HomeMy WebLinkAboutSuWa289sec12-7Alaska Resources Library & Information Services
Susitna‐Watana Hydroelectric Project Document
ARLIS Uniform Cover Page
Title:
River recreation flow and access study, Study plan Section 12.7, 2014
Study Implementation Report SuWa 289
Author(s) – Personal:
Author(s) – Corporate:
AECOM
ERM
AEA‐identified category, if specified:
November 2015; Study Completion and 2014/2015 Implementation Reports
AEA‐identified series, if specified:
Series (ARLIS‐assigned report number):
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project document number 289
Existing numbers on document:
Published by:
[Anchorage : Alaska Energy Authority, 2015]
Date published:
November 2015
Published for:
Alaska Energy Authority
Date or date range of report:
Volume and/or Part numbers:
Study plan Section 12.7
Final or Draft status, as indicated:
Document type:
Pagination:
87 pages in various pagings
Related works(s):
Pages added/changed by ARLIS:
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/
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
(FERC No. 14241)
River Recreation Flow and Access Study
Study Plan Section 12.7
2014 Study Implementation Report
Prepared for
Alaska Energy Authority
Prepared by
AECOM/ERM
November 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page i November 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................1
2. Study Objectives .....................................................................................................................1
3. Study Area ...............................................................................................................................2
4. Methods and Variances ..........................................................................................................2
4.1. River Recreation Internet Survey ....................................................................................2
4.1.1. Variances ................................................................................................................. 3
5. Results ......................................................................................................................................4
5.1. River Recreation Reach 1 (PRM 291.6–PRM 179.3) .....................................................4
5.1.1. Reach 1 Susitna River Recreation Internet Survey Information ............................. 4
5.2. River Recreation Reach 2 (PRM 179.3–PRM 152.3) .....................................................6
5.2.1. Reach 2 Susitna River Recreation Internet Survey Information ............................. 7
5.3. River Recreation Reach 3 (PRM 152.3–PRM 88.9) .......................................................8
5.3.1. Reach 3 Susitna River Recreation Internet Survey Information ............................. 9
6. Discussion ..............................................................................................................................10
7. Conclusion .............................................................................................................................11
7.1. Decision Points from Study Plan ..................................................................................11
7.2. Modifications to Study Plan ..........................................................................................11
7.3. Steps to Complete the Study .........................................................................................12
7.4. Conclusion ....................................................................................................................12
8. Literature Cited ....................................................................................................................12
9. Tables .....................................................................................................................................13
10. Figures ...................................................................................................................................22
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page ii November 2015
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1-1. Susitna River Recreation Internet Survey Distribution .............................................13
Table 5.1-1 Susitna River Reach 1 Internet Survey Participant Information ................................15
Table 5.1-2 Susitna River Reach 1 Put in and Take out Information ............................................16
Table 5.1-3 Susitna River Reach 1 Put in and Take out Information ............................................16
Table 5.1-4 Susitna River Reach 1 Flow Preference Information .................................................17
Table 5.1-5 Susitna River Reach 1 Comparison to other rivers statewide, regionally, and
nationally1 ..............................................................................................................................17
Table 5.2-1 Susitna River Reach 2 Internet Survey Participant Information ................................17
Table 5.2-2 Susitna River Reach 2 Put in and Take out Information ............................................18
Table 5.2-3 Susitna River Reach 2 Put in and Take out Information ............................................18
Table 5.2-4 Susitna River Reach 2 Flow Preference Information .................................................19
Table 5.2-5 Susitna River Reach 2 Comparison to other rivers statewide, regionally, and
nationally1 ..............................................................................................................................19
Table 5.3-1 Susitna River Reach 3 Internet Survey Participant Information ................................19
Table 5.3-2 Susitna River Reach 3 Put in and Take out Information ............................................20
Table 5.3-3 Susitna River Reach 3 Put in and Take out Information ............................................20
Table 5.3-4 Susitna River Reach 3 Flow Preference Information .................................................21
Table 5.3-5 Susitna River Reach 3 Comparison to other rivers statewide, regionally, and
nationally1 ..............................................................................................................................21
Table 5.3-6 Comparison of the number of internet survey participant trips by Reach and type
of travel during ice free periods in 2013 and 2014. ...............................................................21
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1. River Recreation Study Area ......................................................................................23
Figure 5.1-1. Reach 1 Internet Survey Responses Regarding River Access Responses (n=55) ...24
Figure 5.1-2. Primary Purposes of Recreation in Reach 1 .............................................................24
Figure 5.1-3. Secondary Purposes of Recreation in Reach 1 .........................................................25
Figure 5.1-4. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized Trips in Reach 1 (1975-2013) .......26
Figure 5.1-5. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized Trips in Reach 1 (2013 and
2014)1 (See end of figures section) .......................................................................................................26
Figure 5.1-6. Reach 1 Executive Interviewees Winter Activities (8 Interviewees) .......................27
Figure 5.2-1. Reach 2 Internet Survey Responses Regarding River Access Responses (n=47) ...27
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page iii November 2015
Figure 5.2-2. Reach 2 Primary Purposes of Recreation .................................................................28
Figure 5.2-3. Reach 2 Secondary Purposes of Recreation .............................................................28
Figure 5.2-4. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized trips in Reach 2 (1975-2013) ........29
Figure 5.2-5. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized Trips in Reach 2 (2013 and
2014)1 (See end of figures section) .......................................................................................................29
Figure 5.2-6. Reach 2 Executive Interviewees Winter Activities (7 Interviewees) .......................30
Figure 5.3-1. Reach 3 Internet Survey Responses Regarding River Access Responses
(n=146) ...................................................................................................................................30
Figure 5.3-2. Reach 3 Primary Purposes of Recreation .................................................................31
Figure 5.3-3. Reach 3 Secondary Purposes of Recreation .............................................................31
Figure 5.3-4. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized Trips in Reach 3 (1975-2015) .......32
Figure 5.3-5. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized Trips in Reach 3 (2013 and
2014) 1 (See end of figures section) ......................................................................................................32
Figure 5.3-6. Reach 3 Executive Interviewees Winter Activities (17 Interviewees) .....................33
APPENDICES
Appendix A: River Recreation and Access Internet Survey
Appendix B: River Recreation Executive Interview Questions
Appendix C: Winter River Recreation and Transportation Executive Interview Questions
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page iv November 2015
LIST OF ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS
Abbreviation Definition
AEA Alaska Energy Authority
ATV All-terrain vehicle
cfs cubic feet per second
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
ILP Integrated Licensing Process
IP Internet Protocol
ISR Initial Study Report
NOLS National Outdoor Leadership School
PRM Project River Mile
Project Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
REI Recreation Equipment Incorporated
RM River Mile(s) referencing those of the 1980s Alaska Power Authority Project.
RSP Revised Study Plan
SPD study plan determination
USGS United States Geological Survey
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 1 November 2015
1. INTRODUCTION
The River Recreation Flow and Access Study, Section 12.7 of the Revised Study Plan (RSP)
approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for the Susitna-Watana
Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 14241 focused on conducting a recreation flow analysis on
mainstem reaches of the Susitna River that considers the relationship between river flows and ice
conditions, river recreation and transportation.
A summary of the development of this study, together with the Alaska Energy Authority’s
(AEA) implementation of it through the 2013 study season, appears in Part A, Section 1 of the
Initial Study Report (ISR) filed with FERC in June 2014. As required under FERC’s regulations
for the Integrated Licensing Process (ILP), the ISR describes AEA’s “overall progress in
implementing the study plan and schedule and the data collected, including an explanation of any
variance from the study plan and schedule.” (18 CFR 5.15(c)(1)).
Since filing the ISR in June 2014, AEA has continued to implement the FERC-approved plan for
the River Recreation Flow and Access Study. This included:
Participated in ISR study report meetings in October 2014.
Completion of the river recreation internet survey during the 2014 field season.
On November 14, 2014 AEA held a follow-on ISR meeting for the River Recreation
Flow and Access Study.
In furtherance of the next round of ISR meetings and FERC’s Study Plan Determination (SPD)
expected in 2016, this report describes AEA’s overall progress in implementing the River
Recreation Flow and Access Study during calendar year 2014. Rather than a comprehensive
reporting of all field work, data collection, and data analysis since the beginning of AEA’s study
program, this report is intended to supplement and update the information presented in Part A of
the ISR for the River Recreation Flow and Access Study through the end of calendar year 2014.
It describes the methods and results of the 2014 effort, and includes a discussion of the results
achieved.
2. STUDY OBJECTIVES
As set forth in the Study Plan (RSP Section 12.7.1, AEA 2012), the goals and objectives of the
River Recreation Flow and Access Study were to contribute data to the Recreation Resource
Study (12.5) concerning the relationship between river flows and river recreation opportunities
and uses, by:
Document river recreation use and experience for the respective river recreation and
transportation opportunities on three mainstem Susitna River reaches.
Describe the potential effects of altered river flows on existing and potential boating
activity and other river recreational uses of the Susitna River.
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 2 November 2015
Understand river ice preferences for the respective river ice-dependent winter recreation
and transportation on the Susitna River.
Describe new boating or other flow-dependent recreational opportunities that may be
created by Project construction and operation.
3. STUDY AREA
The study area for the River Recreation Flow and Access Study was set forth in RSP Section
12.7.3. During the 2012 recreation study, three distinct river recreation reaches were identified
on the Susitna River, as shown in Figure 3-1, for gathering baseline river recreation information
on the Susitna River. The three river recreation reach breaks comprising the study area were as
follows: (a) River Recreation Reach 1, the section of river from the Susitna River bridge
(RM 291/PRM 291.6) on the Denali Highway to Fog Creek (RM 177/PRM 179.3); (b) River
Recreation Reach 2, Fog Creek to the confluence with Portage Creek (RM 149/PRM 152.3)
downstream of Devils Canyon; and (c) River Recreation Reach 3, Portage Creek to the
confluence with the George Parks Highway Bridge (also known as Sunshine) downstream of the
confluence with the Talkeetna and Chulitna Rivers (RM 83/PRM 88.9). The three river
recreation reach designations overlap other reach breaks delineated for other resource studies.
4. METHODS AND VARIANCES
This study was designed to document the range of flows for a variety of motorized and non-
motorized watercraft using the Susitna River for recreation as well as for a transportation
corridor. Likewise, the study was designed to document river ice-dependent recreation and
transportation activities during the winter period. Recognized river ice variables include temporal
and spatial extent for channel bridging, and longitudinal length for transportation. The methods
and analysis used practices and survey techniques for recreational flow study design, as
described in Whittaker et al. (1993) and Whittaker et al. (2005).
4.1. River Recreation Internet Survey
In conducting the river recreation Internet survey during the 2013 through 2014 field seasons,
AEA followed the methodologies described in Section 12.7.4 of the RSP, with no variances. The
River Recreation and Access Internet Survey was used to gather information on river recreation
uses, location, frequency, seasonal patterns, primary trip purpose, secondary activities, access,
campsites, and river recreation quality relative to trip flow evaluations (Appendix A). The survey
was posted on the Internet (www.susitnariversurvey.com) from June 25, 2013 to December 31,
2014, and served as the primary means for gathering information from river users. The Internet
survey helped expand the collection of responses geographically and temporally. The expansive
study area, remote location, dispersed access points, and anticipated low number of annual user
days were not appropriate for conducting an intercept survey. Furthermore, the electronic survey
provided a means to attempt to capture both past and current recreation use.
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 3 November 2015
Survey participation was solicited by advertising the river recreation survey electronically
through a multitude of forums including, but not limited to, national and regional whitewater
groups; forums for outdoor recreation including adventure races, fishing, hunting, motorized and
non-motorized user groups, message boards, commercial outfitters and guides, and adventure
schools; and transportation services to the study area (Table 4.1-1). Information advertising the
Internet survey was distributed at key locations including outdoor retail shops, key convenience
stores in the study area, restaurants, train station, and commercial transportation service locations
for the study area. Postcards describing the Internet survey, including noting the URL to access
the survey, were also distributed at key access points and staging areas. Hard copy surveys
identical to the Internet survey were prepared for chance encounters during the 2013 season in
the study area. For the Internet surveys, the platform allowed for identification of Internet
Protocol (IP) addresses for entry; therefore, unique responses could be identified.
AEA posted the Internet survey link to a number of groups on the Alaska outdoor online forums
to solicit additional Susitna River recreators to complete the survey. In response, an Internet
survey announcement and link to the Internet survey were posted to additional online forums
including the Alaska Outdoor Directory, Alaska Canoeing, Alaska Freshwater Kayaking, Alaska
Rafting, Alaska Powerboating, Alaska Airboating, Alaska Float Hunting, Alaska Freshwater
Fishing, Alaska Bushflying, Interior Alaska Airboat Association, and the Anchorage Paddling
Club.
The electronic link for the Susitna River Recreation and Access Internet Survey was forwarded
to national and regional paddling groups as well as to whitewater message boards in Alaska.
Whitewater organizations at the national and regional level serve as a portal for disseminating
information to the paddling community through websites, journal articles, and electronic
communication. In addition, efforts were made to identify boaters known to have paddled Devils
Canyon and notify them about the Internet survey. A fairly comprehensive list was assembled of
paddlers who have attempted or completed runs on Devils Canyon dating back to the 1970s.
Individuals on this list were directed to the Internet survey.
Data analysis and reporting includes summaries of the Internet survey data (Section 5). River
recreation use information obtained through the electronic Internet survey and interviews was
summarized for respective recreation opportunities including primary purpose, secondary
activities, demographics of the respective recreational user groups, recreation flow conditions,
seasonal use patterns, frequency of use, access points, campsites, trip length, comparisons with
recreation opportunities on other Alaska rivers, and quality of experience. Likewise, information
gathered through the River Recreation and Access Survey supplements the analysis of river
recreation activities.
4.1.1. Variances
There were no variances in the implementation of the river recreation Internet survey. .
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 4 November 2015
5. RESULTS
The cumulative 2013-2014 results of the river recreation Internet survey in Study Reaches 1, 2,
and/or 3 are presented below. Flow information from four U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
gaging stations (Susitna R. at Sunshine River Mile (RM) 84; Susitna R. at Gold Creek RM 137;
Susitna R. above Tsusena C Nr Chulitna, RM 182; Susitna R. Nr Denali, RM 291) was used to
illustrate present and historic flows in the study reaches during recorded recreation events. Each
study reach is discussed separately starting with Reach 1 and ending with Reach 3.
Data developed in support of this study are available for download at
http://gis.suhydro.org/reports/isr.
5.1. River Recreation Reach 1 (PRM 291.6–PRM 179.3)
River Recreation Reach 1 is a 113-mile section of the Susitna River beginning at the Denali
Highway Bridge and ending downstream at Fog Creek. Motor vehicles can only access Reach 1
at the Denali Highway Bridge and there is an established unimproved boat launch on the
immediate east side of the Denali Highway Bridge. There is only 1,000 feet of elevation drop
over the course of 112 river miles in Reach 1. This relatively gentle gradient provides numerous
options for floatplane access throughout Reach 1.
Reach 1 from the confluence with the Tyone River to just downstream of V-Canyon drops
350 feet in elevation in just 22 miles. This is steeper than the other sections of Reach 1 upstream
and downstream. Egress from River Reach 1 is challenging for river runners due to the remote
location. Reach 1 terminates at Project River Mile (PRM) 179.3, approximately 15 miles
upstream from the start of Devils Canyon at PRM 164.8.
Flows listed on the USGS National Water Information website for the period of record (May 30,
1957 to September 30, 2014) at USGS Gage No. 15291000 (Susitna R. Nr Denali) were
reviewed for the ice-free months (assumed May through October). Data for this location were
not available for the period between August 1, 1986 and May 22, 2012. Average recorded flows
at the Susitna R. Nr. Denali gage were 5,227 cubic feet per second (cfs) and median recorded
flows were 4,400 cfs. The highest recorded flow at this gage was 33,400 cfs in August 1971.
There is a second gage in Reach 1, 109 miles downriver: USGS Gage No. 15291700 Susitna R.
AB Tsusena C NR Chulitna, AK (Susitna R. AB Tsusena). Average recorded flows at the
Susitna R. AB Tsusena gage during ice-free months over the period of record (October 1, 2011
to October 20, 2014 were 15,680 cfs and median recorded flows were 15,300 cfs. The highest
recorded flow at this gage for this period was 72,800 cfs in June 2013.
5.1.1. Reach 1 Susitna River Recreation Internet Survey Information
Table 5.1-1 includes general information about the 55 Internet survey participants who recreated
in Reach 1. Twenty-six of these participants provided recreation information that was not
included in the June 2014 ISR. Participants’ ages ranged from 8 to 83 with a median age of 42.
Only 3 of the participants were female and 81% were Alaska residents. A variety of skill levels
and craft types were recorded in Reach 1. Whitewater kayakers were the largest single group,
with the majority of them utilizing Reach 1 to access Reach 2. Other groups identified by
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 5 November 2015
specific watercraft type that frequently used Reach 1 were rafters, packrafters, airboaters, prop
boaters, and jet boaters. Open and closed deck canoeists, catarafters, and boaters using other craft
types were the least frequent users of Reach 1. Most Reach 1 survey participants identified
themselves as having either advanced or expert skill levels in operating their craft, and used their
respective craft more than 20 days per year. The majority of recreators had more than one
person in their party, with a median party size of 3 and a range of 1 to 25.
Table 5.1-2 includes general information on put-in and take-out options for river recreators on
Reach 1. The majority of participants (34) put-in at the Denali Highway Bridge and used a car
or truck to access the put-in. However, a number of participants utilized float planes (8),
wheeled planes (4), foot travel (3), snowmobile (1), motorized boat (1), and ATV (1) to access
Reach 1. The Denali Highway Bridge was the most active put-in location followed in order of
frequency of use by other unspecified locations, floating in from upstream of the Denali
Highway, Reach 1 remote locations (unspecified), access by floating down tributaries
(unspecified) into Reach 1, and floating down specific tributaries into Reach 1 including Tyone
River, Maclaren River, Watana Creek and Jay Creek.
Take-out options for Reach 1 are limited due to the remote location at the terminus of the reach.
The majority of participants (29) identified use of a car or truck, indicating two-way navigation
back upstream to the Denali Highway Bridge, or, alternatively, floating downstream through
Reach 2 and into Reach 3. A number of participants utilized other Reach 1 take-out methods
including float planes (4), wheeled planes (5), foot travel (3), snowmobile (1), motorized boat
(4), and ATV (1). The Denali Highway Bridge was the most active take-out location followed in
order of frequency of use by other unspecified locations, floating through to Reach 2, Tyone
River, Watana Creek, Reach 1 remote locations (unspecified), exit via tributary (unspecified),
Maclaren River, Oshetna River, and Jay Creek.
In Reach 1, 47% of survey participants indicated that current access to Reach 1 was sufficient in
contrast to 20% opposed to additional access and 24% in favor of access improvements (Figure
5.1-1). Reach 1 participants were also content with current access conditions for river reaches 2
and 3 (33% and 40%, respectively). The remaining Reach 1 participants were split between
favoring access improvements to Reaches 2 and 3 (22% and 18%, respectively), opposing
additional access (20% and 18%, respectively), and no opinion (25% and 23%, respectively).
Participants were asked to list the primary and secondary purposes of their trip in Reach 1 and
were given 12 purposes to choose from, including a write-in option for “other” primary and
secondary trip purposes. Figure 5.1-2 illustrates the primary recreation purposes for aircraft,
motorized craft, and non-motorized craft in Reach 1. Non-motorized craft participants listed
wilderness and solitude (21%), followed by whitewater recreation (18%) as their primary trip
purpose. Motorized craft participants listed hunting as their primary trip purpose (30%), followed
by motorized recreation (19%). Similarly, aircraft participants listed hunting (40%) as their
primary trip purpose, followed by photography (20%).
Figure 5.1-3 illustrates the secondary recreation purposes for aircraft, motorized craft, and non-
motorized craft in Reach 1. The most common secondary trip purposes for non-motorized crafts
were wildlife viewing (19%), and photography (19%) followed closely by camping (17%). The
most common secondary trip purpose for motorized watercraft was camping (21%) and
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 6 November 2015
wilderness/solitude (14%). Fishing (50%) was the most commonly reported secondary trip
purpose for aircraft operators in Reach 1.
Participants were asked a series of questions about factors that influenced the timing of their trip
and how they checked river flows prior to recreating in Reach 1 (Table 5.1-3). The majority of
participants listed flows as a factor that influenced their decision to take a trip in Reach 1. In
addition, the majority of participants checked the flows prior to their trip and used USGS gage
information available on the Internet to do so. The majority of Reach 1 recreators used flow
information from the Gold Creek gage in Reach 3 even though there are two existing stream
gages in Reach 1 (Susitna R. at Nr. Denali and Susitna R. above Tsusena C.). The Gold Creek
gage has the longest continuous flow data record of the three gages and is the gage reference
point in river recreation guidebooks (Embick 1994 and Jettmar 2008) for suitable flow ranges.
Figure 5.1-4 illustrates the timing of air, motorized, and non-motorized trips in Reach 1 from
1975 to 2014 in comparison to recorded flows at the Gold Creek gage. The earliest Reach 1 trip
recorded by a survey participant was a non-motorized trip in 1977. The majority of participants
entered trip information for Reach 1 trips that occurred within the last 5 years. Figure 5.1-5
illustrates the timing of 2013 and 2014 air, motorized, and non-motorized trips in Reach 1 in
comparison to recorded flows at the Gold Creek gage. Most Reach 1 participants felt that the
flow experienced on their trip was about the same as their preferred flow, and that they were very
likely to return to Reach 1 based on this preferred flow (Table 5.1-4). Only two participants had
to cut their trip short because flows were too high in Reach 1; none reported that trip length was
cut short because flows were too low.
When asked to compare Susitna River Reach 1 recreation opportunities with other river
opportunities in Alaska, 40% rated it as above average, 40% average, 13% below average, and
7% did not know. Compared to other rivers in the Pacific Northwest and Canada, 36% rated it as
above average, 18% average, 16% below average, and 29% did not know. Finally, in comparison
to other rivers in the USA, 38% rated Reach 1 as above average, 11% average, 24% below
average, and 27% did not know (Table 5.1-5).
5.2. River Recreation Reach 2 (PRM 179.3–PRM 152.3)
River Recreation Reach 2 is a 27-mile section of the Susitna River from Fog Creek to Portage
Creek that includes Devils Canyon. Access to Reach 2 is limited. There is no motor vehicle
access or recommended float/wheeled plane access within the Reach 2 river corridor, although it
has been used historically by floatplanes for rescues of Devils Canyon boaters and for drop-offs.
Floatplane operators indicated that they no longer land on the river in Reach 2 for safety reasons.
Most motorized boats traveling upstream cannot make it beyond the lower portions of Devils
Canyon just above Portage Creek. Floating into Reach 2 from Reach 1 is the primary means of
non-motorized boat access to Reach 2. River recreators in this portion of the Susitna River
typically exit the river in Reach 3 either floating to Talkeetna or boarding the train at Gold
Creek. Reach 2 has been accessed from High Lake but no established trail exists. Likewise,
whitewater boaters identified the lakes north of Stephan Lake as an access location from which
kayakers drag their boats overland to the Susitna River. Access through private lands require
permission and/or permits from landowners.
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 7 November 2015
Flows listed on the USGS National Water Information website for the period of record
(August 1, 1949 to October 22, 2014) at USGS Gage No. 15292000 Susitna R. at Gold Creek
(Gold Creek gage) were reviewed for the ice-free months (assumed to be May through October).
Data for this location were not available for the period between October 1, 1996 and May 24,
2001. Average recorded flows at Gold Creek gage were 18,559, cfs, and median recorded flows
were 18,600 cfs. The historic maximum recorded daily flow at the Gold Creek gage was
86,800 cfs in June 2013. The Gold Creek gage is located in Reach 3 downstream of Devils
Canyon, but some Reach 2 recreators reference the Gold Creek gage as the gage most often used
to determine flow conditions in Reach 2. Hydraulic features and potential boat routes/portages
through individual rapids in Devils Canyon can change considerably with changes in flow.
5.2.1. Reach 2 Susitna River Recreation Internet Survey Information
Table 5.2-1 includes general information about the 47 Internet survey participants who recreated
in Reach 2. Twenty of these participants provided recreation information that was not included in
the June 2014 ISR. Participants’ ages ranged from 19 to 83 with a median age of 37. Only 6 of
the participants were female and 42% of the Reach 2 participants were Alaska residents. Twenty-
nine of the 44 recreators in Reach 2 responded that their skill level was expert. The majority of
participants had more than one person in their party with a median party size of 4 and range of 1
to 35.
Table 5.2-2 includes general information on put-in and take-out options for river recreators on
Reach 2. Seven used a motorized boat for the put-in, 3 hiked in, 1 used a snowmobile, 17 used a
floatplane, 4 used a wheeled plane, and 15 participants chose N/A or a transportation mode not
listed on the survey for Reach 2. Put-in locations for Reach 2 also varied. Nine participants
floated in from Reach 1, and 11 put in at an undesignated remote location in Reach 2. Five
individuals used Devil Creek, 9 used Fog Creek, and 1 used Log Creek as the put-in for Reach 2.
An additional 10 participants listed “other” as the put-in location. The majority of Reach 2
recreators floated through to Reach 3 to take out.
Approximately 30% of Reach 2 survey participants indicated that current access to Reach 2 is
sufficient, while 43% were opposed to additional access and 28% were in favor of access
improvements (Figure 5.2-1). Reach 2 participants feel current river access conditions are
sufficient in reaches 1 and 3 (38% and 36% respectively), while 36% and 32% of Reach 2
participants oppose access improvements in reaches 1 and 3. Some of the Reach 2 participants
were in favor of improvements to river access in reaches 1 and 3 (26% and 23%, respectively)
(Figure 5.2-1).
Participants were asked to list the primary and secondary purposes of their trip on Reach 2 and
were given 12 purposes to choose from including write-in options for “other” primary and
secondary trip purposes. Figure 5.2-2 illustrates the primary recreation purposes for aircraft,
motorized craft, and non-motorized craft in Reach 2. Non-motorized craft participants listed
whitewater recreation (33%) as their primary trip purpose, followed by wilderness and solitude
(19%). Twenty percent of motorized craft participants reported motorized recreation, and fishing
as their primary purposes, followed by wilderness/solitude (16%). The three aircraft participants
for Reach 2 listed hunting and photography as the primary trip purpose.
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 8 November 2015
Figure 5.2-3 illustrates the secondary recreation purposes for aircraft, motorized craft, and non-
motorized craft in Reach 2. The most common non-motorized craft secondary trip purposes
were camping (22%), photography (20%), wildlife viewing (20%), and wilderness and solitude
(15%). The most common motorized craft secondary trip purposes were wildlife viewing (15%)
and photography (15%). Secondary trip purposes for Reach 2 aircraft participants were split
evenly between fishing (25%), wildlife viewing (25%), camping (25%), and transportation
(25%).
Participants were asked a series of questions about factors that influenced the timing of their trip
and how they checked river flows prior to recreating in Reach 2 (Table 5.2-3). The majority of
participants listed flows as a factor that influenced their decision to take a trip in Reach 2. In
addition, the majority of participants checked the flows prior to their trip and used USGS gage
information available on the Internet to do so. For those Reach 2 recreators who did check the
gage, the majority used flow information from the Gold Creek gage (RM 137) in Reach 2.
Figure 5.2-4 illustrates the timing of air, motorized, and non-motorized trips in Reach 2 in
comparison to recorded flows at the Gold Creek gage for the years 1975 through 2014. The
earliest Reach 2 trip recorded by a survey participant was a non-motorized trip in 1977. Figure
5.2-5 illustrates the timing of 2013 and 2014 air, motorized, and non-motorized trips in Reach 2
in comparison to recorded flows at the Gold Creek gage. Most Reach 2 participants felt that the
flow experienced on their trip was about the same as their preferred flow, and that they were very
likely to return to Reach 2 based on this preferred flow (Table 5.2-4). One participant had to cut
the trip short because flows were too high in Reach 2 and one participant reported that trip length
was cut short because flows were too low.
When asked to compare Susitna River Reach 2 recreation opportunities with other river
opportunities in Alaska, 59% rated it as above average, 24% average, 12% below average, and
6% did not know. Compared to other rivers in the Pacific Northwest and Canada, 65% rated it as
above average, 12% average, and 24% below average. Finally, in comparison to other rivers in
the USA, 65% rated Reach 2 as above average, 6% average, and 29% below average (Table
5.2-5).
5.3. River Recreation Reach 3 (PRM 152.3–PRM 88.9)
River Recreation Reach 3 is a 63-mile section of the Susitna River beginning at Portage Creek
and terminating at the George Parks Highway Bridge over the Susitna River. Motor vehicles can
access Reach 3 at established unimproved boat launches in the lower eleven miles of reach at the
following locations; the George Parks Highway Bridge on river right, the terminus of Susitna
River Road at PRM 99.2, and the southern terminus of D Street in Talkeetna. Motor vehicles can
also access the Susitna River via an improved boat launch on the Talkeetna River northeast of
the town of Talkeetna, about 3,000 feet upstream of the confluence of the Talkeetna and Susitna
rivers. The Alaska Railroad’s Hurricane Turn Whistle Stop Train offers access to upstream
locations on Reach 3 for non-motorized boaters at Chase, Curry, Gold Creek, and other stops
along the rail line.
Motorized and non-motorized boating is a common recreation and commercial activity on
Reach 3. A number of companies from Talkeetna including Denali View Raft Adventures,
Denali River Guides, Mahay’s Riverboat Service, and Talkeetna River Guides advertise boating
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 9 November 2015
and fishing tours in Reach 3. Only Mahay’s runs a commercial motorized trip from Talkeetna,
above Reach 3, into the lower portion of Devils Canyon. The Alaska Railroad, in concert with
Denali View River Raft Adventures, advertises a flag stop rail and Susitna River float, with a
train ride to Chase, and a gentle float back to Talkeetna with views of Mt. McKinley. Mahay’s
Riverboat Service advertises its Reach 3 commercial jet boat trips internationally and has as
many as 25,000 customers annually (Steve Mahay, Owner of Mahay’s Riverboat Service,
Personal Communication, August 12, 2013).
There are two USGS gaging stations in Reach 3. Recorded flows for the Gold Creek gage are
described in Section 5.2. Flows listed on the USGS National Water Information website were
reviewed for the period of record (May 1, 1981 to October 17, 2014) at USGS Gage No.
15292780 Susitna R. at Sunshine, AK (Sunshine gage), during the ice-free months (assumed to
be May through October). Data from this location were not available between July 1, 1986 and
September 30, 2011. Average recorded flows at the Sunshine gage were 45,431 cfs and median
recorded flows were 45,400 cfs. A high flow of 168,000 cfs was recorded in September 2012.
5.3.1. Reach 3 Susitna River Recreation Internet Survey Information
Table 5.3-1 includes general information about the 146 Internet survey participants who
recreated in Reach 3. Eighty-three of these participants provided recreation information that was
not included in the June 2014 ISR. Participant ages ranged from 17 to 82 with a median age of
45. Thirty-four participants were female and 112 were male. Ninety percent of the Reach 3
participants were Alaska residents. A variety of skill levels and craft types was recorded in
Reach 3. Reach 3 participants included whitewater kayakers, jet boaters, prop boaters, rafters,
catarafters, inflatable kayakers, canoers, and packrafters. Reach 3 survey participants reported a
wide range of skill levels including novice (11%), intermediate (29%), advanced (37%), and
expert (23%). The majority of Reach 3 participants had more than one person in their party with
a median party size of 4 and a range of 1 to 47.
Table 5.3-2 includes general information on put-in and take-out options for river recreators on
Reach 3. The largest single category (51%) of participants used a car or truck to access the put-
in location in Talkeetna, followed by access via train (19%). Train put-in locations included
Gold Creek and Curry. Other participant put-in locations included “remote Reach 3 locations,”
“float in from Reach 2,” Chulitna River, George Parks Highway Bridge, Indian River, Portage
Creek, Sherman, and “other”. Similarly, at the take-out, the majority of participants used a car or
truck to take out in Talkeetna (69%). Twenty-nine participants took out at the George Parks
Highway Bridge, 10 downstream of the George Parks Highway Bridge, 79 at Talkeetna, 1 at
Curry, 3 on the Chulitna River, 4 at Gold Creek, 7 at remote Reach 3 locations, 1 at Sherman,
and 12 at “other” locations.
Survey responses for Reach 3 participants indicated 38% feel the current level of access to Reach
3 is sufficient, while 26% were in favor of improvements and 25% opposed additional access
(Figure 5.3-1). Reach 3 participants indicated current river access conditions were sufficient for
Reaches 1 and 2 (36% and 32%), while 27% of the respondents indicated they would oppose
additional access to Reach 1 and 2. In contrast, 23% and 25% of Reach 3 participants were in
favor of improvements to Reach 1 and 2, respectively (Figure 5.3-1).
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 10 November 2015
Participants were asked to list the primary and secondary purposes of their trip in Reach 3 and
were given 12 purposes to choose from including a write-in option for “other” primary and
secondary trip purposes. Figure 5.3-2 illustrates the primary recreation purposes for aircraft,
motorized craft, and non-motorized craft in Reach 3. Non-motorized craft participants listed
non-motorized recreation (27%) as their primary trip purpose, followed by wilderness and
solitude (20%). Twenty-one percent of motorized craft participants reported fishing as their
primary trip purpose, followed by motorized recreation (17%). The four aircraft participants for
Reach 3 listed hunting photography, and wildlife viewing as their primary trip purposes. Figure
5.3-3 illustrates the secondary recreation purposes for aircraft, motorized craft, and non-
motorized craft in Reach 3. The most common non-motorized craft secondary trip purposes
were wildlife viewing and camping. The most common motorized craft secondary trip purposes
were motorized recreation, and wildlife viewing. Fishing, photography, and wilderness/solitude
were the secondary trip purposes for the four Reach 3 aircraft participants.
Similar to Reach 1 and 2, participants were asked a series of questions about factors that
influenced the timing of their trip and how they checked river flows prior to recreating in Reach
3 (Table 5.3-3). The majority of participants listed flows as a factor that influenced their
decision to take a trip in Reach 3. In addition, the majority of participants checked the flows
prior to their trip and used USGS gage information available on the Internet to do so. Also
similar to recreators on Reaches 1 and 2, the majority of Reach 3 recreators used flow
information from the Gold Creek gage. Figure 5.3-4 illustrates the timing of air, motorized, and
non-motorized trips in Reach 3 from 1975 to 2015 in comparison to recorded flows at the Gold
Creek gage. The earliest Reach 3 trip recorded by a survey participant was a non-motorized trip
in 1979. Figure 5.3-5 illustrates the timing of 2013 and 2014 air, motorized, and non-motorized
trips in Reach 3 in comparison to recorded flows at the Gold Creek gage. Most Reach 3
participants felt that the flow experienced on their trip was about the same as their preferred
flow, and that they were very likely to return to Reach 3 based on this preferred flow (Table
5.3-4). Four participants had to cut their trips short because flows were too high in Reach 3 and
three reported that trip length was cut short because flows were too low.
When asked to compare Susitna River Reach 3 recreation opportunities with other river
opportunities in Alaska, 54% rated it as above average, 31% average, and 15% below average.
Compared to other rivers in the Pacific Northwest and Canada, 54% rated it as above average,
23% average, 15% below average, and 8% did not know. Finally, in comparison to other rivers
in the USA, 54% rated Reach 3 as above average, 15% average, 23% below average, and 8% did
not know (Table 5.3-5).
6. DISCUSSION
As described in Section 12.7.4 of the RSP, River Recreation Flow and Access Study efforts to
date have involved documenting river uses including transportation river uses. The Susitna River
Recreation and Access Internet Survey was used to gather information on river recreation uses,
location, frequency, seasonal patterns, primary trip purpose, secondary activities, access,
campsites, and river recreation quality relative to trip flow evaluations for three distinct Susitna
River Recreation reaches described in Section 12.7.3 of the RSP.
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 11 November 2015
Survey participation was solicited by advertising the river recreation survey electronically
through a multitude of forums. Formal and informal interviews were conducted in 2013 to
supplement the Internet survey data as well as gather additional information about user groups,
trip purposes, use patterns, access, flows, and other recreation information and presented in the
June 2014 ISR. Information on winter recreation activities and transportation on the ice-covered
Susitna River was obtained through interviews with regional officials, winter recreation users,
event organizers, event participants, and other knowledgeable area residents, and presented in the
June 2014 ISR. River ice-dependent winter recreation and transportation information obtained
through the interviews was summarized for respective recreation opportunities including primary
purpose, secondary activities, ice thickness required, need for ice bridges versus longitudinal ice
cover, seasonal use patterns, frequency of use, access points, and winter recreation quality on the
Susitna.
All data from the internet survey has been obtained and results presented in this report. The study
component is now complete.
7. CONCLUSION
7.1. Decision Points from Study Plan
Based on the data and analysis thus far, the study has concluded the Project would not affect
river flows in a way that would impact how recreationists currently use the reach of the river
downstream of the Parks Highway Bridge (PRM 88.9). The Study Plan (RSP Section 12.7.3)
provides that if 2013 study results indicate that the Project may affect river flows in a way that
recreationists currently use the reach of the river downstream of the Parks Highway Bridge
(PRM 88.9), the study effort for the next study season may extend farther downstream. In 2013
and 2014, the study team collected information on river recreation use and experience and
coordinated with the study teams for the Instream Flow Study (Study 8.6), Ice Processes in the
Susitna River Study (Study 7.6), Geomorphology Study (Study 6.5), Recreation Resources Study
(Study 12.5), and Aesthetics Resources Study (Study 12.6).
In 2013 and 2014, AEA collected information on river recreation use and experience and
coordinated with the study teams for the Instream Flow Study (Study 8.5), Ice Processes in the
Susitna River Study (Study 7.6), Geomorphology Study (Study 6.5), Recreation Resources Study
(Study 12.5), and Aesthetics Resources Study (Study 12.6). The first year results from Instream
Flow Study (Study 8.5), Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study (Study 7.6), Geomorphology
Study (Study 6.5), Recreation Resources Study (Study 12.5), and Aesthetics Resources Study
(Study 12.6) do not indicate that the project would affect river flows in a way that recreationists
currently use the reach of the river downstream of the Parks Highway Bridge (PRM 88.9) as as
described in the June 2014 ISR.
7.2. Modifications to Study Plan
None
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 12 November 2015
7.3. Steps to Complete the Study
Two focus group discussions are pending: (1) whitewater boating, and (2) winter ice and snow
travel in the river corridor for motorized and non-motorized users. Once completed, information
obtained from the focus discussions will be summarized for flow preferences for whitewater
boating and ice conditions needed for motorized and non-motorized travel.
7.4. Conclusion
From 2013 to 2014, AEA completed a recreation flow analysis on mainstem reaches of the
Susitna River that considers the relationship between river flows and ice conditions, river
recreation and transportation.. The field work, data collection, data analysis, and reporting for
this River Recreation Flow and Access Study successfully meet the study objectives in the
FERC-approved Study Plan. The results of this River Recreation Flow and Access Study are
reported herein and earlier by AEA in the June 2014 ISR.
8. LITERATURE CITED
AEA (Alaska Energy Authority). 2012. Revised Study Plan: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric
Project, FERC Project No. 14241. Prepared for the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission by the Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage, AK. December 2012.
Published online at: http://www.susitna-watanahydro.org/study-plan.
Embick, Andrew. 1994. Fast and Cold, a Guide to Alaska Whitewater. Globe Pequot Press.
298p.
Jettmar, Karen. 2008. Alaska River Guide: Canoeing, Kayaking, and Rafting in the Last
Frontier. Menasha Ridge Press 328p.
Whittaker, D., B. Shelby, W. Jackson, R. Beschta. 1993. Instream flows for recreation: a
handbook on concepts and research methods. U.S. Dept. Interior National Park Service.
103pp.
Whittaker, D., Shelby, B. and Gangemi, J. 2005. Flows and recreation: A guide to studies
for river professionals, Portland, OR: Hydropower Reform Coalition and National Park
Service Hydropower Recreation Assistance Program.
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 13 November 2015
9. TABLES
Table 4.1-1. Susitna River Recreation Internet Survey Distribution
Organization Electronic Solicitation Personal Solicitation Distribution of Postcards
Above Alaska Aviation x x x
Alaska Department of Fish and Game;
Glennallen x
Alaska Airmen’s Association x
Alaska Backcountry Adventure Tours x
Alaska Bush Float Plane Service x x x
Alaska Fish Bone Charters x
Alaska Flyfishers Association x
Alaska Mountaineering School x
Alaska Outdoor Council x
Alaska Raft and Kayak x x x
Alaska Railroad x x x
Alaska Tour and Travel x
Alaska Outdoor Recreation Forum x
Alaska Freshwater Kayaking Forum x
Alaska Rafting Forum x
Alaska Powerboating Forum x
Alaska Airboating Forum x
Alaska Float Hunting Forum x
Alaska Freshwater Fishing Forum x
Alaska Flyfishing Forum x
Alaska Bushflying Forum x
American Whitewater Association x
Anchorage Paddling Club x
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 14 November 2015
Organization Electronic Solicitation Personal Solicitation Distribution of Postcards
Black Bear ATV/Air-Boat Tours x
Bureau of Land Management, Glennallen;
Heath Emmons & Denton Hamby x
Boy Scouts of America, Blair Lake Project x
Cross Country Alaska x
Dave Fish Alaska x
Denali Guides and Outfitters/Denali
Trekking Co. x
Denali Outdoor Center x x x
Denali Raft Adventures x x x
Denali Southside River Guides x x x
Denali View Raft Adventures x x x
Deshka Landing x x x
Fairbanks Paddlers x
High Lake Lodge x
Huskeytown Kennel x
Gracious House Lodge x x x
Interior Alaska Airboat Association Inc. x
Just Fly Fish x
K2 Aviation x x x
Lake Louise Lodge x
Maclaren River Lodge x
Mahay’s Riverboat Service x x x
Mckinley Flight Tours/Talkeetna Aero
Services x x x
National Outdoor Leadership School
(NOLS), Alaska x x
Nova River Guides x x x
Paxson Alpine Tours x
Phantom Salmon Charters x
Recreation Equipment Incorporated (REI)
Anchorage x x x
River Wranglers x
Rust’s Flying Service x
Sheldon Air Service x
Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife x
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 15 November 2015
Organization Electronic Solicitation Personal Solicitation Distribution of Postcards
Sportsman’s Warehouse Anchorage x x x
Stephan Lake Lodge x
Talkeetna Adventure Company x
Talkeetna Air Taxi x x x
Talkeetna Chamber of Commerce x
Talkeetna River Guides x
Talkeetna Sundog Kennel x
Talkeetna Travel and Reservations x
Talkeetna/Denali Visitor Center x
Talkeetna Roadhouse x
Three Rivers Fly Shop x x x
Tri Rivers Charter x x x
University of Alaska Kayak Club x
Willow Air x
Table 5.1-1 Susitna River Reach 1 Internet Survey Participant Information
Age; Gender Age: Mean (44), Median (42), Range (8-83); Gender: M(49) F (3)
Resident or Non-Resident Non-Residents (10) Residents (42)
Type of Craft Motorized (18), Non-Motorized (29), Airplane (5)
Specific Watercraft Whitewater Kayak (10) Raft (8) Packraft (6) Closed deck canoe (1) Open
canoe (1) Airboat (6) Prop Boat(6) Jetboat (6) Cataraft (1) Other (2)
Skill Level Novice (4), Intermediate (13), Advanced (15), Expert (15)
Years Using the Craft Mean (17), Median (15), Range (1-59)
How many days/year using this craft <5 (3) 6-10 (4) 11-20 (11) >20 (34)
How many times have you recreated on
this Reach
1 (11) 2-5 (16) 6-10 (9) >10 (16)
How many people were in your party Mean (4), Median (3), Range (1-25)
Use of Commercial Outfitter or Rental 25%% Yes 75%% No
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 16 November 2015
Table 5.1-2 Susitna River Reach 1 Put in and Take out Information
Table 5.1-3 Susitna River Reach 1 Put in and Take out Information
Do they typically check flows for the trip;
For this trip?
Typically (37 Yes; 22 No) This Trip (33 Yes;22 No)
How do they check flows for the trip Internet Gage (21), Internet Gages for Adjacent Rivers (10), Observation
(14), Local Knowledge (16), Weather Patterns (12) Other (3)
Gage (s) Used for Flow Information Su. R. at Sunshine, RM 84 (7); Su. R. at Gold RM 137 (14); Su. R. above
Tsusena C. RM 182 (8); Su. R. at Nr. Denali RM 291 (11);
Factors that influenced the decision to
take the trip
Flow (24) Weather (19) Vacation time (16) Hunting/fishing season (29)
Availability with friends/family (18) Other (10)
Car/Truck ATV Motorized
Boat
Non-
motorized
Boat
Snowmobile Float Plane Wheeled
Plane Hike NA
Float in from upstream of Denali Hwy 7 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
Denali Highway Bridge 24 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Access via tributary float 3 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
Reach 1 remote location 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 0
Jay Creek 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maclaren River 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
Tyone River 3 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Watana Creek 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
Other 8 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 3
Denali Highway Bridge 17 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Float through to Reach 2 6 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2
Exit Via Tributary 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Reach 1 remote location 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0
Jay Creek 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maclaren River 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oshetna River 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Tyone River 5 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
Watana Creek 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
Other 15 6 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 5
Take-out
Access Type Location Name
Total Number
using Access
Location
How did you access the Susitna River at this location?
Put-in
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 17 November 2015
Table 5.1-4 Susitna River Reach 1 Flow Preference Information
Compared to the recent trip should the
flows be lower, higher, or the same
Much lower (4) slightly lower (4) About the same (34) slightly higher (13)
Much higher flow (0)
Likeliness of returning to the River Reach
based on preferred flow
Very likely (45) Somewhat likely (7) Unlikely (3)
Did lack of water clarity contribute to hits,
stops, drags and boat running aground
A lot (2) Somewhat (17) Not at all (36)
Trip length cut short because flows were
too high or too low
Too high (2) Too Low (0) Not Applicable (53)
Table 5.1-5 Susitna River Reach 1 Comparison to other rivers statewide, regionally, and nationally1
Compared to other rivers in: Median Mean Below Average Average Above Average Don’t Know
Alaska 2 2.4 13% 40% 40% 7%
Pacific Northwest & Canada 3 2.8 16% 18% 36% 29%
USA 3 2.7 24% 11% 38% 27%
1. Rating Scale: 1-Below Average, 2-Average, 3-Above Average, 0-Don’t know
Table 5.2-1 Susitna River Reach 2 Internet Survey Participant Information
Age; Gender Age: Mean (42), Median (37), Range (19-83); Gender: M(41) F (6)
Resident or Non-Resident Non-Residents (27) Residents (20)
Type of Craft Motorized (9), Non-Motorized (35), Airplane (3)
Specific Watercraft Raft (1) Cataraft (1) Whitewater Kayak (28) Packraft (2) Closed deck canoe
(1) Jetboat (6) Airboat (1) Prop boat (2) Other (2)
Skill Level Novice (3) Intermediate (5), Advanced (7), Expert (29)
Years Using the Craft Mean (21), Median (20), Range (0-59)
How many days/year using this craft >5 (2) 6-10 (1) 11-20 (5) <20 (39)
How many times have you recreated on
this Reach
1 (15) 2-5 (15) 6-10 (6) >10 (11)
How many people were in your party Mean (5), Median (4), Range (1-35)
Use of Commercial Outfitter or Rental 51% Yes 49% No
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 18 November 2015
Table 5.2-2 Susitna River Reach 2 Put in and Take out Information
Table 5.2-3 Susitna River Reach 2 Put in and Take out Information
Do they typically check flows for the trip;
For this trip?
Typically (37 Yes; 10 No) This Trip (38 Yes; 9 No)
How do they check flows for the trip Internet Gage (24), Internet Gages for Adjacent Rivers (9), Observation
(13), Local Knowledge (21), Weather Patterns (18) Other (5)
Gage (s) Used for Flow Information Su. R. at Sunshine, RM 84 (3), Su. R. at Gold RM 137 (21); Su. R. above
Tsusena C. RM 182 (4); Su. R. at Nr. Denali RM 291 (4);
Factors that influenced the decision to take
the trip
Flow (34) Weather (27) Vacation time (17) Hunting/fishing season (11)
Availability with friends/family (17) Other (7)
Car/truck ATV Motorized
Boat
Non-
motorized
Boat
Snowmobile Float Plane Wheeled
Plane Hike Helicopter NA
Float in from Reach 1 9 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 6
Reach 2 Remote location 11 0 0 0 0 0 8 1 1 0 1
Devil Creek 5 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0
Fog Creek 9 0 0 1 0 0 3 1 1 0 3
Log Creek 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Portage Creek 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other 10 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 5
Float through to Reach 3 15 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 11
Reach 2 remote location 4 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0
Devil Creek 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
Fog Creek 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Log Creek 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Portage Creek 6 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 2
Other 18 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 3 0 12
Take-out
Access Type Location Name
Total Number
using Access
Location
How did you access the Susitna River at this location?
Put-in
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 19 November 2015
Table 5.2-4 Susitna River Reach 2 Flow Preference Information
Compared to the recent trip should the
flows be lower, higher, or the same
Much lower (0) slightly lower (8) About the same (26) slightly higher (12)
Much higher flow (1)
Likeliness of returning to the River Reach
based on preferred flow
Very likely (35) Somewhat likely (7) Unlikely (5)
Did lack of water clarity contribute to hits,
stops, drags and boat running aground
A lot (3) Somewhat (7) Not at all (37)
Trip length cut short because flows were
too high or too low
Too high (1) Too Low (1) Not Applicable (45)
Table 5.2-5 Susitna River Reach 2 Comparison to other rivers statewide, regionally, and nationally1
Compared to other rivers in: Median Mean Below Average Average Above Average Don’t Know
Alaska 3 2.6 12% 24% 59% 6%
Pacific Northwest & Canada 3 2.4 24% 12% 65% 0%
USA 3 2.4 29% 6% 65% 0%
1. Rating Scale: 1-Below Average, 2-Average, 3-Above Average, 0-Don’t know
Table 5.3-1 Susitna River Reach 3 Internet Survey Participant Information
Age; Gender Age: Mean (46), Median (45), Range (17-82); Gender: M(112) F (34)
Resident or Non-Resident Non-Residents (14) Residents (132)
Type of Craft Motorized (61), Non-Motorized (81), Airplane (4)
Specific Watercraft Whitewater Kayak (21) Packraft (14) Jetboat (50) Airboat (3) Prop Boat (8)
Raft (25) Cataraft (3) Inflatable Kayak (7) Open Canoe (7) Other (4)
Skill Level Novice (15) Intermediate (41), Advanced (53), Expert (33)
Years Using the Craft Mean (16), Median (15), Range (0-54)
How many days/year using this craft <5 (14) 6-10 (15) 11-20 (37) >20 (80)
How many times have you recreated on
this Reach
1 (20) 2-5 (56) 6-10 (17) >10 (53)
How many people were in your party Mean (5), Median (4), Range (1-47)
Use of Commercial Outfitter or Rental 23% Yes 77% No
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 20 November 2015
Table 5.3-2 Susitna River Reach 3 Put in and Take out Information
Table 5.3-3 Susitna River Reach 3 Put in and Take out Information
Do they typically check flows for the trip;
For this trip?
Typically (120 Yes; 26 No) This Trip (113 Yes; 33 No)
How do they check flows for the trip Internet Gage (71), Internet Gages for Adjacent Rivers (24), Observation
(53), Local Knowledge (63), Weather Patterns (40) Other (9)
Gage (s) Used for Flow Information Su. R. at Sunshine RM 84 (31); Su. R. at Gold RM 137 (43); Su. R. above
Tsusena C. RM 182 (8); Su. R. at Nr. Denali RM 291 (10);
Factors that influenced the decision to take
the trip
Flow (73) Weather (66) Vacation time (43) Hunting/fishing season (44)
Availability with friends/family (80) Other (23)
Car/truck ATV Motorized
Boat
Non-
motorized
Boat
Snowmobile Float Plane Wheeled
Plane Hike Train NA
Reach 3 remote location 9 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 3
Float in from Reach 2 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 7
Curry 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0
Chulitna River 14 13 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
George Parks Highway Bridge (aka
Sunshine)10 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Gold Creek 18 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 16 0
Indian River 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Portage Creek 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2
Sherman 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Talkeetna 56 43 0 5 0 1 3 0 0 2 2
Other 15 5 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 2
Reach 3 remote location 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3
Curry 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
Chulitna River 3 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Downstream George Parks Highway
Bridge 10 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
George Parks Highway Bridge (aka
Sunshine)29 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Gold Creek 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
Sherman 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Talkeetna 79 58 1 5 0 0 1 0 4 1 9
Other 12 4 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 3
Take-out
Access Type Location Name
Total Number
using Access
Location
How did you access the Susitna River at this location?
Put-in
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 21 November 2015
Table 5.3-4 Susitna River Reach 3 Flow Preference Information
Compared to the recent trip should the
flows be lower, higher, or the same
Much lower (1) slightly lower (15) About the same (107) slightly higher (20)
Much higher (3)
Likeliness of returning to the River Reach
based on preferred flow
Very likely (102) Somewhat likely (39) Unlikely (5)
Did lack of water clarity contribute to hits,
stops, drags and boat running aground
A lot (8) Somewhat (30) Not at all (108)
Trip length cut short because flows were
too high or too low
Too high (4) Too Low (3) Not Applicable (139)
Table 5.3-5 Susitna River Reach 3 Comparison to other rivers statewide, regionally, and nationally1
Compared to other rivers in: Median Mean Below Average Average Above Average Don’t Know
Alaska 3 2.4 15% 31% 54% 0%
Pacific Northwest & Canada 3 2.5 15% 23% 54% 8%
USA 3 2.5 23% 15% 54% 8%
1. Rating Scale: 1-Below Average, 2-Average, 3-Above Average, 0-Don’t know
Table 5.3-6 Comparison of the number of internet survey participant trips by Reach and type of travel during ice free
periods in 2013 and 2014.
Reach Type of Travel 2013 2014
Reach 1
Air 2 0
Motorized 12 0
Non-motorized 10 1
Reach 2
Air 1 0
Motorized 7 0
Non-motorized 10 0
Reach 3
Air 1 0
Motorized 34 6
Non-motorized 34 1
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 22 October 2015
10. FIGURES
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 23 October 2015
Figure 3-1. River Recreation Study Area
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 24 October 2015
Figure 5.1-1. Reach 1 Internet Survey Responses Regarding River Access Responses (n=55)
Figure 5.1-2. Primary Purposes of Recreation in Reach 1
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Oppose Additional Access In Favor of Improvements to
Access River
Current Access is Sufficient No Opinion
Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3
1%9%2%
19%
16%
10%
18%
11%
7%
8%
7%
10%
8%
4%
20%
4%
30%40%
5%
11%10%21%
9%10%5%4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Non-motorized Craft Motorized Craft Aircraft
Primary Purpose of Recreation
Other
Wilderness/Solitude
Fishing
Hunting
Photography
Wildlife Viewing
Camping
Whitewater Recreation
Non-Motorized River Recreation
Motorized Recreation
Transportation
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 25 October 2015
Figure 5.1-3. Secondary Purposes of Recreation in Reach 1
4%7%2%
10%8%
3%8%
17%21%
33%
19%10%
17%
19%
10%
4%
7%
9%
10%50%
9%
14%
2%7%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Non-motorized Craft Motorized Craft Aircraft
Secondary Purpose of Recreation
Other
Wilderness/Solitude
Fishing
Hunting
Photography
Wildlife Viewing
Camping
Whitewater Recreation
Non-Motorized River Recreation
Motorized Recreation
Transportation
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 26 October 2015
Figure 5.1-4. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized Trips in Reach 1 (1975-2013)
Figure 5.1-5. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized Trips in Reach 1 (2013 and 2014)1 (See end of figures section)
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
Gold Creek Air Trips Motorized Trips Non-motorized Trips
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000 2013 -2014
Gold Creek Air Trips Motorized Trips Non-motorized Trips
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 27 October 2015
Figure 5.1-6. Reach 1 Executive Interviewees Winter Activities (8 Interviewees)
Figure 5.2-1. Reach 2 Internet Survey Responses Regarding River Access Responses (n=47)
skiing/
skijoring
15%
dog mushing
7%
wood cutting
6%
cabin access
7%
Snowshoeing
4%
Hunting/
Predator
Calling
17%
Trapping
11%
Ice Fishing
8%
Sight seeing/
Aurora
Viewing/
Photography
8%
snowmachining
13%
Aviation
4%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Oppose Additional Access In Favor of Improvements to
Access River
Current Access is Sufficient No Opinion
Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 28 October 2015
Figure 5.2-2. Reach 2 Primary Purposes of Recreation
Figure 5.2-3. Reach 2 Secondary Purposes of Recreation
2%4%1%
20%
12%14%
33%
4%
10%
16%
14%
7%
8%
5%
4%
14%
1%
8%29%
4%20%
14%
19%
16%14%5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Non-motorized Craft Motorized Craft Aircraft
Primary Purpose of Recreation
Other
Wilderness/Solitude
Fishing
Hunting
Photography
Wildlife Viewing
Camping
Whitewater Recreation
Non-Motorized River Recreation
Motorized Recreation
Transportation
10%
25%
15%
13%
10%
2%
10%
22%
5%
25%
20%
15%
25%20%
15%
5%4%
25%15%
15%
4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Non-motorized Craft Motorized Craft Aircraft
Secondary Purpose of Recreation
Other
Wilderness/Solitude
Fishing
Hunting
Photography
Wildlife Viewing
Camping
Whitewater Recreation
Non-Motorized River Recreation
Motorized Recreation
Transportation
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 29 October 2015
Figure 5.2-4. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized trips in Reach 2 (1975-2013)
Figure 5.2-5. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized Trips in Reach 2 (2013 and 2014)1 (See end of figures section)
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
Gold Creek Air Trips Motorized Trips Non-motorized Trips
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000 2013 -2014
Gold Creek Air Trips Motorized Trips Non-motorized Trips
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 30 October 2015
Figure 5.2-6. Reach 2 Executive Interviewees Winter Activities (7 Interviewees)
Figure 5.3-1. Reach 3 Internet Survey Responses Regarding River Access Responses (n=146)
Skiing/
Ski-jouring
17%
Dog mushing
5%
Cabin access
10%
Snowshoeing
10%Hunting/
Predator Calling
15%
Trapping
12%
Sight seeing/
Photography
8%
Snowmachining
15%
Aviation
8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Oppose Additional Access In Favor of Improvements to
Access River
Current Access is Sufficient No Opinion
Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 31 October 2015
Figure 5.3-2. Reach 3 Primary Purposes of Recreation
Figure 5.3-3. Reach 3 Secondary Purposes of Recreation
3%7%1%
17%27%
13%
1%
15%
13%
8%
5%
20%
5%
4%
20%
2%
13%
60%
3%21%
20%13%
4%5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Non-motorized Craft Motorized Craft Aircraft
Primary Purpose of Recreation
Other
Wilderness/Solitude
Fishing
Hunting
Photography
Wildlife Viewing
Camping
Whitewater Recreation
Non-Motorized River Recreation
Motorized Recreation
Transportation
4%9%
18%
4%
2%
7%
3%
19%
10%
20%
18%
18%12%
33%
2%4%
11%9%
33%
12%13%
33%
2%1%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Non-motorized Craft Motorized Craft Aircraft
Secondary Purpose of Recreation
Other
Wilderness/Solitude
Fishing
Hunting
Photography
Wildlife Viewing
Camping
Whitewater Recreation
Non-Motorized River Recreation
Motorized Recreation
Transportation
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 32 October 2015
Figure 5.3-4. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized Trips in Reach 3 (1975-2015)
Figure 5.3-5. Timing of Air, Motorized, and Non-motorized Trips in Reach 3 (2013 and 2014) 1 (See end of figures section)
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
Gold Creek Air Trips Motorized Trips Non-motorized Trips
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000 2013 -2014
Gold Creek Air Trips Motorized Trips Non-motorized Trips
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 33 October 2015
Figure 5.3-6. Reach 3 Executive Interviewees Winter Activities (17 Interviewees)
1. Excludes trips where flow data was not available due to river ice
Skiing/Ski-jouring
21%
Dog Mushing
5%
Wood Cutting
5%
Fat Tire Biking
2%Cabin Access
10%
Snowshoeing
11%
Hunting/Predator
Calling
12%
Trapping
8%
Ice Fishing
5%
Sight Seeing/
Photography
4%
Snowmachining
15%
Aviation
2%
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 October 2015
APPENDIX A: RIVER RECREATION AND ACCESS INTERNET SURVEY
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 1 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 2 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 3 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 4 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 5 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 6 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 7 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 8 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 9 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 10 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 11 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 12 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 13 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 14 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 15 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 16 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 17 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 18 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 19 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 20 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 21 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 22 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 23 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 24 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 25 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 26 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 27 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 28 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 29 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 30 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 31 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 32 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 33 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 34 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 35 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 36 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 37 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 38 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 39 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix A – Page 40 October 2015
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 October 2015
APPENDIX B: RIVER RECREATION EXECUTIVE INTERVIEW
QUESTIONS
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix B – Page 1 October 2015
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
River Recreation and Access 2013 Executive Interview
Protocol (DRAFT)
(revised DRAFT 10/10/2012)
Introduction:
Hi I’m _____________with OASIS ERM, a consulting firm located in Anchorage.
We are working for the Alaska Energy Authority on the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
studying river recreation resources in the Susitna River area. We are contacting agencies,
commercial providers, organizations, and individual users to get a better sense of river
recreation use patterns on the Susitna River. We would like to conduct an interview with you. Is
now a good time or can I schedule a time that is more convenient?
Before we start I would like to read you a brief description of the project.
This survey is part of a study to determine river recreation use patterns, access and flow
preferences for three river reaches on the Susitna River. The Alaska Energy Authority is studying
the feasibility of building the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project. The proposed Project would
be located on the Susitna River roughly 86 river miles upstream from Talkeetna and
approximately 34 miles upstream of the Devils Canyon rapids. As currently envisioned, the
project would include a roughly 750-foot tall dam located below Watana Creek and would result
in a 23,546 acre, 42.5-mile long reservoir. Project construction and operation will alter river
flows in the Susitna downstream. The dam and reservoir could alter downstream navigation and
access. When completed, the project would produce nearly 50 percent of the Railbelt’s electrical
demand, or an annual average of 2,800,000 Megawatt Hours (MWh) of renewable energy
generation.
This survey is designed to collect information on existing motorized and non-motorized river
recreation opportunities using a variety of watercraft. The river has been divided into three
distinct reaches: Reach 1, Denali Highway bridge to Fog Creek (RM 290 to 177); Reach 2, Fog
Creek to Portage including Devils Canyon (RM 177 to 149); and Reach 3, Portage Creek to the
George Parks Highway Bridge (RM 149 to 86).
1) First of all, can you please describe your business/organization/agency or individual?
a) Areas of operation/activity relative to the three river recreation reaches
b) Years in business/doing activity
c) Services/tours provided
d) Client/membership base – Anchorage? Fairbanks? Non-residents? Local area
residents?
e) Other information
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix B – Page 2 October 2015
2) Do you or your [organization/ business/agency] have any [knowledge/or use] of river
recreation activities on the three river recreation reaches on the Susitna River?
Can you please provide me with some background on the following?
a) Types of river recreation use by river reach/location
b) Type of watercraft
c) Time of year the river is used
d) Frequency of use
e) Level of use (ex. heavy, light, etc.) –[look for hard numbers]
f) Any other information?
3) For your river recreation trips on the Susitna River what is the…?
a) Primary trip purpose
b) Secondary activities associated with trip
c) Type of watercraft
d) Trip length (days and miles)
e) Time of year the river is used
f) Frequency of use
g) For commercial providers--Client / membership base – Anchorage? Fairbanks?
Non-residents? Local area residents?
h) Any other information?
4) Please describe the flow levels when you participate or observe river use for:
a) Transportation
b) Recreation
c) Whitewater
5) Relative to river flows, what flow related factors most influence your decision to
initiate a trip on the Susitna River? Please elaborate for each factor that applies and
identify high and low flow levels that trigger you to initiate vs. cancel a trip.
a) river safety
b) speed of travel
c) navigation
d) access to river camps
e) portages (lack thereof or access to river-level portages around difficult rapids)
f) whitewater opportunities: challenging rapids, powerful hydraulics, play spots
g) access for fixed wing aircraft on floats or wheels (specify)
h) Other
6) How do you estimate the flow levels in the River?
a) Internet
b) Direct observation
c) Communication with other river users
d) Other
e) Do not check flow levels
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix B – Page 3 October 2015
7) How and where do you access the river?
a) Access locations for respective river reaches
b) Modes of transportation to access each location
c) Approximate cost for each mode of transportation to the river
8) Are you noticing any trends in recreational use of the area?
a) Seasonal Changes?
b) Is use and interest growing?
c) Lessening?
d) About the same?
e) Is the mix of recreational use changing?
9) What types of new infrastructure might help improve river access?
Would you prefer river access not be improved? [If yes] Why?
10) Are there any other issues regarding river recreation use or access that we should be
aware of?
11) Would you consider this area a unique setting for river recreation use in Alaska? Why
or why not?
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 October 2015
APPENDIX C: WINTER RIVER RECREATION AND TRANSPORTATION
EXECUTIVE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix C – Page 1 October 2015
Winter Recreation & Transportation Exec. Interview Template
Day, Month xx, 2013
TIME
Name and Contact Number:
Organization or Agency:
Date of Interview:5//2013
Time of Interview (start):Time of
Interview (end):
Primary Use Season:
Summer□
Winter □
Main Month of Use:
Type of Use:
Recreation □
Utilitarian □
Transportation □
Main Winter Activities:
Snow machining□
Skiing □
Dog mushing/skijoring □
Hunting/Trapping □
Cabin-access □
Other□
Commercial□
Non-Commercial□
Interviewee Expertise
Aesthetics □
Soundscape □
River Recreation/Flow □
General Recreation □
River Reach for Winter Use:
RR1 □ RR2 □ RR3 □
Main locations of Use (see map grid):
1. First of all, do you use the river in the capacity as a commercial
operator, organization, event, agency, or as a non-commercial user?
Indicate all that apply.
2. For [commercial operator, organization, event, agency] please
describe your [business/organization/ event/agency]
a) Areas of operation:
b) Years in operation:
c) Services/tours provided:
d) Membership
e) Event type and dates
f) Other information
3. Do you or your [business/organization/event/agency/individual] have
any [knowledge/or use] of the three winter recreation reaches on
the Susitna River?
4. Can you please provide me with some background on this?
a) Type of activity
1. Snow machining
2. Skiing—ungroomed vs groomed surface/marked trail
3. Dog mushing
4. Trapping
5. Snowshoeing.
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix C – Page 2 October 2015
6. Aviation
7. Walking or other (Recreational cabin access and re-supply)
8. Other?
b) Time of winter—specific months and level of use (ex. heavy, light, etc.) [look for hard
numbers].
c) Client / membership base–
1. Local area resident?
2. Anchorage?
3. Fairbanks?
4. Non-resident?
5. Please describe the timing of winter recreation activities and your preferences for winter
recreation and travel for each river reach where you have experience along the river
corridor:
a) Do you consider your activities to be transportation, winter recreation or both?
Transportation
b) What areas of the Susitna River corridor do you use for winter transportation?
c) Why do you use the river corridor in winter for transportation?
d) From a transportation perspective, do you use the river ice to cross the river from
one side to the other or travel longitudinally up and down the river corridor?
e) What type of ice conditions do you require to safely travel the river during the
winter?
f) What is the earliest and the latest month to safely travel the river during the winter?
g) In what month is your highest frequency of winter transportation activity on the river
corridor.
Recreation (follow up questions if not answered above)
h) What recreation activities are you pursuing during the winter on or near the Susitna?
i) What areas of the Susitna River corridor do you use for these winter recreation
activities?
j) For these recreation activities, do you recreate on the river corridor specifically or do you cross the
river to pursue your desired recreation activity?
k) What is the earliest month you typically engage in these recreation activities on the
river corridor?
l) What is the latest month for these winter recreation activities on the river corridor?
m) In what month is your highest period of winter recreation activity?
Winter Recreation Events
n) Are there any special events during the winter that are dependent on safe ice
conditions? If so, what month of the winter does this event(s) occur?
o. What type of ice conditions do you require for safe recreation during the winter?
Winter Recreation Events
a. Are there any special events during the winter that are dependent on safe ice conditions? If so,
what month of the winter does this event(s) occur?
b. Do you participate in any of these events? Please name.
2014 STUDY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT RIVER RECREATION FLOW AND ACCESS STUDY (12.7)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix C – Page 3 October 2015
6. Are you noticing any trends in recreational use of the area? a) Seasonal Changes during the winter
(month to month)? b) Is use and interest growing for winter recreation?
c) Lessening?
d) About the same?
e) Is the mix of recreational use changing?
7. What types of provisions might help improve winter access to the river? (i.e.
informational signs, postings, public access points, developed facilities).
8. Would you prefer access not be improved? [If yes] Why?
9. Are there any other issues regarding winter recreation use on the river corridor or access
that we should be aware of?
10. Would you consider this area a unique setting for winter recreation use in Alaska? Why
or why not?
11. What other areas with winter recreation opportunities similar to the Susitna do you use for
recreational outings?
12. Are there any specific people that you think it would be important for us to include in
our interview research?