HomeMy WebLinkAboutSuWa252Alaska Resources Library & Information Services
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document
ARLIS Uniform Cover Page
Title:
SuWa 252
Salmon escapement study (Study 9.7), 2014 implementation and
preliminary results, technical memorandum
Author(s) – Personal:
Author(s) – Corporate:
LGL Alaska Research Associates, Inc.
AEA-identified category, if specified:
September 30, 2014 technical memorandum filings
AEA-identified series, if specified:
Series (ARLIS-assigned report number): Existing numbers on document:
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project document number 252
Published by: Date published:
[Anchorage, Alaska] : Alaska Energy Authority, [2014] September 2014
Published for: Date or date range of report: Alaska Energy Authority
Volume and/or Part numbers:
Final or Draft status, as indicated:
Attachment E
Document type: Pagination:
Technical memorandum v, 43 p.
Related work(s): Pages added/changed by ARLIS:
Cover letter to this report: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project,
FERC Project no. 14241-000; Third set of 2014 technical
memoranda for Initial Study Plan meeting. (SuWa 247)
Attachments A-D (SuWa 248-251) and F (SuWa 253)
Added cover letter (3 pages)
Notes:
All reports in the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document series include an ARLIS-
produced cover page and an ARLIS-assigned number for uniformity and citability. All reports
are posted online at http://www.arlis.org/resources/susitna-watana/
September 30, 2014
Ms. Kimberly D. Bose
Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20426
Re: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project, Project No. 14241-000
Third Set of 2014 Technical Memoranda for Initial Study Plan Meetings
Dear Secretary Bose:
As the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) explained in its September 17, 2014 filing
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) for the
proposed Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 14241 (Project), the
June 3, 2014 Initial Study Report (ISR) provided for AEA to prepare certain technical
memoranda and other information based on 2014 work. In accordance with Commission
Staff direction, on September 17 and September 26, AEA filed and distributed the first
and second sets of technical memoranda and other information generated during the 2014
study season.
With this letter, AEA is filing and distributing the third set of technical
memoranda generated during the 2014 study season, as described below.
This third set of technical memoranda includes:
• Attachment A: Baseline Water Quality Study (Study 5.5) and Water Quality
Modeling Study (Study 5.6), Water Quality and Lower River Modeling
Technical Memorandum. This technical memorandum evaluates water quality
data collected during 2013 and 2014 for adequacy in representation of current
riverine conditions. This Technical Memorandum further includes an
assessment of whether to extend the Water Quality Modeling Study’s riverine
model below PRM 29.9.
• Attachment B: Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study
(Study 5.7), Evaluation of Continued Mercury Monitoring Beyond 2014
Technical Memorandum. This technical memorandum evaluates the need for
continued monitoring of mercury data beyond 2014 and whether the existing
data collection efforts are sufficient to satisfy objectives for characterizing
baseline mercury conditions in the Susitna River and tributaries (Revised
Study Plan (RSP) Section 5.7.1).
2
• Attachment C: Groundwater Study (Study 7.5), Preliminary Groundwater and
Surface-Water Relationships in Lateral Aquatic Habitats within Focus Areas
FA-128 (Slough 8A) and FA-138 (Gold Creek) in the Middle Susitna River
Technical Memorandum. This technical memorandum provides an overview
of the types of data and information that are being collected to support the
Task 6 activities of the Groundwater Study, and describes the methods and
techniques that are being applied in analyzing the data leading to development
of response functions to be used for evaluating Project operational
effects. The TM centers on the analysis for FA-128 (Slough 8A) and to a
lesser extent FA-138 (Gold Creek) and represents an expansion of the
presentation materials provided during the Proof of Concept meetings held on
April 15-17, 2014.
• Attachment D: Groundwater Study (Study 7.5), Groundwater and Surface-
Water Relationships in Support of Riparian Vegetation Modeling Technical
Memorandum. This technical memorandum provides an overview of the
types of data and information that are being collected to support the Task 5
activities within the Groundwater Study, and describes the methods and
techniques that are being applied in analyzing the data leading to development
of response functions for evaluating Project operational effects. The TM
provides analysis objectives for FA-115 (Slough 6A) as a primary example of
upland versus riverine dominated groundwater conditions. Additional
examples are shown for FA-128 (Slough 8A) and FA-138 (Gold Creek).
• Attachment E: Salmon Escapement Study (Study 9.7), 2014 Implementation
and Preliminary Results Technical Memorandum. This technical
memorandum describes 2014 implementation (including methods and
variances) of and preliminary results from the Salmon Escapement Study.
• Attachment F: Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study Plan (Study 9.17), 2015
Implementation Plan Technical Memorandum. This implementation plan
describes the methods for study activities proposed for 2015 that would
implement the Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study (instead of those described in
RSP Section 9.17.1).
AEA appreciates the opportunity to provide this additional information to the
Commission and licensing participants, which it believes will be helpful in determining
the appropriate development of the 2015 study plan as set forth in the ISR. If you have
questions concerning this submission please contact me at wdyok@aidea.org or (907)
771-3955.
3
Sincerely,
Wayne Dyok
Project Manager
Alaska Energy Authority
Attachments
cc: Distribution List (w/o Attachments)
Attachment E
Salmon Escapement Study (Study 9.7), 2014 Implementation and
Preliminary Results Technical Memorandum
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
(FERC No. 14241)
Salmon Escapement Study
(Study 9.7)
2014 Implementation and Preliminary Results
Technical Memorandum
Prepared for
Alaska Energy Authority
Prepared by
LGL Alaska Research Associates, Inc.
September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1
2. Study Objectives................................................................................................................ 1
3. Study Area ......................................................................................................................... 1
4. Methods .............................................................................................................................. 2
4.1. Objective 1: Capture, radio-tag, and track adults of five species of Pacific
salmon in the Middle and Upper Susitna River in proportion to their
abundance. Capture and tag Chinook, coho, and pink salmon in the Lower
Susitna and Yentna rivers. .................................................................................2
4.1.1. Fish Capture .....................................................................................2
4.1.2. Variances..........................................................................................3
4.2. Objective 2: Determine the migration behavior and spawning locations of
radio-tagged fish in the Lower, Middle, and Upper Susitna River ....................4
4.3. Objective 3: Characterize adult salmon migration behavior and timing within
and above Devils Canyon ..................................................................................4
4.3.1. Fixed-station Monitoring .................................................................4
4.3.2. Aerial Telemetry Surveys ................................................................4
4.3.3. Aerial Spawner Surveys ...................................................................4
4.3.4. Using Sonar to Enumerate Salmon at the Proposed Dam Site ........5
4.4. Objective 4: Use available technology to document salmon spawning
locations in turbid water.....................................................................................6
4.5. Objective 5: Compare historical and current data on run timing, distribution,
relative abundance, and specific locations of spawning and holding salmon....6
4.6. Objective 6: Generate counts of adult Chinook salmon spawning in the
Susitna River and its tributaries .........................................................................6
4.6.1. Variances..........................................................................................7
4.7. Objective 7: Collect tissue samples to support the Fish Genetics Study ...........7
5. Results ................................................................................................................................ 8
5.1. Objective 1: Capture, radio-tag, and track adults of five species of Pacific
Salmon in the Middle and Upper Susitna River in proportion to their
abundance. Capture and tag Chinook, coho, and pink salmon in the Lower
Susitna and Yentna rivers. .................................................................................8
5.1.1. Fish Capture .....................................................................................8
5.1.2. Radio-tagging ...................................................................................8
5.1.3. Numbers and Size of Marked and Unmarked Fish at Selected
Locations ..........................................................................................9
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page i September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
5.2. Objective 2: Determine the migration behavior and spawning locations of
radio-tagged fish in the Lower, Middle, and Upper Susitna River ....................9
5.2.1. Stock Classifications and Spawning Locations – Lower River .......9
5.2.2. Stock Classifications and Spawning Locations – Yentna River ......9
5.2.3. Stock Classifications and Spawning Locations – Middle and Upper
River .................................................................................................9
5.3. Objective 3: Characterize adult salmon migration behavior and timing within
and above Devils Canyon ................................................................................10
5.3.1. Species, Number, and Destination .................................................10
5.3.2. Migration Timing for Fish Passing Above Devils Canyon ...........11
5.3.3. Relative Abundance of Salmon Passing Above Devils Canyon ....11
5.3.4. Size of Chinook Salmon Tracked In and Above Devils Canyon...11
5.3.5. Aerial Spawner Surveys .................................................................12
5.3.6. Using Sonar to Enumerate Salmon at the Proposed Dam Site ......12
5.4. Objective 4: Use available technology to document salmon spawning
locations in turbid water...................................................................................13
5.5. Objective 5: Compare historical and current data on run timing, distribution,
relative abundance, and specific locations of spawning and holding salmon..13
5.5.1. Run Timing ....................................................................................13
5.5.2. Relative Abundance .......................................................................13
5.5.3. Spawning and Holding Salmon Locations .....................................14
5.6. Objective 6: Generate counts of adult Chinook salmon spawning in the
Susitna River and its tributaries .......................................................................14
6. Literature Cited .............................................................................................................. 14
7. Tables ............................................................................................................................... 16
8. Figures .............................................................................................................................. 32
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page ii September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
LIST OF TABLES
Table 5.1-1. Number of Chinook salmon captured at three fishwheel sites in the Middle
River, by size category and year. ...................................................................................... 17
Table 5.1-2. Number of Chinook salmon radio-tagged at three fishwheel sites in the
Middle River, by size category and year. ......................................................................... 17
Table 5.2-1. Classifications for radio-tagged Chinook salmon in 2014, by size category
and release site. ................................................................................................................. 18
Table 5.3-1. Details of the radio-tagged Chinook salmon that approached or passed the
Middle River impediments, 2014. .................................................................................... 20
Table 5.3-2. Destinations of radio-tagged Chinook salmon that passed each Middle River
impediment, 2014. ............................................................................................................ 23
Table 5.3-3. Details of impediment-passage events for radio-tagged Chinook salmon,
2014................................................................................................................................... 24
Table 5.3-4. Number of Chinook salmon counted during aerial spawner surveys, by
location and survey period, 2014. ..................................................................................... 26
Table 5.3-5. Sample effort, CPUE, and net upstream count of fish measuring 50 cm or
greater at two ARIS units located at PRM 187.1 in the Upper River, 2014. .................... 27
Table 5.4-1. Survey effort and observations using DIDSON to identify Chinook salmon
spawning behavior in turbid water, 2014. ......................................................................... 29
Table 6.4-1. Number of adult Chinook salmon counted during aerial spawner surveys in
the Indian River, by date and river section, 2014. ............................................................ 31
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1. Susitna River watershed showing fish capture sites (fishwheels) and the
locations of fixed-station telemetry receiver sites, 2014. ................................................. 33
Figure 4.1-1. Daily fishing effort (hours) and rotational speed (RPM) at three fishwheel
sites in the Middle River, 2014. ........................................................................................ 34
Figure 4.1-2. Daily discharge of the Susitna River at Gold Creek from April 1 to
November 30, 2012-2014. ................................................................................................ 34
Figure 4.3-1. Ortho image showing the ensonified wetted width coverage of each ARIS
unit near the Watana Dam Site, 2014. .............................................................................. 35
Figure 5.1-1. Cumulative length-frequency distributions for Chinook salmon captured at
the Middle River fishwheels, by size category and capture site, 2014. ............................ 36
Figure 5.1-2. Cumulative length-frequency distributions for Chinook salmon captured
and radio-tagged at the Middle River fishwheels, by size category, 2014. ...................... 36
Figure 5.2-1. Classifications for radio-tagged Chinook salmon released in the Lower
River (left panels) or Middle River (right panels), by size category, 2014. ..................... 37
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page iii September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 5.2-2. Potential mainstem spawning sites for radio-tagged Chinook salmon in the
Lower River, 2014. ........................................................................................................... 38
Figure 5.3-1. Tracking history of a radio-tagged Chinook salmon (tag #537) that was
detected above Impediment 3, 2014. ................................................................................ 40
Figure 5.3-2. Tracking history of a radio-tagged Chinook salmon (tag #787) that was
detected above Impediment 3, 2014. ................................................................................ 41
Figure 5.3-3. Daily numbers of large Chinook salmon that approached and passed each
of the three Middle River impediments in 2014. .............................................................. 42
Figure 5.5-1. Comparison of Chinook salmon catches (top panel), relative proportion of
catches (middle panel), and cumulative proportion of catches (bottom panel), at
the Middle River fishwheels near Curry, 1981-2014. ....................................................... 43
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page iv September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
LIST OF ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS
Abbreviation Definition
ADCP Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler
ADF&G Alaska Department of Fish and Game
AEA Alaska Energy Authority
ARIS Adaptive Resolution Imaging Sonar
AUC area under the curve
cfs cubic feet per second
cm Centimeter
CPUE catch per unit effort
DIDSON Dual Frequency Identification Sonar
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FOV field-of-view
ft Feet
GPS global positioning system
ILP Integrated Licensing Process
in Inch
ISR Initial Study Report
km Kilometer
LZ landing zone
m Meter
mi Mile
METF mid-eye to fork
MHW mean high water
PRM Project River Mile
Project Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
RPM revolutions per minute
RSP Revised Study Plan
SPD study plan determination
TL total length
USGS United States Geological Survey
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page v September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
1. INTRODUCTION
This Technical Memorandum was prepared by AEA to describe part of the methods, variances,
and preliminary results of the 2014 Salmon Escapement Study. The methods and variances
described herein are focused on activities conducted in the Middle and Upper rivers, and
preliminary results are focused on Chinook salmon. It is important to note that 2014 field
activities were still underway at the time this document was prepared. As such, results presented
here are subject to change as additional field data is collected and existing data is more
thoroughly reviewed. The preliminary results presented in this Technical Memorandum will be
updated and presented as a component of a larger Escapement Study Report once all of the third
year of data has been collected, data QAQC and analysis has been completed.
At the time this document was prepared, the QC level of data review for various study
components included:
• Middle River fishwheels and tagging – QC3 level review completed for data collected
through August 11, QC2 level review for data collected from August 11 to September 7;
operations are scheduled to continue through September.
• Curry sonar (at Site 1) – QC3 level review completed for all data collected through June
25; and QC2 level review for data collected in August and September.
• Fixed- and mobile-tracking telemetry data – QC2 level review for all data collected
through August 31; telemetry operations are scheduled to continue into October.
• Indian River weir and video – QC3 level review for all data; operation ended June 26.
• Watana sonar – QC3 level review of sonar imagery through August 14 on the river right
unit and August 22 on the river left unit, QC2 level review completed for all data;
operations ended August 22.
• Turbid water sonar – QC3 level review for all data; operations ended July 25.
2. STUDY OBJECTIVES
The study objectives were established in RSP Section 9.7.1.2 and they remain unchanged and are
indicated below in the Section 4 Methods.
3. STUDY AREA
As established by RSP Section 9.7.3, the study area encompasses the Susitna River from Cook
Inlet upstream to the Oshetna River, or as far upstream as Chinook salmon are detected (Figure
3-1), with an emphasis on wherever salmon spawn in mainstem habitats of the Susitna River.
The mainstem Susitna River was divided into three segments: the Lower River (Project River
Mile [PRM] 33–102.4), Middle River (PRM 102.4–187.1), and Upper River (PRM 187.1–
261.3). RSP section 9.7.3 used Historical River Miles (RM) which are: Lower River (RM 30–
98), Middle River (RM 98–184), and Upper River (RM 184–260). Devils Canyon extends from
approximately PRM 153.4 to PRM 166.1 (RM 150 to 163, respectively). Within Devils Canyon,
the channel constricts and increases in vertical gradient to form three potential fish passage
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 1 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
impediments (referred to as Impediments 1, 2, and 3) that may block or delay fish passage (see
Section 3.2 in AEA [2013] for more detail on the impediments).
4. METHODS
Descriptions of the study methods are organized below by objective. This is a multi-year study
initiated in 2012 (AEA 2012, 2013, 2014). The methods below refer to research conducted in
2014.
4.1. Objective 1: Capture, radio-tag, and track adults of five species
of Pacific salmon in the Middle and Upper Susitna River in
proportion to their abundance. Capture and tag Chinook, coho,
and pink salmon in the Lower Susitna and Yentna rivers.
In 2014, AEA implemented the methods with respect to Objective 1 as described in the Study
Plan with the exception of variances explained below (Section 4.1.2). Tasks to address
Objective 1 were listed in RSP Section 9.7.4.1.
4.1.1. Fish Capture
In the Middle River, three fishwheels and gillnets were used to capture adult Chinook salmon for
tagging in 2014. Two of the fishwheels were operated at the same two locations used in 1981–
1985, 2012, and 2013 (sites 1 and 2), and a third fishwheel was operated at a site that was first
used in 2013 (site 3; Figures 3-1).
From June 6 to September 7, the Site 1 fishwheel operated for 1,371 hours (61.3 percent of the
time it was in place) on the west bank of the Susitna River (PRM 124.1; Figure 4.1-1).
Excluding the days it did not operate, daily fishing effort at Site 1 averaged 14.9 hours (range:
8.3–24 hours). The targeted amount of daily fishing effort at Site 1 varied by period: 13 hours
from June 6–11, 15–17 hours from June 12–28, 24 hours from June 29 to July 28, 12 hours from
July 29 to August 28, and 10 hours from August 29 to September 7. The Site 1 fishwheel did not
operate during high water and heavy debris loads on June 26, June 27, and part of June 28
(Figure 4.1-2).
From June 12 to September 7, the Site 2 fishwheel operated for 1,270 hours (60.6 percent of the
time it was in place) on the east bank of the river (PRM 123.0; Figure 4.1-1). Daily fishing effort
averaged 14.8 hours (range: 8.8–24.0 hours). Targeted daily fishing effort varied at Site 2: 15–
17 hours from June 12–29, 24 hours from June 30 to July 18, 12 hours from July 19 to August
29, and 10 hours from August 30 to September 7. The Site 2 fishwheel did not operate during
high water and heavy debris loads on June 26, June 27, and part of June 28).
From June 9 to September 7, the Site 3 fishwheel operated for 1,302 hours (60.2 percent of the
time it was in place) on the west bank of the Susitna River at PRM 126.0 (Figure 4.1-1). Daily
fishing effort averaged 14.8 hours (range: 4.8–24.0 hours). Targeted daily fishing effort varied at
Site 3: 15–17 hours from June 9–29, 24 hours from June 30 to July 18, 12 hours from July 19 to
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 2 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
August 29, and 10 hours from August 30 to September 7. The Site 3 fishwheel was not
operational during high water from June 26–28.
During daylight operations, crews were never away from the fishwheels for more than one hour.
From late June to mid-July, the fishwheels were left unattended overnight (~11:30 P.M. thru 9:00
A.M. the following morning).
On June 25, four sets were made using gillnets (60 ft long, 10 ft deep, 3.5 in. mesh [stretch]) in
the vicinity of Curry. Total fishing time was 109 minutes (6–49 min. per set).
4.1.2. Variances
4.1.2.1. Fish Capture
As per Section 7.1.2.1.2 of the ISR, land access limitations prohibited operation of a fishwheel at
Devils Canyon in 2013 (as proposed in the RSP). In response, AEA increased the tagging goal
from 400 to 560 large Chinook salmon at Curry (ISR Section 4.1.4) to offset the loss of applying
tags at Devils Canyon. In 2013, AEA demonstrated that it was feasible to capture and tag over
600 Chinook salmon with two Middle River fishwheels, and outlined a rationale for not tagging
at Devils Canyon. It was decided that three Middle River fishwheels operating in 2014 would be
sufficient to increase the sample size of radio-tagged Chinook salmon and provide sufficient
opportunity to observe them ascend Devils Canyon. Specifically, AEA increased the tag goal
from 400 (Curry plus Devils Canyon) to 650 fish at Curry (550 large and 100 small). AEA also
increased fishing effort at the fishwheels (ISR Section 4.1.8.1). The Site 3 fishwheel operated
over the entire Chinook salmon run past Curry in 2014. These changes in activities are a
variance from the 2013 RSP, but are consistent with modifications stated in the ISR for 2014
study implementation.
4.1.2.2. Assessing Any Stock- and Size-selective Capture
RSP Section 9.7.4.1.5 indicated that Chinook, sockeye, and chum salmon would be examined on
selected spawning grounds to test whether fish were equally vulnerable to being captured and
radio-tagged. However, results from spawning ground surveys in 2012 indicated that it was
going to be difficult to achieve useful sample sizes from surveying spawning grounds on foot
and from the water. Therefore, AEA determined that a floating picket weir and underwater
video system on the lower Indian River would be a more effective means of examining a large
number of fish in 2013. Results from the 2013 field season showed that operating a video weir
in the lower Indian River was a highly effective method. The same two metrics (i.e., mark rate
and size distribution of tagged/untagged fish) would be developed from fish counts at the weir
that would have been developed from spawning ground surveys.
Unfortunately, the video weir installed in June 2014 was washed out during a higher water event
and could not be salvaged prior to Chinook salmon passing the site (see Section 5.1.3.1 for more
detail). In response, AEA increased the frequency of aerial spawner surveys and aerial telemetry
surveys in Indian River, in the event that these additional data could be used in lieu of video weir
data to develop mark rates (see Section 4.6.1 for more detail). Fish size distributions could not
be developed using these methods.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 3 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
4.2. Objective 2: Determine the migration behavior and spawning
locations of radio-tagged fish in the Lower, Middle, and Upper
Susitna River
AEA implemented the methods with respect to Objective 2 as described in the Study Plan with
the exception of modifications described in Section 7 of the ISR. Tasks to address Objective 2
were listed in RSP Section 9.7.4.2.
4.3. Objective 3: Characterize adult salmon migration behavior and
timing within and above Devils Canyon
AEA implemented the methods with respect to Objective 3 as described in the Study Plan with
no variances. Tasks to address Objective 3 were listed in RSP Section 9.7.4.3.
4.3.1. Fixed-station Monitoring
A combination of aerial telemetry surveys and fixed stations below, within, and above Devils
Canyon was used to determine the migration timing and behavior of radio-tagged salmon that
passed into the Upper River (Figure 3-1). Fixed stations were deployed at locations where they
had the highest probability of detecting radio-tagged salmon. The fixed stations deployed at the
confluences with Kosina Creek and Oshetna River provided additional information that was used
to assess the detection efficiencies for all mainstem fixed stations downstream from these sites.
The data from these fixed stations was also used to guide the aerial and ground-based survey
efforts needed to identify spawning areas in the Upper River.
4.3.2. Aerial Telemetry Surveys
Aerial telemetry surveys provided location data for radio-tagged fish in areas that were not
directly monitored by fixed-station receivers (e.g., in the mainstem between receivers; within
tributaries, etc.). These detections assisted with the successful tracking of fish movements within
and above Devils Canyon, providing day-to-day locations, passage timing, and hold durations.
The aerial telemetry data were critical for the identification of potential spawning behavior, and
for detecting potential spawning locations. The goal of 300 m accuracy of geographic position
when locating tagged fish, including spawning fish, (RSP Section 9.7.4.2.2) was achieved by the
combined effect of airspeed, flight path, antenna direction, and receiver gain control. In
addition, the aerial detections contributed to the estimation of detection efficiencies for each
fixed station. The timing and proportion of all tagged salmon that passed Devils Canyon was
calculated and compared to the remaining tagged population, and their final spawning locations
were identified.
4.3.3. Aerial Spawner Surveys
Aerial visual-observation surveys to determine the distribution and relative abundance of adult
salmon were conducted in Susitna River tributaries within and above Devils Canyon, upstream to
and including the Oshetna River. A total of seven aerial spawner survey events were conducted
at approximate weekly intervals from July 14 through August 19, 2014. The survey extent
covered the same major tributaries and clear water areas of the Susitna River as during 2013.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 4 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
From Cheechako Creek to the Oshetna River, a total of 18 streams were surveyed; 15 tributaries
to the Susitna River and three secondary tributaries. Additionally, two lakes in the Tsisi Creek
drainage were surveyed during August specifically to look for spawning sockeye salmon. All
streams were surveyed from their confluence up to 3,000 feet in elevation, or to a predetermined
barrier to anadromous fish passage, or to the stream’s headwater origin, whichever came first.
4.3.4. Using Sonar to Enumerate Salmon at the Proposed Dam Site
The FERC SPD recommended that AEA evaluate the feasibility of putting in a weir or operating
a sonar counting station at or near the dam site in the next year of study to count fish migrating
through Devils Canyon (FERC 2013). Prior to the 2013 field season, operation of a weir near
the dam site was determined to be not feasible due to the physical impossibility of any structure
handling the normal levels and range of discharge for the mainstem Susitna River. In 2013,
AEA assessed the feasibility of placing a sonar counting station at or near the dam site (see
Appendix G in AEA [2014]). In 2014, AEA implemented the methods for achieving the
objectives of sonar monitoring near the proposed Watana Dam site as described in the ISR.
An initial feasibility study was conducted in July of 2013 to assess the suitability of different
locations in the vicinity of the Watana Dam Site for applying Adaptive Resolution Imaging
Sonar (ARIS) methods to estimate adult Chinook salmon passage. To find the optimal location
for sonar sampling along the selected reach, an ARIS 1200 unit was used on July 6, 2014 to map
the bathymetry along multiple transects from the right and left banks. Bottom-profiling allows
for determination of optimal sonar alignment and aiming angles, and determination of the
presence of depressions or troughs in the field-of-view (FOV) that would allow for fish to move
past the sonar undetected (Maxwell and Smith 2007; Faulkner and Maxwell 2009). A single
sonar location was established on each side of the river just below the proposed Watana Dam
Site.
In 2014, data collection started at the left bank station at 4:51 P.M. on July 6 and at 12:12 P.M. on
July 7 at the right bank station. Data were collected continuously in consecutive 10-minute files
until the study period ended on August 22 (with the exception of the period 10:40 A.M. on July
30 through 1:45 P.M. on August 7 when the left bank station was shut down temporarily until an
extension for CIRWG land access at this site could be obtained).
The maximum sample ranges used for analysis were based on the extent to which substrate was
visible in the FOVs. The gradually sloping bottom along the left bank allowed for substrate to be
evident out to 37 m (121.4 ft) in range, whereas the bottom dropped off at 16 m (52.4 ft) in range
along the right bank. Seeing substrate throughout the FOV ensures that no depressions or
troughs exist that would allow for fish to move past the ensonified area undetected. An aerial
photograph of the sampling locations with depictions of the ensonified areas in plan-view is
shown in Figure 4.3-1.
To support further assessment of the fish migration corridor, seven serial ADCP transects at
approximately 80-foot intervals were conducted. To supplement the velocity transects,
bathymetric data was collected using an Odom CV-100 echosounder and a TopCon GPS
receiver. Information forthcoming from that data collection includes velocity profiles and
bathymetric maps of the river channel in proximity to the sonar arrays.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 5 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Any fish targets measuring 50 cm or greater in estimated total length (TL) were classified as
large Chinook salmon. For each Chinook salmon detected, the following parameters were
recorded: estimated total length, range at first and last detection, and direction of travel. Any
fish targets measuring less than 50 cm TL were not classified by species, and only their
estimated total length was recorded. The accuracy of length measures from the sonar data is
approximately ± 10 percent based on known targets. Level-three quality control on the data
review process was conducted by a senior scientist with sonar expertise.
4.4. Objective 4: Use available technology to document salmon
spawning locations in turbid water
AEA implemented the methods with respect to Objective 4 as described in the Study Plan with
no variances.
4.5. Objective 5: Compare historical and current data on run timing,
distribution, relative abundance, and specific locations of
spawning and holding salmon
AEA implemented the methods with respect to Objective 5 as described in the Study Plan with
no variances.
4.6. Objective 6: Generate counts of adult Chinook salmon
spawning in the Susitna River and its tributaries
AEA implemented the methods with respect to Objective 6 as described in the Study Plan with
the exception of variances explained below (Section 4.6.1). This objective was addressed by
attempting to operate a weir on the Indian River and conducting aerial spawner surveys in the
Indian River (see Section 4.3.3) in 2014. The purpose of this work was to establish survey-area
mark rates (proportion of fish tagged in different areas) that would support inferences about the
representativeness of tagging across spawning stocks. In addition, mark rates from these areas
could be used to estimate the abundance of salmon passing the tagging sites.
For the aerial spawner surveys conducted in the Indian River, Chinook salmon counts were
stratified into three river sections. Section 1 included the clear water plume at the Indian River
mouth up to Bridge 1 in the lower river; Section 2 extended from Bridge 1 to the power line
crossing; and Section 3 extended from the power line crossing to the Forks. These aerial
spawner surveys did not provide a direct estimate of the total Chinook salmon abundance.
Instead, they provided a minimum count, and then helped to establish minimum and likely
tributary-specific mark rates, as was done for Portage Creek (2012) and the Indian River (2012
and 2013).
Concurrent aerial telemetry surveys were conducted in the Indian River in July and August 2014
to determine the number of live radio-tagged Chinook salmon present. Protocols developed
based on 2012 and 2013 experiences were implemented in 2014 to survey the Indian River.
Multiple aerial telemetry surveys were flown bracketing the entire spawning period of Chinook
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 6 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
salmon. Survey aircraft were equipped with telemetry receivers and GPS to identify positions of
radio-tagged fish.
4.6.1. Variances
Results from the 2012 escapement study indicated that it would be unlikely to obtain sufficient
numbers of fish samples through spawning ground surveys to provide a robust mark rate, and in-
turn, an estimate of the numbers of fish above Devils Canyon (as established during the FERC
Study Dispute process). Therefore, a decision was made to replace spawning ground surveys
with operation of a weir and an underwater video system on the Indian River to enumerate
tagged and untagged fish, and establish mark rates. The methods and approach of using weirs to
obtain this information is consistent with RSP Sections 9.7.4.1.5 and 9.7.4.6. However, as
described in Section 4.1.2.2 and Section 5.1.3.1, the Indian River weir was washed out during a
high water event prior to the onset of the Chinook salmon run in 2014.
As a result, at the end of June 2014, AEA considered alternative methods for estimating the mark
rate of Chinook salmon in the Indian River to ensure the study objective was met. One option
AEA considered was to install a sonar unit at or near the weir site to count passing fish.
However, the advantages of being able to install a sonar unit soon after the weir was blown out
were outweighed by the fact that multiple salmon species would be present in the river by mid-
July, and thus Chinook salmon could not be reliably counted (since sonar cannot distinguish
between species). AEA considered conducting a gillnet operation below the Indian River weir
site to capture and sample Chinook salmon. Although physically handling fish is a reliable
method of collecting mark-rate and length data, physical conditions in the lower river were not
suitable for gillnetting, so it was unlikely crews could capture a sufficient number of fish. Also,
there may be negative impacts on fish health due to the capture and handling process. AEA also
considered stream walks to count Chinook salmon, but their experiences in 2012 proved this
method was unlikely to succeed.
Since Chinook salmon were already staging at the mouth of the Indian River, AEA decided that
the best available option was to increase the frequency (every 3rd day during the spawning
period) of aerial spawner surveys and aerial telemetry surveys in the event that these additional
data could be used in lieu of video weir data to develop mark rates. In theory, fish counts from
aerial spawner surveys and area-under-the-curve (AUC) methods (Ames and Phinney 1977;
English et al. 1992) could be used to generate an escapement estimate for Chinook salmon
returning to the Indian River in 2014. The marked fraction of Chinook salmon present in the
Indian River, as well as estimates of residence time (i.e., the length of time Chinook salmon are
present in the river) could be estimated from detections of radio-tagged fish that were released at
the Middle River fishwheels.
4.7. Objective 7: Collect tissue samples to support the Fish
Genetics Study
AEA implemented the methods with respect to Objective 7 as described in the Study Plan with
no variances.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 7 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
5. RESULTS
5.1. Objective 1: Capture, radio-tag, and track adults of five species
of Pacific Salmon in the Middle and Upper Susitna River in
proportion to their abundance. Capture and tag Chinook, coho,
and pink salmon in the Lower Susitna and Yentna rivers.
5.1.1. Fish Capture
From May 22 to August 26, 2014, a total of 2,048 large Chinook salmon were captured in the
Lower River, of which 1,880 were captured in fishwheels and 168 were captured in gillnets.
From May 22 to June 25, a total of 2,990 large Chinook salmon were captured in the Yentna
River (at the tag deployment site), of which 2,594 were captured in fishwheels and 396 were
captured in gillnets.
A total of 877 adult Chinook salmon (672 large, 205 small), including recaptures, were captured
at the Middle River fishwheels in 2014 (Table 5.1-1). The largest proportion of Chinook salmon
were captured at Site 3 (48 percent), followed by Site 1 (41 percent) and Site 2 (11 percent). All
fishwheels combined, peak catch of large Chinook salmon occurred on July 1 (58 fish), whereas
catches of small Chinook salmon peaked on June 21 and July 6 (17 fish). CPUE for large
Chinook salmon was highest at Site 1 (1.6 fish/hour on June 30), followed by Site 3 (1.1
fish/hour on July 1) and then Site 2 (0.5 fish/hour on July 5). Large Chinook salmon captured in
the Middle River averaged 72 cm METF (28.2 in) and small Chinook salmon averaged 36 cm
METF (14.2 in.). Cumulative length-frequency distributions for Chinook salmon captured in the
Middle River fishwheels, by capture site, are shown in Figure 5.1-1.
One small Chinook salmon (35 cm METF) was captured on June 24 while set gillnetting along
river left approximately 1 mile downstream of Site 2 (lat/long: 62.58747, -150.03842).
5.1.2. Radio-tagging
In the Lower River, 651 large Chinook salmon (527 caught in fishwheels, 124 caught in gillnets)
were radio-tagged in 2014. In the Yentna River, 294 large Chinook salmon were radio-tagged
(190 caught in fishwheels, 104 caught in gillnets).
A total of 623 Chinook salmon (590 large, 33 small) were radio-tagged at the Middle River
fishwheels in 2014 (Table 5.1-2). The daily number of radio tags applied peaked at 51 for large
Chinook salmon (July 1) and three for small Chinook salmon (June 30 and July 1, 2, and 5;
Table 5.1-2). Radio tags were deployed in proportion to catch for large Chinook salmon since all
healthy fish captured were tagged. In contrast, only 16 percent (33 of 205) of small Chinook
salmon captured received a radio tag due to difficulties inserting the tags into smaller-sized fish.
Cumulative length-frequency distributions for Chinook salmon captured and radio-tagged at the
Middle River fishwheels, by size category, are shown in Figure 5.1-2.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 8 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
5.1.3. Numbers and Size of Marked and Unmarked Fish at Selected Locations
5.1.3.1. Indian River Weir
The underwater video system at the Indian River weir was operated 24 hours a day, and collected
89 hours of video footage from 1:30 P.M. on June 22 to 6:29 A.M. on June 26, 2014. Due to poor
visibility, 5.2 hours of video imagery collected on June 26 was not reviewed. Persistent rain on
June 25 and June 26 contributed to high-water conditions in the Susitna (Figure 4.1-2) and Indian
rivers. At approximately 6:29 A.M. on June 26, due to high flows and debris loading, the
anchoring system failed and the majority of the weir components were flushed approximately
one mile down river. A portion of the weir components were retrieved from July 4–8, and the
remainder were retrieved on August 15 when water levels were considerably lower.
In total, three rainbow trout and two round whitefish, but no salmon, were observed on the video
footage.
5.2. Objective 2: Determine the migration behavior and spawning
locations of radio-tagged fish in the Lower, Middle, and Upper
Susitna River
5.2.1. Stock Classifications and Spawning Locations – Lower River
Of the 656 large Chinook salmon tagged in the Lower River, 581 (89 percent) were classified by
destination. Of these, 574 (99 percent) went to tributaries (mainly the Yentna, Deshka,
Talkeetna, or Chulitna rivers), and 7 (1 percent) went to destinations in the mainstem Susitna
River (Table 5.2-1; Figures 5.2-1 and 5.2-2). The remaining 75 Chinook salmon exhibited
movements that prevented conclusive assignment to the mainstem or tributaries (see “Other
Classifications” in Table 5.2-1).
5.2.2. Stock Classifications and Spawning Locations – Yentna River
Chinook salmon radio-tagged in the Yentna River were expected to stay within this major
tributary, and significant movement to other Susitna River tributaries was not expected (relative
to Chinook salmon tagged in the Lower River). Two hundred nineteen of the 295 Chinook
salmon released in the Yentna River (74 percent) were classified with a Yentna destination, and
8 (3 percent) were classified in other Susitna River tributaries (Little Willow and Willow creeks,
or Deshka or Chulitna rivers; Table 5.2-1). The remaining 68 salmon exhibited movements that
prevented conclusive assignment to a specific destination.
5.2.3. Stock Classifications and Spawning Locations – Middle and Upper River
Of the 590 large Chinook salmon radio-tagged in the Middle River, 473 (80 percent) were
classified by spawning destination (Table 5.2-1). Of those classified by spawning destination,
437 (92 percent) went to tributaries (mainly Portage Creek or Indian River) and 36 (8 percent)
went to destinations in the mainstem Susitna River below Devils Canyon (Table 5.2-1; Figures
5.2-1 and 5.2-3). Destinations of the remaining 117 large Chinook salmon could not be
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 9 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
classified, due to movements that prevented conclusive assignment to the mainstem or tributaries
(Table 5.2-1).
In addition to the large Chinook described above, 33 small Chinook salmon were radio-tagged
and released in the Middle River. In all, 25 (76 percent) were classified by destination (Table
5.2-1). Of these, 21 (84 percent) went to tributaries (mainly Indian River or Portage Creek) and
4 (16 percent) went to destinations in the mainstem Susitna River (Table 5.2-1; Figure 5.2-1).
Destinations of the remaining 8 small Chinook salmon could not be classified (Table 5.2-1).
Chinook salmon were tracked to 18 potential mainstem spawning sites in the Middle River
between PRM 111.03 and PRM 155.9 (Figure 5.2-3).
5.3. Objective 3: Characterize adult salmon migration behavior and
timing within and above Devils Canyon
5.3.1. Species, Number, and Destination
Of the 590 radio-tagged large Chinook salmon released at the Middle River fishwheels, 491 were
detected above Gateway Station (PRM 130.1) after tagging. Of these 491 fish, 11 (2.2 percent)
were tracked above Impediment 1, 8 (1.6 percent) above Impediment 2, and 2 (0.4 percent)
above Impediment 3. Two of the Chinook salmon radio-tagged and released at the Lower River
fishwheels were tracked above Impediment 1, one of which subsequently passed Impediment 2
(Table 5.3-1). Of the 33 radio-tagged small Chinook salmon released at the Middle River
fishwheels, 25 were detected above Gateway Station after tagging. Of these 25 fish, none passed
Impediment 1.
The likely spawning areas for each of the total 13 Chinook salmon tracked above Impediment 1
are provided in Table 5.3-2. Three (43 percent) of the seven Chinook salmon that passed
Impediment 2 (but not Impediment 3), dropped back to destinations downstream of Impediment
2. One (25 percent) of the four Chinook salmon that passed Impediment 1 (but not Impediment
2) likely spawned in an area downstream of Impediment 1. One of the two Chinook salmon that
passed Impediment 3 died below Impediment 3 and the other moved into Kosina Creek (Figures
5.3-1 and 5.3-2). Overall, 31 percent of the Chinook salmon that passed at least one of the three
impediments dropped back to destinations downstream of the last impediment they passed – two
of these went to Portage Creek, one in Cheechako Creek, and one in the mainstem near the
mouth of Cheechako Creek.
Two Chinook salmon passed Impediment 3, each showing markedly different behaviors (Figures
5.3-1 and 5.3-2). One Chinook salmon just barely passed Impediment 3, subsequently returned
downstream of it, and eventually died in the mainstem downstream of Impediment 1 (Figure 5.3-
1). The other Chinook salmon travelled directly into Kosina Creek, spent 6 days therein, then
took 5 days to swim to and return from Oshetna River (40 km [25 mi] each way), before
returning to Kosina Creek (Figure 5.3-2). This latter fish stayed in Kosina Creek for another 6
days, and then drifted out, settling just downstream of the mouth of Fog Creek.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 10 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
5.3.2. Migration Timing for Fish Passing Above Devils Canyon
The first successful fish passage past Impediment 1 occurred on June 30 when flow at the
Tsusena Creek gage was 19,400 cubic feet per second (cfs; 26,000 cfs at the Gold Creek gage;
Figure 5.3-3). Other fish passed on July 1 and on July 6, during flows of 23,200 cfs or greater at
the Tsusena Creek gage (27,900 cfs or greater at the Gold Creek gage). No other fish passed
until the period from July 18–August 1, when Tsusena Creek gage flows ranged between 15,500
and 23,400 cfs (18,800–27,100 cfs at the Gold Creek gage). There was a period with no fish
passage from July 7 to 17, in which flows ranged from 19,900 to 35,300 cfs at the Tsusena Creek
gage (24,200–36,500 at the Gold Creek gage; Table 5.3-3; Figure 5.3-3). Both Chinook salmon
that passed Impediment 3 had passed Impediment 1 on the same day (July 20; Table 5.3-3).
Fish showed noticeable milling or holding behavior below Impediment 1 and Impediment 3.
Fish that moved past Impediment 1 held below it for an average of 3.9 days, similar in duration
to individuals that did not pass (average 4.5 days; Table 5.3-3). Four fish that passed
Impediment 1 did not attempt to pass Impediment 2, rather they moved into Cheechako Creek,
back-tracked to Portage Creek, or dropped downstream and died. All of the fish that approached
Impediment 2 passed it quickly (≤ 1 day; Table 5.3-3). Three fish that passed Impediment 2 did
not attempt to pass Impediment 3, rather, they explored the area around Chinook Creek, and
eventually dropped back downstream. For the six fish that approached Impediment 3, the hold
times were shorter and approach dates were later for the fish that passed, compared to those that
did not pass. The two fish that passed Impediment 3 held below it for an average of 6.8 days,
whereas those that did not pass, held for an average of 11.3 days before moving downstream.
The two fish that passed approached on or after July 30, where approach dates of the non-passing
fish ranged from July 2 to 28. Discharge when the two fish passed Impediment 3 ranged from
15,500 cfs (July 30) to 16,200 cfs (August 4) at the Tsusena Creek gage (19,200–19,400 cfs at
the Gold Creek gage).
5.3.3. Relative Abundance of Salmon Passing Above Devils Canyon
Chinook salmon was the only species with radio-tagged fish detected upstream of Devils
Canyon. Of the 491 Chinook salmon tagged at the Middle River fishwheels and detected
moving above Gateway Station, two passed Impediment 3 (0.4 percent), and only one (0.2
percent) successfully migrated beyond Devils Canyon (Table 5.3-1). No Chinook salmon radio-
tagged in the Lower River were detected upstream of Devils Canyon. Given the positions of the
fixed-station receivers and the extensive mobile survey effort, it is unlikely that any radio-tagged
fish passed upstream of Devils Canyon undetected.
5.3.4. Size of Chinook Salmon Tracked In and Above Devils Canyon
Of the 38 radio-tagged large Chinook salmon that entered Devils Canyon (6 tagged in Lower
River, 32 tagged in Middle River), the mean body length of fish that approached but did not pass
Impediment 1 (79.7 cm [31.4 in]) was not significantly different from that of fish that passed
Impediment 1 (77.3 cm [30.4 in]; Table 5.3-1; t36 = 0.28, P = 0.60). The mean length of fish that
approached, but did not pass, Impediment 3 (79.0 cm [31.1 in], n = 4) was identical to that of fish
that passed Impediment 3 (n = 2; Table 5.3-1). These observations are suggestive that length
was not a factor in successful passage through Devils Canyon for Chinook salmon.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 11 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
5.3.5. Aerial Spawner Surveys
Chinook salmon were the only salmon species observed from Cheechako Creek upstream to the
Oshetna River. Adult Chinook salmon were observed in Middle River tributaries between
Impediments 1 and 2 (Cheechako Creek [0–17 fish]), between Impediments 2 and 3 (Chinook
Creek [0–5 fish]), and above Impediment 3 (Devil [0–10 fish] and Fog [0–3 fish] creeks). No
adult salmon were observed during spawning surveys in the mainstem Susitna River or in any
Upper River tributaries (e.g., Deadman, Watana, and Kosina creeks, and the Oshetna River;
Table 5.3-4).
5.3.6. Using Sonar to Enumerate Salmon at the Proposed Dam Site
The FERC SPD (Feb 2013) requested a feasibility assessment in 2013 of putting in a weir or
sonar station near dam site in 2014 to provide a count of fish. Results from 2013 field activities
showed that it was likely feasible to count salmon-sized fish (50 cm TL or greater) and
corroborate counts with radio-telemetry. In 2014, AEA used ARIS sonar to count the number of
salmon-sized fish (50 cm TL or greater), as well as those measuring less than 50 cm TL, passing
the proposed Watana Dam site from July 6 to August 22, and collected bathymetry and water-
velocity profiles at the monitoring sites.
During sonar operations from July 6 to August 22, Susitna River flows at the Tsusena Creek
gage ranged from 14,200 to 35,300 cfs (16,700–36,500 cfs at the Gold Creek gage). Discharge
in the Upper Susitna River generally decreased during the sonar sampling period after a peak of
35,300 cfs at the Tsusena Creek gage on July 8 (36,500 cfs at the Gold Creek gage). Periodic
increases in discharge occurred in mid to late July. Throughout August, discharge remained
below 19,000 cfs at the Tsusena Creek gage (below 22,000 cfs at the Gold Creek gage). With
the exception of the period from July 30 through August 7 when the left bank station was
demobilized due to permit compliance, both stations operated continuously throughout the
sample period.
After initial setup of the sonar systems, the left bank station insonified an estimated 41.5 percent
of the wetted channel width and the right bank station insonified an estimated 16.1 percent of the
wetted channel width. With respect to overall scope, the systems covered 57.6 percent of the
wetted channel widths, leaving 42.4 percent of the thalweg section of the river uncovered with
sonar. Cross-sectional coverage of the water column throughout the sampling ranges of the left
and right bank sonar systems is forthcoming.
A total of 24 net upstream-migrating (26 upstream, 2 downstream) Chinook salmon (50 cm TL
or greater) were counted at the sonar stations in 2014 (Table 5.3-5). Twenty-two of the 24 fish
(92 percent) were observed with the right bank sonar station. All fish detections were within 4 m
from the sonar units with most occurring at 3 m (9.8 ft) in range.
In addition, 213 fish measuring 40–49 cm TL, and 1,044 fish measuring less than 40 cm TL,
were counted at the sonar stations (direction of movement for these fish was not recorded).
These fish were not identified. For fish which were less than 50 cm TL, while a percentage of
these fish could potentially be small Chinook salmon (as based on measurements at the Middle
River fishwheels (minimum 27 cm MEF; see Figure 5.1-1)), the potential species as based on
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 12 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
sampling from Study 9.5, and in order of likelihood in the observed size range, include Arctic
grayling, burbot, round whitefish, and longnose sucker.
5.4. Objective 4: Use available technology to document salmon
spawning locations in turbid water
From July 19 to July 25, 2014, 37 potential Chinook salmon spawning sites were visited and 15
were surveyed using DIDSON (Table 5.4-1). Confirmation visits were made at three of the 37
sites where Chinook salmon were previously observed milling or holding in areas considered to
contain substrate suitable for redd construction. Several potential spawning sites could not be
accessed via boat and others sites had physical characteristics not suitable for sonar sampling
(e.g., low water or entrained air). The presence of chum salmon at some locations made
confirmation of Chinook salmon difficult.
Chinook salmon were confirmed at nine sites, including the three confirmation sites. Behavior
indicative of Chinook salmon spawning was observed at one mainstem location, approximately 8
m (26 ft) downstream of the confluence of Jack Long Creek and the mainstem. At this site,
Chinook salmon were observed holding over and guarding a redd, located outside of the
tributary’s clear water zone of influence. In addition to the redd observed near Jack Long Creek,
a second redd was identified downstream of the confluence of 4th of July Creek and the
mainstem.
Due to bathymetry and size of substrate, many redd locations could not be visualized in the sonar
imagery. Similarly, redd digging behavior could not be captured, despite collecting several
hours of imagery containing Chinook salmon in areas considered to provide suitable substrate.
This often occurred, when a fish swam into a depression and could not be observed due large
cobble or small boulders between the sonar and the target fish.
5.5. Objective 5: Compare historical and current data on run timing,
distribution, relative abundance, and specific locations of
spawning and holding salmon
5.5.1. Run Timing
In 2014, Chinook salmon (all size groups) were captured at the Middle River fishwheels from
June 11 to August 24 (Figure 5.5-1). The earliest a Chinook salmon has been captured at the
Middle River fishwheels is June 9 (1984), and the latest is August 20 (1981). The midpoint of
catches in 2014 occurred on July 2, which was earlier than midpoints in 1981, 1983, 1984, and
2013 (range: June 24–30), but later than those in 1982, 1985, and 2012 (range: July 3–9). Dates
of peak catch were similar over the recent 3-year period (July 2 in 2012 and 2013, and July 1 in
2014).
5.5.2. Relative Abundance
In recent years, total catch of Chinook salmon (all size categories) was highest in 2013 (952),
followed by 2014 (877), and then 2012 (566; Table A-1). High catches in 2012 were due largely
to the abundance of small Chinook salmon (336), as more large Chinook salmon were captured
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
in 2014 (672) than in 2013 (616). The majority (61–83 percent) of large Chinook salmon were
captured at Site 1 in 2012 and 2013, compared to only 41 percent in 2014. Operating a third
fishwheel at Site 3 throughout the entire Chinook salmon run in 2014 improved overall catches
as 48 percent of large Chinook salmon were caught at this site.
Over eight years of operation (1981-1985 and 2012-2014), the highest catches of adult Chinook
salmon at the Middle River fishwheels occurred in 1984 (1,589) and lowest in 1981 (284).
Catches in 2012, 2013, and 2014, ranked 7th, 4th, and 5th, respectively.
5.5.3. Spawning and Holding Salmon Locations
Potential spawning sites of Chinook salmon in the mainstem river were identified using radio
telemetry (Sections 5.2.1 to 5.2.3), and confirmed with sonar (DIDSON) in the Middle River.
In 2014, radio-tagged Chinook salmon were tracked to four potential spawning sites in the
Lower River, and 17 sites in the Middle River. The only confirmed spawning site for Chinook
salmon was at the mouth of Jack Long Creek in the Middle River (Table 5.4-1). Similarly,
tributary deltas were the only mainstem habitats confirmed for Chinook salmon spawning during
the 1980s surveys (Barrett et al. 1985; Thompson et al. 1986).
5.6. Objective 6: Generate counts of adult Chinook salmon
spawning in the Susitna River and its tributaries
From July 7 to August 19, 11 aerial spawner surveys were conducted in the Indian River
(approximately every 3rd day; Table 6.4-1). Data collected for this task could support alternative
methods to assess mark rates.
6. LITERATURE CITED
AEA. 2012. Revised Study Plan: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.
14241. December 2012. Prepared for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission by the
Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage, Alaska. http://www.susitna-
watanahydro.org/study-plan.
AEA. 2013. Adult Salmon Distribution and Habitat Utilization Study. Susitna-Watana
Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 14241. February 2013. Anchorage, Alaska.
http://www.susitna-watanahydro.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Attachment-A-AS.pdf
AEA. 2014. Initial Study Report, Salmon Escapement Study, Study Plan Section 9.7, Part A.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 14241. June 2014. Anchorage,
Alaska. http://www.susitna-watanahydro.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/05/09.07_ESCAPE_ISR_PartA.pdf
Ames, J., and D. E. Phinney. 1977. 1977 Puget Sound summer-fall chinook methodology:
escapement goals, run size forecasts, and in-season run size updates. Wash. Dep. Fish.
Tech. Rep. No. 29: 71 p.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 14 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
English, K.K., R.C. Bocking, and J.R. Irvine. 1992. A robust procedure for estimating salmon
escapement based on the area-under-the-curve method. Can. J. Fish. Aqu. Sci. 49: 1982.
Faulkner, A. V. and S. L. Maxwell. 2009. An aiming protocol for fish-counting sonars using
river bottom profiles from a Dual-frequency Identification Sonar (DIDSON). Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, Fishery Manuscript No. 09-03, Anchorage, AK.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), Office of Energy Projects. 2013. Study Plan
Determination for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project. Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Washington, D.C. Issuance: 20130201-3041.
Maxwell, S. L. and A. V. Smith. 2007. Generating river bottom profiles with a Dual- frequency
Identification Sonar (DIDSON). North American Journal of Fisheries Management
27:1294-1309.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 15 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
7. TABLES
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 16 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.1-1. Number of Chinook salmon captured at three fishwheel sites in the Middle River, by size
category and year.
Table 5.1-2. Number of Chinook salmon radio-tagged at three fishwheel sites in the Middle River, by size
category and year.
Species (Size)Site 2012 2013 2014 All Years
Chinook Salmon Site 1 256 514 273 1,043
(Large)Site 2 166 89 79 334
Site 3 13 320 333
All Sites 422 616 672 1,710
Chinook Salmon Site 1 83 262 85 430
(Small)Site 2 61 64 18 143
Site 3 10 102 112
All Sites 144 336 205 685
Total 566 952 877 2,395
Notes:
Totals include all tagged fish recaptured at the fishwheels.
Large: 50 cm METF or greater; Small: less than 50 cm METF.
Site 3 was not used in 2012; and it was not used in 2013 until July 17.
Species (Size)Site 2012 2013 2014 All Years
Chinook Salmon Site 1 214 449 247 910
(Large)Site 2 138 81 75 294
Site 3 -6 268 274
All Sites 352 536 590 1,478
Chinook Salmon Site 1 0 55 18 73
(Small)Site 2 0 12 2 14
Site 3 -0 13 13
All Sites 0 67 33 100
Total 352 603 623 1,578
Notes:
Large: MEF 50 cm or greater; Small: MEF less than 50 cm.
Site 3 was not used in 2012; and it was not used in 2013 until July 17.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 17 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.2-1. Classifications for radio-tagged Chinook salmon in 2014, by size category and release site.
Classification
Lower
River Middle River Yentna Middle River
Tributary Destinations (total)574 437 227 21
Yentna 113 0 219 0
Deshka 136 0 4 0
Willow 30 0 2 0
Little Willow 22 0 1 0
Kashwitna 16 1 0
Goose 3 1 0
Sheep 6 0 0
Montana 16 5 0
Sunshine 1 0 0
Birch 2 1 0
Talkeetna 89 25 1
Chulitna 109 15 1 0
Whiskers 1 1 1
Lane 0 3 2
4th of July 0 8 0
Gold 0 6 0
Indian 17 182 9
Jack Long 0 3 0
Portage 12 183 8
Cheechako 1 2 0
Kosina 0 1 0
Mainstem Destinations (total)7 36 0 4
Mainstem Proper 3 8 0
Downstream of Lane 3 1 0
no prior spawn location 3 1 0
Upstream of Lane 0 7 0
no prior spawn location 0 6 0
was in Portage Creek 0 1 0
Tributary Mouths 2 21 3
Talkeetna Mouth 1 0 0
Lane Mouth 0 1 0
no prior spawn location 0 0 0
was up Talkeetna River 0 1 0
5th of July Mouth 0 3 0
4th of July Mouth 0 2 0
no prior spawn location 0 0 0
was up Indian River 0 1 0
was up 4th of July Creek 0 1 0
Indian Mouth 0 10 3
no prior spawn location 0 8 1
was up Indian River 0 2 2
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm)
Chinook
Salmon
(<50 cm)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 18 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.2-1. Continued.
Classification
Lower
River Middle River Yentna Middle River
Gold Mouth 0 1 0
Portage Mouth 0 4 0
no prior spawn location 0 2 0
was up Portage Creek 0 2 0
Cheechako Mouth 1 0 0
no prior spawn location 0 0 0
was up Cheechako Creek 1 0 0
Side Channels & Sloughs 2 7 1
Slough 8A 0 0 0
Slough 9 0 0 0
Slough 11 0 0 0
Slough 21 0 0 0
Other areas 2 7 1
no prior spawn location 2 6 1
was up Indian River 0 1 0
Other Classifications (total)75 117 68 8
Other Mainstem 31 59 4 3
Max Zone downstream of Lane 30 0 4 0
Max Zone upstream of Lane 1 59 0 3
Downstream Only 16 40 46 4
Near Release Site 13 17 9 1
No or Single Detections 15 1 9 0
Total Tags Released 656 590 295 33
Notes:
Fish that were detected on several occasions within a limited area were classified with a 'Mainstem Destination'
(either in side-channel/slough locations, in a tributary mouth, or in the mainstem proper). Some of the fish that
showed the ‘Mainstem Destination’ detection pattern did so after entering a spawning tributary (those that had at least
one live detection in the mainstem location and that spent less than 6 days in the tributary location are noted in the
table – otherwise the mainstem detection was ignored and the fish was assigned to the tributary location). Tags that
were recovered or returned were included in this table either under the 'Other Mainstem' classification (if the
recovery date was outside of the range of probable spawning dates) or within the row that was associated with the
recovery location (if recoveries were from within a tributary, or were in a possible mainstem spawning location).
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm)
Chinook
Salmon
(<50 cm)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 19 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.3-1. Details of the radio-tagged Chinook salmon that approached or passed the Middle River impediments, 2014.
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm) that Passed Impediment 3
Tag
Number Species Capture/ Release Site
Capture
Date
METF
Length
(cm)Sex
First
Detection
Above I-1
First
Detection
Above I-2
First
Detection
Above I-3 Comments
537 CN Curry, Site Three 4 Jul 80 Male 20 Jul 20 Jul 4 Aug just above I3, then mort DS
787 CN Curry, Site Two 11 Jul 78 Undetermined 20 Jul 20 Jul 30 Jul Kosina (8/2-8/7), Oshetna (8/9), then Kosina (8/12-18),
drfited to below Fog Ck.
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm) that Passed Impediment 2 but not Impediment 3
Tag
Number Species Capture/ Release Site
Capture
Date
METF
Length
(cm)Sex
First
Detection
Above I-1
First
Detection
Above I-2
First
Detection
Above I-3 Comments
17 CN Curry, Site One 14 Jun 70 Undetermined 30 Jun 30 Jun -Below I3, then Cheechako (7/10) then Portage (7/14-
8/6) then mort DS
139 CN Curry, Site One 21 Jun 61 Undetermined 24 Jul 28 Jul -Cheechako (7/25-26) then mort near Chinook Creek
222 CN Curry, Site Two 24 Jun 75 Undetermined 6 Jul 18 Jul -Below I3, then mort DS
516 CN Curry, Site One 4 Jul 87 Undetermined 1 Aug 1 Aug -Cheechako to Chinook mouths, then Cheechako (8/9)
then out, mort at mouth
882 CN Curry, Site Three 16 Jul 51 Undetermined 25 Jul 1 Aug -Chinook mouth then Cheechako (8/3-9) then mort DS
903 CN Curry, Site Three 17 Jul 78 Undetermined 23 Jul 24 Jul -Below I3, mort between Chinook and I3
5531 CN Lower River, gill net 12 Jun 93 Undetermined 18 Jul 18 Jul -Below I3, then in Cheechako (8/12) and at mouth (8/15
onwards)
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm) that Passed Impediment 1 but not Impediment 2
Tag
Number Species Capture/ Release Site
Capture
Date
METF
Length
(cm)Sex
First
Detection
Above I-1
First
Detection
Above I-2
First
Detection
Above I-3 Comments
221 CN Curry, Site One 24 Jun 92 Undetermined 20 Jul --Portage (7/10), just Above I1, then Below I1, drifted as
mort DS
828 CN Curry, Site Three 13 Jul 55 Undetermined 18 Jul --Cheechako Stn, then Portage
868 CN Curry, Site Three 15 Jul 94 Male 23 Jul --Cheechako (7/31-8/1 and 8/6-8/12), mouth (to 8/18)
then drifted DS to below Portage
5702 CN Lower River, gill net 23 May 91 Undetermined 1 Jul --0.75 mi above Cheechako Stn, then in Cheechako
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 20 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.3-1. Continued.
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm) that Approached Impediment 1 but did not Pass
Tag
Number Species Capture/ Release Site
Capture
Date
METF
Length
(cm)Sex
First
Detection
Above I-1
First
Detection
Above I-2
First
Detection
Above I-3 Comments
23 CN Curry, Site Two 14 Jun 63 Undetermined ---Below I1, Portage (7/25-8/4), then mort DS
33 CN Curry, Site Two 15 Jun 63 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Talkeetna
40 CN Curry, Site Two 16 Jun 68 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Portage
91 CN Curry, Site Three 19 Jun 92 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Portage
103 CN Curry, Site One 20 Jun 81 Undetermined ---mort Below I1
108 CN Curry, Site Two 20 Jun 99 Undetermined ---Below I1, Portage (7/22-23) then DS
111 CN Curry, Site Three 20 Jun 97 Undetermined ---Portage (7/4-7/5), Below I1, Portage (7/19-onwards)
166 CN Curry, Site One 22 Jun 63 Undetermined ---Below I1, Portage (7/14), Portage mouth (7/22-8/4),
mort DS
198 CN Curry, Site One 23 Jun 78 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Talkeetna
237 CN Curry, Site One 25 Jun 93 Male ---Below I1, Indian (7/22-8/6) then DS
239 CN Curry, Site One 25 Jun 87 Female ---Below I1, then Portage
244 CN Curry, Site Two 25 Jun 84 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Portage (mid-Aug onward, incl mort
8/20)
264 CN Curry, Site One 28 Jun 78 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Gold Creek
300 CN Curry, Site One 29 Jun 66 Undetermined ---Portage mouth , Below I1, then up Portage
359 CN Curry, Site Three 30 Jun 59 Undetermined ---Below I1, then mort DS
562 CN Curry, Site One 5 Jul 79 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Portage
611 CN Curry, Site Three 5 Jul 91 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Portage
621 CN Curry, Site One 6 Jul 87 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Portage
668 CN Curry, Site Three 6 Jul 80 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Portage
716 CN Curry, Site One 8 Jul 95 Undetermined ---Below I1, then mort DS
818 CN Curry, Site Two 13 Jul 64 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Indian (7/26-8/5) then mort DS of mouth
5242 CN Lower River, East Bank 4 Jun 75.5 Undetermined ---Chulitna, Below I1, then Chulitna
5255 CN Lower River, East Bank 7 Jun 83 Undetermined ---Deshka, Below I1, then Portage
5384 CN Lower River, West Bank 17 Jun 73.5 Undetermined ---Below I1, then mort DS
5408 CN Lower River, gill net 31 May 93 Undetermined ---Below I1, then Portage
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 21 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.3-1. Continued.
Chinook Salmon (< 50 cm) that Approached Impediment 1 but did not Pass
Tag
Number Species Capture/ Release Site
Capture
Date
METF
Length
(cm)Sex
First
Detection
Above I-1
First
Detection
Above I-2
First
Detection
Above I-3 Comments
574 CNj Curry, Site One 5 Jul 41 Undetermined ---Below I1, Portage (7/25-8/4), then Indian (8/9), then
back to Portage (8/15-onwards)
Notes:
Fish characteristics include 'tag numbers' (unique numbers assigned to each individual radio-tagged fish), species (CN = Chinook salmon ≥ 50 cm; CNj = Chinook salmon < 50 cm; and SO = sockeye
salmon), capture and release site, capture date, METF (mid-eye to fork length, in cm) and sex. Tracking details include the date of first detections above each impediment, and a comment about the general
movments of the fish. Top panel: Chinook salmon (≥ 50 cm) that passed Impediment 3. Second panel: Chinook salmon (≥ 50 cm) that passed Impediment 2, but not Impediment 3. Third panel: Chinook
salmon (≥ 50 cm) that passed Impediment 1, but not Impediment 2. Fouth panel: Chinook salmon (≥ 50 cm) that approached within 1 km of Impediment 1, but did not pass. Fifth panel: Chinook salmon (< 50
cm) that approached within 1 km of Impediment 1, but did not pass.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 22 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.3-2. Destinations of radio-tagged Chinook salmon that passed each Middle River impediment, 2014.
Passed I1
but not I2
Passed I2
but not I3 Passed I3 Total
Classification
Tributary Destinations
Portage Creek 1 1 2
Cheechako Creek 2 1 3
Kosina Creek 1 1
Mainstem Destinations
Mouth of Cheechako 1 1
Unknown Destination 1 4 1 6
Total 4 7 2 13
Downstream from Impediment
Number 1 3 0 4
Percent 25%43%0%31%
Notes:
An “I” refers to “impediment.”
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 23 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.3-3. Details of impediment-passage events for radio-tagged Chinook salmon, 2014.
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm) that Passed Impediment 3
Tag
Number
First
Detection
Above I-1
First
Detection
Above I-2
First
Detection
Above I-3
Hold Time
Below I1
(d)
Hold Time
Below I2
(d)
Hold Time
Below I3
(d)
Flow at I-1
Passage
(cfs)
Flow at I-2
Passage
(cfs)
Flow at I-3
Passage
(cfs)
537 20 Jul 20 Jul 4 Aug 4.5 0.5 8.0 21,100 21,100 16,200
787 20 Jul 20 Jul 30 Jul 2.5 0.5 5.5 21,100 21,100 15,500
Average 20 Jul 20 Jul 2 Aug 3.5 0.5 6.8 21,100 21,100 15,850
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm) That Passed Impediment 2 but not Impediment 3
17 30 Jun 30 Jun -1.0 0.5 4.5 19,400 19,400 -
139 24 Jul 28 Jul -7.0 1.0 d.n.a.17,800 16,500 -
222 6 Jul 18 Jul -1.0 0.5 17.0 23,700 18,700 -
516 1 Aug 1 Aug -10.5 0.5 d.n.a.15,700 15,700 -
882 25 Jul 1 Aug -4.5 0.5 d.n.a.17,600 15,700 -
903 23 Jul 24 Jul -0.5 0.5 10.5 17,800 17,800 -
5531 18 Jul 18 Jul -2.5 0.5 13.0 18,700 18,700 -
Average 18 Jul 22 Jul 3.9 0.6 11.3 18,671 17,500
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm) That Passed Impediment 1 but not Impediment 2
221 20 Jul --4.5 d.n.a.-21,100 --
828 18 Jul --2.5 d.n.a.-18,700 --
868 23 Jul --6.5 d.n.a.-17,800 --
5702 1 Jul --3.0 d.n.a.-23,200 --
Average 16 Jul 4.1 -20,200
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm) That Approached Impediment 1 but didn't pass
Tag
Number
First
Detection
Above I-1
First
Detection
Above I-2
First
Detection
Above I-3
Hold Time
Below I1
(d)
Hold Time
Below I2
(d)
Hold Time
Below I3
(d)
Flow at I-1
Passage
(cfs)
Flow at I-2
Passage
(cfs)
Flow at I-3
Passage
(cfs)
23 ---3.0 -----
33 ---4.5 -----
40 ---1.5 -----
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 24 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.3-3. Continued.
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm) That Approached Impediment 1 but didn't pass
Tag
Number
First
Detection
Above I-1
First
Detection
Above I-2
First
Detection
Above I-3
Hold Time
Below I1
(d)
Hold Time
Below I2
(d)
Hold Time
Below I3
(d)
Flow at I-1
Passage
(cfs)
Flow at I-2
Passage
(cfs)
Flow at I-3
Passage
(cfs)
91 ---4.5 -----
103 ---25.5 -----
108 ---5.0 -----
111 ---5.0 -----
166 ---1.5 -----
198 ---1.5 -----
237 ---4.0 -----
239 ---1.5 -----
244 ---13.5 -----
264 ---7.5 -----
300 ---2.5 -----
359 ---1.5 -----
562 ---1.5 -----
611 ---2.5 -----
621 ---12.0 -----
668 ---0.5 -----
716 ---0.5 -----
818 ---1.0 -----
5242 ---2.0 -----
5255 ---3.0 -----
5384 ---5.5 -----
5408 ---1.5 -----
Average 4.5
Chinook Salmon (< 50 cm) That Approached Impediment 1 but didn't pass
Tag
Number
First
Detection
Above I-1
First
Detection
Above I-2
First
Detection
Above I-3
Hold Time
Below I1
(d)
Hold Time
Below I2
(d)
Hold Time
Below I3
(d)
Flow at I-1
Passage
(cfs)
Flow at I-2
Passage
(cfs)
Flow at I-3
Passage
(cfs)
574 ---1.5 -----
Average -1.5 -
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 25 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.3-4. Number of Chinook salmon counted during aerial spawner surveys, by location and survey period, 2014.
River Section Waterbody
Miles
Surveyed
Jul 14 -
Jul 15
Jul 19 -
Jul 20
Jul 25 -
Jul 26
Jul 31 -
Aug 1
Aug 6 -
Aug 7
Aug 12 -
Aug 13
Aug 18-
Aug 19
Middle River -Cheechako Creek Susitna 155.9 2.4 11 16 8 13 7 0 0
Below Impediment 3 Chinook Creek Susitna 160.4 8.7 0 5 5 2 2 0 0
Middle River -Devil Creek Susitna 164.8 2.5 0 0 0 2 10 5 2
Above Impediment 3 Fog Creek Susitna 179.3 19.3 0 0 0 3 2 0 1
Fog Creek Tributary L1 Fog Mile 5.1 7.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unnamed PRM 184.0 Susitna 184.0 5.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unnamed PRM 184.0
Tributary R1 Unnamed 0.8 8.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tsusena Creek Susitna 184.4 3.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Upper River -Deadman Creek Susitna 188.4 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Within Reservoir Watana Creek Susitna 196.9 21.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Watana Creek Tributary
R5 Watana 8.6 8.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Kosina Creek Susitna 209.2 18.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gilbert Creek Kosina 6.2 6 0 NS2 NS2 0 0 0 0
Tsisi Creek Kosina 7.3 6.4 0 NS2 0 0 0 0 NS1
Tsisi Lake 1 Tsisi 7.2 2.8 NS1 NS1 0 0 0 0 0
Tsisi Lake 2 Tsisi 10.6 5.2 NS1 NS1 0 0 0 0 0
Jay Creek Susitna 211.0 13.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Upper River -Goose Creek Susitna 232.9 11.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Above Reservoir Oshetna River Susitna 235.1 26.3 0 0 0 0 NS2 0 0
Black River Oshetna 6.2 0 0 0 0 NS2 0
1 No survey - surveys targeting sockeye salmon began July 25-26.
2 No survey - high and/or turbid water prevented survey.
Confluence
Project River
Mile
Survey Dates
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 26 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.3-5. Sample effort, CPUE, and net upstream count of fish measuring 50 cm or greater at two ARIS units located at PRM 187.1 in the Upper
River, 2014. Mean daily discharge of the Susitna River at Tsusena Creek is also shown.
Date Upstream
Down-
stream
Net
Upstream
Sample
Effort (h)
CPUE
(fish/h)Upstream
Down-
stream
Net
Upstream
Sample
Effort (h)
CPUE
(fish/h)
06-Jul 0 0 0 7.1 0.00 23,648
07-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 11.8 0.00 31,521
08-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 35,331
09-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 29,431
10-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 28,232
11-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 23.7 0.00 27,668
12-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 1 -1 24.0 -0.04 30,000
13-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 31,527
14-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 31,069
15-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 25,300
16-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 2 0 2 24.0 0.08 21,900
17-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 19,900
18-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 18,700
19-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 1 1 0 24.0 0.00 18,500
20-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 21,100
21-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 23,400
22-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 20,400
23-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 17,800
24-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 17,800
25-Jul 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 17,600
26-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 20,000
27-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 18,600
28-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 16,500
29-Jul 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 16,100
30-Jul 0 0 0 10.7 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 15,500
Mean
Discharge
(cfs)
River RightRiver Left
Fish Count Fish Count
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 27 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.3-5. Continued.
Date Upstream
Down-
stream
Net
Upstream
Sample
Effort (h)
CPUE
(fish/h)Upstream
Down-
stream
Net
Upstream
Sample
Effort (h)
CPUE
(fish/h)
31-Jul 2 0 2 24.0 0.08 15,600
01-Aug 3 0 3 24.0 0.13 15,700
02-Aug 2 0 2 24.0 0.08 15,900
03-Aug 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 16,200
04-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 16,200
05-Aug 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 16,600
06-Aug 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 17,300
07-Aug 0 0 0 10.3 0.00 0 0 0 23.9 0.00 16,200
08-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 15,600
09-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 15,700
10-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 14,800
11-Aug 0 0 0 23.7 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 14,200
12-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 14,700
13-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 14,800
14-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 14,500
15-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 14,700
16-Aug 1 0 1 24.0 0.04 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 16,400
17-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 17,300
18-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 18,000
19-Aug 0 0 0 23.8 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 17,700
20-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 16,200
21-Aug 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 0 0 0 24.0 0.00 15,400
22-Aug 0 0 0 10.1 0.00 1 0 1 12.0 0.08 14,700
Total 2 0 2 891.5 24 2 22 1067.2
River left sonar not operational
Mean
Discharge
(cfs)
River RightRiver Left
Fish Count Fish Count
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 28 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.4-1. Survey effort and observations using DIDSON to identify Chinook salmon spawning behavior in turbid water, 2014.
Site Date Sample Location Latitiude Longitude
DIDSON
Used
Chinook
Observed
Spawning
Observed
Redds
Observed Comments
1 19-Jul Gateway Slough 62.67643 -149.89302 Yes No --
2 19-Jul Mainstem gravel bar, d/s PRM 133 62.70674 -149.84082 No No --
3 19-Jul 4th of July Slough (60 m u/s of outlet)62.71587 -149.80301 Yes No --
4 19-Jul Mainstem side channel, PRM 135.5 62.72485 -149.75978 No No --Inaccessable by boat
5 19-Jul Mainstem slough, river right, near PRM 137 62.73609 -149.74144 No No --
No potential sampling
sites
6 19-Jul Slough 11 62.74281 -149.72163 No No --Inaccessable by boat
7 20-Jul Slough between PRM 121 and 122 62.58162 -150.04994 Yes No --
8 20-Jul Mainstem side channel, near PRM 117 62.53128 -150.10338 Yes No --
Entrained air and river
velocity precluded
usable sonar imagery
9 20-Jul Mainstem d/s 4th of July Cr. mouth 62.71481 -149.80823 Yes Yes No No
Individuals observed
milling/holding
10 20-Jul 4th of July slough (30 m u/s of outlet)62.69163 -149.85922 No No --
11 20-Jul 4th of July Cr. Slough (100 m u/s outlet)62.72582 -149.75722 No No --Large cobble substrate
12 21-Jul Portage Creek mouth, river right 62.83034 -149.38153 No No --
13 21-Jul Mainstem d/s Portage Cr. mouth, river right 62.83035 -149.38403 Yes Yes No No
Individuals observed
milling/holding
14 21-Jul Mainstem d/s Portage Cr. mouth, river right 62.83116 -149.38715 No No --
15 21-Jul Mainstem u/s Jack Long Cr. mouth, river left 62.82270 -149.49220 No No --Sand substrate
16 21-Jul Mainstem u/s Jack Long Cr. mouth, river left 62.82143 -149.50706 No No --Large cobble substrate
17 21-Jul Mainstem d/s Jack Long Cr. mouth, river left 62.82245 -149.49872 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Individual observed
guarding and holding
18 21-Jul Mainstem d/s Jack Long Cr. mouth, river left 62.82150 -149.50507 Yes No --
19 21-Jul Mainstem d/s Gold Cr. mouth, river left 62.76779 -149.69141 No No --
20 21-Jul Mainstem d/s Sherman Cr. mouth, river left 62.71310 -149.81103 No No --
21 21-Jul Mainstem d/s Skull Cr. mouth, river left 62.67699 -149.86920 No No --
22 22-Jul Side channel entrance u/s Indian R., river right 62.79191 -149.62464 No No --Areas of upwelling
23 22-Jul Side channel exit u/s Indian R., river right 62.78956 -149.63977 No No --
24 22-Jul Mainstem below side channel, river right 62.78861 -149.64438 No No --Sand substrate
25 22-Jul Mainstem at Beaver impoundment exit, river right 62.78752 -149.65044 No No --
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 29 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 5.4-1. Continued.
Site Date Sample Location Latitiude Longitude
DIDSON
Used
Chinook
Observed
Spawning
Observed
Redds
Observed Comments
26 22-Jul Mainstem d/s Indian R. delta (10 m), river right 62.78514 -149.65891 Yes Yes No No
Individuals observed
milling/holding
27 22-Jul
Mainstem d/s Indian R. delta, over flow channel, river
right 62.78413 -149.66248 No No --
28 22-Jul Mainstem d/s Indian R. slough entrance 62.78296 -149.66805 Yes Yes No No
Individuals observed
milling/holding
29 22-Jul Mainstem d/s Indian R., river right 62.78377 -149.65660 No No --
30 22-Jul Mainstem d/s Indian R. slough exit 62.77943 -149.68706 Yes No --
31 23-Jul Slough u/s Gold Cr., river left 62.77146 -149.68672 No No --
Sand and large cobble
substrate
32 23-Jul Mainstem d/s Gold Cr., river right 62.76829 -149.69449 No No --
33 23-Jul Mainstem d/s Gold Cr., river right 62.76650 -149.71121 Yes Yes No No Traveling u/s observed
34 23-Jul
Mainstem channel d/s Curry unnamed tributary delta,
river right 62.59989 -150.03344 No No --
35 25-Jul Confirmation: d/s Portage Cr Mouth 62.83044 -149.38871 Yes Yes No No
Individuals observed
milling/holding
36 25-Jul Confirmation: d/s Jack Long Cr Mouth 62.82243 -149.49821 Yes Yes No No
Individual observed
milling/holding
37 25-Jul Confirmation: d/s 4th of July Cr Mouth 62.71475 -149.80908 Yes Yes No Yes
Individual observed
milling/holding
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 30 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Table 6.4-1. Number of adult Chinook salmon counted during aerial spawner surveys in the Indian River, by
date and river section, 2014.
Survey
Date
River
Sectiona
Observed
Count Comment
Survey
Date
River
Sectiona
Observed
Count Comment
07-Jul 1 36 Good conditions 01-Aug 1 47 Good conditions
2 91 Most fish holding in pools 2 351
3 0 pool count estimated 3 146
Total 127 Total 544
10-Jul 1 82 Fair conditions 03-Aug 1 59 Good conditions
2 184 dark, light rain 2 323
3 29 Most fish holding in pools 3 96
Total 295 pool count estimated Total 478
14-Jul 1 123 Good conditions 06-Aug 1 34 Good conditions
2 233 Some fish holding in pools 2 214
3 72 pool count estimated 3 58
Total 428 Total 306
17-Jul 1 110 Good conditions 09-Aug 1 18 Good conditions
2 389 Less fish in pools 2 127
3 101 Spawning activity 3 24
Total 600 Total 169
19-Jul 1 61 Poor conditions 12-Aug 1 6 Good conditions
2 330 Bad weather 2 55
3 56 dark and rainy 3 14
Total 447 Total 75
22-Jul 1 160 Excellent conditions 15-Aug 1 5 Good conditions
2 490 Fish evenly distributed 2 16
3 148 on spawning grounds 3 4
Total 798 Total 25
26-Jul 1 70 Fair conditions 18-Aug 1 0 Good conditions
2 327 Turbidity in lower reaches 2 2
3 108 following high water event 3 1
Total 505 Total 3
29-Jul 1 67 Excellent conditions 19-Aug 1 0 Good conditions
2 379 Fish redistributed 2 2
3 160 following high water event 3 1
Total 606 Total 3
a Section 1 = clearwater plume to Bridge 1; Section 2 = Bridge 1 to Powerline; Section 3 = Powerline to Forks.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 31 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
8. FIGURES
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 32 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 3-1. Susitna River watershed showing fish capture sites (fishwheels) and the locations of fixed-station telemetry receiver sites, 2014.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 33 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 4.1-1. Daily fishing effort (hours) and rotational speed (RPM) at three fishwheel sites in the Middle
River, 2014. Only data through August 11 was included.
Figure 4.1-2. Daily discharge of the Susitna River at Gold Creek from April 1 to November 30, 2012-2014.
Historical (1949-2013) minimum, maximum, and mean discharges are shown for reference. Source: USGS National
Water Information System (http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis).
Date (m/d)Rotational Speed (RPM)Daily Fishing Effort (h)0
2
4
6
8
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
6/66/136/206/277/47/117/187/258/18/88/158/228/299/5Effort RPM
Site 1 (Right Bank)
0
2
4
6
8
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
6/66/136/206/277/47/117/187/258/18/88/158/228/299/5Site 2 (Left Bank)
0
2
4
6
8
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
6/66/136/206/277/47/117/187/258/18/88/158/228/299/5Site 3 (Right Bank)
0
15,000
30,000
45,000
60,000
75,000
90,000
4/14/114/215/15/115/215/316/106/206/307/107/207/308/98/198/299/89/189/2810/810/1810/2811/711/1711/27Discharge (cfs)Date (m/d)
2014 2013 2012 Min/Max (1949-2013)Mean (1949-2013)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 34 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 4.3-1. Ortho image showing the ensonified wetted width coverage of each ARIS unit near the Watana
Dam Site, 2014. Ensonified coverage is scaled to match the width of the river. River flow is from right to left.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 35 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 5.1-1. Cumulative length-frequency distributions for Chinook salmon captured at the Middle River
fishwheels, by size category and capture site, 2014.
Figure 5.1-2. Cumulative length-frequency distributions for Chinook salmon captured and radio-tagged at
the Middle River fishwheels, by size category, 2014. Cumulative ProportionMid-eye to Fork Length (cm)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95 105 115
Chinook Salmon
(Middle River)
Site 1 (n = 337)
Site 2 (n = 99)
Site 3 (n = 104)Cumulative ProportionMid-eye to Fork Length (cm)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
45 55 65 75 85 95 105 115
Chinook
(≥ 50 cm)
Captured in the
Middle River
Radio-tagged
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
25 30 35 40 45 50
Chinook
(< 50 cm)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 36 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 5.2-1. Classifications for radio-tagged Chinook salmon released in the Lower River (left panels) or
Middle River (right panels), by size category, 2014. Top panels: Fish that were detected on several occasions
within a limited area were classified with a 'Mainstem Destination' (either in side-channel/slough locations, in
a tributary mouth, or in the mainstem proper). Some of the fish that showed the 'Mainstem Destination'
detection pattern did so after entering a spawning tributary, and those that had at least one live detection in
the mainstem location. See text and Table 5.2-1 for more detailed classifications. Middle Panels: Relative use
of side-channel/slough locations, tributary mouths, and the mainstem proper, by fish that were classified with
a 'Mainstem Destination.' Bottom Panel: Relative use of sloughs vs. side-channel habitats by fish classified
with a 'Mainstem Destination.' 'tbd' = to be determined.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Chinook
Salmon
Pink
Salmon
Coho
SalmonRelative FrequencyTributary Mainstem
General Classification
Releases from Lower River
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Chinook
Salmon
Pink
Salmon
Coho
SalmonRelative FrequencyMainstem Proper Tributary Mouths Side-channel / Sloughs
Mainstem Use
Releases from
Lower River
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Chinook
(≥ 50 cm)
Chinook
(< 50 cm)
Pink
Salmon
Coho
Salmon
Sockeye
Salmon
Chum
Salmon
General Classification
Releases from Middle River
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Chinook
(≥ 50 cm)
Chinook
(< 50 cm)
Pink
Salmon
Coho
Salmon
Sockeye
Salmon
Chum
Salmon
Mainstem Use
Releases from Curry
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Chinook
(≥ 50 cm)
Chinook
(< 50 cm)
Pink
Salmon
Coho
Salmon
Sockeye
Salmon
Chum
SalmonRelative FrequencySlough 8A
Slough 9
Slough 11
Slough 21
Side-channels
Side -channel / Slough Use
Releases from Curry
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 37 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 5.2-2. Potential mainstem spawning sites for radio-tagged Chinook salmon in the Lower River, 2014.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 38 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 5.2-3. Potential mainstem spawning sites for radio-tagged Chinook salmon in the Middle River, 2014.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 39 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 5.3-1. Tracking history of a radio-tagged Chinook salmon (tag #537) that was detected above Impediment 3, 2014.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 40 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 5.3-2. Tracking history of a radio-tagged Chinook salmon (tag #787) that was detected above Impediment 3, 2014.
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 41 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 5.3-3. Daily numbers of large Chinook salmon that approached and passed each of the three Middle
River impediments in 2014. Orange bars: fish that approached but did not pass. Blue bars: fish that
approached and successfully passed. Figures show the date of first detection above the impediment (blue) or
the date of first detection below the impediment (orange). Also shown is the average daily flow of the Susitna
River as measured at the Tsusena Creek gage.
0
2
4
6
8
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
6/10 6/13 6/16 6/19 6/22 6/25 6/28 7/1 7/4 7/7 7/10 7/13 7/16 7/19 7/22 7/25 7/28 7/31 8/3 8/6 8/9 8/12 8/15 8/18 8/21 8/24Number of Fish at I1Tsusena Discharge (cfs)Date (m/d)
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm)
Impediment 1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
6/10 6/13 6/16 6/19 6/22 6/25 6/28 7/1 7/4 7/7 7/10 7/13 7/16 7/19 7/22 7/25 7/28 7/31 8/3 8/6 8/9 8/12 8/15 8/18 8/21 8/24Number of Fish at I3Tsusena Discharge (cfs)Passed
Approached (did not pass)
Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm)
Impediment 3
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
6/10 6/13 6/16 6/19 6/22 6/25 6/28 7/1 7/4 7/7 7/10 7/13 7/16 7/19 7/22 7/25 7/28 7/31 8/3 8/6 8/9 8/12 8/15 8/18 8/21 8/24Number of Fish at I2Tsusena Discharge (cfs)Chinook Salmon (≥ 50 cm)
Impediment 2
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 42 September 2014
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 2014 SALMON ESCAPEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PRELIMINARY RESULTS
Figure 5.5-1. Comparison of Chinook salmon catches (top panel), relative proportion of catches (middle
panel), and cumulative proportion of catches (bottom panel), at the Middle River fishwheels near Curry,
1981-2014. These data include Chinook salmon of all size categories, and catches at two (1981-2012) or three
(2013-2014) fishwheels.
Date (m/d)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
6/16/66/116/166/216/267/17/67/117/167/217/267/318/58/108/158/20Cum. Proportion of Catch0
30
60
90
120
150
180
6/16/66/116/166/216/267/17/67/117/167/217/267/318/58/108/158/20Catch (# fish)1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
2012
2013
2014
0.00
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
6/16/66/116/166/216/267/17/67/117/167/217/267/318/58/108/158/20Rel. Proportion of CatchSusitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 43 September 2014