UPSTREAM FISH PASSAGE 2013 ANNUAL REPORT

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "UPSTREAM FISH PASSAGE 2013 ANNUAL REPORT"

Ralf Turner
6 years ago
Views:

1 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ARTICLE 103 UPSTREAM FISH PASSAGE 2013 ANNUAL REPORT REPORTING PERIOD JUNE 1, 2013 MAY 31, 2014 BAKER RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC No January 2015 PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project

2 CONTENTS CONTENTS 1.0 Executive Summary Introduction Activity Report Adult Fish Returns Modifications and Facilities Improvements Monitoring Results, Observations, and Analysis Documents Submitted Accounting Funding and Expenditures Prescribed by SA Additional PSE Expenditures for SA Adjustments Agency Review Comments and Responses Reviewer Replies List of Tables Table 1. Baker upstream fish trap operations protocol for all species Table 2. Baker upstream fish trap species count by month for June 1, 2013 May 31, Table 3. Funds allocated to upstream fish passage implementation, (years one through six) Table 4. Primary and alternate ARG representatives who received the draft Upstream Fish Passage 2013 Annual Report for formal review List of Figures Figure 1. Rendering of Baker upstream fish trap, completed June Figure 2. Baker upstream fish trap adult sockeye & coho returns, Figure 3. from PSE accompanying the draft Upstream Fish Passage 2013 Annual Report PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page ii

3 Executive Summary 1.0 Executive Summary This annual report reviews actions undertaken by Puget Sound Energy (PSE) in 2013 to implement settlement agreement article 103 (SA 103), Upstream Fish Passage Implementation Plan, of the Baker River Hydroelectric Project license. The report covers SA 103 implementation measures completed during the 2013 reporting period of June 1, 2013 May 31, 2014 outlined in the reporting schedule contained in SA 102. During this period, PSE: Operated and maintained the Lower Baker upstream fish passage facilities. Transported and distributed collected fish according to the Baker upstream fish trap operations protocol. Consulted with the Aquatic Resources Group (ARG) regarding SA 103 planning and reporting, as well as operations, maintenance, issues, and modifications to the trap. Shut down and dewatered the trap from May 28, 2013 (during the previous reporting period) through June 10, 2013 for routine annual maintenance activities. Shut down and dewatered the trap from March 31 through April 11, 2014 for routine annual maintenance activities. 2.0 Introduction This report has been prepared in consistence with SA 102 ( Aquatics Reporting ) and SA 103 of the Order on Offer of Settlement, Issuing New License and Dismissing Amendment Application as Moot (the license) for the Baker River Hydroelectric Project, issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on October 17, The Baker River has historically supported six species of anadromous salmonids: sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), coho salmon (O. kisutch), Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha), steelhead (O. mykiss), native char (bull trout - Salvelinus confluentus, previously reported as Dolly Varden - Salvelinus malma), and sea-run cutthroat trout (O. clarki clarki). Two salmon species not historically reported as present in the Baker River drainage are occasionally captured in the upstream trap and transported to the reservoirs. These are: chum salmon (O. keta) and pink salmon (O. gorbuscha). A trap-and-haul program for upstream migration continuity between the Skagit River and the Project reservoirs has been in effect in one form or another since initiation of Lower Baker dam construction in SA 103 Upstream Fish Passage Implementation Plan addresses the ongoing need for safe and effective upstream fish passage operations, and includes a requirement for the major modification of the existing upstream fish trap located downstream of the Lower Baker dam. The original fish trap began operation in July Construction of the modified trap was completed in June Upstream fish passage between Lake Shannon and Baker Lake is addressed in SA 104, Fish Connectivity Implementation Plan. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 1

Introduction Figure 1. Rendering of Baker upstream fish trap, completed June 2010.

4 Introduction Figure 1. Rendering of Baker upstream fish trap, completed June (R2 Resource Consultants Inc., October 2008) PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 2

5 Activity Report 3.0 Activity Report Routine adult collection and transport operations were conducted at the Lower Baker trap throughout the reporting period (June 1, 2013 May 31, 2014). The reporting period marks the fourth full year of operation of the modified trap, completed in June During the reporting period, PSE: Operated and maintained the Lower Baker upstream fish passage facilities (figures 2 and 3). Transported and distributed fish collected in the trap according to the Lower Baker upstream trap operations protocol (tables 1 and 2). The Fish Co-managers 1 update this protocol annually, with additional periodic updates as required for consistency with basin management goals (the most recent revision was on September 9, 2013 which modified Chinook and sea-run cutthroat trout handling & transport directives). The adult fish returns and trap collection data for the period from June 1, 2013 to May 31, 2014 are detailed in table 3. Consulted with the ARG regarding operations, maintenance, issues, and modifications to the trap. Consulted with the ARG regarding planning and reporting relative to SA 103. Shut down and dewatered the trap from May 28, 2013 (previous reporting period) through June 10, 2013 for routine annual maintenance activities. Fish recovered from the trap during the 2013 maintenance dewatering and returned to the river included 24 juvenile cutthroat trout, 27 juvenile steelhead, 3 juvenile Chinook salmon, 3 juvenile coho salmon, 1 juvenile sockeye salmon, 3 whitefish (Prosopium williamsoni), and 2 suckers (Catostomus spp.). No fish were captured or transported for four days following startup of the trap. Shut down and dewatered the trap from March 31 through April 11, 2014 for routine annual maintenance activities. Fish recovered from the trap during the 2014 maintenance dewatering and returned to the river included 190 juvenile steelhead, 1 juvenile cutthroat trout, and 1 juvenile sockeye salmon. No fish were captured or transported for five days following startup of the trap. 1 The Fish Co-managers jointly manage Baker basin fisheries and is comprised of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, the Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, and the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 3

6 Activity Report Logged 170 maintenance actions. Nothing of significance occurred during the reporting period that affected daily trap operation for an extended time. Examples of routine maintenance actions in 2013 are: o Recovering systems from a power outage February 24, o Remedying failure of the fish lock brail. o Correcting issues with the vee barrier pneumatic actuator. o Replacing the loading hopper gate bulb seal to address a leak into the hopper and onto the loading ramp. o Addressing HMI control system logic issues. o Inspecting flume heaters and sprinklers for freeze protection. 3.1 Adult Fish Returns Transport and distribution of fish collected in the upstream fish trap are directed by annual protocols established by Fish Co-managers to reflect basin management goals. Operation of the trap during the reporting period was consistent with this protocol, which is detailed in tables 1 through 3. Trap data are recorded and transmitted to the Co-Managers daily. These data are summarized in section Modifications and Facilities Improvements The refurbishment and improvement of the trap below the Lower Baker Development that began in spring 2008 in compliance with SA 103 was completed June No facility improvements were made during the current reporting period. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 4

7 Activity Report Table 1. Baker upstream fish trap operations protocol for all species. This version was in effect as of September 9, BAKER ADULT FISH TRAP PROTOCOL Revised: September 9, 2013 (Chinook Revisions) w ith steelhead VEI & PIT-tag scan additions Species Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Transport to Baker Lake EXCEPT systematically sample and retain--1 out of every 5 (20%) unmarked+cwt (Baker Wild Indicator Stock) coho returning to the trap throughout the season. The 1 out of every 5 unmarked+cwt coho are systematically sampled to represent the composition of origin of the unmarked+cwt coho returning to the trap and can be retained for broodstock. Broodstock need is approximately 200. If the broodstock goal of 200 can be met using unmarked+cwt fish, continue systematic sampling and retaining (sacrifice) 1 out of every 5 unmarked+cwt coho that Coho returns to the trap beyond broodstock needs through the end of the season. This systematic sampling of the unmarked+cwt coho SUPERCEDES ALL other needs. Collect the snouts of the unmarked+cwt Wild Indicator Stock that w ere used for broodstock after spaw ning and send to Co-managers for CWT extraction along w ith the snouts of any sacrificed unmarked+cwt coho. ALSO Sacrifice and retain snouts from all Ad-clip+CWT (non-local strays) fish and send to Co-mangers for CWT extraction. Carcasses (w ithout snout) from sacrificed fish can be used for Tribal distribution if in good condition, or can be used for nutrient enhancement. Sockeye Follow sockeye protocol 1 Chinook (unmarked-no cwt)-- WILD (June 1-Aug 15) to Baker Lake (w ild Spring run) Beginning August 16 Return to Skagit River (Wild Summer/Fall) Chinook (unmarked+cwt)-- Mostly Non-Skagit Hatchery Stray Chinook (ad-clip, no cwt)-- Non-Skagit Hatchery Stray Chinook (ad-clip+cwt)--likely Non-Skagit Hatchery Stray Natural-run Steelhead Hatchery-run Steelhead Pink Chum Native Char Other, Non-Native Char (lake trout, brook trout) Sea-run Cutthroat Atlantic Salmon Available for WDFW (Skagit Hatchery Broodstock) Return to Skagit River Sacrifice, remove and retain Otolith, send to WDFW lab for reading. Sacrifice and retain CWT snout (mostly Non-Skagit hatchery strays, but could be Skagit hatchery spring-run)-- Collect scale sample Returned to Skagit River (returns to Skagit River Hamilton w hen possible, default to Baker mouth)--collect Scale sample; inspect adults for VEI in eye, scan adults & juveniles for PIT tag (record #), collect length/ wt/scales for juveniles, data to UST & WDFW Remove from system (for treaty or non-treaty use as determined in-season)--collect scale sample Sacrifice and Examine for positive species identification. Return to Skagit River Sacrifice and retain CWT snout. Collect Scale sample. First 5,000 fish trapped haul to Baker lake. After 5,000 return to Skagit River. Return to River at Hamilton to discourage trap re-entry w hen possible, default location at Baker mouth. Available for WDFW (Skagit Hatchery Broodstock) Adults (>300 mm) : If carrying PIT tag, transport to Baker Lake if Upper Baker origin or unknow n origin, to Lk. Shannon if Sulphur Cr. origin, or to Skagit R. if out-of-basin origin. If not carrying PIT tag, take scales & tissue sample, PIT tag, record #, and return to Skagit R. Sub-adults/Juveniles (<300 mm): If carrying PIT tag, transport same as adults. If not carrying PIT tag, estimate approximate length (record w ith inserted comment) and release to Skagit R. 1 Sockeye distributed to artificial incubation program, spaw ning beaches, Baker Lake, or tribes (Sauk- Suiattle, Sw inomish, & Upper Skagit) follow ing year specific beach loading plan as provided by the Fish Co-Managers. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 5

8 Activity Report 3.3 Monitoring Results, Observations, and Analysis Fish collected in and transported from the trap totaled 18,791 from June 2013 through May This included 12,534 sockeye salmon, 4,106 coho salmon, 16 Chinook salmon, 23 steelhead, 1 chum salmon, 37 pink salmon, 35 native char, 3 cutthroat trout, and 2,036 smaller, primarily sub-adult fishes. These are recorded in the Other column in the table below, and include fishes not identified by species in the spreadsheet, and juveniles of identified species that had no identified handling or transport destination directive in the protocol submitted annually by the Co-managers, but which were identified in the comments column within the monthly file sheets (e.g., juvenile steelhead and other salmonids, cutthroat, whitefish, sculpin [Cottus spp.], peamouth chub [Mylocheilus caurinus), sucker]. These fish were primarily diverted to the stress-relief ponds for release back into the Baker River. The data set is being modified, and will in future reporting years include a more detailed record of all fish entering the upstream trap. See table 3 for monthly trap data. Table 2. Baker upstream fish trap species count by month for June 1, 2013 May 31, Month Sockeye Coho Chinook Steelhead Chum Pink Native Char Cutthroat Other a Total Jun 1, ,118 Jul 10, ,195 Aug ,015 Sep Oct 27 1, ,283 Nov 4 1, ,551 Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Total 12,534 4, ,036 18, Sockeye Adult Returns in A total of 12,534 sockeye entered the upstream trap during the season. When adjusted for terminal harvest, the run total was 17,024 sockeye, which included a harvest of 4,500 fish taken in the treaty (commercial and take-home) fisheries. Test fisheries and the terminal sport river and lake fisheries have not yet been reported. A total of 390 sockeye were distributed to the three Skagit River Indian tribes for ceremonial and subsistence needs under an agreement with the WDFW. Escapement goals for adult sockeye were met by transporting and distributing fish returning to the trap to the Upper Baker fish hatchery and artificial incubation facility (see the annual report for SA 101); 2,235 sockeye were distributed to the spawning beaches and 3,846 were distributed for artificial incubation during the 2013 reporting period. After escapement goals and allotments for the hatchery were met, 6,041 sockeye PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 6

Activity Report were released into Baker Lake, allowing the fourth-ever recreational lake fishery from July 1 through September 4, 2013.

9 Activity Report were released into Baker Lake, allowing the fourth-ever recreational lake fishery from July 1 through September 4, The Skagit River recreational fishery also opened from June 16 through July Historic Sockeye Escapement Sockeye salmon populations vary over time; however, an evaluation of adult migration data indicates an increasing population trend over time (figure 2). The lowest return on record was observed in 1985, when only 99 adult sockeye were collected at the trap. The highest collections on record have occurred during each of the previous three reporting periods, when 22,767 sockeye in 2010, 37,264 sockeye in 2011, and 48,014 sockeye in 2012 were transported to the Upper Baker hatchery and to Baker Lake, and additional fish were harvested by in-river tribal ceremonial, subsistence, and recreational fisheries. The return of at least 17,034 adult sockeye in 2013 was below the previous three years returns, but in excess of the long-term average, and possibly indicative of the range of future interannual variation. Figure 2. Baker upstream fish trap adult sockeye & coho returns, Coho Adult Returns A total of 4,106 coho adults returned to the Baker River trap in 2013, of which 229 were removed from the trap for the supplementation program. This small group was held at PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 7

10 Accounting the Upper Baker rearing facility until sexually mature and then spawned, after which the coded wire tags were recovered from the carcasses for stock identification. 3.4 Documents Submitted The following document was submitted under SA 103 during the reporting period. The 2012 annual report was submitted August 26, 2013 for ARG review (subsequently resubmitted to the ARG in accordance with SA 102, Aquatics Reporting, and then to the FERC as the 2012 annual report for SA 102). 4.0 Accounting Puget Sound Energy, pursuant to settlement agreement articles 102, 201, 301, 501, and 602, is required to provide an annual summary of expenditures made during the preceding year, as well as an accounting of funding expenditures, any interest earned, disbursements made as required by any article, and adjustments for inflation. This section provides an accounting of all expenditures made during the reporting period. All disbursement adjustments and relevant calculations were determined using the guidelines provided in settlement agreement article Funding and Expenditures Prescribed by SA 103 Prescribed annual funding made available for beneficial modifications to the upstream trap and related facilities has accrued at $20,000 per year since the date of license issuance, escalated from 2006 dollars. Annual funding is made available on the anniversary date of license issuance (i.e., October 17, 2008 for the 2009 funding year). No expenditures were made against prescribed funds during the reporting period. The balance is reflected in the following table. Table 3. Funds allocated to upstream fish passage implementation, (years one through six). Year Amount Allocated Amount Spent Amount Carried Over Interest Remaining (1) , , ,035 (2) , , ,194 (3) , , ,530 (4) , , ,482 (5) , , ,816 (6) , ,183 a 130,237 b Total 130, , ,237(+) b a Annual allocation of $20,000 occurs in October of the reporting period, escalation is applied in February, and interest is accrued the following October. b Not including interest that will be accrued in October Note: table incorporates adjustments based on the latest accounting review; rounding error may cause slight discrepancy. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 8

11 Accounting 4.2 Additional PSE Expenditures for SA 103 Non-prescribed PSE expenditures for SA 103 implementation during the reporting period totaled $382,166. The total expenditure of all funds for SA 103 during the reporting period was $382, Adjustments There were no adjustments to the funding for SA 103 during the reporting period. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 9

12 Agency Review Comments and Responses 5.0 Agency Review Comments and Responses 5.1 Distribution List On August 26, 2014, PSE sent the draft SA 103 Upstream Fish Passage 2013 Annual Report to the primary and alternate ARG representatives (table 4) by for review. The document submittal (figure 3) is provided in this section for reference. Table 4. Primary and alternate ARG representatives who received the draft Upstream Fish Passage 2013 Annual Report for formal review. Name Organization Address Brock Applegate WA Dept. Fish & Wildlife Brett Barkdull WA Dept. Fish & Wildlife Len Barson The Nature Conservancy Ellen Bynum Skagit County citizen Bob Carey The Nature Conservancy Dennis Clark WA Dept. of Natural Resources Steve Fransen National Marine Fisheries Service Jeremy Gilman USDA Forest Service Nancy Gleason U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Reed Glesne National Park Service Bob Helton Skagit County citizen Little Mountain Rd. Mount Vernon, WA Lou Ellyn Jones U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Monika Kannadaguli WA Dept. of Ecology Alice Kelly WA Dept. of Ecology Grant Kirby Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe Sue Madsen Skagit Fisheries Enhancement Group Marianne Mandille-Ailles Town of Concrete Jeff McGowan Skagit County Ed Meyer National Marine Fisheries Service Ashley Rawhouser National Park Service Scott Schulyer Upper Skagit Indian Tribe Michael See Skagit County Jon Paul Shannahan Upper Skagit Indian Tribe Devin Smith Swinomish Indian Tribal Community Alison Studley Skagit Fisheries Enhancement Group Brenda Treadwell WA Dept. of Natural Resources Tom Van Gelder The WA Council of Trout Unlimited Stan Walsh Swinomish Indian Tribal Community and Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe Lynn Wetzler U.S. Army Corps of Engineers PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 10

13 Agency Review Comments and Responses 5.2 Cover Message From: Aspelund, Arnie Sent: Tuesday, August 26, :18 PM To: Alice Kelly Alison Studley; Applegate, Brock A (DFW); Ashley_Rawhouser@nps.gov; Aspelund, Arnie; Bob Helton (poetsmart1@gmail.com); Brenda Treadwell (brenda.treadwell@dnr.wa.gov); Brett Barkdull (barkdbcb@dfw.wa.gov); dennis.clark@dnr.wa.gov; dsmith@skagitcoop.org; Ellen Bynum (skye@cnw.com); Flynn, Tom; Fransen, Steve; Gleason, Nancy C NWS; Glesne, Reed; Grant Kirby (gkirby@sauk-suiattle.com); Jeremy Gilman (jmgilman@fs.fed.us); Jones, Lou Ellyn; jonpauls@upperskagit.com; Len Barson (lbarson@tnc.org); Lynn Wetzler (lynn.wetzler@usace.army.mil); Marianne Mandille-Ailles (townplanner@concretewa.gov); McGowan, Jeff; Meyer, Ed; Michael See (michaels@co.skagit.wa.us); Monika Kannadaguli (mkan461@ecy.wa.gov); Schuyler, Scott; Sue Madsen; Tom Van Gelder (thevangelders@comcast.net); Walsh, Stan Cc: Hackbart, Alice; Padgett, Alana W; Hunting, Andrew; Bruland, Douglas A -Doug; Kupfer, Lynda; Verretto, Nicholas E - Nick; OpenText ECM --mail-- Subject: 2013 Baker SA103 Annual Report 30-day ARG review due Sept 26 Attachments: BAK A annual report ARG 30day NVAH pdf Aquatic Resources Group: PSE is forwarding the 2013 draft annual report for Settlement Agreement Article Upstream Fish Passage Implementation Plan to the Aquatic Resources Group designated representatives for the 30-day review period and seeks comments and suggestions. The report covers activities and protocols for upstream fish passage in the Baker River basin from June 1, 2013 through May 31, Please send comments to me via or hard-copy by the close of business September 26, This review is part of the Aquatics Resources Group review cycle described in Article Aquatics Reporting. Thanks for your efforts. (paper copy to Bob Helton) Arnold A. Aspelund Senior Resource Scientist Puget Sound Energy, Licensing P.O. Box PSE-09S Bellevue, WA Phone: (425) FAX: (425) arnie.aspelund@pse.com Figure 3. from PSE accompanying the draft Upstream Fish Passage 2013 Annual Report. 5.3 Reviewer Replies No comments were received during the 30-day review period. PUGET SOUND ENERGY Baker River Hydroelectric Project Page 11

UPSTREAM FISH PASSAGE 2015 ANNUAL REPORT

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ARTICLE 103 UPSTREAM FISH PASSAGE 2015 ANNUAL REPORT REPORTING PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2015 DECEMBER 31, 2015 BAKER RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC No. 2150 November 2016 PUGET SOUND ENERGY