chinook salmon.round
whitefish (Prosopium cy1indraceum).10ngnose sucker (Catostomus catostomus).
arctic grayling,pink salmon.Dolly Varden.rainbow trout.threespine
stickleback (Gasterosteus acu1eatus).burbot.slimy sculpin (Cottus
cognatus).and the western brook lamprey (Lampetra p1aneri).
Montana Creek was selected to obtain data on juvenile chinook
salmon abundance and migration.A total of 25.176 fry were marked from
July 19 through August 14.The distribution of marking was 16.039 in
the upper area and 9.137 in the middle area.Species composition of
other fish was similar to Rabideux Creek.Table 5 illustrates the
findings of trapping in biweekly periods until the first of December.
After this time,trapping was conducted one to three days per month.
The chinook salmon catch per hour indicated a gradual population
density decline until February when a drastic reduction was recorded
(Table 5).The gradual reduction is attributed to fry slowly moving
downstream to the Susitna River throughout the season.This is also
evidenced by marked fry being recovered below their area of release
while no evidence of upstream recoveries was recorded.
Willow Creek was also sampled with ~innow traps periodically
between August 23 and March 2.This data clearly shows a decline in
population density between December and February (Table 6).
The drastic reduction in population density found in February is
attributed to the extremely low water conditions encountered at that
time.The reduced flow was believed to have eliminated required rearing
habitat and forced the juvenile salmonids into the mainstem Susitna
River.Traps were set in the Susitna River and one of its sloughs to
test this theory.Chinook salmon fry were recovered from the Susitna
1-25
)-".J
Table 5.Montana Creek salmon fry trapping,DevilsCanyon Project,1977.
Chinook Chinook Chinook Total
Fry Fry Fry Coho Coho Number Trap Chinook Chinook
Date Unmarked Upper Mark Lower Mark Fry Yearling Traps Hours Per Trap Per Hour
UPPER SECTION
8/16-8/31 178 56 ------13 312 18.0 .75
9/1-9/15 336 6 --I 5 5 115 68.4 2.97
.9/16-9/30 461 2 --11 --14 294 33.1 1.57
10/1-10/15 4188 7 ----14 110 2540 38.1 1.65
10/16-10/31 2987 16 --6 5 74 1560 40.6 1,.93
11/1-11/15 1467 3 --2 8 37 888 39.7 1.66
11/16-11/30 410 1 ----2 17 402 24.2 1.02
12/22 136 ----2 --5 128 27.2 1.06
1/27 185 ----4 --5 126 37.0 1.47
2/23-24 126 --.--I --22 440 5.7 0.29
H MIDDLE SECT IONI
N
0-8/16-8/31 1206 6 13 ----15 360 81.7 3.40
9/1-9/15 1445 6 8 19 1 17 3~8 85.8 4.45
9/16-9/30
10/1-10/15 1982 4 4 --10 39 936 51.0 2.1.3
10/16-10/31 3218 5 10 24 13 65 1490 49.7 2.17
11/1-11/15 1601 3 5 22 3 52 1208 30.9 1.33
11/16-11/30 507 3 1 3 3 17 390 30.1 1.31
12/22 187 ------3 5 120 37.4 1.56
1/27 40 ----I --7 130 5.7 0.31
2/23-24 32 ------I 20 406 1.6 0.08
LOWER SECTION
8/16-8/31 1627 6 9 -- --
24 576 68.4 2.85
9/1-9/15 2077 --2 56 --30 142 69.3 14.64
9/16-9/30 891 1 3 7 39 28 423 32.0 2.12
10/1-10/15 5002 4 1 100 162 141 3292 35.5 1.52
10/16-10/31 2221 6 1 75 21 54 1236 41.3 1.80
11/1-11/15 647 1 --3 --40 936 16.2 0.69
11/16-11/30 456 ----I 3 10 228 45.6 2.00
12/21-23 174 1 ----4 12 288 14.6 0.61
1/27 116 ----3 --5 108 23.2 1.07
2/23-24 108 ------I 18 372 6.0 0.29
H
I
N
"
)
Table 6.Willow Creek chinook salmon fry trapping,Devils
Canyon Project,1977.
1977 Catch/Trap Hour 1978Index
Area 8/23 10/26 12/1 1/18 3/2
III 2.8 2.6 1.3 1.5 1.29
112 3.8 3.2 3.3 1.3 0.28
113 4.2 4.1 4.8 1.3 0.67
,~River at a rate of 0.45 per hour.In the slough they were recovered at
a rate of 0.12 per hour.These catch rates document that chinook salmon
juveniles utilize the mainstem river for rearing during the winter
period.
Juvenile studies
Juvenile salmonids were present in all sloughs and clearwater
tributaries identified within this study,with the exception of Lane
Creek.The absence of juveniles in the latter location does not preclude
their presence,since survey conditions of this creek were generally
poor for juveniles.Pink salmon were the only species observed spawning
within this creek and emergent fry would not be expected to be present
when surveys were conducted,since this species migrate toward sea after
their emergence from the gravel in late May and early June.
The major species utilizing these areas for rearing during summer
months were chinook and coho salmon,although sockeye salmon were also
collected.Misidentification of salmon fry samples collected in previous
studies,particularly between chinook and coho salmon,was noted during
1977.Samples from previous years were reexamined and correct identification
was made.Data indicates chinook salmon were the most abundant rearing
species collected during 1974 through 1976.
Estimated fry abundance varied throughout the season.Lowest
numbers occurred during late September surveys.This data is concurrent
with studies conducted in Willow\.and Montana creeks (see p.25)•
Attempts were not generally made to establish migration from the upper
sloughs and tributaries to the mainstem river.A limited experiment
was,however,conducted in Indian River to determine if migrations
observed in MOntana and Willow creeks also occurred.A total of 579
1-28
chinook salmon fry were trapped during a two hour period on August 18.
Large numbers of chinook salmon fry were also observed near the confluence
area during late August and September.On August 31 the first chinook
salmon fry was trapped in the mainstem Susitna River immediately downstream
of Indian River.Logistical problems prevented follow-up studies until
March 7.Ten traps were fished on this date for 24 hours in areas where
high densities of fry had been observed during the summer.Only four
chinook salmon were captured.Data is 1imited~but it does corroborate
findings in Montana Creek.Montana Creek and Indian River have comparable
gradients~velocities~pool to riffle ratios~and are representative of
most of the clearwater tributaries to the Susitna River.It would be
reasonable to speculate that life history information of salmon fry from
one of these tributaries would be representative of the other.
In addition to the apparent intrasystem migration of juvenile
chinook salmon from the lateral tributaries to the Susitna River in the
fall~it appears some young-of-the-year chinooks move out of the parent
stream in the spring.The majority of the salmon fry observed in
sloughs during 1977 were chinook salmon.Adult chinook salmon were not
observed spawning in these sloughs during 1976.Observations~therefore~
indicate the fry dropped out of spawning areas sometime in the spring
into the Susitna River and then moved into the sloughs to rear for the
summer.
Definition of the intrasystem migrations for the various life
history phases of each species will be important considerations in
assessing the potential impacts of this project.It can be assumed that
individuals of a species will tend to select areas within a drainage
that have the most favorable combinations of hydraulic conditions which
1-29
support life history requirements.They will also utilize less favorable
conditions,with the probability-of-use decreasing with diminishing
favorability of one or several hydraulic conditions (Bovee,1978).
Observations demonstrate that individuals elected to leave an area
before conditions became lethal.The movement of rearing salmon fry out
of the sloughs in the fall has been documented and is an example of
areas where conditions could become lethal.
Data indicates that in early summer salmon rearing conditions are
poor in the mainstem Susitna River because of high discharge and sediment
loads.The clearwater sloughs and tributary areas are utilized by fry
at this time.As the season progresses,discharge and sediment loads of
the mainstem Susitna begin to decrease.By fall and winter,the silt
load appears to be low enough to transform the mainstem Susitna River
into suitable fry rearing habitat to replace slough areas,which are
dewatered when mainstem discharge and stage decreases,and tributaries
that often freeze in the winter.
Samples for age,length and weight analysis were obtained from each
slough during late July and early August and late September.Analysis
,
will not be discussed,but is presented in Appendix I Tables 3,4,and
5.
Aquatic insects and juvenile salmon gut contents
Knowledge of the aquatic insect fauna and its ecology is necessary
to assess the potential impacts of the Devils Canyon and Watana dams
upon the salmon population downstream.Alterations of currently existing
populations would probably have a corrollary effect upon rearing fish.
Gut contents of juvenile salmon from sloughs and tributaries
between Portage Creek and the Chulitna and Susitna River confluence were
1-30
examined to determine feeding habits of rearing fish during 1977.
Studies were considered minimal and further investigations will be
required.
Immature members of the Orders Diptera,Plecoptera,Ephemeroptera,
Trichoptera,Coleoptera,Hemiptera,and adult forms of Hemiptera and
Coleoptera were found in the summer and fall diets of juvenile salmon
(Appendix I Table 6).Adult terrestrial insects were estimated to be
the largest percentage of the gut contents by volume.Although most of
these adult forms were terrestrial,the majority of their life histories
were spent in the aquatic environment.
Percent composition of gut contents varied between species of fish
examined (Table 7).Feeding habits·of chinook and coho salmon were,
however,similar during the summer sampling period.Adult Insecta were
of primary importance for the latter two species during summer.Sockeye
salmon fry fed primarily on Diptera larvae during summer months.Cladocera
(Bosminidae)were also found to be important food organisms for sockeye
salmon in three sloughs (Appendix I Table 6).
Adult Insecta remained the major food items identified in the fall
stomach content samples.Adult Diptera and Hymenoptera comprised approximately
80 percent of the food items in sockeye salmon during the fall as compared
to about 18 percent during summer.The importance of immature Insecta
and Crustacea apparently decreased appreciably.Change in percent,
composition of food items per fish was not significant for chinook and
coho salmon fry.
Aquatic insects probably play a more important role in the juvenile
salmon diet during winter months than in the summer and fall.Many
groups of insects (P1ecoptera,Ephemeroptera,Trichoptera,and Diptera)
1-31
Table 7.Mean percent composition of gut contents per fish of chinook,sockeye.and
coho salmon juveniles in sloughs and clearwater tributaries of the Susitna
River,Devils Canyon Project,1977.
H
I
W
N
Mean Percent Per Fish
Immature Adult
Species Sample Size Crustacea Insecta Insecta Other
Summer Fall Summer Fall Summer Fall Summer Fall Summer Fall
Chinook 219 158 4 trace 24 26 71 62 1 12
Sockeye 35 18 27 2 54 17 18 80 1 1
Coho 17 45 9 trace 17 9 68 69 6 22
are very active during the winter even at water temperatures of Oo:C
(Hynes,1970)~Conversely,during these cold months terrestrial insects
are nonexistent and plankton is either greatly reduced or nil.This
would suggest that aquatic insects would probably be a greater proportion
of the juvenile salmon diets than in the summer.Additional studies are
required to analyze this.
Research and literature in the area of environmental factors
affecting aquatic insects is sparse and often times conflicting.There
is,apparently,a high degree of variability as to substrate type
preference,temperature requirements,and general modes of existence
even within the Order level.Evaluating species diversity would probably
be the most useful means of monitoring on-going environmental changes in
the invertebrate fauna of the river (McCoy,1974).It would not,however,
provide a means to predict whether or how a change will occur.Environmental
factors which would probably result in the greatest alterations in the
aquatic fauna include:water temperature,flow,substrate types,water
clarity,and chemical water quality.
Research in the area of water temperature effects on aquatic fauna
are conflicting,but apparently the "environmental clues"for the
hatching of eggs,the change from a larval to pupal state,etc.,are a
combination of threshho1d temperatures and changing day length (Hynes,
1970).Disruptions in the seasonal pattern of temperature are attributed
to have caused extensive alterations in the aquatic insect fauna of the
Saskatchewan River (Lehmkuhl,1972).Hypolimnial water discharge from a
dam in the river reduced both diversity and absolute numbers of insects
downstream.River temperatures became higher in winter and lower in
summer,differing from the norm in such a way that Ephemeroptera eggs
1-33
failed to.develop into nymphs.Similar temperature effects were thought
to have adversely affected other aquatic insect groups at this site,
even at a distance of 70 miles downstream.Alteration of natural flow
could affect both the respiration of organisms and substrate types.
Most arthropods in still water self-ventilate their gills or respiratory
structures.Many immature aquatic insects have lost this function and
rely on running water or current to artificially "fan"their gills.A
decrease in flow could therefore have an adverse effect upon respiration.
The nature of the flow is intimately related to substrate type.A fast
current area will generally be clean swept and have a rocky or gravel
substrate.The sediment load will drop in slow moving waters and the
bottom will become increasingly silty.Each different substrate type
supports a completely different benthic fauna.All these current related
factors can perhaps best be summarized by Hynes'observation that areas
subjected to wide fluctuations in current "are often without much fauna."
Neither those organisms adapted to a slow moving area nor those to one
of swift water can thrive.
Numerous investigators have established the importance of substrate
types upon the nature of the benthic fauna.Each species of aquatic
insect seems adapted to a certain substrate type or at least greatly
prefers one type to another.Obviously,changes in substrate type will
result in altered benthic fauna.This was evidenced when a small beaver
dam across a stream in Ontario altered the upstream bottom habitat from
swift flowing and stoney to slow moving and silty stones.The total
number of aquatic insects were reduced,"especially of Ephemeroptera,
Plecoptera,and Trichoptera,"while the proportion of Diptera Chironomid
larvae was increased (Hynes,1970).There can be great variations in
1-34
substrate preference within each order or even family.Some trends are,
however,discernable.In general,rocky or stoney substrates with a
swift flow of water will contain both a greater species diversity and a
higher biomass than silty substrates with slower moving water.These
riffle areas are the most productive regions in running water.
The possible introduction of turbid glacial water by the proposed
dam into the clear winter water of the upper Susitna seems to indicate
substrate type would be altered to one of increasing silt.This would
probably change the aquatic insect fauna and quite possibly reduce its
abundance.
Chemical water quality influences upon aquatic insects would be
minimal in comparison to the above factors.Lehmkuhl (1972)and Spence
and Hynes (1971)discovered no appreciable differences in chemical water
quality upstream and downstream from dam impoundments and thus concluded
there were no effects from these factors upon benthic invertebrates.
The importance of drift to the relationship between aquatic insects
and the diet of juvenile salmon is another factor to consider.Many
benthic invertebrates,displaced by crowded conditions and as a means of
finding more favorable substrate habitats,leave the substrate and are
carried downstream by the water's flow.These are cumulatively called
"drift".Investigators have repeatedly found that most of the food
items of salmonid fish in flowing water situations consist of drift.
Hynes (1970)reports that brown trout feed mostly on drifting organisms.
Becker's (1973)food habits study of juvenile chinook salmon on the
Columbia River concluded prey items were either drift organisms or adult
insects floating on the water's surface.Loftus and Lenon (1977)also
believed drift to be an important food source to chinook and chum smelt
1-35
on the Salcha River in interior Alaska.A comparison between the gut
contents of a limited number of longnase suckers (bottom feeders)
collected in our study with that of the juvenile salmon reveals that
drift aquatic insects together with floating adult insects were apparently
the major food items.The numbers and kinds of organisms in the drift
appear to differ substantially when compared to fauna collected strictly
on the bottom.As might be expected,heavier organisms such as Trichoptera
larvae and their cases,snails,etc.,are relatively rare in drift,
while Ephemeroptera,Diptera Chironomid larvae,and P1ecoptera form a
\
higher percentage than they do On the substrate.Various environmental
factors can alter the amount of drift.Investigators have reported
varying drift because of ice scouring,water temperature,and daylight
changes (Hynes,1970).The role of drift organisms in both the food
,
habits of rearing salmonid fishes and in the overall ecology of aquatic
insects is thus probably of some importance in the Susitna River and
should be investigated further.
If a hypolimnia1 discharge hydroelectric dam is constructed at
Devils Canyon,it appears almost certain the downstream benthic fauna
will be altered.This will most probably occur because of:1)changed
water temperatures resulting from the hypolimnia1 discharge which may
disrupt the life cycles of certain species;2)substrate types altered
by increased winter turbidity of downstream river water,which will in
turn alter the aquatic insects living on the substrate,and 3)discharge
flow variations because of varying power demands,which will create
areas of the river bottom to which neither swift current associated
species nor slow current forms are perfectly adapted for.Which species
or group of insects will be most affected,whether they will be major
1-36
food items of rearing juvenile salmon or whether the salmon will switch
their food preference to the newly abundant forms,and whether the
biomass of benthic fauna will decrease,will probably be difficult,if
not impossible,to predict.We can only hope to broadly outline what
changes may occur.
Impoundment area fisheries investigations
Alterations will definitely occur to the fish habitat in the areas
to be inundated.The fisheries investigations in the impoundment area
during the first two weeks of July revealed that Arctic grayling were
abundant in all of the major clearwater tributaries (Table 8).Extreme
lake level fluctuations of the Watana reservoir will destroy habitat and
affect the high quality fishery which presently exists.
No anadromous species were captured upstream of Devils Canyon
during the first two weeks of July.More extensive sampling,however,
is necessary throughout the summer to determine if Devils Canyon is a
velocity barrier to salmon during different natural flow regimes over
a three to five year period.
Lakes in the impoundment area which could be impacted by construction
of road or transmission corridors and increased access were also surveyed
for species composition (Table 9).Fifteen of the eighteen lakes
sampled supported desirable game fish populations.
Construction of the Devils Canyon dam would inundate 7,550 acres
and have a surface elevation of 1,450 feet and extend for 28 miles
upstream (U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,1977).Construction of the
Watana dam would result in inundation of 43,000 acres with a surface
elevation of 2,200 feet extending for 54 miles upstream along the Susitna
River.For downstream discharge to remain relatively constant,at least
1-37
r~Table 8.Limnological data from selected tributaries to the Susitna River,
Devils Canyon Project,1977 .
Est.Estimated
Flow Velocity Percent Bottom Conduc-Fish
Stream (cfs)(fps)Pools TyPe Temp.pH tivity Observed*
Oshetna 600 3 15 Rubble 13 8 75 GR
Boulder
Goose 100 2 40 Rubble 15 GR
Boulder
Jay 75 2 40 Gravel 8 8.4 160 GR,SK,WF,
Boulder SC
Kosina 100 2 30 Gravel 14 8 65 GR
Boulder
Watana 300 1.5 20 Gravel 12 7.8 110 GR
Rubble
Deadman 900 3 10 Boulder 14 GR
Tsusena 600 2 10 Gravel 6 7.8 50 GR
Boulder
Fog 200 1.5 30 Sand 9 7.9 75 GR
*GR -Grayling
SK -Suckers
SC -Sculpin
WF-Whitefish
1-38
Table 9 •
Susitna River impoundment area lake surveys,Devils Canyon Project,1977.
Surface Surface Maximum Fish Species
Lake Location Elevation Acres Depth (Ft)Present*
Clarence ·T30N,R9E,S19,20 2,900 299 35 LT,GR,WF
Fog 1 T31N,RSE,S9 2,230 147 72 DV,SC
2 T31N,R5E,S8 2,230 237 50 DV,SC
3 T31N,R5E,S15 2,110 339 81 DV,SC
4 T31N,RSE,S13 2,300 358 9 DV,SC
5 T31N,R6E,S7 2,300 269 6
George T6N,R7W,S20,29 2,400 80 18 GR,LNS
Louise T32N,R6E,S7 2,362 155 155 LT,BB,WF,GR
Connor T6N,R7W,S28 2,450 18 13 GR
Tsusena Butte T33N,R5E,S21 2,493 190 110 GR,LT,WF
Pistol T32N,R6E,S7 2,350 205
Big T32S,R3,4W,S25,3,070 1,080 80 LT,WF
·18,19,30
Deadman T22S,R4W,S13,14 3,064 380 70 LT,GR,WF
Watana T30N,R7W,S36 3,000 300 30 LT,WF,GR
Square T30N,R3E,S35 1,935 230 34
Little Moose
Horn T30N,R3E,S36 1,850 120 33 GR,LT,LNS
Stephan T30N,R3E,S2,10,16 1,862 840 95 LT,RT,RS
SS,GR,WF,LNS
*Species:GR -Grayling
RT -Rainbow Trout
DV -Dolly Varden
LT -Lake Trout
WF -White Fish
SC -Sculpin
S8 -Coho Salmon
BB -Burbon
1-39
RS -Sockeye Salmon
LNS -Long Nosed Sucker
one of these reservoirs will have to fluctuate considerably.The Watana
reservoir is projected to have the most extreme fluctuations.The
majority of the clearwater tributaries to be inundated are found within
this section of river and,of the two impoundments,greater impacts will
probably occur here since loss of portions of these tributaries is
inevitable if the two dams are built.If salmon utilize the area above
the Devils Canyon dam site,however,both the Devils Canyon and Watana
dams and impoundments could adversely impact migration.Reservoir
fluctuations could have a variety of effects on the tributaries.The
mouths of these tributaries and stretches of water upstream provide some
of the most productive fishery habitat in this area.Some tributaries
have steep gradients upstream of the mouth area which act as migration
barriers and do not appear to support fish species.
In tributaries where the full pool would extend up to the base of
steep tributary gradients or waterfalls,critical lotic habitat would be
lost.Periods of lowered pool levels could have a suction effect and
result in the erosion and formation of channels with steep gradients
which may block intersystem fish migrations and eliminate suitable
fishery habitat.Preliminary data on fish species present demonstrates
that additional information is required to evaluate the full effects of
inundation and regulation in these areas.
WATER QUANTITY
Between May 17 and June 14,1977 the unregulated flow of the Susitna
River increased from 13,600 cubic feet per second (cfs)to a peak discharge
of 52,600 cfs (Figure 4;Appendix II,Table 1).By July 20,the flow
decreased to 22,400 cfs and fluctuated around 20,000 cfs until August
25.On September 6 the flow dropped to 9,520 cfs and then increased to
1-40
50,000
45,000
.49,000
,....,
to
4-l 35,000c.J
'-"
ill
Oil
~
C'j,...-()
to 30,000'r-I
'4
>..-;
-rl
co
0
t::
Q
Q 25,000.....""'
20,000
15,000
la,000
9,000
8,000
Hay June July
Date
August September
(
Figure 4.Susitna River discharge at Gold Creek,Devils Canyon Project,1977.
16,900 cfs one week later.The flow decreased to 9,840 cfs on September
27 which again was followed by increased flow until the last reading of
12,500 cfs was made.on September 30.
Fluctuations in flow during August and September were attributed to
heavy rain.Stage fluctuations within the majority of clearwater
sloughs of the Susitna River,related directly to mainstem discharge
variations (Appendix II,Table 2).Downstream flow is projected to be
maintained at a constant rate of approximately 7,000 to 8,000 cfs at
Gold Creek after completion of the dams.Slough surveys were terminated
near the end of September when the flow was approximately 15,000 cfs.
It was not possible to observe the sloughs during this study when the
mainstem flow was 8,000 cfs due to freezing conditions.Observations
during the 1976 study,however,concluded that 75 percent of the rearing
sloughs studied were undesirable habitat when the flow in the mainstem
was 7,000 cfs (Riis,1977).
Habitat requirements for passage,spawning,egg incubation,fry,
juvenile,and adult phases of the salmon species studied are quite
specific.The USFWS Cooperative Instream Flow Service Group has developed
criteria which demonstrate the narrow tolerances of certain sa1monid
species to hydraulic parameters of velocity,depth,substrate and
temperature (Bovee,1978).The seasonally wide fluctuations of water
velocity,depth,temperature,substrate,and sediment of the mainstem
Susitna,its sloughs and tributaries determine to some extent the
\
intrasystem migrations of fish seeking more desirable environments.
Thus,any alterations to the existing aquatic ecosystem which restrict
or reduce the availability of required habitat,will also reduce fish
\
production.
1-42
Low flows were encountered in Rabideux Creek from mid-June through
the end of August (Table 10).The lowest flow recorded was 24.3 cfs on
August 23.The highest flow was 440.7 cfs on September 29 and was
apparently due to the heavy rains encountered at that time.
WATER QUALITY
Ryan thermo graphs were installed in the upper sub-areas of Rabideux
and Montana creeks.Water temperatures in Rabideux Creek ranged up to
five degrees celsius (OC)higher than Montana Creek during corresponding
time periods.The high recorded in Rabideux Creek was l8.8°C on both
July 11 and 12;the low of 107°C occurred on October 22 and 23 at which
time the thermograph was removed (Appendix II,Table 3).In Montana
Creek,a high of l5.D oc was recorded on July 28 and the low of D.DoC was
,
recorded from November 3 through 6 at which time recording was terminated
(Appendix II,Table 4).
A thermograph was also installed in the Susitna River at the Parks
Highway bridge.When installed on June 27 the temperature was lD.SoC
and the highest water temperature of 14°C was reached on July 12 followed
by temperatures fluctuating between l3.SoC and 10°C when a steady decline
began on August 25 and continued to the lowest reading of 2°C on October
2 (Table 11).
Temperatures at all other sampling sites were measured with a combined
dissolved oxygen and temperature meter and/or a pocket thermometer.Data
is presented in Appendix II,Table 2.
Water chemistry of Rabideux and Montana creeks was measured throughout
the season.Determinations of dissolved oxygen,pH,hardness,and total
alkalinity are presented in Appendix II,Tables 5 and 6.
In Rabideux Creek,dissolved oxygen ranged from a low of 6 ppm in
the upper sub-area to a high of 11 ppm recorded in all areas ..Hydrogen
1-43
Table 10.Water flows of Montana,Rabideux,and Willow cr~eks from Hay •
through November,Devils Canyon Project,1977.~1
MONTANA CREEK
r-"Date Flow (cis)
5/1 935
5/21 2,000
6/5 4,800
6/20 1,764
7/1 935
7/21 935
8/6 233
8/22 153
9/1 103
9/29 1,349
10/15 .394
11/9 490
RABIDEUX CREEK
;-
Date Flow (cfs)
4/13 325.4
5/25 128.7
6/7 116.7
6/17 50.2
6/30 33.2
7/13 36.7
7/26 31.4
8/23 24.3
8/31 29.2
9/21 242.9
9/29 440.7
IHLLOW CREEK
...
\
Date
5/1
5/30
6/15
6/29
7/15
7/30
8/15
8/30
9/16
9/29
10/15
10/30
11/8
Flow (cfs)
443
1,590
3,320
1,900
951
525
409
1'22
1,590
2,070
525
348
676
Montana and Willow creeks data is provisional and was obtained from
the National Weather Service.
1-L,4
Table 11.Thermograph set in Susitna River downstream of Parks Highway
Bridge,daily maximum and minimum water temperature,Devils
Canyon Project,1978.
Temp.°c Temp.0c Temp.°c
Date Min.Max.Date Min.:M"..ax.Date 'Min.Max.
6/27 10.5 10.5 7/30 12.5 12.5 9/12 7.5 8.0
6/28 10.5 10.5 7/31 11.0 12.5 9/13 7.5 7.5
6/29 10 10.5 8/1 10.0 10.5 9/14 7.5 7.5
6/30 10 10 8/2 10.0 10.0 9/15 6.0 7.5
7/1 10.5 10.5 8/3 10.0 11.0 9/16 6.0 6.5
7/2 10.5 10.5 8/4 11.0 11.0 9/17 6.5 6.5
7/3 10 10.5 8/5 11.0 11.0 9/18 6.5 6.5
7/4 9.5 10 8/6 10.5 11.0 9/19 6.0 6.5
7/5 9.5 10 8/7 11.0 11.0 9/20 5.5 6.5
7/6 10 11 8/8 10.0 10.5 9/21 5.5 5.5
7/7 12 12.5 8/9 10.0 11.5 9/22 5.5 6.0
7/8 12 13 8/10 .11.0 11.5 9/23 5.5 6.0
7/9 12 13 8/11 10.5 11.0 9/24 5.0 5.5
7/10 12.5 13.5 8/12 10.5 11.0 9/25 4.5 5.0
7/11 13 13.5 8/13 10.5 11.0 9/26 4.5 5.0
7/12 13.5 14 8/14 10.5 11.0 9/27 5.0 5.0
7/13 13 13.5 8/15 10.5 11.0 9/28 5.0 5.0
7/14 11 13 8/16 11.0 11.0 9/29 4.5 5.0
7/15 10.5 11 8/17 11.0 11.0 9/30 3.0 4.5
7/16 10.5 11.5 8/18 10.0 10.5 10/1 2.5 3.0
7/17 11.3 12 8/19 10.5 12.0 10/2 2.0 2.5
7/18 12 12 8/20 11.0 12.0 10/3 2.0 2.0
7/19 11.5 11.5 8/21 10.5 12.0 10/4 2.0 3.0
7/20 11.5 11.5 8/22 11.0 11.5 10/5 2.5 3.0
7/21 11 11 8/23 11.0 12.0 10/6 2.0 2.5
7/22 11 11.5 8/24 10.5 11.5 10/7 2.5 2.5
7/23 11 11.5 8/25 9.5 10.5 10/8 2.5 3.0
7/24 11 11.5 8/26 9.0 10/9 3.0 3.5
7/25 11.5 11.5 10110 3.5 3.5
7/26 11.5 11.5 10/11 3.5 4.0
7/27 10.5 12.0 9/9 8.0 10/12 3.5
7/28 11.0 12.5 9/10 7.5 8.0
7/29 12.0 13.0 9/11 7.5 8.0
1-45
ion (pH)concentrations were found to be relatively stable ranging from
a low of 6.5 to a high of 7.7.Both hardness and total alkalinity were
found to range between 17 mg/1to 68 mg/1.The higher readings occurred
during the warmer summer months.
Montana Creek exhibited less fluctuation in chemical water character-
istics than Rabideux Creek.The d~ssolved oxygen ranged from 9 to 12
ppm~pH from 6.8 to 7.7,and hardness and total alkalinity from 17 to 34
mg/L
Water samples were collected jointly by ADF&G and USGS from three
sites on the Susitna and the USGS laboratory carried out the complete
standard chemical analysis.This data is presented in Appendix II,
Table 7 and considerably expands the daLa base which will be used for
future comparisons.
Field determinations of dissolved oxygen,pH,hardness,total
alkalinity and specific conductance were collected in clearwater sloughs
and tributaries and are tabulated in Appendix II,Table 2.Thefindings
were within acceptable limits for fish life and were in the range of
expected.resu1ts for natural waters in southcentra1 Alaska.
CONCLUSION
Baseline inventory studies,to date,emphasize the need to initiate
a comprehensive study to properly assess the potential environmental
impacts to the aquatic ecosystem of the Susitna drainage by the proposed
Watana and Devils Canyon hydroelectric project prior to final design
approval and construction authorization.
The Susitna River is a product of its tributaries.All aquatic
habitat and populations (within the power transmission corridor site,
construction road routes,and above and below the proposed dam sites)
which would be directly or indirectly affected during construction and
after completion of the project must be carefully evaluated.It is
imperative to thoroughly investigate the interrelationships between the
aquatic biology and the water quantity and quality of the existing free
flowing Susitna River system.Recreational,social,economic,and
aesthetic considerations should also be included.
With this information the Alaska Department of Fish and Game will
be able to provide the input for preventing unnecessary losses of the
fisheries and related resources held in high esteem by the people of
Alaska and the Nation as a whole.
1-47
RECOMMENDATIONS
Continued collection of biological data and completion of resource
assessment in the area affected by the proposed hydroelectric project
ts essential to understanding the potential impacts of the proposed
action.Appendix III is a summary of ADF&G's reconnnendations for
essential aquatic studies.
Direct studies of aquatic and terrestrial species can delineate a
population and indicate their distribution throughout the year and define
why species are there to a certain ~xtent.Seasonal life history
studies must be accompanied by habitat studies if we are to determine
the full.significance of habitat alteration to the population.
The studies identified for the pre-authorization environmental
assessment are necessary to predict the impacts of hydroelectric develop-
ment on the ecosystem.The objectives of the biological investigations
are based upon the assumption that the Devils Canyon and Watana two dam
plan will be selected.It must be realized that as the plan evolves and
new information becomes available,the program must be flexible enough.
to permit adjustment in study direction.If other basin development
schemes are proposed,study time and costs will have to be reevaluated.
Capital requirements for each year were based upon FY-78 dollars.Inflation
will therefore necessitate annual supplemental allocations which represent
revised cost estimates.The proposals are closely integrated and
demonstrate the need for continuity.The design,timing,manpower
requirements,and funding levels of the individual projects have been
coordinated.
A team of resource specialists representing various scientific
disciplines will be required to carry out field investigations in habitat
I-48
assessment.Adequate time will be required to organize study personnel
and procure equipment prior to the first field season.An untimely
delay could prevent the initiation of the field studies one year.
1-49
ACKNOHLEDGEMENTS
Several biologists with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game
gave freely of their time and expertise to assist us during this
study.We would like to express our thanks to Paul Janke,Larry Engel,
Roger Wadman,Stan Kubik,Larry Heckart,Fred Williams,Mike Mills,
Dave Watsjold and Bob Chlupach.
The temporary biologists who worked on this project deserve credit
for long hours spent collecting and analyzing data:Christopher Estes,
Jeff Hock,Terry Bradley,Pete Probasco,Kevin Delaney,Ward Knous,
Steven Sykes,Doug Bue,Dave Clausen and Dave Go1we11.LabQrato~y
.analysis and literature research on aquatic insect samples were"CQnduc.ted
by Dave Clausen.Special appreciation is extended to Christopher Estes
for his participa~ion in the preparation of this document.
Funding for this study was provided by the U.S.Fish and Wildlife
Service.Individuals from the USFWS also assisted with the Chinook fry
marking operation in Montana Creek.
The USGS cooperated in every way possible in collecting and analyzing
water samples.
Appreciation is also extended to those individuals not mentioned here
who assisted with this project.
I-50
LITERATURE CITED
Alaska District U.S.Army Corps of Engineers.1977.Plan of Study
for Susitna hydropower feasibility analysis.Prepared under contract
agreement for the state_of Alaska.September.297 pp.
Barrett,B.M.1974.An assessment study of the anadromous fish population
in the upper Susitna River watershed between Devils Canyon and the
Chulitna River.Cook Inlet Data Report No.74-2.Alaska Department
of Fish and Game.Division of Commercial Fisheries.56 pp.
Becker,C.D.1973.Food and growth parameters of juvenile chinook
salmon,Oncorhynchus tshaFYtscha,in central Columbia River.
Fishery Bulletin.Vol.71.No~2.387-400 pp.
Bovee,K.D.1978.Probabi1ity-of-use criteria for the family Sa1monidae
FWS/OBS -78/07 Cooperative Instream Flow Service Group.Fort
Collins,Colorado.
___'and T.Cochnauer.1977.Development and evaluation of weighted
criteria probabi1ity-of-use curves for instream flow assessment:
Fisheries FWS/OBS -77/63 Cooperative Instream Flow Service Group.
Fort Collins,Colorado.39 pp.
Brown,C.J.D.
Montana.
1971.Fishes of Montana Big S~y Books.
207 pp.
Bozeman,
Friese,N.V.1975.Preauthorization assessment of anadromous fish
populations of the upper Susitna River watershed in the vicinity of
the proposed Devils Canyon hydroelectric project.Cook Inlet Data
Report No 75-2.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Division of
Commercial Fisheries.121 pp.
Friese,N.V.(in prep).Susitna River salmon escapement studies,1977.
Cook Inlet Data Report Series.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
Division of Commercial Fisheries.
Hynes,H.B.N.1970.The ecology of running water.Univ.of Toronto
Press,Toronto.
Jaques,H.C.1947.How to know the insects.Second Edition.WID.
C.Brown Co.Dubuque,Iowa.205 pp.
Kubik,S.W.and R.Wadman.1977.Inventory and cataloging of sport
fish waters of the lower Susitna River and central Cook Inlet
drainages.Annual Report of Progress,1976-1977.Project F-9-9,
Vol.18,No.G-I-H.28 pp.
Lehmkuhl,D.M.1972.Change in thermal regime as a cause of reduction
of benthic fauna downstream of a reservoir.J.Fish.Res.Bd.
Canada.Vol.29,No.9.1329-1332 pp.
Loftus,W.F.and H.L.Lenon.1977.Food habits of the salmon smolts,
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha and o.keta,from the Salcha River,Alaska.
Trans.Am.Fish.Soc.Vol.106,No.3.235-240 pp.
I-51
McCoy,G.1974.
the Chena and
Flood Control
Survey,Water
LITERATURE CITED (cant.)
Preconstruction assessment of biological quality of
Little Chena rivers in the vicinity of Chena Lakes
Project near Fairbanks,Alaska.U.S.Geological
Resources Investigations 29-74.84 pp.
Pennak,R.W.1953.Freshwater invertebrates of the United States.
The Ronald Press Co.New York.
Riis,J.C.1977.Pre-authorization assessment of the proposed Susitna
River hydroelectric projects:preliminary investigations of water
quality and aquatic species composition.Alaska Department of Fish
and Game.Division of Sport Fish.91 pp.
Spence,J.A.and H.B.N.Hynes.1971a.
and downstream of an impoundment.
28,No.1.35-43 pp.
Differences in benthos upstream
J.Fish.Res.Bd.Canada.Vol.
1971b.Differences in fish populations upstream and downstream
of a mainstem impoundment.J.Fish.Res.Bd.Canada.Vol.28,No.
1.45-46 pp.
U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service.1976.Southcentral railbe1t area -
Susitna River basin.Fish and wildlife studies related to the
Corps of Engineers Devils Canyon -Watana Reservoir hydroelectric
project.Studies conducted by the Alaska Dept.of Fish and Game
under contract agreement with the u.S.Fish and Widlife Service.
February.185 pp and appendices.
Usinger,R.L.1968.Aquatic insects of California.Univ.of Calif.
Press.Berkeley.
Ward,H.B.and G.C.Whipple.1959.Freshwater Biology.Second
Edition.John Wiley and Sons,Inc.New York.
Watsjold,D.A.1977.Inventory,cataloging,and population sampling
of the sport fish and sport fish waters in upper Cook Inlet.
Annual Report of Progress,1976-1977.Project F-9-9,Vol.18,No.
G-I-D.48 pp.
I-52
APPENDIX I
Tables in the following appendix include data on adult and juvenile
salmonids and stomach content analysis.
I-53
Appendix I
Table 1 •Percent age composition of chinook,sockeye,coho,and chum salmon escapement
samples.Devils Canyon Project.1974.1975.and 1977.
Year of Sample
Return Age Class Brood Year Size
CHINOOK:
1977 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974
Percent 9.5 9.5 52.4 28.6 0.0 0.0 28.6 52.4 9.5 9.5 100.0
Number 2 2 11 6 a 0 6 11 2 2 21
1975 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
Percent 9.3 4.6 34.9 44.2 7.0 7.0 44.2 34.9 4.6 9.3 100.0
Number 4 2 15 19 3 3 19 15 2 4 43
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SOCKEYE:
1977 1.1 1.2 1.3 2.1 2.2 1972 1973 1974
Percent 3.3 16.7 76.7 3.3 0.0 76.7 20.0 3.3 100.0
Number 1 5 23 1 0 23 6 1 30
1975 1.1 1.2 1.3 2.1 2.2 1970 1971 1972
Percent 6.3 41.8 37.9 0.0 14.0 51.9 41.8 6.3 100.0
Number 5 33 30 0 11 41 30 5 79
1974 1.1 1.2 1.3 2.1 2.2 1969 1970 1971
Percent 27.9 46.5 4.7 11.6 9.3 14.0 58.1 27.9 100.0
Number 12 20 2 5 4 6 25 12 43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COHO:
1977 1.1 1.2 2.0 2.1 1973 1974
Percent 14.3 0.0 0.0 85.7 85.7 14.3 100.0
Number 1 0 0 6 6 1 7
1975 1.1 1.2 2.0 2.1 1971 1972
Percent 11.8 5.9 0.0 82.3 88.2 11.8 100.0
Number 2 1 0 14 15 2 17
1974 1.1 1.2 2.0 2.1 ·1970 1971
Percent 15.9 0.0 0.9 83.2 84.1 15.9 100.0
Number 18 0 1 94 95 18 113
~:
1977 0.2 0.3 0.4 1972 1973 1974
Percent 4.8 88.1 7.1 7.1 88.1 4.8 100.0
Number 2 37 3 2 37 2 42
1975 0.2 0.3 0.4 1970 1971 1972
Percent 16.4 82.0 1.6 1.6 82.0 16.4 100.0
Number 21 105 2 2 105 21 128
1974 0.2 0.3 0.4 1969 1970 1971
Percent 48.1 33.4 18.5 18.5 33.4 48.1 100.0
Number 229 159 88 88 159 229 476
I-54
Appendix I
Table 2 Age.length.and sex characteristics or cnum.chinook.sockeye.and coho salmon
escapement,samples.Devils Canyon Project.1974.1975.and 1977.
Year of Age Mean Standard Range of Number Number
Return Class Length <mm)Deviation (s.)Lengths Males Females n
CHUM:
1974 0.2 545.0 32.05 410-650 155 74 229
0.3 614.8 33.61 510-695 88 71 159
0.4 627.6 30.71 520-695 47 41 88
1975 0.2 552.7 13.58 530-578 11 10 21
0.3 587.6 20.62 532-628 55 50 105
0.4 620.5 2.50 618-623 0 2 2
1977 0.2 568.5 3.50 565-572 0 2 2
0.3 618.3 29.05 545-667 28 9 37
0.4 656.7 9.43 650-670 2 1 3
--------.----------------------------------------.-----------------------------------------------
CHINOOK:
1975 1.1 389.3 31.69 341-421 4 0 4
1.2 483.5 6.50 477-490 1 1 2
1.3 710.6 84.25 569-812 12 3 15
1.4 856.2 62.63 778-990 7 12 19
1.5 937.0 45.08 897-1000 0 3 3
1977 1.1 371.5 28.50 343-400 2 0 2
1.2 580.0 5.00 575-580 2 0 2
1.3 816.3 59.10 725-920 8 3 11
1.4 994.8 52.02 950-1103 4 2 6
---------------------------.--------.---------------------------------------------~-----------
SOCKEYE:
1974 1.1 395.5 69.14 315-485 12 0 12
1.2 527.8 48.99 417-595 10 10 20
1.3 572.5 12.50 560-585 0 2 2
2.1 376.6 56.94 318-485 5 0 5
2.2 536.3 20.12 515';'565 3 1 4
1975 1.1 352.4 37.15 313-423 5 0 5
1.2 471.8 42.36 398-548 15 18 33
1.3 576.1 26.65 514-638 12 18 30
2.1 0 0 0
2.2 532.3 39.54 460-576 4 7 11
1977 1.,1 347.0 347 1 0 1
1.2 451.8 27.09 433-505 4 1 5
1.3 596.4 30.24 509-639 11 12 23
2.1 371.0 371 1 0 1
2.2 0 0 0
--------------------------------------------------------
£Q!!Q:
1974 1.1 487.9 42.92 410-575 11 7 18
2.0 375.0 375 1 0 1
2.1 527.7 48.00 376-605 49 45 94
1975 1.1 495.5 4.50 491-500 1 1 2
1.2 540.0 540 1 0 1
2.1 531.1 38.53 454-608 5 9 14
1977 1.1 337.0 337 1 0 1
2.1 473.0 54.54 400-549 5 1 6
I-55
'))
Appendix I
Table .1.Analyses of age,length,weight and cOlldition factors of juvenile sockeye salmon samples from SlIsitns River sloughs and
clearwater tributaries.Devils Canyon Project.1977.(continued)
')
H
I
V1
-.J
Length (mm)Weight (g)Condition Factor
Age Standard Standard Staodard Percent!1
Location Class Date Mean Deviation Range .Iean Deviation Range Mean Deviation Range Composition n
Slough 19 0.0 7/26 32.4 7.9 25-51 0.4 0.5 0.1-1.9 0.803 0.335 0.370-1.432 100 12
0.0 8/2 53.5 1.5 52-55 1.5 0.1 1.4-1.7 1.009 0.013 0.996-1.022 100 2
-
0.0 9/21 50.0 --1.5 --1.200 --100 1
11 Percent composition of each age class within sampling period.
\J
Appendix I
Table 4.Analyses of age,length,weight and condition factors of juvenile coho salmon samples from Susitna River sloughs and
clearwater tributaries,Devils Canyon Project,1977.
Length (nun)Weight (g)Condition Factor
Age Standard Standard Standard Percent!.!
Location __Jaass Date Mean Deviation Range Mean Deviation Range Mean Deviation Range Composition n
Slough 1 0.0 9/24 54.6 3.9 49-61 2.0 0.5 1.3-2.9 1.199 0.08/1 1.022-1.315 93 13
1.0 9/24 80.0 --6.0 --1.172 --7 1
-
Slough 4 0.0 9/24 62.7 3.3 59-67 2.9 0.4 2.5-3.6 1.196 0.017 1.175-1.217 23 3
1.0 9/24 75.4 8.3 68-99 5.9 3.3 3.7-15.6 1.268 0.126 1.152-1.628 17 10
-
Slough 5 0.0 9/23 17.0 --6.2 --1.358 --25 1
H 1.0 9/23 105.3 8.9 93-114 14.9 3.0 10.7-17 .5 1.267 0.104 1.120-1.351 75 3
I
Ln
00 7/27 57.0Slough60.0 --1.9 --1.026 --100 1
Slough 6A 0.0 7/27 49.5 1.5 48-51 1.5 0.0 1.5 1.243 0.'113 1.113-1.356 100 2
Slough 0.0 9/23 63.0 - -
3.0 --1.216 --100 1
or SA
Slough BC 0.0 9/23 47.0 --1.2 --1.156 --100 1
Slough 10 0.0 7/27 57.0 --2.1 --1.134 --100 1
)
Appendix I
Table 4.Analyses of age,length,weight and condition factors of juvenile coho salmon samples from SusHna River sloughs and
clearwater tributaries,Devils Canyon Project,1977.(continued)
l.ength (mm)Weight (g)Condition Factor
Age Standard Standard Standard Percentll
Location Class Date Mean Deviation Range__Mean Deviation Range Mean Deviati()fi Range'C.:I!Upositlon n
Slough 13 0.0 9/22 59.0 --2.2 --1.071 --100 1
Slough 16 0.0 9/21 63.0 2.0 61-65 3.2 .....0.3 2.9-3.5 1.276 0.002 1.274-1.278 100 2
Slough 19 0.0 9/21 71.0 2.0 69~73 4.7 0.7 4.0-5.3 1.290 0.072 1.218-1.362 100 2
Slough 21 0.0 9/20 56.0 --1.5 --0.854 --100 1
---~~--
Chase 0.0 8/6 43.0 2.0 41-45 0.9 0.1 0.8-1.1 1.184 0.023 1.161-1.207 100 2
Creek
H 8/5IWhiskers0.0 43.0 5.0 38-48 0.9 0.3 0.6-1.2 1.089 0.004 1.085-1.093 100 2
Ln CreekI,Q
0.0 9/24 50.7 4.3 46-57 1.7 0.4 1.1-2.2 1.243 0.837 1.130-1.356 100 6
11 Percent composition of each age class within sampling period.
'It
'I
~
Appendix I
Table 5.Analyses of age,length,weight and condition factors of juvenile chInook salmon samples from Susitna River sloughs and
clearwater tributaries,Devils Canyon Project,1977.(continued)
Length (lUlU)Weight (g)Condition Factor
Age Standard Standard Standard Percent!/
Location Class Date Mean Deviation Range Mean Deviation Range Mean Deviation Range Composition n
Slough 11 0.0 9/21 60.3 3.5 54-69 2.5 0.5 1.3-4.0 1.166 0.104 0.972-1.366 100 40
Slough 13 0.0 9/22 56.0 3.5 53-62 2.1 0.5 1.9-3.0 1.221 0.052 1.142-1.276 100 4
Slough 14 0.0 9/22 60.7 4.1 54-68 2.8 0.5 2.0-3.8 1.233 0.0110 1.165-1.296 90 9
1.0 9/22 74.0 --5.1 --1.259 --10 1
Slough 15 0.0 7/26 48.5 2.1 45-52 1.2 0.1 1.0-1.6 1.048 0.080 0.924-1.175 100 10
H 0.0 9/21 60.8 6.3 48-74 2.9 0.9 1.8-4.8 1.260 0.137 0.926-1.628 100 19I
0'1
N
Slough 16 0.0 7/26 51,7 3.l 46-58 1.5 0.3 1.0-2.3 1.092 0.080 0.962-1.242 100 20
0.0 9/21 54.8 4.4 47-63 2.1 0.5 1.4-2.8 1,268 0.102 1.075-1.461 93 13
1.0 9/21 73.0 --4.6 --1.182 --7 1
-
Slough 17 0.0 7/11 47.9 1.0 46-50 1.3 0.1 1.2-1.4 1.208 0.069 1.085-1.266 100 10
0.0 7/26 46.1 2.6 40-50 ·0.9 0.1 0.7-1.1 0.916 0.239 0.719-1.563 100 9
)
Appendix I
Table 5.Analyses of age.length.weight and condition factors of juvenile ch:l.nook salmon smnp1es from SU61tna River sloughs and
clearwater tributaries.Devils Canyon Project.1977.(continued)
Length (mm)Weight (g)Condition Factor
Age Standard Standard Standard Percent!/
Location Class Date Mean Deviation Range Mean Deviation Range Mean Deviation Range Composition n
Slough 18 0.0 7/26 50.0 3.5 46-52 1.3 0.3 1.0-2.2 1.079 0.065 0.963-1.175 100 10
0.0 9/21 61.7 4.5 58-69 3.1 1.0 2.3-4.6 1.286 0.126 1.179-1.463 100 3
-
Slough 19 0.0 8/2 60.5 3.5 57-64 2.1 0.2 1.9-2.4 0.970 0.055 0.915-1.026 100 2
0.0 9/21 60.3 3.7 52-65 2.7 0.4 1.7-3.2 1.206 0.084 1.111-1.412 100 8
-
Slough 20 0.0 7/25 54.2 4.4 46-64 1.7 0.5 0.8-2.8 1.048 0.128 0.822-1.207 100 20
H 0.0 9/20 60.7 3.9 51-68 2.7 0.5 1.5-3.2 1.211 0.063 1.080-1.343 100 19
I.0'
W 7/13 45.0 .43-47Slough210.0 1.6 1.2 0.2 1.0-1.5 1.340 0.078 1.258-1."45 100 3
0.0 9/20 58.9 2.5 57-63 2.3 0.3 1.9-3.0 1.139 0.075 1.019-1.296 100 14
Chase 0.0 8/6 48.7 4.1 42-54 1.3 0.3 0.8-2.2 1.171,0.069 1.080-1.266 100 6
Creek
Fourth of 0.0 8/3 49.7 4.3 40-57 1.3 0.3 0.7-1.8 1.009 0.076 0.873-1.138 100 13
July Creek
0.0 9/22 63.0 3.0 59-68 3.2 0.3 2.9-3.6 1.297 0.061 1.240-1.412 100 6
H
I
'".f::'-
Appendix I
Table 5.Analyses of age,length,weight and condition factors of juvenile chinook salmon samples from Susltna River sloughs and·
clearwater tributaries,Devlls Canyon Project,1977.(continued)
Length ~mm)Weight (g)GondHion Factor
Age Standard Standard Standard Percent.!}
Location Class Date Mean Deviation Range Mean Deviation Range Mean DeviatioJL Range _fo~sltion n
McKenzie 0.0 7/27 47.6 4.8 39-59 1.1 0.4 0.7-2.1 1.012 0.085 0.822-1.142 100 24
Creek
Whiskers 0.0 8/5 45.0 4.0 41-49 1.1 0.3 0.8-1.4 1.175 0.014 1.161-1.190 100 2
Creek
0.0 9/24 53.0 3.7 49-59 1.9 0.3 1.5-2 •.5 1.246 0.033 1.209-1.282 100 4
11 Percent composition of each age class within sampling period.
-J
Appendix I Table 6.Stomach content analysis of juvenile chinook,coho,and sockeye salmon collected in sloughs and
clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River during summer and fall,Devils Canyon Project,1977.
))
Appendix I Table 6.Stomach content analysis of juvenile chinook.coho,and sockeye salmon collected in sloughs and
clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River during summer and fall.Devils Canyon Project,1977,
(continued).
Appendix I Table 6.Stomach content analysis of juvenile chinook,coho,and sockeye salmon collected in sloughs and
clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River during summer and fall,Devils Canyon Project,1977,
(continued).
Estimated Percent of Combined Gut Contents
Location Date Number Immature Adult Predominate Organisms
Specimens Crustacea Insecta Insecta Other
Susitna 7/13 3 0 10 90 0 Adult Diptera
#21
Whiskers 8/5 2 10 <5 >85 0 Adult Di ptera
Creek
Chase 8/6 11 1 4 95 0 Adult Homoptera and Hymenoptera
Creek
H
I
~McKenzie 7/27 21 0 40 60 0 Adult Diptera;Diptera Chironomid
Creek larvae and pupae
Fourth of 8/3 13 0 40 60 0 Adult Diptera;adult Chironomid
July Creek larvae and pupae.
Chinook-Fall
Susitna 9/24 6 0 20 80 0 Adult Hemiptera and unidentified
#3 adult Insecta;Diptera Chironomid
larvae
Susitna 9/24 1 0 10 >85 <5 Unidentified adult insect fragments
#4
Slough 9/23 2 0 5 35 60 Oligochaeta (1);Unidentified adult
#A insect fragments
Susitna 9/23 10 0 >45 50 <5 Adult Diptera and Hymenoptera;Diptera
#8 Chironomid pupae and larvae;Trichoptera
pupae;Diptera Tepulidae larvae
'il
Appendix I Table 6.Stomach content analysis of juvenile chinook,coho,and sockeye salmon collected in sloughs and
clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River during summer and fall,Devils Canyon Project,1977,
(continued).
Estimated Percent of Combined Gut Contents
Location Date Number Immature Adult Predominate Organisms
Specimens Crustacea Insecta Insecta Other
Susitna 9/23 3 0 10 90 0 Adult Diptera,Hymenoptera and Lepidoptera
lIaB
Susitna 9/23 6 0 30 40 30 Adult Homoptera and unidentified adult
IISC insect fragment;Oligochaeta (?);Diptera
Chironomid larvae and pupae
Susitna 9/23 1 0 30 70 0 Adult insect fragments;Diptera Chironomid
H lIaD larvaeI
0'1
0:>
Susitna 9/22 10 0 <5 >95 0 Adult Diptera,Hymenoptera,Homoptera and
119 Lepidoptera
Susitna 9/21 20 0 70 20 10 Trichoptera and Diptera Chironomid pupae;
1111 adult Hemiptera and unidentified adult
fragments
Susitna 9/22 4 0 30 70 0 Adult Diptera and unidentified adult
1113 fragments;Diptera Chironomid larvae and
pupae
Susitna 9/22 10 0 9 90 1 Adult Diptera,Hymenoptera,Plecoptera
1114
Susitna 9/21 19 0 10 30 60 Oligochaeta (?);Adult Diptera and
1115 Hemiptera
Susitna 9/21 14 0 10 85 5 Adult Diptera and Hemiptera
1116
Susitna 9/21 8 1 14 85 0 Diptera Chironomid pupae
1119
)
Appendix I Table 6.Stomach content analysis of juvenile chinook,coho,and sockeye salmon collected in sloughs and
clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River during summer and fall,Devils Canyon Project,1977,
(continued).
Estimated Percent of Combined Gut Contents
Location Date Number Immature Adult Predominate Organisms
Specimens Crustacea Insecta Insecta Other
Sus:f.tna 9/20 19 a 30 65 5 Adult Hemiptera Diptera and H~nenoptera
/120 fragments;Diptera Ch:f.ronomid larvae
Sus:f.tna 9/20 14 0 <5 >95 0 Adult Diptera
1121
Whiskers 9/24 4 0 >95 <5 0 Trichoptera pupae
Creek
H
I
0\Fourth of 9/22 7 0 15 75 10 Adult Diptera,Hemoptera,and Hymenoptera~
July Creek
Coho-Summer
Susitna 8/5 5 10 10 80 0 Adult Lepidoptera and unidentified
111 adult insect fragments
Susitna 7/27 1 70 0 30 0 Calanoid Copepoda;Adult insect
116 fragments
Susitna 7/27 2 0 80 20 0 Diptera Chironomid larvae,unidentified
116A adult insect fragments
Susitna 7/27 2 0 20 80 0 Unidentified adult insect fragments;
1110 D:f.ptera Chironomid pupae
Whiskers 8/5 2 10 10 80 0 Adult Coleoptera fragments
Creek
Chase 8/6 2 <5 0 >45 50 Sand grains;adult Hymenoptera and
Creek Diptera
')
ifJ
f
Appendix I Table 6.Stomach content analysis of juvenile chinook,coho,and sockeye salmon collected in sloughs and
clearwater tributaries of the Suettna River during summer and fall,Devils Canyon Project,1977,
(continued).
Estimated Percent of Combined Gut Contents
Location Date Number Immature Adult Predominate Organisms
Specimens Crustacea Insecta Insecta Other
McKenzie 7/27 3 0 10 90 0 Adult Diptera
Creek
•Coho-Fall
Susitna 9/24 14 <1 1 >98 0 Adult Hemiptera,Homoptera,Coleoptera,
111 Lepidoptera and fragments
H
I
~Susitna 9/24 13 0 <5 >35 60 3 salmonid juveniles;adult Coleoptera,
114 Hemiptera,Homoptera,Hymenoptera,Dipteraf
Susitna 9/23 4 0 1 89 10 .Adult Diptera,Coleoptera,Hemiptera,
115 and Homoptera
Slough 9/23 1 0 70 30 0 Diptera Chironomid larvae;Ephemeroptera
IIA Plecoptera nymphs;adult Diptera
Susitna 9/23 1 0 40 60 0 Unidentified adult Insecta;Diptera
118C Chironomid larvae
Susitna 9/22 1 <1 10 >84 5 Adul,t Diptera and Homoptera
1113
Susitna 9/21 2 0 20 0 80 Algae;Diptera Chironomid larvae
1/16
Susitna 9/21 2 0 20 80 0 Adult Coleoptera and Diptera;Diptera
1119 Chironomid pupae
Susitna 9/20 1 0 10 90 0 Adult Diptera
1121
)
Appendix l'Table 6.Stomach content analysis of juvenile chinook,coho,and sockeye salmon collected in sloughs and
clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River during summer and fall,Devils Canyon Project,1977,
(continued).
Estimated Percent of Combined Gut Contents
Location Date Number Immature Adult Predominate Organisms
Specimens Crustacea Insecta Insecta Other
Whiskers 9/24 6 0 20 80 0 Adult Homoptera,Coleoptera,Hemiptera,
Creek Hymenoptera;Trechoptera pupae
-'
Sockeye-Sunnl\er
Susitna 8/5 2 50 20 20 10 Calanoid and Cyclopoid Copepoda;Diptera
/11 adults and Chironomid larvae
H
I
-...J Susitna 7/27 1 90 10 0 0 Cladocera BosminidaeI--'
115
Susitna 7/27 3 50 50 0 0 Ostracoda;Diptera Chironomid larvae
1/6
Susitna 7/27 4 0 10 90 0 Adult Diptera,Homoptera,Hymenoptera
118
Susitna 7/29 10 0 90 10 0 Diptera Chironomid larvae
/112
Susitna 7/26 1 20 80 0 0 Diptera Chironomid larvae
1/17
Susitna 7/14 3 20 40 40 0 Adult Diptera;Diptera Chironomid larvae;
1/19 Cladocera Bosmididae
Susitna 7/26 11 50 50 0 0 Cladocera Bosminidae;Diptera Chironomid
1119 larvae
)
Appendix I Table 6.Stomach content analysis of juvenile chinook,coho,and sockeye salmon collected in sloughs and
~learwater tributaries of the Susitna River during summer and fall,Devils Canyon Project,1977,
(continued).
Estimated Percent of Combined Gut Contents
Location Date Number Immature Adult Predominate Organisms
Specimens Crustacea Insecta Insecta Other
Sockeye-Fall
Su~itna 9/24 1 5 10 85 0 Unidentified adult insect fragments;
113 Diptera Chironomid larvae
Susitna 9/23 2 1 9 90 0 Adult Diptera
fl8
Susitna 9/23 12 <1 3 >95 <1 Adult Hymenoptera,Diptera,and
fl8B Lepidoptera
H
I......Susitna 9/21 2 5 95 0 0 Diptera Chironomid pupae and larvaeN
fIll
Susitna 9/21 1 10 50 40 0 Diptera Chironomid larvae;unidentified
1119 adult insect fragments
APPENDIX II
Tables in the following appendix include data on water quality and quantity
within the mainstem Susitna River and its clearwater sloughs and tributaries
collected by ADF&G and USGS water quality data collected at established
gaging stations.
1-73
Appendix II
Table 1.Susitna River d~scharge at Gold Creek (USGS provisional data)1977.
May June July August September
Gauge Gauge Gauge Gauge Gauge
Day Height__D:i,scE_arge _HeighL__Rischarge Height Discharge Height Discharge Height Discharge
1 11.49 30,900 35,000 10.60 24,200 8.00 10,600
2 12.19 36,700 32,000 10.89 26,200 8.03 10,700
3 12.44 39,000 32,000 10.49 23,400 8.02 10,700
4 12.52 39,700 30,000 10.17 21,500 7.97 10,500
5 12.34 38,100 30,000 10.20 21,700 7.81 9,840
6 11.77 33,200 28,000 10.f19 23,400 7.72 9,520
7 11.54 31,300 27,000 10.48 23,400 7.82 9,880
8 11.56 31,500 27 ,000 10.12 21,200 8.20 11,400
9 11.61 31,900 27,000 9.80 19,300 8.48 12,500
10 11.93 34,400 28,000 9.90 19,900 8.05 10,800
11 12.39 -38,500 28,000 9.98 20,400 8.81 14,000
H 12 13.02 44,200 30,000 10.12 21,200 9.34 16,700
I
'-I 13 13.67 51,400 30,000 9.74 18,900 9.38 16,900
.j::'-
14 13.78 52,600 32,000 9.58 18,000 9.37 16,800
15 13.78 5i,600 32,000 9.94 20,100 9.01 15,000
16 13.58 50,400 30,000 10.01 20,600 9.13 15,600
17 8.72 13,600 13.07 44,800 28,000 9.78 19,200 8.90 14,500
18 9.06 15,300 12.82 42,400 26,000 9.69 18,600 8.87 14,400
19 10.37 22,700 12.67 41,000 24,000 9.66 18,500 8.59 13,000
20 10.92 26,400 12.22 37,000 10.31 22,400 9.67 18,500 8.41 12,200
21 10.19 21,600 11.93 34,400 10.28 22,200 9.76 19,100 8.84 14,200
22 9.56 17,900 11.75 33,000 10.22 21,800 9.93 20,100 8.93 14,600
23 9.33 16,600 33,000 10.41 23,000 10.18 21,600 8.95 14,800
24 9.38 16,900 34,000 10.39 22,800 10.16 21,500 8.60 13,000
25 9.36 16,800 36,000 10.14 21,300 .9.72 18,800 8.21 11,400
26 9.61 18,200 38,000 10.00 20,500 9.19 16,000 7.95 10,400
27 10.22 21,800 40,000 9.84 19,500 8.88 14,400 7.81 9,840
28 10.54 23,800 42,000 9.87 19,700 8.68 13,400 8.10 11,000
29 11.18 28,400 40,000 9.90 19,900 8.41 12,200 8.31 11,800
30 11.76 33,100 38,000 9.85 19,600 8.09 .11,000 8.48 12,500
31 11.34 29,700 10.11 21,200 7.85 10,000
·Append.:i.x II Table 2.Water qual~ty data and juvenile salmon surveys in sloughs and clearwater tributaries of the Susitua River
between the Chu~itua River and Portage Creek.Devils Canyon Project.1977.
Specific Gage Number of
Data Time Weather Water Temperature ·C D.O.pH Conductance Height Fry
ConcU,tioDS Conditions Air Water (PPM)(uMHOS/CM)(M)Observed
Slaugh.n (26N O.sw llDAD)
7/18 1250 Swmy SUty 22.0 15 .•0 8.1 5.9 .90
7/'30 1425 S=y SUty 22.0 11.0 8.4 100 .38
8/5 1340 5=y Silty 23 •.5 13.0 9.7 6.5 100 .76
8/12 15'35 Cloudy SUty 16.0 U.S 8.4 &.6 290 .7&190
8/22 1620 Cloudy SUty 17 .5 14.0 8.9 100 .70 150
9/24 1.530 S=y Clear 16.0 6.0 9.4 &.0 125 .31 14
Slc:IUgh #2 (26N OSW 02CDD)
7/18 1330 S=y 22.0 11.5 8.7 6.2 .26 500
7/30 14.50 S=y 21.0 10.0 8.6 150 .16 4
8/5 1440 Su=y 20.0 9.0 8.4 6.5 190 .17 100
B/12 1615 S=y 18.5 10.0 6.7 7.1 130 .18 60
B/22 1520 Cloudy 18.0 10.0 8.0 130 .16 125
9/10 1130 Rain 10.0 8.0 10.1 6.0 102
Slough #3 (27N OSW 35Cca)
7/17 1800 5=y SUty 26.5 19.5 8.3 5.9
7/30 1600 Su:my Clear 19.0 13.5 7.1 125 2
8/5 1745 S=y Clear 19.5 11.0 7.0 5.6 100 100
8/12 1800 Su:my Clear 20.5 10.0 5.4 6.2 110 465
8/22 1800 S=y Clear 17.0 13.0 5.6 100 300
9/10 1100 Rain SUty 10.2 6.8 6.6 5.5 72.
9/24 1245 S=y Clear 10.0 5.3 8.2 5.5 B5 350
Slough #4 (27N OSW 25CCC)
7/17 1725 S=y Clear 22.0 17 .0 7.5 6.5 .88 1,000+
8/14 1800 Rain Clear 17.5 15.0 9.1 6.0 100 .82 500
9/10 0900 Rain SUty 9.0 10.1 11.1 6.0 78 .61
9/24 1120 Sunny Clear 7.0 6.2 10.9 5.0 85 .82 52
Slough.#5 (27N OSW 01CCA)
7/16 1050 Silty 23.0 17.0 4.3 7.3 .58
7/27 1800 S=y Rusty 22.0 18.5 5.4 6.3 120 5
8/6 1200 Rain 16.0 15.0 7.2 6.0 105 .26 10
8/13 0845 Rain 14.0 1.3 .5 2.7 6.0 180 .13
8/21 1330 Rain 21.0 14.0 1.2 240 .il
8/29 1730 Partly 17.0 15.0 7.6 6.5 100 7
Sunny
9/9 1915 Overcast Algae 11.0 12.5 10.8 6.0 88 90
9/23 1720 Over~st il.O 9.9 11.0 5.0 68 4
Slough #6 (27N OSW OUAD)
7/16 1ll.5 23.5 14.0 9.2 7.0 .85
7/27 1715 S=y Rusty 24.0 22.0 6.2 6.7 100 .36 100
8/6 1230 Rain Rusty 19.5 14.0 5.6 5.0 100 .57 5
8/13 0800 Rain Rusty 13.5 12.0 4.8 6.0 110 .42 12
8/21 1315 Rain Rusty 21.0 16.0 7.2 100 .39 42
8/29 1700 Partly Rusty &18.5 17.2 9.8 &.0 130 .33
5=y Algae
9/9 1850 Overcast Rusty &11.0 12.5 10.8 6.0 88
Algae
9/23 1650 Overcast 11.0 8.3 10.4 6.0 38 .36
1-75
1'""'"',
Appendix II Table 2.Water quality da~and juvenile salmon surveys in sloughs and clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River
berween the Chulitna River and Portage Creek,Devils Canyon Project,1977 (contL~ued).
Specific Gage Number of
Date Tillie Weather Water Temperature ·C D.O.pH Conductance neight Fry
Conditions Conditions Air Water (PPM).(uMHOS /CM)(M)Observed
Slough ~7 (28N OSW 12DCA)
7/13 1530 Sunny Clear 20.0 14.0 8.4 8.1
8/4 1500 Sunny Clear 16.0 12.0 11.2 100
8/11 2025 S=y Clear 16.0 17.0 9.4 6.0 130 12
8/19 1930 Sunny Clear 17.5 16.0 8.1 100 10
8/29 1530 Part:1y Clear 18.0 17.0 11.0 6.0 90 30
S=y
9/9 1815 Overcast Clear 11.0 14.5 10.0 5.0 100 80
9/23 1550 Overcast Clear 11.0 9.0 12.2 5.0 100
Slough #8 (28N 04W 07BCB and OnCC)
7/13 1500 Sunny Clear 18.0 12.0 9.2 7.8 .36 3,500
7/27 1510 Sunny Clear 23.0 13.5 9.1 7.3 70 .26
8/4 1435 Rain 16.0 9.5 9.2 65
8/11 1915 Sunny Clear 16.0 9.0 10.4 6.2 90 .26 670
8/19 1850 Sunny Clear 18.0 11.0 9.2 102 .25 400
8/29 1500 S=y Clear 18.5 11.5 10.3 6.0 70 .24
9/9 1800 Ovarcast 12.5 8.8 10.7 100 .21 1,200
9/23 1500 Overcast 12.0 7.8 9.8 5.0 100 .20 35
Slough U8A (30N 03101 20C,29BBB and 30A)
7/12 1730 Sunny Clear 23.0 17.0 10.1 7.6
8/3 1730 Fair SUty 19.0 16.0 8.4 6.8 140 1,500
8/11 1400 Sunny Clear 17.5 17.0 7.1 6.5 175
8/19 ·1400 Sunny Clear 17.0 14.0 8.0 45 2,000
8/29 0825 Pardy Clear 5.0 10.0 10.3 5.8 118 90
C1ou4y
9/9 1350 Pardy Clear 12.5 12.5 10.1 6.0 145 135
C1audy
9/22 1700 Overcast 9.0 7.1 10.3 5.6 75
Slough ~8B (29N 04101 02CBA)
7/13 1105 Sunny SUty 17.0 11.0 8.1 7.9 1,000
8/4 1000 Sunny SUty 14.0 8.5 9.2 6.5 100
8/11 1515 Sunny Clear 19.5 13.0 8.4 6.7 170 560
8/19 1510 Sunny Clear 17.0 12.0 7.7 200 650
8/29 0930 Pardy Clear 10.0 7.2 11.2 5.8 110 350
Cloudy
9/9 1510 Partly Clear 14.0 9.9 8.8 6.0 135
C1ou4y
9/23 1100 Sunny Clear 6.5 5.0 10.8 5.6 68 25
Slough U8C (29N 04101 02eCC)
7/13 1140 Sunny Clear 21.5 9.5 7.2 7.8 500
8/4 1100 Sunny Clear 16.0 7.5 7.5 6.0 80 30
8/11 1625 Sunny Clear 16.5 11.0 7.2 6.9 70 34
8/19 1540 Sunny Clear 16.0 11.0 6.8 130 850
8/29 1020 Partiy Clear 11.0 6.9 9.0 5.5 60
Clou4Y
9/9 1540 Par!:ly Clear 14.0 8.8 7.5 5.5 60
Cloudy
9/23 1130 S=y Clear 10.0 7.0 10.8 5.6 45 7
Slough H8D (29N 0401 113M)
7/13 1200 Sunny Clear 23.0 11.0 11.0 7.2
8/4 1130 Sunny Clear 17.0 8.0 9.2 5.0 50 4
8/11 1640 Sunny Clear 18.0 14.0 8.0 6.9 90
8/19 1600 Sunny Clear 15.0 13.0 8.6 130 40
8/29 1045 Partly Clear 13.2 8.0 10.8 5.8 58 50
C1ou4y
9/9 1600 Pardy Clear 13.0 9.9 9.8 5.5 72 750
C1ou4y
9/23 1210 Sunny Clear 12.2 6.5 10.3 5.6 55 1
T_7~
ApPen4iJ1:II Table 2.Wa1:er quali1:y da1:a and juvenile salmon surveys in sloughs and c.learva1:er tribu1:aries of the Susitna River
between the Chulitna River and Portage Creek,Devils Canyon Projec.1:,1977 (c.on1:inued).
Spedfic.Gage Number of
Date TilDa Weather Water Temperature ·C D.O.pH Ccnduc.tanc.e Height Fry
Conditions Ccnditio:i!S Air Water (PPM)(uMHOS/CM)(M)Observed
Slough A (3ON 0'""25D511)
7/13 1020 Swmy Clear 17 .5 9.0 9.9 7.7
8/3 1830 Sumly Clear 24.0 12.0 7.0 6.3 UO 20
8/ll 1415 Sunny Clear 15.5 14.0 7.1 6.9 110 27
8/19 1415 Swmy Clear 20.0 13.0 7.1 200 85
8/29 0900 Par1:ly Clear U.O 9.8 U.3 5.0 UO
C1QucIy
9/9 1400 Partly Clear 12.2 9.9 12.4 85
Cloudy
9/23 1010 Sumly Clear 5.2 6.0 9.8 5.6 58 3
Slough #9 (3ON 03W 16BD)
7/12 1600 Clear Silty 20,0 15.5 9.6 8.0 .39
7/27 0850 Cloudy Clear 15.0 8.0 8.9 6.7 190 .38 40
8/3 1630 Clear Silty 17.0 13.0 8.8 7.0 US .39
8/U 1200 Clear Clear 17.0 U.O 7.7 6.8 175 .38 140
8/19 USO Clear Clear 17.0 10.0 8.0 210 .38 700
8/29 1015 Rain Clear 15.0 12.0 7.0 5.4 .38 600
9/9 1230 Overcast Clear li.O 8.0 9.9 6.0 135 .36 2S0
9/22 1500 Clear Clear 10.5 7.8 10.8 5.6 100 .43 78
Slough 1110 (3lN 03W 36MB)
7/8 IllS Clear Clear 22.0 7.0 11.0 6.8 .68
7/12 1445 Clear Clear 22.0 U.S 9.1 7.8 .81
7/27 0850 Partly Clear 19.0 7.0 9.7 6.5 150 .71 1,000
Cloudy
8/3 1135 Clear Clear 16.0 7.5 9.4 6.5 100 .88 1,000
8/19 0900 Claar Clear 12.0 6.0 8.5 6.0 140 .65 1.200
8/26 1415 Rain Clear 13.0 4.0 7.0 6.4 .52 2,500
9/9 1015 Overcall!:Clear 9.0 5.1 9.6 6.0 145 .30 250
Slough #11 (3111 02W 30AAB,2011.20C)
7/1 1500 Claar Clear 23.0 10.0 1.38
7/12 1350 Clear Clear 23.0 U.O 10.6 7.8 1.24 3,000
7/27 1745 Partly Clear 27.0 12.0 11.0 7.9 <1.00 8,000
ClOUdy
8/2 2010 Clear Silty 14.0 9.0 9.2 7.5 <1.00
8/3 1710 Mouly Silty 28.0 12.0 11.0 7.3 180 <1.00 8,000
Sunny
8/10 1600 Parely Silty 16.5 11.0 10.0 7.0 155 <1.00 8,000
Cloudy
8/17 1530 Claar Silty 16.0 9.0 11.0 150 1.08 8,000
8/28 1820 Clear Clear 13.0 8.5 9.8 5.0 170 :92 10,000
9/8 1900 Clear Clear 10.5 5.2 10.8 5.5 190 .89 2,000
9/22 1215 Clear Clear 8.5 6.2 U.S 5.6 105 1.00 87
Slough H12 (31.~07W 19DCD)
7/1 1400 Most.ly Silty 22.0 11.0
Cloudy
7/12 1330 Clear Silty 23.0 9.1 8.2 .95
7/27 1545 Partly Silty 20.0 9.0 8.0 7.6 150 .85 30
Cloudy
8/2 1945 Clear Silty 14.0 9.5 9.2 6.8 200 <1.00
8/3 1540 Mostly Clear 20.0 11.0 9.0 7.5 200 .94 175
Sunny
8/10 1540 Clear Silty 17.5 13.0 8.9 7.4 170 .85 10
8/17 1600 Rain Silty 15.0 10.0 10.0 175 .80
8/23 10
8/28 1750 Clear 15.0 10.0 10.0 6.0 "158 10
9/8 1830 Rain Silty 10.0 9.1 11.1 6.0 160 .51 9
9/22 1200 Clear Clear 7.0 6.0 11.0 6.5 175 .64 a
1-77
Appendu II Table 2.Water quaJ.1ty data and juvenile salmon surveys in slouglu;and clearwacer cr:i.butaries or the Susitna River
between che Chulitna River and Portage Creek,De~s Canyon Project,1977 (continued).
Specific Gage Number of
Date Tjm.e Weather Water Temperature 'C D.O.pH Conduccance Height Fry
Conditions Condicions Air Water (PPM)(uMHOS/O:l)(M)Observed
Slough #13 (3lN 02W 19DAB)
7/1 1340 Mostly Clear 24.0 7.0
Cloudy I
7/lZ 1310 Clear Clear 26.0 11.1 7.7 .26
7/28 1210 Clear Clear 25.0 7.0 10.0 7.4 ISO .25 15
8/2 1900 Clear Clear lS.O 7.5 9.6 6.5 185 .27 400
8/3 1800 Partly Clear 25.0 7.0 9.0 7.5 180 .26 75
Cloudy
8/10 1500 Clear Clear 20.0 9.0 8.8 6.9 205 .25 310
8/17 1630 Clear Clear 15.0 7.0 11.0 170 .25 400
8/28 InS Clear Clear 15.0 7.0 9.5 6.0 160 .25 400
9/8 1aOO Clear Clear 10.0 7.0 11.7 6.0 130 .29 120
9/22 1130 Clear Clear 8.5 5.0 11.4 6.0 105 .25 5
Slough 414 (3lN O~19AAA)
7/1 1300 Mostly Clear 26.0 15.0 .5a
ClouAy
7/12 1240 Clear Clear 26.0 7.1 7.4 .43
7/2a 1305 Clear Clear 26.0 15.0 9.0.6.9 as .35
7/29 0950 Clear Clear 500
8/2 laOO Clear Clear 1S.0 U.S 7.1 6.3 as 2,000
8/3 1900 Partly Clear lS.0 11.0 6.8 6.0 ao .42
ClouAY
a/10 1435 Clear Clear 18.0 15.0 7.a 6.0 95 .35 100
8/19 0830 Clear aear 12.0 10.5 7.3 6.0 78 .28 120
8/26 1530 Rain 10.0 14.0 6.5 .23 500
a/2a 1645 Clear Clear 13.0 12.0 8.0 6.5 85 .65 100
9/8 1720 Overcast Cloudy 12.0 8.9 10.8 8.5 60 1.15 20
9/22 1030 Clear Clear 7.5 6.5 10.3 5.6 34 .50 10
Slough illS (3lN 02W 17CAC)
7/1 1235 Mostly Clear 25.0 15.0 .88
Cloudy
7/12 1215 Clear Silty 22.5 14.0 8.3 8.4 .66
7/26 1745 Cloudy Silty 18.5 13.5 7.3 6.7 70 .53 1,500
8/2 1400 Mosdy SUty 17.0 12.5 7.8 6.4 105 .93 2,000
Cloudy
8/10 1145 Cloudy Silty 22.5 12.5 7.2 6.4 105 .55
8/16 2000 Clear Silty 16.5 14.0 6.8 6.0 78 .53 1,000
8/28 1515 Clear Clear 16.0 8.8 8.8 6.0 58 .80 155
9/a 1410 Overcast Clear 7.0 10.6 11.2 5.5 30 20
9/21 1630 Rain Clear 7.5 6.5 10.8 5.6 la .29 19
1015 Clear Clear
..09 50
(Ice Cover)
Slough #16 (3lN O~17AAC)
7/1 1210 Partly Clear 21.5 9.0 .68
Cloudy
7/11 1600 Clear Clear 9.0 7.2 .26
7/26 1710 Mostly Clear 17.5 12.5 9.5 6.7 50 .17 9,000
Cloudy
8/2 1248 ClouAy Silty 16.5 11.5 10.4 7.6 95 .72
8/3 1200 Parcly Silty 21.0 11.5 .48 99
Cloudy
8/10 llOO Cloudy Clear 21.0 ll.O 10.8 6.6 80 .18 600
a/16 1925 Clear Clear 16.0 11.5 8.7 6.0 75 .17
8/23 1500 Clear Clear 17 .0 10.0 9.5 6.0 75
9/8 1340 Overcast Clear 10.5 7.2-11.6 6.0 50 .08 300
9/2~1500 Rain Clear 8.0 5.5 10.2-5.6 10 18
10/5 Clear Clear .13 150
(Ice Cover)
1-78
Appendix II Table 2.Water qual.1ty data and juvenile salmon surveys in sloughs and clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River
between the Chulitna River and Portage Creek.Dev~s Canyon Project.1977 (continued).
Specific Gage Number of
Date Tillie Weather Wa.ter Temperature ·c D.O.pH Conductance !ieiglll:"Fry
Conditions Conditions Air Water (PPM)(uMHOS/CM)(M)Observed
Slaugh-U17 (3lN O~09DBD)
6/14 0030 Clear Silty 1.03
6/30 2345 Clear S~ty 9.0 6.0 9.0 6.9 140 .84
7/7 1740 MoeUy Silty 19.0 10.0 .71
Sunny
7/11 1710 Claar SUty 10.8 7.5 .94 50
7/26 1315 CJ.ear Clea.r 20.0 8.5 9.8 6.8 90 .84 900
8/2 1145 CJ.ear SUty 17 .0 8.0 10.2 6.2 85 1.12 1
8/10 1000 Cloudy Clear 20.0 7.0 8.4 6.0 95 .83 230
8/16 1830 Clear Clear 16.0 9.5 9.9 6.3 100 .82 3
8/28 1100 Clear Clear 17.0 6.5 8.5 5.5 58 .75 15
9/8 1200 R.a;I.n Clear 8.0 4.5 10.'8 6.5 50 .17 10
9/21 1400 bill Clear 7.5 4.5 10.8 5.9 70 .37
1015 Clur Clear .12 6
(lee Cover)
Slough 1il.8 (3ll'l o~10CBC)
7/7 1725 Mostly Clear 19.0 15.0 9.7 7.2 .51
Sunny
7/11 1720 Clear Clear 20.0 13.5 9.1 7.5 .65
7/26 1245 Claar Clear 25.0 12.0 7.8 7.3 140 .63 1.000
8/2 1125 Clear Clear 15.0 8.5 8.2 6.7 145 .98 125
8/10 0945 Cloudy Clear 20.5 9.0 7.0 6.4 115 .63 60
8/16 1835 Clear Clear 15.0 12.0 8.4 125 .60 100
8/28 1015 Clear Clear 13.0 7.0 5.4 5.5 80
9/8 1230 1la1n Clear 9.5 8.2 9.7 5.5 88 .48 12
9/21 1330 Rain Clear 7.5 6.0 10.4 6.0 100 .52 3
1015 Clear Clear .47 50
(lee Cover)
SlOtlgh 1119 (3lN 02w 10DBD)
6/30 2235 Meetly Clear 10.0 7.2 125 .74
Sumly
7/7 1700 Clear 20.0 12.0 .43
7/11 1745 Claar Clear 15.0 18.5 11.4 6.7 .54
7/26 1210 Mostly Clear 20.0 8.5 9.5 7.7 150 .54 2.000
Cloudy
8/2 1000 Partly Clear 11.5 7.5 10.8 6.6 130 .78 2.000
Swmy
8/10 0845 Cloudy Clear 17.0 9.0 8.6 6.4 140 .53 200
8/16 1750 Cloudy Clear 18.5 10.0 8.3 6.8 130 .53 800
8/27 2010 Cloudy Clear 12.0 8.5 9.0 6.9 100 .19 100
9/7 1935 Rain Clear 9.0 7.0 8.9 6.5 100 .17
9/21 UOO 1la1n Clear 6.5 5.0 10.8 5.5 100 .17 11
1015 Claar Clear .11 500
(Ice Cover)
Slaugh #20 (3lN OZW llBBD)
6/30 2130 Mostly SUty 14.0 9.0 10.0 7.8 70 .33
S=y
7/7 1630 Silty 24.0 12.0 .39
7/ll 1817 Clear Clear 19.0 12.0 10.4 7.5 .37
7/25 2045 MosUy SUty 13.0 10.0 10.0 7.9 75 .34 56
Cloudy
8/1 1855 Mostly SUty 15.5 11.5 10.4 7.0 125 .56
Sunny 7008/9 1945 Cloudy Clear 16.5 12.5 9.6 6.7 140 .31
8/16 1725 -Partly Silty 18.0 13.0 9.6 7.2 180 700
Cloudy
8/27 1945 Mostly SUty 12.5 11.5 10.3 6.0 90 1.000
Sunny
9/7 1910 R.a..in Clear 9.5 7.2 9.8 6.0 60 .38
9/20 1910 Rain Clear 6.0 5.1 12.2 60 .77 19
1015 Clear Clear .44
(lee Cover)
1-79
Appendix II Table 2.Water qu.aJ.ity data and juvenile saJ.mgn surveys in sloughs and clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River
berween the Chulitna River and Portage Creek,Devils Canyon Project,1977 (continued).
Specific Gage Number of
Date T:!.me Weather Water TE!lIIperature ·C D.O.pH Conductance Height Fry
Conditions Conditions Air Water (PPM)(uMHoS/CM)(M)Observed
SloulZh H21 (32N 02W 36CCC)
6/30 1940 Mostly Silty 19.5 7.0 8.0 7.9 175 .52
SumLy
7/7 1530 Silty 14.0 24.0 .25
t/ll 2010 Clear Clear 21.5 8.0 10.2 7.9 .30
7/25 1945 Clear Clear 19.5 8.0 8.9 8.0 180 .28
.a/l 1710 Mostly SUty 17.0 10.0 9.6 6.8 200 .43 33
Cloudy
8/9 1800 Mostly SUty 9.0 9.9 7.6 245 .26 385
Cloudy
8/16 1635 Clear Silty 18.0 12.0 8.5 7.7 210 .29 600
8/27 1820 Partly Clear 17.0 7.5 10.2 6.7 170 180
1730
Cloudy
9/7 Rain Clear U.S 7.5 10.4 6.0 135
9/20 1800 Rain Clear 7.0 3.9 11.6 5.6 145 15
10/5 Clear Clear .01 350
(Ice Cover)
Whisker's Creek (26N OSW 03AAC)
Downstream Gage
7/17 1820 SUty 22.0 15.5 9.0 6.2
7/30 1530 Clear 21.5 17 .0 8.9 95 .44
8/5 1525 SUty 17.0 13.0 10.8 6.0 100 .53
8/12 1655 Silty 17.0 14.0 9.8 1.0 80 .52
8/22 1700 Silty 11.5 16.0 9.0 70 .48 200
9/10 1000 Rain Clear 9.5 9.1 10.8 5.5 3D .13
9/24 .25
UEstream Gage
7/17 1825 Clear 25.0 15.5 9.3 5.3
7/30 1,540 Clear 20.0 16.0 10.8 60 .76 1,000
S/5 1535 Clear 17.5 14.,5 9.5 5.6 90 .78
8/12 1700 Clear 19.5 14.0 9.5 6.3 60 .78 500
8/22 1715 Clear 17.0 15.5 9.9 35 .76 200
9/10 Rain Clear .78
9/24 1320 Clear 8.0 7.0 U.2 5.5 38 .69 10
McKenzie Creek (29N 04101 3ZABA)
7/13 1350 Su::ny Clear 21.0 11.0 11.2 8.0 30,000
7/27 1405 Su::ny Clear 20.5 10.5 10.8 7.7 105 12,500
8/4 1310 Sunny Clear 16.0 8.5 11.8 6.9 100 2,000
8/11 1800 S=y Clear 17.0 11.0 9.8 5.9 125 1,800
8/19 1800 S=y Clear 16.0 10.0 10.3 105 1,300
8/29 1200 Overcast Clear 12.0 8.5 13.8 5.2 130 3,500
9/9 1650 Overcast Clear 13.5 9.9 10.8 5.5 78 2,500
9/23 1340 OVercast Clear 12.5 7.3 10.8 5.6 70 20
Chase Creek (27N OSW 12liCC)
7/16 U30 SUllnY Clear ·23.0 16.0 12.8 7.0
8/6 1330 Su::ny Clear 21.0 17.0 9.6 6.0 60 10,000
8/13 0905 S=y Clear 15.0 13.0 8.6 6.0 78 5,000
8/21 1400 Sunny Clear 21.0 IB.O 8.1 50 5,000
B/29 1800 Overcast Clear 19.0 14.5 8.9 6.5 48
9/9 1935 Overcast Clesr 11.6 U.2 10.8 5.5 45
9/23 1800 OVercast Clear 10.5 11.2 7.5 5.0 52/-
1-80
"
~
Appendix II Table 2.Water quality data and juvenile salmon surveys in slougbs and clearwater tributaries of the Susitna River
between the Chuli~a River and Portage Creek,Devils Canyon Project,1977 (continued).
Specific Gage Number of
Date T1me Weather Water Temperature ·C D.O.pH Conduc:tanee Height Fry
Condi.tions •Conditions ALr II'ater (PPM)(uMHOS/CM)(M)Observed
Lane Creek (28N OSW lZOAA)
7/13 -1450 Sunny Clear 18.0 11.0 9.6 7.7
7/27 1535 S=y Clear 24.5 12.0 10.9 8.0 60
8/4 1420 SUllDY Clear 17.0 11.0 10.4 5.4 60
8/11 2000 S=y Clear 17.0 11.0 10.0 6.2 90
8/19 1900 SWUlY Clear 18.0 12.0 9.0 90
8/29 1430 Overcast Clear 24.0 10.5 10.7 6.0 62
9/9 1730 Ovsrcsst Clear 13.0 9.0 11.4 99
9/23 1520 Overcast Clear 14.0 6.2 10.6 5.0 75
Fourth of July Creek (30N 0310 03DAC)
7/29 1140 Clear Clear 23.0 15.0 9.0 7.3 30
8/3 1300 Claar Clear 22.0 16.0 9.0 7.4 125 5,000
8/11 0945 Clear Clear 14.0 13.0 9.5 7.1 50
8/19 1030 Clear Clear 15.5 14.0 9.2 45
8/26 1230 Rain Clear 12.0 12.0
6.6 8.0 18
8/28 2010 Partly Clear 12.5 11.0 9.8 5.5 24
Cloudy
9/9 1120 Cloudy Turbid 10.0 9.1 11.6 5.5 46
9/22 1330 Clear Turbid 9.0 7.0 11.7 5.6 31 7
Gold Creek (31N 02'~20BAD)
6/14 2100 RaiJ:l Turbid 11.0 4.0 12.0 7.8 60
7/21.1200 Pardy Clear 23.0 10.0 10.0 7.8 160
Cloudy
8/17 1400 RaiJ:l Clear 16.5 ll.O 12.0 200
9/22 1030 Clear Clear 28
Indian River (3lN 0211'09CDA)
7/29 1140 Claar Clear 20.0 12.0 11.0 7.1 SO
8/18 1530 Partly Clear 17.0 12.0 ll.O 7.5 40 581
Cloudy
8/28 1430 Partly Clear 17.0 12.0 11.2 6.0 43
Cloudy
9/8 1300 Cloudy Clear 10.0 7.8 10.0 5.9 40
Portage Creek (32..'i OlW 26CDB)
7/7 1200 Clear Clear 27.0 10.0 14.0 7.5
7/28 1645 Clear Clear 23.0 13.0 10.0 7.8 80
8/25 1200 Clear 11.0 6
1-81
"'\
Appel )n
Table 3.Thermograph set in Rabideux Creek,tipper sub-area;daily maximun and minimum water temperattire,
Devils Canyon Project,1977.
0 0 0 0 0Temp.C Temp.C Temp.C Temp.C Temp.C
Date Max.Min.Date Max.Min.Date Max.Min.Date Max.Min.Date Max.Min.
5/25 8.2 -8.2 6/27 14.7 14.3 7/30 16.0 15.6 9/1 11.0 10.9 10/5 4.0 3.0
26 10.0,8.2 28 14.3 14.2 31 15.6 15.3 2 10.9 10.9 6 3.9 3.5
27 10.0 9.8 29 15.5 14.2 8/1 15.2 14.8 3'10.8 10.7 7 4.0 3.5
28 11.7 10.0 30 15.2 14.1 2 14.8 14.7 4 10.7 10.0 8 4.0 3.9
29 10.8 9.2 7/1 15.6 14.1 3 16.0 14.8 5 10.0 10.0 9 4.1 4.0
30 10.1 9.2 2 14.8 13.7 4 15.8 15.4 6 10.0 10.0 10 4.5 4.1
31 11.7 10.1 3 14.4 13.0 5 15.4 14.6 7 10.0 10.0 11 5.5 4.5
6/1 12.6 11.3 4 13.1 13.0 6 15.3 14.6 8 10.0 10.0 12 5.7 5.5
2 14.1 12.6 5 13.2 13.0 7 15.2 15.0 '9 10.0 10.0 13 5.7 3.7
3 14.8 13.0 6 13.9 13.0 &15.1 14.9 10 10.0 10.0 14 4.0 3.9
4 13.3 10.8 7 15.3 13.2 9 16.0 15.1 11 10.0 10.0 15 4.0 3.9
5 10.8 10.4 8 16.3 13.2 10 15.9 15.0 12 10.0 10.0 16 4.0 3.9
6 10.7 10.4 9 17.2 14.2 11 15.0 14.0 13 9.9 9.9 17 4.0 3.8
H 7 11.0 10.8 10 17.9 14.5 12 14.0 13.7 14 9.9 9.9 18 3.8 3.2I
CP 8 12.3 10.0 11 18.8 15.1 13 14.8 13.8 15 9.9 8.8 19 3.2 2.5N
9 12.8 12.3 12 18.8 15.0 14 14.7 14.7 16 8.8 8.3 20 2.5 2.2
10 13.6 12.8 13 16.0 15.0 15 14.7 14.7 17 8.3 8.3 21 2.2 1.8
11 13.6 '13.6 14 15.5 15.0 16 14.7 14.7 18 8.3 8.3 22 1.8 1.7
12 13.6 13.6 15 15.0 14.0 17 14.7 14.5 19 8.3 8.3 23 1.8 1.7
13 13.6 13.6 16 17.0 14.0 18 14.5 14.4 20 8.3 7.7
14 14.4 13.6 17 16.8 14.0 19 14.6 14.4 21 7.7 7.7
15 14.7 14.5 18 16.5 14.0 20 15.5 14.4 22 7.7 7.5
16 14.8 1l1.8 19 15.8 13.9 21 15.5 14.3 23 7.5 7.2
17 14.8 14.5 20 14.8 13.9 22 15.5 14.5 24 7.2 6.7
18 14.5 13.3 21 14.9 14.7 23 14.8 13.5 25 N/A N/A
19 13.3 13.2 22 15.2 13.7 24 14.0 13.9 26 N/A N/A
20 ,14.2 13.5 23 15.3 13.0 25 13.9 13.7 27 7.5 7.5
21 14.2 14.0 24 16.0 13.0 26 13.7 13.0
28 7.5 7.2
22 14.0 13.6 25 15.3 14.4 27 13.0 12.4 29 7.2 6.8
23 13.3 13.0 26 15.3 14.4 28 12.4 11.5 30 6.8 \'5.5
24 14.4 13.0 27 I 15.3 14.3 29 11.3 11.3 10/1 5.5 3.0
25 13.9 13.8 28 .16.4 14.3 30 11.3 11.0 2 3.0 2.4
26 14.9 13.8 29 16.0 15.6 31 11.0 11.0 3 2.5 2.4
4 3.0 2.5
Appendix II
Table 4.Thermograph set in Montana Creek,upper sub-area;daily maximum and minimum w-ater tllmperature,
Devils Canyon Project,1977.
Temp.0c Temp.oC Temp.°c Temp.0c Temp.oc
Date Max.Min.Date Max.Min.Date Max.Min.Date Max.Min..Date Max.Min.'
5/25 3.0 2.8 6/27 10.1 9.5 8/17 13.2 12.5 9/19 6.0 5.5 11/1 0.2 0.1
26 5.1 3.2 28 10.1 9.3 18 13.2 12.0 20 5.8 5.5 2 0.1 0.1
27 5.2 2.9 29 10.5 10.0 19 13.8 12.3 21 6.5 5.6 3 0.1 0.0
28 6.5 4.7 30 10.3 10.1 20 13.7 12.6 22 6.8 5.0 4 0.0 0.0
29 3.9 3.0 7/1 11.1 9.8 21 13.6 12.6 23 5.6 4.7 5 0.0 0.0
30 4.9 3.0 2 11.1 10.5 22 13.3 12.7 9/24-10/24 N/A N/A 6 0.0 0.0
31 5.8 4.0 3 10.5 10.0'23 13.7 13.0 10/5 3.4 3.0
6/1 5.3 4.0 4 10.5 10.1 24 13.2 12.7 6 3.5 3.3
2 5.8 4.0 5 10.0 10.0 25 12.7 11.3 7 4.0 3.6
3 6.9 4.0 7/24 N/A N/A 26 ·11.6 11.0 8 4.1 4.0
4 4.5 4.1 25 14.0 12.3 27 12.0 10.5 9 4.4 4.2
5 4.7 4.1 26 14.0 11.7 28 11.0 9.8 10 4.5 4.5
6 5.1 4.5 27 14.8 12.7 29 10.6 9.9 11 4.5 3.2
7 5.5 5.0 28 15.0 13.7 30 10.6 9.8 12 3.8 3.2
~8 7.0 5.1 29 13.8 12.7 31 10.2 9.8 13 3.9 3.4J
9 6.5 6.1 30 13.8 11.0 9/1 10.2 9.2 14 3.4 3.0
10 7.8 6.1 31 12.8 11.3 2 10.2 9.8 15 3.0 2.3
11 7.8 7.2 8/1 13.7 11.0 3 11.9 9.6 16 2.3 1.1
12 7.0 6.7 2 14.0 12.8 4 10.1 9.4 17 1.1 0.8
13 7.6 6.4 3 12.8 12.1 5 10.0 9.8 18 0.8 0.7
14 8.3 7.2 4 12.2 11.1 6 9.8 8.4 19 0.8 0.8
15 8.0 7.7 5 12.2 11.8 7 8.4 8.4 20 0.9 0.2
16 7.7 7.5 6 11.0 10.5 8 8.7 8.4 21 0.5 0.1
17 8.0 7.7 7 12.8 10.8 9 9.0 8.8 22 0.8 0.5
18 7.8 7.0 8 13.2 12.5 10 8.9 8.9 23 0.6 0.5
19 8.7 6.9 9 12.8 11.7 11 9.0 8.6 24 0.6 0.4
20 9.8 3.3 10 12.5 11.5 12 8.6 7.7 25 0.6 0.5
21 9.0 9.0 11 13.0 11.8 13 7.7 7.7
26 0.8 0.5
22 9.0 8.8 12 13.5 12.7 14 7.9 7.5 27 0.9 0.7
23 9.0 8.5 13 13.0 12.3 15 7.5 6.6 28 0.8 0.8
24 .10.9 8.7 14 12.7 12.2 16 7.2 6.3 29 0.9 0.8
25 10.7 9.5 15 ).2.9 12.0 17 6.8 6.3 30 0.9 0.5
26 11.0 9.5 16 13.7 12.1 18 6.8 5.7 31 0.5 0.3
Appendix II Table 5.
Water chemistry data~Rabideux Creek,Devils Canyon Project,1977 .
D.O.Hardness Alkalinity
Date (mg/1).E!!.(mg/1)(mg/1)
Upper Sub Area
5/25 11 6.6 17 17
6/7 12 7.3 34 17
6/16 8 7.0 34 34
6/30 7 7.3 51 51
7/13 6 6.5 51 51
7/26 8 7.0 51 51
8/8 7 7.0 51 51
8/23 6 6.8 51 51
9/15 8 6.8 34 17
9/27 10 6.8 34 17
10/12 9 6.8 34 17
10/27 11 7.2 34 17
Middle Sub Area
5/25 11 7.0 34 34
6/7 11 7.3 34 17
6/16 9 7.3 51 51
6/30 9 7.3 51 51
7/13 9 7.7 51 51
7/26 8 7.5 68 51
8/8 8 7.3 68 68
8/23 8 7.3 68 68
9/15 9 7.3 34 34
9/28 10 7.3 34 17
10/12 10 7.2 51 34
10/27 10 7.2 5i'51
Lower Sub Area
5/25 11 7.2 17 17
6/8 10 7.5 34 34
6/30 9 7.3 51 51
.7/13 10 7.7 51 68
7/26 9 7.7 51 68
8/8 10 7.3 68 68
8/23 9 7.3 68 68
9/15 9 7.3 34 34
9/29 9 7.3 34 34
10/12 11 7.2 34 34
10/27 11 7.2 34 34
1-84
Appendix II Table 6.
Water chemistry data,Montana Creek~Devils Canyon Project~1977.
/",..,
A1~a1inityD.O.Hardness
Date (mg/1).P.!!(mg /1)(mg/1)
Upper Sub Area
6/7 11 7.3 34 17
6/29 9 7.7 34 34
7/13 9 7.7 34 34
7/26 9 7.3 34 17
8/10 9 7.3 34 34
8/22 9 7.3 34 .34
9/13 10 7.3 34 34
9/28 10 7.3 17 17
10/11 10 7.3 34 34
10/26 13 7.3 34 34
Middle Sub Area
6/7 12 7.3 34 17
6/29 9 7.3 34 34
7/13 8 6.8 34 34
8/10 9 7.3 34 34
8/22 9 7.3 34 34
9/13 10 7.3 34 34
10/11 9 7.3 34 34
10/28 10 7.4 34 34
11/11 10 7.3 34 34
Lower Sub .Area
6/7 11 7.3 34 17
6/29 10 7.3 34 34
7/13 9 7.7 34 34
7/26 9 7.3 34 17
8/10 9 7.3 34 34
8/22 9 7.3 34 34
9/2 ( 9
7.6 34 34
9/13 10 7.3 34 34
9/30 10 7.3 34 17
10/11 10 7.3 34 34
10/28 10 7.4 34 34
1-85
DIS-DIS~SU5~.
DIS-SOLVED SOLVED DIS-015..SED.H SOLVED TOTAL •TOTAL TOTAL SOLIDS soliDS SOLVED .SOLVED fALLI
00 HAN-MOLYO-TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL ALUH-SElf-(RES1-ISU"or SOLIDS SOLIDS OIA".0'GANESE DENmt NICKEL SILVE~ZINC .INUH NIU"DUE AT CONSTI-(TONS noNs i fiNER
CHN.CHO.'Nit eAG'(IN.(AU (SEt 180 q TUENTS'PEIl PER TI-IAN
CUG/l''VO/U CUO/l.WO/U CU6/L.WG/L.eUG/U CHO/L,(HO/l'DAY'Ac-rn .002 HI~e01056 •.'01062'tOl061'iOI071~UI092,lolios.t011411'n0300,nOlOI,4103021 (10303,(10J37t
20 1 too <10 liD 9500 1 SO 51 6150 .07 l
Appendix !r Table 7.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR -GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
624941149221500 ~SUSITNA R AD PORTAGE C H"GOLD CREEK AK
PROCESS DATE 02/10/'"
DISTRICT CODE 02
WATER QUALITY DATA.WATER YEAR OCTOUER 1916 TO SEPTEMBER 1977
SPE-
CIFIC
I NSTAN-COLOR .CON-4Lt<A-
TANEOUg (PLAT~DUCT-OIS-CARBON UNITY BICAR-Cl\R-
TEHPER-015-INUH-ANCE SOLVED p,~DIOX IOE AS DONATE BONATE
:rIHE TYPE ATURE CHARGE COBALT IHIC"O-OXYGEN I(02)CACOJ IHCOJ'le031
DATE tOEO.C'(efS)UNITS'tlHOS)It·1G1L ,.WNITSI (MG/l)IHG/l'IMG/L'mOIl)
100010)(00061)100000)100095'100300'(00400'100405'(00410)100440'co.0445'
JUN
J114.u 1130 2 O.ClESOOOO 55 80 12.8 1.2 3.7 30 0
015-OIS-DIS-015-DIs-SOLVED SOLVED SOLVED NON-DIS-SOLVED SODIUM SOLVED DIS-
H NITRITE ORmo ORTHO.CAR-SOLVED HAG-015-AO-PO-SOLVEDIPLUSPHOS-PHOS-HARO-BONATE CAL-HE-SOLVED SORP-TAS-CtlLO-00 NITRATE PtlATE PHORUS NESS HARD-CruM SlUM SODIUM TlON PERCENT SlUM RIOE"IN)Ipolft (P)(e",,MGt NESS fCA'(HGt (NA,RATIO SODIUM IKt leLlIHQ/U tHO/L)'HO/L'(Hall)'HG/U HIG/lt (HG/U (HG/lt IHG/U IHG/l,10063U (00660)«006111 (00900)(00902)100915'100925'(00930,(00931)(00932,(00935t (00940t
.06 .06 .02 36 5 12 1.4 Z.6 .2 13 1.2 4.9
015-
DIS-SOLVED OIS-TOTAL TOTAL Ols-TOTALSOLVEDFlUO-SOLVED TOTAL ToTAL CAO-CBRO-JOTAL TOTAL SOLVED TOTAL "ft"'-SUf.;HTE RJOE SILICA ARSENIC BARIUM HlUff HIUM COPPER IRON IRO~.LEAD GANESE1$04)In 'SIOlt (AS)lOA)(tOt (CRt (CU,frE)erE'(POt IHmIt-lOll)tMG/U tHG/LI tUO/L'WG/l),IUO/l)WG/l)IUG/l)WG/l)WG/U IUO/LI (UO/LJf00945'100950'100955'101002.(01001)'01021'101034)101042)(010',5'(01046'10IOSn 101055'
5.0 .0 5.2 .h 100 <lo 30 200 15000 110 1200 280
·Appendix II Table 7.
lJtI6UEU STAT~tJ(Pl\~TMeNr QrT/"t£INTEH!O~
GEO~OGIC~~Su~vEr
Cf.Nr~AI.l..A~OHQ.TOAY.DfNvEl:1.CO~ORAOO
'f'"
w~TEH ~AI.ITY ANAI.Y~IS
us'10 It 29106"~ECOHO •427qa
SAMPLE LOC~i!ON:SUSITNA R AS PORTAGE C N~GOLD CREEK AK
STATION 10:<;24941149221500 !-Ai .l..uNG.SEQ.:~249~l 1~q221S ao
OA~OF COL~eCTION:6£GIN--771005 ENu--TI~E--1300
STkTE CODE:02 COUNTY ClJCE:170 PRO.JECT IOENnnCA.TlO"l:470200~SO
D.HA TYPE:2 SOUR<:&;:SlJHFAC~wATER GC;OI.OGIC.UNIT:
COMMENTS:
FIE~VA~UE UseD FOA BICARB ~CARSONATE.
AIR TEl'IP tOEG Cl
ALK.TOi (AS CACOJl
At.U~INUH iOTA~
ARSDfIC iOTAI..
eA~IUM TOTAl-
BICARBONATe:
CADMIUM TOTAl..
C~CIU'"OIS5
CARBONATE
Ofl..ORIDc 0155
CiROMIUM TOTAl-
cat..OR
CcP!=e:;;.TOTAL
F'LUOiotIDE DISS
H~RONESS NaNCA~e
HtoROhESS TOTAl.
IRON OISSO~VEO
IRON TOUL
LEAD TOrAL
MAGNEsru:-t 01SS
MANGANESE DISSOLVED
MANGANESe:TOTAL
MERCURY TOTAL
MG/L
UG/l-
uG/I-
UG/t-
MG/L
UG/!.<
"lG/t..
"'IG/l-
MG/!.
UG/t-
uli/\...
1'113 It..
.MG/L
"'GIL
UG/l.
UG/L·
UG/L <
MG/!.
UG/l.
UG/L
UG/L
a.o
4.S
'-10
1
200
55
10
20
o
17
10
o
20
0.1
17
a2
40
7:30
100
3.0
o
'"'0
0.0
MOLYSUENUM TaTA~
NICKEl..TOTA\....
N02.NOJ AS N ~ISS
OXYGEN tJlSSa~v~
Pl1FIEl.C
FHOS ORTHa OIS AS P
PHOSF~Ar~015 ORiHO
POTASSIUM or S5.
~ES I Due:0 IS CALC SUM
RES IOue:0 I5 TONI'A.rT
RESIDuE 015 TON/CAY
~eSIOU~~IS laGe
.SAR
SC:L£,I\f!UM TOTAl.
SILICA uISSOLvED
SILv€Ft TOiAt.
SOO!UH uIS5
sao I U:oI ?-::jo(C~.N r
SP.CONDUCT~~C~FLO
SP.CONOUCTANCE:I.A8
STREAMFLOw (CFS)-!NST
SUl.rATE Or55
~AT~q TEM~{OEG CJ
ZINC TOTAL
llGL.L
UG/t..«
MG/L.
MG/L
~/L
MG/L
~G/l
"'G/L
MG/t..
uG/\...
"!(V'-
UG/!-<
MG/l-
UG/L
4
sa
0.Q7
13.9
1.2
0.00
0.00
1.6
98
0 ..12
1530
87
_0,,4-
aa.7
10
7.1
19
165
170
6'500
1:3
2.0
20
AI-f!ONS
C,ilLCIUM O!SS
MAGNESIUM 'OISS
POUSS1UM iJ!SS
SODIUM 0155
(MG/!-'
2U
3.~
1.6
7.1
TOTAL
(MEa/I.)
O.9~d 8!CAP.~vNATE
0.247 C),R90NATE.
O.O~l C~1.0RrOE QIS5
0.309 FLUO~IUE.orss
SULF'ATE aI55
N02"N03 ,.5 N 0
1.$.,5
(MG/!.l
55
o
17
0.1
IJ
0.07
TOT~L
(M€O/T.-
0.90
0.00
-0 ....8
0.00
0.27
0.00
l.~
1-88
)
Appendix II Table,7.
UNlTED STATES DEPARTMENT or INTERIOR -GEOLOGICAL.SURVEY
15292000 -SUSITNA RIVER AT GOLD C AK
WATER QUALITY DATA,WATER YEAR OCTOOER 191~TO SEPTEMBER 1911
PIlOCESS DATE 'll
DISTRICT CODE 02
DATE
SPE-
CIfiC
INSTAN:--COLOR CON-ALKA-
AIR sunfACE TANEOUS IPLAT-OUCT-015"CARRON UNITY
TEMPER-TEMPER.,.AJ~EA DIS"INU"'-ANCE SOLVED PH DIOXIDE AS
1'lHE TYPE ATURE ATunE (SaUAnE CHARGE COOALT IHleno-OXYGEN (:C02.CAC03
10EG C)iDEO C.HILESJ Icrs.UNITS)MHOS'(HG/LI «UNITS)(:HG/L'tHO/L'
100010.coo020a 100049'.100061)100080'100095'100300.(oo/too.IM40St 100410 •.
H
I
00
1..0
ocr
•01 •••
HAY
10 •••
'18 •••
JUN
)4 •••
JUL
\.20 ...
.AUG
,to •••
I/tOO 2 J.5 -,.6160 5330 ~-----.
18JO a 1.0 -of'6160 J7JO ------1000 2 ----6160 14200
i630 2 0,0 11.'6160 52000 45 102 12.2 6.8 l·l
1130 2 l/t.o -or 6160 21000
1430 2 12.0 --616tJ 20000 25 163 II.t·1.9 1.1
sus.SUS ..sus.sus'.sus.[LEV.sus-SED.SED.SED.SED.SED •.or LAND PEt'IOEDfALLfALLfAllfALLfAllSURfACE.sus-SEDI-D1AH.DlAH.DIAH.OIAM.01 A14.TOTAL DATUH PENDED HENT'4 fiNER inNER •fJt-lER 15 fiNER t fiNER ~ERC"RY (fT •SEDI-015-TIiAN TftAN "'AN THAN.THAN CHG'ABOVE HENT CHARG~DATE .062 MH .125 HH .~50 MH .500 HH 1.00 HH WG/l.HSU IHGIL.IT/DAY).410342.ClOJ4J,(10344.t10J4S)C10346.111900)1120001 180154'180.55.'
OCT
01 •••------------611 10 144HAY
10 •••
_..----------\611 120 121010•••---------_.--617 UIO'42600JUN
I'....'.0 62 04 91 100 .2 611 915 128000JUL
28 •••--,----------611 394 22300AUG
10 •••----------.J 611 656 35400
23
45
Appendix II Table 7.
UNITED STATES OEPARTHENT Of INTERIOR -GEOlOGICA~SURVEY PROCESS O"E 0
15292000 -SUSITNA RIVER AT GOLD C AK DISTRICT CODE t2
WATER QUALITY DATA,WATER YEAn OCTODER 1916 TO SEPTEMBER 1911
015-DIS-OIS-DIS"
SOLVED SOLVED SOLVED 1II0N-015-SOLVEO SODlUt4
NITRITE ORTHO OI1Hto.CAR-SOLVED HAG-OIS-AO-'
BleAR-CAR-PLUS PHOS-PHOS-UARO-BoNATE CAL-NE-SOLVED SORP-
bONATE BONATE NITRATE PHATE PI-lOR US NESS HARO-elUH SlUM SODIUM TlON PERCENT
eHC03)(COJ)(N)ep04)ep)eCA,HG)NESS ICA)CHO)eNAI .RATIO SODIUM
DATE eMOIl)tHO/LJ (HG/U CHO/U (MOIL)eMOIU eMGll1 eHGILt eHO/l),MG/LI
eOO /140'(004451 (0063"1006601 (00611)C009001 (009021 100915)e00925)(009301 (00931'CQ0932J
OCT
oi •••
HAY
)0 ...
10 •••
JUN
14 •••28 0 .06 .06 .02 .36 lJ 12 1.4 2.4 .2 ,12
H JuLI
o.D 28 ...
0 Auo
·10 ...55 0 .06 .02 15 30 ZJ 4.J 3.6 .2 9
DIS-
SOLVED 015-OIS-rOTAL TOTAL OIS-po-SOLVED .DIS-SOLVED DIS-
SOLVED TOTAL TOTAL CAD-CHRO-TOTAL TOTAL SOLVED
TAS-CHLO-SOLVED nuo-·IRON IRON
RIOE ,!iULFATE RlDE SILICA ARSENIC BARIUM HIUM HIU'"COPPER$IUM (5102)(ASI COAt ceDI (CRI ecut efEl eFEI
.eK J celt esOitt en (UG/L)WG/L)WG/L)CUG/L)
tMG/Lt eHOIl)tHG/LI (HG/LI wa/u WG/U COO/UOATEeHOllteol021t (01034t co 1042 t eOl045t co 1046)
(009351 fo0940t 100945t e00950)C009551 .010021 (010011
OCT --------01 •••--.;.-
ttAY
10.;.-------~
IA •••
JUN .<10 30 50 20~00 100
14 ...1.1 is '..1 ..5.2 5 0
JUl ---------------_.
211 •••
AUG 14 .1 4.'1 iz 1)00 <10 40 50 18000
10 •••4.1t 5.4
Appendix II Table 7.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT Of INlERIOR -GEOLOGICAL SUnVEY PROCESS OAT£.U:
1529aOOO -SUSlTNA RIVER AT GOLD C AK DISTRICT CODE 02
WATER QUALITY DATA,WATER YEAR OCTOBER 1916 TO SEPTEHBER 1911
SUS. SUS.SUS.SUS.SU5.SUS.SUS.SUS.SUS. SUS.
sus.
DIS-SED.SED.SED.SED.SEO.SED.SED.SED.SEO.SED.SED.
SOLVED SiEVE SiEVE SIEVE SIEVE SIEVE SiEVE FALL FALL FALL FALL FALL
SOLIDS DIAH.DIAH.OIAH.OIAH.DIAH.OIAf.l.OIAH.DIAH.DIMh DIM,.01"'1.
CliONS ,FINER ,fiNER 'Ii fiNER ~FINER ti fiNER "FINER .,;fiNER '.t riNER ~fiNER "FINER ,rINER
PER THAN HI AN THAN THAN TI-tAN THAN THAN TIiAN tJ~AN THAN TllAN
DATE AO-fT'.062 t-tH .125 UH ,250 HH .500 HH 1.00 HH 2.00 HH .002 HH .004 HH .008 Ht-t .016 HH .Oll HM
110303'nOJl.,nOJ3z,110l33'CI03341 n03351 (70]]6»1103311 (10]381 C70JJ9'170340.(103411
OCT
01 ...
HAY
10 •••--44 64 81 99 100 -----,
18 •••--63 16 90 99 100 --1 9 11 21 4/,
JON
14 ....09 ------------2 It 6 11 b
JUL
H 28 •••--10 00 92 99 IOn --14 19 29 44 54
I AUG
\0 10 ....10 6S 1 1,86 95 98 99 13 19 21 39 S2.....
OIS-015-
DIs-SOLVED SOLVED OIS-
TOTAL SOLVED TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL SOLIDS SOLIOS SOLVED
'(OTAL ~'AN-HAN-HOLYO ...TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL ALUH-SElE ..IRESI-ISlIf1 OF SOLIDS
lEAD GANESE OANESE DENU'"NICKEL SiLVER liNe INUM NIUI"DUE At CONSTI-nONS'
IPo)IHNI IMN)CHOI CNIt CAO)iZN)CALI ISE)100 c.lUEHTS'PER
OATt::CUO/Lt CUG/U CUGll)CUO/U CUGILI WO/U fUO/L.CUG/L)CUOILi IHGll'CHG/L'DAY.
COI05U COI0551 '01056)(01062)to1061)fOI011.fOI092,COll05'eOII"1'(10300)Ci030lt 110302.,.
OCT
01 •••
"'AY
10 ...---~...-.....
to ...-------..----------------I.JUN
14 ....100 310 40 I 50 <10 80 14000 0 63 56 ROSO
JUL
28 ....
AUG
10 •••<100 320 ,180 8 <50 <10 00 IJOOO 1 16 130 4100
Appendix II Table 7.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ~e INTERIOR
G£OLOGICA~SU~VEY
C~NTRAL LA80RATORY.OENvER,COLOR~OQ
w~TER OU~LITY ANALYSIS
L~8 10 •291068 REeOHO •42795
SAMPLE LOCATION:SUSITNA RIvER AT GO~O C AK
STATION 10:1:5292000 UT".!.ONG.SEQ.:0,21'.0604 149412B 00
OATE Or CQL~ECTION:~EGIN--77100~ENO__TIME--1600
SlATE.CODE:02 COUNTY CODE:'170 F'RQ.JECT IOENTIF'lCATlON:41a2~OJSO
OATA TlPE:2 SOURCE:'SU~FACE ~ATER GEOLOGIC UNIT:
-CO!'lMENTS:
F'IELO VALUE USED F'OR SICARS ,CARSONAT~.
AIR TE!'IP COEG C)
ALK.TOT (AS CAC03)
ALUMINUM TOTAl..
ARSENIC .TOTAL
6ARIUM TOTA~
BICARBONATE
CADMIUM TaTA~
CALCIUM DI5S
CAR80NATE
CHLORIDE 0155
04ROMIUM TOTA.~
COL-OR
COPPEH TOTAL
FLUORIDE 01S5
HARDNEss NONC':'Rtf
HARDNESS TOUL
I~ON DISSOLveo
IRON TOTAL.
LE,o.O TOTAL.
IoIAG~ESIUM 015S
H~NGANESE DISSULVED
M,ANGANESE TOTAL
"lERCURY TOT4.l.
MG/l..
UG/l..
UG/L
UG/l..
"IG/L
UG/l..<
MG/L
MG/1...
"'cut..
UG/L
.UG/l..
MG/L
"'G/L
MG/L
UG/l..
UG/L
UG/L <
I"IG/l..
UG/l.
UG/l..
UG/L
9 •.0-
37
SOD
1
200
45
10
18.
o
11
0'
'12
SO·
0.1
20
57
40
sse
100
3.0
o
20
0.2
1<'OL.'f8DENUht TO TA'--
NICKa TOTA~
N02+NOJ AS N 01SS
OXYGEN OISSOLV(O
PH F'IELO
PMOS ORTHO 01S AS F>
PWOSPHATE DIS ORTHO
POTASSIUM 01SS
~ESIOuE DIS CAt.C SUM
RESIDuE DIS TON/A~T
HESIOuE'DIS TON/OAY
RESIDUE DIS l~OC
SAR _
SEL.ENIUM'TOTAt.
SILICA OISSOLVeO
SILVER TOTA~
SPOIU!"I 01S5
S.001UH,PE~CENT
5P~'CONOUCTANCE FLO
S?CON~uCTANCE LAB
SiREAMFLC~(CFS}-INSi
SULFATE otss
w~TE~TEMP (UEG C]
ZINC TOTAt.
UGA
UG/L <
Jo4G/1...
MG/t..
MG/L
'~G/L
MG/l.
MG/L
/'4G/L
UG/L
MG/L
UG/L <
;.4G/\.
MG/L
UG/l..
7
SO
0.11
12.6
7.4-
0.00
0.00
1.4
as
0.10
1740
76
0.4-
o
8.6
10
6.5
19
150
154-
.~500
14
3.5
30
CA nONS ANIONS
CAt.CIUH 0155
MAGNESIUM 0155
POTASSIUM OI5S
SOOIUM 0155
(~G/l..)
Ie
3.0
1.4
6.5
TOt>\l.
CMF-Co/L)
O.ij~9 BICARdONATE
0.2..7 CA~80NATE
0.030 C"t.O~ICE 015S
O.2S~FLUORIO~0155
SUI.FATE orss
NOZ ...~~03 AS /II a
1.404
(MG/l.l
45-
o
11
0.1
14
0.11
TOTAL
(MEO/L
0.73.
0.00'
0•.31
0.00
Q.2q
0.00
1.35
P~RCENT OIFFE~ENCE =J.9~
1-92
')
Appendix II Table 7.
UNITED STATES OE~ARTHENT or INTE~IOR -GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
15292100 -SUslTNA R AT SUNSHINE AK
WATER QUALITY DATA.WATER YEAR OCTOBER 1916 TO SEPTEMBER 1971
PROCESS DATE e~~1
DISTRICT cnOE 02
DATE
sus.
SED.
stEVE
DiAH.
i fINER
THAN
.125 MH
1103JZ)
SUS.
SED.
StEVE'
DtAH.
,ftNER
THAN
.250 t-t,..
(103J3.
SUS.
SED.
stEVE
OlAf••
,FJNER
THAN
.500 "H
1103J/••
sus.
5£0.
SiEVE
OUH.
S fiNER
"HAN
1.00 HH
110335.
sus.
SED.
fAll
OII\H.
I FtNEtl
THAN
.oo~H"
(103J1I
sus.
SED.
fALL
OIAH.
~FINER
TUAN
.004 HH
1703301
sus.
SED.
fALL
OIA".
inNER
THAN
.000 HH
(10339'
sus.
SED.
fALL
OIAM.
,fiNER
JUAN
.016 HH
(10340)
sus.
SEO.
FALL
DIAH.
,nNER'
THAN
.0J"1 MH
(70H"
TOTAL
MERCURY
IHG)
.tuO/L'
(11900'
sus-
PENDED
SEOI-
HENT
(HG/L)
(8015 /.'
JUN
IS,••
AUa
10 •••.1 900
.2 1630
H
I
\0
.p-
DAtE
DIS-
SOLVED
HAN-
GANESE
IMN.
WO/l'
(010561
64
83
TOTAL
MOLYO-
DENUM
(HOI
wa/U
(01062'
84
92
TOTAL
NICKEL
(NU
WOIU
(01061'
91
99
TOTAL
SILVER
UG,
'UG/LI
(01071)
100
100
tOTAL
ZINC
IlNt
WO/L)
(010921
1
16
TOTAL
ALUM-
INUM
(·AL'
IUO,/Lt
'01105'
q
~B
TOTAL
SElE-
NIUM
ISEt
WG/L)
(011411
15
40
DIS-
SOLVED
SOLIDS
IRESI-
DUE AT
180 CI
IHG/I~)
(70300'
22
51
DIS-
soLVED
souos
ISUM Of
CONSTI-
TUENTS)
(HG/U
110301)
33
64
DIS-
SOLVED
soLI os
(JOW;
PER
.04Y)
(103021
DIS-
SOLVED
SOLIDS
nOt-4s
P[R
AC-fTl
("0303)
SliS.
SED •
.SIEVE
OIA"'.
."flNEq
TIIAH
.062 tiM
nOJJI ).
JUN
15 ...
AUG
10 ..,
20 1
o
100
<50
<10
dO
150
&20
22000
15000
)
o
56 51 17400
'102
.08
.09
46
16
DAT~
JUN
15 ....
AUG
10 ••,
DIS-
SOLVED
SULfATE
'504)
'MG/Lt
(00945»
5.1
11
tH S..;•
SOLVED
flUO-
RIDE
If)
CHO/LI
'00950)
.1
• I
DIS-
SOLVED
SiLICA
(S1021
('m/Ll
100955.
,4.9
'..0
TOTAL
ARSENIC
US)
WG/U
101002'
25
2 1,
TOTAL
BARlu,..
IBAI
WO/L)
101001)
200
soo
TOTAL
«:1\0-
HIUM
(CO)
IUG/l)
101021)
<10
<10
TOTAL
CltRO-
MfUH
IC~)
WO/Lt
101034)
60
40
TOTAL
COPPER
(Cut
tuG/l)
(01042)
200
40
TOTAL
IRON
(fE)
IUGIL.
'01045'
31000
2,.000
DIS-
SOLVED
IRON -I
(fE)
IUG/l)
10IQ4(,)
IRO
TOTAL
LEAD
IPDI
IUG/L,
1010Slt
300
<100
.TOTAL
HI\t-4-
GI\NESE
IMN.
(U6/Lt
1010551
790
540
Appendix II Table 7.
u~tT£D ST~ras OE~ARTMENr OF THe INT~~IO~
G£O~aGICAL SU~vEr
CE:NT~Al..l.AAOSolATORy,lJfNVe:~.CO~Ojoo!AOO
WATER QUA~IiY ANALYSIS
l.AB 10 •2~lQ70 ~ECOHO #~<SGl
SAl'tPl.~I.CCA nON:SUSlTNA R ~r SUNSHIN.e:AI(
'STATION 10:lS2927dO I.AT.l.ONG.S£~.:"ZlOJ=lSill01S 00
DATE OF CO~.e:CT!ON:aEGIN--77100~~~o--i!M.e:--~915
STATE COUE:02 COUNTY CODE:170 PRO..JECT rOENTIFICATlON:Z.70200350
OAT4 TYPE:2 SQ~ct:SUqFAC!WATER GEOLOblC UNIT:
CQMMENTS:
FIELO VALUE USEll FOR etcARo ~CARBONATE.
A 1R TEMP (OE03 CJ
4~K.TQT (AS CAC03)
·ALUMINUM TOTAL
ARSENIC rnnL
BAR!UM iOTAL
8ICAP.SONATE
CJ.OMtulof iOTA~
c.4LCIUM 0IS$·
.CAR80NATE
C1otLCRIOE 0155
'Cl-tAOM 1UM rOT Al.
COl-OR
:COPPER TOTA~
:~uort10E OI5S
,,...ARCNESS NONCARd
HARDNESS TOTAL
IRON OISSOLI/€O
IAON TOTAl.
!..EAD rOUL
;.tAGNESIUM DISS
~ANGANe:5E CISSOLVED
rANGl1NESE rOTAI.
,~E;:'CUA.,.'TO r AI.
l'IG.lL
UG/L
UG/t.
UG/t.
"1G/L
UG.I\.<
MG/t.
~.IL
MG.lL
WG.I\.
UG/t.
MG/L
~lG/L
"'Ii/\..
UG.I\.
UG.I\.
UG/L <
~/t.
UG/L
UG/L
UG/1.
6.8
43
2200
3
ZOO
52
10
.17
u
~.a
10
B
20
0.1
12
55
00
3700
100
3.0
o
loa
0.0
MO~YAOENUM TO TAt.NIcxa TOTAl....-
N02.N03 AS N 01S5
OXYG~~DISSOl.VEO
Plot F'I E3..u
'PHOS ORTHO OIS AS ?
P~OSP~AT~DIS ORTHO.
~HssrUM DI5S
~ES10uE DIS·CALC su~
~ESI~u£DIS rON/4FT
~ESIOUE 015 rON/DAY
RESIOUE U15 l~OC
SA,q
SEl-EN1UM rOTAI.
SILICA DISSOl.vED
SILvE:R TOTAt.
SODIUM 0155
saOlulof PE>oICENT
SP.CONDUCTANC~FLO
SP.CONOUCT~NC~L~8
ST~EAMFLOw(~S)-rNST
SU~FArE urss
~ATER T~~~(OEG C)
ZINC TOhl.
UG/L
UG/lo <
MG/I..
104GIL
MG/t.
~/t.
MG/L
~G/L
Io4G.lL
UG/t.
.'1G/L
UG/L <
MG/\..
"'G/L
UG/t.
~
50
0.23
12.8
7.4
0.00
0.00
1.2
78
O.Q9
408aO
&6
0.3
o
7.4
10
4.4
15
135
133
27400
12
4.0
30
CATIONS ANIONS
~:'~C!U~015S
:'!AGNESIUM 01S5
~OHSSIUH 01SS
SODIUM 0lS5
(Mu/I.)
17
3.0
1.2
4.4
(l04EQ/L)
0.849 aICAR50~ATE
0.247 CAP901llATE
0.031 C~1.0~!U~orS5
0.192 rLUO~10E 01SS
SULFATE DISS
~'llJ2 ·NOJ ....S ,,.0
(MG/l.>
S2
o
~.O
0.1
12
1,).23'
rlo4EC/1.,
O.S:U
0.000
0.170
0.006
0.250
Q .1317
TOHI.
PERCENT OIFF'E~E,'<jCE:0.':/2
1-95
TOT"L -~
APPENDIX III
The following appendix is a synopsis of ADF&G's recommended plan of
study for the aquatic environment.Yearly objectives and cost estimates
are included.
1-96
AQUATIC BIOLOGY STUDIES
In troduction
The p~oposed Susitna River hydroelectric project wil~have various
impacts on both the indigenous organisms and the natura~conditions within
the aquat~c environment.The fish populations are the most obvious aspects
of the aquatic community where impacts will be evident due to their economic
and recreational importance to the people of Alaska and the nation.
However,studies cannot be limited to the fishery resource alone due to
the complex interrelationships between all biological components of,and
within,the aquatic community and the associated habitat.The majority of
the impacts on fish species will likely ~esult from changes in the natural
regimes of the river rather than direct impacts on the fish in the vicinity.
Primary areas of concern are reduction of stream flow,increased turbidity
levels during winter months,and thennal and chemical pollution.Alterations
of the habitat may adversely affect the existing fish populations and
render portions of the drainage either nonproductive or unavailable in
future years.
Baseline fisheries inventories wer~conducted by the Alaska Department
of Fish and Game in the upper Susitna River during the 1974-1977 field
seasons.The Susitna Basin is the .major coho,pink,chum,and chinook
salmon production area within the Cook Inlet area.Although total escape-
ment estimates have not been derived for this system,it is probably the
second or third largest sockeye salmon production area within Cook Inlet.
Grayling,rainbow trout,Dolly Varden,lake trout,whitefish,and burbot
are among the important resident fish species present.
The interrelationships within the biological communities and between
their habitats must be clearly defined to protect the aquatic ecosystem
fr~losses incurred by hydroelectric development.The effects on the
anadromous and resident fish populations are of primary concern to the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game fisheries divisions.Aquatic studies
wi~,therefore,concentrate on the seasonal life histories and critical
habitat requirements of fish species present.'
Seasonal fluctuations in the physiochemical composition of the aquatic
habitat are apparently the major factors influencing distribution of fish
within the upper drainage.Any alterations resulting from hydroelectric
project activities which restrict or reduce quality or quantity of required
habitat will also reduce fish populations and associated members of the
aquatic commtmity.
Each aquatic community is dependent upon various river mechanics to
provide the necessary habitat for its existence.Depth,width,and velocity
of the stream flow determine the quality and quantity of habitat available'
to aquatic organisms.High water discharge associated with spring and
summer r~off results in important physical habitat alterations.Unregulated
flowing waters dilute and transport natural and man-generated pollutants.
A flushing or scouring action occurs during periods of high 'flows and
removes deposited sediments and fines,resulting in an annual cleansing of
the river botto~This is an important factor in rivers like the Susitna
1-97
which transport large amounts of glacial silt~Deposition of sediment
without the annual scouring could change the overall productivity of the
river,.eventually suffocating some of the aquatic organisms.
Individual study'proposals are designed to provide the necessary
background information to enable proper evaluation of impacts.Six general
.objectives have been outlined:
1)
2)
3}
4)
5)
6)
Determine the relative abundance and distribution of anadromous
fish populations within the drainage.
Determine the distribution and abundance of selected resident
fish populat~ons.
Determine the seasonal habitat requirements of anadromous and
resident fish species during each stage of their life histories.
DeteI:ll1ine the economic,recreational,social,and aesthetic
values of the existing resident and anadromous fish stocks and
habitat.
Determine the impact the Devils Canyon project will have on the
aquatic ecosystems and any required mitigation prior to con-
struction approval.
Determine a long term plan of study,if the project is authorized,
to monitor the impacts during and after project completion.
Fisheries and physiochemical sampling techniques and equipment for
large rivers similar to the Susitna are in the early stages of development.
Research and development must accompany the study to modify equipment and
techniques to the habitat conditions of the specific environment to be
evaluated.
The large drainage areas encompassed by the project are divided and
categorized by location and activity.The three major study areas are:
1)The Susitna River basin between Denali Highway and Cook Inlet .'-
2)The proposed transmission line corridor and construction rQad
'drainage areas.
3)The Cook Inlet estuarine area.
All proposed studies are interrelated and have been coordinated to
produce specific results.The elimination of any segment of a project
will require revision of study plans.Investigations have been arbitrarily
divided into anadromous and resident species studies.To insure pre~se
and adequate aquatic data are collected each study is limited to a specific
geographic area.A sufficient number of personnel must therefore be
distributed throughout the study areas.to insure a cross-sec.tion of habitat
conditions are examined and movements of fish populations are monitored.
1-98
Title:Impact of the Proposed Devils Canyon-Watana Hydropower Projects On
Anadramous Fish Po~ulations Within the Susitna Riyer Drainage.
Obj ectives:Determine the abundance and distributi'On of anadromous fish
populations.
Determine the seasonal freshwater habitat requirements of adult and
juvenile salmon,including spawning,incubation,rearing,and migration.
Background:The salmon stocks of the Susitna River drainage are major
contributors to the Cook Inlet area fishery._Determining total escapement
into this system is greatly complicated by the glacial conditions of the
major streams and the enormity of the area.Management of the northern
Cook Inlet salmon stocks has been difficult due to the mixed stock commercial
fishery in Cook Inlet and the lack of adequate tools to provide accurate
in season escape~nt estimates for the drainage •
.The major hydroelectric proj ect impacts on the anadromous fish species are
expected to be due to changes in habitat.Alteration of the normal flow
regimes and the physical and chemical water characteristics will probably
be the most critical impacts.It is difficult at this time to determine
the distance downstream from the proposed dams that changes w~ll occur.
Studies conducted by Townsend (1975)in the Peace River demonstrate that
effects were observed 730 miles downstream from the Bennett.Dam.
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game has conducted fisheries investiga-
tions in the area of proposed dam construction downstream since 1974.
Emphasis has been on the inventory of adult and juvenile salmon stocks and
habitat assessment.Current research investigations have concentrated on
determining total escapement of salmon species into the Susitna drainage
and intrasystem migrations of fry.Successful tag and recovery projects
were operated in the lower river during 1975 and 1977 and the feasibility
of sonar operation was tested in the mainstem Susitna River approximately
25 miles upstream from Cook Inlet during 1976.
Only through complete stock assessment will it be possible to determine
what portion of the Susitna River anadromous fish runs will be affected
by the project and determine the level of mitigative measures which will
ultimately be required.It is essential to know what portion the affected
stocks contribute to the total Susitna River salmon escapement in orde~to
determine potential losses of fish populations and numbers.Economic
values and relative importance can be determined after establishing this.
Pink,chum,and chinook salmon are the dominant species utilizing the upper
reaches of the drainage although sockeye and coho salmon are also observed.
Adults
Population estimates 'of salmon species utilizing the Susitna River above
the Chulitna River confluence were estimated during the 1974, 1975,and
,~1977 field seasons based on tagging and subsequent recovery of fish.These
studies indicate a portion of the salmon tagged are not destined to spawn
above the tagging site,but rather below it.The importance and extent
1-99
of this milling behavior in the upper river areas requires definition.
The alterations in flow and water quality in the mainstem river after
project completion could significantly affect this behavior and consequently
spawning success.Behavior modifications and disorientation of fish due
to tagging and handling may have been a contributing factor.
Observations of spawning areas between the Chulitna and Susitna river
confluence upstream to Portage Creek during fall surveys indicate that a
reduction in flow to proposed post-construction levels would prevent
access to many impoJ::tant spawning areas.
The degree of impact of reduced flows will be dependent on the total area
affected.The distance affected downstream would depend partially on the
contribution of the natural Susitna River flow regimes to that of each
major tributary and the drainage as a whole.
Studies conducted during the late 1950's indicate that Cook Inlet salmon
stocks are unable to ascend the Susitna River beyond Devils Canyon,the
latter being a natural water velocity barrier td migration (U.S.Department
of the Interior,1957).Reports from local residents of salmon observations
above Devils Canyon indicate that this should be investigated further.
Juveniles
Previous studies have defined important clearwater streams and spring fed
sloughs within the Susitna River drainage which support juvenile anadromous
fish species.Investigations have,however,concentrated primarily on .
summer rearing areas.Surleys indicate these populations are not static,
but vary in abundance and distribution.Studies conducted during the
winter of 1974-1975 revealed that juvenile anadromous species also utilize
the mainstem Susitna River.
Data collected since 1974 prOVide only baseline information.Generaliza-
tions may be made,but sufficient information is not available to determine
specific impacts of dam construction and operation on incubating and
rearing anadromous species.
Adults
Procedures:Emphasis should be on determining total salmon escapement
into the drainage,stock separation,and habitat evaluation.Types of
sampling gear which can be utilized in the upper area of the river and
catchability of adult salmon migrating upstream greatly affect the success
of a tag and recovery program.Recent developments and improvements in
sonar salmon counters are a viable option.A sonar counting system suitable
for operation in the upper Susitna River would have to be designed and
tested.Installation of weirs or counting towers to determine escapements
would be feasible on most clearwater tributaries.
1-100
Commercial Fisheries Division will operate side-scanning sonar salmon
counters in the lower Susitna River during 1978 as part of their ongoing
studies.A salmon tag and recovery program to provide an alternate
escapement estimate could be funded through Devils Canyon studies to·
provide additional data and supplement sonar escapement information.The
duration of this project-is dependent on correlation of population esti-
mates and sonar counts.Data obtained from these studies would be
correlated with population estimates in the upper Susitna River.Through
thesa studies the importance of the Susitna River salmon stocks to the
.Cook.Inlet area as a whole could be detennined.
Evaluation cif milling behavior of adult salmon in the'upper Susitna River
will require new sampling techniques.Obtaining escapement samples and
marking them.to detenn:f.ne migrational characteristics without causing some
modification of normal behavior is difficult.Internal sonic transmitters
may be utilized to evaluate this.The effectiveness of this type of tag
in heavily silt laden waters 'would have to be tested.Recently developed
stock separation techniques based on salmon scale ¢haracteristics may
eventually enable researchers to assign unknown stocks to specific areas.
This technique is still in the developmental research stage t but preliminary
data indicate that samples obtained from Cook Inlet can be assigned to
one of the three major salmon producing systems with ±14 percent confi-
dence.A large data base of scale characteristics from tributary systems
would have to be established before analysis could be made.
Surveys and escapement sampling should be conducted in the proposed
impowdment areas between the Denali Highway and Devils Canyon during
periods of peak adult salmon abundance.Initial observations would be
conducted by aerial surveys to document the presence or absence of adult
salmon.Surveys would be done in conjunction with resident fish investi-
gations.Data obtained would be utilized to determine necessary mitigation
measures.
Water quality,quantity,and biological studies to predict the effects on
spawning and migration habitat are described in the habitat study section.
Juveniles
Year-round studies are required to determine complete juvenile salmon.
distribution and habitat utilization data.
Surveys of all rearing areas defined in previous studies should be con-
tinued.The distribution,species composition,and growth characteristics
of juvenile salmonids should be monitored.Additional sampling equipment
should be employed to assure representative samples are being collected.
These include seines t minnow traps,small fyke traps,and dip nets.Fore-
gut sample analysis should be continued and related to invertebrate studies.
Winter sampling should be initiated on selected sloughs and clearwater
tributaries that support significant populations of rearing.fish during
the summer and are also accessible during the winter months.'.Physio-
chemical parameters of the aquatic habitat will be monitored during each
survey.
1-101
The timing of migration of juvenile fish from sioughs and tributaries to
the mainstem river and the extent of mainstem utilization should be docu-
mented.Factors which trigger the outmigration will be determined through
habitat monitoring.These will include water temperature,ice cover,
relative water levels,dissolved oxygen,pH,and conductivity.Fish
samples will.be collected primarily by traps.Coded wire tags and/or
pigment dye marking may be effective methods of determining intrasystem
migrations after initial documentation of this phenomenon.
The quantity and quality of water within the mainstem Susitna River will
be monitored year round.Data will be obtained from U.S.G.S.gauging
stations and at additional sites by field crews monitoring fry distribution.
(See Habitat Section).
Schedule:Following is a preliminary schedule of anadromous fish project
activities.The initiation of some segments of the studies will be dependent
on testing of sampling equipment and delivery time required for more complex
equipment,i.e.,sonar counters.
The·fiscal years (FY)outlined encompass the period of July 1 through
June 30.
FY ·79
.FY 80
Determine total salmon escapement estimate for the
Susitna River drainage.
Determine total escapement in selected streams in the upper
drainage.
Monitor abundanc~,distribution,characteristics,and
habitat requirements of adult and juvenile salmonids.
Monitor physical,chemical and hydrological parameters of
the mains·tem Susitna River,sloughs,and clearwater
tributaries.
Evaluate the feasibility of operation of various types of
sampling gear for use in the upper river areas.
Begin building data base for stock separation studies •
Continue salmon escapement estimates.
Continue fry and habitat studies.
Evaluate milling behavior of adult salmon.
Continue water quantity and quality monitoring.
Continue impoundment surveys,if salmon are observed
during FY 79.
Continue stock separation studies and begin detailed
analysis.
1-102
FY 81
IT 82
F"i 83
Continue all FY 80 studies and revise programs as necessary.
Continue ongoing field projects (FY 81)and begin final
analysis of projects.
Continue field monitoring and prepare final report.
FY 79
FY 80
FY 81
FY 82
IT 83
$909,800
$S9Z~700
$S9Z~700
$S92~700
$592,700
Literature Cited:
Townsend,'G.H.1975.Impact of the Bennett Dam on the Peac.e-Athabasca
Delta.J:Fish.Res.Board Can.Vol.32 (1).pp.171-176.
U.S.Dept.of the Interior.1957.(Unpublished).Progress Report 1956
field investigation Devils Canyon Dam Site,Susitna River Basin.
15 pp.
Title:Impact of the.Susitna aydrcelect~c.Froject on Resident Fish Species
Obi ectives:Dete:cnine spades present and disttibut~on.
Deter.mine seasonal abundance of selected populations.
Dete:r:m:ine seasoncll habitat requirements necessary to s'USta:in the
spedes present.
Background:The Alaska Department of Fish.and Game has conducted limited
fisheries iIIV'estigations in the Susitna River and its tributaries.,both
upstream at1d downstteam of the p-roposed dam.sites and in lakes near the
:t:mpcnmdment uea.The gene:raJ.d:i.st:r:1buti.on of resident species was 1llonito1:'ed
and.basic seasonal lile histo-ry and habi.tat obse'rVations were conducted
durlng portions of the SP1:'ing,summe1:',fall,and winte1:'seasons.Some
resident spec:i.es 1l1ake tUajor m.grations from.lake and t1:'ibutary systems into
the 1I1ainstem Susitna for purposes of ovennntering.The impo1:'tance of this
intrasystemmigraticn and the role of the mainste:m Susitna Ri'Ver is not
understood at this time.Surveys conducted be~een 1974 and 1977 document
that a high quality sport fishery is provided by the Susitna River,its
ttibutaxies,and nearby lakes.
P-rocedu1:'e:Seasonal life history,distribution,population abundance,and
habitat requ:i.rement investigat:i.ons of sele.cted resident fish species will.
be continued and expanded.These studies will be closely coordinated ~th
the anadrc:mcus fisn s~udies.Special attention will be given to those
areas important to resident fish which may not coincide with anadromous
fish habitat.!he study area for resident fish investigations may be
considerably greater,extending along the Susitna Riyer from the mouth of
the Tyotle River to Cook Inlet,including tributaries bisected by transmission
and road corridors.
Of particular illIpoxtance in this study will be the determination of winter
distribution,mgrational and habitat requirements within axeas subj ect to
proj ect impact.Stuclies will be made of the tributaries where resident
fish predominately spawn and reside during the summer months,and the
mainstem Susit'Ila River where many of these same fish may winter.Emphasis
will also be gi'Vet1 to streams impacted by inundation.Human utilization of
resident species wi~l also be determined.
This study will be conducted in two parts,with results of the first two
years of extort being compiled and analyzed for use in related studies and
as a basis £01"deter.mining areas where efforts should be concentrated
during the remaining years of the study.
Due to dtificulty in capturing fish from the Susitna River through the
winter ice cover,high velocities and tuxbid water conditions in the summer,
considerable equipment and sampling technique adaptations will be necessary.
Boom and backpack electroIishing,side scanning sonar,sonar,angling,
radio tags,anchor tags,coded woire tags,fyke nets,seines,gill nets,
fixed traps,fish wheels,weirs,and ground surveys will be among the
techniques to be employed.
1-104
'!hose elements of the physiochemical and trophic makeup of the e:dsting
natural ba.bi.tat which will be analyzed are discussed under the Habitat
Studies Section.
Schedule:
FY 79
FY 80
.FY 81.
FY 82
FY 83
Organi.ze Susic:r.a River Basin study team and coordinate work
schedule with other study teams where necess~.
Establish base camps and'begin fisheries iIIVentorj",seasonal
life history~and associated habitat investigations.
Continue field activities and relocate various personnel as
dictated by·data which are generated.Areas of investigation
include impoundment,transmission and road corridors,and .
downstteam of DeviJ.s Canyon to Cook Inlet •
Continuefie1d actiYities and relocate various personnel as
dictated by data which are generated.
Continue field ac:tivities and relocate various personnel as
dictated by data which ara generated.
Initiate report writj.ng process.
Continue field activities and relocate various personnel as
dictated by data which are generated,and integrate and
s~rize all data collected into final report.
Cost:
IT 79 $462,900
IT 80 $416,600
FY 81 $416,600
FY 82 $416,600
FY 83 $416,600
1-105
Title:Investigations of the Cook Inlet Estuarine Area and Potential
Effects of Hydroelect;ic Development.
Obj ectives:Identliy the fisheries 'resources of the lower Susitna River
and the Cook Inlet es tu.uy.
Deter.mine the existing water quality and biological p'roductivity of
the lower Susitna River and the:Cook Inlet es~ary.
Determine the contributiou and importance of the Susitna River to the
Cook Inlet.estuary.
Background:Cook I:c.lat is appro.:c:iJnately 170 miles long and 60 miles wi.de
at its 1210uth~with a total volume of J..7 x 1013 feet 3 •It can be divided
into two natural regions-~a northern and southern portion,by a natural
topographic featuZ'e,the East and West Forelands.The Susitna.River and
the major streams and rivers ~terlng Knik AD1 represent-about 70-80
percent 0'£the total freshwater entering the Inlet (Rosenberg,1967).
Estuaries generally have exceptional usefulness in support of fisheries as
rearing areas.It is generally a high.food production area for pri:mary
consumers suc.l].as c:lams and other filter feeding organisms and the secondary
and tertiary level consumers,including finfish and shellfish species.
Migratory fishes such as salmen must pass through the estuarine area to
reach their spawning grounds.
The estuary is,in many ways,the mest complicated and -variable of the
aquatic ecosystems.Current and~salinity shape the life of the estuary
where the envirotmleut is neither fresh nor salt water.Estuarine currents
result from the interaction of one-d:irection flow which varies with seasonal
ru~off,oscillating tides and the winds.The unique assemblages of
organisms utilizing the estuarine habitat have evolved to survive these
rigorous conditions.
Oceanograpbic data from the Cook Inlet estuarine area is limited~The
extent to which juvenile and adult salmon species utilize this estuar:i.ne
area is UIlkncwn.If natural-flow regimes and water quality are altered by
the hydroelectric project,adverse effects would possibly be observed
within the Inlet.Baseline studies to detenrine existing physiochemical
habitat conditions and biological productivity should be conducted.
Parameters which need to be evaluated include:temperatuTe,salinity,pH,
nutrients,sediJnentation processes,water stage and velocity,and biological
activities.
Investigations of estuarine areas are more difficult than for river systems
and will 'require elaborate equipment and use of large vessels.
Procedures:Baseline aquatic biology,and habitat studies and a thorough
investigation of existing data available on the Cook Inlet area will be
conducted p~ior to initiation of any camp~ehensive field investigations.
This environmental data will provide an adequate data base for determining
the direction and level of future field studies necessary to project the
effects of the hydroelectric project on the estuarine ecosystem.
Schedule:
FY 72.
IT 80
FY ]9
FY 80-8..3
CQnduct field ~eseazc~and analyze ~e data collected.
RevieW'and evaluate e:xis'ting etIVi.~on::mental data of the
Cook.Inlet a~ea.
Develop ,cOlDpreheusi-ve.study plan.
Actin.ties will dep end on n 79 f1Ii<tings.Oagoing
J!lOE1itoring and p-revi.ous studies may p~O"rlde suf:fic:ient
data..If nat,.addit:iona~field investj.gations will
have to be ilUt1ated.
$75,000
Open.Will depend ou FY 79 ~esults.Overall
allocation JIJay have to be aJIlended.
..~
Lite~ature Cited:
Rosenberg,D.H.,S..C.Burrell,K.V.Matarajan,and D.W.Hook,1967.
Oceanograph.y of Cock Inlet with special reference to the effluent
from.the Collier Ca.rbon and Chemical Plant.Institute of Marine
Science,UniV'ersi.ty of Alaska.Report No.R67-5..80 pp •.
1-107
Title:SusitIla River BasiIl Habitat Investigations
ObjectiveS:Identify seasoIlal habitat characteristics associated with the
SusitIla.River Basin aDadromous and resident fisheries.
De£inethe complex.interrelationships between the various components of
the habitat.
Dete:minewhiCh habitat components are c:,itical to the sustenance of
the-existing fisheries,and wny •.
Background:Maintenance o£anadl:CDJus and resident fish pOpulations within
the Susi:tna River Basin will requ:ire a thorough u:n.derstandiIlg of their life
sustaining habitat.Impacts.by the hydroelectric project which alter or
reduce the quantity or quality·of the critical.spawning,incubation,rearing,
and migration habitat o£these species will reduce or eliminate their
populations.Major changes may'taka place in the biotic commnnity nth only
a subtle change in the habitat.
Baseline physiochemical and b~ological aquatic habitat data were collected
between 1974 and 1977 by the Alaska DepartJI1ent of Fish and Game at selected
sites within the-Susitna River drainage.The United States Geological
Survey and other agencies have also monitored physiochemical parameters of
the drainage.
Literature on the physiochemical and biological composition of aquatic
habitat in lotic and lentic environments and its relationships to aquatic
conmnmities is also available.
Procedure:Personnel conducting seasonal fisheries life history investi-
gatio~within the Susitna River Basin will concurrently collect the maj ority
of the associated physiochemical field habitat data.In situ water velocity,
Width,depth,gradient,temperature,conductivity,pH and dissolved oxygen
measurements will be collected with sophisticated electronic and mechanical
instrumentation.Watar samples will also be collected for laboratory analyses
of basic metals,dissolved solids,total suspended solids,alkalinity,.
hardness,pH,conductivity,and total recoverable solids.Additional in-
vestigations by fisheries personnel will include water surface and sedi-
mentation profiles.The U.S.G.S.will be contracted to install stream
gauging stations at sele~ted sites.
Biological habitat investigations will include primary productivity,benthos
species composition and diversity,fOTage fish,pathological,and bioassay
studies.Benthos,forage fish and fish pathology investigations will be
integrated with fisheries li.fe history studies.The remaining three will be
conducted as individual studies.
To define the complex interrelationships of the dynamic habitat conditions
of the Susitna River Basin it ~be necessary to collect data over an
extended period of time.Because of the precise measurements required,
eqUipment for this investigatio?will be costly.
1-108
Schedule:
FY 79
n 80
IT 81.
FY82
n°83
Organize field staff ana procure equipment.Establ1sh
fiel.d camps,install equ:t.pment,and i~t:tate field and
office research.
CantiDue field and office research.
Coutimle field and..o.f£ice resea-rch.
Coutinue £ield and office research.
.Cont:tnue field and office s'tUdies,analyze data,and
write report •
.£E!5.:Personnel and their associated expenses are included in the fishe-r"ies
investigations.
FY 79
FY 80
]'I'81
F!'82
IT 83
$191,000
$149,000
$149,000
$149,000
$149,000
1-109
----------------
Title:Transmission Corti.dors,Access Road Corridor,and Construction Pad
Sites-Fisheries Investigations
Objectives:.Identify all fishery resources within the four proposed trans-
mission cor1:idors,the access road c01:':ridor,and the construction pad
sites.
Ident1.fy species present in these waters and determine ~easonal presence.
Identi.fy the habitat associated with these species.
Backg;oUJ:1d:Four ttansmission corti.dorroutes,one access road·conidor,
gravel and fill sites,and.numerous bulllting site pads are under considera-
tion.The corn.dors wU~provide human access to previ.ously i.naccessible
areas.!his access will concentrate sportsman.efforts in certain areas
which may result in adverse iIllpacts to aquatic life.Uncontrolled removal.
of grave.l and fill for construction activities will.also adversely affect
the aquatic habitat.No hydroelectric related fishery investigations of
these areas have been conducted.-Other so~ces·of fisheries data in these
dra.iJ::1a.ges ue insufficient.•
Procedures:Fishery resources,thrlr seasonal presence and associated
habitat wtiJ.be identified ildthin these areas.Ground surveys,fish
trapping,fish marking,benthic:species collection and physiochemical
water quality measurement techniques will be conducted.Backpack electro-
fishing~nets,traps,anchor and radio tags,electrophoresis instrumentation,
weirs,benthic samplers,sophisticated water quality measurement devices,
water quantity measurement equipment,and survey equipment are among the
equipment which will b.e.ut.:Ui::ed.
Schedule:
FY 79 Organize corridor and building site study teams,procure
equipment,and coordinate schedules with other study teams
where necessary.
Establish base camps and initiate fisheries resource
identification,species identification,and seasonal
presence and habitat investigations.
FY 80 Continue field activi.ties.
FY 81 Continue field activities and relocate various personnel as
dictated by data and overall study findings.
FY 82 Continue field activities and relocate various personnel as
dictated by data and overall study findings.
\
FY 83 Conduct concentrated studies if necessary and integrate and
s~ize all data collected.
I-lln
.f.2!E..:
FY 79 $13Q,5QQ
n 80 $125 ,5"00
FY 8~$125,500
J!Y 82 $125~500
IT 83.$125,500
T _111
Title~Existing Economi.c,Recreat:lonal,Social and Aesthetic Evaluat:lons
of the Susitna Ri"Ver ..
Object:lves:Determne.the econemic "Values of the aquatic and terrestr:laL
ecosystems.
Deten1ine the'recreational..values of the aquat:lc and terrestrial
ecosystems.
Dete:r::m:ine the social.values of the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.
Deter:mine the aesthetic values of the aquatic.and terrestria,J.el::osystems ..
Background:Economic,recreational,social,and aesthetic.values of the
project drainages must be determined in order to project whether the
project.will enhance or diJilinish these values.The close pro:x::imity of
1I1UUic:ipalities containing half the human population of Alaska.elIlPhasizes
the.need to assess these values.The Susitna drainage is highly used and
important to the sport and commercial fisherman,the recreational enthusiast,
industry,and mun:i.cipaJ.j.ties.The popularl.ty of Denali State Park and
nearby Mt.McKinley National Park further attests to the high social,
reaeat:loual,and aesthetic qual.ities of the area.Specific data on these
subjects in the hydroelectric project area watersheds are incomplete or
lack.ing.
Procedure:The four objectives will be accomplished through statistical
surveys and analyses.Some of the methods employed will be literat:ure
'searches,mail surveys,creel surveys,personal interviews,and fish tag
return data.
Schedule:
FY 79
IT aa
FY al
FY 82
FY 8.3
Costs:
IT 79
FY 80
IT 81
FY 82
FY 83
Organize personnel,procure equipment,and begin literature
searches,and develop survey approaches.
Continue literature searches,analyze data,and begin surveys.
Continue literature searches,analyze data,and continue
surveys.
Continue literature searches,analyze data,and continue
surveys.
Continue data collection and analyses and write report.
$200,000
$200,000
$100,000
$100,000
$100,000
T _11?
T:ttle:Predict Project Impacts
ODject:l-ves:Determine the direct~indUect,and :magnitude.of ef.fects the
Devils Canyon/~tana p-rej ect w:Ul.fulve on the Sus:.ttna Ri'Ver Rasin fishe%'ies
and oeher drainages prior to coust'rUct:ten approval.
Background:Susitna River Basin 11IVestigations to date have not gene%'ated
suf£ic:ient data to predict.the iJDpacts of this project on the aquatic eco-
system...Scientific literature is available on the ecological effects of
hydroelectric dams which.ha:ve been constructed in othe1'areas.
Procedure:This study culminates ~previously outlined studies.An
evaluation of data obtained fram the proposed fisheries related biological,
l1abitat,socia-economic,and recreational studies will be combined with
other'engineering a:c.d design studies.A predicti'Ve medel of the aquatic
ecosystem with and without the hydroelectric project will be constr~cted.
Concerns ~not be limited to f~sheries;secondary effects and haw humans
w:ilJ.be af.fected will also be addressed.In£ormation required in this
analysis incl.udes seasonal life history habitat requirements of the existi.:c.g
aquatic camtmmity,a thorough understanding of the interrelationships between
physical,.chemical,and biological components of the habitat,and recreational
and socio-eccnOIDic values.Proj ect engineering and design II10dels will also
be required~espec.ially those concerned with sed:i:mentation,tempe%'ature,
dissolved gasses,discharge"and other related physiochemical characteristics.
Literature searches and various proj ect data wil~be continually analyzed to
insure all sources of pertinent data are included.
Schedule:
IT 79 Literature research.
FY 80 Literature research,analyze data.
n 81 Literature research,analyze.data.
n 82 Literature research,analyze data-
FY 83 Literature research,analyze data,predict impacts.
~:\
FY 79 $5,000
IT 80 $5,000
FY 81 $20,000
FY 82 $60,000
F'Y 83 $60,000
1-113
Title:M::ttigat~:ve Measures fo:r:Lost Aquat;i.c Habitat
OojectiiTe:To identi£y and evaluate tf1e DevUs CanyonlWatana Dam p-roj ect
fisheries mitigation requtrements and implementation costs pr1o~to
construction app~oval.
3 a c:.kground:Ctitical habitat for "Various life history stages of aquati.c
species couJ.d ee e 1 ;:minated or redw:ed in quality and quantity by the Susitna
hydropower project.For e:xa:mple lt regulation will result in decreased flows
downstream of the dams during the S'1.mlli1er months which could eliminate
critical rearing a~eas for sal:mouid fry.The proposed aquatic and related
habitat studies should.quanti.fy the losses and resulting impact on the
fisheries.This activ:ity is designed t.d p~av1dei:c.formation to assess the
feasibi1:tty of mitigation and to incU.cate"long t.enu studies wh:lch would
direct actual mitigation warts.Evaluation of these studieS will go beyond
phase I i.f t.he proj ect is deemed feasible.
Procedure:Analyze all project data collected wh:lch relate to the fisheries
and aquatic habit2.t of the Susit11a River Basin and other impacted drainages •.
Conduct speciaJ..studies where necessary and analyze.Conduct literature
1;'esearch to obtain aquatic impact data relating to e:dsting and proposed
nydroelectric proj ects.
Conduct preli:m;1Jary site surveys which include reconnaissance and topographic
analysis.De"tailed site surveys arid analysis will begin in the last t"'N'O
years of this study.
Sched1,1le:
FY 79
n 80
FY 81
FY 82
FY 83
Preliminary site surveys.
Reconnaissance and to~ographic analysis
Conduct literat'ltte research and review.
Continue preliminary site surveys.
Analyze data and identify potential areas for mitigation.
Continue literature search and review.
Report on findings.
Detailed site surleys •
.Analyze surveys.
Continue literature search and review.
COl1tiInle literature "search and review.
Continue detailed.site surveys and literature search and
review.
Report on findings.
Cost:
FY 79 $26,000
FY 80 $10,000
IT 81*$60,000
FY 82 $50,000
FY 83 $6Q,000
..Asswz:es $10,000 per site survey.
I-llS
Title:Plan of Study During and After Completion
Otijective:Develop a plan of study to monitor th.e effects of the project
to the aquatic ecosystems during and after completion.
Procedure:This ongoing activity w:tl~oe dependent on the feasibility
results.'I1i.e data generated from all.of the pTe-authorization studies rill
provide the ground work for this plan.FlexLbility must be built into this
.plan until the results of the biological and detailed fea.sibility studies
aTe a:vailable.
Schedule:Complete p~within an additional 14 months after completion of
the detailed feasibility studies.
~:$SO~OOO
1-116