Hydropower and Fish. Considerations & Case Studies for Sustainable Development. Megan Marie Habitat Biologist ADF&G Division of Habitat Anchorage, AK

Transcription

1 Hydropower and Fish Considerations & Case Studies for Sustainable Development USSD Cold Climate Workshop September 20, 2017 Girdwood, AK Photo by CVEA Megan Marie Habitat Biologist ADF&G Division of Habitat Anchorage, AK Mark Emery

2 Discussion Objectives Importance of fish & hydropower in Alaska Potential impacts to fish Regulatory framework for fish habitat protection in Alaska Considerations & BMPs to avoid/minimize impacts

3 Fish are Important to Alaska Alaska Constitution: Article VIII, Section 3 Common Use and Section 4 Sustained Yield Intimately tied to life in Alaska (personal use, subsistence, sport, and commercial fisheries) Economic value - Commercial & Sport Fishing

4

5 The Economic Value of Alaska s Seafood Industry, McDowell Group for ASMI, December 2015

6 Sport & Personal Use Fishing 2007 ADF&G study - economic impacts of sport fishing $1.4 billion in angler spending 15,879 jobs & $545 million in income $14M revenue license sales in FY16 Mark Emery Ken Marsh Subsistence harvest rural Alaska: avg ~160lb/person (2014) Personal use fisheries: ~730,000 salmon harvested in 2014

7 Hydro is Important to Alaska 2 nd highest avg cost per kwh ~18 cents Can be 3-5X higher in many rural areas Abundant opportunities for hydropower

8 Hydropower Impacts on Fish & Habitat Direct Effects Fish passage Modified instream flow Indirect Effects Changes/loss of instream habitats Suspended sediment transport Changes in subsurface flows Avoidance/migration delay Food availability-stream productivity

9 The Balancing Act Balance Resource Development and Resource Protection

10 Permits & Authorizations Relevant to hydropower projects in Alaska Permit/Authorization Fish Habitat Permit Fish Resource Permit Water Rights/Water Use Permit Section 10 / Section 404 Permit Material Sale Permit Flood Hazard/ other local permits SWPPP review/approval Right of Way/ Land Use Permit Regulatory Agency Alaska Department of Fish & Game Alaska Department of Fish & Game Alaska Department of Natural Resources US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska Department of Natural Resources Borough/Municipality of project location Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation (or muni/borough) Land manager for project area

11 ADF&G Statutory Authority THE FISHWAY ACT AS ANADROMOUS FISH ACT AS FISH RESOURCE PERMIT For handling or transporting fish during dewatering or diversion (Division of Sport Fish)

12 AS requires that any obstruction built across fishbearing waters will provide for fish passage AS options if fish passage is impractical: Pay a lump sum to the State fish and game fund Build operate, and maintain a hatchery in perpetuity Pay to expand, maintain, and operate existing hatcheries

13 Fishway Act (.841) Strengths Applies to all fish bearing streams (resident and anadromous) and all fish species. Requires long-term commitment to operation & maintenance Limitations Applies to fish passage only Archaic provisions for mitigation inappropriate

14 AS (a) ADF&G must specify those waters that are important for the spawning, rearing, or migration of anadromous fish (AWC) (b-c) notification and plans required before conducting work in a specified waterbody (permit application) (d) ADF&G will approve or deny the proposed work

15 Anadromous Fish Act (.871) Strengths Applies to any activity Applies to any life stage Limitations Jurisdiction limited to below OHW Waterbody must be in AWC Freshwater only

16 ADF&G Roles FERC-Regulated Statewide Aquatic Resources Unit leads Dept. review (Sport Fish) Develop FERC license terms Non-FERC Generally smaller hydro projects Habitat Division leads Dept. review

17 Baseline Studies Data, data, data!! Flow, fish, habitat surveys Data often limited in much of AK More data = less uncertainty of risks to fish = better decision making

18 Fish Data Fish Resource Monitor AWC updated annually Only ~50% complete

19 Physical Habitat Data Flow data and cross-section surveys can be used to assess impacts to habitat Natural fish passage barriers may exist Depth at 10 cfs Depth at 5 cfs

20 Design Considerations Location, location location!!! Avoid important fish habitat/anadromous streams Design diversion, bypass reach, tailrace to minimize impacts

21 Diversion Structure Fish passage required? Allow sediment/debris movement Provide instream flows Tailrace Locate above anadromy Exclusion required?

22 Construction Considerations Water management Erosion & sediment control Timing/Sequencing Communication is key!!

23 Humpback Creek

24 Operation Considerations Instream flow ability to measure/monitor Flushing - timing Ramping rates

25 Future of Hydropower in AK Fish are a foundation of Alaska Fish habitat in Alaska is largely intact Incorporating the needs of fish and people requires conscious, proactive choices and early communication Mark Emery

26 Questions? Megan Marie ADF&G Habitat Anchorage, AK (907)