Environmental 

Assessment 

Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project 

Mile Post 1339, Alaska Hwy 

20 Miles West of Tok, Alaska 

 

Prepared for: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Rural Utilities Service (RUS) 

Prepared by: 

Alaska Power & Telephone Company 

Corporate Headquarters 

Port Townsend, Washington 

April 2010 

Author: Glen Martin – Project Manager 

 Alaska Power & Telephone Company 

 P.O. Box 3222 

Port Townsend, WA 98368 

(360) 385-1733 x122 

(360) 385-7538 fax 

glen.m@aptalaska.com
Page | ii

SUMMARY

The USDA Rural Utilities Service (RUS) has selected the Alaska Power & Telephone 

Company (AP&T) as a finalist in its High Energy Cost Grant Program to construct the 

proposed Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (or Project). The proposed Project would be 

located approximately twenty miles west of Tok, Alaska, at Mile Post 1339 on the Alaska 

Highway. The proposed Project would supply renewable energy to four communities in 

the Tok area: Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tetlin, and Tok. Prior to making an award for a partial 

grant, RUS has determined that an Environmental Assessment (EA) must be prepared, 

pursuant to 7 CFR Part 1794, RUS’s Environmental Policies and Procedures, as amended. 

This EA identifies environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of 

the proposed Project. It has been decided that impacts associated with upgrading the 

supporting transmission system would be minimal, as the infrastructure already exists and 

would only require minor upgrading and the stringing of a higher voltage conductor. All of 

this work would occur in previously disturbed rights-of-way that previously have been 

cleared of vegetation. The Project would be located on lands owned by the state of Alaska 

and Tanacross, Inc. 

This proposed Project is needed because the communities of Dot Lake, Tanacross, Tetlin, 

and Tok rely on diesel generation for their electricity, which is expensive and fluctuates 

frequently. The Project would reduce electric rates to these four communities by 

approximately 20%. Several of these communities are on the Denali Commission’s list of 

distressed communities1

 as this area is experiencing a significant economic downturn. 

Reducing electric rates may help the local economy. 

The results of the impact analysis show the project may have the follow environmental 

affects: 

 Temporarily impact wildlife due to noise from construction activity, which may 

temporarily impact hunting in the area 

 Have a minor impact to wetlands, by placing fill in the creek (i.e. diversion 

structure, bridge piers (2), part of tailrace) 

 Have a minor impact to Dolly Varden and Arctic grayling in the bypass section of 

Yerrick Creek during winter and late summer months because of low flow 

 Provide easier access for recreation, potentially disturbing wildlife 

 Reduce the use of diesel in Tok, which in turn would reduce air emissions of greenhouse gases and particulate matter as well as reducing opportunities for fuel spills 

 

1

 Dot Lake, Tanacross, and Tetlin are on the 2009 Denali Commission list of distressed communities. Tok 

was on the 2008 list. 
Page | iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY........................................................................................................................... ii 

LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................. iv 

LIST OF APPENDICES....................................................................................................... iv 

LIST OF ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS.................................................................... v 

1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1 

2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................ 3 

3 PURPOSE/NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION............................................................ 5 

4 ALTERNATIVES.......................................................................................................... 6 

4.1 No Action............................................................................................................... 6 

4.2 Energy Generation Technologies Considered ....................................................... 6 

4.3 Alternative Locations for siting the hydroelectric facility..................................... 7 

5 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT..................................................................................... 8 

5.1 Land Use ................................................................................................................ 8 

5.2 Cultural Resources and Historic Properties........................................................... 8 

5.3 Biological Resources ........................................................................................... 10 

5.3.1 Fish Resources ............................................................................................. 10 

5.3.2 Wildlife (mammal) Review ......................................................................... 11 

5.3.3 TES botanical survey ................................................................................... 14 

5.4 Water Quality & Quantity.................................................................................... 15 

5.4.1 Water Quality............................................................................................... 15 

5.4.2 Water Quantity............................................................................................. 15 

5.5 Floodplains/Wetlands .......................................................................................... 16 

5.6 Environmental Justice.......................................................................................... 17 

5.7 Socioeconomics ................................................................................................... 17 

6 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES .................................................................. 19 

6.1 Alternative 1: No – Action................................................................................... 19 

6.2 Alternative 2: The Proposed Project.................................................................... 19 

6.2.1 Land Use ...................................................................................................... 19 

6.2.2 Cultural Resources and Historic Properties................................................. 20 

6.2.3 Biological Resources ................................................................................... 20 

6.2.4 Water Quality & Quantity............................................................................ 21 

6.2.5 Floodplains/Wetlands .................................................................................. 21 

6.2.6 Environmental Justice.................................................................................. 22 

6.2.7 Socioeconomics ........................................................................................... 22 

7 MITAGATION AND PERMITS ................................................................................ 23 

8 LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................ 25 

9 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................. 27 

9.1 Agency Correspondence .......................................................................................... 

9.2 Hydrology Studies ................................................................................................... 

9.3 Biological and Other Surveys .................................................................................. 

9.4 2009 Denali Commission List of Distressed Communities..................................... 
Page | iv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Map of Proposed Project Area .............................................................................. 1 

Figure 2: Proposed Project Features ..................................................................................... 2 

Figure 3: Transmission Line Features................................................................................... 4 

LIST OF APPENDICES

9.1 – Project Correspondence 

9.2 – Hydrology / Feasibility Report 

9.3 – Biological Surveys 

 9.3.1 – Fish Resources Report 

 9.3.2 – Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive (TES) Plant Report 

 9.3.3 – Literature Review and Field Report: Hydrology Baseline Study 

 9.3.4 – Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination 

 9.3.5 – Heritage Resource Survey 

9.4 – 2009 Denali Commission List of Distressed Communities 
Page | v

LIST OF ACRONYMS & ABBREVIATIONS

% percent 

ADF&G Alaska Department of Fish & Game 

AKNHP Alaska National Historic Preservation 

ALA 

APE area of potential effect 

AP&T Alaska Power and Telephone 

ATV All terrain vehicle 

cfs cubic feet per second 

CO2 carbon dioxide 

DNR Alaska Department of Natural Resources 

EA Environmental Assessment 

HDPE 

kV kilovolt 

kWh kilowatt-hour 

MW megawatt 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

OHW Ordinary high water (mark) 

pop. population 

ROW right-of-way 

RUS Rural Utilities Service 

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office 

TES threatened, endangered, and sensitive (species) 

USACOE U.S. Army Corp of Engineers 

USGS U.S. Geological Service 

 
Page | 1 

1 INTRODUCTION

The USDA Rural Utilities Service (RUS) has selected the Alaska Power & Telephone 

Company (AP&T) as a finalist in its High Energy Cost Grant Program to construct the 

proposed Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project (20 Miles west of Tok, Alaska at Mile Post 

1339, Alaska Hwy). The granting of funds by RUS is a federal action subject to 

environmental impact review, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

and RUS’s NEPA implementing regulations, Environmental Policies and Procedures, 7 

CFR Part 1794, as amended. RUS has determined that an Environmental Assessment (EA) 

must be prepared for this Project. This EA provides an analysis of potential environmental 

impacts, which may result from RUS’s action related to this proposal. RUS Bulletin 

1794A-601, “Guide for Preparing an Environmental Report for Electric Projects Requiring 

an Environmental Assessment,” was used as guidance in the preparation of this EA. In 

addition to fulfilling its obligations under NEPA, this EA also documents RUS’s 

compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Section 7 of the 

Endangered Species Act, and other applicable environmental laws and regulations. 

Figure 1: Map of Proposed Project Area 
Page |

2

Figure 2: Proposed Project Features 
Page | 3

2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

AP&T plans to construct a 1.5 megawatt (MW) “run-of river” hydroelectric facility that 

would supply renewable energy to the communities of Tok, Tetlin, Tanacross, and Dot 

Lake, Alaska. The facility could potentially supply 100% of the communities' energy 

demand during high flow periods (typically June and July). During the remainder of the 

year, only part of the load would be met. AP&T’s hydrology studies indicate there will be 

sufficient flow during the extremely cold winter month for the Project to operate, although 

at substantially reduced output. While not getting these communities completely off of 

diesel generation year round, the Project will be a significant first step for the area to 

reduce and eventually eliminate the use of fossil fuels. 

The Project will consist of: 

 Approximately 3 miles of single-lane access road from the highway to the diversion 

site. The clearing width for the road will generally be 40-50 feet, but may be 

somewhat wider in areas of significant ground slope due to the widths of cuts and 

fills. The right-of-way (ROW) width will be 100 feet to provide for minor field 

adjustment of the alignment if necessary. The road will cross Yerrick Creek at one 

location about 2 miles from the highway; the bridge will be about 200 feet long. 

 A diversion structure at about El 2220, just below the confluence of the main stem 

of Yerrick Creek and two tributaries. The diversion structure will include a 

concrete-faced rockfill dike on the west abutment, a concrete-faced rockfill spillway 

and roughened channel outlet in the central portion, and a concrete intake on the 

right abutment. 

 A buried pipeline approximately 15,000 feet in length (known as a penstock) using 

42-inch HDPE pipe for the upper 55% and 36-inch ductile iron pipe for the lower 

45%. The penstock will cross Yerrick Creek just above the bridge noted above; it 

will be buried below the stream channel and encased in concrete. 

 A powerhouse approximately 1,500 feet upstream of the Alaska Highway where the 

water will pass through a single turbine to the tailrace. Other powerhouse 

equipment will include the 1500 kW generator, controls and switchgear, bridge 

crane, and pad-mount transformer. The powerhouse structure will be a metal 

building set on a concrete foundation. 

 A tailrace consisting of a pond and 800 feet of excavated canal to an existing 

overflow channel of Yerrick Creek. The pond will be formed in a borrow pit 

excavated to provide fill material for the access road. The pond is expected to 

develop a stable ice cover in winter that will allow the turbine to discharge without 

glaciering. 

 A transmission line consisting of 1,500 feet of 12.4 kV underground transmission 

cable from the powerhouse to the highway and 10 miles of upgraded 12.4 kV 

overhead transmission line adjacent to the highway (see Figure 3), 

Based on the hydrology studies conducted to date (see Appendix 9.2), AP&T has selected a 

hydraulic capacity for the Project at 60 cfs, which will provide a generating capacity of 

1,500 kW. The streamflow will only exceed the hydraulic capacity during the early 

summer (typically June and July), or about 10%-20% of the year. This is a relatively low 

exceedence level for a run-of-river project, but AP&T believes the high capacity is 
Page | 4

worthwhile because of the high cost of diesel generation. Before pipe and generating 

equipment is ordered, AP&T will reevaluate the hydraulic capacity. It could be reduced to 

perhaps 50 cfs, which would allow a reduction in the penstock diameter from about 42 

inches to 36 inches. The environmental impacts would be virtually the same with a smaller 

capacity, therefore the conclusions of this EA would not change. 

During times of high flow, water will flow over the diversion structure. If the overflow is 

less than about 30 cfs, it will all pass through the roughened channel outlet to allow fish 

passage. At higher rates of overflow, water will also pass over the spillway. The duration 

of this overflow will be intermittent, and of course will vary with the amount of snow 

accumulated in the basin; during low runoff years there may be only a very short period of 

overflow, but during high runoff years the overflow period may start in June and extend 

into August. 

 

Figure 3: Transmission Line Features 

The proposed Project requires state and federal permitting prior to project commencement 

of construction. The permits needed are: (1) a Department of Natural Resource (DNR) 

land lease permit; (2) DNR water rights permit; (3) Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) 

habitat permit; and, (4) a U.S. Army Corp of Engineers permit. In addition, besides being 

on State of Alaska managed lands, this project is also on Tanacross, Inc. lands (private), 

which is a Native corporation. The diversion structure and approximately 7,000 feet of the 

penstock and access road will be on state land, the remainder of the penstock and access 

road as well as the powerhouse and buried portion of the transmission line will be on 

private land. The size of easement needed on state land will be approximately 28.4 acres. 

The size of easement needed on private land will be approximately 27.7 acres. 
Page | 5

3 PURPOSE/NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION

The purpose of this hydroelectric project is to reduce the use of fossil fuels presently used 

for generating electricity in the Tok area along the Alaska Highway. The communities that 

will benefit from this project are Tetlin (pop. 117), Tanacross (pop. 140), Dot Lake (pop. 

19), and Tok (pop. 1,393), Alaska. These communities are presently 100% reliant upon 

fossil fuels for their electricity. AP&T applied to the RUS for a grant for a 2.0 MW run-ofriver hydroelectric project that would connect directly to the AP&T transmission system 

that is centralized out of Tok where diesel generation facilities are located. Based on 

further hydrologic analysis, the facility is currently being designed with a 1.5 MW 

capacity. AP&T presently sells power for $0.47 per kWh (2009) in Tok and to other 

communities connected to Tok’s closed grid. 

The Proposed Action is needed to reduce this areas use of fossil fuels and to reduce price 

fluctuations and air emissions associated with diesel generation. To do this, a renewable 

energy resource is necessary. The proposed Project will be the first such project on this 

interior Alaska grid. Placing this hydroelectric project on the Tok grid will reduce electric 

rates to approximately $0.37 per kWh (~20% reduction). The current rate is above the 

RUS High Energy Cost Benchmark of Extremely High Average per unit energy costs 

($0.239 per kWh), one of the eligibility criteria of this program. Two of the communities 

that would benefit from this project have large Native Alaskan populations, Tetlin 94.9%, 

Tanacross 88.6%. 

 
Page | 6

4 ALTERNATIVES  

4.1 No Action

If no action is taken, the four communities that would benefit from the proposed Project 

would remain on diesel generation for their electrical needs. The price of diesel fluctuates 

and is expected to remain high, keeping the area’s electric rates high. Diesel generation 

also puts particulate matter and gases such as CO2 into the air, which are related to global 

warming. The high volume of diesel fuel needed for this small grid increases the 

likelihood of spills during transport and fueling operations as well as potential leaks from 

storage. The transport of hundreds of thousands of gallons of fuel each year relies on the 

burning of fossil fuels to transport fuel, which would continue. The high cost of electricity 

is a stress on residential customers, schools, and businesses, suppressing economic and 

population growth. The increasingly expensive electrical rates may drive people away 

from these communities. This economically impacted area on the Alaska Highway will 

continue to struggle with increases in the cost of diesel fuel. 

4.2 Energy Generation Technologies Considered

Other energy generation technologies considered other than hydroelectric power were 

hydrokinetics, wind power, and woody biomass. 

A hydrokinetic project (the use of moving water to passively move a turbine placed in its 

flow) was evaluated for the Tanana River not far from Yerrick Creek. However, the 

environmental issues related to placing a turbine in this river appeared significant (possible 

impacts to fish, fishermen, boat traffic, subsistence use, testing of new technology, impact 

of floating debris). In addition, this type of technology is still being developed and tested. 

Hydrokinetic technology for a river turbine is presently not as efficient and the units are not 

very large, producing only a small amount of electricity. AP&T prefers to go with proven 

technology to get the best use of grant funds made available by RUS for renewable energy 

development as well as develop a larger project to meet more of the load. 

Wind power is still being evaluated for the area. AP&T is evaluating one or two sites that 

look promising, but their development could be years down the road. Wind generation 

requires consistent wind speeds above a base velocity rather than just being a windy area. 

This too is experimental technology at this northern latitude and is not known to be able to 

startup as fast as hydro from power outages when integrated with a diesel system. 

Conventional hydroelectric technology can start almost instantaneously, allowing 

supplemental diesel generation to be brought more slowly on line. Thus, conventional 

hydroelectric generation is more reliable in hybrid systems like the one being proposed. 

Biofuel is being considered by AP&T for the Tok grid. AP&T has been considering the 

possibility of a 2.0 MW-sized biomass facility using wood from the local area; however, 

funding was not made available to AP&T by the State of Alaska in its recent grant funding 

for Renewable Energy Fund Round III. This option will not be pursued in the near term 

unless grant funding becomes available. In order to get the communities on the Tok grid 

off of diesel generation, it will require a combination of renewable energy projects. 

However, biofuel is also less reliable than conventional hydroelectric power in that wood 
Page | 7

would have to be purchased and would therefore be dependent on a reliable and available 

source. 

Conventional hydroelectric power is a mature technology that is well proven. The 

components are readily available, and the science of finding a good site is well established. 

Yerrick Creek meets the requirements for a sustainable run-of-river (no storage) 

hydroelectric project due to relatively consistent flow throughout the year, no significant 

environmental issues, and no major engineering challenges. All of these contribute to 

keeping costs down. Hydroelectric projects also have the advantage of quick start-up time 

after a power outage, which is almost instantly. Hydroelectric power also integrates well 

with diesel generation units, making the balance between the two easy to manage. The 

other technologies that were considered either do not work well with quick start-ups or are 

relatively unproven, however, hydroelectric projects integrate well with other renewable 

energy projects, such as wind, because generation can be well regulated where as most 

other renewable energy technologies do not have consistent energy production. 

4.3 Alternative Locations for siting the hydroelectric facility

Other watersheds considered by AP&T for conventional hydroelectric included: 

 Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1, just west of Yerrick Creek, 

o does not have as large a drainage area as Yerrick Creek 

o does not have enough flow year round, and 

o does not have the easy accessibility of Yerrick Creek. 

 Tanana River 

o many environmental issues, particularly fish passage and sediment buildup 

o significantly greater costs to construct a project on a river versus a creek 

AP&T’s transmission grid passes by Yerrick Creek allowing the project to plug into the 

existing infrastructure, whereas other potential sites would require new transmission 

infrastructure because they were further away, which would lead to an increase in project 

costs and introduce new environmental impacts. 

 
Page | 8

5 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

5.1 Land Use

Approximately 50% of the proposed Project is located on state managed land, and the 

remainder is on property privately owned by Tanacross, Inc. The portion of the Yerrick 

Creek basin on which the Project would be located is used by hunters for bear, moose, 

caribou, and Dall sheep. Trapping for small furbearers also takes place. The site is used 

for a combination of subsistence and recreational activities, which is typical of the general 

area. 

Trespassing for hunting and/or trapping purposes is a concern of Tanacross, Inc., the 

private landowner. This sort of activity is not unusual in rural Alaska, which resembles an 

open range without fencing. Development of this project would provide easier access into 

both Tanacross, Inc. and state lands. 

AP&T is considering reasonable solutions to prevent vehicular access, such as installing a 

locked gate at the access road’s entrance point. AP&T is also willing to compensate 

Tanacross, Inc. for the use of its land and to mitigate the effects of trespassing and loss of 

land. While subsistence and recreational hunters and trappers will have easier foot access 

to a part of this area, wildlife hunting would remain heavily controlled and monitored by 

state and federal agencies that permit the amount of take allowed in the area. Therefore, 

although hunting is allowed in this area, a permit is necessary to harvest, and only a certain 

number of each species is allowed to be taken annually. This may provide some restraint 

for illegal use of this area. 

5.2 Cultural Resources and Historic Properties

Under the provisions of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, archeological sitelocation information is confidential; disclosure of such information is exempt from requests 

under federal and state freedom of information laws. The following reports are not public 

documents. They are intended for release to Alaska Power & Telephone (AP&T), the Rural 

Utilities Service (RUS), the Alaska State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), Tanacross, 

Inc., and other consulting parties under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 

Act. 

Prior to initiating consultation with consulting parties under Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act (Section 106), AP&T gathered information about historic 

properties in the general project area. On July 9, 2008, AP&T submitted a letter the Alaska 

State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), which included a copy of a literature review 

and preliminary recommendations for additional archaeological and historic structure 

surveys. The Alaska SHPO responded on August 15, 2008, that it agreed with the 

recommendations of the report, specifically the letter stated that additional archaeological 

surveys should be completed for the proposed access route, powerhouse site, and penstock 

route and that surveys should not be needed for the impoundment area. Based on this 

recommendation, RUS determined that the area of potential effect (APE) would be the 

proposed locations for the access road, powerhouse site, and penstock. 
Page | 9

By letter dated October 14, 2008, RUS formally initiated consultation with the Alaska 

SHPO and government-to-government consultation with the Native Village of Tanacross, 

Tanacross, Inc., the Native Village of Tetlin, and the Village of Dot Lake. The letter 

identified the project’s APE, requested that additional information be provided about 

historic properties within the APE, and requested the participation of consulting parties 

(Alaska SHPO, the Native Village of Tanacross, Tanacross, Inc., the Native Village of 

Tetlin, and the Village of Dot Lake) in a teleconference on November 13, 2008. The 

purpose of this teleconference was to give a more detailed description of the project, 

discuss known historic properties that may be within the APE, and discuss the predicted 

progression of this project under Section 106. On November 10, 2008, Tanacross, Inc., 

provided comments in response to RUS’s letter. Comments included: 

 A significant portion of the project (approximately one half of the penstock route, 

construction and maintenance roads, and all of the powerhouse site & its auxiliary 

facilities [access road and transmission infrastructure]) would be located on lands 

owned and managed by Tanacross, Inc. 

 The project would conflict with use of historic trails by members of the Native 

Village of Tanacross for subsistence purposes. 

 The project would interfere with right-of-way development by Denali-The Alaska 

Gas Pipeline LLC (Denali) for the transportation of North Slope natural gas to 

market. The proposed location of the powerhouse would be at the same location of 

Denali’s proposed compressor station. 

Several of these concerns were addressed during the teleconference held on November 10, 

2008. Meeting minutes and a formal response to Tanacross, Inc.’s letter were submitted 

via email to participants of the teleconference on December 17, 2008. 

Representatives from the Native Village of Tanacross, Tanacross, Inc., the Native Village 

of Tetlin, and the Village of Dot Lake participated in the teleconference. Minutes from this 

meeting are included in Appendix 9.1 – Project Correspondence. Following the discussion, 

Tanacross, Inc., identified a historic trail used by members of Tanacross for subsistence 

purposes that may be within the APE of this Project. By letter dated, December 17, 2008, 

RUS requested that site-specific locations of the trail be identified. To date, this 

information has not been submitted to RUS for review. 

Following the teleconference, RUS authorized AP&T to begin surveys of the APE, 

provided it acquired the necessary permissions from Tanacross, Inc., to access its land. In 

2009, AP&T hired Northern Land Use Research, Inc. (NLUR) to conduct a cultural 

resource survey of the APE. The survey identified the following sites within the APE: 

 TNX-156: Tanacross quadrangle segment of the Haines-Fairbanks pipeline 

 TNX-074: Yerrick Creek cabin 

 TNX-211: Can Dump area 

 TNX-212: Construction camp site 

When designing this project, AP&T treated all of these sites as eligible for inclusion in the 

National Register of Historic Properties, although RUS, with SHPO concurrence) have 
Page | 10

determined that site TNX-211 is ineligible.2

 The historic trail, identified by Tanacross, 

Inc., was not found within the APE. 

5.3 Biological Resources

Yerrick Creek is located within the Yukon/Tanana uplands physiographic province 

(Warhafting 1965). The climate of this area is continental with average annual 

temperatures ranging between -32°F and 72°F, and extreme temperatures have been 

measured from -60 to 99°F (ADCED 2004). The Tanana Valley is bound by low, rounded 

hills ranging in elevation from 300 meters to 1,500 meters (1,000 to 5,000 feet) above sea 

level, that are interspersed with lowland bog areas and depressions. Wildlife resources 

within Upper Tanana region include large game, such as moose, caribou and Dall sheep, 

and furbearers, such as snowshoe hare, muskrat and red squirrels (Halpin 1987). Aquatic 

resources include occasional whitefish, arctic grayling, and Dolly Varden, while avian 

resources include geese, ptarmigan, ducks and grouse. A literature search indicates that 

these species exist in the Yerrick Creek area. 

The Alaska Range lines the southern horizon of the project area beyond the low-lying hills. 

The higher relief hills are typically igneous intrusions that sometimes have extensive rock 

exposures and shallow soil deposition, whereas the lowlands are often characterized by 

vegetated loess dunes and thick organic layers covering permafrost. The area surrounding 

the Tanana River is dotted with lowland lakes and small creeks. Yerrick Creek flows north 

from the Alaska Range before joining the Tanana River. 

Yerrick Creek is a cascading stream with fast flow with some “islands” of vegetation 

present in the channel, but for the most part the channel consists of braided sand, gravel, 

and cobble bars with some large boulders. Old meander channels and lower elevation 

vegetated creek banks exhibit signs of recent and past vegetation log jams from spring 

break up. Vegetation in the project area consists of an upland spruce-hardwood forest. 

Dominant trees include black and white spruce, paper birch, quaking aspen and 

cottonwood. Willow and alder shrubs are also present in recently disturbed areas. 

Understory shrubs include dwarf birch, wild rose, Labrador tea, high bush cranberry and 

raspberry. The dominant forest ground cover noted include toad flax, bog and low bush 

cranberry, Sphagnum moss, lichens, blue joint grasses and horsetail. 

Initially, AP&T submitted a Draft Study Plan to the resource agencies to determine what 

studies were needed and what information was lacking in their biological analysis of the 

site. Based on comments received from ADF&G on September 3, 2008, the study of 

mammals was not necessary because there was significant information already available on 

agency websites, which was included in AP&T’s Study Plan. Fish species, plant surveys, 

and a wetland determination, however, were conducted. 

5.3.1 Fish Resources

For most of its length, Yerrick Creek is a cascading stream with fast flow and boulder 

substrate. The stream generally comprises one to three channels, within a wide dynamic 

 

2

 March 24, 2010, letter from SHPO to RUS. 
Page | 11

(scoured) perimeter. Apparent fish habitat consists of widely spaced, very small (~10-foot 

long) pools behind large boulders or logjams. Roughly one mile before the creek joins the 

Tanana River, the habitat is significantly different; flow is much slower and the habitat is 

composed mostly of sand. In this “delta” area, there are three main channels with several 

smaller channels which leave and rejoin the larger channels, and at least one large area 

(“city block” in size) through which the creek flows more-or-less overland, in very shallow 

channels among dense spruce trees. In between these two reaches is a transition zone, 

where flow is intermediate in strength and substrate is small rocks and large gravel. This 

transition zone is only a few hundred yards long. Complicating this situation is the fact that 

the surface water flowing in the creek is not always continuous within the river. Because 

of the porous substrate, the water sometimes disappears from the surface and flows 

underground. 

Fish surveys were conducted by a qualified fish biologist, Stephen Grabacki (Anchorage), 

who conducted surveys in 2008 on September 3-4 and 29-30 and in 2009 on May 19-20, 

May 27-29, and June 7. A report on the fish surveys can be found in Appendix 9.3.1 – Fish 

Resource Report. Mr. Grabacki stated, “The stream bed morphology indicates that even 

when there is surface flow, the quality of the habitat is limited and the larger rock moved 

during the high flow periods reduces the quality of fish habitat.” 

Based on sampling in early September 2008, and on the three sampling sessions in MayJune 2009, an understanding of Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma) and Arctic grayling 

(Thymallus arcticus) use of Yerrick Creek seems to have emerged. Grayling appear to use 

parts of Yerrick Creek (below and within the bypass reach) for summer feeding, on an 

opportunistic basis. No evidence was found to support that grayling spawn in Yerrick 

Creek: 

 The creek did not connect to the river at the expected time of grayling spawning 

 No aggregations were observed of grayling anywhere in Yerrick Creek; all grayling 

observed in the creek in May-June 2009 appeared to be individual fish 

 No adult-size grayling were observed, and the largest grayling observed in June 

2009 (a 2- or 3-year-old) did not appear to be in either a pre-spawning or postspawning condition. 

Studies conducted showed that the majority of Dolly Varden (DV) year-round habitat is 

above the diversion site. During a May 2009 meeting between ADF&G and AP&T, 

ADF&G acknowledged that this Project would not significantly impact DV (it was at this 

time AP&T was directed to focus on studying Grayling use of the creek). Studies 

confirmed that there is little over-wintering refugia in the bypass portion of the creek so 

that any loss of over-wintering refugia will have minimal impact to DV. 

5.3.2 Wildlife (mammal) Review

Wildlife is not expected to be significantly impacted by the proposed Project, either by 

construction or operation. Species that use the proposed Project area are not considered 

threatened, endangered, or listed species of concern (TES). A literature search conducted 

by AP&T does not point to any TES using this basin, although some may occasionally pass 

through during migration. Of the many species that do use the Yerrick Creek area, Game 
Page | 12

Management Unit 12, some are hunted for their meat (moose, caribou, Dall sheep, black 

and brown bear) and trapped for their pelts (lynx and marten), or harvested because they 

kill other preferred game, i.e., wolves. There will be a minimal loss of habitat types from 

project features: 

 The powerhouse, staging area, and lower borrow area are near the Alaska Highway 

and a total of approximately 5.2 acres will be cleared. 

 The tailrace will require clearing approximately 0.6 acres. 

 The access road/penstock route will require approximately 38.7 acres of clearing. 

 The upper borrow area will require approximately 2.5 acres, however this is mostly 

exposed bedrock. 

 The upper staging area will require approximately 5.7 acres of clearing, but will be 

allowed to revegetate after construction. 

 The diversion area covers 3.4 acres, but little of this has vegetation. 

The habitat type for the project area is typically open paper birch – white spruce forest. 

Open balsam poplar–white spruce forest and open white spruce forest habitats are found in 

drier portions of the Project area. Open black spruce forest and open dwarf black spruce 

forest occupy areas with poorly drained soils. Closed tall alder or willow scrub occupies 

the transitional areas between forested areas and creek channel. This habitat type is 

common throughout this drainage basin as well as other drainages along the Tanana River 

that Yerrick Creek drains into. 

 

ADF&G in a July 1, 2008, letter to AP&T, requested that the penstock and access road 

remain a minimum of 66 feet from the creek accept when intersecting with the diversion 

structure or powerhouse; however, it is necessary to cross the creek due to perma frost, 

wetlands, and steep slopes found further south on the west side of the creek. A single-lane 

bridge would be used to cross the creek and the penstock would be buried under the creek 

to avoid damage from flooding that occurs in this wide, dynamic creek. The penstock 

(pipe) would be passable to wildlife because it will be buried along the access road. This 

Project is viewed as having limited impacts to wildlife in the area. The main concern 

would be whether this project will provide easier vehicular access into this basin for 

hunters and trappers, which could place more pressure on wildlife. 

However, in regards to increased hunting pressure, sport and subsistence hunting go handin-hand in this area, although most is by Alaskan hunters and is therefore most likely for 

subsistence. All hunting is controlled by permit in this area and there is a limit to how 

many of each species can be harvested in a given year. This places a control on harvesting 

these species regardless of whether there is improved access to this drainage or not. 

Big game that use Game Management Unit 12 are black and brown bear, moose, and 

possibly migrating caribou. Dall sheep most likely stay at higher elevations. Wolves 

probably migrate through looking for game. Roads in remote areas with little traffic often 

become travel corridors for the wildlife using the area (AP&Ts experience from other 

projects), which simply makes it easier for them to get around. However, the Yerrick 

Creek forest is primarily open, possibly reducing use of the road by wildlife. Although this 

project will remove habitat, the loss is not significant because the amount of land is small 

in comparison with the surrounding undeveloped area. 
Page | 13

Dall sheep hunting is controlled by a drawing for a permit, only so many permits are 

allowed, so increased access should have little impact to this species because only so many 

can be legally harvested. Of the participating hunters, 94% were Alaska residents in 

regulatory years (RY) 2001-2003, of which 92% of the harvested rams were by Alaskans.3

For Macomb caribou, a permit is required as well with a harvest limit of one bull per year 

(only for residents). Only one Macomb caribou was harvested in Unit 12 in RY2001-2002 

and RY2002-2003. Highway vehicle followed by horse are the dominant methods to hunt 

Macomb caribou in recent years.4

Brown bears are distributed throughout Unit 12. Unit 12 brown bear hunting regulations 

were liberalized in 1981 to reduce the bear population and elevate moose calf survival. "In 

1994, the Unit 12 brown bear management goal to reduce the brown bear population to 

increase moose calf survival was eliminated and the management goal was revised to 

provide for maximum opportunity to hunt brown bears in Unit 12. The management goal 

has remained the same since 1994."5

 Presently, only one brown bear per permit per 

regulatory year is allowed to be harvested. During RY 04 & 05, non-residents of Alaska 

accounted for 65% and 75% of the harvest respectively. For black bear, three bears per 

permit per regulatory year can be harvested. Alaska residents accounted for 89-93% of the 

black bears harvested during RY98-RY00. Yerrick Creek does not contain a reliable 

source of fish in the project area (diversion to the powerhouse) to attract bears to feed. 

Other streams along the Tanana River have better runs of grayling and Dolly Varden as 

well as other salmonid species. 

Regarding moose, "Predation by wolves and grizzly bears has likely been the greatest 

source of mortality for moose in Unit 12 and has likely been the major factor keeping the 

population at a low density since the mid 1970s. In contrast to most other areas that 

contain sympatric moose, wolf, and grizzly bear populations, wolves, rather than bears, 

appeared to be the primary predator on moose calves on the Northway-Tetlin Flats, based 

on research conducted during the late 1980s (ADF&G, unpublished data; U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, unpublished data). Wolf predation also appeared to be the greatest 

source of adult mortality. However, in some mountainous areas of Unit 12, fall 

composition data indicate that predation on moose neonates was high, suggesting grizzly 

bear predation."6

 Hunters using 3 or 4 wheelers accounted for the highest percentage of 

the harvest with highway vehicles next. Predation by wolves and bears shows that other 

natural processes have a far greater impact on moose than humans. Only one bull can be 

harvested per year per permit. 

 

3

 Parker McNeill D.I. 2005. Portions of Units 12, 13C, and 20D Dall sheep management report. Pages 68-79 

in C. Brown, editor. Dall sheep management report of survey and inventory activities 1 July 2001-30 June 

2004. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Project 6.0. Juneau, Alaska. 

4

 DuBois, S. D. 2007. Units 12 and 20D caribou. Pages 65-82 in P. Harper, editor. Caribou management 

report of survey and inventory activities 1 July 2004-30 June 2006. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 

Project 3.0. Juneau, Alaska, USA. 5

 Gross, J. A. 2007. Unit 12 brown bear. Pages 132-142 in P. Harper, editor. Brown bear management report 

of survey and inventory activities 1 July 2004-30 June 2006. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Project 

4.0. Juneau, Alaska, USA. 

6

 Hollis, A. L. 2006. Unit 12 moose. Pages 126-143 in P. Harper, editor. Moose management report of survey 

and inventory actitivies 1 July 2003-30 June 2005. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Project 1.0. Juneau, 

Alaska, USA. 
Page | 14

Up to five wolves can be harvest per year in Game Management Unit 12. 

Management of these species with state harvest limits is what controls the human take of 

these species. Putting a road into the Yerrick Creek drainage to reach the diversion site 

may provide easier access by hunters, but all these species require permits to harvest. The 

harvest total for the management unit is based on what the populations can tolerate. This 

short road into Yerrick Creek will not change management of these species, even if it 

makes it easier to get into this area. 

Avian species are not expected to be significantly impacted due to the limited nature of the 

clearing needed (15 feet wide for access road / penstock route) although there could be 

some loss of habitat. 

5.3.3 TES botanical survey

A threatened, endangered, and sensitive (TES) plant species survey was conducted within 

the Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric project area by a qualified botanist of HDR, Inc., 

Anchorage. The purpose of the study was to determine if there were any individuals or 

populations of plant species of interest that may be affected by project activities. The 

survey was conducted at Level 5 intensity. 

Most of the project area is undeveloped with an open gravel waterway, islands of mixed 

hardwood and softwood trees, abandoned gravel side channels in various states of 

revegetation, and heavily forested banks. The main vegetation of Yerrick Creek study area 

is typically open paper birch – white spruce forest. Open balsam poplar–white spruce 

forest and open white spruce forest inhabits drier sites. Open black spruce forest and open 

dwarf black spruce forest occupy areas with poorly drained soils. Closed tall alder or 

willow scrub occupies the transitional areas between forested areas and creek channel. 

Narrow areas of gravel floodplain areas along Yerrick Creek are inhabited by early seral 

graminoids and forbs. Bluejoint meadows and lowland sedge wet meadows occupy wet 

areas adjacent to ponds.

The HDR project botanist surveyed most of the major vegetation types, and covered much 

of the geographic extent of the Yerrick Creek project area. The majority of collection 

locations were concentrated on gravel river bars and shrub areas adjacent to the Yerrick 

Creek. More than 100 vouchers were collected. Specimens were given provisional names 

in the field and later sorted, examined and identified by the HDR botanist. Specimens of 

notable taxa will be sent to the UAF Herbarium (ALA) for review by the museum staff. 

Most of these species are widespread in interior Alaska. No non-native species were 

observed in the Yerrick Creek study area. 

In total, 145 species from 40 families were recorded at the area. The complete list of 

species encountered in Yerrick Creek study area is found in Appendix 9.3.2 – TES Plant 

Report. Two lakes were visited. Aquatic plants were observed and recorded from the 

shore. The study area was not surveyed for aquatic plants specifically. 

Four notable plants were found in the project area. The AKNHP tracks populations of 

plants of interest. Notable plants are not considered rare, sensitive, or endangered but are 

considered to be of ecological interest by the AKNHP. 
Page | 15

Phlox sibirica (Siberian phlox) was not previously reported from the area. The closest 

records of this plant are approximately (UAF 2008): 

1. 30 miles NW of Yerrick Creek in Fort Greely Military Reservation in 2004 

(63.78°, -145.79°) 

2. 45 miles SE of Yerrick Creek at Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve 

(62.20266°, -142.123273°) 

Other notable plants, for which there are no nearby records, include: 

1. Botrychium lunaria (common moonwort) 

2. Platanthera obtusata (blunt-leaved orchid) 

3. Astragalus robbinsii ssp. harringtonii (Harold’s milkvetch) 

The TES plant survey found no globally or state ranked Rare or Sensitive species during 

the survey. No Endangered species were encountered or identified during the survey. The 

only plant federally listed or proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Alaska is 

Polystichum aleuticum C. Christensen, which is endangered. It is only known from Adak 

Island and is not expected to occur in the proposed Project area. Most plant species 

observed in the area are considered common and widespread in interior Alaska. 

5.4 Water Quality & Quantity

5.4.1 Water Quality

A water quality survey was conducted by Travis/Pederson Environmental Consulting, Inc., 

Fairbanks, using past (USGS 15476000) and present information to complete an analysis 

(report can be found in Appendix 9.3.3. – Literature Review and Field Report: Hydrology 

Baseline Study). The findings from the water quality study is that Yerrick Creek is a clear, 

oligotrophic (low nutrient levels) and well oxygenated stream. The moderately high pH for 

surface water suggests contact with some kind of carbonate rock within the drainage. High 

flushing flows occur on almost an annual basis, scouring and moving the cobble within the 

creek banks. 

5.4.2 Water Quantity

AP&T’s initial assessment of the water quantities in Yerrick Creek (Berkshire, 2007) were 

based on transposition of the record of the USGS gage on Berry Creek some 33 miles west 

of Yerrick Creek, with adjustment for the drainage areas of the two streams. 

AP&T installed a stream gage on Yerrick Creek near the diversion site in June 2007. In 

July 2008, the gage installation was washed out by flooding. The gage was subsequently 

moved upstream a few hundred feet to a more protected location, but equipment 

malfunctions prevented collection of data until the spring of 2009. As with all stream 

gages in interior Alaska, the gage installation is subject to ice influence, and flows in the 

winter can only be estimated. 

AP&T has attempted to correlate the small amount of data from the Yerrick Creek gage 

with contemporaneous data from USGS gages in the area. Unfortunately, there are no 

contemporaneous USGS gages with similar characteristics (basin size, elevation, annual 

precipitation); available USGS gages are as follows: 
Page | 16

 Phelan Creek near Paxton - - 12.2 mi2

 drainage area, mostly glaciated. 

 Goodpaster River near Big Delta - - 677 mi2

 drainage area, lower and flatter 

topography 

 Yukon River near Eagle - - 113,500 mi2 drainage area 

Correlations between the data from AP&T’s gage and that from the USGS gages are only 

fair, with correlation coefficients (R2

) between 0.79 and 0.85. 

Based on the flow data collected to date and the correlations with the USGS gage data, it 

appears that Yerrick Creek has a higher base flow than might be expected. Even in the 

winter, AP&T has always found water flowing under the ice at the gage location. AP&T 

theorizes that this is because of the large amount of alluvium in the valley. AP&T will 

continue to measure Yerrick Creek flows to develop more reliable streamflow correlations. 

In 2010, AP&T contracted for another review of the hydrology information for the site 

(Environ Corp., 2010). For that study, a double correlation was attempted between Berry 

Creek, the Yukon River, and Yerrick Creek. The study determines likely upper and lower 

limits for Yerrick Creek flows. 

5.5 Floodplains/Wetlands

A wetlands jurisdictional determination was conducted by HDR, Inc. (Appendix 9.3.4 – 

Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination). Most of the proposed Project area is 

undeveloped, with an open gravel waterway, adjacent forests, abandoned gravel side 

channels in various states of re-vegetation, and heavily forested banks. The creek corridor 

is the only floodplain, and the project features that will be within the floodplain are the 

diversion structure and a small portion of the penstock. Besides the creek, there are small 

and large ponds on the ridges above the creek to the west as well as hydric soils and 

permafrost scattered about. A significant portion of the soils are not hydric and are well 

drained. 

Conclusions from the wetland delineation were: at wetland data from locations, 15 out of 

the 28 sites had hydrophytic vegetation. The most common trees in the project area include 

white spruce (Picea glauca), balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera), and some paper birch 

(Betula papyrifera). The most common shrub is alder (Alnus crispa). Saplings of white 

spruce and cottonwood are also common in the shrub layer. Common graminoids include 

bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis) and a variety of sedges (Carex spp.). 

Common forbs include timberberry (Geocaulon lividum) and dwarf fireweed (Chamerion 

latifolium). Mosses and lichens were found primarily in forested plots. 

Wetland locations are based upon the dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydrologic 

indicators, and hydric soil indicators. Other waters of the U.S. are based on the 

investigators’ judgement about the location of the ordinary high water mark of Yerrick 

Creek. Based on the findings above, approximately 21.3% (147.1 acres), a conservative 

delineation, of the mapped acres were determined to meet the USACOE requirements for 

being classified as wetlands or other waters. Most of the mapped wetland areas are not 

within the proposed project construction areas. 
Page | 17

The remainder of the mapped project area, approximately 78.7% (542.6 acres) of the 

mapped area, lacks one or more of the required three parameters to support classifying an 

area as wetland and is not below the plane of the ordinary high water (OHW) mark of 

Yerrick Creek. These areas would not be subject to jurisdiction under Section 404 of the 

Clean Water Act. 

Yerrick Creek and its adjacent active bars are waters of the U.S. below the creek’s OHW 

mark. OHW is particularly difficult to define for a braided channel such as this one. There 

may be some areas within the river bars that are not actually below the OHW mark. 

5.6 Environmental Justice

The communities that would benefit from the proposed Project are Tetlin (pop. 117; 94.9% 

is Native American), Tanacross (pop. 140; 88.6% is Native American), Dot Lake (pop. 19), 

and Tok (pop. 1,393; 12.8% is Native American), Alaska. The state’s percentage of Native 

Americans is 13.4%. According to the U.S. Census data, the county median household 

income was $38,776, which is 75% of the State median household income of $51,571. The 

per capita income for these communities is: Tetlin $7,372; Tanacross $9,429; Tok $18,521; 

and Dot Lake $19,406 compared to the State at $33,761. Family poverty levels are higher 

in Tetlin (40%), Tanacross (22.6%), and Tok (9.5%) than the State as a whole (6.7%). 

Unemployment in Tanacross is 57.1%, Tetlin 46.9%, and in Tok 18%.7

 The Denali 

Commission’s 2009 Report on Distressed Communities in Alaska lists Dot Lake, Tetlin 

and Tanacross as distressed. Tok was last listed as a distressed community by the Denali 

Commission in their 2008 report. Based on the current state of the U.S. economy, it is 

likely that all four communities will be listed in 2010. The Denali Commission list of 

Distressed Communities can be found in Appendix 9.4 – 2009 Denali Commission List of 

Distressed Communities. 

5.7 Socioeconomics

The present (2009) electric rates for AP&T customers in Tetlin, Tok, Tanacross and Dot 

Lake (a small, isolated grid) is approximately $0.47 per kWh. AP&T’s current diesel fuel 

consumption is approximately 350,000 gallons per year, which at today’s prices (the 2008 

average was $3.577 per gallon) costs $1,252,000 annually. Over 50 years, AP&T’s diesel 

generation plant will use approximately 17,500,000 gallons of diesel. The existing diesel 

plant in Tok, which supplies electricity to all four communities, presently has six diesel 

generators to meet and act as backup for the load demand. The generators require 

significant labor and maintenance. The frequency of generator overhaul and replacement 

of these six units averages a cost of approximately $50,000 annually. These costs are 

passed on to customers via the electric rates. 

Many customers in AP&T’s service area supplement their electrical use with wood, 

kerosene, and oil or gas generators for heating because of the high cost of electricity. 

Several customers also use propane for cooking, clothes dryers, hot water heaters, etc. The 

economy along the Alaska Highway has suffered from high gas prices, the slowed national 

economy. This situation has impacted the local economy, which is reliant upon tourism for 

 

7

 Based on the 2000 U.S. Census Records 
Page | 18

its economic sustainability. As mentioned under Environmental Justice, Dot Lake, Tetlin, 

and Tanacross are on the 2009 Denali Commissions list of distressed communities, and 

have been so for years, with Tok last listed in 2008. The local school is seeking cheaper 

electric rates and is therefore looking at other technologies. A couple businesses have 

come through looking for sites to build manufacturing plants in the Tok area until they 

discovered how expensive the electricity is. Economic development is bleak for the area at 

this time. 
Page | 19

6 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES  

6.1 Alternative 1: No – Action

If No Action is taken, the environment at Yerrick Creek would remain unchanged. There 

would be no diverting of flow out of the creek to be returned further downstream, having 

no impact on the limited fish habitat available in this area of the creek and therefore allow 

free movement by fish as currently exists. There would be no loss of terrestrial habitat 

from the clearing of the right-of-way for the access road and penstock route. Wildlife that 

uses the area would not be stressed by the activity of construction, possibly temporarily 

forcing them out of the area. There would be no possibility of human induced erosion or 

sedimentation to the creek. 

The No Action alternative would also mean the four communities that would benefit from 

this project will remain on diesel generation for their electrical needs. This will cause their 

electric rates to fluctuate with the price of diesel, which is expected to remain high keeping 

the area electric rates high. Diesel generation also puts particulate matter and gases such as 

CO2 into the air, which are related to global warming. The high volume of diesel fuel 

needed for this small grid increases the likelihood of spills during transport and fueling 

operations as well as potential leaks from storage. The transport of hundreds of thousands 

of gallons of fuel each year relies on the burning of fossil fuels, which would continue. 

The high cost of electricity would continue to stress residential customers, schools, and 

businesses, suppressing economic and residential growth. The increasingly expensive 

electrical rates may drive people from these communities. This economically impacted 

area on the Alaska Highway will continue to struggle with increases in the cost of diesel 

fuel. 

6.2 Alternative 2: The Proposed Project

6.2.1 Land Use

Fall hunting, subsistence activity, and trapping would likely be temporarily impacted 

during the construction phase because wildlife would probably stay away during 

construction activity. Although, as usually happens at this type of construction activity, 

based on AP&Ts experience, if construction clearings cross a wildlife corridor the wildlife 

will continue to use it but may change the time of day they cross the area of activity. 

During the operations phase, impacts to hunting, subsistence activity, and trappers would 

be minor due to personnel surveillance of the proposed Project site for operation and 

maintenance. Building the access road into the diversion site will make access easier for 

hunters, possibly changing the land use by increasing, at minimum, the foot traffic into the 

basin and increasing pressure on wildlife. However, wildlife hunted in this state 

management unit (Unit 12) is managed by permits, which limits the number harvested per 

permit. This protects the mammals so that they are not harvested beyond what their 

population can tolerate. Therefore, any easier access into this area should not increase 

pressure on wildlife because only a certain number can be taken. Other pressure from 

increased access is just the intrusion or disturbance potentially caused by more recreational 

foot traffic or ATVs if they are able to access the project access road. Though use of the 
Page | 20

basin is likely to increase, this is not expected to be a significant impact as this is a remote 

part of Alaska, even being on the Alaska Highway. 

Overall, use of the project area for recreational purposes is likely to increase due to easier 

access, but impacts are not expected to be significant. The use of both state and private 

land for this project would be mitigated by paying fees for the use of the land. A gate 

which locks just off the highway will help limit access by vehicle to prevent illegal 

dumping. 

6.2.2 Cultural Resources and Historic Properties

On January 13, 2010, RUS submitted a finding of effects letter to consulting parties (i.e., 

Alaska SHPO, Tanacross, Inc., Native Village of Tanacross, Native Village of Tetlin, and 

the Village of Dot Lake). In that letter, RUS included its determination of eligibility of 

sites identified in the November 2009 survey for inclusion in the National Register of 

Historic Places, which included sites: TNX-156 (Tanacross quadrangle segment of the 

Haines-Fairbanks pipeline), TNX-074 (Yerrick Creek cabin), TNX-211 (Can Dump area), 

and TNX-212 (Construction camp site). On March 24, 2010, the Alaska SHPO indicated 

that it considers TNX-212 a historic property. The Alaska SHPO stated that it has no 

objections with the current design of the proposed Project (i.e., the access road avoiding 

site TNX-212). SHPO requested that the boundaries of the site be marked as an avoidance 

area for construction crews. The Alaska SHPO concurred with RUS’s determination that 

monitoring at site TNX-212 would not be needed. To date, no letters from the other 

consulting parties have been received. 

6.2.3 Biological Resources

No Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive wildlife species are known to utilize the proposed 

Project area, although they may pass through it. Impacts would be temporary from 

construction activities causing wildlife to avoid the site during construction. No long term 

impacts are expected. 

No Threatened, Endangered, or Sensitive plant species were found to inhabit the site; 

therefore, no impacts are anticipated. 

Fish resources in the Project’s bypass reach will be minimally impacted because the 

existing quality of the habitat is currently poor. Dolly Varden in the creek primarily use 

habitat above the proposed Project area, and the Arctic grayling primarily use habitat below 

the proposed Project’s discharge point. There is no evidence that the Arctic grayling use 

the creek for spawning; but the species are opportunistic, they may enter the area to feed. 

The potential loss of the bypass reach as fish habitat during parts of the year when flow is 

low is not significant for the sustainability of these two species due to better habitat in other 

nearby streams in the Tanana River basin. 

ADF&G issued a permit on August 5, 2009, allowing the construction of this Project; 

however, they do request to see the intake and spillway designs prior to construction. As 

requested by ADF&G, AP&T plans to remain 66 feet away from the riparian corridor as 

much as practicable to reduce impacts of sedimentation into the creek. AP&T also 
Page | 21

proposes to implement erosion and sedimentation control methods to reduce this potential 

to a level of non-significance. AP&T also proposes to bury the penstock to prevent a 

barrier to wildlife passage through the project and to place the penstock within the access 

road corridor as much as possible to minimize vegetation clearing. ADF&G has indicated 

they agree with both these approaches. ADF&G requested in the habitat permit that an 

“excess flow bypass shall be constructed as a roughened channel that permits all flow in 

excess of 60 cfs to remain in the middle bypass reach and that provides fish passage, both 

upstream and downstream.” This creek is not considered Essential Fish Habitat. 

With the proposals made by AP&T, which are approved by ADF&G, this Project is not 

expected to have significant impacts to Biological Resources. 

6.2.4 Water Quality & Quantity

Based on the water quality studies conducted, there are no chemical abnormalities that 

would warrant further investigation of the stream to be impacted by the hydroelectric 

project. With the erosion and sedimentation control methods AP&T proposes to employ 

(i.e. silt fencing, jut netting, seed mix using annual non-invasive species, using as narrow a 

corridor as possible, and use of riprap to stabilize slopes along with revegetation as needed) 

during and after construction of the proposed Project, water quality should be only 

minimally impacted as these methods will significantly reduce the opportunity for 

sedimentation. Construction within the creek will use cofferdams to divert flow around 

construction activity to minimize sedimentation. Cofferdams will likely be made from 

super-sacks8

 filled with sand. Therefore, the proposed Project should have no significant 

impacts to water quality. 

6.2.5 Floodplains/Wetlands

The project will impact a floodplain (creek) by installing a diversion structure across the 

creek, which will remove flow of up to 60 cfs. This floodplain, or creek, is an open gravel 

waterway with abandoned gravel side channels in various states of re-vegetation with 

heavily forested and steep banks. Construction of the diversion and removal of up to 60 cfs 

would remove most water flow between the diversion and the Project’s tailrace; however, 

this would have minimal environmental impacts to this floodplain due to a lack of 

vegetation and poor fish habitat to support. Based on the flow data collected to date and in 

correlation with other nearby gaged streams, during a typical year flows greater than 60 cfs 

will occur only in early summer (June and July). During times of high flow, water will 

flow over the diversion structure and continue down the creek. The duration of this spill 

flow will be intermittent, and will vary with the amount of snow accumulated in the basin. 

During low runoff years, there may be only a very short period of spill, but during high 

runoff years the spill period may start in June and extend through August. 

The Yerrick Creek channel routinely experiences peak flows over 1000 cfs (based on 

regional parameters, the two-year flood is estimated at 1,102 cfs and the five-year flood is 

estimated at 1,575 cfs). This Project will reduce flood flows below the diversion structure, 

however, the 60 cfs reduction is not considered significant compared to the high peak 

flows. The diversion structure will be constructed with a relatively flat upstream concrete 

 

8

 Large nylon-fabric sacks (very strong) meant to perform like conventional sandbags, only larger. 
Page | 22

face (4H:1V) to allow movement of bedload and sediment downstream during floods. 

Nevertheless, accumulation of sediment in the diversion pond is expected, and will require 

periodic removal and placement in the downstream floodplain to maintain the existing 

sediment movement regime. There will be minimal impacts to the Yerrick Creek 

floodplain caused by Project construction or operation because high flows that exceed 60 

cfs occur annually. 

Outside of the creek floodplain, there will be few if any impacts to wetlands because the 

Project utilizes uplands, thereby avoiding impacting wetlands along the access 

road/penstock route. The wetland survey conducted found that there were approximately 

21% wetlands within the project boundary (including hydric soils), though not necessarily 

where the project features will be located. In fact, the final design specifically avoids 

wetlands along the access road/penstock route until meeting the creek where it is spanned 

by a single-lane bridge. AP&T proposes to mitigate potential impacts to wetlands by using 

silt fencing to prevent runoff from disturbed soils and revegetation with grass seed mixes, 

which will help stabilize disturbed soils. AP&T also proposes to confine construction 

activity to as narrow a footprint as possible, which will also reduce impacts. 

6.2.6 Environmental Justice   

This project would not disproportionately affect low income or minority communities in 

the proposed Project area. This Project, however, will improve conditions for these small 

communities by saving the customers money and potentially attracting industry or other 

commercial endeavors, which would provide employment to the area. Part of the Project is 

located on the Tribal Corporation, Tanacross, Inc., lands that AP&T will pay compensatory 

fees to use. 

6.2.7 Socioeconomics  

The proposed Project would provide rate stabilization and lower rates, which may attract 

more residents and commercial operations to any and all the communities this Project 

would serve. This Project may have a byproduct of providing more local employment in 

this economically distressed area. Having stabile rates could impact demographics as 

mentioned above and if the economy continues to decline, there will still be a need for less 

expensive and clean power. This project will reduce the noise and air pollution associated 

with diesel generation facilities which are located within city limits and will increase public 

safety by reducing the use of diesel fuel. This project will partially displace the use of 

diesel and diesel fuel sellers by reducing the amount AP&T purchases. 

 
Page | 23

7 MITAGATION AND PERMITS

Mitigation measures that would be implemented in the construction and operation of the 

proposed Project include: 

General 

 Diversion should have an excess flow bypass when flows exceed the hydraulic 

capacity of the project (60 cfs) as a roughened channel to provide fish passage in 

both directions. 

 Fish exclusion configuration at intake to prevent their injury or mortality; screen 

openings would not exceed 1⁄4 inch. 

 The access road and penstock will remain a minimum of 66 feet from the riparian 

zone along the creek except where access is needed to the diversion structure, the 

bridge crossing, and powerhouse, or unless otherwise necessary. 

 The penstock will be buried as much as possible to allow wildlife passage. 

 Project clearing will be kept to a minimum to reduce potential impacts to wildlife. 

 The boundaries of site TNX-212 will be marked as recommended by SHPO. 

Construction crews will be notified of this avoidance area. 

 Silt fencing will be used to contain runoff and prevent sedimentation. 

 Grass seed mix, jut netting, and/or riprap will be used to stabilize disturbed soils 

after construction activity has ceased in an area. 

ADF&G issued a habitat permit for construction on August 5, 2009, with the following 

stipulations that AP&T would implement: 

 Prior to construction, civil plans for construction of the impoundment dam and 

excess flow bypass shall be submitted to ADF&G for review and approval. 

 The excess flow bypass shall be constructed as a roughened channel that permits all 

flow in excess of 60 cfs to remain in the middle bypass reach and that provides fish 

passage, both upstream and downstream. 

 Prior to construction, plans shall be submitted to provide for fish exclusion at the 

penstock intake. These plans must provide for an effective screen opening that does 

not exceed 1⁄4 inch. 

USACOE issued a Department of Army (DA) permit for construction on April 30, 2010, 

[POA-2009-445] with the following stipulations that AP&T would implement: 

 All fill slopes and disturbed areas subject to erosion and siltation of Yerrick Creek 

or project area wetlands shall be stabilized against erosion by revegetation either by 

seeding and/or transplanting species native to the immediate area. Erosion control 

with materials such as coir logs, straw wattles, silt fencing, fiber biodegradable 

mats, straw mulch etc. must be used as best management practices. 

 Migratory birds, their nests, eggs, nestlings, etc. will not be taken (disturbed in any 

manner). Vegetation must not be cleared between 5 May and 25 July of any year, 

unless the area to be cleared has been surveyed for birds and their nests, by a 

qualified biologist, and the land clearing or human disturbances can be conducted 

without a take. 
Page | 24

 Yerrick Creek bed and banks disturbed by construction of temporary diversion 

channels, cofferdams, bridges, or other disturbances must be restored to original 

conditions upon removal of the temporary fills or structures. 

 No equipment or machinery shall be refueled, lubricated, or maintained while in 

any active or inactive channels of Yerrick Creek. All debris will be cleaned from 

work areas authorized by this permit immediately following construction. 

 Earthen materials shall not be stockpiled adjacent to Yerrick Creek to prevent 

erosion and siltation of creek waters. 

 Trenching of Yerrick Creek for installation of the penstock crossing shall not occur 

within any flowing or open waters. The diversion must result in a dry work area. 

The creek bed must be restored with the large cobble rocks existing in the channel 

for armor protections prior to diverting the creek waters back to the original channel 

over the buried penstock. The creek bed and banks shall have the original elevation 

and contours re-established. 

 Reasonable precautions and controls must be used to prevent incidental and 

accidental discharge of petroleum products or other hazardous substances into any 

water or wetland areas. Clean-up materials shall be available on-site and used 

immediately to contain any spills of such pollutants. Fuel storage and handling 

must not be conducted in Yerrick Creek or wetland areas. Equipment leaking fuel, 

oil, hydraulic oil, etc. must not be operated in aquatic areas and be repaired prior to 

use in or near Yerrick Creek. 

 As compensatory mitigation for the permanent net loss of approximately 0.8 acre of 

Yerrick Creek area, the permittee shall pay an in-lieu fee to The Conservation Fund, 

or other Corps’ In-lieu Fee Program sponsor, prior to initiating construction in 

waters of the U.S., at the ratio of 1 acre of creek to 1.5 acre preserved. The 

Conservation Fund will provide the cost per debit to the permittee at the time of 

payment. Proof of the in-lieu fee payment shall be provided to the Corps prior to 

beginning construction in the waters of Yerrick Creek. 

The issuance of following permits are pending: 

 DNR Land Use Permit 

 DNR Water Rights Permit 

AP&T is committed to implementing all environmental stipulations associated with the 

issuance of these permits. 

 
Page | 25

8 LITERATURE CITED

ADF&G, FH-09-III-0182 Permit issued for Construction, R. F. McLean, August 5, 2009. 

Alaska Power & Telephone Co., AP&T Temperature and Fish Presence Survey, (e-mail) 

June 24, 2009. 

Berkshire, P. B., Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project, Estimate of Average Annual Energy, 

July 2007. 

Browne, Patricia, Findings of AHRS Data Review and Evaluation of Cultural Resources 

Potential for Hydroelectric Project Development..., June 5, 2008.

Denali Commission. 2009 Denali Commission List of Distressed Communities. June 

2009. 

DuBois, S. D. 2007. Units 12 and 20D caribou. Pages 65-82 in P. Harper, editor. Caribou 

management report of survey and inventory activities 1 July 2004-30 June 2006. 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Project 3.0. Juneau, Alaska, USA. 

Environ Corp., Yerrick Creek – A Review of Available Data and Recommended Flow 

Duration Curve, Hydrology Report, May 26 2010. 

Grabacki, S.T. Fisheries Baseline Study for a Proposed Hydroelectric Development 

on Yerrick Creek, October 2008. 

Grabacki, S.T. Fisheries Study for Spawning AG and DV and their movement throughout 

the Creek during May and June 2009, June 2009.

Gross, J. A. 2007. Unit 12 brown bear. Pages 132-142 in P. Harper, editor. Brown bear 

management report of survey and inventory activities 1 July 2004-30 June 2006. 

Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Project 4.0. Juneau, Alaska, USA. 

HDR Alaska, Inc. Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination. February 2009. 

HDR Alaska, Inc. Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive (TES) Plant Report. February 2009. 

Hollis, A. L. 2006. Unit 12 moose. Pages 126-143 in P. Harper, editor. Moose management 

report of survey and inventory actitivies 1 July 2003-30 June 2005. Alaska 

Department of Fish and Game. Project 1.0. Juneau, Alaska, USA. 

http://alaska.fws.gov/fisheries/endangered/listing.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/
Page | 26

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/black_bear.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/birds.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/brown_bear.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/caribou.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/dall_sheep.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/fox.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/marten.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/moose.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/otter.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/snowshoe_hare.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/wolf.htm

http://tetlin.fws.gov/wildlife/wolverine.htm

http://www.adfg.state.ak.us/pubs/notebook/furbear/lynx.php

http://www.wildlife.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=pubs.mgt

Parker McNeill D.I. 2005. Portions of Units 12, 13C, and 20D Dall sheep management 

report. Pages 68-79 in C. Brown, editor. Dall sheep management report of survey 

and inventory activities 1 July 2001-30 June 2004. Alaska Department of Fish and 

Game. Project 6.0. Juneau, Alaska. 

Proue, M., Neely, B. 2009 Cultural Resource Survey of Alaska Power & Telephone’s 

Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project Near MP 1334 of the Alaska Highway, Alaska. 

Northern Land Use Research, Inc. November 2009. 

Travis/Pederson Environmental Consulting, Inc. Literature Review and Field Report: 

Hydrology Baseline Study (Including Water Quality Testing), October 2008. 

USACOE, DA Permit POA-2009-445 issued for Construction, April 30, 2010. 
Page | 27

9 APPENDICES
Page | 28

9.1 Agency Correspondence
Page | 29

9.2 Hydrology Studies
May 26, 2010 

Mr. Larry Coupe, PE 

Alaska Power & Telephone 

Attn: Larry Coupe, PE 

193 Otto Street 

Port Townsend, WA 98368 

Re: Yerrick Creek - Review of Available Data and Recommended Flow Duration Curve 

Dear Larry: 

The AP&T stream gage on Yerrick Creek has been collecting data since June 2007. The data 

record is not only short, but the gage was relocated several times; and its new location is subject 

to ice corruption, which can affect the data collected. In order to develop daily flow time series and 

duration curves, at least twenty years of average daily flow data are needed. This analysis can be 

conducted on a stream with a long flow record, if: (a) its flows are correlated with Yerrick Creek 

flows, and (b) its watershed is hydrologically similar to the Yerrick Creek watershed. Specifically, 

the watershed should have a similar drainage area (30 square miles), mean annual precipitation 

(MAP) (18 inches), mean elevation (2,000 feet), and should not be glaciated. 

A search of the US (USGS and its partners) and Canadian hydrologic data found only two 

hydrologically similar watersheds: (a) Berry Creek watershed, thirty miles northwest of Yerrick 

Creek, with USGS gage 15476300 near Dot Lake, recording between 1971 and 1981; and (b) the 

Boulder Creek watershed, more than 100 miles north-northwest of the site, with USGS gage 

15439800, and a data record from 1966 to 1986. The watershed above Berry Creek gage was 

measured at 65.1 square miles, and had average MAP of 18 inches. The gage was located at 

1,400 feet, Both Berry Creek and Yerrick Creek watersheds drain a mountain-type watershed, with 

highest drainage peaks exceeding 6,000 feet. The Boulder Creek watershed drains a drainage 

area with elevations up to 3,000 feet, and has an average MAP of 16 inches. Flow measurements 

were distorted by ice between October and April of every year recordings made over the 20 year 

period. The Berry Creek flow data was used by a previous consultant (Berkshire 2007) to 

reconstruct representative Yerrick Creek flows; however, the Berkshire study was conducted in 

2007, and they had no access to Yerrick Creek flow data. 

After further analysis, it was decided to use the Berry Creek gage data, in order to develop its 

correlation with the existing Yerrick gage data. This was conducted in two steps: 

(1) As the Berry Creek and Yerrick Creek data cover different time periods, the Berry Creek gage 

data was first correlated to the Yukon River flows at Eagle (USGS gage 15356000). This Yukon 

River gage has a continuous flow record for 38-years. Although the Yukon River is a much larger 

stream than Berry Creek, and drains a significantly larger watershed (113,500 square miles), it 

was the only stream in the region where flows were continuously recorded from 1971, and for 

which flows also have a fair correlation (coefficient of determination R2

 was 0.48) with Berry Creek 

flows. The Berry Creek flows were then extended through 2009 using the Berry Creek-Yukon 

River correlation.

605 First Avenue, Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98104 www.environcorp.com 

Tel: +1 206.336.1650 Fax: +1 206.336.1651 
2 

(2) Berry Creek flows developed in step (1) were correlated with the recorded Yerrick Creek flows 

recorded at the AP&T gage (2007-2009). Then, the Yerrick Creek 38-years flow series was 

constructed using the Yerrick-Berry Creek flow correlation. 

The correlation between Yerrick Creek and Berry Creek flow data is presented in Figure 1 below. 

The coefficient of determination (R2

) was 0.7856. The best fit curve is shown in black color; while 

the boundary line approximating outliers is shown in purple color. 

The Yerrick Creek flow duration curve (Figure 2) was developed using 38-years of reconstructed 

Yerrick Creek data. The flow duration curve using the developed correlation equation is shown in 

blue color. The flow duration curve of the boundary line approximating outliers is shown in red 

color. The flow duration curve using recorded Berry Creek data developed by Berkshire is also 

shown (in black color) for comparison. The Berkshire Berry Creek flow duration curve lies midway 

between the Yerrick Creek main duration curve and the Yerrick Creek low prediction envelope, 

except for very low flows (below 10 cfs) and high flows (exceeding 70 cfs). 

Conclusion: 

With collection of more data at the Yerrick Creek gage, the flow duration curve may tend to adjust 

to the lower prediction limit flow duration curve (shown in red color in Figure 2). However, this 

adjustment may be limited to medium range flows (10 cfs – 30 cfs). It is unlikely that the curve will 

be adjusted towards lower flows that were recorded at the Berry Creek USGS gage 15476300 

near Dot Lake. The reason is that the AP&T gage is located in a wide shallow section of a stream 

that is susceptible to ice during the period of low flows in Yerrick Creek. Formation of this ice 

prevents correct recording of low flows at the Yerrick Creek gage. It also appears that the ice 

(“frazil ice”) is corrupting data collection in the weeks leading up to the complete freeze, as pointed 

out by Berkshire in his report (2007). The Berry Creek USGS gage is located at a narrower section 

of the creek, and is able to capture longer periods of low flows

(http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/measurements?site_no=15476300&agency_cd=USGS&format=ht

ml_table_expanded). 
3 

 

Figure 1 

Yerrick Creek - Berry Creek Correlation

y = 14.539Ln(x) - 11.927

R2

 = 0.7856

1.0

10.0

100.0

1000.0

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Berry Creek Q (predicted from Yukon)

Yerrick Creek (recorded) Q

Fitting Curve

Lower Limit Fitting Envelope

Log. (Fitting Curve)

Figure 2 

Flow Duration Curve - Yerrick Creek (correlated on Berry Creek/Yukon River)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Percent Time Exceeded

Yerrick Creek Flow, cfs

Yerrick Creek from Berry and Yukon

Yerrick Creek - lower prediction limit

Berry Creek (Berkshire)
(BLANK PAGE) 












Page | 30

9.3 Biological and Other Surveys

9.3.1. Fish Resources Report 

9.3.2. Threatened, Endangered, Sensitive (TES) Plant Report 

9.3.3. Literature Review and Field Report: Hydrology Baseline 

Study 

9.3.4. Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination 

9.3.5. Heritage Resource Survey 
9.3.1. – FISH RESOURCES REPORT 
10 June 2009

To: APT – Glen Martin

From: GRAYSTAR – Steve Grabacki

Subject: Report of Fisheries Fieldwork, Yerrick Creek, May-June 2009

I conducted three sampling sessions on Yerrick Creek -- 19-20 May 2009, 27-29 May 2009, and 

7 June 2009.

For the first two sessions, the study area included lower Yerrick Creek, from roughly 1⁄2-mile 

above the proposed powerhouse site downstream to the Tanana River. The main purpose of the 

sampling was to compare spawning aggregations of Arctic grayling above vs. below the 

proposed powerhouse site. Sampling methods included visual observation with polarized lenses, 

angling with spin and fly terminal tackle, underwater video, and 3 styles of fish traps (small 

wire-mesh minnow traps, medium collapsible minnow traps with larger throat, and larger 

collapsible traps) baited with commercially cured salmon roe.

On the third sampling session, we focused on the creek downstream of the highway. The purpose 

of this sampling was to observe and capture Arctic grayling in lower Yerrick Creek, and to 

compare grayling's use of the creek for spring spawning by adults vs. summer feeding by 

juveniles. Sampling methods included visual observation with polarized lenses, angling with 

spin and fly terminal tackle, and herding fish through pools into a bag seine.

General Habitat Description

For most of its length, Yerrick Creek is a cascading stream with fast flow and boulder substrate. 

The stream generally comprises 1-3 channels, within a wide dynamic (scoured) perimeter. 

Apparent fish habitat consists of widely spaced, very small (~10-foot long) pools behind large 

boulders or logjams.

Roughly 1 mile before the creek joins the Tanana River, the habitat is significantly different. 

Flow is much slower, and the habitat is composed mostly of sand. In this “delta” area, there are 

3 main channels, several smaller channels which leave and rejoin the larger channels, and at least 

one large area (“city block” in size) through which the creek flows more-or-less overland, in very 

shallow channels among dense spruce trees.

In between these two reaches is a transition zone, where flow is intermediate in strength and 

substrate is small rocks & large gravel. This transition zone is only a few hundred yards long.
Complicating this situation is the fact that the water flowing in the creek is not always 

continuous with the river. Because of the porous substrate, the water sometimes disappears from 

the surface, and flows underground.

First Sampling Session

During the field trip of 19-20 May 2009, Yerrick Creek did not flow into (connect to) the Tanana 

River. Water flow appeared strongest at the uppermost sampling station (above the powerhouse 

site), and water was flowing in only 1 channel under the highway bridge.

On 19 May, the water disappeared approximately 3⁄4-mile downstream of the bridge, within the 

rocky streambed. On 20 May, the water had reached about 0.9 miles farther downstream, but 

disappeared in the sandy substrate. In the sandy delta area, there were a few very small pools 

with very little flow, and mostly dry substrate.

At the bridge, water temperature was –

10.8°C at about 1630 on 18 May

5.1°C at 1030 on 19 May

1.7°C at 0915 on 20 May

-- this range of daily temperature variation was observed on both sampling trips. (Arctic 

grayling are thought to spawn at 4°C).

The 3 channels of Yerrick Creek drain into a backwater slough of the Tanana River. Although 

there was no surface water flow from the creek to the river, there was water in that slough. 

Water temperature was 10.5°C. We observed approximately 12 grayling in a tight school. The 

fish appeared to be roughly 250-300 mm in length. They were easily spooked, and did not 

respond to spinners or flies. We also observed 1 round whitefish, of approximately 300 mm in 

length, dozens of small (~20 mm) grayling, and hundreds of tiny (<10 mm) fish (species 

unknown). We captured no fish in the fish traps.

Above the powerhouse site on 19-20 May, we captured 1 Dolly Varden (225 mm FL) in a trap, 

but observed no other fishes in this area.

Second Sampling Session

During the field trip of 27-29 May 2009, the flow in the creek was much greater, and the water 

appeared to be more turbid, than it had been a week earlier. At the bridge, the water was flowing 

in 2 channels (vs. one 1 channel, a week before), and was –

5.1°C at 1010 on 27 May

4.1°C at 0600 on 28 May, after a cool night
7.1°C at 1240 on 28 May

2.8°C at 0610 on 29 May, after a rainy night

3.5°C at 0925 on 29 May

5.3°C at 1455 on 29 May 

Yerrick Creek was flowing into the Tanana River (the slough where we had earlier sampled) 

through its 3 main channels. Just above those confluences, the creek was braided through the 

forest, with several small channels and overland flows (among the trees). In these small 

channels, we observed 2 individual grayling (the fish were widely separated, not aggregated).

We observed no fish in the lower creek (below the bridge), on either the rocky or sandy 

substrates, but we did capture 2 slimy sculpin in a trap. Water temperature in the lower creek 

was –

6.8°C at 1145 on 28 May

4.5°C at 1135 on 29 May

Above the powerhouse site, we captured 7 Dolly Varden in traps, but observed no other fishes, 

with any sampling method. Water temperature in this area was –

7.5°C at 1325 on 28 May

3.7°C at 1330 on 29 May

During this second field trip, we found some of the fish traps in different positions from where 

we had set them. They appeared to have been moved to the shore or (in one case) out of the 

water by an overnight flood event.

To summarize the first two samplings -- For grayling to spawn in Yerrick Creek, 2 factors are 

necessary – water temperature of 4-5°C, and continuity of water flow from the creek to the river. 

As expected, we observed a school of grayling in the Tanana River very near the mouth of 

Yerrick Creek, before the creek had reached the river. Those fish were apparently waiting to 

enter the creek. After the creek had reached the river, we observed grayling in the sandy-bottom, 

slower-flowing “delta” channels of the creek, but no grayling in the rocky-bottom, faster-flowing 

cascading parts of the creek. Also, we did not observe aggregations of grayling anywhere in 

Yerrick Creek.

Third Sampling Session

We sampled Yerrick Creek on 7 June 2009. The weather was cool and rainy in the morning, but 

turned mostly sunny and warm in the afternoon. Water was clear, and 5.4C at 1100.

The purpose of this sampling was to observe and capture Arctic grayling in lower Yerrick Creek, 

and to compare grayling's use of the creek for spring spawning by adults vs. summer feeding by 
juveniles. Sampling methods included: visual observation with polarized lenses, angling with 

spin and fly gear, and herding fish downstream through pools into a bag seine, which was 

stretched across the creek.

We observed no fishes in the fast flow / boulder substrate zone, or in the slow flow / sand 

substrate zone. In the transition zone, we captured 1 grayling, and observed 4 individual (not 

aggregated) grayling: 2 of these were roughly 200 mm long, and 2 fish were approximately 100 

mm long. The captured grayling was 208 mm fork length, and did not appear to be in either a 

pre-spawning or post-spawning condition.

I took scale samples from the captured grayling, and released it in apparent good condition. I 

drove to Delta, and met with ADFG's Fronty Parker. We discussed my findings, and we pressed 

and read the sample of scales that I took from the fish I caught on Sunday (6/7). That grayling 

was 2 or 3 years old, definitely juvenile, not a spawning adult.

Based on my sampling in early September 2008, and on these three sampling sessions in MayJune 2009, a picture of grayling use of Yerrick Creek seems to have emerged. Grayling appear 

to use parts of Yerrick Creek (below and within the bypass reach) for summer feeding, on an 

opportunistic basis. While I cannot prove that grayling do not spawn in Yerrick Creek, I have 

found no evidence to support it --

* The creek did not connect to the river at the expected time of grayling spawning.

* I observed no aggregations of grayling anywhere in Yerrick Creek; all grayling observed in 

the creek in May-June 2009 appeared to be individual fish.

* I observed no adult-size grayling, and the largest grayling observed in June 2009 (the 2- or 

3-year-old) did not appear to be in either a pre-spawning or post-spawning condition.
1

REPORT

FISHERIES BASELINE STUDY

for a

PROPOSED HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT

on

YERRICK CREEK

near

TOK, ALASKA

prepared for –

ALASKA POWER & TELEPHONE Company

Port Townsend, Washington

by –

Stephen T. Grabacki, FP-C

GRAYSTAR Pacific Seafood, Ltd.

Anchorage, Alaska

(907) 272-5600

graystar@alaska.net

October 2008
2

1 -- INTRODUCTION

ALASKA POWER AND TELEPHONE COMPANY (AP&T) has proposed to install a 

hydroelectric project on Yerrick Creek, near Tok, Alaska. This document is the report of the 

first year of a fisheries baseline study, in support of that project.

The study area included Yerrick Creek (YER) and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 (CR1). These 

streams are small tributaries of the upper Tanana River, in eastern interior Alaska. The fish and 

fisheries of the upper Tanana River drainage are studied and managed by the Alaska Department 

of Fish & Game (ADFG, or “the department”). Neither YER nor CR1 are listed in ADFG’s 

Catalog of Waters Important for the Spawning, Rearing or Migration of Anadromous Fishes and 

its associated Atlas -- http://www.sf.adfg.state.ak.us/SARR/awc/ -- although the Tanana River 

itself is listed.

YER and CR1 lie within ADFG’s Upper Tanana Management Area (UTMA), which is within 

ADFG’s fishery management region III, also known as the Arctic-Yukon-Kuskokwim (AYK) 

region (Figure 1). The UTMA encompasses Delta Junction, Tok, and several smaller 

communities (Figure 2).

Region II

Region III

Region I

Lower Tanana Management Area

Upper Tanana Mangement Area

Upper Copper Upper Susitna

Management Area

Northwestern/Arctic Yukon Management Area

Management Area

Kuskokwim

Management Area

Figure 1 -- Map of ADFG’s Sport Fish Regions, and the Six Region III Management Areas

source: Parker 2006
3

Figure 2 -- Map of the Upper Tanana Management Area within the Tanana River Drainage

source: Parker 2006

Several fish species are found in the UTMA –

Common Name Scientific Name

chinook (king) salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha

coho (silver) salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch

chum (keta) salmon Oncorhynchus keta

Arctic grayling Thymallus arcticus

burbot Lota lota

lake trout Salvelinus namaycush

Dolly Varden Salvelinus malma

round whitefish Coregonus cylindraceum

least cisco Coregonus sardinella

humpback whitefish Coregonus pidschian

northern pike Esox lucius

YER & CR1 

study area
4

ADFG’s Division of Sport Fish publishes an annual Fishery Management Report for Sport 

Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River Drainage. These reports focus on the more abundant sportcaught fishes: coho salmon, Arctic grayling, northern pike, lake trout, and burbot. Dolly Varden 

char are not explicitly studied. The most recent available such report (as of October 2008) is 

Parker 2006.

ADFG has stocked rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus), coho 

salmon, Arctic grayling, and lake trout in selected waters of the Upper Tanana area (Parker 

2006).

In general, there is less sport fishing effort in the UTMA, as compared to the Lower Tanana 

Management Area (Parker 2006); for example, in 2005 --

* 33% of anglers in the Tanana River drainage fished in UTMA

* 30% of fishing trips in the Tanana River drainage were in UTMA

* 28% of fishing effort in the Tanana River drainage was in UTMA

* 39% of fish harvest in the Tanana River drainage was in UTMA

In 2005, Arctic grayling comprised over half of the sport fish catch, but less than one-third of the 

sport fish harvest (fish caught and retained) in UTMA (Parker 2006) –

Species Catch % of Catchd Harvest % of Harveste % Harvested

Salmon

* chinook 25 0.03 25 0.15 100.0

* cohoa 2,830 2.97 267 1.61 9.4

* cohob 2,973 3.12 1,002 6.02 33.7

* chum 686 0.72 0 0.0 0.0

Non-Salmon

* rainbow trout 17,355 18.20 6,336 38.10 36.5

* lake trout 3,651 3.83 569 3.42 15.6

* charc 1,453 1.52 463 2.78 31.8

* Arctic grayling 55,943 58.66 5,242 31.52 9.4

* northern pike 8,299 8.70 1,646 9.90 19.8

* whitefish 455 0.48 60 0.36 30.5

* burbot 1,370 1.44 1,021 6.14 74.8

* sheefish 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0

* other fishes 321 0.34 0 0.0 0.0

TOTAL 95,361 16,631 17.4

a – anadromous salmon

b – landlocked coho & Chinook salmon c – includes Arctic char & Dolly Varden

d – the species’ percent of UTMA total catch, calculated from Table 7 in Parker 2006 e – the species’ percent of UTMA total harvest, calculated from Table 7 in Parker 2006
5

The preceding table shows that 1.52% of the catch, and 2.78% of the harvest, were composed of 

“char”, which includes both wild Dolly Varden and stocked Arctic char.

Because of their wide distribution and comparatively high abundance, Arctic grayling are 

important to both sport and subsistence harvesters. As such, they have been extensively studied 

by ADFG scientists for decades. In the Tanana River drainage, grayling exhibit a wide range of 

age and size at maturity (Clark 1992). Similar studies have not been conducted for Dolly Varden 

in the upper Tanana drainage, but anecdotal observations indicate that Dolly Varden in that area 

may reach maturity and spawn at small sizes (< 200 mm fork length) (J.F. Parker, ADFG, 

personal communication, 2008), and even while exhibiting so-called “juvenile” characteristics 

such as parr marks (A.E. Rosenberger, University of Alaska Fairbanks, School of Fisheries & 

Ocean Sciences, personal communication, 2008).

ADFG has conducted comprehensive fish surveys of the streams of the middle and lower Tanana 

River drainage, including clear, clear/glacial, glacial, humic/glacial, and humic creeks and rivers, 

and found no Dolly Varden in any of those habitats (Durst 2001, Hemming & Morris 1999).

Arctic grayling conduct seasonal migrations among overwintering, spawning, and summer 

feeding habitats, and seasonal changes in water temperature are generally considered to be the 

triggers for those movements (Ridder 1995, Ridder 1994, and several previous studies cited in 

those reports. Similar studies have not been conducted for Dolly Varden in the upper Tanana 

drainage, but anecdotal reports indicate that there may be year-round resident populations of 

Dolly Varden in the upper reaches of Yerrick Creek (J.F. Parker, ADFG, personal 

communication, 2008).

In 1988, 367 Tok households were surveyed to determine their subsistence use of fish, game, and 

plant resources. Most households used subsistence-caught salmon (79.4%) and freshwater fish 

(71.4%). In the freshwater fish category, the predominant subsistence species were grayling 

(55.7%), burbot (40.2%), rainbow trout (35.0%), large pike (27.2%), whitefish (25.9%), and lake 

trout (22.9%). Only 0.9% of Tok households reported using subsistence-caught Dolly Varden. 

The report does not identify where these various fish species were harvested, but because the 

Tok data set includes marine fish (27.5%), such as halibut, it appears that Tok residents harvest 

subsistence fisheries resources far from home, and not only in the local Tok area (McMillan & 

Cuccarese 1988).

In conclusion, Arctic grayling are the most commonly sport-caught fish in the UTMA, and the 

second-most common sport-harvested species. Grayling are also taken by subsistence 

harvesters. Dolly Varden are comparatively uncommon in the UTMA, in both the sport and 

subsistence harvests, and were not reported by either of two ADFG scientific investigations.

Finally, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the Alaska Department of Fish & Game’s Division of 

Fisheries Rehabilitation, Enhancement, & Development (FRED) investigated possible sites for 

salmon hatcheries throughout Alaska. In a survey of Yerrick Creek in February 1980, Raymond 

(1980) reported –
6

* the Upper Tanana River Valley has many ingredients for a good hatchery site:

 year-round highway access, high-gradient streams, and hardly any salmon

* most of the creeks in this area dry up in winter

* there was no evidence of running water at the highway bridge

* there was evidence of running water at two sites: 1 mile and 2 miles upstream of 

 the highway

* water temperature was too low for a flow-through hatchery

* there was plenty of hydropower available

2 -- METHODS

YER is characterized by steep gradient, cascading flows, and large boulder substrate. The 

channels appear to be dynamic, as judged by cleanliness of the substrate in and near the water: 

very little periphyton and almost no terrestrial vegetation. There are few pools in YER that 

appear capable of providing habitat for fishes. Those pools are small, in the range of 10-20 ft 

long.

CR1 is much smaller and steeper than YER. It is essentially one long, cascading run, with strong 

current and large boulder substrate. Small pools are apparent only at very low flows. For 

example, in June (lower flow than in September), a pool of roughly 10 ft wide x 20 ft long x 2 ft 

deep was observed at WP 037: 63°21.595’N 143°43.005’W elevation: 2,239 ft but this pool 

could not be located in early September, when flow was greater. Similarly, a few smaller pools 

were observed in June, but by early September, the dynamic channel appeared to have shifted so 

that they were no longer apparent.

During sampling visits in summer 2008, the wetted perimeters of both streams were much 

smaller (narrower) than their respective dynamic channels (area of clean boulders).

The fish sampling stations on YER and CR1 were selected to bracket the area of interest to 

AP&T’s proposed project (Figure 3) –

* Station UYC: upper Yerrick Creek, well above the hydropower impoundment site

* Station UMY: middle/upper Yerrick Creek, above the impoundment site

* Station YCI: Yerrick Creek, in the general vicinity of the proposed impoundment

* Station MYC: middle Yerrick Creek, between the impoundment and the powerhouse

* Station LYC: lower Yerrick Creek, downstream of the proposed powerhouse

* Station CRI: Cathedral Rapids Creek #1, in the vicinity of the proposed impoundment

The purpose of this study was to characterize the seasonal presence and distribution of fishes in 

the two streams.
7

Figure 3 -- Sampling Sites for the 2008 Fisheries Baseline Study

The two creeks were visited on foot and examined, but not sampled, 6-7 June 2008. Fish habitat 

was generally characterized, and the locations of possible fish-bearing pools were recorded.

Sampling, supported by helicopter, was conducted –

* 3-4 September 2008 (YER and CR1); this sampling was originally scheduled for early 

August, in order to sample fish in their summer habitats, but because of unusually heavy and 

prolonged rains and flooding in the Tok area, the trip was postponed twice until early 

September; nevertheless, the weather and water were warm and summer-like, but the water 

flow was still noticeably higher than in June

LYC

UYC

UMY

YCI

MYC

CRI
8

* 29-30 September 2008 (YER only); this sampling was intended to sample fish immediately 

before freeze-up, in order to understand the species winter habitats; the water flows were 

lower than in early September

Sampling methods included --

* electrofisher + bag seine (the electrofisher was used to herd the fish into the bag seine, 

rather than stunning them); it was difficult to maintain the seine in the current at some sites, 

and impossible at other sites; also, this was more effective in late September, because flow 

was less than in early September; where it was not possible to maintain the bag seine in 

strong current, electrofishing was performed as best as possible along the sides of the stream 

and in small backwater areas; in most cases, electrofishing was performed by two people: 

one bearing the backpack unit, and the other using a dipnet

* minnow traps baited with commercially cured salmon eggs and left to soak overnight in 

pools, where pools could be found; fewer pools were visible during early September (higher 

flow) vs. in late September (lower flow), so that traps were not set at all sites in early 

September

GPS coordinates, as displayed on a brand new Garmin GPS unit, do not appear to match the 

apparent location as displayed in Figure 3, which is drawn from a brand new version of the 

TOPO! mapping software. It is not clear if the error is within the GPS unit, the software, or in 

the interaction between the two. In this report, the GPS readings are listed in Appendix A, and 

the apparent location is shown in Figure 3.

3 -- RESULTS

Fish sampling was conducted under ADFG Fish Resource Permit SF2008-172. A report of those 

activities was submitted to ADFG on 27 October 2008, and is attached to this report as Appendix 

A. Two species of fish were captured: Dolly Varden (DV) and Arctic grayling (AG). All fishes 

were measured and released alive, in apparent good condition. The results of the 2008 fish 

sampling were –

YERRICK CREEK – 3-4 September 2008

Station UYC

** 1 minnow trap + electrofish ~40 yds of stream

DV (5): 127, 122, 120, 127, 117 mm fork length (FL)
9

Station YCI

** 2 minnow traps + electrofish ~160 yds of stream

DV (4): 135, 110, 102, 115 mm FL

AG (3 possible males): 220, 235, 190 mm FL

AG (1 possible female): 207 mm FL

AG (7 undetermined sex): 165, 150, 148, 190, 148, 162, 148 mm FL

Station MYC

* not possible to set bag seine: current too strong, too wide in run, too deep & fast

* not possible to set minnow trap: current too strong, no slow water

* water still high & fast >10 days after latest rain; thalweg depth 3.5-4.0 ft

* attempted electrofishing along ~50 yards of shoreline: sighted 1 fish ~150mm,

 species unknown

Station LYC

* set of seine not very good; current very strong

* electrofish ~35 yards downstream to seine: no fish observed

* no other fish-able sites nearby or anywhere below old pipeline corridor

* no minnow trap set here

YERRICK CREEK – 29-30 September 2008

Station UYC

** 1 minnow trap

DV (3): 175, 126, 145 mm FL

Station UMY

** 1 minnow trap + electrofish ~ 25 yds of stream

DV (4): 125, 147, 159, 142 mm FL

+ 1 DV sighted

Station YCI

** 2 minnow traps + electrofish ~40 yds of stream

DV (14): 124, 131, 167, 133, 131, 137, 136, 128, 125, 123, 141, 105, 130, 80 mm FL

DV (1 possible gravid female?): 149 mm FL
10

Station MYC

* 1 minnow trap + electrofish ~100 yds of stream

DV (2): 122, 98 mm FL

DV (1 w/ white-edged fins, possible spawning male?): 164 mm FL

AG (1): 162 mmFL

+ sighted 3 small fish, each <100 m FL

Station LYC

* 1 minnow trap + electrofish ~100 yds of stream

AG (1): 79 mm FL

CATHEDRAL RAPIDS CREEK #1 – 3-4 September 2008

Station CRI

* electrofished ~0.1 mile of CR1, roughly near the approximate impound site

no fish sighted or captured

* no minnow trap set (no pools)

4 – CONCLUSIONS

Yerrick Creek is used by Dolly Varden and Arctic grayling, in occasional small pools separated 

by long sections of cascading runs.

Dolly Varden were captured in the middle and upper reaches of the creek (including the 

proposed impoundment area), while Arctic grayling were captured in the middle and lower 

sections. In this sampling, Arctic grayling were captured less often than were Dolly Varden.

Dolly Varden were commonly encountered in both late summer and late fall (immediately before 

freeze-up), which suggests that they are year-round residents, including over winter. [Inferring 

the over-winter habitat of Dolly Varden based on pre-freeze-up surveys and sampling is used by 

ADFG biologists in other Alaska streams (Scanlon 2008).]

The capture of a possibly gravid female and possibly spawning male suggests that Dolly Varden 

might spawn in the middle reaches of this stream.

This apparent distribution is consistent with general anecdotal observations of these species in 

UTMA –

* dwarf Dolly Varden are thought to be year-round residents of upper Yerrick Creek

* Arctic grayling migrate seasonally into and out of lower Yerrick Creek
11

No fish were captured or sighted in Cathedral Rapids Creek #1, and fish habitat appears to be 

very scarce. It is not clear to what extent, if any, this cascading stream is used by either fish 

species.

5 -- RECOMMENDATIONS

The 2008 fisheries sampling has provided useful characterizations of fish presence and 

distribution in Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1, in late summer, late fall, and by 

inference, over-winter. These data, when supplemented by a sampling in late spring or early 

summer of 2009, will yield a picture of yearly habitat use of these two streams. This future

sampling should be performed at a very low water stage, to allow for thorough electrofishing at 

all stations.

6 – LITERATURE CITED

Clark, R.A. 1992. Age and Size at Maturity of Arctic Grayling in Selected Waters of the 

Tanana Drainage. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Division of Sport Fish; Anchorage. 

Fishery Manuscript 92-5.

Durst, J.D. 2001. Fish Habitats and Use in the Tanana Floodplain Near Big Delta, Alaska, 

1999-2000. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Habitat & Restoration Division; Juneau. 

Technical Report 01-05.

Hemming, C.R., & W.A. Morris. 1999. Fish Habitat Investigations in the Tanana River 

Watershed, 1997. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Habitat & Restoration Division; Juneau. 

Technical Report 99-1.

McMillan, P.O., & S.V. Cuccarese. 1988. Alaska Over-the-horizon Backscatter Radar System: 

Characteristics of Contemporary Subsistence Use Patterns in the Copper River Basin and Upper 

Tanana Area; Volume I: Synthesis. Draft Report. Prepared for: Hart Crowser Inc. and Arctic 

Environmental Information & Data Center, in cooperation with Alaska Department of Fish & 

Game (Anchorage & Fairbanks) and U.S. National Park Service.

Parker, J.F. 2007a. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River 

Drainage in 2002. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Divisions of Sport Fish and 

Commercial Fisheries; Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 07-03.

Parker, J.F. 2007b. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River 

Drainage in 2003. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Divisions of Sport Fish and 

Commercial Fisheries; Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 07-05.
12

Parker, J.F. 2006. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Upper Tanana River 

Drainage in 2005. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Divisions of Sport Fish and 

Commercial Fisheries; Anchorage. Fishery Management Report 06-67.

Raymond, J. 1980. AYK Hatchery Site Surveys, and Miscellaneous Chum Spawning 

Observations. Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Division of Fisheries Rehabilitation, 

Enhancement, & Development; Fairbanks.

Ridder, W.P. 1995. Movements of Radio-Tagged Arctic Grayling in the Tok River Drainage. 

Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Division of Sport Fish. Fishery Data Series 95-36.

Ridder, W.P. 1994. Arctic Grayling Investigations in the Tok River Drainage During 1993. 

Alaska Department of Fish & Game; Division of Sport Fish; Anchorage. Fishery Data Series 

94-19.

Scanlon, B. 2008. Fishery Management Report for Sport Fisheries in the Northwest / North 

Slope Management Area, 2006. Alaska Department of Fish & Game, Anchorage. Fishery 

Management Report 08-35.
13

APPENDIX A

Report for FRP SF2008-172
14

Report of Activities and Collections

27 October 2008

Fish Resource Permit SF2008-172

Stephen T. Grabacki, FP-C; 907-272-5600; graystar@alaska.net

Location: Yerrick Creek (YER) and Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 (CR1)

The two creeks were examined but not sampled 6-7 June 2008. Fish habitat was generally 

characterized, and the GPS locations of possible fish-bearing pools were recorded.

Sampling was conducted 3-4 September 2008 (YER and CR1), and 29-30 September 2008 (YER 

only), with electrofisher + bag seine (the electrofisher was used to herd the fish into the bag 

seine, rather than stunning them), and minnow traps baited with commercially cured salmon eggs 

and left to soak overnight.

GPS coordinates, as displayed on Grabacki’s brand new Garmin GPS unit, do not appear to 

match the apparent location as displayed on the attached map. In this report, the GPS readings 

are listed in the text, and the apparent location is shown on the map.

(1) RESULTS FROM 3-4 SEPTEMBER 2008

YERRICK CREEK (YER)

Upper YER, above fork, western channel, well above impoundment, 04SEP08

63°18.204’N 143°35.387’W elevation: 2,830 ft

Minnow trap set 03SEP08@1915, retrieved 04SEP08@1030 –

DV (1): 127 mmFL

Electrofished 2 channels –

* single channel, ~40 yards

* Y-shaped channel, ~80 yards

DV (4): 122, 120, 127, 117 mmFL

All fish in apparent good condition, released alive
15

Pool at/near impoundment site (above Mike’s camp), 03SEP08

Waypoint 009, elevation: 2,284 ft

63°20.435’N 143°37.852’W

Electrofished pool & run, ~30 yards –

DV (1): 115 mmFL

AG (3 possible males): 220, 235, 190 mmFL

AG (1 possible female): 207 mmFL

AG (5 undetermined sex): 150, 148, 190, 148, 162, 148 mmFL

All fishes in apparent good condition, and released alive

Minnow trap set 1430, retrieved 0955 (04SEP08) –

DV (2): 110, 102 mmFL

Fish in apparent good condition, released alive

Pool below impoundment site, 03SEP08

Waypoint 008, elevation: 2,263 ft

63°20.589’N 143°37.684’W

Electrofished 2 channels –

* main channel, ~80 yards: no fish captured or sighted

* side channel, ~50 yards: 1 fish sighted + 2 fish captured –

Arctic grayling (AG) 165mm fork length (FL), apparent good condition, released alive

Dolly Varden (DV) 135 mmFL, apparent good condition, released alive

(DV bore parr marks)

Minnow trap set 1300, retrieved 0930 (04SEP08): no catch

Middle YER, near big cut in hill on west bank

Waypoint 024 on Mike Warner’s GPS: 63°21.411’N 143°37.852’W elevation: 2,100 ft

Not possible to set bag seine: current too strong, too wide in run, too deep & fast below pool

Water still high >10 days after latest rain; thalweg depth 3.5-4.0 ft

Attempted electrofishing along ~50 yards of shoreline: sighted 1 fish ~150mm, species unknown

Same conditions downstream ~0.5 mile

Might be able to work this site in lower flow

Lower YER, below highway bridge

63°23.062’N 143°35.538’W elevation: 1,971 ft

Set bag seine below a slight pool

Set of seine not very good; current very strong; lead line not on bottom in some places

My assistant was the anchor for one end of the seine

Electrofished ~35 yards downstream to seine: no fish observed

No other fish-able sites nearby or anywhere below old pipeline corridor

Observation: In June, flow at upper YER was greater than at lower YER. In September, there 

was stronger flow at mid- and lower YER sites. Judging by wet marks on the rocks, the water 

level was dropping.
16

Yerrick Creek is characterized by steep gradient, cascading flows, and large boulder substrate. 

The channels appear to be dynamic, as judged by cleanliness of the substrate in and near the 

water: very little periphyton and almost no terrestrial vegetation. There are few pools in YER 

that appear capable of providing habitat for fishes. Those pools are small, in the range of 10 ft 

long. Besides the pools that we sampled, other small pools were observed (in June) at –

* 63°22.308’N 143°37.007’W elevation: 1,847 ft

* 63°22.123’N 143°37.104’W elevation: not recorded

* 63°21.572’N 143°37.608’W elevation: 2,050 ft (pool near spur of hill)

* 63°21.582’N 143°37.638’W elevation: 1,930 ft

* 63°21.257’N 143°37.913’W elevation: 2,220 ft (pool near scree slope; 1 AG seen in June)

CATHEDRAL RAPIDS CREEK #1 (CR1)

Station CRI

Electrofished ~0.1 mile of CR1, roughly near the approximate impound site

* from WP 012: 63°21.086’N 143°43.153’W elevation: 2,495 ft

* to WP 011: 63°21.175’N 143°43.163’W elevation: 2,442 ft

No fish sighted or captured

No minnow trap set (no pools)

Note: this site was not really a pool or pools; it was a reach of the stream near the impound site, 

where we could reasonably set the bag seine and conduct electrofishing.

CR1 is much smaller and steeper than YER. It is essentially one long, cascading run, with strong 

current and large boulder substrate. In June (lower flow than in September), a pool of roughly 

10 ft wide x 20 ft long x 2 ft deep was observed at WP 037: 63°21.595’N 143°43.005’W 

elevation: 2,239 ft but this pool could not be located in early September. Similarly, a few 

smaller pools were observed in June, but by early September, the dynamic channel appeared to 

have shifted so that they were no longer apparent.
17

(2) RESULTS FROM 29-30 SEPTEMBER 2008

YERRICK CREEK (YER)

Station UYC

Upper YER

Waypoint 026, elevation: 2,811 ft

63° 18.193’N 143°35.406’W

Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1415; retrieved 30SEP08@1320 --

DV (3): 175, 126, 145 mmFL

All fish in apparent good condition, released alive

Station UMY

Upper YER, below WP 026

Waypoint 029, elevation: 2,548 ft

63° 19.371’N 143°36.591’W

Nice pool at big dead spruce and snag

Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1440; retrieved 30SEP08@ 1235 –

DV (3): 147, 159, 142 mm FL

All fish in apparent good condition, released alive.

Electrofished 2 pools, ~25 linear yards of stream –

DV (1): 125 mm FL

+ 1 DV sighted

Fish in apparent good condition, released alive

Station YCI

Pools near impoundment site

Waypoint 030, elevation: 2,242 ft

63° 20.606’N 143°37.686’W

2 minnow traps set 29SEP08@1500, retrieved 30SEP08@1115 –

DV (12): 149*, 133, 131, 137, 136, 128, 125, 123, 141, 105, 130, 80 mm FL

* possible gravid female?

All fish in apparent good condition, released alive.

Electrofished pools near impoundment site, ~25 linear yards of stream –

no fish sighted or captured

Electrofished pool at fork of 3 channels ~100 yards above impoundment site

Waypoint 032, elevation: 2,204 ft

63° 20.521’N 143° 37.773’W

DV (3): 124, 131, 167 mm FL

All fish in apparent good condition, released alive
18

Station MYC

Middle YER, near big spur of hill (“razorback”) on west bank

Waypoint 031, elevation: 2,026 ft

63° 21.623’N 143° 37.565’W

Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1550, retrieved 30SEP08@1400 –

DV (3): 164*, 122, 98 mmFL

* white-edged fins, possible spawning male?

Electrofished ~100 linear yards of stream, in various small pools –

AG (1): 162 mmFL

+ sighted 3 small fish, each <100 m FL

Fish in apparent good condition, released alive

Station LYC

Lower YER, below highway bridge

Waypoint 025, elevation: 1,717 ft

63° 22.878’N 143°36.438’W

Minnow trap set 29SEP08@1350, retrieved 30SEP08@1000 –

* no catch

Electrofished ~100yards of stream –

AG (1): 79 mm FL
9.3.2. – THREATENED, ENDANGERED, SENSITIVE 

(TES) PLANT REPORT 
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project 

Tok, Alaska 

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) Plant Report 

February 2009 

Prepared for: 

Alaska Power and Telephone Company 

PO Box 3222 

Port Townsend, WA 98368 

Prepared by: 

HDR Alaska, Inc. 

2525 C Street, Suite 305 

Anchorage, Alaska 99503
Table of Contents

STUDY PURPOSE AND LOCATION.............................................................................................................. 1

METHODS........................................................................................................................................................... 1

SAMPLING DESIGN............................................................................................................................................. 2

FIELD METHODS................................................................................................................................................ 3

COLLECTION AND VOUCHERS............................................................................................................................ 3

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.......................................................................................................................... 3

NOTABLE PLANTS ............................................................................................................................................ 4

CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................................................... 5

DETERMINATION OF TES SPECIES MADE BY........................................................................................ 5

ATTACHMENTS................................................................................................................................................ 5

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................... 5

APPENDICES...................................................................................................................................................... 6

APPENDIX A: SURVEY INTENSITY AND RARITY RANK FOR SPECIES.................................................................. 6

APPENDIX B: PLANTS RECORDED AT SAMPLE PLOTS ........................................................................................ 8

APPENDIX C: PROJECT AREA PLANT SPECIES LIST.......................................................................................... 13

APPENDIX D: PHOTOGRAPHS........................................................................................................................... 16

APPENDIX E: FIELD DATA FORMS ................................................................................................................... 17

Figures 

FIGURE 1: TES SURVEY MAP ......................................................................................................AS ATTACHEMENT

FIGURE 2: PHLOX SIBIRICA PHOTO......................................................................................................................... 4 

Tables 

TABLE 1: PRELIMINARY LIST OF POTENTIAL RARE PLANTS..................................................................................... 1

i
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project 

Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive (TES) Plant Report 

Key Findings: 

No threatened, endangered, or sensitive plants were located 

within areas likely to be affected by project activities. 

The project, as described, is not expected to adversely 

affect any sensitive plants. 

Study Purpose and Location 

A threatened, endangered, and sensitive (TES) plant survey was conducted within the 

Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric project area. The purpose of the study was to determine if there 

were any individuals or populations of plant species of interest that may be affected by 

project activities. The survey was conducted at Level 5 intensity (Appendix A). 

The project area is located near along Yerrick Creek, a cobble, gravel and sand substrate 

creek which crosses the Alaska Highway at approximately milepost 1339 (see Figure 1 in the 

Yerrick Creek Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination Report for wetlands). Most of the 

project area is undeveloped with an open gravel waterway, islands of mixed hardwood and 

softwood trees, abandoned gravel side channels in various states of revegetation, and heavily 

forested banks. Specific legal and geographic descriptions for the property required for 

Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations are included in the Preliminary Jurisdiction report 

for wetlands in Table 1. 

The main vegetation of Yerrick Creek study area is typically open paper birch – white spruce 

forest. Open balsam poplar–white spruce forest and open white spruce forest inhabit drier 

sites. Open black spruce forest and open dwarf black spruce forest occupy areas with poorly 

drained soils. Closed tall alder or willow scrub occupies the transitional areas between 

forested areas and creek channel. Narrow areas of gravel floodplain areas along Yerrick 

Creek are inhabited by early seral graminoids and forbs. Bluejoint meadows and lowland 

sedge wet meadows occupy wet areas adjacent to ponds. 

Methods 

A five-day site visit was completed between August 21st and 25th, 2008, to identify any 

threatened, endangered, and sensitive plant species in the proposed project area. 

To target rare plants within the Yerrick Creek project area, we composed a list of rare plant 

species likely to be encountered. The target species list was compiled based on the Alaska 

Natural Heritage Program’s (AKNHP) Biotics database. The AKNHP database query did not 

show the occurrence of rare plants within the project area. This area has not been previously 

1
surveyed for rare plants. Rare plants known in the general vicinity of Tanacross B5 and B6 

USGS Quad maps were located from two queries on 7/21/2008. One query was the AKNHP 

Biotics Database query, and the other was from the Arctos Database at the University of 

Alaska-Fairbanks (UAF), which lists all known herbarium records stored at the UAF 

Herbarium (code letters ALA). The compiled list was reviewed and edited by local botanist 

Rob Lipkin (pers. com.) Rarity was determined by the AKNHP’s 2006 Vascular Plant 

Tracking list (Lipkin, 2008). 

Table 1: Preliminary list of potential rare plants (for explanation of Rarity Rank, see Appendix A). 

Scientific Name Common Name Family 

Global 

Rarity 

Rank 

State 

Rarity 

Rank 

Possible Habitat 

Agrostis clavata clavate bentgrass Poaceae G4G5 S1S2 

Open balsam poplarwhite spruce forest. 

Bare soils, wet 

meadows 

Carex heleonastes Hudson Bay sedge Cyperaceae G4G5 S2S3 Peat bogs, swamps 

Castilleja annua Scrophulariaceae G3G4Q S3S4 Waste places 

Ceratophyllum demersum coon's tail Ceratophyllaceae G5 S1 

Ponds, lakes, and 

slow moving streams 

and rivers. Either 

anchored in the mud 

or floating freely near 

the surface. 

Draba paysonii Payson's draba Brassicaceae G5 S1S2 Gravel cutbank in 

glacial cirque 

Lupinus kuschei Yukon lupine Fabaceae G3 S2 roadsides 

Montia bostockii Bostock's minerslettuce Portulacaceae G3 S3 Wet places in the 

mountains 

Phacelia mollis soft phacelia Hydrophyllaceae G2G3 S2S3 

Tall white spruceaspen forest, coarse 

sand, dry sand 

beach, dry alpine 

tundra meadows. 

Poa secunda curly bluegrass Poaceae G5 SNA Meadows, open 

woods 

Taraxacum carneocoloratum fleshy dandelion Asteraceae G3Q S3 

high alpine scree 

slopes, extremely 

rare 

Sampling Design 

The goal was to visit all vegetation types in the study area and identify all plant species 

encountered during field work that was focused on wetland mapping. All species were 

identified in the field or collected for further identification. 

We reviewed aerial photography to identify vegetation types most likely to contain the taxa 

of interest. Habitats of greatest interest included the following: 

2
 Openings in mixed birch – spruce forest, 

 Edges of ponds and meadows, 

 Seeps and small creeks, 

 Gravel river banks along Yerrick Creek. 

Daily work was planned to visit as many different habitat types as possible, including those 

most likely to include rare plants. 

Field Methods 

Teams traveled by foot while conducting the survey. As new vegetation communities were 

encountered, sampling points were established and the following data were collected: 

 Each plot was georeferenced using a Garmin GPS unit. Survey routes were also 

mapped. 

 Representative photos of the vegetation community were taken at each plot. 

 Vegetation type and dominant species by growth form (trees, shrubs, forbs, ferns/ 

non-vascular plants) were recorded at each site, using the vegetation classification 

system by Viereck (1992). 

 Additional data were gathered specific to the location, habitat, landform, notable 

plants, bare ground, or other parameters of interest. 

 Unidentified plants were collected for lab identification and noted on the field form. 

 A complete list of plant species encountered was compiled as the survey progressed. 

Collection and Vouchers 

Collections were made only if the population was large enough to support removal of 

individuals. The following data were recorded with each voucher specimen: date, latitude and 

longitude (Datum: NAD_1983_StatePlane_Alaska_2_FIPS_5002_Feet, in decimal degrees, 

taken from the Garmin GPS unit), associated species, vegetation type, substrate, notes on 

characteristics that may not preserve well (e.g., flower color), associated photo number, and 

other ecological observations. Each voucher specimen was referenced to a specific 

geographic locality. 

Results and Discussion 

The HDR project botanist surveyed most of the major vegetation types, and covered much of 

the geographic extent of the Yerrick Creek project area. The majority of collection locations 

were concentrated on gravel river bars and shrub areas adjacent to the Yerrick Creek. 

More than 100 vouchers were collected. Specimens were given provisional names in the field 

and later sorted, examined and identified by the HDR botanist. Specimens of notable taxa 

will be sent to the UAF Herbarium (ALA) for review by the museum staff. Most of these 

species are widespread in interior Alaska. No non-native species were observed in the 

Yerrick Creek study area. 

3
In total, 145 species from 40 families were recorded at the area. The complete list of species 

encountered in Yerrick Creek study area is found in Appendix C. 

Two lakes were visited. Aquatic plants were observed and recorded from the shore. The 

study area was not surveyed for aquatic plants specifically. 

Notable Plants 

Four notable plants were found in the project area. The AKNHP tracks populations of plants 

of interest. Notable plants are not considered rare, sensitive, or endangered but are considered 

to be of ecological interest by the AKNHP. 

Phlox sibirica (Siberian phlox) was not previously reported from the area. The closest 

records of this plant are approximately (UAF 2008): 

1. 30 miles NW of Yerrick Creek in Fort Greely Military Reservation in 2004 (63.78°, -

145.79°) 

2. 45 miles SE of Yerrick Creek at Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve 

(62.20266°, -142.123273° ) 

Figure 2: Phlox sibirica, Siberian phlox. 

Other notable plants, for which there are no nearby records, include: 

1. Botrychium lunaria (common moonwort) 

2. Platanthera obtusata (blunt-leaved orchid) 

3. Astragalus robbinsii ssp. harringtonii (Harold’s milkvetch) 

4
Conclusion 

No globally or state ranked Rare or Sensitive species were encountered or identified during 

the survey. 

No Endangered species were encountered or identified during the survey. The only plant 

federally listed or proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Alaska is Polystichum 

aleuticum C. Christensen, which is endangered. It is only known from Adak Island and is not 

expected to occur in the project area. 

Most plant species observed in the Yerrick Creek project area are considered common and 

widespread in interior Alaska. 

This TES plant survey is significant as a first floristic study in Yerrick Creek area. 

Determination of TES Species Made By 

Irina Lapina 

Vegetation Ecologist 

HDR Alaska, Inc. 

Date: February 2008 

Attachments 

Figure 1: TES Survey Map 

References 

Alaska Natural Heritage Program (AKNHP). 2008. Botany Databases. 

http://aknhp.uaa.alaska.edu/botany/Botany_Home.htm. 

Cody, W.J. 1996. Flora of the Yukon Territory. NRC Research Press, Canada. 668 p. 

Lipkin, R. 2008. Alaska Natural Heritage Program Rare Vascular Plant Tracking List. April. Alaska Natural 

Heritage Program, Anchorage, AK. 

http://aknhp.uaa.alaska.edu/botany/pdfs/Rare%20PLant%20List%202008.pdf

Hultén, E. 1968. Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA. 

University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF). 2006. Arctos Database. 

http://arctos.database.museum/SpecimenResults.cfm. 

Viereck, L.A., C.T. Dyrness, A.R. Batten, & K.J. Wenzlick. 1992. The Alaska vegetation classification. Gen. 

Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-286. Portland. OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific 

Northwest Research Station. 278 p. 

5
Appendices 

Appendix A: Survey Intensity and Rarity Rank for Species 

Survey intensity level for plants: 

LEVEL 1 = "FIELD CHECK" 

The surveyor gives the area a quick "once-over" but does not walk completely through the 

project area. The entire project area has not been examined. 

LEVEL 2 = "CURSORY" 

The surveyor gives the area a "once-over" by walking through the project area. The entire 

project area has not been examined. 

LEVEL 3 = "LIMITED FOCUS" 

The surveyor closely examines one or more habitat-specific locations within the project area, 

but does not look at the rest of the area. 

LEVEL 4 = "GENERAL" 

The surveyor gives the area a closer look by walking through the project area and walking 

around the perimeter of the area or by walking more than once through the area. Most of the 

project area is examined. 

LEVEL 5 = "INTUITIVE CONTROLLED" 

The surveyor has closer look by conducting a complete examination of specific areas of the 

project after walking through the project area and perimeter or by walking more than once 

through the area. 

LEVEL 6 = "COMPLETE" 

The surveyor has walked throughout the survey area until nearly all of the area has been 

examined. 

Rarity Rank for Species: 

The rarity rank is a value that best characterizes the relative rarity or endangerment of a 

native taxon within the specified geographic boundaries (i.e., range-wide for global, or 

within-state or province for subnational). 

In general, NatureServe Central Science staff assign global, U.S., and Canadian national 

Element ranks with guidance from local Heritage Programs/Conservation Data Centres, 

especially for endemic Elements, and from experts on particular taxonomic groups. Local 

installations assign subnational ranks for Elements in their respective jurisdictions. 

Only the following rank components should be entered in this Rank field: 

The appropriate geopolitical-level prefixes currently in use are: 

G = global 

S = subnational 

Allowable values are: 

1 = critically imperiled 

2 = imperiled 

3 = vulnerable 

6
4 = apparently secure 

5 = secure 

H = possibly extinct 

X = presumed extinct 

U = unrankable 

NR = not ranked 

NA = not applicable (Element is not a suitable target for conservation) 

If applicable, an indicator of uncertainty about the rank, either in the form of a range rank or 

a “?” qualifier following a numeric basic rank. 

For national and subnational ranks, a suffix that describes the population of a migratory 

species, as follows: 

B = breeding population 

N = nonbreeding population 

M = transient population 

Ranks for one, two, or all three population segments can be entered, separated by commas 

(e.g., S1B,S2N,S3M). 

For global ranks, if applicable, an appended T-rank for an infraspecies. 

For global ranks, if applicable, a qualifier after the basic rank in the form of a Q indicating 

questionable taxonomy, or a C indicating captive or cultivated 

Species Ranks used by the Alaska Natural Heritage Program 

Species Global Rankings 

G1: Critically imperiled globally (5 or fewer occurrences) 

G2: Imperiled globally (6-20 occurrences) 

G3: Rare or Uncommon globally (20-100 occurrences) 

G4: Apparently secure globally, but cause for long-term concern (>100 occurrences) 

G5: Demonstrably secure globally 

G#G# Rank of species uncertain, best described as a range between two ranks 

G#Q Taxonomically questionable 

G#T# Global rank of species and global rank of the described variety or subspecies 

Species State Rankings 

S1: Critically imperiled in state (5 or fewer occurrences) 

S2: Imperiled in state (6-20 occurrences) 

S3: Rare or Uncommon in state (20-100 occurrences) 

S4: Apparently secure in state, but cause for long-term concern (>100 occurrences) 

S5: Demonstrably secure in state 

S#S# Rank of species uncertain, best described as a range between two ranks 

For further information concerning rare plant species for this area, please contact the Alaska 

Natural Heritage Program Botanist (907) 257-2785. 

7
Appendix B: Plants Recorded at Sample Plots 

Scientific Name Plot 

Number Latitude Longitude Elevation (ft) Habitat 

Betula papyrifera 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Picea glauca 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Betula glandulosa 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Ledum groenlandicum 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Vaccinium vitis-idaea 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Vaccinium uliginosum 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Salix scouleriana 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Geocaulon lividum 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Salix alaxensis 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Calamagrostis canadensis 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Lycopodium annotinum 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Polygonum alaskanum 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Cornus canadensis 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Carex sp. 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

feather moss 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

lichens 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Polytrichum sp. 1 63.34361 -143.63515 2479 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Picea mariana 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Ledum groenlandicum 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Salix pulchra 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Betula glandulosa 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Vaccinium vitis-idaea 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Empetrum nigrum 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Andromeda polifolia 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Lycopodium annotinum 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Equisetum arvense 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Equisetum sylvaticum 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Vaccinium oxycoccus 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Geocaulon lividum 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Carex sp. 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

feather mosses 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Sphagnum russowii 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Sphagnum sp. 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

lichen 2 63.34405 -143.63589 2407 dwarf open black spruce forest 

Betula glandulosa 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Ledum groenlandicum 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Vaccinium vitis-idaea 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Empetrum nigrum 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Vaccinium uliginosum 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Salix glauca 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Carex sp. 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Rubus chamaemorus 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Trientalis europaea 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

8
Scientific Name Plot 

Number Latitude Longitude Elevation (ft) Habitat 

Geocaulon lividum 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Petasites frigidus x 

hyperboreoides 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Vaccinium oxycoccus 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Polytrichum sp. 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Sphagnum sp. 3 63.34571 -143.63655 2378 open black spruce forest 

Agrostis sp. 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Arabis lyrata 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Artemisia tilesii 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Calamagrostis inexpansa 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Epilobium latifolium 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Festuca rubra 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Poa alpina 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Poa arctica 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Poa arctica ssp. lanata 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Poa palustris 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Poa pratensis 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Salix alaxensis 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Trisetum spicatum 4 63.34128 -143.63066 2285 active channel, partially vegetated 

Picea glauca - sapling 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub 

Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub 

Salix alaxensis 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub 

Populus balsamifera - sapling 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub 

Dryopteris fragrans 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub 

Calamagrostis canadensis 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub 

Artemisia tilesii 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub 

Poa glauca 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub 

Silene menziesii ssp. williamsii 5 63.34141 -143.63107 2288 closed tall alder scrub 

Populus balsamifera 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Picea glauca 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Salix alaxensis 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Ribes triste 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Rosa acicularis 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Spiraea beauverdiana 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Calamagrostis canadensis 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Artemisia tilesii 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Stellaria sp. - no flowers 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Boschniakia rossica 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Pyrola sp. 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Poa glauca 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Aster sibiricus 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Angelica lucida 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Aconitum delphinifolium 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Geocaulon lividum 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Mertensia paniculata 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Taraxacum sp. 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

Anemone richardsonii 6 63.34259 -143.63077 2287 open balsam poplar-white spruce forest 

9
Scientific Name Plot 

Number Latitude Longitude Elevation (ft) Habitat 

Betula papyrifera 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Picea glauca 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Populus balsamifera 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Geocaulon lividum 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Rosa acicularis 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Salix barclayi 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Ribes triste 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Rubus idaeus 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Ledum groenlandicum 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Calamagrostis canadensis 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Equisetum pratense 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Cornus canadensis 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Vaccinium vitis-idaea 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Epilobium angustifolium 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Linnaea borealis 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Polygonum alaskanum 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Geocaulon lividum 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Pyrola secunda 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Aconitum delphiniifolium 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Equisetum sp. 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Hylocomium splendens 7 63.34992 -143.63422 2274 open paper birch-white spruce forest 

Salix barclayi 8 63.35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water 

Chamaedaphne calyculata 8 63.35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water 

Carex aquatilis 8 63.35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water 

Eriophorum sp. 8 63.35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water 

Calamagrostis canadensis 8 63.35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water 

Potentilla palustris 8 63.35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water 

Equisetum fluviatile 8 63.35283 -143.63574 2257 fresh sedge marsh and open water 

Populus tremuloides 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow 

Iris setosa 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow 

Calamagrostis canadensis 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow 

Carex lyngbyei 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow 

Carex spp. 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow 

Callitriche verna 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow 

Alopecurus aequalis 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow 

Juncus filiformis 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow 

Rorippa palustris 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow 

Ranunculus filiformis 9 63.35394 -143.63544 2289 bluejoint herb meadow 

Agropyron sp. 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Artemisia tilesii 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Aster sibiricus 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Boschniakia rossica 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

10
Scientific Name Plot 

Number Latitude Longitude Elevation (ft) Habitat 

Calamagrostis canadensis 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Calamagrostis purpurascens 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Dryopteris fragrans 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Epilobium angustifolium 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Geocaulon lividum 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Hylocomium splendens 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Leymus mollis 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Linnaea borealis 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Lupinus nootkatensis 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Mertensia paniculata 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Moehringia lateriflora 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Picea glauca 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Goodyera repens 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Lupinus nootkatensis 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Poa glauca 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Poa pratensis 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Ribes triste 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Rosa acicularis 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Saxifraga cespitosa 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Shepherdia canadensis 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Silene menziesii ssp. williamsii 14 63.37882 -143.60716 1806 open black spruce forest, with bare 

ground channel - sand 

Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Vaccinium uliginosum 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Betula glandulosa 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Empetrum nigrum 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Ledum groenlandicum 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Chamaedaphne calyculata 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Carex aquatilis 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Andromeda polifolia 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Lycopodium annotinum 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Carex sp. - peat forming 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Rubus chamaemorus 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

11
Scientific Name Plot 

Number Latitude Longitude Elevation (ft) Habitat 

Geocaulon lividum 15 63.36281 -143.63779 2190 subarctic lowland sedge wet meadow 

Carex aquatilis 16 63.36144 -143.63693 2229 pond 

Nuphar lutea 16 63.36144 -143.63693 2229 pond 

Carex lyngbyei 16 63.36144 -143.63693 2229 pond 

Iris setosa 16 63.36144 -143.63693 2229 pond 

Potamogeton zosteriformis 16 63.36144 -143.63693 2229 pond 

Populus balsamifera 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Picea glauca 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Rubus idaeus 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Populus balsamifera - sapling 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Shepherdia canadensis 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Pyrola secunda 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Calamagrostis canadensis 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Calamagrostis purpurascens 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Artemisia tilesii 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Silene menziesii ssp. williamsii 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Aconitum delphiniifolium 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Poa glauca 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Mertensia paniculata 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Angelica lucida 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Agropyron subsecundum 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

lichen 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

feather moss 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Hylocomium splendens 18 63.37563 -143.61504 1843 open alder tall shrub 

Picea glauca 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Rosa acicularis 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Geocaulon lividum 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Vaccinium vitis-idaea 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Shepherdia canadensis 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Alnus viridis ssp. crispa 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Equisetum pratense 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Mertensia paniculata 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Astragalus americanus 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Calamagrostis canadensis 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Boschniakia rossica 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Coptis trifolia 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Goodyera repens 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Erigeron acris 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Epilobium angustifolium 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Aster sibiricus 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Pyrola secunda 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Hylocomium splendens 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

Silene menziesii ssp. williamzii 19 63.37489 -143.61653 1894 open white spruce forest 

12
Appendix C: Project Area Plant Species List 

# Scientific Name Family 

1 Achillea millefolium Asteraceae 

2 Aconitum delphiniifolium Ranunculaceae 

3 Agropyron sp. Poaceae 

4 Agropyron subsecundum Poaceae 

5 Agrostis scabra Poaceae 

6 Agrostis sp. Poaceae 

7 Alnus viridis ssp. crispa Betulaceae 

8 Alopecurus aequalis Poaceae 

9 Andromeda polifolia Ericaceae 

10 Anemone parviflora Ranunculaceae 

11 Anemone richardsonii Ranunculaceae 

12 Angelica lucida Apiaceae 

13 Antennaria sp. Asteraceae 

14 Arabis lyrata Brassicaceae 

15 Arctagrostis latifolia Poaceae 

16 Arctostaphylos uva-ursi Ericaceae 

17 Artemisia alaskana Asteraceae 

18 Artemisia arctica Asteraceae 

19 Artemisia tilesii Asteraceae 

20 Aster sibiricus Asteraceae 

21 Astragalus alpinus Fabaceae 

22 Astragalus americanus Fabaceae 

23 Astragalus robbinsii ssp. harringtonii Fabaceae 

24 Betula glandulosa Betulaceae 

25 Betula papyrifera Betulaceae 

26 Boschniakia rossica Orobanchaceae 

27 Botrychium lunaria Ophioglossaceae 

28 Calamagrostis canadensis Poaceae 

29 Calamagrostis inexpansa Poaceae 

30 Calamagrostis lapponica Poaceae 

31 Calamagrostis purpurascens Poaceae 

32 Calamagrostis purpurascens ssp. purpurascens Poaceae 

33 Callitriche verna Callitrichaceae 

34 Campanula lasiocarpa Campanulaceae 

35 Carex aquatilis Cyperaceae 

36 Carex brunnescens Cyperaceae 

37 Carex canescens Cyperaceae 

38 Carex loliacea Cyperaceae 

39 Carex magellanica Cyperaceae 

40 Carex saxatilis Cyperaceae 

41 Carex scirpoidea Cyperaceae 

42 Carex tenuiflora Cyperaceae 

43 Carex utriculata Cyperaceae 

44 Cerastium sp. Caryophyllaceae 

45 Chamaedaphne calyculata Ericaceae 

46 Coptis trifolia Ranunculaceae 

47 Cornus canadensis Cornaceae 

48 Crepis elegans Asteraceae 

13
# Scientific Name Family 

49 Dasiphora fruticosa ssp. floribunda Rosaceae 

50 Dryopteris fragrans Dryopteridaceae 

51 Empetrum nigrum Ericaceae 

52 Epilobium angustifolium Onagraceae 

53 Epilobium latifolium Onagraceae 

54 Equisetum arvense Equisetaceae 

55 Equisetum fluviatile Equisetaceae 

56 Equisetum pratense Equisetaceae 

57 Equisetum scirpoides Equisetaceae 

58 Equisetum sylvaticum Equisetaceae 

59 Erigeron acris Asteraceae 

60 Erigeron acris ssp. polatus Asteraceae 

61 Eriophorum brachyantherum Cyperaceae 

62 Eriophorum vaginatum Cyperaceae 

63 Festuca brachyanterum Poaceae 

64 Festuca brachyphylla Poaceae 

65 Festuca rubra Poaceae 

66 Geocaulon lividum Santalaceae 

67 Goodyera repens Orchidaceae 

68 Hedysarum mackenzii Fabaceae 

69 Hierochloe alpina Poaceae 

70 Hierochloe odorata Poaceae 

71 Iris setosa Iridaceae 

72 Juncus castaneus Juncaceae 

73 Juncus filiformis Juncaceae 

74 Ledum groenlandicum Ericaceae 

75 Leymus innovatus Poaceae 

76 Linnaea borealis Caprifoliaceae 

77 Lupinus arctica Fabaceae 

78 Lupinus nootkatensis Fabaceae 

79 Luzula parviflora Juncaceae 

80 Lycopodium annotinum Lycopodiaceae 

81 Lycopodium clavatum Lycopodiaceae 

82 Lycopodium complanatum Lycopodiaceae 

83 Mertensia paniculata Boraginaceae 

84 Mertensia paniculata ssp. paniculata Boraginaceae 

85 Minuartia stricta Caryophyllaceae 

86 Moehringia lateriflora Caryophyllaceae 

87 Moneses uniflora Pyrolaceae 

88 Nuphar lutea Nymphaeaceae 

89 Oxyria digyna Polygonaceae 

90 Oxytropis campestris Fabaceae 

91 Oxytropis campestris ssp. gracilis Fabaceae 

92 Oxytropis nigrescens Fabaceae 

93 Pedicularis labradorica Scrophulariaceae 

94 Petasites frigidus Asteraceae 

95 Petasites frigidus x hyperboreoides Asteraceae 

96 Petasites hyperboreus Asteraceae 

97 Phlox sibirica Polemoniaceae 

14
# Scientific Name Family 

98 Picea glauca Pinaceae 

99 Picea mariana Pinaceae 

100 Platanthera obtusata Orchidaceae 

101 Poa alpina Poaceae 

102 Poa arctica ssp. lanata Poaceae 

103 Poa glauca Poaceae 

104 Poa palustris Poaceae 

105 Poa pratensis Poaceae 

106 Polemonium acutiflorum Polemoniaceae 

107 Polygonum alaskanum Polygonaceae 

108 Polygonum bistorta Polygonaceae 

109 Populus balsamifera Salicaceae 

110 Populus tremuloides Salicaceae 

111 Potamogeton zosteriformis Potamogetonaceae 

112 Potentilla palustris Rosaceae 

113 Pyrola asarifolia Pyrolaceae 

114 Pyrola secunda Pyrolaceae 

115 Ranunculus filiformis Ranunculaceae 

116 Ranunculus lapponicus Ranunculaceae 

117 Ribes triste Grossulariaceae 

118 Rorippa palustris Brassicaceae 

119 Rosa acicularis Rosaceae 

120 Rubus chamaemorus Rosaceae 

121 Rubus idaeus Rosaceae 

122 Salix alaxensis Salicaceae 

123 Salix alaxensis var. alaxensis Salicaceae 

124 Salix arbusculoides Salicaceae 

125 Salix barclayi Salicaceae 

126 Salix bebbiana Salicaceae 

127 Salix glauca Salicaceae 

128 Salix pulchra Salicaceae 

129 Salix scouleriana Salicaceae 

130 Saxifraga cespitosa Saxifragaceae 

131 Saxifraga tricuspidata Saxifragaceae 

132 Sedum rosea Crassulaceae 

133 Shepherdia canadensis Eleagnaceae 

134 Silene menziesii ssp. williamsii Caryophyllaceae 

135 Spiraea beauverdiana Rosaceae 

136 Stellaria crassifolia Caryophyllaceae 

137 Taraxacum sp. Asteraceae 

138 Trientalis europaea Primulaceae 

139 Trisetum spicatum Poaceae 

140 Trisetum spicatum ssp. spicatum Poaceae 

141 Vaccinium oxycoccus Ericaceae 

142 Vaccinium uliginosum Ericaceae 

143 Vaccinium vitis-idaea Ericaceae 

144 Viburnum edule Caprifoliaceae 

15
Appendix D: Photographs 

Included as a Word file: 

AppendixD_plantphotos_yerrick.doc

16
17

Appendix E: Field Data Forms 

Included as an Adobe file: 

AppendixE_plantfieldforms_yerrick.pdf 
9.3.3. – LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: 

HYDROLOGY BASELINE STUDY 
LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGY BASELINE STUDY 

YERRICK CREEK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT, TOK, ALASKA 

Prepared for 

GRAYSTAR PACIFIC SEAFOOD, LTD. 

P.O Box 100506 

Anchorage, AK 99510 

and 

ALASKA POWER AND TELEPHONE CO. 

P.O. Box 3222 

Port Townsend, WA 98368 

Prepared by 

329 2nd Street 

Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 

3305 Arctic Blvd., Suite 102 

Anchorage, Alaska 99503 

October 2008 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page ii 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Page 

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 

2.0 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MONITORING ..............................................2 

 2.1 BACKGROUND .....................................................................................................2 

 2.2 SAMPLE LOCATIONS ........................................................................................13 

 2.3 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS ...................................................................14 

 2.4 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................14 

3.0 RESULTS ..........................................................................................................................15 

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................19 

5.0 CLOSURE .........................................................................................................................19 

6.0 LITERATURE CITED ......................................................................................................19 

TABLES 

Table 2.1 Yerrick Creek USGS water quality measurements ..................................................2 

Table 2.2 Yerrick Creek USGS water quality sampling – alkalinity and hardness .................3 

Table 2.3 Yerrick Creek USGS water quality sampling – metals, filtered ..............................3 

Table 2.4 Yerrick Creek USGS water quality sampling – nutrients, ions, residuals ...............4 

Table 2.5 Summary of water quality data from USGS 15476000 on the Tanana River .........7 

Table 2.6 Model input parameters ...........................................................................................9 

Table 2.7 Peak flows and recurrence intervals for Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids 

 Creek No. 1 ..........................................................................................................9 

Table 2.8 Surface water quality parameters ...........................................................................14 

Table 3.1 Field measurements ...............................................................................................17 

Table 3.2 Laboratory analyses ...............................................................................................18

FIGURES 

Figure 1.1 Sample locations on Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 .................1 

Figure 2.1 Tanana River mean daily discharge, 1953 through 1990 ........................................5 

Figure 2.2 Tanana River peak flow ...........................................................................................6 

Figure 2.3 Tanana River peak flow distribution ........................................................................6 

Figure 2.4 Drainage areas for proposed impoundment sites .....................................................8 

Figure 2.5 Surficial geologic map of the Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project area ..............11 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page iii 

Figure 2.6 Key to geologic map ..............................................................................................12

Figure 2.7 Bedrock and surficial geology ...............................................................................13 

Figure 3.1 Sample site locations..............................................................................................16 

APPENDICES 

Appendix A Sample Site Maps and Site Photos 

Appendix B Analysis Methods and Laboratory Data Report 

Appendix C Data Sheets and Field Notebook
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 1 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

The hydroelectric project proposed by Alaska Power and Telephone (AP&T) will include an 

impoundment in Yerrick Creek just below the confluence of two tributaries with Yerrick Creek 

(Yerrick Creek Diversion Sample Site, Figure 1.1). A penstock will be constructed to carry 

water to a powerhouse to be constructed near the old pipeline corridor (Yerrick Creek Discharge 

Sample Site). A separate diversion and powerhouse system may be constructed on Cathedral 

Rapids Creek No. 1 as well. The impoundment would be in the approximate location of 

Cathedral Rapids No. 1 Diversion Sample Site (Figure 1.1). Power generated from the 

hydroelectric project would power Tok and surrounding communities during summer months 

and possibly supply some portion of the power supply for a larger portion of the year. 

Figure 1.1. Sample locations on Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 (Google 

Earth, 2008). 

The purpose of the hydrology and water quality studies presented herein is to establish a 

preliminary baseline necessary for the permitting process. Additional baseline studies may be 

required (see Section 4.0 for recommended further action). Additional flow studies are being 

N Alaska Highway

Old pipeline corridor

1 Mile
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 2 

conducted by AP&T to determine the potential power output and feasibility of the hydroelectric 

project. 

2.0 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY MONITORING 

2.1 BACKGROUND 

Hydroelectric project background

The Yerrick Creek hydroelectric project, as described by AP&T is to include: (1) a small 

diversion structure with intake; (2) a 48-inch diameter, 15,000-foot long penstock; (3) a 

powerhouse with the capacity of 2 to 3 MW; (4) a 0.5-mile long buried and 22-mile overhead 

transmission line to connect an existing power grid; and (5) appurtenant facilities. 

Hydrology background from nearby USGS stations

Water quality data were collected from Yerrick Creek at USGS station 632257143353500, which 

is located in Yerrick Creek at the highway crossing (63°22’57” N; 143°35’35” W; NAD27). 

Data were collected between 1949 and 1956. No flow data are available, but a total of 28 

physical and chemical parameters were recorded, most of which are summarized in tables below 

(Table 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4; USGS, 2008). 

Table 2.1. Yerrick Creek USGS water quality measurements (USGS, 2008). 

Temperature Specific 

Conductance

pH Carbon 

Dioxide

Color 

 °C μS/cm pH units mg/L PtCo units, filtered 

7/21/1949 7 95 6.6 14 -- 

6/22/1951 -- 164 7 8.2 10 

6/4/1952 -- 109 6.8 9.6 25 

2/17/1953 0 254 7.5 4.5 5 

5/13/1953 0 130 7.1 5.6 25 

5/18/1955 -- 107 7 6.1 50 

9/20/1955 -- 161 7.8 1.5 5 

5/11/1956 -- 105 7 6.4 -- 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 3 

Table 2.2. Yerrick Creek USGS water quality sampling – alkalinity and hardness (USGS, 2008). 

Acid neutralizing 

capacity 

bicarbonate hardness non-carbonate 

hardness 

 mg/L as CaCO3 mg/L mg/L as 

CaCO3

mg/L as CaCO3

7/21/1949 29 35 39 10 

6/22/1951 42 51 65 23 

6/4/1952 31 38 50 19 

2/17/1953 72 88 120 49 

5/13/1953 36 44 60 24 

5/18/1955 31 38 46 15 

9/20/1955 50 61 68 18 

5/11/1956 33 40 45 12 

Table 2.3. Yerrick Creek USGS water quality sampling – metals, filtered (USGS, 2008). 

 Calcium Magnesium Sodium Potassium Iron 

 mg/L, 

filtered 

mg/L, 

filtered 

mg/L, 

filtered 

mg/L, 

filtered 

μg/L, 

unfiltered 

7/21/1949 

6/22/1951 21 3.1 20 

6/4/1952 15 3.1 1.8 2.1 70 

2/17/1953 39 5.6 2.8 4.3 10 

5/13/1953 19 3.1 1.2 2.3 40 

5/18/1955 15 2.2 1.2 2.4 170 

9/20/1955 22 3.2 2.3 2.8 0 

5/11/1956 14 2.5 1.6 2 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 4 

Table 2.4. Yerrick Creek USGS water quality sampling – nutrients, ions, and residuals (USGS, 

2008). 

Nitrate Sulfate Chloride Fluoride Silica Residue, sum 

of constituents 

Residue 

 mg/L as 

N, 

filtered 

mg/L, 

filtered 

mg/L, 

filtered 

mg/L, 

filtered 

mg/L 

filtered 

mg/L, filtered tons/acrefoot, 

filtered 

7/21/1949 0.2 15 0.5 4.3 

6/22/1951 0.2 27 0.5 0.2 7.3 88 0.12 

6/4/1952 0.38 20 1 0.1 5.7 69 0.09 

2/17/1953 0.34 58 0.5 0.1 8.4 164 0.22 

5/13/1953 0.25 25 0.5 0.2 3.9 78 0.11 

5/18/1955 0.47 20 0.5 0 4.4 66 0.09 

9/20/1955 0.16 26 0 0 11 98 0.13 

5/11/1956 17 1 58 0.08 

Data are also available from USGS station 15476000 on the Tanana River just downstream of 

the confluence of Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 with the Tanana River. The drainage area sampled 

by this station is 8,550 square miles. Data were collected at this site from 1953 through 1990, 

including discharge, peak stream-flow, and water quality information. The record of daily mean 

discharge is shown in Figure 2.1. Peak flows are shown in Figure 2.2 and the distribution of 

peak flows among the summer months is shown in Figure 2.3 (USGS, 2008). 

Nine of the ten highest daily discharge measurements for USGS 154760000 occurred between 

July 19th and 27th in 1988. Of the 50 highest daily discharge measurements, 27 occurred in July, 

18 occurred in August, and 5 occurred in June, suggesting that summer rains cause the highest 

flows rather than snowmelt and breakup. If, however, the month of July 1988 is removed from 

the record, four of the top ten daily discharges occurred in August and three occurred in each 

June and July. Likewise, excepting July 1988, 29 of the 50 highest daily discharges occurred in 

August, 14 occurred in July, and 7 occurred in June. 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Figure 2.1. Tanana River mean daily discharge, 1953 through 1990 (USGS, 2008). 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 6 

 

Figure 2.2. Tanana River peak flow (USGS, 2008). 

Figure 2.3. Tanana River peak flow distribution (USGS, 2008). 

Water quality data for USGS 15476000 on the Tanana River include 101 parameters. A portion 

of the data is presented below and the remainder is available from the USGS at 

http://alaska.usgs.gov/science/water/index.php. Data collected only once or several times were 

not included in the table below. 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 7 

Table 2.5. Summary of water quality data from USGS 15476000 on the Tanana River (USGS, 

2008). 

Parameter, units Maximum Minimum Count Mean Median

Temperature, °C 16.5 0 105 6.3 6.5 

Color, filtered, PtCo units 60 0 203 10.4 5 

Specific Conductance, μS/cm 448 160 222 233.0 220 

pH 8.4 6.6 212 7.7 7.7 

Carbon Dioxide, mg/L 68 0.7 212 5.4 3.7 

Acid neutralizing capacity, mg/L as CaCO3 203 61 212 98.3 92 

Bicarbonate, mg/L 247 74 212 119.7 112 

Nitrate, mg/L as Nitrogen 0.77 0 206 0.17 0.14 

Phosphate, mg/L 0.16 0 52 0.019 0.01 

Hardness, mg/L as CaCO3 230 72 207 110.4 100 

Non-carbonate Hardness, mg/L as CaCO3 30 0 207 12.2 12 

Calcium, filtered, mg/L 62 20 207 32.8 31 

Magnesium, filtered, mg/L 19 2.9 207 6.97 6.2 

Sodium, filtered, mg/L 11 3.3 208 5.84 5.65 

Potassium, filtered, mg/L 3.1 0.1 208 1.48 1.5 

Chloride, filtered, mg/L 7 0.4 208 3.05 3 

Sulfate, filtered, mg/L 45 11 208 21.2 20 

Fluoride, filtered, mg/L 1.2 0 205 0.148 0.1 

Silica, filtered, mg/L 44 7.2 208 11.8 11 

Residue on evaporation, filtered, mg/L 205 108 28 132.6 128 

Residue, sum of constituents, filtered, mg/L 310 95 207 143.1 136 

Residue, dissolved, tons per day 10500 666 206 4769.2 4680 

Residue, filtered, tons per acre foot 0.42 0.13 207 0.196 0.19 

Orthophosphate, unfiltered, mg/L as 

phosphorous 

0.05 0 52 0.006 0 

Nitrate, filtered, mg/L 3.4 0 206 0.76 0.6 

Manganese, unfiltered, μg/L 100 0 140 1.86 0 

Iron, unfiltered, μg/L 620 0 192 64.9 30 

Suspended sediment, mg/L 3460 15 106 976.9 908 

Suspended sediment, tons/day 326000 81 104 52024 28300 

USGS station 15475997 is located on Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1, but no data are available 

from this station. This station is located on Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 approximately 0.4 

miles above (south of) the highway crossing (63°22’45”N; 143°44’00”W; NAD27) and has a 

drainage area of 8.83 square miles (USGS, 2008). 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 8 

Detectable levels of antimony, arsenic, nitrates/nitrites, barium, chromium, and fluoride have 

been found in public drinking water systems in the Tok basin (ADEC, 2008). The only inorganic 

contaminant exceedance of maximum contaminant levels for drinking water has been for nitrates 

(ADEC, 2008). 

Peak Flow Estimates

Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 are within region 6 as described by USGS 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4188 (Curran et al., 2003). As such, the equations for 

peak stream-flow presented by Curran et al. (2003) include drainage area, area of lakes and 

ponds (storage), and area of forest. Drainage areas are shown in Figure 2.4. Model input 

parameters for each stream are shown in Table 2.6. Peak flows are calculated for the proposed 

diversion points in each drainage. Peak flows for each recurrence interval are presented in Table 

2.7. 

Figure 2.4. Drainage areas for proposed impoundment sites. 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 9 

Table 2.6. Model input parameters 

 Yerrick Creek Cathedral Rapids 

Creek No. 1 

Drainage Area 

(square miles) 30 6 

Area of lakes and ponds 

(percent) 0 0 

Area of forest 

(percent) 0 0 

Table 2.7. Peak flows and recurrence intervals for Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek 

#1. 

Recurrence 

Interval (yr) 

Yerrick Creek Peak 

Streamflow (CF/S) 

Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 

Peak Streamflow (CF/S) 

2 1102 262 

5 1575 402 

10 1916 508 

25 2373 652 

50 2728 767 

100 3093 887 

200 3468 1012 

500 3985 1186 

The model of Curran et al. (2003) was used to estimate peak flows in the upper and lower gage 

sites of Mack (1987, 1988) at Rhoads-Granite Creek, which is approximately 7 miles east of 

Donnelly Dome. Input values were a basin area of 32.2 square miles, zero percent storage (lakes 

and ponds), and 0.5 percent forest for the upper gage site and 81.2 square miles of drainage 

basin, 5.5 percent storage, and 42 percent forest for the gaging site at the road. Drainage area 

and percentage forested were extracted from Mack (1987, 1988) and percentage lakes and ponds 

was selected so as to minimize the difference from Mack’s output (loss to groundwater and 

distributaries are complexities not accounted for in the model of Curran et al. 2003). Output was 

compared to the model output produced by Mack (1987, 1988) and the average absolute value of 

the percentage errors (assuming Mack’s model output is the best estimate of actual) was 

approximately 25 percent for each gaging site. 

The data from Mack (1987, 1988) was not used to refine or calibrate the model of Curran et al. 

(2003) for the Yerrick Creek or Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 because Mack’s output was model 

output based on limited data and a complex watershed. Since region 6, the region for which the 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 10 

model equations were designed, is quite large, more local data for refinement of the model to a 

smaller region would be desirable and the Mack studies may provide some significant 

considerations which may be applicable at Yerrick and Cathedral Rapids Creeks. Some 

conditions from Rhoads-Granite Creek which may be found at Yerrick Creek and Cathedral 

Rapids Creek No. 1 are: (1) significant loss to groundwater due to permeable glacial deposits; (2) 

abandoned channels which may serve as distributaries at high water; and (3) seasonal modeling 

complexity based on snowmelt and frost conditions. 

Local geology

According to Carrara (2004), the map units that occur in the Yerrick Creek drainage include Qac, 

Qco, Ata, Qfa, Qty, Qto, Qrg, and Qls (Figures 2.5, 2.6). Cathedral Rapids Creek #1 drains an 

area that includes map units Qac, Qfc, Qto, Qfa, Qrg, and Qta. These map units include alluvial, 

colluvial, glacial, and periglacial deposits. Biotite gneiss and schist are among the rock types 

found in the surface geology of the area. 

Carrara (2004) notes that areas underlain by the Qac unit are subject to floods and debris flows. 

The Yerrick Creek bridge abutment was damaged by flooding in August 1997 (Carrara, 2004; 

Figure 2.6). With regards to map unit Qto, Carrara (2004) notes that in the Yerrick Creek and 

Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 areas the unit forms hummocky end moraines extending out from 

the base of the Alaska Range. 

Bedrock and surficial geology units mapped by Holmes (1965) within the Yerrick Creek and 

Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 drainages (Figure 2.7) include Qc (colluvium – mixtures of 

rubble, talus, alluvium, and loess), Qag (flood-plain gravelly alluvium), Qt (talus – angular 

boulders), Qdgl (moraine deposits from Donnelly glaciations), Qdm (moraine deposits from 

Delta glaciations), Qg (fan-apron and alluvial-fan deposits – mostly gravel; gravel from local 

sources), pCb (Birch Creek Schist – schist, gneiss, quartzite, and amphibolites), Qdf (glaciofluvial deposits), and Qts (stream-terrace deposits – mostly silt and sand). 

The Birch Creek Schist is the predominant bedrock geologic form in the study area as mapped by 

Holmes (1965). The Precambrian or early Precambrian Birch Creek Schist is a thick group 

extensive in area resulting from one or more periods of high grade regional metamorphism 

(Holmes, 1965). Schist (gray quartz-mica; chloritic; and graphitic), gneiss (gray or light brown 

biotite; gray hornblende; and hornblende-biotite), quartzite (white to light brown or gray or 

greenish gray), and amphibolites (black) are the main rock types in the mapped area (Holmes, 

1965). 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 11 

Figure 2.5. Surficial geologic map of the Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project area (Carrara, 

2004) 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Figure 2.6. Key to geologic map (Figure 2.5).
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 13 

Figure 2.7. Bedrock and surficial geology (Holmes, 1965). 

2.2 SAMPLE LOCATIONS 

The two streams directly impacted by the Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project are Yerrick Creek 

and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1. Yerrick Creek has the larger drainage basin, which includes 

approximately eight tributaries identifiable on the 1:63,360 scale USGS map. Two small streams 

merge to form the headwaters of Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1. Both Cathedral Rapids Creek 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 14 

No. 1 and Yerrick Creek drain to the north into the Tanana River. The proposed diversions, as of 

September 2008, would discharge into Yerrick Creek downstream (north) of the old pipeline 

corridor) and at a separate downstream location on Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1. 

2.3 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS 

The water quality parameters measured are listed in Table 2.8. The physical and chemical 

parameters include alkalinity, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, hardness (calculated), pH, 

settleable solids, total dissolved solids, total suspended solids, temperature, and turbidity. Two 

other general parameters commonly measured are chloride and fluoride. Chloride is necessary 

for performing an ion balance. Fluoride is included because it is required by the ADEC. The 

nutrient parameters include nitrate, phosphate, and sulfate. The remaining parameters in Table 

2.8 are metals and trace elements. Hardness is calculated from measured parameters. Analysis 

of all parameters will be on unfiltered samples, so the results are total, not dissolved 

concentrations 

Table 2.8. Surface water quality parameters. 

Laboratory 

Antimony Chloride Magnesium Sodium Total Dissolved Solids 

Arsenic Chromium Manganese Sulfate Total Suspended Solids 

Barium Copper Mercury Zinc Weak Acid Dissociable 

Beryllium Fluoride Potassium Cyanide 

Cadmium Iron Selenium Total Cyanide 

Calcium Lead Silver 

Field 

Flow pH Conductivity Temperature Turbidity 

Alkalinity Nitrate Color Settleable Solids Dissolved Oxygen 

Orthophosphate Nitrite 

2.4 METHODOLOGY 

Field and laboratory water quality parameters were measured in accordance with the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency manual Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes 

or Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. Open channel flow was 

measured using Model 1205 Price type “mini” current meter. In-situ measurements of 

conductivity, temperature, pH and dissolved oxygen were accomplished with YSI 63 and YSI 95 

meters. Color, turbidity, and alkalinity were measured in the field within 24 hours of sample 

collection using the Hach DR890 Colorimeter, Hach 2100P Turbidimeter, and Hach digital 

titrator. A table showing analytes and methods is included in Appendix B. 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 15 

SGS Environmental Services, Inc. was the analytical laboratory selected for the monitoring 

program. SGS Environmental Services, Inc. is an ADEC Certified Chemistry Lab. Duplicate 

samples were not collected as part of this sampling effort. Laboratory quality assurance and 

quality control measures and results are shown in the laboratory data report in Appendix B. 

3.0 RESULTS 

Measurements and samples were taken at 3 locations. The sample sites, shown in Figure 3.1, are 

located at: 

• The approximate diversion site for Yerrick Creek, which is also the transducer location as 

of September 2008; 

• The approximate diversion site for Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1; and 

• A downstream site near the old pipeline corridor’s intersection with Yerrick Creek, which 

was intended to be at the discharge or re-entry site for water diverted from Yerrick Creek. 

The discharge point will actually be downstream of the sample site. 

The Yerrick Creek diversion site is also the location where AP&T personnel have conducted 

flow studies and are presently recording stage data on a continuous basis with a permanently 

installed pressure transducer. The data collected by AP&T is not included in this report, but 

should be comparable based on location. 

The Yerrick Creek downstream site is also in immediate vicinity of field work conducted by 

Denali-The Alaska Gas Pipeline personnel. Data from their efforts, if made available, should be 

comparable based on location. 

Physical and chemical measurements made in the field are presented in Table 3.1. Laboratory 

analysis results are shown in Table 3.2. Hardness (Table 3.2) was calculated from the calcium 

and magnesium concentrations. Iron, zinc, and manganese could have been included, but were 

all either not detected, or detected at levels below the practical quantitation limit and are 

therefore minor contributors to total hardness. 

Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 are clear, oligotrophic (low nutrient levels), 

and well oxygenated. The moderately high pH for surface water suggests contact with some 

kind of carbonate rock within the drainage. 

Laboratory results confirm that Yerrick Creek and Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 have minimal 

levels of most dissolved substances. 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 16 

Laboratory quality assurance and quality control information were reviewed. No problems were 

identified that would affect data quality. For additional details, see the case narrative on page 2 

of the laboratory data report in Appendix B. 

Figure 3.1. Sample site locations. 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 17 

Table 3.1. Field measurements. 

Parameter Yerrick Creek 

Diversion 

Yerrick Creek 

Downstream Site 

Cathedral Rapids 

Creek Diversion 

Latitude 63° 20.639’ N 63° 22.442’ 63° 21.090’ N 

Longitude 143° 37.715’ W 143° 36.769 143° 43.151’ W 

Elevation (feet) 2272 1856 2455 

Width (feet) 44 51.5 18.5 

Discharge (CF/S) 110 99 27 

Temperature (°C) 4.5 6.2 5.0 

pH 8.01 8.14 8.18 

Specific Conductance (μS) 260 277 384 

Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 16.02 18.511 12.39 

Settleable Solids (mL/L) < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 

Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3) 57.6 64.0 80.4 

Color (PtCo units) 4 6 0 

Turbidity (NTU) 0.91 0.89 0.70 

Nitrate-N (mg/L) 0.01 0.03 0.01 

Nitrite-N (mg/L) 0.002 0.002 0.002 

Orthophosphate (mg/L) 0.18 0.19 0.21 

1

Whitewater – supersaturated. 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 18 

Table 3.2. Laboratory analyses. 

Parameter Units Yerrick Creek 

Diversion 

Yerrick Creek 

Downstream Site 

Cathedral Rapids 

Creek Diversion 

Sample ID AP&T 01 AP&T 03 AP&T 02 

Sample Date/Time 9/03/08 12:27 9/03/08 17:50 9/03/08 15:05 

Antimony ug/L 0.621 J 0.454 J < 0.310 

Arsenic ug/L < 1.50 < 1.50 < 1.50 

Barium ug/L 32.2 31.8 44.1 

Beryllium ug/L < 0.500 < 0.500 < 0.500 

Cadmium ug/L < 0.600 < 0.600 < 0.600 

Calcium ug/L 43500 42700 57600 

Chromium ug/L < 1.20 < 1.20 < 1.20 

Copper ug/L < 1.80 < 1.80 < 1.80 

Iron ug/L < 310 < 310 < 310 

Lead ug/L < 0.310 < 0.310 < 0.310 

Magnesium ug/L 7880 7790 12900 

Manganese ug/L 0.859 J 0.907 J 1.08 J 

Mercury ug/L < 0.0620 < 0.0620 < 0.0620 

Potassium ug/L 3290 3330 3660 

Selenium ug/L < 0.620 < 0.620 < 0.620 

Silver ug/L < 0.620 < 0.620 < 0.620 

Sodium ug/L 2400 2460 3250 

Zinc ug/L < 7.80 < 7.80 < 7.80 

Chloride mg/L 0.0880 J < 0.0310 0.0800 J 

Fluoride mg/L 0.0750 J 0.0870 J 0.049 J 

Sulfate mg/L 81.8 81.0 119 

Total Cyanide mg/L 0.0022 J < 0.0015 0.0017 J 

Weak Acid Dissociable Cyanide mg/L < 0.0015 < 0.0015 < 0.0015 

Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 183 176 253 

Total Suspended Solids mg/L 1.00 0.400 J 0.700 

Hardness (calc.: Ca, Mg) mg/L* 141 139 197 

*as CaCO3

J = analyte was detected below the practical quantitation limit 

Analytes that were not detected are reported as < the minimum detection limit. 
Alaska Power and Telephone, 1311-01 October 7, 2008 

LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD REPORT: HYDROLOGIC BASELINE STUDY Page 19 

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 

As there are no chemical abnormalities that would warrant further investigation of the streams to 

be impacted by the hydroelectric project and flow data has been collected regularly by AP&T 

personnel, no additional hydrology field work should be required before permitting or 

construction. 

5.0 CLOSURE 

TPECI holds all information acquired during this investigation in the strictest confidence with 

AP&T. We will not release any information to any party other than Graystar Pacific Seafoods 

unless AP&T has notified us of their approval to do so. 

6.0 LITERATURE CITED 

Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC). 2008. Basin Fact Sheet for Tok. 

Accessed online at http://www.dec.state.ak.us/eh/docs/dw/DWP/Tok.pdf on 7-Oct-2008. 

Carrara, P.E. 2004. Surficial Geologic Map of the Tanacross B-6 Quadrangle, East-Central 

Alaska. 

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

peak streamflows for ungaged sites and streams in Alaska and conterminous basins in 

Canada. USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4188. 

Holmes, G.W. 1965. Geologic reconnaissance along the Alaska Highway Delta River to Tok 

Junction, Alaska. Geological Survey Bulletin 1181-H. 

Mack, S.F. 1987. Peak flows at the Alaska Highway from the Rhoads-Granite Creek drainages, 

Mt. Hayes Quadrangle, Alaska. Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys. 

Public-data File 87-5. 

Mack, S.F. 1988. Peak flows from Rhoads-Granite Creek (1987), Mt. Hayes Quadrangle, 

Alaska. Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys. Public-data File 88-

10. 

United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2008. National Water Information System. Accessed 

at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis on 30-July-2008. Sites: 632257143353500, 15476000, 

and 15475997. 
APPENDIX A 

SAMPLE SITE MAPS 

SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 
Yerrick Creek Map 
Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 Map 
Yerrick Creek Diversion Site Map 
Yerrick Creek Diversion Site Photos 

Upper Left: aerial view 

Upper Right: site view 

Middle Left: upstream view 

Middle Right: downstream view 

Lower Left: sediment view 
Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 Diversion Site Map 
Cathedral Rapids Creek No. 1 Site Photos 

Upper Left: aerial view 

Upper Right: site view 

Middle Left: upstream view 

Middle Right: downstream view 

Lower Left: sediment view 
Yerrick Creek Downstream Site Map 
Yerrick Creek Downstream Site Photos 

Upper Left: aerial view 

Upper Right: site view 

Middle Left: upstream view 

Middle Right: downstream view 

Lower Left: sediment view 
APPENDIX B 

ANALYSIS METHODS 

LABORATORY DATA REPORT (SGS WO# 1084964) 
WATER ANALYSIS METHODS 

Method/ 

Instrument 

Parameter Matrix Container Preservative Hold 

Time 

Analysis 

Location 

Metals, Total 

SM 6020 

Antimony 

Arsenic 

Barium 

Beryllium 

Cadmium 

Calcium 

Chromium 

Copper 

Iron 

Lead 

Magnesium 

Manganese 

Potassium 

Selenium 

Silver 

Sodium 

Zinc 

Water 250 or 500 

mL HDPE 

HNO3; 4°C 180 days Laboratory 

EPA 7470 Mercury Water 250 or 500 

mL HDPE 

HNO3; 4°C 28 days Laboratory 

EPA 300.0 Chloride Water 60 mL 

Nalgene 

4°C 28 days Laboratory 

EPA 300.0 Fluoride Water 60 mL 

Nalgene 

4°C 28 days Laboratory 

Hach Method 8192 Nitrate Water N/A N/A ASAP Field 

Hach Method 8048 

equivalent to 

EPA Method 365.2 

and Standard 

Method 4500-PE 

Orthophosphate Water N/A N/A ASAP Field 

EPA 300.0 Sulfate Water 60 mL 

Nalgene 

4°C 28 days Laboratory 

SM 4500CN-C,E Cyanide Water 60 or 250 mL 

Nalgene 

NaOH; 4°C 14 days Laboratory 

SM 4500CN-I Weak Acid 

Dissociable 

Cyanide 

Water 60 or 250 mL 

Nalgene 

NaOH; 4°C 14 days Laboratory 

SM 2540C Total Dissolved 

Solids 

Water 250 or 500 

mL HDPE 

4°C 7 days Laboratory 

SM 2540D Total Suspended 

Solids 

Water 1 L HDPE 4°C 7 days Laboratory 

Model 1205 Price 

Type “Mini” 

Current Meter 

Flow Water In-Situ N/A N/A In-Situ 

YSI 63 pH Water In-Situ N/A N/A In-Situ 
YSI 63 Conductivity Water In-Situ N/A N/A In-Situ 

YSI 63 Temperature Water In-Situ N/A N/A In-Situ 

Hach 8203 Alkalinity Water N/A N/A ASAP Field 

Hach DR 890 

Colorimeter 

Method 8025 

Color Water N/A N/A ASAP Field 

YSI 95 Dissolved 

Oxygen 

Water In-Situ N/A N/A In-Situ 

Imhoff Cone Settleable Solids Water N/A N/A ASAP Field 

Hach 2100P 

Turbidimeter 

EPA Method 180.1 

Turbidity Water N/A N/A ASAP Field 
	




	


			


	
	


	

	

	
	







	

	





	

	

	





	



 	!	
		!	


		


		

"

	
	

 


#	
$	
		 	
	
	%
	$
	
&







 !"#$"

Page 1 of 50

Alaska Division Technical Director 

Stephen C. Ede

2008.10.01

11:25:31 -08'00'
	
 


	
 


 	   

 	  ! 




 

	! 


"
# 
$"
"
"
 $%(

)*+)

),- ./$% $!%-	# %2$ 2 %"$

(	#%""
$3#


 % %2$  ##4(

),-	!%-	# %2$ 2 %"$

(	#%""
$3#
 %

 %2$  ##4(

 6	

)*+)

7(- 82
%-	# 9 2 %"4$

(:## %#9
3#4(

 6	

,++*

),-	!%-	# %2$ 2 %"$

(	#%""
$3#
 %

 %2$  ##4(

9 6	;)*+)9<

,+=7

),- ./$% $!%-	# %2$ 2 %"$

(	#%""
$3#


 % %2$  ##4(

9 6	;)*+)9<

,=*

7(- 82
%-	# %%2$ 2 %"4$

(:#
 2 
3#4(

99 6	;)*+)99<

,),

+- >
$?
 "
@@ 8@%>A 3
2 %"$$$$

( -%A  /3  2$$ "2(

> :)-)-B.;)=7><

,)+

+- >
$?
 "
@ >@%83
2 %"$$$$

( -%A  /3  2$$ "2(

> :)-)-B.;)=7><

 B ?
 
?$ 
$(  /? .  
 
?$#
A / **,

   ;*=< ,+(7)7" ;*=< ,+(,7333(2 ( A ($

  >  
"B B 
2;$CC B CC
%2
?$<

Page 2 of 50
	











	
	














 






!







!







"#
$

%&








"#
%

'()(
*

+
!	,))-./

	
		

&").-#0112-((1+").-#0112-((3

4




:



5




6%
76

! 

6

!




6*8*
5


 *8*9
%
 
*%


 	: %
(.. : %	

	))1/3

  
").-#1;(('0'").-#1;/1'./ 6
 

  5*8*8 6

Page 3 of 50

Alaska Division Technical Director 

Stephen C. Ede

2008.10.01

11:25:49 -08'00'
	









	






	


	









	












 


	

!


"








#$








" 

%






&

'






()*+,-.
#/0$
&,--.
#$
	
(--)*+
#1$

/
	
(+----+

2'
#33




	4
+-5-
+6++
7-+-8
*9*-
*9*+
)-9-8
)-9.
)-.7
)-7-
:-+.8
:-5+8
:-:+:-:5
:57-8
:5*-$

;"


"

	





	
	





"









"%









!






2

%

'

	


 
	


""



 






<


%



 	 



"










"




!
=

1 



)-*,.75,5696

&

 
	"



	


"





%









	


1/' 1

	
/


'


' 





'

#"
 

$

' 






 

'


 <	







>	





	

	

F <	

%





 











1/'

G &











2/ <	









	

	

8 <	







	




	






"

H &





;		

 







/ &













	


!& !

&


'&



















'
&


 
"




"

 

1 

;



"


&






%




	
 

3 3=
	

/F 

/

F


G'


















&




"
%
	
	

 













IJ  


"	

		

I<J  


<


		

"	

		

 




 



18 1

	
8

' #/$ '



"
#/"
$

1#/$ 1
;
"
#/"
$

81#/$ 

"
1
;
"

3/ 3
%


/

<K <



K


K 



K


1 1

	


		
		


2
4

"

"
	


	
 







"	



/
4
+-+5--:

2
4

/3L33L



 
	
"
L


 !
% 

  %
<
  
/ %

5--
0 




/ %

 

)).+:



 
 #)-*$
.755696


#)-*$
.7+.6-+


  



 
 1  

!
! "


Page 4 of 50
	


		

	



		





	





 






 ! "##$#

%&)&# &)&#'(),$)


*+,#(#

-

),## !.
* (#),##+/0

-
1)2(,)# (#(,)#

-
%(#(,)# (#(,)#

 
3

*
. (#),##+/


4)#')'(##2



5


*
 


)#2)6,)##) 7-#)

)#2)6,)##( 7-#(

)#2)6,)##" 7-#"

 8  1 
 1$  
3
 1(##    1  

3
66,)2

  6#&!,,($(")""6#&!,,)$,"#)999$%$$ 

    *58 8 %::8::
%1
!

Page 5 of 50
 	
	 	






	
	 

!





 
	
 


!
"

$
%& 

	
 


#




'	()	
*+	
,-,+./

	








 	

 	
	 	

  
 
 
	

 	

 "	
	


 " "#

'
+0 1 


 


 +23 '4!
  '55
""



$


	
)4#3


-(	4#
3

%	0	6	7'4!


%	0	'
7.)""
%-#

%	088	
 


##


6	7'55
""


'
7.'- 9:


	
 


!
 	



;

+<	 %	08 

   -  = 
	 
 =
 8 % 	 8>	 =8

) 
8
  =
%  7 	2
% 	 8>	#

  
*
"/#!!*
"/##!
???+8828 

  '
 @
  +*AAAA	
.
+=
	   
 /

Page 6 of 50
 	
	 	






	
	 

!





 
	
 


!
"

$
%& 

	
 


#




'	()	
*+	
,-,+./

	








 	

 	
	 	

  
 
 
	

 	

 %
$  &

 " "#

%0 
B 

 
!
 +23 ''# # '55

#

%8
 1 #

 #
 +23 ''# # '55

#

6	+ ! !

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#

6
0+ 1 

 
#

 +23 ''#!" # '55

#

	.+ 1 

 


 +23 ''# # '55

#

	+ !#

 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

7+ 1 

 
 +23 ''# # '55

#


 1 

 
 +23 ''# # '55

#

 1 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

3
	. 1 

 
!
 +23 ''# # '55

#

'	2
8+ "
 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

'	2	
8
 
#B 

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#



+ 1 

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#

=
 1 

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#

.+ 

 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

C 1 #
 "
 +23 ''# # '55

#

	88+ !
 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#



$


	
)4#
3


-(	4#
3

%	0	6	7''#

%	0	'
7.)



%	088	
 

#

#


6	7'55

#


'
7.)!

%


	
 





 	



;

+<	# %	08'9

	
)4#
3


-(	4#
3

%	0	6	7''#!"

%	0	'
7.)



%	088	
 

"



6	7'55

#


'
7.)!

%


	
 





 	



;

+<	# %	08'9

   -  = 
	 
 =
 8 % 	 8>	 =8

) 
8
  =
%  7 	2
% 	 8>	#

  
*
"/#!!*
"/##!
???+8828 

  '
 @
  +*AAAA	
.
+=
	   
 /

Page 7 of 50
 	
	 	






	
	 

!





 
	
 


!
"

$
%& 

	
 


#




'	()	
*+	
,-,+./

	








 	

 	
	 	

  
 
 
	

'
	 "	
	


 " "#

7.
 


B 


 

!
 23 )#  )55


<+.
 

"#
B 


 

!
 23 )#  )55


+	
  
#

 
## 23 )# # )55


 	+8
.
..8 

 
#

 
#
 23  !

0	.
 


B 


#
 


# 23 )%  )55""

)
	>%.88	@
1 1 


#
 


# 23 )%  )55"

 	88=
..8 ! 

 !
 23 )% " 



$


%	0	6	7 ! 	
)4


3

%	0	'
7.'
#


%	088	
 



!# 	



;-

%	08D9

%	0	6	7)% " 	
)4
3

%	0	'
7.'
#


%	088	
 



#

 	



;6

+<	 %	08D9

	
)43


-(	43

%	0	6	7)%

%	0	'
7.'
#

;1

%	088	
 

#
!#


6	7)55"


'
7.-5 )%


	
 

#



 	



;

+<	 %	08%<

	
)43


-(	43

%	0	6	7)%

%	0	'
7.'
#

;1,-

%	088	
 

#



6	7)55""


'
7.-5 1#




	
 

#



 	



;

+<	 %	08%<

	
)4
3


-(	4
3

%	0	6	7)#

%	0	'
7.-%!




%	088	
 


"


6	7)55



'
7.9:-!




	
 


!
 	



;%

+<	 %	08BC

	
)4
3


-(	4
3

%	0	6	7)#

%	0	'
7.-%!




%	088	
 





6	7)55



'
7.9:-!




	
 


!
 	



;%

+<	# %	08BC

   -  = 
	 
 =
 8 % 	 8>	 =8

) 
8
  =
%  7 	2
% 	 8>	#

  
*
"/#!!*
"/##!
???+8828 

  '
 @
  +*AAAA	
.
+=
	   
 /

Page 8 of 50
 	
	 	






	
	 

(





 
	
 


!
#
#

$
%& 

	
 


#




'	()	
*+	
,-,+./

	








 	

 	
	 	

  
 
 
	

 	

 "	
	


 " "#

'
+0 1 


 


 +23 '4!
  '55
""



$


	
)4#3


-(	4#
3

%	0	6	7'4!


%	0	'
7.)""
%-#

%	088	
 



"


6	7'55
""


'
7.'- 9:


	
 


!
 	



;

+<	 %	08 

   -  = 
	 
 =
 8 % 	 8>	 =8

) 
8
  =
%  7 	2
% 	 8>	#

  
*
"/#!!*
"/##!
???+8828 

  '
 @
  +*AAAA	
.
+=
	   
 /

Page 9 of 50
 	
	 	






	
	 

(





 
	
 


!
#
#

$
%& 

	
 


#




'	()	
*+	
,-,+./

	








 	

 	
	 	

  
 
 
	

 	

 %
$  &

 " "#

%0 1 

 
!
 +23 ''# # '55

#

%8
 1 #

 #
 +23 ''# # '55

#

6	+  !

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#

6
0+ 1 

 
#

 +23 ''#!" # '55

#

	.+ 1 

 


 +23 ''# # '55

#

	+ #"

 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

7+ 1 

 
 +23 ''# # '55

#


 1 

 
 +23 ''# # '55

#

 1 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

3
	. 1 

 
!
 +23 ''# # '55

#

'	2
8+ 

 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

'	2	
8
 
B 

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#



+ 1 

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#

=
 1 

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#

.+ !#
 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

C 1 #
 "
 +23 ''# # '55

#

	88+ !
 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#



$


	
)4#
3


-(	4#
3

%	0	6	7''#

%	0	'
7.)



%	088	
 

#






6	7'55

#


'
7.)!

%


	
 





 	



;

+<	# %	08'9

	
)4#
3


-(	4#
3

%	0	6	7''#!"

%	0	'
7.)



%	088	
 

"
#


6	7'55

#


'
7.)!

%


	
 





 	



;

+<	# %	08'9

   -  = 
	 
 =
 8 % 	 8>	 =8

) 
8
  =
%  7 	2
% 	 8>	#

  
*
"/#!!*
"/##!
???+8828 

  '
 @
  +*AAAA	
.
+=
	   
 /

Page 10 of 50
 	
	 	






	
	 

(





 
	
 


!
#
#

$
%& 

	
 


#




'	()	
*+	
,-,+./

	








 	

 	
	 	

  
 
 
	

'
	 "	
	


 " "#

7.
 



B 


 

!
 23 )#  )55


<+.
 


B 


 

!
 23 )#  )55


+	
  
#

 
## 23 )# # )55


 	+8
.
..8 
"

 
#

 
#
 23  !

0	.
 


"B 


#
 


# 23 )%  )55""

)
	>%.88	@
1 1 


#
 


# 23 )%  )55"

 	88=
..8 #! 

 !
 23 )% " 



$


%	0	6	7 ! 	
)4


3

%	0	'
7.'
#


%	088	
 



!# 	



;-

%	08D9

%	0	6	7)% " 	
)4
3

%	0	'
7.'
#


%	088	
 



#

 	



;6

+<	 %	08D9

	
)43


-(	43

%	0	6	7)%

%	0	'
7.'
#

;1

%	088	
 

#
!##


6	7)55"


'
7.-5 )%


	
 

#



 	



;

+<	 %	08%<

	
)43


-(	43

%	0	6	7)%

%	0	'
7.'
#

;1,-

%	088	
 

#



6	7)55""


'
7.-5 1#




	
 

#



 	



;

+<	 %	08%<

	
)4
3


-(	4
3

%	0	6	7)#

%	0	'
7.-%!




%	088	
 


#



6	7)55



'
7.9:-!




	
 


!
 	



;%

+<	 %	08BC

	
)4
3


-(	4
3

%	0	6	7)#

%	0	'
7.-%!




%	088	
 


!


6	7)55



'
7.9:-!




	
 


!
 	



;%

+<	# %	08BC

   -  = 
	 
 =
 8 % 	 8>	 =8

) 
8
  =
%  7 	2
% 	 8>	#

  
*
"/#!!*
"/##!
???+8828 

  '
 @
  +*AAAA	
.
+=
	   
 /

Page 11 of 50
 	
	 	






	
	 

)





! 
	
 


!
"#


$
%& 

	
 


#




'	()	
*+	
,-,+./

	








 	

 	
	 	

  
 
 
	

 	

 "	
	


 " "#

'
+0 1 


 


 +23 '4!
  '55
""



$


	
)4#3


-(	4#
3

%	0	6	7'4!


%	0	'
7.)""
%-#

%	088	
 






6	7'55
""


'
7.'- 9:


	
 


!
 	



!;

+<	 %	08 

   -  = 
	 
 =
 8 % 	 8>	 =8

) 
8
  =
%  7 	2
% 	 8>	#

  
*
"/#!!*
"/##!
???+8828 

  '
 @
  +*AAAA	
.
+=
	   
 /

Page 12 of 50
 	
	 	






	
	 

)





! 
	
 


!
"#


$
%& 

	
 


#




'	()	
*+	
,-,+./

	








 	

 	
	 	

  
 
 
	

 	

 %
$  &

 " "#

%0 
#B 

 
!
 +23 ''# # '55

#

%8
 1 #

 #
 +23 ''# # '55

#

6	+ ! !

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#

6
0+ 1 

 
#

 +23 ''#!" # '55

#

	.+ 1 

 


 +23 ''# # '55

#

	+ "

 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

7+ 1 

 
 +23 ''# # '55

#


 1 

 
 +23 ''# # '55

#

 1 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

3
	. 1 

 
!
 +23 ''# # '55

#

'	2
8+ ""
 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

'	2	
8
 

"B 

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#



+ 1 

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#

=
 1 

 

 +23 ''# # '55

#

.+ 
 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#

C 1 #
 "
 +23 ''# # '55

#

	88+ !!!
 


 !
 +23 ''# # '55

#



$


	
)4#
3


-(	4#
3

%	0	6	7''#

%	0	'
7.)



%	088	
 

#





6	7'55

#


'
7.)!

%


	
 





 	



!;

+<	# %	08'9

	
)4#
3


-(	4#
3

%	0	6	7''#!"

%	0	'
7.)



%	088	
 

"





6	7'55

#


'
7.)!

%


	
 





 	



!;

+<	# %	08'9

   -  = 
	 
 =
 8 % 	 8>	 =8

) 
8
  =
%  7 	2
% 	 8>	#

  
*
"/#!!*
"/##!
???+8828 

  '
 @
  +*AAAA	
.
+=
	   
 /

Page 13 of 50
 	
	 	






	
	 

)





! 
	
 


!
"#


$
%& 

	
 


#




'	()	
*+	
,-,+./

	








 	

 	
	 	

  
 
 
	

'
	 "	
	


 " "#

7.
 1 


 

!
 23 )#  )55


<+.
 

"
B 


 

!
 23 )#  )55


+	
 
 
#

 
## 23 )# # )55


 	+8
.
..8 


B 
#

 
#
 23  !

0	.
 1 


#
 


# 23 )%  )55""

)
	>%.88	@
1 1 


#
 


# 23 )%  )55"

 	88=
..8 " 

 !
 23 )% " 



$


%	0	6	7 ! 	
)4


3

%	0	'
7.'
#


%	088	
 



!# 	



!;-

%	08D9

%	0	6	7)% " 	
)4
3

%	0	'
7.'
#


%	088	
 



#

 	



!;6

+<	 %	08D9

	
)43


-(	43

%	0	6	7)%

%	0	'
7.'
#

;1

%	088	
 

#
!##


6	7)55"


'
7.-5 )%


	
 

#



 	



!;

+<	 %	08%<

	
)43


-(	43

%	0	6	7)%

%	0	'
7.'
#

;1,-

%	088	
 

#



6	7)55""


'
7.-5 1#




	
 

#



 	



!;

+<	 %	08%<

	
)4
3


-(	4
3

%	0	6	7)#

%	0	'
7.-%!




%	088	
 


!!


6	7)55



'
7.9:-!




	
 


!
 	



!;%

+<	 %	08BC

	
)4
3


-(	4
3

%	0	6	7)#

%	0	'
7.-%!




%	088	
 


#!


6	7)55



'
7.9:-!




	
 


!
 	



!;%

+<	# %	08BC

   -  = 
	 
 =
 8 % 	 8>	 =8

) 
8
  =
%  7 	2
% 	 8>	#

  
*
"/#!!*
"/##!
???+8828 

  '
 @
  +*AAAA	
.
+=
	   
 /

Page 14 of 50


	










  	











 






 !"#%&' (%%)' *#+

,-#%%&%./ 0#&10

	2	'	2	'	2	

1 3#

30/-

41 5

6


74 7

	


"#0" 87 )
 ) 1/4 

 !"



 ""

"

	7

Page 15 of 50


	










  	










222 






 !"#%&' (%%)' *#+

 992

(9-8	




,-#%%&%./ 0#&10

	2	'	2	'	2	

1 3#

30/-

41 5

6


74 7

	


-6 87 )
 ) 1/4 

 !"



 7		

"
	
:-8 -'(

;<

Page 16 of 50


	










  	










2 






 !"#%&' (%%)' *#+

 992

(9 7



,-#%%&%./ 0#&10

	2	'	2	'	2	

1 3#

30/-

41 5

6


74 7

	


 &7&<-8 87 )
 ) 1/4 

 !"



 7		

"
	
:-8 =

;<

Page 17 of 50


	










  	










	 






 !"#%&' (%%)' *#+


99	


(>?7

2

,-#%%&%./ 0#&10

	2	'	2	'	2	

1 3#

30/-

41 5

6


74 7


	



 87 ) )2 #/4 2

 !"



 
-@

" 	(	
)

"
#1 1

Page 18 of 50


	










  	

















 !"#%&' (%%)' *#+

 992

>?(

2

,-#%%&%./ 0#&10

	2	'	2	'	2	

1 3#

30/-

41 5

6


74 7

	


- 87 ) ) 1/4 2

A# 87 ) ) 1/4 2

"#% 87 ) ) 1/4 2

 !"



 =-	
2

()


1=-

Page 19 of 50


	










  	










		 






 !"#%&' (%%)' *#+

,-#%%&%./ 0#&10

	2	'	2	'	2	

1 3#

30/-

41 5

6


74 7

	


7" 87 ) ) 1/4 

 !"



 22

"

	-

Page 20 of 50


	










  	










	 






 !"#%&' (%%)' *#+


99


" 



,-#%%&%./ 0#&10

	2	'	2	'	2	

1 3#

30/-

41 5

6


74 7





16 87 ) ) #/4 	

& 87 
) )
 #/4 	

#1 87 ) )	 #/4 	

6#1 87 ) )
 #/4 

-1#1 87 ) )2 #/4 	

- 87   #/4 	

-1#1 87 	) ) #/4 	

-00 87 2) ) #/4 	

= 87   #/4 	

4 87 ) ) #/4 	


/#1 87   #/4 	


/ 87 ) )2 #/4 	

"#1 87 ) )2 #/4 	

" 87 ) )2 #/4 	

"#1 87   #/4 	

B& 87 
) ) #/4 	

#1 87   #/4 	

 !"



 

"
2

" 2

(1"&C =-:
"

Page 21 of 50


	










  	





 

	

 


	  

 



 
$%&$'()

	

*+$
 
 ,
 -.$( /


	/



*+

0



1


 0	

0	

2/

3.

0
 4

	


 
(
($(   /.2 $5$$) 





#$



6$	

Page 22 of 50


	










  	





 

	

 


	  

 



 
$%&$'()

		

*+$
 
 ,
 -.$( /


	7	$	7	$	7	

	/



*+

0



1


 0	

0	

2/

3.

0
 4

	


 
(
($( 	 	 /.2 $ 5$$) 





#$



6$	

Page 23 of 50


	










  	





 

 887

%8+9	

$$$
6

	




	  

77 



 
$%&$'()

	7	

*+$
 
 ,
 -.$( /


	7	$	7	$	7	

	/



*+

0



1


 0	

0	

2/

3.

0
 4

	


+1(
 &$: & /.2 $ 5$$) 





#$


		

6$	;+9$+%

<
=

Page 24 of 50


	










  	





 

 887

%8


$$$
6

	




	  

7 



 
$%&$'()

	7	

*+$
 
 ,
 -.$( /


	7	$	7	$	7	

	/



*+

0



1


 0	

0	

2/

3.

0
 4

	



>$
($=
$+9 9 9 /.2 $ 5$$) 





#$


		

6$	;+9$?

<
=

Page 25 of 50


	










  	





 

 887

@3%	

7$$$	6

	




	  

 4(.

($



 
$%&$'()

	7	

*+$
 
 ,
 -.$( /


	7	$	7	

	/



*+

0



1


 0	

0	

2/

3.

0
 4

	


+,(
 &$: & /.2 $ 5$$) 7

A(
 &$: & /.2 $ 5$$) 7


 & 7& /.2 $7 5$$) 7





#$

?+	7

%	
$&

6
,/$$?+

Page 26 of 50


	










  	





 

 887

@3%	

7$$$	6

	




	  

 4(.

($



 
$%&$'()

	7	

*+$
 
 ,
 -.$( /


	7	$	7	

	/



*+

0



1


 0	

0	

2/

3.

0
 4

	


+,(
 &$: & /.2 $ 5$$) 7

A(
 &	$: &7 /.2 $5$$) 7


   /.2 $ 5$$) 7





#$

?+	7

%	
$&

6
,/$$?+

Page 27 of 50


	










  	





 

	

 


	  

	



 
$%&$'()

	

*+$
 
 ,
 -.$( /


	/



*+

0



1


 0	

0	

2/

3.

0
 4

	


 
($( 7	 7 /.2 $ 5$$) 





#$


77

6$	+

Page 28 of 50


	










  	





 

	

 


	  

	 



 
$%&$'()

	

*+$
 
 ,
 -.$( /


	7	$	7	$	7	

	/



*+

0



1


 0	

0	

2/

3.

0
 4

	


 
($( 		77 /.2 $5$$) 





#$


77

6$	+

Page 29 of 50


	










  	











 	




		



		%&' (%%)' *	

	
%%&%


	&

 

!"#$%&$""!'!"#$%&$""''!"#$%&$""(

		



)


&

)&


*




+

), ,

,



),



	





  $-)' %$ %".!!" /" "%"%'""#





 !"

(''%

0'"'/$",

Page 30 of 50


	










 !""!'""# !" ($









#/&&#- 	




#/&&## 	


,

&

		



		%&' (%%)' *	

11&-%-

(12$/""

"%!/'""#

	
%%&%


	&

 

!"#$%&$""!'!"#$%&$""''!"#$%&$""(

		



)


&

)&


*




+

), ,

,



),



	


+  ")"/' !"( -/.!'/ ")"/ "%!/'""#

, ")"/$ !"- $ 3'/ ")"/ "%!/'""#





 !"

,!$$'

0'"$/"".2'(

;


Page 31 of 50


	










 !""!'""# !" ($









#/&-"! 	




#/&-"' 	


,

&

		



		%&' (%%)' *	

11&-%#

(1,!

"%!/'""#

	
%%&%


	&

 

!"#$%&$""!'!"#$%&$""''!"#$%&$""(

		



)


&

)&


*




+

), ,

,



),



	


*&,&
2  ")"/$ !"- -/.!'/ ")"/ "%!/'""#

, ")"/$ !"% ! 3'/ ")"/ "%!/'""#





 !"

,!$$!

0'"$/"".24

;


Page 32 of 50


	










 !""!'""# !" ($









#/-"$$ 	




		



		%&' (%%)' *	

011'"--$

0(56,

"%!&'""#

	
%%&%


	&

 

!"#$%&$""!'!"#$%&$""''!"#$%&$""(

		



)


&

)&


*




+

), ,

,



),




	


0	&	+  $)"! !"" #/.!!/ $ "%!&'""#





 !"

07(%%"

-$-"('$/)!

0

	&	+

Page 33 of 50


	










 !""!'""# !" ($









#/-!!& 	




		



		%&' (%%)' *	

11&#"!

5'6((""

"%!&'""#

	
%%&%


	&

 

!"#$%&$""!'!"#$%&$""''!"#$%&$""(

		



)


&

)&


*




+

), ,

,



),



	



	  %)&# %- %".!!" !" "%!&'""#

8
	  !")' !"' %".!!" !" "%!&'""#


%  %)$- %/ %".!!" !" "%!&'""#





 !"

4$'/&

(("")"

0	-((4(

Page 34 of 50


	










 !""!'""# !" ($









#/-$/" 	




		



		%&' (%%)' *	

	
%%&%


	&

 

!"#$%&$""!'!"#$%&$""''!"#$%&$""(

		



)


&

)&


*




+

), ,

,



),



	



,

  &$$" %- -/.!'/ &&/" "%!"'""#





 !"

-!&&

0'"'/$"

Page 35 of 50


	










 !""!'""# !" ($









#/#$'$ 	




		



		%&' (%%)' *	

011'"#"/

("!"

"%'''""#

	
%%&%


	&

 

!"#$%&$""!'!"#$%&$""''!"#$%&$""(

		



)


&

)&


*




+

), ,

,



),







+  %(/ %$ #".!'" !""" "%'$'""#

	&  %&! %& #".!'" !""" "%'$'""#

9	  %(" %( #".!'" !""" "%'$'""#

9	+

  !"/ !"/ #".!'" !"" "%'-'""#

  %-)# %# #".!'" !"" "%'$'""#


&  !"!"" !"! #".!'" !"""" "%'$'""#

	  (-" %( #".!'" $"" "%'$'""#



	  %#! %# #".!'" !""" "%'$'""#

4	  $/'" %" #".!'" /""" "%'$'""#

  !"!" !"! #".!'" !""" "%'$'""#

0  %&!" %& #".!'" !"""" "%'$'""#

0  $/& %! #".!'" /"" "%'$'""#


  %&& %- #".!'" !""" "%'$'""#


	  !"" !"" #".!'" !"" "%'$'""#

  %-"" %- #".!'" !"""" "%'$'""#

B&  %$/ %/ #".!'" !""" "%'$'""#

  %$'" %$ #".!'" !"""" "%'$'""#





 !"

00/&'#

&"'"

	*(
	&C4.0(

Page 36 of 50


	

 	

 !""!'""# !" ($






	







#/ 	

	





 !!

"#	$	%	&&	'()

*+*,

-"%&%.&&/	0
	%1
&%2

,3

41

-"

5%&

4

56


	

71

7&#%	%

$

*$

(	1	% 54$

54$

(	1	%

8	0	&

5%& -&		%

	


"#	  ,,9 + + !+:,+ + 10*( *+*,









$7,

,+:":"

'&)

Page 37 of 50



 	

 **, 23






	







+! 	

	





 !

7	$	%%%	)&":$

*+*,

-"%&%.&&/	0
	%1
&%2

,3

41

-"

5%&

4

56


	

71

7&#%	%

$

*$

(	1	% 54$

54$

(	1	%

8	0	&

5%& -&		%

	


7	$	%%	)&":  :$ + 3 !+:,+ + 10*( *+*,









$7

,+:":;

'&)

Page 38 of 50



 	

 **, 23






	







+!+ 	

	

!



 ,!!

$	0%	#

**,

-"%&%.&&/	0
	%1
&%2

,3

41

-"

5%&

4

56


	

71

7&#%	%

$

*$

(	1	% 54$

54$

(	1	%

8	0	&

5%& -&		%


	


#  :$ , , +:+  0*( **,









"<3

!!7*,+

47	&&	11#77

Page 39 of 50



 	

 **, 23






	







+! 	

	

+! 	

	$
&	

+

	&*&	#/	0.

 ,!!

$	0%	#

**,

-"%&%.&&/	0
	%1
&%2

,3

41

-"

5%&

4

56


	

71

7&#%	%

$

*$

(	1	% 54$

54$

(	1	%

8	0	&

5%& -&		%


	


#  :$ ,  +:+  0*( **,

$ ,   =+  0*( **,









"<3

!!7*,+

47	&&	11#77

Page 40 of 50



 	

 **, 23






	







+! >.
	(	?	





 

473
	%*(

**,

-"%&%.&&/	0
	%1
&%2

,

41

-"

5%&

4

56


	

71

7&#%	%

$

*$

(	1	% 54$

54$

(	1	%

8	0	&

5%& -&		%

	


".&	 >: 9   :  10*( **,

A&	 >: !+9 ,  :  10*( **,

& >:  3 ! : + 10*( **,









;",+

473

.1!33;"3

Page 41 of 50



 	

 **, 23






	







+!, >.
	(	?	

,



 

473
	%*(

**,

-"%&%.&&/	0
	%1
&%2

,3

41

-"

5%&

4

56


	

71

7&#%	%

$

*$

(	1	% 54$

54$

(	1	%

8	0	&

5%& -&		%

	


".&	 >: 9   :  10*( **,

A&	 >: 9 , , :  10*( **,

& >:  ! : + 10*( **,









;",+

473

.1!33;"3

Page 42 of 50



 	

 **, 23






	







+,+ 	

	

+,	

	$
&	

!3,



 ,+

3@,$	0%&%;"4

*,,*,

-"%&%.&&/	0
	%1
&%2

,3

41

-"

5%&

4

56


	

71

7&#%	%

$

*$

(	1	% 54$

54$

(	1	%

8	0	&

5%& -&		%





;   +,, ,A :, + 0*( *,*,

$ ! !,A + =+ + 0*( *,*,

0%   3  :, + 0*( *,!*,

$  ,A , =+ + 0*( *,!*,









+3!

,

4	&1	
;"4:43

Page 43 of 50



 	

 **, 23






	







+,! >.
	$;D$

!3,



 ,+

3@,$	0%&%;"4

*,,*,

-"%&%.&&/	0
	%1
&%2

,3

41

-"

5%&

4

56


	

71

7&#%	%

$

*$

(	1	% 54$

54$

(	1	%

8	0	&

5%& -&		%





; >:$    !+:,+ ,+ 0*( *,*,

0% >:$  ,3 3 !+:,+ ,+ 0*( *,!*,









+3!

,

4	&1	
;"4:43

Page 44 of 50
Page 45 of 50
Page 46 of 50
Page 47 of 50
Page 48 of 50
Page 49 of 50
Page 50 of 50
APPENDIX C 

DATA SHEETS AND FIELD NOTEBOOK 











9.3.4. – PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL 

DETERMINATION 

 
Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project 

Tok, Alaska 

Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination 

February 2009 

Prepared for: 

Alaska Power and Telephone Company 

PO Box 3222 

Port Townsend, WA 98368 

Prepared by: 

HDR Alaska, Inc. 

2525 C Street, Suite 305 

Anchorage, Alaska 99503 
i

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE .............................................................................................................. 1

PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENT........................................................................................................... 2

2. METHODS....................................................................................................................................................... 3

FIELD INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................................................................... 3

MAPPING ........................................................................................................................................................... 5

3. PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION....................................................................... 6

VEGETATION ..................................................................................................................................................... 7

HYDROLOGY...................................................................................................................................................... 9

SOILS............................................................................................................................................................... 11

4. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................. 12

ATTACHMENTS.............................................................................................................................................. 14

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................. 14

APPENDICES.................................................................................................................................................... 15

APPENDIX A: WEATHER AND CLIMATE DATA................................................................................................. 15

APPENDIX B: SUMMARY TABLE ...................................................................................................................... 18

APPENDIX C: PHOTOGRAPHS ........................................................................................................................... 19

APPENDIX D: FIELD DATA FORMS................................................................................................................... 20

Figures 

FIGURE 1: PROJECT VICINITY MAP......................................................................................................................... 2

FIGURE 2: YERRICK CREEK PHOTOS....................................................................................................................... 3

FIGURE 3: NWI MAPPING OF PROJECT AREA ......................................................................................................... 6

FIGURE 4: YERRICK CREEK WETLANDS MAP.........................................................................ATTACHED MAP BOOK

Tables 

TABLE 1: PROJECT AREA INFORMATION ................................................................................................................ 3

TABLE 2: VEGETATION AT WETLAND DATA FORM SITES – DOMINANT SPECIES PER PLOT ..................................... 8

TABLE 3: INDICATORS AT WETLAND DATA FORM SITES WITH WETLAND HYDROLOGY...................................... 11

TABLE 4: S SOILS AT WETLAND DATA FORM SITES FOUND TO HAVE HYDRIC SOILS .......................................... 12

TABLE 5: MAPPED AREA SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 13
1

Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project 

Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination 

1. Introduction and Purpose 

The purpose of this report is to identify and describe wetlands and other waters within an 

approximately 700-acre area along Yerrick Creek near Tok, Alaska (Figure 1). The area 

contains land owned by the State of Alaska and by Tanacross, Inc. 

This report describes locations within the project area that are subject to the jurisdiction of 

the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) under authority of Section 404 of the Clean 

Water Act. By federal law (Clean Water Act) and associated policy, it is necessary to avoid 

project impacts to wetlands wherever practicable, minimize impact where impact is not 

avoidable, and in some cases compensate for the impact. The focus of this document is on 

delineation of wetlands. Wetlands, waters of the U.S., and uplands (non-wetlands), as 

referenced in this report, are defined as: 

Wetlands. “Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a 

frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do 

support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33 

Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 328.3(b)). Wetlands are a subset of “waters of the 

U.S.” Note that the “wetlands” definition does not include unvegetated areas such as streams 

and ponds. 

Waters of the U.S. Waters of the U.S. include other waterbodies regulated by the USACOE, 

such as lakes, ponds, and streams, in addition to wetlands. The ponds and streams mapped in 

the project area are “waters of the U.S.” but not “wetlands”. 

Uplands. Non-water and non-wetland areas are called uplands. 

As described in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual, 

wetlands must possess the following three characteristics: 

1. Hydrophytic Vegetation: Vegetation community dominated by plant species that are 

typically adapted for life in saturated soils. 

2. Wetland Hydrology: Inundation or saturation of the soil during the growing season. 

3. Hydric Soils: Soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the 

growing season to develop anaerobic conditions. 
2

Figure 1: Project Vicinity Map 
3

Project Location and Environment 

The project area is located along Yerrick Creek, a cobble-, gravel- and sand-substrate creek 

which crosses the Alaska Highway at approximately milepost 1339 (Figure 2). Most of the 

project area is undeveloped, with an open gravel waterway, adjacent forests, abandoned 

gravel side channels in various states of revegetation, and heavily forested banks (see images 

below). Specific legal and geographic descriptions for the property required for Preliminary 

Jurisdictional Determinations are included in Table 1. 

Figure 2: Photos of Yerrick Creek 

Figure 2: Yerrick Creek Photos 

Table 1: Project Area Information 

1. APPLICANT: Alaska Power and Telephone Company (AP&T) 

2. WATERWAY: Yerrick Creek 

3. LOCATION:

A. Narrative: The project area is along Yerrick Creek near Tok, Alaska, approximately 20 miles west of Tok at 

milepost 1339 of the Alaska Highway. 

 B. Legal Description: 

 Sections: 36 and 1, 2, 11, and 14 Township: 19N and 18N Range: 9E Meridian: Copper River 

 Latitude/Longitude (WGS84 Datum): N55.0667159 / W132.1461172 

4. SOURCE(S):

 USGS Maps: Tanacross B-6 

 NWI Maps: Tanacross B-6, digital interpretation 

 Soil Maps: None 

 Corps Wetland Maps: None 

Aerial Photographs: True Color Aerial Photography, 2008, provided by AP&T. Color Infrared High Altitude Aerial 

Photography, 1978, from the Alaska GeoData Center archives. 

Other: Reconnaissance-level field survey with wetland data forms, written site observations, and photographs from 

HDR Alaska, Inc. site visit dated August 21-25, 2008. 

2. Methods 

Two steps were used to inventory wetlands and waterbodies in the project area. These two 

steps include: 

Field Investigation 

A five-day site visit was completed between August 21 and 25, 2008, to identify any 

wetlands and other waters potentially under the jurisdiction of the USACOE. USACOE 

guidance on Alaska’s growing season references the end of the growing season to generally 
4

follow several continuous days below 28°F. Temperature and precipitation data for the threemonth period prior to the field investigation (June 2008 through August 2008) was reviewed 

to determine the degree to which any recent climatic events may have influenced field 

hydrology and vegetation indicators. Weather and climate data are given in Appendix A, 

including monthly summaries of temperature and precipitation, recording period average, and 

stream gage output for part of 2008 for Yerrick Creek. 

The general trend in the summer of 2008 was a colder, wetter season than normal. Over the 

three-month period preceding the field visit, the average maximum temperature in °F (64.87 

for June, 63.9 for July, and 61.52 for August) was lower than the average maximum 

temperature for the recording period of 1954 to 2005 (71 for June, 73 for July, and 68 for 

August) (NOAA 2008). The average minimum temperature (48.39 for June, 48.55 for July, 

and 42.9 for August) was higher than the average minimum temperature for the recording 

period (40 for June, 43 for July, and 39 for August). Precipitation for June 2008 was 2.12 

inches compared to an average of 1.82 inches. July precipitation average for the period 1946 

to 2008 is 2 inches, compared to the single year (2008) measurement of 6.68 inches. August 

average is 1.2 inches, compared to the 2008 measurement of 0.79 inches. The much higher 

than average precipitation in July led to higher than normal water levels in the creek, and 

unusual conditions at the study site during the field survey. Side channels that normally lack 

water experienced flow during July, according to AP&T personnel familiar with the project 

area. Observations of side channels by AP&T personnel and HDR scientists suggested that 

such channels had not experienced any flow in over 20 years. A stream gage on the main 

channel of Yerrick Creek was knocked out during an especially high storm at the end of July. 

Scientists collected detailed information on soil conditions, hydrology, and plant community 

composition. A summary table listing plot number, wetland status, wetland mapping code 

from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s National Wetland Inventory (NWI) mapping program 

(USFWS 2006), and photo numbers is found in Appendix B. Photographs taken at each of 

the data collection locations are included in Appendix C. Locations were studied using the 

U.S. Corps of Engineers 1987 wetland delineation manual’s (USACOE 1987) and 2007 

Alaska Regional Supplement’s (USACOE 2007) three-parameter method of determining an 

area’s wetland status. Standard 2007 Alaska Regional Supplement Corps of Engineers data 

sheets were completed at these sites and are included in Appendix D. Each location visited 

during the field visit was logged into a handheld global positioning system (GPS) Archer 

Field PC unit. Representative photographs and observational data were collected at each plot. 

While in the field, wetland/upland boundaries were determined by completing standard 

wetland data forms near observable transition zones between wetter and drier areas. A 

wetland determination is completed in the area with questionable wetland status, then the 

boundary identified in the appropriate direction between that point and obvious wetlands or 

uplands. The wetland/upland boundary between the two data plots is then notated on paper 

aerial photography maps of the area for later guidance in Geographic Information System 

(GIS) mapping of wetland/upland boundaries. In addition, photo points were taken at more 

sites to document conditions at a wider range of locations. For these points, a data sheet was 

not completed, but photos were taken and conditions were notated in a field notebook. 
5

Mapping 

Scientists analyzed aerial photography and NWI wetland mapping in a GIS map 

environment. GPS locations of field-visited sites and wetland/upland boundaries were 

overlaid on aerial photography and notes and photographs completed at each site were 

reviewed to identify any wetlands or waterbodies present within the project area. The process 

of delineating wetlands from aerial photography included using the following methods: 

Vegetation clues: On aerial photography, scientists looked for saturation-adapted vegetation 

communities, indicative canopy structure and height, and presence of hydrophytic plant 

species. A common example is dwarf spruce trees, which are indicative of a limitation to 

growth such as excessively wet soils. 

Evidence of soil saturation: Visible evidence of wetland hydrology was sought, including 

surface water and darker areas of photos indicating surface saturation. A site’s proximity to 

streams, open water habitat, and marshes may be indicative of shallow subsurface water. 

Existing mapping: Wetland mapping from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s National Wetland 

Inventory mapping program is available for the project area (USFWS 2006). This mapping is 

generally an effective tool for large-scale planning and analysis of wetlands but not suitable 

for smaller site-specific projects such as needed for this study. NWI mapping is primarily 

based on aerial photographic interpretation with limited ground truthing, and therefore 

wetland boundaries tend to be oversimplified with many smaller wetland complexes not 

included in the mapping. According to available NWI mapping for USGS quadrangle 

Tanacross B-6, wetlands occur in the project area (Figure 3). Four pond polygons and two 

evergreen shrub polygons were mapped at the fringe of the project area, in mostly forested 

areas to the west of the creek channel. The main creek channel is mapped as riverine waters, 

with seven shrub polygons mapped on channel islands or on the edge of the main channel. 

Areas with marginal evidence of wetland characteristics were mapped conservatively as 

wetlands. Preliminary JDs do not make legally binding determinations, therefore individual 

sites can be assessed at a later date if necessary (USACOE, June 2008). 
6

Figure 3: NWI Mapping of Project Area 
7

3. Results 

No detailed vegetation or soil mapping was available for the project area prior to the field 

study. Information presented below is summarized from data collected at 28 wetland data 

form locations over the five-day field investigation (Appendix D). Locations of each data 

collection location are displayed on Figure 4. Of the 28 wetland data form locations, 6 were 

determined to occur in wetlands and 3 in other waters of the U.S. 

Vegetation 

At wetland data form locations, 15 out of the 28 sites had hydrophytic vegetation (Table 2). 

Dominant plant species are shown by stratum for each plot. The most common trees in the 

project area include white spruce (Picea glauca), balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera), and 

some paper birch (Betula papyrifera). The most common shrub is alder (Alnus crispa). 

Saplings of white spruce and cottonwood are also common in the shrub layer. Common 

graminoids include bluejoint reedgrass (Calamagrostis canadensis) and a variety of sedges 

(Carex spp.). Common forbs include timberberry (Geocaulon lividum) and dwarf fireweed 

(Chamerion latifolium). Mosses and lichens were found primarily in forested plots. 
8

Table 2: Vegetation at Wetland Data Form Sites – Dominant Species per Plot 

 Tree Stratum Shrub Stratum 

black spruce 

feltleaved willow 

balsam poplar 

paper birch 

white spruce bog kalmia Labrador tea black spruce diamond willow alder dwarf birch 

Picea mariana 

Salix alexensis 

Populus balsamifera 

Betula papyrifera 

Picea glauca 

Andromeda polifolia 

Ledum groenlandicum 

Picea mariana 

Salix pulchra 

Alnus crispa 

Betula glandulifera 

Plot Number FACW FAC FACU FACU FACU OBL FACW FACW FACW FAC FAC 101 1 1 1 103 1 1 104 1 105 1 106 1 107 1 1 1 108 1 109 1 1 110 1 1 116 1 1 1 118 1 119 120 121 1 1 1 122 1 1 1 124 1 125 1 1 1 126 1 128 1 130 1 1 132 1 1 1 133 1 134 1 1 1 135 1 136 1 137 1 1 138 1 1 139 1 
9

Table 3, continued 

Shrub Stratum Herbaceous Stratum bog blueberry lingonberry bunchberry dogwood white spruce balsam poplar prickly rose boreal bog sedge NT sedge water sedge marsh five-finger Vaccinium uliginosum 

Vaccinium vitis-idaea 

Cornus canadensis 

Picea glauca 

Populus balsamifera 

Rosa acicularis 

Carex magellanica 

Carex utriculata 

Carex aquatilis 

Comarium palustris 

Plot Number FAC FAC FACU FACU FACU FACU OBL OBL OBL OBL 101 1 103 1 1 104 105 106 107 108 109 1 110 116 1 118 1 1 119 1 1 120 1 1 121 122 1 124 1 125 126 128 1 1 130 1 132 1 133 134 135 1 136 1 137 138 139 1 
10

Table 4, continued 

Herbaceous Stratum bluejoint reedgrass fireweed dwarf fireweed Menzies' campion common horsetail timberberry bluebells boreal sagebrush glaucous bluegrass field locowCalamagrostis canadensis 

Chamerion angustifolium 

Chamerion latifolium 

Silene menziesii ssp.williamsii 

Equisetum arvense 

Geocaulon lividum 

Mertensia paniculata 

Artemisia arctica 

Poa glauca 

Oxytrcamp

Plot Number FAC FAC FAC FAC FACU FACU FACU NI NI NI 101 103 1 104 1 1 105 1 106 1 107 1 1 108 1 109 1 1 110 1 116 1 118 1 119 1 120 121 1 1 122 1 124 1 125 1 126 1 1 128 130 1 132 1 133 1 1 134 1 1 135 1 1 136 1 1 1 137 1 138 1 1 1 139 1 
11

Hydrology 

The project area is situated along the valley bottom and slopes of the Yerrick Creek drainage. 

Yerrick Creek experiences a declining flow along the surveyed length due to subterranean 

flow. The unusually high precipitation and storm events in July filled channels that normally 

do not experience flow, and in some cases, likely did not experience any flow for over 20 

years, according to observations of persons familiar with the study area. Hydrological 

indicators were carefully examined at plot data collection locations that occurred in side 

channels to ensure that data collected was not influenced by conditions deviating from 

normal. All efforts were made by wetland scientists to consider normal conditions despite the 

unusual weather conditions preceding the field data collection time. 

At wetland data form locations, 13 out of the 28 sites had wetland hydrology (Table 3). 

Commonly seen primary indicators included surface water, saturation, high water table, and 

drift deposits. Common secondary indicators included drainage patterns, geomorphic 

position, stunted or stressed plants, and FAC-neutral test. 

Table 5: Indicators at Wetland Data Form Sites with Wetland Hydrology 

Field Observations Primary Wetland 

Hydrology Indicators 

Secondary Wetland Hydrology Indicators 

Plot 

Number 

Surface Water Depth 

(inches)

Water Table Depth 

(inches) 

Saturation Depth 

(inches) 

Surface Water (A1) 

High Water Table (A2) 

Saturation (A3) 

Water Marks (B1) 

Sediment Deposits (B2) 

Drift Deposits (B3) 

Inundation Visible on 

Aerial Image (B7) 

Water Stained Leaves 

(B9) 

Drainage Patterns (B10) 

Presence of Reduced 

Iron (C4) 

Stunted or Stressed 

Plants (D1) 

Geomorphic Position 

(D2) 

Shallow Aquitard (D3) 

Microtopographic relief 

(D4) 

FAC Neutral Test (D5) 

101 0-10 11 5 X X X X X X X 

104 0-24 0 0 X X X X X X X X 

105 X X X X X 

108 0-24 0 0 X X X X X X X X X 

109 X X X 

118 12 0 0 X 

119 X 

120 2 0 0 X X X X X X 

126 11 6 X X X X X 

128 4 0 0 X X X X X X X 

129 0 8 4 X X X 

133 X X X 

136 X 

Soils 

Both hydric and non-hydric soil conditions were observed in soil pits examined during the 

field visit. Soils were carefully assessed by wetland scientists to consider soils under normal 

conditions, despite the unusual rainfall of the season. Hydric soils were encountered at 6 of 

the 28 wetland data form sites (Table 4). Indicators of hydric soil included histosol, histic 
12

epipedons, and several other indicators that fell under problematic soil conditions. Analysis 

of conditions at all sites with problematic hydric soils that are listed in Table 4 concluded that 

the site did contain a hydric soil as per USACE direction (USACE 1987, 2007). Specific 

characteristics of the sampled mineral soils, including color and texture, are included on the 

wetland data forms (Appendix D). 

Table 6: Soils at Wetland Data Form Sites Found to Have Hydric Soils 

Hydric Soil Indicators 

Plot 

Number 

Histosol or 

Histel (A1) 

Histic 

Epipedon 

(A2) 

Restrictive 

Layer Type 

Restrictive 

Layer Depth 

(inches) 

Other Indicator of Hydric Soils or 

“Waters” Status 

101 X Permafrost 16 

104 

 

Outwash, Entisol (Substrate too young 

and coarse to show redox features and 

with too little organic carbon to promote 

reduction) 

108 

 

Outwash, Entisol (Substrate too young 

and coarse to show redox features and 

with too little organic carbon to promote 

reduction) 

118 No pit, emergent vegetation and 12" 

standing water present 

120 

 

Hydrophytic vegetation, primary hydrology 

indicator, concave landscape, positive 

alpha-alpha dipyridyl 

126 X 

128 X 

130 X 

4. Conclusion 

Wetland locations are based upon the dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, hydrologic 

indicators, and hydric soil indicators. Other waters of the U.S. are based on the investigators’ 

judgement about the location of the ordinary high water mark of Yerrick Creek. Based on the 

findings above, it has been determined that areas displayed as wetlands or waters on Figure 4 

meet the USACOE criteria for being classified as wetland or fall below the plane of Ordinary 

High Water (OHW) of Yerrick Creek. Approximately 21.3% (147.1 acres), a conservative 

delineation, of the mapped acres were determined to meet the USACOE requirements for 

being classified as wetlands or other waters, and are listed and described in Table 5. The 

areas shown as wetlands and other waters on Figure 4 may be subject to jurisdiction under 

Section 404. For the purpose of this PJD, it is assumed that Yerrick Creek is a Relatively 

Permanent Tributary to Traditional Navigable Waters, and that the mapped wetlands are 

“adjacent” to Yerrick Creek. Most of the mapped wetland areas are not within the proposed 

project construction areas. 
13

The remainder of the mapped project area, approximately 78.7% (542.6 acres) of the mapped 

area, lacks one or more of the required three parameters to support classifying an area as 

wetland (Table 5), and is not below the plane of OHW of Yerrick Creek. The areas would not 

be subject to jurisdiction under Section 404. As project plans are developed, if construction 

would affect wetlands or other waters, AP&T may wish to refine wetland boundaries by 

further field investigation and consideration of the jurisdictional status of any affected 

wetlands. 

Yerrick Creek and its adjacent active bars are waters of the US below the creek’s OHW 

mark. OHW is particularly difficult to define for a braided channel such as this one. There 

may be some areas within the river bars shown on Figure 4 that are not actually below OHW. 

Table 7: Mapped Area Summary 

Wetland Type NWI Mapping Code Approximate Area 

(Acres) 

Seasonally flooded emergent persistent 

herbaceous wetland PEM1C 0.51 

Semipermanently flooded emergent persistent 

herbaceous wetland PEM1F 3.89 

Saturated needle-leafed evergreen forest/broadleafed scrub-shrub wetland PF04/SS3B 5.07 

Saturated needle-leafed evergreen forest wetland PFO4B 0.68 

Seasonally flooded broad-leafed scrub-shrub 

wetland PSS1C 0.10 

Saturated broad-leafed evergreen/needle-leaved 

scrub-shrub wetland PSS3/4B 42.24 

Seasonally flooded broad-leafed evergreen scrubshrub/persistent herbaceous wetland PSS3/EM1B 0.64 

Seasonally flooded broad-leafed evergreen scrubshrub wetland PSS3B 0.37 

Seasonally flooded broad-leafed evergreen/broadleafed evergreen scrub-shrub wetland PSS4/3B 5.92 

Saturated needle-leafed evergreen scrub-shrub 

wetland PSS4B 14.33 

Permanently flooded unconsolidated bottom 

palustrine wetland PUBH 3.35 

Temporarily flooded upper perennial 

unconsolidated floor/permanently flooded 

unconsolidated bottom wetland 

R3USA/UBH 69.96 

Upland (non-wetland) U 542.56 

Total Mapped Area 689.63 

Total Wetlands and Other Waters 147.1 acres (21.3%)

Total Upland (non-wetland) 542.6 acres (78.7%)
14

Determination Made By 

Elizabeth Bella, Chris Wrobel, and Irina Lapina 

Wetland Scientists 

HDR Alaska, Inc. 

Date: February 2008 

Attachments 

Figure 4: Yerrick Creek Wetlands Map Book 

References 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2008. National Weather Service, Alaska Regional 

Headquarters. Monthly and annual climate data summaries. Available online at 

http://www.arh.noaa.gov/climate.php. 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. June 26, 2008. Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 08-02. Available online at: 

http://www.saw.usace.army.mil/WETLANDS/Policies/RGL08-02.pdf.. 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Laboratory (USACOEEL). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands 

Delineation Manual. Vicksburg, MS. 

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Research and Development Center. 2007. Regional Supplement to the Corps of 

Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Alaska Region (Version 2.0). Vicksburg, MS. 

U.S. Federal Register. November 13, 1986 Part II. Rules and Regulations, Vol. 51, No. 219. U.S. Department of 

Defense. Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army. 33 CFR Parts 320-330, Regulatory Programs 

of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. National Wetland Inventory Mapping for USGS Quadrangle Tanacross 

B-6. Available online at: http://enterprise.nwi.fws.gov/shapedata/alaska/. 
15

Appendices 

Appendix A: Weather and Climate Data 

http://www.arh.noaa.gov/climate.php

NOAA National Weather Service Alaska Regional Headquarters Data 

Period of Record:1946 to 2008 

Observed (°F) Observed Extreme Temperature (°F) 

Day 2008 Max 

Temp: 

Min 

Temp: 

Precipitation 

(inches): 

Highest 

Max: 

Lowest 

Max: 

Highest 

Min: 

Lowest 

Min: 

1-Jun 63 47 0 87 1958 44 1947 57 1990 31 1969 

2-Jun 69 47 0 80 1958 44 1947 57 1979 32 1947 

3-Jun 67 49 T 85 1958 44 1974 57 1957 32 1974 

4-Jun 61 49 T 84 1957 40 2006 56 1985 27 1961 

5-Jun 61 49 0 85 1957 44 1963 60 1958 26 2006 

6-Jun 64 44 T 84 1951 49 1985 60 1986 31 1963 

7-Jun 66 49 0.01 84 1958 52 1983 57 1965 36 1991 

8-Jun 67 48 T 84 1946 51 1970 55 1969 30 1992 

9-Jun 56 45 0.09 83 1947 50 1983 56 2006 32 1961 

10-Jun 62 47 0.02 79 1971 52 1959 60 2006 34 1991 

11-Jun 63 44 T 80 1972 52 1955 56 2005 35 1987 

12-Jun 61 48 0.32 81 1992 52 1979 56 2005 36 1960 

13-Jun 68 44 0 85 1972 48 1952 59 1969 36 1955 

14-Jun 69 47 0 91 1969 45 1954 58 1972 37 1971 

15-Jun 71 48 0.36 91 1969 50 1985 60 1950 32 1960 

16-Jun 64 48 0.08 81 1948 52 1985 58 1968 36 1960 

17-Jun 59 50 T 88 1948 56 1982 58 1946 40 1987 

18-Jun 67 52 0.01 86 1967 52 1980 62 1948 36 1982 

19-Jun 69 55 0.09 82 1958 51 1949 58 1967 35 1960 

20-Jun 75 50 0 88 1958 53 2005 58 1958 41 1951 

21-Jun M M M 90 1991 47 1956 58 1969 33 1968 

22-Jun 72 55 T 82 1987 50 2006 60 1969 38 1993 

23-Jun 61 50 0.56 85 1971 50 1963 57 1983 33 1949 

24-Jun 57 48 0.28 90 1991 50 1964 58 1971 39 1961 

25-Jun M M M 86 1983 44 1949 60 1980 35 1949 

26-Jun M M M 83 1991 50 1949 63 1983 34 1949 

27-Jun M M M 85 1957 49 1949 65 1969 36 1960 

28-Jun M M M 81 1986 8 1971 68 1968 -11 1971 

29-Jun M M M 85 1992 48 1949 70 1968 34 1949 

30-Jun M M M 87 1992 47 1971 64 1987 35 1971 

JUNE 2008 

AVERAGE 64.87 48.39 Total: 1.82 

JUNE 

NORMAL 71 40 2.12 

1-Jul M M M 83 1991 47 1945 58 1985 32 1971 

2-Jul M M M 82 1990 55 1981 60 1958 34 1960 

3-Jul 80 48 T 85 1958 57 1969 62 1955 36 1961 

4-Jul 82 53 T 91 1958 57 1959 62 1990 37 1961 
16

5-Jul 79 53 T 86 1990 55 1949 62 1968 44 1960 

6-Jul 72 58 0.07 84 1986 57 1981 63 1980 41 1963 

7-Jul 70 53 0.01 82 1982 54 1981 60 1986 42 1993 

8-Jul 55 49 0.23 85 1951 54 1981 62 1968 43 1992 

9-Jul 68 50 0.01 82 1946 54 1957 60 1968 38 1991 

10-Jul 69 52 0.08 88 1975 54 1964 59 1989 36 1960 

11-Jul 68 53 0.15 85 1975 48 1954 60 1980 35 1960 

12-Jul 73 52 0.01 89 1960 55 1962 59 1980 38 1990 

13-Jul 68 52 0.04 85 1960 55 1959 60 1975 36 1961 

14-Jul 58 51 0.13 85 1967 53 1971 64 1989 38 1961 

15-Jul 71 46 0.01 85 1993 57 1960 62 1954 42 1991 

16-Jul 72 52 0 88 1951 53 1955 60 1993 38 1960 

17-Jul 63 49 0.27 83 1993 47 2003 62 1947 38 2003 

18-Jul 51 46 0.53 79 1993 51 2008 57 1988 39 1961 

19-Jul 58 45 T 84 1990 52 1965 59 1978 41 1966 

20-Jul 56 47 0.1 85 1990 51 1973 59 1990 38 1968 

21-Jul 64 45 0.27 81 1976 51 1956 60 2006 42 1959 

22-Jul 55 42 0.16 83 1955 54 1959 61 1952 40 1968 

23-Jul 58 44 T 86 1990 58 2008 60 1961 42 1971 

24-Jul 67 43 T 86 1990 52 1965 62 1990 38 1988 

25-Jul 62 49 T 90 1955 49 1969 60 1947 40 1991 

26-Jul 68 50 0.54 85 1955 48 1957 59 1978 40 1961 

27-Jul 55 49 0.41 86 1953 53 1963 63 1977 39 1957 

28-Jul 51 44 2.27 83 1953 8 1971 62 1958 -11 1971 

29-Jul 59 43 0.36 85 1977 59 2008 60 1962 38 1975 

30-Jul 53 46 0.28 88 1977 53 2008 62 1947 42 1971 

31-Jul 48 44 0.75 85 1978 48 2008 58 1965 35 1968 

JULY 2008 

AVERAGE 63.9 48.55 Total: 6.68 

JULY 

NORMAL 73 43 2 

1-Aug 60 45 0.1 87 1976 56 1982 64 1993 34 1968 

2-Aug 70 44 0.3 79 1962 56 1971 64 1953 35 1948 

3-Aug 54 44 0.13 82 1977 50 2003 59 1986 40 1964 

4-Aug M M M 88 1977 49 1947 60 1986 36 1968 

5-Aug M M M 80 1968 56 1962 62 1977 34 1946 

6-Aug M M M 86 1968 54 1949 60 1981 33 1946 

7-Aug M M M 85 1968 45 1969 58 1981 33 1969 

8-Aug 49 41 0.03 79 1977 42 1969 61 1981 33 1969 

9-Aug 53 37 0.01 82 1957 53 2008 62 1977 34 1969 

10-Aug M M M 85 2005 43 1969 63 1979 29 1969 

11-Aug 61 44 0.05 86 1980 50 1965 59 1945 33 1969 

12-Aug 68 35 0 84 1980 46 1969 59 1958 33 1969 

13-Aug 66 49 0 85 1990 48 1973 66 1975 29 1969 

14-Aug 71 45 T 86 1990 45 1946 57 1991 26 1969 

15-Aug 67 50 T 85 1990 50 1983 64 1979 27 1969 

16-Aug 67 46 0.04 84 1957 42 1981 64 1979 36 1981 

17-Aug 59 49 0.11 80 2007 48 1946 63 1990 28 1981 
17

18-Aug M M M 81 1977 53 1992 56 1977 32 1947 

19-Aug 60 45 T 81 1950 51 1987 57 2007 35 2005 

20-Aug 59 42 0 81 1973 49 1981 55 1950 33 1946 

21-Aug 62 37 T 86 1977 42 1946 56 1972 31 1974 

22-Aug 64 49 0.02 84 1977 41 1948 56 1963 30 1989 

23-Aug M M M 79 1979 44 1948 57 1989 25 1986 

24-Aug 58 39 T 82 1979 45 1983 55 1963 22 1948 

25-Aug 60 43 0 80 1981 45 1983 57 1989 31 1993 

26-Aug 62 38 0 78 1981 38 1984 57 1989 27 1991 

27-Aug M M M 80 1981 40 1984 61 1957 29 1991 

28-Aug 62 41 T 82 1949 8 1971 63 1989 -11 1971 

29-Aug M M M 82 1949 40 1984 51 1951 28 1991 

30-Aug 60 38 0 85 1974 40 1948 56 1949 25 1955 

31-Aug M M M 77 1974 42 1962 49 1993 23 1987 

AUGUST 

2008 

AVERAGE 

61.52 42.9 Total = 0.79 

AUGUST 

NORMAL 68 39 1.2 

http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/summary/Climsmak.html

Western Regional Climate Center, wrcc@dri.edu 

Monthly Climate Summary for Tok, AK 

Period of Record : 6/11/1954 to 12/31/2005 

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual 

Average Max. 

Temperature (°F) 

-6.6 7.7 25 44 60.4 71 73 68 54 32 8.9 -3.5 36.2 

Average Min. 

Temperature (°F) 

-25 -16 -6 16 29.5 40 43 39 29 13 -9.9 -22 10.8 

Average Total 

Precipitation 

(inches) 

0.35 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.7 2.1 2 1.2 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.43 9.22 

 
18

Appendix B: Summary Table 

Plot Number Plot Type JD Status NWI Code Photo Numbers 

101 JD W PSS3/4C 124-pit, 125-surface, 126-W, 127-E, 128-S 

102 PP-RW* W R4SBH 129-W, 130-E 

103 JD U U 131-pit, 132-surface, 133-E, 134-W, 135-S 

104 JD W R3UB1/2H 136-N, 137-E, 138-S, 139-W 

105 JD U U 144-N, 145-S, 146-pit, 147-surface 

106 JD U U 148-pit, 149-surface, 150-E, 151-SW, 152-N 

107 JD U U 153-pit, 154-surface, 155-N, 156-S 

108 JD W R3US1/2C 157-W, 158-N, 159-E, 160-S, 161-SW 

109 JD U U 162-N, 163-SE, 164-SW, 165-NW, 166-pit, 167-surface 

110 JD U U 168-pit, 169-surface, 170-SE, 171-S, 172-N 

111 PP-RU U U 173-SW, 174-NW, 175-NE 

112 PP-RW W R3UB2H 180-channel, 181-channel 

113 PP-RU U U 182-NW, 183-SE, 184-SE-channel, 185-N 

114 PP-RU W R3UBH 186-NW, 187-SE 

115 PP-RW W R4SB2C 188-N, 189-S 

116 JD U U 190-pit, 191-surface, 192-N, 193-S 

117 PP-RW W R4UBF 194-NW, 195-SE 

118 JD W PEM1F (Center of polygon is 

PUBH) 

196-water, 197-E, 198-W, 199-pond 

119 JD U U 200-pit, 201-surface, 202-NE, 203-N, 204-hydro 

120 JD W PEM1F 205-pit, 206-redox, 207-alpha-alpha, 208-E, 209-W 

121 JD U U 210-N, 211-S, 212-pit, 213-surface 

122 JD U U 216-N, 217-S, 218-pit, 219-surface 

123 PP-RW W R3UB1/2H (Gravel Bar is 

R3US1/2C or A) 

220-NE, 221-SW, 222-S 

124 JD U U 226-NE, 227-SW, 228-SE, 229-pit, 230-surface 

125 JD U U 233-N, 234-S, 235-windthrow, 236-pit, 237-surface 

126 JD W PSS4B 238-N, 239-N, 241-pit, 242-surface 

127 PP-RW U U 243-N, 244-S, 245-pit 

128 JD W PEM1/SS3C (PEM1C 

adjacent) 

246-N, 247-S, 248-water 

129 PP-RW W PUBH (PEM1C on fringe) 249-NE, 250-W, 251-W 

130 JD W PF04/SS3B 252-NE, 253-SW, 254-pit, 255-surface 

131 PP-RW W PF04/SS3B 256-N, 257-S, 260-pit, 261-surface 

132 JD U U 262-NE, 263-SE, 264-S, 267-pit, 268-surface 

133 JD U U 269-NE, 270-SE, 271-SW 

134 JD U U 272-NE, 273-SW, 274-pit, 275-surface 

135 JD U U 277-NE, 278-SE, 279-SW 

136 JD U U 280-N, 281-SW (cliff), 282-SW, 283-pit, 284-surface 

137 JD U U 292-NE, 293-SW, 294-pit, 295-surface 

138 JD U U 297-N, 298-S, 299-pit, 300-surface 

139 JD U U 305-N, 306-W, 307-S, 310-pit, 311-surface 

140 PP-RU U U 312-NE, 313-SW 

*PP-RW or PP-RU: Photopoint Plot at a Representative Wetland or Waters (RW) or a 

Representative Upland (RU) site, where photos and basic information are recorded instead of 

the entire field form, due to similarity in site conditions with previously surveyed plots. 
19

Appendix C: Photographs 

Included as a Word document: 

AppendixC_photos_yerrick.doc 
20

Appendix D: Field Data Forms 

Included as an Adobe document: 

AppendixD_plotfieldforms_yerrick.pdf 
9.3.5. – HERITAGE RESOURCE SURVEY 

(Report has sensitive information and is not available to the 

general public) 
Office of History and Archaeology: Cultural Resources Report Coversheet 

(Must Accompany All Compliance Reports Submitted to OHA/SHPO) 

Office of History and Archaeology

Division of Parks & Outdoor Recreation 

Alaska Department of Natural Resources 

550 W. 7th Ave., Suite 1310 

Anchorage, AK 99501-3565 

Phone: (907) 269-8721 Fax (907) 269-8908 

http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/parks/oha/index.htm 

Was this survey/investigation(Check one): Negative Positive X

Negative = no cultural resource sites are reported or updated. Positive = cultural resource sites are reported or updated. 

Note: Alaska Heritage Resources Survey (AHRS) numbers are required for reported cultural resource sites, including 

buildings. AHRS numbers can be obtained by contacting Joan Dale at 907-269-8718). 

Project/Report Information: 

● Report Title: 2009 Cultural Resource Survey of Alaska Power & Telephone’s Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric 

Project near MP 1334 of the Alaska Highway, Alaska 

● Report Author(s): Molly Proue, M.A., R.P.A., and Burr Neely, M.A., R.P.A. 

● Report Date: November 2009 

● Submitting Organization/Agency Northern Land Use Research, Inc. 

● Project Name and Project Number: 09-968 Yerrick Creek Hydroelectric Project 

● Principal Investigator (PI) name: Peter M. Bowers, M.A., R.P.A. 

Geographic Information (attach an extra sheet or cite report page numbers if necessary) 

● USGS Mapsheet (1:63,360 if available) Tanacross B-6 

● Meridian/Township / Range / Section (MTRS) location: (all affected sections)

Format example: “F021N018E|13-14” C019N009E, Section 36; C018N009E, Sections 1, 2, 11, and 14 

● Verbal description of survey area 

 (for example: “123 Acme Street,” “confluence of Fish and Moose creeks,” “Milepost 9-16 ...”

The middle portion of the Yerrick Creek drainage, south of the Alaska Highway, 22 miles west of Tok. 

● Does this report contain boundary coordinates for the surveyed area? Yes No X Page #(s)

 

● Does this report contain boundary coordinates for reported sites? Yes No X Page #(s)

● Land owner(s): State of Alaska and Tanacross Native Corp. 

 

● Answer one: Acres Surveyed 127 Hectares Surveyed 

Cultural Resources Management (CRM) Information 

● List AHRS numbers of new and updated sites – (do not list sites that are merely described in the background section). 

TNX-211 and TNX-212 

● Is the report part of a National Historic Preservation Act - Section 106 consultation? Yes X No 

 

● Is the report part of an Alaska Historic Preservation Act compliance consultation? Yes No X

 

● Does the report’s data support a submitting agency’s determination of eligibility? Yes X No 

 

● Does the report’s data support a submitting agency’s determination of effect? Yes X No 

 

● Was this report submitted to fulfill State Field Archaeology Permit requirements? 

Permit No.: Permit Application # 2009-27 Yes X No 

 

● Was this project and/or report overseen or authored by someone meeting the minimum 

qualifications of the Sec. of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines (48 FR 44738-44739)? Yes X No 

 

● Is the Principal Investigator’s resume’ appended to the report or on file at OHA? Yes X No 

Revised 3/29/07 
Page | 31

9.4 2009 Denali Commission List of Distressed Communities
Denali Commission

510 L Street, Suite 410

Anchorage, AK 99501

907.271.1414 tel

907.271.1415 fax

888.480.4321 toll free

www.denali.gov

Issue: Distressed Community Criteria 2009 Update

Date: June 2009

Background:

This 2009 annual update of the distressed community list prepared by the Alaska 

Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Research and Analysis Section, 

uses the most current population, employment and earnings data available to 

identify those Alaska communities considered “distressed”. The distressed status is 

determined by comparing average income of a community to full-time minimum 

wage earnings, the percentage of the population earning greater than full-time 

minimum wage earnings and a measure of the percentage of the population 

engaged in year-round wage and salary employment.

More Community Data Available

This report uses enhanced physical place of residence information to better 

identify the community of residence for Permanent Fund Dividend applicants age 

16 and over. Communities included in this report are closely aligned with those 

used in the annual population place estimates prepared by the Alaska 

Department of Labor and Workforce Development. 

Attached is a list of Alaska communities with employment and earnings information 

used to determine their distressed community status for 2009. Maps by economic 

region that show locations of communities that meet the distressed criteria are also 

included.

Surrogate Standard Background

The Denali Commission adopted alternate methods of determining community 

eligibility when census data were not available for the 2000 update. That 

“surrogate” standard considered additional data and methodology. For this 2009

update, we compiled the data required to implement a “surrogate” standard to 

determine eligibility.

Data Sources and Methodology

Three sources of data are used for the 2009 update:

• 2008 Permanent Fund Dividend applications (PFD). This information 

includes the applicant’s age, social security number (SSN), and physical 

place of residence.

• Alaska unemployment insurance wage records for calendar year 2008. 

This information includes wage and salary worker earnings from all 
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 2

private, state and local government employers. Federal government, 

military, and self-employed earnings are not available and not included in 

the earnings estimate.

• Calendar year 2007 Commercial Fisheries Entry Commissions (CFEC) 

total fish value data by community, the most recent data available. 

All 2008 PFD applicants age 16 and over in 2008 were assigned to an Alaska 

borough/census area and community by place of residence. PFD applicants age 

16 and over were matched with wage and employment information by SSN. 

CFEC 2007 total fish values were added to wage and salary earnings to compute 

community average market income.

2009 Update Surrogate Standard

A community that meets two of the following three surrogate standard criteria is 

considered distressed:

Criteria 1 Average market income in 2008 is less than $14,872.

Average market income = Community UI Earnings + Community CFEC Earnings

 Number Residents 16 and Over

 $14,872 = Minimum Wage ($7.15/hour x 2,080 hours/year)

Any community with an average market income of less than $14,872 in 2008 meets this 

criteria.

Criteria 2 More than 70% of residents 16 and over earned less than $14,872 in 

2008.

Percent Residents w/Earnings < than $14,872 = 100 x Number Residents w/Earnings < than $14,872

Number Residents 16 and Over

Any community with more than 70% of its residents earning less than $14,872 in 2008 

meets this criteria.

Criteria 3 Less than 30% of residents 16 and over worked all four quarters of 2008.

Percent Residents Employed All 4 Quarters = 100 x Number Residents Employed All 4 Quarters

Number Residents 16 and Over

Any community with less than 30% of its residents employed all four quarters of 2008 

meets this criteria.

Appeals

The Denali Commission recognizes that in some cases the data collection and 

application methodology does not accurately reflect the appropriate classification 

of some communities. Therefore, the Commission is open to reviewing a 

community’s classification as “non-distressed.” Any community that believes a 

“non-distressed” classification was determined in error may appeal to the Denali 
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 3

Commission. Appeals determinations will be made in lieu of new information 

(relevant economic data and facts) which demonstrate the data compiled by the 

DOL&WD was erroneous, invalid, or outdated. Additionally, the Commission will 

take into consideration the past economic status of a community as determined 

by the Denali Commission’s annual Distressed Community Criteria lists dating 

back to 2002. Past economic statuses will not, however, be the single 

determining factor for successful appeals. They will be considered in addition to 

the new information provided. New information must come from a verifiable 

source and be robust and representative of the entire community and/or 

population. 

In addition to demonstrating the data compiled by the DOL&WD was erroneous, 

invalid, or outdated, the new information must demonstrate a community does 

meet at least two of the three Surrogate Standard criteria as defined above for 

classification as a distressed community. 

Appeals must be sent in writing to the attention of the Denali Commission 

Director of Programs who will make an appeal determination based on the new 

verifiable information presented and will provide a response in writing within 30 

days.

Send appeals to: 

Denali Commission

Attention: Director of Programs

510 L Street, Suite 410

Anchorage, AK 99501

*The last section of the “Communities that meet 2009 Distressed Criteria” below 

contains the names of communities which have successfully appealed their 

status as “non-distressed” and received a “distressed” classification from the 

Commission.

Distressed Communities as Defined by Surrogate Standard

The following is a list of communities that meet the surrogate standard for 

distressed communities.

Communities that meet 2009 Distressed Criteria

AKHIOK CITY

AKIACHAK CDP

AKIAK CITY

ALAKANUK CITY

ALATNA CDP

ALCAN BORDER CDP

ALEKNAGIK CITY

ALENEVA CDP

ALLAKAKET ANVSA

AMBLER CITY
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 4

Communities that meet 2009 Distressed Criteria

ANGOON CITY

ANVIK CITY

ARCTIC VILLAGE CDP

ATMAUTLUAK CDP

BELUGA CDP

BETTLES CITY

BIG DELTA CDP

BIRCH CREEK CDP

BREVIG MISSION CITY

CENTRAL CDP

CHALKYITSIK CDP

CHASE CDP

CHEFORNAK CITY

CHEVAK CITY

CHICKEN CDP

CHIGNIK LAGOON

CHIGNIK LAKE

CHINIAK CDP

CHISANA

CHITINA CDP

CHUATHBALUK CITY

CIRCLE CDP

CLAM GULCH CDP

CLARKS POINT CITY

COOPER LANDING CDP

COVENANT LIFE CDP

CROOKED CREEK CDP

CROWN POINT CDP

DOT LAKE CDP

DRY CREEK CDP

EAGLE CITY

EAGLE VILLAGE

EDNA BAY

EEK CITY

EIELSON AFB

EKWOK CITY

ELFIN COVE CDP

ELIM CITY

EMMONAK CITY

EXCURSION INLET CDP

FERRY CDP

FORT GREELY CDP

FOX RIVER CDP

FUNNY RIVER CDP

GAMBELL CITY
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 5

Communities that meet 2009 Distressed Criteria

GAME CREEK CDP

GLACIER VIEW CDP

GOODNEWS BAY CITY

GRAYLING CITY

GULKANA CDP

GUSTAVUS CDP

HALIBUT COVE CDP

HAPPY VALLEY CDP

HARDING-BIRCH LAKES CDP

HEALY LAKE CDP

HOBART BAY CDP

HOLLIS CDP

HOLY CROSS CITY

HOOPER BAY CITY

HOPE CDP

HUSLIA CITY

HYDABURG CITY

HYDER CDP

KAKE CITY

KALTAG CITY

KARLUK CDP

KASIGLUK CDP

KENNY LAKE CDP

KIPNUK CDP

KIVALINA CITY

KLUKWAN CDP

KODIAK STATION CDP

KOKHANOK CDP

KOLIGANEK CDP

KONGIGANAK CDP

KOTLIK CITY

KOYUK CITY

KOYUKUK CITY

KUPREANOF CITY

KWETHLUK CITY

KWIGILLINGOK CDP

LAKE LOUISE CDP

LAKE MINCHUMINA CDP

LIVENGOOD CDP

LOWER KALSKAG CITY

LUTAK CDP

MANLEY HOT SPRINGS CDP

MANOKOTAK CITY

MARSHALL CITY

MCCARTHY CDP
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 6

Communities that meet 2009 Distressed Criteria

MENTASTA LAKE CDP

MEYERS CHUCK

MINTO CDP

MOSQUITO LAKE CDP

MOUNTAIN VILLAGE CITY

MUD BAY CDP

NANWALEK CDP

NAPAKIAK CITY

NAUKATI BAY CDP

NELCHINA CDP

NEW STUYAHOK CITY

NEWTOK CDP

NIKOLAEVSK CDP

NIKOLAI CITY

NINILCHIK CDP

NONDALTON CITY

NOORVIK CITY

NORTHWAY CDP

NORTHWAY VILLAGE

NULATO CITY

NUNAM IQUA CITY

OLD HARBOR CITY

OUZINKIE CITY

PAXSON CDP

PELICAN CITY

PERRYVILLE CDP

PILOT STATION CITY

PITKAS POINT CDP

PLATINUM CITY

POINT BAKER CDP

POPE-VANNOY LANDING CDP

PORT ALEXANDER

PORT ALSWORTH CDP

PORT GRAHAM CDP

PORT PROTECTION CDP

PORTAGE CREEK CDP

QUINHAGAK CITY

RAMPART CDP

RED DEVIL CDP

RUBY CITY

RUSSIAN MISSION CITY

SAVOONGA CITY

SCAMMON BAY CITY

SELAWIK CITY

SELDOVIA CITY
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 7

Communities that meet 2009 Distressed Criteria

SHAGELUK CITY

SHISHMAREF CITY

SKWENTNA CDP

SLANA CDP

SLEETMUTE CDP

STEBBINS CITY

STEVENS VILLAGE CDP

STONY RIVER CDP

SUSITNA CDP

TANACROSS CDP

TATITLEK CDP

TELLER CITY

TENAKEE SPRINGS CITY

TETLIN CDP

THOMS PLACE

THORNE BAY CITY

TOGIAK CITY

TOKSOOK BAY CITY

TOLSONA CDP

TONSINA CDP

TRAPPER CREEK CDP

TULUKSAK CDP

TUNTUTULIAK CDP

TUNUNAK CDP

TWIN HILLS CDP

UGASHIK CDP

UPPER KALSKAG CITY

VENETIE CDP

WHALE PASS CDP

WHITESTONE CAMP CDP

WILLOW CREEK CDP

WISEMAN CDP

Y CDP

*Communities Classified as Distressed through the Appeals Process

The following communities have successfully completed the appeals process and 

been reclassified by the Denali Commission as distressed communities:

HAINES (Granted 2008)

GLENNALLEN (Granted 2007)

CHENEGA (Granted 2006)

NANWALEK (Granted 2006)

ATMAUTLUAK (Granted 2005)

GEORGETOWN (Granted 2005)

KONGIGANAK (Granted 2005)
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 8

MCGRATH (Granted 2005)

NAPASKIAK (Granted 2005)

NEWTOK (Granted 2005)

OSCARVILLE (Granted 2005)

SHAKTOOLIK (Granted 2005)

BREVIG MISSION (Granted 2005)

PORT GRAHAM (Granted 2004)

NEWHALEN (Granted 2001)

Communities that do not meet 2009 Distressed Criteria

ADAK CITY

AKUTAN CITY

ANAKTUVUK PASS CITY

ANCHOR POINT CDP

ANCHORAGE

ANDERSON CITY

ANIAK CITY

ATKA CITY

ATQASUK CITY

BARROW CITY

BEAR CREEK CDP

BEAVER CDP

BETHEL CITY

BIG LAKE CDP

BUCKLAND CITY

BUFFALO SOAPSTONE CDP

BUTTE CDP

CANTWELL CDP

CHENEGA CDP

CHICKALOON CDP

CHIGNIK CITY

CHISTOCHINA CDP

COFFMAN COVE CITY

COHOE CDP

COLD BAY CITY

COLDFOOT CDP

COLLEGE CDP

COPPER CENTER CDP

COPPERVILLE CDP

CORDOVA CITY

CRAIG CITY

DEERING CITY

DELTA JUNCTION CITY

DELTANA CDP

DIAMOND RIDGE CDP

DILLINGHAM CITY
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 9

Communities that do not meet 2009 Distressed Criteria

DIOMEDE CITY

DOT LAKE VILLAGE

EGEGIK CITY

ESTER CDP

EVANSVILLE CDP

FAIRBANKS CITY

FALSE PASS CITY

FARM LOOP CDP

FISHHOOK CDP

FORT YUKON CITY

FOUR MILE ROAD CDP

FOX CDP

FRITZ CREEK CDP

GAKONA CDP

GALENA CITY

GATEWAY CDP

GLENNALLEN CDP

GOLOVIN CITY

HAINES CDP

HEALY CDP

HOMER CITY

HOONAH CITY

HOUSTON CITY

HUGHES CITY

IGIUGIG CITY

ILIAMNA CITY

JUNEAU CITY

KACHEMAK CITY

KAKTOVIK CITY

KALIFORNSKY CDP

KASAAN CITY

KASILOF CDP

KENAI CITY

KETCHIKAN CITY

KIANA CITY

KING COVE CITY

KING SALMON CDP

KLAWOCK CITY

KNIK RIVER CDP

KNIK-FAIRVIEW CDP

KOBUK CITY

KODIAK CITY

KOTZEBUE CITY

LAKES CDP

LARSEN BAY CITY
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 10

Communities that do not meet 2009 Distressed Criteria

LAZY MOUNTAIN CDP

LEVELOCK CDP

LIME VILLAGE CDP

LOWELL POINT CDP

MCGRATH CITY

MCKINLEY PARK CDP

MEADOW LAKES CDP

MEKORYUK CITY

MENDELTNA CDP

METLAKATLA

MOOSE CREEK CDP

MOOSE PASS CDP

NAKNEK CDP

NAPASKIAK CITY

NELSON LAGOON CDP

NENANA CITY

NEWHALEN CITY

NIGHTMUTE CITY

NIKISKI CDP

NIKOLSKI CDP

NOATAK CDP

NOME CITY

NORTH POLE CITY

NORTHWAY JUNCION CDP

NUIQSUT CITY

NUNAPITCHUK CITY

OSCARVILLE CDP

PALMER CITY

PEDRO BAY CDP

PETERSBURG CITY

PETERSVILLE CDP

PILOT POINT CDP

PLEASANT VALLEY CDP

POINT HOPE CITY

POINT LAY CDP

POINT MACKENZIE CDP

PORT HEIDEN CITY

PORT LIONS CITY

PRIMROSE CDP

PRUDHOE BAY

RED DOG MINE CDP

RIDGEWAY CDP

SAINT GEORGE CITY

SAINT MARYS CITY

SAINT MICHAEL CITY
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 11

SAINT PAUL CITY

SALAMATOF CDP

SALCHA CDP

SAND POINT CITY

SAXMAN CITY

SELDOVIA VILLAGE CDP

SEWARD CITY

SHAKTOOLIK CITY

SHUNGNAK CITY

SILVER SPRINGS CDP

SITKA CITY

SKAGWAY CITY

SOLDOTNA CITY

SOUTH NAKNEK CDP

STERLING CDP

SUNRISE CDP

SUTTON-ALPINE CDP

TAKOTNA CDP

TALKEETNA CDP

TANAINA CDP

TANANA CITY

TAZLINA CDP

TOK CDP

TWO RIVERS CDP

TYONEK CDP

UNALAKLEET CITY

UNALASKA CITY

VALDEZ CITY

WAINWRIGHT CITY

WALES CITY

WASILLA CITY

WHITE MOUNTAIN CITY

WHITTIER CITY

WILLOW CDP

WOMENS BAY CDP

WRANGELL CITY

YAKUTAT

Communities that are determined distressed when plus/minus 3% formula* 

is applied to data.

The following is the list of criteria for communities that do not meet the 2009 

surrogate standard for distressed communities.

Additional communities that meet distressed criteria when using 

plus/minus 3% formula
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 12

ANCHOR POINT CDP

ANDERSON CITY

BEAVER CDP

BUCKLAND CITY

COHOE CDP

DOT LAKE VILLAGE

FORT YUKON CITY

FRITZ CREEK CDP

HAINES CDP

HOMER CITY

HOONAH CITY

KACHEMAK CITY

KIANA CITY

Additional communities that meet distressed criteria when using 

plus/minus 3% formula

KOBUK CITY

LARSEN BAY CITY

LEVELOCK CDP

MCKINLEY PARK CDP

NAPASKIAK CITY

NENANA CITY

NIGHTMUTE CITY

NIKOLSKI CDP

NUNAPITCHUK CITY

POINT HOPE CITY

POINT MACKENZIE CDP

PORT LIONS CITY

SAINT MICHAEL CITY

SALCHA CDP

SELDOVIA VILLAGE CDP

SHUNGNAK CITY

SOUTH NAKNEK CDP

WALES CITY

WHITTIER CITY

WILLOW CDP

WRANGELL CITY

3% Criteria

Criteria 1 Average earnings in 2008 from UI covered employment and fishing less than 

$14,872 x 1.03 = $15,318 (change from $14,872)

Criteria 2 The percentage of residents 16 and over with 2008 earnings less than 

minimum wage of $14,872 greater than 67% (change from 70%)
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 13

Criteria 3 The percentage of residents 16 and over employed in all four quarters of 2008 

is less than 33% (change from 30%)

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Borough/Census Area and Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

Aleutians East Borough

AKUTAN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 28,396 41.9 72.0

COLD BAY CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,035 46.3 50.0

FALSE PASS CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 57,770 57.7 50.0

KING COVE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 41,778 63.5 36.2

NELSON LAGOON 

CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 38,340 65.4 36.5

SAND POINT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 47,564 64.0 38.1

Aleutians West Census Area

ADAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,785 60.7 26.8

ATKA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,377 46.9 63.3

NIKOLSKI CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,971 68.2 36.4 Yes

SAINT GEORGE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,695 66.2 33.8

SAINT PAUL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 27,056 59.2 42.6

UNALASKA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 40,743 33.8 67.1

Anchorage Municipality

ANCHORAGE Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,814 53.7 46.9

Bethel Census Area

AKIACHAK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 11,477 75.1 27.8

AKIAK CITY Distressed Non-Distressed 10,885 70.4 44.2

ANIAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,790 57.8 42.2

ATMAUTLUAK CDP Distressed Distressed 7,875 80.9 23.0

BETHEL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 28,323 47.8 49.0

CHEFORNAK CITY Distressed Distressed 11,206 78.0 45.5

CHUATHBALUK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,981 76.7 35.0

CROOKED CREEK 

CDP Distressed Distressed 9,767 76.7 34.9

EEK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,585 76.6 37.8

GOODNEWS BAY 

CITY Distressed Distressed 12,293 76.4 29.7

KASIGLUK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,131 80.0 36.5

KIPNUK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,404 79.5 31.0

KONGIGANAK CDP Distressed Distressed 8,975 81.0 35.4

KWETHLUK CITY Distressed Distressed 9,523 76.0 30.1

KWIGILLINGOK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,249 71.8 38.7

LIME VILLAGE CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 11,676 64.3 35.7

LOWER KALSKAG 

CITY Distressed Distressed 7,970 78.8 33.3

MEKORYUK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,197 65.8 42.6

NAPAKIAK CITY Distressed Distressed 9,049 79.2 40.7

NAPASKIAK CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 10,889 69.9 37.7 Yes
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 14

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Borough/Census Area and Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

NEWTOK CDP Distressed Distressed 8,396 80.7 43.6

NIGHTMUTE CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,136 67.9 47.4 Yes

NUNAPITCHUK CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,205 69.6 46.1 Yes

OSCARVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,932 48.3 62.1

PLATINUM CITY Distressed Distressed 10,158 82.4 35.3

QUINHAGAK CITY Distressed Distressed 11,186 75.6 33.2

RED DEVIL CDP Distressed Distressed 7,895 86.7 23.3

SLEETMUTE CDP Distressed Distressed 8,650 80.0 36.9

STONY RIVER CDP Distressed Distressed 10,181 80.6 27.8

TOKSOOK BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 12,693 75.4 40.3

TULUKSAK CDP Distressed Distressed 6,254 86.2 25.9

TUNTUTULIAK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,458 73.4 35.2

TUNUNAK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,981 79.3 35.7

UPPER KALSKAG 

CITY Distressed Distressed 10,477 75.5 31.3

Bristol Bay Borough

KING SALMON CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 32,077 48.8 38.4

NAKNEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 30,456 55.9 39.2

SOUTH NAKNEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,530 68.8 17.2 Yes

Denali Borough

ANDERSON CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,923 68.6 31.4 Yes

CANTWELL CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,355 65.5 31.6

FERRY CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 10,708 76.7 16.7

HEALY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,048 60.6 37.3

MCKINLEY PARK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 15,131 66.8 27.4 Yes

Dillingham Census Area

ALEKNAGIK CITY Distressed Distressed 18,970 70.3 29.7

CLARKS POINT CITY Distressed Distressed 10,431 88.9 33.3

DILLINGHAM CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,258 50.8 46.7

EKWOK CITY Distressed Distressed 12,338 72.0 37.8

KOLIGANEK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 13,862 72.0 30.5

MANOKOTAK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,486 82.8 23.2

NEW STUYAHOK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,777 76.7 34.7

PORTAGE CREEK 

CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

TOGIAK CITY Distressed Distressed 13,226 79.3 25.6

TWIN HILLS CDP Distressed Distressed 9,870 74.1 34.5

Fairbanks North star Borough

COLLEGE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,633 53.3 46.6

EIELSON AFB Distressed Distressed 4,757 88.2 12.0

ESTER CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,875 52.3 46.2

FAIRBANKS CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,929 60.8 40.4
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 15

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Borough/Census Area and Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

FOX CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,995 52.0 45.6

HARDING-BIRCH 

LAKES CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 16,571 70.1 25.7

MOOSE CREEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,711 64.0 37.1

NORTH POLE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,706 60.2 41.4

PLEASANT VALLEY 

CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,967 61.0 36.8

SALCHA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,932 68.3 31.3 Yes

TWO RIVERS CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,622 51.7 46.5

Haines Borough

COVENANT LIFE CDP Distressed Distressed 10,881 73.8 29.2

EXCURSION INLET 

CDP Distressed Distressed ND 76.9 15.4

HAINES CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,640 70.5 31.4 Yes

LUTAK CDP Distressed Distressed 12,377 66.7 25.0

MOSQUITO LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 11,708 76.1 24.4

MUD BAY CDP Distressed Distressed 13,501 69.5 29.7

Hoonah-Angoon Census Area

ANGOON CITY Distressed Distressed 11,678 72.2 31.7

ELFIN COVE CDP Distressed Distressed 38,219 87.9 24.2

GAME CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

GUSTAVUS CDP Distressed Distressed 11,866 82.2 19.0

HOBART BAY CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

HOONAH CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 16,366 72.0 31.2 Yes

KLUKWAN CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 12,394 71.1 38.9

PELICAN CITY Distressed Distressed 25,854 77.6 22.4

TENAKEE SPRINGS 

CITY Distressed Distressed 11,922 81.9 26.6

WHITESTONE CAMP Distressed Non-Distressed 8,779 85.7 14.3

Juneau Borough

JUNEAU CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,495 50.7 49.8

Kenai Peninsula Borough

ANCHOR POINT CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,677 68.7 30.0 Yes

BEAR CREEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,559 53.9 44.0

BELUGA CDP Distressed Distressed 18,017 73.7 26.3

CLAM GULCH CDP Distressed Distressed 21,990 71.8 25.8

COHOE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,821 68.8 30.4 Yes

COOPER LANDING 

CDP Distressed Distressed 13,274 76.9 19.8

CROWN POINT CDP Distressed Distressed 14,808 64.0 26.0

DIAMOND RIDGE CDP Non-Distressed N/A 17,447 66.8 33.5

FOX RIVER CDP Distressed Distressed 5,044 87.4 15.7

FRITZ CREEK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,422 68.7 31.8 Yes
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 16

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Borough/Census Area and Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

FUNNY RIVER CDP Distressed Distressed 16,188 71.3 28.4

HALIBUT COVE CDP Distressed Distressed 27,996 90.9 12.1

HAPPY VALLEY CDP Distressed Distressed 13,150 75.9 22.3

HOMER CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 33,217 68.6 32.2 Yes

HOPE CDP Distressed Distressed 11,380 77.6 19.4

KACHEMAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,236 68.4 31.1 Yes

KALIFORNSKY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,574 57.8 43.3

KASILOF CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 27,574 66.3 34.6

KENAI CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,894 58.5 43.3

LOWELL POINT CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,340 56.1 46.3

MOOSE PASS CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 18,159 66.5 30.5

NANWALEK CDP Distressed Distressed 10,163 76.1 32.1

NIKISKI CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,878 62.1 39.0

NIKOLAEVSK CDP Distressed Distressed 20,578 79.0 21.9

NINILCHIK CDP Distressed Distressed 16,037 73.6 24.1

PORT GRAHAM CDP Distressed Distressed 12,370 70.5 34.8

PRIMROSE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,529 64.0 33.3

RIDGEWAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,022 61.9 38.5

SALAMATOF CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,181 64.5 35.9

SELDOVIA CITY Distressed Distressed 25,153 76.9 27.5

SELDOVIA VILLAGE 

CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,297 69.1 33.1 Yes

SEWARD CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,657 57.0 42.1

SOLDOTNA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,776 59.7 42.7

STERLING CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,807 60.9 39.5

SUNRISE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,554 56.3 31.3

TYONEK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 13,438 65.8 33.3

Ketchikan Gateway Borough

KETCHIKAN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,973 56.2 45.0

SAXMAN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,142 66.9 37.0

Kodiak Island Borough

AKHIOK CITY Distressed Distressed 12,688 72.5 52.5

ALENEVA CDP Distressed Distressed 10,330 83.3 16.7

CHINIAK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 13,197 71.7 23.3

KARLUK CDP Distressed Distressed 12,212 73.9 43.5

KODIAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 42,358 55.6 51.4

KODIAK STATION CDP Distressed Distressed 6,960 85.3 17.7

LARSEN BAY CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,675 70.2 31.6 Yes

OLD HARBOR CITY Distressed Distressed 18,844 82.9 28.3

OUZINKIE CITY Distressed Non-Distressed 14,719 74.1 40.1

PORT LIONS CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 18,225 72.3 32.7 Yes
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 17

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Borough/Census Area and Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

WOMENS BAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,184 63.5 35.7

Lake and Peninsula Borough

CHIGNIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 50,220 44.9 51.0

CHIGNIK LAGOON Distressed Distressed 80,571 79.4 25.4

CHIGNIK LAKE Distressed Non-Distressed 9,977 82.2 28.8

EGEGIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,726 64.0 34.0

IGIUGIG CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,254 58.6 55.2

ILIAMNA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,022 51.1 42.9

KOKHANOK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,167 78.4 30.4

LEVELOCK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,100 69.2 32.7 Yes

NEWHALEN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,267 47.5 45.9

NONDALTON CITY Distressed Distressed 11,836 76.5 29.5

PEDRO BAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,090 62.5 37.5

PERRYVILLE CDP Distressed Distressed 15,266 77.1 29.2

PILOT POINT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,041 69.6 47.8

POPE-VANNOY 

LANDING CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

PORT ALSWORTH 

CDP Distressed Distressed 10,014 82.4 22.4

PORT HEIDEN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 31,410 53.0 40.9

UGASHIK CDP Distressed Distressed 35,151 75.0 16.7

Matanuska-Susitna Borough

BIG LAKE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,451 65.2 35.0

BUFFALO 

SOAPSTONE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,950 57.0 41.6

BUTTE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,156 60.0 40.3

CHASE CDP Distressed Distressed 19,813 72.3 27.7

CHICKALOON CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,802 65.7 32.9

FARM LOOP CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,527 62.3 39.4

FISHHOOK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,566 57.7 42.7

GATEWAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,339 57.1 43.0

GLACIER VIEW CDP Distressed Distressed 15,934 71.2 23.7

HOUSTON CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,539 63.9 36.4

KNIK RIVER CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,980 59.1 39.7

KNIK-FAIRVIEW CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,329 56.4 43.3

LAKE LOUISE CDP Distressed Distressed 12,629 83.3 16.7

LAKES CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,670 58.3 42.6

LAZY MOUNTAIN CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,643 63.5 36.3

MEADOW LAKES CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,534 61.8 38.0

PALMER CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,863 61.8 40.2

PETERSVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,527 66.7 33.3

POINT MACKENZIE 

CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,721 69.9 30.8 Yes
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 18

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Borough/Census Area and Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

SKWENTNA CDP Distressed Distressed 5,032 88.6 7.1

SUSITNA CDP Distressed Distressed 10,582 80.8 11.5

SUTTON-ALPINE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,872 64.2 33.2

TALKEETNA CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,717 66.5 34.3

TANAINA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,923 56.2 44.2

TRAPPER CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 12,176 76.5 23.7

WASILLA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,153 61.0 39.2

WILLOW CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 17,539 69.4 29.3 Yes

Y CDP Distressed Distressed 12,583 75.5 25.6

Nome Census Area

BREVIG MISSION CITY Distressed Distressed 9,672 76.1 38.5

DIOMEDE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,117 63.9 51.4

ELIM CITY Distressed Distressed 11,293 71.9 36.2

GAMBELL CITY Distressed Distressed 8,954 77.9 31.7

GOLOVIN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,194 55.6 60.6

KOYUK CITY Distressed Distressed 11,414 75.3 38.9

NOME CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 28,859 49.1 49.7

SAINT MICHAEL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,528 69.7 32.8 Yes

SAVOONGA CITY Distressed Distressed 9,942 78.9 25.9

SHAKTOOLIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,659 65.1 44.1

SHISHMAREF CITY Distressed Distressed 9,466 78.6 36.5

STEBBINS CITY Distressed Distressed 8,198 80.0 30.1

TELLER CITY Distressed Distressed 11,405 72.2 38.1

UNALAKLEET CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,593 64.7 37.2

WALES CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,225 69.1 46.8 Yes

WHITE MOUNTAIN 

CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,572 66.9 43.1

North Slope Borough

ANAKTUVUK PASS 

CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,441 63.1 33.3

ATQASUK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,637 61.7 34.4

BARROW CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,072 47.8 41.8

KAKTOVIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,552 53.4 45.5

NUIQSUT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,796 57.6 34.6

POINT HOPE CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,582 63.0 30.9 Yes

POINT LAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,115 55.7 32.9

PRUDHOE BAY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 67,434 13.6 81.8

WAINWRIGHT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,683 61.4 28.3

Northwest Arctic Borough

AMBLER CITY Distressed Non-Distressed 12,909 72.5 27.5

BUCKLAND CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,769 67.2 32.1 Yes

DEERING CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,491 60.9 43.5
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 19

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Borough/Census Area and Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

KIANA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,056 71.7 33.1 Yes

KIVALINA CITY Distressed Distressed 12,131 75.4 32.9

KOBUK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,458 68.4 28.9 Yes

KOTZEBUE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 27,127 52.0 46.7

NOATAK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,047 69.5 47.4

NOORVIK CITY Distressed Distressed 13,930 71.9 28.8

RED DOG MINE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed ND 0.0 100.0

SELAWIK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,795 74.6 24.1

SHUNGNAK CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,073 67.7 30.5 Yes

Petersburg Census Area

KAKE CITY Distressed Distressed 14,190 71.2 36.2

KUPREANOF CITY Distressed Distressed 8,198 75.0 25.0

PETERSBURG CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 35,319 69.6 33.1

PORT ALEXANDER Distressed Distressed 33,538 90.2 12.2

Prince of Wales-Outer Ketchikan/Hyder Census Area

COFFMAN COVE CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 17,621 65.2 32.6

CRAIG CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,289 65.0 38.1

EDNA BAY Distressed Distressed 20,202 82.4 11.8

HOLLIS CDP Distressed Distressed 13,883 71.7 31.5

HYDABURG CITY Distressed Distressed 16,977 72.5 24.8

HYDER CDP Distressed Distressed 5,692 89.6 11.7

KASAAN CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,516 66.7 35.9

KLAWOCK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,570 66.8 36.0

METLAKATLA Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,528 63.7 38.0

NAUKATI BAY CDP Distressed Distressed 8,366 84.6 18.8

POINT BAKER CDP Distressed Distressed ND 91.3 13.0

PORT PROTECTION 

CDP Distressed Distressed 3,037 92.6 14.8

THORNE BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 12,986 75.3 25.8

WHALE PASS CDP Distressed Distressed 3,088 90.5 9.5

Sitka Borough

SITKA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,706 58.7 43.3

Skagway Municipality

SKAGWAY CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,753 59.6 34.0

Southeast Fairbanks Census Area

ALCAN BORDER CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

BIG DELTA CDP Distressed Distressed 16,107 70.5 28.6

CHICKEN CDP Distressed Distressed ND 93.8 6.3

DELTA JUNCTION 

CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,322 64.8 35.3

DELTANA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,868 64.9 33.0

DOT LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 6,434 76.2 23.8
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 20

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Borough/Census Area and Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

DOT LAKE VILLAGE Non-Distressed Distressed 11,888 69.2 30.8 Yes

DRY CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 2,280 93.3 5.0

EAGLE CITY Distressed Distressed 8,532 79.0 23.5

EAGLE VILLAGE Distressed Distressed 6,871 86.6 17.9

FORT GREELY CDP Distressed Distressed 13,206 79.2 17.5

HEALY LAKE CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 5,296 81.8 27.3

NORTHWAY CDP Distressed Distressed 10,830 74.7 26.5

NORTHWAY 

JUNCTION CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 20,466 63.4 41.5

NORTHWAY VILLAGE Distressed Distressed 11,333 77.6 24.1

TANACROSS CDP Distressed Distressed 11,405 73.6 23.1

TETLIN CDP Distressed Distressed 6,986 84.6 20.5

TOK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,574 66.5 33.1

Valdez-Cordova Census Area

CHENEGA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,544 46.9 44.9

CHISANA Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

CHISTOCHINA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,326 67.1 34.2

CHITINA CDP Distressed Distressed 9,344 81.9 27.7

COPPER CENTER 

CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,208 68.4 33.7

COPPERVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,216 59.6 42.6

CORDOVA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 37,062 62.3 36.0

GAKONA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,410 62.8 36.1

GLENNALLEN CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,538 67.8 36.5

GULKANA CDP Distressed Distressed 12,411 70.4 33.8

KENNY LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 12,418 75.1 25.9

MCCARTHY CDP Distressed Distressed 7,392 82.4 10.3

MENDELTNA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,756 64.4 37.3

MENTASTA LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 12,105 76.1 19.6

NELCHINA CDP Distressed Distressed 16,341 71.2 25.4

PAXSON CDP Distressed Distressed 16,385 80.0 15.0

SILVER SPRINGS CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,820 63.5 32.2

SLANA CDP Distressed Distressed 7,777 77.1 14.7

TATITLEK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 14,513 77.8 30.6

TAZLINA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,896 62.5 37.5

TOLSONA CDP Distressed Distressed 11,188 72.4 24.1

TONSINA CDP Distressed Distressed 11,312 76.2 20.6

VALDEZ CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 37,124 49.4 51.4

WHITTIER CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 16,759 67.4 29.3 Yes

WILLOW CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,720 77.6 23.1

Wade Hampton Census Area
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 21

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Borough/Census Area and Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

ALAKANUK CITY Distressed Distressed 8,919 80.6 27.4

CHEVAK CITY Distressed Distressed 8,948 78.7 33.3

EMMONAK CITY Distressed Distressed 12,814 71.1 35.4

HOOPER BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 8,465 79.5 30.2

KOTLIK CITY Distressed Distressed 9,486 79.5 32.6

MARSHALL CITY Distressed Distressed 12,078 72.0 39.4

MOUNTAIN VILLAGE 

CITY Distressed Distressed 12,415 73.0 36.7

NUNAM IQUA CITY Distressed Distressed 11,310 73.3 54.3

PILOT STATION CITY Distressed Distressed 8,726 80.7 30.2

PITKAS POINT CDP Distressed Distressed 8,229 81.1 32.1

RUSSIAN MISSION 

CITY Distressed Distressed 10,357 74.9 37.0

SAINT MARYS CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,656 66.4 37.4

SCAMMON BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 8,506 80.8 30.6

Wrangell Borough

MEYERS CHUCK Distressed N/A ND 100.0 5.3

THOMS PLACE Distressed Distressed ND 62.5 25.0

WRANGELL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,648 68.1 31.8 Yes

Yakutat Borough

YAKUTAT Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,288 65.8 38.0

Yukon-Koyukuk Census Area

ALATNA CDP Distressed Distressed 8,374 88.2 11.8

ALLAKAKET ANVSA Distressed Distressed 8,554 80.8 27.2

ANVIK CITY Distressed Distressed 13,177 73.2 44.6

ARCTIC VILLAGE CDP Distressed Distressed 9,874 78.4 26.7

BEAVER CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 11,809 67.8 37.3 Yes

BETTLES CITY Distressed Distressed 10,781 81.0 28.6

BIRCH CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 2,059 94.1 0.0

CENTRAL CDP Distressed Distressed 10,536 83.8 20.0

CHALKYITSIK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,012 71.2 39.0

CIRCLE CDP Distressed Distressed 4,813 92.3 12.8

COLDFOOT CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,002 57.9 42.1

EVANSVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 31,679 40.0 60.0

FORT YUKON CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,712 68.2 33.0 Yes

FOUR MILE ROAD 

CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 31,644 53.3 53.3

GALENA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,236 54.5 37.9

GRAYLING CITY Distressed Distressed 7,100 82.7 27.3

HOLY CROSS CITY Distressed Distressed 7,197 81.1 28.7

HUGHES CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,101 65.6 49.2

HUSLIA CITY Distressed Distressed 9,150 76.6 22.3
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 22

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Borough/Census Area and Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

KALTAG CITY Distressed Distressed 9,308 78.7 24.7

KOYUKUK CITY Distressed Distressed 8,867 78.8 37.9

LAKE MINCHUMINA 

CDP Distressed Distressed ND 73.3 20.0

LIVENGOOD CDP Distressed Distressed 10,664 81.0 16.7

MANLEY HOT 

SPRINGS CDP Distressed Distressed 14,240 74.4 28.2

MCGRATH CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,725 61.3 34.7

MINTO CDP Distressed Distressed 9,398 79.7 27.5

NENANA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,389 68.1 27.7 Yes

NIKOLAI CITY Distressed Distressed 6,674 86.1 13.9

NULATO CITY Distressed Distressed 10,838 72.8 33.2

RAMPART CDP Distressed Distressed 9,945 78.9 47.4

RUBY CITY Distressed Distressed 14,524 70.7 36.8

SHAGELUK CITY Distressed Distressed 7,903 82.1 23.9

STEVENS VILLAGE 

CDP Distressed Distressed 7,016 85.7 25.0

TAKOTNA CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 20,634 54.5 54.5

TANANA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,408 63.2 34.8

VENETIE CDP Distressed Distressed 6,923 84.9 21.6

WISEMAN CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 18,332 76.9 23.1

Cells marked with ND were not able to be disclosed due to confidentiality policies.

Source: Alaska Department of Labor, Research and Analysis Section; Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 23

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

ADAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,785 60.7 26.8

AKHIOK CITY Distressed Distressed 12,688 72.5 52.5

AKIACHAK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 11,477 75.1 27.8

AKIAK CITY Distressed Non-Distressed 10,885 70.4 44.2

AKUTAN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 28,396 41.9 72.0

ALAKANUK CITY Distressed Distressed 8,919 80.6 27.4

ALATNA CDP Distressed Distressed 8,374 88.2 11.8

ALCAN BORDER CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

ALEKNAGIK CITY Distressed Distressed 18,970 70.3 29.7

ALENEVA CDP Distressed Distressed 10,330 83.3 16.7

ALLAKAKET ANVSA Distressed Distressed 8,554 80.8 27.2

AMBLER CITY Distressed Non-Distressed 12,909 72.5 27.5

ANAKTUVUK PASS CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,441 63.1 33.3

ANCHOR POINT CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,677 68.7 30.0 Yes

ANCHORAGE Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,814 53.7 46.9

ANDERSON CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,923 68.6 31.4 Yes

ANGOON CITY Distressed Distressed 11,678 72.2 31.7

ANIAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,790 57.8 42.2

ANVIK CITY Distressed Distressed 13,177 73.2 44.6

ARCTIC VILLAGE CDP Distressed Distressed 9,874 78.4 26.7

ATKA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,377 46.9 63.3

ATMAUTLUAK CDP Distressed Distressed 7,875 80.9 23.0

ATQASUK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,637 61.7 34.4

BARROW CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,072 47.8 41.8

BEAR CREEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,559 53.9 44.0

BEAVER CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 11,809 67.8 37.3 Yes

BELUGA CDP Distressed Distressed 18,017 73.7 26.3

BETHEL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 28,323 47.8 49.0

BETTLES CITY Distressed Distressed 10,781 81.0 28.6

BIG DELTA CDP Distressed Distressed 16,107 70.5 28.6

BIG LAKE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,451 65.2 35.0

BIRCH CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 2,059 94.1 0.0

BREVIG MISSION CITY Distressed Distressed 9,672 76.1 38.5

BUCKLAND CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,769 67.2 32.1 Yes

BUFFALO SOAPSTONE Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,950 57.0 41.6

BUTTE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,156 60.0 40.3

CANTWELL CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,355 65.5 31.6

CENTRAL CDP Distressed Distressed 10,536 83.8 20.0

CHALKYITSIK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,012 71.2 39.0

CHASE CDP Distressed Distressed 19,813 72.3 27.7
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 24

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

CHEFORNAK CITY Distressed Distressed 11,206 78.0 45.5

CHENEGA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,544 46.9 44.9

CHEVAK CITY Distressed Distressed 8,948 78.7 33.3

CHICKALOON CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,802 65.7 32.9

CHICKEN CDP Distressed Distressed ND 93.8 6.3

CHIGNIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 50,220 44.9 51.0

CHIGNIK LAGOON Distressed Distressed 80,571 79.4 25.4

CHIGNIK LAKE Distressed Non-Distressed 9,977 82.2 28.8

CHINIAK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 13,197 71.7 23.3

CHISANA Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

CHISTOCHINA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,326 67.1 34.2

CHITINA CDP Distressed Distressed 9,344 81.9 27.7

CHUATHBALUK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,981 76.7 35.0

CIRCLE CDP Distressed Distressed 4,813 92.3 12.8

CLAM GULCH CDP Distressed Distressed 21,990 71.8 25.8

CLARKS POINT CITY Distressed Distressed 10,431 88.9 33.3

COFFMAN COVE CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 17,621 65.2 32.6

COHOE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,821 68.8 30.4 Yes

COLD BAY CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,035 46.3 50.0

COLDFOOT CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,002 57.9 42.1

COLLEGE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,633 53.3 46.6

COOPER LANDING CDP Distressed Distressed 13,274 76.9 19.8

COPPER CENTER CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,208 68.4 33.7

COPPERVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,216 59.6 42.6

CORDOVA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 37,062 62.3 36.0

COVENANT LIFE CDP Distressed Distressed 10,881 73.8 29.2

CRAIG CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,289 65.0 38.1

CROOKED CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,767 76.7 34.9

CROWN POINT CDP Distressed Distressed 14,808 64.0 26.0

DEERING CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,491 60.9 43.5

DELTA JUNCTION CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,322 64.8 35.3

DELTANA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,868 64.9 33.0

DIAMOND RIDGE CDP Non-Distressed N/A 17,447 66.8 33.5

DILLINGHAM CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,258 50.8 46.7

DIOMEDE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,117 63.9 51.4

DOT LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 6,434 76.2 23.8

DOT LAKE VILLAGE Non-Distressed Distressed 11,888 69.2 30.8 Yes

DRY CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 2,280 93.3 5.0

EAGLE CITY Distressed Distressed 8,532 79.0 23.5

EAGLE VILLAGE Distressed Distressed 6,871 86.6 17.9

EDNA BAY Distressed Distressed 20,202 82.4 11.8
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 25

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

EEK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,585 76.6 37.8

EGEGIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,726 64.0 34.0

EIELSON AFB Distressed Distressed 4,757 88.2 12.0

EKWOK CITY Distressed Distressed 12,338 72.0 37.8

ELFIN COVE CDP Distressed Distressed 38,219 87.9 24.2

ELIM CITY Distressed Distressed 11,293 71.9 36.2

EMMONAK CITY Distressed Distressed 12,814 71.1 35.4

ESTER CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,875 52.3 46.2

EVANSVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 31,679 40.0 60.0

EXCURSION INLET CDP Distressed Distressed ND 76.9 15.4

FAIRBANKS CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,929 60.8 40.4

FALSE PASS CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 57,770 57.7 50.0

FARM LOOP CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,527 62.3 39.4

FERRY CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 10,708 76.7 16.7

FISHHOOK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,566 57.7 42.7

FORT GREELY CDP Distressed Distressed 13,206 79.2 17.5

FORT YUKON CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,712 68.2 33.0 Yes

FOUR MILE ROAD CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 31,644 53.3 53.3

FOX CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,995 52.0 45.6

FOX RIVER CDP Distressed Distressed 5,044 87.4 15.7

FRITZ CREEK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,422 68.7 31.8 Yes

FUNNY RIVER CDP Distressed Distressed 16,188 71.3 28.4

GAKONA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,410 62.8 36.1

GALENA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,236 54.5 37.9

GAMBELL CITY Distressed Distressed 8,954 77.9 31.7

GAME CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

GATEWAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,339 57.1 43.0

GLACIER VIEW CDP Distressed Distressed 15,934 71.2 23.7

GLENNALLEN CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,538 67.8 36.5

GOLOVIN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,194 55.6 60.6

GOODNEWS BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 12,293 76.4 29.7

GRAYLING CITY Distressed Distressed 7,100 82.7 27.3

GULKANA CDP Distressed Distressed 12,411 70.4 33.8

GUSTAVUS CDP Distressed Distressed 11,866 82.2 19.0

HAINES CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,640 70.5 31.4 Yes

HALIBUT COVE CDP Distressed Distressed 27,996 90.9 12.1

HAPPY VALLEY CDP Distressed Distressed 13,150 75.9 22.3

HARDING-BIRCH LAKES 

CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 16,571 70.1 25.7

HEALY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,048 60.6 37.3

HEALY LAKE CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 5,296 81.8 27.3
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 26

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

HOBART BAY CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

HOLLIS CDP Distressed Distressed 13,883 71.7 31.5

HOLY CROSS CITY Distressed Distressed 7,197 81.1 28.7

HOMER CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 33,217 68.6 32.2 Yes

HOONAH CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 16,366 72.0 31.2 Yes

HOOPER BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 8,465 79.5 30.2

HOPE CDP Distressed Distressed 11,380 77.6 19.4

HOUSTON CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,539 63.9 36.4

HUGHES CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,101 65.6 49.2

HUSLIA CITY Distressed Distressed 9,150 76.6 22.3

HYDABURG CITY Distressed Distressed 16,977 72.5 24.8

HYDER CDP Distressed Distressed 5,692 89.6 11.7

IGIUGIG CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,254 58.6 55.2

ILIAMNA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,022 51.1 42.9

JUNEAU CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,495 50.7 49.8

KACHEMAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,236 68.4 31.1 Yes

KAKE CITY Distressed Distressed 14,190 71.2 36.2

KAKTOVIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,552 53.4 45.5

KALIFORNSKY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,574 57.8 43.3

KALTAG CITY Distressed Distressed 9,308 78.7 24.7

KARLUK CDP Distressed Distressed 12,212 73.9 43.5

KASAAN CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,516 66.7 35.9

KASIGLUK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,131 80.0 36.5

KASILOF CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 27,574 66.3 34.6

KENAI CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,894 58.5 43.3

KENNY LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 12,418 75.1 25.9

KETCHIKAN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,973 56.2 45.0

KIANA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,056 71.7 33.1 Yes

KING COVE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 41,778 63.5 36.2

KING SALMON CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 32,077 48.8 38.4

KIPNUK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,404 79.5 31.0

KIVALINA CITY Distressed Distressed 12,131 75.4 32.9

KLAWOCK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,570 66.8 36.0

KLUKWAN CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 12,394 71.1 38.9

KNIK RIVER CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,980 59.1 39.7

KNIK-FAIRVIEW CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,329 56.4 43.3

KOBUK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,458 68.4 28.9 Yes

KODIAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 42,358 55.6 51.4

KODIAK STATION CDP Distressed Distressed 6,960 85.3 17.7

KOKHANOK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,167 78.4 30.4

KOLIGANEK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 13,862 72.0 30.5
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 27

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

KONGIGANAK CDP Distressed Distressed 8,975 81.0 35.4

KOTLIK CITY Distressed Distressed 9,486 79.5 32.6

KOTZEBUE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 27,127 52.0 46.7

KOYUK CITY Distressed Distressed 11,414 75.3 38.9

KOYUKUK CITY Distressed Distressed 8,867 78.8 37.9

KUPREANOF CITY Distressed Distressed 8,198 75.0 25.0

KWETHLUK CITY Distressed Distressed 9,523 76.0 30.1

KWIGILLINGOK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,249 71.8 38.7

LAKE LOUISE CDP Distressed Distressed 12,629 83.3 16.7

LAKE MINCHUMINA CDP Distressed Distressed ND 73.3 20.0

LAKES CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,670 58.3 42.6

LARSEN BAY CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,675 70.2 31.6 Yes

LAZY MOUNTAIN CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,643 63.5 36.3

LEVELOCK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,100 69.2 32.7 Yes

LIME VILLAGE CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 11,676 64.3 35.7

LIVENGOOD CDP Distressed Distressed 10,664 81.0 16.7

LOWELL POINT CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,340 56.1 46.3

LOWER KALSKAG CITY Distressed Distressed 7,970 78.8 33.3

LUTAK CDP Distressed Distressed 12,377 66.7 25.0

MANLEY HOT SPRINGS 

CDP Distressed Distressed 14,240 74.4 28.2

MANOKOTAK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,486 82.8 23.2

MARSHALL CITY Distressed Distressed 12,078 72.0 39.4

MCCARTHY CDP Distressed Distressed 7,392 82.4 10.3

MCGRATH CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,725 61.3 34.7

MCKINLEY PARK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 15,131 66.8 27.4 Yes

MEADOW LAKES CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,534 61.8 38.0

MEKORYUK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,197 65.8 42.6

MENDELTNA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,756 64.4 37.3

MENTASTA LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 12,105 76.1 19.6

METLAKATLA Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,528 63.7 38.0

MEYERS CHUCK Distressed N/A ND 100.0 5.3

MINTO CDP Distressed Distressed 9,398 79.7 27.5

MOOSE CREEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,711 64.0 37.1

MOOSE PASS CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 18,159 66.5 30.5

MOSQUITO LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 11,708 76.1 24.4

MOUNTAIN VILLAGE 

CITY Distressed Distressed 12,415 73.0 36.7

MUD BAY CDP Distressed Distressed 13,501 69.5 29.7

NAKNEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 30,456 55.9 39.2

NANWALEK CDP Distressed Distressed 10,163 76.1 32.1
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 28

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

NAPAKIAK CITY Distressed Distressed 9,049 79.2 40.7

NAPASKIAK CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 10,889 69.9 37.7 Yes

NAUKATI BAY CDP Distressed Distressed 8,366 84.6 18.8

NELCHINA CDP Distressed Distressed 16,341 71.2 25.4

NELSON LAGOON CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 38,340 65.4 36.5

NENANA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,389 68.1 27.7 Yes

NEW STUYAHOK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,777 76.7 34.7

NEWHALEN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,267 47.5 45.9

NEWTOK CDP Distressed Distressed 8,396 80.7 43.6

NIGHTMUTE CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,136 67.9 47.4 Yes

NIKISKI CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,878 62.1 39.0

NIKOLAEVSK CDP Distressed Distressed 20,578 79.0 21.9

NIKOLAI CITY Distressed Distressed 6,674 86.1 13.9

NIKOLSKI CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,971 68.2 36.4 Yes

NINILCHIK CDP Distressed Distressed 16,037 73.6 24.1

NOATAK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,047 69.5 47.4

NOME CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 28,859 49.1 49.7

NONDALTON CITY Distressed Distressed 11,836 76.5 29.5

NOORVIK CITY Distressed Distressed 13,930 71.9 28.8

NORTH POLE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,706 60.2 41.4

NORTHWAY CDP Distressed Distressed 10,830 74.7 26.5

NORTHWAY JUNCTION 

CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 20,466 63.4 41.5

NORTHWAY VILLAGE Distressed Distressed 11,333 77.6 24.1

NUIQSUT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,796 57.6 34.6

NULATO CITY Distressed Distressed 10,838 72.8 33.2

NUNAM IQUA CITY Distressed Distressed 11,310 73.3 54.3

NUNAPITCHUK CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,205 69.6 46.1 Yes

OLD HARBOR CITY Distressed Distressed 18,844 82.9 28.3

OSCARVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,932 48.3 62.1

OUZINKIE CITY Distressed Non-Distressed 14,719 74.1 40.1

PALMER CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,863 61.8 40.2

PAXSON CDP Distressed Distressed 16,385 80.0 15.0

PEDRO BAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,090 62.5 37.5

PELICAN CITY Distressed Distressed 25,854 77.6 22.4

PERRYVILLE CDP Distressed Distressed 15,266 77.1 29.2

PETERSBURG CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 35,319 69.6 33.1

PETERSVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,527 66.7 33.3

PILOT POINT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,041 69.6 47.8

PILOT STATION CITY Distressed Distressed 8,726 80.7 30.2

PITKAS POINT CDP Distressed Distressed 8,229 81.1 32.1
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 29

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

PLATINUM CITY Distressed Distressed 10,158 82.4 35.3

PLEASANT VALLEY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,967 61.0 36.8

POINT BAKER CDP Distressed Distressed ND 91.3 13.0

POINT HOPE CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,582 63.0 30.9 Yes

POINT LAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,115 55.7 32.9

POINT MACKENZIE CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,721 69.9 30.8 Yes

POPE-VANNOY 

LANDING CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

PORT ALEXANDER Distressed Distressed 33,538 90.2 12.2

PORT ALSWORTH CDP Distressed Distressed 10,014 82.4 22.4

PORT GRAHAM CDP Distressed Distressed 12,370 70.5 34.8

PORT HEIDEN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 31,410 53.0 40.9

PORT LIONS CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 18,225 72.3 32.7 Yes

PORT PROTECTION 

CDP Distressed Distressed 3,037 92.6 14.8

PORTAGE CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

PRIMROSE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,529 64.0 33.3

PRUDHOE BAY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 67,434 13.6 81.8

QUINHAGAK CITY Distressed Distressed 11,186 75.6 33.2

RAMPART CDP Distressed Distressed 9,945 78.9 47.4

RED DEVIL CDP Distressed Distressed 7,895 86.7 23.3

RED DOG MINE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed ND 0.0 100.0

RIDGEWAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,022 61.9 38.5

RUBY CITY Distressed Distressed 14,524 70.7 36.8

RUSSIAN MISSION CITY Distressed Distressed 10,357 74.9 37.0

SAINT GEORGE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,695 66.2 33.8

SAINT MARYS CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,656 66.4 37.4

SAINT MICHAEL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,528 69.7 32.8 Yes

SAINT PAUL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 27,056 59.2 42.6

SALAMATOF CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,181 64.5 35.9

SALCHA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,932 68.3 31.3 Yes

SAND POINT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 47,564 64.0 38.1

SAVOONGA CITY Distressed Distressed 9,942 78.9 25.9

SAXMAN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,142 66.9 37.0

SCAMMON BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 8,506 80.8 30.6

SELAWIK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,795 74.6 24.1

SELDOVIA CITY Distressed Distressed 25,153 76.9 27.5

SELDOVIA VILLAGE 

CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,297 69.1 33.1 Yes

SEWARD CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,657 57.0 42.1

SHAGELUK CITY Distressed Distressed 7,903 82.1 23.9

SHAKTOOLIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,659 65.1 44.1
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 30

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

SHISHMAREF CITY Distressed Distressed 9,466 78.6 36.5

SHUNGNAK CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,073 67.7 30.5 Yes

SILVER SPRINGS CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,820 63.5 32.2

SITKA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,706 58.7 43.3

SKAGWAY CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,753 59.6 34.0

SKWENTNA CDP Distressed Distressed 5,032 88.6 7.1

SLANA CDP Distressed Distressed 7,777 77.1 14.7

SLEETMUTE CDP Distressed Distressed 8,650 80.0 36.9

SOLDOTNA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,776 59.7 42.7

SOUTH NAKNEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,530 68.8 17.2 Yes

STEBBINS CITY Distressed Distressed 8,198 80.0 30.1

STERLING CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,807 60.9 39.5

STEVENS VILLAGE CDP Distressed Distressed 7,016 85.7 25.0

STONY RIVER CDP Distressed Distressed 10,181 80.6 27.8

SUNRISE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,554 56.3 31.3

SUSITNA CDP Distressed Distressed 10,582 80.8 11.5

SUTTON-ALPINE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,872 64.2 33.2

TAKOTNA CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 20,634 54.5 54.5

TALKEETNA CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,717 66.5 34.3

TANACROSS CDP Distressed Distressed 11,405 73.6 23.1

TANAINA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,923 56.2 44.2

TANANA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,408 63.2 34.8

TATITLEK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 14,513 77.8 30.6

TAZLINA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,896 62.5 37.5

TELLER CITY Distressed Distressed 11,405 72.2 38.1

TENAKEE SPRINGS 

CITY Distressed Distressed 11,922 81.9 26.6

TETLIN CDP Distressed Distressed 6,986 84.6 20.5

THOMS PLACE Distressed Distressed ND 62.5 25.0

THORNE BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 12,986 75.3 25.8

TOGIAK CITY Distressed Distressed 13,226 79.3 25.6

TOK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,574 66.5 33.1

TOKSOOK BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 12,693 75.4 40.3

TOLSONA CDP Distressed Distressed 11,188 72.4 24.1

TONSINA CDP Distressed Distressed 11,312 76.2 20.6

TRAPPER CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 12,176 76.5 23.7

TULUKSAK CDP Distressed Distressed 6,254 86.2 25.9

TUNTUTULIAK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,458 73.4 35.2

TUNUNAK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,981 79.3 35.7

TWIN HILLS CDP Distressed Distressed 9,870 74.1 34.5

TWO RIVERS CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,622 51.7 46.5
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 31

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Place

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

TYONEK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 13,438 65.8 33.3

UGASHIK CDP Distressed Distressed 35,151 75.0 16.7

UNALAKLEET CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,593 64.7 37.2

UNALASKA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 40,743 33.8 67.1

UPPER KALSKAG CITY Distressed Distressed 10,477 75.5 31.3

VALDEZ CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 37,124 49.4 51.4

VENETIE CDP Distressed Distressed 6,923 84.9 21.6

WAINWRIGHT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,683 61.4 28.3

WALES CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,225 69.1 46.8 Yes

WASILLA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,153 61.0 39.2

WHALE PASS CDP Distressed Distressed 3,088 90.5 9.5

WHITE MOUNTAIN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,572 66.9 43.1

WHITESTONE CAMP 

CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 8,779 85.7 14.3

WHITTIER CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 16,759 67.4 29.3 Yes

WILLOW CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 17,539 69.4 29.3 Yes

WILLOW CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,720 77.6 23.1

WISEMAN CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 18,332 76.9 23.1

WOMENS BAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,184 63.5 35.7

WRANGELL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,648 68.1 31.8 Yes

Y CDP Distressed Distressed 12,583 75.5 25.6

YAKUTAT Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,288 65.8 38.0

Cells marked with ND were not able to be disclosed due to confidentiality policies.

Source: Alaska Department of Labor, Research and Analysis Section; Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 32

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Distressed Status

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

AKHIOK CITY Distressed Distressed 12,688 72.5 52.5

AKIACHAK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 11,477 75.1 27.8

AKIAK CITY Distressed Non-Distressed 10,885 70.4 44.2

ALAKANUK CITY Distressed Distressed 8,919 80.6 27.4

ALATNA CDP Distressed Distressed 8,374 88.2 11.8

ALCAN BORDER CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

ALEKNAGIK CITY Distressed Distressed 18,970 70.3 29.7

ALENEVA CDP Distressed Distressed 10,330 83.3 16.7

ALLAKAKET ANVSA Distressed Distressed 8,554 80.8 27.2

AMBLER CITY Distressed Non-Distressed 12,909 72.5 27.5

ANGOON CITY Distressed Distressed 11,678 72.2 31.7

ANVIK CITY Distressed Distressed 13,177 73.2 44.6

ARCTIC VILLAGE CDP Distressed Distressed 9,874 78.4 26.7

ATMAUTLUAK CDP Distressed Distressed 7,875 80.9 23.0

BELUGA CDP Distressed Distressed 18,017 73.7 26.3

BETTLES CITY Distressed Distressed 10,781 81.0 28.6

BIG DELTA CDP Distressed Distressed 16,107 70.5 28.6

BIRCH CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 2,059 94.1 0.0

BREVIG MISSION CITY Distressed Distressed 9,672 76.1 38.5

CENTRAL CDP Distressed Distressed 10,536 83.8 20.0

CHALKYITSIK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,012 71.2 39.0

CHASE CDP Distressed Distressed 19,813 72.3 27.7

CHEFORNAK CITY Distressed Distressed 11,206 78.0 45.5

CHEVAK CITY Distressed Distressed 8,948 78.7 33.3

CHICKEN CDP Distressed Distressed ND 93.8 6.3

CHIGNIK LAGOON Distressed Distressed 80,571 79.4 25.4

CHIGNIK LAKE Distressed Non-Distressed 9,977 82.2 28.8

CHINIAK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 13,197 71.7 23.3

CHISANA Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

CHITINA CDP Distressed Distressed 9,344 81.9 27.7

CHUATHBALUK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,981 76.7 35.0

CIRCLE CDP Distressed Distressed 4,813 92.3 12.8

CLAM GULCH CDP Distressed Distressed 21,990 71.8 25.8

CLARKS POINT CITY Distressed Distressed 10,431 88.9 33.3

COOPER LANDING CDP Distressed Distressed 13,274 76.9 19.8

COVENANT LIFE CDP Distressed Distressed 10,881 73.8 29.2

CROOKED CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,767 76.7 34.9

CROWN POINT CDP Distressed Distressed 14,808 64.0 26.0

DOT LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 6,434 76.2 23.8

DRY CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 2,280 93.3 5.0
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 33

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Distressed Status

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

EAGLE CITY Distressed Distressed 8,532 79.0 23.5

EAGLE VILLAGE Distressed Distressed 6,871 86.6 17.9

EDNA BAY Distressed Distressed 20,202 82.4 11.8

EEK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,585 76.6 37.8

EIELSON AFB Distressed Distressed 4,757 88.2 12.0

EKWOK CITY Distressed Distressed 12,338 72.0 37.8

ELFIN COVE CDP Distressed Distressed 38,219 87.9 24.2

ELIM CITY Distressed Distressed 11,293 71.9 36.2

EMMONAK CITY Distressed Distressed 12,814 71.1 35.4

EXCURSION INLET CDP Distressed Distressed ND 76.9 15.4

FERRY CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 10,708 76.7 16.7

FORT GREELY CDP Distressed Distressed 13,206 79.2 17.5

FOX RIVER CDP Distressed Distressed 5,044 87.4 15.7

FUNNY RIVER CDP Distressed Distressed 16,188 71.3 28.4

GAMBELL CITY Distressed Distressed 8,954 77.9 31.7

GAME CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

GLACIER VIEW CDP Distressed Distressed 15,934 71.2 23.7

GOODNEWS BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 12,293 76.4 29.7

GRAYLING CITY Distressed Distressed 7,100 82.7 27.3

GULKANA CDP Distressed Distressed 12,411 70.4 33.8

GUSTAVUS CDP Distressed Distressed 11,866 82.2 19.0

HALIBUT COVE CDP Distressed Distressed 27,996 90.9 12.1

HAPPY VALLEY CDP Distressed Distressed 13,150 75.9 22.3

HARDING-BIRCH LAKES 

CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 16,571 70.1 25.7

HEALY LAKE CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 5,296 81.8 27.3

HOBART BAY CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

HOLLIS CDP Distressed Distressed 13,883 71.7 31.5

HOLY CROSS CITY Distressed Distressed 7,197 81.1 28.7

HOOPER BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 8,465 79.5 30.2

HOPE CDP Distressed Distressed 11,380 77.6 19.4

HUSLIA CITY Distressed Distressed 9,150 76.6 22.3

HYDABURG CITY Distressed Distressed 16,977 72.5 24.8

HYDER CDP Distressed Distressed 5,692 89.6 11.7

KAKE CITY Distressed Distressed 14,190 71.2 36.2

KALTAG CITY Distressed Distressed 9,308 78.7 24.7

KARLUK CDP Distressed Distressed 12,212 73.9 43.5

KASIGLUK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,131 80.0 36.5

KENNY LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 12,418 75.1 25.9

KIPNUK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,404 79.5 31.0

KIVALINA CITY Distressed Distressed 12,131 75.4 32.9
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 34

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Distressed Status

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

KLUKWAN CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 12,394 71.1 38.9

KODIAK STATION CDP Distressed Distressed 6,960 85.3 17.7

KOKHANOK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,167 78.4 30.4

KOLIGANEK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 13,862 72.0 30.5

KONGIGANAK CDP Distressed Distressed 8,975 81.0 35.4

KOTLIK CITY Distressed Distressed 9,486 79.5 32.6

KOYUK CITY Distressed Distressed 11,414 75.3 38.9

KOYUKUK CITY Distressed Distressed 8,867 78.8 37.9

KUPREANOF CITY Distressed Distressed 8,198 75.0 25.0

KWETHLUK CITY Distressed Distressed 9,523 76.0 30.1

KWIGILLINGOK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,249 71.8 38.7

LAKE LOUISE CDP Distressed Distressed 12,629 83.3 16.7

LAKE MINCHUMINA CDP Distressed Distressed ND 73.3 20.0

LIVENGOOD CDP Distressed Distressed 10,664 81.0 16.7

LOWER KALSKAG CITY Distressed Distressed 7,970 78.8 33.3

LUTAK CDP Distressed Distressed 12,377 66.7 25.0

MANLEY HOT SPRINGS 

CDP Distressed Distressed 14,240 74.4 28.2

MANOKOTAK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,486 82.8 23.2

MARSHALL CITY Distressed Distressed 12,078 72.0 39.4

MCCARTHY CDP Distressed Distressed 7,392 82.4 10.3

MENTASTA LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 12,105 76.1 19.6

MEYERS CHUCK Distressed N/A ND 100.0 5.3

MINTO CDP Distressed Distressed 9,398 79.7 27.5

MOSQUITO LAKE CDP Distressed Distressed 11,708 76.1 24.4

MOUNTAIN VILLAGE 

CITY Distressed Distressed 12,415 73.0 36.7

MUD BAY CDP Distressed Distressed 13,501 69.5 29.7

NANWALEK CDP Distressed Distressed 10,163 76.1 32.1

NAPAKIAK CITY Distressed Distressed 9,049 79.2 40.7

NAUKATI BAY CDP Distressed Distressed 8,366 84.6 18.8

NELCHINA CDP Distressed Distressed 16,341 71.2 25.4

NEW STUYAHOK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,777 76.7 34.7

NEWTOK CDP Distressed Distressed 8,396 80.7 43.6

NIKOLAEVSK CDP Distressed Distressed 20,578 79.0 21.9

NIKOLAI CITY Distressed Distressed 6,674 86.1 13.9

NINILCHIK CDP Distressed Distressed 16,037 73.6 24.1

NONDALTON CITY Distressed Distressed 11,836 76.5 29.5

NOORVIK CITY Distressed Distressed 13,930 71.9 28.8

NORTHWAY CDP Distressed Distressed 10,830 74.7 26.5

NORTHWAY VILLAGE Distressed Distressed 11,333 77.6 24.1

NULATO CITY Distressed Distressed 10,838 72.8 33.2
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 35

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Distressed Status

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

NUNAM IQUA CITY Distressed Distressed 11,310 73.3 54.3

OLD HARBOR CITY Distressed Distressed 18,844 82.9 28.3

OUZINKIE CITY Distressed Non-Distressed 14,719 74.1 40.1

PAXSON CDP Distressed Distressed 16,385 80.0 15.0

PELICAN CITY Distressed Distressed 25,854 77.6 22.4

PERRYVILLE CDP Distressed Distressed 15,266 77.1 29.2

PILOT STATION CITY Distressed Distressed 8,726 80.7 30.2

PITKAS POINT CDP Distressed Distressed 8,229 81.1 32.1

PLATINUM CITY Distressed Distressed 10,158 82.4 35.3

POINT BAKER CDP Distressed Distressed ND 91.3 13.0

POPE-VANNOY 

LANDING CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

PORT ALEXANDER Distressed Distressed 33,538 90.2 12.2

PORT ALSWORTH CDP Distressed Distressed 10,014 82.4 22.4

PORT GRAHAM CDP Distressed Distressed 12,370 70.5 34.8

PORT PROTECTION 

CDP Distressed Distressed 3,037 92.6 14.8

PORTAGE CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed ND 100.0 0.0

QUINHAGAK CITY Distressed Distressed 11,186 75.6 33.2

RAMPART CDP Distressed Distressed 9,945 78.9 47.4

RED DEVIL CDP Distressed Distressed 7,895 86.7 23.3

RUBY CITY Distressed Distressed 14,524 70.7 36.8

RUSSIAN MISSION CITY Distressed Distressed 10,357 74.9 37.0

SAVOONGA CITY Distressed Distressed 9,942 78.9 25.9

SCAMMON BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 8,506 80.8 30.6

SELAWIK CITY Distressed Distressed 10,795 74.6 24.1

SELDOVIA CITY Distressed Distressed 25,153 76.9 27.5

SHAGELUK CITY Distressed Distressed 7,903 82.1 23.9

SHISHMAREF CITY Distressed Distressed 9,466 78.6 36.5

SKWENTNA CDP Distressed Distressed 5,032 88.6 7.1

SLANA CDP Distressed Distressed 7,777 77.1 14.7

SLEETMUTE CDP Distressed Distressed 8,650 80.0 36.9

STEBBINS CITY Distressed Distressed 8,198 80.0 30.1

STEVENS VILLAGE CDP Distressed Distressed 7,016 85.7 25.0

STONY RIVER CDP Distressed Distressed 10,181 80.6 27.8

SUSITNA CDP Distressed Distressed 10,582 80.8 11.5

TANACROSS CDP Distressed Distressed 11,405 73.6 23.1

TATITLEK CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 14,513 77.8 30.6

TELLER CITY Distressed Distressed 11,405 72.2 38.1

TENAKEE SPRINGS 

CITY Distressed Distressed 11,922 81.9 26.6

TETLIN CDP Distressed Distressed 6,986 84.6 20.5
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 36

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Distressed Status

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

THOMS PLACE Distressed Distressed ND 62.5 25.0

THORNE BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 12,986 75.3 25.8

TOGIAK CITY Distressed Distressed 13,226 79.3 25.6

TOKSOOK BAY CITY Distressed Distressed 12,693 75.4 40.3

TOLSONA CDP Distressed Distressed 11,188 72.4 24.1

TONSINA CDP Distressed Distressed 11,312 76.2 20.6

TRAPPER CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 12,176 76.5 23.7

TULUKSAK CDP Distressed Distressed 6,254 86.2 25.9

TUNTUTULIAK CDP Distressed Distressed 11,458 73.4 35.2

TUNUNAK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,981 79.3 35.7

TWIN HILLS CDP Distressed Distressed 9,870 74.1 34.5

UGASHIK CDP Distressed Distressed 35,151 75.0 16.7

UPPER KALSKAG CITY Distressed Distressed 10,477 75.5 31.3

VENETIE CDP Distressed Distressed 6,923 84.9 21.6

WHALE PASS CDP Distressed Distressed 3,088 90.5 9.5

WHITESTONE CAMP 

CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 8,779 85.7 14.3

WILLOW CREEK CDP Distressed Distressed 9,720 77.6 23.1

WISEMAN CDP Distressed Non-Distressed 18,332 76.9 23.1

Y CDP Distressed Distressed 12,583 75.5 25.6

ADAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,785 60.7 26.8

AKUTAN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 28,396 41.9 72.0

ANAKTUVUK PASS CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,441 63.1 33.3

ANCHOR POINT CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,677 68.7 30.0 Yes

ANCHORAGE Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,814 53.7 46.9

ANDERSON CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,923 68.6 31.4 Yes

ANIAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,790 57.8 42.2

ATKA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,377 46.9 63.3

ATQASUK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,637 61.7 34.4

BARROW CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,072 47.8 41.8

BEAR CREEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,559 53.9 44.0

BEAVER CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 11,809 67.8 37.3 Yes

BETHEL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 28,323 47.8 49.0

BIG LAKE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,451 65.2 35.0

BUCKLAND CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,769 67.2 32.1 Yes

BUFFALO SOAPSTONE 

CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,950 57.0 41.6

BUTTE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,156 60.0 40.3

CANTWELL CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,355 65.5 31.6

CHENEGA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,544 46.9 44.9

CHICKALOON CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,802 65.7 32.9

CHIGNIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 50,220 44.9 51.0
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 37

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Distressed Status

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

CHISTOCHINA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,326 67.1 34.2

COFFMAN COVE CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 17,621 65.2 32.6

COHOE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,821 68.8 30.4 Yes

COLD BAY CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,035 46.3 50.0

COLDFOOT CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,002 57.9 42.1

COLLEGE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,633 53.3 46.6

COPPER CENTER CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,208 68.4 33.7

COPPERVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,216 59.6 42.6

CORDOVA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 37,062 62.3 36.0

CRAIG CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,289 65.0 38.1

DEERING CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,491 60.9 43.5

DELTA JUNCTION CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,322 64.8 35.3

DELTANA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,868 64.9 33.0

DIAMOND RIDGE CDP Non-Distressed N/A 17,447 66.8 33.5

DILLINGHAM CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,258 50.8 46.7

DIOMEDE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,117 63.9 51.4

DOT LAKE VILLAGE Non-Distressed Distressed 11,888 69.2 30.8 Yes

EGEGIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,726 64.0 34.0

ESTER CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,875 52.3 46.2

EVANSVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 31,679 40.0 60.0

FAIRBANKS CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,929 60.8 40.4

FALSE PASS CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 57,770 57.7 50.0

FARM LOOP CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,527 62.3 39.4

FISHHOOK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,566 57.7 42.7

FORT YUKON CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,712 68.2 33.0 Yes

FOUR MILE ROAD CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 31,644 53.3 53.3

FOX CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,995 52.0 45.6

FRITZ CREEK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,422 68.7 31.8 Yes

GAKONA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,410 62.8 36.1

GALENA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,236 54.5 37.9

GATEWAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,339 57.1 43.0

GLENNALLEN CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,538 67.8 36.5

GOLOVIN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,194 55.6 60.6

HAINES CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,640 70.5 31.4 Yes

HEALY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,048 60.6 37.3

HOMER CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 33,217 68.6 32.2 Yes

HOONAH CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 16,366 72.0 31.2 Yes

HOUSTON CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,539 63.9 36.4

HUGHES CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,101 65.6 49.2

IGIUGIG CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,254 58.6 55.2

ILIAMNA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,022 51.1 42.9
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 38

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Distressed Status

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

JUNEAU CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,495 50.7 49.8

KACHEMAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,236 68.4 31.1 Yes

KAKTOVIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,552 53.4 45.5

KALIFORNSKY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,574 57.8 43.3

KASAAN CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,516 66.7 35.9

KASILOF CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 27,574 66.3 34.6

KENAI CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,894 58.5 43.3

KETCHIKAN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,973 56.2 45.0

KIANA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,056 71.7 33.1 Yes

KING COVE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 41,778 63.5 36.2

KING SALMON CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 32,077 48.8 38.4

KLAWOCK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,570 66.8 36.0

KNIK RIVER CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,980 59.1 39.7

KNIK-FAIRVIEW CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,329 56.4 43.3

KOBUK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,458 68.4 28.9 Yes

KODIAK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 42,358 55.6 51.4

KOTZEBUE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 27,127 52.0 46.7

LAKES CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,670 58.3 42.6

LARSEN BAY CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,675 70.2 31.6 Yes

LAZY MOUNTAIN CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,643 63.5 36.3

LEVELOCK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,100 69.2 32.7 Yes

LIME VILLAGE CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 11,676 64.3 35.7

LOWELL POINT CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 26,340 56.1 46.3

MCGRATH CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,725 61.3 34.7

MCKINLEY PARK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 15,131 66.8 27.4 Yes

MEADOW LAKES CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,534 61.8 38.0

MEKORYUK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,197 65.8 42.6

MENDELTNA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,756 64.4 37.3

METLAKATLA Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,528 63.7 38.0

MOOSE CREEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,711 64.0 37.1

MOOSE PASS CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 18,159 66.5 30.5

NAKNEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 30,456 55.9 39.2

NAPASKIAK CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 10,889 69.9 37.7 Yes

NELSON LAGOON CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 38,340 65.4 36.5

NENANA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,389 68.1 27.7 Yes

NEWHALEN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,267 47.5 45.9

NIGHTMUTE CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,136 67.9 47.4 Yes

NIKISKI CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,878 62.1 39.0

NIKOLSKI CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,971 68.2 36.4 Yes

NOATAK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,047 69.5 47.4

NOME CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 28,859 49.1 49.7
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 39

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Distressed Status

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

NORTH POLE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,706 60.2 41.4

NORTHWAY JUNCTION 

CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 20,466 63.4 41.5

NUIQSUT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,796 57.6 34.6

NUNAPITCHUK CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,205 69.6 46.1 Yes

OSCARVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,932 48.3 62.1

PALMER CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,863 61.8 40.2

PEDRO BAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,090 62.5 37.5

PETERSBURG CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 35,319 69.6 33.1

PETERSVILLE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 29,527 66.7 33.3

PILOT POINT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,041 69.6 47.8

PLEASANT VALLEY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,967 61.0 36.8

POINT HOPE CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,582 63.0 30.9 Yes

POINT LAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,115 55.7 32.9

POINT MACKENZIE CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,721 69.9 30.8 Yes

PORT HEIDEN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 31,410 53.0 40.9

PORT LIONS CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 18,225 72.3 32.7 Yes

PRIMROSE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,529 64.0 33.3

PRUDHOE BAY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 67,434 13.6 81.8

RED DOG MINE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed ND 0.0 100.0

RIDGEWAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,022 61.9 38.5

SAINT GEORGE CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 19,695 66.2 33.8

SAINT MARYS CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,656 66.4 37.4

SAINT MICHAEL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,528 69.7 32.8 Yes

SAINT PAUL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 27,056 59.2 42.6

SALAMATOF CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,181 64.5 35.9

SALCHA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,932 68.3 31.3 Yes

SAND POINT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 47,564 64.0 38.1

SAXMAN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,142 66.9 37.0

SELDOVIA VILLAGE 

CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,297 69.1 33.1 Yes

SEWARD CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,657 57.0 42.1

SHAKTOOLIK CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,659 65.1 44.1

SHUNGNAK CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 14,073 67.7 30.5 Yes

SILVER SPRINGS CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,820 63.5 32.2

SITKA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,706 58.7 43.3

SKAGWAY CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,753 59.6 34.0

SOLDOTNA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 24,776 59.7 42.7

SOUTH NAKNEK CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 25,530 68.8 17.2 Yes

STERLING CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,807 60.9 39.5

SUNRISE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 15,554 56.3 31.3

SUTTON-ALPINE CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 17,872 64.2 33.2
Distressed Community Criteria April 2009

Page 40

Distressed Community Status 2009,

Alaska Communities by Distressed Status

Communities

2009 

Distressed 

Status

2008 

Distressed 

Status

Average 

earnings in 

2008 from UI 

employment 

and fishing 

% w/ 2008 

earnings 

less than 

minimum 

wage of 

$14,872

% 

Employed 

all four 

quarters 

of 2008

Becomes 

Distressed in 

2009 with 3% 

formula

TAKOTNA CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 20,634 54.5 54.5

TALKEETNA CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,717 66.5 34.3

TANAINA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,923 56.2 44.2

TANANA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 14,408 63.2 34.8

TAZLINA CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,896 62.5 37.5

TOK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 16,574 66.5 33.1

TWO RIVERS CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 23,622 51.7 46.5

TYONEK CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 13,438 65.8 33.3

UNALAKLEET CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 18,593 64.7 37.2

UNALASKA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 40,743 33.8 67.1

VALDEZ CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 37,124 49.4 51.4

WAINWRIGHT CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 16,683 61.4 28.3

WALES CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 12,225 69.1 46.8 Yes

WASILLA CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 22,153 61.0 39.2

WHITE MOUNTAIN CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 13,572 66.9 43.1

WHITTIER CITY Non-Distressed Distressed 16,759 67.4 29.3 Yes

WILLOW CDP Non-Distressed Distressed 17,539 69.4 29.3 Yes

WOMENS BAY CDP Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,184 63.5 35.7

WRANGELL CITY Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 20,648 68.1 31.8 Yes

YAKUTAT Non-Distressed Non-Distressed 21,288 65.8 38.0

Cells marked with ND were not able to be disclosed due to confidentiality policies.

Source: Alaska Department of Labor, Research and Analysis Section; Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission