National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Natural Resource Program Center

Water Resources Assessment of the Toklat Basin in 

the Vicinity of the Stampede Trail Alignment

Denali National Park and Preserve

Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRR—2006/018
ON THE COVER

Toklat Basin (NPS 2005)
Water Resources Assessment of the Toklat Basin in 

the Vicinity of the Stampede Trail Alignment

Denali National Park and Preserve

Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRR—2006/018

Kenneth F. Karle, P.E.

Hydraulic Mapping and Modeling

PO Box 181

Denali Park, Alaska 99755

November 2010

U.S. Department of the Interior

National Park Service

Natural Resource Program Center

Fort Collins, Colorado
ii

The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that 

address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National 

Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and 

environmental constituencies, and the public. 

The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies 

in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the 

achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum 

for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page 

limitations. 

All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the 

information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended 

audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. Data in this report were 

collected and analyzed using methods based on established, peer-reviewed protocols and were 

analyzed and interpreted within the guidelines of the protocols. This report received informal 

peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, 

or reporting of the data.

Views, statements, findings, conclusions, recommendations, and data in this report are those of 

the author and do not necessarily reflect views and policies of the National Park Service, U.S. 

Department of the Interior. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute 

endorsement or recommendation for use by the National Park Service.

This report is available from http://www.nature.nps.gov/water/wrdpub.cfm, the Natural Resource 

Publications Management website (http://www.nature.nps.gov/publications/NRPM), and the 

Alaska Resources Library & Information Services (http://www.arlis.org).

Please cite this publication as:

Karle, K. F. 2006. Water resources assessment of the Toklat Basin in the vicinity of the 

Stampede Trail alignment: Denali National Park and Preserve. Natural Resource Report 

NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRR-2006/018. National Park Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

NPS 186/101070
iii

Contents

Page

Figures............................................................................................................................................ iv

Tables/Appendices...........................................................................................................................v

Executive Summary...................................................................................................................... vii

Introduction......................................................................................................................................1

Hydrologic Inventory - Existing Data..............................................................................................5

Water Quality Studies ............................................................................................................. 5

Toklat River Studies................................................................................................................ 6

Fish Studies ............................................................................................................................. 8

Flood Flow Statistics........................................................................................................................9

Water Quality.................................................................................................................................13

Channel Geometry Analysis..........................................................................................................17

Morphological Descriptions...........................................................................................................21

East Fork and Toklat Rivers.................................................................................................. 21

Clearwater Fork and Sushana Rivers .................................................................................... 22

Wigand Creek........................................................................................................................ 22

Hydraulic Modeling Analysis........................................................................................................23

Flood-Prone Area Delineation .......................................................................................................25

Toklat Springs................................................................................................................................27

Recommendations..........................................................................................................................31

Supplementary Products ................................................................................................................33

References......................................................................................................................................35
iv

Figures

Page

Figure 1. Study location maps and project field work sites.............................................................2

Figure 2. Watershed map developed from GIS data identifies five watersheds in the Toklat 

Basin Hydraulic Mapping and Modeling.........................................................................................4

Figure 3. Annual exceedance probability and flood magnitudes for Sushana River watershed....11

Figure 4. High flow and low flow duration statistics for the Clearwater Fork River....................12

Figure 5. Discharge measurement at the East Fork River (Karle 2004)........................................14

Figure 6. High suspended sediment load and turbidity in the Toklat River. .................................16

Figure 7. Particle size distribution for the East Fork River. ..........................................................19

Figure 8. HEC-RAS estimate for the 200-year flood for the Toklat River....................................24

Figure 9. Approximate flood-prone area for the East Fork River..................................................25

Figure 10. Upper end of open water channel at Toklat Springs (Karle 2005)...............................28

Figure 11. Open water channel extending downstream from Toklat Springs. ..............................29

Figure 12. Salmon head at Toklat Springs (Karle 2005). ..............................................................29

Figure 13. Floodplain breach diverting water from Toklat River into Sushana River upstream 

of Toklat Springs area....................................................................................................................30
v

Tables

Page

Table 1. Water quality data from Edwards and Tranel (1998) for East Fork and Clearwater 

Fork Rivers.......................................................................................................................................6

Table 2. Basin characteristics for Toklat Basin study watersheds...................................................9

Table 3. Flood frequency estimates for Toklat Basin study watersheds........................................10

Table 4. Estimates of bankfull discharge for the five Toklat Basin study sites.............................11

Table 5. Water quality for Sushana River, Toklat River, and Wigand Creek. ..............................13

Table 6. Results from cross-section surveys of the Toklat Basin study river channels.............18

Appendices

Appendix A. Anecdotal salmon presence map for Toklat Basin...................................................37

Appendix B. Flood magnitudes, estimates of error, and confidence limits...................................39

Appendix C. Annual exceedance probability graphs.....................................................................43

Appendix D. High flow and low flow duration statistics for Toklat Basin study watersheds.......47

Appendix E. Surveyed cross-sections for the five Toklat Basin study watersheds.......................53

Appendix F. Particle size distribution graphs for the five Toklat Basin study rivers....................59

Appendix G. HEC-RAS Modeling results for the five Toklat Basin study watersheds................63

Appendix H. Approximate flood-prone delineation for the five Toklat Basin study rivers..........71

vii

Executive Summary

A massive, state-proposed, road or railroad building project will, if constructed, bisect the Toklat 

Basin area in and adjacent to Denali National Park and Preserve, along one of three proposed 

routes. If construction occurs, the road and its associated gravel pits will affect hundreds of 

pristine waterbodies, aquatic habitat, and wetlands. At particular risk are spring-fed, gravel-bed 

streams, which act as salmon spawning, rearing, and overwintering areas. A basic and severe 

lack of knowledge of the water resources along this corridor seriously threatens the National 

Park Service’s (NPS’s) ability to analyze, manage, and protect this area and subsequently 

mitigate impacts if this road construction occurs. In response, a comprehensive study was 

initiated in 2004 to determine baseline water quality and physical hydrology information for five 

major rivers and streams in the Toklat Basin–the Sushana River, the East Fork River, Wigand 

Creek, the Toklat River, and the Clearwater Fork River.

To assist with the assessment of watershed hydrology for the five major drainages, estimates of 

the magnitude and frequency of peak streamflows were developed by using USGS predictive,

regional, regression equations. Estimates for magnitudes for the 2-year, 5-year, 10-year, 25-year, 

50-year, 100-year, 200-year, and 500-year floods were developed using statistically significant 

basin characteristics, including basin area size, percentage of basin covered by forest, and 

percentage of area covered by lakes and ponds. Estimates of the bankfull flow for each drainage 

were also developed. USGS predictive regional regression equation techniques were used to 

develop estimates of the magnitude and frequency of peak streamflow and, as selected, highflow and low-flow duration statistics.

Water quality was characterized using historic data, as well as new data from samples taken 

specifically for this study. For the three watersheds without existing water quality data (Sushana, 

Toklat, Wigand), water quality information was obtained by field visits to the sites in 2004, using 

a variety of field techniques. Based on the results of the water chemistry analyses, the general 

water quality of the five study watersheds may be described as good. The remoteness of these 

watersheds, their location in a national park and preserve, and the limited access to date to these 

areas for humans have combined to limit environmental degradation of these freshwater 

resources.

The measured values of water temperature and dissolved oxygen values are sufficient for fish 

growth and activity. All dissolved oxygen values were at or close to saturation values for fresh 

water. Turbidity levels were well within expected ranges. Turbidity measurements for the Toklat 

and East Fork Rivers reflect the high suspended sediment loads common in glacier-fed systems.

The low turbidity values from the three clear-water streams (Sushana River, Wigand Creek, and 

Clearwater Fork River) were well within the typical range for clear-water rivers in Alaska. 

Using basic cross-section survey techniques, surveys of channel characteristics were conducted 

to both help describe the physical characteristics of the stream channel and to provide a physical 

representation of the channel for numerical modeling purposes. The fieldwork conducted at each 

site included the following:
viii

• survey of longitudinal profile

• survey of 2 or 3 cross-sections per site

• water discharge measurements in each flowing channel at each site 

• water surface elevation data for each discharge measurement

• channel material gradation, using pebble count

• river morphology information

• photographs

• high water indicators, where available

Because of the difficulty in obtaining hydraulic measurements during high river stage, the HECRAS hydraulic modeling analysis software was used to estimate water surface elevations and 

water velocities during high flood flows. Numeric models of the five study sites were created 

using stream geometric data from the field surveys. Following calibration, estimates of channel 

velocities and stage were calculated and presented for each cross-section for a range of 

discharges.

Based on the results from the cross-section surveys, the HEC-RAS analyses, and field 

observations, approximate flood-prone areas of the five streams in the vicinity of the old

Stampede Trail were delineated using several remote sensing products, including color aerial 

photographs and color satellite photographs.

The Toklat Springs area, located at the confluence of the Sushana River and the Toklat River, is 

a candidate for Critical Habitat listing by the State of Alaska, due to its importance as a salmon 

spawning area. This feature’s existence is due in part or whole to an upwelling of water through 

the riverbed gravels, and is notable for its reach of open water all winter long. As part of this 

project, several ground visits were conducted in an effort to map the extent of the springs. During 

a March 2005 site visit, open water was noted for approximately 0.5 mile upstream of the 

confluence with the Toklat River. From the confluence with the Toklat River, this channel 

remained open downstream for a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, where a large area of 

aufeis (ice formed by ground-water discharge or upwelling of river water behind already existing 

ice dams) was noted. At the springs, water temperatures ranged from 1° C at the upstream end of 

the open water to 2° C at the lower end.

During a field trip in August 2005, a large breach in the spruce forest floodplain between the 

Toklat River and the Sushana River channel was observed one mile upstream of Toklat Springs.

This breach resulted in a large flow from the Toklat River entering the Sushana River channel 

and Toklat Springs from upstream. The silty discharge from the Toklat River breach appeared to 

be at least several times greater in flow rate than the existing clear-water discharge from the 

Sushana River. It is unclear if this new diversion channel will remain active, decrease, or 

increase in size.

Additional studies are needed to continue the evaluation of the water resources of the north 

access corridor. Given the likelihood of the continued interest in developing a transportation 

corridor in that area, the following research topics are suggested:
ix

• Estimates of the quantity of gravel required to build and maintain the north access route 

should be developed and/or acquired from the Alaska Department of Transportation and 

Public Facilities (AKDOT&PF). Impacts to local hydrologic conditions from gravel 

mining should be identified.

• River crossings should be identified, and a technical analysis of the impacts from bridges 

and culverts should be developed.

• Fish spawning and rearing areas should be identified. Upstream habitat areas that may be 

blocked as a result of road construction should be identified.

• Other potential threats to the park aquatic resources should be identified and quantified.

Based on the significant threat to these water resources, additional baseline data acquisition 

should begin immediately. The baseline data parameters to be sampled should be carefully 

selected with the goals of 1) establishing the condition of the existing undisturbed resources and 

2) determining the impacts to those resources from subsequent road construction. This data 

collection effort should focus on three categories: water quality, aquatic habitat, and aquatic 

organisms.

1

Introduction

Mt. McKinley National Park was established in 1917. In 1980, four million acres were added to 

the park, the original two million acres were designated wilderness, and the name was changed 

to Denali National Park and Preserve (DENA). A single, 85 mile gravel road through the old Mt. 

McKinley Park wilderness currently serves as the main park transportation corridor. However, 

construction of a new north access to the interior of DENA has been under consideration by the 

State of Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (AKDOT&PF) and others for 

a number of years.

Three routes are under consideration. The primary focus is a 90 mile road or railroad from the 

Parks Highway near the town of Healy to Wonder Lake. The proposed route runs along the north 

side of the Alaska Range, approximately 12 to 25 miles north of the existing Denali Park Road.

This proposed route generally follows the alignment that is commonly known as the Stampede 

Trail. The route would traverse state lands, as well as ANILCA additions to DENA that were 

included to ensure protection of wilderness recreation and ecosystem values. The Rex and Rock 

Creek routes traverse state lands north of the Denali National Preserve boundary before turning 

south toward Kantishna and crossing DENA land. Additional descriptions of these proposed 

routes, and the potential impacts to water resources if such a road is constructed, are found in an 

NPS Natural Resource Report entitled Potential Impacts to Water Resources from Development 

of a North Access Route through Denali National Park and Preserve (Karle 2006).

Opening the north access corridor to visitor traffic would disturb pristine habitat and segment the 

park with an additional transportation corridor, bounding the Wyoming Hills Range on the north 

and south with human development. Impacts from the proposed northern access corridor would 

include: influences of imported material containing non-native biota, disturbance to wet tundra 

and riparian habitat, and changes to hydrology, water quality, and aquatic habitat of five major 

river corridors. These watersheds include:

• Sushana River

• East Fork River

• Toklat River

• Wigand Creek

• Clearwater Fork River

Denali National Park and Preserve requested assistance with assessing the stream water quality, 

hydrology, and hydraulic geometry of the five major watersheds along the proposed north access

route, west of the Teklanika River (Figure 1). Additionally, the park was interested in obtaining 

baseline information on the area known as Toklat Springs. Toklat Springs is one of the warm 

springs on north-flowing rivers, which may be the least understood, yet most productive, aquatic 

systems within the park. Salmon spawning and rearing areas are created by warm springs, and

the springs provide over-wintering habitat for juvenile salmon.
2

Figure 1. Study location maps and project field work sites.

Field Work 

Site

Location 

(latitude,

longitude)

Field Work 

Conducted

1. Toklat River 63° 48’ 03.6”

150° 15’ 51.7”

Cross-sections, 

pebble count, 

discharge

2. Toklat River 63° 53’ 47.7”

150° 09’ 18.4”

Water quality

3. Wigand

Creek

63° 53’ 47.7”

150° 09’ 18.4”

Cross-sections, 

pebble count, 

discharge, water 

quality

4. Sushana

River

63° 52’ 38.0”

149° 48’ 52.0”

Cross-sections, 

pebble count, 

discharge, water 

quality

5. East Fork

River

63° 52’ 52.5”

150° 03’ 52.0”

Cross-sections, 

pebble count, 

discharge

6. Clearwater

Fork

63° 47’ 16.4”

150° 20’ 16.0”

Cross-sections, 

pebble count, 

discharge

7. Toklat

Springs

64° 09’ 13.5”

149° 59’ 29.0”

Water 

temperature, 

depth
3

The construction of a travel corridor will require the extraction of large quantities of gravel in 

and adjacent to these aquatic systems. Such actions could pose an immediate and significant 

threat to these rare springs. Addition impacts from road construction and maintenance could 

result in significant water quality degradation, including such parameters as turbidity, suspended 

solids, and heavy metals contamination. This project utilizes existing data from previous studies, 

along with newly acquired field information, to provide baseline information of the hydrologic 

resources in this area.

The NPS established a contract with Hydraulic Mapping and Modeling, a private firm, to provide 

an overview of the water quality and physical hydrology of the water resources along the 

Stampede Trail/north access route. The specific tasks that were accomplished for this project 

include:

• Inventory of existing data for the five major watersheds

• Development of flood-flow statistics, including magnitude and flow duration 

• Water quality analysis and STORET (USEPA) data entry

• Aerial survey of Toklat Springs

• Channel geometry analysis of the five Toklat Basin river channels

• Air photo analysis of flood-prone areas on each of the five Toklat Basin river channels

For the purposes of this study, the five watersheds are defined as the area above a specific point 

on the stream from which water drains toward that stream (Figure 2). Those downstream 

“catchment points” are essentially located at or near the intersection of the Stampede Trail and 

the river or stream. These points also served as the locations for conducting much of the field 

work, including water chemistry and cross-section surveys. The determination of the statistical 

hydrology was based on watershed area defined by these points.

There are four digital products associated with this report that are available in the Denali 

National Park Technical Library. The first is an MS Access database file that contains all field 

data obtained to this point, including water chemistry, discharge, cross-section surveys, pebble 

counts, and flood magnitude estimates. Many of the graphs included in the appendices of this 

report are embedded in the Access database. Additionally, the database contains several 

photographs from each of the study sites. The second product is a GIS (ArcGIS 9) file that

contains the geodatabase used to delineate and display the five study watersheds. The geodetic 

projection of all the data is Albers Equal Area Alaska, NAD27. The projection is Albers Equal 

Area Alaska, NAD27. The third product is the collection of digital project photographs to date, 

organized by river. The fourth product is the EPA STORET water quality files.
4

Figure 2. Watershed map developed from GIS data identifies five watersheds in the Toklat Basin 

hydraulic Mapping and Modeling. Numbers denote the downstream catchment points of each watershed.
5

Hydrologic Inventory - Existing Data

The first step in conducting a hydrologic inventory is to compile all existing information on the 

study watersheds. To accomplish this, peer-reviewed and internal reports and studies (literature 

describing water-related studies within DENA) were reviewed for pertinent information. The 

following information provides an overview and links to available water quality information for 

watersheds that intersect or are adjacent to the north access corridor.

Water Quality Studies

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maintains the world's largest repository of 

ambient water quality data. STORET data available on the Internet is divided into two separate 

databases, according to when it was originally supplied to EPA and to which of the two 

STORET databases it was originally archived (Environmental Protection Agency). The older 

database is referred to as the STORET Legacy Data Center. The Legacy Data Center contains 

data of undocumented quality. Further, these data are static. The Legacy Data Center does not 

permit updates, so the data will not change over time.

More recently acquired data are stored in the current Modernized STORET. All data supplied to 

EPA since January 1, 1999, have been placed in the Modernized STORET System.

Both the Legacy Data Center and the Modernized STORET databases were queried to determine 

what types of data from the study watersheds are stored. No sites or data were found in the 

Modernized STORET database. In the Legacy Data Center, the following watersheds are 

included in the database: Clearwater Fork River, Moonlight Creek, Stampede Creek (above and 

below the Stampede Mine), and Myrtle Creek. These stations contain water quality data; 

sampling of these sites occurred in the early 1980s in response to extensive placer mining 

operations taking place on a number of streams in the Kantishna Hills mining district. Data,

including pH, discharge, major ions, and metals are found in a project PDF file (storetdata.pdf).

Edwards and Tranel (1998) conducted a parkwide study to characterize water quality baseline 

conditions. Clear-water and glacier-fed streams were sampled, both on the north side and south 

side of the park. They noted significant differences in mean pH, alkalinity, and conductivity 

values when comparing north and south side samples. Comparisons were also made between 

glacier-fed and clear-water streams on the north side. For example, mean concentrations of most 

ions were relatively comparable for those two types of streams on the north side. Flow was 

correlated only weakly to suspended sediment and turbidity for both glacier-fed and clear-water

streams.

Correlation matrices were developed between chemical constituents to identify ion pairings in 

order to interpret possible mineralogical characteristics; those results are applicable to the 

watersheds flowing through the north access corridor. For example, ion concentrations were not 

correlated strongly to instantaneous discharge; this finding indicates that neither concentration 

nor dilution processes are prevalent with streamflow increases. High correlations for DENA

streams were noted between sulfate and calcium and between sulfate and magnesium. Edwards 

and Tranel concluded that calcium sulfate and magnesium sulfate are the dominant ion pairs 

present in most streams in DENA.
6

A significant difference was noted in turbidity values between clear-water streams and glacierfed streams on the north side. The mean value of turbidity for clear-water streams was 3.7 

Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTUs), a standard measure of turbidity; for glacier streams 

(including the East Fork River), the mean value was 363 NTUs. Flow was correlated only 

weakly to turbidity (and sediment) for both glacier-fed and clear-water streams.

In addition to general water quality characterizations, the Edwards and Tranel report included 

water quality from the East Fork River and from the Clearwater Fork River. These two rivers 

were sampled four times each between 1994 and 1996. Some of the results are described in 

Table 1.

Table 1. Water quality data from Edwards and Tranel (1998) for East Fork and Clearwater Fork Rivers.

Stream Clearwater Fork River East Fork River

Date

8/16/

1994

6/29/

1995

7/7/

1995

8/9/

1995

9/12/

1995

7/1/

1996

8/20/

1996

9/25/

1996

Flow (cfs) . 21.3 204.5 184.5 . . . .

Field pH 8.2 8.03 7.82 8.22 8.46 8.22 8.16 8

Field Cond (uS/cm) 376 709 336 389 350 409 348 426

Water Temp degC 16.3 6.8 10.7 9.1 5.8 8.9 5.7 2.4

TDS (mg/L) 188 354 167 194 175 204 173 213

Dissolved Oxy 

(mg/L) . 12.1 11.4 11.4 12.3 11.3 11.8 12.2

Air Temp degC . 12.4 19 17.6 10.8 15.6 9.1 3.3

Lab Conductivity 

(uS/cm) 434 758 308 365 362 430 359 438

Turbidity (NTU) 4.9 6.1 0.6 1 133 41 208 11

Alkalinity (mg 

CaCO3/L) 116.2 109.1 83.5 92.3 144.9 117.2 100.4 124.6

Cl (mg/L) 0.35 0.25 0.3 0.29 . . 15.8 25.9

NO3-N (mg/L) 0.14 0.08 0.19 0.18 0.27 0.13 0.09 0.12

SO4 (mg/L) 99.5 301.2 71.5 90.6 44.9 48.1 41.4 64.1

NH3-N (mg/L) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ca (mg/L) 54.3 69.56 46.46 57.73 31.25 51.87 43.65 51.84

Mg (mg/L) 20.3 62.63 15.22 19.41 10.57 9.68 9.71 12.43

Na (mg/L) 3.53 10.67 3.64 1.54 12.08 19.21 12.87 16.92

K (mg/L) 1.21 0.75 0.93 1 2.47 3.85 2.82 3.28

DOC (mg C/L) 1.88 10.54 2.71 3.61 7.84 0.68 7.29 6.05

Toklat River Studies

The hydraulic, hydrologic, and geologic conditions associated with floodplain delineation and 

bank erosion predictions are not well understood for large, braided river systems. Schalk et al. 

(2001) researched methods to delineate floodplains and assess erosion potential on large, braided 

river systems in DENA. Field data collected for this project include surveyed cross-sections and 

discharge measurements for both the Toklat and East Fork Rivers. These cross-section data from 

the Toklat and Teklanika Rivers were used to construct hydraulic computer models to estimate 

flood depths, degree of inundation, and water surface profiles. These are classic techniques used 

to delineate floodplains on other rivers. The authors noted, however, that banks on the Toklat and 

Teklanika Rivers have been subject to large rates of lateral erosion during periods of discharge 
7

less than bankfull, and that the use of classic techniques is ineffective for predicting the location 

of banks subject to erosion and capture.

In addition to areas of inundation, the authors determined that the threat of streambank erosion 

associated with a particular flood event also needed to be considered when assessing the risks of 

flooding on wide, braided rivers such as the Toklat. By using a number of physical and 

hydrologic parameters to assess the potential for lateral streambank erosion in an inundated area 

and defining a level of consequence severity, a two-dimensional risk analysis matrix was 

developed to assess the risks of flooding in a braided river flood hazard zone. The authors noted 

that due to the high rates of hydrologic activity associated with large, braided rivers, and the 

presence of highly erodible banks that are found on this stream type, accurate bank erosion 

predictions are difficult to determine.

Included in Schalk et al. (2001) is a literature review. Topics reviewed include: braided rivers, 

causes of the braided pattern, sediment transport, floodplain delineation techniques, and bank 

erosion.

In response to the need for a replenishable source of gravel, the NPS conducted a study to 

provide a comprehensive analysis of the fluvial processes that occur near and in an alluvial 

floodplain gravel removal site (Karle 1989). The report identified the hydraulic characteristics 

unique to braided rivers, including several dividing and uniting, wide shallow channels with 

unstable and poorly defined banks and coarse bed material. Karle cites Drage (1977), who 

concluded in an earlier report that the primary causes of braiding are an abundant sediment load, 

large and sudden discharge variations, erodible banks, and a steep gradient. Karle describes the 

hydrology of the Toklat River basin from the park road corridor upstream as two subbasins 

roughly equal in size.

In addition to snowmelt and rainfall, the Toklat is fed by glaciers, which cover 2 percent of the 

basin area (from the park road). Karle describes the methods used for this study, which included 

computer modeling of the Toklat River floodplain, and experimental physical manipulations of 

the floodplain system. In a related document, Karle describes the techniques developed by the 

NPS that were used to excavate gravel while insuring adequate replenishment rates and selfhealing of heavy equipment impacts (Karle 1990).

In a companion study, the U.S. Geological Survey monitored the movement of bed material in 

the Toklat River (Emmett et al. 1996). Bedload sediment was sampled and measured using a 

handheld bedload sampler. Median bedload size was about 8 millimeters, and transport rates 

ranged from less than 10 to nearly 3000 megagrams per day. As transport rates increased, mean 

and maximum sizes of bedload tended to increase.

Additionally, the authors used radio transmitters placed inside coarse sediment cobbles to track 

the rate of downstream movement of bedload in the Toklat River (Emmett et al. 1996, Chaco et 

al. 1989). Radio-tagged cobbles moved distances between about 2,000 and 5,000 meters during a 

6- to 8-week period of high flow. The authors reported that most particle movement occurred 

during the first few days of submersion in water; after that, the particles tended to get abandoned 

on the floodplain or deposited and buried underneath other bedload.
8

Based on these and several subsequent studies, the NPS initiated a gravel removal operation on 

the Toklat River. NPS estimates that the Toklat River drainage course could yield up to 11,000 

cubic yards of material each year and has set 11,000 cubic yards as the average annual extraction 

limit. This is approximately 7 percent of the estimated annual bedload transport of the Toklat

River in the vicinity of the Denali Park Road (south of the study area).

Fish Studies

A survey of fishery resources and water quality was conducted in DENA in 1981 (Miller 1981).

The presence of fish was established by electroshocking in 26 streams. Streams within the five 

study watersheds that were sampled included a tributary to the East Fork River, Color Creek 

(tributary to the east branch of Toklat River), Toklat River, and three tributaries to the 

Clearwater Fork River (Stony Creek, Betty’s Brook, and Little Stony Creek). Arctic grayling 

(Thymallus arcticus) was the only species noted in these streams. Water quality parameters,

recorded using field instruments, were water temperature, conductivity, pH, hardness, alkalinity, 

dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and discharge.

A 1982 study by the NPS investigated the fish resources and aquatic habitat of the Kantishna 

Hills, including a few tributaries of the Toklat River (Meyer and Kavanaugh 1982). Only five 

fish species were observed, with Arctic grayling and slimy sculpin the most abundant and 

widespread. The draft report also includes some water quality data. No final report for this 1982 

draft is available.

The Toklat River and its tributaries, provide important chinook, chum, and coho salmon 

spawning habitat (Holder and Fair 2002). Of special note is the Toklat Springs spawning area, 

which is an extremely productive fall chum salmon spawning area. The Alaska Department of 

Fish and Game began estimating Toklat River fall chum salmon spawning abundance and 

distribution in 1974, using both aerial and ground surveys conducted during periods of 

anticipated peak spawning (Barton 1984). Annual surveys using a variety of techniques are 

ongoing. The Toklat River escapement database with annual estimates of total spawning 

abundance is compiled and updated annually (ADF&G 2005).

Individuals familiar with the area have conducted less formal fish presence studies. For example, 

a Fairbanks-based pilot, while conducting wildlife reconnaissance flights over a number of years 

for various government agencies, recorded the location and frequency of salmon presence in 

rivers along the north side of DENA, including the Toklat Basin (Caribou Air, Dennis Miller, 

pilot, pers. comm., 2004). His fish presence map is found in Appendix A.
9

Flood Flow Statistics

Extreme events in water hydrology are of interest to managers because of their importance both 

ecologically and economically. For example, extreme events affect the populations and 

distributions of aquatic organisms. The design of bridges, culverts and other hydraulic 

conveyance structures requires an understanding of expected flood characteristics (Gordon et al. 

1992). Hydrologists develop estimates of such events using statistical and probabilistic methods; 

such methods are described below.

To assist with the assessment of watershed hydrology for the five major drainages, an estimation 

of the magnitude and frequency of peak streamflows is required. As these drainages are all 

ungaged, flood magnitudes are computed by using predictive regional regression equations. The 

USGS recently completed a project to update the peak streamflow frequency statistics for 

streamflow-gaging stations in Alaska and to update the regression equations for estimation of 

peak streamflow frequency at ungaged sites (Curran et al. 2003).

This new report supersedes previous reports describing peak-flow frequency statistics. These 

equations, which require the determination and use of physical and climatic drainage basin 

characteristics, provide estimates of the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, 200-, and 500-year recurrence 

interval flood magnitude. Statistically significant basin characteristics that vary by region 

throughout the State include basin area size, mean basin elevation, mean annual precipitation, 

mean minimum January temperature, and percentage of basin covered by forest or covered by 

lakes and ponds. Regression equations are provided for seven hydrologically distinct streamflow 

analysis regions in Alaska and conterminous basins of Canada.

The Toklat Basin study watersheds fall within Streamflow Region 6 (Curran et al. 2003). The 

input values for the physical characteristics of each catchment for regression equations were 

derived in ArcView (GIS software) using digital data acquired from the USGS. These included 

60 m resolution digital elevation models (DEM) and 1:63,000 scale hydrography for streams and 

lakes. Polygons for each catchment were intersected with the DEM and the lakes coverage to 

allow calculation of mean basin elevation and percent of basin in lakes and ponds, glaciers, and 

forest. Basin characteristics for the five watersheds are found in Table 2.

Table 2. Basin characteristics for Toklat Basin study watersheds.

Basin 

Characteristics

Clearwater Fork 

River

East Fork 

River

Sushana River Toklat River Wigand Creek

Drainage Area 

(mi2)

253.0 203.6 91.6 264.4 78.5

Mean Basin 

Elevation (ft)

3198 3626 2321 3474 2211

Area of Lakes and 

Ponds (mi2)

0.78 2.82 1.45 8.67 0.1

Area of Forest 

(mi2)

86.4 9.0 2.4 89.4 45.0

Area of Glaciers 

(mi2)

0 2.74 0 8.43 0
10

It is also important to note the accuracy and limitations of using such regression equations to 

estimate flood magnitudes on ungaged rivers. The updated USGS method provides values for the 

standard error of prediction, which is a measure of the accuracy of a streamflow statistic for an 

ungaged site estimated from the regression equations. For example, the standard error of 

prediction for the Region 6 Q2 estimate ranges from -33% to +49%. The USGS method also 

provides estimates of the 5% and 95% confidence limits for each discharge estimation. All errors 

of prediction and confidence limits for the estimates of flood magnitudes are found in Appendix 

B.

The average standard error of prediction for this method roughly ranges from plus 80% to minus 

32% for flood frequency Region 6. Estimates for flood magnitudes for the 5 drainages are found 

in Table 3.

Table 3. Flood frequency estimates for Toklat Basin study watersheds.

Flood Frequency 

Estimate

Clearwater Fork 

River

(cfs)

East Fork 

River

(cfs)

Sushana River

(cfs)

Toklat River

(cfs)

Wigand Creek

(cfs)

2-year flood 2300 2870 1990 1740 724 

5-year flood 3490 4070 2860 2660 1180

10-year flood 4360 4920 3480 3330 1530

25-year flood 5520 6030 4320 4200 2010

50-year flood 6420 6870 4960 4880 2390

100-year flood 7350 7740 5620 5570 2790

200-year flood 8310 8610 6300 6280 3210

500-year flood 9630 9800 7230 7250 3790

The flood flow frequency analysis is a method to assign probabilities to events of a given size. In 

Table 2, the probability is expressed as an “N-year flood” and represents a 1-in-N-year chance.

This recurrence interval describes the average length of time between two floods of a given size 

or larger. The probability of such a flood being equaled or exceeded in any one year is the 

reciprocal of the recurrence interval. For example, a 100-year flood event has a 1% probability of 

being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The annual exceedance probabilities are plotted on 

log-normal probability axis to provide a graphical flood frequency analysis. The annual 

exceedance graph for the Sushana River is plotted in Figure 3. Graphs for all five watersheds are 

found in Appendix C.

The graphical flood frequency analysis may be used to provide estimates of the bankfull 

discharge at a site. The bankfull discharge is an important flow parameter to determine when 

assessing the hydrology of a watershed because of the concept that river channels are shaped by, 

and accommodate, a dominant discharge, and that this discharge occurs with some frequency.

Though the gross form of a channel may be shaped by rarer (large) flows, the maintenance of the 

channel form and features, such as gravel bars, bank vegetation, and others, are more closely 

related to more frequent discharges. The bankfull discharge, or that discharge which just fills the 

channel to its bank, is often assumed to be the dominant discharge (Gordon et al. 1992). Many 

investigators assign a recurrence interval of 1.5 years to the bankfull discharge.
11

60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.1

Probability of being equalled or exceeded in one year (%)

1000

10000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

Sushana River

Figure 3. Annual exceedance probability and flood magnitudes for Sushana River watershed.

In addition to using field techniques to determine bankfull discharge, it may be estimated from 

the graphical flood frequency analyses. By extrapolating the straight line of the annual 

exceedance probabilities, the 1.5 year recurrence interval, with a probability of 0.67% is used to 

find the bankfull discharge. Estimated bankfull discharges for the five major rivers are found in 

Table 4.

Table 4. Estimates of bankfull discharge for the five Toklat Basin study sites.

Clearwater 

Fork River East Fork River Sushana River Toklat River Wigand Creek

Bankfull discharge 

(cfs) 1850 2360 1630 1400 560

Another aspect of a watershed hydrologic analysis is the development of a flow-duration curve.

These curves, developed from streamflow data, are used to display the relationship between 

streamflow and the percentage of time it is exceeded. For example, the 98-percent duration flow 

is considered a low flow, because it is equaled or exceeded 98 percent of the time. Conversely, 

the 2-percent flow is considered a high flow, as it is only equaled or exceeded 2 percent of the 

time. The development and evaluation of flow-duration curves can provide specific answers for 

resources concerns, such as what percentage of time the daily flow on a stream with fish 

spawning habitat is at or above some critical level.

The USGS recently developed methods for estimating daily mean flow-duration statistics for 

seven regions in Alaska (Wiley and Curran 2003). This report includes equations to estimate the 

15-, 10-, 9-, 8-, 7-, 6-, 5-, 4-, 3-, 2-, and 1-percent duration flows for the October-throughSeptember water year for seven regions in Alaska and conterminous basins in Canada.

Additionally, the 98-, 95-, 90-, 85-, 80-, 70-, 60-, and 50-percent duration flows may be 

estimated for the individual months of July, August, and September.
12

Regression equations for estimating the selected high-flow and low-flow statistics for the 

selected months and seasons for ungaged sites were developed from an ordinary-least-squares 

regression model using basin characteristics as independent variables. Basin characteristics 

included drainage area and precipitation for high flow estimation, and drainage area, 

precipitation, mean basin elevation, and area of glaciers for low flow estimation. These

estimating equations can be used at ungaged sites in Alaska where streamflow regulation, 

streamflow diversion, urbanization, and natural damming and releasing of water do not affect the 

streamflow data for the given month or season (Wiley and Curran 2003).

The Toklat Basin falls within the Region 6 flood frequency area. For Region 6, standard errors of 

estimate ranged from 27 to 33 percent for high-duration flow statistics, and 34 to 78 percent for 

monthly low-duration flow statistics.

Figure 4 contains the graphs for both the high-flow and low-flow duration statistics for the 

Clearwater Fork River. Graphs for all the study watersheds are found in Appendix D.

0 4 8 12 16

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

800

1200

1600

2000

2400

Discharge (cfs)

Clearwater Fork

Annual High Duration Flows

50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

100

200

300

400

500

Discharge (cfs)

Clearwater Fork

Monthly Low Duration Flows

July

August

September

Figure 4. High flow and low flow duration statistics for the Clearwater Fork River.
13

Water Quality

Because of its importance to the biota that drinks, transpires, or lives in the water flowing 

through rivers, water quality has long been regarded as an important characteristic in the 

assessment and description of watersheds both remote and urban (Gordon et al. 1992). As 

described previously, some water quality information is already available for the East Fork River 

and Clearwater Fork River from the Edwards and Tranel report (1998). For the remaining 

watersheds not included in that baseline survey (Sushana, Toklat, Wigand), water quality 

information was obtained by field visits to the sites in August 2004, using a variety of field 

techniques (Table 5). Some parameters were measured in the field, while laboratory analyses of 

collected water samples were used for other parameters.

Table 5. Water quality for Sushana River, Toklat River, and Wigand Creek.

Sushana River Toklat River Wigand Creek

Date 08/19/2004 08/19/2004 08/19/2004

Discharge (cfs) 8.21 na 102.68

water temperature (deg C) 8.9 13.8 5.8

dissolved oxygen (ppm) 11.87 10.24 13.79

pH 8.28 8.53 8.45

conductivity (us/cm) 274 310 541

Turbidity (NTU) 0.9 1020 2.2

Total Phosphorus (mg/L) <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Nitrate-Nitrogen (mg/L) 0.1 0.2 0.1

Ammonium-Nitrogen (mg/L) <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Alkalinity (mg CaCO3/L) 100.0 118.5 120.0

Calcium (mg/L) 38 45.0 63.0

Magnesium (mg/L) 13 9.0 32.0

Sodium (mg/L) 3 7.0 9.0

Potassium (mg/L) <1.0 1.0 2.0

Chloride (mg/L) <1.0 6.0 4.0

Sulfate (mg/L) 14.0 9.0 66.0

Dissolved Organic Carbon (mg 

C/L)

1.2 <MRL* <MRL

*method reporting limit

At each sampling site, stream temperature, pH, and dissolved oxygen were measured in the field.

Temperature and dissolved oxygen were measured with a YSI DO 200 Dissolved 

Oxygen/Temperature Meter, and pH was measured with an Oakton hand-held wand-type pH 

meter. Turbidity was measured with a Hach Model 16800 Portalab TurbidiMeter.

Temperature and dissolved oxygen were determined by immersing the conductivity cell directly 

into the stream water near the channel’s edge, but in the active current. After allowing the meter 

to stabilize for a few minutes, the reading for each parameter was recorded in the field notebook.

Temperature was recorded in °C, and dissolved oxygen was recorded in ppm. The dissolved 

oxygen meter was calibrated at the beginning of the sampling effort, according to the 

manufacturer’s instructions. Similarly, the pH wand was calibrated at the start of the sampling 

day according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
14

Samples were collected and stored in new HDPE bottles for laboratory analysis. Four 250-ml 

samples were collected at each stream. One sample was collected for ionic chemistry analyses; 

one sample was collected for dissolved organic carbon; two samples were collected for 

duplicates. Each sample bottle was labeled with the sampling location, date, time, and bottle 

number prior to collecting the samples.

The bottles for ionic chemistry and dissolved organic carbon were filtered by hand-vacuum 

pumping through a 0.45-um membrane filter. The filtering apparatus (Nalgene 310) and the filter 

were rinsed initially with stream water, and the stream rinse water was then discarded. The 

sample was then filtered, and the initial filtered water was used to rinse the bottle and cap. Then 

the full sample was filtered and poured into the bottles. All samples were refrigerated 

immediately after collection and shipped immediately to the analytical laboratories in coolers 

packed with ice and placed within insulated boxes. The samples for dissolved organic carbon 

analysis were delivered to Analytica Laboratories in Anchorage, Alaska, and all other samples 

were delivered to the Central Analytical Laboratory at Oregon State University in Corvallis, 

Oregon.

A coincident discharge measurement was taken at the time of sampling, if safe wading 

conditions allowed for such (Figure 5). Measurements were made at the East Fork River, Wigand 

Creek, and Sushana River. To measure discharge, a tape was stretched across the stream, and 

depth and velocity were measured at 0.6-depth levels, using either a Price AA or Pygmy current 

meter and wading rod. Typically, the streamflow was divided into 5-percent sections, and 

measurements were taken in the middle of the sections. At least 20 cross-sectional measurements 

were collected for each transect.

Figure 5. Discharge measurement at the East Fork River (Karle 2004).
15

The results from the water chemistry analyses of the Sushana River, the Toklat River, and 

Wigand Creek are similar to those for the East Fork River and Clearwater Fork River and within 

the ranges for north side, glacier-fed and non-glacier-fed rivers as described in the Edwards and 

Tranel report (1998). The pH values for the 3 sampled sites were contained in a narrow range 

from 8.28 to 8.53; all samples were considered alkaline (i.e., pH > 7.0.). A study of 62 streams in 

DENA (Edwards and Tranel 1998) found the average pH of north side streams was 7.77 and the 

average pH of south side streams was 7.00. Alkalinity values for the 3 sites ranged from 100.0 to 

120.0 mg/L. These streams may be considered well-buffered, especially when compared to south 

side streams within DENA. Generally speaking, a well-buffered system will resist quick and 

dramatic changes to the pH of the water from sources such as atmospheric acidic deposition.

There are two main sources of dissolved oxygen in stream water–the atmosphere and 

photosynthesis. Oxygen from the atmosphere readily dissolves into cold water up to a saturation 

point through the actions of waves and tumbling water. Additionally, oxygen is introduced by 

aquatic plants and algae as a byproduct of photosynthesis. The measured values of water 

temperature and dissolved oxygen found in this study are sufficient for fish growth and activity.

All dissolved oxygen values were at or close to saturation values for fresh water.

Turbidity levels were well within expected ranges. Glacier-fed rivers, such as the East Fork and 

Toklat Rivers, generally show turbidities in excess of 30 NTU during mid to late summer 

discharges (Milner and Oswood 1997). Turbidity measurements for those two rivers reflect the 

high, suspended sediment loads common in glacier-fed systems (Figure 6). Likewise, the low 

turbidity values from the three clear-water streams (Sushana River, Wigand Creek, and 

Clearwater Fork River) were well within the typical range for clear-water rivers in Alaska, which 

generally have turbidities of less than 10 NTU (Milner and Oswood 1997).

The general water quality of the five study watersheds may be described as good. The 

remoteness of these watersheds, their location in a national park and preserve, and the limited 

access to these areas for humans to date have combined to limit environmental degradation of 

these freshwater resources.
16

Figure 6. High suspended sediment load and turbidity in the Toklat River (Karle 2004).
17

Channel Geometry Analysis

The shape of a river cross-section at a given location is a function of the flow, the quantity and 

size of the sediment carried by the flow, and the composition of the bed and bank materials of 

the river. Surveys of channel characteristics are conducted to both help describe the physical 

characteristics of the stream channel and to provide a physical representation of the channel for 

numerical modeling purposes. Using basic cross-section survey techniques, all major features of 

the stream channel and floodplain for the East Fork, Toklat, Sushana, and Clearwater Fork 

Rivers and Wigand Creek at their potential road corridor crossings were measured and mapped.

Fieldwork was conducted during September 2004 and August 2005 during a period of low flow, 

to allow surveyors to safely wade the channels. The fieldwork conducted at each site included

the following:

• survey of longitudinal profile

• survey of 2 or 3 cross-sections per site

• water discharge measurements in each flowing channel at each site 

• water surface elevation data for each discharge measurement

• channel material gradation, using pebble count

• river morphology information

• photographs

• high water indicators, where available

All profile surveys and cross-section surveys were conducted using a Pentax PTS V3 threesecond total station. Most sites were wadable, and cross-sections were surveyed by shooting to a 

wader carrying a reflecting prism. All discharge and velocity measurements were made using a 

Price AA or pygmy current meter.

The water surface slope was surveyed to be used as a surrogate for the energy slope of the 

channel. The slope was surveyed by surveying the horizontal location and vertical elevation of 

the water surface at the right edge of water at multiple locations along the main channel of each 

river. The slope was calculated by dividing the elevation difference between the upstream and 

downstream point by the total horizontal difference along the channel between the two points.

All surveyed cross-sections for the five rivers are found in Appendix E. Note that because these 

braided rivers are extremely wide in nature, the vertical scales are much smaller than the horizontal 

scales when graphing the cross-sections. The ratio of the vertical distances to the horizontal 

distances is approximately 7.6.

Cross-section widths from bank to bank, the energy slope of the channel at low flow, the total 

flow measured in all significant channels at the time of the survey, the distance between the 

cross-sections at their mid-points, and the energy slope of the channel at low flow are found in 

Table 6.
18

Table 6. Results from cross-section surveys of the Toklat Basin study river channels (August 2004).

River Slope (ft/ft) Discharge (cfs) Cross-section Bankfull width 

(ft)

Distance 

between (ft)

East Fork 0.0098 49.03 

(3 channels)

upper 1298 643

middle1 1256 1014

lower 1117 -

Toklat 0.0097 87.53 

(4 channels)

upper2 2376 1865

middle 2872 -

Sushana 0.0093 8.21

upper 149 303

middle 205 310

lower 292 -

Clearwater Fork 0.0084 387.07

upper 256 234

middle 297 318

lower 265 -

Wigand Creek 0.0042 102.68

upper 62 159

middle 97 81

lower5 83 -

1-Location of middle East Fork cross-section N63o52’52.5” W150o03’52.0”

2-Location of upper Toklat cross-section N63o48’03.6” W150o15’51.7”

3-Location of middle Sushana cross-section N63o52’38” W149o48’52”

4-Location of middle Clearwater Fork cross-section N63o47’16.4” W150o20’15.9”

5-Location of lower Wigand Creek cross-section N63o53’47.7” W150o09’18.43”

To characterize the composition of the stream bed, a Wolman pebble count was conducted at 

each study site (Wolman 1954). Bed particles were randomly selected via a step-toe procedure, 

and the intermediate axis (neither the longest nor shortest of the three mutually perpendicular 

sides of each particle picked up) was measured and recorded. One hundred particles were 

measured per count. Pebble counts were conducted between the bankfull limits of the channel, 

unless the section was not wadable.

Counts were conducted between the lower and upper cross-sections of each site. The sampler 

began at the downstream cross-section and worked his way upstream in a zigzag fashion while 

continuing to sample. In addition to the in-channel pebble counts, dry banks adjacent to the 

channels were sampled by stretching a 100 foot tape along the ground surface and measuring 

each pebble at one foot increments. For both pebble counts, the particles are tallied and reported 

by using Wentworth size classes in which the size doubles with each class (2, 4, 8, 16, 32, etc.).

Particle tallies are plotted as a cumulative total on log-normal graphs; the graph for the East Fork 

River is found in Figure 7, along with estimates for both the in-channel and dry bank materials of 

the D50, which is the effective median particle size. Particle size graphs for all rivers are found in 

Appendix F.
19

1 10 100 1000

Particle Size (mm)

0

20

40

60

80

100

P

erce

nt Fin

er Th

a

n (%)

East Fork Pebble Count

Channel D50 = 35 mm

Bank D50 = 16 mm

Figure 7. Particle size distribution for the East Fork River.

21

Morphological Descriptions

East Fork and Toklat Rivers

The East Fork and Toklat Rivers are both multiple-channel, or braided, systems and consist of 

interconnected distributary channels formed in depositional environments. At the study sites, 

these channels are classified as D4 stream types in the Rosgen classification system (Rosgen 

1996). The channel bed materials are predominantly gravels, with a mixture of cobbles, silt, and 

occasional boulders. Typical, braided channel systems, such as these two rivers, are 

characterized by high bank erosion rates, excessive deposition occurring as both longitudinal and 

transverse bars, and annual shifts of the bed locations (Rosgen 1996).

Bed location shifts have been noted by this author much more frequently upstream on the Toklat 

and East Fork Rivers, often in the space of a month or less. The bed morphologies for both rivers 

are characterized by a closely spaced series of rapids and scour pools formed by 

convergence/divergence processes that are very unstable, though more pronounced in the Toklat 

River.

As mentioned before, the primary causes of braiding are an abundant sediment load, large and 

sudden discharge variations, erodible banks, and a steep gradient. Previous studies have shown 

that the presence of glaciers in a watershed, even in small amounts, can significantly modify the 

hydrograph from precipitation-dominated rivers (Anderson 1970). The flow of glacier-fed rivers 

in DENA may be expected to steadily increase from early May to the middle of June, as 

snowmelt occurs. High flashy peaks in the hydrograph are often observed in July and August and 

are due to a combination of warmer weather (glacial melt) and precipitation events (Karle 1989).

Rosgen noted that width to depth ratios for braided rivers are very high and may range from 40 

to 400 or larger (Rosgen 1996). Large width to depth ratios were noted for all surveyed crosssections for this study for these two rivers. Emmett et al. (1996) measured high bedload 

discharge rates for the Toklat River, and estimated annual bedload discharge ratesfor both the 

East Fork and Toklat Rivers (Emmett, 2002).

In the vicinity of the surveyed cross-sections, the right bank (looking downstream) of the East 

Fork River is approximately 6-7 feet high. Overhanging black spruce trees and a thick organic 

layer are collapsing into an active channel, indicating recent erosion. The left bank is much 

lower, approximately 1 foot high, with low willows, no obvious organic mat, and scalloped areas 

of erosion noted occasionally. In the center of the wide, braided, gravel drainage course, willows

6-10 feet high were noted in some areas. Large, uprooted, spruce tree boles were also noted 

scattered across the drainage course, indicating recent flood activity.

In the vicinity of the Toklat River surveyed cross-sections, the right bank is approximately 1-2 

feet high. The bank appears stable, and the adjoining floodplain supports mature white spruce 

and aspen trees 30 feet high or more and thick willows 6 feet or higher. A heavy deposit of silt is 

observed on the floodplain floor. The low left bank adjoins a terrace consisting of willows, 

alders, and grasses, which is backed by a steep bank of mixed conifer, birch, and aspen trees.
22

Clearwater Fork and Sushana Rivers

The Clearwater Fork and Sushana Rivers are both slightly entrenched, meandering riffle-pool 

channels with well-developed floodplains. At the study sites, these channels are classified as C4 

stream types in the Rosgen classification system (Rosgen 1996). The channel bed materials are 

predominantly gravels, with a mixture of cobbles, silt, and occasional boulders.

Streambanks along these two rivers are characterized by unconsolidated, heterogeneous, noncohesive, alluvial materials that are finer than the gravel-dominated bed material, as can be 

observed in the particle size graphs in Appendix F. Point bars and other depositional features are 

also common along these two rivers. Rosgen notes that such rivers are very susceptible to shifts 

in both lateral and vertical stability. Such instability could be caused by direct channel 

disturbance or by changes in the flow and sediment regimes of the contributing watershed 

(Rosgen 1996).

The right bank of the Clearwater Fork River near the vicinity of the surveyed cross-sections is 

steep and 5-6 feet high. The adjacent floodplain is heavily vegetated by mature spruce and poplar 

trees, along with thick willows and alders, and appears very stable. The low left bank adjoins a 

terrace, consisting of willows, alders, and grasses, which is backed by a slightly higher bank of 

mixed willows, alders, and conifer trees.

The right bank of the Sushana River (looking downstream) is approximately 3-4 feet high.

Overhanging willows and an organic layer are collapsing into an active channel, indicating 

recent erosion. The floodplain has sparse riparian vegetation, with grasses and 6-foot high 

willows. The 3 foot left bank is much lower, approximately 1 foot lower in height, with low 

willows, no obvious organic mat, and occasional scalloped areas of erosion. The left floodplain 

is well formed and heavily vegetated with dwarf birches.

The Sushana River is notable because of the disappearance of flowing water in the channel in 

several locations downstream from the study site. During low flow conditions, water appears to 

submerge into the channel gravels and re-emerge several miles downstream. During an August 

2005 flyover of the lower Sushana River, this was noted at two separate locations. The longest 

dry reach was approximately 4-5 miles and was located upstream of the Toklat Springs. Other 

rivers in this area of Interior Alaska exhibit similar conditions during low flow, such as Moose 

Creek downstream of the Kantishna area.

Wigand Creek

Wigand Creek is a stable riffle/pool stream with well-developed and fully vegetated floodplains.

The channel has low sinuosity, and the surveyed cross-sections exhibit much lower width-todepth ratios than those of the other four rivers in this study. This channel is composed of 

predominantly gravel sized bed materials, with some cobbles and silt. The 2-3 foot banks are 

well-vegetated with mature willows and alders, and the floodplains also have occasional mature 

spruce trees. Channels such as Wigand Creek are generally very stable unless the stream banks 

are disturbed or the sediment supply is drastically changed (Rosgen 1996).
23

Hydraulic Modeling Analysis

Because of the difficulty in obtaining hydraulic measurements during high river stage, computer 

numerical analysis software is often used to estimate water surface elevations and water 

velocities during high flood flows. For example, a commonly used program is the HEC-RAS 

hydraulic modeling system (USACE 1998), which is a water-surface profile computational 

model for one-dimensional, gradually varied flow. The basic computational procedure is based 

on the solution of the one-dimensional energy equation. Energy losses are evaluated by friction

(Manning’s equation) and contraction/expansion. The momentum equation is utilized in 

situations where the water surface profile is rapidly varied, such as at bridges (USACE 1998).

Numeric models of study sites are created using stream geometric data. Once the models are

constructed and calibrated, estimates of channel velocities and stage are calculated for each 

cross-section for a range of discharges.

The cross-section conditions present at a typical, braided river site present many unique 

computational problems for numerical modeling efforts. At low and intermediate flows, the 

occurrence of flowing water in any of the many channels spaced across the wide, braided 

drainage course appears often as a randomized process. In fact, channels with a higher thalweg 

elevation may contain significant flow while lower channels on the same section are often dry.

Such an effect can be noted in the cross-section surveys for the East Fork and Toklat Rivers for 

this survey.

Such conditions cannot be replicated in a numerical model, where hydraulic calculations assume 

flowing water initiates at the lowest point in a cross-section. This results in a situation where a 

numerical model cannot be properly calibrated at low flow, even using observed discharges and 

water surface elevations in numerous channels across the section. Additionally, modeling at high 

flood flows may also not result in accurate predictions of which channels or areas of the wide 

cross-section are inundated. Results from such modeling efforts should be used with extreme 

caution.

Numerical models of the five Toklat Basin rivers were constructed in HEC-RAS, using the 

surveyed cross-sections. Techniques were employed to increase the functional stability of the 

hydraulic analysis process; this is accomplished by increasing the number of cross-sections in the 

model by replicating surveyed cross-sections and adjusting the elevation of the points based on 

the surveyed slope. Estimates of the Manning’s n roughness value were obtained by using the 

field discharge measurements to back-calculate a value. Estimates of the areas of inundation 

were made by modeling 4 different flood flows: the 2-year, 50-year, 100-year, and 200-year 

floods. An example of the output from HEC-RAS for the 200-year flow in the Toklat upper 

cross-section is found in Figure 8. Graphs from both rivers and all cross-sections are found in 

Appendix G.
24

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 1678

1679

1680

1681

1682

1683

1684

1685

Toklat Plan: Plan 02 2/23/2005 

 Toklat Upper Cross-section

Station (f t)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year f lood

Ground

Bank Sta

.06 .

0

6

Figure 8. HEC-RAS estimate for the 200-year flood for the Toklat River.
25

Flood-Prone Area Delineation

Based on the results from the cross-section surveys, HEC-RAS analysis, and field observations, 

approximate flood-prone areas of the five Toklat Basin study areas in the vicinity of the old 

Stampede Trail were delineated using several remote sensing products, including:

• 1:6000 true color aerial photographs from 1987

• 1-meter color satellite photography from 2004

Figure 9 displays an example of the flood-prone area delineation for the East Fork River.

Delineations for all Toklat Basin rivers are found in Appendix H.

Figure 9. Approximate flood-prone area for the East Fork River (Base: NPS aerial photo 1987).

A floodplain may be defined as a level area near a river channel, constructed by the river in the 

present climate and overflowed during moderate flow events (Leopold 1994). For a typical, 

meandering, single channel river, the flood-prone area is generally found in a vegetated zone 
26

between the top of the channel bank and higher terraces. For braided rivers such as the Toklat 

and East Fork Rivers, the flood-prone areas generally occur between the two banks, on the nonor lightly-vegetated gravel drainage course.

As noted earlier in this report, the delineation of floodplains and predicted areas of bank erosion 

is difficult on large braided rivers. For example, even though the HEC-RAS analysis for the three 

cross-sections of the East Fork show the 100-year flood flow contained within 900 to 1,000 feet 

center to right in the 1400-foot cross-sections, field evidence shows obvious flow channels in the 

“non-flood” sections. Though some areas of the braided gravel cross-section are higher in 

elevation than others by 3 to 5 feet and appear as “islands” in the HEC-RAS analysis, this does 

not exclude those areas from being subject to occasional flow inundation. Because of this, the 

flood prone area in Figure 9 was delineated largely by using the existing permanent vegetation 

line, along with field observations.

Though banks on these large braided rivers can be subject to large rates of lateral erosion, even at 

lower flows, it appears large floods generally do not readily inundate the higher vegetated banks 

but are contained within the banks, even as they erode. Older, non-active side channels that have 

revegetated exist in some areas, such as the inside point bar bisected by the old Stampede Trail 

on the left bank of the East Fork River (Figure 9). Some of these channels may be the result of 

winter icing conditions, which can leave a thick layer of ice covering the entire gravel bar long 

into the spring and early summer. Such aufeis often forces water flowing from spring melt out of 

the main channel and over the banks into the lower vegetated areas until the gravel course melts 

out.
27

Toklat Springs

The Toklat Springs is an extremely productive, fall, chum salmon spawning area that is very 

important to the subsistence and commercial fisheries along the Tanana and Yukon rivers

(ADF&G 2005). This feature’s existence is due in part or whole to an upwelling of water 

through the riverbed gravels and is notable for its reach of open water all winter long. The 

springs are located at the confluence of the Sushana River and the Toklat River, approximately 

18.5 miles north of the confluence of the East Fork River, Toklat River, and the Stampede Trail

(Figure 1). The springs are described in several documents, including Sheldon (1930) and 

Valkenburg (1974).

Sheldon described the open water as 3.5 to 4.8 miles in length, though he did not delineate the 

portions attributable to the length on the Sushana or Toklat Rivers. On several field visits in

February to March in both 1973 and 1974, Valkenburg noted that the springs originate from 

water bubbling up through the dry channel bed of the Sushana River, starting at about 0.45 miles

upstream from its confluence with the Toklat. At that time, the total extent of the open water was 

estimated at 2.5 miles, and water depths were estimated to be from a few inches to 6 feet in 

some larger pools. Valkenburg also noted that it is possible that the spring is just a re-emergence 

of the waters of the Sushana River (1974).

Valkenburg obtained several water temperature readings on a visit to the springs on March 18, 

1974. He noted that the water temperature ranged from 4° C at the head of the springs to 2° C 1.5 

km downstream (Valkenburg 1974).

As part of this project, an aerial survey of and a brief ground visit to the Toklat Springs were

conducted in an effort to map the extent of the springs. The visit was conducted on March 24, 

2005, using a chartered ski-equipped SuperCub fixed wing aircraft. Location readings were taken 

on the ground using a handheld GPS unit to delineate the extent of open water on the Sushana 

River. Open water was noted for approximately 0.5 mile upstream of the confluence with the 

Toklat River (Figure 10). From the confluence with the Toklat River, this channel remained open 

downstream for a distance of approximately 2.5 miles, where a large area of aufeis was noted 

(Figure 11). Observers note that the extent and discharge of the springs varies somewhat 

annually, depending on seasonal precipitation patterns and influx from side channels of the 

Toklat River (Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Bonnie Borba, pers. comm., 2005).

Water ranged in depth from a tenth of a foot to approximately 3 feet deep in one pool in the 

downstream section. Water temperatures were measured with a handheld thermometer.

Temperatures ranged from +1° C at the upstream end of the open water to 2° C at the lower end.

Though not measured, visible discharge was noted to double from the upstream end to the lower 

end; total discharge was estimated not to exceed a few cubic feet per second.

In addition to the Toklat Springs, open water channels were noted in several other locations 

nearby. For example, smaller open water channels were located on several streams 

approximately 1 and 2 miles to the east and several miles north of the Toklat River. These 

channels remained open for several miles before closing back up with an ice cover, or connecting 
28

Figure 10. Upper end of open water channel at Toklat Springs (Karle 2005).

to the Toklat River channel. One open channel was also noted flowing into the west side of the 

Toklat River, several miles downstream from the Toklat Springs.

In their descriptions of the springs, both Sheldon and Valkenburg noted extensive evidence of 

wildlife utilizing the spring area. During the March 2005 visit for this study, a wolf was observed 

at the site during the initial flyover; it subsequently left the site during our visit. Six ducks were 

also noted at the site, though the species was not noted. Additionally, there were numerous 

salmon heads and carcasses that had been recently deposited on the banks along the channel; 

again, the species was not noted (Figure 12).

Water bodies, such as lakes and regional precipitation, have characteristic D/H (

2

H/1H) and 

18O/16O ratios (chemical signatures of a water sample) that can be used to identify their 

contribution to mixed waters. This is particularly useful in identifying sources of subsurface 

waters. To positively identify the source of water for the Toklat Springs area, the Toklat Springs 

area was to have been sampled in late summer 2005, along with samples of precipitation, 

samples from upstream surface water sources, and samples from downstream.
29

Figure 11. Open water channel extending downstream from Toklat Springs (Karle 2005).

Figure 12. Salmon head at Toklat Springs (Karle 2005).

During a field trip to take the stable isotope samples in August 2005, it was noted that a large 

breach in the spruce forest floodplain between the Toklat River and the Sushana River channel 

had occurred approximately 1 mile upstream of the Toklat Springs (Figure 13). This breach 
30

Figure 13. Floodplain breach diverting water from Toklat River into Sushana River upstream of Toklat 

Springs area, August 2005 (Karle).

resulted in a large flow from the Toklat River entering the Sushana River channel and Toklat 

Springs from upstream. The silty discharge from the Toklat River breach appeared to be at least 

several times greater in flow rate than the existing clear-water discharge from the Sushana River.

The newly formed diversion of the Toklat River into the Toklat Springs area was first noted by 

aerial observers in 2004 and consisted of sheet flow through vegetation (National Park Service, 

Hollis Twitchell, pers. comm., 2005). The same observers also noted that the diversion had 

developed a distinct channel form by mid-summer 2005. It is unclear if this new diversion 

channel will remain active, decrease, or even increase in size. It is also unclear as to what impact 

the effect of diverting a large flow rate of silty water into the Sushana River channel with have 

on the spawning habitat value of the Toklat Springs. However, this diversion has, for the time 

being, nullified the value of stable isotope sampling for water source identification. As such, the 

intended isotope sampling effort was cancelled.
31

Recommendations

Additional studies are needed to continue the evaluation of the water resources of the north 

access corridor. Given the likelihood of the continued interest in developing a transportation 

corridor in that area, the following research topics are suggested:

• Estimates of the quantity of gravel required to build the north access route should be 

developed and/or acquired from the AKDOT&PF. Estimates of gravel required for 

annual maintenance purposes should also be developed. Potential sites for gravel borrow 

pits should be identified. Impacts to local hydrologic conditions from gravel mining 

should be identified.

• River crossings should be identified, and a technical analysis of the impacts from bridges 

and culverts should be developed. Impacts from floodplain restriction should be 

identified.

• In addition to the Toklat River, fish spawning and rearing areas should be identified on 

other streams and sloughs, including the East Fork River and Wigand Creek. In 

particular, upstream habitat areas that may be blocked as a result of road construction 

should be identified.

• Other potential threats to the park aquatic resources should be identified and quantified.

• The importance of the Toklat Springs to salmon and the value of the spawned-out salmon 

to other species (which may depend on their biomass) need further investigation.

Based on the significant threat to these water resources, additional baseline data acquisition 

should begin immediately. The baseline data parameters to be sampled should be carefully 

selected with the goals of 1) establishing the condition of existing resources and 2) determining

the impacts to those resources from subsequent road construction through a long-term 

monitoring program.

This baseline data collection effort, and the subsequent long-term monitoring, should focus on 

three categories: water quality, aquatic habitat, and aquatic organisms. These suggested actions 

should be conducted before road construction begins.

1. Water Quality: Because of its importance to the biota that drinks, transpires, or lives 

in the water flowing through rivers, water quality has long been regarded as an important 

characteristic in the assessment and description of watersheds both remote and urban 

(Gordon et al. 1992). Baseline data should be collected on all streams crossed by the road 

project in advance of road construction in order to evaluate potential source and nonsource water quality impacts later. Chemical variables to be sampled include major 

metals, trace elements, major ions, major nutrients, and dissolved organic contaminants.

Additionally, chemical contaminants, such as pesticides, should be measured in the water 

column, the streambed sediment, and biological tissues.
32

2. Aquatic Habitat: Aquatic habitat forms the structure within which aquatic organisms 

make their home. Measurements of such habitat in an undisturbed setting are generally 

more predictable, less variable, and more easily measured than biological and chemical 

factors (Gordon et al. 1992).

Habitat measurement and description provide the ability to examine the relative influence 

of changes in physical and chemical characteristics on biological communities to better 

interpret long-term changes in ecological conditions. For example, changes to fish habitat 

from road construction activities will provide scientists with a means to predict impacts 

to fish communities. Before road construction begins, aquatic habitat should be described 

and identified on all streams crossed by the project road that contain fish communities.

Using a USGS method, habitat sampling is based on a tiered design. At the basin level, 

GIS is used to obtain such characteristics as the hydrology, geology, and soils of a 

watershed. At the stream-segment level, stream morphology is described in a reach of the 

study area bounded by major tributaries. Morphological descriptions include gradient, 

elevation, sinuosity, and other channel/floodplain features. Finally, stream-reach level 

sampling is used to describe local characteristics of streamflow, bank stability, and 

others. The description and quantification of riparian vegetation, including species, 

density, and species dominance, is critical for establishing the relationship between the 

stream environment and aquatic organisms.

3. Aquatic organisms: Before road construction begins, an assessment should be 

conducted on all streams crossed by the project road to determine fish species presence

and relative abundance. Fish should be sampled using several sampling methods, 

including electrofishing and seining. Fish should be identified as to species, length, and 

weight. Additionally, the presence of external anomalies, including skeletal deformities, 

eroded fins, lesions, tumors, diseases, and parasites, should be noted.

Chlorophyll (as algal growth) is the primary producer and base of the aquatic system and 

is an excellent indicator of water quality changes even when periodic water column 

measurements show no changes. Chlorophyll will provide an important baseline parallel 

to fish and should be measured.

Baseline data should be collected before road construction activities begin. If and when road 

construction is initiated, long-term monitoring should be implemented. Monitoring of the major 

parameters (organisms, habitat, and water quality) should occur on a 2 year interval. Based on 

the results from the baseline data collection effort, some monitoring parameters or their sampling 

intervals may be modified.
33

Supplementary Products

Four products developed for this study are not included due to space limitations and the desire 

for a manageable document for park managers. Instead, these products are included on a CD that

is on file/available at the Denali National Park and Preserve Technical Library. The products are:

• MS Access database file with all field data obtained to this point, including water 

chemistry, discharge, cross-section surveys, pebble counts, and flood 

magnitudeestimates. Many of the graphs included in the appendices of this report are 

embedded in the Access database.

• GIS (ArcGIS 9) file, containing the geodatabase used to delineate and display the study 

watersheds. The projection is Albers Equal Area Alaska, NAD27.

• All digital project photographs to date, organized by river.

• EPA STORET water quality files.

35

References

Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G). 2005. Yukon River salmon 2004 season summary and 2005 

season outlook. Prepared by the U.S. and Canada Yukon River Joint Technical Committee. Anchorage, AK,

and Whitehorse, Yukon.

Anderson, G. S. 1970. Hydrologic reconnaissance of the Tanana Basin, Central Alaska. U.S. Geological 

Hydrological Investigations Atlases, HA-319. Fairbanks, AK.

Barton, L. H. 1984. A catalog of Yukon River salmon spawning escapement surveys. Alaska Department of 

Fish and Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries. Technical Data Report No. 121. Juneau, AK.

Chaco, Jr., E. F., R. L. Burrows, and W.W. Emmett. 1989. Detection of coarse sediment movement using radio 

transmitters. In Proceedings XXIII Congress on Hydraulics and the Environment, International Association 

for Hydraulic Research, Ottawa, Canada.

Curran, J. H., D. H. Meyer, and G. D. Tasker. 2003. Estimating the magnitude and frequency of peak 

streamflows for ungaged sites on streams in Alaska and conterminous basins in Canada. U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigation Report 03-4188. Anchorage, AK.

Drage, B. T. 1977. Hydraulic engineering investigation of braided rivers flowing from the eastern Brooks 

Range, Alaska. M.S. Thesis. University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK.

Edwards, P. J. and M. J. Tranel. 1998. Physical and chemical characterization of streams and rivers within 

DENA. In cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Timber and 

Watershed Laboratory, Parsons, WV. On file at Denali National Park and Preserve.

Emmett, W.W. 2002. Letter report from William Emmett, Consulting Hydrologist, Littleton, Colorado, to Ken Karle, NPS, Denali

National Park and Preserve, Denali, Alaska, on estimating annual bedload discharge on the East Fork River. March 7, 

2002.Emmett, W. W., R. L. Burrows, and E.F. Chacho, Jr. 1996. Coarse-particle transport in a gravel-bed 

river. International Journal of Sediment Research 11(2).

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2005. STORET database access center at 

http://www.epa.gov/storet/dbtop.htm. Last accessed 15 February 2005.

Gordon, N. D, T. A. McMahon, and B. L. Finlayson. 1992. Stream hydrology; an introduction for ecologists.

John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.

Holder, R. R., and L. Fair. 2002. Toklat River fall chum salmon radio telemetry study, 1997. Regional 

Information Report No. 3A02-50. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage, AK.

Karle, K. F. 1989. Replenishment potential for gravel removal sites at the Toklat River, Alaska. M.S. Thesis.

University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK.

Karle, K. F. 1990. Replenishment potential for gravel removal sites for the Toklat River, Denali National Park 

and Preserve. Unpublished. On file at Denali National Park and Preserve Headquarters.

Karle, K. F. 2006. Potential impacts to water resources from development of a north access route through 

Denali National Park and Preserve. Unpublished. On file at Denali National Park and Preserve Headquarters.
36

Karle, K. F. 2006. Potential impacts to water resources from development of a north access route through 

Denali National Park and Preserve. Natural Resource Report NPS/NRPC/WRD/NRR ―2006/019. National 

Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center, Water Resources Division, Fort Collins, CO.

Leopold, L. B. 1994. A view of the river. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Meyer, S. C. and R. C. Kavanaugh. 1982. Fish resources and the effects of mining activities in the Kantishna 

Hills, Denali National Park, 1982. Draft. National Park Service, Anchorage, AK.

Miller, P. 1981. Fisheries resources of stream along the park road and in Kantishna Hills, Denali National Park 

and Preserve. National Park Service. Unpublished. On file at Denali National Park and Preserve 

Headquarters.

Milner, A. M. and M. W. Oswood, editors. 1997. Freshwaters of Alaska, ecological syntheses. Ecological 

Studies, Volume 199. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.

Schalk, B., C. S. Maniaci, and R. F. Carlson. 2001. Floodplain delineation and development of management 

recommendations for flood hazard zones in Denali National Park and Preserve, final report. Civil and 

Environmental Engineering Department, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK.

Sheldon, C. 1930. The wilderness of Denali. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, London.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1998. HEC-RAS river analysis system. In U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center user’s manual. CPD-68.

Valkenburg, P. 1974. Notes on the winter ecology of an Interior Alaska spring. Alaska Cooperative Park 

Studies Unit. Unpublished. On file at Denali National Park and Preserve Headquarters.

Wiley, J. B. and J. H. Curran. 2003. Estimating annual high-flow statistics and monthly and seasonal low-flow 

statistics for ungaged sites on streams in Alaska and conterminous basins in Canada. U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigation Report 03-4114. Anchorage, AK.

Wolman, M. G. 1954. A method of sampling coarse river-bed material. Transactions of the American 

Geophysical Union 35:951-956.
37

Appendix A. Anecdotal salmon presence map

for Toklat Basin

This map was compiled by Fairbanks contract pilot Dennis Miller and is based on his experience flying wildlife 

surveys over the north side of DENA over a period of 35 years.
38
39

Appendix B. Flood magnitudes, estimates of 

error, and confidence limits

This program computes estimates of N-year floods for ungaged sites in Alaska based on the report

"Estimating the Magnitude and Frequency of Peak Streamflows for Ungaged Sites on Streams in Alaska and 

Conterminous Basins in Canada", VERSION 10/04/03, WRIR 03-4188. See this publication for equations. In addition to 

the standard error of prediction (SE), the average equivalent years of record (EQ. YEARS) value is an overall measure of 

predictive ability; it relates the predictive ability of the regression equations to that obtained by flood-frequency analysis 

of number of years of peak-discharge data collected at the site.

Flood frequency estimates for

Site: Clearwater River 

Region 6

Drainage area, in square miles: 253.00

Percent of area in lakes and ponds: 0.3

Forest cover, in percent: 34.0

 N DISCHARGE SE (+%) SE(-%) CONFIDENCE LIMITS EQ. YEARS

 (cfs) 5% 95%

 2 2300 47.8 -32.3 1200 4420 1.3

 5 3490 49.0 -32.9 1790 6800 1.8

 10 4360 52.0 -34.2 2170 8760 2.2

 25 5520 56.8 -36.2 2600 11700 2.7

 50 6420 61.0 -37.9 2900 14200 3.0

 100 7350 65.5 -39.6 3170 17000 3.3

 200 8310 70.2 -41.2 3420 20200 3.5

 500 9630 76.8 -43.4 3720 24900 3.6

Flood frequency estimates for

Site: Toklat River 

Region 6

Drainage area, in square miles: 264.38

Percent of area in lakes and ponds: 3.3

Forest cover, in percent: 34.0

 N DISCHARGE SE (+%) SE(-%) CONFIDENCE LIMITS EQ. YEARS

 (cfs) 5% 95%

 2 1740 48.1 -32.5 905 3360 1.2

 5 2660 49.4 -33.1 1360 5210 1.7

 10 3330 52.4 -34.4 1650 6720 2.2

 25 4200 57.3 -36.4 1970 8960 2.7

 50 4880 61.5 -38.1 2190 10900 3.0

 100 5570 66.1 -39.8 2390 13000 3.2

 200 6280 70.9 -41.5 2570 15400 3.4

 500 7250 77.6 -43.7 2780 18900 3.5

Flood frequency estimates for

Site: Wigand Creek 

Region 6
40

Drainage area, in square miles: 78.46

Percent of area in lakes and ponds: 0.1

Forest cover, in percent: 57.3

 N DISCHARGE SE (+%) SE(-%) CONFIDENCE LIMITS EQ. YEARS

 (cfs) 5% 95%

 2 724 47.9 -32.4 377 1390 1.6

 5 1180 49.2 -33.0 605 2300 2.3

 10 1530 52.1 -34.3 758 3080 2.9

 25 2010 57.0 -36.3 945 4270 3.6

 50 2390 61.2 -38.0 1080 5300 3.9

 100 2790 65.7 -39.6 1200 6480 4.2

 200 3210 70.4 -41.3 1320 7820 4.5

 500 3790 77.1 -43.5 1460 9850 4.7

Flood frequency estimates for

Site: East Fork River 

Region 6

Drainage area, in square miles: 203.60

Percent of area in lakes and ponds: 1.4

Forest cover, in percent: 4.4

 N DISCHARGE SE (+%) SE(-%) CONFIDENCE LIMITS EQ. YEARS

 (cfs) 5% 95%

 2 2870 48.3 -32.6 1490 5540 1.3

 5 4070 49.6 -33.2 2080 7980 1.8

 10 4920 52.7 -34.5 2430 9970 2.3

 25 6030 57.7 -36.6 2820 12900 2.8

 50 6870 61.9 -38.3 3070 15400 3.1

 100 7740 66.5 -40.0 3300 18100 3.4

 200 8610 71.4 -41.6 3500 21200 3.5

 500 9800 78.2 -43.9 3730 25700 3.7
41

Flood frequency estimates for

Site: Sushana River 

Region 6

Drainage area, in square miles: 91.60

Percent of area in lakes and ponds: 0.0

Forest cover, in percent: 2.6

 N DISCHARGE SE (+%) SE(-%) CONFIDENCE LIMITS EQ. YEARS

 (cfs) 5% 95%

 2 1990 49.3 -33.0 1020 3890 1.5

 5 2860 50.7 -33.7 1440 5680 2.1

 10 3480 53.9 -35.0 1700 7160 2.6

 25 4320 59.1 -37.2 1990 9380 3.2

 50 4960 63.6 -38.9 2180 11300 3.6

 100 5620 68.3 -40.6 2360 13400 3.9

 200 6300 73.3 -42.3 2510 15800 4.1

 500 7230 80.4 -44.6 2700 19400 4.2

43

Appendix C. Annual exceedance probability graphs

60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.1

Probability of being equalled or exceeded in one year (%)

1000

10000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Discharge (cfs)

Clearwater Fork

60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.1

Probability of being equalled or exceeded in one year (%)

1000

10000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Discharge (cfs)

East Fork River
44

60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.1

Probability of being equalled or exceeded in one year (%)

1000

10000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Discharge (cfs)

Sushana River

60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.1

Probability of being equalled or exceeded in one year (%)

1000

10000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Discharge (cfs)

Toklat River
45

60 50 40 30 20 10 5 2 1 0.5 0.1

Probability of being equalled or exceeded in one year (%)

100

1000

10000

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Discharge (cfs)

Wigand Creek

47

Appendix D. High flow and low flow duration statistics

for Toklat Basin study watersheds

0 4 8 12 16

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

800

1200

1600

2000

2400

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

Clearwater Fork

Annual High Duration Flows

50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

100

200

300

400

500

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

Clearwater Fork

Monthly Low Duration Flows

July

August

September
48

0 4 8 12 16

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

400

800

1200

1600

2000

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

East Fork River

Annual High Duration Flows

50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

100

200

300

400

500

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

East Fork River

Monthly Low Duration Flows

July

August

September
49

0 4 8 12 16

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

Sushana River

Annual High Duration Flows

50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

20

40

60

80

100

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

Sushana River

Monthly Low Duration Flows

July

August

September
50

0 4 8 12 16

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

800

1200

1600

2000

2400

2800

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

Toklat River

Annual High Duration Flows

50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

Toklat River

Monthly Low Duration Flows

July

August

September
51

0 4 8 12 16

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

100

200

300

400

500

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

Wigand Creek

Annual High Duration Flows

50 60 70 80 90 100

Percent of time flow is equalled or exceeded (%)

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Dis

c

h

arg

e (cfs)

Wigand Creek

Monthly Low Duration Flows

July

August

September

53

Appendix E. Surveyed cross-sections for the 

five Toklat Basin study watersheds

Clearwater Fork Cross-sections

-2

0

0 -10

0

0 10

0

2

0

0

3

0

0

Station Fro

m

L

eft B

ank (ft)

16

6

0

16

6

4

16

6

8

16

7

2

16

7

6

)tf( noit avel E

ar g l ev

gev

oolf l pd ni a

gev

oolf l pd ni a

voe

ar g l ev

ar g l ev

ar g l ev

ar g l ev

wel

wer

Cle

arwater F

ork-Lower Cross-se

ction

0 10

0

2

0

0

3

0

0

4

0

0

Station Fro

m

L

eft B

ank (ft)

16

6

6

16

6

8

16

7

0

16

7

2

16

7

4

16

7

6

16

7

8

)tf( noit avel E

voe

ar g l ev

ar g l ev

ar g l ev

wel

wer

r ps ecu

olli w w

Cle

arwater F

ork-Mid

dle

Cross-se

ction

-5

0

0

5

0 10

0 15

0

2

0

0

2

5

0

Station Fro

m

L

eft B

ank (ft)

16

6

6

16

6

8

16

7

0

16

7

2

16

7

4

16

7

6

)tf( noit avel E

ar g l ev

ar g l ev

wel

wer

voe

dl a w,r e

wolli

r ps ecu

Cle

arwater F

ork-U

p

p

er Cross-se

ction
54

East Fork River Cross-sections

0

4

0

0

8

0

0 12

0

0

Statio

n

Fro

m

L

eft B

a

n

k (ft)

14

8

4

14

8

8

14

9

2

14

9

6

15

0

0

15

0

4

)tf( noit avel E

geb nni gni t f o eer nil- e

bot vh- wy wolli

enil

voe g- var l e

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer voe g- var l eoolf l pd ni a e

br

E

a

st Fork

River-Lower Cro

s

s-s

e

ctio

n

0

4

0

0

8

0

0 12

0

0 16

0

0

Statio

n

Fro

m

L

eft B

a

n

k (ft)

14

9

6

14

9

8

15

0

0

15

0

2

15

0

4

)tf( noit avel E

t oc wnot doo o-s ot u f f ool l pd ni a

nec et nilr s- e mat dep de art li

ar g , ss vtl ge bot

ar g l ev ahc enn l

aps esr olli w w

aps esr olli w w

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

bot r ps ecu

eert s

E

a

st Fork

River-Mid

dle

Cro

s

s-s

e

ctio

n
55

East Fork River Cross-sections

0

4

0

0

8

0

0 12

0

0 16

0

0

Statio

n

Fro

m

L

eft B

a

n

k (ft)

14

9

6

15

0

0

15

0

4

15

0

8

1512

)tf( noit avel E

gev w- wolli

wel

wer

wel

wer

olli w w

olli w w

olli w w

olli w w

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer br ps- cur rt e see

E

a

st F

ork

River-U

p

p

er Cro

s

s-s

e

ctio

n
56

Sushana River Cross-sections

0 10

0

2

0

0

3

0

0

Station Fro

m

L

eft B

ank (ft)

9

2

9

4

9

6

9

8

10

0

)tf( noit avel E

gev

ar g l ev

WEL

WER

ar g l ev

hgil wt

wolli

Sushana

River-Lower Cross-section

0

2

0

0

4

0

0

6

0

0

Station Fro

m

L

eft B

ank (ft)

9

6

9

8

10

0

10

2

10

4

10

6

)tf( noit avel E

olli w w

ar g l ev

WEL

WER

ar g ol

lliev

w w

Sushana

River-Mid

dle

Cross-section

0

4

0

8

0 12

0 16

0

Station Fro

m

L

eft B

ank (ft)

10

0

10110

2

10

3

)tf( noit avel E

BL pu- r ep gev

ar g l ev r ab

wel

wer

ar g l ev r ab

Sushana

River-U

p

p

er Cross-section
57

Toklat River Cross-sections

0

5

0

0 10

0

0 15

0

0

2

0

0

0

2

5

0

0

Statio

n

Fro

m

L

eft B

a

n

k (ft)

16

7

8

16

8

0

16

8

2

16

8

4

16

8

6

)tf( noit avel E

t oc wnot doo o-s ot u f f ool l pd ni a

bot ar g w-ss

wolli ar g w-ss

wolli

ar g w-ss

wol

alri g w-ss

wolli

ar g w-ss

wolli

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wel wer

bot

gev

To

klat River-U

p

p

er Cro

s

s-s

e

ctio

n

0 10

0

0

2

0

0

0

3

0

0

0

Statio

n

Fro

m

L

eft B

a

n

k (ft)

16

5

6

16

6

0

16

6

4

16

6

8

16

7

2

)tf( noit avel E

voe g- var l e

aeh ei v evr t eg oit a n

ani vit c lf e doo al p ni ps- sr a we wolli

wel

wer

wel

wer

wel

wer

voe g- var l e - BR

olli w

c, w ott o wn doo

To

klat River-Mid

dle

Cro

s

s-s

e

ctio

n
58

Wigand Creek Cross-sections

-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Station From Left Bank (ft)

9698

100102104

)tf( noit avel E

ar g l ev

wel

wer

ar g l ev

Wigand Creek-Lower Cross-Section

-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Station From Left Bank (ft)

98

100102104106

)tf( noit avel E

gde o e evf g

wel

wer

ar g l ev

gde o e evf g

Wigand Creek-Middle Cross-section

-20 0 20 40 60 80 Station From Left Bank (ft)

98

100102104106

)tf( noit avel E

bl

wel

wer

Wigand Creek-Upper Cross-section
59

Appendix F. Particle size distribution graphs for 

the five Toklat Basin study rivers

1 10 100 1000

Particle Size (mm)

0

20

40

60

80

100

P

erce

nt Fin

er Th

a

n (%)

Clearwater Fork Pebble Count

Channel D50 = 35 mm

Bank D50 = 29 mm

1 10 100 1000

Particle Size (mm)

0

20

40

60

80

100

P

erce

nt Fin

er Th

a

n (%)

East Fork Pebble Count

Channel D50 = 35 mm

Bank D50 = 16 mm
60

1 10 100 1000

Particle Size (mm)

0

20

40

60

80

100

P

erce

nt Fin

er Th

a

n (%)

Sushana River Pebble Count

Channel D50 = 47 mm

Bank D50 = 17 mm

1 10 100 1000

Particle Size (mm)

0

20

40

60

80

100

P

erce

nt Fin

er Th

a

n (%)

Toklat River Pebble Count

Bank D50 = 20 mm

Channel D50 = 29 mm
61

1 10 100 1000

Particle Size (mm)

0

20

40

60

80

100

P

erce

nt Fin

er Th

a

n (%)

Wigand Creek Pebble Count

Channel D50 = 31 mm

63

Appendix G. HEC-RAS Modeling results for 

the five Toklat Basin study watersheds

Clearwater Fork

-200 -100 0 100 200 300

1660

1662

1664

1666

1668

1670

1672

1674

1676

Clearwater Fork Plan: clearwater 11/12/2005 

 lower cross-section

Station (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.07 .06 .

0

7

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

1666

1668

1670

1672

1674

1676

1678

Clearwater Fork Plan: clearwater 11/12/2005 

 middle

Station (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.07 .06 .07
64

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250

1666

1668

1670

1672

1674

1676

Clearwater Fork Plan: clearwater 11/12/2005 

 upper cross-section

Station (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.05 .04 .

0

5

East Fork River

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1498

1500

1502

1504

1506

1508

1510

1512

East Fork Plan: Plan 02 2/23/2005 

 East Fork Upper Cross-section

Station (f t)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.058
65

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1496

1497

1498

1499

1500

1501

1502

1503

1504

East Fork Plan: Plan 02 2/23/2005 

 East Fork Middle Cross-section

Station (f t)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.058

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1480

1485

1490

1495

1500

1505

East Fork Plan: Plan 02 2/23/2005 

 East Fork Lower Cross-section

Station (f t)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.058 .

0

6
66

Sushana River

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

92

94

96

98

100

102

Sushana River Plan: Plan 02 11/12/2005 

 lower cross-section

Station (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.07 .06 .07

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

96

98

100

102

104

106

Sushana River Plan: Plan 02 11/12/2005 

 middle cross-section

Station (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.07 .06 .07
67

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

Sushana River Plan: Plan 02 11/12/2005 

 Upper Cross-section

Station (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.07 .06 .07
68

Toklat River 

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 1678

1679

1680

1681

1682

1683

1684

1685

Toklat Plan: Plan 02 2/23/2005 

 Toklat Upper Cross-section

Station (f t)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.06 .

0

6

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 1658

1660

1662

1664

1666

1668

1670

Toklat Plan: Plan 02 2/23/2005 

 mid tok xsec Toklat Middle Cross-section

Station (f t)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.06
69

Wigand Creek 

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

98

100

102

104

106

108

Wigand Creek Plan: Plan 01 11/11/2005 

 lower cross-section

Station (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

50-year flood

100-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.1 .08 .1

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

98

100

102

104

106

108

Wigand Creek Plan: Plan 01 11/11/2005 

 middle cross-section

Station (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.1 .08 .1
70

-40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

98

100

102

104

106

108

110

Wigand Creek Plan: Plan 01 11/11/2005 

 upper cross-section

Station (ft)

Elevation (ft)

Legend

200-year flood

100-year flood

50-year flood

2-year flood

Ground

Bank Sta

.1 .08 .1
71

Appendix H. Approximate flood-prone delineation

for the five Toklat Basin study rivers

Clearwater Fork

(Base: NPS aerial photo 1987)
72

East Fork River

(Base: NPS aerial photo 1987)
73

Sushana River

(Base: NPS aerial photo 1987)
74

Toklat River

(Base: NPS aerial photo 1987)
75

Wigand Creek

(Base: Satellite photo 2004)

The Department of the Interior protects and manages the nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage; provides scientific and 

other information about those resources; and honors its special responsibilities to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated 

Island Communities.

NPS 186/101070
National Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior

Natural Resource Program Center

1201 Oakridge Drive, Suite 150

Fort Collins, CO 80525

www.nature.nps.gov

EXPERIENCE YOUR AMERICA TM